Anthony Davis: No Loyalty

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
12,000
I agree with this and I would also add that while the Pelicans ownership and organization has remained the same, they now have a new GM in Griffin. Griffin obviously has ties to LeBron and Klutch as well as around the league in general.

Once again, the return is really contingent on what Griffin's bosses are expecting him to do. If he wants the best package possible, he needs to include all bidders including the Lakers. And if he is looking for a diversified package of talent vs a big name, that will also impact the Celtics chances. Tatum is arguably the biggest star who has been mentioned going to New Orleans but if Griffin is empowered to get a bunch of useful young bodies and pick assets, that opens the field up to a bunch of other teams.

Unless Bulpett is privy to the dynamic between Griffin and the Gayle Benson, he probably knows little more than we do at this point.
Griffin has even stronger connections in Boston. Ainge gave him his first job, and he’s tight with Zarren.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,679
Not sure I agree. It seems very unlikely to me that a 2019 draft choice of some sort won't be going NO's way. And they're going to want to decide who it's used on.
I hope not, Boston needs to be thinking about what happens when Davis walks next summer.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,679
Guess we'll see how far Klutch is willing to go.
It is sort of predictable as the Lakers ended up with #4 in a three player pool. And everything else they have comes with giant question marks. Maybe if they talked Phoenix into Ball for #6 the Pelicans would feel differently about the rest of it. But LA would have some serious spade work to do to put together an acceptable package.
 

NickEsasky

Please Hammer, Don't Hurt 'Em
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 24, 2001
9,191
It is sort of predictable as the Lakers ended up with #4 in a three player pool. And everything else they have comes with giant question marks. Maybe if they talked Phoenix into Ball for #6 the Pelicans would feel differently about the rest of it. But LA would have some serious spade work to do to put together an acceptable package.
It's a good strategy entering a negotiation to rule out considering one of the top 2 potential offers, right?
I think the joke went over your head.

Rich Paul, in the study, with a beignet.
This guy gets it.
 

djbayko

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
25,895
Los Angeles, CA
It's a good strategy entering a negotiation to rule out considering one of the top 2 potential offers, right?
He could be ruling them out privately but intended to use them in negotiations. Maybe he didn’t intend for this info to get out.

Or it’s BS.

Edit: Oh, now see this report is about Gayle, not Griffin.
 

Tony C

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Apr 13, 2000
13,695
How can the edict in NO not be: do whatever is necessary to improve our team?

You really have to wonder about an owner who at the same time undermines her new GM and the negotiating position of their team. I mean...even if you have it out for a team like the Lakers, why would you let that be known? All you're doing is reducing your own team's leverage (maybe after the trade if you want to do a nyaah nyaah victory dance you can leak that, though even then seems dumb/immature).

Not a good sign for Griffin in re dealing with the owner. Wasn't her husband known as a meddling owner before his death, too? (In re the Saints, in any case)
 

djbayko

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
25,895
Los Angeles, CA
How can the edict in NO not be: do whatever is necessary to improve our team?

You really have to wonder about an owner who at the same time undermines her new GM and the negotiating position of their team. I mean...even if you have it out for a team like the Lakers, why would you let that be known? All you're doing is reducing your own team's leverage (maybe after the trade if you want to do a nyaah nyaah victory dance you can leak that, though even then seems dumb/immature).

Not a good sign for Griffin in re dealing with the owner. Wasn't her husband known as a meddling owner before his death, too? (In re the Saints, in any case)
Regarding the bolded, it may seem immature, but at the same time it does provide at least a little deterrence effect by letting the Lakers and any future teams know they didn't "get away with it". The problem with this shady but legal tampering by a big market team is that, as many have pointed out, it's in the small market team's best interest to play along with their charade.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,209
Even if Gayle Benson were to come out and demand Rob Pelinka's head on a pike, it means nothing. Either Griffin is empowered to do whatever he thinks is in the best interests of the Pelicans (short or long-term) or he is not. Without knowing how much latitude he has, its impossible to comment on what New Orleans trade prospects are.

As HRB notes this time of year, its "silly season" and we will be fed all sorts of information via the press. If the people running the NBA teams are good at their jobs, most of it will be wildly and deliberately inaccurate.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
31,194
Perhaps the message for the Lakers is that tampering with other team's players relentlessly for years will generate enemies?

I don't know, just spitballin' here....
 

Big John

New Member
Dec 9, 2016
2,086
Meh. So the Lakers tampered. The Pelicans will take the best deal anyway. If the tampering was relentless, it's up to Silver to impose a more meaningful penalty than mere fines.
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
13,487
Santa Monica, CA
If you're the Pelicans, I guess it doesn't hurt during this dead period to try and plant some seeds with LA that they'll have to overpay to get back in the mix. Even if you don't mean it.
 

JCizzle

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 11, 2006
20,532
Lakers already offered everything they have. I guess the 4th pick is worth something but Ingram’s value has tanked.
It certainly doesn't help that Ingram had that scary injury and Ball can't stay on the court. I think the Lakers vastly overrated their chips. As Celtics fans we obviously would never do that ourselves ;)
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,850
It certainly doesn't help that Ingram had that scary injury and Ball can't stay on the court. I think the Lakers vastly overrated their chips. As Celtics fans we obviously would never do that ourselves ;)
Well, if you check the thread where people are thinking Kuzmais around equal to Tatum, then I don't think we are.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,406
around the way
Well, if you check the thread where people are thinking Kuzmais around equal to Tatum, then I don't think we are.
Celtics fans (most fans) are prone to fall in love with their own guys, of course. That's understandable.

Much of the Kuzma, Ball, and Ingram national hype comes from "national media" hoop talking heads who either embrace this Lakers Exceptionalism nonsense or want to advance the interests of the team out of LA roots or friends/contacts associated with the team.

It's a coordinated PR hype machine, and you saw it at last year's trade deadline. And you're seeing it now, with them pumping up the value of the #4 pick in a draft with 3 standouts. There's a non-zero chance that Ball and Ingram play 40 games next year between them and that pick is barely a rotation guy on a good team, yet a lot of the hoop pages are battering readers with "Pelicans have to take that deal, right? Right?".

Griffin is a professional. We don't exactly know his mandate from ownership and how quickly they want to build it up, whether the Lakers are really persona non grata, etc. But he won't be influenced materially by hype.
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
9,276
I think a lot of you are misinterpreting the “over my dead body” idea.

Windhorst was on some radio show and I think he said it best. Basically if the Lakers got the #1 pick they would be able to offer a package so good that the Pelicans would have no choice but to accept. However, with the #4 pick in a 3 player draft, combined with the recent health/external issues of their main assets, is their offer much better now than it was at the trading deadline? I’d argue that it’s not and there’s no way it’s good enough to force the Pelicans hand, make them plug their nose and accept an offer from a Laker team that they clearly think tried to submarine their season and potential trade returns.

I think Griffin could trade with the Lakers if he wanted too but he’s really going to have to pound the table for that trade and convince Benson/Loomis/whoever that its definitely the best offer. I’ve yet to find any intelligent basketball person who has said that the Lakers even have the best potential offer let alone CLEARLY the best offer.

Who knows what he thinks but I highly doubt that Griffin loves the Lakers package so much he’s willing to fight for it and open himself up to that scrutiny from ownership.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
12,000
The funny thing is, none of this stuff regarding the shit value of the Lakers' young guys is hypothetical. If they could have shipped off Ball or Ingram or Kuzma that they thought the Pelicans would like more, they'd have done it in Jan. Ingram had very high value at one time, but they waited too long. Ball has the "I don't want to play in LA" and "I can't shoot basketballs" issue, and no one is giving up real pieces for young MaMo.
 

JCizzle

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 11, 2006
20,532
I think a lot of you are misinterpreting the “over my dead body” idea.

Windhorst was on some radio show and I think he said it best. Basically if the Lakers got the #1 pick they would be able to offer a package so good that the Pelicans would have no choice but to accept. However, with the #4 pick in a 3 player draft, combined with the recent health/external issues of their main assets, is their offer much better now than it was at the trading deadline? I’d argue that it’s not and there’s no way it’s good enough to force the Pelicans hand, make them plug their nose and accept an offer from a Laker team that they clearly think tried to submarine their season and potential trade returns.

I think Griffin could trade with the Lakers if he wanted too but he’s really going to have to pound the table for that trade and convince Benson/Loomis/whoever that its definitely the best offer. I’ve yet to find any intelligent basketball person who has said that the Lakers even have the best potential offer let alone CLEARLY the best offer.

Who knows what he thinks but I highly doubt that Griffin loves the Lakers package so much he’s willing to fight for it and open himself up to that scrutiny from ownership.
I think it shows that the Celtics, LAC, and NYK were so smart to collect future picks that aren't their own. The LAL have no real value to offer beyond this year since AD kills the value of their own future picks. The other three teams can offer picks that are independent of AD's impact.
 

HowBoutDemSox

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2009
10,103
Rumors of the Lakers talking to the Bulls about flipping Lonzo to Chicago for assets to package to New Orleans:
K.C. Johnson of the Chicago Tribune reported Ball "intrigues" the Bulls because of his passing ability and defense, which they view as a good fit with Lauri Markkanen, Zach LaVine and Wendell Carter Jr. Johnson speculated the Bulls could use the No. 7 pick as part of a trade package for Ball, either going back to Los Angeles or to the New Orleans Pelicans.
https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2837134-lonzo-ball-trade-rumors-lakers-pg-intrigues-bulls-entering-2019-nba-draft

That feels like an overpay for Lonzo, but interesting to see how they plan on building the assets to make their play for Davis.
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
21,766
Pittsburgh, PA
yeah if it's #7 for Ball straight-up, sure, that's an overpay. But with Robin Lopez expiring, the Bulls have a ton of cap space and can do some creative deals for future assets. Wouldn't you love to own a 2022 Lakers first?
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
8,160
If you are NOL, do you really want more draft picks this draft? If I'm them, I think I'd be thrilled with having the #1 pick this year, a young player who's been in the league 1-2 years, and hopefully high value future draft pick(s).
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,850
yeah if it's #7 for Ball straight-up, sure, that's an overpay. But with Robin Lopez expiring, the Bulls have a ton of cap space and can do some creative deals for future assets. Wouldn't you love to own a 2022 Lakers first?
The value of the Lakers 2022 first round pick is dependent on whether or not the #7 pick helps pry AD away from New Orleans.
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
21,766
Pittsburgh, PA
Fair point, DD, but I'd think the #7 this year could be spun into an unprotected future first from at least a half-dozen teams. Then it just depends on who you want to bet against.

The league is more interesting the more unprotected (or little-protected) firsts are floating around, so I generally root for that to happen.
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
13,487
Santa Monica, CA
If you are NOL, do you really want more draft picks this draft? If I'm them, I think I'd be thrilled with having the #1 pick this year, a young player who's been in the league 1-2 years, and hopefully high value future draft pick(s).
Hmm, you mean the exact package your favorite team is offering?
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
13,487
Santa Monica, CA
Fair point, DD, but I'd think the #7 this year could be spun into an unprotected future first from at least a half-dozen teams. Then it just depends on who you want to bet against.

The league is more interesting the more unprotected (or little-protected) firsts are floating around, so I generally root for that to happen.
I don't think that's true (the first part). Unless you mean from teams that are currently contenders or near-contenders and likely to remain that way for several years.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
19,470
Somewhere
Ball and Kuzma for Dunn and #7 is probably a fair deal.

I'm not sure Dunn (sorry, Bakes!) carries any value so it's basically a pair of supporting players for air.

Whether that gets the Lakers closer to a deal with New Orleans is an open question.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,850
Fair point, DD, but I'd think the #7 this year could be spun into an unprotected future first from at least a half-dozen teams. Then it just depends on who you want to bet against.

The league is more interesting the more unprotected (or little-protected) firsts are floating around, so I generally root for that to happen.
Sure, it *could*. I'm operating on the assumption that if Ball is traded for the #7 it's done because NO has told the Lakers that the #7 is more attractive than Ball.

I still think the Celtics can top that though. #7 in a 2 or 3 person draft isn't that enticing.
 

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
15,671
The value of the Lakers 2022 first round pick is dependent on whether or not the #7 pick helps pry AD away from New Orleans.
The problem for AD, or any FA considering LAL, is that the Lakers have (realistically) signaled they are foreseeing the possibility of blowing everything up in 2-3 years. They only wanted Lue for three years, they signed Vogel for three years. James is likely to be done or gone. AD can go there, or Kyrie can go there, but if I were them I'd be thinking of it as quite possibly very temporary. The 2023 pick would be safer.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,679
I still think the Celtics can top that though. #7 in a 2 or 3 person draft isn't that enticing.
On the other hand, four and seven does allow them to gamble a little, which mitigates the risks. You can slightly overdraft someone like De’Andre Hunter at 4 (because he's a sure thing with upside) and still have #7 to use on either a wildcard like Reddish or defensive anchor like Hayes.

If you are NOL, do you really want more draft picks this draft? If I'm them, I think I'd be thrilled with having the #1 pick this year, a young player who's been in the league 1-2 years, and hopefully high value future draft pick(s).
Why wouldn’t you want a pair of guys that come with a minimum of seven years control? The real question would be what can the Lakers turn Kuzma into to make the package more attractive? Or what does New Orleans think his market is?
 

bakahump

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2001
7,522
Maine
Hurt feelings doesnt have to be an all or nothing.

"So you want to buy my Horse. Even though you have been feeding him laxatives to make him weak when I showed him to other buyers. Well I have a price in mind. Say $10000. Boston or NY might offer 10k and 9k respectively. From you I want 12K for being an ass."

Do the lakers
1. Not only have "10K" But the ability to come up with 2k More?
2. Break a deal over having to pay a premium (a premium they themselves caused).

From an owners standpoint you cant really lose.
If they come up with 12K you can then ask Boston to do the same. Then go with whomever.
Or they cant come with 12 K but can come up with 11k so you ask Boston to Match and go with whomever. Or maybe the Lakers cant even come up with 9K and so you take Bostons or NYs 9K and you can show everyone that you have principals (a not valueless asset in business.)

TLDR
There is a floor. Telling the lakers that if they want the asset they need to be above the floor doesnt hurt the Pelicans.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,094
Find this very doubtful. Unprotected picks are pretty much a thing of the past.
Yeah. Everyone will be protecting picks through 1-4 going forward. Only possible exceptions I see are if a team needs to make a trade to complete a super team formation and just has to get it done.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,679
Unprotected picks will be ever with us. If only because teams will always be looking to trade for players or draft picks to draft players that they think are future stars. Teams will still trade picks with declining protections for something that they want now. Mostly because GMs don't care what might happen after they've moved on to another job.
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
21,766
Pittsburgh, PA
Plus, protections remove the upside of a deal. Take away the upside, you take away value, and you're able to trade for less value. That much is obvious, but how it plays out is that different teams have very different views of the probability distribution of a team's outcome 3-5 years down the line. Like it was reported about the Billy King deal, the reaction in the Nets' front office was "we're going to be deep in the playoffs anyway, so what would that right-to-swap-picks really cost us?" As long as (A) your time horizon is very different than your counterparty's (nighthob's point) or (B) your projections of your future are very different than your counterparty's, you might well be inclined to do it unprotected.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,679
Yeah, the standard format is that teams trade picks whose protections decline over time, like the Memphis pick Boston has coming. Now a deal like the Nets deal probably won't happen again, but that was a perfect storm of circumstance, the Nets thought they had their star and they were desperate to do whatever it took to get him to re-sign with them. And so they emptied the cupboard for some vets to surround him with. Unfortunately for them their star was getting toasty.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,094
Unprotected picks will be ever with us. If only because teams will always be looking to trade for players or draft picks to draft players that they think are future stars. Teams will still trade picks with declining protections for something that they want now. Mostly because GMs don't care what might happen after they've moved on to another job.
I may be blanking but were there any unprotected picks traded this year other the Knicks? And by this I mean teams trading their own unprotected pick so not including the Harris/Sixers deal. It’s definitely not going away but I see it declining.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,679
Last year the Mavericks traded a pick with top five protection in 2019 and none in 2020 for the right to draft Luka Doncic via pick swap. These sorts of trades will keep happening because GMs see assets that they want now.

If you think you’ve identified the next Siakam, why are you worried what happens to a first round pick down the road? If you’re right no one will care about the lost first, if you’re wrong, you’re not likely to still be the GM.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,094
Last year the Mavericks traded a pick with top five protection in 2019 and none in 2020 for the right to draft Luka Doncic via pick swap. These sorts of trades will keep happening because GMs see assets that they want now.

If you think you’ve identified the next Siakam, why are you worried what happens to a first round pick down the road? If you’re right no one will care about the lost first, if you’re wrong, you’re not likely to still be the GM.
I agree with the logic but we have the same franchise acting aggressively while I don’t think anyone else has. We’ll see if that changes. For the record, I love how quickly Cuban has revamped the building block talent on that team. He had nothing post-Dirk and now has a Doncic/Unicorn core.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
70,735
Yep, Doncic and Porzingis are just 20 and 23 respectively. Those are the kind of talents you make aggressive moves for.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
8,160
Hmm, you mean the exact package your favorite team is offering?
Nope. The Celtics would be offering a 2 year player who has established himself as one of the best players in his class, and a future pick (Memphis) that is only top 6 protected and could be unprotected in 2021 if it doesn't convey.

Personally, I don't think picks #14, #20, and #22 have much value in this potential trade. For a team that wants to fill out its roster with young players, sure they have more value than nothing, but the centerpiece of the trade is Tatum + Memphis pick.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
8,160
Question: Does anyone know how it works with teams agreeing in principle, but not officially concluding the trade until later with regards to what they can reveal? In other words, if the Celtics are going to be picking players on behalf of NOLA, can they say that publicly, or do they have to be completely secret about it?

If NOLA trades Davis to someone else, obviously we'll hear about it as soon as it happens. My question is, if they decide to trade him to the Celtics, when would we know about it? Would they have to be completely silent until 30 days after the draft?