Is Luka for AD the most shocking trade of all time

[tc1]

How was Davis a one year rental when he was still in LA 4 years later and allowed them to obtain one of the top 5 players in the league in his prime?

Because the Lakers signed Davis as a UFA in December 2020. This is public knowledge, you can look it up.

Davis wanted out. As did Kareem and so many other players who ended up stars for the Lakers. LA has a huge edge because it's Los Angeles and they have a winning history. That's why they are able to land stars in one sided deals which they have done throughout their history.

Only the Chamberlain deal was one-sided in the Lakers' favor at the time. The Abdul-Jabbar deal didn't quite work out for Milwaukee as they hoped, but they still got 25% of the best players in the first 50 years of franchise history in that deal.

This Davis deal does not fit your story, either, because it didn't happen due to Doncic waiting to go West. It happened because somewhat inexplicably, Harrison believes that Anthony Davis is just about the most desirable player in the league.

You are aguing that Kareem for Brian Winters, Elmore Smith, Junior Bridgeman & David Meyers was a result of the Lakers amazing ability to obtain those 5 players and they were of equal value to Kareem Abdul Jabbar and Walt Wesley. They weren't. Kareem wanted out of a small market and LA was a perfect fit, so the Bucks were forced to trade him for a far less value in return.

Abdul-Jabbar is from New York. Everyone and their uncle assumed the Knicks would acquire him. The Knicks were outbid by the Lakers who had drafted, and were willing to risk, more assets.

In hindsight, we all know that Abdul-Jabbar played 14 more seasons at an incredibly high level. Not many would have predicted that, in '75. Even today, big men do not play at a high level in much of their thirties, and back then, the situation was even more pronounced. Russell retired at 34, and even that was considered very old for a big. Cowens was done at 31. Unseld made his last All-star game at 28. Thurmond's last was at 32, and that was basically only reputational. Elmore Smith's career ended with an injury at 29.

Trading four young, very good, players for ~6 years of Abdul-Jabbar was a big risk.

If Meyers doesn't go crazy and Smith's injury luck is better, and Abdul-Jabbar doesn't turn out to be an alien who can play 'til 42, that trade looks quite good for Milwaukee.

 

[tc1]

I think this is the guy who thought even if OSU beat Oregon that Oregon deserved a share of the title in CFB thread?

Oh fun, now my stalker has arrived. I should get a restraining order.

For those who don't read the CFB forum, this individual is obsessed with me, so now you will probably have to read a bunch of their personal attacks on me. Sorry.

 

[Jordan23]

Cool thing is lakers have 2 of the biggest whiners and floppers in the league on the same team now.

 

[tc1]

Its a contender for worst trade in the history of sports. I've heard reporters all day that asked GM's what they would have given if they had had a chance to bid on Luka. The answer most gave was "everything". And Fella wants to talk about his defense in a first round series they won on their way to the Finals lol. Strong Gin

Supposedly -- and this might be damage control -- one GM declined to acquire Doncic. We don't know who.

NBA rumors: Mystery team turned down Mavericks' Luka Doncic trade offer before Lakers deal

Before the Lakers got their hands on Luka Doncic, there was a mystery team that tried to acquire the ex-Mavericks star.

clutchpoints.com

Harrison's decision here is still puzzling, but Doncic is being lionized a little bit excessively right now, much like what happens after a person dies.

Who can honestly say that, __before__ last year's playoffs, they considered the Mavericks serious title contenders? I don't know of anyone who did, nor why they would. They had previously made the Conference Finals once, and gotten smoked by a Warrior team that was among the worst Champions of the past couple decades.

The Mavericks missed the playoffs entirely just two years ago.

Now, all of the sudden, people are claiming -- with seemingly straight faces -- that having Doncic guarantees that a franchise will be contenders for a decade. Sorry, that doesn't comport. Dallas made a surprising run the Finals, but that is wildly different from being serious annual contenders.

 

[DJ Fieri]

Oh fun, now my stalker has arrived. I should get a restraining order.

Cry harder....that's what you told people yesterday, right?

 

[tc1]

Edmonton got 3 1sts back and $15m (Gretzky's salary was about 300K at the time for comparison) along with 2 players. Edmonton got better pcs back than Dallas. Still certainly shocking at the time.

You are missing the point. Gretzky was very close to being a religious figure in Canada. He still is, to some degree. And Pocklington sold him for financial reasons.

 

[tc1]

Luka is one of two players to ever average 30+ ppg in the playoffs. The other is MJ

Yeah, and Allen Iverson is at 29.73. That stat is not everything -- especially considering that almost everyone's average declines as they approach retirement, seasons which Doncic has not yet played.

You're babbling about him being bailed out in the playoffs.

Read the context.

 

[tc1]

I’m not sure young Bro is legal age to drink… but I’m sure him mom has ample supply of gin he swipes.

Pretty telling when the Laker fans I respect on this forum all think he’s full of shit.

Not nearly so telling as being forced to resort to mom jokes, after being completely unable to refute anything that I have written.

How humiliating for you.

 

[msgkings322]

This guy comes to play lol. The Comic Book Guy persnickitiness and contrarianism is a bit much but interesting to have a new asshole around.

 

[msgkings322]

Yeah, and Allen Iverson is at 29.73. That stat is not everything -- especially considering that almost everyone's average declines as they approach retirement, seasons which Doncic has not yet played.


Read the context.

You try to hard to refute conventional wisdom. It’s not always wrong. In fact the consensus opinion on these things is usually pretty spot on

No amount of contrarian douchebaggery will get people to think Luka isnt a great playoff performer.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

You try to hard to refute conventional wisdom. It’s not always wrong. In fact the consensus opinion on these things is usually pretty spot on

No amount of contrarian douchebaggery will get people to think Luka isnt a great playoff performer.

From what I have heard - Dallas had a concern about Luka's conditioning - It has been stated that he is lazy and does put enough effort into that - The might be over-stated - who knows. They also reportedly didn't want to give him the maximum contract that Luka would have been elgible for in the off season. The Mavericks wanted a big man with Irving - but It seems like to me that they got older and there isn't much of a window to win a title - unless they are giving up on this year and hoping for something good for next year. I do think they could have done better - but I am one to look a gift horse in the mouth and turn it down - Lol. As a Warriors fan - I was just wondering if Klay Thompson can give them the threes at the end of the games like he used to. That would make it interesting for them

 

[msgkings322]

From what I have heard - Dallas had a concern about Luka's conditioning - It has been stated that he is lazy and does put enough effort into that - The might be over-stated - who knows. They also reportedly didn't want to give him the maximum contract that Luka would have been elgible for in the off season. The Mavericks wanted a big man with Irving - but It seems like to me that they got older and there isn't much of a window to win a title - unless they are giving up on this year and hoping for something good for next year. I do think they could have done better - but I am one to look a gift horse in the mouth and turn it down - Lol. As a Warriors fan - I was just wondering if Klay Thompson can give them the threes at the end of the games like he used to. That would make it interesting for them

Luka has always had that vibe of being the opposite of Kobe. Likes a beer, does not like intense working out. So it’s a risk. Basically Dallas decided they don’t want a Zion or Embiid type situation. Might be wrong might be right but that was the thought process.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

Luka has always had that vibe of being the opposite of Kobe. Likes a beer, does not like intense working out. So it’s a risk. Basically Dallas decided they don’t want a Zion or Embiid type situation. Might be wrong might be right but that was the thought process.

That was the same feeling Dr Jerry Buss had about Shaq - He felt that Kobe was a better bet long term because Shaq was lazy - He wasn't wrong - The Lakers were far better off with Kobe - The question now will be what Lebron can do with the young man and teach him about hard work. I had a nephew 20 years ago who was getting into fights - got suspended. I picked him and had him work with me while suspended - The young man finished High School and learned to work hard and now has grown children and thanked me for teaching him hard work - but that is a lesson learned at 16 years old - Not 25 -

 

[tc1]

You try to hard to refute conventional wisdom. It’s not always wrong. In fact the consensus opinion on these things is usually pretty spot on

This sentence is a mixed bag. I never said that CW is always wrong. But when it is, I sometimes spend my free time educating people on exactly why their belief is wrong. An awful lot of "consensus opinions" exist because people are too lazy to think for themselves, and far too lazy to actually perform the necessary research that is required to inform that thought.

No amount of contrarian douchebaggery will get people to think Luka isnt a great playoff performer.

It doesn't reflect well on you when you resort to childish name-calling.

And I never said that. As I suggested, read the context of the comment which you are fixated on -- it was about the fact that breaks are a big part of winning championships.

That said, Doncic has played 9 playoff series, and his teams are 5-4 -- with him contributing a couple stinkers from an efficiency standpoint. He is not George Mikan is this regard, who never lost a series while healthy. Yes, Doncic always puts up huge counting stats, but inefficient volume scoring is not very contributory to winning basketball. And Doncic is not particularly efficient, in the playoffs or otherwise. For his career, he is shooting 46% from the field, and 35% from three in the playoffs -- both are below league average, and again, that's not a strong recipe for winning games.

 

[DJ Fieri]

This sentence is a mixed bag. I never said that CW is always wrong. But when it is, I sometimes spend my free time educating people on exactly why their belief is wrong. An awful lot of "consensus opinions" exist because people are too lazy to think for themselves, and far too lazy to actually perform the necessary research that is required to inform that thought.



It doesn't reflect well on you when you resort to childish name-calling.

And I never said that. As I suggested, read the context of the comment which you are fixated on -- it was about the fact that breaks are a big part of winning championships.

That said, Doncic has played 9 playoff series, and his teams are 5-4 -- with him contributing a couple stinkers from an efficiency standpoint. He is not George Mikan is this regard, who never lost a series while healthy. Yes, Doncic always puts up huge counting stats, but inefficient volume scoring is not very contributory to winning basketball. And Doncic is not particularly efficient, in the playoffs or otherwise. For his career, he is shooting 46% from the field, and 35% from three in the playoffs -- both are below league average, and again, that's not a strong recipe for winning games.

You didn't resort to name calling yesterday???

LOL

 

[tc1]

That was the same feeling Dr Jerry Buss had about Shaq -

The enormous difference being that Buss chose the younger player, the Mavericks did the opposite.

He felt that Kobe was a better bet long term because Shaq was lazy - He wasn't wrong - The Lakers were far better off with Kobe

Only because Bryant was younger, and only just barely were they better off. It is very debatable whether or not the Lakers made the correct decision between O'Neal and Bryant.

Had they instead traded Bryant, they very likely wind up with more titles. Inefficient high-volume scoring guards are much easier to replace than the best center in the game. As shown precisely by the Heat winning their title with O'Neal and Wade.

To put all too fine a point on it, Bryant never won a damn thing without an All-star center or two.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

The enormous difference being that Buss chose the younger player, the Mavericks did the opposite.



Only because Bryant was younger, and only just barely were they better off. It is very debatable whether or not the Lakers made the correct decision between O'Neal and Bryant.

Had they instead traded Bryant, they very likely wind up with more titles. Inefficient high-volume scoring guards are much easier to replace than the best center in the game. As shown precisely by the Heat winning their title with O'Neal and Wade.

To put all too fine a point on it, Bryant never won a damn thing without an All-star center or two.

Not for me - Shaq got one more title in Miami and then went down hill after that. Kobe led the Lakers too two more championships and spent his entire career with the Lakers - I doubt you will find anyone who disagrees with this not counting you.

 

[tc1]

Not for me - Shaq got one more title in Miami and then went down hill after that. Kobe led the Lakers too two more championships and spent his entire career with the Lakers - I doubt you will find anyone who disagrees with this not counting you.

O'Neal continued to play at an All-star level for another 5 seasons, winning one title. During that time, Bryant won zilch. Had O'Neal remained a Laker, with the assets acquired in the Bryant trade -- that would have been considerable, to put it mildly -- the Lakers very likely win at least one, and probably multiple titles.

And if they went on to acquire Gasol anyway, the combination of Pau and O'Neal -- even at the very end of his career -- with those aforementioned assets, would have been a contender even through '11 when O'Neal retired.

Yes, keeping Bryant pleased low-information fans who don't know or care about much beyond points-per-game, but again, inefficient high-volume scorers are not rare commodities in the NBA, nor are they particularly valuable with respect to winning games or titles. Most such players do not win titles, and Bryant only did because of who he played with, not because of how he played.

I've had this conversation with many Laker fans over the last two decades, and their position always boils down to "I love Kobe". And that's fine, that's why we watch sports -- but just realize that choosing Bryant over O'Neal very likely cost the Lakers titles. Especially considering Bryant's disastrous late-career tenure, that caused the franchise to miss the playoffs a previously unheard-of 6 consecutive times. On average, the Lakers should have been 2 titles in those six years.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

O'Neal continued to play at an All-star level for another 5 seasons, winning one title. During that time, Bryant won zilch. Had O'Neal remained a Laker, with the assets acquired in the Bryant trade -- that would have been considerable, to put it mildly -- the Lakers very likely win at least one, and probably multiple titles.

And if they went on to acquire Gasol anyway, the combination of Pau and O'Neal -- even at the very end of his career -- with those aforementioned assets, would have been a contender even through '11 when O'Neal retired.

Yes, keeping Bryant pleased low-information fans who don't know or care about much beyond points-per-game, but again, inefficient high-volume scorers are not rare commodities in the NBA, nor are they particularly valuable with respect to winning games or titles. Most such players do not win titles, and Bryant only did because of who he played with, not because of how he played.

I've had this conversation with many Laker fans over the last two decades, and their position always boils down to "I love Kobe". And that's fine, that's why we watch sports -- but just realize that choosing Bryant over O'Neal very likely cost the Lakers titles. Especially considering Bryant's disastrous late-career tenure, that caused the franchise to miss the playoffs a previously unheard-of 6 consecutive times. On average, the Lakers should have been 2 titles in those six years.

Kobe brought much more to the Lakers besides two more championships - Virtually every arena was sold out in every game he played- They make millions off Kobe - It was Lakers's front office that failed to get Kobe better players

 

[UK Cowboy]

Supposedly -- and this might be damage control -- one GM declined to acquire Doncic. We don't know who.

NBA rumors: Mystery team turned down Mavericks' Luka Doncic trade offer before Lakers deal

Before the Lakers got their hands on Luka Doncic, there was a mystery team that tried to acquire the ex-Mavericks star.

clutchpoints.com

Harrison's decision here is still puzzling, but Doncic is being lionized a little bit excessively right now, much like what happens after a person dies.

Who can honestly say that, __before__ last year's playoffs, they considered the Mavericks serious title contenders? I don't know of anyone who did, nor why they would. They had previously made the Conference Finals once, and gotten smoked by a Warrior team that was among the worst Champions of the past couple decades.

The Mavericks missed the playoffs entirely just two years ago.

Now, all of the sudden, people are claiming -- with seemingly straight faces -- that having Doncic guarantees that a franchise will be contenders for a decade. Sorry, that doesn't comport. Dallas made a surprising run the Finals, but that is wildly different from being serious annual contenders.

He is 25 and led them to the Finals last year. Really no idea what you are babbling about