So let me get this straight. Under your scenario AD just waits to leave (while teams would line up to trade for him). All the YUTES miraculously reach their full potential (never mind a lot of them had major injury issues). Rosy much?
Worse case scenario AD leaves and we sign someone else.
Some of you act like no one would want to come here... but someone would have.
Could have even been Jimmy Buckets if we made the effort.
No one has ever claimed we'd keep all the YUTES. We'd have to decide whether to pay Ingram... and then Lonzo the following year... but what we would have had was the chance to carefully decide who to pay and who to keep and maybe trade some for future draft picks as we could no longer afford to pay them.
Then we also would have had Garland under cost control... we'd have drafted a player like Bane with whom we had mutual interest...
No one knows what would have happened... and sure, you are correct that this is all theoretical and we could still f*ck things up
But by not trying to swing for the fences and do these blockbuster trades we could have gotten a lot more for our money.
We did everything that the current good teams didn't.
The Warriors kept their young assets... the Heat kept theirs... the Bucks
kept theirs... the Celtics kept theirs
Meanwhile the Nets and us look pretty crazy right now.
I'm not saying it's never wise to trade for superstars.
Maybe Dallas does something to help Luka.
Maybe the Heat does something to help Jimmy B.
But at least get to the point where you realize your young assets can only take you so far.
LBJ was winning before he decided to trade all the kids.
He just didn't have the vision to see it through.
He didn’t have the vision? Dude won a championship year 1 with AD. You can whine all you want but they achieved their goal of a championship.
LBJ got to the finals with Ilgauskas and Varejao
This is individual basketball skill on a supernatural level not visionary GM skills.
He could have just as easily won with the kids and another elite player
You guys conveniently believe simultaneously that no one would come... yet we'll get Hall of Fame quality ring chasers every year.
Someone would have come... and we'd be in a lot better position had we waited.
He was 23 when he did that. And they got swept. 😆
I don’t have to imagine anything. They won in 2020. _________________ From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
So let me get this straight. Under your scenario AD just waits to leave (while teams would line up to trade for him). All the YUTES miraculously reach their full potential (never mind a lot of them had major injury issues). Rosy much?
Worse case scenario AD leaves and we sign someone else.
Some of you act like no one would want to come here... but someone would have.
Could have even been Jimmy Buckets if we made the effort.
No one has ever claimed we'd keep all the YUTES. We'd have to decide whether to pay Ingram... and then Lonzo the following year... but what we would have had was the chance to carefully decide who to pay and who to keep and maybe trade some for future draft picks as we could no longer afford to pay them.
Then we also would have had Garland under cost control... we'd have drafted a player like Bane with whom we had mutual interest...
No one knows what would have happened... and sure, you are correct that this is all theoretical and we could still f*ck things up
But by not trying to swing for the fences and do these blockbuster trades we could have gotten a lot more for our money.
We did everything that the current good teams didn't.
The Warriors kept their young assets... the Heat kept theirs... the Bucks
kept theirs... the Celtics kept theirs
Meanwhile the Nets and us look pretty crazy right now.
I'm not saying it's never wise to trade for superstars.
Maybe Dallas does something to help Luka.
Maybe the Heat does something to help Jimmy B.
But at least get to the point where you realize your young assets can only take you so far.
LBJ was winning before he decided to trade all the kids.
He just didn't have the vision to see it through.
He didn’t have the vision? Dude won a championship year 1 with AD. You can whine all you want but they achieved their goal of a championship.
LBJ got to the finals with Ilgauskas and Varejao
This is individual basketball skill on a supernatural level not visionary GM skills.
He could have just as easily won with the kids and another elite player
You guys conveniently believe simultaneously that no one would come... yet we'll get Hall of Fame quality ring chasers every year.
Someone would have come... and we'd be in a lot better position had we waited.
He was 23 when he did that. And they got swept. 😆
I don’t have to imagine anything. They won in 2020.
Yes and so did the 1988 Dodgers
Doesn't mean they should have won.
Just because a team wins once doesn't mean they were built correctly.
I can promise you that Andrew Friedman didn't study Fred Claire to figure out how to build a team.
Joined: 20 Jul 2006 Posts: 8518 Location: Left coast
Posted: Mon May 30, 2022 10:42 am Post subject:
epic_ wrote:
lakersboy wrote:
epic_ wrote:
lakersboy wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
lakersboy wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
Which is why the championship was absolutely worth it. No guarantees a team wins one. I’m not sure about the Lakers future but neither are you. They could be poor or they could be lucky and grab 2-3 max FAs that work out.
Worth it to you and now the cupboard is bare. Not worth it to me because the cupboard could have been well stocked with hope that any one guy could have come in and been a long term difference maker, like AD was that 1 year.
As I previously said, you can count on 1 hand how many top tier free agents the Lakers have ever signed. We all sat around and waited for Jim to bring in promised free agents year after year, and eventually when it wasn’t believable, he was fired. I’m not falling for the “we’re going to sign 3 top guys.” They’ll be doing good if they get 1 who still has a bright future. Adding 3 top f/a’s hasn’t ever been done by the Lakers and as I think about it, I doubt anyone else has either.
You assume the YUTES would have been a championship team. I don’t think they were.
No I don't. I assume that them PLUS the 6 1st rd picks (2nd rd'ers) could have easily added up to something very special. Why is that hard to see?
What does special mean to you? Getting bounced in the playin, 1st or 2nd round?
Who wants "special" when you can get a ring?
Darius Garland is special and was rumored to be the likely pick if not traded: Yr 3- 21.7 pts, 8.6 asts, 46% shooting, would have prevented Schroeder and Westbrook trades and thus the current salary cap issues are clearly able to retain Caruso. If you don't think he's special, watch a Cav's game. Warriors have special players. Boston does too. I don't see them getting bounced now that they've allowed their core to mature. I'll take that any day over a team that begins a season looking like it can't win and follows that up by proving me right.
If you have the time, do you mind posting the theoretical lineup for this past year if we didn't make the AD trade?
Unlike some posters, I don't do excessive research when I post. An occasional Google helps. My point is, I lost interest in the drafts the Lakers didn't participate in, so I'm only vaguely familiar with the new NBA up and coming stars. I no longer care about pre draft camps that I used to watch. I can't tell you beyond certain reports about who the Lakers were interested in at the time, who would have been viable options. They'll never be drafted here so I no longer research.
However, I see young talent all over the league, not just lottery picks, that I admire.
Which is why the championship was absolutely worth it. No guarantees a team wins one. I’m not sure about the Lakers future but neither are you. They could be poor or they could be lucky and grab 2-3 max FAs that work out.
Worth it to you and now the cupboard is bare. Not worth it to me because the cupboard could have been well stocked with hope that any one guy could have come in and been a long term difference maker, like AD was that 1 year.
As I previously said, you can count on 1 hand how many top tier free agents the Lakers have ever signed. We all sat around and waited for Jim to bring in promised free agents year after year, and eventually when it wasn’t believable, he was fired. I’m not falling for the “we’re going to sign 3 top guys.” They’ll be doing good if they get 1 who still has a bright future. Adding 3 top f/a’s hasn’t ever been done by the Lakers and as I think about it, I doubt anyone else has either.
You assume the YUTES would have been a championship team. I don’t think they were.
No I don't. I assume that them PLUS the 6 1st rd picks (2nd rd'ers) could have easily added up to something very special. Why is that hard to see?
What does special mean to you? Getting bounced in the playin, 1st or 2nd round?
Who wants "special" when you can get a ring?
Darius Garland is special and was rumored to be the likely pick if not traded: Yr 3- 21.7 pts, 8.6 asts, 46% shooting, would have prevented Schroeder and Westbrook trades and thus the current salary cap issues are clearly able to retain Caruso. If you don't think he's special, watch a Cav's game. Warriors have special players. Boston does too. I don't see them getting bounced now that they've allowed their core to mature. I'll take that any day over a team that begins a season looking like it can't win and follows that up by proving me right.
If you have the time, do you mind posting the theoretical lineup for this past year if we didn't make the AD trade?
Unlike some posters, I don't do excessive research when I post. An occasional Google helps. My point is, I lost interest in the drafts the Lakers didn't participate in, so I'm only vaguely familiar with the new NBA up and coming stars. I no longer care about pre draft camps that I used to watch. I can't tell you beyond certain reports about who the Lakers were interested in at the time, who would have been viable options. They'll never be drafted here so I no longer research.
However, I see young talent all over the league, not just lottery picks, that I admire.
Interesting Questions
If we would have allowed “The Process” to continue with our young players (DLo, BI, Hart, Clarkson, Nance, Zubac and Randle) that we would have won a ring (nope), close to a ring (maybe) and consistently in the playoffs (yep, but how hard is that). Of these players, only BI is starting to flourish with others having shown some flashes (Randle, DLo, Clarkson) while all of them will have long NBA careers but they won’t be the top reason why their team could win a ring in the future
Should be noted that Friedman DID get trade for high profile and expensive players while replenishing the farm system (who did trade/get for Freedman, Mookie and others)
Clips, 76ers, Grizzs, Jazz, Nets, Bulls and other teams have shown that having a major focus on The Process, that things can/has/will change very quickly and that nothing is guaranteed in the NBA
Today’s Celtics (long shot at the beginning of the season) is a version of the Clips (Tatum/Brown vs Kwahi/PG13), with only one team in The Finals (noting the many factors that can change a team’s fortune)
Will/Can Ja, Luka, Jokic, Booker, BI, Tatum, Anthony Edwards, Trae Young, etc win one or more rings against the likes of the Splash Brothers, the Greek Freak and others??????
Step 1 - Win a Ring (accomplished)
Step 2 - Keep winning rings (Lakers went “All In” that the LBJ/AD/Westbrook combo would have been in The Finals). The Nets (KD, Kyrie, Harden), 76ers (Embiid/Harden), Clips (Kwahi/PG13) and others have shown how expectations can quickly change because of injuries and egos
Joined: 20 Jul 2006 Posts: 8518 Location: Left coast
Posted: Mon May 30, 2022 1:45 pm Post subject:
A Mad Chinaman wrote:
lakersboy wrote:
epic_ wrote:
lakersboy wrote:
epic_ wrote:
lakersboy wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
lakersboy wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
Which is why the championship was absolutely worth it. No guarantees a team wins one. I’m not sure about the Lakers future but neither are you. They could be poor or they could be lucky and grab 2-3 max FAs that work out.
Worth it to you and now the cupboard is bare. Not worth it to me because the cupboard could have been well stocked with hope that any one guy could have come in and been a long term difference maker, like AD was that 1 year.
As I previously said, you can count on 1 hand how many top tier free agents the Lakers have ever signed. We all sat around and waited for Jim to bring in promised free agents year after year, and eventually when it wasn’t believable, he was fired. I’m not falling for the “we’re going to sign 3 top guys.” They’ll be doing good if they get 1 who still has a bright future. Adding 3 top f/a’s hasn’t ever been done by the Lakers and as I think about it, I doubt anyone else has either.
You assume the YUTES would have been a championship team. I don’t think they were.
No I don't. I assume that them PLUS the 6 1st rd picks (2nd rd'ers) could have easily added up to something very special. Why is that hard to see?
What does special mean to you? Getting bounced in the playin, 1st or 2nd round?
Who wants "special" when you can get a ring?
Darius Garland is special and was rumored to be the likely pick if not traded: Yr 3- 21.7 pts, 8.6 asts, 46% shooting, would have prevented Schroeder and Westbrook trades and thus the current salary cap issues are clearly able to retain Caruso. If you don't think he's special, watch a Cav's game. Warriors have special players. Boston does too. I don't see them getting bounced now that they've allowed their core to mature. I'll take that any day over a team that begins a season looking like it can't win and follows that up by proving me right.
If you have the time, do you mind posting the theoretical lineup for this past year if we didn't make the AD trade?
Unlike some posters, I don't do excessive research when I post. An occasional Google helps. My point is, I lost interest in the drafts the Lakers didn't participate in, so I'm only vaguely familiar with the new NBA up and coming stars. I no longer care about pre draft camps that I used to watch. I can't tell you beyond certain reports about who the Lakers were interested in at the time, who would have been viable options. They'll never be drafted here so I no longer research.
However, I see young talent all over the league, not just lottery picks, that I admire.
Interesting Questions
If we would have allowed “The Process” to continue with our young players (DLo, BI, Hart, Clarkson, Nance, Zubac and Randle) that we would have won a ring (nope), close to a ring (maybe) and consistently in the playoffs (yep, but how hard is that). Of these players, only BI is starting to flourish with others having shown some flashes (Randle, DLo, Clarkson) while all of them will have long NBA careers but they won’t be the top reason why their team could win a ring in the future
I can't understand why people insist on saying what the young guys wouldn't have done without considering/admitting that additional players would have been added to the squad. 6 first round draft picks would likely turn into multiple quality players of need who are any combination of centers, fwds, guards, rebounders, shot blockers, shooting specialists, assist men, or athletes in general. It's completely unreasonable to sum up what the young players (who still aren't fully developed) couldn't do because, even before free agency, additional chemistry/assets and parts would have been added. It would have been easy not to overpay for 1 superstar, and then bring in a valuable piece like Wiggins for Dlo (for example), while keeping good players who are valuable to the team's chemistry.
If we would have allowed “The Process” to continue with our young players (DLo, BI, Hart, Clarkson, Nance, Zubac and Randle) that we would have won a ring (nope), close to a ring (maybe) and consistently in the playoffs (yep, but how hard is that). Of these players, only BI is starting to flourish with others having shown some flashes (Randle, DLo, Clarkson) while all of them will have long NBA careers but they won’t be the top reason why their team could win a ring in the future
I can't understand why people insist on saying what the young guys wouldn't have done without considering/admitting that additional players would have been added to the squad. 6 first round draft picks would likely turn into multiple quality players of need who are any combination of centers, fwds, guards, rebounders, shot blockers, shooting specialists, assist men, or athletes in general. It's completely unreasonable to sum up what the young players (who still aren't fully developed) couldn't do because, even before free agency, additional chemistry/assets and parts would have been added. It would have been easy not to overpay for 1 superstar, and then bring in a valuable piece like Wiggins for Dlo (for example), while keeping good players who are valuable to the team's chemistry.
Because people are solely looking at as young players vs AD and not young players + AD or some other array of quality players to be aligned with Bron.
Joined: 20 Jul 2006 Posts: 8518 Location: Left coast
Posted: Mon May 30, 2022 2:25 pm Post subject:
Outspoken wrote:
lakersboy wrote:
A Mad Chinaman wrote:
Interesting Questions
If we would have allowed “The Process” to continue with our young players (DLo, BI, Hart, Clarkson, Nance, Zubac and Randle) that we would have won a ring (nope), close to a ring (maybe) and consistently in the playoffs (yep, but how hard is that). Of these players, only BI is starting to flourish with others having shown some flashes (Randle, DLo, Clarkson) while all of them will have long NBA careers but they won’t be the top reason why their team could win a ring in the future
I can't understand why people insist on saying what the young guys wouldn't have done without considering/admitting that additional players would have been added to the squad. 6 first round draft picks would likely turn into multiple quality players of need who are any combination of centers, fwds, guards, rebounders, shot blockers, shooting specialists, assist men, or athletes in general. It's completely unreasonable to sum up what the young players (who still aren't fully developed) couldn't do because, even before free agency, additional chemistry/assets and parts would have been added. It would have been easy not to overpay for 1 superstar, and then bring in a valuable piece like Wiggins for Dlo (for example), while keeping good players who are valuable to the team's chemistry.
Because people are solely looking at as young players vs AD and not young players + AD or some other array of quality players to be aligned with Bron.
The "decade of talent" given up involves the 4 picks for AD, and not just the 3 players. Keeping those assets would have prevented giving away addional picks for Schroeder and Westbrook because they would likely have drafted Garland.
If we would have allowed “The Process” to continue with our young players (DLo, BI, Hart, Clarkson, Nance, Zubac and Randle) that we would have won a ring (nope), close to a ring (maybe) and consistently in the playoffs (yep, but how hard is that). Of these players, only BI is starting to flourish with others having shown some flashes (Randle, DLo, Clarkson) while all of them will have long NBA careers but they won’t be the top reason why their team could win a ring in the future
I can't understand why people insist on saying what the young guys wouldn't have done without considering/admitting that additional players would have been added to the squad. 6 first round draft picks would likely turn into multiple quality players of need who are any combination of centers, fwds, guards, rebounders, shot blockers, shooting specialists, assist men, or athletes in general. It's completely unreasonable to sum up what the young players (who still aren't fully developed) couldn't do because, even before free agency, additional chemistry/assets and parts would have been added. It would have been easy not to overpay for 1 superstar, and then bring in a valuable piece like Wiggins for Dlo (for example), while keeping good players who are valuable to the team's chemistry.
Because people are solely looking at as young players vs AD and not young players + AD or some other array of quality players to be aligned with Bron.
The "decade of talent" given up involves the 4 picks for AD, and not just the 3 players. Keeping those assets would have prevented giving away addional picks for Schroeder and Westbrook because they would likely have drafted Garland.
those are separate moves.
The thread title should be, " a decade of talent given up for a championship."
If we would have allowed “The Process” to continue with our young players (DLo, BI, Hart, Clarkson, Nance, Zubac and Randle) that we would have won a ring (nope), close to a ring (maybe) and consistently in the playoffs (yep, but how hard is that). Of these players, only BI is starting to flourish with others having shown some flashes (Randle, DLo, Clarkson) while all of them will have long NBA careers but they won’t be the top reason why their team could win a ring in the future
I can't understand why people insist on saying what the young guys wouldn't have done without considering/admitting that additional players would have been added to the squad. 6 first round draft picks would likely turn into multiple quality players of need who are any combination of centers, fwds, guards, rebounders, shot blockers, shooting specialists, assist men, or athletes in general. It's completely unreasonable to sum up what the young players (who still aren't fully developed) couldn't do because, even before free agency, additional chemistry/assets and parts would have been added. It would have been easy not to overpay for 1 superstar, and then bring in a valuable piece like Wiggins for Dlo (for example), while keeping good players who are valuable to the team's chemistry.
Because people are solely looking at as young players vs AD and not young players + AD or some other array of quality players to be aligned with Bron.
The "decade of talent" given up involves the 4 picks for AD, and not just the 3 players. Keeping those assets would have prevented giving away addional picks for Schroeder and Westbrook because they would likely have drafted Garland.
Right, and people are not looking at it like that. Why, I have no idea. They are looking at it as we wouldn't have won with just the young talent, as if we were just gonna stock pile young talent. Like we couldn't decide who to keep, who to trade, keep our draft picks or use them for quality players to go with our young talent we decided to keep and Bron, with another max player.
We had better options to benefit sustainable success, rather than a 1 and done. But they are like "we got a bubble championship, that's good enough for me." I just disagree with that because I would like 1, but also continue to compete for a championship, not get worse every year to we are in the lottery. Now, I'm just hoping we do better and I believe we will.
It's the "3rd" star that's more of a problem than the AD trade.
Giving up Dlo, Randle, Clarkson, Nance and Zubac for cap space that ended up being Green instead of the 3rd star is probably more wasteful than the AD trade. Then you compound it by trading Green and a 1st for DS, who you let go in the end.
That's 6 useful assets the lakers had where the end result is nothing after 3-4 years.
Part of the reason AD trade costs so many picks is because we refused to take back additional bad contracts to maintain space for the 3rd star. Maybe we don't give up the 4th pick if we took back solomon hill.
Even after creating space, the lakers foolishly targeted kawhi alone and chose to wait for him instead of having a coherent plan to use the cap space for other FAs. Imagine using that cap space for jimmy butler instead of waiting for kawhi.
Then there's using what assets you had left with the westbrook trade as the 3rd "star".
Honestly it's not about sacrificing the youth for AD and a championship. The lakers could have had all three (Youth+AD+championship) even after making a similar AD trade at the time if they didn't have magic/pelinka making FO decisions over the years.
A competent GM/POB wouldn't have AD/LBJ and a bare cupboard like the current situation.
Joined: 24 Dec 2007 Posts: 35812 Location: Santa Clarita, CA (Hell) ->>>>>Ithaca, NY -≥≥≥≥≥Berkeley, CA
Posted: Mon May 30, 2022 3:27 pm Post subject:
dabask11 wrote:
It's the "3rd" star that's more of a problem than the AD trade.
Giving up Dlo, Randle, Clarkson, Nance and Zubac for cap space that ended up being Green instead of the 3rd star is probably more wasteful than the AD trade. Then you compound it by trading Green and a 1st for DS, who you let go in the end.
That's 6 useful assets the lakers had where the end result is nothing after 3-4 years.
Part of the reason AD trade costs so many picks is because we refused to take back additional bad contracts to maintain space for the 3rd star. Maybe we don't give up the 4th pick if we took back solomon hill.
Even after creating space, the lakers foolishly targeted kawhi alone and chose to wait for him instead of having a coherent plan to use the cap space for other FAs. Imagine using that cap space for jimmy butler instead of waiting for kawhi.
Then there's using what assets you had left with the westbrook trade as the 3rd "star".
Honestly it's not about sacrificing the youth for AD and a championship. The lakers could have had all three (Youth+AD+championship) even after making a similar AD trade at the time if they didn't have magic/pelinka making FO decisions over the years.
A competent GM/POB wouldn't have AD/LBJ and a bare cupboard like the current situation.
Or you don’t sign LeBron, then wait a season for AD to be a free agent and potentially sign both Kawhi and Butler as well. _________________ Damian Lillard shatters Dwight Coward's championship dreams:
It's the "3rd" star that's more of a problem than the AD trade.
Giving up Dlo, Randle, Clarkson, Nance and Zubac for cap space that ended up being Green instead of the 3rd star is probably more wasteful than the AD trade. Then you compound it by trading Green and a 1st for DS, who you let go in the end.
That's 6 useful assets the lakers had where the end result is nothing after 3-4 years.
Part of the reason AD trade costs so many picks is because we refused to take back additional bad contracts to maintain space for the 3rd star. Maybe we don't give up the 4th pick if we took back solomon hill.
Even after creating space, the lakers foolishly targeted kawhi alone and chose to wait for him instead of having a coherent plan to use the cap space for other FAs. Imagine using that cap space for jimmy butler instead of waiting for kawhi.
Then there's using what assets you had left with the westbrook trade as the 3rd "star".
Honestly it's not about sacrificing the youth for AD and a championship. The lakers could have had all three (Youth+AD+championship) even after making a similar AD trade at the time if they didn't have magic/pelinka making FO decisions over the years.
A competent GM/POB wouldn't have AD/LBJ and a bare cupboard like the current situation.
Or you don’t sign LeBron, then wait a season for AD to be a free agent and potentially sign both Kawhi and Butler as well.
Even if you signed lebron and did the AD trade, you probably have players like zubac or assets like the 4th pick if the lakers didn't focus on the 3rd star plan.
Even with cap space, you probably end with someone better than green if you didn't wait for kawhi. You also keep your FRP instead of using it to get rid of green a year later.
Most importantly, you don't make the westbrook trade if the lakers felt forming a big 3 was unecessary.
Joined: 20 Jul 2006 Posts: 8518 Location: Left coast
Posted: Mon May 30, 2022 4:39 pm Post subject:
l4kerz wrote:
lakersboy wrote:
Outspoken wrote:
lakersboy wrote:
A Mad Chinaman wrote:
Interesting Questions
If we would have allowed “The Process” to continue with our young players (DLo, BI, Hart, Clarkson, Nance, Zubac and Randle) that we would have won a ring (nope), close to a ring (maybe) and consistently in the playoffs (yep, but how hard is that). Of these players, only BI is starting to flourish with others having shown some flashes (Randle, DLo, Clarkson) while all of them will have long NBA careers but they won’t be the top reason why their team could win a ring in the future
I can't understand why people insist on saying what the young guys wouldn't have done without considering/admitting that additional players would have been added to the squad. 6 first round draft picks would likely turn into multiple quality players of need who are any combination of centers, fwds, guards, rebounders, shot blockers, shooting specialists, assist men, or athletes in general. It's completely unreasonable to sum up what the young players (who still aren't fully developed) couldn't do because, even before free agency, additional chemistry/assets and parts would have been added. It would have been easy not to overpay for 1 superstar, and then bring in a valuable piece like Wiggins for Dlo (for example), while keeping good players who are valuable to the team's chemistry.
Because people are solely looking at as young players vs AD and not young players + AD or some other array of quality players to be aligned with Bron.
The "decade of talent" given up involves the 4 picks for AD, and not just the 3 players. Keeping those assets would have prevented giving away addional picks for Schroeder and Westbrook because they would likely have drafted Garland.
those are separate moves.
The thread title should be, " a decade of talent given up for a championship."
7 players based on your view. Not 3. Since the starting pg was traded, they gave up 1 pick and players the next 2 years to get pgs.
The acquisition directly resulted in 6 picks.
Win a championship and people P&Ming like the world is falling apart.
Did I expect LBJ/AD duo to win more than 1 ring? Yup. But am I disconsolate about one championship? Absolutely not.
I'll be happy to revisit this in a few more years as the team will be moving on from LBJ by then. _________________ From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
The "decade of talent" given up involves the 4 picks for AD, and not just the 3 players. Keeping those assets would have prevented giving away addional picks for Schroeder and Westbrook because they would likely have drafted Garland.
Right, and people are not looking at it like that. Why, I have no idea. They are looking at it as we wouldn't have won with just the young talent, as if we were just gonna stock pile young talent. Like we couldn't decide who to keep, who to trade, keep our draft picks or use them for quality players to go with our young talent we decided to keep and Bron, with another max player.
We had better options to benefit sustainable success, rather than a 1 and done. But they are like "we got a bubble championship, that's good enough for me." I just disagree with that because I would like 1, but also continue to compete for a championship, not get worse every year to we are in the lottery. Now, I'm just hoping we do better and I believe we will.
Yep. I've been making this point for a long time. The bubble title was the minimum acceptable result. It wasn't a windfall return on the investment. It's just that anything less would have been a calamity. If Lebron or Davis had gotten hurt in the bubble, or if Miami had just had a couple more magical games, the Lebron window would be one of the worst front office catastrophes in the history of team sports. Seriously, it would rate up there with Ted Stepien.
Winning the bubble title averted the calamity. We avoided becoming a cautionary tale, and instead we're arguing about whether the price we paid for Davis was too high. That's a big difference. At the same time, though, we're still going to be paying the price for a few more years, barring some stroke of good fortune.
There are people who are locked into the narrative that winning a title justifies anything. These folks look down their noses at the rest of us and talk about how we're spoiled and delusional. This is more a product of social media culture than anything else. It's not a big deal. _________________ Internet Argument Resolved
We should never include those picks. Ingram, Lonzo, Hart and #4 pick was more than enough when c's werent trading Tatum. If we had those picks it would be so much easier to surround AD and LeBron.
What was our cap situation the year after the AD trade for those wishing we waited for AD to become a FA?
Did we have enough cap space or did we need to send players away without returning salary? By attaching picks? I don't recall.
We won a title year 1. God forbid year 2 ended the same way with injuries and Lakers end up with 0 rings after 2 years instead of 1 in 3 years. _________________ 💜💛 🏆 👀 🍖 #18!!!
The fact that We gave up a generations’ worth of talent for AD and a championship imo is not up for logical debate…of course we did. The question is…was it worth it?
For me, 1 championship and a few years of competing for another would have made it worth it…but 1 championship and several embarrassing losing years make it NOT WORTH IT.
We wouldn’t have been much different than the Keltics now if we had not given up our draftees and they appear to be poised to compete for years to come.
PG - Ball similar to Smart,
can’t ignore DPOY but Ball plays excellent D and averages more points, better 3pt%, more rebounds, assists, same steals, slightly better blocks. It’s closer than one might think
PG/SG - DLo similar to Rozier
DLo much better considering scoring and assists but both teams punted early on their 2015 PG/SG lottery pics
SG/SF- Ingram similar to Brown
Ingram better but close
PF/SF - Randle compared to Tatum
Tatum better but Randle’s rebounds and assist close the gap, plus Randle’s fit for roster construction much better since Keltics draftees overlapp much more than Lakers,
Then add in our non-lottery pics and we would have developed into a formidable force. Clarkson, Nance, Zubac, Hart, T Bryant. Individually perhaps C’s appear better but collectively I can see the Laker draftees being a better team. I can see them competing for a title for ten years and winning at least one.
Zubac Bryant
Randle Nance
Ingram Hart
Russel Clarkson
Ball
Even still, the best case scenario appears to have been a combination of youth plus LeBron instead of the overpay for AD. I would have waited but not expecting to sign AD because that strategy of waiting to sign a player that said they wanted to be a Laker just failed twice in successive years with Paul George and Kwai Lenoard. imo that the process of waiting and expecting is a fool’s plan.
The best roster imo would have been:
Lopez Zubac Bryant
LeBron Randle
Ingram Kuzma
(Green) KCP Hart
Lonzo (Rondo)
Perhaps win now and grow for the future, plus we would have had all our draft pics potentially adding Garland.
Anyway, nice crying over spilled milk, we’re fracked up right now. I hope Pilinka can pull off a miracle.
Turner Cousins Dwight
AD Melo Gabriel
LeBron Johnson
Oubre Monk AB
Brogdon Nunn Reeves
Joined: 14 Apr 2001 Posts: 144462 Location: The Gold Coast
Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2022 2:01 pm Post subject:
Will it be worth it if it becomes 2030 and we last had the bubble title? We went from 2002 to 2009 without a title and Laker fans freaked out. The same between 2010 and 2020. I didn’t have much of an issue with the players we traded for AD, the picks and pick swaps were pure incompetence. _________________ RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023.
Will it be worth it if it becomes 2030 and we last had the bubble title? We went from 2002 to 2009 without a title and Laker fans freaked out. The same between 2010 and 2020. I didn’t have much of an issue with the players we traded for AD, the picks and pick swaps were pure incompetence.
Too soon to say what happens post 2023 though. _________________ From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
What does that mean?
The Lakers championships have mostly come through getting a superstar via trade or free agency.
I will say that most championships have been won with a homegrown star. There have been exception, I'm not saying ALL championships are won that way. To your point, I don't think there is a particular formula, but it is better, with the new CBA to build through the draft and manage the draftees or picks in whichever makes the team better. The objective though is to have a vision, which I don't believe our FO has or had, I have to see what happens next season and moving forward.
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
those are separate moves.
