Kobe, Walton, Turaif, and Farmar. I'd love to give Odom another opportunity, but if we can package him and Bynum for a big that will make us contenders, then pull the damn trigger mitch!
Do you guys really think you could produce a good enough package for a Kevin Garnett or Jermaine O'Neal type player?
I think we do have the ability to produce a good enough package for a player of their calibur, but it would definitely mean saying good bye to Odom and Bynum.
<div class="quote_poster">Swish Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Do you guys really think you could produce a good enough package for a Kevin Garnett or Jermaine O'Neal type player?</div> Talent for talent, no we cannot put a package to acquire KG or JO. Providing financial relief for small-market teams (Minnesota & Indiana), along with some young productive talent is something we can accomplish.
Yeah, that's true. I just can't see a team giving up a Kevin Garnett or Jermaine O'Neal when the main piece they are acquiring is Lamar Odom. I've seen many of you Laker fans complain about Lamar's effort and I don't understand why any other team would want him. It seems like another team would be able to put together a better package than Los Angeles could similar to what happened around the trade deadline when the Bulls were trying to add someone like Pau Gasol or Kevin Garnett for some of their young guys (although now that Deng is playing awesome in the playoffs the chances of him leaving are slim).
<div class="quote_poster">Swish Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Yeah, that's true. I just can't see a team giving up a Kevin Garnett or Jermaine O'Neal when the main piece they are acquiring is Lamar Odom. I've seen many of you Laker fans complain about Lamar's effort and I don't understand why any other team would want him. It seems like another team would be able to put together a better package than Los Angeles could similar to what happened around the trade deadline when the Bulls were trying to add someone like Pau Gasol or Kevin Garnett for some of their young guys (although now that Deng is playing awesome in the playoffs the chances of him leaving are slim).</div> You're right, other teams could put a better package together, but a lot of teams aren't willing to gut their roster either. Then you have to factor in the luxury tax you will be forced to pay with KG on your payroll. A lot of these franchise owners are adament about not paying the luxury tax. Let's take Chicago for example. They are already paying a lot for Ben Wallace, and the problem with trading Deng, Hinrich, or Gordon, is the fact they're still playing on their rookie deals. Aside from Big Ben and PJ Brown, no one on the Bulls is making over $5M per year. They'd have to trade 3 or 4 players just to match KG or Gasol's deal. Neither KG or Gasol demanded a trade either, so Chicago doesn't have much leverage in negotiating the best deal.
<div class="quote_poster">shapecity Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Exactly, I'd trade Bynum for the opportunity to win now with Kobe. I do have faith in Bynum, but most big men take 5 to 6 years before they develop into a dominant force in the NBA. Unfortunately, the Lakers don't have the depth to accomodate Bynum and Kobe simultaneously. Of course, I wouldn't just give Bynum away, I'd want a premiere big man or point guard (a top 15 talent) in return.</div> Do you think the Lakers should have included Bynum in the Kidd talks during the deadline?
<div class="quote_poster">MrJ Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Do you think the Lakers should have included Bynum in the Kidd talks during the deadline?</div> Probably cause bigs are what the Nets are sorely lacking, and they also have very little young players.
<div class="quote_poster">MrJ Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Do you think the Lakers should have included Bynum in the Kidd talks during the deadline?</div> I would have included Bynum if the Lakers could have built a deal around him and not ship out Odom or Kwame with him. If the Lakers had to include Bynum + Odom, or Bynum + Brown, it wouldn't make any sense, because the Lakers wouldn't have any depth on the frontline. Bynum + Mihm (expiring K) + McKie (expiring K) + Smush (expiring K) + Radman or Cook + 1st Rounder Something along those lines I would have done.
People always saying how much potential Bynum has. Shouldn't we focus on what we are doing now? Why keep on wasting Kobe's prime and expect Bynum to be a dominated center? I don't get it. Who knows what is going to happen in 10 years? Focus on now and make a good deal. If we can get a really nice player with Bynum + someone else, just do it. By the way, i still think Bynum won't be able to dominate
<div class="quote_poster">TopLake Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">People always saying how much potential Bynum has. Shouldn't we focus on what we are doing now? Why keep on wasting Kobe's prime and expect Bynum to be a dominated center? I don't get it. Who knows what is going to happen in 10 years? Focus on now and make a good deal. If we can get a really nice player with Bynum + someone else, just do it. By the way, i still think Bynum won't be able to dominate </div> Should the Lakers have traded Kobe Bryant when he was a struggling rookie and they had Shaq in his prime?
<div class="quote_poster">shapecity Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Should the Lakers have traded Kobe Bryant when he was a struggling rookie and they had Shaq in his prime?</div> Good point in terms of waiting through for talent to develop, but it seems different in some circumstances though. Was the Lakers team 'wasting' Shaq's prime, well he was only 24 1/2 at the start of the 1996-97 year and they put up a respectable 56-26 record. They got to the West Conference Semis to lose to the Jazz with the 1996-97 league's MVP Karl Malone, and the Jazz went on to the Finals to lose to the Bulls in 6. The next year the Lakers had the second best record in the West of 61-21, only behind the Utah Jazz 62-20. They made it to the Western Conference Finals and lost to the Jazz, which went on to the Finals against the Bulls to lose in 6. While Kobe might be looking at another first round exit, and will be 29 by the start of next season, while Bynum will be almost 20. I think you might be right though to not trade Bynum, in case he develops into a top 5 center in the league and gives the Lakers a solid center for a good period of time.
Kobe Luke Farmar Turiaf Bynum Cook Evans This are the only lakers who have been steping it up. the rest have not improve or just suck. Even though Lamar plays good he is not good for this laker team he is only good to play in a cheap teams like Bobcats or Memhis.Brown plays no defence and the same for Parker .
