Mozgov and Deng are unplayable. Their contracts were 2 of the worst in the league.
Could we have offloaded them better than we did? Sure. But in no way does that overshadow the idiocracy of giving them those contracts in the first place.
Bingo.
We bought the toxic assets.
We then hired a new company to get rid of the toxic assets.
Could the cleanup crew have done better? Of course.
But who bought the toxic assets in the first place? _________________ From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Mozgov and Deng are unplayable. Their contracts were 2 of the worst in the league.
Could we have offloaded them better than we did? Sure. But in no way does that overshadow the idiocracy of giving them those contracts in the first place.
It's like having someone live in a hoarder home. Filled with cat piss and rats. And someone coming in and bulldozing it and starting from scratch. But in the process they destroyed some valuable things that were still in the home.
Sure, the new person should've dug through the crap and saved what was valuable. And they're wrong for that. But not nearly as wrong as the person who turned the home into a hazmat zone to begin with. The bulldozer was only used because of the (bleep) that pre-dated it.
No one is arguing this. _________________ Under New Management
Mozgov and Deng are unplayable. Their contracts were 2 of the worst in the league.
Could we have offloaded them better than we did? Sure. But in no way does that overshadow the idiocracy of giving them those contracts in the first place.
It's like having someone live in a hoarder home. Filled with cat piss and rats. And someone coming in and bulldozing it and starting from scratch. But in the process they destroyed some valuable things that were still in the home.
Sure, the new person should've dug through the crap and saved what was valuable. And they're wrong for that. But not nearly as wrong as the person who turned the home into a hazmat zone to begin with. The bulldozer was only used because of the (bleep) that pre-dated it.
No one is arguing this.
Well. There may be one. _________________ From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Joined: 15 Sep 2012 Posts: 29286 Location: La La Land
Posted: Tue Sep 17, 2019 11:51 am Post subject:
yinoma2001 wrote:
Well. There may be one.
That's the only reason why I said anything. I'm down for crapping on Magic. He was better than his predecessor. But still a below average head of bball ops. _________________ "Every hurt is a lesson, and every lesson makes you better”
That's the only reason why I said anything. I'm down for crapping on Magic. He was better than his predecessor. But still a below average head of bball ops.
I think 99.99% of LG agree about Moz/Deng (hereafter referred to as "toxic assets") being poor signings.
I think close to a majority of LG would agree that there were other ways to have gotten ridden of said toxic assets. _________________ From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
That's the only reason why I said anything. I'm down for crapping on Magic. He was better than his predecessor. But still a below average head of bball ops.
I think 99.99% of LG agree about Moz/Deng (hereafter referred to as "toxic assets") being poor signings.
I think close to a majority of LG would agree that there were other ways to have gotten ridden of said toxic assets.
That I doubt. _________________ Under New Management
Joined: 29 Aug 2004 Posts: 11197 Location: The Other Perspective
Posted: Tue Sep 17, 2019 12:02 pm Post subject:
https://twitter.com/Lakers/status/1173764241007890432 _________________ "Chick lived and breathed Lakers basketball…but he was also fair and objective and called every game the way it was played."
-from Chick: His Unpublished Memoirs and the Memories of Those Who Knew Him
Last edited by LandsbergerRules on Tue Sep 17, 2019 5:22 pm; edited 1 time in total
That's the only reason why I said anything. I'm down for crapping on Magic. He was better than his predecessor. But still a below average head of bball ops.
I think 99.99% of LG agree about Moz/Deng (hereafter referred to as "toxic assets") being poor signings.
I think close to a majority of LG would agree that there were other ways to have gotten ridden of said toxic assets.
That I doubt.
Well, point is, the first contention mostly everyone is in agreement. The bolded, is up for discussion. Some liked what Magic did, others didn't. But Magic is gone and I think a lot of people here were happy he quit to be honest. _________________ From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
That's the only reason why I said anything. I'm down for crapping on Magic. He was better than his predecessor. But still a below average head of bball ops.
I think 99.99% of LG agree about Moz/Deng (hereafter referred to as "toxic assets") being poor signings.
I think close to a majority of LG would agree that there were other ways to have gotten ridden of said toxic assets.
That I doubt.
Well, point is, the first contention mostly everyone is in agreement. The bolded, is up for discussion. Some liked what Magic did, others didn't. But Magic is gone and I think a lot of people here were happy he quit to be honest.
Do you think it was a mistake to give him the position in the first place? _________________ Under New Management
That's the only reason why I said anything. I'm down for crapping on Magic. He was better than his predecessor. But still a below average head of bball ops.
I think 99.99% of LG agree about Moz/Deng (hereafter referred to as "toxic assets") being poor signings.
I think close to a majority of LG would agree that there were other ways to have gotten ridden of said toxic assets.
That I doubt.
Well, point is, the first contention mostly everyone is in agreement. The bolded, is up for discussion. Some liked what Magic did, others didn't. But Magic is gone and I think a lot of people here were happy he quit to be honest.
Do you think it was a mistake to give him the position in the first place?
Yes. But I was hoping for the best. But that's another conversation. He was part of the clean up crew. _________________ From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Joined: 14 Apr 2001 Posts: 144462 Location: The Gold Coast
Posted: Tue Sep 17, 2019 1:36 pm Post subject:
yinoma2001 wrote:
Baron Von Humongous wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
kikanga wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
Well. There may be one.
That's the only reason why I said anything. I'm down for crapping on Magic. He was better than his predecessor. But still a below average head of bball ops.
I think 99.99% of LG agree about Moz/Deng (hereafter referred to as "toxic assets") being poor signings.
I think close to a majority of LG would agree that there were other ways to have gotten ridden of said toxic assets.
That I doubt.
Well, point is, the first contention mostly everyone is in agreement. The bolded, is up for discussion. Some liked what Magic did, others didn't. But Magic is gone and I think a lot of people here were happy he quit to be honest.
And some were against bringing him in at all. I guess that he really is Jeanie’s brother. _________________ RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023.
It was an expensive cost of business. People don’t give the Lakers discounts. Cost us first round picks to dump Walton and Vucj, once we made a mistake, we had t9 oa6 through the nose again to get out of it.
Right. Which means whether it was Lonzo or Tatum, that salary would be needed to aggregate matching salaries.
Right, which has been one of my biggest criticisms of this FO. Imagine if we had Mozgov’s or Deng’s salary to trade.
Having either of their contracts to trade would probably have meant the Lakers would have to somehow give up even more in the trade, not less. Why would a team take on a garbage contract just to match salaries compared to asking for Lonzo or Tatum?
This! We had to give up d’angelo to get rid of mozgov’s contract. Wow VLF is looney
His critique is about stretching Deng's contract as unnecessarily early as they did, you daft twats.
Please get this through your thick, molasses-and-mucus-filled skulls.
((REMOVED - JMK)) While it may have ended up being "unnecessarily early" to stretch Deng's contract (even though it gave us $32.7m+ in cap-space to sign any worthy FA who became available... and "unnecessarily early" with hindsight only, which tends to be 20/20 hindsight vision in arm-chair GMs... this isn't what VLF is arguing! He's saying that if we had Mozgov and Deng, we could have included them instead of Lonzo or BI in a deal for AD to match salaries... ignoring that we'd then either have to give up even more picks and/or take back bad contracts in addition to giving up all our picks. So we'd simply be replacing one bad contract (Moz/Deng) with another (like Solomon Hill)... and we wouldn't have any picks left to help get the new bad contract off our books either. Look at the 2 quotes in this chain that are highlighted in red and bolded for context.
Apparently I'm Nostradumbass because I called out the move when it happened - LaMind was there first - and have been vindicated by actual events because it was only ever a cosmetic good move to the gibbering cretins who always applaud when Jeanie saves herself money. And to be accurate, the whole reason we were clapping and snorting in approval last September is because it was supposed to clear $39M this summer because that was the exact amount needed to sign Kevin Durant (who once again took less money to sign with the team he really wanted) - please get your facts straight.
What are you even arguing against?
1) Everyone knew years in advance that this was going to be a summer with a lot of marquee FAs available... KD, Kawhi, Klay, Kyrie, Butler, Kemba, Harris... and the FO freed up enough cap-space to sign any of those FAs. Would you prefer that we didn't free up the cap-space to try and sign one from this glut of FAs outright.. and leave ourselves at the mercy of other teams in order to make a trade for a star... even though AD demanding out of the Pels was not even a thought/factor at the time?
2) Even if we anticipated not getting one of these FAs and needing to making a trade for a star (any star, not just AD)... how many teams do you know who are willing to trade their superstars to us without asking for the sun and the moon and the stars in return?
Ultimately, we didn't sign KD, Kawhi, Kyrie, Klay... we can't force anyone to want to join... but we can create circumstances that enable us to sign them (1 - by creating the needed cap-space, which was done... and 2 - organisationally with regard to the rest of the team/staff and the system/culture, where we seem to have failed). Anyway, I am glad the FO did what was needed financially to go after these guys rather than not play at all. The odds of signing an FA when there were so many good ones available was better than the odds of making a trade, i.e., before AD LATER demanded out of the Pels. Armchair GM-ing is real easy, especially with hindsight and if we're ignoring reality (such as, we're one of the least favorite teams for other teams to trade to).
Quote:
VLF is arguing a counterfactual, which is never wise, but he seems to be arguing for keeping at least one larger non-rookie scale contract on the roster last season to help facilitate matching salaries and add flexibility in trade negotiations. Seems reasonable to me.
No, that is not exactly what VLF is arguing. For the third time, VLF is a wily troll... and he is trying to say that Mozgov and Deng should have been kept on the books in order to distract from Jim/Mitch's mistake there. There are plenty of other examples he could have used instead, if his point was only to say that we should have kept other non-rookie scale contracts on the roster... like BroLo or even Randle (although Randle was reportedly asking for at least $15m and a 3+ year contract as a bench player... we could/should have got something there instead of letting him go for nothing)... but that isn't VLF's intention... and you fell for it hook, line and sinker.
Quote:
But please go on arguing in favor of the handful of moves Magic made as GM before he chickened out because the job was too hard.
Magic did plenty wrong and I'm glad he's gone... but waiving Deng wasn't a mistake, it was one of a couple of plausible options that he chose to exercise. Also, I have been among the first to point out when Magic did wrong, even to the extent of being called a racist at times by some... because I don't care who the person is, their legacy or race... and only care about the team. I think signing LeBron was a mistake because it forced a shift in what we were doing (from going through "the process" to being in win-now mode) and his characteristics didn't fit in with the strengths of the 2 best assets we'd drafted (BI and Lonzo)... and speaking of Lonzo, although I can see the draw behind drafting a local guy and the positives of his size/defense... I really wanted us to sign Fox, so drafting Lonzo was another mistake IMO. So I'm not sure what your point is with that last statement too.
Right. Which means whether it was Lonzo or Tatum, that salary would be needed to aggregate matching salaries.
Right, which has been one of my biggest criticisms of this FO. Imagine if we had Mozgov’s or Deng’s salary to trade.
Having either of their contracts to trade would probably have meant the Lakers would have to somehow give up even more in the trade, not less. Why would a team take on a garbage contract just to match salaries compared to asking for Lonzo or Tatum?
This! We had to give up d’angelo to get rid of mozgov’s contract. Wow VLF is looney
His critique is about stretching Deng's contract as unnecessarily early as they did, you daft twats.
Please get this through your thick, molasses-and-mucus-filled skulls.
((REMOVED - JMK)) While it may have ended up being "unnecessarily early" to stretch Deng's contract (even though it gave us $32.7m+ in cap-space to sign any worthy FA who became available... and "unnecessarily early" with hindsight only, which tends to be 20/20 hindsight vision in arm-chair GMs... this isn't what VLF is arguing! He's saying that if we had Mozgov and Deng, we could have included them instead of Lonzo or BI in a deal for AD to match salaries... ignoring that we'd then either have to give up even more picks and/or take back bad contracts in addition to giving up all our picks. So we'd simply be replacing one bad contract (Moz/Deng) with another (like Solomon Hill)... and we wouldn't have any picks left to help get the new bad contract off our books either. Look at the 2 quotes in this chain that are highlighted in red and bolded for context.
Apparently I'm Nostradumbass because I called out the move when it happened - LaMind was there first - and have been vindicated by actual events because it was only ever a cosmetic good move to the gibbering cretins who always applaud when Jeanie saves herself money. And to be accurate, the whole reason we were clapping and snorting in approval last September is because it was supposed to clear $39M this summer because that was the exact amount needed to sign Kevin Durant (who once again took less money to sign with the team he really wanted) - please get your facts straight.
What are you even arguing against?
1) Everyone knew years in advance that this was going to be a summer with a lot of marquee FAs available... KD, Kawhi, Klay, Kyrie, Butler, Kemba, Harris... and the FO freed up enough cap-space to sign any of those FAs. Would you prefer that we didn't free up the cap-space to try and sign one from this glut of FAs outright.. and leave ourselves at the mercy of other teams in order to make a trade for a star... even though AD demanding out of the Pels was not even a thought/factor at the time?
2) Even if we anticipated not getting one of these FAs and needing to making a trade for a star (any star, not just AD)... how many teams do you know who are willing to trade their superstars to us without asking for the sun and the moon and the stars in return?
Ultimately, we didn't sign KD, Kawhi, Kyrie, Klay... we can't force anyone to want to join... but we can create circumstances that enable us to sign them (1 - by creating the needed cap-space, which was done... and 2 - organisationally with regard to the rest of the team/staff and the system/culture, where we seem to have failed). Anyway, I am glad the FO did what was needed financially to go after these guys rather than not play at all. The odds of signing an FA when there were so many good ones available was better than the odds of making a trade, i.e., before AD LATER demanded out of the Pels. Armchair GM-ing is real easy, especially with hindsight and if we're ignoring reality (such as, we're one of the least favorite teams for other teams to trade to).
Quote:
VLF is arguing a counterfactual, which is never wise, but he seems to be arguing for keeping at least one larger non-rookie scale contract on the roster last season to help facilitate matching salaries and add flexibility in trade negotiations. Seems reasonable to me.
No, that is not exactly what VLF is arguing. For the third time, VLF is a wily troll... and he is trying to say that Mozgov and Deng should have been kept on the books in order to distract from Jim/Mitch's mistake there. There are plenty of other examples he could have used instead, if his point was only to say that we should have kept other non-rookie scale contracts on the roster... like BroLo or even Randle (although Randle was reportedly asking for at least $15m and a 3+ year contract as a bench player... we could/should have got something there instead of letting him go for nothing)... but that isn't VLF's intention... and you fell for it hook, line and sinker.
Quote:
But please go on arguing in favor of the handful of moves Magic made as GM before he chickened out because the job was too hard.
Magic did plenty wrong and I'm glad he's gone... but waiving Deng wasn't a mistake, it was one of a couple of plausible options that he chose to exercise. Also, I have been among the first to point out when Magic did wrong, even to the extent of being called a racist at times by some... because I don't care who the person is, their legacy or race... and only care about the team. I think signing LeBron was a mistake because it forced a shift in what we were doing (from going through "the process" to being in win-now mode) and his characteristics didn't fit in with the strengths of the 2 best assets we'd drafted (BI and Lonzo)... and speaking of Lonzo, although I can see the draw behind drafting a local guy and the positives of his size/defense... I really wanted us to sign Fox, so drafting Lonzo was another mistake IMO. So I'm not sure what your point is with that last statement too.
The argument: stretching Deng's contract when they did was a mistake. I argued that it was a mistake at the time. That's it.
My goal as a fan is to see the best Lakers team possible put together. Looking around the league at other successfully constructed rosters it seems apparent that it requires a whole lot of luck along with institutional competence and a process-oriented vision. Nothing too complicated. You first have to get your Lebron and Anthony Davis, of course, which is by far the hardest thing to do and mightily impressive work from Magic and Pelinka, but winning enough marginal transactions when constructing the roster around that duo can be the difference between a title and a WCF loss to the Clippers.
Stretching Deng when they did? Poor process decision. Losing Lopez for less money than Lance Stephenson was given? Poor process decision. Trading Zu for a worse player because they realized too late they needed a big man with Lopez's skillset? Poor process decision. Giving KCP (again), Rondo, and McGee de facto no-trade clauses? Poor process decision. Hiring Jason Kidd in any capacity? Poor process decision. Signing Howard over Noah? Poor process decision. Overvaluing Kuzma? Potentially a poor process decision. And most of these decisions were obviously poorly conceived in the moment they were executed.
But if the Lebron/AD core wins a title, it's all gravy washed under the carpet. Because luck and elite talent are at the core of every NBA championship team and Maginka have helped build a roster with the latter and may have enough of the former to overcome the damage Rondo is going to do what they've built. _________________ Under New Management
Just remember, stuff happens. Toronto wasn't considered a favorite to beat the Warriors when the season started. Yet everything fell in line for them.
Here's to hoping that we enter the playoffs healthy. LBJ/AD is a very tough team to beat in a 7 game series. _________________ From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
I don't understand why a lot of people are not appreciating Davis. The guy is a top 5 player and we will have him for the rest of his career. Love the guy and wnjoy the ride. Think how much easier it will be for us to recruit with a 26 yr old on our teamz
here's Zach Lowe recalling AD's progression as a ballhandler; from a convo with his former assistant coach.. going from 1 dribble move, to 2. And AD said last Summer he needed his confidence to grow as a ball handler. And that happened last season. He's still growing as a player
Mozgov and Deng are unplayable. Their contracts were 2 of the worst in the league.
Could we have offloaded them better than we did? Sure. But in no way does that overshadow the idiocracy of giving them those contracts in the first place.
It's like having someone live in a hoarder home. Filled with cat piss and rats. And someone coming in and bulldozing it and starting from scratch. But in the process they destroyed some valuable things that were still in the home.
Sure, the new person should've dug through the crap and saved what was valuable. And they're wrong for that. But not nearly as wrong as the person who turned the home into a hazmat zone to begin with. The bulldozer was only used because of the (bleep) that pre-dated it.
No one is arguing this.
Well. There may be one.
you mean the clipper fan from ventura? _________________ “God knew they couldn’t be on this Earth without each other. He had to bring them home to have them together.” – Vanessa Bryant
When he was on with James Worthy and the crew, pushed about AD at the 5, Vogel all but confirmed that the plan is to close with AD at 5
.
So AD will start at 4, but the death lineups are going to have AD at the 5. Very similar to Pau Gasol in his prime. AD is more athletic and talented defensively.
When he was on with James Worthy and the crew, pushed about AD at the 5, Vogel all but confirmed that the plan is to close with AD at 5
.
So AD will start at 4, but the death lineups are going to have AD at the 5. Very similar to Pau Gasol in his prime. AD is more athletic and talented defensively.
It was nice to hear that.
That's great to hear. Having a nearly flawless defensive 5 like Davis adds so much versatility and value over having him at PF alongside more limited defensive bigs like McGee/Howard. When you absolutely, positively have to get a win, take Davis at center every time.
I also hope Caruso's up to the task offensively to earn closing minutes, because he's a better interior defender on switches than KCP, Bradley, and apparently even Danny Green. My guess is that the Lakers best defensive lineups this season will obviously all include AD and Green, but their very best will have Caruso alongside them.
Basketball nerd + male pattern baldness closing lineup of death: AD/Dudley/Lebron/Green/Caruso. _________________ Under New Management
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
