Laker Summer FAQ (Read 1st post on pg. 1, then ask Qs, thx)

Postby Laker's Fan on Mon May 07, 2007 11:12 pm

Sky - I don't see a deal that NY can make the tops Odom/Kwame/19/Farmar for JO Tinsley. What do you think they can offer?

On top of that NY is a marginal playoff team as currently constructed. If the Pacers send Oneal to NY it's another team that takes a playoff spot away from them.

Otherwise a Laker deal including Odom probably puts them on par or above NY for one of the last 2 playoff spots while they continue to rebuild.

Plus does Lary really want to help Isiah get to the playoffs while he sits on the outside looking in?
To be good is not enough when you dream of being great.
Laker's Fan

 
Posts: 253
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 12:58 pm
Location: Santa Barbara

Postby Sky on Tue May 08, 2007 12:04 am

Podium - Great question. On offense they woudl need to force JO to the low block rather than going high and wide as he had in Indy. Then the spacing works. But if JO stays high and wide then the Lakers don't get the inside-out balance they need. So the trio can only work if JO becomes a real big. Variation is to send Odom low and make him a hub and spoke passer. In theory Odom becomes a fill in the blanks guy getting opportunity points while focusing on boards and assists. But it's up to JO going low to make it all work, that unlocks the floor for everyone else.

Defensively I'd hope that they use JO as an off ball anchor who takes the high scoring bigs man. The Kwame role, but an anchor that can rotate, anticipate and swat.
User avatar
Sky
Clublakers Analyst
 
Posts: 6292
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 3:22 pm
Location: up

Postby jBL on Tue May 08, 2007 12:06 am

If we could get JO without giving up Odom, that's a good deal. Add some veterans and we should be rolling.

JO
Odom
Walton
Kobe
MLE PG
jBL

 
Posts: 2267
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 9:08 pm

Postby Sky on Tue May 08, 2007 12:19 am

Veinte Quatro - Indy would want to keep Harrison imo. LA would get the most value out of Greene anyway, bench 1 defender.

DHL - The rule is a team can't trade future #1's in consecutive years. Not an issue for the Lakers they'd only be dealing this year's pick.

gng - It's not enough toughness but it would have to do. The key is to get the man D down low and swats, JO provides both.

Life - If Bynum is in the deal I think that's what Indy wants most.

Fan - Why all the tap dancing? Why not just say it? You rrrrrrrrrrrrrreeeeealllllllllllly want to keep Bynum.

New York would not be the only JO competition, Phoenix could get involved, JO loves Portland, there will be more than just two suitors. The probelm with the proposed deal that you love is that it's predicated on LA being alone in taking back Tinsley. They wouldn't be. Whch forces the move to scenario 2 and Bynum.

What can New York offer? A very hot commodity in David Lee on a dirt cheap contract. Frye, Nate Robinson or the shooting 1 Indy needs in Crawford. Future picks. Isiah can make an attractive offer. So can other teams in the west including Portland and Seattle.

If LA wants to win the bidding war for JO, and other teams will take Tinsley, then the Lakers only have one bullet left in the gun. Bynum would have to go.
User avatar
Sky
Clublakers Analyst
 
Posts: 6292
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 3:22 pm
Location: up

Postby ladam24 on Tue May 08, 2007 12:58 am

I'm sorry if you've answered this already Sky, but i have a question:

a) Can we get Garnett, realistically?
b) Who do you prefer? Garnett or O'Neal?
c) What would each do for our teams?
"no matter what — no matter how hard, how far, or how many stand in my way, I remain determined."
User avatar
ladam24

 
Posts: 11829
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 6:57 pm
Location: Gold Coast, AUS

Postby sister golden hair on Tue May 08, 2007 1:37 am

The Eddie Jones/Derek Anderson gambit sounbds exactly like something PJ would relish. Vets. Ability to spot up with a modicum of slashing ability still in the tank. Major upgrade defensively in the backcourt. Switching ability on the perimeter because of good 6'5+ size out there. Brian Shaw redux X2.

SGH
sister golden hair

 
Posts: 723
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 8:51 pm

Postby sister golden hair on Tue May 08, 2007 1:58 am

Reading between the lines of what PJ said in his recent press conference:

I doubt they deal Bynum. The FO (apart from Phil) will not deal the only player they believe they can build around in the post-Kobe era. PJ thinks the kid has skill and that he can make another quantum leap in improvement over the off-season. They believe he can be a player, and I don't care what the urgency is, team's will not trade a 7-footer whom they believe has the ability to have impact. It would kill them to watch him blow-up elsewhere.

PJ wants Artest. PJ believes Artests' skills (or those of an Artest-like player which is basically Rodman-lite with more offense) has a positive multiplier effect on team chemistry. If he could get Artest without giving up Odom, he would do it in a second. Which means Kwame to the Kings. Q: do the Kings want Kwame? If Artest is unavailable, I think PJ pushes for the Nannystopper and tries to undo his mistake of several years ago when he dumped him unceremoniously. Next in line would be comeone like Posey.

Odom: I think PJ wants to keep him, not because of the echoes of Scottie but because Odom has turned out to be a different kind of player, but valuable in his own right. THis season has been a difficult onbe for Odom, and I can't see the FO having the heart to trade him (unless the deal was spectacular) in light of everything Odom at least tried to give to the team.

Luke is a keepr in PJ's eyes (because of the chemistry question), but if I were Mitch I would deal him if the opportunity presents itself. One or two pretty assists per game do not make up for YMCA-level defense, or the inability to finish at the rim.

Rad will be dealt if they can unload him. PJ likes free spirits, but Rad's unfortunate sojourn to Park City probably put him in PJ's doghouse forever. He's a talent, but is flakey, and his salary could be used as ballast in a major deal.

Sasha: lucky to even be in the league. He's gone if someone takes him.

Evans: useful in the second unit.

McKie: gone.

Ronny: Stays. Great lockeroom guy, and has game.

Farmar: probably stays, but if the Kings wanted him in an Artest deal, he goes.

Shammond: probably stays, unless the lakers can get a vet like Eddie/Derek or both (doubtful, but intriguing to PJ given his predilections).

Mihm: they will re-sign him (assuming he's physically capable.) He fits that Scott Wennington (back-up center) mold that PJ likes.

McGloire is an option but doesn't seem mobile enough or BB-smart enough to fit in with PJ's system. But if they trade away Bynum and Kwame he may be the default ... by default.

So, IMO, and for what it's worth, the only major player they really want to move is Kwame, probably combined with the 19th pick, and whatever other player is needed for ballast (Rad, Farmar, Sasha, Luke, etc.)

I doubt that wil be enough. But the FO may be convinced that one player (like Artest) can change the team's chemistry/personality (become tougher), and a veteran addition to the backcourt who can actually play (a la Eddie or Derek) might be enough of an upgrade in terms of vet experience to get the job done.

SGH
sister golden hair

 
Posts: 723
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 8:51 pm

Postby Kobe's Empire on Tue May 08, 2007 2:53 am

great article... i was thinking all the same things as you were. too many senarios for everything
User avatar
Kobe's Empire

 
Posts: 3681
Joined: Thu May 15, 2003 3:08 pm
Location: La Crescenta/Glendale, California

Postby JamrockLakaFan on Tue May 08, 2007 7:51 am

To me getting oneal without giving up odom is the best deal and then try and
get artest, my ?tion is how would artest/oneal get along??
because this is deadly

Oneal
Odom
Artest
Kobe
Farmer(maybe a MLE PG)
Image

Welcome to JamRock
Camp Weh Di Thugs Dem Camp at
2 Pound A Weed Inna Van Back :smoker: :smoker: :smoker:

1 Good Thing About Music When It Hits U Feel no Pain
User avatar
JamrockLakaFan

 
Posts: 1788
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2005 12:03 pm
Location: Kgn,Jamaica

Postby The Maverick on Tue May 08, 2007 8:37 am

If a trade for O'Neal happens and Lamar isn't included, what would be the chances of Lamar getting traded? eg. a trade of Odom for Z. Randolph and J. Jack (Not saying that, that could happen, just a trade that could land us a big and a pg)
Last edited by The Maverick on Tue May 08, 2007 8:32 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Image
User avatar
The Maverick
Australia's Lakers Rep
 
Posts: 7379
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 8:58 pm

Postby SignPippenNow on Tue May 08, 2007 8:50 am

No question Sky, just a big thank you for taking time to do this. I love this type stuff. It does look like any big improvement by Lakers will have to come thru a trade unless as you said Artest or someone like that is bought out. I just hope Mitch makes a good trade or two this time.
SignPippenNow

 
Posts: 3296
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 10:44 am

Postby DaBumt on Tue May 08, 2007 10:41 am

Even with the Lakers not being in the draft lottery, this years lottery could have a huge impact on the moves the Lakers can or will make. Minnesota and Indiana (top 10 protected) are in the lottery and if either team wins it will have a big impact on the moves both the players and teams make. Throw in the fact that the Hawks have the same needs that the Lakers would end up with in most trade scenarios, C and PG, and they could end up with 2, 1 or no lottery picks, affecting their free agent moves this summer and this could be a very important lottery for the Lakers.
It's official, Blake Griffin has convinced me to jump on the Clippers bandwagon. I am now slightly more willing to go to a Clippers game than a Sparks game.
User avatar
DaBumt

 
Posts: 793
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2005 11:04 pm
Location: Orcutt

Postby AVH on Tue May 08, 2007 10:44 am

Sky,

A couple notes/questions.

1) You mentioned about Gasol being soft. If we sign Magloire to the MLE and keep Odom by sending out Bynum and Kwame in the deal to get GAsol,

Magloire can provide the toughness we need at center by moving Gasol to PF and Odom to SF.

What do you think?

We can then look to improve the PG position by another trade. Perhaps Vlad for Watson or Ridnour, as an example.

2) And the same applies to Oneal.

IF Odom stays, we can still sign Magloire and have a Magloire, Oneal, Odom frontcourt. Very strong defensively and on the boards.

I think either scenario in 1 and 2 works.

And by getting Green, it limits our PG problems in this scenario.

3) However, do you really think that deal is enough for JO. I don't remember you thinking Vlad could be in a deal like that without taking back Tinsley AND For the fact they already have Dunleavy in a similar role being paid 8 mil a year. I think I remember you saying it was a no go.

Realistically, what are the chances that other teams are willing to take on Tinsley, so we throw in Bynum, BUT the Pacers STILL demand Odom on the deal rather than Kwame and Vlad.

Because frankly, I know Kwame is an expiring contract, but his deal + Bynum's isn't enough to land JO, therefore another player will have to be added.

Obviuosly both sides will start somewhere.

The lakers start with

Kwame, Odom, #19 for JO

The Pacers counter with

Kwame, Odom, Bynum for JO, Tinsley

And somewhere in the middle a deal will be reached. BUT, in that compromised deal, I just don't see the Pacers in that compromise willing to:

1) NOT unload Tinsley
2) TAKE Back Vlad
AND
3) NOT get Odom

Thats what the proposed, Kwame, Bynum, Vlad, 19 for JO and Green is.

It basically gives us everythign we wanted outside of trading Bynum.

The question is, whats more valuable to the Pacers:

Kwame's expiring contract or Lamar Odom's ability and realtively short 2 years left?

If I had a choice as Pacers GM and the choices were, I cant trade Tinsley but I get a choice of Odom, Bynum or Kwame and Vlad + Bynum,

Id choose Odom + Bynum EVERY single time.

4) So the ultimate question to ask is this:

IF we agree to somehow trade Odom AND Bynum plus filler to the Pacers for JO WITHOUT Tinsley, what can we get back of value coupled with JO.

Can we get Marquis Daniels or say Danny Granger (Pipe) or Shawne Williams and Orien Greene.

Because its like I said, id rather have Odom for 2 years than Kwame for 1 and Vlad for 5.

Odom, Bynum, 19 >>>>> better than Kwame, Vlad, Bynum, 19
Last edited by AVH on Tue May 08, 2007 11:10 am, edited 1 time in total.
AVH

 
Posts: 1890
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 2:08 pm

Postby Sky on Tue May 08, 2007 10:59 am

AVH -

1. If the Lakers have Gasol and Odom like it or not they would start at 5 and 4 respectively, they are NOT moving Odom to 3. Which means Mags doesn't have a starting job here and signs elsewhere.

2. If LA offers Bynum for JO they're going to count on that concession to break down everything else. No Odom. No Tinsley. Indy still gets the 9M last year in Kwame and a mid 1st to get the shooter Bird wants. Indy has no #1 btw so that's big for them. If Bird's rebuilding that's how to do it. Get the long term rookie contract center, lose a 20M per salary, get the future starting 2.

If Indy insists on Bynum those are likely to be LA's terms. Indy says no we want Bynum AND you take Tinsley the deal dies. LA can't match the salaries without including Odom.

Your hypothetical dies on the LA side. They won't offer Bynum and Odom. Even if they did Indy would still refuse to give Granger, which I suspect is what you're getting at. Pacers deal JO and Granger the team is faceless, franchises rarely do something like that. You can get away with that in LA if you bring in a star. In Indy? When the new faces of the franchise are Odom and Bynum? Doesn't sell well.
User avatar
Sky
Clublakers Analyst
 
Posts: 6292
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 3:22 pm
Location: up

Postby AVH on Tue May 08, 2007 11:24 am

Sky,

I just dont see

Kwame, Bynum, Vlad, 19 getting it done for JO and Greene.

Bro, you yourslef laughed this idea off just a few days ago. Now, I know bhatta mentioned it in his article and all, but seriously, if other teams are bidding out there AND willing to take on Tinsley, there is no way Bynum is enough when you throw in Vlad's contract.

Perhaps a Turiaf or a Walton, but Kwame AND Vlad??

I mean if Kwame made 13-14M a year as an expiring, Id be like Okay, Kwame, Bynum, 19 for JO and Greene.

But with Vlad in there AND with no Odom AND with us not taking Tinsley.

That just isn't enough for the Pacers and 4 days ago you agreed. Im wondering what changed where now they would somehow take back the radioactive long term contract of another player who basically does the same thing as one they are paying 8M to already AND still have not unloaded the also radioactive contract of one Jamaal Tinsley.

You see where my skepticism is.

I think we'd have HIGHER likelihood of trading Odom, Bynum in a deal with, Kwame, and 19 for JO, Tinsley AND Granger than we do of trading

Kwame, Bynum, Vlad and 19 for JO and Greene.

IF they had a choice between those two trades, to me, I think they choose the former.

At least in my scenario:

1) They get Bynum
2) They also get Odom
3) They also DONT take back Vlad
4) They also get rid of Tinsley

And all for one price: Danny Granger included in the deal. I know you stand on your faces of franchise theory, but im standing on the ground of sound business and basketball decisions and I don't see any way on earth that they accept your scenario over mine.

The only drawback of my scenario is Granger.
The drawbacks of your scenario is NO Odom, NO Tinsley in trade and Having to take back Vlad.

Im no authority, but Im looking at this from Pacers point of view, and between those two, like I said, id choose my scenario.

Either:

1) Odom, Bynum, 19 for JO and Greene

OR

2) Kwame, Bynum, 19 and another one or two players

for JO and Greene

Something Farmar + Sasha's expiring deal OR Farmar and Cook.

But definitely NOT Vlad!
AVH

 
Posts: 1890
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 2:08 pm

Postby Showtime08 on Tue May 08, 2007 11:29 am

I really like the Randolph idea but I dont see them giving us Jack. What about Kwame, Cook and 19 for Randolph straight up? Then we still have Farmar and MLE for a point guard.
Showtime08

 
Posts: 48
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 12:58 am
Location: SD

Postby Laker's Fan on Tue May 08, 2007 11:29 am

Sky wrote:Fan - Why all the tap dancing? Why not just say it? You rrrrrrrrrrrrrreeeeealllllllllllly want to keep Bynum.


Guilty as charged. It really is a rock and a hard place. I also recognize the status quo is unacceptable. My wishlist is KG, Oneal,.........several other players.

Moving Odom, Kwame, #19 and taking on Tinsley is fair for landing Oneal. I also understand that the market may push the price above that but I don't advocate overpaying.

I don't see Bird handing Isiah the piece that gets NY into the playoffs for the next 5 years while not getting a difference maker in return. Portland, who is still a couple years out won't extend Oneal w/ Randolph on the books and Boston may be happier paying Jefferson half as much.

The Lakers would be offering playoff contention (Odom), Salary relief (Kwame, Odom on short deal) and a first round pick in conjunction with taking on JT. But the Laker's problem isn't what they will offer for Oneal, it's who is making the offer. I will be greatly encouraged if I see West come back to "consult" on this very important offseaon.
To be good is not enough when you dream of being great.
Laker's Fan

 
Posts: 253
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 12:58 pm
Location: Santa Barbara

Postby Sky on Tue May 08, 2007 11:56 am

AVH - I consider any deal with Granger added to JO to be metapipe. It comes down to how much Bird values Bynum. That dictates. If Bynum alone isn't enough for Odom and Tinsley immunity then LA passes. Bird wants a shooter, Radman can do that. He doesn't want the contract then LA can get creative, Buss willing.

Bynum, Kwame, Cook, Sasha, 19 and 1-2M cash for JO. The money allows Indy to cut players at no loss to the bottom line. LA has to make the pick for Indy, sign him and then complete the deal. Need the rookie salary. Even with Cook's BYC that's a cap doable deal. No Radman.

If Indy insists on Bynum and Odom LA passes.

Fan - Isiah is not the only competition. Phoenix, Portland and Seattle can all get into this.
User avatar
Sky
Clublakers Analyst
 
Posts: 6292
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 3:22 pm
Location: up

Postby AVH on Tue May 08, 2007 12:05 pm

Sky wrote:AVH - I consider any deal with Granger added to JO to be metapipe. It comes down to how much Bird values Bynum. That dictates. If Bynum alone isn't enough for Odom and Tinsley immunity then LA passes. Bird wants a shooter, Radman can do that. He doesn't want the contract then LA can get creative, Buss willing.

Bynum, Kwame, Cook, Sasha, 19 and 1-2M cash for JO. The money allows Indy to cut players at no loss to the bottom line. LA has to make the pick for Indy, sign him and then complete the deal. Need the rookie salary. Even with Cook's BYC that's a cap doable deal. No Radman.

If Indy insists on Bynum and Odom LA passes.

Fan - Isiah is not the only competition. Phoenix, Portland and Seattle can all get into this.


Okay, NOW we're talking.

No Vlad. Still no Odom and no Tinsley out, but I think they can live with Cook's salary for another 3 years at 3.5 than they can Vlad's at almost 6 mil for 4 more years.

If that gets it done, Ill be ecstatic man. Seriously.

Its a big IF though. JO, LO and KO.....Man oh man.

Do you see us signing Mags to play center in that situation, as JO seriuosly does NOT want to play center.

OR maybe even someone like Mikki Moore might be enough with JO and LO frontline??
AVH

 
Posts: 1890
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 2:08 pm

Postby AVH on Tue May 08, 2007 12:12 pm

Sky,

What about what that other guy above, I think Showtime suggested:

Kwame, Cook and 19 for Zach.

Or even Kwame, Vlad and 19 for Zach.

We get a physical powerful PF who we both know is unstoppable on offense and still retain our MLE to acquire a PG.

Its not as good as getting Zach and Jack.

People will point to defense, but frankly, a frontline of Bynum, Zach and Odom is FAR superior defensively AND on the boards to Bynum, Odom and Walton.

Plus, we know that Zach has that key ingredient that we are missing. A true low post scoring presence. If Bynum can at least somewhat develop physically over the summer, he may be able to anchor our defense and not worry so much about scoring as Kobe, Odom and Zach can handle that.

In addition, if we can pry away a PG like Bell, or sign another one, we can limit penetration next year with a MLE PG, Kobe, Odom perimeter on defense, thereby limiting our foul trouble and easy opposition baskets.

Its something to consider if you are the lakers. The key is, how combustible is Zach and is it a risk worth taking?

Ill say this much. Had we had him, that entire Phoenix Series has a different outcome. There is NO one and I mean no one on that roster, Thomas and Amare included that can handle this behemoth down low.

They'd either double team him freeing up Kobe and LO on the perimeter OR they'd get into foul trouble galore trying to guard him one on one.
Last edited by AVH on Tue May 08, 2007 12:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
AVH

 
Posts: 1890
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 2:08 pm

Postby Sky on Tue May 08, 2007 12:13 pm

Mags won't sign with a team that already has two power players as starters. Much as JO hates playing center he would have to under that scenario.

I know you want Walton out as starting 3 but as long as Jackson is coaching Luke will start. Odom will not go to 3. I suppose LA could make the deal for JO and then offer Odom to NJ for Kidd, but I don't see LA doing that either.

The frontcourt woudl be Walton-Odom-JO. I know I know, I'm not a big Luke fan either. But Jackson is here for another year and you can't fight city hall. Walton will be re-signed and start at 3, trust me.

Zach can score inside and board, but he can't pass or defend. Doesn't help the tri to have a black hole big.
User avatar
Sky
Clublakers Analyst
 
Posts: 6292
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 3:22 pm
Location: up

Postby TIME on Tue May 08, 2007 12:45 pm

I can live with a JO / LO / LW front line given that the NBA trend seems to be toward a long athletic versatile front court. At least 2 of those 3 fits that profile and Luke would make up some with smarts and Tri glue.

If this happens AND we add Steve Blake with the MLE, then I think we take a big step forward.

Sky, any chance Eddie Jones would come for the vet min?
I'm lost in the fog of denial!
User avatar
TIME
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 9437
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 11:06 am

Postby crucifixion on Tue May 08, 2007 12:48 pm

I would love JO at 5 and Odom at 4...thats the new NBA model- speed and athleticism. We'd only suffer against Houston. And S.A., but then again, who doesn't suffer against S.A. Everyone else, we can roatate matchups, like JO can guard Boozer and Odom on the perimeter to guard Okur for example.

Anyways, I know Luke has to be at the 3, but man, Desmond Mason at the 3 for the MLE, I would praise the Lord Jerry Buss if he was willing fork the luxury tax on that and have a JO-LO-Mason front court...but anyways, getting too ahead of myself here.

I need to be realistic and realize that Farmar will be our starting PG, and Bynum will be our C and we won't even use the MLE because we resigned Luke and Buss doesn't want to pay luxury
Odom Light: Less filling, Wastes great
User avatar
crucifixion

 
Posts: 4051
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2005 1:39 am
Location: Posting at CL from my phone while at Staples

Postby D Nice on Tue May 08, 2007 12:51 pm

Sky, I just wanna thankyou for that really comprehensive breakdown you posted. Really answers a lot of questions.

You say that it will come down to Indy asking for Bynum or being content with us taking Tinsley, giving them salary relief, Odom, and the 19th pick. But if they ask for more value back, could Farmar be a suitable compromise? After all, they'll need a point guard to replace Jamaal and Farmar has shown a lot for a young rookie. His play in the playoffs likely only boosted his value.

And of your 2 scenarios, which one would you deem more likely? The Kwame/Bynum package for only JO or the Odom/Kwame package for JO and Tinsley?

Also, if we are able to make a trade like

Odom, Kwame, Farmar, 19 for JO, Tinsley

Do you see Bynum being sent in another deal, perhaps a package with Vlad or someone, to get us a 3rd big piece to run with Kobe and Jermaine? Or would we try and develop Drew with JO on board?

And sorry, one last question. Do you really see the Knicks as competition for O'Neal? Thomas is in love with Curry, so I don't see him going out for JO. And I mean all they can offer is a package centered around either Francis or Marbs...that doesn't seem more appealing than Odom + Kwame + youth/picks/cash
User avatar
D Nice

 
Posts: 2427
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 9:32 pm
Location: Chapel Thrill Baby!

Postby catlyke72 on Tue May 08, 2007 1:02 pm

Sky,

Thank you so much for all your hard work and well thought out scenarios.

I have an overriding question. Is LA going to be able to deal Kwame and/or Odom if they have surgery this summer? Would they have to wait until they were recovered after the surgery?

I recall Mitch saying in his exit interview that health would play a big part in the off season, mentioning surgeries are possible for a couple of players.
catlyke72

 
Posts: 176
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2004 10:43 am

PreviousNext

Return to Lakers Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 9 guests

cron
Advertise Here | Privacy Policy | ©2008 Sculu Sports. Come Strong.