Lakers, Bynum agree on extension
The LAT's Mike Bresnahan reports that the Lakers and Andrew Bynum have reached agreement on a contract extension:
The Lakers and Andrew Bynum have agreed in principle on a four-year contract extension worth about $58 million, keeping their center of the future in the fold through the 2012-13 season, according to sources familiar with the negotiations who would not speak publicly.
Bynum, who will make $2.8 million this season, will earn close to $42 million over the first three years of his contract extension. The fourth year will be a team option for about $16 million...
Basically, management and Camp Bynum met in the middle to find some harmony - the Lakers giving more money than originally proposed, Bynum accepting a shorter deal for less than the max that mitigates the team's risk, but to his benefit could get him back on the free-agent market quicker. In the end, both sides ought to come out feeling good about the deal, Bynum especially. $42 million guaranteed is a lot of money. $58, if the option is picked up? Well, that's even more.
For the Lakers, assuming Drew is what they, and most writers and fans, think he is, this is money very well spent. There is some risk -- Bynum is yet to finish a full NBA season as a starter -- but given that they can get out of the deal in three years should things turn sour, it's a very reasonable, relatively low-risk gamble for the organization. While I always believed long term Bynum wasn't going anywhere, I'm a little surprised an agreement was reached before the Halloween deadline and thought Bynum would enter restricted free agency this off-season, but clearly once the terms and perameters were adjusted, it was easier to reach a deal.
UPDATE: More news below!!! but this is the story that will dominate conversation.
BK
Our Lakers-Clippers video recap (player and PJ vids on the side of the page):
Those things are sweeping the nation, you know.
Overall, it's fair to say that whatever NBA scheduling official was responsible for forcing the Clippers, on the one night of the year they maybe, possibly, perhaps get to see top billing on the town's NBA marquee, to open their season against the Lakers ought to be dismissed. Apparently, the news that Lakers fans love to gobble up tix when the red, white, and blue host the purple and gold -- cheap Laker game! -- is yet to reach New York. Thus the Lakers found themselves wearing purple but playing before a very sympathetic crowd Wednesday night as they absolutely crushed the Clipper ship, 117-79.
That's two games and two wins, by a combined total of 58 points. Day-um. Just as it was in Tuesday's win over Portland, the Lakers played some very solid D, limiting the LAC to 36.7% shooting on the night -- this after the Clippers were 11-22 through the first quarter. There was also balance, with seven Lakers finishing in double figures, and the offensive load spread through all 12 guys who dressed. Again, the ball movement was crisp, as the Lakers racked up assists both fancy and pedestrian.
In short, the Lakers looked really good, and the Clippers looked like dudes who had never actually played together. Both sound about right, though Phil Jackson notes it's a little too early to be choosing a caterer for the post-parade bash.
Given their depth, back-to-backs should be less of an issue for the Lakers this season. Of course, blowing teams out on the front end takes the edge off, too.
The Lakers are off today, and will practice Friday.
LakerTommy,
"Thanks for the shout outs from Pig, Jon K, Charles, Edwin, PsychedLakerGirl, Fatty, and dave (not Eric, LOL)."
I was unable to give you a shout out because you were WRONG!
You said at least 10 times Pay him the Max, Pay him now, Don't hurt his feelings!" THAT DID NOT HAPPEN!
LOOK IT UP. Unfortunately for you, the blog has an archive.
As you slowly, almost imperceptibly, CHANGED your argument for months, to what most on the blog stated from the beginning, you now have the balls to say "Look at me, I was right all along."
The only people who think you were right, are yourself, and those who didn't remember what your original position was.
Posted by: Eric M. | October 30, 2008 at 12:38 PM
======================
Nope you forgot to include me. I was right. Look at my position when I stated many times that I hoped AB and the Lakers agreed to a contract which both sides could agree on.
I argued AB's side since the most bloggers took Lakers side. The things I said were definite possibilities for AB's side to do. But it all worked out.
I knew both sides would start with best for their side. Lakers low ball AB, and Lee asking max money. That is the usual negotiating stance. Start there and meet in middle until both sides are happy.
The end reslut is all are happy.
Posted by: JustaLakerFan | November 01, 2008 at 03:12 PM
"Even LBJ has yet to prove he's worth all his money and hype."
Please explain that statement.
If you are serious, there's a fun conversation about to happen.
Posted by: "Pig" Miller | October 30, 2008 at 09:50 AM
========================
Well in some bloggers minds he has not proved himself. He has no MVP awards or championship rings etc. Yes a dumb argument but some like to think that way.
Or it could be a joke.
Posted by: JustaLakerFan | November 01, 2008 at 03:19 PM
LakerTom,
"Even those who wrongly claimed there was no risk. I think this proved for once and all that the Lakers were not going to let Drew become a free agent of any kind, restricted or unrestricted. Period"
Not at all. The issue was whether or not the Lakers would feel that it was worth signing Bynum to a maximum-length, no incentives, maximum salary contract to avoid the very slight chance that Bynum would become a free agent.
While this contract does not answer that question, the very strong implication is that the answer is no, because clearly Bynum and his agent wanted the max, and clearly the Lakers did not offer them the max.
Posted by: exhelodrvr | October 30, 2008 at 12:04 PM
=======================
LakerTom you are right and also I wonder if you have a business major.
Negotiations always ask the best for repective side.
AB said before he negotiations that he would take less to stay with Lakers and Lee came back and said he was young and then demanded the max. Stupid or smart?
Smart because you negotiate from your first position and to ask for less than max you are starting from a lower position.
Lee knew what he was doing and it worked for both sides as AB said he wanted to be a Laker before and after contract.
Posted by: JustaLakerFan | November 01, 2008 at 03:31 PM
Dear copenhagen laker and all the lovely fambam,
Since copenhagen laker brought up the name, I have one poll question.
Assuming Memphis does not pick up Javaris Crittenton's option: Would you sign him for cheap if he would want to come back?
Farmar and Javaris would be great PG's as 2 & 3. And both have plus' because of their skill set. Sun can be a 2-3 guard/forward option assuming he pans out. (Big Assumption)
Best,
Posted by: Charles | October 30, 2008 at 12:28 PM
========================
Can I vote? I will anyways. Heck yeah I would sign Crit under those conditions or close to them.
Posted by: JustaLakerFan | November 01, 2008 at 03:36 PM
Speaking of trolls...where arrrrrre youuuuu Trolllllls! LOL! I know - they'll be back right after the Lakers' first loss. But, boy, the silence is beautiful.
Posted by: cscoot | October 30, 2008 at 12:51 PM
=========================
SSSHHH
Lets keep winning and enjoy the silence. Keep them away.
Best way to starve them is to bet them senselessly on the court.
Posted by: JustaLakerFan | November 01, 2008 at 03:39 PM