| Today's Game
No Game Today.
Coming Up
Wednesday Feb 10 6:00PM
at Utah Jazz
TV: KCAL
Game After
Tuesday Feb 16 7:30PM
vs. Golden State Warriors
TV: FS West
Lakers Standings
Lakers Record: 40-13, 1st Place Of Division. Playoff Seed # 1 In Conference. |
|
|
|
|
Welcome to Lakers Topbuzz! This site is dedicated to bringing you the latest Los Angeles Lakers rumors and news, + a Lakers Forum powered by you, the dedicated fans. It's a Laker Blog & community in one. Please be sure to check in with us often and feel free to participate in the Los Angeles Lakers Forum and comment on stories. Will Kobe be successful in his quest for his 5th Championship? How will the team improve itself (via trades and/or free agency)? Will the Lakers win the NBA Championship back-to-back with Ron Artest added to the already talented pool of players of Kobe, Pau Gasol, Lamar Odom, Derek Fisher, and Bynum? What was the LA Lakers score? Who were great in the Lakers game and who didn't do their share? Which team should we be looking out for on the upcoming Laker Schedule? There's even a gallery of Laker photos (including yes, the Laker Girls :-)). Join the Lakers Message Board fellow fans and chat it up on all the latest trade rumors, free agent signings, LA Laker draft picks and more! Once you join this Laker Fan Site please be sure to read and follow the Forum Rules and Guidelines- thanks!
-Lakers Topbuzz Management |
|
| Lakers Forum | | | | | LAST FORUM POSTS | | | Topic | Replies | | Views | | Poster | | Date | | Time |  still in need of a good point guard!! | 24 | | 775 | | CALB | | Feb, 09 | | 07:10 | | Can Shannon Brown start - please | 33 | | 870 | | CALB | | Feb, 09 | | 05:08 | | A Case For Kobe Bryant As Lakers' Sixth Man | 29 | | 932 | | koberivers | | Feb, 09 | | 04:30 | | why so much HATE for artest | 19 | | 498 | | Walkin' | | Feb, 09 | | 04:27 | | [89] Spurs @ [101] Lakers Game Thread | Feb. 8th, 2010 | go to [pg. 1] | 210 | | 3318 | | LakerRRTX | | Feb, 09 | | 04:04 | | gasol's FG% taking trending downward quickly | 8 | | 244 | | flixos | | Feb, 09 | | 03:48 | | odom= lakers QB..... | 2 | | 115 | | BaadMaster | | Feb, 09 | | 03:26 | | Lakers notebook: Bynum's knee better, hip hurting | 0 | | 61 | | KBLakers24 | | Feb, 09 | | 03:23 | | TRADE BYNUM PLEASE!!!!!!!!!1 | go to [pg. 1] | 72 | | 1975 | | KILLA_INSTINCT24 | | Feb, 09 | | 03:03 | | Flashback: 01-02 season (edited) | 2 | | 105 | | Watch_the_Sky_Fall_24 | | Feb, 09 | | 02:25 | | The Zombie Chronicles: Adventures Of A Non-existant Bench | go to [pg. 1] | 69 | | 2430 | | Watch_the_Sky_Fall_24 | | Feb, 09 | | 02:07 | | UPDATE: Lakers Unlikely To Make Deadline Move | go to [pg. 1] | 258 | | 16081 | | jc89 | | Feb, 09 | | 01:48 | | Gasol trade worked out for both sides | 6 | | 340 | | warrenweelim | | Feb, 08 | | 22:50 | | Lakers shouldn't think they can win without Kobe | 17 | | 637 | | KILLA_INSTINCT24 | | Feb, 08 | | 20:35 | | Freakish Career NBA Stats | 8 | | 336 | | spankees | | Feb, 08 | | 19:31 | | Whats wrong with the Lakers? Maybe nothing at all. | go to [pg. 1] | 55 | | 1341 | | spankees | | Feb, 08 | | 18:37 |
[Access Forum]
| MEMBERS ONLINE | | | | There are 118 unregistered users and 2 registered users on-line | 
You are an anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here |
|
|
|
Posted by: SPQR on Saturday, February 06, 2010 - 03:06 AM
Lakers Blog
|
 With the home loss to the Carmelo Anthony less Nuggets, the question is sure to arise again on LTB: What is wrong with the Lakers? Why are they not playing up to their capabilities? What do they need to do to start doing playing up to their capablities and win the championship?
The answer to this question may in fact be: Nothing is wrong with them. And there is nothing for them to do in order to win the title again.
To go further into this idea, lets take a look at some factors involving this team and at our expectations for them.
Coming into this season, many of us, myself included, thought that given our roster, if we remained relatively healthy, the title would be there for us to get again. A fait accompli if you will.
So lets look at this for a moment. Here we are, the defending champions trying to repeat. What has changed for us this year as opposed to last year to buttress this feeling of entitlement for our team? To make our hopes valid?
Well, I think even Andrew Bynums toughest critics will say he is playing better now than he did last year after coming back from his injury. That is a plus.
I would venture to say that Derek Fisher is playing a year older and not as good as last year. A minus.
The other big change is that we acquired Ron Artest for Trevor Ariza. Some would say thats a plus. I would say for this particular team, which can be lethargic at times and often needs a shot of youthful, athletic, effective energy, it may be a minus.
Shannon Brown has taken a very nice step this year and is contributing in ways he could not last year. That is a plus.
So in total, not really a big check in the plus side or the deficit side of the ledger. Almost a wash when you take it all into account.
So there is really nothing there to definitively say our expectations coming into the year were pipe dreams or off base.
Now lets take a look at the concept of repeating. For the longest time, repeating a championship in the NBA was deemed almost as hard to do as it is in the NFL. After the Celtics amazing string of titles in the 60's, there was no repeat champion for 20 years. That is a long time and a lot of great teams that did not do it. Finally in the late 80's the Showtime Lakers turned the trick. It was considered a huge accomplishment and the Lakers garnered much press and accolades for doing so.
But then in quick order, the 'bad boy' Pistons repeated and the Jordan Bulls did too. Soon after, the Lakers had their 3peat. It seemed that winning consecutive titles in the NBA was not so hard for a good team. A good team like we have now. But is this really so?
If you look at the teams who did it, they were all extremely talented teams. Pretty much dynastic. Populated by some of greatest players in NBA history. But does this mean repeating is really so easy as it has seemed lately?
Since the 3peat teams, its been 7 years since anyone has done it. Some of the great teams of the recent past who have not been able to repeat include Bird's Celtics and Duncans Spurs. These teams were not chumps or lucky champions. They were some of the best teams of all time. Yet, in the ensuing year after they won their multiple titles, something was lost each year. They could not climb that mountain again for a second straight year.
So perhaps the ease of a repeat for a good championship team, which some of us kind of bought into, is not really such an easy thing at all.
Now I want to go into the way we percieve the Lakers, and in fact any of our favorite teams. We are by nature egocentric beings. We can't help this. We see the world through our eyes, we think with our brains. We can't become other people, we can only be ourselves. Because of this, our worlds revolve around us. And other people and objects are things that are in the orbit of our lives. They can't be anything else.
We also tend to be egocentric when it comes to our sports teams. By this I mean we watch the games our teams play, we see and learn our teams athletes, everything they do, their flaws and weaknessess.
So when it comes to our games with other teams, we tend to see our teams as living, functioning, active organisms and the other teams as kind of inert punching bags or sparring partners. By this I mean, we think if OUR team does everything correct: hustles, play good defense, fight through screens, share the ball, rebound and so on and so forth, the other team, the sparring partner, will succumb to us. Our team decides whether it wins or loses based on what THEY do. Not what the other teams does.
But this is of course not so. Despite how we may get seduced into seeing things, the fact is that the other team is just as active an organism as ours. That team is working just as hard to impose its will on ours as we are on them. They are not some petrie dish experiment waiting to lose if we "just play our game."
And this leads me to a point. Remember two years ago when we lost to Boston so badly in the regular season and then the finals? What happened? The Lakers so clearly rededicated themselves to becoming mentally and physicall tougher. They redoubled their efforts to lot let that Celtic lose happen again. To be better than the year before. And they did it. They did it so well that they won the title.
So then, is it so hard to imagine other good teams, say Cleveland or Denver, to go through this same process that we went through last year?
Is it not possible that these very good teams, populated by proud, accomplished athletes said, "Not next year. No more losing to the Lakers again. No more failures next time."? Just as our own team did last year.
Perhaps when we say, "IF Kobe shot more," or "IF Kobe shot less," or "IF Pau was not so soft," or "IF Drew played better defense," or any of those myriad complaints we so often make after every loss, we are all just wrong. Maybe this team is playing just as good as its talent will allow. Maybe there are no big "IF's" on this team that can be the magic bullet that will allow us to repeat.
Mabye, just mabye, this team is playing as good as it can. Maybe, just maybe, there really is nothing all that wrong with this team. That there is nothing to fix or that can get fixed. Mabye, just maybe, the Lakers are the defending champions, a very good team, that this year is just not the best team in basketball. Maybe this year, this time around, no matter what the Lakers do, they just are not as good as couple of the other teams. Mabye this Laker team is fine, but just like all those other champions, just not good enough to repeat.
Am I saying in this post we are finished? Of course not. No team with Kobe Bryant, Pau Gasol, Lamar Odom, Andrew Bynum, Ron Artest and Phil Jackson can be counted out. There is still a half year and lots of basketball to be had. It would be no shock if we did indeed go on to win the championship.
What I am saying is that based on the history of repeating, looking at how our own team responded last year to its previous year of disappointment, and admitting that other teams can respond now exactly the same as we did, perhaps we do not have that inevitable claim on the title this year, "as long as we play like we can."
Maybe even doing that will not be enough this time around. Maybe there really is nothing wrong with this team. Maybe it's just not the best team in basketball this year.
|
|
Discuss 1 Review/Comment
|
|
Posted by: SPQR on Tuesday, February 02, 2010 - 01:04 PM
Lakers Blog
|
In view of our big win in Boston this week, I am taking a look back at one of the most painful memories Lakers fans have ever endured against their ancient and hated rival: The Boston Celtics.
There has always been frequent discussion about what a good, top flight coach can bring a team, and how far his influence can go. Over the years it has been my observations that a good coach is essential to maximizing a teams potential. A good coach can take a talented team and bring out its best, help them win a championship. A good coach cannot take an inferior team, even one slightly so, and beat a better one in a seven game series, as long as that other team also has a competent coach. I think Phil Jackson is one object lesson in that; witness his losses to Detroit and Boston, where he had good teams, but could not work some alchemy or magic and defeat two teams who were somewhat better and more solid and had competent coaches on their benches.
But what is the effect of a bad coach on a great team? Can he destroy great team’s chances of winning a title? I think the answer to that is yes. I have seen examples of this in many sports over the years.
Lets take a look at this phenomenon as it pertained to the championship series of 1969 when the two old rivals-Boston and Los Angeles hooked up for what proved to be the 7th and final time of their decade long fight for the NBA title. So if you will, let’s all take a step back in time and visit the unusual events that led up to one of most painful series in Lakers history and a specific, distinct moment in Lakers history that may indeed have changed the course of the two NBA’s powerhouse organizations and all those who participated in that moment.
By the time this 1969 finals came around, a die had been cast in the one sided series of title match ups between the two teams. And it did not favor the team from the left coast. Six times they had met for the brass ring and all six times the mighty Celtics had sent Jerry West, Elgin Baylor and the purple and gold home empty handed.
In the end, the deciding factor had always been Bill Russell. His rebounding and defense along with his crew of all star players just gave Boston that definitive edge that the greatness of West and Baylor could not overcome.
But was 69 just another case of the Celtics, with Russell, so strong, so powerful, once again putting the wood on the ‘fakers’ for Los Angeles?
The answer is no. This was the series the Lakers were supposed to win, when all the demons of Celtic championship losses past were to be exorcised from the body of the Lakers organization and balance brought back from evil to good in the NBA. But it didn’t happen. Instead the Celtics got to stick the long sharp knife in one more time in a goodbye present to their hapless rivals. And this time, the fabled Celtic luck seemed to be added and abetted by a fifth columnist, a wrench in the Lakers works. A man who helped Boston as much as Boston helped themselves. Who was this turncoat, this fool, this traitor? None other than the Lakers own coach: Butch Van Breda Kolf.
Going into the 68-69 season, LA finally felt they had the answer for Boston and Russell. Russell was old and had decided to retire after the season. Many of the stars of Celtics past were already gone: Bob Cousy was retired, as was KC Jones and Bill Sharman; Red Auerbach had retreated from coaching and was now ensconced in the front office and the great warrior, Russell himself, had taken the helm as player-coach of the team.
As the Celtic machine was running down, the Lakers decided to take the steps necessary to finally take their place on the mountain top. Owner Jack Kent Cooke brought over Wilt Chamberlain as the final piece of the puzzle, the anti Russell so to speak, to finally get us that long awaited ring. Teamed with Jerry West and Elgin Baylor, the talk of super team on the west coast was mentioned in all NBA circles.
Yet right off the bat, there were chinks, portents and presentiments that the super team perhaps would not achieve a fairy tale ending. The first was age. All of the Lakers big three were on the wrong end of 30 and both Baylor and West were now held hostage to ever increasing injuries that had begun to steal their effectiveness, like a slick guard who knows how to tap a ball away with subtle, almost invisible flick of his hand.
The other problem actually involved the relationship between the ‘savoir’-Wilt Chamberlain-and the Lakers coach, Butch Van Breda Kolff. When the trade for Wilt was announced, a reporter asked Breda Kolff if he anticipated any problems with Chamberlain; his reply was, “I can handle him.” Chamberlain upon hearing this quote thought, “You handle horses, you work with human beings.”
Van Brenda Kolff was an ex marine whose idea of coaching was My way or the highway. Right away he told Chamberlain he wanted him to play the high post to enable Baylor to drive into the lane unobstructed. Chamberlain balked at this, thinking while Baylor was great low post player, he was better, both a higher scorer and better rebounder than Elgin.
Chamberlain who was in his tenth year tried to discuss this situation with his coach, who was in his second year, but quickly found out there was no room for discussion with Van Breda Kolff. The coach told Chamberlain in no uncertain terms that players were to play and were not expected to have any input into coaching decisions or how the team was run.
On February 13 in Seattle, everything came to a head as player and coach almost came to blows after a game. By now a bad relationship had been formed between the two that would have a serious impact on the finals yet to come and rear its head at the exact wrong moment in history, when literally everything was on the line.
Chamberlain called a players only meeting to alleviate the tension on the team. Players were looking over their shoulders and sniping at each other. Wilt told the team that they needed to play through this, that it was obvious that the coach would not be back the next year and he didn’t want the team’s future poisoned by what Van Breda Kolff was doing now.
As the playoffs started, the super team seemed to finally realize its potential. After losing the first two games to San Francisco, it swept them out. They then destroyed Atlanta in five to reach the finals. In the east, the unexpected happened. Baltimore had been the power that year. Yet in the playoffs, they inexplicably lost to the Knicks, who then proceeded to get beat by the old, decrepit Celtics who had not been expected to reach other finals. Yet now once again, here they were facing their old whipping boys.
The Lakers continued to roll, taking the first game in LA by 2 and then the second game by 6 to take two games to none control of the series. It looked like a decade of agony was finally at an end.
The Celtics returned the favor back home in game three which set up the infamous game four of that series. The Lakers led 88-87 with fifteen seconds to go for the win and an insurmountable lead in the series. Wilt slapped a rebound to Elgin who then stepped out of bounds and Boston had one more chance with seven seconds left. Sam Jones slipped while shooting a desperation lunge shot that hit the front rim and bounced in for the win.
The Lakers trounced Boston back in LA 117-104 but West hurt his hamstring and this was a major factor in LA losing the sixth back in Boston 99-90.
Coming back to LA, Los Angeles was in a fever championship pitch. The series had shown that the Lakers were simply too good to lose at home. Owner Jack Kent Cooke was so excited about the impending victory over our hated rival that he installed thousands of balloons in the rafters to be released in the final second, while the USC marching band would come out and serenade the players and fans in style. It would be a victory party fitting a Hollywood scenario. It never happened. The balloons never fell, the band never played.
Wilt hit seven of eight and West finished with 42 points, but the rest of the team was cold shooting 20 percent for the game. In the third quarter the Lakers missed 15 straight shots and the Celtics jumped to a 17 point lead.
Finally the Lakers started to rally. The lead was cut to 9 with five minutes to go. At that point Wilt had 18 points and 27 rebounds. When he came down with number 27 he collided knees with another player and had to hobble off the court. The Laker trainer, Frank O’Neil quickly sprayed it with a substance that players called, “don’t hurt no more” and after a minute Wilt signaled Van Breda Kolff that he was ready to return. The Lakers had continued to cut into the lead with Wilt out and the coach told Wilt to stay out a bit longer. Twice more the Big Dipper signaled that he was ready to return. Finally Breda Kolff told him, simply, “We don’t need you.”
When the final buzzer sounded, the Celtics had prevailed by a razor thin 108-106 margin, giving them their 7th straight ring in 7 championship series with Los Angeles.
The final tally for the game for the two Laker centers: Wilt had 18 points on 7 of 8 shooting and 27 rebounds. Back up center Mel Counts, who Van Breda Kolff refused to pull out when Wilt was ready to go back in: 5 points on 4 for 13 shooting.
After the game, Earl Strom, who officiated said, “In a sense, I respect Butch for making one of the dumbest moves any coach has ever made. You just don’t try to win a title with Mel Counts when you have Wilt Chamberlain, but..he always was his own man and he would coach his own way.”
For the rest of his life, Chamberlain believed Van Breda Kolff’s animosity to him led him to risk sacrificing a championship to prove he could win it without Wilt.
For the Lakers, who had to endure losing to Boston, this time with the ‘better team’ the nightmare agony was complete. For Boston, this final surprise win over LA once again proved that no matter the circumstances, no matter who had the better team, they would always be the masters of the ‘fakers’ from west.
Was Van Breda Kolff correct in his decision? I would ask this, can one envision Pat Riley doing the same to Kareem or Magic in that same situation? Phil to MJ or Kobe? Sloan to Stockton or Malone? Pops to Duncan or Ginobilli? Something was terribly wrong here. It was the case a bad coach, who let his ego and private motivations get the better of him, to the detriment of his team, his organization and fans who lived and breathed Los Angeles basketball. It was a decision that just may have changed NBA history.
For coach Van Breda Kolff, his inevitable firing took place shortly thereafter. He made the rounds with other teams, always ending up a failure, always being deposed in short order. His career devolving into the typical, NBA journey man coach until he just faded away into oblivion.
For Wilt, West and super team Lakers, they had to wait a couple more years before potential was realized. Finally they won 69 games, then an NBA record, and took home that elusive ring against the New York Knicks. But for West, he never did taste the sweet droughts of wine that he could have against Boston back in 1969. As a player, he remains forever parched, a man living a quotidian desert nightmare of thirst, forever in search of championship win against his most hated and despised of rivals.
For Baylor it is even worse. His body betraying him, his knees unable to function, he finally retired a few games into the Lakers championship season. This great, great player was never to realize his championship aspirations against anyone, any team. This may be the bitterest and cruelest of the injustices perpetrated by coach Van Breda Kolff’s decision in those pivotal last few minutes of that game seven.
For the Celitcs, that improbable last triumph was truly was the end of the road. Without Russell, that great edge they enjoyed for all those years, the endless games and series was finally, irrevocably gone. They would reemerge as champions again under the aegis of Havlichek, Cowans, Bird and Garnett. But there would be no more real dynasties.
For the Lakers, it would take them 16 long years and yet another finals loss to Boston before they finally defeated the Celtics in the ultimate arena. It took a whole new generation of greats like Magic, Kareem, Worthy and Cooper to get a modicum of vengeance for both them, the long suffering fans of LA and the aging players like West and Baylor who lived through the worst of times against their rivals from the east coast. It was indeed fitting that the final LA win over Boston was the first time the Celtics lost a title on their hollowed home floor. West was so emotional; he could not attend those games nor continually watch the final, victorious game on tv. It just hurt too much, the memories just that strong in their unyielding pull on his psyche. For owner Jerry Buss, the feelings of the organization, their fans and players old and young, past and present was expressed with his champaign drenched statement, "We have erased the odious sentence in the english language, never again can it be said the Los Angeles Lakers haven't defeated the Boston Celtics in the NBA finals."
As you watched Buss and these new Lakers celebrate the exorcism of a sports demon unlike any a team had to rid if self of in any sport, if one squinted hard enough, you could almost see thousands of balloons dropping from the rafters, listen just right, almost hear those young kids- now so much older gown men- of a by gone generation playing that victory seranade in the USC marching band. If you shut your eyes, you could almost see a young vital, West, Wilt and Baylor with smiles on their lips, victory on their faces, the joy of having their personal and professional ghosts finally expiated, living a moment that should have been theirs so very long ago. If you shut your eyes and imagined it, you could almost see it. Almost.
And so the story ends and the question can be asked: can a coach, a bad one cost a team a championship? Can he literally change sports history and in doing so, contribute in no small measure pain and suffering for players, fans and the organization too? Can he cause damage that can never really, truly be undone? If you ask Wilt, West, Baylor, Jack Kent Cooke and the hundreds of thousands of Laker fans who lived through it, the answer would undoubtedly be yes.
|
|
Discuss
|
|
Posted by: SPQR on Thursday, January 28, 2010 - 09:51 AM
Lakers Blog
|
Ever since the day Andrew Bynum was drafted, through Kobe’s desire to have him traded, his two injuries and his play up to now, I don’t think there any subject has brought on more controversy here or more threads and posts. And here is another of same written by me.
It has almost become as contentious as a political debate between the left and right, dividing LTB into two camps, both equally sure they are correct in their evaluation of him and what his future will be and what we should do with him.
We know the pro and con arguments-Pro: He is doing great for his age; he is doing great for someone with his experience; he can be franchise player; he is limited in what he can show because he has to defer to Pau and Kobe. Con: He does not move well; he has already played five years and should be better; he does display heart or fire; he does rebound or play defense well. And on and on for both sides.
But the debate goes even deeper. More interesting are those who think Drew may indeed become a good player, but that we need to trade him and get other players who can help us now, who would make us a better team than one with Drew on it.
I am not going to dwell too much on those arguments. I used to jump into every Drew debate I found expressing my support for him and giving my reasons why. I think I made the points I wanted to make. Right now my good friend, Lakeshowsd, is carrying the standard for Drew’s proponents on LTB, using very good logic and factual arguments in a manner that is as well thought out as any person here, or anywhere else really, could possibly do. I applaud Steve for his insight and his position and agree with everything he says. In my view he is fighting the good fight not only for Drew, but the future of the Lakers as well.
Since Steve is doing such a great job, in my opinion, in defending our young center, I will only make a few of the same points he is hitting on out of pure necessity, but will mostly take this in a different direction, bring up some other things that have crossed my mind on this issue.
I sure that many of you came to this thread because of the title. Since there is obviously a very big Drew controversy, where did I get that title? It was given to me by the announcers of the Indiana Pacers last night. During the game, because of Drew’s fine performance and damage he was doing, the talk naturally turned to Andrew. One of the Pacers announcers said, “When Bynum was drafted by the Lakers, there was a lot of controversy about the move. Well I am sure there is no controversy anymore.”
Well, when he said that, I thought, “Dude, you obviously haven’t been to LTB lately!”
This comment was interesting in the fact that the Pacers have their own young center, Roy Hibbert, who they are very enamored with. Hibbert showed why they like him so much as he played very well and struck us for 21 points. But Drew clearly outplayed him in going for 27pts and 12boards. These are the kind of head to head match ups against his contemporaries that are incisive and honest sounding boards for Drew’s progress. It was obvious that had the Lakers wanted to milk Drew for all he was worth in the second half, he could have gone for 37pts or even more. Another comment that caught my attention was when the Pacers announcers were comparing the two they said Drew was lighter on his feet than Hibbert. This is high praise for the player who is much bigger and heavier than the smaller one. In watching that game last night, was there any doubt which of the two young prospects one would rather have on their team?
This outside view of Drew by the Pacer announcers and others not affiliated with the Lakers is telling. In the past few weeks I have heard high praise for Drew’s play and development from Mark Jackson, Hubie Brown, Earnie Johnson, Chris Webber, Kevin Mchale and Jeff Van Gundy among others. A few weeks ago I heard the San Antonio broadcasting team say, “Why on earth do some people in LA want to trade this guy? He is going to be a beast!”
So why does the look from the outside about Drew seem so different than the look from inside? Is it because they don’t see him enough to notice his flaws? Or is it because these ‘outsiders’ are more patient, more realistic in their evaluation of a 22 year old players progress and development? These analysts (former players, coaches and current announcers) have been around a long time and seen a lot of basketball, many players. The have certain bona fides in their outlook. I suspect in their case the reason is the latter.
I have been firmly in Drew’s corner since he first exploded two years ago. I don’t believe you can fake it when dominating games as Drew started doing back then and he is starting to do again. There are no smoke and mirrors in athletic competition.
In addressing this Drew ‘controversy’ I would point a few things out. If Drew had gone to college, this would be his rookie year. If this were his rookie year, who in this league would be the run away winner for the rookie of the year award? Our own Andrew Bynum. I would ask Drew’s critics: would you be happy with his play then, and would you not be ecstatic that we had drafted the rookie of the year? Would you not now be eagerly anticipating his future with the team? So why don’t you feel that way now? His chronological age is still the same. And in fact, his great play did not start at age 22 but really started at age 20. TWO YEARS before he would have finished college. It is not Drew’s fault that the last two years of his career were negated by injuries when he was taking off both times. What would Drew be like, right now, at the tender age of 22 had he not had two seasons erased? Two seasons where he was coming on like nobodies business.
Another thing to consider about Drew and college: He was recruited and committed to go to U Con. It’s where he would have played his college ball had he gone that route. That is one of the elite basketball programs in the country in one of the toughest conferences in American. The coach there, Jim Calhoun is not in the habit of giving a scarce scholarship to bad players. Does this mean Drew is a sure fire bet? Of course not. Even men like Calhoun make mistakes. But it shows you that others, once again outside of LA, had a very high opinion of what Drew is and what he would one day be. Does Drews progress at this point, what would be his rookie year in the NBA, seem to vindicate Calhoun’s and the other aforementioned basketball luminaries opinion of Drew. I think so.
Some critics will say that it does not matter that Drew is 22, that he would be a rookie this year. They say he has been in the league for five years and should be showing more.
To this I say- nonsense. Sports history shows over and over that it just doesn't work that way. You can’t change a person’s chronological age or what to expect from so young a player-whether he went to college or has been in the league. His years in the league would still be tantamount to his years in college. He would still be a rookie this year. His play should and would not really be any further advanced than it is now. In fact, one could say he would have been further advanced now had he gone to college. Why? For three reasons: He would have had much more extensive coaching. In college there is much more time to work on fundamentals. It is intensive, every day training and learning. The time constraints of the pro game just don’t allow that kind of work, even that he did with Kareem. Number two, he would have played right from the get go as a freshmen in college. He would have been among developmental contemporaries and not had to sit for two years like he did in the pros. This would have allowed him to work his game and expand it in real game situations. Three, unlike with the Lakers, he would have quickly become the focal point of U Con’s team. He would have been much more involved on both ends of the floor than he was and still is in Los Angeles. He would have been able to expand and grow his game because he would have been the best player on that team, the go to guy in every way.
To further rebut this argument about Drew I will say this: a person’s chronological age is more a deciding factor, both mentally and physically than anything else. And that’s something that you can’t change or rush. I will use two examples here from two different sports, first Kobe Bryant. Many of you are old enough to have seen Kobe and remember him at 22. His path to the pros was just like Andrew’s. No college experience to help him learn and grow as a player. At 22 anyone could see his obvious physical skills. A blind man could. But at that age, he was still so very raw, so incredibly wild on the court. He would throw up insane shots, he would frequently pull the team from it’s offence during his crazy solo forays. He would do things nobody wanted to see. I would ask those who discount Drew’s age: back then when Kobe did all those crazy, stupid things a player that age will tend to do, did you say, “Hey this guy has been in the league for four years. He hasn’t learned yet. We need to trade him?” If you did, are you glad now that we didn’t trade him? If you didn’t then why are you not extending the same courtesy to another 22 year old who has also lost two years to injury, something that didn’t happen to Kobe?
For the other example lets all turn to NFL football for a moment. The Chicago Bears a few years ago drafted a running back with their high first round pick. His name was Cedrick Benson. For you NFL fans out there, you know exactly who I am talking about. One of the best running backs in the league. Benson came to the Bears with very high expectations after a sensational college career. But because he was young, physically and mentally immature he had problems. Many that he brought about himself. He did not produce. After a couple years, the Bears decided to cut their losses and flat out cut him. Nobody wanted him. He finally managed a tryout with the Cincinnati Bengals. Somewhere along the line, Benson matured both physically and mentally. His tenure with Bengals has been the exact opposite of what happened with the Bears. He is now one of the elite running backs in the league. As with so many young players, it took him awhile to figure the game out, to become the player his skills and body would allow him to be. Now any team in football would kill to have him-including the Bears. Do I blame the Bears for cutting him? I can’t say I do. But if they had the chance to do it over again, to be more patient, would they? You bet your life they would. And one other thing I want to point out here, Benson’s performance with the Bears was NOTHING like what we are seeing with Drew. Benson was a total bust there. Had he showed what Drew is delivering now, they would have kept him.
I could fill this post all day with more examples like this, but you guys get my point.
So I would ask Drew’s critics, do you really want to trade a guy who is playing as well as Drew is now? Do you really want to risk seeing him become that rarest of NBA commodities, a franchise center, for some other team for the next 12 years? Do you really want to see him rip teams apart, including the Lakers, all the while saying, “Sh*t, we should have been more patient. We should have kept him.”? Not a pleasant scenario if it were to play out, is it? It would be an excruciatingly long decade to live with, would it not? Do you want to be the NBA’s Bears, but even to a much bigger degree? These are questions to give a lot of hard thought to.
I want to make one more point then of course I am sure LTB’s estimable members will weigh in with pros and cons.
Andrew is on a team right now that has two established stars: Kobe Bryant and Pau Gasol. Because of this, the focus on Drew, rightly or wrongly, is muted. He is not allowed to take the starring role or even a starring role. He is third in the pecking order. I would ask Drew’s critics this: Go through the roster of the other NBA teams. See on how many of those other teams, would Drew, at the callow age of 22, already be the main focus of their attack. On how many of those teams would he already be the go to guy, the guy they attack other teams with? And on those few teams where he would not be THE MAN yet, on which of those would he already be the second guy, the right hand man to the star? When you look at it, it’s quit a few isn’t it? That’s because those teams don’t have a Kobe Bryant and a Pau Gasol. Let me ask another question: On how many of those teams, if he went there right now, at 22 years of age, would he come in and relegate their starting centers to the bench forthwith? Pretty much all of them with a rare exception, right?
So given these facts, I would once again ask Drew’s critics, is this a guy who you really want to trade to another team? A guy who at this age would already mean so much to so many other teams in the league? And not just any player, but a center? That most valuable and rare of NBA commodities.
So to go back to the beginning, the title of this post, that remark made by the Pacer broadcasters: There is no controversy anymore.
For this observer and many others on LTB, there really hasn’t been one about Drew since he showed he could do two years ago. For other Laker fans and habitués of LTB, the controversy remains.
As with a 22 year old Kobe Bryant and the NFL’s Cedrick Benson, the questions about Drew will one day be finally, unequivocally ended. At that point we will all know who was on the right side of the controversy and who was in the wrong. Unlike so many difficult and muddy issues in life or politics, that is the nice, concrete thing about sports. Final answers are almost always assured.
|
|
Discuss
|
|
Posted by: SPQR on Friday, January 22, 2010 - 08:48 AM
Lakers Blog
|
Some quick thoughts on the Lakers second loss to Cleveland last night.
In diametric opposition to their first game, Pau and Drew got off to a good, effective, aggressive start this time around. And this was reflected in the early lead the Lakers took. It was a nice turnaround from the nervous, weak, tentative start our big guys had in the last game against the large lineup Cleveland puts on the floor.
The bad part was that as the game went on, Cleveland’s physical play and large lineup once again started to cause us trouble. It once again contributed in no small measure to their eventual success.
The Kobe vs Lebron showdown just about lived up the hype this time around. Both men did damage to the opposition. In this game, Lebron was just a bit better and it too played a large measure in their victory. It is apparent that the Lakers don’t really have anyone who can stop Lebron, not even strong bodied stopper Artest. As good as Ron is in this department, Lebron is just too big, to fast, too powerful and too great a player. As with Kobe, he just won’t be stopped by any one player. When he has a bad game, its because he had a bad game, not because someone threw a wrench in his works.
These types of match ups between the two acknowledge best players in the game will always reignite the debate about who is the best player. I guess my opinion is this: we see Kobe play out his miracles on a nightly basis. When we see this over and over again we think, “I know Lebron is great, but he can’t be this good.” Sometimes we don’t realize that at this same time, Cleveland fans are watching Lebron perform his own special brand of greatness every night for Cleveland, prompting those fans to think exactly the same thing about Lebron. Which one is greater? All I know is I would gladly have either one on my team.
So what does the Cleveland sweep mean in the larger picture? Well the fact that we were able to play them heads up this time around does alleviate some concern that they have our number like Boston showed two years ago in their two devastating victories over us a couple of seasons ago. But the fact that Mo Williams did not play last night and they still one is not a good thing. The fact that as the game went on, Cleveland’s size and physical play once again took its toll on us is also alarming. The fact that they have a player in Lebron who can do whatever he wants, whenever he wants is also a problem we have to deal with. The fact that they swept us is not a good sign.
If we meet them in the finals, can we emerge victorious? I think it is not unreasonable to say yes. I didn’t see anything in the game last night that definitively proved we would end up the losers in that series. By the same token, from what I have seen in the two games, it would not be an easy series if we were to win. This year, unlike last year, Cleveland seems to have some answers for us. Effective ones at that.
So in the end I would say that if we do play this squad in the finals, expect a much more gut wrenching, soul searching battle than we had to endure last year. To sum it up: Cleveland ain’t no Orlando.
|
|
Discuss
|
|
Posted by: SPQR on Saturday, January 16, 2010 - 02:54 PM
Lakers Blog
|
Last night the Lakers looked like a very good team avenging an earlier loss on a very mediocre and injured team. It was nice to see the team had taken that loss personally and with one of the more resounding beatings in memory took an ample drought of revenge against their cross-town rivals, and then some.
The Lakers showed brio and energy, hitting on all cylinders on both ends of the court. What I really liked was that for the first time in a long time, the twin towers concept was executed in the smartest, fundamental way. Pau actually did not leak into the lane, displacing Drew nearly as much as he has all year. This enabled our boy wonder to actually stay in his comfort zone and be effective instead of being reduced to a spectator. Pau also was shooting his jumper from his forward spot, with good effect instead of demanding time in the block. This is the only way these two guys will be able to coexist and play with synergy. This was how it was done last year before Drew was hurt and not how it was being done this year until Pau got hurt. Yes, it will most likely mean Pau’s numbers will slide to a degree. But I will take this slide and a more effective Drew in the post, than having Drew being relegated to insignificance. Because even with his numbers down, Pau will still have a great effect on the game. I would rather have both these guys doing damage than just one. As I watched Drew then Pau score, as they seemed to take turns hammering in shot after shot, unstoppable in their attack, I thought, “This is what was envisioned here.” I also thought, “The Clippers are not going to be able to take this all game long. They will break.” And they did. Any many teams will under that kind of attack from a very versatile, two headed monster.
Sometimes injuries can be a good thing, If it shows a team something they have forgotten. With Pau out, the Lakers got an object lesson in just how good Drew can be when he is used as he should. They got a refresher course in what he was doing last year. One can only hope that Pau, Kobe and Phil take this lesson given during Pau’s injury and the way the two played together last night and we don’t slide back to ‘Pau as center’ and Drew doing nothing at power forward outside the block.
It was nice to see Kobe looking spry and much more his usual self. The iron man of the NBA is, as we all expected, shaking off his back spasms and starting to like Kobe Bryant again. As for his broken finger? What broken finger? Lol
Now that revenge has been exacted in our hometown, it’s time to move onto more important games in very portentous week of play. The team has two huge red flag games coming fast: Orlando and Cleveland.
Orlando will come in here breathing fire and brimstone. They have no doubt circled and waited for this game for a year. To them, this game 6 of the NBA finals. The Lakers need to be ready because there can be no mistake that for Orlando, this is redemption time. If the Lakers stand tall and take Orlando’s measure onto another win, it will be a very large statement both to the Magic and league. A very important test for us.
But as interesting as that game is, it’s just an appetizer for the main course: Lebron, Shaq and the Cavs. I usually don’t put much stock in a single NBA regular season game, but there are exceptions and this is most definitely one of them. We all know what happened the first time we played on our own court. For me, it was the one game this year that set off warning alarms in my head. It was very reminiscent of our first regular season loss to Boston two years ago. They dominated us on both ends of the floor and made us look like a lower class team. They had an answer for us all the way through. This could have been just an off night for us. Or it could have indicated something more ominous. Two years ago Boston went on to prove in a second game repeat of their first victory that they had our number every which way. And those games turned out to precursors and previews of the finals demolition. And this rematch with Cleveland will go a long way to saying if this is the case with them this year or whether that first game was just an aberration. If the Lakers win, or even if they stay close, showing they can play Cleveland effectively even in a losing effort, then there is no cause for concern. But if Cleveland replicates that first easy win again, it will show to this observer that even though we may have a better team on paper, the particular chemistry in a head to head matchup between these two teams favors the Cavs. And if that ends up the case, it does not foreshadow a favorable result if we do meet for the Championship.
With all this being so, and Cleveland now playing the best ball in the east and seemingly improved from last year, this is one of those ‘playoff’ type games you sometimes have in the regular season. The implications of this game are huge for both teams, and I can say I have not looked forward to a regular season game with more excitement or trepidation since our first matchup last year with Boston. Make no mistake this is NOT just another regular season game against a good team.
Well guys, as Michael Buffer like to bellow out before a big fight, "LETS GET READY TO RUMBLE!!!" Are you guys ready to rumble? I am.
And speaking of a rumble, one last thought on the Clippers game. We have heard Charles Barkley repeatedly say over the years that NBA players really don’t want to fight. That when they jaw and posture, they are just selling wolf tickets. I agree with this. These guys aren’t boxers or real tough guys, just athletes plying the trade they know. But once in while there is that real deal. In life you see them; that person who can handle themselves, the one who not only will fight, but can fight. A person with the temperament and ability to hurt someone: A dangerous person. Watching Baron Davis lose his cool last night was something you don’t see too often. This guy was not just mouthing off while he conveniently knew nothing would come of it. The look in his eyes, the set of his face, the vibes coming off him all said this guy was ready and willing to fight and that he is person who knows how to fight. Derek Fisher, a very tough man, stood in there like you knew he would, but he had the look of someone who was not going to push this further or press Baron’s buttons anymore than they had been. You had the feeling Derek too could sense that Baron Davis is not one of those many players Charles Barkley talks about who can’t and won’t fight. I think he was very wise not to push Baron any further off the ledge than Davis already was. He strikes me as a man who can hurt someone. Not a man you want to mess with in a fight.
A couple more things: Kobe Bryant was named by Sports Illustrated as the Bball player of the decade. A good choice in my view, the only logical one. 4 NBA championships and the leading scorer of the decade. What more could one ask? The other starters on SI’s all deacade team: Lebron James, Tim Duncan, Shaq and Steve Nash. Phil got the obvious nod as head coach. Three Lakers on the all decade team including best player and coach. We are not doing too bad, are we?
Finally to something very serious. I know most of you have seen what is happening in Haiti and horrendous, explicit film and pictures and reporting of what is going on there. I know financial times are hard in this country and certainly must be affecting some of LTB’s habitués, but if you have anything to give, no matter how small, please find a reputable relief organization and do so. Even a dollar is something, because it adds up. 200,000 people donating a dollar comes to $200,000 dollars, and that is no small amount. It will be the best spent money you will part with all year. Please do it if you can. Thanks.
|
|
Discuss 1 Review/Comment
|
|
Posted by: SPQR on Wednesday, January 13, 2010 - 09:03 AM
Lakers Blog
|
Regarding the loss to San Antonio last night.
The final score was not representative of the game played. Yes San Antonio led from the first quarter on, but a very banged up Lakers team did make them earn it, closing within a few points in the fourth quarter to make them sweat and keep things interesting.
When one considers that our top two player didn't play the whole game (Pau) or was rendered ineffective and taken out of the game during its crucial time (Kobe) I guess its all you could ask for.
If you remove Duncan and Ginobelli from the Spurs and have them play a tough team on the road, its unlikely they would fare much better. That goes for any team fighting the same circumstances.
The other thing to consider is this: The Lakers top two players are not just 'their top two players.' With no disrespect to Drew, Artest and Lamar, Kobe and Pau are not just the top two players on the team, but exist on completely different tiers than their teamates. Kobe is a habitue of his own realm, shared only with Lebron James and perhaps Dwayne Wade. Pau is one of top players in the entire league. When you remove these guys, you are extracting the pistons from the Laker engine, some very special players, not just the 'top two players' as would be the case on many teams.
San Antonio played that game like a team who knew if they lost to a Kobeless and Pauless Lakers at home, their season would in essence be over. And had they lost, it would have been.
Some other thoughts on the game and the broadcast on NBA TV: The round table mentioned that once again the one thing that may prevent us from winning that game, and the title was our bench. This is no surprise. Had the bench played better, its possible that we could have won. But at this stage, can we really expect this? No. Once in a while they will catch lightening in a bottle and really come through, but in reality, nobody can expect this to happen with any regularity. They played as usual and its what we have to factor into any equation, in any game. Its all we can expect. Anything else is just a bonus and won't happen often.
They had a very nice interview with Cap on the show. For those fortunate ones who watched it, I am sure it was as great seeing him as it was for me. He talked about Drew, and his training of him. These were the salient thoughts he gave on his plan of attack in trying to bring the kid up to snuff to play in the NBA: He said he had to start with Drew from scratch. This was because he had no college and because of injury, in essence no HS experience to really learn from. He said he had to remake Drew because he was all bad habits from lack of any real coaching opportunity. He said he wanted to teach Drew to move his man off his spot and keep him moving. That way Drew had the advantage of his position and would not have to deal with someone who had it instead. He said he taught Drew to use his left hand, because Drew wanted to do EVERYTHING with his right. Kareem said he was pleased with Drews progress on the offensive end and he needed much more work yet on the defensive end. This of course is something that has been talked about many times on LTB and is something we all pretty much agree on.
It is interesting that whenever the Lakers are televised on the NBA channel, they seem to dwell on Drew alot with the round table of Chris Webber, Kevin Mchale and Ernie Johnson. I have seen the Lakers on this channel three times now and they always discuss him in detail both before the games and at halftime. They generally have only good things to say about him. It was also interesting to hear the Spurs announcers take on him, something different from the Laker announcers or those opinions we here on LTB, but actual thoughts from the 'enemy' if you will. The Spurs announcers were very enamoured and praised his play several times. At one point one of them said, "I can't believe the Lakers even consider trading this guy. He's going to be a beast." I have to say I agree with that assesment. Anyway, it was facinating to hear from the Spurs side on what they thought of him. They actually like him better than many Lakers fans, lol.
Noticed Phil was very hard on Lamar and Artest. He said Lamar has to step up with Pau and Kobe out. He said Artest is "'not doing anything well." It does bring to mind that old question, was the Artest for Trevor move the best for this particular team? I won't go into that here, but save it for another time, later in the year. I still think its a bit early to tell although I have my ideas on the matter as I am sure so many of you do.
As for the game tonight...well lets just say I am not expecting redemption of any kind for last night. We are in a situation we have seen before this year: playing a very good team in their arena, in the second of a back to back, after we have just recently blown that very same team out. You know Dallas wants to make just as strong a statement as we did at home. We all also know what has happened to LA in previous 'trap' games of this kind so far this year-nothing good, lol. When you throw in Pau not playing and Kobe being hobbled, well I have seen better situations to expect a victory in. But thats why they play the games so lets see what happens.
Finally a few words about a very bad image I saw last night and what it made me think:
Watching Kobe walk off, his finger bandaged, his back in agony, for the first time the words Kobe and old entered my mind and I did not like the feeling.
It brought to mind a story I read about Larry Bird after he had retired. He told of when he was in the league around his third year. He and Red Auerbach had played a match of tennis and were shooting the breeze about basketball and other players (wouldnt you like to have been a fly on the wall that day?). The talk turned to longevity and injuries. Red told Bird that after ten years, players bodies start to betray them. Too many years, too many miles and too much stress. They start to break down. Bird, in the flush of youth and a dominant game laughed and told Red that would not happen to him. But in the end it did. I thought about that conversation watching Kobe rendered unable to play by his own magnificent body.
Since Reds day, sports medicine, players attitudes about health and eating (candy lover Lamar excused, lol), and workout regimes have changed quit a bit-extending that ten mile warranty that Red talked about. But in the end, it only extends it a few years. The inevitable will happen to all players, Kobe included. Because of Kobes indomidable spirit, his energy and his drive for the game, it seems he has been young forever and will always remain so. But your head tells you he won't. On that night when his finger was wrapped like a mummy, and his back would hardly let him walk, much less play basketball, I felt for the first time that soft, chill wind of morality with him. It made me sad, and it made me scared. Because on the day that soft, chill wind becomes and unstoppable, bitter cold gust that sweeps him away from us, then just like with Magic Johnson before him, you will know that no matter what great players will someday inhabit the Purple and Gold, you will never see the likes of Kobe again.
There is no doubt Kobe will fight through the hand issue and the back spasms will fade. But watching this preview of him being old, this precursor, so to speak, really brings home what we have and what we will someday lose. Enjoy it now, savor every moment of greatness he displays, someday, and that someday is sooner rather than later, it will be gone forever.
|
|
Discuss
|
|
Posted by: SPQR on Monday, January 11, 2010 - 12:07 AM
Lakers Blog
|
Many times in the last two years I have written posts in the wake of another amazing game perpetrated by The Great Man-Kobe Bryant. And I have no doubt I will do so again many times in the future.
But tonight ain't one of them.
Instead it is a time to criticise him for the horrific display of ego and selfishness he exhibited tonight against Milwaukee.
Early in the game Drew and others showed how this win would be achieved. And yes, for a change, it would happen without Kobe being the leading man.
Yet, Kobe did all in his power to try and take defeat from the jaws of victory. On a night when Drew was showing the way, Kobe decided it just was not to be. Whether it was because Delpino got on his nerves in their exchange of words, or Kobe just started to freak out at the thought that for one lousy night without Pau, he didn't have to be the main cause of victory, Kobe let his ego plunge him to the depths of idiocy.
The second quarter was a black mark that one is hard to forget. Kobe completely took the team and Drew out of its successful concept and began to jack up increasingly obtuse and ridiculous shots.
Unlike Drew, who has been a lightening rod for criticism, Kobe has no legitimate excuses for his play. Oh yes, he has an excuse for poor shooting-his finger-but not his abject stupidity and egoism. This is the guy who it is said understands every nuance of the game. Yet tonight, he let himself be reduced to the mistakes a callow rookie would make. The only difference being a callow rookie probably would have made more shots.
Kobe, you have won four rings, have set uncountable scoring records, had more glory than any 5 men, yet for one lousy night, you couldn't just sit back and help facilitate the good that the team and Drew were accomplishing? Don't you realise we all know you are the star? Is your ego and selfishness that over bearing? For this night, you couldn't see and do the smart thing?
When people say Kobe is not as great as Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, Oscar Robertson, Lebron James, this is why. Because those men would never play so dumb, be so stupid as to sabatoge their own teams chances when things were going so very well. When the smooth road to victory was already mapped, excavated and paved and just had to be tread, Kobe decided that we needed a detour up the rocky road of his ego and insecurities....again.
How very stupid of this 'smart' player.
Am I being harsh given his past greatness? Perhaps, but there comes a time when stupidity-abject, total stupidity-has to be called what it is. Tonight was that time, when the limit was reached for me. What he did made me want to vomit. What more does he need to be happy, to let the others have some glory? Jesus. GIVE ME A BREAK.
Kobe, give your teamates a break.
The sad part is, with this guy, sitting on the bench smiling, watching his guys play better without him, he was no doubt thinking, "those lucky son of a bitches."
Kobe.......UGH!!!! Let me ask you something: What the hell is freaking wrong with you?? Just what the f*ck is your major mental malfunction?
Want to make a shout out to Drew. For the third str8 game he got a double/double Since Pau left.
It seems that some of his problems may in fact be due to a forward, Pau (who also fights for ever touch he can get with Mr. Bryant on the team) who leaks into the post to take Drews area for his own, and a very selfish shooting gaurd who refuses to subsume his own ego and utilize the kid as he should.
I will also go on record as saying if we do trade Drew for Bosh, in two years we will be lamenting that move in no uncertain terms. Is Bosh better now? Yes, but now is not always whats best. Will Bosh be better in two years, in four years, is the more important question. I am betting no, for right or wrong.
To the team, a very nice, tight played game and well desevered blowout. Congratulations on beating the Bucks and beating Kobe. You had to do both to get the win. Not an easy task.
To Kobe, go home and look at yourself in the mirror and tell yourself how great you are. Sickening.
|
|
Discuss
|
|
Posted by: SPQR on Friday, January 08, 2010 - 04:47 AM
Lakers Blog
|
So here we sit, defending champions, with another great record, with realistic expectations of doing the repeat thing. The team is strong and feared throughout the league. Yet it’s not always wine and roses. Sometimes nagging problems rear their ugly heads and end up as threads on LTB. We all know of them: Why is Drew suddenly slipping? How come the defense seems to disappear at times? Why is the bench so completely abysmal? Why do we lose to some mediocre teams? How can a team this good get blown out like it sometimes does?
And it leads one to ask, is there a way to be better? And if so, how?
But before we go into this, let’s see how this current Lakers team came to be constructed as it is. And to discuss this Lakers team on must start with the man who is the driving force behind it: Kobe Bryant. He is the most dominant player not only on the Lakers, but the entire league. His brilliance has not only overshadowed his team, but really the entire NBA. He has in essence trained us, not only Lakers fans, but his teammates, coaches and opponents to expect nothing but the extraordinary to come from him. And he has delivered in spades. Doesn’t it seem now that one can barely imagine the Lakers without him? Isn’t it hard to remember what the team was like before he ascended his incredible plateau? Doesn’t it seem like he will be here forever, that he has been here since the teams’ inception? So often we hear the line, “his teammates seem to just stand around waiting for him to do something.” Doesn’t that line really apply to all of us: his teammates, his fans, his coaches and the teams and players we face? We have been conditioned this way because we have seen this miracle man do his thing so long to such great effect we all expect nothing less now. Kobe has trained all of us to be this way through his pure greatness and performance for over a decade. Hasn’t he made us take him for our basketball savior through raw performance and achievement under any and all circumstances?
But how did it get this way? How did we all find ourselves in this spot? How did he become such an overwhelming, overweening presence on this team and organization? His talent? Oh yes, to be sure. But there were other circumstances at work as well. To see how this current version of the Lakers got this way, to understand how Kobe took over and trained us all in his special greatness, let’s all step back a few years and see how this evolution took place. How it was necessary.
Let’s break Kobe’s career down to three stages: The first, second and third acts. In the first act, he came to the Lakers and a child prodigy. His physical talent was obvious from the get go. And with his drive and desire, it did not take too awful long for him to start to translate this frightening talent into spectacular results. Once teamed with Shaq, they dynamic duo began to run roughshod over the league and it lead to the amazing 3peat championship years. During this time, the actual groundwork for Kobe’s rise to savior and dominant force was first laid and achieve early acceptance. On that particular team, only two men could be counted on to score with consistency- Shaq and Kobe. The other players on that team, while bringing their own particular talents to bear, where not really very effective or reliable scorers. So very early on, Kobe had carte blanche to take a leading role in putting in points, to taking a lion’s share of the shots, to getting us accustomed to his role as artistic basketball savant of the a very high nature. The groundwork for today’s Kobe and today’s Lakers, and what we all expect from him and his role on this current team was already being laid way back then.
It was in act two that final mortar and brick were locked in place in regard to what Kobe and Lakers would be during his tenure here. Shaq left, Fish took off for greener pastures and the other parts of 3Peat got old and faded away. During this time, by necessity, Kobe really took over and exploded. His performance with a team very bereft of talent was something only the smallest handful of the best players in NBA history may have hoped to duplicate. Kobe regularly scored in the 40’s and 50’s. He even reached the rarified heights of the 60’s and once the 80’s. It was performance art on a very lonely, virtuoso stage that no other player in the NBA at that time could even dream to match.
While the team languished, for Kobe’s personal statistics, it would be a bonanza. Scoring titles and jaw dropping games were de rigueur, not an exception. It was during this time that we all were all really and totally trained by the Great Man. He had to carry a poor team on his back and boy, carry it he did! Everyone watching him, playing with him, coaching him and going against him were conditioned like so many of Pavlov’s dogs. A great Kobe game? A victory. A 55 point effort? A win. Behind with two seconds left and Kobe takes the shot? Another Bryant miracle. It seemed like he had to reach into his reservoir on unending greatness to drag that team kicking and screaming to every win they could get. We were conditioned to accept that Kobe Bryant had to dominate for us to win. After a while, it seemed there could be no other way.
Finally we come to the third act. During this time the Lakers finally got Kobe the help he so wanted. Drew was drafted, Fish returned home, Pau was acquired, Ariza came and then Artest. Sasha and Farmer showed promise. The worm had finally turned. And what were the results of this? Two straight trips to the finals and a championship.
So now we come full circle back to the start of this post. Once again we are a top team. But there are hints of problems and dissatisfactions too. Why is Drew having problems? Why is the bench so bad? Why do Pau and now Artest throw out statements every so often saying they should see the ball some more? There can be no doubt those comments are aimed at Kobe. Why is the bench so bad?
When watching this team play, you see the ancillary players shooting like scared, flinching rabbits on opening day of small game season. They throw up some strange shots almost hoping they fall. Even an accomplished player like Artest has done it. You get the feeling that these guys think, “I better get something up because I won’t have too many chances.” You also have to think that they feel they HAVE to make the shots they do shoot even when they have a good look because they know if they don’t, it will get even worse for them. Not an optimum position for players to succeed in or feel comfortable with.
So here we are, defending champions with a great record but with some nagging problems that may or may not cost us another title. Because we are so successful it is natural to say, “Hey it’s worked this well. Let’s just keep it the same.” And because Kobe has trained us over the years to associate his scoring prowess and need to score with victory, it seems like the same, cozy, smart Lakers world we have always enjoyed with him. And actually this team mirrors the 3peat on in this way, Kobe has taken over the Shaq role, dominating the shots and ball while Pau has become his right hand. But this team is different in one big way: unlike 3peat, it has three other players who can all score-Drew, Lamar and Artest.
So a question comes up: might there actually be a better way than the one Kobe has trained us on? Is this team, which is now so different offensively from any other team Kobe has every played on in its collection of putative scorers really at its best with Bryant’s scoring in the high 20’s or 30’s. Is he old Bryant scoring game still the sine qua non to our success?
To look at this issue, lets for a moment open a parallel Lakers universe, ok? In this universe, everything is exactly the same. The only difference would be this: before training camp opened, before the team came together for the first time, Phil takes a ride to Kobe’s house and they have a nice chat. In this chat, Phil tells Kobe that this is a team unlike that which Kobe has played on before. That to maximize the talent on it, to bring everyone on board to the best of their ability, to make this team impossible to defend by its competitors, it needs to change. That Kobe needs to change. He tells Kobe he wants him to lower his scoring. Not by a little, but by a lot. He tells Kobe his average to optimize this team to its best potential should be between 18 and 22 points a game. In this universe, Kobe is very intrigued by this idea; he understands that by bring in all the collective offense talent on the squad, something really special may happen. He agrees with Phil’s suggestion whole heartedly. The two men shake hands with excitement, eager to see what type of fruit this new system, this new team may bear.
This of course would not Kobe in to that average every night. If our opponents made the fatal mistake of thinking Kobe was handcuffed, and sloughed off on the defensive end, covered him as though he were just any other player, he would have the green light to tear them apart. Something he would easily do facing a regular defensive effort. Also, when it came to that last second miracle finish that The Great Man has branded his own unique domain, who else would we want to take that shot? Of course it would be Kobe. It would all be a general guideline, dictated by events.
And what would happen with this type of team. If a real, honest, concerted effort was made to get the ball to Drew with consistency? To Pau? If Artest did not think he would be so limited in his chances? If the ancillary players knew they could better pick their spots, be more relaxed, because more chances would come their way? Would things be even better than now or worse? Who knows? But would it not be most interesting to watch this parallel universe Lakers and find out the answers?
As I said, things are going pretty good here right now. It is hard to imagine tinkering with things. But sometimes having great success can let you stay in a mode that precludes you from looking for achieving even better heights that could be attained. Perhaps this more diversified, inclusive team would not get blown out as often as this one does. Perhaps it would not have those inexplicable games where they lose to bad teams and everyone on the team seems to look at Kobe to bail us out. Perhaps it would be even better than this version.
Of course this universe will never be open to us. Even if in the back of Phil’s mind he may actually wish that scenario to happen, he knows better than anyone that Kobe would never allow it. Not in this real universe we live, not on the actual Lakers. If Phil did have that conversation with Kobe, two things would happen forthwith: Kobe would go batshit, either internally or overtly, and in about an hour Dr. Buss would get a call from his agent demanding a trade.
But do any of you wonder in back of your minds what type of team this would be if that parallel universe scenario did play out? Yes we have been trained by Kobe. The thought of him not averaging 28 or more points a game and us still winning seems inconceivable. Yet common sense does tell us that this team is so unlike any he had to carry in years past. That this team does have the offensive parts to be something we have never had before-a better team without Kobe having to dominate the scoring as conclusively as he has had to in the past. A team that might- and I say might- actually be better served by incorporating all its scoring parts and excluding more of Kobe’s.
Since I wrote the post I will not cop out by not saying what I think. To me it’s a fifty/fifty proposition. The idea of a Bryant averaging 18-22 points a game seems foreign and anathema to victory. I have been just as conditioned by him as any Lakers fan, teammate, coach or opponent. The idea of others taking those shots seems strange and almost frightening.
But on the other side of the fifty/fifty, I wonder, would Pau, Drew, Artest, Odom and the others do better if they knew their time, their opportunities would come with regularity? Would then not get even more effective with a steadier diet of action and chances to work their own offensive games? Would this perhaps carry over to other parts of their games as well? This feeling of being truly part of the whole team.
Since I do tend to be a person who is fascinated by change and ways to make things better, in the end, I think I would reject my conditioning by all the years of Kobe’s scoring brilliance, of his carrying us to victory, and opt to try the experiment. This team is indeed different in its offensive capabilities and weapons than any Kobe has been on before. I think I am curious enough to see what that different iteration would bring and make me want to jump to that parallel universe; at least for a year and see what that team would bring forth. I think with this particular team, with its parts, there is a chance- a real chance- that there is a better way.
|
|
Discuss
|
|
Posted by: SPQR on Saturday, January 02, 2010 - 04:31 AM
Lakers Blog
|
Watching 'killer' Kobe last night put another team (Sacramento) six foot under with no time left on the clock, it got me to thinking a bit.
I remember when one of the ultiimate NBA assassins once said (paraphrasing here but close): every player on every team wants to shoot all the time, but in the last minute of a close game, nobody does."
It was Birds way of saying how players of his and Kobes ilk were few and far between. Last nights game was just another object lesson in what it takes to be that cold blooded and confident. Kobe was more comfortable shooting a three point shot with no time left to flat out win the game than Udoka was standing at the charity stripe with a two point lead.
Being a movie buff was well as a sport fan, after the game I began to wonder which of the many decades of unforgetable movie characters the equally unforgetable Kobe Bryant would best be personified by? There have so many great, memorable cinematic villians and heros over the years. For us, Kobe would be the hero, for the rest of the leagues fans and teams, most assuredly one of all time great villians.
But for me, no matter what one sees him as-hero or villian-Kobe is above all one thing: a cold blooded killer of teams who has no conscience, no regrets and has pure ice water coursing through his veins. He simply destroys and takes what he wants and damn his reputation or the consequences of his violence.
For me, the personification of this type in film would be the ruthless, murderous killer and assassin William Munny portrayed by Clint Eastwood in the Oscar winning classic film: The Unforgiven.
He is man even his friends fear. He is a force of nature that can't be stopped or placated. He will utterly destroy any and all who cross his path or try to stop him. He is the best at what he does, and in Munny's case, as with Kobe, what he does best is just kill.
At the end of the movie, Munny has an inevitable showdown with another expert gunman, sheriff 'Little Bill' Dagget played by Gene Hackman.
In that end scene dialoge, Munny is exposed for all he is and was. Here are those lines:
Little Bill: "You be William Munny out of Missouri, killer of men, women and children."
William Munny: "I've killed men, women and children. I've killed just about everything that walked or crawled at one point or another and now I'm here to kill you Little Bill."
That conversation gave the essence of William Munny and what he was. What he was capable of doing, what he did to people in that milieu of the old west.
It could also be applied to what Kobe Bryant has done to his opponents who cross his path in his quest to dominate the NBA. The old west's Dagget could well be the NBA's Reggie Miller, Allen Iverson, Jason Kidd or Dwight Howard. The results, metaphorically at least are the same, just another notch on the gun of a very scary guy who killed as easy as other men breathed.
That is why my cimematic choice for Kobe Bryant would be that very character. Munny was killer of men and their dreams. Kobe is the same.
It would be interesting to see what choices other fans of Kobe's and LTB can come up with. I am sure you guys have plenty of great heros or villians who remind you of The Great Man who seems to be on his own planet while he wears the purple and gold.
As an aside. To those who love movies like I do, if you have not seen The Unforgiven, do yourself a favor and rent or buy it. It is one of the gritty, realisitic looking and sounding westerns ever made. It really is tour de force of american cinema featuring four of the great actors of our times: Clint Eastwood, Gene Hackman (who won an oscar for his performance), Morgan Freeman and Richard Harris all giving virtuoso performances working with great material inside a mesmerizing story. The best western and one of top ten movies I have ever seen.
|
|
Discuss
|
|
Posted by: SPQR on Thursday, December 31, 2009 - 04:09 PM
Lakers Blog
|
When I saw that article about the Lakers being "too talented" on here, it immediately caught my eye. I have seen many great teams in lots of sports over the years but rarely, if ever, a team that was "too talented."
That opinion brings back to mind an equally fallacious theory expounded about the 3peat Lakers years ago. Those of you old enough will remember it. It was an idea propagated and signed onto by many tv 'experts' when trying to explain why they 3peat teams had so much trouble blowing other teams out or holding down large leads: A lack of killer instinct.
I always found this idea kind of simplistic and nonsensical. But once it was thrown out there it gained respect and currency and eventually was pretty much taken as gospel by media members. The real fact was that the 3peat team had many rough, tough players with killer instincts: Shaq, Kobe, Horry, Fisher and Rick Fox to name some. The real problem they had in dominating and executing teams by a wide margin was they lacked a scoring punch to deliver the knockout blow. The only two guys on that team who could create their own shots and consistently score were Shaq and Kobe. For a few years Derek Fisher was a decent third scorer as he became better. Other than that, they had nobody.
Without the necessary firepower, as good as that team was, it was difficult for them to blow out or sustain large leads on opponents. Contrast that with the Showtime team that had a reputation for blowing teams out. Look at the names of the players on those teams who all could score: Magic, Kareem, Worthy, Wilkes, Mcadoo, Thompson, Scott, Nixon and even Cooper as he got better with time.
That 3peat did have a killer instinct and was tough as nails. Remember all those tough playoff series against Portland and Sacramento? We won them all. You don’t win those kinds of series without being mentally tough as nails or not having a killer instinct. That team had to overcome a lack of scoring punch to win those titles and it did. Three times. Lack of killer instinct? Hardly. Lack of scoring? Yes.
As an aside here, that teams flaw troubled me so much that after they won their first title, I wrote Mitch Kupchak a letter expressing my concern over their lack of scoring punch and how it might keep that team from accomplishing all it could in the future. He was a nice enough gentleman to hand write back a response. In the back of my mind, I can't help but wonder if that team would have been able to accomplish more had we been able to get a couple more good scorers to compliment Shaq and Kobe. So for those of you who considered sending a Mitch a letter in the past but decided he probably would not get it, let alone read it, that is not necessarily so.
Now looking at this team, lets dispel any theories about it being “too talented.” This is as much a canard as the old saw about the 3peat teams.
If you look at this team as a ship, it is of very unusual construct. It is powered by five very powerful, state of the art engines. Those being: Kobe, Pau, Artest, Drew and Odom. A very talented group to be sure.
When those engines are all running stoked and full steam, this ship sails very straight and very true. They can beat anyone and crush most. You begin to notice the problem when all the engines are not running smoothly: When like now, Drew is not playing well, when Lamar has his ‘off’ nights, when Artest is not playing because of his injury or Kobe is missing his shots. When like against Cleveland, Pau shys away from his best game. When two or more of these engines of destruction are not firing on all cylinders the Laker ship tends to list and sway, to not have balance.
Why is this?
It is not because we have too much talent, but just the opposite, we don’t have enough talent. And no, I don’t mean more star power. We have plenty of that. What I do mean is the smaller, “ballast” type players, for want of a better term. These are the ancillary players who kind of give the ship that extra weight, that proper ability to steer when the big engines are not running smoothly. They are the guys who can come in and give you ten or 12 points, get some hard rebounds, give you some nice assists and play a bit of shut down defense. The Lakers are striking in their paucity of this type of essential player.
Look at the players we have to use for ballast: Derek Fisher, Sasha, Jordan, Powell, Morrison, Mbenga and Walton.
When you look at a team, any team, one can ask yourself, who can you DEPEND on with consistency to keep the ship plowing forward, to provide ballast with real consistency? Let’s take an arbitrary but to me fair number to define consistency. I will use 4 out of 6 games. To me, any player who you can expect good contribution every 4 out of six games provides good ballast for the team ship. A player who does that is a steady, dependable player.
On the Lakers, who right now can we say provides this? Kobe for sure. Pau, yes. After that it becomes a bit more problematic. Artest? Yeah I guess I will give him the 4 of six though not in a spectacular way. Drew? He did at the beginning but certainly not close right now. Odom? Can’t say I will depend on him to deliver every 4 of six games. After the five big engines, anyone? The answer is no.
I hate to say this about Derek Fisher, who has been so great for so long, but he is terribly shot as a player. His defense is atrocious, his consistent shot long gone and he never was a great passer. Yes, he still is clutch and will no doubt hit his share of big shots the rest of the year, but these moments do not help overcome the hurt he causes this team night in and night out. Once in while he will throw back the hands of time and be what he was, but doing that once every 15 or 20 games is not helping this team. He says he wants to play for two more years yet. That thought makes me cringe.
How about the others? Can you count on any of them to provide consistency and ballast to the Laker ship of state 4 nights out of 6? The only one who is even coming close is Shannon Brown. Walton of course is out with injury.
So when you look at the problems we have had (and yes, 99.99 percent of the leagues team would love to have our ‘problems’) it is not because we have too much talent. It is because we have almost no talent at all after you get through our five big engines that drive this team. So consequently, when the five big engines are either out of action from injury, or not playing well for other reasons, this Lakers ship does not have the ancillary players to add balance and production to make up for the lost ballast. The ship starts to sway and lose direction.
It is an interesting dichotomy that a team can have so much talent in its first five best players and then such a horrendous dearth of talent down the line in its remaining roster. It is this dichotomy that provides us with that lack of ballast that can cause some of the rough, unequal play by our team and also produce some blowout losses that seem so inexplicable.
Like the 3peat team of a basketball generation ago, this Lakers team is an envy of the league, but like its predecessor it also has an odd flaw that will show itself from time to time and make people wonder what is wrong.
In wondering what is wrong, it is important to have the correct answer, not only for the fans, but more importantly for the front office in its effort to correct any problems that it reasonably can in the future.
Since immediate help will most likely not be forth coming, this team, like its previous 3peat iteration, will need to find the way to overcome this flaw and triumph come NBA playoffs and finals time.
The 3peat team and many others over the years have shown you don’t have to be perfect, or be bereft of flaws to win the championship.
In the end we will go just as far and fast as our big five state of the art engines drive us. There is no other way for the 2009-2010 Lakers to obtain or keep championship ballast.
|
|
Discuss
|
|
|
|
| Lakers Poll | |
[ Results |
Polls ]
Votes: 561
Comments: 0
Created by: JamFan
|
|
| | The current LTB time is 4:27 AM Pacific. |
|
| Showtime Allstars |
Top 15 Active Members by Reputation Voting:
|
|
| Top Posters |
The top 10 posters over the last 5 days:
|
|
| Link to Us | | To link to us, simply copy and paste the html code below on your webpage:
<a href=http://lakers.topbuzz.com/> Los Angeles Lakers</a> rumors, news & fan forum at Lakers Topbuzz!
|
|
|
