Carmelo Anthony Free Agency Watch

Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

1) Yah
20
28%
2) Nay
28
40%
3) Not only no but hell no
22
31%
 
Total votes : 70

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby Rooscooter on Tue Jan 07, 2014 8:33 am

Lets Go Lakers wrote:I'll just stop here.


best news of the day…….
"If the past sits in judgment on the present, the future will be lost." Winston Churchill

“The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present - and is gravely to be regarded." Dwight Eisenhower

"Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it" Thomas Sowell
User avatar
Rooscooter

 
Posts: 23048
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 4:25 pm
Location: Chandler AZ and Andalué

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby LakersN4 on Tue Jan 07, 2014 9:12 am

Rooscooter wrote:
Lets Go Lakers wrote:
Rooscooter wrote:
Lets Go Lakers wrote:Your definition of superstar must mean an all-time great because if CP3 ain't a superstar, no one is. You don't need to have postseason success or intestinal fortitude to be a superstar. Just a player who performs at the highest level for years. CP3, Melo and Howard have done that. And Paul George is on his way.

As for your second paragraph, we actually acquired Shaq and Gasol. We acquired Jabbar and Wilt. The Heat acquired LeBron and Bosh. The Celtics acquired Garnett and Allen. The Bulls acquired Rodman. The Heat acquired Shaq. The 76ers acquired Moses Malone. So a good amount of the "history" has shown that you CAN win championships by acquiring superstars.


Yes….. Superstar is an all time great IMHO. Paul is a stat hound that can be easily nullified in the playoffs. History has shown that again and again.

…..and they did that under much different financial rules….. something I've said 3 times to you that you have ignored 3 times.


LOL at your Paul response. The guy is absolutely one of the best PGs ever. Yeah, his lack of postseason success does hinder his overall legacy somewhat but watching this guy on a nightly basis, he's special.

So what really is your point about acquiring superstars and winning rings? That you can't acquire two superstars in today's CBA agreement? Or that teams who acquire superstars via trade or FA can't win rings (I eliminated that notion).



Last try…. Paul is like Howard and Melo in that they are not super stars in my opinion…. they are like Iverson…. great individual players but will have to "tag along" to ever win a championship. If your impressed by stats or playing Fantasy this is your guy…. if not and you want to follow a team to success in the playoffs then these guys will disappoint over and over again. If we're comparing Paul to the all time greats then I'll compile a list of PG's I've seen personally over 40+ years of watching the game that have been better than Paul. I'd take Iverson over him and you would too if you are looking at stats…. All of this is before the fact that he's got a character flaw in that he focuses a large part of his game on tricking the officials. Beautifully that has backfired and he injured his shoulder flopping. Karma is a great thing.

You "eliminated nothing"….. 2004 Lakers and 2012-13 Lakers show that acquiring star players doesn't translate into winning championships. The Heat are the exception….. not the rule. The Knicks during the late 90 and early 2000's acquired several top star players and sucked. Dallas won a championship with one legit star player and an over the hill great PG…. Detroit spanked our superstar team in 04. Detroit in the late 80's beat the crap out our team with one aged all time great and a bunch of great role players. Seattle won a chip with no HOFer's, Golden State won in the 70's with a similar team. Name a player on Portland's championship team other than Walton. There is plenty of "history" out there to show that teams can win with one alpha and a well balanced team behind them.

Finally, the new CBA makes what you flippantly say nearly impossible. Star players have a huge incentive to stay where they are (more per and an extra year). As I said before…. true superstars…. the ones that lead teams to championships don't move because they are where they want to be (winning). The ones who move are running from failure 9 times out of 10 or are looking for money they can't get where they are.

You're putting it all on the players when in reality coaches & the front office can prevent those star players from ever winning a chip.. Was Lebron not a superstar in Cleveland? He never won 1 there & still might not have a ring today if he had stayed. It's extremely rare for 1 player to will a team to a title, with Dirk being the only recent example.
LakersN4

 
Posts: 2531
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 2:55 am

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby Lets Go Lakers on Tue Jan 07, 2014 10:24 am

LakersN4 wrote:
Rooscooter wrote:
Lets Go Lakers wrote:
Rooscooter wrote:
Lets Go Lakers wrote:Your definition of superstar must mean an all-time great because if CP3 ain't a superstar, no one is. You don't need to have postseason success or intestinal fortitude to be a superstar. Just a player who performs at the highest level for years. CP3, Melo and Howard have done that. And Paul George is on his way.

As for your second paragraph, we actually acquired Shaq and Gasol. We acquired Jabbar and Wilt. The Heat acquired LeBron and Bosh. The Celtics acquired Garnett and Allen. The Bulls acquired Rodman. The Heat acquired Shaq. The 76ers acquired Moses Malone. So a good amount of the "history" has shown that you CAN win championships by acquiring superstars.


Yes….. Superstar is an all time great IMHO. Paul is a stat hound that can be easily nullified in the playoffs. History has shown that again and again.

…..and they did that under much different financial rules….. something I've said 3 times to you that you have ignored 3 times.


LOL at your Paul response. The guy is absolutely one of the best PGs ever. Yeah, his lack of postseason success does hinder his overall legacy somewhat but watching this guy on a nightly basis, he's special.

So what really is your point about acquiring superstars and winning rings? That you can't acquire two superstars in today's CBA agreement? Or that teams who acquire superstars via trade or FA can't win rings (I eliminated that notion).



Last try…. Paul is like Howard and Melo in that they are not super stars in my opinion…. they are like Iverson…. great individual players but will have to "tag along" to ever win a championship. If your impressed by stats or playing Fantasy this is your guy…. if not and you want to follow a team to success in the playoffs then these guys will disappoint over and over again. If we're comparing Paul to the all time greats then I'll compile a list of PG's I've seen personally over 40+ years of watching the game that have been better than Paul. I'd take Iverson over him and you would too if you are looking at stats…. All of this is before the fact that he's got a character flaw in that he focuses a large part of his game on tricking the officials. Beautifully that has backfired and he injured his shoulder flopping. Karma is a great thing.

You "eliminated nothing"….. 2004 Lakers and 2012-13 Lakers show that acquiring star players doesn't translate into winning championships. The Heat are the exception….. not the rule. The Knicks during the late 90 and early 2000's acquired several top star players and sucked. Dallas won a championship with one legit star player and an over the hill great PG…. Detroit spanked our superstar team in 04. Detroit in the late 80's beat the crap out our team with one aged all time great and a bunch of great role players. Seattle won a chip with no HOFer's, Golden State won in the 70's with a similar team. Name a player on Portland's championship team other than Walton. There is plenty of "history" out there to show that teams can win with one alpha and a well balanced team behind them.

Finally, the new CBA makes what you flippantly say nearly impossible. Star players have a huge incentive to stay where they are (more per and an extra year). As I said before…. true superstars…. the ones that lead teams to championships don't move because they are where they want to be (winning). The ones who move are running from failure 9 times out of 10 or are looking for money they can't get where they are.

You're putting it all on the players when in reality coaches & the front office can prevent those star players from ever winning a chip.. Was Lebron not a superstar in Cleveland? He never won 1 there & still might not have a ring today if he had stayed. It's extremely rare for 1 player to will a team to a title, with Dirk being the only recent example.


Since 1980, I can only think of two examples of teams winning it all with just one true superstar (1994 Rockets and 2010 Mavs). On the flip side, I can only think of one team that won a ring with no superstar (2004 Pistons). Although Billups played like a superstar in the Finals. You pretty much need two stars to win a title and history has proven this. For one guy to do it, he has to play out of his mind like Olajuwon and Dirk did. You might also argue that Wade did it in 2006 but he did have an older Shaq. But he was a one man show in the Finals though. One of the greatest performances ever in a playoff series.
User avatar
Lets Go Lakers

 
Posts: 2877
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 3:25 pm

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby Savory Griddles on Tue Jan 07, 2014 10:52 am

^^^

I rarely disagree with Roo, but on the whole "We don't need at least two star/superstars" I cannot agree. As mentioned by Lets Go Lakers, the amount of teams that have won a title without at least 2 stars is a very short list. A list that you could actually put asterisks next to each one.
2004 Pistons: Do they win if our team wasn't starting Slava at pf and Kobe and Shaq weren't literally about to kill each other?
1994 Rockets: Jordan was serving his suspension for gambling on basketball games...I mean, playing baseball.
2010 Mavs: Lebron choked

Now, I DO agree wholeheartedly that Melo should not be either one of those stars. Does Monroe have star potential? Bledsoe? To have any hope at one of them this offseason, we likely have to offer the max. Neither of them is worth the max at this point. I think we should try to trade Pau to a bad team for an unprotected 2015 first rounder to get us back in that draft. We then sign minimums again this offseason and go hard after Love to pair with Kobe and whoever we get in the next two drafts.
User avatar
Savory Griddles

 
Posts: 9048
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 10:56 am
Location: AV,CA

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby Rooscooter on Tue Jan 07, 2014 11:11 am

LakersN4 wrote:You're putting it all on the players when in reality coaches & the front office can prevent those star players from ever winning a chip.. Was Lebron not a superstar in Cleveland? He never won 1 there & still might not have a ring today if he had stayed. It's extremely rare for 1 player to will a team to a title, with Dirk being the only recent example.


You're making my larger point…. superstars don't win championships…. whether it's one or two or even 3…. it's a balanced team behind them…. continuity in coaching and owner leadership and a little luck in terms of health.

Even this dominant Heat team flamed out the first try. It took a while to learn to play together… some skillful additions to fill in the holes and coaching continuity to make it happen. Also the 3 stars took a lot less money that they could have. Somehow that gets transferred to what stars should do to join the Lakers when in reality it was very, very rare.

The larger point is that the new CBA was specifically designed to prevent what happened in Miami from happening again. Melo left Denver with the hopes of joining Stat and getting CP3 there to form another super team. Our situation is that we no longer have assets to trade….. we've traded first round picks and we are only signing players we can jettison if/when a marketable star is available to throw max money at.

In no given offseason in the foreseeable future can we get two "Superstars" and balance the team in Kobe's window. We may get one this offseason as I believe we will be held hostage by Melo until his situation is settled. That leaves the coaching situation which needs to change to win again.

I think we just saw what our only tradable asset is worth so even that isn't on our side. The reality is that top players don't move around very often…. they didn't in the past and the new CBA is stacked against it happening in the future. Maybe we can pull it off…. odds and history is definitely against us however.
"If the past sits in judgment on the present, the future will be lost." Winston Churchill

“The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present - and is gravely to be regarded." Dwight Eisenhower

"Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it" Thomas Sowell
User avatar
Rooscooter

 
Posts: 23048
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 4:25 pm
Location: Chandler AZ and Andalué

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby Lets Go Lakers on Tue Jan 07, 2014 11:26 am

Rooscooter wrote:
LakersN4 wrote:You're putting it all on the players when in reality coaches & the front office can prevent those star players from ever winning a chip.. Was Lebron not a superstar in Cleveland? He never won 1 there & still might not have a ring today if he had stayed. It's extremely rare for 1 player to will a team to a title, with Dirk being the only recent example.


You're making my larger point…. superstars don't win championships…. whether it's one or two or even 3…. it's a balanced team behind them…. continuity in coaching and owner leadership and a little luck in terms of health.

Even this dominant Heat team flamed out the first try. It took a while to learn to play together… some skillful additions to fill in the holes and coaching continuity to make it happen. Also the 3 stars took a lot less money that they could have. Somehow that gets transferred to what stars should do to join the Lakers when in reality it was very, very rare.

The larger point is that the new CBA was specifically designed to prevent what happened in Miami from happening again. Melo left Denver with the hopes of joining Stat and getting CP3 there to form another super team. Our situation is that we no longer have assets to trade….. we've traded first round picks and we are only signing players we can jettison if/when a marketable star is available to throw max money at.

In no given offseason in the foreseeable future can we get two "Superstars" and balance the team in Kobe's window. We may get one this offseason as I believe we will be held hostage by Melo until his situation is settled. That leaves the coaching situation which needs to change to win again.

I think we just saw what our only tradable asset is worth so even that isn't on our side. The reality is that top players don't move around very often…. they didn't in the past and the new CBA is stacked against it happening in the future. Maybe we can pull it off…. odds and history is definitely against us however.


Superstars DO win championships. That's a pretty obvious and accepted theory in basketball. Of course you need complimentary pieces but it's all about the superstars, first and foremost. The NBA has always been a superstar driven league and will always be one. This is not baseball or football where a bunch of nobodies can play together and win rings. In basketball, the superstars win rings because one player can impact the game unlike any of the major three sports.

And LeBron simply choked in 2011. I think the Heat were up 2-1 in the series and had like a 15 point lead in the 3rd quarter and had a chance to go up 3-1. LeBron and company chocked that game away and they lost the series from that point on. Had the LeBron of 2012 and 2013 showed up in 2011, the Heat would've won easily. I don't think anyone would dispute that.
User avatar
Lets Go Lakers

 
Posts: 2877
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 3:25 pm

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby Juronimo on Tue Jan 07, 2014 12:20 pm

Savory Griddles wrote:1994 Rockets: Jordan was serving his suspension for gambling on basketball games...I mean, playing baseball.


Whoa whoa whoa....

Where did you hear this regarding Jordan gambling basketball?

Also that Houston team had Drexler. Yeah he was on the downside of his career but he could still play at that point plus Dream was so utterly dominant.
Image

Ferguson, we hear you.
RIP Mike Brown.
User avatar
Juronimo

 
Posts: 6598
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 6:20 pm
Location: Fist in the air on a quest for justice

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby abeer3 on Tue Jan 07, 2014 1:27 pm

Rooscooter wrote:building a team of cohesive parts over building with what ever is available for what we have to spend in a given offseason. One demands a plan and guts…. the other is swinging for the fences ever offseason. Essentially what the Knicks do.


yeah, we've already had this discussion. you're putting forth a vague ideology, not a plan.

I know you want greg Monroe and rondo, and I want LeBron and kevin love. but these things have a very similar likelihood of happening (about zero), so the question becomes: is overpaying melo better than overpaying the gortats and lowrys of the world? this, of course, requires that you even have the option of getting any of these guys.

the truth is that the day kobe shredded his Achilles, the lakers were finished for a while. it led to howard's exit, which put the lakers in their current predicament. unless the lakers just don't spend the money this summer (an interesting option that I'm pretty sure they won't use, given the kobe investment), they're going to be overpaying someone, as that's how you get FAs to change teams. imo, melo's a proven star, redundant or not (I tend to think kobe can and will adjust his game if a superior scorer arrives). all the other targets are far from it and will get paid a lot more than people are thinking right now.
abeer3

 
Posts: 10407
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 4:15 pm

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby Rooscooter on Tue Jan 07, 2014 1:30 pm

Savory Griddles wrote:^^^

I rarely disagree with Roo, but on the whole "We don't need at least two star/superstars" I cannot agree. As mentioned by Lets Go Lakers, the amount of teams that have won a title without at least 2 stars is a very short list. A list that you could actually put asterisks next to each one.
2004 Pistons: Do they win if our team wasn't starting Slava at pf and Kobe and Shaq weren't literally about to kill each other?
1994 Rockets: Jordan was serving his suspension for gambling on basketball games...I mean, playing baseball.
2010 Mavs: Lebron choked

Now, I DO agree wholeheartedly that Melo should not be either one of those stars. Does Monroe have star potential? Bledsoe? To have any hope at one of them this offseason, we likely have to offer the max. Neither of them is worth the max at this point. I think we should try to trade Pau to a bad team for an unprotected 2015 first rounder to get us back in that draft. We then sign minimums again this offseason and go hard after Love to pair with Kobe and whoever we get in the next two drafts.


The list is longer than that…. In any event I wasn't' making the point that superstars don't wing championships rather that true superstars aren't on the FA market…. and two of them certainly are not. Guys like Melo are…. Further I was making the point that just saying that this guy and that guy are coming here is not in any way a reality and in most cases somewhat childish. If you go back 3 years on this board and look at the posts were people have listed their "depth chart" including all the guys that would come to the Lakers for cheap in their view and then overlay that with the reality of what really happened you will find the truth.

Do superstars win championships? Chicken and eggs to me. Superstars are made by winning championships is a better way to look at it. I do contend that some of the best players to ever play were stuck in situations where they were not able to get on a team that had a chance (Maravich for example) but to hold the moniker of "superstar" to me is less than 3 or 4 players at any given time in the NBA. It isn't a quick look at Basketball Reference for some obscure stat line and who has the coolest shoes at Foot Locker…..

The elephant in the room is not do superstars win but the new CBA and getting them. We've taken the approach that we can get them just like we did in the past….. i'm not sure that's realistic anymore. We've signed a "past his prime" guy to one of the highest contracts in the league for services rendered…. getting two more guys of that caliber is almost a pipe dream….. filling in a squad around them is nearly as pipe worthy.

We will have Kobe, Kelly and Nash (not sure if anyone else is under contract) under contract this summer. We will have a first in the top 10 most likely and enough money to spend to get a Max player and maybe resign one or two of our more successful players from this year's squad. The rest will be another round of one year vet deals most likely. If we don't offer our current guys multi-year deals with hopes on another Max guy available in 15 we will lose them and it will be 2/3 of the roster in 1 year contracts again. IF that was successful we would have a 39 year old Kobe and two Max players consuming nearly 90% of the cap and nothing to fill in a squad. Since championship squads rarely if ever are thrown together players 5-13 it would take a year or two to get the team working together enough to make a legit run. Then Kobe needs another contract or you let him go…. That's what I'm seeing as the only way to get 2 stars here…….. and that is almost laughable IMO.

Finally, last year and 2004 should have taught Laker Fans that you can't create "nuclear" teams of a collection of stars and expect success just because of their stats, all star appearances and accolades….. it's still a team sport and mishmashing players together just because they are available is what the Knicks have done without success for 15 years.
"If the past sits in judgment on the present, the future will be lost." Winston Churchill

“The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present - and is gravely to be regarded." Dwight Eisenhower

"Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it" Thomas Sowell
User avatar
Rooscooter

 
Posts: 23048
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 4:25 pm
Location: Chandler AZ and Andalué

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby MadMax on Tue Jan 07, 2014 1:40 pm

Juronimo wrote:
Savory Griddles wrote:1994 Rockets: Jordan was serving his suspension for gambling on basketball games...I mean, playing baseball.


Whoa whoa whoa....

Where did you hear this regarding Jordan gambling basketball?

Also that Houston team had Drexler. Yeah he was on the downside of his career but he could still play at that point plus Dream was so utterly dominant.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/131997-mjs-1st-retirement-was-it-a-secret-suspension
User avatar
MadMax

 
Posts: 13890
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 3:15 pm
Location: The Beach Cities

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby Rooscooter on Tue Jan 07, 2014 1:44 pm

abeer3 wrote:
Rooscooter wrote:building a team of cohesive parts over building with what ever is available for what we have to spend in a given offseason. One demands a plan and guts…. the other is swinging for the fences ever offseason. Essentially what the Knicks do.


yeah, we've already had this discussion. you're putting forth a vague ideology, not a plan.

I know you want greg Monroe and rondo, and I want LeBron and kevin love. but these things have a very similar likelihood of happening (about zero), so the question becomes: is overpaying melo better than overpaying the gortats and lowrys of the world? this, of course, requires that you even have the option of getting any of these guys.

the truth is that the day kobe shredded his Achilles, the lakers were finished for a while. it led to howard's exit, which put the lakers in their current predicament. unless the lakers just don't spend the money this summer (an interesting option that I'm pretty sure they won't use, given the kobe investment), they're going to be overpaying someone, as that's how you get FAs to change teams. imo, melo's a proven star, redundant or not (I tend to think kobe can and will adjust his game if a superior scorer arrives). all the other targets are far from it and will get paid a lot more than people are thinking right now.


I don't "want" anyone. Rondo is a perfect complement for a guy like Kobe…. CP3 is not. My opinion on that is based on what I've seen in balanced teams. Rondo is a great guy for a team with a dominant wing scorer. Pierce benefited tremendously from him. Rondo plays both ends and has shown some real desire in the playoffs. If we didn't have Kobe I'm not sure Rondo would be a great fit for a team without that dominant scorer on the wing.

Monroe is a guy that may be available (long shot at best)…. he's a true inside presence which I value more than a "stretch 4" and if anything we really need an inside presence. Love is a very good player as well. His injury history is a little scary quite frankly. Monroe might come cheaper than Love and I think he's a better complement to a team with Kobe because he isn't a guy that "needs" to be fed touches to make a significant impact on a game.

I don't think Kobe's injury pushed Howard away…. it's Kobe that did it. Kobe is too serious for Dwight and it scared him to be looked at as the future of the Lakers IMO. Howard wasn't staying IMO….

Your final point is right on target….. building through FA alone means that we pay a lot more…. for a team that is paying the most for any player in the league that's a tough way to do things. Trades would help but we have no assets….. thus back in the circle again…. this is why I've been on the trade Pau bandwagon for 2 years. 2 years ago we may have gotten picks and pieces to give us trading chips now…. instead we can't even get a highly protected 1st, a couple seconds and a salary dump for him.
"If the past sits in judgment on the present, the future will be lost." Winston Churchill

“The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present - and is gravely to be regarded." Dwight Eisenhower

"Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it" Thomas Sowell
User avatar
Rooscooter

 
Posts: 23048
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 4:25 pm
Location: Chandler AZ and Andalué

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby Rooscooter on Tue Jan 07, 2014 1:53 pm

Lets Go Lakers wrote:And LeBron simply choked in 2011. I think the Heat were up 2-1 in the series and had like a 15 point lead in the 3rd quarter and had a chance to go up 3-1. LeBron and company chocked that game away and they lost the series from that point on. Had the LeBron of 2012 and 2013 showed up in 2011, the Heat would've won easily. I don't think anyone would dispute that.


:man10: If Lebron choked in 2011 what did Magic and Worthy do in 84?… Are you giving the Heat a "Participation Ribbon" for 2011 with a photo of Larry O on it?…... :man10: They lost the championship…. By that logic Dallas won the one against the Heat in 05…. What did out team of HOF'ers do in 2004?…. we choked…. do we get #17 in honorary form?
"If the past sits in judgment on the present, the future will be lost." Winston Churchill

“The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present - and is gravely to be regarded." Dwight Eisenhower

"Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it" Thomas Sowell
User avatar
Rooscooter

 
Posts: 23048
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 4:25 pm
Location: Chandler AZ and Andalué

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby Lets Go Lakers on Tue Jan 07, 2014 2:11 pm

Rooscooter wrote:
Lets Go Lakers wrote:And LeBron simply choked in 2011. I think the Heat were up 2-1 in the series and had like a 15 point lead in the 3rd quarter and had a chance to go up 3-1. LeBron and company chocked that game away and they lost the series from that point on. Had the LeBron of 2012 and 2013 showed up in 2011, the Heat would've won easily. I don't think anyone would dispute that.


:man10: If Lebron choked in 2011 what did Magic and Worthy do in 84?… Are you giving the Heat a "Participation Ribbon" for 2011 with a photo of Larry O on it?…... :man10: They lost the championship…. By that logic Dallas won the one against the Heat in 05…. What did out team of HOF'ers do in 2004?…. we choked…. do we get #17 in honorary form?


Each Finals is different. Sometimes the better team beats the inferior team. Sometimes two teams are evenly matched and the series is decided by a couple of plays (like last year). And sometimes, the superior team loses to the inferior team because their superstar players choke and don't play up to their potential. That was clearly the case with LeBron in 2011. He simply choked and let the moment get to him. And yeah, Magic also choked in 1984.

I just see every finals for what it is instead of generalizing the "winner" as being great and the "loser" as being losers. Each Finals has their own plot and stories and reasons why one team won and the other team lost. For instance, everyone in the world knew LeBron and his Cavs had no shot against the Spurs in 2007. They weren't supposed to win and they didn't. And no one put it against LeBron. But in 2011, LeBron and co were the clear favorites and were supposed to win. And it was clear as night and day that LeBron got caught up in the big moments. He simply choked that series away.
User avatar
Lets Go Lakers

 
Posts: 2877
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 3:25 pm

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby revgen on Wed Jan 22, 2014 7:17 pm

"He will leave, he wants to go to L.A. The Lakers are the prime destination for him. Although I've heard that the Lakers are not too enamored with grabbing Carmelo, it's just that they need to move beyond the Kobe era, and they understand that Carmelo is the prime free agent available."


-- Stephen A Smith

https://soundcloud.com/siriusxmsports/stephen-a-smith-joined-the
"Every time he’s hurt, he always plays, he always comes through."

- Metta World Peace on teammate Kobe Bryant
revgen
HDTV/Multimedia Guru
 
Posts: 21735
Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 10:53 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby Doc Brown on Wed Jan 22, 2014 7:19 pm

Paying Carmelo 29 million dollars in the last year of his deal. :nono5: :nono5:
Rule of Thumb at ClubLakers - Never encourage people to check your post history.
User avatar
Doc Brown

 
Posts: 19457
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 10:11 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby Weezy on Wed Jan 22, 2014 8:56 pm

Ugh, please no, 2 Kobe type players on one team? Can we handle that much ball stoppage? The ball will never move, it will stop in Melo or Kobe's hands constantly. And the defense, wont somebody please think of the defense?!
User avatar
Weezy
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 50881
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 11:14 am
Location: Anaheim, CA

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby Slurpee22 on Wed Jan 22, 2014 9:01 pm

If, Melo can't lead his team in the dreadful EC, what makes people think he can make an impact in the loaded WC?

I rather sign Blodsoe and Monroe with all the cap-space.
Slurpee22

 
Posts: 500
Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2013 8:40 am
Location: Forrest Island

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby therealdeal on Wed Jan 22, 2014 11:28 pm

Like I said: if this team was just a second away from contention that's one thing. But we need to build from the bottom up right now.
Stu : "Yeah, that's an old fashioned whoopin'."
therealdeal
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 40357
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:03 pm

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby Barnstable on Wed Jan 22, 2014 11:48 pm

therealdeal wrote:Like I said: if this team was just a second away from contention that's one thing. But we need to build from the bottom up right now.


I was totally for getting Melo before, but I'm starting to think he's going to want too much and not going to give enough back to make it worth it. If this were Durant we're talking about instead of Melo, I'd be all in balls deep. But Melo at full price won't get us there with the state of this roster.

If Melo were to come for a substantial discount...
"league getting mitch-slapped"
User avatar
Barnstable
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 14313
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2006 1:01 pm
Location: Queens NY

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby Center Court on Wed Jan 22, 2014 11:58 pm

Slurpee22 wrote:If, Melo can't lead his team in the dreadful EC, what makes people think he can make an impact in the loaded WC?

I rather sign Blodsoe and Monroe with all the cap-space.


Phx is going to match anything. Monroe is going to command $10-12MM and might even get traded before then. Besides, signing both will take us out of the running for Love. Not sure if they make us good enough to pass on him.

NY doesn't have Kobe as a partner. If it's a healthy Kobe + Melo + Lotto + Swaggy + Resigned Pau through 16 +Hill + Marshall + Farmar + X + Wes + Championship level coach (Thibs)

Pau/Sacre
Hill/Wes
Melo/X
Kobe/Swaggy
Marhall/Farmar

Depending on who the lotto pick is, that could be a contender. Fill in with some quality role players and that's a contender. Key ingredient is the coach who can bring that all together.

All that said, I'm far from sold that is the best route myself. I think the draft determines a lot of how we move forward.

I love the idea of Lotto in 2014 + Love in 2015, Durant in 2016 and Westbrook in 17 but that is a pretty long term plan compared to acquiring Melo and swinging for the fences. Not to mention has a ton of variables...

The Perfect scenario is if the first plan happens but Melo only signs 2 years and Love postpones his FA til 2016.
User avatar
Center Court

 
Posts: 3177
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 12:45 pm
Location: @ CL since '04

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby Lets Go Lakers on Thu Jan 23, 2014 7:25 am

I simply don't want this guy. He is not a winner. He is a ball stopper who destroys the rhythm and flow of a team. You will never win a ring with this guy. NEVER. Not the way he plays. You have to be able to play team ball and get others involved and play as a single, flowing unit to win rings. With Melo, all that goes out the window. All he knows how to do is get his, AT THE EXPENSE of the offense.

The guy is 30 years old. He has maybe 2-3 prime years left and after that, he will inevitably decline. I'll be pissed if we get this guy.
User avatar
Lets Go Lakers

 
Posts: 2877
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 3:25 pm

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby SK8 on Thu Jan 23, 2014 7:47 am

Image
The second place means you're the first loser
ex Uncle Drew
User avatar
SK8

 
Posts: 1507
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 11:26 am

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby Rooscooter on Thu Jan 23, 2014 8:12 am

As I've said before….. Melo will hold us hostage this offseason while the attention is on him and his decision making….. meanwhile we will lose any of the gems we've found this year because we will be paralyzed until he signs either with us or someone else.

I hope we don't…. but think we will…..
"If the past sits in judgment on the present, the future will be lost." Winston Churchill

“The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present - and is gravely to be regarded." Dwight Eisenhower

"Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it" Thomas Sowell
User avatar
Rooscooter

 
Posts: 23048
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 4:25 pm
Location: Chandler AZ and Andalué

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby Barnstable on Thu Jan 23, 2014 8:21 am

Rooscooter wrote:As I've said before….. Melo will hold us hostage this offseason while the attention is on him and his decision making….. meanwhile we will lose any of the gems we've found this year because we will be paralyzed until he signs either with us or someone else.

I hope we don't…. but think we will…..


Reports say that the FO isn't super enamored with Melo, but that he may still believe him to be the best we can get this off season. I'm hoping we don't wait forever for him to make up his mind, or better yet, he's already made up him mind, and he's coming to the Lakers for a reduced price*

I would however take Melo (at a bargain price) along with Monroe if Mitch has a bit of sorcery left in his wand.











*total pipe
"league getting mitch-slapped"
User avatar
Barnstable
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 14313
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2006 1:01 pm
Location: Queens NY

Re: Carmelo Anthony: Yah or nay?

Postby Rooscooter on Thu Jan 23, 2014 8:52 am

Barnstable wrote:
Rooscooter wrote:As I've said before….. Melo will hold us hostage this offseason while the attention is on him and his decision making….. meanwhile we will lose any of the gems we've found this year because we will be paralyzed until he signs either with us or someone else.

I hope we don't…. but think we will…..


Reports say that the FO isn't super enamored with Melo, but that he may still believe him to be the best we can get this off season. I'm hoping we don't wait forever for him to make up his mind, or better yet, he's already made up him mind, and he's coming to the Lakers for a reduced price*

I would however take Melo (at a bargain price) along with Monroe if Mitch has a bit of sorcery left in his wand.











*total pipe


Monroe is an underrated big IMHO. He's very effective and efficient and doesn't NEED to be fed the ball to be effective. We will lose Pau. I looks like we have no interest in Kaman and Hill will get paid. We will have no bigs of any value come July it seems. You don't win without an inside presence of some sort in this league and good bigs are much harder to find than high scoring wings so I'm all in on the Monroe idea.
"If the past sits in judgment on the present, the future will be lost." Winston Churchill

“The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present - and is gravely to be regarded." Dwight Eisenhower

"Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it" Thomas Sowell
User avatar
Rooscooter

 
Posts: 23048
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 4:25 pm
Location: Chandler AZ and Andalué

PreviousNext

Return to Lakers Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests

cron
Advertise Here | Privacy Policy | ©2008 Sculu Sports. Come Strong.