POLL How far will these misfit Lakers go?

[Shaqdaddy11]

You dont think the Lakers wish they would have dealt the #2 pick for PG at this point?

Again, how hard is this for you to understand?

Lonzo played 52 NBA games in his career.

George played almost 600.

See the difference?

A year ago you said pretty much the same things about Ingram as you're doing to Lonzo right now. And all of a sudden an 'Ingram for PG trade' would make OKC "think"?

 

[WiggyRuss]

Again, how hard is this for you to understand?

Lonzo played 52 NBA games in his career.

George played almost 600.

See the difference?

A year ago you said pretty much the same things about Ingram as you're doing to Lonzo right now. And all of a sudden an 'Ingram for PG trade' would make OKC "think"?

Wiggins had played zero games for the Cavs and Love had been a multi time all star with the Twolves.

I have no clue what point you are trying to make.

I mean - if Lonzo Ball goes on to be Jason Kidd and is a hall of famer and plays 20 years in the league then- sure i think the Lakers will be glad they did not trade the #2 pick for George- but i do not think that is likely.

I am not sure what is so hard to understand here.

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

Wiggins had played zero games for the Cavs and Love had been a multi time all star with the Twolves.

I have no clue what point you are trying to make.

I mean - if Lonzo Ball goes on to be Jason Kidd and is a hall of famer and plays 20 years in the league then- sure i think the Lakers will be glad they did not trade the #2 pick for George- but i do not think that is likely.

I am not sure what is so hard to understand here.

Lol, you're seriously going to compare the cavs front office to the Lakers'?

The same cavs who took in Clarksons contract so that the Lakers could steal Lebron from them?

 

[WiggyRuss]

Lol, you're seriously going to compare the cavs front office to the Lakers'?

The same cavs who took in Clarksons contract so that the Lakers could steal Lebron from them?

again, that is absolutely not relevant, and the Cavs absolutely do that deal again coisdering it helped them win a title and Love has been a multi time all star for the Cavs while Wiggins has been a disappointment. If I could tell you that trading for George when he was with the Pacers would be a key part of a Lakers title winning team of course you do it 10/10 just like the Cavs would with Love and Wiggins again.

My point has been the same from my first post- I think in retrospect the Lakers fucked up by not trading the #2 pick for George and if they could do it over again i think they would- esp. if their plan was always to take Lonzo Ball....now BELIEVE ME, if they took Tatum with the #2 pick it might be a VERY VERY different story. lol.

unless the draft is absolutely LOADED- id much rather have the guy that had already made multiple All-Star, ALL-NBA, and ALL-Defensive teams rather than a #2 pick in a draft that was just not that great at the top (and at the time was STILL only 27).

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

My point has been the same from my first post- I think in retrospect the Lakers fucked up by not trading the #2 pick for George and if they could do it over again i think they would- esp. if their plan was always to take Lonzo Ball....now BELIEVE ME, if they took Tatum with the #2 pick it might be a VERY VERY different story. lol.

That is your opinion.

I don't think anyone would agree.

 

[trojanfan12]

3-4 years from now when Ingram and Ball are just beginning to enter their primes, LeBron's prime will be long gone.

Looks like perfect timing to me.

 

[trojanfan12]

I posted an article confirming what many of us thought- that the Lakers could have had George for either Ingram or the #2 pick.

What many of us thought?

No one else thinks about it but you.

 

[WiggyRuss]

Looks like perfect timing to me.

 

[Sparhawk]

That is your opinion.

I don't think anyone would agree.

I would agree with his opinion.

But, then again, I tend to agree with pretty much any opinion that goes against the Lakers or Celtics, so there is that.....

 

[WiggyRuss]

What many of us thought?

No one else thinks about it but you.

Apparently Adrian Wojanarowski does, lol...it was his report---- “The Pacers would’ve done a deal to trade Paul George to the Lakers if they got the No. 2 pick in the 2017 draft or Brandon Ingram,” ESPN reporter Adrian Wojnarowski said on The Woj Pod.

i will let him know you disapprove.

 

[shopson67]

That is your opinion.

I don't think anyone would agree.

I certainly don't. Lakers have adequate SG depth to bridge to next season (and George would have been playing there out of position) with KCP, Hart, Stephenson, and Svi. Next year, Lakers could sign Kawhi or Butler (or Klay if he suprisingly becomes available) to take KCP's and Stephenson's roster spots.

If George wasn't smart enough (or didn't care) to realize the Thunder's upside is likely capped as a second round exit, same as the Lakers are without him, then he's not the guy for the Lakers. Happy in Thunder purgatory.

 

[trojanfan12]

I certainly don't. Lakers have adequate SG depth to bridge to next season (and George would have been playing there out of position) with KCP, Hart, Stephenson, and Svi. Next year, Lakers could sign Kawhi or Butler (or Klay if he suprisingly becomes available) to take KCP's and Stephenson's roster spots.

If George wasn't smart enough (or didn't care) to realize the Thunder's upside is likely capped as a second round exit, same as the Lakers are without him, then he's not the guy for the Lakers. Happy in Thunder purgatory.

Yeah, right now, at this moment in time, if the report that they could have had him for the #2 pick is true, it looks like they probably should have done the trade.

The problem is, we won't know whether they really should have done the trade for at least 3-5 more years.

If Ball hits the "Jason Kidd ceiling" or close to it that folks say is his top end and/or they get a better (Kawhi or Klay) or equal (Butler) player, then they will have been smart to not make the deal.

 

[shopson67]

Yeah, right now, at this moment in time, if the report that they could have had him for the #2 pick is true, it looks like they probably should have done the trade.

The problem is, we won't know whether they really should have done the trade for at least 3-5 more years.

If Ball hits the "Jason Kidd ceiling" or close to it that folks say is his top end and/or they get a better (Kawhi or Klay) or equal (Butler) player, then they will have been smart to not make the deal.

The source article is just guessing anyway. That "may" have been enough for Indiana, lol. They basically turned down Randle/Clarkson/Kuzma/Hart (Kuzma/Hart represented by draft picks at the time); that "acceptance" of Ingram or the #2 wouldn't have been alone, and likely couldn't be for cap purposes.

 

[WiggyRuss]

The source article is just guessing anyway. That "may" have been enough for Indiana, lol. They basically turned down Randle/Clarkson/Kuzma/Hart (Kuzma/Hart represented by draft picks at the time); that "acceptance" of Ingram or the #2 wouldn't have been alone, and likely couldn't be for cap purposes.

when Adrian Woj says “The Pacers would’ve done a deal to trade Paul George to the Lakers if they got the No. 2 pick in the 2017 draft or Brandon Ingram,” ESPN reporter Adrian Wojnarowski said on The Woj Pod.--i tend to believe him

Woj did not say "may have" - he said "would have". Not sure where you get "may" from.

and you could have absorbed George into cap space with little finagling.

 

[shopson67]

when Adrian Woj says “The Pacers would’ve done a deal to trade Paul George to the Lakers if they got the No. 2 pick in the 2017 draft or Brandon Ingram,” ESPN reporter Adrian Wojnarowski said on The Woj Pod.--i tend to believe him

Woj did not say "may have" - he said "would have". Not sure where you get "may" from.

and you could have absorbed George into cap space with little finagling.

Lakers fans aren’t sweating George’s decision because they reeled in the biggest fish of the summer—LeBron James. But according to ESPN’s Adrian Wojnarowski, the Pacers were open to the option of trading George to the Lakers. If the Lakers were willing to part with Brandon Ingram or the second overall pick (which eventually became Lonzo Ball), the Pacers may have dealt George out to the left coast.

REPORT: Pacers Would've Traded Paul George To Lakers, But LA Wasn't Offering What They Wanted

 

[WiggyRuss]

REPORT: Pacers Would've Traded Paul George To Lakers, But LA Wasn't Offering What They Wanted

while I am sure Danny Small of Clutch Points is The Man...id PROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOBABLY defer to Woj....just saying.

this is what your boy Small even linked from Woj:

Woj: The Pacers would've done a deal to trade Paul George to the Lakers if they got the #2 pick in the 2017 draft (which Los Angeles ended up using on Lonzo Ball) or Brandon Ingram



obviously when the Pacers could not get Ingram or the #2 pick- they refused the pupu platter offer from the Lakers and instead got Oladipo and Sabonis.

 

[shopson67]

while I am sure Danny Small of Clutch Points is The Man...id PROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOBABLY defer to Woj....just saying.

this is what your boy Small even linked from Woj:

Woj: The Pacers would've done a deal to trade Paul George to the Lakers if they got the #2 pick in the 2017 draft (which Los Angeles ended up using on Lonzo Ball) or Brandon Ingram



obviously when the Pacers could not get Ingram or the #2 pick- they refused the pupu platter offer from the Lakers and instead got Oladipo and Sabonis.

He's not my boy Small, just the first link that popped up in google.

Pupu platter? Randle/Clarkson/Kuzma/Hart? You're delusional.

 

[WiggyRuss]

He's not my boy Small, just the first link that popped up in google.

Pupu platter? Randle/Clarkson/Kuzma/Hart? You're delusional.

pupu platter is not necessarily a negative connotation- it just means a lot of lesser things- which is what those guys are/were when compared to Ingram or the #2 pick.

 

[Black Adam]

lol, you cats still going at it with WiggityWack...?

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

pupu platter is not necessarily a negative connotation- it just means a lot of lesser things- which is what those guys are/were when compared to Ingram or the #2 pick.

Again you're saying the same things about Lonzo that you were saying about Ingram after his rookie season.

Ingram, according to you was a scrub not worthy of the #2 pick.

So what changed?