8 After 8
With Kobe now sporting new digits on his jersey, it's only natural that I'm getting a little nostalgic for the days when I was forced to type "8" (or at least some reference to his number) 100 times every post. Maybe I'm just a sentimental fool, but the lack of "8 opportunities" (aside from "Ocho times 3," which I refuse to call him) have left me jonesing for the days of yore. Or Kobe's number change has simply eliminated a simple, lazy, fall-back reference point (which is obviously the real tragedy). So in honor of "The New Jack Bauer's" old tag, It felt only appropriate to present an octet of observations after an octet of games. Obviously, at 5-3 in mid-November, everything we've witnessed up to this point is of a "grain of salt" variety, especially since several guys are just starting to get healthy or reenter the lineup. But everything I'm bringing up has presented itself on a fairly consistent basis, so I think it's worth the cyberspace equivalent of ink. Here goes.
1) Smush Parker is not himself right now. I'm aware that will strike some readers as comical, considering they didn't think much of him last season when he was theoretically "at the top of his game." But my statement remains true. I'm not even talking about his often suspect perimeter D. Frustrating as that element can be, we very well could be dicussing an "it is what is" scenario. You hope for the best and expect not the worst (Smush's ball hawking hands absolve him from true "dregs" status), just spotty results. Instead, I'm talking about his oft-indecisiveness while holding the rock (occasionally resulting in last minute passes to teammates forced to avoid a shot clock violation). His dwindling shooting percentage. An overall lack of aggressiveness, especially at the rack. I don't even remember the last time I saw Smush dunk. Lest we (or he) forget, dude's got some considerable hops.
Reasons for this funk? Not quite sure. Smush has talked lately about "lost mojo," which could be an offhanded admission of a simple "nothing to read into" slump or an Austin Powers-centric way of avoiding the question. It could be an adjustment to the extra weight he purposely (and perhaps misguidedly) put on. It could be the result of eschewing team oriented summer workouts for individualized fare. It could be him looking too much in the rear view mirror at Jordan Farmar, a big mistake since "Justin," while doing a nice job off the bench, still isn't ready. For that matter, nobody behind Smush has played well enough to threaten his job via merit. Therefore, a new starter would more likely be the result of Smush playing his way out of the gig than another guy actually swiping it. Or the problem is something else entirely. But whatever it is, Smush needs to figure it out... and fast.
For what it's worth, I think focus is the culprit. Smush has looked either overly dialed in (like during the Memphis game, where bad shooting was offset by some terrific passes and timely steals) or out to lunch. No in-between. Should Smush find a way to maintain the former mindset, I think he could bring himself back to (if not actually improve upon) last season's level of play.
2) Luke Walton's teammates should watch how he keeps cutting to the rack without the ball. And, um, I don't know... copy him. Because it's pretty freakin' effective. Obviously, Luke's increased production comes in part as the result of extra minutes, increased shot attempts, and a gaudy 70% clip from behind the arc. But he's only launching one trey per game and is certainly willing to give up the ball (at times to a fault), so it's not like he discovered his inner "ball hog." Luke's often succeeding because he's apparently running with the notion that an uncontested layup right under the basket with a defender trailing would qualify as a "high percentage shot." I'd like to think those without his "basketball I.Q." can also wrap their heads around said concept. This team's capable of setting up guys for baskets (even Bynum and Kwame pass pretty well for big men), so other Lakers would do well following the example set by Big Red's kid.
3) Luke Walton's teammates should be watching how he keeps cutting to the rack while playing with the second unit, all things being equal. "Things" mostly constitutes a return to form by Vladimir Radmanovic (and an increased comfort with the triangle). I feel for Vlad, because that hand is obviously aching, and while he's trying valiantly to compensate by making more trips to the rack, his bread and butter is being taken away. But should Vlad pick up the pace, I would love to see Walton helping run the second unit. I think he'd still find the same scoring opportunities and his passing ability would take some facilitating pressure off Jordan Farmar (which might cut down on the rook's turnovers). To clarify, I don't see this as demoting Walton, who's been playing like a legit starter and earned his elevated status. I just think it would be better for the overall team composition. Perhaps that sucks for Walton, but life often sucks without the added benefit of being a millionaire. He'll live. But the catalyst for change hinges more on Vlad than Luke anyway.
4) Chris Mihm's contributions are already missed. Now before at least one guy starts screaming at me, please note that I'm in no way implying that the team lives or dies by Mihm suiting up. Obviously, they've proved capable of winning without him. Nor am I implying Mihm is an All-Star in the making, irreplaceable, a complete player, better than Kwame Brown (or even comparing him to Kwame Brown), etc, etc. etc...
Ah, screw it. I sense a rant coming no matter what I say. Might as well get to the point.
Mihm's best asset might be his consistency. His good and bad points typically surface in a manner that's easily relied on. Steady low post scoring. Solid rebounding and shot blocking. Mediocre D. But you could set your watch by Mihm's game and plan accordingly. The Lakers may not have that luxury with their other true bigs. In our pre-season predictions, BK and I both warned that Andrew Bynum would be all over the place and Ronny Turiaf, while undoubtedly improved, might have trouble staying on the court for extended minutes because he's a foul magnet. Thus far, both have proved true, which limits the ability to bank on either past a certain point. Not a slam, just a simple fact of life for both at this juncture of their careers. And since Brian Cook and Vladimir Radmanovic don't exactly rule the paint (and Lamar Odom can't do everything down low), Mihm's steadiness would have been an asset. Which brings me to my next point.
5) It's more apparent now than ever that Kwame Brown NEEDS to be a consistent contributor. And more than just as one-on-one post defender. The team needs reliable results from Kwame. He's the lone vet presence among the true bigs and easily (or scarily, for those skeptical) their most seasoned. Therefore, stepping up is mandatory. I'm more than willing to assume last season's terrific ability to body up elite bigs will remain unchanged and Kwame definitely was looking more confident in camp before getting hurt. Hopefully, that momentum can be immediately regained, because the team needs him.
There's been a lot of blogging nation debate as to what numbers would qualify as "good" for Kwame. 12/8? 15/10? 18/12? 20/12? When I think about his potential stats, my bigger concern is the number on the right. Kwame needs to become a a less erratic glass eater. There were too many games last season where a double digit effort was followed by a series of games where he'd snag 3-6. That can't continue if the Lakers are going to be successful. As far as Kwame's scoring, I'm not really as concerned about the exact ppg as I am about the consistent threat of those points. Obviously, Kwame needs to become something of an offensive factor, just to keep defenders honest and his teammates from playing 4 on 5. But as long as he's providing reasonable help (8-11 pppg would qualify, in my mind) and doing it in steady fashion that requires him to be guarded, I'm not all that worried about him becoming a 15-20 point machine this season. If it happens, fantastic and more power to him. But as long as he becomes a dependable option, the actual points become less important. And as long as we're talking dependability...
6) Lamar Odom remains this team's "X-Factor," not Kobe. Take a look at LO's game log this season (and last season, should you so desire). When he's on, the Lakers generally win. When he's off, the Lakers generally struggle. It's really that simple. What isn't simple is figuring out how Odom can remain that dominant force on a regular basis (or where the roots for failing to do so begin). The subject has been rehashed a billion times without a hint of resolution, so I see no reason to do it for the 1,000,000,001th time. But Lamar is the biggest key to a great season, even more than Kobe, the one Laker you don't have to worry about coming through on a regular basis. When healthy, he's about as money as they come. Unless you think Mr. Bean can carry a team for an entire season by himself (which he can't), the squad will only go as far as their second best player allows. I don't think anybody doubts that's Lamar Odom.
7) The D kinda stinks. Obviously, this statement comes with a caveat, since two of their more dependable defenders (Kwame and Kobe) have either been sidelined or operating at less than 100%. Once they're back in the swing of things, item #7 could become a non-issue. But it still bears mentioning, since the overall defense has been Cottonelle soft.
8) Sasha Vujacic needs to take up smoking. OK, maybe not literally (although it did do wonders for Vlade Divac's career). But perhaps he should investigate a prescription drug habit. Hypnosis. The tender loving touch of a good woman. Whatever avenue pursued, the guy must find a means of relaxing while he's on the court. Ever since Sasha opened the season as an "oh-fer," he's seemed incredibly anxious to "make something happen" during his increasingly limited minutes. I understand the urge, but it's mostly resulted in forced shots often way too early in the shot clock. As a result, he's turned himself into sort of a Slovenian version of Von Wafer, but with two major differences.
A) While Sasha's flirting with Von's shockingly low shooting percentage last season, his "rate of chuck" doesn't even hold a candle to Von's. Sasha's also forcing shots in an ill-fated but earnest attempt to work his way out of a slump. Von forced shots because he's a compulsive gunner. And Sasha can't even carry Von's jock strap when it comes to the art of inexplicably poor decisions. The kind where you sit bug-eyed and think, "Wow. I genuinely did not see that one coming." Why is all this important? Because it means Sasha Vujacic playing poorly isn't nearly as unintentionally hilarious as Von Wafer playing poorly. Which means Sasha's slump brings nothing to the table.
B) Nothing was expected (nor received) from Von Wafer last season. BK and I figure the Lakers realized right around this time in 2005 that they completely bricked that draft pick, but found themselves enormously entertained by Wafer's antics, which balances everything out. Sasha, however, was a rotation player last season. It's one thing when increased depth costs a player his spot in the rotation. It's another thing when that guy plays his way out of the rotation. Sasha's case is decidedly the latter.
I admire how much it obviously matters to Sasha to work his way back into the rotation, and while I've questioned his talent many times, I've never questioned his effort. But this approach clearly ain't working out.
Your thoughts? Anything glaring that I should have mentioned instead?
—AK
Over/under on people who point out the Lakers are 5-3, not 4-4....17.
Posted by: Andrew Z | November 14, 2006 at 03:52 PM
Andrew Z,
Just 1, because I realized my brain cramp and fixed it. Thanks.
AK
Posted by: Andrew Kamenetzky | November 14, 2006 at 03:56 PM
AK,
Surprised you didn't mention more about Andrew Bynum. Since he's been not only the talk of the blog, but the national media, it seems like a point to make. For the first time post-Shaq, media pundits are talking about the Lakers without speaking primarily about Kobe.
Posted by: Andrew Z | November 14, 2006 at 03:56 PM
Andrew Z,
I actually thought about making Bynum a "point," but didn't, for basically the reasons you just stated. Between the national media and what BK and I (and all of you, really) have already discussed, it felt a little too well worn. But it's certainly a story, for sure.
And even while erratic, he's had some very nice games, too. All in all, I'm pleased with his progress.
AK
Posted by: Andrew Kamenetzky | November 14, 2006 at 03:58 PM
Doh!
That's why I don't bet on sports (or blogs).
Posted by: Andrew Z | November 14, 2006 at 03:58 PM
Andrew Z,
I was the first one to predict that the total wins and losses at this point of the season would add up to 8.
AK,
Excellent points. Kwame also needs to improve picking up the penetrators, especially with the weak perimeter defense. On offense, he doesn't seem to want to position himself for the offensive rebounds. As far as points, with him it's not so much the total points, as taking advantage of the opportunities when they present themselves. (i.e. when someone doubles on Kobe, catch the pass and dunk it.) He does not have to have any offensive "moves" to provide what the team needs; just putbacks and dunks!
Posted by: exhelodrvr | November 14, 2006 at 04:09 PM
Ex,
"I was the first one to predict that the total wins and losses at this point of the season would add up to 8."
Dude, you're gonna put me out of a job with zingers like that. Hilarious.
AK
Posted by: Andrew Kamenetzky | November 14, 2006 at 04:10 PM
Disciples of Kwame!!!!
I too want to join the holy one, and praise his name. Mike T, hold the keys to’ Kwame’s Kingdom’ and you to can join him in basketball heaven if follow the ‘Ten Commandments’ according to Mike T
1. Kwame Brown is better than Kobe.
2. Kwame Brown is the Franchise.
3. Chris Mihm cannot lace-up Kwame’s trainer’s (Well neither can Kwame with his butter fingers)
4. Kwame would make an excellent catcher in baseball.
5. Kwame did not disappear the last 3 games of series against Suns
6. Kwame is to good a player to worry shooting above 50% from field or even the FT line
7. Kwame should start because he is going to get 15 points 10 rebound a game. (When has he ever done that in his career)
8. Kwame does not need to listen to the Captain he already has all the tools (He can be a tool at times)
9. Kwame is better than Chris Mihm. (Have I mentioned that)
10. Trade Kobe for Wade, Lebron or Melo and build the team around Kwame!!
Peace & Love
Lakers_Uk
Posted by: Lakers_Uk | November 14, 2006 at 04:26 PM
I'm no Smush Parker hater but I've got to say this: "Smush Parker is who we thought he was!!"
Thank you Dennis Green.
Posted by: Xodus | November 14, 2006 at 04:30 PM
Kobe and Lamar really are adept at finding Luke when he cuts.
However, I often wonder why those two are not on the receiving end of the pass more often. Oh yeah, neither of them cuts very often!
You're absolutely right, AK, about the cutting, and I've noticed the two main culprits of this are our two main players! Granted, they can create their own shot pretty well, but their lives -and shots- would be so much easier if they followed Luke's lead and cut to the basket after passing.
I don't think part of the triangle offense is to stand and wait at the three point line after passing the rock, but it would seem like it if you focused on the offense of Lamar and Kobe.
I'm out like Bobby Knight's coaching "techniques".
Posted by: Kobe is a Team Player | November 14, 2006 at 04:32 PM
On HBO Tonight!!
The 'Fight for the Ages'
Not Ali Vs Norton, not Ali vs Frasier but
"Knight vs Sprewell"
I would pay money to this one!!!
Peace & Love
Lakers_UK
Posted by: Lakers_Uk | November 14, 2006 at 04:49 PM
AK,
You'll get tired of them after I've used that same template another 20 or so times.
Posted by: exhelodrvr | November 14, 2006 at 04:49 PM
Ex,
That may be true, but I'll likely giggle at the first 19.
AK
Posted by: Andrew Kamenetzky | November 14, 2006 at 05:02 PM
Laker UK,
Your 3 and 9 have the same thought. If I may suggest:
3 or 9 : The triangle doesn't show off Kwame's skills. Fire Phil Jackson, Mitch K and Dr. Buss.
Posted by: p ang | November 14, 2006 at 05:03 PM
Ex and AK,
I was the first to get tired of that.
Posted by: RespectMyAuthoritah | November 14, 2006 at 05:04 PM
"Unless you think Mr. Bean can carry a team for an entire season by himself (which he can't)"
Family Guy: It seems to me...
That he did last season...of course that's just probably me. And granted with how old those knees are, and how he's fared this season so far...it might not have been possible this season...in any case...
I'd have added our "depth"...there were sets, rather games where our depth really showed. Where Turiaf showed why we love him, where Farmar has shined. Then again, those are positives, and these are not positives haha...JK...seriously JK.
And finally, just cause you wanted it...it's time to finish the Family Guy lyrics lol...
"Lois: It seems to me that all you see is violence in movies and sex on Tv.
Peter: But, Where are those good ol' fashion values ...
All: ... on which we used to rely?
All: Lucky theres a Family Guy!
All: Lucky theres a man who, positively can do all the thing that make us
Stewie: ...Laugh and cry!
All: He's a Family Guuuuuuuuuuuuy!"
Posted by: Faith | November 14, 2006 at 05:05 PM
P ang Good Shout!!
Your 3 and 9 have the same thought. If I may suggest:
3 or 9 : The triangle doesn't show off Kwame's skills. Fire Phil Jackson, Mitch K and Dr. Buss.
Don't forget, it was my deliberate attempt at sarcasm!!!
Peace & Love
Lakers_Uk
Posted by: Lakers_Uk | November 14, 2006 at 05:08 PM
Faith,
I should rephrase (and may even add it as an edit in the post). Kobe CAN carry a team in spots and even stretches. But he can't carry a team by himself for an entire season through the Western Conference- plus a deep run in the playoffs- and have much meaningful success. That much I'm sure of.
AK
Posted by: Andrew Kamenetzky | November 14, 2006 at 05:08 PM
Faith,
Actually, I just re-read what I wrote and that is in fact what I originally said. Thus, no need to edit anything. haha
AK
Posted by: Andrew Kamenetzky | November 14, 2006 at 05:11 PM
AK,
Got it, you know how we are here in Lakerville...ever the picky people. haha
Posted by: Faith | November 14, 2006 at 05:11 PM
Faith,
No, I'm more than aware of how sensitive y'all are with Kobe. haha
But it's not a diss. It's simply the truth. The West is too tough. Could Kobe carry a team into a deep Eastern conference playoff run? Yeah, sure. LeBron did it with a pretty average Cavs team, so I don't see why Kobe couldn't. But this is the West, which is brutally competitive. Thus, Kobe (like anyone) needs help over the long haul.
AK
Posted by: Andrew Kamenetzky | November 14, 2006 at 05:13 PM
Laker Uk,
"Don't forget, it was my deliberate attempt at sarcasm!!!"
Gotcha. You think he did?
Posted by: p ang | November 14, 2006 at 05:22 PM
1. If you are trying to play the 'triangle' offence, it would help to remember that triangle is not made up of 4 right angles!!! (ie make a cut to the basket!!
2. Socks watch your back!! Kwame's got your numbers!!! It would be nice if he could average
10pts 63%FG 73% FT 6.5RBNDS 1.3BLK (Bynum)
and not near his career average last year
7.4pt 52.6%FG 54%FT 6.6RBNDS 0.6BLK (Kwame)
3. Evans can jump like 'Samurai Jack'!!
4. Sasha must have a twin brother, ie the one who shoots the lights out in practice!!
5. Please, please do not 'Shut that Back Door', that play will be available all season long!!
6. We do not want to face Houston in first round!!
Peace & Love
Lakers_Uk
Posted by: Lakers_Uk | November 14, 2006 at 05:38 PM
AK and other basketball minds out there,
Regarding Smush's slump, it seems to me that he's gotten away from his bread and butter on the offensive end, which is attacking the basket. Dude seemed fearless last season. Now he seems content to be planted behind the 3 point line and get wide open looks courtesey of #24 driving to the basket. Am I missing something or wouldn't it make more sense to have someone like sasha be planted behind the dotted line and be the benefactor of Kobe's drives ... whilst Smush should be encouraged to drive to the basket more
Seems like it'd solve 2 problems ... raise Smush percentages since he'll stop taking so many damn 3s and it'll raise Sasha's game since he'll get better shots ( I'm sure if he had as many wide open 3s as Smush he'd knock em down more ). I mean it ain't like Smush was creating those shot's for himself, they seemed like set play's almost, he was just spotting up behind the 3 waiting for #24 to pass to him, why not have Sasha do that?
Really I'd like to hear what folks think, I'd throw in Vlad in there too as being better suited to be planted behind the line but I don't know the deal with his fingers.
The coaches just seem to be using their depth chart wrongly ... holla back y'all
In a Laker Squad led by Kobe we Trust,
Go Lakers
Posted by: Taliq | November 14, 2006 at 05:55 PM
coming up:
the bulls
the Clippers
the Jazz
the Nets
the Bucks
and the Jazz, again.
Two things to watch for: The Lakes win and loses. And Bynum's numbers.
You people just show that you want Bynum to succeed and Kwame to fail. Why? It's without doubt that Bynum is "going" to be great, in my opinion. But the Lakers were 4-3 with him Bynum as the starter before Kwame got back. And that was against weak teams. Bynum had 2 good games...the rest were the the reality of what Bynum is. And that is 19 years old.
Don't forget 4-3 with loses to Seattle and Portland. With a good team like Detroit...Look at his stats in that game. Again, we have the Bulls, Clippers, Jazz, Nets, Bucks, and the Jazz coming up. We'll see then where Bynum's development is. That's when you're going to see the truth.
I want Bynum to be great, too. But he's only 19 years old. I don't see the Lakers winning a championship with Bynum as the starting center this year. But cheer him all you want...if it makes you feel good. No harm in that.
mike
Posted by: Michael Teniente | November 14, 2006 at 06:01 PM
Mike-
I agree with you regarding Bynum (he's not consistent enough to start on a team with playoff aspirations, especially if there are alternatives) but continue to be amazed at your ability to see everything as a zero-sum game with Kwame.
BK
Posted by: Brian Kamenetzky | November 14, 2006 at 06:11 PM
Laker Uk,
Nah, He didn't get it.
Posted by: p ang | November 14, 2006 at 06:12 PM
Mike T,
Good point, we do have a bunch of tough games coming up ... so I say may we win all those games irrespective of who's starting ...
Mike T, can we get an "amen" to that from you ( or an unconditional "i hope so" if u ain't the religious type )
Taliq
Posted by: Taliq | November 14, 2006 at 06:17 PM
P ang!!
May be he didn't catch it!!!
HaHaHa!!!
Peace & Love
Lakers_Uk
Posted by: Lakers_Uk | November 14, 2006 at 06:19 PM
BK,
Chuckle ... think that's what I was trying to imply with the amen I requested from Mike T ... I'm like i'm not so sure this dude will be happy if the lakers get it done w/o kwame ... but hey lets hope kwame turns out to be a stud for the long haul, I'll take the Ws it'll result in even if we have to listen to Mike rant "i told you so" for a few odd years
On another note, did you see my question on Smush, am I just being retarded or am i right in saying the dude shouldn't be our 3point guy and his talents are best utilized elsewhere in the offense
Taliq
Posted by: Taliq | November 14, 2006 at 06:23 PM
BK,
Right now I satisfied with Kwame defense. Or shall I say...I'm counting on it more than consistency from Bynum at this point.
Taliq,
Amen! I am religious. If I wasn't religious I would still be slapping people around. Wait...on occassion I still do. But AMEN, anyway!
mike
Posted by: Michael Teniente | November 14, 2006 at 06:26 PM
Laker Uk,
LOL!
Posted by: p ang | November 14, 2006 at 06:28 PM
Taliq,
Smush is only doing what Kobe and Tex Winters have been yelling at the whole team about. When you have the open shot, take it.... Stop defering to Kobe, Stop causing our bigs to be called for 3 sec's in the lane by passing up shots. That's what's wrong with Lamar and Walton, they over pass and we have a big camped out in the paint thinking they're going to shoot. Bingo, turnover! Never mind that Smush's shot isn't falling right now, they will. Smush just needs to get comfortable launching a little more often and know he's not going to be yelled at if they don't go in.
Posted by: Laker Larry | November 14, 2006 at 06:36 PM
Taliq,
I'll be happy if the Lakers get it done without Kwame. But the Lakers were a game or two above 500 with Chris Mihm as center. I didn't see any hope of that trend changing until I saw Kwame's defense make the difference. I mean, with Kwame in the middle we finished with an 11-3 record. People want to say Walton had a lot to do with that...but I give most of the credit to Kwame patroling the paint, which makes it easier for the other men to stick to their players. I went over this in the summer so much that I won't bore you with more details. But the Lakers are 2 games above 500 right now against the soft part of the schedule. I see the same trend. I want to see a 5 game winning streak. I want to see an 9-1 run. followed by an 8-2 run. The only way that's happening is with defense...not Bynum inconsistent numbers on offense.
Believe me...I was writing about Bynum since last year. I even said that I was annointing Bynum the next big thing in the NBA. I even suggested the Lakers trade Mihm because we had Bynum and Turiaf to replace him. But as for winning a Championship this year. Not with Bynum in the middle. Not this year, pal. Keep your eye on the prize and not at the glimpses of Bynum coming greatness. Can I get an amen on that?
mike
Posted by: Michael Teniente | November 14, 2006 at 06:37 PM
Mike-
My point was you again interpreted enthusiasm for Bynum on the site for people wishing for Kwame to fail. You can have the first without the second, and it will benefit the team, which is what everyone seems to want.
Taliq-
I'm all for Smush going to the hole more often. It would help open up his game, for sure. But I think his biggest problem is that edge he had last year seems to be gone. He's a step slow on everything, too tentative on offense. He has stretches where he seems to snap out of it, but overall he hasn't been as good as he was last year. And when you consider that he's ideally a backup anyway, that is not a good thing.
BK
Posted by: Brian Kamenetzky | November 14, 2006 at 06:38 PM
Maybe Smush doesn't look as good right now because Kobe isn't anywhere near 100%. Kobe doesn't command a full time double right now so defenses can pay more attention to other players on the court. As Kobe gets better, so will the rest of the team.
Posted by: Laker Larry | November 14, 2006 at 06:51 PM
AK,BK
Is it just me, but do you think the Lakers flow better when the make all those 'Back Door' plays. For one, it keeps the defence on their toes, i.e. if you double or trap the ball handler, you will leave your self open for that play.
If I remember, 'The Bulls', used to run that play to get easy points with their athleticism and execution of the play
Peace & Love
Lakers_Uk
Posted by: Lakers_Uk | November 14, 2006 at 06:52 PM
The reality is .... Bynum and Kwame is the cards we've been dealt with this year. It should have been Mimm and Kwame, with a little Bynum seasoning here and there. Bynum will start every game this year,(if Tex gets his way) even if Kwame gets most of the minutes. Kwame has NO low post game, none,nada, absolutely nothing. The triangle demands more. Kwame is key to our success, but wouldn't even be the starter if Mimm was healthy. And until he makes his Free Throws will not see alot of action at the end of games.
Do not misinterpet this, I Like Kwame, for our success He must become a monster at both ends of the court. Blocking the lane, blocking out for boards, and Blocking Shots! If he can't do these he's expendable.
Side Note: Can't wait to see Kwame and Bynum tandum up against some of the big teams.
Posted by: jfatty | November 14, 2006 at 06:52 PM
Actually, with Kwame in the middle the Lakers finished 0-3.
Posted by: exhelodrvr | November 14, 2006 at 08:35 PM
RespectMyAuthoritah,
"I was the first to get tired of that."
Screw you guys, I'm going home.
Posted by: exhelodrvr | November 14, 2006 at 08:46 PM
exhelodrvr,
You know, I try to post basketball stuff that makes sense. Then you go and say something like you like:
"Actually, with Kwame in the middle the Lakers finished 0-3."
I mean, did I have to say the regular season? I'm mean, if you followed the Lakers you would know we finished the regular season 11-3. Gee, I didn't say regular season...but with 11-3 record being a fact to the end of the regular season...it's implied. Can't you just accept the fact that is what I'm talking about instead of trying to make a point that has no bearing on what I'm trying to say?
What am I trying to say? What I'm saying is that if the Lakers are going to win the Championship THIS YEAR it won't be with Bynum starting at center. THAT'S THE POINT!
And if you must know, we lost 3 games in a row because PJ didn't pull Smush Parker from the line-up when he was being eaten alive by Steve Nash. That's why we lost 3 in a row to Phoenix, in my opinion. But that's gone. What isn't gone is the Lakers chances of winning a championship this year.
mike
Posted by: Michael Teniente | November 14, 2006 at 10:13 PM
Nice Post AK. BTW, speaking of the 'busted Wafer pick' does anybody else feel a little sore that Monta Ellis went right after that? If not for Von's entertainment factor, I might just be glib about it.
Posted by: anonymous | November 14, 2006 at 11:10 PM
BK
I enjoyed your comments and agree with all of them. I would add to your "copy Luke" insights to include noticing how Luke's development of a solid midrange jumper has solidified his offensive game. This would apply especially to Smush and Sasha who seem to look to the three exclusively.
I am interested in your view of what Mo Evan's role should be. He is obviously very athletic, has a decent mid-range shot, is active on the boards, and has strength/size. Do you think he has the ball-handling skills and smarts to initiate and facilitate the offense, thereby freeing up Kobe or Lamar? Of course, he needs more experience working within the Triangle, but I am curious how you see his role down the road.
Posted by: freakylakerlover | November 14, 2006 at 11:18 PM
Laker Larry/BK.
I'm all for smush pulling the trigger, it's just I don't understand why he's the one getting wide open 3 point looks that seem to come from set plays ... wouldn't cook, vlad, sasha be better options for that? We just don't seem to be utilizing our guys right.
Mike T, ,,, yeah u can ... amen
Posted by: Taliq | November 14, 2006 at 11:53 PM
AZ,
In response to your post to me yesterday....
What your reponse to my trade scenario from yesterday shows is that you can't seem to grasp the concept of sarcasm!
Posted by: JJ | November 15, 2006 at 06:22 AM
M T,
Then stop pretending that Kwame was the reason for the Lakers finishing the regular season 11-3. He played a minor role in that resurgence. The primary reason for that record was Lamar. Second, the schedule. Third, Kobe recognizing the improved play of the teammates and getting them involved. Fourth, Luke's play. Fifth, Kwame's play. He played mediocre during that stretch. But for him, mediocre was such a big improvement, it gets blown out of proportion.
Posted by: exhelodrvr | November 15, 2006 at 06:27 AM
Mike T,
So, for the record...
"What am I trying to say? What I'm saying is that if the Lakers are going to win the Championship THIS YEAR it won't be with Bynum starting at center. THAT'S THE POINT!"
These are your words typed by your hands. I don't want to hear anything differently later in the year if the Lakers hit a hot streak with Bynum as the starting center. You have already taken your stance.
Posted by: JJ | November 15, 2006 at 06:36 AM
O gee, JJ, I didn't know I was subjected to you. Get real! I'll say what I want and not worry about crossing any lines you set up for me to meet.
As for EX, that's your opinion. It's not mine.
mike
Posted by: Michael Teniente | November 15, 2006 at 08:19 AM
Can you believe this guy?
"These are your words typed by your hands. I don't want to hear anything differently later in the year if the Lakers hit a hot streak with Bynum as the starting center. You have already taken your stance."
It's a blog not a court of law. If I'm wrong I'm wrong. If I'm right I'm right. It's nothing more than that.
mike
Posted by: Michael Teniente | November 15, 2006 at 08:21 AM
LAKERS ! LAKERS ! LAKERS !
i live and die with my team. ANY TEAM WHO BEATS LAKERS, i challenge them in my PS2. AND LAKERS AND I BECAME CHAMPIONS. actually im on my 4th nba finals appearnce on my NBA 2k6 game.hmmmmm, maybe its a prophetic thing. hehehe!
MABUHAY ANG LAKERS! MABUHAY KA KOBE ! MABUHAY KA MANNY PAQUIAO
---- traze2blaze from philippines -----
Posted by: traze2blaze | November 15, 2006 at 08:25 AM
JJ,
Sacrasm didn't come through too well in your writing on that post. It's hard to tell the difference when you think we can start Sasha at point guard the second half of the season and contend for a title. How can I take anything seriously you write if you put up a doozy like that?
Posted by: Andrew Z | November 15, 2006 at 08:38 AM
M T,
"What am I trying to say? What I'm saying is that if the Lakers are going to win the Championship THIS YEAR it won't be with Bynum starting at center. THAT'S THE POINT!"
Way to go out on a limb!! The Lakers are not going to win the title this year.
However, by the time the playoffs come around, their chances would be better, albeit probably only slightly, with Bynum at center.
"And if you must know, we lost 3 games in a row because PJ didn't pull Smush Parker from the line-up when he was being eaten alive by Steve Nash. That's why we lost 3 in a row to Phoenix, in my opinion. But that's gone"
Kwame did a poor job of helping out when Nash penetrated. A good portion of the blame for Nash's effectiveness belongs there.
"But that's gone"
So the 0-3 finish in the playoffs is "gone", but the 11-3 finish to the regular season is not?
Posted by: exhelodrvr | November 15, 2006 at 09:18 AM
ex,
Again, your opinion is your opinion. What more do you want?
mike
Posted by: Michael Teniente | November 15, 2006 at 09:50 AM
AK/BK,
I just wanted to hear more about Maurice Evans and the impact he could have on this team.
These cats are at it today too. I am upset I just got here.
Posted by: Najja aka Bonus | November 15, 2006 at 12:04 PM
Wow that 8 after 8 thread became 3 and 9 post. this blog is going in circles, I will remember those numbers when I get to Vegas this weekend.
Posted by: Edwin Gueco | November 15, 2006 at 04:39 PM
Mike give in and go with Ocho Times Three
Posted by: Ash | November 16, 2006 at 03:34 AM
Maybe P.J. can loan his Carlos Castaneda books to Sasha... then send him out to the desert to trip for a couple of days.
Dave M
Posted by: dave m | November 16, 2006 at 12:41 PM