Hughes and McGrady

joe.linnen · Post #1 » by **joe.linnen** » Fri Feb 19, 2010 6:56 am

I'm only asking if they were waived from their new team which one would go for and why? I think either would play a good role on our team on the bench. Me, I would like to have McGrady because of his passing and his ablitiy to play Point, Shooting, and Small Forward.

chefy · Post #2 » by **chefy** » Fri Feb 19, 2010 7:00 am

Sofa King · Post #3 » by **Sofa King** » Fri Feb 19, 2010 7:01 am

I haven't seen any indication Tmac would be waived.

Hughes is a joke, but he's an upgrade at the one spot for the Lakers no matter what.

Jajwanda · Post #4 » by **Jajwanda** » Fri Feb 19, 2010 7:04 am

Hughes might be too ball dominant to work for the Lakers. The swingman problem will be addressed (I hope). I don't think they'll add a PG unless Chris Duhon finds a way to get bought out.

Even if he does it's Farmar who won't play. The whole obsession with Hinrich was that he was the guy that could have enough standing in the league to convince Phil to start him. Isn't that kind of ridiculous that your 11m coach highest in any professional sport won't start the better player?

Post #5 » by **Slava** » Fri Feb 19, 2010 7:06 am

Hughes would be a good upgrade at PG over Fisher.

laduane1 · Post #6 » by **laduane1** » Fri Feb 19, 2010 7:09 am

Lakers do not want to add any money, that is why they did not do any trades. They would have loved to sheed money. Morrison, Walton, Sasha. No one wants them. So we are stuck. Walton is useless for the rest of the year. Morrison is garbage time player. Sasha gets a few minutes when needed.

Would have loved to add something. McGrady. NY will not let him go, they need him as a draw. Hughes. What has he done.....