# Lakers Interested in Earl Boykins?



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

> Sources close to agent Mark Termini confirmed to RealGM’s Christopher Reina yesterday that Earl Boykins will not exercise his $3 million option for next season, which will make him an unrestricted free agent next month. The Bucks acquired Boykins from the Nuggets in January, after averaging over twenty points per game in a stretch for Denver. *With a light free agent class this summer Boykins should cash in, and rumors have the Lakers, Cavaliers, and Nuggets interested in the guard.* He’d make a perfect fit in Cleveland, unless Mike Brown thinks Daniel Gibson is more than a one-hit wonder.


http://www.realgm.com/src_feature/929/20070621/the_active_bulls_realgm_makes_headlines_boykins_bolts_and_cadillac/


----------



## L.A. Guy (Jun 8, 2007)

Hell yea! The little guy can flat out play. Do it Mitch!


----------



## Showtime87 (Jun 27, 2005)

Earl is for real. He's a sparkplug, and a very good shooter. I would love to see him as a Laker next year.


----------



## Theonee (Dec 5, 2006)

NO MIDGET ALLOWED. Earl is a point guard who refuses to pass. He is a good three point shooter, but he shoots 40% from the floor.
As for his defense, he can't even guard a pole.


----------



## cmd34 (Jul 17, 2002)

No thanks.


----------



## L.A. Guy (Jun 8, 2007)

You guys are right..our previous PG's sasha,smush,shaman,Jordan they are all better shooters and defenders..yes you guys are all on the money with that one!


----------



## Bartholomew Hunt (Mar 4, 2003)

L.A Guy said:


> You guys are right..our previous PG's sasha,smush,shaman,Jordan they are all better shooters and defenders..yes you guys are all on the money with that one!


Ding ding ding.

It would be an obvious upgrade. I would rather see the MLE spent on someone better though, and that's probably what it's going to take to bring him in.


----------



## Showtime87 (Jun 27, 2005)

He's not gonna be brought in to play defense! Obviously. He's someone that provides offense in a pinch and is capable of changing the pace of the game anytime the ball is in his hands. He may not be quite worth the MLE, but you could do a lot worse.


----------



## L.A. Guy (Jun 8, 2007)

Two words: Do it Mitch! ..wait that was 3, oh well you guys get the point.


----------



## KDOS (Nov 29, 2005)

Theonee said:


> NO MIDGET ALLOWED. Earl is a point guard who refuses to pass. He is a good three point shooter, but he shoots 40% from the floor.
> As for his defense, he can't even guard a pole.


Seriously.


No matter what some people say, IMO we need a defensive minded point guard, more than a undersized shoot first point guard.


If we want to get past the Suns or the Spurs in the postseason next year, we better look at other options, plus for the MLE? I hope not...


----------



## L.A. Guy (Jun 8, 2007)

Ya a defensive pg is good..but nash and parker dont spend any energy on playing defense because our pathetic pg's cant shoot for squat!


----------



## Showtime87 (Jun 27, 2005)

KOBEDUNKEDONSHAQ said:


> Seriously.
> 
> 
> No matter what some people say, IMO we need a defensive minded point guard, more than a undersized shoot first point guard.
> ...


Yes the team needs defense at the point, among other positions, but they also severly lack the type of offensive spark that Boykins can provide. Kobe was essentially the only player in the backcourt who could be depended upon to hit a jumper with any kind of regularity, with the exception of a few flashes from Jordan Farmar. Boykins has proven he can play in this league and put up some fairly impressive numbers for a player of any size. He's not a novelty act, he's a good NBA PG who can help any team with his skillset.


----------



## Bartholomew Hunt (Mar 4, 2003)

Please name some good defensive PGs that could be had fairly easily. There are not many with the ****ty rules. Show me a good defensive PG and I will show you a good defensive anchor right behind him to clean up the mess.


----------



## Showtime87 (Jun 27, 2005)

Bartholomew Hunt said:


> Please name some good defensive PGs that could be had fairly easily. There are not many with the ****ty rules. Show me a good defensive PG and I will show you a good defensive anchor right behind him to clean up the mess.


Very well said. Excellent point. :clap2:


----------



## L.A. Guy (Jun 8, 2007)

We dont necessarily need a good defensive pg. We just need someone to keep up with nash, barbosa, parker, etc. We need them to be an offensive threat so these guys can spend some energy on D, which means less energy on scoring on us.


----------



## Showtime87 (Jun 27, 2005)

L.A Guy said:


> We dont necessarily need a good defensive pg. We just need someone to keep up with nash, barbosa, parker, etc. We need them to be an offensive threat so these guys can spend some energy on D, which means less energy on scoring on us.


Another excellent point...


----------



## KDOS (Nov 29, 2005)

Showtime87 said:


> Yes the team needs defense at the point, among other positions, but they also severly lack the type of offensive spark that Boykins can provide. Kobe was essentially the only player in the backcourt who could be depended upon to hit a jumper with any kind of regularity, with the exception of a few flashes from Jordan Farmar. Boykins has proven he can play in this league and put up some fairly impressive numbers for a player of any size. He's not a novelty act, he's a good NBA PG who can help any team with his skillset.


Seriously guys. Do y'all think Earl will be a perfect fit for the Tri? I mean c'mon fellas. The guy is quick, sure but he's also a streaky shooter(career %41). If our concept is for Boykins to somehow outscore Nash, Parker and Terry next year, then we might as well forget it, because Earl is not on their level and much more on a playoff series.




Boykins is the type of player that you should have if your team has a strong foundation on your point guard slot. And so far, Farmar is the designated starter next year. We've seen how his inexperience hurt us last year against the Suns.


We have to realize that as of right now, LA's plan is still dependent on Kobe and Phil, therefore we should look forward knowing that we can still compete for a championship, and that we should add pieces that canhelp us tremendously in some areas. 


Boykins would be a great addition. But again for the MLE? No Thank you. A whole lot of guards can be had this year, MO Williams, Charlie Bell and even Chris Duhon are available, last time I checked.


----------



## cmd34 (Jul 17, 2002)

I would think after 2 or 3 of Boykins' patented coast-to-coast numbers, Kobe would punt Boykins in to the Staples Center crowd.


----------



## Showtime87 (Jun 27, 2005)

Mo Williams would be the grand prize of this season's FA PG's, but there's no way he's coming for the MLE. I wouldn't mind having Duhon, but he's also going to cost us the MLE, which I don't think he's worth at this point.


----------



## KDOS (Nov 29, 2005)

L.A Guy said:


> We dont necessarily need a good defensive pg. We just need someone to keep up with nash, barbosa, parker, etc. We need them to be an offensive threat so these guys can spend some energy on D, which means less energy on scoring on us.


And our answer for Nash,Barbosa and Parker is a 5'5 guard, who makes a living because of his jumper? So this is our answer to Nash, Terry, Parker and Barbosa when Farmar is on foul trouble?



I dont know whats all this logic about tiring out the Suns. Because when jealthy these Lakers simply cannot beat the Suns in their own game.


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

Personally, I don't necessarily want Boykins on the team if we can get someone better, but at this point, it's not looking like that's going to happen, so if Boykins does indeed sign with the Lakers, I can only hope he plays his hardest and help get things going for us.


----------



## KDOS (Nov 29, 2005)

Showtime87 said:


> Mo Williams would be the grand prize of this season's FA PG's, but there's no way he's coming for the MLE. I wouldn't mind having Duhon, but he's also going to cost us the MLE, which I don't think he's worth at this point.


Thats a bit reaching it. Mo is good, but he's not the grand prize of FA PG. He's not Chauncey Billups.


Duhon is not a a Free Agent, so there's no need for the Lakers to use the MLE on him. Bulls are simply shopping him.


----------



## L.A. Guy (Jun 8, 2007)

KOBEDUNKEDONSHAQ said:


> And our answer for Nash,Barbosa and Parker is a 5'5 guard, who makes aliving because of his jumper when Farmar is on foul trouble?
> 
> 
> 
> I dont know whats all this logic about tiring out the Suns. Because when jealthy these Lakers simply cannot beat the Suns in their own game.


I didnt say he is the answer for these guys. I just said he we need someone to keep up with them. None of our guards were able to do this. Last time I checked boykins is pretty quick at 5'5 or 5'6. And I didnt say that Boykins was going to score as much as nash and parker, but he can score anywhere from 10-25 ppg..and thats enough to make nash and parker play some freakin D.


----------



## Showtime87 (Jun 27, 2005)

KOBEDUNKEDONSHAQ said:


> Thats a bit reaching it. Mo is good, but he's not the grand prize of FA PG. He's not Chauncey Billups.
> 
> 
> Duhon is not a a Free Agent, so there's no need for the Lakers to use the MLE on him. Bulls are simply shopping him.


Considering Billups is very likely to resign I would definitely say Williams is #1. He might even be the number one guy regardless. He's younger and on the verge of becoming a top 5 NBA Pg.


----------



## KDOS (Nov 29, 2005)

Showtime87 said:


> Considering Billups is very likely to resign I would definitely say Williams is #1. He might even be the number one guy regardless.* He's younger and on the verge of becoming a top 5 NBA Pg.*



Man, you just keep digging a hole for yourself.


----------



## KDOS (Nov 29, 2005)

L.A Guy said:


> I didnt say he is the answer for these guys. I just said he we need someone to keep up with them. None of our guards were able to do this. Last time I checked boykins is pretty quick at 5'5 or 5'6. And I didnt say that Boykins was going to score as much as nash and parker, but he can score anywhere from 10-25 ppg..and thats enough to make nash and parker play some freakin D.


Again, if our plan is to somehow make Nash and Barbosa play defense by using a 41% FG shooter as our bait. Then I wish us all the luck in the world.


Hey, If LA ends up with Boykins, I hope he fits well and proves me wrong. I just really have a very bad feeling of wasting another MLE for a player who wouldnt really help much.


----------



## Showtime87 (Jun 27, 2005)

KOBEDUNKEDONSHAQ said:


> Man, you just keep digging a hole for yourself.


Okay, if you say so...Just keep close tabs on Williams next season and we'll revisit the issue then.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

Pass on Boykins unless he comes for cheap. No defense chucker. Pargo gives us that at a discounted rate.


----------



## Theonee (Dec 5, 2006)

If it is difficult to find a defensive point guard , then atleast try to find someone who is bigger and can shoot more than 40 % from the field.


----------



## Showtime87 (Jun 27, 2005)

Theonee said:


> If it is difficult to find a defensive point guard , then atleast try to find someone who is bigger and can shoot more than 40 % from the field.


Right, who is the magical defensive master that everyone seems to think is so readily available? You could probably get GP back, maybe he'll regain his 1994 defensive form.


----------



## Theonee (Dec 5, 2006)

Showtime87 said:


> Right, who is the magical defensive master that everyone seems to think is so readily available? You could probably get GP back, maybe he'll regain his 1994 defensive form.


We don't have to find all defense pgs, but that doesn't mean we have to sign the worst defensive players in the league.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Holy crap. 

90% of the board would hate him within the first month.

He is a 5'5" Chucky Atkins. Most Laker fans wished death on Chucky.

"The grass is greener..."


----------



## L.A. Guy (Jun 8, 2007)

Jamel Irief said:


> Holy crap.
> 
> 90% of the board would hate him within the first month.
> 
> ...


I actually think chucky is alot better than what we have had the past two years.


----------



## Bartholomew Hunt (Mar 4, 2003)

L.A Guy said:


> I actually think chucky is alot better than what we have had the past two years.


Smush in the first half of last season was great. I guess he became content and lost the fire in his belly.


----------



## KDOS (Nov 29, 2005)

L.A Guy said:


> I actually think chucky is alot better than what we have had the past two years.


Smush in the first half of last season was great. I guess he became content and lost the fire in his belly.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

L.A Guy said:


> I actually think chucky is alot better than what we have had the past two years.


I thought both Chucky and Smush were comptent PGs. Most of this board disagrees though and would hate Boykins as well.


----------



## Showtime87 (Jun 27, 2005)

Smush was nothing but inconsistent for the entire time he was in a Lakers uniform. He would have a great game or two and then completetly fall off the map and have a stretch of miserable performances. Neither Smush nor Chucky were true NBA starters, they only started for this team because there was no better option. I'm not saying Boykins would be my first choice, but if they did bring him in to split time Farmar next season I think it would be a definite improvement over what they've had for the last 4 or 5 seasons. The player I would really like to see the Lakers go after is the other Earl - Watson. Seattle has ridnour playing a significant portion of the minutes and Watson is definitely good enough to start in most situations. He's a very intelligent player who also brings an element of toughness to the position, which admittedly you won't get from someone like Boykins. He could probably be had fairly cheaply too, I would ship Radmanovic back to Seattle in a second straight up for Watson.


----------



## BDB (Dec 19, 2006)

Doesn't Phil Jackson like tall point guards that can play defense?
Not so sure how Earl would work in the triangle offense.


----------



## Showtime87 (Jun 27, 2005)

BDB said:


> Doesn't Phil Jackson like tall point guards that can play defense?
> Not so sure how Earl would work in the triangle offense.


Earl actually plays pretty big at 6'1''. He's a little smaller than the prototype triangle guard, but then again the Lakers haven't had one since Ron Harper retired. With Watson I don't think size would be an issue whatsoever, and he definitely has the capabilities to grasp the triangle offense. He's a smart player and a pass-first point, which this team has sorely lacked. I wouldn't mind seeing Boykins signed this offseason, but now that I think about I'd rather give up something like a Radmanovic or Brown for a proven guard like Watson and save the MLE for additional veteran frontcourt help. He's just been under the radar his entire NBA career playing in Memphis, Denver and Seattle. Another bonus is that he's a UCLA grad and bringing him back to LA would seem to be a great fit for both himself and the team, as well as the LA fans.


----------



## KDOS (Nov 29, 2005)

Showtime87 said:


> Earl actually plays pretty big at 6'1''.


DUDE!


Boykins is 5'5. My Grandma's taller than him.


Keep tellin ya man, that hole is getting deeper.


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

KOBEDUNKEDONSHAQ said:


> DUDE!
> 
> 
> Boykins is 5'5. My Grandma's taller than him.
> ...


Dude! Hes talking about Watson man.:lol:


----------



## KDOS (Nov 29, 2005)

CubanLaker said:


> Dude! Hes talking about Watson man.:lol:


:lol: 


He said, Earl and the thread is about Earl Boykins.

Self pwnt! LMAO


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

KOBEDUNKEDONSHAQ said:


> :lol:
> 
> 
> He said, Earl and the thread is about Earl Boykins.
> ...





> Earl actually plays pretty big at 6'1''. He's a little smaller than the prototype triangle guard, but then again the Lakers haven't had one since Ron Harper retired. With *Watson* I don't think size would be an issue whatsoever, and he definitely has the capabilities to grasp the triangle offense.


God im bored!
:lol:


----------



## Showtime87 (Jun 27, 2005)

KOBEDUNKEDONSHAQ said:


> DUDE!
> 
> 
> Boykins is 5'5. My Grandma's taller than him.
> ...


Apparently you didn't read my post did you? I was answering a question in regard to Earl Watson, who is 6'1". Okay? LOL


----------



## Showtime87 (Jun 27, 2005)

CubanLaker said:


> God im bored!
> :lol:


Glad somebody took the time to read the post first.


----------



## KDOS (Nov 29, 2005)

Showtime87 said:


> Apparently you didn't read my post did you? I was answering a question in regard to Earl Watson, who is 6'1". Okay? LOL


I quickly glanced at your post and read Earl and 6'1. I was like WTF is shotime somking, coz I want some of that.

:lol: 

5 Star Thread right here fellas.



Off Season...its fantastic


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

KOBEDUNKEDONSHAQ said:


> I quickly glanced at your post and read Earl and 6'1. I was like WTF is shotime somking, coz I want some of that.
> 
> :lol:
> 
> ...


I created a 5 Star Thread?!?!?!

GREAT SUCCESS!

Oh, and uh...Earl Watson would be better than Boykins.


----------



## KDOS (Nov 29, 2005)

Basel57 said:


> I created a 5 Star Thread?!?!?!
> 
> GREAT SUCCESS!
> 
> Oh, and uh...Earl Watson would be better than Boykins.


Yes sir indeed!

:clap:


----------



## BDB (Dec 19, 2006)

I like Earl Watson as well he's a great backup point guard. He'd be good alongside Kobe if he stays.


----------

