# Sprewell to Lakers talks may be multi-team deal



## onetwo88 (Jul 16, 2002)

from this nba rumors page: 

"InsideHoops.com editor Jeff Lenchiner reports that the Los Angeles Lakers are still actively working to gain the services of Latrell Sprewell. The Lakers need backcourt help, and Spree would love to be next to Kobe Bryant." InsideHoops.com 

"Because the Lakers only have about half of their mid-level exception available, a sign-and-trade is required satisfy Sprewell's financial desires. So far, the Lakers and Timberwolves have yet to agree on a deal. "We're probably going to work on a three team, four team trade, if we can pull it together, to get what all the teams need," Bob Gist, Sprewell's agent, told InsideHoops.com." InsideHoops.com 

"Sprewell already owns a home in California. Also, the main office of Sprewell Motor Sports, where his famous rims can be found, is in San Gabriel, California." InsideHoops.com


----------



## Brian34Cook (Mar 26, 2003)

Cmon down Spree and Garnett :rofl:

Nah.. But I could see us working out a deal for Spree


----------



## Steez (Nov 28, 2002)

Personally, I dont think Spree can help us much..... he isnt like he was before, too old.


----------



## Jermaniac Fan (Jul 27, 2003)

Good thing is that Spree can create his own scoring opportunities but bad thing is that he forgets too often to pass the ball.


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

Spree for George and maybe a 2nd would be a good deal. I'm hoping we get Latrell.


----------



## L (Sep 20, 2005)

Steez said:


> Personally, I dont think Spree can help us much..... he isnt like he was before, too old.


agreed, he brings bad chemistry and hes a minor spark off the bench on some nights at best(thats if he is comin off the bench 4 the lakers).


----------



## Brian34Cook (Mar 26, 2003)

Screw Chemistry.. How do we know he wont work out just fine with Kobe? And even if they get him it's not like they are winning the NBA title.. They'd have a better record and maybe even make the playoffs with his addition though..


----------



## Tyrellaphonte (Feb 21, 2004)

inuyasha232, sit


----------



## Seuss (Aug 19, 2005)

Adding Spree is like adding another ball hog. Devean George knows Phils system better, so I don't see them getting rid of him. 

Predictiing the starting lineup

PG - Aaron Mckie
SG - Kobe
SF - Odom
PF - Slava (Knows Phils system)
C - Mihn (More of a center Phil likes to use rather then a guy like Kwame)


----------



## LamarButler (Apr 16, 2005)

> hes a minor spark off the bench on some nights at best


Spree will play a lot of minutes if he comes here. He can play both wing positions, hes a good defender, and he can hit open mid range jumpers. He will be starting point guard if he comes since the triangle doesnt require a pure point guard. He'd have good size (6'5 195 lbs) for point guard. He has above average passing and ballhandling skills for a shooting guard. He adds more talent and depth. 

Sunsfan57, Slava wont be starting PF, thats why we got Kwame.


----------



## Unique (Apr 13, 2005)

Spree is not done yet in his career .....He will be more then a spark ....More like a flare


----------



## Seuss (Aug 19, 2005)

LamarButler said:


> Sunsfan57, Slava wont be starting PF, thats why we got Kwame.




We will see. 



Phil likes using vets who are willing to sacrafice for the team. I don't see Kwame there. 


Kwame probable wants to have attention. It will be interesting.


----------



## L (Sep 20, 2005)

Teezy said:


> inuyasha232, sit


lol ow.


----------



## L (Sep 20, 2005)

LamarButler said:


> Spree will play a lot of minutes if he comes here. He can play both wing positions, hes a good defender, and he can hit open mid range jumpers. He will be starting point guard if he comes since the triangle doesnt require a pure point guard. He'd have good size (6'5 195 lbs) for point guard. He has above average passing and ballhandling skills for a shooting guard. He adds more talent and depth.
> 
> Sunsfan57, Slava wont be starting PF, thats why we got Kwame.


o yea, i forgot he can probably pg, screw the bench if he can play pg. :cheers:


----------



## Unique (Apr 13, 2005)

SunsFan57 said:


> We will see.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yea I can see how good Slavas Europeon coach was so proud of him.............Kwame is the starting PF.


----------



## LamarButler (Apr 16, 2005)

> Phil likes using vets who are willing to sacrafice for the team. I don't see Kwame there. Kwame probable wants to have attention


I wish people would stop looking at things that dont have to do with basketball like personal feelings. The truth is, Phil is going to play whoever is gonna make us better. Kwame is better than Slava. 

And yea Phil likes to put in vets who sacrifice for the team. Thats why he started Dennis Rodman, who drew a technical foul just, got in a fight, changed his hair color, or got in trouble with the law just about every three games.


----------



## Seuss (Aug 19, 2005)

I'm telling you, Phil is a weird guy. So, it wouldn't surprise me if he started Slava at PF.


Kwame maybe better then Slava, but it doesn't mean he'll understand Phil's system.


----------



## LamarButler (Apr 16, 2005)

> I'm telling you, Phil's a weird guy.


lol on that LSD again

Well Kwame contributes more than Slava in areas other than offense. Slava just stands at the elbow and chucks. Kwame is a much better rebounder and shotblocker. He is more athletic. He can provide better defense. Plus, Kwame seems intelligent, but his work ethic is his downfall.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Hello lottery.


----------



## Brian34Cook (Mar 26, 2003)

EHL said:


> Hello lottery.


If it took Spree possibly coming to the Lakers to notice that just then, then someone has a problem.. 

Lottery without Sprewell anyways. What's the difference?


----------



## dark chaos (Sep 6, 2005)

Do we really need Spre


----------



## L (Sep 20, 2005)

dark chaos said:



> Do we really need Spre


no imo


----------



## Cris (Jun 18, 2003)

SunsFan57 said:


> I'm telling you, Phil is a weird guy. So, it wouldn't surprise me if he started Slava at PF.
> 
> 
> Kwame maybe better then Slava, but it doesn't mean he'll understand Phil's system.


uh huh.... we traded caron butler and atkins so slava could start, its all clear to me now, i see slava playing in the euro tourny was just to prepare him to play everyday, but slava doesnt need any more preperation, i mean come on its slava medvedenko. the lakers future and truly great team leader right. pshhh kwame brown who cares about that guy, we have slava baby!!!


----------



## LamarButler (Apr 16, 2005)

Getting Spree would greatly improve us. We wouldn't have to worry about point guard depth. I mean, why wouldn't you want to add talent? He can backup the 2 and 3 also. He'd really make up for the scoring punch lost in the Kwame trade. He'll improve our defense also, which was our downfall last year.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Brian34Cook said:


> If it took Spree possibly coming to the Lakers to notice that just then, then someone has a problem..
> 
> Lottery without Sprewell anyways. What's the difference?


Come on B34C, you and I both know there's a good chance the Lakers could make the playoffs, albeit while still being a mediocre team/seed. Fact is that Spree is a cancer, and that Phil is the only possible cure. And forgive me if I've lost faith in Phil's ability to cure cancer (JR anyone).


----------



## SoCalfan21 (Jul 19, 2004)

yes KG and Spree to the lakers...happiest day of my life!


----------



## DANNY (Aug 9, 2005)

funny how people say "this player brings bad chemistry blah blah blah"

put spree in the right situation and you get a solid contributor

if you want to talk about bad chemistry, we should probably release half of our team and hope the other half can mingle and win 60 games


----------



## shobe42 (Jun 21, 2002)

Steez said:


> Personally, I dont think Spree can help us much..... he isnt like he was before, too old.


at the point spree is in his career i think PJ would be the perfecty coach for him...


----------



## L (Sep 20, 2005)

dannyM said:


> funny how people say "this player brings bad chemistry blah blah blah"
> 
> put spree in the right situation and you get a solid contributor
> 
> if you want to talk about bad chemistry, we should probably release half of our team and hope the other half can mingle and win 60 games


so ur sayin that spree wants to be playing for a bad lakers team at the moment.... :whatever:


----------



## BBB (Jan 19, 2005)

SunsFan57 said:


> I'm telling you, Phil is a weird guy. So, it wouldn't surprise me if he started Slava at PF.


Thank god you're not Phil.


----------



## LamarButler (Apr 16, 2005)

Yea I can't stand Slavas elbow chucking.


----------



## socco (Jul 14, 2002)

Damian Necronamous said:


> Spree for George and maybe a 2nd would be a good deal. I'm hoping we get Latrell.


Make it a (unprotected) 1st rounder and you got a deal. We're not gonna pay almost $10 Devean George with no incentive. If the Wolves trade Spree, we're gonna get a helluva deal out of it, or else we simply won't trade him, somebody can just sign him.



dannyM said:


> put spree in the right situation and you get a solid contributor


I agree with what you're saying to an extent, the whole cancer thing is a little overblown, it's still there though. But the biggest thing is that Spree can't play anymore. He just can't. He is a very poor defender, he has no athleticism left. And the only thing he can do on offense, and I mean the ONLY thing, is shoot jumpers. If you're happy with a 40% jumpshooter, then Spree's your guy.


----------



## Brian34Cook (Mar 26, 2003)

Spree to Lakers?

Spree to Lakers? The agent for Wolves free-agent swingman Latrell Sprewell said the Wolves and the Los Angeles Lakers are discussing a possible sign-and-trade deal. Sprewell's agent, Bob Gist, said a third or fourth team probably would need to enter the trade discussions to complete a deal that *would satisfy all parties.*

"Kevin (McHale) and I are *optimistic* we can work it out," Gist said.

Here

Be prepared for a move unless something changes IMO.


----------



## jstempi (Jul 23, 2003)

socco said:


> Make it a (unprotected) 1st rounder and you got a deal. We're not gonna pay almost $10 Devean George with no incentive. If the Wolves trade Spree, we're gonna get a helluva deal out of it, or else we simply won't trade him, somebody can just sign him.


Yeah right, a first rounder. :laugh: 

First of all, George has about $5 million left on the final year of his contract. Secondly, the Lakers are not going to give up a first rounder to get Spree (unless Buss is really high that night). Does anyone know if the lakers bought out Vlade's contract already? If not, they could trade Vlade's contract and cash for Minny to pay off the buyout so Minny doesn't have any CAP consequences. Then they could give Minny a second rounder for their troubles.


----------



## socco (Jul 14, 2002)

jstempi said:


> Yeah right, a first rounder. :laugh:
> 
> First of all, George has about $5 left on the final year of his contract. Secondly, the Lakers are not going to give up a first rounder to get Spree (unless Buss is really high that night). Does anyone know if the lakers bought out Vlade's contract already? If not, they could trade Vlade's contract and cash for Minny to pay off the buyout so Minny doesn't have any CAP consequences. Then they could give Minny a second rounder for their troubles.


Yes, a first rounder. Don't like it? Then we won't do the trade, simple enough. We're not gonna just do you and Spree a favor. If we're going to do a sign and trade, you better make it worth our time. Vlade & cash for the buyout & 1st would be good deal. 2nd rounder's are useless. Again, you're gonna have to make it worth our time.


----------



## jstempi (Jul 23, 2003)

socco said:


> Yes, a first rounder. Don't like it? Then we won't do the trade, simple enough. We're not gonna just do you and Spree a favor. If we're going to do a sign and trade, you better make it worth our time. Vlade & cash for the buyout & 1st would be good deal. 2nd rounder's are useless. Again, you're gonna have to make it worth our time.


:laugh: Sorry, I didn't realize you were the GM. :whatever: 

Getting a second rounder for a few minutes/hours of your time is good enough. Although you may not think so, second rounders do have some value.


----------



## socco (Jul 14, 2002)

jstempi said:


> :laugh: Sorry, I didn't realize you were the GM. :whatever:


I'm not the GM, but I do happen to know a little bit about the Wolves and what their interests are, unlike you.



jstempi said:


> Getting a second rounder for a few minutes/hours of your time is good enough. Although you may not think so, second rounders do have some value.


Not to us they don't. Late 1st rounders don't even have value. We're not going to accmoidate that *******s wants. We're not about to do anybody a favor, especially Sprewell and another team fighting for a playoff spot in our conference. You're gonna have to give us some insentive to help you both out, and a 2nd rounder is not going to do it. You can sign him for half the MLE, or he can sign elsewhere, that's fine with us. If all you have for us is a 2nd rounder, we're not going to even bother. Come back when you have a quality player or a high draft pick to give us...which is there's going to have to be another team involved, because there's nothing that you have that we want.


----------



## LakerLunatic (Mar 1, 2005)

socco said:


> I'm not the GM, but I do happen to know a little bit about the Wolves and what their interests are, unlike you.
> 
> 
> Not to us they don't. Late 1st rounders don't even have value. We're not going to accmoidate that *******s wants. We're not about to do anybody a favor, especially Sprewell and another team fighting for a playoff spot in our conference. You're gonna have to give us some insentive to help you both out, and a 2nd rounder is not going to do it. You can sign him for half the MLE, or he can sign elsewhere, that's fine with us. If all you have for us is a 2nd rounder, we're not going to even bother. Come back when you have a quality player or a high draft pick to give us...which is there's going to have to be another team involved, because there's nothing that you have that we want.



Whos we? Your insane man go wear someone skin as a dress or something. We are getting spreewell, and unless you are part of the negotiations, then i suggest you dance in someone skin.


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

socco said:


> Yes, a first rounder. Don't like it? Then we won't do the trade, simple enough. We're not gonna just do you and Spree a favor. If we're going to do a sign and trade, you better make it worth our time. Vlade & cash for the buyout & 1st would be good deal. 2nd rounder's are useless. Again, you're gonna have to make it worth our time.



LMAO, you're not the GM buddy. The Wolves want help on the wings and they'd take Devean George for a 1yr/$5M deal.


----------



## jstempi (Jul 23, 2003)

socco said:


> I'm not the GM, but I do happen to know a little bit about the Wolves and what their interests are, unlike you.


LOL. Please, enlighten us as to what additional insight you have. Of course their interests would be a first more than a second…is that the amazing additional insight you have? Well, guess what, we all know that. But sorry, I think Minny would be moderately interested in getting a second rounder for nothing.



socco said:


> Not to us they don't. Late 1st rounders don't even have value. We're not going to accmoidate that *******s wants. We're not about to do anybody a favor, especially Sprewell and another team fighting for a playoff spot in our conference. You're gonna have to give us some insentive to help you both out, and a 2nd rounder is not going to do it. You can sign him for half the MLE, or he can sign elsewhere, that's fine with us. If all you have for us is a 2nd rounder, we're not going to even bother. Come back when you have a quality player or a high draft pick to give us...which is there's going to have to be another team involved, because there's nothing that you have that we want.


Oh I see…this is just bitterness at Spree. Kupchek may be stupid enough to give away a first rounder, but that doesn’t mean he’d give it to Minny just because some teenager who thinks he’s part of Wolves management says so.


----------



## socco (Jul 14, 2002)

LakerLunatic said:


> Whos we? Your insane man go wear someone skin as a dress or something. We are getting spreewell, and unless you are part of the negotiations, then i suggest you dance in someone skin.


You've never heard a fan of a team say "we" in reference to that team? Or are you just acting like an ***? You can have Spree, I don't care, but the Wolves (there, I didn't say we, happy) don't want any of the crap that you guys could offer in a sign and trade for him. Why do you think Spree's agent is trying to get other teams involved in the deal?




Damian Necronamous said:


> LMAO, you're not the GM buddy. The Wolves want help on the wings and they'd take Devean George for a 1yr/$5M deal.


Where the hell did I say I was the GM? I can't state my opinion on what the Wolves would want? I can create a thread suggesting you guys trade Kobe for Mark Madsen and Wally Szczerbiak and you can't disagree because you're not the GM of the Lakers? I know what the Wolves want, and we don't want anything you got. Devean George and his 1 year $5Mil PLUS luxury tax payments is not something we're interested in, it's just not. Sorry, but we don't want your crap.



jstempi said:


> LOL. Please, enlighten us as to what additional insight you have. Of course their interests would be a first more than a second…is that the amazing additional insight you have? Well, guess what, we all know that. But sorry, I think Minny would be moderately interested in getting a second rounder for nothing.


What aditional insite? I'm not an ignorant Lakers homer, how's that for a start? And no we're not going to do Spree and the Lakers a favor for a measly 2nd round pick.



jstempi said:


> Oh I see…this is just bitterness at Spree. Kupchek may be stupid enough to give away a first rounder, but that doesn’t mean he’d give it to Minny just because some teenager who thinks he’s part of Wolves management says so.


Not really, though our GM does hate Spree, so it could be bitterness on his part I guess. I love the shot at my age though, classy. Not that I really expected any better though...


Wow, 3 of you fools have now said that I supposedly think I'm the GM of the team. I can't have an opinion on what the team I follow would like to do? Or I guess I can, but when it doesn't make you people happy then I'm wrong? I'm sorry for being a knowledgeable poster, I didn't realize that was frowned upon over here...


----------



## jstempi (Jul 23, 2003)

socco said:


> What aditional insite?


Exactly, you dont have any additional insight. 



socco said:


> I'm not an ignorant Lakers homer, how's that for a start? And no we're not going to do Spree and the Lakers a favor for a measly 2nd round pick


If you are implying that I am, I'll let the mods deal with it. A lot of little kiddies have come on this board pretending like they have some inside knowledge and when questioned they resort to immature name calling instead of supplying some well thought-out reasonable arguments. Sounds like you are just another.



socco said:


> Not really, though our GM does hate Spree, so it could be bitterness on his part I guess. I love the shot at my age though, classy. Not that I really expected any better though...


What shot at your age? It was simply a suitable descriptive adjective. I am sorry you expected better, I could have used many other suitable descriptive adjectives that would have been agreeable to anyone else on this thread...but the mods would have likely deleted them.



socco said:


> Wow, 3 of you fools have now said that I supposedly think I'm the GM of the team. I can't have an opinion on what the team I follow would like to do? Or I guess I can, but when it doesn't make you people happy then I'm wrong? I'm sorry for being a knowledgeable poster, I didn't realize that was frowned upon over here...


Apparently you lack the intelligence to comprehend the difference between a stated opinion and repeated references to being a part of the decision making and references to being an insider. Your posts sound as if you either think you are a part of Wolves management or lack a life so badly that the only thing you have to do is vehemently include yourself when talking about team decision makers.


----------



## Unique (Apr 13, 2005)

jstempi said:


> Exactly, you dont have any additional insight.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Niiiiiiiice.....U realated 2 EHL? haha i luv that EHL arguements.


----------



## socco (Jul 14, 2002)

jstempi said:


> Exactly, you dont have any additional insight.


My "additional insight" is that I follow the Minnesota Timberwolves very closely. MUCH more closely than any of you guys. I don't know any more about this situation than is available to any of you guys. I just happen to know a large majority of that information because I'm a big Wolves fan, and I try to know as much about them as possible. I don't think that's the case with any of you (and that's not a bad thing).



jstempi said:


> If you are implying that I am, I'll let the mods deal with it. A lot of little kiddies have come on this board pretending like they have some inside knowledge and when questioned they resort to immature name calling instead of supplying some well thought-out reasonable arguments. Sounds like you are just another.


I don't have any inside knowledge (actually that's not true, but in this situation it is), never claimed to. All I've claimed is that I follow the Wolves, and have a pretty good idea what they want. You guys don't. Also think it's kinda funny how many shots you take at me, but if I suggest that people on here may be ignorant homers (which last time I checked I don't think is against the rules), I'm gonna "get in trouble"?



jstempi said:


> What shot at your age? It was simply a suitable descriptive adjective. I am sorry you expected better, I could have used many other suitable descriptive adjectives that would have been agreeable to anyone else on this thread...but the mods would have likely deleted them.


How does me being a "teenager" have anything to do with anything? Especially coming from somebody who refuses to show their age. It's not like I'm a little 13 year old kid, I'm not a "kiddie" like you say. I'm a 19 year old sophomore in college who likes to follow the local basketball team rather closely. I don't see what's wrong with that.



jstempi said:


> Apparently you lack the intelligence to comprehend the difference between a stated opinion and repeated references to being a part of the decision making and references to being an insider. Your posts sound as if you either think you are a part of Wolves management or lack a life so badly that the only thing you have to do is vehemently include yourself when talking about team decision makers.


References to being an insider? What the **** are you talking about? My posts sound as if I'm a Wolves fan and have some degree of knowledge as to what the Wolves would or would not want in a potential sign and trade for Latrell Sprewell. It's widely aparent to those who follow the team closely that we're not necessarily going to take on the best offer for Spree. For a good amount of time at the beginning of free agency we were not even in discussions with Spree or his agent about signing him or trading him. I'm not telling you what trade is going to happen. I'm telling you that we're not gonna fool around and take whatever we can get for Sprewell. We already have 16 players under contract, we already have a replacement for Sprewell and Hoiberg, we haven't been planning this whole summer to get something for Spree. If we get a good offer, of course we're not going to pass it up. But we're no tgoing to do a trade just to help out Spree and the Lakers. This is me knowing my team, not me claiming to be an "insider".


----------



## LakerLunatic (Mar 1, 2005)

You know the rules Lunatic, please abide by them.


----------



## Darth Bryant (Feb 1, 2005)

LakerLunatic said:


> Whos we? Your insane man go wear someone skin as a dress or something. We are getting spreewell, and unless you are part of the negotiations, then i suggest you dance in someone skin.




:eek8: :whoknows:


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

Why would the T-Wolves have to pay luxury tax on Devean George? They used 2.5 of their MLE on Griffin, and should be around $53 mil. Luxury tax range is around $62, right? That also doesn't count for the $1.5 mil they saved from luxury realm. No way will the Lakers get a first for Sprewell. No way. And I can see how that suggestion would cause Lakers homers to go crazy. But...what else is out there for the T-Wolves to look at? Glenn Robinson? Casey Jacobsen? Wolves need insurance in case Wally can't stay healthy again, and Richie Frahm is unproven. Trust me, I know George ain't the best player by any stretch...but at least he'll give some minutes and is a team player. And 2nd's are not crap...especially when you consider that it could be a lower second. Every year there are capable guys that go in the second round.

2004 - Anderson Varejao, Chris Duhon, Trevor Ariza
2003 - Mo Williams, Kyle Korver, Steve Blake, James Jones, Kieth Bogans, Jason Kapono
2002 - Carlos Boozer, Ronald Murray, Dan Gadzuric, Rasual Butler
2001 - Gilbert Arenas, Bobby Simmons, Mehmet Okur, Earl Watson, Trenton Hassell, Jamison Brewer
2000 - Michael Redd, Marko Jaric, Eddie House, Eduardo Najera, Jason Hart, Bryan Cardinal
1999 - Manu Ginobili, Todd MacCulloch, Lee Nailon, Gordan Giricek
1998 - Rashard Lewis, Cuttino Mobley, Jahidi White, Greg Buckner, Ruben Patterson, Shammond Williams

You're saying these second rounders are useless?

Devean George and a second for Sprewell. I'd do it if I were Minnesota. It's only one year, and you won't have to pay luxury tax for him. You get a second out of it when he could have just walked. Who knows, you could be getting the next second round sleeper since the Lakers probably won't make the playoffs next year.

This stuff about socco claiming to be an insider is crazy. I say "we" when talking about the Suns all the time. Doesn't mean I think I'm an insider or have less of an opinion...that's just dumb.


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

socco said:


> Why do you think Spree's agent is trying to get other teams involved in the deal?


Maybe to meet Spree's financial trade demands that LA can't match?


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

socco said:


> Yes, a first rounder. Don't like it? Then we won't do the trade, simple enough. We're not gonna just do you and Spree a favor. If we're going to do a sign and trade, you better make it worth our time. Vlade & cash for the buyout & 1st would be good deal. 2nd rounder's are useless. Again, you're gonna have to make it worth our time.


What are you? Kevin McHale? "We won't do the trade." I never knew this was how NBA trades went down, two teenagers get together on a internet board and negotiate until they agree on a deal and fax it to the respective GMs?


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Opps, I see that the next four posts got on that "we" thing before I did...


----------



## KillWill (Jul 1, 2003)

it may sound juvenile, but without the fans the league is zilch. no one's buyin' $125 shoes or jerseys or tickets or video games. in some ways the fans are as important to a sport as the stars that we are so fan-atical about. need an example? how about hockey? WNBA? remember the expos? pretty much the same team almost made the playoffs in a new town with fans that cared. and news flash, we are not as removed from the players as we sometimes think we are. it's the difference between being courtside at a lakers game and courtside at a clipper game; fans can make a difference. so i think its ok to say "we" in some contexts. of course the players play the games, but if horry makes a last second game winner and no ones around to hear it, does it make a swish?


----------



## jstempi (Jul 23, 2003)

JaggedPulse said:


> i think its ok to say "we" in some contexts.


I agree, but not to the extent this guy portrayed himself. He was so vehement in his assertions that he is clearly living vicariously through McHale.


----------



## jstempi (Jul 23, 2003)

Lakermike05 said:


> Niiiiiiiice.....U realated 2 EHL? haha i luv that EHL arguements.


Funny you mention EHL. He and I used to pound on all the haters that used to come in here. But I grew tired of the Laker forum (got pretty slow) and hang out in the EBB political forum.


----------



## socco (Jul 14, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> What are you? Kevin McHale? "We won't do the trade." I never knew this was how NBA trades went down, two teenagers get together on a internet board and negotiate until they agree on a deal and fax it to the respective GMs?


What the **** is wrong with you people? Somebody answer this question for me already, have you people honestly never heard somebody say "we" when referring to their team?


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

socco said:


> What the **** is wrong with you people? Somebody answer this question for me already, have you people honestly never heard somebody say "we" when referring to their team?


Yes, in instances like "we should of won that game!" Not when someone comes into a board disgusted with proposed trades and says "we aren't doing this deal!" as if they are the authority on the deal.


----------



## socco (Jul 14, 2002)

I say we wouldn't do that trade because we wouldn't do that trade. We're not gonna pass on that trade just because I said so. I think that's pretty much common sense.


----------



## KillWill (Jul 1, 2003)

common sense dosent always seem to prevail in real life nor the nba, especially when it should.


----------



## jstempi (Jul 23, 2003)

socco said:


> I say we wouldn't do that trade because we wouldn't do that trade. We're not gonna pass on that trade just because I said so. I


And that is our point. You might consider changing your approach, you come off as though you think so.


----------



## LamarButler (Apr 16, 2005)

Ya guys why dont we just talk about what this thread was created for, instead of just knitpicking at what socco said and bringing up dumb things.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

socco said:


> We're not gonna pass on that trade just because I said so. I think that's pretty much common sense.


Of course, which is why your "no deal Lakers" stance is comical at best. Tell us why it's bad for the wolves instead of telling a bunch of people who are also uninvolved that they need to include a first rounder or no trade. For all you know the wolves might not even want draft picks.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

LamarButler said:


> Ya guys why dont we just talk about what this thread was created for, instead of just knitpicking at what socco said and bringing up dumb things.


EDITED


----------



## socco (Jul 14, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> Of course, which is why your "no deal Lakers" stance is comical at best. Tell us why it's bad for the wolves instead of telling a bunch of people who are also uninvolved that they need to include a first rounder or no trade. For all you know the wolves might not even want draft picks.


No, it's not necessary that a first rounder be included. If it's going to be a deal between just the Lakers and Wolves, then I think it would. We're close to the luxury tax, so we're going to have to pay almost double for any player we would get in a trade for Spree. $8-10Mil for somebody like Devean George? If it's somebody better than that, who would actually be worth paying that much for, then I could see it happening. But I don't see any way the Wolves would pay that much for a player like Devean George (or scrubs like David Wesley back when it looked like Spree might be going to Houston) without some additional incentive.


----------



## sheefo13 (Jul 13, 2002)

PauloCatarino said:


> Sorry, but socco (or as i like to call him, *locco*) is evil.
> Laker fans have the right to protect themselves from his diabolical posts...



Dude that is unneccasary... No personal attacks bro.


----------



## Unique (Apr 13, 2005)

sheefo13 said:


> Dude that is unneccasary... No personal attacks bro.



Ditto. Let's all stay on topic which is Spre coming to the lakers or not.


----------



## Brian34Cook (Mar 26, 2003)

Cmon get back on topic and quit fighting!!


----------



## DANNY (Aug 9, 2005)

quoting mr. phil jackson, 

he said something about trading for spree is probably unlikely

so i'm guessing if spree wants to take the 2.5 mil 

then he'll play for the lakers

if he doesnt then maybe we can use that 2.5 mil to hire more laker girls?

wahahaha


----------



## Zuca (Dec 4, 2003)

I won't be shocked if I see a Spree+Kandi trade for George and Mihm happens... Don't Kareem likes Kandiman as a C? It's JUST a thought...


----------



## Tyrellaphonte (Feb 21, 2004)

i think sprewell needs to take that 2.5. otherwise he is going to be out of a job next year


----------



## LamarButler (Apr 16, 2005)

Kareem hates Kandi because of his crappy work ethic.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

socco said:


> No, it's not necessary that a first rounder be included. If it's going to be a deal between just the Lakers and Wolves, then I think it would. We're close to the luxury tax, so we're going to have to pay almost double for any player we would get in a trade for Spree. $8-10Mil for somebody like Devean George? If it's somebody better than that, who would actually be worth paying that much for, then I could see it happening. But I don't see any way the Wolves would pay that much for a player like Devean George (or scrubs like David Wesley back when it looked like Spree might be going to Houston) without some additional incentive.
> 
> 
> 
> Paulo*****arino, if you have nothing to contribute to this thread I suggest you stop posting in it.


Where do you get that the Wolves would pay George 8-10 million?


----------



## socco (Jul 14, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> Where do you get that the Wolves would pay George 8-10 million?


I didn't say we'd pay George $8-10Mil. I said we'd pay $8-10Mil for George. There's a difference. We have about $60.5Mil in salary right now, subtract Hoiberg's contract (who we cut with the amnesty clause) and we're at $59Mil. Luxury tax is $61.7Mil. So we'd have to pay the $5Mil for George's contract, plus $2.3Mil or so in luxury tax payments.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

sheefo13 said:


> Dude that is unneccasary... No personal attacks bro.


I was joking!

But i'll edit it just the same.


----------



## socco (Jul 14, 2002)

PauloCatarino said:


> I like socco's as a poster (that is, in non-KG-related topics)


You're dumber than I thought...


:wink:



edit: lol, so you don't like me as a regular poster? I'm hurt. :laugh:


----------



## Unique (Apr 13, 2005)

Doubt this trade will happen since Phil said he doubts it 2..........But then again it is the lakers :/


----------



## LamarButler (Apr 16, 2005)

He said the TRADE was unlikely so maybe Spree will just settle for 2.5 mil.


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

I just love how Kupchak and Phil seem to feel that the best way for our team to get better is by keeping it crappy and not bringing in any good players....


----------



## Brian34Cook (Mar 26, 2003)

Spree Rumor shot down



> Timberwolves owner Glen Taylor said a report in Minneapolis that his team has been talking to the Lakers about signing Latrell Sprewell so it can trade him to Los Angeles is news to him.
> 
> "That's not true; we're maxed out with players and we couldn't sign another guy even to trade him," Taylor said.


----------



## Unique (Apr 13, 2005)

Brian34Cook said:


> Spree Rumor shot down



Ehhhh saw that coming a mile away .........Fine no i didnt but o well.


----------



## casebeck22 (Jul 20, 2005)

Lakermike05 said:


> Ehhhh saw that coming a mile away .........Fine no i didnt but o well.


I can't get into it.


----------

