Jul 20, 2009


I can't trust media. What they report as facts are often skewed or incomplete.

After further research, it seems that the 4 year contract I spoke of (4 years $36 million) is inconclusive. Some sources (Ric Bucher) report that the 3 year deal is the only one that Lamar was offered. Some LA Times writers, who are presumably more in the know, have made statements that there were definitely two contracts offered. What seems to be the case is that if the 4 year deal was indeed on the table, it was a 3 year guaranteed with a team option for the 4th year, with a $3 million buy out clause. In other words, the Lakers were guaranteeing Lamar 3 years of work for 30 million dollars, with either contract.

It makes sense why Lamar didn't sign. A 4 year deal, with a guaranteed $36 million, would almost certainly have been accepted. The Lakers have been firm in what they're willing to offer.

I previously stated that Ron Artest was given a 3 year deal at the mid level exception. Apparently its a 5 year deal, with a player option after 3 years. Again, way to go media. Who is a reliable source of information these days?

No comments:

Post a Comment