Sources: Celtics close to Garnett deal

<div class="quote_poster">shapecity Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">For the record, the majority of LA media does not like Andrew Bynum or believe in him living up to his potential. They've petitioned to have him traded for someone who can help Kobe win now.

The only person who has supported Bynum from day one has been Jim Buss.</div>

Fair enough. I'm not sure who put him on that pedastale. All I know is that he's up there, undeservingly. Not only was the second best point guard in the game offered for him, but that offer was rejected. That rubs me the wrong way.

 

Kobe's basically can get his wish out of LA. Remeber Mitch said he will not explore any Kobe deals until KG does something. Since it seems KG will go to Boston, Kobe might be headed somewhere to. If Chicago, the eastern conference Champonship will be really exciting. No easy path there.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Voodoo Child Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Gerald Green averaged 10+ ppg this season. That's a lot more than just winning the dunk contest, and that's a lot more than Andrew Bynum has done. He's raw, just like Bynum, with all the same upside, and yet he's a better player at the moment as well. Laker fans get all worked up over the few instances Bynum grabbed ten boards. What about the 33 points Green went off for towards the end of the season, or the 20.8 ppg he averaged in the first seven games of April? He's shown far more in the little time he's played so far for the C's than Bynum has shown in the little time he's played for the Lakers.</div>
Gerald Green scored those points on a horrible Celtics team that was basically tanking the whole year for Greg Oden. As a result, I feel his stats are a bit inflated. Him and Bynum both have potential, and they've shown flashes of the players they can become throughout the season. At the end of the day, I'd take Bynum over Green simply because bigs with potential are valued highly around the league. Gerald Green can become a great scorer in the future, but there are many scorers all around the league. Bynum is a young 7 footer with a soft touch around the basket, which is something not many people in the league have. And again, Bynum played great before the fatigue settled in.

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Monta Ellis was a second round pick, but he slipped there. In the months leading up to the draft, he was a projected mid first rounder. Had the Lakers shown a commitment to him heading into the draft, the pick wouldn't have come as much of a surprise as the Bynum pick was. If you remember, Bynum was a projected late first rounder when the Lakers stretched and picked him #10.

Need proof?

http://web.archive.org/web/20050529084824/...t.net/index.asp

#21 - Monta Ellis
#22 - Andrew Bynum

Date: May, 26th

Still think that going after Ellis would have been a stretch?</div>
Maybe picking Bynum was a stretch, but if I remember correctly, before the draft, the Lakers showed a lot of interest in Andrew Bynum, so it wasn't shocking when he was picked. Monta Ellis slipped all the way into the later second round, we could have picked him, but instead we wasted our draft pick on Von Wafer. Also, Andrew Bynum was picked 10th overall. There are very few players from the draft taken below the 10th overall pick that I would take over Andrew Bynum. Sean May? No. Rashard McCants? No. Danny Granger? No. At the time, we had a log jam at the small forward position, and picking him would have made matters even worse. Gerald Green? No, like I said, I would take Bynum over Green



<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">I never said he wasn't going to be a good center, but the Laker bias is overwhelming. Trading Kobe and rebuilding around Bynum? We're not talking about Andrew Bogut here, we're talking about Andrew Bynum. He's not a franchise caliber big man.</div>
I'm not recommending we build around Andrew Bynum either, but like shape said, the front office seems to have tons of faith in him for whatever reason. If it were up to me, I'd look for some ways to trade Bynum in a package for some good veteran help, but that's obviously not going to happen since Bynum is probably even more untouchable than Kobe Bryant, according to the management.

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">You're throwing around a lot of if's.</div>
If he put up indentical numbers in Bynum's sophmore season as Al Jefferson's sophmore season, why can't Bynum be on the same level as Jefferson? Especially when you consider the fact that last season was esentially Bynum's rookie since he barely played at all in his rookie year, unlike Jefferson who averaged 15 minutes per game in his rookie season. Jefferson also plays on a horrible Boston Celtics team and he will get a lot more touches than Andrew Bynum who has to play with the likes of Kobe Bryant and Lamar Odom

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">What separates him from any of the Sonics' big men, for example? Robert Swift, Johan Petro, Saer Sene --- all of them are physically comparable and have shown just as much development as Bynum. </div>
Robert Swift was injured for basically the entire season last year, I don't see how he showed more flashes than Bynum. Johna Petro never had the string of games Bynum put up when he looked like a future star, and Saer Sene, if I'm not mistaken, barely played at all last season. I'd say Bynum has definetly shown more than all three of the above

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">What about guys like Amir Johnson, Andray Blatche, Hilton Armstrong, Cedric Simmons, etc.; Bynum has shown nothing to separate himself from that crowd. Laker fans are too beguiled by the Los Angeles media and their own lofty expectations.</div>
Andrew Bynum has shown more than guys like Amir Johnson, Andray Blatche, Hilton Armstron, Cedric Simmons, and etc. Like I said before, Bynum had a long stretch of games last season when he played great. But when fatigue settled in, he struggled. Guys like Amir Johson and Andray Blatche have barely played any minutes in the NBA yet to detirmine what type of players they will become.

Also, I'm not saying Andrew Bynum is the next big thing, because I don't think he is. I don't think we should build around Bynum either. All I'm saying is, Bynum has shown more than the Amir Johnsons and the Andray Blatches of the league, and he has a brighter future than your making him out to be

 

<div class="quote_poster">Voodoo Child Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Why plan for free agency when you can get one of those players immediately in a deal for Kobe?
He's probably the most valuable player in the league right now, so they should be able to set their asking price unreasonably high.


</div>

I would take the deal to Chicago, even though it seems as if it is Ben Gordon and role players. It really is the best deal possible for LA. Its not like we could compete this year for a playoff seed with a team of Gordon and as you call Role players. But it is an excellent move for the future. I would pursue Gilbert Arenas really hard in 2008, then we could defiantley end up with an excellent lineup to compete for a Championship.

Gordon/Gilbert/Farmar/Criteron/Fisher
Gilbert/Gordon
Odom/Nocioni
Thomas/Odom/Turiaf
Bynum/Thomas/Kwame

^This lineup could get much better also with free agency and some trades.

 

I still won't believe it until it's all official. Didn't the sources also say that he was a Laker and then that he was a Sun? His agent may have said that talks are getting serious, but has he mentioned any specific teams? Also, how do we know he's not bluffing to get other GM's interested?

 

Mchale is obivously still a celtic. Bird mights as well just send Jermaine Oneal to Boston for Brian Scalabrine.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Voodoo Child Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Gerald Green averaged 10+ ppg this season. That's a lot more than just winning the dunk contest, and that's a lot more than Andrew Bynum has done. He's raw, just like Bynum, with all the same upside, and yet he's a better player at the moment as well. Laker fans get all worked up over the few instances Bynum grabbed ten boards. What about the 33 points Green went off for towards the end of the season, or the 20.8 ppg he averaged in the first seven games of April? He's shown far more in the little time he's played so far for the C's than Bynum has shown in the little time he's played for the Lakers.

I never said he wasn't going to be a good center, but the Laker bias is overwhelming. Trading Kobe and rebuilding around Bynum? We're not talking about Andrew Bogut here, we're talking about Andrew Bynum. He's not a franchise caliber big man.

You're throwing around a lot of if's.

What separates him from any of the Sonics' big men, for example? Robert Swift, Johan Petro, Saer Sene --- all of them are physically comparable and have shown just as much development as Bynum. What about guys like Amir Johnson, Andray Blatche, Hilton Armstrong, Cedric Simmons, etc.; Bynum has shown nothing to separate himself from that crowd. Laker fans are too beguiled by the Los Angeles media and their own lofty expectations.</div>
Dude, do some research and watch more Lakers tape before you speak up. Lets me remind you, KOBE BRYANT produced the same amount or even less than Andrew Bynum, at his age and the minute he played. To make matter more interesting, Dwight Howard's rookie season he averaged only slighly better than Bynum despite getting at least 10min more of playtime than Bynum. With that track record, and a big who plays the game the way it supposes to for a center, that is rare. Bynum, may or may not, be a dominant center, but you win championship starting with a traditional center. Now go back and read.

 

^Sorry to break the bad news, but I have a feeling and heard some rumors that the Lakers aren't willing to give up on Bynum for JO. From what I know, the Lakers offer Odom/Brown as the centerpiece for JO, which explain why the Pacers haven't bite yet. They have a reason to too.

 

<div class="quote_poster">kobe4life Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">^Sorry to break the bad news, but I have a feeling and heard some rumors that the Lakers aren't willing to give up on Bynum for JO. From what I know, the Lakers offer Odom/Brown as the centerpiece for JO, which explain why the Pacers haven't bite yet. They have a reason to too.</div>

From what I've heard, the Pacers want both Bynum and Odom in the deal. But if what you said is indeed true, it sickens me. Bynum better be an allstar next season then

 

^That's true. It was the original deal the Pacers laid out on the table. But I think after the Draft Night, the Lakers have a second thought about giving up Bynum for JO. I don't know, possibly the Lakers think Bynum for JO is too much at this point. The Lakers are willing to offer Odom/Brown, and wait for the Pacers to bite, but they're not right now. Eventually the Lakers need to offer Bynum/Brown and Pacers accept, otherwise there won't be a deal. The Lakers won't trade Bynum/Odom for JO, and I can't blame them for that. As good of a player as JO, he and Kobe ain't bring this Lakers team anywhere, so why bother and giving up LO and the future Bynum. It doesn't make sense.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Brian Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">From what I've heard, the Pacers want both Bynum and Odom in the deal. But if what you said is indeed true, it sickens me. Bynum better be an allstar next season then</div>

I know what you mean. Wait till Aug 1st, that day should be a good indication whether tje JO's deal goes through or not because I think J-Crit could officially be in a trading packet. There are two offers on the table, I heard.

1. Bynum, Brown, J-Crit, Evans, 2008 1st for JO/Harrison

2. LO, Brown, J-Crit, Evans, 2008 1st for JO/a bad contract (Dunleavy)

Right now it seems the Lakers are leaning toward the 2nd offer, but obviously the Pacers want the 1st. But who know? at last there won't be any deal since the Pacers demand both Bymum/Odom and Lakers won't trade both.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Brian Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Gerald Green scored those points on a horrible Celtics team that was basically tanking the whole year for Greg Oden. As a result, I feel his stats are a bit inflated.</div>

How can you really take away from a player's individual success by saying that he played on a bad team? By that logic, I guess the success of players like Kevin Garnett, Pau Gasol, and Joe Johnson should be taken with a grain of salt as well, right?

Did you ever think that maybe playing on a team without Kobe Bryant to draw double teams works against Green, or perhaps, playing on a team without a capable distributer may hurt him? Last season, especially down the stretch, Green created his own offense. He really came into his own in the months of March and April, going off for 20+ on any given night, even errupting for that aforementioned 33 point performance. That kind of offensive productivity is not just the result of touches and playing time.

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Him and Bynum both have potential, and they've shown flashes of the players they can become throughout the season. At the end of the day, I'd take Bynum over Green simply because bigs with potential are valued highly around the league. Gerald Green can become a great scorer in the future, but there are many scorers all around the league. Bynum is a young 7 footer with a soft touch around the basket, which is something not many people in the league have. And again, Bynum played great before the fatigue settled in.</div>

Yeah, there are tons of 6'8", second-year two guards with Green's athletic abilities who are capable of putting up 20+ points on any given night.

Green's in the mold of Tracy McGrady and Kobe Bryant. If you track their developments and compare them to Green's, he's right on the same track they are. He's more athletic, a better shot, and has all the tools to be a dominant defender.

Sure, when it comes to building your team around a big man or a wing, if they're on equal talent levels, you take the big man, but Bynum's not a future All-Star caliber big man, he's not the next Shaq, and he's not the next great wing like Green could be. You said so yourself -

"Also, I'm not saying Andrew Bynum is the next big thing, because I don't think he is. I don't think we should build around Bynum either."

If you don't think he's the 'next big thing,' yet you'd still take him over Green, then I take it you don't think Green will amount to anything?

Green's potential is more tangible than Bynum's. It's not just based off of his size, it's based off of his talent. He just needs a better understanding of the game. He's explosive and quick enough with his first step to where he can beat most defenders off the dribble, but he doesn't take advantage of that and instead settles for jumpers. If he took it to the rack more often, got to the line a million times like the primadonna wings that dominate today's NBA, and started to take an overall more aggressive approach to the game, he'd be a star.

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Maybe picking Bynum was a stretch, but if I remember correctly, before the draft, the Lakers showed a lot of interest in Andrew Bynum, so it wasn't shocking when he was picked. Monta Ellis slipped all the way into the later second round, we could have picked him, but instead we wasted our draft pick on Von Wafer.</div>

All it takes is one team to be interested in a player for them to be drafted high. Had the Lakers not taken Bynum, he would have gone late first to early second round. What's to say they couldn't have commited to Monta Ellis in the same way? The fact of the matter is that Bynum and Ellis had about equal draft stock heading into June. The only difference is that between June 1 and June 26, Los Angeles made a commitment to Bynum, and rumors started floating around that there was some team foolish enough to promise the kid a lottery pick. It could have just as easily been Monta Ellis the Lakers had locked in on, had their scouting been better.

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Also, Andrew Bynum was picked 10th overall. There are very few players from the draft taken below the 10th overall pick that I would take over Andrew Bynum. Sean May? No. Rashard McCants? No. Danny Granger? No. At the time, we had a log jam at the small forward position, and picking him would have made matters even worse. Gerald Green? No, like I said, I would take Bynum over Green</div>

Sean May? Perhaps. He hasn't had a chance to play much these past few years because of injuries, but could the Bobcats have predicted that when they drafted him? Fully healthy, he's good for 10-20 points and 6-10 boards every night on a consistent basis. He doesn't have the long term potential that Bynum has, but potential doesn't always pan out, and May is a sure thing. Charlotte knew that when they drafted him.

Danny Granger? Yes, yes, and yes! Not only has he already made a name for himself as one of the NBA's elite defenders, but he would be a huge upgrade on any third option the Lakers currently have offensively. You said the Lakers had a logjam at the small forward position, but I don't see it. Your top five scorers that year were Kobe (SG), Odom (SF/PF), Smush (PG), Mihm &copy;, and Kwame (PF/C). Unless, of course, you're telling me that having Devean George on the roster prevented you from going after a player like Granger.

If you guys had drafted Granger, maybe you would have had a better seeding, gone on past the first round, and wouldn't have found yourselves in the situation you are right now with Kobe throwing a temper tantrum.

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">If he put up indentical numbers in Bynum's sophmore season as Al Jefferson's sophmore season, why can't Bynum be on the same level as Jefferson? Especially when you consider the fact that last season was esentially Bynum's rookie since he barely played at all in his rookie year, unlike Jefferson who averaged 15 minutes per game in his rookie season. Jefferson also plays on a horrible Boston Celtics team and he will get a lot more touches than Andrew Bynum who has to play with the likes of Kobe Bryant and Lamar Odom </div>

Again, a player's team is no reason to penalize them when talking about their individual productivity. If a player is talented and productive, they'll put up numbers regardless of their situation, and vice versa for players who aren't talented and productive.

As for Jefferson and Bynum's numbers, do stats really say anything when you're only averaging about 8 ppg and 6 rpg? By that logic, Alexander Johnson, who as a rookie, averaged 4.4 ppg and 3.1 rpg, should be the next Kevin Garnett.

Don't you see how flawed that logic is?

It's not the fact that Jefferson averaged around 8 ppg and 6 rpg his sophomore year that makes him so special, it's the fact that he improved to the level to where he was a 16/11 player the next season. He's still not anywhere near an All-Star level talent, and he won't be for seasons to come. Doc Rivers himself will tell you that much. But he does have a leg up on Bynum in that he developed and improved dramatically between his sophomore and junior seasons. Bynum's development has yet to be seen.

A lot of players get hung up on the 8 ppg, 6 rpg range. Not too many players transcend that and become 20/10 players. Until Bynum shows some sort of consistency, there's no reason to believe he's got any more of a chance at becoming that 20/10 player than, say, Andray Blatche.

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Robert Swift was injured for basically the entire season last year, I don't see how he showed more flashes than Bynum. Johna Petro never had the string of games Bynum put up when he looked like a future star, and Saer Sene, if I'm not mistaken, barely played at all last season. I'd say Bynum has definetly shown more than all three of the above</div>

Just because Swift was injured doesn't mean he couldn't develop. One of his biggest weaknesses was his lack of strength, but he's been pumping iron ever since his injury from two season ago, and he's about forty pounds of muscle mass heavier than he was before.

Before the injury, Swift was a 6 ppg, 6 rpg player for the Sonics (who were then a playoff team) in a role similar to what Bynum played for the Lakers. He's since done nothing but work on his weaknesses and spend time in the weight room, and he's now 40+ lbs. heavier as a result. I don't see why you'd think he wouldn't be a better player than Andrew Bynum next season.

Petro has better career stats and very similar stats on '06-07 season as Bynum. You say that he hasn't had games like Bynum, where he looks like a 'future star,' but actually he has: 22 points, 5 rebounds vs. Memphis; 16 points, 10 rebounds @ Chicago; 10 points, 10 rebounds @ Phoenix; 13 points, 13 rebounds @ Toronto; 13 points, 7 rebounds vs. Orlando; etc. His only problem, like Bynum, is that he hasn't been able to produce consistently, because while he has raw talent and great physical tools, he's still very underdeveloped as a basketball player.

As for Mouhamed Sene, he was a rookie last season, but his potential derives from the same place as Bynum's - his size. He's just as tall as Bynum and has a reach that puts Bynum's to shame. His rookie season (1.9 ppg, 1.6 rpg), while unproductive, was still more productive than Bynum's (1.6 ppg, 1.7 rpg). Given his physical abilities being superior to Bynum's, and the fact that in his rookie year he produced just as much as Bynum, I don't think how you can say Bynum is a more valuable commodity.

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Andrew Bynum has shown more than guys like Amir Johnson, Andray Blatche, Hilton Armstron, Cedric Simmons, and etc. Like I said before, Bynum had a long stretch of games last season when he played great. But when fatigue settled in, he struggled. Guys like Amir Johson and Andray Blatche have barely played any minutes in the NBA yet to detirmine what type of players they will become.</div>

If you're good enough to play in the NBA, you're good enough to have nights like the ones Andrew Bynum had this past season (ie: the Alexander Johnson example). The fact that he went off for 10+ rebounds in a few scattered games doesn't set him apart from the crowd, because everyone else in the crowd has done the exact same thing before. The fact of the matter is that you keep hinging your argument on this "long stretch of games," but that stretch is nonexistent. Bynum has never put up more than 20 points in his entire career, and his highest monthly ppg average is just 10.7. Every single one of those players I listed is fully capable of the same sort of productivity, and they all have Bynum's size, or moreso. What makes Bynum different? It's the uniform he wears, and that's it. If we threw Hilton Armstrong in a Lakers uniform, he'd be the anointed as the second coming of christ.

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Also, I'm not saying Andrew Bynum is the next big thing, because I don't think he is. I don't think we should build around Bynum either. All I'm saying is, Bynum has shown more than the Amir Johnsons and the Andray Blatches of the league, and he has a brighter future than your making him out to be</div>

You keep saying that you don't think Bynum is the next big thing, but then you contradict yourself by standing up to him in comparison to future role players like Sene, Petro, Armstrong, etc.; if he's not on their level, as a young, developing role player, then obviously he's the next big thing. So really, your post is inconsistent. As much as you say you don't expect big things from him, your post indicates otherwise.

<div class="quote_poster">kobe4life Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Dude, do some research and watch more Lakers tape before you speak up. Lets me remind you, KOBE BRYANT produced the same amount or even less than Andrew Bynum, at his age and the minute he played. To make matter more interesting, Dwight Howard's rookie season he averaged only slighly better than Bynum despite getting at least 10min more of playtime than Bynum. With that track record, and a big who plays the game the way it supposes to for a center, that is rare. Bynum, may or may not, be a dominant center, but you win championship starting with a traditional center. Now go back and read.</div>

First of all, refrain from posting if you can't do so with respect for the other posters on this site. This is the second condescending post I've read from you in the past day.

Secondly, it's not even fair to compare Andrew Bynum and Dwight Howard's careers. As a rookie, Dwight posted 12.0 ppg and 10.0 rpg in 82 games. Bynum was good for 1.6 ppg and 1.7 rpg in 46 games. As for their sophomore seasons, Howard averaged 15.8 ppg and 12.5 rpg (second in the NBA). Bynum averaged 7.8 ppg and 5.9 rpg. How are they even remotely comparable? Howard dominates the glass now as a 21-year old kid in a way that Bynum won't be able to at any point in his career, even in his prime. He's in a whole nother stratosphere.

 

Well its official, KG will be a Celtic. It will be announced tomorrow, since KG is on a Cruise out in the Pacific.

 

<div class="quote_poster">shapecity Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">The Lakers still had Caron Butler at the time. Along with Walton, George, and Kobe was logging minutes at the 3.

Mitch Kupchak actually wanted Sean May, but I'm glad we didn't end up with him either.

I wanted Granger or Jack with the pick at the time. I never thought Granger would drop to us, and would be a top 8 pick. IIRC he had a strong workout for the Lakers, and the Lakers really wanted Bynum they could have worked out a deal later on in the draft to acquire another pick. The only other team remotely interested in Bynum was New Jersey.</div>

The Lakers traded Butler shortly thereafter though. He wasn't a part of their long term plans apparently, and even if so, that's no reason to really pass up a player like Granger. It's not like they expected instant productivity from their draft pick, if they went after a player like Bynum. That logjam was just a concern for the present season, not something that would have effected their long term plans.

SG - Kobe Bryant / George
SF - Danny Granger / Walton

It would have worked...

As for May, I agree that he wouldn't necessarily be a good pick for the Lakers, but I think it's unfair to compare him from Bynum, because they were two separate types of players. One was a low-ceiling, instant-impact type of player and the other a high-ceiling, long-term project. For a team that needed that extra push to get them into the playoffs and not a long-term investment, he would have been a better pick than Bynum.

(I know that you know all this already, just directing it at the crowd, not you specifically.)

<div class="quote_poster">YourNewChef Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Well its official, KG will be a Celtic. It will be announced tomorrow, since KG is on a Cruise out in the Pacific.</div>

Do you have a link? I can't find anything on ESPN about it.