Pau Discussion: Pau-dini escapes another trade deadline!

Would you re-sign Pau for ~7 million per?

Yes
38
33%
No
63
55%
Maybe (explain)
12
10%
 
Total votes : 113

Re: Pau Gasol Discussion

Postby lakersin4 on Sun Dec 02, 2012 10:35 pm

Lol while that's 100% hindsight I can see his point.. Having the pieces we gave up for Pau would be better than having Pau right now. Kwame + Marc would net a better return than Pau. We officially waited too long to trade him.
lakersin4

 
Posts: 2377
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 8:02 pm

Re: Pau Gasol Discussion

Postby Doc Brown on Sun Dec 02, 2012 10:36 pm

lakersin4 wrote:Lol while that's 100% hindsight I can see his point.. Having the pieces we gave up for Pau would be better than having Pau right now. Kwame + Marc would net a better return than Pau. We officially waited too long to trade him.


CP3, David Stern, Basketball Reason, I ran out of clues.....
Rule of Thumb at ClubLakers - Never encourage people to check your post history.
User avatar
Doc Brown

 
Posts: 18343
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 10:11 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Pau Gasol Discussion

Postby gill on Sun Dec 02, 2012 10:36 pm

lakersin4 wrote:Lol while that's 100% hindsight I can see his point.. Having the pieces we gave up for Pau would be better than having Pau right now. Kwame + Marc would net a better return than Pau. We officially waited too long to trade him.


So you guys would trade in 3 straight Finals appearances and 2 championships just because Pau sucks AFTER those events? To top it off... YOU'D WANT TO KEEP KWAME BROWN???? :man10: :man10: :man10:

How easy people forget Pau netted us CP3 LAST YEAR! :man10:
User avatar
gill

 
Posts: 19278
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 8:57 am
Location: Middle of Nowhere, Canada

Re: Pau Gasol Discussion

Postby khmrP on Sun Dec 02, 2012 10:38 pm

its a shame the LAKERS have to give him rest, when he should've taken it during the Olympics.....crying shame :man6:
User avatar
khmrP

 
Posts: 9956
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 10:45 pm

Re: Pau Gasol Discussion

Postby easyguy on Sun Dec 02, 2012 10:38 pm

Rooscooter wrote:
GoldenKnight wrote:Pau had a tough game, his knees are bad at the moment, id better hear the same hate on every player tonight for all of their performances.


We gave up 40 points in the 4th.... 32 after Pau went out. This one is in no way Pau's fault.

I agree,, i think pau is hurting out there. We need to rest him for a week or two. Come back with no excuse.
User avatar
easyguy

 
Posts: 711
Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 9:09 pm

Re: Pau Gasol Discussion

Postby Greatest of All Time on Sun Dec 02, 2012 10:38 pm

Finwë wrote:LMAO @ that 3 team, 18 player trade someone suggested. Not likely


Let's ignore the whole 18 player trade thing no matter how unlikely it is. That's just an example of what they could do. Would you not take Millsap/Parsons/whatever over Pau Gasol at this point? Parson's potential is very intriguing, especially in this offense. I'd take him over Derrick Williams.

Yes an 18 player deal is really unlikely but if I'm each team and I consider the benefits of the deal and conclude that it would help improve my team, I'd at least explore options to see if they can come up with a deal that everyone accepts. Maybe they could restructure it to include less players, maybe they'd need 4 teams I don't care, as long as it could help my team. If I'm Jim Buss and someone told me I could possibly make a deal that would improve the team and save money but it involved a huge 3-team trade, I wouldn't let that stop me. Were you laughing at that Steve Nash thread when it was just wishful thinking by a fan?

Trading Pau virtually requires at least 3 teams. If we consider other stretch 4s like Ryan Anderson, Aldridge, David West etc., you'd have to think those teams don't want Pau straight up. So you'd need to find a third team who wants Pau and can offer enough incentive to help the Lakers get the stretch 4. This is similar to the Dwight Howard situation where the Magic couldn't get what they wanted in a straight up deal so they orchestrated that crazy 4 team deal to make it work. Except Pau's trade value is ten times lower and nobody really wants him.

Kirilenko, Williams, and Ridnour sounds nice but Kirilenko is going to get injured sooner or later. You just have to hope and pray it's nothing significant or something that lingers but he's good for missing at least 10 games a season.
User avatar
Greatest of All Time

 
Posts: 455
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 3:07 pm
Location: Kobe Bryant

Re: Pau Gasol Discussion

Postby Armani on Sun Dec 02, 2012 10:39 pm

Pau didn't play badly tonight, but he needs to go now. He's the only trading chip we have. We absolutely need some defense and youth.
Image
User avatar
Armani

 
Posts: 1912
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2007 2:45 pm

Re: Pau Gasol Discussion

Postby GoldenKnight on Sun Dec 02, 2012 10:39 pm

Rooscooter wrote:
GoldenKnight wrote:Pau had a tough game, his knees are bad at the moment, id better hear the same hate on every player tonight for all of their performances.


We gave up 40 points in the 4th.... 32 after Pau went out. This one is in no way Pau's fault.


Try convinving the blind posters of this...not everything is Paus fault.
Image

CHECK OUT MY DESIGNS ON FB/INSTAGRAM/TWITTER: @GoldenKnightGFX
User avatar
GoldenKnight

 
Posts: 2185
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2010 7:57 am

Re: Pau Gasol Discussion

Postby scissors on Sun Dec 02, 2012 10:43 pm

I appreciate what Pau has done for us. Helped us get 2 rings. But now he is done with this team. I just don't see him improving and most importantly i don't see the drive in him that I saw few years ago when we were winning rings.
User avatar
scissors

 
Posts: 4170
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 8:53 pm

Re: Pau Gasol Discussion

Postby Finwë on Sun Dec 02, 2012 10:45 pm

So pathetic.
"The first time I ever saw my uniform hanging in the locker I put it on right away, and it just felt like I was putting on golden armour. From that day forward, I just called it 'the golden armour', it just felt like there was something mystical and magical about it" - Kobe Bryant.
User avatar
Finwë

 
Posts: 8070
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 4:32 pm

Re: Pau Gasol Discussion

Postby gill on Sun Dec 02, 2012 10:59 pm

KEVIN DING ‏@KevinDing

Kobe said Pau will make the necessary adjustments to D'Antoni system: "Put your big-boy pants on."


KEVIN DING ‏@KevinDing

D'Antoni on Pau: "We're slow right now. Athletically, we're struggling."
User avatar
gill

 
Posts: 19278
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 8:57 am
Location: Middle of Nowhere, Canada

Re: Pau Gasol Discussion

Postby Greatest of All Time on Sun Dec 02, 2012 11:03 pm

Parsons + Millsap pl0x
User avatar
Greatest of All Time

 
Posts: 455
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 3:07 pm
Location: Kobe Bryant

Re: Pau Gasol Discussion

Postby lakersin4 on Sun Dec 02, 2012 11:10 pm

gill wrote:
lakersin4 wrote:Lol while that's 100% hindsight I can see his point.. Having the pieces we gave up for Pau would be better than having Pau right now. Kwame + Marc would net a better return than Pau. We officially waited too long to trade him.


So you guys would trade in 3 straight Finals appearances and 2 championships just because Pau sucks AFTER those events? To top it off... YOU'D WANT TO KEEP KWAME BROWN???? :man10: :man10: :man10:

How easy people forget Pau netted us CP3 LAST YEAR! :man10:

No way.. I'm just comparing the assets today.. We made the right move.. Where we messed up was not having Pau gone before this season started. There is no hope for him pumping his stock back up. To be fair, trading him before D'antoni took over would have been a disaster as we'd be loaded with Mike Brown guys. Once again we're stuck in that spot where the offers are so bad that we're better off riding out the year with Pau. Hopefully we can find the right role for him. I think our best chance at getting the most out of Pau/getting his value up is having him close out games when Dwight is struggling from the line.. Pau/Jamison isn't quite Pau/LO but it's close enough to work. If Jamison is struggling, we know Hill plays great with Pau. Once we have Nash making the plays down the stretch I trust that frontcourt to close.
lakersin4

 
Posts: 2377
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 8:02 pm

Re: Pau Gasol Discussion

Postby Finwë on Sun Dec 02, 2012 11:18 pm

Greatest of All Time wrote:
Finwë wrote:LMAO @ that 3 team, 18 player trade someone suggested. Not likely


Let's ignore the whole 18 player trade thing no matter how unlikely it is. That's just an example of what they could do. Would you not take Millsap/Parsons/whatever over Pau Gasol at this point? Parson's potential is very intriguing, especially in this offense. I'd take him over Derrick Williams.

Yes an 18 player deal is really unlikely but if I'm each team and I consider the benefits of the deal and conclude that it would help improve my team, I'd at least explore options to see if they can come up with a deal that everyone accepts. Maybe they could restructure it to include less players, maybe they'd need 4 teams I don't care, as long as it could help my team. If I'm Jim Buss and someone told me I could possibly make a deal that would improve the team and save money but it involved a huge 3-team trade, I wouldn't let that stop me. Were you laughing at that Steve Nash thread when it was just wishful thinking by a fan?

Trading Pau virtually requires at least 3 teams. If we consider other stretch 4s like Ryan Anderson, Aldridge, David West etc., you'd have to think those teams don't want Pau straight up. So you'd need to find a third team who wants Pau and can offer enough incentive to help the Lakers get the stretch 4. This is similar to the Dwight Howard situation where the Magic couldn't get what they wanted in a straight up deal so they orchestrated that crazy 4 team deal to make it work. Except Pau's trade value is ten times lower and nobody really wants him.

Kirilenko, Williams, and Ridnour sounds nice but Kirilenko is going to get injured sooner or later. You just have to hope and pray it's nothing significant or something that lingers but he's good for missing at least 10 games a season.

Of course I'd take that trade, I was just stating that it's a very unlikely scenario and maybe we should refrain from discussing such ideas and start with simpler, more possible & most importantly actually rumored ones.
"The first time I ever saw my uniform hanging in the locker I put it on right away, and it just felt like I was putting on golden armour. From that day forward, I just called it 'the golden armour', it just felt like there was something mystical and magical about it" - Kobe Bryant.
User avatar
Finwë

 
Posts: 8070
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 4:32 pm

Re: Pau Gasol Discussion

Postby Lakerjones on Sun Dec 02, 2012 11:18 pm

Rooscooter wrote:
GoldenKnight wrote:Pau had a tough game, his knees are bad at the moment, id better hear the same hate on every player tonight for all of their performances.


We gave up 40 points in the 4th.... 32 after Pau went out. This one is in no way Pau's fault.


^^ Agreed. I've been plenty hard on Gasol over the past couple years but I don't put this one him at all. Jamison didn't really show up tonight on either end after he came in during the fourth. If that's the case, D' Antoni needs to insert Hill if he's not willing to put in Pau. Bottom line, we were up by 7 - D' Antoni takes out Pau and Meeks, puts in D12, and Kobe with Jamison, and we lost the lead for good.
Lakerjones

 
Posts: 14887
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 12:37 am

Re: Pau Gasol Discussion

Postby Finwë on Sun Dec 02, 2012 11:24 pm

GoldenKnight wrote:
Rooscooter wrote:
GoldenKnight wrote:Pau had a tough game, his knees are bad at the moment, id better hear the same hate on every player tonight for all of their performances.


We gave up 40 points in the 4th.... 32 after Pau went out. This one is in no way Pau's fault.


Try convinving the blind posters of this...not everything is Paus fault.

I don't think anyone here said the loss was on Pau. What most of us are doing is complaining about his individual performance, which was unquestionably bad. I also think everyone that complained about Pau also posted in other threads pointing out what other players did wrong.
To many (not me, I picked Howard because I can't stand his FT woes -still was disgusted by him again) he was the zero of the game. That doesn't necessarily = main reason we lost the game, it just means that he was one of the worst guys out there. And that's happened MANY times this season.
Considering Pau's MASSIVE salary, our dependancy on his performances being solid, and especially the fact that he's been like this (awful) for a LONG time now, I don't think said complaints are over the line.
If the right package comes along, I wouldn't hesitate to trade Pau, and the definition of what's a "right" package for Pau keeps getting downgraded.
"The first time I ever saw my uniform hanging in the locker I put it on right away, and it just felt like I was putting on golden armour. From that day forward, I just called it 'the golden armour', it just felt like there was something mystical and magical about it" - Kobe Bryant.
User avatar
Finwë

 
Posts: 8070
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 4:32 pm

Re: Pau Gasol Discussion

Postby lakersin4 on Sun Dec 02, 2012 11:39 pm

How foolish do we look for not taking Dragic, Martin, Scola, 1st? Who knows if we would have made the move for Nash, but still. Hindsight can be depressing.
lakersin4

 
Posts: 2377
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 8:02 pm

Re: Pau Gasol Discussion

Postby Lakerjones on Sun Dec 02, 2012 11:50 pm

lakersin4 wrote:How foolish do we look for not taking Dragic, Martin, Scola, 1st? Who knows if we would have made the move for Nash, but still. Hindsight can be depressing.


When was this actually on the table, though? The last I remember those guys were all going to New Orleans and we were getting Chris Paul. And then Basketball Reasons happened.

I don't remember that bundle for Pau ever being considered by the Lakers? Where is the proof of that?
Lakerjones

 
Posts: 14887
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 12:37 am

Re: Pau Gasol Discussion

Postby KareemTheGreat33 on Sun Dec 02, 2012 11:53 pm

Need to retire asap
"Allons-y Lakers!"
User avatar
KareemTheGreat33

 
Posts: 7378
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2004 2:52 am
Location: Philippines

Re: Pau Gasol Discussion

Postby lakersin4 on Mon Dec 03, 2012 12:00 am

Lakerjones wrote:
lakersin4 wrote:How foolish do we look for not taking Dragic, Martin, Scola, 1st? Who knows if we would have made the move for Nash, but still. Hindsight can be depressing.


When was this actually on the table, though? The last I remember those guys were all going to New Orleans and we were getting Chris Paul. And then Basketball Reasons happened.

I don't remember that bundle for Pau ever being considered by the Lakers? Where is the proof of that?

I tried searching for it..

http://lakernation.com/forums/index.php ... for-gasol/

There's a link to Broussard saying it was on the table on there but the story doesn't seem to be up anymore.
lakersin4

 
Posts: 2377
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 8:02 pm

Re: Pau Gasol Discussion

Postby Lakerjones on Mon Dec 03, 2012 12:03 am

lakersin4 wrote:
Lakerjones wrote:
lakersin4 wrote:How foolish do we look for not taking Dragic, Martin, Scola, 1st? Who knows if we would have made the move for Nash, but still. Hindsight can be depressing.


When was this actually on the table, though? The last I remember those guys were all going to New Orleans and we were getting Chris Paul. And then Basketball Reasons happened.

I don't remember that bundle for Pau ever being considered by the Lakers? Where is the proof of that?

I tried searching for it..

http://lakernation.com/forums/index.php ... for-gasol/

There's a link to Broussard saying it was on the table on there but the story doesn't seem to be up anymore.


^^ That's what I mean. I don't think that rumor ever had any legs. If it did we'll never know. So I wouldn't worry about it as something that ever had any kind of reality to it. In other words it's not worth getting worked up about. Now the Chris Paul trade getting vetoed really was something to get worked up about - whether someone was in favor or not of the trade. The way that was shut down was straight out mafioso.
Lakerjones

 
Posts: 14887
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 12:37 am

Re: Pau Gasol Discussion

Postby Finwë on Mon Dec 03, 2012 12:21 am

Lakerjones wrote:
lakersin4 wrote:
Lakerjones wrote:
lakersin4 wrote:How foolish do we look for not taking Dragic, Martin, Scola, 1st? Who knows if we would have made the move for Nash, but still. Hindsight can be depressing.


When was this actually on the table, though? The last I remember those guys were all going to New Orleans and we were getting Chris Paul. And then Basketball Reasons happened.

I don't remember that bundle for Pau ever being considered by the Lakers? Where is the proof of that?

I tried searching for it..

http://lakernation.com/forums/index.php ... for-gasol/

There's a link to Broussard saying it was on the table on there but the story doesn't seem to be up anymore.


^^ That's what I mean. I don't think that rumor ever had any legs. If it did we'll never know. So I wouldn't worry about it as something that ever had any kind of reality to it. In other words it's not worth getting worked up about. Now the Chris Paul trade getting vetoed really was something to get worked up about - whether someone was in favor or not of the trade. The way that was shut down was straight out mafioso.

Well it was only logical... The Rockets were giving up Dragic, Scola, Martin & a first to the Hornets in the original 3-team CP3 centered trade and only getting back Pau. Why wouldn't they just trade for Pau straight up with us for said package after the trade was nixed? It's the same trade for them
"The first time I ever saw my uniform hanging in the locker I put it on right away, and it just felt like I was putting on golden armour. From that day forward, I just called it 'the golden armour', it just felt like there was something mystical and magical about it" - Kobe Bryant.
User avatar
Finwë

 
Posts: 8070
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 4:32 pm

Re: Pau Gasol Discussion

Postby Lakerjones on Mon Dec 03, 2012 12:38 am

Finwë wrote:
Lakerjones wrote:
lakersin4 wrote:
Lakerjones wrote:
lakersin4 wrote:How foolish do we look for not taking Dragic, Martin, Scola, 1st? Who knows if we would have made the move for Nash, but still. Hindsight can be depressing.


When was this actually on the table, though? The last I remember those guys were all going to New Orleans and we were getting Chris Paul. And then Basketball Reasons happened.

I don't remember that bundle for Pau ever being considered by the Lakers? Where is the proof of that?

I tried searching for it..

http://lakernation.com/forums/index.php ... for-gasol/

There's a link to Broussard saying it was on the table on there but the story doesn't seem to be up anymore.


^^ That's what I mean. I don't think that rumor ever had any legs. If it did we'll never know. So I wouldn't worry about it as something that ever had any kind of reality to it. In other words it's not worth getting worked up about. Now the Chris Paul trade getting vetoed really was something to get worked up about - whether someone was in favor or not of the trade. The way that was shut down was straight out mafioso.

Well it was only logical... The Rockets were giving up Dragic, Scola, Martin & a first to the Hornets in the original 3-team CP3 centered trade and only getting back Pau. Why wouldn't they just trade for Pau straight up with us for said package after the trade was nixed? It's the same trade for them


Sure, but that doesn't mean it was actually something the Lakers considered (no Chris Paul in return) or that it was actually even offered. What's the point of crying over spilled milk in this case? As far as we know it was never on the table. We should more concerned about the fact that Stern screwed us in broad daylight with no repercussions. He went against the very thing that he said he wouldn't do when he took over the NOH franchise. He said in his letter that he would allow the FO to continue on doing their work including trades. He did the exact opposite thing - it was a blatant conflict of interest and he knew it, and he dismissed it. Basketball reasons. That's something to be upset about. A valid, legal trade happened and the commish stepped in as owner of the team and vetoed it because of "basketball reasons." That's never happened before and I doubt it will ever happen again.
Lakerjones

 
Posts: 14887
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 12:37 am

Re: Pau Gasol Discussion

Postby Greatest of All Time on Mon Dec 03, 2012 12:48 am

Finwë wrote:
Greatest of All Time wrote:
Finwë wrote:LMAO @ that 3 team, 18 player trade someone suggested. Not likely


Let's ignore the whole 18 player trade thing no matter how unlikely it is. That's just an example of what they could do. Would you not take Millsap/Parsons/whatever over Pau Gasol at this point? Parson's potential is very intriguing, especially in this offense. I'd take him over Derrick Williams.

Yes an 18 player deal is really unlikely but if I'm each team and I consider the benefits of the deal and conclude that it would help improve my team, I'd at least explore options to see if they can come up with a deal that everyone accepts. Maybe they could restructure it to include less players, maybe they'd need 4 teams I don't care, as long as it could help my team. If I'm Jim Buss and someone told me I could possibly make a deal that would improve the team and save money but it involved a huge 3-team trade, I wouldn't let that stop me. Were you laughing at that Steve Nash thread when it was just wishful thinking by a fan?

Trading Pau virtually requires at least 3 teams. If we consider other stretch 4s like Ryan Anderson, Aldridge, David West etc., you'd have to think those teams don't want Pau straight up. So you'd need to find a third team who wants Pau and can offer enough incentive to help the Lakers get the stretch 4. This is similar to the Dwight Howard situation where the Magic couldn't get what they wanted in a straight up deal so they orchestrated that crazy 4 team deal to make it work. Except Pau's trade value is ten times lower and nobody really wants him.

Kirilenko, Williams, and Ridnour sounds nice but Kirilenko is going to get injured sooner or later. You just have to hope and pray it's nothing significant or something that lingers but he's good for missing at least 10 games a season.

Of course I'd take that trade, I was just stating that it's a very unlikely scenario and maybe we should refrain from discussing such ideas and start with simpler, more possible & most importantly actually rumored ones.


What rumored deals are there really? The Josh Smith deal is probably just something released by his agent. And what makes something like that more realistic than a 3-team trade? Because it's less complicated? It might be less complicated but those negotiations would never really get serious when you consider that Atlanta has absolutely no reason to pay Pau for an extra year.That scenario is even more unlikely than a 3-team trade. I'd think that the Jazz would be morewilling to accept a deal that saves them money and nets them return for Millsap and the Rockets would be more likely to want Pau Gasol than the Hawks would be willing to pay Pau Gasol $19 million for an extra year.

I realize that the 18 player trade was a little outrageous so I simplified it as much as I could. I got it down to 9 players:

Image

Utah saves $7,900,000.00 in 2012-2013, $6,900,000.00 in 2013-2014, and $14,800,000.00 total over the next 2 seasons with this deal.

Houston gets Pau Gasol. They don't have a backup 2 or 3 but they keep Lin, Asik, Harden and Patterson. Marcus Morris might be able to play some 3 for them.

The Lakers take on an additional $388,250.00 in salary and pay an extra $388,250.00 in luxury taxes. However, next season, they'd save $9,100,000.00 in 2013-2014 plus $13,650,000 in luxury taxes (taxes multiplied by 1.5 for repeat offenders next season). In total, they'd save $8,711,750.00 in guaranteed salaries over the next 2 years.

The Lakers would need to cut Sacre and DJO and someone like Ebanks and try to dump Clark's expiring on someone to make enough room.

The trade can be adjusted so the Lakers get Raja Bell and the Jazz get Earl Clark. If they do this, the Lakers take on an additional $2,688,250.00 in salary this season plus $2,688,250.00 in taxes. They save $9,100,000.00 in salaries next season for a total savings of $6,411,750.00 in guaranteed salary over the next 2 seasons. The Jazz save $10,200,000.00 this year, $6,900,000.00 next year, and $18,300,000.00 total in salaries if Bell and Clark are included.
Last edited by Greatest of All Time on Mon Dec 03, 2012 12:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Greatest of All Time

 
Posts: 455
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 3:07 pm
Location: Kobe Bryant

Re: Pau Gasol Discussion

Postby lakersin4 on Mon Dec 03, 2012 12:51 am

Lakerjones wrote:
Sure, but that doesn't mean it was actually something the Lakers considered (no Chris Paul in return) or that it was actually even offered. What's the point of crying over spilled milk in this case? As far as we know it was never on the table. We should more concerned about the fact that Stern screwed us in broad daylight with no repercussions. He went against the very thing that he said he wouldn't do when he took over the NOH franchise. He said in his letter that he would allow the FO to continue on doing their work including trades. He did the exact opposite thing - it was a blatant conflict of interest and he knew it, and he dismissed it. Basketball reasons. That's something to be upset about. A valid, legal trade happened and the commish stepped in as owner of the team and vetoed it because of "basketball reasons." That's never happened before and I doubt it will ever happen again.
I'm not ok with basketball reasons.. I mention the Dragic/Martin/Scola/1st deal because I think that's the best offer we had. Would love to have a star like CP3 but he's another huge health risk. Nash was actually a safer bet. Obviously it hasn't worked out that way but CP3 misses alot of games & is only 1 player. If we had Dragic, Martin, Scola instead of Pau right now, we'd be winning games. Of course we might not have gotten Nash & whatever else. While we're exploring the "what if", take it a step further & say OKC still takes a package centered around Martin & a 1st. We don't have a Lamb to throw in but who knows what Mitch could have pulled off.
lakersin4

 
Posts: 2377
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 8:02 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Lakers Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 8 guests

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