PDA

View Full Version : Is Bynum Expendable now?



MillerTime
02-18-2009, 01:07 AM
The Lakers seem to be playing a lot better with Bynum out. LO has some in and played amazing. Do you guys think hes expendable now?

MyFavMartin
02-18-2009, 01:15 AM
no

Trader Joe
02-18-2009, 01:16 AM
Nah, they'll still keep him. He fits into their long term plans. Even if he just maintains this current level of production.

Mourning
02-18-2009, 01:41 AM
Nope.

Roaming Gnome
02-18-2009, 01:49 AM
No way, Jose...

Reggie43.Yes!
02-18-2009, 01:53 AM
no possible way. If anything, and this probably wont even be the case, they give a bench role when he comes back from injury.

jeffg-body
02-18-2009, 05:22 AM
I have to agree not a chance in hell that Bynum is expendable. He's their long term plan and LO is their guy right now that can stop gap that starting spot.

Unclebuck
02-18-2009, 08:45 AM
The Lakers seem to be playing a lot better with Bynum out. LO has some in and played amazing. Do you guys think hes expendable now?

Too few games to make any sort of assumption like that.

But maybe if we called and the first name we mentioned was Granger - the lakers might not hang up the phone. They would want to throw us a bad contract or two and might want a first round pick (in addition to Danny) But that is where Bynum's trade value is right now (of course his trade value could plummet if these injuries occur every year

Major Cold
02-18-2009, 09:42 AM
I would say that his value is the same a year ago. If the Lakers win it all without him, he still is not expendable, but his value is not as high.

Trevor Ariza on the other hand...

loborick
02-18-2009, 11:33 AM
Ridiculous. Lakers are not playing better without him. They were playing just as well with him. And he is needed as an enforcer. The other Lakers have stepped up with him out, but he is needed.

No, he won't be available.

BRushWithDeath
02-18-2009, 01:41 PM
Trevor Ariza isn't either.

flox
02-18-2009, 01:54 PM
haha no.

Major Cold
02-18-2009, 04:21 PM
Trevor Ariza isn't either.

Look when his contract is up. They are not gonna wanna keep him, Walton, and Vladamir. Maybe not this year but by next year they will need to do something.

WetBob
02-18-2009, 04:27 PM
Look when his contract is up. They are not gonna wanna keep him, Walton, and Vladamir. Maybe not this year but by next year they will need to do something.

Radmanovic is already gone. And there is about as good of a chance as us picking Rasho over Roy as there are of the Lakers choosing Walton over Ariza, but the point is moot since they'll almost assuredly keep them both.

Smoothdave1
02-18-2009, 11:14 PM
Bynum=hype

Is he a good player? Yes, but until he can stay healthy for a full season and produce consistently, then he'll just be a good player and not the superstar that everyone makes him out to be.

Remember when Eddy Curry was supposed to be the next Shaq? New York can't find anyone who will even touch his deal now.

Look at Curry and Bynum's numbers for their first few years:

Curry:

200102 Chicago 72 31 16.0 .501 .000 .656 3.8 .3 .2 .7 6.7
200203 Chicago 81 48 19.4 .585 .000 .624 4.4 .5 .2 .8 10.5
200304 Chicago 73 63 29.5 .496 1.000 .671 6.2 .9 .3 1.1 14.7
200405 Chicago 63 60 28.7 .538 .000 .720 5.4 .6 .3 .9 16.1


Bynum:

200506 L.A. Lakers 46 0 7.3 .402 .000 .296 1.7 .2 .1 .5 1.6
200607 L.A. Lakers 82 53 21.9 .558 .000 .668 5.9 1.1 .2 1.6 7.8
200708 L.A. Lakers 35 25 28.8 .636 .000 .695 10.2 1.7 .3 2.1 13.1
200809 L.A. Lakers 41 41 29.4 .549 .000 .669 8.4 1.7 .4 1.9 14.2

PacersRule
02-18-2009, 11:23 PM
No, he's too good of a player to be expendable. And he's still not at his full potential yet.