U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Basketball
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-14-2011, 12:18 AM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
14,330 posts, read 19,540,214 times
Reputation: 18436

Advertisements

Whatever moves they make, they need to get rid of Bynum and Artest. Bynum looks like a big lumbering buffoon out on the floor. He looks better suited for being a Lumberjack than a center for the Los Angeles Lakers. He reminds me of Chris Bosh with the way he moves: feet too big and wide to be mobile, not too bright, works harder than necessary to look legitimate, not very athletic. He's a liability not an asset and the Lakers play better when he's not on the floor. Trade rumors put some spark to his game, but if he needs that type of motivation to give more of an effort, he should be traded. The man is LAZY.

Artest is simply not very good. He too seems like a lumbering goon without any finesse whatsoever. His outside shot stinks. His defense is adequate but he can't do two things at once. He can't play solid defense and contribute offensively. Now he plays mediocre defense and is not a factor offensively. He too is a liability. Big, bulky, slow, awkward. He belongs in the eastern conference, slamming the boards, blocking out, getting rebounds, and being physical. A scorer and a contributor he is not. Not anymore.

Out: Bynum and Artest - both are a detriment now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-15-2011, 07:28 AM
 
Location: spring tx
7,912 posts, read 8,195,031 times
Reputation: 1982
lakers are sure lucky they dont have to face the bobcats in the playoffs. just like the spurs are lucky they dont have to visit philly in the playoffs. some teams just have your number but i think jordan likes his team sticking it to phil.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2011, 08:43 AM
 
Location: Earth
3,653 posts, read 3,878,906 times
Reputation: 1802
Jordan once said his Bulls would have had trouble beating Hakeem's Rockets back in the day.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2011, 06:39 PM
 
51,901 posts, read 41,783,059 times
Reputation: 32374
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg1977 View Post
Jordan once said his Bulls would have had trouble beating Hakeem's Rockets back in the day.
I hadn't heard that but I've said the same thing. Olajuwon at his peak was as good as anyone that has ever played this game.

The Bulls squeeked past a number of teams that were NBA championship calibre (Pheonix and Utah in particular....plus the Knicks). The Knicks were arguably the 2nd best team in the NBA some of those years and never got to the finals.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2011, 08:41 PM
JL
 
7,351 posts, read 11,880,681 times
Reputation: 7198
The battles between the Bulls and Rockets during the early 90s were hard fought games. This is what MJ said about Olajuwon a few years ago.

"If I had to pick a center [for an all-time best team], I would take Olajuwon. That leaves out Shaq, Patrick Ewing. It leaves out Wilt Chamberlain. It leaves out a lot of people. And the reason I would take Olajuwon is very simple: he is so versatile because of what he can give you from that position. It's not just his scoring, not just his rebounding or not just his blocked shots. People don't realize he was in the top seven in steals. He always made great decisions on the court. For all facets of the game, I have to give it to him." -Michael Jordan
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2011, 12:28 AM
 
Location: Brooklyn, NY $$$
6,836 posts, read 12,849,321 times
Reputation: 1582
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg1977 View Post
Of course, the fact that Boston just beat the Lakers in LA the other day is neither here or there.... too funny. Obviously these two teams are about as evenly matched as you can get, so any matchup between the two of them will go to who's healthier and who has homecourt.

Is it me, or is Kobe really struggling nowadays to blow past defenders?
evenly? nope. celtics overall have the most perfect team in the nba,

as for the lakers. No offense but i have not seen no show from artest or bynum and even gasol looks more soft this year as to last year.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2011, 04:11 AM
 
Location: Earth
3,653 posts, read 3,878,906 times
Reputation: 1802
Quote:
Originally Posted by nycjowww View Post
evenly? nope. celtics overall have the most perfect team in the nba,

as for the lakers. No offense
Which was the same last year, the Celtics have always had the better 1-12 roster. That's not what I mean when I say evenly matched. I'm talking in terms of experience, coaching, intangibles, mental toughness. Let's be real, the Lakers have been more mediocre than their record would indicate, but they're not going to give away their title. They're still as dangerous as any team in the league when healthy, and in a Lakers-Celtics matchup, the best player on the floor wears purple and gold. This is what 'evens things'.

No offense taken, I'm not a Lakers fan
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2011, 06:36 AM
 
Location: spring tx
7,912 posts, read 8,195,031 times
Reputation: 1982
i have to say the whole "lakers are more dangerous then any team in the league when they are healthy" i dont agree with. i mean the lakers are healthy now with the exception of matt barnes who wasnt on the team last year so he really doenst count IMO. the spurs have shown so far this year that they are more dangerous when healthy. the celtics being right up there with the spurs. the lakers look to have lost SOMETHING. i have been saying it all season but they look tired. they look like the 3 years in the finals has taken a huge toll. PJ does it in 3s but he has had his 3 trips he fell short on the 1st, their time is up. celtics are the team (of the 2) who still has gas in their tank and the lakers are not going to have the legs. playing 300+ games in 3 years (plus 2 years of international ball for gasol who only rested last summer) is taking a huge toll, especially on pau.

with the lakers i think health isnt the factor, its gas. with the celtics and spurs its health. now dont get me wrong, kobe or pau go down and they are done but i think if they lose any other (odom is close to the same level of need as K & P) and they can be just as dangerous.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2011, 07:06 AM
 
Location: Earth
3,653 posts, read 3,878,906 times
Reputation: 1802
Quote:
Originally Posted by rigas View Post
i have to say the whole "lakers are more dangerous then any team in the league when they are healthy" i dont agree with. i mean the lakers are healthy now with the exception of matt barnes who wasnt on the team last year so he really doenst count IMO. the spurs have shown so far this year that they are more dangerous when healthy. the celtics being right up there with the spurs. the lakers look to have lost SOMETHING. i have been saying it all season but they look tired. they look like the 3 years in the finals has taken a huge toll. PJ does it in 3s but he has had his 3 trips he fell short on the 1st, their time is up. celtics are the team (of the 2) who still has gas in their tank and the lakers are not going to have the legs. playing 300+ games in 3 years (plus 2 years of international ball for gasol who only rested last summer) is taking a huge toll, especially on pau.

with the lakers i think health isnt the factor, its gas. with the celtics and spurs its health. now dont get me wrong, kobe or pau go down and they are done but i think if they lose any other (odom is close to the same level of need as K & P) and they can be just as dangerous.
I didn't say they were more dangerous than any team, I said they were AS dangerous. And prior history has shown me that these Lakers can have lethargic regular season play, and turn it up in the playoffs. Is this the year they run out? Quite possibly, but it's hard to predict. Who would thought from last year's regular season, that the Celtics would be 5 minutes from the NBA title? They looked more worn out last year, than the Lakers look THIS year. I've learned not to put too much stock in the regular season with these veteran clubs. The Spurs, Lakers and Celtics are all capable of beating each other, and HCA and health is probably the biggest determining factor as to who will emerge out of the 3.

Believe me, I won't shed a tear if the Lakers lose this year, but I'm not quite ready to count them out yet.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2011, 08:11 PM
 
Location: spring tx
7,912 posts, read 8,195,031 times
Reputation: 1982
dont look now but the cavs just beat the lakers.
pau played 41 minutes, and had 30-20, and kobe shot 8-24 and the lakers lose.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Basketball
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top