Lakers Thread

Haha, friend? You're a poster on a forum, I dont know you so no, we're not friends? Moving on since I'm done on the topic.

Good game against the Grizz, they always give LA a hard time and it was good to see them get the win. Ronnie keeping his cool was pretty nice to see too, he was glaring at the younger Gasol there for a bit but walked up to him and accepted the apology after the time out.

Bynum for Anthony going around, I can see the positives in some way I guess, he's a scorer but yeah, I dont think I've ever really been a fan of Anthony. Not to mention giving up a 23 year old big..? I'm eh about it.

Thanks, jack. Good to know everything's cleared up

Imo lakers would be lucky to get that kind of value. Bynum's young but is already having durabikity issues

I'd stay the course if I were in Kupchak's shoes. One of the Lakers' strengths is their size up front and while a Kobe/Melo tandem is intriguing, Melo's not a strong enough defender to play the Pippen role and I don't see Kobe being the one to give up shots.

I'd stay the course if I were in Kupchak's shoes. One of the Lakers' strengths is their size up front and while a Kobe/Melo tandem is intriguing, Melo's not a strong enough defender to play the Pippen role and I don't see Kobe being the one to give up shots.

When considering a Bynum/Melo deal, I would look at long term re: Melo rather than short term. The Lakers would need a primary scoring option on the wing as Kobe falls off the map and Melo could give them that.

I reckon that in the short term, it might not be a perfect fit but in the long term, this could be a smart deal - esepcially if we do not need to give away Lamar and/or Artest in the process. I like Bynum and I do think he makes a difference being on the floor but his track record health-wise has not been strong.

I doubt that it will happen but if it did - Gasol is capable of playing centre and Odom has always been a great starter and underrated on the boards.

Right now I'd give up Artest before Bynum, though I doubt the Nuggets would be interested in that kind of deal unless everything else falls through. Bynum himself could be that primary scoring option when Kobe starts to take a backseat, though I doubt that's happening anytime soon, certainly not soon enough to be pursuing Melo as a potential replacement.

Not to mention that he's highly likely to sign with NY in the off-season anyway, at which point you've given away your future for nothing.

What is the future's value? Bynum's numbers are pretty good but that injury issue is a big concern. Also gasol's numbers are actually worse efficiency wise when he and bynum are on the court

If the Lakers get 'Melo, I'm really not sure I would do. If the Nuggets do this, call them retarted. Why trade Melo to a rival?

If the Lakers get 'Melo, I'm really not sure I would do. If the Nuggets do this, call them retarted. Why trade Melo to a rival?

Risk of losing Melo for nothing and at least having a young centre who could be a preenial All-Star.

The only concern I have with Bynum is that he has been hurt for most of the last 3 seasons.

Right now I'd give up Artest before Bynum, though I doubt the Nuggets would be interested in that kind of deal unless everything else falls through. Bynum himself could be that primary scoring option when Kobe starts to take a backseat, though I doubt that's happening anytime soon, certainly not soon enough to be pursuing Melo as a potential replacement.

Well, Bynum being the number 1 option is obviously Plan A. But Melo could provide an intriguing Plan B.

Yes, there is the rationale here - there's more Melos out there than Bynums so why you trading away the rarer asset? Well, after weighing up the intangibles, I think that it's a move worth taking.

Anyways, I'm not barricking for a trade as I am quite content with the current team. I am just saying that there are positives in a Melo deal that is unlikely to happen.

Shannon Brown Story

Hopefully Shannon is ok off-the-court and also glad to see him playing well. He did sort of drop off after that great first month to the season. We need him to be shooting well come playoffs especially if Fish/Blake keep shooting poorly.

Why do the Lakers always lose in Charlotte?

Why do the Lakers always lose in Charlotte?

Same question here...

Why do the Lakers always lose in Charlotte?

Because we have a history of winning against better teams and losing to the shitty ones. We beat the LeBron-led Cavs all three times last year and now we've won 8 of our last 10 against LA. Must be something about defense...

http://lakersmedia.com/Flash/when-i-was ... ryant.html

Why do the Lakers always lose in Charlotte?

Because we have a history of winning against better teams and losing to the shitty ones. We beat the LeBron-led Cavs all three times last year and now we've won 8 of our last 10 against LA. Must be something about defense...

But I think they should really try to win the next games against San Antonio and Miami just to boost their confidence come playoff time.

Charlotte is much too athletic a team for LA, they underestimate their ability to hit outside shots & play off of Wallace who burns them with outside shots, then when they close in on him he drives them to the basket.

Augistin plays the pick & roll & Bynum prefers not to defend it a la Shaq. Henderson just went off on Kobe pretty much trying to prove a point of sorts. Bad loss.

lakers are under .500 (5-7) against the top teams in each conference

I can accept a loss against the Magic and I called the loss against the Bobcats. But a loss to the Cavs - are you kidding me?

I'm not panicking but losing to the Cavs is uncalled for.

I can accept a loss against the Magic and I called the loss against the Bobcats. But a loss to the Cavs - are you kidding me?

I'm not panicking but losing to the Cavs is uncalled for.

Forget about Air Jordan, Baby Jordan, Euro Jordan, how about Congo Jordan?

Uncalled for? Very much so.

Were they thorougly outplayed? Very, very much so.

We know teams with a PG are able to rape LA and that's basically what Cleveland did. They out ran them, they out hustled them and LA never looked older.

Oh well, on to the All-Star festivities & to the second half of the season.

I'm not panicking but losing to the Cavs is uncalled for.

You should be panicking. If this was earlier in the season, I think people would be calling for Lakers missing the playoffs altogether. They've definitely taken a big down turn over the last couple months. I don't expect them any higher than 4th seed in west.

Haha, why would there be a need for panicking when this is basically what LA has done for the past 2-3 seasons?

People are still over reacting, as usual.

Haha, why would there be a need for panicking when this is basically what LA has done for the past 2-3 seasons?

People are still over reacting, as usual.

Correct.

The real season starts in June. And the Lakers will be there.

And they will win. Quote me in June.

The Lakers are basically the opposite of the Mavericks.

The real season starts in June. And the Lakers will be there.

And they will win. Quote me in June.

Careful there, you were also pretty adamant they'd win 70 in the early weeks of the season.

It's not time for the Lakers to panic, just time for them to get their act together sooner rather than later.