72 Suburbs in Search of a City: Anthony Davis to Los Angeles Lakers

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
The Billy King comparisons are absurd hot takes. Anthony Davis at 26 vs on their last legs KG and PP -- which of these have nothing to do with the other? Particularly when you're pairing AD with LeBron.

Among the many, many other hot takes in this thread that has me puzzled is that the picks are what makes it a good deal for the Pels. Sure...we don't know, but very very good chance those are mainly late picks. All the wishcasting about AD injuries/LeBron decline/no one else every signing with the Lakers is just...well...wishcasting. But Ingram and Ball are really valuable pieces. On Ingram, there's ton of assertions that he doesn't try on defense which can only come from people who don't watch him play. He's got one of those facial expressions that doesn't scream "white guy overachiever" but he's a hard worker with amazing wing span and good feet. I know it's just a month or so, but he was killing it before he went out with this blood clot thing -- the idea he wouldn't go at #4 this year is ridiculous. I'd probably take him #2 and just no way I'd value Hunter over him. And Ball is...well...we all know what he is: he's an elite passer and defender which make him very valuable. God knows what happened to his college shot and his FT shooting makes one think maybe it'll never come around. But if it does -- he moves beyond very valuable to all-star. Those are the 2 prizes for the Pels along with the #4 (Garland? Would love his combo with Zion, Ball, and Ingram). The other picks are what they are.

For all the celebrating in this and other threads, this is a classic win-win trade. Celtics the big losers in re never converting their assets into championship winning studs. Good not great is not where you want to be in this league.

The one thing about Father Time is that he remains undefeated. The age 34 LeBron is no longer head & shoulders better than his peers. He’s still a top 5 player for sure, but the decline’s begun. The draft picks are coming in his age 37-39 seasons. The odds of his remaining a top 5 player for those years are basically non-existent.

As for Davis, he hasn’t exactly led the Pelicans on deep playoff runs by himself, and Laker management has been every bit as disastrous as New Orleans. It’s really a pretty good bet that those three picks are going to come in in the top half of the draft. His commitment to the Lakers begins and ends with LeBron. And if LeBron sees a better avenue to a title when this contract is up, he’ll almost certainly take it.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
90,017
Oregon
The only thing that seems true at the moment is that the Lakers get a significant immediate benefit ... and even that benefit comes at a cost, if they are prevented from signing a max player because of the cap/timing.

The haul for the Pelicans depends entirely on things that are unknown.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,205
The only thing that seems true at the moment is that the Lakers get a significant immediate benefit ... and even that benefit comes at a cost, if they are prevented from signing a max player because of the cap/timing.

The haul for the Pelicans depends entirely on things that are unknown.
Wait...what? Pick a side! Someone is a massive loser in this deal right now - there has to be or else why bother posting.

In all seriousness, the Lakers had to do this - they went all in with LeBron/Klutch last year and they are now in a position to contend for a title next year depending on how they fill out their roster.

The Pelicans, on the other hand, were in a tough situation in that everyone knew they had to move Davis and that he/his people were really intent on limiting the field to one counterparty. Griffin appears to have secured a very good package with the players and a wealth of potentially valuable picks.

That said, the questions around all the young players in the deal, as well as the debates about the current draft speak volumes about the high degree of variance around picks. It seems like hardcore sports fans are more inclined to overvalue potential vs actual performance. As others have noted, the odds favor players picked with the slots sent to New Orleans by the Lakers turning out to be rotation players vs elite/star types.

In the end, I suspect the Lakers would take one or two more championships vs the potential of those picks any day. Their gamble may not work out but if you are running an NBA franchise to win, you make this trade every day if you are Los Angeles.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,997
Wait...what? Pick a side! Someone is a massive loser in this deal right now - there has to be or else why bother posting.

In all seriousness, the Lakers had to do this - they went all in with LeBron/Klutch last year and they are now in a position to contend for a title next year depending on how they fill out their roster.

The Pelicans, on the other hand, were in a tough situation in that everyone knew they had to move Davis and that he/his people were really intent on limiting the field to one counterparty. Griffin appears to have secured a very good package with the players and a wealth of potentially valuable picks.

That said, the questions around all the young players in the deal, as well as the debates about the current draft speak volumes about the high degree of variance around picks. It seems like hardcore sports fans are more inclined to overvalue potential vs actual performance. As others have noted, the odds favor players picked with the slots sent to New Orleans by the Lakers turning out to be rotation players vs elite/star types.

In the end, I suspect the Lakers would take one or two more championships vs the potential of those picks any day. Their gamble may not work out but if you are running an NBA franchise to win, you make this trade every day if you are Los Angeles.
Yeah, the problem is less that they traded value for AD than that their position with LeBron forced them to play their cards face-up. Every negotiation has a walk-away point for both sides, and Griffin knew exactly where the Lakers’ was, and so extracted full value.

LeBron could have helped things out a lot by pretending to be fine playing with the youngsters, or chilling in LA, but for whatever reason he and Paul made it abundantly clear where the Lakers’ BATNA was. For a guy as undeniably smart as LeBron, he played this pretty poorly.
 

djbayko

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
25,895
Los Angeles, CA
LeBron could have helped things out a lot by pretending to be fine playing with the youngsters, or chilling in LA, but for whatever reason he and Paul made it abundantly clear where the Lakers’ BATNA was. For a guy as undeniably smart as LeBron, he played this pretty poorly.
That assumes he cares about the Lakers’ post-Lebron future. He played it pretty well if he only cares about winning now and his legacy. Go ask the Cavs.

Perhaps the Lakers were okay with waiting one more year because it allowed them to salvage the future and Lebron had to play it this way.
 

ElUno20

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
6,055
Has this current Laker brainrust looked like they were running a franchise to win?
I think a lot you are missing the point. Does this trade make it more or less likely the lakers will win the title this upcoming season vs what they had before? That's all they're worried about. Get the next one and figure the rest out after. Because draft picks, cap space, etc. That shit doesnt matter to them. They'll always be a star forcing their way/headed to the lakers.

Even after lebron leaves, AD bridges the gap for the next star to join him. So yeah, great job, Griffin. Enjoy the picks that you probably wont even be employed to use.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
90,017
Oregon
I think a lot you are missing the point. Does this trade make it more or less likely the lakers will win the title this upcoming season vs what they had before? That's all they're worried about. Get the next one and figure the rest out after. Because draft picks, cap space, etc. That shit doesnt matter to them. They'll always be a star forcing their way/headed to the lakers.

Even after lebron leaves, AD bridges the gap for the next star to join him. So yeah, great job, Griffin. Enjoy the picks that you probably wont even be employed to use.
You make it sound as though there's only one point to be understood.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,205
Has this current Laker brainrust looked like they were running a franchise to win?
Yes. They signed LeBron James last summer and now they turned a bunch of young players & picks into Anthony Davis. That undoes a lot of bad calls in the years prior. We can dismiss these events as a function of their location and the value of the Lakers brand. However, they are now in a position to contend for the championship next season - note they may not win but they have a legitimate shot which is all you can ask.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
90,017
Oregon
Yes. They signed LeBron James last summer and now they turned a bunch of young players & picks into Anthony Davis. That undoes a lot of bad calls in the years prior. We can dismiss these events as a function of their location and the value of the Lakers brand. However, they are now in a position to contend for the championship next season - note they may not win but they have a legitimate shot which is all you can ask.
Oh sure ... NOW you take me seriously
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
21,759
Pittsburgh, PA
For Celtics fans, I think the takeaway is that the Lakers were so desperate that Ainge never had enough to compete. Adding Tatum wouldn't get this deal done. This was like bidding at against Nick Cage at an auction - you're never going to beat insanity. Griffin did really well.
Fantastic reference, especially since higher authorities can always come around later and tell you that despite winning that auction, you no longer get to keep that asset you bought.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
4,546
That assumes he cares about the Lakers’ post-Lebron future. He played it pretty well if he only cares about winning now and his legacy. Go ask the Cavs.

Perhaps the Lakers were okay with waiting one more year because it allowed them to salvage the future and Lebron had to play it this way.
He hurts the current Lakers too though, if he hurt their negotiating position for AD so much that they were forced to give up too much.

Assuming they even get a third star to join the team, they'll have Lebron, AD, star #3, Kuzma, one guy signed for the room exception, and 7 guys making the minimum.

If they want to make a trade to add to that squad, forget about it. They have no prospects, no salary to match up for a player making any real money, and can't trade a first round pick until 2026(and even that could be pushed back to 2027).

If not being so out in the open about needing to trade AD could've saved them even one asset, that could make a huge difference in building around Lebron and AD.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,460
I was one of the biggest haters in his draft year, but one of my current hotter takes is that I think Lonzo is going to be really good, and maybe great. He is a ball movement savant. Great size, good rebounder, and a pretty savvy (if unathletic) defender. The Lebron offense wasn’t great for him. The total inability to get to the line/hit free throws is an impediment but if his deep shooting floor is the 30% he shot as a rookie, I think he’ll ultimately be fine. Someone you include in a superstar trade? A thousand times yes, but I’m not ashamed to say I like him. More than Ingram at least, who is a huge ball-stopper.

Dad needs to chill, obviously.
I've seen this from a few people, but I couldn't disagree more. He has almost no chance to be great, and little chance to be really good. He's an exceptionally poor offensive player, he can't shoot at all, on any level, he draws no fouls, and he can't shoot FTs, so he's someone you straight up can't play late in a close game as opponents will just foul to let you take that 0.86 PPP. He's a solid defender and a good passer, but all that makes him is a worse version of Ricky Rubio, probably significantly worse.

He has all the makings of a career backup PG.

If Kyrie leaves, what about Ball as the Celtics PG instead of Rozier? What's Ball worth in draft picks?

Would Memphis trade the 2 for the 4, if a couple of the Lakers picks came in the deal, or the Pels' 202 first round pick? Instead of Morant, Memphis could go with Coby White or Darius Garland, and the Pels could re-unite Zion and Morant for a 21st century Stockton/Malone pairing.

Would NO have the Celtics draft a wing for them at 14, and pick a PG at 4, and move Ball to the Celtics for the 14 and a pick (and salary ballast)?
I would hate it, you can get Ricky Rubio cheaper and he's a better player in the same mold
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
90,017
Oregon
He hurts the current Lakers too though, if he hurt their negotiating position for AD so much that they were forced to give up too much.

Assuming they even get a third star to join the team, they'll have Lebron, AD, star #3, Kuzma, one guy signed for the room exception, and 7 guys making the minimum.

If they want to make a trade to add to that squad, forget about it. They have no prospects, no salary to match up for a player making any real money, and can't trade a first round pick until 2026(and even that could be pushed back to 2027).

If not being so out in the open about needing to trade AD could've saved them even one asset, that could make a huge difference in building around Lebron and AD.
You don't understand ... the Lakers won bigly
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
21,759
Pittsburgh, PA
You make it sound as though there's only one point to be understood.
Yeah, and that's My Point. Your Point is clearly dumb or irrelevant, because it's not My Point.

Yeah, the problem is less that they traded value for AD than that their position with LeBron forced them to play their cards face-up. Every negotiation has a walk-away point for both sides, and Griffin knew exactly where the Lakers’ was, and so extracted full value.

LeBron could have helped things out a lot by pretending to be fine playing with the youngsters, or chilling in LA, but for whatever reason he and Paul made it abundantly clear where the Lakers’ BATNA was. For a guy as undeniably smart as LeBron, he played this pretty poorly.
It may not have been Lebron or even his agent playing this poorly - it's just that the Lakers front office and/or executive management leaks like a sieve, to their own detriment.

Funniest moment of the season was the Lebron's Gonna Trade You chant in Indiana. The various revelations that led to that, and the detailed history of the failed trade-deadline negotiations (details of which were clearly furnished on the Lakers' side rather than the Pelicans'), are a pretty strong indictment of this management being able to keep their cards face-down, even when dealt some pretty good cards.
 

Tony C

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Apr 13, 2000
13,694
It seems to me Paul and LeBron saved Lakers' management from themselves. Basically Paul/LeBron decided to go to the Lakers last year and overcame all their circular firing squad stuff. And they're the ones who made the AD deal happen despite the front office mayhem having become national news.

I thought LeBron as GM was thoroughly mediocre in Cleveland and something of a necessary burden to put up with given what he gave on the court. Not sure how the Lakers are going to round out their squad, but I'd trust Paul/Lebron more than Pelinka/Rambis -- LeBrons not just still a great player he's the only hope to save Buss/Pelinka/Rambis from looking like the total incompetents they are.
 

OurF'ingCity

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 22, 2016
8,469
New York City
Celtics the big losers in re never converting their assets into championship winning studs.
Would you not call Hayward and Kyrie “championship winning studs”? Hayward’s injury threw a major wrench into the works no one was expecting, but their plan worked - they just didn’t end up winning a championship. And the Lakers could very well end up in precisely the same situation depending on injury luck, how other teams in the West perform, etc.
 

Tony C

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Apr 13, 2000
13,694
True. Luck/chance/breaks are always the big unknown factors.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
LeBron could have helped things out a lot by pretending to be fine playing with the youngsters, or chilling in LA, but for whatever reason he and Paul made it abundantly clear where the Lakers’ BATNA was. For a guy as undeniably smart as LeBron, he played this pretty poorly.
LeBron rolled out the red carpet to get Davis to LA for the Lakers, I’m not sure what else he was supposed to do given the LA front office’s ineptitude. Had they drafted well they wouldn’t have needed all those picks, but they haven’t.
 

ManicCompression

Member
SoSH Member
May 14, 2015
1,352
The reason I don't like the move for the Lakers is that I have zero faith they'll surround these two tremendous talents with anything approaching a championship level roster. To me, the post Jerry Buss Lakers are very interested in accumulating stars, but they're not very interested in actually doing the things that translate to winning. I think we conflate those two ideas when we say it's a "star league" - yeah, of course you need stars, but no one's winning a championship without quality depth as well. We see role players stepping up every playoffs, like Fred Van Vleet this year or Kevon Looney or James Posey or Robert Horry or Ray Allen on the Heat. Those are the guys on the margins who often make up the difference in a tight playoff series.

The past couple of years of Pelinka moves (I mean, just look at the Muscala trade, or the Beasley signing, or letting Brook Lopez go for nothing, or signing Lance Stephenson, drafting Mo Wagner so high, Lonzo at 2, etc.) don't fill me up with confidence. He doesn't seem very detail-oriented and all of the articles about him paint him as a guy who doesn't listen to his basketball operations people. Will have the patience or skill to find guys, outside of Lebron and AD, who will match or overperform their contracts? Because they're going to need that out of players 3-8 on the roster if they're going to contend. And if he doesn't, and they fall short... how do they rebound next year with no draft picks to trade, no young players on cost-controlled contracts, and $80 million dedicated to two players?

If Jeannie Buss had fired Pelinka and hired, I don't know, David Griffin and he made this same trade, I'd be encouraged that they could actually maximize the AD/Lebron years. I just am pretty pessimistic that current regime will be able to leverage them correctly and that'll be a pretty disappointing waste of AD's prime and LeBron's last legs. Time will tell, of course.
 

Big John

New Member
Dec 9, 2016
2,086
The reason I don't like the move for the Lakers is that I have zero faith they'll surround these two tremendous talents with anything approaching a championship level roster. To me, the post Jerry Buss Lakers are very interested in accumulating stars, but they're not very interested in actually doing the things that translate to winning. I think we conflate those two ideas when we say it's a "star league" - yeah, of course you need stars, but no one's winning a championship without quality depth as well.
Not only decent depth, but also decent coaching. I'm not saying Frank Vogel is a bad coach, but if the team gets off to a lousy start, he's going to get fired and Jason kidd (who was foisted upon Vogel, not chosen by him) will be the coach. Jason Kidd is not a good coach.

The belief seems to be that superstars don't really need a bench, and they don't need much coaching either. Auerbach and the Zen Master (with Tex Winter by his side) might disagree.
 

slamminsammya

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
9,154
San Francisco
I was one of the biggest haters in his draft year, but one of my current hotter takes is that I think Lonzo is going to be really good, and maybe great. He is a ball movement savant. Great size, good rebounder, and a pretty savvy (if unathletic) defender. The Lebron offense wasn’t great for him. The total inability to get to the line/hit free throws is an impediment but if his deep shooting floor is the 30% he shot as a rookie, I think he’ll ultimately be fine. Someone you include in a superstar trade? A thousand times yes, but I’m not ashamed to say I like him. More than Ingram at least, who is a huge ball-stopper.

Dad needs to chill, obviously.
I think he has a low ceiling. As we saw with Lebron his skillset is best used when the offense is running through him, but he doesn't score enough to be in charge of the ball for a top offense. Its a weird combination, similar to Rondo I would say. For all the lovely looking assists those Celtics offenses were not very good besides 2008.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Moderator
SoSH Member
The Billy King comparisons are absurd hot takes. Anthony Davis at 26 vs on their last legs KG and PP -- which of these have nothing to do with the other? Particularly when you're pairing AD with LeBron.

Among the many, many other hot takes in this thread that has me puzzled is that the picks are what makes it a good deal for the Pels. Sure...we don't know, but very very good chance those are mainly late picks. All the wishcasting about AD injuries/LeBron decline/no one else every signing with the Lakers is just...well...wishcasting. But Ingram and Ball are really valuable pieces. On Ingram, there's ton of assertions that he doesn't try on defense which can only come from people who don't watch him play. He's got one of those facial expressions that doesn't scream "white guy overachiever" but he's a hard worker with amazing wing span and good feet. I know it's just a month or so, but he was killing it before he went out with this blood clot thing -- the idea he wouldn't go at #4 this year is ridiculous. I'd probably take him #2 and just no way I'd value Hunter over him. And Ball is...well...we all know what he is: he's an elite passer and defender which make him very valuable. God knows what happened to his college shot and his FT shooting makes one think maybe it'll never come around. But if it does -- he moves beyond very valuable to all-star. Those are the 2 prizes for the Pels along with the #4 (Garland? Would love his combo with Zion, Ball, and Ingram). The other picks are what they are.

For all the celebrating in this and other threads, this is a classic win-win trade. Celtics the big losers in re never converting their assets into championship winning studs. Good not great is not where you want to be in this league.
Agree that this year’s #4 is the most valuable of the draft assets acquired by NO. It’s unlikely that any of the future picks will land in the top 3, and even if they did, the 4th overall pick now is worth more than the 2nd or 3rd pick 5 years from now.

Strongly disagree that Ingram and Ball are highly valuable assets. Ingram didn’t mesh well with LeBron and should benefit from a change of scenery, but he has been a disappointment to date and will be an RFA after next season. Ball is under NO’s control for two seasons, but he’s not a useful NBA player unless and until he rediscovers his shot, which has been missing for over a year now. Both have the potential to become much more than they’ve been to date, but there’s not a GM in the league who would part with more than a late 1st-rounder for either of them at this point.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,840
They actually thought a 38 year old Steve Nash and Dwight Howard were gonna run the West.

They won 45 games and were swept in first round of playoffs as Nash played 50 games. The next season he played 15 and Lakers won 27.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
19,467
Somewhere
The Billy King comparisons are absurd hot takes. Anthony Davis at 26 vs on their last legs KG and PP -- which of these have nothing to do with the other? Particularly when you're pairing AD with LeBron.
Maybe you should consider reading for context before accusing a whole bunch of folks of posting garbage.

The Billy King comparison is pretty easy to understand. The Lakers are taking on a lot of (future) downside risk in order to win now. Of course they are much more justified in doing this since pretty much everyone in the organization below Buss *has* to win this season and taking on Davis is obviously a better move than bringing in a much older Garnett-Pierce-Terry. But the thinking is more or less the same, as is the potential downside. The Lakers pretty much traded every asset they have in order to make this happen and that's why Griffin did very well by this deal. This is *especially* true if the Celtics weren't serious about their competing offer. Of course trading a star is almost never the right move but when compelled to do so you take what the Pelicans got every day of the week.

Also, there's *no way* the Lakers are odds-on favorites. Even if the books are crazy, no one in their right mind is going to be favored against the field. Even the Warriors plus Durant opened with 3-2 odds and the Lakers are definitely not that good.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,112
Santa Monica
He hurts the current Lakers too though, if he hurt their negotiating position for AD so much that they were forced to give up too much.

Assuming they even get a third star to join the team, they'll have Lebron, AD, star #3, Kuzma, one guy signed for the room exception, and 7 guys making the minimum.

If they want to make a trade to add to that squad, forget about it. They have no prospects, no salary to match up for a player making any real money, and can't trade a first round pick until 2026(and even that could be pushed back to 2027).

If not being so out in the open about needing to trade AD could've saved them even one asset, that could make a huge difference in building around Lebron and AD.
No worries, the Pelinka-Linda Rambis-Buss brain trust has a keen sense for undervalued talent...

The Carter-Williams, Jamal Crawford, Swedish Bird and "Moose" Monroe bench is going to get it done, especially on LBJ/AD load days. :drunk:

Can we just put them in the Finals now?
 

kazuneko

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
2,816
Honolulu HI
If the Lakers hadn't had insane ping pong ball luck, this trade probably doesn't happen.

Stupid lottery.
People who know better please correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe a big factor with that was the NBA changing how the odds work to discourage tanking. Under the new system the difference between the best and worst team in the lottery's chances of winning a top pick is far closer than in previous years. Ironically this seems to have benefited 2019's most blatantly tanking team: The LA Lakers.
In the past system any team in serious contention for that pick was so bad that the difference between them tanking and not taking felt relatively unimportant. Despite that, the NBA seemed hell bent on "fixing" the problem. Now, under this new system, the NBA appears to be encouraging something much worse: good teams tanking to avoid the playoffs.
The Lakers -if they wanted to be - were a playoff team this year. They intentionally limited LeBron's minutes and then sat him and others because they wanted to lose. The new system rewarded their efforts with the number 4 pick.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,494
but there’s not a GM in the league who would part with more than a late 1st-rounder for either of them at this point.
For whatever it is worth, there have been multiple reports that LAL could get high lottery pick for Ball.

Leaving aside medical concerns, which I don't know anything about other than rumors he will be fine, Ingram is 6'10" with PG skills and some ability to guard smaller players (again, look at his defense on Kyrie). In the six games after the All-Star break - before he got shut down - he averaged 27.8 points and 7.5 rebounds while shooting an incredible 57% from the field and 53% on 3Ps. SSS true but he certainly has the ability to do things like this consistently.

No one rationale is trading Ingram for a late first-round pick. Danny would take Ingram in a heartbeat if he could get him for 14.

I get that people would love the Ben Simmons, Jaylen Browns, Jayson Tatums, and Brandon Ingrams (etc.) of the world to come in and be an All-Star in their first season but there aren't too many guys like that and I doubt there is more than one in this draft. But that doesn't mean that they suck.
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
8,017
Imaginationland
The Lakers -if they wanted to be - were a playoff team this year. They intentionally limited LeBron's minutes and then sat him and others because they wanted to lose. The new system rewarded their efforts with the number 4 pick.
The bolded is absolutely not true. In his first 12 games back he averaged 38.5 mpg, which is far more than he averaged before the injury (34.7 mpg). In his 12th game back in a loss to the clippers, he played over 42 minutes (after playing 40 minutes two nights earlier) and the loss dropped them to 30-34, 5.5 games out of the 8th spot. Down that much with 18 games to go and their young guys dropping like flies, there was no way they were making the playoffs. After that game Lebron averaged just 33 mpg and played in just 9 games, so that's the point at which they threw in the towel. The mid season Lebron injury, late season injuries to the youngsters and injuries and poor play from their odd collection of role players did them in, it wasn't intentional until they were already dead.

At no point was a 6th straight lottery appearance the goal, but once it became a reality they did what everyone does and lose as best as they could down the stretch.
 

kazuneko

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
2,816
Honolulu HI
The bolded is absolutely not true. In his first 12 games back he averaged 38.5 mpg, which is far more than he averaged before the injury (34.7 mpg). In his 12th game back in a loss to the clippers, he played over 42 minutes (after playing 40 minutes two nights earlier) and the loss dropped them to 30-34, 5.5 games out of the 8th spot. Down that much with 18 games to go and their young guys dropping like flies, there was no way they were making the playoffs. After that game Lebron averaged just 33 mpg and played in just 9 games, so that's the point at which they threw in the towel. The mid season Lebron injury, late season injuries to the youngsters and injuries and poor play from their odd collection of role players did them in, it wasn't intentional until they were already dead.

At no point was a 6th straight lottery appearance the goal, but once it became a reality they did what everyone does and lose as best as they could down the stretch.
That's a well researched answer and I suppose that makes me feel a bit better about what happened. That said, I still can't stand evening out the odds of the lottery as it definitely would seem to encourage one type of tanking (among borderline playoff-teams) to avoid a less significant type of tanking (among teams that are horrible).
 

nattysez

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2010
8,433
I will be referring to the Lakers as Nets West going forward. If they make a Finals appearance and no more than 1 of the picks they traded winds up being a lottery pick, I'll admit I was wrong.
 

djbayko

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
25,895
Los Angeles, CA
That's a well researched answer and I suppose that makes me feel a bit better about what happened. That said, I still can't stand evening out the odds of the lottery as it definitely would seem to encourage one type of tanking (among borderline playoff-teams) to avoid a less significant type of tanking (among teams that are horrible).
What I don't get is that the type of tanking that they are trying to discourage is the kind that everyone can sympathize with. You're a shitty team going nowhere. Who am I to judge you for trying to pull yourself out of hell somehow? I really don't care. Now they're going to be giving top draft picks to the teams who don't need them most. It's just stupid and backwards. They'll probably switch it up again several years down the road after a worst case scenario happens.
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
8,017
Imaginationland
We're only one year in, but is that really happening? From my vantage point the teams fighting it out in the 7/8/9/10 range fought like hell until close to the very end. The one possible exception would be the Clippers because of the Harris trade, but even that was complicated (not only did the playoffs mean no shot at a top 4 pick, it meant they lost their first rounder altogether).
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,112
Santa Monica
We're only one year in, but is that really happening? From my vantage point the teams fighting it out in the 7/8/9/10 range fought like hell until close to the very end. The one possible exception would be the Clippers because of the Harris trade, but even that was complicated (not only did the playoffs mean no shot at a top 4 pick, it meant they lost their first rounder altogether).
It sure looked like the Clips were throwing in the towel, at first blush it felt like a good GFIN deal for Philly. The ironic part is the Clippers won the Harris trade this season and massively in the future. They sold high on his 3pt %, the dudes' defense is bad and trending south. Jerry West knows best. :notworthy:

The Sixers will probably compound that bad trade by MAXing him.* After which we'll read about all the scoring they have, it's a star-driven league, can't live w/out Tobias' 3pt shooting/spreading the floor, 76ers had to MAX him - can't lose an asset for nothing etc, etc, etc

I like my MAX/star player to play both sides of the ball, defense matters.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/harrito02.html

*if the 76ers don't MAX Tobias or if he takes his talents elsewhere, we can only pray he partners with Kyrie in Brooklyn
 
Last edited:

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Moderator
SoSH Member
For whatever it is worth, there have been multiple reports that LAL could get high lottery pick for Ball.
I’m guessing someone in the Lakers’ organization is the source for those reports. I don’t believe them for a second. I was bullish on Ball a year ago, figuring his late-season shooting woes were a product of the distractions created by his family and that he’d snap out of it. That hasn’t happened. He doesn’t have to become Steph Curry or anything, but if teams can leave him unguarded at the 3-point line, he can’t play.


Leaving aside medical concerns, which I don't know anything about other than rumors he will be fine, Ingram is 6'10" with PG skills and some ability to guard smaller players (again, look at his defense on Kyrie). In the six games after the All-Star break - before he got shut down - he averaged 27.8 points and 7.5 rebounds while shooting an incredible 57% from the field and 53% on 3Ps. SSS true but he certainly has the ability to do things like this consistently.

No one rationale is trading Ingram for a late first-round pick. Danny would take Ingram in a heartbeat if he could get him for 14.

I get that people would love the Ben Simmons, Jaylen Browns, Jayson Tatums, and Brandon Ingrams (etc.) of the world to come in and be an All-Star in their first season but there aren't too many guys like that and I doubt there is more than one in this draft. But that doesn't mean that they suck.
This is one of those situation where the old adage about GMs trading contracts rather than players holds true. Danny would give up #14 in a heartbeat to control Ingram for four years, but not for one year of control plus the right to match offers next summer.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,405
around the way
I’m guessing someone in the Lakers’ organization is the source for those reports. I don’t believe them for a second. I was bullish on Ball a year ago, figuring his late-season shooting woes were a product of the distractions created by his family and that he’d snap out of it. That hasn’t happened. He doesn’t have to become Steph Curry or anything, but if teams can leave him unguarded at the 3-point line, he can’t play.




This is one of those situation where the old adage about GMs trading contracts rather than players holds true. Danny would give up #14 in a heartbeat to control Ingram for four years, but not for one year of control plus the right to match offers next summer.
Zero chance that Ball for #6 story was true.

I'd be curious what he would give up for current state Ball or Ingram.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,997
It sure looked like the Clips were throwing in the towel, at first blush it felt like a good GFIN deal for Philly. The ironic part is the Clippers won the Harris trade this season and massively in the future. They sold high on his 3pt %, the dudes' defense is bad and trending south. Jerry West knows best. :notworthy:

The Sixers will probably compound that bad trade by MAXing him.* After which we'll read about all the scoring they have, it's a star-driven league, can't live w/out Tobias' 3pt shooting/spreading the floor, 76ers had to MAX him - can't lose an asset for nothing etc, etc, etc

I like my MAX/star player to play both sides of the ball, defense matters.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/harrito02.html

*if the 76ers don't MAX Tobias or if he takes his talents elsewhere, we can only pray he partners with Kyrie in Brooklyn
Re Harris: if Embiid is healthy in the playoffs, there's a pretty decent chance they are NBA champions. That wouldn't have been the case without Harris imo, given how thin they were on the wing. If they bring him and Butler back and fill out their depth a little (1st rounder missed the whole season this year), they are going to be a problem. I think they overpaid for Harris, but they also didn't have any other paths forward, and this path looks fine-ish even in hindsight.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,090
This is one of those situation where the old adage about GMs trading contracts rather than players holds true. Danny would give up #14 in a heartbeat to control Ingram for four years, but not for one year of control plus the right to match offers next summer.
Am I the only one who would trade #14 for Ingram’s 2019-2020 season and RFA rights (assuming health issues aren’t major)?
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
19,467
Somewhere
Am I the only one who would trade #14 for Ingram’s 2019-2020 season and RFA rights (assuming health issues aren’t major)?
I'd probably do it since generally speaking even playing as badly as Ingram has is more than you can expect from most mid-first round draft picks.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,494
Am I the only one who would trade #14 for Ingram’s 2019-2020 season and RFA rights (assuming health issues aren’t major)?
In this draft? I'm sure others here have spent more time in a week looking at players than I have in total but my impression from reading what might be available to the Cs is that most of the players available at 14 and back are low ceiling guys.

So no, you are not the only one.
 
Last edited:

Carmine Hose

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 2, 2001
5,046
Dorchester, MA
If the Lakers hadn't had insane ping pong ball luck, this trade probably doesn't happen.
It certainly was lucky that the team that AD wanted to go to needed to move up from 11 to the top 4 to make the trade palatable to NO. And also for the team losing AD to move up to 1 to get Zion. And also for a weak market team to move up to 2. And also for NYK to not fall past 3 in a 3 player draft.

An almost too lucky result one might say.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
I'd probably do it since generally speaking even playing as badly as Ingram has is more than you can expect from most mid-first round draft picks.
Totally. Ingram has his flaws, but any guy capable of scoring like he has is well worth the #14 pick.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Moderator
SoSH Member
Am I the only one who would trade #14 for Ingram’s 2019-2020 season and RFA rights (assuming health issues aren’t major)?
I think it depends whether you think the C’s will want to get under the cap anytime in the next 4-5 years.

Unless Ingram is a total bust next season, it will take a 4-year deal at substantially more than the full MLE to retain him. I think that would scuttle any chance of signing a max free agent two years from now (when Hayward comes off the books, assuming he opts in for 2020-21).

If money isn’t a factor, then sure, I can see why you’d like Ingram better than #14. But your typical team drafting in the mid-late teens would almost certainly prefer the flexibility; if Danny offers #14 for Ingram, it will be NO’s richest offer by far.