# Pau Gasol to the Lakers....



## matador1238 (May 3, 2006)

WTF??

Pau Gasol for Kwame Brown + Aaron Mckie + Javaris Crittenton + 2008 and 2010 1st round picks


And we couldnt offer the Grizzles a better deal than this? Now, the Lakers is a championship contender and we are still stuck in the basement. This is bull crap!!!


----------



## nauticazn25 (Aug 27, 2006)

omg that is crazy....the lakers imo are now up there with the spurs, mavericks, and the suns now...i cant believe memphis did that traade....they couldve gotten a WAY better deal then KWAME BROWN?? and two first rounderS?(which will be late picks now)


----------



## leidout (Jul 13, 2005)

Wow, i'm stunned. I think we could've easily had Gasol for Kaman in that case. Total bull**** tho, just like the KG to Boston trade.


----------



## Showtime87 (Jun 27, 2005)

matador1238 said:


> WTF??
> 
> Pau Gasol + Aaron Mckie for Kwame Brown + Javaris Crittenton + 2008 and 2010 1st round picks
> 
> ...


Who would the Clippers have offered? Elton Brand? Seriously, we already have Brand and Kaman...what good would it have done to trade one of them for Gasol? The Lakers just happened to have a huge expiring contract and a hot prospect that the Grizz must have wanted REALLY badly (for some reason). Such is life as a Clippers fan...


----------



## leidout (Jul 13, 2005)

Showtime87 said:


> Who would the Clippers have offered? Elton Brand? Seriously, we already have Brand and Kaman...what good would it have done to trade one of them for Gasol? The Lakers just happened to have a huge expiring contract and a hot prospect that the Grizz must have wanted REALLY badly (for some reason). Such is life as a Clippers fan...


Trade Kaman for Gasol, even with Kaman's recent improvement, Gasol is still a superior player who can be counted on just as much as Brand. He's also a great passing big man, rarely makes ******* decisions, never flat out loses his man and is fast enough to play in a high tempo game. Brand + Gasol would've been too much for any team to handle, even with our senior citizen back court we'd have been a menace in the playoffs.


----------



## Showtime87 (Jun 27, 2005)

leidout said:


> Wow, i'm stunned. I think we could've easily had Gasol for Kaman in that case. Total bull**** tho, just like the KG to Boston trade.


They just wanted to dump salary to make it easier for Heisley to sell the team. They wouldn't have wanted Kaman's long-term deal. This was a salary dump, pure and simple. I do think Jerry West had a hand in this though, he saw an opportunity to help the Lakers and I think he urged the GM to make this deal.


----------



## leidout (Jul 13, 2005)

Showtime87 said:


> They just wanted to dump salary to make it easier for Heisley to sell the team. They wouldn't have wanted Kaman's long-term deal. This was a salary dump, pure and simple. I do think Jerry West had a hand in this though, he saw an opportunity to help the Lakers and I think he urged the GM to make this deal.


Salary dump? Maggette + Cassell or whatever. Better deal than the Lakers. Like I said, it's a bull**** deal.


----------



## LA68 (Apr 3, 2004)

You forget, your monkey wrench owner says the Clips can win now with their two top talents out for the year. With management like this , how can you be successful for any length of time. 

Damn I really thought a Laker/Clip rivalry was a reality. I guess I was mistaken.


----------



## Showtime87 (Jun 27, 2005)

leidout said:


> Salary dump? Maggette + Cassell or whatever. Better deal than the Lakers. Like I said, it's a bull**** deal.


Think about it: Why would they want guys like Maggette and Cassell if they KNOW they won't resign them? They'll take a guy like Kwame Brown because he's not an impact player and they'll take absolutely zero flack for letting him walk at the end of the year. The Grizzlies are also playing for ping pong balls, so why trade for solid players who might help you win if you're going to let them walk anyway after the season? This wasn't a deal the Clippers ever had a chance of being involved in...that's just the way it is.


----------



## Showtime87 (Jun 27, 2005)

LA68 said:


> You forget, your monkey wrench owner says the Clips can win now with their two top talents out for the year. With management like this , how can you be successful for any length of time.
> 
> Damn I really thought a Laker/Clip rivalry was a reality. I guess I was mistaken.


And the frustrating thing is that most Clippers fans are backing him. Sterling is a joke, he's the reason this team has been a laughing stock for so many years.


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

Surprised the Grizzlies took this. They could have gotten much more, those 1st rounders are going to be late. And why do they need Crittenton? They already have a better PG prospect in Conley.


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

If they are having a fire sale the Clippers better be working the phones for Mike Miller.


----------



## Showtime87 (Jun 27, 2005)

Weasel said:


> Surprised the Grizzlies took this. They could have gotten much more, those 1st rounders are going to be late. And why do they need Crittenton? They already have a better PG prospect in Conley.


That's the really confusing part, I have no idea why they would want Crittenton. They drafted Conley at #4 and they just acquired a guard taken 15 spots lower in the draft. I think the fact of the matter is that they wanted to take on as little salary as possible and the Lakers happened to have an enormous expiring contract.


----------



## ElMarroAfamado (Nov 1, 2005)

if the Clippers really cared about getting out of the basement, or Sterling did, he did whatever to give us this lineup by this time next year
Arenas
Mobley
Mike Miller
Tim Thomas
Kaman

maybe get a mediocre PF in the process not to score but that can rebound and block a shot here n there


----------



## Showtime87 (Jun 27, 2005)

ElMarroAfamado said:


> if the Clippers really cared about getting out of the basement, or Sterling did, he did whatever to give us this lineup by this time next year
> Arenas
> Mobley
> Mike Miller
> ...


You want to get rid of Elton? I'm sorry man, couldn't agree less. Losing a 28 year-old PF of Elton's caliber in order to add a shoot-first PG like Arenas is a bad move. I would much rather let Maggette and Cassell walk, then try moving Mobley's contract in order to clear enough cap space so that we can have them both. That's the only way getting Arenas makes any sense to me. I also want to see Al Thornton start next season, he has the talent to be an impact player in this league and he's never going to achieve that by coming off the bench.


----------



## PAIDNFULL23 (Jul 9, 2005)

Maybe we should try and get Kyle Lowry, he's the type of PG we need, a great penetrator, who can create shots for himself and his teammates, plus he plays with a lot of heart. What is Memphis gonna do with 3 young PGs?


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

Wow, Clippers sit on the butts again and miss out. Clippers could have easily gotten gasol. Kwame and low first round picks? YUCK! 

We have the expiring (at worst next year) contracts we could have offered such as maggette, brand, cassell, williams. This is really too bad. Gasol/Kaman would have been a great dynamic duo, perfect complements for each other. WHen is sterling going to fire baylor/and or dunleavvy so that we dont miss out on deals like this.

Hats off to kupchack who originally made some ridiculous moves but has since done a 180 degree turnaround, and pulled off great drafts and moves of late (Critt wasnt a smart pick, but hey, it got them gasol. lol).


----------



## Showtime87 (Jun 27, 2005)

yamaneko said:


> Wow, Clippers sit on the butts again and miss out. Clippers could have easily gotten gasol. Kwame and low first round picks? YUCK!
> 
> We have the expiring (at worst next year) contracts we could have offered such as maggette, brand, cassell, williams. This is really too bad. Gasol/Kaman would have been a great dynamic duo, perfect complements for each other. WHen is sterling going to fire baylor/and or dunleavvy so that we dont miss out on deals like this.
> 
> Hats off to kupchack who originally made some ridiculous moves but has since done a 180 degree turnaround, and pulled off great drafts and moves of late (Critt wasnt a smart pick, but hey, it got them gasol. lol).


Come on yama, look at the reasoning behind this deal! The Grizzlies did not want talent in return. They wanted somebody they could dump after the season without catching any flack. They certainly couldn't do that with Maggette, Cassell or BRAND! They are simply trying to dump salary. And BTW: I'm going to continue to confront you every time you suggest Elton Brand should be traded or released from this team. It's your opinion and you're certainly entitled to it, but it makes absolutely no sense. :banghead:


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

Thats what Im talking about. We have the same things. Theres brand who at worst would be out next year, at best, he opts out, and they can work a sign and trade, thus giving them a lot better chance at using cap space (does anyone think with kwames expiring deal, a big name FA will be interested in signing in memphis?) Then theres maggette who also is expiring deal they could have had, very similar to kwames deal. Cassell as well. All as good if not better (due to sign and trade potential) for the memphis cap situation. Not sure how you cant see that. 

Confront all you want, but its the only logical step to get us to a championship caliber team. Brand is not a superstar, cant carrry a team on his back, cant take nor hit late game shots, and is going to be asking for a superstar extenstion that will cap us out for years. I 100% guarantee that with brand at a max or anywhere near max deal, we will never win a championship, and wed be dang lucky to get to the WCF even . Its not just a guess, its a deduction based on brands entire career. 

This is not a popularity or humanitarian contest. In that regards, we should give brand MORE than the max contract. The NBA is about winning a championship. And bottom line is youre not going to get there if you give superstar contracts to non superstar players. Even gasol is more of a star than brand...and is even cheaper than brand. 

I also predict that we will miss out with 1 or more superstars b4 the trade deadline that we could have offered better deals to, namely, jason kidd, perhaps others. 

Meanwhile, lakers all of a sudden are a championship team again, and probably will be for the next 3 years.

Bynum/Gasol/Odom/Kobe/Any PG


----------



## LA68 (Apr 3, 2004)

It's not over yet ! You still have some moves you could make.

We all know Cassell has been talking to Rondo in Boston and now the Celtics will be pressured to shore up their PG. We all know Dunleavy can't stand Maggette. NJ is still trying to unload VC. A creative GM would take this into consideration and try something. 

After all, Kupchak just traded a rookie, a retired player and a bum and got an all star. Anything is possible if you only believe....


----------



## leidout (Jul 13, 2005)

LA68 said:


> It's not over yet ! You still have some moves you could make.
> 
> We all know Cassell has been talking to Rondo in Boston and now the Celtics will be pressured to shore up their PG. We all know Dunleavy can't stand Maggette. NJ is still trying to unload VC. A creative GM would take this into consideration and try something.
> 
> After all, Kupchak just traded a rookie, a retired player and a bum and got an all star. Anything is possible if you only believe....


Unfortunately we don't have Jerry West/Kevin McHale type alumni trying to dump some all-stars on us. Best possibility? Clippers make zero moves before the all-star break.


----------



## Showtime87 (Jun 27, 2005)

yamaneko said:


> Thats what Im talking about. We have the same things. Theres brand who at worst would be out next year, at best, he opts out, and they can work a sign and trade, thus giving them a lot better chance at using cap space (does anyone think with kwames expiring deal, a big name FA will be interested in signing in memphis?) Then theres maggette who also is expiring deal they could have had, very similar to kwames deal. Cassell as well. All as good if not better (due to sign and trade potential) for the memphis cap situation. Not sure how you cant see that.
> 
> Confront all you want, but its the only logical step to get us to a championship caliber team. Brand is not a superstar, cant carrry a team on his back, cant take nor hit late game shots, and is going to be asking for a superstar extenstion that will cap us out for years. I 100% guarantee that with brand at a max or anywhere near max deal, we will never win a championship, and wed be dang lucky to get to the WCF even . Its not just a guess, its a deduction based on brands entire career.
> 
> ...


Apparently, you either don't understand what I said or you simply don't bother to read my posts entirely. The point for Memphis was not to get talent in return, it was to cut payroll - that's it. They wouldn't want impact players like Maggette, Cassell or Brand because they might actually help the team win games, which is NOT what they want. They were already a lottery team with Gasol, moving him was a way of:
A) cutting payroll for the future and 
B) improving their chances of a higher draft pick next summer. What would be the point of trading for impact players who will improve your team when you have no intention of re-signing them in the offseason? 

As far as Brand goes, I'm not talking at all about his personality or demeanor. I'm simply referring to the solid, consistent production he's given this team since he got here in 2001. You must be as short-sighted as all those fans and coaches who have consistently snubbed him over the years in terms of all-star consideration. All he has done is average 20 pts, 10 rebs, 2.5 ast, 2 blks and 1 steal per game over the course of his career. Not to mention his MVP caliber season, the year HE led the Clippers to the brink of the WCF! But I guess you think they would've been there with or without him, right? Just because he's hurt this year, don't completely write the guy off! I don't know if you're just assuming that his production will drop off because of the injury, or if you're just not paying attention to how good he actually is, but there aren't many players in this league who have done what he has over the last 8 seasons. This franchise was nowhere before Brand got here and you think they're going to be championship contenders with him gone? By the way, if you're seriously expecting a championship anytime soon, you've got a lot of disappointment coming. This team has never seriously contended for a title (oh yeah, besides the year Elton almost got them there) and they probably won't in the next couple of seasons. But without a player like Elton Brand to anchor the frontcourt and run the offense through, they're going to be in terrible shape. Even Donald Sterling knows that much!


----------



## leidout (Jul 13, 2005)

Showtime87 said:


> Apparently, you either don't understand what I said or you simply don't bother to read my posts entirely. The point for Memphis was not to get talent in return, it was to cut payroll - that's it. They wouldn't want impact players like Maggette, Cassell or Brand because they might actually help the team win games, which is NOT what they want. They were already a lottery team with Gasol, moving him was a way of:
> A) cutting payroll for the future and
> B) improving their chances of a higher draft pick next summer. What would be the point of trading for impact players who will improve your team when you have no intention of re-signing them in the offseason?
> 
> As far as Brand goes, I'm not talking at all about his personality or demeanor. I'm simply referring to the solid, consistent production he's given this team since he got here in 2001. You must be as short-sighted as all those fans and coaches who have consistently snubbed him over the years in terms of all-star consideration. All he has done is average 20 pts, 10 rebs, 2.5 ast, 2 blks and 1 steal per game over the course of his career. Not to mention his MVP caliber season, the year HE led the Clippers to the brink of the WCF! But I guess you think they would've been there with or without him, right? Just because he's hurt this year, don't completely write the guy off! I don't know if you're just assuming that his production will drop off because of the injury, or if you're just not paying attention to how good he actually is, but there aren't many players in this league who have done what he has over the last 8 seasons. This franchise was nowhere before Brand got here and you think they're going to be championship contenders with him gone? By the way, if you're seriously expecting a championship anytime soon, you've got a lot of disappointment coming. This team has never seriously contended for a title (oh yeah, besides the year Elton almost got them there) and they probably won't in the next couple of seasons. But without a player like Elton Brand to anchor the frontcourt and run the offense through, they're going to be in terrible shape. Even Donald Sterling knows that much!


You're fooling yourself cuz of your Laker bias. This trade is worse for Memphis than a Cassell + Maggette trade would've been. Cassell wouldn't resign with Memphis if you put a gun to his head, end of problem there. As for Maggette, he'd be fighting for time with a ton of players there and that's not the situation he'd want to be in again, he'd easily find greener pastures elsewhere. Salary dump problem solved, and we also could have provided more picks for Gasol as well, all of which would've been higher for Memphis.

It would've given us the front court of Brand/Gasol/Kaman, before the deadline we could move Brand or Kaman for a guard who fit well with the team. Doesn't really matter now tho, Lakers ended up with a better player than either of our big guys.


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

> The point for Memphis was not to get talent in return, it was to cut payroll - that's it. They wouldn't want impact players like Maggette, Cassell or Brand because they might actually help the team win games, which is NOT what they want. They were already a lottery team with Gasol, moving him was a way of:
> A) cutting payroll for the future and
> B) improving their chances of a higher draft pick next summer. What would be the point of trading for impact players who will improve your team when you have no intention of re-signing them in the offseason?


Oh brother. So now youre going to say memphis is purposely tanking? Theyre already owners of about the worst record in the league, no way is there any point in "trying" more, not to mention purposely tanking in this situation is something completely unproveable. Brand is an impact player? How when hes probably not going to play again this season? Kwame >>>> a brand who is on the injured list. Cassell an impact player in that offense? And im sure they must have figured maggette would mean tons of wins on that terrible team, heck look how many games we have won since we have him this year...oh...wait.....

Kwame's contract is just as expiring as cassell. Maggette or brand also good chance of being expiring deals and at worst, great trade bait for sign and trade. (much better than just open market). Even if you could call a cassell an "impact" player for memphis which is down right laughable, if they REALLY thought he was going to win games for them, then they just do what everyone else (including them) have done this year ,and buy his deal out. 

You also need to get off your brand train. Hes a great player, but youre missing the point. NOT WORTH MAX MONEY. I AM looking at his history, and he hasnt led us to anything. His "mvp" type year was thanks to a healthy sam cassell, and thats pretty much a given in as much as the year before cassell came, what did brand do, then the year after, when cassell was injured, what did brand do. WIth chicago nor clippers brand has not been able to carry the team on his back. Hes just not on the level of duncan, gasol, garnett, etc. Those guys i would pay max money to, Brand i would not. 

We especially do not need to pay max money to brand when we have kamans big deal, and how much less on the dollar we will be getting from kaman, when brand comes back. Brand has proven his whole career he is not a superstar max money guy, he has proven that he cant carry this team anywhere except not being as bad as we were in the late 90's. Maybe youre satisfied with just being a borderline playoff team. However the organization and most other fans will only be fully satisfied when we have a championship. When you have a mix of guys that obviously will not get you a championship, then you dont give them a raise and lock them in, you try something new. Does arenas guarantee a championship? no, but its better than status quo with what we know already doesnt work.


----------



## PAIDNFULL23 (Jul 9, 2005)

yamaneko said:


> Oh brother. So now youre going to say memphis is purposely tanking? Theyre already owners of about the worst record in the league, no way is there any point in "trying" more, not to mention purposely tanking in this situation is something completely unproveable. Brand is an impact player? How when hes probably not going to play again this season? Kwame >>>> a brand who is on the injured list. Cassell an impact player in that offense? And im sure they must have figured maggette would mean tons of wins on that terrible team, heck look how many games we have won since we have him this year...oh...wait.....
> 
> Kwame's contract is just as expiring as cassell. Maggette or brand also good chance of being expiring deals and at worst, great trade bait for sign and trade. (much better than just open market). Even if you could call a cassell an "impact" player for memphis which is down right laughable, if they REALLY thought he was going to win games for them, then they just do what everyone else (including them) have done this year ,and buy his deal out.
> 
> ...


You would give Gasol max money but not Brand? I don't see the sense in that, Gasol is 0-12 in playoff games. I wouldn't say that Brand is a max player either but to say that Gasol is, is a slap in the face to Brand, who is without a doubt a better player than Gasol.


----------



## NewAgeBaller (Jan 8, 2007)

PAIDNFULL23 said:


> What is Memphis gonna do with 3 young PGs?


Exactly, thats the stupidest part of the deal.. Why make it with THE LAKERS, and where the best piece you get in return is a POINT GUARD, probably you're best set position??


----------



## ElMarroAfamado (Nov 1, 2005)

Showtime87 said:


> Come on yama, look at the reasoning behind this deal! The Grizzlies did not want talent in return. They wanted somebody they could dump after the season without catching any flack. They certainly couldn't do that with Maggette, Cassell or BRAND! They are simply trying to dump salary. And BTW: I'm going to continue to confront you every time you suggest Elton Brand should be traded or released from this team. It's your opinion and you're certainly entitled to it, but it makes absolutely no sense. :banghead:


yup i think you got it right on with the gasol thing, and as far as Elton being traded.....unless its for a Gilbert Arenas, or another all-star, i would not do it....and the thing about his contract situation is i dont think extending Elton for the long run is going to make us a winning franchise.....i really want them to do anything that amounts to wins NO MATTER WHAT THEY DO....Sam leaves and Elton stays then what? we arent going anywhere with corey maggette, our only bright spots are al and kaman but if i were sterling id be jealous the lakers pulled this trade off and get the ****ing trades going with this team


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

> yup i think you got it right on with the gasol thing, and as far as Elton being traded.....unless its for a Gilbert Arenas, or another all-star, i would not do it....and the thing about his contract situation is i dont think extending Elton for the long run is going to make us a winning franchise


So in other words you are agreeing with me? Lol. Then why did you quote showtime? 



> You would give Gasol max money but not Brand? I don't see the sense in that, Gasol is 0-12 in playoff games. I wouldn't say that Brand is a max player either but to say that Gasol is, is a slap in the face to Brand, who is without a doubt a better player than Gasol.


If it was an equal decision, and it was our ONLY decision (no other options), then yes, i would give gasol money before brand, reason being, he will get us more bang for the buck..due to his style of play not only will he do good things, but he wouldnt take away as much from kamans game as brand would/will when he comes back. 

But, thats not even an issue at this point. Next year we would owe brand 15.3 million, the following year, 16.4 million, and if he gets a max deal, were talking at least 17 million to start the following year? No gracias. Meanwhile, gasol only makes 13 and change this year, next year, jumps to 15 million even, the following year, 16, and doesnt hit 17 mill until 2010/2011, when his contract ends (whereas with brand we would be ending up paying him 20 million when hes far past his prime).


----------



## DaFranchise (Jun 29, 2005)

Weasel said:


> Surprised the Grizzlies took this. They could have gotten much more, those 1st rounders are going to be late. And why do they need Crittenton? They already have a better PG prospect in Conley.


Conley has been injured. Im glad Critt will get a chance in Memphis. Every time he got PT with LA he looked good. Critt is going to give Conley and Lowry a run for their money.


----------



## DaFranchise (Jun 29, 2005)

PAIDNFULL23 said:


> Maybe we should try and get Kyle Lowry, he's the type of PG we need, a great penetrator, who can create shots for himself and his teammates, plus he plays with a lot of heart. What is Memphis gonna do with 3 young PGs?


Memphis wants to play small and run the entire game. DOnt forget who their coach is?


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

Wonder what pau think of his brother going to memphis as part of the deal


----------



## Free Arsenal (Nov 8, 2004)

Who cares. The fact is that it is over, and the only way things could get better is if Sterling hired one of us to be the GM right?


----------



## Showtime87 (Jun 27, 2005)

You guys crack me up. You blame Elgin Baylor for not getting Pau Gasol? I'm not going to say it again because it seems to be a waste of time, but Memphis didn't have any interest in anything the Clippers could've offered. Do you just assume that all he does is sit in his office in a catatonic state all day? GM's are constantly working the phones and looking to find ways to improve their team, yes - EVEN ELGIN BAYLOR. You may be able to make things happen and win executive of the year awards on your playstation doesn't mean you'd be a capable GM in the NBA. It's just not that easy.


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

Theres no reason that a package the clippers could have offered would not have been more appealing than the lakers deal. Also note how in the press, clippers were not one of the teams mentioned to have offered something.


----------



## DaFranchise (Jun 29, 2005)

We have NO GM!!! It's almost comical. We are obviously done and need a to make a big move so why not shake up the roster a bit for the future


----------



## ElMarroAfamado (Nov 1, 2005)

DaFranchise said:


> We have NO GM!!! It's almost comical. We are obviously done and need a to make a big move so why not shake up the roster a bit for the future


i mean really besides our injured star, what else do we have to offer.........


----------



## afobisme (Apr 29, 2006)

why would clips want gasol anyways? don't they already have a power forward in EB? and a center in kaman? and why would gasol want to come to the clippers?

what do the clips even have to offer the grizzlies? sam is the only expiring, so the grizz would have to take on another semi-big unwanted contract, and maybe a draft pick.


----------



## bootstrenf (May 24, 2006)

is jerry west still the gm over in memphis??? maybe this was a "favor" to the lakers...one of those "wink wink" type trades(collusive)...


----------



## bootstrenf (May 24, 2006)

either way, the lakers have a hell of a team...and they are relatively young, with great depth to boot...

fisher/farmar
kobe/ariza
odom/walton
gasol/turiaf
bynum/turiaf/mbenga

that's a damn good team for years to come...wow...


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

Yup. Lakers pulled off the coup of the decade with this one.


----------



## bootstrenf (May 24, 2006)

yamaneko said:


> Yup. Lakers pulled off the coup of the decade with this one.


yeah, reminds me of the shaq signing...there was speculation that this or that team would get him, then the lakers came out of left field to snag him....


with shaq, it was just the money, but i truly don't understand why the grizzlies would give such a good trade to a western conference foe...

collusion is very high on my list of reasons for this trade...


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

people talk about the garnett trade being lopsided, but dang. Twolves got someone almost on brands level already at an early age: Jefferson, and a slew of other young talent. So what if they gave up arguably the best player in the league, they loaded up for the future...

But the grizz...man, i just cant get over this. Lakers first rounders is practically like getting 2nd rounders since they will probably be one of the last 4 picks of each draft of the first round. Critt is far from spectacular, and thats actually the only position they already had a bunch of young talent at. 

Im so hoping theyre desperate enough to give us mike miller for maggette, or some other combination. If maggette assures them hes opting out i bet they would do it, whereas at the end of last year and beginning of this year if anyone suggested miller for maggette theyd think were crazy, especially after miller's year last year, and his showing with the national team. But who knows they just might do it. OR, even better, cassell for miller, and then they go and buy him out so he can go to boston. The only reason i wouldnt do either of those is because it makes us a better team, meaning worse player in the draft. But miller is a perfect Dunleavvy SG.


----------



## bootstrenf (May 24, 2006)

yamaneko said:


> people talk about the garnett trade being lopsided, but dang. Twolves got someone almost on brands level already at an early age: Jefferson, and a slew of other young talent. So what if they gave up arguably the best player in the league, they loaded up for the future...
> 
> But the grizz...man, i just cant get over this. Lakers first rounders is practically like getting 2nd rounders since they will probably be one of the last 4 picks of each draft of the first round. Critt is far from spectacular, and thats actually the only position they already had a bunch of young talent at.
> 
> Im so hoping theyre desperate enough to give us mike miller for maggette, or some other combination. If maggette assures them hes opting out i bet they would do it, whereas at the end of last year and beginning of this year if anyone suggested miller for maggette theyd think were crazy, especially after miller's year last year, and his showing with the national team. But who knows they just might do it. OR, even better, cassell for miller, and then they go and buy him out so he can go to boston. The only reason i wouldnt do either of those is because it makes us a better team, meaning worse player in the draft. But miller is a perfect Dunleavvy SG.


since the grizzlies seem perfectly content in gutting their team, maybe we could somehow get conley for maggette...throw in some fillers from both sides...they got critt anyways, who they seem to value, if they gave up gasol for him...


----------



## Showtime87 (Jun 27, 2005)

yamaneko said:


> people talk about the garnett trade being lopsided, but dang. Twolves got someone almost on brands level already at an early age: Jefferson, and a slew of other young talent. So what if they gave up arguably the best player in the league, they loaded up for the future...


Yep. I completely agree with you here. Al Jefferson is a beast and just turned 23 years old, so I think the Wolves did well to get him if nothing else in the deal for Garnett. The Lakers deal however smacks of a fire sale for Memphis. I'm sure Jerry West had something to do with this deal, you'd almost be naive to think otherwise. But, the bottom line for Memphis and owner Michael Heisley was simply to get rid of as much salary as possible. Thus, acquiring Brown's expiring deal and Crittenton who makes a mere 1.6 million over the next two seasons instead of a more talented player like Odom.


----------



## afobisme (Apr 29, 2006)

bootstrenf said:


> since the grizzlies seem perfectly content in gutting their team, maybe we could somehow get conley for maggette...throw in some fillers from both sides...they got critt anyways, who they seem to value, if they gave up gasol for him...


sorry, that's just delusional. they are a young rebuilding team. why would you throw away your promising rookie for maggette's expiring (actually, it's not even expiring)? conley only costs them a few million a year.


----------



## leidout (Jul 13, 2005)

afobisme said:


> sorry, that's just delusional. they are a young rebuilding team. why would you throw away your promising rookie for maggette's expiring (actually, it's not even expiring)? conley only costs them a few million a year.


You're right, Mike Miller makes a lot more sense, but why give up Maggette for a team that doesn't care about being competitive? 

Cassell says he doesn't want a buyout, but if Cassell got traded for Miller, then Memphis offered him a buyout, I can't imagine him turning it down...


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

yeah, memphis would never trade conley jr. for someone like maggette contract or not


----------



## Bartholomew Hunt (Mar 4, 2003)




----------



## bootstrenf (May 24, 2006)

afobisme said:


> sorry, that's just delusional. they are a young rebuilding team. why would you throw away your promising rookie for maggette's expiring (actually, it's not even expiring)? conley only costs them a few million a year.


i'm delusional??? look at the gasol trade...lakers got a pau for basically nothing...i just want us to get something for nothing like you guys did, while the memphis front office is still temporarily insane...



yamaneko said:


> yeah, memphis would never trade conley jr. for someone like maggette contract or not


yeah, maggette for conley is freaking crazy!!! why did i even bring it up???

but the pau gasol for kwame, critt, and a couple low first rounders trade makes a world of sense!!! you're right, once again!!!


----------



## Bartholomew Hunt (Mar 4, 2003)

How are we delusional? It happened. :laugh:


----------



## bootstrenf (May 24, 2006)

Bartholomew Hunt said:


> How are we delusional? It happened. :laugh:


excuse me, but what the **** is your point???


----------



## bootstrenf (May 24, 2006)

my point, is that if someone told me that the lakers would be able to get gasol for 2 low future first round picks, critt, and kwame, i would have called them delusional, but like you said, it happened...now, to call my suggestion delusional is stupid, because it is obvious memphis is willing to make any trade...just look at the gasol trade, and you see what i mean...


----------

