Just how good is this team?

[Lakers_55]

I'll offer up a pesrpective from a Laker point of view. You need your guys healthy. So do we. Were we to lose Bynum again come playoff time, It's going to be tough to go all the way. Same with any other key player for us.

Baring injuries that hurt either of us, the records now are pretty meaningless. Either us could finish well above the other, the season has just started. Mid season acquisitions could play a role as well. However, the key is, who would win if the personnel stays as it is. No logical person can count either out. Your big three was strong enough to dominate from 2005 to 2007, but the league has adjusted. That's what happened to the Lakers after 2002. It was Shaq and Kobe and a bunch of average role players, and we haven't won since. Once you get TP and MG back, don't be surprised if you don't win a lot at first. The key will be how the last month of the regular season goes for both of us. We only play 3 games together in the regular season. You get us at home twice, a night after we play the Rockets both times. If one team can sweep the other in the regular season, Spurs have the better odds to do that it would seem. a 3-0 edge could be a psychological edge for either of us if we meet in the postseason. However, it's way to early to speculate with so many possible outcomes.

Just relax and enjoy the season. I said elsewhere you would be fine while TP and MG are out, and it looks like you are.

[z0sa]

I think the teams in the Western Conference this year are different than two years ago with their frontcourts. I think Phoenix would be a tougher problem this year than last year because they utilize Shaq more.

No doubt the entire landscape of the NBA changed just before last season's trade deadline. But I honestly hope they use Shaq more than Amare - have you seen Amare's numbers against us in the last few PO series? The Big Mouth averagd 15/9 last series, respectively. Not very scary. Even if they force feed him, he's not going over 20/11, which would stall that Phoenix offense just like we want it, and tire him out. He'd also have to nail some FTs. If you remember, Parker scorched them that series over and over, because Shaq doesn't have the ability to close out, and Amare just doesn't care about defense. Rinse and repeat with Manu - not exactly front court problems.

I think New Orleans will be a tougher match-up for the Spurs this year as they got that year experience in the playoffs.

How can you use this AGAINST the Spurs, when the Spurs beat THEM? if any team gets a + in the experience dept, its us.

The Lakers already beat the Spurs in a playoff series without Andrew Bynum. Heck, I think the Spurs could struggle against Denver in a playoff series because of Nene.

Bynum has pretty much failed those high expectations (next DRob?), though he brings something they didnt have before which is a big interior presence. Then again, Manu was hurt, Pop failed to play someone else, we blew three 20 pt leads. LA is the ultimate overhyped basketball club - the Spurs had their number and just didn't pull it off.

Denver? Do we have to look at th Spurs playoff track record to see just how we dismantle Denver postseason after postseason? They can go on a 31-3 record after the All-star break a la 2005 and we will still hand them their asses - Pop has Karl beat in every category coaching wise, and Parker's speed is Billups achilles hill.

Like I said, the Spurs are still dangerous. Parker, Ginobili or Duncan could each drop a 40 point game if one of them got hot. But, I think in a seven game series, that front court will hurt the Spurs.

That's my opinion.

I understand, and am not trying to 'change' it. Just refute your reasons for it

[Allanon]

Bynum has pretty much failed those high expectations (next DRob?), though he brings something they didnt have before which is a big interior presence.

I believe you should have another look. Bynum is rounding into form and his production is increasing. He started the first few games slow but he's starting to really pick it up now.

He's also worked on other aspects of his game (Defense/Mid-range jumper). Hollinger, Barkley and another ESPN article have attributed Bynum as the biggest reason for the Lakers improved defense. Bynum has been a serious defensive force.

Bynum has added major defense to his already solid offensive game. His explosiveness is coming back again.

As the season progresses, the Lakers will change to a more post-oriented game and that will mean more touches for Bynum.

Bynum's well on his way to being on the All-Star team this year (barring any player jumps from Power Forward to Center)

This Bynum is even better than last year's. He should be at 15 points/10 rebounds/3 blocks by January...that's super on a deep Lakers team that has to slice up minutes.

[JamStone]

z0sa,

I think you underrate the Suns. It's not the same team the Spurs faced last season, nor is it the same team it faced the last few playoff series before then. If your argument consists of "we beat them before, we'll beat them again" well then , no team but the Lakers will ever beat the Spurs in the playoffs. Teams change, players get better, players decline, situations become different, injuries to different teams happen, mental mistakes about staying on the bench in a fight may or may not happen. It's not as simple as saying "we owned them before in the playoffs, they can't beat us." Dallas would never have beaten the Spurs in 2006 then.

The experience argument I used for New Orleans isn't in comparison to the Spurs' experience as much as it is to say that as a team they had no playoff experience last year. Now, they know what to expect from a mental approach and style of aggressive play and how difficult it is.

Denver is also a different team. A healthy Nene is a beast. They have poise and tempo with Billups. It would be a different series. No guarantee the Nuggets beat the Spurs if both teams are healthy and face each other in a series, but I think they'd be a much bigger challenge, despite what has happened the previous couple times the two teams have met in the playoffs.

Teams get better. Teams get worse. I think it's happened in the Western Conference and with the Spurs.

[Mavs<Spurs]

The Spurs are a lot better than I thought they would be without Tony and Manu.

However, I think that they do need another big who can help Tim defend and rebound to be considered equally likely to win a 7 game series against LA.

[mystargtr34]

If the Spurs go back to playing Spurs defense, then that alone will give us a shot against anyone in a 7 game series provided everyone is healthy.

Again, if everyone is healthy, i would expect to win a 7 game series against any team in the league, outside of LA and Boston. If we beat either of those two, i would consider it an upset. But, alot of things can happen until then, right now im just happy to see the young guys and the new guys playing so well, and to be at 6-6 (5-1 without Tony) without Manu and Tony is pretty incredible. This should be a fun season when everyone returns.

[mrspurs]

The Spurs are a lot better than I thought they would be without Tony and Manu.

However, I think that they do need another big who can help Tim defend and rebound to be considered equally likely to win a 7 game series against LA.

Not just the Lakers.

[K-State Spur]

z0sa,

I think you underrate the Suns. It's not the same team the Spurs faced last season, nor is it the same team it faced the last few playoff series before then. If your argument consists of "we beat them before, we'll beat them again" well then , no team but the Lakers will ever beat the Spurs in the playoffs. Teams change, players get better, players decline, situations become different, injuries to different teams happen, mental mistakes about staying on the bench in a fight may or may not happen. It's not as simple as saying "we owned them before in the playoffs, they can't beat us." Dallas would never have beaten the Spurs in 2006 then.

The experience argument I used for New Orleans isn't in comparison to the Spurs' experience as much as it is to say that as a team they had no playoff experience last year. Now, they know what to expect from a mental approach and style of aggressive play and how difficult it is.

Denver is also a different team. A healthy Nene is a beast. They have poise and tempo with Billups. It would be a different series. No guarantee the Nuggets beat the Spurs if both teams are healthy and face each other in a series, but I think they'd be a much bigger challenge, despite what has happened the previous couple times the two teams have met in the playoffs.

Teams get better. Teams get worse. I think it's happened in the Western Conference and with the Spurs.

It's still a team that - when they have their best 5 on the floor - have 3 BAD (not mediocre, but BAD) defensive players out there at a given time.

Historically, Parker owns Nash. And I don't see any reason why that would change. And even this year's edition of the Suns aren't going to beat anybody in the playoffs if they don't have the advantage at the PG position.

[Frenchise player]

z0sa,

I think you underrate the Suns. It's not the same team the Spurs faced last season, nor is it the same team it faced the last few playoff series before then. If your argument consists of "we beat them before, we'll beat them again" well then , no team but the Lakers will ever beat the Spurs in the playoffs. Teams change, players get better, players decline, situations become different, injuries to different teams happen, mental mistakes about staying on the bench in a fight may or may not happen. It's not as simple as saying "we owned them before in the playoffs, they can't beat us." Dallas would never have beaten the Spurs in 2006 then.

The experience argument I used for New Orleans isn't in comparison to the Spurs' experience as much as it is to say that as a team they had no playoff experience last year. Now, they know what to expect from a mental approach and style of aggressive play and how difficult it is.

Denver is also a different team. A healthy Nene is a beast. They have poise and tempo with Billups. It would be a different series. No guarantee the Nuggets beat the Spurs if both teams are healthy and face each other in a series, but I think they'd be a much bigger challenge, despite what has happened the previous couple times the two teams have met in the playoffs.

Teams get better. Teams get worse. I think it's happened in the Western Conference and with the Spurs.

You are right to say that every season is different and it is not because the Spurs did it in the past that they will do this year too.

But the only team who has proved it can win championships in the west are the Spurs with the Manu-Parker-Duncan core.
The Spurs will only begin to decline when one of these three players don't perform anymore, but so far Parker in the few games he played has been terrific, Duncan is playing like he is 26 and Manu had his best regular season last year.

On the other hand, so far the western conference isn't as good as last year.
Phoenix and Houston are works in progress, these teams are playing worse than the sum of their parts and 2 of their 3 stars have shown signs of decline (it's more than signs for Shaq and TMac).
Denver is not a contender sorry, their entire season hinges on Nene and Martin staying healthy (it would be miraculous considering their history) and Carmelo is not a Franchise player, he doesn't make his teammates better, he is not a leader and that's why they traded for Billups.
New Orleans is probably going to be a contender but they had everything in hand last year and didn't get it done, moreover I don't think they are as good as they seemed to be last year, West was out of his mind in the first games.
In the same category you have Utah, is DWill-Boozer-AK47 a championship core? Don't think so.
Finally you have the Lake show, a great team, Kobe is a franchise player, Gasol-Bynum is the best frontcourt in the NBA, deep and quality bench.

The more things change, the more they stay the same, Spurs-Lakers in the WCF.

[024]

judging from the beginning of the season, the lakers should be the spurs' only focus. even if the spurs can beat the rockets, hornets, or jazz, the lakers remain the spurs' biggest obstacle. lakers just have to make sure they don't screw up by getting injured or getting into petty fights about playing time. if they can do that, barring some major addition on another contending team, the lakers should blow through the western conference. hopefully, the lakers will come back down to earth the say way the spurs did last year. if the lakers keep up their intensity and continue to develop, they are going to be a very hard team to beat.

[DPG21920]

I do not think Bynum has under achieved. He is doing well on a crowded team that is still trying to gel. Plus he is still rusty. He is far ahead of what I thought he would be.

[itzsoweezee]

spurs would be championship material if they had quality big men (other than duncan). maybe mahinmi will be the savior, but i wouldn't hold my breath.

[Russ]

All they need to win it all is a big man who can run the floor, play a liitle D, and board some.

Doesn't have to have great basketball skills, just be big, athletic and understand how to take direction.

Mahinmi would seem to be ideal but no one seems confident enough to push him into the fray, whether it be the Spurs, the French national team or an international suitor. Is he bright enough? Ruthless enough? Tough enough? He seems to be the reluctant warrior at this point with "something" missing.

In fact, the Spurs have lost out on international big men recently because the ones they drafted were in too much demand, i.e., Splitter and Scola.

The good news is no one else seems to want Mahinmi. That may be the bad news too.

[mystargtr34]

I do not think Bynum has under achieved. He is doing well on a crowded team that is still trying to gel. Plus he is still rusty. He is far ahead of what I thought he would be.

I think your the first person here to actually say that. People expect him to put up 20-10 on a team where most nights hes the third and fourth option. If he can play 75 games, grab 10 rebounds and block 2-3 shots a game, hes doing exactly what they need him to do. Hes going to get his 8-10 points without much stuff run for him because he so damn long and athletic, and he has good skills. I think the Lakers are pretty happy with where hes at right now.

[barbacoataco]

The Spurs look better than expected considering the injuries. One issue with the Lakers is that Bowen no longer is effective against Kobe, and neither is Udoka. In 2003 Bowen handled Bryant, but not last year. That is a problem, but good team defense could still slow Kobe if the Spurs are really on their game.

[Russ]

The Spurs look better than expected considering the injuries. One issue with the Lakers is that Bowen no longer is effective against Kobe, and neither is Udoka.

How about Hill?

[Mulletino]

This team is better than last years team. We are just short Manu and Tony. Once they come back, Spurs will be unstoppable.

[xellos88330]

I hope that Ian is the 2nd big that most of us here have been clamoring for. If he is, I think we match up well against the Lakers and any other team for that matter.

The main reason why the Lakers beat the Spurs was because noone seemed to be able to meet them above the rim. With Mahinmi who is a solid athlete, could provide the presence above the rim that the Spurs need so far this season. Bye bye easy layups and dunks just because you can jump high.

[mystargtr34]

How about Hill?

Dont know about that. Hes long but hes still 6'2" maybe 6'3" on a good day and about 185. Too small.

[DPG21920]

bump

[ducks]

le contender

[ducks]

they own houston in the playoffs

[CubanMustGo]

bump

[z0sa]

I believe you should have another look. Bynum is rounding into form and his production is increasing. He started the first few games slow but he's starting to really pick it up now.

He's also worked on other aspects of his game (Defense/Mid-range jumper). Hollinger, Barkley and another ESPN article have attributed Bynum as the biggest reason for the Lakers improved defense. Bynum has been a serious defensive force.

Umm... of course the Lakers were going to get better on defensive with Bynum replacing Pau at center, and Pau moving to his more natural 4 spot. It doesn't surprise anyone, and I gave him and LA credit, saying he's a big interior presence. Where did I sell him short?

Bynum has added major defense to his already solid offensive game. His explosiveness is coming back again.

I would beg to differ, having watched Bynum closely since being drafted (as close as I can at least - I've caught at least 20 Laker games that weren't nationally televised in the past two seasons). His offense is going to separate him from many big men, his defense has always been more than decent (what would you expect, him growing up with Tim as his role model? ). But that offense is not going to be there every night, especially come PO time.

As the season progresses, the Lakers will change to a more post-oriented game and that will mean more touches for Bynum.

Bynum's well on his way to being on the All-Star team this year (barring any player jumps from Power Forward to Center)

Why they would go to Bynum more and not Pau should they change their style of game is beyond me (why change your style of play midway through the season anyway?). Pau is just much, much better on the block, and any additional post plays other than usual should go through him.

This Bynum is even better than last year's. He should be at 15 points/10 rebounds/3 blocks by January...that's super on a deep Lakers team that has to slice up minutes.

Its November and 12 games into the season. January is still a month away and a lot of West teams will be healthy(er) by then. Let's talk stats after they happen, not before. Besides, championships aren't won in January. I think you'll want Bynum and the Lakers playing their best BBall come April.

[z0sa]

z0sa,

I think you underrate the Suns. It's not the same team the Spurs faced last season, nor is it the same team it faced the last few playoff series before then.

It isn't? The only difference I see is Matt Barnes roster wise. Terry Porter's system is better than D'Antoni's, but will end up hurting them. The Suns are not made for half-court basketball (other than Shaq, of course). I just don't see how the exact two teams meet this season and anything's different.

If your argument consists of "we beat them before, we'll beat them again" well then , no team but the Lakers will ever beat the Spurs in the playoffs. Teams change, players get better, players decline, situations become different, injuries to different teams happen, mental mistakes about staying on the bench in a fight may or may not happen. It's not as simple as saying "we owned them before in the playoffs, they can't beat us." Dallas would never have beaten the Spurs in 2006 then.

I didnt' really do that, but what do you expect, anyway? PHO for instance. If we meet, the teams are the same, and the mentality that hurt so many the most with that roster, run run run, is gone. I am less scared of the Suns than ever, frontcourt problems or no, and I can tell you most NBA fans can understand my position. The fact we've beat this roster and a similar one three times before it just proves my point.

The experience argument I used for New Orleans isn't in comparison to the Spurs' experience as much as it is to say that as a team they had no playoff experience last year. Now, they know what to expect from a mental approach and style of aggressive play and how difficult it is.

The very fact we beat just last season should be enough. True, they were inexperienced - but they didn't play like it. You could say they didn't do nearly as well on the road, but neither did the incredibly experienced Spurs. I can't see them improving on what was really a special series for them, one I don't expect to happen again even. Last year was their best time to beat this spurs roster as it stands, and they couldn't pull it off. How do I justify this? Pop made some excellent adjustments during the series which would be there from the get-go, like Bowen on Peja, which altered NO's gameplan after Game 3. I would go as far to say that single adjustment alone wins either Game 1 or 2 in NO, even with Tim sick and Manu injured.

They added Posey, a good move, but lost Pargo, who was great for them during the regular season. Posey vs Manu will be excellent to watch when the time comes, but he doesn't put them over the top.

Denver is also a different team. A healthy Nene is a beast. They have poise and tempo with Billups. It would be a different series. No guarantee the Nuggets beat the Spurs if both teams are healthy and face each other in a series, but I think they'd be a much bigger challenge, despite what has happened the previous couple times the two teams have met in the playoffs.

Dude, c'mon. I don't really have to argue this, do I? We've rolled two different Nuggets teams on two separate le runs. I WANT Nene touching the ball and beating us every time, keep it out of Melo's hands and keep him shooting jumpers. Billups? he's one of my favorite players in the L. His leadership is nice and all, but come playoff time, he ain't gonna have his longtime Detroit buddies around, it's going to be this young and inexperienced (except at losing) Denver squad. They're hungry yes, but I don't see anything but another first round exit.

Teams get better. Teams get worse. I think it's happened in the Western Conference and with the Spurs.

You've said this more or less for a while now, but your reasoning behind has no base. You remind me of East Coast journalists writing the Spurs off year after year because they're too old, they're unathletic, they're system doesn't work, this up and coming team will destroy them, etc. We've heard it all before, and by this point I think we can agree its pointless to count the spurs out til they've lost 4 out of 7.

This team we have is better in just about every regard compared to last season, and we were a Manu injury from an epic series against LA. Do we need help upfront? Sure. Which team doesn't need help somewhere?

I mean, really, I'm curious. Phoenix you think got our number, despite losing AGAIN to US after a huge trade? How about utah, whose essentially same team we thrashed on the way to a championship? NO, who we beat in a Game 7 at their home court just last season with an injured Manu? Denver, who we've manhandled two different le runs with them having two different mentalities and major pieces, and having late season runs? Portland, who'll be lucky to get 3-4 games over .500 and a playoff spot? Dallas, who has a worst record than us right now despite being fully healthy? Houston I mention with a bit of fear, but considering what we did to them without Manu and Tony just a few games back ... I don't see their hearts in the right place even yet, which means it may never happen.

Lakers and us take the cake in the West. Don't buy into the "pundits" on ESPN, bro.