Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard

Moderators: cupcakesnake, bwgood77, zimpy27, infinite11285, ken6199, Domejandro, bisme37, Dirk, KingDavid

User avatar
Frank Mulely
Head Coach
Posts: 6,847
And1: 649
Joined: Sep 04, 2009
Location: gone phishing

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#21 » by Frank Mulely » Fri Jul 6, 2012 6:02 pm

Anybody who thinks Dwight will leave LA clearly hasn't partied in LA :lol:

Just speaking personally, the first time I really got a good look at the amount of dimes in LA... :o
User avatar
Viper1500
Head Coach
Posts: 6,904
And1: 2,778
Joined: Apr 15, 2009
Location: Orlando, FL
   

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#22 » by Viper1500 » Fri Jul 6, 2012 6:05 pm

TruSkool wrote:Mitch DONT do it, the lakers are very capable as is

Watching Dwight since ever, he will be even better along side Steve Nash. L.A would be crazy not to do this. Kobe will no longer be the opposing teams main priority, it'll be Nash+Howard. I've been praying for ages to have a legit pg next to Dwight, and if L.A has even a slight chance of retaining him, it should be an easy yes.
User avatar
Wade2k6
RealGM
Posts: 15,104
And1: 77
Joined: May 29, 2004
 

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#23 » by Wade2k6 » Fri Jul 6, 2012 6:06 pm

This Dwight Howard saga is getting really old. I hope Orlando doesn't trade him and he's forced to play somewhere other than LA and Brooklyn when he becomes a FA.
User avatar
whocurrz
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,250
And1: 1,481
Joined: Apr 14, 2011
   

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#24 » by whocurrz » Fri Jul 6, 2012 6:08 pm

I would be pissed if I was a Laker fan and they traded Bynum for an unextended Howard, especially if they'd have to give up more. Mostly because Howard's most recent back issues. Bynum is injury prone but at least you know he's going into next season healthy which should be a major factor for a team in win now mode.

Like others have said though, I doubt they make the trade if they don't think he'll resign. Lakers rarely get hustled, unless Stern can overrule.
TheXFactor
Banned User
Posts: 3,976
And1: 31
Joined: Apr 19, 2012

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#25 » by TheXFactor » Fri Jul 6, 2012 6:08 pm

Viper1500 wrote:
TruSkool wrote:Mitch DONT do it, the lakers are very capable as is

Watching Dwight since ever, he will be even better along side Steve Nash. L.A would be crazy not to do this. Kobe will no longer be the opposing teams main priority, it'll be Nash+Howard. I've been praying for ages to have a legit pg next to Dwight, and if L.A has even a slight chance of retaining him, it should be an easy yes.


Agreed. Lakers need more defense than offense, and Howard provides this.
followwind
Ballboy
Posts: 43
And1: 1
Joined: Apr 24, 2009

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#26 » by followwind » Fri Jul 6, 2012 6:15 pm

chubby_1_kenobi wrote:
Levity wrote:
chubby_1_kenobi wrote:I think the FO are fools for taking this gamble if the report is true.


if LA did trade for dwight and he did leave, as so many posters are speculating; well, where do you see him going, realistically? most likely, brooklyn wont be an option by then.

Dallas would be my guess but who knows? When an unrestricted FA like Howard is on the market, crazy stuff are going to be happening with teams trying to clear cap space to sign him. The Lakers should not be a part of that wild goosechase after acquiring someone like Steve Nash. Keep it simple, keep it conservative.

Conservative aint gonna win you anything. This team as it is still gets beat by the Thunders. Adding Dwight, who is a sure 20-10 nightly contributor (unlike Bynum's disappearing act here and there) will only make this team better.

They are already going all in with Nash, and if anything, the Buss family always gamble and they rarely got the short end of the stick.
Lakersmylife
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,262
And1: 11
Joined: Feb 15, 2010

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#27 » by Lakersmylife » Fri Jul 6, 2012 6:19 pm

It's tough, but DO IT MITCH!!!! A Dwight/Nash/Pau/Kobe core gets us ahead of OKC.
rockmanslim wrote:I want to have Vince Carter's babies
User avatar
lodom7
Senior
Posts: 608
And1: 6
Joined: Jan 02, 2012

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#28 » by lodom7 » Fri Jul 6, 2012 6:32 pm

the only concern the lakers FO has is Howard's back
Image
User avatar
SheedsWeed
RealGM
Posts: 12,931
And1: 0
Joined: Jul 30, 2004
Location: to all the killas and the hundred dolla billas
Contact:

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#29 » by SheedsWeed » Fri Jul 6, 2012 6:34 pm

How is Howard's back anyway? I don't think I've heard anything about it since he had surgery.
User avatar
lodom7
Senior
Posts: 608
And1: 6
Joined: Jan 02, 2012

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#30 » by lodom7 » Fri Jul 6, 2012 6:36 pm

SheedsWeed wrote:How is Howard's back anyway? I don't think I've heard anything about it since he had surgery.


apparantly it is the only thing keeping the lakers from pulling the trigger
Image
MannyRam99
Banned User
Posts: 3,321
And1: 33
Joined: Apr 28, 2012

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#31 » by MannyRam99 » Fri Jul 6, 2012 6:44 pm

Frank Mulely wrote:
MannyRam99 wrote:good.

Dwight will extend next summer, I'm sure of it. Just get the deal done.

When Westbrook blows by Nash we will need Howard in the paint to meet him.


I've been saying this. If they can trade Bynum straight up for Howard, Lakers have to do it.

Dwight ain't leaving a Lakers team with Kobe / Pau / Nash to play with Deron and Joe Johnson. c'mon son. Also, socal is just too fun for a 20-something superstar. He is NOT leaving if they trade for him, I don't care what anybody says, even him. He'll change his mind and sign a long term deal without a shadow of a doubt.

Exactly.

Lakers are not about being conservative when trying to compete, I wanna be the CLEAR CUT best team in the west. As of right now, OKC can still beat us somewhat handily, we need defense.
User avatar
RHBullsFan
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,544
And1: 52
Joined: Mar 03, 2005
Location: Tampa, FL
Contact:
         

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#32 » by RHBullsFan » Fri Jul 6, 2012 6:45 pm

I think his back ailment got considerably better the moment Stan was fired.
A Nash/Howard connection would be unstoppable, and one we've dreamed about for the last few years in Orlando.
Old School Magic Fan since 1990
Shaheen
Banned User
Posts: 2,767
And1: 0
Joined: Jul 01, 2010

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#33 » by Shaheen » Fri Jul 6, 2012 6:56 pm

Yeah just like Houston didn't require the extension and GSW didn't require the extension. Call me when a team actually gives up its main assets for Dwight without an extension.

Cause till then these rumors just sound stupid. Bynum AND Dwight both have to agree to extensions for these deals to work.

Also, for people who say Dwight can't leave. He can easily go to Dallas and Dallas has enough cap space to sign CP3 or another big FA.
User avatar
whocurrz
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,250
And1: 1,481
Joined: Apr 14, 2011
   

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#34 » by whocurrz » Fri Jul 6, 2012 6:58 pm

I thought the back thing was just a tactic so he didn't have to play for SVG, but then he decided to have surgery and weren't there reports that Howard is expected to miss the beginning of the season. Rushing him back would be terrible which is why they'd need an extension. Even then that's a bit risky as back injuries and ailments can have a major effect on one's career.
TayP
Junior
Posts: 447
And1: 0
Joined: Feb 05, 2012

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#35 » by TayP » Fri Jul 6, 2012 7:03 pm

Do they not know that the Nets could still find away to get him? All the Nets have to do is fine a taker for Lopez+filler+3million cash if Lakers don't want him to another team and sign Dwight. Dwill starting salary is $17.1 million with a 7.5% increase couldn't Howard lower his 1st year salary and get a higher increase over time? If Nets can't do that then Dallas could sign him. They have `18-20 million of cap space depending on if the cap is 58 or 61 million. If they amnesty Hayward that's is another 9 million off the cap. They could sign Dwight and still have 12 million left.
User avatar
Zedders
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,741
And1: 613
Joined: Apr 27, 2012
       

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#36 » by Zedders » Fri Jul 6, 2012 7:03 pm

Shaheen wrote:Yeah just like Houston didn't require the extension and GSW didn't require the extension. Call me when a team actually gives up its main assets for Dwight without an extension.

Cause till then these rumors just sound stupid. Bynum AND Dwight both have to agree to extensions for these deals to work.

Also, for people who say Dwight can't leave. He can easily go to Dallas and Dallas has enough cap space to sign CP3 or another big FA.


Someone is scared.
User avatar
Jazza2319
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,387
And1: 128
Joined: Feb 06, 2011

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#37 » by Jazza2319 » Fri Jul 6, 2012 7:07 pm

Us Laker fans have to be realistic for a second, Drew being healthy this past season was a rarity. Not saying he cant do it going forward, but i'd rather take a risk on IronDwight coming off back surgery than Drew's knees

Dwight and Pau are instantly the best 4-5 duo in the league and if we can grab either Grant Hill or Dorell Wright and re-sign Ebanks, i like our defense going into next season
Image
User avatar
Jazza2319
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,387
And1: 128
Joined: Feb 06, 2011

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#38 » by Jazza2319 » Fri Jul 6, 2012 7:08 pm

Shaheen wrote:Yeah just like Houston didn't require the extension and GSW didn't require the extension. Call me when a team actually gives up its main assets for Dwight without an extension.

Cause till then these rumors just sound stupid. Bynum AND Dwight both have to agree to extensions for these deals to work.

Also, for people who say Dwight can't leave. He can easily go to Dallas and Dallas has enough cap space to sign CP3 or another big FA.


CP3 isn't going to Dallas, he's staying right in Clipperland. Dwight's only option is Dallas which doesn't look too appealing right now
Image
KrazySixersD
General Manager
Posts: 9,779
And1: 1,008
Joined: Jul 16, 2008

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#39 » by KrazySixersD » Fri Jul 6, 2012 7:11 pm

Flipdog69xxx wrote:
Cares wrote:Hell no...sign that extension bitch!


whose in your avi bro?
User avatar
Typhoon20
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,991
And1: 4
Joined: Nov 07, 2004

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#40 » by Typhoon20 » Fri Jul 6, 2012 7:11 pm

People people people. We're talking about DWIGHT here.
No way is he gonna resign with LA this guy doesn't care about winning a ring the only thing he wants is Brooklyn. He wants to be THE GUY on that team playing for that city.
Image

Return to The General Board