This is hobbitmage's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following hobbitmage's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
hobbitmage
Recent Activity
Justanothermambafan, you wrote: This is still a championship core IMO. I can see them "tweaking" the roster, but wholesale change just doesn't make sense. I think this current mess was brought on by lack of execution moreso than lack of talent. To basically gut the team to address our need for a PG or outside shooter will only open up another can of worms. I don't know, hobbit - I'm just sitting here waiting...and wondering.... like everyone else LOL!! BTW - I answered your questions about the RC and gave you the link in another post. Don't know if you saw it... my response: I don't think you can "tweak" the roster. Any change you make to any of the starting 6 is *BIG*. Furthermore, we'll be changing the offense & defense this year, so it's already *BIG*. To exchange LO or Pau for someone else will drastically affect the rotations used and also makes us weaker at two positions & makes us a weaker rebounding team. To exchange Bynum for someone else immediately changes our defense, weakens our biggest assest (according to some) & gives LakerTom explosive diarrhea. To exchange Artest for someone else possibly weakens our defense, but strengthens our offense. I just wonder who would take Artest given his horrible offensive performance over the last two seasons. I don't think you can actually get rid of D-Fish or Artest w/o one of our "bigs" and that's not a "tweak" in my book, but a major re-configuration. re: RC. I did see it, but got involved in "life". If you'll re-post, I'll visit shortly.
Justanothermambafan, you wrote: LTLF - agreed - it's crazy! I just think losing LO on this team is a big mistake. He does so many things on this team that I think can't be quantified in dollars. I get that it's a business, but I don't understand the thinking of trading big pieces of a championship core for unproven players. Not when you've got a healthy Kobe Bryant who wants and needs to win NOW. Posted by: Justanother Mambafan | June 23, 2011 at 09:18 AM my response: re: trading big pieces of a championship core. Actually, this is not a championship core. This is the core of a team that won the championship two years ago. What's the difference? We couldn't get it done this year? Why is that a problem? Because it begs the question, "Will we be able to get it done next season?" Why is there doubt? Because of the way we lost. The closest analogy to our season would be "How did the Lakers do after their last 3-in-a-row visit to the finals?" Answer: It took ~ 4 years and almost a whole new squad to get us back to the finals. I keep coming back to "How are we going to run w/ Chicago, Miami, & OKC?" or "How are we going to stop the shooting of Dallas?"
LakerTom, you wrote: “I could be like some and try and trade away everyone I dislike or who interferes w/ my favorite player getting more court time, but what's the point?” LOL. In your case, you don’t trade them. You just rip them a new one, especially if they threaten to take away shots from Kobe. … As for Minny asking about Bynum. That was the logical move after the Lakers asked for Love and the #2. Minny countered with Bynum for Love and the #2 and the Lakers naturally said no. With all the hullabaloo surrounding Ricky’s press conference, the big bump in selling season tickets, we may still see Kahn buckle and blink and give us what we want for Pau, which is Love and the #2 et al. my response: Are you high? Again? Let's be factually correct about this, ok? Kobe's shot count has been decreasing ever since Pau arrived. Not once have I talked about Pau taking Kobe's shots. Not once! You have suggested trades for Lamar, Pau, & just about every other Laker not named Bynum. I've been incredibly clear about this and yet you keep getting it wrong. Are you verbally challenged? I don't care about the number of shots Kobe takes. I care about the Lakers winning. You have been selling Bynum tickets since he was drafted: Here's a quick draft of your musings ... Bynum needs to be the focus of the offense. You can't play defense if you're not getting your offensive touches. Inside-Outside basketball. It takes years for a big man to mature. Bynum's presence is crucial for the Lakers to 3-peat. You have been wrong about nearly everything and yet you keep spouting off at the mouth. Now it's trade everyone except for Kobe & Bynum. If Kobe didn't have a "no trade" clause, you'd trade Kobe too. re: ripping "them" a new one & who I like. This is nice fiction. Do you actually know what a fact is? So ... who have I ripped a new one? I have said: Pau played like a chump. Artest & D-Fish were offensively challenged. Bynum & Pau are slow. That's your definition of "ripping someone a new one" ? You are sooooo weak! C'mon man! You're better than this.
LakerTom, re: the T'wolves and Bynum. The point isn't that the Lakers said no re: Bynum. The point is that you're selling tickets for Pau & the T'wolves and it seems as if you're wrong. fwiw, I'm keeping my mouth shut until the season starts re: personnel. I could be like some and try and trade away everyone I dislike or who interferes w/ my favorite player getting more court time, but what's the point? Jim Buss is running the show and he'll put the Lakers in the toilet or he won't. Go Kobe! Go Lakers!!!
Didn't the T'wolves just ask for Bynum?
You did answer about the difference in builds. Then you started talking about the skyhook again, which confused me. Thanks for the info about Moses Malone.
Toggle Commented Jun 21, 2011 on Free agent profile: Wilson Chandler at Lakers Now
LakerTom, you wrote: I just don’t think you can attribute his hesitancy to incorporate the sky hook in his repertoire as Drew slighting Kareem. my response: umm ... Why are you fixated on the sky hook? LakerTom, thanks for the reply. To be honest, I was thinking less of the Skyhook and more about general overall game. Posted by: hobbitmage | June 20, 2011 at 03:18 PM My original question was not about a particular move and more about his overall style of play. So, I'm not talking about the skyhook.
Toggle Commented Jun 21, 2011 on Free agent profile: Wilson Chandler at Lakers Now
LakerTom, you wrote: Kareem was such a talented and coordinated guy that I don’t think his skill set and Drew’s are a good match. my response: So ... Kareem mentoring Drew was not the best choice? That sucks. you wrote: Mentor or not, there comes a time when every player has to make his own mark. my response: hmmm ... this seems sketchy to me. While I don't expect Bynum to be to squeeze through the same openings as Kareem, I would expect him to be able to gain the same vision. That's probably not a good way to phrase it. At the risk of beating a dead horse: Consider Kobe: His game looks a lot like MJ's because he's emulating MJ. Going farther back, I believe you can see flashes of Elgin Baylor & Dr. J because those were the players he had tapes of and patterned his game after. So ... who is Bynum's game patterned after if not his mentor? you wrote: My main goal for Drew next year is not for him to get more shot attempts, although I do believe he will, but to reprise the exact same role he did during the big run – focus on defense and boards and let the rest of the game come to him as it may. That’s the winning formula. my response: I like this. re: By the same token, I want to see Mike Brown get Kobe focused on defense again, shutting down his man and not free lancing looking for steals. Kobe can be a huge factor in helping shore up our perimeter defense just by his own play and focus. Getting him easier higher percentage shots on offense should leave him with more energy for playmaking and defense. I hope it just wasn’t offensive plays that had Mike and Kobe working on when they got together. Time for Kobe to walk the walk and earn his first team all-NBA defensive award. my response: 1. Kobe was returning off of knee surgery. Did you forget that? *I* thought it would have healed faster. Kobe's words were: He thought he could have gotten to another level w/ more time to work out. We'll find out next season. 2. re: freelancing for steals. Umm ... I think that's the way Kobe plays defense. http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/bryanko01.html He had a 20% drop off in steals from two years ago. I think you're looking at age. re: playmaking. Tell the front line to run all game. Tell the perimeter players to make their shots. The shooting of Artest & D-Fish was sooooo bad! re: Time for Kobe to walk the walk and earn his first team all-NBA defensive award. I think Kobe "walks the walk" just fine. Just out of curiosity .... If in 5 years Kobe's medical history is released and we find the following: right knee: bone on bone left ankle: arthritic right index finger: arthritic left pink: permanently deformed Will you give him props for playing hurt or will you still find things to bad mouth him for? You do realize that you come across as ungrateful, right? I'm not saying that you are. I'm saying that's how you come across. And yes, I'm aware that one might say the same thing about me and Bynum. Which is one of the reasons why I've kept stressing that he played great at the end of last season. And yes, I do see a difference b/n playing hurt during the regular season vs. playing hurt in the playoffs/finals.
LakerTom, thanks for the reply. To be honest, I was thinking less of the Skyhook and more about general overall game.
http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/30461/kareem-abdul-jabbar-on-youth-lebron an interesting read. LakerTom &/or anyone else who cares to answer, I have a question for you: If emulation is the greatest complement, does Bynum emulate Kareem in his style of play?
justanothermambafan, What blog are you speaking of?
someone wrote: Kobe has had a few of those good 3 point shooters off of his double team, especially in the playoffs. of course Fisher but also hitting big 3's off of double teams were Ariza, Sasha, Farmarr, Artest, and Shannon Brown. And from '99-'04 they had Shaw, Horry, and Fox my response: Is this a response to an earlier post about Shaq having Kobe as a 3-pt shooter & inside/outside basketball ? Generally, we posters on this blog refer to inside-outside basketball they usually mean get the ball to Bynum & Pau as a second option. At least those most vocal are. That was why I mentioned that Kobe was the shooter for Shaq. That post was looking at MJ with Kerr/Paxson/BJ Armstron. Are you going to put any of the Lakers shooters in that company?
G. Money, you wrote: Look dude, I going to mention this once to you, don't come at me like your opinion and argument is the gospel it's your opinion. If you can't respond with respect don't respond at all...my man. my response: Actually, if you read my post ... you'd find that I asked you some questions. Your answers would allow me to change my opinion towards yours if they were logically sound & pertinent to the facts of the Lakers. i.e. Should Artest & Fisher shoot more or is your statement all about Bynum? secondly. The fact that I've stated my *opinion* as opinion means that it's not gospel and shouldn't be taken that way. o·pin·ion (-pnyn) n. 1. A belief or conclusion held with confidence but not substantiated by positive knowledge or proof: stu·pid (stpd, sty-) adj. stu·pid·er, stu·pid·est 1. Slow to learn or understand; obtuse. 2. Tending to make poor decisions or careless mistakes. 3. Marked by a lack of intelligence or care; foolish or careless: a stupid mistake. 4. Dazed, stunned, or stupefied. 5. Pointless; worthless: stupid [ˈstjuːpɪd] adj 1. lacking in common sense, perception, or normal intelligence 2. (usually postpositive) stunned, dazed, or stupefied stupid from lack of sleep 3. having dull mental responses; slow-witted 4. trivial, silly, or frivolous Please explain to me why Kobe deferring to: - a non-allstar center with no college experience, no international experience - a non-captain - a slow-footed 7-footer - non-hustling - w/ limited play-making ability - w/ limited ability to get into position quickly Does not qualify as: silly, frivolous, & lacking in common sense? I will be happy to recant. Btw, I asked you some serious basketball related questions. If you can show me where my perceptions about the game are wrong, I will be happy to state that I was wrong, apologize and change my position. How's that? And before anyone chimes in, I would *LOVE* for Bynum to lead the league in rebounds this year & be an all-star.
G. Money, You're back. I've got some questions for you ... you wrote: Dude...Mike Brown maybe over his head with what's developed within the locker room this past season. Drew and Kobe's situation will divide the team next season, one wants more power and the other don't want to let go. Regardless of the offense Brown tries to run it'll will never satisfy both players, it's not always about winning it's how you win. I truly believed the Lakers could have won more games, but this one particular player has to call the shots and believe me he wants the headlines. Kobe will butt heads with Brown continually through out next season if things doesn't go his way, you can count on it. A player like Kobe feels a sense of entitlement, MY TEAM, MY WAY pissed off that he wasn't contacted before hiring this coach. Everyone knows why he's not talking, what were stupid now. Kobe constantly tries to insult people's intelligent with his childish BULL $HIT. Until the issues with Kobe and Drew are resolved this team will IMPLODE, poor mike is over his head with this ONE. The Kobe LOVERS and management will bend over and KISS his SORRY @zz. The best thing they can do is TRADE him as soon as he go into my team mode to the coaching staff. my response/questions: 1. What's the stated goal of professional teams in the NBA? To win a championship, right? 2. With Kobe, the Lakers have been to 7 finals in ~ 11 years and won 5. Can you name 3 other players that have done something similar? Let me help you out. Bill Russell, Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson. Does that sound about right? 3. Which of those above players didn't actually dictate how their team played? 4. Would you not agree that according to accolades awarded & championships won, that Kobe is the best judge of basketball skill/talent/play of all the players that the Lakers actually have? 5. Can you name any good teams that the Lakers have beaten when Bynum was the focal point of the offense? By good teams, I mean playoff teams that had a solid center who played close to the rim. 6. Can you explain how to beat the Lakers from an opposing team's perspective w/ Bynum becoming more of a focus? All right, here's my take on it and many people should feel free to correct my basketball understanding. The Lakers starting lineup, at the end of last season, was: Fisher, Bryant, Artest, Gasol & Bynum. This is what I do as an opposing coach: 1. Get the ball out of Bryant's hands. 2. Knock Gasol out of position. [ note: you've just accounted for 60-75% of the Lakers offense. ] 3. Put a mobile rebounding center on Bynum. 4. Force the ball into Ron Artest's hands. W/ those 4 things, I'll win 85% of all games against the Lakers. I'd say 95%, but I'm feeling humble. :) Your argument is flawed & stupid because you're not paying attention to the personnel that the Lakers have and how they play. Your only argument for Kobe's statement is that you want Bynum to get the ball more and your just not saying it. Either that or your not watching the games and it's a principle thing for you. Knowledge is power. http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/a/artesro01.html Ron Artest averaged 8.5 points and his FG% was under 40%. His 3-pt % was also under 40%. .397 & .36 to be precise. http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/f/fishede01.html D-Fish averaged 6.8 pts and his FG% was just like Artest at: .389 & .396. Ok. Are we clear? The ball should NOT be going more to Fisher & Artest. That leaves 3 players: Bynum, Gasol & Bryant. I'll ask you again: 4. Would you not agree that according to accolades awarded & championships won, that Kobe is the best judge of basketball skill/talent/play of all the players that the Lakers actually have? 5. Can you name any good teams that the Lakers have beaten when Bynum was the focal point of the offense? By good teams, I mean playoff teams that had a solid center who played close to the rim. As best I can tell, your argument is this: 1. You don't like Kobe. 2. You're indifferent or don't like Gasol. 3. You love Bynum. 4. You want Bynum to fulfill all the fantasies you have for him. Here's *my* opinion of why making Bynum the focal point of the offense is flawed. 1. He doesn't have the experience for it. - He didn't play college ball. - He's never been a captain on a championship team. - He hasn't focused on his play making abilities. 2. He doesn't play either offense or defense well enough. 3. He's the slowest player out there. 4. He's never been an all-star which is a good gauge of skill. No, it's not perfect. However all all-stars *are* good players. You were talkin' a whole lotta crap about how LBJ was better at TEAM basketball. Yet he got smacked by the Mavs. He disappeard in the 4th. That's your definition of *TEAM* basketball? Pass ot other people? Don't take it upon your shoulder to win? That's your idea of a good captain? Dude! You suck! Your horrible at understanding what it takes to win. I said it before and I'll say it again. Championships are WON not given. Every team is different. You have to play the particular strengths and hide the weaknesses of all players *while* winning games. By making Bynum the focal point, you're going to highlight the following facts: 1. He's slow footed. 2. He's not a great rebounder. 3. He's not a great playmaker. Can he become a great rebounder? Probably. Can he become a great play maker? Maybe. If he's concentrating on scoring more points, how is he going to do either of those? I'm not sure. This is what I do know: Great Centers are known for a couple of things: Rebounding, Defense, athletic ability, offensive dominance. What we have seen of Bynum is that he's *NOT* focusing on rebounding or defense. His athletic ability has been compromised by two knee injuries and a big 'ol honkin' brace. If you make Bynum the focus of the offense, the Lakers won't reach the NBA finals. I'm not talking about some trite cliche that was being spouted at the beginning of the 2010-2011 season. I'm talking about the specifics of this team and how it's currently constructed. So, tell me. Where am I wrong?
Brenbags, you wrote: That's not exactly true. During Kobe's first three championships, he definitely had shooters on the wing. Posted by: Brenbags | June 17, 2011 at 08:24 PM my response: Kobe *WAS* the shooter during the first 3 championships. Mr. Bryant's original discussion was about inside-outside basketball. So. Who was working the inside during the first 3 titles? That would be the "Fatman". Now, some of you may think that I'm wrong and it might be so, therefore you should help me out. Shaq was the starting C and the most dominant C in the NBA. Therefore, if we play inside out and we don't ignore Shaq ..... The ball goes inside to Shaq and he kicks it back out to whom? http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/bryanko01.html
Mr. Bryant said: Every year that Michael Jordan played, he always had a shooter. Steve Kerr, John Paxson, B.J. Armstrong. Name all the shooters Kobe had in his career. When crack reporters are analyzing the game, that's the first thing they should look at. What helped Michael out was he would penetrate, get double teamed and then stick it out to Steve Kerr. Kobe never had that, but he's still been successful. my response: That all sounds so familiar. It's almost like *I* said that before someone told me that we needed a dominant 7-footer ... Oh Well. Who knew??? Go Kobe! Go Lakers!!!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43429358/GT1=43001
before LakerTom loses his mind, http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/r/robinda01.html Dave Robinson averaged 21/10 on 14.4 shot attempts per game. Blocks come in at 3.0 Maybe one should look at the college accolades of Robinson and how those translated into performance in the NBA, before one starts to call me a "Bynum Basher". David Robinson was an awesome center.
I don't think you can determine if the Lakers will win the championship until you see 3 issues: 1. Health 2. Commitment of the players. 3. Coaching scheme. Number 1 should be obvious. re: 2 In light of the debacle that was the playoffs, I'm surprised that this isn't talked about more. Maybe *I* am one of the few who likes to talk about the truth regardless of if it's positive or not. These are the issues of #2 as I see it. 1. The commitment of Bynum. Can we now fess up? Pushing back the surgery to go to the World Cup was a mistake. 2. Reality TV shows, clothing lines, perfumes, & charities should be addressed in the off season not during the regular season. [ PSP/RSP, don't hurt me. ] 3. Players have to know their role and be content in their role. So far, Bynum has not shown either. Artest *seemed* to know his role, but seems unhappy because his offensive value is dubious at best. Pau is confused. He seems to be working on clearing up his confusion. re: 3 This is critical. Does Mike Brown's coaching schemes take advantage of the attributes of the Lakers? Will it make them successful? These are things that are unknown. If he tries to run something like the Spurs ran with Robinson & Duncan ... I don't think we'll win. Why? Because we don't have either of those players. Robinson was soooo much more mature than Bynum. He was also more of an offensive threat than Bynum. Both Duncan & Robinson bought into defense & I'm not sure that Bynum does. Pau is obviously less physical than either Duncan or Robinson. Finally, will out players actually run for 48 minutes. If we're talking about Bynum, I have no reason to believe that the answer is yes. I'd like it to be. If we're talking about Pau, the answer is maybe. Can't give you anything more right now.
Laugh! I said laugh, DA&^^%T! http://news.yahoo.com/s/prweb/20110616/bs_prweb/prweb8519977
justanothermambafan, I know how to settle your hash! this is for you: http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/43410842/ns/today-books/t/can-moms-be-hot/ you may thank me. :)
What sort of strange day is it when *I* am asking for a cessation of hostilities??? On second thought, hold on while I go get some popcorn. "FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT!" Ok. Seriously. I'd like to thank y'all for all of the basketball knowledge y'all post. I continue to learn and I read & interact w/ y'all. I just had a strange conversation w/ a man who didn't understand all of the vitriol heading LBJ's way. Because of all of the knowledge on this blog, I was able to speak coherently about free agency, sign & trade, salary cap issues. Woot! Sadly, the conversation did not end well because the human was only interested in bashing people who were bashing LBJ. It makes me a little sad. There are so many people out there who don't realize that there's a special room in Hell for those who worship LBJ. :(
I've got $10.00 that says the Lakers don't get CP3 or D-Will. I've got $5.00 that says the Lakers don't get DH. It is nice to dream though....
I don't hate the Heat. I do dislike LBJ. I do not want to replicate the Heat. None of the trades suggested actually do that in my opinion. It is not a problem to have a "Big 3". Boston did it and they won. Miami tried to do it and lost. Trading Drew for Dwight does not replicate the Heat, because the Heat do not have a DPOY at C. Furthermore, if I read the trades right ... We would have Dwight, Pau, Artest/Barnes, Kobe & CP3. *THAT* is a championship roster. You've got *jack* for a bench, but we've had that for the last two years haven't we? Also, I think these last finals clearly showed the difference b/n Kobe & LBJ. One is a killer. The other is a businessman masquerading as a basketball player. Give me a "healthy" killer w/ sidekicks over the 3 amigos any day of the week.