My whole point, is that you play into LA's hands by having your center shooting jumpers to "take advantage" of Shaq's hesitance to leave the paint. If it really hurt LA, don't you think Phil would be in Shaq's face about it? LA would rather you run your offense around a jump shooting center, than through a star player.
Uhh, what? Since when do you see Laker perimeter defenders on opposing centers? And the notion that Kobe and Fox not having anything to do with why LA has the best 3pt % defense in the league is ridiculous. Fisher, Kobe, Fox, and Hunter when he was there being solid perimeter defenders have everything to do with why the Lakers are so tough on the perimeter (even in your little scenario, you have Kobe and Fox being great at rotating as the reason why the Lakers have the best 3pt% defense in the league). Add to that Shaq's imposing presence in the middle, and the Laker perimeter defenders can play even tighter to their man.
Well I would also say, Shaq is not a great defensive player. He has never seemed interested in beaing committed to improving himself defensively. Its interesting also. Ive always thought Hakeem was a better team defensive player than an individual defensive player (not saying that he wasnt great individually). Dream was excellent at making up for his teamates defensive mistakes by guarding the back door. Ive never though it was a fair statement that he always shut down people like Robinson, O'Neal, etc. He really didn't. They usually would get theirs against dream. The huge difference was, he didnt let anyone else beat our team inside and thats why we won like we did.
I agree. A jump shooting center should be just icing on the cake; teams running their offense through one wouldn't be wise. The last two biggest threats to the Lakers, the Blazers and Kings both had terrific shooting centers in Sabonis and Divac, but still relied on their star players (Wallace with the Blazers and Webber and Bibby with the Kings).
Those 2 teams are LA's biggest threats because they have/had the most talent... It doesn't really have all that much to do with the fact that they have centers who can shoot. Otherwise, we should have beaten LA in 99, when Olajuwon was nailing 19 ft jumpers all day long...
Perhaps we woud have, had Quitten not choked in game 4. I didn't say it was the main reason, I said it was icing on the cake.
Kid and Codell. I promise you if the Kings had a player like EG on their team he had to have gotten the playing time, especially since Webber was out. Further his rebounding and shot blocking is not existent on the Kings first team much less Pollard. You guys got to be kidding comparing Pollard to EG and to be covering for Pollard's evident deficiencies, claiming that he did what he had to do. Are you kidding me? "Scrappiness" goes only so far. Whatever defense Vlade was playing on Shaq, I believe Cato can play it better than Pollard. Pollard is short with no jumping ability and could not put a body on Shaq. When was the last time Pollard got an alleyhoop pass, an option with Cato. EG on the other hand could have knock down some shots which Pollard could not do and stretch the defense some. Remember the Kings were that close.
Actually, the one thing Pollard can do well, is shoot from 15 ft or so. He also is decent at finishing inside, and is MUCH better than Cato. Regardless, the Kings got their EG-type player in Keon Clark, who is better, at this point, than EG. Though he's not going to be knocking down any shots anytime soon. Kings don't really need an offensive threat from the backup PF/C position anyhow.
The problem is that while your C is shooting 19 ft jumpers, LA is going to Shaq for 5 ft hook shots... Guess who has the advantage there? LA wants you to play out of your game. They are great at making teams go away from what made them good to begin with.
Scrapiness goes a long way. See Mario Elie. If you look at his stats on paper, they werent eye catching. His intangibles, what he did for this team and they way he played the role that was given to him compare to what Pollard does for Sac. I dont think anyone here is saying Pollard is better than Griff (even based on his rookie season). But Pollard has played the same role for them for serveral seasons. Its hard to say that Eddie would have just stepped right in and assumed that role and filled it better. Also, Pollard doesnt have to score because they dont ask him to. They have so much firepower, as long as he comes in and does the dirty work, then the Kings are happy with him. You also brought up that when their starting 4 was out, EG would have gotten alot of playing team. Our starting 4 was out, Eddie got minutes and developed. I dont see how he would have developed quicker on their team than ours.
The loss of Bibby really changes things for the Kings. They still have alotta weapons in webber, stojakovic, webber, divac, christie, and clark just to name a few. Even without Bibby, I still think they're the team to beat. Bobby Jackson is still a legit startin point gaurd.....Lets see wut the Rocks and otha teams in the West can do to take advantage of the Kings' loss.
PEOPLE THESE DAYS...GEEZ THE ROCKETS MIGHT HAVE SUCKED LAST SEASON AND they probably wont whoop the kings but hey we never know until we watch the actual games..we might..just might be able to snatch a couple of wins!
Come on, people, last year is history. Next year about this time the same teams we are sweating in this thread will be sweating how they will beat us. Heck, they're sweating now. IMO, our individual matchups are superior. However, basketball is a team game. Once the Rockets learn to play as a cohesive unit, the title is ours for the taking.
The only way we pass up the Spurs, Kings or Lakers is if Ming develops into the same type of dominant player that Duncan, Webber and Shaq has and he odds are if he does, it will take him a few years. If he turns out to be a mediocre player, we dont have a chance really. Im sure hope he does though. The potential and upside is there.
Codell I am not getting involved with whether he becomes a great player like this one or that one. There are certain things he needs to do now that would put us there, including averaging 14 pts/50 fg%/8 reb/ 1 blk. If he does that, and I expect he will, we will be there. Put another way if for 48min the center position gives us 20pts/12reb/51fg%/3blks we will be in the top 4. Why? Because those figures go with 45pts from 1 and 2, and 40 pts from 3 and 4.
Excellent points. I still think top 4 is ambitious, but anything could happen. Center position is definately the biggest key. Cant win without good numbers from that position.
But do you believe that it is unrealistic to get those numbers from Cato/Ming and possibly EG? Man that is some serious balance if we could pull that off. The more you try to take a hard, realistic look at this team's potential the more it blows your mind. Not only is the talent abundant, there are no bad eggs on the team. Like no Kemp, no Payton, if you follow me. For the most part, it is a bunch of choir/altar boys.
