NEW GENERAL FREE AGENCY/TRADE THREAD
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 704, 705, 706 ... 709, 710, 711  Next

 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
LakerDYnasty72
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Posts: 4070

PostPosted: Thu Nov 24, 2022 9:17 pm    Post subject:

andree wrote:
LakerDYnasty72 wrote:
venturalakersfan wrote:
Inspector Gadget wrote:
pjiddy wrote:
OT but...

Tatum right now is looking like a top 5 NBA player.

30 ppg 7.6 rebs, 4.6 assists at 24 years old.

Just for fun.

Kobe at 24

30 ppg 7 rebs, 6 assists per game.

Lonzo over Tatum. Ouch.


Tatum is a great player don’t get me wrong but it’s unfair to criticize Lonzo as if he has played enough games to prove that he’s also a superstar talent, his injury issues will likely make him never reach his potential, the Celtics got the lucky bounce, maybe someday the same will happen to us.


Yeah, that’s the point. Magic screwed the team royally.


The person I'd like to meet is the one who was adamant that we draft Tatum back then, if they exist. I'd rely on their judgment a great deal more than the executive you mentioned above.

As a player I'd happily say his name, but as an executive, I want to vomit. Not only did he F' up on the draft, but he was also the "executive" that traded Zubac to the other team in LA!

I read the details of that trade again just to be clear. It was reported at that time that Jerry West and and some of their people were laughing at that trade at dinner that night, and, of course, by extension laughing at this ex-player masquerading as an NBA front office executive.

By the way, Zubac is at the top, or near it, as far as total rebounds....damn!!!!!!!!!!!!


I can answer at your question! Those persons didn't exist. Neither here on the forum nor official.
The official consensus was Fultz nr.1, Lonzo nr.2, Jackson and Tatum nr. 3&4. Fultz was regarded as the second coming of Kyrie Irving. Lonzo the passing maestro. Though by Lonzo were a few questions about his shooting technique and his ability to play P&R, which is the bread and butter in the NBA.

I remmeber that I asked here to whom you compare Tatum and Markkanen. Tatum was viewed as similar to Camelo or Tobias Harris (manny points but overall ineffective player) and Markkanen was supposely another Radmanovic.
Fultz was nr. 1 consensus and expected to go to Boston. The first one was Chris Brussard at Colin Cowherd, who said that he heard a rumour that Ainge liked Tatum. And after a while came that deal with Philly.
Actually nobody believed Tatum would be so good. Only Ainge. The same with Donovan Mitchell. Nobody was talking about Mitchell. I heard about Mitchell only after the summer league.

And with Zubac was a totally embarrassment. But to be fair, he was rotting on the bench. Luke didn't develop him at all. Only at Clippers he started to become the player he is today.


I appreciate your summary. It sounds pretty much like what happened. The problem I'm having now is that astute cap management people on this board like vashti are exposing the errors our front office are still making.

Errors like not receiving anything in return for players who have left like Julius Randle, trading first picks to the point that now we are holding on for dear life the ones that we have, trading for RW.

The result of all this? Pelinka's extension. Yep.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
andree
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 05 May 2014
Posts: 495

PostPosted: Fri Nov 25, 2022 5:56 am    Post subject:

The biggest tragedy in my opinion is not that we gave so many first round picks or we receive nothing for Randle.
During our rebuilding years (2013-2018) look what we drafted (late first round picks and second rounds): Clarkson, Nance jr. and Anthony Brown, Zubac, Kuzma and Josh Hard.
There are 6 players and except Anthony Brown, all are real NBA players, some better (Clarkson and Kuzma) the other good rotational players. Lakers drafted superb in the late part of the draft. I don`t believe that was anyone better. I don`t know exactly who pulled the strings but from what I read, one of Busses and Ryan West (son of Jerry) were in charge with scouting.

Imagine we had a rotation of Clarkson-Hard-Kuzma-Nance-Zubac alongside Lebron and AD. This is better that we had all those years alongside our 2 stars.
And none of these were a necessary sacrifice. AD would have come without Hard, Kuzma for RW , Zubac for Muscala . There were so many wrong moves.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 89955
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Fri Nov 25, 2022 9:19 am    Post subject:

andree wrote:
The biggest tragedy in my opinion is not that we gave so many first round picks or we receive nothing for Randle.
During our rebuilding years (2013-2018) look what we drafted (late first round picks and second rounds): Clarkson, Nance jr. and Anthony Brown, Zubac, Kuzma and Josh Hard.
There are 6 players and except Anthony Brown, all are real NBA players, some better (Clarkson and Kuzma) the other good rotational players. Lakers drafted superb in the late part of the draft. I don`t believe that was anyone better. I don`t know exactly who pulled the strings but from what I read, one of Busses and Ryan West (son of Jerry) were in charge with scouting.

Imagine we had a rotation of Clarkson-Hard-Kuzma-Nance-Zubac alongside Lebron and AD. This is better that we had all those years alongside our 2 stars.
And none of these were a necessary sacrifice. AD would have come without Hard, Kuzma for RW , Zubac for Muscala . There were so many wrong moves.


Jesse Buss and the scouting department worked well with Mitch, who is good at scouting and had final call. Mitch was also a good trader. He lost a few chances by being careful by nature, but almost always seemed to get the better guy, or the added throw in. Pelinka has none of those skills, and tends to be the guy the Mitch’s of the world take extra picks and pieces from.
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Inspector Gadget
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 18 Apr 2016
Posts: 41931

PostPosted: Fri Nov 25, 2022 10:04 am    Post subject:

The issue with Pelinka when it comes to making trades is that he doesn’t have a good reputation around the league, when he’s working with the Lakers FO in signing FAs he does a good job most of the time, hence why Brown/Bryant/Walker signings have worked out really well so far, he needs to build better relationships with GMs so it will be easier for him to negotiate.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LakerDYnasty72
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Posts: 4070

PostPosted: Fri Nov 25, 2022 11:23 am    Post subject:

Omar Little wrote:
andree wrote:
The biggest tragedy in my opinion is not that we gave so many first round picks or we receive nothing for Randle.
During our rebuilding years (2013-2018) look what we drafted (late first round picks and second rounds): Clarkson, Nance jr. and Anthony Brown, Zubac, Kuzma and Josh Hard.
There are 6 players and except Anthony Brown, all are real NBA players, some better (Clarkson and Kuzma) the other good rotational players. Lakers drafted superb in the late part of the draft. I don`t believe that was anyone better. I don`t know exactly who pulled the strings but from what I read, one of Busses and Ryan West (son of Jerry) were in charge with scouting.

Imagine we had a rotation of Clarkson-Hard-Kuzma-Nance-Zubac alongside Lebron and AD. This is better that we had all those years alongside our 2 stars.
And none of these were a necessary sacrifice. AD would have come without Hard, Kuzma for RW , Zubac for Muscala . There were so many wrong moves.


Jesse Buss and the scouting department worked well with Mitch, who is good at scouting and had final call. Mitch was also a good trader. He lost a few chances by being careful by nature, but almost always seemed to get the better guy, or the added throw in. Pelinka has none of those skills, and tends to be the guy the Mitch’s of the world take extra picks and pieces from.


I'd love to disagree, but the track record won't let me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
MJST
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 06 Jul 2014
Posts: 23052

PostPosted: Fri Nov 25, 2022 12:00 pm    Post subject:

LakerDYnasty72 wrote:
andree wrote:
LakerDYnasty72 wrote:
venturalakersfan wrote:
Inspector Gadget wrote:
pjiddy wrote:
OT but...

Tatum right now is looking like a top 5 NBA player.

30 ppg 7.6 rebs, 4.6 assists at 24 years old.

Just for fun.

Kobe at 24

30 ppg 7 rebs, 6 assists per game.

Lonzo over Tatum. Ouch.


Tatum is a great player don’t get me wrong but it’s unfair to criticize Lonzo as if he has played enough games to prove that he’s also a superstar talent, his injury issues will likely make him never reach his potential, the Celtics got the lucky bounce, maybe someday the same will happen to us.


Yeah, that’s the point. Magic screwed the team royally.


The person I'd like to meet is the one who was adamant that we draft Tatum back then, if they exist. I'd rely on their judgment a great deal more than the executive you mentioned above.

As a player I'd happily say his name, but as an executive, I want to vomit. Not only did he F' up on the draft, but he was also the "executive" that traded Zubac to the other team in LA!

I read the details of that trade again just to be clear. It was reported at that time that Jerry West and and some of their people were laughing at that trade at dinner that night, and, of course, by extension laughing at this ex-player masquerading as an NBA front office executive.

By the way, Zubac is at the top, or near it, as far as total rebounds....damn!!!!!!!!!!!!


I can answer at your question! Those persons didn't exist. Neither here on the forum nor official.
The official consensus was Fultz nr.1, Lonzo nr.2, Jackson and Tatum nr. 3&4. Fultz was regarded as the second coming of Kyrie Irving. Lonzo the passing maestro. Though by Lonzo were a few questions about his shooting technique and his ability to play P&R, which is the bread and butter in the NBA.

I remmeber that I asked here to whom you compare Tatum and Markkanen. Tatum was viewed as similar to Camelo or Tobias Harris (manny points but overall ineffective player) and Markkanen was supposely another Radmanovic.
Fultz was nr. 1 consensus and expected to go to Boston. The first one was Chris Brussard at Colin Cowherd, who said that he heard a rumour that Ainge liked Tatum. And after a while came that deal with Philly.
Actually nobody believed Tatum would be so good. Only Ainge. The same with Donovan Mitchell. Nobody was talking about Mitchell. I heard about Mitchell only after the summer league.

And with Zubac was a totally embarrassment. But to be fair, he was rotting on the bench. Luke didn't develop him at all. Only at Clippers he started to become the player he is today.


I appreciate your summary. It sounds pretty much like what happened. The problem I'm having now is that astute cap management people on this board like vashti are exposing the errors our front office are still making.

Errors like not receiving anything in return for players who have left like Julius Randle, trading first picks to the point that now we are holding on for dear life the ones that we have, trading for RW.

The result of all this? Pelinka's extension. Yep.


We'd have traded Tatum and Ingram for Davis regardless.

So any "shoulda, woulda, couldas" about Tatum are irrelevant.
_________________
How NBA 2K18 failed the All-Time Lakers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxMBYm3wwxk
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
lakersfever714
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 05 Jan 2016
Posts: 9595

PostPosted: Fri Nov 25, 2022 12:50 pm    Post subject:

MJST wrote:
LakerDYnasty72 wrote:
andree wrote:
LakerDYnasty72 wrote:
venturalakersfan wrote:
Inspector Gadget wrote:
pjiddy wrote:
OT but...

Tatum right now is looking like a top 5 NBA player.

30 ppg 7.6 rebs, 4.6 assists at 24 years old.

Just for fun.

Kobe at 24

30 ppg 7 rebs, 6 assists per game.

Lonzo over Tatum. Ouch.


Tatum is a great player don’t get me wrong but it’s unfair to criticize Lonzo as if he has played enough games to prove that he’s also a superstar talent, his injury issues will likely make him never reach his potential, the Celtics got the lucky bounce, maybe someday the same will happen to us.


Yeah, that’s the point. Magic screwed the team royally.


The person I'd like to meet is the one who was adamant that we draft Tatum back then, if they exist. I'd rely on their judgment a great deal more than the executive you mentioned above.

As a player I'd happily say his name, but as an executive, I want to vomit. Not only did he F' up on the draft, but he was also the "executive" that traded Zubac to the other team in LA!

I read the details of that trade again just to be clear. It was reported at that time that Jerry West and and some of their people were laughing at that trade at dinner that night, and, of course, by extension laughing at this ex-player masquerading as an NBA front office executive.

By the way, Zubac is at the top, or near it, as far as total rebounds....damn!!!!!!!!!!!!


I can answer at your question! Those persons didn't exist. Neither here on the forum nor official.
The official consensus was Fultz nr.1, Lonzo nr.2, Jackson and Tatum nr. 3&4. Fultz was regarded as the second coming of Kyrie Irving. Lonzo the passing maestro. Though by Lonzo were a few questions about his shooting technique and his ability to play P&R, which is the bread and butter in the NBA.

I remmeber that I asked here to whom you compare Tatum and Markkanen. Tatum was viewed as similar to Camelo or Tobias Harris (manny points but overall ineffective player) and Markkanen was supposely another Radmanovic.
Fultz was nr. 1 consensus and expected to go to Boston. The first one was Chris Brussard at Colin Cowherd, who said that he heard a rumour that Ainge liked Tatum. And after a while came that deal with Philly.
Actually nobody believed Tatum would be so good. Only Ainge. The same with Donovan Mitchell. Nobody was talking about Mitchell. I heard about Mitchell only after the summer league.

And with Zubac was a totally embarrassment. But to be fair, he was rotting on the bench. Luke didn't develop him at all. Only at Clippers he started to become the player he is today.


I appreciate your summary. It sounds pretty much like what happened. The problem I'm having now is that astute cap management people on this board like vashti are exposing the errors our front office are still making.

Errors like not receiving anything in return for players who have left like Julius Randle, trading first picks to the point that now we are holding on for dear life the ones that we have, trading for RW.

The result of all this? Pelinka's extension. Yep.


We'd have traded Tatum and Ingram for Davis regardless.

So any "shoulda, woulda, couldas" about Tatum are irrelevant.


Yea, but like discussed b4, at the time of the trade, Tatum was already a young phenom flourishing in his rookie year. If Pelinka would have still given up the exact same package with Tatum instead of Ball, then it would be more on Pelinka being so fixated on AD and being gullible.

Seeing as how Toronto wouldn't give up Scotty Barnes for KD, I don't think every GM would have traded for AD. Thats why the GM is so important. Who knows? Maybe a different GM would have made the deal but would given up a lot less.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ThePageDude
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 25 Jul 2002
Posts: 2058

PostPosted: Fri Nov 25, 2022 1:52 pm    Post subject:

MJST wrote:

<snip>
We'd have traded Tatum and Ingram for Davis regardless.

So any "shoulda, woulda, couldas" about Tatum are irrelevant.


Arguments like this excuse poor management because subsequent events/circumstances saved their behinds. The only relevant questions in such matters should be : was the right process followed to arrive at the decision? was the right decision then made at that time? My answer to that for this situation is a resounding NO.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
MJST
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 06 Jul 2014
Posts: 23052

PostPosted: Fri Nov 25, 2022 2:12 pm    Post subject:

ThePageDude wrote:
MJST wrote:

<snip>
We'd have traded Tatum and Ingram for Davis regardless.

So any "shoulda, woulda, couldas" about Tatum are irrelevant.


Arguments like this excuse poor management because subsequent events/circumstances saved their behinds. The only relevant questions in such matters should be : was the right process followed to arrive at the decision? was the right decision then made at that time? My answer to that for this situation is a resounding NO.


It doesn't matter. Tatum wouldn't be here. Lonzo is precisely the kind of point guard that would be fitting perfectly with our team currently, defensive, 3 point shooting, passing ability, rebounding etc.

Ingram right now would be fitting the same way Tatum would have, and we unloaded Ingram, Lonzo, Hart for AD. If we had Tatum instead of Lonzo, he'd have been shipped out as well with maybe the only consolation being we MIGHT keep Hart. But the Pelicans ARE TAKING the two Top 5 First Picks of the Lakers for prime Anthony Davis. Thinking otherwise at this point is pure fantasy.

Tatum and Ingram are only a year apart in age.

This retrospective stuff is the most annoying thing about when people decide to look at stuff. The "But Tatum was a young phoenom by then!!" crap.

Tatum in the 2018-2019 Season (the season he'd have been traded after) was putting up 15.7 PPG 6.0 RPG and 2 APG on 45% field goal and 37% three at age 20.

Guess who was putting up those kind of numbers at age 20 for the Lakers that they couldn't stop talking trash about? Brandon Ingram.

Ingram put up 16.1 PPG 5.3 RPG 3.9 APG on 47% from the Field and 39% from three. But Lakers fans weren't calling him "young phenom" they were taking him for granted just like they were doing everybody else. THIS was just a year after Magic said himself that Ingram was the only person he wouldn't ever trade. But then Anthony Davis came on the table, and despite the "phenom Tatum" numbers Ingram was putting up he was in trade reports all freaking year and the general consensus was "Well yeah but Anthony Davis is Anthony Davis." So when people play that "Tatum and Ingram wouldn't have been traded for AD" stuff, it has no basis in reality.
The Lakers might keep a pick, they might keep Hart. They aren't keeping Ingram and Tatum.

Tatum didn't really show a leap in his game till the 2019-2020 season, which is the season after we'd have traded him for Davis.

2018 Tatum along with Ingram would have been traded for Anthony Davis with no second guess by our FO to be made.
_________________
How NBA 2K18 failed the All-Time Lakers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxMBYm3wwxk
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
lakersfever714
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 05 Jan 2016
Posts: 9595

PostPosted: Fri Nov 25, 2022 2:25 pm    Post subject:

MJST wrote:
ThePageDude wrote:
MJST wrote:

<snip>
We'd have traded Tatum and Ingram for Davis regardless.

So any "shoulda, woulda, couldas" about Tatum are irrelevant.


Arguments like this excuse poor management because subsequent events/circumstances saved their behinds. The only relevant questions in such matters should be : was the right process followed to arrive at the decision? was the right decision then made at that time? My answer to that for this situation is a resounding NO.


It doesn't matter. Tatum wouldn't be here. Lonzo is precisely the kind of point guard that would be fitting perfectly with our team currently, defensive, 3 point shooting, passing ability, rebounding etc.

Ingram right now would be fitting the same way Tatum would have, and we unloaded Ingram, Lonzo, Hart for AD. If we had Tatum instead of Lonzo, he'd have been shipped out as well with maybe the only consolation being we MIGHT keep Hart. But the Pelicans ARE TAKING the two Top 5 First Picks of the Lakers for prime Anthony Davis. Thinking otherwise at this point is pure fantasy.

Tatum and Ingram are only a year apart in age.

This retrospective stuff is the most annoying thing about when people decide to look at stuff. The "But Tatum was a young phoenom by then!!" crap.

Tatum in the 2018-2019 Season (the season he'd have been traded after) was putting up 15.7 PPG 6.0 RPG and 2 APG on 45% field goal and 37% three at age 20.

Guess who was putting up those kind of numbers at age 20 for the Lakers that they couldn't stop talking trash about? Brandon Ingram.

Ingram put up 16.1 PPG 5.3 RPG 3.9 APG on 47% from the Field and 39% from three. But Lakers fans weren't calling him "young phenom" they were taking him for granted just like they were doing everybody else. THIS was just a year after Magic said himself that Ingram was the only person he wouldn't ever trade. But then Anthony Davis came on the table, and despite the "phenom Tatum" numbers Ingram was putting up he was in trade reports all freaking year and the general consensus was "Well yeah but Anthony Davis is Anthony Davis." So when people play that "Tatum and Ingram wouldn't have been traded for AD" stuff, it has no basis in reality.
The Lakers might keep a pick, they might keep Hart. They aren't keeping Ingram and Tatum.

Tatum didn't really show a leap in his game till the 2019-2020 season, which is the season after we'd have traded him for Davis.

2018 Tatum along with Ingram would have been traded for Anthony Davis with no second guess by our FO to be made.


I guess it all depends on the eyes of the beholder but I saw flashes of greatness from Tatum during his rookie year because of a few games he had that a rookie shouldn't be having.

Even if Tatum wasn't that good at the time, he still would have been perceived better than bricking Lonzo Ball who was missing layups and airballing threes. We basically traded away Ball at his absolute lowest value. He was almost like a throw-in in the trade.

If we want to look at how we got here today, we should look at the severe mismanagement of assets in the AD and Westbrick trade.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
MJST
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 06 Jul 2014
Posts: 23052

PostPosted: Fri Nov 25, 2022 3:02 pm    Post subject:

lakersfever714 wrote:
MJST wrote:
ThePageDude wrote:
MJST wrote:

<snip>
We'd have traded Tatum and Ingram for Davis regardless.

So any "shoulda, woulda, couldas" about Tatum are irrelevant.


Arguments like this excuse poor management because subsequent events/circumstances saved their behinds. The only relevant questions in such matters should be : was the right process followed to arrive at the decision? was the right decision then made at that time? My answer to that for this situation is a resounding NO.


It doesn't matter. Tatum wouldn't be here. Lonzo is precisely the kind of point guard that would be fitting perfectly with our team currently, defensive, 3 point shooting, passing ability, rebounding etc.

Ingram right now would be fitting the same way Tatum would have, and we unloaded Ingram, Lonzo, Hart for AD. If we had Tatum instead of Lonzo, he'd have been shipped out as well with maybe the only consolation being we MIGHT keep Hart. But the Pelicans ARE TAKING the two Top 5 First Picks of the Lakers for prime Anthony Davis. Thinking otherwise at this point is pure fantasy.

Tatum and Ingram are only a year apart in age.

This retrospective stuff is the most annoying thing about when people decide to look at stuff. The "But Tatum was a young phoenom by then!!" crap.

Tatum in the 2018-2019 Season (the season he'd have been traded after) was putting up 15.7 PPG 6.0 RPG and 2 APG on 45% field goal and 37% three at age 20.

Guess who was putting up those kind of numbers at age 20 for the Lakers that they couldn't stop talking trash about? Brandon Ingram.

Ingram put up 16.1 PPG 5.3 RPG 3.9 APG on 47% from the Field and 39% from three. But Lakers fans weren't calling him "young phenom" they were taking him for granted just like they were doing everybody else. THIS was just a year after Magic said himself that Ingram was the only person he wouldn't ever trade. But then Anthony Davis came on the table, and despite the "phenom Tatum" numbers Ingram was putting up he was in trade reports all freaking year and the general consensus was "Well yeah but Anthony Davis is Anthony Davis." So when people play that "Tatum and Ingram wouldn't have been traded for AD" stuff, it has no basis in reality.
The Lakers might keep a pick, they might keep Hart. They aren't keeping Ingram and Tatum.

Tatum didn't really show a leap in his game till the 2019-2020 season, which is the season after we'd have traded him for Davis.

2018 Tatum along with Ingram would have been traded for Anthony Davis with no second guess by our FO to be made.


I guess it all depends on the eyes of the beholder but I saw flashes of greatness from Tatum during his rookie year because of a few games he had that a rookie shouldn't be having.

Even if Tatum wasn't that good at the time, he still would have been perceived better than bricking Lonzo Ball who was missing layups and airballing threes. We basically traded away Ball at his absolute lowest value. He was almost like a throw-in in the trade.

If we want to look at how we got here today, we should look at the severe mismanagement of assets in the AD and Westbrick trade.


Ball wasn't a throw-in. He was our other top pick. Here's the main thing. As I said, if you want to say "Tatum had a higher value than Ball" great... then maybe we keep a pick.. or perhaps we keep Hart. But at the end of the day, Tatum and Ingram are both gone. If he had a higher value than Ball at that time and was a Laker then he definitely would have been thrown in along with Ingram, we MIGHT keep a pick, or might keep Hart. But Tatum and Ingram aren't remaining on the Lakers if we trade for Anthony Davis. That is the main point.


The thing that hurts the MOST about that trade isn't just the losing of Ingram and Ball. It's the fact the Lakers in the 2019 Draft were slated to be drafting Darius Garland. Worked him out in private and were very high on him.

But BOOM days later we agree to trade for Anthony Davis, so we wind up drafting DeAndre Hunter for them instead and Darius Garland winds up a Cavalier instead.

If we didn't do that crap, the Lakers would have been looking at Lonzo Ball, Brandon Ingram and Darius Garland going forward paired with LeBron.

THAT is what hurts in losing the most. It's not just losing Ingram, and Ball, its the fact we also defacto lost Garland because had we not agreed to the Anthony Davis trade, Garland was the guy we were going to draft.

Now look at him.

If the Lakers don't bite on he first AD scenario and draft Garland anyway. Then MAYBE when it comes to Garland, Lonzo and Ingram you can keep one of them if you can negotiate. But alas, the Lakers bit, and we got our chip, and now we pay for it with lack of assets.

As Omar said, Pelinka is the kind of guy that bites on the kind of deals Mitch used to pull on people.
_________________
How NBA 2K18 failed the All-Time Lakers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxMBYm3wwxk
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
lakersfever714
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 05 Jan 2016
Posts: 9595

PostPosted: Fri Nov 25, 2022 3:23 pm    Post subject:

Well, my point is we mismanaged our assets when we were plentiful and now we're paying dearly for it. Pelinka still hasn't made a deal where I feel he's "won".

Jeanie probably gave him a lot of credits for the championship, blamed the Westbrick trade on Lebron and blamed last season on Vogel. It makes perfect sense why she gave Pelinka an extension if u think about it. She probably will blame this season on Ham and give Pelinka a bigger extension next season.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
MJST
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 06 Jul 2014
Posts: 23052

PostPosted: Fri Nov 25, 2022 3:27 pm    Post subject:

lakersfever714 wrote:
Well, my point is we mismanaged our assets when we were plentiful and now we're paying dearly for it. Pelinka still hasn't made a deal where I feel he's "won".

Jeanie probably gave him a lot of credits for the championship, blamed the Westbrick trade on Lebron and blamed last season on Vogel. It makes perfect sense why she gave Pelinka an extension if u think about it. She probably will blame this season on Ham and give Pelinka a bigger extension next season.


Agree with that 100%
_________________
How NBA 2K18 failed the All-Time Lakers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxMBYm3wwxk
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 28930

PostPosted: Fri Nov 25, 2022 4:14 pm    Post subject:

MJST wrote:
If the Lakers don't bite on he first AD scenario and draft Garland anyway. Then MAYBE when it comes to Garland, Lonzo and Ingram you can keep one of them if you can negotiate. But alas, the Lakers bit, and we got our chip, and now we pay for it with lack of assets.

As Omar said, Pelinka is the kind of guy that bites on the kind of deals Mitch used to pull on people.


I agree with what you're saying. It's worth remembering that, while Magic was still around, we supposedly offered everything but the kitchen sink at the trade deadline. We were desperate to get that second star to pair with Lebron, and everyone knew it. I don't know how anyone could negotiate under those conditions. This isn't a defense of Pelinka. We were just operating in a manner that would have seemed alien to Kupchak. Even when Kobe was talking about how he would prefer to play on Pluto, Dr. Buss didn't panic.
_________________
Internet Argument Resolved
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
andree
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 05 May 2014
Posts: 495

PostPosted: Fri Nov 25, 2022 4:39 pm    Post subject:

I tend to disagree with the general opinion.

At the trade moment, if you remember what we put on the table were players with big question marks.
Ingram had that thrombosis and there was an entirely discussion, how his career will evolve (don`t forget Bosh case was pretty fresh in that moment).
Ball hype was really deflated. After 2 years of NBA, he was a brick throwing machine. No trace of the new Magic. And don`t forget Lavar Ball and his big mouth at that moment.
Darius Garland was just a hypothesis. He missed his college season. And there also a lot of discussion about his height and skinny frame which will make him a weak defender. Neither Pelicans believed in him.

So in the end we offer 2 role players and one with star potential but with question marks (health problems and already 3 years in NBA). That is the reason we had to agree with those picks.

Tatum is another discussion. As a rookie he fought against Lebron in ECF with a Celtic team without Irving (they lost with 4-3 after a lot of tough games). He was already considered by everyone a star in the making (more than Ingram).
If we had Ingram and Tatum, Pelicans would surely want Tatum. But with Ingram, we might had a chance to keep him.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 28930

PostPosted: Fri Nov 25, 2022 4:59 pm    Post subject:

andree wrote:
I tend to disagree with the general opinion.


I don't know that there is a "general opinion" on this subject. There are a lot of nuances to the discussion. If we confine the discussion to the time of the trade (as you do), then we need to disregard the title in the bubble. It hadn't happened yet and was far from a sure thing. We were still hoping to sign Kawhi. It wasn't clear what our roster was going to look like if we didn't get him.

I think that the general consensus was that the Davis trade was a good thing, even if we paid a steep price. The fanbase was worn down by the years of losing. Everyone knew that we were getting gouged on the deal, but Team Lebron had set up the whole thing. We knew that Ingram and Ball had warts, but they were still young players with considerable upside. It was the mass of draft capital that made a lot of us wince.
_________________
Internet Argument Resolved
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
pjiddy
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Dec 2005
Posts: 27946

PostPosted: Fri Nov 25, 2022 5:00 pm    Post subject:

ThePageDude wrote:
MJST wrote:

<snip>
We'd have traded Tatum and Ingram for Davis regardless.

So any "shoulda, woulda, couldas" about Tatum are irrelevant.


Arguments like this excuse poor management because subsequent events/circumstances saved their behinds. The only relevant questions in such matters should be : was the right process followed to arrive at the decision? was the right decision then made at that time? My answer to that for this situation is a resounding NO.


Tatum’s potential was way ahead of any of the players we traded at that time. At the very least, trading him instead of Lonzo would have at least saved us some picks
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
deal
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 17 Aug 2008
Posts: 14396
Location: Earth

PostPosted: Fri Nov 25, 2022 5:08 pm    Post subject:

I disagree that we needed Ball. Tatum & Ingram would have been our younger and even better Kawhi/George. Would have AD have come? Don't know but that's another story.

The supporting cast would have been interesting, we didn't have to let
Randle walk with no return, those picks, etc.

We would have a team for 10+ years.
_________________
Lakers need to build a freaking team !
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
HawaiiLaker
Rookie
Rookie


Joined: 03 Jul 2012
Posts: 10

PostPosted: Fri Nov 25, 2022 5:32 pm    Post subject:

andree wrote:
The biggest tragedy in my opinion is not that we gave so many first round picks or we receive nothing for Randle.
During our rebuilding years (2013-2018) look what we drafted (late first round picks and second rounds): Clarkson, Nance jr. and Anthony Brown, Zubac, Kuzma and Josh Hard.
There are 6 players and except Anthony Brown, all are real NBA players, some better (Clarkson and Kuzma) the other good rotational players. Lakers drafted superb in the late part of the draft. I don`t believe that was anyone better. I don`t know exactly who pulled the strings but from what I read, one of Busses and Ryan West (son of Jerry) were in charge with scouting.

Imagine we had a rotation of Clarkson-Hard-Kuzma-Nance-Zubac alongside Lebron and AD. This is better that we had all those years alongside our 2 stars.
And none of these were a necessary sacrifice. AD would have come without Hard, Kuzma for RW , Zubac for Muscala . There were so many wrong moves.


I think I saw some video footage of Josh Hard the other day on pornhub
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
fansincemagic
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 10483

PostPosted: Fri Nov 25, 2022 6:23 pm    Post subject:

Can we take "Los Angeles" off these jerseys and trade them with cash to the Kings for a 2nd? I don't care if it's protected at this point.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
dabask11
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 27 Dec 2012
Posts: 1980

PostPosted: Fri Nov 25, 2022 7:20 pm    Post subject:

Myles Turner has switched his agency to CAA per Marc Stein

Link

Troublesome for the Lakers.

It could also mean an extension given 4 other clients on the Pacers are represented by CAA.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
levon
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 11 Oct 2016
Posts: 6860

PostPosted: Fri Nov 25, 2022 7:41 pm    Post subject:

dabask11 wrote:
Myles Turner has switched his agency to CAA per Marc Stein

Link

Troublesome for the Lakers.

It could also mean an extension given 4 other clients on the Pacers are represented by CAA.

Why is that troublesome for the Lakers?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
dabask11
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 27 Dec 2012
Posts: 1980

PostPosted: Fri Nov 25, 2022 7:46 pm    Post subject:

levon wrote:
dabask11 wrote:
Myles Turner has switched his agency to CAA per Marc Stein

Link

Troublesome for the Lakers.

It could also mean an extension given 4 other clients on the Pacers are represented by CAA.

Why is that troublesome for the Lakers?


Lakers don't have a good history with CAA, especially if Turner's new agent is Aaron Mintz.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
levon
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 11 Oct 2016
Posts: 6860

PostPosted: Fri Nov 25, 2022 7:50 pm    Post subject:

dabask11 wrote:
levon wrote:
dabask11 wrote:
Myles Turner has switched his agency to CAA per Marc Stein

Link

Troublesome for the Lakers.

It could also mean an extension given 4 other clients on the Pacers are represented by CAA.

Why is that troublesome for the Lakers?


Lakers don't have a good history with CAA, especially if Turner's new agent is Aaron Mintz.

I mean it's fairly clear we're not trading for Turner
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
dabask11
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 27 Dec 2012
Posts: 1980

PostPosted: Fri Nov 25, 2022 8:01 pm    Post subject:

levon wrote:
dabask11 wrote:
levon wrote:
dabask11 wrote:
Myles Turner has switched his agency to CAA per Marc Stein

Link

Troublesome for the Lakers.

It could also mean an extension given 4 other clients on the Pacers are represented by CAA.

Why is that troublesome for the Lakers?


Lakers don't have a good history with CAA, especially if Turner's new agent is Aaron Mintz.

I mean it's fairly clear we're not trading for Turner


Well if the Lakers had any remaining hope or desire of trading for Turner, then him switching to CAA just further complicates things.

Can't forget the Paul George fiasco.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 704, 705, 706 ... 709, 710, 711  Next
Page 705 of 711
Jump to:  

 
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






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB