PDA

View Full Version : Post Game Thread #11 Blown Out by the Lakers



idioteque
11-20-2007, 10:34 PM
Thought I'd get it started.

Ugly, ugly, ugly loss. But I'll start with the positives because there were a few. Keep in mind that I only saw the second half.

Obviously, Shawne Williams played well tonight. I'm starting to see why Obie is so excited about him. He seems to be a very hard worker that is actually hungry to get better, seems to have a real passion for the game. He was aggressive all night, had some nice plays taking the ball to the basket topped off with a monster dunk in the third quarter. Showed a nice touch from the outside as well.

Granger played slightly above my expectations, had a nice couple of plays in the third quarter, was aggressive, shot the ball reasonably well. He showed up tonight which is more than can be said for some of our guys.

Quis didn't shoot the ball incredibly well but he at least seemed to put forth some effort, especially when we were down big. Are we really that bad of a team that I am lauding guys for TRYING?!

Hulk looked rather solid on defense and scored in double figures. Oh, and he didn't get into foul trouble. That's really all I expect from him.

Okay, on to the negatives.

Deiner cannot handle the ball whatsoever. He's a terrible shooter (right now) and even worse at defending. It seems like Obie is losing some confidence in him, he only have him 8 minutes of PT tonight. That doesn't bode too well for our PG depth, at all. Farmar took him to school tonight.

Dunleavy didn't even look like he was trying. He is supposed to be one of our primary options and shot the ball I think 6 times. That's scary, as in scary bad.

Our defense all around was HORRIBLE, especially on the perimeter. The Lakers looked like they were conducting some type of orchestra with their ball movement out there. And what they were doing wasn't especially revolutionary or anything, it's just that we couldn't keep up to where the ball was at for some reason, giving them plenty of open looks from beyond the arc. We kind of looked like a tormented cat chasing one of those laser light things, always a couple of steps behind ;)

JO played mediocre. I still feel like we're dumping it down to him to much. A couple of plays that looked forced immediately come to mind. He has improved on his outside shot, but he isn't too good at going inside at all right now. Although Ike has only played in three games all year, so far he looks like our primary interior threat. By losing a lot of his ability to play inside JO has lost a key facet to his game. Hopefully this is only temporary and those years of banging around in the paint haven't caught up to him, yet.

And on to Nawlins. I don't have a lot of confidence about beating them right now, we can only hope that Peja stays consistent to his days as a Pacer and sits out ;)

bellisimo
11-20-2007, 10:34 PM
ah you beat me - punk :P

Trader Joe
11-20-2007, 10:35 PM
Shawne should be getting more minutes thats about all I got from this game.

bellisimo
11-20-2007, 10:37 PM
alright off to bed I go - i might be able to see some defense in my dreams...this was a horrid night - my blankie could do a better job at covering a LA LA player tonight...

bellisimo
11-20-2007, 10:38 PM
oh after seeing tonights game - I think the trade talks of JO for Bynum should be put to sleep - no way that deal is going down...

Unclebuck
11-20-2007, 10:44 PM
I have a real serious question. I considered staring a new thread for this.

I have heard from many of you over the past couple of seasons that you can take losing if the team plays a wide open free wheeling offense. How many times have I had the Denver game from 4 seasons ago thrown in my face - the one where the Pacers won 72-72 and I made a big deal about how much I loved it.

Well is this better. Giving up 130 points. But the offense sure looked good

Shade
11-20-2007, 10:46 PM
Changes...MAJOR changes have to be made. Or we're a lottery team. Period.

D-BONE
11-20-2007, 10:47 PM
Haven't seen the last few games b/c of being out of town. Having seen this one, wish I were going to be away more often this season.

Honestly, I see nothing I like outside Williams and Granger. Well, Foster was his usual hustling self and that's good. Harrison looked halfway decent, but I won't count on that of course.

Bynum rejected JO like 3-4 times. Twice consecutively. I guess it must be the knee. At this point, Odom and/or Farmar would have been a welcome deal.

BlueNGold
11-20-2007, 10:48 PM
It is a proven fact that defense, not a free flowing offense, wins playoff games and championships. However, this team does not have great defensive players. Consequently, I would rather see games where we lose 130-110 than 90-75.

So, until we stock this team with the right type of players and with enough talent, that is the choice.

D-BONE
11-20-2007, 10:48 PM
I have a real serious question. I considered staring a new thread for this.

I have heard from many of you over the past couple of seasons that you can take losing if the team plays a wide open free wheeling offense. How many times have I had the Denver game from 4 seasons ago thrown in my face - the one where the Pacers won 72-72 and I made a big deal about how much I loved it.

Well is this better. Giving up 130 points. But the offense sure looked good

It looked good for the first half. Then it looked about as bad as the defense.

odeez
11-20-2007, 10:49 PM
We played a good offensive game. Look horrible on the defensive end. They shot 58% for the game. What sucks is that we killed them on second chance points, but it didn't matter.

D-BONE
11-20-2007, 10:51 PM
You can run up the floor and gun up plenty of shots, but you can't hide a lack of talent. We've got no defensive players (especially perimeter), no shooters, no big-time socrer.

What's happened to Dunleavy? The disappearing acts appear to be back.

Tom White
11-20-2007, 10:53 PM
Well is this better. Giving up 130 points. But the offense sure looked good

Buck, I did not get to see the majority of the game, but from what I did see and read on here, the offense was not that good. Maybe compared to the defense, but......

rexnom
11-20-2007, 10:54 PM
I have a real serious question. I considered staring a new thread for this.

I have heard from many of you over the past couple of seasons that you can take losing if the team plays a wide open free wheeling offense. How many times have I had the Denver game from 4 seasons ago thrown in my face - the one where the Pacers won 72-72 and I made a big deal about how much I loved it.

Well is this better. Giving up 130 points. But the offense sure looked good
You nailed it during the last game. If the other team doesn't have outside shooters, the offense and defense are going to look fantastic. Otherwise, we're in big, big trouble. I am starting to think that Obie's defense might be a little outdated considering how many perimeter-oriented teams there are in this league. Phoenix could potentially score 150 points on us.

sportsmusicxboxpacer
11-20-2007, 10:55 PM
line up changes is a must right now or something this too much real pain in *** see team play like this we need a back up point badly diner is a waste of money i dont care abt 3 point shot he can do but run team hell no no doubt in my mind there will be a trade in few weeks if this keep going

odeez
11-20-2007, 10:56 PM
trade please!

Erik
11-20-2007, 10:58 PM
Haven't seen the last few games b/c of being out of town. Having seen this one, wish I were going to be away more often this season.

Honestly, I see nothing I like outside Williams and Granger. Well, Foster was his usual hustling self and that's good. Harrison looked halfway decent, but I won't count on that of course.

Bynum rejected JO like 3-4 times. Twice consecutively. I guess it must be the knee. At this point, Odom and/or Farmar would have been a welcome deal.j.o. sprained his ankle in the first half.

D-BONE
11-20-2007, 11:05 PM
j.o. sprained his ankle in the first half.

Thanks for the info. Now that you mention it, I do remember him grimacing at some point.

Now is another injury good? Well, excuses his awful performance tonight. Hopefully, it's minor, but the injuries just keep cropping up.

BlueNGold
11-20-2007, 11:10 PM
trade please!

There are not many healthy, tradeable assets to work with...and teams just don't give away talent.

I seriously doubt this team will get much better before we do so through the draft. For those who constantly downplay the draft, look at Shawne Williams and Danny Granger. I believe they are two of our best players just after a few years...and they were picked pretty low at #17. Imagine if we got a couple lotto picks.

Shade
11-20-2007, 11:23 PM
I am seriously open to moving anyone other than Granger and Shawne if it gets us some decent draft picks next season. I'm ready to stop delaying the inevitable and just rebuild through the draft.

rexnom
11-20-2007, 11:24 PM
I am seriously open to moving anyone other than Granger and Shawne if it gets us some decent draft picks next season. I'm ready to stop delaying the inevitable and just rebuild through the draft.
I'd like to add Ike to that. I sincerely believe that we've got something good with those three.

Shade
11-20-2007, 11:27 PM
I'd like to add Ike to that. I sincerely believe that we've got something good with those three.

I like Ike, but I'm very concerned about his size. I'm not sure the rest of his game can make up for his inability to stop bigger guys from simply shooting over him.

I'd be fine with keeping him, though.

TheDon
11-20-2007, 11:32 PM
Honestly I didn't really come away from watching that game with too many negatives we played our game the entire time from beginning to end. We're supposed to be protecting the paint and forcing them to take their 3's trouble was they were making them. Other than that Kobe was just Kobe and had one of his better nights. I honestly don't believe every team not even if we played the lakers another 9 games in a row would be shooting lights out like they did tonight.

rexnom
11-20-2007, 11:33 PM
I like Ike, but I'm very concerned about his size. I'm not sure the rest of his game can make up for his inability to stop bigger guys from simply shooting over him.

I'd be fine with keeping him, though.
He's learning, though. I'd love for him to just face up and shoot when bigger guys stop him. This is what took Amare's game to another level. Ike is a very, very solid mid-range guy.

BlueNGold
11-20-2007, 11:35 PM
I am seriously open to moving anyone other than Danny and Shawne if it gets us some decent draft picks next season. I'm ready to stop delaying the inevitable and just rebuild through the draft.

Shawne, Granger and Ike in that order. No one else has any long term value IMO. Foster is important if you want to win games right now, but his days are numbered and should be traded. You can count JO's time left by looking at your watch. Trade him now or stick a fork in him. Same with Quis.

Not preparing to succeed, is preparing to fail....

Here is the plan over the next 3 years:
1) Trade all assets for '08, '09 and '10 draft picks
2) Allow Dun, Murphy and Tins contracts to expire (note: they are not tradeable assets
3) Hit the free agent market, because we will have a ton of cap room.

Unclebuck
11-20-2007, 11:35 PM
I am seriously open to moving anyone other than Granger and Shawne if it gets us some decent draft picks next season. I'm ready to stop delaying the inevitable and just rebuild through the draft.

Who else on our roster has any real trade value. JO's trade value is very low right now, he looks old, tired, and like he should be ready to retire.

Shade
11-20-2007, 11:40 PM
Shawne, Granger and Ike in that order. No one else has any long term value IMO. Foster is important if you want to win games right now, but his days are numbered and should be traded. You can count JO's time left by looking at your watch. Trade him now or stick a fork in him. Same with Quis.

Not preparing to succeed, is preparing to fail....

Here is the plan over the next 3 years:
1) Trade all assets for '08, '09 and '10 draft picks
2) Allow Dun, Murphy and Tins contracts to expire (note: they are not tradeable assets
3) Hit the free agent market, because we will have a ton of cap room.

I really like that plan.

We need to do whatever we can to draft Eric Gordon. Seriously. He's Dwyane Wade II.

Shade
11-20-2007, 11:41 PM
Who else on our roster has any real trade value. JO's trade value is very low right now, he looks old, tired, and like he should be ready to retire.

JO's trade value isn't as low as you'd think. People are still more than willing to take a chance on a multiple-time All-Star.

And he'll improve as the season progresses.

OnlyPacersLeft
11-20-2007, 11:45 PM
well i loved how JO got more involved in the offense! It turned out great let me tell ya!

Doug
11-20-2007, 11:53 PM
FWIW, I thought Harrison looked decent tonight.

JO didn't get a rebound until the 4th quarter. Inexcusable.

We must have left our feet on defense a bazillion times. DON'T GO FOR THE SHOT FAKE!

Our defensive rotations were SSSSLLLLLOOOOOOWWWWW.

Hicks
11-21-2007, 12:10 AM
Believe it or not, defense wasn't really the problem tonight. It wasn't great, but it wasn't bad either. The Lakers were hitting weakside long jumpers and threes, hitting tough layups, and pulling several shots directly from their collective ***. No, the real problem was the offense. It's a miracle they put up this many points with it. The things I saw during the Utah game disappeared most of the game, and it was ugly and bad tonight on that end. It's truly amazing they produced this many points tonight.

DGPR
11-21-2007, 12:12 AM
I just got back from the so called "game". It was much more like the Lakers versus the Indianapolis Retirement Community. The crowd wasn't excited at all, and a lot of them were Laker fans anyways. Shawne Williams definitely showed up to play along with Granger and Quis. But 3 on 5 is a little lopsided.

Unclebuck
11-21-2007, 12:18 AM
I just got back from the so called "game". It was much more like the Lakers versus the Indianapolis Retirement Community. The crowd wasn't excited at all, and a lot of them were Laker fans anyways. Shawne Williams definitely showed up to play along with Granger and Quis. But 3 on 5 is a little lopsided.

Jeff played well

DGPR
11-21-2007, 12:23 AM
*4 on 5

LAPacer
11-21-2007, 12:34 AM
LA is playing really well. I don't think there was anything our personnel could have done differently. They were on their game and have alot more talent. Hard to stop that. I wish they would have traded Kobe to Detroit.

Reckoner
11-21-2007, 12:43 AM
Believe it or not, defense wasn't really the problem tonight. It wasn't great, but it wasn't bad either. The Lakers were hitting weakside long jumpers and threes, hitting tough layups, and pulling several shots directly from their collective ***. No, the real problem was the offense. It's a miracle they put up this many points with it. The things I saw during the Utah game disappeared most of the game, and it was ugly and bad tonight on that end. It's truly amazing they produced this many points tonight.

Agree. The Lakers showed us how to move the ball well and consistently give guys good looks. We had too many periods where movement slowed down and we had to force it.

A few thoughts:

I was a bit concerned from early on when we were relying quite heavily on second chance points to stay with them. When that dried up they just pulled away.

We really lack a quality 2 guard who can just flat out score. We seem to have quite a bit of depth but in the end we just don't have that 1 guy you can rely on to carry the team through tough periods in games. Maybe Granger can become this guy. I'm not sure if he has the confidence/killer instinct for it though. I don't think Quis can but he's great off the bench. Dunleavy is more like a Luke Walton.

I'm not going to be hard on JO because it's obvious his knee is limiting him significantly.

Murphy is useless if he can't hit those open shots.

Williams is a gun.

LAPacer
11-21-2007, 12:45 AM
Williams is a gun.

I was going to say that he is just pulling the trigger as the coach has instructed, but thinking about it, you might be right. We should keep an eye on it for this season.

Reckoner
11-21-2007, 12:49 AM
I was going to say that he is just pulling the trigger as the coach has instructed, but thinking about it, you might be right. We should keep an eye on it for this season.

Ha, no sorry mate I didn't mean it like that. Over here "gun" means very good/exciting (usually young) player. I think very similar to how you use "stud". I'll try and conform in the future :D

rexnom
11-21-2007, 12:56 AM
Ha, no sorry mate I didn't mean it like that. Over here "gun" means very good/exciting (usually young) player. I think very similar to how you use "stud". I'll try and conform in the future :D
Please don't conform! I love that saying - I think I'm gonna start using it. Shawne is a gun. I like the sound of that.

Evan_The_Dude
11-21-2007, 01:06 AM
I really like that plan.

We need to do whatever we can to draft Eric Gordon. Seriously. He's Dwyane Wade II.

I'd take us losing every single game the rest of this season if it put us in position to draft Gordon and put him on the court with Shawne & Danny.

Pacemaker
11-21-2007, 01:06 AM
I would trade JO for Bynum straight up in a heartbeat! Throw in Farmar for any other Pacer filler (excluding Danny, Shawne, Ike) as an appetizer ;)

CableKC
11-21-2007, 01:11 AM
Okay...I will ask the question that no one outside of the few Laker fans that have graced our board have asked....what are your impressions of Bynum?

I didn't see the game...so I don't know...other then reading that Bynum swapped JONeal 4 times :banghead:

CableKC
11-21-2007, 01:12 AM
I would trade JO for Bynum straight up in a heartbeat! Throw in Farmar for any other Pacer filler (excluding Danny, Shawne, Ike) as an appetizer ;)
If there ever was a boat that involved Bynum ( which I doubt ), that boat sailed the second that Bynum played his first game of the preseason.

rexnom
11-21-2007, 01:21 AM
Okay...I will ask the question that no one outside of the few Laker fans that have graced our board have asked....what are your impressions of Bynum?

I didn't see the game...so I don't know...other then reading that Bynum swapped JONeal 4 times :banghead:
Bynum looked very impressive. I feel like all of the mistakes he made were experience-related. I don't see why he can't average an 18-10 as soon as next season or the year after that, given the playing time.

Peck
11-21-2007, 01:36 AM
Okay...I will ask the question that no one outside of the few Laker fans that have graced our board have asked....what are your impressions of Bynum?

I didn't see the game...so I don't know...other then reading that Bynum swapped JONeal 4 times :banghead:

http://galeriamit.tripod.com/hercules.jpg

I was reminded of watching the old X-Men cartoon years ago on fox saturday mornings when Apocolype was on and said "I am as far beyond mutants as mutants are beyond humans". Because all I could think was that Bynam was as far beyond O'Neal as O'Neal is beyond Harrison.

Obviousley not a career, but for that game, it wasn't even close.

As Doug said, J.O. didn't even get a board till the 4th quarter and one of the boards that they credited him with was where he had his shot blocked by Bynum and he picked up the ball.

It would take Jermaine and Granger to even get them to talk to us and even then I'm not sure that would be enough.

rexnom
11-21-2007, 01:51 AM
Our only hopes for Bynum would have been a poor start by the Lakers and Kobe *****ing like crazy. Now? Not so much.

Btw, it takes a real man to reference an X-Men cartoon while having a Weyoun avatar. Beyond impressive, Peck.

Oh and as far as this game goes, I'm not so sure that David didn't have a better game than JO. He certainly did better work in the post.

Edit: Addendum, I still think a JO for Bynum and filler trade would be great for both sides. I think JO would be rejuvenated playing Robin to Kobe's Batman. If LA unloaded some bad salaries in the process, I think they should seriously consider it. That team still seems a little too weak inside.

pwee31
11-21-2007, 02:48 AM
If we play a team that shooting well from the outside, we'll get beat. If the team is shooting badly from the outside, we'll keep it close or win.

This seems to be what I'm taking from most of the games so far this season.

Rather it's our defense being that bad or what, but if the opposing team is constantly hitting from 15ft or out... we're in trouble.

CableKC
11-21-2007, 03:10 AM
Our only hopes for Bynum would have been a poor start by the Lakers and Kobe *****ing like crazy. Now? Not so much.
I really hope that Bird wasn't hoping that the Lakers would tank and Kobe would go ape**** and therefore force the Lakers FO to cave to Odom+Bynum. I have always thought that Bird is not a great gambler when it comes to taking risks. He may roll the dice and come up with a 7 or 11 ( like drafting Shawne ) from time to time....but most of the time...he just rolls snake eyes.


Edit: Addendum, I still think a JO for Bynum and filler trade would be great for both sides. I think JO would be rejuvenated playing Robin to Kobe's Batman. If LA unloaded some bad salaries in the process, I think they should seriously consider it. That team still seems a little too weak inside.
Dream on......there is nothing that we can offer the Lakers that would entice them to give up Bynum for JONeal.

oneofthesedays
11-21-2007, 03:11 AM
Maybe you Pacer fans can elaborate more on this but Jermaine looked like he flat out didn't want to be there. No emotions at all from him. He was playing like he didn't even care. He just looks so dejected......

TheDon
11-21-2007, 03:51 AM
If we play a team that shooting well from the outside, we'll get beat. If the team is shooting badly from the outside, we'll keep it close or win.

That's exactly my thoughts on the matter and kind of what I was getting it at with my post earlier talking about how we played our game where we protected the paint but they were hitting their threes. I really think these losses are a product of the system and ability of the other team to actually hit from 3 point land.

In the pacers wins here's how the teams did from 3 point land
washington (.300)
miami (.563)
memphis (.222)
utah (.222)

The miami game can be counted as somewhat of a fluke cause for once this season we actually got to the line more times than our opposition. Now as far as our losses.

LA Clippers (.533)
Bobcats (.357)
Nuggets (.387)
Celtics (.286) but they had twice as many FTA
Wizards (.364)
Raptors (.522)
Lakers (.520)

Someone made the comparisona few games ago and I forget who but they said that this reminds them of what Mike Davis did at IU where he tried to turn a bunch of people who were consistently bad shooters magically into shooters and it didn't work. I think that that's a pretty good comparison. Pacers have shot over 35% from outside 4 times...wonder if you can guess which games those were. When you come up against a situation where we can't hit a three and the other team does, worst case scenario you see games like what happened tonight.

CableKC
11-21-2007, 04:17 AM
If we play a team that shooting well from the outside, we'll get beat. If the team is shooting badly from the outside, we'll keep it close or win.

This seems to be what I'm taking from most of the games so far this season.

Rather it's our defense being that bad or what, but if the opposing team is constantly hitting from 15ft or out... we're in trouble.
That's the $64,057,500 question ;) ....how do we improve our defense when we have Tinsley, Dunleavy and an oft-injured Marquis guarding the perimeter?

The short answer is we can't. We live with this until something major ( or drastic ) changes and pray that the other team doesn't shoot the ball well.

Cactus Jax
11-21-2007, 06:33 AM
LA is playing really well. I don't think there was anything our personnel could have done differently. They were on their game and have alot more talent. Hard to stop that. I wish they would have traded Kobe to Detroit.

What so we could get reamed 4 times a year by Kobe instead of 2? Count me in as one person who is very glad the Lakers are playing well and will hopefully keep him out west.

We're a fast break, run and gun, shooting team thats gonna give up points. At least they did one of those parts well tonight.

Unclebuck
11-21-2007, 08:29 AM
All I want for Christmas is some perimeter defenders

Putnam
11-21-2007, 09:41 AM
I have a real serious question. I considered staring a new thread for this.

I have heard from many of you over the past couple of seasons that you can take losing if the team plays a wide open free wheeling offense. How many times have I had the Denver game from 4 seasons ago thrown in my face - the one where the Pacers won 72-72 and I made a big deal about how much I loved it.

Well is this better? Giving up 130 points. But the offense sure looked good


Unclebuck, no this isn't better. I'm one who has yanked your chain a few times, but I hope I've never said I'd accept "losing if the team plays a wide open" game. I want the Pacers to win.

I want the Pacers to be able to get stops when they need to. I want them to be able to protect a lead. I want them to be able to contest shots effectively and make the other team earn every point. But I'd rather see them win and score 100+ as opposed to see them win and score less than 80. I'd love the Pacers to consistently exceed the other team in rebounds, blocks and steals. I disagree with you about the other aspects of "good" defense. I suppose you'd like to see the other team blocked out and waste the 24 seconds without a shot, while I'd prefer them to take their shots and make a slightly lower percentage of them than the Pacers do.

And I hate the Pat Riley/Bruce Bowen aspects of defense. I hate the shoving and holding and elbowing.

I'm happier about this team than last years' team. It is good that they can score at a high clip. That alone is not enough, and the Pacers aren't going to be a very good team on just that. But explosive offensive potential is one good thing. Only one: there's still a lot wrong with the offense. But I'm happy knowing the Pacers can score.

Major Cold
11-21-2007, 10:05 AM
All I want for Christmas is some perimeter defenders


I am with you. It is sick. I wish we traded for Marice Evans.

Daniels and Granger are the only consistent defenders. Shawne will be better once he gets more PT and understands each player he is defending. He simply has not played players like Pierce and Kobe to be considered a reliable defender against them.

JO has slighty better trade value than Chris Webber did with the Sixers. There is no team with the right pieces out there to trade and get what we need. It would be better if he opts out by taking a buyout. Bynum tore him apart on both ends. But to JO's credit if Farmar, Kobe, and Fisher did not blow past their so called defenders he would have been in better position to at least have a chance.

With Bynum the way he is now I still think that the Lakers are stupid for not using him in a trade for Jason Kidd. Kidd can rebound better than anyone on that team.

David Harrison needs to put two games back to back. If he is solid again then we may be able to use him in a trade with JO.

So far the Rush and Diener project is failing. It is just November and I can't see any reason why Diener got that long contract. I know he is injured, but it is ridicoulous how much he looked like Saras tonight.

I would like to see better defense coming off a long layoff. Tommorrow should be interesting since Tyson Chandler won't be playing. He tore us apart last year.

And interesting stat though.

We give up more points than any team not in Memphis or Oakland. We give up more points than any team in the East. What is even more sad is that when your take the average Points scored of all of our opponents it is lower than the points that we give up. By 6 points.

Our defense is the main reason why we are failing. It may come around but we do not have the players that can assure that. A backcourt shake up is needed if we want to make the playoffs. Which means we may have to give up Shawne or Danny to get that.

odeez
11-21-2007, 10:54 AM
All I want for Christmas is some perimeter defenders

Amen Brother!

Elgin56
11-21-2007, 11:20 AM
How does JO manage to snag 3 measley boards? Hell the ball boy could do that for a hell of a lot less cash.

LTD
11-21-2007, 11:24 AM
With regards to JO, I think it's clear right now that you have to stick with him, hope he gets/stays healthy, and then reassess his trade value at that point. It would be a huge mistake to trade him now.

After watching the game last night, if Bynum was truly on the table, and Indy was holding out for Odom AND Bynum, I have to say that that was a bigtime mistake. Again, IF he was on the table, Pacers bras should have pulled the trigger.


As for the Bynum for Kidd trade, I think some don't realize that it was more than just Bynum. Kwame Brown and another player or two would have had to be included to make that deal work. So, having Kobe and Kidd would be nice, but do you really think that that team makes any serious noise at all in the western Conference with Brain Cook or Ronny Turiaf starting at center? I think not. To trade for Kidd, LA wouldn't have had any big men left.

naptownmenace
11-21-2007, 12:00 PM
Our defense all around was HORRIBLE, especially on the perimeter. The Lakers looked like they were conducting some type of orchestra with their ball movement out there. And what they were doing wasn't especially revolutionary or anything, it's just that we couldn't keep up to where the ball was at for some reason, giving them plenty of open looks from beyond the arc. We kind of looked like a tormented cat chasing one of those laser light things, always a couple of steps behind ;)



I agreed with everything you said but what I quoted above was the reason they lost they game.

It was the same thing against the Lakers that we saw against the Clippers, Nuggets, Wizards, and Raptors - slow rotations to the open man. The goal is to trap the pick and roll and shut down the middle but neither has been to effective in those 5 losses in particular. They were running around like chickens with their heads cut off and the Lakers kept drilling wide open "practice" jumpers.

I'm starting to think that they should stop trapping the pick and roll and stick to man to man defense unless they can do a better job of rotating.

Claptonrocks
11-21-2007, 12:24 PM
How does JO manage to snag 3 measley boards? Hell the ball boy could do that for a hell of a lot less cash.

How does he manage to snag 3????
they fell into his hands by mistake!!!!

ABADays
11-21-2007, 02:38 PM
Isn't it interesting to note that this summer JO possibly traded to LA for Bynam + and now we couldn't even trade him straight up for Bynum.

ABADays
11-21-2007, 02:41 PM
Pacers bras should have pulled the trigger.

Did I miss something here? Do we have women running the show now or is this another Seinfeld episode?

LTD
11-21-2007, 02:52 PM
LOL

brass!

Naptown_Seth
11-21-2007, 06:21 PM
Well first the good.

Shawne, brilliant, confident, superstar in the making if he keeps this up. I'd pay to watch him play. He was a big surprise last year with how ready he was and his fast progression continues.

Danny. Forced some shots, and sometimes settled instead. But ultimately he made a couple of impressive defensive efforts against Kobe and showed some ability to score on the dribble drive. Wasn't always pretty, but it was an effort to get it going and to expand his game. He doesn't shine like Shawne, doesn't have that spark or something, but he's a damn good player. To me this was not really a great night for him and it was still pretty good.

Harrison. Yes, Harrison. Didn't just avoid fouls by avoiding plays, he defended pretty well at times without fouling. If he could just add a bit more discipline to his defensive instincts, not go chasing the homerun block or steal, he'd really be a guy you could count on. His post offense is a great asset.

But most of all his effort to keep his cool and stay in games must be commended. He's got a fair ways to go still, but at least he finally seems to understand which way he's supposed to be headed. I really hope he keeps it up and that this isn't just a one week wonder.


Okay, that takes care of the good. Now the bad.

Remember the offensive movement vs Utah. Neither do the Pacers. It was horrible and it's not a JO thing. Things actually got worse after JO hit his knee and went out.

JO. Got brutalized by Bynum and you just have to hope it was because his leg was hurting after getting it smacked hard. He didn't win battles on the glass, he didn't really stop people inside very often, and Bynum got deep in his head with those shot blocks. I do agree that he was hung out to dry because he was forced to constantly help on dribble penetration. One time Farmar flat out posted up Tins and then went up and under on him which JO had to cover, and that left Bynum free for a dunk.

Tinsley. Mel Mel was tossing the rock around with wreckless abandon. I'll admit that I kinda like that, but when those passes are getting stolen or leading to poor plays it's pretty frustrating. He also had some trouble scoring. But his defense was where he got rung up as bad. He was a serious liability at that end.

Troy. Ugh. Luke Walton, all-star thanks to Troy. Here's some money, buy a shot. At least he was active on the glass at times which did help out a few times.


Mike. Mike did play, right? Yeesh. When he's going he's a big help, but he goes invisible man much faster that McKey ever did. Well, on offense that is.

Quis. Well it wasn't for lack of effort, but he missed some of his classic inside ugly shots and obviously had big time trouble stopping Kobe, who just shot right over him a couple of times. Really more of a meh than a bad game.

Foster. See Quis. Meh, but still good hustle. Of course it was classic Jeff with several missed tip-in/put back attempts.

Diener and Rush. Where's all this sweet shooting? Diener did nothing helpful till the game was about 25 points, then hit a couple of meaningless shots. Diener was also abused at the defensive end which hurt.

Naptown_Seth
11-21-2007, 06:36 PM
I'd like to add that I sat with Gnome and Mal and not only did Mal and I not come to blows, we were in total agreement that the defense was not particularly horrible overall. Perimeter defense is still a big issue, but team defense wasn't terrible considering the power of weapons like Kobe paired with Bynum.

Frankly the Lakers shot their way to that offense, not unlike the Pacers in the first few games this year. Kobe busting contested 3s with his 32% rate or whatever he came in with? Come on. That running sideways jumper by Farmar. That falling over leaner layup by Odom.

If the Pacers were putting up s*** like that I'd be PO'd, even if it was going in. They got some good looks out of their offense too, don't get me wrong, but that 130 was built on some pretty hot shooting too.

The Pacers offense was horrid. Not bad. Horrid. Stagnant, confused, intimidated by Bynum. It was the polar oppostive of what we saw vs Utah, and that led to the poor FG%. They weren't taking the same types of shots (um, were there any lane cutter layups at all?) and weren't getting shots in the same kind of rhythm.

BoomBaby31
11-21-2007, 06:40 PM
All i have to write is, man that JO/?/? for Bynum/odom/? is probably sounding a lot better now.

Evan_The_Dude
11-21-2007, 07:14 PM
rhythm.


The key to our offense besides ball movement is rhythm.

Elgin56
11-21-2007, 07:25 PM
I'd like to add that I sat with Gnome and Mal and not only did Mal and I not come to blows, we were in total agreement that the defense was not particularly horrible overall. Perimeter defense is still a big issue, but team defense wasn't terrible considering the power of weapons like Kobe paired with Bynum.

Frankly the Lakers shot their way to that offense, not unlike the Pacers in the first few games this year. Kobe busting contested 3s with his 32% rate or whatever he came in with? Come on. That running sideways jumper by Farmar. That falling over leaner layup by Odom.

If the Pacers were putting up s*** like that I'd be PO'd, even if it was going in. They got some good looks out of their offense too, don't get me wrong, but that 130 was built on some pretty hot shooting too.

The Pacers offense was horrid. Not bad. Horrid. Stagnant, confused, intimidated by Bynum. It was the polar oppostive of what we saw vs Utah, and that led to the poor FG%. They weren't taking the same types of shots (um, were there any lane cutter layups at all?) and weren't getting shots in the same kind of rhythm.



I sat with my wife, does that count?

imawhat
11-21-2007, 11:58 PM
Just wanted to add I wasn't as down about this game as most. To me, it's little more than a very hot shooting night by the Lakers. The Pacers had trouble closing out, but LA still had to make the shots.


The thing that concerns me is that we're playing a type of defense that allows the opponent to get into such a good rhythm that they're hitting tough shots. It reminds me of our defense right after we got Peja. Ouch.


Otherwise, the Lakers have been playing very well lately. I was courtside when they dismantled the Pistons in the 4th last Friday. Also beat Houston earlier that week.




BTW, Fox Sports needs to invest in a better camera. I watched the game on LA's "WB4", and the quality of the footage was 10Xs better.

BobbyMac
11-22-2007, 12:01 AM
Good game tonite...too bad that Chris, Clark and the TV director were more interested in talking to the Hornets GM and showing people in the stands when the game was going on.

BoomBaby31
11-22-2007, 06:35 AM
Just wanted to add I wasn't as down about this game as most. To me, it's little more than a very hot shooting night by the Lakers. The Pacers had trouble closing out, but LA still had to make the shots.


The thing that concerns me is that we're playing a type of defense that allows the opponent to get into such a good rhythm that they're hitting tough shots. It reminds me of our defense right after we got Peja. Ouch.


Otherwise, the Lakers have been playing very well lately. I was courtside when they dismantled the Pistons in the 4th last Friday. Also beat Houston earlier that week.




BTW, Fox Sports needs to invest in a better camera. I watched the game on LA's "WB4", and the quality of the footage was 10Xs better.

Hey I was at that game too, sitting courtside.

pwee31
12-08-2007, 03:02 PM
LOL since this game we're 6-3 and the Lakers are 4-5

BlueNGold
12-08-2007, 03:26 PM
The great Andrew Bynum just had two points and two rebounds in 26 minutes. ...while Marcus Camby had 20 rebounds in that same game.

LOL.

I know the guy is young and everything, but he is several years from being that effective. He will NEVER be anything close to a Shaq franchise type player. Not even close. The Laker fans will be very disappointed when he plateaus to a pumped up version of Brendan Haywood.

The Lakers should deal that young man and whatever other assets they have to make a run....while Kobe and Lamar Odom can help win a championship.

Anthem
12-08-2007, 03:34 PM
a pumped up version of Brendan Haywood.
I don't disagree. But that's not a bad thing. A solid big man who patrols the lane, converts easy buckets, plays D, and has a decent post game good for a couple buckets a night is nothing to sneeze at. Bynum could become that guy.

But then, so could David Harrison.

CableKC
12-08-2007, 03:41 PM
The great Andrew Bynum just had two points and two rebounds in 26 minutes. ...while Marcus Camby had 20 rebounds in that same game.

LOL.

I know the guy is young and everything, but he is several years from being that effective. He will NEVER be anything close to a Shaq franchise type player. Not even close. The Laker fans will be very disappointed when he plateaus to a pumped up version of Brendan Haywood.

The Lakers should deal that young man and whatever other assets they have to make a run....while Kobe and Lamar Odom can help win a championship.
I'm not gonna say that Bynum is gonna be the next Shaq or anything.....but it was just 1 game against a decent defender like Camby. If I'm not mistaken, this was the day after he sat out due to a stomach flu.

CableKC
12-08-2007, 03:42 PM
I don't disagree. But that's not a bad thing. A solid big man who patrols the lane, converts easy buckets, plays D, and has a decent post game good for a couple buckets a night is nothing to sneeze at. Bynum could become that guy.

But then, so could David Harrison.
So could JONeal....if he wanted to.....:zip:

Anthem
12-08-2007, 04:27 PM
I'm not gonna say that Bynum is gonna be the next Shaq or anything.....but it was just 1 game against a decent defender like Camby. If I'm not mistaken, this was the day after he sat out due to a stomach flu.
I'm not saying he's going to be a stiff. But he's not the next Dwight Howard, let alone the next Shaq.

CableKC
12-08-2007, 06:28 PM
I'm not saying he's going to be a stiff. But he's not the next Dwight Howard, let alone the next Shaq.
Oh no....neither am I......I just think that he will be a solid borderline Starting Center in the future.