Ramona Shelburne was on ESPN LA Radio today and I highlighted some key points below:
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
The Juggernaut
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 24 Aug 2017
Posts: 4572

PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:11 am    Post subject:

Runway8 wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
Quote:
They offered him the QO and then rescinded it due to Jules request.

They could have taken him hostage but it's not in their mettle.

Your turn.


The whole point is that it was a "request."

Jules options were:

1. sign with Lakers
2. get another team to sign him as a RFA
3. take a QO, be an UFA in 2019
4. sit out.

I doubt Jules does #4 and would have taken #3 and been unhappy about it.

But you know what Jules did when he was unhappy about being benched for Nance at the beginning of 2017-18? He crushed it and we had to play him. I think he would have done the same, helping the team AND his 2019 FA value.


By arguing these...I'm presenting to you what they hold as their values.

Magic and Pelinka were basketball players.

Maybe you think an unhappy player is more motivated but they certainly did not.

It's just a difference in opinion.

Personally, I would have gotten assets for Jules if there were any.


But my point is they benched him for the start of 2017-18 for Nance when Jules came in the best shape. What did he do? He wrecked the competition and played well.

Likely he does the same for us. I hope they don't cave like this if BI or Lonzo asked to be released too.



I don't think they caved in to JR's demand necessarily. I just they they are simply rookies at the helm who did not appreciate, or understand proper asset management. This culminated with their anxiousness to put their on finger print on THEIR team. They carelessly moved quickly. They had a harebrained idea to sign a group of rag-tag free agents and they just couldn't wait to get to it.

When they have an idea, they go for it without deep analysis, and Ivica Zubac proved this tendency hasn't gone away.


Great points. I agree
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:12 am    Post subject:

2 max FAs aren't a panacea. There are teams with 2 max FAs that aren't contenders. It's how you develop a team around them and the culture you have (i.e. coaching, FO, organization).
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Hero Ball
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 26 May 2015
Posts: 4403

PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:17 am    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
2 max FAs aren't a panacea. There are teams with 2 max FAs that aren't contenders. It's how you develop a team around them and the culture you have (i.e. coaching, FO, organization).


So 2 max ie bron and PG...

So was it if it materialized, a good start or a bad start?
_________________
Trade AD now.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
The Juggernaut
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 24 Aug 2017
Posts: 4572

PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:18 am    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
2 max FAs aren't a panacea. There are teams with 2 max FAs that aren't contenders. It's how you develop a team around them and the culture you have (i.e. coaching, FO, organization).


Which team has 2 superstars and isn't a contender?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Runway8
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Posts: 22835
Location: La Jolla, San Diego

PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:18 am    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
2 max FAs aren't a panacea. There are teams with 2 max FAs that aren't contenders. It's how you develop a team around them and the culture you have (i.e. coaching, FO, organization).


Yep. After signing Lebron, I started drinking the cool-aid. But seeing how they have no skills to finesse the rest of the roster. My confidence is very low right now that they could build a good roster supporting Lebron and whoever his sidekick is. Losing Ivica isn't the worst thing in the world, but it's their talent evaluation skills and reasoning that's scary. How can you not tell Ivica has so much more upside than Muscala, and is considered a more valuable asset? How can you say he's redundant, then essentially trade for another Mo Wagner, who btw is beating out Muscala in minutes now.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Mamba Mentality
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 04 May 2017
Posts: 3078
Location: The Left Coast

PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:20 am    Post subject:

Runway8 wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
2 max FAs aren't a panacea. There are teams with 2 max FAs that aren't contenders. It's how you develop a team around them and the culture you have (i.e. coaching, FO, organization).


Yep. After signing Lebron, I started drinking the cool-aid. But seeing how they have no skills to finesse the rest of the roster. My confidence is very low right now that they could build a good roster supporting Lebron and whoever his sidekick is. Losing Ivica isn't the worst thing in the world, but it's their talent evaluation skills and reasoning that's scary. How can you not tell Ivica has so much more upside than Muscala, and is considered a more valuable asset? How can you say he's redundant, then essentially trade for another Mo Wagner, who btw is beating out Muscala in minutes now.


Yep.
_________________
“You can't be held captive by the fear of failure or the fear of what people may say.” - Kobe Bryant
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Treble Clef
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 20 Nov 2012
Posts: 23881

PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:20 am    Post subject:

Jesusdelonla wrote:
kentu_tiro wrote:
So now who is Ramona's source? She's besties with Jeannie right?


It's Jeanie and magic, who r getting ready to fire Rob Pelinka


Yeah that's the only possible explanation. Insiders like Ramona are not going to say negative stuff about the Lakers unless specifically instructed to do so.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:22 am    Post subject:

The Juggernaut wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
2 max FAs aren't a panacea. There are teams with 2 max FAs that aren't contenders. It's how you develop a team around them and the culture you have (i.e. coaching, FO, organization).


Which team has 2 superstars and isn't a contender?


I said max FAs, i.e. what the market paid them.

For example, Conley/Gasol got max level deals.

Portland has Lillard/CJ on max level deals.

Pels have AD/Jrue on same.

These teams have big deals on their books but not exactly the best constructed roster for a contender. Portland is a playoff team, but they're not a contender at all.

The magic is to get 2 max FAs and build a cohesive roster and culture. I actually think we will get an all star level max FA (most likely Kemba/Jimmy to me), but I'm not convinced about the cohesive roster/culture part yet.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Runway8
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Posts: 22835
Location: La Jolla, San Diego

PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:23 am    Post subject:

The Juggernaut wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
2 max FAs aren't a panacea. There are teams with 2 max FAs that aren't contenders. It's how you develop a team around them and the culture you have (i.e. coaching, FO, organization).


Which team has 2 superstars and isn't a contender?


Minnesota for awhile. They got better unloading one of their max. But what is your definition of "contender?" Being a Laker fan, isn't that the finals or nothing? Are we happy with first or 2nd round exits? 4th or 5th seed? Because there are quite a few teams with two max in those scenarios such as Damien and CJ, PG13 and Westbrook, etc. When we got Lebron, the expectation here is the championship. I have no confidence Magic can build a 60+ win team, a #1 seed type powerhouse.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:24 am    Post subject:

Runway8 wrote:
The Juggernaut wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
2 max FAs aren't a panacea. There are teams with 2 max FAs that aren't contenders. It's how you develop a team around them and the culture you have (i.e. coaching, FO, organization).


Which team has 2 superstars and isn't a contender?


Minnesota for awhile. They got better unloading one of their max. But what is your definition of "contender?" Being a Laker fan, isn't that the finals or nothing? Are we happy with first or 2nd round exits? 4th or 5th seed? Because there are quite a few teams with two max in those scenarios such as Damien and CJ, PG13 and Westbrook, etc. When we got Lebron, the expectation here is the championship. I have no confidence Magic can build a 60+ win team, a #1 seed type powerhouse.


Right, KAT/Wiggins is another one.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Hero Ball
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 26 May 2015
Posts: 4403

PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:27 am    Post subject:

Winning takes time...then suddenly KD decides to sign with you.
_________________
Trade AD now.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Cutheon
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 10 Jul 2009
Posts: 12125
Location: Bay Area

PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:27 am    Post subject:

Quick note on Magic's talent evaluation. Re-watching Game 6, 2009 WCF. Youtube video starts with pre-game commentary. Stuart Scott: "Magic, Hedo Turkoglu: is he a better second-best player than Pau Gasol?" Magic: "Oh, no question about it. He can get the ball from the perimeter, shoot from the outside, take it to the basket and score, and get his teammates involved with his great passing."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Hero Ball
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 26 May 2015
Posts: 4403

PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:30 am    Post subject:

Cutheon wrote:
Quick note on Magic's talent evaluation. Re-watching Game 6, 2009 WCF. Youtube video starts with pre-game commentary. Stuart Scott: "Magic, Hedo Turkoglu: is he a better second-best player than Pau Gasol?" Magic: "Oh, no question about it. He can get the ball from the perimeter, shoot from the outside, take it to the basket and score, and get his teammates involved with his great passing."


Kuzma.
_________________
Trade AD now.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
The Juggernaut
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 24 Aug 2017
Posts: 4572

PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:30 am    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
Runway8 wrote:
The Juggernaut wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
2 max FAs aren't a panacea. There are teams with 2 max FAs that aren't contenders. It's how you develop a team around them and the culture you have (i.e. coaching, FO, organization).


Which team has 2 superstars and isn't a contender?


Minnesota for awhile. They got better unloading one of their max. But what is your definition of "contender?" Being a Laker fan, isn't that the finals or nothing? Are we happy with first or 2nd round exits? 4th or 5th seed? Because there are quite a few teams with two max in those scenarios such as Damien and CJ, PG13 and Westbrook, etc. When we got Lebron, the expectation here is the championship. I have no confidence Magic can build a 60+ win team, a #1 seed type powerhouse.


Right, KAT/Wiggins is another one.


Ah, I see you meant max free agents as in their contract status not their actual ability. Looking at the top West teams only GSW has more than 2 stars. If we add a legit 2nd star with Bron it changes our team dramatically. Fill in the rest with 3-D perimeter guys and a Dedmon/Brook type center
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:33 am    Post subject:

The Juggernaut wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
Runway8 wrote:
The Juggernaut wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
2 max FAs aren't a panacea. There are teams with 2 max FAs that aren't contenders. It's how you develop a team around them and the culture you have (i.e. coaching, FO, organization).


Which team has 2 superstars and isn't a contender?


Minnesota for awhile. They got better unloading one of their max. But what is your definition of "contender?" Being a Laker fan, isn't that the finals or nothing? Are we happy with first or 2nd round exits? 4th or 5th seed? Because there are quite a few teams with two max in those scenarios such as Damien and CJ, PG13 and Westbrook, etc. When we got Lebron, the expectation here is the championship. I have no confidence Magic can build a 60+ win team, a #1 seed type powerhouse.


Right, KAT/Wiggins is another one.


Ah, I see you meant max free agents as in their contract status not their actual ability. Looking at the top West teams only GSW has more than 2 stars. If we add a legit 2nd star with Bron it changes our team dramatically. Fill in the rest with 3-D perimeter guys and a Dedmon/Brook type center


Right, the overwhelming majority of contenders will have at least 2 all star level talents. That's not in dispute.

But just having 2 max level FAs (or extensions) will not be enough. It's how you build around them that also matters.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Hero Ball
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 26 May 2015
Posts: 4403

PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:34 am    Post subject:

The Juggernaut wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
The Juggernaut wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
The Juggernaut wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
Robster8989 wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
Julius wore the "PAY ME" shirt.

FO didn't like it.


Fine, then use his RFA rights to match any offer he received then trade him for something if he wasn't in your plans.
Letting a #7 pick (who panned out no less) walk away for nothing was mismanagement of an important asset.


maybe there were no offers


Then you do a QO.

When we had Kuz playing backup "center" b/c we had no one else, would you have preferred Jules?


Loved Jules.

Are you sure he would have signed the QO?


As opposed to sitting out?


As opposed to be released, as what has happened.


You're not getting it. Randle could only be released if Magic and the Lakers allowed it. They should have never allowed it. Either match an offer he gets, offer him the QO, or he has to sit out the year. Don't ever let your RFA #7 pick, that's just starting to blossom, go for nothing in return


They offered him the QO and then rescinded it due to Jules request.

They could have taken him hostage but it's not in their mettle.

Your turn.


That's the point. They acquiesced to his request when they had no obligation to do so. It was a foolishly naive move by Maginka.


They treated him like a person by granting him his freedom.


It was naive.

It was foolish
.


Ok looks like we're in agreement then.



_________________
Trade AD now.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Mamba Mentality
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 04 May 2017
Posts: 3078
Location: The Left Coast

PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:39 am    Post subject:

Hero Ball wrote:
The Juggernaut wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
The Juggernaut wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
The Juggernaut wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
Robster8989 wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
Julius wore the "PAY ME" shirt.

FO didn't like it.


Fine, then use his RFA rights to match any offer he received then trade him for something if he wasn't in your plans.
Letting a #7 pick (who panned out no less) walk away for nothing was mismanagement of an important asset.


maybe there were no offers


Then you do a QO.

When we had Kuz playing backup "center" b/c we had no one else, would you have preferred Jules?


Loved Jules.

Are you sure he would have signed the QO?


As opposed to sitting out?


As opposed to be released, as what has happened.


You're not getting it. Randle could only be released if Magic and the Lakers allowed it. They should have never allowed it. Either match an offer he gets, offer him the QO, or he has to sit out the year. Don't ever let your RFA #7 pick, that's just starting to blossom, go for nothing in return


They offered him the QO and then rescinded it due to Jules request.

They could have taken him hostage but it's not in their mettle.

Your turn.


That's the point. They acquiesced to his request when they had no obligation to do so. It was a foolishly naive move by Maginka.


They treated him like a person by granting him his freedom.


It was naive.

It was foolish
.


Ok looks like we're in agreement then.




Great convo fellas
_________________
“You can't be held captive by the fear of failure or the fear of what people may say.” - Kobe Bryant
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Karmaloop
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Posts: 2387

PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:47 am    Post subject:

Runway8 wrote:
I just realized something. I bet you with 100% certainty, the Lakers got played by Mintz. This "favor" to free Randle, I bet you there were somehow Paul George expectations tied into that decision making process.

But wow! Brook Lopez was an all-star, prior to the Lakers at least, and a person that was capable of commanding $20 million a year. When you had an actual shot at signing him for the same amount you gave a career journeyman, you decide to go with the journeyman. Unbelievable. Fast forward, you waste your most promising big to get back the stretch 5 you lost in Brook, another guy who is or will be a journeyman in this league in Muscala.

Rookies at the helm, no other ways to put it.


It's wasn't a "favor" for Mintz. The Lakers were "doing right" by Julius. Everyone knew the Lakers weren't going to sign Julius Randle to a long-term deal, so even if the Lakers dangled him in a trade they weren't getting much in return. This was purely about "doing right" for the player. That's one thing that the Lakers have prided themselves is that they take care of their own. I mean, they gave Kobe Bryant a 2 year, $48.5M when he was clearly on a decline. Look at the reputation that Boston has gotten. That's not something the Lakers want, and it's something they actively avoid.

But the whole timeline doesn't make any sense. Julius Randle signed with the Pelicans on July 9th. Michael Beasley didn't sign until July 23rd. Beasley was Randle's replacement.
_________________
kikanga wrote:
I'm interested in Olivia Munn. But similar to this LAL/DROZ situation. I don't think the feelings are mutual.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:50 am    Post subject:

Quote:
The Lakers were "doing right" by Julius.


But I think there was some Mintz'ing around with the PG13 situation, and I think they just didn't want him (look at how they treated him at the start of 2017-18) and didn't want to deal with Mintz either.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Hero Ball
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 26 May 2015
Posts: 4403

PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:56 am    Post subject:

Karmaloop wrote:
Runway8 wrote:
I just realized something. I bet you with 100% certainty, the Lakers got played by Mintz. This "favor" to free Randle, I bet you there were somehow Paul George expectations tied into that decision making process.

But wow! Brook Lopez was an all-star, prior to the Lakers at least, and a person that was capable of commanding $20 million a year. When you had an actual shot at signing him for the same amount you gave a career journeyman, you decide to go with the journeyman. Unbelievable. Fast forward, you waste your most promising big to get back the stretch 5 you lost in Brook, another guy who is or will be a journeyman in this league in Muscala.

Rookies at the helm, no other ways to put it.


It's wasn't a "favor" for Mintz. The Lakers were "doing right" by Julius. Everyone knew the Lakers weren't going to sign Julius Randle to a long-term deal, so even if the Lakers dangled him in a trade they weren't getting much in return. This was purely about "doing right" for the player. That's one thing that the Lakers have prided themselves is that they take care of their own. I mean, they gave Kobe Bryant a 2 year, $48.5M when he was clearly on a decline. Look at the reputation that Boston has gotten. That's not something the Lakers want, and it's something they actively avoid.

But the whole timeline doesn't make any sense. Julius Randle signed with the Pelicans on July 9th. Michael Beasley didn't sign until July 23rd. Beasley was Randle's replacement.


They were rookies.

Give them time.
_________________
Trade AD now.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jonnybravo
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 21 Sep 2007
Posts: 30666

PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 12:18 pm    Post subject:

Hero Ball wrote:
Karmaloop wrote:
Runway8 wrote:
I just realized something. I bet you with 100% certainty, the Lakers got played by Mintz. This "favor" to free Randle, I bet you there were somehow Paul George expectations tied into that decision making process.

But wow! Brook Lopez was an all-star, prior to the Lakers at least, and a person that was capable of commanding $20 million a year. When you had an actual shot at signing him for the same amount you gave a career journeyman, you decide to go with the journeyman. Unbelievable. Fast forward, you waste your most promising big to get back the stretch 5 you lost in Brook, another guy who is or will be a journeyman in this league in Muscala.

Rookies at the helm, no other ways to put it.


It's wasn't a "favor" for Mintz. The Lakers were "doing right" by Julius. Everyone knew the Lakers weren't going to sign Julius Randle to a long-term deal, so even if the Lakers dangled him in a trade they weren't getting much in return. This was purely about "doing right" for the player. That's one thing that the Lakers have prided themselves is that they take care of their own. I mean, they gave Kobe Bryant a 2 year, $48.5M when he was clearly on a decline. Look at the reputation that Boston has gotten. That's not something the Lakers want, and it's something they actively avoid.

But the whole timeline doesn't make any sense. Julius Randle signed with the Pelicans on July 9th. Michael Beasley didn't sign until July 23rd. Beasley was Randle's replacement.


They were rookies.

Give them time.


Each and every poster would be rookies in that position as well yet the moves of this current FO (other than signing Lebron) were universally panned. Not just one move but nearly every, single one and rightfully so. They were God-awful under any lens. Experience won't fix stupid. I've been in the work force long enough to come to that conclusion.
_________________
KOBE
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Hero Ball
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 26 May 2015
Posts: 4403

PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 12:19 pm    Post subject:

jonnybravo wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
Karmaloop wrote:
Runway8 wrote:
I just realized something. I bet you with 100% certainty, the Lakers got played by Mintz. This "favor" to free Randle, I bet you there were somehow Paul George expectations tied into that decision making process.

But wow! Brook Lopez was an all-star, prior to the Lakers at least, and a person that was capable of commanding $20 million a year. When you had an actual shot at signing him for the same amount you gave a career journeyman, you decide to go with the journeyman. Unbelievable. Fast forward, you waste your most promising big to get back the stretch 5 you lost in Brook, another guy who is or will be a journeyman in this league in Muscala.

Rookies at the helm, no other ways to put it.


It's wasn't a "favor" for Mintz. The Lakers were "doing right" by Julius. Everyone knew the Lakers weren't going to sign Julius Randle to a long-term deal, so even if the Lakers dangled him in a trade they weren't getting much in return. This was purely about "doing right" for the player. That's one thing that the Lakers have prided themselves is that they take care of their own. I mean, they gave Kobe Bryant a 2 year, $48.5M when he was clearly on a decline. Look at the reputation that Boston has gotten. That's not something the Lakers want, and it's something they actively avoid.

But the whole timeline doesn't make any sense. Julius Randle signed with the Pelicans on July 9th. Michael Beasley didn't sign until July 23rd. Beasley was Randle's replacement.


They were rookies.

Give them time.


Each and every poster would be rookies in that position as well and almost unanimously, the moves of this current FO (other than signing Lebron) was universally panned. Not just one move but nearly every, single one. Experience won't fix stupid. I've been in the work force long enough to come to that conclusion.


So what's the move?
_________________
Trade AD now.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jonnybravo
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 21 Sep 2007
Posts: 30666

PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 12:22 pm    Post subject:

Hero Ball wrote:
jonnybravo wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
Karmaloop wrote:
Runway8 wrote:
I just realized something. I bet you with 100% certainty, the Lakers got played by Mintz. This "favor" to free Randle, I bet you there were somehow Paul George expectations tied into that decision making process.

But wow! Brook Lopez was an all-star, prior to the Lakers at least, and a person that was capable of commanding $20 million a year. When you had an actual shot at signing him for the same amount you gave a career journeyman, you decide to go with the journeyman. Unbelievable. Fast forward, you waste your most promising big to get back the stretch 5 you lost in Brook, another guy who is or will be a journeyman in this league in Muscala.

Rookies at the helm, no other ways to put it.


It's wasn't a "favor" for Mintz. The Lakers were "doing right" by Julius. Everyone knew the Lakers weren't going to sign Julius Randle to a long-term deal, so even if the Lakers dangled him in a trade they weren't getting much in return. This was purely about "doing right" for the player. That's one thing that the Lakers have prided themselves is that they take care of their own. I mean, they gave Kobe Bryant a 2 year, $48.5M when he was clearly on a decline. Look at the reputation that Boston has gotten. That's not something the Lakers want, and it's something they actively avoid.

But the whole timeline doesn't make any sense. Julius Randle signed with the Pelicans on July 9th. Michael Beasley didn't sign until July 23rd. Beasley was Randle's replacement.


They were rookies.

Give them time.


Each and every poster would be rookies in that position as well and almost unanimously, the moves of this current FO (other than signing Lebron) was universally panned. Not just one move but nearly every, single one. Experience won't fix stupid. I've been in the work force long enough to come to that conclusion.


So what's the move?


I don't know my friend. I'm close to giving up hope . We're the Knicks west man...
_________________
KOBE
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Hero Ball
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 26 May 2015
Posts: 4403

PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 12:27 pm    Post subject:

jonnybravo wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
jonnybravo wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
Karmaloop wrote:
Runway8 wrote:
I just realized something. I bet you with 100% certainty, the Lakers got played by Mintz. This "favor" to free Randle, I bet you there were somehow Paul George expectations tied into that decision making process.

But wow! Brook Lopez was an all-star, prior to the Lakers at least, and a person that was capable of commanding $20 million a year. When you had an actual shot at signing him for the same amount you gave a career journeyman, you decide to go with the journeyman. Unbelievable. Fast forward, you waste your most promising big to get back the stretch 5 you lost in Brook, another guy who is or will be a journeyman in this league in Muscala.

Rookies at the helm, no other ways to put it.


It's wasn't a "favor" for Mintz. The Lakers were "doing right" by Julius. Everyone knew the Lakers weren't going to sign Julius Randle to a long-term deal, so even if the Lakers dangled him in a trade they weren't getting much in return. This was purely about "doing right" for the player. That's one thing that the Lakers have prided themselves is that they take care of their own. I mean, they gave Kobe Bryant a 2 year, $48.5M when he was clearly on a decline. Look at the reputation that Boston has gotten. That's not something the Lakers want, and it's something they actively avoid.

But the whole timeline doesn't make any sense. Julius Randle signed with the Pelicans on July 9th. Michael Beasley didn't sign until July 23rd. Beasley was Randle's replacement.


They were rookies.

Give them time.


Each and every poster would be rookies in that position as well and almost unanimously, the moves of this current FO (other than signing Lebron) was universally panned. Not just one move but nearly every, single one. Experience won't fix stupid. I've been in the work force long enough to come to that conclusion.


So what's the move?


I don't know my friend. I'm close to giving up hope . We're the Knicks west man...


Man up JB.

The best thing about Magic is he's got other gigs.

He would step down, when his time comes.
_________________
Trade AD now.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
BigGameHames
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 24 May 2015
Posts: 7982

PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 12:35 pm    Post subject:

Hero Ball wrote:
jonnybravo wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
jonnybravo wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
Karmaloop wrote:
Runway8 wrote:
I just realized something. I bet you with 100% certainty, the Lakers got played by Mintz. This "favor" to free Randle, I bet you there were somehow Paul George expectations tied into that decision making process.

But wow! Brook Lopez was an all-star, prior to the Lakers at least, and a person that was capable of commanding $20 million a year. When you had an actual shot at signing him for the same amount you gave a career journeyman, you decide to go with the journeyman. Unbelievable. Fast forward, you waste your most promising big to get back the stretch 5 you lost in Brook, another guy who is or will be a journeyman in this league in Muscala.

Rookies at the helm, no other ways to put it.


It's wasn't a "favor" for Mintz. The Lakers were "doing right" by Julius. Everyone knew the Lakers weren't going to sign Julius Randle to a long-term deal, so even if the Lakers dangled him in a trade they weren't getting much in return. This was purely about "doing right" for the player. That's one thing that the Lakers have prided themselves is that they take care of their own. I mean, they gave Kobe Bryant a 2 year, $48.5M when he was clearly on a decline. Look at the reputation that Boston has gotten. That's not something the Lakers want, and it's something they actively avoid.

But the whole timeline doesn't make any sense. Julius Randle signed with the Pelicans on July 9th. Michael Beasley didn't sign until July 23rd. Beasley was Randle's replacement.


They were rookies.

Give them time.


Each and every poster would be rookies in that position as well and almost unanimously, the moves of this current FO (other than signing Lebron) was universally panned. Not just one move but nearly every, single one. Experience won't fix stupid. I've been in the work force long enough to come to that conclusion.


So what's the move?


I don't know my friend. I'm close to giving up hope . We're the Knicks west man...


Man up JB.

The best thing about Magic is he's got other gigs.

He would step down, when his time comes.


That logic makes no sense. He’s succeeded in other aspects because he wouldn’t accept failure not because he quit after a few mistakes.
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, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Page 7 of 9
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