When Kobe came out of high school at the age of 19 everyone though trading Vlade Divac was a huge mistake also. Just sayin.
The difference is that the others who've done it are historically great HOFers. LMA isn't of that caliber, even if two of his games reached those heights. The fact that LMA had historic games doesn't mean that he's the sort of player you can rely on to give you those sorts of performances when they're needed - it just means that he was incredibly hot for two games. I'd say it's similar to Troy Daniels scoring 17 points on 71.4% shooting. I completely agree that those were amazing performances and without them we lose the series. No question there. I just question the sanity of basing a decision on anomalies. I find it very similar to early in the season when people would point to the W/L record when anybody dared question the way the team was playing. Comparing the scoring output of LMA to his "counterparts" is not a good argument - LMA is our #1 option and his counterparts are after-thoughts in the HOU offense. Of course he's going to dramatically outscore his "counterparts".
Why did you choose to only respond to a select part of Boob's post? Did you completely miss the part where he talks about Aldridge completely altering the game plan for the Houston Rockets?
Because he would look foolish trying to counter the entire post. blue9 is so obsessed with bashing LMA that the only way he can continue is to practice cognitive dissonance.
Because it's the only part I felt like responding to. Also, I don't have time to respond to the rest of it. Also, also, is it required that every single point be responded to? Here's a response: Altering HOU's game plan? You mean, Kevin "Can't Coach" McHale's game plan?
Where have you been? I'm not even the biggest LA fan, but this thread made me want to jump up and scream to appreciate what he brings to the Blazers and usually I just have to read while you battle it out. Thank god for BNM
First, Kobe came out of high school and was drafted at age 17, not 19. I don't remember anyone, other than Vlade and his agent, thinking that at the time. The Lakers were clearing cap space to sign Shaq, so they were eager to dump Vlade. Shaq wanted to be in LA and the Lakers wanted him - all they needed to do was dump Vlade and his contract to make it happen - which is exactly what they did, and also got Kobe, who had previously worked out for the Lakers and as an arrogant 17-year old insisted that playing for Charlotte was "an impossibility". Do you really think EVERYONE was saying the Lakers should keep Vlade over Shaq and Kobe????? Really? I sure don't remember that. BNM
Your analogy sucks. Did you miss the part about Aldridge leading the team in scoring in all four victories in the Houston series? Did you miss that part about, in spite of being the focus of Houston's defense, he still scored 29 in game 4 and 30 in game 6? Did you miss the part about him scoring 179 points in the series? Yeah, that's JUST like Troy Daniels scoring 17 points in game 4 and being a complete non-factor after that scoring a total of 5 points in Games 5 an 6 combined. Of course it is. Aldridge was our advantage in that Houston series, and he stepped up big time. So, Aldridge is the #1 option on the team that won that series. Sounds like a pretty good player to me and a guy I'd like to have on my team. BNM
They won 54 games, had HCA and were favored to win the series based on McHale's original game plan. The way Aldridge completely dominated in Games 1 and 2 forced him to change that previously successful game plan. McHale may not be a great head coach, but he was smart enough to realize they needed to slow Aldridge down or they'd get swept. Putting Asik on Aldridge was the right move. It did slow Aldridge down, but created problems elsewhere. BNM
Yep. Did Kobe work out for anyone other than the Lakers prior to the draft? The trade (13th pick for Vlade) was arranged prior to the draft and Charlotte didn't even know who they were picking for the Lakers until 5 minutes before they made the pick. BNM
I'm not sure but Jerry was close friends with his dad and knew about Kobe at a way young age. That dynasty was built in that one summer.
Didn't miss those - just felt they were meaningless points that I didn't feel needed responding to. But if you want a response... Is it surprising to you that the guy who takes the most shots scores the most points? Is that some how revelatory? Personally, I've never been impressed by PPG stats - without FG% and FGA it's a pretty meaningless stat. Guys who take a lot of shots are going to score a lot of points. LMA took 142 shots - scored 179 points. Harden took 133 shots - scored 161 points. Howard took 106 shots - scored 156 points. Everyone thought that Harden played like crap for the series. Yet LMA only scored 18 more points on 9 more shots, and was less well defended than Harden was. LMA had phenomenal games in G1 & G2. He also played some great one/one defense on Howard at various times throughout the series. I'm not debating his importance in winning the series - without him (and Lillard, and Nic, and Wes) we lose that series. I'm looking at his entire body of work and saying he's NOT the player we saw in G1 & G2 - those two games were an anomaly. Making any decision that's based on a single Playoff series is not a wise move. Now I understand that you also like his entire body of work - that's fine. But understand that PPG isn't going to sway me away from my opinion that LMA is an inefficient player who plays the most stacked (and least important) position in the NBA.
Upon further consideration I decided that we shall not trade Lamarcus but keep him and decide after next year if to re-sign him. All Rejoice!
That is the most likely scenario. Depending on what the offers are, it may or may not be the best decision.
It doesn't seem like anyone is trying to discredit Aldridge but rather to look at the entire body of work as a whole realistically. He had an amazing first two games...but he also had a very mediocre following 9 games from an efficiency standpoint. Those are not praises or criticisms but simple reality it would seem. He was the leading scorer on many occasions but that doesn't make it incorrect to say he was a high volume, low percentage shooter taking low percentage shots.....both statements can be true. The point is, going forward as LA ages, he is getting farther from the basket shooting increasingly amounts of low percentage shots. He is shooting more often so his points are still high but his TS% is continually going down. Not a criticism, just a statistical fact. Add to that, do you want that trend to be signed to a 5 year contract through age 35 at $20+ million/year? I'm sure LA would still continue to put up solid total numbers but to expect one to improve their game after their physical peak when it is already in an efficient decline seems optimistic. If one removes the emotion, success is build on buying low and selling high. I'm not advocating trading Aldridge but now would seem to be about the most value you could get for him in the coming years. Given that he is at his peak and will very likely decline in the coming years, why would one put even more money into someone like that? That is what Olshey is faced with. Making the right decision for the team without getting caught up in the emotional fandom of liking a player that has been very good but starting to produce at a less and less efficient rate but wants more money. If this was someone who had taken you to a title or two, maybe you resign him for the 'good will' of it like the Yankees did with Jeter or the Laker did with Kobe. But from a financial/competitive standpoint, both moves were poor decisions.
Upon reaching said decision I've also decided to only play said player 35mpg next season. Also decided that if said player can't provide sufficient defense, would only play 30mpg. All Rejoice!
