Lakers Now

Round-the-Clock Purple and Gold

« Previous Post | Lakers Now Home | Next Post »

Lakers Derek Fisher and Matt Barnes uncertain if they will play vs. Spurs

Fisher-lakers

Injured Lakers Derek Fisher and Matt Barnes both got treatment Saturday during practice, but their status for Sunday's game at San Antonio remains uncertain.

Fisher suffered a sprained left elbow in the third quarter of Friday night's game against Charlotte at Staples Center. Fisher got treatment from Lakers trainer Gary Vitti and practiced with the team Saturday.

The Lakers said Fisher is listed as probable for the game against the Spurs.

Barnes, who has been out since Jan. 11 after having surgery on his right knee, irritated the knee during pregame warm-ups Friday night and was forced to shut it down, missing his 26th consecutive game.

Barnes also got treatment from Lakers trainers Sauturday, and he also practiced.

The Lakers listed the small forward as day-to-day.

-- Broderick Turner

Photo: Lakers point guard Derek Fisher writhes in pain after getting his left elbow injured in a rebounding battle with Bobcats center Kwame Brown in the second half Friday night at Staples Center. Credit: Jayne Kamin-Oncea / US Presswire

 
Comments () | Archives (37)

The comments to this entry are closed.

The Barnes injury is more troublesome. I just hope he didn't set things back by hurrying

They'll both play.

Cybercosmix,

you wrote: hobbit, cool that you searched the archives for that article you reprinted regarding L.O. at PG, but Tom went on to explain how L.O. needs to merely keep PG's in front of him, his length would disrupt a lot of what they do. He would be backpedaling at times, but he wouldn't be doing worse than Fish who bodies up a lot, they go around him. It's 'outside the box' thinking, probably something that Phil wouldn't partake in during his closing act, but Tom pretty much convinced me that at worst L.O. would be no worse than Fish on the defensive end, his length and ability to keep PG's in front of him would work about as well as we cover speedy PG's now.

my response: So, I'm surprised that you two fountains of basketball
knowledge/history are actually getting this wrong. Allow me to clarify.

Phil Jackson has always had a defensive philosophy. With that set as the
background, Phil's comments on the TALL lineup were that we were too slow
in transition. That means that LO never gets a chance to setup in front of
the speedy pg's.

The second thing you're getting wrong is first step. LO isn't quick enough
to be in front of the PG to take the charge. That means that he would then
either be "reaching in" or "blocking" doesn't it?

OK. So maybe I'm getting this wrong.

http://www.coachesclipboard.net/M2MDefense.html

snippet:
We want our defender on the point guard to play fairly "straight-up", and even over-guard the offensive player's right or left side, depending on which way he/she likes to go. The point defender must work hard and play defense with his/her feet and stay in front of the offensive player, and not just "reach-in" and swipe at the ball.

Thirdly. Have you been paying attention to what the opposing teams
are saying? "We thought we could run on them." -- KG.

4th. We've had this conversation before. Moving LO into a position where
he's less of a rebounder is FOOLISH. Think about this for a sec. Bynum has
been in the NBA for 5+ years and he's not a great rebounder. i.e. he can't
average 10 boards a game. If you put him on the floor w/ Odom & Gasol,
how many rebounds do you honestly think he's going to fight for? That's
probably not clear enough for you, so I'll say it this way. Bynum & Odom's
aggression towards rebounding will be diminished in the TALL lineup &
that's a *BAD* thing for the Lakers.

LO at the pg does nothing more than screw up the offense & defense of the
Lakers. It screws up the rotation. It diminishes the rebounding rate for
Odom & Bynum . We gain nothing significant on offense or defense.
After coaching Bynum & LO for 3 & trying this in a couple of different
ways ... going back to this flawed idea seems FOOLISH. The coach has
said it doesn't work. You'd be better off trading Bynum for LeBron and
then we'd have a TALL lineup that would work. And since we're reaching
for the stars, it would be mandatory for all of the Laker girls to have a
cocktail hour with all blog members before every game.

Jon K - The first rule of the Secret Brotherhood of Bartenders is, you do not talk about the Secret Brotherhood of Bartenders!

And for the rest: we all like to think the best of people and give them the benefit of the doubt, and I've always found that there's usually something to connect with in people (except for the Charlie Mansons and dead-eyed bangers); nevertheless, 90 to 95% of the time... after all is said and done, it ain't worth it. The other 5 to 10% hang out at the RC.

hobbit - please don't use my posts to support your arguments with Laker Tom. You took that out of context. Not cool, bro.

hobbit - btw - are you talking the Laker girls? Or the REAL Laker girls? Cuz if there's cocktails to be had.... well.... you know.....

The Lakers' failure to add depth to their thin roster and Phil Jackson's stubborn refusal to involve new players both from within and outside of LAL just may come back and bite them in their arses.

Here's hoping I'm wrong but if Barnes and Fish do not get well soon the 3-peat is doomed. One more significant injury to the prime 7 will also doomed any championship aspiration.

Just to think Lakers could have had Mike Bibby or Sasha Pavlovic or Corey Brewer or Troy Murphy... to bolster their chance. All outstanding players who are worth at least #8 on LAL talent chart.

Now all their main elite rivals have all significantly upgraded while they stand pat.

Stoopid is as stoopid does!!!

Isn't Carlos Arroyo still available after waived by Heat? he can't possibly be any worse than Fisher and Blake.

And how about Al Thornton after waived by Warriors? no matter what he's still one thousand times better than Luke Walton.


@LROB… “The most encouraging part of Drew's play is he now understands that his biggest value to the team is on defense. It's a beautiful thing to see him grow. As Drew continues to be a defensive force referees will start giving him more leeway. Maybe that's already happening with just 1.7 fouls in the last six games.”
…..
Great points, LRob. If Drew continues to play like this, the Lakers are going to have a great chance to three-peat. As for the fouls, I was thinking the exact same thing last night as Bobcats drove right into Drew but didn’t get a call because Drew went straight up. No way could a ref watch this guy dominate the paint the way he has without respecting his defensive skills. Just keep it up Big Drew.
………………………..
@SEAN… “This 6 game winning streak can symbolize the versatility of the Lakers line-ups, match-ups and determination. Two blowout wins (Hawks, Clippers), two close road victories in hostile territory (Blazers, Thunder) and two defensive wins, when we couldn't throw a pea into the ocean. In that span, the Lakers are averaging 98.3ppg, while only giving up only 87.6 ppg. Defensive efficiency has been constant, as has Ron's frustrating Defense that at times makes players feel like he's pulling teeth. Stephen Jackson did not want to be on the floor last night. Bynum's 6 blocks and 17 rebounds shows his consistency in Rim protection and anchoring the defense.”
…..
Your point about the Lakers versatility is right on, Sean. It’s what makes this team so tough to defeat. They can dominate you with offense or defense. They can play half-court or full court. They can wear you down and beat you up with their size and length with Drew, Pau, and Lamar. They have multiple defenders who can shut or slow down opponents top players with Ron, Kobe, and Drew. And they have the greatest offensive player, scorer, and closer in the NBA in Kobe Bryant, the Black Mamba.
………………………..
@HOBBITMAGE… How’s it going. Thought that post might wake you up. My take is that Phil has never played the Big Five together and has only played Drew, Pau, and Lamar together two or three times for stints of a couple of minutes. That certainly does not prove that the lineup would not work. How about after running it for a couple of practices and then playing an entire half or game. Then we would have some real evidence as to whether it would work or not.
…..
As for Phil’s opinion of the Big Five, he has always said there could be situations where he might try it. What better time than in the stretch run of his last stand? Anyway, I mainly brought the subject up because it was a fun idea that makes a lot of sense despite your frivolous dismissal. And frankly, the way that Steve Blake has been playing, Lamar at point if Fish can’t go could be a great solution, not to mention what it would do to other teams’ planning and preparation to play the Lakers.
………………………..
@P&GR… Thanks for having my back. I would never wish for a player to get injured even if he was on the other team. Regrettably, I even hoped that Pierce would be OK after they wheeled him out in a wheelchair. Nor am I happy that Fish is injured, even if I sometimes question whether it’s time for him to give up the starting job. Frankly, Fish has the job because none of his possible successors has shown they can do the job. So bottom line, it’s my opinion that Lamar would be our best option to replace Fish if he can’t go. The only other option would be Kobe at point and UPS at the 2. The 3rd option is starting Steve Blake, which is what Phil will naturally do.
…..
The thing is that the game tomorrow is as big a regular season game as we’re gonna get and Tony Parker is without doubt the quickest and fastest point guard we will face and a guy unlike Rondo who can shoot lights out from mid-range. If Phil starts Blake, Parker is going to kill us. Even with Drew protecting the rim, Blake is going to have to concede the midrange jumper to Tony whereas Lamar has the length to sag off Parker and still challenge or block the shot. His weakness would be getting beaten off the dribble for a layup, which is where Drew comes in. With a guy like Parker, who rarely shoots the 3, you want to keep him out of the paint and always challenge his midrange jumper.
……………………….
@WIN BLEVINS… “Mark Medina, You are genuinely a fine writer, but this is a terrible sentence ; ‘It would be a gutsy and stroke of genius that could help Phil and the Lakers pull away to win their 4th threepeat.’ Is this what the ridiculously short deadlines required to compete with the net are doing to us?”--an anonymous professor and novelist
…..
Actually, I was the one who wrote this terrible sentence, which should have read: “It would be a gutsy MOVE and stroke of genius that could help Phil and the Lakers pull away to win their 4th threepeat.” Anyway, you maligned MM in error so I will accept your scorn and criticism as you intended. Good idea to remain anonymous and good luck on your novel. LOL.
………………………..
@CCX… Good to have you back, Mike. I had the same thing you did and it lasted over 3 weeks. I would love to see Lamar get a shot at point, especially if Fish were not available. I remember Phil saying that there were situations where the Big Five lineup could be dominating. Let’s hope that Phil gives it a chance tomorrow. Long shot, but what fun. What is there that Derek Fisher does for this team that Lamar Odom could not also do just as well if not better. Stay in front of his man? Take a charge? Pass into the post? Drive into the lane? Block a shot? Get a rebound? Make a 3-pointer? And no Hobbitmage, Phil has never played the Big Five at the same time. YET…..
………………………..
@BRONX ….”With Bynum busting his butt grabbing rebounds and blocking shots, you'd think that Kobe would try to reward him with a few looks on offense. Kobe needs to nurture Andrew at this point in the season....the Lakers are going to need the Baby Beast as they go forward.”
…..
Got to agree with you 100% and I love Kobe, too, but just 4 shots for the guy who was dominating the game for the Lakers just does not sit well with me either. My grandson’s CYO 5th grade basketball just finished their regular season with another win to march into the playoffs 7-1 and I didn’t have to tell either of my point guards to feed the ball to our bigger players who control the boards and paint. I’m hoping the Lakers really focus on getting the ball down low to Drew tomorrow. If they do, he can be just as dominant at the offensive end as he has been at the defensive end. Big Drew, the Beast!
………………………..
TOM

63,

What is the % of people that are worth hanging out with? That is a good question. I've always felt that roughly 20% of the population is just BSC, I mean like Michelle Bachmann crazy. Of course that % is somewhat higher in Texas. Hmmm?

When we reach the PO's, I'm hoping that our best players will be on the court most of the time. With no back-to-backs, our best should play the most. I'd like to see on the court most of the time:

PG-Kobe
SG-Ron
C- Drew
PF-Pau
SF-Lamar

Subs-Brown, Barnes, Fisher, and Blake.


LAKERS 92, BOBCATS 84: NO BARNES, BUT PLENTY OF BYNUM
by Dexter Fishmore for Silver Screen and Roll
http://www.silverscreenandroll.com/2011/3/4/2031281/lakers-94-bobcats-82-recap-analysis-nba-andrew-bynum-matt-barnes-kobe-bryant-derek-fisher
………………………
Excellent review of Drew’s performance last night. Here is an excerpt:
………………………
This evening the Lakers got by just fine without Barnes, thanks in no small part to Andrew Bynum. Drew was the linchpin of a splendid defensive effort that held Charlotte to 0.92 points per possession. The kid was straight-up monstrous. His six blocks and 12 defensive rebounds (out of 17 total) are impressive enough but hardly capture his dominance. He was quick, rangy and aggressive and swallowed up nearly everything the Cats tried to get around the hoop.
…..
His presence visibly intimidated Charlotte ballhandlers, who for long stretches simply stopped trying to penetrate for fear of Bynum's rock-star-from-Mars awesomeness. Drew's performance tonight was another step in his development into a guy who can tilt the playing field in the Lakers' favor without a lot of touches. Granted, the Bobcats don't have the deadliest array of low-post scoring threats, but if Drew can exert something like this kind of influence against teams that do, I'll agree not to make any more World Cup jokes at his expense.
………………………
TOM

Always the "IF" word, but IF Drew plays like he has been, we are gold! I still would swap for Dwight yesterday, today and tomorrow. HOWEVER, Drew just might change my mind about that, hope so!

While we aren't on the subject, I like Derek and Luke personally, but we definitely could use upgrades at their positions if possible next season. I know we are not gonna be able to trade either, but I was sure hoping Blake was the answer (sorry for the misuse AI!).

I hope, if we keep Andrew, we can let him know that his time will come (bout a couple years or less). He would/will be the "Man," but for now that's Kobe. And then we hope Kobe fills a number 2 role then. Too bad Shaq and Kobe couldn't work out a similar deal. Shaq leads us to 3 or 4 titles and then Kobe leads us to 3 or 4 more, each exchanges lead roles at some point. Too bad it didn't ahppen.

DJ

I think the Lakers will need a third talent to fill the gap between Bynum and Kobe.

I could probably name 10 players that would fulfill this. Kobe can be deadly and stick around A LONG time if (big if) there's enough talent around to fill the void and make it worth his time

yello - WTH??? What kind of Laker fan (not to mention what kind of person) are you that you're "stoked" about a Lakers' injury?? And not just any Laker, but a 5 time champion starting guard, not to mention a really great guy like Fish?? Your post just makes me mad, and sad to share a board with you. You need to rethink what you want people to think about you. Maybe there'll be those who'll start wishing injury on YOU. Some kinda cramped arthritic fingers thingy.... Jeeze.

Justanothermambafan,

re: taking your comment out of context. Actually, I don't think that I
did. Feel free to go back and look at the threads from that time. BTW,
that's actually why I re-posted your entire comment.

LakerTom,

you wrote: My take is that Phil has never played the Big Five together and has only played Drew, Pau, and Lamar together two or three times for stints of a couple of minutes. That certainly does not prove that the lineup would not work. How about after running it for a couple of practices and then playing an entire half or game. Then we would have some real evidence as to whether it would work or not.
…..
As for Phil’s opinion of the Big Five, he has always said there could be situations where he might try it. What better time than in the stretch run of his last stand? Anyway, I mainly brought the subject up because it was a fun idea that makes a lot of sense despite your frivolous dismissal. And frankly, the way that Steve Blake has been playing, Lamar at point if Fish can’t go could be a great solution, not to mention what it would do to other teams’ planning and preparation to play the Lakers.

my response: When your car doesn't start & you have no battery do you
keep turning the key? yes, that's a very sensationalistic scenario. The point is
that you don't have to do something for 3 mos to figure out if it works
or not.

http://www.ocregister.com/sports/odom-223965-bynum-big.html

snippet:
Jackson, who wants his players to stretch their comfort zones to learn on their own, hadn't even prepared by playing Bynum, Gasol and Odom together in practice. What he did try to do is give them a fair chance of defending themselves on the perimeter and in transition — Jackson's greatest concerns with going so big — by pitting them vs. a seemingly impotent Utah unit while Deron Williams rested.

snippet:
Utah had rookie point guard Eric Maynor out there with three unimposing threats of guard Wesley Matthews and forwards C.J. Miles and Paul Millsap to go with undersized center Carlos Boozer. In theory, the Lakers' size up front, with Shannon Brown and Jordan Farmar defending the perimeter, could have come up big.

In reality, the failures of the Bynum-Gasol-Odom alignment in the first 51/2 minutes of the second quarter were the beginning of the end of the Lakers' 11-game winning streak.

The score went from a 25-25 tie to a 44-37 Utah lead before Odom headed to the bench — not exactly the tallest and most talented of his teammates stepping up and winning one for sick, tired and broken-fingered Bryant.

snippet:
That second quarter began with Odom getting to the foul line — and missing both free throws. At the other end, he immediately was called for a hand-check foul on the perimeter when the entire premise of this strategy is that he must defend reasonably like the small forward he was previously in this league.

To be fair, the article speaks more to LO at the SF rather than at the PG.
Which begs the immediate question, if he can't deal with faster small forwards
how on earth will he deal with PG's.


snippet from an email exchange with Kevin Ding:

So that lakers lineup was/is: Lamar, Bynum, Gasol, Brown & Farmar yes?

later you have:
Ron Artest came in for Brown midway through that stretch to make the Lakers even bigger, but Artest's defensive prowess didn't fix anything. In 10 trips down court against Bynum-Gasol-Odom, Utah scored nine times.

so that would be Farmar, Lamar, Bynum, Artest & Gasol, right?


-----end email snippet ----------

However, feel free to keep suggesting something that Phil isn't thrilled
about. Maybe a blog sync think will happen and every one will agree that
LO at the pg is a fantastic idea and Phil will ignore us, play LO at the PF
off the bench and win another championship. Oh, wait. That happened
last year.

LakerTom: 3 weeks? Aiieeyaaiieyaiieeeeee........

- - -

hobbit: Let me try and give you a response. Before I do, let me tell you the biggest thing that would concern me about a Big Five is the lack of depth this would create for the bigs. So, yeah, I agree with you that our rotation would be screwed up. Perhaps DC and Joe Smith might be able to handle extended minutes, but I would hate to have to give them big backup minutes in close games versus quality teams.

That being said, the argument that taking L.O. out of rebounding position is flawed in that he would be out there in essence as PG, no? So, in effect, he is playing Fish's role. How many rebounds does Fish get?

I totally disagree with your assertion that Bynum is a poor rebounder. "Bynum & Odom's aggression towards rebounding will be diminished in the TALL lineup & that's a *BAD* thing for the Lakers." - that's a stretch that would make Mr. Fantastic proud, and on top of that you're drawing from conclusions based on it.

Footwise, lateral movement I guess you're referring too, would it be that big of a dropoff? As I believe Tom pointed out, Odom wouldn't be looking to take those charges that you are inferring he would be too slow to take, he'd be dropping back more, keeping himself between his man and the basket, using his reach more than his body. He could still defend opposing players strong side, like Fish does. If a player likes to go left or right, L.O. could defend that, no?

Here's how it could work, in my eyes. Having L.O. come in for Blake, if Fish is out and Blake is the starter. Having him overlap his time with Gasol/Drew on the floor, then having him slide over to the frontcourt when one of the bigs go out, probably Drew. This could work for a few minutes at a time.

Yeah though, the lack of competent bigs outside our big-3 make this hard to visualize doing. I can't see Phil doing it for that reason, the throwing off of the rotations it would cause if they were to give L.O. Fish-like minutes at his position. But for a few minutes at a time it would work, rotation-wise.

BTW, Kobe could guard the speediest of PG's in said fantasy lineup, much like he already has to do to the Westbrooks of the league...

I wouldn't entertain a Bynum-for-princess jimmy trade either, why would we want a guy who doesn't bring his talents to the 4th quarter?


AS ALWAYS - AND FOREVER - GO LAKERS!!!!!!

What ever happened to the Elric of Melnibone movie they were rumored to be making?

hobbit - yes it was my complete comment. BUT - it's taken out of the context considering the state of the team now vs the state of the team when I posted it. Anyhoo.... I didn't like it. But whatever. Don't forget my cocktail.

You know it's beyond bad when fans start expressing happiness that you're injured.

Come on Derek.

You need to step up next season and take a back seat to whomever.

FYI, I'm NOT happy about his injury. Maybe last season when we had parts to replace him with I would have been... but not right now. He's all we got.

Anyone that is happy that Fish is hurt is not a Laker Fan deep down...

There is no justifying this line of thinking...enough said...

Justa/Lew: RIGHT ON! Anyone celebrating Fish's injury are not only not Laker fans, they're SICK!

@Scott - congrats on the RCOTD.

@fever - C'mon man. You're better than that...i hope.


Thoughts on the big lineup.....

Just say NO. Here's a few reasons why...some already stated!

1. Mess up rotations.

2. Defense would be worst. P/R defense? Smaller players have the advantage in sliding around picks better. Or imagine SA let Manu initiate the offense and ran Parker/Hill off several baseline screens. Having LO chase them would not be good. If the Lakers met Boston in the finals can you picture him chasing Ray Allen?

3. LO couldn't use his height on offense because Pau and Drew would already be in the post. If one of them vacated the post to make room for LO, then opposing teams would just double LO and force him to pass out to a big man 15 ft away from the hoop.

If you seriously want to consider going tall then the best option would be to insert Barnes in with Drew,Pau, Ron and Kobe.

CyberCosmix,

you wrote: That being said, the argument that taking L.O. out of rebounding position is flawed in that he would be out there in essence as PG, no? So, in effect, he is playing Fish's role. How many rebounds does Fish get?

my response: Actually, you've made my point. Allow me to clarify. LO
has done best for the Lakers when he's doing a lot of rebounding. By playing
him at the PG, you've moved him away from rebounding. Which is one of
his strengths. If he's not rebounding, then how is he supposed to energize his
game? Can you think of a great game LO had where he didn't have a good
number of rebounds?

you also wrote: I totally disagree with your assertion that Bynum is a poor rebounder

my response: You're allowed to have your opinion. If a 7+ 250 lb man isn't
even averaging 9 rebounds a game, he's not a good rebounder in my book.

http://forums.nba-live.com/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=63300&start=0

snippet:
odman, the greatest rebounder in history topped out at 30% of rebounds. If we assume a player single-minded in focus playing starter minutes and being the best ever could get 33%. There are about 83 rebound opportunities per game these days, playing 36 minutes per game, that's 62.

So the greatest rebounder ever playing at 110% of Rodman's absolute peak season (which itself was 110% higher than his second highest) would get about 21 per game. (And the leaders in rebounds this season, Camby and Howard, rebound at 2/3rds of that rate.)

[ note: While not definitive, it's certainly a good place to start the conversation
and gives methodology which could be tweaked. ]

you wrote: Odom wouldn't be looking to take those charges that you are inferring he would be too slow to take, he'd be dropping back more, keeping himself between his man and the basket, using his reach more than his body.

my response: that would be the "reaching in" foul I talked about.

you also wrote:
Here's how it could work, in my eyes. Having L.O. come in for Blake, if Fish is out and Blake is the starter. Having him overlap his time with Gasol/Drew on the floor, then having him slide over to the frontcourt when one of the bigs go out, probably Drew. This could work for a few minutes at a time.

my response: And we're back to where we started. You don't really
believe that it works otherwise you wouldn't limit it to a few minutes.
Which means that you're hoping that the other team doesn't go small.
In the Utah game, Utah went small and we immediately fell behind.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/f/fishede01.html

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/o/odomla01.html

LO is shooting ~ 10% worse than D-Fish from the 3.

you also wrote: BTW, Kobe could guard the speediest of PG's in said fantasy lineup, much like he already has to do to the Westbrooks of the league...

my response: and you're missing the point. again. LO is too slow to guard
good PG's, SG's, & SF's. It's *not* about the offense. It's about the defense.
Moving LO away from the basket means that you don't get to take advantage
of his size in a meaningful way. You prevent his rebounds. You make him
susceptible to more fouls and there's no payoff for it because you're not
going to do it for long anyway.

However, as I said, maybe we should all just agree that it's the best thing
since sliced bread. Phil Jackson can ignore us, not play LO at the pg
position and we can win another championship. Just like we did last year.
Just like we did the year before last.

@yellofever - I deleted your comment in which you expressed delight in Fisher's injury. Criticize players all you want, but expressing pleasure in someone's ill will is personal and distasteful

Mark G/63 Footer,

"What is the % of people that are worth hanging out with?"

It's going to depend up who you are, really.

I've come to the conclusion that 35% of people are about character and 65% of people are about experience.

What I mean by this is that 35% of people have rigid character and 65% are shaped by their life experience and societal values.

Of those 35% with rigid character, they can be subdivided into 20% who are essentially attracted to evil (sociopaths) and 15% who are attracted towards altruism.

One wants to completely avoid the 20% with Axis II personality disorders and sociopathy because it's this 80% that screws it up for the everybody else and is the reason we have so many otherwise stifling and ridiculous rules and constrictions in society. Without them the 20% would run amok more than they already do.

The 60% of "norms" out there are unreliable, whether or not you want to hang out with them is based upon how interesting their life experience is, because that shapes who they are so completely. They don't manifest much freewill.

Of the 15% who are drawn towards altruism, a little more than half of them are tedious good-doers and idealists who are obsessed with changing the world to be more altruistic. You don't want to hang out with them because their character also overwhelms their freewill.

That leaves about 6% of people who are instinctively attracted to altruism, but still practice freewill and individuality--making them interesting people who you can rely upon and trust.

So, my answer to your question is 6%.

6% of people are worth hanging out with.

74% of people are worth treating with respect, compassion and kindness.

20% of people are worth delivering a good solid punch to the throat to the first time they try to weasel into your life.

Next question, please.

What do we play for? RINGS!!!

Lakers Today... Lakers Tomorrow... Lakers Forever.

GO LAKERS!!!

LEWSTRS,

"Anyone that is happy that Fish is hurt is not a Laker Fan deep down..."

Anyone happy Derek is hurt is a part of the 20% I described above. Wearing a Kobe jersey won't change the fact that they're a troll.

What do we play for? RINGS!!

Lakers Today... Lakers Tomorrow... Lakers Forever.

GO LAKERS!!!

yellowfever,

You expressed "delight" at Derek's injury?

What is wrong with you?

What do we play for? RINGS!!!

Lakers Today... Lakers Tomorrow... Lakers Forever.

GO LAKERS!!!

[Repost with grammatical corrections]

Mark G/63 Footer,

"What is the % of people that are worth hanging out with?"

It's going to depend on who you are, really. However...

I've come to the conclusion that 35% of people are about character and 65% of people are about experience.

What I mean by this is that 35% of people have rigid character and 65% are shaped by their life experience and societal values.

Of those 35% with rigid character, they can be subdivided into 20% who are essentially attracted to evil/extreme selfishness (sociopaths/Axis II personality disorders) and 15% who are attracted towards altruism.

One wants to completely avoid the 20% with Axis II personality disorders and sociopathy because it's this 20% that screws it up for the everybody else and their orientation is the primary reason we have so many otherwise stifling and ridiculous rules and constrictions in society. Without those rules and restrictions, the Axis II 20% would run amok more than they already do.

The 60% of "norms" out there are unreliable, whether or not you want to hang out with them is based upon how interesting their life experience is, because that shapes who they are so completely. They don't manifest much freewill.

Of the 15% who are drawn towards altruism, a little more than half of them are tedious do-gooders and idealists who are obsessed with changing the world to be more altruistic. You don't want to hang out with them because their character also overwhelms their freewill.

That leaves about 6% of people who are instinctively attracted to altruism, but still practice freewill and individuality--making them interesting people who you can rely upon and trust.

So, my answer to your question is 6%.

6% of people are worth hanging out with.

74% of people are worth treating with respect, compassion and kindness.

And 20% of people are worth delivering a good solid punch to the throat the first time they try to weasel their way into your life.

Next question, please.

What do we play for? RINGS!!!

Lakers Today... Lakers Tomorrow... Lakers Forever.

GO LAKERS!!!

justanothermambafan,

Did you get my Facebook request?

What do we play for? RINGS!!!

Lakers Today... Lakers Tomorrow... Lakers Forever.

GO LAKERS!!!

anyone missing sasha vujacic right about now?

danny boy,

I am.

I was not in favor of the trade.

What do we play for? RINGS!!!

Lakers Today... Lakers Tomorrow... Lakers Forever.

GO LAKERS!!!

It would have been nice for the team to keep Sasha for greater value in return for his contract at the deadline.

Instead we have a player who cant contribute on a nightly basis for whatever reason our coach see's fit not to use him..

Not the smartest move in recent times for Mitch.

Gadzuric,Finley (fully recovered) and plenty of other 10 day contract type players to choose from....Not much else .

NBA (No Bench Available)... ?

Mitch, Buss & coach Jackson think they Lakers are fine as they are. Well, what do u think now ?? Fisher has always been the worse PG and I do not remember Barnes such a great or even good player. Laker management decided not to bring any new talent aboard and stick it out with what they had. This coming road trip will tell the truth of their decisions. If Fisher had any respect for the game and himself he would volunteer to go to the bench and retire at end of year. Luke is the worst. When he hits the floor the team dissolves with his bad passing and air balls.

Is this the sane thread?


Connect

Advertisement

In Case You Missed It...

Video

All Things Lakers »

Your database for all things purple and gold.

Find a Laker

Search a name

Select a season

Choose one of our lists



Categories


Archives
 

About the Bloggers


Bleacher Report | Lakers

Reader contributions from Times partner Bleacher Report

More Lakers on Bleacher Report »



Get Alerts on Your Mobile Phone

Sign me up for the following lists:


In Case You Missed It...