# Steve Nash to the Lakers



## Floods (Oct 25, 2005)

> Marc Stein ‏@ESPNSteinLine
> Just going up online & via SportsCenter: Sources say Suns have consented to sign-and-trade Steve Nash to Lakers for package of future picks
> 
> Paul Coro ‏@paulcoro
> ...


Not bad.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Floods said:


> Not bad.


Don't believe it yet. Chris Paul.


----------



## Floods (Oct 25, 2005)

Can't say I blame you lol.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

If it happens, we will never be complaining about Kobe's shot selection and Pau and Bynums inability to coexist offensinevly anymore!


----------



## Floods (Oct 25, 2005)

Phoenix gets LA's 2013 and 2015 firsts, and their seconds for 2013 and 2014.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Floods said:


> Phoenix gets LA's 2013 and 2015 firsts, and their seconds for 2013 and 2014.


Why the hell is Phoenix so willing to help us out? Damn resign Ramon and Hill and maybe get another wing and call this offseason a rap.

Oh and see if you can dump Blake if you resign Ramon.


----------



## Lynx (Mar 6, 2004)

Nash to Bynum..........ALLEY-OOPS


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Lynx said:


> Nash to Bynum..........ALLEY-OOPS


Lakers will reign as lob city back to back seasons!


----------



## Floods (Oct 25, 2005)

It sounds odd as a Celtics fan but I would like to see Kobe get number six. And seven, what the hell. As long as it doesn't come against my team (I doubt it will). I want the legends to get as much as they can, while they can.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Well apparently Hill is the other wing I spoke of. Even though Hill wouldn't return our calls in 2007.

And just to beat Daiman-

Nash... Sessions... Blake
Kobe... Ebanks.... Goudelock
Artest... Hill
Pau... Hill... McRoberts
Bynum

With maybe Morris, Johnson-Odom and Murphy making the team.


----------



## Lynx (Mar 6, 2004)

With this S&T and rumor of Hill joining the Lakers, pressure will be on both old veterans to deliver. It maybe a bit odd for Kobe not being a Sr. member on the squad (aside from Fish) after so long.

Living in Phoenix, I'm very interesting to see the reaction from my co-workers. I'm so rubbing it in tomorrow by wearing my Lakers T-shirt.


----------



## sylaw (Nov 7, 2002)

First good news I've heard about the Lakers all year. Next season will certainly be more a lot more interesting.


----------



## Cris (Jun 18, 2003)

When was the last time the Lakers drafted in the first round and kept the pick?



> Also something to note:
> Sources told ESPN.com that Nash will try to convince longtime teammate Grant Hill, one of his closest friends in the game, to join him with the Lakers. ESPN The Magazine's Ric Bucher reported over the weekend the Lakers were one of four teams (along with Toronto, New York and Phoenix) in the running for Hill after the 39-year-old's recent trip to Germany to undergo the same platelet-enrichment treatment on his knee that Bryant credited for his rejuvenated knee last season.


----------



## Lynx (Mar 6, 2004)

Cris said:


> When was the last time the Lakers drafted in the first round and kept the pick?


LOL...we never had a good draft pick than pan out for us.


----------



## Cris (Jun 18, 2003)

Lynx said:


> LOL...we never had a good draft pick than pan out for us.


I mean Bynum isn't THAT bad is he?


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

I'm so happy.


----------



## Lynx (Mar 6, 2004)

Cris, 

Bynum is still a work in progress. This past playoff showed how he doesn't have much in the tank. Game 7 against Nuggets he was weak sauce compared to what he did in Game 1. He needs to learn how to pace the game. Now, that Nash will be the focal point on offense, this will give Bynum an opportunity to learn from the veteran when and how effectively to defend the P&R.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

Jamel Irief said:


> Lakers will reign as lob city back to back seasons!


Happy Jamel is so much more pleasant to be around.

I can't wait until the season now. This is awesome.


----------



## Cris (Jun 18, 2003)

Lynx said:


> Cris,
> 
> Bynum is still a work in progress. This past playoff showed how he doesn't have much in the tank. Game 7 against Nuggets he was weak sauce compared to what he did in Game 1. He needs to learn how to pace the game. Now, that Nash will be the focal point on offense, this will give Bynum an opportunity to learn from the veteran when and how effectively to defend the P&R.


I know Bynum has issues, but to say he is in the same category as Brian Cook, Farmar and Sasha. A bit of a stretch.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

Amazing move. Kobe's recruiting was a factor if reports are to believed.

Wonder who else we get now. Doubt that Ramon is back.


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

I'm ecstatic! Now flip Pau for Derrick Williams and Beasley. 

Nash Blake Morris
Kobe Glock DJO
Beasley Metta Ebanks
DWill Hill McBob
Bynum Hill

And if Dwight changes his mind...

Nash Blake Morris
Kobe Glock DJO
Beasley Ebanks
Williams McBob Hill
Dwight Hill

Handle the scandal Mitch!!


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

for all his faults bynnum is the second best center in the league and we got him for the #10 pick - someone is being argumentative

also 2 #1s is a lot to give up for a very old player no matter how good he is

that said if we can resign Sessions and Hill and add Grant Hill we are looking pretty damn good


----------



## Lynx (Mar 6, 2004)

Cris said:


> I know Bynum has issues, but to say he is in the same category as Brian Cook, Farmar and Sasha. A bit of a stretch.


I never put him in that category since he did become an All-star this past season. Still, he needs to work on his stamina. Might as well adopt Kobe's 666 workout..lol


----------



## Eternal (Sep 7, 2005)

Is Derrick Williams really even that good? I haven't seen much of him, but really not sure of him. I do like he has a lot of upside to him though.


----------



## LA68 (Apr 3, 2004)

Ramon is out, back to the lottery teams for him. Shoulda took the PO when he could. Lots of PG's in play this off season and he's very low on the list.

Oh this is gonna be a sloooooow team next year. Its the only way they could compete without blowing it all up so might as well. A real PG should help Brown's system as well as the bigs.

I knew the Lakers wouldn't be left empty.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Hurry up and be official please!


----------



## Game3525 (Aug 14, 2008)

Until I see Nash holding up a Lakers jersey.....I refuse to believe it.


----------



## MojoPin (Oct 10, 2008)

You also have to think of the intangible effects that Nash brings. Dude is a proven leader, on the court and off. His presence will foster team cohesion.


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

This is the best news we've had in years. July 11 needs to get here so this can be official.


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

we FINALLY have a competent point guard!!


----------



## Wilmatic2 (Oct 30, 2005)

I'm sorry guys, but I do not like this deal at all. Nash is 39 years old and plays no defense, yet its justified to give him a 3 year deal? LA needed to get younger, athletic at the point guard position. They should have gotten Dragic instead, he was the better fit in my opinion.


----------



## Eternal (Sep 7, 2005)

Beasley is a no go now. Just agreed to Suns.


----------



## ceejaynj (Oct 9, 2005)

Wilmatic2 said:


> I'm sorry guys, but I do not like this deal at all. Nash is 39 years old and plays no defense, yet its justified to give him a 3 year deal? LA needed to get younger, athletic at the point guard position.


I like Steve Nash a lot...but I have to agree here. We are going in the wrong direction as far as age and athleticism. This is only a short term solution to a long term problem.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

ceejaynj said:


> I like Steve Nash a lot...but I have to agree here. We are going in the wrong direction as far as age and athleticism. This is only a short term solution to a long term problem.


If the solution means we get a ring or two, who cares? 

Sessions is far more athletic than Nash, but there is no question we are much, much better with Nash.


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

Nobody is stopping the Westbrooks of the world but you best believe Nash will keep them working on the other end.


----------



## MojoPin (Oct 10, 2008)

Dudes: we have two years of Kobe left max. There is no long-term solution to the PG problem. Nash is our best bet for winning NOW. I'll take a 39 year-old Nash over a 25 year-old Sessions 365 days a year.


----------



## Wilmatic2 (Oct 30, 2005)

No one considered Dragic for LA? To me, Dragic would've been the better choice. By no means he would've been the solution, but he's younger and quicker.


----------



## Eternal (Sep 7, 2005)

Wilmatic2 said:


> No one considered Dragic for LA? To me, Dragic would've been the better choice. By no means he would've been the solution, but he's younger and quicker.


Nash is better then him right now. We need to win now while Kobe still has time.


----------



## MojoPin (Oct 10, 2008)

Let's hope he can convince Grant Hill to come, too. I've always been a pretty big fan of Hill. It was torture watching him go through all those ankle injuries in the early 00's. 

Hell, I think Dr. Buss should fly the entire team over to Germany for the Kobe Treatment.


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

I don't like the move for different reasons the way our team is built will not allow Nash to be Nash.Nash has only worked well in an offense when he has had shooters and the floor spread at tempo. We play slow plodding ball with 2 bigd gumming up the offense and no shooters. 

unless we trade a big get a couple shooters this trade bumps us only alittle bit. The Shaq/Amare/Nash thing never worked this isn't that bad but has similar elements of floor clogging plodding offense.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Brown wants to run a pick and roll offense so how do you see: "Nash not being allowed to be Nash"?


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

Our biggest two weaknesses in our offense were lack of reliable three point shooting and the tendency for our offense to stagnate/not feeding the bigs consistently. Steve does both of these things as well as any other player in the NBA. How is this a bad trade? It's a dream come true.

Yes, he's ancient. But we're in a position where if we don't win a championship in the next two years it's over for these guys except for Bynum. I'm happy that our front office is showing some suave and some balls by consolidating resources for one or two last runs.

Oh, and **** whatever scrub we would've picked at 25/55 anyways. How often does that work out for us? Look at our freaking draft history and tell me that this was not a good trade.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

jazzy1 said:


> I don't like the move for different reasons the way our team is built will not allow Nash to be Nash.Nash has only worked well in an offense when he has had shooters and the floor spread at tempo. We play slow plodding ball with 2 bigd gumming up the offense and no shooters.
> 
> unless we trade a big get a couple shooters this trade bumps us only alittle bit. The Shaq/Amare/Nash thing never worked this isn't that bad but has similar elements of floor clogging plodding offense.


I can see your point which is why I still want Dwight. He wouldn't change the spacing, but if we did a Bynum/Artest for Dwight/Richardson deal it would improve our athleticism and outside shooting.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

you ever notice how previously good or even great three point shooters come to the Lakers and then cant hit the side of a barn? which came first the chicken or the offensive system that creates no rhythm, spacing or consistency for the shooters?


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

Looks like there is a chance Pau stays on the team. Hopefully we still swap Bynum for Dwight. Throwing in JRich for Artest would be even better.


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

Wilt_The_Stilt said:


> I can see your point which is why I still want Dwight. He wouldn't change the spacing, but if we did a Bynum/Artest for Dwight/Richardson deal it would improve our athleticism and outside shooting.


I agree here Howard runs the floor better and is much more of a lob finisher so he could add some more movement to our offense than Bynum brings Richardson would be a shooter we could use to add some punch. 

But I don't think Nash is the answer the way this roster is currently built. we can't shoot it period and our bigs clog the paint. 

we gotta get away from the twin towers affect it doesn't work. I would trade both Pau and Bynum Now for Howard. our offense would be perfect with Howard and no Pau as well. 

I would have never traded both for Howard before but with Nash its the better way teams ......aren't gonna win in the league now with congested plodders. The heat and Thunder are the new winning model. 

we won 2 titles with odom as the primary other big not Bynum and Pau.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

why would you trade both players for howard when bynum alone would suffice?


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

I hear the Lakers are meeting with Jamison, and I think that would be a good move. Give us some floor spacing off the bench at the 4 spot. 

I'd also take Shard if that didn't work out.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Jamison is a ton better than Lewis at this point - if we can get him for the mini that would be huge


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

I would welcome Jamison with open arms. That would help our spacing even more so.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

I realize the Ramon resigning thing was a pipe dream. Jamison as the backup 4 with Pau and Bynum taking all the center minutes would be awesome.

Do we lead the league in scoring next year?


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

Jamison would be an excellent addition. Stretch 4 who can play off of Bynum and Pau.


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

Give me Jamison, Jordan Hill and Grant Hill and we're good to go. Old as hell, but good to go.

Nash will make Goudelock, Ebanks and McRoberts much more solid contributors.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

So Kobe is going to go from playing his whole career as the primary ball carrier to being ok with Nash dominating the ball and playing set up man?

I don't want to hear any shit about Fisher or how Odom used to play point forward or blah blah blah. For the most part Kobe has been the primary ball handler for the Lakers for over a decade. I can't see him just going from that to being a guy who runs around screens looking for a Steve Nash dime.

Nash makes shit players look decent and decent players look good. But players who can set up their own shot and score on their own? He stifles that. 

This should make Bynum and to a lesser extend Pau look great. But Kobe is going to have a terrible year. 

If Kobe is still "the guy" on the Lakers, then this was a bad signing all around.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Kobe recruited him and Kobe isnt stupid and neither is Nash - go trolling someplace else


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

e-monk said:


> Kobe recruited him and Kobe isnt stupid and neither is Nash - go trolling someplace else


So your answer is neither of them are stupid. 

Great. 


And second, I'm tired of shit posters pulling a "oh you're trolling!" when anyone questions a move their team made.

Sorry, but its a forum junior. If you aren't suited to have discussions on here outside of "Lakers RAH! RAH RAH LAKERS!" then that's your problem, not mine.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

R-Star said:


> So your answer is neither of them are stupid.
> 
> Great.
> 
> ...


it's not general posters, it's you - do you claim not to have a reputation as a provocatuer? 
(also go **** yourself with that 'shit poster' bs)

and yeah that's the answer: they're both smart enough to know what they're getting into. in fact it probably takes someone of Nash's stature to get Kobe to give up the ball


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

e-monk said:


> it's not general posters, it's you - do you claim not to have a reputation as a provocatuer?
> (also go **** yourself with that 'shit poster' bs)
> 
> and yeah that's the answer: they're both smart enough to know what they're getting into. in fact it probably takes someone of Nash's stature to get Kobe to give up the ball


Not really concerned with what my reputation is. I come here to talk about basketball, which is what I'm doing now.

So is Nash going to spend less time with that ball then he's accustomed to? Because its a given that Kobe is going to have to. How well does Kobe play going from the primary ball handler to playing a late in his career Reggie Miller type of role?

Someone wanting to actually talk about the fit of this trade rather than just pull a "Yes!!! We're the greatest!" isn't a bad thing.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

It will be interesting to see how it works out, but I'm not really worried. Kobe adjusted his game when he played with Payton and also during the Olympics for what that's worth.

And Nash is a guy who has the stature to waive Kobe off when he wants the ball.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Wilt_The_Stilt said:


> It will be interesting to see how it works out, but I'm not really worried. Kobe adjusted his game when he played with Payton and also during the Olympics for what that's worth.
> 
> And Nash is a guy who has the stature to waive Kobe off when he wants the ball.


Meh, I'm not sure Kobe's ok with anyone "waiving him off", but we'll see. 

As far as Payton, that's kind of different seeing as Nash is about 10x the player right now that Payton was at the time. The Lakers really haven't had an above average point guard since Kobe's been there.

I'm not saying it will work out terribly, or even bad. The Lakers are a better team with Nash on paper at least. But Kobe is going to be the one to have to pay for it.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

R-Star said:


> Meh, I'm not sure Kobe's ok with anyone "waiving him off", but we'll see.
> 
> As far as Payton, that's kind of different seeing as Nash is about 10x the player right now that Payton was at the time. The Lakers really haven't had an above average point guard since Kobe's been there.
> 
> I'm not saying it will work out terribly, or even bad. The Lakers are a better team with Nash on paper at least. But Kobe is going to be the one to have to pay for it.


Hey it's Lukes job to use hyperbole.

I personally think Payton's 2002-03 was better than Nash last season.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> Hey it's Lukes job to use hyperbole.
> 
> I personally think Payton's 2002-03 was better than Nash last season.


I don't. Even Paytons D was falling off quite dramatically by that time. Nash is a far better player in comparison. But agree to disagree.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

Jamel Irief said:


> Hey it's Lukes job to use hyperbole.
> 
> I personally think Payton's 2002-03 was better than Nash last season.


Yessir.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

R-Star said:


> So Kobe is going to go from playing his whole career as the primary ball carrier to being ok with Nash dominating the ball and playing set up man?
> 
> I don't want to hear any shit about Fisher or how Odom used to play point forward or blah blah blah. For the most part Kobe has been the primary ball handler for the Lakers for over a decade. I can't see him just going from that to being a guy who runs around screens looking for a Steve Nash dime.
> 
> ...


That is retarded. Healthy top five players don't have terrible seasons. Will he (and Nash) have to adjust to compliment each other? Absolutely. But the fact remains that both of these guys has exactly one thing in mind - winning a title. Granted, Kobe's a primadona and Steve has never played with a player of Bryant's caliber, but I'm willing to bet that two of the smartest basketball minds of the generation will be able to work something out. All this means is that there will be less Kobe ISOs and more spot up opportunities. I for one am looking forward to watching a real offense.

And when exactly has Steve Nash ever "stifled" any players ability to score the ball?


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Luke said:


> That is retarded. Healthy top five players don't have terrible seasons. Will he (and Nash) have to adjust to compliment each other? Absolutely. But the fact remains that both of these guys has exactly one thing in mind - winning a title. Granted, Kobe's a primadona and Steve has never played with a player of Bryant's caliber, but I'm willing to bet that two of the smartest basketball minds of the generation will be able to work something out. All this means is that there will be less Kobe ISOs and more spot up opportunities. I for one am looking forward to watching a real offense.
> 
> And when exactly has Steve Nash ever "stifled" any players ability to score the ball?


Amar'e and Dirk really suffered to score with Nash.

That was sarcasm.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

BTW the Maple Leafs were rumored to be trading for Steve Nash before the Lakers got him.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

Jamel Irief said:


> Amar'e and Dirk really suffered to score with Nash.
> 
> That was sarcasm.


The '05-'07 version of Amar'e is 100 times better than Dirk ever was.

That was hyperbole.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Luke said:


> That is retarded. Healthy top five players don't have terrible seasons. Will he (and Nash) have to adjust to compliment each other? Absolutely. But the fact remains that both of these guys has exactly one thing in mind - winning a title. Granted, Kobe's a primadona and Steve has never played with a player of Bryant's caliber, but I'm willing to bet that two of the smartest basketball minds of the generation will be able to work something out. All this means is that there will be less Kobe ISOs and more spot up opportunities. I for one am looking forward to watching a real offense.
> 
> And when exactly has Steve Nash ever "stifled" any players ability to score the ball?


Its not Nash himself stifling star players, but premier pass first PG's in general. 

Kobe been averaging over 20 shots per game the last 8 years, and 10 out of the last 11. Not to mention he's been "the guy" for that time as far as taking care of the ball.

Again, not saying its going to fail, but Kobe is going to be the guy who takes the hit for it. And Kobe was a top 5 player last year while taking 23 shots. I'm not sure he's a top 5 next year when he's taking a more backseat role. Although I could be wrong on that and wouldn't mind if I am. I enjoy watching Kobe.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> Amar'e and Dirk really suffered to score with Nash.
> 
> That was sarcasm.


Dirk actually scored better once Nash left.....


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

Luke said:


> *That is retarded. *Healthy top five players don't have terrible seasons. Will he (and Nash) have to adjust to compliment each other? Absolutely. But the fact remains that both of these guys has exactly one thing in mind - winning a title. Granted, Kobe's a primadona and Steve has never played with a player of Bryant's caliber, *but I'm willing to bet that two of the smartest basketball minds of the generation will be able to work something out*. All this means is that there will be less Kobe ISOs and more spot up opportunities. I for one am looking forward to watching a real offense.
> 
> And when exactly has Steve Nash ever "stifled" any players ability to score the ball?


R-Star is not that far-off, imho.
Kobe Bryant has never played alongside a PG who not only is THE distributer, but also excells on dishing the ball. Nash' game has been deteriorating, but there's no denying he is still one of the best at providing teammates with a good shot oportunity.
Enters Bryant, who not only hogs the ball, but also has the "shoot first, think later" mentality. How will they mesh? Obviously, i'm hoping that the backcourt pair does great, but i have some trouble imagining that (obviously, at least for now).

On the other hand, and like others have said, Kobe must have ok'ed the signing. So maybe (maaaaaybe!) Kobe is willing to change his game to acomodate a floor general like Nash (who only plays one side of the ball).

Interesting times...


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

R-Star said:


> Its not Nash himself stifling star players, but premier pass first PG's in general.
> 
> Kobe been averaging over 20 shots per game the last 8 years, and 10 out of the last 11. Not to mention he's been "the guy" for that time as far as taking care of the ball.
> 
> Again, not saying its going to fail, but Kobe is going to be the guy who takes the hit for it. And Kobe was a top 5 player last year while taking 23 shots. I'm not sure he's a top 5 next year when he's taking a more backseat role. Although I could be wrong on that and wouldn't mind if I am. I enjoy watching Kobe.


I see what you're saying, and I agree with you to a certain extent, but I feel like you're looking too much into this. Kobe is arguably the most versatile offensive player in the league and Nash is arguably the least selfish. That alone makes this a decent match regardless of playing styles of preferences. There will be an adjustment period, but after a while I (hope to) see the Lakers running their offense through Nash for the most part with Kobe conserving energy until the fourth. Through the first three quarters I would like to see him being featured in the post and abusing defenders with his mid-range game (especially now that he has a shooter in Nash to dish to) more than he was last year.

He will be taking less shots, but he will also probably shoot a better efficiency next year. I would be surprised if he didn't average 25 a game.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Luke said:


> I see what you're saying, and I agree with you to a certain extent, but I feel like you're looking too much into this. Kobe is arguably the most versatile offensive player in the league and Nash is arguably the least selfish. That alone makes this a decent match regardless of playing styles of preferences. There will be an adjustment period, but after a while I (hope to) see the Lakers running their offense through Nash for the most part with Kobe conserving energy until the fourth. Through the first three quarters I would like to see him being featured in the post and abusing defenders with his mid-range game (especially now that he has a shooter in Nash to dish to) more than he was last year.
> 
> He will be taking less shots, but he will also probably shoot a better efficiency next year. I would be surprised if he didn't average 25 a game.


I'm fine with that. I can see nights where it goes amazing, and nights where you're banging your head against the wall because Kobe tries to put the Lakers back in a game on his own.

Either way its an exciting trade that makes the Lakers better. Just a matter of time until we see how well the backcourt meshes together. I know Bynums fantasy stock just shot through the roof.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

Maybe it's just me, but I think Nash/Kobe will coexist wonderfully. Nash doesn't _have_ to dominate the ball to be a productive offensive player. He's extremely gifted when it comes to knowing what his team needs at that moment, and considering he's one of the elite three point shooters in terms of percentage (career average is just shy of is 43%). He will be able to balance being a shooter and being a distributor well enough to make them dangerous. 

Kobe and Nash are also workaholics when it comes to conditioning, I can see them having incredible mutual respect for eachother and that translating to good chemistry on the court. If Nash can recruit Grant Hill, and the Lakers add Jamison as a sub watch out...I see that making them an elite team in the West again.


----------



## onelakerfan (Nov 11, 2004)

another note







Staple Center just requested this at players parking lot


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

So Bynum has a place to park?


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

dammit! beat me to it


----------



## Kneejoh (Dec 21, 2004)

Where is the Jamison talk coming from, did I miss something?


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

R-Star said:


> So Kobe is going to go from playing his whole career as the primary ball carrier to being ok with Nash dominating the ball and playing set up man?
> 
> I don't want to hear any shit about Fisher or how Odom used to play point forward or blah blah blah. For the most part Kobe has been the primary ball handler for the Lakers for over a decade. I can't see him just going from that to being a guy who runs around screens looking for a Steve Nash dime.
> 
> ...



I think you make a good point here though I don;t see the problem being as extreme as you do. Kobe will get his did when we had the 4 HOF'ers did with Shaq, Kobe will force his offense and Bynum/Gasol will get less. my big question is will Kobe and Nash play with any continuity. 

When Sessions 1st got with the Lakers he was running alot of high pick and roll and Kobe basically sat in the corner off the ball. Now thats Sessions who isn't half the player Nash is so when Nash is running repeated pick and rolls what the hell is Kobe gonna be doing spotting up in the corner its a valid question. Can Kobe find continuity playing with a ball dominant overdribling pg like Nash. 

Maybe. 

Maybe not. 

I'm guessing we will have 2 different offense next season heck maybe 3. the Kobe offense , the Nash pick and roll offense and the post dumps to the bigs offense. 

How all of that works cohesively is beyond me. So I think Nash bumps us just not convinced its as much as people think. 

Nash makes marginal players more effective because he limits what they need to do offensively Kobe can work off screens get some paint duckins from Nash quit hitters but what happens in the normal offense Kobe is best Iso'd, in the mid post/low post not moving off the ball especially at his age. 

we'll see. 





e-monk said:


> why would you trade both players for howard when bynum alone would suffice?


I know its not gonna happen but I don't think the Twin tower thing works at all. Bynum/Gasol combo as primary post players is not a winning formula. too damn slow laterally to contain pick and rolls and get back on defense. 

Howard and Gasol maybe I still see elements of a problem there.


----------



## onelakerfan (Nov 11, 2004)

Kobe will adjust because he respects Steves game and he is not the same kobe of 03-04 with 4 HOFs. Nash can actually get the ball to kobe when he is trying to post or give a TIMELY pass when he goes though sceens, or actually have a player on him cuz other PG will respect his game as well and open the area for all players. who the hell is sessons, an unprooven bench player.

will kobe force some shots, hell ya, but thats part it, you have to take good with bad, specially when the good is way more than bad


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

> I know its not gonna happen but I don't think the Twin tower thing works at all. Bynum/Gasol combo as primary post players is not a winning formula. too damn slow laterally to contain pick and rolls and get back on defense.
> 
> Howard and Gasol maybe I still see elements of a problem there.


so trade Gasol to someone else for other pieces - dont overpay for Howard


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

there is such a thing as a 1/2 P&R folks


----------



## Hyperion (Dec 5, 2006)

PauloCatarino said:


> R-Star is not that far-off, imho.
> Kobe Bryant has never played alongside a PG who not only is THE distributer, but also excells on dishing the ball. Nash' game has been deteriorating, but there's no denying he is still one of the best at providing teammates with a good shot oportunity.
> Enters Bryant, who not only hogs the ball, but also has the "shoot first, think later" mentality. How will they mesh? Obviously, i'm hoping that the backcourt pair does great, but i have some trouble imagining that (obviously, at least for now).
> 
> ...


You clearly have not watched Nash. You're just assuming based on his age, but katy season was probably his best or at least rivaling his best season. Nash put up with wince harder, kobe is a steep upgrade over anyone nash has played with. Kobe will shoot a career best fg% this year though and everyone will realize that nash is the best team player of all time.


----------



## Sean (Jun 7, 2002)

Kneejoh said:


> Where is the Jamison talk coming from, did I miss something?


Sam Amico of the FoxSportsOhio recently reported on Los Angeles' interest in Jamison through his twitter account: "Lakers also expected to meet with Antawn Jamison, probably early next week."

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/360009/20120705/lakers-trade-rumors-hill-jamison.htm


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

e-monk said:


> so trade Gasol to someone else for other pieces - dont overpay for Howard


If we could get more athletic on the perimeter I'd move Gasol. Not for just anything or just to dump him but for platyers with athleticism and some shooting. 

I want Howard over Bynum thats a huge upgrade defensively.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

This is why I enjoy posting with the Lakers. The majority of your fanbase on here is actually subjective and doesn't pull the ridiculous homer BS most other fanbases on here do.

Looking forward to next season and seeing how you guys do. You'll be my main team in the West along with the Wolves since they're still looking pretty exciting.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

Anyone else worried that Mike Brown is going to run Nash into the ground with excessive minutes? He didn't cut Pau or Kobe's minutes last season, so I am a little concerned.


----------



## Seuss (Aug 19, 2005)

If Brown does decide to keep quite a bit of isos for Kobe, I don't think they are wasting Nash's talents. If they have Nash spot up, and Kobe gets doubled, Nash will either drain the 3 or he'll penetrate and get the ball to Pau or Bynum. The Lakers are going to a very good shooting percentage with those four players on their team.


----------

