Are we short one quality big?

[0HeadAche0]

lakers have BY FAR BY FAR the best bigs in the entire league.

and you want one more? lol

why not get an extra shooting guard while you are at it?

we may have the best bigs in the league but one is injury prone and can pick up fouls easily, the other one is a power forward who we play at center for half the game and our final big is a rebounding tweener, who plays the four. then we have nothing else after that.

celtics with perkins healthy are a matchup nightmare. they've got 3 legit 7ft centers, a great player in KG, jermaine o'neal can come in and play if needed and just loads of hustle and scoring off the bench with glen davis.

its quite clear we have 3 great bigs. however. they just overwhelming have more depth than us at that position.

[HERSH]

who is even available?

[0HeadAche0]

no-one is available. maybe should have looked at getting a better player in return for sasha instead of it just being a salary dump.

i dont think our lack of size will hurt us against anyone other than the celtics. i mean we match up well in the lighter positions, like kobe on rondo, artest on pierce etc.

[CX44]

There are a combined 96mins available at C and PF during a game that will be divided between Bynum, Gasol, and Odom. If needed Artest can give spot mins at PF but only in certain situations. You build your team to win through YOUR system and force other teams to match that. With your scenario of worring about Boston thatn a defending PG is a much bigger issue since this is the Lakers true biggest weakness and has been so for the past several years.

[Dr Aki]

yes we worry about boston, because we forced them to recruit as many bigs to counter us.

their collection is impressive, hence the angst

[CowsMoo]

Assuming the Lakers take care of business and Celtics get to the Finals and it's a rematch:

Yes, Boston's bigs are "old", banged up, offensively limited, but they're kind of like bodies to throw at our bigs and can make our bigs work for their points. Offensively, I don't expect much. The only thing our bigs need to worry about (Bynum especially) is staying out of foul trouble.

If it's a war of attrition with our Bigs, we'd lose for sure. Therefore, our bigs need to remain efficient, on the floor and keep balance in our offense (inside out game, slashing, and so on).

The Celtics can really disrupt our bigs by putting multiple defending bigs at us, and have plenty of fouls to go around.

I feel like in theory, yes, maybe we need one more big. Problem is, no one is available, and there wouldn't be any minutes. We might be able to get away with Artest at PF.

In the end, I rather rest my hopes that our bigs just stay efficient and out of foul trouble. So far, seems alright.

[Penberthy]

Bynum > Perkins
Pau > KG
Odom > Baby
Theo < Shaq
Joe S. > Harangody
Caracter > Erden

Jermaine already requires season ending knee surgery. And God only knows if Shaq, KG, Perkins, or Bynum will be walking upright in June.

With that in mind, I think we are quite OK.

[So Gutta]

i think with the trade of vujacic, we need to be looking for a good, young, guard.

[Dr Aki]

Bynum > Perkins
Pau > KG
Odom > Baby
Theo < Shaq
Joe S. > Harangody
Caracter > Erden

Jermaine already requires season ending knee surgery. And God only knows if Shaq, KG, Perkins, or Bynum will be walking upright in June.

With that in mind, I think we are quite OK.

u spaced on jermaine o'neal.

they have 5 useable bigs vs our 3

[Penberthy]

O'Neal's future hangs in balance: Boston center Jermaine O'Neal needs surgery on his left knee and according to NESN.com, he's going to make the decision when to have it by Tuesday. O'Neal said he considered playing on Friday against Charlotte, but decided to take the cautious route. The veteran center has spoken to several doctors, the last appointment coming on Monday. "I think it's the right course of action," Celtics coach Doc Rivers said of O'Neal putting off his decision until Tuesday. "Surgery could mean never playing again. You never know. He's trying to figure out a way, and we're trying to figure out a way, with Dr. McKeon and everybody, to get him on the floor. Even if it's got to be, worst-case scenario, the way it's been, where he plays four or five games and then has to sit out." O'Neal has played in only 17 of the Celtics' 38 regular season games because of his sore knee. "My preference is to play," he said. "Play, get through it, take the meds that I need to take to play. You don't get this opportunity very often. It's a difficult position to be in, to make decisions now that you may have to pay for down the road. But sometimes it's worth it. It's hard to find a situation like this, where you have a team that's legitimately supposed to win it. So you want to do well, and you want to support the team."
(Updated 01/14/2011)

[chefy]

Assuming the Lakers take care of business and Celtics get to the Finals and it's a rematch:

Yes, Boston's bigs are "old", banged up, offensively limited, but they're kind of like bodies to throw at our bigs and can make our bigs work for their points. Offensively, I don't expect much. The only thing our bigs need to worry about (Bynum especially) is staying out of foul trouble.

If it's a war of attrition with our Bigs, we'd lose for sure. Therefore, our bigs need to remain efficient, on the floor and keep balance in our offense (inside out game, slashing, and so on).

The Celtics can really disrupt our bigs by putting multiple defending bigs at us, and have plenty of fouls to go around.

I feel like in theory, yes, maybe we need one more big. Problem is, no one is available, and there wouldn't be any minutes. We might be able to get away with Artest at PF.

In the end, I rather rest my hopes that our bigs just stay efficient and out of foul trouble. So far, seems alright.

+1

[chefy]

OP has a point. 'Talent wise' Lakers still have the best frontcourt in the league, but 'Matchup wise' a fully healthy Celtics frontcourt have the potential to be a dangerous matchup for our bigs.