Letters to Sports: Why the Lakers should (and shouldn't) get rid of LeBron James



Bill Plaschke’s idea is bold yet very sensible. The choice comes down to keeping today’s franchise player (with little chance of winning a title) or saving $51.4 million to build the franchise of the future. It’s a no-brainer. And it will keep Coach Darvin Ham from being hamstrung with a star who still makes his shots but in all likelihood calls the shots too.

Ron Ovadia
Irvine

::

How do you improve the Lakers ? Easy, get rid of LeBron! He is not the player of yesteryear, but a run-down version who burdens the club by his slow-down play. The future will be bleak for the Lakers if they decide to keep him.

G.T. Oka
Rosemead

::

Bill Plaschke uses the term G.O.A.T. in referring to LeBron James. To me the greatest of all time should refer to players who brought championships to their team, not ones who run to teams to try to win championships. See Michael Jordan and Bill Russell as examples.

Bert Bergen
La Cañada

::

They say that love is blind. It’s apparent that Bill Plaschke’s infatuation with LeBron James has once again clouded his perspective. In his column he calls James “the NBA’s G.O.A.T.” How does he not see Bill Russell, Michael Jordan or Wilt Chamberlain, to name a few, more worthy of that honor? Greater than Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Magic Johnson or Kobe Bryant, each bringing five NBA titles to the Lakers?

David Grisanti
Bremerton, Wash.

::

Well, the NBA trade deadline has passed and the Lakers made no moves. Cue the series of LeBron James cryptic tweet emojis and self-serving, passive-aggressive offhand comments to the press beginning in 3 … 2 … 1 …

Richard Turnage
Burbank



Source link

About The Author

Scroll to Top