# Odom, Bynum want to remain with the Lakers



## Eternal (Sep 7, 2005)

*Odom, Bynum want to remain with the Lakers*
_ocregister_


If the Lakers are going to make a blockbuster trade this summer, they most likely will have to package 19-year-old Andrew Bynum's potential in one offer or 27-year-old Lamar Odom's potential All-Star skills in another. Or it could take both.

However, there is no indication the Lakers are prepared to give up Bynum, in whom Lakers vice president Jim Buss passionately believes. And Lakers coach Phil Jackson said Odom's powerhouse game in the playoff finale despite injuries "left us thinking what a great player he is and how valuable he is to our team."

Odom said he "definitely" hopes to stay, saying: "This is a team I want to retire with." And after the death of his infant son last summer and then injuries this season, Odom expects next season could be his breakthrough.

"When I do come back in shape and physically fit and focused, I don't think there should be anything that's going to stop me," he said.

Lakers general manager Mitch Kupchak asked Odom on Friday how to reconcile his 15.8-point career average with his 33-point playoff finale, prompting Odom to say later: "I know they want me to score. So I might be catching the ball a little closer to the basket."

Bynum "maybe" could score 12-14 points per game next season, Jackson said. He said the Lakers will monitor Bynum's workouts all summer, though Bynum said he will spend time taking college classes in math and English.

"We are going to have great input in what he does this summer and watch him carefully and hope his development increases as much as it did from Year 1 to Year 2," Jackson said.

Yet when Jackson spoke of the need for an energetic, defensive-minded big man for next season, he complained about Kwame Brown's injury problems but never mentioned Bynum's potential. Bynum said he will try to address deficiencies in his core strength and lower-body strength to improve his speed and explosiveness.

"I want to be an All-Star within four years (in the NBA)," he said, referring to the 2008-09 season.

Asked about trade talk, Bynum said: "It's good to know I'm wanted by other teams. It means I'm doing something right."

Asked about new faces perhaps coming to the team, Bynum said: "I have no idea what's going to happen. I just hope to see myface on the team next year."


----------



## Bartholomew Hunt (Mar 4, 2003)

Hearing about how these players want to remain Lakers and how they are working hard makes it tough to trade them. However, if it took trading Kobe to make this team better(not saying it would), I would be all for it. I'm ready for more championships.


----------



## elcap15 (Aug 8, 2006)

I have this problem, I want to get new players for the lakers to improve the team, but the players that keep getting brought up in trade talks, are the layers i like on the team. (Odom, Farmar, Bynum, Luke) I am all for making some moves, maybe even big ones, but I am just so nervous about what our pieces might become.

And I hope odom and Bynum arent just blowing smoke up our asses and are actually working their butts off this offseason.


----------



## Silk D (Feb 6, 2006)

Bartholomew Hunt said:


> Hearing about how these players want to remain Lakers and how they are working hard makes it tough to trade them. However, if it took trading Kobe to make this team better(not saying it would), I would be all for it. I'm ready for more championships.


agreed. No need to get rid of them for the sake of getting rid of them. But we need to do whatever it takes to get back to the top. Now that the frustration of this season has subsided a bit, bringing in a PG and giving this line-up (hopefully healthy) one more shot might not be such a bad idea if a big name player is not available. I'm not saying that's what I want, but I wouldn't mind seeing how Andrew develops and if he makes the same leap from year 2 to 3 as he did from 1 to 2.


----------



## SoCalfan21 (Jul 19, 2004)

Thats nice to hear. We want a Championship team. So..get their asses out of here.


----------



## SoCalfan21 (Jul 19, 2004)

Bartholomew Hunt said:


> Hearing about how these players want to remain Lakers and how they are working hard makes it tough to trade them. However, if it took trading Kobe to make this team better(not saying it would), I would be all for it. I'm ready for more championships.


I don't really think im ready for Kobe to leave...ever. I would be in depression for months if Kobe got traded or left.


----------



## Silk D (Feb 6, 2006)

elcap15 said:


> I have this problem, I want to get new players for the lakers to improve the team, but the players that keep getting brought up in trade talks, are the layers i like on the team. (Odom, Farmar, Bynum, Luke)


that's just it. you usually have to give up quality to get quality. people around here think I'm in love with this roster, which is hardly the case. It just gets to me when people are like "MAKE A TRADE MITCH!!" when he basically has no chips to bargin with outside of our key players. Nobody that has any value on this team is really expendable outside of Andrew whom Jim buss won't let mitch touch.


----------



## Shaolin (Aug 6, 2004)

Trading either Bynum and/or Odom would be a step backwards.


----------



## afobisme (Apr 29, 2006)

no, not trading bynum would be a step backwards. we need to get rid of him.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

afobisme said:


> no, not trading bynum would be a step backwards. we need to get rid of him.



Thank you.

I know guys feel a loyalty to the players on their team, and in most cases over rate them, but come on. Im a little tired of hearing "I wouldnt trade Odom for JO straight up". Thats just pretty ****ing stupid if you ask me. Or "Bynum could be great". Yes, he could be, or he could be a role player. Why not trade him while his stock is high so you dont have to wait and see what kind of player he turns into? Because Im pretty sure Kobe is tired of waiting.


----------



## Eternal (Sep 7, 2005)

R-Star said:


> Thank you.
> 
> I know guys feel a loyalty to the players on their team, and in most cases over rate them, but come on. Im a little tired of hearing *"I wouldnt trade Odom for JO straight up"*. Thats just pretty ****ing stupid if you ask me. Or "Bynum could be great". Yes, he could be, or he could be a role player. Why not trade him while his stock is high so you dont have to wait and see what kind of player he turns into? Because Im pretty sure Kobe is tired of waiting.


That's not stupid at all... not wanting to trade Odom for JO straight up... O'neal is injury proned, and Odom was putting up great numbers this year until the injuries occured. Look what Odom was doing against the Phoenix Suns... with 3 significant injuries.

Odom's stats for 2007:
15.9 ppg, 9.8 rpg, 4.8 apg, .468 shooting percentage

O'neal's stats for 2007:
19.4 ppg, 9.6 rpg, 2.4 apg, .436 shooting percentage

I wouldn't say there's an advantage at all in getting O'neal for Odom... not to mention it would take O'neal awhile to get used to the triangle offense.

I'm all for getting rid of Bynum, but not all for getting rid of Odom, unless it's for KG.


----------



## SoCalfan21 (Jul 19, 2004)

package bynum for J. Kidd then trade Odom for JO...that would be awesome.


----------



## Silk D (Feb 6, 2006)

afobisme said:


> no, not trading bynum would be a step backwards. we need to get rid of him.



yessir. I'm not anxious to 'get rid of him', but I definetely hope we move him. How good Andrew can become is still a big question mark. but one this is for sure; he won't reach his potential for at least another 2-3 year, when kobe's game will begin to decline. we can't afford to wait, we need to get what we can for him right now.


N' lamar for JO is a sideways move at best. Lamar's not going anywhere unless it's for KG.


----------



## The One (Jul 10, 2005)

Silk D said:


> Lamar's not going anywhere unless it's for KG.


How about KG and Artest?
Da Trade...


----------



## Shaolin (Aug 6, 2004)

Lunacy. Its insane to mortgage the future for the unsure, possible short term gain. 

I'll keep the young talent whos under the direct tutelage of a legend, and give him time to develop further. I wouldn't trade him for established players who can't lead their current teams to the playoffs. You think theres a reason why other teams see value in Bynum? IN MY GUT, something tells me that trading the kid would come back to bite us in the *** in the future.


----------



## Silk D (Feb 6, 2006)

Shaolin said:


> Lunacy. Its insane to mortgage the future for the unsure, possible short term gain.
> 
> I'll keep the young talent whos under the direct tutelage of a legend, and give him time to develop further. I wouldn't trade him for established players who can't lead their current teams to the playoffs. You think theres a reason why other teams see value in Bynum? IN MY GUT, something tells me that trading the kid would come back to bite us in the *** in the future.



what's insane is waisting kobe's prime waiting on the unsure future of Andrew Bynum. Even if he does reach is enormous potential, kobe and lamar will be in their 30's and past their prime. I wouldn't give him up for players of the Jason Kidd, Pau Gasol variety. but a package for JO or KG? com'on man, you value him way too much.


----------



## Eternal (Sep 7, 2005)

Shaolin said:


> Lunacy. Its insane to mortgage the future for the unsure, possible short term gain.
> 
> I'll keep the young talent whos under the direct tutelage of a legend, and give him time to develop further. I wouldn't trade him for established players who can't lead their current teams to the playoffs. You think theres a reason why other teams see value in Bynum? IN MY GUT, something tells me that trading the kid would come back to bite us in the *** in the future.


I'd rather give him up, and get Kobe the help he needs, which we know is a great player, and not waste his prime like silk d said. There is alot of unsures here... like we are unsure if Bynum will ever be good. If we did get a KG or O'neal we know they are great players and we know Kobe is great. I'm willing to go with what we know, instead of waiting on a youngster, not knowing if he will ever be great or not.


----------



## Maddocks (Jun 16, 2006)

SoCalfan21 said:


> package bynum for J. Kidd then trade Odom for JO...that would be awesome.


my dreams will come true if that trade happened.


----------



## Eternal (Sep 7, 2005)

Maddocks said:


> my dreams will come true if that trade happened.


I'd rather just do the Kidd trade. Odom > JO IMO.


----------



## elcap15 (Aug 8, 2006)

Cant we just lease Bynum out for a couple years. I mean, I dont really want to see him go. . .for good. Cant we work out some sort of rental schedule, or maybe like a study abroad program to another team.


----------



## Shaolin (Aug 6, 2004)

Silk D said:


> what's insane is waisting kobe's prime waiting on the unsure future of Andrew Bynum. Even if he does reach is enormous potential, kobe and lamar will be in their 30's and past their prime. I wouldn't give him up for players of the Jason Kidd, Pau Gasol variety. but a package for JO or KG? com'on man, you value him way too much.


I value KG and JO way too little, actually. 

IMO, the Lakers don't really need another superstar player with another superstar contract. They need mid-level veterans who play consistent defense, can handle hostile enviroments and pressure, who have playoff experience. They don't need big names and stats, they need little guys who play well together. See: Detroit and Utah. 

Besides, bring in the big name/money superstars and they're still going to struggle, because they'll have to learn the *&^*%#@ Triangle offense. Remember how well Payton and Malone did here? 

Kobe is the now and the immediate future, and yes the Lakers need to build around him now. But that doesn't mean setting up the team so that in a few years, they've got nobody to build around and its time to go back to the Western Conference basement. For now, I'd keep the big tall kid and actually get him the ball more often (something the Lakers infuriatingly refused to do this year)


----------



## Silk D (Feb 6, 2006)

Shaolin said:


> I value KG and JO way too little, actually.
> 
> IMO, the Lakers don't really need another superstar player with another superstar contract. They need mid-level veterans who play consistent defense, can handle hostile enviroments and pressure, who have playoff experience. They don't need big names and stats, they need little guys who play well together. See: Detroit and Utah.
> 
> ...



very good points, but there's a couple of problems. 

first, we need a better second scoring option. I'm more than comfortable w/ Lamar being our second best player, however, his game is not suited to handle a big scoring load. Lamar has the ability to average 22 pts, but I doubt it will ever happen in his career because that's just not his game. I would love to bring in a 'role player' that can drop 20-22 a night and occasionally go off for 30-35. any come to mind?

second, how do we upgrade the roster? Lamar and Andrew are our only real trading chips. this is always my main point when I argue w/ the people on this board who want a trade every other week. NOBODY WANTS OUR GARBAGE PLAYERS!! so upgrading our roster, even if it is just getting role players, is not going to be easy w/o giving up one of our big pieces. I mean, what do you suggest? Trading Andrew for spare parts? No, I don't think we NEED KG, or JO. but if there's any chance of getting them, we need to do whatever we can to do so.

third, if we wanna just make the play-offs for the next ten years, yeah, stick w/ what we got, and we'll be fine. but when you have a talent of kobe's magnitude on your team, the goal should always be championships. I'm not suggesting we sign a bunch of crappy old vets to try to make one last push (i.e. miami), but there will be plenty of time to prepare for life after kobe. for now, lets put a championship team around him, so he can lead us back to the top.


----------



## Shaolin (Aug 6, 2004)

Silk D said:


> very good points, but there's a couple of problems.
> 
> first, we need a better second scoring option. I'm more than comfortable w/ Lamar being our second best player, however, his game is not suited to handle a big scoring load. Lamar has the ability to average 22 pts, but I doubt it will ever happen in his career because that's just not his game. I would love to bring in a 'role player' that can drop 20-22 a night and occasionally go off for 30-35. any come to mind?
> 
> ...


I'm reluctant to say "lets go get X" mostly because I want to see whos going to be on the free agent market. Right now, I've no idea whos going to be available.

The Lakers problem isn't scoring. *Its defense*. They can't stop other teams from scoring, even lowly teams found their fortunes through the porous Laker defense. They can't stop mediocre teams, and against top teams like PHX they were dead meat. Fix the defense and you don't need a big 2nd option. 

Other big problems? The lack of a good passer. Get someone who can pass well, and guys will get easier baskets. 

No other team is going to give the Lakers anything. The last two "steals" they picked up were Robert Horry and Kobe (for Vlade Divac no less...lol) The best they can hope for is to trade young talent to a team looking to get younger or to dump salary. AFAIC, Cook, Walton, Sasha, Turiaf, Evans.....maybe Kwame...are trade bait. Mihm and Radmanovic are damaged goods and practically useless. 

But if it were to me, Odom and Bynum are nucleus material and off the table.

EDIT: as a side note, I recall Jermaine O'Neal being something of a project player when he started with Portland. I'll never forget this one dunk that Shaq laid on him in the playoffs, most monstrous gorilla dunk I've ever seen. Its ironic that so many years later, we're fiending for a guy that started out as a kid with an uncertain future......


----------



## ii9ce (Feb 1, 2005)

Maddocks said:


> my dreams will come true if that trade happened.


Sorry mate, but this is a stupid trade. JO for Odom is backwards. Looking at the stats, there isn't anything to chose between them. But Odom knows the triangle and I feel has the potential to get better. 

JO will not get any better and his monster salary is somthing we do not need. In Odom we have the stats without the luxury tax.

Drew for Kidd, again Kidd's got a monster salary and is past his prime. Kidd will just become another Mith Richmond, Aron McKie, B Russell etc but costing us a whole lot more. 

The only reasone I would trade Odom or Drew is we are getting KG.


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

Shaolin said:


> I'm reluctant to say "lets go get X" mostly because I want to see whos going to be on the free agent market. Right now, I've no idea whos going to be available.
> 
> The Lakers problem isn't scoring. *Its defense*. They can't stop other teams from scoring, even lowly teams found their fortunes through the porous Laker defense. They can't stop mediocre teams, and against top teams like PHX they were dead meat. Fix the defense and you don't need a big 2nd option.
> 
> ...


The biggest problem is defense, and the reason defense is such a problem is because 1) Lamar is a defensive liability playing at the 4 (and an average defensive player anyway the sf), 2) Bynum is a defensive liability period. Is your solution really to just hope these guys become better defenders? A second offensive option is a must for a team like this, you bring up a team like Detroit, they're a deep team which has 3 all stars in their starting lineup (4 in 2006), and one of the best defenses in the league. They aren't just little guys who can play together. They're not just a few veteran role players, Billups, Hamilton, Wallace and Prince? These are all players who are good enough to be that second option on this Lakers team, they are all players who could average close to 20 ppg if needed, just one of them, and Detroit has 4 of them. How are the Lakers supposed to build a team in that mold when the only players you have working with are guys like Cook, Sasha, Walton, Brown (if you're not including Odom and Bynum). 

When you build an offense that is so offensively dependent on one player, you need a second option. Take a look at all the past championship teams. In the last 15-20 years, how many teams built around one great offensive player didn't have a strong second option? Kareem/Magic, Bird/McHale, Jordan/Pippen, Hakeem/Drexler, Jordan/Pippen redux, Duncan/Robinson, Shaq/Kobe, Duncan/Ginobili/Parker, Shaq/Wade? The only teams I can think of that didn't have strong 1-2 (and 1-2-3 if you're talking about the Spurs) combinations built around a single offensive option are the 03-04 Pistons, the 02-03 Spurs (When the team was really just Duncan and a bunch of role players), and the 93-94 Rockets, two of which, their star player was a defensive powerhouse big man. 

JO was a raw kid out of HS with an uncertain future. And look at that, it took him what? 6 years to develop into the player he is now. In 4 years, Kobe will be 33 years old, Odom will be 32 years old, their games will have declined, and their primes wasted all so you could wait on Bynum to develop into we don't even know what? Not going after a championship now and opting to wait on a kid will be a tragedy. Bynum will not ever be a superstar on Kobe's level. Kobe will go down as one of the top 10-15 (at least) players who ever stepped on the hardwood. Bynum is slow footed, limited athletically, and clueless defensively, his potential lies in his size and a nice touch near the basket.

Last, I'm not a big fan of O'Neal, hes a very talented low post player who unfortunately likes to take jumpshots instead, but if Bynum were to EVER develop into a player of JO's caliber, he would be a huge success. I wouldn't trade Odom and Bynum for him, but I would have no problems letting Bynum + filler go. Why? Maybe he can develop into a player as good as O'Neal, but by then, Kobe will not be the same player he is now, I opt to instead have both players in their prime.

Finally, a big no to Jason Kidd. Hes past his prime, not to mention, he doesn't fit. The Lakers aren't an uptempo fast break team, and all that is really needed from the pg position is defense and shooting, not a guy who has to handle the all to have a huge effect on the floor.


----------



## Shaolin (Aug 6, 2004)

Drewbs said:


> The biggest problem is defense, and the reason defense is such a problem is because 1) Lamar is a defensive liability playing at the 4 (and an average defensive player anyway the sf), 2) Bynum is a defensive liability period. Is your solution really to just hope these guys become better defenders? A second offensive option is a must for a team like this, you bring up a team like Detroit, they're a deep team which has 3 all stars in their starting lineup (4 in 2006), and one of the best defenses in the league. They aren't just little guys who can play together. They're not just a few veteran role players, Billups, Hamilton, Wallace and Prince? These are all players who are good enough to be that second option on this Lakers team, they are all players who could average close to 20 ppg if needed, just one of them, and Detroit has 4 of them. How are the Lakers supposed to build a team in that mold when the only players you have working with are guys like Cook, Sasha, Walton, Brown (if you're not including Odom and Bynum).
> 
> When you build an offense that is so offensively dependent on one player, you need a second option. Take a look at all the past championship teams. In the last 15-20 years, how many teams built around one great offensive player didn't have a strong second option? Kareem/Magic, Bird/McHale, Jordan/Pippen, Hakeem/Drexler, Jordan/Pippen redux, Duncan/Robinson, Shaq/Kobe, Duncan/Ginobili/Parker, Shaq/Wade? The only teams I can think of that didn't have strong 1-2 (and 1-2-3 if you're talking about the Spurs) combinations built around a single offensive option are the 03-04 Pistons, the 02-03 Spurs (When the team was really just Duncan and a bunch of role players), and the 93-94 Rockets, two of which, their star player was a defensive powerhouse big man.
> 
> ...


Good post. 

I don't agree with Bynum and Odom being poor defenders. Bynum is a raw talent, and (so far) a noob who wouldn't get a call if the paid the refs for it. Being a 3rd year guy now, the refs will give him a bit more leeway. Odom spent the season with a bum knee and shoulder. I suspect when healthy his defense will be better. 

They also suffered from breakdowns at the guard positions (glares at Smush). When your point defender gets repeatedly beaten every time down the floor, the secondary defense has to react; too often that meant picking up the foul or leaving their own guy to go help. Fix the guard defense and the secondary guys will benefit. You and I prolly agree that Lamar really isn't a PF, he's a SF pressed into a PF role. Give me a front line of Bynum, Brown and Odom. 

Detroit, individually, none of those players are what we'd call "superstars" (although I'd make a case for Billups). _Collectively_ they're IMO the best team in the league because they play team ball so well. They know their roles, take their turns, they don't stand around and wait for one player to do something magical. 

The Lakers have a 2nd and 3rd option _now_. Their problem is not getting them the ball in situations to be effective. Odom can shoot outside, go to the basket and post up. Bynum has a developing inside game, decent touch and IIRC a pretty good shooting average. He'd score more if they got him the damned ball. And he'd get the ball, if they ran the offense more effectively OR ran a more effective offense. 

Lastly...point taken about Jason Kidd. His effectiveness would be limited, first by his own limitations but IMO compounded by the Triangle. I keep going back to how these players have to navigate the triangle, how they spend more energy learning the orthodoxy of the system instead of playing basketball. Its not easy to argue with a system thats been used to win nine titles. But its easy to see that the players are unsure of themselves, confused. I'd love to see the team just every now and then get a defensive board and run the break; or just run some quick pick & roll plays. Its also easy to see that other teams have studied the triangle as well: it not an unusual novelty anymore. If they've adjusted, has the triangle adjusted as well, or is it intent on doing things the way its always been done? I'm starting to think the latter.


----------



## Bartholomew Hunt (Mar 4, 2003)

Letting expiring contracts lay by the wayside really cost this team since the proper pieces to make trades are lacking. Having a true visionary in the front office would be a step in the right direction. Regardless of the limited talent level, there are GMs out there who can create something out of basically nothing(most of the time through expiring contracts).


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

Bartholomew Hunt said:


> Letting expiring contracts lay by the wayside really cost this team since the proper pieces to make trades are lacking. Having a true visionary in the front office would be a step in the right direction. Regardless of the limited talent level, there are GMs out there who can create something out of basically nothing(most of the time through expiring contracts).


Having Brian Grant's expiring right now would have been nice.


----------



## SoCalfan21 (Jul 19, 2004)

Drewbs said:


> Having Brian Grant's expiring right now would have been nice.


Yeah, I dont know why the team was that eager to release Grant when he came to the lakers. If they were originally planning on doing that when they traded Shaq then I dont know why they accepted a stupid *** trade like that. Why couldn't we have gotten Nash and Howard. WTF!!


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Eternal said:


> Odom > JO IMO.


JO's best attribute is his shot blocking ability and his interior D, both extreme weaknesses on the Lakers. Odom provides neither and doesn't complement Kobe well as a scorer. I think Phil Jackson is just what JO needs as he enters his prime.


----------



## Eternal (Sep 7, 2005)

EHL said:


> JO's best attribute is his shot blocking ability and his interior D, both extreme weaknesses on the Lakers. Odom provides neither and doesn't complement Kobe well as a scorer. I think Phil Jackson is just what JO needs as he enters his prime.


Possibly, but JO won't take this team to the next level if we are giving up Odom and Bynum. That trade would be a huge mistake.


----------



## ElMarroAfamado (Nov 1, 2005)

afobisme said:


> no, not trading bynum would be a step backwards. we need to get rid of him.


Bynum is very Livingstonesque....hype..flashes...etc......if i were the Lakers id get rid of him while you can still get something in return before something drastic happens with him like Livingston and you get NOTHING......


----------

