<div class="quote_poster">Chutney Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Why would the Lakers trade for a malcontent and cancer in McInnis? No team in the NBA wants him.</div> Jackson has taken players like Rodman and Rider and made them useful in his system,McKie is way past his prime and about to retire,McInnis still has gas in the tank,and in my opinion is a better option at PG than Smush Parker if given the PT and confidence in him by the coach. all the contracts involved come off the books at the end of the year and if it didnt work all they would have to do is waive him.
<div class="quote_poster">nba_specialist_24_7 Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Jackson has taken players like Rodman and Rider and made them useful in his system,McKie is way past his prime and about to retire,McInnis still has gas in the tank,and in my opinion is a better option at PG than Smush Parker if given the PT and confidence in him by the coach. all the contracts involved come off the books at the end of the year and if it didnt work all they would have to do is waive him.</div> The risk far outweighs any potential benefits. You'd have to bank on McInnish being able to play after having an extended rest forced on him by the Nets. You'd have to bank on McInnis not being a cancer after having shown the same habit throughout his career. And you'd have to bank on him learning the triangle offense quickly (something very few point guards can do, let alone one as selfish as McInnis). All the while, the Lakers give up a player like Mckie who, while being way past his prime, is a good veteran presence in the locker room. It just doesn't make sense.
<div class="quote_poster">Chutney Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">The risk far outweighs any potential benefits. You'd have to bank on McInnish being able to play after having an extended rest forced on him by the Nets. You'd have to bank on McInnis not being a cancer after having shown the same habit throughout his career. And you'd have to bank on him learning the triangle offense quickly (something very few point guards can do, let alone one as selfish as McInnis). All the while, the Lakers give up a player like Mckie who, while being way past his prime, is a good veteran presence in the locker room. It just doesn't make sense.</div> The Lakers arent exactly an elite team as of now so I dont see why your making such a fuss about team chemistry with them.Odom has finally shown he can compliment Kobe and Kwame is showing serious strides,but besides that who else on this team if they traded would mess up the supposed chemistry your talking about? Yes McInnis has ran his mouth and has really hurt his trade value up to this point,but that doesnt mean he isnt worthless and couldnt help this Laker team.I honestly think the culprit here is Lawrence Frank,he is one of those coaches like Bob Hill who once your on his bad side its impossible to get back on it.McInnis played fin with Paul Silas,one of the toughest minded coaches in the league and McInnis did very well for him,I feel the same is possible with Jackson. and as for McKie I think your overvalueing his contribution to this team and the team chemistry you think will be lost in having him being traded.The guy is past his prime and cannot get any PT as it is on this Laker squad. If we are going to talk about Jackson worried so much about team chemistry why dont we go back and look at the Perdue-Rodman trade.Perdue was a better locker room presence by far compared to Rodman but would have the Bull won 72 games with Perdue?.I ask you that to look on. Besides McKie and McInnis are both season ending,your acting like the Lakers are taking on some huge gamble.I think your critism on this is unwarranted
<div class="quote_poster">nba_specialist_24_7 Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">The Lakers arent exactly an elite team as of now so I dont see why your making such a fuss about team chemistry with them.Odom has finally shown he can compliment Kobe and Kwame is showing serious strides,but besides that who else on this team if they traded would mess up the supposed chemistry your talking about? Yes McInnis has ran his mouth and has really hurt his trade value up to this point,but that doesnt mean he isnt worthless and couldnt help this Laker team.I honestly think the culprit here is Lawrence Frank,he is one of those coaches like Bob Hill who once your on his bad side its impossible to get back on it.McInnis played fin with Paul Silas,one of the toughest minded coaches in the league and McInnis did very well for him,I feel the same is possible with Jackson. and as for McKie I think your overvalueing his contribution to this team and the team chemistry you think will be lost in having him being traded.The guy is past his prime and cannot get any PT as it is on this Laker squad. If we are going to talk about Jackson worried so much about team chemistry why dont we go back and look at the Perdue-Rodman trade.Perdue was a better locker room presence by far compared to Rodman but would have the Bull won 72 games with Perdue?.I ask you that to look on. Besides McKie and McInnis are both season ending,your acting like the Lakers are taking on some huge gamble.I think your critism on this is unwarranted</div> I'm not overvaluing Mckie, but simply comparing him to a player that no team would want to bring in. His comparative upside is simply a scoring guard who can stretch the defense and can distribute a little, but most likely won't. There's a reason the Nets are paying him not to play. And you're argument that Lawrence Frank is just hard-headed doesn't hold up, because he's been just as big a cancer with Cleveland and Portland. You're right about the Lakers, they aren't the most talented team in the league. That's why they can't afford to take a chance on a scrub player who could mess up their lockerroom.
<div class="quote_poster">Chutney Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">I'm not overvaluing Mckie, but simply comparing him to a player that no team would want to bring in. His comparative upside is simply a scoring guard who can stretch the defense and can distribute a little, but most likely won't. There's a reason the Nets are paying him not to play. And you're argument that Lawrence Frank is just hard-headed doesn't hold up, because he's been just as big a cancer with Cleveland and Portland. You're right about the Lakers, they aren't the most talented team in the league. That's why they can't afford to take a chance on a scrub player who could mess up their lockerroom.</div> Alright man geez,you act like McInnis is the antichrist or something.You cant always go by what the media says about a player,for a while they were acting like Kidd was a cancer,You get my point? Ok you dont like the trade fine,but quit acting like this trade would turn the lakers into perenial loosers by trading their 13th man for someone who is better and on the same season ending contract.Its just a mild shakeup idea that isnt out of the realm of possibility like you so diehardly believe it is <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">If we are going to talk about Jackson worried so much about team chemistry why dont we go back and look at the Perdue-Rodman trade.Perdue was a better locker room presence by far compared to Rodman but would have the Bull won 72 games with Perdue?.I ask you that to look on.</div> If you can honestly give me a good answer on the quoted statment above then I will leave these forums for good and not make any more posts about my so called ''NBA Live trades''
