The Bay Area streak, she is no more
The Lakers entered Oracle Arena with nine consecutive wins over their Pacific Division rivals, the Golden State Warriors. And after a 108-106 loss, they'll have to be content to begin a new multi-game rally (and with their playoff-steady pace). The Lakers could have left Oakland with a positive result in their pockets, having owned the entire first half and regained control of the match down the stretch. This in spite of an off-shooting night from Kobe, who sustained a fourth quarter quad injury that felt like he was a victim of a shooting. Said ailment took him off the court during the last 90 or so seconds, when the Warriors seized a four-point advantage off a huge trey ball from kissing bandit Baron Davis. The knockout punch was administered after Lamar Odom missed a wild 11-footer on the heels of some handle issues. LO managed to cut the deficit in half with a last minute layup, but missed his and-one opportunity (and the rebound to Monta Ellis), which iced a box score in Golden State's favor.
Some fans have hoped for a little more "fire" from the oft mellow appearing Andrew Bynum. Thursday night, they got their wish after Drew got himself tossed for excessive jawing about a rough housing Obero Fabricio. Vigor is good, but only when coupled with an actual court appearance, which Bynum recognizes. Thus, the kid regrets his reaction.
For those without a calender, it's December 15th, the day free agents inked during the off-season can be traded. This could mark the beginning of a swap flurry, perhaps even big enough to include one Mamba of a player. With all due respect to Otis Smith, Lakersblog would advise its readers not to bet the farm on that one. We do agree, however, that should any takers emerge, this ex-Laker would be wise to price moving companies.
Steve Nash's take on some point guards that could cause the Lakers fits for years to come.
even though we lost last night that was probably the most exciting game of the year. seems like we might have a little rivalry with the warriors now. it seems like baron doesnt really like us. cant wait for the rematch. kobe doesnt like being beaten personally or on a team level and i gurantee that on march 23rd kobe will drop 50 (even though that probably wont be good for the team) and the lakers will win.
is it just me or does every team hate the lakers? it seems like a lot more teams have a problem with the lakers then we have with them. guess theyre just envious of our 9 titles.
GO LAKERS
Posted by: mrbarneydangles | December 15, 2007 at 12:42 PM
Mike T,
So Dwight Howard who averages 15 boards and nearly 3 blocks a game doesn't set a defensive tone, but Kwame does? The Magic give up just 98 points per game and have a point differntial of 5.1 on the season.
That's just ludicrous.
Now I've heard everything.
And Ben Wallace is a shell of himself. The Bulls were a great defensive team before he got there and the Pistons have remained a great defensive team after he left. You know why? Because great TEAM DEFENSE wins games.
You say that the Lakers are 5-6 with Bynum as the starter, but you ignore that the Lakers are 4-8 with Kwame starting at center in the playoffs.
Where was Kwame when the Suns were running layup drills on us the past two seasons?
Posted by: Xodus | December 15, 2007 at 12:43 PM
MESSAGE FROM YODA, TO ANDREW BYNUM
"The boy you trained, gone he is, consumed by Darth Vader." >> Yoda
MESSAGE FROM YODA, TO LAMAR ODOM
"The fear of loss is a path to the Dark Side." >> Yoda
MESSAGE FROM YODA, TO KOBE BRYANT
"Great warrior, hmm? Wars not make one great." >>Yoda
MESSAGE FROM YODA TO THE LAKERS
Ready are you? What know you of ready? For eight hundred years have I trained Jedi. My own counsel will I keep on who is to be trained. A Jedi must have the deepest commitment, the most serious mind. This one a long time have I watched. All his life has he looked away... to the future, to the horizon. Never his mind on where he was. Hmm? What he was doing. Hmph. Adventure. Heh. Excitement. Heh. A Jedi craves not these things. You are reckless.
GO LAKERS
GOD IS A LAKER FAN
Posted by: Yoda Speaks | December 15, 2007 at 12:52 PM
MikeT,
I really enjoy your post about Kwame. Like selling a Yugo and being told it's a Mercedes. I really get to laugh and I love the responses you are able to get.
BD
Posted by: bd | December 15, 2007 at 12:55 PM
Yoda Speaks,
As a huge Star Wars fan I must say I enjoyed your post.
Posted by: Xodus | December 15, 2007 at 01:15 PM
kwame brown sucks
GO LAKERS
Posted by: mrbarneydangles | December 15, 2007 at 01:17 PM
How is Kobe? Is his injury going to be serious enough to keep him out of the east coast road trip?
Posted by: Kei Kim | December 15, 2007 at 01:23 PM
that was probably the most entertaining game of the season so far. it would have been nice to come away with a W, but nonetheless was an encouraging game. there were some mistakes but i figure in the course of the whole game you can't avoid those.
when Kwame returns and starts, Bynum will surely fit in better with the second unit. for some reason, the starting unit just can't seem to get it in to him.
i noticed last night that PJ had odom out there with the second unit. i'm not sure why he did that. that took the ball out of farmar's hands and it seemed to have messed with how they did things out there.
i don't have as much love for Kwame as mike t. does, but i do understand that it would be better if he starts. one good reason is that luke gets relegated back to the bench. i think we can all agree that would be a big positive. as much as andrew has progressed and has done some nice things, i still think that there's a few things Kwame does better than he (at the moment) such as setting strong picks, and showing on pick and rolls. it might not seem like a big deal to some of you what these intangibles bring to the table but it contributes a lot to the general tone of the game.
Posted by: sixonezero | December 15, 2007 at 01:36 PM
YODA speaks
"Ready are you? What know you of ready? For eight hundred years have I trained Jedi."
You da man Yoa!! Forget the Zen, bring the Yoda!
Posted by: Staples 24 | December 15, 2007 at 01:38 PM
"So Dwight Howard who averages 15 boards and nearly 3 blocks a game doesn't set a defensive tone"
Actually rebounds and blocked shots don't set the tone. Stuff like that happens near the rim. In my studies I'm seeing that players like Camby, Chandler, Howard, JO, and even Bynum get a lot of numbers because they play so close to the rim.
What that means is this: Penetration has already occured. Their activity near the rim is great but it doesn't lead to wins. It leads to numbers but no defensive tone is set at all. I'll give a full explanation in about a month.
mike
Posted by: Michael Teniente | December 15, 2007 at 01:56 PM
There are those rare games where Kobe’s confidence turns into foolishness, and last night was one of those. He didn’t “have” it, was injured, and did not lean on his teammates.
It didn’t help that Odom again turned into the invisible man offensively. How did he get the rep as a good defender and facilitator? He couldn’t stop anyone and his decision making is definitely suspect. He is a great rebounder but can we find a replacement for that at less than 13 million? I still can’t help wondering if this team would be better off with another type of player working with Kobe. I think Ariza will have more impact than Lamar by season’s end.
Put this one in the could of/should of won column.
Overall I'm still encouraged by this team's progress and if they can stay healthy could end up being a second tier ballclub.
Posted by: Andy B | December 15, 2007 at 01:56 PM
Having gone back and re-watched the fourth quarter, a couple things really stick out: First, they turned the ball over way too much, and against a team that runs as well as GS, that can't happen. But more than bad defense, what stuck out to me was bad O. The Lakers scored four points over the final three and a half minutes, and that included only one FG. More than that, there was little ball movement:
The last three minutes:
-Fish TO leads to easy Ellis run out. 102- 98 LAL.
-2:40, Kobe misses iso jumper, lucky to draw the foul. Makes 1-2. 103-98.
-2:20, Davis hits a ridiculous step back three in front of Luke, who picked him up on a switch. 103-98.
-2:04, Fish srapes off screen, misses runner off the left side of the lane. No passes on the possession. GS runs, hobbled Kobe can't stop the ball, turns into easy layup for Jackson. 103-103.
-1:39, Kobe misses three. Iso, no ball movement
-1:27, Lakers get ball back as Fish draws foul on Harrington after good D. Makes 1-2, 104-103.
-1:00- Beidrins tip in. 104-105.
-:42- Terrible possession w/o Kobe on floor, wild LO shot
-:16.7- Davis ridiculous step back three over Fish. 104-108.
After that, it was the Kobe missed three, lucky to get the ball back, LO drives, gets the and-one, misses the FT then loses the ball.
If you take it back more, the Lakers were ineffective offensively going back deeper into the quarter, settling for too many jumpers and not running the offense.
On the Walton question, I'm among the gang who thinks they're better having him come off the bench. He certainly hasn't played well (both AK and I called him the most disappointing member of the team on this week's podcast), and last night he had a couple of really bad turnovers. Ironically, though, down the stretch his defense wasn't an issue. Normally, it's a focal point. Combine the fact he's not hitting shots with too many TOs, and he's clearly not performing to the level the Lakers expect. They're better off with him on the court for 20-25 as opposed to 30+, no question.
And while LO didn't shine on a couple possessions late, he was a large reason they were even in the game down the stretch. Kobe was hobbled on D, which hurt (no pun intended) and shot the ball horribly before and after the injury, forcing way too many shots. Certainly he's earned enough good will to let one bad game slide by.
I know it's tough to swallow a loss like that, since they could and should have won. To me, they simply stopped executing offensively, which hurt them on the other end. They turned the ball over, and settled for jumpers. Ball and player movement basically stopped. Davis hit a couple monster shots of the sort where you simply tip your hat. There were too many breakdowns. But a couple buckets over the last six minutes or so, and they leave with a win.
GS is a good team, very good at home. That they lost to the Warriors really isn't a disaster, and upon further review, neither was that game. I still think they need to make a more concerted effort to play inside out, which will both take advantage of Drew's play and LO's ability down low, but also make it easier for Kobe, and everyone else on the court. Obviously, the TOs need to come down. But after watching this one again, I really don't see the need to get overly worked up.
A better effort to open the third might have helped, too. But once the initial lead was gone, they Lakers found themselves in a dogfight. They're not going to win all of them.
BK
Posted by: Brian Kamenetzky | December 15, 2007 at 01:57 PM
anybody know the extent of kobe's groin strain, or whatever it is?
Posted by: greek dude | December 15, 2007 at 01:59 PM
"Where was Kwame when the Suns were running layup drills on us the past two seasons? "
On the bench! That was my whole complaint about PJ last season. The year before all PJ had to do was put Deven George on Steve Nash and we would have won the series.
and "great TEAM DEFENSE" can only be had with a strong defensive center. Great team defense isn't initiated with the 1, 2, 3 , or 4 spots. It's the 5 spot that allows the other players to be a strong defensive unit.
mike
Posted by: Michael Teniente | December 15, 2007 at 02:00 PM
Xodus,
Sometimes fans make too big a personal investment in a player. If he doesn't pan out, they don't want to acknowledge that, because that feels like acknowledging personal failure. Blame everyone else but the player (and thus, themselves) ...
Posted by: exhelodrvr | December 15, 2007 at 02:10 PM
mike t,
doesn't kwame play near the rim. shouldnt he be getting those same rebounds and blocks that all those other good centers are. there's no denying that hes not stopping penetration, a la every point in the league, but what does that say in terms of how kwame sets the tone of the game? if the guards arent scared to go to the rim, how is that setting a defensive tone in the game?
Posted by: andand | December 15, 2007 at 02:12 PM
I say the game was lost because we weren't able to establish a pace to the game. We turned the ball over in the 4th quarter...that's based on the Lakers trying to play at the Warriors pace. If we try to play at the Warriors pace that means we aren't establishing our pace, which is defense.
That whole Warriors pace implies that the Lakers had abandoned the defensive structure. Our defense should have been able to take away the Warriors pace to the game.
You can watch the 4th quarter all you want but what you'll see is the game being played at the Warriors pace. And by deduction that means we aren't playing at our defensive pace. We focused on the offense at their pace, which led to the turnovers. But what's so cold is that the Warriors were making turnovers, too. But they can do that because that's what happens when they play at their pace.
We can't!
Heck, while the Warriors were making turnover and shooting fast, Stu Lanz said it doesn't matter because that's the way the Warriors play and that's the way they wanted the Lakers to play.
Now all that is based on Bynum's inability to help the Lakers set a defensive tone to the game. Because that's the center's responsibility.
mike
Posted by: Michael Teniente | December 15, 2007 at 02:14 PM
B K,
"what stuck out to me was bad O."
Absolutely - that had led to as many of the losses over the past couple of years as the defense. You can't look at the total number of points that the team scores and say "Oh, they should have won." It is those extended periods with no/minimal scoring, and the inability to score on a couple of straight possessions when that it is needed to put an opponent away.
Posted by: exhelodrvr | December 15, 2007 at 02:15 PM
"doesn't kwame play near the rim."
On defense, actually he doesn't. That the whole Kwame influence. He keeps the action so far away from the rim that it changes the whole game. He plays that way and it effect the shot clock, too.
I'm going to write it in more detail in about a month.
mike
Posted by: Michael Teniente | December 15, 2007 at 02:17 PM
also mike, if there numbers dont relate to wins, why are howards, chandlers, bynums, camby's team all with winning records. their numbers seriously dont have nothing to do with it? their rebounds, blocking shots dont correspond with wins? your arguement is stretching a little on what kwame does. if kwame could put up the numbers that those guys do, (being a center, physically blessed, and naturally playing close to the rim, you would expect that) but he doesnt.
only time i remember him doing anyhting was in the suns first series, but he still couldnt get those blocks or rebounds we needed consistently that would have set the tone for us to storm out of phoenix on top.
Posted by: andand | December 15, 2007 at 02:18 PM
Ex-
Especially against a team like GS, where the best way to slow them down is to put the ball in the hoop.
BK
Posted by: Brian Kamenetzky | December 15, 2007 at 02:19 PM
"Now all that is based on Bynum's inability to help the Lakers set a defensive tone to the game. Because that's the center's responsibility."
I mean if that isn't enough...the Lakers are 5-6 with Bynum as the starting center. Those wins and losses don't lie.
mike
Posted by: Michael Teniente | December 15, 2007 at 02:20 PM
"also mike, if there numbers dont relate to wins, why are howards, chandlers, bynums, camby's team all with winning records. their numbers seriously dont have nothing to do with it?"
Actually I'm talking in the context of Elite teams and 2nd teir teams. All players you mentioned, with their teams are 2nd teir at best. What they do won't get them to elite status.
I've been writing about this for a while. And everything I write is supposed to taken in the context of being an elite team, which when we're healthy I think we are. That's something I've made plain over and over again.
But let me make it plain. Without Kwame Brown we are a bubble team. Not even a 2nd teir team. It's not about just having a winning record. It's about getting to championship level.
mike
Posted by: Michael Teniente | December 15, 2007 at 02:24 PM
Mike T,
Then why are Detroit and Orlando strong defensive teams? By your definition Howard doesn't set a strong defensive tone, than why are they one of the best defensive teams around. Why were the Pistons playing Chris Webber at center for long portions of last season and winning games?
By your definition that only 3 centers (Kwame, Big Ben and TD) in the league set a defensive tone why isn't every team in the league a poor defensive squad. And why is that the Lakers have never been a strong defensive team during Kwame's tenure in LA?
Kwame played nearly 33 minutes a game in the 05-06 Phoenix series and you say he didn't get any minutes. I agree that we do miss Kwame, but it's because we're forced to use Ronny as a backup center. With both Kwame and Bynum we've got a strong defensive center rotation with Kwame's strength and Bynum's length. But Kwame by himself isn't the reason why we're not better defensively.
Posted by: Xodus | December 15, 2007 at 02:28 PM
Here's the thing. In the 13 games that Kwame has missed the Lakers have not been able to establish their defensive pace for not even one game. Not against the T-Wolves and not against the defensive weakling Nuggets.
Not one team! Is it a wonder that were 7-6 and 5-6 with Bynum starting?
We have plenty of offense to be competitive but not nearly enough defense to be even a 2nd teir team without Kwame.
mike
Posted by: Michael Teniente | December 15, 2007 at 02:28 PM
Lakers trade: Lamar Odom
Lakers in: Udonis Haslem, Mickael Pietrus
Warriors out: Al Harrington, Mickael Pietrus
Warriors in: Lamar Odom
Heat out: Udonis Haslem
Heat in: Al Harrington
Using the proposed LA-GSW deal, the Lakers and Warriors include Miami in a threesome that benefits all 3 teams.
Lakers get Udonis Haslem - the perfect TRI PF. He has a very good mid-range game too and his defense is stellar. If the Lakers landed Haslem, I'd be jumping all over my room and office.
Miami trades Haslem for a better all around player in Harrington to support Shaq and Wade's cause. Miami has been slumping since last year and I wouldn't be too surprised if they dealt one more time.
JWill / Smush
Wade / Cook
Davis / Wright
Harrington / Blount
Shaq / Zo
Warriors fans are in unison in saying that Harry + Pietrus = Odom is a good deal for them. Odom is a better version of Harrington in Nellie's small ball and he can help their rebounding much. They will still be the lightning-quick organized-chaotic team, much to Nellie's liking. Losing Pietrus means they will have no pressure to re-up him as well. They have Biedrins and Monta Ellis to worry about for the moment and Matt Barnes will have to play exceptional here as well.
Baron / Hudson
Ellis / Belinelli
Jackson / Barnes
Odom / B. Wright
Biedrins / O'Bryant
As for the Lakers getting Pietrus, we add a real player that can play behind Kobe. He is a decent scorer and defender as well but as far as the future goes, we can trade him to Miami or another team depending on how he fits. Worst case scenario, we let him expire at the end of the season as we have another Frenchman to pay more - Ronny Turiaf.
Farmar / Crit
Kobe / Fish
Ariza / Pietrus
Haslem / Turiaf / Radmanovic
Bynum / Kwame / Mihm
I simply love the flexibility and defensive upgrades this trade brings to LA.
Posted by: Staples 24 | December 15, 2007 at 02:33 PM
Xodus,
Actually I already answered your question about Detroit and Orlando. I will give a full explanation in about a month. I want to see some things play out before I do that.
But one thing is without doubt. The separation between Elite and 2nd teir teams is growing fast. Right now, in my opinion, there are only 2 Elite teams right now. Boston and San Antonio. The rest are falling off.
Again, I'll give a full report in about a month.
I've been doing a lot of scouting and the report is coming.
mike
Posted by: Michael Teniente | December 15, 2007 at 02:38 PM
Mike T,
We're not as bad defensively as our bad PPG against suggests and that's what you're missing. The Lakers play at the sixth fastest pace in the league. We average 100.5 possessions per game. More possessions means more points for both teams. If you look at other stats you'll see that we're not that bad, though we're not elite.
We're 4th in the LEAGUE in opponents FG% at 43%. Sixth in the league in opponent's 3 point percentage at 33% and third in the league in rebounds per game.
You're ignoring these defensive stats and pinning our losses on Bynum. It's a team game and you're ignoring that Kwame's injury forced Bynum to start which took his strong play awayfrom the second unit. Turiaf was hurt at the same time, Lamar Odom was still recovering from injury and we traded away Cook and Evans and had to integrate Ariza into the team.
All of these things combined are the reason why we struggled after Kwame went down. Since we've adjusted to all these things we put together a 4 game winning streak and and were minutes away from a 5th.
Posted by: Xodus | December 15, 2007 at 02:39 PM
I know he's only 20 so maybe it is an immaturity issue but I was a bit miffed at Bynum being so giddy during the interviews after the game. It's like dude, be mad...you lost...aye
Posted by: mcfly | December 15, 2007 at 02:44 PM
That Baron Davis is a great player but he's not easy to look at. I don't know if he's a cartoon character or what.
Colorado loves the Lakers!
Posted by: Hugo Boss | December 15, 2007 at 02:45 PM
Xodus,
Beyond what you're saying about having to play Ronny at backup center (where he's less suited), it also creates a situation where their arguably best defensive 4 can't play that position, since Ronny's minutes have to be used at center. Unless they're gonna go with Mihm, which Phil clearly doesn't want to do unless forced. For those wondering why Turiaf isn't starting, that's likely the reason (since health doesn't seem to be an issue anymore and it was Phil's original plan).
Thus, the rotation options at the 4 become LO (who can do it, but is undersized), or Vlad and Luke, neither of whom are particularly known for their D. And no matter which way you go, overall, the defensive options for a five man unit are weakened.
This isn't simply boiled down to "Kwame's absence or presence = cut and dry X." It's about how that absence or presence affects the overall rotation.
AK
Posted by: Andrew Kamenetzky | December 15, 2007 at 02:46 PM
Last night's game was lost to bad coaching and Kobe being Kobe. Kobe shot poorly all night. Instead of him trying to pass the ball when he was doubled, he wanted to take poor shots. Bynum was killing them the whole game and could only get 10 touches. It just seems like to me that Phil needs to tell Kobe to get the ball to Bynum when he is hot. We should have rode him to victory because even if he gets fouled, he will make free throws. Kobe decides that he is going to shoot and nothing else matters. Did anyone one notice that he went 3-10 and then 3 -12 in the second half. He needs to show restraint and be a better leader and pass the ball when he doesn't have it especially when he got hurt...comments anyone??
Posted by: AD | December 15, 2007 at 02:48 PM
"I mean if that isn't enough...the Lakers are 5-6 with Bynum as the starting center. Those wins and losses don't lie" mike
Well, since 2004, Lakers with Kwame Brown are 87-77 (or more like kwame brown and Chris Mihm), that numbers dont lie either and that's hardly a good number, when Kobe basically had games of his life. Give a 20 year old guy 11 games, and judge him on that, is rather harsh dont you think?!
"But let me make it plain. Without Kwame Brown we are a bubble team. Not even a 2nd teir team. It's not about just having a winning record. It's about getting to championship level."
So i guess with Brown on the team, we are championship contender team then?! Yeah, too bad we lost on NBA final for consecutive 2 years when Kwame Brown was our starting center, lol..
My point is that 5-6 is what the whole team achieve, not Bynum alone. There are more factors in a Bball game than just a centre. Heck, even Shaq and Wade lost in the first round last year, does it mean the better get Ilgauskas from Cleveland just because they went all the way too final? I dont think so.
Last night we got burned by Baron, who supposed to be guarded by Kobe.
Bynum shot 8-10 and yet they didnt even try to go to him, at all!!
It's easy to say what Kwame would have done, but we have given him 2 seasons, and he hasnt done much for the team. What makes you think that with Kwame we'll be one step better as a team?!
Posted by: moko | December 15, 2007 at 02:49 PM
Isiah Thomas is looking to trade Eddie Curry!!!
My suggested Trade Scenario between New York, Sacramento and the Lakers...
New York gets Odom, Artest and Kenny Thomas
Sacramento gets Kwame Brown, Quentin Richardson and New York's 1st rd draft pick(2008 and 2009)
Lakers get Eddie Curry, David Lee and Jarred Jeffries
Lakers starting line up
PG- Fisher
SG-KObe
SF-Walton
PF-Curry
C-Bynum
bench...farmar,lee,jeffries,radmanovic,ariza,critt, Mihm, Karl,Turiaf,Vujacic
Posted by: Botsoy | December 15, 2007 at 02:57 PM
AK,
Exactly Kwame's injury forces us to shuffle our lineup and keeps us from rolling out our best defensive lineup and forces guys to play out of position. If Mihm were able to contribute close to where he was in 05 we'd be much better off because Ronny could play at the 4 spot.
Posted by: Xodus | December 15, 2007 at 02:58 PM
"Is it a wonder that were 7-6 and 5-6 with Bynum starting?"
No, because that corresponds to Turiaf's ankle injury, which he apparently isn't fully recovered from. That period also includes additional physical problems that Mihm has had. Not just an issue of Kwame being unavailable.
Posted by: exhelodrvr | December 15, 2007 at 02:58 PM
xodus,
It's not that we're that bad on defense. It's that we're not that good. The separation between those two ideas is what we're missing.
mike
Posted by: Michael Teniente | December 15, 2007 at 02:59 PM
last night did anyone else see that semi hook shot from bynum in the second half on the far baseline, with the guy in his face? beautiful! kareemesk?
Posted by: andand | December 15, 2007 at 03:01 PM
"Well, since 2004, Lakers with Kwame Brown are 87-77 (or more like kwame brown and Chris Mihm), that numbers dont lie either and that's hardly a good number, when Kobe basically had games of his life."
Actually, I've explained this at least a thousand times but I'll do it once more.
The Lakers are between 15-20 games above 500 when Kwame Brown is the starting center in the regular season. From the time Shaq left the Lakers are well below 500 with anyone else as the starting center.
mike
Posted by: Michael Teniente | December 15, 2007 at 03:03 PM
Isiah is probably looking to trade Curry because he has Randolf to do the scoring down in the post. But neither Randlof or Curry can defend the post.
mike
Posted by: Michael Teniente | December 15, 2007 at 03:05 PM
AD--I agree with you that Kobe was forcing some TERRIBLE shots. But it's hard to teach an old dog new tricks, unfortunately. If only he knew how to play a team game! Why the Lakers did not look for Bynum in the post is just unfathomable to me. There were many possessions when I was screaming "throw it in!" yet the Lakers failed to get him the ball. Poor strategy that cost them the game.
I can't finish without commenting about Lamar Odom. Although I want him to succeed, I'm afraid to say that he just doesn't have what it takes to be more than an average player. The guy is immensely gifted for someone his size, but his decisions on the court are usually awful, and he doesn't seem to realize that HIS OUTSIDE SHOT SUCKS. I can almost shoot better with my offhand. He about single-handedly handed the game to GS when he had an awful offensive possession (poor decision not to pass), then missed the free throw (was certain he would), and then he failed to grab the rebound. Lamar is someone whose game has not improved over the years because he doesn't really understand the game very well and how to use his skills to his advantage. I wish it were different but the reality is it's not.
Posted by: Laker fan | December 15, 2007 at 03:06 PM
Botsoy,
Why would we want an overweight, underachieving center with a bad attitude? We don't need Curry and he definitely can't play the 4 spot fr us.
Ex,
Not to mention trading Cook and Evans for Ariza. The team was discombobulated because of all these things happening at the same time. We just have the misfortune of having injury prone players who often get hurt at the same time.
Posted by: Xodus | December 15, 2007 at 03:08 PM
Mike T,
"But neither Randlof or Curry can defend the post."
"Can" or "even tries to?" haha. But either way, you are correct that they combine to create a sieve. That may be the worst defensive frontcourt in NBA history.
AK
Posted by: Andrew Kamenetzky | December 15, 2007 at 03:08 PM
staples24,
love that trade, but i dont thik that GW would part with AH and peitrus to get odum. maybe odum and sombody decent, but not just him. and haslem leaving miami? thats hard, hes been (from what i've read) one of their more consistent guys. avg 7? boards and dbl fig points? unless they're looking for a shake up of the team. but overall a haslem on the lakers would make me pretty damn happy too. how'd you come up with that? not bad.
botsoy,
i know curry is a beast downlow, i dont knwo if he has any midrange game, but his defense isn't what you call great. he's lazy and slow, and doesnt give any effort. especially at N. maybe he'd change with a trade, but that'd be a risk i'd rather not take. maybe for Randolph? i dont know why but he seems so much more appealing in terms of D and O ( he has that mid range game) and is a beast on the boards when hes trying. but same thing for him. it'd be a risk. but one id rather take then with curry.
Posted by: andand | December 15, 2007 at 03:09 PM
"The Lakers are between 15-20 games above 500 when Kwame Brown is the starting center in the regular season. From the time Shaq left the Lakers are well below 500 with anyone else as the starting center"
That's because Kobe played so well and last year, Odom was having his best seasons before he got injured. Walton played well too.
I agree when Kwame is back, we'll be better team, because we can put Ronny in 4. However, it's more because we need a back up center,now that Mihm is struggling. Just because he started, doesnt mean he is a better centre. Look at Ginobili and Barbosa.
Posted by: moko | December 15, 2007 at 03:12 PM
Open letter to mike tenienite
Mike i just want to say that iam 100 per-cent behind your big body theory and you are correct when you say that the average blogger either does not have enough knowledge to understand the nuances of the game or they are to blinded by their pride by recognizing your genuis,Keep up the good work i do admire your courage in the face of the storm,and by standing tall by the relentless attacks against your very character.
Posted by: Ron artest | December 15, 2007 at 03:14 PM
BK
"On the Walton question, I'm among the gang who thinks they're better having him come off the bench. He certainly hasn't played well (both AK and I called him the most disappointing member of the team on this week's podcast), and last night he had a couple of really bad turnovers. Ironically, though, down the stretch his defense wasn't an issue. Normally, it's a focal point. Combine the fact he's not hitting shots with too many TOs, and he's clearly not performing to the level the Lakers expect. They're better off with him on the court for 20-25 as opposed to 30+, no question".
I applaud you for coming out of the dark and into the light as it relates to Walton. 20-25 minutes? How did you come to that conclusion.......based on what? I'm going to leave you alone because at least you and AK have taken a positive step in the right direction.
Here is the real question BK........are you ready? If we agree that Walton is an albatross around the neck of the Lakers......at least that's what I think........What is Phil Jackson's thinking or strategy for playing him OVER 30 MINUTES!!.........AGAINST GOLDEN STATE OF ALL TEAMS!!
After all you can't characterize Luke's performance as "disappointing" in as much as you can't blame a turtle for not being able to fly..........although you may "expect" the turtle to fly..........turtles just can't fly.
On occasion they may have a little more pep in their step.....but the reality is .........a turtle is a turtle.
I personally subscribe to the philosophy of two-time NBA champion coach Rudy Tomjanovich..........place Walton at the end of the bench.......if he is on the team at all.......this way people like you will no longer be "disappointed" when turtles.........don't fly.
Posted by: pfunk36 | December 15, 2007 at 03:27 PM
BK/AK,
While we cannot ask for more on the Lakers efforts on offense, the defense left a lot of things to desired on Walton and Odom. In the end, Kobe became ineffective because of the groin injury. He brought in Ariza but did not assign to the toplight GS. I have been watching the games here in Connecticut with white surrounding at wee-hours in the morning. I wonder what the coaching staff are doing in a see-saw battle as if there were gunfights in trading shots and let the best man standing wins. Where are the defense tactics of the Zen. Is he really worth $12 Million a year??? Here are my observations, of course I'm just second guessing a HOF Coach.
1. Why did he not play Ariza or Vlad in the 4thQ instead of Walton who is faltering on defense and has non-existing offense although he made some decent free throws;
2. This coach is really stubborn in trying to freeze a reliable rookie, Javaris who is taller than Monte Ellis, he could have been more effective in slowing him down. An Ariza-Javaris-Kobe could have neutralized the offensive movements of Golden State. Fisher and Farmar are both good PG, but based on assignments, you need a nimble guy to match the agility.
3. Lakers were playing man-to-man against a team that is fast and furious, they easily go on pick and roll, Lakers could not solve this kind of offense. Had they went on zone, GS could have been finished in 4thQ when the score went up to 8 pts.
4. Why did we not use the height of Chris Mihm against the small Centers of Golden State;
Have you noticed the Lakers games, there is no clear path of the ball, it is a helter skelter kind of offense? They go for a fast play but they could not finsh it with a convincing finish, it is only when Andrew controls the middle. AK/BK, can somebody tell PJ to stop patronizing his favorite player in the triangle Luke Walton, instead go with Ariza or Vlad and it's a consensus in the Lakers Blog.
How many more games are the Lakers willing to lose, before they realize of letting Luke Walton sit down or just go away?
Posted by: Edwin Gueco | December 15, 2007 at 03:29 PM
Pfunk36,
"I applaud you for coming out of the dark and into the light as it relates to Walton. 20-25 minutes? How did you come to that conclusion.......based on what? I'm going to leave you alone because at least you and AK have taken a positive step in the right direction."
If you'd ever bother to read what we write instead of continually making smarmy statements based on nothing in a failed effort to sound superior, you'd know we've both been saying that about Walton since early last season.
Along the lines of "steps in the right direction," I'd recommend maybe asking or reading what we think instead of just incorrectly stating or inferring it. I realize that would cut down on the speeches and posturing, but it might actually lead in some legit dialogue, which I'd personally prefer. But the choice is yours, I guess. If you wanna keep making foot in the mouth statement after foot in the mouth statement, have at it. That seems to be your M.O., so who am I to offer an alternative?
AK
Posted by: Andrew Kamenetzky | December 15, 2007 at 03:35 PM
these trade proposals make me laugh.
i do NOT want lamar odom on my warriors.
i agree, they need to make some changes. they are an explosive team, but a little fragile. when they go cold and start bricking all those 3's thats where their achilles heel is exposed.
yes they certainly need a beefy rebounder in the middle. i can only dream of getting a player like boozer, zack randolph, deng... etc.
but personally i cant stand lamar... id like a player with the right kind of balls2thewall aggressive attitude that the warriors have in players like davis, harrington, stephen jackson... the fearless attitude they had when they beat dallas... odom would not fit, he just seems mentally weak to me.
Posted by: superklown | December 15, 2007 at 03:46 PM