Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard

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

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#721 » by SheedsWeed » Mon Jul 9, 2012 3:59 am

I still think this is the Magic's way of getting LA to step in and up the ante.
Trader_Joe
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 29,176
And1: 3,953
Joined: Jan 19, 2009
 

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#722 » by Trader_Joe » Mon Jul 9, 2012 3:59 am

Bad things happen overnight.

I still think it's being leaked for up LA's offer. This is the exact script of the Melodrama.

LA may need to bring in a 3rd team.
Mikhail Prokhorov wrote:My posse usually needs another vacation after a vacation with me.
Josephpaul
Banned User
Posts: 7,261
And1: 295
Joined: Jan 28, 2012

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#723 » by Josephpaul » Mon Jul 9, 2012 4:00 am

So when the owners were crying about big 3 stars joining up they were BS right ?
microfib4thewin
Head Coach
Posts: 6,275
And1: 454
Joined: Jun 20, 2008
 

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#724 » by microfib4thewin » Mon Jul 9, 2012 4:01 am

Lakerfan17 wrote:If the Magic get Bynum they can rebuild overnight per Devos wishes, they will have no problem attracting stars to that market.


As good as a Bynum offer is the Magic is not going to rebuild with Bynum when he's going to be paid 20 mil a year. That's like saying the Magic are rebuilding if they are going to re-sign Dwight. The Magic has good reason to be hesitant about giving Bynum that kind of money when he has only played one full season.
User avatar
wilhelmthe1st
Pro Prospect
Posts: 839
And1: 178
Joined: Jun 18, 2010

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#725 » by wilhelmthe1st » Mon Jul 9, 2012 4:03 am

Brook max contract vs Bynum max contract (he's not walking, lets me serious "there's a bank in every city", plus if he was on the Magic he would be THE MAN down there, no question, he wouldn't leave that) hmm...
User avatar
rj2496
Starter
Posts: 2,042
And1: 111
Joined: Dec 06, 2010
Location: New Jersey
       

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#726 » by rj2496 » Mon Jul 9, 2012 4:03 am

microfib4thewin wrote:
Lakerfan17 wrote:If the Magic get Bynum they can rebuild overnight per Devos wishes, they will have no problem attracting stars to that market.


As good as a Bynum offer is the Magic is not going to rebuild with Bynum when he's going to be paid 20 mil a year. That's like saying the Magic are rebuilding if they are going to re-sign Dwight. The Magic has good reason to be hesitant about giving Bynum that kind of money when he has only played one full season.



It was a 66 game season as well
User avatar
Magic Mamba
Junior
Posts: 434
And1: 22
Joined: Jun 22, 2008

Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#727 » by Magic Mamba » Mon Jul 9, 2012 4:05 am

It's not like Lopez is a safe bet , those foot injuries come back to haunt big men I.e Yao. Atleast bynums injuries were freak accidents
Image
Shaheen
Banned User
Posts: 2,767
And1: 0
Joined: Jul 01, 2010

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#728 » by Shaheen » Mon Jul 9, 2012 4:06 am

Trader_Joe wrote:Bad things happen overnight.

I still think it's being leaked for up LA's offer. This is the exact script of the Melodrama.

LA may need to bring in a 3rd team.


I don't think LA cares as much as everyone thinks.

The Bynum offer was always more about the Magic wanting Bynum than LA wanting Dwight.

Lakers don't have any other assets to offer besides Bynum. No picks and who else can they really trade to get back assets? Gasol?
Don't think that would be worth it.
User avatar
Magic Mamba
Junior
Posts: 434
And1: 22
Joined: Jun 22, 2008

Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#729 » by Magic Mamba » Mon Jul 9, 2012 4:07 am

Shaheen wrote:
Trader_Joe wrote:Bad things happen overnight.

I still think it's being leaked for up LA's offer. This is the exact script of the Melodrama.

LA may need to bring in a 3rd team.


I don't think LA cares as much as everyone thinks.

The Bynum offer was always more about the Magic wanting Bynum than LA wanting Dwight.

Lakers don't have any other assets to offer besides Bynum. No picks and who else can they really trade to get back assets? Gasol?
Don't think that would be worth it.



Thought it was past your bed time
Image
TheXFactor
Banned User
Posts: 3,976
And1: 31
Joined: Apr 19, 2012

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#730 » by TheXFactor » Mon Jul 9, 2012 4:09 am

Magic Mamba wrote:
Shaheen wrote:
Trader_Joe wrote:Bad things happen overnight.

I still think it's being leaked for up LA's offer. This is the exact script of the Melodrama.

LA may need to bring in a 3rd team.


I don't think LA cares as much as everyone thinks.

The Bynum offer was always more about the Magic wanting Bynum than LA wanting Dwight.

Lakers don't have any other assets to offer besides Bynum. No picks and who else can they really trade to get back assets? Gasol?
Don't think that would be worth it.



Thought it was past your bed time


:lol:
User avatar
CB-Blazer
Head Coach
Posts: 7,161
And1: 545
Joined: Jun 23, 2008
       

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#731 » by CB-Blazer » Mon Jul 9, 2012 4:14 am

Shaheen wrote:
Trader_Joe wrote:Bad things happen overnight.

I still think it's being leaked for up LA's offer. This is the exact script of the Melodrama.

LA may need to bring in a 3rd team.


I don't think LA cares as much as everyone thinks.

The Bynum offer was always more about the Magic wanting Bynum than LA wanting Dwight.

Lakers don't have any other assets to offer besides Bynum. No picks and who else can they really trade to get back assets? Gasol?
Don't think that would be worth it.



Why do the Lakers need anymore assets?

Andrew Bynum is hands down worth more than anything the Nets can offer.
User avatar
Dr Aki
RealGM
Posts: 35,851
And1: 32,299
Joined: Mar 03, 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
   

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#732 » by Dr Aki » Mon Jul 9, 2012 4:17 am

actually this feels a lot like the dwight to nets trade last summer like it was actually going to really happen

before orlando pulled the plug on it all though. except orlando can't hope for a dwight extension this time around
Image
User avatar
Magic Mamba
Junior
Posts: 434
And1: 22
Joined: Jun 22, 2008

Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#733 » by Magic Mamba » Mon Jul 9, 2012 4:17 am

CB-Blazer wrote:
Shaheen wrote:
Trader_Joe wrote:Bad things happen overnight.

I still think it's being leaked for up LA's offer. This is the exact script of the Melodrama.

LA may need to bring in a 3rd team.


I don't think LA cares as much as everyone thinks.

The Bynum offer was always more about the Magic wanting Bynum than LA wanting Dwight.

Lakers don't have any other assets to offer besides Bynum. No picks and who else can they really trade to get back assets? Gasol?
Don't think that would be worth it.



Why do the Lakers need anymore assets?

Andrew Bynum is hands down worth more than anything the Nets can offer.
Image
therealbig3
RealGM
Posts: 29,601
And1: 16,133
Joined: Jul 31, 2010

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#734 » by therealbig3 » Mon Jul 9, 2012 4:17 am

CB-Blazer wrote:
Shaheen wrote:
Trader_Joe wrote:Bad things happen overnight.

I still think it's being leaked for up LA's offer. This is the exact script of the Melodrama.

LA may need to bring in a 3rd team.


I don't think LA cares as much as everyone thinks.

The Bynum offer was always more about the Magic wanting Bynum than LA wanting Dwight.

Lakers don't have any other assets to offer besides Bynum. No picks and who else can they really trade to get back assets? Gasol?
Don't think that would be worth it.



Why do the Lakers need anymore assets?

Andrew Bynum is hands down worth more than anything the Nets can offer.


Bynum is still a big injury risk, probably moreso than Lopez.

And he's probably going to refuse to sign an extension.

Lopez is getting underrated. Very good scorer, we know that, but he also doesn't implode when he gets doubled, like Bynum (black hole and TO machine when he gets doubled).

Bynum is a much better defender and rebounder, and for that, I'd say he's a better overall player. But even his defense isn't all that great either, because he gets so lazy.

Lopez in terms of team chemistry and offensive ability I think is better than Bynum. And he'll stay around long term. He's a good player, a top 5 center in the league when healthy probably. He just needs a coach to drive it in to play harder on the glass and focus more on defense. Those are things that good coaching would overcome quite easily.
User avatar
Jordan45822
RealGM
Posts: 13,564
And1: 1,891
Joined: Jun 18, 2007

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#735 » by Jordan45822 » Mon Jul 9, 2012 4:22 am

I don't think its about Bynum. Its about draft picks + taking on bad contracts.
Jameslm18
Sophomore
Posts: 224
And1: 5
Joined: Jul 09, 2010
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#736 » by Jameslm18 » Mon Jul 9, 2012 4:24 am

Magic Mamba wrote:
Shaheen wrote:
Trader_Joe wrote:Bad things happen overnight.

I still think it's being leaked for up LA's offer. This is the exact script of the Melodrama.

LA may need to bring in a 3rd team.


I don't think LA cares as much as everyone thinks.

The Bynum offer was always more about the Magic wanting Bynum than LA wanting Dwight.

Lakers don't have any other assets to offer besides Bynum. No picks and who else can they really trade to get back assets? Gasol?
Don't think that would be worth it.



Thought it was past your bed time
Shaheen - the biggest nets homer on realgm
rhp1990 wrote:y'all need to just ignore shaheen. Dont feed the troll. He needs to realize if this many people are calling him a moron then maybe he is a moron/ignorant when it comes to ball.
MagicMamba88
Pro Prospect
Posts: 920
And1: 1,691
Joined: Aug 07, 2009
Location: California
 

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#737 » by MagicMamba88 » Mon Jul 9, 2012 4:25 am

Image
Image
Image
misterrunon
Senior
Posts: 605
And1: 63
Joined: Mar 10, 2011

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#738 » by misterrunon » Mon Jul 9, 2012 4:25 am

if this is a ploy to get more from the lakers, i don't think they're going to bite. they don't NEED to make a trade, but want to.
RocketPower23
Banned User
Posts: 7,497
And1: 26
Joined: Dec 20, 2005

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#739 » by RocketPower23 » Mon Jul 9, 2012 4:30 am

Jordan45822 wrote:I don't think its about Bynum. Its about draft picks + taking on bad contracts.

Agreed, the whole Bynum won't sign an extention thing doesn't jive with me. Could be a concern, but Bynum has publicly said conflicting signs as to where he would be willing to sign (following the money), it's more likely the Magic at the very least want the Lakers to take back a toxic contract and the Lakers saying no.
mjba
Analyst
Posts: 3,002
And1: 121
Joined: Jul 19, 2009

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard 

Post#740 » by mjba » Mon Jul 9, 2012 4:33 am

i will be shockkkked if they take the Nets deal of a S&T for Lopez, Brooks, terrible picks just to dump some bad contracts. shocked. Magic fans must be on suicide watch right now

Return to The General Board