Artest traded to Houston...

[DEEP3CL]

Bruno, it's not that Bynum is that good. It's more that he brings something the Lakers lack. And as I said in my previous post, the Lakers will become much better because their 2nd best player, Gasol, will benefit greatly by not having to play Center. Gasol is a very talented player, but with Bynum out, he was forced to play Center, which was not his strength.

Agree totally with this tombattor. I think people tend to think we'll only be slightly improved because of Bynum coming back. But the general perception is that Bynum isn't as good when fact of the matter is before his injury he was averaging 18 and 13 a game and was coming off a career high of 28 and 17 against the Suns on Christmas day. But you precisely evaluated what the problem was for the Lakers.

Pau having not to worry about playing center for extended chunks of minutes will enable him to take advantage of his strengths while Bynum will do the heavy lifting in the middle.

[bruno sundov]

Bruno, it's not that Bynum is that good. It's more that he brings something the Lakers lack. And as I said in my previous post, the Lakers will become much better because their 2nd best player, Gasol, will benefit greatly by not having to play Center. Gasol is a very talented player, but with Bynum out, he was forced to play Center, which was not his strength.

No I understand what you are saying. AB is going to give the lakers something they don't have right now. Point taken. You are assuming he can come back and play at a high rate. Dislocating your knee is a serious injury. It might take him all of next year just to get back where he was before the injury. I'm sorry he has to be playing at his highest ability to make them better. I just don't know if he can after that injury.

It is more than a fair question. I would love to have him on my team. The lakers took a huge risk in selecting him. He was hardly even 17 when they drafted him. It is going to take more time to get to where LA needs him because of the injury. Who knows if he can do it. All fair questions.

[tombattor]

No I understand what you are saying. AB is going to give the lakers something they don't have right now. Point taken. You are assuming he can come back and play at a high rate. Dislocating your knee is a serious injury. It might take him all of next year just to get back where he was before the injury. I'm sorry he has to be playing at his highest ability to make them better. I just don't know if he can after that injury.

It is more than a fair question. I would love to have him on my team. The lakers took a huge risk in selecting him. He was hardly even 17 when they drafted him. It is going to take more time to get to where LA needs him because of the injury. Who knows if he can do it. All fair questions.

Well, that goes without saying. If he's not back from the injury, obviously he can't help them. However Bynum was playing very well before he went down so if he's healthy, I don't see why he can't get back to that level eventually. Besides, it's as much about Bynum as it's about Gasol. If Gasol can play the 4 instead of 5, he can better utilize his skills and his size/quickness combination to give most PFs a very tough time. IMO, even that alone should improve the Lakers.

[Celtsfan1980]

I hear a lot of people say the Lakers have a top 5 defense, but others don't think it's all that good. Rebounding was certainly an issue in game 6, so Bynum should definitely help in that regards. It's interesting because Bynum has looked mediocre vs. Boston, but I'd expect that to change in a big series. Personally I'd rather see Boston and LA again, but it'd be nice to see new matchups after a few years.

[campybatman]

Well, that's what all fans probably want to see beyond Boston and Los Angeles fans. How would Bynum do against Boston now with P. Gasol? Perkins is a mismatch for Bynum because of his physical style of play. Bynum must adjust or he'll get bullied by Perkins. But, Abdul-Jabbar has worked with Bynum and C. Ray continues to work with Perkins. So, the match ups between these two could be good. Consistency at the center position is so important for both teams to succeed defensively.

[bruno sundov]

So the lakers are supposed to be better because AB replaces a marginal talent, at best in turiaf. Ok that makes sense. He allows Pau to play the 4. OK now Pau just gets abused by KG more often. AB doesn't make this team better just by being there. Sorry that is not the case.

[tombattor]

So the lakers are supposed to be better because AB replaces a marginal talent, at best in turiaf. Ok that makes sense. He allows Pau to play the 4. OK now Pau just gets abused by KG more often. AB doesn't make this team better just by being there. Sorry that is not the case.

KG didn't abuse Gasol in the finals, so what makes you think he will next year? KG probably played better in the Finals than Gasol, but Gasol also had his moments in taking KG in the post. So it's not exactly KG destroying Gasol. The Celtics just had the better team top to bottom and Pierce was the best player in that series with Ray Allen being a close second. Whether it was the Celtics' D or what, but Kobe didn't have very good series.

Besides, people's saying that the Lakers will be better doesn't mean that they will be better than the Celtics. It just means that they'll be better than last year's Lakers. Is that so hard to understand?

So here is the breakdown, since you don't seem to be able to grasp such a simple concept.

- Last year's Lakers had Radmanovic starting at PF with Gasol starting at C.

- Next year's Lakers will start Gasol at PF and Bynum at C.

- Can we agree that Gasol is better at PF than at C, since he lacks the bulk and toughness to be a center? So this move should improve Gasol's play, right?

- Can we also agree that Bynum at C is better than having Radmanovic at PF? Ok, so what's the problem here? What do you not get?

I think the problem here is that you are concentrating more on crapping on the Lakers and flexing than actual analysis of the situation. Of course, there are many variables that can throw the whole thing off, like injuries. However, you can say that about any team. For example, if the Hornets lose Chris Paul, they are at best a 30-win team. But with Paul, they are a legit contender.

[bruno sundov]

WOW! The concept is broken. There isn't a whole lot to grasp onto. Radmanovic played sparingly in the finals. It was Gasol and LO. They both dissapeared during crunch time.

Yes, we have the lakers starting line up figured out if healthy. Great

I don't agree that Pau is a better 4 then a 5. All he has played his whole NBA career is the 5. He has done pretty well at it.

I just don't see how if this kid is not healthy he is better that Radman.

Yeah instead of crapping on the lakers I have been making the point very clearly, that kid has to be healthy and played at this all star level for the team to be better. What he is doing is replacing Pau at the 5 who is an all star and moving LO to the bench of the 3, where he struggles mightly in shooting and defense.

WHat is so hard about that.

[DEEP3CL]

So the lakers are supposed to be better because AB replaces a marginal talent, at best in turiaf. Ok that makes sense. He allows Pau to play the 4. OK now Pau just gets abused by KG more often. AB doesn't make this team better just by being there. Sorry that is not the case.

KG didn't abuse Gasol in the finals, so what makes you think he will next year? KG probably played better in the Finals than Gasol, but Gasol also had his moments in taking KG in the post. So it's not exactly KG destroying Gasol. The Celtics just had the better team top to bottom and Pierce was the best player in that series with Ray Allen being a close second. Whether it was the Celtics' D or what, but Kobe didn't have very good series.

Besides, people's saying that the Lakers will be better doesn't mean that they will be better than the Celtics. It just means that they'll be better than last year's Lakers. Is that so hard to understand?

So here is the breakdown, since you don't seem to be able to grasp such a simple concept.

- Last year's Lakers had Radmanovic starting at PF with Gasol starting at C.

- Next year's Lakers will start Gasol at PF and Bynum at C.

- Can we agree that Gasol is better at PF than at C, since he lacks the bulk and toughness to be a center? So this move should improve Gasol's play, right?

- Can we also agree that Bynum at C is better than having Radmanovic at PF? Ok, so what's the problem here? What do you not get?

I think the problem here is that you are concentrating more on crapping on the Lakers and flexing than actual analysis of the situation. Of course, there are many variables that can throw the whole thing off, like injuries. However, you can say that about any team. For example, if the Hornets lose Chris Paul, they are at best a 30-win team. But with Paul, they are a legit contender.

Exactly tombatter, this what I put in bold is what will make the Lakers a different team no matter how people want to look at it. Bruno so you are suggesting that the Lakers losing Turaif is a devastating blow then the Lakers regaining Bynum ? The thing you don't understand is Turaif's minutes were bound to be cut drastically with Pau at the 4 and the fact that the Laker front line is interchangeable because Odom could also play there if need be.

Our front line will be our strength next season due to the depth we have in those 4 and 5 spots along with being interchangeable at the 5, 4 and 3 spots period. Instead of admitting that much of you haven't seen Bynum to really judge him, you quickly bash him and say he isn't all that good when fact of the matter is you just haven't saw enough of him. Well I have and his numbers indicate what he can do on a per 48 minute basis. He's working hard again he's got a clean bill of health from doctors on his knee and he's added muscle to his frame weighing in at 290 now with 9% body fat.

Plus he's in a contract year so we know what the motives are, how that translates to the Lakers being better we'll just have to wait and see. But I know this we'll be in the mix out west period.

[ParticleMan]

WOW! The concept is broken. There isn't a whole lot to grasp onto. Radmanovic played sparingly in the finals. It was Gasol and LO. They both dissapeared during crunch time.

Yes, we have the lakers starting line up figured out if healthy. Great

I don't agree that Pau is a better 4 then a 5. All he has played his whole NBA career is the 5. He has done pretty well at it.

I just don't see how if this kid is not healthy he is better that Radman.

Yeah instead of crapping on the lakers I have been making the point very clearly, that kid has to be healthy and played at this all star level for the team to be better. What he is doing is replacing Pau at the 5 who is an all star and moving LO to the bench of the 3, where he struggles mightly in shooting and defense.

WHat is so hard about that.

LO is not going to the bench. LO played the 3 in the finals, and he will play the 3 for the Lakers next year too. There's no change there.

It's Radman who goes to the bench. And since Radman was probably the worst starting player we faced in the whole damn playoffs, I'd say pretty much anyone else is an improvement. Especially a kid who averaged a double-double.

You keep saying Bynum won't be healthy. Do you know something? Cuz the reports I hear say he's going to be fine. It's not like he's coming back from a Tony Allen injury. Remember we had our own kid named Al who had his share of injuries and was slow to recover, and he turned out pretty good. I'm not saying Bynum will be that good but you can't write him off just because he had an injury and he's been slow to recover.

Man I hat eto stick up for the Lakers but damn, this seems pretty obvious.

[DEEP3CL]

I don't agree that Pau is a better 4 then a 5. All he has played his whole NBA career is the 5. He has done pretty well at it.

I just don't see how if this kid is not healthy he is better that Radman.

Yeah instead of crapping on the lakers I have been making the point very clearly, that kid has to be healthy and played at this all star level for the team to be better. What he is doing is replacing Pau at the 5 who is an all star and moving LO to the bench of the 3, where he struggles mightly in shooting and defense.

WHat is so hard about that.

First of Pau played the 5 because it was out of necessity in Memphis, yes Pau is a 5 by height standards but by NBA standards he's not because of his physical build.

Second Bynum wasn't playing at "All Star" level when he went down and the Lakers were number 1 in the west. Him playing at that level is not a necessity for the Lakers to improve, him just putting up solid numbers like he was and playing a good chunk of games will improve the team. By your estimation if Bynum sucks we don't even make a mark improvement at all. Bynum's rapid improvement last season was the main reason the Lakers started to surge ahead of the pack by January anyway. Your playing too much into his injury or clearly think he back to the bottom of the barrel.

[canman1971]

To get back on the topic. Here is a question: When is the last/first time Artest has made difference on a team he has played on? And why do some poster here have to piss and moan about Bynum making the Lakers better? I mean, nobody hates the Lakers as much as I do, trust me. But I also like to consider myself somewhat intelligent and even I feel Bynum helps the Lakers. Would they have beaten the Cs? Probably not, but we will never know, and I don't really care. I'm not sure why people waste so much time/energy complaining or worrying about another team when our team is the freaking 2008 NBA Champions. It really makes many around here look bad, IMO.

[bruno sundov]

^^^

Your right. If enough of that. The last time Ron Ron made a team better was IND when they got beat in 7 by det in the ECF. That was it. Next year was the brawl. The year after that it was the (album), and off to Sactown. What was that 3-4 years ago now?

[Alex_De_Large]

Kings 38 wins. Probably 25 without him.