Dude Could End Up Getting The "McKie" To The City
August 25, 2006 | 9:51
am
And after that headline, not hiring me as his speech writer for the ceremony. But I digress.
While it remains a mystery how much Aaron McKie can help the Lakers next season, what's not in question is how much he's helping his hometown of Philly. The guy has clearly not forgotten where he came from. Kudos to the cagey vet.
AK
Let me in on the bandwagon.
Start Farmer. Start Bynum. The Saint is your hero. I say, maintain mediocrity! Go Brokebacks!
Posted by: sonnybelfast | August 28, 2006 at 12:54 PM
Exhelodrvr,
I put quite a bit of stock into the NCAA Tournament. In that that setting, the best players will usually step up to the occasion and do special things. Wade, Carmelo, Paul, recently Noah, etc. are the kinds of guys who make big impacts in the NBA. All of these guys took their teams to places nobody expected because they rise to the occasion.
Jordan Farmar fits into that category. As far as lifting his team in the NCAA's past the expectations of anyone. It was Farmar's stellar play as a sophmore in the clutch that lifted UCLA. Not many players have the mental fortitude to handle that kind of pressure like Jordan Farmar. I think if you put Smush in Farmar's shoes last year at UCLA, the Bruins probably would not have gotten as far as they did.
Farmar possesses these winning intangibles that I think Phil is going to have to mix into the line-up. Whether he's 19 yrs old or not. Starting seems to be a long shot at this point, but anything can happen. I do agree he should have to work for it. I don't see that being a problem for Farmar though.
Posted by: Rocky | August 28, 2006 at 12:55 PM
Andrew Z:
"It seems Jordan Farmar turned into Magic Johnson over the weekend. That's good for us fans since the last time I checked he was a 19-year-old rookie who was lucky to be drafted 26th. We're definitely going to win a championship this year, for sure!!!"
You made me LOL with that post, Andrew. Good shot.
Just to set the record straight, I have never said that Farmar was as good as or would ever be as good as Magic Johnson. As MAGIC=GOAT has always said, he is the GreatestOfAllTime.
Nor have I ever said that we were definitely going to win a championship this year. I think we have an outside chance to sneak in this year and should really be ready to win it all by next year. But even then, not DEFINITELY.
While not disrespecting Smush and his contributions as a Laker, a big part of why Farmar has a realistic chance to take over the point guard starting position is that his competition is basically just Smush, whom most observers will admit is better suited to be the backup.
Just injecting a dose of reality into your "fantasy" comments. Thanks.
Tom
Posted by: LakerTom | August 28, 2006 at 12:55 PM
Hey ThreeCaliKing,
Get off my man Sasha! j/k
His role on the team for now is the only good pesky point guard defender. We all saw that Sasha is a capable shooter, its just a matter of confidence. Over 90% from freethrow line, over 60% from three during playoffs.(wow, i've said that like 6 times during the offseason)
Although these cases are far, few, and in between, I do remember Sasha has come up in the clutch. Remember agaist Utah, Kobe fouled out, and Sasha made a 4 point play in overtime to put the lakers on top w/like 20 seconds left?
Posted by: greek dude | August 28, 2006 at 01:02 PM
lakersrydeordie,
The Lakers have the same amount of televised games as the Miami heat. They say that miami has 33 because they are counting NBATV games, the Lakers also have 33 games on national TV. It breaks down like this: 24 games on TNT,ABC and ESPN combine, the same thing for Miami and also 9 games on NBATV that's 33 games altogether, they have the same games.
The Lakers along with Miami, Phoenix, Dallas, San Antonio have the most appearances on national television, as you might know the games add up among each other, when Miami plays the Lakers, when the Lakers play Phoenix and so on.
Posted by: lakofan | August 28, 2006 at 01:06 PM
If having a "true" point guard would make the triangle that much better, why is it that Phil and Tex never made getting a "true" point guard one of their priorities?
Phil would have at least 15 titles by now if he had only had a "true" point guard to run the triangle!!
Posted by: exhelodrvr | August 28, 2006 at 01:14 PM
Not sure if this has been posted but here's the 2006-2007 KCAL 9 Lakers TV Schedule
http://www.clublakers.com/index.php/schedule-2006-2007/
Posted by: Raz-B | August 28, 2006 at 01:17 PM
Taliq:
I thought the subject was long dead, too. But I can’t even respond to all of the posts. And, by the way, the odds are only 25 to 1 that Farmar will win ROY, which I think are probably pretty reasonable odds that I would consider fair. You should know, however, that I have won a lot of 25 to 1 shots in my lifetime. And, of course, I have lost a few of those, too.
As for Smush to win MVP, that is probably a 2500 to 1 shot, but if it happened it would have meant that we won a ring so I would be as elated as you would be.
Tom
Posted by: LakerTom | August 28, 2006 at 01:21 PM
AK:
Neither of us is going to change their opinion on this subject. You can ridicule my opinion as much as you want and make as many “Yoda” comments as you can think of but I just do not believe that Smush has acquired any special knowledge or understanding of the Triangle Offense other than the basics of how to run it during the last year.
Smush sees basketball through the eyes of a shooting guard who can handle the ball OK and has been put in the position of point guard. He is not a very smart, driven, or clutch player as was shown during the Sun’s series last year. He still suffers from all of the “rookie-itis” that want to burden Farmar with to prove your points.
It is my opinion that Farmar will run the Lakers offense better than Smush from the start of training camp because he is a “true” point guard and knows intuitively what to do and because he is a penetrator, which is the real key to running any offense, including the Triangle Offense. I also think that Jason Kidd, Steve Nash, or Chris Paul would be able to do the same.
As for Gary Payton, I do agree he was a great point guard but he was also not a “true” point guard. Gary was always a shoot first type of guard whose game was totally dependent upon the ball being in his hands. Where Gary really failed was in his offensive game, where he lost confidence in his shot and ended up playing almost as poorly as Smush in the playoffs. And his “storied” glove-tight defense became very porous. That is why Gary did not succeed as the Lakers point guard. He wanted to run the team the way he had always done in the past, not the way that the Lakers wanted him to run it.
Finally, you have to remember who the competition for Farmar to start is. I really do not want to disrespect Smush, but you know that Farmar is thinking right now that I can play the point better than that guy did last year. If we had an experienced proven point guard who really played well, we wouldn’t be having this huge debate. But the “reality” is that the Lakers biggest need is to get greatly improved play from the point guard position. And the great “stroke of luck” is that we were able to draft a guy who just might be able to do it as #26.
Tom
Posted by: LakerTom | August 28, 2006 at 01:22 PM
Joninjapan:
I think Farmar will have some problems on defense early but will adjust and prove to be our best point guard defender by the middle of the season. I think he will end up being better than Smush or Shammond at staying in front of his man.
The switch between Kobe and Vlade in the Triangle just makes logical sense in that we want Vlade parked on the 3-point line and we want Kobe to get the easiest possible shots without being double teamed, which is what playing the 3 will get him. I also think you may see Kobe actually play defense against even other point guards, provided he gets easier shots on offense and other guys pick up the scoring to let him focus on defense. That is what I sense from his interview.
Tom
Posted by: LakerTom | August 28, 2006 at 01:29 PM
joninjapan:
Say whatever you want to say but just substitute "!" for "i" and "$" for "s" etc. in any words that somebody might find objectionable. I have never had a post rejected, even though I am sure AK wanted to reject some of them for having too optimistic content by his judgement.
Tom
Posted by: LakerTom | August 28, 2006 at 01:32 PM
Guity,
LOL That definitely wasn't me. Sadly, I've never been to Southern California area. But, I've got to say that's an interesting way to try and hold up an airplane and I wish Miamians would stop making me look bad. People can't figure out how to properly punch a whole into a presidential ballot and now we're phoning in bomb threats to hold up a flight.
Posted by: Xodus | August 28, 2006 at 01:32 PM
Sonnybelfast
I think that the Portland Trail Blazer will have a better record then the Sacramento Kings. I think that they have a better team then the Kings.
Roy-6'6 pt
Dixon-6-4 ball player
3-man-????? I don't know yet
Randolph-power forward
Lafrentz-that is a good core of players.
Posted by: Zakee | August 28, 2006 at 01:37 PM
LakerTom,
"This is not going to be an easy, fun camp for Smush like it was last year."
You can't be serious. Smush was signed for the league minimum and had to play his tail of in the SPL and training camp just to STAY IN THE LEAGUE! I give Smush all the props in the world for earning his NBA stripes. Sure, he had his issues in the Suns series, but I put much more stock in his mental toughness and perserverence for bouncing around every known professional league and working hard and eventually EARNING and KEEPING a starting point guard position playing for the Los Angeles Lakers and Coach Phil Jackson. Say what you will, but I'm guessing there is no way in hell he lets a rookie come in and steal his spot.
Also, you said this:
"Second, I find it amazing that you are including Shammond Williams in the discussion. Have you seen him play? Why do you believe that he has a better chance than Farmar, who has played starting point guard for one of the top basketball programs in the country and is seen as the future starter by most analysts and bloggers?"
Um, last time I checked Shammond Williams played point guard at UNC, which I think is a top basketball program.
For this Laker team I think it benefits us to have guys that have been around at a professional level. The expectations this year are much higher and no one is taking the Lakers lightly. With the amount of good teams all trying to get a playoff spot, every win is huge and there is no time for learnng on the job. That being said,
exhelodrvr,
Count me in on that bandwagon. We could even set the over/under at 20 games. I don't think Farmar and Bynum will start 20 games between them. I don't think Bynum will average 10 minutes a game, and I'd be surprised if Farmar is the same.
Posted by: Andrew Z | August 28, 2006 at 01:39 PM
Laker Tom-
Of course it comes down to who makes the team better when they're on the court. That's kind of the point. In my mind, at least initially, that's Parker. If Farmar outplays him, then it'll be him. I just don't see it happening out of the gate. Sometime during the season? Sure, that's possible (mostly b/c he doesn't have All Stars in front of him, but even then I'd bet against it). But from day one? I don't think so. Down the line, I think everyone hopes he takes over the starting job. If he doesn't, that's a problem.
BK
Posted by: Brian Kamenetzky | August 28, 2006 at 01:40 PM
LakerTom,
"He is not a very smart, driven, or clutch player as was shown during the Sun’s series last year."
How do you know Smush isn't very smart? And as for being driven, I explained in another post, but the guy earned every last minute of playing time he got, knowing that if he didn't work his ass off he'd be out of the league. I agree, he collapsed a bit in the Suns series, but in Game 4 he basically won the thing for us with a very "clutch" three-pointer and one of the most "clutch" steals I have ever seen. To be honest, I don't know how clutch Jordan Farmar is. His team got to the Finals of this last NCAA tourney where they got shelled. And i don't remember him being so "clutch" getting them there in the first place.
Anyway, throwing all this stuff around about Smush and Farmar is ridiculous when most of it is incorrect. Smush Parker earned his spot from Phil Jackson and was able to keep it all year. I'm guessing Phil saw something there that apparently you don't, and no offense, I'm going with Phil on this one.
Posted by: Andrew Z | August 28, 2006 at 01:45 PM
Michael A:
I have been wearing the same glasses to view nine Laker championships and I have been right more often than I have been wrong when predicting how my team was going to do or what players were going to be keys.
That is not saying that I will be right about Farmar starting as soon as I am hoping but my experience tells me there is a fair chance that it will happen. For sure, however, he will become the starting point guard at some time. I just happen to believe that the need and the opportunity are there for him to start now.
The primary reason that Phil has never used a “true” point guard in the Triangle is that he never had one. He probably wasn’t in favor of using our first round pick to draft one either. He never did in Chicago.
On the subject of taking the ball out of Kobe’s hands, I am surprised that the “Don’t Start Farmar Bandwagon (Yes, there are so many of you non-believers that you have your own bandwagon) haven’t honed in on that fact. Kobe and Lamar want the ball in their hands so how does a “true” point guard fit with the Lakers?
You basically answered the question yourself with your comment about the quarterback letting the running back make the decisions. That is exactly what is happening with the Lakers today. The running backs (Kobe and Lamar) are making the decisions because the quarterback (Smush) cannot make them. We will be a better team with a “true” point guard running the team and getting everybody easier shots and preventing teams from double-teaming Kobe and/or Lamar to take us out of our offense.
How about 63% from the field for the Summer Pro League? Yes, Farmar needs to be more consistent as a 3-point shooter but he has already shown that he is money anywhere inside the lane and will only get better.
Hope I at least answered your questions.
Tom
Posted by: LakerTom | August 28, 2006 at 01:47 PM
Laker Tom,
Payton's not a true PG and his been "shoot-first" his whole career? Dude's the 6th all-time assist man in NBA history and #1 among current players. If GP's not a true PG, I'm really curious who you define as one. And even if GP's D has slipped, that doesn't somehow mean that Farmar's D cuts it. Again, Farmar hasn't proven anything on that level when it comes to the NBA-level.
Again, I agree with you that Farmar is going to end up eventually running the triangle better than Smush. But we're talking about the now. Smush's knowledge of the overall offense (not "running it" ability, just knowledge of it), is better, because he's actually been taught more of it. Even if he just knows the "basics," as you put it, he likely still knows more of said "basics" than Farmar through pure experience. I don't see why that's a hard concept to buy, considering Farmar's had little (if any) exposure to the system in its entirety.
By the way, I meant no disrespect with the "Yoda" comment. I was just trying to illustrate (in my own comedic way) how your zeal for the guy may be causing you to exaggerate his skills. I've already conceded that Farmar could end up starting at some point this season. I just think we need to see the guy play against and with actual pro players, plus expose him to the entire offense before declaring him a triangle master at the NBA-level. I don't think that's unreasonable.
AK
Posted by: Andrew Kamenetzky | August 28, 2006 at 01:51 PM
Laker Tom,
Your opinion of Farmar will be settled in about 2 months. When Farmar doesn't start the season as the starter, there will be no further need to discuss this. I have just chosen to move my thoughts ahead to that time already. I don't mean to sound harsh in my analysis, but in all fairness to Jordan Farmar, it simply isn't within the framework of the Lakers plans to have a rookie step in and lead the show. I predict that he will be brought along the same way all the rest have....slowly.
Luke Walton was as polished a rookie as Phil Jackson has ever coached and even he didn't step right in and get a starting role. He didn't even get much playing time at the beginning of the season and the was in light of both Kobe and Shaq liking the guy.
I have a hard time understanding your reasoning for Farmar stepping right in when it isn't a reasonable thing to expect. At best, he should be happy with making the 12-man roster. That will be a tough thing in and of itself for him. You fail to understand that for him to make the active roster, let alone start, someone else will have to go on the inactive list. Who would you put on the inactive list? I can assure that the Lakers didn't pickup Shammond Williams, Maurice Evans or Vlade Radmanovic to sit any of them on the Inactive List.
Do you look for any of last year's starters to sit on the IL? That means that at best, there are 4 spots open to the remaining roster of players. Out of Chris Mihm, Brian Cook, Sasha Vujacic, Andrew Bynum and Jordan Farmar, which one do you think is going to be placed on the IL?
Posted by: JJ | August 28, 2006 at 02:02 PM
A lot of people agree that it will take the addition of another "breakthrough" type of player for the Lakers to become champions again. Fans want that player so bad that they fantasize about KG trade scenarios or they drool over mediocre acquisitions like Al Harrington like as if championship rings would rain from the sky as soon as Al put on purple and gold.
Or fans pick out a player they have a personal affinity for and look for ways in which they can elevate their perceived value of that player, until they blow him up big enough so that suddenly THIS guy is the answer to everything the Lakers need. The player, who has accomplished little to support a lot of these suddenly expanded expectations, becomes hyped up in fans' minds as THE breakthrough player Lakers fans need and desire.
A couple of Lakerville's most valuable bloggers have gone this route; MikeT with Kwame, and LakerTom with Farmar.
Sometimes I am a little bit persuaded by the arguments made in support of these players as potential answers. But one thing that keeps coming back to me is that to my memory, the Lakers don't seem to have a history of sneaking great players in through the back door.
Nobody was particularly surprised when Shaq and Kobe tore up the league and won championships, or when Magic and Kareem dominated. My question is, did the Lakers EVER pick up a "breakthrough" type of player who turned out much better than expected, as opposed to picking up the type of player that everyone could clearly see was a champ from a mile away?
I don't mean that question to pertain to a guy like Smush, who defied all expectations just by making the starting rotation last year. It would have to be a guy like Smush would have been if he had become the go-to guy who helped lead the Lakers past the Suns and over the Clippers in the playoffs last spring...
Posted by: Guity | August 28, 2006 at 02:05 PM
AK,
Laker Tom is so sold on Jordan Farmar that he doesn't see anything but his way of looking at this thing. It just doesn't make good basketball sense to place Farmar in as the starter next season. At best he may end up as the 12th player on the active roster, meaning that the Lakers will lose one of their big men on the active list.
The best thing for Farmar is to work hard in practice, learn the system and grow into being a great player in a few years. Moving these young players up so quickly is what has hurt the NBA as a whole anyway. Very few are able to handle the immediate pressures placed on them. It is best to bring him in slowly and let him push Parker to play better in practice.
Besides, if Farmar has the potential to replace Parker at the beginning of the season this year.....I would question why the Lakers even kept Parker on the team. If he can be replaced so quickly by a rookie, he shouldn't be here.
Posted by: JJ | August 28, 2006 at 02:07 PM
Andrew Z:
What Phil saw in Smush was his only option at point guard. Or would you rather that Sasha started? This year he will have a choice. You think it will be Smush. I think it will be Farmar. Let's just wait and see what happens.
Tom
Posted by: LakerTom | August 28, 2006 at 02:09 PM
I will laugh so hard if the Maloofs move their franchise to somewhere like Oklahoma or Vegas. I pulled the following off of HoopsHype. Sonny would probably have to come out of the closet as a Lakers fan if this happened. I hate the Queens. There's something queer about that franchise.
The negotiations are taking place at a ticklish time for Maloof Sports and its Kings franchise. Team owners Joe and Gavin Maloof are navigating speculative waters swirling around whether they will move their Kings and WNBA Monarchs franchises unless they get a new publicly subsidized arena. All of that drives down the present arena's value to Arco or any prospective sponsor, experts say. Even worse, recent trends indicate that the naming rights market has gone soft. Sacramento Bee
Posted by: Marcus | August 28, 2006 at 02:11 PM
JJ:
Assuming no trades or buyouts, here are:
My 12-man active roster:
1 – Farmar, Parker, Williams
2 – Kobe, Evans
3 – Vlade, Luke
4 – Lamar, Turiaf
5 – Kwame, Mihm, Bynum
My 3-man inactive roster:
Vujacic, McKie, Cook
Tom
Posted by: LakerTom | August 28, 2006 at 02:15 PM
Guity,
You must be a young guy because if you look through the history of the Lakers you will find that they have been notorious for picking players that surprised everyone by the level of contribution that they gave to the team.
Bryon Scott, Kurt Rambis, AC Green, Michael Cooper, Derek Fisher, and Jamal Wilkes are just some of the Lakers that made great impact on the Lakers teams that eventually won championships.
You youngsters kill me with your veiws of the game as if the NBA just started 10 or 20 years ago. Just sit back and watch the game for a while and learn something.
Posted by: JJ | August 28, 2006 at 02:15 PM
Zakee,
O.K.. You like Portland.
Posted by: sonnybelfast | August 28, 2006 at 02:16 PM
Okay Laker Tom,
We'll just wait and see....but when it turns out to be Smush, I hope you will have the decency to come in here and admit that you were wrong.
Posted by: JJ | August 28, 2006 at 02:17 PM
Counting today, there are 71 days and a wake-up.
Posted by: sonnybelfast | August 28, 2006 at 02:19 PM
LAKERFAN
Thanks for the KOBE interview
TALIQ
FIRST, nice qoute (that was funny stuff) SECOND, KOBE's 28, if the LAKERS aren't going any where he'll have his 12th NBA season when he's 30. Would you take the chance of KEEPING him when a contact guard is playing his 12th seasons and you have to build around him. AT that point DWIGHT will be in his 4th season and the BEST BIG MAN in the league. I am not saying trade KOBE. Cause then I can't watch basketball anymore. Its just than he's not untouchable, looking at his situation. Just writing to let you know it wasn't the INHEILOZ. It was the KNOWLEDGE PILLS, thats all.
Posted by: rayray | August 28, 2006 at 02:21 PM
Guity:
I think your discussion of “breakthrough” types of players is right on target for the current discussion. Excellent post. You are right that the team’s need for a “breakthrough” player is what fuels the KG trade proponents, the Harrington “hopers,” and Mike T’s and my beliefs about Kwame and Farmar.
I don’t necessarily believe, however, that it is only superstar players that can be the “breakthrough” players for the team. Guys that I would consider “breakthrough” players for prior Laker teams would be A.C. Green, Kurt Rambis, Jaamal Wilkes, Jim McMillan, Derek Fisher, and Rick Fox. Each of these guys emerged to play a major role in our winning a championship.
Today’s candidates include Lamar Odom, Kwame Brown, Andrew Bynum, and Jordan Farmar. If these four guys end up playing to their potential, it will mean many more championships for the Lakers.
Tom
Posted by: LakerTom | August 28, 2006 at 02:25 PM
LakerTom,
Granted, I think Sasha sucks and Phil probably does too, but I don't think someone like Phil Jackson would have sat by all year with a guy if he didn't think he could get the job done. If he thought Smush was that bad he would have asked the front office to get someone else. Smush performed pretty well over 82 games, at least well enough to get the team to the playoffs.
But like you said, we'll wait and see what happens.
I also think you would see Brian Cook on the active roster before you would see Andrew Bynum.
Posted by: Andrew Z | August 28, 2006 at 02:26 PM
JJ:
As I have said many times, if it is Smush who starts when the season opens, I will support him 100% because it will mean that he had to improve his play to hold off Farmar. It will mean that the team will be better. Competition is something we did not have enough of on last year's team. Smush won the starting job by default in my opinion. If he wins it this year, it will be by playing better. Even if he begins the season as starter, Farmar will be pushing him all year long and will eventually catch him. In the meantime, the Lakers may end up with two players who are much better as a result.
Tom
Posted by: LakerTom | August 28, 2006 at 02:29 PM
JJ:
Nice response to Guilty. I forget BScott and Coop on my list but they definitely were "breakthrough" players for the Lakers.
What was your first Lakers championship team? Mine was the Wilt/West squad of 1971. Thanks.
Tom
Posted by: LakerTom | August 28, 2006 at 02:32 PM
marcus:
You are right. Sonny may well come out of the closet and become a Laker fan if the Kings move to Vegas, which is where they will go when the sales tax bill to foot the new arena fails.
Tom
Posted by: LakerTom | August 28, 2006 at 02:34 PM
Laker Tom,
Believe it or not, you may have stumbled upon something we agree on. "Who'll start/who'll come off the bench" specifics aside, I think your 12 man active/3 players inactive proposal may end up the lineup for many a game.
AK
Posted by: Andrew Kamenetzky | August 28, 2006 at 02:34 PM
Andrew Z:
I think that training camp and preseason will not only decide who will start but also who will be on the Inactive List. What is important for Laker fans to see is that there will be at least one good player who will end up on the inactive roster. Which also means that the 12 guys who will be on the active roster will be a much better and deeper group than last year.
tom
Posted by: LakerTom | August 28, 2006 at 02:37 PM
Marcus my son,
I can only guess how old you are, but I would almost bet that I was a Brokeback fan long before you were excreted, which would also mean that I can claim more Brokeback championships than you.
The Kings are my team now, and have been since arriving in God's country. I don't know the exact numbers, but Kings home games have sold out more than any team in the NBA, by a wide margin, including your Brokebacks.
Pending voter approval, they are preparing to break ground for a new arena as I speak.
The Maloofs are billionaire businessmen who talk business. Give me a break.
Posted by: sonnybelfast | August 28, 2006 at 02:39 PM
I know about Kobe's knees and all the miles on him. You have to look at his effort, though. All of his teammates have been astonished at the amount of time and effort he puts into training. Cassell is going into his 17th season this year and he was playing some impressive ball last season at 37 years old. I don't see Kobe falling off as soon as many predict based upon his injuries and the wear and tear from playing in the NBA since he was 18. Jason Kidd had microfracture surgery and performed well defensively last year in his 13th season. I would consider that surgery as being worse than the added miles from playing a couple seasons in the NBA. Kobe is so dedicated to preserving himself and putting in the extra effort to always prepare that it is hard for me to see him losing all-star caliber skills until sometime after 36. Shaq didn't lose it 'til 34 and he is notoriously lazy and fat. Phil was talking about how he got into shape for the playoffs (after Riley talked a whole bunch of smack) and was able to come out from under the basket defensively for the first time in years. Obviously, only time will tell.
Posted by: Marcus | August 28, 2006 at 02:40 PM
Damn Andrew Z!,
So far, your 1:39 post is my favorite post written today. Get 'em!!
>_<
Posted by: dan the man >_< aka smushcalade | August 28, 2006 at 02:41 PM
JJ, you threw a lot of names out there in one big clump, and i wonder if they really all belong together like that. Were you surprised that Wilkes became a great contributor to the Lakers? Derek Fisher did some greta things fdor the Lakers, but would you call him a "breakthrough" player? I mean if we could take derek, at the peak of his caree, and place that Derek on the Lakers this year, would that give them the championship?
Everybody loved Kurt Rambis for his hard work and hustle, but was he a "breakthrough" player that could give the Lakers a championship this year?
How about the other 3 guys? Could any of them (taken at the peak of his career, not now) make the Lakers champs this year?
Posted by: Guity | August 28, 2006 at 02:42 PM
AK:
Oh, No. Maybe I should change my list. LOL.
Let's see, maybe Cook will learn to play defense during training camp? No. Maybe McKie will find the fountain of youth? Probably not. Maybe Sasha will continue to shoot 60% from the 3-point line and learn to drive? Doubtful.
Damn, guess you are right for a change, AK. What more could I say. What is really important here is that we could agree that two guys who were really part of the Lakers rotation last year - Cook and Sasha - could well find themselves inactive this year. That has to say something about the improvements Mitch made during the offseason, doesn't it?
Tom
Posted by: LakerTom | August 28, 2006 at 02:44 PM
LakerTom,
Hey, something we agree on also. I think the Lakers are a couple players away from being contenders, but I think those players are coming in the organic form, not via trade or free agency. I believe the players are Lamar, Kwame, and, believe it or not, Ronny Turiaf. I like Jordan Farmar's future more than I like Andrew Bynum's so I think he'll be a bigger player in the Lakers future than the young big man.
Here's another question. Let's say Kwame starts at the 5 this year and plays at least as well as he did towards the end of the year, and then next year gets the starting 5 spot again, and hopefully continues to improve. Well then you have a 26 year-old beast of a center in his prime and Andrew Bynum. You don't move Kwame to the 4 because you just spent three years with him at the 5. Bynum can't play the 4, so what do we do? Do we root for Kwame to suck so Socks gets the starting nod or do we use Bynum as trade bait? Is Kwame just a rental for two more years? What if he turns into a 15-10 guy, who's to say Bynum ever gets to that point. Just food for thought.
Posted by: Andrew Z | August 28, 2006 at 02:44 PM
I really, really tried hard to get over the fact that Miami/Shaq won the title last year. Its a pill I cannot swallow and do not think I will ever be able to. It hurts very bad and to the point where I can no longer feel comfortable in my own skin until the Lakers/Kobe win 2 championships..let alone one.
Shaq is a horrible person who is selfish, self centered, and inconsiderate to others feelings unless it benefits himself. He does not deserve this championship. For years he has been surrounded by HOF talent and only able to conjure up one championship in 3 years. I feel if Kobe had that type of talent around him we could become a dynasty. I hate Shaq more than I've hated anyone in my life. Kobe is the hardest person ever to play this sport. We need justice!
Is there anyone else out there who feels the same pain?
Please share you story with me.
0C24
Posted by: kobeOC24 | August 28, 2006 at 02:47 PM
"Brokeback" in reference to the Lakers and "fan" being in the same sentence is about as ridiculous as Artest trying to justify his actions or the franchise firing Adelman.
Posted by: Marcus | August 28, 2006 at 02:48 PM
JJ,
Jamaal Wilkes was already a proven player when the Lakers got him; he hardly falls into a category of a Kurt Rambis. And Fisher and Green had very good college careers; they weren't "shockers".
Posted by: exhelodrvr | August 28, 2006 at 02:54 PM
Cookie on the inactive list? We need to remember that in the month of March, he averaged 14 pts on 56% with 50% 3's. I doubt Farmar or Bynum could contribute that much. Sasha could :) lol
laker Tom,
This is getting rediculous! 25 to 1 odds on winning ROY? With Kobe and Lamar on the team, and Phil holding Farmar on the bench, Farmar can't get even close to competing with much better players who have a bigger impact on bad teams. I'd go more toward 250 to 1.
Posted by: greek dude | August 28, 2006 at 02:56 PM
Guilty:
Here is my take on whether adding any of the following players would be the "breakthrough" player to take the Lakers to a championship:
Michael Cooper - Yes, would be starter at 1.
Jaamal Wilkes - Yes, would be starter at 3.
Rick Fox - Yes, would be starter at 3.
Derek Fisher - Yes, would be starter at 1.
Byron Scott - Yes, would have to play at 1.
Kurt Rambis - Maybe, great rebounder, good defender.
A.C.Green - Maybe, great rebounder, good defender.
I am assuming that these guys would all be in their prime and not over the hill as Derek Fisher is at this point in time.
Tom
Posted by: LakerTom | August 28, 2006 at 03:03 PM
Dan the man (Smushcalade),
You're right, getting Kenny Anderson isn't as important or appealing as I first thought. He is getting old and he really isn't needed as a veteran and locker-room help for us(thats why we still have McKie I suppose). Not to mention, we have a crap-load of guards anyway. What was I thinking!?
We will obviously allow Smush to start again for us, and now we have the luxury of having two good back-up PG's in Williams and Farmar. We're pretty much all set for this season, as far as our current roster is concerned. The only way I see it changing is if we get rid of Mckie for Profit (which I LOVE by the way) or pulling off a trade to give us more breathing room as far as our 15 man roster is concerned (something along the lines of Mihm, cook and sasha) for a starter or something.
Posted by: blaze1bx | August 28, 2006 at 03:03 PM
LakerTom,
Are you ok? Are your arms getting tired from fighting the negative, I mean realistic wing of the blog?
Posted by: Ken | August 28, 2006 at 03:05 PM
greek dude:
In case you did not know it, the guys who set the odds in Vegas for gambling do this for a living. They aren't just tossing words around on a blog. If they screw up and money is lost, they may even be in danger of losing more than their jobs. It is Vegas, after all.
Are you sure you want to claim to know more about the odds of Farmar winning ROY than these guys? Remember also, these were not the odds of Farmar starting. I would guess that those odds were probably around 10 to 1. Just my guess, of course, but I would put money on Farmar to start at 10 to 1.
By the way, you never answered my question about whether you thought Greece would start out 6-0. That must have been longer odds than 25 to 1. So why not Farmar starting at 10 to 1. I never said it was a sure thing. I just said that there was a lot of writing on the wall that suggests it might very well happen. My bet is 10 to 1 is about right. Not 1,000 to 1 that AK probably believes.
By the same token, I wonder what the odds of the Lakers winning a championship this year. I would probably say that it is 50 to 1 in my book, maybe 25 to 1 if Farmar starts. I don't know what the Vegas odds are but I am sure I will find out pretty quickly.
Tom
Posted by: LakerTom | August 28, 2006 at 03:11 PM