Comments on what the Lakers can learn from the Celtics

Posted on LakersGround.net on 7/31/07.

A tremendous display of emotion trumping facts by iceberg01

iceberg01 wrote:
While the Lakers FO is hemming and hawing about possibly giving away too much for KG, or too much for JO, the Celtics are pulling off deals.

As others have pointed out, the Lakers FO did not hem and haw about possibly giving away too much for KG.

iceberg01 wrote:
While we hear the Lakers FO state what it's NOT going to do, i.e., trade Odom & Bynum for JO, or trade Kwame for Artest, Boston is telling the NBA what it CAN and WILL DO.

Every indication is that Mitch has told Larry Bird what he will do for JO.

iceberg01 wrote:
Boston traded it's draft pick for Ray Allen, an aging superstar shooter who is asking for BIG money.

A terrible trade that would have doomed the C's to years of mediocrity if McHale hadn't saved Ainge.

iceberg01 wrote:
Then, it turns around and trades probably a future All-Star big in Al Jefferson, a future possible All-Star in Gerald Green, a good player in Ryan Gomes, and TWO future 1st round picks for an aging superstar bigman, who's going to ask for a $125 million extension.

"Future possible All-Star in Gerald Green"??? Talking about seriously overvaluing another team's player. Green only plays well when the Celtics are tanking. My guess is that the C's winning percentage when he starts is less 15%. He was the third best young SG (behind Tony Allen and Delonte West) on the 2nd worst team in the NBA.

As for Jeffeson, he has one season of good numbers while his team was playing terribly and he's "probably a future All-Star"? There are so many good PF's in the West that it will be tough for a player on as bad a team as Minny is going to be to make it.

iceberg01 wrote:
While Boston has assembled a Finals or Championship-caliber team, we here at LG, and the Lakers FO are patting ourselves on the back for "not giving up too much". Makes me SICK!

I don't think they will be that good - they have nothing beyond their Big 3. It's also a lot easier to be a Finals-caliber team in the East with the three best teams (San Antonio, Dallas, Phoenix) in the West.

iceberg01 wrote:
The Lakers FO had and still has a chance to assemble the defensive EQUIVALENT of the Celtics. By pulling the trigger on the LO/Bynum for JO & trading Kwame for Artest, the Lakers could have THREE All-Defensive teamers on one team, and a team certainly capable of making the Finals or winning a championship.

There's also the distinct risk that that same team could totally implode.

So you want to make some dumb moves on the chance that something good might happen. You have tremendous potential as an adviser to President Bush.

iceberg01 wrote:
Al Jefferson has shown MORE potential to be an All-Star NBA big than has Andrew Bynum.

Have you consider that might be because Jefferson is almost 3 years older than Bynum? Jefferson's numbers last year (7.9, 5.0) weren't that exciting. My guess is that the Lakers FO is hoping that Bynum will blow up this year or next.

iceberg01 wrote:
Gerald Green has also shown the same amount of potential, if not more.

iceberg01 wrote:
On top of that, Boston included TWO future picks.

If Boston is truly "a Finals or Championship-caliber team", those draft picks will be REALLY valuable

iceberg01 wrote:
We, on the other hand, are SCARED to give up an INCONSISTENT Lamar Odom, HOPING AND PRAYING for the MIRACULOUS DAY he becomes a consistent, All-Star player, and Andrew Bynum, who, to this point, has shown mostly that he can block shots, rebound SOME, catch the ball, and score layups (the vast majority of his baskets come off of feeds from other people, and at point-blank range).

... for a LEGIT 20/10/3 guy in JO.

JO has never averaged 3 blocks. He hasn't averaged 10 rebounds in 3 years. Odom is a better rebounder and shots a higher percentage. JO isn't going to be taking 15-16 shots per game for the Lakers - Shaq didn't even do that in his last season with the Lakers.

Later I added:

iceberg01 wrote:
The Lakers FO has been guilty of telling teams "the most they'll do". I believe that they made an offer of Kwame, Bynum & Odom (& not much more).
:
I won't even acknowledge the thing about the draft picks. But you can be sure that us giving up 2 #1's, in ANY deal, would have been an issue for Kupchak & Co.

Do you have anything to support these opinions? Minny getting back their #1 was meaningless as the C's weren't going to get it, so the C's really only traded one #1 pick.

iceberg01 wrote:
But, primarily, this comment was aimed at JO & the Lakers arrogant attitude towards acquiring perhaps the LAST legit 2-way big man available.

And, although you can argue semantics if you like, the Lakers FO has essentially given Indy an ultimatum: EITHER a package of Bynum & Odom, or nothing, essentially saying that they CANNOT do what Indy is offering.

My understanding is that Indy wanted Bynum and Odom and the Lakers said no. What do you think Indy is offering?

iceberg01 wrote:
You can debate about the quality of Boston's players included in the deal all you like. My point is exactly that, in fact: while some here think Bynum is the second coming, other GM's around the league may think he's crap. Opinions vary. But the point is, Boston could have refused to give up Jefferson (who, BTW, IMO, IS a future All-Star) and Green, much like we're refusing to give up LO & Bynum for JO. That's my point.

Well see about Jefferson being a future All-Star. To me, it's a no-brainer to give up Jefferson and Green for KG. However, trading Bynum and Odom for JO is more of a lateral move.

iceberg01 wrote:
And for those of you who think a lineup of three All-Stars: a shooter, physical swingman & do-it-all Top-5 caliber paint player ISN'T a contender, maybe you should return to the planet earth & stop smoking that wacky tabacky. They're legit. Depth or not.

We will see.

iceberg01 wrote:
As for O'Neal, he's a near-league leader in blocks. About 2.7, I believe. And, if you'd rather Odom DEFENDING opposing PF's at 230 (while JO is about 250-260, I believe), you're guilty of some serious Laker homerism. JO is UNDOUBTEDLY bigger, more physical, and the better defensive player. Playing alongside Kobe will also undoubtedly raise his FG%.

Do I think JO is a better defensive player than Odom? Yes. Do I think JO is a better rebounder than Odom? No. Do I think JO will score 20 ppg playing next to Kobe? No. Do I think Mihm+JO is better than Bynum and Odom? I lean towards not.

So you agree that you were overstating things when you called JO a 20/10/3 player?

iceberg01 wrote:
Lastly, when do the excuses STOP? We've been hearing why we CAN'T do deals for a couple of years now: Boozer, Davis, etc. Now, I'm not mad about losing out on Davis, who is clearly injury prone, but at some point, this Lakers FO has to take a chance: they've become PARALYZED by fear!

Funny, I thought the Lakers did a high risk trade about two years ago. There is a problem with high risk trades - they are high risk. Mitch takes a lot of risks as GM - just not the risks that you want him to take.

Where is your support for your "Future possible All-Star in Gerald Green" statement? Based upon the PER ratings from 82games.com, Sasha is a better player offensively and defensively than Gerald Green.