FB&G Info
Affiliates
Commenting Tips
  • 1. Don’t use profanity. Don't talk politics.
  • 2. Try not to make multiple comments in a row (we want a discussion not a lecture).
  • 3. No personal attacks.
  • 4. We use complete sentences here, this is not an IM conversation.
  • 5. This is not a blog that supports wild trade speculation. Nor will there be discussions of off-the-court issues.
  • 6. Don’t drink and comment.
  • Know that often comments do not appear immediately as they can be held for moderation. Comments will be approved (if they meet with the above criteria) as soon as reasonably possible. Read the full guidelines.
Sponsors
FB&G T-Shirts
Laker Sites
LA Sports Sites
New NBA Stats
Nothing But Net
Other Reads
Categories
Archives
Meta
Fast Break Thoughts
August 7th, 2007

Thoughts while waiting for the next episode of Mad Men on AMC…..

• Jermaine O’Neal wants to be a Laker. And we want him. So, what’s the hold up?

Well, a lot of things. The same things that have been holding it up all summer. And while O’Neal may have gone public with a non-demand statement, this deal is apparently no closer to getting done than it was a month ago. I’m not a fan of discussing trade scenarios in main blog posts, but the level of news here warrants a breakdown (even if this all seems a little redundant after the comments on yesterday’s post, which broke it down so well). Bottom line, this is not a pretty picture for the Lakers.

At the top of the list of hurdles apparently are the trade demands coming from Indiana (or, not willing to be given up by the Lakers, depending on what trade scenario you want to believe). I’ve said before and I think most Laker fans agree — trading both Andrew Bynum and Lamar Odom for JO is a lateral move for the Lakers. To seriously contend fast, per Kobe’s diatribe demands, the Lakers need JO, LO and Kobe.

But centering a package around Bynum, Farmar or Crittenton, Kwame Brown as salary filler and some other pieces (likely sign-and-trade McKie) is filled with flaws as well. Starting with, would Indiana really want that? Could they sell that as a good deal to their fans as the start of a serious rebuilding? We may like to think so from our end, but it’s a hard sell — you are trading an All-Star in his prime for two guys who likely will develop into solid NBA starters/role players in Bynum and Farmar, plus some salary cap relief. Then there is the roster problems for Indy — Hoopshype says they have 15 guys under contract, although other bloggers for that team say only 12 are guaranteed. Still, they can’t take on more than a few guaranteed deals back, and to make the salaries work the Lakers have to send a lot bodies east.

Or, there is the scenario where the Lakers send LO east, somehow convince Larry the Legend not to take Bynum, then all Laker fans go to church and light a candle for Bynum to take a big step forward and be the third offensive cog in the triangle every night. Are you really comfortable with that?

Then, as commenter Mike in the Mountain West pointed out, any trade for JO would mean the Buss family is paying a lot of luxury tax the next couple of years. Eric Pincus breaks down the numbers. We fans tend to scoff at this issue, thinking the Buss family is made of money and not running a business. But they are running a business, it’s not our money and we are spending a lot of it over the luxury tax. That — plus how to get out of the tax down the line — has to be serious considerations for ownership.

There are a lot of hurdles. I still want to see it happen, but there are a lot of hurdles.

• I think the guy at Indy Cornrows said it best about JO’s original comments — he was trying to be everything to everybody, not ticking off the fans in Indiana while stoking the trade fire. That’s a hard line to walk.

• Great stuff from friend-of-the-site Tom Ziller over at Ballhype using graphs to map out the NBA — showing who is fun to watch and who is a little dull. Amazingly well done and researched piece. For those Laker focused, well, much like their record, the Lakers often fell into no-mans land on the charts.

• Long story, but the bottom line is I got to go last weekend for a $175-a-plate fundraising event for a summer arts camp for youth last weekend (my employer picked up the tab). As my wife and I are walking by a silent auction table with very nice items way outside my price range, I see two Clippers tickets that nobody has bid on. They were for a preseason game against the Kings at Staples. So, I bid $20. And that was enough to win.

I’m not sure which is worse — that the best the Clippers could come up to donate to charity is two above-the-luxury boxes tickets to a preseason game, or that $20 was enough to win them. Either way, I get to watch me some Spencer Hawes. Now that is exciting.

UPDATE: One other link worth checking out, especially if you read the odd “Baron Davis should play in LA because h’s from here” column in the LA Times the other day. A Bay Area writer (who used to write in LA) takes that column to task. It makes me miss the old “Fire Jim Tracy” blog which took on the Herculean task of trying to point out all of Bill Plaschke’s logic errors.

Posted in Fast Break Thoughts |
126 Comments »

  1. Yep, the Lakers are in “no mans land” both on those charts and in the trade market. We need to face it…any super high salary guy is going to require Odom. He is the guy making almost $14mill a year and the guy that has the most value. Bynum will be the sweetner. And for that price JO is not a good enough return. Many have said, myself included, that Gasol would be a better fit due to age, but mostly salary considerations. But that is a bigger pipe dream than KG now that JCN is going to the Grizz. To quote Denny Green “we are who we thought they were!!!” and the Lakers are pretty much stuck with what we got. Which isn’t so bad if EVERYTHING breaks the right way (everyone playing great, Bynum taking the 3rd year leap, no injuries, etc)….
    The only saving grace that could make a trade work is if the Lakers could aquire a cheaper player to replace Odom, then turn around and make the Indy deal the way that Indy wants it (and that still does not deal with the Tax Issue). The only guy that fits that bill is, you guessed it, Ron Artest. If the Lakers could aquire Ron-Ron w/o giving up Odom, Bynum, or Kwame they could then deal with Indy and end up with a trio of Kobe, Artest, and JO. Let’s just say I’m not holding my breath on that one…

    Comment by Darius — August 7, 2007 @ 4:32 pm

  2. I disagree that Odom needs to be included. They can get good young talent from us in Bynum and Crittendon, expiring salary from Kwame, and a 1st round pick if they want it. Murphy and Dunleavy are making way too much to be sitting on the bench.

    Their lineup:
    PG: Tinsley/Crittendon
    SG: Dunleavy/Rush
    SF: Granger/Daniels/Williams
    PF: Murphy/Diogu
    C: Brown/Bynum/Foster

    Their future is very bright with a future starting lineup looking like this:

    PG: Crittendon
    SG: Granger
    SF: Williams
    PF Diogu
    C: Bynum

    This doesn’t include the 2 1st rounders they would have in ‘08 either. Like I said, it depends on how you look at this trade.

    Comment by Carter — August 7, 2007 @ 5:30 pm

  3. Carter, you and I agree, I’m just not sure Indiana (or their fans) see it that way.

    Comment by Kurt — August 7, 2007 @ 6:02 pm

  4. If JO wants to be a Laker “so badly” then I can’t wait for him to opt out of his contract next year and sign with us for the Veteran’s minimum.

    Comment by Bryan — August 7, 2007 @ 7:01 pm

  5. I agree Carter, that is the same thoughts running to and fro my head even in my sleep. Indiana would be insane to not take that from a “team” perspective… although they might get the fan-base bash if they did it.

    We are truly in a holdout stage. What scares me the most will be an aggravated Kobe bashing the FO thru the media once more. Here is a player I like to play with, who likes to play with me, a player I respect and who respects me, a player who has expressed the desires of his heart to play here, yet FO does nothing. I would not blame Kobe one bit if he demanded it once more.

    Indy is torn between 2 schools of thought: Rebuilding or Retooling. I guess the payroll and the fan base suggest they cannot fully do the rebuilding although logic might dictate that is the way to go. Instead, we may see that window closing very soon when Indy decides to go suicide and take the NJ offer instead. Then we would have our own time bomb waiting to explode.

    The thing is w/ the luxury tax is, it is supposed to be an unnecessary expense. No sane Corporate Man would do that. But I am sure they are better corporate assessors like me, who understands the concept of Risk vs Reward in the cost-benefit ratio.

    The only impediment I see in the process is the possible inclusion of a huge contract in the likes of Murphy’s 42M in 4 yeers. With that we would no longer have anything to offer unless we part with Lamar Odom.

    But luckily, so won’t New Jersey.

    Comment by WarrenWeeLim — August 7, 2007 @ 11:28 pm

  6. I see Indiana’s problems are worse than ours. But there are also escapes to it that might not be seen directly. For instance, If Indiana submits to the full-rebuild concept, there are teams out West who could use the services of their burdens in exchange for some crappy contracts that are otherwise useless, converted to a somewhat useful and productive player in Dunleavy, Tinsley or Murphy.

    You can never really do a Portland-approach in rebuilding better than they can since they are also banking on a Multi-Billionaire owner that makes the 30M buyout of Steve Francis look like Petty Cash Expense. But there can be options.

    Instead of the original map of the trades proposed, why not include Portland in the mix for them to accept Troy Murphy in exchange for Raef Lafrentz? The deal will somehow look like this:

    Portland gets:
    Brian Cook
    Troy Murphy

    LA Lakers get:
    Jermaine Oneal

    Indiana gets:
    Andrew Bynum
    Javaris Crittenton
    Kwame Brown
    Raef Lafrentz
    Sasha Vujacic

    Comment by WarrenWeeLim — August 8, 2007 @ 12:00 am

  7. I agree Warren a 3rd team might be needed to take back a bad contract from Indiana. The problem is what team in the West would be willing to help the Lakes land JO.

    Comment by ryan — August 8, 2007 @ 6:45 am

  8. Portland there helps themselves foremost. Its merely an aid, Portland wont be on the same time line as the Lakers will be in contending anyway…

    Comment by WarrenWeeLim — August 8, 2007 @ 7:39 am

  9. No way Portland wants that Murphy contract. It’s longer (5 years), and they already have two good power forwards in Aldridge and Frye.

    The more I think of the Murphy and Dunleavy contracts, the more I’m completely baffled. What was Bird thinking there??? Not only are they WAY overpriced, but they’re really long contracts too. Throw Tinsley’s contract in there, and the Pacers are a complete disaster.

    Comment by Carter — August 8, 2007 @ 10:31 am

  10. Tinsley’s making the mid-level for 5 years though. Not nearly as bad as Dunleavy/Murphy.

    And Murphy’s only has 4 years remaining. This year plus 3 more.

    Comment by Chise — August 8, 2007 @ 10:52 am

  11. By the way, if you wanted to see how the JO comments are playing in Indy, check out the link below, but here is a taste:

    O’Neal’s basic point is that there were some major “ifs” attached to his comments that weren’t reported in L.A.

    For example, he said he would like to play for the Lakers or Nets if the Pacers decide to trade him. And, he doesn’t want to be part of a rebuilding effort with the Pacers if they decide to embark upon one _ which he doesn’t believe they have.

    The audio file, which was offered to the Pacers by another reporter on the scene, clearly shows some discrepancies between what was said and what was reported.

    http://blogs.indystar.com/pacersinsider/archives/2007/08/whose_controver.html

    Hat Tip to True Hoop.

    Comment by Kurt — August 8, 2007 @ 11:02 am

  12. #2 The thing with that trade is that the salaries do not match. A deal that includes Kwame, Critt, Bynum, and a 1st rounder is not enough in dollars to aquire JO’s contract. Even if you add Cook to those players, because of his base year compensation status, it still does not add up. Odom makes 5mil more per year than Kwame. It will take creative financing to make this deal work if it is only between the Pacers and Lakers. As others have brought up, a 3rd team would really help to absorb some salary to make the numbers work.

    Comment by Darius — August 8, 2007 @ 11:21 am

  13. @Darius (#12): Kwame (9) + Bynum (2) + Farmar (1) + Sasha (2) + signed and trade Mckie for one year guaranteed (2) + 3 mill in cash + 2 draft picks for JO (20-21) works. I believe the draft picks get attached some salary figure as well, and if they don’t, that’s still 16-19 mill going out for JO’s 20-21 mill coming in.

    Comment by Chise — August 8, 2007 @ 11:59 am

  14. There are two ways that the salaries can be matched without including odom and assuming they will not take Vlad.

    1. Bynum, Brown, Critt, Sasha, Cook
    2. Bynum, Brown, Critt, Mckie S&T for 3.5M.

    the lakers only have to match 75% +$100,000 of Oneil’s 19.7M, thats about 14.9M.

    Comment by ryan — August 8, 2007 @ 12:19 pm

  15. I’ve always felt that NJ has more to offer (their number 2 and 3 scorers, and perhaps Collins and Williams), but it’s funny how Indiana intimated ‘no’ to such a trade some months ago. Nenad Krstic and Marcus WIlliams are both pretty solid young un’s, while RJ and Jason Collins are hitting 30, around the same age as Kobe and Jermaine. Nenad Krstic is a solid center (who I wish could at least record some blocks every now and then), Marcus Williams can always chip in 10-20 points and a studly amount of assists when he logs more than 20 minutes, and RJ is a freakin’ high flyer who can finishes at the rim often, but is a respectable mid to long range shooter as well. Jason Collins is just some extra rebounding baggage.

    Comment by the other Stephen — August 8, 2007 @ 12:34 pm

  16. Here’s how it looks on the RealGM trade checker (without Odom)

    http://www.realgm.com/src_tradechecker/3/

    Comment by skigi — August 8, 2007 @ 12:51 pm

  17. oops… sorry guys… the trade I made doesn’t show up on the link I posted… I will repost it on the ESPN trade machine

    Comment by skigi — August 8, 2007 @ 12:52 pm

  18. Ok this one should work…
    http://games.espn.go.com/nba/features/traderesult?players=615~981~2748~1998~3197~2421&teams=13~11~11~11~11~11&te=&cash=

    Comment by skigi — August 8, 2007 @ 12:53 pm

  19. Simple apples for apples deals have two advantages:

    1) They preserve the overall balance and character of the teams.

    2) They get done.

    Complex apples for strawberry deals seem to multiply disputes and disagreements: before, during, and after the deals.

    The power forward for the Pacers is Jermaine O’Neil. The corresponding power forward for the Lakers is Lamar Odom.

    Lamar moves into the starting power forward for the Pacers; Jermaine moves into the starting power forward for the Lakers.

    I’m slow, but I understand that.

    We could say this several ways, but fundamentally, Jermaine earns more money than Lamar–implying more value. To equalize value, one must add another player to the deal. Kwame Brown seems to be a good value add:

    He was a starter for the Lakers last year at center and a real defensive complement to other players on the team: bigger and stronger than either Lamar or Jermaine. If he works out as a player, his value and Lamar’s value are about the same as Jermaine. If he doesn’t work out as a player, the Pacers get $9 million of cap relief–a winner no matter what. If Lamar works out, he might complement existing players at a lower cost. If not, he’s tradeable: maybe even back to the Lakers with a renegotiated and more realistic salary.

    Them’s the apples.

    I kind of understand that. It only destabilizes the teams a little.

    Some bloggers seem to want to start two power forwards for the Lakers rather than a power forward and center. In order to meet salary matching requirements, they make proposals that unbalance and sort of “Celtic-ate” both teams.

    In order to get the salaries to match, they substitute strawberries for apples according to whim: some liking certain strawberry qualities; others, liking different qualities and quantities. They don’t seem to care that the other team already has it’s own strawberries and might come down with diarheea if they get too many.

    I don’t fully understand the consequences of trading our apples for their apple–but I’d be willing to give it a try.

    Selfishly, I may want to sneak in some inappropriate Laker strawberries to get me that Pacer apple: some may be bruised, some may be a bit green, some may have the wrong shape, some may have the wrong taste. It gets very confusing to them. They may not know my strawberries, but they know their apple–and they’ve got strawberries of their own already.

    I certainly don’t understand the consequences of apples for strawberry deals at all because everything gets so unbalanced. in particular, I have a hard time seeing the kind of balance that leads to win-win deals between the Lakers and Pacers.

    All I see is a fruit salad–and I hate fruit salad!

    Comment by drrayeye — August 8, 2007 @ 12:57 pm

  20. I hear you guys on those deals…But the question still remains would McKie agree to a deal like that, and would the Pacers really want Cook?
    I actually think Cook would help the Pacers, he fits in with what Coach O’brien likes to do, fire up a bunch of 3’s. But his contract does run for 2 more seasons and Bird is a tough sell (look how long he waited to deal Artest). I just think it gets harder to make a deal for a player that makes as much as Jermaine w/o Odom included. But, my main point is, I don’t want to give up Odom. He will be the guy that does all the little things (similar to Walton now, only WAY more talented) and really be the bridge between Kobe and O’neal. We need that 3rd, really talented player who can round out the team, lead the 2nd unit when Kobe is out, and play the versataile game that the triangle requires from hybrid wing players like Lamar. It just doesn’t look like Indy has the incentive to take what we want to give, and they don’t have to help us. As Warren always points out, the trades have to work out for both parties and if Bird wants a kings ransom, what can we do?

    Comment by Darius — August 8, 2007 @ 12:58 pm

  21. Drraye: Lamar Odom’s natural positon is SF.
    Take some mylanta for your stomach indigestion, 3 for 1, 4 for 1 and even 5 for 1 trades take place. Those are most likely the type that will occur for a superstar. Last, it is reported the Lakers have offered Odom, and Indy doesn’t want him.

    Comment by kwame a. — August 8, 2007 @ 1:05 pm

  22. From everything I read, Indiana wants Bynum and will only take Odom as a way to get Bynum. The Lakers want JO and will only give up either Bynum or Odom, but not both. The Lakers have 3 large contracts (Kobe, Odom, Kwame) and Indiana has 3 large contracts (JO, Murphy, Dunleavy). The problem is that the filler for the Lakers (Kwame) has 1yr left and the fillers for Indiana (Murphy, Dunleavy, Tinsley) have 3-5yrs left.

    Indiana can’t really rebuild unless they can get rid of their filler and Los Angeles’s filler will be gone by next year.

    Unless the Lakers take some of Indiana’s filler I don’t see any deal being made. The Lakers would be absolutely crazy to take any of Indiana’s filler - regardless Kobe’s situation they would be hamstrung by tax and salaries for the next 3-5yrs.

    Guys, I don’t really see a deal here. What am I missing?

    Comment by Craig W. — August 8, 2007 @ 1:43 pm

  23. Craig W,

    “Guys, I don’t really see a deal here. What am I missing?”

    Nothing, I don’t see a deal making sense either.

    Let’s move on.

    Comment by Drew Boy — August 8, 2007 @ 2:58 pm

  24. I should also say that the “no-mans land” that we seem to be in wouldn’t have been that bad, in my opinion, had Kobe not gone on his Radio Tour 2007. I have repeatedly said that I like our roster and think we’re balanced and deep. However, we’re one All-Star type player away. Well, it would be much easier to deal for one as the season progresses, using Kwame’s expiring as a centerpiece. Now, Kobe has throw the whole thing off (I don’t care if his concerns are justified, his outbursts have hurt the team, period) and our no-mans land is terrible.

    Comment by Drew Boy — August 8, 2007 @ 3:00 pm

  25. 22/23- You guys are probably right. Great summary Craig. Sad, but painfully true.

    Comment by kwame a. — August 8, 2007 @ 3:03 pm

  26. Craig W - you need a girlfriend !!!

    Comment by Anonymous — August 8, 2007 @ 3:04 pm

  27. I have a wife, but she works and I’m a nerd on the computer.

    Comment by Craig W. — August 8, 2007 @ 3:06 pm

  28. Kwame a (21)

    I’m not the one to convince.

    Pacer bloggers (not Laker bloggers) have themselves identified the pretty obvious Odom/Brown for O’Neil as a deal that Pacer management might reluctantly accept.

    I see no wild enthusiasm for Bynum in the Indiana Blogs. I think that including him inevitably leads to the type of multi[player swaps they prefer.

    Though you could certainly come up with a strawberries for apple deal that I might like, Pacer fans want to add in a few strawberries of their own to trade back. It gets more and more confusing. People suggest third teams. It’s KG all over again.

    Mies van der Roh said: “Less is more.”

    I’m with him.

    Comment by drrayeye — August 8, 2007 @ 3:08 pm

  29. I’m with kwame a. and Craig W. I want to see this work but it’s hard to see a deal both sides can live with. Maybe that changes onces games start being played and we move closer to the deadline, at least I hope so, but the future is not all that bright here.

    Comment by Kurt — August 8, 2007 @ 3:15 pm

  30. 19) I was about to echo kwame a. in 21) that Lamar ought to be playing SF for the Lakers, and it would be a pity to give him up.

    Indiana makes no sense to me, and every time I speculate about their future, I come up miles short. Sure they’ve taken in almost a dozen new players in the past number of months, but it looks like a dozen of either spectacular mediocrity, or uncovered skill that has either been hiding behind limited minutes or injuries. And it’s those no-names that are making it even more difficult for us to give them equal value for JO. I don’t see a centerpiece to their rebuliding effort, and Danny Granger alone is not it.

    How do you guys see them rebuilding the team, because that would have implications for any sort of a JO deal?

    Comment by the other Stephen — August 8, 2007 @ 3:21 pm

  31. Stephen,
    I agree that the Indiana roster makes no sense. This is one reason I don’t want to be the club that is pushing for a trade. The leverage should be on Indiana to try to get out of JO’s contract, not on us to try and get him.

    Perhaps this will all change by the time FEB rolls around and we have all been playing for awhile. We certainly should know a lot more about our players by that time.

    The risk people seem to be afraid of is that JO will get traded elsewhere. Given Larry Bird’s track record, that is certainly a possibility. However, why should the LAL be saddled with a poor deal just because Larry is unpredictable?

    Again, wait for Indiana to approach us and do not EVER close the door, regardless of what stupid deal they are peddling today.

    Comment by Craig W. — August 8, 2007 @ 3:43 pm

  32. Kurt,

    Lamar must be part of any realistic negotiations for a superstar like Jermaine. Maybe he can be pulled out if some multiplayer combinations click–but I doubt it.

    The only scenario I can come up with where we keep Lamar is a trade for Pau Gasol.

    Where a number of you are headed in your determination to keep Lamar in the way you propose, is an inadvertant move to trade Kobe.

    Comment by drrayeye — August 8, 2007 @ 3:47 pm

  33. Forget that last question, cause they need help everywhere. I think they’ve dug themselves into a deep hole for a while, starting with that terrible trade involving with GS. Indiana would have been better off without it, rebuilding or not. So with that in mind, the folks in Indiana shouldn’t be so picky about getting equal value when their ship is already filled to the brim with crap.

    Comment by the other Stephen — August 8, 2007 @ 3:49 pm

  34. 31) But yeah, Craig, what you’re saying makes sense.

    Comment by the other Stephen — August 8, 2007 @ 3:52 pm

  35. 32- The Lakres can’t get anything for Lamar, it is not a matter of the Lakers willingness to part with him. Far from it, they have tried and tried (almost for Francis at the all-star break in ‘06, as part of a KG 3 way earlier this summer), but it is OTHER TEAMS that do not want Lamar. For a team trying to rebuild, WHY would they take a 2 year 24 million dollar rental. Answer, none of them would, thus in pretty much any trade the Lakers make the other team will ask for Bynum+ whatever. I’m not saying Bynum is the best prospect, but he is a legit C prospect.

    Comment by kwame a. — August 8, 2007 @ 4:16 pm

  36. (35) Kwame a,

    You’re getting it wrong. You are treating what I write as my opinion coming from me. That is only partly correct.

    Most of what I’m presenting is what is being said on the Indiana Pacer blogs. We are not the only ones who were impressed by Lamar’s character in the playoffs last season. If anything, they are more active than we are in talking about prospective trades.

    THEY feel that Lamar is both someone who can play significant minutes, and could be an intriguing part of a trade package.

    BUT . . . they would prefer a package deal for many reasons. That’s really where Bynum comes in and . . .that’s where everything breaks down.

    They, of course, would much prefer the package approach.

    The Pacer blogs say that they might “cave” for a simple Odom/Brown for Jermaine deal.

    That’s the compromise I support.

    Comment by drrayeye — August 8, 2007 @ 5:02 pm

  37. Forget what blogs say. Lamar could not be moved to Charlotte for the #8 pick. That was why we couldn’t get the KG deal done. That’s an indication of Lamar’s value.

    Comment by kwame a. — August 8, 2007 @ 5:30 pm

  38. I’m not really sure it matters what the Pacers bloggers/fans think. Their assessment of the situation does not necessarily match the assessment of the Pacers FO. Indeed, it sounds as if they’re way off if we’re to believe that Larry Bird isn’t interested in Odom as some have suggested.

    Why does Lamar have to be a part of any realistic negotiation? A trade of Kwame, Cook, Vujacic, Farmar, and Bynum works financially and has some nice elements for them: Kwame and Vujacic are expiring contracts of about $12 million, Bynum and Farmar are nice prospects, Cook and Vujacic are excellent three point shooters.

    I think alot of this will hinge on how well our young players start the season. If Farmar, Bynum, or Crit jump out of the starting gate like gangbusters a deal becomes much easier. And I think it’s very likely at least one of those players has a great start to the season.

    Comment by Mike in the Mountain West — August 8, 2007 @ 5:54 pm

  39. why dont we just trade Kwame for Kurt Thomas both have identical deals and expire after this year. I am sure Seattle wouldnt mind swapping Kurt for Kwame. This makes a lot of sense on both teams part. What do you guys think?

    Comment by G — August 8, 2007 @ 6:01 pm

  40. If Lamar Odom isn’t worth Brandon Wright, then something is terribly wrong with the Charlotte Bobcats. They traded their pick, Wright, for Jason Richardson and I fail to see how he is any better than Odom. It’s not even close in my opinion.

    That said, Indy appears to want Odom, Bynum, Critt (or Farmar), filler, and draft picks. That’s more than Philly got for Iverson, more than Orlando got for McGrady, more than the Raps got for Vince, and pretty much every star who’s been traded in recent memory. They’re asking for too much to see what offers come in and then they compromise at some point and make a deal for JO. Kwame, Bynum, Farmar (or Critt), filler, 3 mill in cash, and draft picks is the best offer they will get. The RJ/Kristic/Collins offer is not anywhere close to the LA offer.

    As for the Odom/Kwame deal, I don’t understand why they’d rather have that when it’s not as good as the offer on the table. Granted Lamar is the best player in either offer, but this particular kind of trade has no picks and no young prospects to rebuild for the future. If I’m Indy, sure I want LO and Bynum with filler (picks, Farmar, whetevr), but I would not take Kwame/LO instead of Bynum/Farmar/Kwame/filler/cash/picks. If they take the Kwame/LO deal, not that it’s been offered yet, they basically give JO away for cap space since they would appear to view LO as a 2 year rental to let expire after 2 years. That’s easier to sell to the fanbase than cap space, picks, and two pretty good young prospects? Okay….

    And ask yourselves this question, why would the Lakers want to field a JO/Bynuim front line anyway? The triangle is better suited for one big banger down low, like JO, wing players (Kobe/Odom), shooters, and slashers (Kobe). With JO and Bynum, they don’t have that one guy to just focus on rebounds, defense, etc. Both guys need the post in the post somewhat. Mihm/JO/Odom is a better front 3 than Bynum/JO/Luke.

    And to whoever said Gasol would be so much easier to trade for than JO, they have about a 4 million dollar difference in salary. I fail to see how that’s too big of an obstacle to overcome. You’d have to take back at least 15 mill instead of 12.

    One last thing. No one mentions this, but, on draft night, it was reported the Pacers were shutting down trade talk regarding JO because they wanted to revisit the Lakers offer at some point. I get the impression the Lakers are balking at including Bynum and Bird specifically wants Bynum.

    Comment by Chise — August 8, 2007 @ 6:10 pm

  41. Sources say Kobe says no to Odom and Bynum for JO, but I’m having trouble believing that. I’d think he’s just saying that because he wants the Lakers to give up less, which means, he wants Bynum to head out the door.

    Both teams are being pressured to make a move, and the recent ‘I want to stay in Indiana’ story comes indirectly from Bird. Looks like each team is waiting for the other team to burst.

    Oh and
    GetGarnett? No! Get JO.com

    Comment by ca-born — August 8, 2007 @ 6:28 pm

  42. @Ca-born: Where’d you see Kobe says no to LO/Bynum for JO? I’d believe he’d say that cuz at best it is a lateral move, as we’ve all suggested. I am just curious as to what “sources” you are referring to.

    Comment by Chise — August 8, 2007 @ 6:36 pm

  43. “Sources close to both parties indicate neither the Lakers nor Kobe Bryant feel a trade sending out both Lamar Odom and Andrew Bynum for O’Neal is a move worth making.”

    http://www.hoopsworld.com/article_22974.shtml

    Take it with a grain of salt.

    Comment by ca-born — August 8, 2007 @ 6:44 pm

  44. Here is my take on the situation. Indiana is in a horrible situation right now. They hava n unhappy star (regardless of his backpeddling) , they are not contenders; I don’t even think they will make the playoffs (they might but no better than 7th or 8th). They are not in a position to rebuild because they have too many large contracts (Dunleavy, Murphy, Tinsley). I just don’t see a way they can keep O’neill. Can they afford to extend his contract in two years at 20M per? I just do not see a way they can keep O’neill unless he is willing to sign an extension for less than what he is making right now.

    I don’t understand why the Pacers are so enamored with Odom. Does having Odom as PF instead of O’neill make them any better? No, if anything they will be slightly worst defensively. Are they going to resign or extend Odom’s contract in two years when it is up? Thats the same year they will have to extend, Granger’s, Diogu’s and Bynum’s (assuming they got him too). Are they going to use him in a sign and trade? or as a delayed expiring contract?

    It just doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. I think there are two reasons why Bird and the Pacers FO would want Odom in a trade for O’neil. One is that a trade of Odom and Bynum for O’neil is easier to sell to the fans. The other reason is that they want the Lakers to take back one of their bad contracts (Murphy’s preferably), in which case Odom has to be included to make salaries match. For example Bird’s offer of O’neil and Murphy for Odom, Bynum, Kwame (worst trade ever, sorry had to throw in a Simpsons refference).

    I think Indiana is in a very similar situation as Minnesota was in (or soon will be). O’neil will want a huge contract extension of 3 0r 4 yrs for 60M or 80M. They will not be willing to pay a player that much when they are not even making the playoffs and have no means to make the team better. So they will be forced to trade him or let him opt out and get nothing in return.

    Can anyone see a different end to this situation for Indiana? I can’t.

    Comment by ryan — August 8, 2007 @ 8:06 pm

  45. The Lakers have to entertain the fact that we need to absorb one of the Indiana contracts as Bird’s final hammer to signal the rebuilding. I think Indiana is wanting to rebuild - they just can’t. Facilitate the huge contract and we may have a deal.

    Now in this regard, its best to explore a 3rd team, out west that might be willing to give a scrap for Troy Murphy or Mike Dunleavy. One team I had already mentioned is Portland with Raef Lafrentz and/or Darius Miles. Surely an overpaid Murphy is better than a lame LaFrentz? Or am I missing something here…

    One other team would be Murphy’s old team itself - GSW. They can offer a LaFrentz-type of contract (only lesser) in Adonal Foyle, only to expire in 2 years time and they have a trade exception at hand. It would be like trading Foyle to Charlotte for #8 pick + TE. Murphy would still fit in the system, that team has a 6′9 SF playing center.

    This may be the missing 3rd wheel that COULD balance the inequities of the expression. While you may not appreciate the 3-headed monster + 6 decent backups team, I do. Even if I had to personally pay the luxury tax.

    Comment by WarrenWeeLim — August 8, 2007 @ 8:38 pm

  46. Nothing is going to happen….The Lakers think that the start to last season, before injuries, might be recaptured and will gamble that all healthy they will recapture that. The problem is last seasons schedule was weak in the beinging and now it is strong.

    25 - 30 games in we shall see then. The Pacers will be goign no where and a deal will be there and Kobe will be happy or demanding a trade and you can still get value at that point.

    I would lke to keep Odom, he showed me nothing but heart. Kobe holds all the cards even though the Lakers management misdealt themsleves and find themselves at fault for his dismay, partially anyway.

    Kobe said he woudl play on pluto but we all know he would veto any trade other then to NY or ChiTown. If he was willing to go anywhere lets go get areanas and butler, It works I tried it. Butler should be here anyway. Also we know Phil will jump ship (leave Jeannie behind Phil) when we dont win and if we retool for him and Kobe and they leave anyway we will be screwed for 7-10 years. I love Kobe and his game but my sentiments are starting to turn. I played pro-am ball for a few years (I was a role player) and know the value in a leader. If Kobe had gone to the Clippers he would be in the same spot right now, best player in the world on a medicor team.

    I wonder why we didnt pick up a Ruben Patternson, Phil likes kid guards that can play defense and he uses these retreads I met vets very well.

    I think we are looking for the home run (Garnet when we shoudl be looking for doubles good players not superstarts).

    I would love ot see the Busses sober up long enough to drive ot the Forum and sell the Lakers to a corporation of only former LAKERS.

    Do we really think a deal will happen before the seaon? I mean honestly and does it make sense? Lets talk abotu players we coudl pcik up? Why didnt we ask Reggie Miller to play for his home town team?

    This just in the Celtics has asked Karl Malone, Charles Barkley, Dominc Wilikens and Tony Sapronao to play for them to win a ring…

    Comment by vanexeiled — August 8, 2007 @ 10:02 pm

  47. Mike in the Mountain West,
    “I think alot of this will hinge on how well our young players start the season. If Farmar, Bynum, or Crit jump out of the starting gate like gangbusters a deal becomes much easier.”

    If our youngsters start out of the gate really well, we may not WANT to make any deal.

    If Bynum and Farmar/Crittenton start fast, we may not need any more pieces and…this solves OUR long term salary problem. We could trade Kwame in mid season, if everyone is showing consistency, and we will be in good position to resign Kobe, Lamar, and Bynum. Now that would be a real win-win for LAL. That’s why I like always keeping good, young, underpaid talent in the pipeline.

    Comment by Craig W. — August 8, 2007 @ 11:21 pm

  48. The Pincus Hoopsworld article mentioned in #43 concludes by saying Indiana is prepared to just ‘wait out’ the Lakers. They think their situation is less severe than the Lakers’.

    This is where Kobe going coastal really may have cost us. By all calculations Indiana is in a far worse financial and talent situation than the Lakers. The only advantages they have over us is that we are probably we are THE major NBA market at the moment and Kobe applied the pressure early in the summer.

    If the FO can find the backbone to wait out the fans, I think we could get something done in JAN/FEB, when Indiana should really start to be feeling the heat. If our guys start out well they know we may not do a deal with them and they may cave. If we are going to do a deal, this would be the time - not now when all parties are looking around for icing on the cake.

    Comment by Craig W. — August 8, 2007 @ 11:38 pm

  49. (38) Mike the Mountain man

    You say, “Why does Lamar have to be a part of any realistic negotiation? ”

    That’s where the money is, and Jermaine earns more than Kobe!

    You say, “A trade of Kwame, Cook, Vujacic, Farmar, and Bynum works financially and has some nice elements for them”

    They already have too many guys under contract to accept a 5 for 1–even if they wanted to.

    Considering how many guys are under contract for both teams, as you deviate from a symmetrical apples for apples deal, you move very quickly from reality to fantasy.

    Comment by drrayeye — August 9, 2007 @ 12:13 am

  50. 49- Is the roster issue really that big of a problem? They can’t waive a couple of the guys with less than a million left on their contract? I’m by no means expert on this, so if I’m wrong please correct me, but if we sign-and-trade McKie for example, can’t we then send cash considerations to cover the cost of buying him out? By my count there’s really only 9 or 10 guys on that roster (and that’s being generous) that deserve to be there. I think Craig W is right that 3-point shooters like Sasha and Cook actually might not be that bad idea for O’Brien.

    Anyway, my point is that it’s called +filler for a reason. Once you agree on the big stuff, you can find creative ways to deal with the rest I think.

    Comment by chopperdave — August 9, 2007 @ 12:53 am

  51. Craig (47) (48)

    You say, “If Bynum and Farmar/Crittenton start fast, we may not need any more pieces . . .”

    Given the structure of our current Lakers team, Bynum will not start and may not play much. Farmar will probably be our starting pg, and is very unlikely to be traded once the season starts. Crittenton is unlikely to play much and could end up in the development league. How will we know whether or not we need more pieces?

    You go on to argue that we can make out best deal in Jan./Feb.

    If you were a Pacer fan, that might be a good argument, since they made a midseason change the last two years. As a Laker fan, you must know that Phil never does midseason trades. It takes time to work players into the triangle.

    If the Pacers trade Jermaine for Kwame and Lamar, they’ve broken their big money pieces into smaller pots–and they’ve got two veterans who can play right away and/or be assembled into a package with other players they might trade.

    Jermaine and Kobe instantly become a true nucleus for the Lakers–almost like Kobe and another O’Neil. And we keep all of our “kids.”

    However, it’s not the only way for them to go.

    For us either.

    Let’s consider where this impasse may be leading.

    We could always trade Kobe and Kwame for O’Neil, Dunlevy, and two first round draft picks . . . . .

    we’d be:

    pg: Farmar, Fisher
    sg: Dunlevy, Odom
    sf: Walton, VladRad
    C: Mihm, Bynum
    pf: O’Neil, Turiaf

    Of course, Odom could also be sf or pf–Evans or Sasha could be sg, Javaris would be backup pg.

    The Pacers would definitely have someone to build around and some veterans that could do the job!

    Craig,

    How do you like them apples?

    Comment by drrayeye — August 9, 2007 @ 1:21 am

  52. chopperdave,
    Here are the Indiana salaries… http://www.hoopshype.com/salaries/indiana.htm
    Forget about anyone with more than 1yr on the books and you have 4 players, totalling just over $3M (Rush, Greene, Graham, Owens). You could also drop David Harrison for $3.3M. Their total payroll is now $60M and they have 9 players. We will add $17.5M to their payroll + 5 players ($68M–just over the luxury tax level).

    This is rather scary for Indiana now because:
    1) Only Kwame comes off the books next year @$9M and they will still be close to luxury tax level.
    2) Only 2 players (Foster, Sasha) have 2yrs left @$9M and every one’s salary escalates in the 2nd year.
    3) Six players come off the books in 3yrs @$24M, but only Cook ($3.5M) would be let go. They may want to sign Diogu, Bynum, Granger, Daniels, or Diener; however, they are really in salary cap he** and have been drafting people for 3 yrs.
    —This team is now really ‘in the bucket’ because they cannot sign the players they need 3yrs after they trade their franchise player.—

    The Lakers will be at $72M with $65M in long term contracts for 6 people. Very serious luxury tax problems. They also have lost 2 key and inexpensive players and it doesn’t take an accountant to see Kobe should opt out after 2yrs or he will be presiding over a dead and bankrupt team that absolutely cannot resign Lamar.

    Comment by Craig W. — August 9, 2007 @ 1:35 am

  53. Trade for Kurt Thomas
    Why dont we just trade Kwame for Kurt Thomas both have identical deals and expire after this year. I am sure Seattle wouldnt mind swapping Kurt for Kwame. This makes a lot of sense on both teams part. What do you guys think? I would appreciate your guys thoughts on this than you

    Comment by G — August 9, 2007 @ 4:59 am

  54. Chopperdave (50),

    Whenever there is a will, there is a way, but that “way” may involve money one doesn’t want to pay AND compromises one doesn’t want to make.

    Let’s say to hell with balance. Let’s say that Indiana just needs to get rid of Jermaine’s salary and the Lakers want him to join Kobe and Lamar–no matter what! Let’s suppose 15 Indiana players are already signed:

    Here’s a suggested offer for Jermaine:

    “Kwame, Cook, Vujacic, Farmar, and Bynum”

    Kwame clearly goes for O’Neil as the highest salary. To get Farmar, you need to pay off–say Deiner. To get Cook, who do you pay off? Same for Vujacic and Bynum. Either the cost goes up or the balance of the team changes–probably both.

    The Lakers didn’t want to lose any of their players–they held “slots,” whereas the Pacers only probably want Kwame as an expiring–and Bynum.

    Oh, by the way, we’re now short 4 players (worth about $10 million) and can only spend a vet minimum and a small portion of a midlevel exception to replace them.

    We’ve lost our starting point guard–where do we get his replacement? We’re out of balance again. We’re heading back toward the situation that brought us Smush Parker.

    Our depth at the “big” positions is gone–we only have one center, Mihm, coming back from injuries.

    But never mind. We’ve got two all star power forwards that can play multiple positions. Maybe Jermaine can play center.

    Wait a minute!

    Doesn’t Jermaine do his stuff best when he works side by side with a strong big like Kwame? (Sorry–we traded him). Isn’t that how Jermaine gets injured, playing out of postion? Isn’t that partly how Lamar got injured, too? What if Jermaine and Kobe get injured? Do we have quality backups? (stop worrying. Our players never get injured).

    No, we’ll sign a backup for Mihm or bring Gasol in from Spain. We’ll play Odom at sf–his “natural” position (even though he’s almost always been a PF). What about Walton and VladRad?

    Guess we need to trade at least one of them–maybe for a pg.

    But we don’t have any money!

    And the beat goes on.

    Wouldn’t it be better to have a balanced team, with the right number of players at each position who complement each other and have experience playing together?

    Maybe those “onesy twosy” deals better preserve team balance and chemistry?

    Nah. It’s more fun to Celtic-ate and scramble.

    Comment by drrayeye — August 9, 2007 @ 6:49 am

  55. I really think Kwame is both better than Kurt Thomas and knows the triangle better. Other than some scoring, what do we get more of from Kurt Thomas. Change just for change sake can impact chemistry also.

    Comment by Craig W. — August 9, 2007 @ 6:56 am

  56. I agree with Craig (for the most part, Kwame is a slightly better man on defender but Thomas is better offensively). Besides that I do not think Seattle would do that trade anyways.

    Comment by ryan — August 9, 2007 @ 8:18 am

  57. Something has to give in Indiana. Bird is clearly asking for more than what JO is worth. does anyone really believe JO is worth Jefferson/Kristic plus fillers? If I was NJ I wouldn’t do that trade. I would wait and see how that team performed before I even thought about that trade. I think the asking price has to drop. To what level I don’t know, but it has to come down. If he doesn’t drop it then Bird might be forced to trade him at the trade deadline or before the draft in which case all of his leverage will be gone.

    Comment by ryan — August 9, 2007 @ 8:35 am

  58. Did anyone catch Kobe on Jimmy Kimmel last night?

    Comment by Drew Boy — August 9, 2007 @ 9:03 am

  59. Odom played SF the entire time he was with the Clippers. He also played SF for the Lakers in ‘05-’06 season. Only for 3 seasons has Odom played PF, and the two years he played PF in the West he got hurt for 20+ games…because he’s not a PF in the West.

    Comment by kwame a. — August 9, 2007 @ 11:03 am

  60. 58 - Drew Boy

    Yeah I watched Kobe last night on Kimmel. It was alright. Nothing other than him chit chatting with Jimmy about random stuff like nicknames, Harry Potter, and team USA.

    He did, however, say that he threw his back out vacuuming. Jimmy answered with what I was thinking right after Kobe said that, “You know theres this thing called a maid right?”

    At one point, Jimmy said, “I know theres been a lot of speculation about where you might play next season, and I know you can’t say anything about that right now, but I just want to say that as a longtime Laker fan, I hope you retire in a purple and gold jersey”… Kobe didn’t look too amused.

    Comment by skigi — August 9, 2007 @ 11:10 am

  61. 54.

    drrayeye,

    exactly. Maybe trading Kobe is our only possible move…

    The thing that bothers me is… Kobe has a will to win and a killer instinct like no other in the world, and because of that we forgive him?

    I won’t forget the 2004 Finals nor will I forget game 7 against the Suns in 2006. To me, 75 cents on the dollar now is better than holding that dollar for two years and then losing it for nothing.

    Comment by Renato Afonso — August 9, 2007 @ 1:59 pm

  62. Does anybody think that the Lakers should make and offer to Allan Houston? I mean the guy was a two-time all star and has shown that he can still play. Its not a move that will instantly make us contenders but it would solidify our bench what do you guys think?

    Comment by Luke — August 9, 2007 @ 2:09 pm

  63. 62) Just how much would we pay him? 100k? Perhaps we could pay him in happy meals.

    Comment by the other Stephen — August 9, 2007 @ 4:03 pm

  64. 63. They would pay the minimum just like any other team he joins will pay.

    That being said, I’d rather that the Lakers not contribute to what’s shaping up to be a throwback year in the NBA. Boston is trying to get Reggie Miller out of retirement, Allan Houston is considering a comeback, and Miami just signed Penny Hardaway. What the hell is going on?

    Comment by Exick — August 9, 2007 @ 4:07 pm

  65. Renato, people like you amaze me. Are you serious about Game 7 of the Suns series?!?! Come on, don’t fall into the media trap. If you TRULY watched that entire game, you would know that he was beyond frustrated with the guys on this team. One guy can’t do everything himself. And he realized that he was in fact doing everything himself, while his team continuously falied him.

    Kobe is a human. He should not be judged as if he is more than that.

    Comment by Carter — August 9, 2007 @ 4:22 pm

  66. 64) Haha I know, Exick. You weren’t kidding though–Penny Hardaway is coming back too. That one was out of the blue, without any fanfare. Remember when Scottie Pippen wanted to come back and everyone laughed at him and shouted him down? Maybe this is his time. Time to enrich the the NBA with some seasoned geezers!

    Comment by the other Stephen — August 9, 2007 @ 5:34 pm

  67. Perhaps John Amaechi will consider a comeback.

    Comment by ca-born — August 9, 2007 @ 5:43 pm

  68. I just wanted to ask if anyone thought the Pacers would go for a Kwame/Odom/Sasha or Critt package for Jermaine and one of their bad contracts? We could actually absorb any salary up to Murphy’s with that deal.

    Indy could dump a bad contract get a good player in Odom, salary relief from Kwame, and a young PG in Critt or more salary relief (albeit small) from Sasha. The deal is not a huge 4 or 5 for 1 like the other deals we are offering.

    For the Lakers the only drawback is the tax. The Lakers get to keep Bynum and the front court has a ton of depth with Mihm, Bynum, Jermaine, Murphy, Turiaf…or if we take back Tinsley or Marquise Daniels istead of Murphy, we supplement the loss of Critt w/ another guard who can play some PG.

    Just wondering what anyone else thinks on this…

    Comment by Darius — August 9, 2007 @ 5:52 pm

  69. 68) The other draw back is losing Odom. People don’t realize what Odom does for this team. He does everything on the court except score consistently.

    Comment by JONESONTHENBA — August 9, 2007 @ 5:59 pm

  70. 65. Carter,

    Kobe’s a professional basketball player. Yes, even them get emotional on court. I have been really emotional at times (three times suspended this season) and that’s been reflected on payday. However, if a teammate of mine pulled that thing on a game, he would be in serious trouble with me.

    Rule #1 on court: Winning the game is all that matters, no matter who’s carrying the team or taking the shots. Win it first, discuss it later.

    I’ts not media crap. I watched the game two times and Kobe was frustrated for sure, but he still should be doing his job… You know what happens when one of us doesn’t deliver during his day job? We get a warning, if lucky… Otherwise we’re out the door…

    Sorry for venting on this subject Carter, but I’m just saying that “trade me” appeal he made was not a first. He did it two years ago and did it in the finals. Kobe plays because HE wants to win, not because he wants the team to win. (and there’s a difference…)

    Comment by Renato Afonso — August 9, 2007 @ 6:01 pm

  71. I’m slowly turning into JohnR… Argh! This hurts…

    Comment by Renato Afonso — August 9, 2007 @ 6:06 pm

  72. @Darius: Why would LA do a Kwame/Odom/Sasha/Critt for JO/Bad contract? Indy might do it, but why would we? I think Odom is a better value for us than Bynum. I am just really put off by Bynum and the other teams seem to love him. I think he’s hit or miss and I don’t really want to find out either way. I say strike now before his value/mystique wears off. If he struggles this year or doesn’t really develop enough, we won’t be able to get as much for him next off-season.

    I understand why everyone is put off by taking on Murphy, but if doing something like JO/Murphy for Bynum/Kwame/Farmar/Mckie/Vlad/3 mill/picks (maybe one minimum salary like Sasha as well), why wouldn’t we do that? Murphy has averages 11 and 8 over 28 min a game for his career and he shoots a good 3 point %. I honestly believe he is a pefect triangle type player and allieviates some of the depth we’d lose along the frontline. If this allows us to keep Odom and facilitates the deal, the why not? I mean, you try to get a 3rd team to take Murphy but if you can’t, just pull the trigger.

    Now, the luxary tax will be an issue, yea, but you’ll have a contender year in and year out. In 4 years, when JO and Kobe may be a step slower, Murphy will be off the books, JO in the last year of an extension, Odom possibly as well, and you have plenty of options to go from there. If the Lakers stand pat, I don’t see them contending anytime soon. You know what happens then? Kobe causes trouble, and we end up selling for 50 cents on the dollar, which would be worse than the Deng/Gordon/Nocioni deal. LO may not want to re-sign when his contract is up. And then we’re in a full-fledge rebuilding mode and searching for our #1 star. Right now, we need a #2, but it’s far harder to find the #1. I say go for the #2 now while it’s sitting right there for the taking.

    Comment by Chise — August 9, 2007 @ 6:29 pm

  73. I think the Lakers front office needs to consider making more smaller moves as opposed to making just a big splash trade. There are numerous options out there right now that can be done and would make them better! As much as i think JO would be a great fit for the Lakers i have come to the realization that this trade probably will not happen before the season starts. So if i am the Lakers GM i would seriously consider adding a few more solid veteran role players via trade and Free Agency. These move won’t make headlines but they’ll make them more competitive and possibly keep Kobe satisfied for the short-term.

    Comment by Luke — August 9, 2007 @ 6:31 pm

  74. What is there really out there though Luke? I mean, who’s available on a smaller scale? Camby would be great, but Denver wants more than Kwame’s expiring and I don’t know if that entailed anyone other than a Sasha type player I would offer more than Kwame’s expiring and a 2nd rounder. Other than Camby, where is there another realistic possibility? JO is the best option and the only one readily available right now.

    To be honest, they probably should had tried to get Zach Randolph before the Knicks did. Kwame + filler would have been enough to seal the deal I think as long as they weren’t totally against sending him to someone in their own conference.

    Comment by Chise — August 9, 2007 @ 6:38 pm

  75. 68) I agree with Chise. That’s not a good deal for us.

    Comment by the other Stephen — August 9, 2007 @ 6:46 pm

  76. Darius (68),

    That’s the type of deal that the Pacers want: apples for apples. It keeps both teams balanced and it helps both teams move in their respective directions. It would certainly reopen negotiations.

    My candidates for “bad contract” for us to consider would be #1 Dunlevy or #2 Daniels.

    I believe that Dunlevy could be a possible basis to trade for Ron Artest. Daniels could give us depth at pg.

    Just negotiating back and forth might lead to the simpler Odom/Brown for Jermaine, but I’d be willing to be flexible and consider more apples.

    It should please Kobe, and I want him to stay–but if Kobe were recalcitrant, it forms a foundation for a new Laker team when we trade him!

    Chise’s style “keep Odom” trade gets into the problems discussed yesterday (54).

    Comment by drrayeye — August 9, 2007 @ 8:33 pm

  77. There is one other player… Chris Wilcox. As of now, he is quite untouchable. But if you offer Cook, Bynum and Sasha to Seattle, they might be wiling to take in Bynum as a project to go along with Jeff Green and Kevin Durant. Add in Crittenton and they might just give us Luke Ridnour as well.

    See this move is a fairly decent one. One that constitutes the apples-for-apples suggested by Craig and drrayeye and we would not be sinking to the luxury tax further. We could also urge Seattle to trade us the exception they have in the Allen and Lewis deals…

    As far as Odom going back to the natural SF position he is, we can do that now. We start Wilcox at PF and Kwame at the center. If Mihm turns out to be really healthy, we now have a solid frontcourt in Wilcox-Turiaf-Kwame-Mihm.

    The Lakers will look like this:
    Farmar / Ridnour / Fisher
    Kobe / Evans / Karl
    Odom / Walton / Radman
    Wilcox / Turiaf
    Kwame / Mihm

    Odom can slide to PF in playing the faster teams in the league like GS and Phoenix, as Wilcox plays center.

    Comment by WarrenWeeLim — August 9, 2007 @ 11:14 pm

  78. Assuming Bird thinks he needs to rebuild-which is highly doubtful,when trading an All-Star type player you’d want some combination of cap clearance,young talent and draft picks. Any Laker draft picks would be around #20 and those are hardly the ones to rebuild w/.(Let alone how willing are the Lakers to give away the next couple of yrs draft.)Farmar and Bynum have not shown that “something” that indicates they will be anything more than rotation guys. since it takes @ $16mil to trade for O’Neal,using Kwame leaves $7mil short. There is no way Bird takes back a contract like Radman’s,so the Lakers either send away 1/3 their roster for one player or it’s Lamar and Bynum and Farmar.(In either case imagine the junk the Lakers will sign to fill out their roster.Houston may well end up looking like a prize signing! Rick Fox may get a call.)

    If Bird is rebuilding he’s looking to the future,so he’d still want Lamar. Brown offers cap relief that will soon be eaten up.Lamar offers a second trade that can bring back extra picks and/or young talent. There are numerous players in the last yr of their contract,so brown is nothing special.(Seattle could counter w/Thomas and has all those extra picks for example.)

    The O’Neal,Murphy combo I’ve seen suggested is a non-starter. If the pair is so good,why would Indy trade them away-esp being in the East?

    The Lakers lack somebody in the front office who is looking several moves ahead. For example,earlier someone asked why not a Kwame for Thomas trade.(Kudo’s to the board for not erupting in ridicule at the thought.)But what about accessorizing such a trade by making it Kwame and Evans(or a First )for Thomas and Damien Wilkins. When Thomas is free to be traded again,send him down the hall to Clippers for Cassell and Ross. Continue by trading Cassell to Orlando for Turkoglu.(If Clips won’t deal,Thomas,Sasha to Orlando for Turkoglu and Dooling.) W/Turkoglu,Radmanovich is surplus and could be traded for a Donyell Marshall. Kwame is turned into 2-3 solid players that no one would ever trade for him.(Note.These are suggestions of what could be done. Clips and Orlando want a big,Orlando wants out of Turkoglu’s contract,Marshall wants out of Cleveland and Cavs could use more shooters for LeBron,Seattle has a bunch of SFs and vet PFs that they will have to make a trade or two.) My point is the Lakers FO has been too focused on the Blockbuster trade and has ignored smaller steps that could improve the overall roster.

    We Stephens may disagree on this or that,but we know how to spell our name right :)

    Comment by Stephen — August 9, 2007 @ 11:35 pm

  79. drrayeye,

    away from the topic… sorry, but…
    i read your earlier post making a reference from Mies’s “less is more”, you are an architect too?

    Comment by samu — August 10, 2007 @ 12:16 am

  80. wilcox plays for the kings now.

    Comment by KAs — August 10, 2007 @ 12:16 am

  81. Hey everyone, I was only asking…
    I have already read on this thread that there really isn’t a deal here, and for the most part I agree with that. But the more I think about it, the more I realize that JO is better than Odom. Believe me, I am a huge Odom fan. I think he is a tough, skilled, unselfish player that has the ability to impact a game in more ways than most of the players in the league. He can score it, pass it, rebound, has great feel….I could go on forever. But he is not a true complement to Kobe…I have seen a couple too many games where Odom does not have the impact the Lakers need from their 2nd best player. And while O’neal is not as skilled as Odom, nor is he as versataile or have the same feel, O’neal is an assertive offensive player who will get you 20pts a game while also defending the rim on the weakside. And while he is not an amazing rebounder in the KG/Howard/Chandler mold, he is more than capable on the glass.
    I guess my point is, to get a player the caliber of JO, a multiple all-star, you will have to give up something of value. And that is value in terms of talent and in terms of dollars. In both cases Odom is the best fit. Would the Lakers lose a great piece, especially for our system? Of course. But O’neal fits what we want to do as well.
    I guess I just think that

    Fisher/Farmar/Sasha or Critt Daniels
    Kobe/Evans or
    Walton/Vlad + Dunleavy Cook/Turiaf or
    Mihm/Bynum Murphy

    Is a more all around team than what we have now. And would be more ready to compete. And keeping Bynum is going to work out. He is skilled, he is competitve, and best of all, he is big. I think he can turn into a pretty good pro. I know he sulks, but he is young…and I honestly think that JO could help him mature and teach him the ropes. Remember JO was a prep to pro young big once too, and he always said how much Rasheed Wallace helped him become the player he is now. Showing him how to compete and challenging him every day in practice.
    It may seem like change just for change’s sake, but I want this to be the best team it can be….and I always have the thought of an unhappy Kobe in the back of my head. I don’t just want to cow tow to the superstar…but he is a once and a generation player: he has all the talent AND all the drive….those guys just don’t come around every year. When you have one. you have to do what it takes to build your team around that guy. Like I said, I just want the best team.

    Comment by desus32 — August 10, 2007 @ 12:23 am

  82. By the way, I meant

    Fisher/Farmar/Sasha OR Critt
    Kobe/Evans
    Walton/Radman
    JO/Turiaf/Cook
    Mihm/Bynum

    AND Dunleavy or Daniels or Murphy.

    That got all jumbled in the previous post.

    Comment by desus32 — August 10, 2007 @ 12:27 am

  83. It must be the doldrums of summer, because the comment thread here has gotten silly. Desperately silly.

    In 77 Warren starts off with saying Wilcox is “As of now, he is quite untouchable” then proceeds to come up with a trade for him anyway. And offering our best trading chip in the mix. For Chris Wilcox. Then in 81 Desus32 decides JO is a better fit than Odom if we swap the two out — there’s not a ton of debate there, the problem is Indiana doesn’t just want Odom, they want Bynum too. That’s what the entire hold up is in every media account, Larry Bird asking for both.

    That’s why I hate trade speculation without foundation. It’s the time of year when fans start coming up with random crap to fill needs that is never going to happen. Sorry for the rant, but this just all starts to drive me nuts and is one of the reasons there is a note on the sidebar under commenting tips saying “This is not a blog that supports wild trade speculation.”

    Comment by Kurt — August 10, 2007 @ 12:57 am

  84. Pardon the lack of maturity in the Wilcox suggestion Kurt, but we have to take it in the context of “moving Odom to SF as his natural position” rather than taking it as pure trade speculation. Since the big guys are talking heavily on playing the positions and off positions, I Just thought better that moving Odom to SF EVEN WITHOUT ACQUIRING JO would be a lot saner move than trading 1/3 of the team for an oft-injured star.

    If I may defend the merits of that suggestion, It would be that we get a decent PF/C in Wilcox in exchange for a hit-or-miss-Andrew Bynum-on-his-breakout-year thing.
    We also get to dump Cook along the way… As for Seattle, Bynum might fit their timetable better.

    The suggestion was no worse than Pau Gasol to LA discussion. Only perhaps that Pau is a superstar and Wilcox is a role player - for now.

    Comment by WarrenWeeLim — August 10, 2007 @ 2:02 am

  85. how about Kwame for Wilcox str8 up

    Comment by G — August 10, 2007 @ 2:08 am

  86. G, If you were Seattle, would you do it?

    Just for arguments sake:
    If it did not include Bynum from us, Im guessing it’d have to be Kwame + Cook + Sasha + Crittenton for Szczerbiak and Wilcox. Something like that…

    Comment by WarrenWeeLim — August 10, 2007 @ 2:23 am

  87. i would do that Warren but i would try to hold onto Critt and replace him with a future 1st rounder
    I have some suggestions on other possible trades that would make sense for both teams

    1. I like Warrens suggestion for wally and wilcox I think that seattle would do it beacuse they are rebuilding and want Kwames expiring and the young cook and Sasha plus replace critt with 09 1st rounder
    2. Denver receives Kwame brown and Brian Cook
    Lakers receive Reggie Evans and Eduardo Najera
    Analysis:
    This improves laker defense immensely and improves Denvers outside shooting woes with Cook and replaces evans with Kwame and saves the teammoney because Kwame expires and their owner is cheap and wants to save $
    3. Detroit receives Kwame Brown And Sasha Vujacic plus Cash
    Lakers receive Nazr Mohammed and Flip Murray
    Analysis: Detroit’s cheap owner receives cash and Kwames expiring for a player they dont play Nazr Mohammed and a bench player Flip that is a wash with Sasha. The Lakers receive a legitimate frontcourt player in Mohammed and a solid bench player in Flip
    4. Minnesota receives Kwame Brown, Brian Cook, Sasha Vujacic, Jordan Farmar and Cash (3mill)
    Lakers receive Juwan Howard, Marko Jaric and Trenton Hassell
    Analysis: Minnestoa receives young players and Kwames expiring for all of Minnys long term conntracts that they wantto get rid off since there in rebuild mode
    Lakers get a solid permiter defender in Hassell a legit pg that would thrive in the triangle in Marko Jaric and Juwan Howard a solid big guy to play D to make up for abscense of Kwame
    5.Orlando receives Kwame Brown and Jordan Farmar
    Lakers receive Carlos Arroyo and Hedo Turkoglu
    Analysis: Lakers get a legit starter at the 3 and Luke can come of the bench and get a legit PG in Arroyo
    Magic get rid of Turkolu who became redundant with the siging of Lewis and get a young promisong Pg to replace for Carlos Arroyo
    6.Utah receives Kwame Brown, Brian Cook, and Sasha Vujacic
    Lakers receive Andrei Kirilenko
    Analysis: Lakers get a legit PF in Kirilenko and Odom can go back to play SF with Luke coming off the bench
    Utah gets rid of the sulking Kirilrnko and his huge contract that they want to get out of and gives them some finacial flexibility

    I think these are all plausible trades for both teams and would rank them in order of trying to make the trade with Utah first, Seattle second, Minnesota third, denver fourth, Detroit 5th, and Orlando 6th.

    None the less I think any of these trades improve The lakers and thus could make Odom expenadable for a trade with Jermaine O’neal. I would truly like to know what you guys think of these plausible scenarios and would appreciate your input. Do not be afraid to criticize my scenarios I welcome all feedback thanks.

    Comment by G — August 10, 2007 @ 3:15 am

  88. I have to agree that a trade for O’neil does not seem plausible at this point. Bird is clearly asking for more than what O’neil is worth and the lakers (as they should) are not willing to pay it. I do agree that O’neil is an upgrade at PF over Odom (especially since Odom is not a PF), but Odom + Bynum and I think they wanted Critt + picks is overpaying. You could argue for Odom, Bynum, Sasha fo JO but thats not what Bird wanted. As of right now I do not think a trade for O’neil is realistic; though it could be around FEB depending on how everyones season is going.

    I think the Lakers need to address a different problem through smaller trades. I really believe they need a defensive wing. There are a few players I think they should look into to see what it would take to them. A S&T for Posey would be a great move but I don’t know who the Lakers have to offer. A trade for Quentin Ross would also be a good move but again not sure what it would take. I think those are the type of players the Lakers should be looking into getting.

    By the way I would do a Odom, Bynum, Sasha (thats it no 1st rnd picks) for O’neil if the Lakers could get Posey for Vlad (but I know that won’t happen). I think that would give the Lakers a very good defensive team, much better than the one we have now.

    Comment by ryan — August 10, 2007 @ 7:02 am

  89. I forget who said it, but, obviously JO is a better player than Odom. Not as versatile, but clearly a better player. The main point myself and others have made about trading Odom for JO is that it is a lateral move at best. How much better is JO than LO? Not enough to make a difference between the bottom 4 and the top 4 in the West. With JO/Kobe, and for argument’s sake Bynum, will the Lakers reach the top 4? I don’t think so. With LO/JO/Kobe? Absolutely. I’d honestly rather stand pat than include Odom is any trade for JO. Add to that that we’d have to surrender our expiring Kwame contract as well (or Bynum) and it becomes an even worse deal.

    Comment by Chise — August 10, 2007 @ 7:13 am

  90. I think this is pretty funny. I don’t why but I do. Reggim Miller is planning a comeback at 42, Allan Houston is at 36, Penny Hardaway (36) signed with Miami, as if they were not old enough already. Charles Oakley (44) said some teams have called about him. Sean Kemp (38) reportedly has talked to some teams about coming to training camp. Maybe teams (Boston) will start calling Kareem to see if he can still do his sky hook. What about MJ?

    Maybe they should just start the senior NBA.

    Comment by ryan — August 10, 2007 @ 9:24 am

  91. 89. ryan,

    Does the senior NBA includes a timeout for pudding?

    Comment by Renato Afonso — August 10, 2007 @ 9:27 am

  92. Alright….Sorry Kurt. I do not mean to just “promote wild trade speculation”. I was wondering what others on this site thought of aquiring JO IF we had to succumb to what Indy is really wanting while also accounting for the fact that the Salaries have to work. This entire thread was started by the idea that JO wants to come to LA and what would be a good deal for the Lakers to aquire him. Sorry if my ideas on that are unfounded “crap”…

    But even you wrote: “Or, there is the scenario where the Lakers send LO east, somehow convince Larry the Legend not to take Bynum, then all Laker fans go to church and light a candle for Bynum to take a big step forward and be the third offensive cog in the triangle every night. Are you really comfortable with that?”

    I guess I am more comfortable with that….but I think that Bynum would still be playing behind Mihm in this scenario. I also think that the Lakers would be adding another piece besides JO in this deal. But my other posts explain my reasoning here. I guess until something actually happens, then, we should just assume that this is the team that we are going into the season with. I hope we can take the next step with these players.

    Comment by Darius — August 10, 2007 @ 10:15 am

  93. It would seem to me that any sort of Odom for O’Neal swap wo