How you rooting now?
Ever since May 5th, I've been carefully watching developments around the NBA, scouring the web for late breaking headlines, word of a loophole unveiled, or some kind of newly uncovered rules infraction that turns the world of hoops upside down. But now that every second round playoff series has either begun or is scheduled begin later tonight, I've resigned myself to the following conclusion:
The Lakers are indeed out of the playoffs, that's just not going to change and there you have it.
Now I don't know about every Lakersblog reader, but I always keep watching the playoffs, even after my Purple and Gold have been bounced. It's not always the most entertaining of experiences (Spurs vs. Nets for the 2003 crown, anyone?), but I love me some roundball, so I'm gonna stick around. But like anything with sports, it always helps to have a rooting interest. Thus, here are the top 3 teams I'm now hoping capture the Larry O'Brien.
1) The Phoenix Suns - For those of you who didn't shatter their laptops tossing them across the room, let me explain. I picked the Suns in October to win it all, so I'd like a shot at being able to say, "I'm not really a genius, but I play one in cyberspace." (Although BK picked Dallas, so at least I'm already more correct than him, which is always the most important contest to win). Plus, I'm one of those cats who takes comfort knowing my team got beat by the eventual champs. That's just how I roll. And Pat Burke's simply too good a player to go his entire career without a ring.
2) The San Antonio Spurs - My girlfriend is a huge Spurs fan (and before anyone starts bashing a L.A. woman rooting for the enemy, she's a native Texan, her entire family roots Spurs- I snagged a bunch of the team's media guides the last time they visited Staples, which earned me big points- and she always cheers on the Lakers for me, assuming they're not playing Mr. Eva Longoria's team). This requires something of a balancing act, since my #1 alternate playoff team is playing hers, but we've seemed to arrive at a compromise. I'll be genuinely happy for her if San Antonio wins and she's going to sulk like a brooding, inconsolable teenager who's not allowed to attend a Fall Out Boy concert if Phoenix wins. Problem solved. Besides, anything that keeps Robert Horry flush in bling is fine by me (assuming it doesn't come at the Lakers' expense).
3) The Golden State Warriors - Because it's a great story. Plus, if they don't win it all, one assumes Stephen Jackson will be angry. And as far as I'm concerned, any scenarios that could spark such a reaction should be treated with the words of David Banner from the old "Incredible Hulk" TV show. "Don't make me angry. You wouldn't like me when I'm angry." (Incidentally, when we were little kids, BK LOVED this show!)
Honorable mention: The Utah Jazz. See team #2, then sub "Derek Fisher" for "Robert Horry."
So there you have it. My top 3. But where do your rooting interests lie? And why? Or do you even give a crap now that the Lakers have gone fishin'? Let's hear how you're cheering (or shrugging your shoulders in utter indifference).
-AK
How many of you saw the Spurs and Suns game? How many of you saw the Suns make runs at the Spurs when Jacque Vaughn was in the game?
You could see the Suns abuse Vaughn on pic and rolls. Steve Nash just used him. Then on the offensive end Vaughn was trying to create stuff and was turning the ball over.
That's was in limited minutes. And that what we had for 80 games as Smush Parker as a starter. That's on PHIL JACKSON! That's coaching! That dumb motherFer had the nerve to ride Parker for 80 games and then pull him in the 81 game. THAT IS COACHING!
In the playoff the Lakers looked lost when they were getting back. It was because Farmar and Williams had no type of team chemistry to work with the other players. THAT'S COACHING!
The guy played Parker for 80 games then pulls him in the 81st game just before the playoffs? What type of chemistry do you think the Lakers were going to have then? THAT'S COACHING!
mike
Posted by: Michael Teniente | May 08, 2007 at 12:02 AM
Fkillah,
I truly do hear what you're saying, but to be honest, that stuff doesn't bother me a whole lot. I don't get wrapped up in the whole "respect" issue. In my mind, you earn your respect (and re-earn it, and re-earn it) from an opponent. It's not just accorded to you. From my standpoint, if Phoenix (or any team) doesn't respect the Lakers, that's on the Lakers, not Phoenix. Earn their respect by beating them.
And honestly, I'm more concerned about the Lakers starting to win again than if anyone "respects" them. They can be the most disrespected team in the NBA for all I care, as long as they keep adding banners.
But again, that's just me.
AK
Posted by: Andrew Kamenetzky | May 08, 2007 at 12:02 AM
AK,
Dampier was hurt and only averaged like 12 minutes a game. He had a shoulder injury. He got hurt towards the end of the season. Yeah, he was hurt. He was limited. Heck, AJ didn't even play him in the last game. Why? Because he was ineffective? Yeah...he had a should injury.
mike
Posted by: Michael Teniente | May 08, 2007 at 12:05 AM
Is it true that the first Laker who's going to be traded this off season is Kwame Brown?
Well try to trade him, because it's going to be hard, his only quality is his expiring contract.
I don't remember where I read it, but it said that since Phil said they cannot have a center who just plays 41 games that that's the first change the Lakers will try to make.
Along with a point guard.
well let the trade rumors begin, who knows what's true or not, but we all know Phil said in his exit interview that Kwame was not the answer for the team and they needed a better player, so it might be true.
I just hope the team keeps Luke, Lamar and Ronny.
Posted by: lakofan | May 08, 2007 at 12:08 AM
mitchell,
"Do you really think Kobe would be taking over 33 shots a game if he played with Baron Davis, Richardson, Jackson, Monta Ellis, and Harrington???"
We'll never know, will we? And even if we don't have those type of players you don't play the way Kobe did in any circumstance, especially in the playoffs.
I understand Kobe shooting when we were injured but not all the way through the playoffs.
mike
Posted by: Michael Teniente | May 08, 2007 at 12:08 AM
Michael Teniente,
how can you bash PJ so much when the man brought three straight Championships to us. Sure he had Kobe and Shaq and good vets around them but so did Del Harris and he never won a championship. Look at the year when Phil did not coach;we missed the playoff's. I mean sure I dont agree with every decision that Phil makes and I do believe that his ego plays too much of a role in his decision making sometimes, But who do you think would be a better coach for the Lakers. Sam Mitchell? thats absurd. I mean every coach in the NBA knows the x and o's for the most part but the biggest issue for a coach is getting his players to respect him and respond to him which Phil has shown he is very good at.
Posted by: James da kingpin | May 08, 2007 at 12:09 AM
Mike T,
Okay, if you say so. Like I said, I don't recall his shoulder injury being mentioned in describing his ineffective play, just that his play was indeed ineffective (like, poor). I never heard that injury mentioned as a reason (nor do I remember reading anything about it). But I could be wrong.
AK
Posted by: Andrew Kamenetzky | May 08, 2007 at 12:10 AM
AK,
Yeah, Dampier was injured. I was aware of it from the end of the season. Then I read about it after the Mavericks lost. I was going to post it but decided not to. It didn't say that it was the reason why the Mavericks lost just that he was limited.
mike
Posted by: Michael Teniente | May 08, 2007 at 12:17 AM
what happened to two thumbs up for PJ?? 82 games + 5 playoff games before you figured out he was terrible? Just a question for the enlightened one.
Posted by: Jandro | May 08, 2007 at 12:17 AM
Michael t
Got to disagree on your notion that the triangle and the entry pass into the 5. Watch old Bulls tapes and you rarely see the offense initiated with an entry pass to the 5. It ran through Pippin and Jordon. The 5 was basically a kick out option for a 15 foot J. Phil tweeked the triangle to accomadate Shaq. The problem is the triangle is a motion offense and no one was moving whether Kobe had the ball or not. In a funny way I agree with both you and BK here. I do not believe that we had the right parts to run the triangle effectively, so why run it if it doesnt showcase the strengths of the team? While Kobe can play in the triangle I dont believe it is the best fit for his skill set. Lamar has the passing skills for it but his offense suffers because of it. He is more effective creating with the ball in his hand then moving without the ball. Neither Kwame or Andrew have shown the ability to consitantly hit the outside jumper that this offense is suppose to create for them and it goes on and on. So should we try and bring a lot of players that may or may not fit inside the triangle or turn to an offense that compliments the guys we have and add a few pieces to that group. Personally i feel the second option is much easier.
MH
Posted by: michael h | May 08, 2007 at 12:21 AM
Mike-
First of all, as a point of clarification, I've never touted Luke Walton as the next great thing after sliced bread. I've always said that on a better team, he probably wouldn't start, is best suited to be a sub 30 minute a night guy, and that if he's your third best player, which far too often he was this season, that's a problem. Is he a valuable member of the team? Their record without him would seem to indicate that. Is he limited? Sure. He's still not a consistent enough outside shooter, is a bad one-on-one defender, to name a couple things. But he does a lot of things well, too, and has value. As far as Mihm goes, again, go back and point out to me where I say anything beyond a solid player capable of contributing. Not a star, but a solid player. As for Smush, he played because there wasn't a better option. Throughout the year, Jackson said in a variety of ways he was waiting for someone to take away his job, and nobody did. Who played well enough to start ahead of him? Farmar? Sasha? I think he should have given more run earlier to Shammond, but don't think a season of Shammond Williams at point would have made a big difference (in more minutes against better players, his issues would have been exposed, too).
I say these things not to start a debate with you about my "record" so to speak (or to have you launch into a pro-Kwame speech), but to clarify to others who might read your posts and assume things about my opinion that aren't true, as opposed to what your contentions are, which is you pushing and projecting your agenda on me. If you want to go back and dig up where I've said otherwise, feel free. It'll be a while.
Moving on-
You can say that PJ cost the team eight games and that they should have won 50, despite the injury issues. I will disagree, not just because your numbers are completely arbitrary (saying they would/should have won those games had Jackson made different substitution choices doesn't make it so) but because I didn't think they'd win 50 if everyone stayed healthy. Why? Because as I said before, talent is the biggest thing in the NBA. You can't win without it, and the Lakers don't have a lot of talent, and once players started getting hurt, that problem became even worse. Beyond that, obviously I think Jackson is a better coach than you do (I don't consider placing the primary focus of the blame for what went wrong this year on the roster and injuries making excuses for him). Second, you apparently think the roster contains better players than I do.
Msybe I missed it in your journals, but explain to me what coach would have turned this bunch into a fifty win team? What strategies should they have employed? Which eight guys should they have leaned on in the playoffs to prevail in that series? Which nine? I'm sure it starts with more time/and or love for Kwame. Everything does with you.
You cannot make chicken salad out of chicken (poop) as the old saying goes. And in terms of a championship, or even close-to-championship caliber team, injuries took a shaky group to begin with, one where everything needed to go right in order for the team to thrive, and turned it into poop.
BK
Posted by: Brian Kamenetzky | May 08, 2007 at 12:21 AM
AK,
Don't get me wrong, I would love to see the Lakers win banners. But winning banners and respect go hand-in-hand. As a fan, losing to the Suns is just as painful as losing to the Heat. It's safe to say that the Suns and Lakers have a a rivalry, and it is never easy to root for the rivals.
Posted by: fkillah | May 08, 2007 at 12:23 AM
Mike T,
after reading your posts for over a year now I am certain that you know very little about basketball.
Posted by: James da kingpin | May 08, 2007 at 12:27 AM
michael h,
I understand that but it still isn't the way it was supposed to be run.
mike
Posted by: Michael Teniente | May 08, 2007 at 12:27 AM
What happend to the audio where Kobe, PJ, and Mitch were recorded?
mike
Posted by: Michael Teniente | May 08, 2007 at 12:30 AM
Fkillah,
To me, if the banners are there, so's the respect, whether an opponent makes an outward showing of it or not. In sports, it's impossible not to respect winning. That's one of the things I admire a lot about the Spurs. They clearly don't care if you respect them, don't respect them, or even know who their starting five is. They're just gonna beat you and let some other shmoe worry about whether or not they got enough "props." And that's (in part) why I think the whole "respect" thing is totally overrated. It's often more about a player or team feeling like they're getting enough verbal praise than anything resembling truly earned respect. Who cares if the team "bows down" to you, as long as you beat them?
And yeah, the Suns are definitely rivals at this point, but I can look past it for these purposes. Mind you, I never said I'd actually be happy if they won. Just validated. haha
AK
Posted by: Andrew Kamenetzky | May 08, 2007 at 12:31 AM
Mike-
As for Game 5, I agree with you that Kobe didn't play a good game, especially in the second half, and particularly for a stretch in the fourth quarter. And (again, it would require you to actually pay attention to anything I write) I've always freely said when I think Kobe has gone too far outside the offense and wasn't taking good shots, and been critical of him for it. In general, I don't think it's a good thing for one player to dominate the ball that much. Occasionally, but not always. But I think if you look back at the season, when players were healthy and the team was successful, Kobe was scoring and facilitating. He wasn't taking 30+ shots a night. That changed as the season, and available personnel did.
Besides, as you pointed out many a time throughout the season, offense wasn't the problem. Putting the ball in the basket wasn't the problem. Keeping it out was. So to suddenly start blaming the offense seems a little strange. And where was all this "Kobe needs to learn a lesson" talk when you capped every post with "Kobe is marvelous," or something similar?
As for you not really respecting my opinion, I can live with that and lose no sleep. All I really care about is that you don't misrepresent it, which you frequently do.
BK
Posted by: Brian Kamenetzky | May 08, 2007 at 12:32 AM
Mike T did you ever acually play basketball?
Posted by: James da kingpin | May 08, 2007 at 12:37 AM
BK,
Again...what about PJ costing us 8 games with his rotations. What about that foolish 11 and 12 man rotation in the playoffs?
Say it!
PHIL JACKSON Fed THIS THING UP!
mike
Posted by: Michael Teniente | May 08, 2007 at 12:38 AM
Mike T-
Again, that you put the number of games PJ cost the team with his rotations at 8 doesn't make it true. First, there's the assumption that had something else been done in those eight games, the result would have automatically been positive and the Lakers would have won. Which is just silly, unless of course "because I said so" is a viable way to declare something true, which it often is in your world. Second, your number is completely arbitrary, based on the, um, precision of your journals. Are you sure it's not 10? Maybe PJ's rotations cost the team 15 games. Hell, they could have pushed Utah and Houston for a home seed. Or maybe he only cost them seven. Or five. Or three. I don't know... maybe I'll reread a season of journals to make sure you have the number right.
As for his playoff rotations, like I said, I really didn't have a problem with the amount of guys he played, because a) Phoenix poses unique matchup problems for any team, and b) the Lakers were in a situation where they had to try as many things as they could just to have a prayer of competing. Had Jackson stuck with an eight man rotation, I'm sure you and others of your ilk would be bitching that he left weapons on the bench when the results of the series turned out the same (which they would have). And again, you didn't answer my question- which eight guys should he have gone with? Which nine? Why would that have worked?
As you might have said at the end of the year, what Phil did was in many ways irrelevant, because the Lakers had a 10 million coach and a 20 buck roster. If they continue to do that, I would agree, there's no point in having PJ around.
As for the audio with Kobe, Mitch, PJ, etc., it's coming later this week. We've got a lot of material to post.
BK
Posted by: Brian Kamenetzky | May 08, 2007 at 12:46 AM
I agree with Michael H. There is no ONE way to initiate the triangle offense...which is part of the beauty of the offense in the first place. The triangle isn't obsolete, but I also agree, its not the ideal offense for this team (nor was it for the team when we had GP and Malone). I can't stand someone knocking Kobe for not playing within the triangle. First of all, you know, they don't ALWAYS run the triangle offense. There are many points in the game where they purposely do not go into the triangle and it seems they only run it 66-75% of the game on average. Even Phil realizes that Kobe must score in order for this team to win games. I can't believe Laker fans would even knock Kobe for this. Even Tex has said that this group does not fit in well with the triangle and noone outside of Kobe understands it fully. One reason we have such low talent though is due to our drafting process during our championship years. We never looked to add the most talent possible, but simply find role players that could fit into the offense. While that was fine then, it has significantly hurt our present state.
Posted by: wiZo | May 08, 2007 at 12:57 AM
Reading the triangle pro vs con tonight, it suddenly dawned on me that Phil really has to decide if he wants to coach beyond this year. if we go into the off season, do we go after triangle friendly players? Seems to me that is one of the problems with this team. While we have went after guys we thought might fit the system, other teams were going after athletes. We have missed out on several fast, athletic, point guards because of Phils preference for tall guard to run the triangle. While we finally took a shorter guard in Jordon he still had triangle like skills. Now the problem with our strategy hasnt been on the offensive end. We score points. It has been on the defensive end where we are considerably slower then other teams at most positions. I think this is something Mitch has to look at before we try to aquire new players and retaining the guys that we have.
Posted by: michael h | May 08, 2007 at 12:58 AM
UGH, how can ANY Laker fan root for Phoenix or San Antonio!??!?!?!
I'm glad I have a big hunky computer that I can't just chuck across the room. I was going for the Rockets before they lost. Now I'm rooting for G.S. cuz it will be a great story....though I must say I have a lot of friends from the Bay area and it'll be annoying how much they will brag about how great everything from the bay is. (Ever notice ppl from the bay hate on So Cal for no good reason, but we could care less about the bay area?).
Also don't want the Jazz (always hated the Jazz, but hate them even more after the shady Boozer fiasco), the Pistons (still angry they beat us in the Finals.....I still say had we had Malone we would've won!), or the Cavs (then we'll have to hear how Lebron is the best player in the league...just like Wade when he won it....annoying).
Posted by: wiZo | May 08, 2007 at 01:06 AM
Mike T
Do you consider yourself too important to answere my question or to respond to my post? you know I thought your Jackson Journals were going to be interesting to read...but they were not. It seems that now the season is over your just writing crazy things to get attention. Well I dont really have a problem with that considering this a blog but I think it might be healthy for you to take a break from the Lakers for a little bit. Sit back and recharge your batteries and try to come back with a fresh prespective on things.
Posted by: James da kingpin | May 08, 2007 at 01:11 AM
BK I have to agree
During the playoffs we had Kobe and Lamar, then evryone else was pretty much the same. Playing 11-12 guys was about the only chance we had. We had to try and exploit certain match ups and keep fresh legs on the court to have a prayer at winning. I looked at having 12 guys who could play as one of the few advantages that we did have. During the first half of the year when we were winning I never heard one complaint about Phils 10 man rotation. And no one stepped up with play that demanded more court time. The only thing I may have done differntly was play Luke less because he was struggleing and I would have played Vlade in a game, just to see if he could get hot. Other then that I really dont have a problem with the rotation. What else were we going to do?
MH
Posted by: michael h | May 08, 2007 at 01:16 AM
Wizo I agree man,
People from the bay just rep the bay way too much. It's like there trying to prove something, but the question is what. Why the hell do they need to rep the bay so much? There must be somthing in the water up there that makes people abnoxious.
Posted by: James da kingpin | May 08, 2007 at 01:17 AM
james the kingpin,
I grew up playing basketball all my life.
mike
Posted by: Michael Teniente | May 08, 2007 at 01:18 AM
BK,
There's your 8 games. Read them and weep, bitch!
Here are the links to the thumbs down games. You’ll have to scroll down if you want to read them.
1) November 5, 2006 the Seattle Supersonics game. (This is the beginning of the rotation patterns.)
http://lakersblog.latimes.com/lakersblog/2006/11/extra_extra_116.html#comments
2) November 29, 2006 the Milwaukee Bucks game.
http://lakersblog.latimes.com/lakersblog/2006/11/extra_extra_112_9.html#comments
3) December 13, 2006 the Dallas Mavericks game.
http://lakersblog.latimes.com/lakersblog/2006/12/extra_extra_121_5.html#comments
4) December 17, 2006 the Washington Wizards game.
http://lakersblog.latimes.com/lakersblog/2006/12/extra_extra_121_9.html#comments
(Due to the blog’s typepad restrictions I can only post a limited amount of links. So I have to continue this report with an additional post.)
mike
Posted by: Michael Teniente | May 08, 2007 at 01:20 AM
(Continuing from where I left off.)
5) January 21, 2007 the New Orleans Hornets game.
http://lakersblog.latimes.com/lakersblog/2007/01/extra_extra_121.html#comments
6) February 11, 2007 the Cleveland Cavaliers game.
http://lakersblog.latimes.com/lakersblog/2007/02/extra_extra_212.html#comments
7) April 4, 2007 the Los Angeles Clippers game.
http://lakersblog.latimes.com/lakersblog/2007/04/thus_coaches_re.html#comments
8) April 12, 2007 the Los Angeles Clippers game.
http://lakersblog.latimes.com/lakersblog/2007/04/oh_my.html#comments
What? Did you think I did the Journal for nothing? Yeah, right! It's there in black and white.
mike
Posted by: Michael Teniente | May 08, 2007 at 01:21 AM
I'd love to see the Spurs crush the Suns.. Phoenix players and coaches are so arrogant. Their fans are classless.
After the suns are ousted, I don't care who'll win it all.
Posted by: rondiel | May 08, 2007 at 01:22 AM
james the kingpin,
I don't think I have to amswer every question that people address to me. The question is this: Do you think you're so important that I have to answer you? I'll answer who I want and ignore who I want.
mike
Posted by: Michael Teniente | May 08, 2007 at 01:23 AM
And even if the 8 games don't come into question. Starting Smush Parker for 80 games and pulling him is certainly the biggest boneheaded decision of the Lakers basketball season. And everyone except for you, of course, would be alright with a 11 and 12 man rotation in the playoffs.
Tonight the Warrior went with an 8 man roation and Ellis only played 5 minutes. So that's really like a 7 man rotation. The Jazz went with a 9 man rotation and Brewer only played 1 minute and Millsap only played 5 minutes. But leave it to BK to be alright with PJ going with a 11 and 12 man rotation because...of course...it's part of his holy triangle.
PJ, Walton and Mihm.
You'll never catch BK saying anything about these guys. And you wonder why you didn't get much Laker interview this year. What was it? Maybe 2 interviews this year compared to how many last year. You think that maybe the players have you on their hater list? The way you talk about everyone except for PJ, Mihm, and Walton...it's no wonder why you didn't get a lot of interviews this year.
mike
Posted by: Michael Teniente | May 08, 2007 at 01:32 AM
MIKE T:
And even when they ran the triangle reasonably well to begin the season with it still wasn't operating with a steady supply of entry passes to the 5 spot. THAT IS NOT THE TRIANGLE! The triangle when executed properly invovles the 5 spot.
---
Yes, everybody remembers how much the ball went to Luc Longley in Chicago. Luc Longley had the ball so much he was accused of being a ball hog. One season, Luc Longley had the ball so much that Mike T. blasted him in a journal...
Clearly, it wasn't just Shaq's presence in LA that made the 5 spot important. It was the triangle. The triangle demands that the 5 spot get the ball to finish every 5 out of 4 possessions, be it Shaq or Longley or Kwame.
Especially Kwame. The more Kwame fumbles, the more oppoents are scared. When Kwame lets the ball slip through his hands, that's when you know all is well with the triangle.
Posted by: Mike T is valuable to the blog...but getting too wound up. | May 08, 2007 at 01:35 AM
HEY, this is NOT-CHAEL TENIENTE:
I am completely relaxed, don't attack people without reason, and never call the blog-masters bitches.
- NOT-CHAEL TENIENTE
Posted by: Not-chael Teniente | May 08, 2007 at 01:57 AM
BK,
And one more thing. You're the only one who doesn't think that PJ coaching didn't cost us games. All season long people were complaining to me why I gave PJ a thumb's up. I was very conservative in giving him thumb's downs. If it were left up to the rest of the bloggers PJ would have costed us close to 15 games this season. I don't know how many times I had to justify my thumb's up for the guy. 8 games is very conservative. It's really more like 15 games.
And if you think I wrote the Jackson Journal for your reading pleasure...think again. I wrote as a testiment against Jackson.
mike
Posted by: Michael Teniente | May 08, 2007 at 01:58 AM
Even Stu Lanz mentioned on the last game against Phoenix: Phil really needs to shorten his rotations.
It was ridiculous. Stu mentioning it just goes to show you that in the playoff basketball it is out of the question. PJ himself said it just before the season ended that playoff basketball is about shortening the rotation to 7 or 8 men. Then the playoffs come and he goes 11 and 12. But now...it's OK. Yeah, right!
mike
Posted by: Michael Teniente | May 08, 2007 at 02:02 AM
Kwame let the ball slip out of his hands on dish offs not entry passes. There's a difference. When you're just standing around not being invovled in the offense the all of a sudden, when a player is in trouble...he passes the ball. Yeah, right!
Where talking about an entry pass to the post. Not a dishoff.
mike
Posted by: Michael Teniente | May 08, 2007 at 02:05 AM
Suns? HELL, NO!
Like most of you I just hate them.
I can't stand Mike D,Antonio for 2 reasons:
1-His high-pitched voice is jarring and unpleasant.
2-His unfair assessment of Lakers in his worthless book. I have never seen a coach criticizing another team they way he does.
Spurs? I am indifferent to Spurs. Simply because they all give me the impression to be indifferent. I seldom see any emotion in this bunch. I don't see them smile (at the best a wisdom grin on Duncan face) rarely scream, complain, happy or sad, just cast iron faces. I could never establish a connection to this team. But, They are all great players.
Oh, I almost forgot: they don't excite me
Warriors? Yes, now you are talking. They are exciting. You just like to watch them play. I used to skip quarter 1 trough 3 of their games with Lakers and just watch the last minute of the 4th. But this season things changed and they just exploded in playoffs. I just love to see the underdogs to bite their way all the way to the top. I just hope they play with the same passion they played against MAVs.
One day after Lakers funeral, I stopped mourning watching the underdog Warriors bury the top dog MAVs. Right than I had a substitute to fill the empty space of the late Lakers.
Just for this playoffs. I promise. And I promise; I WILL NOT fall in love. I am a Lakers fan for life.
Cyrus
Posted by: Cyrus | May 08, 2007 at 02:23 AM
Well AK I AM a genius and I picked the Suns before the playoffs...and the Spurs before the start of the season....so things are looking good for you my man...
Who do I wanna see win?
Detroit...dont ask me why I just like the way they play...I love the games of Billups,Hamilton and Prince and Rasheed Wallace is impossible not to like (unless you are a ref I guess)
They are also from the eastern conference so I feel less of a traitor...although last year after the lakes lost it was more of a case of rooting for whoever is playing miami.
Posted by: Kiwi | May 08, 2007 at 02:23 AM
Mike t
Come on dude enough of Kwame. You are probably like his friends and family enabling his failure. Its like its ok kwame its MJ's fault. thats ok Kwame its Phils fault, thats ok kwame its kobes fault, your the greatest kwame. I saw flashes of what he could be over the last two years and have been left totally frustrated by him. Can you imagine the core if we had kept butler? Kwame lacks desire and focus to be the best. He settles. If he had that desire to be great he would be. He is so devon george like, all the talent in the world but dissapears come game time. He will continue to get paid big bucks because big guys are over paid in this league but he has cost himself millions. And I am sorry a good pro is ready at all times. Even if you are not getting the ball you need to be ready. He is PAID 9 mil a year to stay focused and ready. No excuses when you are recieving that kind of cash.
MH
Posted by: michael h | May 08, 2007 at 02:24 AM
I have to say, I was against the 11 to 12 man rotation.
And any game that PJ had Smush taking the last shot, Smush starting the game or Kobe gunning up 30 or more shots a game, I was given thumbs down too!
But Mike T. Your boy is soft and really soft in the heart.
No matter if we went 7 or 8 man deep we still would have lost because of these points:
1) Kobe shot us out of two of the games.
2) We didn't utilize Lamar as much as we should have in 3 of the 5 game. Blame ball hog Kobe.
3) Luke Walton was terrible and should have sat on the bench and had very limited minutes.
4) Your boy Kwame only showed up to play 1 game out of the whole series. And that was game 3. The other games, he was hustling like a hungry player should on the inside. He never contested rebounds or tried to block shots.
5) PJ rotations was horrible.
Posted by: gunner24 | May 08, 2007 at 03:15 AM
Ugh - the Suns.
I love GSW to win it all just for the Cinderella aspect. I also love the way they don't let it bother them when they're behind - they just battle right back.
Utah - because of Fisher, and because those guys play with such heart.
Spurs - because of Horry, and man - they are really good!
Posted by: LongtimeLakerLover | May 08, 2007 at 06:10 AM
ATTENTION LAKER FANS: HOSTAGE UPDATE:
DAY 7 GARNETT HELD HOSTAGE BY MINNESOTA FOR RANSOM BY LAKERS.
HONORARY DEPUTY SHERIFF SHAQ THREATENS TO STORM MINNESOTA
IF GARNETT IS RELEASED TO LAKERS. KOBE BRYANT HAS INFORMED
DEPUTY SHAQ THAT HIS FAT LAZY A** HELP IS NOT NEEDED. MEANHWILE
MITCH KUPCHAK SAYS HE WILL NOT WAIVER FROM HIS NO NEGOTIATIONS
WITH TERROIST STANCE. UNKNOWN TO KUPCHAK, JIM BUSS IS ASSEMBLING
RANSOM, WHICH SMUSH PARKER HAS BEEN ASSIGNED TO GUARD.
............................SPECIAL BULLETIN ................................................
A NEW DEVELOPMENT IN THE DRAMA MAY BE ABOUT TO HAPPEN.
INFORMED SOURCES TELL US THAT DR. JERRY BUSS IS CONSIDERING
MAKING AN OFFER TO A MR. J. WEST TO HELP IN THE CRISIS.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ROLL CALL:
FAITH, KEIFO, FATTY, MITCHELL, KIWI, TALIQ, RespectMyAuthrothm, EDWIN G., TIM-4-SHOW, thirty2
FAN OF MAMBA, WESOJOENIXON, BAYWOOD, JJ, EXHELODRVR, AJAX, WOW, MIKE T, SBPIMP,
LAKERTOM, LAKER FAN, DAVID WHANG, VMAN, KOREY, XTRO ,Tha Show, FearlessWhacK,MARTY,
JANDRO, LAKERFAZE, MCGARNAGLE, GO RAKERS, EASTCOASTJESSIE, GUGY, Zakee, Swettual,Utzworld
FKILLAH, GENERIC_ONE, GDCHILD, ANDREW Z, GINO, CBUCK, LAKERGURL,ADAM KILEY,Jorema
Bynum=TheBigLazy, ZEN, SARCOCOP,COMPTONS FINEST, MIGUELINHO,J.Walter Weatherman
JOREMA, CRITICAL BEATDOWN, PFUNK36, PAUL LEE, WEAVE MAN,JON KAVULIC,Lakers4Life,JimBussIsAMoron
BERKLEYLAKER, CHITOWNLAKER, ANGRYLAKER AK, BK LAKER FANS,
ALL TOGETHER NOW:
"FREE GARNETT NOW BUSS PAY THE RANSOM"
"FREE GARNETT NOW BUSS PAY THE RANSOM"
LAKERS TODAY LAKERS TOMORROW LAKERS FOREVER
GO LAKERS GO!
Posted by: Mamba24 | May 08, 2007 at 06:22 AM
I think the main problem with the triangle is that we dont have the personel who want to run it.With veteran players who want to win it works....with snotty nosed little s*!ts who want to make a name for themselves and tons of money...it doesnt.
Even PJ basically said this at the end of the season.With Kobe and Lamar its a winning offense...without players who consistently approach it with the right mentality its not going to work.
I dont know why we expect a team so young to contend or play consistently.I also think the gap between Phil Kobe...then to a lesser extent Lamar....then everybody else is probably not the healthiest of situations.It reminds me of Collins/MJ and the wizards...we need more of a a 'typical' hierachy balance.It would be good for everyone.
Posted by: Kiwi | May 08, 2007 at 06:24 AM
"of a sudden, when a player is in trouble...he passes the ball. Yeah, right!"
Bynum catches those passes and usually scores a bucket on them.
Posted by: Tim-4-Show | May 08, 2007 at 07:07 AM
Kwame Brown dropped plenty of entry passes all season.
MR
Posted by: Matt R. | May 08, 2007 at 07:12 AM
The Lakers need to watch this and learn. Especially Kobe Bryant.
mike
Posted by: Michael Teniente | May 07, 2007 at 10:27 PM
I think someone needs a detox. Betty Ford Clinic or whereever Britney Spears has gone to.
Posted by: Lakergurl | May 08, 2007 at 08:01 AM
Lakergurl, "think someone needs a detox. "
Lakergurl you're a cold woman lol.
Posted by: Mamba24 | May 08, 2007 at 08:09 AM
Mike T -
3 comments for you:
1) First off, though AK was right about his availability, even if Dampier was injured how can you say that's the reason the Mavs lost? Dampier is a grade C center somewhere south of Kwame and north of Benoit Benjamin. Any team that has to depend on him to win is in deep doo-doo from the start.
2) How can you fault Phil for going with Smush? His only other choices were an unproven rookie, a washed-up Euro league cast off, and (worst of all) Sacha. If Kupcake didn't give him a decent horse, what is he supposed to ride?
3) A personal question - have you ever considered getting a real life?
Posted by: Jay Jay | May 08, 2007 at 08:18 AM
WiZo welcome back, where have you been hiding all season.
Lakers are now history but the season has just begun for the last 8, this is what the Laker oldtimers have been watching. Lakers are always for 2nd round playoffs i.e. when there was no 1st rd playoffs until the NBA honchos thought of making more money by adding the last four teams, going for a round of 16. It is so pathetic to have this kind of life in Lakerville when we have nothing to cheer on for our team except analyze these players in disgrace whether Mihm who never played a single game but can play a game after the season ended and at end of his contract ??? Walton started a stellar performance as the best three point shooter in percentage and then choked in the last 20 games, blamed it to injuries, now he too, wants to become a Laker @$5M mortgaging his future based good looks??? or Kwame, the hope of the enterprise after we traded Caron Butler and supposedly this is Kwame's second coming of his career who could muscle Amare, the truth is, he never caught up with Amare, for he was always 3 seconds late. I dream that three players be traded in exchange of a good basketball player fun to watch who could play 100 games and 48 minutes, no ifs and buts and no excuses of injuries! What a miserable players we have to represent themselves as Lakers and I don't know why Laker fans continue arguing on their merits which none, nada and no more.
Anyway, WiZo I remember last summer you put up an analysis chart on the acquisitions of Mitch Kupchak versus the players that he failed to take who are now stars in other teams. I wish you can post it again because we continue to embrace an incompetent GM and now he will be designated as the architect again of the future Lakers. You can't keep using a bad architect who could not even lay the right foundations, however we cannot comprehend the politics in Lakers from the owners, front office, coaches and media, somehow they feed one another on a quid-pro-quo basis (I'll scratch your back and you scratch mine). The fans are the in-despair losers and suckers that paid the amenities of these privileged entities.
I will cheer for the underdog Golden State to give back to NoCal fans for all these years of their devotion to the Lakers. When you go to Northern California, most of avid basketball fans there follow the Lakers trail since the time of Magic because their team sucks. They jumped and cried with their SoCal comrade in arms. Now that we traded places, it my time to give back that loyalty to Golden State, I will always go with California. Go Baron, Go Matt.
Realistically, I think the Finals will be between the Spurs and Pistons.
Posted by: Edwin Gueco | May 08, 2007 at 08:22 AM