The official- "LA rejects X player for 1st"

Dalakerbox · Post #241 » by **Dalakerbox** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 3:47 pm

we are not getting Dwight. I wish we would already get over that and look to upgrade this aging roster. How do you refuse Beasley and Sessions? I hope these reports are false man I really do. I would hate to see the Celts end up with Beasley and the Hawks get Sessions.

Post #242 » by **dockingsched** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 3:54 pm

lakers gonna end up getting them for a 2nd, no one else can completely absorb their deal

BEazy · Post #243 » by **BEazy** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 3:57 pm

Front office got a lot of explaining to do. They're rejecting deals left and right...smh...

Desiderium · Post #244 » by **Desiderium** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 4:06 pm

Probably another luxury tax issue. We'd have to pay nearly 9 mil to sign him

TruSkool · Post #245 » by **TruSkool** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 4:16 pm

sessions is a better point guard than any other first round point guard not named austin rivers

Jan_Sobieski · Post #246 » by **Jan_Sobieski** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 4:21 pm

dockingsched wrote:lakers gonna end up getting them for a 2nd, no one else can completely absorb their deal

Sofa King · Post #247 » by **Sofa King** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 4:22 pm

It's not like the Lakers have scouts that are doing their jobs right now. I think they don't care if the point guard will be better than the 1st round picks. It's just the 1st round picks will be cheaper to have on the roster next year than Sessions.

The Skyhook · Post #248 » by **The Skyhook** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 4:32 pm

Dalakerbox wrote:we are not getting Dwight. I wish we would already get over that and look to upgrade this aging roster. How do you refuse Beasley and Sessions? I hope these reports are false man I really do. I would hate to see the Celts end up with Beasley and the Hawks get Sessions.

They might not end up getting Dwight but if they are rejecting deals the way these reports claim then it makes you wonder what the hell they are after. I refuse to believe this team has become so cheap that they won't upgrade at point when such an opportunity has presented itself.

desertlakerfan · Post #249 » by **desertlakerfan** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 4:40 pm

Any move involving our first round picks wont happen until Dwight is 100% unavailable.

This has been the case for a long time now, not really worth getting upset when reading these "LA rejects X player for 1rst round pick" stories.

tviper · Post #250 » by **tviper** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 4:45 pm

I don't see this as a failure by the FO. Until and unless D12 is moved, or until the deadline they have to keep all of their assets. With particular respect to Sessions and Beasley, neither is worth the tax hit because neither puts us over the top. Beasley especially IMO is not someone who I would add regardless of the price (well, if they would take Luke ok) because he is simply a chucker and would take minutes from Barnes. Just don't see a huge upgrade there for the price.

barrettcg · Post #251 » by **barrettcg** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 4:46 pm

I actually think that the Lakers front office is looking to save money, and I actually don't hate the fact that they aren't taking on mid level players. I really think that the priorities are still the same as they were prior to the season starting, and that is getting an all star calliber point guard. Sessions is okay but I see him as being another blake level player and we see how that is working out (okay but he isn't going to put us over the top)

Desiderium · Post #252 » by **Desiderium** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 5:01 pm

heres the issue, we dont have the necessary assets to get BOTH dwight and a star point guard. on books/salary wise we do, but realistically speaking, no team is gonna hand us a star point guard for an aging pau gasol knowing dwight is also on the team. i say forget about dwight, keep bynum, and go after a star point guard by any means necessary. meaning you part with your picks, pau. and then use your TPE to sign a serviceable big man

Post #253 » by **snaquille oatmeal** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 5:16 pm

Scandalouzzzz wrote:heres the issue, we dont have the necessary assets to get BOTH dwight and a star point guard. on books/salary wise we do, but realistically speaking, no team is gonna hand us a star point guard for an aging pau gasol knowing dwight is also on the team. i say forget about dwight, keep bynum, and go after a star point guard by any means necessary. meaning you part with your picks, pau. and then use your TPE to sign a serviceable big man

or use the TPE to get a serviceable pg and keep Pau.

Sofa King · Post #254 » by **Sofa King** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 5:20 pm

Scandalouzzzz wrote:heres the issue, we dont have the necessary assets to get BOTH dwight and a star point guard. on books/salary wise we do, but realistically speaking, no team is gonna hand us a star point guard for an aging pau gasol knowing dwight is also on the team. i say forget about dwight, keep bynum, and go after a star point guard by any means necessary. meaning you part with your picks, pau. and then use your TPE to sign a serviceable big man

Post #255 » by **TyCobb** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 5:33 pm

dockingsched wrote:lakers gonna end up getting them for a 2nd, no one else can completely absorb their deal

The Bulls 2nd round pick is terrible. They mad. :lol:

dirtymike · Post #256 » by **dirtymike** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 6:29 pm

Yea...we are not making a move until we find out what the hell Howard and the Magic are gonna do! I'm getting a little depressed here!

Edrees · Post #257 » by **Edrees** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 6:58 pm

I will be very upset if this is actually true. We aren't getting Dwight

alaskan34pac34 · Post #258 » by **alaskan34pac34** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 7:06 pm

I think the Lakers will do something. You just dont agree to a trade the second someone offers you something. If they offered it to you once they will again. You still have two weeks till the trade deadline, lakers arent going to give up assets they could use in a bigger trade till they are absolutley sure something big isnt going to happen. Eric Pincus always says this why loose assets before you really have too. We can get Sessions for a 1st march 15th if we want. Same with Beasley. We still got time people Lakers will get better by the time the trade deadline is over.

jigga_man · Post #259 » by **jigga_man** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 7:07 pm

good, not worth a 1st

azdaver · Post #260 » by **azdaver** » Fri Mar 2, 2012 7:07 pm

barrettcg wrote:I actually think that the Lakers front office is looking to save money, and I actually don't hate the fact that they aren't taking on mid level players. I really think that the priorities are still the same as they were prior to the season starting, and that is getting an all star calliber point guard. Sessions is okay but I see him as being another blake level player and we see how that is working out (okay but he isn't going to put us over the top)

This!

Our current business model from a salary cap perspeciive is NOT SUSTAINABLE due to the new CBA. One of the critical objectives of the franchise is to find a more cost effective set of star power players that make it possible to continue to spend $25M to $30M on Kobe Bryant annually.

Pau Gasol at 31 years old making $20M per year needs to be traded (if at all possible) for a lesser expensive but high quality, star powered point guard (my favorite is Kyle Lowry but Rondo would do).

We don't need marginal players who bring high risk, especially if it costs us the few assets we have remaining to us. We can expect to find most of those marginal choices like Beasley and Sessions still available to us right up until the deadline so if we choose to exercise either of them it may prove to happen for a less expensive asset.