Joined: 14 Apr 2001 Posts: 144462 Location: The Gold Coast
Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:08 pm Post subject:
Jeffs wrote:
Duncan? For one of his titles, he had Robinson (nuff said). Then he had Parker (All Star) and Ginobili (Olympic Gold Medalist). Duncan was easily the best player, but he didn't do it all by himself.
Nothing personal, but that is one of the stupidest arguments ever. That ranks right up there with "but Phil has never won a title without great players". Players don't win titles by themselves, even as dominant as Shaq was for a few seasons he couldn't do it alone. And no coach has ever won a title with a crappy team. _________________ RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023.
Joined: 14 Apr 2001 Posts: 144462 Location: The Gold Coast
Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:11 pm Post subject:
Luke wrote:
Give me Pippen and Rodman and some smart shooters ( Harper, Kerr) and I'll give you a contender built around Kobe.
Can't do it without that intimidating big man, can you? That is where Bynum's value exceeds that of Gasol. _________________ RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023.
Joined: 14 Apr 2001 Posts: 144462 Location: The Gold Coast
Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:12 pm Post subject:
golakersgo121 wrote:
venturalakersfan wrote:
Luke wrote:
Give me Pippen and Rodman and some smart shooters ( Harper, Kerr) and I'll give you a contender built around Kobe.
Can't do it without that intimidating big man, can you? That is where Bynum's value exceeds that of Gasol.
Rodman is INTIMIDATING BIG MAN?
He was one of the better interior intimidators of the time. If you scored on him, you worked your butt of doing so. Not to mention the rebounding. _________________ RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023.
Joined: 07 Oct 2003 Posts: 5004 Location: Deep Europe
Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:17 pm Post subject:
venturalakersfan wrote:
Jeffs wrote:
Yes, Shaq has always been on a contender, but he has not carried his team all by himself. Honestly, do you see the Lakers winning their 3 titles without Kobe?
Do you think a team of Shaq, Marion, and Kidd could win some titles? Along with the usual, Fox, Fish, Horry, Ho Grant? I think so.
venturalakersfan wrote:
Quote:
Luke wrote:
Give me Pippen and Rodman and some smart shooters ( Harper, Kerr) and I'll give you a contender built around Kobe.
Can't do it without that intimidating big man, can you?
So, Snaq can have Kidd AND Marion to show how he is dominant ( even if with Penny and Horace Grant he couldn't win...), but Kobe can't have even a good rebounder with him ? He has to do it only with the scrubs you will allow him to have ?
Joined: 14 Apr 2001 Posts: 144462 Location: The Gold Coast
Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2007 2:17 pm Post subject:
Luke wrote:
So, Snaq can have Kidd AND Marion to show how he is dominant
Not really, if you watch basketball, you see how dominat Shaq was. And my post had nothing to do with domination, only to show how Shaq could have won a title without Kobe. If the Lakers had gone through with the Kobe for Kidd and Marion trade, I think the Lakers still win titles.
I must say though, great job of taking things totally out of context in a failed attempt to be witty. _________________ RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023.
Joined: 07 Oct 2003 Posts: 5004 Location: Deep Europe
Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2007 2:50 pm Post subject:
venturalakersfan wrote:
Luke wrote:
So, Snaq can have Kidd AND Marion to show how he is dominant
Not really, if you watch basketball, you see how dominat Shaq was. And my post had nothing to do with domination, only to show how Shaq could have won a title without Kobe. If the Lakers had gone through with the Kobe for Kidd and Marion trade, I think the Lakers still win titles.
I must say though, great job of taking things totally out of context in a failed attempt to be witty.
You actually took things out of contest quoting me : re-read my posts and I said that I didn't want to trade Bynum for gasol bc Kobe needed a good big man who can protect the paint : I never said it differently, and here we agree.
Then, I argued with Wolf about building around Kobe or Shaq ; it was a different thing, but you quoted me and you run with that quote out of context to try to show something else .
If you are careful re-reading, you will understand that Bynum/Gasol and Shaq/ Kobe were two different arguments...
So, Snaq can have Kidd AND Marion to show how he is dominant
Not really, if you watch basketball, you see how dominat Shaq was. And my post had nothing to do with domination, only to show how Shaq could have won a title without Kobe. If the Lakers had gone through with the Kobe for Kidd and Marion trade, I think the Lakers still win titles.
I must say though, great job of taking things totally out of context in a failed attempt to be witty.
His point is solid.
You give Shaq one of the best PGs ever, and another 22/10 player who can be a lock down defender and spread the floor, and yeah, you'll have a good shot. How about if you gave Kobe Dwight Howard and Chauncey Billups? Do you think he'd have a shot to win a title? I think so.
I assume you included Kidd/Marion because of the possible trade at the time. What do you think the Lakers could have gotten for a non-disgruntled Shaq? They could have EASILY gotten two all stars and won a few titles with Kobe as the centerpiece.
I know you love Shaq to death, VLF, but he didn't win (bleep) by himself. He always had all star guards around him.
As for the Duncan argument, you're the one that is taking it out of context. The argument was made that Kobe wasn't able to win a title without Shaq, while Shaq won one two years after leaving Kobe. My point is that Shaq had ALL STARS on his team, helping him win. It isn't fair to compare Shaq and Kobe when one team has so much more talent on it. If you put Duncan on the Lakers, and take Kobe off - do you think this team wins a title? No. If you put last year's Shaq on the Lakers - do they win a title? No. That's the point. _________________ Jeffs
I feel like I just watched someone TRULY give 100%. Not the BS I'm-gonna-give-a-110%-just-like-everyone-else-says platitudes, but someone that went until he just....broke. - GT
I don't trade Bynum for Gasol for the simple fact that there have been and there will be, other trades that will cost a lot less. The idea is to obtain as many quality pieces as possible, not trading one for the other.
Furthermore, if Bynum is the next Duncan or even Shaq, you've just traded away a lot more chances at titles.
Shaq won a ring in 2 years. He's been to the Finals 2 times without Kobe and consistently been on a contender in his career.
He went to the finals with Wade and Penny. How nice of you to omit the fact that in all occasions he went to the finals he had the benefit of a dominant guard and good bench depth. He did squat before Kobe, Wade and Penny.
MJ also had Scottie Pippen and he did well enough with the depth in his team. If only Odom would become like Pippen, it wouldn't be a question if we'd win a title, but when. _________________ "In essence, the trade was: Shaq, Rick Fox and Gary Payton for Odom, Kwame, Mihm, Profit, 2nd round picks, a 1st round pick and 30 million in luxury tax saviings." - LakerJam
And Kobe's span this league will probably be longer than most here think.
More importantly since Kobe has shown that without Shaq he has struggled to make the playoffs and then get out of the 1st round ... building just around Kobe is foolish.
SG's just don't impact the game like 2-way bigs do.
Kobe's a great individual player. However If I had to choose between worrying about building a team for him now or developing my prodigy who is on pace to become a 2-way big ... It is not even hard for me which one I choose.
And unlike most .. I was saying the same thing a year ago when Artest trade talks were dominant. That was before Drew even broke out and showed that he could help right away. Now that it's become even more obvious that he can, it is absolutelty foolish to even think about trading Drew.
Ofcourse with the Kobe only crowd ... nothing but giving Kobe help now matters. Always has .. dating back to Artest last season.
The reasons for our struggle in the past couple of years have nothing to do with Kobe not impacting the game significantly-What a stupid premise. But our coach quitting midway through that season, losing Lamar Odom and Kobe to injuries, switching offense midway. And last year it had to do with our team struggling to learn the offense and Kobe having to carry the load. Hell, we were one rebound away from the second round against a team that we played well against during the regular season. You give Kobe more depth and growth from the players he has and we win a title. We're on the right path, the only question marks on this team are Odom, Kwame and the continued improvement of Bynum.
The main reason the "Kobe-only" (yet another dumb (bleep) title made up by you) crowd want to see improvements now is because they fear Kobe going down and losing his effectiveness. So naturally they want to improve their chances (if possible) now to win with our only dominant player.
Personally, I'm with the people who want to take their time and develop the team around Kobe like it is right now. Don't make the mistake and assume that Bynum is anything but help for Kobe. The team is being built around Kobe not the other way around. _________________ "In essence, the trade was: Shaq, Rick Fox and Gary Payton for Odom, Kwame, Mihm, Profit, 2nd round picks, a 1st round pick and 30 million in luxury tax saviings." - LakerJam
^^ Farmar
Last edited by eniq 0x00 on Wed Feb 07, 2007 3:36 am; edited 1 time in total
So, Snaq can have Kidd AND Marion to show how he is dominant
Not really, if you watch basketball, you see how dominat Shaq was. And my post had nothing to do with domination, only to show how Shaq could have won a title without Kobe. If the Lakers had gone through with the Kobe for Kidd and Marion trade, I think the Lakers still win titles.
I must say though, great job of taking things totally out of context in a failed attempt to be witty.
You're dense. In all occasions he won a title he had the benefit of a dominant guard. He didn't win squat without Kobe, Penny (Finals appearance at least) and Wade. Hell, it was the Wade show in the last finals. If Shaq had demonstrated that success without these guards, you'd have a point, but he didn't, so that's that. _________________ "In essence, the trade was: Shaq, Rick Fox and Gary Payton for Odom, Kwame, Mihm, Profit, 2nd round picks, a 1st round pick and 30 million in luxury tax saviings." - LakerJam
Shaq won a ring in 2 years. He's been to the Finals 2 times without Kobe and consistently been on a contender in his career.
He went to the finals with Wade and Penny. How nice of you to omit the fact that in all occasions he went to the finals he had the benefit of a dominant guard and good bench depth. He did squat before Kobe, Wade and Penny.
MJ also had Scottie Pippen and he did well enough with the depth in his team. If only Odom would become like Pippen, it wouldn't be a question if we'd win a title, but when.
Actually Jordan won with HO Grant averaging 12/9 .. something noone on this team does from a bigman's POV. Again that could be Bynum. It was supposed to be Kwame.
Second Odom is no Pippen but Kobe is no Jordan. Both are similar but either treated differently in games (Kobe) or just not the same player exactly (Odom). So it's really hard to just win like that without having that bigman.
Bottom line ... Lakers will need more bigman play. Even Jordan had Grant or Rodman. Now while Gasol could be that big, the thing is that Kobe isn't exactly Jordan and Odom isn't exactly Pippen. They also play in the zone era which totally changes the way you defend and play on O. Shooting is far more important now than it was before. Defense is no longer like the Bulls .. it's more "contain" defense. This comes from Tex Winter himself on the contain defense part. If Jordan were called the way Kobe is and they had to play through the zone era along with no Ho Grant/Rodman .. they win squat too.
This team needs a shotblocking presence in the middle. They need a low post scorer. That is the last piece to the puzzle in terms of championship talent. They have that in Bynum .. it's only about waiting for him to become consistent (15/10/2 guy). Is Gasol that? Offensively, yes. Defensively? I don't think so.
Oh and on Shaq playing with great guards .. you just PROVED MY POINT. It is far easier to pair a good to great guard with a dominant 2-way big than it is the opposite. Also what have those 2 other guards (Penny and Wade) shown without Shaq? Neither could even take their team to the playoffs (Look at Wade this season without Shaq)
Parker is another great example. Would he be an all-star if he weren't playing with TD on a very good team? Noway. He's making that team because he's 2nd best player on a contender. Not coincidentally the perrenial contenders have a dominant 2-way big on it.
Basically .. If you have a chance (not even a guarantee) of molding a 2-way big like Drew into an elite player .. you just don't trade that. Not even if it helps Kobe a bit more now but potentiall far less later in his career.
I think Lamar is a combination between Horace Grant and Toni Kukok ,but with some low post skills,and ability to draw more double teams in the low post. He isnt pippen ,but more of a cross between those 2. Horace averaged 15 points 11 rebounds in 1994 the year without Jordan and Kukok averaged like 12 points a game.
Lamar is currently averaging 17 points 9 rebounds. _________________ It's Showtiiiime
Best Laker Teams ever
Back to Bynum for a second. I really like the kid but honestly I dont think he's athletic enough to be a dominant center. Compare him to another young big man in Howard. Howard is jsut as big but is so much quicker, and more athletic than Andrew. I think Drew will become a good player, not an allstar but a good player and honestly if we have the chance of getting a KG or a Gasol for him without losing Odom, or Kobe I would definitely look into it. Gasol gives us back what w lost with Shaq and thats an interior threat in the low post. You free up Odom to be a facilitator and not have to worry about the low post duties and Kobe would just keep doing his thing. A Gasol, Kobe, Odom trio with Luke, and the rest of the guys on this team along with the coaching we have in Phil would be a top tier contender right away. Even this year we would be able to win it all and if not this year next year this is a 60+ game winning team and the front runners for the ring.
Back to Bynum for a second. I really like the kid but honestly I dont think he's athletic enough to be a dominant center. Compare him to another young big man in Howard. Howard is jsut as big but is so much quicker, and more athletic than Andrew. I think Drew will become a good player, not an allstar but a good player and honestly if we have the chance of getting a KG or a Gasol for him without losing Odom, or Kobe I would definitely look into it. Gasol gives us back what w lost with Shaq and thats an interior threat in the low post. You free up Odom to be a facilitator and not have to worry about the low post duties and Kobe would just keep doing his thing. A Gasol, Kobe, Odom trio with Luke, and the rest of the guys on this team along with the coaching we have in Phil would be a top tier contender right away. Even this year we would be able to win it all and if not this year next year this is a 60+ game winning team and the front runners for the ring.
I think Bynum is athletic for his size, we are just used to seeing more athleticism at the center spot in todays NBA because most of the centers are actually power forwards. Compare Bynum to Shaq and Eddy Curry and he is probably more athletic then both of those guys. I am with you though about getting Gasol. Bynum will be good one day, but we have the best player in the NBA right now, if we can add Gasol to him and Odom they will contend for 5 to 7 years.
Back to Bynum for a second. I really like the kid but honestly I dont think he's athletic enough to be a dominant center. Compare him to another young big man in Howard. Howard is jsut as big but is so much quicker, and more athletic than Andrew. I think Drew will become a good player, not an allstar but a good player and honestly if we have the chance of getting a KG or a Gasol for him without losing Odom, or Kobe I would definitely look into it. Gasol gives us back what w lost with Shaq and thats an interior threat in the low post. You free up Odom to be a facilitator and not have to worry about the low post duties and Kobe would just keep doing his thing. A Gasol, Kobe, Odom trio with Luke, and the rest of the guys on this team along with the coaching we have in Phil would be a top tier contender right away. Even this year we would be able to win it all and if not this year next year this is a 60+ game winning team and the front runners for the ring.
I think Bynum is athletic for his size, we are just used to seeing more athleticism at the center spot in todays NBA because most of the centers are actually power forwards. Compare Bynum to Shaq and Eddy Curry and he is probably more athletic then both of those guys. I am with you though about getting Gasol. Bynum will be good one day, but we have the best player in the NBA right now, if we can add Gasol to him and Odom they will contend for 5 to 7 years.
No way is Bynum more athletic than a 20 year old Shaq. Go back and look at videso of him at LSU and the Magic! Shaq was a freak for his size! he would start breaks and go all the way for the dunk like Odom does. I disagree with the Shaq comparison, maybe Curry but we saw what Curry did to Bynum last week.
Like you said, we have Kobe in his prime, we have a great player in Odom, and a solid defender in Kwame. We have shooters in Sasha, Vlad, Cook, we have it all. We need a 2nd option and a 2nd option in the post such as Gasol would definitly put us over the top.!
No way is Bynum more athletic than a 20 year old Shaq. Go back and look at videso of him at LSU and the Magic! Shaq was a freak for his size! he would start breaks and go all the way for the dunk like Odom does. I disagree with the Shaq comparison, maybe Curry but we saw what Curry did to Bynum last week.
Like you said, we have Kobe in his prime, we have a great player in Odom, and a solid defender in Kwame. We have shooters in Sasha, Vlad, Cook, we have it all. We need a 2nd option and a 2nd option in the post such as Gasol would definitly put us over the top.!
True. Even before Shaq hit his prime in Los Angeles, his days with the Magic were filled with running full court to block shots, running fast breaks, coast-to-coast dunks.
And your right again, similar to a young Shaq is Odom (without the power and a post game). The rub is that you list all of our greatest qualities as a team right now, specifically "we have a great player in Odom," we compare him to Shaq, and in the end, we still need a 2nd option!?
No way is Bynum more athletic than a 20 year old Shaq. Go back and look at videso of him at LSU and the Magic! Shaq was a freak for his size! he would start breaks and go all the way for the dunk like Odom does. I disagree with the Shaq comparison, maybe Curry but we saw what Curry did to Bynum last week.
Like you said, we have Kobe in his prime, we have a great player in Odom, and a solid defender in Kwame. We have shooters in Sasha, Vlad, Cook, we have it all. We need a 2nd option and a 2nd option in the post such as Gasol would definitly put us over the top.!
True. Even before Shaq hit his prime in Los Angeles, his days with the Magic were filled with running full court to block shots, running fast breaks, coast-to-coast dunks.
And your right again, similar to a young Shaq is Odom (without the power and a post game). The rub is that you list all of our greatest qualities as a team right now, specifically "we have a great player in Odom," we compare him to Shaq, and in the end, we still need a 2nd option!?
LOL you're right ....
Odom is great, I'm liking him more and more but maybe i should have worded it differently. All Im saying is that adding a Gasol to the duo of Kobe and Odom would make us complete! and if Bynum is the piece they want then I would have to consider the trade if I was the Lakers front office.
Joined: 31 Jul 2004 Posts: 14226 Location: city of angels
Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 3:21 pm Post subject:
Bynum is more athletic than Tim Duncan. He's also taller. After his progress this season, he may become a monster next season. _________________ "Darkness cannot drive out darkness. Only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate. Only love can do that." ~~Martin Luther King Jr.~~
Bynum is more athletic than Tim Duncan. He's also taller. After his progress this season, he may become a monster next season.
I dont know I really like Bynum but c'mon fellas, Duncan may be the best big man, low post player of this generation. Maybe we're getting a bit carried away with what Bynum is....
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Rodman is INTIMIDATING BIG MAN? 
