PDA

View Full Version : George Karl believes: Lakers Better Without Bynum?



JordansBulls
02-27-2009, 11:34 AM
Source: LATimes (http://www.latimes.com/sports/basketball/nba/lakers/la-sp-lakers-fyi27-2009feb27,0,3360762.story)



The Lakers are 12-1 since Bynum went down, including the Jan. 31 game in which he was injured, a victory over Memphis.

He wasn't sure when he would return.

"I have no idea," he said. "Right now, all I know is it feels good to me and I think I'll be able to at least come back and contribute.

"It's cool because when I come back in, they'll all be jelling together and I'll just have to work my way back."

With the way Lamar Odom and Pau Gasol have been playing down low, Bynum is almost a certainty to come off the bench when he returns.

Bynum is averaging 14 points, 8.2 rebounds and 1.9 blocked shots in 29.1 minutes a game.


The Lakers' record without Bynum has been noticed around the league.

Denver Nuggets Coach George Karl even wondered how much the Lakers really miss him.

"Don't you have to make the statement that maybe they're better without Bynum?" he asked reporters in Denver on Thursday. "Why do we always say Bynum? How many games has he played for this team? I like Bynum. I think he's a great player. But sometimes you can have too much talent out there and it can kind of be confusing."

Gibby23
02-27-2009, 11:40 AM
He's wrong. How could the Lakers be worse if they have Bynum coming off the bench instead of Powell or Mbenga?

JordansBulls
02-27-2009, 11:50 AM
He's wrong. How could the Lakers be worse if they have Bynum coming off the bench instead of Powell or Mbenga?

I think he means better without him starting.

HoLLyWooD PLK
02-27-2009, 11:53 AM
i dont care whos playin when we winnin, i WANT TO WIN !!

Raidaz4Life
02-27-2009, 11:53 AM
He's wrong. How could the Lakers be worse if they have Bynum coming off the bench instead of Powell or Mbenga?

exactly.... I am all for bringing him off the bench when he gets back and just running the second unit offense through him.

JJ81
02-27-2009, 12:06 PM
He's wrong. How could the Lakers be worse if they have Bynum coming off the bench instead of Powell or Mbenga?

Exactly.


I think he means better without him starting.

It is most likely that he won't be starting until next year any way, he'll come off the bench.

Kakaroach
02-27-2009, 12:12 PM
George Karl is only making these statements because he had too much talent in Melo and AI and didn't know how to control so it got confusing for him...

Gibby23
02-27-2009, 12:14 PM
I think he means better without him starting.

I think he is just hating a bit. He did say But sometimes you can have too much talent out there and it can kind of be confusing."

He isn't going to start when he comes back, but will still get 25 to 30 mins off the bench. He would make an impact with the bench.

Hellcrooner
02-27-2009, 01:05 PM
:ohttp://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-38-249/George-Karl--Lakers-Better-Without-Andrew-Bynum-.html

What do you Think?


I woudl welcome unbiased answers, no Blind Laker fans or Blind Laker haters................uh............does that exist? :)

Raidaz4Life
02-27-2009, 01:09 PM
I'm pretty sure this has already been posted

JJ81
02-27-2009, 01:12 PM
When Bynum comes back he'll be playing off the bench for the rest of the season. How could having Bynum coming in off the bench in place of Powell and Mbenga be bad for us?

Living Legend
02-27-2009, 01:13 PM
It is just not true.

Bynum gives the Lakers defense.

zachattach
02-27-2009, 01:24 PM
Better without him in the starting lineup maybe... but no way are they a better team without him, if nothing else he adds depth to this team. The Lakers are not better without him, they are just still really good without him. They've gone 11-1 without him and I think they might have been 12-0 throug that stretch with him.

Vidball
02-27-2009, 01:24 PM
Yeah...Lakers D is much better with Bynum. I also think he gives the Spurs, Celtics & Cavs bigger problems than a Laker team without him.
Can the Lakers win it all with out Bynum??? Yes.
Are the Lakers more likely to win it all with Bynum??? No doubt.

Hellcrooner
02-27-2009, 01:26 PM
I think he is refering to probable chemistry touches and so...

mrblisterdundee
02-27-2009, 01:51 PM
George Carl is a fool. Even if the Lakers had Bynum, they could use him any way they wanted. Besides, Bynum was averaging beastly numbers right before he got injured. The Lakers are most definitely better with him.

Wilson
02-27-2009, 02:06 PM
Well we're 48-10 on the season, so it's not like we're drastically better without Bynum...

Also, I don't think that a few extra regular season wins mean too much. Example: How many times have the Spurs finished with the best regular season record, and how many championships do they have over the past decade?

Bynum gives us much better defense than either Pau or Lamar, which is why he's so important to us. Bynum is our inside presence on defense, and you need one of those presences in the play-offs. That's where he makes us a better team...

superkegger
02-27-2009, 02:23 PM
I understand what Karl is saying. Until about 6 games before Drew got hurt, as good as the Lakers were, they were still somewhat out of rhythm. Getting both Bynum and Pau enough touches was tough along with Kobe getting his, and it seemed like either Bynum or Pau would kind of dissappear in some games. So from that respect, I understand what Karl is saying. Since then, we've seen a much smoother running team.

Now, for those 5 or 6 games before Bynum got hurt, when he was really starting to come into his own is a different story. But because Bynum went down LO has stepped up, which is a huge luxury to have, a guy who was a good starter relegated to the bench able to step in and be not only a good starter, but fill the role the Lakers need him to.

I don't know if the Lakers are better without Bynum, perhaps more smooth. But Bynum makes that team a more dangerous championship comepetitor.

leftymo
02-27-2009, 02:51 PM
Lakers are very good without Bynum. Best in the west and a championship contender.

Lakers are dominant with Bynum. Best in the league and the odds on favorite to win. Boston & Cleveland can't stand in their way.

Sidious
02-27-2009, 05:05 PM
Lakers are very good without Bynum...

Lakers with Bynum...BROKEN!

Missing56&33
02-27-2009, 06:52 PM
George Carl is a fool. Even if the Lakers had Bynum, they could use him any way they wanted. Besides, Bynum was averaging beastly numbers right before he got injured. The Lakers are most definitely better with him.

:clap: I agree with you what is GC commenting on the Lakers for in the first place either way you look at it the Lakers are the defending western conf champions, his team have to beat them with or w/o Bynum so who the freak cares? I dont like the comment

Hawkeye15
02-27-2009, 08:06 PM
Karl always says whats on his mind, sometimes he is right on, sometimes not. For the regular season, Bynum not being there doesn't matter. But he could, and I stress COULD, be a big difference in the playoffs, especially watching Boston just overpower them down low last year. I mean, how does a 7', 270 lb center who goes for 13-10-2 not help?

bogmon
02-27-2009, 08:10 PM
Bynum is soft...he is a detriment to the team in that you can never count on him to be out there on the court.

I think his Injury-pronitus somehow rubbed off on Greg Oden when they were battling in the post so many months ago.

Both these guys are doomed to short and inconsistent careers I'm afraid....so much for the Russell-Chamberlain comparisons!

Julio Zuleta
02-27-2009, 08:12 PM
lakers keep my streak alive tonight

KB24PG16
02-27-2009, 08:27 PM
karl probaly knows a thing or two about the lakers havent they beat the nuggets 8 straight times and one more comin tonight he knows something we dont

JordansBulls
02-27-2009, 09:10 PM
Bynum is soft...he is a detriment to the team in that you can never count on him to be out there on the court.

I think his Injury-pronitus somehow rubbed off on Greg Oden when they were battling in the post so many months ago.

Both these guys are doomed to short and inconsistent careers I'm afraid....so much for the Russell-Chamberlain comparisons!

He is a shot blocker. That is what you need as well.

G-Funk
02-27-2009, 09:18 PM
Offense is better without Bynum.

Defense is better with Bynum.

Drtino
02-27-2009, 09:23 PM
karl probaly knows a thing or two about the lakers havent they beat the nuggets 8 straight times and one more comin tonight he knows something we dont

Exactly... he can think whatever towards Bynum and we all can think what we want on his thoughts...

That's just dumb and stupid.:rolleyes:

Kohaku
02-28-2009, 12:45 AM
lakers keep my streak alive tonight

Denied.

LAKERS 24/7
02-28-2009, 12:55 AM
I understand what Karl is saying. Until about 6 games before Drew got hurt, as good as the Lakers were, they were still somewhat out of rhythm. Getting both Bynum and Pau enough touches was tough along with Kobe getting his, and it seemed like either Bynum or Pau would kind of dissappear in some games. So from that respect, I understand what Karl is saying. Since then, we've seen a much smoother running team.

Now, for those 5 or 6 games before Bynum got hurt, when he was really starting to come into his own is a different story. But because Bynum went down LO has stepped up, which is a huge luxury to have, a guy who was a good starter relegated to the bench able to step in and be not only a good starter, but fill the role the Lakers need him to.

I don't know if the Lakers are better without Bynum, perhaps more smooth. But Bynum makes that team a more dangerous championship comepetitor.

Well said. I agree completely.

Rique
02-28-2009, 12:57 AM
Bynum is so overrated

Lakersfan2483
02-28-2009, 01:04 AM
The lakers are much better with Bynum, it's not even a valid argument. He's a shot blocker and changes the game defensively. He also has a good low post game. He's a legit center in the NBA and the team is better with him on the court.

Wilson
02-28-2009, 01:10 AM
The lakers are much better with Bynum, it's not even a valid argument. He's a shot blocker and changes the game defensively. He also has a good low post game. He's a legit center in the NBA and the team is better with him on the court.

When he gets position down low and gets the ball, his hook shot is beautiful. He seems to hit it every time.

still1ballin
02-28-2009, 01:35 AM
Bynum is so overrated

How so?:eyebrow:

mrmike101
02-28-2009, 01:37 AM
Screw bynums hook shot his offence is detrimental to the teams success. He need to anchor the defence and maybe get 10 pts on putbacks and fastbreaks NO MORE!! offence through bynum = another celtic championship

JordansBulls
02-28-2009, 01:50 AM
Bynum is so overrated

I agree for the time being. But it really depends on what your expectations for him are.

Mile High Champ
02-28-2009, 01:58 AM
Lakers fans have really infalted his value. He is a good center but not great. The team shares the ball better when Bynum aint in the lineup..

superkegger
02-28-2009, 02:03 AM
I agree for the time being. But it really depends on what your expectations for him are.

I think for realistic people and non homers, he was about what was expected. For people that made him out to be the next Wilt Chamberlin, or whatever, yeah of course that would make him overrated.

I think what most Laker fans would tell you is that the Lakers are a very good team without Bynum and perhaps capable of winning a championship if he is injured. But with Bynum healthy (and by healthy I don't just mean he's not injured and on the active roster, but he's healthy and contributing the way he can and should) we feel that our chances at winning a championship greatly increase, and that we would be favorites in any series with our team at full strength.

still1ballin
02-28-2009, 03:20 AM
I agree for the time being. But it really depends on what your expectations for him are.

You agree he is overated. How so JB? What reasons?

cambovenzi
02-28-2009, 03:41 AM
I agree for the time being. But it really depends on what your expectations for him are.


You agree he is overated. How so JB? What reasons?

he said it depends on what the expectations for him are.
any player can be considered overrated depending how you think people look at him.

bynum is a pretty good big solid young center.
we are definitely better with him available, but i can see where karl would get the idea that we are somehow better w/o him when we are winning almost all of the games.

snickers
02-28-2009, 03:51 AM
imo bynum not overrated at all. when lakers drafted him everyone thought we were on crack and everyone thought we whould draft sean may. he came in to this league as a overweight center. hell he wasn't even a starter on his high school team.

one of the things i like about bynum his he walked up to kareem and said "i want to be great so can you help me" then ever since then he been pretty good.

george karl is on crack if he thinks were a better team without bynum. i agree that the offense runs more smoothly without him cause bynum clogs up the paint cause he has bigger body then gasol.

but when it comes to the playoffs and the game slows down a lil bit. then you need that defense interior presence. and shot blocking. and bynum has that gasol dosen't

xanderyear
02-28-2009, 11:09 AM
I agree when people say Bynum is overrated, but that's simply because of the unrealistic expectations people have place on his shoulders. This is about where I imagined him honestly, yet a year ago, people were all over Bynum saying he was the next big thing. Look at his numbers, they are solid, but he is NOT worth as much as people make out (don't get me wrong, I'd love to have a guy like that on my team).

That being said, I think Karl has some warrant to what he was saying. The team performed exceptionally well without Bynum, bringing him back could disrupt the way things have been going as far as minutes for everyone. Sometimes it's better to have a team that's comfortable with eachother than to add a bit more talent.