# If this is true we're screwed



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

http://espn.go.com/los-angeles/nba/...sota-timberwolves-trade-offer-michael-beasley

The Minnesota Timberwolves offered to trade Michael Beasley to the Los Angeles Lakers for a first-round draft pick, but the Lakers turned them down, according to a league source.

While Beasley, a talented and athletic small forward, would fill one of the Lakers' greatest needs, the Lakers rejected the offer because they do not want to add to their luxury tax bill, according to the source.


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

> Source: Lakers decline Wolves' offer
> 
> The Minnesota Timberwolves offered to trade Michael Beasley to the Los Angeles Lakers for a first-round draft pick, but the Lakers turned them down, according to a league source.
> 
> ...


SMH


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Im holding onto the hope that since this came from Chris Broussard it's total bullshit


----------



## Wade County (Jun 22, 2003)

If im a Lakers fan, i'm so dissapointed right now. That's a deal that should be done 10x out of 10.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

if they're so concerned about the money they should do the deal and amnesty artest


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

so I guess we better be prepared for no moves at the deadline. I can't believe we've allowed the league to leverage us to the point of mediocrity if true and it seems true based on what we did with the LO trade the new direction the Lakers are headed isn't a good one. 

Beasley would help us alot take alot of pressure off alot of guys and take pressure off of him. Very disappointed to read this.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Would it have been the TPE and the pick?


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/feb/15/sports/la-sp-plaschke-20110216

another log on the barbie:



With new TV deal, Lakers are taking the little guy out of the picture

Starting with the 2012-13 NBA season, the team's games apparently will no longer be available on free TV. Think only a small number of viewers will be disenfranchised? Think again — try 1.6 million.

February 15, 2011|Bill Plaschke

Slowly, forcefully, chillingly, like Ron Artest leaning on Paul Pierce in the paint, the Lakers have been pushing their average fans into irrelevance.

First, they nudged them from Staples Center courtside. Then they dragged them out of the lower level. Soon, even the price of nosebleed seats required the opening of a vein, and the heart of Laker Nation was dumped into the street.

Well, the thinking was, at least they can still watch them for free on television.

Not so fast, as the long, cold arms of the Lakers are now preparing to shove their average fans out of their own homes.

In striking a 20-year agreement with Time Warner Cable that begins in 2012, the Lakers are removing themselves from free TV for all but the occasional national network telecasts, a stunning move by a team whose popularity was built by the of sort of grass-roots fans on whom they are pulling the plug.

Beginning in 2012, only those rare Lakers games found on ABC will be free, as most of the schedule will be accessible only through a pay-TV service — cable or satellite providers such as Time Warner, DirecTV, Charter and Cox. For the several million in town who have such services, this will probably mean a small monthly increase in their bill, but it shouldn't dramatically change their viewing habits.

But did you know that about 620,000 homes in this area do not have a pay-TV service? Based on the 2000 U.S. census average of 2.59 people per household, that's roughly 1.6 million people, or a city roughly the size of Phoenix, and imagine if none of those people could ever watch the Suns on television? How long do you think the Suns would continue to exist?


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

We just signed a ****ing 3 billion dollar tv deal!! **** saving!!


----------



## DaRizzle (May 22, 2007)

I dont know about this story. Anything true AND untrue gets leaked out of David Khan's office. Bill Simmons has gone to great lengths explaining this and actually had a sitdown interview with him a while back on the radio. This could real or fake story was probably intentionally "leaked" by the Twolves front office.

...I wanna hate on lil Jimmy but Ill reserve judgement until the trade deadline...Beasley is a head case and there might be different opportunities out there.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

We can always revisit this closer to the deadline. Better to hold onto our assets until we are sure we can't do better. And if he is traded by then, it's not like there aren't any other bench scorers to go after.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

bench? he would start tonight if they did the deal


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

yeah it could always be a negotiating ploy I guess


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

I'm thinking the same thing Rizz. Isn't it great timing that this story comes out the day after Beasley has a great game against the Clippers? And on the same day the Wolves play us.... Something doesn't smell right.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Dre said:


> Would it have been the TPE and the pick?


woulda hadto - that's only way they can take him back without sending salary out but then again that's all the TPE really is theoretical cap space to make those kind of moves


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

> “@AlexKennedyNBA: The Los Angeles Lakers have expressed interest in Kirk Hinrich, according to sources. No deal is imminent.”


...


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

I don't know you've been hearing about the Lakers trying to use that TPE in the right situation (Sessions, Calderon, Beasley just a couple days ago) and never has it come up before that they'd be weary of the luxury tax.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

true


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

we don't appear to willing to make an actual move until the Howard thing is said and done and apparently they don't want what we got or are still holding out hope they can keep Howard which is a pipedream. 

I don't remember Shaq back in 96 creating any drama regarding his potetial free agency.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

actually I think people in Orlando were talking shit about him and saying he wasnt worth what he was going to ask for leading up to that summer - maybe I dreamed that but I dont think so


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

Howard isn't coming to Los Angeles, unless he wants to vacation here.

I really don't get the Howard thing...this guy is worse at free throws than Bynum, and has only slightly better stats than Bynum does offensively.

We already have a world-class center...we don't need to upgrade at center! We need a ****ing PG. That's what we need.

Oh, and a new 3rd...oh, and a deeper bench...or should I ask for only a "slightly-deep" bench? Can't be greedy, right?

Yeah, we are screwed...


----------



## onelakerfan (Nov 11, 2004)

same here, i don't care if we don't get howard as long as he stays in the east


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

Supposedly Minny was asking for both 1st round picks.


----------



## Cris (Jun 18, 2003)

I call BS... Use the ****ing Amensity Clause if they are worried about the luxury cap bill.


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

> “@Lakerholicz: UPDATE: @LAIreland says his sources told him that Timberwolves asked for TWO first-round picks for Beasley, not one. http://t.co/HLIjhaqt”


...


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

that's different - two is bullshit for a guy with an expiring that theyre clearly not going to resign


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

e-monk said:


> that's different - two is bullshit for a guy with an expiring that theyre clearly not going to resign


I agree.


----------



## ceejaynj (Oct 9, 2005)

Ron said:


> I really don't get the Howard thing...this guy is worse at free throws than Bynum, and has only slightly better stats than Bynum does offensively.
> 
> We already have a world-class center...we don't need to upgrade at center! We need a ****ing PG. That's what we need.
> 
> Oh, and a new 3rd...oh, and a deeper bench...or should I ask for only a "slightly-deep" bench?


I couldn't agree with you more Ron!


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

Ron said:


> Howard isn't coming to Los Angeles, unless he wants to vacation here.
> 
> I really don't get the Howard thing...this guy is worse at free throws than Bynum, and has only slightly better stats than Bynum does offensively.
> 
> ...


If you don't think Bynum to Howard is a massive step forward, then you've lost me.

I mean, I get what you're saying. But that's a very short-sighted viewpoint. You're looking at it from the perspective of winning it all this year, but landing Dwight keeps you afloat after Kobe retires while still keeping you extremely competitive in the here and now.

Now if I'm Dwight, I don't think my dream destination is LA, but if I'm LA he's definitely priority number one.


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

2 1st rders for Beasley they can kiss my ass. This is a deep draft where some quality players are gonna get pushed down. If thats the sticking point we wait them out they'll go for the deal for 1 before the deadline.


----------



## Laker Freak (Jul 1, 2003)

I would love for Mitch to play hardball and send a counter offer of 2 second round picks for Beasley. It's not like teams are lining up to trade for the guy. :linsanity:


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

2 First Rounders for Beasley = no way
1 First Rounder = easily, yes


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

BlakeJesus said:


> If you don't think Bynum to Howard is a massive step forward, then you've lost me.
> 
> I mean, I get what you're saying. But that's a very short-sighted viewpoint. You're looking at it from the perspective of winning it all this year, but landing Dwight keeps you afloat after Kobe retires while still keeping you extremely competitive in the here and now.
> 
> Now if I'm Dwight, I don't think my dream destination is LA, but if I'm LA he's definitely priority number one.


No, I disagree with you...Bynum is younger and he has just as much to keep the Lakers going forward as Howard does. It's not short-sighted, it's long-term and I really don't think the Lakers have much of a shot at winning this year anyway.


----------



## Laker Freak (Jul 1, 2003)

Ron said:


> *No, I disagree with you...Bynum is younger and he has just as much to keep the Lakers going forward as Howard does. It's not short-sighted, it's long-term* and I really don't think the Lakers have much of a shot at winning this year anyway.


How can you say that? Even though Bynum is younger than Howard he will *never* be a better player. Not now and not 12 years from now. Then there's the fact that Howard has played in 99% of his team's games since entering the league and Bynum has missed significant time in 4 out of the last 5 seasons.


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

Laker Freak said:


> How can you say that? Even though Bynum is younger than Howard he will *never* be a better player. Not now and not 12 years from now. Then there's the fact that Howard has played in 99% of his team's games since entering the league and Bynum has missed significant time in 4 out of the last 5 seasons.


Howard's free-throw shooting is a true liability...worse than Shaq ever was. Bynum is a better free-throw shooter, period. (Not by much, I will grant you that.)

Look at Bynum's numbers, and look at Howard's numbers...

Bynum: PPG 16.3 RPG 12.80 APG 1.3 EFF + 23.07
Howard: PPG 20.1 RPG 15.30 APG 2.1 EFF + 26.37

So, do you really think our problem is at center? I don't think so...I think our bigger problems, by far, is getting a 1, a 3, and a bench.

Some of you guys aren't thinking. Not at all.


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

C'mon Ron. Don't overrate Bynum. He's a great young center but he isn't on Dwights level yet. The advantage he has in youth is marginal when taking into account his injury history. And Dwight is far better defensively while also being a top free agent draw. With that said, I won't trade Bynum for any center not named Dwight and you're right when you say we have bigger holes to fill at the 1 and 3.


----------



## ii9ce (Feb 1, 2005)

Assuming he stays injury free, we can expect 2 to 3 years of top level play from Kobe. On that basis, I say forget Dwieght and plug the holes we have at point, SF & the bench. With the right moves, and with Kobe still producing, we couldm, with a bit of luck, win a ring or two before Kobe is done. 

As far as am concerned, its this option, or go into full rebuilding mode and trade our assets for picks and young players with Bynum as the nuclus of the team or just do an OKC....which is unlikely as looking at Lakers organisation history, they dont really do rebuilding.


----------



## DaRizzle (May 22, 2007)

Ron said:


> Howard's free-throw shooting is a true liability...worse than Shaq ever was. Bynum is a better free-throw shooter, period. (Not by much, I will grant you that.)
> 
> Look at Bynum's numbers, and look at Howard's numbers...
> 
> ...


I agree there isnt a problem with Center but it is a concern. History says Bynums knee will fall off and have to be reattached sometime within the next year. He's already taking shots as upkeep for his knee. I HOPE AND PRAY Im wrong but we are all gonna feel really really dumb and helpless when(if) he has a major knee injury again. We dont have a concern at C until we dont have a C(Bynum injury). 

If the Lakers are healthy then I agree with your assessment....but I REALLY dont think Bynum is gonna last. 

If the Lakers were to trade Bynum for Dwight I give it at least a 50% chance that within a year Lakers fans will be saying "Holy crap Im glad we traded for Dwight since Bynum just had his knee blow up again, I hear they are considering microfracture surgery"


----------



## ceejaynj (Oct 9, 2005)

They are certainly taking chances on Drew's knees with all the alley-oop passes they throw him.


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

DaRizzle said:


> I agree there isnt a problem with Center but it is a concern. History says Bynums knee will fall off and have to be reattached sometime within the next year. He's already taking shots as upkeep for his knee. I HOPE AND PRAY Im wrong but we are all gonna feel really really dumb and helpless when(if) he has a major knee injury again. We dont have a concern at C until we dont have a C(Bynum injury).
> 
> If the Lakers are healthy then I agree with your assessment....but I REALLY dont think Bynum is gonna last.
> 
> If the Lakers were to trade Bynum for Dwight I give it at least a 50% chance that within a year Lakers fans will be saying "Holy crap Im glad we traded for Dwight since Bynum just had his knee blow up again, I hear they are considering microfracture surgery"


It is the injury history that is scaring you that is also scaring Orlando to make the deal.

I say roll the dice and stick to Bynum. I know I am in the minority here but I have always been a Drew supporter...although he did test my patience with his unsportsmanlike hits on Beasley and Barea last season.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

I'd trade Gasol/Bynum for Howard/fillers in a heartbeat.


----------



## DaRizzle (May 22, 2007)

Wilt_The_Stilt said:


> I'd trade Gasol/Bynum for Howard/fillers in a heartbeat.


Wait Im confused...you mean both or one or the other?


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

It does not really appear that Howard is really interested in the Lakers or that the Magic are really interested in Bynum. I don't think they are interested in having Bynum as their best player and why would they be?


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

I just read that Howard is saying he wouldnt resign here anyway - move on


----------



## seifer0406 (Jun 8, 2003)

Ron said:


> It is the injury history that is scaring you that is also scaring Orlando to make the deal.


I think Otis Smith being retarded is what's blocking the deal. Retarded first, injury history second.


----------



## seifer0406 (Jun 8, 2003)

I mean you know that Marcin freaking Gortat is averaging 16 and 10 this year. That's almost Bynum numbers right there. They could've had this instead they have Hedo Turkoglu and Jason Richardson for the next 50 years.

I'm actually surprised that the Lakers are even offering Gasol + Bynum. Should just tell Otis that Bynum actually changed his name to Metta World Peace and just give him Artest and Gasol.


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

seifer0406 said:


> I mean you know that Marcin freaking Gortat is averaging 16 and 10 this year. That's almost Bynum numbers right there. They could've had this instead they have Hedo Turkoglu and Jason Richardson for the next 50 years.
> 
> I'm actually surprised that the Lakers are even offering Gasol + Bynum. Should just tell Otis that Bynum actually changed his name to Metta World Peace and just give him Artest and Gasol.


The Lakers are not offering both Bynum and Gasol.

As was mentioned above, doofus won't even resign with the Lakers. Deal is toast. Move on to New Jersey, Dwight, and don't bother calling.


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

Why even have a list of teams if hes not willing to sign an extension?? It seems pretty clear that Dwight is using us a leverage to force a deal to the Nets.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

seifer0406 said:


> I mean you know that Marcin freaking Gortat is averaging 16 and 10 this year. That's almost Bynum numbers right there.


except that Gortat is the primary scoring option on his team and is being spoon fed his touches by a hall of fame bound point guard whereas Bynum has to make do with the big dog's table scraps


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

King Sancho Fantastic said:


> Why even have a list of teams if hes not willing to sign an extension?? It seems pretty clear that Dwight is using us a leverage to force a deal to the Nets.


or the Mavs 

I'd be a little wary of signing with the shell of what right now constitutes an 11-25 crap-fest (and that's with Deron Williams already on board btw) - maybe lucking out in the lottery and landing the top pick could change things but that team sucks right now and will be stripped down for parts this summer just to sign him and Williams - no guarantees he'd be any better off there than he is now


----------



## DaRizzle (May 22, 2007)

e-monk said:


> I just read that Howard is saying he wouldnt resign here anyway - move on


Any article I found mentioning that was 1. a "rumor" and 2. about a month old

...just clarifying


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

DaRizzle said:


> Any article I found mentioning that was 1. a "rumor" and 2. about a month old
> 
> ...just clarifying


http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=ycn-11041434

missed this one from this morning I guess (it's an aggregation of a feb 27 report, for clarity's sake)


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

a couple things Howard is so much better than Bynum its almost a joke. Bynum is a good center but hardly ever has a great game. He doesn't really have great player talent. Howard does he can manufacture great games off offensive boards and stick backs and defensively ontrolling the lane with his athleticism. The athleticism is the big difference and its game altering with Howard. 

He plays the pick and roll defensively incredibly with quick feet and recovery. Bynum just doesn't. 

2nd thing who the hell knows the real feelings with Howard on whom he would sign an extension with and where his heart truly is. There are alot of reasons for disinfo to be out there. 

Why wouldn't the Nets leak out there through emissaries yeah he truly wants here who the hell ever truly wants to play with the Nets in nba history thats a place players wanna leave not go to.

So to me I have no idea what rumors to believe.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Bynum is a more polished offensive player than Dwight and has become a fairly good paint presence defensively (you dont see 'great games' from him because he plays with #24 and rarely gets more than 13 shots a game) but those knees are what worry me 

that said Pau+Bynum for Dwight and dreck doesnt do much for us and it sounds like (now two different reports: amick and vecsey - and they're not talking to the nets they're talking to an anonymous 'friend of howard' whoever that is - could be his agent, could be some smuck - who knows)he doesnt want to be here so it's a dead horse at this point


----------



## DaRizzle (May 22, 2007)

e-monk said:


> http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=ycn-11041434
> 
> missed this one from this morning I guess (it's an aggregation of a feb 27 report, for clarity's sake)


im not trying to be a dick, but i dont see where it said he wouldnt resign if traded to LA


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

http://www.google.com/search?q=howa...F-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7ADRA_enUS437


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

e-monk said:


> Bynum is a more polished offensive player than Dwight and has become a fairly good paint presence defensively (you dont see 'great games' from him because he plays with #24 and rarely gets more than 13 shots a game) but those knees are what worry me
> 
> that said Pau+Bynum for Dwight and dreck doesnt do much for us and it sounds like (now two different reports: amick and vecsey - and they're not talking to the nets they're talking to an anonymous 'friend of howard' whoever that is - could be his agent, could be some smuck - who knows)he doesnt want to be here so it's a dead horse at this point


Bynum has more polished looking moves not offensive game. Howard can get deep most every time Bynum not more than half the time. Bynum gets easy baskets for lobs and things because of Kobe and Pau's presence not nearly as consistent 1on1 against defenders in the post. Howard's athleticism is so far and away from where BYnum is it gives him a chance if he plays with a legit superstar player of being dominant. Not merely pretty good. 

Bynum hardly ever plays well against Howard because of a lack of lateral quickness and explosiveness. 

again I have never heard him said he doesn't want to be here its all speculation that some tend to wanna believe is fact. 

Vecsey has no credibloity as far as I'm concerned most likely parroting someone elses report. its all speculation. 

I do know whats true we are listed as one of the 3 teams as a possible destination.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

yeah, you're off base there


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Yeah I think it's time to let the Dwight dream go. Jim Buss and Kobe ****ed that up, in varying degrees


----------



## Tom (Jul 15, 2002)

Beasley isn't worth a first rounder. He plays one good game a month and that is about it. He is a waste of time. Don't touch this guy.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

The Lakers suck at drafting anyways so I wouldn't be opposed to throwing one at Minny if it meant Beasely in return. 

And I don't even like Beasely or think he's good...We just really need another player that can score, and if nothing else Mike is atleast adequate in that regard.


----------



## DaRizzle (May 22, 2007)

Luke said:


> The Lakers suck at drafting anyways


Disagree...Marc Gasol, Luke Walton, Von Wafer are all 2nd rd picks that have had decent to good NBA careers. Thats pretty good


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Plus when was the last time they really had a high pick...last high pick they had was Bynum at 10 right. A 10 spot is no guarantee to draft an all-star and they did that

But now with a bartender and his best customer as 2/3s of your scouting team that could change


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

DaRizzle said:


> Disagree...Marc Gasol, Luke Walton, Von Wafer are all 2nd rd picks that have had decent to good NBA careers. Thats pretty good


Eh. I forgot about Marc and Von. I guess they're not as bad as I originally stated, but they're still not the Spurs or anything.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Luke said:


> The Lakers suck at drafting anyways so I wouldn't be opposed to throwing one at Minny if it meant Beasely in return.
> 
> And I don't even like Beasely or think he's good...We just really need another player that can score, and if nothing else Mike is atleast adequate in that regard.


for 30 games - that's how long we'd have Beasley

go get Ariza from the Hornets for a first and cap space - they like picks and money right now and dont need some guy log jamming their payroll for another 3 seasons


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

e-monk said:


> for 30 games - that's how long we'd have Beasley
> 
> go get Ariza from the Hornets for a first and cap space - they like picks and money right now and dont need some guy log jamming their payroll for another 3 seasons


Oh yeah he is an expiring isn't he?

I'd much rather have Trevor. I've been bitter ever since I found out what a douche his agent was.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

him and sessions would go a long way to making us whole


----------



## M.V.W. (Apr 2, 2011)

Luke said:


> Oh yeah he is an expiring isn't he?
> 
> *I'd much rather have Trevor.* I've been bitter ever since I found out what a douche his agent was.


Yea, he already knows some of the guys. Am I wrong in thinking that Kupchak and Buss don't want to spend the luxury tax on the wrong player?


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

Seeing as the new luxury tax makes it very hard for big spenders like us to overpay for talent, draft picks have become very VERY valuable. We can't afford to give away our first rounders anymore because we're going to have to flesh out the rest of the roster with cheap talent. Unless we're bringing in a significant piece, I say keep the picks and wait for the summer.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

bullshit - if that is actually the thinking then they need to blow the whole mess up because they are not contenders as constituted and Kobe's window is about as long as his remaining contract

if that's really how they're thinking then they should trade Pau now and amnesty Kobe and **** them

but stop, I've seen nothing to indicate this outside of David lying Kahn's bullshit subterfuge and Chris Broussard's gullibility concerning the same - they've been talking moves all year long and no one's brought up lux tax until Minnie leaked it this week as a reason the Lakers turned down the beasley offer - and lied about how many picks they asked for in the process - luxury tax? that's why you turn down a deal where you send 2 first round picks for a 30 game rental on a pot head? sure it was the luxury tax

now I saw reports today concerning them passing on a sessions for the mavericks pick deal - if that's the case then we really should be worried but Im not going to panic for a couple weeks yet - talk to me on the 16th


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

Yeah Khan tried to run game in the media. he floated the bullshit to get Lakes fans riled up. I still think we get Beasley late if we want him Minny wants him gone and we need him for the run. 

Truth be told I'm not real concerned in that era past Kobe. He'll be elite for another 3-4 years. This is when we try and fortify with some decent depth. Problem is I truly believe Jim is thinking the time after Kobe and doesn't wanna tie up money past when Kobe is gone. Question is does he give a damn about Kobe's last 3-4 elite years.

Make a Sessions move a Beasley move or/and an Arenas move and I think we make a strong run for a ring.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

here's the thing, Jimmy can think that way and still make these moves - 3 summers from now the only current player we will have on our roster (presumably) is Bynum 

Kobe and Pau both come off the books after the 2014 season - right now we have 0 commitments in 2015 - so you figure they extend Bynum, make a couple more runs with this core and rebuild around Drew as he gets to age 27 - the summer of 2014 is for us what this summer is for the celtics


----------

