Is Luka for AD the most shocking trade of all time

[tlance]

Which is why I just had to explain that draft to you a few minutes ago -- right. Of course you were in the room with West and Riley and others as they discussed all this.

Cummings would have been the better fit, being closer to a four, and with Wilkes already on the roster at the 3. But just about everyone thought Worthy was the best player, after he dragged Jordan to that title.




Look at their numbers and/or watch them play.



And this is all better than Irving + Davis is likely to be, which is the point.

Who on Dallas' roster other than Irving and Davis is better than any of: Russell, Reaves, Hachimura, or even Malik Monk?

You really making friends here aren’t you.

 

[tlance]

He literally said he might leave. If you cannot process that, well, just luck in life I guess.

Was Doncic linked to Los Angeles until about 20 hours ago? No. You don't hear everything. But you did just hear Davis say that he might leave.

He said he wasn’t locked in to anything on the night they won the championship.

And why would he be? Would be stupid to say otherwise until pen is on the paper.

He took his time and nobody ever thought he was going anywhere. I guess except you.

Congrats?

 

[tc1]

You really making friends here aren’t you.

Already have friends, thanks. Not why I'm here.

 

[DJ Fieri]

It's not just about who the better player is...it's about who the better fit is.

Worthy was a better fit for the Lakers than 'Nique would have been...that's why they took him instead of 'Nique.

Luka is a better player than AD, but AD fits better with Kyrie than Luka does.

AD also fits better with Lebron than Luka, which is why the Lakers have more work to do than the Mavs, but the Luka move is more about the post-Lebron era.

Not hard to understand if you know basketball....

 

[tc1]

He said he wasn’t locked in to anything on the night they won the championship.

And why would he be? Would be stupid to say otherwise until pen is on the paper.

In other words, he was considering leaving. Like I said.

He took his time and nobody ever thought he was going anywhere. I guess except you.

Congrats?

You can honestly say that you believe Rich Paul -- Rich Paul -- told his client not to investigate his options, and just be loyal and sign up like a good boy? After they'd be telling anyone who would listen for a year that Davis was going UFA to explore his options?

I guess it must be wonderful to be that naive.

 

[tlance]

In other words, he was considering leaving. Like I said.



You can honestly say that you believe Rich Paul -- Rich Paul -- told his client not to investigate his options, and just be loyal and sign up like a good boy? After they'd be telling anyone who would listen for a year that Davis was going UFA to explore his options?

I guess it must be wonderful to be that naive.

LOL.

Find one documented source that had AD interviewing with another team.

A quote from a presser where the player is clearly emotional from winning a title is nothing at all.

Did you not ever learn not to make big life decisions when in an emotional state?

 

[tc1]

Find one documented source that had AD interviewing with another team.

Top free agents do not "interview" with teams, and if they do, they are rarely public.

A quote from a presser where the player is clearly emotional from winning a title is nothing at all.

Actually, immediately after winning the title, one would expect him to be full of love for this team and city, and say the opposite, something like "I love it here! I'm never leaving!"

That would be an emotional response. That's 180 degrees opposite from what happened, for exactly the reasons that I have already explained ad nauseum.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

It's not just about who the better player is...it's about who the better fit is.

Worthy was a better fit for the Lakers than 'Nique would have been...that's why they took him instead of 'Nique.

Luka is a better player than AD, but AD fits better with Kyrie than Luka does.

AD also fits better with Lebron than Luka, which is why the Lakers have more work to do than the Mavs, but the Luka move is more about the post-Lebron era.

This is what I was thinking when I saw the trade - Even my 12 great nephew understood that - He thought the Lakers got the best of the trade - LOL
I told my nephew that Jr was correct because Lebron and Luka have a chance to be what Lebron was with Irvine - but Irving with Davis has the potential to be a pretty good team - But unless the Lakers gets a legitimate big man or takes Hayes and works magic on him - they aren't going anywhere this year - This trade is about next next year and after that with a legitimate point guard.

I like Davis - but it seems like he was on the injury list more than he was off of it and he is now 31 with little time to spare to build around him

 

[True Lakers Fan]

LOL.

Find one documented source that had AD interviewing with another team.

A quote from a presser where the player is clearly emotional from winning a title is nothing at all.

Did you not ever learn not to make big life decisions when in an emotional state?

We know that never happened - LOL and another thing - Contrary to the new guy in here - The New Orleans did not want to lose Davis and they never tried to shop him - Davis wanted to play with Lebron as we already know.

 

[tc1]

We know that never happened - LOL and another thing - Contrary to the new guy in here - The New Orleans did not want to lose Davis and they never tried to shop him - Davis wanted to play with Lebron as we already know.

If all that is true -- and let's assume that Rob Pelinka is not a complete moron, for argument's sake -- how can you explain the massive haul the Lakers traded to rent Davis for one season?

That simply does not add up. If there was only one bidder, and Pelinka wasn't completely stupid, he would have made a reasonable offer to New Orleans. New Orleans would have either accepted it unwillingly, or wrecked another season with an angry Davis -- probably again being forced to send him away from the team due to his attitude -- and then lose him for nothing. At which point the Lakers would have signed Davis as a UFA, and built a ridiculous super team with all those other assets that they didn't waste on renting him.

That does not add up.

The only explanation that comports with the known facts are that at least one other very serious bidder was involved, which forced Pelinka to trade the biggest haul ever seen for a single player rental for one season.

When your story makes no sense whatsoever, like yours, you have to step back and ask yourself "Why?"

 

[True Lakers Fan]

If all that is true -- and let's assume that Rob Pelinka is not a complete moron, for argument's sake -- how can you explain the massive haul the Lakers traded to rent Davis for one season?

That simply does not add up. If there was only one bidder, and Pelinka wasn't completely stupid, he would have made a reasonable offer to New Orleans. New Orleans would have either accepted it unwillingly, or wrecked another season with an angry Davis -- probably again being forced to send him away from the team due to his attitude -- and then lose him for nothing. At which point the Lakers would have signed Davis as a UFA, and built a ridiculous super team with all those other assets that they didn't waste on renting him.

That does not add up.

The only explanation that comports with the known facts are that at least one other very serious bidder was involved, which forced Pelinka to trade the biggest haul ever seen for a single player rental for one season.

When your story makes no sense whatsoever, like yours, you have to step back and ask yourself "Why?"

Neither of those players have been one year rentals as you say - This was the sixth season for Davis - and it was expected at the time he would resign with the Lakers since Lebron conceived the idea.

Luka has another year besides the rest of this season and he has a player option for the 27-28 season

Do you know what a one year rental is? I do - I have seen it many times - in Real estate - Renter signs a one year lease and then usually moves one - very common where I worked for people wanting to buy a home and take their time- - One year rental in basketball has been a common problem for the Lakers - signing a player for one season only - None of that hear - Makes good sense if you understand basketball.

If Luka were to choose to leave in 2026 - then the Lakers would have the money under the cap to go after someone else - The Lakers is attractive to many players so that isn't a problem here -Oh did you look at the Lakers last signed with Davis - LMAO at one year rental - Davis had to waive his no -trade kicker to get this done -

 

[tc1]

Neither of those players have been one year rentals as you say - This was the sixth season for Davis - and it was expected at the time he would resign with the Lakers since Lebron conceived the idea.

This has been covered as nauseum. Davis played out his contract, became an unrestricted free agency in December of 2020, and then chose to sign with the Lakers. Meaning he was precisely a one-year rental.

Catch up.

Do you know what a one year rental is? I do - I have seen it many times - in Real estate - Renter signs a one year lease and then usually moves one

"Usually" you say? Think about the ramifications of that word here.

- very common where I worked for people wanting to buy a home and take their time- - One year rental in basketball has been a common problem for the Lakers - signing a player for one season only - None of that hear - Makes good sense if you understand basketball.

If Luka were to choose to leave in 2026 - then the Lakers would have the money under the cap to go after someone else - The Lakers is attractive to many players so that isn't a problem here -Oh did you look at the Lakers last signed with Davis - LMAO at one year rental - Davis had to waive his no -trade kicker to get this done -

None of this has any relevance to my preceding comment.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

This has been covered as nauseum. Davis played out his contract, became an unrestricted free agency in December of 2020, and then chose to sign with the Lakers. Meaning he was precisely a one-year rental.

Catch up.



"Usually" you say? Think about the ramifications of that word here.



None of this has any relevance to my preceding comment.

Well yes it is - because you ignorantly referred to Davis as a "One year rental" And that might be the case sometimes - but it's a good way to test a player out before signing him long term and also dump salary - Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't Again in Davis' case - It was a foregone conclusion he would stay and like I said before - this is was his sixth season with the Lakers - 6 is greater then a one year rental

 

[MHSL82]

I thought it was April 1st for a minute there

So you are saying you thought it was a “Sham”? (Shams Charania, from ESPN, first reported it.)

 

[tc1]

Well yes it is - because you ignorantly referred to Davis as a "One year rental" And that might be the case sometimes - but it's a good way to test a player out before signing him long term and also dump salary - Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't Again in Davis' case - It was a foregone conclusion he would stay and like I said before - this is was his sixth season with the Lakers - 6 is greater then a one year rental

No, it was not a foregone conclusion.

I posted video of Davis saying exactly that.

And again, your story makes no sense, as I previously explained. If your foregone conclusion story were true, the Lakers would not have been forced to send a Godfather offer to New Orleans -- but they did.

And you are unable to explain that conundrum -- because you are wrong.

Here it is again, since you were unable to read it correctly the first time:

If all that is true -- and let's assume that Rob Pelinka is not a complete moron, for argument's sake -- how can you explain the massive haul the Lakers traded to rent Davis for one season?

That simply does not add up. If there was only one bidder, and Pelinka wasn't completely stupid, he would have made a reasonable offer to New Orleans. New Orleans would have either accepted it unwillingly, or wrecked another season with an angry Davis -- probably again being forced to send him away from the team due to his attitude -- and then lose him for nothing. At which point the Lakers would have signed Davis as a UFA, and built a ridiculous super team with all those other assets that they didn't waste on renting him.

That does not add up.

The only explanation that comports with the known facts are that at least one other very serious bidder was involved, which forced Pelinka to trade the biggest haul ever seen for a single player rental for one season.

When your story makes no sense whatsoever, like yours, you have to step back and ask yourself "Why?"

 

[True Lakers Fan]

No, it was not a foregone conclusion.

I posted video of Davis saying exactly that.

And again, your story makes no sense, as I previously explained. If your foregone conclusion story were true, the Lakers would not have been forced to send a Godfather offer to New Orleans -- but they did.

And you are unable to explain that conundrum -- because you are wrong.

How old are you? This is all basketball information that everyone knows - It was six years ago - Davis forced his way out of New Orleans who tried to talk him into staying - There was never a one- year rental business and he helped Lebron win a championship right away

Now if you was only 5 years old at the time - then I can see why you don't remember any of this - And yes the Lakers were forced to send a Godfather offer - Not even New Orleans were willing to give him away for peanuts - If they had Kept him - then Davis woiuld have had a choice between getting on the court and do what he was paid to do or retire and get sued for breach of contract

 

[tc1]

Now if you was only 5 years old at the time - then I can see why you don't remember any of this - And yes the Lakers were forced to send a Godfather offer - Not even New Orleans were willing to give him away for peanuts - If they had Kept him - then Davis woiuld have had a choice between getting on the court and do what he was paid to do or retire and get sued for breach of contract

Alright, this is about my last comment to you, because you do not read or understand anything.

There is an enormous gap between a Godfather offer and "peanuts". If you don't or can't understand this, ask someone to help you.

Davis would have had options -- among them, the same one he used at the end of the previous season. Act so poorly around the team that they benched him, and then sent him away because his conduct was detrimental to the team. He already did that, so he could easily do it again.

So you still have not explained the conundrum in your nonsensical story. Why did the Lakers make a Godfather offer if they were the only bidder?

And, in case you think you're novel, I've been explaining this to Laker fans almost literally since the day that trade happened. You aren't the first, and unfortunately, not likely to be the last. I like to believe that Laker fans are smarter than average... but then I talk to some of them.

 

[msgkings322]

You really making friends here aren’t you.

Got no problem with a new board asshole to take over for me and dtgold but he needs to make his case without assuming facts with no proof or pretending not to understand counter arguments. Which two LOL

 

[True Lakers Fan]

Got no problem with a new board asshole to take over for me and dtgold but he needs to make his case without assuming facts with no proof or pretending not to understand counter arguments. Which two LOL

He called Davis "A one year rental of the Lakers" - LMAO

 

[tlance]

Top free agents do not "interview" with teams, and if they do, they are rarely public.



Actually, immediately after winning the title, one would expect him to be full of love for this team and city, and say the opposite, something like "I love it here! I'm never leaving!"

That would be an emotional response. That's 180 degrees opposite from what happened, for exactly the reasons that I have already explained ad nauseum.

This is false.

Top free agents usually have a list of contenders to sign them, and we often hear about those meetings.

Remember the KD meeting and all the talk of the Hanpton’s 5?

Not saying we always know what is going on behind closed doors. We don’t.

But if AD had ever REALLY seriously considered signing with anybody else, we would have heard about it. He was too big a name and reporters were all over his movements.

YOur insistence that this was a “rental” is really peculiar.

But to answer your questions definitively:

The Lakers paid so much to get Anthony Davis because he was not a rental. He said the Lakers were his preferred destination, and while there was no guarantee, it was always expected by everyone that he would resign.

And he did. The Celtics wisely wouldn’t include Tatum in their AD proposal because he would have actually been a rental for them based on his comments. Had Davis been willing to re sign in Boston? Tatum might have been a Pelican. The Celtics did not expect AD to resign after the 1 year, so they weren’t willing to raise their bid enough to get him.

And second, the fact that the Lakers had to pay so much to acquire him despite being the only team that didn’t view AD as a rental (see what I did there?) is absolutely proof as to his immense trade value.

And it was a good thing they did, because they got a title out of it. Wait until 2020 and things might have played out differently in a bad way.

Sorry, but just because you say it so doesn’t make it true. You are having semantical arguments and playing like your views are facts when they aren’t all. Making bad conclusions based of limited data sets.

There is a reason nobody else agrees with you, and I can promise you it is not because you are smarter than everyone else here.