|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
missingkobe
Rookie
Joined: 08 Apr 2019
Posts: 22
|
 Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2019 10:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Since LBJ signed:
Lakers season ticket waiting list is much longer.
Huge price increase on season tickets.
More fans are paying more money to see Lebron James. They are different fans than the ones who came to see Kobe.
If you don't like Lebron, chances are you haven't contributed any $$$ to the Lakers. So remind me why they should "trade Lebron" for you, a cheapskate who does zero business with the Lakers.
Sorry to stick it to you so bluntly but it's the truth.
| Sentient Meat wrote: | Judging by the general comments made by other NBA players... it wouldn't be a black eye if we traded LBJ... as long as we did it in a respectful manner, we'd gain respect for taking back our team leadership.
Only hardcore LBJ fans would be annoyed. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
GameCock-MD
Star Player
Joined: 14 Dec 2004
Posts: 4498
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2019 11:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| daytripper wrote: | | GameCock-MD wrote: | I'm not in favor of any plan that doesn't start with a top tier Free Agent. All of these "moneyball" signings sound good on paper but they are what you do when you can't get the best.
I'd rather start with 2 Max Level Players and fill the rest of the roster with players who complement them, not try to build a patchwork roster around LeBron or Ingram. Doesn't make sense.
And anytime LeBron is on the floor with Ingram, it's LeBron or Ingram...Ingram has not shown he can play with or off an elite player...nor has he shown he can lead a team to victories as the #1.
You guys are building an entire roster around a foundation that is flawed. |
Not to mention you can't 'waste' almost 20 mil of capspace on Allen Crabbe when you have Lebron on the roster. It would basically be punting again.
With that said I don't hold anything personal against the Nets either. They made an opportunistic trade with the Lakers and have done a great job developing DLo. Good for them digging out of that huge hole Billy King put them in. |
I think the most important part of building a team is the system and team identity. Some of these ideas assume the fit will be well in all systems or players' efficiency/production will translate directly to this new roster...that's not how it works.
| YSong wrote: | | GameCock-MD wrote: | I'm not in favor of any plan that doesn't start with a top tier Free Agent. All of these "moneyball" signings sound good on paper but they are what you do when you can't get the best.
I'd rather start with 2 Max Level Players and fill the rest of the roster with players who complement them, not try to build a patchwork roster around LeBron or Ingram. Doesn't make sense.
And anytime LeBron is on the floor with Ingram, it's LeBron or Ingram...Ingram has not shown he can play with or off an elite player...nor has he shown he can lead a team to victories as the #1.
You guys are building an entire roster around a foundation that is flawed. |
But he’s young and better than Ben Simmons  |
LOL...that was funny...and a little sad.
| LBJ23 wrote: | | GameCock-MD wrote: | I'm not in favor of any plan that doesn't start with a top tier Free Agent. All of these "moneyball" signings sound good on paper but they are what you do when you can't get the best.
I'd rather start with 2 Max Level Players and fill the rest of the roster with players who complement them, not try to build a patchwork roster around LeBron or Ingram. Doesn't make sense.
And anytime LeBron is on the floor with Ingram, it's LeBron or Ingram...Ingram has not shown he can play with or off an elite player...nor has he shown he can lead a team to victories as the #1.
You guys are building an entire roster around a foundation that is flawed. |
These ideas and rosters are of we strike out on the max player. We have a very good chance to strike out |
That's cool but if we strike out, shouldn't our first option be to try trading for a star?
| Sentient Meat wrote: | Yeah, no one argues against signing KD or Kawhi... maybe some have various reservations about Kyrie, Klay or Kemba... then more have reservations about Jimmy or Tobias... the majority have fears about Boogie.
I'm happy signing any of these guys in the top five tier. I fear signing Jimmy and Tobias somewhat because of tying up salary long term and having the John Wall effect... If Jimmy were younger than I wouldn't worry as much.
We all get the basic principle behind signing a top player... we also get the sacrifices already made for the cap space...
But do you double down on an error if you already made it?
You don't have to sign a lower tier "elite" agent just because you cleared the space.
PG didn't come... KD and Kawhi might not...
The plan was good in principle, but for whatever reason, maybe we can't close it.
Does this mean we sign a John Wall like vet... just to prove we didn't make a mistake in the first place?
Does this mean we trade half our team for AD so we can say the cap space trades weren't a waste?
No one debates AD is a great player... some like myself only quibble about paying a Kareem like price for a player who historically hasn't had his impact on winning.
That is why these moneyball solutions are appealing... not because they are plan A... but because they are plan Bs that are superior than a knee jerk mindset that because we traded DLO, Clarkson, Nance... let Randle walk... that we must at all costs sign a "top" agent.
The only thing dumber than getting rid all those assets... is doubling down and signing a John Wall type just so we can say it wasn't a waste to do so. |
I don't buy into the "binary decision tree" of this situation. It's true we could strike out in Free Agency but that's doesn't mean we are out of options or the moneyball solution is the next best option.
There are plenty of stars currently under contract on other teams who'd love to be in LA and would likely love being the next face of the Lakers Franchise once LBJ retires. I'd shake the "trade for a star" tree long before I went to the "moneyball" solution. In fact, I'd have made multiple overtures long before Free Agency came around just in case a team decides they want to blow it up and start over.
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | LBJ23 wrote: | | GameCock-MD wrote: | I'm not in favor of any plan that doesn't start with a top tier Free Agent. All of these "moneyball" signings sound good on paper but they are what you do when you can't get the best.
I'd rather start with 2 Max Level Players and fill the rest of the roster with players who complement them, not try to build a patchwork roster around LeBron or Ingram. Doesn't make sense.
And anytime LeBron is on the floor with Ingram, it's LeBron or Ingram...Ingram has not shown he can play with or off an elite player...nor has he shown he can lead a team to victories as the #1.
You guys are building an entire roster around a foundation that is flawed. |
These ideas and rosters are of we strike out on the max player. We have a very good chance to strike out |
Even though I think some of these ideas are a little harebrained, I'd take them over another year of punting. I'd rather move forward with Kemba Freaking Walker and Allen Freaking Crabbe than spend another year dreaming of Anthony Davis while Lebron gets older. |
I agree about punting. I disagree that a Kemba or Crabbe type signing are our only (or best) options.
Most important part of getting lucky is being aware. If we have a need (star) and we start putting it out there we want to see what it takes to make a deal for, lets just say, Bradley Beal, WAS will go ahead and put together their wish list. We may not be willing to pay what they want right now but we keep touching bases with them. If they ever decide to move him, who's to say we don't get an advanced heads up by them reaching out to us on the deal we discussed?
Who's to say we don't get a chance to negotiate before they even put him on the block? There are more reasons to trade a star than to get back equal talent, no?
I have always believed that most deals are made long before anyone in the media sniffs them out. I would rather take a chance prying a star from a team via trade than settling for bargain bin deals based on analytics alone. I could be wrong but that seems wrong for some reason. In fact, when Jim and Mitch signed Deng and Mozgov, it felt like there was some mathematical formula they used to target these 2 guys. Didn't seem to make much sense otherwise. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakerMindLA
Star Player
Joined: 26 Dec 2008
Posts: 5344
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2019 11:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| pjiddy wrote: | | adkindo wrote: | What the Lakers could actually get in a LeBron James trade
LINK
wow, all of those suck |
I'd take a few of those actually. |
The Chicago trade would be my first choice of the options listed.
Markkanen, Dunn + 2 lottery picks.
Lakers would still have room for almost 2 max players. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
where24happens
Star Player
Joined: 08 May 2009
Posts: 3410
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2019 11:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LAL1947 wrote: | | where24happens wrote: | | LOL haven't been checking the forums much since the season ended, but I see it is STILL literally the same 3 or 4 Lebron haters talking about getting rid of him. You guys are persistent I give you that. |
I've got a challenge for ya. Come up with a better + realistic team for us than these two listed below... not just for next year but in the long-term too... and I'll happily jump on board the train. If you can't... then you ask the Mods to change your username to LA-Bronsexual. Do we have a deal? 
1) Houston deal
Lonzo / ?? / Bonga
Ingram / Gordon / Hart
Kawhi / Bullock
Kuzma / Sekou
Capela / McGee / Wagner
+ 3 1st round picks
2) Nets deal
Lonzo / ?? / Bonga
Levert / Harris / Hart
Kawhi / Ingram
Kuzma / Sekou
Allen / McGee / Wagner
+ 2 1st round picks
PS: I don't hate or even dislike LeBron... I just like the Lakers more. |
You are legit spouting fantasy scenarios with a 0% chance of happening and are delusional enough to think it’s realisic. This is like being a rocket fan and fantasizing about what you can get for trading away James Harden because you dislike James Harden. I never called you a hater, I have no idea who you are, but anyone who uses the term bronsexual pretty clearly shows where your feelings are. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GameCock-MD
Star Player
Joined: 14 Dec 2004
Posts: 4498
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 12:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think anyone taking the "LeBron Trades" seriously in discussion here is way out over their skis. We are light years away from seriously considering that.
It's simply not realistic, unless LeBron requests a trade. That would say more about us than him. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RI Laker
Star Player
Joined: 27 Jun 2005
Posts: 7148
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 2:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LJ would bail in a heartbeat if he thought this team was not going to compete next season. He is not afraid to speak and throw his team and management under the bus. He has been very quiet (almost like he knows something). I really believe he does know something and is going to let it play out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LAL1947
Star Player
Joined: 26 Dec 2018
Posts: 1855
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 2:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| where24happens wrote: | | You are legit spouting fantasy scenarios with a 0% chance of happening and are delusional enough to think it’s realisic. This is like being a rocket fan and fantasizing about what you can get for trading away James Harden because you dislike James Harden. I never called you a hater, I have no idea who you are, but anyone who uses the term bronsexual pretty clearly shows where your feelings are. |
Really? You think the delusional aspect of my scenario is in wanting to trade someone that you believe is "our Harden"? (Well, he is our best player easily... but he just got here, created a whole lot of drama when the going got tough instead of putting the team on his back, is not happy unless he has control of everything including the coach and FO, is 5 years older and in the process of visible decline, and is also apparently distracted by Hollywood pursuits... 5 valid differences that I can think of between the two). If he proves me wrong in year 2 though, I'd be a happy camper because I only want us to be in a good place.
I feel the "delusional/fantasy" aspects of my scenario come from thinking that teams would give up that many assets for LeBron (like the Nets)... or be willing to include the #1 pick in a trade (some of y'all think we shouldn't trade the #1 pick for AD if we had it, but think others should willingly give it up for an aging LeBron?)... or be willing to upset the applecart to make place for him (like the Rockets, would Harden want that trade and would the Rockets entertain the idea for fear of pissing him off?)... or thinking that LeBron would just up and go to places like Nets/Chi/etc (I'm certain he'll have a no-trade clause that we don't yet know about). If these are not such delusional things as merely wanting to trade LeBron, then great! Lol.
Btw, I thought using the term Bronsexual in a humorous (to me at least) signature bet challenge was an appropriate retort to someone who doesn't see that people don't have to be LeBron Haters because they feel trading him might be a good thing for the Lakers. I haven't ever used the term in another setting. Hope you didn't take offense, cheers.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 6:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| GameCock-MD wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | LBJ23 wrote: | | GameCock-MD wrote: | I'm not in favor of any plan that doesn't start with a top tier Free Agent. All of these "moneyball" signings sound good on paper but they are what you do when you can't get the best.
I'd rather start with 2 Max Level Players and fill the rest of the roster with players who complement them, not try to build a patchwork roster around LeBron or Ingram. Doesn't make sense.
And anytime LeBron is on the floor with Ingram, it's LeBron or Ingram...Ingram has not shown he can play with or off an elite player...nor has he shown he can lead a team to victories as the #1.
You guys are building an entire roster around a foundation that is flawed. |
These ideas and rosters are of we strike out on the max player. We have a very good chance to strike out |
Even though I think some of these ideas are a little harebrained, I'd take them over another year of punting. I'd rather move forward with Kemba Freaking Walker and Allen Freaking Crabbe than spend another year dreaming of Anthony Davis while Lebron gets older. |
I agree about punting. I disagree that a Kemba or Crabbe type signing are our only (or best) options.
Most important part of getting lucky is being aware. If we have a need (star) and we start putting it out there we want to see what it takes to make a deal for, lets just say, Bradley Beal, WAS will go ahead and put together their wish list. We may not be willing to pay what they want right now but we keep touching bases with them. If they ever decide to move him, who's to say we don't get an advanced heads up by them reaching out to us on the deal we discussed?
Who's to say we don't get a chance to negotiate before they even put him on the block? There are more reasons to trade a star than to get back equal talent, no?
I have always believed that most deals are made long before anyone in the media sniffs them out. I would rather take a chance prying a star from a team via trade than settling for bargain bin deals based on analytics alone. I could be wrong but that seems wrong for some reason. In fact, when Jim and Mitch signed Deng and Mozgov, it felt like there was some mathematical formula they used to target these 2 guys. Didn't seem to make much sense otherwise. |
I rate Bradley Beal at the same level as Kemba Walker. In fact, I rate Walker as a little better. Regardless, they are guys who don't really move the needle much. They are not good defenders, and their games may not scale (in other words, their games may be more valuable on a bad team than on a good team).
When you talk about trades, the key is that we must have something to send to the other team. (Duh.) At this point, we don't have a lot of spare assets. This is something I have been complaining about for a long time, way before it became cool around here to complain about Magic. We squandered so many assets that could have been used to make the sorts of trades that you are envisioning. Magic tossed them in the garbage because he dreamed of catching a second superstar in free agency.
Even with Magic gone, we are still mostly committed to that strategy. We can't snatch back Russell, Nance, Bryant, Randle, and Zubac and use them to make trades. If we ditch Ball, Ingram, or Kuzma, we are just filling in one hole while digging another. So of course we would need to dump our draft picks. This should feel like deja vu.
So our fate for the next five years may depend on Kawhi Leonard. It's not just a question of whether he signs here. It's also a question of whether he is so good that he and Lebron can carry a depleted roster. That's pretty much where we are. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakerLanny
Retired Number
Joined: 24 Oct 2001
Posts: 47580
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 6:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
Kawhi has done a good job of keeping his intentions under wraps.
The further Toronto goes in the playoffs, the worse for our chances but I think the Lakers actually have a better shot at him than what is being reported.
He bought a house in Rancho Santa Fe last year, I doubt he wants to spend his career in the Frozen Tundra stuck in the Eastern Conference...even though Toronto is a great city and a good organization.
If he signs here to pair with LeBron and our young talent, we may have something finally.
_________________
Love, Laker Lanny |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakerLanny
Retired Number
Joined: 24 Oct 2001
Posts: 47580
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 6:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: |
So our fate for the next five years may depend on Kawhi Leonard. It's not just a question of whether he signs here. It's also a question of whether he is so good that he and Lebron can carry a depleted roster. That's pretty much where we are. |
I think our roster is actually OK if we can keep them on the floor.
You can't have 3/5th's of your starting lineup out for half of every season, we have to find a way to keep our players on the floor.
LeBron, Kawhi and our young players would be intriguing for sure.
_________________
Love, Laker Lanny |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr. Laker
Franchise Player
Joined: 12 Apr 2002
Posts: 17104
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 7:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LakerLanny wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: |
So our fate for the next five years may depend on Kawhi Leonard. It's not just a question of whether he signs here. It's also a question of whether he is so good that he and Lebron can carry a depleted roster. That's pretty much where we are. |
I think our roster is actually OK if we can keep them on the floor.
You can't have 3/5th's of your starting lineup out for half of every season, we have to find a way to keep our players on the floor.
LeBron, Kawhi and our young players would be intriguing for sure. |
Yes, get that 2nd Superstar and you can fill-in around them.
_________________
On Lakersground, a concern troll is someone who is a fan of another team, but pretends to be a Lakers fan with "concerns". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
h2omike
Star Player
Joined: 24 Jun 2005
Posts: 2811
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 8:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Getting the second superstar allows us to keep the three little pigs, and see if they can develop into a big bad wolf. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
YSong
Star Player
Joined: 16 Sep 2016
Posts: 2329
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 8:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| GameCock-MD wrote: | I think anyone taking the "LeBron Trades" seriously in discussion here is way out over their skis. We are light years away from seriously considering that.
It's simply not realistic, unless LeBron requests a trade. That would say more about us than him. |
But LeBron is hurting the development of our young future Hall of Famers!
Trade LeBron he had a crappy season was expecting 30/10/10 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NBALakerLegends
Star Player
Joined: 06 Aug 2007
Posts: 1026
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 9:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BI learning from Kawhi would be incredible. Imagine what he could teach him especially on the defensive end. BI has the tools to be elite on that end and he has shown significant improvement this year. It would be like having MJ and Pippen on the defensive end with a Payton-lite at the PG spot. Perimeter locked down. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HAWAIIGUY27
Star Player
Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Posts: 2338
Location: Los Angeles, CA
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 10:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| NBALakerLegends wrote: | | BI learning from Kawhi would be incredible. Imagine what he could teach him especially on the defensive end. BI has the tools to be elite on that end and he has shown significant improvement this year. It would be like having MJ and Pippen on the defensive end with a Payton-lite at the PG spot. Perimeter locked down. |
And he's also a fun guy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 10:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LakerLanny wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: |
So our fate for the next five years may depend on Kawhi Leonard. It's not just a question of whether he signs here. It's also a question of whether he is so good that he and Lebron can carry a depleted roster. That's pretty much where we are. |
I think our roster is actually OK if we can keep them on the floor.
You can't have 3/5th's of your starting lineup out for half of every season, we have to find a way to keep our players on the floor.
LeBron, Kawhi and our young players would be intriguing for sure. |
We would be paper thin. Some level of injuries is inevitable. We would have Lebron, Leonard, Ball, Ingram, Kuzma, plus whatever we can cobble together with the vet min and the room exception (or whatever it is called). Maybe the draft pick will be a contributor, or maybe not. Unless the front office works wonders, we will lack rim protection and will be short on outside shooting.
I can imagine this working out, but the margin for error is worrisome. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GameCock-MD
Star Player
Joined: 14 Dec 2004
Posts: 4498
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 10:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | GameCock-MD wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | LBJ23 wrote: | | GameCock-MD wrote: | I'm not in favor of any plan that doesn't start with a top tier Free Agent. All of these "moneyball" signings sound good on paper but they are what you do when you can't get the best.
I'd rather start with 2 Max Level Players and fill the rest of the roster with players who complement them, not try to build a patchwork roster around LeBron or Ingram. Doesn't make sense.
And anytime LeBron is on the floor with Ingram, it's LeBron or Ingram...Ingram has not shown he can play with or off an elite player...nor has he shown he can lead a team to victories as the #1.
You guys are building an entire roster around a foundation that is flawed. |
These ideas and rosters are of we strike out on the max player. We have a very good chance to strike out |
Even though I think some of these ideas are a little harebrained, I'd take them over another year of punting. I'd rather move forward with Kemba Freaking Walker and Allen Freaking Crabbe than spend another year dreaming of Anthony Davis while Lebron gets older. |
I agree about punting. I disagree that a Kemba or Crabbe type signing are our only (or best) options.
Most important part of getting lucky is being aware. If we have a need (star) and we start putting it out there we want to see what it takes to make a deal for, lets just say, Bradley Beal, WAS will go ahead and put together their wish list. We may not be willing to pay what they want right now but we keep touching bases with them. If they ever decide to move him, who's to say we don't get an advanced heads up by them reaching out to us on the deal we discussed?
Who's to say we don't get a chance to negotiate before they even put him on the block? There are more reasons to trade a star than to get back equal talent, no?
I have always believed that most deals are made long before anyone in the media sniffs them out. I would rather take a chance prying a star from a team via trade than settling for bargain bin deals based on analytics alone. I could be wrong but that seems wrong for some reason. In fact, when Jim and Mitch signed Deng and Mozgov, it felt like there was some mathematical formula they used to target these 2 guys. Didn't seem to make much sense otherwise. |
I rate Bradley Beal at the same level as Kemba Walker. In fact, I rate Walker as a little better. Regardless, they are guys who don't really move the needle much. They are not good defenders, and their games may not scale (in other words, their games may be more valuable on a bad team than on a good team).
When you talk about trades, the key is that we must have something to send to the other team. (Duh.) At this point, we don't have a lot of spare assets. This is something I have been complaining about for a long time, way before it became cool around here to complain about Magic. We squandered so many assets that could have been used to make the sorts of trades that you are envisioning. Magic tossed them in the garbage because he dreamed of catching a second superstar in free agency.
Even with Magic gone, we are still mostly committed to that strategy. We can't snatch back Russell, Nance, Bryant, Randle, and Zubac and use them to make trades. If we ditch Ball, Ingram, or Kuzma, we are just filling in one hole while digging another. So of course we would need to dump our draft picks. This should feel like deja vu.
So our fate for the next five years may depend on Kawhi Leonard. It's not just a question of whether he signs here. It's also a question of whether he is so good that he and Lebron can carry a depleted roster. That's pretty much where we are. |
I disagree strongly about Kemba vs Beal. Beal is 6'5 and a legit combo guard while Kemba is undersized and barely 6'0. In a switch heavy defense, Beal wins 10 out of 10 times. Beal is the better defender, stronger scorer and more easily slotted next to 1s or 2s. The comparison is not even close, IMHO.
We aren't talking about assets as the primary option. If we can't get a star via Free Agency, I propose we hold on to our kids while shopping them for the 2nd star. I don't see the point of using lots of cap space for placeholders.
Now, the part about "squandering assets", I disagree. The only player we could have kept but didn't was Randle. Lou wanted a long term deal. Russell had to go out to move Moz. Clarkson had to go to create the 2nd max slot...Nance was a casualty of that trade/matching salaries. Not one of those players are even worth Trae young or Luka Doncic, 2 rookie players. You could put all of them together in a package and I doubt ATL or DAL picks up the phone.
We can't keep lamenting moves that had legit rationale. If you were talking about Moz and Deng signings, I'd agree. No reason to do that. The others? Sound basis at the time and I'd do it again if it were me.
Ignore all that. We still have young players who if they show they are healthy COULD (with could being the operative word) entice a team to take them IF that team was looking to rebuild or move on from a disgruntled player. That happens every year. That would be a more worthwhile gamble than locking ourselves into long-term deals for "moneyball" players.
If you put another star around LeBron, the rest of the assets are of minimal importance. LeBron and Kawhi will attract ring chasers and amplify the efficiency of the role players we have.
In short, build with STARS 1st and your money will be more easily and efficiently spent surrounding them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GameCock-MD
Star Player
Joined: 14 Dec 2004
Posts: 4498
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 10:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| YSong wrote: | | GameCock-MD wrote: | I think anyone taking the "LeBron Trades" seriously in discussion here is way out over their skis. We are light years away from seriously considering that.
It's simply not realistic, unless LeBron requests a trade. That would say more about us than him. |
But LeBron is hurting the development of our young future Hall of Famers!
Trade LeBron he had a crappy season was expecting 30/10/10 |
LOL...that's how some people perceive the situation, no question.
| NBALakerLegends wrote: | | BI learning from Kawhi would be incredible. Imagine what he could teach him especially on the defensive end. BI has the tools to be elite on that end and he has shown significant improvement this year. It would be like having MJ and Pippen on the defensive end with a Payton-lite at the PG spot. Perimeter locked down. |
Wasn't this the same thing we were talking about last summer? Ingram turning into LeBron's "Pippen"?
That's not likely but not because it CAN'T happen. It's not likely because Ingram is entering a contract year. He's already shown he's not good playing off LeBron, who is one of the best passers in the NBA. I seriously doubt that if you add Kawhi, another slasher, to the equation that Ingram's potential will somehow be unlocked.
And I seriously doubt Ingram is going to accept coming off the bench in a year that will determine his next contract. He will want out and even if he doesn't, there is little to no evidence that he will play better beside Kawhi than he played beside LeBron this year.
And I know Sentient is going to come in and tout Ingram's defense...just check the stats...steals, blocks, rebounds...all of the advanced metrics don't say what people believe about Ingram on either side of the floor.
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | LakerLanny wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: |
So our fate for the next five years may depend on Kawhi Leonard. It's not just a question of whether he signs here. It's also a question of whether he is so good that he and Lebron can carry a depleted roster. That's pretty much where we are. |
I think our roster is actually OK if we can keep them on the floor.
You can't have 3/5th's of your starting lineup out for half of every season, we have to find a way to keep our players on the floor.
LeBron, Kawhi and our young players would be intriguing for sure. |
We would be paper thin. Some level of injuries is inevitable. We would have Lebron, Leonard, Ball, Ingram, Kuzma, plus whatever we can cobble together with the vet min and the room exception (or whatever it is called). Maybe the draft pick will be a contributor, or maybe not. Unless the front office works wonders, we will lack rim protection and will be short on outside shooting.
I can imagine this working out, but the margin for error is worrisome. |
I think people are considering a team with LeBron and Kawhi with the role players and level of lesser Free Agents we had this year. I believe there is ample evidence that if we have Kawhi and LeBron, we will attract the BEST vet role players who will take less to play with them in LA. I have ZERO worries about fielding a team around 2 stars of that caliber.
We heard the same argument against trading for Kawhi last year: "even if the Spurs would trade with us, we shouldn't send all of our youth because we wouldn't have depth". Funny how that argument didn't come up when AD requested a trade in the middle of the season with MUCH less options to fill the team at or after the trade deadline with no cap space.
IMHO, go all out for 2 stars. Let the depth worry about itself. Having 2 stars will shrink the role of every other player on the court with them so you can get the same production/efficiency out of less talent.
And, to be honest, there is no way all 3 kids (Lonzo/Ingram/Kuzma) start nor is there any chance all 3 max out their potential. At BEST, Lonzo and/or Kuzma would find a niché. Ingram? With 2 SUPERSTARS who do everything he does except BETTER? He'd be a waste of an asset on this team, trade waiting to happen. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 1:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| GameCock-MD wrote: | | I disagree strongly about Kemba vs Beal. Beal is 6'5 and a legit combo guard while Kemba is undersized and barely 6'0. In a switch heavy defense, Beal wins 10 out of 10 times. Beal is the better defender, stronger scorer and more easily slotted next to 1s or 2s. The comparison is not even close, IMHO. |
Beal has gotten highly overrated in these discussions. However, I am not a proponent of Kemba Freaking Walker, so I’m not invested in this side argument. I consider both of them to be minor stars who don’t move the needle much.
| GameCock-MD wrote: | | We aren't talking about assets as the primary option. If we can't get a star via Free Agency, I propose we hold on to our kids while shopping them for the 2nd star. I don't see the point of using lots of cap space for placeholders. |
Sure, that’s punting.
| GameCock-MD wrote: | | Now, the part about "squandering assets", I disagree. The only player we could have kept but didn't was Randle. Lou wanted a long term deal. Russell had to go out to move Moz. Clarkson had to go to create the 2nd max slot...Nance was a casualty of that trade/matching salaries. Not one of those players are even worth Trae young or Luka Doncic, 2 rookie players. You could put all of them together in a package and I doubt ATL or DAL picks up the phone. |
This is the second max slot justification. As of this moment, that slot has gained us nothing. We just threw away all of those assets so we’d have cap space for Paul George. Oops. Now, if Leonard signs this summer, it may work out. But if it doesn’t, we lost all of those assets for nothing (or close to nothing, depending on how you value Hart). We will either punt again or use the cap space on players who are not as good, in the aggregate, as what we let go.
| GameCock-MD wrote: | | We can't keep lamenting moves that had legit rationale. If you were talking about Moz and Deng signings, I'd agree. No reason to do that. The others? Sound basis at the time and I'd do it again if it were me. |
Arguably, there was a sound basis up to the moment Paul George signed with OKC. But we are living in the present, and Paul George did not sign with us. Heck, we could have kept Mozgov and Deng, and they would now be expiring contracts.
| GameCock-MD wrote: | | Ignore all that. We still have young players who if they show they are healthy COULD (with could being the operative word) entice a team to take them IF that team was looking to rebuild or move on from a disgruntled player. That happens every year. That would be a more worthwhile gamble than locking ourselves into long-term deals for "moneyball" players. |
We here this just about every year. Other teams are trying to win, not to help us. They will extract value from us. It is possible to make deft trades, but even the best GMs are hit and miss.
| GameCock-MD wrote: | If you put another star around LeBron, the rest of the assets are of minimal importance. LeBron and Kawhi will attract ring chasers and amplify the efficiency of the role players we have.
In short, build with STARS 1st and your money will be more easily and efficiently spent surrounding them. |
For the vet min? It’s not impossible, of course, but you may be disappointed by the players who would be interested in taking the vet min to play with Lebron and Leonard. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dreamshake
Franchise Player
Joined: 05 May 2006
Posts: 13711
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 2:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LAL1947 wrote: | | adkindo wrote: | What the Lakers could actually get in a LeBron James trade
LINK
wow, all of those suck |
I know these are just hypothetical but I'd take either the Rockets or Nets deals in a hot second. I've actually written that same HOU deal a coupla times here. The Nets deal is also great.
How do these suck especially if they give us a better shot at Kawhi? We could also do some things with those picks. This is not about trading LeBron away for some petty reason... I really think both deals leave us in a better place for the future. The HOU deal probably gives Lebron a better shot at winning one last title next season than he'll have here and before he starts to fade. Win-win for everyone.
1) Houston deal
Lonzo / ?? / Bonga
Ingram / Gordon / Hart
Kawhi / Bullock
Kuzma / Sekou
Capela / McGee / Wagner
+ 3 1st round picks
2) Nets deal
Lonzo / ?? / Bonga
Levert / Harris / Hart
Kawhi / Ingram
Kuzma / Sekou
Allen / McGee / Wagner
+ 2 1st round picks |
Houston wouldn’t give up all those unprotected picks and Capela (on a good contract), especially not to build around a core with an aging CP3 and LeBron. I do think they would give up Capela, Gordon and a pick. When Morey made his 4 pick offer for Butler, he was also shedding bad salary and they weren’t unprotected. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakersForever123
Star Player
Joined: 07 Oct 2012
Posts: 2261
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 2:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nobody has mentioned about this.
But Jeremy Lamb will be an unrestricted free agent shooting guard.
And he is only 26 yrs old. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Baron Von Humongous
Retired Number
Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 32979
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 3:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LakersForever123 wrote: | Nobody has mentioned about this.
But Jeremy Lamb will be an unrestricted free agent shooting guard.
And he is only 26 yrs old. |
I did. He's a guy along with Noah Vonleh and Kevon Looney I'd target depending on how the max free agent money is spent.
_________________
Under New Management |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Baron Von Humongous
Retired Number
Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 32979
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 3:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The Kemba slander is too much, man.
_________________
Under New Management |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jesusdelonla
Franchise Player
Joined: 24 Jan 2018
Posts: 15430
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 4:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Baron Von Humongous wrote: | | LakersForever123 wrote: | Nobody has mentioned about this.
But Jeremy Lamb will be an unrestricted free agent shooting guard.
And he is only 26 yrs old. |
I did. He's a guy along with Noah Vonleh and Kevon Looney I'd target depending on how the max free agent money is spent. |
alex len?
i have wanted Looney for a while now |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakersForever123
Star Player
Joined: 07 Oct 2012
Posts: 2261
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 4:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| yes to both Vonleh and Len. |
|
| 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
|
|
