|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
LakerSanity
Moderator
Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 33474
Location: Long Beach, California
|
 Posted: Mon Aug 13, 2007 1:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Tony Almeida wrote: | | LakerSanity wrote: |
I think it comes down to how we differ in evaluating JO. In any case, as you said, it's moot. Even if I can understand why, I am still somewhat bothered no big moves have been made this summer. The only think I am curious about is whether or not we have offered Bynum to Indiana or not. Overall though, I am hoping like no other next year we have good chemistry, good health, Bynum blows up, Phil teaches defense for once, and Kobe comes in open minded... so that we come out the gates strong and keep it up for a season. I don't think all of that is beyond the realm of possibility, so I still allow myself a good bit of hope. As usual, we'll see. |
Fair enough. 
I'm just really frustrated at our FO for essentially relying on a 19 year old Andrew Bynum blowing up this year to help get us to the second round and MAYBE beyond -- a 19 year old who doesn't even have any meaningful playoff experience. |
The thing is though is that as the summer has (come and) gone, we really have had no choice but to put all our eggs into the "Bynum basket" because no other feasible options presented themselves. In a more comprehensive perspective, however, it is the long-term negligence of this front office which got the Lakers into such an unenviable position in the first place.
This summer is the summation of our past mistakes which have now resulted in limited flexibility and, accordingly, a lack of available alternative options to Bynum.
_________________
LakersGround's Terms of Service
Twitter: @DeleteThisPost |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
OregonLakerGuy
Franchise Player
Joined: 23 Feb 2005
Posts: 13207
Location: Oregon
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 13, 2007 1:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jeffs wrote: | | golakersgo121 wrote: | | KobeDunk wrote: | | rebirth wrote: | | hold out fro a bynum/kwame/critt package. if not I am not against moving both LO and bynum for JO.. I dont think that is a lateral move, we are a better team especially defensively. |
They will not trade Bynum. THey think he's the future and won't do it. If they had any intentions or desire to move him we would have Jason Kidd right now. |
...and would be stupid doing this trade. Plain stupid... |
Just as we would be plain stupid for not trading Bynum and Crittenton for a six-time All Star. |
Seems to be that your view hinges on how you value prospects. Do I take it from your comments that you do not consider Bynum and Crittenton blue chip prospects? If that is the case, then your view is completely understandable to me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tony Almeida
Retired
Joined: 05 Jan 2006
Posts: 12072
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 13, 2007 1:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LakerSanity wrote: | | Tony Almeida wrote: | | LakerSanity wrote: |
I think it comes down to how we differ in evaluating JO. In any case, as you said, it's moot. Even if I can understand why, I am still somewhat bothered no big moves have been made this summer. The only think I am curious about is whether or not we have offered Bynum to Indiana or not. Overall though, I am hoping like no other next year we have good chemistry, good health, Bynum blows up, Phil teaches defense for once, and Kobe comes in open minded... so that we come out the gates strong and keep it up for a season. I don't think all of that is beyond the realm of possibility, so I still allow myself a good bit of hope. As usual, we'll see. |
Fair enough.
I'm just really frustrated at our FO for essentially relying on a 19 year old Andrew Bynum blowing up this year to help get us to the second round and MAYBE beyond -- a 19 year old who doesn't even have any meaningful playoff experience. |
The thing is though is that as the summer has (come and) gone, we really have had no choice but to put all our eggs into the "Bynum basket" because no other feasible options presented themselves. In a more comprehensive perspective, however, it is the long-term negligence of this front office which got the Lakers into such an unenviable position in the first place.
This summer is the summation of our past mistakes which have now resulted in limited flexibility and, accordingly, a lack of available alternative options to Bynum. |
Yup. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
XxBaDGuYxX
Star Player
Joined: 01 Jun 2005
Posts: 1595
Location: Los Angeles
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 9:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
 
_________________
What I'm doing right now, I'm chasing perfection.
- Kobe Bryant |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144585
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 9:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Tony Almeida wrote: | | I know it's not a popular opinion, but I still believe trading LO/Bynum for JO isn't all that bad |
Only if you can make a side deal and bring in a legit NBA center to pair with Mihm.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
golakersgo121
Franchise Player
Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 11717
Location: 8 miles from Staples Center
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 9:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jeffs wrote: | | golakersgo121 wrote: | | KobeDunk wrote: | | rebirth wrote: | | hold out fro a bynum/kwame/critt package. if not I am not against moving both LO and bynum for JO.. I dont think that is a lateral move, we are a better team especially defensively. |
They will not trade Bynum. THey think he's the future and won't do it. If they had any intentions or desire to move him we would have Jason Kidd right now. |
...and would be stupid doing this trade. Plain stupid... |
Just as we would be plain stupid for not trading Bynum and Crittenton for a six-time All Star. |
Yep. Everybody on this team has a price tag.
At this particular point, it is as stupid to trade AB for Steve Fransis as it is NOT to trade him for JO.
To trade him for JKidd is closer by value, but it still did not make any sense...
If a price tag for JO is AB+Crit+fillers to make it work (again - at this particular juncture), it is a fair deal on both sides. Despite JO being overpaid, Indy is entitled to two blue chip prospects back, one of them being big...
_________________
Major bullets dodged: DH12 - twice, LMA, Melo - twice, PG-13, DeMar DeRozan. Hit jackpot with DH-12 at the right time |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TNLakersFanInLA
Star Player
Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 9657
Location: Chattanooga, TN
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 10:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| golakersgo121 wrote: | | Jeffs wrote: | | golakersgo121 wrote: | | KobeDunk wrote: | | rebirth wrote: | | hold out fro a bynum/kwame/critt package. if not I am not against moving both LO and bynum for JO.. I dont think that is a lateral move, we are a better team especially defensively. |
They will not trade Bynum. THey think he's the future and won't do it. If they had any intentions or desire to move him we would have Jason Kidd right now. |
...and would be stupid doing this trade. Plain stupid... |
Just as we would be plain stupid for not trading Bynum and Crittenton for a six-time All Star. |
Yep. Everybody on this team has a price tag.
At this particular point, it is as stupid to trade AB for Steve Fransis as it is NOT to trade him for JO.
To trade him for JKidd is closer by value, but it still did not make any sense...
If a price tag for JO is AB+Crit+fillers to make it work (again - at this particular juncture), it is a fair deal on both sides. Despite JO being overpaid, Indy is entitled to two blue chip prospects back, one of them being big... |
I pretty much agree with you on that point except for Jarvis. I think that if we have to give up Jarvis, we should get a little something extra back. Maybe a shawne williams or something. I really believe that Jarvis will be great for us, and giving him up would be tough.
_________________
Monta Ellis: "Kobe is #1, I'm #2, LeBron is #3." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jeffs
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Aug 2006
Posts: 25274
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 10:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| OregonLakerGuy wrote: | | Jeffs wrote: | | golakersgo121 wrote: | | KobeDunk wrote: | | rebirth wrote: | | hold out fro a bynum/kwame/critt package. if not I am not against moving both LO and bynum for JO.. I dont think that is a lateral move, we are a better team especially defensively. |
They will not trade Bynum. THey think he's the future and won't do it. If they had any intentions or desire to move him we would have Jason Kidd right now. |
...and would be stupid doing this trade. Plain stupid... |
Just as we would be plain stupid for not trading Bynum and Crittenton for a six-time All Star. |
Seems to be that your view hinges on how you value prospects. Do I take it from your comments that you do not consider Bynum and Crittenton blue chip prospects? If that is the case, then your view is completely understandable to me. |
My thing isn't really undervaluing prospects, but just putting a lot more value in proven talent. JO is only one of four players in the NBA that has averaged 19/9/2 over the past 5 seasons. His averages are something like 19.5/9.9/2.2 over the span, essentially a 20/10 player. He is a consistent producer on offense and, more importantly, defense.
I don't really think Bynum will be that good. Maybe I just have lower expectations for him than a lot of people here do, but I really don't see him being better than maybe a 16-18/10/2.5 kinda guy. These stats are very solid, but I don't think it makes sense to wait another 3-4 years for him to achieve these stats, when we could have them now with JO.
As for Javaris, I'd like to keep the guy, but I wouldn't let him be a deal breaker. Unlike Bynum, he comes into the NBA with a much better skillset. He doesn't have to "learn" how to play like Bynum did (which adds on a few years of development time), but just to refine his skills. Maybe the Lakers got a gem with their late pick - we don't know yet. I guess that's where it comes back to my emphasis on proven talent.
_________________
Jeffs
I feel like I just watched someone TRULY give 100%. Not the BS I'm-gonna-give-a-110%-just-like-everyone-else-says platitudes, but someone that went until he just....broke. - GT |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike@LG
Moderator
Joined: 10 Apr 2001
Posts: 65135
Location: Orange County, CA
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 10:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
My thing isn't really undervaluing prospects, but just putting a lot more value in proven talent. JO is only one of four players in the NBA that has averaged 19/9/2 over the past 5 seasons. His averages are something like 19.5/9.9/2.2 over the span, essentially a 20/10 player. He is a consistent producer on offense and, more importantly, defense.
I don't really think Bynum will be that good. Maybe I just have lower expectations for him than a lot of people here do, but I really don't see him being better than maybe a 16-18/10/2.5 kinda guy. These stats are very solid, but I don't think it makes sense to wait another 3-4 years for him to achieve these stats, when we could have them now with JO. |
Agreed.
As for Crittenton, he's not a project. He's the prospect worth keeping.
_________________
Resident Car Nut.
https://lakersdraft.substack.com/
I am not an economic advisor nor do I advise economic strategies or plans. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gimme_the_rock
Franchise Player
Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 11882
Location: Looking outta the window, watching the asphalt grow ...
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 11:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Now if only Indy will agree to a Laker offer.
Of course, they won't.
And hopefully it works out in the Laker's favor. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
golakersgo121
Franchise Player
Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 11717
Location: 8 miles from Staples Center
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 11:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| TNLakersFan wrote: | | golakersgo121 wrote: | | Jeffs wrote: | | golakersgo121 wrote: | | KobeDunk wrote: | | rebirth wrote: | | hold out fro a bynum/kwame/critt package. if not I am not against moving both LO and bynum for JO.. I dont think that is a lateral move, we are a better team especially defensively. |
They will not trade Bynum. THey think he's the future and won't do it. If they had any intentions or desire to move him we would have Jason Kidd right now. |
...and would be stupid doing this trade. Plain stupid... |
Just as we would be plain stupid for not trading Bynum and Crittenton for a six-time All Star. |
Yep. Everybody on this team has a price tag.
At this particular point, it is as stupid to trade AB for Steve Fransis as it is NOT to trade him for JO.
To trade him for JKidd is closer by value, but it still did not make any sense...
If a price tag for JO is AB+Crit+fillers to make it work (again - at this particular juncture), it is a fair deal on both sides. Despite JO being overpaid, Indy is entitled to two blue chip prospects back, one of them being big... |
I pretty much agree with you on that point except for Jarvis. I think that if we have to give up Jarvis, we should get a little something extra back. Maybe a shawne williams or something. I really believe that Jarvis will be great for us, and giving him up would be tough. |
I understand and respect your point opinion. At this point Jarvis might be very promising prospect (might be - not because I doubt it. I just don't have an eye for prospect evaluation outside of the NBA game).
Has he not been a very promising prospect, his name wouldn't come up. My point is very simple though. In order to get JO team has to give up two prospects, there are no 'ifs' or 'buts' about it. Farmar (as much as I am UCLA homer) is a prospect as well. But he is a prospect to become a solid NBA player, not an All-Star/first three spots on the roster guy... It is a possibility that Farmar will have an NBA career and Jarvis won't. I am talking more about who this prospect CAN become.
In JO any team in the league gets (at the very least) guy #2 on their roster. I don't mean #2 offensive option but rather overall #2 player (again - at the very least). In exchange the Pacers have to get back two prospects that will have a fair chance to become an option #2...
_________________
Major bullets dodged: DH12 - twice, LMA, Melo - twice, PG-13, DeMar DeRozan. Hit jackpot with DH-12 at the right time |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Mike
Star Player
Joined: 16 Aug 2005
Posts: 1126
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 11:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
I have come to really dislike the excuse that O'Neal shoots a low FG%. With him not being the number 1 option their is a very good chance that his % will go up. If you look at Lamar's & Kwame's shooting % they both have had their highest percentage years playing next to Kobe.
_________________
"Kobe Bryant is an absolute nightmare. You can hold your breath, send for help, sacrifice a chicken, it won't matter. Kobe Bryant is coming for you. He's got the ball and he's going to score...some way, some how."
Dancing Barry |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
golakersgo121
Franchise Player
Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 11717
Location: 8 miles from Staples Center
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 11:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gimme_the_rock wrote: | Now if only Indy will agree to a Laker offer.
Of course, they won't.
And hopefully it works out in the Laker's favor. |
Is there an offer on the table that you know off?
_________________
Major bullets dodged: DH12 - twice, LMA, Melo - twice, PG-13, DeMar DeRozan. Hit jackpot with DH-12 at the right time |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rebirth
Star Player
Joined: 26 Apr 2005
Posts: 3970
Location: Garden Grove
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 11:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | I don't really think Bynum will be that good. Maybe I just have lower expectations for him than a lot of people here do, but I really don't see him being better than maybe a 16-18/10/2.5 kinda guy. These stats are very solid, but I don't think it makes sense to wait another 3-4 years for him to achieve these stats, when we could have them now with JO. |
I think the expectations that most people here have for bynum are built on the foundation of the Fo's hype. The fact that he has literally been deemed untouchable for anyone but KG which is no longer an option is a huge travesty. He has shown signs, but those signs are far to inconsistant. The most troubling part of bynums game for me is his focuss and lack of intensity. those you dont teach, they are intagibles that you have or you dont have. That being said it totaly agree with your post. I dont think bynum will ever be as good as Laker manangement is making him out to be. Not trading him for kidd or JO will be mistakes that we as laker fans will look back on and be dissapointed, especially if it cost us Kobe!
_________________
“What is 17,505”
“Rest at the end not at the middle” |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike@LG
Moderator
Joined: 10 Apr 2001
Posts: 65135
Location: Orange County, CA
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 11:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | In exchange the Pacers have to get back two prospects that will have a fair chance to become an option #2... |
Disagree. Depends on what their plan is. If they want capspace to sign a #2 or #1 option through FA, the Lakers can cater to that. If they want multiple prospects under rookie contracts to save the franchise money for 2-3 years, the Lakers can cater to that as well.
_________________
Resident Car Nut.
https://lakersdraft.substack.com/
I am not an economic advisor nor do I advise economic strategies or plans. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
golakersgo121
Franchise Player
Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 11717
Location: 8 miles from Staples Center
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 11:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mike@LG wrote: | | Quote: | | In exchange the Pacers have to get back two prospects that will have a fair chance to become an option #2... |
Disagree. Depends on what their plan is. If they want capspace to sign a #2 or #1 option through FA, the Lakers can cater to that. If they want multiple prospects under rookie contracts to save the franchise money for 2-3 years, the Lakers can cater to that as well. |
Good point, Mike. I just don't believe (in Pacers situation) that option with cap space exists at all (and Larry has nobody to blame for it but himself) - thanks to Murphy/Dunleavy contracts and trading for MDaniels. So, I simply disregarded it. Besides, I don't believe in JO opting out, period.
I might have given in the past 3% chance to KG opting out of Minnesota next season; I give no chance to JO opting out other than for a reason to sign an extension or force S&T. My point being is that even if he forces S&T, the Pacers have to get back salary as well...
_________________
Major bullets dodged: DH12 - twice, LMA, Melo - twice, PG-13, DeMar DeRozan. Hit jackpot with DH-12 at the right time |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
OregonLakerGuy
Franchise Player
Joined: 23 Feb 2005
Posts: 13207
Location: Oregon
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 11:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mike@LG wrote: | | Quote: |
My thing isn't really undervaluing prospects, but just putting a lot more value in proven talent. JO is only one of four players in the NBA that has averaged 19/9/2 over the past 5 seasons. His averages are something like 19.5/9.9/2.2 over the span, essentially a 20/10 player. He is a consistent producer on offense and, more importantly, defense.
I don't really think Bynum will be that good. Maybe I just have lower expectations for him than a lot of people here do, but I really don't see him being better than maybe a 16-18/10/2.5 kinda guy. These stats are very solid, but I don't think it makes sense to wait another 3-4 years for him to achieve these stats, when we could have them now with JO. |
Agreed.
As for Crittenton, he's not a project. He's the prospect worth keeping. |
And I disagree on Bynum. I don't think we will need to wait "another 3-4 years" for Bynum to be solid. I expect this year to be his breakout, though I am willing to admit that it is a risk. I just think that it is a risk worth taking.
Agree on Critt. I especially don't want to lose both of these prospects and find ourselves two to three years down the road with no great young players ready to step in. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Laker Lurker
Star Player
Joined: 24 Oct 2002
Posts: 7652
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 11:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| rebirth wrote: | | Quote: | | I don't really think Bynum will be that good. Maybe I just have lower expectations for him than a lot of people here do, but I really don't see him being better than maybe a 16-18/10/2.5 kinda guy. These stats are very solid, but I don't think it makes sense to wait another 3-4 years for him to achieve these stats, when we could have them now with JO. |
I think the expectations that most people here have for bynum are built on the foundation of the Fo's hype. The fact that he has literally been deemed untouchable for anyone but KG which is no longer an option is a huge travesty. He has shown signs, but those signs are far to inconsistant. The most troubling part of bynums game for me is his focuss and lack of intensity. those you dont teach, they are intagibles that you have or you dont have. That being said it totaly agree with your post. I dont think bynum will ever be as good as Laker manangement is making him out to be. Not trading him for kidd or JO will be mistakes that we as laker fans will look back on and be dissapointed, especially if it cost us Kobe! |
I think he'll be as good as the FO expects which is a franchise player. However , I don't mind him going to Indy same as I don't mind Farmar and Crit going to Indy as well to get JO and we keep Odom. LO,. JO, with Turiaf coming on will be a pretty good front line. LO at SF, JO at C and Ronny at PF. if D Fish comes through, the Lakers would contend since they have depth at Sf and Evans can back up SG,
The second reason I don't mind these guys leaving is that with 4 Lakers going to Indy + Granger, they should have a shot at the ECF especially since Pacers will be deep at every position. I can root for these guys(not only individually but as a team). I don't think have they chance of developing with PJ as coach anyway- I might as well see them play- instead of sitting on the bench because PJ can't coach them.
Finally , I would love to have Lakers East kick the Celts, Pistons, and Heat asses. and well as having McHale strung up by the Minny fans for passing up what could be the core of a Title team. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakerSanity
Moderator
Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 33474
Location: Long Beach, California
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 11:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
We seem to all agree (well 99% of us) that Bynum + parts for JO is worth it, but we also seem to agree (well 85-90% of us) that Bynum + LO for JO is not worth it.
Is there really any more debate to it than that?
_________________
LakersGround's Terms of Service
Twitter: @DeleteThisPost |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AV
Starting Rotation
Joined: 24 Jun 2005
Posts: 606
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 11:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Lakers just seem to be stuck in neutral these days |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jeffs
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Aug 2006
Posts: 25274
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 12:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LakerSanity wrote: | We seem to all agree (well 99% of us) that Bynum + parts for JO is worth it, but we also seem to agree (well 85-90% of us) that Bynum + LO for JO is not worth it.
Is there really any more debate to it than that? |
While it does seem that most agree that Bynum/LO is too much for JO, I don't think nearly as many people agree that Bynum/filler for JO is a good deal. Some people just overrate Bynum and expect too much out of the kid. Not his fault, really, since the incompetent front office is who put all these unfair expectations on his shoulders.
_________________
Jeffs
I feel like I just watched someone TRULY give 100%. Not the BS I'm-gonna-give-a-110%-just-like-everyone-else-says platitudes, but someone that went until he just....broke. - GT |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
OregonLakerGuy
Franchise Player
Joined: 23 Feb 2005
Posts: 13207
Location: Oregon
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 12:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jeffs wrote: | | LakerSanity wrote: | We seem to all agree (well 99% of us) that Bynum + parts for JO is worth it, but we also seem to agree (well 85-90% of us) that Bynum + LO for JO is not worth it.
Is there really any more debate to it than that? |
While it does seem that most agree that Bynum/LO is too much for JO, I don't think nearly as many people agree that Bynum/filler for JO is a good deal. Some people just overrate Bynum and expect too much out of the kid. Not his fault, really, since the incompetent front office is who put all these unfair expectations on his shoulders. |
Isn't it Indiana who is insisting on Bynum? If so, doesn't that mean that they are overrating him? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
THE_SHOES
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Apr 2001
Posts: 29556
Location: Taiwan
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 1:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| venturalakersfan wrote: | | Tony Almeida wrote: | | I know it's not a popular opinion, but I still believe trading LO/Bynum for JO isn't all that bad |
Only if you can make a side deal and bring in a legit NBA center to pair with Mihm. |
So true... Why not just forfeit the season after doing that deal as well? There would be no difference. You lose two players who would collectively easily out produce anything a "tri ignorant" JO would bring to the table. You add to that as ventura implies a drop in bigmen of which can't possibly be beneficial unless you were only losing Kwame. One of the bigs who is only a season, or so from becoming a force. JO's salary means the Lakers damned well better win with him, or they are in big trouble in the seasons to come.
That is not a trade that is going to make an impact of any beneficial size over not doing that deal... Hence, the Lakers are ignoring it... As well they should...
_________________
"According to ESPN.com's conference projections, the Lakers will finish 12th in the West, which prompted Bryant to tweet earlier this offseason, "12th I see.." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
THE_SHOES
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Apr 2001
Posts: 29556
Location: Taiwan
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 1:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| OregonLakerGuy wrote: | | Jeffs wrote: | | LakerSanity wrote: | We seem to all agree (well 99% of us) that Bynum + parts for JO is worth it, but we also seem to agree (well 85-90% of us) that Bynum + LO for JO is not worth it.
Is there really any more debate to it than that? |
While it does seem that most agree that Bynum/LO is too much for JO, I don't think nearly as many people agree that Bynum/filler for JO is a good deal. Some people just overrate Bynum and expect too much out of the kid. Not his fault, really, since the incompetent front office is who put all these unfair expectations on his shoulders. |
Isn't it Indiana who is insisting on Bynum? If so, doesn't that mean that they are overrating him? |
Good call... They seem to like the kid in Jersey as well... The thing with Bynum is if he is in your house, you have to wait... There is just to much there to kick to the curb on something that is only going to "somewhat" improve your club. KG? ok... JO? NO, and hhhhhhhhheeeelllll no! Especially if in the near future Bird can have yet another opportunity to beat his chest for doing a job on Los Angeles...
_________________
"According to ESPN.com's conference projections, the Lakers will finish 12th in the West, which prompted Bryant to tweet earlier this offseason, "12th I see.." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KobeDunk
Retired Number
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 26849
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 1:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I would trade Bynum for JO in a heartbeat!
Kobe+JO would be a great duo even if it means losing LO.
JO for Bynum and LO while a tough pill to swallow I think ultimately would improve our team. Its not a lateral move because JO is an allstar, great defender and while he may not be in the post as much as people seem to want he still has the post moves to go down and play there. Kwame + JO on defense are a huge improvement from Kwame+LO or Bynum+LO.
JO=Allstar and a true 2nd option
Bynum=project 3 to 5 years away (too long to wait when we have Kobe)
LO=great all around talent but underachiever.
JO>Bynum+LO |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
