RIC BUCHER Report: Pelicans admitted Lakers trade offer "was pretty attractive"

If I am Griff’s new GM, I would go to Cleveland and try to make a deal for Love. Perhaps EM and Hill plus a couple of second round picks. If that happens then we are a more attractive option to the AD camp staying, and more importantly, makes his leaving more costly to whatever teams want him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silver Nail

If I am Griff’s new GM, I would go to Cleveland and try to make a deal for Love. Perhaps EM and Hill plus a couple of second round picks. If that happens then we are a more attractive option to the AD camp staying, and more importantly, makes his leaving more costly to whatever teams want him.

---

With Love and Jrue here, most any deal we get for AD now, will still be available to us from any teams looking to make a final push at next year’s deadline if we are not a major factor ourselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silver Nail

If I am Griff’s new GM, I would go to Cleveland and try to make a deal for Love. Perhaps EM and Hill plus a couple of second round picks. If that happens then we are a more attractive option to the AD camp staying, and more importantly, makes his leaving more costly to whatever teams want him.

---

You want Kevin Love's contract anywhere near this team? Chronically injured, serious back problems that plague him throughout entire seasons, already 31 years old and is getting $30m per season for the next 4 years?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

You want Kevin Love's contract anywhere near this team? Chronically injured, serious back problems that plague him throughout entire seasons, already 31 years old and is getting $30m per season for the next 4 years?

---

We also have Nelson, the guy has revived a lot of over the hill players, so yeah, I want him, I think AD stays if we have him and to be honest I think we have more immediate value then waiting to unload Hill at next deadline. If we wait we can't negotiate AD's departure from a position of strength.

Only person that wanted to pull the trigger on the deal (that had any semblance of a voice) was Alvin.

Dell, Ferry, and all of ownership were strong no.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

Also note that there have been rumours stirring that say that Phoenix is tired of their current situation and could be moving into a "young vets" mentality. If that's true, then I think they're probably in the conversation as well. Ayton+Suns 2019 FRP+ Suns 2021 FRP is a good start. Oubre is on the board as well.

As much as it's an outside chance, I could imagine Atlanta getting involved too if they were high enough on the idea of Trae+AD, but that really depends on how they view the Eastern conference in general.

---

Would you take Ben Simmons in some kind of deal? I just can't sell myself on him. I watched him play at LSU & he looks exactly the same.


BTW- If I can get Oubre for certain in that PHX deal, I truly like that deal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kumar

Only person that wanted to pull the trigger on the deal (that had any semblance of a voice) was Alvin.

Dell, Ferry, and all of ownership were strong no.

---

Are you saying this was already proposed and ownership said no? IF that is the case, than perhaps it should be revisited since those players are no longer calling the shots and things change daily. Especially opinions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silver Nail

We also have Nelson, the guy has revived a lot of over the hill players, so yeah, I want him, I think AD stays if we have him and to be honest I think we have more immediate value then waiting to unload Hill at next deadline. If we wait we can't negotiate AD's departure from a position of strength.

---

Nelson has already revived a lot of over the hill players, but there's a huge difference.

When Grant Hill went to Phoenix and had his career brought back by Nelson, he was on a minimum contract, getting less than $2m a year. In that case, you take the risk because you know you have a good chance of your training staff bringing them back to playable condition, and if they fail then it's no big loss.

Love is on a contract which has $120 MILLION left on it. If you bring him back to peak condition, great! If you fail, you have pretty much a third of your salary destroyed for the next four years. That's a huge difference.

And I don't know what you're talking about when you say we ''can't negotiate AD's departure from a position of strength''. We're already IN the position of strength: he's signed on a contract for an entire season with absolutely no control in where he gets traded. We have the leverage to play kingmaker to a bunch of teams who are looking to make moves into next season, whether that's Boston attempting to salvage the Kyrie era, or the Knicks attempting to enter relevance again. If we make a trade for K.Love now in the abject hope that he will suddenly be good again and that that will convince AD to stay, then you are literally throwing away all that leverage because nobody is trading diddly-squat for AD next trade deadline when he has 3 months left on his contract.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tinman

Would you take Ben Simmons in some kind of deal? I just can't sell myself on him. I watched him play at LSU & he looks exactly the same.


BTW- If I can get Oubre for certain in that PHX deal, I truly like that deal.

---

Nope. Simmons is no superstar to me. I don't see the superstar in him either, for the future. He's a very good player and I think he will continue to be a very good player with a set of clear limitations that will prevent him from ever being the leader on a winning team. Can't shoot. Can't defend particularly well. Can't guard up. Shrinks under pressure.

Ben Simmons is no superstar, Donovan Mitchell is a superstar. Ben Simmons is a guy who will top out as a top 20-30 player, but he will never be a guy who will get you over th top.

Ben Simmons is an average to slightly above average who is useless in the playoffs. Love is a bad contract. I’d pass on either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silver Nail

Are you saying this was already proposed and ownership said no? IF that is the case, than perhaps it should be revisited since those players are no longer calling the shots and things change daily. Especially opinions.

---

Pretty sure he is referring to the Lakers proposal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silver Nail

Are you saying this was already proposed and ownership said no? IF that is the case, than perhaps it should be revisited since those players are no longer calling the shots and things change daily. Especially opinions.

---

No, I'm saying that the org from top to bottom was on the same page about not dealing with the Lakers. It was only Alvin who wanted it, because he didnt want to deal with the locker mess and actually likes Lonzo.

Ownership's stance hasn't changed. They are going to need a better deal from LA (4 picks) to get it done.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kumar

No, I'm saying that the org from top to bottom was on the same page about not dealing with the Lakers. It was only Alvin who wanted it, because he didnt want to deal with the locker mess and actually likes Lonzo.

Ownership's stance hasn't changed. They are going to need a better deal from LA (4 picks) to get it done.

---

Alvin should have been fired.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darkhorse985

Alvin should have been fired.

---

Something we agree on!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kumar

No, I'm saying that the org from top to bottom was on the same page about not dealing with the Lakers. It was only Alvin who wanted it, because he didnt want to deal with the locker mess and actually likes Lonzo.

Ownership's stance hasn't changed. They are going to need a better deal from LA (4 picks) to get it done.

---

I don’t think it’s a better deal from LA so much as it’s a better deal from another team. Not much LA can really offer outside of Lebron that they haven’t. This was all about entering the off season where we have even more leverage as a lot more teams enter the discussion. Lakers deal is still a great one imo and the way Griffin feels about Ingram it is a very real option.

Kuzma and LBJ are the only decent players the Lakers have. Ball and Ingram will never amount to anything substantial in the NBA. People who think Ball and Ingram could be legitimate contributors on a contending team do not know what they are talking about. And that is putting it nicely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darkhorse985

Alvin should have been fired.

---

That’s a tall order. Revamp the whole organization from the trainers to the scouts, properly scout for the draft, AND find a whole new coaching staff? There’s no reason to fire Gentry now that isn’t just as fine to do next year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darkhorse985

Kuzma and LBJ are the only decent players the Lakers have. Ball and Ingram will never amount to anything substantial in the NBA. People who think Ball and Ingram could be legitimate contributors on a contending team do not know what they are talking about. And that is putting it nicely.

---

I largely agree on Ingram, especially if you're talking about right now. I don't think he's ever going to be a superstar, and I've been clear on that, but especially right now he'd be useless on a team with real aspirations.

I do disagree slightly on Ball though. I don't think he can be the best player on a contender, god no. I don't think he could be the second best either. But could he be a decent piece on a team without completely destroying it? Yeah, I think he could. He does have some skills, even if he also has glaring weaknesses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eman5805

That’s a tall order. Revamp the whole organization from the trainers to the scouts, properly scout for the draft, AND find a whole new coaching staff? There’s no reason to fire Gentry now that isn’t just as fine to do next year.

---

Trade AD, draft a new guy. Have a brand new team filled with young talent, looking to form an identity, have them play together in a certain style with a certain mindset together for a year.

And then fire the coach.

That's why you consider firing Gentry now (or rather, firing him a month ago). Cause otherwise you have to either accept keeping him on long term, or face up to the fact you're going to have to can him and disrupt continuity and the education of a whole group of young names. That goes double for if you take the Boston trade and you end up having Brown and Tatum playing for 3 coaches in three years (Stevens in Boston, Gentry their first year here, then another guy their second year here).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eman5805

That’s a tall order. Revamp the whole organization from the trainers to the scouts, properly scout for the draft, AND find a whole new coaching staff? There’s no reason to fire Gentry now that isn’t just as fine to do next year.

---

Alvin Gentry has never shown he can develop a winner from young talent. He has failed as a head coach in every job he has had. The only way he can win consistently is if Griffin provides him with a roster that an amateur could coach to the playoffs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darkhorse985

Kuzma and LBJ are the only decent players the Lakers have. Ball and Ingram will never amount to anything substantial in the NBA. People who think Ball and Ingram could be legitimate contributors on a contending team do not know what they are talking about. And that is putting it nicely.

---

So you know what you are talking about but not David Griffin? Makes complete sense. We must have hired an absolute idiot just putting it nicely since he has stated he believes Ingram is a cornerstone piece. These guys can’t be legitimate contributors? Now if you wanna say Ingram won’t be a super star.. Go ahead that’s not some bold statement when their are how many super stars? I’ll be on him becoming an all star caliber player next season. Ball again is not some bold statement saying he won’t be something. He is already one of the best defensive PGs in the league. He is a solid jumper away from being a star and if that never develops you have a 6’6 Rondo. Now I’m not a Ball fan but it’s a little foolish for anybody to claim someone doesn’t know what they are talking about because they believe at 21 and 20 year old kid still can develop into very good players. The ones around here that want to act like they have the only opinions that matter are the ones that don’t really know what they are talking about. That’s ok cause time will make some people look very very foolish on this topic..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

Trade AD, draft a new guy. Have a brand new team filled with young talent, looking to form an identity, have them play together in a certain style with a certain mindset together for a year.

And then fire the coach.

That's why you consider firing Gentry now (or rather, firing him a month ago). Cause otherwise you have to either accept keeping him on long term, or face up to the fact you're going to have to can him and disrupt continuity and the education of a whole group of young names. That goes double for if you take the Boston trade and you end up having Brown and Tatum playing for 3 coaches in three years (Stevens in Boston, Gentry their first year here, then another guy their second year here).

---

If Griffin were just installing a new piece here or there, I'd agree. But he's not. He's making sweeping changes to the whole organizational make. Takes a LOT of resources to do what he's about to do and bringing in a new coach just isn't all that important. I mean, how many coaches in the NBA honestly make a world of difference to their team? Maybe three? MAYBE? Coach Pop and maybe two other guys? What are the odds the guy we bring in is that good at it? Not like we don't have a good coaching staff already, Gentry included. Worrying about guys having different coaches is immaterial, because rosters with talent matter more.

I'm saying that it makes sense to just put something that isn't critical to our future off for later and not over extend when we're so early into the process. We'd be crazy to be in win-now mode without AD buying in, which none of us thinks he'll do. So...why does it matter when the coach we bring in next is brought in? Hell, sucking for another season would be beneficial as the next two drafts should be nicer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GuardianAngel25

So you know what you are talking about but not David Griffin? Makes complete sense. We must have hired an absolute idiot just putting it nicely since he has stated he believes Ingram is a cornerstone piece. These guys can’t be legitimate contributors? Now if you wanna say Ingram won’t be a super star.. Go ahead that’s not some bold statement when their are how many super stars? I’ll be on him becoming an all star caliber player next season. Ball again is not some bold statement saying he won’t be something. He is already one of the best defensive PGs in the league. He is a solid jumper away from being a star and if that never develops you have a 6’6 Rondo. Now I’m not a Ball fan but it’s a little foolish for anybody to claim someone doesn’t know what they are talking about because they believe at 21 and 20 year old kid still can develop into very good players. The ones around here that want to act like they have the only opinions that matter are the ones that don’t really know what they are talking about. That’s ok cause time will make some people look very very foolish on this topic..

---

Must be a Lakers fan. I’ll take the smart money and go with my original opinion. I implore you to call me out when A team with Ingram and Ball In it’s top 3 contributors even wins a playoff series. Both players will never be more than low to mid level starters on bad teams. If David Griffin trades AD for Ingram and Ball, it’s still a terrible trade. Also, I would lose all respect for David Griffin’s team building capabilities.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eman5805

If Griffin were just installing a new piece here or there, I'd agree. But he's not. He's making sweeping changes to the whole organizational make. Takes a LOT of resources to do what he's about to do and bringing in a new coach just isn't all that important. I mean, how many coaches in the NBA honestly make a world of difference to their team? Maybe three? MAYBE? Coach Pop and maybe two other guys? What are the odds the guy we bring in is that good at it? Not like we don't have a good coaching staff already, Gentry included. Worrying about guys having different coaches is immaterial, because rosters with talent matter more.

I'm saying that it makes sense to just put something that isn't critical to our future off for later and not over extend when we're so early into the process. We'd be crazy to be in win-now mode without AD buying in, which none of us thinks he'll do. So...why does it matter when the coach we bring in next is brought in? Hell, sucking for another season would be beneficial as the next two drafts should be nicer.

---

Sucking for the next season is only beneficial if that suckage doesn't come at the detriment of the progression of the same young guys we're hoping will eventually lead us into productive basketball again.

I can totally understand the argument that says that you can't change everything at once and that it's better to just leave Gentry where he's not doing any harm rather than add something new to the plate of things to do. I get that. I'm just also acutely aware that while great coaches are rare, sure, a bad coach can really damage a player and Alvin is not a good coach. He just isn't. He's been a head coach for something like 16 seasons (can't remember exactly) and I can count the number of winning seasons he's had on one hand. Whatever you think of him as an offensive co-ordinator, or assistant coach, or whatever, he is not a good NBA head coach. He's just not. Doesn't produce the goods.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darkhorse985

Must be a Lakers fan. I’ll take the smart money and go with my original opinion. I implore you to call me out when A team with Ingram and Ball In it’s top 3 contributors even wins a playoff series. Both players will never be more than low to mid level starters on bad teams. If David Griffin trades AD for Ingram and Ball, it’s still a terrible trade. Also, I would lose all respect for David Griffin’s team building capabilities.

---

I never said Ball would be in a top 3. I do think Ball could be a very solid starting PG as the 4th-5th option. Possible he becomes better then that but for me it’s not the talent but the drama that comes with him that simply isn’t worth it for us which is why I would try and flip him. There will be teams that believe in him and will give up something. Move Ball and some of our 1st round picks that we have from the Lakers for Beal and we have a team ready to compete now that could be deadly in a year. With Ball and 6 1st round draft picks we will have plenty of options that Griffin can source out there to get us a deal wether it be Beal or someone else. You just stated how you liked Kuzma who would be in the deal as well. Jrue/Beal/Ingram/Kuzma is a core you can build around like the Nuggets and Blazers.. Kuzma is another piece we can move. The Lakers trade is valuable to us for more reasons then just what the initial deal looks like. Lots of options we have in this scenario.

Yes I do believe Ingram is going to develop into the 2nd/3rd option on a serious contender. No he’s not there right now but in a year or 2 this kid will look like a completely different player. Now he has the talent to be the #1 but I don’t think he gets there and ideally we would have someone else. I don’t think you have to have some clear superstar to win in the NBA but can build something similar to the Sixers with pieces that fit better together and still win. Look at Denver as well as another team to model after. The Blazers are near the same team we just swept. I think the NBA will even out much more over the next few years as well with the path to an NBA championship a little more wide open.

That’s fine with your opinion on Griffin if he trades with the Lakers but just like Griffin many others would have a different opinion on that scenario as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GuardianAngel25

So you know what you are talking about but not David Griffin? Makes complete sense. We must have hired an absolute idiot just putting it nicely since he has stated he believes Ingram is a cornerstone piece. These guys can’t be legitimate contributors? Now if you wanna say Ingram won’t be a super star.. Go ahead that’s not some bold statement when their are how many super stars? I’ll be on him becoming an all star caliber player next season. Ball again is not some bold statement saying he won’t be something. He is already one of the best defensive PGs in the league. He is a solid jumper away from being a star and if that never develops you have a 6’6 Rondo. Now I’m not a Ball fan but it’s a little foolish for anybody to claim someone doesn’t know what they are talking about because they believe at 21 and 20 year old kid still can develop into very good players. The ones around here that want to act like they have the only opinions that matter are the ones that don’t really know what they are talking about. That’s ok cause time will make some people look very very foolish on this topic..

---

When did Griffin say that? When he was on Sirius/XM he criticized the Lakers offer as simply not good enough. Ingram's medical issue alone now makes him too much of a risk to be a significant piece of a trade.

Ric Bucher is trash words. I'd trust more basketball insight from Whoopi Goldberg.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

When did Griffin say that? When he was on Sirius/XM he criticized the Lakers offer as simply not good enough. Ingram's medical issue alone now makes him too much of a risk to be a significant piece of a trade.

---

When did Griff say that about Ingram? Don’t remember exactly when he said it but he absolutely talked about Ingram as a young rising star and cornerstone for a franchise. It’s been talked about here a few times as well regarding his comments. I don’t remember him saying the deal wasn’t good enough but I do remember him saying it wasn’t the right time to make the trade until the summer. I think I’ll leave Ingram being to risky for a trade up to a heart Dr. My sister in law is a hear Dr and as she told me these are usually complete non issues that do not impract anything for the rest of their life especially with how early he caught it.. It could be a problem but for anyone to say he isn’t a significant trade piece all the sudden is a reach but your opinion. I’m pretty sure they will do every test possible to make sure the main trade piece acquired in that deal is good to go. If the Docs give him the green light then I’m going with them. If they don’t give the go ahead then no they no we should not be interested. As of now he has had successful surgery to remove a blood clot and is expected to be ready for next season.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GuardianAngel25

When did Griff say that about Ingram? Don’t remember exactly when he said it but he absolutely talked about Ingram as a young rising star and cornerstone for a franchise. It’s been talked about here a few times as well regarding his comments. I don’t remember him saying the deal wasn’t good enough but I do remember him saying it wasn’t the right time to make the trade until the summer. I think I’ll leave Ingram being to risky for a trade up to a heart Dr. My sister in law is a hear Dr and as she told me these are usually complete non issues that do not impract anything for the rest of their life especially with how early he caught it.. It could be a problem but for anyone to say he isn’t a significant trade piece all the sudden is a reach but your opinion. I’m pretty sure they will do every test possible to make sure the main trade piece acquired in that deal is good to go. If the Docs give him the green light then I’m going with them. If they don’t give the go ahead then no they no we should not be interested. As of now he has had successful surgery to remove a blood clot and is expected to be ready for next season.

---

Ingram had a blood clot. Your sister may be referring to it not being an issue for a normal person. For an athlete it is a huge deal. He cannot play on blood thinners. My understanding is that if he can get past this one fine and not have to be on blood thinners long term, it may not be an issue. However, a second one would require blood thinners long term and likely end his career (i.e. Bosh). At his young age, that is a risk. Way too big a risk for any team to take as the primary piece in a blockbuster deal.

My question with regards to Griffin's comments about Ingram was to determine when it was said (i.e. before the clot).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GuardianAngel25

When did Griff say that about Ingram? Don’t remember exactly when he said it but he absolutely talked about Ingram as a young rising star and cornerstone for a franchise. It’s been talked about here a few times as well regarding his comments. I don’t remember him saying the deal wasn’t good enough but I do remember him saying it wasn’t the right time to make the trade until the summer. I think I’ll leave Ingram being to risky for a trade up to a heart Dr. My sister in law is a hear Dr and as she told me these are usually complete non issues that do not impract anything for the rest of their life especially with how early he caught it.. It could be a problem but for anyone to say he isn’t a significant trade piece all the sudden is a reach but your opinion. I’m pretty sure they will do every test possible to make sure the main trade piece acquired in that deal is good to go. If the Docs give him the green light then I’m going with them. If they don’t give the go ahead then no they no we should not be interested. As of now he has had successful surgery to remove a blood clot and is expected to be ready for next season.

---

Conspiracy theory confirmed: Hiring Nelson to monitor the long-term heath of Ingram. We are trading with the Lakers. j/k

Ingram’s condition as I have been told is nowhere even similar to what Bosh had. Blood clot in a much safer area that was caught way earlier. As I said Ingram should be perfectly fine to start the season and nothing has been said otherwise. She obviously has a pretty good understanding he is an athlete and how it works since she works for an NFL team. Nothing suggest Ingram will be on blood thinners for any extended period.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GuardianAngel25

Ingram’s condition as I have been told is nowhere even similar to what Bosh had. Blood clot in a much safer area that was caught way earlier. As I said Ingram should be perfectly fine to start the season and nothing has been said otherwise. She obviously has a pretty good understanding he is an athlete and how it works since she works for an NFL team. Nothing suggest Ingram will be on blood thinners for any extended period.

---

I mean that's great for Ingram however it doesn't reduce or minimize the fact that 1 single additional blood clog and his career is over. Like, finished, done. You cannot deny that the risk of trading for him or that his value has taken a significant hit due to the blood clot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GuardianAngel25

Ingram’s condition as I have been told is nowhere even similar to what Bosh had. Blood clot in a much safer area that was caught way earlier. As I said Ingram should be perfectly fine to start the season and nothing has been said otherwise. She obviously has a pretty good understanding he is an athlete and how it works since she works for an NFL team. Nothing suggest Ingram will be on blood thinners for any extended period.

---

As I said, if he has a second one, it may require blood thinners long term. Still too big of a risk.