Who should start at SF?

Who should start at SF?

Metta
10
45%
Ebanks
12
54%
 
Total votes : 22

Who should start at SF?

Postby Lets Go Lakers on Wed Oct 31, 2012 7:52 am

Does anyone else cringe when you see Artest with the ball? I sure do. 90% of the time, something bad happens. I mean the guy is a solid defensive player but he is not the jaggernaut he used to be 5-7 years ago. His offense is just terrible. His primary job in this offense is to space the floor but we all know defenses don't respect his shot. And he regularly clogs up the paint when there are already bigs posting up, which is comical at times. He can't contribute anything athletically to an already old, starting unit. He limts our offense.

Ebanks fits better with the starting unit because he doesn't need the ball like Artest to contribute. With so many alpha males in the starting unit, that's what we need. A young, athletic and live body who can contribute in ways Artest can't. He's the type of guy who can just pick his spots ala Ariza/Barnes by playing good defense, running the floor, moving and cutting without the ball,etc. He isn't Artest defensively but he can defend well enough and his shot has improved.

Artest functions better with the ball in his hands. So i think him coming off the bench would be better because he would have more chances to dominate the ball and get into a groove.

This team still lacks overall team athleticism and i think switching the two would be very beneficial. And i'm not saying we banish Meta to bench status ala Blake and limit his minutes. If the need is there for him to defend someone, keep him in there. But going forward, Ebanks starting makes this team better.

Thoughts?
User avatar
Lets Go Lakers

 
Posts: 2901
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 3:25 pm

Re: Who should start at SF?

Postby karacha on Wed Oct 31, 2012 7:54 am

You forgot one "t" in Metta, so I corrected it. :man9:
"It's not realistic to get younger and better when you only have the veteran's minimum to offer free agents." :mhihi:

-Troll Kupchak
User avatar
karacha
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 37447
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 3:20 pm

Re: Who should start at SF?

Postby Lets Go Lakers on Wed Oct 31, 2012 8:05 am

Just think about the SF position in today's game. We are talking about some amazingly athletic players and that's what we should expect from the 3 in this day and age. Artest is without a doubt the most unathletic 3 in the game. I mean the guy just limits our offense and what it can do. If his D was lights out on a consistent basis, it might warrant him starting but it's not. And he really brings nothing else to the table except the potential to throw another elbow. It's time for a change. The 3 position requires athelticism in today's game.
User avatar
Lets Go Lakers

 
Posts: 2901
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 3:25 pm

Re: Who should start at SF?

Postby XXIV on Wed Oct 31, 2012 8:06 am

Metta, he just needs to stop thinking he's the point guard and hand the ball to Steve Nash.
XXIV

 
Posts: 6386
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 11:20 am
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Who should start at SF?

Postby wcsoldier81 on Wed Oct 31, 2012 8:15 am

Too bad Kobe isn't in his physical prime and can't defend at a high level anymore .. we could have started Meeks at the 2 and Ko at SF ... floor spacing is horrible with Metta

I can't take Metta crap anymore ... he's flat out garbage
wcsoldier81

 
Posts: 6420
Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 1:20 am

Re: Who should start at SF?

Postby Lets Go Lakers on Wed Oct 31, 2012 8:27 am

wcsoldier81 wrote:Too bad Kobe isn't in his physical prime and can't defend at a high level anymore .. we could have started Meeks at the 2 and Ko at SF ... floor spacing is horrible with Metta

I can't take Metta crap anymore ... he's flat out garbage


Nope, he can't. Kobe is 34 but his legs are really like a 38 year old given the mileage. Kobe's defense has been overrated for years. Most Laker fans know this. Him getting voted to All-Defense every year is a joke. Our starting unit seriously lacks athleticism and Metta just seals the deal. We thought our starting 5 was bad athletically with Fish and Metta at the 1 and 3 but it's about the same with Nash. Of course Nash is an ATG PG but it still doesn't change the fact that athletically, he is very limited. We need some a young, live body to complement our aging stars.
User avatar
Lets Go Lakers

 
Posts: 2901
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 3:25 pm

Re: Who should start at SF?

Postby Lets Go Lakers on Wed Oct 31, 2012 8:27 am

XXIV wrote:Metta, he just needs to stop thinking he's the point guard and hand the ball to Steve Nash.


He also thinks he's a center at times the way he tries to post up when there are already 2 bigs down in the paint.
User avatar
Lets Go Lakers

 
Posts: 2901
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 3:25 pm

Re: Who should start at SF?

Postby wcsoldier81 on Wed Oct 31, 2012 8:35 am

Lets Go Lakers wrote:
wcsoldier81 wrote:Too bad Kobe isn't in his physical prime and can't defend at a high level anymore .. we could have started Meeks at the 2 and Ko at SF ... floor spacing is horrible with Metta

I can't take Metta crap anymore ... he's flat out garbage


Nope, he can't. Kobe is 34 but his legs are really like a 38 year old given the mileage. Kobe's defense has been overrated for years. Most Laker fans know this. Him getting voted to All-Defense every year is a joke. Our starting unit seriously lacks athleticism and Metta just seals the deal. We thought our starting 5 was bad athletically with Fish and Metta at the 1 and 3 but it's about the same with Nash. Of course Nash is an ATG PG but it still doesn't change the fact that athletically, he is very limited. We need some a young, live body to complement our aging stars.


Where did I say the contrary ? :man10:
wcsoldier81

 
Posts: 6420
Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 1:20 am

Re: Who should start at SF?

Postby Lets Go Lakers on Wed Oct 31, 2012 8:37 am

wcsoldier81 wrote:
Lets Go Lakers wrote:
wcsoldier81 wrote:Too bad Kobe isn't in his physical prime and can't defend at a high level anymore .. we could have started Meeks at the 2 and Ko at SF ... floor spacing is horrible with Metta

I can't take Metta crap anymore ... he's flat out garbage


Nope, he can't. Kobe is 34 but his legs are really like a 38 year old given the mileage. Kobe's defense has been overrated for years. Most Laker fans know this. Him getting voted to All-Defense every year is a joke. Our starting unit seriously lacks athleticism and Metta just seals the deal. We thought our starting 5 was bad athletically with Fish and Metta at the 1 and 3 but it's about the same with Nash. Of course Nash is an ATG PG but it still doesn't change the fact that athletically, he is very limited. We need some a young, live body to complement our aging stars.


Where did I say the contrary ? :man10:


I was agreeing with your statement about Kobe not being able to defend like he used too. That's where, "Nope, he can't" came from.
User avatar
Lets Go Lakers

 
Posts: 2901
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 3:25 pm

Re: Who should start at SF?

Postby Lakerjones on Wed Oct 31, 2012 8:49 am

How about the question becomes, who should backup MWP at the SF? Jamison or Ebanks? I mean how can you be seriously advocating Ebanks starting when the coach did not even play him last night? Do you really think he's going to start him? He started him for a week or so last season and then he sat him on the bench for a couple months, never to play again. And you think he's going to make him a starter again?

Not going to happen. And I wouldn't even want it to happen. I would however like Brown to actually play Ebanks SOME time. He should be the backup SF. Develop him. Jamison hasn't played the position in ages and doesn't look too capable of it.
Lakerjones
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 15212
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 12:37 am

Re: Who should start at SF?

Postby Lets Go Lakers on Wed Oct 31, 2012 9:24 am

Lakerjones wrote:How about the question becomes, who should backup MWP at the SF? Jamison or Ebanks? I mean how can you be seriously advocating Ebanks starting when the coach did not even play him last night? Do you really think he's going to start him? He started him for a week or so last season and then he sat him on the bench for a couple months, never to play again. And you think he's going to make him a starter again?

Not going to happen. And I wouldn't even want it to happen. I would however like Brown to actually play Ebanks SOME time. He should be the backup SF. Develop him. Jamison hasn't played the position in ages and doesn't look too capable of it.


I could care less what Brown thinks. I have my own opinion on who i think is the best starting line up. And maybe it saids volumes about Brown because he DIDN'T play Ebanks yesterday? And not in a good way?
User avatar
Lets Go Lakers

 
Posts: 2901
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 3:25 pm

Re: Who should start at SF?

Postby dwighthowardsdad on Wed Oct 31, 2012 9:29 am

I agree with you. Ron is an awful fit for this offense & team. He's a good fit for our bench but as a starter he's a liability.
dwighthowardsdad

 
Posts: 1695
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 11:31 am

Re: Who should start at SF?

Postby therealdeal on Wed Oct 31, 2012 9:29 am

^ It's COULDN'T. If you COULD care less, it means you care a little bit. I can't stand when people say that...

Anway, it's Metta World Peace. Of course it is. He's the best starting SF we have on the team. Jamison should be backing up Gasol. Ebanks should be getting burn as the backup 3.

It's all very simple.
Stu : "Yeah, that's an old fashioned whoopin'."
therealdeal
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 40322
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:03 pm

Re: Who should start at SF?

Postby dj vitus on Wed Oct 31, 2012 9:33 am

I wonder why Ebanks didn't play. Is he in the dog house again? We saw how much he improved--at least offensively. Please don't tell me MB still likes sitting players for several weeks in a row who deserve to play. :bang:
"Why are they blocking out all the good stuff? They let Sarah Jessica Parker's face on TV and she looks like a foot!!"
User avatar
dj vitus

 
Posts: 9480
Joined: Sun May 02, 2004 6:59 pm
Location: Walnut, CA by way of Laaaas Vegas!

Re: Who should start at SF?

Postby Texas Lakers Fan on Wed Oct 31, 2012 9:44 am

World Peace.
Image
User avatar
Texas Lakers Fan

 
Posts: 5438
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 2:26 am

Re: Who should start at SF?

Postby Lets Go Lakers on Wed Oct 31, 2012 9:49 am

therealdeal wrote:^ It's COULDN'T. If you COULD care less, it means you care a little bit. I can't stand when people say that...

Anway, it's Metta World Peace. Of course it is. He's the best starting SF we have on the team. Jamison should be backing up Gasol. Ebanks should be getting burn as the backup 3.

It's all very simple.


Metta might be the better SF on a young team that needs a second fiddle type player to dominate the ball at times but on this unit and more importantly, with the starting unit that we have, i think Ebanks is a better fit. And he would make us a better team IMO.
User avatar
Lets Go Lakers

 
Posts: 2901
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 3:25 pm

Re: Who should start at SF?

Postby kray28 on Wed Oct 31, 2012 9:52 am

I like Ron a lot, but he's hurting us more than he's helping us.
Image
User avatar
kray28

 
Posts: 21242
Joined: Wed May 09, 2007 8:16 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: Who should start at SF?

Postby therealdeal on Wed Oct 31, 2012 9:59 am

Lets Go Lakers wrote:Metta might be the better SF on a young team that needs a second fiddle type player to dominate the ball at times but on this unit and more importantly, with the starting unit that we have, i think Ebanks is a better fit. And he would make us a better team IMO.


I disagree. World Peace is better in pretty much every way and he needs to be in the starting lineup to defend opposing wings.

As time goes along and the offense improves, his issues will too. Right now, he's definitely the best fit. But he should definitely be backed up by Ebanks who gives a different kind of production.
Stu : "Yeah, that's an old fashioned whoopin'."
therealdeal
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 40322
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:03 pm

Re: Who should start at SF?

Postby kray28 on Wed Oct 31, 2012 10:10 am

If Ron continues to start, it's only to keep his ego in check, because he cannot handle being benched. There was no great SF to guard last night...and he was pretty bad all around.
Image
User avatar
kray28

 
Posts: 21242
Joined: Wed May 09, 2007 8:16 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: Who should start at SF?

Postby Lets Go Lakers on Wed Oct 31, 2012 10:22 am

therealdeal wrote:
Lets Go Lakers wrote:Metta might be the better SF on a young team that needs a second fiddle type player to dominate the ball at times but on this unit and more importantly, with the starting unit that we have, i think Ebanks is a better fit. And he would make us a better team IMO.


I disagree. World Peace is better in pretty much every way and he needs to be in the starting lineup to defend opposing wings.

As time goes along and the offense improves, his issues will too. Right now, he's definitely the best fit. But he should definitely be backed up by Ebanks who gives a different kind of production.


And i said in my OP that if the need arises, we can play Metta a lot of minutes for the purpose of playing D.

Metta is a better defender and probably slightly better shooter (although Ebanks is improving). He's better at creating his own shot but in this offense, it's really not needed and might actually hurt the offense.

Ebanks is much more athletic, can run the floor, is a better rebounder, and can move better without the ball. I like Ebank's traits better when considering our starting line up.
User avatar
Lets Go Lakers

 
Posts: 2901
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 3:25 pm

Re: Who should start at SF?

Postby borri on Wed Oct 31, 2012 10:30 am

Screw it...just play Jamison at SF. Big drop in defense....big increase in offense. Hey that's the reason we got D12 anyways.....to be the anchor.
User avatar
borri

 
Posts: 8035
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2005 5:16 pm

Re: Who should start at SF?

Postby therealdeal on Wed Oct 31, 2012 10:31 am

Well that's fine, I just totally disagree.

I think he fits better mentally and physically with the starting unit. Our second unit should be explosive and dynamic, two things Ebanks can be when he's out on the break. I think that unit would serve him much better.
Stu : "Yeah, that's an old fashioned whoopin'."
therealdeal
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 40322
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:03 pm

Re: Who should start at SF?

Postby lakersfever on Wed Oct 31, 2012 10:35 am

Trevor Ariza
User avatar
lakersfever

 
Posts: 349
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 10:38 am
Location: OC

Re: Who should start at SF?

Postby Lets Go Lakers on Wed Oct 31, 2012 10:41 am

therealdeal wrote:Well that's fine, I just totally disagree.

I think he fits better mentally and physically with the starting unit. Our second unit should be explosive and dynamic, two things Ebanks can be when he's out on the break. I think that unit would serve him much better.


Yeah, but our starting unit lacks athleticism outside of Howard, and he's a center. Centers don't slash to the basket or make quick cuts. Well, Howard can to some extent but you want that element from your 3. We need to be able to manufacture easy baskets at times. Artest doesn't provide that element.
User avatar
Lets Go Lakers

 
Posts: 2901
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 3:25 pm

Re: Who should start at SF?

Postby Lets Go Lakers on Wed Oct 31, 2012 10:42 am

lakersfever wrote:Trevor Ariza


:stunoice: I miss Ariza and what he brought to our team. Perfect role player.
User avatar
Lets Go Lakers

 
Posts: 2901
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 3:25 pm

Next

Return to Lakers Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 13 guests

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