Well Iceburg Slim summed it up best in his post, kblo247 you make an excellent argument for T-Mac but it's just too risky to try. But at the same time I'm not picky and I don't think we as fans can be that picky either.
If T-Mac was the only thing left and he agreed to play a minimal role then it's worth a shot. The way I see it hell he wouldn't be as bad as Kapono or Murphy. At least he'll have some hot flash in the pan moments, Jason and Troy was just breathing the extra air in Staples most nights.
What about T-Mac
Moderators: Kilroy, Danny Darko, TyCobb
Re: What about T-Mac
-
DEEP3CL
- RealGM
- Posts: 27,899
- And1: 3,207
- Joined: Jul 23, 2005
- Location: LOS ANGELES,CA.
-
Re: What about T-Mac
VETERAN LAKERS FAN
SmartWentCrazy wrote:It's extremely unlikely that they end up in the top 3.They're probably better off trying to win and giving Philly the 8th pick than tanking and giving them the 4th.
Re: What about T-Mac
-
GoldenKn1ght
- Banned User
- Posts: 51
- And1: 5
- Joined: Jul 28, 2012
- Location: (2025 Posts) Real Join Date: Mon Jun 13, 2011 10:16 am
Re: What about T-Mac
If he can play better than Ebanks & for the vet min, I don't see why not....
Re: What about T-Mac
-
LaLa
- Banned User
- Posts: 4,143
- And1: 202
- Joined: Mar 09, 2011
- Location: ball
Re: What about T-Mac
screw Ebanks, sign TMac!
Re: What about T-Mac
-
ennui
- General Manager
- Posts: 9,719
- And1: 955
- Joined: Feb 10, 2011
- Location: I see jigaboos, I see styrofoam
Re: What about T-Mac
-
Ckay
- Head Coach
- Posts: 6,676
- And1: 8,921
- Joined: Feb 29, 2012
- Location: going going, back back, to Cali Cali
-
Re: What about T-Mac
-
kblo247
- RealGM
- Posts: 13,834
- And1: 2,131
- Joined: Apr 16, 2011
Re: What about T-Mac
I also want to add that T-Mac had already made a deal for the vet min to be Dengs backup in Chicago. The Bulls though screwed the pooch as they couldn't and can't make anymore deals with their cap situation once they used the BAE on Bellinelli.
They inked Nate, then Marco officially and now can't make any moves under the CBA
They inked Nate, then Marco officially and now can't make any moves under the CBA
Re: What about T-Mac
-
Rosque
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,048
- And1: 2,010
- Joined: Aug 11, 2012
-
Re: What about T-Mac
He can't be worse than Duhon and, oh God, Blake. And surelly he must be and upgrade over Ebanks. He still has the vision and his playmaking ability along side with his 3 pointer would make it low risk, high reward.
"All these guys who run these organizations who talk about analytics, they have one thing in common: They're a bunch of guys who ain't never played the game, they never got the girls in high school, and they just want to get in the game."
Re: What about T-Mac
-
Rosque
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,048
- And1: 2,010
- Joined: Aug 11, 2012
-
Re: What about T-Mac
So.. Assuming these are rotations of LakeShow if we sign T-Mac
PG: Nash (31 min), T-Mac (17 at PG)
SG: Kobe (38), T-Mac (10 at SG, 27 with SG and PG)
SF: Metta (33), Jamison(15 at SF)
PF: Pau (37), Jamison (6 at PF, 21 with SF and PF), Hill (5 at PF)
C: Dwight(38), Hill (10 at C)
I'd be more than happy with this.
PG: Nash (31 min), T-Mac (17 at PG)
SG: Kobe (38), T-Mac (10 at SG, 27 with SG and PG)
SF: Metta (33), Jamison(15 at SF)
PF: Pau (37), Jamison (6 at PF, 21 with SF and PF), Hill (5 at PF)
C: Dwight(38), Hill (10 at C)
I'd be more than happy with this.
Re: What about T-Mac
-
matek
- Freshman
- Posts: 67
- And1: 1
- Joined: May 24, 2012
Re: What about T-Mac
Rosque wrote:So.. Assuming these are rotations of LakeShow if we sign T-Mac
PG: Nash (31 min), T-Mac (17 at PG)
SG: Kobe (38), T-Mac (10 at SG, 27 with SG and PG)
SF: Metta (33), Jamison(15 at SF)
PF: Pau (37), Jamison (6 at PF, 21 with SF and PF), Hill (5 at PF)
C: Dwight(38), Hill (10 at C)
I'd be more than happy with this.
Where is Meeks?
Re: What about T-Mac
-
LocLaker
- Sophomore
- Posts: 197
- And1: 0
- Joined: Jun 28, 2012
- Location: In a world of Purple and Gold
Re: What about T-Mac
never really liked t mac, he has bitched in the past about pt, but i would take him with the vet min.
Re: What about T-Mac
-
Rosque
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,048
- And1: 2,010
- Joined: Aug 11, 2012
-
Re: What about T-Mac
matek wrote:Rosque wrote:So.. Assuming these are rotations of LakeShow if we sign T-Mac
PG: Nash (31 min), T-Mac (17 at PG)
SG: Kobe (38), T-Mac (10 at SG, 27 with SG and PG)
SF: Metta (33), Jamison(15 at SF)
PF: Pau (37), Jamison (6 at PF, 21 with SF and PF), Hill (5 at PF)
C: Dwight(38), Hill (10 at C)
I'd be more than happy with this.
Where is Meeks?
****. Forgot 'bout him.
"All these guys who run these organizations who talk about analytics, they have one thing in common: They're a bunch of guys who ain't never played the game, they never got the girls in high school, and they just want to get in the game."
Re: What about T-Mac
-
MAMBAEMD
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 5,022
- And1: 1,696
- Joined: May 16, 2007
-
Re: What about T-Mac
We don't need a player like TMac.
Only positive thing he brings is offense, and he's not even close to what he used to be with his shooting and offense.
Our team does not need more offense.
We need hustle guys, guys who'll dive for loose balls, take charges, make a hard foul when needed.
We need people who will helps us get the "50-50" balls.
We have plenty of big names and talent, but that alone doesn't win rings.
Therefore, I would prefer to fill out our roster with someone who doesn't care about how many shots he gets, but someone who is willing to sacrifice for the team.
Only positive thing he brings is offense, and he's not even close to what he used to be with his shooting and offense.
Our team does not need more offense.
We need hustle guys, guys who'll dive for loose balls, take charges, make a hard foul when needed.
We need people who will helps us get the "50-50" balls.
We have plenty of big names and talent, but that alone doesn't win rings.
Therefore, I would prefer to fill out our roster with someone who doesn't care about how many shots he gets, but someone who is willing to sacrifice for the team.
Formerly lakerRD