Of course they do. It's like the Academy Awards or any other annual bizness. Some years your winner just ain't that great. Like your boys.Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Cleva
Printable View
Of course they do. It's like the Academy Awards or any other annual bizness. Some years your winner just ain't that great. Like your boys.Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Cleva
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Cleva
Wrong. Had Pau got more touches in playoffs, Lakers would have won more comfortably. If Artest takes even more shots away from Pau, Lakers will have even more trouble.
Artest is like the Terrel Owens of the NBA, huge upside, potential to make the team better based on their game, but also has the same potential of aspects of their non-game issues to cause an organization to implode.
He was great in Houston, but Artest in LA is like throwing a match into a fireworks stand, on so many levels it will be fun to watch as he lights things up on and off the court.
:lmaoQuote:
Originally Posted by 2Cleva
Are you sure you want to get owned again?
:lmao
The ones taking too many shots is Fisher and Kobe.Quote:
Originally Posted by in2deep
More specifically - its not getting Pau more touches - its LA needing to go inside.
Whenever they went inside first - whether it was Pau, Bynum, Kobe, LO or even Walton on a mismatch - good things happen. That's how they destroyed Denver late in that series and set up things for the Finals.
If Artest is getting his from inside, it won't bother me at all. Fortunately, most of the Lakers are such willing passers that its contagious. Just about everyone but Farmar, Kobe, and Fisher. Kobe and Fisher have enough stripes to get away with it.
Only thing LA is missing with Trevor gone is his speed. That will hurt on transition offense and defense. But in the halfcourt on either end, LA will have the steel toes on.
Measure of succes with Artest is easy - but its also the only measurement the Lakers go by.
We'll see in 11 months.
No surprise by the analysis. Most of the experts and talking heads are giving props to the San Antonio Spurs for what they accomplished this season.
Both Lakers and Spurs were given high marks for their offseason moves there's really no need for arguments here.
But of course there will be so what else is new......:rolleyes
Ariza was the x factor these last playoffs, everytime I had the misfortune of seeing the lakers win I found myself hating Ariza more than everyone else. I think it was a terrible move to give up Ariza, so I am happy. Artest doesn't scare me. I can't wait for this season to start to see who made the right decisions, gonna be fun.
Yup. Ariza was a sort of James Posey/Robert Horry role for Lakers. Artest will help but he will NOT be a role player.
"Spurs (not that Popovich cares about the regular season),"...
Very true!
Why does EVERYBODY question Ginobili's or Duncan's health, yet NOBODY questions Bynum's health? I'm sick of it. Bynum is just as likely to get injured, if not moreso, than Manu or Tim.
Even if Bynum is healthy, what has he proven in this league? That he's the most overrated player in the entire NBA? That he can average 12 and 10 for 35 games? Gee, I'm shaking.
Also, Lamer Odom, if he even re-signs with LA, has been injury-prone is his career, as has been Gasol. Fisher is 35 yrs old and dreadfully slow. So the likelihood of the Lakers having another season where they are 100% healthy for the playoffs is very low.
I predict that this season will be the one in which Bryant's body starts breaking down. And that's apart from the mental anguish of playing with Artest. Not to mention Artest's mental anguish in playing with a tyrant like Bryant.
Do people really think this will work? If so, that feeling is quite naive.
I can't help thinking that if the Spurs had signed Artest that the tone of the analysis concerning him would be entirely different here. The guy helped lead a team missing two important starters deep into the playoffs and was instrumental in their playing the Lakers tougher than the Eastern Conference champions did. Putting whatever opinions people have about him personally aside, I think anyone that doesn't at least acknowledge his accomplishments last year is just showing his or her inability to be objective about players from teams other than the Spurs.
If only the Lakers had signed Rasheed Wallace too. Then we could endlessly debate the psychological and talent aspects of the signing.
Wallace, Kobe and Artest all on one team. Hiroshima 2.0
How did the '08-'09 Lakers had a cred of rings backing them up?Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Cleva
After 6 years you still hadn't learned that it doesn't matter this year what happened 6 years ago? Or 20 years ago? or 30 years ago?
Ariza was better for the Lakers, plane and simple. Ariza can guard players Artest ABSOLUTELY CANNOT: ie quick point guards!Quote:
Originally Posted by Tully365
However, if the Lakers had signed Dice and the Spurs had signed Artest, you wouldn't hear a thing about Artest on ESPN. But you'd hear no end to how much Dice would bring to the Lakers.
I suppose the Lakers will be FAR more over the cap than many think, what when you factor in all the millions of dollars given to the media.
I'm not debating the Ariza vs Artest issue. I'm talking about homerism, and how most sports fans are blissfully subjective and will change their opinions of a player mostly just based on whether or not he is on their favorite team.Quote:
Originally Posted by poeticism707
I'm not saying you're wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tully365
But other than post up, Ariza can do what Artest can do. Artest cannot do what Ariza can do. Not to mention Ariza is only 24 years old!
Artest may score a few more buckets a game, but Ariza got his by playing TOTALLY WITHIN THE FLOW OF THE LAKER OFFENSE.
Can Artest? And even if he can, that doesn't take away from Ariza's defensive versatility, and all that coupled with their respective ages, and it's easy to see that Ariza was a much better player for the Lakers.
artest makes the lakers a better team I dont think there is any way you can get around that... now if they lose odom... they lose some versatility...
lol artest wont be happy with ariza's 8 shots .. jus wait and watch ... its gonna be artest 14 pau - 6 odom 9, fisher 7. And believe me u will miss pau's 12 incredibily effcient shots soon enough. At which point just try telling artest to stop shooting so much. It will immediately lead to lackluster defense. :wakeup. Of course this is conjecture so for your sake, u better hope artest has a complete change of heart and really respects kobe/phil as much you would have us believe.Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Cleva
As much as I hate the Lakers (or rather, Phil Jackson), I just don't buy -- or like -- the "weak champion" argument. That's like saying the Spurs' first championship in the lockout-shortened 1999 season was asterisked. The Lakers dominated through the regular season, and they dominated again in the playoffs. They are the champions, and they deserve it.
But in regards to who improved the most: the Lakers lost Ariza, a MAJOR role player. Bowen, KT, and Oberto didn't do as much for the Spurs as Ariza for the Lakers. It is a reasonable argument that McDysse is as big for the Spurs as Artest of the Lakers. I personally think Jefferson is MUCH better for the Spurs.
BTW- I like that they called out Orlando for actually getting WORSE. I can't stand the sportswriters that are hanging on those magic nuts. VC does not automatically make you better. Adding him plus losing Hedo is absolutely disasterous.
Orlando clearly got better, since they keep Gortat..
Vince>>>Hedo, as a player and as a fit..he does everything Turkoglu does, except much better..
a healthy Nelson>>>>>>Alston..
Gortat=Gortat..
Bass>>>>Battie..
Anderson<Lee..
i am willing to buy the argument that VC > Hedo, but your statement isn't remotely true.Quote:
Originally Posted by HarlemHeat37
Maybe im being the homer here, so feel free to call me out....
But how can anyone but a homer say the Lakers improved more than the Spurs? Artest > Jefferson + Blair + McDyess?
Jefferson = Artest at worst for the Spurs. I think the majority of most non Laker fans would take RJ at this point. Hes far more efficient on offense and a better finisher and shooter, while Artest has shown a real drop off in his defense.
I realise the majority of the 'expert' picked the Spurs, but i dont see how a single person could really say the Lakers have improved more, while holding a straight face. They might be the better team, but no way they improved more.