Page 1 of 2
Sessions
Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 2:21 pm
by ROballer
Minnesota signed Ramon Sessions to a four-year, $16 million contract last summer, but are currently shopping him in the trade market.
“They’re basically looking for a salary dump,” said an executive with a team who spoke to Minnesota. “That won’t be easy.”
GM David Kahn is looking to sign Luke Ridnour to a four-year, $16 million contract.
http://realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/ ... g_ridnour/Sessions for Sasha's expiring?
Re: Sessions
Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 2:23 pm
by Gek
Because we're better off with another point guard that shoots 18% from 3 instead of a PF?
Re: Sessions
Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 2:32 pm
by ROballer
We have 3 bigs.....they will be the only ones playing barring injuries(very possible with Bynum)
But still,it would be stupid to waste an expiring to bring a big that will only play if someone is injured and in the meantime rot on the bench.
Re: Sessions
Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 2:49 pm
by Gek
ROballer wrote:We have 3 bigs.....they will be the only ones playing barring injuries(very possible with Bynum)
But still,it would be stupid to waste an expiring to bring a big that will only play if someone is injured and in the meantime rot on the bench.
We have Pau, Bynum and Odom. Bynum is our only true center and he gets hurt more than my 87 year old grandma. We should have four realistic BIGS (I don't count Caracter b/c he has SF size). We have our SF's then we need a 6'5" Combo guard imo.
Re: Sessions
Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 3:02 pm
by ROballer
Last year,even with the numerous injuries of Bynum,our 4th big(Powell) played only 63 games and 9.2 min/game.The year before he played only 60 games and 11.7 min/game,again Bynum being injured a lot.
Would you spend an expiring and possibly pay 3-5 millions a year on a guy that plays 9-12 freakin minutes a game?
Cause the playing time ain't gonna change that much from last year ,heck maybe we get lucky and Bynum doesn't miss that many games and plays at least 70.
Re: Sessions
Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 3:09 pm
by Gek
ROballer wrote:Last year,even with the numerous injuries of Bynum,our 4th big(Powell) played only 63 games and 9.2 min/game.The year before he played only 60 games and 11.7 min/game,again Bynum being injured a lot.
Would you spend an expiring and possibly pay 3-5 millions a year on a guy that plays 9-12 freakin minutes a game?
Cause the playing time ain't gonna change that much from last year ,heck maybe we get lucky and Bynum doesn't miss that many games and plays at least 70.
We can agree to disagree, but our team will not survive on 3 bigs, where as we just spent 4 million a season on Blake and we're getting back Fisher, why pay 4 million for Ramon Sessions so he can do what Blake and Fish do only not as well?
Re: Sessions
Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 3:50 pm
by stunnar0b
going the whole season with only three bigs, cmon playa this is a marathon not a sprint, every player gets dinged up during the duration of the season. thats why you need legitimate bigs that can fill up the spots when need be. thats nonsense bringing in another higher paid pg when its hard enough to run a 5 guard line up let alone a 6
Re: Sessions
Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 3:50 pm
by Desiderium
I had no idea Powell played 10 mins a game last season O_o
Re: Sessions
Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 4:09 pm
by ROballer
stunnar0b wrote:going the whole season with only three bigs, cmon playa this is a marathon not a sprint, every player gets dinged up during the duration of the season. thats why you need legitimate bigs that can fill up the spots when need be. thats nonsense bringing in another higher paid pg when its hard enough to run a 5 guard line up let alone a 6
Who said something about 3 bigs ?Sure,you can add 2 more,for the minimum
My point is that you don't need to pay 3-5 mil/year for a big who isn't going to play unless Bynum is injured.And even then,I can't see more than 15-16 min cause Phil's gonna play Odom and Gasol ~40 mins.
And what 6 guard lineup are you talking about
Kobe,Blake,Fish,Sessions.....Shannon ain't coming back IMO ....that's 4 guys ,maybe we add another guy with the 1.8 mil remaining from the MLE
Fish is old ,I wouldn't play him more than 20 mins in the regular season,gotta save him for the playoffs
Blake can play the 2 guard too,so there would be plenty of room for Sessions
Re: Sessions
Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 4:15 pm
by Gek
Why pay 4 million for a 3rd string PG? Fisher/Blake/Sessions CANNOT play SG and Sessions can't shoot, we'd be better off with Strawberry.
Re: Sessions
Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 4:22 pm
by stunnar0b
your right but either way we're not trading sashas contract year for another pg when we desperately need a wing that can create for himself or others, though i agree blake can play some 2 at this point sashas a way better fit for what we need coming into this threepeat year.
Re: Sessions
Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 4:24 pm
by stunnar0b
any word on tmac anybody/????????
Re: Sessions
Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 4:26 pm
by SniperHawk10
Sure he is a decent point guard, but you just have to know that he just does not fit into our triangle. Now there will be people saying how we dont run it that much especially with our bench, but we need point guards that fit effectively. I would rather have farmar back rather then sessions actually...
Re: Sessions
Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 4:31 pm
by Gek
Re: Sessions
Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 4:48 pm
by dula14
Sasha's expiring is the Lakers best remaining trade asset, and using it on a guard who doesn't fit the system would not be the best use of that asset.
Re: Sessions
Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 4:49 pm
by eagles nut
Sasha to MIN
Sessions and Hollins to MIL
Delfino and Kurt Thomas to LAL
Re: Sessions
Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 4:56 pm
by chefy
yea I don't think trading sasha's expiring...maybe our biggest asset right now..for a 3rd center...is the last thing I would look on to. unless its a no brainer trade. just use the vet min to get our 3rd center. if I'm gonna trade sahasa I would still look for a guy that can score off the bench/hit the threes.
Re: Sessions
Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 4:57 pm
by LApwnd
wow is it just me or is Kahn a freakin dumb arse when it comes to being a GM?
Re: Sessions
Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 5:21 pm
by Frantik
LApwnd wrote:wow is it just me or is Kahn a freakin dumb arse when it comes to being a GM?
Kahn and Bird... makes you appreciate what we have in Mitch Kupchak....
Look at their friggin rosters... duplicates all over the place... Its madness...
Re: Sessions
Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 5:49 pm
by Frantik
While you guys are sitting here banging heads about how Mitch should trade Sasha's expiring, Mitch is probably going to sit back and let that salary silently slide off the books... Or he might trade it for draft picks.
I agree that we don't need Sessions. We have the best squad in the league without Sessions. With that said, why would Mitch add THAT salary to the already-bloated salary pool?
The triangle needs a solid PG, not a spectacular one. We have a solid PG in Blake. We have a playoff PG in Fisher(he will re-sign). All we need is a 800k - 1mil third string that can shoot the ball.
Winning an NBA Championship is not about packing your roster with Top players. You need balance. You need role players. Sessions is not a 3rd string PG! Mitch just denied Farmer because he wont settle in his role. Why would Mitch want another disgruntled role player to replace his ass? Get what you need, and leave what you don't need alone.
BTW... we should focus on getting a backup Big as many here have said. At least we have a backup combo guard in Sasha (who will play his ass off because it's his contract year--- Mitch knows that. Sasha did it last contract-year and he will do it again).
We don't have ANY true backup center. None. Caracter will make the team bit he is an undersized PF in the NBA.
I believe mitch will carry 13 players for the season:
Blake/Fish/****combo shooter*****
Kobe/Sasha/
Artest/DeeBanks/Walton
Pau/Odom/Caracter
Bynum/****backup true center****/