It's Time To Hate The Lakers Again

[shopson67]

Comical stuff on MSN - I found this:

It's been a little over 36 hours and I thought I'd be over the Luka Doncic-Anthony Davis trade by now.

I'm not.

This deal sucks, man. No matter how you look at it, it doesn't make sense. Short term. Long term. Somewhere in the middle. It screams, "Hey, this is a bad idea!" But the Mavericks did it anyway. There's a reason we all thought this trade was fake.

TRADE GRADES: Here are our grades for the deal. As I'm sure you can imagine, Dallas didn't do too well here.

I don't need to break down the details here. You've surely seen them all by now. You know exactly how much this deal sucks — well, unless you're a Laker fan. Then it's great for you.

But that's the thing, man. It's always great for you. I cannot think of a time in my life when it has not been great for Lakers fans.

It always works out. Why? No idea, man. Because it's the Lakers. That's the only answer I have at this point. And you can't say it's not valid because look at how many stars they've lucked into.

I already have one friend - who is calling it a conspiracy - I am going to go with - It's not the Laker's fault because they are smarter traders

Here is the link if anyone is interested.

MSN

 

[shopson67]

Without that NBA blocking that trade, The Lakers might have won a title that year - Personally - I liked the Chris Paul trade for the Lakers - but for the other team - I think Stern was right -

I don't think Stern was right. If you're going to put your guy to be GM of that team, let him make his decisions. Complaints from other owners caused Stern to neuter his own GM placement. It was pure pettiness.

If that trade happens, a lot of future bad outcomes are potentially avoided (Nash signing, Dwight leaving after one year, etc).

 

[shopson67]

This author is not very old, then.

As recently as 2019, long-suffering fans around the league were thoroughly enjoying a rare chance to mock and insult the Lakers because they had acquired no less than LeBron James and still missed the playoffs -- for the sixth consecutive season. Not many cared that the reason was 3 full seasons dedicated to Bryant's farewell tour, because it was a cherished opportunity to take a little revenge on Los Angeles.

The Ceballos years, the end of Kobe's career and the tanking, Kobe's passing, there have been stretches of pain for Lakers fans.

That said, you can't really complain when you compare those stretches to what most other franchises have endured. They've been the most consistently good team in my lifetime (70s forward). If you include the 60s, the Celtics are right there with them.

 

[DJ Fieri]

People never stopped hating the Lakers....

LOL.

 

[tlance]

Actually, here is what you wrote:

"The deal was for a bunch of vets who would have kept the Hornets closer to middle of the pack which is precisely where you can’t be as an NBA franchise."

And that remains as wrong as just about any statement can be.




That is also as wrong as anything could be. Even if you are completely ignorant of basketball -- which you might be -- I have demonstrably posted an array of information on that topic.



No, we were not, and literally could not have been discussing "rebuilding teams" since we were discussing the Hornets, who have never been "built" in the first place! You cannot rebuild something that was never built.




Okay. Given that almost every recent champion was in the middle-of-the-pack shortly before winning their title, what did you mean?



And where are you when "building toward contention"?

And how often does bottoming-out lead to a title, versus building from the middle of the pack? Are you still "trusting the Process"?




Find a "perpetual 35-45 win team". They are vastly rarer than you seem to think.

The value of "high picks" is also overstated. Look at the best players in the league. How many were "high picks"? Not Jokic. Not Antetokounmpo. Not Brunson. Not Gilgeous-Alexander. Not Sabonis. Not Curry. Not Lilliard. Not Maxey. Not Adebayo. Not Halliburton. Not Booker. Not Leonard. Not George. Not Mitchell.

This past All-star game, we had 11 guys who were top 5 picks and 13 who were not.


You were using playoff performance to define "middle of the pack" just a moment ago, as I'm sure you recall.




Buy a calculator. 16 teams out of 30 make the playoffs, so the first-round losers are precisely "middle of the pack".



At least I can do two-digit arithmetic.

You have real problems man.

Yes, the second the Hornets decided to trade Chris Paul they were rebuilding.

Acquiring vets to put them at the 35-40 win pace is exactly the opposite of good management.

Ask yourself. If you are buying a new franchise, would you rather have:

A collection of good, not great vets on a fringe playoff roster?

Or a promising young talent (Gordon) and 2 lottery picks with one of them having great odds to land in the top 3?

There is a reason teams like the Bulls sell off their vet pieces once it is clear they have plateaued.

Cant get stuck in the middle.

Literally everyone that follows NBA knows this and accepts it as fact.

 

[tc1]

The Ceballos years, the end of Kobe's career and the tanking, Kobe's passing, there have been stretches of pain for Lakers fans.

The Lakers did not tank, they were just organically terrible -- because they were paying Bryant enormously, who was horribly inefficient by that time, and no one in the League with any other options wanted to play with Bryant. Also, they foolishly fired a great coach in Byron Scott, and those do not grow on trees. ( And yes, I invite the clueless patrol here to challenge that statement. I have been there and done that many times, so you will want to inspect Scott's career in detail before proceeding. )

That said, you can't really complain when you compare those stretches to what most other franchises have endured. They've been the most consistently good team in my lifetime (70s forward). If you include the 60s, the Celtics are right there with them.

I certainly was not complaining, just correcting the statement made in the previously-posted article. The Lakers are the most consistently-good team in major professional sports -- in half of the NBA's seasons, the champion either was the Lakers, or had to beat the Lakers in the playoffs. To put it mildly, no team anywhere can match that.

 

[tc1]

Yes, the second the Hornets decided to trade Chris Paul they were rebuilding.

Rebuilding from what? Winning one playoff series in Paul's four seasons?

Acquiring vets to put them at the 35-40 win pace is exactly the opposite of good management.

And yet, this is how almost every recent champion has been built. Who to believe -- history, or some guy who is completely unfamiliar with it? Tough call...

There is a reason teams like the Bulls sell off their vet pieces once it is clear they have plateaued.

And look at the track record for that approach. It is not good, at all.

Cant get stuck in the middle.

Again, find such teams. They are very rare. There is barely even any such thing as "Stuck", in this context.

Provide some evidence to support your theory, if you can find any.

Literally everyone that follows NBA knows this and accepts it as fact.

Yes, I know -- people accept many things as fact, that they don't understand, and that are wrong, because they have never bothered to do any research nor apply any thought to the matter.

 

[shopson67]

The Lakers did not tank, they were just organically terrible -- because they were paying Bryant enormously, who was horribly inefficient by that time, and no one in the League with any other options wanted to play with Bryant. Also, they foolishly fired a great coach in Byron Scott, and those do not grow on trees. ( And yes, I invite the clueless patrol here to challenge that statement. I have been there and done that many times, so you will want to inspect Scott's career in detail before proceeding. )

The way the Lakers handled the end of Kobe's career is a large part of why free agents (like Lebron) will come to the Lakers in the future. They don't dump their stars unceremoniously when they decline late in their career.

It was more than Jimmy Buss' ineptitude. Amassing those early draft picks was what enabled the Lakers to add AD to free agent signing Lebron. Being mediocre for that stretch would've been FAR worse.

 

[tc1]

The way the Lakers handled the end of Kobe's career is a large part of why free agents (like Lebron) will come to the Lakers in the future. They don't dump their stars unceremoniously when they decline late in their career.

I'm aware, but thanks for explaining to the peanut gallery.

It was more than Jimmy Buss' ineptitude. Amassing those early draft picks was what enabled the Lakers to add AD to free agent signing Lebron. Being mediocre for that stretch would've been FAR worse.

Not as much as you probably think. Look at those drafts when the Lakers did pick early. Instead of Ball, they might've wound up with Donovan Mitchell, Bam Adebayo, Jarrett Allen, OG Anunoby, or others who were drafted in the mid-to-late first round. Instead of Ingram, they might've drafted Sabonis, Murray, or another Murray, who were drafted later. Rather than Russell, they might've drafted Booker or Turner.

And historically, the Lakers do make those excellent draft selections. They've drafted more talent after the first round than many franchises have in total.

Scouting is not the science that many wish it is.

 

[trojanfan12]

The Lakers did not tank, they were just organically terrible -- because they were paying Bryant enormously, who was horribly inefficient by that time, and no one in the League with any other options wanted to play with Bryant.

The "tanking" was in the decision to honor Kobe with that final contract. They knew before they did it that it meant they were not going to be able to put together a good team (though they did try). They could have chosen not to re-sign Kobe and used cap space to bring a high level FA or 2.

Personally, I have no issue with that decision. Kobe earned that honor.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

I don't think Stern was right. If you're going to put your guy to be GM of that team, let him make his decisions. Complaints from other owners caused Stern to neuter his own GM placement. It was pure pettiness.

If that trade happens, a lot of future bad outcomes are potentially avoided (Nash signing, Dwight leaving after one year, etc).

It was political - for sure -

 

[True Lakers Fan]

The "tanking" was in the decision to honor Kobe with that final contract. They knew before they did it that it meant they were not going to be able to put together a good team (though they did try). They could have chosen not to re-sign Kobe and used cap space to bring a high level FA or 2.

Personally, I have no issue with that decision. Kobe earned that honor.

Agreed - It still hurts how he died though

 

[True Lakers Fan]

People never stopped hating the Lakers....

LOL.

That was my point - but that new guy didn't understand it - So I decided to ignore him and let him remain in the dark -

 

[True Lakers Fan]

Solid Gold Comedy

 

[True Lakers Fan]

Just found this - Which is what I was thinking - that Doncic being with Lebron would teach him a better work ethic

The Los Angeles Lakers believe they can address a big issue with Luka Doncic that reportedly played a role in the Dallas Mavericks deciding to trade him.

The Lakers are hopeful that LeBron James will be a positive mentor to Doncic, according to Shams Charania of ESPN. One of the reasons the Lakers have no intention of trading James is that they want Doncic to learn by example from James’ work ethic and dedication to his craft.

“The relationship between (James) and Luka Doncic is something I’m definitely going to keep an eye on,” Charania said on ESPN’s “NBA Today” Monday. “The Lakers want LeBron James to be a mentor of sorts. Someone that can help Luka Doncic continue to develop, develop the right habits, develop everything on and off the court.”

MSN

 

[ANGELAKERAMS]

What the Hornets could have had: Lamar Odom, Kevin Martin, Luis Scola, Goran Dragic

What the Hornets wound up with: Chris Kaman, Eric Gordon, Al-Farouq Aminu, Austin Rivers, ( - $350k ), ( -1 second round pick )


The first package is easily better, even with Odom basically ceasing to play after the trade broke his heart.

What they got was worse than the Lakers trade by far.

Which makes Stern vetoing the trade look even worse because the offer was better. The owners were just mad it was the Lakers- period.

 

[tlance]

Rebuilding from what? Winning one playoff series in Paul's four seasons?



And yet, this is how almost every recent champion has been built. Who to believe -- history, or some guy who is completely unfamiliar with it? Tough call...



And look at the track record for that approach. It is not good, at all.



Again, find such teams. They are very rare. There is barely even any such thing as "Stuck", in this context.

Provide some evidence to support your theory, if you can find any.



Yes, I know -- people accept many things as fact, that they don't understand, and that are wrong, because they have never bothered to do any research nor apply any thought to the matter.

Nope.

Absolutely not true.

Recent champs have built a core through either draft or free agency and steadily improved and tweaked with those groups.

All of them had superstars in their core.

As soon as you talk about trading Chris Paul (a superstar) for a bunch of good, not great players you are putting a ceiling on that team.

And they are much better off tearing it down to the studs so they can draft their next franchise player.

Which they did

 

[True Lakers Fan]

This is the reason the Lakers got Doncic for a cheap price - Doncic has problems - and comes with risks

 

[tlance]

This is the reason the Lakers got Doncic for a cheap price - Doncic has problems - and comes with risks

This may be true.

But the rest of the league did not know.

So Mavs could have got more if they shopped him.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

This may be true.

But the rest of the league did not know.

So Mavs could have got more if they shopped him.

I think the Lakers plan to play him with Lebron as a mentor - is a fantastic idea - The only player I know that ever had a better work ethic than Lebron was Kobe Bryant - I won't argue with that - but they wanted Anthony Davis - who does have a championship - Good for the Lakers, bad for everyone else. I tend to believe that the Lakers still aren't quite there as a contender yet - unless they can develop Hayes into a better defender - and I am a person who believes you need a good chicken for chicken pie - Not chicken shit