2003-2004 NBA Season (1 Viewer)

[Lew Crippen]

Magic's Lakers got blown out sometimes worse than that game last night,

Ervin and Showtime did not get blown out all that often.

 

[Rob Tomlin]

I agree with a lot of your post George, but you seem to make this effort out to be one of their worst ever, and it wasn't. You and I have both seen worse than this. At least Shaq was on his game. We have seen all of the Lakers put in half assed apathetic efforts before (including Shaq) that were worse than this.

But this is the finals, so we don't expect that from the Lakers. We expect them to turn it on in the finals, as they have over the last 5 years.

That being said, I am in agreement with you that I get a bit tired of worrying about which Laker team will show up...the ready to play and give it 110% Lakers, or the half-assed apathetic Lakers.

Let's not forget that they lost the first game to Philly a few years ago, then won the next four. I doubt that will happen this time. But I will also be surprised if we see another half assed effort like we did last night.

 

[Casey Trowbridg]

Let's not forget that they lost the first game to Philly a few years ago, then won the next four.

Oh how I wish they had won that game, they could've gone through the whole post season undefeated, which would've been insane.

On ESPN News tonight they said that the Lakers have lost 4 game 1 home games in their history in the NBA finals, and have won each of the previous 4 series and have won 3 of the 4 in 5 games. So lets hope they go 5 for 5 unless your a Pistons fan, and in that case I can understand why you might not be so hopeful for that.

 

[Seth Paxton]

and so if it really was a lack of effort

It wasn't and to say that it was borders on insanity. LA moved the ball well at times, Kobe ran his ass off and tried to make tough shots (per usual) and Shaq had many points chasing down loose balls and rebounds.

What didn't happen is that Rush was not left alone, neither was Fish, DET clogged the passing lanes (per usual) and rotated hard to close any gaps that opened up.

On defense Kobe again ran his ass off fighting through screens and did a better job than Artest was able to do, though perhaps not better than Reggie could but then he knows that style better than anyone (he just can't stop a guy off the dribble).

Gary got in foul trouble trying to play "Glove" defense, ie speed and physicality. The problem is Billups is now faster than him and beat him to spots over and over which meant that Gary was just running into him, foul....running into him, foul...reaching in, foul.

Prince, Rip, and Billups were all able to get to the basket off the dribble from all areas on the court.

I would say LA didn't hustle on defense, but then that is the defense they play. Karl is not a transition guy anymore and he relies on the ball slap when you bring the ball past your waist. He had a couple of those so you can't say he didn't bring it.

Shaq played Shaq defense, which is nothing unless a small guy tries to do a layup over him or the occassional block of big man when he is right at the basket. But no movement per se, no arms over his head. It was the same Shaq that I've watched since the mid-90's.

In fact Shaq's variety of good shots on offense was him at his very best. He hit left and right bankers, showed a fast spin move, and so on.


LA CAN improve some on defense, even in a limited time frame. But they will still look a lot slower than DET does on defense...its kinda what DET does you know. Expecting LA to be as good at it is in no way realistic.


All of this and George's "they didn't try" rebuttle is explicitly why I said "LA fans think they know, but they don't know". The top 3 East teams play a different kind of defense than even the Spurs do. Spurs are a great defensive team, but they approach it a bit differently. Houston isn't bad on DEF, but they also like to just play slow ball.



Carlo, I 100% guarantee you Rip missed more "regular" shots (ie, ones he normally gets, likes, and hits) than Karl did. Karl was only off his post season FG PCT by 2 SHOTS...I'll give you the 4 points. I can think of 4 open looks Rip missed just off the top of my head, but I'll take just 2 of those to get Rip's FG% also back in line.

We call it a wash then.


There is only one place I would expect LA to find more points, and that's from Kobe. The fact is that Prince gave him fits despite someone saying he wouldn't. Even Kobe alluded to it.

Look for Kobe to try and take him off the dribble a lot more. I don't know if it will work or not since DET helps out so well on those breakdowns, not to meantion that Prince is pretty good at closing out when he is beat which helps stop the pass past the help defense.

If anyone can do it in the NBA, its Kobe.

If LA does win the next 4 or 4 of 5, it will be because of adjustments and strategy, not because LA "really tried hard for mommy".

You guys should try some little league coaching or something, and then run out that coaching angle, see how well it works. I can tell you from experience that it doesn't get you far.


Or consider your boss at the next company meeting..."sales are down, you guys need to start really trying". Yeah, that's the problem, I just didn't give a shit.

Frankly I think its terribly insulting to the effort I saw LA guys putting in.

 

[Seth Paxton]

On a Pacers tip for anyone who gives a shit (ie, nobody but me )...

it's starting to sound like the "T-Mac" rumors weren't so crazy after all, at least from the Pacers side of things. The rumor mill is buzzing again, basically seeing Harrington and Croshere in a deal for T-Mac, though others could also be involved (say Bender or a pick or something), or a Magic contract they want to move for cap space.

Add to this Carlisle's strong statement that the roster WILL BE different next year, as well as strong buzz dating back to mid-season that Harrington wants to be a starter (and Fred Jones promising season) and it starts to seem very likely that Indy is at least pursuing T-Mac.

Now it takes 2 to tango and I've also heard the Magic are looking more toward a West team. I'm just saying that I'm betting Indy is working a lot harder on such a deal than I used to think was possible.


Also in the mix is Dampier, whom GS looked to trade to MEM last season at one point. I had heard in the season that Dampier would like to return to Indy and that the Pacers were interested. Again, GS has the most important say in such a deal and may have no interest in what Indy is shopping.


Personally I half expect them to go for a guy like Van Exel thanks to his shooting and ability to get his own shot, plus a pretty decent hustle ethic on the court.


Anyway, its starting to seem very likely that next year's Pacers will be pretty different. The funny thing to me is that I've heard a couple of locals saying "its about time they broke this group up".

Um, Brad Miller traded before this season.
Rose and Best traded for Artest and Miller just over 2 seasons ago (end of 2002 season).
Tinsley added by draft in 2002.
The entire team broken up before the 2001 season.
Tim Hardaway brought in, Kenny Anderson brought in, my mom got a few minutes in there at PG too.

Just how much f'ing change do people need? I understand thinking a trade now is a good idea or something, you always want to improve. But the idea that Indy hasn't made moves is crazy.

And all this after they won 60 for the first time ever and had the best record in the NBA. Yeah, I can see where you would think "well, this isn't going anywhere". I hate local morons.

 

[Seth Paxton]

Speaking of team changes, while DET will look to basically keep everything together (and I think Sheed will be willing to help on that issue), what about LA.


What's your opinion of what LA will look like following either an LA Finals win or LA Finals loss?

Does Karl hang on after a loss? Is a win a certain retirement?

Will Gary stay at all?

Will Phil still return?

And what about the bench? Do they just let the young guys mature and keep the old guys on the bench?

Heck, there's even the Kobe issue, although I'd be surprised if LA didn't seriously try to keep him.

 

[Haggai]

Tim Hardaway brought in, Kenny Anderson brought in, my mom got a few minutes in there at PG too.

Hey, your mom was breakin' shit down when they put her in! Come on, Carlisle, give Mrs. P some clock.

It reminds me of a Pacers-related comment a friend of mine made during the 2000 finals, in the crazy OT game where Shaq fouled out and was replaced by John Salley. Somehow, Indy failed to go to Smits on the last possession, even though the pathetic Spider was utterly incapable of doing anything. My friend's observation was, "How old is Salley, 45? My dad could score on him."

 

[Haggai]

I hope you're right in your assessment of Lakers v. Pistons, Seth. I think Brown coached circles around Jackson in Game 1, so the adjustments will be very interesting to watch. I'm feelin' you on the weakness of the oh-those-silly-Lakers-why-can't-they-just-try-harder line of reasoning.

 

[Casey Trowbridg]

This whole issue is a mess of fine lines. I'm going to not talk about yesterday's game at all, so everyone know I'm speaking in general or broad terms. I won't comment on what I didn't see and I'd like to think I've been consistent on that for the most part in this thread. Even I have lapses from time to time.

Anyway, the issue of whether or not a team takes a game off or doesn't put in effort can be very tricky. On one hand you have the obvious problem of the reaction to the statement. If I say my team lost because my team didn't put in the effort to win, you might feel rightly so in some instances that I was not giving your team credit. Yet, on the other hand all of us in this thread are more than casual watchers of our respective teams and so we know when something is not right effort wise. I'm sure that Seth can tell when the Pacers are not giving it their all or not as concerned as they might be. I do believe that not every team gives maximum effort every night, especially in the era of the NBA with which we find ourselves. Its more of an attitude thing, and the more 18 year olds get more handed to them for doing less, I fear the worse the problem will get.
Anyway, the point is, that sometimes you have to call a spade a spade. I did not think that L.A. gave much of an effort in game 2 against the Wolves and I said as much. I also said that in combination with that lack of effort the T-Wolves played a great game, and that accounted for an 18 point beating whereas a poor effort from the Lakers and average game from the Wolves might have only ben a 6 point victory for the Wolves. People disagreed with my assessment of game 2 and that's great, this thread would not be the fun place of discussion it is if people were always in agreement.
I try to be careful when I use the lack of effort card. I also only use it or make the comparison to how this team this year has played. I don't pull out the card if this years Lakers team is not doing something that last year's team did, or if they're not moving up and down like Magic and Worthy.

Plus, what makes this all the more difficult to assess and discuss is how one defines effort. Shaq and Kobe can have big games for example, but that does not mean that they're making an effort necessarily. They might be working hard individually, but what if they ignore their team mates...or what if they work really hard to get their teammates involved and don't focus on their game. What I might see as bad effort, you might see as good effort and so on and so forth. That's why I fealt for example that game 2 against the Wolves was lost due to lack of effort from L.A.'s part, but I did not feel the same way about game 5.

You can play great as a team and still lose.
You can play awful as a team and still win.
One team in a game can be playing with maximum effort and the other with minimum effort and when this happens the term blow out is thrown around quite often.

So while I think the lack of effort from 1 team argument has some merit, and I want to make mention that as far as I can tell Seth never said that it was a completely invalid argument, it is very difficult to judge when it is valid and when it is not. A strong familiarity with the team in question helps but that isn't the be-all end-all of it.

 

[Casey Trowbridg]

What's your opinion of what LA will look like following either an LA Finals win or LA Finals loss?

I have no clue either way, it will be a fun off season. After the regular season this team has had, nothing surprises me or will surprise me in the offseason.

Ok, if Indiana wants to deal with GS than this is my suggestion. Come up with the worst possible trade offer, the one that makes GS look the most foolish for taking, and put that on the table, and they're guaranteed to bite on it. As I mentioned briefly I have a shoft spot for the Warriors, but they have the longest playoff drout in the NBA, even longer than the Clippers which is hard for me to believe.

As for McGrady, I'm not sure I'd want this guy. One week he comes out and says he wants to go to a team that wants to win right away, because he wants to win right away. The next week, he says he doesn't want to go to a team like L.A. because there would be no chalenge and that's what he wants is a chalenge.

Uh T-Mac? The biggest chalenge you could get is if you stayed in Orlando, but I can't think of too many teams that give you the chance to win now and yet make it a chalenge. I guess Indiana fits that bill, in the sense that they are already a good team, but would still have a chalenge from Detroit and then whoever comes out of the West, but honestly I'm not sure what McGrady wants or if he even knows.

Oh, and Seth, I do care about Pacer info like that, because its something I don't hear anywhere other than this thread, my attitude with this is the same as it is for MLB or the NFL. If a person wants to talk about what the Bears need to do to be better, I'll discuss it, if we get bored and want to discuss the prospects for the Clippers I'm down with that. Talking about sports to me is more than just being able to pimp your own team.

So, to me it is obvious Indiana could use McGrady's talent, but I'm just not sure that boy is right in the head.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

If LA does win the next 4 or 4 of 5, it will be because of adjustments and strategy, not because LA "really tried hard for mommy".

Amen, Seth. I think that George's tantrum about being so disgusted by this team that he may never watch them again is pretty ridiculous. He's watched three different Laker championship eras in LA (Wilt/West, Showtime and Shaq/Kobe), the current team is playing for its fourth title in five years, Sunday's loss ended an 8 game winning streak in the Finals for LA, and he's still not happy? The fan of any other NBA team would be delighted by these results. I've been watching the Pistons since the early '70's and have only experienced one glorious championship run in the late '80's. Seth has only seen his Pacers make one Finals appearance. I think some Laker fans have become spoiled by the team's success. Maybe it's time to become Clipper fans for awhile so you can appreciate what you have.

That news regarding McGrady is interesting. I had heard San Antonio as a possible destination for T-Mac, but this is the first I've heard of Indy. That would make an already fine team even more scary, and an even more serious title contender. McGrady's biggest downside is that he disappears when he's not happy, but I think that Carlisle could correct that -- he's been able to get the best effort from his players in both Indy and Detroit.

 

[Brandon_T]

Well, non playoff related, there have also been T-Mac to Detroit rumors, involving Chauncey and Memo. From what I have been reading and hearing, is that Pheonix wants Memo so bad, and Shawn Marion wants out that that is a possible trade scenario for Detroit. Doubt it would happen, just kinda sick of all the talk about the Pistons winning that game cuz L.A. didn't try.

I have said it all season, Tim Legler is a Piston hater, not sure what his beef is, but my brother in law noticed it early on too. Anybody else notice it, before this series even?

 

[Jan H]

I give nothing but credit to Detroit for the Game 1 win. I feel the Lakers gave a decent effort on both ends of the floor, but they didn't play well at all, outside of Shaq, and the Pistons had a lot to do with that. The Lakers just didn't look like they knew what they wanted to do. It wsan't about effort, it was about strategy, and Larry whipped Phil in this regard. As I said before, though the effort was mostly there, the Lakers still lacked an intensity that they've shown periodically throughout the playoffs. If it returns tonight, they'll win. We'll see if PJ's adjustments lead to better results.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

Well, non playoff related, there have also been T-Mac to Detroit rumors, involving Chauncey and Memo. From what I have been reading and hearing, is that Pheonix wants Memo so bad, and Shawn Marion wants out that that is a possible trade scenario for Detroit.

Before the playoffs, I had heard Hamilton and Memo for McGrady rumors, but not Billups. I doubt that Dumars would deal Rip for T-Mac, though. If they made a Billups/Memo for McGrady deal, it would leave them with two starting shooting guards (Rip and T-Mac) and no point guard. Dumars would need to make an additional move to get a starting PG.

Regardless, Okur is gone after this season. He's a free agent, and Detroit will be able to offer him only $5 million after paying Rasheed. I'm sure that some team will offer Memo more, plus a chance to start. In Detroit, he would once again be backing up Rasheed. The only way Memo is back is if Detroit is unable to resign Wallace, which is highly unlikely.

 

[Brandon_T]

Scott,

Some of the thoughts in the Tmac deal are the fact that he can play the 3, rip the 2 and Tay actually has more of a PG mentality. It wouldn't be unheard of , just not conventional. Rip is untouchable according to JoeD lately. If Chauncy finishes the series as strong as he started, he will be in that category too.

Jan, I think you are right, and there is a big difference between effort and intensity. Good Call, doesn't mean I want it to change...

 

[Rob Tomlin]

Jan, I think you are right, and there is a big difference between effort and intensity.

Really?

 

[Scott Merryfield]

Some of the thoughts in the Tmac deal are the fact that he can play the 3, rip the 2 and Tay actually has more of a PG mentality. It wouldn't be unheard of , just not conventional. Rip is untouchable according to JoeD lately. If Chauncy finishes the series as strong as he started, he will be in that category too.

That certainly would be unusual. While Prince is a very good ball handler for a small forward, I do not think he could run the offense as a PG. Also, he would have trouble moving the ball upcourt if teams employed a press defense. Having Billups, Rip and Prince makes it hard to press the Pistons -- replacing Chauncey with T-Mac would change that, IMO.

I think Tayshaun is better suited to be a 6th man off the bench. If Dumars could somehow package Memo and Corliss Williamson for another scoring small forward, then you would have something. This would be tough to pull off, though, since Williamson will not have much value unless someone is looking at future salary cap space.

Gee, where could they get a scoring small forward (cough, Carmelo, cough)? :frowning:

 

[Jan H]

To sum up the difference between effort and intensity: Effort is running as hard as you can for a loose ball. Intensity is running as hard you can for a loose ball and throwing yourself at it, no matter who you have knock over, no matter how much it hurts, and regardless of what period in the game it is.

 

[Brandon_T]

Effort-1)The use of physical or mental energy to do something; exertion. 2) A usually earnest attempt

Intensity-1)Exceptionally great concentration, power, or force. 2)The state or quality of being intense; intenseness; extreme degree

And these definitions are exactly what I am talking about so yes Rob REALLY! I do think it is possible to have effort but lack intensity, but not the other way around.

 

[Carlo_M]

I certainly would not call the Lakers effort half-assed. Nor would I say they put their best game on the floor and Detroit took it and gave it back to them (that would mean Detroit should sweep).

My take is this: the Lakers, outside of Kobe, are an old team. Shaq is not too old, but his size makes him...um...not play in an up-tempo manner. Malone is, what, sixty and ready for his pension? GP tries to run as fast as a 35 year-old-man playing an 25-year-old's game can...and yes George is average at best.

So this team needs the Phil Jackson adjustments. This team isn't going to shock anyone with their offense. They've been running Phil's system ever since he got here, and have just recently thrown in a pick-n-roll variety just to shut GP up...but that's not exactly a new & novel concept in the NBA (the P-n-R, not shutting GP up). They have a set game plan, and want to do things they're comfortable with.

So basically other teams know what they're getting with the Lakers, and the Lakers don't have any element of surprise, no young talent to really be an "X" factor [Rush's outburst was the exception rather than the rule]. Detroit threw a great D-scheme, with good rotations and athletic players at them, and took them out of that rhythm.

But what this old team can do is this: figure you out. That's what crafty and skilled veterans do. Jackson won't turn to a new offense to counter the Detroit D. He'll analyze the D and figure out how he can run the offense based on their defense in Game 1. If watching him for over a decade has proven anything, it's that Phil is the master of adjustments. He doesn't instill a new offense, he finds a way to make the offense work with what the defense gives him. That way his players still feel like they're in that comfortable offense, just tweaked a little to accommodate a new opponent's wrinkles.

San Antonio learned that lesson the hard way.