# How angry were you when we passed up on Green?



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

I was cursing for about 20 minutes straight. Kobe, Odom, Butler and Green would've been vicious.


----------



## Drk Element (Nov 10, 2004)

Damian, i was so mad, i turned pale, literally


----------



## Unique (Apr 13, 2005)

i was mad but ...i want lamar to go back to sf


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Not that mad at all... he wouldn't play next year.

This does prove that I was right all along that the #10 pick wouldn't make a huge impact next year or start for us, so making the lottery didn't improve our playoff chances for next year.


----------



## GPS (Mar 28, 2003)

I was so angry that my head started spinning. Bynum was my choice for the draft, but only if Green wasn't available. Well, once it stopped I cursed Mitch in 3 different languages for about 20 minutes as well, and invented some new curses in the process. But then after 1 hour homerism started to take over and now I actually like the pick.


----------



## Cris (Jun 18, 2003)

I Was So Pissed Off


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

I wasn't mad at all. Draft a raw HS swingman (in addition to the 12329438758492543 swingmen the Lakers already have) to sit on the bench for 2 years?


----------



## Cris (Jun 18, 2003)

yeh instead we drafted a 17 year old, baby shaq

great...


this will be another
coulda woulda shoulda drafts


----------



## LamarButler (Apr 16, 2005)

Daaang I didn't think Green would go so long undrafted! I was so excited when it was the Lakers' turn to pick that I was jumpin in circles. When Stern started opening his mouth I thought we were drafting a Euro. I was like, oh god....But I was satisfied with Bynum. His size really intrigues me. Plus, what I saw was pretty good. I think he's a real upgrade over Mihm. Mitch did something right for once.


----------



## Drk Element (Nov 10, 2004)

Man, Bynum better be good, hey Cris are you gunna make those kupcake shirts?


----------



## Laker Freak (Jul 1, 2003)

Rememeber a while back when Mitch held that meeting with the season ticketholders and said they would pick the best player avilable in the draft. Then move foward to today right after Bynum is drafted Jim Gray is interviewing Mitch and he says "we decided to take Andrew because he is a center and centers are a rare thing in the draft." I wonder what his reason for drafting Von Wafer was?


----------



## JT (Mar 1, 2004)

lakers have kobe. theres no need for green. i feel he will be a bust anyway.


----------



## Locke (Jun 16, 2003)

I wasn't angry at all. I think Green's going to be a great player one day but it was going to be extremely difficult for us to shore up our front line and to get someone with Bynum's size through trade or free-agency with our lack of desirable tradeable assets and cap room.

The most upset I was all night was when Atlanta took Salim Stoudamire. We were so close! Second was taking Von "Vanilla" Wafer. I bet anyone in here anything he won't even make the team.


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

After the draft, I'm not sure what to think of Green either. There might be a reason why so many teams passed on him. It wasn't even that he didn't fit the needs, but lots of other swingmen were drafted like as Graham, Wright, and Granger. It might be because no one really saw him play against great competition during workouts.

Bynum might be a big raw, HS baby Shaq.

But unlike Green, hes big, and he fills a void. Bust or no bust, at worst, you can stick him in the paint and have a big body there at least, whcih is mroe than you could say for last season. Regardless, passing on Chris Taft is inexcusable. Even if he does have attitude problem, this is a 2nd round pick, and some scrub like Von Wafer will probably get cut in training camp. Also, John Gilchrist wasn't drafted, theres always the chance that the Lakers could sign him.


----------



## 22ryno (Mar 17, 2003)

Pretty pissed but passing on Ukic in the second round hurt makes me want to give them a F grade.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

Locke said:


> I wasn't angry at all. I think Green's going to be a great player one day but it was going to be extremely difficult for us to shore up our front line and to get someone with Bynum's size through trade or free-agency with our lack of desirable tradeable assets and cap room.
> 
> The most upset I was all night was when Atlanta took Salim Stoudamire. We were so close! Second was taking Von "Vanilla" Wafer. I bet anyone in here anything he won't even make the team.


You and I were probably the only people happy with the pick because we liked Bynum alot. I'm with you on the second round. I was hoping Salim would fall to us. However, I loved the Turiaf pick. I wanted either Taft or Ukic with the second pick. I didn't like that Wafer pick at all. His clips left alot to be desired.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Wafer also is the type of player Phil hates... individual talents who on play with intesinity when they have the ball and know nothing about team basketball.


----------



## thekid (Apr 3, 2003)

I have a feeling a couple years down the line, there will be people who speak on this draft similar to how we took Devean George, Kareem Rush, Mark Madsen, etc over Manu, Prince, Krstic, Boozer, etc..

I can live with the Bynum pick but I didn't like the 2nd round picks too much, to think we could of had a draft of Green/Ukic/Taft or even Bynum/Ukic/Taft. Oh wells, I sit here and they make the moves..


----------



## cmd34 (Jul 17, 2002)

Is it just me or did this whole draft just seem like a big middle finger from Kupchak to Phil Jackson?

Bynum and Wafer make no sense at all. Neither will see any minutes from Phil anytime soon. Turaif might see time if he out hustles Medvedenko and Cook. Jim Gray said Buss and Kupchak "dismissed" Phil from the Laker offices for the draft. I get that Phil doesn't like rookies and may not have the scouting info but shouldn't the coach be there for input on potential picks and trades?


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

I'm really confused. The Lakers need a PG. Ukic, a tall, Phil Jackson type of guard is available. John Gilchrist is still there... 

and Von Wafer? a 6'5 swingman, who from what I've read, is a ball hog that has a bad attitude.


----------



## Lynx (Mar 6, 2004)

I wasn't mad. Infact, I was relief that we didn't select Green 'cause he can't defend Ducan, KG and Amare in the West. 

We needed a big body and we got two of them. My only concern is Wafer pick. We should have gone for PG not a swingman. Oh well, 2 out of 3 for Mitch. Not bad.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Taft sucks. You guys are just intrigued by him because people made the mistake at one time to call him a top ten prospect even though hes done nothing.


----------



## thekid (Apr 3, 2003)

What's wrong with giving him a non guaranteed contract? Would you rather have Wafer?


----------



## compsciguy78 (Dec 16, 2002)

I'm still kind of mad we didn't get Green. I haven't seen much of Bynum, but Green's athleticism and size are hard to pass up. He could have been the Scottie Pippen to Kobe. Remember Scottie came a few years after MJ.


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

compsciguy78 said:


> I'm still kind of mad we didn't get Green. I haven't seen much of Bynum, but Green's athleticism and size are hard to pass up. He could have been the Scottie Pippen to Kobe. Remember Scottie came a few years after MJ.


I actually wrote a very long post about this. and Scottie Pippen didn't come 8 years younger than Jordan either.


----------



## OPMSm0k3r (May 25, 2005)

Jamel Irief said:


> Taft sucks. You guys are just intrigued by him because people made the mistake at one time to call him a top ten prospect even though hes done nothing.


So your saying you would rather have Wafer over Taft? I agree with you that Taft was not as great as people made him out to be. In fact I was extremely happy when we took Ronny even though I still knew Taft was around. What I could not let go was the fact that with our #39th pick we took...Wafer. Now, chances are this guy is not going to make the team anyways. So why not take a player who now is in a bad dilemna and probably will realize that and play hard to get on the team. If he doesn't, cut him. If he finally gets it into his head that if he doesnt get his game together he will have no where to go...imagine that steal. Still though...why did we not take Roko over Wafer. They are both guards and Roko is a hundred fold better than that damn Wafer. Overall grade of this draft...C.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

No, I wasn't. But I don't know much about Bynum. Neither do most people here. This is one of those draft picks that you have to wait on.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

I'm saying I don't give a damn that we don't have Taft, not that I wanted Wafer instead. The what could of been scenerios involving Taft are extreme.

Actually I probably do want Wafer instead of Taft because at least Wafer plays a position where we only have one player under contract.


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

So much for getting Jarrett Jack. He wouldve looked great in a Laker uniform...


----------



## Lakerman33 (Oct 16, 2004)

at first there were alot of F-Bombs

Then i noticed why did he slip to 18th?????

And finally I said " Atleast we can get some rebounding"

The lakers got ALOT bigger in this draft and thats always a good thing because Mihm always gets in foul trouble and Ronny will provide that mark madsen spark off the bench


----------



## Brian34Cook (Mar 26, 2003)

I let out some F bombs but I'm like.. Well why the f is Gerald falling so far? There had to be a reason.. Bynum I think can be a fine player.. We'll see!


----------



## NOODLESTYLE (Jan 20, 2005)

I knew Bynum was the high school player Mitch Kupchak was talking about! Remember the Lakers and Portland were the only 2 teams to work him out, I think the Lakers feared the Blazers might take him with the #3...very high for Bynum, but Bynum was projected to #1 had he stayed for year in college..

the only thing I'm upset about is the supposed Bender/17th deal that was suppose to go down....but people say that Danny Granger was a pick for the Lakers, so I don't know much about Danny Granger, and with that said it's completely insane that they would've passed up on Gerald Green...cuz who knows Kobe could blow out a knee or something, Green would be a perfect compliment to Lamar and Bynum...

but we'll have to wait and see...


----------



## SoCalfan21 (Jul 19, 2004)

i mean i was pretty angry but......


...remember when the lakers took a chance on the youngest player ever chosen in 96?


----------



## HallOfFamer (May 26, 2003)

I was pissed, and then add to the fact that I couldnt express my anger here cause the site was down, and I was furious!


----------



## LA68 (Apr 3, 2004)

Damian Necronamous said:


> I was cursing for about 20 minutes straight. Kobe, Odom, Butler and Green would've been vicious.


 And one ball ??

That really would have been vicious!! And who do you suppose is going to bang for the rebound ?? dive after a loose ball?? We needed defense and toughness, he does neither. We have enough ball hogs and shooters, didn't need more!


----------



## Darth Bryant (Feb 1, 2005)

It seems that 16 teams decided to pick someone else over Green. Including Toronto, who could have benifited most with a Green pick. Perhaps like many have speculatated, Green could have been a smoke screen. 

Green also needs the ball in his hands most of the time to be effective. He is that type of player. We already have enough people in the backcourt running with the ball now. Green is NOT better than Odom, Kobe, or even Butler at this point. 

We were an extremly small team with a thin front court. We drafted three decently sized guys, one banger and one gigantic center. Project or not, they give this team some height and more presense under the paint. 

If Andrew can run from one end of the court to the other, put his hands in the air on the defensive end, and actually prevent shots without fouling out every night, he will already add something that our front court is missing. Green would offer nothing to the Lakers, other than another small SG/SF type that needs the ball to be effective.

I say good trade.


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

*How could they pass on Green, Sean May, and Hakim Warrick!*



Damian Necronamous said:


> I was cursing for about 20 minutes straight. Kobe, Odom, Butler and Green would've been vicious.


:laugh: I seriously considered forming a group of angry lakers fans to assinate Mitch Kupchak.

:rocket:

Hopefully Bynum will be a good player, I've seen him play and he's nice. But other players available could have given an immediate impact. :nonono:


----------



## ralaw (Feb 24, 2005)

At first I was upset becuase Green, and Granger where sitting there waiting to be selected. I hope/pray Bynum becomes worth a top 10 in the long run because when I look at him and his size I can't help but to think about Desagana Diop!


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

I liked Green up until a week or two ago, when I found out that he refused to work out with anybody. Seriously, that kind of **** rubs me the wrong way. You've got guys that are projected to go in the top 3 that work out against other players. Did Green think he was a lock for a top 3 selection or was he just too scared to go up against a quality opponent and have his stock drop? Whatever his motivation was, ultimately his stock ended up dropping substantially. He has no one to blame but himself.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Pinball said:


> I liked Green up until a week or two ago, when I found out that he refused to work out with anybody. Seriously, that kind of **** rubs me the wrong way. You've got guys that are projected to go in the top 3 that work out against other players. Did Green think he was a lock for a top 3 selection or was he just too scared to go up against a quality opponent and have his stock drop? Whatever his motivation was, ultimately his stock ended up dropping substantially. *He has no one to blame but himself*.


and his agent....who should be fired ....yesterday


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

Pinball said:


> I liked Green up until a week or two ago, when I found out that he refused to work out with anybody. Seriously, that kind of **** rubs me the wrong way. You've got guys that are projected to go in the top 3 that work out against other players. Did Green think he was a lock for a top 3 selection or was he just too scared to go up against a quality opponent and have his stock drop? Whatever his motivation was, ultimately his stock ended up dropping substantially. He has no one to blame but himself.


I had no idea that he refuse to workout with teams. He didn't workout anywhere? WOW. Him dropping to the later first round makes sense now.


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

Green has nobody to blame but himself, but having been passed by so many teams may motivate him. It also pays him a lot less.

He and Marcus Banks may form a nice backcourt in the future.

I think Bynum was a good pick for the Lakers. He has skills and size, you can't beat that. DeSagana Diop is not a comparison at all; Diop is a defender and shot-blocker only. Bynum won't block shots like that, but he could be a MONSTER scorer down low.

Who needs Green when you have Kobe, right? 

:biggrin:

Of course, Bynum provides zero immediate impact and Phil will never play him. So that means that the veterans and free agents they sign will have to push them up. The Lakers have no 1st round pick next year.


----------



## LoyalBull (Jun 12, 2002)

Im a little unclear why people would be pissed.

Green is an athletic swingman.

Thats wonderful and all... but what does that get you? Especially when there are no fewer than 3 guys on the roster that play the swing position better than he probably ever will.

That said, I like the Lakers approach. It was a slight risk with potential large benefits with a solid course for the next two years.

Step one: Build around Kobe and Lamar under Jackson's system and allow them (as the primary's of the team) to get completely familiar with it and each other.

Step Two: Continue to improve the team internally over the next couple of seasons.

Step Three: In 2007 there will be a large excess of cash to throw at an impact free agent.

If Im a free agent and I see:

1.) Improved team in large market with premeir players and a premeir coach

2.) Plenty of cash

3.) A chance to be a missing peice to become a true contender

I jump on it.

In 2007, Bynum (a true Center) would be coming around to making consistent contributions.

I think the Lakers have targeted 2007 as their first year of REAL true darkhorse contention. And their plan fits that like a glove!


----------



## Sean (Jun 7, 2002)

LoyalBull said:


> Im a little unclear why people would be pissed.
> 
> Green is an athletic swingman.
> 
> ...



yep, what you said. :clap:


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

Alot of teams passed on Green. Even after the workouts, many teams were speaking very highly of him, including the teams that passed on him and had an immediate need for a high scoring swingman. Maybe Gerald Green is just not that good, and it was all just smokescreens. In an interview with Bernie Bickerstaff, he said Green was worth the 5th pick, yet didn't take him with 5 or 13, LA who apparently had an infatuation with Green didn't take him at 10, Toronto, also didn't take him at 7 or 16. I think there might be to it. Mitch is dumb, but not THAT dumb.


----------



## Truth34 (May 28, 2003)

Sorry, but Mitch is THAT dumb.

Bynum is a good roll of the dice, but there are many factors as to why Green fell. 

Portland wanted Webster slightly over Green, but later tried to trade into the middle of the 1st round to also get Green.

The Lakers needed a center. Charlotte needed to sell tickets. Toronto is stupid. Some of the teams needed more experience. 

I guess only time will tell.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

Truth34 said:


> Sorry, but Mitch is THAT dumb.
> 
> Bynum is a good roll of the dice, but there are many factors as to why Green fell.
> 
> ...


Webster was barely a blip on the radar of most NBA teams and now he gets picked at the top of the lottery by Portland, way ahead of Green? Something is wrong with that picture. Green and Webster basically project to the same position and will probably have the same developmental curve. Why did Portland want Webster instead of Green? Webster may be a better shooter but Green supposedly had a much higher ceiling. Charlotte could have used a guy like Green with one of their picks and they passed on him twice. Toronto passed, despite needing a SF-type. The Lakers passed. I think there were other factors involved. One, I think Green's refusal to work out against other players rubbed some GM the wrong way. Also, I think some people questioned how good he actually was. I mean, obviously he's athletic as hell and can score. However, there were some concerns about his work ethic and his defensive commitment. Also, he's on the thin side and probably needs some time in the weight room before having the capability to play for 30-35 minutes a night. In summary, I just don't think he was quite as good as he was hyped up to be. He might end up being a great player but I think he needs alot more work than people were/are willing to admit. Otherwise, he would have gone much higher.


----------



## clien (Jun 2, 2005)

i ws not angry that we passed on green at all, unless we eventually plan on dealing caron and odom down the line, b/c we cant have 4 guys who are most (in some cases only)affective when they have the ball we have kobe odom and butler we didnt need gerald green,as for the future bynum wasnt a bad choice anyways with his size and athleticism hes going to be good down the road, and he can still develope much more he wont turn 18 until like a week before the 06 season starts


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Truth34 said:


> Sorry, but Mitch is THAT dumb.
> 
> Bynum is a good roll of the dice, but there are many factors as to why Green fell.
> 
> ...


Hopefully it's not too long for the storied Celtics franchise. Its been nearly 20 years after all.


----------



## luizmelo (Sep 18, 2003)

22ryno said:


> Pretty pissed but passing on Ukic in the second round hurt makes me want to give them a F grade.


if you give a F-, I will agree...


----------



## BallStateCards (Oct 14, 2004)

I don't know about Ukic, he was a second rounder for a reason...

I was happy we didn't get Green. We're fine at the swingman position anyway. I'm more pissed that Simien is playing for the damn Heat.


----------



## clien (Jun 2, 2005)

ClayVTrainum said:


> I don't know about Ukic, he was a second rounder for a reason...
> 
> I was happy we didn't get Green. We're fine at the swingman position anyway. I'm more pissed that Simien is playing for the damn Heat.


imo that was an awsome pick for the heat

question: is udonis haslem an *unrestricted* free agent and if so do u think we can get him w/ the mle...i personally think a pg should be our #1 priority in fa anyways, but what do yall think


----------



## Lakerman33 (Oct 16, 2004)

clien said:


> question: is udonis haslem an *unrestricted* free agent and if so do u think we can get him w/ the mle...i personally think a pg should be our #1 priority in fa anyways, but what do yall think


Yeah I think he is but im not 100% sure

BUT because of this draft were not really needing a 4. If you look at our depth Chart were just lacking a decent pg but a 4 that can play that gritty tough rebounding role would be great( i dont know how good ronny will be)


----------



## Mr. Hobbes (Jul 1, 2005)

Green? no way.. Kobe aint gonna let anyone take shot that belong to him.. using Green as strictly a spot up shooter is a waste of talent


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

Outside of the HS All Star games, highlights etc, none of us have really seen that much of Gerald Green. Everyone here was just excited because of how highly Mitch and other GM's talked about him, but none of us REALLY know how good he is. Its obvious that Green was just a smokescreen, so theres nothing to get upset about.


----------

