# Bynum + Expiring Contracts for Ratliff + Jack?



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

Makes sense for both teams really. Some LA radios and fan website forums are suggestoing Bynum is on the block....

Portland gets some cap relief (Divac + Atkins) + a big YOUNG center to go with the Baby Blazers. Atkins can be the backup point, Divac retires.

Lakers get a starting quality point guard who is big and pretty solid (for the PJ Offense) plus a defensive minded center who is the best shot blocker in the game.

Just some random thoughts....


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Xericx said:


> Makes sense for both teams really. Some LA radios and fan website forums are suggestoing Bynum is on the block....
> 
> Portland gets some cap relief (Divac + Atkins) + a big YOUNG center to go with the Baby Blazers. Atkins can be the backup point, Divac retires.
> 
> ...




This actually makes all the sense in the world for both teams.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

mediocre man said:


> This actually makes all the sense in the world for both teams.


It does make sense. But then again, keeping a big, strong, good defender who can immediately be our backup PG also makes sense. 

I think I'd prefer to keep Jack.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Fork said:


> It does make sense. But then again, keeping a big, strong, good defender who can immediately be our backup PG also makes sense.
> 
> I think I'd prefer to keep Jack.




LOL if that happens Nash will have turned #3 into #6 and #10 along with a first round pick next year and cap room galore net season.

I hope it happens just so certain people in this forum shut their pie holes.


----------



## FeloniusThunk (Jan 1, 2003)

I was thinking about this while listening to some show talking about how useless Bynum is to Phil Jackson. Since the Blazers were interested in him and Ratliff would clearly help them in the 3 year PJ window, it makes a lot of sense. I would hope to keep Jack out of it and leave it as a young-but-questionable for old-but-solid swap. It makes the Blazers even worse for the next year or so, but might help toward resigning Przybilla and Bynum might turn into a keeper in 3-4 years.


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

I'd do it. The Lakers need help now. Ratliff (or SAR?) would certainly provide some and Jack seems much more likely to be a contributer within the next season or two than Bynum.

I'd be bummed to lose Jack because he seems like such a good fit on this team but, particularly given that I'd never heard of him before yesterday and that it still should be possible to find someone like Jaric, I'd roll those dice as soon as the Lakers were ready to do it.


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

I think it depends on what other PG the Blazers might be able to get in the FA market. GP? Jasikevicius?


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

As soon as I heard we were trading up to get Jack, I thought it would be part of a deal that night for Bynum. Jack is the perfect PG for Phil's offense (tall, pass first, plays D, hits the 3) and Bynum is the perfect project for Portland. 

I can't imagine Phil wants to wait that long for Bynum to develop. He probably has a 1-2 year time frame for getting back to the top (regardless of what he says).


----------



## Spoolie Gee (Feb 3, 2005)

I dont know. This could be a good deal but I really think Jack is the perfect fit for our backcourt.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

I'm torn on this deal. I'd love to get Bynum (and the expiring contracts), but I also like Jack... tough call.


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

As a Lakers fan, I'll definitely pass. We're going to trade our "Shaq of the future" for a C whose best days are behind him and a DECENT PG prospect?

No way.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

I am getting very exciting about having Jack on the team. Been waiting for a guard like him for a while. But........

If we can trade Theo and Jack for Bynum and Expriring deals DO IT.

That fits so much in PLAN A as described in the Changing Guard thread.

The Blazers get big salary relief and very young Seven Footer. They only have to move one more big contract, DA (ideally), Darius or Zach, and they will have enough cap room to resign Joel (if he deserves it and wants to stay).

So, in essence we are trading Theo and Jack for Bynum and Joel. You gotta do that deal.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

Damian Necronamous said:


> As a Lakers fan, I'll definitely pass. We're going to trade our "Shaq of the future" for a C whose best days are behind him and a DECENT PG prospect?
> 
> No way.


We will see who wins that power struggle in the Lakers front office.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

If I was the Lakers, I'd try to work Ruben into the deal. He'd be a good role player for them at SF with C.Butler.


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

Did you see this quote on Canzano's blog:



> Blazers finally finish draft day
> In the wee hours after draft night, Blazers GM John Nash sent me an email at 3:50 a.m. indicating they were done dealing for the day.
> 
> The man has a sense of humor.


Maybe funnier than you know, John. Maybe he was hinting that there'd be more deals to come.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

I can't form a coclusive opinion in my mind....Part of me says, No Jack will be a great player, but then Bynum could as well....Atkins is a competent veteran backup for Telfair for a season, then expires, Divac...who cares, and he expires.....I don't know.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

How about we keep Theo

Deal Jack, DA and Darius for Divac, George and Bynum


but the more I read about Jack.. I say no way....

DA and Ruben for Divac and George


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

I would rather LA has to deal with their own bad contracts and not the Blazers.


----------



## Reep (Jun 4, 2003)

Jack has value and will either be a solid backup or a solid starter. Hard to see him being less.

Bynum will either be Diop or Shaq-lite. Bynum is smart, so I don't think he will be a total washout, but he will end up being much more valuable than Jack, or worth much less. Greater risk, greater reward.

If I could trade without losing a core player, I would take Bynum, just because he would be worth the risk. However, if we can't get Bynum and end up with Jack, I like that too. Jack will push Telfair in all the right ways, or Jack will pass him up. I hear he is quite motivated and the starting PG position is his type of challenge.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

If this deal happens, let me guess Portland would have Telfair, Bynum, Outlaw, Webster all on the roster still needing to be developed? Not to mention Ha and the Russians? I sure hope the Blazers don't do a dumb deal like this. I like Bynum I really do, but he's two years in the NBDL away from contributing IMO. 

If I'm the Lakers I hop on this deal in a second. Jack is better than any PG they have right now.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

HKF said:


> If this deal happens, let me guess Portland would have Telfair, Bynum, Outlaw, Webster all on the roster still needing to be developed? Not to mention Ha and the Russians? I sure hope the Blazers don't do a dumb deal like this. I like Bynum I really do, but he's two years in the NBDL away from contributing IMO.
> 
> If I'm the Lakers I hop on this deal in a second. Jack is better than any PG they have right now.


Telfair and Outlaw dont "need to be developed". They are ready now. We have Joel, so Bynum wouldnt need to make an impact right away.

Somone shoot Nash an email and see how he responds.


----------



## RipCity9 (Jan 30, 2004)

I just can't come to grips with the idea of helping the Lakers, even if it helps us as well.


----------



## Crimson the Cat (Dec 30, 2002)

I'd take that deal instantly. Jack will be a very good player in this league, but with the right guidance and practice, so will Bynum, and he's 9" taller!

What you're proposing is that Portland gives up a reserve point guard for a likely starting center? All the while ridding the team of Ratliff's contract?

Where do I sign?

Remember, Nash really liked Bynum. Incredible wingspan and 3.7 gpa.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

BEER&BASKETBALL said:


> Telfair and Outlaw dont "need to be developed". They are ready now.


Ready to do what? Get the **** kicked out of them every night? I mean they're gona play, and that's good, but they'll be doing meet and greets with future Blazer lotto picks for the next 2-3 years.

Cheers.


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

i think you are underestimating how much the lakers are valuing bynum. it would probably take something like jack + portland's #1 next year (not detroit's) + ratliff/patterson/NVE for bynum, vlade etc.

lol patterson and NVE to lakers, how strange would that be :banana:


----------



## sa1177 (Feb 18, 2005)

> As a Lakers fan, I'll definitely pass. We're going to trade our "Shaq of the future" for a C whose best days are behind him and a DECENT PG prospect?
> 
> No way.


HAHHAHAHAHAAA thanks for the laugh..the next Shaq..bold prediction. To much sun melting your brain down there in LA?


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

crowTrobot said:


> i think you are underestimating how much the lakers are valuing bynum. it would probably take something like jack + portland's #1 next year (not detroit's) + ratliff/patterson/NVE for bynum, vlade etc.


Called Smokescreening. They're proably holding out for Sergei Monya's rights or a future DP.


----------



## MercyKersey (Jul 22, 2003)

There was talk of LA wanting Ruben a while ago wasnt there? I could see Ruben +Jack for Bynam and others. LA is getting ripped pretty hard for picking this kid, and the last interview i watched with Phil Jackson he was remarking that trading Ruben was one of there biggest mistakes.. 
I like Ruben and Jack, but would trade them for Bynam..


----------



## YardApe (Mar 10, 2005)

Bynum is not even a standout high school player by many peoples opinion. He could end up far more like Boumtje Boumtje and we would be giving LA the next coming of Stepan in Jack. Phil has no interest in developing Bynum with as short of a contract as he's signing for three years. 

If Phil wants Jack that's all the reason for us to keep him!!!! Phil is no fool when it comes to talent!!!!!

Bynum is not on the same level as Jack.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Think about it.

The Lakers could of had Jack instead of Bynum. So would they trade Atkins and Vlade for Ratliff? I would rather have Jack than Bynum but Mitch wouldn't.


----------



## YardApe (Mar 10, 2005)

My thinking is LA wanted an instant triangle with defensive stoppers Patterson and Theo thrown in along with Jack. Phil has said he doesn't follow the high school scene to much and developing Bynum will take longer than his contract is good for. 

Bynum does not have the size of Shaq not even close, he's a Boumtje guy at best. Where is Boumtje now?


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> Think about it.
> 
> The Lakers could of had Jack instead of Bynum. So would they trade Atkins and Vlade for Ratliff? I would rather have Jack than Bynum but Mitch wouldn't.


Wouldn't the Lakers prefer Theo to Vlade and Atkins? Especially if they think Jack can do a decent job filling in for Atkins, or if they think they can get Watson or someone similar as a FA? Presumably, the Lakers are interested in winning big NOW, and Jackson Bynum doesn't help Phil and Co. do that.

I don't know if the Lakers are interested, but the Blazers should be... as several people have said: I really like Jack, but I'd be willing to give him up if we could get Bynum and get rid of Theo's contract. 

There are a lot of dots here that seem to connect (rumored LA-Portland deal before the draft; Portland's reported promise to Bynum; LA picking the guy least likely to help them in the near term) but we might just be seeing tootsie rolls.

Ed O.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

YardApe said:


> Bynum does not have the size of Shaq not even close, he's a Boumtje guy at best. Where is Boumtje now?


I don't think that you're assessing Bynum very fairly... Bynum's no Shaq at the moment, and there's certainly the probability that he never will be, but at age 17 he's a massive man and similar in size to Shaq at the same age.

Ed O.


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

Maybe Jack's not even part of the trade. Maybe it's Bynum and a guy or two like Atkins and Butler who get traded for Blazers who could help now: Ratliff, SAR, Miles, Patterson, Damon....okay, maybe not Damon. :biggrin: Still, the Blazers are full of potentially useful guys that Jackson might really want for his next stint as head coach.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> Think about it.
> 
> The Lakers could of had Jack instead of Bynum. So would they trade Atkins and Vlade for Ratliff? I would rather have Jack than Bynum but Mitch wouldn't.


Yeah I did think about it. This roster:

Jack
Kobe
Butler
Odom
Theo

is better the next 3 years than

Atkins
Kobe
Butler
Odom
Mihm

It's really that simple. 

Bynum won't see the floor as a Laker under Phil. Worthless to him.

Phil hates small point guards, and hates role players who can't defend. Atkins is worthless to him.

Vlade is done.

You say the Lakers could of had Jack themselves, but if the Lakers had drafted Jack themselves their roster is short a veteran bigman that Phil will demand. Blazers aint trading their Center for Atkins and Vlade alone. Nor for a future pick. Not for anything else the Lakers have. So your though doesn't play out. 

A deal like the proposed is the only way it works for the Lakers dealing with the Blazers. Course, the Lakers can always go to Utah to try to get Boozer and Lopez for Bynum and expiring, for example, if they prefer that.


----------



## Bookworm (Feb 23, 2005)

So we get rid of Jack who will better than Atkins...

Get a 7'0 who may or may not be a starter in 4yrs.

We will still have Prizz at age 29 and Ha..why do we
need a 3rd one..I think Ha is closer to NBA ready than
Bynum..

Bad deal for the Blazers and a great one for LA...

Sorry I don't want to be LA's farm team...If they wanted
Jack they should of drafted him or traded down...

Now Vlade and filler for theo I would do.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Ed O said:


> I don't think that you're assessing Bynum very fairly... Bynum's no Shaq at the moment, and there's certainly the probability that he never will be, but at age 17 he's a massive man and similar in size to Shaq at the same age.
> 
> Ed O.


How true...Ed,Bynum is actually bigger than Shaq at 17,and has a better vertical than Shaq ever had..The kid is 17..who knows what he may or may not become


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Masbee said:


> Yeah I did think about it. This roster:
> 
> Jack
> Kobe
> ...


Lakers drafting Bynum= roster void of vetern big men
Lakers drafting Jack= roster void of vetern big men

I really doubt that Mitch drafted Bynum hoping he would later find a team with a vetern big men and another young player to deal for. 

The reason the Lakers don't trade for Ratliff isn't because Atkins and Vlade are great, its because Ratliff is always hurt and gets paid way more than he should. They are actually considering cutting Grant who was the only the guy that got defensive boards after Odom went down and a great character just to save money. 

You will not convince me that Phil wants nothing to do with Bynum, because the Lakers would not of drafted him if that were the casem no GM is that cluelessless. Your arguement against Bynum wasn't at all convincing since you didn't present one. Bynum's a studious person with no ego, is eager to learn and will do whatever the team wants from him. The type Phil loves.

Bottom line is Mitch doesn't like this trade even if Blazer fans do. It will never happen. I will mail you a gift and salute you in my avatar if it does.


----------



## Perfection (May 10, 2004)

What if we also add in some more value. Perhaps they trade us Brian Grant as part of the deal, and we send back Miles. Obviously that wouldn't work salary wise, but it'd offset the contract with Ratliff. 

For some reason, I can't trade for Grant on RealGM (rumor that he might be waived soon under the new CBA), but....maybe: 

Brian Grant 14,355,648
Vlade Divac 5,393,300
Chucky Atkins 4,500,000
Andrew Bynum ~ 3 Mill

For 

Theo Ratliff 9,684,211
Darius Miles 6,857,143
Jarret Jack ~ 3 Mill 
Nick Van Exel 13,688,900


What do you think. We have to take back Grant's salary...although he is a great PR move and his contract will come off the books just in time to resign some of our younger guys. Also, it relieves them and gives them reason to take Theo's contract back. As for Van Exel...not like we're signing a major free agent anytime soon, so might as well use the cap space as a trade incentive. Also, Miles will give them a good starting 3, with Butler being able to come off the bench and back him and Kobe up. 

Jack
Kobe
Miles
Odom
Ratliff

I wouldn't turn that down if I was them, and we get back Bynum, a short term backup PG, and some large contract filler, which will at least be good PR and come off the books before most of our guys need to be resigned. 

I guess it just depends on how much we value Jack as being a part of the future of this franchise, as I see him bolting right after his rookie contract for a starting job somewhere else.


----------



## Draco (Jun 28, 2003)

Do NOT trade Jack or Miles to LA!

I don't want to have to see them playing against us for the next 10 years.

God that would be my worst nightmare. I don't care if Bynum is as good as Shaq, you don't give LA anything that will let them have a chance at beating you in the future.

Never deal with LA! EVER! I'd rather have the Blazers become the 21st century clippers then help LA in any way.


----------



## Perfection (May 10, 2004)

i know what you mean...believe me...i was really pressed to even suggest something that could help LA. But...I'm trying to take an objective stance and see what might be better for us. Apparently we really liked Bynum....a guy who would have started for UConn next year. 

Anyways, it just depends, but I'm trying to find a fair trade...but year, I hate LA with a firey passion.


----------



## crowTrobot (Jun 24, 2005)

Draco said:


> Do NOT trade Jack or Miles to LA!



i agree. always thought miles with a coach like phil jackson could be a dominant, kobe-like player. 2 kobe's at the 2-3. yikes.


----------



## Captain Obvious (Jun 15, 2003)

#10 and expiring contracts for #22 and a mammoth contract? Something doesn't add up here.


----------



## Perfection (May 10, 2004)

Captain Obvious said:


> #10 and expiring contracts for #22 and a mammoth contract? Something doesn't add up here.



My amended deal sort of makes up for this...but I don't like the idea of giving LA any value, let alone essentially 3 starters for a prospect.

I don't think any deal will happen...and I don't have a big problem with it as I think Jack was a steal at #22...only devalued due to this being a PG and overall deep player draft. 

I mean...roko and marty in the 40's are steals.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Captain Obvious said:


> #10 and expiring contracts for #22 and a mammoth contract? Something doesn't add up here.


What doesn't add up? The Lakers hired Phil to win NOW. They just used a lottery pick on a guy who's not going to be able to contribute for years. That doesn't really add up, either.

Theo is paid too much for the Blazers because (a) they have a player that's very similar but younger, and (b) they don't have any illusions of being competitive for a couple more years. Neither of those apply to the Lakers.

NOT saying that this is a sure thing, or even that likely, but as far as wild guesses go, it makes more sense than most.

Ed O.


----------



## gambitnut (Jan 4, 2003)

Jamel Irief said:


> Think about it.
> 
> The Lakers could of had Jack instead of Bynum. So would they trade Atkins and Vlade for Ratliff? I would rather have Jack than Bynum but Mitch wouldn't.


I agree. If the Lakers wanted Jack they could have taken him. So, now, they're supposed to trade the higher pick, who I assume they liked more, and their expiring contracts for our longer contracts and lower pick? Not gonna happen. Just so you know, if Mitch were crazy enough to offer us that trade, I'd jump on it.


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

:sigh: Again, Jack doesn't need to be part of the deal. I think the Lakers might well have picked up Bynum as a chip. If he and players the Lakers are ready to be done with (Grant, Butler?) are the main pieces coming to Portland while they're getting back their pick of Ratliff, SAR, Miles, Patterson, etc., it seems like it might really be well worth it to both teams. The Lakers are gearing up for NOW while the Blazers are still three to four years out.


----------



## xoai (Jun 14, 2005)

So the Lakers wasn't able to draft jack at #10, so they drafted bynum and then trade Jack.
Then they trade expiring contracts which are so bad for them next year for a big contract in ratliff which are so good for the lakers. 
The lakers' management must smoking crack with portland players to get that kind trade idea.
While they are at crack, why not get this deal done, why not trade kobe + odom + butler for the blazers' future second round pick?


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

xoai said:


> While they are at crack, why not get this deal done, why not trade kobe + odom + butler for the blazers' future second round pick?


Hey: who's starting for the Lakers next year at center?

Is Phil Jackson going to bring Luc back, or Cartwright? Shaq coming back?

Or, least likely of all, is Mihm going to get you guys into the playoffs?

Hamblen could lead you to the lottery again... there'd be no reason to spend lots of money on Phil Jackson unless he has good enough players to make it worth his while. As it is right now, the Lakers don't have a decent starting center, and Bynum's not going to change that any time soon.

Ed O.


----------



## YardApe (Mar 10, 2005)

I think Phil is a master mind and if he's interested in Jack and Theo he is using our team to finish his triangle. This in my mind is a huge mistake for the Blazers to make. 

If Phil were to get a big physical smart kid in Jack to run the point to pass the ball to Kobe first and say SAR second he's got his triangle. Throw in Theo as a defensive stopper along with say Patterson and the Lakers are a play off team tomorrow. 

In return we get a 7 foot center that is three years away from doing anything for us. Phil will get another ring and we'll get to watch. I'm not liking this at all!

I think it's very probable that LA took Bynum cause Phil didn't just want Jack he wanted Sar, Theo and maybe even Patterson. 

Just drafting Jack wouldn't have gotten the rest the players he wants from us cause who would he have to trade to get them? Caron Butler? Think Again!

WE DO NOT WANT TO BUILD THE LAKERS TRIANGLE WITH OUR PLAYERS!!!!!

It's one thing to get beaten by the Lakers, worse will be with our guys.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

you could combine only the best players from both the Lakers and Blazers and you still wouldn't have a team good enough to beat the Spurs for a championship. the Lakers just aren't going to be contenders this year no matter who is coaching. 

if it were only about winning in the short term for LA, they would've kept Shaq and watched Kobe walk. Shaq and the scrubs on that team was still enough to win 50 games, and maybe even get hot enough in the playoffs to win a ring with a few good breaks. 

honestly, I don't think LA moves Bynum just because Phil Jackson is the coach. PJ is a great coach, but you don't dump a 280 lb high schooler who could become a really good center because you think a rookie point guard will take you to contending status. 

you could argue that it's also about adding in Ratliff, but hell, if Ratliff is so great then why is there no buzz here on this board about how he's going to tear it up for Portland? if Ratliff really is a championship caliber center at this stage of the game, Portland should be talking about the playoffs this year. 

there just isn't a quick fix for LA, regardless of who is coaching. I think (although I don't know) they're smart enough to know that.


----------



## xoai (Jun 14, 2005)

Ed O said:


> Hey: who's starting for the Lakers next year at center?
> 
> Is Phil Jackson going to bring Luc back, or Cartwright? Shaq coming back?
> 
> ...


So you think by getting Theo, the lakers will automatically being in the playoffs next year?
And by the way, there was a rumor that blazers are trying to waive Theo. So you think Lakers rather trade expire contracts to get Theo's massive contract then trying to sign him with less money?
While I am typing this message down, I dream about Theo will take us back to the playoffs already. Someone please wake me up before it becomes a nightmare


----------



## xoai (Jun 14, 2005)

"Another possibility (for the Lakers) is veteran shot-blocker Theo Ratliff, who may be waived by the Portland Trail Blazers as part of the amnesty provision in the new collective bargaining agreement. (Teams that pay the luxury tax have a one-time opportunity to release a player. Such teams would still have to pay the player's salary, but he could earn a second salary with another team.)" Los Angeles Times 
By the way, here is the rumor came from


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

xoai said:


> "Another possibility (for the Lakers) is veteran shot-blocker Theo Ratliff, who may be waived by the Portland Trail Blazers as part of the amnesty provision in the new collective bargaining agreement. (Teams that pay the luxury tax have a one-time opportunity to release a player. Such teams would still have to pay the player's salary, but he could earn a second salary with another team.)" Los Angeles Times
> By the way, here is the rumor came from



Somehow I doubt the team will waive Theo's contract. Sure, it's muuuuch bigger than necessary, but unlike the other candidates (Ruben, DA and to a lesser degree Darius) Theo wants to be here. 

Now, thats not to say that the team might not do it, but it seems to be a bit of a waste. If Theo was a DA clone (whiney, not wanting to be here, thinking he actually has talent) that's one thing. Or if he was a Ruben clone (not the sharpest tool in the shed, demands to be traded yearly, and has several players ahead of him in the rotation) that's another.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

There are more strawmen and flatout bull**** that I have seen in a signle thread in a while.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

Bookworm said:


> So we get rid of Jack who will better than Atkins...
> 
> Get a 7'0 who may or may not be a starter in 4yrs.
> 
> ...


WRONG!

We will be VERY unlikely to be able to keep Joel unless we can move 2 of 4 big contracts - DA, Theo, Darius & Zach.

You DO NOT get to keep Joel otherwise. Get it?

Trading Theo to the Lakers, in this example, increases the odds of keeping Joel immensely.

The odds of being able to keep both are LOW.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> Lakers drafting Bynum= roster void of vetern big men
> Lakers drafting Jack= roster void of vetern big men
> 
> I really doubt that Mitch drafted Bynum hoping he would later find a team with a vetern big men and another young player to deal for.
> ...


Who knows why Mitch drafted Bynum?

Maybe it was a big F You to Phil?

Maybe is IS a bargaining chip. We will all see.

What has cutting Grant got to do with Theo? Theo, playing hurt all year, had better stats and bigger game impact than Grant and gets paid less and is real Center size. How can you compare the two?

I never argued the Lakers were going to do this trade, only that it is the kind of trade they could be looking at. It only makes sense.

They can trade with the Blazers for example, and get a studly (looking) guard and an injury prone shot-blocking center, or they can get from Utah for example, a much inferior guard (Lopez) and a hustling, younger (but also with injury history) Power Forward in Boozer.

If they wan't to win now the trades won't be perfect the Lakers have little to offer. They aren't trading for Mike Bibby and Brad Miller.

Theo played hurt last season and still averaged 5pts

Why do I have to present an argument about Bynum. He is huge and an athletic freak for his size, but didn't overwhelm in High School ball.

You are telling me you are going to argue that he will be the very youngest Big Man to be effective in the NBA EVER!!! With a coach who abhors playing green players?

You are the poster who has to do the arguing here.

As for the Blazer's fans wanting the trade, read this thread - most Blazer fans HATE the proposal. What do you make of that?


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

Draco said:


> Do NOT trade Jack or Miles to LA!
> 
> I don't want to have to see them playing against us for the next 10 years.
> 
> ...


Ever hear of the saying, "cut off your nose to spite your face"?

Look it up.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

theWanker said:


> you could combine only the best players from both the Lakers and Blazers and you still wouldn't have a team good enough to beat the Spurs for a championship. the Lakers just aren't going to be contenders this year no matter who is coaching.
> 
> if it were only about winning in the short term for LA, they would've kept Shaq and watched Kobe walk. Shaq and the scrubs on that team was still enough to win 50 games, and maybe even get hot enough in the playoffs to win a ring with a few good breaks.
> 
> ...


Who, anywhere, said anything about setting the Lakers up for winning championships?

Not me. All I said was a roster of: Jack, Kobe, Caron, Odom, Theo is a heck of lot better, and far more appealing to Phil than Atkins, Kobe, Caron, Odom, Mihm. Simple as that.

Phil will DEMAND roster improvements. Big ones. In fact, he already has.

But the Lakers don't have the juice to get enough to vault them to contender. Too bad for them.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

xoai said:


> So you think by getting Theo, the lakers will automatically being in the playoffs next year?
> And by the way, there was a rumor that blazers are trying to waive Theo. So you think Lakers rather trade expire contracts to get Theo's massive contract then trying to sign him with less money?
> While I am typing this message down, I dream about Theo will take us back to the playoffs already. Someone please wake me up before it becomes a nightmare


WRONG!!!!

False rumuor.

Try again.

When you argument is based on a false premise, it kinda, sorta, often, falls aparts.

If you think some team is going to trade the Lakers a starting quality, decent BIG MAN, that isn't paid an obscenely large amount of money, well, you are truly delusional.

Big Men that can play, that are on cheap contracts are gold. You trading Kobe for Ben Wallace? If not, forget it.


----------

