| . |
 |
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.
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.Originally Posted by Mythrol
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.
Basketball.
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
Lakers adding 4th pick on draft definitely makes it more appealing. I don’t mind stripping Toronto’s team.
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
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.
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.
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.
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
Last edited by Taker597; 06-05-2019 at 09:38 AM.
Yeah. I mean you can’t say no to that and the Lakers 4th pick added makes it very appealing now.
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.
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
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!
Last edited by NMThreeMVP; 06-05-2019 at 10:30 AM.
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.
Last edited by Taker597; 06-05-2019 at 10:35 AM.
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.
Last edited by msusousaphone; 06-05-2019 at 10:45 AM.
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.
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
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.
There are currently 31 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 31 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote