BIBBY TO NEWYORK (A SMOKESCREEN ! )

[tigrao]

Why would Sac consider Marbury and Lee when Lakers could give so much more. Kwame who expires THIS year and one of their young guys or solid role players and maybe a 1st.

[Smills91]

Why would Sac consider Marbury and Lee when Lakers could give so much more. Kwame who expires THIS year and one of their young guys or solid role players and maybe a 1st.

How is Kwame even mentioned in the same breath as Bibby. Give me a break dude. That's NOTHING.

[Sacramento_King]

Why would Sac consider Marbury and Lee when Lakers could give so much more. Kwame who expires THIS year and one of their young guys or solid role players and maybe a 1st.

Kwame does nothing for them unless you are taking back Jefferies and James and crap like that.

[moocow007]

-= original quote snipped =-



Kwame does nothing for them unless you are taking back Jefferies and James and crap like that.

I may be wrong (doubt it) but I believe tigrao is talking about why would the Kings trade Bibby to the Knicks when the Lakers can give the Kings (not the Knicks) so much more. You guys are so used to be defensive that I think you may have taken what he's saying the wrong way.

[moocow007]

-= original quote snipped =-



How is Kwame even mentioned in the same breath as Bibby. Give me a break dude. That's NOTHING.

So you would rather have Marbury than Kwame?

He's talking about it from a Kings perspective (as why would the Kings trade Bibby to NY when they can trade Bibby to LA and NOT, why would the Knicks trade Marbury to Sacramento when they can trade him to LA).