The word is that Wolves free agent point guard Marcus Banks is headed for the Los Angeles Lakers. Two years ago, the Boston Celtics and the Lakers made a trade that had Banks going to the Lakers and Gary Payton moving to the Celtics. But Payton failed a physical and the deal was called off. The Lakers have been trying to land Banks ever since, and that is where he is likely to be when the 2006-2007 season starts.
"I brick layups"
"I miss dunks, then fall"
"Hits some open shots"
"Athletic playground baller"
"Better than Smush Parker"
"Got some game"
"I slap board on layups"
"I brick layups"
"I miss dunks, then fall"
"Hits some open shots"
"Athletic playground baller"
"Better than Smush Parker"
"Got some game"
"I slap board on layups"
He is better than Parker, but if the Wolves can pick up someone like Brevin Knight, I wouldn't mind losing Banks.
"I brick layups"
"I miss dunks, then fall"
"Hits some open shots"
"Athletic playground baller"
"Better than Smush Parker"
"Got some game"
"I slap board on layups"
Roy talks? L.A has nothing to offer to land Roy. Stop listening to idiots!
sakf posted my thoughts on banks. good job!
Gobb,Odom is nothing? You keep showing your ignorance at every trade rumour that involves the lakers by saying "Lakers have nothing to offer". Go on,give me a bad rep point for calling you out.
Gobb,Odom is nothing? You keep showing your ignorance at every trade rumour that involves the lakers by saying "Lakers have nothing to offer". Go on,give me a bad rep point for calling you out.
Trading Odom for a chance at Roy isn't a good idea for either team.
Chicago needs a real post presence. Odom isn't it. The Bulls need a guy who consistently scores and defends inside.
The trade thins the Laker frontcourt so that they're relying constantly on Brown and Mihm, all for a guy who plays the same position as Bryant? Don't give me that "Roy can be the point in the triangle offense" crap. Trading for a player for the purpose of playing him out of position is an awful idea.
Seriously you gotta be joking? A SG can play in the triangle. Phil likes bigger guards and most point guards in laker history were big and were usually PG. Smush Parker is suppose to be a SG,the pg of the triangle doesnt even need to bring the ball up. Educate yourself.
Seriously you gotta be joking? A SG can play in the triangle. Phil likes bigger guards and most point guards in laker history were big and were usually PG. Smush Parker is suppose to be a SG,the pg of the triangle doesnt even need to bring the ball up. Educate yourself.
You're using SMUSH PARKER as an example of a non-PG being successful in the triangle offense? You've got to be kidding. Parker was just the best available scrub free agent to fill the role. Giving up Odom for a player who isn't made to play in that role just isn't worth it. The Lakers would be much better off keeping Odom and signing a real point. Parker shouldn't get more than 15 minutes on most any team.
Banks to Lakers!
