Griffin doesn't necessarily hurt them in the Lebron sweepstakes. Like I said, they could realistically have only Nash at 9.7m and Griffin at 17.6m in the summer of 2014. That is 27.3m with 30+ million to play with in free agency.
Again, they lose their bandwagon fans to LAC. And imo Griffin is overrated. Maybe they just don't like him that much and would rather use the money on some other player in next yr's FA, like Melo + LBJ. That way, they can at least tell LBJ, hey, we will sign you and ANYONE ELSE you want to have here in LAL instead of, hey, we will sign you to play w/ Griffin, who you may or may not want to play with, and have some money left over to fill out the roster pretty nicely! The latter just doesn't sound nearly as sexy. Again, I would be 50/50 on it.
Agree to disagree. I think the latter is way more sexy when you realize who else are FAs. But I agree, I think Griffin is incredibly overrated. But if it's Griffin or nothing... I think they go Griffin. Bandwagon fans be damned. Also, I don't think there is ANY way Lebron is leaving Miami.
Really? Have you seen Bosh this yr or in the playoffs? Or Wade? He had a great Game 4 but for the last few months, his age is showing. Both of them are on such an obvious decline. If I were LBJ, I would get the heck out of dodge if the LAL can offer me max + room to create my own team. Owner all about money and stubborn -- think he wants LAC to steal his money AND be the new talk of the town? Rather tank for 1 yr and maybe get Wiggins
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>An NBA executive said the Lakers will either, A, sign Dwight Howard, or B, let him walk if he wants and have ample cap space next summer.</p>— Brad Turner (@BA_Turner) <a href="https://twitter.com/BA_Turner/statuses/346040741425991680">June 15, 2013</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Lakers first priority would be to sign Dwight. If that's not happening, you bet your ass that they will bend the Clippers over backward.
I don't get why Boston would take on Jordan's poisonous contract. That's the one thing that's been perplexing with that news coming out. He only averages 8 and 7. What?
Thanks for sharing. There was also another message frm the Laker's FO posted somewhere in the GARM. Lakers are acting as expected. Absolutely NO SIGN AND TRADE, you stay or you walk, we will save cap room for 2014. I think Sterling and the Clippers are going to tow a similar line, stay or walk. We can throw out any scenarios which involve a sign and trade. It makes it more difficult for us to obtain both D12 and CP3. But that's not a bad thing.
Only 2 yrs left on that contract. They would get to try him out for a year. And if it doesn't work, they can ship him out as a huge $10M expiring in the off-season.
What that means is we may do a sign and trade, but only to a team with cap room, and only if the assets favor us. (The entire point of the no s&t scenario isn't to not do a s&t but to not expand the market Dwight can go to, teams with cap room are already in the market)
From Woj: http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nba--c...ers--kevin-garnett-to-clippers-201709995.html Clippers and Celtics deep in talks to send Doc Rivers and Garnet to Clippers. If this goes down, it means Chris Paul is staying with the Clips. If the Lakers rumors are true that they will not do a sign and trade for Dwight then this whole story of Dwight and CP3 together next year has just been blown up.
Yes, we'd have the cap room we cleared for Dwight to play with. I don't think Garnett to the Clippers necessarily means they are getting rid of Griffin and Bledsoe.
Sorry, I misunderstood. No we wouldn't have cap room after signing Dwight. Woj on twitter: Clippers are reluctant to trade Bledsoe and Jordan to Celtics. Lakers resisting all trade offers involving Dwight Howard.
Posted by bandwagon 3 hours ago on page 24, and referred to by others since then. Do you read anything, or just enjoy repeating news?
