Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
Moderators: Clav, Domejandro, ken6199, bisme37, Dirk, KingDavid, cupcakesnake, bwgood77, zimpy27, infinite11285
Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
- 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
I still think this is the Magic's way of getting LA to step in and up the ante.
Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
-
Trader_Joe
- Forum Mod

- Posts: 29,176
- And1: 3,953
- Joined: Jan 19, 2009
-
Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
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 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.
Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
-
Josephpaul
- Banned User
- Posts: 7,261
- And1: 295
- Joined: Jan 28, 2012
Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
So when the owners were crying about big 3 stars joining up they were BS right ?
Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
-
microfib4thewin
- Head Coach
- Posts: 6,275
- And1: 454
- Joined: Jun 20, 2008
-
Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
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.
Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
- wilhelmthe1st
- Pro Prospect
- Posts: 839
- And1: 178
- Joined: Jun 18, 2010
Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
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...
Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
- rj2496
- Starter
- Posts: 2,042
- And1: 111
- Joined: Dec 06, 2010
- Location: New Jersey
-
Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
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
Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
- Magic Mamba
- Junior
- Posts: 434
- And1: 22
- Joined: Jun 22, 2008
Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
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

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
-
Shaheen
- Banned User
- Posts: 2,767
- And1: 0
- Joined: Jul 01, 2010
Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
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.
Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
- Magic Mamba
- Junior
- Posts: 434
- And1: 22
- Joined: Jun 22, 2008
Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
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

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
-
TheXFactor
- Banned User
- Posts: 3,976
- And1: 31
- Joined: Apr 19, 2012
Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
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
Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
- CB-Blazer
- Head Coach
- Posts: 7,161
- And1: 545
- Joined: Jun 23, 2008
-
Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
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.
Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
- 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
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
before orlando pulled the plug on it all though. except orlando can't hope for a dwight extension this time around

Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
- Magic Mamba
- Junior
- Posts: 434
- And1: 22
- Joined: Jun 22, 2008
Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
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.

Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
-
therealbig3
- RealGM
- Posts: 29,601
- And1: 16,133
- Joined: Jul 31, 2010
Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
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.
Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
- Jordan45822
- RealGM
- Posts: 13,564
- And1: 1,891
- Joined: Jun 18, 2007
Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
I don't think its about Bynum. Its about draft picks + taking on bad contracts.
Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
-
Jameslm18
- Sophomore
- Posts: 224
- And1: 5
- Joined: Jul 09, 2010
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
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.
Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
-
MagicMamba88
- Pro Prospect
- Posts: 920
- And1: 1,691
- Joined: Aug 07, 2009
- Location: California
-
Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
-
misterrunon
- Senior
- Posts: 605
- And1: 63
- Joined: Mar 10, 2011
Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
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.
Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
-
RocketPower23
- Banned User
- Posts: 7,497
- And1: 26
- Joined: Dec 20, 2005
Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
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.
Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
-
mjba
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,002
- And1: 121
- Joined: Jul 19, 2009
Re: Lakers no longer require extension from Dwight Howard
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









