Are the Lakers Contenders?

Moderators: Domejandro, infinite11285, Harry Garris, ken6199, Dirk, bisme37, KingDavid, bwgood77, zimpy27, cupcakesnake

Are the Lakers Contenders?

Yes
71
56%
No
55
44%
 
Total votes: 126

SA37
RealGM
Posts: 16,147
And1: 7,052
Joined: Sep 10, 2002
Location: Basking in the Glory
 

 

Post#81 » by SA37 » Thu Jan 10, 2008 7:47 pm

semi-sentient wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



I think everyone needs to look at that a little closer, yourself included. The team that started 23-13 was relatively healthy compared to the one that finished 19-27 (actually, they started 26-13, and finished 16-27). I can't believe people keep bringing this argument up as if it's any indication of what we can expect this year from the Lakers. For one, the Lakers are a deeper team, with their young guys are finally starting to step up. This didn't happen last year when injuries started hitting, so the team struggled mightily. So far this season the Lakers haven't really missed a beat even though Odom, Kwame, Walton, Radman, and Turiaf have all missed multiple games due to injury. It's clear that this year the team is more equipped to deal with injuries. No one can predict if or when injuries happen, so I think most people here arguing for the Lakers are looking at what the team would do when relatively healthy.

The only team that I would fear in the West, with all parties being healthy, is San Antonio. Everyone else is very much beatable, and I have to say I love our chances against any of them, ESPECIALLY Phoenix, who I hope we meet in round 1 or 2.

A few "words" on playoff experience: Phil Jackson, Kobe Bryant, Derek Fisher, Lamar Odom, Luke Walton, and yes, even Kwame Brown. Our guys, combined, have plenty of playoff experience, and the only team with more at this point is San Antonio.


The point was only to show that the season is long and things happen -- both good and bad. What that particular poster did was dismiss Utah because they aren't in the playoff picture right now. (Right now being less than halfway through the season).

The only players with significant playoff experience outside of Bryant and Fisher are Odom (25 games) and Radmanovic (23 games). Walton is credited with 29 games, but 17 were spent essentially riding the bench in 2003-2004 (8 minutes per game).

Is that your definition of "plenty" of playoff experience?

Just looking at the Suns' roster (noting that all but Hill have played in the WCF the last two years):

Barbosa (43 games)
Bell (63 games)
Diaw (30 games)
Hill (19 games)
Marion (65 games)
Nash (97 games)
Stoudemire (31 games)
That Nicka
Banned User
Posts: 15,350
And1: 34
Joined: Jun 28, 2005
Location: USC

 

Post#82 » by That Nicka » Thu Jan 10, 2008 7:47 pm

Sedale Threatt wrote:What happens if Kobe goes down Friday with a torn ACL?



OMG.. why would you say such a thing?? If this happens I will find you!
That Nicka
Banned User
Posts: 15,350
And1: 34
Joined: Jun 28, 2005
Location: USC

 

Post#83 » by That Nicka » Thu Jan 10, 2008 7:49 pm

[quote="SA37"][/quote]

Why would you not include Kobe and Fisher?
That Nicka
Banned User
Posts: 15,350
And1: 34
Joined: Jun 28, 2005
Location: USC

 

Post#84 » by That Nicka » Thu Jan 10, 2008 7:51 pm

Last year we started great because
1) 17 of our first 24 games were at home
2) Our starters worked well together and had good chemistry (Phill managed to maximize the potential of Smush, Kwame, Luke etc) but we did not have much of a bench

As soon as someone got injured it heavily affected the entire team because we had no depth and relied so much on the starters... Couple that with the fact that we were bad defensively and our rode trips came at times when we were most injured




This year we have started great because
1) Bynum
2) Fisher
3) Bench development
4) Defensive rotations
5) We have learned to win on the road
6) When someone gets injured his backup is ready and willing to step up
7) Free throw shooting is much better
8 ) NO SMUSH
9) Fisher
10) Bynum


Last year we were winning by 5, this year we are winning by 25... We are so much better this year its not even funny
Bgil
Assistant Coach
Posts: 3,812
And1: 1
Joined: Dec 16, 2005

 

Post#85 » by Bgil » Thu Jan 10, 2008 9:44 pm

That Nicka wrote:Last year we started great because
1) 17 of our first 24 games were at home
2) Our starters worked well together and had good chemistry (Phill managed to maximize the potential of Smush, Kwame, Luke etc) but we did not have much of a bench

As soon as someone got injured it heavily affected the entire team because we had no depth and relied so much on the starters... Couple that with the fact that we were bad defensively and our rode trips came at times when we were most injured




This year we have started great because
1) Bynum
2) Fisher
3) Bench development
4) Defensive rotations
5) We have learned to win on the road
6) When someone gets injured his backup is ready and willing to step up
7) Free throw shooting is much better
8 ) NO SMUSH
9) Fisher
10) Bynum


Last year we were winning by 5, this year we are winning by 25... We are so much better this year its not even funny


11. No smush.
12. Farmar
13. Ariza as a defensive stopper
14. Uptempo Triangle results in easier hoops and more confused defenses... also helps us not get out ran by teams like Phoenix
"I'm sure they'll jump off the bandwagon. Then when we do get back on top, they're going to want to jump back on, and we're going to tell them there's no more room." - Kobe in March of 2005
User avatar
CDB
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,515
And1: 1
Joined: May 04, 2007
Location: Dont Hate because Phil is styling on ya!

 

Post#86 » by CDB » Thu Jan 10, 2008 9:52 pm

I personally think that the Lakers are contenders. They have so much depth that it isnt even funny. With Kobe getting his guys more into the game and Ariza's perimeter D I think that the Lakers are in a way complete.

I love watching this team everytime they play and the game againt NO shows what the Lakers can do when everybody gets it clicking.

The 4 contenders in the west for me is the Lakers, Spurs, Suns and Mavs. How far the Lakers will go in the offs is waited to be seened but I think with the right matchups they can go a long way.
Image
Dont Get Kobeterized!
User avatar
farzi
RealGM
Posts: 12,485
And1: 5
Joined: Dec 20, 2007

 

Post#87 » by farzi » Thu Jan 10, 2008 9:57 pm

2nd round team at best this year.
Thank you for all the memories BRoy. You were a class act and brought hope to an entire region for 5 years. You will be missed.
User avatar
dockingsched
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 55,655
And1: 21,466
Joined: Aug 02, 2005
     

 

Post#88 » by dockingsched » Thu Jan 10, 2008 11:21 pm

i think the lakers are the best non elite team in the league. (elite = suns, spurs, mavs, celtics, pistons)
"We must try not to sink beneath our anguish, Harry, but battle on." - Dumbledore
KobeFarmarEra
Pro Prospect
Posts: 973
And1: 0
Joined: Oct 24, 2006

 

Post#89 » by KobeFarmarEra » Fri Jan 11, 2008 12:51 am

Frosty wrote: -= original quote snipped =-



:rofl:Yah 121-90 (Game 7) had everyone sitting on the edge of their seats....


:roll:

Game 6 was the deciding factor in that series. If only Lamar Odom knew how to box out, he wouldn't have given up that rebound to Marion which allowed TT to crush the Lakers spirit.

Frosty wrote:And of course this is after being up 3-1 and choking 3 games straight.


Considering, the Lakers were STARTING Smush Parker and Kwame Brown and has the 30th ranked bench in the league, not bad all things considering. The Lakers had no business being up 3-1 in the first place.
KobeFarmarEra
Pro Prospect
Posts: 973
And1: 0
Joined: Oct 24, 2006

 

Post#90 » by KobeFarmarEra » Fri Jan 11, 2008 12:54 am

dcash4 wrote:i think the lakers are the best non elite team in the league. (elite = suns, spurs, mavs, celtics, pistons)


:roll: :roll:

This isn't 2006 guys.

The Lakers already beat (easily I might add) the Suns twice, and the Pistons/Spurs once. They are an ELITE TEAM when healthy. Deal with it and accept reality. Hater.

Oh and I'm absolutely sick of people claiming that the Spurs are UNBEATABLE. They are basically the same team that lost to Dallas 2 years ago and were a two key suspensions away from losing to Phoenix. Because sweping a terrible Cleveland (who beat the Pistons which is pathetic) team in the finals was so impressive, not.
Patterns
Banned User
Posts: 6,008
And1: 18
Joined: Sep 19, 2007

 

Post#91 » by Patterns » Fri Jan 11, 2008 3:00 am

[quote="KobeFarmarEra"][/quote]
You make Lakers fans look bad. Quit your homerism. The Lakers aren't elite as demonstrated by the abuse given by the Celtics on their second of back to back games.

We beat Detroit without Billups. We beat the Spurs without Duncan and Parker. We didn't even compete with the Spurs this year on their home court. We were absolutely embarrassed by the Jazz without Boozer. We blew wins against the Nets, Bucks, Cavs, etc.

Yes, we did beat the Suns but they have regressed a lot this year. I felt like the game at Staples on Christmas could have gone either way easily.

Let me know when we beat a healthy Detroit, Mavericks, Spurs team on their home courts. We already blew it twice against the Celtics.

We're still one player away from Elite.
User avatar
JellosJigglin
RealGM
Posts: 15,407
And1: 9,400
Joined: Jul 14, 2004

 

Post#92 » by JellosJigglin » Fri Jan 11, 2008 3:03 am

KobeFarmarEra wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



:roll: :roll:

This isn't 2006 guys.

The Lakers already beat (easily I might add) the Suns twice, and the Pistons/Spurs once. They are an ELITE TEAM when healthy. Deal with it and accept reality. Hater.

Oh and I'm absolutely sick of people claiming that the Spurs are UNBEATABLE. They are basically the same team that lost to Dallas 2 years ago and were a two key suspensions away from losing to Phoenix. Because sweping a terrible Cleveland (who beat the Pistons which is pathetic) team in the finals was so impressive, not.


We beat the Pistons and Spurs without their best players. We still don't know how this Laker team matches up with them. Besides, I don't think saying the Lakers are not an elite team makes anyone a hater. Elite status is earned in the postseason. I personally don't want this team to have the "elite" label. That is too much pressure to put on the 3rd youngest team in the league.
RIP BASKETBALL REASONS (DEC 8TH 2011 - OCT 11TH 2020)
semi-sentient
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 20,149
And1: 5,609
Joined: Feb 23, 2005
Location: Austin, Tejas
 

 

Post#93 » by semi-sentient » Fri Jan 11, 2008 3:09 am

SA37 wrote:The only players with significant playoff experience outside of Bryant and Fisher are Odom (25 games) and Radmanovic (23 games). Walton is credited with 29 games, but 17 were spent essentially riding the bench in 2003-2004 (8 minutes per game).

Is that your definition of "plenty" of playoff experience?


Yes, it is. You also excluded the coaching staff, which is quite important.

Anyway, the Lakers have 3 starters who currently have NBA Finals experience (and lots of it), so I think that goes a long way. Walton, while not having a ton of minutes as you pointed out, has shown that he can play at a high level in the NBA Finals (he is a large part of the reason why we won our only game against Detroit), so I'm confident he can perform under pressure.

Lamar Odom is a proven playoff performer. He did it in Miami, and he's done it with the Lakers. Marion might have him in terms of games, but Odom has been a better overall performer.

Just looking at the Suns' roster (noting that all but Hill have played in the WCF the last two years):

Barbosa (43 games)
Bell (63 games)
Diaw (30 games)
Hill (19 games)
Marion (65 games)
Nash (97 games)
Stoudemire (31 games)


Fisher (133 games)
Kobe (131 games)
Walton (29 games)
Odom (25 games)
...
Radmanovic (23 games)
Kwame (19 games)

The Lakers starters have more overall experience, and at a higher level. The only real weakness in their starting lineup, in terms of experience, is Andrew Bynum (6 games). I'd call both teams benches about even, all things considered.

When you throw in the experience of the coaching staff, the edge goes to the Lakers IMO.
"Imagination will often carry us to worlds that never were. But without it we go nowhere." - Carl Sagan
KobeFarmarEra
Pro Prospect
Posts: 973
And1: 0
Joined: Oct 24, 2006

 

Post#94 » by KobeFarmarEra » Fri Jan 11, 2008 5:30 am

Benches are not even at all. While Phoenix does have Barbosa off the bench, their actual depth is terrible compared to LAL's.
SA37
RealGM
Posts: 16,147
And1: 7,052
Joined: Sep 10, 2002
Location: Basking in the Glory
 

 

Post#95 » by SA37 » Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:41 pm

semi-sentient wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Yes, it is. You also excluded the coaching staff, which is quite important.

Anyway, the Lakers have 3 starters who currently have NBA Finals experience (and lots of it), so I think that goes a long way. Walton, while not having a ton of minutes as you pointed out, has shown that he can play at a high level in the NBA Finals (he is a large part of the reason why we won our only game against Detroit), so I'm confident he can perform under pressure.


Sorry, I am not in the least bit swayed. Luke Walton was dreadful in the playoffs last year, and it should be noted he had an insignificant role in the Lakers' run to the Finals his rookie year. I don't care how you want to twist it, his experience is not significant.

And while coaching is important, the teams that I named -- Utah, San Antonio, Phoenix, and Dallas -- all have coaches who have coached in the Conference Finals and 3 of the 4 teams have coaches that have been to the NBA Finals.

Fisher (133 games)
Kobe (131 games)
Walton (29 games)
Odom (25 games)
...
Radmanovic (23 games)
Kwame (19 games)

The Lakers starters have more overall experience, and at a higher level. The only real weakness in their starting lineup, in terms of experience, is Andrew Bynum (6 games). I'd call both teams benches about even, all things considered.

When you throw in the experience of the coaching staff, the edge goes to the Lakers IMO.


With only glancing at the Lakers' roster, I think only Odom, Fisher, Walton, and Bryant have been past the first round of the playoffs.

When almost the entire roster of each of the 4 teams I mentioned -- Dallas, Utah, San Antonio, and Phoenix -- can claim to have been to the 2nd round (in most cases, they can say at least the Conference Finals), those are the teams with the overall experience. Period. There is just no arguing that.
Jules Winnfield
Banned User
Posts: 1,157
And1: 1
Joined: Jul 17, 2006

 

Post#96 » by Jules Winnfield » Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:50 pm

Lake Show is 3rd in the West. Moving on up!
That Nicka
Banned User
Posts: 15,350
And1: 34
Joined: Jun 28, 2005
Location: USC

 

Post#97 » by That Nicka » Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:53 pm

SA37 wrote:Sorry, I am not in the least bit swayed. Luke Walton was dreadful in the playoffs last year, and it should be noted he had an insignificant role in the Lakers' run to the Finals his rookie year. I don't care how you want to twist it, his experience is not significant.

And while coaching is important, the teams that I named -- Utah, San Antonio, Phoenix, and Dallas -- all have coaches who have coached in the Conference Finals and 3 of the 4 teams have coaches that have been to the NBA Finals.


Luke Walton was playing on an injured ankle down the stretch last year, he still managed to be an outside threat from us shooting 42% from 3 during the playoffs... The year before he averaged 12 and 6 in the playoffs




SA37 wrote:With only glancing at the Lakers' roster, I think only Odom, Fisher, Walton, and Bryant have been past the first round of the playoffs.

When almost the entire roster of each of the 4 teams I mentioned -- Dallas, Utah, San Antonio, and Phoenix -- can claim to have been to the 2nd round (in most cases, they can say at least the Conference Finals), those are the teams with the overall experience. Period. There is just no arguing that.


Kobe and Fisher's playoff experience: winning 3 championships and being to the finals 4 times and Phil Jacksons playoff experience: winning 9 championships; and 10 finals appearances + even the little experience of everyone else on the team is greater than the playoff experience of Dallas, Phoenix and any other Western Conference team not called the Spurs... Period.

You act like we have gained 2 years of playoff experience playing against the Knicks... We played the #2 seed both years... That is more than enough experience for role players being led by Derek Fisher, Kobe Bryant and Phil Jackson... Just look at what teams like GSW and Utah Jazz did in the playoffs last year with little to NO playoff experience and tell me that we arent better equipped to make just as good a run as either of those teams
User avatar
OzzyAZ
Analyst
Posts: 3,491
And1: 1,166
Joined: Nov 09, 2006
Location: Possibly Bryan Colangelo

 

Post#98 » by OzzyAZ » Fri Jan 11, 2008 9:26 pm

Jesus, this happens every single year. Thanks to the few level headed Laker fans. See you all again next year :nonono:
Ballings7
RealGM
Posts: 23,537
And1: 1,468
Joined: Jan 04, 2006

 

Post#99 » by Ballings7 » Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:03 am

I do agree the Lakers are a better team than Phoenix, this season, so far. Unless there are significant changes, I think it'll stay that way.

The Lakers are balanced. The Suns are not.
The Lakers have good depth. The Suns don't.
The Lakers have a versatile offense. The Suns don't.
The Lakers are a solid defensive team. The Suns are not, being inconsistent, and limited in playing effective defense.
The Lakers have a great, more diverse and experienced coach. The Suns don't.

More established team? No. Obviously Phoenix is that.

I'd also pick the Lakers to beat the Suns in a playoffs series. They're advantages where the Suns are weaker gives the Lakers the edge, and Kobe/Phil, especially now, is a great on-off court tandem.
The Playoffs don't care about your Analytics
sixers_simmons
Junior
Posts: 252
And1: 275
Joined: Jun 18, 2016

Re: Are the Lakers Contenders? 

Post#100 » by sixers_simmons » Wed Jan 29, 2020 10:28 am

Relevant poll, what does everyone think now?

Warning --- don't bump ancient topics.

Return to The General Board