Hey everyone. How's it going? Just me this week. Let's get 'er started!
DeMarcus Cousins and Thornton for Bynum? Then send Pau to Houston for Scola, Lowry and their 14th pick?
Jason: Interesting scenario with Bynum, although I could see 2 potential snags. First, I'm not sure Bynum would sign an extension to stay with the Kings, given the market and how unstable the organization has been, and the Kings aren't gonna give up those two players for a potential rental. And Cousins certainly has his own red flags, albeit with some talent to go with them.
what holds more importance.. upgrading the bench or upgrading the point guard position?
Shayan: In my opinion, the bench. The Lakers need an upgrade (even if it's just an improved Sessions at the end of the day) at the point, but depth matters. Being a top-heavy contender is a risky proposition. The support cast has to be in place, and in particular, with some shooters added to the mix.
Would Nick Young come to Lakers for mini mle which is about one million less than Clippers could pay him. Would Lakers want him? Also, is Mo Williams for Lamar Odom trade exception possible?
LAhome48: My guess is Young stays with the Clips. From what I understand/read, he likes them, and the feeling is mutual. I'm guessing resigning Young is a high priority. But if staying in L.A. is of interest to Young (and I'm guessing it is, because he loves his hometown), you never know.
Would you trade Gasol for Deng and some of Chicago's depth like Gibson Korver?
Maximus: I'd consider it, because depth would help this team a LOT. They've been far too top heavy the last two seasons. I also like Gibson (underrated player, in my opinion) and Korver fills a desperate shooting need. But Deng's health makes me a little nervous. He'd be a centerpiece and if he has issues, the impact of that trade immediately drops. But it's not a horrible proposition. Having said that, I don't see why Chicago makes the deal, unless they can move Boozer. Makes little sense for them.
How you like me now after my game 1 performance? That layup over wade with me flying over 36' i bet yall loved it. haha
Do you think Jordan Hill will be willing to sign with the Lakers for a deal starting at the 3.6 million that they're allowed to offer him? Or do you think he'll leave for some other team for more money?
LTLF:It's very hard for me to gauge Hill's value, to be honest. He acquitted himself pretty nicely as a Laker, all in all, and had a few double-doubles off the bench during the playoffs. However, he also disappeared in a few other games and in the meantime, has been traded twice in 3 seasons as a former lottery pick. That has to raise red flags. Throw in his pending legal situation and the punitive nature of the new CBA and I don't know how much teams would pay for a young, athletic, but highly unproven big man. But dude can rebound. That's for sure.
If you can trade Gasol for 3 solid role players, but no real superstar, do you do it? Is Kobe/Drew + good role players better than Kobe/Drew/Pau lousy ones?
Caleb: Depending on who the depth is, yes. I do think Gasol is going to be missed a lot more than many Lakers fans realize, and in some ways, I think they might be better off trading Bynum for a better player. But depth is also needed, and if Gasol can fetch it, the front office needs to consider the particulars.
do you think the lakers could sign nash without trading away any of the core peices?
Jacob: If Nash is willing to sign for a mini mid-level exception or (dare to dream) the veteran's minimum, absolutely. And that would be a huge pickup for the Lakers. However, it only really makes sense for him to take below market value to sign with a legit contender. Do the Lakers still qualify? And would Nash be confident Kobe will play off ball enough to let him make as big a difference as possible? These are all matters to consider.
Is Kobe going overseas again for treatment? He should go every year.
Bob: Yep, and Bynum is also getting the German experience.
I believe a player that has everything the Lakers need is Nicolas Batum: long, great, athletic defender that would bother Durant and Lebron among others and is a good 3 point shooter. Can you see any way the Lakers can get him? I would trade Gasol in the move to get him.
RJ: I can't conceive of Portland giving up a player that young for Pau, even if Pau is the better player at the moment. The Blazers already have Aldridge down low, and he's a young piece as build around with Batum. That feels very unlikely to me.
Do the Lakers have a chance to pick up any of the Celtics big 3, assuming they are available?
Tyrone: KG strikes me as the most realistic option, in terms of filling a need for the Lakers and potential mutual interest, although I'm wondering if he ends up resigning with Boston. He had a nice season and the money shouldn't be an issue, given how much KG has already made. He seems to really love it in Boston.
What exactly went wrong with Spurs? They looked like a legend in the making and poof they are gone
Yousef: I think it was a matter of water seeking its own level, so to speak. The Spurs are a very good team, but OKC was the one everyone expected to be better in the first place. After a slower start, they returned to the anticipated form, and that was too much for San Antonio.
Who do you have winning the finals. And, do you think Kobe is watching?
CLG: OKC and yes.
any word on matt barnes? feel bad for the guy coming into the playoffs hurt both years.. really coulda added something to this team
Shayan: There's no official "word" on Barnes, but I'm guessing he's not back. Unless the Lakers decide to Amnesty MWP or lose Ebanks to FA, the need to resign him decreases, and it sounded in his exit interview like he might be looking for more money than the Lakers may offer. (Whether he can actually get it is another story, but...) And I agree, it was disappointing to see playoff injuries trip up two solid regular seasons. The guy worked very hard, did whatever the coaches asked and was by all accounts and appearances a very good teammate. Shame to see the postseasons fizzle so badly.
If Jordan Hill and Ramon Sessions decide to leave for a new team, regardless the reason, would they be considered a waste trading for. They both cost the lakers a first round pick, and now the"re gone and now we"re left with nothing.
Enrique: Particularly in the case of Sessions. Hill was something of a throw-in, and the Lakers shed Fish's salary with the deal, so that's a plus. But they nonetheless did give up a pick in the process. As for Sessions, the pick truly becomes wasted. Walton could have been flipped this offseason or next season anyway as an expiring deal and Kapono didn't cost much money anyway. If they don't either retain Sessions or get something in a sign-and-trade, the deal will still be logical in hindsight, but probably chalked up as a sizable failure.
3 way deal: Pau, Blake, Magic draft pick to Nets; Bynum and Farmar to Magic; Howard, Deron, and Hedo to Lakers. Who says no? Magic shed Hedo's contract and can let Jameer go unsigned and allow Farmar to start. They get an elite center to replace Dwight with. Nets get an awesome post weapon in Pau to pair with Lopez and a replacement PG (Blake) for Deron.
Travis Knight: The Nets would emphatically say no. Great a player as he is, a 31 year old/expensive Gasol does them no good while rebuilding. Particularly when you take into account they'd be giving up Williams in the process (for Steve Blake???), and the pick from Orlando is only #19. I can't possibly see the appeal for Brooklyn.
How about them Thunder? If the Lakers somehow get Andre Iguadala and Kyle Lowrie that would be great.
Is the ultimate plan to win now because of Kobe's age or build for the very near future with Kobe still bein an important piece of the puzzle?
Henry: I'm not sure what the plan is, but at times, it feels like both, and that's a very difficult tightrope to walk.
Allrighty, folks. Gotta run. But I appreciate everyone stopping by. Be sure to keep checking the blog for news. Thanks!!!