Extra! Extra! (1.26)
Think a brouhaha against the perennially bottom dwelling Charlotte Bobcats is a ho-hum affair? Well, then you're obviously not a member of the orange squad, because they're still living on cloud 9 after their instant-ish "classic" 3OT win last month. For certain franchises, you take history book moments where you can get them. And given the Lakers' recent history against the slugs of the world, their "been there, done that" factor possibly goes out the window. But the Lakers hope the return of Lamar Odom will help prevent another chapter of "Carolina Glory" from being written. Not that the stop gap folks haven't been doing a good job, but LO's ability to zone in on a errant ball is skill the squad's been seriously missing for six weeks. And the All-Star votes Odom managed to tally even while missing a month and a half show hint that an injury-free season might have landed him in Vegas with 3rd leading vote getter Kobe Bryant. He'll just have to settle for making his team a potential killer.
Dunno if Andrew Bynum brings him an apple every practice, but the kid likes his teach plenty.
Vlade Divac got out at the right time.
Congrats, Jessica!
Oh, Tractor. You little scamp!
Subscribe to this Blog What is RSS?
Since AK was kind enough to post his mid-season reviews of his predictions, I started thinking about the blog...
Blogging host of the Year: this is close one between AK & BK
Blogger who advocates lock down defense, only to get locked out: Faith
Blogger most like their hero: Steven, just like Shaq, has become irrelevant and basically has disappeared, I don't know if Steven's fingers are injured or what, but this guy's blogging career seems to have stopped.
Most Valuable Blogger: It will be tough to top LakerTom
The AC Green consistency blogger: Michael T's journal, good posts and usually gives us some food for debate, he's the closest one to dethroning LakerTom as MVB.
Blogger who sucks: Well, we all know by now that "Smush sucks", enough said. Maybe now Zakee can talk about more interesting things.
Rookie Blogger of the Season: Probably a close race here, I've only been reading this thing for about a year, but my guess would be Ron has been making some great posts lately.
Not much for me to say, except I'm having a lazy Friday here, so my apologies for the non-content post...
PS, I think we all knew Jessica would win it, though I'm sure Lindsey was close.
Posted by: Tim | January 26, 2007 at 09:39 AM
FROM ESPN.COM:
4. Which dark horse has a legitimate shot at surprising us and winning it all?
Anthony: Several teams fall into this category -- Houston, Denver, even the struggling Cavs.
But the team I think is the most dangerous is the Lakers. (By the way, I spoke to at least a half dozen GMs and head coaches in the West and they agreed.) Best player + best coach = a legit chance to win it all.
Broussard: I'm torn on this one between Houston, Denver and the Los Angeles Lakers. I would say Houston if I had confidence in its health. Denver can upset anyone, but I'm not sure it can win three WC series just yet.
So I'll go with the Lakers because of Kobe and Phil Jackson.
Bucher: Lakers. They have the league's best player in the clutch not named Steve Nash and they believe in their system and their coach.
Hollinger: Denver is a popular answer, and a good one, but I think folks are sleeping on Houston. Even with Tracy and Yao missing long stretches, the Rocks are 26-16 and ranked No. 1 in Defensive Efficiency. If both are healthy come April, they have the pieces to make a run.
Sheridan: The Houston Rockets, because despite the absence of Yao Ming and the never-ending problems with Tracy McGrady's back, Jeff Van Gundy has them playing sustained winning basketball -- 10 games over .500, including a winning road record. Watch out when Yao gets back.
Stein: Don't see one. I'm quite sure that the champion is coming from the power trio of Dallas, Phoenix and San Antonio -- not ready here to write the Spurs off just yet -- but I'd pick Miami to repeat before I start trying to dream up dark horses.
Posted by: Sunny | January 26, 2007 at 09:42 AM
FROM ESPN.COM
Which will happen first -- the Knicks will win 50 games in a season, the Celtics will win 50 games in a season or the Lakers will win an NBA title?
Anthony: Lakers will win an NBA title. I haven't seen one single, solitary reason why we should expect two of the most storied franchises in professional sports history to be vastly improved in the next two or three years -- ugh!
Broussard: Lakers will win a title. Kobe and the Bryantaires are beginning to figure things out, Andrew Bynum is going to be fantastic and Phil Jackson's the greatest coach in NBA history. That claim will become official after he wins his 10th ring.
Bucher: The Lakers win an NBA title. Because they're not that far away now and their young players look more promising than anything in Boston or New York.
Hollinger: Looking into my crystal ball & the Celtics will win 50 games in a season before either of the other two events happens because the front line of Paul Pierce, Kevin Durant and Al Jefferson will be among the best in basketball.
Sheridan: Gotta go with the Lakers here, 'cause they're in the mix for the title this year. At full strength in a seven-game series, they can play with anybody in the West.
Stein: Common sense says Lakers, Lakers, Lakers. Then you remember that winning 50 games in today's East is a heck of a lot easier than getting out of the West and into the Finals. So I'll go with the Celtics, based on the premise they hit a home run in the draft or trade for Pau Gasol to partner with Paul Pierce.
Posted by: Sunny | January 26, 2007 at 09:44 AM
Hollinger,
Get off the drugs man.
I can agree with the Denver thing, they will be tough this second half. However, it's obvious him and Simers are drinking the same kool-aid with that celtic comment.
Posted by: Tim | January 26, 2007 at 09:58 AM
AK/BK - Do either of you know why we didn’t sign Kareem Rush last summer? It sure seemed like Phil wanted him back and there was team support as well. Why Shammond instead of a taller guard who already knows the system? I've heard that Mitch had his eye on Shammond for a few years. What was the internal debate?
dave m
Posted by: dave m | January 26, 2007 at 10:06 AM
Dave M,
I don't know anything rock sold regarding Rush. But if I had to guess, it's because after signing Radmanovic, already having Cook in the fold (and if Sasha's theoretically hitting three's), the team didn't necessarily need another "shooter." He doesn't help you defensively. In the meantime, Rush isn't a good enough ball handler to run the point, which is why Shammond makes more sense in terms of pure logic. I'm not quite sure why they signed Shammond in particular, but he's a point guard, so I get it on that level.
I doubt Rush would have cost them much, so if they took a flyer, no worries. But I don't think the Lakers are really missing much. He's a nice kid, but didn't exactly set the world on fire in L.A. and has since gone on to get waived from two lousy teams (Charlotte and Seattle). He's had a lot of people question his work ethic (including Phil Jackson) and he's been hurt lately, too. He's currently in Europe right now, so if they do want him, he's available.
AK
Posted by: Andrew Kamenetzky | January 26, 2007 at 10:16 AM
I'm curious about dave's question as well. Rush has experience in the triangle, he's less of a playmaker but probably has a better ability to hit the trey. Was Shammond just a gimmick for the KG sweepstakes?
Posted by: Tim | January 26, 2007 at 10:16 AM
You have to love it that the lakers made a written offer to the Nets for Kidd. All expiring contracts other than Farmar.
I thought the plan was for next year but as we can see they might roll the dice b/4 the trading deadline, very interesting.
Kidd on the lakers, Showtime again, to good 2B true. I guess I can dream.
But now that we know they are willing to take on another mega contract, it sure is great to be a Laker Fan, the Lakers do need one other great player, make it happen Mitch.
bd
Posted by: bd | January 26, 2007 at 10:21 AM
ESPN's crew of goons is the worst Ive ever seen, with the exception of Greg Anthony they have no clue what they are talking about. Most simply rely on stats to make their points, mainly Hollinger who should be working for fantasy leagues, plus the guy looks creepy, speaking of looks, most look like they have never touched a basketball in their lives, paricularly Hollinger and Sheridan.
So how can we take anything they say seriously, and these guys have a vote for who gets MVP? Its a travesty, Hollinger saying "Looking into my crystal ball & the Celtics will win 50 games in a season before either of the other two events happens because the front line of Paul Pierce, Kevin Durant and Al Jefferson will be among the best in basketball"
ANything he says hereafter should be thrown out, Boston is a horrible team, Paul Pierce is a good player but hes a loser player who will never win squat and will be soon forgotten like many others, plus they have a horrible coach.
Posted by: BrandonC | January 26, 2007 at 10:24 AM
I dont know why they didnt sign Rush, but I do know why they took Shammond Williams, the guy had an awesome year last year in Europe, he averaged over 20 points a game and a nice level of assists, cant remember the exact #'s but he got the Lakers scouts attention, plus the guy torched us a few times when he played for Seattle.
Now as to why Phil wont play him is anybodys guess, especially playing Farmar over him since Phil usually doesnt play rookies historically.
Posted by: BrandonC | January 26, 2007 at 10:29 AM
I wish I had a crew of goons at my disposal. With my brains and their muscle, I could take over this town. haha
AK
Posted by: Andrew Kamenetzky | January 26, 2007 at 10:30 AM
Brandon C,
I think the only reason you like Greg Anthony is because he speaks highly of the Lakers. I'm not the biggest fan of Hollinger, although I find his stats interesting, but Sheridan I really like.
Sheridan answered my question on his chat today, it's like my sorry 15 minutes.
Posted by: Andrew Z | January 26, 2007 at 10:40 AM
Thanks for the comments back. The whole Rush debacle just seems kind of odd to me (in fact, all the Rush brothers seem snakebit)... Kareem was actually playing fairly well in Charlotte, averaging around 10 points in 20 minutes, but he was always in and out of the rotation. Then Bickerstaff waived him right before the end of the season and there was the whole thing in the press with Phil saying it was vindictive. Rush spent the summer hanging out with Luke and Cookie and Richard Jefferson in San Diego, working out and playing ball. Then we signed Shammond and Kareem went to Seattle, had a groin strain and couldn't play so they waived him. Now AK says he's playing in europe... while Shammond (who was a star in europe) is sitting on the bench here. I guess that's the life of a journeyman player, right?
dave m
Posted by: dave m | January 26, 2007 at 10:41 AM
Brandon C,
Also, getting to 50 wins wouldn't be that difficult in the East. Getting through the Suns, Mavs and Spurs in the playoffs and then having to beat a team from the East is very difficult. So I can see Hollinger's rational that the Celts could win 50 games before the Lakers win a title. However, I don't agree with him. I think it's a bad mix when you have too much youth, however talented it is.
Posted by: Andrew Z | January 26, 2007 at 10:50 AM
Trading deadline coming? There's only 1 player I would even think of trying to trade for:
Kevin Garnett...give up anything outside of Kobe, Odom. KG has a solid 5 years left in him. Drew might be the next BIG Center but he's at least 2-3 years away. KG's a proven player who can fit into ANY offense. He can carry the load through 3 quarters and let Kobe finish in the 4th.
Pau, nah, costs too much + won't have as much impact as Bynum eventually will.
Ron Artest would make it interesting for sure, that's not a bad trade.
Corey Maggette would be a cancer with his constant whining.
Jamaal Magloire and PJ Brown would be nice but not at the expense of any rookies. Vlade or Brian Cook perhaps.
Posted by: Brandon | January 26, 2007 at 10:50 AM
Dave M,
It wouldn't shock me if Rush's waiving last season was somewhat personal on Bickerstaff's part. The timing certainly raised eyebrows. And another former Bobcat told me off the record once that Bickerstaff wanted to ruin his career once he entered Bernie's doghouse. Of course, this did come from a former Bobcat, with an emphasis on "former," so all must be taken with some grain of salt. But I agree with Phil that it read as pretty vindinctive.
That said, it doesn't eliminate the fact that Rush's work ethic has been questioned a few times. And some of that came from Phil. Who knows if Rush has matured and is simply the victim of a bad rep, but I can't say hearing it shocked me to hear Bickerstaff cite some laziness.
AK
Posted by: Andrew Kamenetzky | January 26, 2007 at 10:56 AM
Brandon,
Amen. I haven't been a fan of Marc Stein's ever since his opening article of the 2001 campaign, when he said "the only question that really matters is where are the Trailblazers going to have the parade?"
You're dead to me, Stein.
GO LAKERS!
Posted by: SBLakerFan | January 26, 2007 at 10:56 AM
Andrew Z,
Actually I dont like Greg Anthony either, but he at least has played the game at the NBA level and has experience to back up his point of view. And honestly I dont think he likes the Lakers at all, if I remember correctly he was with Portland when they gave us a run back in 1999-2000.
He does however seem to be able to check his bias at the door.
The rest are just wannabe's. Ill never understand why ESPN got rid of David Aldridge, sports writers who I respect (but still dont like) are Charlie Rosen, David Aldridge and Peter Vescey.
Posted by: BrandonC | January 26, 2007 at 10:57 AM
Mitch looking to re-sign Luke, Smush and Chris Mihm unless they're traded.
Taken from Hoopsworld.com who quoted Lakers.com
Mitch Kuptchak
"The assets are our players; we have several players on one year, expiring, contracts. Other teams may look at that and say that's a valuable asset to them. Frankly, an expiring contract, all that really means is you have the ability to take back a player from another team that has more than 1 year on it and that team doesn't want that player. Unless that player for some reason is a great player that another team wants to get rid of, which I don’t know why they would want to do that, I don't consider one year contracts that valuable. I know a lot of people do, but we want to preserve our ability to sign Luke during the summer, so we're not looking to take back salaries that would alter our ability to sign back our free agents this summer. And we're going to have Luke, we're going to have Smush and we're going to have Chris Mihm, who I think is going to recover. But all our guys are on pretty good contracts, they're all young and I think they're all respected around the league so I think there are enough assets there to make a deal with a team, if you were so inclined."
Posted by: Brandon | January 26, 2007 at 11:03 AM
Can you believe?.....
Steve Nash, the past 2 times mvp award winner isn't voted by the fans to start this ALL STARS game?
Maybe the fans knows something that media circles don't: The guy is overrated.
Last year...his team struggles to win series 1 and 2 in 7 games. Struggled with a Lakers team mediocre, unexperienced and with a lousy bench.
If Kwame-Cake-Brown haven't melted after the problem with the girl that accused him, the history would have being very different.
--The truth is...offense can be contained more easily in Playoffs that regular games.
--Phoenix had played with the team almost intact the whole season. No serious injury to key players. So that's what explain their records.
---They are better this year? Yes Amare is aboard.
---Are Lakers and Dallas better this year?
Yes. Lakers can score and have a better interior game that last year. Players know their role and coming time of Playoffs, defense strategy will be a factor key to disrupt Phoenix schemes. Count on Phil to provide that.
----Coming playoffs...Vladimir will be a strong factor. He already played a solid playoff last year and because in Playoffs time, comes and goes a lot of wild factors, he should be a dangerous treat in those kind of situations.
Posted by: joremita | January 26, 2007 at 11:04 AM
I think they gave David Aldridge's job to Stephen A Smith.
Posted by: Mrhish | January 26, 2007 at 11:08 AM
Brandon,
I agree about acquiring Garnett would be a big plus for the Lakers however, I have to disagree with giving up Andrew Bynum in the Process. The way I see it, Andrew does have potential to becoming an all-star and it may be within the next three years. But on top of it all, he may just be the future of the Lakers. And I may be stretching it too far, but he has potential to becoming the next Shaq of the NBA. His body is still growing and he's been known in his young career as a fast and serious learner.
No, Bynum didn't come in with the force that Shaq did however, Bynum also came directly out of highschool whereas Shaq played college. So all in all, the Lakers giving up someone like Bynum for Garnett would be a bad move, however I wouldn't mind giving up Kwame, Radmonovich, or even Mihm when in regards of Laker Big men for KG21.
Posted by: Ron | January 26, 2007 at 11:09 AM
Greg Anthony knows well the power of Phil Jackson’s teams.
He remembers the 5 or 6 seasons in Knick uniform with Pat Riley, when Bulls crunched them year after year.
He remember that Portland series and how a less talented team besides Shaq and a younger Lakers, destroyed them in the last 7 minutes of a decisive game and how Portland team never was the same after that.
He knows at first hand that Phil's teams are always a treat, and if you add the Kobe factor, no other choice but consider that team as a legitimate contender.
Posted by: joremita | January 26, 2007 at 11:15 AM
Bd,
Where did you get that news of a written offer to the Nets on all expiring contracts for Kidd? He is a good PG but can't go beyond two years. That would mean Kwame, Smush, Cook, Walton, Mihm, Mckie, Shammond, is that really true or just made up stories?
Posted by: Edwin Gueco | January 26, 2007 at 11:25 AM
Ron,
I'm still hesitant of giving Bynum for Garnett. Besides GM Mchale will match salaries that might include Kwame, LO & bynum. That will water down the Lakers to lose so many for acquiring one. I think Garnett can opt from his contract and can come to LA in a different direction by end of the season not through straight trade. He has those options.
Posted by: Edwin Gueco | January 26, 2007 at 11:29 AM
Bynum will be one of the new dominant big men in years to come, he already has learned much from the best in the Business, the Captain himself.
Even if he does get traded he will be one of the best big men in the league for many years.
And if you think about it this is an exciting time for the NBA in regards to bigs. Once Greg Oden comes in we will have 4 dominant young bigs in the league.
Emeka Okafor, A solid post defender who is getting his offense down as well, think Akeem jr.
Dwight Howard, Strong as a bull, a rebounding machine, explosive and quick. Think Shaq jr.
Andrew Bynum, still growing both physically and his skill set, has good defensive instincts, will eventuallly revive "the shot" Think Kareem Jr.
Greg Oden, havent watched him very much but by all accounts the guy is a stud, what little ive seen he has good post moves, solid body that looks like it belongs on a 30 year old not a 19 year old, think Ewing jr.
Posted by: BrandonC | January 26, 2007 at 11:35 AM
Mike T is the main reason I almost never read the comments on this Blog.
The guy would bring a guitar to an Eric Clapton concert.
Giving him props is like encouraging a public labotomy.
Won't someone stop the madness?
Posted by: J. Walter Weatherman | January 26, 2007 at 11:35 AM
J. Walter W.
You will appreciate the World of Mike T. if you just focus on some of his analysis and discard the "bleeping" extravagance. There are some truths on what he's saying but sometimes it goes beyond him that he gets lost in translation. Perhaps, the best word is tolerance rather public lobotomy. lol!
Posted by: Edwin Gueco | January 26, 2007 at 11:49 AM
Ron and Edwin, I know what you're both saying about Bynum...he really could be something special.
I cannot see KG leaving Minny unless Bynum is included in the trade. If Minny were to trade KG, they're officially rebuilding. When rebuilding, they only want the "Next big thing" which in the Lakers would be Bynum. I'm thinking a trade would happen as Bynum, Farmar+other guys (Kwame, Mihm, Mckie, Shammond, etc). This would give Minny 1 possible superstar and 1 promising poing guard. The others would be servicable in their jobs with expiring contracts.
The Lakers won't give up Lamar because then it'd be just Kobe + KG which wouldn't be enough.
Kobe, Lamar and KG are in their prime. Bynum is at least 3-5 years from being in his prime. By that time, Kobe and KG will be a step slower.
Kobe, Lamar, KG + scrubs can run with ANYBODY for the next 5 years.
This trade is really up to the Wolves playing in the next few weeks. If they can't solidify the team and get a solid playoff push, look for a KG trade to happen and Minny starting to watch Greg Oden's games.
Posted by: Brandon | January 26, 2007 at 11:50 AM
55 Wins:
25 of our remaining 39 games are against teams below .500. Only 14 of our last 39 are against teams above .500, and only 7 of those are against teams .600 or above. IMO we should have no problem winning 55+, as long as we beat the teams we're supposed to, which I know has been kind of hard for us this season, but I think with LO coming back tonight, that's gonna change.
As for the roadtrip, I know they're road games, but only 2 of the 8 are against teams above .500 (Detroit and Cleveland), so as long as we take care of business, like we should be doing anyways, we can easily go 7-1 or 6-2 on this upcoming roadtrip, especially with Kwame's return scheduled sometime in the next two weeks.
Posted by: Showtime07 | January 26, 2007 at 12:08 PM
AK/BK,
What's good fellows?
Edwin, that written offer is listed in the rumors today on ESPN Insider, that may be where they got it from.
Any trade involving LO or Bynum is just a no go, that includes KG, not at this point. You dont give away young talented big men.
Did someone here say they respect Peter Vecsey?! WOW!!! WHY?????
I'd jump out of my chair for Jason Kidd. I mean leap. I think for a guy who works as hard as JKidd, 4 years maybe even 5 left in him a very high level and he isnt a good point guard, he is one of the all-time greats. Believe that....
Posted by: Najja aka Bonus | January 26, 2007 at 12:15 PM
As I have said before, the Lakers don't very often trade their stars, especially their young ones. They develop them and keep them close. Bynum is going nowhere. He, and possibly Farmar, are the face of the franchise after Kobe and Lamar are gone. Until then they make up a fantastic base to win several championships with.
The Lakers look to win every year, not just this year, and that makes how they view trades different from many other franchises. They will not sacrifice 2-3 championships down the road for a better possibility this year.
Posted by: Craig W. | January 26, 2007 at 12:44 PM
I hope we can trash Bobcats today. It would be really important to start with solid defense. I'm counting on LO to pickup rebounds for us and playing solid D. Looks like Bobcats will have a problem to dress up bigs for today, we need to take advantage of Bynum killing them in paint. It's time for vengeance for this 3OT loss at Charlotte!!!
GO LAKERS!!!
Posted by: LAL_Fan | January 26, 2007 at 12:48 PM
Edwin,
Fox sports under Rumors. Written today by Peter Vesey.
bd
Posted by: bd | January 26, 2007 at 12:51 PM
The Lakers will not trade Bynum even for KG.
The Laker Brass rates Bynum with Lebron. He is going to be SPECIAL.
I can't beleive that the Laker faithful would even think of trading him.
When Lakers win it all it will have KOBE, LAMAR,
and AB and 1 other great player-to be determined later.
I watched Bymum at the pyramid in Long Beach during summer league games, vs now--- The potential is off the charts and could never trade that kind of potential.
His jersey will hang from the rafters with the other greats.
Lakers have never won a championship without a great center, Buss and all laker fans know this.
I really think that the NBA should investigate on how he fell into the Lakers hands. It's a crime. They will be great for a decade with Bynum!!!!
GODZILLA in the making.
bd
Posted by: bd | January 26, 2007 at 01:10 PM
Brandon,
I like most of your suggestions. However, for the price it would cost us to acquire KG via trade, it would decimate this team. Why start over, no matter how good KG would fit with Kobe?
But I do agree with your comments about Artest. If the Lakers could get him either now or in the summer (when he can opt out), he makes the Lakers a much more potent defensive team, especially in the middle.
By the way, another player to think about this summer is Detroit's PG Chauncy Billups. He is getting $6.4 mil this year(expiring contract) and could likely be signed for far less what J Kidd would cost us. Billups is arguably the best PG in the league right now, is fairly big (6-3), and is a good defender. A great fit for the Lakers.
If we acquire these two players, now or during the summer, we would likely be the favorite to contend next year. A real strong combination, and both could likely be acquired for less money than what Kidd or Garnett would cost us.
Even PJ is in agreement that we are still a good player (or two) away from being a serious contender. Artest & Billups are difference makers. Those are the type of players we need!
This summer, Kwame will be starting the final year of his current contract. With Bynum continuing to develop faster than expected, KB could be a good trading chip, along with Radman. We have the extra pieces to make some trades & Mitch appears to be looking. Go get 'em Mitch!
Posted by: LakerAl | January 26, 2007 at 01:27 PM
bd -
Do you really think something criminal led to the Lakers getting Bynum, or are you just jerking our chain?
Posted by: RespectMyAuthoritah | January 26, 2007 at 01:32 PM
LakerAl,
Agree with you about Chauncy, Artest another story. He is maybe one of the best defenders in this league, but he is also well known cancer in locker room. Now he is as reported fighting Bibby, before that it was Indiana. Yes you could say with Kobe and LO and PJ who had an experience dealing with Rodman in the past they can keep Artest in check, but do we need this kind of distraction, especially having so many young players on the team? Artest will be too much baggage to deal with..
Posted by: LAL_Fan | January 26, 2007 at 01:49 PM
lol...I like that lock down got locked out...props!
Did you guys watch the KG onterview yesterday? It doesn't sound good with him asking for a trade...Mchale needs to do the right thing and trade him...hopefully to us for our disposables, you know the fat chance package lol.
Posted by: Faith in my Treo because bot prison is the shizit! ;-) | January 26, 2007 at 01:52 PM
Respect,
The crime was, how did the draft experts for the teams miss on Bynum? The Lakers never get a good draft choice and somehow he just falls into there hands. This might be as big as when Magic was drafted by Lakers. They rolled the dice and after watching his progress from 2 years ago to now,oh my GOD, were not only spoiled but lucky as Laker Fans.
Showtime, then KOBE and Shaq, now BYNUM...
All I have to think about when I see Bynum's size at 19, I think of Jermaine O,Niel at 19, skinny kid and doesnt have half the skills this kid has and who has the wingspan of a Bynum in the league?
Intelligent, willing to learn, great hands, great footwork at 19, are you kidding me?? Doesnt sound like your typical player of today.
Bynum can not be traded or I will root for the Clippers. And that would be rough after watching every game since Magic's first game. LOL
bd
Posted by: bd | January 26, 2007 at 02:05 PM
This blog have powerfull announcers like netflix and cars.com.
Things are going good fo K-brothers
Posted by: joremita | January 26, 2007 at 02:17 PM
bd,
The answer to your question is quite simple: Bynum was the 10th player to be drafted that year. Remember we had a lottery pick, got the 10th and Mitch chose Andrew? How come none of the 9 teams that came first selected him? Well, for starters, no one had the guts to do it, but Mitch. Bynum was a 17-year, unknown AAU player. Can you blame the less enlightened scouts and GMs who never went for Andrew? I think it took a lot of guts for Mitch (and Jim Buss too, they say AB was selected by him) to go after him. We should be seeing the results in the championship parades we'll have in the next few years, thanks to him, Kobe, Lamar, etc.
Cheers from Brazil
Posted by: Fabio | January 26, 2007 at 03:05 PM
JC,
News flash: HE'S 19 YEARS OLD.
Posted by: Jon F. | January 26, 2007 at 03:08 PM
I agree that Andrew IS good with a chance at greatness.
1) He has a light shooting touch even though he's a big man. His free throws will probably be around 75% for his career. So he's not a Hack-a-Drew liability
2) He's big with freakish long arms
3) He's got good foot speed for a 7'0 guy and he's not overweight
4) He's got a good feel for the shot blocks
His major problem? He doesn't yet have the desire to be the best like Shaq, Kobe, KG, Magic, Wilt, Kareem, Dwight Howard, Lebron.
He really could become the next Kareem. Or he could become the next Kandi-Man. Who knows?
Add to that, the NBA will be flooded with quality young big men in this year's draft so Andrew will be one of MANY up-and coming big men.
With KG, you know what you're getting and he'll instantly make the Lakers championship contenders for the next 5 years. Don't get me wrong, I doubt this trade will happen but it sure would be nice.
Posted by: Brandon | January 26, 2007 at 03:13 PM
bd -
It was still a big gamble on the Lakers' part. He had the physical gifts, but seriously unproven. How many draft picks with great physical skills turned out to be busts? A lot. Jim Buss had a strong feeling about AB, dad let him exercise his inner gambler to train him in the successful Buss team development model, and the rest is recent history. The freaky thing is how many times the Lakers have managed to draft or trade for the best centers, while keeping the other marquee players intact. A crime? Or is God a Lakers fan?
Posted by: RespectMyAuthoritah | January 26, 2007 at 03:17 PM
Here's the rumor...
Presuming the Nets might want to distance themselves from their leader's marriage crisis, as well as unload Jason Kidd's $40 million guaranteed over the next two seasons, the Lakers submitted a bunch of disposable players/expiring contracts - Chris Mihm, Aaron McKie, etc. The only L.A. player of consequence mentioned was rookie guard Jordan Farmar. They figured wrong. That doesn't mean the Lakers have stopped trying to find a Kobe Bryant-compatible workaholic to lighten his everyday burden, the return to active duty of Lamar Odom and Kwame Brown, aside. Management's greatest concern is that the team's over reliance on Bryant ultimately will extinguish his flame seasons ahead of time.
Posted January 26, by Ben Maller
Digg this | Add to del.icio.us
Discuss in the Forums | Link
Posted by: wesjoenixon | January 26, 2007 at 03:23 PM
Well, there were quite a few good players in front of Andrew
1. Andrew Bogut - kind of a bust
2. Marvin WIlliams - another bust
3. Deron Williams - quite good
4. Chris Paul - Extremely good
5. Raymond Felton - quite good
6. Martell Webster - ok
7. Charlie Villanueva - quite good
8. Channing Frye - ok
9. Ike Diogu - could be good
Most of the guys who were picked before Andrew ended up as starters on their team. All of them solid players but no Lebrons or Melo's in there.
The difference between Andrew and the rest? Andrew can be a Superstar, those other guys will probably max out as an ALl-Star
Posted by: Brandon | January 26, 2007 at 03:23 PM
RespectMyAuthoritah, I gotta agree, the Lakers have a freakishly good record of Great Centers. I can't think of any other franchise that so consistently has a Super Center.
Posted by: Brandon | January 26, 2007 at 03:25 PM
With Lamar coming back it might be just enough to beat the Bobcats tonight.
All of us know, that is not funny. Case in point. Were you laughing when the Bobcats took us to triple overtime and won!
Did you find yourself rolling on the ground holding your gut, eyes watering, yelling "Stop it! Stop it! Your killing me!" I didn't think so. If you were like me, you were in the bathroom, puking your purple and gold guts out. It has for sure been sickening to watch, losing to lousy teams, The one thing this blog can all agree on.
The Problem: The Lakers lack of consistency (Well duh!)
The Solution: Workman Like Attitude
My Resolution: Physicality is not the answer. MUSICALITY is what will save us.
This is my theory. Before the game, all these guys have the head phones on, rocking out to there favorite tunes. Why do they do this? To psyche themselves up, to get into the mood, to get ready to play. There own words, not mine. The preferred choice of music? For some of these guys, Rap, Hip Hop, or for Dirk, yodeling by David Hasselhoff.
I’m sorry, Snoop Dog does not inspire me to work.
It’s a proven fact, music can be a formidable motivator.
Ask a military man that went through boot camp how important those clever and catchy marching songs were. I bet you when they close there eyes at night, they still remember with fondness ”Give me your right, your right, your right, give me your left, your left, your left.”
Or ask a prisoner that worked the chain gangs, or broke rocks with a sledge hammer the importance of a song with a good rhythmic beat.
I think you get my point. Right music, makes for right work.
We need to change the tunes they listen to.
Before you get into Bill of Rights, Constitution stuff, remember, this is the league that already chooses the clothes they wear off the court, the drugs they can and cannot take, the clubs they can visit off hours, no showing of emotions when a bad call happens, and when on the road, enacting curfews.
So certainly, it would be nothing for a coach to come up with approved pre-game tunes.
Suggestions for proper pre-game approved music.
How about BTO’S “Takin’ Care of Business?
Catchy tune, pounding rock, and meaningful words.
"Taking care of business every day. Taking care of business every way" "Work out"!
Of course edit out the part
"We love to work at nothing all day"(that would apply to bloggers though)
Maybe you have some suggestions for proper, approved, pre-game tunes?
I think you understand my point.
If music can make marching fun, and prison work enjoyable, then it easily can help us to quit taking lousy teams, not seriously.
We need a workmanlike attitude, that will lead to consistency, and
Musicality, not Physicality, is what will lead us to victory
Posted by: Fatty | January 26, 2007 at 03:28 PM
Andrew Bynum is good, BUT...
Here's the thing with Bynum. The guy was injured for a lot of his senior year in high school. He has very little experience. To make matters worse is that when he was a senior, young Andrew was chubby. When he came to the Lakers he was weak. He could barely bench press 100 lbs.
From the end of his senior year to the time the Lakers drafted him, Andrew dropped the baby fat and tried out for teams. That was the 1st year.
After his 1st year, during the off season, young Andrew hit the weights. The body you see on Bynum is like a shock to his system. He looks good but he went from Chubby, to weak, to the body you see now. That's in 2 and a half years. In other words he has no true stength. That's why Kwame Brown pushes him around in practice. That's why oppossing centers can get position on him.
What all this means is that he hasn't even come into his true playing weight. He's around 280 right now. He's projected to fill out at 300-310. When he reaches his fill out weight, it's then that he'll be able attach strength to it. That might take 2 more years. He could go up to 300 by next year but the stength still might not be there. Once his body becomes accustom to the weight...then the strength will come.
mike
Posted by: Michael Teniente | January 26, 2007 at 03:30 PM