2007-09-11 13:23:12.0 Brian Kamenetzky: Mike-

2007-09-11 13:23:37.0 Ed: Mike T, you're not asking questions! ....Or are you?

2007-09-11 13:25:01.0 Brian Kamenetzky: I didn't know you were on the phone with them (just kidding). But it's more than whether or not he would have come to L.A., it's also whether or not Minnesota would have traded him here. There are two parts to it. If KG had pushed hard for L.A. (basically LA or bust) it might have been different, but there's no question that all of this nonsense hurt a great deal. You're right about that for sure.

2007-09-11 13:25:06.0 JJ: Are we too focused on superstars? If you go back to 2000 forward, we had great role players who were as responsible for Laker success as Shaq or Kobe.

2007-09-11 13:27:09.0 Ed: In response to JJ, I think the FO is more concerned with getting the superstars first, then putting role players around them. It's generally easier to find a Derek Fisher type than a Shaquille O'Neal.

2007-09-11 13:27:43.0 Andrew Kamenetzky: JJ, to some degree, you may be right. The Fox's, Horry's, Fish's, Shaw's, etc. can't be overlooked in the three-peat success. While I do think the Lakers legitmately need another A-level guy with Kobe and LO, I also think a strong argument can be made that the Lakers simply need better role players, period.

2007-09-11 13:27:53.0 dogcatcher: The bigger question for me is will we ever see another laker dynasty?

2007-09-11 13:28:49.0 Andrew Kamenetzky: ... (to JJ), if you look at Fish, Horry, Fox, Rice, Shaw, Harp, vs. Kwame, Bynum, Cook, Walton, Evans, etc., there's no question that the first group was better

2007-09-11 13:28:51.0 Brian Kamenetzky: JJ- I do think the drive for superstars can blind a team to other opportunities available. It can be harder to hit a home run than a few doubles (to use some baseball terms) but both score runs. They need to get better, whether at the top of the roster or through the middle... or both.

2007-09-11 13:29:05.0 Administrator2: Hey chatters, if you've sent a question and haven't seen it in the chat room yet, hang tight! You know your friends the Kamenetzkys are VERY popular!

2007-09-11 13:29:09.0 Brian Kamenetzky: Dogcatcher- Dynasty? Depends on how you define dynasty....

2007-09-11 13:29:16.0 Mike Teniente: Is this a question and answer type situation?

2007-09-11 13:29:19.0 Administrator2: yup!

2007-09-11 13:29:23.0 Brian Kamenetzky: ...if you're talking six titles in seven years? No...

2007-09-11 13:29:49.0 Brian Kamenetzky: That sort of thing just isn't going to happen anymore in the NBA. But three titles in six years? Sure. Why not? How long do you plan on living (haha).

2007-09-11 13:29:58.0 kbate: Realistically, considering the thought of no further additions, where do the Lakers finish in the west?

2007-09-11 13:30:46.0 Mike Teniente: If it's a question and answer type of thing...this isn't my cup of tea. I'm more of a blog guy. Heck, I know more about basketball than the two of you. LOL!

2007-09-11 13:31:03.0 Administrator2: haha-- anyone got questions for Mike T?

2007-09-11 13:31:11.0 Brian Kamenetzky: kbate- no higher than sixth. More likely seven or eight, and if anything goes wrong, Summer of Kobe II could kick off relatively early.

2007-09-11 13:31:18.0 purplemagic: will Mhim's return help or hurt Bynum's progress? (lakerfaze/purplemagic)