Pelicans underwhelmed by Lakers' initial offers for Anthony Davis

His deal actually has a bit of value as an expiring next year incase we did want to make a move.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

His deal actually has a bit of value as an expiring next year incase we did want to make a move.

---

Cmon, Myth, dont get lazy on me. I said NOT ideal, but not fatal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tinman

Cmon, Myth, dont get lazy on me. I said NOT ideal, but not fatal.

---

I wasn't really responding to your post as much as thinking it through myself that's why I didn't quote you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

I wasn't really responding to your post as much as thinking it through myself that's why I didn't quote you.

---

Do you think we can land a All-Star caliber player 20-22 mill, along with Boston or Knick haul?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tinman

Do you think we can land a All-Star caliber player 20-22 mill, along with Boston or Knick haul?

---

well if dell is gone.....come on down boogie [emoji23]

Sent from my SM-S903VL using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tinman

Do you think we can land a All-Star caliber player 20-22 mill, along with Boston or Knick haul?

---

I'm not sure what this question is asking. Do you mean od I think we can sign an All Star this summer for 20-22 million to pair with our haul? No. We'd have to overpay.

If you're asking do I think we can trade for an ALL Star using our Boston haul, yeah probably, but I doubt we do anything like that this summer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JunkHead

LaVar Ball tells ESPN that if Lonzo Ball is traded, he wants his son to go to Phoenix: “We want to be in LA. But if he’s traded, I don’t want Lonzo in New Orleans. Phoenix is the best fit for him. And I am going to speak it into existence.”

— Ohm Youngmisuk (@NotoriousOHM) February 4, 2019

I hate Lavar Ball so much. I wish I could speak him out of existence.

---

Not wishing any harm on anyone, of course, but the fact that some people make it to middle age without having all of their teeth knocked out is just baffling.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

Not wishing any harm on anyone, of course, but the fact that some people make it to middle age without having all of their teeth knocked out is just baffling.

---

I love LaVar ball for doing this. He is absolutely tanking Magic's "top" trade asset. Magic gotta be so pissed right now.

Don't want Ball or his dad anywhere near this team but let him keep killing the Lakers trade capital.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

I love LaVar ball for doing this. He is absolutely tanking Magic's "top" trade asset. Magic gotta be so pissed right now.

Don't want Ball or his dad anywhere near this team but let him keep killing the Lakers trade capital.

---

Oh sure, from our perspective it's helpful, but he really is just an intolerable person.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

I love LaVar ball for doing this. He is absolutely tanking Magic's "top" trade asset. Magic gotta be so pissed right now.

Don't want Ball or his dad anywhere near this team but let him keep killing the Lakers trade capital.

---

I'm sure this is no different from AD's dad "tanking" Davis' value with Ainge.

If the Pelicans want Ball, they're not going to care what LaVar says, and they will have confidence that the role they have for him - as the starting PG next to Jrue - will appeal to him in the long run.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

I'm sure this is no different from AD's dad "tanking" Davis' value with Ainge.

If the Pelicans want Ball, they're not going to care what LaVar says, and they will have confidence that the role they have for him - as the starting PG next to Jrue - will appeal to him in the long run.

---

But, I have no reason to believe that the Pelicans want Ball. We know the Celtics want AD.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

I'm sure this is no different from AD's dad "tanking" Davis' value with Ainge.

If the Pelicans want Ball, they're not going to care what LaVar says, and they will have confidence that the role they have for him - as the starting PG next to Jrue - will appeal to him in the long run.

---

I agree with that to some extent, especially because Lonzo is signed for a while whereas AD is obviously ust a one year deal, but on the other hand we are sellers of talent. LA are buyers of talent.

People are willing to take fliers on AD because he is a generational talent, and so is worth the risk. People are less willing to take on potential hassle for Lonzo Ball and his broken jumpshot.

This board is going to be apoplectic if/when the Pels send AD to the Lakers, because folks have 1.) convinced themselves the Lakers offer is trash 2.) bought into the twitterverse' views that AD won't be traded to the Lakers before the deadline.

Personally, I think the the Lakers offer isn't the best, but it's far from trash. And I put the odds of him being traded before Thursday at a toss up. Unless we know 100% what BOS/NYK are telling the Pels and offering, we can't begin to know for sure that the Lakers offer isn't superior. Our best case NYK/BOS offers are just fan speculation at this point. If the Knicks aren't willing to trade all 4 picks unprotected, they aren't really in the convo. I've heard a lot of podcast suggest the Knicks offer the pick "Top 1 protected". We're also not sure how specific Ainge has been. Maybe he's said Brown and the premium picks, or Tatum and NO PICKS. We actually don't know. That's why I put it at a toss up. The idea that BOS/NYK could offer the moon, could be Pels spin to drive up the Lakers price. Once they squeeze the Lakers, they might do the deal.

Please everybody be OK if they trade him to the Lakers. I feel like yall aren't properly prepared for that possibility! And I know for sure yall will trash Dell/Loomis/ownership, even though you'll have no idea what the negotiations were like with other teams.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

I'm sure this is no different from AD's dad "tanking" Davis' value with Ainge.

If the Pelicans want Ball, they're not going to care what LaVar says, and they will have confidence that the role they have for him - as the starting PG next to Jrue - will appeal to him in the long run.

---

Oh sure if the Pels want Ball. The difference is the Pels are Sellers instead of Buyers. The Lakers are trying to buy AD but their top asset doesn't want to go to the Pelicans. That hurts their trade and gives Pelicans more leverage to say, "He doesn't even want to be here. What value is he to us?"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarkHornet

But, I have no reason to believe that the Pelicans want Ball. We know the Celtics want AD.

---

There was literally a report a few days ago that said the Pelicans were excited about the prospect of featuring Lonzo at PG next to Jrue. Everyone took it as Pels trying to drive up offers from BOS/NYK, but maybe they actually do think Lonzo would thrive at PG next to Jrue. I know I think he would.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

This board is going to be apoplectic if/when the Pels send AD to the Lakers, because folks have 1.) convinced themselves the Lakers offer is trash 2.) bought into the twitterverse' views that AD won't be traded to the Lakers before the deadline.

Personally, I think the the Lakers offer isn't the best, but it's far from trash. And I put the odds of him being traded before Thursday at a toss up. Unless we know 100% what BOS/NYK are telling the Pels and offering, we can't begin to know for sure that the Lakers offer isn't superior. Our best case NYK/BOS offers are just fan speculation at this point. If the Knicks aren't willing to trade all 4 picks unprotected, they aren't really in the convo. I've heard a lot of podcast suggest the Knicks offer the pick "Top 1 protected". We're also not sure how specific Ainge has been. Maybe he's said Brown and the premium picks, or Tatum and NO PICKS. We actually don't know. That's why I put it at a toss up. The idea that BOS/NYK could offer the moon, could be Pels spin to drive up the Lakers price. Once they squeeze the Lakers, they might do the deal.

Please everybody be OK if they trade him to the Lakers. I feel like yall aren't properly prepared for that possibility! And I know for sure yall will trash Dell/Loomis/ownership, even though you'll have no idea what the negotiations were like with other teams.

---

If there was one player in the Lakers offer that I could point to as a future star, I may be able to come to grips with a Laker trade. However, given that we would significantly strengthen a WC team and the players are closer to rotational players than future stars, I cannot see any way that I could get behind that trade.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

If there was one player in the Lakers offer that I could point to as a future star, I may be able to come to grips with a Laker trade. However, given that we would significantly strengthen a WC team and the players are closer to rotational players than future stars, I cannot see any way that I could get behind that trade.

---

Basically. If Ingram had showed significant progress in his three years, or if Kuzma was a two way player, I'd be much more open to it. Instead it just seems like, if we took the Lakers trade, we'd be taking all their bad decisions off their hands and gifting them AD in return for their incompetence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

There was literally a report a few days ago that said the Pelicans were excited about the prospect of featuring Lonzo at PG next to Jrue. Everyone took it as Pels trying to drive up offers from BOS/NYK, but maybe they actually do think Lonzo would thrive at PG next to Jrue. I know I think he would.

---

geezus man [emoji849]

Sent from my SM-S903VL using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

Basically. If Ingram had showed significant progress in his three years, or if Kuzma was a two way player, I'd be much more open to it. Instead it just seems like, if we took the Lakers trade, we'd be taking all their bad decisions off their hands and gifting them AD in return for their incompetence.

---

they should of drafted Tatum

Sent from my SM-S903VL using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

Oh sure if the Pels want Ball. The difference is the Pels are Sellers instead of Buyers. The Lakers are trying to buy AD but their top asset doesn't want to go to the Pelicans. That hurts their trade and gives Pelicans more leverage to say, "He doesn't even want to be here. What value is he to us?"

---

Ingram is probably their top asset.

This is literally the same leverage Ainge has over the Pelicans. He can say to Dell "We're not sure AD will resign, therefor we can't give you EVERYTHING"

There has to be a difference between AD's value if he said he would resign in BOS versus AD's value with his camp saying he won't. At the very least, Ainge would attempt to hold back some assets. Hell, the Celtics, Kyrie, and AD's camp could be colluding to push the narrative that AD might not sign specifically to lower the value -- even if it's just allowing them to hold onto Jaylen, the Memphis pick, or Clippers pick!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

If there was one player in the Lakers offer that I could point to as a future star, I may be able to come to grips with a Laker trade. However, given that we would significantly strengthen a WC team and the players are closer to rotational players than future stars, I cannot see any way that I could get behind that trade.

---

I mean, obviously this comes down to player evaluation. And obviously we differ in terms of Ingram and Ball's ability to still reach the level people expected of them when they were drafted.

But that's not even my larger point. My point is that unless you know what is being discussed with other teams, it's not fair to assume the best offers we've imaged were actually offered and the Pels just chose to make the Lakers deal. It's possible Tatum is not on the table. It's possible the NYK pick completely unprotected is not on the table. Other teams may not be offering anything better than the Lakers for what they perceive as a rental.

At the end of this, if you're predisposed to not trust Pels management, you'll probably be apoplectic about however this turns out because the stakes are so high and you'll assume the worst and think something better was out there if only they'd someone done something differently.

I think A MASSIVE trade is going to happen. I think it will be a three team trade. Niko and Hill could be involved. I have no sources.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pelicanchamp

I think A MASSIVE trade is going to happen. I think it will be a three team trade. Niko and Hill could be involved. I have no sources.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Well, you have just as many sources as everyone else. So, have at it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

I mean, obviously this comes down to player evaluation. And obviously we differ in terms of Ingram and Ball's ability to still reach the level people expected of them when they were drafted.

But that's not even my larger point. My point is that unless you know what is being discussed with other teams, it's not fair to assume the best offers we've imaged were actually offered and the Pels just chose to make the Lakers deal. It's possible Tatum is not on the table. It's possible the NYK pick completely unprotected is not on the table. Other teams may not be offering anything better than the Lakers for what they perceive as a rental.

At the end of this, if you're predisposed to not trust Pels management, you'll probably be apoplectic about however this turns out because the stakes are so high and you'll assume the worst and think something better was out there if only they'd someone done something differently.

---

Not really. For me, the issue isn't necessarily which deal to take, because although on paper NY and Boston have much better assets, you're right in that maybe they wouldn't offer them all. I think they would, but maybe they don't: that's always possible, and we won't know until after whichever trade is done, is done, and then all the failed trades get leaked (as always happens).

My issue is how the deal is done. Trading to LA before the deadline would be a sign that the management caved. There is literally no good reason to trade before the deadline. Any LA offer will still be available come June. The only possible reason to trade before the deadline is if you are scared that the trade market for a 25 year old perennial MVP candidate is going to dry up, and if you're scared of that possibility then I don't want you involved in my NBA franchise because you're always going to cave and you can't hold your head up and have some confidence in yourself as an executive.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...ef304cf5d4.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

Ingram is probably their top asset.

This is literally the same leverage Ainge has over the Pelicans. He can say to Dell "We're not sure AD will resign, therefor we can't give you EVERYTHING"

There has to be a difference between AD's value if he said he would resign in BOS versus AD's value with his camp saying he won't. At the very least, Ainge would attempt to hold back some assets. Hell, the Celtics, Kyrie, and AD's camp could be colluding to push the narrative that AD might not sign specifically to lower the value -- even if it's just allowing them to hold onto Jaylen, the Memphis pick, or Clippers pick!

---

The Celtics really want AD and have already said they don't care about the reports. The Lakers are trying to get AD. This hurts their trade value they are trying to leverage. AD's dad saying stuff would hurt us if AD could walk this summer. We have 18 months of him still on a deal.

Come on dude, you're smart enough to see the difference.

Don't want Rondo or Stephenson in any LA trade, and we'd better be getting the Suns pick in that.

LAKERS GET: AD, Hill

PELS GET: Kuzma, Rondo, Stephenson, Hart, LAKERS 2019 1st, Ayton, TJ Warren.

SUNS GET: Lonzo, Ingram, Randle, Zubac and the LAKERS 2021 1st


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pelicanchamp

LAKERS GET: AD, Hill

PELS GET: Kuzma, Rondo, Stephenson, Hart, LAKERS 2019 1st, Ayton, TJ Warren.

SUNS GET: Lonzo, Ingram, Randle, Zubac and the LAKERS 2021 1st


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Pass.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

The Celtics really want AD and have already said they don't care about the reports. The Lakers are trying to get AD. This hurts their trade value they are trying to leverage. AD's dad saying stuff would hurt us if AD could walk this summer. We have 18 months of him still on a deal.

Come on dude, you're smart enough to see the difference.

---

I think you only see it that way because you have a bias towards seeing this favorably for the Pels.

Ball has 3 years left, and then he'd be a RFA. By your own logic of us having 18 months of AD still on a deal being to our advantage, it means it doesn't matter at all what LaVar wants because we'd have Ball's rights for twice as long plus his restricted rights.

I just want yall to be consistent in your logic.

there is no way in hell the suns do that

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pelicanchamp

LAKERS GET: AD, Hill

PELS GET: Kuzma, Rondo, Stephenson, Hart, LAKERS 2019 1st, Ayton, TJ Warren.

SUNS GET: Lonzo, Ingram, Randle, Zubac and the LAKERS 2021 1st


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

so we get 4 fringe players? huh? l9l okay man you can't be gm

Sent from my SM-S903VL using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

Pass.

---

Seriously?

Starting 5

Rondo, Jrue, Warren, Kuzma, Ayton

Depth: Hart, Niko, Elfrid, Okafor, Jackson etc

We’d get starting SF Warren, Starting big man young talent Ayton, Kuzma and Hart all for long term. All good contracts. PLUS we’d get a leader in Rondo. Re-sign Niko and Rondo and we’d be doing ok I think.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

I think you only see it that way because you have a bias towards seeing this favorably for the Pels.

Ball has 3 years left, and then he'd be a RFA. By your own logic of us having 18 months of AD still on a deal being to our advantage, it means it doesn't matter at all what LaVar wants because we'd have Ball's rights for twice as long plus his restricted rights.

I just want yall to be consistent in your logic.

---

Yes, but we are selling. We are the ones with the asset. The team which is giving up the best part of the deal isn't the team that should be forced to compromise by taking big risks on players. It's basic risk versus reward.

If, say, Boston takes AD, there's a high risk there (that he doesn't resign) but the reward if it pays off is much greater (25 year old perennial MVP candidate and DPOY caliber player).

If we take Ball, there's a high risk there (that he also leaves, or perhaps causes Eric Gordon-like problems while he's here), and the potential reward if he plays along isnt that high (broken shooter with no offensive game, solid roleplay ceiling unless he radically refits his offense).

So for Boston there's an inclination to do the trade because the potential upside of the deal is literally championships. For us, why would we take on that risk when the reward isn't anything special?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

Pass.

---

Getting all of that plus a lakers 2019 1st and Rondo with a HUGE chip on his shoulder would be very interesting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

I think you only see it that way because you have a bias towards seeing this favorably for the Pels.

Ball has 3 years left, and then he'd be a RFA. By your own logic of us having 18 months of AD still on a deal being to our advantage, it means it doesn't matter at all what LaVar wants because we'd have Ball's rights for twice as long plus his restricted rights.

I just want yall to be consistent in your logic.

---

I feel like you don't understand the difference between being a buyer and being a seller.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pelicanchamp

Getting all of that plus a lakers 2019 1st and Rondo with a HUGE chip on his shoulder would be very interesting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Rondo is in an expiring. We'd buy him out because we want to be bad. Lakers 2019 1st with them with AD and LBJ is useless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

I think you only see it that way because you have a bias towards seeing this favorably for the Pels.

Ball has 3 years left, and then he'd be a RFA. By your own logic of us having 18 months of AD still on a deal being to our advantage, it means it doesn't matter at all what LaVar wants because we'd have Ball's rights for twice as long plus his restricted rights.

I just want yall to be consistent in your logic.

---

and by literally every thing you post you think we should take the Lakers deal why? sorry you nor anyone else should be cool with another aminu Gordon and kamen picture where non of them wanted to be here especially Gordon but hey we should take what we can get since you're a scared fan and don't think we can get what we should lol you're living in the old laker days where they actually had assets not the now where they don't

Sent from my SM-S903VL using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pelicanchamp

Seriously?

Starting 5

Rondo, Jrue, Warren, Kuzma, Ayton

Depth: Hart, Niko, Elfrid, Okafor, Jackson etc

We’d get starting SF Warren, Starting big man young talent Ayton, Kuzma and Hart all for long term. All good contracts. PLUS we’d get a leader in Rondo. Re-sign Niko and Rondo and we’d be doing ok I think.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

That is mind numbingly nauseating!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

Rondo is in an expiring. We'd buy him out because we want to be bad. Lakers 2019 1st with them with AD and LBJ is useless.

---

Any trade involving Phoenix, I want their first because it's the best asset either LA or Phoenix have. If, for some reason, Phoenix was willing to give it up, why would we deal with LA at all when we could just get Phoenix's first, Ayton, Warren, etc, which are better assets than anything LA can give? Why would Phoenix give up assets to facilitate LA getting better when they could just try and pair AD with Booker and fast-forward their rebuild? There is literally no good reason for Phoenix to help LA here.

Ayton, Warren PHX 2019 1st for AD


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

I feel like you don't understand the difference between being a buyer and being a seller.

---

that's funny. being buyer vs being seller is irrelevant to how you value the asset. In either case, you have to agree on the value of all the assets. If AD not wanting to be somewhere isn't reason to devalue him as an asset, then Ball not wanting to be somewhere isn't a reason to devalue him as an asset. You have to apply the same logic to evaluating the asset. Whether you're buying or selling has nothing to with the logic around your evaluation of the player. If AD's wishes should be disregarded because he's under contract for another year, then Ball's wishes should be disregarded because his control over where he wants to be is even more restricted.

Buyer vs Seller is irrelevant. But, hey it sounds nice.

I’m gonna barf lmao. Nothing sticks. Let’s just hope we hold tight and tank and get the best offer we can in summer. We shouldn’t make a move but if we do I want young star level players and picks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

that's funny. being buyer vs being seller is irrelevant to how you value the asset. In either case, you have to agree on the value of all the assets. If AD not wanting to be somewhere isn't reason to devalue him as an asset, then Ball not wanting to be somewhere isn't a reason to devalue him as an asset. You have to apply the same logic to evaluating the asset. Whether you're buying or selling has nothing to with the logic around your evaluation of the player. If AD's wishes should be disregarded because he's under contract for another year, then Ball's wishes should be disregarded because his control over where he wants to be is even more restricted.

Buyer vs Seller is irrelevant. But, hey it sounds nice.

---

I explained the risk vs reward aspect to you twice. Come on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

that's funny. being buyer vs being seller is irrelevant to how you value the asset. In either case, you have to agree on the value of all the assets. If AD not wanting to be somewhere isn't reason to devalue him as an asset, then Ball not wanting to be somewhere isn't a reason to devalue him as an asset. You have to apply the same logic to evaluating the asset. Whether you're buying or selling has nothing to with the logic around your evaluation of the player. If AD's wishes should be disregarded because he's under contract for another year, then Ball's wishes should be disregarded because his control over where he wants to be is even more restricted.

Buyer vs Seller is irrelevant. But, hey it sounds nice.

---

Oh please guy who literally knows nothing tell all of us who knw more then you how everything works lol please I beg you :)

Sent from my SM-S903VL using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

that's funny. being buyer vs being seller is irrelevant to how you value the asset. In either case, you have to agree on the value of all the assets. If AD not wanting to be somewhere isn't reason to devalue him as an asset, then Ball not wanting to be somewhere isn't a reason to devalue him as an asset. You have to apply the same logic to evaluating the asset. Whether you're buying or selling has nothing to with the logic around your evaluation of the player. If AD's wishes should be disregarded because he's under contract for another year, then Ball's wishes should be disregarded because his control over where he wants to be is even more restricted.

Buyer vs Seller is irrelevant. But, hey it sounds nice.

---

Um...

I don't even know how to respond to this. You are literally saying being a buyer or seller is irrelevant. That's a huge difference!

We have something other teams want.

Other teams are trying to convince us to take their stuff to get what they want.

How is this not clear that LaVar is far more damaging to the Lakers trade value than AD's dad to his?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bahmamamba

and by literally every thing you post you think we should take the Lakers deal why? sorry you nor anyone else should be cool with another aminu Gordon and kamen picture where non of them wanted to be here especially Gordon but hey we should take what we can get since you're a scared fan and don't think we can get what we should lol you're living in the old laker days where they actually had assets not the now where they don't

Sent from my SM-S903VL using Tapatalk

---

I've said numerous times I rank them Celtics deal, Knicks deal, then Lakers deal... assuming (a huge risk) that the best possible offer is what's actually being offered. But I don't hate the Lakers deal, so I guess I'm in the minority here, nor am I convinced the other teams will ultimately offer what we hope they will, nor am I convinced the Pels will take the risk (lots of variables I've thrown out there- Zach Lowe echoed a couple on his podcast today - that could diminish their leverage if they wait) of holding out for Celtics or chance Knicks win lottery.

You guys seem to have absurd levels of certainty around how things will play out and player evaluations. I'm not as certain on Ingram/Ball being a bum, or Brown/Tatum being future stars outside of Celtics system.

I'm a pragmatic guy, which comes across as radical on this message board!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bahmamamba

and by literally every thing you post you think we should take the Lakers deal why? sorry you nor anyone else should be cool with another aminu Gordon and kamen picture where non of them wanted to be here especially Gordon but hey we should take what we can get since you're a scared fan and don't think we can get what we should lol you're living in the old laker days where they actually had assets not the now where they don't

Sent from my SM-S903VL using Tapatalk

---

I do not want this again!Attachment 6389

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NMThreeMVP

You guys seem to have absurd levels of certainty around how things will play out and player evaluations. I'm not as certain on Ingram/Ball being a bum, or Brown/Tatum being future stars outside of Celtics system.

I'm a pragmatic guy, which comes across as radical on this message board!

---

Nobody has levels of certainty about anything. Everyone has admitted that there's details we can't know yet, if at all, and that things are far from certain. The only person with any certainty right now seems to be you, certain that you're more level headed and sensible than everyone else.

You're not pragmatic, you're being obstinate to the point of ridiculousness.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mythrol

Um...

I don't even know how to respond to this. You are literally saying being a buyer or seller is irrelevant. That's a huge difference!

We have something other teams want.

Other teams are trying to convince us to take their stuff to get what they want.

How is this not clear that LaVar is far more damaging to the Lakers trade value than AD's dad to his?

---

It's irrelevant to the value of the asset.

LaVar's comment about not wanting to be in New Orleans is only more damaging to the Lakers trade value if the Pelicans actually care. Same as AD's dad's comments about Boston. You assume Ainge doesn't care, and Dell/Loomis do.