Laker: They won but could they have been a better team if?????

Well, on paper they would have been a better team. But isn't Glen Rice supposed to make them deadly too? If the team doesn't work together, it just doesn't.

Van Exel is a great talent, but nonetheless a ball hog.

Elden Campbell is a rare big man would good post up moves, strength, and defensive abilities. The knock on him is that he is inconsistent, but I don't think the Lakers should have let him go in the first place.

There is no excuse however for letting Eddie Jones go. They must have thought Glen Rice would be worth it, but Charlotte won in that deal.

Let's face it, Shaq and Kobe have to be made happy by being fed the ball. Take just a little a bit away from that and you'll have problems.

I still regret them trading Jones though. Absolutely no excuse. Can you imagine Jones and Bryant (if they worked well together) working together! And I'm sure Phil Jackson could have helped Campbell in the consistency department.

But then again, when they made the trade, they didn't know they were getting Phil.

------------------
"One who conquers others is strong; One who conquers himself is mighty" - Lao Tzu

 

Imagine if we still had Cassell and Horry and Chucky Brown and Zan Tabak and Pete Chilcutt

------------------
"When your dead, anything's funny."-John Lennon

 

First, a confession -- having grown up in L.A., I was a Lakers fan from the 80's through the Eddie Jones trade, when I looked at a starting lineup that included Shaq, Dennis Rodman, Glen Rice, and Derek Harper and wondered, "Where the hell are all the Lakers on this team?!?"

So, having said that, here are a few insights from having followed the team closely:

(1) Shaq had an enormous role in personnel decisions during the years before this one. He had an "out" clause in his contract that he could have used to become a free agent last summer, IF he wasn't happy -- so keeping Shaq happy became the name of the game. And if that meant bringing in the "thug and a shooter" (Rodman and Rice) that he kept publicly asking for, or dumping first Harris and then Rambis as coach, or not complaining about his declining interest in playing defense, well, that's the way it was. It was NOT a coincidence that every Laker who was on the team before Shaq got traded away, IMHO, nor is it a coincidence that only after Shaq's out clause had expired (and P. Jackson brought in on a long-term contract) did he start focusing on correcting his own shortcomings rather than blaming others -- basically, he knew he'd run out of excuses.

(2) Although trading for Rice was a Shaq-mandated move, the two Jerrys (West and Buss) have to share part of the blame. Buss apparently wants to avoid paying the luxury tax, and asked West to move Campbell's contract somewhere else. And West, who loves Kobe more than anything, was convinced that Kobe's true position was SG, so Jones had to be moved even though Bryant was playing exceptionally well (including stellar defense and about 10 rebounds/game) at SF. (Kobe's defense suffered immediately after the move, because he wasn't used to chasing smaller guards around screens.)

(3) Obviously, if they had known Jackson was coming in, the Lakers would have kept Eddie Jones -- can you imagine what a defensive nightmare a Jones-Bryant backcourt would pose for other teams? But even though Jackson's interest was well known, West didn't think Buss would pay that much for a coach (and, to be honest, West doesn't like coaches to have much power -- which is no doubt part of why he may quit this summer -- so there was probably some wishful thinking on his part as well).

(4) Van Exel was in large part a Shaq-identified scapegoat after losing in the playoffs one year, but even so his defensive liabilities and chronic knee problems (which always seemed to slow him down in the later playoff rounds) may have dictated that he had to go at some point anyway for the Lakers to win it all. The reason the Jazz pick-and-roll always decimated the Lakers is that it went at their two weakest defensive players (Shaq and Van Exel).

All told, I think the Lakers could have won their second straight title this year if the Rice trade hadn't been made. (The Spurs beat them by consistently using a two-man game with Duncan, guarded by the Lakers' PF, and whoever Glen Rice was supposedly defending -- this would have been much tougher if LA still had Campbell, its best interior defender, and Jones, its best perimeter defender.) But there's too many what-ifs to prove that decisively now.

------------------


[This message has been edited by Swopa (edited July 06, 2000).]

 

In hindsight, those trades probably shouldn't have been made, but at the time, they were pretty good.

At the time, Van Exel was a ballhog, and a disruption to the team.

At the time, Eddie Jones was freakishly inconsistent and vanished come playoff time.

At the time, Elden Cambell was lazy.

Both Cambell's and Jone's numbers were down the year they were traded, probably because of all the trade talk around them.

------------------
Who would've thought Don Nelson would pass up Olumide Oyedeji not once, not twice, but thrice?

 

The Lakers didnt win anything but the NBC title, This phoney franchise comprised of media hyped players and also rans are as phoney as you can get. Anyone that thinks the Lakers are the best team in the league knows absolutely nothing about basketball. The NBA staged it perfect for the Lakers. First robbing the Blazers then the poor Pacers. I just feel sorry for the Pacers players because those guys have worked hard their whole careers to the get to the finals then get cheated by some biased lakers officials.
Its a damn shame I tell and nobody deserved a ring more than Sam Perkins with the exception of Barkley.

------------------

 

Phil Jackson didn't bring LA the title. Maturity did. Del had $haq when he was only 26 and Kobe was still a teenager!!!!! Let's also keep in mind that $haq had a couple of big injuries during Del's run that certainly did nothing to help chemistry.

Bottom line is, young talent doesn't win anything. Talented veterans win almost everything(Shaq with 8 seasons, Kobe with four, Harper, Green, Rice, Salley all with 10+).

------------------
WE WILL WATCH THEM FALL... next year, at least.

 

Pued (can I call you Pued?), the concerns you cite were the "conventional wisdom" about the Lakers players, but as you probably know, the conventional wisdom isn't always true.

Van Exel was traded primarily because of a behind-the-scenes incident during a playoff series against the Jazz, which Shaq and others interpreted as NVE "quitting" on the team. His defensive weaknesses and recurring injury problems were secondary concerns.

I never understood where the legend about Jones disappearing in the playoffs came from. His career FG% (regular and 3-pt.) actually increases when you look at his Laker playoff stats. And he was the best player the Lakers had in the '96 playoffs, when they played ... hmm, what was that team again? ... oh, yeah, the Rockets.

If Campbell made $2M per year instead of $7M, he'd still be a Laker, lazy or not. That was a pure salary dump.

AntiSonic, I agree with you to some extent. The revolving door the Lakers had going every year after making the playoffs in Harris' first year as coach made it hard to develop chemistry. The Spurs got off to an equally rough start two years ago, but instead of making a Rice-like trade or firing the coach, they stayed the course . . . and it paid off for them.

Coach . . . I guess we can't expect you to grow up any faster, can we? This thread is discussing the team's development, regardless of whether it deserved to win the title. You've bored everyone on this board several times over with your ranting; repeating it several more times is just makes you (and your argument) look more foolish. Deal with it.

------------------


[This message has been edited by Swopa (edited July 06, 2000).]

 

AntiSonic,

But you gotta admit that if Phil wasn't there, the Lakers wouldn't have matured as quick. You think they could have won the championship with Kurt Rambis at the helm?

------------------
"One who conquers others is strong; One who conquers himself is mighty" - Lao Tzu

[This message has been edited by temujinphl (edited July 07, 2000).]

 

Antisonic -- could've used your opinions during the playoffs.

temujinphl -- so we've established that Phil may be a better coach than Kurt Rambis. Wow!

------------------
I Hate Every Bone in Your Body But Mine

 

I wouldn't say anything the Lakers could have done would have resulted in them beating San Antonio in their championship year. The Spurs were working so well, they rolled over everybody. They looked much like the '95 Rockets after their rocky playoff start. I don't think there was any stopping them.

------------------
http://www.gaffordstudios.cjb.net/

 

The Freak,

Well Phil has the ring to prove it. With virtually the same lineup for the past 2 years or so.

------------------
"One who conquers others is strong; One who conquers himself is mighty" - Lao Tzu

 

COACH IS RIGHT!

NBC gave that title to the Lakers. The refs tried their best to give the Pacers some of Kobe's calls. But the Pacers didn't have the money to pay them like the Lakers did.

COACH IS WRONG!

The Pacers lost the title because they can't read. They are the dumbest jocks in basketball. Larry should of read them the script if they were too dumb to read it themselves! They could've won the series if they would of just stuck to the script. Didn't you notice that in almost every game, the Pacers had the lead? Then they gave it up? Why? Because they can't read!

------------------
I Want To Thank God For Making Me A Rocketfan

 

temujinphl--

"Well Phil has the ring to prove it. With virtually the same lineup for the past 2 years or so."

Exactly- it takes time for a team to develop chemistry." You could've almost dropped Don Nelson of all people into that job and gotten about the same result.

Almu-- man, are you going to sit there and say that Steve Smith didn't get raped on that call in game seven? How about the completely and utterly ridiculous foul where that one Pacer(can't remember which one) didn't even touch Shaq? I know you have to suck it up and try to rise above the calls, but the kinda crap the hypocritical refs let the Faker$ get away with was unheard of!

------------------
WE WILL WATCH THEM FALL... next year, at least.

[This message has been edited by AntiSonic (edited July 07, 2000).]

 

Almu Almu Almu, You can joke around all you want about this all you want but I am serious the Pacers were not given a fair share in that series. I never said anything about the Lakers paying any refs off. The NBA tells the refs what to call and they dont get any extra money for doing what the people in charge tell to.

------------------

 

Swopa, I cant help if your a Lakers fan and the truth hurts, The only one who is foolish is you with gimmicks of happy and sad faces trying to get your point across. I could understand why a Lakers fan like you would get angry because I keep reminding you of the factoid of the Lakers tainted wins. It seems like your the one ranting about my posts cause your upset about reality.

------------------

 

No, but the NBA would have made a ton of extra money if the Finals had gone to 7 games. Which is why your conspiracy nonsense is a load of crap.

But hey, if a teenager says the NBA gave up millions of dollars just because they love the Lakers so much, I guess we shouldn't argue with the kid, should we?

It's sad that a once-interesting thread got hijacked by this idiocy, which has already been argued into the ground.

------------------

 

That type of simple minded thinking is just what the NBA wants everyone to believe. Nobody is talking about conspiracy here so get it right. When you say conspiracy you are saying why(ratings, money, revunue) the NBA does it and I dont care why. The only thing I am concentrating on is the fact that the NBA did cheat for the Lakers not why. Maybe it is hard for someone like you accept this but it is blantant reality. The proof has already taken place and it is documented on tape. I understand that you are a Lakers fan so when you see Kobe get away with hack after hack after hack you just dismiss it as a missed call. If I was a Lakers fan like yourself I would just admit the Lakers got the calls because it is not like they didnt get them.
So when you revert to butt naked metaphors like " Hijacked by idiocy" remember the Lakers did not earn their title is was hand ed to them on a David Stern silverstein platter.

------------------


[This message has been edited by COACH SAMPSON (edited July 08, 2000).]

 

Sigh . . . well, I'm sure everyone else has stopped reading this thread, so I'll reply before it's mercifully locked.

First of all, as I said above, I was a Lakers fan until the Eddie Jones trade, which dismantled the last of their mid-90's team. But I'm sure you just missed the "was," just like you missed seeing any calls that went against the Lakers -- that's how closed minds like yours work, by simply filtering out any unwanted information.

Second, my little genius, you claim not to care about the why of the Lakers supposedly getting favorable calls, but your claim that "the NBA cheated for the Lakers" is itself an attempt to explain why they got calls -- albeit one that you don't support with any evidence or even any rationale as to how or why they would do it.

Then again, maybe we do get a hint about your motivation with your twisted "silverstein platter" remark. But I guess being a bigot fits in the rest of your pattern of ignorance.

------------------