LA Times: Jeanie Buss thwarts initial efforts from brothers to take over the Lakers
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 45, 46, 47  Next

 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
angrypuppy
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 30202

PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 12:52 pm    Post subject:

Dr. Laker wrote:
I will link it http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2697145-lakers-show-loyalty-matters-more-than-family-with-new-magic-pelinka-front-office

Quote:
The GM position is all about the details, and despite Johnson's previous verbal takedowns targeting Jim, Jeanie and Magic weren't happy with reports of Kupchak's shortcomings alongside Jim, either.

There was too much evidence of Kupchak's work ethic weakening, his knowledge of the league's players being less than encyclopedic, his inability to play the behind-the-scenes game to get you-scratch-my-back benefits from agents, his tendency to trade draft picks to make bad contracts go away and his outright complacency in managing the draft-pick protections in the Steve Nash trade.


So the assertion is that Mitch had gotten fat & lazy and wasn't giving due diligence to the work.

I haven't paid attention enough to support or naysay that, but it has been an ongoing concern of Mitch supporters like me that he was not as active as we wanted in moving expiring contracts or squeezing the extra drop out of deals.

I go allllllllllll the way back to the Gary Payton deal to Boston. Not only did Mitch get punked out of LG Legend Marcus Banks, but we ended up tossing in the draft pick that became Rajon Rondo, because Mitch let Payton & Ainge intimidate him into changing the announced deal.



I'm not entirely sure that Ding wrote an accurate assessment of Mitch, at least by the more tangible criticisms. That Nash trade was terrible, but there were decent protections in place. The big picture criticism (ignored by Ding) is whether the trade made sense from a team chemistry perspective, and whether the team should two surrender two first round picks, given that it was aging and the contracts were expiring. That team had the potential to drop off the cliff. In other words, protections were fine, though not the trade itself.

Honestly, I think Mitch did the best he could, presented the pro forma trade to management (Dr. Buss or Jimbo, perhaps both) and executed the deal. At least that's my impression. I honestly don't know what happened behind the scenes.

I also think Mitch couldn't politically navigate the white waters known as the Lakers front office. You had to pick your poison: Jimbo or Jeanie. If you talked to one camp, the other camp would probably freeze you out.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 18231

PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 1:06 pm    Post subject:

Dr. Laker wrote:
I go allllllllllll the way back to the Gary Payton deal to Boston. Not only did Mitch get punked out of LG Legend Marcus Banks, but we ended up tossing in the draft pick that became Rajon Rondo, because Mitch let Payton & Ainge intimidate him into changing the announced deal.


If you're going all the way back to 2005, it's hard to say that anything about Mitch had changed.

But I'm not going to spend any time defending Mitch. He did great things for us in the '00s. We'll always remember him for that. But if you have 5-6 years of stuff that doesn't work out, you get fired. Heck, it can happen a lot faster than that. Mitch got a pass for a few years because of the unique circumstances, but eventually it was time to let someone else take over.

My opinion is that Mitch (and by extension, Jim) were stuck in the mindset of the Dr. Buss era -- that we could eventually spend our way back to the top. A lot of people on this board are still stuck in that mindset. They are waiting for the next great free agent to come to LA. I think the NBA landscape changed after 1999. The money started getting so big for everyone that the value of coming to the Lakers gradually diminished. If you can make $25-30M anywhere, then what is the benefit of playing in LA? If anything, it's a negative because of the taxes, cost of living, and constant media scrutiny. I think that Mitch and Jim eventually figured this out, but they didn't have the mental flexibility to embrace it. The Deng signing shows this.

What worries me is that Magic is a disciple of Dr. Buss. Does he understand that things are different now? This is why it comforts me that Pelinka is on board. Pelinka is bound to understand the realities of the new NBA.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ocho
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 24 May 2005
Posts: 40806

PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 1:17 pm    Post subject:

Dr. Laker wrote:

I go allllllllllll the way back to the Gary Payton deal to Boston. Not only did Mitch get punked out of LG Legend Marcus Banks, but we ended up tossing in the draft pick that became Rajon Rondo, because Mitch let Payton & Ainge intimidate him into changing the announced deal.


This is not accurate. On several points.

Gary Payton refused to report on the deal, which meant Boston could walk away or amend the deal. Rather than lose out on the real target of the deal (Mihm) it was amended so that Boston sent Jumaine Jones instead of Marcus Banks (Jones turned out to be better anyway) and didn't have to send a 2nd rounder anymore (oh no, what a punking).

The original trade had the Lakers giving a conditional 1st round pick. This was unchanged when the deal was amended. So they didn't strongarm him into giving up a draft pick. The draft pick was already part of the deal.

As far as Rondo goes, I don't know where you're getting your information. Boston acquired that pick from Phoenix in exchange for a future 1st that they got from Cleveland. The Lakers had nothing to do with it.
_________________
14-5-3-12
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Dr. Laker
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Apr 2002
Posts: 11200

PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 1:42 pm    Post subject:

ocho wrote:
Dr. Laker wrote:

I go allllllllllll the way back to the Gary Payton deal to Boston. Not only did Mitch get punked out of LG Legend Marcus Banks, but we ended up tossing in the draft pick that became Rajon Rondo, because Mitch let Payton & Ainge intimidate him into changing the announced deal.


This is not accurate. On several points.

Gary Payton refused to report on the deal, which meant Boston could walk away or amend the deal. Rather than lose out on the real target of the deal (Mihm) it was amended so that Boston sent Jumaine Jones instead of Marcus Banks (Jones turned out to be better anyway) and didn't have to send a 2nd rounder anymore (oh no, what a punking).

The original trade had the Lakers giving a conditional 1st round pick. This was unchanged when the deal was amended. So they didn't strongarm him into giving up a draft pick. The draft pick was already part of the deal.

As far as Rondo goes, I don't know where you're getting your information. Boston acquired that pick from Phoenix in exchange for a future 1st that they got from Cleveland. The Lakers had nothing to do with it.


My bad - I thought the #1 was in exchange for Banks dropping out.

According to http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/paytoga01.html

Quote:
August 6, 2004: Traded by the Los Angeles Lakers with Rick Fox and a 2006 1st round draft pick (Rajon Rondo was later selected) to the Boston Celtics for Chucky Atkins, Jumaine Jones and Chris Mihm.


Still, in hindsight, that was an awful deal (yeah, Mitch didn't have the benefit of hindsight) especially given Mihm's Laker career.

Perceptionally - especially at the time - it was just another thing Mitch didn't do. It wasn't until the Pau/Ariza/Shannon Brown trades that Mitch got his rep back (in my eyes).
_________________
Suck it, whiners. I have TWC!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 24519

PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 2:13 pm    Post subject:

Daphanabe wrote:
activeverb wrote:
Daphanabe wrote:
activeverb wrote:
Daphanabe wrote:
Forget the fact that good teams like San Antonio haven't had to rebuild because of good FO management.



What are these "good teams" like San Antonio that haven't had to rebuild?

Seems like San Antonio is unique.


Just focusing on championship comparables:

Celtics (pains me to say this). We were in the finals in the same year. They've missed the playoffs only once and are well positioned for the future.

Miami. LeBron leaves, bad luck with Bosh, yet they only missed playoffs once (and are surprisingly frisky this year).

Dallas. Won in 2011, missed playoffs only once since then (and are surprisingly frisky this year)





Miami is 31-34.
Dallas is 27-36.

This is your idea of "surprisingly frisky" teams that have never rebuilt and have no need to rebuild? You honestly think they are comparable to San Antonio two straight decades of success?

I don't even know where to begin ...


Just highlighting that if you take anyone who has won a championship (making that a potential definition for 'successful team' that is the crux of the original point I was debating) since 2000, we are the only team that has had to endure this length of 'crapness', of which the old regime played a big part in enabling.

The original point was that supposedly successful teams were punished by the NBA (brought up by another poster to ostensibly defend Jim Buss). I highlighted that good FOs can navigate that and gave SA as an example. It was highlighted that that is an exception -- at which point I highlighted other comparables (you ignored Celtics by the way). As to Dallas and Miami -- they are both a game or 2 away from the 8th playoff spots. And that is directly attributable to good FO moves (e.g. good FA pickups, not handing out stupid contracts, etc.)


Sure, dude there are teams that won rings and within a few years were able to build themselves up to a place where they almost made the playoffs. It's absolutely nothing like what San Antonio has done of course but I guess that wasn't your real point after all
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
laker4life
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 26 Nov 2001
Posts: 7062

PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 5:11 pm    Post subject:

Daphanabe wrote:
activeverb wrote:
Daphanabe wrote:
activeverb wrote:
Daphanabe wrote:
Forget the fact that good teams like San Antonio haven't had to rebuild because of good FO management.



What are these "good teams" like San Antonio that haven't had to rebuild?

Seems like San Antonio is unique.


Just focusing on championship comparables:

Celtics (pains me to say this). We were in the finals in the same year. They've missed the playoffs only once and are well positioned for the future.

Miami. LeBron leaves, bad luck with Bosh, yet they only missed playoffs once (and are surprisingly frisky this year).

Dallas. Won in 2011, missed playoffs only once since then (and are surprisingly frisky this year)





Miami is 31-34.
Dallas is 27-36.

This is your idea of "surprisingly frisky" teams that have never rebuilt and have no need to rebuild? You honestly think they are comparable to San Antonio two straight decades of success?

I don't even know where to begin ...


Just highlighting that if you take anyone who has won a championship (making that a potential definition for 'successful team' that is the crux of the original point I was debating) since 2000, we are the only team that has had to endure this length of 'crapness', of which the old regime played a big part in enabling.

The original point was that supposedly successful teams were punished by the NBA (brought up by another poster to ostensibly defend Jim Buss). I highlighted that good FOs can navigate that and gave SA as an example. It was highlighted that that is an exception -- at which point I highlighted other comparables (you ignored Celtics by the way). As to Dallas and Miami -- they are both a game or 2 away from the 8th playoff spots. And that is directly attributable to good FO moves (e.g. good FA pickups, not handing out stupid contracts, etc.)


You have to obviously recognized the greatness of the Spurs.

In fact, 5 - 6 years ago, the Lakers were actually revered like the Spurs since the Lakers were equally successful.

Unfortunately, since Jim Buss took over, our franchise's reputation has suffered and we are now in year 4 of being in the lottery.

I agree that the Heats and Mavericks have done a fairly impressive job.

Congarts to them on making good moves to maintain their competitiveness.

Hopefully, our new regime will be able to do the same.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LakerLanny
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 24 Oct 2001
Posts: 37226

PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 5:29 pm    Post subject:

ocho wrote:
Dr. Laker wrote:

I go allllllllllll the way back to the Gary Payton deal to Boston. Not only did Mitch get punked out of LG Legend Marcus Banks, but we ended up tossing in the draft pick that became Rajon Rondo, because Mitch let Payton & Ainge intimidate him into changing the announced deal.


This is not accurate. On several points.

Gary Payton refused to report on the deal, which meant Boston could walk away or amend the deal. Rather than lose out on the real target of the deal (Mihm) it was amended so that Boston sent Jumaine Jones instead of Marcus Banks (Jones turned out to be better anyway) and didn't have to send a 2nd rounder anymore (oh no, what a punking).

The original trade had the Lakers giving a conditional 1st round pick. This was unchanged when the deal was amended. So they didn't strongarm him into giving up a draft pick. The draft pick was already part of the deal.

As far as Rondo goes, I don't know where you're getting your information. Boston acquired that pick from Phoenix in exchange for a future 1st that they got from Cleveland. The Lakers had nothing to do with it.


That may be true Ocho (and nice post as usual by the way) but I liked the other story better!
_________________
Love, Laker Lanny
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Dr. Laker
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Apr 2002
Posts: 11200

PostPosted: Sat Mar 11, 2017 12:29 pm    Post subject:

laker4life wrote:
Daphanabe wrote:
activeverb wrote:
Daphanabe wrote:
activeverb wrote:
Daphanabe wrote:
Forget the fact that good teams like San Antonio haven't had to rebuild because of good FO management.



What are these "good teams" like San Antonio that haven't had to rebuild?

Seems like San Antonio is unique.


Just focusing on championship comparables:

Celtics (pains me to say this). We were in the finals in the same year. They've missed the playoffs only once and are well positioned for the future.

Miami. LeBron leaves, bad luck with Bosh, yet they only missed playoffs once (and are surprisingly frisky this year).

Dallas. Won in 2011, missed playoffs only once since then (and are surprisingly frisky this year)





Miami is 31-34.
Dallas is 27-36.

This is your idea of "surprisingly frisky" teams that have never rebuilt and have no need to rebuild? You honestly think they are comparable to San Antonio two straight decades of success?

I don't even know where to begin ...


Just highlighting that if you take anyone who has won a championship (making that a potential definition for 'successful team' that is the crux of the original point I was debating) since 2000, we are the only team that has had to endure this length of 'crapness', of which the old regime played a big part in enabling.

The original point was that supposedly successful teams were punished by the NBA (brought up by another poster to ostensibly defend Jim Buss). I highlighted that good FOs can navigate that and gave SA as an example. It was highlighted that that is an exception -- at which point I highlighted other comparables (you ignored Celtics by the way). As to Dallas and Miami -- they are both a game or 2 away from the 8th playoff spots. And that is directly attributable to good FO moves (e.g. good FA pickups, not handing out stupid contracts, etc.)


You have to obviously recognized the greatness of the Spurs.

In fact, 5 - 6 years ago, the Lakers were actually revered like the Spurs since the Lakers were equally successful.

Unfortunately, since Jim Buss took over, our franchise's reputation has suffered and we are now in year 4 of being in the lottery.

I agree that the Heats and Mavericks have done a fairly impressive job.

Congarts to them on making good moves to maintain their competitiveness.

Hopefully, our new regime will be able to do the same.


To be fair, the Spurs have a different model and a key to understanding sports ownership is that some of the owners are actually in it to make money.

http://blog.mysanantonio.com/spursnation/2014/06/30/report-spurs-were-sixth-most-profitable-last-season-per-nba-memo/

San Antonio won the Finals in 2014 and also made $39 million in operating profit.

The Lakers went 27-55 in 2014 and made $100 million in operating profit.

For the Spurs - the model was to emphasize continuity, teamwork and sacrifice - players gave up money to keep core pieces together, management made great compromises to keep Greg Popovich in place and the result is a run (in terms of cumulative record) that really only the hated Celtics can match.

GREGG POPOVICH HAS RUN THE SPURS SINCE 1994 - GM from 94-98, GM/HC from 99-2002 and HC since then - but everyone on the basketball side reports to him.

In that same time, the Lakers have had 3 Presidents, 3 GMs, 14 Head Coaches (interim & fulltime).

Lakers model emphasizes stars - stars bring problems: ego (Shaq/Kobe/NVE/Rice/Rodman/Ceballos/PJax/West/D'antoni, etc.), money (money = respect and everyone in LA wants theirs), territorialism (PJax dumping on The Logo), etc. The Lakers model, however, generates HUGE revenue (as well as expense - Lakers spend more than most teams make) and at the end of the day, LA has won the same number of rings and been to more Finals than the Spurs in the same period.

So, from an ownership (not fan) perspective, do you prefer the Spurs method which produced 5 rings and 20 straight winning seasons in the past 24 seasons, with a very good team now, or the Lakers method, which has produced 5 rings in the past 24 seasons, five straight years in the lottery and AT LEAST A BILLION DOLLARS MORE IN OPERATING PROFIT?

To defend Jimmy, the nixed CP3 trade hurt. To castigate Jimmy, the Nash trade hurt more, IMO and failing to get something for D12 means you gave away Bynum AND a 1st round pick for a bad gamble. There is something to be said, however, in that the bad gambles still brought in stars that drove revenue in terms of season tickets. A sports economist will have to drill down into that argument.

Bottom line - from a straight bball perspective, Lakers are in a prolonged dive and other teams have been able to bounce back on the court faster than we have.
_________________
Suck it, whiners. I have TWC!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
raffi
LG Contributor
LG Contributor


Joined: 24 Jun 2005
Posts: 9915

PostPosted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 4:00 pm    Post subject:

Quote:
The struggle between Jeanie Buss and her brothers, Jim and Johnny, for control of the Lakers has moved toward resolution.

The brothers signed a two-page consent agreement earlier this week to waive the teamís annual shareholders meeting and elect their sister and four others to the board of directors, according to documents filed Friday in Los Angeles County Superior Court.

This means Jeanie Buss, the Lakers president, will remain the teamís controlling owner until at least the next shareholders meeting in December.

Joey Buss, the second-youngest of the six Buss siblings who is president of the teamís NBA Development League affiliate, Johnny Buss, AEG President Dan Beckerman and Lakers Executive Vice President Francis Mariani were also selected as directors.


http://www.latimes.com/sports/sportsnow/la-sp-lakers-buss-trust-20170317-story.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
32
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 04 Nov 2009
Posts: 49049

PostPosted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 4:08 pm    Post subject:

Well I'm glad this matter is resolved at least until December.
_________________
Nobody in the NBA can touch the Laker brand, which, like the uniform color, is pure gold.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 18231

PostPosted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 4:11 pm    Post subject:

I wonder what else is going on. Everyone has been very quiet.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LakerLanny
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 24 Oct 2001
Posts: 37226

PostPosted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 4:14 pm    Post subject:

fiendishoc wrote:
Another Ding hit on Kupchak. What's the point? Not going to link.


I don't think it was a hit piece but it is interesting these articles weren't coming when he was failing as GM.

He did a terrible job the last five years and honestly was spared further embarrassment. The league had passed him by pretty clearly as far as assembling a roster in the modern CBA era.
_________________
Love, Laker Lanny
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
P.K.
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 10 Jul 2003
Posts: 18506

PostPosted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 4:15 pm    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
I wonder what else is going on. Everyone has been very quiet.

Supposedly Ramona had a 2nd part to this whole story....
I'm wondering what going on with that.
_________________
BI, PG13, #2, Zu: future core
Never argue with a fool - listeners can't tell you apart
Wilt's unstoppable fadeaway: www.youtube.com/watch?v=8O9MgNfcGJA
NPZ's Magic Johnson mix: www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8Qbo0WqvOI
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Dr. Laker
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Apr 2002
Posts: 11200

PostPosted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 5:27 pm    Post subject:

raffi wrote:
Quote:
The struggle between Jeanie Buss and her brothers, Jim and Johnny, for control of the Lakers has moved toward resolution.

The brothers signed a two-page consent agreement earlier this week to waive the teamís annual shareholders meeting and elect their sister and four others to the board of directors, according to documents filed Friday in Los Angeles County Superior Court.

This means Jeanie Buss, the Lakers president, will remain the teamís controlling owner until at least the next shareholders meeting in December.

Joey Buss, the second-youngest of the six Buss siblings who is president of the teamís NBA Development League affiliate, Johnny Buss, AEG President Dan Beckerman and Lakers Executive Vice President Francis Mariani were also selected as directors.


http://www.latimes.com/sports/sportsnow/la-sp-lakers-buss-trust-20170317-story.html


IIRC that is the same board they've had.

My guess is: Buy out. Johnny and Jim will either get bought out of the trust by their 4 siblings or the Buss' 66% stake in the Lakers will be sold to a new trust consisting of Janie, Jeanie, Jesse and Joey, with Johnny & Jim splitting $150-$200 million for their trouble (7 to 10 times their annual earnings).
_________________
Suck it, whiners. I have TWC!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
pio2u
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 26 Dec 2012
Posts: 24787

PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 7:46 am    Post subject:

Jim and Johnny Buss elect Jeanie Buss as governor of the Lakers

The power struggle ceases for at least a little while.
Quote:
Lakers part-owners Jim and Johnny Buss ďsigned a consent agreement on Monday that waives the teamís annual shareholders meeting and elects Jeanie Buss to the Lakers board of directors,Ē according to Mark Medina and Larry Altman of the Orange County Register. As they note, this means that Jeanie Buss will remain in full control of the Lakers.

The agreement comes a few weeks after Jim and Johnny Buss attempted to seize power within the Lakers, a move Jeanie Buss thwarted fairly easily.

http://www.silverscreenandroll.com/2017/3/18/14966128/la-lakers-jim-and-johnny-buss-elect-jeanie-buss-as-governor-of-the-lakers

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/buss-746906-jeanie-lakers.html
_________________
www.trendydeckpost.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
LakerSanity
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 28139
Location: Long Beach, California

PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 8:41 am    Post subject:

Jim isn't on the board. My guess is that Jim and Johnny just got something they really wanted, but, for PR purposes, that part won't be publicized so Jeanie can look like she "won."
_________________
LakersGround's Terms of Service
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
clutchkobe
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 18 Sep 2005
Posts: 1795

PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 9:23 am    Post subject:

LakerSanity wrote:
Jim isn't on the board. My guess is that Jim and Johnny just got something they really wanted, but, for PR purposes, that part won't be publicized so Jeanie can look like she "won."


thats a positive way to look at it for jim.....how about he had to remove him self this time to save face because jim and johnny were getting killed in the meda. Its only for a year. these two idiots are not done yet.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 18231

PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 7:27 pm    Post subject:

LakerSanity wrote:
Jim isn't on the board. My guess is that Jim and Johnny just got something they really wanted, but, for PR purposes, that part won't be publicized so Jeanie can look like she "won."


I thought it was interesting that the next board meeting is scheduled for December. It could be nothing, or it could be an agreement to give the stakeholders the rest of the year to arrange a buyout or something like that.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
wolfpaclaker
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 29 May 2002
Posts: 51463

PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 3:34 am    Post subject:

angrypuppy wrote:
Dr. Laker wrote:
I will link it http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2697145-lakers-show-loyalty-matters-more-than-family-with-new-magic-pelinka-front-office

Quote:
The GM position is all about the details, and despite Johnson's previous verbal takedowns targeting Jim, Jeanie and Magic weren't happy with reports of Kupchak's shortcomings alongside Jim, either.

There was too much evidence of Kupchak's work ethic weakening, his knowledge of the league's players being less than encyclopedic, his inability to play the behind-the-scenes game to get you-scratch-my-back benefits from agents, his tendency to trade draft picks to make bad contracts go away and his outright complacency in managing the draft-pick protections in the Steve Nash trade.


So the assertion is that Mitch had gotten fat & lazy and wasn't giving due diligence to the work.

I haven't paid attention enough to support or naysay that, but it has been an ongoing concern of Mitch supporters like me that he was not as active as we wanted in moving expiring contracts or squeezing the extra drop out of deals.

I go allllllllllll the way back to the Gary Payton deal to Boston. Not only did Mitch get punked out of LG Legend Marcus Banks, but we ended up tossing in the draft pick that became Rajon Rondo, because Mitch let Payton & Ainge intimidate him into changing the announced deal.



I'm not entirely sure that Ding wrote an accurate assessment of Mitch, at least by the more tangible criticisms. That Nash trade was terrible, but there were decent protections in place. The big picture criticism (ignored by Ding) is whether the trade made sense from a team chemistry perspective, and whether the team should two surrender two first round picks, given that it was aging and the contracts were expiring. That team had the potential to drop off the cliff. In other words, protections were fine, though not the trade itself.

Honestly, I think Mitch did the best he could, presented the pro forma trade to management (Dr. Buss or Jimbo, perhaps both) and executed the deal. At least that's my impression. I honestly don't know what happened behind the scenes.

I also think Mitch couldn't politically navigate the white waters known as the Lakers front office. You had to pick your poison: Jimbo or Jeanie. If you talked to one camp, the other camp would probably freeze you out.


Spot on as usual AP.

Mitch had no option but to put all his things with the Jim camp. Jim was calling the shots, he had his own mathematical formula on how to evaluate players. I don't think Mitch ever had complete control. Without Kobe and a great coach like Phil, it's a totally different thing to build a winning team and while Mitch made some mistakes, I don't think he's at all guilty of the things said there.

I'll always remember Mitch as a great GM who did great things for this franchise. The last few years were bad, but I will never put all of it on him. He had tied himself to Jimmy and when Jimmy was out, Mitch had to go as well. Sucks.
_________________
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6Rz0TSprFc
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Dr. Laker
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Apr 2002
Posts: 11200

PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 9:41 am    Post subject:

LakerSanity wrote:
Jim isn't on the board. My guess is that Jim and Johnny just got something they really wanted, but, for PR purposes, that part won't be publicized so Jeanie can look like she "won."


I don't believe that Jimmy was ever on the board - at least not after Dr. Buss' death. It is a private corporation so we won't know all of the details, but it looks like it is going to be a win for Jeanie either way. Either Jimmy & Johnny are bought out and the threat is eliminated (which is a win-win), or Jimmy & Johnny see that the other 4 Buss kids, AEG & the NBA are backing Jeanie and the older brothers have determined there's no point in continuing a losing battle (a clear win for Jeanie).
_________________
Suck it, whiners. I have TWC!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
wolfpaclaker
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 29 May 2002
Posts: 51463

PostPosted: Tue Mar 21, 2017 4:29 am    Post subject:

Jeanie wasn't horsing around.
She's kicked her brother's ass pretty bad.
I can't believe how easily she accomplished this.
My guess is Jim didn't think Jeanie would actually go through with it, which is why he never seemed to care much about the timeline.

Not a great situation, but hopefully now resolved for the coming free agency, draft and trade period.
_________________
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6Rz0TSprFc
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
laker4life
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 26 Nov 2001
Posts: 7062

PostPosted: Tue Mar 21, 2017 9:33 am    Post subject:

LakerLanny wrote:
fiendishoc wrote:
Another Ding hit on Kupchak. What's the point? Not going to link.


I don't think it was a hit piece but it is interesting these articles weren't coming when he was failing as GM.

He did a terrible job the last five years and honestly was spared further embarrassment. The league had passed him by pretty clearly as far as assembling a roster in the modern CBA era.


It was not coming out because it was till a work in progress.

It could have worked out if the signings worked and Russell and Ingram became a star.

Now that there is a change, we can call it for what it is.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
laker4life
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 26 Nov 2001
Posts: 7062

PostPosted: Tue Mar 21, 2017 9:37 am    Post subject:

I do not believe it is OVER

Jeanie wants their votes for the rest of their lives.

HAHAHAHA

She is not messing around.


Lakers' Jeanie Buss asking for brothers' votes for rest of her life


"... In Friday's court filing, Jeanie's lawyers argued that as trustees they have a fiduciary responsibility to support her as a director and controlling owner for the rest of her lifetime. If they are unwilling to comply, the lawsuit she has filed in probate court will proceed. The next hearing in that lawsuit is set for May 15."



http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/18939450/jeanie-buss-los-angeles-lakers-asks-johnny-buss-jim-buss-assurance-vote-rest-life
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Dr. Laker
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Apr 2002
Posts: 11200

PostPosted: Tue Mar 21, 2017 3:12 pm    Post subject:

laker4life wrote:
I do not believe it is OVER

Jeanie wants their votes for the rest of their lives.

HAHAHAHA

She is not messing around.


Lakers' Jeanie Buss asking for brothers' votes for rest of her life


"... In Friday's court filing, Jeanie's lawyers argued that as trustees they have a fiduciary responsibility to support her as a director and controlling owner for the rest of her lifetime. If they are unwilling to comply, the lawsuit she has filed in probate court will proceed. The next hearing in that lawsuit is set for May 15."



http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/18939450/jeanie-buss-los-angeles-lakers-asks-johnny-buss-jim-buss-assurance-vote-rest-life


Jeanie is taking lessons from Putin!

Clearly, she cannot expect the court to do that - she has an endgame, as well. Maybe she wants to but them out and they won't go? Or (more likely), she's taking away their negotiating leverage?
_________________
Suck it, whiners. I have TWC!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
laker4life
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 26 Nov 2001
Posts: 7062

PostPosted: Wed Mar 22, 2017 9:26 pm    Post subject:

Dr. Laker wrote:
laker4life wrote:
I do not believe it is OVER

Jeanie wants their votes for the rest of their lives.

HAHAHAHA

She is not messing around.


Lakers' Jeanie Buss asking for brothers' votes for rest of her life


"... In Friday's court filing, Jeanie's lawyers argued that as trustees they have a fiduciary responsibility to support her as a director and controlling owner for the rest of her lifetime. If they are unwilling to comply, the lawsuit she has filed in probate court will proceed. The next hearing in that lawsuit is set for May 15."



http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/18939450/jeanie-buss-los-angeles-lakers-asks-johnny-buss-jim-buss-assurance-vote-rest-life


Jeanie is taking lessons from Putin!

Clearly, she cannot expect the court to do that - she has an endgame, as well. Maybe she wants to but them out and they won't go? Or (more likely), she's taking away their negotiating leverage?


I think it is pretty damm smart move.

Go for the kill when your enemy is weak.
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 ... , 45, 46, 47  Next
Page 46 of 47
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
© 1995-2010 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