Lakers Thread

EDIT: And what's up with Stu Lantz? "No he's not." No-selling your own superstar

I'm pretty sure he meant it as a compliment, kind of like he has no trouble believing that Kobe would come through like that. It does come off a bit weird when you think about it though, sort of a backhanded compliment even if it wasn't meant that way.

We still have another year to go before the new decade. Unless 0 is the new 1. But we have a year to come up with new ones.

It's a new decade, the same as 1989 was the last year of the 80s and 1990 was the first year of the 90s. 2000-2009 is a span of ten years.

0 certainly isn't a 10.

But by that reasoning, 1990 is part of the 80s. For some reason we're changing the rules now that there's a 20 in front of the latter two digits instead of 19.

...I was arguing the same point you are. The zero isn't a ten, and therefore comes before the 1, making this the first year of the new decade.

Fair enough, my mistake.

So year 0 was the first year? Or was it year 1? Sorry for going all cosmic on you.

Year 0 was the start of the first year. Year 1 was the start of the second year. So year 2010 is the start of the first year of the new decade?

Year 0 was the start of the first year. Year 1 was the start of the second year. So year 2010 is the start of the first year of the new decade?

We have a winner

So year 0 was the first year? Or was it year 1? Sorry for going all cosmic on you.

When's your first birthday? Think about it.

I like how numbers/dates are more interesting than discussing about the Lakers.

You can only get all excited about Kobe winning the game on the buzzer so many times before it becomes boring.

Perhaps that's what Stu Lantz was getting at when he made that remark, still meant in a weirdly complimentary way.

Yeah, but it would have sounded better with the word 'it' in place of the word 'he', or something, indicating that once Kobe got the ball it was as good as over, but Kobe is still one hell of a player. Even so, you still have to sell it. He should talk to the Milwaukee guys, they managed to sell a cookie and a wrong call on a lane violation better than Lantz sold a buzzer-beating game-winner. And the lane violation wasn't even the wrong call.

The argument is relative. A decade is ten years. Start it whenever you want as long as you end it 10 years later.

True, generally speaking a decade is any span of ten years but usually when people talk about a decade like the 70s, 80s, 90s etc they're talking about a period that starts with a year ending in a zero (1990) and ending with a year ending with a 9 (1999), which does indeed span ten years.

I've just got to say that I can't wait for Ron Artest to be back with the team. The Lakers have been shit defensively since he got hurt in 'a fall'. Speaking of Artest, he has really surprised me. No issues so far and even if he jacks up a few ill-advised shots here (in one game he missed a three, somehow got the ball after a team mate got the offensive board and threw up another three straight away. Those kinda attempts make me shake my head) and there each game, he has been overall a positive addition to the team.

Mind you, they did a pretty impressive job of trouncing the Mavericks despite Kobe having a very ordinary game.

Mind you, they did a pretty impressive job of trouncing the Mavericks despite Kobe having a very ordinary game.

Team play over individual play always triumphs. More players will have increased morale and the result is usually a better executing unit.

Not the best of news coming out of the game though:
Tests confirm Lakers’ Gasol has strained hamstring

injury bug is in L.A

Not that he can't do it but I hope Kobe does not try to shoulder even more of the load with Pau out.

in one game he missed a three, somehow got the ball after a team mate got the offensive board and threw up another three straight away. Those kinda attempts make me shake my head

I find it's the best time to shoot. Coming straight off a miss, the adjustment you need to make is fresh in your mind.

Actualy one comment about game against kings. Last seconds Kings played like Queens. C'mon everybody knows that 99.9% shots will go to the Kobe and no DOUBLE TEAM?

Sure, Udoka had to hit those free throws and than shit like that would never happen.

No one from the "Queens" team is even left on this Kings team.

Pointless.

Andrew Bynum was great down the stretch in the Rockets game. Lamar Odom was a beast after stepping up.

A couple of surprising losses in a row for the Lakers. No cause for panic admittedly but without Gasol they're relying heavily on an ailing Kobe to carry them even against lottery teams and depleted teams they should still beat and still coming up short in their last two. Kobe took 37 shots to score 32 points which doesn't happen all that often but the bench is proving unreliable to the point where it's coming down to their top six players and if one is missing, things start falling apart as Kobe is expected to bail everyone out. It's resulted in some spectacular game winners but often in games the Lakers should have won more handily. If the Lakers don't repeat this year, I think a big reason for it will be simple fatigue, brought about a lack of dependable depth beyond their impressive first six players in the rotation.

We really missing Pau Gasol. That's all I can say Andrew.

Plus we are 3-6 in the second of back-to-back games.

And Kobe is trying to do too much... whether it is him trying to prove a point and/or the other players not stepping up.