|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
mad55557777
Franchise Player
Joined: 29 Jun 2005
Posts: 23673
|
 Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2021 11:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| activeverb wrote: | | matigol wrote: | | Man, I would be pissed if we would have given DLO this toxic contract. Julius, Lonzo and BI are good, but none of them is a teams cornerstone |
It's not clear that a team could get past, oh, the second round with any of those players as their main guy.
They might surprise us at some point, but at this point I am not wistfully imagining the road not taken.
Randle looks like the best of the lot. He's in his 8th season, and I think he'll top out as a good, borderline all-star type of player. |
he is 27, AD is 28, i think i will take AD any day of the week.
i don't get all the fetish with Lonzo, he is not even close to a star. so far, he is putting up worse numbers compare to last season while playing 3 more minutes per game. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
activeverb
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2021 12:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| venturalakersfan wrote: | | matigol wrote: | | Man, I would be pissed if we would have given DLO this toxic contract. Julius, Lonzo and BI are good, but none of them is a teams cornerstone |
Knicks fans would disagree |
Meaningless.
In the last 20 years, the Knicks have made the playoffs 5 times. They lost in the first round four times, the second round once.
Knicks fans are desperate to believe anything hopeful. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Vancouver Fan
Franchise Player
Joined: 17 Apr 2006
Posts: 17740
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2021 12:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The aftermath of this current team will be worse than the last time. I'd would've rather kept the young ones together. But hey, we got a bubble chip. The start over is about to happen and I can't wait to be honest.
_________________
Music is my medicine |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144585
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2021 12:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| activeverb wrote: | | venturalakersfan wrote: | | matigol wrote: | | Man, I would be pissed if we would have given DLO this toxic contract. Julius, Lonzo and BI are good, but none of them is a teams cornerstone |
Knicks fans would disagree |
Meaningless.
In the last 20 years, the Knicks have made the playoffs 5 times. They lost in the first round four times, the second round once.
Knicks fans are desperate to believe anything hopeful. |
So Randle wasn’t the cornerstone for last year’s Knicks team?
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
matigol
Starting Rotation
Joined: 18 Oct 2012
Posts: 664
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2021 1:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| venturalakersfan wrote: | | activeverb wrote: | | venturalakersfan wrote: | | matigol wrote: | | Man, I would be pissed if we would have given DLO this toxic contract. Julius, Lonzo and BI are good, but none of them is a teams cornerstone |
Knicks fans would disagree |
Meaningless.
In the last 20 years, the Knicks have made the playoffs 5 times. They lost in the first round four times, the second round once.
Knicks fans are desperate to believe anything hopeful. |
So Randle wasn’t the cornerstone for last year’s Knicks team? |
Okay maybe this is better: Nobody would trade for Julius and build a team around him
_________________
White guy to white guy alley oop |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Treble Clef
Franchise Player
Joined: 20 Nov 2012
Posts: 23944
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2021 1:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Randle is a stat filler. We saw what he looked like in the playoffs when he was actually gameplanned against. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
activeverb
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2021 3:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| venturalakersfan wrote: | | activeverb wrote: | | venturalakersfan wrote: | | matigol wrote: | | Man, I would be pissed if we would have given DLO this toxic contract. Julius, Lonzo and BI are good, but none of them is a teams cornerstone |
Knicks fans would disagree |
Meaningless.
In the last 20 years, the Knicks have made the playoffs 5 times. They lost in the first round four times, the second round once.
Knicks fans are desperate to believe anything hopeful. |
So Randle wasn’t the cornerstone for last year’s Knicks team? |
My sense is this is going to quickly devolve into the semantics of what a "cornerstone player" means.
If all you're saying is that Randall can be the top player on a team that makes it to the second round of the playoffs no argument. If you're saying Randall could be the top player on a contender, I've seen no evidence of that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KingKobe20
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2006
Posts: 18738
Location: L.A County, 26 miles away from Staples Center
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2021 3:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Treble Clef wrote: | | Randle is a stat filler. We saw what he looked like in the playoffs when he was actually gameplanned against. |
I got mad love for Jules but this is true.
Hell John Collins is far from being a cornerstone to any NBA franchise and he locked down Julius and matched him point for point in that series.
Most Knicks fans love Julius and are grateful to have him but most of them realize that RJ Barrett has a bigger upside.
D.Rose easily has the highest IQ on their team atm |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KindCrippler2000
Franchise Player
Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 15821
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2021 5:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| With Lebron James out, we could sure use Jonathan Randle's 20-10-6 right about now. Sure, I wasn't high on him when he was here, because of his blatant stat-padding antics at times, but he's evolved as a player and is more team oriented. I suppose that's just a function of age and maturity. Young players need time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steve007
Franchise Player
Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 13255
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2021 5:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BILBJH wrote: | | yinoma2001 wrote: | The Pelicans have not fared well at all in the AD trade so far. That team looks like it is really going downhill fast.
We are so far 1 for 2 in terms of championships with AD. |
Or you can also say AD is 0 for 9 in terms of championships without LBJ.
AD got hot during the bubble championship, but LBJ had the luxury of a shorter season and no travel in the bubble which helped him compete better at his age. I'm not saying they didn't deserve the title... they did, but it was an unnatural amount of rest for an older player while the following year was the opposite.
From what I can see AD has little ability to lead the team to victory without LBJ, so although he is better than Ingram or Randle, or whichever kid you want to compare him to, he hasn't shown the play of a franchise cornerstone on which you can build a future champion.
If AD played like Embiid then maybe you could say losing all these assets was worth it... but when Ingram averages 25 like AD shooting 40% from three instead of 30%... then I don't see a huge difference between LBJ with AD vs. Ingram and all the kids.
If AD starts really playing like a center... then sure Ingram can't compare... but if AD keeps playing like a perimeter player... then especially offensively he's a worse player than Ingram from the outside shooting threes and the midrange. |
MJ went 0 for his career without Scottie. Shaq never won without Kobe and Wade (and Wade shot a million free throws in the Finals).
But who cares? The important thing is MJ, Shaq and AD were great enough to win when team up with a great player.
Kobe played with a guy that was called “the future” in Kwame Brown. When Gasol became a Laker I really appreciated seeing a guy on the team that could win as the #2 guy. I wasn’t concerned about his playoff record in Memphis. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BILBJH
Star Player
Joined: 23 Jul 2020
Posts: 5157
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2021 6:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steve007 wrote: | | BILBJH wrote: | | yinoma2001 wrote: | The Pelicans have not fared well at all in the AD trade so far. That team looks like it is really going downhill fast.
We are so far 1 for 2 in terms of championships with AD. |
Or you can also say AD is 0 for 9 in terms of championships without LBJ.
AD got hot during the bubble championship, but LBJ had the luxury of a shorter season and no travel in the bubble which helped him compete better at his age. I'm not saying they didn't deserve the title... they did, but it was an unnatural amount of rest for an older player while the following year was the opposite.
From what I can see AD has little ability to lead the team to victory without LBJ, so although he is better than Ingram or Randle, or whichever kid you want to compare him to, he hasn't shown the play of a franchise cornerstone on which you can build a future champion.
If AD played like Embiid then maybe you could say losing all these assets was worth it... but when Ingram averages 25 like AD shooting 40% from three instead of 30%... then I don't see a huge difference between LBJ with AD vs. Ingram and all the kids.
If AD starts really playing like a center... then sure Ingram can't compare... but if AD keeps playing like a perimeter player... then especially offensively he's a worse player than Ingram from the outside shooting threes and the midrange. |
MJ went 0 for his career without Scottie. Shaq never won without Kobe and Wade (and Wade shot a million free throws in the Finals).
But who cares? The important thing is MJ, Shaq and AD were great enough to win when team up with a great player.
Kobe played with a guy that was called “the future” in Kwame Brown. When Gasol became a Laker I really appreciated seeing a guy on the team that could win as the #2 guy. I wasn’t concerned about his playoff record in Memphis. |
When MJ joined the Bulls they improved 11 games
When Shaq joined the Magic, they improved 20 games. You tried to minimize it by saying they only went .500 but that was a great job.
They were a contender soon after
When Kareem joined the Bucks they improved 29 games. He won a title soon after
When LBJ joined the Cavs they improved 18 games... he was a perennial playoff contender.
When AD joined the then Hornets... they didn't improve at all and barely made the playoffs while he was the main piece.
We paid a generational price for AD but he's not as good as any of these generational players.
I get that most of you are cool with that... but personally I just disagree. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
activeverb
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2021 7:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BILBJH wrote: | | Steve007 wrote: | | BILBJH wrote: | | yinoma2001 wrote: | The Pelicans have not fared well at all in the AD trade so far. That team looks like it is really going downhill fast.
We are so far 1 for 2 in terms of championships with AD. |
Or you can also say AD is 0 for 9 in terms of championships without LBJ.
AD got hot during the bubble championship, but LBJ had the luxury of a shorter season and no travel in the bubble which helped him compete better at his age. I'm not saying they didn't deserve the title... they did, but it was an unnatural amount of rest for an older player while the following year was the opposite.
From what I can see AD has little ability to lead the team to victory without LBJ, so although he is better than Ingram or Randle, or whichever kid you want to compare him to, he hasn't shown the play of a franchise cornerstone on which you can build a future champion.
If AD played like Embiid then maybe you could say losing all these assets was worth it... but when Ingram averages 25 like AD shooting 40% from three instead of 30%... then I don't see a huge difference between LBJ with AD vs. Ingram and all the kids.
If AD starts really playing like a center... then sure Ingram can't compare... but if AD keeps playing like a perimeter player... then especially offensively he's a worse player than Ingram from the outside shooting threes and the midrange. |
MJ went 0 for his career without Scottie. Shaq never won without Kobe and Wade (and Wade shot a million free throws in the Finals).
But who cares? The important thing is MJ, Shaq and AD were great enough to win when team up with a great player.
Kobe played with a guy that was called “the future” in Kwame Brown. When Gasol became a Laker I really appreciated seeing a guy on the team that could win as the #2 guy. I wasn’t concerned about his playoff record in Memphis. |
When MJ joined the Bulls they improved 11 games
When Shaq joined the Magic, they improved 20 games. You tried to minimize it by saying they only went .500 but that was a great job.
They were a contender soon after
When Kareem joined the Bucks they improved 29 games. He won a title soon after
When LBJ joined the Cavs they improved 18 games... he was a perennial playoff contender.
When AD joined the then Hornets... they didn't improve at all and barely made the playoffs while he was the main piece.
We paid a generational price for AD but he's not as good as any of these generational players.
I get that most of you are cool with that... but personally I just disagree. |
To me it's more complex than that.
LBJ, Jordan and Kareem aren't merely "generational talent." They are arguably the three best basketball players in NBA history. Add in Shaq and that's four guys who are on the GOAT short list.
If that's your standard, 99.99999999999% of the time you will think the move fail.
AD is a great player. Controversially, one of the 75 best of all time. But there other 75 best player who probably couldn't be the best player on a ring team.
The question, to me, isn't whether what we gave us is worth an Jordan or Kareem. It's whether it was worth a Kevin McHale or Paul Pierce.
if you make the discussion more nuanced, it becomes more interesting. If you make it about whether AD deserves to be on the Mt. Rushmore of NBA players, your stacking the deck so much in your favor it's hard to care.
So I'd position it this way: Do you think what we gave up for AD would be worth giving up for Kevin McHale in his prime? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
roger_federer
Star Player
Joined: 01 Mar 2020
Posts: 3145
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2021 7:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Treble Clef wrote: | | Randle is a stat filler. We saw what he looked like in the playoffs when he was actually gameplanned against. |
We got the biggest stat filler in the history of NBA in Westbrick |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BILBJH
Star Player
Joined: 23 Jul 2020
Posts: 5157
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2021 7:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| activeverb wrote: | | BILBJH wrote: | | Steve007 wrote: | | BILBJH wrote: | | yinoma2001 wrote: | The Pelicans have not fared well at all in the AD trade so far. That team looks like it is really going downhill fast.
We are so far 1 for 2 in terms of championships with AD. |
Or you can also say AD is 0 for 9 in terms of championships without LBJ.
AD got hot during the bubble championship, but LBJ had the luxury of a shorter season and no travel in the bubble which helped him compete better at his age. I'm not saying they didn't deserve the title... they did, but it was an unnatural amount of rest for an older player while the following year was the opposite.
From what I can see AD has little ability to lead the team to victory without LBJ, so although he is better than Ingram or Randle, or whichever kid you want to compare him to, he hasn't shown the play of a franchise cornerstone on which you can build a future champion.
If AD played like Embiid then maybe you could say losing all these assets was worth it... but when Ingram averages 25 like AD shooting 40% from three instead of 30%... then I don't see a huge difference between LBJ with AD vs. Ingram and all the kids.
If AD starts really playing like a center... then sure Ingram can't compare... but if AD keeps playing like a perimeter player... then especially offensively he's a worse player than Ingram from the outside shooting threes and the midrange. |
MJ went 0 for his career without Scottie. Shaq never won without Kobe and Wade (and Wade shot a million free throws in the Finals).
But who cares? The important thing is MJ, Shaq and AD were great enough to win when team up with a great player.
Kobe played with a guy that was called “the future” in Kwame Brown. When Gasol became a Laker I really appreciated seeing a guy on the team that could win as the #2 guy. I wasn’t concerned about his playoff record in Memphis. |
When MJ joined the Bulls they improved 11 games
When Shaq joined the Magic, they improved 20 games. You tried to minimize it by saying they only went .500 but that was a great job.
They were a contender soon after
When Kareem joined the Bucks they improved 29 games. He won a title soon after
When LBJ joined the Cavs they improved 18 games... he was a perennial playoff contender.
When AD joined the then Hornets... they didn't improve at all and barely made the playoffs while he was the main piece.
We paid a generational price for AD but he's not as good as any of these generational players.
I get that most of you are cool with that... but personally I just disagree. |
To me it's more complex than that.
LBJ, Jordan and Kareem aren't merely "generational talent." They are arguably the three best basketball players in NBA history. Add in Shaq and that's four guys who are on the GOAT short list.
If that's your standard, 99.99999999999% of the time you will think the move fail.
AD is a great player. Controversially, one of the 75 best of all time. But there other 75 best player who probably couldn't be the best player on a ring team.
The question, to me, isn't whether what we gave us is worth an Jordan or Kareem. It's whether it was worth a Kevin McHale or Paul Pierce.
if you make the discussion more nuanced, it becomes more interesting. If you make it about whether AD deserves to be on the Mt. Rushmore of NBA players, your stacking the deck so much in your favor it's hard to care.
So I'd position it this way: Do you think what we gave up for AD would be worth giving up for Kevin McHale in his prime? |
Remember my beef wasn't with acquiring him... I like AD... still do.
I just felt he wasn't the game changing player worth that much talent.
He was better than McHale or Gasol... but not at the Kareem or Shaq level.
But we paid a Kareem like price.
I didn't have a huge problem with the Westbrook trade, although right now I'm feeling buyer's remorse... I didn't mind the Gasol trade... I didn't mind the Glen Rice trade... I didn't mind the Kareem trade.
I don't mind the Scherzer/Turner trade... I don't mind the Stafford trade... I don't mind the Von Miller trade.
I'm saying this because I want it to be clear that I'm not a psycho who is obsessed with keeping young talent and picks.
I generally agree with my teams' trades as they are usually done by people who know more about their respective sports than myself
But when LBJ and his sports agency took over the team... I started to wonder if Klutch's priorities were put before the Lakers welfare.
I wondered this even more when we didn't trade for Lowry and sure when we chose Westbrook over Hield (I know that wasn't a Klutch client, but it was a LBJ friend decision)
So, until I feel that conflict of interest is resolved... I can't help but feel like moves are made for Klutch's benefit over the team's.
Can their goals be mutual at times? Sure.
Can Klutch right the ship? Also, sure.
But until they are gone, I always wonder if LBJ and Rich are looking out for their own empire... even eventually buying the Lakers from the Buss family... or making all decisions purely about what benefits the Lakers which is what I want in an executive.
I would have traded the kids for Bird... but not McHale. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steve007
Franchise Player
Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 13255
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2021 7:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BILBJH wrote: |
When MJ joined the Bulls they improved 11 games
When Shaq joined the Magic, they improved 20 games. You tried to minimize it by saying they only went .500 but that was a great job.
They were a contender soon after
When Kareem joined the Bucks they improved 29 games. He won a title soon after
When LBJ joined the Cavs they improved 18 games... he was a perennial playoff contender.
When AD joined the then Hornets... they didn't improve at all and barely made the playoffs while he was the main piece.
We paid a generational price for AD but he's not as good as any of these generational players.
I get that most of you are cool with that... but personally I just disagree. |
Davis only spent a year in college and most guys on your list were in college much longer. Not really a good comparison IMO. Davis rookie year in the league was a year when he would still be college continuing his development in an earlier era.
After his rookie year, New Orleans improved by 13 games, 24 games, and 9 games from the year before Davis arrived. That looks really good when the GOAT improved his team by 11 games.
More importantly, MJ needed 7 years and Scottie Pippen to win a ring. Kareem needed 2 years and then never won a ring in his next 5 years in Milwaukee. In his first stint in Cleveland, which lasted 7 years, Lebron never won and felt he needed to team up with Wade and Bosh to win. Shaq never won in his 4 years in Orlando and it took him 8 years and the emergence of Kobe to win. So Davis winning his first year in LA looks pretty damn good.
If those guys struggled THAT much to win rings, imagine how much of a struggle it is for players like Randle, Ingram and Lonzo. Even KD joined the Warriors because doing it in OKC was too hard for him.
Last edited by Steve007 on Fri Nov 05, 2021 7:47 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steve007
Franchise Player
Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 13255
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2021 7:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Funny I hated the Glen Rice trade and still do. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BILBJH
Star Player
Joined: 23 Jul 2020
Posts: 5157
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2021 7:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steve007 wrote: | | BILBJH wrote: |
When MJ joined the Bulls they improved 11 games
When Shaq joined the Magic, they improved 20 games. You tried to minimize it by saying they only went .500 but that was a great job.
They were a contender soon after
When Kareem joined the Bucks they improved 29 games. He won a title soon after
When LBJ joined the Cavs they improved 18 games... he was a perennial playoff contender.
When AD joined the then Hornets... they didn't improve at all and barely made the playoffs while he was the main piece.
We paid a generational price for AD but he's not as good as any of these generational players.
I get that most of you are cool with that... but personally I just disagree. |
Davis only spent a year in college and most guys on your list were in college much longer. Not really a good comparison IMO. Davis rookie year in the league was a year when he would still be college continuing his development in an earlier era.
After his rookie year, New Orleans improved by 13 games, 24 games, and 9 games from the year before Davis arrived. That looks really good when the GOAT improved his team by 11 games.
More importantly, MJ needed 7 years and Scottie Pippen to win a ring. Kareem needed 2 years and then never won a ring in his next 5 years in Milwaukee. In his first stint in Cleveland, which lasted 7 years, Lebron never won and felt he needed to team up with Wade and Bosh to win. Shaq never won in his 4 years in Orlando and it took him 8 years and the emergence of Kobe to win. So Davis winning his first year in LA looks pretty damn good.
If those guys struggled THAT much to win rings, imagine how much of a struggle it is for players like Randle, Ingram and Lonzo. Even KD joined the Warriors because doing it in OKC was too hard for him. |
The season before AD arrived in New Orleans was strike shortened.
The winning percentage didn't change at all when he joined the team.
Shaq got the Magic to the finals.
AD barely got to the next round.
No one, and I repeat no one, including myself has claimed any of the young players are better than AD.
All I've said and maybe a few others, is that the collective of assets we've squandered wasn't worth accommodating Klutch's agenda.
No one has said Buddy is better than Russ... but having KCP, Buddy, and AC might be better.
I get the principle that in some cases... one transcendent player can be worth three or four good or decent players.
But unless AD ups his game... for me it wasn't worth it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BILBJH
Star Player
Joined: 23 Jul 2020
Posts: 5157
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2021 7:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steve007 wrote: | | Funny I hated the Glen Rice trade and still do. |
It wasn't a great trade... but my point was I didn't throw a fit about it for a year. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steve007
Franchise Player
Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 13255
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 06, 2021 7:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BILBJH wrote: | | Steve007 wrote: | | BILBJH wrote: |
When MJ joined the Bulls they improved 11 games
When Shaq joined the Magic, they improved 20 games. You tried to minimize it by saying they only went .500 but that was a great job.
They were a contender soon after
When Kareem joined the Bucks they improved 29 games. He won a title soon after
When LBJ joined the Cavs they improved 18 games... he was a perennial playoff contender.
When AD joined the then Hornets... they didn't improve at all and barely made the playoffs while he was the main piece.
We paid a generational price for AD but he's not as good as any of these generational players.
I get that most of you are cool with that... but personally I just disagree. |
Davis only spent a year in college and most guys on your list were in college much longer. Not really a good comparison IMO. Davis rookie year in the league was a year when he would still be college continuing his development in an earlier era.
After his rookie year, New Orleans improved by 13 games, 24 games, and 9 games from the year before Davis arrived. That looks really good when the GOAT improved his team by 11 games.
More importantly, MJ needed 7 years and Scottie Pippen to win a ring. Kareem needed 2 years and then never won a ring in his next 5 years in Milwaukee. In his first stint in Cleveland, which lasted 7 years, Lebron never won and felt he needed to team up with Wade and Bosh to win. Shaq never won in his 4 years in Orlando and it took him 8 years and the emergence of Kobe to win. So Davis winning his first year in LA looks pretty damn good.
If those guys struggled THAT much to win rings, imagine how much of a struggle it is for players like Randle, Ingram and Lonzo. Even KD joined the Warriors because doing it in OKC was too hard for him. |
The season before AD arrived in New Orleans was strike shortened.
The winning percentage didn't change at all when he joined the team.
Shaq got the Magic to the finals.
AD barely got to the next round.
No one, and I repeat no one, including myself has claimed any of the young players are better than AD.
All I've said and maybe a few others, is that the collective of assets we've squandered wasn't worth accommodating Klutch's agenda.
No one has said Buddy is better than Russ... but having KCP, Buddy, and AC might be better.
I get the principle that in some cases... one transcendent player can be worth three or four good or decent players.
But unless AD ups his game... for me it wasn't worth it. |
Okay, good point on the strike shortened season. I should have noticed that. One thing I would say about Shaq though is the Magic were loaded with talent. That was the biggest reason they rose so quickly. And they added another superstar in Penny Hardaway. I think adding that second star is a huge deal. You may not think AD is a great #1 option, but he is an excellent #2, better than Paul Gasol ever was.
I’m guessing you don’t feel this way but I also think matching and surpassing the Celtics 17 titles is a big deal. It’s more meaningful to me to get that 17th title and match them; I wasn’t confident it would happen around 15-20 years ago.
And when I follow teams in other sports, I think their championships are a big deal, even if they only win one. I still watch stuff about the 1988 Dodgers, a team that was only special for a year. The Dodgers have a rich history with high expectations and that team is still a big deal to me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
activeverb
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 06, 2021 8:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BILBJH wrote: |
I would have traded the kids for Bird... but not McHale. |
The modern equivalent of Bird is probably Durant or Giannis. You couldn't get someone like that for Ingram, Ball, and Hart (unless, like AD, Giannis and Durant were on expiring contracts and making it clear they were going to leave anyways, which wasn't the case.)
If all you're saying is you think we gave up too much for AD and you wouldn't have done the trade, fair enough. But if you are saying we could have gotten AD for less or traded for a better player than AD, I see no evidence to support that belief.
| BILBJH wrote: |
But when LBJ and his sports agency took over the team... I started to wonder if Klutch's priorities were put before the Lakers welfare. |
I'm not even sure what this means. Lebron's priority is to put a team around him that can win. The Lakers, by signing onto the Lebron strategy, are accommodating this. Now, you can argue that the moves Lebron has lobbied for aren't the most effective way to build a team. But I am not sure how you think the Lakers' welfare and Lebron's welfare aren't in sync.
Last edited by activeverb on Sat Nov 06, 2021 9:33 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hanging from Rafters
Star Player
Joined: 31 Jul 2018
Posts: 4593
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 06, 2021 9:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
I have been in denial and finally realize it. Logically I know that one real championship is better than a theoretical dynasty, especially since that one championship tied the Lakers for the most in NBA history.
Emotionally though, I’m greedy and would rather have had the potential to surpass the tie at #17 to go for 10 years like the 80’s where perhaps there would be 5 titles in 9 appearances.
In 4 years the Lakers drafted 3 all-stars that can play SG, SF, PF. Two starters at C and another starter at PG. Also drafted 6th man of the year at SG and two rotation players at PF and SF.
Emotionally I would rather have had those home grown players plus our future draft picks to take my chances at a dynasty than the team we have now with 1 championship and a closing window looking at possibly another torture chamber like the one we went through for 4 embarrassing losing years when we drafted them.
If we can afford LeBron, AD, and Westbrook we could afford the team below, and I take my chances with them long term
Zubac(starter)/Thomas Bryant(starter)
Randle(all star)/Nance
Ingram(all star)/Hart
Russel(all star)/Clarkson(6th moty)
Ball(starter) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BILBJH
Star Player
Joined: 23 Jul 2020
Posts: 5157
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 06, 2021 9:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| activeverb wrote: | | BILBJH wrote: |
I would have traded the kids for Bird... but not McHale. |
The modern equivalent of Bird is probably Durant or Giannis. You couldn't get someone like that for Ingram, Ball, and Hart (unless, like AD, Giannis and Durant were on expiring contracts and making it clear they were going to leave anyways, which wasn't the case.)
If all you're saying is you think we gave up too much for AD and you wouldn't have done the trade, fair enough. But if you are saying we could have gotten AD for less or traded for a better player than AD, I see no evidence to support that belief.
| BILBJH wrote: |
But when LBJ and his sports agency took over the team... I started to wonder if Klutch's priorities were put before the Lakers welfare. |
I'm not even sure what this means. Lebron's priority is to put a team around him that can win. The Lakers, by signing onto the Lebron strategy, are accommodating this. Now, you can argue that the moves Lebron has lobbied for aren't the most effective way to build a team. But I am not sure how you think the Lakers' welfare and Lebron's welfare aren't in sync. |
If we traded for Durant or Giannis, I wouldn't be complaining because they are a level above AD.
When people mention the trade they always try to abbreviate it to Ingram, Lonzo, Josh to minimize the overpay.
We also lost #4 (Hunter?, Garland?) and three future first round picks
If people felt it was so reasonable... they wouldn't try to minimize the price... all the small pieces that were also cleared for the two elites plus the trade itself.
If you were a GM for the opposing team... your arguments would make sense to me, but you are a Lakers fan... and it's almost like you are negotiating or arguing against your own interests.
Is it the worst trade in history? I don't think I've even said that... I've said we paid too much and made it very difficult to rebuild or sustain the team and so far that seems somewhat true.
I still like AD... it was just too pricey.
Of course Klutch and LBJ are trying to win, but they don't care about anything but the present. It's not good when a sports agency with client obligations is also a de facto GM.
Take the case of THT. We have seen flashes of brilliance... maybe he's the future of the franchise... but you can't really know for sure whether we didn't trade for Lowry because he's that good... or because he's a Klutch client.
Maybe he is that good... in which case, well done Klutch.
But maybe he isn't... in which case this was a conflict of interest and that's what I'm worrying about when you pay so much for AD... and then you protect THT.
As I said, we don't know exactly what goes on, but I don't think it's a good system of checks and balances for a sports agency to be essentially negotiating with itself. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
activeverb
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 06, 2021 9:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BILBJH wrote: | | activeverb wrote: | | BILBJH wrote: |
I would have traded the kids for Bird... but not McHale. |
The modern equivalent of Bird is probably Durant or Giannis. You couldn't get someone like that for Ingram, Ball, and Hart (unless, like AD, Giannis and Durant were on expiring contracts and making it clear they were going to leave anyways, which wasn't the case.)
If all you're saying is you think we gave up too much for AD and you wouldn't have done the trade, fair enough. But if you are saying we could have gotten AD for less or traded for a better player than AD, I see no evidence to support that belief.
| BILBJH wrote: |
But when LBJ and his sports agency took over the team... I started to wonder if Klutch's priorities were put before the Lakers welfare. |
I'm not even sure what this means. Lebron's priority is to put a team around him that can win. The Lakers, by signing onto the Lebron strategy, are accommodating this. Now, you can argue that the moves Lebron has lobbied for aren't the most effective way to build a team. But I am not sure how you think the Lakers' welfare and Lebron's welfare aren't in sync. |
If we traded for Durant or Giannis, I wouldn't be complaining because they are a level above AD.
When people mention the trade they always try to abbreviate it to Ingram, Lonzo, Josh to minimize the overpay.
We also lost #4 (Hunter?, Garland?) and three future first round picks
If people felt it was so reasonable... they wouldn't try to minimize the price... all the small pieces that were also cleared for the two elites plus the trade itself.
If you were a GM for the opposing team... your arguments would make sense to me, but you are a Lakers fan... and it's almost like you are negotiating or arguing against your own interests.
Is it the worst trade in history? I don't think I've even said that... I've said we paid too much and made it very difficult to rebuild or sustain the team and so far that seems somewhat true.
I still like AD... it was just too pricey.
Of course Klutch and LBJ are trying to win, but they don't care about anything but the present. It's not good when a sports agency with client obligations is also a de facto GM.
Take the case of THT. We have seen flashes of brilliance... maybe he's the future of the franchise... but you can't really know for sure whether we didn't trade for Lowry because he's that good... or because he's a Klutch client.
Maybe he is that good... in which case, well done Klutch.
But maybe he isn't... in which case this was a conflict of interest and that's what I'm worrying about when you pay so much for AD... and then you protect THT.
As I said, we don't know exactly what goes on, but I don't think it's a good system of checks and balances for a sports agency to be essentially negotiating with itself. |
1. I agree that we traded too much for AD. Rob always seems to pay top price. But that was probably a consequence of the pressure of Lebron pushing him to fix matter quickly. In that sense, I agree that signing onto Team Lebron means you have to forsake the future for the present. If you're not willing to do that, signing Lebron makes no sense.
But I wouldn't call that a case of a sports agency negotiating with itself. It was more a case of Lebron pressuring the Lakers to make the deal.
2. It's anyone's guess if the Lakers wouldn't include THT in the Lowry trade because of pressure from Klutch, or because they thought he was too good. The Lakers did trade two Klutch, KCP and Harrell, for Westbrook, and they let two other Klutch client, Morris and Waiters, leave. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BILBJH
Star Player
Joined: 23 Jul 2020
Posts: 5157
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 06, 2021 10:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| activeverb wrote: | | BILBJH wrote: | | activeverb wrote: | | BILBJH wrote: |
I would have traded the kids for Bird... but not McHale. |
The modern equivalent of Bird is probably Durant or Giannis. You couldn't get someone like that for Ingram, Ball, and Hart (unless, like AD, Giannis and Durant were on expiring contracts and making it clear they were going to leave anyways, which wasn't the case.)
If all you're saying is you think we gave up too much for AD and you wouldn't have done the trade, fair enough. But if you are saying we could have gotten AD for less or traded for a better player than AD, I see no evidence to support that belief.
| BILBJH wrote: |
But when LBJ and his sports agency took over the team... I started to wonder if Klutch's priorities were put before the Lakers welfare. |
I'm not even sure what this means. Lebron's priority is to put a team around him that can win. The Lakers, by signing onto the Lebron strategy, are accommodating this. Now, you can argue that the moves Lebron has lobbied for aren't the most effective way to build a team. But I am not sure how you think the Lakers' welfare and Lebron's welfare aren't in sync. |
If we traded for Durant or Giannis, I wouldn't be complaining because they are a level above AD.
When people mention the trade they always try to abbreviate it to Ingram, Lonzo, Josh to minimize the overpay.
We also lost #4 (Hunter?, Garland?) and three future first round picks
If people felt it was so reasonable... they wouldn't try to minimize the price... all the small pieces that were also cleared for the two elites plus the trade itself.
If you were a GM for the opposing team... your arguments would make sense to me, but you are a Lakers fan... and it's almost like you are negotiating or arguing against your own interests.
Is it the worst trade in history? I don't think I've even said that... I've said we paid too much and made it very difficult to rebuild or sustain the team and so far that seems somewhat true.
I still like AD... it was just too pricey.
Of course Klutch and LBJ are trying to win, but they don't care about anything but the present. It's not good when a sports agency with client obligations is also a de facto GM.
Take the case of THT. We have seen flashes of brilliance... maybe he's the future of the franchise... but you can't really know for sure whether we didn't trade for Lowry because he's that good... or because he's a Klutch client.
Maybe he is that good... in which case, well done Klutch.
But maybe he isn't... in which case this was a conflict of interest and that's what I'm worrying about when you pay so much for AD... and then you protect THT.
As I said, we don't know exactly what goes on, but I don't think it's a good system of checks and balances for a sports agency to be essentially negotiating with itself. |
1. I agree that we traded too much for AD. Rob always seems to pay top price. But that was probably a consequence of the pressure of Lebron pushing him to fix matter quickly. In that sense, I agree that signing onto Team Lebron means you have to forsake the future for the present. If you're not willing to do that, signing Lebron makes no sense.
But I wouldn't call that a case of a sports agency negotiating with itself. It was more a case of Lebron pressuring the Lakers to make the deal.
2. It's anyone's guess if the Lakers wouldn't include THT in the Lowry trade because of pressure from Klutch, or because they thought he was too good. The Lakers did trade two Klutch, KCP and Harrell, for Westbrook, and they let two other Klutch client, Morris and Waiters, leave. |
If we agree on point one, I don't get why we are even arguing. I have moved on... even to the point where I've been trying to justify the Westbrook trade most of this summer.
The only reason I keep replying is because people keep acting like this wasn't a problem.
As Santayana said, those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.
When I read threads where I see people over and over say... I'd do it again... that's where I take issue and will continue to debate it.
If they say... it was too much, but we have to live with it, then I can understand that perspective.
Point 2.
Harrell was already unhappy and I'm sure KCP didn't mind the fresh start... instead of always being the whipping boy of disgruntled fans.
I liked both of them... thought Harrell was a bad fit, but good energy guy and I thought KCP was underappreciated. I'm sure Klutch would have at least asked if they were cool with it. Remember Harrell opted in, so they were on good terms.
Morris was a new client and Waiters was not going to resurrect his career here so I don't think the Klutch factor played much of a part.
We'll find out about THT maybe even later this year. I personally saw a lot of promise... I just thought if LBJ didn't get hurt that Lowry would have brought us closer to the second title right now. And when you already traded everyone else... I didn't get what made him so special when Ball and Ingram also showed a lot of promise other than he was Klutch. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144585
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 06, 2021 10:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Trading for a second wheel was the right move, I wouldn’t regret that, though we outbid ourselves. I regret that the only available star was AD. He is an amazing player but your window only extends to the end of Lebron as a Laker. Building around a big is something you did in the 2000’s, not in today’s game. The idea was solid but far from perfect.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| 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
|
|
