[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

Lamar Odom Not Happy About Possible Pacer Trade
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 1 of 2  1  2 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
TrueBlue
Posts: 29144
Alba Posts: 12
Joined: 9/20/2006
Member: #1172
6/6/2007  11:25 AM
Marc Stien ESPN.com
Not quite sure why there's a vibe in circulation that the Lakers trading for Jermaine O'Neal, as a means of appeasing Kobe Bryant, is some sort of new concept.

Haven't we been talking about this for more than a month?

Wasn't it more like April when this idea was broached, with O'Neal letting it slip in Indiana that he wouldn't mind winding up in Lakerland and Kobe struggling to restrain himself as he spoke of teaming up with his pal from the 1996 draft?

"There's not a lot I can say about it right now," Bryant offered some six weeks ago, long before his recent spree of hourly interviews to advance the idea that he wants to leave L.A. "But if it gets to the point that Jermaine wants to be here instead of Indy, we'd love to have him. We'd be crazy not to."


Kobe would love to play with Jermaine O'Neal. Later, Lamar?

As stated in this cyberspace a week ago, I've heard nothing in the last month to sway me from the belief that O'Neal is the most realistic big-time trade target for L.A., far more realistic than Jason Kidd or Kevin Garnett. The Pacers, according to NBA front office sources, are increasingly open to moving their center -- especially to a Western Conference team -- and have expressed interest in Lakers forward Lamar Odom, center Andrew Bynum, Kwame Brown's expiring contract and the Lakers' first-round pick later this month … which is only a so-so pick at No. 19 until you remember that Indy, at present, has no first-round pick.

The new wrinkle here?

It's the increasing volume on rumblings that Odom doesn't want to go to Indiana.

He might not have a choice, obviously, with the Lakers believed to be desperate to make some sort of statement trade to appease Bryant before the June 28 draft.

But sources close to Odom indicate the 27-year-old would be "quite unhappy" if he's sent to the Pacers in an O'Neal deal … and that it would take a three-year contract extension from the Pacers (or any team that makes a move for him) to get Odom "on board" with a trade. No word yet on how that might factor into Indy's decision making.

The lanky lefty has two seasons left on his contract after this season runs out, at $13.2 million and $14.1 million. Packaging Odom and Bynum would get the Lakers close to O'Neal's salary-cap number -- $18.1 million if the trade happened before the draft and $19.8 million if it happened after July 1 -- but at least one other low-salaried Laker (such as Sasha Vujacic) would have to be included.

The Lakers are expected to resist Indy's efforts to expand the deal to include Jamaal Tinsley, even though they need a point guard as much as anything, because plugging a non-shooter like Tinsley into Phil Jackson's triangle offense holds little appeal.

If you're thinking, incidentally, that Odom and Bynum is a lot to give up for O'Neal -- even without a draft choice thrown in -- you'll surely recall that the Lakers had an opportunity to trade for Kidd in February without including Odom. Bynum and Brown's expiring contract would have been the Jersey-bound cornerstones of that deal -- creating a Bryant-Kidd-Odom trio -- but Bynum still had an untouchable tag at that point. That's no longer the case, according to L.A. sources.

Of course, leverage to make a not-so-lopsided deal is something that the Lakers have a lot less of than they did before Bryant's back-and-forth "trade me/scratch that" media blitz. Bryant hammered the Lakers' front office about as loudly as possible with his criticisms of their decisions and/or inaction since trading Shaquille O'Neal away in the summer of 2004, but "crippled" is the word used by one source close to the situation to describe the position Bryant's bosses find themselves in as a result.


Sabatoge it Lamar just to prove me right again about how sad and pathetic this league is. Players holding teams hostage and sabatoging trades, the NBA IT'S FANTASTIC. LOL I guess Lamar is learning from KOME. All we need to hear now from O'neal that "a deal better not fall through because of a player's unhappiness of circumstances".

Also Indy doesn't have to make any deal with the Lakers they don't like.
LMFAO @ the Bio [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephon_Marbury[/url]
AUTOADVERT
Silverfuel
Posts: 31750
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 6/27/2002
Member: #268
USA
6/6/2007  11:28 AM
So no Jermaine to LA?
A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
playa2
Posts: 34922
Alba Posts: 15
Joined: 5/15/2003
Member: #407
6/6/2007  11:41 AM
If every owner wanted to put winning championships and money profits #,1+2 on their list you wouldn't have players dogging it or demanding trades.

Owners and agents have ruined sports , notn just the players !
JAMES DOLAN on Isiah : He's a good friend of mine and of the organization and I will continue to solicit his views. He will always have strong ties to me and the team.
TrueBlue
Posts: 29144
Alba Posts: 12
Joined: 9/20/2006
Member: #1172
6/6/2007  12:26 PM
Posted by playa2:

If every owner wanted to put winning championships and money profits #,1+2 on their list you wouldn't have players dogging it or demanding trades.

Owners and agents have ruined sports , notn just the players !

I don't care what vantage point this is looked upon, it's all a result of Stern's inept to run a league with integrity and that keeps fans first.

[Edited by - TrueBlue on 06-06-2007 1:46 PM]
LMFAO @ the Bio [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephon_Marbury[/url]
MS
Posts: 27064
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/28/2004
Member: #724
6/6/2007  2:36 PM
That deal is horrendous for the Lakers giving up a young center and a versatile power foward that can match Oneils numbers if he is the focal point of the offense along with a pick??????
Nalod
Posts: 72408
Alba Posts: 155
Joined: 12/24/2003
Member: #508
USA
6/6/2007  2:41 PM
Posted by MS:

That deal is horrendous for the Lakers giving up a young center and a versatile power foward that can match Oneils numbers if he is the focal point of the offense along with a pick??????

BUt if it keeps Kobe in line and attendance up then its worth it!

Oh-Dumb is pretty rooted by now in LA and Im sure does not want to leave. This keeping the player "Happy" and he won't be happy unless he gets extended is pure crap. 3 years is a long time to be asking for an extention.

I say he don't want to play then he don't get paid or let him walk away from his deal and let indy have the cap room!
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
6/6/2007  3:36 PM
i wouldn't mind getting in on a 3 way to bring Odom here as long as all it takes is Jefferies, Malik & Frye or Francis & Frye... his contract expires along w/Marbury's & he'd fill our need for offensive production out of the SF position.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
Ira
Posts: 24693
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 8/14/2001
Member: #91
6/6/2007  4:24 PM
Posted by TMS:

i wouldn't mind getting in on a 3 way to bring Odom here as long as all it takes is Jefferies, Malik & Frye or Francis & Frye... his contract expires along w/Marbury's & he'd fill our need for offensive production out of the SF position.

I wouldn't mind something like that either, but I think we'd have to add our first round pick to what you suggested to appease Indiana. Even that probably wouldn't get the Pacers to pull the string.
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
6/6/2007  5:19 PM
Posted by Ira:
Posted by TMS:

i wouldn't mind getting in on a 3 way to bring Odom here as long as all it takes is Jefferies, Malik & Frye or Francis & Frye... his contract expires along w/Marbury's & he'd fill our need for offensive production out of the SF position.

I wouldn't mind something like that either, but I think we'd have to add our first round pick to what you suggested to appease Indiana. Even that probably wouldn't get the Pacers to pull the string.


i think LA would have to be the ones giving up more in that deal to get JO actually... Odom for JO is not nearly an even up trade IMO... if LA ponies up Farmar & a future pick, i think the deal can work for all 3 parties.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
BlueSeats
Posts: 27272
Alba Posts: 41
Joined: 11/6/2005
Member: #1024
6/6/2007  7:14 PM
Posted by TrueBlue:
Posted by playa2:

If every owner wanted to put winning championships and money profits #,1+2 on their list you wouldn't have players dogging it or demanding trades.

Owners and agents have ruined sports , notn just the players !

I don't care what vantage point this is looked upon, it's all a result of Stern's inept to run a league with integrity and that keeps fans first.

[Edited by - TrueBlue on 06-06-2007 1:46 PM]

I have a feeling it's got more to do with the player's union, the CBA and guaranteed contracts. Stern is employed by the owners, and I've gotta figure the owners would love to get away from guaranteed contracts, so I gotta figure Stern would too - but I honestly don't know much about the situation. If you have any legitimate info on the matter please share it.
bigpimpin
Posts: 22176
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 11/17/2004
Member: #801
USA
6/6/2007  8:08 PM
Lamar Odom won't be the first nor last player to be unhappy about a trade. Derek Fisher almost didn't show up in Utah when he heard he was traded but he didn't seem to wiping tears from his eyes during the WC Semifinals.

Odom will survive.

"Anyone who sits around waiting to hit the lottery, whether basketball or real life, in order to better their position is a loser."
tkf
Posts: 36487
Alba Posts: 6
Joined: 8/13/2001
Member: #87
6/7/2007  12:59 AM
Posted by TrueBlue:
Posted by playa2:

If every owner wanted to put winning championships and money profits #,1+2 on their list you wouldn't have players dogging it or demanding trades.

Owners and agents have ruined sports , notn just the players !

I don't care what vantage point this is looked upon, it's all a result of Stern's inept to run a league with integrity and that keeps fans first.

[Edited by - TrueBlue on 06-06-2007 1:46 PM]

The NBA made a huge mistake by marketing players first and Teams second. Next the league should have never caved into giving these long guaranteed deals with such a tight cap. The league has to get down to 3 year guaranteed deals and that is it, you will find a league with better teams, more competitive, and players who will actually have to compete for a roster spot or end up out of the league in a few years... these long term deals are going to kill the NBA....
Anyone who sits around and waits for the lottery to better themselves, either in real life or in sports, Is a Loser............... TKF
playa2
Posts: 34922
Alba Posts: 15
Joined: 5/15/2003
Member: #407
6/7/2007  6:44 AM
What about each NBA Owner assuring the fans that they are "TRULY" trying to put together a team to win a CHIP . That in itself would make players more competitive knowing that management wants to win more than they do.
JAMES DOLAN on Isiah : He's a good friend of mine and of the organization and I will continue to solicit his views. He will always have strong ties to me and the team.
TheGame
Posts: 26657
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/15/2006
Member: #1154
USA
6/7/2007  7:46 AM
Posted by TrueBlue:
Posted by playa2:

If every owner wanted to put winning championships and money profits #,1+2 on their list you wouldn't have players dogging it or demanding trades.

Owners and agents have ruined sports , notn just the players !

I don't care what vantage point this is looked upon, it's all a result of Stern's inept to run a league with integrity and that keeps fans first.

[Edited by - TrueBlue on 06-06-2007 1:46 PM]


I agree that it is not a great deal for the laker but O'Neal is a more consistent player at what he does that Odom. If he stays healthy, which is a big if, I think the Lakers would be better off with O'Neal rather than Odom. Whether the deal turns out good or bad will more likely depend on what the ceiling is for Bynum. If he is going to become the next Jamal Magloire, the Lakers can recover from giving him away. If he is going to be the next Shaq, which I doubt but he could become maybe 90% of a young Shaq, then the Lakers become the big losers in this trade.
Trust the Process
K22
Posts: 25143
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/18/2006
Member: #1182
USA
6/7/2007  10:13 AM
Posted by tkf:

The NBA made a huge mistake by marketing players first and Teams second. Next the league should have never caved into giving these long guaranteed deals with such a tight cap. The league has to get down to 3 year guaranteed deals and that is it, you will find a league with better teams, more competitive, and players who will actually have to compete for a roster spot or end up out of the league in a few years... these long term deals are going to kill the NBA....

Preach it.
-- the preceding post was brought to you by the letter K and the number 22.
TrueBlue
Posts: 29144
Alba Posts: 12
Joined: 9/20/2006
Member: #1172
6/7/2007  11:00 AM
Posted by tkf:
Posted by TrueBlue:
Posted by playa2:

If every owner wanted to put winning championships and money profits #,1+2 on their list you wouldn't have players dogging it or demanding trades.

Owners and agents have ruined sports , notn just the players !

I don't care what vantage point this is looked upon, it's all a result of Stern's inept to run a league with integrity and that keeps fans first.

[Edited by - TrueBlue on 06-06-2007 1:46 PM]

The NBA made a huge mistake by marketing players first and Teams second. Next the league should have never caved into giving these long guaranteed deals with such a tight cap. The league has to get down to 3 year guaranteed deals and that is it, you will find a league with better teams, more competitive, and players who will actually have to compete for a roster spot or end up out of the league in a few years... these long term deals are going to kill the NBA....


You have to chuckle a little, 2yrs ago Stern scaled back those long term deals/contracts a yr. He has such a hard on for his idiotic vision. He wants stars to stay on 1 team, yet doesn't want those stars to have any long term financial stability because in all honesty he probably wants them on shorter term/non guaranteed deals himself, yet creates this cesspool with the owners...... an f'd up cap & lottery platform that allows owners a total out to..... just make money, shiit on winning, and with every mulligan hope they find that diamond in the rough player every 5-7yrs or so. This league is as close to a video game as it gets, if things aren't going well just hit the reset button.

[Edited by - TrueBlue on 06-07-2007 10:19 AM]
LMFAO @ the Bio [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephon_Marbury[/url]
tkf
Posts: 36487
Alba Posts: 6
Joined: 8/13/2001
Member: #87
6/7/2007  1:13 PM
Posted by TrueBlue:
Posted by tkf:
Posted by TrueBlue:
Posted by playa2:

If every owner wanted to put winning championships and money profits #,1+2 on their list you wouldn't have players dogging it or demanding trades.

Owners and agents have ruined sports , notn just the players !

I don't care what vantage point this is looked upon, it's all a result of Stern's inept to run a league with integrity and that keeps fans first.

[Edited by - TrueBlue on 06-06-2007 1:46 PM]

The NBA made a huge mistake by marketing players first and Teams second. Next the league should have never caved into giving these long guaranteed deals with such a tight cap. The league has to get down to 3 year guaranteed deals and that is it, you will find a league with better teams, more competitive, and players who will actually have to compete for a roster spot or end up out of the league in a few years... these long term deals are going to kill the NBA....


You have to chuckle a little, 2yrs ago Stern scaled back those long term deals/contracts a yr. He has such a hard on for his idiotic vision. He wants stars to stay on 1 team, yet doesn't want those stars to have any long term financial stability because in all honesty he probably wants them on shorter term/non guaranteed deals himself, yet creates this cesspool with the owners...... an f'd up cap & lottery platform that allows owners a total out to..... just make money, shiit on winning, and with every mulligan hope they find that diamond in the rough player every 5-7yrs or so. This league is as close to a video game as it gets, if things aren't going well just hit the reset button.

[Edited by - TrueBlue on 06-07-2007 10:19 AM]

well the NBA did a good thing by allowing the team to sign their own players to the most money and even if they are over the cap they could sign and keep their own FA's. that is fine, but the 7 year guaranteed deal is a killer, it kills teams, I mean that is like the "silver surfer" of the NBA instead of wiping out planets, those contracts are going to wipe out the league. I don't see any upside to these types of deals, I mean what was stern vision in this?
Anyone who sits around and waits for the lottery to better themselves, either in real life or in sports, Is a Loser............... TKF
BlueSeats
Posts: 27272
Alba Posts: 41
Joined: 11/6/2005
Member: #1024
6/7/2007  7:34 PM
Posted by TrueBlue:
Posted by tkf:
Posted by TrueBlue:
Posted by playa2:

If every owner wanted to put winning championships and money profits #,1+2 on their list you wouldn't have players dogging it or demanding trades.

Owners and agents have ruined sports , notn just the players !

I don't care what vantage point this is looked upon, it's all a result of Stern's inept to run a league with integrity and that keeps fans first.

[Edited by - TrueBlue on 06-06-2007 1:46 PM]

The NBA made a huge mistake by marketing players first and Teams second. Next the league should have never caved into giving these long guaranteed deals with such a tight cap. The league has to get down to 3 year guaranteed deals and that is it, you will find a league with better teams, more competitive, and players who will actually have to compete for a roster spot or end up out of the league in a few years... these long term deals are going to kill the NBA....


You have to chuckle a little, 2yrs ago Stern scaled back those long term deals/contracts a yr. He has such a hard on for his idiotic vision.

True, you're just spewing. What do you think his "idiotic" vision is?

He wants stars to stay on 1 team, yet doesn't want those stars to have any long term financial stability because in all honesty he probably wants them on shorter term/non guaranteed deals himself,

Why does he want them on short deals if he wants them to stay on one team?
yet creates this cesspool with the owners...... an f'd up cap & lottery platform that allows owners a total out to..... just make money, shiit on winning, and with every mulligan hope they find that diamond in the rough player every 5-7yrs or so. This league is as close to a video game as it gets, if things aren't going well just hit the reset button.

[Edited by - TrueBlue on 06-07-2007 10:19 AM]

How does the cap and guaranteed contracts enable owners to "hit the reset button"? Do you prefer that bad teams never be allowed to rebuild, or that there be no cap so that big market teams can always outbid the competition?

You really need to clarify your views because these little snippets don't create a coherent picture.
BlueSeats
Posts: 27272
Alba Posts: 41
Joined: 11/6/2005
Member: #1024
6/7/2007  7:46 PM
Posted by tkf:
Posted by TrueBlue:
Posted by tkf:
Posted by TrueBlue:
Posted by playa2:

If every owner wanted to put winning championships and money profits #,1+2 on their list you wouldn't have players dogging it or demanding trades.

Owners and agents have ruined sports , notn just the players !

I don't care what vantage point this is looked upon, it's all a result of Stern's inept to run a league with integrity and that keeps fans first.

[Edited by - TrueBlue on 06-06-2007 1:46 PM]

The NBA made a huge mistake by marketing players first and Teams second. Next the league should have never caved into giving these long guaranteed deals with such a tight cap. The league has to get down to 3 year guaranteed deals and that is it, you will find a league with better teams, more competitive, and players who will actually have to compete for a roster spot or end up out of the league in a few years... these long term deals are going to kill the NBA....


You have to chuckle a little, 2yrs ago Stern scaled back those long term deals/contracts a yr. He has such a hard on for his idiotic vision. He wants stars to stay on 1 team, yet doesn't want those stars to have any long term financial stability because in all honesty he probably wants them on shorter term/non guaranteed deals himself, yet creates this cesspool with the owners...... an f'd up cap & lottery platform that allows owners a total out to..... just make money, shiit on winning, and with every mulligan hope they find that diamond in the rough player every 5-7yrs or so. This league is as close to a video game as it gets, if things aren't going well just hit the reset button.

[Edited by - TrueBlue on 06-07-2007 10:19 AM]

well the NBA did a good thing by allowing the team to sign their own players to the most money and even if they are over the cap they could sign and keep their own FA's. that is fine, but the 7 year guaranteed deal is a killer, it kills teams, I mean that is like the "silver surfer" of the NBA instead of wiping out planets, those contracts are going to wipe out the league. I don't see any upside to these types of deals, I mean what was stern vision in this?

I'm not sure what you guys are talking about. The owners want the long deals to lock in stars. Notice when Wade, Bron, Melo, etc, signed their post-rookie extensions they chose short 4 year deals because they didn't want to be locked in. Surely the owners would prefer to keep them forever. It takes a bit of personal savvy and responsibility on the part of the players and GMs. Players have to be willing to sign short deals if they want flexibility, and owners have to spend responsibly. The teams who survive are the ones with good management who players want to play for.

The player's union is very strong and every time the CBA is up for renewal the players threaten a lock-out, which really hurts the league. Both sides need to be placated, and thus, most situations are less than perfect compromise solutions.

As for marketing, you almost have to market stars over teams because the league is so diluted now it's a rare team that has more than one star on the roster, and thus there are few dynasties and rivalries worth noting. I don't really see a cure for the dilution problem other than things like age limits, which in theory could bring in more NBA ready players, but even such rules as imposing a rule like a 19 year age limit is met with accusations of racism.

What Stern wants more than anything else is a strong, profitable league with parity of talent, but try to find unanimity on how to get there.
TrueBlue
Posts: 29144
Alba Posts: 12
Joined: 9/20/2006
Member: #1172
6/7/2007  8:30 PM
Posted by BlueSeats:
Posted by tkf:
Posted by TrueBlue:
Posted by tkf:
Posted by TrueBlue:
Posted by playa2:

If every owner wanted to put winning championships and money profits #,1+2 on their list you wouldn't have players dogging it or demanding trades.

Owners and agents have ruined sports , notn just the players !

I don't care what vantage point this is looked upon, it's all a result of Stern's inept to run a league with integrity and that keeps fans first.

[Edited by - TrueBlue on 06-06-2007 1:46 PM]

The NBA made a huge mistake by marketing players first and Teams second. Next the league should have never caved into giving these long guaranteed deals with such a tight cap. The league has to get down to 3 year guaranteed deals and that is it, you will find a league with better teams, more competitive, and players who will actually have to compete for a roster spot or end up out of the league in a few years... these long term deals are going to kill the NBA....


You have to chuckle a little, 2yrs ago Stern scaled back those long term deals/contracts a yr. He has such a hard on for his idiotic vision. He wants stars to stay on 1 team, yet doesn't want those stars to have any long term financial stability because in all honesty he probably wants them on shorter term/non guaranteed deals himself, yet creates this cesspool with the owners...... an f'd up cap & lottery platform that allows owners a total out to..... just make money, shiit on winning, and with every mulligan hope they find that diamond in the rough player every 5-7yrs or so. This league is as close to a video game as it gets, if things aren't going well just hit the reset button.

[Edited by - TrueBlue on 06-07-2007 10:19 AM]

well the NBA did a good thing by allowing the team to sign their own players to the most money and even if they are over the cap they could sign and keep their own FA's. that is fine, but the 7 year guaranteed deal is a killer, it kills teams, I mean that is like the "silver surfer" of the NBA instead of wiping out planets, those contracts are going to wipe out the league. I don't see any upside to these types of deals, I mean what was stern vision in this?

I'm not sure what you guys are talking about. The owners want the long deals to lock in stars. Notice when Wade, Bron, Melo, etc, signed their post-rookie extensions they chose short 4 year deals because they didn't want to be locked in. Surely the owners would prefer to keep them forever. It takes a bit of personal savvy and responsibility on the part of the players and GMs. Players have to be willing to sign short deals if they want flexibility, and owners have to spend responsibly. The teams who survive are the ones with good management who players want to play for.

The player's union is very strong and every time the CBA is up for renewal the players threaten a lock-out, which really hurts the league. Both sides need to be placated, and thus, most situations are less than perfect compromise solutions.

As for marketing, you almost have to market stars over teams because the league is so diluted now it's a rare team that has more than one star on the roster, and thus there are few dynasties and rivalries worth noting. I don't really see a cure for the dilution problem other than things like age limits, which in theory could bring in more NBA ready players, but even such rules as imposing a rule like a 19 year age limit is met with accusations of racism.

What Stern wants more than anything else is a strong, profitable league with parity of talent, but try to find unanimity on how to get there.



That's what I was getting at Blue. I think Stern has a vision except has two sides to deal with and tilts more in favor of one side. I think Stern is Pro Owners and Owners want large profits and long term deals only with Superstars, therein lies the problem because Stern also wants to market the league globally and has to cater to the Player's Union because players makeup the league. As you said Teams don't anymore because Stern has allowed more teams/franchises to surface, tapping into these semi hopeful markets so that each can have their own hopeful Micheal Jordan. With 1 star ran teams, stars have adjusted to the fact that "hey I am this franchise and I hold it in the palm of my hand". Now we have a hostage situation. Alonzo Mourning(New Jersey/Raptor/Miami), Paul Pierce(Porltand/Boston), A.I. & Webber(Philly) K.G.(Minny), Jermaine O'neal(Pacers), Shaq(Lakers), NVE(Dallas/Warriors) Ron Artest(Pacer/Kings), Corey Magette(Clippers), Kobe & Odom(Lakers) Payton (Seattle) etc etc. And of all leagues this is the worst when it comes to coach vs players. We also have large markets becoming footnotes in this league. My question is where's the fans in all of this?
LMFAO @ the Bio [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephon_Marbury[/url]
Page 1 of 2  1  2 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Lamar Odom Not Happy About Possible Pacer Trade
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy