Discussion in 'NBA Discussion' started by 432J, Dec 7, 2017.
Maybe, but I think Luke has way more pressure on him.
This is definitely true IMO
So a long winded no they haven't been a FA destination.
I believe it is. I think Luke has had a lot of issues that aren't necessarily his fault but I don't think he's a great coach either.
I'll have the conversation you want, but let's be sure it's the conversation you've started.
"Have they been an FA destination?" isn't "They have no appeal as a FA destination." One is retrospective. One is prospective.
I'm just responding the same way you did. I don't mind having a civil conversation.
The question posed was: which team will bear fruit first between Brooklyn and LA?
My answer: LA has an inherent advantage because they'll have money available that Brooklyn doesn't have and because LA's history lends itself to a FA destination. If you want to call that a bias, I guess that's your prerogative, but the Lakers brand is the strongest in basketball. That counts for something and it inherently puts Brooklyn behind. That doesn't mean they can't come out on top, but they're going to start out behind the Lakers in terms of attraction and in terms of finances.
LA probably doesn't have the strongest brand. I guess it depends how you measure that, but as you've suggested New York (Knicks) have a strong brand, too. It's been valued more highly than the Lakers. Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtba...e-nbas-most-valuable-teams-2017/#77fbfc817966
All that said, people aren't exactly flocking to the Knicks or Lakers, so I'm looking elsewhere for advantages. I noted that LA has the advantage in the upcoming offseason and that Brooklyn would have cap in the next season (and probably the one after that). So, I don't know which will bear fruit sooner, but it's not at all clear that the Lakers will. That's been my point from the start.
So in 2019 the Nets will have the same situation the Lakers have in 2018.
Which means the Lakers will start in a position of strength over the Nets.
I'm glad we can agree.
I think what sets the Lakers apart is the PG talks of wanting to join LA over the summer. Toss in the Lebron rumors and that continues the momentum but really, if PG doesn’t leak that he wants to be a Laker then, no, there would be no evidence to suggest we’re a more preferred destination than the Nets. That changed once PG leaked that he preferred the Lakers. Forget the Lebron talk that has no evidence, and the PG development alone gives us an edge over Brooklyn.
i'd agree if george had stuck to his guns and forced a trade to la or bust. when he indicated he'd accept deals elsewhere, it was time to stop banking on him in FA. thus, i'm not sure you can put it as a point in the ledger, even though it was encouraging to have a player name the lakers as a preferred destination again. doesn't matter if you don't get the deal done.
my whole point here is that the lakers are moving talent to get cap space and bkn is sacrificing cap space in an effort to get talent. the teams are in similar spots. which method will work?
I don’t think it’s fair to say George didn’t stick to his guns. He didn’t have a no trade clause. OKC took a gamble and of course George has said the right things because, why piss off ALL of your new fan base? Nothing George has said convinced me that he’ll stay and their play hasn’t helped the cause.
I don’t claim to understand your bluster.
I wouldn't expect you to.
I agree with both of you. I think @wallangong is right to use George as the example: the Lakers are still a team players are interested in playing for. I've yet to see a big FA really push to get to Brooklyn. However, are we competitive enough to draw interest this summer remains to be seen. The key will be having enough space to add two max deals which the FO is confident they'll be able to do (they're not quite there yet).
Which brings me back to my original point: the Lakers have the ability to be attractive now while the Nets will have to wait at least a year. They won't have the means to attract more than one big FA this summer, they've never really shown tremendous FA appeal, and they don't have the name power that the Lakers do. They're inherently in a worse position for this question. They could still "win" by attracting a big name this summer while the Lakers are stuck giving Lopez an extension, but that'd mean they beat the odds to get there.
see...i think you're assuming FA is the only path to relevance. my point is that maybe nj keeps eating salary in order to take shots at reclamation projects. there's a chance they hit on that strategy sooner than the lakers hit on luring a top notch FA.
I think FA is the only way for either team to achieve relevance in a relevant time frame. That's why I'm still pretty focused on this 2018 plan because the alternative may work, but it'll take years for us to get there.
I definitely agree that their strategy is a good one for where they're at though. It's better than what they had before which was no plan at all. I think Russell/Okafor is a cool start, but I think they'll take a while to get anywhere and even when that happens, how good will they be? Good enough to compete with the other talented young teams? Maybe, maybe not.
i think they're equally plausible strategies. neither is likely to yield success, but they're at least nobler than what philly did.
i'm not sure anyone's "ahead" right now, though. if you don't win the lotto, it's a long slog to relevance.
I just disagree on the last point. Otherwise I think we're on the same page.
Happy for you, Jah