NBA Rumors: Andrew Bynum Spurning Orlando Will Send Dwight Howard to Brooklyn
Just when you thought that Dwight Howard's future residence hinged entirely on his short list of preferred destinations, it turns out he's not the only one with a list.
Bynum has shown no inclination to agree to an immediate extension if sent to Orlando as part of a Dwight Howard package, sources tell Y!— Adrian Wojnarowski (@WojYahooNBA) July 8, 2012
That could have significant implications for both centers' futures. If there was any chance Howard might rethink his Brooklyn-first preference now that Steve Nash is joining the Lakers, it may not matter if Bynum isn't on board.
After all, why would new Magic general manager Rob Hennigan have any interest in exchanging one lost cause for another?
As Wojnarowski later points out, the Lakers and Magic would both take serious risks by dealing with one another:
If Magic and Lakers want to do a deal, each may need to call the bluff on Howard and Bynum stated unwillingness to accept extensions.— Adrian Wojnarowski (@WojYahooNBA) July 8, 2012
So long as the Brooklyn Nets are still in the picture, there's absolutely no reason for Hennigan to accept such a risk. And, so long as Bynum is content in Los Angeles, GM Mitch Kupchak would be absolutely crazy to do so.
So, where does that leave Howard and his temporary handlers in Orlando?
Chris Chambers/Getty Images
The Nets may need to find a third team to help make a deal with Orlando viable, but that hardly seems like a deal-breaker given that there are so few other deals on the table.
The Magic have done a fine job playing hardball, but let's be honest: They have to take what they can get.
Howard isn't sticking around, and cap space isn't an especially valuable asset when there's so little in Orlando likely to attract free agents. If Hennigan lets Howard go without any compensation, it would quickly earn him a dubious reputation among fans with no interest in waiting interminably for the next Dwight to come along.
There was already a case to be made that Brooklyn's offer of young pieces and draft picks was a better long-term venture than acquiring Bynum.
That argument just got a lot easier to make.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?