|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Trade AD or Trade for Star Player? |
| Trade AD after next season for picks, etc. |
|
51% |
[ 18 ] |
| Keep AD and trade young players and picks for another star player |
|
48% |
[ 17 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 35 |
|
| Author |
Message |
cital
Star Player
Joined: 25 May 2002
Posts: 3675
|
 Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2024 7:51 am Post subject: Trade AD or trade for another Star Player? |
|
|
| I think the team needs to decide between running it back for one more season and then going into full rebuild mode, which should probably include trading AD for draft capital, or trading for another star player to pair with AD going forward. The two most recent names to come up are Young and Mitchell. What would you guys prefer, full rebuild or trade young core of role players and a bunch of picks for a star player? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Hanging from Rafters
Star Player
Joined: 31 Jul 2018
Posts: 4892
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2024 8:13 am Post subject: Re: Trade AD or trade for another Star Player? |
|
|
| cital wrote: | | I think the team needs to decide between running it back for one more season and then going into full rebuild mode, which should probably include trading AD for draft capital, or trading for another star player to pair with AD going forward. The two most recent names to come up are Young and Mitchell. What would you guys prefer, full rebuild or trade young core of role players and a bunch of picks for a star player? |
Neither…don’t like either of those scenarios…imo there is a better 3rd option that I prefer. It’s your poll…make it as you like…but it doesn’t make sense to me to make it seem like we have to do one of those when a more logical, reasonable, move is to add a non-all star impact player and role players to keep depth. It’s premature to think “blow it up without AD”, and adding a 3rd star is such a waste because one of the 3 would have to take a back seat and end up producing more like a good role player anyway. Then, because the 3rd star cost so much, the depth around 2 stars, and a 3rd playing like a good role player is so thin that a team struggles to compete as a top 3 seed.
Get a high end role player and keep depth would be my suggestion as a 3rd voting option but again, your poll, your choice, but why put two bad options and leave out what some may consider the best one? imo.
_________________
“When it looks as if it is a realistic possibility, I want to focus on winning a ship like it’s a goal that can’t be denied. I didn’t see that this off season.” |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Runway8
Franchise Player
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Posts: 22959
Location: La Jolla, San Diego
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2024 8:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| In order for me to choose an option, I would need to know what's going to happen to the gigantic elephant in the room. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
defense
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jan 2010
Posts: 39924
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2024 8:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Neither
Trade Lebron and rebuild |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
governator
Retired Number
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 25540
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2024 8:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Until Bron retire; gotta go for it with AD
_________________
“The main goal for the Lakers is to win a championship. All I care about, all we care about, is to raise another banner in the rafters.“ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tox
Franchise Player
Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 18383
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2024 9:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
Trade AD when we don't have 2025 or 2027 picks? Ehhh
I suppose you can see it as a sunk cost but |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cital
Star Player
Joined: 25 May 2002
Posts: 3675
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2024 9:46 am Post subject: Re: Trade AD or trade for another Star Player? |
|
|
| Hanging from Rafters wrote: | | cital wrote: | | I think the team needs to decide between running it back for one more season and then going into full rebuild mode, which should probably include trading AD for draft capital, or trading for another star player to pair with AD going forward. The two most recent names to come up are Young and Mitchell. What would you guys prefer, full rebuild or trade young core of role players and a bunch of picks for a star player? |
Neither…don’t like either of those scenarios…imo there is a better 3rd option that I prefer. It’s your poll…make it as you like…but it doesn’t make sense to me to make it seem like we have to do one of those when a more logical, reasonable, move is to add a non-all star impact player and role players to keep depth. It’s premature to think “blow it up without AD”, and adding a 3rd star is such a waste because one of the 3 would have to take a back seat and end up producing more like a good role player anyway. Then, because the 3rd star cost so much, the depth around 2 stars, and a 3rd playing like a good role player is so thin that a team struggles to compete as a top 3 seed.
Get a high end role player and keep depth would be my suggestion as a 3rd voting option but again, your poll, your choice, but why put two bad options and leave out what some may consider the best one? imo. |
I hear what you are saying, but in my opinion, reality is that AD is not going to stick around post LeBron if another star is not brought in to play with him, and the only real way of making that happen is through a trade. I don’t think it’s realistic through free agency, but I could be wrong. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ocho
Retired Number
Joined: 24 May 2005
Posts: 54631
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2024 10:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| tox wrote: | Trade AD when we don't have 2025 or 2027 picks? Ehhh
I suppose you can see it as a sunk cost but |
You offset that with the picks coming back in a trade. The alternative is we continue to not contend, we still don’t have 25 or 27, LeBron retired, we face another coaching change in 2 years and we will throw even more picks away trying to elevate a squad that doesn’t have it anymore. AD is going to be traded at some point. We can do it now when his stock is its highest or we can wait until it drops.
_________________
14-5-3-12 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hanging from Rafters
Star Player
Joined: 31 Jul 2018
Posts: 4892
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2024 11:02 am Post subject: Re: Trade AD or trade for another Star Player? |
|
|
| cital wrote: | | Hanging from Rafters wrote: | | cital wrote: | | I think the team needs to decide between running it back for one more season and then going into full rebuild mode, which should probably include trading AD for draft capital, or trading for another star player to pair with AD going forward. The two most recent names to come up are Young and Mitchell. What would you guys prefer, full rebuild or trade young core of role players and a bunch of picks for a star player? |
Neither…don’t like either of those scenarios…imo there is a better 3rd option that I prefer. It’s your poll…make it as you like…but it doesn’t make sense to me to make it seem like we have to do one of those when a more logical, reasonable, move is to add a non-all star impact player and role players to keep depth. It’s premature to think “blow it up without AD”, and adding a 3rd star is such a waste because one of the 3 would have to take a back seat and end up producing more like a good role player anyway. Then, because the 3rd star cost so much, the depth around 2 stars, and a 3rd playing like a good role player is so thin that a team struggles to compete as a top 3 seed.
Get a high end role player and keep depth would be my suggestion as a 3rd voting option but again, your poll, your choice, but why put two bad options and leave out what some may consider the best one? imo. |
I hear what you are saying, but in my opinion, reality is that AD is not going to stick around post LeBron if another star is not brought in to play with him, and the only real way of making that happen is through a trade. I don’t think it’s realistic through free agency, but I could be wrong. |
Imo AD will stick around after LBJ retires if the FO shows commitment to going after a ship, especially if that commitment results in a ship win before LBJ retires. I believe AD would be patient in that circumstance and stick around, realizing another star is likely to be acquired based on the aforementioned demonstrated commitment to continue a ship pursuit.
However, if the FO doesn’t demonstrate commitment to a ship, I don’t think any action matters anyway. I actually fear that is where we are now.
_________________
“When it looks as if it is a realistic possibility, I want to focus on winning a ship like it’s a goal that can’t be denied. I didn’t see that this off season.” |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tox
Franchise Player
Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 18383
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2024 11:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ocho wrote: | | tox wrote: | Trade AD when we don't have 2025 or 2027 picks? Ehhh
I suppose you can see it as a sunk cost but |
You offset that with the picks coming back in a trade. The alternative is we continue to not contend, we still don’t have 25 or 27, LeBron retired, we face another coaching change in 2 years and we will throw even more picks away trying to elevate a squad that doesn’t have it anymore. AD is going to be traded at some point. We can do it now when his stock is its highest or we can wait until it drops. |
Might as well run it back this year and see if you can make smart upgrades at the margins to become a Top-4ish seed. And if so, maybe you spend draft capital to go for it. The league is wide open. If not, then just ride out the 7th seed. And if Father Time catches up to LeBron and the Lakers are 12th in the brutal West, then yeah trade AD.
I don't see the point of trading AD and LeBron when they showed they still had the juice this season. Yeah they're no longer collectively dominant and you have to support them with a very strong supporting cast. I don't think the current roster is it, but you can make smart trades to get there. Suppose the DaRon Holmes falls to the Lakers and he ends up being what people project (rim protecting weak side 4/5 who can defend in space but not in the post) -- that would be a game changer for the Lakers in a way that Lively has been for Dallas.
I guess because the Lakers lack their 2025 pick, and I saw enough from LeBron and AD (but not the rest of the supporting cast), I am open to the prospect of running it back one more year. Can always reevaluate in Jan/Feb |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ocho
Retired Number
Joined: 24 May 2005
Posts: 54631
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2024 12:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| tox wrote: | | ocho wrote: | | tox wrote: | Trade AD when we don't have 2025 or 2027 picks? Ehhh
I suppose you can see it as a sunk cost but |
You offset that with the picks coming back in a trade. The alternative is we continue to not contend, we still don’t have 25 or 27, LeBron retired, we face another coaching change in 2 years and we will throw even more picks away trying to elevate a squad that doesn’t have it anymore. AD is going to be traded at some point. We can do it now when his stock is its highest or we can wait until it drops. |
Might as well run it back this year and see if you can make smart upgrades at the margins to become a Top-4ish seed. And if so, maybe you spend draft capital to go for it. The league is wide open. If not, then just ride out the 7th seed. And if Father Time catches up to LeBron and the Lakers are 12th in the brutal West, then yeah trade AD.
I don't see the point of trading AD and LeBron when they showed they still had the juice this season. Yeah they're no longer collectively dominant and you have to support them with a very strong supporting cast. I don't think the current roster is it, but you can make smart trades to get there. Suppose the DaRon Holmes falls to the Lakers and he ends up being what people project (rim protecting weak side 4/5 who can defend in space but not in the post) -- that would be a game changer for the Lakers in a way that Lively has been for Dallas.
I guess because the Lakers lack their 2025 pick, and I saw enough from LeBron and AD (but not the rest of the supporting cast), I am open to the prospect of running it back one more year. Can always reevaluate in Jan/Feb |
Problem there is any meaningful improvement will surely cost you multiple picks. You get 1 “last dance” season where we are still heavily relying on a 40 year old star and a coach who hasn’t ever coached before. Then you’re back in the same hole we are in now only without up to 3 more of our 1sts. I could see the justification if we had been competitive in the playoffs or the regular season but we weren’t. We’re a perennial play-in team.
_________________
14-5-3-12 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tox
Franchise Player
Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 18383
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2024 1:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ocho wrote: | | tox wrote: | | ocho wrote: | | tox wrote: | Trade AD when we don't have 2025 or 2027 picks? Ehhh
I suppose you can see it as a sunk cost but |
You offset that with the picks coming back in a trade. The alternative is we continue to not contend, we still don’t have 25 or 27, LeBron retired, we face another coaching change in 2 years and we will throw even more picks away trying to elevate a squad that doesn’t have it anymore. AD is going to be traded at some point. We can do it now when his stock is its highest or we can wait until it drops. |
Might as well run it back this year and see if you can make smart upgrades at the margins to become a Top-4ish seed. And if so, maybe you spend draft capital to go for it. The league is wide open. If not, then just ride out the 7th seed. And if Father Time catches up to LeBron and the Lakers are 12th in the brutal West, then yeah trade AD.
I don't see the point of trading AD and LeBron when they showed they still had the juice this season. Yeah they're no longer collectively dominant and you have to support them with a very strong supporting cast. I don't think the current roster is it, but you can make smart trades to get there. Suppose the DaRon Holmes falls to the Lakers and he ends up being what people project (rim protecting weak side 4/5 who can defend in space but not in the post) -- that would be a game changer for the Lakers in a way that Lively has been for Dallas.
I guess because the Lakers lack their 2025 pick, and I saw enough from LeBron and AD (but not the rest of the supporting cast), I am open to the prospect of running it back one more year. Can always reevaluate in Jan/Feb |
Problem there is any meaningful improvement will surely cost you multiple picks. You get 1 “last dance” season where we are still heavily relying on a 40 year old star and a coach who hasn’t ever coached before. Then you’re back in the same hole we are in now only without up to 3 more of our 1sts. I could see the justification if we had been competitive in the playoffs or the regular season but we weren’t. We’re a perennial play-in team. |
I hate the "perennial play-in team" phrasing, it is a misleading way to understate the Lakers. The Mavericks who are in the Finals won 3 more regular season games than us. (The Mavericks went 21-9 to end the season after their trades. The Lakers went 22-10 after they started Rui, if that's an argument you want to make.) The Nuggets, who've had our number, were trailing for the majority of the series -- this wasn't a team that was clearly outmatched. This was with Darvin Ham as our coach. That 47 wins could've easily been 50. That Game 3 loss could've been a win if we had a coach who knew what he was doing. Are we having the same conversation if the Lakers won 50 and lost in 6 or 7 to the Nuggets?
There is improvement the Lakers can make by just making a good draft pick and/or making good vet min signings. What if the Lakers sign Goga and they no longer fall apart defensively without AD? What if they end up with Holmes? The Lakers' starters last year, while in my opinion not really a real championship contending core, actually won a lot of games at a good rate, even when LeBron was injured. While LeBron and AD might decline, there's always the alternative: what if Reaves becomes the on ball threat he seemed he might become in the '23 playoffs, or if Christie in this third year becomes a capable 3&D two guard which team desperately needs.
As far as trades go -- yeah, I agree. Let's not trade 3 future first rounders (unless it's for a bona fide star like Mitchell who signs an extension) for no reason. But maybe the Lakers can dangle JHS... like Vincent/JHS for Olynyk if the Lakers really want a stretch 5 next to AD (after seeing how well LeBron/AD/Wood played together but don't like Wood specifically). Or maybe you look for other smart trades like the Nunn/Rui trade that gets you a rotation piece for just about nothing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ocho
Retired Number
Joined: 24 May 2005
Posts: 54631
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2024 2:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| tox wrote: | | ocho wrote: | | tox wrote: | | ocho wrote: | | tox wrote: | Trade AD when we don't have 2025 or 2027 picks? Ehhh
I suppose you can see it as a sunk cost but |
You offset that with the picks coming back in a trade. The alternative is we continue to not contend, we still don’t have 25 or 27, LeBron retired, we face another coaching change in 2 years and we will throw even more picks away trying to elevate a squad that doesn’t have it anymore. AD is going to be traded at some point. We can do it now when his stock is its highest or we can wait until it drops. |
Might as well run it back this year and see if you can make smart upgrades at the margins to become a Top-4ish seed. And if so, maybe you spend draft capital to go for it. The league is wide open. If not, then just ride out the 7th seed. And if Father Time catches up to LeBron and the Lakers are 12th in the brutal West, then yeah trade AD.
I don't see the point of trading AD and LeBron when they showed they still had the juice this season. Yeah they're no longer collectively dominant and you have to support them with a very strong supporting cast. I don't think the current roster is it, but you can make smart trades to get there. Suppose the DaRon Holmes falls to the Lakers and he ends up being what people project (rim protecting weak side 4/5 who can defend in space but not in the post) -- that would be a game changer for the Lakers in a way that Lively has been for Dallas.
I guess because the Lakers lack their 2025 pick, and I saw enough from LeBron and AD (but not the rest of the supporting cast), I am open to the prospect of running it back one more year. Can always reevaluate in Jan/Feb |
Problem there is any meaningful improvement will surely cost you multiple picks. You get 1 “last dance” season where we are still heavily relying on a 40 year old star and a coach who hasn’t ever coached before. Then you’re back in the same hole we are in now only without up to 3 more of our 1sts. I could see the justification if we had been competitive in the playoffs or the regular season but we weren’t. We’re a perennial play-in team. |
I hate the "perennial play-in team" phrasing, it is a misleading way to understate the Lakers. The Mavericks who are in the Finals won 3 more regular season games than us. (The Mavericks went 21-9 to end the season after their trades. The Lakers went 22-10 after they started Rui, if that's an argument you want to make.) The Nuggets, who've had our number, were trailing for the majority of the series -- this wasn't a team that was clearly outmatched. This was with Darvin Ham as our coach. That 47 wins could've easily been 50. That Game 3 loss could've been a win if we had a coach who knew what he was doing. Are we having the same conversation if the Lakers won 50 and lost in 6 or 7 to the Nuggets?
There is improvement the Lakers can make by just making a good draft pick and/or making good vet min signings. What if the Lakers sign Goga and they no longer fall apart defensively without AD? What if they end up with Holmes? The Lakers' starters last year, while in my opinion not really a real championship contending core, actually won a lot of games at a good rate, even when LeBron was injured. While LeBron and AD might decline, there's always the alternative: what if Reaves becomes the on ball threat he seemed he might become in the '23 playoffs, or if Christie in this third year becomes a capable 3&D two guard which team desperately needs.
As far as trades go -- yeah, I agree. Let's not trade 3 future first rounders (unless it's for a bona fide star like Mitchell who signs an extension) for no reason. But maybe the Lakers can dangle JHS... like Vincent/JHS for Olynyk if the Lakers really want a stretch 5 next to AD (after seeing how well LeBron/AD/Wood played together but don't like Wood specifically). Or maybe you look for other smart trades like the Nunn/Rui trade that gets you a rotation piece for just about nothing. |
You may not like the phrasing but it’s nevertheless accurate. We used to blame it on health. We got health and the result was the same so we blamed coaching. In reality we’ve just jettisoned a tremendous amount of talent with little or nothing to show for it. Now, in a relative talent deficit, it’ll cost multiple picks to replenish (that’s assuming those deals are even available to us which isn’t guaranteed.) The Mavericks are in the Finals, where they are about to lose, and spent multiple 1sts on marginal upgrades and are now pretty well locked into a team that isn’t good enough to win it all. I would peg their chances at getting back to the Finals as pretty slim.
With regards to your points about Denver, as much solace as some Laker fans have taken with their 2nd and 3rd quarter (blown) leads, we have been annihilated by that team on a consistent basis for two years. Two regular seasons and two playoff series and 1 single won game (and that came after the series was already essentially over.) We have not been competitive against them. Full stop.
A home run off season can get us out of the play-in. It’s going to come at a great cost though and on top of that it will also require another season of great health, a miracle first coaching year by Redick, and continued elevated play from a 40 year old LeBron who has already shown visible decline. That doesn’t sound like a hand I want to play, particularly if I have to keep raising the bet.
_________________
14-5-3-12 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RI Laker
Star Player
Joined: 27 Jun 2005
Posts: 7383
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2024 2:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Its a catch 22 for me. Trade AD now while his value is high (especially playing the amount of games he did). Cash in on him but unfortunately we would be feeding the Pels who own our pick (not protected). I am kind of leaning towards ripping the band aid all in one shot then peeling it off slowly. Take the pain as soon as possible and get it over with. If we are being honest, we are a cluster F right now and are going nowhere next season. We need to keep our picks. If we trade them, attach them with current players to get better picks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lakersfever714
Franchise Player
Joined: 05 Jan 2016
Posts: 12536
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2024 2:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Depends on how much we'd get back but trading AD now would be giving up maybe 2 more chances at winning another ring.
But I mean we drafted DLo, BI and Lonzo Bust with 3 second overall picks so it'd be dangerous to give the Lakers FO those picks imo.
If we have a new GM, then trade AD. If we keep Pelinka, then keep the team as it is. Sorry but I don't trust any of Jeanie's friend to draft that high anymore.
_________________
Los Angeles Lakers 2025 NBA Champions!! Go JJ!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Denny_Russo
Star Player
Joined: 27 Jan 2016
Posts: 3209
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2024 5:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Can't trade AD because the Pels have the pick next year. Trading him will result in a lottery berth because the team has one of the worst defenses when he's not on the floor.
I say keep him around for as long as possible. It may be hard to believe but defense is still a major requirement in winning a ring today. It's no shocker that Lively and Gafford propelled the Mavs to the finals. Not having AD means we will be one of the worst defensive teams in the league until they find a suitable replacement (hint: it won't be anytime soon).
The above is why I've advocated for moving on from Bron and doing a soft rebuild around AD. Get scrappy defensive, 3 and D guys that complement AD, draft well and hope a star is born. It's the best hope at getting back to the top.
_________________
Yi Jianlian Fanboy. Respect The Chair.
Starting anew. I'm retiring my main. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hammett
Star Player
Joined: 20 Dec 2008
Posts: 9568
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2024 5:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dude's 31 and injury prone. I think we've squeezed all the juice we can out of him. He's not going to get better, he's at the point where we are going to see the slow progression of his physical decline. We got 5 prime seasons out of him; it's time to move on.
_________________
Lakers. Built different. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tox
Franchise Player
Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 18383
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2024 7:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ocho wrote: | You may not like the phrasing but it’s nevertheless accurate. We used to blame it on health. We got health and the result was the same so we blamed coaching. In reality we’ve just jettisoned a tremendous amount of talent with little or nothing to show for it. Now, in a relative talent deficit, it’ll cost multiple picks to replenish (that’s assuming those deals are even available to us which isn’t guaranteed.) The Mavericks are in the Finals, where they are about to lose, and spent multiple 1sts on marginal upgrades and are now pretty well locked into a team that isn’t good enough to win it all. I would peg their chances at getting back to the Finals as pretty slim.
With regards to your points about Denver, as much solace as some Laker fans have taken with their 2nd and 3rd quarter (blown) leads, we have been annihilated by that team on a consistent basis for two years. Two regular seasons and two playoff series and 1 single won game (and that came after the series was already essentially over.) We have not been competitive against them. Full stop.
A home run off season can get us out of the play-in. It’s going to come at a great cost though and on top of that it will also require another season of great health, a miracle first coaching year by Redick, and continued elevated play from a 40 year old LeBron who has already shown visible decline. That doesn’t sound like a hand I want to play, particularly if I have to keep raising the bet. |
Cmon Ocho, you know it's "accurate" but it's misleading as hell. The Lakers' 47 wins would've been the #4 seed in '22-'23 -- better seed than the Mavs this year -- does that suddenly make that same win total more impressive?
Anyway, a better argument is that the Lakers' net rating of +0.6 was only 19th in the league -- the Lakers won a lot of clutch games which typically regress to the mean. And that's with a healthy LeBron and AD, although I think the number of injuries to our PoA defenders and/or bigs were a serious issue as well and I also think it's misleading to say the Lakers had "great health."
I mean with the Grizz/Spurs/Rockets being better next year, I would expect the Lakers to still be in the play in area. But I just don't see a big difference between the Lakers and Mavs this year, at least record-wise |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ocho
Retired Number
Joined: 24 May 2005
Posts: 54631
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2024 8:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| tox wrote: | | ocho wrote: | You may not like the phrasing but it’s nevertheless accurate. We used to blame it on health. We got health and the result was the same so we blamed coaching. In reality we’ve just jettisoned a tremendous amount of talent with little or nothing to show for it. Now, in a relative talent deficit, it’ll cost multiple picks to replenish (that’s assuming those deals are even available to us which isn’t guaranteed.) The Mavericks are in the Finals, where they are about to lose, and spent multiple 1sts on marginal upgrades and are now pretty well locked into a team that isn’t good enough to win it all. I would peg their chances at getting back to the Finals as pretty slim.
With regards to your points about Denver, as much solace as some Laker fans have taken with their 2nd and 3rd quarter (blown) leads, we have been annihilated by that team on a consistent basis for two years. Two regular seasons and two playoff series and 1 single won game (and that came after the series was already essentially over.) We have not been competitive against them. Full stop.
A home run off season can get us out of the play-in. It’s going to come at a great cost though and on top of that it will also require another season of great health, a miracle first coaching year by Redick, and continued elevated play from a 40 year old LeBron who has already shown visible decline. That doesn’t sound like a hand I want to play, particularly if I have to keep raising the bet. |
Cmon Ocho, you know it's "accurate" but it's misleading as hell. The Lakers' 47 wins would've been the #4 seed in '22-'23 -- better seed than the Mavs this year -- does that suddenly make that same win total more impressive?
Anyway, a better argument is that the Lakers' net rating of +0.6 was only 19th in the league -- the Lakers won a lot of clutch games which typically regress to the mean. And that's with a healthy LeBron and AD, although I think the number of injuries to our PoA defenders and/or bigs were a serious issue as well and I also think it's misleading to say the Lakers had "great health."
I mean with the Grizz/Spurs/Rockets being better next year, I would expect the Lakers to still be in the play in area. But I just don't see a big difference between the Lakers and Mavs this year, at least record-wise |
Win totals are always relative to the strength of the conference. It doesn’t matter how many wins we have as long as there are several other teams that win more than we do. Aside from one year, we’ve been either out of playoff contention or at the bottom of it trying to scrap our way into a low seed. We can blame coaching or injuries or bad trades and some or even all of those arguments might have merit but it just means we don’t have enough to be competitive.
I disagree it’s misleading at all to say we had great health. If we can’t withstand an injury to our backup PG we aren’t that good of a team. Vando gets hurt every year. Our most important players were basically always available. Given how the last few seasons have gone (and how I anticipate the next few will go) it’s about as good as it gets health wise. We were a 7 seed and got bounced in 5 games.
The Mavs are experiencing this year what we did last year. They made some key deadline deals, caught favorable matchups, and found themselves going on a deep run. Like us, I don’t expect them to repeat it next year. They’re about to lose the Finals and are fairly locked in to a situation where they raised their floor but will find it difficult to raise their ceiling. We can keep pumping 1st round picks into the fire to try and keep it going but that’s an enormous gamble for a creaky old team like this. Especially one with a totally green coach.
_________________
14-5-3-12 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Japago
Star Player
Joined: 21 Jun 2018
Posts: 1645
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2024 9:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think the Lakers should go for it because of the combination of LeBron and AD still being good and rebuilding being overrated.
LeBron and AD played well enough that I think they can make another run if they have a great supporting cast. I think they would win with the Celtics' supporting cast. While talented, I think these playoffs have shown AR, DLo, Rui aren't the kind of players who can be THE main supporting cast.
Rebuilding is all about getting the star. I don't think any random year is likely to yield a star. So, putting it off for 1 or 2 years isn't that big of a deal to me. The Lakers can recoup some picks back by trading these players away then, even if they aren't at peak value at that point.
Having a lot of picks for many years doesn't really matter at the end of the day.
The Lakers spent 5 years rebuilding, and had 3 #2 overall picks. The Lakers weren't any closer to contending after ALL of those picks.
You're probably talking about many years, decades rebuilding when you start from scratch. Putting that off for a few years doesn't really matter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wolfpaclaker
Retired Number
Joined: 29 May 2002
Posts: 58599
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 17, 2024 3:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
I've been on the trade AD wagon (better a year or two early than too late) for a while. However in order to do so you have to somehow stay competitive post trade. I don't see Jeanie/Pelinka going for a full out re-build for multiple years, it was what she always trashed her brother Jimmy on.
He just came off 76 games played, all-NBA and defensive teams. It won't get better than this. If you trade him now, you'll get a lot. He's on a 3 year deal/extension. You'll get at least 3-4 FRPs, plus a young starter. Think back to the Gobert/Durant trades.
The thing is as I said in para 1, in the Jeanie era I can't see the Lakers ever doing a full 5 year re-build. It's never really worked with any kind of success in the Lakers Buss era. People will say we drafted Ingram, Ball, DLO, Randle etc. Yeah, but not one actual championship level franchise #1 or #2. Not one Lebron, AD, Tatum, Brown, Luka, Kyrie, Joker etc. I can't see Jeanie going with this. She has recent history "proving" her that re-building like that doens't work. But "trading" and FA does.
The best case of a re-build for us would be a competitive re-build ala OKC. They've re-built their team really well. Traded Paul George into SGA, a lot of draft picks. They were in the deep lottery only 1-2 years. They were competitive most of the non-Durant/Westbrook re-build years. What we need to do is find the Paul George/Clippers style trades for us. Unfortunately, Presti works for them, and we have Pelinka. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ocho
Retired Number
Joined: 24 May 2005
Posts: 54631
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 17, 2024 5:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | The Lakers spent 5 years rebuilding, and had 3 #2 overall picks. The Lakers weren't any closer to contending after ALL of those picks. |
How can you not see the connection between those picks and us holding up the 2020 Championship trophy?
_________________
14-5-3-12 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Japago
Star Player
Joined: 21 Jun 2018
Posts: 1645
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 17, 2024 5:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
OKC's "success" is them getting SGA. We'll if it ends up getting a ring.
OKC is also an example of how hard is to build through the draft even if you do EVERYTHING correctly.
They draft MVPs 3 straight years and have no championships to show for it. Their skill and luck allowed them to do that and had only 1 finals appearance to show for it.
All these teams are building through the draft constantly. How many championships do they have? Most teams have 1 championship core in their entire histories. The Bulls have the 3rd most championships, and won ALL of their rings with 1 core.
You're most likely going to go years, decades, generations without doing anything just by building "naturally".
Why rush to that? LeBron and AD played well enough that they have more than a 0% chance of leading a team to a ring.
It's worth it over scratch rebuilding, and missing out on a few non-difference makers like D'Angelo Russell, Brandon Ingram, and Lonzo Ball. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JUST-MING
Retired Number
Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 44528
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 17, 2024 5:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ocho wrote: | | Quote: | | The Lakers spent 5 years rebuilding, and had 3 #2 overall picks. The Lakers weren't any closer to contending after ALL of those picks. |
How can you not see the connection between those picks and us holding up the 2020 Championship trophy? |
Boston built their finals team in the same positions in the same drafts. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Japago
Star Player
Joined: 21 Jun 2018
Posts: 1645
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 17, 2024 5:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ocho wrote: | | Quote: | | The Lakers spent 5 years rebuilding, and had 3 #2 overall picks. The Lakers weren't any closer to contending after ALL of those picks. |
How can you not see the connection between those picks and us holding up the 2020 Championship trophy? |
Those level of guys come along EVERY draft if you draft high enough.
They're NOTHING special. And, those are the level of players the Lakers were looking at "building" around until LeBron decided he wanted to become a Laker.
You can collect those after a few years. But at the end of the day, you're just waiting to get a number 1 superstar. |
|
| 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
|
|
