Reply With QuoteI take it mouse is afraid
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
LMAO! They did call his bluff Einstein, that's why Shaq demanded a trade.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.
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.LMAO! They did call his bluff Einstein, that's why Shaq demanded a trade.
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 at udes 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.
The Clippers will finish ahead of them.
And then he leaves in 2005 and the Lakers are left with Kobe and their thumbs up their asses.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.
That is, assuming Kobe still decided to stick around with Shaq.
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.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.
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.I have a feeling that Kobe was the real reason he wasn't forced to stay.
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.**** 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 at udes 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.
No, they're definitely better than either the Grizzlies or Suns, who have no superstar and can't play any defense.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 Spurms, continue to taste the sweet defeat of 0.4 beetches!Suck it Laker beetches.
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 will finish ahead of them.
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.
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.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.
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 re 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.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.
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.
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.If "mediocrity" is consistently making the playoffs and contending in 2 years, then so be it.
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.No, they're definitely better than either the Grizzlies or Suns, who have no superstar and can't play any defense.
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.
is there really one laker fan on this site saying they'll be contenders next year? Because I certainly haven't read that...Whatever. Laker fans can't accept it but they'll be looking at early exits in the playoffs for a few years.
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???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.
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
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.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.
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.I'm not sure I get your point. Wouldn't most teams suffer if their superstar gets injured???
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 are we going to win a le 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.
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.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
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.
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.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.
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.
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.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).
<< 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 ing sidekick.
The Lakers will not do 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 is going to be LAs pg? Huh. What? Payton? Great. 40 wins. Thats it. Thats all I see.
Kobe isn't without a big man. wake up ducks.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions