ImageImageImageImageImage

Horry: "Lakers won't make Finals"

Moderators: crazyeights, Slava, Danny Darko, TyCobb, Kilroy

User avatar
GoldKnightRises
Senior
Posts: 565
And1: 24
Joined: Sep 03, 2012
Location: City of Angels
Contact:

Re: Horry: "Lakers won't make Finals" 

Post#31 » by GoldKnightRises » Thu Sep 13, 2012 1:18 am

LaLa wrote:So basically Blake/Meeks/Ebanks/Jamison/Hill is a horrible bench? dafuq Horry.


Last year: Blake/Goudelock/Barnes/McRoberts/Murphy

This year: Blake/Meeks/Ebanks/Jamison/Hill

We have definitely built a solid bench to compliment out incredible starters, we don't need a SUPER bench when we have Nash/Kobe/Metta/Pau/Howard.
Image

CHECK OUT MY DESIGNS ON INSTAGRAM/TWITTER: @GoldenKnightGFX
User avatar
Sofa King
RealGM
Posts: 17,537
And1: 1,602
Joined: Jul 27, 2003
Contact:
 

Re: Horry: "Lakers won't make Finals" 

Post#32 » by Sofa King » Thu Sep 13, 2012 1:21 am

nbaintel1 wrote:He said HE THINKS - not the Lakers won't. OP, you should know better than that trying to stir up controversy.

It's the title of the effing article :roll:
TyCobb wrote:Kobe just passed up a buzzer beater shot to a wide open Lin for 3 to close the half. Just wanted to get that on record.
User avatar
DEEP3CL
RealGM
Posts: 25,595
And1: 1,655
Joined: Jul 23, 2005
Location: LOS ANGELES,CA.
     

Re: Horry: "Lakers won't make Finals" 

Post#33 » by DEEP3CL » Thu Sep 13, 2012 5:32 am

We supposedly had a weak bench in Rob's days here too. Not gonna get mad at what he said, it's easier to say they won't make it as oppose to flat out saying way too early that they'll win it all. Too much flak will come his way if he made such a prediction and it blew up in his face.

But again guys overrate bench play during the playoffs, in reality you only play 2-3 guys decent minutes. For example in 2002 our main guys were Fish and Rob playing a lot more than others.
VETERAN LAKERS FAN
6-8-4-11
User avatar
EArl
RealGM
Posts: 40,645
And1: 7,441
Joined: Mar 14, 2012
Location: Santa Cruz
Contact:
   

Re: Horry: "Lakers won't make Finals" 

Post#34 » by EArl » Thu Sep 13, 2012 6:21 am

I aint even mad!!
People live their lives bound by what they accept as correct and true. That's how they define "reality". But what does it mean to be "correct" or "true?" Merely vague concepts...
User avatar
tugs
General Manager
Posts: 9,290
And1: 738
Joined: Jul 22, 2010

Re: Horry: "Lakers won't make Finals" 

Post#35 » by tugs » Thu Sep 13, 2012 7:39 am

given the personnel I think the roster's set to go. I'm campaigning for Pietrus or Barbosa but I'm not complaining also. just because the bench doesn't have household names in some positions doesn't make it weak or useless. Lakers actually have a very solid 4/5 rotation with Gasol, Hill, Jamison, Howard. Kobe and Ebanks and MWP can even play 2/3, MWP and Clark 4/5, or MWP Jamison 3/4, GLock, Morris and Meeks 1/2. combinations are "endless".

the challenge here is how Mike Brown will manage the rotation. it's a lot harder to manage minutes having players that can effectively play at different positions.
User avatar
EnigmaticProblem
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,648
And1: 324
Joined: Jul 28, 2006
         

Re: Horry: "Lakers won't make Finals" 

Post#36 » by EnigmaticProblem » Thu Sep 13, 2012 8:56 am

This is something I've never understood. . . All this talk about the Lakers' lack of depth.

Who does Oklahoma City have coming off that bench? Let''s assume James Harden is a starter in the scenario. That leaves Nick Collison, Daequan Cook, Eric Maynor, Daniel Orton, and Thabo Sefolosha. How is that better than what the Lakers have? I'd take Jordan Hill over Nick Collison; I'd take Jodie Meeks over Daequan Cook; I'd also take Antawn Jamison over Daniel Orton (or Perry Jones III). That leaves Eric Maynor, who's coming off an ACL injury, and Thabo Sefolosha.

Am I missing something, here?

EDIT: However, Miami is much deeper than us, provided their bench is healthy. You have Battier, Miller, Allen, along with Haslem. This isn't a bad thing, though. All of those players are wing players, and anyone keeping Wade and LeBron off the floor can't be a bad thing. They have an oversaturation in perimeter players, and no front court depth-- It'll be interesting seeing how all of those minutes are distributed.
Stebo_SSK
Banned User
Posts: 1,626
And1: 22
Joined: Apr 06, 2012

Re: Horry: "Lakers won't make Finals" 

Post#37 » by Stebo_SSK » Thu Sep 13, 2012 4:25 pm

The last thing wrong with last year's Lakers was the bench. Of course it could have been better but in reality it wasnt the deciding factor in them getting roasted by OKC and nearly beaten by the Nuggets.
User avatar
chefy
Head Coach
Posts: 6,156
And1: 179
Joined: Aug 14, 2006

Re: Horry: "Lakers won't make Finals" 

Post#38 » by chefy » Thu Sep 13, 2012 5:31 pm

lol. this no bench thing is getting annoying and overrated in the nba. whenever you have someone criticizing the lakers or picking OKC over the lakers, they always say "its because they don't have a bench"...can you tell me something new? its how you use and maximize your player is what's important. our bench was pretty mediocre in 08-10 but phil did a good job maximizing their talent.
User avatar
TruSkool
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,706
And1: 253
Joined: Jun 01, 2007
 

Re: Horry: "Lakers won't make Finals" 

Post#39 » by TruSkool » Thu Sep 13, 2012 6:36 pm

not only are we making it to the damn finals, we're winning it mr. robert horry
User avatar
Speedlot
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,362
And1: 129
Joined: Jan 01, 2007
     

Re: Horry: "Lakers won't make Finals" 

Post#40 » by Speedlot » Fri Sep 14, 2012 6:16 am

EnigmaticProblem wrote:This is something I've never understood. . . All this talk about the Lakers' lack of depth.

Who does Oklahoma City have coming off that bench? Let''s assume James Harden is a starter in the scenario. That leaves Nick Collison, Daequan Cook, Eric Maynor, Daniel Orton, and Thabo Sefolosha. How is that better than what the Lakers have? I'd take Jordan Hill over Nick Collison; I'd take Jodie Meeks over Daequan Cook; I'd also take Antawn Jamison over Daniel Orton (or Perry Jones III). That leaves Eric Maynor, who's coming off an ACL injury, and Thabo Sefolosha.

Am I missing something, here?

EDIT: However, Miami is much deeper than us, provided their bench is healthy. You have Battier, Miller, Allen, along with Haslem. This isn't a bad thing, though. All of those players are wing players, and anyone keeping Wade and LeBron off the floor can't be a bad thing. They have an oversaturation in perimeter players, and no front court depth-- It'll be interesting seeing how all of those minutes are distributed.


You're missing something for sure. James Harden is NOT a starter. Why would you assume it that he is. It's like when we placed Odom on our bench, we had a decent bench. Thabo Selfolosha is wonderful off the bench. All-NBA Defensive Second Team in 2010. That alone makes him more valuable than everybody on our bench.
User avatar
EnigmaticProblem
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,648
And1: 324
Joined: Jul 28, 2006
         

Re: Horry: "Lakers won't make Finals" 

Post#41 » by EnigmaticProblem » Fri Sep 14, 2012 8:33 am

Speedlot wrote:
EnigmaticProblem wrote:This is something I've never understood. . . All this talk about the Lakers' lack of depth.

Who does Oklahoma City have coming off that bench? Let''s assume James Harden is a starter in the scenario. That leaves Nick Collison, Daequan Cook, Eric Maynor, Daniel Orton, and Thabo Sefolosha. How is that better than what the Lakers have? I'd take Jordan Hill over Nick Collison; I'd take Jodie Meeks over Daequan Cook; I'd also take Antawn Jamison over Daniel Orton (or Perry Jones III). That leaves Eric Maynor, who's coming off an ACL injury, and Thabo Sefolosha.

Am I missing something, here?

EDIT: However, Miami is much deeper than us, provided their bench is healthy. You have Battier, Miller, Allen, along with Haslem. This isn't a bad thing, though. All of those players are wing players, and anyone keeping Wade and LeBron off the floor can't be a bad thing. They have an oversaturation in perimeter players, and no front court depth-- It'll be interesting seeing how all of those minutes are distributed.


You're missing something for sure. James Harden is NOT a starter. Why would you assume it that he is. It's like when we placed Odom on our bench, we had a decent bench. Thabo Selfolosha is wonderful off the bench. All-NBA Defensive Second Team in 2010. That alone makes him more valuable than everybody on our bench.

This is absolutely a nonsensical reply. It needs to be stated that Lamar Odom's situation has little similarity to James Harden's. Lamar Odom came off the bench 'cause having him in the starting line up would create a major redundancy. There would have been 4 post players in the starting line up, which wouldn't work with the triangle. The issue here is of redundancy/luxury versus necessity.

Now, let's address the rest of your drivel. Sure, technically James Harden doesn't start games. However, his role is not that of a bench player's. Last year, Sefolosha averaged just a touch over 20 minutes per game, whereas Harden averaged just a touch under 32. Moreover, Sefolosha's minutes have gone down (considerably) every year he's been in Oklahoma City. The most cardinal tangent here is the fact that their roles do not overlap, in any way whatsoever. Harden is, in essence, a starter. Why is Harden relegated to the bench? I'd say it's 'cause the Thunder's bench would be absolutely atrocious-- Like, epically atrocious-- Without him providing a slight spark. So, where Lamar Odom was a luxury, James Harden is a necessity.

Nonetheless, you didn't address the rest of my post. Outside of Harden, do you not think OKC's bench is worse than the Lakers'? Do you not think Jordan Hill is considerably better than Nick Collison? Don't answer that unless you know their stats. You can pretty much do this player versus player comparison for both benches, and the Lakers would come out on top. The Lakers, overall, have a much better roster than the Thunder. They have five players capable of scoring 20+ points, any given night (Steve, Kobe, Pau, Dwight, Antawn). In comparison, the Thunder have three. lol..
LaLa
Banned User
Posts: 4,143
And1: 202
Joined: Mar 09, 2011
Location: ball

Re: Horry: "Lakers won't make Finals" 

Post#42 » by LaLa » Fri Sep 14, 2012 9:27 am

EnigmaticProblem wrote:
Speedlot wrote:
EnigmaticProblem wrote:This is something I've never understood. . . All this talk about the Lakers' lack of depth.

Who does Oklahoma City have coming off that bench? Let''s assume James Harden is a starter in the scenario. That leaves Nick Collison, Daequan Cook, Eric Maynor, Daniel Orton, and Thabo Sefolosha. How is that better than what the Lakers have? I'd take Jordan Hill over Nick Collison; I'd take Jodie Meeks over Daequan Cook; I'd also take Antawn Jamison over Daniel Orton (or Perry Jones III). That leaves Eric Maynor, who's coming off an ACL injury, and Thabo Sefolosha.

Am I missing something, here?

EDIT: However, Miami is much deeper than us, provided their bench is healthy. You have Battier, Miller, Allen, along with Haslem. This isn't a bad thing, though. All of those players are wing players, and anyone keeping Wade and LeBron off the floor can't be a bad thing. They have an oversaturation in perimeter players, and no front court depth-- It'll be interesting seeing how all of those minutes are distributed.


You're missing something for sure. James Harden is NOT a starter. Why would you assume it that he is. It's like when we placed Odom on our bench, we had a decent bench. Thabo Selfolosha is wonderful off the bench. All-NBA Defensive Second Team in 2010. That alone makes him more valuable than everybody on our bench.

This is absolutely a nonsensical reply. It needs to be stated that Lamar Odom's situation has little similarity to James Harden's. Lamar Odom came off the bench 'cause having him in the starting line up would create a major redundancy. There would have been 4 post players in the starting line up, which wouldn't work with the triangle. The issue here is of redundancy/luxury versus necessity.

Now, let's address the rest of your drivel. Sure, technically James Harden doesn't start games. However, his role is not that of a bench player's. Last year, Sefolosha averaged just a touch over 20 minutes per game, whereas Harden averaged just a touch under 32. Moreover, Sefolosha's minutes have gone down (considerably) every year he's been in Oklahoma City. The most cardinal tangent here is the fact that their roles do not overlap, in any way whatsoever. Harden is, in essence, a starter. Why is Harden relegated to the bench? I'd say it's 'cause the Thunder's bench would be absolutely atrocious-- Like, epically atrocious-- Without him providing a slight spark. So, where Lamar Odom was a luxury, James Harden is a necessity.

Nonetheless, you didn't address the rest of my post. Outside of Harden, do you not think OKC's bench is worse than the Lakers'? Do you not think Jordan Hill is considerably better than Nick Collison? Don't answer that unless you know their stats. You can pretty much do this player versus player comparison for both benches, and the Lakers would come out on top. The Lakers, overall, have a much better roster than the Thunder. They have five players capable of scoring 20+ points, any given night (Steve, Kobe, Pau, Dwight, Antawn). In comparison, the Thunder have three. lol..

What the ****? And how is that any different from the LO situation at all? LO always closed games out for us, he wasn't just a "luxury", he was a necessity for us. Bynum NEVER closed out games for us from 08-11. Everything you just said about Harden is spot on about LO. :lol:
User avatar
EnigmaticProblem
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,648
And1: 324
Joined: Jul 28, 2006
         

Re: Horry: "Lakers won't make Finals" 

Post#43 » by EnigmaticProblem » Fri Sep 14, 2012 10:07 am

The reason Lamar closed out games was 'cause that particular line up made more sense 'to' close out games. It gave us an advantage offensively (floor spacing, another ball handler, et cetera), while also giving us an advantage defensively (switching on to smaller players, hedge and return, help defence). Despite all of that, Odom was a luxury. We could have easily closed out games with Bynum, too (as we did all of 2011-2012). How many teams can take out their all-star big men, and not losing anything in terms of production? That's a luxury.

If Harden were starting, there would be a massive drop in production from the bench, making his inclusion on the bench a necessity. Harden isn't starting 'cause their bench would suck without him-- Odom didn't start 'cause we had equally competent players in our front court.
User avatar
Dr Aki
RealGM
Posts: 18,915
And1: 2,157
Joined: Mar 03, 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
   

Re: Horry: "Lakers won't make Finals" 

Post#44 » by Dr Aki » Fri Sep 14, 2012 2:49 pm

also because lamar was an absolute monster on the glass

could u see bynum going balls out going for every rebound every playoff game?

no doubt about it, bynum had higher value around the league, but lamar was essential
Image
User avatar
The Skyhook
RealGM
Posts: 10,263
And1: 427
Joined: Sep 16, 2008
 

Re: Horry: "Lakers won't make Finals" 

Post#45 » by The Skyhook » Fri Sep 14, 2012 3:23 pm

Horry is bitter that the Lakers have a newly opened championship window and if they win back to back Kobe will have as much rings as him.

Sure our bench isn't the best in the league because we don't have a James Harden coming off the bench but we certainly improved our bench from the past season. We didn't have a legit backup shooting guard for Kobe last season and now Jordan Hill is going to have a full season knowing what his role is. You can't forget about Antawn Jamison and the scoring punch he will be capable of providing off the bench. I remember seeing a stat that said Jamison alone averaged more points than our bench did last season. Then you can't forget about the fact that our starting lineup just got a major upgrade.
Image
Stebo_SSK
Banned User
Posts: 1,626
And1: 22
Joined: Apr 06, 2012

Re: Horry: "Lakers won't make Finals" 

Post#46 » by Stebo_SSK » Fri Sep 14, 2012 3:26 pm

The Skyhook wrote:Horry is bitter that the Lakers have a newly opened championship window and if they win back to back Kobe will have as much rings as him.

Sure our bench isn't the best in the league because we don't have a James Harden coming off the bench but we certainly improved our bench from the past season. We didn't have a legit backup shooting guard for Kobe last season and now Jordan Hill is going to have a full season knowing what his role is. You can't forget about Antawn Jamison and the scoring punch he will be capable of providing off the bench. I remember seeing a stat that said Jamison alone averaged more points than our bench did last season. Then you can't forget about the fact that our starting lineup just got a major upgrade.


Bitter? He was the main one giving Kobe praise these past few years so why would he be bitter at Kobe getting more rings? The man just gave his opinion. It wasnt like it was filled with a bunch of hate or shade of the current team.
User avatar
Kilroy
Forum Mod - Lakers
Forum Mod - Lakers
Posts: 9,970
And1: 2,597
Joined: Jul 10, 2006
Location: North Side of Hammered
       

Re: Horry: "Lakers won't make Finals" 

Post#47 » by Kilroy » Fri Sep 14, 2012 4:16 pm

Stebo_SSK wrote:Bitter? He was the main one giving Kobe praise these past few years so why would he be bitter at Kobe getting more rings? The man just gave his opinion. It wasnt like it was filled with a bunch of hate or shade of the current team.


Just because he clearly likes/respects Kobe, doesn't mean he feels the same about the Lakers as a whole... Everything I've read from Horry since his time in LA ended, has had some sort of subtle jab at the Lakers.

His opinion, no doubt, but the lack of logic or historical recognition in this current opinion, makes it a pretty useless one.

I can't think of a single championship the Lakers won since Showtime, when they had the clearly superior bench.
Just give me back the board, Lance. It was a good board, and I like it.
User avatar
The Skyhook
RealGM
Posts: 10,263
And1: 427
Joined: Sep 16, 2008
 

Re: Horry: "Lakers won't make Finals" 

Post#48 » by The Skyhook » Fri Sep 14, 2012 6:44 pm

Stebo_SSK wrote:
The Skyhook wrote:Horry is bitter that the Lakers have a newly opened championship window and if they win back to back Kobe will have as much rings as him.

Sure our bench isn't the best in the league because we don't have a James Harden coming off the bench but we certainly improved our bench from the past season. We didn't have a legit backup shooting guard for Kobe last season and now Jordan Hill is going to have a full season knowing what his role is. You can't forget about Antawn Jamison and the scoring punch he will be capable of providing off the bench. I remember seeing a stat that said Jamison alone averaged more points than our bench did last season. Then you can't forget about the fact that our starting lineup just got a major upgrade.


Bitter? He was the main one giving Kobe praise these past few years so why would he be bitter at Kobe getting more rings? The man just gave his opinion. It wasnt like it was filled with a bunch of hate or shade of the current team.

I wasn't being serious about the bitter part. :lol:
Image
User avatar
DEEP3CL
RealGM
Posts: 25,595
And1: 1,655
Joined: Jul 23, 2005
Location: LOS ANGELES,CA.
     

Re: Horry: "Lakers won't make Finals" 

Post#49 » by DEEP3CL » Sat Sep 15, 2012 2:25 am

Rob has pop'd off a lot in recent years about the Lakers. He blamed Phil for the Shaq/Kobe fude. Horry's been bitter since 2003 when the Lakers never made him an offer to pay him $5 million a season. On his way out the door he flat out called Kobe and Shaq two of the biggest ball hogs he's ever played with. Took a shot at Shaq by saying...."Duncan is not like that. You're not going to read anything in the paper about "My teammates need to get me the ball", like another big man we know".

Keep talking Rob, you're only going to piss Kobe off.......you know he hears about this stuff.
VETERAN LAKERS FAN
6-8-4-11
AAAAA1
Banned User
Posts: 553
And1: 12
Joined: Oct 09, 2012

Re: Horry: "Lakers won't make Finals" 

Post#50 » by AAAAA1 » Wed Jan 23, 2013 6:11 am

Matt6288 wrote:Is our bench really that bad? I think we have a pretty good bench, its definitely better than Miamis and they won last season.....


lol

Warned for trolling. Don't bump old threads.

Return to Los Angeles Lakers