The Bender Rumor

Postby mm708 on Wed Jun 22, 2005 3:33 pm

I think this is just a smokescreen and the Bender is going to be in Los Angeles before the draft. Weren't the Pacers the team that said that they wouldn't trade Jalen Rose, but the next day he got shipped off to Toronto?
User avatar
mm708

 
Posts: 184
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 9:30 pm

Postby abeer3 on Wed Jun 22, 2005 3:54 pm

this is a very elaborate "smokescreen".
abeer3

 
Posts: 9964
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 4:15 pm

Postby msb212 on Wed Jun 22, 2005 3:57 pm

abeer3 wrote:this is a very elaborate "smokescreen".


my thoughts exactly.
User avatar
msb212

 
Posts: 1062
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 2:17 am

Postby gill on Wed Jun 22, 2005 4:57 pm

mm708 wrote:I think this is just a smokescreen and the Bender is going to be in Los Angeles before the draft. Weren't the Pacers the team that said that they wouldn't trade Jalen Rose, but the next day he got shipped off to Toronto?


Rose went to the Bulls first, and then to T.O.
User avatar
gill

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

Postby LAL25 on Wed Jun 22, 2005 5:39 pm

Is it REALLY that hard for you people to wait 6 freaking days???
LAL25

 
Posts: 372
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 8:46 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Postby abeer3 on Wed Jun 22, 2005 5:55 pm

LAL25 wrote:Is it REALLY that hard for you people to wait 6 freaking days???


yeah. i'm fairly bored lately.
abeer3

 
Posts: 9964
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 4:15 pm

Postby msb212 on Wed Jun 22, 2005 7:12 pm

LAL25 wrote:Is it REALLY that hard for you people to wait 6 freaking days???


no, but I prefer not to.
User avatar
msb212

 
Posts: 1062
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 2:17 am

Postby Kingsama on Wed Jun 22, 2005 7:22 pm

msb212 wrote:
LAL25 wrote:Is it REALLY that hard for you people to wait 6 freaking days???


no, but I prefer not to.


ditto
User avatar
Kingsama

 
Posts: 6421
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 7:41 pm
Location: Tejas

Postby purplengoldjonez on Wed Jun 22, 2005 9:18 pm

Found this on LG posted about an hour ago from emplay

Hey all - I've been swamped with other things outside of basketball - Lionel's response is basically the general consensus from my sources - a universal shrug - we'll see what happens vibe. They think it's still on.

I talked to an Indiana source who covers the Pacers and he says that the denials aren't anything out of the ordinary before a trade is executed by Indiana.

We'll all know soon enough.

In other news - unless LA finds a trade partner from a pick - a doubt any big deal happens before July 1. There are some caveats to the new collective bargaining agreement that may change things signficantly.

I'm trying to hone this down but it sounds like each team can waive a single player and it won't count against the cap at all (previously reported as just not counting towards the luxury tax). If this is true - the Lakers may have more incentive to simply waive Brian Grant. Or if they can trade him and the other team works out a buy out - if permited - could be a boon.

If I'm understanding this rule - could LA trade Brian Grant for Theo Ratliff and Derek Anderson? Then the Blazers waive Grant and the Lakers waive DA? The Blazers save money - the Lakers take on a bigger contract but Ratliff should have more left in the tank than Grant.

I'm not recommending this happen - and I'm not even sure it's legal in the new CBA- but until this is clear I could see most NBA teams waiting before making a move.

LA should be trying to move Vlade though in a smaller deal since his $3+ mil savings expires on July 1.

Just some thoughts . . .
What is 17,505
User avatar
purplengoldjonez

 
Posts: 1422
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 8:04 pm
Location: Newport Beach, CA.

Postby LakerFan1972 on Thu Jun 23, 2005 8:22 am

From Emplay on LG: Posted Thu Jun 23, 2005 1:04 am


Hey - I hope I'm right - my sources are pretty damn sure - but I won't really be comfortable til it's announced.
User avatar
LakerFan1972

 
Posts: 256
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2003 10:06 am
Location: So. Cal

Postby abeer3 on Thu Jun 23, 2005 8:49 am

vlade's gotta move before july 1, i would think.

if this "waive a player" rule is real, could it actually be bad for la?

they wouldn't have as much time to shop grant around for a good deal, and if teams can just waive bad contracts, they might be less willing to deal them (overpaid players are generally the ones that move in expiring contract trades). don't know, haven't thought it through, but i was sort of ok with the fact that grant would be trade bait in 2007...
abeer3

 
Posts: 9964
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 4:15 pm

Postby KB24 on Thu Jun 23, 2005 9:00 am

abeer3 wrote:vlade's gotta move before july 1, i would think.

if this "waive a player" rule is real, could it actually be bad for la?

they wouldn't have as much time to shop grant around for a good deal, and if teams can just waive bad contracts, they might be less willing to deal them (overpaid players are generally the ones that move in expiring contract trades). don't know, haven't thought it through, but i was sort of ok with the fact that grant would be trade bait in 2007...

Well IF you can waive a player its from the new CBA so thats going to work AFTER July 1st so we have enaugh time to trade Grant. Divac has to go on the other side of the table QUICKLY. DUMBchuck do it! :mad1:
As for Grant I think there will be troubles with the Grant trade because every team could waive someone and get rid of a bad contract but we can do nothing but wait to see what Sky and Eric have to say. :man1:
Image

"It is not how big you are, it is how big you play"
"Basketball doesn't build character. It reveals it"
"Be strong in body, clean in mind, lofty in ideals"
User avatar
KB24
Site Admin
 
Posts: 55505
Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2004 10:56 pm
Location: In Heaven

Postby abeer3 on Thu Jun 23, 2005 9:46 am

KB8@CL wrote:
abeer3 wrote:vlade's gotta move before july 1, i would think.

if this "waive a player" rule is real, could it actually be bad for la?

they wouldn't have as much time to shop grant around for a good deal, and if teams can just waive bad contracts, they might be less willing to deal them (overpaid players are generally the ones that move in expiring contract trades). don't know, haven't thought it through, but i was sort of ok with the fact that grant would be trade bait in 2007...

Well IF you can waive a player its from the new CBA so thats going to work AFTER July 1st so we have enaugh time to trade Grant. Divac has to go on the other side of the table QUICKLY. DUMBchuck do it! :mad1:
As for Grant I think there will be troubles with the Grant trade because every team could waive someone and get rid of a bad contract but we can do nothing but wait to see what Sky and Eric have to say. :man1:


i think it's moot, anyway. every source i've seen says the money still counts against the cap, meaning that it would be better for the lakers to just pay grant for another year.
abeer3

 
Posts: 9964
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 4:15 pm

Postby KB24 on Thu Jun 23, 2005 9:48 am

abeer3 wrote:
KB8@CL wrote:
abeer3 wrote:vlade's gotta move before july 1, i would think.

if this "waive a player" rule is real, could it actually be bad for la?

they wouldn't have as much time to shop grant around for a good deal, and if teams can just waive bad contracts, they might be less willing to deal them (overpaid players are generally the ones that move in expiring contract trades). don't know, haven't thought it through, but i was sort of ok with the fact that grant would be trade bait in 2007...

Well IF you can waive a player its from the new CBA so thats going to work AFTER July 1st so we have enaugh time to trade Grant. Divac has to go on the other side of the table QUICKLY. DUMBchuck do it! :mad1:
As for Grant I think there will be troubles with the Grant trade because every team could waive someone and get rid of a bad contract but we can do nothing but wait to see what Sky and Eric have to say. :man1:


i think it's moot, anyway. every source i've seen says the money still counts against the cap, meaning that it would be better for the lakers to just pay grant for another year.
Yup he is IN FACT our best trade bait. Now paying him and cut him would kill our next seasons plan. I agree we should just pay him and hope he can help us luring a player.
Image

"It is not how big you are, it is how big you play"
"Basketball doesn't build character. It reveals it"
"Be strong in body, clean in mind, lofty in ideals"
User avatar
KB24
Site Admin
 
Posts: 55505
Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2004 10:56 pm
Location: In Heaven

Postby venturalakersfan on Thu Jun 23, 2005 1:03 pm

abeer3 wrote:
i think it's moot, anyway. every source i've seen says the money still counts against the cap, meaning that it would be better for the lakers to just pay grant for another year.


That is the $50 million question. If waiving the player only brings luxury tax relief, then Grant becomes more valuable. If it brings salary cap relief, then not so valuable.
"Just to be safe, 5% of Americans bring their passports when traveling to New Mexico."
- David Letterman
User avatar
venturalakersfan

 
Posts: 2495
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2003 10:35 am
Location: Ventura

Previous

Return to Sourced Rumors

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

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