# Honest Question: Lamar Odom for Gerald Wallace



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

For the Bobcat fans, would you do it/consider it? Take into consideration Odom's contract, play style, exisiting bobcats team.Gerald's contract, skill, etc....

I don't want outside opinions from non-bobcat fans. Nor do I have any intention of talking about Odom's good points, just want an honest thought opinion.

Gerald would work great with Kobe. Wondering how you think Odom would fit in, considering Wallace'skills duplicate JRich.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

Kobe's first team all defense at the same position.Why do you need Mr Wallace?


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

Diable said:


> Kobe's first team all defense at the same position.Why do you need Mr Wallace?


Kobe plays SG...Wallace plays SF.

We need a tough SF who can play some defense against some of the better wings in the league.


----------



## southeasy (Jun 11, 2003)

i'm not a Bobcat fan & i read your contention, but Gerald Wallace is one of my favourite players. I think the deal is = talent wise.

i don't agree that Wallace is a duplicate of Richardson, outside of the high flying dunks. Wallace is the much more tough defensive minded player, more of an inside versatile scorer with J-Rich being the more accomplished shooter.

likewise with Kobe, they play different positions, & outside of the hard nose defense, not really similar.

i can see the deal working for both teams as it's bassically a wash. Not familiar with Odom's contract however, but with G.Wall's injury concerns, i can see him being available.


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

Diable said:


> Kobe's first team all defense at the same position.Why do you need Mr Wallace?


See Paul Pierce against Luke Walton or Vladdy, lol.

Lakers need more strong defensive players. Odom is a great rebounder but can't stretch the defense with jumpshots, in fact he might clog the post when Bynum gets back. Wallace is more of a traditional SF. While Odom can play SF, he is not the optimal SF defensively which Lakers need (since existing SFs do not play defense except for Ariza, who Phil may not give minutes too).


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

Additionally, part of Odom's strength is his ability to dribble and penetrate well as a bigman. Something that Lakers don't get full value on because the triangle offense is based off of ball movement through passing. So its better to trade off a player like Odom for a defensive SF like Wallace which the Lakers would get full value on.

Basically a decent about of us on the Lakers board would like a reliable SF that has an ok offensive skill set but that can turn it on, on the other end of the court (Walton and Vlad are two of the worst defensive SFs). Artest, Battier and Wallace fit the bill. Unlike Artest, Wallace is not insane, which makes him preferable. Battier has less value IMO, so while a trade for Battier might be beneficial because of needs, it is less fair talent wise, making Gerald ideal.


----------



## Piolo_Pascual (Sep 13, 2006)

wallace is a good defender but is he going to solve you're shooting woes? i doubt it. to me he's like an expensive but much more explosive trevor ariza.


lakers are better off with jefferson or prince. maybe shawn marion too but he too expensive. artest is too cazy but he the best fit imo.


----------



## Bartholomew Hunt (Mar 4, 2003)

aznzen said:


> wallace is a good defender but is he going to solve you're shooting woes? i doubt it. to me he's like an expensive but much more explosive trevor ariza.
> 
> 
> lakers are better off with jefferson or prince. maybe shawn marion too but he too expensive. artest is too cazy but he the best fit imo.


We don't have shooting woes. We have team defense woes.


----------



## Ruff Draft (Nov 21, 2004)

Odom for Wallace is the deal I can see happening for both teams. Detroit wont want just Odom, Odom doesn't fit Jersey very well, and etc.


----------



## nutmeged3 (Apr 11, 2005)

How much is Odom getting per and why is Gerald involved in so much trade talk lately.


----------

