# How Would You Fix the Lakers?



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

Does Steve Nash make this team a true championship contender without moving Gasol or Bynum?

Would you consider trading Bynum for Dwight Howard?

Will a team coached by Mike Brown ever win a title?

Will Kobe seed the main ball-handling duties willingly to Steve Nash for the good of the team?

Are you worried that Bynum might leave L.A. after this season if they don't win a title?

Larry **** thinks the Lakers should amnesty Metta World Peace. Do you agree?

Jodie Meeks, Raja Bell, Rashard Lewis, and Brandon Rush have been rumored to be on the wish list. Who would you go after?

Would you consider resigning Matt Barnes?

Will Darius Johnson-Odom or Robert Sacre ever play any meaningful minutes for this team?

http://hoopshype.com/salaries/la_lakers.htm


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

RollWithEm said:


> Does Steve Nash make this team a true championship contender without moving Gasol or Bynum?


I say yes, although are chances are much better if we get Dwight. And upgrading the bench so the starters can rest would be nice.



> Would you consider trading Bynum for Dwight Howard?


Yes.



> Will a team coached by Mike Brown ever win a title?


It's possible. I just hope he doesn't run the starters into the ground.



> Will Kobe seed the main ball-handling duties willingly to Steve Nash for the good of the team?


Yes.



> Are you worried that Bynum might leave L.A. after this season if they don't win a title?


No



> Larry **** thinks the Lakers should amnesty Metta World Peace. Do you agree?


Wouldn't surprise me if they did. I'm not as high on him as some, so if we could get a decent player to replace him on the cheap I'm ok with it.



> Jodie Meeks, Raja Bell, Rashard Lewis, and Brandon Rush have been rumored to be on the wish list. Who would you go after?


Rush would be excellent. Meeks would be my next choice, and then Bell. I'd prefer Jamison over Lewis. I'd also be interested in a sign and trade of Sessions for Courtney Lee.



> Would you consider resigning Matt Barnes?


I think he is gone.



> Will Darius Johnson-Odom or Robert Sacre ever play any meaningful minutes for this team?


Doubtful they do this season. Maybe in the future.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

RollWithEm said:


> Does Steve Nash make this team a true championship contender without moving Gasol or Bynum?


sure, with a few tweaks on the bench



> Would you consider trading Bynum for Dwight Howard?


yep



> Will a team coached by Mike Brown ever win a title?


dont see why not - especially one made up of a lot of veteran players who provide their own leadership




> Will Kobe seed the main ball-handling duties willingly to Steve Nash for the good of the team?


as long as he gets enough shots aned they are winning



> Are you worried that Bynum might leave L.A. after this season if they don't win a title?


not really, **** him



> Larry **** thinks the Lakers should amnesty Metta World Peace. Do you agree?


no - Metta is fun and he's better than people think



> Jodie Meeks, Raja Bell, Rashard Lewis, and Brandon Rush have been rumored to be on the wish list. Who would you go after?


sessions, hill , hill, jamison and raja bell can go **** himself



> Would you consider resigning Matt Barnes?


vets min? sure



> Will Darius Johnson-Odom or Robert Sacre ever play any meaningful minutes for this team?


meaningful? ever? no idea



> http://hoopshype.com/salaries/la_lakers.htm


----------



## LA68 (Apr 3, 2004)

RollWithEm said:


> Does Steve Nash make this team a true championship contender without moving Gasol or Bynum?


Sure, but they aren't the favorite. 



> Would you consider trading Bynum for Dwight Howard?


I am very leery of back surgeries. He doesn't want to be here so no.



> Will a team coached by Mike Brown ever win a title?


If he toughens up and can earn the respect of Bynum and Gasol, yes. 



> Will Kobe seed the main ball-handling duties willingly to Steve Nash for the good of the team?


He already said in interview that he wants that. To just be a scorer, his job.



> Are you worried that Bynum might leave L.A. after this season if they don't win a title?


For every Sessions, Ariza etc... There's another guy who can't wait to get here. Playboy mansion is still in L.A. so I have no worries




> Larry **** thinks the Lakers should amnesty Metta World Peace. Do you agree?


I would never say a team should pay someone $7 million to play for another team. Nash might improve his game ? The amnesty won't help the team, only Buss' bottom line. You can't sign anyone for that money. 



> Jodie Meeks, Raja Bell, Rashard Lewis, and Brandon Rush have been rumored to be on the wish list. Who would you go after?


Lakers could have drafted Boozer ! After that achilles injury, he can't leave the ground. He won't play for the minimum either.If Phil was still here I would get Darko. Maybe he could get production out of him. 



> Would you consider resigning Matt Barnes?


One of the best vet min. players out there. If he'll play for that, he's in.



> Will Darius Johnson-Odom or Robert Sacre ever play any meaningful minutes for this team?


If Odom applies himself , he can take someone's job. Maybe take over for Nash in a few years. But, its up to him. 

Sacre is a big body like Jordan Hill. You can throw him out there on an eastern trip and he can throw some elbows under the basket. He could become a rotation guy if given a chance. Not sure Brown will do that. 

http://hoopshype.com/salaries/la_lakers.htm[/QUOTE]


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

RollWithEm said:


> Does Steve Nash make this team a true championship contender without moving Gasol or Bynum?


A championship contender, yes. A favourite? No.



> Would you consider trading Bynum for Dwight Howard?


If D-Ho would resign, than yes, in a second. Without that reassurance, nope. 



> Will a team coached by Mike Brown ever win a title?


It's possible. If a guy like Rudy T did it (where is he now?), why not Brown? If the team is good enough, whomever is the coach won't be a problem. 



> Will Kobe seed the main ball-handling duties willingly to Steve Nash for the good of the team?


Yes. But he won't be Reggie Miller (as in a "catch-and-shoot" player): he will have the ball some of the time, in iso plays and while trying to create from the weak side (who will give Nash the ball for the 3?)



> Are you worried that Bynum might leave L.A. after this season if they don't win a title?


Nope.



> Larry **** thinks the Lakers should amnesty Metta World Peace. Do you agree?


No. Metta still has game in him. And plenty of heart (see 2012 playoffs). Still got, at least, one more season as the starting SF. 



> Jodie Meeks, Raja Bell, Rashard Lewis, and Brandon Rush have been rumored to be on the wish list. Who would you go after?


Raja Bell can go **** himself. I don't know much about Meeks or Rush, but i would go after the one who can consistently be a long-range bomber.



> Would you consider resigning Matt Barnes?


For the right price, yes.



> Will Darius Johnson-Odom or Robert Sacre ever play any meaningful minutes for this team?


Not in a couple of years.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

*Does Steve Nash make this team a true championship contender without moving Gasol or Bynum?
*
Yes

*Would you consider trading Bynum for Dwight Howard?*

In a heartbeat if he agreed to re sign

*Will a team coached by Mike Brown ever win a title?*

Hopefully this team will.

*Will Kobe seed the main ball-handling duties willingly to Steve Nash for the good of the team?*

Kobe's a selfish asshole, but a vet like Nash will probably be able to pry the ball out of his hands a little. I'll say yes

*Are you worried that Bynum might leave L.A. after this season if they don't win a title?
*
Not really.

*Larry **** thinks the Lakers should amnesty Metta World Peace. Do you agree?*

Not until we get a replacement 3. A below average small forward is better than no small forward.

*Jodie Meeks, Raja Bell, Rashard Lewis, and Brandon Rush have been rumored to be on the wish list. Who would you go after?*

'Shard is already off of the table. Brandon Rush and Raja Bell both suck. I guess we could use Jodie Meeks as a shooter off the bench. I'd sign him if the price was right.

*Would you consider resigning Matt Barnes?*

For like the vet minimum.


*Will Darius Johnson-Odom or Robert Sacre ever play any meaningful minutes for this team?*

Probably not.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Why would the Lakers amnesty Metta? It doesn't give them anymore cap room.

Or is it just the Wilt "lets save Buss some money" line of thinking?


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

Because he's not very good? If we get a replacement that's better at playing basketball then we should amnesty him. If we don't, then we shouldn't amnesty him.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Artest came into 'camp' out of shape but played himself back into condition and was actually pretty decent in the last month of the regular season and into the play-offs. I think he still has something left and unless they find an upgrade I would be disappointed to see them making that kind of money move that wont help them win now


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

*Does Steve Nash make this team a true championship contender without moving Gasol or Bynum?*

I think so. I feel like people aren't realizing how much better we're about to get, despite his age.

*Would you consider trading Bynum for Dwight Howard?*

You would have to at least consider it, assuming Dwight says he'd sign an extension.

*Will a team coached by Mike Brown ever win a title?*

I sure as **** hope that this will be the team to do it. Otherwise, I don't think so. He won't get much better opportunities than coaching LeBron and then this Lakers squad.

*Will Kobe seed the main ball-handling duties willingly to Steve Nash for the good of the team?*

When necessary, yes, but I still think down the stretch of games, he'll have the ball in his hands a lot and work from there.

*Are you worried that Bynum might leave L.A. after this season if they don't win a title?*

Not at all.

*Larry **** thinks the Lakers should amnesty Metta World Peace. Do you agree?*

Nope. He started playing well late last season and his defense is still much needed in my opinion.

*Jodie Meeks, Raja Bell, Rashard Lewis, and Brandon Rush have been rumored to be on the wish list. Who would you go after?*

Give me Elton Brand or Antawn Jamison.

*Would you consider resigning Matt Barnes?*

If you can't get anything better, then sure.

*Will Darius Johnson-Odom or Robert Sacre ever play any meaningful minutes for this team?*

Maybe, but not anytime soon.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Luke said:


> Because he's not very good? If we get a replacement that's better at playing basketball then we should amnesty him. If we don't, then we shouldn't amnesty him.


That makes no sense, amnestying Metta doesn't put them in a better position to get a better small forward. Whoever they can get with Metta off the roster they can get with him on the roster.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> Why would the Lakers amnesty Metta? It doesn't give them anymore cap room.
> 
> Or is it just the Wilt "lets save Buss some money" line of thinking?


You mean the realistic way of looking at things? It would save them luxury tax money. Artest is not really essential to winning a title. There are a lot of guys you could replace him with and not really hurt your chances.

So why pay him the money? You might not want it to be that way, but that's the way it is.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Wilt_The_Stilt said:


> You mean the realistic way of looking at things? It would save them luxury tax money. Artest is not really essential to winning a title. There are a lot of guys you could replace him with and not really hurt your chances.
> 
> So why pay him the money? You might not want it to be that way, but that's the way it is.


name one realistic option out there right now that's better

dropping him without upgrading hurts your chances this year - and this year and next is pretty much the window - that's the reality


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

Carlos Delfino. Better 3 pt shooter and more mobile.

The reality is that Metta is just not that good any more. People keep talking him up based on games that were played without Kobe and a couple playoff games. I don't consider that a good basis for judging him going forward.


----------



## LA68 (Apr 3, 2004)

Delfino will not be playing for the vet's min. Try again !


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Wilt_The_Stilt said:


> You mean the realistic way of looking at things? It would save them luxury tax money. Artest is not really essential to winning a title. There are a lot of guys you could replace him with and not really hurt your chances.
> 
> So why pay him the money? You might not want it to be that way, but that's the way it is.


I wasn't being a critic, I was asking a question.

I was curious as to why people wanted to cut metta, what Luke said made no sense. I just wanted to see if they subscribed to your "owners need to dump players even when it all it does is save them money" line of thinking.

Not to mention Metta only has two years left no? That could be valuable in the near future (see Luke Walton trade).


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> Not to mention Metta only has two years left no? That could be valuable in the near future (see Luke Walton trade).


That's true. I could see them keeping him for another year before deciding to amnesty him if he isn't sent out in a trade.


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

> @Lakerholicz: After a "big push" by Kobe Bryant and Steve Nash, Grant Hill is close to signing with the Lakers. http://t.co/EeEH61qp


...


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

I like it.


----------



## West44 (Jun 29, 2005)

e-monk said:


> Artest came into 'camp' out of shape but played himself back into condition and was actually pretty decent in the last month of the regular season and into the play-offs. I think he still has something left and unless they find an upgrade I would be disappointed to see them making that kind of money move that wont help them win now


Exactly correct! The Lakers leading scorer in the 7th game of the finals in their last championship season still has some game left. And he played Paul Pierce very tough too. At the end of the season, there were periods where it seemed to me that he made good things happen on both ends of the floor. Surprising IQ for a nutcase. Been hating the Celtics since the 60's. You help beat them the way he did and I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

Jamel Irief said:


> That makes no sense, amnestying Metta doesn't put them in a better position to get a better small forward. Whoever they can get with Metta off the roster they can get with him on the roster.


Uh, yeah it does. If the Lakers come across a better small forward they should capitalize, amnesty Artest and move forward. If they don't, then they should keep him. Not seeing the problem here.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Luke said:


> Uh, yeah it does. If the Lakers come across a better small forward they should capitalize, amnesty Artest and move forward. If they don't, then they should keep him. Not seeing the problem here.


Uh, so if they get a better center than Bynum should they capitalize and amnesty Bynum?

How does using the amnesty help them acquire a player?

The problem is they can get the better small forward without using the amnesty on metta. So they keep them both.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Wilt_The_Stilt said:


> Carlos Delfino. Better 3 pt shooter and more mobile.
> 
> The reality is that Metta is just not that good any more. People keep talking him up based on games that were played without Kobe and a couple playoff games. I don't consider that a good basis for judging him going forward.


you apparently missed the last 2 months of the season and as stated Delfino is not a realistic option (nor arguably better by any objective measure)


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Luke said:


> Uh, yeah it does. If the Lakers come across a better small forward they should capitalize, amnesty Artest and move forward. If they don't, then they should keep him. Not seeing the problem here.


Why? Like Jamel said, amnestying Artest doesn't help you get anyone. And if you were to get a better option, what's wrong with Arest off the bench seeing as your bench is currently one of the worst in the league?


I doesn't make any sense.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

e-monk said:


> you apparently missed the last 2 months of the season and as stated Delfino is not a realistic option (nor arguably better by any objective measure)


Delfino is a better shooter by the numbers. And we have more than the vet min to use.

And even when Artest was playing better, he was still just a decent player. Nothing that is necessary towards winning a championship.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Wilt_The_Stilt said:


> Delfino is a better shooter by the numbers. And we have more than the vet min to use.
> 
> And even when Artest was playing better, he was still just a decent player. Nothing that is necessary towards winning a championship.


While I certainly don't think Delfino is better, even if he was the aspect of team chemistry and consistently put Metta over the top. Why tinker with the lineup more just for marginal at best upgrades?


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> While I certainly don't think Delfino is better, even if he was the aspect of team chemistry and consistently put Metta over the top. Why tinker with the lineup more just for marginal at best upgrades?


Because the lineup hasn't won anything lately.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Wilt_The_Stilt said:


> Delfino is a better shooter by the numbers. And we have more than the vet min to use.


aside from that you have mini-mle which still isnt going to get you an upgrade (which Delfino most definitely is not)



> And even when Artest was playing better, he was still just a decent player. Nothing that is necessary towards winning a championship.


Delfino is a better shooter (from behind the arc) but not by much - and in all other ways inferior - so net/net inferior (Troy Murphy was a better shooter than either last season and I dont see anyone clamoring for him to be resigned - there's more to the game than shooting you know)

and jamel is right even if you could get an upgrade you still need to bolster your bench

and you're high if you dont think having someone who can give Durant and Lebron trouble (which he still can and did last season) is 'not necessary towards winning a championship' (especially given the fact that our perimeter defense just got even weaker with the addition of Nash)


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

e-monk said:


> aside from that you have mini-mle which still isnt going to get you an upgrade (which Delfino most definitely is not)
> 
> 
> 
> ...


His efg% is 4 percent higher overall and 10 percent higher than Metta's on his jump shots. It is not a slight advantage. And he is a much better player than Murphy. 

And Metta can't really defend Durant or LeBron anymore.

I'm not saying we can't win with Metta. I was responding to Jamel's point about cutting costs. If you can get a comparable player, it makes some sense to ditch Metta's salary. I think the Lakers have at least some interest in doing that.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Metta's shooting was horrible until March or so. If we are getting the Metta of the first two months of the season then I would rather have Luke Walton.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Wilt_The_Stilt said:


> His efg% is 4 percent higher overall and 10 percent higher than Metta's on his jump shots. It is not a slight advantage. And he is a much better player than Murphy.
> 
> And Metta can't really defend Durant or LeBron anymore.
> 
> I'm not saying we can't win with Metta. I was responding to Jamel's point about cutting costs. If you can get a comparable player, it makes some sense to ditch Metta's salary. I think the Lakers have at least some interest in doing that.


there is no comparable player for the mini, and Delfino is an 11.0 PER scrub with a lower efg than Troy Murphy (4% higher efg!) - if it's not shooting tell me exactly what else he does better than Murphy (because for real, it's not shooting) let alone Artest

and your name's not Buss so why are you so worried about saving money in moves that baseline wont help your team and more likely hurt their chances at a title(at the minimum hurting morale and chemistry)?


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

e-monk said:


> there is no comparable player for the mini, and Delfino is an 11.0 PER scrub with a lower efg than Troy Murphy (4% higher efg!) - if it's not shooting tell me exactly what else he does better than Murphy (because for real, it's not shooting) let alone Artest
> 
> and your name's not Buss so why are you so worried about saving money in moves that baseline wont help your team and more likely hurt their chances at a title(at the minimum hurting morale and chemistry)?


And what is Metta's PER? Even lower than Delfino's. And stop with the Murphy nonsense. He shot the ball less than 3 times a game and is one of the slowest players in the league. Delfino can handle the ball and create his own shot. They don't even play the same position.

I'm not worried about Buss or his money. But I am looking at it from a realistic perspective. Why do you think Metta was being shopped for a draft pick? They don't want to pay him. Maybe they aren't as worried about team chemistry as you are.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

your realistic perspective is BS - if it were otherwise you would have been right 8 months ago when you first started with this tired bullshit

saying the same nonsense for 8 months and claiming it's a 'realistic perspective' while the franchise does nothing like what youre suggesting makes you 'realistic perspective' look like the nonsense it is

you are wrong

3500!


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

Lol.

So why did the Lakers trade a draft pick to get rid of Sasha? And why did they throw in Luke Walton in the Sessions trade? Because they want to save money.

I thought they would trade Pau eventually, but that was because I didn't see Nash coming. I've said they would be willing to pay for a contender, Metta isn't vital to that. Just like Sasha and Walton weren't.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Wilt_The_Stilt said:


> Lol.
> 
> So why did the Lakers trade a draft pick to get rid of Sasha? And why did they throw in Luke Walton in the Sessions trade? Because they want to save money.
> 
> I thought they would trade Pau eventually, but that was because I didn't see Nash coming. I've said they would be willing to pay for a contender, Metta isn't vital to that. Just like Sasha and Walton weren't.


Sasha and Walton suck. You're comparing Ron Artest to Luke Walton?

Artest is an average starting 3 every year except the majority of last year where he played like shit.

You don't just try to dump him for nothing unless you have a backup plan. Seeing as you guys have no money, and no real tradeable assets outside of Pau and Bynum, getting rid of Artest is crazy.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

R-Star said:


> Sasha and Walton suck. You're comparing Ron Artest to Luke Walton?
> 
> Artest is an average starting 3 every year except the majority of last year where he played like shit.
> 
> You don't just try to dump him for nothing unless you have a backup plan. Seeing as you guys have no money, and no real tradeable assets outside of Pau and Bynum, getting rid of Artest is crazy.


For one thing, I only said they would do it if they had a decent replacement. As for his abilities, I guess we just have different opinions on how good he is.

I could see the Lakers holding on to him another year, but I also think there is a reason he was being shopped.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Wilt_The_Stilt said:


> For one thing, I only said they would do it if they had a decent replacement. As for his abilities, I guess we just have different opinions on how good he is.
> 
> I could see the Lakers holding on to him another year, but I also think there is a reason he was being shopped.


How are you going to get a backup that is as good or better than Artest?


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

R-Star said:


> How are you going to get a backup that is as good or better than Artest?


Are you talking about a replacement or keeping him and bringing him off the bench? The former with the MMLE, and as for the latter I am skeptical of bringing him off the bench. He was horrendous at that last year.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Wilt_The_Stilt said:


> Are you talking about a replacement or keeping him and bringing him off the bench? The former with the MMLE, and as for the latter I am skeptical of bringing him off the bench. He was horrendous at that last year.


Who are you replacing him with with the MMLE?


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

R-Star said:


> Who are you replacing him with with the MMLE?


Delfino, Grant Hill (I think he is better, but he can't really shoot either) or we could go even cheaper and get a guy like Martell Webster and use the MMLE on a guy like Jamison and not really be that much worse off. Maybe even get a guy like Jodie Meeks and slide Kobe to the 3.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

How is saying "not really be that much worse off" something that helps prove your point?

Grant Hill isn't going to be logging a ton of minutes, and Delfino is being vastly overrated in this thread.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

R-Star said:


> How is saying "not really be that much worse off" something that helps prove your point?
> 
> Grant Hill isn't going to be logging a ton of minutes, and Delfino is being vastly overrated in this thread.


It's an expression. I think we would be just as good or better.

How is saying that Artest is an average player except for most of last year something that helps your point?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Wilt_The_Stilt said:


> It's an expression. I think we would be just as good or better.
> 
> How is saying that Artest is an average player except for most of last year something that helps your point?


:laugh:

Because players have off years?


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

R-Star said:


> :laugh:
> 
> Because players have off years?


Do a lot of 32 year old "average" players have off years as bad as Metta's and then come back strong?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Wilt_The_Stilt said:


> Do a lot of 32 year old "average" players have off years as bad as Metta's and then come back strong?


He doesn't need to come back strong. He needs to come back at his regular level of play. Adding Nash is going to make everyone on the team look quite a bit better. Artest included.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Wilt

here's proof that you are wrong: Is Artest still a Laker? yes 

therefore you are wrong - *as soon as Jim and Mitch decide that you are right they will most certainly amnesty Artest* - until they do that you are wrong and the proof of it is that you are in disagreement with Mitch and Jimmy and that's just the way it is 

(and for all the time until they do that you will remain wrong and only not be wrong (though not right) after such a time which may be as much as a season down the line - all the time they dont amnesty Artest you are wrong and once they do your opinion will still be subject to review giving consideration to the effect that things may have changed over time to conform to your previously wrong opinion such that you are still wrong about the previous considerations and only 'right' in as much as finally Artest's value has diminished to meet your previously understated mis-evaluation of it to the effect that you have been wrong for x number of months and even at this moment have not been vindicated nor proven right in any way but rather that things have simply changed over time)


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

e-monk said:


> Wilt
> 
> here's proof that you are wrong: Is Artest still a Laker? yes
> 
> ...


Lol.

What am I wrong about? I already said I could see them holding on to Metta for another year.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

e-monk said:


> and your name's not Buss so why are you so worried about saving money in moves that baseline wont help your team and more likely hurt their chances at a title(at the minimum hurting morale and chemistry)?


Oh boy, I already tried this. I'll summarize how he feels.

Even though us as fans invest hundreds of dollars and hours to the Lakers a year we are supposed to accept and condone owners who want to make a bigger profit (not keep from losing money, a bigger profit mind you) even if it sacrifices wins here and there.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> Oh boy, I already tried this. I'll summarize how he feels.
> 
> Even though us as fans invest hundreds of dollars and hours to the Lakers a year we are supposed to accept and condone owners who want to make a bigger profit (not keep from losing money, a bigger profit mind you) even if it sacrifices wins here and there.


Never said you had to condone it.

I don't really think you should be complaining about dumping a few scrubs with big contracts. Lakers usually have one of the highest payrolls in the league and the results speak for themselves. Buss will pay for a winner but that doesn't mean paying for scrubs like Luke, Sasha and imo Metta.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

BTW here is something that makes it more convincing the Lakers have no chance of amnestying him. If they do they are still on the hook for his salary, minus whatever some other team picks up. Brand and Haywood each got picked up for 2 million, which is almost what the Lakers would have to pay Metta's replacement. So in the end they don't save any money and needlessly turned over the roster.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Wilt_The_Stilt said:


> Never said you had to condone it.
> 
> I don't really think you should be complaining about dumping a few scrubs with big contracts. Lakers usually have one of the highest payrolls in the league and the results speak for themselves. Buss will pay for a winner but that doesn't mean paying for scrubs like Luke, Sasha and imo Metta.


They had to give up a first rounder to dump Sasha, that could of been Marshon Brooks. They didn't dump Luke either, they used his salary to upgrade a position in need.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> BTW here is something that makes it more convincing the Lakers have no chance of amnestying him. If they do they are still on the hook for his salary, minus whatever some other team picks up. Brand and Haywood each got picked up for 2 million, which is almost what the Lakers would have to pay Metta's replacement. So in the end they don't save any money and needlessly turned over the roster.


It doesn't count against the luxury tax though. Which is even more important next year when the tax rates go up.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> They had to give up a first rounder to dump Sasha, that could of been Marshon Brooks. They didn't dump Luke either, they used his salary to upgrade a position in need.


Which is why unlike you, I was opposed to giving Sasha his contract. I'm not defending the signing of scrubs to big contracts. Just getting rid of them.

And they could have gotten Sessions for the TPE. They threw in Luke to dump his contract.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Wilt_The_Stilt said:


> Which is why unlike you, I was opposed to giving Sasha his contract. I'm not defending the signing of scrubs to big contracts. Just getting rid of them.
> 
> And they could have gotten Sessions for the TPE. They threw in Luke to dump his contract.


I'm not getting into this shit about the Sasha contract, you said it was no big deal to dump a scrub like Sasha, I pointed out that they gave up more than Sasha. Should I of accepted or condoned the Sasha trade to New Jersey?

As for Sessions, they threw in Luke so that they could keep the TPE and get a guy like Steve Nash.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> I'm not getting into this shit about the Sasha contract, you said it was no big deal to dump a scrub like Sasha, I pointed out that they gave up more than Sasha. Should I of accepted or condoned the Sasha trade to New Jersey?
> 
> As for Sessions, they threw in Luke so that they could keep the TPE and get a guy like Steve Nash.


You should have been against the Sasha contract in the first place. The price of their mistake was a draft pick. You can accept it or keeping whining about one of the best owners in sports dumping a bad contract.

The Lakers weren't going to give up a 1st for a half season rental of Sessions. They needed to shed some salary too. It was a smart decision to keep the tpe just in case but Luke was a salary dump.

EDIT: And what do people think the Fisher trade was? A salary dump.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Wilt_The_Stilt said:


> You should have been against the Sasha contract in the first place. The price of their mistake was a draft pick. You can accept it or keeping whining about one of the best owners in sports dumping a bad contract.


No I shouldn't, regardless it's a seperate issue. Remember I have the "unrealistic" view that owners should treat teams like their hobbies (like it is for you and me) and not like a business. BTW here is what you said: "I don't really think you should be complaining about dumping a few scrubs with big contracts." And then I complained about them dumping Sasha since it gave up a pick. So which is it? Don't complain about dumping scrubs or do?


> The Lakers weren't going to give up a 1st for a half season rental of Sessions. They needed to shed some salary too. It was a smart decision to keep the tpe just in case but Luke was a salary dump.


You aren't Mitch or Buss, you don't know what they had planned for the TPE. I'm sure they weren't sad to see Luke go, but to act like they didn't use a powerful TPE that has been used to aquire Chandler, Odom and now Nash is stupid.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> No I shouldn't, regardless it's a seperate issue. Remember I have the "unrealistic" view that owners should treat teams like their hobbies (like it is for you and me) and not like a business. BTW here is what you said: "I don't really think you should be complaining about dumping a few scrubs with big contracts." And then I complained about them dumping Sasha since it gave up a pick. So which is it? Don't complain about dumping scrubs or do?


You should realize that owners don't like to pay for players that aren't earning their money. You can complain of course, but it just seems strange to approve of signing a guy to an undeserved contract and then complain when they have to dump him. 



> You aren't Mitch or Buss, you don't know what they had planned for the TPE. I'm sure they weren't sad to see Luke go, but to act like they didn't use a powerful TPE that has been used to aquire Chandler, Odom and now Nash is stupid.


Neither are you. For all you know they were planning to let the tpe expire. Reading accounts of what happened, it doesn't seem like they had been planning on getting Nash.


----------



## Wilmatic2 (Oct 30, 2005)

Any updates on OJ Mayo?


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

We're not getting Mayo, guys. He wants $8M/year.

Since we're likely only going to sign guys for the minimum, our possibilities are the following (and some of these guys will surely get more than the minimum)...
Grant Hill
Jodie Meeks
Martell Webster
Matt Barnes
Shannon Brown
C.J. Miles
Carlos Delfino
Willie Green
Mickael Pietrus
Anthony Parker
Delonte West
Marco Belinelli
Brandon Rush
Leandro Barbosa
Sam Young

Stop saying O.J. Mayo and Courtney Lee - both of them will get $5M/year at the very least. Terrence Williams also isn't even worth discussing because he's a restricted FA and Sacramento would match anything we could offer.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

I think it will be Hill.

Belleni would be awesome with Nash though!


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

I don't want oldman Hill but it will most likely be him.I'd take Barbosa if he came cheap or maybe even Meeks to hit some 3's.


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

> @basketballtalk: Report: Grant Hill leaning toward signing with Lakers http://t.co/Z0iQC6Wn #PBT #NBA


...


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

Hill isn't as old as his age says. All those years on the bench while he was injured means less wear and tear on the tires. He's actually played less minutes than Kobe.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

Hill would be a great addition to our bench. He's old, but we've got a two year window max anyways. Sign him up.


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

> @YannisHW: Watching free agent forward Brandon Rush work out. He looks good, draining just about every shot.





> @YannisHW: Brandon Rush confirms the Los Angeles Lakers are interested in him. Negotiations are ongoing.


..


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

Rush/Hill/Barnes/Ebanks is pretty solid depth from the wing, hopefully we nab him for cheap.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

Why is everyone assuming he would be coming off the bench? He was as good as if not better than MWP last season... and Nash loves playing with him.


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

It's pretty clear that we're not making any more moves until the Dwight situation resolves itself. Ebanks is still waiting to sign his contract.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

RollWithEm said:


> Why is everyone assuming he would be coming off the bench? He was as good as if not better than MWP last season... and Nash loves playing with him.


I don't like Ronnie off the bench, and it's not like he and Hill won't be playing together, they just won't be starting together.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

I just figure Hill will be the starter. MWP can come in and back up Pau and Hill.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

Hill can still play, but I do question the fit a little bit. I think we need another shooter who can play big minutes.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

> Right now, I don’t think we’ll use the mini mid-level exception.


http://blog.lakers.com/lakers/2012/07/16/kupchak-checks-in-from-vegas/

Obviously could impact who we pick up.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

Wilt_The_Stilt said:


> http://blog.lakers.com/lakers/2012/07/16/kupchak-checks-in-from-vegas/
> 
> Obviously could impact who we pick up.


The way Kupchak describes Dr Buss in that interview is exactly how I envision him, too. He's not just giving his GM free reign to do whatever, but he works quickly when he hears about a possibility he really likes. Sign of a good owner.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

Now that the Mavs have Mayo, I'm hoping we go after Delonte.


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

> @WojYahooNBA: Free agent Grant Hill has reached agreement on a deal with the Los Angeles Clippers, league sources tells Y!


Welp..


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

Wilt_The_Stilt said:


> Now that the Mavs have Mayo, I'm hoping we go after Delonte.


Dallas wants to re-sign him as well, especially since they lost Terry.


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

Jamison to the Lakers interesting. He'll get us some bench buckets with Nash diming will allow Kobe and Pau to rest more this season.


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

> @GwashNBAGlobe: Perhaps a little too late for the #celtics but Jermaine O'Neal looked as good of condition as he had in years during workout for #lakers


...


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

lol I remember when fans here were clamoring for JO years ago then we got Gasol.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

Well reading this thread back now seems kind of silly. Before Dwight decision, people were getting revved up about Grant Hill. Look at what I assume will be the final 12-man roster now:

*PG Steve Nash*/Chris Duhon/Steve Blake
*SG Kobe Bryant*/Jodie Meeks
*SF Metta World Peace*/Devin Ebanks
*PF Pau Gasol*/Antawn Jamison/Earl Clark
*C Dwight Howard*/Jordan Hill

That scenario seems almost too outlandish to have even suggested in the OP.


----------



## Eternal (Sep 7, 2005)

RollWithEm said:


> Well reading this thread back now seems kind of silly. Before Dwight decision, people were getting revved up about Grant Hill. Look at what I assume will be the final 12-man roster now:
> 
> *PG Steve Nash*/Chris Duhon/Steve Blake
> *SG Kobe Bryant*/Jodie Meeks
> ...


Agreed!


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

So...now how would you fix the Lakers?


----------



## Cris (Jun 18, 2003)

I've said this many times.. we have traded our first rounders time and time again which is fine but ultimately we've gotten old and slow because there's no hustle anywhere on this team. 

As good as Dwight is, S&T him for three or so first rounders to say, Houston or Atlanta? Houston as the Raptors first rounder this year and could be a nice piece to start the 'mini' rebuild.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

keep dwight if he wants to stay and s&t him for picks if not - spin Pau if Dwight stays, for a pick and a kid, hope Kobe a) comes back as some semblance of himself b) is willing to resign for dimes at a dollar (for some reason I think he might), keep clark, meeks, resign matty barnes

get Phil to consult a bought out and promoted bshaw - let all the contracts go next summer

dwight and phil and cheap kobe + cap space, picks and kids etc


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

also be it understood, do nothingg to mess with the 2014 cap space


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

Main goal should be re-signing Dwight. If he stays then I'm trying to break Pau's contract up into a few short contracts, youth and draft picks. If Dwight leaves then we keep Pau and make a run with him, Kobe, Nash and co while keeping our cap space saved for 2014. I'd shop Nash too or try to acquire a young athletic pg (Ellis anyone?) that can syphon significant minutes from him. He's too old to be playing starter minutes for 82 games. The broken leg was an accident but the hip, back and hamstring issue is a degenerative issue that will continue to be a problem.


----------



## 23isback (Mar 15, 2006)

Get rid of Jim Buss.


----------



## Cajon (Nov 1, 2012)

Fire D'antoni.



e-monk said:


> keep dwight if he wants to stay and *s&t him for picks if not* - spin Pau if Dwight stays, for a pick and a kid, hope Kobe a) comes back as some semblance of himself b) is willing to resign for dimes at a dollar (for some reason I think he might), keep clark, meeks, resign matty barnes
> 
> get Phil to consult a bought out and promoted bshaw - let all the contracts go next summer
> 
> dwight and phil and cheap kobe + cap space, picks and kids etc


^^ I believe some teams have the cap space to sign Dwight outright so it's either he stays or goes with us gaining nothing. He is an unrestricted free agent.


----------

