Lakers owned by Memphis.

Discussion in 'Los Angeles Lakers' started by bbwtrench, Nov 10, 2004.

  1. GiantMidget

    GiantMidget JBB JustBBall Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2004
    Messages:
    959
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    A little late to post here but who cares i must correct someone. Clearly i said "As great as he played then, he certainly didnt have much D." Divac didnt have D or control the boards then and he wont now, PERIOD.
     
  2. yanix

    yanix JBB JustBBall Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2004
    Messages:
    544
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    <div class="quote_poster">Quoting GiantMidget:</div><div class="quote_post">A little late to post here but who cares i must correct someone. Clearly i said "As great as he played then, he certainly didnt have much D." Divac didnt have D or control the boards then and he wont now, PERIOD.</div>

    you say that now cuz he's not a king anymore [​IMG]
     
  3. jbbReal Deal

    jbbReal Deal Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2004
    Messages:
    2,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    <div class="quote_poster">Quoting GiantMidget:</div><div class="quote_post">A little late to post here but who cares i must correct someone. Clearly i said "As great as he played then, he certainly didnt have much D." Divac didnt have D or control the boards then and he wont now, PERIOD.</div>
    Divac was an important part of the Kings' offense, whether it was covering the paint while Miller was moved to PF (because of Webber) or his passing that gave everyone else on that team open looks...Divac was the thread and needle, holding the Kings together.
     
  4. GiantMidget

    GiantMidget JBB JustBBall Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2004
    Messages:
    959
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    All that about how the kings benefited from Divac and all the things hes good at is true. Although i disagree with "whether it was covering the paint while miller was moved to pf..". Divac certainly didnt cover the paint very well seeing as how the kings interior D and rebounding was terrible.Divac isnt all to blame for that, but he didnt help in those areas.The point is Divac isnt the type of dude to come in and get rebounds or make defensive stops,which is what LA needs.
     
  5. jbbReal Deal

    jbbReal Deal Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2004
    Messages:
    2,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    <div class="quote_poster">Quoting GiantMidget:</div><div class="quote_post">All that about how the kings benefited from Divac and all the things hes good at is true. Although i disagree with "whether it was covering the paint while miller was moved to pf..". Divac certainly didnt cover the paint very well seeing as how the kings interior D and rebounding was terrible.Divac isnt all to blame for that, but he didnt help in those areas.The point is Divac isnt the type of dude to come in and get rebounds or make defensive stops,which is what LA needs.</div>
    Wrong, man. The rebounding is not really an issue. If you take a look at the games, we are either winning the rebounding aspect or are really close behind.

    The problem is defending shooters and having turnovers. The passing is horrible...and we can't draw offensive fouls for anything.

    Vlade flops...and is the best passing center in the league.
     
  6. og15

    og15 JBB *********

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2004
    Messages:
    6,594
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    I don't know why y'all were complaining about rebounds when the Lakers have like a +2 average advantage over their opponents on the boards each game?
     

Share This Page