|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
jlkr42
Starting Rotation
Joined: 30 Jan 2003
Posts: 845
Location: DVNH
|
 Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 8:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Dagger - Utah could not have accepted that trade. Utah had room to sign 1 max FA plus small change. Shaq's contract was worth nearly 2 max FA's and Utah did not have that much space to use.
For all you impatient, spoiled children, that's what you are: rebuilding takes time and a plan. In the entire history of the NBA, only two franchises have lost a major superstar and come back to win a ring within 5 seasons after the last ring. The Lakers aren't one of them. If it was that easy, someone else would have done it already.
So who are those franchises?
1) the Celtics:
68, 69: Russell, Havlicek
74, 76: Havlicek, Cowens, White
81: Archibald, Parish, Bird
84, 86: Parish, Bird, McHale
2) the Spurs:
99: Robinson, Duncan
03, 05: Duncan, Ginobili, Parker
So what Mitch is trying to accomplish is extraordinarily difficult to begin with. Since the Lakers have traditionally not had high draft picks, Mitch has had to take some gambles in order find "diamonds in the rough". He has had to make those gambles on Brown and Bynum because he knows that no team can win a ring without an All-Star quality big, and those guys just do not grow on trees. So he's taking a chance on these two and giving himself the flexibility of going in another direction if Brown and/or Bynum do not work out.
Mitch has had to come up with a long-term plan that gives the team the necessary flexibility down the road, flexibility they would not have if Shaq was still on the roster. Flexibility they would not have had they signed some FA last summer for more than 2 years like you spoiled children wanted so badly. Mitch has had to have enough balls to not sacrifice the plan for players who won't put the team over the top. Even with Artest, the Lakers do not contend for a title this year. Therefore Odom was too much risk to take Artest on.
The problem is that without the '07 plan, Mitch will always have the same limits on stocking the roster that he had to contend with during the championship years. With this flexibility, he isn't limited to finding someone in the draft or on the FA list, he can also take back more salary than he gives out in trades. So think of the trade scenarios he might be able to come up if he can do that.
I have been through the Dark Years of the 70's as well as the 90's, I've been a Laker fan since 1967 so I know damn well what I'm talking here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
vakobe
Star Player
Joined: 29 Mar 2003
Posts: 1392
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 8:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The Dagger wrote: | | raffi wrote: | | bounty wrote: | | can we trade grants 15mil for a player? |
Nope - we cut him last summer so that Buss could save some dough by not having to pay the luxary tax. That $15 million is dead money for another year. People really don't understand how horrible a deal we made. |
People called me crazy and wanted my head, but I proposed trading Stay Puff to Utah for a number two draft pick. We would've received instand cap-room and would've saved 3 years of Kobe's prime. Utah would've accepted it because their fans would've revolted if not. Plus they had like 40 million in cap-room that year and would've still kept AK-47. The best part is Snaq would've been forever humiliated for being traded for only a draft pick. Oh, well, if only I was the GM.  |
That's an revolutionary idea for sure. But could Utah or any other team really absorb a $30 million cap hit without sending any players out? And why would you want a second-round pick instead of a first? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Dagger
Star Player
Joined: 15 Mar 2002
Posts: 7276
Location: Sovngarde
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 8:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| jlkr42 wrote: | | Dagger - Utah could not have accepted that trade. Utah had room to sign 1 max FA plus small change. |
I remember distinctly they had more than enough room. They had approximately 10 million in guaranteed salaries that year. I know this w/o a doubt. The trade was possible and I was begging for it. Kupkake would've never done it though because he would've looked like a fool.
_________________
The great Laker Center Tradition continues.....Mikan, Wilt, Kareem, Shaq, Gasol, AD....Gasol. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
B-Scott
Starting Rotation
Joined: 22 Dec 2005
Posts: 418
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 8:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
The 2007 Pipe dream
1. hope we make the playoffs in 2006 and 2007 with the false hope we can land Chris bosh in the summer of 2007. Basically lets just keep the fans happy for those 2 yrs.
OR
2. Reality- We miss the playoffs 2006 and 2007 because we past up chances to acquire players that would improve the team. Chris bosh re-signs with Toronto. Kirk hinrich Billups Wade all re-sign with there teams.Same with Nowitski.
NOW WHAT? You threw away 2 of kobe's prime yrs just to acquire some leftover 2007 FA. This will be the most likely scenario. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
raffi
LG Contributor
Joined: 24 Jun 2005
Posts: 9987
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 9:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| B-Scott wrote: | | You threw away 2 of kobe's prime yrs just to acquire some leftover 2007 FA. This will be the most likely scenario. |
Correction - you threw away 3 of Kobe's prime years . . . |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zhengi
Star Player
Joined: 06 Sep 2004
Posts: 6445
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 9:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| B-Scott wrote: | The 2007 Pipe dream
1. hope we make the playoffs in 2006 and 2007 with the false hope we can land Chris bosh in the summer of 2007. Basically lets just keep the fans happy for those 2 yrs.
OR
2. Reality- We miss the playoffs 2006 and 2007 because we past up chances to acquire players that would improve the team. Chris bosh re-signs with Toronto. Kirk hinrich Billups Wade all re-sign with there teams.Same with Nowitski.
NOW WHAT? You threw away 2 of kobe's prime yrs just to acquire some leftover 2007 FA. This will be the most likely scenario. |
Wow, it's hilarioius how you've narrowed down all the possibilities in the future into two scenarios. Can you tell me what the lottery numbers are going to be next week?
_________________
I'm like a Hadouken, down-right Fierce! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
raffi
LG Contributor
Joined: 24 Jun 2005
Posts: 9987
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 9:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Zhengi wrote: | | raffi wrote: | | Quote: | | As for Grant, he's definitely useless, but at least he comes off the books earlier than Shaq. |
Shaq would have come off the books this year at $30 million - now that is some serious cap room. |
Except we would be a terrible team and a lot more people would be complaining about how the Clippers would be going to the WCF and possibly the Finals with Kobe, Maggette, Livingston, and Elton Brand. Then all you whiners would be crying about how Shaq should have been traded and Kobe should have been kept. Can't win either way.
| Quote: | | Quote: | | As for the pieces we got for Shaq, it can't be helped. He wanted to go only to a few select places and that limited our options. Plus, we were on a time constraint. |
Couldn't disagree more - the time constraint was self-imposed. Shaq had zero leverage. The timing issue had more to do with Kobe - which is truly unfortunate, because he's now left with a talentless roster. They should have promised Kobe that they would move Shaq, but only at the right time and on the right terms. This would've been in the best interests of the team and Kobe. They acted in haste and got a bunch of waste.
Despite the past successes (for which I am eternally grateful), it doesn't excuse such a horrifically stupid and one sided transaction. And having Kobe and nothing else on the horizon doesn't make me feel any better - we're a lot further than one player away. Because if this is about winning championships, it's the wrong way to go about it. We've made it more difficult on ourselves and I think shrewd management could have helped.
Trust me, I hope I'm wrong, but I've aced this test so far. |
Whether it was a timing issue due to Shaq or Kobe, it was still a time issue. Lakers had to move Shaq within that time period, so therefore, it was a time constraint.
Seriously, look at Shaq. Do you think he'll continue to hold up for 4 additional years? He's on the decline. You keep harping on the trade being one sided when evidence is starting to surface that perhaps it wasn't that bad of a trade seeing as Shaq's numbers and production has fallen remarkably.
As for winning championships, give this team and Jerry Buss a chance to build a contender. It's a little too early to dismiss the 2007 cap space plans without even seeing a smidgeon of results. |
You keep missing the point - you didn't have Shaq on the books for another 4 years and no one is proposing that you would have given him the extension. All I'm asking is for our world class organization to have made a trade that made sense - honestly, they couldn't have made a worse deal. It was all based on getting a stud in 07 - any intelligent person could see that based on the pieces we got back and their contract lengths - which was a huge gamble that didn't pay off.
And many of you also keep forgetting that the trade was made so as to avoid the rebuilding project (at least that was what they said publicly). Accordingly, they must have thought they were getting impact players or they just lied to appease the masses.
And if this was a timing constraint due to Kobe (which it most likely was) then he deserves some of the responsibility. They swallowed a huge pill (at least 3 yrs of mediocrity despite having the best player in the NBA) just to rid themselves of the "Big Pill." And IMO the price was too high.
And at this point (after the trade), I don't think you can blame Mitch - the damage is done. They have no choice but to wait and hope to get lucky (07, 08, 09?) and count on Kobe to sell tickets in the interim. We've become the Sixers with Iverson. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aussiesuede
Franchise Player
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 10964
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 9:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| raffi wrote: | | B-Scott wrote: | | You threw away 2 of kobe's prime yrs just to acquire some leftover 2007 FA. This will be the most likely scenario. |
Correction - you threw away 3 of Kobe's prime years . . . |
Kinda like Minny throwing away 10 of KG's prime years. Portland throwing away 12 of Drexlers prime years. Or Utah throwing away 14 of Stockton and Malones prime years. So let's see, Kobe already has three rings and has a good shot at another few over the next decade yet people are complaining because he has to wait a few years as the team gears up for another run? Since he's been in the League Kobe's avegeraged 3 championships every 8 years. If he get's three championships in the coming 8 years, I doubt he'll be complaining about which years those championships came in - 2007 or 2011.
It's a simple little thing called reality. No organisation stays on top forever. All have to retool for the future and common sense dictates that you won't be challenging for a championship during that proccess. Some here seem to actually think that they've a better grasp on just what is the proper way to go about that rebuilding process than the very people who've successfully navigated the Lakers through this process twice before during the past 30 years.
So for those that don't have the stomach for the process then please do jump off the bandwagon now, especially the ones with season tickets. The last time you fools jumped off the bandwagon I was able to pick up three more sets of seasons tickets for the price of one. Don't worry though, when the Lakers are good again and you come running back, I'll be happy to sell ya some familiar gameday seats and 10 times the price.
_________________
I'm On point, On task, On message, and Off drugs. A Streetwise Smart Bomb, Out of rehab and In denial. Over the Top, On the edge, Under the Radar, and In Control. Behind the 8 ball, Ahead of the Curve and I've got a Love Child who sends me Hate mail. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
B-Scott
Starting Rotation
Joined: 22 Dec 2005
Posts: 418
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 10:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Zhengi wrote: | | B-Scott wrote: | The 2007 Pipe dream
1. hope we make the playoffs in 2006 and 2007 with the false hope we can land Chris bosh in the summer of 2007. Basically lets just keep the fans happy for those 2 yrs.
OR
2. Reality- We miss the playoffs 2006 and 2007 because we past up chances to acquire players that would improve the team. Chris bosh re-signs with Toronto. Kirk hinrich Billups Wade all re-sign with there teams.Same with Nowitski.
NOW WHAT? You threw away 2 of kobe's prime yrs just to acquire some leftover 2007 FA. This will be the most likely scenario. |
Wow, it's hilarioius how you've narrowed down all the possibilities in the future into two scenarios. Can you tell me what the lottery numbers are going to be next week? |
Honestly do you really think Bosh will turn down a huge contract offer,and wait a full yr to be a FA. He will look at the Stoudamire situation,realize that injuries do happen. Take advantage of a big contract that is currently being offered.
Lakers are beginning to look like last yrs Lakers,while the Rockets Kings Jazz are beginning to click.
So this points to the scenario. No playoffs. No Bosh. 2007 Leftover FA |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zhengi
Star Player
Joined: 06 Sep 2004
Posts: 6445
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 10:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| raffi wrote: | | Zhengi wrote: | | raffi wrote: | | Quote: | | As for Grant, he's definitely useless, but at least he comes off the books earlier than Shaq. |
Shaq would have come off the books this year at $30 million - now that is some serious cap room. |
Except we would be a terrible team and a lot more people would be complaining about how the Clippers would be going to the WCF and possibly the Finals with Kobe, Maggette, Livingston, and Elton Brand. Then all you whiners would be crying about how Shaq should have been traded and Kobe should have been kept. Can't win either way.
| Quote: | | Quote: | | As for the pieces we got for Shaq, it can't be helped. He wanted to go only to a few select places and that limited our options. Plus, we were on a time constraint. |
Couldn't disagree more - the time constraint was self-imposed. Shaq had zero leverage. The timing issue had more to do with Kobe - which is truly unfortunate, because he's now left with a talentless roster. They should have promised Kobe that they would move Shaq, but only at the right time and on the right terms. This would've been in the best interests of the team and Kobe. They acted in haste and got a bunch of waste.
Despite the past successes (for which I am eternally grateful), it doesn't excuse such a horrifically stupid and one sided transaction. And having Kobe and nothing else on the horizon doesn't make me feel any better - we're a lot further than one player away. Because if this is about winning championships, it's the wrong way to go about it. We've made it more difficult on ourselves and I think shrewd management could have helped.
Trust me, I hope I'm wrong, but I've aced this test so far. |
Whether it was a timing issue due to Shaq or Kobe, it was still a time issue. Lakers had to move Shaq within that time period, so therefore, it was a time constraint.
Seriously, look at Shaq. Do you think he'll continue to hold up for 4 additional years? He's on the decline. You keep harping on the trade being one sided when evidence is starting to surface that perhaps it wasn't that bad of a trade seeing as Shaq's numbers and production has fallen remarkably.
As for winning championships, give this team and Jerry Buss a chance to build a contender. It's a little too early to dismiss the 2007 cap space plans without even seeing a smidgeon of results. |
You keep missing the point - you didn't have Shaq on the books for another 4 years and no one is proposing that you would have given him the extension. All I'm asking is for our world class organization to have made a trade that made sense - honestly, they couldn't have made a worse deal. It was all based on getting a stud in 07 - any intelligent person could see that based on the pieces we got back and their contract lengths - which was a huge gamble that didn't pay off.
And many of you also keep forgetting that the trade was made so as to avoid the rebuilding project (at least that was what they said publicly). Accordingly, they must have thought they were getting impact players or they just lied to appease the masses.
And if this was a timing constraint due to Kobe (which it most likely was) then he deserves some of the responsibility. They swallowed a huge pill (at least 3 yrs of mediocrity despite having the best player in the NBA) just to rid themselves of the "Big Pill." And IMO the price was too high.
And at this point (after the trade), I don't think you can blame Mitch - the damage is done. They have no choice but to wait and hope to get lucky (07, 08, 09?) and count on Kobe to sell tickets in the interim. We've become the Sixers with Iverson. |
Actually, you're the one who doesn't get it why Shaq had to be traded. If you don't trade Shaq, you lose out on Kobe. We'd have cap space after Shaq leaves the team, but what two impact players are you going to sign to take us to a championship? And in the meantime, Kobe is contending for championships with the Clippers.
With the current plan, we might have to wait a little longer, but we have one cornerstone of the franchise already in Kobe. There's a strong possibility of Bynum becoming the other cornerstone, but we won't know that until later on. Since we already have Kobe, we only have to add one more player through the 2007 plan. That's a lot easier done than just giving up Shaq for nothing and trying to get two star players in FA.
Therefore, it's not such a bad idea. Again, if you throw out the fact that Shaq is declining and that he signed an extension, then you're right, the trade was terrible. But the reality is that Shaq is declining and he's stuck with his team for a long period of time. We're coming out on top of this trade already. So no regrets there.
EDIT: And if you look at all the whining going around right now, think about how bad it would be having Shaq miss 18 games this season and us being in the cellar. You same people would turn around and cry that Shaq should have been traded and Kobe should have been kept. Then you'd say the Lakers wasted 2 years of being able to contend by keeping Shaq and how his salary stops us from getting any signifcant help. yada, yada, yada... it'd be the same pissing and moaning.
_________________
I'm like a Hadouken, down-right Fierce! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zhengi
Star Player
Joined: 06 Sep 2004
Posts: 6445
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 10:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| B-Scott wrote: | | Zhengi wrote: | | B-Scott wrote: | The 2007 Pipe dream
1. hope we make the playoffs in 2006 and 2007 with the false hope we can land Chris bosh in the summer of 2007. Basically lets just keep the fans happy for those 2 yrs.
OR
2. Reality- We miss the playoffs 2006 and 2007 because we past up chances to acquire players that would improve the team. Chris bosh re-signs with Toronto. Kirk hinrich Billups Wade all re-sign with there teams.Same with Nowitski.
NOW WHAT? You threw away 2 of kobe's prime yrs just to acquire some leftover 2007 FA. This will be the most likely scenario. |
Wow, it's hilarioius how you've narrowed down all the possibilities in the future into two scenarios. Can you tell me what the lottery numbers are going to be next week? |
Honestly do you really think Bosh will turn down a huge contract offer,and wait a full yr to be a FA. He will look at the Stoudamire situation,realize that injuries do happen. Take advantage of a big contract that is currently being offered.
Lakers are beginning to look like last yrs Lakers,while the Rockets Kings Jazz are beginning to click.
So this points to the scenario. No playoffs. No Bosh. 2007 Leftover FA |
I find it hilarious that you have absolutely outlined the future with great detail and have inside information about what the Lakers are doing.
_________________
I'm like a Hadouken, down-right Fierce! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
B-Scott
Starting Rotation
Joined: 22 Dec 2005
Posts: 418
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 10:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Aussiesuede wrote: | | raffi wrote: | | B-Scott wrote: | | You threw away 2 of kobe's prime yrs just to acquire some leftover 2007 FA. This will be the most likely scenario. |
Correction - you threw away 3 of Kobe's prime years . . . |
Kinda like Minny throwing away 10 of KG's prime years. Portland throwing away 12 of Drexlers prime years. Or Utah throwing away 14 of Stockton and Malones prime years. So let's see, Kobe already has three rings and has a good shot at another few over the next decade yet people are complaining because he has to wait a few years as the team gears up for another run? Since he's been in the League Kobe's avegeraged 3 championships every 8 years. If he get's three championships in the coming 8 years, I doubt he'll be complaining about which years those championships came in - 2007 or 2011.
It's a simple little thing called reality. No organisation stays on top forever. All have to retool for the future and common sense dictates that you won't be challenging for a championship during that proccess. Some here seem to actually think that they've a better grasp on just what is the proper way to go about that rebuilding process than the very people who've successfully navigated the Lakers through this process twice before during the past 30 years.
So for those that don't have the stomach for the process then please do jump off the bandwagon now, especially the ones with season tickets. The last time you fools jumped off the bandwagon I was able to pick up three more sets of seasons tickets for the price of one. Don't worry though, when the Lakers are good again and you come running back, I'll be happy to sell ya some familiar gameday seats and 10 times the price. |
1. Portland did not throw away Drexlers prime yrs. Portland had a great team. They just had to deal with the 80s Lakers. 1990 Pistons. 1992 Bulls. I would love for Kobe to have a prime Terry porter, Buck williams Young Cliff robinson, Jerome kersey when he was younger. Veteren Danny ainge.
2. T-wolves- Did there best to build around KG with Spreewell and Casell 2 yrs ago.
3 things you also forgot. The t-wolves dont have a project who is 18 yrs old,that could have gotten them ron artest. The only trade piece they had was Wally,and the Pacers didnt want Wally's contract. Had the T-wolves had Andrew bynum,they would traded him for artest in a heartbeat.
4 Utah- they had great teams. They just had to go through the Bulls in 97 and 98
Nobody jumped off any bandwagon. Jumping off would be if you stop watching the games,and just give up on the team. I never did that. I support the team,but i also let EVRYONE know,they are not trying to build the best possible team around Kobe.
If the Old Portland team, Current T-wolves team had Andrew bynum,and both had a chance to get a Ron artest caliber player,for a project. They would have done it. T-wolves did not have that trade piece,that the Lakers had. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
B-Scott
Starting Rotation
Joined: 22 Dec 2005
Posts: 418
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 10:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Zhengi wrote: | | B-Scott wrote: | | Zhengi wrote: | | B-Scott wrote: | The 2007 Pipe dream
1. hope we make the playoffs in 2006 and 2007 with the false hope we can land Chris bosh in the summer of 2007. Basically lets just keep the fans happy for those 2 yrs.
OR
2. Reality- We miss the playoffs 2006 and 2007 because we past up chances to acquire players that would improve the team. Chris bosh re-signs with Toronto. Kirk hinrich Billups Wade all re-sign with there teams.Same with Nowitski.
NOW WHAT? You threw away 2 of kobe's prime yrs just to acquire some leftover 2007 FA. This will be the most likely scenario. |
Wow, it's hilarioius how you've narrowed down all the possibilities in the future into two scenarios. Can you tell me what the lottery numbers are going to be next week? |
Honestly do you really think Bosh will turn down a huge contract offer,and wait a full yr to be a FA. He will look at the Stoudamire situation,realize that injuries do happen. Take advantage of a big contract that is currently being offered.
Lakers are beginning to look like last yrs Lakers,while the Rockets Kings Jazz are beginning to click.
So this points to the scenario. No playoffs. No Bosh. 2007 Leftover FA |
I find it hilarious that you have absolutely outlined the future with great detail and have inside information about what the Lakers are doing. |
yup it sure is hilarious. Rockets jazz NO Kings are beginning to play well and you honestly believe the Lakers will hold them off with this crappy team.
The way the Lakers are playing,they will be 10th seed next week. How can you be a playoff team with that team around kobe. Thats not being psychic. Im going by how we are playing now,and how other teams are beginning to play. Combine that with what happen last yr when the overachieving stopped. Denver ,Memphis and the rockets past us right on by.Moves need to be meade to take advantage of Kobe's 10th and 11th yr in the league.
He will be in his 12th yr beginning of the 2007/2008 season |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zhengi
Star Player
Joined: 06 Sep 2004
Posts: 6445
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 10:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| B-Scott wrote: | | Zhengi wrote: | | B-Scott wrote: | | Zhengi wrote: | | B-Scott wrote: | The 2007 Pipe dream
1. hope we make the playoffs in 2006 and 2007 with the false hope we can land Chris bosh in the summer of 2007. Basically lets just keep the fans happy for those 2 yrs.
OR
2. Reality- We miss the playoffs 2006 and 2007 because we past up chances to acquire players that would improve the team. Chris bosh re-signs with Toronto. Kirk hinrich Billups Wade all re-sign with there teams.Same with Nowitski.
NOW WHAT? You threw away 2 of kobe's prime yrs just to acquire some leftover 2007 FA. This will be the most likely scenario. |
Wow, it's hilarioius how you've narrowed down all the possibilities in the future into two scenarios. Can you tell me what the lottery numbers are going to be next week? |
Honestly do you really think Bosh will turn down a huge contract offer,and wait a full yr to be a FA. He will look at the Stoudamire situation,realize that injuries do happen. Take advantage of a big contract that is currently being offered.
Lakers are beginning to look like last yrs Lakers,while the Rockets Kings Jazz are beginning to click.
So this points to the scenario. No playoffs. No Bosh. 2007 Leftover FA |
I find it hilarious that you have absolutely outlined the future with great detail and have inside information about what the Lakers are doing. |
yup it sure is hilarious. Rockets jazz NO Kings are beginning to play well and you honestly believe the Lakers will hold them off with this crappy team.
The way the Lakers are playing,they will be 10th seed next week. How can you be a playoff team with that team around kobe. Thats not being psychic. Im going by how we are playing now,and how other teams are beginning to play. Combine that with what happen last yr when the overachieving stopped. Denver ,Memphis and the rockets past us right on by.Moves need to be meade to take advantage of Kobe's 10th and 11th yr in the league.
He will be in his 12th yr beginning of the 2007/2008 season |
Considering there are two injured players right now, it's no surprise that we're free falling. However, this team can still hold it enough to make the playoffs. We have a favorable 2nd half schedule and should be able to hold them back. So no worries there.
As for Kobe's prime, this guy still has a lot of years left. He's one of the best conditioned athletes and he won't suddenly drop off the face of the earth like you're expecting him to. He certainly won't be the same player, but he'll have more help with a developed Bynum and that impact FA we're aiming for. So no worries there either.
EDIT: Besides, with Kobe's midrange game, he'll be in the league at least another 8 years. He has been changing his game and it'll continue to happen. Kobe is no longer the dunking machine that he used to be. That fact alone will prolong his career.
_________________
I'm like a Hadouken, down-right Fierce! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jlkr42
Starting Rotation
Joined: 30 Jan 2003
Posts: 845
Location: DVNH
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 10:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| B-Scott wrote: | | Aussiesuede wrote: | | raffi wrote: | | B-Scott wrote: | | You threw away 2 of kobe's prime yrs just to acquire some leftover 2007 FA. This will be the most likely scenario. |
Correction - you threw away 3 of Kobe's prime years . . . |
Kinda like Minny throwing away 10 of KG's prime years. Portland throwing away 12 of Drexlers prime years. Or Utah throwing away 14 of Stockton and Malones prime years. So let's see, Kobe already has three rings and has a good shot at another few over the next decade yet people are complaining because he has to wait a few years as the team gears up for another run? Since he's been in the League Kobe's avegeraged 3 championships every 8 years. If he get's three championships in the coming 8 years, I doubt he'll be complaining about which years those championships came in - 2007 or 2011.
It's a simple little thing called reality. No organisation stays on top forever. All have to retool for the future and common sense dictates that you won't be challenging for a championship during that proccess. Some here seem to actually think that they've a better grasp on just what is the proper way to go about that rebuilding process than the very people who've successfully navigated the Lakers through this process twice before during the past 30 years.
So for those that don't have the stomach for the process then please do jump off the bandwagon now, especially the ones with season tickets. The last time you fools jumped off the bandwagon I was able to pick up three more sets of seasons tickets for the price of one. Don't worry though, when the Lakers are good again and you come running back, I'll be happy to sell ya some familiar gameday seats and 10 times the price. |
1. Portland did not throw away Drexlers prime yrs. Portland had a great team. They just had to deal with the 80s Lakers. 1990 Pistons. 1992 Bulls. I would love for Kobe to have a prime Terry porter, Buck williams Young Cliff robinson, Jerome kersey when he was younger. Veteren Danny ainge.
2. T-wolves- Did there best to build around KG with Spreewell and Casell 2 yrs ago.
3 things you also forgot. The t-wolves dont have a project who is 18 yrs old,that could have gotten them ron artest. The only trade piece they had was Wally,and the Pacers didnt want Wally's contract. Had the T-wolves had Andrew bynum,they would traded him for artest in a heartbeat.
4 Utah- they had great teams. They just had to go through the Bulls in 97 and 98
Nobody jumped off any bandwagon. Jumping off would be if you stop watching the games,and just give up on the team. I never did that. I support the team,but i also let EVRYONE know,they are not trying to build the best possible team around Kobe.
If the Old Portland team, Current T-wolves team had Andrew bynum,and both had a chance to get a Ron artest caliber player,for a project. They would have done it. T-wolves did not have that trade piece,that the Lakers had. |
You missed the point. The point is those teams got the great players and still failed to win the ring. That alone should tell you just how tough it is to get there.
Today the teams to get by are the Suns, the Spurs and the Pistons. Lakers had to trade Shaq, there was no way Kobe was staying if Shaq was still on the roster. At least at the moment while we are seeing Shaq in his obvious decline, the Lakers definitely have one cornerstone on which to build the next championship team. If they had kept Shaq and lost Kobe, they wouldn't even have that now. You think it's bad now, imagine trying to go from Shaq today to getting two cornerstones tomorrow.
Lakers retained one cornerstone and the rebuilding exercise involves several different ways they're going about finding the cornerstone big to play with Kobe.
Let me point out that it doesn't have to be an FA signing in '07, it could be a trade in which the Lakers take back more salary than they give. That's flexibility the Lakers don't have this year or this summer. But they'll have it next summer. If Shaq is still on the roster, sure don't extend him, but see how fast the team sinks and how hard it is to go from zero cornerstones to two cornerstones instead of having a Kobe in his prime and just needing to find an All-Star quality big to play next to him. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laker4life
Star Player
Joined: 26 Nov 2001
Posts: 7324
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 11:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| raffi wrote: |
Zhengi - you can't be serious. Compared to Grant, Shaq looks like a bargain. Add to that Odom ($11.5) and Kwame ($7.5) and you have a serious lack of bang for the buck.
We didn't get expiring Ks, we didn't get impact players, we didn't acquire athleticism we could keep, we didn't get young cheap talent that could play (Haslem), we didn't get players with trade value and we didn't get better. And it isn't just the money - the real killer is having to wait until 07 to have any chance to add to the roster.
And I know it was likely a matter of Kobe or Shaq - I'm not even saying that they chose the wrong guy. But at what cost? And if the timing was driven by Kobe, then he deserves this talentless mess. But as a die-hard fan and season ticket holder, I deserve better. We all do.
Saying they've made mistakes doesn't make me any less of a fan - it just breaks my heart to see it come to this. I knew exactly what they were in for the day they made the trade - I'm just surprised it wasn't obvious to so many others. Barring a miracle, they're done (adding PJ was only a quarter miracle) - the entire 07 plan was about one guy . . . Amare. And he ain't coming. |
Raffi,
I am with you. As a ticket holder, I feel your pain and anger. We deserve better from this organization. The trading for Grant has been a "disaster" .
Kupcake's decision to trade for him fall on his shoulder. Not Buss. Buss wanted him traded but Kupcake made the deicision. If your GM made such a mistake in the past, I am entitled to question his future decisions . |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
raffi
LG Contributor
Joined: 24 Jun 2005
Posts: 9987
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 11:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Zhengi wrote: | | raffi wrote: | | Zhengi wrote: | | raffi wrote: | | Quote: | | As for Grant, he's definitely useless, but at least he comes off the books earlier than Shaq. |
Shaq would have come off the books this year at $30 million - now that is some serious cap room. |
Except we would be a terrible team and a lot more people would be complaining about how the Clippers would be going to the WCF and possibly the Finals with Kobe, Maggette, Livingston, and Elton Brand. Then all you whiners would be crying about how Shaq should have been traded and Kobe should have been kept. Can't win either way.
| Quote: | | Quote: | | As for the pieces we got for Shaq, it can't be helped. He wanted to go only to a few select places and that limited our options. Plus, we were on a time constraint. |
Couldn't disagree more - the time constraint was self-imposed. Shaq had zero leverage. The timing issue had more to do with Kobe - which is truly unfortunate, because he's now left with a talentless roster. They should have promised Kobe that they would move Shaq, but only at the right time and on the right terms. This would've been in the best interests of the team and Kobe. They acted in haste and got a bunch of waste.
Despite the past successes (for which I am eternally grateful), it doesn't excuse such a horrifically stupid and one sided transaction. And having Kobe and nothing else on the horizon doesn't make me feel any better - we're a lot further than one player away. Because if this is about winning championships, it's the wrong way to go about it. We've made it more difficult on ourselves and I think shrewd management could have helped.
Trust me, I hope I'm wrong, but I've aced this test so far. |
Whether it was a timing issue due to Shaq or Kobe, it was still a time issue. Lakers had to move Shaq within that time period, so therefore, it was a time constraint.
Seriously, look at Shaq. Do you think he'll continue to hold up for 4 additional years? He's on the decline. You keep harping on the trade being one sided when evidence is starting to surface that perhaps it wasn't that bad of a trade seeing as Shaq's numbers and production has fallen remarkably.
As for winning championships, give this team and Jerry Buss a chance to build a contender. It's a little too early to dismiss the 2007 cap space plans without even seeing a smidgeon of results. |
You keep missing the point - you didn't have Shaq on the books for another 4 years and no one is proposing that you would have given him the extension. All I'm asking is for our world class organization to have made a trade that made sense - honestly, they couldn't have made a worse deal. It was all based on getting a stud in 07 - any intelligent person could see that based on the pieces we got back and their contract lengths - which was a huge gamble that didn't pay off.
And many of you also keep forgetting that the trade was made so as to avoid the rebuilding project (at least that was what they said publicly). Accordingly, they must have thought they were getting impact players or they just lied to appease the masses.
And if this was a timing constraint due to Kobe (which it most likely was) then he deserves some of the responsibility. They swallowed a huge pill (at least 3 yrs of mediocrity despite having the best player in the NBA) just to rid themselves of the "Big Pill." And IMO the price was too high.
And at this point (after the trade), I don't think you can blame Mitch - the damage is done. They have no choice but to wait and hope to get lucky (07, 08, 09?) and count on Kobe to sell tickets in the interim. We've become the Sixers with Iverson. |
Actually, you're the one who doesn't get it why Shaq had to be traded. If you don't trade Shaq, you lose out on Kobe. We'd have cap space after Shaq leaves the team, but what two impact players are you going to sign to take us to a championship? And in the meantime, Kobe is contending for championships with the Clippers.
With the current plan, we might have to wait a little longer, but we have one cornerstone of the franchise already in Kobe. There's a strong possibility of Bynum becoming the other cornerstone, but we won't know that until later on. Since we already have Kobe, we only have to add one more player through the 2007 plan. That's a lot easier done than just giving up Shaq for nothing and trying to get two star players in FA.
Therefore, it's not such a bad idea. Again, if you throw out the fact that Shaq is declining and that he signed an extension, then you're right, the trade was terrible. But the reality is that Shaq is declining and he's stuck with his team for a long period of time. We're coming out on top of this trade already. So no regrets there.
EDIT: And if you look at all the whining going around right now, think about how bad it would be having Shaq miss 18 games this season and us being in the cellar. You same people would turn around and cry that Shaq should have been traded and Kobe should have been kept. Then you'd say the Lakers wasted 2 years of being able to contend by keeping Shaq and how his salary stops us from getting any signifcant help. yada, yada, yada... it'd be the same pissing and moaning. |
Your reading comprehension is horrible. In this entire thread, where do I say don't trade Shaq. All I'm saying is that Kobe and the organization should have been more patient in moving him - you can't refute that.
And I don't care if we had gotten a sack of potatoes for him - but not at the cost of tying up my cap for 3 years. Instead we added overpaid junk, and overpaid not-so-junk to our roster, while adding a year of cap inflexibility. And that's a good thing? You've got to be kidding me.
And if you're telling me that was the ONLY way we were keeping Kobe, then I wish everybody would please stop whining about Kobe's lack of help. He did it to himself.
My proper contention is that it didn't need to be this difficult - we've made the job of rebuilding much tougher on ourselves. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vanexelent
Retired Number
Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 30081
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 12:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| raffi wrote: | | Zhengi wrote: | | raffi wrote: | | Zhengi wrote: | | raffi wrote: | | Quote: | | As for Grant, he's definitely useless, but at least he comes off the books earlier than Shaq. |
Shaq would have come off the books this year at $30 million - now that is some serious cap room. |
Except we would be a terrible team and a lot more people would be complaining about how the Clippers would be going to the WCF and possibly the Finals with Kobe, Maggette, Livingston, and Elton Brand. Then all you whiners would be crying about how Shaq should have been traded and Kobe should have been kept. Can't win either way.
| Quote: | | Quote: | | As for the pieces we got for Shaq, it can't be helped. He wanted to go only to a few select places and that limited our options. Plus, we were on a time constraint. |
Couldn't disagree more - the time constraint was self-imposed. Shaq had zero leverage. The timing issue had more to do with Kobe - which is truly unfortunate, because he's now left with a talentless roster. They should have promised Kobe that they would move Shaq, but only at the right time and on the right terms. This would've been in the best interests of the team and Kobe. They acted in haste and got a bunch of waste.
Despite the past successes (for which I am eternally grateful), it doesn't excuse such a horrifically stupid and one sided transaction. And having Kobe and nothing else on the horizon doesn't make me feel any better - we're a lot further than one player away. Because if this is about winning championships, it's the wrong way to go about it. We've made it more difficult on ourselves and I think shrewd management could have helped.
Trust me, I hope I'm wrong, but I've aced this test so far. |
Whether it was a timing issue due to Shaq or Kobe, it was still a time issue. Lakers had to move Shaq within that time period, so therefore, it was a time constraint.
Seriously, look at Shaq. Do you think he'll continue to hold up for 4 additional years? He's on the decline. You keep harping on the trade being one sided when evidence is starting to surface that perhaps it wasn't that bad of a trade seeing as Shaq's numbers and production has fallen remarkably.
As for winning championships, give this team and Jerry Buss a chance to build a contender. It's a little too early to dismiss the 2007 cap space plans without even seeing a smidgeon of results. |
You keep missing the point - you didn't have Shaq on the books for another 4 years and no one is proposing that you would have given him the extension. All I'm asking is for our world class organization to have made a trade that made sense - honestly, they couldn't have made a worse deal. It was all based on getting a stud in 07 - any intelligent person could see that based on the pieces we got back and their contract lengths - which was a huge gamble that didn't pay off.
And many of you also keep forgetting that the trade was made so as to avoid the rebuilding project (at least that was what they said publicly). Accordingly, they must have thought they were getting impact players or they just lied to appease the masses.
And if this was a timing constraint due to Kobe (which it most likely was) then he deserves some of the responsibility. They swallowed a huge pill (at least 3 yrs of mediocrity despite having the best player in the NBA) just to rid themselves of the "Big Pill." And IMO the price was too high.
And at this point (after the trade), I don't think you can blame Mitch - the damage is done. They have no choice but to wait and hope to get lucky (07, 08, 09?) and count on Kobe to sell tickets in the interim. We've become the Sixers with Iverson. |
Actually, you're the one who doesn't get it why Shaq had to be traded. If you don't trade Shaq, you lose out on Kobe. We'd have cap space after Shaq leaves the team, but what two impact players are you going to sign to take us to a championship? And in the meantime, Kobe is contending for championships with the Clippers.
With the current plan, we might have to wait a little longer, but we have one cornerstone of the franchise already in Kobe. There's a strong possibility of Bynum becoming the other cornerstone, but we won't know that until later on. Since we already have Kobe, we only have to add one more player through the 2007 plan. That's a lot easier done than just giving up Shaq for nothing and trying to get two star players in FA.
Therefore, it's not such a bad idea. Again, if you throw out the fact that Shaq is declining and that he signed an extension, then you're right, the trade was terrible. But the reality is that Shaq is declining and he's stuck with his team for a long period of time. We're coming out on top of this trade already. So no regrets there.
EDIT: And if you look at all the whining going around right now, think about how bad it would be having Shaq miss 18 games this season and us being in the cellar. You same people would turn around and cry that Shaq should have been traded and Kobe should have been kept. Then you'd say the Lakers wasted 2 years of being able to contend by keeping Shaq and how his salary stops us from getting any signifcant help. yada, yada, yada... it'd be the same pissing and moaning. |
Your reading comprehension is horrible. In this entire thread, where do I say don't trade Shaq. All I'm saying is that Kobe and the organization should have been more patient in moving him - you can't refute that.
And I don't care if we had gotten a sack of potatoes for him - but not at the cost of tying up my cap for 3 years. Instead we added overpaid junk, and overpaid not-so-junk to our roster, while adding a year of cap inflexibility. And that's a good thing? You've got to be kidding me.
And if you're telling me that was the ONLY way we were keeping Kobe, then I wish everybody would please stop whining about Kobe's lack of help. He did it to himself.
My proper contention is that it didn't need to be this difficult - we've made the job of rebuilding much tougher on ourselves. |
I'm not sure why it took them this long to figure out what you have been saying this entire thread? Your comparasion of Kobe and the Lakers to AI and the Sixers is dead on! With the exeption that the Sixers have a solid veteran PF, a young athletic stud (Iguadala), and a nice young outside shooter(Koever). If Kobe had that line up in the triangle we wouldn't be having an '07 plan conversation.
I completely agree that Shaq should have been traded...at a later time in the summer. We've heard all the reasons why Shaq was traded so soon, i.e. he limited our possiblities because he wanted to play in a warm climate, we didn't want to move him to a Western Conference foe, or we were being nice and honoring his great contribution to our team. But we should all know now, that it was purely the fact that Kobe demanded Shaq's immediate trade before he signed his contract. He has nobody to blame but himself, about who he is currently playing with.
Thankfully Kobe has basically carried this team the whole year. If not for a 43 ppg average in the month of January, where would we be getting our entertainment from? I have not lost my faith in the organization though, to get us out of this mess. We are not bottom dwellers, so we got something to start with. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cr8zy0
Starting Rotation
Joined: 02 Jun 2005
Posts: 820
Location: Los Angeles & Philadelphia
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 1:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
the key point is that we could have got a better trade. we should have shipped him to dallas, forget about the same conference stuff. josh howard, marquis nash would have been nice. then sign big men. or ship him to pho where we could have gotten marion and joe johnson.
_________________
SMUSH FOR MVP |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Walter Sobchak
Star Player
Joined: 14 May 2003
Posts: 4520
Location: Hollywood, Ca.
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 6:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| raffi wrote: | | Quote: | | As for Grant, he's definitely useless, but at least he comes off the books earlier than Shaq. |
Shaq would have come off the books this year at $30 million - now that is some serious cap room.
| Quote: | | As for the pieces we got for Shaq, it can't be helped. He wanted to go only to a few select places and that limited our options. Plus, we were on a time constraint. |
Couldn't disagree more - the time constraint was self-imposed. Shaq had zero leverage. The timing issue had more to do with Kobe - which is truly unfortunate, because he's now left with a talentless roster. They should have promised Kobe that they would move Shaq, but only at the right time and on the right terms. This would've been in the best interests of the team and Kobe. They acted in haste and got a bunch of waste.
Despite the past successes (for which I am eternally grateful), it doesn't excuse such a horrifically stupid and one sided transaction. And having Kobe and nothing else on the horizon doesn't make me feel any better - we're a lot further than one player away. Because if this is about winning championships, it's the wrong way to go about it. We've made it more difficult on ourselves and I think shrewd management could have helped.
Trust me, I hope I'm wrong, but I've aced this test so far. |
Unfortunately you are wrong and you failed that test. Shaq had leverage, he could have opted out last summer and split for nothing and if the Lakers didn't move him quick they were at risk of losing Kobe for nothing as well. If the Lakers lost Kobe, Shaq could have faked an "injury" and sat out the whole year if he'd wanted to and split and left the Lakers with nothing. Kobe wasn't going to sign and just trust the Lakers that they'd deal Shaq because his free agency was the only leverage he had.
The Lakers shopped Shaq around, but unfortunately the rest of the league realized Shaq's true value, even if you still don't. Shaq was overpaid, overweight, over the hill and lazy. Not a good combination, and not something that increases your trade value. There's a reason that the Lakers couldn't get better players in exchange for Shaq. Miami wasn't willing to offer Wade and that was after Wade's rookie season. The Mavs weren't willing to offer Dirk. The Lakers had to trade for expensive players because they had to make the salaries match. Where was the better deal out there that the Lakers could have made?
Shaq and Kobe's messy situation hurt the Lakers, it wasn't Mitch. Kobe wasn't willing to wait a year or two more with Shaq and risk the best part of his career hoping the Lakers wouldn't re-sign Shaq again, and Shaq demanded the Lakers trade him. One of them had to go, and Kobe wanted to make sure the Lakers were committed to him and was going to sign with the Clippers if the Lakers weren't committed.
The only way that Mitch screwed up, IMO, was that he didn't trade Shaq two years earlier when his trade value would have been highest. But Mitch was being loyal to a guy who'd just been the 3 time MVP, so I can understand that. I could see the writing on the wall that Shaq and Kobe were not liking each other and that it was going to get worse as Shaq got worse and Kobe got better. I could see that Shaq was just going to get older and lazier and more expensive and it was better to get rid of him then before Kobe could leave and while they could still get great players in exchange for him.
For all the hype surrounding Shaq last year, the GMs around the league knew what Shaq was worth and they weren't willing to just hand over their best players to get him. Those GMs knew the mess the Lakers were in with the Shaq-Kobe feud and they knew LA couldn't just stand pat. The Shaq-Kobe feud took away Mitch's leverage and that is why the Lakers had to settle for Odom, Grant and Butler.
The biggest mistake Mitch has made since then was using the one-time exception on Grant, and that was no doubt Buss's call not Mitch's. The move saved Buss money but it hurt the Lakers as a team. Not only do the Lakers not have Grant as a player (which isn't a big deal), but they can't try to trade his expiring K next year for a good player. Instead we've got the 2007 plan.
_________________
"People don't think it be like it is, but it do." - Oscar Gamble
Just a reminder folks: "a lot" is two words. So is "no one". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Omar Little
Moderator
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90307
Location: Formerly Known As 24
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 6:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Just a few observations on the Shaq trade:
It was Shaq who demanded the extension.
It was Shaq who would have pouted and jaked his way through the existing contract.
Not trading Shaq risked losing Kobe.
Odom and Kwame, with future cap room, are worth more than a broken down Shaq with a huge extension and no forseeable cap space to improve the team.
Shaq demanded a 30 mil per year extension from LA, and when it was refused, demanded a trade. He later settled for 20 mil per year with Miami. F him, the lakers did as good as could be done.
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Krispy Kreme
Franchise Player
Joined: 30 Mar 2003
Posts: 12252
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 7:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Didnt Kobe say he wanted to play with Shaq??? Yet you guys think he would have bolted if Shaq was not traded. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
raffi
LG Contributor
Joined: 24 Jun 2005
Posts: 9987
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 08, 2006 10:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Walter Sobchak wrote: | | raffi wrote: | | Quote: | | As for Grant, he's definitely useless, but at least he comes off the books earlier than Shaq. |
Shaq would have come off the books this year at $30 million - now that is some serious cap room.
| Quote: | | As for the pieces we got for Shaq, it can't be helped. He wanted to go only to a few select places and that limited our options. Plus, we were on a time constraint. |
Couldn't disagree more - the time constraint was self-imposed. Shaq had zero leverage. The timing issue had more to do with Kobe - which is truly unfortunate, because he's now left with a talentless roster. They should have promised Kobe that they would move Shaq, but only at the right time and on the right terms. This would've been in the best interests of the team and Kobe. They acted in haste and got a bunch of waste.
Despite the past successes (for which I am eternally grateful), it doesn't excuse such a horrifically stupid and one sided transaction. And having Kobe and nothing else on the horizon doesn't make me feel any better - we're a lot further than one player away. Because if this is about winning championships, it's the wrong way to go about it. We've made it more difficult on ourselves and I think shrewd management could have helped.
Trust me, I hope I'm wrong, but I've aced this test so far. |
| Quote: | | Shaq had leverage, he could have opted out last summer and split for nothing |
You're wrong - how many teams do you think had $20 plus million of cap room? Shaq had nowhere to go - and if he somehow did opt out that would've been great for us. Instant cap flexibility!
| Quote: | | Kobe wasn't going to sign and just trust the Lakers that they'd deal Shaq because his free agency was the only leverage he had. |
So he didn't trust Buss to move Shaq, but trusts him to build a winner around him with no cap flexibility or impact players? Brilliant logic.
| Quote: | | The Lakers shopped Shaq around, but unfortunately the rest of the league realized Shaq's true value, even if you still don't. |
Miami's owner made a mint off that trade - selling 7000 extra seats a game, charging more for advertising, playoff revenue, merchandise sales - heck, even the worth of his franchise increased by $100 million. And he didn't have to add a penny to his team's salary. Pure genius!
| Quote: | | There's a reason that the Lakers couldn't get better players in exchange for Shaq. |
Yes - because they moved him too early.
| Quote: | | Shaq and Kobe's messy situation hurt the Lakers, it wasn't Mitch. Kobe wasn't willing to wait a year or two more with Shaq and risk the best part of his career . . . |
I'm sure he's thrilled with this roster - not risking his career with these guys.
| Quote: | | For all the hype surrounding Shaq last year, the GMs around the league knew what Shaq was worth and they weren't willing to just hand over their best players to get him. Those GMs knew the mess the Lakers were in with the Shaq-Kobe feud and they knew LA couldn't just stand pat. The Shaq-Kobe feud took away Mitch's leverage and that is why the Lakers had to settle for Odom, Grant and Butler. |
I really wish you would read the entire thread: We didn't get expiring Ks, we didn't get impact players, we didn't acquire athleticism we could keep, we didn't get young cheap talent that could play (Haslem), we didn't get players with trade value and we didn't get better. And it isn't just the money - the real killer is having to wait until 07 to have any chance to add to the roster.
And I don't care if we had gotten a sack of potatoes for him - but not at the cost of tying up my cap for 3 years. Instead we added overpaid junk, and overpaid not-so-junk to our roster, while adding a year of cap inflexibility. And that's a good thing? You've got to be kidding me.
And if this was a timing constraint due to Kobe (which it most likely was) then he deserves some of the responsibility. They swallowed a huge pill (at least 3 yrs of mediocrity despite having the best player in the NBA) just to rid themselves of the "Big Pill." And IMO the price was too high.
| Quote: | | The biggest mistake Mitch has made since then was using the one-time exception on Grant, and that was no doubt Buss's call not Mitch's. The move saved Buss money but it hurt the Lakers as a team. Not only do the Lakers not have Grant as a player (which isn't a big deal), but they can't try to trade his expiring K next year for a good player. |
We finally agree on something. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
md8
Star Player
Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Posts: 1851
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 08, 2006 11:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
I can accept rebuilding. But the truth is we aren't doing that right now. Rebuilding is adding good young talent to the team, not trying to clear everyone off our roster in 2 years. Thats when we will start to rebuild. For now there is nothing to look forward to. Even after 2007 we will suck for awhile. We will get a max player and have kobe, odom, bynum, max player and a bunch of players that signed for the minimum. And you think out bench is bad now. Instead of a max player, we might get 2 or 3 decent players but the rest of the roster will still suck. We better get use to losing....
And the Shaq trade was just terrible. I was in favor of trading Shaq a year before we traded him. But we did not only not get enough for him. We took on contracts that are just killing us by not letting us rebuild for 3 years. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Smel Counts
Star Player
Joined: 07 May 2005
Posts: 1744
Location: corner of Prairie and Manchester
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 08, 2006 2:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Walter Sobchak wrote: | | raffi wrote: | | Quote: | | As for Grant, he's definitely useless, but at least he comes off the books earlier than Shaq. |
Shaq would have come off the books this year at $30 million - now that is some serious cap room.
| Quote: | | As for the pieces we got for Shaq, it can't be helped. He wanted to go only to a few select places and that limited our options. Plus, we were on a time constraint. |
Couldn't disagree more - the time constraint was self-imposed. Shaq had zero leverage. The timing issue had more to do with Kobe - which is truly unfortunate, because he's now left with a talentless roster. They should have promised Kobe that they would move Shaq, but only at the right time and on the right terms. This would've been in the best interests of the team and Kobe. They acted in haste and got a bunch of waste.
Despite the past successes (for which I am eternally grateful), it doesn't excuse such a horrifically stupid and one sided transaction. And having Kobe and nothing else on the horizon doesn't make me feel any better - we're a lot further than one player away. Because if this is about winning championships, it's the wrong way to go about it. We've made it more difficult on ourselves and I think shrewd management could have helped.
Trust me, I hope I'm wrong, but I've aced this test so far. |
Unfortunately you are wrong and you failed that test. Shaq had leverage, he could have opted out last summer and split for nothing and if the Lakers didn't move him quick they were at risk of losing Kobe for nothing as well. If the Lakers lost Kobe, Shaq could have faked an "injury" and sat out the whole year if he'd wanted to and split and left the Lakers with nothing. Kobe wasn't going to sign and just trust the Lakers that they'd deal Shaq because his free agency was the only leverage he had.
The Lakers shopped Shaq around, but unfortunately the rest of the league realized Shaq's true value, even if you still don't. Shaq was overpaid, overweight, over the hill and lazy. Not a good combination, and not something that increases your trade value. There's a reason that the Lakers couldn't get better players in exchange for Shaq. Miami wasn't willing to offer Wade and that was after Wade's rookie season. The Mavs weren't willing to offer Dirk. The Lakers had to trade for expensive players because they had to make the salaries match. Where was the better deal out there that the Lakers could have made?
Shaq and Kobe's messy situation hurt the Lakers, it wasn't Mitch. Kobe wasn't willing to wait a year or two more with Shaq and risk the best part of his career hoping the Lakers wouldn't re-sign Shaq again, and Shaq demanded the Lakers trade him. One of them had to go, and Kobe wanted to make sure the Lakers were committed to him and was going to sign with the Clippers if the Lakers weren't committed.
The only way that Mitch screwed up, IMO, was that he didn't trade Shaq two years earlier when his trade value would have been highest. But Mitch was being loyal to a guy who'd just been the 3 time MVP, so I can understand that. I could see the writing on the wall that Shaq and Kobe were not liking each other and that it was going to get worse as Shaq got worse and Kobe got better. I could see that Shaq was just going to get older and lazier and more expensive and it was better to get rid of him then before Kobe could leave and while they could still get great players in exchange for him.
For all the hype surrounding Shaq last year, the GMs around the league knew what Shaq was worth and they weren't willing to just hand over their best players to get him. Those GMs knew the mess the Lakers were in with the Shaq-Kobe feud and they knew LA couldn't just stand pat. The Shaq-Kobe feud took away Mitch's leverage and that is why the Lakers had to settle for Odom, Grant and Butler.
The biggest mistake Mitch has made since then was using the one-time exception on Grant, and that was no doubt Buss's call not Mitch's. The move saved Buss money but it hurt the Lakers as a team. Not only do the Lakers not have Grant as a player (which isn't a big deal), but they can't try to trade his expiring K next year for a good player. Instead we've got the 2007 plan. |
Brilliant post. I don't even think it was the Shat-Kobe thing that compromised Mitch's position. It was just Shat. GM's really don't want to put their job security in the hands of an admitted jaker on the last legs of a disappointing career. It's like trading for Babe Ruth when he's 50 hoping he'll completely change his ways and get you over the hump.
I too am a season ticket holder and I completely understand your frustration but IMO it should be directed at 2 people.
1) Shat.
He was a complete terrorist who kept threatening to push the button on the franchise whenever he didn't get his way. Finally, when he had burned all his bridges and his demise was inevitible he took the whole franchise down with him (not really a surprise IMO). Shame on us for ever giving him the power to do it, but we did.
Many of us were willing to ignore the 400 lb. purple and gold elephant sitting in the living room all those years. I wasn't, but I will admit the titles were nice, just tainted (they came at the expense of our soul. i.e. our current situation, Jerry West leaving, Shat disgracing this proud organization in public on more occasions than I can count, stunting Kobe's development- perhaps irrepairably, etc.).
We continually tried to build on a foundation of Shat's blubber, so we unfortunately have to take a hit because of it.
Oh well, that's almost 2 years down and 1 to go.
I'll take it, at least there's finally some light at the end of the tunnel, and although the price was pretty steep,at least we got our mojo/soul back.
2. Phillip. He was hired at great expense to make sure Shat didn't do exactly what he ended up doing and he failed miserably.
He gave Shat the power to kill us and he chased Jerry West out in the process.
His actions were often just as unprofessional as Shat's. (Sleeping w/ the boss' daughter, constantly airing team's dirty laundry in the press, publishing his diary, deciding immediately that Shat could do no wrong and Kobe would be the whipping boy, etc.)
When he was rehired, I don't think his quote about redemption was about anyone else but him. He nearly destroyed the franchise and Kobe (a better man than he'll ever be) and he finally felt bad about it. He knew he Fd up.
We sold our soul for 3 titles and if the price for reclaiming it is watching Michaelangelo (Kobe) have to paint trashcans for 3 years, then unfortunately that's what we gotta do. Fortunately Kobe's man enough to bear the load. Something neither Shat nor Phillip would/could ever even contemplate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
