Ventre -- the Lakers need to trade Kobe . . .

[guest-koast]

^---that was me obviously and to fix one part

"That was last year and Kobe felt the triangle wasnt working because of teams learning how to play against it"

[WayOutWest]

FYI,

Shaq has stated publically that he is the reason NVE was gone.  NVE had a problem with the Diesel so he had to go.  Problem for Shaq with Kobe is that Dr. Buss and Mr. Logo would not let Kobe go despite Shaq insisting on moving Kobe.

Shaq said the same of EJ and Elden but he was especially bitter about NVE, in crunch time the Lakers were NVE's team, that's why Shaq had a problem with NVE and why NVE had a problem with Kobe in the 1998 Utah series.  

JoMal, you may want to paint a picture of Kobe being the root of all evil in L.A., he clearly wasn't.  Kobe was part of the problem along with Shaq, PJ and Buss's tight wallet.  While I hated to see Shaq go I know he wasn't the Lakers future because of his PROVEN track record after the 2000 championship.  Not assumptions, inuendo or speculation but because of the FACT that Shaq was less and less motivated as a basketball player, the proof being his fitness and time off the court durring the regular season.

Also, there has NEVER been a rivalry between the Lakers and the Kings.  The only recent Laker rivalry was with the Spurs.  The Spurs have been Championship slayers/winners in their own right. Both teams have taken each other out, in some cases devestated each other, on their quest to a title.    The Kings on the other hand have been nothing more than playoff fodder on the path to championship glory.  Pretty much in the same class as the Mavs, Wolves and Blazers.

[Reality]

This is the "reality", Randy. Kobe claims to make teammates better, but so far has failed to do so, while Shaq does not claim to make anyone better, but his teammates happen to benefit tremendously by having O'Neal as a teammate. It opens things up for them. So Rush, Walton, Medva......could they have been the Damon Jones',  Udonis Haslem's, or Eddie Jones this year instead?

We can't answer that, but I am sure those latter three would not want to participate in this game at all. 

 

Or put another way, how would the Heat be doing if it were Kobe that was traded to the Heat?  Hey thats the ticket.  Lets trade DWade to LA straight for Kobme.  Oh woops we better throw in another player or two to the Lakers cause Kobadiah is soooo good, much better then DWade and plus his salary is higher.  Now how are the Lakers doing?  How are the Heat doing?  Since all you Laker posters claim Kobe is the one to build around.

Shaq, Karl Malone, Slava, Rush, DWade.  Yeah i like that.

Instead you got Kobadiah under .500 for 2005.  Hey is Kobadiah now under .500 for his career without Shaq?  150-175 games or so.  Ya that stat tells you nothing.  

More Laker winnin juice on the way for all you Kobe people.

[westkoast]

Excuse me while I die laughing at Reality giving Shaq major props.  Anyone have any wild ideas why? :rofl:     "Build around" means for many years to come Reality.  Not the following season.  

WoW is giving you guys info we've all known forever.  Like I said its ancient history to us Laker fans.  We all still love Shaq but we know how he is.  How many players does he have to diss because of attention for you guys to get it?  Kobe and Shaq are pretty much one in the same (although one has rat in em) when it comes to ego and being the center of the universe.

[JoMal]

JoMal, you may want to paint a picture of Kobe being the root of all evil in L.A., he clearly wasn't.  Kobe was part of the problem along with Shaq, PJ and Buss's tight wallet.  While I hated to see Shaq go I know he wasn't the Lakers future because of his PROVEN track record after the 2000 championship.  Not assumptions, inuendo or speculation but because of the FACT that Shaq was less and less motivated as a basketball player, the proof being his fitness and time off the court durring the regular season.

 

The root of all evil in LA!  :rofl:  :rofl:  :rofl:

I love that one.

The problem is that Kobe is the root of all evil just for the Lakers.

While the negative attention brought on by Kobe hurts the reputation of a franchise like the Lakers, if he were doing his schick with the other LA team, for instance, it would preferable, as the Clippers could use the attention, negative or not. See, that little sticking point of mine again, about Kobe just being a poor fit these days with the Lakers.

Also, there has NEVER been a rivalry between the Lakers and the Kings.  The only recent Laker rivalry was with the Spurs.  The Spurs have been Championship slayers/winners in their own right. Both teams have taken each other out, in some cases devestated each other, on their quest to a title.    The Kings on the other hand have been nothing more than playoff fodder on the path to championship glory.  Pretty much in the same class as the Mavs, Wolves and Blazers.

Star centers and star coaches don't spend all their free time dissing an opponent if they just considered them the same as the Mavs, Wolves, or Blazers.

Besides, we beat the Lakers in 2002. That we did not go to the championship round had nothing to do with the Kings being playoff fodder for the Lakers, but with some odd choice the League and the refs had to prevent Sacramento from taking LA out that year.

Put your *sterick next to THAT year's championship, because it was clearly not earned.

[Guest_Randy]

JoMal, you may want to paint a picture of Kobe being the root of all evil in L.A., he clearly wasn't.  Kobe was part of the problem along with Shaq, PJ and Buss's tight wallet.  While I hated to see Shaq go I know he wasn't the Lakers future because of his PROVEN track record after the 2000 championship.  Not assumptions, inuendo or speculation but because of the FACT that Shaq was less and less motivated as a basketball player, the proof being his fitness and time off the court durring the regular season.

 

The root of all evil in LA!  :rofl:  :rofl:  :rofl:

I love that one.

The problem is that Kobe is the root of all evil just for the Lakers.

While the negative attention brought on by Kobe hurts the reputation of a franchise like the Lakers, if he were doing his schick with the other LA team, for instance, it would preferable, as the Clippers could use the attention, negative or not. See, that little sticking point of mine again, about Kobe just being a poor fit these days with the Lakers.

Also, there has NEVER been a rivalry between the Lakers and the Kings.  The only recent Laker rivalry was with the Spurs.  The Spurs have been Championship slayers/winners in their own right. Both teams have taken each other out, in some cases devestated each other, on their quest to a title.    The Kings on the other hand have been nothing more than playoff fodder on the path to championship glory.  Pretty much in the same class as the Mavs, Wolves and Blazers.

Star centers and star coaches don't spend all their free time dissing an opponent if they just considered them the same as the Mavs, Wolves, or Blazers.

Besides, we beat the Lakers in 2002. That we did not go to the championship round had nothing to do with the Kings being playoff fodder for the Lakers, but with some odd choice the League and the refs had to prevent Sacramento from taking LA out that year.

Put your *sterick next to THAT year's championship, because it was clearly not earned.

You are SOOO right, JoMal -- it was clearly the refs fault -- or the Lakers fault (one of the two anyway) that made the Kings miss all those freethrows!!!  IF the Kings had made their freethrows, then the Kings would have won with or without the refs -- isn't it HARD to blame the refs when you consider that?  Oh, but that would mean the Kings weren't nearly as good as you want us to believe they were -- because IF they were that good, they would choke during clutch time, right?

It is SOOO hilarious that you don't seem to find it wrong when the freethrows were SOOO off in the Kings direction -- just when it's in the Lakers directions!

[WayOutWest]

Besides, we beat the Lakers in 2002. That we did not go to the championship round had nothing to do with the Kings being playoff fodder for the Lakers, but with some odd choice the League and the refs had to prevent Sacramento from taking LA out that year.

Put your *sterick next to THAT year's championship, because it was clearly not earned.

If anyone is to blame for the Kings not winning it all in 2002 it's the Kings Cardiologist and free throw coach.  No heart and tons of missed freethrows is what did the Kings in, not the refs.

Then again if you go by the saying "No guts, no glory", maybe it's the Kings Internist that should be blamed, not the refs.

I think you should nominate Nick Anderson as an "honorary" inductee into the Kings hall of shame...err...fame.

[JoMal]

Prick a Laker fan, find an apologist. Or better yet. an anti-cynicist.   :bounce:  

[Ted]

I think the Kings lost that series because the Lakers shot free throws so well. I mean, they shot like 26 of them in one potentially eliminating quarter. They deserve some props for that.

[Guest_Randy]

Exactly, Ted, and the refs finally quit giving the Kings all those freethrow attempts because they didn't want them to continue to get embarrassed at the line -- CWebb already had that embarrassing timeout call in the Final Four -- they wanted to help save him the embarrassment of blowing yet ANOTHER important game!

[westkoast]

  CWebb already had that embarrassing timeout call in the Final Four -- they wanted to help save him the embarrassment of blowing yet ANOTHER important game!

Which is why they let the hip check on Derek Fisher slide so Bibby could hit the game winning shot.    

[JoMal]

  CWebb already had that embarrassing timeout call in the Final Four -- they wanted to help save him the embarrassment of blowing yet ANOTHER important game!

Which is why they let the hip check on Derek Fisher slide so Bibby could hit the game winning shot.  

So one non-call that goes in favor of the Kings equates to 13 bogus calls that go in favor of the Lakers?  :huh:

Just trying to get the ratio right.  

[westkoast]

  CWebb already had that embarrassing timeout call in the Final Four -- they wanted to help save him the embarrassment of blowing yet ANOTHER important game!

Which is why they let the hip check on Derek Fisher slide so Bibby could hit the game winning shot.  

So one non-call that goes in favor of the Kings equates to 13 bogus calls that go in favor of the Lakers?  :huh:

Just trying to get the ratio right.

Bogus calls LOL

Difference JoMaL?  That was a game winning play.  The Kings could have still beat the Lakers *IF* they were going to hit their freethrows and didnt tense up when the pressure was on.  Face it, the Kings LOST because THEY couldnt hit free throws.

[JoMal]

Bogus calls LOL

Difference JoMaL?  That was a game winning play.  The Kings could have still beat the Lakers *IF* they were going to hit their freethrows and didnt tense up when the pressure was on.  Face it, the Kings LOST because THEY couldnt hit free throws.

The Kings lost because the series should never have gone to seven games in the first place.  

[Reality]

Bogus calls LOL

Difference JoMaL?  That was a game winning play.  The Kings could have still beat the Lakers *IF* they were going to hit their freethrows and didnt tense up when the pressure was on.  Face it, the Kings LOST because THEY couldnt hit free throws.

The Kings lost because the series should never have gone to seven games in the first place.

Jomal,

Ever consider selling Laker Winnin Juice instead of reasoning with a Lakerist?

Also was it only 13 calls in that memorable fixed outcome?  28 FTAs in the 4th.   Hmmn maybe more like 20 calls in that qtr.  

But wasn't your *favorite* call the Game 4 when Vlade was not fouled, instead drove it past Rick Fox for the uncontested layup.  Tweeet.  Erase the clinching layup points, Fox called for a foul out by the three point line where Vlad had dusted him.    :rofl:  Beautiful.