Rebuilding slowly vs. Mortgaging the future
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  

If you are guaranteed to win only the next two championships over the span of the next 10 years, would you mortgage away the future and trade away 3 out of 4 of DLo, Randle, JC, #2 Pick?
Yes
60%
 60%  [ 56 ]
No
39%
 39%  [ 37 ]
Total Votes : 93

Author Message
troy
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 30 Jan 2013
Posts: 4973

PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2016 1:06 pm    Post subject:

The Thunder have two big name players, and have for years. Still no rings. Clippers have big name players. Nothing. It's more about chemistry and coaching than anything else.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Gatekeeper
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 11 Jan 2012
Posts: 5103
Location: Southland Native

PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2016 1:27 pm    Post subject:

Who's to say that five years from now we won't have a balanced Championship contending squad like the Warriors are right now? Our championship winning teams that we have were a balance of star free agents (Kareem, Wilt, Shaq) and drafted stars (Magic, Worthy, Kobe*). I'd rather have someone on the team to root for that was home grown, it makes you appreciate them more.

*never played for Charlotte
_________________
Character
Manchester United | Greatest European Moments
Fabric of United - Our Belief
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470

PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2016 3:36 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
Yes, I would do it.

But it's a whole different story when you remove the guarantee of championship success which is a very real consideration in a real life scenario.

Because in the fake scenario, I sign Lebron and KD to 2-year deals, get rid of the kids, and then start over in 2 years and get new kids.

But in the real life scenario, I have to sign Lebron and KD to much longer term deals, with no guarantee of championship success, and that is a much tougher pill to swallow.


I think the fake scenario was that you would get two rings, but no matter what you did you would only win those 2 rings over the next 10 years. So you don't have the option of new players after 2 rings -- and least not new players who would win.

And, yes, the poll is a little silly because there are no real life guarantees. We could sign three great free agents and not win. We could keep all our young players and draft picks, and they could all flop, and we could be totally rebuilding in 5 years after no success.

The real scenarios are about gauging risk and reward.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vanexelent
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 30081

PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2016 3:38 pm    Post subject:

We can do both.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
bandiger
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 02 Apr 2014
Posts: 12555

PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2016 3:46 pm    Post subject:

troy wrote:
The Thunder have two big name players, and have for years. Still no rings. Clippers have big name players. Nothing. It's more about chemistry and coaching than anything else.


They got side tracked with injuries just like the 2011 and 2012 Lakers, D. Rose and his Bulls, or PG with the Pacers, etc. No guarantees ever. Some teams just get extremely lucky when they can come out healthy deep into the playoffs.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470

PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2016 5:16 pm    Post subject:

Gatekeeper wrote:
. I'd rather have someone on the team to root for that was home grown, it makes you appreciate them more.



I've never felt this way. I didn't root less for Kareem, Shaq and Gasol when they were here because they played on other teams first. I don't care if talent comes through drafting, trades or free agency.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2016 6:30 pm    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Yes, I would do it.

But it's a whole different story when you remove the guarantee of championship success which is a very real consideration in a real life scenario.

Because in the fake scenario, I sign Lebron and KD to 2-year deals, get rid of the kids, and then start over in 2 years and get new kids.

But in the real life scenario, I have to sign Lebron and KD to much longer term deals, with no guarantee of championship success, and that is a much tougher pill to swallow.


I think the fake scenario was that you would get two rings, but no matter what you did you would only win those 2 rings over the next 10 years. So you don't have the option of new players after 2 rings -- and least not new players who would win.

And, yes, the poll is a little silly because there are no real life guarantees. We could sign three great free agents and not win. We could keep all our young players and draft picks, and they could all flop, and we could be totally rebuilding in 5 years after no success.

The real scenarios are about gauging risk and reward.


If that's the case, then the poll makes even less sense. So it's 2 years of glory and 8 years of misery versus 10 years of misery?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2016 6:31 pm    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
Gatekeeper wrote:
. I'd rather have someone on the team to root for that was home grown, it makes you appreciate them more.


I've never felt this way. I didn't root less for Kareem, Shaq and Gasol when they were here because they played on other teams first. I don't care if talent comes through drafting, trades or free agency.


I think I'm with Gatekeeper on this one. If given the choice, of winning rings with a homegrown core, versus a "bought" core, I'd take the former every time.

There is something special about watching a player grow up, become a man, and lead your team to the promised land.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
TooMuchMajicBuss
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 17 Sep 2008
Posts: 21064
Location: In a white room, with black curtains near the station

PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2016 7:24 pm    Post subject:

^exactly.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
TooMuchMajicBuss
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 17 Sep 2008
Posts: 21064
Location: In a white room, with black curtains near the station

PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2016 7:33 pm    Post subject:

I'm so sick of the lingering ramifications of the last "Guaranteed Title" we mortgaged away our future for. There is no such thing as a guaranteed title and if you could make it so, that would take all the fun out of it.

I can't bring myself to answer 'yes' on this thread, you just can't plug the nose hard enough to block out the smell of the last 'mortgage' we took out on our future, a strategy HIGHLY lauded by all the analysts and pundits, that blew up in our face. The Lakers have been in the cellar for several years, the franchise reputation is taking a beating, and free agents have been steering clear in recent years. I don't want to see this be the team status for yet another decade, even if it did mean an automatic two trophies in the near future. Which, of course, it wouldn't.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Deathstroke
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 10 Dec 2015
Posts: 2131
Location: OC

PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2016 7:54 pm    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
Gatekeeper wrote:
. I'd rather have someone on the team to root for that was home grown, it makes you appreciate them more.



I've never felt this way. I didn't root less for Kareem, Shaq and Gasol when they were here because they played on other teams first. I don't care if talent comes through drafting, trades or free agency.


Agreed
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Dave20
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 15 Jun 2013
Posts: 11333

PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2016 7:57 pm    Post subject:

pmacla wrote:
is this like the guarantee of titles when we traded for Nash and Howard ?? and we are still paying up for those trades ? and 0 playoff wins
Exactly.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Halflife
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 15 Aug 2015
Posts: 16656

PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2016 8:25 pm    Post subject:

The smart way
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
gng930
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 11475

PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2016 8:30 pm    Post subject:

Depends...are the Celtics going to be winning any rings in the next 10 years?

If you could guarantee they won't I'd vote hell yes!
_________________
Luxury Tax/FA Spreadsheet (Save to your Google Drive to edit)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Gatekeeper
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 11 Jan 2012
Posts: 5103
Location: Southland Native

PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2016 9:16 pm    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
Gatekeeper wrote:
. I'd rather have someone on the team to root for that was home grown, it makes you appreciate them more.



I've never felt this way. I didn't root less for Kareem, Shaq and Gasol when they were here because they played on other teams first. I don't care if talent comes through drafting, trades or free agency.



Fair enough. However, let me play devil's advocate here. Ask yourself the following: Who do you appreciate MORE between the following pairings a)Kareem and Magic and b)Shaq and Kobe? (Don't give a cop out answer like "I appreciate both equally" because that defeats the purpose of this exercise.)
_________________
Character
Manchester United | Greatest European Moments
Fabric of United - Our Belief
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jjangx27
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 2456
Location: Seoul, Korea

PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2016 10:59 pm    Post subject:

Gatekeeper wrote:
activeverb wrote:
Gatekeeper wrote:
. I'd rather have someone on the team to root for that was home grown, it makes you appreciate them more.



I've never felt this way. I didn't root less for Kareem, Shaq and Gasol when they were here because they played on other teams first. I don't care if talent comes through drafting, trades or free agency.



Fair enough. However, let me play devil's advocate here. Ask yourself the following: Who do you appreciate MORE between the following pairings a)Kareem and Magic and b)Shaq and Kobe? (Don't give a cop out answer like "I appreciate both equally" because that defeats the purpose of this exercise.)



what's the difference between the two?

in each pairing, 1 was drafted by the team, the other was brought in via free agency/trade
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
tox
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 17835

PostPosted: Wed Jun 08, 2016 2:00 am    Post subject:

I thought this was going to be a stupid, loaded question from the title, and it ended up being a no-brainer in the opposite direction.

We had Kobe Bryant in his peak form from 2004-2013 and won 2 rings. I think I will manage to survive if we "only" win the next two rings even if it means 8 years of not winning after (especially if that time includes playoff runs that come up short).

We aren't close to being set up for a dynasty so it's a win/ win.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vanexelent
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 30081

PostPosted: Wed Jun 08, 2016 3:21 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
activeverb wrote:
Gatekeeper wrote:
. I'd rather have someone on the team to root for that was home grown, it makes you appreciate them more.


I've never felt this way. I didn't root less for Kareem, Shaq and Gasol when they were here because they played on other teams first. I don't care if talent comes through drafting, trades or free agency.


I think I'm with Gatekeeper on this one. If given the choice, of winning rings with a homegrown core, versus a "bought" core, I'd take the former every time.

There is something special about watching a player grow up, become a man, and lead your team to the promised land.


Not only that, but Shaq and Gasol and Kareem all put there time in with the franchise. What's being proposed is similar to what the Heat just experienced, where it's simply a franchise with cap space where star players use to win a ring.

How endearing is Lebron to long time Miami fans (are there any)?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
lakerhaterhater
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 03 May 2016
Posts: 402

PostPosted: Wed Jun 08, 2016 3:36 am    Post subject:

The question boggles the mind, I do not understand.
There is no such thing as a guarantee. The very best you can hope for is an instant window but that is always synonymous with brevity.
I'd rather have a competitive team with a longer lifespan.
Let's build a base, like we've always done, then when/if we hit a wall with what we have, we can make those trades.
Let's not (bleep) the bed again
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Steve007
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 13165

PostPosted: Wed Jun 08, 2016 3:52 am    Post subject:

TooMuchMajicBuss wrote:
I'm so sick of the lingering ramifications of the last "Guaranteed Title" we mortgaged away our future for. There is no such thing as a guaranteed title and if you could make it so, that would take all the fun out of it.

I can't bring myself to answer 'yes' on this thread, you just can't plug the nose hard enough to block out the smell of the last 'mortgage' we took out on our future, a strategy HIGHLY lauded by all the analysts and pundits, that blew up in our face. The Lakers have been in the cellar for several years, the franchise reputation is taking a beating, and free agents have been steering clear in recent years. I don't want to see this be the team status for yet another decade, even if it did mean an automatic two trophies in the near future. Which, of course, it wouldn't.


That was never a guaranteed title. There was no guarantee the team would beat Miami, or even OKC or the Spurs. I think anyone who thought at the time that it was a guaranteed title after watching the team in 2004 fail was obviously being irrational. Miami still had Lebron in his prime teamed up with Wade and Bosh who were both superstar players. OKC was still loaded, young, and had just been in the Finals. Just because posters on LG declared the team was paper champions didn't mean they would be the champions on the court.

Also, this thread is assuming that these guaranteed titles are actually guaranteed. In other words, it is assuming the opposite of what you are talking about. You are talking about an attempt to win titles which failed. This thread is talking about an attempt to win titles that actually succeeds. It's a HUGE difference.

If you vote no because of what happened with the Howard/Nash team then you're rejecting the scenario that is presented by the OP and making up a different situation.

And yes this thread is asking about a situation that will never happen because again, no titles are ever guaranteed.


Last edited by Steve007 on Wed Jun 08, 2016 4:08 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Steve007
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 13165

PostPosted: Wed Jun 08, 2016 4:02 am    Post subject:

pmacla wrote:
is this like the guarantee of titles when we traded for Nash and Howard ?? and we are still paying up for those trades ? and 0 playoff wins



s_habe wrote:
Isn't it the road we just turned off from?

We had "guaranteed" trips to finals after trading for CP. Then trading all the future picks for Nash and Howard.
Kobe, Pau, Nash, Howard, what else can "guarantee" a trip to the finals?

Been there, done that.



Again, this thead is asking if you would accept a situation with the experiment being a complete success. You guys are talking about a situation that was not a success.

And Nash was injured in his second game and was always injured. That wasn't a guaranteed title. Miami and OKC were still loaded and the Spurs were extremely good.

A better comparison would be a hypothetical scenario with Nash and Howard being healthy and playing great, the team beating the Miami Heat twice in the Finals, and Kobe picking up some more Finals MVP awards to go along with rings #6 and #7. Would you accept that followed by 8 years of losing? I absolutely would!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Dilla_
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 25 Oct 2015
Posts: 1274

PostPosted: Wed Jun 08, 2016 5:52 am    Post subject:

I don't know why I but I immediately thought of this when people are suggesting trading for a big name which will mean guarantee success.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/A57hsG3CEAEG49Q.jpg


_________________
Coach MWP.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Wed Jun 08, 2016 6:32 am    Post subject:

Steve007 wrote:
pmacla wrote:
is this like the guarantee of titles when we traded for Nash and Howard ?? and we are still paying up for those trades ? and 0 playoff wins



s_habe wrote:
Isn't it the road we just turned off from?

We had "guaranteed" trips to finals after trading for CP. Then trading all the future picks for Nash and Howard.
Kobe, Pau, Nash, Howard, what else can "guarantee" a trip to the finals?

Been there, done that.



Again, this thead is asking if you would accept a situation with the experiment being a complete success. You guys are talking about a situation that was not a success.

And Nash was injured in his second game and was always injured. That wasn't a guaranteed title. Miami and OKC were still loaded and the Spurs were extremely good.

A better comparison would be a hypothetical scenario with Nash and Howard being healthy and playing great, the team beating the Miami Heat twice in the Finals, and Kobe picking up some more Finals MVP awards to go along with rings #6 and #7. Would you accept that followed by 8 years of losing? I absolutely would!


Yeah, you highlighted exactly why this thread makes no sense. Basically, it is asking whether you would to have success or failure? Do you want to win twice and lose 8 times or just lose 10 times? Huh?! Haha.

The issue I have with the thread is that the title is "rebuild slowly vs mortgage the future" -- but the hypothetical scenario doesn't allow for a fair comparison of those two options.

It's like if I started a thread that said "Byron Scott vs Luke Walton" but then in the post say ok, pretend Byron leads you to 5 championships with the same team vs Luke leading you 17 wins for those same 5 seasons. Who would you rather have? People are obviously going to choose Byron but not because they want Byron.

Same thing here. The thread title says rebuild slow vs mortgage future but what people are asked to pick is 2 titles or zero? Makes no sense.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
TooMuchMajicBuss
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 17 Sep 2008
Posts: 21064
Location: In a white room, with black curtains near the station

PostPosted: Wed Jun 08, 2016 7:45 am    Post subject:

Steve007 wrote:
TooMuchMajicBuss wrote:
I'm so sick of the lingering ramifications of the last "Guaranteed Title" we mortgaged away our future for. There is no such thing as a guaranteed title and if you could make it so, that would take all the fun out of it.

I can't bring myself to answer 'yes' on this thread, you just can't plug the nose hard enough to block out the smell of the last 'mortgage' we took out on our future, a strategy HIGHLY lauded by all the analysts and pundits, that blew up in our face. The Lakers have been in the cellar for several years, the franchise reputation is taking a beating, and free agents have been steering clear in recent years. I don't want to see this be the team status for yet another decade, even if it did mean an automatic two trophies in the near future. Which, of course, it wouldn't.


That was never a guaranteed title. There was no guarantee the team would beat Miami, or even OKC or the Spurs. I think anyone who thought at the time that it was a guaranteed title after watching the team in 2004 fail was obviously being irrational. Miami still had Lebron in his prime teamed up with Wade and Bosh who were both superstar players. OKC was still loaded, young, and had just been in the Finals. Just because posters on LG declared the team was paper champions didn't mean they would be the champions on the court.

Also, this thread is assuming that these guaranteed titles are actually guaranteed. In other words, it is assuming the opposite of what you are talking about. You are talking about an attempt to win titles which failed. This thread is talking about an attempt to win titles that actually succeeds. It's a HUGE difference.

If you vote no because of what happened with the Howard/Nash team then you're rejecting the scenario that is presented by the OP and making up a different situation.

And yes this thread is asking about a situation that will never happen because again, no titles are ever guaranteed.


You are correct on the premise of the question. And I can see the argument for voting yes. I'm in the minority, but nonetheless, in a hypothetical world, if we can flick a magic wand and just add 2 titles for the next 2 seasons then suck for another decade, I'd still vote against it. It's not as fun if it's automatic, nor would it be fun knowing full well there's nothing worth watching for yet another decade once this is done because we've given away all our building assets. Anti-dynasty. A smart trade or two, yes; mortgaging the future, no. I enjoy watching a good team that can compete for years emerge and this premise skips what I consider the best part.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
TooMuchMajicBuss
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 17 Sep 2008
Posts: 21064
Location: In a white room, with black curtains near the station

PostPosted: Wed Jun 08, 2016 7:50 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:

It's like if I started a thread that said "Byron Scott vs Luke Walton" but then in the post say ok, pretend Byron leads you to 5 championships with the same team vs Luke leading you 17 wins for those same 5 seasons. Who would you rather have? People are obviously going to choose Byron but not because they want Byron.

Same thing here. The thread title says rebuild slow vs mortgage future but what people are asked to pick is 2 titles or zero? Makes no sense.


Excellent analogy. This is exactly how the OP question comes across to me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 2 of 4
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB