Talking With: Ken Miller, Los Angeles Sentinel (Part I)
Recently, we had a chance to speak with Ken Miller, longtime basketball writer and the Sports and Entertainment Editor at the Los Angeles Sentinel, who shared some interesting views on the state of the Lakers. This is the first part of our discussion.
Brian Kamenetzky: What was your impression of the team going into the season, and have they performed how you expected?
Ken Miller: I think it’s been about what I expected. The Lakers are about where they should be considering the talent level on the team. I think that Kobe Bryant is truly, I think he’s the best player- the best talent in the league, bar none. There’s not anyone in the league that’s more talented and determined than Kobe Bryant. Lamar Odom is a very good role kind of player who can be a leader, but he can only be a leader if Kobe is not on the court. And they need him to coexist with Kobe. They need dynamic play from Lamar Odom when he and Kobe Bryant are on the floor, and I don’t think that Lamar Odom can perform that way. I think that he’s the kind of guy that when Kobe is out there, he’s not going to put up the same kind of numbers than when Kobe is not out there. I don’t know how to explain that. I don’t think that he’s Kevin Garnett. I think that he’s a real solid player. He’s not as versatile as some people give him credit for- I don’t think I’ve ever seen him go to his right. But he’s 6’10”, and you can’t teach height, and you can’t teach athleticism.
The big surprise is Smush Parker. Nobody really knew what this guy was capable of doing, and I think that he has proven beyond any reasonable doubt that the could be an adequate point guard in this league. He’s a solid on the ball defender, I think that he’s very athletic. His leaping ability is surprising. I didn’t think he was that strong in terms of going to the rack. However, his shooting percentage is going to flatline. He is not going to be a consistent outside threat that the Lakers really want him to be. And I think that the x-factor on the team is Sasha Vujacic. If Vujacic can turn out to be a prolific kind of scorer- because he’s not a prototypical point guard, he’s more of a shooting point guard- and if he can consistently knock in long range shots, which he hasn’t been able to do, I think things could turn out to be surprising.
I don’t think this team will make the playoffs, having said all that. I think Brian Cook is a nice player, I think that when they get Luke Walton back you’ll see a lot better ball rotation and ball movement, however on the defensive end they’re going to suffer with that. But what the Lakers have to do in order to be a good basketball team with the talent level they have now, they’re going to have to abandon the triangle. And I don’t think Phil Jackson, with the success that he’s had with the triangle is going to be willing to do that. These players don’t fit the triangle. Kwame Brown is a heartless big guy who doesn’t have the passion or the desire to be a superstar. And I think that if they don’t scrap the triangle, the best case scenario is that they won’t make the playoffs, they probably will fight to win 40 games. I don’t think they’ll win 40 games. Then the big x-factor is, what if somebody goes down, which is inevitable in an 82 game grind? And when someone goes down, this team this team is going to be looking at the lottery, particularly if it’s Kobe Bryant. And I know there’s speculation that the Lakers are going to go after Kevin Garnett. I see no reason why Kevin Garnett would want to come and play with a team that’s not going to contend for an NBA championship.
Andrew Kamenetzky: We’ve been trying to convince some of our readers of that. They’re not all listening.
KM: Number one, he’s not going to come and play with a team that’s not going to be contending for an NBA championship. Number two, I think that people vastly underestimate the code of NBA players among themselves. And having said that, I don’t think that Kobe Bryant’s reputation has healed in that regard. There are a number of players who I’ve spoken to personally around the league who will not come and play with this guy, and I think it was evident in the free agent period. Even though the Lakers $5 million, they couldn’t even convince the marginal players to come and play here. Antonio Daniels, he didn’t want to come. I talked to Tyron Lue personally, and he said that he would never come to play for the Lakers with Kobe Bryant, and so to have that sentiment from the players in the league, your only hope and your only prayer is for someone who’s not in the NBA to come and make a difference in your ball club. And they are horrendous at best in the scouting department and overseas. I think they lucked out with Smush Parker, but the Lakers have failed miserably in the scouting department looking at and evaluating talent.
BK: Why is that? They drafted Vujacic, they brought in Medvedenko, but obviously they’ve missed out on the impact players from South American and Europe
KM: We can go further than that. How could the Lakers miss out on some of the guys that came out of Duke? Daniel Ewing was one. Look at some of the guys that the Lakers passed on this year that are making contributions with their professional clubs. I don’t think that the front office brass that the Lakers have today has the keenness of insight to evaluate talent and make good decisions. And I think that Phil Jackson, as good of a coach as he is, he’s kind of yielded a lot of that responsibility to Mitch Kupchek, who has proven year in and year out that while he might be able to find an obvious talent, he cannot find that marginal talent. And again, when Mitch Kupchek was putting some of these parts together he has no idea and no clue that Phil Jackson was ever going to return to coaching. When Phil does return, they draft a kid, Andrew Bynum, who wasn’t even the best high school player in the draft.
People talk about his upside, but what about it? If his upside is Michael Olowokandi, you’re still in no better situation than you are today. And the Lakers passed up some accomplished players who had played at a high level. I think Sean May would have been a much better fit than Andrew Bynum. But I’ve got to give Phil Jackson credit, because I think that he knows that, “we may not make the playoffs, and we’re gonna lose more games than we win,” but he’s allowing those kids to play, and he’s allowing those kids to get experience, albeit marginally. I think that’s what’s going to make a difference. When you can see what Andrew Bynum looks like after a season or two, then you’re going to be able to gauge. Because you know that the only thing that this guy’s gonna do is to get bigger and he’s going to get better, but how good is he going to be? I think that we could be going into the next millennium trying to replace Shaquille O’Neal.
AK: In terms of Bynum, with the limited minutes he’s played, do you have an impression of him?
KM: You know what, I love the way he runs the floor. I love his feel for the game. There are some players who are just big and can get up and down the floor, but this guy is obviously bright. This guy obviously has a very special feel for the game, to where some things that would come a little more difficult to someone else with his experience level kind of come in a fluid fashion for him. I like his shot blocking ability. He just needs to play. He hasn’t played a lot of basketball period, let alone NBA basketball. But I feel that over the long haul, this guy is going to be a marginally good plodder. I don’t know if he’s going to be a dominant force on the offensive end, but he certainly could change the way you play defense. I like what I see.
BK: If you accept the strategy- and I have a lot of problems with it- the Lakers have chosen: to bide their time, clear cap space, and in two years be in a place to really improve, does it make sense to draft a guy like Bynum? Someone who will be that center you need when the team will be competitive?
KM: I tell you one thing, what the NBA has proven year in and year out is that if you get a guy like Andrew Bynum and put the right pieces around him it makes him a better player. He’s not going to be Tim Duncan, he’s not going to be Shaquille O’Neal. He’s probably going to be somewhere in the neighborhood of a taller, oversized Jarron Collins, or someone like that. But if you put the right players around him, then you have a team that certainly can go deep into the playoffs and depending on the talent level of the players around him can contend for a championship. I’m not saying he’s not the guy, but you’ve got to look at what the Lakers must really feel about Andrew Bynum. If they think he’s that, than why would they go out and invest money in Kwame Brown? The fact of the matter is I don’t believe the Lakers think that Andrew Bynum is the guy...
BK: So you don’t believe they think he’s got the kind of upside to be an all star caliber center?
KM: No.
Subscribe to this Blog What is RSS?
You know, I think I agree with everything Ken Miller said. Everything. Too bad Cupcake and Jerry Buss's numskull son Jim Buss can't be so clearsighted.
Posted by: Jason's Club | November 28, 2005 at 06:12 PM
Great interview idea! Keep up the good work. I've heard Ken Miller on the radio and he always has alot of insightful things to say.
Posted by: oxling | November 28, 2005 at 06:15 PM
Hey BK,
Thats a great interview and everthing KM is absolutely correct. This team wont make playoffs and I think they are better last year with up tempo offense.
But you forgot to ask one more question.
Why Lakers still going with mitch cupcake when he did so many mistakes in evaluating in USA and internationally? Why dont they just fire him. I am afraid to ask but is there any love-relationship building between Jim Buss and cupcake( i mean literally )
Posted by: Laker Fan | November 28, 2005 at 06:45 PM
Nice job, BK. I concur with the bulk of it although it's hard to know about Bynum, he obviously doesn't have the pedigree Lou Alcindor had at Power Memorial. Liz Taylor said, "the best deoderant is success". If Kobe wins it will change the way players think about him, if not it's going to be a long career for all of us. Truth is, players just want to play with big guys that will cover their butt on D and get them easier shots and Gatorade spots. I'm crushed Tye Lou didn't want to come back 'cause of Kobe, what a loss to the franchise and city of LA. His aura alone could have turned things around.
Posted by: vman | November 28, 2005 at 06:54 PM
I agree with most of Mr. Miller's takes. But I don't agree with his assertion that Kobe is the best player in the league. Please. More talented than D. Wade, Lebron, T. Duncan, or Garnett? Not in my book.
Posted by: Coach Casey | November 28, 2005 at 07:03 PM
So, we can add Ken Miller to the list of pundits who think the Lakeshow should abandon the triangle. Both Jack Haley and Reggie Miller said the same. And it was coach Larry Brown who said Phil's "triangle" consisted of Michael, Shaq, and Kobe. Maybe so.
Posted by: G. Abbes | November 28, 2005 at 07:40 PM
Ken Miller seems pretty insightful. If I was a ball player I wouldnt want to play with Kobe Bryant either. Although he is one of the top players in the league. And I have to disagree with my man Ken Miller on Kobe being the best player in the league. Did you forget KG, SHAQ, AMARE, LEBRON, DUNCAN. Kobe at best is the top 6th best player in the league, but even thats questionable with what DWADE, MCGRADY, NASH, NOWITZKI.
Let me tell you something people... last years offense was hell of boring....screen and roll...one on one...3 pt shot .... they had no structure and it was boring....although we dont have the personnel to run this offense its a beautiful thing to watch when ran the right way....
Posted by: petey | November 28, 2005 at 08:37 PM
It ain't the triangle, though it's hard to disagree with the genius of Jack Haley. The triangle doesn't foul Mihm out, force to LO go 1 for December, make Smush show every third game and make 1/3 of the team go down with injuries. Nobody likes this roster, and the roster is the problem. If no one wants to play with Kobe, he's going to have to step up and deal with that one on one with the likes of a KG or whomever the Lakes are chasin'. It ain't Kobe, or Lebron or Wade or KG, it's San Antonio and Detroit, and it won't be the Lakers again till we get a few more go to, step up, night after night, play both ends, basketball savy, under the cap, worth the ticket price, playin' motha fellows.
Posted by: vman | November 28, 2005 at 09:09 PM
Hmm, so he thinks that Bynum has a very special feel for the game, is big, bright, runs the floor well, he likes his shot blocking abilities, and thinks that Bynum will get bigger and better - but thinks his upside is a marginally good plodder? Doesn't that contradict what he said about Bynum? Usually "marginally good plodders" don't have a very special feel for the game, to go with size and their ability to run the floor. YMMV.
Oh, and trading for Kwame doesn't reflect in any way on what the Lakers think of Bynum - the Lakers intend for Kwame to be their power forward, not center. They could be confident that Bynum will ultimately be the best center in NBA history and still want to get an athletic power forward. (not that anybody thinks that Bynum will be THAT good, but the point stands)
I don't know about all of his comments - but being so inconsistent at best in his comments on Bynum doesn't give me a lot of faith in his analyses.
Posted by: akrasian | November 28, 2005 at 09:10 PM
I would agree with most of what Mr. Ken Miller said, specially what he said about Sasha Vujacic, whom I am a fan of. But I would disagree about his assertment on the Kwame Brown deal in relation to drafting Andrew Bynum. I think getting Kwame had more to do with the Lakers needing size in general. Also, its unfair to consider missing out on Daniel Ewing a mistake. I thought the selection of Ronny Turiaf was a very good selection, while also satisfying the Lakers need for size, nobody expected him to have a heart condition. The Lakers are really missing him with the heartless play of Kwame. I have also been wondering how much the NBA is similar to the NFL. The NFL is always considered a copy-cat league, when one team is succesful doing something no one else is, then the other teams copy them. When an organization like the San Antonio Spurs have so much success with overseas players and when players like Peja, Nowitzki, and Yao have so much success, you would expect other teams to follow. So its very disheartening to hear about the Lakers horrendous lack of effort in the scouting department and overseas, specially when the Lakers were one of the pioneers with Vlade Divac. The blame for this falls directly on owner Jerry Buss. Now, for the most serious of manners, if Lamar Odom can only be a leader and at his most effective when Kobe isn't on the floor, then Odom has to go. What type of 1-2 punch can Kobe & Odom possibly be if they are better with one of them on the bench. So I say the Lakers push up the waiting period, take Odom and any package to balance the salaries for one of those big expiring contracts everyone is always talking about (maybe, Jalen Rose). This offseason, make a run at Peja, who would be perfect for the triangle offense and be reunited with Divac (a very close friend), and Nene, whose rehab is way ahead of schedule and with the Lakers PF spot just waiting for him.
Posted by: Oscar Garcia | November 28, 2005 at 09:20 PM
personally i think lakers should trade odom too. they would be doing odom a favor cuz honestly he doesn't look like he wants to play for LA. he looks completely lost in the triangle, just keep jacking up 3s. he's playing worse than last yr. he does not look like the same player he was in miami and in the clippers.
Posted by: Michael | November 28, 2005 at 11:17 PM
I agree with everything KM said. And to everyone who says otherwise, who else can play defense and offense like Kobe can? T-Mac? What a joke he cant even stay healthy. D-Wade? He's a shorter version of Kobe. I would say Lebron, but he can't play defense the way Kobe does so that would rule him out. KG? I don't think so. The only players that can compare is Tim Duncan, and Shaq. Last I heard Shaq's injured. So that leaves Duncan. Until the Laker's can start winning more games, I would say Duncan ranks ahead of Kobe for the time being.
Posted by: Frustrated Laker Fan | November 28, 2005 at 11:26 PM
I disagree with a lot that Ken Miller has to say.
The team is young. The team has been together running the triangle for only a few games, only a few months. The players, each have to dedicate himself to growing and developing. The triangle is a very complex offense which can't be picked up easily unless you have very experienced players as the Lakers had in their last championships.
In regard to Lamar Odom, I think he is still learning his role in the triangle (as are they other guys). He does have to be more aggressive and consistent. He has to take a leadership role. Kobe will get his shots. But Lamar also has to get his shots.
Smush is a real find. He just has to be much more consistent. It's hard work being a superstar. You have to bring your A game every single night.
Kwame Brown is an enigma. He has the physical skills. He is trying. I get the feeling he is still very much a rookie and is learning the basics. Footwork is still a problem which gets him into foul trouble. If Kwame develops into a Jermain ONeill, I'd be very happy.
Mihm still has to work on his footwork. Fouls come to easily when you don't move on defense and instead reach in. Mihm has to work on consistency.
Aron McKie is still getting his feet wet in the triangle.
I'm not sure if Sasha can develop into a hard-nosed competitor. He's still too frail.
Andrew Bynum is still a very young buck. He is not the dominant high school player that Kareem was. However, Andrew is bright, has talent. He can develop into an effective center. He may not be a Tim Duncan, but team a good center with a Michael Jordan-type player and you can be successful.
The team is young, inexperienced, learning to run an offense which requires players who are thinkers, who have a lot of trust in one another, who can work as a unit. I'd say, give them time.
Sure, scouting has been a problem. But Andrew Bynum, I think, is a great pick. Ron Turiaf would have been a very nice player if he did not have heart problems. Now that he has completed surgery, the Lakers may still have great use for him next year.
Posted by: James Katt | November 28, 2005 at 11:46 PM
First of all Antonio Daniels did not come to the Lakers because they offered 2 years with a third year optional at the mid level exception ($5 million) and he eventually signed a 5 year deal with the Wizards. So he chose the Wizards because they offered him at least $20 Million more than the Lakers.
2. T Lue signed with the Hawks because he believed he would get more playing time and had already been cut or not re-signed by Phil Jackson once, coming off his best season after winning the NBA championship and playing sensational D on Iverson in the finals, so why would he come back to play for the same coach?
3. It is too early and a little irresponsible to claim the A. Bynum's upside is at best “Olowakandi”, the Kid is barely 18 and unless Ken Miller is a part time soothsayer, I would like to know where is he getting his information about Dre’s future from?
4. Kwame Brown is a PF and Dre (Andrew Bynum) is a Center, if Ken Miller does not know the difference between the two, then his analysis is suspect at best.
5. Players go where the money is (example: Joe Johnson to Atlanta) everything else is secondary to suggest otherwise is a joke.
6. I strongly suspect that Phil Jackson with the 9 Championships knows a little more about basketball than Ken Miller and should know what is best for a team he is being paid $10 million to coach.
7. Sean May has been brutal off the bench for the Bobcats, if you don’t believe me check his stats, and yes, he is a little undersized to play PF in western conference.
Finally he is right; Cupcake stinks as a talent evaluator.
Posted by: Let The Truth Be Told | November 29, 2005 at 01:19 AM
I don't agree with everything Ken Miller said. But he offers some interesting points for debate and he has obviously spent time seriously studying the Lakers. Kobe Bryant's image around the league is a complicated thing. It's been shaped by the constant efforts of Shaquille O'Neal and Phil Jackson. And Kobe himself. I believe it's much more of an image versus reality thing, that Kobe's great competitive nature will win out. I covered the great Bulls teams closely, and people forget that Michael Jordan is not a man who was loved by teammates. Ditto for Larry Bird in Boston. Or Isiah Thomas in Detroit. I wrote books about both of those teams and saw these things first hand. If it were a popularity contest, we'd have never heard of any of those guys.
I think the key issue with the Lakers is time. And nothing points that up more dramatically than Kwame Brown.
Given the lack of depth in the Lakers frontcourt, fans find themselves in the same boat as the coaches. They have little choice but to hope that Kwame Brown finds his game in the spotlight in Los Angeles. It's not an easy situation to be in. The pressure is immense, and even heavier considering Brown's miserable start to his career. Should he have punched his lottery ticket and jumped to the NBA out of high school as the number one overall pick? If you're his accountant, the answer is a resounding YES. He's made millions. Yet he's rapidly becoming the poster boy for everything that's bad about the NBA's speculative raiding of high school talent.
On the other hand, if there's any coach who can help him ressurrect his basketball life, it's Phil Jackson. This should be remembered about all the Laker roster, young and old: It takes a minimum of two years to learn the triangle offense and to gain a sense of confidence in it.
Ron Harper struggled through a miserable 1994-95 season in Chicago and was said by many, even his coaches, to be at the end of his career. He hated the offense and was thoroughly confused playing in it. The very next season the system suddenly clicked for Ron, and he became the crucial unsung factor in the Bulls going on their 72-10 run. He played that key role in three straight championships in Chicago and later came to Los Angeles as the key elder starter. He retired after winning two more titles in L.A. and at the time was considered one of the best triangle players ever.
The lesson is all of this for Lakers fans? It takes two years. Don't be so quick to judge these guys, even a kid like Kwame trying to find his way.
As Tex Winter told me, you see all that talent in Kwame and you just hope that he has it in his heart and in his head to work hard and get better. Kwame Brown needs time to reveal that. This is not an easy task. Ron Harper busted his butt and did it in two years. I sure wish Phil Jackson had decided to keep Harper or Scottie Pippen on his coaching staff. Those guys are needed to guide and calm these current Lakers. As for abandoning the triangle, it's won nine NBA championships over the past 14 years and just missed at one other.
The jury is also out on Kupchak, but remember, Jerry Buss has never been eager to spend crazily on talent. He keeps his eye on his money. As former Lakers coach Del Harris explained to me, Buss would never pay for a third superstar when Shaq and Kobe were there. He's also reluctant to spend on good role players. There's been a wall of negative noise in L.A. for two years. It's going to take at least two years for that to settle down, for the coaches and fans to see what this team is capable of doing. Impatience and more stridence are the last things the Lakers need right now.
Roland Lazenby
Author of The Show, The Inside Story of the Spectacular Los Angeles Lakers Told in the Words of Those Who Lived It
Posted by: Roland Lazenby | November 29, 2005 at 02:23 AM
Hey, Ron, do you really think the "triangle" won nine championships . . . or did the Bulls and Lakers win despite it? Both the Bulls and the Lakers improved dramatically on the defensive end of the court but I would guess that they improved hardly at all on the offensive end of the court. I mean, why spend so much time and effort implementing an offense that's no great shakes anyway? It seems to me it represents alot of wasted effort.
Posted by: Skip Jones | November 29, 2005 at 04:51 AM
Kupchak is a disaster. I can only think of one good move he's made in the last five years -- trading Glenn Rice for Horace Grant. That's it. Otherwise, he's made one stupid move after another. His record speaks for itself.
Posted by: O.C. Biker | November 29, 2005 at 04:53 AM
I have to agree with Roland, as Laker Fans ,the best we can do is wait. I know as Lakers Fans that's going to be the hardest thing for us to do. Oscar I agree I would love if the Lakers found a way to bring Jalen in here. As far as the Kwame situation, I dont know what to say ,I dont trust Kupkake but I do think Kareem will help him and the kid. So with that in mind (KEEP HOPE ALIVE!!)
Posted by: shaun | November 29, 2005 at 06:07 AM
Hey Coach,
Kobe Bryant is not more talented than D. Wade? Kobe has three rings. How many does Mr. Wade have.....I know we are talking about individual talent here but I bet in five years or so Mr. Wade will still be a rigless wonder. He (wade) is a great player but bettrer than Kobe??? On skills alone I think Bryant is much better, once you factor in heart and desire it just aint close.
Great interview.
Posted by: todd | November 29, 2005 at 07:49 AM
Roland, there is huge difference between being loved and being respected.
Jordan, Bird, Thomas may not have been loved (though I submit were you to ask their teammates when the champagne was drenching their scalps, their stories might change). But they were all respected. Kobe isn't loved; who cares? He isn't respected, as a teammate or player, and that's the Lakers' problem.
Posted by: poster | November 29, 2005 at 07:51 AM
I don't have the time to explain how wrong Ken is with this interview. But, everyone has their own opinion and they just want to add more contraversy to this blog so that people will actively respond.
They traded for Kwame because they think Andrew is not their future all-star calliber center? GIVE ME A BREAK!
We all know Andrew is going to take like 3 years to develop. He's 18. Get real!
Antonio Daniels didn't come because he wanted more years on his contract!! Research your statements first!
Phil Jackson never thinks "We're not going to make the playoffs". Get real!
Posted by: Zen | November 29, 2005 at 08:35 AM
Alright Sir Lazenby!!! Now THAT'S a true and complete picture of what's going on in with the Lakers. TWO years everyone!! Personally, I see future greatness for this team.
Posted by: Reality not Perspective | November 29, 2005 at 08:44 AM
When Lue decided he did not want to come back to the Lakers, it did not surprise me at all, especially when after he made that decision his name came up in a possible deal with the Heat. Why? Because more than likely Shaq made a phone call on the side to talk Lue out of it. And for the person who posted that they would take Wade over Kobe, you have to be kidding me. The Heat have more offensive weapons to keep the defense honest and know their roles, just like the Lakers used to have during the championship years. That, in turn, opens up the floor for Wade to roam. Kobe doesn't have that, and until both the Buss family and Kupkake wake up and model what Detroit and San Antonio have done (built through drafts and trades) to get where they are now, then we will continue to move behind the Clippers (since it looks like Sterling finally got the memo).
Another Shaq factor: if you take a look at how Shaq acted post-Jerry West, it seems as if there was resentment on Shaq's part towards Buss for letting Jerry West walk (along with his lack of respect for Kupkake). I believe if Jerry West was still there, he would have been able to get Shaq to compromise as much as he has financially in Miami (and still be the highest paid player in the league).
In terms of Odom, what the Lakers should do is figure out a way to trade him for Al Harrington and change. If he doesn't work out, he's off the books this year and the Lakers can use that money to go after Peja and/or KG this summer. The Hawks are way under the cap, and definitely able to take on Odom's salary. Odom would be the man in Atlanta and would be the point forward and get the ball to all of the other players on the team (especially since some posts think they have more talent on paper). Harrington would not be afraid to score and can get to the hole if Kobe gets him the ball. He's around the same age as Odom, but with the aptitude to score more consistently.
Posted by: Rich1906 | November 29, 2005 at 08:56 AM
Roland's rationale is dead on, but tonight, as the triangle doesn't form, we're going to need a place to vent and that's where this blog comes in. Especially if you're a season ticket holder. At those prices, impatience is a virtue.
Posted by: vman | November 29, 2005 at 09:07 AM
Antonio Daniels didn't want to play with Kobe? In what world? The man wanted a long-term contract wich the Lakers weren't offering. Do your homework please.
Posted by: Kemi | November 29, 2005 at 09:29 AM
Players don't come because of Kobe?? Funny how Ken Miller conveniently leaves out the fact that the Lakers were not offering long-term deals and this had an effect on free agents such as Antonio Daniels. I guess when you personally hate Kobe that much then you would develope selective memory too.
Posted by: Kevin Trac | November 29, 2005 at 11:35 AM
Players around the league and the Names you come with is T.Lue?give me break Ken,I tought you know Basketball,how much the Lakers offered those guys and for how many years?
As for the Lakers, we not just couples pieces away for been a good team that`s a player like Harrington
will be great for us or a pick up like Tim Thomas who probably will be waives by the Chicago and even Jalene, tough he can play defense,
Posted by: Rock( Toronto) | November 29, 2005 at 12:17 PM
I agree with most of what Ken Miller had to say and the interview was very refreshing and thought provoking. I also agree without a doubt that Kobe is the best talent in the league.....his heart and determination and ability to "show up" in the biggest moments is unmatched by any player in the NBA today.
I don't agree however that players will not play with Kobe....I think Antonio McDaniels considered very carefully the Lakers but Washington offered him more guaranteed years than did the Lakers who only wanted to give him two years. In the case of Tyron Lue if he allowed his emotions to drown his logic then he failed to see the big picture.....like Micheal to Sonny in the Godfather "this isn't personal Sonny,...this is business". When we mature we realize that we don't have to like one another personally in order to achieve a goal together bigger than both of us.....I am sure that Ken Miller understands that Kobe had a problem with popularity among players long before the legal problems began.....a lot of it had to do with envy of his early success but most of it was do to as Roland Lazenby truthfully stated Phil Jackson's manipulation of the media and a gullible public that believes what they read in the paper.
Ken Miller's assessment of the triangle offense is right on and I couldn't disagree more with Roland Lazenby about having patience with this offense. I love Roland's articles and his in-depth analysis of the Lakers is superb (one of the very few) but he is dead wrong about this issue. Let me ask a hypothetical question.....Could the Bulls and the Lakers have won Championships by running another offense? I would say yes.....as long as they retained Micheal Jordan, Scottie Pippen, Kobe Bryant and Shaquille O'Neal.....I could even make the argument that the Bulls and the Lakers didn't win the titles "because" of the triangle offense....but that they won them "despite" the offense. Let's see... if it is the Triangle offense then how did San Antonio, Detroit, Houston, Isiah's Pistons, Magic's Lakers, and Bird's Celtics win titles? None of these teams ran the triangle.....did they? Am I missing something? Can someone answer that for me?
When you look at the only game the Laker's won in the 2004 Finals what happened? During the fourth quarter and overtime they abandoned the triangle and put the ball in Kobe's hands who literally killed the Pistons with his penetration off screens into the lane and the gut of the Piston's defense similar to what Dwade was doing last year for Miami.......Larry Brown made the adjustment of double-teaming Kobe and even triple teaming him when he put the ball on the floor in the triangle but he allowed single coverage on Shaq.....Phil Jackson never made one adjustment to this strategy the rest of the series, continued to run the triangle and was thoroughly out-coached.
My point is Basketball is not static....basketball is alive and it is a series of adjustments....not one move or system will work all the time....part of coaching is being able to make adjustments to fit your roster to get the most out of them now....not two years from now.
In two years all of Los Angeles may be in the Pacific Ocean.
Posted by: pfunk36 | November 29, 2005 at 12:18 PM
I heard Dennis Rodman is looking for a job.Sign em up
Posted by: Emil in Long Beach | November 29, 2005 at 01:18 PM
Ken Miller:
I know Antonio personally and he said himself he would have been a Laker if they would have added 2 years onto the deal they were offering.
Nice try though trying to slander Kobe a$$ clown.
Get some brains and some morals.
Posted by: Jake | November 29, 2005 at 03:17 PM
This has got to be the worst interview I've ever read. And of all places, to read it on a Lakers blog, for Laker FANS, not haters. All of Mr. Miller's points illustrate the fact that he thinks the Lakers suck and will suck for a long time. What kind of optimism is that? And if he has such feelings, they should be posted on the Sacramento Kings website, because Laker fans don't wanna hear that kind of garbage.
Posted by: Yonatan | November 29, 2005 at 03:33 PM
I just wanna give pfunk a quick shout out for the Sonny Corleone reference. Any "Godfather" reference is always welcome.
AK
Posted by: Andrew Kamenetzky | November 29, 2005 at 04:15 PM
Yonaton,
Sorry if the interview seems negative, but everyone needs to remember something. Brian and I are doing the blog as journalists first, not Lakers fans. We're gonna focus on everything good, bad, ugly, funny and sad all season. As a fan, just use these sentiments as motivation to root harder and rally other members of the nation. But in trying to get you guys as much perspective as possible, negative thoughts will be a part of things.
Thanks again for the readership and enthusiasm. We really appreciate it.
AK
Posted by: Andrew Kamenetzky | November 29, 2005 at 04:32 PM
I don't know about stats and defense and one on one player but I do know that there is no one in the NBA that I would rather watch that Kobe. Same goes for some of my family that hate the Lakers. Kobe is like MJ where no matter if you love or hate you'll watch to see what he does next.
In my personal opinion, which worth less than the time it takes to write this, is that they have the talent to make the playoffs. I think if Kobe could set up teamates like MJ used to do they would make the playoffs. MJ put guys like Bill Wennington (sp?) and Will Perdue in a position to get easy buckets. He attacked the basket for no other purpose than getting Steve Kerr and BJ Armstrong an open look. If Kobe could find ways to put Kwame and Chris in a position to get easy buckets and other guys like Smush and Devon to get open looks this team could win.
When Kobe passes on shots or "looks to get his teammates involved" its usually from the perimeter. Its as though he expects them to create shots for themselves, the way he does for himself.
Now do we have the talent to knock down open shots from the outside consistently, it remains to be seen. But I've worked on a jump shot and mine gets better the more I work on it. My point being you can practice a 20 footer and become proficient at it. Role players need to understand their rolls and excel at them.
I think the talent is there.
Peter
Posted by: Peter | November 29, 2005 at 04:43 PM
It’s amusing to me the amount of dialogue about the Triangle and whether or not the Lakers or anyone should run it. At it’s core it’s a motion offense. Yes, players who have been groomed and molded to think a certain way in regards to where they need to be on the court for their designated position (i.e. point guard) have a little trouble grasping it at first, but when it is run correctly there is constant motion and passing and limited dribbling. In my opinion, all the factors of a perfect offensive system. Now, the Lakers have roster issues, there is no arguing that. For some reason Lamar hasn’t lived up to his potential his entire career. To say it’s because of playing along side Kobe is ridiculous. How could playing with someone who is constantly drawing double and triple teams be bad for your game? I’ve watched numerous games this year where Kobe is basically playing one on five and not by choice. If I was another team I would make the rest of the Lakers beat me also.
Where the Lakers have the most trouble is that they have very few marketable assets if they were to desire a trade. Kwame and Bynum are extremely young and inexperienced. Yes, they are both at least two years from being steady contributors to this team. What concerns me is that the Lakers are wasting Kobe’s prime years. If they are planning on sticking to a game plan where they are going to nurture this young team and try to gain cap space in two years then we have to deal with that. I hate to see someone like Kobe miss the playoffs for a couple more years but that’s what we’re looking at. I don’t think hitting the panic button and making trades for the sake of making trades is a good idea, I think we need to realize we are looking at two more lotteries and hopefully a bright future.
Posted by: Andrew Z | November 29, 2005 at 04:45 PM
Laker Fans, stop bringing up Kevin Garnett's name, he is not coming to the Lakers. So stop, you just sound stupid when you do.
Posted by: Oscar Garcia | November 29, 2005 at 05:53 PM
This is a fun and fascinating debate that may never be settled. I think the triangle's value speaks for itself, but that won't stop the debate about it. Yes, those nine championships were won with great players, all of whom had won nothing before the offense created a way for them to relate. It's a way of playing, not set plays, it's a discipline. This Laker group is quite young. If these players find their way in the offense, it will serve them well. I just hope they get the time together to reveal that. Right now, though, it's very painful to watch, which makes it understandable that fans are so frustrated.
As for this blog, I think the interview with Ken Miller was great. I don't agree with many things that he says, but what he offers is provocative. The best thing is the passion Lakers fans have for these subjects. The demands and expectations are very high. It shouldn't be any other way. Just saw the give n go between Luke and Smush for the slam in the third quarter against San Antonio. These guys have their moments, just as they struggle, but they play hard. And as Tex Winter told me, Kobe and all of them want to get it right. They want to do it the right way, and given time, they will. What's amazing is how ready Phil seems to use many of these young players on a nightly basis. Tex says Phil is really digging the chance to be a teacher these days. Thank goodness for that.
Posted by: Roland Lazenby | November 29, 2005 at 07:17 PM
Im afraid I agree whole heartedly with Yonatan. If I want to read negitive comments about the Lakers Ill keep reading the Times. You guys want to report go to the Lakers Facility and let us know whats going on in Practices get real interviews with the Players and People associated with the Organization. But dont just pick any Yahoo with a Journalists tag and interview them. Sorry Guys poor choice in my view!
Posted by: GMac | November 29, 2005 at 10:07 PM
The lakers need a REBOUND PUT BACK Player. The Lakers have NO inside game. No one to rebound all those Kobe MISSES. I have found the man! He is a senior at Florida. He is the SIXTH MAN. His name is CHRIS RICHARD. He is 255 lbs and six nine, quick as a cat, loves to rebound and put back. I've never seen anybody like him in the NCAA tournament. He reminds me of Moses Malone. Greg Oden said, "I swear that guy plays football." Plus he made 25 0f 27 shots in the 6 games on the way to their second straight championship. Forget about the four juniors, I'll take Chris Richard over all of them. Then the Lakers can get rid of Kwame Brown, and Brian Cook. Cook wants to shoot threes and can't and Brown has no offensive game whatsoever. It's embarrassing.
Mr. Mitch Kupchak and Mr. Phil Jackson, I would pleased to the uttermost to to see Chris Richard in a Laker uniform next season. It hurt me when you let Teshean Prince go. Don't let Chris get away.
It looks like Chris will be overlooked in the draft. You need to take him. He is READY TO play!! I guarantee you.
I AM
Daddy West
Posted by: daddy west | April 06, 2007 at 04:26 PM