Is Lamar the new Maggette?

by citizen zhiv on Sep 30, 2008 2:52 PM PDT

This is interesting. I'm always amused by the little conflicts over at Lakertown, especially when they relate to things that we've seen with the Clippers, and given the fact that they're talked about endlessly on AM570.

So the only significant Laker news, it seems, is about whether they will be bringing Lamar Odom off the bench. Lamar, in a contract year and accustomed not just to starting every basketball game he's ever played in, but also being the focal point of the offense because of his ball-handling and size--or that's the way that it was before he started playing with Kobe, at least--isn't happy about this turn of events.

I didn't really see it coming myself. LO is a natural SF. But, as it turns out, the Lakers have a bit of a glut at SF, especially when Kobe plays about 65 minutes a game at SG.

Let's remember that these are all high class problems that the Lakers have, and we're not worrying about them. Rather, we're interested in the complications of their situation to see if their chemistry might go awry, but with Jackson at the helm it's unlikely.

At any rate, the talk is that Ariza might be the starter at SF. It's worth remembering that Bynum wasn't the only injured player on the Lakers roster, as Ariza was on the shelf until the last series. He seemed to play well and bring a lot of energy to his one short appearance, and then he was gone. I also thought that Ariza exercised his option, or whatever it was, with the Lakers, awfully quickly. His value might be a little bit higher than what he's getting paid, but he was coming off an injury. The interesting thing is that I'm only hearing about Ariza as a starter, with no discussion of Radman or Walton. This makes some sense, except for the fact that Radman and Walton are the guys who are getting paid and who will be around for awhile longer.

The other moving parts here are Ronny Turiaf and our own Josh Powell. Turiaf is gone to GSW of course. Apparently Phil isn't so interested in putting Powell into the rotation and making him Gasol's back up right away. You start Ariza, you bring in Lamar for either Bynum or Gasol, Radman and/or Walton come off the bench, and with Farmar/Fisher you've got your Laker rotation, more or less.

But the trick is for Odom to go along with this. Kind of reminiscent of the good old Maggette/Ross days, isn't it.

0 recs | Comment 9 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

mm

odom already said he wouldn’t come off the bench so that lineup is fail.

by saintdee on Sep 30, 2008 5:03 PM PDT 0 recs

phil jackson

said that lamar will be comming off the bench as their sixth man, i guess he has a new strategy this year, with the addition of bynum.

by highriser on Sep 30, 2008 11:21 PM PDT up 0 recs

Yess

I believe with Ariza starting at SF we have a better shot with Al in the match up department. Ariza is no slack off defensively but Thorton can most likely get around him or threw him lol better than LO.

Always felt Luke Walton was a little underrated he is not as good shooter as he was but he is one hell of a passer and can be a solid defender at times.

by KillaClip on Oct 1, 2008 8:57 AM PDT 0 recs

This could be fun

I really like this little development for a bunch of reasons.

Obviously the main one is going to be setting up an ongoing comparison to the Maggette/QRoss October 06 situation.

Here, on Day 2, when we get the next set of reactions, it’s fun to see the spin. Odom is the starter until he isn’t; he is, but he isn’t. He’s in a contract year, and he said yesterday that he “wants to start, for obvious reasons.” In the meantime, Andrew Bynum really really wants a big money extension (88 million), but the Lakers want him to play in the exhibition season. LO obviously wouldn’t mind a big money extension, but that’s not going to happen. The Lakers are committed to Gasol, Kobe, presumably Bynum, and Radman and Walton. Walton, by the way, is conveniently not part of the starting SF conversation because he can’t play yet, coming back from ankle surgery.

Where will LO be next year? One scenario, perhaps the Lakers preferred version, is that he comes off the bench and plays well, but not so well that they can’t resign him to a modest contract. In talking about LO becoming selfless, I’ve heard him compared to James Posey, “who got paid” in the offseason. Maybe I’m wrong, but I don’t think that LO believes his next contract is going to be for Posey-like money.

Another issue here is that none of the Lakers primary options does much in the way of perimeter shooting, excluding Kobe of course. Starting Bynum and Ariza will improve their defense considerably, but Ariza isn’t a great shooter by any means. And LO’s game is much better when he goes to the basket and doesn’t settle for shots. They have Radman, and will want to put him to work. He’s more important to the Lakers than people might realize—he’s going to be very helpful in the same role that he came in to play on the Clippers in their playoff run, a big man off the bench spreading the opposing defense.

Kobe and Gasol are going to hit shots and score, so the issues aren’t especially significant. But there’s a deeper problematic narrative to what’s going on with the Lakers and Odom than what you read in the papers. They have to figure it out this year, by adding Bynum and Ariza (and Powell) and subtracting Turiaf, and they need to be successful to keep things afloat as they pare it down. They’ll presumably lose LO, as the Celtics lost Posey (and PJ Brown).

by citizen zhiv on Oct 1, 2008 10:35 AM PDT 0 recs

Since they added Gasol...

I’ve always assumed that the Lakers would lose Lamar from the minute they signed Gasol. Bynum gets his extension, Lamar walks, the Lakers don’t go further into luxury tax land. Maybe Buss is willing to pay double for LO – but I doubt it.

In that sense, they have some incentive to find out what it’s like without Lamar starting. Obviously they still want his contribution this season, and I assume they’re counting on him to be a professional. But I don’t think he’s in their plans after this season.

Regarding Bynum’s extension, I have NO IDEA why they would extend him at this time. He’s just had knee surgery, he hasn’t played in 6 months, and they’ll have the right to match any offer next summer. Why would you extend him now?

In this world, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant. - Elwood P. Dowd

by ClipperSteve on Oct 1, 2008 11:08 PM PDT up 0 recs

cause some

other team may try to steal him away later.

by saintdee on Oct 2, 2008 5:19 PM PDT up 0 recs

Two items

Bynum extension: I don’t know what the timing is, but Bynum’s group is already making a little bit of noise about the extension. The Laker/Kupchak line that I heard is that they want to see him get through camp healthy and see how he plays in the preseason.

One reason to do the extension sooner rather than later is that they might get a bit of a discount. If Bynum starts out strong and plays well they’ll have to pay him top dollar. Just before the season starts, they might be able to get save 5-10 million over five years.

If I’m Bynum, I do the Lebron-Melo-Wade trick and take as much money as I can get, and even give up the discount, for a 3 year deal. Get back to the table sooner rather than later.

But who’s to say that Bynum is really going to be that good. I’m very happy with Kaman (and his deal), and it will be EXTREMELY interesting to look at the combined numbers of Kaman-Camby vs. Bynum-Gasol.

About Lamar: The thing about not starting him is that they have a huge incentive to devalue him, and still get productivity out of him. As a “6th man of the year” candidate, they would be trying to resign him for James Posey money, giving him the privilege of making a major financial and career sacrifice in order to compete for championships. But LO will be able to find a slot on a lot of teams where he would start and help the team compete. He would do that on the Lakers as a starter, where he’d be the team’s 3rd best player after Kobe and Gasol, with Bynum contributing on defense and rebounding.

You and I know that LO will not be a Laker next year. But I’m curious about what Laker fans are thinking. And of course we also knew that there was no way that the Clippers would buy out Sam Cassell. So we always have that type of certainty going for us.

by citizen zhiv on Oct 2, 2008 9:19 PM PDT 0 recs