The Lakers might be good next season

I know it is consensus opinion that the Lakers will be a team of mediocrity incarnate but upon reflecting, their lineup looks very impresive.

Kobe Bryant, Lamar Odom, Caron Butler, Vlade Divac

I also firmly belive it is Karl Malone's intention to sign with the Lakers soon...

Plus the handful of scrappy yet good players they got from Boston, Chris Mihm most notably, and the collection of up-and-comming role players such as Karem(sp) Rush and Luke Walton, and I see a team that may end up like the Kings, or at the very least the Mavericks. They could be a fairly diffucult team to beat


I'm interested in your thoughts especially Kori becasuse you tend to be a voice of moderation. Anyway am I justified to feel a little nervous after glancing at this roster?

I think the Lakers will be better than people think. I don't think they will contend for the title, but they aren't going to be horrible.

Their division isn't strong: Golden State Warriors, Los Angeles Clippers, Los Angeles Lakers, Phoenix Suns, Sacramento Kings. If the Kings falter, the Lakers could easily win the division and end up with the third playoff seed.

They'll be a much different Lakers team than everyone is used to, obviously, but I don't think Kobe will let them become a "bad" team.

It does not matter how good they are they need to get past the top 3 teams Mavs Kings and Wolves.

I don't see it happening.

I think they could beat the mavs

I think mavs lost alot in nash
point guards run the o

time will tell

You willing to bet cash on that?

what terms?

Mavs go further than the spurs this season for $100.00 Bucks kori holds the cash,

that has nothing to do with the lakers beating the mavs

but I will make that bet
when does kori get the money?
all star break?
end of the week?
right before playoffs?


one sure way to make money in the world

nash is not there to help coach their point guards this year
nash gets alot more respect then aj
nash puts up big numbers and young guns respect him

by the way I want mailman even if he does sign with the spurs
I will go on record with that

I agree, I think the Lakers will be OK next season. And I like what they're doing, as they prepare for the future (rebuilding) while not trying to slip into the lottery. A feat that is VERY difficult to do, but it can be done (see: Indiana Pacers).

Overall, the Lakers will have a complete lineup, with the Vlade Divac pickup being HUGE for the Lakers for next season. But I don't see them surpassing the Kings, Wolves, or Spurs. I see them as being on par with the Mavs and Denver, and I have a sneaking suspicion that the Suns will be good next year as well.

I think the Lakers will be really good this season!!!
They got some new young players!!! Without Shaq they are totally different!!!!

Why should the Fakers be any better than the Raptors?
Ok, Rudy T. has Sam Mitchell's edge.

Ducks The bet has everything to do with the topic.

if your that stupid to think the Spurs will go further than the Mighty Mavericks it shows how far up your ass your head really is,...oh shit,,, Wait OMG....maybe we are posted in the wrong topic. What topic was the Bet topic? sorry to the rest of you.. my bad Dawgshttp://www.sahoops.net/smilies/lmao.gif

http://www.imgspot.com/u/04/153/08/duncan__4.gif

A lot of people have the Lakers as low as 7th/8th with the possibility of missing the playoffs. I find that sort of ridiculous, not when you know Kobe is going to go 30-6-6 or even 30-7-7 season, and not when the Lakers have so many good role players that are versatile and can pass (Odom, Butler, Vlade, and Walton are all very good passers and role players). Mihm provides much needed depth at the 5, and if Malone comes back to battle with KG and Duncan, I really don't see any reason why the Lakers can't finish between 4th and 6th seed in the West, with the possibility of a 3rd seed if the Kings falter during the season again or if Peja is traded for less than an All Star.

Only the Twolves and Spurs are clearly better, with the Kings probably being better as well, but not as guaranteed. There's no reason to believe the Mavs or Nuggets are better than the Lakers when Kobe is better than any player on both those teams and when they have comparable role players, coaches, and 2nd option (Odom).

mouse this is the thread about the bet

are you trying to get out of it now?

the spurs will go further then the mavs
also I still think the lakers could beat the mavs

The Sterns and Twolves match up very favorably vs the Lakers now.

No worries, Snaq's act had tired in Los Angeles and the Lakers are probably one to two years away. But they could still be a factor.

BS. The Lakers are done.

I don't think they'll contend... but I think, depending on what type of offense RudyT installs, that they could give the Spurs a tough matchup. For instance, if they morph into a Cassell-Robinson-Allen era Milwaukee team (ie - mid range jump shooting as a primary offensive weapon). It is the most effective form of offense against the Spurs defensive system.

Too early to tell though. But if I were the Lakers, I would be building my team in a way to counter the Spurs.

Lakers will not be terrible next year, but they'll have a tought time even being tops in thieir division - both the Kings and the Suns are going to be good next year. Nash is better than Chucky Atkins, Amare is younger and quicker than Vlade. Brad Miller is younger and quicker than Vlade, and Bibby is better than Chucky Atkins. Really, what the Lakers have that no other team has is Kobe, but I think he'll put up monster numbers (30-7-7 average sounds about right) but it will be indicative of him trying to do it all, which is exactly what he wanted, but he'll wind up like Allen Iverson - all stats and nothing to show for it.

Mavs will not recover from the loss of Nash. Pavel will turn out to be a bust ala Wang Zhi Zhi -remember him? Dampier will not fit into the Mavs system as well as Nelly hoped.

Spurs and Timberwolves in the West finals next year. Spurs and either the Pistons or the Heat in the Finals. Spurs win it all.

I think LA will be better than most people think, but they're definitely not contenders yet. Wolves and Spurs are both clearly ahead, but I don't even believe the Kings are that far ahead of LA at this point. If LA gets a legit PG before the start of the season than I'd even say they were equal to the Kings.

I don't honestly think they're anything to be scared about though. They'll give SA and Minny trouble for sure, but they're not ready to take back the title yet.

Getting a legit poing guard is a big concern, but that can wait. This is a rebuilding season, so we'll see what happens.

And since we're on the subject of Kobe, I'd like to point out that I don't think he'll put up big scoring numbers. I actually see his scoring output DECREASING with Shaq gone, but Kobe's other numbers could increase. I see Kobe as being more of a better all around player statistically, sort of like Magic Johnson. Averaging around 25-7-7, or something similar. I don't see Kobe winning any scoring titles.

Chucky Atkins is going to surprise you. He is a much better player than most media know-nothings realize.
If the original deal with Boston including Marcus Banks had held up, the Lakers would have had an off-season for the ages.

As it went down, I can only grade it a B-. If we got Marcus Banks (NBA steals leader per minute last season as a rookie) to shore up our PG defense, it would have been one big man signing next summer and it is OVER for the rest of the league. Remember, we have Kobe (sans criminal charges) and he will be training, pumped and ready to kick ass and take names after having to defer to an out of shape and injury prone big man the last few years.

:kiss

Quote:

---

If the original deal with Boston including Marcus Banks had held up, the Lakers would have had an off-season for the ages.

---

It already is an offseason for the ages.

You traded Shaq, dumbasses.

Who the **** does that?

Quote:

---

It already is an offseason for the ages.

You traded Shaq, dumbasses.

Who the **** does that?

---

Anyone with half a brain trades a declining Shaq who demands $40M per until age 38, doesn't work out in the offseason, and doesn't rebound or play defense until the postseason, where he can only do those things with 2+ days of rest between games.

Not trading Shaq would have been stupider. But hey, I'm sure you'll find a way to say keeping a declining 33 year old Shaq at $40M per year would have been a smarter move. Especially when Shaq's toe disintegrates before his 35th birthday.

Damn, i'll take that Spurs/Mavs bet if everyone else on here is scared. You still game Mouse?

Shaq was unstoppable after the first round. Kobe wasn't. Here endeth the lesson.

Quote:

---

Not trading Shaq would have been stupider. But hey, I'm sure you'll find a way to say keeping a declining 33 year old Shaq at $40M per year would have been a smarter move.

---

You call his bluff on the extension -- you're a bigger idiot than I thought if you think anyone is going to pay that to Shaq. You keep him for one more year at any rate.

But please, tell me how Divac is so much better than Shaq and how this would've been the best offseason in the history of sport if only the ChuckyBanks point tandem had become a reality.

Shaq is the reason the Lakers won 3 out of the last 6 championships. In 2000 and 2001, he could have won it playing with the Keebler Elves.

Kobe will be lucky to make it into the playoffs - he will, numerous times, over the next 5 or 5 years - but he won't win a championship with Chucky Atkins at point and Vlade Divac (who, you might remember, is OLDER than Shaq) helping him. Sorry.

Chucky Atkins is a decent point guard. I watched him last season with the C's. With him, the C's record improved considerably, and they became a better team. But, this is going from a team that hasn't won a championship since the 80's and hadn't made the playoffs for a long time until 2 years ago.

Compared to the Lakers as a 3 time championship team, Chucky Atkins is a major downgrade, even from an old, slow, grumpy Gary Payton.

Shaq may be older and not as agile as he once was (and he was once phemonenally, unhumanly athletic) but he transforms the Heat to a playoff contending team, and his absence will hurt the Lakers. Even older and slower and less in shape, he's still the best C in the league, other than Tim Duncan, who prefers to play forward so he doesn't have to bang in the C position the whole game.

I take it mouse is afraid

Quote:

---

You call his bluff on the extension -- you're a bigger idiot than I thought if you think anyone is going to pay that to Shaq. You keep him for one more year at any rate.

---

LMAO! They did call his bluff Einstein, that's why Shaq demanded a trade. :lol

Quote:

---

LMAO! They did call his bluff Einstein, that's why Shaq demanded a trade.

---

You can demand a trade all you want but if you're still under contract, you can't do squat. That's what he meant by calling his bluff.

If Shaq tanked the season or had surgery during the year like he was threatening to do if he wasn't traded, he would have torpedoed his market value. Being a year older and pulling a stunt like that wouldn't have been a good career move for him financially and he knew it. He'd have had to play out the season, like it or not.

I have a feeling that Kobe was the real reason he wasn't forced to stay.

**** the Lakers anyhow. They made their bed now let them sleep in it. It's about time that band of man-children self destructed. Their egomaniacal attitudes and infighting as a high profile team was bad for the league and for promoting basketball as a team sport. I for one will be glad to see them wallow in mediocrity for a few years.

The Lakers are no longer contenders and as such are inconsequential for the elite like our Spurs. They're not much different from the Grizzlies or Suns right now.

Suck it Laker beetches. :fro

The Clippers will finish ahead of them.

Quote:

---

If Shaq tanked the season or had surgery during the year like he was threatening to do if he wasn't traded, he would have torpedoed his market value. Being a year older and pulling a stunt like that wouldn't have been a good career move for him financially and he knew it. He'd have had to play out the season, like it or not.

---

And then he leaves in 2005 and the Lakers are left with Kobe and their thumbs up their asses.

That is, assuming Kobe still decided to stick around with Shaq.

Quote:

---

You can demand a trade all you want but if you're still under contract, you can't do squat. That's what he meant by calling his bluff.

If Shaq tanked the season or had surgery during the year like he was threatening to do if he wasn't traded, he would have torpedoed his market value. Being a year older and pulling a stunt like that wouldn't have been a good career move for him financially and he knew it. He'd have had to play out the season, like it or not.

---

No, you don't risk tanking a season and possibly losing Kobe Bryant just because you think Shaq is bluffing. Kobe might not have resigned if the Lakers didn't have a young, decently talented core in place. You don't risk that, especially since the last time Shaq didn't get his extension he had surgery before training camp and missed 6 weeks of the beginning of the regular season, not to mention exaggerating injuries during the year.

Quote:

---

I have a feeling that Kobe was the real reason he wasn't forced to stay.

---

If Shaq had just shut his mouth about his contract, conditioned like he was supposed to, and played defense during the year, Kobe probably would have been more vocal about him staying. Otherwise, though, Kobe certainly didn't force Shaq out. Buss was most adamant about Shaq leaving; he had just let Phil Jackson go and denied Shaq his extension for the final time, pushing Shaq over the edge.

Quote:

---

**** the Lakers anyhow. They made their bed now let them sleep in it. It's about time that band of man-children self destructed. Their egomaniacal attitudes and infighting as a high profile team was bad for the league and for promoting basketball as a team sport. I for one will be glad to see them wallow in mediocrity for a few years.

---

Well, they didn't wallow when they back door swept your Spurs this season, and they certainly won't wallow with a younger and more talented core this year. If "mediocrity" is consistently making the playoffs and contending in 2 years, then so be it.

Quote:

---

The Lakers are no longer contenders and as such are inconsequential for the elite like our Spurs. They're not much different from the Grizzlies or Suns right now.

---

No, they're definitely better than either the Grizzlies or Suns, who have no superstar and can't play any defense.

Quote:

---

Suck it Laker beetches.

---

Suck it Spurms, continue to taste the sweet defeat of 0.4 beetches!

Quote:

---

The Clippers will finish ahead of them.

---

I don't think so my friend. Too many rounds of golf at the club in the hot sun might have warped your brain slightly on this one.

The Clippers are the Clippers. They do what they do better than any other team in the league. But that is not finishing head of the Lakers.

Let me know if you want to send me the money in advance that I would win betting you on that.

Quote:

---

No, you don't risk tanking a season and possibly losing Kobe Bryant just because you think Shaq is bluffing. Kobe might not have resigned if the Lakers didn't have a young, decently talented core in place. You don't risk that, especially since the last time Shaq didn't get his extension he had surgery before training camp and missed 6 weeks of the beginning of the regular season, not to mention exaggerating injuries during the year.

---

here here... I'll take Kobe and a young talented core with potential in two or so years over an aging, ailing, and overpaid Shaq surrounded by the likes of slava medvedenko, devean george, and various other geriatric players any day.

Quote:

---

And then he leaves in 2005 and the Lakers are left with Kobe and their thumbs up their asses.

That is, assuming Kobe still decided to stick around with Shaq.

---

I'm sure Kobe threatening to leave was the reason they didn't call Shaq's bluff. If he wasn't such a child, they could have contended for another season and then just let the retard walk. I hardly think Odom and Grant's anchor of a contract for the next 2 years are better than they might have done with the caproom Shaq leaving would have provided them.

Whatever. Laker fans can't accept it but they'll be looking at early exits in the playoffs for a few years. Tim was out for 9 games last year and we made the playoffs easily. This group certainly won't make the playoffs if Kobe (or that warrior Odom either for that matter) is out for a similar time. They'd better hope he stays healthy because without him, a college team could probably take them. :lol

Quote:

---

If "mediocrity" is consistently making the playoffs and contending in 2 years, then so be it.

---

Two years of first round exits (assuming Kobe, Odom don't miss more than 5 games a season) should be very satisfying. I know I'll enjoy watching it. :lol

Quote:

---

No, they're definitely better than either the Grizzlies or Suns, who have no superstar and can't play any defense.

---

Suuuure they are. The Lakers have been defensive powerhouses the last 2 years. They should be even better with Shaq gone. Vlade and Grant will strike fear into any who dare drive the lane on the mighty Lakers. :)

What happen to my post after Supergirl?

Shaq may be older and not as agile as he once was (and he was once phemonenally, unhumanly athletic) but he transforms the Heat to a playoff contending team, and his absence will hurt the Lakers.

Miami made it to deep in the 2nd round of the playoffs last year with the young guys Kobe now has. Are they going to get farther than that this year with Shaq? No. It was a great move for Miami business wise but they are no closer to a ring and hamstrung long term.


LA dealt Shaq for 2 reasons. The Kobe reason was one but the business aspect was another. They didn't win rings the past 2 years with Shaq, why keep paying him more than anyone else when rings are far from a guaranteed result the next couple of seasons. Now, LA is able to rebuild and get real younger while still maintaining a playoff team.

Quote:

---

Whatever. Laker fans can't accept it but they'll be looking at early exits in the playoffs for a few years.

---

is there really one laker fan on this site saying they'll be contenders next year? Because I certainly haven't read that...

Quote:

---

Tim was out for 9 games last year and we made the playoffs easily. This group certainly won't make the playoffs if Kobe (or that warrior Odom either for that matter) is out for a similar time. They'd better hope he stays healthy because without him, a college team could probably take them.

---

Shaq missed 15 games the year they won their last championship... I'm not sure I get your point. Wouldn't most teams suffer if their superstar gets injured??? Do you really think that LA's Kobe-less roster is any worse than SA's roster minus Duncan???

Brent Barry
Bruce Bowen
Devin Brown
Manu Ginobili
Robert Horry
Linton Johnson
Sergei Karaulov
Sean Marks
Tony Massenburg
Rasho Nesterovic
Tony Parker
Malik Rose
Viktor Sanikidze
Romain Sato
Beno Udrih

Vs.

Chucky Atkins
Caron Butler
Brian Cook
Vlade Divac
Devean George
Brian Grant
Slava Medvedenko
Chris Mihm
Lamar Odom
Jumaine Jones
Kareem Rush
Sasha Vujacic
Luke Walton

Quote:

---

Suuuure they are. The Lakers have been defensive powerhouses the last 2 years. They should be even better with Shaq gone. Vlade and Grant will strike fear into any who dare drive the lane on the mighty Lakers.

---

Now that the Lakers actually have athletes that can play defense like Odom and Butler (instead of Jurassic Fox) and a legit 7 footer like Mihm (instead of Samsucki Walker or Jamal freaking Sampson), they will certainly be better defensively at those positions. Shaq didn’t play defense until the postseason anyway, so I don’t know what your point is really. Shaq’s defense hasn’t been consistently great since about 2001/2002.

Quote:

---

I'm not sure I get your point. Wouldn't most teams suffer if their superstar gets injured???

---

Yeah, I'm not really sure what THJ is getting at here. Of course the Lakers will suffer if Odom and/or Kobe go down. Didn't the Spurs go something like 5-4 when Duncan was out last year? Hardly a stellar record there. ANY team will suffer if their superstar or 2nd options go down.

Spurs without duncan would still own the Lakers without Kobe. I don't think you remember how quick Parker is. Years of shaq doing what only shaq can do totally changed the NBA. He was on every contending teams GM's mind when making a roster. Guys weren't scratching their head saying, How the hell are we going to win a title trying to stop Kobe? Its no wonder that Kobe has been called the Best one on one player in the game because he doesn't get much double teams for a player his caliber. Guys weren't knocking down Miami's door trying to get Bowen, they weren't bombarding Portand trying to get the self-proclaimed Kobe stopper. They were trying to find the best way to minimize the damage that O'neal does. Throwing 3 7 footers at him, hackiing him or even double teaming his WITHOUT the ball. No one did any of that for Kobe. Kinda Ironic that the clippers for years have always been loaded with young, athletic talent but there trash. Miami basically got rid of there overload at the swing position for the best player in the game (sorry duncan fans but a motivated O'neal is downright scary) So what if you have O'neal and a bunch of scrubs in a few years. I'll take 2 rings now and crap later over a Jazz team that has been good for the last two decades but never great.

The words "legit" and "Mihm" can't be used in the same sentence.

If only Marcus Banks were here....

Kevin Kaster has down's syndrome.

Quote:

---

Do you really think that LA's Kobe-less roster is any worse than SA's roster minus Duncan???

Brent Barry
Bruce Bowen
Devin Brown
Manu Ginobili
Robert Horry
Linton Johnson
Sergei Karaulov
Sean Marks
Tony Massenburg
Rasho Nesterovic
Tony Parker
Malik Rose
Viktor Sanikidze
Romain Sato
Beno Udrih

Vs.

Chucky Atkins
Caron Butler
Brian Cook
Vlade Divac
Devean George
Brian Grant
Slava Medvedenko
Chris Mihm
Lamar Odom
Jumaine Jones
Kareem Rush
Sasha Vujacic
Luke Walton

---

Please tell me you're joking. The entire Laker starting lineup would have never even played together not to mention the adjustment all players would have to make to a new coach.

Even brushing that huge negative under the rug, the Spur lineup still has more experience (both individually and as a team) and more talent.

Put down the pipe.

Quote:

---

Please tell me you're joking. The entire Laker starting lineup would have never even played together not to mention the adjustment all players would have to make to a new coach.

Even brushing that huge negative under the rug, the Spur lineup still has more experience (both individually and as a team) and more talent.

---

Of course the Spurs as a team have more experience, but that's something that will come for LA over the next year. And I thought the point was to get younger... because afterall, all I heard from everyone outside of LA is that the Lakers are far too old and far too slow. So now that they've gotten younger, you're saying that they're TOO young? The Spurs average career length is around 6 years with their current roster, minus the rookies. LA's is around 5 years. Not a huge difference.

As far as individual talent goes, well I think that's debateable. The second highest scorer on the Spurs roster is Parker, who last year averaged 15ppg and 5.5 assists. Brent Barry averaged 10ppg, Manu averaged 13ppg, and after that you've got a bunch of 4-7ppg guys.

The person who will likely be the second highest scorer on LA will be Odom, who averaged 17ppg, 4.4apg and 9.7rpg. Chucky Atkins averaged 12 ppg and 4apg, and Caron Butler has a lot of potential (whether or not he'll realize it remains to be seen) but averaged 10ppg last year. Brian Grant, if he can stay healthy can contribute nicely as well, as his career averages are 10ppg and 8rpg (although last year he only did 9 and 7).

Of course those are only offensive stats, defensively I agree that the Spurs will likely be better, although I'd like to see how well LA can get defensively with their new roster.

Setting aside the fact that LA will likely have an adjustment period, I don't see a huge difference at all in the rosters sans Duncan and Kobe. And let me be clear that I'm not saying that the Spurs roster is bad, I'm just saying that I think the Lakers roster could be just as good once a few more tweaks are made.

Quote:

---

As far as individual talent goes, well I think that's debateable. The second highest scorer on the Spurs roster is Parker, who last year averaged 15ppg and 5.5 assists. Brent Barry averaged 10ppg, Manu averaged 13ppg, and after that you've got a bunch of 4-7ppg guys.

The person who will likely be the second highest scorer on LA will be Odom, who averaged 17ppg, 4.4apg and 9.7rpg. Chucky Atkins averaged 12 ppg and 4apg, and Caron Butler has a lot of potential (whether or not he'll realize it remains to be seen) but averaged 10ppg last year. Brian Grant, if he can stay healthy can contribute nicely as well, as his career averages are 10ppg and 8rpg (although last year he only did 9 and 7).

---

Come on Tawnia, I know you know better than that. The Spurs have been an elite team in the western conference for some time now. You can't compare offensive averages of players from non-contending, eastern conference teams to players on a western conference powerhouse like the Spurs who must defer to the likes of Tim Duncan. Please.

<< This was posted by TwoHandJam logged in under Walton's account>>

Tawnia,

You lost Fisher, Shaq, Kobe's ego, Phil's zen, and Rick Fox's wife. Then you picked up a bunch of Clippers.

Lakers ain't doin nuttin.

Bam.

How bout dat?

Face the fear. Lakers suck.

Tawnia79 I agree with alot of what you said

kobe is not going to let that team lose
yes they will need to make adjustments
it will be intersting how quick they can make them
and there is very few big men in the nba now
so it is not like the lakers now have a major hole in that area
they do need a guy to stop duncan and kg
mailman may be a guy to slow them done

Ducks, don't be a wuss. The Lakers suck. Period. The are a average team without Shaq. 41 and 41. Not good enough for the playoffs.

you laugh all you want
lakers will make the playoffs
they pull a mid season trade and get a big they could be scary

kobe is like duncan
with him you always have a chance

shaq won NOTHING without kobe

Shaq is probably the best player in the NBA. Kobe is a fucking sidekick.

The Lakers will not do shit without Shaq. Who is going to take the pressure off of kobe? Odom? Uh.. yeah right.

The Lakers have NO Big man that is worth a damn. Duncan, Nowitski, Garnett, Shaq, Wallace, Webber, Ming will SCORE AT WILL against the Lakers. The Lakers might lose against Phoenix. 8th Seed at best.

Also, who in the hell is going to be LAs pg? Huh. What? Payton? Great. 40 wins. Thats it. Thats all I see.

Kobe isn't shit without a big man. wake up ducks.

Kobe is a fucking sidekick

Ok so basically you are saying kobe is just a role player
right?

who is going to stop kobe?

if mailman goes there he can set kobe some NASTY picks to get open
bowen will not be able to run thru that screen

sure spurs will take that team
but it will not be easy
sure they have no answer

and dirk shoots threes it is not like he scores in the paint where most big men play




you know what duncan can not do anything without outside shooting. that is why spurs lost to the lakers
their shooters went COLD

Shaq got to the finals without Kobe, how far did Kobe get without shaq again?

Ok, so thats not really fair.

The case will be that he is no more effective than Tmac by himself.

shaq was in the weast east to:eyebrow


lakers are one team I would not want to play

odom and kobe could be special together(if odom does not get caught but with him with lakers that will not happen)


kobe gets hot he is a winner

Quote:

---

shaq was in the weast east to

---

What are you trying to say Ducks? the East was weak in 95? when you had Ewing's Knicks, Jordan-Pip's Bulls (I know MJ wasnt MJ that year, but still a respectable team), Miller's Pacers. The east was a lot stronger back then than it is now.

There's no doubt that Kobe will score 30 a game, but didn't T-Mac lead the league in scoring the last 2 years and what has he done?

Quote:

---

You lost Fisher

---

:cry Must u bring this up? :depressed

kobe is alot better then mcgrady


kobe,duncan,kg would not let their team lose 19 straight games in the weak east
that is almost 1/4 of the nba season games

mcgrady is overrated
kobe makes his teamates better

like duncan does

lakers have a better team then the magic did with mcgrady now also

lakers might have lost phil jackson
but that team stopped believing in the triagle
and a triangle needs a decent big man.
phil had a decent one with the bullls to

I do not see that as a major lost. Rudy is a proven good coach. It actually might be a welcome change to that team. Kobe is going to love it. And he is going to try to prove that the triangle was holding him back...............


I am not saying they are going to challenge from the title
but in the west I think it boils down to spurs and wolves
kings,mavs, nuggets are next. then suns,rockets,lakers and jazz are next. the clippers you are never sure what they will do. they look decent on paper.alot depends on livingston.

Ducks is a laker fan.

A homer one.

Odom fucking sucks ducks.

Are you that dumb?

Quote:

---

kobe,duncan,kg would not let their team lose 19 straight games in the weak east

---

Well lets look at what Kobe did at the beginning of 02-03 when Shaq missed the first 12 games or so.

Quote:

---

2002-03 Regular Season
Date Opponent Score W-L Location
10/29/2002 San Antonio Spurs 82 - 87 Box 0 - 1
10/30/2002 at Portland Trailblazers 90 - 102 Box 0 - 2
11/1/2002 at Los Angeles Clippers 108 - 93 Box 1 - 2
11/3/2002 Portland Trailblazers 98 - 95 Box 2 - 2
11/5/2002 at Cleveland Cavaliers 70 - 89 Box 2 - 3
11/7/2002 at Boston Celtics 95 - 98 Box 2 - 4
11/8/2002 at Washington Wizards 99 - 100 Box 2 - 5
11/12/2002 Atlanta Hawks 83 - 95 Box 2 - 6
11/15/2002 Golden State Warriors 96 - 89 Box 3 - 6
11/17/2002 Houston Rockets 89 - 93 Box 3 - 7
11/19/2002 at Dallas Mavericks 72 - 98 Box 3 - 8
11/20/2002 at San Antonio Spurs 88 - 95 Box 3 - 9

---

3-9 without Shaq, including a game where Kobe shot 17-47 vs Paul Pierce and the Celtics, and a 19-pt loss to the Ricky Davis led Cavaliers (pre Lebron). They also lost to the Hawks at home, and got blown out in Dallas. Kobe made who better? I'm not hating on kobe, but I won't kiss his ass until I see him lead the Lakers to the conference finals without Shaq.

Quote:

---

Kevin Kaster has down's syndrome.

---

Says the "Spurs" fan derided on his own board who couldn't argue a point if his illegitimate daughter tried.

Sequ has his moments.

As a native he is derided about as much as Chris Mihm.

Connect the dots, if you can.

Mihm > Rasho. I can write that in crayon if you'd like.

Mihm = Travis Knight from 1999. The foul per minute guy.

Travis Knight is Jason Hart-like scrub, Mihm is scrub levels above him. Maybe just above Rasho scrubness? Probably.

You know you fellated Knight as well in the day.

Kneepads ON!

I fellated Knight about as much as you fellated Hedo after the WCSF.

Speaking of fellatio, Mihm was a guy who got posterized by Shandon Anderson a couple of years ago.

KKK, is like Wolves009.

Yep, 6 and 5 from a #7 pick is completely deserving of our love and respect.

Recognize.

Number one sign you are in denial after trading Shaq?

You convince yourself Chris Mihm can play basketball.

Has John Wallace ever stuffed another seven footer's shit this clean in his life?

http://www.detnews.com/pix/2001/02/26/spopistons.jpg

Quote:

---

Yep, 6 and 5 from a #7 pick is completely deserving of our love and respect.

Recognize.

---

I'd hope you recognize, since Mihm scores and rebounds better than Rasho per 48. :lol Man, it's almost sad how little you know about your players.

I am a little suprised this trhread is still here, i must have made quite an impression

Quote:

---

Shaq is probably the best player in the NBA. Kobe is a fucking sidekick.

---

funny how your memory works... I seem to remember that sidekick kicking your team's ass quite a few times over the last few years.

The Lakers will be ok next season, in particular because the Kings have lost a step or two. They might even win their division and finish 3rd in the conference.

Having said that, if you think that trading Shaq would actually help the team, you are in complete denial. :shootme

Kobe can be shut down. See Pistons, Finals.
Shaq cannot.
Double team Kobe.
Vlade, Odom, Grant, Mihm are NO match for
Tim, Rasho, Malik, Robert, Sean, Massenburg.

Let's see how Grant, Mihm, and Odom do in the West. Let's see how well they can do well against the likes of. Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, Yao Ming and the more fierce western conferecne.

Tony > Chucky
Kobe > Ginobili
Bowen > Butler
Tim > Odom
Rasho = Vlade

Our bench >>>>> Your bench
Rudy = Popovich

Quote:

---

I'd hope you recognize, since Mihm scores and rebounds better than Rasho per 48.

---

So did all our backups. Rasho wasn't a #7 -- please keep trying to spin that. You'd think Mihm would be able to play more then.

Why not?

Oh yeah, the sucking.

I'll concede this -- his .318 FG in playoff garbage time is almost as good as Rasho in full meltdown mode.

Tawnia,

Eat shit. Lakers suck and you know it.

The Lakers will be alright, but they may have to win their division to actually make the playoffs. One thing is for sure, if they stand pat, Mitch is even stupider than I thought. Five swingmen to split time behind Odom and Kobe won't cut it.

I don't think Sacramento is going to fall as much as people think -- they had a quietly good offseason; their pickups at guard were excellent given what they had to work with. And Ostertag could have a Mihm-like impact as well....

Quote:

---

Tawnia,

Eat shit.

---

frankly that's what I feel like I'm doing every time I read one of your posts.

I suppose we'll just have to wait and see how LA performs. I'm not predicting that they'll win their division, I'm just saying I think they'll be better than people assume they'll be. And I still don't agree that LA's bench is bad, I think it's a VAST improvement over what it has been in the past.

And losing Shaq was not beneficial to the Lakers in the short term. I'm not going to re-hash why its better for them in the long term, because those of you that don't understand it haven't paid any attention to the situation that LA was in, or you probably just don't want to understand. In either case, I'm through discussing that.

Quote:

---

Let's see how Grant, Mihm, and Odom do in the West. Let's see how well they can do well against the likes of. Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, Yao Ming and the more fierce western conferecne.

---

Hate to break it to you, but Odom and Grant have both spent significant time in the western conference. Odom averaged 15 points and 7 rebounds over 4 years with the Clippers, and Grant averaged 11.5 points and 7.5 rebounds over six years with Sacramento and Portland. And I'm pretty sure they played against Duncan and Garnett while on those teams.

Look, I think Radosoft is better than Chris Mihm.

Trading franchise/great players for a smorgasboard of good players in the NBA has always been a Rather bad proposition.

Quote:

---

Kevin Kaster has down's syndrome.

---

WOW!

The day has come where I have to say: I agree with Sequ

Quote:

---

Rasho wasn't a #7 -- please keep trying to spin that. You'd think Mihm would be able to play more then.

---

Who gives a crap. Kandi was drafted #1. Kobe was drafted #13 the same year Samaki Walker was drafted higher. Sometimes picks aren't accurate, I'd think you'd be smart enough to figure that out.

Quote:

---

Why not?

Oh yeah, the sucking.

---

Mihm > Rasho.

Quote:

---

Hate to break it to you, but Odom and Grant have both spent significant time in the western conference. Odom averaged 15 points and 7 rebounds over 4 years with the Clippers, and Grant averaged 11.5 points and 7.5 rebounds over six years with Sacramento and Portland. And I'm pretty sure they played against Duncan and Garnett while on those teams.

---

Grant averaged those number in the west 4 years ago. For reference, Steve Smith was averging 15 ppg back then. Do you want him on your team now? Last year Grant averaged a pretty underwhelming 8.7ppg 6.9rpg .46bpg in the east on a bad team. As already mentioned even Rasho fared better, and in the west no yet. Grant's contract is among the worst in all the NBA. No GM will touch it.

Odom is virtually the only solid help Kobe might have and he's known to be fragile. He played a healthy season for the first time in three years and he's had trouble with drugs in LA to the extent that he will be expelled from the league on the next infraction. He's played well but whether it will continue in LA, under Rudy T is not a given.

Again, LA sans Kobe does not impress me.

I wasn't using those numbers to give the impression that I believed that Grant would be putting up similar numbers this year. Of course I am fully aware of his previous season numbers and the fact that he's been out of the west for awhile now. What I was disputing was the fact that it was assumed that he wouldn't be able to do well against the WC because it was implied that he's never had the opportunity to, which is false. Both he and Odom played in the West and they both did well. If Grant contributed numbers somewhere near (even slightly lower than) his career stats I'd be more than satisified. And I'm a Lakers fan, there's no point in talking to me about the horror of a bad contract. We had Shaq's, remember???

Quote:

---

Again, LA sans Kobe does not impress me.

---

It's not supposed to impress you. Kobe's on the team for a reason, he's needed. But if you're going to sit there and tell me that this year's bench isn't a vast improvement over what they've had in the last few years then I'd have to strongly disagree. And if the arguement is really over who's roster is better minus their star, well you're going to have to wait for a few months to really see the definitive answer to that. Frankly, the Spurs' roster with the exception of Parker and Ginobilli doesn't do a whole lot for me, but I know that you could say the same about LA, so we'll just have to wait and see how both teams play next year.

Quote:

---

What I was disputing was the fact that it was assumed that he wouldn't be able to do well against the WC because it was implied that he's never had the opportunity to, which is false.

---

That wasn't what was implied. It was 4 years ago and isn't relevant at all now. The point is still that players like Briant Grant who are already in decline don't generally improve their stats over time. Even less so when moved to a new team and a stronger conference.

Quote:

---

Both he and Odom played in the West and they both did well. If Grant contributed numbers somewhere near (even slightly lower than) his career stats I'd be more than satisified.

---

If Grant played at his career stats, it would be the best season he's had in 4 years.

Someone mentioned that Kobe could be shut down and Shaq couldn't - ie the Det series. Shaq was shut down as well. He never faced a double team yet he only had one big game scoring. Tex Winters was on LA radio a couple of weeks back calling out Shaq's lack of D, rebounding and effort.

Det had a brilliant plan. For once, a team focused on shutting down Kobe and dared Shaq to beat them - he obviously couldn't. Prince had the main assignment but every defender kept their eye on Kobe to help out against any penetration or trap him off the pick and roll. And because of the Lakers offense - that was the only opportunities he had since LA didn't run, nor post up Kobe.

Det's D concepts were great that series but of course you'd have to really understand basketball to get it.

Tawnia79,

Your saying the Spurs minus their best 3 players doesn't impress you much? Well duh! Take the best three players away from any team see what you have left. Oh wait, doesn't that describe the Lakers?

Useruser666 :eyebrow

Quote:

---

Your saying the Spurs minus their best 3 players doesn't impress you much? Well duh! Take the best three players away from any team see what you have left. Oh wait, doesn't that describe the Lakers?

---

that was kind of the point...

Quote:

---

Let's see how Grant, Mihm, and Odom do in the West. Let's see how well they can do well against the likes of. Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, Yao Ming and the more fierce western conferecne.

---

This doesn't imply the idea that they've never played against these people consistently before? Odom was just in the WC a year ago, and you must have known that because you didn't take issue with any of my Odom comments.

For the record, I'm not expecting Grant to do anything huge. 9 points and 7 boards is not an impossibility. He's a hard worker, so as long as he contributes as much as he possibly can then I'll be ok with that.

Quote:

---

Shaq was shut down as well. He never faced a double team yet he only had one big game scoring.

---

Perhaps that is because Shaq was taking three shots for every four Kobe was taking.

When you see that Shaq was shooting .631 and Kobe .381, and that Shaq got to the line more than twice as much as Kobe while shooting less, how do you come to the conclusion that Shaq was shut down and that the Lakers did everything right?

Detroit's strategy was brilliant alright -- when you shut down Kobe, he still shoots the ball at the same clip. It hardly matters what Shaq does because he'll never see the ball enough to make up the difference.

Quote:

---

that was kind of the point...

---

I don't understand then. You say the Spurs wouldn't be good without their three best players, yet infer the Lakers will be better than everyone thinks without their three best players? It's so funny how the Big Diesel goes to the little weed eater when you're looking down the other end of the barrel.

Useruser666 :eyebrow

Hahah, the difference between Shaq's contract and Grant is as enormous as the contract itself. The worst contracts aren't the biggest ones, there the ones that are overpaid. Shaq was still kicking ass and taking names. Grant was getting his ass kicked. Shaq every year is a MVP option. Meanwwhile Grant has hobbled knees that are getting worse. I'd rather have declining feet getting 20/10/2.5 than bad knees getting, what?, 8 and 6 if your lucky?

Quote:

---

yet infer the Lakers will be better than everyone thinks without their three best players?

---

no, I was suggesting that the Lakers as a whole would be better than everyone expected. Someone then suggested that the Lakers sans Kobe wasn't that impressive, and that's where that argument came in. I'm not at ALL saying that LA could be good without its top three players.

:brotha

Quote:

---

I was suggesting that the Lakers as a whole would be better than everyone expected. Someone then suggested that the Lakers sans Kobe wasn't that impressive, and that's where that argument came in

---

See that is what you fail to realize, Tawnia, the Spurs players have already proven that while individually, they may not look as impressive, collectively they have shown that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. The Lakers may, in time, show that they can too, but they have yet to do it.

I'm of the opinion that if Kobe doesn't up his game immensely on both sides of the court, he will be just like TMac in Orlando. That dominant big is a huge, huge factor in a team's success. You can cite Jordan but I'll one up you with names like Oakley, Grant, & Rodman as big 4's who got double figures in points and rebounds plus held their positions defensively.
Who do the Lakers have that can do that...right now?

Anyways...I look forward to watching the season. Since I'm in SO CAL, I can't wait to hear how Jack Haley and the rest of the media spin mediocrity.
It can very well happen, unless Mitch figures out how to effectively deal his glut of swingmen and expiring K's.

Quote:

---

Hahah, the difference between Shaq's contract and Grant is as enormous as the contract itself. The worst contracts aren't the biggest ones, there the ones that are overpaid. Shaq was still kicking ass and taking names. Grant was getting his ass kicked. Shaq every year is a MVP option. Meanwwhile Grant has hobbled knees that are getting worse. I'd rather have declining feet getting 20/10/2.5 than bad knees getting, what?, 8 and 6 if your lucky?

---

What? First off, Grant's contract is about half Shaq's, so any thing he produces as a player needs to be halved anyway. Secondly, Shaq said he wouldn't play if he wasn't paid close to or at the max he can get through a contract extension. Buss initially offered him an extension until 2010 at $25M per, which would have made him the highest paid player in the league. Shaq rejected it, and asked instead for bigger annual increases that would have paid him between $35M-$40M at age 37. Shaq's worth $35M-$40M about as much as my left nut is. His toe will be long gone by the time he's 35, so there would be no point in paying him ungodly sums when he's worthless at ages 36 and 37 (and perhaps sooner than that). Thirdly, Shaq at that price would have put Buss in luxury tax hell if he had any desire to keep Kobe Bryant. By the time Shaq would leave at 37 (assuming Kobe stays), only THEN would the Lakers be able to build a core around him, and he'd be 32. Better to build a young core around a young 26 year old Kobe than a 32 year old Kobe.

Quote:

---

See that is what you fail to realize, Tawnia, the Spurs players have already proven that while individually, they may not look as impressive, collectively they have shown that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. The Lakers may, in time, show that they can too, but they have yet to do it.

---

Isn't that what you said last year? I don't think you understand that in the playoffs, anything goes.

Quote:

---

Isn't that what you said last year? I don't think you understand that in the playoffs, anything goes.

---

I've heard that, then all the calls supposedly go against the Lakers and then the whining starts.

We'll see how Boy Wonder does without Batman, this year.

Quote:

---

I've heard that, then all the calls supposedly go against the Lakers and then the whining starts.

---

Don't confuse Laker Lanny with most Laker fans. Lanny is an idiot, pure and simple. Sort of a local village idiot.

Anyway, this talk of "they're a team" more than the Lakers can't be proven until we actually see how the new squad does.

Quote:

---

We'll see how Boy Wonder does without Batman, this year.

---

We'll also see how Robot Duncan does during his 2nd year without Sarge Robinson.

I guess I'll chime in and give you my 2 cents.....
The Lakers will be good, 50+ wins.
That's the bottom line....
We will sign Malone in the next few weeks, we have a good bench and the best 2 guard in the L.
Nuff said.
Oh and we have Slava...the equalizer