I think one thing most Lakers fans agree on is that the small forward position will be key for next year’s Lakers. Where the disagreement is exactly how to deal with that. But some think they have the answer.
On this blog, in Lakers forums all over the Internet, on talk radio, seemingly everywhere there is a fascination among some Lakers fans with bringing Ron Artest to the LA. And I don’t get it. I understand being unsure how well Odom will do as the small forward, it’s a legitimate question and concern.
But Ron Artest is not the answer.
Let me give you my thinking on this. And to start I’ll grant two points to the pro-Artest fans:
1) Artest is a better defender. He is. But not by as much as you think. Last year opposing threes guarded by Ron Artest shot 51.5% (eFG%) and had a PER of 16.4 — those are not great numbers. Odom spent far less time matched up against threes, but he held them to 45.5% and a PER of 14.6. I don’t think those numbers would bear out if Odom spent more time guarding threes, like I said I’ll grant Artest is a better defender. But the gap is not as big as most think, Odom’s length creates problems for opposing threes.
2) Artest is a better three point shooter. Artest shot 38% and 35% from three the last two years, Odom shot 29% and 27%. Artest would be better at stretching the defense in the half court. That said, Artest is not the three point shooter many think he is. Go look at Artest’s hot zone shot chart at NBA.com — Artest shot 47% from three from the top of the arc, but no higher than 30% anywhere else on the arc. He can shoot the three from “his spot” but is not a classic three-point shooter. (If you look at Odom’s Hot Zones chart you’ll see he was 11 of 22 on corner threes this season — if he works on that this offseason could he keep up that pace over more attempts?)
To me, there are far more negatives than positives with Artest.
1) He is a worse shooter than Odom. Last season, using traditional FG%, Odom shot 52% and Artest 45%. Use eFG% (to account for three point shooting) and Odom is still 5% higher. The reason is Artest takes a lot of jumpers (66% of his shots last year) while Odom gets to the rim (44% of Odom’s shots are jumpers). And, on all those jumpers, Artest shoots just 3% higher than Odom. Look again at Artest’s hot zones shooting chart — he is not a good midrange guy at all. Bottom line, Artest is like Iverson in that he takes a lot of shots to make his points, he is not an efficient scorer.
2) Artest is not someone who has played well inside an offensive system. There are things he does well, but what are the Lakers going to do when Artest decides he should just take his man (on the post or on the wing) and steps outside the offense? The Lakers offense was impressive last year because everyone played within the system. Do you really think Artest is going to do that for a season and playoffs, when that has not been his MO in the past?
3) Lamar Odom is a much better rebounder than Artest. I don’t think anyone would question this — last season Odom grabbed 15.6% of available rebounds when on the floor, Artest was at 8.6%. You can say that a healthy Bynum will soak up some of those, but for a team that wants to get out and run having control of the boards will be key. Odom led some of the best Laker breaks this year by grabbing the board and bringing the ball up himself, and we need more of that not less.
4) If you think Odom takes games off…. Artest is worse. Far worse. It is not a crunch time thing with him, it is a week at a time thing. He does not bring it every night. Ask Kings fans about this. And this brings us to….
5) So this is the veteran image you want in the locker room? The Lakers are still a young team, a team that by all reports bonded more last season than any Laker team has at least since the three-pete era, and maybe longer. And into that you do want to bring in a true wild card? Some will make the argument that Phil has dealt with these types of personalities before, he kept Rodman in check in Chicago. But he had Jordan ad Pippen and other veterans (plus Jack Haley) to keep him in line. Who in the Laker locker room is going to step up to Artest? Kobe, Fisher and……
The bottom line for me is that the slim advantages you gain from Artest in a couple areas are far outweighed in other areas. He has the chance of being a big problem, if you don’t think so look at his track record. Do you really want to take that risk?
I’m not sure Odom is the answer. I’m in the camp of keeping the roster largely intact, starting the year with Odom at the three and seeing how it works out. If it does not, see who is available at the trading deadline. Or, even let him walk and see if you can save the money (if someone like Ariza really steps up). Any of that is better than bringing in Ron Artest.
Have to agree. At one point last off season when the future did not look so bright I thouhgt it might have been worth the risk. But certainly not now.
Comment by ryan — July 5, 2008 @ 3:10 pm
Good post Kurt. Right on. Anyone who advocates this must not watch the Lakers, nor Artest. I actually think it’s a silly debate. There are too many ifs, and where we’re at right now, we don’t need ifs.
Comment by wondahbap — July 5, 2008 @ 3:15 pm
boy, luke walton’s hot zones chart is not a very happy picture.
Comment by the other Stephen — July 5, 2008 @ 3:16 pm
Well said, Kurt. I’d much rather the Lakers do absolutely nothing this summer than even glance at Artest.
Comment by weston — July 5, 2008 @ 3:29 pm
at last, bynum’s overdue return:
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/bynum-season-knee-2084686-foot-lakers
Comment by the other Stephen — July 5, 2008 @ 4:47 pm
Kurt,
This may be confused–but bear with me.
The case for Ron Artest is not about percentages–it is about perception. Ron is the alpha male who won’t back down. Ron is perceived as a lock down defender who can take out the other team’s shooter. He plays great position defense, plays great switching defense, makes key steals, and can intimidate opponents. On the offensive end, he can force his “man” to defend by making key shots. He often plays that role at the end of a game–very much like Kobe does. Artest does not back down and he never gives up. We’ve experienced that directly last year when he singlehandedly beat us.
Ron Artest specializes in stopping the best shooting guard or small forward of an opposing team while scoring himself. He should not be compared to the Lamar Odom of 2007-2008–especially the Lamar Odom who just found himself as a Laker last year playing power forward.
I’d like to overlook the “character” issues altogether, and concentrate on “contract” and “rotation” issues.
Ron is not a free agent. The Lakers must trade for him. Ron earns $7.4million on an expiring contract, but he would demand a contract extension. The Kings just signed Beno Udrih to a 5 year mid level exception, placing their projected budget for next year to $83 million (Luxury tax hell), with more to go. Sacto. would like expiring contracts and might want to unload longer term contracts with Ron. The only expiring contract the Lakers have is Lamar Odom at over $14 million–and Lamar may be the Lakers only defense against contract hell themselves next year. I can’t imagine any combination of possibilities that would please all parties.
A deeper problem is that the Lakers are considering a long term commitment to Trevor Ariza at the 3, so they may be wishing to “rent a vet” as a mentor–understanding that Trevor is to be “the man.” It is not clear the Ron Artest would like such a mentoring role It is more likely that Ron would want to be “the man.”
The truth is that the Lakers need for Trevor to become the starting 3 for 2009-2010-or they will have their own Luxury cap hell.
Unless something very bizarre happens, I don’t see any way for Ron to become a Laker this year (2008)–and next year (2009), we would hope to be able to say that our starting small forward is Trevor Ariza.
Comment by drrayeye — July 5, 2008 @ 6:05 pm
I have to say that I always cringe when Odom has two at the line late, but I still think that we have to give the line up of LO, Gasol, Bynum a shot before we go and mess up what everyone can agree was great chemistry. Especially considering that Artest is not exactly a “chemistry” guy.
Comment by Don W. — July 5, 2008 @ 6:13 pm
I go back and forth on this.
Artest would address three of the Lakers weaknesses - perimeter defense, outside shooting (to some degree), and toughness. But you never know with him and his behavior.
I guess it comes down to how the Lakers will use Odom. If they plan on playing him for 35-40 minutes at SF, I would say to take a chance on Artest. If they plan on using Lamar off the bench and /or in some kind of 3-way rotation with Gasol and Bynum (with some combination of Ariza/Vlad/Kobe/Luke at SF) then I think that Artest is not worth the risk.
Comment by exhelodrvr — July 5, 2008 @ 6:31 pm
Drrayeye, no doubt that for a game Artest can be an Alpha make who takes over a game, but he doesn’t do that nightly. He takes games, heck whole road trips, off. He is not the most focused player in the league. I’d rather dance with the devil I know, one who fits in on the team, than the devil I don’t.
But it is true, the contract thing makes Artest not a likely reality. I just wanted to address the perception.
Comment by Kurt — July 5, 2008 @ 6:53 pm
Kurt, 100% agree. Don’t tinker with the roster yet. It’s not as if the Lakers got beat in the first round. They got to the Finals in a year where they were not even expected to contend. They get a camp of a healthy Bynum, a healthy Ariza, Gasol, etc. They are not in the same boat as say Dallas or Phoenix. Both of those teams panicked and made trades they both secretly regret.
As for the Artest lovers, pop in the tape of infamous Motown Brawl and that’s all you need to know. That year Indiana was a legit Finals contender and he in one swoop destroyed that. That franchise has yet to recover from his chaos.
Comment by Smooth — July 5, 2008 @ 7:29 pm
On the subject of what the Lakers need: the team has enough 3 point shooters to space the floor. They need someone besides Kobe to go to the rack consistently. Even with Bynum in the post they need more penetration. Our best hope is for Jordan to provide this.
I also feel that the whole Lamar debate has gotten way out of hand. This has left no one talking about another key sub-plot for next year’s team: When does Farmar become the de facto starter? I love Fish to death but I think next year’s the year his minutes go way down. Derek will start the games if he’s healthy, but I think Jordan will wind up playing more minutes than Fish by the end of season.
Comment by Rob L. — July 5, 2008 @ 7:42 pm
Rob- I thought Jordan attacked the whole a lot more in year 1 than he did he did in year 2. I hope he doesn’t stay in love with the 3ball, and goes back to the tear-drop, and the drive and kick.
Kurt-I think there are only a handful of people I’d consider to start at the 3: Artest, Marion, Battier. After that, I just don’t see anyone that can bring more that what LO does.
Comment by kwame a. — July 5, 2008 @ 7:52 pm
I agree that we shouldn’t trade Odom. Still, I think we will do something about our forwards. My gut tells me Buss will have Mitch let Odom walk or have Mitch trade him for a late lottery pick. Either that, or the unlikely possibility that Luke Walton is traded.
Lets face it, us Laker fans, we’re spoiled. We want to see a move made just to see a move made. I bet if we had Artest we would be lobbying for Mitch to trade him for a player that brings intangibles to the table… sort of like… Odom.
I’m stickin’ with my idea… if Posey isn’t available for the right price, go for Najera. Najera is more versatile than Posey so he won’t steal too many minutes from our current players (say Trevor Ariza) plus he can knock down the 3 now.
Comment by anoni — July 5, 2008 @ 8:16 pm
Agree…don’t want to see Artest come within 300 miles of the Lakers except when he plays against us or the Clippers. I do think the Lakers can improve the SF position via free agency or a trade, but Artest is not the answer. He wouldn’t be the answer even if his numbers were significantly better than they have been the past couple seasons. He’s a cancer.
Comment by The Dude Abides — July 5, 2008 @ 8:24 pm
[paragraph deleted as it was a response to a now deleted comment of trade speculation]
Kurt,I agree w/you on just say no to Artest. There’s a running argument on Rocket boards about Artest. Too many people who want him haven’t watched him recently. If another player gets some baskets on him,Ron makes the game a 1-on-1 contest and will start jacking up wild shots. He dribbles and dribbles and dribbles… He is no spring chicken,he’s almost 30. As to his reputation,I found it suprising how poorly he did in both Defensive Player of Yr(16 players got more votes) and how little support he got from coaches on NBA DEfensive Team voting.
He has developed a bad case of “Wanting to be the Man”-itis. He wanted out of Indy because he didn’t want to be in O’Neal’s shadow,he now wants out of Sac because it’s becoming Martin’s team and we’re supposed to believe he’ll be happy being behind Kobe,Gasol,Bynum and even Fisher.
Joined with his “Man-itis” is his expressed belief that he deserves a max contract.Since no one is crazy enough to give him one,Ron will never be happy w/whatever he gets and that will eat away at him.
If you were going to get somebody from Sac,I’d go after Francisco Garcia. Tall SG who’s played some PG for them,good 3pt shooter and ave @20ppg in emergency starter duty.
In a what-if sort of way,the best SF that I could think of for the Lakers is Josh Howard. Defends,drives,shoots decently mid-range out,rebounds and passes.
Comment by Stephen — July 5, 2008 @ 8:30 pm
kwame a. - I agree that Jordan seemed to drive a bit more in year one. But there were times this year he did, and I thought he looked quicker and was showing less to the hoop than before to avoid as many blocks. He did fall in love with the 3. The whole team did. Hopefully he knows that isn’t his primary function in the triangle. He shouldn’t be creating space by jump shooting but by driving.
I have real hope that he’ll go down that road mainly because he looks like he’s having a ball every time he drives on a fast break.
Comment by Rob L. — July 5, 2008 @ 8:50 pm
It would be silly to trade Odom before we see what the team looks like together. Odom played really well with Gasol up until the Celtics series. One bad series is not a reason to trade a guy–especially one as versatile as Lamar. We know that he plays better when he doesn’t have a lot of pressure to score. Well, when Bynum comes back he can focus on rebounding, defense and passing and leave the bulk of the scoring to the other four starters who can put up big numbers. Yes, he may have some trouble gaurding 3’s, but much less than the over-reactors are saying. His best year as a pro was playing the 3 with the Heat and, if anything, he’s improved as a defender since then. The great thing about this year’s team is that we have no pressure to trade for the sake of trading. If a great deal comes along, go for it. If not, we can still win a championship with Lamar. Perhaps people are just running out of things to talk about in the off-season.
Comment by DMo — July 5, 2008 @ 8:51 pm
No way should they trade Odom for Artest. The only possible reason to bring in Artest would be that Sacramento accepted something like Walton and a signed and traded Turiaf (however doubtful that is). Even then, I’d prefer to keep Ron Ron on the second unit where his more assertive (read: independent, out of the system) offensive skills will fit better and he can play minutes down the stretch if his defense is needed. Then, he might be worth the gamble. Otherwise, try to sign Posey or live with Lamar at the three or coming off the bench as the first big. But to trade Lamar or ‘Lamar Odom’s expiring contract’ for a player ill suited for the triangle, with behavior issues (any person that mistreats their dogs is suspect in my book), and appears to be starting an early decline in his career, would be a terrible mistake. If Brown’s contract brought us PAU!, then Lamar’s can bring us something real sweet, especially considering all the teams trying to get under the cap for 2010.
But here’s hoping Lamar finds a place with this team and plays an important role in our winning the championship next season.
Comment by Nicholas — July 5, 2008 @ 8:57 pm
Hypothetical playing time/position: Lakers
Assuming all players come back, here’s a hypothetical Laker rotation/projection for next year. I have two units–future and veteran (numbers in parenthesis are minutes per game).
The Laker team of the future is:
PG Jordan Farmar (24)
SG Kobe Bryant (18)
SF Trevor Ariza (24)
PF Pau Gasol (18)
C Andrew Bynum (24)
We have a veteran “shadow team” consisting of
PG Derek Fisher (18)
SG Kobe Bryant (18)
SF Luke Walton (24)
PF Lamar Odom (24)
C Pau Gasol (18)
Others in the rotation include Sasha, VladRad, and Mihm
Adding in the entire rotation pattern, I might imagine the shadow team playing 24 and the future team playing 24–but with Kobe and Pau being replaced by a backup for at least 12 minutes drawn from either team. Kobe would always be replaced by Sasha (18), who might also back up Derek. Pau would be replaced by VladRad on the Future team (6). Andrew would be replaced by Mihm (6) on the Future team.
Kobe and Pau will average 36 minutes, Lamar, Trevor, Jordan, Luke, and Sasha will average 24, Derek will play 18, and Mihm, VladRad, will play 6.
Any PF could be replaced by Ronny. Any PF, SF, or PG could be replaced by Lamar.
The following players will be designated as 3 point shooters: Derek, Kobe, VladRad, Sasha, Jordan, Luke, Trevor
The following players are designated as offensive rebounders: Andrew, Pau, Lamar, Chris
What do you think?
Comment by drrayeye — July 5, 2008 @ 9:50 pm
What’s up with the Celtics’ interest in Maggette? Isn’t he kind of redundant with Paul Pierce?
Comment by anoni — July 5, 2008 @ 10:01 pm
I think the Lakers roster as is will be formidable next year but we do need an enforcer. I dont know if young Bynum can fill that roll but between him and Ariza i hope our defense wont be the sieve it was in the finals.
Having said that i wouldnt mind seeing the lakers get rid of Walton and Vlade. We have lots of mediocre talent that we could try to consolidate into a player that better serves our needs. [edited for trade speculation]
Comment by Omar — July 5, 2008 @ 11:02 pm
I agree with you Kurt that no dramatic fixes are needed though quick ones may still be worth the thought. Is there still no chance of having artest without giving lamar? I may be dreaming here but isn’t that still possible. If not, then we can surely use an improved version of what we have.
Still, I think we are overloaded at the SF position and we need another guard and more importantly, an enforcing big. If we can get a veteran then we are better off than last year. Bottomline, I think our bench needs toughening. This is where an artest for some bizarre reason coming to us for little cost can be good. But then, am not so high on this.
I am excited to see the triple tower treat but I also am with those who say lamar has to agree with D and SHOOTING. Our interior may get too crowded but that isn’t a bad thing if the bigs are as capable as our 3.
Go Lakers!
Comment by passerby — July 5, 2008 @ 11:16 pm
Any thoughts on Duhon to the Knicks? Not the perfect guy for D’Antoni, but maybe the best option available. And much better than Starbury.
Comment by Kurt — July 5, 2008 @ 11:17 pm
And by the way, still picking Nadal to beat Federer.
Comment by Kurt — July 5, 2008 @ 11:18 pm
drrayeye
No offense, but I don’t see how your rotation idea works. Many NBA players need minutes just to get comfortable. For one, Kobe Bryant will always want to play as many minutes as he can and will average somewhere in the 42 or so range. Here is another projection:
Starters:
PG: Derek Fisher - 28 minutes
SG: Kobe Bryant - 42 minutes
SF: Vladamir Radmonovic - 15 minutes
PF: Lamar Odom - 30 minutes
C: Pau Gasol - 30 minutes
Bench:
Jordan Farmar - 18 minutes
Sasha Vujacic - 18 minutes
Trevor Ariza - 15 minutes
Luke Walton - 8 minutes
Ronny Turiaf- 10 minutes
Andrew Bynum- 26 minutes
I think something like that would be more reasonable with Chris Mihm coming in only when a big man was injured, in bad conditioning, or for whatever reason at some point during back to backs. Joe Crawford, a third true point guard, and Colby Carl can ride the pine on the inactive list.
Another way for the above to change is if Farmar shows himself to be so good that he starts taking more and more minutes from Fish, but at least for this season, I don’t see that happening too often. Another factor would be Luke Walton showing if he can play better defense and thus prove he deserves to be on the court more. He is a good passer and knows the offense, but most likely Phil will keep him in for only short bursts so he doesn’t try to do too much. Also the more I think about it, Bynum rather than Odom should be on the bench at the start of the season. Odom has more experience than Bynum and while the young fella won’t like coming off the bench it could also drive him to keep working harder than ever before. Thoughts, comments?
Comment by Sid Singh — July 5, 2008 @ 11:43 pm
What are people’s thoughts on Sun Yue? Can he play? If we aquire him in, say, a years time, does that move Farmar into the starting line-up? This would allow Yue to take Farmar’s role of the change-of-pace point off the bench, considering his size/speed. Phil would certainly enjoy having this flexibility.
Comment by Anonymous — July 5, 2008 @ 11:46 pm
I agree with your overall assessment, but it’s not very fair to compare Odom’s and Artest’s shooting percentages and defensive PER. Odom was either a 2nd or 3rd wheel for his career, gets to shoot uncontested jumpers beyond 17 feet frequently, and rarely if ever shot a 3 under defensive pressure. Artest was usually a 1B scoring option to Bibby/O’Neal, takes a fair amount of ‘Kobe 3’s’ with someone guarding him closely and still shot better overall. What could his percentages be if he’s your 4th scoring option and gets to camp in the corner and play off Bynum and Gasol in the post? It’s like comparing Kobe’s percentages to Jason Kapono’s or Damon Jones when one gets to shoot open jumpers and the other is double teamed even without the ball…Kobe probably shoots 50% at 3’s if he’s wide open (Where’s synergy sports when you need it…). Artest also tends to guard the opposing team’s best defender where as Vladimir f’ing Radmanovic received the prize of guarding Paul Pierce in the finals
Comment by Goo — July 5, 2008 @ 11:48 pm
Kurt,
I understand that it took Nash to seal the deal for Duhon. Very good for D’Antoni. If he had to start the preseason with Marbury, he would have ended up in Bellevue.
Comment by drrayeye — July 5, 2008 @ 11:50 pm
I’m as puzzled as Kurt by the fascination with Artest as a Laker. I do confess to being intrigued by Corey Maggette, though. Is he a feasible pickup while retaining Odom? Would love to see Luke and Radman banished to the farthest end of the bench next year ….
Comment by Rick — July 6, 2008 @ 12:22 am
I imagine Boston is thinking of Maggette as 6th man, backing up both Allen and Pierce. Who else do they have?
Comment by Stephen — July 6, 2008 @ 12:42 am
Anonymous, there is a video clip of Sun Yue at the ‘Club Lakers’ link here. He looked good from the video both defensive and offensive moves. I have not seen him really play a game, we will need to wait for the Olympics for that..
Comment by sT — July 6, 2008 @ 12:48 am
I agree. Count me as one of the people that did not love the idea of Artest as a Laker especially right after the Finals.
Not that I don’t like Artest as a person, he seems genuinely like a nice dude, but his on court antics are a little sketchy for me to feel comfortable with him being a Lakers. I get that he’ll pose a “toughness” that everyone seems to think the Lakers are lacking, but at the same time, he’s not a solid team player, which was what this year’s Lakers was built on.
Artest is kinda like Radman - sketchy when unmotivated, but a threat when motivated … I mean, does anyone remember that game the Kings played against the Hornets (it was a crucial game for the Hornets to get #1 in the conference) when he claimed his thumb was injured so he couldn’t play, yet the Kings won without him … then the very next game against the Lakers, his thumb miraculously felt better and he played against us and they lost? It’s funny and exasperating, but that’s only because he’s on the Kings. If he pulled something like that with us, I think most of those advocators who wanted Artest would be made to look like jokes.
Comment by Peanut Butter Spread — July 6, 2008 @ 12:55 am
What I don’t like about Artest was what happened back in either the 2004-05 or 2005-06 season when he wanted to “take a break” from the Indiana Pacers to promote some no-name female R&B group.
That kind of “commitment” is not one that I would like on the Lakers especially because the team is still relatively young. For all of the people saying that Phil can handle an Artest or Rodman type of player should also realize that Phil had the Chicago Bulls which was a veteran ball club that could police themselves.
Ron Artest is a “feel good” solution because of the star power he has. Everyone must also remember the baggage that he brings.
Personally, I’d rather have James Posey if the Lakers were thinking of using their mid-level exception.
Comment by Melvin Mason — July 6, 2008 @ 2:58 am
drrayeye, if our guys are all healthy next year, then Luke and Vlad should only get minutes in garbage time, or if Trevor or Lamar get into foul trouble…plus, our third option at SF is Kobe, with Sasha at SG.
Comment by The Dude Abides — July 6, 2008 @ 3:26 am
23. is Starbury being bought out? If he is (which I assume he will be) what GM is dumb enough to pick him. I say Miami or maybe GS gets him/
Duhom is not perfect (I think he is just a backup in the league) but better than anyone they have now. D’antoni was hoping for the #1 pick so that he could get Rose. Would have fit his system perfectly.
Comment by ryan — July 6, 2008 @ 6:33 am
Last Fall, I said that I liked the Lakers team that we had. After two more trades, I couldn’t think of any other player I wanted at any position. Not that there aren’t desireable players “out there,” but I felt that they would unbalance the team. I still feel that way.
Going into the summer, the Lakers have already reassembled most of the team that almost won an NBA championship. Kobe and Pau will be playing in the Olympics, possibly against each other or against team China–where they will play against a future Laker.
The budget of the 2008-2009 Lakers will be higher–even though the players are the same–well into luxury tax hell. Adding anyone could easily effect negotiations downstream for key players, playing time, and team chemistry. On top of all of that, most deals for known free agents aren’t even possible, and even the simplest trades which seem straightforward can quickly become complex.
An acquisition of Posey for the mid level exception cannot be ignored, but it becomes more a curse than a blessing after 2009 for the Lakers–when new contracts for Andrew, Trevor, Jordan, and Lamar all happen at the same time.
Under this backdrop, be grateful that we have such a great team, but think 3 times before you even consider any change–then think again. It’s not impossible, but once you’ve found a sure thing, check the alignment of the stars. If it’s a trade, don’t tell anyone until the last moment or it probably will collapse.
Comment by drrayeye — July 6, 2008 @ 7:32 am
(34) The Dude Abides,
counting playoffs, there may be 100 games next year. Kobe needs more rest–’cause he’s playing more games. Everyone plays, one way or another. Some players not even in the rotation will get chances to start. The Lakers have deliberately chosen every player (except Lamar), and they’ve been chosen for a reason. Both Luke and Vlad are core players on long term salaries. I like and appreciate them as part of a truly balanced team. Change the chemistry, and you may get a lot less than you bargained for.
Comment by drrayeye — July 6, 2008 @ 7:48 am
For those who want Kobe to play 40-42min next year, I have a question. Do you want Kobe to play 3 more years or 6/7 more years? With all the mileage he has on his tires, Kobe needs to slow down a bit in the minutes. His conditioning is phenomenal, but none of us can completely turn back time and wear-and-tear. Were he to have played 4 yrs in college he would be 34 at this time. With Sasha and Ariza we have people who can give him some rest - let’s do it.
Comment by Craig W. — July 6, 2008 @ 8:50 am
well I keep saying it in response to these ridiculous trade odom for (a small forward) comments but if you trade him the Lakers interior becomes very thin. Ponder the following:
a) Odom has been our best rebounder. bynum may replace him in that but until this happens for a season, do you really want to chance it?
b) your front line is then bynum, gasol, turiaf (IF he resigns) and mihm. sorry folks but this scares me. Bynum ((if healthy) is a solid interior presence. Gasol has his moments inside. I know we all love Ronny’s energy but he is NOT a good rebounder (check the numbers). And can we really rely on Mihm for substantial minutes?
c) you add new small forward to our pre-existing 3 - ariza, walton, and vlad. Ariza may fill the need, but we have to wait and see. and in Luke and Vlad you have two guys with with contracts that one would be hard pressed to trade for and that you would have a hard time throwing down at the end of the bench. I think Vlad, though far from perfect filled his role on offense fairly well; come in score 8-10 points quickly in Q1, disappear rest of game. Walton may be the weakest link, but even he had a great series against Denver. so how do you divide the time with new small forward? (and don’t say trade one of the aforementioned 3 because it isn’t going to happen)
just to reiterate what MOST of you have said, we shouldn’t approximate moves based on what happened against Boston. They were the only team that beat us in the playoffs. Also if you take that short sighted approach of changing your roster for one team, well look happened with Phoenix, and they still couldn’t beat the Spurs.
Comment by Bingo T. Klown — July 6, 2008 @ 9:00 am
we really should give our lineup a shot unless something stupendeous presents itself.
and honestly, after the confidence our team must have gained getting to the finals, and their realization that THEY could’ve been the difference between losing and winning, i really think our stars deserve a summer to prove themselves.
…
anyway, i actually saw Jordan Farmar in Korea. Shorter than i thought
He was here to promote EA NBA madness or something like that, along with the Mavericks’ cheerleaders.
Comment by harold — July 6, 2008 @ 9:15 am
26 and 31. Sun is still raw… he has got just 2 good seasons at the Asian league and it’s not even one of the top leagues in the world. I like him, a lot, but he needs loads and loads of work on him.
As I said in a previous comment in an other post here, Sun and Coby will make an exciting couple for the Defenders.
Comment by Xavier — July 6, 2008 @ 9:23 am
@Bingo: You nailed it. We have a great team and will make a run at it again. Being in the West ill affords us room to make a mistake on chemistry or future signings. Mitch more than made up for the acquisition of Kwame with Gasol so I say let’s roll with what we got. Remember we didn’t do what a lot of people were saying to do last summer (trade Kobe) and we turned out alright I would say.
Comment by Don W. — July 6, 2008 @ 9:25 am
It’s a long , long season and every player will be needed.Starters and older veterans should be played only long enough to win. That’s the upside to having a great bench.Keep them fresh for the playoffs.
Comment by magiclover — July 6, 2008 @ 9:32 am
Sid (25),
Your numbers are pretty good, but we make different assumptions. I’ll try to compare and explain mine.
How can you have Pau Gasol play center for 30 minutes, and Andrew play center for 26? There are only 42 minutes in a game.
Why on earth would you want to increase Kobe’s playing time per game? I’d like to reduce playing time per game for our stars. Maybe they can get us ahead enough so they don’t need to play the 4th quarter?
Pau Gasol is not a center. The Lakers traded for Pau Gasol as a power forward. That’s his natural position. The idea is to have Pau and Andrew playing together.
My idea is to transition a bit from our success last year by allowing Pau to play a bit of center, since he’s played both positions at Memphis before. This then allows Lamar to play the power forward like he did last year. Mihm (or some backup center) needs to play center regularly.
I don’t see Vlad at the small forward next year. I see him at the power forward backing up Pau. His minutes may be low statistically, but he may play much longer minutes some nights. I see Ariza as the small forward, backed up by Luke (or vice versa, if you wish). As you notice, I don’t see Lamar at the small forward position, though he might switch over under certain conditions. His 3 point shooting last year was worst on the team; his rebounding was best. I do envision Lamar occasionally playing at point guard in his old role, getting our three towers on court together.
Comment by drrayeye — July 6, 2008 @ 10:17 am
I have mixed feelings re Odom v. Artest, so I am going to play devil’s advocate to Kurt.
I agree with much of what Kurt said. In particular, I agree that Artest is likely to often take games/weeks off, play outside the offense, and threaten cohesion off the court. For these reasons, I think Odom is worth far more wins over the course of 82 regular season games than Artest. With Odom we have demonstrated cohesion and unity, on and off the court. Last year’s team (largely) played as one, and was thus more than the sum of their parts, especially during the blitz from Gasol’s acquisition through the Western Conference Finals. I have no doubt that even if Odom isn’t the ideal 3, the team would have enough talent to overpower most teams and roll through the regular season in impressive fashion — something like 60-65 wins.
With Artest, it would feel choppier and the team would be more prone to prolonged funks. But I’m still tempted by it. After what happened in the finals, I wonder if the current LA team is another shade of the Webber-Bibby Kings, or Nash-Dirk Mavs, or Nash Suns. A team that has remarkable chemistry and rolls through the regular season but ultimately falls short because of some fatal flaw and/or lack of toughness. Remember, during the Shaq-Kobe title runs, the Lakers almost always won far less games than other Western powers (those listed above), as they had a hard time playing as one, but they always had another gear and were able to unite during the playoffs to defeat the prettier, smoother teams.
I’m not sure what type of team we have now. And while I’d rather have Odom over 82 regular season games, when I honestly ask who I’d want in a 7 game series against Boston or San Antonio (with a healthy Ginobili), I have to answer Artest. I could be wrong, but I just believe that when focused in these do or die series, he would be more successful defending the Ginobili/Pierce types and less prone to be totally neutralized offensively (you can’t just sag off Artest 5 feet and take away his left hand like Garnett did to Odom).
A few other statistical notes:
Odom shot 52.5% last year, but that was a clear aberration, fueled largely by playing PF next to the brilliantly passing Gasol; he is a career 46% shooter and will be stuck on the perimeter much more next year, without the clear path to cut to the rim like he did constantly post-Gasol. I do not think he is a more efficient scorer than Artest, especially as a SF. Odom struggles mightily as a 3. They’ve tried to put him at his “natural” SF position numerous times to open the season and it always fails. He just isn’t an effective SF, at least not in our offense. His PER as a SF the last few years has been been markedly lower than as a PF. Last season, he had a 19.4 PER (56% eFG) as a PF and a 10.5 PER as a SF (38% eFG). He just doesn’t have the offensive skills to succeed on the perimeter in the triangle. He is what he is. He’s had summers to work on that 3 point shot and find ways to diversify his offensive game — it hasn’t happened. We shouldn’t expect that it will happen.
Artest’s PER at SF has been over 20 the last two seasons. His outside shot is improving and is more accurate than Odom’s. He is a capable passer. He can drive left or right, post up, and hit the perimeter shot with enough accuracy to force team’s to play honest (whereas Odom encouraged Garnett to play free safety and jam up the triangle’s spacing). He has a much more diversified set of offensive skills and would give LA another perimeter scorer to create offense besides Kobe, whether in the pick and roll or isolation. LA sorely needed that at times against Boston.
Artest’s defensive numbers are misleading in that he has had to play with no defensive support behind him on the Kings, who have had one of the worst defensive front lines in basketball and no shotblocking. The last time Artest had a true defensive presence in the paint behind him, in Indiana, he held SF’s to an incredible 12.7 PER allowed. I suspect that if he had Bynum and Gasol behind him here, his defensive numbers would improve.
So, Artest just fits better on both ends of the court next to Bynum and Gasol. I love Odom as a player and person, but think we are being overoptimistic in thinking he can refine his game to be an effective 3 in our system. He’s certainly good enough for us to overpower most teams and roll through the regular season, especially with his versatility and ability to play a lot of backup 4. But our season’s success is not going to be determined by how many regular season wins we have — it will be on whether we can beat SA, Boston, Detroit, Utah, and so forth. As wonderful and multi-talented as Odom is, I just think he is what he is, and he is definitely not an effective SF. Artest is, despite his sometimes destructive tendencies. It might be worth living through those issues for 82 games to have him during 7.
That’s my devil’s advocate case for Artest. I still lean towards keeping Odom and giving the team a chance to work out any kinks, but I admit being tempted by Ron and that I would feel more comfortable going to battle with him against the elite contenders — not throughout a long season, but definitely during a brutal 7 game series against a SA or Boston.
Comment by Reed — July 6, 2008 @ 11:45 am
Reed,
One thing about your comparison of the Lakers to the Suns and Dallas. The Suns were never able to even reach the finals and the Mavs got there and got an advantage, but fell apart when the refs started pushing the whistle and Dirk had to come up big. The Lakers got to the finals, but they were clearly not the better team this year and Kobe is known as a clutch player.
I think we should all agree the Celtics were clearly the best team last year - and on a real mission, to boot. The Lakers were a team many ‘talking heads’ didn’t expect would make the playoffs and a very young team. Now that the players not only have more confidence in themselves, but know what real pressure is, there is every reason to expect significant growth and more veteran savvy from these same players. That is the change we will see in next year’s Lakers, not by breaking up the club and adding ‘heavy’ to the mix.
Comment by Craig W. — July 6, 2008 @ 12:22 pm
Now that was a championship. Kurt, you were right about Nadal, but what a match.
Comment by Craig W. — July 6, 2008 @ 1:17 pm
I know. I’m still completely shocked that someone beat Federer at Wimbledon, but we Nadal has been playing so well. Um, I hope this inspires Pau to win his own championship!!
Comment by Emma — July 6, 2008 @ 1:25 pm
I can honestly say that there really isn’t an easy or simple answer to this. In almost every way I agree with both Reed and Kurt. Artest’s and Odom’s faults are clear and definable, impacting the team in ways that aren’t difficult to foreshadow. Their strengths are also easily defined and are very good assets to have on any team, and when considering how those strengths would help us, it’s easy to envision both of them providing qualities that help us win.
This is why, while I’m an advocate for Artest as a player (while still recognizing all his faults) I’ve never wanted a clean trade off of Odom for Artest. I think both provide so much (while still providing frustrations) that I can’t easily say that either would be the ultimate problem or the final solution. That’s why if we were really to try and aquire Ron, I would want to do it without giving up Odom. And ultimately I don’t think it’s possible to do it that way, so I don’t know what else to add. I’m not going to conjure up some crazy trade that works on a trade machine and act like it could actually happen. So, what’s the point really?
Ultimately, I still think we need to see how this team plays next season, the way that it is. But, we must also consider how the rest of the off-season plays out and that will take time and patience. Sasha and Turiaf returning are not a given. Mitch signing a FA or making a trade is not out of the question. While it’s great to debate the merits of current players on the roster or speculate how an addition to the team may fit, nothing has actually happened yet. So, in the meantime, I just wait…which isn’t such a bad thing really. We were just in the Finals. In off-seasons past, I was a guy so concerned with how we’d get to the playoffs at all or how we’d get out of the first round. Now we’re talking how do we win a title. Things have changed for the ultimate better, and for that alone, I’m happy.
Comment by Darius — July 6, 2008 @ 1:26 pm
45- Reed
I agree entirely with your analysis about Artest and Odom. Artest can potentially be better in a series, but for an entire season obtaining Artest is a risky move. Let’s hope Lamar takes the loss this season and wants to improve instead of being content. It’s his contract season so I’m sure he’s going to be working hard to get a contract if not from the Lakers than from someone else…that’s something that has been failed to be mentioned.
Comment by Travis Y. — July 6, 2008 @ 2:03 pm
Kurt,
I’m tapped out of the Lamar discussion. I’m seeing 7’s in my sleep.
Comment by wondahbap — July 6, 2008 @ 2:24 pm
Emma,
We sure hope so. It can be done. If Nadal can beat Federer on grass, then Pau can consistantly take it to Kendrick Perkins. First the World Cup, then this. Spain’s on fire. Why did our Spaniard flame out?
Also, I think this year actually makes the case for Federer and Nadal’s greatness stronger. Roger wins everything but the French for years because Nadal is one of, if not the best clay court specialists ever, and when Roger finally loses HIS tournament, it’s to Nadal who is increasingly comin into his own as a GREAT player, period, not just on clay. Call me wierd, but I think this actually helps Roger’s legacy. Now, if he can beat Nadal on clay…….then……….
Comment by wondahbap — July 6, 2008 @ 2:30 pm
48- I hope by “championship” you don’t mean “gold medal”. Anyone else itching for the olympics?
Comment by DMo — July 6, 2008 @ 2:58 pm
OT: Nadal-Federer was the best Wimbledon match I’ve seen since 1980 McEnroe-Borg. Truly scintillating tennis. I think Roger was a little stubborn by playing at the baseline too much, although Rafa did hit some unbelievable passing shots. One thing that Roger never seemed to notice was that Rafa rarely passed him cleanly down the line whenever Roger’s approach shot was cross court. Every time Roger was passed after hitting a crosscourt approach shot, Rafa’s pass was crosscourt. Changing the line of approach on a passing shot is the toughest shot to hit in tennis, especially if the approach shot is cross court. Even when Roger hit his approach up the line, most of the time Rafa’s pass went right back down that same line.
I was pulling for Roger, and this drove me crazy. He only won one out of his 13 break points. Most of these took place in the ad court, and Rafa would get him in a Nadal forehand to Federer backhand baseline rally every time. Some of these points were on second serves, and Roger could have tried chipping the return down the line and charging the net, but never did. An approach shot that stays low is a more effective shot on grass against Nadal, who absolutely crushes everything thigh high and above.
Comment by The Dude Abides — July 6, 2008 @ 3:07 pm
Whenever a team loses in the Playoffs,there’s an immediate reaction and that the losers feel they must “fix” whatever let the other team win.(Much like armies are said to prepare for the last war.) “Fixing” the Lakers so they can beat the Celtics is fine-but what if the Celts aren’t the opponent ? Focusing on the specific team and not the general weaknesses exposed leads to bad decision making. For example the Lakers lost a series to the Suns and Radmanovic had a great series against them,so let’s sign him to a MLE and now we have our Suns-killer.
I think most here would agree Laker weaknesses during the Playoff run were:
Lack of interior defensive presence-both individual and team help,as well as rebounding
Perimeter defense-whether on pck/rolls,preventing penetration or being able to slow down a hot shooter
Consistant scoring off the bench
Overall offensive execution
Mental toughness-not neccesarily physical toughness,but the mindset that refuses to allow another team to impose its’ will.
Looking at the Lakers roster as is,I-and prob the team-believe a healthy Bynum will go far for fixing the interior defensive presence problem. His swatting away a couple of shots early will help the perimeter D as other players will no longer feel they have an open lane to drive. Bynum being the main interior defender will allow Gasol-and his celebrated length-to be potent weak-side shot-blocker.
W/the integration of Ariza into the offense,he will get far more minutes,proving a perimeter defender.(In the Triangle he will usually set up in the baseline corner. Even if he can’t shoot from distance,if his man sags off,Ariza should cut hard to basket where Gasol will reward him and Ariza can finish strong.) We don’t know how much Fishers’ injury hurt him of defense,but if he’s healthy he gives the Lakers the strength to fight thru screens. But I would expect Laker perimeter D,esp screen/roll,to continue to be a weakness as Phil will prob spend most of camp and Pre-Season integrating Ariza,Bynum and Gasol into the Triangle and working out Lamar’s best fit. Next yr will be when Phil and staff concentrate on D.(Benefit of being cap-locked into current team for next couple of yrs.)
The Lakers bench is young and that tends towards inconsistancy,plus there’s no one on the bench who can get their own shot at any time. So they have to score out of the system,or off fast breaks. Once the Season starts,the bench should have it’s roles set and the focus on getting Ariza and Gasol integrated into Triangle should have a trickle down effect. I also imagine there will be couple shifts of Bynum/Lamar w/second unit to help get them running.
If Gasol becomes the “Initiator” out of the High Post,the rest of the team snaps into place on offense. Fisher/Farmer/Sasha at top of 3pt line as outlet 3s and fast break defenders. Bynum/Turaif on weakside for backdoors,screens for Kobe to continue thru and curl off of and,most importantly,crashing the boards. Kobe on the wing w/a multitude of options and free to focus on scoring and D. Lamar/Ariza in corner for quick cuts to basket or Rad/Luke/Sasha there for 3pt shooting.
The time spent in Pre-Season will result in a much more efficient offense and one w/far more player movement.
The mental toughness of the team will hopefully be improve by last yrs experience,increased confidence from better offensive execution and the good chance of a very successful Regular Season.(Instead of drama from last yr-Kobe,Bynum down,Gasol trade,etc,the team should go into season optimistic and w/increased success should grow increased confidence.) Further,Bynum seems to be pretty mentally tough and his presence will help immeasureably in that department.
The Laker Organization can feel pretty confident that the weaknesses that were exposed last yr can be remedied for the most part by players already on their roster.
Thanks for putting up w/my long-winded post. I just see so much right w/the Lakers-darn it!-that I wanted to express them. The personnel shortcomings I see are a third PG-either to groom for future or vet for when Farmar struggles and a reserve SG who can fill it up in a hurry can be fixed by Gasol running the O from High Post well enough for Phil to bite bullet and make Sasha the starting PG and the Triangle being run effeciently by second unit.
Comment by Stephen — July 6, 2008 @ 3:10 pm
Kurt,
Sactown Royalty has taken on your “challenge,” and the preponderance of opinion there is along the lines of Reed’s “devil’s advocate” post. They think that Ron’s defense would make a huge difference for the Lakers–and they give specific examples of how and why.
They would not be surprized to see the Lakers come knocking sooner or later.
Comment by drrayeye — July 6, 2008 @ 4:23 pm
53. I’m not usually taking my patriotism for a walk but… we are rocking the sports world. Basketball, Soccer, Tennis, Fernando Alonso was a two-time F1 champion 2 years ago, Handball and (grass) Hockey… It feels good for out sport.
Trying my best to be un-biassed, I’m still rooting for Spain at the olympics although this year USA team really scares me.
For the record, since Pau Gasol trade spanish media have been sooooo anoying. The headers after a Laker win is something like “Pau Gasol leads the Lakers to another win” when maybe Kobe and Lamar both had bigger games. But is something I’m willing to live with.
Comment by Xavier — July 6, 2008 @ 4:28 pm
Mani, for one thing Luke had nagging injuries this last season, his minutes also dropped from the previous year, where he was a starter. I don’t know if his father had anything to do at all with the Lakers signing him from college or keeping him (I would think not). I do not think any player would tend to want to play worse in seasons following a contract extension like Luke’s. He played fine aginst the Nuggets but terrible against the Celtics (because of Paul Pierce), he is currently just one of many SF’s the Lakers have to work with and is not a problem or a savior for them.
Comment by sT — July 6, 2008 @ 5:02 pm
the key fact for the lakers this year was the lack of experience in deep play-off runs inside the team. some could say this was the same on the celtics side but each member of the big 3 had been in the conference finals before while being the man so they had experienced heavy pressure. in the lakers team only fish and kobe had previous deep play-off run experience. LO just played one time in the second round with miami, all the other players never played past the first round before, except walton (he was a rookie in 2004). i think the celts were more experienced and that’s why they won so i don’t see any need to do massive changes. everyone remember that MJ never losed in the finals but before that he experienced a decade of losing in eastern conference semi-finals or finals. losing this year will just bring the best of this young team for the future.
then for the team in itself for next year, LO should be on the bench rather than at 3 and would be effective playing in the same period as farmar. i think trevor could be the answer at 3 if he watches videotapes of bruce bowen killing other teams with his corner 3s all summer and tries to do the same next year.
i also hope ronny, bynum and vujacic were not just playing for the contract this year. walton did that a year ago, he received a good contract and now he is under-performing.
on the free-agent side, brent barry would be the only useful addition. posey is a very good player but at 10M$ with taxes, buss will never signed him whereas barry is not expensive and he is capable of making key 3s, something we lacked this year.
Comment by pi_r — July 6, 2008 @ 5:06 pm
[edited for trade talk]
odom has peaked as a player, and has some valuable skills that several teams are interested in. the fact that he does not fit in the lakers system does not mean he is a bad player or that the lakers need to adjust for him. its just time to move on. no point in dragging it out.
consider this: have you ever seen kobe and lamar execute any type of two man game at all? any type of give and go, pick and roll, cut, or anything? can you find any examples on youtube?
don’t worry, I’ll wait.
the numbers are skewed for artest because he was hurt and playing in a system where he didn’t fit. kings didn’t really have much of an offense anyway, and he was basically their 2nd or 3rd best offensive threat depending on who you ask.
rebounding is a wash. we start two 7 footers. please.
so what if he took games off in sacramento, its sacramento. he’s not motivated. I wonder if we have a coach who knows anything about motivating precocious players…
no one will need to step up to artest. he and kobe have a strong mutual respect for each other, as well as a strong friendship.
can you name any other players in the nba that kobe has a strong friendship with?
don’t worry, I’ll wait.
thanks for listening.
kurt has the best laker site in the world.
Comment by gasolgasol — July 6, 2008 @ 5:10 pm
60. “don’t worry, I’ll wait.”
hahahah, gasolgasol has plenty of time… to wait.
woaahh there’s nothing like summer with nothing else to do, uh? (I wish I was in that situation)
Comment by Xavier — July 6, 2008 @ 5:31 pm
I actually hope we keep Lamar and that it works out. There was something very pure about last year’s team that was distinguishable from the Shaq-Kobe teams. Part of it was the absence of drama, but part was the fact the team (sans Gasol) were homegrown — we had watched them develop, overcome weaknesses, understand their individual roles, etc. Even before Gasol came, the team had become a contender, and that was largely driven by the hard work of our young players to become better than any of us imagined (Bynum, Farmar, Sasha, Turiaf). Even Odom adapted his game and evolved to new heights once Gasol arrived. Once we start shipping out key cogs and bringing in new faces, it might feel like a collection of mercenaries rather than homegrown soldiers. So, I do hope we stick with the same team and let them grow, especially Odom whom we all have such a soft spot for. But in that desire I admit a little uneasiness in sticking with Odom and leaving a (fatal) flaw unattended. Perhaps Odom learns how to produce as a SF, perhaps Ariza steps, but I’m sure, rather than merely hopeful, that an Artest or Marion would get the job done during the playoff series that will inevitably decide our season. Even if it comes at the expense of some regular season cohesion and purity. So, I remain torn, hoping it works and that the team sticks together, but acknowledging that there might be a better path, even if less satisfying.
Comment by Reed — July 6, 2008 @ 5:58 pm
Reed,
I think we all are concluding that Lamar is Lamar and he isn’t going to change to any great degree. That being true, our other players all have finals playoff experience and playoff confidence. I expect noticeable growth from all our other players - except Kobe and Fish. This growth will change the dynamics Phil has to work with and lessen our reliance on Lamar. The only real fear I have is with our defense and this, I think, relies more on the coaching staff than on bringing in any additional players.
Comment by Craig W. — July 6, 2008 @ 7:41 pm
which is the reason why we’re not the GM and the actual GM is taking the heat. let’s hope that what buss, kupchak and company conjure up isn’t a merely quiet summer not unless they hold the team intact and cook something to dominate next season with an emphasis on defense.
i believe the triple tower treat can work. however, i am also for toughening the lineup particularly the bench. we need a go-to guy off the bench. that’s how things are in the nba. you can’t simply rely on a 1-2 punch, it has to be the team now which is a good thing. not even jordan could see this landscape the same way he did the 1990s. so i am hoping that we can get both artest and odom for no heavy cost. again, i am not high on ronron but i am willing take a chance if this presents itself possible (the not losing lamar scenario). if not, goodness, even maggette is worth chasing if only to meet the need of a 6th man. lamar can be the 6th man but that will mean ariza stepping up. i hold that trevor be the starting sf if not lamar, not vlad or luke. if this happens, then i have faith in trevor and may not see the need for acquisitions other than a big man off the bench and a posey-type role player with lamar…yikes. then our bench can run with the league’s starting 5 and that is scary.
i entertain the idea of moving one of luke and vlad. we have enough shooters. barry, though still a nice piece is worth adding but then we have people playing in summer camp who are younger and as capable. we have contracts to worry about.
with a formidable 5 and a 6th man anchoring a young and talented bench, and with a tougher mentality i’m sure we have entering this year, we can truly say we have the legitimate claim to the trophy.
hats off to kurt, reed and the rest. we want the lakers to win. it’s up to them really but then, it’s nice to know the laker nation is hungry, let’s let this trickle down. GO LAKERS!
Comment by passerby — July 6, 2008 @ 7:59 pm
I agree Craig. And that is part of the reason why I’d hold off on Odom for Artest, despite feeling that Ron is such a superior fit. But I’m extremely torn by the idea.
Comment by Reed — July 6, 2008 @ 8:18 pm
Hi Reed, Craig,
I’ve been trading posts at Sactown Royalty. They are commenting on Kurt’s thread. I find their perspective on Ron very interesting. I don’t think they have a clue how and when Petrie will trade Ron–and I think it will happen.
It certainly is a situation worth watching.
Comment by drrayeye — July 6, 2008 @ 8:32 pm
To all supporting a trade for artest and jetisoning LO (not that it would be one for the other because salary cap issues and no real trade as such has been placed out there) please ANSWER these questions that I guess I have not made clear in prior posts:
1) are you satisfied with an interior of Bynum, Gasol, Turiaf (if he resigns) and Mihm? If so let me hear you justification because I am skeptical.
2) what are you going to do with 4 small forwards? And if you say trade (and I know Kurt hates trade speculation but) I want to hear something plausible.
3) what’s the rotation??
Comment by Bingo T. Klown — July 6, 2008 @ 8:57 pm
first off…… (11) and (12)… and everyone here… please dont call farmar “Jordan”.
and as far as my opinions go… i like the team as it is… i like ariza… and i think ariza and gasol can gel really well together with ariza cutting into the lane as he has been known to do.
(17)— hehe…. well said
(21), (29)– agree totally… dont like vlade and luke is okay, but i feel his attitude isnt the greatest. he showed us hes got the potential to be a good player last year, won a contract and then shut shop. I really hope sasha doesnt do the same.
personally, i like the starting lineup of bynum, gasol, kobe, sasha and farmar/fish
lamar and ariza go to the bench, luke/ vladi ( unless we show them the door )
this lineup sorts out a few issues, but we need to keep it flexible, to match up against the bigger SFs
Comment by rohan — July 6, 2008 @ 9:30 pm
As a long-time lakers fan since the 80’s, I’d like to say I was surprised when the team got to the final. But what concerns me the most is our MVP, he looked worn-out and had no lift on his jumpers. Perhaps, bigger defenders really cause trouble, who’s to say that Kobe won’t face similar defense next year. I brought this out, simply look at what spurs and celts had done; some strategy, mano-on-mano, contest shots and keep the man guessing at all time. Well, it did NOT work for spurs coz Kobe MADE just enough shots against the spurs (50%+). I’ve seen way too many 7-21, 6-15, etc type of nights from Kobe. You’re not going to win a title when your best player struggle throughout a game, never mind a playoff series. Not here to bash Kobe; I love the man’s in-between game but it’s up to mgmt and the coaching staff to recognize that. Triangle offense actually needs spacing more than timing, and that’s why we struggle against the C’s since our big men can’t establish any presence inside, with the like of Oden, healthy Yao, it ain’t going to be easy for our bigs next season. My suggestion is this, trade GASOL, as unfathomable as it is, Gasol is over-rated. I don’t see him put up 20,30 lbs nor do I expect him to improve both of his jumpers and free throws (look at both %). There’s no upside in him, I’d take Odem over Gasol any day. Remember, titles are won in June. You can’t have softies on the floor not when zone defense is employed as well as the celts did to us. In playoffs, coaching staff has enough time to dissect you, expose your weaknesses, you ability to adjust hinges on the talent of your players. Gasol is who he is, great in regular season, but … just my 2 cents.
Comment by Victor — July 6, 2008 @ 9:32 pm
This is how I see it: If everything goes according, Lakers reach the Finals as well as the Celtics in 2009, we will have to play practically the same team that demolished us. Yes, Bynum will be around , Gasol will be playing his “natural” position, and Odom will be at the SF position. (This is, of course, barring any injuries to our players, which, in the recent history of the organization, is damn near impossible)
And guess what? Odom will still be unable to guard Pierce, Gasol will still be unable to guard KG, and what do we end up with? A repeat of this past season.
Of course, the Lakers should make or not make adjustments just to achieve the best regular season record, right? Forget all about the toughest opponent we will eventually meet in the Finals, right? Being that opponent will likely end up as the Celtics, we can just lose to them again because we decided to adjust for best regular season achievements, rather than that one primary obstacle that hindered us this year from winning the championship.
I love when some of the posters say, “If you think otherwise, you must not know or watch any Lakers basketball.” That elitist attitude is amusing and fascist, because apparently, Kurt is only ever right, right? Not a shot at Kurt, but I find it funny that everytime I read those comments, they usually follow something along the lines of, “I agree 100% with you Kurt,” or “You’re absolutely right, Kurt.”
Comment by lol — July 6, 2008 @ 10:22 pm
44 drrayeye
Your points are fair enough although there are 48 minutes in a game. I don’t actually have Gasol playing 30 minutes exclusively at Center. I expect him to start there, but to slide to PF when Bynum is on court with him which is why their totals add up to 56. The positions I showed in my earlier post are just where the players will start the game at, although obviously many of the players can play multiple positions over the course of the game and season.
As for Kobe’s high minute totals, they are indeed ridiculous and high, but at the same time…thats what he wants. Its one thing to say Kobe should get less minutes, its another to actually tell the guy to stay sitting when he is so competitive. The only time Phil convinces him to stay sitting is if its a huge blowout, and even then apparently its tough. Look, if any coach can do it, it’s Phil, but since he hasn’t done it the past two seasons (perhaps fairly due to the team being wildly inconsistent without him, but again mostly because of Kobe’s personality) why would that change?
Vlad is too weak to consistently have to guard power forwards. That can be used as a rare wrinkle here and there, but if done too often, opponents will just back him down in the post and abuse him.
What i posted earlier isn’t what I might want for the team, its more of what I expect. Balancing minutes is normally a bad idea because it doesn’t allow many players to get into a groove while at the same time over extending others. With all the players being decent enough to expect the minutes drrayeye has given them, Phil has quite the headache upcoming, but it is one that I’m sure he’ll welcome since its always better to have too many options than too little.
As for the Lamar Odom for Artest rumors, I hate them. Odom can play some power forward while Artest cannot. That means getting Artest includes Turiaf as the only dependable backup to Gasol and Bynum in the playoffs while rising the minutes of all three to minute totals that will probably lead them into some injury or the other in the regular season (and tire them for the playoffs even if it doesn’t.) Artest is also too slow to guard many of the quicker wings out there. He is a very physical defender to be fair and has a fair amount of success against bigger opponents, but all of the above is only when he exerts his full energy which is rare. Thus, there will be many games where Artest will be too lazy to play consistent defense. Then you have his offense which as agreed upon by many of the posters above me is ridiculous. He jacks up too many shots, ignores his teammates, and generally disregards the offensive game plan. We already have a player like that who does that occasionally, but unlike Artest, Kobe Bean Bryant is good enough to do that here and there. Odom is not as inconsistent as Artest (not that the distinction is huge) plays within the offense, grabs rebounds, and can pass. His defense isn’t terrible (tho below Artest’s when Artest tries.) In the end, he is a better fit.
The comparisons of Artest to Rodman are not accurate either as while Artest knows his fair share of basketball, Rodman was a basketball savant (thanks ESPN Classic!) Yeah he was a headcase off the court, but on the court his defense was excellent and his rebounding the greatest ever. He, unlike Artest, knew his limitations on offense and only did what he could.
Comment by Sid Singh — July 6, 2008 @ 11:11 pm
Victor,
One of the features of the Laker organization is that they will stick to you for a while, before blowing you out of the water - see Lamar Odom. The same is true for Gasol. He won’t be judged because of one series. He also has work to do over the summer and he will be playing a different position.
As for bemoaning the series against the Celtics. Just like last year, people seem to forget that a new year brings changes to most young players and finals experience seems to toughen a lot of players - regardless of experience. Last year was a unique time - for both the Lakers and the Celtics (lest we forget). We will not see the low expectations, excitement, and consistent hand wringing we witnessed last year with the Lakers. However, we may not see as much drive, hunger and cohesion as we saw from the Celtics either. Just ask San Antonio just how easy it is to repeat in this league.
Standing pat next year does not mean our team remains the same and it behooves all of us to remember that.
Comment by Craig W. — July 6, 2008 @ 11:28 pm
lol,
Thru the first 5 Finals games Gasol was a +5,KG +4.
Gasol had 77 points on 54 FGAs,KG had 83 on 87 FGAs. Gasol had 16 assists,KG 14. Gasol had 53 rebounds,KG 64. A straight head-to-head match-up is much more even than supposed.
Comment by Stephen — July 6, 2008 @ 11:41 pm
I thought Gasol guarded Garnett pretty well. His length bothered him. But Gasol isn’t nearly as good as Bynum at defending the rim when a guard or forward penetrates. He is merely decent at it…he did a pretty good job against Utah and San Antonio. However, the primary players on those two teams who were successful penetrators were Tony Parker and Deron Williams. Both 6-3 or shorter. The problem with Boston was that their primary penetrator was Paul Pierce (6-7), who was matched up in the Finals with two of the worst defending SFs in the playoffs. He’s both taller and significantly stronger than Williams and Parker, so our bigs had a tougher time against him when they had to be the last line of defense. If we play the Celtics again, Lamar and Trevor should be able to do a much better job on Pierce, and Bynum’s presence will give us a more effective last line of defense.
Comment by The Dude Abides — July 7, 2008 @ 12:07 am
I’m with Bingo. If Ron v. LO were simply a case of who would provide the best combination of defense and outside shooting, then by all means get Artest, warts and all. But as so many have pointed out, we are loaded at the position. Too bad we can’t combine Vlad’s offense, Luke’s savvy and decent inside game, with Trevor’s defense and slashing athleticism. Alas, not possible, ergo our little dilemna.
Keep in mind though, that not every team has a Paul Pierce. In the end, we will take advantage of LO’s flexibility and use him 30-35 min/game with 10-15 at SF and the remaining 20 playing with Drew or Paul at PF. As per Bingo, LO is best suited at PF. In the finals, Ronny was disapointing inside, showing really no inside offensive skills or much rebounding. The team really could have used a rotation of Bynum/Gasol/Lamar/Turiaf at the 4 and 5 spots with LO then free to guard Pierce. LO may get outquicked by a few SFs but not outphysicaled as Pierce did to all 4 options at the position. Of course, even with a patchwork SF, I see Vlad and Luke getting reduced time IF everyone is healthy.
Predict we win 60 next year.
Comment by Lloyd — July 7, 2008 @ 5:16 am
Kurt,
You made a very good case against Artest. But I don’t think you have him enough credit. He’s a MUCH better defender than Odom. In fact, it’s not even close. Ron is a former Defensive Player of the Year.
True, he has a checkered past. But for the most part, he’s been a good teammate in Sacramento.
He’s an excellent scorer in the post. He’s too big for every 3 not named LeBron and he’s too quick for every 4 not named Stoudemire.
If Jackson could get through to Rodman, I’m confident that he could reign in Artest. Ron also respects Kobe so I don’t think he’d challenge the team hierarchy like he did in Indiana (Jermaine O’Neal).
What this guy brings to the table is undeniable. When he’s on his game and surrounded by a winning team, he’s an animal.
Comment by Brandon Hoffman — July 7, 2008 @ 6:56 am
(70) Victor,
Surprised they made it the Finals? Maybe you hadn’t watched a game since the 80’s either. Let me guess. You didn’t realize how good they were until the Playoffs started and then you found out they were #1 in the West.
Comment by wondahbap — July 7, 2008 @ 7:02 am
Quick question….if the Lakers offer their MLE to someone else are they still allowed to match any offer for Sasha and Ronny even if it means going beyond the cap
Comment by Omar — July 7, 2008 @ 8:22 am
70. well, you’re certainly 100% right on the head, lol.
skim a bit, and i think you’ll find more free thinkers than you first realized.
13. anoni, it’s interesting to contemplate najera, but was paid 5 million last year. i wonder at the likelihood of landing him.
Comment by the other Stephen — July 7, 2008 @ 8:37 am
lol,
Well, guess you didn’t watch the Finals, right? Lamar didn’t play PP much, ang KG didn’t kill Pau either. He score over 20 in Games 1 & 6. I can live with him canning 18 footers for 3 quarters. What hurt us was Eddie House spacing the floor, not closing out on shooters in crucial situations, Pau not establishing position and being quick, intent and forceful, and not responding to runs. The lakers held Boston under 100 in all but 2 games (2 & 6), both of those being abberations, in a sense. Game 2 was one of the most terribly officiated games I have ever seen, and the Lakers just quit in Game 6. The other 4 games? Well, we blew a 24 point lead in one, and were beat in one competitive tight game, and won 2. So were the Lakers that bad, that it’s time to retool? No. What was bad was the help D, and the way they played pick and rolls on PP. & KG, and the lack of matching Boston toughness and hustle. All things that can be worked on, especially goven the talent of this team. So when some of us say, “If you think otherwise, you must not know or watch any Lakers basketball.” or “Good post Kurt. Right on. Anyone who advocates this must not watch the Lakers, nor Artest.” is correct, because you forget that we have a team that DID make the Finals, and although we got outworked, we can play with the Celtics, especially with TWO key players in Bynum and Ariza coming back, and a lesson learned from the Finals loss. The problems the Lakers had can be corrected by focus. So to think we need to wipe the board, and possibly make major changes is ridiculous, especially a major question mark like Ron Artest.
In 1989, the Pistons got revenge on our Lakers, then went back to back, after getting beatby LA in ‘88. They made a major trade after the ALL-Star Break in ‘89, we get Bynum and Ariza back for this whole year. We’ll be fine. So again, Good post Kurt. Right on. Anyone who advocates this must not watch the Lakers, nor Artest, and “If you think otherwise, you must not know or watch any Lakers basketball.”
Comment by wondahbap — July 7, 2008 @ 8:54 am
LOL, I think you and I differ on a key point — I don’t think the Lakers can or should go into next season thinking about how their roster matches up with the Celtics. We need the best all around team just to get out of the West — the Spurs will be back healthy (and better if they get Maggette), New Orleans will be more mature and better, same with Utah, and Portland, the Clippers and others will improve. You cannot match your roster to some East coast team you may or may not see in the finals (are you sure they can beat Detroit and Cleveland again, are you sure the Celtics remain healthy like they did this playoff run?).
To me, you have to field the best team, and LO is part of that more than Artest would be.
And I’m certainly not always right. I like that several posters here (and at Sactown) think I’m wrong and are willing to state the case. I want a lively debate, not a cult.
Comment by Kurt — July 7, 2008 @ 9:33 am
Umm…There is a little something I call heart - Artest couldn’t care less when he was playing in Sactown, which is why his defensive numbers don’t look that great. if he’s playing for the Lakers, he’s gonna be charged up big time. And he’s big enough to defend the really tough 3s of the NBA - Lebron, Anthony etc. Odom for Artest - I would do it before you can say Odom Sucks!
Comment by Jimbo — July 7, 2008 @ 9:39 am
82. Sure it’s easy to get up for LeBron, everyone does. To me the mark of a professional (say Fisher or Kobe) is they bring it every night. And I think Odom does that as well or better than Artest. I just don’t buy the “he’s a Laker so he’ll be pumped” argument. KG was pumped every night in Minny, he just had nobody around him.
Comment by Kurt — July 7, 2008 @ 9:44 am
The biggest on court reason to prefer Odom to Artest, which others noted, is that Odom provides key depth at the PF spot. If Odom were traded for a purer 3, we would be woefully thin up front, especially whenever Gasol or Bynum were hurt or in foul trouble. While Artest is capable of defending most 4’s, he does not provide the rebounding that Odom does. With Odom, we have a beautifully flexible and interchangeable lineup, as he can slip to the 4 whenever Gasol or