# Starting Point Guard



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

*Chucky Atkins* 
--Atkins has the most experience of the three. He is not a point guard who is going to set up others, he is more of a shooter off of screens. Tough player, but he's been bounced around the league. Defense is just average. I thought he played better defense when he was with Orlando. Won't make as many mistakes as the other two, but he won't really stand out either. Safe but not spectacular choice.

*Marcus Banks* 
--You can look at him 1 of 2 ways. Either he is the defensive stopper we have always needed, or he is the player who for every steal he gets, turns it over. Very quick, a lot of energy. Not much of a shooter, more of a slasher. Not a lot of assists, a lot of turnovers. Plays out of control at times. His energy would be nice off the bench. Most people will argue that we don't need him for his offense-- Kobe and Odom will take care of that-- and that we only need him for defense. I'm slowly starting to be convinced to that line of thinking, but most Celt fans seem to think Atkins is better.

*Sasha Vujacic* 
--The long shot. I've only seen 1 game...and I wasn't very impressed. He has pretty good court vision, but he uses it better off the dribble a la Walton rather then actually setting up the offense like your normal point although he did seem like the vocal leader of the spl team. He can hit the mid-range shot, but his outside shot is shaky. He will struggle on defense...do we really want Kobe defending the 1's? Rudy T likes him from what I have heard. 

Here is how I would rank them.
1a. Banks (I'm still not totally convinced on him)
1b. Atkins 
Sasha

Thoughts?


----------



## Locke (Jun 16, 2003)

Depends. I'd say whoever performs the best in the pre-season and earns the job. But if we didn't have a pre-season I'd start off with Atkins because of the experience factor.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Locke</b>!
> Depends. I'd say whoever performs the best in the pre-season and earns the job. But if we didn't have a pre-season I'd start off with Atkins because of the experience factor.


Ditto.
This Laker team can´t afford to have a ill-decision making PG.
For all acounts, Banks is young and should be able to play himsekf to the system... Till he does (for he seems to be a great defender), I´d start Atkins...


----------



## Pan Mengtu (Jun 18, 2004)

Vujacic for sure. Atkins doesn't fit the new run and gun laker system, Banks in unreliable. Vujacic is the only one who can produce right now, with Banks possibly taking the spot in the future if he improves. Vujacic can do everything that needs to be done on this style of team. He'll hit any open shot Kobe gives him, he doesn't turn over the ball, and he doesn't have to hold on to the ball all the time to be effective. Atkins will probably start for a while, but I see Vujacic taking that spot by January.


----------



## Cris (Jun 18, 2003)

Sasha Isnt Ready To Start, He Needs To Put On A Few, Ok Alot Of Musscle Before Starting And His Name Get Brought Up


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

Atkins all the way... And it looks ly my boy is leading in the polls :greatjob:


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Kobe for sure, with Rush at the SG.

Much like the days of Kobe and Fish.


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Jamel Irief</b>!
> Kobe for sure, with Rush at the SG.
> 
> Much like the days of Kobe and Fish.


I kind of see this happening also. 

This would give us the scoring and pure shooting. 

Its whay I've been explaining to folks in the Atkins camp. Kobe will do the majority of ball distribution. No need for a standard point guard. Atkins defense is suspect and Banks might not be ready and who knows how good Sasha is. 

I think Banks could be the smothering defender off the bench. 

This is why I've been saying I don't want to trade Rush at all. I think he could have a breakout year and become really special as a shooter with Shaq gone and the pressure relieved.


----------



## JYD (Sep 3, 2002)

I voted for Banks, because of his defense. I also like the possibility of a starting Line-up of...

PG...Kobe
SG...Kareem
SF...Caron
PF...Lamar
C.....Vlade


----------



## City_Dawg (Jul 25, 2004)

I'd take Atkins, on experience alone, but i've heard he's a guy who be willing to give up his sopt for someone. If banks progesses enough, he might start

I dunno, i just think it comes down he progesses the most


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

If Rudy goes with a traditional backcourt, Atkins will start, no doubt about it. Banks will back him up, probably playing spot minutes at the 2 when Kobe rests. Mitch and Buss will make sure Banks gets his minutes. 

If Rudy goes with a less traditional mixed combination backcourt, it'll be Kobe and Rush or Kobe and Butler. Problem is, Rudy knows that backcourt won't be able to guard elite PGs on the title contending teams (Parker, Bibby, etc.). So, what'll probably happen is Rudy will play around with rotations of Banks-Kobe-Rush at the 1, 2, and 3, or Atkins-Kobe-Rush, or Atkins-Kobe-Butler, with Banks and/or Butler coming off the bench as double team trappers or as man up defenders on quick PGs.

Sasha won't be getting any minutes, that's pretty obvious.

Though, this could change if Malone comes back, making Odom's position on the team the 3 spot.


----------



## Lynx (Mar 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Pan Mengtu</b>!
> Vujacic for sure. Atkins doesn't fit the new run and gun laker system, Banks in unreliable. Vujacic is the only one who can produce right now, with Banks possibly taking the spot in the future if he improves. Vujacic can do everything that needs to be done on this style of team. He'll hit any open shot Kobe gives him, he doesn't turn over the ball, and he doesn't have to hold on to the ball all the time to be effective. Atkins will probably start for a while, but I see Vujacic taking that spot by January.


BINGO!

:banana: Sasha Sasha. :banana:


----------



## Pan Mengtu (Jun 18, 2004)

What? Banks may have the potential to be better than Vujacic, but Vujacic is way better than him right now.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Pan Mengtu</b>!
> What? Banks may have the potential to be better than Vujacic, but Vujacic is way better than him right now.


Sasha's a better PG, but not a better fit for the Lakers. Banks is about 10 levels ahead of Sasha in terms of quickness, athleticism, and defense. Those are the things the Lakers want in their backup PG, they don't want passing or handles from their backup PG because the entire freaking Lakers squad can already pass and score. Sasha will get barbequed and fried to death on defense, he needs several years to develop, and therefore won't play many backup minutes. 

And please, please remember that the Lakers' PG isn't going to be handling or passing the ball much, Odom, Kobe, etc. will be doing that.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

And of course, it's already well known *fact* that Atkins will be starting over Banks or Sasha, as per Mitch Kupchak on the radio today. I can't believe you think a rookie that plays no defense is going to start for the Lakers, just because he can pass and dribble.


----------



## Pan Mengtu (Jun 18, 2004)

Actually it's his amazing scoring ability that will get him the start *eventually*. I realize they're going to start the proven player at first, but Sasha will get the start by the end of the season, I'm confident. Vujacic doesn't have to have the ball to be effective. That's why he'll start. He moves without the ball great, and can also make his own shot. He can be a spot up shooter, but doesn't have to. Banks my be quicker and more athletic, but big deal.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Pan Mengtu</b>!
> Actually it's his amazing scoring ability that will get him the start *eventually*. I realize they're going to start the proven player at first, but Sasha will get the start by the end of the season, I'm confident. Vujacic doesn't have to have the ball to be effective. That's why he'll start. He moves without the ball great, and can also make his own shot. He can be a spot up shooter, but doesn't have to. *Banks my be quicker and more athletic, but big deal.*


It is a big deal. Right now *I* could burn Sasha Vujacic off the dribble. Again, think; why would you want more scoring and passing from your bench when you already have plenty in the starting lineup? Makes zero sense. Enter Banks.

And have you actually watched the summer league? Sasha might be a good passer and dribbler, but he turned the ball over quite often and really didn't shoot or move off the ball that well. Look up some stats or something if you don't believe me.


----------



## JYD (Sep 3, 2002)

Sasha's summer league stats...

Games: 7
FG%: .433
3FG%: .375
FT%: .778
PPG: 12.6
RPG: 4.7
APG: 4.3
BPG: 0.0
SPG: 1.4
TOPG: 4.0


----------



## Pan Mengtu (Jun 18, 2004)

> It is a big deal. Right now I could burn Sasha Vujacic off the dribble. Again, think; why would you want more scoring and passing from your bench when you already have plenty in the starting lineup? Makes zero sense. Enter Banks.


Because you _don't_ have plenty in the starting lineup, you have Kobe and Odom and that's it. And Odom doesn't score most of his points off jumpshots, which is what Vujacic would do.



> And have you actually watched the summer league? Sasha might be a good passer and dribbler, but he turned the ball over quite often and really didn't shoot or move off the ball that well. Look up some stats or something if you don't believe me.


He does shoot and move off the ball well. His FG% was 46% in the very good italian league.

And there you go again resorting to your ad hominems when you no longer have any reasonable line of argument. I could easily resort to your logic and say that I've seen more italian games than you, and am therefore right, but since that's bad logic, I won't go there. I'll stick to basketball.

I'm not sure you should be criticizing Vujacic's turnovers when Banks is the other person we're talking about.


----------



## U reach. I teach (May 24, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Pan Mengtu</b>!
> 
> Because you _don't_ have plenty in the starting lineup, you have Kobe and Odom and that's it. And Odom doesn't score most of his points off jumpshots, which is what Vujacic would do.



:upset: We don't NEED a scorer out of our PG, what we NEED is someone to ignite the fastbreak, and Lock-down opposing PGs. If he can score, it's a bonus; if he can't D-up, than he's a liability.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Pan Mengtu</b>!
> 
> 
> Because you _don't_ have plenty in the starting lineup, you have Kobe and Odom and that's it. And Odom doesn't score most of his points off jumpshots, which is what Vujacic would do.


Huh? The Lakers entire starting lineup can shoot, score and pass just fine. Some better than others. Please tell me how Kobe, Atkins, Odom, Malone and Vlade aren't passers or shooters? 



> He does shoot and move off the ball well. His FG% was 46% in the very good italian league.


Yikes, please don't compare FG% across different leagues. 

FYI, he shot 43.3% in the summer league. *Summer League*.



> And there you go again resorting to your ad hominems when you no longer have any reasonable line of argument.


Where? If I did, it was subtle or unintentional. Don't overreact.



> I could easily resort to your logic and say that I've seen more italian games than you, and am therefore right, but since that's bad logic, I won't go there.


No, because it's already well known that the NBA is a completely different animal than any other league, the quickest and most difficult league to play in in the world. 



> I'm not sure you should be criticizing Vujacic's turnovers when Banks is the other person we're talking about.


I've already commented on this, Banks isn't that great of a passer and turns the ball over a lot. Difference is that Banks is the vastly superior defender and athlete, and why he will be brought off the bench behind Atkins. Assuming Rudy isn't crazy. 

So really, I don't even know what you're arguing or why you're higher on Sasha than Banks.


----------



## HallOfFamer (May 26, 2003)

How do you guys see the minutes being split? Do you think it'll be:

Atkins: 31 minutes
Banks: 17 minutes
Vujacic: Garbage time

or you see a solid rotaton for all 3 PGs, all 3 of them getting some good minutes?


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

Atkins-30
Banks - 25 (Some minutes at the 2)
Sasha - Garbage Time


----------



## U reach. I teach (May 24, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>SacKings384</b>!
> Atkins-30
> Banks - 25 (Some minutes at the 2)
> Sasha - Garbage Time


Yeah, same here, but it will obviously vary with who we play. And no minutes at the 2 for banks.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Backcourt minutes

Atkins- 17 minutes
Banks -17 minutes
Kobe- 40 minutes
Rush- 22 minutes

No way I see Atkins playing more than 25 minutes a game.


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

I actually think Banks will get more burn than Atkins. 

Once Rudy see's that Banks has Francis type athleticism he'll get plenty of run. 

I think Rush is do to establish himself. Last season his defense finally took shape. I think he becomes a solid starter if not a solid double figures scorer.


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

*Jazzy, you love that athleticism*

Atkins 29 min
Banks 19


----------



## JYD (Sep 3, 2002)

Atkins 20
Banks 18
Vujacic 10

I believe Vujacic will see more minutes at the 2 than Banks.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>jazzy1</b>!
> I actually think Banks will get more burn than Atkins.
> 
> *Once Rudy see's that Banks has Francis type athleticism he'll get plenty of run. *
> ...


Hey, while you're at it. Why don't you sign Helicopter and Spider from AND 1? They are both insanely great athletes, who are quick and can dunk! I'm surprised NBA teams aren't lineing up to go pick up those guys... And then, you could deepen your bench even MORE by signing HotSauce, who cares if he would commit like 10 TO's a game, he's got moves quickness and hops!


----------



## Locke (Jun 16, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>SacKings384</b>!
> 
> 
> Hey, while you're at it. Why don't you sign Helicopter and Spider from AND 1? They are both insanely great athletes, who are quick and can dunk! I'm surprised NBA teams aren't lineing up to go pick up those guys... And then, you could deepen your bench even MORE by signing HotSauce, who cares if he would commit like 10 TO's a game, he's got moves quickness and hops!


Well I see the SacKings of old has returned. :nonono:


----------



## City_Dawg (Jul 25, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>SacKings384</b>!
> 
> 
> Hey, while you're at it. Why don't you sign Helicopter and Spider from AND 1? They are both insanely great athletes, who are quick and can dunk! I'm surprised NBA teams aren't lineing up to go pick up those guys... And then, you could deepen your bench even MORE by signing HotSauce, who cares if he would commit like 10 TO's a game, he's got moves quickness and hops!


No...


But they could be part of the halftime show!!!!!


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>City_Dawg</b>!
> 
> 
> No...
> ...


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>SacKings384</b>!
> 
> 
> Hey, while you're at it. Why don't you sign Helicopter and Spider from AND 1? They are both insanely great athletes, who are quick and can dunk! I'm surprised NBA teams aren't lineing up to go pick up those guys... And then, you could deepen your bench even MORE by signing HotSauce, who cares if he would commit like 10 TO's a game, he's got moves quickness and hops!


Well no we could get the fat bald headed announcer he seems to know the game and with his knowledge of the game making he can talk Bibby out of his game. Because as we know he and Atkins both got bald heads and knowledge of the game. 

You're young one day you'll understand this game. If you believe we made this trade to get Atkins. 

Plus you want to feel like the Lakers can't make better moves. 

Go cheerlead your collapsing Kings. They need more help than we do.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

Collapsing Kings? Who went from championship favorite to squeeking by and the playoffs? And I wasn't the one that was like, Bibby starts because of his intelligence. Once Adelman sees Bibbys intelligence he should start. Because you seem for some unknown reason to think that someone fast, and athletic automatically makes them good. As I can easily see with Banks... I don't know how many minutes you have seen of Banks, but I have a pretty good idea it was very little, you just saw a picture of him, heard about what he does, then decided what he was...Athleticism isn't everything, especially for a PG other things are needed. Even though you did this trade to experiment with a pg for the future, Atkins was brought here to play, the best man for the job PLAYS. Luke Walton could be a SF for your future, and yes he has passing, just like Banks has quickness, but Walton can't shoot, nor can he dribble all that well OR defend. So he rode the pine, because he wasn't the best player for the position. It was Devean George, even tho George stunk. Atkins may not be the greatest, but he IS the best man for the job that you got. I really doubt that Rudy T starts Banks to get him some PT so he can be your future PG, even if he isn't the best PG that can be out there...



> Well no we could get the fat bald headed announcer he seems to know the game and with his knowledge of the game making he can talk Bibby out of his game. Because as we know he and Atkins both got bald heads and knowledge of the game.


That's exactly how you sound with Banks. You keep up bringing this guys athleticism, as if that is what makes a player good. O and as a side note, check out the "Who should be our starting PG" poll, just to see how many of your Laker friends feel about Banks starting... Currently Banks is in last place, and WOW look who's in first place... What a shocker...


----------



## radronOmega (Aug 1, 2004)

*re*

*edited*

We got into the finals 4 times in 5 years what about your kings. YOu would probably hang up a western conference champion banner if you got to the finals lol that's how pathetic your team is. Our team is only satisfied with excellence. Anything but a championship is a failure even this year. Your Kings however will be jumping up and down if you get there then fold on national tv haha.

Insults are not allowed. Please refresh yourself with the guidelines.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

I'm not even going to respond to that, because that clearly had no relevance to the starting PG thread... Way to contribute... :greatjob:


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

O and just a little note, as EHL pointed out, Mitch said Atkins will be starting... But of course, EHL is trolling as well then... And so are all the others that said that Atkins should start...


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>SacKings384</b>!
> Collapsing Kings? Who went from championship favorite to squeeking by and the playoffs? And I wasn't the one that was like, Bibby starts because of his intelligence. Once Adelman sees Bibbys intelligence he should start. Because you seem for some unknown reason to think that someone fast, and athletic automatically makes them good. As I can easily see with Banks... I don't know how many minutes you have seen of Banks, but I have a pretty good idea it was very little, you just saw a picture of him, heard about what he does, then decided what he was...Athleticism isn't everything, especially for a PG other things are needed. Even though you did this trade to experiment with a pg for the future, Atkins was brought here to play, the best man for the job PLAYS. Luke Walton could be a SF for your future, and yes he has passing, just like Banks has quickness, but Walton can't shoot, nor can he dribble all that well OR defend. So he rode the pine, because he wasn't the best player for the position. It was Devean George, even tho George stunk. Atkins may not be the greatest, but he IS the best man for the job that you got. I really doubt that Rudy T starts Banks to get him some PT so he can be your future PG, even if he isn't the best PG that can be out there...
> 
> 
> ...



Blah blah blah, a whole bunch of useless blather. 

You leap to the wrong conclusion about Banks as if you're his friend and you know his mindset and game intimately. 

Athleticism plays into things bigtime this is basketball not chess. 

Having exceptional speed , quickness and strength count for a whole lot in basketball. 

YOU USE WHAT YOU HAVE get it, some players are cerebral some are athletes, the great ones have both. So you can't cast off Banks's ability to play pg and be a factor because he plays outta control sometimes nor can you say he's a known commodity just because the Celtics traded him. They traded Billups before the MVP of the FINALS. 

But you want to cast Billups off just because of that thats ridiulous, the Wiizards cast off Ben Wallace before because he was all athlete less smart basketball player now WHAT. 

Atkins is filler he's been filler in a few trades now they didn't make this trade because of that everyone with this trade agrees with that, the Lakers wanted Banks and Mihm, not atkins he's not the pg of the future. 

The Lakers want to fastbreak thats the style Rudy wants to play thats the Style that Banks plays best not Atkins. 

I'm sure Atkins will help. 

BTW Mitch isn't the coach of the team is he I didn't think so Rudy will decide and I find it hard to believe he's decided that already without actually seeing the team together yet. 

Kings are collapsing nontheless,

Peja wants out, Cwebb is blaming everryone, Bjack may want out and he's nicked, Divac is gone yeah there's some turmoil there. 

Petrie acknowledges as much.


----------



## Spriggan (Mar 23, 2004)

marcus banks.

we need him to shut down opposing PGs, which he's perfectly capable of doing.

like everyone has said, odom and kobe will be the primary ball-handlers. put marcus in there to hassle opposing PGs. he isn't necessarily needed for anything else, except pushing the ball up the floor and running a fast break...hich he's also capable of doing.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

*OT*

This isn't a Kings board but I'll decide to inform you, since you only have second hand information. Bo-Jax has already said he isn't unhappy with the Kings and that he would play whole-heartedly next season, and then if the Kings want to pay him he will stay. Peja either won't be traded, or will be traded for Artest... So that is a wash... Webber is fine, and Vlade only left because they weren't paying him. Vlade didn't leave because of turmoil. Petrie acknowledged it, but you failed to mention that he said it was also fixable... As far as the Celtics trading Chauncey, a guy who turned out to be Finals MVP, they also traded Brandon Hunter, guess he's going to be the MVP in a couple of years... O that's right, he just got released by the Cavs... The Lakers lost the most dominant player on earth, the best NBA coach, yet the Lakers are fine according to you. The Kings lose VLADE DIVAC, the Kings may or may not trade Peja, and if he is traded it will be for equal value, and the Kings are going down in flames! Makes loads of sense


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

*Re: OT*



> Originally posted by <b>SacKings384</b>!
> This isn't a Kings board but I'll decide to inform you, since you only have second hand information. Bo-Jax has already said he isn't unhappy with the Kings and that he would play whole-heartedly next season, and then if the Kings want to pay him he will stay. Peja either won't be traded, or will be traded for Artest... So that is a wash... Webber is fine, and Vlade only left because they weren't paying him. Vlade didn't leave because of turmoil. Petrie acknowledged it, but you failed to mention that he said it was also fixable... As far as the Celtics trading Chauncey, a guy who turned out to be Finals MVP, they also traded Brandon Hunter, guess he's going to be the MVP in a couple of years... O that's right, he just got released by the Cavs... The Lakers lost the most dominant player on earth, the best NBA coach, yet the Lakers are fine according to you. The Kings lose VLADE DIVAC, the Kings may or may not trade Peja, and if he is traded it will be for equal value, and the Kings are going down in flames! Makes loads of sense


1st off I don't go on the Kings board and try and tell diehard Kings fans that every move the Kings make is suspect. I don't say oh don't get Kidd, oh wait a minute GP is slow no don't get a quicker defensive mided pg he won't help he can't play . 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=smith_sam&id=1856243

Read that and holla back. 

Lets analize Lakers win 3 straight titles Kings have 3 straight collapses, Lakers lose Shaq and Phil and go in a different direction having 3 rings in their pocket. 

Kings faciing turmoil because of going ringless. 

Lakers add an Olympian and trade for a former 1st rd pg and dump a slow legend. 

Kings dump the best passing center in the game gonna trade the best shooter in the game and you say the Lakers with 3 rings got problems and not the Kings without any. 

Yeah okay ringless. 

Go to the Kings board with your whining. Like the other guy said. 

You have more to say over here than on your favorite teams forum. 

I don't wanna here anymore about them Kings who cares but you and that means nothing. 

I'm a biased Lakers fan I can admit that so what I can atleast admit my bias you hide behind objectivity when you hate the lakers so who's the real fraud. But you hide killing Laker moves hoping to goodness a slow sluggish Atkins will start and not pressure Bibby into a gazillion turnovers. 

We're going in circles and I'm not insane so I'll give you the last word despite the fact you haven't made a point in 2 days. 

We have one of the best players in the league on our team and the Kings don't thats been the Kings problem all along.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

Funny thing is, I didn't bring up the Kings, you guys did! 

Wow and a writer wrote something about the Kings desctruciton

Well here ya go

http://msn.foxsports.com/story/2575984
http://msn.foxsports.com/story/2572302
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5221239/
http://msn.foxsports.com/story/2493008
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/wire?section=nba&id=1824927

Read those and "holla back" and if you decide you need some reading material at night, I'll be glad to give you some more... And like I said, look no further than to OTHER LAKER FANS as to who they feel should start. You still have failed to adress that..



> We have one of the best players in the league on our team and the Kings don't thats been the Kings problem all along.


O and yes, because the Pistons had the best player in the league last year right? BTW, I said the trade was a good move... Just for your info... Hell, like I think the Rudy T is going to listen to what any of us on this board have to say? What's the difference if I think Atkins should start or not. Does it have ANY effect on who actually plays? I didn't think so


----------



## SoCalfan21 (Jul 19, 2004)

i wanna see mitch pull off a very suprising trade by bringing in an eric snow or a jason williams (the grizz one)


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>SoCalfan21</b>!
> i wanna see mitch pull off a very suprising trade by bringing in an eric snow or a jason williams (the grizz one)


I believe snow was recently traded... And the Lakers could I suppose throw out Caron and George as bait for Williams. I don't see West or Mitch deing that, one because the Lakers still aren't positive that Malone is coming back, and Odom would have to play the 4 if he doesn't thus you would have no small forward. Lakers are fine with the PG's they have. Me and the majority of the people on this board feel Atkins should start. Other people have different opinions on the subject.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Locke</b>!
> 
> 
> Well I see the SacKings of old has returned. :nonono:


And O come on, that was one slip up post. Be honest, any opinion I have is mauled by some posters on this board, simply because I am a Kings fan. There are plenty of fans on here that wanted Atkins to start, and Banks come off the bench. Yet some people decide to attack me and only me. Same thing with the J Kidd situation. I said bad move, HongKong said bad move, I get attacked. The grades, HOV agrees with me! He blatantly says it, but I get attacked for it... Things like that, and you get on me for one post? Unfair


----------



## Locke (Jun 16, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>SacKings384</b>!
> 
> 
> And O come on, that was one slip up post. Be honest, any opinion I have is mauled by some posters on this board, simply because I am a Kings fan. There are plenty of fans on here that wanted Atkins to start, and Banks come off the bench. Yet some people decide to attack me and only me. Same thing with the J Kidd situation. I said bad move, HongKong said bad move, I get attacked. The grades, HOV agrees with me! He blatantly says it, but I get attacked for it... Things like that, and you get on me for one post? Unfair


Honestly, I'm not attacking you but recently you've had hate relapse which seems to have been induced by a bunch of supposed Laker trade proposals. The Kidd one, you say Kidd's shot and that the Lakers shouldn't attempt to get him, yet you've got old broke-down Chris Webber on your squad robbing the Maloofs of money he's no longer worth and you defend him at every chance you get. And you've been waaaay down on Marcus Banks seemingly only because many of us Laker fans are glad we have him now. Although I agree that Atkins should definitely start, I like what Banks brings to the table as well.

I know everyone is entitled to their own opinion but it looks a bit suspect when you're proclaiming the Kings will win the championship next year when they're now no more than a shell of what the were 2 or 3 years ago but at the same time saying all the Laker moves or potential Lakers moves are bad. It just seems like you feel threatened because the Lakers have made moves to improve themselves (hopefully) and the Kings have moonwalked backwards. I think that's why you've been getting attacked, not because you have a different opinion but because most of your comments have such a negative slant, plus the fact that it looks hypocritical to bash the Lakes the way you do when you never have one negative thing to say about your own team.

I'm just trying to figure out where all this hate is coming from.


----------



## DaUnbreakableKinG (Jun 28, 2003)

Start Sasha and then if it doesn't work start Banks and then if it still doesn't work start Chucky. :whoknows:


----------



## Cris (Jun 18, 2003)

Sasha Needs To Bulk Up, ALOT Then We Can Talk About Starting


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

Chucky Atkins should start the year at PG, but like many people have been saying, hopefully Banks will finish the year at PG.


----------



## DaUnbreakableKinG (Jun 28, 2003)

And another thing...

Its really sad seeing all this BS being said about SacKings while he only said his opinion. 


Yeah he argued a lot before but that was long time ago. he hasn't said anything wrong right now and you guys attacking him is plain BS. saying that he's dumb and has a lower iq then a shoe size is also BS and not right. And most of you guys stand by that. :sigh: :nonono:

Peace


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Locke</b>!
> 
> 
> Honestly, I'm not attacking you but recently you've had hate relapse which seems to have been induced by a bunch of supposed Laker trade proposals. The Kidd one, you say Kidd's shot and that the Lakers shouldn't attempt to get him, yet you've got old broke-down Chris Webber on your squad robbing the Maloofs of money he's no longer worth and you defend him at every chance you get. And you've been waaaay down on Marcus Banks seemingly only because many of us Laker fans are glad we have him now. Although I agree that Atkins should definitely start, I like what Banks brings to the table as well.
> ...


I wouldn't recommend that ANYBODY trade for Chris Webber. But we have him, and we have his salary. And I'm not going to start hating a guy that has done so much for the team. I proclaim the Kings will win next year, so what? DaUnbreakableKing has the same thing...(Edit: He used too... BOOOOOOOOO UNBREAKABLE!!! BOOOOOO!!!! :laugh: )What I can't have faith in my team? I'm not down on Banks, he should come off the bench, be an energy guy, because he isn't currently fit to be a starting PG... And you won't see me defending what Peja did in the playoffs, nor what Peja has done now. I think it's ridiculous that the Kings turned down Artest at the end of the season. You can even check on the Kings board that I'm worried our GM won't make a trade because he is blinded by his love for Peja... And wasn't I one of the people that said the trade for Banks Mihm and Atkins was a good trade? I believe I did... Of course, I don't agree that the Kings have moonwalked backward, even though some do, just like you don't think the Lakers moved backwards, even though many think the Lakers will barely make the playoffs next season. Does that mean I get to attack your posts because you think the Lakers have moved forward?


----------



## DaUnbreakableKinG (Jun 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>SacKings384</b>!
> I proclaim the Kings will win next year, so what? DaUnbreakableKing has the same thing...(Edit: He used too... BOOOOOOOOO UNBREAKABLE!!! BOOOOOO!!!! :laugh: )What I can't have faith in my team?


:laugh: I'll put it back during the season. I just took it off.....and....I actually can't remember why I took it off. :whoknows:

But i'll defenetly (how the hell do you spell that word???:upset: ) put it up again once the season starts.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>DaUnbreakableKinG</b>!
> 
> 
> :laugh: I'll put it back during the season. I just took it off.....and....I actually can't remember why I took it off. :whoknows:
> ...


Definitely


----------



## DaUnbreakableKinG (Jun 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>SacKings384</b>!
> 
> 
> Definitely


Thank you. I still need to learn more english.


----------



## Locke (Jun 16, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>SacKings384</b>!
> 
> 
> I wouldn't recommend that ANYBODY trade for Chris Webber. But we have him, and we have his salary. And I'm not going to start hating a guy that has done so much for the team. I proclaim the Kings will win next year, so what? DaUnbreakableKing has the same thing...(Edit: He used too... BOOOOOOOOO UNBREAKABLE!!! BOOOOOO!!!! :laugh: )What I can't have faith in my team? I'm not down on Banks, he should come off the bench, be an energy guy, because he isn't currently fit to be a starting PG... And you won't see me defending what Peja did in the playoffs, nor what Peja has done now. I think it's ridiculous that the Kings turned down Artest at the end of the season. You can even check on the Kings board that I'm worried our GM won't make a trade because he is blinded by his love for Peja... And wasn't I one of the people that said the trade for Banks Mihm and Atkins was a good trade? I believe I did... *Of course, I don't agree that the Kings have moonwalked backward, even though some do, just like you don't think the Lakers moved backwards, even though many think the Lakers will barely make the playoffs next season. Does that mean I get to attack your posts because you think the Lakers have moved forward?*


Well obviously I don't think we're as good as we were last year, but post-Shaq I think the Lakers have improved on what they were right after that trade, on paper at least. I'm being optimistic about our chances but I'm also being realistic. I think we make the playoffs and in the best case scenario win one round. We'll see though, I hope I'm pleasantly surprised...

And I'm not justifying or condoning anyone being attacked, but when you go in a team forum and bash the team over and over and over and over again, people start to get irritated. But like I said, you have a right to your opinion, and it ain't against the rules just as long as it isn't personal. With some of the characters on this board though (I won't start dropping names, everyone already knows who they are) it just gets funny. I sit here and literally LOL. Even if I don't respond to it I've most likely still read it. It's just straight comedy sometimes.


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

*Gotta side with SacKings*

Chucky Atkins is LIGHT YEARS ahead of Banks (I have never seen Vujacic play). 

He would have started for the Pistons if they didn't have Billups.

Athleticism is important, but as the Pistons proved, knowing how to play the game is more important, especially in the point guard position.

You all have seen Banks play maybe twice. As you see more you will get a greater appreciation for his phenomenal athleticism and his awful skills as a point guard. 

If he was 6'7", he'd be one of the greatest players in the NBA. But he is 6'2" and cannot shoot.

He will lock guys down on D, if the refs let him.

FYI, bash the Kings all you want, you guys own them and have earned that right. But I think you'll find that the reason you beat the Kings is now in Miami, and Geoff Petrie is one of the best GMs in the NBA. 

Mitch Kupchak is one of the worst. You have never won a championship with him at the helm...and if he continues his "mastery" you may be hard pressed to ever get there again.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

*Re: Gotta side with SacKings*



> Originally posted by <b>Truth34</b>!
> Chucky Atkins is LIGHT YEARS ahead of Banks (I have never seen Vujacic play).
> 
> He would have started for the Pistons if they didn't have Billups.
> ...


I watched Banks play several times in college.

I think you are underrating Kupchack. You should have said "You have never won with him at the helm when Phil Jackson is the coach" because Phil was the reason that the Lakers didn't improve. Mitch could have had Cassell for Horry, but Phil said no. He tried to trade for Ratliff, but Phil said no. 

Is it a coincidence that all these improvements are happening now that Phil is gone? I think not.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

*Re: Re: Gotta side with SacKings*



> Originally posted by <b>Wilt_The_Stilt</b>!
> 
> I watched Banks play several times in college.
> 
> ...


Improvements? The Lakers were favorites last year, in fact they were favorites for the last 5 years... That was all Phil... So if they were favorites last year... Now they aren't considered contenders, how can you consider that an improvement? But Mitch is a pretty good GM, getting these guys for Gary was a good trade, he was left in a tough situation with Shaq. Shaq wanted out, no way do you get equal value for a guy like that with that kind of salary, it just won't happen.


----------



## Ghiman (May 19, 2003)

Ditto!



> Chucky Atkins should start the year at PG, but like many people have been saying, hopefully Banks will finish the year at PG.


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Jamel Irief</b>!
> Kobe for sure, with Rush at the SG.
> 
> Much like the days of Kobe and Fish.


Do you really want Kobe bringing the ball up the court? Without a PG and an offensive post presence Kobe is going to have to create for himself everytime he shoots the ball.


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

*Improvements?*

Yes, the Lakers are deeper, and more athletic, but let's examine:

MAJOR DOWNGRADE at C
DOWNGRADE at PF (Malone ain't coming back)
MAJOR UPGRADE at SF (assuming Odom continues his impr.)
KOBE at SG
DOWNGRADE at PG (no matter what you think about Payton)

UPGRADED the bench, but not enough to overcome the loss of Shaq, Malone, Payton and Fisher

You wanted to trade Horry for Cassell? How many rings would the Lakers have w/o Horry?

Kupchack let Mark Madsen walk. That obviously hurt the Lakers in a couple of series. 

He drafted Brian Cook.

He let the team get old, and ruined the chemistry.

He was unable to get Kobe and Shaq to play nice.

He told everyone he would give in to Shaq's demand for a trade, and had to deal him before July 11th (Kobe's decision day), which caused the Lakers to trade him for 50 cents on the dollar. He could have kept his mouth shut and got more.

He just traded away another 1st round pick.

You are blaming Phil? A guy that got you to 4 finals in 5 years? You would do good to remember that the Lakers were garbage before he got there, and that neither Kobe nor MJ ever won a title without him. You're talking about one of the 5 greatest coaches in NBA history!

Kupchak is a fool, and you're blaming the guy with 10 rings?


----------



## Cris (Jun 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ghiman</b>!


What An Avatar !!!!!!


----------



## DaUnbreakableKinG (Jun 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Cris</b>!
> 
> 
> What An Avatar !!!!!!


:laugh: :laugh: Noone could beat that avatar. :yes:


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

That avatar is really awesome...


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

*Re: Re: Gotta side with SacKings*



> Originally posted by <b>Wilt_The_Stilt</b>!
> 
> I watched Banks play several times in college.
> 
> ...


Please explain to them Wilt we actually have a team capable of winning not just two great players and a great coach. We got 3 titles out of 5 years and 4 finals in 5 years. 

Losers like the Kings are collapsing because they didn't realize their potential because of their shrinking violet players, Christie,Peja, and Cwebb. 

See these cats are trying to slant everything as if the Lakers are dead and its the most ridiculous thing out there. '

Are we favorities NO but are we contenders one of about 5-6 teams we sure are.

We still got one of the best players in the league on our team in Kobe who's on par with KG, and Duncan.

Now lets look at all of these teams players minus the stars. I'm naming the players who have real impact on the game

Kobe, KG, Duncan, 


Spurs, 

Parker
Ginobilli
Rasho
Bowen
Barry

Wolves

Spree
Cassell
Wally
Hudson
Hassell

Lakers

Odom,
Butler
Divac
Grant
Banks
Malone?
Rush


Of those teams and players remaining I think clearly Odom is the best remaining player of that bunch and Divac is the best big remaining of that bunch. Spreewell is the next best player of the bunch behind Odom. 

Lakers are in deficit 

at pg production because Cassell, and Parker have the edge. 

Butler is as good as Barry and Manu, and Wally. I'm talking about the effect they have on the game not stats and Butler is as good as they are talentwise. 


I'm starting with the premise that Kobe is every bit the player that KG and Duncan are and I think he is. He dropped 40ppg for a month a couple seasons ago. 

When he is a CLEAR 1st option he will be as good and an MVP candidate as well. 

Lakers aren't favorites but I think they are clearly contenders. I think the West is wide open and anyone who says different are fooling themselves. I think the Lakers are in that bunch. 

I would make the Wolves and Spurs the favorites but minus the superstars the rosters are really close. 

Lakers are contenders.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

Since when did who you have on a roster effect if you win or not? The Pistons sure as hell didn't have as good of a roster as the Lakers last year. In fact, if the roster thing were true, I believe Dallas should have won it every year...


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>SacKings384</b>!
> Since when did who you have on a roster effect if you win or not? The Pistons sure as hell didn't have as good of a roster as the Lakers last year. In fact, if the roster thing were true, I believe Dallas should have won it every year...


Are you blind or something you must be. 

The Pistons were the better team. 

They had a better pg, better sf, better pf, they also had the better bench. 

Now how exactly does the Lakers have the better roster because technincally it says the Lakers had 4 hall of famers. 

Is that your contention. 

Lakers had 2 hall of famers play like it. 

Pistons had the better roster and team its simple as that. 

Your Kings need your help. 

Like I said the effect of the rest of the players who will have some impact. 

Prince had more impact than George, Billups more than GP, Sheed more than Malone/Slava their whole bench more than Lakers bench.

The mistake was made in thinking 2 players Shaq/Kobe could overcome all that and they couldn't they didn't have enough quality players is all.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

The level that Kobe and Shaq were ahead, was so much greater than ANY advantage the Pistons could have pulled off... And once again, why hasn't Dallas done anything? With their roster of all-stars... I mean last year... Shaq and Kobe were better than the whole Dallas team, but then, Dirk is better than Malone, Jamison is better than George, and Nash was better than Payton. So how come Dallas wasn't any good?


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

*Going on your premise...*

that the Pistons had the better roster (of which I am definitely NOT certain), you have to ask yourself, why is that? Because Kupchak failed. 


Also, Kobe, you will learn, is not on the level of KG, Duncan or Shaq.

Did you forget Houston, Miami, Detroit and Indiana?

The Lakers are not contenders for the championship. They SHOULD make the playoffs.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

I don't know if Miami is a championship contender... Nor is Houston really...


----------



## DaUnbreakableKinG (Jun 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>SacKings384</b>!
> I don't know if Miami is a championship contender... Nor is Houston really...


Miami could be if Shaq averages 35+pts and 25+rbs a game.  

Houston....it depends on Tmac and Yao. If they gel with each other quick and become unstoppable then they'll be considered champion contenders. 

Detroit, Spurs, Indiana, Twolves, Kings, then Houston, Miami. Thats how I see it.


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>SacKings384</b>!
> The level that Kobe and Shaq were ahead, was so much greater than ANY advantage the Pistons could have pulled off... And once again, why hasn't Dallas done anything? With their roster of all-stars... I mean last year... Shaq and Kobe were better than the whole Dallas team, but then, Dirk is better than Malone, Jamison is better than George, and Nash was better than Payton. So how come Dallas wasn't any good?


This is ridiculous when you consider that Kobe's and Shaq's advantage were diliuted by the players they were against in direct competition. 

Rip Hamilton took away from Kobe's advantgae as well as Ben Wallace taking away from Shaq's advantage. 

They would have had to have thrown a shut out at those postions in order to become champions and they couldn't Both Rip and Ben had good games and therefore took away the Lakers main advantage. 

Therefore the Pistons had the better roster. 

You used my point perfectly when talking about the Lakers advantage over Dallas. 

Shaq and Kobe were waay better than the whole of the Dallas roster. 

Malone could counter some of Dirk's effectiveness as could GP at the pg postion. 

Thats why the Lakers struggled against the Spurs because Duncan countered Shaq's effectiveness and Bowen the same with Kobe. 

Lakers needed a desperation shot to overcome thats how close the teams were. Because the Spurs had no real bench advantage as the Pistons did 

case closed. 

Too sad Kings fan. 

There collapsing run.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

*Re: Improvements?*



> Originally posted by <b>Truth34</b>!
> 
> Kupchack let Mark Madsen walk. That obviously hurt the Lakers in a couple of series.
> 
> ...


Kupchak's career moves, for the record I was against the trade to bring in Cassell-

<b>Trades-</b>

00- Trades Rice and Travis Knight for Horace Grant, Greg Foster, Emmanuel Davis and Chuck Person

- Lakers become one of the best teams of all time, going 15-1 in the playoffs.

01- Trades Foster for Lindsey Hunter

- Hunter fills in for injured Fish, plays a big role in the regular season, Foster never heard of again

02- Trades Hunter and Chris Jefferies for Rush and Tracy Murray

- Rush is 10 years younger than Hunter and at the very least is a good backup

04- Shaq trade, Payton trade

- Jury out obviously. Shaq trade was part his fault for going public, but that was a Buss move to decide to deal Diesel. Only thing we can judge Buss for is if he could of gotten more elsewhere.

<b>Free Agents</b>

00- Signed JR Rider, Slava Medvedenko

- At times amazing, up until Feburary of that year was a good contributor, in the end was a non-factor, didn't pay much for him. Slava continues to be a good backup at a cheap price.

01- Signed Samaki Walker, Mitch Richmond

- Walker was the Lakers best backup big man on a title winning team. Mitch dissapointed. Better options weren't on the market.

02- Signed Jannero Pargo

- Didn't have a lot of resources (Buss chose not to use the MLE), Pargo decent contributor

03- Signed Payton, Malone

-Obviously great deals, despite the outcome of the season. Find better players for a combined 6 million not on rookie deals.

04- Signed Vlade

- Lakers were desperate for a center and got the second best one on the market after Dampier

<b>Draft-</b>

01- No picks

02- Rush (pre-arranged deal)

03- Cook, Walton

- Cook so far looks like not much, but most #24 picks last less than 5 years in the league, so you can't call him a bust or critique Mitch much. Walton was a rare second round contributor.

04- Vujacic, Douhit

- Jury is still out. Can't really judge late picks so much.

So <b>Truth34</b> I think you are too hard on Mitch. He hasn't made any devastatingly bad moves, and his made a couple of consensus great moves (Rush trade, Payton/Malone signings). If he can be criticized for anything, some Laker fans here have fealt in the past he sat on his hands too much, but obviously he has done anything but that recently.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Gotta side with SacKings*



> Originally posted by <b>SacKings384</b>!
> Improvements? The Lakers were favorites last year, in fact they were favorites for the last 5 years... That was all Phil... So if they were favorites last year... Now they aren't considered contenders, how can you consider that an improvement? But Mitch is a pretty good GM, getting these guys for Gary was a good trade, he was left in a tough situation with Shaq. Shaq wanted out, no way do you get equal value for a guy like that with that kind of salary, it just won't happen.


Shaq and Kobe were the reasons we were favorites for those 5 years. 

Phil didn't bring them in. West did.

We may have been favorites, but that is just opinion.

The fact is we haven't won a title for 2 years. Would we have been favorites this year if we had kept Shaq? Nope, but we would have been contenders, and we still are after the moves we made. 

So yes I do think the moves we've made have been improvements.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Wilt_The_Stilt</b>!
> 
> Shaq and Kobe were the reasons we were favorites for those 5 years.
> 
> ...


Can´t agree on that one.
Nevertheless depth issues, i think a Payton/Kobe/scrub/Malone/Shaq is *way better *than /Atkins?/Kobe/Odom/Malone?/Divac...

On the other hand, Shaq seemed fed up with Kobe and Phil´s firing, so i believe it was inevitable trading him...
All in all, i agree that, *on paper *, we have a very capable roster and Mitch is responsable for that... But that doesn´t take away the fact that with last year´s team hell yeah, we'd be one of the favourites...


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>jazzy1</b>!
> 
> 
> This is ridiculous when you consider that Kobe's and Shaq's advantage were diliuted by the players they were against in direct competition.
> ...


Wallace took away Shaqs effectiveness???? His 26.6 PPG on 63% shooting was really a downfall... Ben Wallace really did make Shaq ineffective. And since when did MALONE take away Dirks effectiveness? And Payton took away Nashs? And it's funny, alls you can come up with is the Kings are collpasing as an argument, which isn't a real argument more of like, hey I'm getting murdered in this argument better insult some other way instead of trying to make a point... O BTW, Atkins 27 votes, Banks 9 votes... Just a nice little update...


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>SacKings384</b>!
> 
> 
> Wallace took away Shaqs effectiveness???? His 26.6 PPG on 63% shooting was really a downfall... Ben Wallace really did make Shaq ineffective. And since when did MALONE take away Dirks effectiveness? And Payton took away Nashs? And it's funny, alls you can come up with is the Kings are collpasing as an argument, which isn't a real argument more of like, hey I'm getting murdered in this argument better insult some other way instead of trying to make a point... O BTW, Atkins 27 votes, Banks 9 votes... Just a nice little update...


Who was the hero in the close out game I think it was Ben Wallace who was grabbing offensive rebounds and dunking on putbacks and hitting jumpers that Ben Wallace , Shaq had averaged over 30ppg in the finals so yeah he cut Shaq's effectiveness. 

Give me a break. 

I mentioned how the Kings choked away game 7 , I mentioned all the players who tightened up at the end of games, I talked about Divac's flopping, I talked about Cwebb contiuosly coming up small. 

Do we really need to recap the Kings futility I thought you were a fan or you'd know this but then again it was injuries yeah thats it thats their excuse for everything. 

When history writes the story of the Kings they will be thought of as chokers. As mentioned in the espn series the 25 biggets chokes( gotta like that)

And yes Dirk can't blow up Malone for 40 and Nash can't blow up GP either. 

LIke I said before, where are you in a Lakers forum ,why because you hate them for spanking your poor Kings.

You wouldn't be hear throwing dirt on everything LA notice your odom quotes another sly diss of a Lakers player. 

You stay consistent I give you that. 

As far as the poll thing what does that prove nothing I saw a poll here last year that said the Spurs would win the title and that means WHAT nothing. 

Who knows you probably called a bunch of your board buddies in here to take up for you. 

You being young and all. 

No need to insult you thats your thing and rep. 

We cool you just wrong is all.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

Funny, everytime you talk about the Kings. ONCE AGAIN, you talk about the Kings, it has ZERO relevance to anything... It's like, I don't think Atkins should start... Response: YA WELL! THE KINGS SUCK! BOO YA!... Wow, you really are nailing me with these counter-points... And no Dirk can't blow up Malone for 40 considering his career high is only 43... Oh and btw, it's 28-9 now...


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>SacKings384</b>!
> Funny, everytime you talk about the Kings. ONCE AGAIN, you talk about the Kings, it has ZERO relevance to anything... It's like, I don't think Atkins should start... Response: YA WELL! THE KINGS SUCK! BOO YA!... Wow, you really are nailing me with these counter-points... And no Dirk can't blow up Malone for 40 considering his career high is only 43... Oh and btw, it's 28-9 now...


Oh yeah I bring facts you haven't refuted, Kings choked I mentioned the players, your response Atkins should start, I mention how the lakers lost you say, Atkins leading in a poll no one cares about, 

I brought you an article to read I stated why I said such things and you say Atkins fits Rudy T's system better when he said he wants to fastbreak which is Banks strength. 

Then you make mention of who's starting which I find funny because if you go back and check I said that was up to Rudy T so I don't quite no whats your point. 

You just want the last word like an 18 yr old that you are. 

You can have the last word because you haven't said anything valid in about 10 post. 

Enjoy your last word. 

You're not used to gettting stumped thats why the frustration.

Lighten up it ain't that serious. 

I get why you like the lakers forum because we're more popular than the Kings maybe we get more participation which is cool. 

You've won the battle of the last word congrats.


----------



## DaUnbreakableKinG (Jun 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>jazzy1</b>!
> 
> 
> Oh yeah I bring facts you haven't refuted, Kings choked I mentioned the players, your response Atkins should start, I mention how the lakers lost you say, Atkins leading in a poll no one cares about,
> ...


:nonono: 

I don't think this thread was asking whether the kings chocked or not or is it asking that??


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>DaUnbreakableKinG</b>!
> 
> 
> :nonono:
> ...


Lol I was JUST about to say that...:laugh: In his reply he only PROVES that I was sticking to the subject... It's called OT BUDDY, instead of responding to his posts, I should have just put :topic: it would have suited every single one...


----------



## DaUnbreakableKinG (Jun 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>SacKings384</b>!
> I should have just put :topic: it would have suited every single one...


Do that next time.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>PauloCatarino</b>!
> Can´t agree on that one.
> Nevertheless depth issues, i think a Payton/Kobe/scrub/Malone/Shaq is [B[way better [/B]than /Atkins?/Kobe/Odom/Malone?/Divac...
> 
> ...


If we wouldn't have made any changes, here is what probably would have happened.

Phil stays so Shaq stays. 

Would Kobe have stayed with PJ as coach? I think so, but we never know.

Malone would have stayed. Would Payton have stayed? Maybe. He probably wouldn't have gotten as much money elsewhere, so he's probably in, but he would still be unhappy.

Fox retires. Fish leaves for the money and starting role.

That leaves our roster like this

C-Shaq/Douthit
Pf-Malone/Slava/Cook
Sf-George/Walton
Sg-Kobe/Rush
Pg-Payton/Vujacic

11 players...still have the Mle. Who would we sign? Kukoc? Could we get anyone better at sf? Maybe sign a scrub backup point.

C-Shaq
Pf-Malone
Sf-Kukoc (or player of similar abilities)
Sg-Kobe
Pg-Payton

Would we have won with that lineup? I don't know. Shaq declining, Payton unhappy, who knows about Malone's injury. Kobe would play better, but there would almost certainly be problems between Shaq and Kobe as Kobe would start to take over the offense.

Once again we would have a lack of depth, lack of defense, and age concerns.

Fact is we haven't won a title 2 years in a row with Shaq and Kobe. We barely made it to the Finals this year....0.4 and Cassell's injury really helped. You could say we overachieved.

We did have 4 Hall of Famer's...but how often did they actually play like H.o.f players?

Now we have this
C-Vlade/Mihm
Pf-Malone/Grant/Slava
Sf-Odom/Butler/Walton
Sg-Kobe/Rush
Pg-Banks/Atkins

Il: Cook, George, Sasha

Great depth, no chemistry problems. Youth and athleticism. Guys who play defense. I don't see how we aren't contenders. Not favorites but contenders for sure.

Yeah it's an improvement.


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

*Re: Re: Improvements?*



> Originally posted by <b>Jamel Irief</b>!
> 
> <b>Trades-</b>
> 
> ...


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

Truth34

There is no way anyone can defend Kupchack with your logic. You discredit his moves during the title years because of Shaq's dominance, but when they don't win, it's because of Kup and not Shaq.

You really think that Malone and Payton were bad signings? At the time everyone (most likely you as well) made the Lakers the favorites to win the titles because of those signings.

And speaking of Laker "character".... it was West, not Kupchack who signed Dennis Rodman. There's a guy with a lot of class and character right?


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

*Good point on Rodman*

But when you say everyone loved the Payton and Malone signings, you mean the fans and media, right?

I talked to several personnel people and coaches at the SPL in Long Beach the day after it happened, and many said that while the Lakers were always the favorites with Kobe and Shaq, they wondered why the Lakers were going "old" and how they could keep GP and Kobe happy in that offense with so many marquis players. 

I don't care what Van Earl Wrong or Joe Six Pack think because they don't know the game. 

In my humble opinion, Mitch Kupchak is taking this team from the elite team in the league to a perennial also-ran.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

Mitch needs to find that diamond in the rough, Petrie did it with a few palyers (Peja, Jackson, Brad Miller) Brad Miller was decent but nobody knew he was as good as he was... West got Kobe, the Pacers got JO, the Pistons got their whole team like that, Spurs got it with Tony Parker... Mitch needs to do the same.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

> In my humble opinion, Mitch Kupchak is taking this team from the elite team in the league to a perennial also-ran.


I'm not sure you understand the specifics of the situation, Mitch didn't do anything, Buss did. Buss wanted Shaq gone after his ridiculous contract extension requirements ($108M extension over 3 years, $40M at age 37). With Shaq's terrible work ethic, poor attitude, and already diminishing skills, it made all the sense in the world to trade Shaq while he was still young enough to get good players back for. Keeping Shaq and Kobe together was impossible, Shaq wasn’t going to stay without an extension apparently.

Jackson's departure was inevitable; he was dictating the players the Lakers were getting during the championship runs, and all those players were old tri-fit only spot-up shooters with diminishing defensive capabilities. No youth, no perimeter defense beyond Kobe, no future for the Lakers. 

I also don't see how the Lakers will be also-rans. The Lakers arguably have the best fast break team in basketball, with the best combination of speed, perimeter defense, and passing in the NBA. They are easily one defensive big away from being a legitimate contender, and have one of the youngest cores in the league. All after half an offseason of work. Not bad IMO.


----------



## Tyrellaphonte (Feb 21, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>SacKings384</b>!
> Mitch needs to find that diamond in the rough, Petrie did it with a few palyers (Peja, Jackson, Brad Miller) Brad Miller was decent but nobody knew he was as good as he was... West got Kobe, the Pacers got JO, the Pistons got their whole team like that, Spurs got it with Tony Parker... Mitch needs to do the same.


lets not ferget rashard lewis. lol


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

*Curse of The Diesel*



> Originally posted by <b>EHL</b>!
> 
> I also don't see how the Lakers will be also-rans. The Lakers arguably have the best fast break team in basketball, with the best combination of speed, perimeter defense, and passing in the NBA. They are easily one defensive big away from being a legitimate contender, and have one of the youngest cores in the league. All after half an offseason of work. Not bad IMO.



All I'm saying is that when the Red Sox traded the Babe, they never won again. Ponder that.

You don't see the Lakers as also rans? Let me list the teams that WILL finish higher than them:

San Antonio
Minnesota
Sacramento
Houston
Denver
Utah

teams that COULD finish higher than them:

Dallas
Memphis
Phoenix

if two of those do, can you spell L-O-T-T-E-R-Y?


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Houston and Utah have no place on that first list.

Utah has about 2 or 3 players that have ever played in a playoff game and Houston has about 2 or 3 players that deserve to start on a NBA team.


----------



## U reach. I teach (May 24, 2003)

*Re: Curse of The Diesel*



> Originally posted by <b>Truth34</b>!
> 
> All I'm saying is that when the Red Sox traded the Babe, they never won again. Ponder that.


LOL, nice comparision.  The lakers didn't trade a 25 year old Shaq for cash, and the redsox didn't trade a older, declining Babe for 2 young potential stars, and a solid contributer. I don't believe in curses, but if your from Boston, I can see how you do... :laugh:


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

*When you are from Boston...*

you don't believe in curses, you are cursed.

The curse of the Babe is real

The curse of the Billy Goat is real

The curse of the Diesel could be a reality


Oh, and I know Chucky Atkins is a solid contributor--Marcus Banks is a potential star. Who is the second potential star?


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

*Re: When you are from Boston...*



> Originally posted by <b>Truth34</b>!
> you don't believe in curses, you are cursed.
> 
> The curse of the Babe is real
> ...


The only curse i believe in is the Curse of The Leprechaun... Ask Red about it...



> Oh, and I know Chucky Atkins is a solid contributor--Marcus Banks is a potential star. Who is the second potential star?


He was talking about the Shaq trade: Odom, Butler and Grant...


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

*Oh, I see*

Yes, I would agree that Grant is very good contributor and Butler and Odom are possible stars.

Good point.

Just remember Paolo, 16>14, OK?


----------



## U reach. I teach (May 24, 2003)

Thanx for clearing that up Paulo. Although I do think Mihm could be a star... :laugh: 




:joke:


----------

