Are you glad we didn't get Chris Paul?

Posted by: SPQR on Mar 16, 2012 - 03:42 AM
lakers-blog

Remember, it just seemed like yesterday when Stern nixed the Lakers-Paul trade and this place was going bonkers.

I was one of the major adherants to that deal. I mean I really wanted Paul in the worst possible way.

But now I wonder. When you see how well Pau is playing and even more so, the synergy between him and Drew, the unbeatable matchup problems these two guys together create, was the collapse of the Paul really a blessing in disguise?

Yep, I know how good Paul is. But would we be better with him and no Pau, only Drew down low, or with Sessions to go with Pau and Drew?

I wish I could give a definative answer, but I can't, simply because I have not seen Sessions enough to be confident in that answer.

But I will say this, if Sessions is a good point, if he can play some good D, penetrate, get the ball where it should be, when it should be there and take a big load off Kobe's aging body, if he can get even more from open men and Drew and Pau down low, then my answer is, yes, I am glad that trade did not go through.

I mean the Lakers don't need a Chris Paul to become a contender again. They just need a guy at that spot who can get that job done the right way, effectively, to really jump this team up another good notch or even two. Sometimes you can give up too much to get a star, when you can give up a lot less and still get what you need.

So while I don't know enough about Sessions to give that strong answer, I will take a bit of a gamble and say this: If I could go back in time now and either complete that Paul deal or let it slide away, I would let it slide and go with what we are doing now.

What did the Stones say in that classic song about life? "You can't always get what you want, but if you try sometime, you just might find, you get what you need."

And maybe we have without having to give up the whole store.