It's April 27, 2024, 06:03:08 AM
Quote from: Antonio on September 29, 2005, 08:28:51 AMQuote from: 7even the Opinion Maker on September 28, 2005, 06:26:43 AMPoint is probably the hardest position to play. I wouldnt experiment with that. Put a real point guard there.Quote from: TeeRaySix9Teen on September 29, 2005, 07:41:19 AMLike 7even said, get a real point guard in there.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.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.
Quote from: 7even the Opinion Maker on September 28, 2005, 06:26:43 AMPoint is probably the hardest position to play. I wouldnt experiment with that. Put a real point guard there.Quote from: TeeRaySix9Teen on September 29, 2005, 07:41:19 AMLike 7even said, get a real point guard in there.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.
Point is probably the hardest position to play. I wouldnt experiment with that. Put a real point guard there.
Like 7even said, get a real point guard in there.
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
Quote from: TeeRaySix9Teen on September 29, 2005, 02:02:21 PMQuote from: Antonio on September 29, 2005, 08:28:51 AMQuote from: 7even the Opinion Maker on September 28, 2005, 06:26:43 AMPoint is probably the hardest position to play. I wouldnt experiment with that. Put a real point guard there.Quote from: TeeRaySix9Teen on September 29, 2005, 07:41:19 AMLike 7even said, get a real point guard in there.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.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.Just like they penetrated against Ron Harper and John Paxson duiring the Bulls reign, correct? Lakers have a fine amount of point guards or players who can run the point. Aaron Mckie, Smush Parker (very underrated), Sasha Vuvajic (Drazen Petrovic like), Kobe Bryant, shit, Lamar Odom was originally a point guard...If anything, the Lakers suffer in the front court, but we've signed Corie Blount for an extra big body. Not that he's a great addition or anything, but he can defend, block shots, and rebound. He'll be good for backing up Kwame for 10-15 mins a game...PeACe
Shit I'd rather see Kemp than Corie Blunt in a Laker uniform.
Quote from: Now_Im_Blowed on October 03, 2005, 10:12:36 AMQuote from: TeeRaySix9Teen on September 29, 2005, 02:02:21 PMQuote from: Antonio on September 29, 2005, 08:28:51 AMQuote from: 7even the Opinion Maker on September 28, 2005, 06:26:43 AMPoint is probably the hardest position to play. I wouldnt experiment with that. Put a real point guard there.Quote from: TeeRaySix9Teen on September 29, 2005, 07:41:19 AMLike 7even said, get a real point guard in there.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.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.Just like they penetrated against Ron Harper and John Paxson duiring the Bulls reign, correct? Lakers have a fine amount of point guards or players who can run the point. Aaron Mckie, Smush Parker (very underrated), Sasha Vuvajic (Drazen Petrovic like), Kobe Bryant, shit, Lamar Odom was originally a point guard...If anything, the Lakers suffer in the front court, but we've signed Corie Blount for an extra big body. Not that he's a great addition or anything, but he can defend, block shots, and rebound. He'll be good for backing up Kwame for 10-15 mins a game...PeACeYoure right...and this Laker team is exactly like those Championship Bulls teams. LOL!! The Bulls didnt have a great front court....but in all honesty, it was still better then this one. Not to mention, the Bulls were a VERY good defensive team. 2005 Lakers....uhh....not quite the same thing happenin there is it? Jordan and Pippen were constant NBA All Defensive team members...so they had great help defense, even if their bigmen werent amazing shotblockers. You guys dont have that.