Ball vs. DLO
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 15, 16, 17 ... 20, 21, 22  Next
 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
tox
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 17835

PostPosted: Sun Jan 14, 2018 1:49 pm    Post subject:

cal1piggy wrote:
GoldenThroat wrote:
cal1piggy wrote:
GoldenThroat wrote:
cal1piggy wrote:
well this year's team has substantial talent and has consistently given top teams trouble this year (yes injuries). the slump coincided with lonzo's injury, which tells you how valuable lonzo is. before the injury, it felt like the team was taking the next step.


And the Lakers' slump last year coincided with Russell's injury. I'm not even trying to argue that Russell is more valuable than Lonzo (he's not), but the double standards have always been crazy with that dude.


i dont know the characters here. it does feel like the current team is substantially better than the one last year. not all lonzo, since we did bring in vets like kcp and lopez instead of moz and whoever else we had last year.

if this team makes a big run, i would not be surprised.


This team is better than last year's team. It was always going to be better than last year's team, because it's a team that's mostly comprised of really young guys and really young guys gradually get better. Similar to how the '16 team won 9 more games than the year before.

The Lakers are currently on pace for a 29-win season, after a 26-win season last year. I could see a big run too, but that's a hope rather than a reality at this point.


that is all true but we need to project a bit also.
if lonzo was not injured, the 7 game losing streak could easily have been 50-50.
if so, we may currently have gone 7-3 in the last 10 games.

when lonzo is playing, it is not a garbage team.
what is the record when lonzo is not injured?
furthermore, the team would be showing progress in the w-l over time also.

To be fair, the Lakers were a 32 win team through January when Russell played (14-22). The Lakers are 15-21 with Lonzo playing (0-6 without him) which is a 34 win team pace.

I'm also of the opinion that Lonzo is the better player and prospect, but that to me is a function of how good Lonzo is and not a slight on Russell.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
cal1piggy
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 19 Jul 2017
Posts: 2584

PostPosted: Sun Jan 14, 2018 1:51 pm    Post subject:

tox wrote:
cal1piggy wrote:
GoldenThroat wrote:
cal1piggy wrote:
GoldenThroat wrote:
cal1piggy wrote:
well this year's team has substantial talent and has consistently given top teams trouble this year (yes injuries). the slump coincided with lonzo's injury, which tells you how valuable lonzo is. before the injury, it felt like the team was taking the next step.


And the Lakers' slump last year coincided with Russell's injury. I'm not even trying to argue that Russell is more valuable than Lonzo (he's not), but the double standards have always been crazy with that dude.


i dont know the characters here. it does feel like the current team is substantially better than the one last year. not all lonzo, since we did bring in vets like kcp and lopez instead of moz and whoever else we had last year.

if this team makes a big run, i would not be surprised.


This team is better than last year's team. It was always going to be better than last year's team, because it's a team that's mostly comprised of really young guys and really young guys gradually get better. Similar to how the '16 team won 9 more games than the year before.

The Lakers are currently on pace for a 29-win season, after a 26-win season last year. I could see a big run too, but that's a hope rather than a reality at this point.


that is all true but we need to project a bit also.
if lonzo was not injured, the 7 game losing streak could easily have been 50-50.
if so, we may currently have gone 7-3 in the last 10 games.

when lonzo is playing, it is not a garbage team.
what is the record when lonzo is not injured?
furthermore, the team would be showing progress in the w-l over time also.

To be fair, the Lakers were a 32 win team through January when Russell played (14-22). The Lakers are 15-21 with Lonzo playing (0-6 without him) which is a 34 win team pace.

I'm also of the opinion that Lonzo is the better player and prospect, but that to me is a function of how good Lonzo is and not a slight on Russell.


32 vs 34 is a fair comparison, but i would be curious about the month-to-month if you factor out the ball-less (attempt at humor) games. i have not done it, but would be hard to believe the record would not reflect ball shaking off the shooting problems. if he develops 1 other skill for the rest of the season, he could unleash some interesting problems for everyone else (such as a teardrop)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90299
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Mon Jan 15, 2018 2:27 pm    Post subject:

cal1piggy wrote:
GoldenThroat wrote:
cal1piggy wrote:
GoldenThroat wrote:
cal1piggy wrote:
well this year's team has substantial talent and has consistently given top teams trouble this year (yes injuries). the slump coincided with lonzo's injury, which tells you how valuable lonzo is. before the injury, it felt like the team was taking the next step.


And the Lakers' slump last year coincided with Russell's injury. I'm not even trying to argue that Russell is more valuable than Lonzo (he's not), but the double standards have always been crazy with that dude.


i dont know the characters here. it does feel like the current team is substantially better than the one last year. not all lonzo, since we did bring in vets like kcp and lopez instead of moz and whoever else we had last year.

if this team makes a big run, i would not be surprised.


This team is better than last year's team. It was always going to be better than last year's team, because it's a team that's mostly comprised of really young guys and really young guys gradually get better. Similar to how the '16 team won 9 more games than the year before.

The Lakers are currently on pace for a 29-win season, after a 26-win season last year. I could see a big run too, but that's a hope rather than a reality at this point.


that is all true but we need to project a bit also.
if lonzo was not injured, the 7 game losing streak could easily have been 50-50.
if so, we may currently have gone 7-3 in the last 10 games.

when lonzo is playing, it is not a garbage team.
what is the record when lonzo is not injured?
furthermore, the team would be showing progress in the w-l over time also.


I don't think having a fifty fifty record in an odd number of games is easy at all...
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Drifts
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 22 Nov 2004
Posts: 28374

PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2018 12:09 am    Post subject:

Ujah's Goat wrote:
Randle30 wrote:
plus NO ONE wanted to play with DLo... As prayed for, this case is hereby DISMISSED


To anyone who actually watches games, it is clear that Lonzo is head and shoulders above D'Lo in his decision making and getting guys involved. He impacts the games in so many ways superior to D'Lo: passing lanes, transition, defense, help defense, tempo, lower usage. It is obvious why guys in the league, including LeBron Steph KD George Westbrook - aka the BEST players in the league - are raving about Lonzo. Lonzo WAY over D'Lo for me.

Most in this thread keep talking about D'Lo stats he's putting up on a garbage team in the East (and prior to that, in the West), when the issues with D'Lo had nothing to do with his game and everything to do with his attitude & injuries. D'Lo's defenders here talk about BScott, KFT, and crappy situation he was put in. What about Russell's multiple spats with his teammates, coaches, and players around the league? And what about when he liked the Twitter comment about the Lakers not drafting Lonzo? Completely unacceptable behavior which screams of his pettiness.


I agree. Russell has maturity issues, aside from issues with his game itself and his knee problems... the entire package is flawed.

Luckily, the Lakers were able to get Kuzma and Lopez, and then dump salaries too by trading him.
_________________
"Now, if life is coffee, then the jobs, money & position in society are the cups. They are just tools to hold & contain life, but the quality of life doesn't change. Sometimes, by concentrating only on the cup, we fail to enjoy the coffee in it."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
OregonLakerGuy
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 23 Feb 2005
Posts: 13207
Location: Oregon

PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2018 12:29 am    Post subject:

Drifts wrote:
Ujah's Goat wrote:
Randle30 wrote:
plus NO ONE wanted to play with DLo... As prayed for, this case is hereby DISMISSED


To anyone who actually watches games, it is clear that Lonzo is head and shoulders above D'Lo in his decision making and getting guys involved. He impacts the games in so many ways superior to D'Lo: passing lanes, transition, defense, help defense, tempo, lower usage. It is obvious why guys in the league, including LeBron Steph KD George Westbrook - aka the BEST players in the league - are raving about Lonzo. Lonzo WAY over D'Lo for me.

Most in this thread keep talking about D'Lo stats he's putting up on a garbage team in the East (and prior to that, in the West), when the issues with D'Lo had nothing to do with his game and everything to do with his attitude & injuries. D'Lo's defenders here talk about BScott, KFT, and crappy situation he was put in. What about Russell's multiple spats with his teammates, coaches, and players around the league? And what about when he liked the Twitter comment about the Lakers not drafting Lonzo? Completely unacceptable behavior which screams of his pettiness.


I agree. Russell has maturity issues, aside from issues with his game itself and his knee problems... the entire package is flawed.

Luckily, the Lakers were able to get Kuzma and Lopez, and then dump salaries too by trading him.


Normally I would simply let people say what they want, but I don't want this inaccuracy to endure through repetition. Hart was taken with the extra pick and not Kuzma. Every bit of evidence shows that Kuzma was always going to be the Lakers pick and he wasn't on the radar for the Nets. The haul for Russell was Hart, Lopez, and dumping Mozgov.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
markjay
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 12 Feb 2006
Posts: 3913
Location: O.C.

PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2018 5:53 am    Post subject:

OregonLakerGuy wrote:
Drifts wrote:
Ujah's Goat wrote:
Randle30 wrote:
plus NO ONE wanted to play with DLo... As prayed for, this case is hereby DISMISSED


To anyone who actually watches games, it is clear that Lonzo is head and shoulders above D'Lo in his decision making and getting guys involved. He impacts the games in so many ways superior to D'Lo: passing lanes, transition, defense, help defense, tempo, lower usage. It is obvious why guys in the league, including LeBron Steph KD George Westbrook - aka the BEST players in the league - are raving about Lonzo. Lonzo WAY over D'Lo for me.

Most in this thread keep talking about D'Lo stats he's putting up on a garbage team in the East (and prior to that, in the West), when the issues with D'Lo had nothing to do with his game and everything to do with his attitude & injuries. D'Lo's defenders here talk about BScott, KFT, and crappy situation he was put in. What about Russell's multiple spats with his teammates, coaches, and players around the league? And what about when he liked the Twitter comment about the Lakers not drafting Lonzo? Completely unacceptable behavior which screams of his pettiness.


I agree. Russell has maturity issues, aside from issues with his game itself and his knee problems... the entire package is flawed.

Luckily, the Lakers were able to get Kuzma and Lopez, and then dump salaries too by trading him.


Normally I would simply let people say what they want, but I don't want this inaccuracy to endure through repetition. Hart was taken with the extra pick and not Kuzma. Every bit of evidence shows that Kuzma was always going to be the Lakers pick and he wasn't on the radar for the Nets. The haul for Russell was Hart, Lopez, and dumping Mozgov.


Actually, it is your post that is inaccurate.

(1) Kuzma worked out for the Nets on June 14th. That is evidence that they may have taken him.

(2) The Nets were clearly willing to trade the 27th pick. If they hadn’t traded it to the Lakers, what's the evidence that they couldn't have traded it to another team that might have taken Kuzma?

(3) The Lakers clearly wanted to dump Mozgov. If they hadn’t pulled off this trade, what is the evidence they wouldn’t have made another trade that might have cost them the 28th pick in order to dump Mozgov?

In summary, the Lakers used the 27th pick they traded for to get Kuzma. Any idea that if they hadn’t made the trade they still would have gotten Kuzma is pure speculation.

Finally, one more piece of inaccuracy. Even if, on shaky grounds, you claim that the trade didn’t yield Kuzma for them, you at least have to indicate that it yielded both Hart AND Bryant, in addition to Lopez and dumping Mozgov.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Lucky_Shot
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 10 Jan 2016
Posts: 5140

PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2018 6:28 am    Post subject:

To be fair none of us know what the Nets would of done with the 27th pick maybe they take Kuz maybe not but I'd rather have Hart or Kuz over Dlo.

To me it was the trade of the year. I think when we look back this trade is going to be the reason we win a title and it actually turned me into a fan of Magicka.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
governator
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 24996

PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2018 6:50 am    Post subject:

markjay wrote:
OregonLakerGuy wrote:
Drifts wrote:
Ujah's Goat wrote:
Randle30 wrote:
plus NO ONE wanted to play with DLo... As prayed for, this case is hereby DISMISSED


To anyone who actually watches games, it is clear that Lonzo is head and shoulders above D'Lo in his decision making and getting guys involved. He impacts the games in so many ways superior to D'Lo: passing lanes, transition, defense, help defense, tempo, lower usage. It is obvious why guys in the league, including LeBron Steph KD George Westbrook - aka the BEST players in the league - are raving about Lonzo. Lonzo WAY over D'Lo for me.

Most in this thread keep talking about D'Lo stats he's putting up on a garbage team in the East (and prior to that, in the West), when the issues with D'Lo had nothing to do with his game and everything to do with his attitude & injuries. D'Lo's defenders here talk about BScott, KFT, and crappy situation he was put in. What about Russell's multiple spats with his teammates, coaches, and players around the league? And what about when he liked the Twitter comment about the Lakers not drafting Lonzo? Completely unacceptable behavior which screams of his pettiness.


I agree. Russell has maturity issues, aside from issues with his game itself and his knee problems... the entire package is flawed.

Luckily, the Lakers were able to get Kuzma and Lopez, and then dump salaries too by trading him.


Normally I would simply let people say what they want, but I don't want this inaccuracy to endure through repetition. Hart was taken with the extra pick and not Kuzma. Every bit of evidence shows that Kuzma was always going to be the Lakers pick and he wasn't on the radar for the Nets. The haul for Russell was Hart, Lopez, and dumping Mozgov.


Actually, it is your post that is inaccurate.

(1) Kuzma worked out for the Nets on June 14th. That is evidence that they may have taken him.

(2) The Nets were clearly willing to trade the 27th pick. If they hadn’t traded it to the Lakers, what's the evidence that they couldn't have traded it to another team that might have taken Kuzma?

(3) The Lakers clearly wanted to dump Mozgov. If they hadn’t pulled off this trade, what is the evidence they wouldn’t have made another trade that might have cost them the 28th pick in order to dump Mozgov?

In summary, the Lakers used the 27th pick they traded for to get Kuzma. Any idea that if they hadn’t made the trade they still would have gotten Kuzma is pure speculation.

Finally, one more piece of inaccuracy. Even if, on shaky grounds, you claim that the trade didn’t yield Kuzma for them, you at least have to indicate that it yielded both Hart AND Bryant, in addition to Lopez and dumping Mozgov.


good guess vs good guess

Also Nets had the 22nd pick which they didn't draft Kuzma... does this mean anything? (who knows but didn't look like Kuzma was Nets GM's target)
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 Jan 16, 2018 8:37 am    Post subject:

cal1piggy wrote:
GoldenThroat wrote:
cal1piggy wrote:
GoldenThroat wrote:
cal1piggy wrote:
well this year's team has substantial talent and has consistently given top teams trouble this year (yes injuries). the slump coincided with lonzo's injury, which tells you how valuable lonzo is. before the injury, it felt like the team was taking the next step.


And the Lakers' slump last year coincided with Russell's injury. I'm not even trying to argue that Russell is more valuable than Lonzo (he's not), but the double standards have always been crazy with that dude.


i dont know the characters here. it does feel like the current team is substantially better than the one last year. not all lonzo, since we did bring in vets like kcp and lopez instead of moz and whoever else we had last year.

if this team makes a big run, i would not be surprised.


This team is better than last year's team. It was always going to be better than last year's team, because it's a team that's mostly comprised of really young guys and really young guys gradually get better. Similar to how the '16 team won 9 more games than the year before.

The Lakers are currently on pace for a 29-win season, after a 26-win season last year. I could see a big run too, but that's a hope rather than a reality at this point.


that is all true but we need to project a bit also.
if lonzo was not injured, the 7 game losing streak could easily have been 50-50.
if so, we may currently have gone 7-3 in the last 10 games.

when lonzo is playing, it is not a garbage team.
what is the record when lonzo is not injured?
furthermore, the team would be showing progress in the w-l over time also.


The Lakers record with Ball starting is 15-21.

It's ridiculous to evaluate players based on guesses of what they might have done, rather than what they actually did do. So trying to give him credit for some imaginery 7-3 run while he was injured is silly.

In any case, comparing the Lakers w-l with Ball and Russell isn't apples-to-apples since they played with very different teammates. (And I say that having no idea which of them had a better record.)

Five years from now, I'd wager Ball will be regarded as the better player, but I am content to let them play out their careers before I get all worked up about which is better and whether the Russell trade was a smart move.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
cal1piggy
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 19 Jul 2017
Posts: 2584

PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2018 8:58 am    Post subject:

Omar Little wrote:
cal1piggy wrote:
GoldenThroat wrote:
cal1piggy wrote:
GoldenThroat wrote:
cal1piggy wrote:
well this year's team has substantial talent and has consistently given top teams trouble this year (yes injuries). the slump coincided with lonzo's injury, which tells you how valuable lonzo is. before the injury, it felt like the team was taking the next step.


And the Lakers' slump last year coincided with Russell's injury. I'm not even trying to argue that Russell is more valuable than Lonzo (he's not), but the double standards have always been crazy with that dude.


i dont know the characters here. it does feel like the current team is substantially better than the one last year. not all lonzo, since we did bring in vets like kcp and lopez instead of moz and whoever else we had last year.

if this team makes a big run, i would not be surprised.


This team is better than last year's team. It was always going to be better than last year's team, because it's a team that's mostly comprised of really young guys and really young guys gradually get better. Similar to how the '16 team won 9 more games than the year before.

The Lakers are currently on pace for a 29-win season, after a 26-win season last year. I could see a big run too, but that's a hope rather than a reality at this point.


that is all true but we need to project a bit also.
if lonzo was not injured, the 7 game losing streak could easily have been 50-50.
if so, we may currently have gone 7-3 in the last 10 games.

when lonzo is playing, it is not a garbage team.
what is the record when lonzo is not injured?
furthermore, the team would be showing progress in the w-l over time also.


I don't think having a fifty fifty record in an odd number of games is easy at all...


(6/2) + 4 = 10
1st game was truncated to get 10

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
cal1piggy
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 19 Jul 2017
Posts: 2584

PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2018 9:01 am    Post subject:

Lucky_Shot wrote:
To be fair none of us know what the Nets would of done with the 27th pick maybe they take Kuz maybe not but I'd rather have Hart or Kuz over Dlo.

To me it was the trade of the year. I think when we look back this trade is going to be the reason we win a title and it actually turned me into a fan of Magicka.


hmm i would rather have kuz over dlo, but barely because of knees.
but not hart from what i have seen so far
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
cal1piggy
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 19 Jul 2017
Posts: 2584

PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2018 9:03 am    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
cal1piggy wrote:
GoldenThroat wrote:
cal1piggy wrote:
GoldenThroat wrote:
cal1piggy wrote:
well this year's team has substantial talent and has consistently given top teams trouble this year (yes injuries). the slump coincided with lonzo's injury, which tells you how valuable lonzo is. before the injury, it felt like the team was taking the next step.


And the Lakers' slump last year coincided with Russell's injury. I'm not even trying to argue that Russell is more valuable than Lonzo (he's not), but the double standards have always been crazy with that dude.


i dont know the characters here. it does feel like the current team is substantially better than the one last year. not all lonzo, since we did bring in vets like kcp and lopez instead of moz and whoever else we had last year.

if this team makes a big run, i would not be surprised.


This team is better than last year's team. It was always going to be better than last year's team, because it's a team that's mostly comprised of really young guys and really young guys gradually get better. Similar to how the '16 team won 9 more games than the year before.

The Lakers are currently on pace for a 29-win season, after a 26-win season last year. I could see a big run too, but that's a hope rather than a reality at this point.


that is all true but we need to project a bit also.
if lonzo was not injured, the 7 game losing streak could easily have been 50-50.
if so, we may currently have gone 7-3 in the last 10 games.

when lonzo is playing, it is not a garbage team.
what is the record when lonzo is not injured?
furthermore, the team would be showing progress in the w-l over time also.


The Lakers record with Ball starting is 15-21.

It's ridiculous to evaluate players based on guesses of what they might have done, rather than what they actually did do. So trying to give him credit for some imaginery 7-3 run while he was injured is silly.

In any case, comparing the Lakers w-l with Ball and Russell isn't apples-to-apples since they played with very different teammates. (And I say that having no idea which of them had a better record.)

Five years from now, I'd wager Ball will be regarded as the better player, but I am content to let them play out their careers before I get all worked up about which is better and whether the Russell trade was a smart move.


i believe the team was playing better and better before ball got hurt.
record was improving over 10 game spans as was ball's shooting
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 37474

PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2018 9:11 am    Post subject:

markjay wrote:
Actually, it is your post that is inaccurate.

(1) Kuzma worked out for the Nets on June 14th. That is evidence that they may have taken him.

(2) The Nets were clearly willing to trade the 27th pick. If they hadn’t traded it to the Lakers, what's the evidence that they couldn't have traded it to another team that might have taken Kuzma?

(3) The Lakers clearly wanted to dump Mozgov. If they hadn’t pulled off this trade, what is the evidence they wouldn’t have made another trade that might have cost them the 28th pick in order to dump Mozgov?

In summary, the Lakers used the 27th pick they traded for to get Kuzma. Any idea that if they hadn’t made the trade they still would have gotten Kuzma is pure speculation.

Finally, one more piece of inaccuracy. Even if, on shaky grounds, you claim that the trade didn’t yield Kuzma for them, you at least have to indicate that it yielded both Hart AND Bryant, in addition to Lopez and dumping Mozgov.


1) The Nets loved Kyle Kuzma so much that they selected Jarrett Allen with the 22nd pick. The Nets loved Kyle Kuzma so much that they said "who knows who would've drafted Kuzma?...credit to the Lakers" with the 27th pick. Multiple Nets insiders have stated that Kuzma wasn't on their radar.

2) Sure, someone else could've theoretically traded for the 27th pick because they loved Kuzma so much (but not enough to trade for any earlier pick, of course). The argument isn't that there is a 100% certainty that Kuzma would have been available. The argument is that there is a 100% certainty that they would have had Russell and an extraordinarily high likelihood that they would have had Kuzma as well. The way this worked out was a 0% likelihood of Russell and a 100% chance of Kuzma. 100% chance of Russell and a 95%+ chance of Kuzma is a much better deal.

3) The Lakers wouldn't have been able to get out of the Mozgov contract without trading the 2nd pick, Ingram, or Russell. But that only matters if they use the cap space that they freed up with that trade. To be determined. Them simply wanting to get out of his contract doesn't justify the trade on its own.

Lastly, I like Josh Hart. He's a good, professional young player that will probably have a long career in the NBA. But the notion that Hart + Bryant > Russell is so laughable that it shines a huge spotlight on how pettily Russell was viewed/treated when he was here. He was actually able to win games on a bad Lakers roster without Lonzo Ball, which is more than can be said for this year's roster or our other young guys.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DLaker
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 14 Jul 2005
Posts: 1536

PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2018 10:07 am    Post subject:

GoldenThroat wrote:
markjay wrote:
Actually, it is your post that is inaccurate.

(1) Kuzma worked out for the Nets on June 14th. That is evidence that they may have taken him.

(2) The Nets were clearly willing to trade the 27th pick. If they hadn’t traded it to the Lakers, what's the evidence that they couldn't have traded it to another team that might have taken Kuzma?

(3) The Lakers clearly wanted to dump Mozgov. If they hadn’t pulled off this trade, what is the evidence they wouldn’t have made another trade that might have cost them the 28th pick in order to dump Mozgov?

In summary, the Lakers used the 27th pick they traded for to get Kuzma. Any idea that if they hadn’t made the trade they still would have gotten Kuzma is pure speculation.

Finally, one more piece of inaccuracy. Even if, on shaky grounds, you claim that the trade didn’t yield Kuzma for them, you at least have to indicate that it yielded both Hart AND Bryant, in addition to Lopez and dumping Mozgov.


1) The Nets loved Kyle Kuzma so much that they selected Jarrett Allen with the 22nd pick. The Nets loved Kyle Kuzma so much that they said "who knows who would've drafted Kuzma?...credit to the Lakers" with the 27th pick. Multiple Nets insiders have stated that Kuzma wasn't on their radar.

2) Sure, someone else could've theoretically traded for the 27th pick because they loved Kuzma so much (but not enough to trade for any earlier pick, of course). The argument isn't that there is a 100% certainty that Kuzma would have been available. The argument is that there is a 100% certainty that they would have had Russell and an extraordinarily high likelihood that they would have had Kuzma as well. The way this worked out was a 0% likelihood of Russell and a 100% chance of Kuzma. 100% chance of Russell and a 95%+ chance of Kuzma is a much better deal.

3) The Lakers wouldn't have been able to get out of the Mozgov contract without trading the 2nd pick, Ingram, or Russell. But that only matters if they use the cap space that they freed up with that trade. To be determined. Them simply wanting to get out of his contract doesn't justify the trade on its own.

Lastly, I like Josh Hart. He's a good, professional young player that will probably have a long career in the NBA. But the notion that Hart + Bryant > Russell is so laughable that it shines a huge spotlight on how pettily Russell was viewed/treated when he was here. He was actually able to win games on a bad Lakers roster without Lonzo Ball, which is more than can be said for this year's roster or our other young guys.


It is not right to put in percentages when we don't know all the variables involved. Dlo not traded, he will be 100% be here. We can also say it will be highly likely Mozgov and Deng is still here. Kuz is a different variable, who knows what the Lakers will do. The Lakers traded the 28 to pick up two draft picks who to say they won't do that again and gamble with the 27. There are a lot of variables that could not be accounted for, does the Lakers know about DLo's knees, when he had that plasma injection last year so early in his career, I was imagining Brandon Roy.

We can make all the fantasy trade, but we can see from Deng that shedding that contract is difficult. The 100% facts are that we traded Dlo and Moz and got Lopez, Kuz, money to sign KCP and more flexibility in the summer to make moves. The situation we have last year was because of the dumb moves our previous management made. Rob and Magic was given a problem and in my opinion their solution is going toward a positive direction. In a perfect world, I would have love Jokic or Nurkic than Randle, Porz or Booker than Dlo, did not sign Moz and Deng, did not give up so much for Nash, got something back for Howard and Gasol, and NBA allowed the Chris Paul trade. But I was only dreaming
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 37474

PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2018 10:17 am    Post subject:

DLaker wrote:
It is not right to put in percentages when we don't know all the variables involved. Dlo not traded, he will be 100% be here. We can also say it will be highly likely Mozgov and Deng is still here. Kuz is a different variable, who knows what the Lakers will do. The Lakers traded the 28 to pick up two draft picks who to say they won't do that again and gamble with the 27. There are a lot of variables that could not be accounted for, does the Lakers know about DLo's knees, when he had that plasma injection last year so early in his career, I was imagining Brandon Roy.

We can make all the fantasy trade, but we can see from Deng that shedding that contract is difficult. The 100% facts are that we traded Dlo and Moz and got Lopez, Kuz, money to sign KCP and more flexibility in the summer to make moves. The situation we have last year was because of the dumb moves our previous management made. Rob and Magic was given a problem and in my opinion their solution is going toward a positive direction. In a perfect world, I would have love Jokic or Nurkic than Randle, Porz or Booker than Dlo, did not sign Moz and Deng, did not give up so much for Nash, got something back for Howard and Gasol, and NBA allowed theChris Paul trade. But I was only dreaming


The idea that the Russell trade was a result of the dumb Mozgov/Deng signings is predicated on the notion that the Lakers HAD to trade them, and that's not the case. They could've kept everyone, let Mozgov & Deng expire, and made their big free agency moves in 2020 when the young guys were just starting to enter their mid-20's. Perhaps Magic & Pelinka's impatience will be rewarded, but that impatience wasn't a necessity.

The Lakers had Kuzma as a lottery-level talent on both their big man and wing boards. I was told that by someone who would know. They traded down from #28 after they secured Kuzma, but getting him was the priority. They loved him, and I said as much before the draft. If they didn't have #27, they would have certainly taken him with #28 and that would've been that.
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 Jan 16, 2018 10:35 am    Post subject:

DLaker wrote:

It is not right to put in percentages when we don't know all the variables involved.



That's one of my pet peeves -- when people say there is a 95% chance of this or a 70% chance of that or a 30% chance of this when they are just pulling numbers out of thin air.

It's just a way of pretending there is more analysis or science behind an opinion than there really is.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
governator
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 24996

PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2018 10:38 am    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
DLaker wrote:

It is not right to put in percentages when we don't know all the variables involved.



That's one of my pet peeves -- when people say there is a 95% chance of this or a 70% chance of that or a 30% chance of this when they are just pulling numbers out of thin air.

It's just a way of pretending there is more analysis or science behind an opinion than there really is.

But this mod GT actually did talk to both team's FO or close sources... not out of thin air
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 37474

PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2018 10:38 am    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
DLaker wrote:

It is not right to put in percentages when we don't know all the variables involved.



That's one of my pet peeves -- when people say there is a 95% chance of this or a 70% chance of that or a 30% chance of this when they are just pulling numbers out of thin air.

It's just a way of pretending there is more analysis or science behind an opinion than there really is.


I am pulling numbers out of thin air, but I thought that's a pretty obvious colloquialism. If I need to clarify that I have not conducted a scientific, peer-reviewed statistical analysis of Kyle Kuzma's chances of being available at #28, please consider this post to be that.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DLaker
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 14 Jul 2005
Posts: 1536

PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2018 10:39 am    Post subject:

GoldenThroat wrote:
DLaker wrote:
It is not right to put in percentages when we don't know all the variables involved. Dlo not traded, he will be 100% be here. We can also say it will be highly likely Mozgov and Deng is still here. Kuz is a different variable, who knows what the Lakers will do. The Lakers traded the 28 to pick up two draft picks who to say they won't do that again and gamble with the 27. There are a lot of variables that could not be accounted for, does the Lakers know about DLo's knees, when he had that plasma injection last year so early in his career, I was imagining Brandon Roy.

We can make all the fantasy trade, but we can see from Deng that shedding that contract is difficult. The 100% facts are that we traded Dlo and Moz and got Lopez, Kuz, money to sign KCP and more flexibility in the summer to make moves. The situation we have last year was because of the dumb moves our previous management made. Rob and Magic was given a problem and in my opinion their solution is going toward a positive direction. In a perfect world, I would have love Jokic or Nurkic than Randle, Porz or Booker than Dlo, did not sign Moz and Deng, did not give up so much for Nash, got something back for Howard and Gasol, and NBA allowed theChris Paul trade. But I was only dreaming


The idea that the Russell trade was a result of the dumb Mozgov/Deng signings is predicated on the notion that the Lakers HAD to trade them, and that's not the case. They could've kept everyone, let Mozgov & Deng expire, and made their big free agency moves in 2020 when the young guys were just starting to enter their mid-20's. Perhaps Magic & Pelinka's impatience will be rewarded, but that impatience wasn't a necessity.

The Lakers had Kuzma as a lottery-level talent on both their big man and wing boards. I was told that by someone who would know. They traded down from #28 after they secured Kuzma, but getting him was the priority. They loved him, and I said as much before the draft. If they didn't have #27, they would have certainly taken him with #28 and that would've been that.


Sorry, I though we are just rehashing a beat up topic. I don't know if we could have waited that long before we can get FA moves (we will be paying Dlo, Randle & Ingram by then). I believe we needed to act sooner than later. We know for a fact that we did not get the best draft pick available for Dlo and Randle (Jokic, Porz and Booker are all in the verge of All star if not there). Plus knowing how impatient us Lakers fan are (spoiled) we can't seem to enjoy the process. I am enjoying this year squad and can see a light at the end of the tunnel with Zo, Ingram, Kuz, Hart and Nance to start with seemed like great starting point.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 37474

PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2018 10:39 am    Post subject:

governator wrote:
activeverb wrote:
DLaker wrote:

It is not right to put in percentages when we don't know all the variables involved.



That's one of my pet peeves -- when people say there is a 95% chance of this or a 70% chance of that or a 30% chance of this when they are just pulling numbers out of thin air.

It's just a way of pretending there is more analysis or science behind an opinion than there really is.

But this mod GT actually did talk to both team's FO or close sources... not out of thin air


Only as it pertains to their opinion of Kyle Kuzma.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90299
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2018 11:19 am    Post subject:

GoldenThroat wrote:
DLaker wrote:
It is not right to put in percentages when we don't know all the variables involved. Dlo not traded, he will be 100% be here. We can also say it will be highly likely Mozgov and Deng is still here. Kuz is a different variable, who knows what the Lakers will do. The Lakers traded the 28 to pick up two draft picks who to say they won't do that again and gamble with the 27. There are a lot of variables that could not be accounted for, does the Lakers know about DLo's knees, when he had that plasma injection last year so early in his career, I was imagining Brandon Roy.

We can make all the fantasy trade, but we can see from Deng that shedding that contract is difficult. The 100% facts are that we traded Dlo and Moz and got Lopez, Kuz, money to sign KCP and more flexibility in the summer to make moves. The situation we have last year was because of the dumb moves our previous management made. Rob and Magic was given a problem and in my opinion their solution is going toward a positive direction. In a perfect world, I would have love Jokic or Nurkic than Randle, Porz or Booker than Dlo, did not sign Moz and Deng, did not give up so much for Nash, got something back for Howard and Gasol, and NBA allowed theChris Paul trade. But I was only dreaming


The idea that the Russell trade was a result of the dumb Mozgov/Deng signings is predicated on the notion that the Lakers HAD to trade them, and that's not the case. They could've kept everyone, let Mozgov & Deng expire, and made their big free agency moves in 2020 when the young guys were just starting to enter their mid-20's. Perhaps Magic & Pelinka's impatience will be rewarded, but that impatience wasn't a necessity.

The Lakers had Kuzma as a lottery-level talent on both their big man and wing boards. I was told that by someone who would know. They traded down from #28 after they secured Kuzma, but getting him was the priority. They loved him, and I said as much before the draft. If they didn't have #27, they would have certainly taken him with #28 and that would've been that.


This has been my perspective. The front office made three major mistakes IMO. First, they thought like fans rather than basketball people. "We have to turn this mother around now!" Short term vs mid to long. The second mistake was in pre-judging all their assets, and doing it on personalities/grudges/whathaveyou. The third was advertising all of their thoughts.
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
cal1piggy
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 19 Jul 2017
Posts: 2584

PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2018 11:24 am    Post subject:

GoldenThroat wrote:
governator wrote:
activeverb wrote:
DLaker wrote:

It is not right to put in percentages when we don't know all the variables involved.



That's one of my pet peeves -- when people say there is a 95% chance of this or a 70% chance of that or a 30% chance of this when they are just pulling numbers out of thin air.

It's just a way of pretending there is more analysis or science behind an opinion than there really is.

But this mod GT actually did talk to both team's FO or close sources... not out of thin air


Only as it pertains to their opinion of Kyle Kuzma.


any comment on what was thought of dlo's knees?

and how was it that they got such a better read of kuz than other teams?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
greenfrog
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 02 Jan 2011
Posts: 36081
Location: 502 Bad Gateway

PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2018 11:30 am    Post subject:

cal1piggy wrote:
GoldenThroat wrote:
governator wrote:
activeverb wrote:
DLaker wrote:

It is not right to put in percentages when we don't know all the variables involved.



That's one of my pet peeves -- when people say there is a 95% chance of this or a 70% chance of that or a 30% chance of this when they are just pulling numbers out of thin air.

It's just a way of pretending there is more analysis or science behind an opinion than there really is.

But this mod GT actually did talk to both team's FO or close sources... not out of thin air


Only as it pertains to their opinion of Kyle Kuzma.


any comment on what was thought of dlo's knees?

and how was it that they got such a better read of kuz than other teams?


Seriously, how are we even discussing if this was a bad trade at this point. The kid's played 12 games this season, and they still can not set a timetable for his return. Josh Hart has contributed more to wins and losses this season.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 37474

PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2018 11:34 am    Post subject:

greenfrog wrote:
cal1piggy wrote:
GoldenThroat wrote:
governator wrote:
activeverb wrote:
DLaker wrote:

It is not right to put in percentages when we don't know all the variables involved.



That's one of my pet peeves -- when people say there is a 95% chance of this or a 70% chance of that or a 30% chance of this when they are just pulling numbers out of thin air.

It's just a way of pretending there is more analysis or science behind an opinion than there really is.

But this mod GT actually did talk to both team's FO or close sources... not out of thin air


Only as it pertains to their opinion of Kyle Kuzma.


any comment on what was thought of dlo's knees?

and how was it that they got such a better read of kuz than other teams?


Seriously, how are we even discussing if this was a bad trade at this point. The kid's played 12 games this season, and they still can not set a timetable for his return. Josh Hart has contributed more to wins and losses this season.


He's on track to play on Friday.

And the first half of the 2017-18 season is a weird gauge for whether or not this was a good trade.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 37474

PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2018 11:38 am    Post subject:

cal1piggy wrote:
GoldenThroat wrote:
governator wrote:
activeverb wrote:
DLaker wrote:

It is not right to put in percentages when we don't know all the variables involved.



That's one of my pet peeves -- when people say there is a 95% chance of this or a 70% chance of that or a 30% chance of this when they are just pulling numbers out of thin air.

It's just a way of pretending there is more analysis or science behind an opinion than there really is.

But this mod GT actually did talk to both team's FO or close sources... not out of thin air


Only as it pertains to their opinion of Kyle Kuzma.


any comment on what was thought of dlo's knees?

and how was it that they got such a better read of kuz than other teams?


I've never heard Russell's knees be mentioned as a reason why they traded him. But people will retroactively use anything they can to justify the deal.

As for Kuzma, they loved his combine and especially his workout, and loved his combination of size and all-around skills. I can't speak to the opinions that other teams had of him. I just know that they had a Wing Board and a Bigs Board and he was a lottery pick on both of them.
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 ... 15, 16, 17 ... 20, 21, 22  Next
Page 16 of 22
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