Jump to content


Photo

Jimmy Butler Rumors: Chicago already made an offer to the Los Angeles Lakers

Jimmy Butler Luol Deng DAngelo Russell 28th Pick

  • Please log in to reply
111 replies to this topic

#61 Jody Smokes

Jody Smokes

    Legend

  • Member
  • 13,813 posts
  • Fan Since:2003
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe

Posted May 24, 2017 - 02:21 PM

Then trade the pick then.  I'd rather ride out with Russell and Butler as a backcourt than Fox/Ball/Jackson and Butler.  If you guys want Butler that bad then don't give up the guaranteed and fitting talent for him. 

 

I never said that Russell's offensive ceiling is Butlers. What I said was that his ceiling as a player (offense and defense) is Butler. And right now, Butler has better offense and defense than anyone we have right now. And defense is the biggest weakpoint going forward, as Russell and Randle are both below average defensive players. We have no anchor, Ingram is still too skinny, and Ball is unproven if we draft him (Fultz isn't that good on D either). 

 

This reminds me of the Bynum for Bosh discussions we had back in the day. And all the people who said we should keep Bynum cause of his "potential". 


  • KidRN likes this

"Blake and Parker are good at canceling each other out till our bench point guard comes in"  - Majesty aka Bird Ish (12/4/13)


#62 GCMD

GCMD

    Legend

  • Member
  • 17,010 posts
  • Fav. Laker:Magic Johnson

Posted May 24, 2017 - 02:23 PM

Then trade the pick then.  I'd rather ride out with Russell and Butler as a backcourt than Fox/Ball/Jackson and Butler.  If you guys want Butler that bad then don't give up the guaranteed and fitting talent for him. 

 

 

Who says Russell fits better than Ball?  I'm not sure I've heard anyone make that statement...definitely not at 1...Ball is a better fit and it's not even close.


  • UKUGA, bfc1125roy and martin90 like this

#63 DaSmoothOperator

DaSmoothOperator

    DaSmoothOperator

  • Member
  • 5,091 posts
  • Fan Since:1965
  • Fav. Laker:Jerry West

Posted May 24, 2017 - 06:55 PM

No.

Here's the reality.

Making a deal for Jimmy Butler when you have no intention nor possibility of contending within the next 2 seasons is stupid. Particularly if you're trading your youth for them.

Here's a bigger reality. The league is the Warriors and the Cavs for the next 2-3 seasons. So right now what the Lakers should be focusing on is developing their youth, so that in that 2-3 seasons from now period the Lakers are ready to make a run and try to be a team that can trouble Golden State or get close to upsetting them or feels one player away from doing so.

You trade for Jimmy Butler if you're a team like Boston, which is on the cusp but need that final piece or so to push you over the top.

You don't trade for Jimmy Butler when you're a mid 20 team unless you're gonna somehow land LeBron next, because that's the only way you're contending in a span of time that's relevant if you're in a position the Lakers are in.

Buckle down and develop the youth. It's development time, perfect time FOR development as we're not beating the Warriors anytime soon within the next 2 or so seasons. So why the heck would we throw together some mid-level team that's not gonna do anything and then has no youth to build upon? Precisely.

So, no to Jimmy Butler, especially if it comes to trading our future away for him. Let the Celtics give up Fultz for Butler instead.

I agree we have suffered too long to bail when the finish line is only laps away. Patience is key they know something about Butler, bears scrutiny.

Edited by DaSmoothOperator, May 24, 2017 - 06:58 PM.


#64 Jody Smokes

Jody Smokes

    Legend

  • Member
  • 13,813 posts
  • Fan Since:2003
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe

Posted May 25, 2017 - 09:43 AM

Ball's game is so unique that we don't know HOW he fits in the context of an NBA team.  I love some of his game and his unselfishness but the fact the dude can't even come off a screen for a pull up jumper should be really concerning.  He's the type that will make good players better but he's not going to evelate guys that need serious development themselves (Randle, Ingram).  He's going to shine when he has good teammates.  It's the same way I feel about Russell.  If Russell played with seasoned NBA players he'd be a lot more consistent and look better.  The fact that he has to be the best playmaker, scorer AND leader at 21 years on this team is why you won't see that next step as early as you'd like. 

 

 

 

Who says Russell fits better than Ball?  I'm not sure I've heard anyone make that statement...definitely not at 1...Ball is a better fit and it's not even close.


  • Jackson and KidRN like this

"Blake and Parker are good at canceling each other out till our bench point guard comes in"  - Majesty aka Bird Ish (12/4/13)


#65 GCMD

GCMD

    Legend

  • Member
  • 17,010 posts
  • Fav. Laker:Magic Johnson

Posted May 25, 2017 - 11:37 AM

Ball's game is so unique that we don't know HOW he fits in the context of an NBA team.  I love some of his game and his unselfishness but the fact the dude can't even come off a screen for a pull up jumper should be really concerning.  He's the type that will make good players better but he's not going to evelate guys that need serious development themselves (Randle, Ingram).  He's going to shine when he has good teammates.  It's the same way I feel about Russell.  If Russell played with seasoned NBA players he'd be a lot more consistent and look better.  The fact that he has to be the best playmaker, scorer AND leader at 21 years on this team is why you won't see that next step as early as you'd like. 

 

 

Reasonable opinions.

 

We don't know that Lonzo CAN'T come off screens and do various things because the sample size in high school and college has been so low...we also don't know that he WON'T be able to within the next YEAR if, in fact, he can't right now.

 

Your 2nd point sounds more like RUSSELL than Ball.  Russell is the type that makes good players better because he has severe limitations athletically that keep him from dominating a game WITHOUT the right system and support like a legit P&R BIG to help free him up with good screens and a finishing either by rolling hard to create the mismatch switch or by popping and hitting the J.

 

Ball CREATES easy shots for his teammates.  He finds them in positions that they don't have to do much more than hit the J or make the layup...does Russell do that?  Ball makes the game MUCH easier for everyone, which is what a pure PG is supposed to do.  Ball would help Ingram by creating early offense for him, spacing the floor and being a threat to finish at the rim, allowing Ingram to be both a scorer and facilitator.

 

Ball would help Randle by finding him in positions where all he has to do is finish.  Ball would also find Randle in transition helping Randle be more efficient.  

 

Russell is the one that hasn't shown the ability to elevate his teammates...which is the reason people much more knowledgeable than either of us are talking about the Lakers need for a true PG.

 

And don't forget that Luke has echoed similar analysis of Ball's game.  He's a guy who plays the right way, much like Luke did.  Russell has been the best player on this team...so what?  LOU WILLIAMS was the best player for much of the time he was on the court!  LOL...being the best on a team with ill-fitting parts and youth isn't really hard to do.


Edited by GCMD, May 25, 2017 - 11:39 AM.


#66 BasketballIQ

BasketballIQ

    Legend

  • Member
  • 18,701 posts
  • Name:Julius Jordan
  • Fav. Laker:24

Posted May 25, 2017 - 12:38 PM

Can't wait to you slither away. Repeating points that aren't substantiated is useless

#67 Jackson

Jackson

    Legend

  • Member
  • 12,429 posts
  • Location:Honolulu, Hawaii
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe Bryant/Kareem/Sasha(LOL)

Posted May 25, 2017 - 01:54 PM

Jimmy Butler will be on his way out if he comes here and finds out he has only Lonzo Ball to play with.



#68 Majesty

Majesty

    Luol Deng's cousin is awesome. Thanks for the pizza!!

  • Gameday
  • 54,398 posts
  • Name:Jay
  • Fan Since:1987
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe present, Magic past

Posted May 25, 2017 - 02:23 PM

Who says Russell fits better than Ball?  I'm not sure I've heard anyone make that statement...definitely not at 1...Ball is a better fit and it's not even close.


At the 1 Russell is a better fit, as he can actually run the pick and roll at the NBA level and has experience doing so, which Ball is going to need the crash course on as UCLA didn't run it much given their offense, the Lakers will.   

At the 2, Ball is a better fit because everything he did at UCLA, and I mean everything is a PERFECT representation of what Luke would want from the 2 in his offense.  The off ball scoring, cuts, the ability to make quick decisions on the pass, finding teammates etc.   

So no the statement it's "not even close" at the 1, is pretty false and jumping the gun a bit.  Ball didn't run much pick and roll at UCLA and in the NBA it's a different animal, however Russell is good at the pick and roll and penetrating the defense through it, which is where his strengths would be, and WHY he would be the primary 1 in our offense, and Ball would be the off ball passing and shooting 2.  

Because Ball's style fits perfectly at the 2 in Luke's offense.  I don't think Luke would put Ball at the 1 and have him start running pick and rolls, that would just be dumb.   

So what you do is you maximize Ball's strengths while the coaching staff runs him through on the pick and roll at this level and he gets it down, while that's happening though, in the actual games you maximize him as an off ball passing 2 which fits perfect into what Luke wants to do.    

Then you maximize them both and mask some of Ball's flaws/lack of experience in the PnR so that we can maximize our talent early while they're still learning other things. 


  • Ventiquattro likes this

"Bryant had come to rage against the idea that Howard's clownish disposition could overtake the locker room, the Lakers' culture, and had warned Howard that he would never, ever let it happen." 


#69 kray28

kray28

    Sixth Man

  • Member
  • 3,319 posts
  • Location:Pittsburgh, PA
  • Fan Since:1988
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe Bryant

Posted May 25, 2017 - 03:23 PM

This is a totally bogus rumor if you haven't figured it out already.


  • fido likes this

livin' in a river of darkness beneath the neon lights

 

pkray.png


#70 fido

fido

    Analyst, Moderator, Insomniac

  • Moderator
  • 15,630 posts
  • Location:Costa Mesa, CA
  • Name:Andy
  • Fan Since:1982
  • Fav. Laker:Magic Johnson

Posted May 25, 2017 - 08:31 PM

BBIQ:  "Can't wait to you slither away. Repeating points that aren't substantiated is useless"

 

No need to make these kinds of comments. If you have nothing to add to a conversation besides insults and accusations, move along.


  • GCMD likes this

#71 DaSmoothOperator

DaSmoothOperator

    DaSmoothOperator

  • Member
  • 5,091 posts
  • Fan Since:1965
  • Fav. Laker:Jerry West

Posted May 26, 2017 - 08:48 AM

This time of year abounds in all kinds of trade scenarios mainly false, I've often wondered the point of starting such. The 22nd is around the corner so we'll all see

#72 lakersince75

lakersince75

    Sixth Man

  • Member
  • 3,199 posts
  • Fan Since:1975
  • Fav. Laker:Kareem Abdul Jabbar

Posted May 26, 2017 - 10:14 AM

I love how the rhetoric is Russell's ceiling offensively is butler or worse

Do people realize that it took butler until he was 4 years older than Russell to outperform Russell in ANY category offensively

At a year and 2 years older than Russell butler was giving less than half the production of Russell offensively

How is there even remotely a certainty Russell won't eclipse butlers offensive output

It's just not even within range of a logical assertion at this point.

It's on the same level as if 2 people were racing and one of the guys was about 50 yards ahead and the people watching said, "ya the guy 50 yards ahead has no chance at winning the race"

You mean like DEFENSE? At the end of the day, who gives a damn is you average 21 ppg if your defense is horrible??


Edited by lakersince75, May 26, 2017 - 10:15 AM.


#73 last stand 2.0

last stand 2.0

    Legend

  • Member
  • 26,240 posts
  • Location:LA

Posted May 26, 2017 - 10:18 AM

Dangelo isn't horrible defensively. He's mediocre on that end which is sufficient if he becomes what his talent entails offensively
Posted Image

#74 KidRN

KidRN

    Legend

  • Member
  • 10,368 posts
  • Fan Since:I was born
  • Fav. Laker:KB24 or 8

Posted May 26, 2017 - 10:43 AM

You mean like DEFENSE? At the end of the day, who gives a damn is you average 21 ppg if your defense is horrible??

His defense isn't horrible...and Harden and Nash played absolutely terrible defense so being elite offensively certainly covers up your defensive problems.

#75 kball

kball

    Mocker-in-Chief

  • Member
  • 8,462 posts
  • Fan Since:'71
  • Fav. Laker:kobe, magic, logo AND LEBRON!

Posted May 26, 2017 - 01:22 PM

Have we even had a 21 point scorer other than shaq and kobe in the last 15 years?

Offhand i dont think so.

 

I'll take one in that case and worry about his defense later 


Edited by kball, May 26, 2017 - 01:23 PM.

Excited for  1. Lebron! (Still love me some Kobe, but damn this guy is amazing) 2. Another big get (Whether in FA or in a trade we need some attractions and closers) 3. Young Guys making big jump (Assuming we have anyone left after more necessary moves either genius ones or in desperation)

READY FOR SEASON!!!

 

 


#76 GCMD

GCMD

    Legend

  • Member
  • 17,010 posts
  • Fav. Laker:Magic Johnson

Posted May 26, 2017 - 02:31 PM

At the 1 Russell is a better fit, as he can actually run the pick and roll at the NBA level and has experience doing so, which Ball is going to need the crash course on as UCLA didn't run it much given their offense, the Lakers will.   

At the 2, Ball is a better fit because everything he did at UCLA, and I mean everything is a PERFECT representation of what Luke would want from the 2 in his offense.  The off ball scoring, cuts, the ability to make quick decisions on the pass, finding teammates etc.   

So no the statement it's "not even close" at the 1, is pretty false and jumping the gun a bit.  Ball didn't run much pick and roll at UCLA and in the NBA it's a different animal, however Russell is good at the pick and roll and penetrating the defense through it, which is where his strengths would be, and WHY he would be the primary 1 in our offense, and Ball would be the off ball passing and shooting 2.  

Because Ball's style fits perfectly at the 2 in Luke's offense.  I don't think Luke would put Ball at the 1 and have him start running pick and rolls, that would just be dumb.   

So what you do is you maximize Ball's strengths while the coaching staff runs him through on the pick and roll at this level and he gets it down, while that's happening though, in the actual games you maximize him as an off ball passing 2 which fits perfect into what Luke wants to do.    

Then you maximize them both and mask some of Ball's flaws/lack of experience in the PnR so that we can maximize our talent early while they're still learning other things. 

 

 

 

First, you're making stuff up.  Luke never said he wanted Ball to play the 2 nor has Luke ever described his version of the 2 exclusively in that manner.  So again, you're basing your argument on your made up criteria and attributing it to Luke.

 

Second, it doesn't make sense.  Russell is OBVIOUSLY more aggressive scoring, slower, less athletic and appears to have a quicker release on his shot.  Not saying Ball CAN'T score...just that it's Russell's strength.  And Ball is the better defender...meaning you'd probably want the faster, taller, more athletic player on the 1...that's not Russell...not long-term.  I concede that there are times when Russell may guard the opposing PG at the start of Ball's career...but there is no way we would stick with that once Ball has his "NBA Legs".

 

Third, the P&R thing is getting beaten to DEATH.  You claim ball can't run P&R solely because he hasn't run a lot of it.  I say that he has all of the tools to be a great P&R player, just like Kidd was.

 

It's fine to say we don't know exactly what Ball will be like in the NBA...but once you start comparing him and Russell, you must extrapolate and equate KNOWN QUANTIFIABLE tools to make up for the lack of film on any aspect that you want to compare to Russell...it's not like I'm saying Ball will DEVELOP tools he didn't have in college.  I'm saying based on the physical and mental tools he currently has, you and I could make a logical argument for Ball becoming a very good PG...MUCH BETTER than Russell given that Ball has the same skills as far as passing and court vision (possibly better) AND he's a better athlete.

 

Why can't you see that?


Edited by GCMD, May 26, 2017 - 02:32 PM.

  • bfc1125roy likes this

#77 dazz

dazz

    ..............

  • Member
  • 1,804 posts

Posted May 27, 2017 - 12:27 PM

Holy [expletive] u do that deal.

 

Sign Hayward in FA.

 

Somehow clear cap space for George.

 

Now that's a defensive juggernaut. 

 

PG: Ball

SG: Bulter

SF: Hayward

PF: George

C: Doesn't matter

 

That team makes it to the WCF. People who understand the new CBA, is this possible?? 

 

I run some quick numbers and we should have some 25M in cap space to start the off season. And that's assuming Young opts out of his 5.7M player option and we let Tarik walk.

If the Butler trade went down we would free up another 6M, so 31M left to sign George and Hayward. 

 

We would need to free up a significant amount of money to sign George


Edited by dazz, May 27, 2017 - 12:28 PM.

  • bfc1125roy likes this

#78 Majesty

Majesty

    Luol Deng's cousin is awesome. Thanks for the pizza!!

  • Gameday
  • 54,398 posts
  • Name:Jay
  • Fan Since:1987
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe present, Magic past

Posted May 27, 2017 - 03:39 PM

First, you're making stuff up.  Luke never said he wanted Ball to play the 2 nor has Luke ever described his version of the 2 exclusively in that manner.  

He doesn't have to describe it. If you actually understand the offense Luke is running, what Ball does is precisely what he would envision as perfect for the 2 in his offense.  It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that. 

 

 

 

So again, you're basing your argument on your made up criteria and attributing it to Luke.

 

It's actually called "understanding the offense Luke is running."  not hard to do.  

 

 

Second, it doesn't make sense.  Russell is OBVIOUSLY more aggressive scoring, slower, less athletic and appears to have a quicker release on his shot.  Not saying Ball CAN'T score...just that it's Russell's strength. 

 

Russell's strength is both scoring and making things happen out of the pick and roll as well as being able to run the offense.  Unless you seriously think Clarkson was the "point guard" at the end of the season.  Russell was still playing the point, he played the 'role' equivilent to a shooting guard in one game vs Cleveland, but you watch every other game and he was the one bringing the ball up the court primarily, he was the one initiating the offense out of the pick and roll, and he was the one running the team. 

Want some stats to back it up too? 
 

After being moved to "point guard" Clarkson's stats were 

 

15.5 PPG 

4.2 AST 

3.4 REB 

After being moved to "shooting guard" Russell's stats were

 

19.6 PPG 

5.4 AST 

3.2 REB 

And BEFORE being moved to "shooting guard" Russell's numbers post ASB before being benched at "point guard" were 
 

20.5 PPG 

5.5 AST 

3.3 REB   

GEE.... HOW SIMILAR... almost as if.. he was given the EXACT SAME ROLE he had before   :rolleyes:    But of course you noticed that right?  

Russell was still running the team primarily even after the move to "shooting guard" and if you think otherwise you both weren't watching and aren't paying attention to the stats.  

 

So let's move on. 

 

 

 

And Ball is the better defender...meaning you'd probably want the faster, taller, more athletic player on the 1...that's not Russell...not long-term.  I concede that there are times when Russell may guard the opposing PG at the start of Ball's career...but there is no way we would stick with that once Ball has his "NBA Legs".

 

 

Alright time to tear about your argument.  First, Ball has never defended at the NBA level, Secondly Russell is fine as a defender.   Let's look at the good ole percentiles. 

 

"For all of the pearl-clutching about him getting "blown by", he's defended all of 37 possessions in Isolation this year, surrendering 0.98 PPP...exactly at the 50th percentile.

 

He's been a good pick & roll defender (68th percentile), & about as equally efficient at going over (65th), under (61st), or into (60th) screens. He's in the 73rd percentile when guards reject pick & rolls & he has to stay in front. He's been below average on his closeouts (35th percentile) & contesting around the basket (11th). Far too often, he'll give up on a switch vs. a big. He definitely needs to improve there. But overall, Russell ranked in the 57th percentile in all defensive situations." 

In english for you GCMD, that means he's an above average defender.  So there goes your theory there.   Let's take apart the rest.  

 

 

 

 


GCMD: Third, the P&R thing is getting beaten to DEATH.  You claim ball can't run P&R solely because he hasn't run a lot of it.  I say that he has all of the tools to be a great P&R player, just like Kidd was.


 

HE HAS THE TOOLS, doesn't mean he's going to be experienced at it, RIGHT NOW it's a weakness and he has inexperience in that area, he didn't run much pick and roll in high school OR college and at the NBA it's a focal point of the NBA offense and at NBA speed it's gonna take a learning curve.  Russell already knows how to execute plays out of the pick and roll.  Why do you think Ball's usage rate was so low at UCLA?  His usage rate was low because he DIDN'T hammer the ball throughout a possession, it stuck in his hands for a few moments before he passed it off to make the right play for a teammate for a three or a layup.   Russell did that at Ohio State AND also made things happen out of the pick and roll.  So yeah, Ball is a great passer, but he lacks experience in the pick and roll game and is gonna be having to learn it at the highest level. 

THIS is why it's very obvious that Luke wouldn't put Ball at the 1 and have him running a bunch of pick and roll from the get go, that would be stupid, that's not MADE UP.  You just need to use common sense and actual analytical powers beyond "he can do no wrong" to see that.  

 

 

It's fine to say we don't know exactly what Ball will be like in the NBA...



That's the kind of advice you should take yourself. 

 

 

 

 but once you start comparing him and Russell, you must extrapolate and equate KNOWN QUANTIFIABLE tools to make up for the lack of film on any aspect that you want to compare to Russell..


I have, Russell has a better mid range game, a better pick and roll game and passing game OUT of the pick and roll, as well as scoring and he has a better shot off the pick and roll going right than Ball does who has to regather his feet when he drives right to get off his shot from mid, while he can get it off faster going left while going right he has to readjust himself.   Something Russell doesn't have any issues with both passing out of the situation and scoring out of it.   It's his playmaking out of it that makes him the better choice at the 1 than Ball because Ball running pick and rolls out the gate is not a smart decision.   Like I said, everything Ball did at UCLA fits into the ideal that fits the 2 in Luke's offense.  Doesn't hold the ball too long, can either rise up and score, or make the proper pass quickly, is a good cutter and driver to the basket, has an off ball IQ which lead to him getting a lot of alley oops at UCLA and why over half of his shots at the rim were assisted and being a good finisher at the rim when given the opportunity.  No GCMD these aren't MADE UP qualities for Ball, they are aspects of his actual game. 


 

 

.it's not like I'm saying Ball will DEVELOP tools he didn't have in college.  I'm saying based on the physical and mental tools he currently has, you and I could make a logical argument for Ball becoming a very good PG...MUCH BETTER than Russell given that Ball has the same skills as far as passing and court vision (possibly better) AND he's a better athlete.



All that is based upon assumption.   Clarkson's a better athlete than Russell, why can't he outperform him?  That shows how much that kind of stuff matters. 

Ball has skills like passing and court vision like Russell has, here's the difference, Russell can actually get off those passes in the pick and roll and HAS experience in doing so at the NBA level, but Ball hasn't, Ball didn't even run much pick and roll in high school.   Russell is better out of the pick and roll, Ball is better in the open court.  Those are the truth's about both players right now and that is why they benefit each other and fit into each other's games.   Both their games compliment each other.   Entering the NBA, IN LUKE'S OFFENSE, Ball is best suited at the 2.  It takes advantage of all of his off ball skills he showcased at UCLA, from his shooting, to his quick passing without the pick and roll to find a teammate through movement, as well as his off ball IQ and movement and cuts and knowledge of what to do off the ball.   D'Angelo can handle making offense happen out of the pick and roll, and getting shots off from mid and three out of them, as well as the drive and kicking.   Ball benefits from that, because when the defense rotates to Russell because of the pick and roll, guess whose wide open off-ball?  

Precisely.   

Of course GCMD in your mind you can go "yeah BUT WHEN BALL GETS PICK AND ROLL DOWN AND GETS HIS MID RANGE DOWN AND GETS PASSING OUT OF PICK AND ROLL AT THE NBA LEVEL THEN-"  but I cut you off there because you don't know that, have no evidence on it, and haven't even seen any progress in that happening NOR do you know WHEN all that would happen IF ever.  So why don't we stick to what's real and what's actually relevant and can be proven.      He has his flaws, yes they can be improved upon, but we haven't even seen him do such yet at ANY level, so till he does all you've got is assumptions.

 

 


Why can't you see that?



Because I have the stats to back up what I'm saying.  You don't.   


Probably best to move on at this point and agree to disagree.  I lack the patience for the shtick right now. 


Edited by Majesty, May 27, 2017 - 03:48 PM.

  • KidRN likes this

"Bryant had come to rage against the idea that Howard's clownish disposition could overtake the locker room, the Lakers' culture, and had warned Howard that he would never, ever let it happen." 


#79 Clutch Factor

Clutch Factor

    Legend

  • Member
  • 10,162 posts
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe Bryant

Posted May 27, 2017 - 04:11 PM

I wouldn't call Russell an above average defender despite what any advanced stats say. I don't think he's as bad at defense though either.

 

He's just mediocre on that end, and the poorly-timed switches can be attributed to the entire team. 


  • KidRN likes this

#80 Majesty

Majesty

    Luol Deng's cousin is awesome. Thanks for the pizza!!

  • Gameday
  • 54,398 posts
  • Name:Jay
  • Fan Since:1987
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe present, Magic past

Posted May 27, 2017 - 04:17 PM

here's more of them, or a small sample size anyway 

 

aCZ4cgo.png


"Bryant had come to rage against the idea that Howard's clownish disposition could overtake the locker room, the Lakers' culture, and had warned Howard that he would never, ever let it happen." 





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users