# Odom for Peja and B-Jax?



## Locke (Jun 16, 2003)

Just reported on the SoCal sports report that the Lakes are trying to get Stojokovic and Bobby Jackson from the Kings, and that the Kings said the Lakers would have to give up Lamar Odom for it to happen.

This is somewhat in conflict to another report saying that Petrie laughed in Mitch's face at the proposal of Odom for Peja straight up (which doesn't work since Odom makes so much more money).

Personally I think it's BS, but I'm just passing the 'news' along.


----------



## Brian34Cook (Mar 26, 2003)

This one aint happening but I think the Jazz one does!


----------



## onelakerfan (Nov 11, 2004)

i hope not, i like odoms game more and his D is better. peja is non existant in playoffs


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

This won't happen if Phil Jackson comes back to town.


----------



## Spriggan (Mar 23, 2004)

onelakerfan said:


> i hope not, i like odoms game more and his D is better. peja is non existant in playoffs


True, but Peja (the catch-n-shoot extraordinaire) would be a much better fit with Kobe than Odom is.

Plus, Bobby Jackson is superior to Chucky Atkins in basically every facet of the game. He'd make a great starting PG for us, and we can finally bring Chucky and Butler off the bench for some offensive firepower.

This trade makes our frontcourt much worse, though. Who will our starting PF be? Grant? Ew.

Another thing I'd hate, though, is seeing Odom in a Kings uniform.


----------



## Peja Vu (Jun 9, 2002)

Spriggan said:


> True, but Peja (the catch-n-shoot extraordinaire) would be a much better fit with Kobe than Odom is.
> 
> Plus, Bobby Jackson is superior to Chucky Atkins in basically every facet of the game. He'd make a great starting PG for us, and we can finally bring Chucky and Butler off the bench for some offensive firepower.
> 
> ...



But BJax is out until the playoffs start and he has been vocal about wanting his option *not* to be picked up. Do the Lakers want that?


----------



## thegza (Feb 18, 2003)

This deal won't go down, so we won't have to worry about it much. I'm sure Mitch is very interested in bringing Peja here but the Kings won't bite on Odom, too many questions surrounding his play this season.

We'll get a deal done with the Jazz, though.


----------



## Lakerman33 (Oct 16, 2004)

This deal wont happen just due to the past history us and the queens have. But as a fan id rather have odom and boozer. I really hope this deal goes down, im crossing my fingers


----------



## SoCalfan21 (Jul 19, 2004)

im hoping the lakers do that boozer one...the lakers really needed more help rebounding then a PG so ill be watchin


----------



## daniel80111 (Dec 29, 2004)

I d love to have Peja on this team. This team would be better balanced, plus its hard to believe last year the guy averaged 24 points a game on 48% fg pct and 44% fg pct from the 3 pt line shooting 7 a game. Those numbers are incredible. Plus I love the fact that I dont think defenses will start sagging on Kobe too much with Peja around. I love Lamar Odom, but it just doesnt seem like he fits in well. I think a shooter would help out the Lakers a lot more than a slasher like Lamar, although he can shoot at times, when Peja is hot, its one of the greatest things to watch, haha.


----------



## Fracture (Mar 31, 2004)

Peja?....No way.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

Locke said:


> Just reported on the SoCal sports report that the Lakes are trying to get Stojokovic and Bobby Jackson from the Kings, and that the Kings said the Lakers would have to give up Lamar Odom for it to happen.
> 
> This is somewhat in conflict to another report saying that Petrie laughed in Mitch's face at the proposal of Odom for Peja straight up (which doesn't work since Odom makes so much more money).
> 
> Personally I think it's BS, but I'm just passing the 'news' along.


Let's see... A uber talented player who would be a waste in this squad for a sharpshooting SF and a PG who actually knows how to defend and create?

I'd do it in a second.

I hope BOTH trades get done.


----------



## Locke (Jun 16, 2003)

PauloCatarino said:


> Let's see... A uber talented player who would be a waste in this squad for a sharpshooting SF and a PG who actually knows how to defend and create?
> 
> I'd do it in a second.
> 
> I hope BOTH trades get done.


Well the thing is that Jackson has a team option on his contract that he doesn't want exercised apparently, and if it isn't he'd be a free agent. He may be looking elsewhere for a bigger payday than what the option would pay him. So since Jackson is basically out for the rest of the season he wouldn't really be getting him, so this trade would essentially be Lamar for Peja. We seem to be in the minority on this, but I wouldn't be so quick to just blow this deal off.

Peja is a proven player and legitimate all-star (not just "all-star capable/talent" mind you like Odom) and I'd seriously consider moving Odom for him. I admit the man has been a choker for his entire career but I'd still be willing to take a gamble on him. Hell, everything about Odom is a gamble. Will he ever become more aggressive? Will he ever play up to his "potential?" Will he ever fit in with Kobe? Will he rediscover his bong?

It helps that Peja doesn't need the ball in his hands to be effective, except for the .0025 seconds it takes for him to shoot it. If the Lakers plan on bringing in another PG whose entire thought process doesn't revolve around shooting 3s like Chucky and is an adept ball-handler and playmaker I'm not sure we'd need 3 guys who need to dominate the ball (Kobe, Odom, PG) to be factors in the games.

All I'm saying is that I wouldn't turn my nose up to this deal if it's true. However, I don't get the feeling that there's much to this.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

Kobe and Peja would be a great duo at the wings. When dealing with wing players, you try to get two guys who do really different things. Kobe dominates the ball, plays great defense, is a great passer while Peja doesn't need the ball for more than a second to get you three points, he moves off the ball really well, unlike Odom. Peja would be a much better fit.


----------



## SoCalfan21 (Jul 19, 2004)

jack haley reported this would not happen so im going to go with him on this one


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

Sir Patchwork said:


> Kobe and Peja would be a great duo at the wings. When dealing with wing players, you try to get two guys who do really different things. Kobe dominates the ball, plays great defense, is a great passer while Peja doesn't need the ball for more than a second to get you three points, he moves off the ball really well, unlike Odom. Peja would be a much better fit.


Amen.

The proposed deal with Peja has always benefitted Los Angeles. Not sure what the Kings see in Lamar Odom, especially since they'll be forced to play him at the 3.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Odom is a facilitator/initiator. Under Jackson he'll play a role similar to Pippen's role in the tri with Jordan and similar to Malone's role last year. Remember, having Kobe dominate the ball is not the purpose of running a motion offense, both Kobe and Jackson realize this. That's why Jackson is heavily rumored to be coming back, that's why Hamblin brought Shaw and Rambis onto the coaching staff, that's why they've been running tri for weeks. It's to get the ball out of Kobe's hands sometimes so that he isn't always trying to create his own offense. A good offense gets the ball to its best scorer through good passing, cutting screening, and spacing, not via isolation, isolation, isolation.

Peja isn’t a facilitator, Odom is. Though, he is a tremendously gifted (and lightening quick) shooter, and that’s an important role in any motion offense. But passing and spacing is far more important than shooting.


----------



## Tyrellaphonte (Feb 21, 2004)

EHL said:


> Odom is a facilitator/initiator. Under Jackson he'll play a role similar to Pippen's role in the tri with Jordan and similar to Malone's role last year. Remember, having Kobe dominate the ball is not the purpose of running a motion offense, both Kobe and Jackson realize this. That's why Jackson is heavily rumored to be coming back, that's why Hamblin brought Shaw and Rambis onto the coaching staff, that's why they've been running tri for weeks. It's to get the ball out of Kobe's hands sometimes so that he isn't always trying to create his own offense. A good offense gets the ball to its best scorer through good passing, cutting screening, and spacing, not via isolation, isolation, isolation.
> 
> Peja isn’t a facilitator, Odom is. Though, he is a tremendously gifted (and lightening quick) shooter, and that’s an important role in any motion offense. But passing and spacing is far more important than shooting.


ur talking like Phil is for sure coming back... doo u kno somethin we dont?


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

High School Dropout said:


> ur talking like Phil is for sure coming back... doo u kno somethin we dont?


I knew the Boozer trade was coming.


----------



## Cris (Jun 18, 2003)

at this time, Brown seems like lot more likely


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

EHL said:


> Odom is a facilitator/initiator. Under Jackson he'll play a role similar to Pippen's role in the tri with Jordan and similar to Malone's role last year. Remember, having Kobe dominate the ball is not the purpose of running a motion offense, both Kobe and Jackson realize this. That's why Jackson is heavily rumored to be coming back, that's why Hamblin brought Shaw and Rambis onto the coaching staff, that's why they've been running tri for weeks. It's to get the ball out of Kobe's hands sometimes so that he isn't always trying to create his own offense. A good offense gets the ball to its best scorer through good passing, cutting screening, and spacing, not via isolation, isolation, isolation.
> 
> Peja isn’t a facilitator, Odom is. Though, he is a tremendously gifted (and lightening quick) shooter, and that’s an important role in any motion offense. But passing and spacing is far more important than shooting.



Very good breakdown.


----------



## pspot (Jul 14, 2004)

I cant see this deal happening....LA would have to include their 1st but even then i cant see SAC giving up Peja and Jackson at this point in the season...and not to mention that if the Boozer trade does go down the Lakers whave just traded Peja's good friend in Divac, he wouldnt be to happy about that


----------



## SoCalfan21 (Jul 19, 2004)

everyone knows that this would benifit the lakers but peja just cant play any friggin defense thats why i would have my doubts about this trade


----------



## underhill_101 (Feb 22, 2005)

it would b a good trade for the lakers. kobe can drive and dish to peja for open 3's. the only problem is that peja cant play any D.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Another thing people overlook; it's the Kings and Lakers. How many times have division rivals traded with each other? And the Maloofs don't exactly love the Los Angeles Lakers.


----------



## Lakerman33 (Oct 16, 2004)

EHL said:


> Another thing people overlook; it's the Kings and Lakers. How many times have division rivals traded with each other? And the Maloofs don't exactly love the Los Angeles Lakers.


It would only happen if Shaq was involved and hes not soo it wont happen


----------



## Tyrellaphonte (Feb 21, 2004)

EHL said:


> I knew the Boozer trade was coming.


as much as i hope that it actually does come... I dont think you were right on that one


----------



## Pejavlade (Jul 10, 2004)

underhill_101 said:


> it would b a good trade for the lakers. kobe can drive and dish to peja for open 3's. the only problem is that peja cant play any D.



Peja can play decent defence, he may not be as athletic as some of the other guys but he can keep up with them.


----------



## Darth Bryant (Feb 1, 2005)

EHL said:


> I knew the Boozer trade was coming.



Some might argue with you on that one now...


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

CDRacingZX6R said:


> Some might argue with you on that one now...


Yeah, that's why the winky is there.


----------

