Re-Signing Lamar Odom Is Not Optional
by DexterFishmore on Jul 12, 2009 2:15 AM PDT
in Editorial
51 comments
The Lakers' negotiations with free agent Lamar Odom are, to an uncomfortable degree, dragging.
Specific numbers have not been made public, but there appears to be a difference of a couple million dollars in annual salary between the Lakers' bid and Lamar's ask. In its latest bit of reportage on the topic, the Los Angeles Times on Thursday told us that Lamar is hoping for $10 million per year, while the Lakers have offered a deal "likely within a million or two of the average NBA player's salary of $5.85 million." On Saturday, the Orange County Register, quoting Lakers assistant general manager Ronnie Lester, updated us with news that the Lakers are now offering slightly more than $8 million annually. The gap may be closing, but it's not yet closed.
It's time for Dr. Buss and Mitch Kupchak to bring these negotiations to a conclusion. They need to meet Lamar's asking price, or come so close to it that re-signing with the Lakers becomes a surpassingly obvious decision for him. If the latest reports are correct, what separates the two sides is less than $2 million per year. Taking into account the NBA's dollar-for-dollar luxury tax (and the deductibility of player compensation under federal and state income tax laws), what the Lakers are now haggling over will amount to less than $20 million in net expenses over the life of the contract. Although on its face this looks like a substantial figure, in the context of the Lakers' operating budget it is not. And it doesn't justify risking Lamar's departure and the resulting dent that would make in our prospects for additional titles.
Laker management needs to stop worrying about what Lamar costs, and start focusing on what he's worth.
To that end, allow me to unpack several important truths that should inform any thoughtful consideration of l'affaire Odom.
I. Re-signing Lamar will make the Lakers the favorite to win the title, as opposed to merely a favorite.
Of the various causes behind the Lakers' recent championship run, the most basic and important was their ability to deploy elite talent in overwhelming amounts. Kobe Bryant and Pau Gasol are two of the seven or so best players in the world. Lamar is somewhere in the top 20. Andrew Bynum performed like a top-25 player in spurts, and Trevor Ariza was well above league average. The end product was just too much for any opponent to deal with. The Lakers had too many ways to score points and too many players who were good at keeping the other guys from scoring.
Trevor's gone - we know this. So what would it mean to lose Lamar as well? It would mean that the team needs to replace about 4,300 minutes of high-level regular season play at the forward position. Ron Artest has never logged more than about 2,700 minutes in a season, so even if we assume that he repeats his career high in playing time, we're still left with a deficit of 1,600 minutes, or about 20 per game. That's 20 extra minutes a night of Luke Walton and Josh Powell, where we're accustomed to seeing borderline all-star production instead. In scientific terms: no es bueno.
Meanwhile, the challengers to the throne have been restocking their armories. Orlando welcomes back a healthy Jameer Nelson, has upgraded from Hedo Turkoglu to Vince Carter and has picked up a trade exception they can use to acquire further reinforcements. Boston gets KG back and has added Rasheed Wallace. Cleveland bought itself a used Shaq. San Antonio has brought Richard Jefferson and Antonio McDyess on board for a last glorious charge in the Duncan era.
If the Lakers re-sign Lamar, none of this matters. A title is never guaranteed, of course, but the Lakers would remain pretty clearly the team with the most championship-level players in the prime of their careers. Maybe none of this matters anyway, but why take the risk? The Lakers are primed for a two- to three-year run as the NBA's sole superpower. Allowing that historic opportunity to slip away just to save a little payroll would be a shortsighted failure by a franchise not known for them.
II. The Lakers both can and should "overpay" for Lamar.
Let's stipulate that Lamar's "market value," meaning the amount that another team would be willing to pay him, is $8 million per year. Does this mean that the Lakers shouldn't sign him for $10 million a year? Not at all!
Lamar is worth more to the Lakers than he is to any other team. His unusually diverse skill set seems almost genetically engineered for the Triangle offense, and the presence of two alpha dogs in Kobe and Pau means he can thrive in the supporting role that seems to suit his temperament. Over the course of last season, we saw him fill every of several supporting roles he was variously asked to play - inside and outside defender, rebounding maestro and initiator of the second-team offense, to give only a few examples. To have an all-star talent fill roles typically performed by average players or worse is an enormously valuable luxury, and one for which the Lakers should be willing to pay a premium.
And the Lakers, more than any other team except possibly the Knicks, can certainly afford luxuries.
The salary cap rules foster the illusion of the NBA as a classless society, with all franchises on equal financial footing, but behind this illusion is a highly stratified competitive environment. Franchises fund player salaries out of widely varying revenue streams. The Memphis Grizzlies, for instance, don't generate as much money as do the Celtics. The Celts sell more tickets, they sell more expensive tickets, and when's the last time you saw someone wearing a Memphis jersey who didn't actually play for the team?
The Lakers, for their part, are rolling in cash. They are the upper, upper class of the NBA - the basketball version of the Yankees, if you will, which isn't an exaggeration. They sell out every game at some of the highest ticket prices in the league. They've reached the Finals two years in a row, meaning a couple dozen extra home games at even higher-than-normal ticket prices. They've sold untold amounts of advertising and licensed merchandise.
In short, the Lakers have the financial wherewithal to bankroll a top-end roster. If other franchises are struggling at the gate and can't afford a $10 million power forward, that's no excuse for Dr. Buss to cheap out.
III. The Lakers don't get to blame Lamar if he signs with another team.
There are all kinds of nonmonetary reasons, we're told, for Lamar to re-sign with the Lakers. He loves living by the beach! He can stay and win some more rings! He'll get to play with Artest, his old AAU buddy!
All true, I'll concede, and all valid. But the thing is, people don't like to be told they're worth less than they think they are. It's irritating and bad for the self-esteem, and if you get told this over and over by an employer for whom you think you've done good work in the past, it gets very old very fast. And the odds grow that you'll decide to go work for someone else even if the money's not much better. Like hanging at the beach and playing hoops with your buddies, telling an ungrateful employer to f-ck off can be very satisfying.
Would that be an irrational decision on Lamar's part? Yeah, definitely. But he's a human being - we all make irrational decisions every day. This isn't freshman microeconomics; it's a negotiation with a real person who might do something you don't expect and can't explain. It's the job of Laker management to make that as unlikely as reasonably possible. If Lamar walks because of annoyance with the negotiations, the team will still have to answer for any pound-foolishness on its part.
IV. Don't let anyone tell you that this isn't "your money."
You hear this a lot in nearly any free-agency discussion, and I'm really making a point here that's broader than just the Odom contract. In arguments for or against signing a particular player, you'll eventually hear a fan or commentator suggest that we don't really have a say in these things because we're not spending "our money." This is dead wrong. It is most definitely your money, and you have a stake in whether it gets spent on players or, alternatively, pocketed by team owners.
The Buss family isn't a central bank. They don't print currency with Jerry's face on it and use that to meet payroll. They fund player salaries and other operating expenses with revenues generated, directly or indirectly, by the fans. Those expensive tickets you buy, the expensive beers you drink at Staples, the Lakers-licensed merch you wear... everything ultimately comes out of your pocket. The Lakers are a product, and you its consumers. You have a right to demand that the product be of the highest quality.
So, Mitch and Dr. Buss... sign Lamar. Make it rain for the man, and there won't be any trouble.
0 recs |
51 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
LO = HEART
By the sound of it, it looks like the Lakers will be re-signing him soon.
Keeping the hope up that LO will still be in Purple and Gold.
Lakers 2009 Road to Redemption: TREVOR, DEREK, LAMAR, PAU & KOBE.
Play the game of which Lakers reminds you of: TA - TI, Shannon Brown - Chris Brown, Pau Gasol - Jesus, Machine - Luis Scola/Russell Brand, PJ with mustache and beard - Colonel Sanders.
by PeanutButterSpread on Jul 12, 2009 2:26 AM PDT reply actions
With LO running out of options
and it looking like he won’t get what he wants, we could see him sign a one year deal and then look for the type of deal he wants next season when those who lose out on LeBron, Wade, Bosh, etc. have cap room left over.
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Jul 12, 2009 2:33 AM PDT reply actions
"II. The Lakers both can and should "overpay" for Lamar."
Good article, but I read this section and couldn’t help but think: why?
It’s pure economics. If you can buy an apple for 50 cents, but another guy offers you the same apple for 40 cents, which one would you pick? Assuming no travel time or any other inconveniences, the choice is obvious. If no team in the NBA will pay Lamar 8 million dollars, why should the Lakers pay him 10? No reason. None at all. It makes no sense to do that. Why? Because it hurts the team. Sure, Lamar is probably worth 10m to us, but why would we give him that when we could give him 8? We could use the left over two to make better signings at the PG or backup SG position pr other weak areas of the team.
It makes no sense to overpay Lamar when the market doesn’t demand this. Just because the money is “there” doesn’t make it anywhere near close to a good decision. All you need is some basic level economics to understand this. Now if a team offered Lamar 10 / yr? I’d say match it, or at least get close enough to get Lamar to stay. If not though…sign him for as little as possible.
Hell I’d say if a team offers Lamar 8 mil / yr, offer him 7. Why? LA is an important part of his life and could very easily be worth 1 mil / yr (given his clothing business / record label stuff). Lamar is going to stay in LA and he’s NOT going to get 10 mil / yr and the Lakers will be a better team because of it.
The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist.
Why overpay when you don't need to do it?
There is no other team on the market that is going to offer Odom $10 million a year, unless Portland comes to their senses. The Lakers are left with negotiating against themselves. There won’t be a sign-and-trade because the Lakers value Odom a whole heck-of-a-lot more than their opposition.
Their first offer was $7 million. Pretty much in line with the other players at his talent level. They then up their offer to $8 million, still in line with those same free agents at his level. I see no need to offer $10 million when there is no need to do it.
+1
Agreed. One of the worst things that a team can do is to negotiate against itself. While I would love to pay Lamar 10 million (just because I love this guy), there’s no sense in paying that much when the market doesn’t demand it.
by chrisbeomsuh on Jul 12, 2009 9:54 AM PDT up reply actions
Pay LO Today!
LO needs some love and respect for a job well done!
The Blazers will see their $8M-ish offer sheet to Paul Millsap matched by Utah on Friday...
That’s pretty much the offer they could make to Lamar, and there really isn’t another team in the NBA that could go higher than that.
Will KP make a front-loaded offer of that magnitude just to be a jackass to a conference rival? Possible.
THAT’S the market rate for LO. The Lakers can drag things out for another week, hoping that UT doesn’t match and that LO’s leverage will falter — but do they REALLY want the bad feeling associated with rolling back the offer on him?
Lamar pretty much HAS to sign with LAL this coming week, unless he’s banking on taking same money to move to Portland as a matter of principle. Which I really, really, really doubt is on his mind.
"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal
If Utah matches, I see the Boozer trade talks escalating, since the Jazz probably can't afford to keep both.
Wouldn’t the Blazers prefer Hinrich if they could get him? It looks like this offer sheet for Millsap is just leverage to get the Jazz to move on the trade.
Blazers would love HInrich, but without giving up Bayless.
And the problem is that Chicago lost Ben Gordon, so now they’ll want a guard for sure to move Hinrich.
"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal
Hey Timbo
Does Lamar really fit with Portland? Seems to me that they’re looking for more of a 3 and Lamar while versatile is not great for them at the 3. Having him on the floor with Oden/Pryzbilla and Aldridge which would make them too slow to be effective just like playing Lamar at the same time as Bynum & Gasol.
So to Portland he mostly represents a backup to Aldridge and a way to screw with the Lakers roster, no?
I think if Portland got him, he would play back up to Aldridge. Over at Blazersedge they don’t seem to agree. It looks as if they’re enamored with the though of getting Lamar and playing him at small forward, which doesn’t make much sense…..
Bear in mind that nuns are not well versed in the ways of Satan since they tend to avert their eyes...
Most Blazer fans don’t watch Laker games and think Lamar is still the SF that he was when he came into the league for the Clips.
"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal
I should have said ... and SOME think he is still the SF...
Most Blazer fans know he’s a 4. But the point is that many don’t follow the Lakers, actively try NOT to follow the Lakers, and that some people as a result have a certain fundamental ignorance about Lamar.
"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal
Odom would fit in fine with Portland...
He’d definitely play some minutes at the 3. But the Blazers are now chasing Millsap, who is a 4 and only a 4 (his agent’s non-factual puff about him being able to play three positions to the contrary), so the fact that LO is a natural PF at this stage of his career is clearly not an automatic disqualifier.
The only question is that WHEN the Millsap offer is matched (and it will be), WILL KP put together as big a deal on as nasty of terms as he can to inconvenience the Lakers (who are also in the Luxury Tax zone and can be similarly punished by pouring it on in an offer sheet). I don’t know the answer to that. It’s certainly possible, but not better than a 50-50, I think.
At this point, KP will be very satisfied to be virtually the only team under the cap and to look to be the beneficiary of a salary dump at the appropriate juncture, I think. He’d need to renounce a couple Euros to throw a frontloaded $9M or $10M at Lamar to really be a burr under the Lakers’ saddle though, and I think he’d rather keep the rights than maximize his prickiness towards his competitors.
"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal
It's not guaranteed that Pritchard will even get a chance to make an offer on Lamar,
if Utah drags it out the whole seven days, and the Lakers sign him in the meantime.
What I don’t understand is this:
The Blazers front-loaded the contract to make it difficult for Utah to match. They gave Millsap a $5.6 million signing bonus and agreed to pay him $4.7 million of his first-year, $6.3 million salary the day the contract becomes effective.
So a week from now, Millsap would receive $10.3 million. Add to that the $1.6 million that will be spread throughout next season and Millsap, who was paid just $797,581 last season, will be paid $11.9 million this year.
How can a team offer a first year salary plus signing bonus in excess of their cap space? Are signing bonuses not subject to cap rules? (And if that’s the case, why don’t we see more of this sort of thing?) I thought the Blazers only had like $7-8m of cap space, without renouncing any rights to players overseas, and $11.9m is quite a bit more than that. What am I missing here?
I found my answer.
“Signing bonuses don’t count against a team’s salary cap in total in the year paid. The cap hit is spread over the life of the contract.”
Well the negotiations between the Lakers and Lamar don’t seem to be going anywhere…. And with all the new released news, our chances of re-signing Lamar seem even more bleak with each passing day.
Yes, new information changes what I wrote there.
The negotiations seemed to be going well with the news of the Lakers upping their offer, with Lester saying a deal should get done early this week. Now we hear negotiations have stalled. Still, there’s three more days before Utah has to match.
Solid points
I think you have some very salient points here. But one thing I most certainly disagree with is that Pau Gasol is one of the seven best players in the world. Don’t get me wrong, I love Gasol, but nobody thought this two years ago when he was balling in Memphis, and nobody should think this now. Dirk, Duncan, Wade, Lebron, Kobe, KG, Dwight Howard, Brandon Roy, Yao Ming, Nash, etc. etc. Gasol is a top twenty player and Lamar perhaps a top 50. The Lakers need Lamar but not to maintain their favorite status, just to maintain.
Fish is clutch but another year older. And remember, Bynum is still an unknown. He could play 80 games and dominate, or he could play 80 games, dominate for 30 and blow for 50. Or he could get hurt again. He has yet to prove anything. Without Odom, our bench will be Luke Walton, Jordan Farmar, ShanWow, Sasha Vujacic, Josh Powell, Mbenga, and Morrison. That is not scary whatsoever. Brown had 30 games of impressive play, for his entire four year career. Vujacic was horrible last year. Farmar is still trying to refind his magic pre-injury. The rest are scrubs (though, I love Mbenga and Powell). Odom transforms the bench into an elite bench, but only because he’s on it. Without him, our bench is mediocre, at best. Think back to how many meaningful minutes any of the bench outside of Odom got as the playoffs progressed.
So, Gasol, Artest, Bryant is a fearsome starting threesome, but the Celtics now have five all-star quality starters, the Magic upgraded their team with Bass and Carter. The Spurs have proven to be good even with injury-prone players, and they’ve just added McDyess and Jefferson. The Mavs added Shawn Marion and Marcin Gortat to a squad that won 60 games two seasons ago. And the Nuggets should be returning the same squad that won 56 games and looked scary going into the playoffs. Hell, Washington now has a bevy of talent both known and untapped.
The Lakers need to sign Lamar because not only is he their heart and soul and the man who brought everyone together, but because his skill and talent put the Lakers in the conversation of contenders. Without him, they are still really, really good and have a shot (anytime you’ve got Kobe, you’ve got a shot), but they won’t be a superpower in comparison to the other teams mentioned.
Dodgerblue, thank you for pointing out that Gasol was never considered a top 7-15 player when he played with Memphis. I think his offensive game is outstanding, and his defense was considerably better this past year. Having said that, I don’t think he has the personality to lead a team, or to be “the guy”. When he was “the guy”, in Memphis, they either got swept out of the first round or they didn’t make it to the playoffs at all.
To be fair, no team can win without a good to great supporting cast, and his supporting cast back in Memphis was neither. But even still, his numbers (and wins) as the team’s focal point didn’t hardly suggest that he was dominating, which helps explain why he only had one all star appearance as a Grizzly.
I just felt that the hype about the Lakers stealing Gasol, and getting in him, the talent of the decade was unwarranted.
Here’s a question for you. . . at their current ages and abilities who would you rather have Pau Gasol or Tim Duncan? (I’m not asking who’s had a better career. I’m talking right now, from today forward.)
Just curious.
I agree with you to a certain degree...
I agree that they Lakers didn’t really “steal” considering they actually traded away a lot of their “future” to get Pau Gasol. What the Cavs did was considered stealing. Shaq for a bag of peanuts. We got Pay for a carton of peanuts.
That being said, if LO is considered versatile, then Pau is super duper versatile. He can play Center or Power Forward. The dude can dribble the ball, initiate the offense, everything a point guard can do. And he’s 7 feet tall!! He rebounds, he shoots left handed or right handed. He can post up, he can shoot jumpers, baby hooks, usually finishes really really well at the rim. Everything that LO can do but better and more consistent.
He turned Lakers from a one-round exit playoff team to a championship contending team. He was the all star caliber missing player to go with Kobe to push the Lakers to contend every year with Kobe. LO just wasn’t enough.
I agree that Pau is not the “star” of the team, but for he’s a great all-star player to compliment Kobe’s skill. Even better than LO. And you can even make the argument that he makes everyone around him better. He makes life easier for Kobe and he makes life easier for LO. Just look at LO’s production since Pau’s arrived. When he and LO work together, it’s beautiful.
So, I do think Pau’s at least top 7-15 player. His talent was wasted in Memphis, just like KG’s was wasting away in Minnesota. He led Spain to the gold in the world series and heck spain took silver against TEAM USA.
I would say that at this point, Pau’s better than Yao (injured much), Roy (still young), Nash (too old) or Dwight (too young). Wasn’t this Finals series enough to prove how solid Pau was against Dwight nonetheless? He should be mentioned with players like Dirk, Kobe, Wade, Lebron, KG, Duncan, Parker, Bosh, etc. He may not be a top5 player, but he’s definitely a top 10 player. He has too many strengths and not many weaknesses. And especially among big men in the world, he’s one one of the best. He deserves to be mentioned in the Duncan and KG power forward conversations.
Lakers 2009 Road to Redemption: TREVOR, DEREK, LAMAR, PAU & KOBE.
Play the game of which Lakers reminds you of: TA - TI, Shannon Brown - Chris Brown, Pau Gasol - Jesus, Machine - Luis Scola/Russell Brand, PJ with mustache and beard - Colonel Sanders.
by PeanutButterSpread on Jul 12, 2009 11:33 PM PDT up reply actions
Great article and an excellent retort
Pau is a top 10 talent. He can do everything offensively and plays adequate defense. He just doesn’t have the heart. He is Euro-soft. We will see it again when he plays against Boston and now Cleveland (Shaq will only get motivated by five or six games; those two against the Lakers will be two of them). But even though he is Euro-soft, he is no different from any other player in the top 10, they all have weaknesses. KG is not the KG of old, he is an older KG. Dirk used to be called “Irk” because he had no “D” in him. Duncan can’t shoot free throws etc…
The Lakers NEED LO because they need someone to save their butts when Pau and Kobe are off. he has the ability to score 20 and get 20 rebounds. There are not that many players in the league who can do that. He is one of two five tool players in the league (Odom and Hedo). The Lakers should pay Odom and take the hit and sign Matt Barnes to replace most of what Trevor did for them. Matt won’t cost too much and has the ability to score and defend. If he is willing to take the $1.9 million we have left, Mitch should pursue him with both guns. Adam Morrison is not an answer to any question but who should the Lakers cut or trade for any other warm body in the league besides Mark Madsen.
the same can be said of KG
never had a good team in Minnesota till he was surrounded by talent. So is KG not capable of being “the guy” or not dominating, or not a top 7-15 player?
I know that KG is a better defender and rebounder, but the situation is similar.
"The problem actually is that PER is a extra-long, double high wagon load of horse crap." - timbo (7/3/09)
great artilce, dexter. however, one thing stood out to me:
So what would it mean to lose Lamar as well? It would mean that the team needs to replace about 4,300 minutes of high-level regular season play at the forward position.
part of the problem with lamar’s game, is his to go unnoticed in some games because of a lack of energy and motivation on his part. thus, if 82 games = 4,300 minutes, then i have to disagree with your statement.
as for some of the questions others posted above with regard to the 10 million over 8, dexter explains that some players will feel unappreciated and might go work for another employer even if the money is the same. that is true, that may happen. however, like justin says, it is not a good (or smart) reason to overpay. that said, i would offer him the 8 or 8.5 million, and if some other team offers him 10 or 11 (blazers, maybe?) then i say the lakers should match it. ultimately, in basketball economics, lamar is easily worth the 10 million he’s asking for. what he brings to this organization on and off the court is invaluable. sign the man.
Absolutely no need to offer $10 million
Hell, $8 million is already above market value. There is literally no one going to offer Odom a contract larger than the MLE simply because he doesn’t have a market. Portland is wrapped up with Millsap for a week and OKC has taken itself out of the free agent hunt. The Lakers will never do a sign-and-trade because no one will offer them anything major in return for Odom, and there’s absolutely no need to. I doubt even Portland makes an offer if Utah matches because if Odom does take a huge contract offer from them, they’re stuck with a player who doesn’t really mesh with their current scheme and has an unmovable salary.
To secure ourselves against defeat lies in our own hands, but the opportunity of defeating the enemy is provided by the enemy himself.
Good point Ben R
I hadn’t thought about the fact that if Portland overpays for him to try to screw the Lakers that they’d be stuck with him with an un-tradeable contract if the Lakers didn’t match it.
To me he would just be LaMarcus Aldridge’s backup in Portland. They couldn’t use him at the 3 for the same reason we don’t play Bynum, Gasol & Odom at the same time.
Anyone know how may years they are offering?
I agree you gotta have Lamar back but you got to be careful not to overpay too much. No team wants to pay him $10mil now. They won’t want to pay that much in a couple of years and so you end up with an untradable piece like Sacha & Luke.
In a couple of years, maybe Bynum as developed into a beast and so maybe you package Lamar & Pau in a deal for a big name to augment a slowing Kobe. (OK, it is just a dream.) It’s obviously much harder to do that if you overpay Lamar.
So far its been rumored to be offering 8-8.75 million over 3 years (depending on salary caps etc) for a total of 24-26$ million.
But again, those are rumors.
To the OP, there is NO point paying 10 mil. If artest can live off of 6 mill a year, I’m pretty sure odom can live with 8 mill.
EH
Find the latest in stars * media * hype+ * sports * fashion
@ STRKNG LIGHTS BLOG (http://streakinglights.blogspot.com/)
by STREAKINGLIGHTS on Jul 12, 2009 5:13 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
signing L.O. is not optional
Great insight; I totally agree with the logic in this piece. Sure, Lamar showed too many lackadaisical moments since he has been with the team. However, we have to remember: he is not a great (albeit, very good) player, he experienced and had to overcome a recent family tragedy, and he ‘came through’ when it counted most (during this championship run.) This is not the time for Mitch and Buss to stick their heads in the sands of Venice Beach; let’s show L.O. some well deserved love. There are at least two to three others on the roster we should be rid of but that “L” is not one of them.
LOL thats right "make it rain on the man"
I’m still waiting for them to make this happen, I get online everyday looking for news saying the Lakers signed Lamar. I swear if I was anywhere near L.A. I would start a riot because it’s that serious they need to sign Odom no buts about it.
There are basic Fundamentals that are needed to move forward in this game. Always keep your guard up at all times to avoid being caught in a trap. Overcome the fouls that will be commited against you REBOUND AND PRESS ON. ADJUST to the LimeLight: ALL-STAR PLAYERS ARE ALWAYS THE CENTER OF ATTENTION. Know what your role is and play your position. Find a game plan and execute it. REMEMBER YOU ONLY GET OUT OF THE GAME WHAT YOU PUT INTO IT.
Sugar-high decision possible
Guys that eat pounds of candy each day have unstable blood sugar and are prone to doing irrational things.
At any time Odom could be under the influence of Snickers and gummies, and tell Buss and Kupchak to shove their deal. Paul Allen could give Lamar $8 million a year in cash and another $2 million in candy, and then where are we?
The only way to keep him is for the Lakers to sweeten the offer.
.......
1. Yes, Lamar makes us an instant favorite. He is a unique player in that there are very few players in the NBA that can match up with him. His production may not be at the all-star levels, but the intagibles certainly dont get overlooked by the 82 game Laker fan.
that being said….
2. Buss, Kupchack and the Lakers would be retarded if they paid Lamar 10 million, when Lamar wouldnt get more than 8 anywhere else. They are more or less bidding against themselves. Sure you don’t want Lamar to be unhappy during the season, but you don’t want to debiliate yourself…. I’m glad mitch is calling Lamar’s bluff. Mitch gave him a good offer considering Houston and the Knicks are only teams left with money left, and they only have 6-7 million available. What is Lamar gonna do? be a baby are join another team out of spite even though he loves it here? sit out the season? If he does that, then f him, we’re still contenders without him, he just makes life alot easier.
3. Sure you might be saying Buss is a millionaire, he is just being cheap. That is definately not the case. Buss didnt get to be a millionaire being stupid. And as a long time laker fan, we OWE buss and mitch a little trust. We should give them credit for giving us a franchise that is always in the playoffs. A team that is never in rebuilding mode for more than 3 years. Bandwagoners jumped off the bridge when we traded shaq, but look where we are now! Sure we had 2 years of being the suns biatch, but the lakers quickly reloaded, and have a talented and YOUNG group (excluding fish, kobe). So like in the shaq situation, we need to have trust now. I know that if LO doesnt come back, the lakers will put the money elsewhere to good use.
“The Lakers are a product, and you its consumers. You have a right to demand that the product be of the highest quality.”
WHO DO YOU THINK YOU ARE?! Hello, its LA, the Lakers are going to get people in the seats reguardless of whose on the court. That statement just makes you sound like a spoiled brat. Just get off the bandwagon dude, cuz its fans like you that make Laker fans look bad. It’s fans like you that make the Lakers overpay for Sasha and Luke. They have one good year and all of sudden they are the key to a championship. The Lakers have brought too many good moments for me just to start whinning when they are hesitant to pay a man. I know you’re just trying to make our team as good as possible, I’m just saying take with a grain of salt. LAker’s mgmt knows what theyre doing, and yoou should trust them.
Freaking out about losing a player, only inflates the players price and gives them leverage in negotiations, cuz the players can just point to fans like you whinning, and say “ooh you better pay me, or you guys are gonna lose ticket sales” (see Sasha), which simply isnt true for 99% of players with the few exceptions being Kobe, Lebron, and Dwade
umm
I’m glad mitch is calling Lamar’s bluff. Mitch gave him a good offer considering Houston and the Knicks are only teams left with money left, and they only have 6-7 million available.
The Knicks and Rockets? I’m assuming maybe you meant the MLE, but there are plenty of other teams out there that have yet to spend the MLE.
If you mean real cap space, the only teams is Portland and Oklahoma City (with enough to give a real offer to Lamar), and the Blazers are currently tied up with Millsap.
"The problem actually is that PER is a extra-long, double high wagon load of horse crap." - timbo (7/3/09)
hmm
Laker management needs to stop worrying about what Lamar costs, and start focusing on what he’s worth.
I dunno, it seems like that statement is almost backwards. Wouldn’t what he costs be $10 million (what he wants), and what he’s worth is really $8 million? Just because other teams have overpaid for glorified backups for $8 to $10 million isn’t our fault, or Lamar’s. The value of a all-star caliber backup is $8 million.
"The problem actually is that PER is a extra-long, double high wagon load of horse crap." - timbo (7/3/09)
Dallas has the potential to get so much stronger if this trade goes through, and the Magic don’t match the offer sheet for Gortat.
Dallas is in talks with the Milwaukee Bucks about sending Micheal Redd to Dallas for Eric Dampiers expiring contract.
On the Lamar bit, I think Mitch and Buss will make the necessary moves in order to retain him. At this point there isn’t anybody we can get through FA that can replace Lamar, especially because all we have left to offer is the vet’s minimum whereas with Lamar we can offer him as much as we want.
I hope we don’t overpay, but at the same time I hope we pay enough to keep him satisfied. There isn’t much of a market for Lamar which is puzzling, coming off a championship and all. It’s interesting that teams are more interested in the likes of Bass, Gortat, among others yet you don’t hear any interest from other teams for Lamar. The chances of us keeping Lamar, at this point, are pretty good. I hope so at least.
summer league post?
it’d be great to get some gossip on how adam morrison and our new draft picks (but specifically morrison) is doing in the summer league. i’ve been scanning the internet but not much yet. anyone hear anything?
confused me!
I thought my split personality was posting!
"The problem actually is that PER is a extra-long, double high wagon load of horse crap." - timbo (7/3/09)
Lakers are doing the right thing!
As good as Lamar is, he’s not a player you can overspend on because he’s so inconsistent. Can he step up and be the difference maker on this team or any other team? Absolutely! Can he be so inconsistent that fans who normally adore him call for his trade? Yes, and it has happened every year since he came to L.A.
There’s a reason LO isn’t getting the type of interest he expected…he and his agent are over estimating his worth. Is he worth $7-$8 mil per season?…sure. Is he worth $10 mil a year?… probably not.
LO will sign with L.A. this week. Read somewhere today that a person from his camp is saying a deal will be done this week. My guess is that it’ll be in the $8.5mil range for 3 years and we’ll all breathe a collective sigh of relief. He knows he’s got the best chance at another championship with the Lakers and I’m sure he’s looking forward to playing with his Queensbridge native, Artest.
"The Lakers are a product, and you its consumers. You have a right to demand that the product be of the highest quality."
i want a great team always, but are you saying that the “product” have not been of the “highest quality”?
we’re talking lakers here.. championship?? are you worried that the teams wants to give up a championship to save money? or that your GM skills need to be consulted?
relax
Lakers can replace Odom and still be champions
I LIKE Odom as most other Laker fans do. But, fact is, he’s replaceable. Yep, he’s overrated. He became the 4th or 5th option (6th even!) in the offense last year. And, he’s demonstrated in the past and present that he will not produce consistently as the 2nd or 3rd option in an offense on a championship caliber team. His defense (he’s not a defensive stopper), rebounding, and “versatility” is where he adds value. The GMs around the league know this and only the desperate will offer more than the Lakers and it will be at their peril. Lamar rarely overachieves, but frequently underachieves. He did his job down the stretch in the playoffs and in the finals, but its the type of production that is to be expected from him. When we finally get that production, we are all surprised and pleased….and its that last thing we seem to remember. I’m with Mitch and Dr. Buss on this one. If we lose him, we lose him. Do NOT overpay ($9 mil is to much, $10 mil is just looney).
I know there are but a few free agents available that can give us what we need to be champs again, but there are a few. Consider Chris Wilcox. Similar build as Lamar, but more athletic and physical. Can run the floor and finish at the basket (who misses more chippy lay-ups than Odom?) with authority. As good or better defensively than Lamar and can rebound (LO get 2-3 rebounds per night just from his own missed chippy lay-ups). Does not shoot the 3-point shot (I wince most times when Lamar is shooting his 30% clip)so he doesn’t spread the floor the same way but he has a much better midrange game than Lamar (which is non-existent). You don’t hear about players like Chris because he’s always played on bad teams. He would come much cheaper ($4-5 mil?) than LO. Lamar’s role is diminishing. He’s maintained his role to this point only due to Bynum’s injury problems. If Bynum stays healthy and not be such a foul magnet, Odom will be a 20-25 minute per game player. $10 mil for that, uh uh, no way. I’m also concerned that if we sign Odom at the $8 mil or so, he may not respond well mentally and his feelings of being “underappreciated” could impact his play. Lamar has always struggled with the emotional/mental side of life and his game. Lets be real. Set the emotion aside. Lakers may just need to move on.
Chris Wilcox?
He’s not even half the player Odom is. Hell, maybe even half is giving him too much credit. Only scenario that we’re going to get besides resigning Odom is a sign-and-trade, and Kupchak isn’t trading him for anything short of quality players.
To secure ourselves against defeat lies in our own hands, but the opportunity of defeating the enemy is provided by the enemy himself.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Silver Screen and Roll
Related FanShots on Silver Screen and Roll
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
