Contract Shtuff
August 8, 2006 | 1:02
pm
Thought y'all might find this article interesting for a few reasons.
1) Well, it's interesting.
2) It mentions Kobe (in a positive light) and Kwame (not so much) by name.
3) It makes you think about both the contracts of newest Lakers player Vlad Radmanovic and the non-contracts of players such as Antonio Daniels, Marcus Banks and even Caron Butler, all of whom would have liked to have been Lakers, but were deemed unworthy of the theoretical price, length of stay, or both. And given that it'll be a piece of time before the Lakers are well under the cap, it's a topic that will probably end up heavily discussed for a few seasons.
—AK
Ken,
I can't counter a rock solid argument like that.
AK
Posted by: Andrew Kamenetzky | August 10, 2006 at 09:29 AM
After reading the rumor mill and that hoopsworld article a few things became pretty clear.
1. Gooden actually stated himself, that he is interested in becoming a Laker (pretty shocking)
2. Harrington's agent said that Al is considering playing for LA and that if things dont pan out with the Pacers, LA is his next choice (more shocking)
3. Altanta (and a lot of other teams) are asking for Bynum and we the Lakers are absolutely NOT giving Bynum up! (Do u hear that fellow LAKER BLOGGERS?!)
4. We dont have the roster space to keep Pinnock, Profit, D. Green, and Von Wafer so MAJOR decisions must be made by training camp.
-My take on all this is quite simple...the least amount of changes, the better for the team as a whole.
-I dont think we should get, nor do I think we even need gooden. He's not that good and he's NOT clutch at all, PERIOD.
-Harrington is a harder decision, because he IS good, but again we dont need him either. Plus we should not give up ANY of our bigs right now, not even Mihm.
-Bynum is going NO WHERE anytime soon (Thank Goodness)
- And finally, in regards to the roster space situation I say we dump McKie. He is a waste of roster space and has done NOTHING for us besides during practices maybe. We should send Pinnock overseas in order to still keep his rights, I like green and profit even more but I dont know their situations/contracts enough to make a final call on them. Oh and Von Wafer, we should have been DUMPED that bum a long time ago! Lets get this together guys, training camp is right around the corner.
Posted by: Blaze1bx | August 10, 2006 at 10:03 AM
Jay-jay,
Gp is certainly not the answer to our point guard situation, if you remember when he played for us he was out of place and didnt quite fit into the triangle, plus he is not a good 3point shooter, yes he is a better defender, but he just doesnt fit into our scheme. And if we were upset with smush last year for all the bad games we would certainly be pulling our hair out over GP. Smush had better field goal percentage and 3point percentage and GP also had like 9-10 scoreless games, if we are concerned with how consistent smush was we shouldnt be talking about GP.
Posted by: ose | August 10, 2006 at 10:20 AM
About the LO/Brand debate i think they both have some advantages, the same way brand cant guard Lo when he is on the perimeter is the same way lo cant guard brand in the post, but with that said, Lo pulling brand out to the perimeter gives us our best chance to win(in my opinion) because brand is a good shot blocker and with him out with Lo it opens up the lane for everyone else, That in my opinion is the X-factor.
Posted by: ose | August 10, 2006 at 10:40 AM
LO does not come close to Brand. I like LO but I'm not delusional. Brand is a significantly better scorer than LO. Brand has a considerably better mid-range jumper than LO. Just last year Brand started taking other power fowards off the dribble. The combination of jump shot and mobility made him unstoppable and reliable. LO has a really good game but he is not as reliable of a scorer as Brand. LO doesn't really have a go to shot on offense. He can do a lot of things. He creates a lot of match-up problems but he does not have a go to shot which makes him a less reliable scorer. If the Lakers had surrounded LO with better scorers his passing ability may put LO on the same level as Brand but LO can only get assists off passes to Kobe. His passing ability did not factor in.
Brand is also a better shot blocker than LO and provides better interior defense. I think one on one defense and rebounding they are about equal.
You guys are also drastically underestimating Livingston. He is an incredible talent. He is better than the Laker's starting point gaurd.
Kwame is a good post defender but he absolutely brings no team defense nor weakside shot blocking. Actually Kwame's post defense is exceptional. Kaman post game is polished and offensive skills are those of an elite center. He is not as good of a post defender as Kwame and few are but Kaman is a good shot blocker. Kwame's post game and hands are horrid. He can't dunk the ball, he can't finish around the basket, and he can't catch the ball. He is a negative factor on offense because he allows the other team's shot blocker to roam the paint. He did play well against Phoenix in the playoffs but he won't play like that next year against Amare. Amare is one of the top players in the league. Let's not underestimate his impact on Phoenix and the league. I'd take Kaman because Kwame is negative points on offense.
Let's talk about bench. Remember, the only reason why the Lakers are got Mo Evans is because Detroit was not going to give him any playing time. They were grooming someone else. He was not good enough to be a bench player for Detroit. How can you count him as a strength on the Lakers bench?
Kobe and Phil are awesome and will carry the Lakers past a playoff series against the Clippers. Kobe is the difference maker.
Posted by: Chim Chim | August 10, 2006 at 11:00 AM
I apologize for bringing this up, but I just read an interview that KG did where he specifically said if the Timberwolves don't make any more moves to get closer to a championship, he's out. Now, since he's thirty and the highest paid player in the league, I wouldn't trade for the guy, BUT he can opt out of his contract after this season and sign as a free agent somewhere else. If that is the case, and he wants to play for a contender, wouldn't he be a prime candidate to take a pay cut and come to LA? The dude would be leaving quite a bit of money on the table (like $44 million) but he would have to know that if he wanted to go somewhere and compete he would have to sign for a lot less since any team trading for him would have to swap matching salaries and that would probably take away one, if not more, of their better players, therefore leaving the team he was going to in a bad spot talent-wise.
Just a little thought to pass some off-season time.
Posted by: Andrew Z | August 10, 2006 at 11:12 AM
Blaze1bx:
i totally agree with you and i suspect most on this blog will too (with the exception of AK and the bum comment on von perhaps?). I would suggest that Pinnock has the potential to become a Michael Redd (drafted somewhere around 40th if i remember right, played a couple of games in his first season) for the Lakers in seasons to come...sending him overseas will help with his mental as well as his technical development whilst also suiting the lakers. With Green i think he deserves his spot after the summer league. Granted he wasnt playing NBA type oppostion but i think he has definately shown enough consistency, upside and a willingness to improve (his jumpshot in particular) to warrant a spot on the roster. Maybe sending him down to the NBDL will further his development and Lakers will see Gerald Green type numbers after he comes back.
I think people undervalue Mckie slightly though as although he is not contributing any PT, he must do our numerous young guards a world of good. Granted that isnt worth 2.8 mil, but lets give him the benefit of the doubt if he does end up staying.
AK and all others:
Since LO has been so heavily mentioned, if he does not live up to his promise and produce the all star numbers we know he is capable of, would you then trade him for KG if the opportunity arises? Or, more on the topic, would you trade LO for Brand?
Posted by: Caesar | August 10, 2006 at 11:25 AM
AK and Xodus
This is from yesterday conversation.
Brand is good, but he can't win championships. He is only a solid player that just has a good understanding of the game. That is why he gets his numbers. But he ain't getting to Clippers know where. Why do you think they didn't beat the SUNS. If him and Kaman was as talented and tough as you say they are then they should have dominated the SUNS in the post.
Please explain to me what happened?
I think the LAKERS just got distracted by the KWAME case. We didn't win a game after that alleged sexual assualt case. I think the SUNS had something to do with it.But as far as the CLIPPERS. they are not as good as you think they are. They have no superstar. Elton Brand is just a very solid basketball player. All Star. Yes and besides that LO was on the USA team top so Xodus that does mean any thing.
Posted by: Zakee | August 10, 2006 at 11:32 AM
AK & BK,
What happened to the good quality inside stuff you guys used to write? I know it's the offseason, but come on! Give us some good gossip, or some inside information that makes your blog so special. What are the Lakers players doing in the offseason (training/activities/events)? What is Mitch up to? What about the new players... are they nervous, excited, etc??? Get some interviews guys! We thrive on this stuff.
TrueHoop is a great example of a guy that is a complete basketball freak. He gets inside info, interviews, dirt, etc. on what's going on every day. There is always something interesting. He credits you guys too.
Anyway, you guys are great. Looking forward to what you come up with next.
Posted by: Dan | August 10, 2006 at 11:33 AM
OSE
I feel the same way
Advantage LO over Brand.
Posted by: Zakee | August 10, 2006 at 11:33 AM
Zakee,
Kaman was very hurt during the Suns series. He could barely move one of his arms. And the Suns are a good team, so not getting past them isn't an indictment. Plus, by that same logic, how good could Kobe and LO be, if they couldn't take the Lakers past the Suns, either?
Let me ask you this: If LO was still on the Clips and Brand was a Laker, do you honestly think you'd still be championing Odom over Brand? if so, fair enough. But just curious.
Dan,
We do our best, but it's hard tracking guys down in the offseason. And honestly, there ain't a whole lot actually going on, outside of just pure conjecture. But we'll always keep working to make this blog entertaining.
AK
Posted by: Andrew Kamenetzky | August 10, 2006 at 11:42 AM
AK
The Clippers are built around Brand. He is a big man. He was suppose to dominate in the post becuase that is what he is good at. If the Clippers where better inside like you say they are, then they would have saw what the Lakers did and tried that approach. The problem is that they couldn't. My things is if your best player is in the post how couldn't you dominate inside. And for Kaman being hurt that is no my problem. I can't help it if the guy is soft. Don't give me that one.
And if Elton Brand was on the Lakers then he would be subject to having KOBE on his team. But he doesn't and LO does so the advantage goes to LO. Brand has to stick LO on the perimeter. That is the bottom line. And for the record LO can stick Brand in the post. But can Brand stick LO on the perimeter. NO NO NO. Advantage LO.
I am not looking at things from a what if situation. I am looking at things that are realistic. LO is on the Lakers and Brand is on the Clippers.
Posted by: Zakee | August 10, 2006 at 11:57 AM
Not to keep things going but....
My point yesterday is basically this; the Clips are not clearly better than the Lakers. I just think the difference is too close to call, especially when you factor in the records and the playoff performances of both teams. For some reason AK believes they are clearly better, and I just don't understand that at all. Brand is better than LO at this point, there is no question of that, however, overall the teams are virtually even.
Ken
Posted by: Ken | August 10, 2006 at 12:01 PM
Zakee,
Dude, did you even watch Brand play against the Suns, or look at the numbers he put up?
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/players/3324
Outside of the "we win or lose as a team" thing, the loss wasn't Brand's fault. He was the only guy on that team who stepped up every night.
And if you're gonna call Kaman soft for not stepping up against the Suns, then you better call Kwame out just as hard (since they were being compared), because he also disappeared, nor did he dominate against an unintimidating middle. And don't give me excuses about the assault charges. If you consider Kaman soft for not overcoming injury, then Kwame is soft for not overcoming off the court issues. Look how Kobe played during everything in Colorado. It can be done.
Granted, this isn't my opinion. I think Kwame disappeared because he's inconsistent, not soft (and the charges did linger on his mind, which I don't blame him for). But you can't have one without the other. That's only fair.
AK
Posted by: Andrew Kamenetzky | August 10, 2006 at 12:04 PM
AK:
Sorry but I can't let go of the Lakers vs. Clippers thing, especially when you dodged wiZo's 7-game series question rather than answering. So let me ask the question again:
Would you trade the entire current Lakers roster, including Kobe, for the entire current Clippers roster?
Please answer with a full sentence rather than a simple yes or no. The reason I am asking this question again is that I thought your last answer was a purposely vague "I thought I already answered it."
If you really would trade Kobe and the Lakers for Elton and the Clippers, I would like to hear you say it out loud. I actually don't think you would make the trade in the end because of Kobe.
Thanks
Tom
Posted by: LakerTom | August 10, 2006 at 12:17 PM
Caesar, I think the Lakers would try to keep McKie for the mere fact he's got championship experience and perhaps they are hoping he comes back healthy.
Zakee - I thought that too about the Suns and a possible conspiracy involving Kwame and that chick who accused him. The timing of that whole thing made a lot of people wonder. He was still a dumb *bleep* for getting in that situation.
Hopefully he has learned.
Dan - by the way, I, too would love some insight scoop on the newcomers to our team and just the regular offseason going ons but then again, those guys have a right to their privacy too so its no wonder not a whole lot of their B.I.Z. is on blast right about now..
Oh well, 50 something more days til camp opens! Can't wait.
GO LAKES!
Posted by: lakersrydeordie | August 10, 2006 at 12:18 PM
LakerTom,
One of the problem with the Lakers is that they don't have the confidence that you say goes hand-in-hand with having the best player on your team. Kwame, L.O., Smush, Walton have all shown that to a very noticeable degree.
In fact quite often, and this is the case at any level of basketball, having the best player on the team is detrimental to the overall team performance, because the other players expect that best player to do everything, and they end up spectating. Which is what frequently happened with the Lakers last year.
So, yes, I disagree with your theory that having the best player on the team automatically gives the rest of the team a mental edge. It depends on the mental makeup of the rest of the team, and that is a huge question mark with this year's Lakers.
Posted by: exhelodrvr | August 10, 2006 at 12:26 PM
I am going to attempt to keep this post brief.
Topics: 1) Lakers vs. Clippers; 2) Projections for Lakers 2006 Season; 3) AH and Wilcox Discussions
1) Lakers vs. Clippers
I believe that the Lakers matchup very well with the Clippers and in a 7-game series, would beat the Clippers. It has been stated extensively how the Clippers have a slight if not great advantage at every position on the floor except the starting 2-guard position. I disagree. I believe that EVERY position other than Kobe’s matchup, should be considered a wash. The Clippers have an edge with respect to their bench. Overall, the Lakers have an edge over the Clippers in a head-to-head matchup.
2) Projections for the Lakers 2006 Season
I believe that the Lakers have the potential to end up 3rd on down to 7th this season. The ultimate key will be the overall maturation and progress of the team in respect to the coaching/system put in place by the Lakers’ coaching staff. IF they progress as predicted (based on all previous Phil Jackson teams) they could wind up in the 3rd spot with a few other things taking place. However, if injuries or slow progress transpires, they could wind up all the way back in the 7th spot for another season. I believe that they will continue their growth and end up in the 3rd or 4th position.
3) AH and Wilcox
I have well-documented my desire for the Lakers to put together a deal to get Al Harrington. I believe that the opportunity to acquire a player such as him is too great to pass up. However, I am beginning to warm up to the possibility of the Lakers acquiring Chris Wilcox. Wilcox is a strong rebounder, defender, and low post presence offensively. In evaluating the overall needs of the team, his services just might fit a lot better than Harrington’s . In comparing the Lakers to the Bulls model for assembling a championship team, Wilcox would fit in nicely as the Horace Grant/Dennis Rodman power forward player. Even though he doesn’t bring as much versatility to the team, he does bring a stronger presence in the post which is a greater concern. He could spell Kwame Brown at center sometimes along with maintaining the power forward position. What intrigues me most is the possibility of him fitting into a lineup of Lamar, Kobe, Vlade, Chris and Kwame. That’s a ridiculous lineup to put on the floor. Can you imagine the matchup problems they would cause for every team in the league?
Posted by: JJ | August 10, 2006 at 12:27 PM
"They're both going into their 8th seasons. We're well beyond upside periods now. We know exactly what both are capable of. It's simply a matter of how much they can improve upon it and do it on a regular basis."
AK:
I have to totally disagree with you regarding the potential upside of Brand and Odom. Both players are entering into their 8th year and Brand at this point is definitely the better player.
Odom, however, definitely has a much bigger upside than Brand, partly because of the nature of his all-around game and partly because he has not yet gotten close to reaching his full potential, where as Brand has probably already become as good as he is going to get. I would even go so far as to say that Odom at this point is an underachiever while Brand at this point is an overachiever.
While it has taken longer for Lamar to get his game together than it took Brand, Lamar will probably be the better and more valuable player by the end of this season. Lamar has the ability to become a much greater impact player with his ball handling, passing, and better shooting range ability than Brand does with his traditional power forward inside and short-range game.
The safe move to start a franchise would be Brand because you already know what you will get because he has arrived. With Lamar, you will get a player who is much more versatile with a much greater upside.
Tom
Posted by: LakerTom | August 10, 2006 at 12:36 PM
AK:
Would you trade Odom for Brand?
Would you trade Kwame, Mihm, and Bynum for Kaman?
Tom
Posted by: LakerTom | August 10, 2006 at 12:40 PM
AK:
Would you trade Farmar for Livingston?
Tom
Posted by: LakerTom | August 10, 2006 at 12:41 PM
Ceasar,
L.O. is an awesome player, but if trading him is the only way that we could get Brand or KG. Both of these guys have CAREER averages of over 20-10!
Dan
What are we? Chop'd Liva?
Its defenetly the off season for the lakers, but this blogs founders and readers/responders make this thing special. We can hold the fort down when AK/BK are handle'n biz.
dan
Posted by: dan the man aka smushcalade | August 10, 2006 at 12:48 PM
Roster before training camp and preseason:
PG Smush Parker, Shammond Williams, Jordan Farmar
SG Kobe Bryant, Mo Evans, Sasha Vujacic, Aaron McKie
SF Vladimir Radmanovic, Luke Walton
PF Lamar Odom, Brian Cook, Ronny Turiaf
C Kwame Brown, Chris Mihm, Andrew Bynum
Roster after training camp and preseason:
PG Jordan Farmar, Smush Parker, Shammond Williams
SG Kobe Bryant, Mo Evans, Sasha Vujacic, Laron Profit
SF Vladimir Radmanovic, Luke Walton
PF Lamar Odom, Brian Cook, Ronny Turiaf
C Kwame Brown, Chris Mihm, Andrew Bynum
Tom
Posted by: LakerTom | August 10, 2006 at 12:54 PM
Blaze1bx
Most of that stuff is known but some of the bloggers like to speculate which keeps this offseaon interesting. We make up realistic and unrealistic trades and propose players which is sometimes fun. Here are my answers to the the rumors as you stated them.
1. Gooden is a decent player but we dont need him badly enough to throw money at him. We also have a lot of big men and so are in no need of him unless its a bargain for us period.
2. I really like Al and if he doesnt work out we could always trade him since he will be in demand. He would be like an Artest to us. If Artest doesnt work out for the Queens he still has enough value for another team to take him specially since he's so cheap right now.
3.A lot of big men are needed right now and specially guys with the body of Bynum. The Lakers will not trade him atleast not yet. If his development turns out to be more like Kwame's with the same PT then I could see them trading him but that wont happen for ATLEAST another 2-3 seasons.
4.If we can package Mihm with 2-3 other guys for Al Harrington or any other 1-2 players we can free up some space to keep more of these guys. I would also like to see McKie dropped unless he will be at 100% and able to contribute a lot. That being said we have a lot of guards (most which arent great). I dont think we got Evans and Williams to just bench them. Too many guards will limit their minutes and their understanding of the triangle. They need to play it to fully understand it. I think Evans and Williams will only be a temporary (1-2season) answer and will either be dropped or traded if they dont impress the Laker coachs and just blow everyone away.
Posted by: Shady | August 10, 2006 at 01:01 PM
AndrewZ,
Don't mention a possible KG signing unless you mean it. Otherwise, on this blog, it will be like throwing a piece of chocolate cake onto the set of Celebrity Fit Club!
--Fearless
Posted by: Fearless | August 10, 2006 at 01:29 PM
The Clippers aren't our enemy, at least not yet, but our friendly neighbourhood rivals. I thought they were better than us last season, but the jury is out on the upcoming season.
The LO-Elton debate is really moot because they're so different players. In fact LO is such an unusual player it is difficult to compare him to most any other PF in the League.
My grandma not only taught me that those who expect nothing are never disappointed, but also that "anything wasn't necessarily better than nothing at all," (you'll get it if you understand that it is a colloquialism and you read and understand it the way it is written).
The Lakers was a very pleasant surprise last year, and the spark of hope has blossomed into a fire hot with heightened expectations and fueled by dreams of championship contending. There are some things we did not know at the start of the last season, that we know at the start of this season.
We know that Kobe is one of the very best players on the face of the earth, and Phil Jackson is one of the very best coaches in the world. And we know that together they are a challenge to every other team in the NBA.
We know that if LO and Kwame can consistently display the level of skill that match their potential, we should win consistently, and at a level that would put us near the elite, contender level.
We know that if we have consistent outside shooting and the team plays hard on defence, we could contend.
I speculate. Farmar will not start (sorry Tom et al), and will have trouble getting playing time ahead of Williams and Sasha, but could jump ahead of both on the depth chart since they're more combo guards than pure point guards. Barring a (another) major melt down by Smush, Farmar will not takeover the starting job, but I think he will be there possibly by next year.
The addition of Williams and Evans gives the Lakers some more wrinkles and nuances. Both are consistent long range shooters, are veteran presences, meaning that they will accept their roles and work hard at it and not be bitchin' the way the younger guys are wont to do. They are invaluable lockerroom presences and their arrival probably spells the departure of Mckie. If you check it out salary-wise, Evans and Willians is really a two-for-the-price-of-one-Aaron-Mckie-deal with more options.
Mckie, Green, maybe even Von Wafer will be gone soon enough, probably via a trade, but at this point why hurry after Al Harrington? At this point I'd rather wait and see if Josh Powell becomes available.
Why am I the only guy on the blog who wants to see more of Ronny Turiaf and believe that he could provide some really needed help, particularly on the boards? I know he's still basically a rook but I love his enthusiasm, his size, and the more I see him play, the more I like his natural skills set.
Phil doesn't like playing rookies, but with a full season under their belts, Sasha, Bynum and Smush will be better. We're a better team right now than we were at this time last year. We won't lose some of the games we lost last year to Memphis, Boston, Rockets, Cleveland, Nets, Sacto, Seattle, Portland and Atlanta in particular.
Bring on the season!
Posted by: glenntillett | August 10, 2006 at 01:37 PM
LakerTom,
I back AK on his statement that after 8 years you pretty much know what you're going to get with a guy. Can someone change? Sure, but at this point you can look at a player's track record and make some safe assessments. For one, Brand has continuously improved, even heeding his coaches advice during last season to shed some wieght to quicken up and develop a mid-range jumper, which he did and became an MVP candidate. LO has shown no vast improvement from year to year, and it could even be said he's regressed a bit. Just because LO is more versatile, at a certain point you have to throw that out and go with who delivers the goods. Elton Brand is way ahead of LO on that account, and shows no signs of being caught.
As for a Farmar for Livingston trade, in an absolute heartbeat. Livingston is a potential superstar. I actually think he would be the one player in the league that I would want on this Laker roster over any other. I would also trade LO for Brand, but you're "All 3 Laker centers for Kaman" question was a little much. I would trade Kwame for Kaman though, again, in a heartbeat. I think a line-up of Kobe, Brand, Kaman, Livingston, and Vlad is a title contender. Much more realistically so than our roster now.
Posted by: Andrew Z | August 10, 2006 at 01:44 PM
AK,
As far as your argument with Zakee goes, I don't think you can use the same logic for Kaman/Brand vs. the Suns, as you do for LO/Kobe vs. the Suns. We all realized by the end of the season that the best way to beat the Suns was with dominant big men. Kaman, and Brand are suppossed to be dominant big men (which they are) so they should have beat Suns**. LO and Kobe are not dominant big men so you can't say "well the Lakers should have won because of Kobe and LO".
Now you could use that logic if Kwame was more effective, or if we had Mihm, and LO but you can't make the comparison because Kobe isn't a big man.
**I know Kaman's injury effected the outcome.
Posted by: Weave-Man | August 10, 2006 at 02:00 PM
Fearless,
I just read an interview with KG in Slam Magazine and he said that the Timberwolves need to make some more moves and get better players in there to compete for a championship or he's going to leave. I wouldn't throw a KG thing out there without something to back it up. Here's the link:
http://www.realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/41860/20060809/if_the_wolves_dont_improve_garnett_wants_out/
Posted by: Andrew Z | August 10, 2006 at 02:11 PM
I see a lot of people still bringing up Laron Profit, but my question to y'all is why? I don't see where he is needed (we brought Evans in to be Kobe's backup), the dude just came off a serious injury, and if we do have him on the roster he probably would just be inactive.
I think the best way for us to go is to buy out Mckie's contract, trade Cook for a 2nd round pick, and sign Green and Pinnock. Yes, Mckie does bring valuable experience but it's not worth 2mil is it? As many people have stated Cook is Vlad with less game so what is the point of keeping him?
I think Pinnock is going to be a special player (at least a solid contributor), and I think Green can turn into a defensive stopper with a nice jumpshot. I think now is the time to bring in some young players with enough talent to help now, but still young enough to broaden their games. To me Pinnock, and Green fit the bill. These two young guys will be future role players, and with Pinnock I think he can become something even more.
Posted by: Weave-Man | August 10, 2006 at 02:12 PM
shaun livingston? are you kidding? he hasn't shown nothing yet. I'll give you that he shows some potential and upside but he hasn't proven a thing. He is way too skinny to defend bigger guards and doesn't have a reliable jumpshot. Sure he has good court vision but so does farmar. Both of these players are unknowns at this point, i would rather pick the one that is barely 19 and already shows flashes of leadership and determination. When it is all said and done farmar will definitely be a better player than livingston.
Go Lakers
Posted by: TrueLakerFan | August 10, 2006 at 02:17 PM
I think we can all agree that the Suns are better than the Lakers and Clippers since they beat both teams. How much longer are we going to spend discussing which team is the better loser?
On another note, we might just get to LakerTom's 55 wins and championship, half our roster are guys in contract years. That bodes well for us :)
Posted by: Andrew Z | August 10, 2006 at 02:17 PM
Laker Tom,
Good Lord, are you persistent! haha
I actually wasn't dodging the question as much as I was just trying to throw out some humor (we do that around here). But it's honestly a tough one. It's really hard to bet against Kobe in a game 7, but I also think the Clips, being the better team on paper, could possibly end it before reaching game 7. Gun to my head, I'll go Lakers for a game 7, but I'm acknowledging that I'm not sure it's the right answer.
And in the end, who could win one particular game scenario doesn't have anything to do with which team is the better overall team, which is what I've been talking about in the first place.
For your trade questions:
Would I trade LO for Brand? Yes (although I'd hate doing it)
Would I trade Kwame for Kaman? Yes. (I assume you were presenting these as individual one on one swaps, since 3 for one is absurd)
Would I trade Mihm for Kaman? Yes.
Would I trade Bynum for Kaman? Yes, damn the potential regrets. By passing up Kaman, you could very well be passing up what you're hoping Bynum turns into. The question to ask is how much truly better than Kaman do you think Bynum will get? Unless the answer is “light years better"(and you truly have the time to wait), you’re probably better off taking Kaman, who’s already one of the league’s best young centers and has improved every season.
Would I trade Farmar for Livingston? Until I actually see Farmar play as a pro, the question can't be answered in an informed way.
As for the "upside" issue, I wouldn't brand (bad pun intended) what you're talking about with LO as upside. Upside describes what you suspect a player can eventually do. With LO, it's not a mystery regarding "can" or "can't." It's simply a matter of consistency.
AK
Posted by: Andrew Kamenetzky | August 10, 2006 at 02:18 PM
AK
If Brand was killing so much and Livingston is a furture star, then how the hell did they loose with the advantage of having better big men??
I mean they had Cassel, Mobley and Maggety to go along with your boy BRAND, but they still didn't do anything. Brand is not Shaq. Nor is he Duncan. He is not taking is team near a championship. I am sorry. They had a pretty good team last year and they still didn't do it. We have gotten better, they have stayed the same. It is really that simple. Brand is not good enough to dominat a game, therefore I would rather have LO on my team then Brand anyday. I am sorry, but I watch Brand in the USA game and he does not impress me. If fact I think Howard and Bosh are better then he is. He is not scraing anybody.
Posted by: Zakee | August 10, 2006 at 02:19 PM
Andrew Z
Livingston can't shoot worth a lick. I am sorry, but you can't go with a pt. that can't shoot. It will always be somebody just as tall as him that will jsut back up of of him. It is really that simple. I might take him over Farmer, but that is as far as I would go with that one. All Star guy, I don't think so. Ok maybe the guy might for 1 year. Did he even make the rookie/sophomore game? If he did I don't remember.
Posted by: Zakee | August 10, 2006 at 02:22 PM
Weave Man,
I get what you're saying. My point (and maybe I just didn't state it well) was that you can't say the Clips folded, but somehow put the Lakers above the Clips, having folded against those same Suns.
AK
Posted by: Andrew Kamenetzky | August 10, 2006 at 02:25 PM
Andrew Z,
I have to disagree about Livingston becoming a superstar. He will eventually start and be a very good guard, not a superstar.
Glentillett,
I am glad you brought up Turiaf. I really like his game, and I think the full year he will now have including playing with the French team will allow his game to improve drastically. Do you think his offensive game can develop enough?
Posted by: Ken | August 10, 2006 at 02:30 PM
Zakee,
Like I said, the Clips didn't have their entire big man advantage, because Kaman was hurt. And Livingston being a "future" star helps them not an iota playing this year. And beyond that, the Suns are a very good team. I don't why you make losing to them sound like such a disgrace.
As far as Brand goes, if "25pts/10 rebounds/2 blocks/53% FG/7th in MVP voting/5th in double-doubles/excellent defender" doesn't "impress" you, that's your right. I don't get it. At all. But who am I to judge?
AK
Posted by: Andrew Kamenetzky | August 10, 2006 at 02:51 PM
AK,
I respect your opinions and I enjoy reading your posts, but you're doing it again!! Are you serious? Bynum is already bigger, stronger, and more talented than Kaman. And yes Kaman is a more polished player, but where is that going to get you? The second round? Come on!! If you were to match Kaman against Bynum right now, Bynum would dominate that guy. Now you are starting to look like a Clipper fan. :)
Ken
Posted by: Ken | August 10, 2006 at 02:55 PM
Ken,
I'd like to try whatever it is you're smoking if you think Bynum would dominate Kaman right now. It makes me believe that you have never watched a Clipper game and also spend your time watching the 37 minutes of NBA ball that Andrew Bynum has played through heavily tinted rose colored glasses. Kaman is leaps and bounds ahead of Bynum right now, in every category imaginable. I don't understand how you come to that conclusion.
Posted by: Andrew Z | August 10, 2006 at 03:03 PM
Ken,
Bynum would dominate Kaman "now?" As in, "this very minute now?" That's absolutely ludicrious. If that were case, then why didn't he play more than 7 mpg? It's not like Kwame and Mihm play at such a high level that it's impossible to imagine sitting them, or at least sliding them to the 4. And chances are, Bynum ain't starting this season, either. Why is that? If Bynum's good enough to "dominate" a starting center on a playoff caliber team, then the Lakers coaching staff must be the biggest morons on the planet not playing him. I mean, beyond moronic.
Don't get me wrong. I think Bynum's got a good future. But the key word is "future." I mean, he was inconsistent during the Summer League. C'mon now.
AK
Posted by: Andrew Kamenetzky | August 10, 2006 at 03:04 PM
i agree with those who say bynum is better than kaman. If nothing else at least bynum has a better haircut.
Go Lakers
Posted by: TrueLakerFan | August 10, 2006 at 03:07 PM
Fearless,
for some reason that made me laugh out loud
Posted by: Sean714 | August 10, 2006 at 03:07 PM
Ken,
Bynum better than Kaman? That's absurd!! Trade Bynum for Kaman today and we're a legitimate contender for the title.
I would be happy to get a guarantee that in two years Bynum would be at the level Kaman is now.
Posted by: exhelodrvr | August 10, 2006 at 03:18 PM
AK
The reasonI am so hard on Brand is becuas ethose are Shaq and Tim Duncan type numbers that he has always had and he has no championships. So to me he is just a player that can just fill up a stat sheet, but doesn't make others around him better. It is really that simple. Elton Brand makes nobody around him better players. A MVP canidate makes other players better or they have amzing #'s like KOBE. His numbers are very very good, but not amazing.
Posted by: Zakee | August 10, 2006 at 03:20 PM
Ken
I think if Bynum has to play more mins, then by the end of the season, I think he would become a better player then Kaman to, but just not right now. I like Bynum. He just has to turn 20, then I think he is going to strt to dominate in his own way.
Posted by: Zakee | August 10, 2006 at 03:23 PM
Fearless
That was funny.LOL
Posted by: Zakee | August 10, 2006 at 03:24 PM
AK,
To answer your question yes. He is better than Kaman right now. If it were me making the decisions, I would probably start Bynum over Kwame and Mihm. But you know how Phil is w/rookies, plus the organization does not want to heap pressure on the kid right now. However, to me its not pressure its just basketball.
Who would you rather have Ilgauskas or Dwight Howard? Shaq or (a healthy) Amare Stoudamire? Yes Kaman has been around and has more experience but he will never lead a team anywhere, he is simply piece number 5 no matter which team he is on. Bynum, on the other hand has the makings of a star. I learned that from Jerry West. :)
Ken
Posted by: Ken | August 10, 2006 at 03:25 PM
Andrew Z,
Lets clarify, ahead or better? Who has more talent? Kaman has an experience edge, however I think Bynum has more talent. And I don't smoke or drink by the way. ;) Let me just say it, Kaman is just not that good, period. HE is piece #5.
Posted by: Ken | August 10, 2006 at 03:33 PM
Ken,
Okay, but its even debateable who has more talent between Kaman or Bynum. Bynum isn't the most athletic or explosive guy, and to be honest, exhelodrvr said it best, I'd be stoked if Bynum was as good as Kaman is now in two years.
And just to clarify, what has Andrew Bynum done to make you, or anyone, believe he has the makings of being a star? The kid has barely played any organized basketball in his entire life. The only thing he's shown is that he has the ability to grow. If he was such a can't miss prospect out of high school, a potential star, he wouldn't have dropped to #10 in the draft, even more so considering he is a big man.
Posted by: Andrew Z | August 10, 2006 at 03:47 PM