Also, Bynum doesn’t play anything like a young Shaq. Shaq was a freak of nature. Bynum doesn’t run the floor, jump or move near as well. Bynum is no stiff though. He could definitely be a 20pt/12rb/3blk/2ast guy a night in the right system. I doubt he reaches the scoring numbers with the Lakers, but I don’t think the others are out of question. He’s a big, athletic young guy who’s still pretty raw and seems to pick things up fairly quickly. If he can stay healthy he’ll be a multiple time All-Star.
Ok, I’m willing to concede he’s not a young Shaq. I’m just struggling to come with a fair comparison but it certainly isn’t fuckin Ilgauskas.
Jtrinsey, I have watched Bynum play well over 200 games and the opinion you forming on him is flat out wrong. There are a few other well versed basketball aficianados on here (along with me) who all vehemently disagree with your opinions. In this case, they are very weak yet you do have a willingness to debae the issue even though your debate skills are very weak.
Basketball is part objective (statistics) and part subjective (observable actions, tendencies, intangibles, etc). You are relying heavily on the statistics and you yourself have admitted you have little subjective observable experience looking at Bynum. Are you just arguing jus to argue? Because there’s three or four of us on here that have probably all seen him play 200 plus games that also know the game of basketball very well and we’re all telling you way off on this.
You also seem fascinated with the sexy, quick, athletic guard/forward type puzzle pieces without giving much credence with how all those puzzle pieces fit together in a cohesive whole on a team while also coming across as biased against the big Center type puzzle pieces that aren’t as quick and athletic.
Following your logic we’d have Chris Paul, Deron Williams, Steve Nash , Lebron James and Chris Bosh on the same team and you would expect that team to win the championship because they all have awesome stats. You arguments are weak and bordering on retarded.
[quote]randman wrote:
Ok, I’m willing to concede he’s not a young Shaq. I’m just struggling to come with a fair comparison but it certainly isn’t fuckin Ilgauskas.[/quote]
People are struggling to come up with a comparison because there is no comparable player with similar traits who has followed a similar development path to Bynum who has become a superstar. I went through the last 10 All-Star games and put down all the big men who made All-Star teams and listed the guys that Bynum is better than when they were both 22: the only guy he was better than at a comparable age that you could really call a “star” is Jermaine O’Neal. Find me another big man in the past 10-15 years who became a superstar that was producing at the level that Bynum is when they were both 22.
Also, I love how you are killing me because I haven’t seen Bynum play enough but you are swearing up and down that he can’t be compared to Ilgauskas when I am willing to bet that you never saw Ilgauskas play when he was 22-25.
But no, Bynum can’t be compared to a young Ilgauskas because Bynum is destined to be a star.
Your strawman debating is comical. Because I think Bynum is overrated I would pick a team with 3 point guards? Because I thought Durant was a no-brainer over Oden, I would play Lebron at power forward? Did you not read where I agreed that Blake Griffin and Tim Duncan were no-brainer #1 picks? I’m not the one who was comparing Bynum to a young Shaq or who seems to think Bynum is better than Tony Parker. Maybe you don’t think that though, maybe you aren’t that silly. If you were starting a team from scratch and had to pick one of them to start with, who would you choose?
Honestly, it’s funny to me that you keep harping on my apparent love of stats, when I really don’t think stats are that important in evaluating basketball. My first argument was that Bynum has yet to prove he’s a top-3, or even a top-5 guy on a championship basketball team. Parker has already proven that he can be the 2nd or 3rd-best guy on multiple championship teams.
Bynum is already in his 5th year in the league and hasn’t proven to be any more than a complementary piece; a decent but not great role player. History tells us that most big men who turn into stars have already done so by the time they are Bynum’s age and (especially) experience. I’m not going to totally rule out the possibility he will turn the corner and develop into a star. He shows flashes. But after 5 years, flashes don’t make a dominant player, the ability to consistently take over games, especially in crunch time in the playoffs, is what is important.
I don’t have anything against big men. I would say it’s more of the idea that the peak for basketball players is earlier than most people seem to think it is and waiting around for a player to develop after he’s already been in the league for 5 years is not a great idea.
[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
Honestly, it’s funny to me that you keep harping on my apparent love of stats, when I really don’t think stats are that important in evaluating basketball…[/quote]
I call bullshit on this statement because you’ve posted at least 5 times more stats in this thread than anyone else.
.greg.
Can`t we all just be friends 
Jtrinsey, I have watched the NBA for over 30 years and I’ve watched a young Ilgauskas play. Nothing like Bynum. What I meant to say is that he’s closer to a young Shaq than a young Ilgauskas if those were ur only 2 choices.
It is you who are using strawmans. 1. Never said Bynum is better than Parker; said that a trade involving Bynum for Parker was idiotic considering the Lakers current roster (it is you who suggested this as a viable option)
- Bynum does not need to be an all star for him to be a productive member of the Lakers. Another strawmans ur using suggesting anyone is saying that. The argument is that he still has upside potential, that he makes a hell of a lot more sense on the Lakers than Parker if u had to pick and 3. U don’t know basketball nearly as well as ur strong opinions suggest
by the way, this was probably during the games u missed but Bynum was consistently putting up near 20 points and 10 rebounds this year while Gasol was hurt. He absolutely has all star potential. And even with his early injury filled career he has noticeably improved every year he’s been in the league and I expect that trend to continue.
Yes, I used an exxagerated scenario to describe ur biases, it was hard not to considering how off some of ur arguments have been.
[quote]gregron wrote:
[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
Honestly, it’s funny to me that you keep harping on my apparent love of stats, when I really don’t think stats are that important in evaluating basketball…[/quote]
I call bullshit on this statement because you’ve posted at least 5 times more stats in this thread than anyone else.
.greg.[/quote]
I second this bull shit statement; there have been many of us picking at this guy’s flawed logic that could easily be disputed with subjective observation by anyone who knows basketball well and he’s throwing up stats left and right like it makes his weak points stronger.
As long as Bynum can stay healthy, I will predict that Bynum will make the all star team this next year even on the Lakers where his touches are limited with Bryant and Gasol getting first dibs on them.
If he was on a team that didn’t have the Gasol/Bryant combo he’d easily put up all star numbers every year. Does anyone want to back me up who saw most of the early Laker games that Bynum was putting up all star numbers while Gasol was out?
Actually I did look up the stats, during Gasol’s 11 game absence, Bynum put up over 20 points and 12 rebounds a game. How do you like them apples? Mr. Statman - jtrinsey. You just got pwned.
On Pardon the Interruption, they just said that Phil Jackson said he is leaning towards retirement.
Does he stay or leave? Jerry West said that Phil just â??likes to be courtedâ??, so maybe this is just him increasing the Lakersâ?? need to do just that.
If he leaves what kind of position are the Lakers in next year? Theyâ??ve got the talent, but will it hurt them individually/as a group to play under a different system?
I think that the year where Phil wasnt coach, Kobe was actually much worse offensively, but then again the team as a whole made some big changes before that season. This year that wont happen I think, and the Lakers may even get better as far as talent goes.
What I will say on Bynum is this, I think this next year for Bynum will be th most critcal inflection point in his career, if he can stay healthy his future is bright personally and professionally with the Lakers. If he has another injury plagued season, I’m with some others that are already questioning potential versus reality with this guy. I will also write him off.
My point with no quite giving up on Bynum yet is, both of his major knee injuries were freak accidents and didn’t suggest anything structurally wrong (although one has to wonder if structural issues will now surface because of those 2 freak accidents) AND Bynum had started so far behind a normal basketball recruit skills wise since he originally got into the NBA solely on his size and didn’t do college AND he’s had to develop in a system where your competing for the ball with Gasol and Bryant.
It’s because of these unique circumstances that the jury is not out on this guy just yet. He hasn’t followed a normal trajectory in a nor al to frame for a normal big guy in an average talent middle ofthe road NBA team.
This is all the stuff that ur missig jtrinsey hat you simply wouldn’t know unless a) you were a die-hard fan that has followed the Lakers closely and seen a majority of their games over the last 5 plus years or b) ur not a Lakers fan but ur full time job is to follow all ofthese teams this closely and have your thumb on the pulse of all of em.
I’m hoping it’s Phil just positioning so Buss doesn’t go cheap on him which is ludicrous to even consider doing after what you’ve seen the Lakers are like when he’s not around and when he is. I don’t care if the Lakers get more talented, not having him would put a 3-peat at serious risk without him. Yes, I believe he’s that important and does that much for the team.
I hope Phil doesnt retire. If he’s got health issues that will prevent him from coaching (which is what he’s trying to sort out) then I cant blame him at all cause he’s gotta do whats best for him and his family but I sure hope the Lakers can bring him back for one more season… There is something to be said for going out on top though
.greg.
[quote]LarryDavid wrote:
Can`t we all just be friends :([/quote]
no 
.greg.
^LOL
[quote]gregron wrote:
I hope Phil doesnt retire. If he’s got health issues that will prevent him from coaching (which is what he’s trying to sort out) then I cant blame him at all cause he’s gotta do whats best for him and his family but I sure hope the Lakers can bring him back for one more season… There is something to be said for going out on top though
.greg.[/quote]
Good points, but someones gotta tell him that he has a chance to 3peat for the 4th time. Assuming its not health related, that`s gotta overpower the thought of a guaranteed retirement on top. 
[quote]randman wrote:
I’m hoping it’s Phil just positioning so Buss doesn’t go cheap on him which is ludicrous to even consider doing after what you’ve seen the Lakers are like when he’s not around and when he is. I don’t care if the Lakers get more talented, not having him would put a 3-peat at serious risk without him. Yes, I believe he’s that important and does that much for the team.[/quote]
I agree. I dont think there a coach thats more irreplaceable for his team than Jackson, not even Doc Rivers. If Phils gone the Lakers arent favourites to win it again.
PS: We both have dancing hippos in our avatars.
[quote]randman wrote:
What I meant to say is that he’s closer to a young Shaq than a young Ilgauskas if those were ur only 2 choices.[/quote]
Fair enough. I disagree. But fair enough.
[quote]
It is you who are using strawmans. 1. Never said Bynum is better than Parker; said that a trade involving Bynum for Parker was idiotic considering the Lakers current roster (it is you who suggested this as a viable option)[/quote]
For the love of god man, can you read? I never suggested the Lakers should or would trade Bynum for Parker. I said that, from San Antonio’s perspective, they are not giving up Parker for Shannon Brown and DJ Mbenga; it would take Bynum to get Parker. I said that a couple pages ago, requoted it, and still you ignore it. As you will probably do again. My next statement was:
[quote]I’m not saying it’s an obvious deal, or that I would necessarily trade Bynum for Parker if I were the Lakers. You can make the argument that Bynum is still developing and, if he can stay healthy, can be a top-5 big man (at least offensively) in the league. And that the chance to have a dominant big man is more valuable than the certainty of having a very good (but not great) guard.
But let’s take off the yellow-and-purple-tinted sunglasses here and realize that Bynum has never even started more than 65 games in a season yet, and has some serious health issues. He’s only 22, but is that a good thing (because he’s obviously developing) or a not-so-good thing- because if you’re 7’ and having health problems at 22, things may not improve down the road. As of right now, Bynum is still very much a role player.[/quote]
I daresay that there is not a false statement anywhere else in there.
Likewise, I said, regarding Parker and Bynum [quote]maybe you don’t think that though, maybe you aren’t that silly. If you were starting a team from scratch and had to pick one of them to start with, who would you choose?[/quote]
Which, to me, is asking a question, not proposing a strawman. A question which you still haven’t answered.
Umm… when did I say he needed to be an All-Star to be a productive player? He’s a fine role player. He’s got a chance to be more than that, but it’s doubtful that he’s even going to become a consistent All-Star or somebody capable of being one of the top-2 guys on a championship team.
[quote]
3. U don’t know basketball nearly as well as ur strong opinions suggest ;)[/quote]
U don’t know how to read nearly as well as ur strong opinions suggest
Perhaps I am making things too complicated. So I will simplify. Let’s leave the Parker for Bynum commentary aside for a moment. If at this point it is not crystal clear that I never suggested the Lakers should trade Bynum for Parker, I don’t know what else I can do for you.
So here is what I’m saying:
(1) Right now Bynum is a good-but-not great role player who has a solid offensive game, decent rebounding skills and a solid inside presence defensively. However, I don’t think he’s one of the top 20 big men in the league right now. BTW, I still haven’t heard which guys you disagree with. Even if you disagree with a few, I think you’d be hard pressed to put him in the top 15. And please, don’t give me the, “most guys on there aren’t true big men,” crap. Dwayne Wade isn’t a true point guard, but he gets plenty of time at the position and does a pretty good job while he’s at it.
(2) Far more often than not, promising big men never turn into the dominant players their franchises are hoping for. I believe that, in many players, these players get overrated because of the hope they will be the next Shaq. In reality, most dominant big men are dominant almost from the time they join the league. Very rarely do big men blossom into special players after the age of 22.
(3) Based on the history of the last 15 years or so in the league, the only somewhat comparable player to Bynum who became a star is Jermaine O’Neal. So, based on this history, I assert that Bynum’s ceiling is Jermaine O’Neal, but he will most likely fall short of that, becoming a solid player but never making more than one or two All-Star games and never being one of the top 2 players on a championship team.
(4) It’s not impossible for Bynum to become a great player, he has some very nice tools, but it’s unlikely. The longer the Lakers sit and wait for him to blossom, the less valuable he becomes. If they in fact could get Bosh by trading Bynum, they would be foolish to turn that down because Bynum will probably never become the player that Bosh already is.
[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
(4) It’s not impossible for Bynum to become a great player, he has some very nice tools, but it’s unlikely. The longer the Lakers sit and wait for him to blossom, the less valuable he becomes. If they in fact could get Bosh by trading Bynum, they would be foolish to turn that down because Bynum will probably never become the player that Bosh already is.[/quote]
I completely agree. I wish the Lakers could get Bosh for Bynum!
The only thing that I prefer about Bynum is he’s “bigger” than Bosh. I like Bynum throwing that big body of his around. Its nice to have one BIG big man (bynum) and two SMALL big men (gasol, odom) ya know what I mean?
Kinda like having Shaq back in his Laker days before he started putting on too much weight. Its nice to have a big bodied big man (no homo)
.greg.
Jtrinsey, I haven’t addressed all of ur points cuz I’ve been typing on an iPhone the last 2 days while traveling. That being said, ur last post was the most comprehensive and logical one you’ve put together and I disagree with little.
I remember thinking about this earlier, but theres just NO WAY Bosh is getting sign and traded for Bynum. I know Bosh considers LA one of his top 5 teams to play for, but theres nothing in it for the Raptors.
-Bynum is locked up for a few years at a salary that is too much considering what he brings to the table. If he developed into a 20-10 guy his salary would be fair, but that could take a couple of years if it happens at all. His contract may end by then. Yes his big body (pause) brings intangibles that the stats dont show. But (if youre the Lakers) try to negotiate with that as a major attraction.
-Bynum does NOT fit into the kind of team Raptors President and GM Brian Colangelo wants to build. If you want a good idea of what kind of team Brian wants, think of his old team the Phoenix Suns. Bynum doesn`t work in that.
-Bynums injury problems. Bosh has gotten injured too, but nothing serious. With Bynums contract and injury problems I dont see why anyone would want him to be honest.
-Bosh is way better than Bynum. The Lakers would have to throw someone in, and the Lakers wont put anyone good enough into the deal. Well, maybe Fisher, who would fit in with the Raptors team.
That said, what does everyone think of the Lakers trading Odom and another player for Bosh in a sign and trade? Odom and Fisher for Bosh could work, although combined they donâ??t earn as much as Bosh will. Then again a lot of trades donâ??t balance financially. I donâ??t know what Odom bring to the Lakers as well as others on here, but my take is Bosh would be better for them anyway. The Raptors get a quick versatile â??sort of big manâ?? in Odom, and a good shooter and defender in Fish. Both fit into the Raotors team Colangelo is trying to build.
Itâ??d be unpopular to sign and trade Fish when heâ??s so loved by the fans, but this has happened before in sports. Also, many people are saying the Raps are in rebuilding mode, so Odom and a resigned Fish don`t make sense, but maybe Colangelo will try to make a decent team for next year, as the pressure starting come down on him in TO.
^^What if Bosh just decides he’s gonna walk away. Maybe they’d do a sign and trade for Bynum so that at least they’d get something in return. And not just lose Bosh as a free agent?
DISCLAIMER: (I dont know about Bosh’s contract or if he’s in a players option or free agent status right now so my post could be completely off)
.greg.