The Association: Point Counterpoint with Basketbawful: Problem Solved

By Craig Kwasniewski

Here's a new feature at The Association, a point counterpoint exchange with one of my NBA blog brethren Basketbawful.com. Normally we'll drop 10,000 word exchanges in the comments section going back and forth on such important subjects like, "Mark Eaton: Center or Stiff" and "NBA Olympians: Tired or Lazy." Well it's about damn time we turn hours of senseless commenting into a post (on a senseless blogsite, but at least you'll read it).

Enough already, let's get into trouble, baby!

So Basketbawful took my FYI - Suns are 0-4 Versus Western Contenders post and ran with it: Counterpoint: The Lakers aren't contenders.

Here's a brief summary of his comments along with my response:

1. "The term "Western contenders" is, by its very nature, absurd since the Eastern Conference doesn't have any championship contenders this season."

Very true! But if I start saying things like "the top 5 teams in the NBA are all in the Western Conference," I'll get carpet-bombed from the Agent Zero Nation bandwagon. And since 95% of the blogosphere is currently circle jerking over Gilbert's stat sheets, I'll get the predictable "there's no way in hell the Lakers and Jazz are better than the DC Zeros! You're an ass!"

Now, I'm fine with Heat fans (read: empty seats) and Spurs fans (they're so innocent) calling me an ass, but I really can't have Zero Nation all over me. It's Gilbert for crissake! He's untouchable right now.

2. The Jazz are not a fraud and may be better than the Lakers. Yet both teams won't contend for a title.

Sorry, but the Jazz ARE a fraud in the sense that they are Western Conference contenders. As you correctly pointed out, "those are harsh words." But given all the early season hype for the Jazz, fraud is my response to the "experts" who were ranking them up with Phoenix and Dallas.

Now your Utah-Lakers comparison; you brought up the Lakers recent struggles, mentioning that the Lakers are 13-9 after starting the season 14-6, comparing the Lakers' slide to the Jazz's 16-13 record since their 12-1 start. Did you know that Lamar Odom got injured in the 21st game and has been out for the entire 13-9 stretch? Look, I'm not like most Laker fans who'll compare Odom to Scottie Pippen. That's strictly blasphemous! But he's equally as important to the Lakers as Kobe is simply because he does the little things when necessary. Odom's the Lakers best rebounder, he brings the ball upcourt taking pressure off Kobe, he's their best low-post player and he's a good rotational defender. His injury is the equivalent of AK-47 going down for Utah (who missed 54 games the past two seasons and the Jazz struggled).

Speaking of injuries, the Lakers are putting up the fifth best record in the NBA missing two starters for a few weeks. I know, I know, injuries are a part of the game, but the Lakers trail Utah by 0.5 games while having their top seven players missing a combined 41 games with Utah's top seven missing only seven games. And the Jazz of all teams should be quite familiar with injury struggles as their playoff hopes the past two seasons were derailed with injuries.

You put up a respectable argument for the 50-plus games that the Jazz allowed.. yet respectable doesn't cover for such a disturbing trend from the defensive minded Jerry Sloan. Now, I'm not calling the Lakers defensive mavens at all, in fact during the three weeks that I wrote for the AOL NBA Fanhouse, I wrote about their lack of defense against opposing guards. It's weird seeing two teams coached by defensive minded coaches struggle on defense, so let's call this one a draw.

BTW - Recently, Jerry Sloan is issuing a curfew when the Jazz travel because of off-court problems. I'm not using the curfew thing in my argument, I just thought it was a funny story. Jerry Sloan is the only coach in the NBA who could pull that off. Can you see George Karl giving Melo and AI a midnight curfew?

I see the Lakers as the fourth best team in the NBA. Who else ranks ahead of them? Houston will falter once McGrady's back flares up, Denver won't be better and Utah is slighlty lower than the Lakers. Does this make the Lakers a contender? It all depends on the definition of the word. Being the 4th best team in the NBA should count for something, yet given that Dallas and Phoenix are presently eons better than the rest of the league it's a very distant 4th. Yet, the Lakers are a combined 4-2 against the Spurs, Mavs and Suns. Does this mean a banner in LA? Like I've said many times before, not this year.

3. The Lakers don't have the talent up front (Kwame Brown and Andrew Bynum? Seriously?)

The Lakers aren't asking them to dominate but rather provide quality low-post defense and some scoring in the paint. Kwame is one of the strongest players in the game and his sole purpose is to body the opposing bigs out of the paint. He has held his own defensively against Yao, Duncan and Dwight Howard. Howeve, as my friend Matt correctly points out, "he has ass-cheeks for hands." But with Kobe on the floor, the Lakers aren't relying on anything more than 10 ppg from Kwame.

Andrew Bynum is only 18 years old and is two years ahead of schedule. As with many young players, he's very inconsistent, but what impresses me is his confidence in the post. He's a little too methodical with the ball, but he doesn't back down from anyone. Plus, his length gives Duncan trouble on defense. He's only gonna get better.

4. Regarding Phoenix, "as for the 0-4 record against the 'contenders,' well, I take that with a grain of salt." And Craig, you're an ass for continuing to rip on Nash's back-to-back MVP awards. (I'm generalizing with that sentence.)

I agree with your "salt" statement. As I mentioned, the Suns faced San Antonio and the Lakers early in the season before Diaw got in shape and Amare got healthy. I just want to see how well they fare against those two teams and how well they finish before the media ranks them up with the best teams ever.

Nash's first MVP was well deserved, but I still think Kobe earned it for last season. We've gone round and round about this one and 10,000 words will not convince the other person... simple as that.

5. "The Lakers size is no longer an issue. If for some reason these two teams meet in the playoffs, I personally guarantee that the Suns will prevail (barring major injuries to key players)."

There's good hatred between both teams. I didn't read the entire book, but from peeking at Jack McCallum's coverage from last year, the Suns simply don't like the Lakers and especially Kobe. (You've got a good historical grasp on the NBA, what's the last great NBA team that held such a hatred for a crappy team. Not to play therapist here, but could the hate conceal a little but of fear?) The first six games of the Suns-Lakers series ranks up there with the great first-round match-ups of all time. Yes, the Suns are deeper and are playing the best basketball in in the franchise history since 1993, but the 2006-07 Lakers are a far better team than last year also.

Look back at the history of Phil Jackson as a head coach. It takes two years to learn the Triangle Offense and the Bulls and Lakers in his second year both showed incredible improvement. The Bulls won their first title and the Lakers ran off one of the most dominant stretches NBA Playoff history, going 15-1 on their way to a back-to-back. Kobe's the only holdover from the Threepeat days, this is very much like a second year for Jackson. (The 2004-05 Rudy-T era never existed!) I'm not saying the Lakers will win a championship this year (they will be a serious contender next year), but they will win 50-plus games and seriously scare teams in the second round.

Will it be good enough to hang with Phoenix and possibly beat them? Well, since we haven't had a chance to see both teams match up at full strength this year, we really don't know for sure. All I do know is that it won't be one-sided. I think if both teams are healthy, Phoenix wins, but next year will be different.

Comments

You've forced me to do an in depth analysis of the Jazz/Lakers matchup...check it.

Posted by: basketbawful | January 25, 2007 at 01:20 PM

Given 96 regulation minutes vs the Bobcats have yielded a net zero and then two losses in OT I'd say the Lakers are about as good as Charlotte. The lakers team that has been getting blown out on the road by mediocre teams is the real deal. Early in the season all the games were at home where, statistics make clear, they have the most rediculous home court advantage in the league. But hey its a tv contract year, so whatever is best for the league.

Its not like the Suns had to win 5 games last playoffs to advance right? The lakers are fake but the league will not them fall when so much money is on the line.

Posted by: John R. | January 27, 2007 at 08:05 AM