It's our time now.
The 2003 Lakers? WRONG
I blame Mitch Kupchak for that year for not helping out Shaq and Kobe that year. Our most legit PF was Robert Horry that year. LA looked horrible from the outset, starting 7-13 and limping to a 50-win season and the 5th seed in the playoffs. Minnesota almost knocked us off in the first round and San Antonio should of beat us 4-1 in the 2nd round. Bad, bad team.
2004 I agree
Dude give it a rest. Just be happy if you get out of the first round. LA, SA, NO, or Utah would smoke you guys. You guys will be great in a couple years but you aint ready yet
that's what happens when you win and have the best record in the NBA. Not trying to be a smart-ass but that might have something to do with it
Its tough to make deals that will put you over the top. Not every team can get a Pau Gasol for cap space and some picks. Like i keep saying, if the Spurs get Chris Bosh for picks and some cap space, the Lakers would be the team in the Spurs situation.
It's not just that they're winning, they're also doing it without Bynum. That's 15-20 points and 10 rebounds right there.
If Bynum is back, forget it. I almost don't want Bynum back just to make it more interesting.
Just something, anything would have been good. I heard of teams wanting Mason or Hill. You can make the case for keeping Mason but Hill too? Chris Bosh could have been the trade to put the Spurs over the top. Giving up Mason + Hill and dumping a salary might have netted Camby.
But is that too short-sighted vision? Mason + Hill are definitely better to keep in the long run, but they came at the expense of winning it all this year.
As for the Blazers, tlong, you guys need a vet, all those young guys won't win a series. Vince Carter/Caron Butler, even Shaq would have been a great addition. By not committing to a vet, the Blazers are waiting for next year. The current Blazers are 2 years of experience away from being a contender.
Last edited by Allanon; 02-21-2009 at 08:35 PM.
When Bynum makes his return, I think you're getting your wish.Bynum was playing like an All-Star. Odom IS playing like an All-Star and then you have Kobe and Pau who ARE All-Stars. And they aren't over the hill like Payton and Malone were.
But I personally like more compe ive games.
If Bynum comes back Im willing to bet Odom doesn't play at the same level.
It's a double edged sword.
Unfortnately it doesnt work like that. There is only 96 minutes to share between Bynum, Pau and Odom. You cant just add Bynum's 13-8 to Odoms current 20-10 since Bynum has been out, there isnt that many minutes.
Odom's production will most likely drop both in overall value, and in per minute value, like it did when Bynum was starting. Bynum negates alot of his game. Players dont just continue to perform with the same production once they are moved to the bench.
I actually think the Lakers are better of in some situations with Pau/Odom instead of Pau/Bynum. More mismatches and problems.
Not to compare Hill to Odom, but earlier this season, while TP and Manu were out, Hill averaged something like 12-4-4 in less than 30 minutes, thats some serious production. Now that his minutes have gone, his per minute production has also gone down. Players need a rythim to their game to perform to their maximum, especially guys who have been career starters like Odom, a 15-20 MPG bench role isnt something you just move into without problems.
I agree, I think Odom's production will drop a bit once Bynum's back. I think the Lakers have three choices.
1) Leave Odom with Pau on the starters which works great. Pau/Odom or Odom/Bynum works better than Pau/Bynum.
1b) Have Bynum come in as a supersub off the bench. He played well with the bench last year as the 1st option on an inside out game.
or
2) Have Odom take back his role as the leader of the bench. In which case his numbers will probably drop drastically as he sets up the bench.
3) Or the option that most Laker fans would love to see, Luke going to the bench with Pau/Bynum/Odom as the starting front line.
I too think GHill is a very impressive rookie...possibly one of the top in this class before it's said and done. But as a rookie he needs major PT to get into a groove, his stats get hit harder than a vet when going to the bench. Odom will probably drop down to 13 points 9-10 rebounds off the bench.Not to compare Hill to Odom, but earlier this season, while TP and Manu were out, Hill averaged something like 12-4-4 in less than 30 minutes, thats some serious production. Now that his minutes have gone, his per minute production has also gone down. Players need a rythim to their game to perform to their maximum, especially guys who have been career starters like Odom, a 15-20 MPG bench role isnt something you just move into without problems.
At the end of the day, getting Bynum back can only be a major boost; even though it will hurt Odom a bit.
u shud reference slamdumb.com in ur signature. I dont think its right to use it without some kind of reference to the site.
2003 lakers were at their worst in kobe and shaq era.. they finished with the 5th seed the last i remember
lakers arent winning i will gurantee that . remmber folks KOBE CANT WIN WITHOUT SHAQ.
goodluck in the finals
Give them time; they've got a young, blossoming all-star point guard, another young 1st rounder, and a likely lottery pick in 2010 that the Mavs gave them in return for that 21 million dollars' worth of old trash.
Give them time; they've got a young, blossoming all-star point guard, another young 1st rounder, and a likely lottery pick in 2010 that the Mavs gave them in return for that 21 million dollars' worth of old trash.
Blossoming? Harris is like a few weeks away from being 26 years old. You make it out as if he's 21-22. Kevin Durant, Dwight Howard, OJ Mayo, Derrick Rose, these are players that will blossom.
Upside doesn't really apply to players in their 5th year in the NBA. What you see is what you get. Maybe slightly better or the same for a few more years before a decline.
The Nets may go somewhere in the future, but it won't be with Devin Harris as their best player.
26 is better than 36 (or however old Kidd is). And Harris is 'blossoming,' he's developing into a much better player than most thought he would.
Heck, Roger Mason is 28, and I'd say he's 'blossomed' this year in San Antonio.
You can argue until you're blue in the face that the word 'blossoming' isn't appropriate; neither is trading away a young future all-star point guard along with two first rounders (one of them a likely unprotected lottery pick) for a broken down 35-year-old.
How the is 2010 "likely" a lottery pick for the Mavs?
You're going to spend a whole year of your life finding out.
one player can never flourish a team, unless he has got some capable assistants. tmac is not less capable individually than Duncan, though he was drafted later than Duncan in 97. the difference between those two guys is just the teams they were drafted to.
TD joined a contend which had got David Bobinson and other decent role players, injury was the only reason why spurs sucked the season before and got the no.1 pick. tmac was drafted to Raptors where there were no other superstar on team (carter was drafted the next year). tmac's ambition and self-respect kept being bashed by loses one after another, finally his ambition and respect was totally destroyed and he has become a coward since then. What if raptors had got the no.1 pick and drafted duncan? Kwame Brown wouldn't have earned the honour of "the the worst no.1 draft of all time" if that had happend.
You can disagree on that. But throughout 2003, the Lakers were crowned the champions despite their less than steller regular season. They were notorious for flipping the switch in the playoffs, and that was supposed to happen.
That year, it was either the Kings or the Lakers.
Bull . None of those teams will smoke us. We're ready now.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
