|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
im_back
Star Player
Joined: 16 Jul 2008
Posts: 1294
|
 Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 12:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fallout wrote: | | How does the Chicago fans feel about Deng? Do they even know about the LO/Deng discussion? |
i mentioned to a few die hard chi fans. they laugh. they think LO is way overated and no way in hell Pax does that deal |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
JUST-MING
Retired Number
Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 43990
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 12:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fallout wrote: | | How does the Chicago fans feel about Deng? Do they even know about the LO/Deng discussion? |
| JUST-MING wrote: | http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=827236&start=90
| Quote: | I'm down for a Deng+Hinrich to LAL deal for Odom+Farmar.
Gives us immediate cap relief, especially once Hughes is off the books for the wild summer of 2010.
Sure the rest of the NBA will never forgive us, but if we're able to sign LeBron in 2010, who cares? |
| Quote: | Macherie, I'm well aware that Deng+Hinrich >>> Odom+Farmar in terms of productive talent. This is a business deal. We'd be dumping both Odom & Farmar after one season.
The whole idea behind my trade proposal was to unload salary since nobody on the current FA market is going to drastically improve our chances.
http://www.realgm.com/src_freeagents/2010/
There is a crapton of talent outside of LeBron available for 2010. Even if we dont get LBJ persay, there will be much better impact players available on the market than the current crop of RFAs and FAs. If we're going to be in a semi-rebuilding mode with Rose and Tyrus learning the ropes, why not create capspace and sit on it for the right summer to spend? Why overpay for average/above average talent now and handcuff ourselves for the proper summer to be spending? |
| Quote: | | Portland pretty much has to take Hughes to get enough salary to make the deal work with Deng's BYC. |
|
In other words: Odom+Farmar for Deng+Hinrich is like Kwame Brown for Pau Gasol. It's a buisness deal.
Last edited by JUST-MING on Thu Jul 24, 2008 12:33 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakerSanity
Moderator
Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 33474
Location: Long Beach, California
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 12:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
First of all...
| Quote: | Unreal.  |
Don't use the laughing emoticon as a means of degrading a poster's opinion and invalidating their right to have an opinion. It is disrespectul. Thanks.
Now... as for the rest of your post....
| D Nice wrote: | How in the world you can say this...
| Quote: | | I don't know how to respond to that... LO is not a starter in this league? Seriously? I know you two don't like LO, but don't need to exaggerate like that.... just makes any of your subsequent arguments that much weaker knowing they come from an irrational bias |
And then come back with this...
| Quote: | | IMO, right at about 10 it starts to become debatable. I am not a huge Jefferson fan... personally, I think he's a good player on a bad team, like Zack Randolph. I'd take LO over Zack Randolph. I consider Smith and Turkgolu both SFs. I would take Jermaine O'Neal over LO (if O'Neal was healthy) and Rasheed Wallace (at his current age and mental disposition) is about a wash to me. |
Boggles my mind Sanity. Only an incredibly biased/isolated from the rest of the NBA Laker fan would even think for a split second that Lamar is actually a better PF Al Jefferson. Lamarcus Aldrige is also way better, but I could at least see some semblance of an argument made. But Lamar being better than Jefferson? Jefferson being similar to/the same as Randolph? |
First, I assure you, I am not incredibly biased.... anyone who has read any significant number of my posts would say I am only slighty biased (I'm a Laker fan).
Secondly... Yep, I am saying Jefferson may not be any better than Randolph. His defense certainly isn't much better. It's not like he killed anyone in Boston and any numbers he did put up was while he was on a losing team in Boston. Then he comes to another losing team, puts up very nice numbers as the only real legit scorer on the team. To me, plug in Randolph's name for Jefferson and I just described Randolph's career. I may be wrong about Jefferson, but my opinion, which has been echoed by many others, certainly isn't as absurd as saying Lamar Odom is not a starter in the NBA. If in fact Jefferson really is no better than Randolph (which can only be discerned from putting Jefferson on a winning team), then yes, I'd prefer LO. I will certainly recognize though that, for now, Jefferson, as an unproven player, has the upside to be better than LO. That's his real value... his upside.
| Quote: | | Find a sober Blazer fan and ask them if they'd swap Odom for Aldridge. They'll laugh until they start crying, keel over, or do both simultaneously. |
I would laugh too... only because Aldridge is only entering his 3rd year and has the potential to be much better than Odom. However, TODAY... its debatable as to whether LO or Aldridge is the better player RIGHT NOW. I'd probably go with Aldridge myself, but I wouldn't blame someone with going with LO.... that's what makes it debatable.
| Quote: | | Jamison, no, it isn't arguable. Jamison boards just as well as LO, but unlike LO, can actually carry a scoring load and stretch the defense. Both are undersized for their positions, but at least Jamison's offensive ability offsets his post defense. Lamar is at times an offensive DETRACTOR because of his inability to shoot (hence, being benched for freaking Vlad when the game gets tight). Jamison was an all-star and 20pt scorer, things Odom never has, and never will, be. Odom's team defense is a bit better than Jamison's, but that's about it. Whatever passing/handling advantages LO has aren't taken advantage of nearly enough (again, because of his lack of assertiveness/a jumpshot) to offset what Jamison does on offense. |
The fact you just went on to debate it and made a subjective argument that the things LO brings does not make up for the benefits that Jamison brings in fact DOES make whether Jamison v. Odom quite "arguable." You just "argued" it.
I also don't agree Odom is a detractor on offense. He may have his issues, but it doesn't mean his presence on the floor on offense is more often a burden than a benefit. Players who harm a team more than they help it are players who don't get playing time, so that opinion is illogical.
One doesn't have to say "Odom brings nothing" or "Odom is a negative on the floor" to say "Odom doesn't bring enough." That's an example of a polarized/extremist argument that isn't necessary if one's point is just to say "I'd prefer someone other than Odom." All it does is get a rise out of people.
| Quote: | | You could say Turloglu/Smith are SFs, but you'd just be ignoring facts to help your point. They both PLAY PF for their teams (actully, Hedo and Lewis switch off, but since both are better/as good as than Odom, putting one suffices), and that's what counts, because it's the same position Odom would be playing. |
Actually, Turkgolu does play SF for his team... technically, Lewis is the PF. However, both of those guys are SFs. Check the rebounding numbers. They can get away with it because they have Dwight Howard. Smith is an SF.... they just had too many SFs so had to play him at SF/PF. Just like they play Marvin Williams at SF/PF. However, both are much more SFs than LO and LO is much more of a PF than those guys.
I don't alter my opinion based on a debate. I have had this opinion before this argument and I will continue to have it after this argument.... regardless of what happens with LO. Interesting though that you had to accuse me of manipulating facts to support my opinion. Was that necessary?
| Quote: | | I'd also like to add Marcus Camby (or Chris Kaman) to my list of superior PFs to LO. Whichever one starts at 4 is has more impact than he, so the list balloons further. I'll also be willing to bet Beasley has a more productive season than Odom. |
I'll take LO over Camby as well. Camby is older, an overrated defender (great shotblocker, but average man defender and poor on the P/R), and less of an offensive threat than LO. He may be a better help defender and rebounder, but I'll still take LO.
| Quote: | | Seriously guys, stop overrating Odom. We used to need to do it to make ourselves feel better since he was our 2nd best player. We no longer need to do that. We've got 2 legit BALLERS next to Kobe, and apparently we might be able to ship Odom out for a 3rd, who actually fits into the grand scheme of things. |
I am a guy in the middle ground.... I realize LO's weaknesses and, in fact, agree that a better option might be out there. However, your perspective obviously doesn't join me in that middle ground.... given that you're categorizing me as someone who overrates LO when in fact I completely acknowledge his deficits.
Perspectives concerning LO do not have to be so black and white. You say some overrate him... or could it mean you underrate him? Who is to say? However, I certainly tend to think opinions which are willing to see both the good and bad in LO, as opposed to JUST the bad or good, have a better grasp on his worth. The opinions I trust are those who appreciate LO's talents, but also recognize his faults and that he may not fit into the current construction of the Lakers.
Your opinion, in contrast, tends to come off as though it doesn't matter what team LO was on... he's a bum. I just don't find that kind of opinion credible because its too extreme... but of course you're still entitled to it.
_________________
LakersGround's Terms of Service
Twitter: @DeleteThisPost
Last edited by LakerSanity on Thu Jul 24, 2008 12:37 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Omar Little
Moderator
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90307
Location: Formerly Known As 24
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 12:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LakerSanity wrote: | First of all...
| Quote: | | Unreal. |
Don't use the laughing emoticon as a means of degrading a poster's opinion and invalidating their right to have an opinion. It is disrespectul. Thanks.
Now... as for the rest of your post....
| D Nice wrote: | How in the world you can say this...
| Quote: | | I don't know how to respond to that... LO is not a starter in this league? Seriously? I know you two don't like LO, but don't need to exaggerate like that.... just makes any of your subsequent arguments that much weaker knowing they come from an irrational bias |
And then come back with this...
| Quote: | | IMO, right at about 10 it starts to become debatable. I am not a huge Jefferson fan... personally, I think he's a good player on a bad team, like Zack Randolph. I'd take LO over Zack Randolph. I consider Smith and Turkgolu both SFs. I would take Jermaine O'Neal over LO (if O'Neal was healthy) and Rasheed Wallace (at his current age and mental disposition) is about a wash to me. |
Boggles my mind Sanity. Only an incredibly biased/isolated from the rest of the NBA Laker fan would even think for a split second that Lamar is actually a better PF Al Jefferson. Lamarcus Aldrige is also way better, but I could at least see some semblance of an argument made. But Lamar being better than Jefferson? Jefferson being similar to/the same as Randolph? |
First, I assure you, I am not incredibly biased.... anyone who has read any significant number of my posts would say I am only slighty biased (I'm a Laker fan).
Secondly... Yep, I am saying Jefferson may not be any better than Randolph. His defense certainly isn't much better. It's not like he killed anyone in Boston and any numbers he did put up was while he was on a losing team in Boston. Then he comes to another losing team, puts up very nice numbers as the only real legit scorer on the team.
To me, plug in Randolph's name for Jefferson and I just described Randolph's career. I may be wrong about Jefferson, but my opinion, which has been echoed by many others, certainly isn't as absurd as saying Lamar Odom is not a starter in the NBA.
| Quote: | | Find a sober Blazer fan and ask them if they'd swap Odom for Aldridge. They'll laugh until they start crying, keel over, or do both simultaneously. |
I would laugh too... only because Aldridge is only entering his 3rd year and has the potential to be much better than Odom. However, TODAY... its debatable as to whether LO or Aldridge is the better player RIGHT NOW. I'd probably go with Aldridge myself, but I wouldn't blame someone with going with LO.... that's what makes it debatable.
| Quote: | | Jamison, no, it isn't arguable. Jamison boards just as well as LO, but unlike LO, can actually carry a scoring load and stretch the defense. Both are undersized for their positions, but at least Jamison's offensive ability offsets his post defense. Lamar is at times an offensive DETRACTOR because of his inability to shoot (hence, being benched for freaking Vlad when the game gets tight). Jamison was an all-star and 20pt scorer, things Odom never has, and never will, be. Odom's team defense is a bit better than Jamison's, but that's about it. Whatever passing/handling advantages LO has aren't taken advantage of nearly enough (again, because of his lack of assertiveness/a jumpshot) to offset what Jamison does on offense. |
The fact you just went on to debate it and made a subjective argument that the things LO brings does not make up for the benefits that Jamison brings in fact DOES make whether Jamison v. Odom quite "arguable." You just "argued" it.
I also don't agree Odom is a detractor on offense. He may have his issues, but it doesn't mean his presence on the floor on offense is more often a burden than a benefit. Players who harm a team more than they help it are players who don't get playing time, so that opinion is illogical.
One doesn't have to say "Odom brings nothing" or "Odom is a negative on the floor" to say "Odom doesn't bring enough." That's an example of a polarized/extremist argument that isn't necessary if one's point is just to say "I'd prefer someone other than Odom." All it does is get a rise out of people.
| Quote: | | You could say Turloglu/Smith are SFs, but you'd just be ignoring facts to help your point. They both PLAY PF for their teams (actully, Hedo and Lewis switch off, but since both are better/as good as than Odom, putting one suffices), and that's what counts, because it's the same position Odom would be playing. |
Actually, Turkgolu does play SF for his team... technically, Lewis is the PF. However, both of those guys are SFs. Check the rebounding numbers. They can get away with it because they have Dwight Howard. Smith is an SF.... they just had too many SFs so had to play him at SF/PF. Just like they play Marvin Williams at SF/PF. However, both are much more SFs than LO and LO is much more of a PF than those guys.
I don't alter my opinion based on a debate. I have had this opinion before this argument and I will continue to have it after this argument.... regardless of what happens with LO. Interesting though that you had to accuse me of manipulating facts to support my opinion. Was that necessary?
| Quote: | | I'd also like to add Marcus Camby (or Chris Kaman) to my list of superior PFs to LO. Whichever one starts at 4 is has more impact than he, so the list balloons further. I'll also be willing to bet Beasley has a more productive season than Odom. |
I'll take LO over Camby as well. Camby is older, an overrated defender (great shotblocker, but average man defender and poor on the P/R), and less of an offensive threat than LO. He may be a better help defender and rebounder, but I'll still take LO.
| Quote: | | Seriously guys, stop overrating Odom. We used to need to do it to make ourselves feel better since he was our 2nd best player. We no longer need to do that. We've got 2 legit BALLERS next to Kobe, and apparently we might be able to ship Odom out for a 3rd, who actually fits into the grand scheme of things. |
I am a guy in the middle ground.... I realize LO's weaknesses and, in fact, agree that a better option might be out there. However, your perspective obviously doesn't join me in that middle ground.... given that you're categorizing me as someone who overrates LO when in fact I completely acknowledge his deficits.
Perspectives concerning LO do not have to be so black and white. You say some overrate him... or could it mean you underrate him? Who is to say? However, I certainly tend to think opinions which are willing to see both the good and bad in LO, as opposed to JUST the bad or good, have a better grasp on his worth. The opinions I trust are those who appreciate LO's talents, but also recognize his faults and that he may not fit into the current construction of the Lakers.
Your opinion, in contrast, tends to come off as though it doesn't matter what team LO was on... he's a bum. I just don't find that kind of opinion credible because its too extreme... but of course you're still entitled to it. |
Sorry, couldn't resist LS. Good post.
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
OregonLakerGuy
Franchise Player
Joined: 23 Feb 2005
Posts: 13207
Location: Oregon
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 6:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I guess either Sanity let the hot air out of this thread or both sides just moved on to another Odom war  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The End Game
Starting Rotation
Joined: 23 Jul 2008
Posts: 732
Location: Fort Lauderdale
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 6:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| OregonLakerGuy wrote: | | I guess either Sanity let the hot air out of this thread or both sides just moved on to another Odom war |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lakerlgnd
Starting Rotation
Joined: 26 Jul 2001
Posts: 704
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 8:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| GameCock-MD wrote: | | lakerlgnd wrote: | | I haven't read through this entire thread, so appologies if this has been mentioned, but do you think Deng is willing to be the 4th option? He averaged 14.2 shots per game, he's definitely not going to get that here playing behind Kobe (20.6 spg), Gasol (12.3), and Bynum (8.5). Bynum is probably going to get a lot more than 8.5 shots per game, as his were going up each month he got better last year. |
Deng has never been a ball hog. They rode the hot hand. Deng has proven that he can take on the role of primary option. That's something that LO has not.
That's a luxury, not a bane. |
I really don't think we need another guy who could be a primary option, if Bynum develops the way we all hope he does, he could be a primary option. Gasol is fairly close, but not quite there, and with Kobe we have the ultimate primary option. There probably aren't enough shots to go around as is.
| GameCock-MD wrote: | | lakerlgnd wrote: | | Lamar on the other hand averaged only 10.3 shots per game, and he's probably a lot more unselfish than Deng and wouldn't have an issue taking less, and a better passer and will probably create more mismatches. |
Rebounding, passing...neither will be primary duties of SF.
The unselfish comment is false.
How do you know what Deng will and will not have an issue taking?
Mismatches? How about just dominating your PRIMARY position? Deng can. LO can not. |
Passing in the triangle offese is a primary responbility of all the guys on the court, especially from the wing. And having a guy that's 6'10" and can handle the ball, I can just see Odom grabbing the long rebounds and push the ball imediately.
I don't know how Deng would respond as the 4th option, perhaps he'd flourish, perhaps he'd disrupt our flow.
| GameCock-MD wrote: | | lakerlgnd wrote: | | The other thing is Deng is a lousy 3 point shooter (only made 8 all of last year), so if the lineup was Fish, Kobe, Deng, Gasol and Bynum and the ball is in Kobe's hands, where are you going to double off of? Deng. If I was the defense, I'd much rather him shoot the 3 than Fish, they're not going to double off of Gasol or Bynum, because it'll lead to an easy 2. |
Another false statement. Deng didn't TAKE but 22 3ptfgs last year. Making 8 doesn't mean he couldn't hit them. 36% from DEEP = LOUSY???
LOUSY is hitting 27.4% from deep...especially when you MISSED 82 of them...about 4 times more than Deng TOOK!!!! |
31 for 117, 26.5%
21 for 78, 26.9%
1 for 7, 14.3%
8 for 22, 36.4%
Odom is a career 31.4% from 3 and Deng is a career 27.2%. Neither are shooting lights out, but from Deng's trend he's not looking to be a 3 point shooter, and since you said 27.4% is lousy, Deng is below that.
| GameCock-MD wrote: | | lakerlgnd wrote: | | I don't think Deng will make this team stronger. In Lamar you have someone who knows the triangle, you lose him and you lose someone who can initiate the offense. In Deng you're back from square one. |
LO hasn't intitialized the offense for us for about 2.5 years. That ship has sailed. We can't lose something we didn't have.
Deng gives us a complete SF. If that's square one, that's where we need to be. |
Because of Odom's length he'll probably bother more shooters, allowing him to sag off a little more and either help other defenders, but still be able to recover. He'll probably be able to come from the blind side and play the passing lanes.
He's a better passer, rebounder, knows the triangle and fits better with the players we have around. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Drifts
Retired Number
Joined: 22 Nov 2004
Posts: 28374
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 8:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
trade odom for deng now!!! that would be beneficial to all involved.
_________________
"Now, if life is coffee, then the jobs, money & position in society are the cups. They are just tools to hold & contain life, but the quality of life doesn't change. Sometimes, by concentrating only on the cup, we fail to enjoy the coffee in it." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fallout
Star Player
Joined: 03 Jun 2002
Posts: 7626
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 9:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| lakerlgnd wrote: |
31 for 117, 26.5%
21 for 78, 26.9%
1 for 7, 14.3%
8 for 22, 36.4%
Odom is a career 31.4% from 3 and Deng is a career 27.2%. Neither are shooting lights out, but from Deng's trend he's not looking to be a 3 point shooter, and since you said 27.4% is lousy, Deng is below that.
Because of Odom's length he'll probably bother more shooters, allowing him to sag off a little more and either help other defenders, but still be able to recover. He'll probably be able to come from the blind side and play the passing lanes.
He's a better passer, rebounder, knows the triangle and fits better with the players we have around. |
3pt neither of them are good. But if you look at mid range shots, Deng is better. And thats where the damage will be done from midrange for SF.
You're assuming alot with LO. Teams can sag off of LO too because LO doesn't have good jumper. Rebounding is less important, since he's not going to be able to hit the paint as much since Bynum, Pau and the people they're guarding crowding the paint. As far as 'fitting' the player around, how so? He's out of tune playing SF, so that alone doesn't make him a good as a fit in SF as Deng.
I don't know whats Deng's BBQ IQ is. Pau picked it up pretty quick (tho center is easiest position to learn). LO just took a long time because his BB IQ isn't his strongest asset. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
OregonLakerGuy
Franchise Player
Joined: 23 Feb 2005
Posts: 13207
Location: Oregon
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 9:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fallout wrote: | | lakerlgnd wrote: |
31 for 117, 26.5%
21 for 78, 26.9%
1 for 7, 14.3%
8 for 22, 36.4%
Odom is a career 31.4% from 3 and Deng is a career 27.2%. Neither are shooting lights out, but from Deng's trend he's not looking to be a 3 point shooter, and since you said 27.4% is lousy, Deng is below that.
Because of Odom's length he'll probably bother more shooters, allowing him to sag off a little more and either help other defenders, but still be able to recover. He'll probably be able to come from the blind side and play the passing lanes.
He's a better passer, rebounder, knows the triangle and fits better with the players we have around. |
3pt neither of them are good. But if you look at mid range shots, Deng is better. And thats where the damage will be done from midrange for SF.
You're assuming alot with LO. Teams can sag off of LO too because LO doesn't have good jumper. Rebounding is less important, since he's not going to be able to hit the paint as much since Bynum, Pau and the people they're guarding crowding the paint. As far as 'fitting' the player around, how so? He's out of tune playing SF, so that alone doesn't make him a good as a fit in SF as Deng.
I don't know whats Deng's BBQ IQ is. Pau picked it up pretty quick (tho center is easiest position to learn). LO just took a long time because his BB IQ isn't his strongest asset. |
I'm sorry, but I saw that and thought "mmmm steaks" before it finally dawned on me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
