Free Agency: Lamar Odom?

slinky · Post #1 » by **slinky** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 8:45 pm

Here is my next free agency question. These are just bigger name guys that may be available next year. And I want to get a feel for what people think. I am not opposed to younger guys, but I also dont want to keep waiting "one more year" for people to reach potential. Lets get guys in here that have reached their potential. Our current team is built on "untapped potential", so lets bring in some quality veteran guys who know how to help facilitate and lead a team.

What do you all think of Odom's fit with the wolves? Couple of issues I see are his potentially large contract, and his position. I dont know enough about him and his attitude to know how he would mesh, but I think if we traded Miller we can move gomes back to the bench, and Odom may be a a strong point forward that we need.

I am not convinced its a great fit for the wolves, given his injury history and potential contract, but again his skill set seems like it would add nicely to the wolves.

Krapinsky · Post #2 » by **Krapinsky** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 8:55 pm

Odom is a very frustrating player to count on. He dissapears. He's injured a lot. The fact that he is purely a PF alone, makes me inclined to say no. The money is too valuable and too important. To spend it on the position that is our lone strength doesn't make any sense.

slinky · Post #3 » by **slinky** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 9:01 pm

Out of curiosity why is he purely a PF now? I havent seen him play much but I remember he used to play SF with the lakers and clippers. Has he put on weight?

Post #4 » by **Basti** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 9:58 pm

slinky wrote:Out of curiosity why is he purely a PF now? I havent seen him play much but I remember he used to play SF with the lakers and clippers. Has he put on weight?

because he rarely shoots the ball from downtown now. he's always been a tweener but since he doesn't shoot (or hit for that matter) a lot of 3s now I'd say he became more of a Pf and I'm sure many Lakers fans would agree with me (not particuarly with my reasoning though).

anyway I wouldn't want him. sure he has some talent but his brainfarts would be way too much to handle for me. plus from what I've read from a lot of (certainly frustrated) Lakers fans he doesn't seem to improve at all. he's said to have his go to move (IIRC it was his dribble from the left block) and after he does it a couple of times, he really gets predictable... and he's very very prone for commiting charges... combine that with him probably wanting ~10 million a year and I say no.

TheProdigy · Post #5 » by **TheProdigy** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 10:05 pm

I still like the Marvin Williams or Joe Johnson scenario. This offseason we offer Marvin a little bit more than Atlanta wants to spend. If they match then the following offseason they may not have enough money to keep Joe and we snatch him up. Brilliant I tell you, brilliant! Now if only I could take credit for this idea...

shrink · Post #6 » by **shrink** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 11:05 pm

Odom has had many personal problems in the past, but I just heard on the radio that he is one of the most approachable, down-to-earth players in the NBA.

The Lakers are way over the lux, but I'm sure they are still making plenty of money. I think there will be rumblings about letting him walk, but if he's helpful in the play-offs, the Lakers will match any reasonable offer for Odom.

B Calrissian · Post #7 » by **B Calrissian** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 11:12 pm

^Going after Bibby too would further complicate things for the Hawks.

Krapinsky · Post #8 » by **Krapinsky** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 11:24 pm

Childress I tell you, Childress!

His numbers from last year:

30 min/12 points/5 rebounds/.571! from the field/.367 from 3

Plus he's a good defender and is only 25.

Plus he'll cost nearly half of what people want to pay Marvin.

For comparison, Marvin's numbers this year:

35 min/13.3 points/6.3 rebounds/.463 from the field/.378 from 3

Who else is jumping on the Childress bandwagon?

B Calrissian · Post #9 » by **B Calrissian** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 11:27 pm

Dr.Krapinsky wrote:Childress I tell you, Childress!

Who else is jumping on the Childress bandwagon?

I was on that bandwagon last year, everyone thought the combination of him and Brewer would be too thin.

GopherIt! · Post #10 » by **GopherIt!** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 11:53 pm

B Calrissian wrote:
Dr.Krapinsky wrote:Childress I tell you, Childress!

Who else is jumping on the Childress bandwagon?

I was on that bandwagon last year, everyone thought the combination of him and Brewer would be too thin.

there's just something creepy about that name...I don't know what it is...I see a number seven, a purple haze, a hushed crowd and a little brown ball flopping around...

slinky · Post #11 » by **slinky** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 12:28 am

just to be sure, this is assuming we get rid of mike miller right? I dont see the SF position a position of need if we keep miller next year. Especially since it looks like Carney deserves to be resigned.
There is a small sample size on Carney this year, but what will Marvin Williams or Childress give us that Carney cant?

I think if anything getting rid of Mike MIller should be as much about giving Carney a chance to play more as it would be to spend 10 mil a year on williams and childress.

Post #12 » by **revprodeji** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 1:00 am

I am interested to see what Brewer can offer.

I still think our best bet at talent is not going to be a signing, or a draft, but rather packing the picks and using our exp/cap to s/t for a talent or bring in a talent with a heavy contract.

southern wolf · Post #13 » by **southern wolf** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 6:39 am

Dr.Krapinsky wrote:Childress I tell you, Childress!

Who else is jumping on the Childress bandwagon?

I think he'll be staying in Greece for a while, plus the Hawks still hold the rights to him if he does come back. It would be tricky.

theGreatRC · Post #14 » by **theGreatRC** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 6:45 am

Why can't we keep Miller as a 6th man?

Next year(judging by our recent success), we should be even better than we are now(We are on pace to pass our record of last year next month), and every good team needs that player off the bench who gives you an instant boost (Ginobili, Odom, House, etc.), and Miller can be that guy for us.

Miller, Rhino(Assuming Love takes control of the PF spot next year), Carney, FA signing/draft pick

That's a pretty good bench..We go 8 deep with contributors when Brewer comes back.

Howler21 · Post #15 » by **Howler21** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 6:55 am

Im not ready to conclude that Brewer is going to be part of our rotation until he comes back from the injury. I was weary of him before and am even more so after.

As far as our hunt for a sf goes I am praying for a way to get Caron

theGreatRC · Post #16 » by **theGreatRC** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 7:02 am

How about we don't give Brewer playing time until he signs a deal to eat a steak for breakfast, lunch and dinner until he beefs up.

GopherIt! · Post #17 » by **GopherIt!** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 7:45 am

theGreatRC wrote:How about we don't give Brewer playing time until he signs a deal to eat a steak for breakfast, lunch and dinner until he beefs up.

he can afford to eat at Morton's every day for a long time. yum.

Tekkenlaw · Post #18 » by **Tekkenlaw** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:31 am

Not interested in Lamar Odom for the Wolves. We will probably have to give 8-10 million or more since he's likely to take a pay cut if it means he can stay with the Lakers. Plus we're loaded at PF already.

Gus McCrae · Post #19 » by **Gus McCrae** » Thu Jan 29, 2009 5:08 pm

not sure if Odom is the guy you want. He'd have to be your 3rd or 4th scoring option and if you put the pressure on his shoulders at any point, he'll freak out. His nickname is the walking mismatch because his speed and length is very difficult to match up with. He is more suited to play PF because as noted, he doesnt'' shoot the three very well, decent, but not enough to spread the floor.

Plus, I think he will take a paycut to stay with the Lakers. He likes the 6th man role because there's no pressure. For once he gets to exceed expectations rather than fail to meet them. Long story short, if you started a front court of jefferson, love and odom, the paint would be too clogged for your guards to drive or for big al to operate.