NBA Season 2010-2011

[Tonearm Terrorwrist]

People don't think that Gasol gets the props he deserves from most LA fans in this situation. There's a lot of "Kobe shook off Shaq" "Kobe lead them to a double" etc.. but not enough "Gasol came in and brought big man dominance that LA lacked for 5 or 6 years" I guess it's more of the reference to Kobe finally getting it done without Shaq that irks most people because he had Gasol when he did it.

 

[Ridders]

People don't think that Gasol gets the props he deserves from most LA fans in this situation. There's a lot of "Kobe shook off Shaq" "Kobe lead them to a double" etc.. but not enough "Gasol came in and brought big man dominance that LA lacked for 5 or 6 years" I guess it's more of the reference to Kobe finally getting it done without Shaq that irks most people because he had Gasol when he did it.

The reason so much was made of it was because from the time Shaq left LA, until the Lakers beat Orlando, that was pretty much the narrative for Kobe.

"Can't win without Shaq" would be the first sentence that Kobe haters would bring up when referring to him. Understandably so I guess. It was pretty much the main chink in Kobe's resume. And who could forget Shaq's "tell me how my ass tastes". :lol:

So you can understand why it was such a big deal when he finally broke through. So in a way, you can thank Kobe haters for Gasol not getting enough attention :lol:.

Might just be me, but I think Gasol does get his due. The Gasol trade's always viewed as the turning point in the Lakers post-Shaq. Even Kobe acknowledged just how much Gasol meant in his Finals MVP interview.

If anything, moving to LA has helped Gasol out alot reputation wise. For the last couple of seasons, he's often been discussed as one of the best bigs in the game. That never happened while he was in Memphis.

 

[Tiger Hawk]

MJ never won without Pippen, Magic never won with Kareem, Kobe never won without a dominant big man, Shaq never won by himself, LeBron never won by himself, Ginobli and Parker never won without Duncan the list is endless but when Gasol gets traded in late January or early February whenever it was the Lakers lose less games from then until the last game of the finals than they did before he arrived I don't think you can argue with his impact.

Fish never won without Shaq or Gasol either

LeBron never won period.

If I came across as trying to diminish Kobe's impact the last couple of years, I certainly didn't mean to. I was only pointing out how strange it is to see a lot of Lakers fans laying the blame at Gasol's feet because they lost a few January games. How about the negative production at the one and three spots? How about Bynum continuing to be impacted by his knees and Barnes' injury? How about Shannon Brown regressing to his career norms since a blistering start to the season and the Lakers thin bench being exposed for what it is - crap? Gasol has had no influence over any of that.

I'd be worried as a Lakers fan because you haven't won against the elite teams and the record against teams above .500 isn't pretty. But I'd also look at all the above and acknowledge that this team is built for the post-season. Yes it would be nice to have home-court advantage but it's not the end of the world so I don't see why blaming Gasol now is all that productive.

 

[Tonearm Terrorwrist]

LeBron never won period.

If I came across as trying to diminish Kobe's impact the last couple of years, I certainly didn't mean to. I was only pointing out how strange it is to see a lot of Lakers fans laying the blame at Gasol's feet because they lost a few January games. How about the negative production at the one and three spots? How about Bynum continuing to be impacted by his knees and Barnes' injury? How about Shannon Brown regressing to his career norms since a blistering start to the season and the Lakers thin bench being exposed for what it is - crap? Gasol has had no influence over any of that.

I'd be worried as a Lakers fan because you haven't won against the elite teams and the record against teams above .500 isn't pretty. But I'd also look at all the above and acknowledge that this team is built for the post-season. Yes it would be nice to have home-court advantage but it's not the end of the world so I don't see why blaming Gasol now is all that productive.

That's the point though, look at how close he got with such a crap roster behind him and he did it all on his own.

 

[Tiger Hawk]

In other news Emeka Okafor is out 1-3 weeks. Given how thin the Hornets' front-court is, this injury could really hurt their playoff chances, possibly impacting David West's decision in the off-season which in turn will impact CP in the future.

 

[Fast Eddie]

Lakers schmakers.

 

[Special K]

I still can't believe the lakers got Gasol for Kwame freakin' Brown!

Almost as amazing as these guys choking

 

[Ridders]

LeBron never won period.

If I came across as trying to diminish Kobe's impact the last couple of years, I certainly didn't mean to. I was only pointing out how strange it is to see a lot of Lakers fans laying the blame at Gasol's feet because they lost a few January games. How about the negative production at the one and three spots? How about Bynum continuing to be impacted by his knees and Barnes' injury? How about Shannon Brown regressing to his career norms since a blistering start to the season and the Lakers thin bench being exposed for what it is - crap? Gasol has had no influence over any of that.

I'd be worried as a Lakers fan because you haven't won against the elite teams and the record against teams above .500 isn't pretty. But I'd also look at all the above and acknowledge that this team is built for the post-season. Yes it would be nice to have home-court advantage but it's not the end of the world so I don't see why blaming Gasol now is all that productive.

That's a fair point. Gasol's recent play is only one factor, and there are bigger isssues on the team, namely Artest. At least when Barnes is healthy he can take those minutes away from him.

 

[Ridders]

I still can't believe the lakers got Gasol for Kwame freakin' Brown!

Almost as amazing as these guys choking

Let's not forget little bro Marc in this. Guy's going to get paid big this off-season.

 

[Special K]

Marc is good but at the time he was a throw in 2nd rounder who had not even played a minute in the NBA...

 

[Tiger Hawk]

With talk of trades being on the horizon for the Lakers, here's a trade proposal to consider:

Lakers get: Josh Smith and Jamal Crawford
Atlanta get: Andrew Bynum, Ron Artest and Shannon Brown

From Atlanta's perspective, I'd hate to lose Josh but Al has continued his development and this trade allows him to move to his natural power forward spot. Bynum gives us that extra bit of size, albeit with injury risks. Crawford is probably gone after the season and Brown should give us 75% of what Crawford can, at 1/3rd the price. Don't want to take back Artest but it's needed to make the salaries match, and realistically in any Bynum trade that's probably a condition.

From Lakers perspective, you don't want to give Bynum away for nothing but Josh Smith gives that bit of athleticism that is clearly lacking and you could start Crawford alongside Kobe for a killer 1-2 punch in the backcourt.

Atlanta
PG - Bibby
SG - Johnson
SF - Williams
PF - Horford
C - Bynum

Artest, Teague, Pachulia & Evans off the bench

Lakers
PG - Crawford
SG - Bryant
SF - Barnes
PF - Smith
C - Gasol

Odom, Fish, Blake, Walton

I honestly that's a good trade from both teams' perspective. Atlanta probably gets the more valuable player in the trade (Bynum), but the inclusion of Crawford evens things out plus we take back a horror contract in Artest. That Lakers starting five would run most opponents out of the gym, but is obviously weaker defensively. Atlanta becomes a more serious contender out East, but unless Teague or Marv take huge strides probably still a little short.

Thoughts?

 

[Tonearm Terrorwrist]

I can't see LA giving up any of their 4 that's what they base their success around and really all they've got to give up are Brown and Artest and neither will command anything coming the other way that will improve their chances and surely nobody will take on 31 year old Artest in career bad form with a 3 year, $22m contract. There's trade murmurs but I don't see them trading anyone they'll go to the post-season with what they have imo.

 

[Ridders]

With talk of trades being on the horizon for the Lakers, here's a trade proposal to consider:

Lakers get: Josh Smith and Jamal Crawford
Atlanta get: Andrew Bynum, Ron Artest and Shannon Brown

From Atlanta's perspective, I'd hate to lose Josh but Al has continued his development and this trade allows him to move to his natural power forward spot. Bynum gives us that extra bit of size, albeit with injury risks. Crawford is probably gone after the season and Brown should give us 75% of what Crawford can, at 1/3rd the price. Don't want to take back Artest but it's needed to make the salaries match, and realistically in any Bynum trade that's probably a condition.

From Lakers perspective, you don't want to give Bynum away for nothing but Josh Smith gives that bit of athleticism that is clearly lacking and you could start Crawford alongside Kobe for a killer 1-2 punch in the backcourt.

Atlanta
PG - Bibby
SG - Johnson
SF - Williams
PF - Horford
C - Bynum

Artest, Teague, Pachulia & Evans off the bench

Lakers
PG - Crawford
SG - Bryant
SF - Barnes
PF - Smith
C - Gasol

Odom, Fish, Blake, Walton

I honestly that's a good trade from both teams' perspective. Atlanta probably gets the more valuable player in the trade (Bynum), but the inclusion of Crawford evens things out plus we take back a horror contract in Artest. That Lakers starting five would run most opponents out of the gym, but is obviously weaker defensively. Atlanta becomes a more serious contender out East, but unless Teague or Marv take huge strides probably still a little short.

Thoughts?

If Bynum could ever prove to stay healthy, then I'd have said no straight away. Bynum's one of the few interior defensive presences' on the team. And given how rare good young bigs are in the league atm, that makes him more of a valuable commodity.

But it seems as though health is always going to be an issue with Bynum, and for that reason, I'm probably more open to moving him.

It's actually a pretty fair trade. A Horford-Bynum frontcourt would be good to watch. As you said, the main problem from the Hawks perspective would be Artest's contract.

Main problem for LA is that it makes them smaller, which I'm not sure is what they'd want. And it pretty much leaves Gasol as the only legit centre on the roster, not something I'd be comfortable with. They'd have to make another deal to acquire another big if that were to happen.

Tough one tbh. Value wise I think it's good, but from a positional stand-point it does lead to some issues.

 

[Tiger Hawk]

Completely agree that I don't see Lakers making any moves. No need IMO, but in the current climate of trade talk then I thought I'd throw one out there.

The only goal from the Lakers perspective is to win championships. Therefore the question is, does this (or any) trade help achieve that goal? I say the Smith / Crawford trade doesn't. But I'd also say it's hard to envisage any trade that would help achieve that goal.

 

[ByRd]

I think Mitch coming out talking bout trades and moves is just a scare tactic to light a fire under the players. It would be interesting to see if something does happen but i doubt it will.

But its funny how many players are rumoured to come to LA, from Melo, Iggy, G.Wallace, Dwight etc. haha

 

[Tonearm Terrorwrist]

Melo to LA would work as a trade if they sent - and Denver were willing to accept - Artest and Odom and if you're Melo why go to the Nets when you can go to LA on good money?

Odom is surely their trade bait if they want to make a trade for anybody giving up Bynum who is so young would be silly he's got injury problems but he is young enough to risk that but with Odom at 3 years and $24m or whatever his contract is his best is coming to an end and I'm sure a team looking for a short term fix would take that on.

 

[Tiger Hawk]

Interesting:

Lakers' Ron Artest hopes for trade

GM Mitch Kupchak, coach Phil Jackson and LA icon Magic Johnson just did what franchise pillars of their stature rarely do -- something Lakers officials never do, really -- by announcing to the world that the teetering two-time champs might need to make a trade.

Why?

Simple.

The Lakers have been so uncharacteristically public about the potential benefits of an injection of new blood because they know, with a league-high $90.4 million payroll and such limited trade assets, that threatening this locker room with a shakeup move is a far simpler gamble to execute than shaking things up with an actual deal before the Feb. 24 trading deadline.

However ...

I'm told that there's at least one prominent Laker who hopes he's the guy who gets shipped out in the next 20-odd days.

One source close to the situation insists that Ron Artest wants out.

http://espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=stein_marc&page=Artest-110202

 

[Ridders]

Not sure I'd want to trade Ron so soon. He's been terrible to start the season, but I'd be willing to give him more time.

Although that article may have some legs in the sense that the limited role Artest has on offense may also be affecting his interest on defense.

Would be sad to see him go so soon. His Game 7 post-game press conference was one for the ages.

It's obvious that one of the major reasons for Ron coming to the Lakers was to win a ring, and after doing so, maybe he's just lost the tolerance to put up with all the critisism that comes with being a Laker (unless your Kobe).

 

[ByRd]

Im still not buying anything that the Lakers are going to make a move, its all too public for something to happen but who knows

 

[Tiger Hawk]

Ron has come out and said whilst he's unhappy, he doesn't want to leave. Nobody in their right mind would trade for him anyway.