KCP is on a multi-year deal. So is Kuz, and Dennis is likely going to be extended.
I don't understand your criticism. You would rather have a 3rd superstar, thereby depleting our depth even more? Look at the rosters around the league. Most teams are constructed with half or so of the deals expiring. It's just how teams are built. THT is also a RFA so we will likely keep him.
So you're talking about Trez (player option) and AC (who may want to stay on LA).
My criticism was clear and hasn’t changed.
It's not clear. That's what I'm saying.
We got 2 1st team all NBA players. But unlike other teams, we are able to put 2 6MOY role players and several young and affordable pieces (Kuz/KCP on multi-year deals) alongside them, plus a young talent with RFA status (THT). Not sure what the complaint is.
I get what he's saying, though I've made peace with it. I didn't like stripping the roster and going all-in on Team Lebron. But it got us one ring, and it could get us another and maybe more. For the moment, we're relevant again. Yet the concern about sustainability is valid. When Team Lebron is finished with a team, there is wreckage left behind. Ask the Cavs about that.
But I've made peace with it. Jeanie and Magic (later Pelinka) were desperate for a quick turnaround, and so we became the latest team to make a Faustian bargain with Team Lebron. If we can squeeze another ring or two out of it, I'm prepared to accept the potential pain of the post-Lebron era. Who knows? Maybe Pelinka will turn out to be the great GM that some people imagine him to be, or maybe Team Lebron will be able to swing another deal for us.
Either way, Laker Nation wants rings, not a consistent, quality roster. That's just who we are. If we crash and burn in the post-Lebron era, we'll go to Home Depot and load up on torches and pitchforks. That's what we did with Mitch. I think that Jeanie and Pelinka understand this.
I don't think any team is constructed with the notion that they'll sustain it for much more than a few years. 3-4 years as a bonafide contender is about all you can ask for. _________________ KOBE
KCP is on a multi-year deal. So is Kuz, and Dennis is likely going to be extended.
I don't understand your criticism. You would rather have a 3rd superstar, thereby depleting our depth even more? Look at the rosters around the league. Most teams are constructed with half or so of the deals expiring. It's just how teams are built. THT is also a RFA so we will likely keep him.
So you're talking about Trez (player option) and AC (who may want to stay on LA).
My criticism was clear and hasn’t changed.
It's not clear. That's what I'm saying.
We got 2 1st team all NBA players. But unlike other teams, we are able to put 2 6MOY role players and several young and affordable pieces (Kuz/KCP on multi-year deals) alongside them, plus a young talent with RFA status (THT). Not sure what the complaint is.
I get what he's saying, though I've made peace with it. I didn't like stripping the roster and going all-in on Team Lebron. But it got us one ring, and it could get us another and maybe more. For the moment, we're relevant again. Yet the concern about sustainability is valid. When Team Lebron is finished with a team, there is wreckage left behind. Ask the Cavs about that.
But I've made peace with it. Jeanie and Magic (later Pelinka) were desperate for a quick turnaround, and so we became the latest team to make a Faustian bargain with Team Lebron. If we can squeeze another ring or two out of it, I'm prepared to accept the potential pain of the post-Lebron era. Who knows? Maybe Pelinka will turn out to be the great GM that some people imagine him to be, or maybe Team Lebron will be able to swing another deal for us.
Either way, Laker Nation wants rings, not a consistent, quality roster. That's just who we are. If we crash and burn in the post-Lebron era, we'll go to Home Depot and load up on torches and pitchforks. That's what we did with Mitch. I think that Jeanie and Pelinka understand this.
I don't think any team is constructed with the notion that they'll sustain it for much more than a few years. 3-4 years as a bonafide contender is about all you can ask for.
After LeBron we can build around AD-DS-Kuz-AC(-maybe THT if he stays too)... I mean $ wise, age wise, even talent wise (obviously AD over anybody else) that's about equivalent to a BI-Randle-Zo-Hart, I don't think we mortgage our future, I mean we have young players still... now if we start dealing a THT for PJ Tucker then yeah
I get what he's saying, though I've made peace with it. I didn't like stripping the roster and going all-in on Team Lebron. But it got us one ring, and it could get us another and maybe more. For the moment, we're relevant again. Yet the concern about sustainability is valid. When Team Lebron is finished with a team, there is wreckage left behind. Ask the Cavs about that.
But I've made peace with it. Jeanie and Magic (later Pelinka) were desperate for a quick turnaround, and so we became the latest team to make a Faustian bargain with Team Lebron. If we can squeeze another ring or two out of it, I'm prepared to accept the potential pain of the post-Lebron era. Who knows? Maybe Pelinka will turn out to be the great GM that some people imagine him to be, or maybe Team Lebron will be able to swing another deal for us.
Either way, Laker Nation wants rings, not a consistent, quality roster. That's just who we are. If we crash and burn in the post-Lebron era, we'll go to Home Depot and load up on torches and pitchforks. That's what we did with Mitch. I think that Jeanie and Pelinka understand this.
I don't think any team is constructed with the notion that they'll sustain it for much more than a few years. 3-4 years as a bonafide contender is about all you can ask for.
Actually, most of the contenders are constructed exactly that way. Team Lebron is an outlier, as are the Lakers in general. Team Lebron doesn't care about the crash because Lebron will have moved on. The Lakers care about the crash, but they know that the fan base won't be satisfied with anything other than titles, and they also know that they can buy time by projecting the image that the next title window is imminent. I guess maybe you could add the Clippers and Nets to the list, though I'm not convinced that this is more than a short term phenomenon with either of them. Both of them are motivated to make a big splash because they want to draw market share from the more established team in town (the Nets obviously have a much easier path in this respect).
Pretty much everyone else builds a base, then maybe splurges a little if they think this can be their year (Kawhi to Toronto is an example of this, as is Chris Paul to Houston). Most teams would love the peaks, but cannot endure the valleys. _________________ Internet Argument Resolved
I can live with Hassan actually. Rim protection, rebounding. Keep his minutes limited and tell him balls to the walls in those limited minutes ala Dwight. _________________ From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Kenny Jet Smith even saying Lakers need some rim protection
Even Stevie Wonder can see it.
Both Analytics and eye test are valuable in an assessment, but the only people that would say we don’t need rim protection are the ones not watching games and just looking at stats.
Kenny Jet Smith even saying Lakers need some rim protection
Even Stevie Wonder can see it.
t the only people that would say we don’t need rim protection are the ones not watching games and just looking at stats.
.
The only people that want Hassan Whiteside and think he's an actual rim protector and interior defender are the ones not watching games and just looking at bpg. _________________ How NBA 2K18 failed the All-Time Lakers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxMBYm3wwxk
Kenny Jet Smith even saying Lakers need some rim protection
Even Stevie Wonder can see it.
t the only people that would say we don’t need rim protection are the ones not watching games and just looking at stats.
.
The only people that want Hassan Whiteside and think he's an actual rim protector and interior defender are the ones not watching games and just looking at bpg.
He’s not my first choice, but let’s not lie about what he is. I get you don’t like him but he’s serviceable as a center and Sac fans trashing him will be pissed if they see him under Vogel imo.
Again, not my first choice but this team needs what he does well. So if we aren’t able to get anyone else, it would be good to get him and save a Lebron injury from too many minutes because we can’t stop easy baskets at the rim.
Joined: 10 Jul 2009 Posts: 12207 Location: Bay Area
Posted: Tue Feb 23, 2021 4:42 pm Post subject:
Srsly Whiteside? I swear you guys have the shortest memories. Did you watch the playoffs? Did Hassan (bleep) whiteside deter a SINGLE laker from living in the paint all series??? y'all are crazy
just to confirm. If we get whiteside will everyone stop whining about needing another big?
Also:
what are the odds if we land a big people will be clamoring for another position player?
Just get the team a big, a shooter, wing defender and I'll be happy.
Of course I wouldn't mind a 3rd all star to pair with Lebron and AD while we're talking about upgrades.
I get what he's saying, though I've made peace with it. I didn't like stripping the roster and going all-in on Team Lebron. But it got us one ring, and it could get us another and maybe more. For the moment, we're relevant again. Yet the concern about sustainability is valid. When Team Lebron is finished with a team, there is wreckage left behind. Ask the Cavs about that.
But I've made peace with it. Jeanie and Magic (later Pelinka) were desperate for a quick turnaround, and so we became the latest team to make a Faustian bargain with Team Lebron. If we can squeeze another ring or two out of it, I'm prepared to accept the potential pain of the post-Lebron era. Who knows? Maybe Pelinka will turn out to be the great GM that some people imagine him to be, or maybe Team Lebron will be able to swing another deal for us.
Either way, Laker Nation wants rings, not a consistent, quality roster. That's just who we are. If we crash and burn in the post-Lebron era, we'll go to Home Depot and load up on torches and pitchforks. That's what we did with Mitch. I think that Jeanie and Pelinka understand this.
I don't think any team is constructed with the notion that they'll sustain it for much more than a few years. 3-4 years as a bonafide contender is about all you can ask for.
Actually, most of the contenders are constructed exactly that way. Team Lebron is an outlier, as are the Lakers in general. Team Lebron doesn't care about the crash because Lebron will have moved on. The Lakers care about the crash, but they know that the fan base won't be satisfied with anything other than titles, and they also know that they can buy time by projecting the image that the next title window is imminent. I guess maybe you could add the Clippers and Nets to the list, though I'm not convinced that this is more than a short term phenomenon with either of them. Both of them are motivated to make a big splash because they want to draw market share from the more established team in town (the Nets obviously have a much easier path in this respect).
Pretty much everyone else builds a base, then maybe splurges a little if they think this can be their year (Kawhi to Toronto is an example of this, as is Chris Paul to Houston). Most teams would love the peaks, but cannot endure the valleys.
On the other hand, 14 of the 30 teams in the NBA have never won a ring, and 5 of the other teams have only won a single ring. So it's not like what everyone else does is some pathway to success.
As Lakers fan we worry that we took a course that might "only" result in one ring. That's funny when you think that one ring is as good or better than most teams have done in the entire 75-year history of the NBA.
The "Faustian bargain" with Team Lebron is probably the most successful strategy in NBA history.
And what's the downside of the bargain? At some point you have to rebuild and go through some hard years? That's what most teams are doing all the time, without the banner.
[
Dwight messed up man. He would have been the starter this season.
Did he really mess up, though? He's playing well in Philly, he seems to be enjoying himself, and who's to say his odd of winning there are any less than his odds of winning here.
I think we messed up by not nailing his down immediately.
I get what he's saying, though I've made peace with it. I didn't like stripping the roster and going all-in on Team Lebron. But it got us one ring, and it could get us another and maybe more. For the moment, we're relevant again. Yet the concern about sustainability is valid. When Team Lebron is finished with a team, there is wreckage left behind. Ask the Cavs about that.
But I've made peace with it. Jeanie and Magic (later Pelinka) were desperate for a quick turnaround, and so we became the latest team to make a Faustian bargain with Team Lebron. If we can squeeze another ring or two out of it, I'm prepared to accept the potential pain of the post-Lebron era. Who knows? Maybe Pelinka will turn out to be the great GM that some people imagine him to be, or maybe Team Lebron will be able to swing another deal for us.
Either way, Laker Nation wants rings, not a consistent, quality roster. That's just who we are. If we crash and burn in the post-Lebron era, we'll go to Home Depot and load up on torches and pitchforks. That's what we did with Mitch. I think that Jeanie and Pelinka understand this.
I don't think any team is constructed with the notion that they'll sustain it for much more than a few years. 3-4 years as a bonafide contender is about all you can ask for.
Actually, most of the contenders are constructed exactly that way. Team Lebron is an outlier, as are the Lakers in general. Team Lebron doesn't care about the crash because Lebron will have moved on. The Lakers care about the crash, but they know that the fan base won't be satisfied with anything other than titles, and they also know that they can buy time by projecting the image that the next title window is imminent. I guess maybe you could add the Clippers and Nets to the list, though I'm not convinced that this is more than a short term phenomenon with either of them. Both of them are motivated to make a big splash because they want to draw market share from the more established team in town (the Nets obviously have a much easier path in this respect).
Pretty much everyone else builds a base, then maybe splurges a little if they think this can be their year (Kawhi to Toronto is an example of this, as is Chris Paul to Houston). Most teams would love the peaks, but cannot endure the valleys.
On the other hand, 14 of the 30 teams in the NBA have never won a ring, and 5 of the other teams have only won a single ring. So it's not like what everyone else does is some pathway to success.
As Lakers fan we worry that we took a course that might "only" result in one ring. That's funny when you think that one ring is as good or better than most teams have done in the entire 75-year history of the NBA.
The "Faustian bargain" with Team Lebron is probably the most successful strategy in NBA history.
And what's the downside of the bargain? At some point you have to rebuild and go through some hard years? That's what most teams are doing all the time, without the banner.
[
Dwight messed up man. He would have been the starter this season.
Did he really mess up, though? He's playing well in Philly, he seems to be enjoying himself, and who's to say his odd of winning there are any less than his odds of winning here.
I think we messed up by not nailing his down immediately.
I think when it’s all said and done, both sides will feel like they messed up.
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