AD trade scenarios...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pelicanchamp

Guys, Brandon Ingram is going to be a star in this league. He needs to improve his 3 point shot and FT shooting and over time he will become a beast. Watch. If we trade with LA and get Ingram, Ball, Hart and draft Culver and add a shooter Bogdonovich or Niko.... and resign Elfrid I bet all of you will be excited. Maybe not immediately but when we see these kids all on the court it’s going to be fun to watch.

We need to build a team full of young coachable players that can guard multiple positions. I think y’all are underestimating what Ingram can do. If he shoots 3s well this season I would be very happy to have him.

Before the clot he started playing like a star player.

https://youtu.be/aNisYMJQKUg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

He was playing like a star for like 10-15 games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kinglio21093

He was playing like a star for like 10-15 games.

---

More like 6 games lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taker597

Ehhh... Lakers asset is a solid collection of 6th man. I see pairing Zion with Robinson just an all around better plan than Ingram, Zo, and Kuzma.

The big question... Is how do they fit. If I can be honest... They don't. With Zion... We are gonna need a legit rim protecting 5 to keep Zion clean, complementary defender, and shooters to keep spacing. Lakers assets don't solve any of those problems.

Zion biggest need coming into the NBA is having a complementary big. Zion doesn't have the measurable like AD to physically outmatch 4s and 5s. Hell, he can't physically outmatch most 4s in height or reach.

I will argue no matter what trade... A pass first PG is a bad idea. I hate trying to blanetly copy GSW... But we definitely need a PG with above average shooting ability. Lonzo ain't that person. He can grow into a gifted scorer, but not a shooter.

So, I just feel...

Robinson
Zion
RJ
Jrue
Target a 2020 PG in draft

Would be a great defensive juggernaut, but they have to improve shooting. They'll have plenty of picks and assets to round out a fantastic bench squad with so much healthy cap space if one or two players do not work out.

We have insurance with Zion or RJ if one of them don't work out. I just don't see how anyone can feel Laker is the best deal by a mile. It doesn't move the needle to me.

---

If you’re higher on Ingram/Ball than the Pelicans fan consensus, you end up liking the Lakers offer. I happen to be one of those guys. I also like Knicks though, so it’s not like I like the Lakers by a mile. The only trade I dislike is the Nets. Lakers, Knicks, Celtics and Clippers are all preferable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

He has good measurements. But the reason measurements are important is that they give you an indication of physical ability before we get a chance to see what people can actually do at an NBA level. It's the reason nobody cares that Lebron's wingspan isn't the good: cause he's played enough actual NBA basketball that we know it doesn't matter. Ingram's wingspan-to-height ratio is pretty dramatic. Doesn't matter because he doesn't DO anything with it.

Duke product. Who cares, so was Shelden Williams.

We've been over this again and again and again and again, so I'm not doing it for a 50th time. Ingram's advanced stats suck. His ability to win is nonexistent. He's regressed from his sophomore season in a bunch of ways. He cannot defend anything and doesn't seem interested in trying. His IQ is bottom tier. The fact that he has long arms doesn't save him from the fact that he fundamentally doesn't know how to do things on court. Can he improve? Sure, probably. Will he improve? Maybe. Is he good enough to be the CENTER PIECE OF A TRADE FOR A TOP 5 PLAYER?

God no. Not even close. And that's not even getting into the potentially career ending blood clot issue.

---

Look, if the blood clot thing is likely an issue then we won’t make the trade. That’s a dealbreaker.

Brandon Ingram is an up and comer right now. His defense has to improve and it may not. I think he will improve. But on a young team with Zion, Jrue and Ball plus a guy like Culver and more I like him.
Remember how young he is when you’re talking about stats.

Btw Lonzo, after thinking about it, has to be the most important piece in the trade. He’s a future all star. Athletic 6’6” pg with elite defense. A playmaker. Great facilitator.

The 4th pick is probably not a bust. Culver will very likely be the 4th pick. Another reason to consider the lakers trade.

The CELTICS are the only team that I think could beat the LAKERS potential offers. No Tatum no deal though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kinglio21093

He was playing like a star for like 10-15 games.

---

That's the thing, he wasn't even playing like a star in those games. If you look back at that stretch, he put up big raw box score stats but it didn't mean anything. It was classic ''big numbers on a trash team'' syndrome. The stretch people are talking about when they say he was being a star was the final 13 games of his season. During that time he put up 23/5/3, which is definitely pretty good just to look at. It was fairly efficient too, 55% from the floor.

The issue is that the Lakers only went 4-9 in that stretch, including losses to us, Memphis, Phoenix, and Atlanta. He had a -3.9 BPM over those 13 games, and his defense was beyond horrible: for the 9 games he played in the month of February, Ingram's opponents shot 12.4% better than their averages against him within 10 feet of the basket. In the final 2 games he played, the only two he played in March, that got even worse: his opponents shot 23.7% better than their averages within 10 feet of the basket with Ingram as their primary defender. They shot 11.9% better from 3 in March, too. That's just... awful.

His net rating in February was -3.6, and for his 2 games in March, -10.4. His assist percentage dropped from 17.8% to 12.1% in February and then dropped again to 6.1% in March.

We keep getting told that for those final 10 to 15 games or so, he was playing like a star. That's just not true. He was scoring a lot. That's it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

If you’re higher on Ingram/Ball than the Pelicans fan consensus, you end up liking the Lakers offer. I happen to be one of those guys. I also like Knicks though, so it’s not like I like the Lakers by a mile. The only trade I dislike is the Nets. Lakers, Knicks, Celtics and Clippers are all preferable.

---

I think if you rank the trade option from conservative to most aggressive.

I think the Knicks is the most conservative and a long game with depending so much on scouting, draft picks and building through the draft.

It maybe too conservative to some.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taker597

More like 6 games lol

---

And not a star.

Here’s a question: which players do y’all find most interesting as prospects to rebuild around Zion?

For me, the top of the list is Tatum. But, I think SGA and Shamet from CLIPPERS are really intriguing players that are super young and talented. In the draft I like Culver pairing with Zion. I also like Ja Morant but I doubt that happens.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

And not a star.

---

Consider the fact they were tanking.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taker597

Ehhh... Lakers asset is a solid collection of 6th man. I see pairing Zion with Robinson just an all around better plan than Ingram, Zo, and Kuzma.

The big question... Is how do they fit. If I can be honest... They don't. With Zion... We are gonna need a legit rim protecting 5 to keep Zion clean, complementary defender, and shooters to keep spacing. Lakers assets don't solve any of those problems.

Zion biggest need coming into the NBA is having a complementary big. Zion doesn't have the measurable like AD to physically outmatch 4s and 5s. Hell, he can't physically outmatch most 4s in height or reach.

I will argue no matter what trade... A pass first PG is a bad idea. I hate trying to blanetly copy GSW... But we definitely need a PG with above average shooting ability. Lonzo ain't that person. He can grow into a gifted scorer, but not a shooter.

So, I just feel...

Robinson
Zion
RJ
Jrue
Target a 2020 PG in draft

Would be a great defensive juggernaut, but they have to improve shooting. They'll have plenty of picks and assets to round out a fantastic bench squad with so much healthy cap space if one or two players do not work out.

We have insurance with Zion or RJ if one of them don't work out. I just don't see how anyone can feel Laker is the best deal by a mile. It doesn't move the needle to me.

---

I agree with the premise of a 5 and shooters but think the Celtics route is best way to get there. We should not overpay for a Center but think we can pieces from the Celtics trade to move for cap space to sign Brogdon and get a solid 5. I don’t think we should going in a total youth movement direction.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree they are all good

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/...s-trade-offers

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sleeper

I agree with the premise of a 5 and shooters but think the Celtics route is best way to get there. We should not overpay for a Center but think we can pieces from the Celtics trade to move for cap space to sign Brogdon and get a solid 5. I don’t think we should going in a total youth movement direction.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Idk... The more I do research on Robinson. He is raw, but his tape is good. His advance stats is promising for a rookie. I like him a lot and he needs to develop. His rebounding and shoot blocking is legit. If he can modernize his offensive game. I think he could be special. Plus, he is a rookie going on his 2nd year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pelicanchamp

Here’s a question: which players do y’all find most interesting as prospects to rebuild around Zion?

For me, the top of the list is Tatum. But, I think SGA and Shamet from CLIPPERS are really intriguing players that are super young and talented. In the draft I like Culver pairing with Zion. I also like Ja Morant but I doubt that happens.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

IMO, the draft pick who fits not only Zion, but fits Gentry is easily Coby White. One of his drawbacks is that he's always running full speed. So he can shoot + he's always looking to run + he gets to the rim.

This is an extreme long shot, but does anyone think if we gave Dallas a call and tried to build a deal around Luka plus filler they wouldn't instantly hangup? Also with the 76ers going all in do you think they would put Simmons on the table? Hypothetically what would that look like? Would we close games with Zion/Ben as the defensive 5/4?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 13 - 3

I agree they are all good

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/...s-trade-offers

---

Interesting take.

The Knicks offer didn't have Robinson, Laker offer didn't have Kuzma, and the Boston offer didn't have the Memphis pick. Those guys tend to have less optimistic expectations than we do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by msusousaphone

Interesting take.

The Knicks offer didn't have Robinson, Laker offer didn't have Kuzma, and the Boston offer didn't have the Memphis pick. Those guys tend to have less optimistic expectations than we do.

---

Which sorts makes you wonder if the truth will be somewhere in between right?
I’ve seen a lot of proposals here that basically have us taking every player and 3-4 draft picks and leaving teams with AD and....

I mean all of these GMs have seen what a team of AD and bench players looks like already. It caps out at an 8 seed. I don’t think teams are gutting their roster for that. There has to be an avenue left for them to assemble a roster around AD.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bogiesfedora

This is an extreme long shot, but does anyone think if we gave Dallas a call and tried to build a deal around Luka plus filler they wouldn't instantly hangup? Also with the 76ers going all in do you think they would put Simmons on the table? Hypothetically what would that look like? Would we close games with Zion/Ben as the defensive 5/4?

---

Dallas hangs up immediately.

I wouldn't want to do a deal with the 76ers for Ben. There's simply no spacing if you run with Zion and Ben and if he is the centerpiece without other assets like shooters then it's not really interesting to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by msusousaphone

Interesting take.

The Knicks offer didn't have Robinson, Laker offer didn't have Kuzma, and the Boston offer didn't have the Memphis pick. Those guys tend to have less optimistic expectations than we do.

---

Those offers are all jokes. Literally only the Boston offer in that list doesn't get hung up on.

I'm not trying to be rude here, but if anyone on this board actually thinks the Lakers are going to get AD with Ingram and Isaac Bonga, they have a serious undiagnosed brain injury.

Of those 8 I’d definitely take the Celtics offer, though we’d tussle over the Memphis pick. I’d give them back one of their firsts this year and demand the Memphis pick instead....

This is going to be a long (presumably) two week countdown of very repetitive thoughts and posts with little to no real news I suspect. And I will be reading every single post along the way :D

You take the Siakam OG deal from Toronto, and get out of there before Toronto knows what hit them.

List your desired asset in order from most wanted to least. We can keep it short to like top 10 assets.

1) Siakam
2) Tatum
3) Simmons
4) future Memphis pick
5) #3 pick
6) Gary Harris
7) Shai Gilgeous Alexander
8) Ingram
9) Miami 2021 unprotected
10) Kuzma

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taker597

Ehhh... Lakers asset is a solid collection of 6th man. I see pairing Zion with Robinson just an all around better plan than Ingram, Zo, and Kuzma.

The big question... Is how do they fit. If I can be honest... They don't. With Zion... We are gonna need a legit rim protecting 5 to keep Zion clean, complementary defender, and shooters to keep spacing. Lakers assets don't solve any of those problems.

Zion biggest need coming into the NBA is having a complementary big. Zion doesn't have the measurable like AD to physically outmatch 4s and 5s. Hell, he can't physically outmatch most 4s in height or reach.

I will argue no matter what trade... A pass first PG is a bad idea. I hate trying to blanetly copy GSW... But we definitely need a PG with above average shooting ability. Lonzo ain't that person. He can grow into a gifted scorer, but not a shooter.

So, I just feel...

Robinson
Zion
RJ
Jrue
Target a 2020 PG in draft

Would be a great defensive juggernaut, but they have to improve shooting. They'll have plenty of picks and assets to round out a fantastic bench squad with so much healthy cap space if one or two players do not work out.

We have insurance with Zion or RJ if one of them don't work out. I just don't see how anyone can feel Laker is the best deal by a mile. It doesn't move the needle to me.

---

So you said Robinson is better than Ingram Ball and Kuzma you lost me there I like Robinson but come on man three guys that started last year that you call a solid collection of 6th man for Robinson that was a 6th man .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MistaWhoDat

So you said Robinson is better than Ingram Ball and Kuzma you lost me there I like Robinson but come on man three guys that started last year that you call a solid collection of 6th man for Robinson that was a 6th man .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Manu Ginobili was a 6th man damn near his entire career while being regularly better than the starting 2 guard. Don't ever think that just cause someone is coming off the bench, they're worse than whoever is starting.

Robinson is better than Ball and Kuzma, and because of the health threat he's better than Ingram too, and the stats all support this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UNO Gracias

List your desired asset in order from most wanted to least. We can keep it short to like top 10 assets.

1) Siakam
2) Tatum
3) Simmons
4) future Memphis pick
5) #3 pick
6) Gary Harris
7) Shai Gilgeous Alexander
8) Ingram
9) Miami 2021 unprotected
10) Kuzma

---

I'm keeping my list to just LA, LAC, Boston, NY, and Nets.

1) Tatum
2) #3 pick
3) Memphis pick
4) Mitchell Robinson
5) Jaylen Brown
6) SGA
7) Miami unprotected
8) Jarrett Allen
9) Kuzma
10) #4 pick

This would probably change a bit if I spent more time on it.

I don’t think we can have Ball and Zion on court during big games together. Zion’s free throw shooting was in the 60s and Ball is damn near the single worst free throw shooter ever; his percentage is in the 40s.

That’s not an option IMO. You’re just asking to lose games on the free throw line.

Given the fact over the course of 2 years Lonzo has missed basically an entire season worth of games we might not have to worry about Zion and Lonzo on the court at the same time anyway.

This is really one of the most amazing facts people who want to do the Laker trade often just gloss over. 2 of the Lakers 3 top assets are injury risks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

Given the fact over the course of 2 years Lonzo has missed basically an entire season worth of games we might not have to worry about Zion and Lonzo on the court at the same time anyway.

This is really one of the most amazing facts people who want to do the Laker trade often just gloss over. 2 of the Lakers 3 top assets are injury risks.

---

Out of the possible 164 regular season games Ball could have played, he has played 99. 99/164. That's 60.3% of all possible games for him. That is bad.

For Ingram: 246 possible regular season games, but only 190 played. 190/246 is 77%, which is obviously much better, but is still bad.

By comparison, here's Jrue Holiday over the same three year period (a guy who some on this board consider ''injury prone''): 215/246 games played, which is 88%.

Or for AD, who has carried the ''injury prone'' tag for years. Obviously not counting this year, which took him out of some games for non-injury reasons, but if you look at the three years before this he played 211/246 possible games: 86%

The number of early-career games Ingram and Ball have missed is incredible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

Manu Ginobili was a 6th man damn near his entire career while being regularly better than the starting 2 guard. Don't ever think that just cause someone is coming off the bench, they're worse than whoever is starting.

Robinson is better than Ball and Kuzma, and because of the health threat he's better than Ingram too, and the stats all support this.

---

No he’s not better than those three collectively your borderline ridiculous with your anti laker hate is your last name Demps .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

Those offers are all jokes. Literally only the Boston offer in that list doesn't get hung up on.

I'm not trying to be rude here, but if anyone on this board actually thinks the Lakers are going to get AD with Ingram and Isaac Bonga, they have a serious undiagnosed brain injury.

---

Lakers adding 4th pick on draft definitely makes it more appealing. I don’t mind stripping Toronto’s team.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

Out of the possible 164 regular season games Ball could have played, he has played 99. 99/164. That's 60.3% of all possible games for him. That is bad.

For Ingram: 246 possible regular season games, but only 190 played. 190/246 is 77%, which is obviously much better, but is still bad.

By comparison, here's Jrue Holiday over the same three year period (a guy who some on this board consider ''injury prone''): 215/246 games played, which is 88%.

Or for AD, who has carried the ''injury prone'' tag for years. Obviously not counting this year, which took him out of some games for non-injury reasons, but if you look at the three years before this he played 211/246 possible games: 86%

The number of early-career games Ingram and Ball have missed is incredible.

---

You make good points I’ll give you that but to just draw up conclusions on what they’re entire career will look like because of a few years with that dumpster fire of an organization is a little much in my opinion I see potential you don’t I guess we’ll have to disagree .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

Out of the possible 164 regular season games Ball could have played, he has played 99. 99/164. That's 60.3% of all possible games for him. That is bad.

For Ingram: 246 possible regular season games, but only 190 played. 190/246 is 77%, which is obviously much better, but is still bad.

By comparison, here's Jrue Holiday over the same three year period (a guy who some on this board consider ''injury prone''): 215/246 games played, which is 88%.

Or for AD, who has carried the ''injury prone'' tag for years. Obviously not counting this year, which took him out of some games for non-injury reasons, but if you look at the three years before this he played 211/246 possible games: 86%

The number of early-career games Ingram and Ball have missed is incredible.

---

The funniest part to me is when those same Lakers people argue its not a 3 person draft, the 4th overall pick really adds a ton of value to the Lakers package, we could draft a guy like Garland...... Who just missed an entire season of college ball due to injury.

Yeah, that's what I want to do is trade AD and get back 3 guys either currently injured or trying to recover from a serious enough injury that they missed significant time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MistaWhoDat

No he’s not better than those three collectively your borderline ridiculous with your anti laker hate is your last name Demps .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Robinson played only 20 minutes a game, 10 less than Lonzo and almost 15 less than Ingram. Therefore the stats listed here are the per 36 stats, to make it fair to all players.

Mitchell Robinson: 12.8/11.2/1.0, with 1.4 steals and 4.3 blocks per game. 69.4% from the floor. +34 Net Rating, 22.0 PER, 2.7 VORP, 5.7 BPM, .217 WS/48

Brandon Ingram: 19.4/5.4/3.2, with 0.6 steals and 0.6 blocks per game. 49.7% from the floor. -8 Net Rating. 13.4 PER. -0.3 VORP, -2.8 BPM, .055 WS/48

Lonzo Ball: 11.8/6.3/6.5, with 1.7 steals and 0.7 blocks per game. 40.6% from the floor. -9 Net Rating. 11.7 PER. 0.9 VORP, 0.5 BPM, .052 WS/48

Kyle Kuzma: 20.3/5.9/2.8, with 0.6 steals and 0.4 blocks per game. 45.6% from the floor. -6 Net Rating. 14 PER, 0.2 VORP, -1.7 BPM, .065 WS/48

The stats in bold are the leaders in these categories. In case you didn't notice, Robinson leads in pretty much all the advanced stats categories, and in 2 of the normal box score stats. It's INCREDIBLE that he's leading in win shares despite being on the worst team in the NBA.

So yeah, the stats do support that his play leads to more winning and more success than the others. Also, he's the youngest player out of all 4.

I can see the potential upside with the lakers trade but you have to admit there are a ton of red flags not to mention Lavar Ball as the cherry on top.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

The funniest part to me is when those same Lakers people argue its not a 3 person draft, the 4th overall pick really adds a ton of value to the Lakers package, we could draft a guy like Garland...... Who just missed an entire season of college ball due to injury.

Yeah, that's what I want to do is trade AD and get back 3 guys either currently injured or trying to recover from a serious enough injury that they missed significant time.

---

It's boggling. I'm not one of those guys who accuses other people on the board of being undercover Laker fans or whatever, but sometimes it's really hard to resist thinking that. The level of delusion is takes to think that the Lakers offer is the favourite is beyond understanding.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MistaWhoDat

So you said Robinson is better than Ingram Ball and Kuzma you lost me there I like Robinson but come on man three guys that started last year that you call a solid collection of 6th man for Robinson that was a 6th man .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

You realize what the role of 6th man is, right? It's not the 6th best player. Kind of like how Harden was a 6th man in OKC. He didn't fit in the line up. That is what I see with Lonzo, Kuzma, and Ball. They don't particularly fit in the starting line up. Kuzma and Ingram are offensive sparkplug with huge liabilities on defense. Kuzma is Zion back up anyway. Zo is pass first guard in a offense with not ideal spacing. So, their best place for success is off the bench. I see in situations like being down 5 or 6 in the final minutes where a Zion, Kuzma, and Ingram lineup could work. They aren't shooters. So, it isn't ideal lineup Ingram would start out of necessity at the position, but we'll let him walk when his time comes, because he isn't worth a max unless he actually becomes good.

Robinson simply fits as a starter way better than any of the other 3. He has some amazing potential. For a man, that wasn't getting any minute to start the season. Started playing close to 20-30 minutes as the season ended. 2nd team All-NBA rookie. We just need to develop his offensive game, and I like his work ethic enough to gamble on it.What's important... He'll make Zion life a lot easier. This is what I care about... Building around Zion that makes sense.

We built around AD, but it never made any sense. We just grab talent for the sake of getting talent. It doesn't work in NBA, NFL, and etc. They have to fit and complement each other. Lakers assets is simply talent for the sake of talent like a peanut butter and mayonnaise sandwich. I'm freaking tired of peanut butter and mayonnaise sandwiches for last 7 years

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UNO Gracias

You take the Siakam OG deal from Toronto, and get out of there before Toronto knows what hit them.

---

Yeah. I mean you can’t say no to that and the Lakers 4th pick added makes it very appealing now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pels4Life

I can see the potential upside with the lakers trade but you have to admit there are a ton of red flags not to mention Lavar Ball as the cherry on top.

---

You can always flip Ball and Kuzma. Package it for something better. I’m sure Griffin is considering that idea.

So after all of this debate, where do you guys actually have the offers ranked? Just between the main 5 teams, LA, LAC, Boston, NY, Brooklyn. Obviously someone else could run up and make a big splash, like Toronto, but just based on the teams we know are at least interested. Assuming they put everything on the table, which they may not.

For me, it's

1) Boston/Knicks (Boston if you prefer win-now, Knicks if you prefer long term)
2) LAC
3) Brooklyn
4) Lakers

I could flip Brooklyn and the Lakers sometimes, depending on how I feel, cause I think Brooklyn has the best players (potential D-Lo S&T, Jarrett Allen, Kurucs, Levert), but their picks are just bad whereas the #4 pick isn't huge from LA but it's way better than what Brooklyn can offer. So there's some debate there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taker597

You realize what the role of 6th man is, right? It's not the 6th best player. Kind of like how Harden was a 6th man in OKC. He didn't fit in the line up. That is what I see with Lonzo, Kuzma, and Ball. They don't particularly fit in the starting line up. Kuzma and Ingram are offensive sparkplug with huge liabilities on defense. Kuzma is Zion back up anyway. Zo is pass first guard in a offense with not ideal spacing. So, their best place for success is off the bench. I see in situations like being down 5 or 6 in the final minutes where a Zion, Kuzma, and Ingram lineup could work. They aren't shooters. So, it isn't ideal lineup Ingram would start out of necessity at the position, but we'll let him walk when his time comes, because he isn't worth a max unless he actually becomes good.

Robinson simply fits as a starter way better than any of the other 3. He has some amazing potential. For a man, that wasn't getting any minute to start the season. Started playing close to 20-30 minutes as the season ended. 2nd team All-NBA rookie. We just need to develop his offensive game, and I like his work ethic enough to gamble on it.What's important... He'll make Zion life a lot easier. This is what I care about... Building around Zion that makes sense.

We built around AD, but it never made any sense. We just grab talent for the sake of getting talent. It doesn't work in NBA, NFL, and etc. They have to fit and complement each other. Lakers assets is simply talent for the sake of talent like a peanut butter and mayonnaise sandwich. I'm freaking tired of peanut butter and mayonnaise sandwiches for last 7 years

---

I see your point and I like the Knicks deal better than the Lakers but I don’t hate the Lakers deal like some do on here is all I’m saying . I’d take Boston and Knicks deals first if they pony up but if they don’t then I’m good with taking the Lakers deal unless one of these other teams step it up .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

The funniest part to me is when those same Lakers people argue its not a 3 person draft, the 4th overall pick really adds a ton of value to the Lakers package, we could draft a guy like Garland...... Who just missed an entire season of college ball due to injury.

Yeah, that's what I want to do is trade AD and get back 3 guys either currently injured or trying to recover from a serious enough injury that they missed significant time.

---

What really happens is that some on this board crap on the Lakers deal so much, and stan for a hypothetical Boston deal so hard, that the hyperbole gets way out of wack.

Opinions vary around the league on the Lakers players, as well as every draft pick not named Zion or Ja. And even though league opinions vary, on the spectrum those on this board skew heavily anti Laker and heavily against prospects that aren't a part of the hypothetical Celtics trade. For many, the Lakers are the big market team that ruined our season or just the big market team that turns out local "fans" whenever they come to time and it's annoying. I get it. But these takes on the Laker players seem like they are so far off from the median, that it's pointless to even debate.

I used to prefer to the Knicks package. Things change. We have a little bit more info on Ingram's health. We have a sense of Gentry's optimism for using Ball in the offense or the market (Suns/Bulls) if we flip Lonzo. And the Lakers got the 4th pick in the draft. To say we can't get a solid starter at 4 and there aren't guys with All Star potential is silly. Culver, Garland, or RJ could be available at 4 and the potential for all three is starter with all star upside

I've been around long enough to see people on this board crap on D'Angelo Russell in summer of 2016, Jaylen Brown as a prospect, and even Klay Thompson as an overrated SG after his first couple of years. Hell, there were people who didn't want Klay and Curry in a Chris Paul trade because of Steph's defensive limitations and his ankle injuries. You guys loved freakin Nik Batum for a what feels like a 5 years straight. There was a serious debate here about the future stardom of MCW vs Trey Burke! Some of you experts with all your analysis had Bender and Dunn ahead of Jamal Murray and Buddy!

For every prospect you guys have nailed, there are likely 10 you've been all the way off on. I don't have the time, and I'm not sure how far back this board's archives go, but let's just say the talent evaluation chops are proven to be lacking around here.

You guys love the Pelicans new management, but you'd run Griff and Gentry out of the forum and call them Lakers people if they posted their opinions on players!

We know Gentry has a high opinion of Lonzo.
The only thing Griff has ever said about Ingram as a prospect has been glowing and positive.
The draft comps for Garland on various sites include names from Mo Williams to Lillard and Irving. If an All Star appearance and a 14 year career is his floor, that's actually not a bad thing.

Pelicans fans have an anti Lakers bias (but I get it). I just wish it didn't influence/skew the conversation around trade packages. For the sake of the vast majority of posters on here, I hope AD gets traded to the Celtics, Clippers, Knicks, or Nets - I really do!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MistaWhoDat

I see your point and I like the Knicks deal better than the Lakers but I don’t hate the Lakers deal like some do on here is all I’m saying . I’d take Boston and Knicks deals first if they pony up but if they don’t then I’m good with taking the Lakers deal unless one of these other teams step it up .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

I like the Lakers deal, but people claiming that is the best can chill a bit. It's just depends on how you want to build your team.

I favor the conservative route of building through the draft. Lakers represent high risk/high reward.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MistaWhoDat

No he’s not better than those three collectively your borderline ridiculous with your anti laker hate is your last name Demps .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

It's not borderline.

It's funny how in previous season, the tag lines would be "but the stats are skewed lower because they played around LeBron" but that gets thrown out the window when it doesn't fit the narrative. We're basing arguments off of players who were rookies one season and LeBroned the next. Throwing out missed game percentages for players on a team that tanked and probably forced some misses. And this past season for the Lakers may have been the bighest train wreck of a season in NBA history. Those guys were absolutely demoralized.

Furthermore. Never forget that we don't know what's actually being offered. The idea of all that we're getting has ballooned into absurdity. Trade day might be a very sad day for a few posters. Really the only even exchange was the #1 pick. Once we got that, the trade was set up to be underwhelming.

I think one of the most frustrating things about this whole saga is how people are like ''OH, it's just blown up hyperbole and people are arguing for the sake of arguing and I wish everyone was just so nice and calm and level-headed like me''.

Maybe, just maybe, the reason people don't like the Lakers trade proposal isn't because they're engaged in some spiteful contrarianism, and maybe it's not because they have personally placed a hex upon the city of Los Angeles. Maybe they've just looked at the assets LA has in their war chest and found them lacking.

Ingram has been a failure when it comes to winning basketball. He's three years deep into his career and has regressed in almost all categories other than PPG. His advanced stats are horrific to look at, and when he's in charge (i.e, that ''superstar'' streak we keep getting told about) his team is awful and loses to Phoenix, Atlanta, and Memphis. He's missed a very large number of games due to injury so far in his career, is a one way player, doesn't make high IQ plays, and has a very dangerous blood clot issue.

Ball has missed 40% of all possible games since entering the NBA. He's one of the worst free throw shooters of all time. He cannot shoot: he can't even really score at all. He passes well, and is a pretty strong defender, but he is not a playmaker because he lacks the gravity to CREATE shots for his teammates. He also brings with him a circus of stupid, inane, annoying media attention. Again, the advanced stats are not flattering to him.

Kuzma has also regressed as a shooter. He's a one way player who is woeful on defense. He isn't a very good passer. His advanced stats also largely suck, and for his size he's a pretty disappointing rebounder as well. Turning 24 in July, he's old enough that while improvement is possible, it's also not likely to happen on a huge scale: he pretty much is what he is.

The #4 pick is their best asset, undoubtedly. I like Culver a lot, so I think it's a decent pick, but that's not the common perception across the media and the league as a whole: this draft is largely seen as a three man draft, and when the #3 pick is on the table from NY, #4 loses a little bit of that weight.

Sorry to the people who think the Lakers deal is essentially solid gold, but the real problem, even if you get rid of Rich Paul's meddling and the drama surrounding LA, the absolute key issue that makes the Lakers deal unappealing is this: their assets aren't that great.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by msusousaphone

It's not borderline.

It's funny how in previous season, the tag lines would be "but the stats are skewed lower because they played around LeBron" but that gets thrown out the window when it doesn't fit the narrative. We're basing arguments off of players who were rookies one season and LeBroned the next. Throwing out missed game percentages for players on a team that tanked and probably forced some misses. And this past season for the Lakers may have been the bighest train wreck of a season in NBA history. Those guys were absolutely demoralized.

Furthermore. Never forget that we don't know what's actually being offered. The idea of all that we're getting has ballooned into absurdity. Trade day might be a very sad day for a few posters. Really the only even exchange was the #1 pick. Once we got that, the trade was set up to be underwhelming.

---

Completely agree


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Is There’s a strong possibility the KNICKS are really going to get AD?

It would only make them more appealing to Durant if they made that move.

Watch them emerge and it comes down to them and Boston. Kyrie will likely resign with Boston if they get AD? If that’s the case I think Boston will go all in. They’ll have to have confidence that Kyrie will return to play with AD. They’ll still have GH, AH, and other good players. With the new lotto system I would prefer winning now AND growing a young team. That’s why Boston is most appealing to me. I bet they get AD. He’s too damn good. Kyrie really could come back to Boston if they made that bold of a move.

Imagine: Smart, Jrue, Tatum, Zion, and Okafor or another center via FA or trade.

Brown off the bench with Wood, Kenrich, Jackson, Diallo...

Still have options with 14th and 20th picks. Could do something with Moore and Solo. Could still sign Elfrid and also add a very good FA.

Boston deal would blow everything else out the water. Tatum is a future All Star imo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Kyrie not staying in Boston, AD not gonna resign there. were ain't gonna get a deal from them. KNICKS gonna have the best package, Kyrie joins AD in NY, possibly get KD to sign there. My two cents.

A core of Jrue/barrett/Zion/Robinson is pretty damn appealing ! Just need a good sniper guard and I think that's a strong lineup on both ends of the floor

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PeliKhan

Kyrie not staying in Boston, AD not gonna resign there. were ain't gonna get a deal from them. KNICKS gonna have the best package, Kyrie joins AD in NY, possibly get KD to sign there. My two cents.

---

Unless they move some salary around. They don't have space for 2 max FA + AD. KD also have Veterans Max FA pay bump that puts him at 40 million a year.

Its amazing how each of us has our differing favorites or ideas as to who has the best trade package for AD. It just shows this isn't going to be an easy decision for Griffin. It's exciting on one hand because you think with all the interest that exists for AD you're going to get a good return in a trade. But it's also nerve-wracking. In my opinion the best realistic returns in terms of best offer from teams we've heard will be involved are:

Best to worst
Boston
LA Clippers
LA Lakers
New York Knicks
Brooklyn Nets.


This is going to continue to get good. Especially if more teams get in the mix.