You're pretty much seeing what you'd get from Dwight right now in Houston.
Not worth the money or the time.
Which is production amongst the best bigs in basketball, even while playing hurt. In a league where Mozgov can fetch multiple picks, that is most definitely worth any teams time (one trying to compete or rebuild). If you had Howard I'm sure the Cavs would have given you Haywood's expiring snd multiple 1sts from him, along with other assets. That wouldn't help your team?
Kobe never should have driven Dwight out of LA. With a healthy and motivated Dwight we would be a great team.
You're pretty much seeing what you'd get from Dwight right now in Houston.
Not worth the money or the time.
I agree. I was watching timeless Lakers the other night on TWC and while i was watching it i started to noticed how much Dwight has regressed from his years with the Magic. Kind of felt like we dodged a bullet. _________________
Kobe never should have driven Dwight out of LA. With a healthy and motivated Dwight we would be a great team.
You're pretty much seeing what you'd get from Dwight right now in Houston.
Not worth the money or the time.
I agree. I was watching timeless Lakers the other night on TWC and while i was watching it i started to noticed how much Dwight has regressed from his years with the Magic. Kind of felt like we dodged a bullet.
We did. He's fools' gold. And Houston can keep him.
Joined: 19 Dec 2011 Posts: 20880 Location: Southern California
Posted: Tue Jan 27, 2015 10:47 am Post subject:
LakersNewEra wrote:
Well..pains me to say it but I think we are being sore losers as a fanbase re Dwight.
Which is out of character for us because we're used to winning and in this case, he left us..he feuded with Kobe...all of that deeply offends us and hurts our ego.
Don't get me wrong, Dwight is an absolute clown, not in a good way. Dude is a punk.
Would I like if he stayed? Sure.
He is not all that, certainly not an MVP candidate he was back in Orlando but he is still an impact player.
He did make a great decision for himself, I do give him that. He took less money, he knew he'd face the backlash and he still chose the Rockets. Gotta respect that.
For me, it's not even about him leaving anymore. I got over that after the first couple of days. If he didn't want to stay here, then that's fine. He wasn't forced to play for a team he didn't want to play for. It's the way that he carried himself as a Laker that bothers me.
- He complained about the lack of touches he was getting, while infamously waiving stat sheets around, when he CLEARLY didn't deserve them. Did he seriously expect the offense to be run through him when he was fumbling the ball and getting stripped of it after almost every possession? He literally looked like the 2nd coming of Kwame at times.
- He talked crap about Kobe behind his back at the all star game. How petty do you have to be to (bleep) talk about your own teammate, not just your teammate for the game, but a guy you're playing with for the entire season? Even Pop chewed him out that year during the ASG weekend for acting like a prick.
- He bricked free throws constantly, and cost us multiple games because teams were using "Hack-A-Dwight" down the stretch. This guy scoffed at getting lessons on how shoot free throws from Steve freaking Nash, one of the greatest free throw shooters in NBA history.
- He wasn't willing to change his game around. He thought he was too good to be running the PnR. If we had ran the offense through Dwight, and if Kobe wasn't putting up MVP type of numbers from late January through April, we would've missed the playoffs.
- He embarrassed himself, and this entire franchise, in the playoffs. How sad is it that the last playoff series that this franchise played, and probably will play for a few years, was that? Kobe broke down just to get us in the playoffs, and the result was Dwight quitting and making this team look pathetic.
- He tried to get Kobe amnestied. One of the greatest players in NBA history, and in the discussion for being the greatest Laker of all time, and he had the nerve to bring this up when he wasn't even going to stay.
I was disappointed on opening night this season when Jeanie said that this franchise let Dwight down. The only person that let anyone down was Dwight himself. When he got here, this guy had no problem being compared to legendary Laker big men like Mikan, Kareem, Wilt, and Shaq, but when he left, he blamed the everyone else for putting him in the conversation with them. If your mentality is that of being a winner just because you're in the league, then you clearly aren't suited to be an NBA champion.
Lakers fans don't think you're in a better situation buddy, we're not jealous of teams finishing in 2nd place.
They're not finishing in 2nd place either.
They wont win it, but the chance is better there then here these days!
At least he's enjoying the season. He wakes up on game day knowing there is a damned good chance he will win his game tonight.
I'd rather go 0-82 and get the 1st pick in the draft than be a team that hangs their hat on "We don't got a championship squad but we can win 50 games in the regular season". _________________ Maybe you think it's completely innocent. Maybe you don't. But there's no denying that what the rule book says means a lot less than what the NBA wants at any given moment. -Tim Donaghy
Losing Dwight for nothing was one of the main reasons that our franchise has been rock bottom for the last 2 years.
We got him for free, and we didn't pay to lose him, so we're at zero either way.
There was no way to trade a guy like that mid-season without him guaranteeing that team that he will re-sign. And you don't just trade the supposed best center in the league in the middle of the first year that you get him.
You're pretty much seeing what you'd get from Dwight right now in Houston.
Not worth the money or the time.
Which is production amongst the best bigs in basketball, even while playing hurt. In a league where Mozgov can fetch multiple picks, that is most definitely worth any teams time (one trying to compete or rebuild). If you had Howard I'm sure the Cavs would have given you Haywood's expiring snd multiple 1sts from him, along with other assets. That wouldn't help your team?
Having two top picks is better than multiple later 1sts, the elimination of one of our picks, and the devaluing of another.
You're pretty much seeing what you'd get from Dwight right now in Houston.
Not worth the money or the time.
Which is production amongst the best bigs in basketball, even while playing hurt. In a league where Mozgov can fetch multiple picks, that is most definitely worth any teams time (one trying to compete or rebuild). If you had Howard I'm sure the Cavs would have given you Haywood's expiring snd multiple 1sts from him, along with other assets. That wouldn't help your team?
Having two top picks is better than multiple later 1sts, the elimination of one of our picks, and the devaluing of another.
You could have traded him anytime after he signed and still had two top picks, plus whatever you got for him. You could have traded him after last year to the Cavs and got what they gave for Love (the top prospect and then some). Tons of options that would have been better than just letting him walk for nothing.
I agree that he isn't the guy to lead a franchise, but he would clearly still fetch a ton. I mean, we got a freaking lotto pick for Asik when he was due $15M and will hit free agency this summer.
Joined: 23 Aug 2004 Posts: 19482 Location: The X-Files
Posted: Tue Jan 27, 2015 5:37 pm Post subject:
Back then I was very often expressing my vehement opposition to the Dwight acquisition as far as the manner in which it went down.... no certainty he'd stay was far to risky a proposition not to mention the aspects of his game that was in some respects one-dimensional... There had to be far less risky alternatives than the path the Lakers took regardless of all of the replete support we saw expressed unceasingly on this board at the time regarding the acquisition.... _________________ Rule = win titles
Good judgment comes from experience and a lot of that comes from bad judgment. - Will Rogers ...
LOL at those who couldn't care of him leaving couple years ago. that inability to keep Dwight has same if not more negative impact on Lakers these past couple seasons. you can say whatever you want about Dwight, childish, goofying around but the guy brings 17, 10 and 2 while sleep walking. and i have no doubt we'd be in the talks of most likely landing place for Lilliard, Westbrook, and Rondo right about now had Dwight stayed.
Unfortunately Dwight does a lot of sleepwalking - cancer to any title aspiring team. What we should have done was traded him _________________ "Bryant has been the second best player in the NBA for over a decade, but the number 1 player changes every other year. Somehow the number 1 player always seems to fall down the list but Kobe just never moves up. ". The Art of Hating Kobe Bryant
Joined: 23 Aug 2004 Posts: 19482 Location: The X-Files
Posted: Tue Jan 27, 2015 6:18 pm Post subject:
55 wrote:
PhoenixForce wrote:
Losing Dwight for nothing was one of the main reasons that our franchise has been rock bottom for the last 2 years.
We got him for free, and we didn't pay to lose him, so we're at zero either way.
There was no way to trade a guy like that mid-season without him guaranteeing that team that he will re-sign. And you don't just trade the supposed best center in the league in the middle of the first year that you get him.
It's a wash in my book.
How in the world can you say this.... the key to the Dwight acquisition was Bynum.... I understand you can say NOW (after the fact) that Bynum was going to be a "washout", but again that is AFTER THE FACT..... The important thing to keep in mind is that AT THE TIME Bynum was still regarded to have significant value.... and with that value the Lakers certainly had alternatives to acquiring Dwight that would have been FAR LESS risky... and as such could have arguably left the Lakers in a much better situation today than how the Lakers find themselves as a result of losing Dwight for literally NOTHING....
As critical as I recall you were toward Bynum back then, you simply cannot suggest that at the time of the actual 4-way trade that Bynum was considered to be basically worthless to the extent you can equate what we knew then to losing Dwight for nothing because of what transpired later on of which no one could know for sure.... Regardless of how it all shook out, as of the time of the trade Bynum could clearly bring value, PERIOD as proven by the trade itself AT THAT TIME....
The facts are that this is how it was looked at as of the time when the deal went down (quote from link above):
Quote:
At the time of the four-team blockbuster deal, the Lakers and Sixers came away looking like huge winners.
Los Angeles had swapped the league's second-best center in Bynum for its best in Howard, giving up Josh McRoberts, Christian Eyenga and a 2017 first-round pick for the privilege. Meanwhile, Philly parted with Andre Iguodala, Nikola Vucevic, Moe Harkless and a 2015 first-rounder for Andrew Bynum and Jason Richardson, making a borderline playoff team an Eastern Conference contender.
Philly gave up Andre Iguodala, Nicola Vucevic, Moe Harkless and a first round pick to get Bynum.... How can anyone suggest that Bynum was "valueless" at the time of the trade? ... and as noted in the article above at the time Bynum was in many circles regarded as the "2nd best center"....
So again, Bynum was clearly considered at the time to be of value.... and as such could bring value in return.... and that value in return could have clearly been other alternatives than Dwight....
.... the mistake for the Lakers was to gamble on acquiring a player that simply did not really want to be a Lakers player in the first place as directly expressed by Dwight himself in no uncertain terms... Of course the gamble Philly made was based on "health"....
To even suggest that losing Dwight is a "wash" because in your view "we got him free" is just NOT TRUE in the least simply based on the very facts of the matter.... period....
Yes, you can say after the fact it's "zero either way" based on what ultimately transpired with the failure of Bynum in the end, but the fact of the matter is there was absolutely no way to know this for ABSOLUTE SURE.... Clearly as risky as you may personally believe it to be at that time Philly felt that the value of Bynum was worth what they gave up or else they would have never made the trade in the first place.... So based on the facts at the time it remains clear that Bynum could have undoubtedly brought other alternative talent to the Lakers franchise simply based on the trade itself as opposed to the clear risky alternative the Lakers took involving a player that made his feelings known for all to see in no uncertain terms by publicly expressed numerous times his very strong preferences at the time to go to other teams than the Lakers....
Bottom line: the Lakers ended up with "nothing" because of going with Dwight, period... 55, you need to rewrite your "book" if you really believe the ultimate outcome amounts to a "wash" in your book.... _________________ Rule = win titles
Good judgment comes from experience and a lot of that comes from bad judgment. - Will Rogers ...
Joined: 14 Apr 2001 Posts: 144464 Location: The Gold Coast
Posted: Tue Jan 27, 2015 6:50 pm Post subject:
Dreamshake wrote:
kray28_ wrote:
You're pretty much seeing what you'd get from Dwight right now in Houston.
Not worth the money or the time.
Which is production amongst the best bigs in basketball, even while playing hurt. In a league where Mozgov can fetch multiple picks, that is most definitely worth any teams time (one trying to compete or rebuild). If you had Howard I'm sure the Cavs would have given you Haywood's expiring snd multiple 1sts from him, along with other assets. That wouldn't help your team?
There is a thing called winning, that is where Dwight has fallen short. _________________ RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023.
Joined: 14 Apr 2001 Posts: 144464 Location: The Gold Coast
Posted: Tue Jan 27, 2015 6:51 pm Post subject:
PhoenixForce wrote:
Losing Dwight for nothing was one of the main reasons that our franchise has been rock bottom for the last 2 years.
That indicates that there was a chance they could have lost him for something. That wasn't happening. _________________ RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023.
You're pretty much seeing what you'd get from Dwight right now in Houston.
Not worth the money or the time.
Which is production amongst the best bigs in basketball, even while playing hurt. In a league where Mozgov can fetch multiple picks, that is most definitely worth any teams time (one trying to compete or rebuild). If you had Howard I'm sure the Cavs would have given you Haywood's expiring snd multiple 1sts from him, along with other assets. That wouldn't help your team?
There is a thing called winning, that is where Dwight has fallen short.
Agreed, but that wasn't my point. I believe I've acknowledged that Dwight isn't going to lead a team anywhere and is on an athletic decline. But to make it seem like losing him for nothing was good....naw buddy.
Joined: 14 Apr 2001 Posts: 144464 Location: The Gold Coast
Posted: Tue Jan 27, 2015 7:12 pm Post subject:
It was good for the Lakers, they never should have traded for him. The cap space brings more value than Dwight did. _________________ RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023.
You're pretty much seeing what you'd get from Dwight right now in Houston.
Not worth the money or the time.
Which is production amongst the best bigs in basketball, even while playing hurt. In a league where Mozgov can fetch multiple picks, that is most definitely worth any teams time (one trying to compete or rebuild). If you had Howard I'm sure the Cavs would have given you Haywood's expiring snd multiple 1sts from him, along with other assets. That wouldn't help your team?
There is a thing called winning, that is where Dwight has fallen short.
Ehh, then we also have to say just about every top player in the league has fallen short. Durant, Paul, Westbrook, Anthony Davis, Carmelo, Lillard, Harden, Curry, Aldridge, Marc Gasol, Jimmy Butler, and so on. All guys I'd sign for the max.
Losing Dwight for nothing was one of the main reasons that our franchise has been rock bottom for the last 2 years.
We got him for free, and we didn't pay to lose him, so we're at zero either way.
There was no way to trade a guy like that mid-season without him guaranteeing that team that he will re-sign. And you don't just trade the supposed best center in the league in the middle of the first year that you get him.
It's a wash in my book.
How in the world can you say this.... the key to the Dwight acquisition was Bynum.... I understand you can say NOW (after the fact) that Bynum was going to be a "washout", but again that is AFTER THE FACT..... (snipped)
I can say it now like I used to tell you back then... Bynum = damaged goods. The fact that Philly didn't know this and took the chance doesn't change the fact that I knew Bynum was done (which he was). Orlando sure seemed to know.
I wont get into another Bynum/Howard debate but history speaks for itself here.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
