Lifestyle > Sports & Entertainment
Shawn Kemp making a strong comeback...Could possibly sign with the Lakers?
TeeRaySix9Teen:
--- Quote from: Now_Im_Blowed on September 28, 2005, 10:03:26 AM ---
--- Quote from: TeeRaySix9Teen on September 28, 2005, 01:17:17 AM ---
--- Quote from: Now_Im_Blowed on September 27, 2005, 02:32:55 PM ---
--- Quote from: Antonio on September 27, 2005, 02:09:35 PM ---Eddie will be 36 in 2007. I think he could play like Ron Harper, Brian Shaw and Aaron McKie, maybe even as a PG. If Spree can, Eddie DEF can. Man he used to be my fav player, lol! I just want him to finish his career with a Lakers #6 jersey.
--- End quote ---
Spree is much more fit to run the point than Eddie is...Eddie is closer to a small forward more than anything. It's just how you said "Eddie backing up Kobe"...Bad idea. Eddie starting at small forward or backing up Odom (if he's still a Laker) would've sounded better...It'd be nice to see Eddie back in a Laker jersey, but I'd prefer seeing Rush back in that 21 starting in the backcourt with Kobe, or Stojakavic coming off the bench at small forward instead of Jones, who is more of the starting 5 type. Jones should finish his career a starter, he's not the type of player who should slowly subside, but rather the type who should go out with a bang. Eddie needs to find a rebuilding team, possibly head back to Charlotte and use his veteran skills to lead them to sucess...But I'd definitely not decline an Eddie Jones return to LA...PeACe
--- End quote ---
Spree is more "fit" to run the point then Eddie...but believe me, you DO not want him runnin your point...lol
--- End quote ---
Spree can run point and switch off with Kobe...Kobe is excellent at running the point, so I see no reason it can't be done...A backcourt of Sprewell and Kobe would run through shit like it's nothing...PeACe
--- End quote ---
Like 7even said, get a real point guard in there. Youre gonna have some FRUSTRATED bigmen with Kobe and Spree runnin the point lol. I see forced three's, and fade-aways through double teams taken all game lol.
acbaylove:
--- Quote from: 7even the Opinion Maker on September 28, 2005, 06:26:43 AM ---Point is probably the hardest position to play. I wouldnt experiment with that. Put a real point guard there.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote from: TeeRaySix9Teen on September 29, 2005, 07:41:19 AM ---Like 7even said, get a real point guard in there.
--- End quote ---
Do you both knows the triangle system? It doesnt use a real point guard, but a point forward and an "initiator". Lakers have both. Odom is the point forward (the most versatile in the league, probably), and McKie is the initiator. Why should we get a real point guard if the triangle system doesnt need him? Did you remember Payton? He was a real PG, an All-Of-Famer type of PG. But still he failed. Why? Cause he had to do the initiator, not the point guard. So just get an initiator and use Odom as the point forward. There's no need to sign a real point guard. The best initiators in Phil's team was been Ron Harper and Bryan Shaw. Can you honestly call them "real point guards"? And yes, Spree can def do the initiator. All he gotta do is to defend and to share the ball. It's not that hard.
TeeRaySix9Teen:
--- Quote from: Antonio on September 29, 2005, 08:28:51 AM ---
--- Quote from: 7even the Opinion Maker on September 28, 2005, 06:26:43 AM ---Point is probably the hardest position to play. I wouldnt experiment with that. Put a real point guard there.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote from: TeeRaySix9Teen on September 29, 2005, 07:41:19 AM ---Like 7even said, get a real point guard in there.
--- End quote ---
Do you both knows the triangle system? It doesnt use a real point guard, but a point forward and an "initiator". Lakers have both. Odom is the point forward (the most versatile in the league, probably), and McKie is the initiator. Why should we get a real point guard if the triangle system doesnt need him? Did you remember Payton? He was a real PG, an All-Of-Famer type of PG. But still he failed. Why? Cause he had to do the initiator, not the point guard. So just get an initiator and use Odom as the point forward. There's no need to sign a real point guard. The best initiators in Phil's team was been Ron Harper and Bryan Shaw. Can you honestly call them "real point guards"? And yes, Spree can def do the initiator. All he gotta do is to defend and to share the ball. It's not that hard.
--- End quote ---
but it still prevents matchup problems on the other end. Kobe and Spree are good defenders (at their position). Spree, more of an "in the lane" defender then an on the ball defender. Kobe is basically streaky on tha defensive end. Quick penetrating point guards will be in the lane all day against Laker defense...which will be very bad for a team with no front court.
Doggystylin:
all this arguing for nothing, i see no links or articles about any of these deals happening, kemp hasnt even mentioned the lakers AT ALL, wtf are you all talking about, write this down, no kemp or spreewell on the lakers this year
acbaylove:
--- Quote from: TeeRaySix9Teen on September 29, 2005, 02:02:21 PM ---
--- Quote from: Antonio on September 29, 2005, 08:28:51 AM ---
--- Quote from: 7even the Opinion Maker on September 28, 2005, 06:26:43 AM ---Point is probably the hardest position to play. I wouldnt experiment with that. Put a real point guard there.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote from: TeeRaySix9Teen on September 29, 2005, 07:41:19 AM ---Like 7even said, get a real point guard in there.
--- End quote ---
Do you both knows the triangle system? It doesnt use a real point guard, but a point forward and an "initiator". Lakers have both. Odom is the point forward (the most versatile in the league, probably), and McKie is the initiator. Why should we get a real point guard if the triangle system doesnt need him? Did you remember Payton? He was a real PG, an All-Of-Famer type of PG. But still he failed. Why? Cause he had to do the initiator, not the point guard. So just get an initiator and use Odom as the point forward. There's no need to sign a real point guard. The best initiators in Phil's team was been Ron Harper and Bryan Shaw. Can you honestly call them "real point guards"? And yes, Spree can def do the initiator. All he gotta do is to defend and to share the ball. It's not that hard.
--- End quote ---
but it still prevents matchup problems on the other end. Kobe and Spree are good defenders (at their position). Spree, more of an "in the lane" defender then an on the ball defender. Kobe is basically streaky on tha defensive end. Quick penetrating point guards will be in the lane all day against Laker defense...which will be very bad for a team with no front court.
--- End quote ---
Our problem last year was the absence of Shaq inside. We built our defence around him, in the last years. I mean the defenders knew that they had an intimidator inside. Kobe himself was been named a couple of times in the All Defensive team of the NBA. But without Shaq it's obviously a different defence, you gotta do it harder and you cant let your opponent go inside. That's why Atkins, Tierre Brown and Vujacic got exposed, and that's why Odom playing in the PF position was been so bad defensively. This year, like i said, they need great defenders in the "initiator" spot, not Chucky Atkins'. Aaron McKie is known for being a good defender. Spree can defend too. So that's why they both can fit well. Smush Parker himself can defend. Other players who can defend are Watson (probably the best defensive PG in the league), Pargo and Lue, three other Lakers targets (Lue signed with Atlanta tho). That's what we need. We dont need a Jasikevicious type of PG! (even tho he's a fantastic PG!). Oh, and having Kwame Brown inside instead of Odom will help our defence. Phil is building this team around defence, obviously. All the players we acquired are good defenders. Turiaf is another great defender (too bad he had that problem). Wafer can defend. Bynum got long arms and in a couple of years he'll be a good intimidator inside (i'm not saying he'll be a dominant center, but at least a good intimidator). We need defenders. That's why Spree can fit well.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version