If the Lakers let Kwame's contract expire...............

Dexmor · Post #21 » by **Dexmor** » Thu Jan 3, 2008 8:06 pm

You can't count his n.y. stats. Everything is so messed up over there. Look at his whole career and know he is a very good defender. He's a 2 way player.

ak777 · Post #22 » by **ak777** » Thu Jan 3, 2008 8:13 pm

star24 wrote:They should make a move because they need help and Kwame's contract holds value. Even a guy like Q could help them alot.

dude do you have man crush's on these nba players? its like every month you have a new guy attraction? in the summer it was Critt, then after trade ariza ...few days back it was david lee and now Q...whats the matter?

what has Q done lately that you want to trade for this guy? he has tons of injurys and the horrible thing is ....he is not even insured?? did you knew that he is not insured?

in summer you said you were 24....few days back you said you were 27.....but honestly i dont think you are telling the truth

MikeyMike · Post #23 » by **MikeyMike** » Thu Jan 3, 2008 8:17 pm

Q is old, washed up, and overweight...I don't want him on the Lakers.

MAMBAEMD · Post #24 » by **MAMBAEMD** » Thu Jan 3, 2008 8:21 pm

star24 wrote:You can't count his n.y. stats. Everything is so messed up over there. Look at his whole career and know he is a very good defender. He's a 2 way player.

I have tried to stay away from discussions about Q, but could no longer help myself.
Q a good defender?
He has never been a good defender.
He is a one demensional player. The only thing he does is shoot from the outside and he is not very good or consistent at that.
I cannot see him helping the Lakers at all.

Teen Girl Squad · Post #25 » by **Teen Girl Squad** » Thu Jan 3, 2008 8:29 pm

Ugh the usual trade for trade's sake time of year. Unless we can make a significant move with his contract, I would rather let it expire.

Tommy Trojan · Post #26 » by **Tommy Trojan** » Thu Jan 3, 2008 8:39 pm

I don't mind trading Kwame, but if we do we need another big back. With Chris Mihm injured half the season and Bynum is just startting we would need another big coming back our way.

I don't think Mitch will trade Kwame, his stock is all time low and not many teams would want to take him except for salarry reasons

Dexmor · Post #27 » by **Dexmor** » Thu Jan 3, 2008 9:08 pm

His stock is his contract so his play is moot. They should trade him while he is still an asset, it's not just for the sake of making a trade.

Post #28 » by **LLcoleJ** » Thu Jan 3, 2008 9:15 pm

star24 wrote:His stock is his contract so his play is moot. They should trade him while he is still an asset, it's not just for the sake of making a trade.

well it is if we dont get anything viable back. If we trade him we will take back salary so we need to be sure that the salary and player we take back is worthy. I see ZERO reasons why we should commit 20 million over the next 2.5 years to a guy like Q. We dont need him.

Trading for a guy like Q JUST to trade Kwames contract is trading for the sake of trading.

CITYOFANGELSX3 · Post #29 » by **CITYOFANGELSX3** » Thu Jan 3, 2008 9:32 pm

Trading Kwame away should only be for someone who can make a difference on this team. Not another bad contract in Q. Plus Kwame is our dirty man, he does a lot more then score (when he does). His job is to guard the bigs in the western confrence thats why they got him.

I think if we could resign him about at mle money, then we do it. If he wants something near the 9 mill he's getting. Its best to trade him now.

Tommy Trojan · Post #30 » by **Tommy Trojan** » Thu Jan 3, 2008 9:48 pm

What would it take to get Arest in LA?

Do you guys think we can get him for Kwame + Farmar or (Critt) plus a first?

I would love to have Artest in LA, he will give us the inside and outside presence. Not only does he score 20 a game, but his hell of a defender.

Post #31 » by **semi-sentient** » Thu Jan 3, 2008 9:54 pm

Big_Bad_LA wrote:What would it take to get Arest in LA?

Do you guys think we can get him for Kwame + Farmar or (Critt) plus a first?

I would love to have Artest in LA, he will give us the inside and outside presence. Not only does he score 20 a game, but his hell of a defender.

I think we'd be stupid not to do that deal, but I doubt the Kings would. In no way are they going to help us get better, and that deal makes us considerably better on the defensive end. We'd also have somewhat of a log jam at SF (Ariza, Walton, Artest), so we'd need to figure something out on that front. With a guy like Artest coming in, I'd be all for packaging Ariza + Critt (or Farmar) to bring in a big body to back up Bynum, if that's even possible.

One Love · Post #32 » by **One Love** » Thu Jan 3, 2008 11:21 pm

The more games Indiana and Jersey lose the higher the probability that Kwame is shipped this year...

I wouldn't give him a penny to stay on our squad and take minutes away from Gasol )next year), Turiaf and hopefully Mihm...

ak777 · Post #33 » by **ak777** » Thu Jan 3, 2008 11:26 pm

One Love wrote:The more games Indiana and Jersey lose the higher the probability that Kwame is shipped this year...

I wouldn't give him a penny to stay on our squad and take minutes away from Gasol )next year), Turiaf and hopefully Mihm...

Hey One Love you have any insights on the lakers FO? like who are they targetting or something like that?

Post #34 » by **kno** » Thu Jan 3, 2008 11:27 pm

star24 wrote:You can't count his n.y. stats. Everything is so messed up over there. Look at his whole career and know he is a very good defender. He's a 2 way player.

Oh wow..

Post #35 » by **semi-sentient** » Thu Jan 3, 2008 11:35 pm

One Love wrote:The more games Indiana and Jersey lose the higher the probability that Kwame is shipped this year...

I wouldn't give him a penny to stay on our squad and take minutes away from Gasol )next year), Turiaf and hopefully Mihm...

How do we even know that Gasol will be on the team next year, much less knowing if he will be effective or not?

islander009 · Post #36 » by **islander009** » Fri Jan 4, 2008 12:58 am

well it is if we dont get anything viable back. If we trade him we will take back salary so we need to be sure that the salary and player we take back is worthy. I see ZERO reasons why we should commit 20 million over the next 2.5 years to a guy like Q. We dont need him.

I agree with Phil 2.0, there is no reason we should be jumping the gun just yet. Kwame is an expiring contract for us, he still has been somewhat valuable to us. It is true his trade value isnt that high (i personally dont like him on this team) but he is contributing 6 fouls if anything to play defense for us which is our weak point. Like i said before if we decide to let it expire and there are no other options in the off season, why not sign him under MLE. Until a quality player is being dangled by trade deadline and it benefits us getting that player, then we trade. but for now we dont need to incur other salary expenses that will lock us up.

Crooked-I · Post #37 » by **Crooked-I** » Fri Jan 4, 2008 1:04 am

If we do let it expire, how much would it take to resign him? If we can get him for cheap, why not resign him. No way he's getting anywhere close to what he's getting now from any team. No team with give him more than the MLE.

Tommy Trojan · Post #38 » by **Tommy Trojan** » Fri Jan 4, 2008 1:36 am

I say MLE, unless some team is dumb enough to pay him more. And you never know there are GM's like that in the league. Just ask Isiah Thomas

numbas · Post #39 » by **numbas** » Fri Jan 4, 2008 1:52 am

i really dont know y alot of u r saying his trade value is low becuz it doenst matter how hes playin or if hes playing its that he has a contract for 9 mill that will come off the cap,every year theris a trade like this for a team that is cutting salary

Post #40 » by **semi-sentient** » Fri Jan 4, 2008 2:17 am

If we can't trade him for another big, then I'd say resign him at MLE. Letting him walk doesn't put us under the cap, and it's not like there are any better bigs available for MLE-type money.