Predicting the Lakers losses

[DEVO]

Horace Grant said that for the Lakers to be beaten, the opposition must play the perfect game. Well, this narrows the field down to about three or four teams at best. So I'm going to try to predict the games the LA Lakers lose.

07.12.2001, 24.03.2001 - at Sacremento. The two best teams in the league battling it out at Sacremento. The Lakers will give it their all, but home town support, and despiration on the Kings part will proabbaly get them home.

27.01.2002 - at Philadelphia. Revenge will be sweet for the 76ers.

03.02.2001 - at Dallas. Final game of a 5 game road trip that includes Philadelphia and Orlando.

26.02.2002 - at Milwaukee. In the middle of a 5 game road trip, the Lakers may struggle against one of the Premier teams.

27.02.2002 - at Minnesota. A Day after Milwaukee, you don't want to travel to Minnesota. The Lakers will lose two in a row for the only time this season.

07.04.2002 - at Miami. The last game of a 4 game road trip against the best the East has to offer. Like the Milwaukee game, will probably be looking for a break rather then playing.

I could only find seven games that the Lakers would be odds on to lose. There may be a few other games, like away to Portland and Pheonix, but I reckon the Lakers can go at least 73-9 this season.


there you Jod 23, coxon and co, pull me apart.

 

[carb70]

Devo, as a Lakers fan I hope you are right about a 73-9 season. But you have made those predicitions on the assumption that the Lakers are going to play at their best every game and thats very unlikely. Also what would happen if the Lakers lost Shaq or Kobe through injury?.

Also the Lakers seem to struggle against the Knicks, so they are bound to lose a game to them as well.

I will be happy enough with them winning enough games to have home court advantage throughout the playoffs.

 

[DEVO]

I made these assumptions on the basis that the Lakers will improve from a rather poor (form wise) start to the season. Everybody at Lakerland is happy with the 6-0 start, but are not happy with the way the team is handling the new rules and how it's taking a little longer than expected for the new guys to fit into the team structure.
Everybody at Lakerland expects an acroos the board improvement of at least 30%, which suggest real problems for the rest of the league. The fact that they are winning while playing so terribly suggests that a 73-9 season is possible if not probable.

Anyway I can dream can't I. What Chicago's record?

 

[coxon]

hmmm.. they'd have to beat the bulls' 72-10 record...

will take a look at the schedule and see...

when do they play the zone-mastering t-wolves?

 

[jod23]

LMAO!!! 72 - 10 is a record i doubt will ever be beaten...The Bulls that year were probably the greatest team ive ever seen. The Lakers have some problems and let me point them out to you. This is by no means saying they wont win the championship as they certainly are the favourites but to beat 72 - 10 you need a better team that what the Lakers have.

The Lakers dont really have any depth and they lack a third option on offence. There D is shaky at times as Shaq and Kobe are no defensive stoppers. Look at there list...

Joseph Crispin - rookie, not gonna get a game and if he does get a game he wont set the world on fire.

Derek Fisher - between injuries which seems to happen a lot lately he is a serviceable point guard at best.

Rick Fox - getting more useless every year, used to be a good offensive player now he hardly scores 5 a game.

Devean George - who?

Robert Horry - again like Fox, he used to be a good player and was an integral part in Houstons back to back but now you will be lucky if he plays 20 mins and gets 4 points and a rebound.

Lindsey Hunter - your best option at point and can score in bursts but i wouldnt rely on him to be another weapon on offence. Once again only a serviceable point guard..he aint no star.

Mark Madsen - cmon.......

Jelani McCoy - if i was him id ask for a trade as he aint never gonna see minutes at LA. Wouldnt matter anyway, when he gets on the floor he's useless.

Mitch Richmond - poor old Mitch...the only thing he could ever do was score and now he cant even do that....i just rememeber him as part of Run TMC...ahhh the good old days.

Stanislav Medvedenko - pretty useless.

Brain Shaw - see Medvedenko......only useful for giving Kobe or Hunter a quick break.

Samaki Walker - taking up space on the bench, seriously .... why?

Mike Penberthy - LMAO.......

Wow man thats your list....it dramatically drops off after Shaq and Kobe. Shaq and Kobe account for 60 of your points a night, Considering the Lakers average just over 100 ppg this season that is a big problem. A good defensive unit can beat the Lakers and the easiest way to do it would be to shut out Kobe, Shaq is too hard to stop but if you halt one of the two then they will have trouble scoring.

Look at Philly, Iverson, McKie, Snow, Mutombo, Coleman can all score. Zo, Grant, Jones, Carter from the Heat, Hill, T-Mac, Miller, Armstrong for the Magic, Allen, Big Dog, Cassell and Mason from the Bucks.

Other contenders can cover for a down night from a star because they have other options on offence. The Lakers cant, if they dont get 30 and 30 from Shaq and Kobe they find it difficult to win a game.

You have Hunter at 12ppg and then there isnt anybody else averaging more than 7 a game!! Thats a worry. Now im not saying this is why you wont win the championship because your still the favourites but to only lose 9 games all year without a reliable 3rd scorer is just too hard.

 

[DEVO]

Originally posted by jod23
LMAO!!! 72 - 10 is a record i doubt will ever be beaten...The Bulls that year were probably the greatest team ive ever seen. The Lakers have some problems and let me point them out to you. This is by no means saying they wont win the championship as they certainly are the favourites but to beat 72 - 10 you need a better team that what the Lakers have.

The Lakers dont really have any depth and they lack a third option on offence. There D is shaky at times as Shaq and Kobe are no defensive stoppers. Look at there list...

Joseph Crispin - rookie, not gonna get a game and if he does get a game he wont set the world on fire.

Derek Fisher - between injuries which seems to happen a lot lately he is a serviceable point guard at best.

Rick Fox - getting more useless every year, used to be a good offensive player now he hardly scores 5 a game.

Devean George - who?

Robert Horry - again like Fox, he used to be a good player and was an integral part in Houstons back to back but now you will be lucky if he plays 20 mins and gets 4 points and a rebound.

Lindsey Hunter - your best option at point and can score in bursts but i wouldnt rely on him to be another weapon on offence. Once again only a serviceable point guard..he aint no star.

Mark Madsen - cmon.......

Jelani McCoy - if i was him id ask for a trade as he aint never gonna see minutes at LA. Wouldnt matter anyway, when he gets on the floor he's useless.

Mitch Richmond - poor old Mitch...the only thing he could ever do was score and now he cant even do that....i just rememeber him as part of Run TMC...ahhh the good old days.

Stanislav Medvedenko - pretty useless.

Brain Shaw - see Medvedenko......only useful for giving Kobe or Hunter a quick break.

Samaki Walker - taking up space on the bench, seriously .... why?

Mike Penberthy - LMAO.......

Wow man thats your list....it dramatically drops off after Shaq and Kobe. Shaq and Kobe account for 60 of your points a night, Considering the Lakers average just over 100 ppg this season that is a big problem. A good defensive unit can beat the Lakers and the easiest way to do it would be to shut out Kobe, Shaq is too hard to stop but if you halt one of the two then they will have trouble scoring.

Look at Philly, Iverson, McKie, Snow, Mutombo, Coleman can all score. Zo, Grant, Jones, Carter from the Heat, Hill, T-Mac, Miller, Armstrong for the Magic, Allen, Big Dog, Cassell and Mason from the Bucks.

Other contenders can cover for a down night from a star because they have other options on offence. The Lakers cant, if they dont get 30 and 30 from Shaq and Kobe they find it difficult to win a game.

You have Hunter at 12ppg and then there isnt anybody else averaging more than 7 a game!! Thats a worry. Now im not saying this is why you wont win the championship because your still the favourites but to only lose 9 games all year without a reliable 3rd scorer is just too hard.

I don't think you need a better team than the Lakers, I think you need a stronger opposition, and I think all the expansion teams that have been added in the last 10-15 years has weakened the competition enough for a 73-9 record to be a reality, this year if the Lakers can stay healthy and focused.

I agree with most of your comments regarding the Lakers players, it's not a very strong team, but they only need one of these guys, Fisher, Fox, George, Horry, Hunter, Richmond or Shaw to stand up offensively on a given night for them to win. It was Fisher during the playoffs, and he will be most likely again once he returns, but Hunter has been good so far and George has put in a few good efforts.

As for Chicogo's 72-10, I don't want to take anything away from it, because it was a good performance. It extremely hard to stay that focused for such a long period of time, but as mentined above, the competition has been weakened with expansion teams. I'd still rate the Lakers 69-13 record in 1972-73 as a better performance than Chicago's 72-10.

 

[Fall Out Boy]

Originally posted by jod23
LMAO!!! 72 - 10 is a record i doubt will ever be beaten...The Bulls that year were probably the greatest team ive ever seen.

True, the Lakers aren't as good as the 72-10 Bulls BUT they don't have the same quality opposition either.

The early-mid 90's Bulls, Jazz, Knicks and Spurs would easily win the Championship this year.

The Lakers are more than capable of winning 70 games if Shaq and Kobe stay healthy and happy.

Cheers

 

[Fall Out Boy]

Originally posted by jod23
Joseph Crispin - rookie, not gonna get a game and if he does get a game he wont set the world on fire.

Jod, how do you know that he "won't set the world on fire" ? Have you seen him play?

Rick Fox - getting more useless every year, used to be a good offensive player now he hardly scores 5 a game.

Averaging 7 points 6 rebounds and 4 assists, not bad for nothing more than a bit player eh? Many teams would love someone like Rick.
If he played on a bad team he'd be averaging 15 a night.

Stanislav Medvedenko - pretty useless.

Again how could you make such a sweeping statement? The man's played 97 minutes in his NBA career yet you can tell that he's useless?

The man is averaging 30 points per 48 minutes, that scoring rate would put him in the top 20% of scorers in the league.

Look at Philly, Iverson, McKie, Snow, Mutombo, Coleman can all score. Zo, Grant, Jones, Carter from the Heat, Hill, T-Mac, Miller, Armstrong for the Magic, Allen, Big Dog, Cassell and Mason from the Bucks.

Come on, the Laker's don't need and don't have room for a third scorer.
Compare them to the Bulls, they had Jordand and Pippen getting about 50 a night, who was the third scoring option? Kukoc?, Horace grant?
The Bulls needed the scoring of a third person because they didn't get the same output from Pippen and MJ that the Laker's get from Shaq and Kobe.

Other contenders can cover for a down night from a star because they have other options on offence. The Lakers cant, if they dont get 30 and 30 from Shaq and Kobe they find it difficult to win a game

Again, what are you basing that on? This group haven't had the opportunity nor the need to step up as yet, if Shaq or Kobe go down we'll see them given the opportunity, hell 3 or 4 of those guys have played 6 games in a Lakers uniform and already you've decided that they're useless.

Cheers

 

[coxon]

ah.. mitch..
will be good to see him get a championship ring...

penberthy has been waived ~

donno if fisher can replicate last seasons' finals shooting heroics...

but, they still have very capable spot up shooters like hunter, richmond, fox, shaw as well..

 

[coxon]

Originally posted by phatandphreaky


Again how could you make such a sweeping statement? The man's played 97 minutes in his NBA career yet you can tell that he's useless?

The man is averaging 30 points per 48 minutes, that scoring rate would put him in the top 20% of scorers in the league.

Cheers

ya.. a bit harsh to label those unknowns 'useless' already...

samaki walker & jelani mccoy are useless..

hehe... the points 'per 48mins' stat is a bit deceiving...
esp when the guy actually only averages 5pts, in around 9mins..
most of those mins are during junk time at the end of games..

 

[jod23]

Originally posted by DEVO


I don't think you need a better team than the Lakers, I think you need a stronger opposition, and I think all the expansion teams that have been added in the last 10-15 years has weakened the competition enough for a 73-9 record to be a reality, this year if the Lakers can stay healthy and focused.

I agree with most of your comments regarding the Lakers players, it's not a very strong team, but they only need one of these guys, Fisher, Fox, George, Horry, Hunter, Richmond or Shaw to stand up offensively on a given night for them to win. It was Fisher during the playoffs, and he will be most likely again once he returns, but Hunter has been good so far and George has put in a few good efforts.

As for Chicogo's 72-10, I don't want to take anything away from it, because it was a good performance. It extremely hard to stay that focused for such a long period of time, but as mentined above, the competition has been weakened with expansion teams. I'd still rate the Lakers 69-13 record in 1972-73 as a better performance than Chicago's 72-10.

Weakened??? I think the league is just as tough as its ever been, fair enough expansion teams have come in but so has talent. Look at the talent on the expansion teams since 73. Charlotte are playoff contenders almost every year, Toronto are now a top flight team, the Heat are perennial playoff contenders etc etc. In fact i was just thinking about the league and its state, the league is so even its getting very hard to pick winners. Just today the 1-5 Cavs beat the 6-0 T'Wolves.....who would have picked that one.

To go a whole season in the toughest league in the world night in and night out and lose just 10 games from 82 is a mark that is astounding and shouldnt be beaten, certainly not by LA.

 

[jod23]

Originally posted by phatandphreaky


Jod, how do you know that he "won't set the world on fire" ? Have you seen him play?



Averaging 7 points 6 rebounds and 4 assists, not bad for nothing more than a bit player eh? Many teams would love someone like Rick.
If he played on a bad team he'd be averaging 15 a night.



Again how could you make such a sweeping statement? The man's played 97 minutes in his NBA career yet you can tell that he's useless?

The man is averaging 30 points per 48 minutes, that scoring rate would put him in the top 20% of scorers in the league.



Come on, the Laker's don't need and don't have room for a third scorer.
Compare them to the Bulls, they had Jordand and Pippen getting about 50 a night, who was the third scoring option? Kukoc?, Horace grant?
The Bulls needed the scoring of a third person because they didn't get the same output from Pippen and MJ that the Laker's get from Shaq and Kobe.




Again, what are you basing that on? This group haven't had the opportunity nor the need to step up as yet, if Shaq or Kobe go down we'll see them given the opportunity, hell 3 or 4 of those guys have played 6 games in a Lakers uniform and already you've decided that they're useless.

Cheers

Well ive heard about Crispin, never seen him play, you never know he might be the next big thing but id bet my right eye he'll be waived in the next few years, or traded or just become a journeyman.

Rick Fox....cmon, he's handy and is a good shooter but he is a shadow of his former self, those averages will probably drop too as the season wears on.

Medvedenko is usless...just take my word for it, if he's played 97 minutes and still made no impression then i doubt he ever will. 30 per 48 LOL, he plays the last 2 minutes of a game and get an easy layup in junktime and hes awesome....get off it P&P.

Jordan and Pippen were usually good for 50 or 60 between them a night and there third option on offence was Kukoc who would score anywhere between 10 and 20 a night but the difference between the Bulls and the Lakers is that the Lakers need a third scorer, the Bulls never did, why? Because the Bulls were probably the best defensive unit in the league and won there games with great D rather than outscoring there opponent. The Lakers arent what i would call a very good defensive team so they need a third scorer. Right now they dont have a reliable third scorer.

They havent needed to step up.....do you think Shaq want to play 48 minutes a night and he knowsif he doesnt get 35 and 15 that the Lakers may lose?? I dont think so, he wants them to step up now not when he gets injured, that way he can relax in some games and know that not all the pressure is on him.

 

[Fall Out Boy]

jod,
your ignorance is astounding, anyone that you haven't seen or isn't putting up 20 a night is "useless" in your book.

You're telling me that someone is useless yet you've never even seen him play, c'mon that's a bit rich.

What is your basis for saying Medvedenko is useless? Surely not just based on the fact that he's only getting 5 minutes a night?

It's obvious you're making assumptions based purely on statistics.


Cheers

 

[jod23]

Originally posted by phatandphreaky
jod,
your ignorance is astounding, anyone that you haven't seen or isn't putting up 20 a night is "useless" in your book.

You're telling me that someone is useless yet you've never even seen him play, c'mon that's a bit rich.

What is your basis for saying Medvedenko is useless? Surely not just based on the fact that he's only getting 5 minutes a night?

It's obvious you're making assumptions based purely on statistics.


Cheers

Sorry man but if you have played 97 minutes of NBA action and you still havent impressed anyone enough to get more minutes then its fair to say Medvedenko isnt the next big thing...use your brain P&P.

 

[DEVO]

Originally posted by jod23
Jordan and Pippen were usually good for 50 or 60 between them a night and there third option on offence was Kukoc who would score anywhere between 10 and 20 a night but the difference between the Bulls and the Lakers is that the Lakers need a third scorer, the Bulls never did, why? Because the Bulls were probably the best defensive unit in the league and won there games with great D rather than outscoring there opponent. The Lakers arent what i would call a very good defensive team so they need a third scorer. Right now they dont have a reliable third scorer.

They havent needed to step up.....do you think Shaq want to play 48 minutes a night and he knowsif he doesnt get 35 and 15 that the Lakers may lose?? I dont think so, he wants them to step up now not when he gets injured, that way he can relax in some games and know that not all the pressure is on him.

That may be the dumbest thing you have ever said. The way you continually go on about Chicago, leads me to believe you never saw a game pre 1992, and your comments regarding the Lakers lack of a third scorer is insulting. If talent guaranteed the Lakers a 73 win season, they would make it with nine games to spare. The one thing that will stop the Lakers from beating Chicago's mark is mental. If they can't stay up for the season, they'll lose some games. They have the superstars, Shaq and Kobe, they have a plethorer of third scorers, Fisher (when he returns), Hunter, Richmond and Shaw. Even George and Horry can post the numbers when required.

The Lakers only need one player to step up offensively each night and they will cruise to victory. Hunter appears to be the guy so far this season, and when Fisher returns (maybe December), this team will get even better. 73-9 is more than a possibility, it's the Lakers objective for the season.

 

[Fall Out Boy]

Originally posted by jod23


Sorry man but if you have played 97 minutes of NBA action and you still havent impressed anyone enough to get more minutes then its fair to say Medvedenko isnt the next big thing...use your brain P&P.

When did i say that Medvedenko was "the next big thing"?
In fact i never even said he was a good player, just pointed out the ignorance in your calling him "useless" based purely on numbers.

 

[jod23]

Originally posted by DEVO


That may be the dumbest thing you have ever said. The way you continually go on about Chicago, leads me to believe you never saw a game pre 1992, and your comments regarding the Lakers lack of a third scorer is insulting. If talent guaranteed the Lakers a 73 win season, they would make it with nine games to spare. The one thing that will stop the Lakers from beating Chicago's mark is mental. If they can't stay up for the season, they'll lose some games. They have the superstars, Shaq and Kobe, they have a plethorer of third scorers, Fisher (when he returns), Hunter, Richmond and Shaw. Even George and Horry can post the numbers when required.

The Lakers only need one player to step up offensively each night and they will cruise to victory. Hunter appears to be the guy so far this season, and when Fisher returns (maybe December), this team will get even better. 73-9 is more than a possibility, it's the Lakers objective for the season.

They'll cruise to 73-9???? Do you have any idea how hard it is to win 60 games in a year nevermind 70!! It wont happen Devo, im sorry.

You need a reliable third scorer not hoping that someone will step up that night..The Lakers WILL NOT BEAT CHICAGOS RECORD!

End of story.