February 11, 201016 yr I realize the team is better, but Artest for Ariza is at best a wash. Also, guys like Fisher have lost a step. At best I think you could argue that they would be in the six to eight range if they lost Kobe. I'd take Artest over Ariza at this point, but I see no reason that a team with a lineup of Fisher, Artest, Odom, Gasol, and Bynum couldn't be the 4-5 seed. I think they'd be more likely in the 6 range, but it would definitely be possible.
February 11, 201016 yr I'd take Artest over Ariza at this point, but I see no reason that a team with a lineup of Fisher, Artest, Odom, Gasol, and Bynum couldn't be the 4-5 seed. I think they'd be more likely in the 6 range, but it would definitely be possible. We'll agree to disagree then. I for sure would rather have Ariza and what he did last year over what Artest is bringing this year. Those guys aren't consistent enough to get a seed that high in the West. Sure, they have played well in the couple of games since Kobe went down but it's pretty comparable to the situation at Tennessee. They played above their heads for a few games but can't maintain it. We could argue this until we're blue in the face but I don't think there's any way those guys you listed could sustain that level over an 82 game season.
February 11, 201016 yr To say Fisher has lost a step is putting it kindly. How he has managed to still play and start is beyond me. There is a reason they are always looking to upgrade at the PG position. He still makes some big shots when it counts though. The Lakers never really found themselves until Odom accepted his role at PF. Bynum rarely plays down the stretch.
February 11, 201016 yr How were the Lakers before they got Gasol? Were they ever a four or five seed before him? So take away him and the Lakers were always in the six to eight range. Take away Kobe and, they'd be a four or five? Now there's some sound logic. Like I said... I would take Mo over Artest or Fisher, who are LA's 5th and 6th best players IMO. What? What kind of logic is that? How good were the Bulls before Jordan or the Colts before Peyton Manning? What? Odom and Bynum are better now then they were then IMO, and Gasol is a top of the line star in the post. No one in the West has a trio like that inside IMO. Gasol, Odom, Bynum, and Artest are a playoff team, and like I said in the 4-5 range IMO. Maybe a 6 at worst. I don't really see anyone in the West outside of the Nuggets and maybe a few others who would be better. They've beaten the Spurs and Jazz convincingly without Bryant in the last few days. I don't see how they wouldn't still be better than the Thunder, Grizzlies, Rockets or other teams that are fighting for the 6-8 spots in the West this season. They definitely wouldn't be a title threat, but 4-5 is possible, if not likely. Their bench isn't great, but it's not that bad when their guys play their roles. Name 5 better teams in the West than a Kobe-less Lakers.
February 11, 201016 yr What? What kind of logic is that? How good were the Bulls before Jordan or the Colts before Peyton Manning? What? Odom and Bynum are better now then they were then IMO, and Gasol is a top of the line star in the post. No one in the West has a trio like that inside IMO. Gasol, Odom, Bynum, and Artest are a playoff team, and like I said in the 4-5 range IMO. Maybe a 6 at worst. I don't really see anyone in the West outside of the Nuggets and maybe a few others who would be better. They've beaten the Spurs and Jazz convincingly without Bryant in the last few days. I don't see how they wouldn't still be better than the Thunder, Grizzlies, Rockets or other teams that are fighting for the 6-8 spots in the West this season. They definitely wouldn't be a title threat, but 4-5 is possible, if not likely. Their bench isn't great, but it's not that bad when their guys play their roles. Is Tennessee better than Kansas? Over 82 games give me the Spurs or Jazz over LA without Kobe.
February 11, 201016 yr Is Tennessee better than Kansas? Over 82 games give me the Spurs or Jazz over LA without Kobe. If Pau Gasol continues to play like a man possessed I'd take the Lakers over either. And even so, with the Jazz, Spurs and Nuggets and even throw in another team the Lakers would be a 5 seed at worst.
February 11, 201016 yr If Pau Gasol continues to play like a man possessed I'd take the Lakers over either. And even so, with the Jazz, Spurs and Nuggets and even throw in another team the Lakers would be a 5 seed at worst. Gasol has never shown consistency like that in his career. The Lakers would be in a group with Portland, Ok City, Houston & Phoenix sans Kobe. I'd take SA, Denver, Utah & Dallas over them for sure.
February 11, 201016 yr Gasol has never shown consistency like that in his career. The Lakers would be in a group with Portland, Ok City, Houston & Phoenix sans Kobe. I'd take SA, Denver, Utah & Dallas over them for sure. :isurrender: Others can see it too, so there's no point in me arguing it.
February 11, 201016 yr :isurrender: Others can see it too, so there's no point in me arguing it. :lol: Two out of three people who have chimed in have said it's possible that they could get a five seed. Whoooaaaaa!!!
February 11, 201016 yr Gasol has never shown consistency like that in his career. The Lakers would be in a group with Portland, Ok City, Houston & Phoenix sans Kobe. I'd take SA, Denver, Utah & Dallas over them for sure. The Spurs seemingly have the talent but they have been terrible against good teams. The Mavs and Lakers w/o Kobe would be interesting. I'd say that's a wash. They'd fall between 3-8 IMO depending on their health and the health of the others. The Cavs w/o LBJ finish between 8th and last in both conferences IMO.
February 11, 201016 yr :lol: Two out of three people who have chimed in have said it's possible that they could get a five seed. Whoooaaaaa!!! Allow for more people to read it. Also, a few of the guys on NBA TV were talking about it last night, and so far you're the only person I've ran into that thinks differently. But, tell yourself whatever you have to.....
February 11, 201016 yr Allow for more people to read it. Also, a few of the guys on NBA TV were talking about it last night, and so far you're the only person I've ran into that thinks differently. But, tell yourself whatever you have to..... I've watched the Lakers forever now and feel pretty good about the assessment I can make on them. Playing good without Kobe for a few games is great, but doesn't really tell the story of what would happen if he wasn't there. Most of the guys we are talking about (Gasol, Bynum & Odom), are great at times but also have lacked consistency throughout their careers.
February 11, 201016 yr The Cavs w/o LBJ finish between 8th and last in both conferences IMO. No doubt.
February 11, 201016 yr I've watched the Lakers forever now and feel pretty good about the assessment I can make on them. Playing good without Kobe for a few games is great, but doesn't really tell the story of what would happen if he wasn't there. Most of the guys we are talking about (Gasol, Bynum & Odom), are great at times but also have lacked consistency throughout their careers. If we are going on the past few games, the Lakers would be the best team in the NBA going away. The better question is, what does this show about the Lakers that they have performed well the past few games? Does it mean Kobe takes away from team chemistry? At one time I would have agreed with that, but not any longer. I think everyone here feels losing Kobe for the long haul is a lot more of a detriment.
February 11, 201016 yr If we are going on the past few games, the Lakers would be the best team in the NBA going away. The better question is, what does this show about the Lakers that they have performed well the past few games? Does it mean Kobe takes away from team chemistry? At one time I would have agreed with that, but not any longer. I think everyone here feels losing Kobe for the long haul is a lot more of a detriment. Maybe it says that they rely on him too much sometimes.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.