| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
SuperboyReformed
Star Player
Joined: 07 Oct 2012
Posts: 4083
|
 Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2017 5:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| we'll find out some time hopefully. some of these guesses seem outrageous, especially given how tight lipped the Lakers are with this stuff. and i'll never understand the anti-magic sentiment here on the forums. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
1hu2ren3dui4
Franchise Player
Joined: 19 Jul 2002
Posts: 15403
Location: Oak Park
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| If they were desperate to save their jobs they would have pulled the trigger with Ingram. Either they were vetoed by new management or they actually care about the team more than their jobs. I can believe either. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakerSanity
Moderator
Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 33474
Location: Long Beach, California
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
After nearly three decades of playing mediator and good soldier in this organization, and showing nothing but loyalty, I can't see Mitch for a second mortgaging our future or doing anything for the simple sake of saving his job. Mitch would rather go down with the ship than be the one who sinks it.
Mitch was in an impossible situation and, unfortunately, he was the collateral damage of Jeanie and Jim's war, IMO.
_________________
LakersGround's Terms of Service
Twitter: @DeleteThisPost |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dylandogg
Starting Rotation
Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 680
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2017 11:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LakerSanity wrote: | After nearly three decades of playing mediator and good soldier in this organization, and showing nothing but loyalty, I can't see Mitch for a second mortgaging our future or doing anything for the simple sake of saving his job. Mitch would rather go down with the ship than be the one who sinks it.
Mitch was in an impossible situation and, unfortunately, he was the collateral damage of Jeanie and Jim's war, IMO. |
Well said. Agree completely. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SuperboyReformed
Star Player
Joined: 07 Oct 2012
Posts: 4083
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2017 12:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
it's not necessarily a huge mistake for them refusing to include ingram for cousins. I think cousins is great, probably the best center. But for the Lakers, giving up ingram for him is just swapping two good guys and leaves us in almost the same position. It's like if the pelicans swapped davis for cousins, so what? But they didn't. THey kept davis and got cousins. SO this isn't totally on our FO.
i have no idea how NO pulled that off, hopefully we'll find out. But we got Pau in a similar situation a few years ago. The ingram thing is not the reason for the mitch firing. It probably has more to do with long term stuff...like the fact that we didn't have much to give other than ingram, which is the result of multiple years of stuff. WHich is really the result of the damn veto. So once again, screw stern and the veto. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BigBallerBrand
Star Player
Joined: 23 Dec 2008
Posts: 5802
Location: LA
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2017 12:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| SuperboyReformed wrote: | it's not necessarily a huge mistake for them refusing to include ingram for cousins. I think cousins is great, probably the best center. But for the Lakers, giving up ingram for him is just swapping two good guys and leaves us in almost the same position. It's like if the pelicans swapped davis for cousins, so what? But they didn't. THey kept davis and got cousins. SO this isn't totally on our FO.
i have no idea how NO pulled that off, hopefully we'll find out. But we got Pau in a similar situation a few years ago. The ingram thing is not the reason for the mitch firing. It probably has more to do with long term stuff...like the fact that we didn't have much to give other than ingram, which is the result of multiple years of stuff. WHich is really the result of the damn veto. So once again, screw stern and the veto. |
I don't know what you are smoking. Boogie is a perennial all star and one of the best big men in the last 5 years. Ingram is playing like a scrub, although I agree he has star potential. But you don't compare a 100% guaranteed star like Boogie for a possible star in Ingram. That's like comparing Google stock to a startup that has a potential $500B valuation in 20 years. Not comparable
_________________
Billions Billions Billions |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ShowtimeDynasty_24/7
Star Player
Joined: 04 Mar 2005
Posts: 8361
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2017 4:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| 1hu2ren3dui4 wrote: | | If they were desperate to save their jobs they would have pulled the trigger with Ingram. Either they were vetoed by new management or they actually care about the team more than their jobs. I can believe either. |
Well thats the issue-- and I think highlights the issue when Jeanie says the organization is now all pulling in the same direction. No one knows for sure, but Jim or Mitch may have been willing to evacuate the plans of developing the youth during the chase after Cousins who we have coveted for two years. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LandsbergerRules
Franchise Player
Joined: 29 Aug 2004
Posts: 11197
Location: The Other Perspective
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2017 6:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LakerSanity wrote: | After nearly three decades of playing mediator and good soldier in this organization, and showing nothing but loyalty, I can't see Mitch for a second mortgaging our future or doing anything for the simple sake of saving his job. Mitch would rather go down with the ship than be the one who sinks it.
Mitch was in an impossible situation and, unfortunately, he was the collateral damage of Jeanie and Jim's war, IMO. |
Yeah, I see Jim trying mortgaging the future to save his hide, but not Mitch.
_________________
"Chick lived and breathed Lakers basketball…but he was also fair and objective and called every game the way it was played."
-from Chick: His Unpublished Memoirs and the Memories of Those Who Knew Him |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ziggy
Franchise Player
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 12717
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2017 7:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| RJBaca wrote: | | Nnamdi21 wrote: | I can picture Jim Buss hitting the panic button and including all. while Mitch just remained calm with his game face on, not budging an ounce. While Jeanie and Magic were shouting outside the door, ready to knock it down.
Gotta love and will always miss Mitch's poker face. Great years and championships |
Here here. |
Mitch decided to Hold The Door for the young core and sacrificed himself.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
21Dog
Starting Rotation
Joined: 16 Apr 2001
Posts: 317
Location: Tulare, Ca.
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2017 7:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Boybees wrote: | | Cousins does not have the mental make-up to be part of a winning franchise. Similar to Dwight. We dodged a bullet. |
definitely |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
anth2000
Franchise Player
Joined: 16 Apr 2001
Posts: 12193
Location: Pasadena, CA
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2017 7:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Exactly....people need to stop complaining. Cousins was not worth all our young talent. Then he boots like Dwight and then what are you left with? And what if we obtained him and he gets that giant extension and proceeds to get our next 5 coaches fired? It would be stupid.
Please look past his talent, he's more of a problem than he's worth. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vanexelent
Retired Number
Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 30081
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2017 8:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Did the proposed trade with the Kings include Mozgov and Deng? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wolfpaclaker
Retired Number
Joined: 29 May 2002
Posts: 58344
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2017 8:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
I don't think so.
My gut says even Magic wouldn't have given up Russell and Ingram, which is likely what the Kings wanted.
You look at what they got from New Orleans - a lottery pick possibly this year and another pick in 2019. We could have given them the same pick in 2019, but we could not have given them a pick that high in this draft (already our pick may go to another team). Then New Orleans gave up a young PG prospect in Hield. We'd likely have to give up Russell.
My guess is that Mitch/Jim were willing to deal Russell and a 2019 pick plus Mosgov or Deng, but not Ingram on top of it, which is what the Kings would have wanted.
I don't think Magic/Pelinka would have either, but we will find out in the coming months. Magic is talking up your young talent a ton all of a sudden. But clearly he wants a star in LA. He may just wind up dealing for someone within the next 6 months. Paul George if he doesn't sign an extension in Indiana, is a guy I could see us dealing for. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
audioaxes
Franchise Player
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 12573
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2017 9:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
the writing is pretty clear on the wall. Dings hit piece article blasts the Cousins trade attempt as a shift from the youth movement philosophy. And its obvious Ding is Jeanie's mouthpiece.
_________________
(bleep) Kawhi |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ElginBaylor
Franchise Player
Joined: 05 Nov 2005
Posts: 10775
Location: Hoosier Nation
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2017 9:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ziggy wrote: | | RJBaca wrote: | | Nnamdi21 wrote: | I can picture Jim Buss hitting the panic button and including all. while Mitch just remained calm with his game face on, not budging an ounce. While Jeanie and Magic were shouting outside the door, ready to knock it down.
Gotta love and will always miss Mitch's poker face. Great years and championships |
Here here. |
Mitch decided to Hold The Door for the young core and sacrificed himself. |
Hodor.
_________________
Not a legend |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vanexelent
Retired Number
Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 30081
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2017 9:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah, I'm just trying to figure out what the team would have looked like with Cousins as our main building block. We'd be out of trade chips to get him, so would be looking at free agency for other players. Would we even have enough to pair him with a Paul Milsap or Jeff Teague?
Seems like it's better to play this season out and hope to keep the 1-3 pick. If not, then start offering up Ingram and Russell. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bandiger
Franchise Player
Joined: 02 Apr 2014
Posts: 12555
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2017 9:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LakerSanity wrote: | After nearly three decades of playing mediator and good soldier in this organization, and showing nothing but loyalty, I can't see Mitch for a second mortgaging our future or doing anything for the simple sake of saving his job. Mitch would rather go down with the ship than be the one who sinks it.
Mitch was in an impossible situation and, unfortunately, he was the collateral damage of Jeanie and Jim's war, IMO. |
More like 4 years of being one of the worst teams in the league fires the FO/Coach. Name another franchise that can keep the same staff with no improvement after 4 years. The only GM left that has survived tanking for so long are the Magics/Hennigan. I pity Mitch had to be stuck with Jimbo and his bad coaching hires that made team building difficult with no vision. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SuperboyReformed
Star Player
Joined: 07 Oct 2012
Posts: 4083
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2017 3:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 15 wrote: | | SuperboyReformed wrote: | it's not necessarily a huge mistake for them refusing to include ingram for cousins. I think cousins is great, probably the best center. But for the Lakers, giving up ingram for him is just swapping two good guys and leaves us in almost the same position. It's like if the pelicans swapped davis for cousins, so what? But they didn't. THey kept davis and got cousins. SO this isn't totally on our FO.
i have no idea how NO pulled that off, hopefully we'll find out. But we got Pau in a similar situation a few years ago. The ingram thing is not the reason for the mitch firing. It probably has more to do with long term stuff...like the fact that we didn't have much to give other than ingram, which is the result of multiple years of stuff. WHich is really the result of the damn veto. So once again, screw stern and the veto. |
I don't know what you are smoking. Boogie is a perennial all star and one of the best big men in the last 5 years. Ingram is playing like a scrub, although I agree he has star potential. But you don't compare a 100% guaranteed star like Boogie for a possible star in Ingram. That's like comparing Google stock to a startup that has a potential $500B valuation in 20 years. Not comparable |
maybe you have reading comprehension problems. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakerLanny
Retired Number
Joined: 24 Oct 2001
Posts: 47581
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2017 5:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Boybees wrote: | | Cousins does not have the mental make-up to be part of a winning franchise. Similar to Dwight. We dodged a bullet. |
I am so torn on him.
I generally agree with you. I think you have to have the right mental makeup to lead a championship team and so far he hasn't shown it.
He is in some ways a modern day Rasheed Wallace. Extremely talented player, but maybe a clubhouse lawyer?
_________________
Love, Laker Lanny |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AshesToAshes
Star Player
Joined: 20 Jun 2009
Posts: 4837
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2017 8:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ingram for 2 months of cousins during a tank?
No. Thanks Mitch. True to the end.
I like to think it wasn't not getting cousins, it was the risk that maybe Jim would have done a combo including Dlo/random/nance/Jc and gutted the core for him to leave in a couple months.
The risk of such decisions being made is what caused the firings.
But I still don't understand letting Mitch go.
_________________
KOBE!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lakersken80
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Posts: 38789
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2017 11:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 15 wrote: | | SuperboyReformed wrote: | it's not necessarily a huge mistake for them refusing to include ingram for cousins. I think cousins is great, probably the best center. But for the Lakers, giving up ingram for him is just swapping two good guys and leaves us in almost the same position. It's like if the pelicans swapped davis for cousins, so what? But they didn't. THey kept davis and got cousins. SO this isn't totally on our FO.
i have no idea how NO pulled that off, hopefully we'll find out. But we got Pau in a similar situation a few years ago. The ingram thing is not the reason for the mitch firing. It probably has more to do with long term stuff...like the fact that we didn't have much to give other than ingram, which is the result of multiple years of stuff. WHich is really the result of the damn veto. So once again, screw stern and the veto. |
I don't know what you are smoking. Boogie is a perennial all star and one of the best big men in the last 5 years. Ingram is playing like a scrub, although I agree he has star potential. But you don't compare a 100% guaranteed star like Boogie for a possible star in Ingram. That's like comparing Google stock to a startup that has a potential $500B valuation in 20 years. Not comparable |
DMC wouldn't have done much to help advance our cause considering we would've had to trade a lot of pieces to acquire him. I'm sure the Kings did ask for a lot more from the Lakers than the Pelicans because of our past rivalry and playing in the same division. They ended up sending him to the Pelicans for a lot less on the table. I also believe there are teams out there that would rather help another organization than the Lakers because of our past and they would rather stick it to us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
richmorgan12
Starting Rotation
Joined: 13 Feb 2017
Posts: 595
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 23, 2017 2:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LandsbergerRules wrote: | | LakerSanity wrote: | After nearly three decades of playing mediator and good soldier in this organization, and showing nothing but loyalty, I can't see Mitch for a second mortgaging our future or doing anything for the simple sake of saving his job. Mitch would rather go down with the ship than be the one who sinks it.
Mitch was in an impossible situation and, unfortunately, he was the collateral damage of Jeanie and Jim's war, IMO. |
Yeah, I see Jim trying mortgaging the future to save his hide, but not Mitch. |
I don't see that. Buss only had his hobby to lose. He's still owner. He wouldn't willingly screw with inheritance. And Kupchak reported to Buss, so if Buss wanted to trade Ingram, he would have been traded. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
A Mad Chinaman
Star Player
Joined: 07 Apr 2005
Posts: 6145
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2017 8:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 15 wrote: | | SuperboyReformed wrote: | it's not necessarily a huge mistake for them refusing to include ingram for cousins. I think cousins is great, probably the best center. But for the Lakers, giving up ingram for him is just swapping two good guys and leaves us in almost the same position. It's like if the pelicans swapped davis for cousins, so what? But they didn't. THey kept davis and got cousins. SO this isn't totally on our FO.
i have no idea how NO pulled that off, hopefully we'll find out. But we got Pau in a similar situation a few years ago. The ingram thing is not the reason for the mitch firing. It probably has more to do with long term stuff...like the fact that we didn't have much to give other than ingram, which is the result of multiple years of stuff. WHich is really the result of the damn veto. So once again, screw stern and the veto. |
I don't know what you are smoking. Boogie is a perennial all star and one of the best big men in the last 5 years. Ingram is playing like a scrub, although I agree he has star potential. But you don't compare a 100% guaranteed star like Boogie for a possible star in Ingram. That's like comparing Google stock to a startup that has a potential $500B valuation in 20 years. Not comparable |
Boogie is indeed a very talented center, especially on offense - defense is another question
Imagine the frustrations on defense with Boogie and Randle in the front court. With Deng and MWP at SF, we would be very thin. Swaggy and Jr are just temporary patches that neither have performed well
With Boogie, we would not be a lottery team or a playoff team with a mismatched roster. Black and Mosgov would be the backup centers - mismatched roster
As shared on Sports Talk Radio - they went from a very soft spoken team that was very cautious while being tight-lipped to the exact opposite in a very charismatic and inexperienced team.
Jeanie has the right and responsibility of successfully running the team. Jimmy and Mitch had their opportunity and failed. Magic and Rob have placed their legacy and reputation on the line upon taking these jobs.
Will we see the "Magic Touch" - only time will tell |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fiendishoc
Star Player
Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 8488
Location: The (real) short corner
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2017 11:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ziggy wrote: | | RJBaca wrote: | | Nnamdi21 wrote: | I can picture Jim Buss hitting the panic button and including all. while Mitch just remained calm with his game face on, not budging an ounce. While Jeanie and Magic were shouting outside the door, ready to knock it down.
Gotta love and will always miss Mitch's poker face. Great years and championships |
Here here. |
Mitch decided to Hold The Door for the young core and sacrificed himself. |
Jim was out no matter what as Jeanie was going to hold him to the deadline. He may have been trying to save Mitch's job by swinging the deal, which would make sense of the conflicting reports from Ding and Amick.
Remember that Jim was able to extend Mitch three years ago by convincing Jeanie that replacing Mitch would be bad for free agency. The criteria for Mitch's performance became whether he could obtain a star player. He very well could have been sacrificing himself for the good of the franchise. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Goldenwest
Star Player
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2802
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2017 11:25 pm Post subject: Re: Theory: Cousins trade talks were last ditch effort by last regime |
|
|
| ShowtimeDynasty_24/7 wrote: | I am beginning to think that Mitch and company definitely saw the writing on the wall, and realized a move was needed to save their jobs. Is it possible that Mitch was seriously considering mortgaging the team's future for Cousins in an attempt to save his job?
We may never know what happened behind the scenes, but it sure does sound like that a trade offer was on the table for the Kings as recently as Friday, that was no longer available on Sunday... And now it sounds like Magic is actually SUPPORTIVE of the youth movement in Los Angeles, meaning that he does not want to trade Russell and Ingram.
A lot of people believe that not getting Cousins was the final straw for Jeanie Buss, but I think in fact it was an 11th hour desperate move in attempts to savage what may have been the quickest and most savage transition of power we've ever seen in sports. |
If they were desperate to save their jobs they would have sent Ingram in the trade for cousins. After all, is Ingram a sure fire star? No, not yet. But Cousins is. The fact they didn't deal Ingram means either your theory is wrong or someone, like Magic stepped in and stopped it.
I'm glad the change in the FO was made. 4 years with the worst records in Laker history and multiple coaching choices made, means a change had to be made. Magic has already brought more appeal to the Lakers than they've ever had since Doc Buss passed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
