Comments on: Phil Jackson, Draft and Other Thoughts

By: Darius

Darius — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 23:39:44 +0000

196. I think you’re claiming to think long term while still being pretty short sighted. I agree that PG is a concern moving forward, but jettisoning Odom in an attempt to fix that problem is cutting off your nose to spite your face. Odom’s role is much more crucial to team success than what our PG provides. Yes we need to look for Fish’s replacement, everyone agrees there (even our GM). But I don’t think ‘Dyess and Birdman give us any distinct advantage over Josh Powell (except for Birdman’s blocked shots, which do come at the expense of good rebounding and individual post defense) at this point in their careers. You’re making it sound like Odom isn’t a major contributor and that PG is some enormous need when it currently isn’t anywhere near the need that we’d encounter if we had to replace Odom. Like I said, I do think we need to find a long term answer at PG, but not at the expense of our long term solution to our front court depth – which just so happens to be one of the major reasons (outside of Kobe) we just won the title.

By: DirtySanchez

DirtySanchez — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 23:27:54 +0000

194. Its about considering 2 replacements at PF to save money in getting a legitimate point guard. Your fooling yourself if you think Derek F. is gonna play like he did in the playoffs during a full season next year. Home court will be even more crucial next year than this year. LO numbers could be matched by Mcdyess and Birdman at 1/4 the cost. I see fools gold and we as LAKER fans will be the ones hurting because we gave some big contract to LO and lost site of our main objective. That is to remain competitive in a ever changing league with salary caps and salary dumps, which means any team can rent a superstar for one year. All I’m saying is let’s remain flexible with cheaper veteran free agents, and not get caught next year with our pants down holding the 2009 trophy.

By: DirtySanchez

DirtySanchez — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 23:07:38 +0000

Every team that played LA in a physical way in the playoffs(Houston,Denver) gave them problems. Toughness and point guard were our achilles heal all year. We played the Magic in the finals, which happened to have an non standard PF who wanted to shoot jumpers. LO is a honeybun, Boston took him to school in 2008. Good all around player, but wouldnt want him in my foxhole when we have to battle even tougher teams next year who know our weaknesses.

By: Darius

Darius — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 22:56:45 +0000

191. You’ve been advocating dumping Odom ever since the parade. I don’t get it. You’ve mentioned guys like Joe Smith, McDyess, Kurt Thomas, Jamal Macgloire(!), and Birdman as possible replacements and I don’t think all of those guys combined could give us what Odom does. You’ve mentioned pot smoking and absent mindedness and every other possible negative that either no longer apply or have little affect on the overall strength of this team. I would think after everything Odom has done over the course of the last two playoff runs, especially in the WCF and Finals in clinching games that fans would understand his value. I guess it’s like Kurt said (though, about our “softness”), if you don’t see it now, I don’t think you ever will. Odom is a major key to our success and can’t be replaced by washed up role players.

By: Kurt

Kurt — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 22:48:38 +0000

191. I am amazed that the Lakers still have fans questioning their toughness. After beating a Houston, Denver and Orlando team that tried to out physical them, we still have people who think the Lakers are soft? Amazing. I’d put out the counter arguments, but frankly if you can’t see it now what’s the point.

And getting rid of LO would be a huge error.

By: DirtySanchez

DirtySanchez — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 22:41:54 +0000

This just in Vince to the Magic , this is getting crazy.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=4287197

By: DirtySanchez

DirtySanchez — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 22:36:03 +0000

It seems that people are tryiing to convince themselves that this is a bad trade for Cleveland and Shaq. When Shaq is motivated and winning, all the other distractions are out the window. Shaq has not been to the playoffs since the HEAT won the chapionship. Lebron J made 2nd class NBA players on the cavaliers roster better, so why dont you think he’s not going to do the same for Shaq who averaged 18 n 8 in Phoenix.

With that being said a lot of teams in the league are gunning for the title. This creates a domino affect in GM offices trying to one up the next to kiss that trophy. The LAKERS need to sign TA, find a way to get rid of LO for a legit point guard(HINRICH,BIBBY). Replace LO’s production with some tough, jump shooting veterans and we will be fine. We have a gigantic bullseye on our back. If we keep the same team, all these trades are beginning to close the gap. Which inturn will expose our two true weaknesses, point guard and toughness. Please Mitch make some moves we need the shock value of a draft day trade. I can’t wait till next year.

By: P. Ami

P. Ami — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 20:53:11 +0000

@Zephid,

I think part of the deal with the invitees is to build a pool that can be used as a practice team as well as develop players who will slip into the varsity team. That said, Thad Young has an outside chance of making Team USA one day.

By: j.d. Hastings

j.d. Hastings — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 20:17:38 +0000

Shaq trade positives:

-They gave up nothing to get him.

-They now have a player who can score in the post. (or they can play their shooting big man)

-If he demands any double teams that is good for Lebron and all their shooters

-A big body who apparently doesn’t like the idea of Dwight Howard dominating.

-In theory someone with championship experience

Negatives:
-I don’t hink Coach Brown is terrible, he’s just all about Defense, like JVG. When he tries to get shaq to defend the p/r he’s not going to be happy (if this is the real reason they lost to Orlando, watch out)

-What you get from Shaq often depends on the strength of the coach’s personality. If Shaq doesn’t respect the coach, you usually have problems. Brown is very much in the mold of the coaches Shaq doesn’t respect.

-Despite his primary role on 3 title teams, Shaq is too immature to provide the championship experience role of a Ron Harper or Derek Fisher. In fact he may damage their chemistry and force Lebron to police SHAQ more often is Shaq does have issues with Brown.

-Does shaq in the lane attract more defenders, closing off Lebron’s routes to the rim? Shaq + Verejao = 2 big men with no real range, so you can have 2 defenders in the lane waiting always, right?

-How does Cleveland guard Pau and Odom? If Cleveland tries to take advantage of Shaq against Pau, that just takes the ball out of Lebron’s hands, so I’m cool with that. And if Shaq can’t run back on D, that’ll open things for us even more. And this isn’t even asking for anything from Bynum.

In the end, the negatives are based on possibilities and ifs, while the positives are set if they get a healthy (and motivated) shaq. So I think its a net plus for them, unless it ruined their chances to get someone even better. The fact is they weren’t far from winning it all last year, so I wouldn’t be surprised if they won it all this year. Whether Shaq would be the difference will be seen during the games.

But so much more of Cleveland’s fate could be decided by:
-KG’s ability to return to form
-Whether the Celtics trade Rondo and/or Ray Ray
-Orlando’s ability to keep Trukoglu, get Jameer back to all star form, and Dwight to continue developing
-Los Angeles keeping it’s Free Agents and staying hungry, healthy and interested.

IF those 3 teams come back weaker next season, the Cavs may not have even needed Shaq…

By: Bill Bridges

Bill Bridges — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 19:49:15 +0000

169.

They can and have traded the pick. What you can’t do is trade consecutive future picks. In fact, as the knicks are over the cap, trading the player would have required taking back 85% of the salary.