Rooscooter wrote:A NBA partner's employee stirring up the pot before the season starts..... and most of you fell for it....
These guys at ESPN plan this crap.... the Lakers are the most liked and most hated at the same time..... so more people care about a "controversial" article about them.... see the dots here?.... they end at a pot of $$$ for the NBA Partner... These guys and the ones at TNT are not journalists or even "reporters" any longer because the bulk of their companies earnings for the next 9 months is directly tied to hyping the NBA and they share in the profits.....
As for what this clown said......I'd say the Lakers improved their roster quite a bit this offseason..... maybe more than anyone. Denver lost over 30 points a game and replace that with 14 or so. For a team that needs to score to win (no A.I. isn't going to make them a walk it up defensive team) that's a huge hit. SA didn't get any better and OKC is the same team that folded against Miami so we need to prove ourselves but if we play injury free for the most part we will be better than SA and Denver for sure....
The desire to write up something purely for eyeballs is entirely overblown. In the long run, they know the best way to get eyeballs and KEEP eyeballs is by being accurate first and foremost and interesting/engaging second. Notice that when trade rumors come out, everyone waits for ESPN to report it before exhaling. They don't pick up a Bleacher Report article and use it as gospel.
I'm not sure if you read the article but he didn't bag on our offseason moves. If anything, he praised them! The two main reasons he gave for why we might finish 4th in the regular season is:
Regarding health/injuries, this is a legitimate concern. I mean we're coming in to the season WITH injury issues to KEY players. Even you said "IF" we stay injury free and if we're concerned about injuries 3 weeks before the season starts then there are definite question marks.
Regarding age, he said that because we have older players, he is assuming that we will play Kobe and Nash closer to the low 30s in minutes. With that being said then, that means more of the bench and in those two areas our depth is not good. Better than last season sure, but more Meeks and Blake isn't a recipe for success. I think there is validity to that. What makes us potent is having Bryant and Nash on the floor. If we're playing Kobe LESS than we played last year (in the regular season) then that will have a negative impact year over year at the SG position.
Lastly, chemistry. Now, there are unknowns. His point about Nash and Bryant figuring out how to play together, I think they will work that out over the first weeks. I'm not TOO concerned about it, but I'm not entirely not worried about it either. I want to see it first. But I think chemistry is the least of our worries. I think the worst case scenario is that it takes a long time to figure out but I think we will have it figured out by playoff time.
I'm curious ... I haven't seen anyone accuse Hollinger of being a moron or whatever, regarding his comments on our postseason success. He basically said we have age and injury concerns and we'll deal with those concerns during the regular season, to make sure we don't have to deal with them come playoff time where we will be "terrifying". What's wrong with that? I think that is spot on. Not sure I agree with 4th seed, but 3rd seed is a very real possibility even though on paper we should be the 1 seed.
I'm kind of surprised people care so much about our regular season seeding. What difference does it make? This team is built for the postseason, it is not built for an 82 game regular season.