| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Fan0Bynum17
Franchise Player
Joined: 30 Nov 2005
Posts: 15436
|
 Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2015 9:31 am Post subject: Why did the Lakers put such sloppy protection on their picks? |
|
|
| I know this has probably been discussed to death, but why weren't these picks lottery or top 10 protected or something? And saying the Lakers didn't expect for their picks to be that good isn't an acceptable answer, because pick protection isn't about what you expect to happen. Protection is often used as a just in-case measure, as a way to make sure you're not giving up a certain level of pick given an unforeseeable circumstance. Were they in that bad of a bargaining position for Nash? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
BROW GOAT 23
Star Player
Joined: 13 Jun 2010
Posts: 2763
Location: Puerto Rico
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2015 9:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
"Basketball reasons"...
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KobeRe-Loaded
Franchise Player
Joined: 09 Dec 2003
Posts: 14944
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2015 9:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hmmm I dunno.... Kobe, Pau, Howard, and Nash ... you figure it out.
_________________
#11/08/16 America became GREAT again
#Avatar-gate |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2015 9:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
We didn't think we'd be this bad. Not an excuse but it is what it is.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fan0Bynum17
Franchise Player
Joined: 30 Nov 2005
Posts: 15436
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2015 9:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| yinoma2001 wrote: | | We didn't think we'd be this bad. Not an excuse but it is what it is. |
I've already explained that pick protection isn't about where you think your picks are going to end up. You don't make those assumptions when you're negotiated pick protection. Because if you did make those assumptions, why bother protecting it at all? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2015 9:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Fan0Bynum17 wrote: | | yinoma2001 wrote: | | We didn't think we'd be this bad. Not an excuse but it is what it is. |
I've already explained that pick protection isn't about where you think your picks are going to end up. You don't make those assumptions when you're negotiated pick protection. Because if you did make those assumptions, why bother protecting it at all? |
Disagree. It does matter, because if it was a deal breaker, the Lakers thought, "hell, we have Kobe/Nash/Howard/Pau, we won't be a bottom 5 team." If we were a piss poor team, then I'm sure they'd put a better protection on the pick.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
clutchkobe
Star Player
Joined: 18 Sep 2005
Posts: 1982
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2015 9:40 am Post subject: Re: Why did the Lakers put such sloppy protection on their picks? |
|
|
| Fan0Bynum17 wrote: | | I know this has probably been discussed to death, but why weren't these picks lottery or top 10 protected or something? And saying the Lakers didn't expect for their picks to be that good isn't an acceptable answer, because pick protection isn't about what you expect to happen. Protection is often used as a just in-case measure, as a way to make sure you're not giving up a certain level of pick given an unforeseeable circumstance. Were they in that bad of a bargaining position for Nash? |
jim and mitch at their best. vlf- even you have to agree if we don't keep the pick....jim and mitch should go. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
greenfrog
Retired Number
Joined: 02 Jan 2011
Posts: 36081
Location: 502 Bad Gateway
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| They Believed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KobeDunk
Retired Number
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 26849
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| because we have an incompetent, short sighted front office... part of the reason why we're in this predicament in the 1st place. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KobeDunk
Retired Number
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 26849
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:48 pm Post subject: Re: Why did the Lakers put such sloppy protection on their picks? |
|
|
| clutchkobe wrote: | | Fan0Bynum17 wrote: | | I know this has probably been discussed to death, but why weren't these picks lottery or top 10 protected or something? And saying the Lakers didn't expect for their picks to be that good isn't an acceptable answer, because pick protection isn't about what you expect to happen. Protection is often used as a just in-case measure, as a way to make sure you're not giving up a certain level of pick given an unforeseeable circumstance. Were they in that bad of a bargaining position for Nash? |
jim and mitch at their best. vlf- even you have to agree if we don't keep the pick....jim and mitch should go. |
pick or no pick they should go, at least Jimmy the drunk should, Mitch is just his little puppet at this point. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Megaton
Retired Number
Joined: 18 Feb 2015
Posts: 25648
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fan0Bynum17 wrote: | | yinoma2001 wrote: | | We didn't think we'd be this bad. Not an excuse but it is what it is. |
I've already explained that pick protection isn't about where you think your picks are going to end up. You don't make those assumptions when you're negotiated pick protection. Because if you did make those assumptions, why bother protecting it at all? |
Again while its not an excuse, it's the exact reason why. The Lakers literally did not think the worst case would happen, but it did.
It's a shame we didn't see the writing on the line with Nash being 38 only this time, he is without the Suns miracle medical staff, and Dwight Howard coming off of a serious injury that still affects him to this day. With also zero interest in playing for the Lakers in the first place. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
oldschool32
Franchise Player
Joined: 24 Jun 2005
Posts: 20032
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
They were cocky. So use to being in the playoffs every year, that they couldn't imagine things any other way. Eventually mortgaging off the future has to catch up to you...and it did.
Get the top 5 pick, preferably top 3, the Houston pick, Randle, Clarkson and a decent free agent this summer will be a great start towards the rebuild. Plenty of young talent to add free agents too.
_________________
"It's just a job. Grass grows, birds fly, waves pound the sand. I beat people up."-The Greatest |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hector the Pup
Retired Number
Joined: 25 Jul 2002
Posts: 35946
Location: L.A.
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Of course the Suns had no say in the matter. It's not like a trade occurs between two parties (or in this case 3) where each side has an idea of what they would like to get and what they are willing to give.
The master negotiators and talent evaluators on this board would have done a far better job. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kikanga
Retired Number
Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 29331
Location: La La Land
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The pick protection almost makes me believe the Steve Nash kamikaze conspiracy.
Maybe the Suns knew he'd break down. Alot of people consider the Suns medical/training staff the league best and state of the art. I'll never forget when they made a broken down Shaq healthy.
But it's just a conspiracy. We gambled on Nash and we lost. Simple as that.
_________________
"Every hurt is a lesson, and every lesson makes you better” |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JoJo Dancer
Star Player
Joined: 25 Dec 2011
Posts: 7474
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2015 2:07 pm Post subject: Re: Why did the Lakers put such sloppy protection on their picks? |
|
|
| Fan0Bynum17 wrote: | | I know this has probably been discussed to death, but why weren't these picks lottery or top 10 protected or something? And saying the Lakers didn't expect for their picks to be that good isn't an acceptable answer, because pick protection isn't about what you expect to happen. Protection is often used as a just in-case measure, as a way to make sure you're not giving up a certain level of pick given an unforeseeable circumstance. Were they in that bad of a bargaining position for Nash? |
We got did penitentiary style in that deal |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NomisR
Starting Rotation
Joined: 23 Feb 2012
Posts: 471
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2015 2:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| yinoma2001 wrote: | | Fan0Bynum17 wrote: | | yinoma2001 wrote: | | We didn't think we'd be this bad. Not an excuse but it is what it is. |
I've already explained that pick protection isn't about where you think your picks are going to end up. You don't make those assumptions when you're negotiated pick protection. Because if you did make those assumptions, why bother protecting it at all? |
Disagree. It does matter, because if it was a deal breaker, the Lakers thought, "hell, we have Kobe/Nash/Howard/Pau, we won't be a bottom 5 team." If we were a piss poor team, then I'm sure they'd put a better protection on the pick. |
I think it was also getting PHX to bite on the deal too. Since they would be trading Nash to a division rival, it would be hurting them as well, so if the Lakers ended up any good, it would be a more or less useless pick. And if the Lakers were a bust, they probably didn't think we would be this bad, most likely a border line playoff team so protection would've nixed the deal. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gblews
Starting Rotation
Joined: 07 Feb 2007
Posts: 300
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2015 2:45 pm Post subject: Re: Why did the Lakers put such sloppy protection on their picks? |
|
|
| JoJo Dancer wrote: | | Fan0Bynum17 wrote: | | I know this has probably been discussed to death, but why weren't these picks lottery or top 10 protected or something? And saying the Lakers didn't expect for their picks to be that good isn't an acceptable answer, because pick protection isn't about what you expect to happen. Protection is often used as a just in-case measure, as a way to make sure you're not giving up a certain level of pick given an unforeseeable circumstance. Were they in that bad of a bargaining position for Nash? |
We got did penitentiary style in that deal |
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shaolin's Finest
Star Player
Joined: 08 Jan 2009
Posts: 1430
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2015 2:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
After coming off just recently winning back to back championships, and being used to consistently making the playoffs, I'm sure the management didn't expect the team to just suddenly tank the way they did. I admit that I am disappointed with how terrible the pick protections are, but you can't honestly say you expected a team of Kobe/Gasol/Nash/Howard to miss the playoffs. It's unfortunate how things turned out, but I don't blame the management for taking the risk. At the time, if the Suns or Magic wanted the pick to be top 5 protected only, would you really cancel the trade just because you wanted higher protection? If I remember correctly majority of Laker fans loved the trades for Nash and Howard and nobody complained about the pick protection then. Obviously these trades failed and we fell flat on our faces, but I don't blame Mitch or the management for what they did.
I do blame them, however, for their coaching hires and letting Gasol and Howard walk for absolutely nothing. But that's another story. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Theseus
Franchise Player
Joined: 15 Dec 2007
Posts: 14208
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2015 3:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Its not an appealing pick if it has all these protections on it |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lakerlynx
Starting Rotation
Joined: 16 Apr 2011
Posts: 310
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2015 3:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I wonder if Mitch considered the possibility that these draft pick protections would cause die-hard, multi-decade Lakers fans to actively cheer for their team to lose for a period of several years.
_________________
Chick Hearn and Vin Scully. How lucky are we? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
diamondcutter
Starting Rotation
Joined: 20 Oct 2007
Posts: 114
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2015 3:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| KobeDunk wrote: | | because we have an incompetent, short sighted front office... part of the reason why we're in this predicament in the 1st place. |
This is the truth. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Don Draper
Retired Number
Joined: 21 Feb 2008
Posts: 28460
Location: LA --> Bay Area
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2015 3:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| lakerlynx wrote: | | I wonder if Mitch considered the possibility that these draft pick protections would cause die-hard, multi-decade Lakers fans to actively cheer for their team to lose for a period of several years. |
It's more likely that Mitch traded away protections willy-nilly because he figured he'd be able to rebuild the team through trades and free agency (which he has far more experience in). Little did he know. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144464
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2015 4:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So far the picks have amounted to a big steaming pile of doggy doo.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakersMD
Star Player
Joined: 27 Jun 2003
Posts: 8014
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2015 4:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The protections aren't the problem. The problem was trading away all their first round picks for half a decade. Terribly short sighted. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Karmaloop
Star Player
Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Posts: 2387
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2015 4:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Because they didn't anticipate Murphy's law going into effect. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
