LABron James Discussion: Triple Triple Doubles

I think the NY deal is sitting under the tree with a bow on it. I think there's a SA deal available (I'm lower on that one than most). I think there is a deal with the Hornets to be had (probably waiting for a bigger package to be available). And in two weeks, there's an Orlando deal readily available. I haven't gotten the sense that we're serious about any of those avenues. Waiting. Waiting. And more waiting. The inaction is going to do more harm until it doesn't matter anymore. This path played a part in AD's injury and it's going to get Bron hurt too, if we continue to be this reckless and stupid when it comes to physical limitations.

 

14-21

best leader of all time

 

i've been over tj many times already. he's played like 8 games this year. and yeah, not a defender. i don't think he changes much for us at all this year. and he's definitely not the guy everyone claims we needed. finally, we don't know that we didn't reach out and that he didn't take the bkn offer. remember when he signed, kd had demanded a trade.

anyway, the fact that the same guy (who again, has played very few games this year) is brought up as the lone exemplar of the player we were supposed to get kind of supports my point that there wasn't a supply of these players.

i've seen this take a lot, too, and i'm not positive that's true, either. i think we went for the best talent available for the money we had, which was almost none. honestly, our FA was pretty great, all things considered. bryant, brown, and JTA are all great vet min signings, and until we neutered him, lonnie was the league's best mini mle signing. the problem wasn't our FA execution, it was the fact that we needed those guys to be our 3rd/4th/5th guys instead of our 8th/9th/10th guys like most good teams who are in the luxury tax use FA. getting mad about it is like sending your kid to the store with 3 bucks and wondering why you're not having steak for dinner.

me too. i'll actually be very surprised if we do nothing at all. i just disagree that it had to happen by now if it were going to happen.

i think so, too, but i don't know so.

i've said i'd be happy with fournier/reddish for bev/nunn/jones with zero picks outgoing (i'd probably ask for a 1st from them and offer to send one of our seconds this year for it).

and again, just to play devil's advocate--say we make that deal, and then someone better comes loose later. am i going to be on this forum listening to nine months of whining about how we traded our only non-russ chips for two guys who are routine dnp-cds for a borderline playoff team in the east?

what is it, though? again, i've outlined deals i'd do with SA (russ and two 2nds for mcdermott/richardson, russ and a 1st for those two and poeltl), but i haven't seen one floated that we turned down. guessing SA's after all of our goodies, just like everyone else.

once again, i agree, and once again these are all just our thoughts. we do not know what's been offered and by whom and when. we just know we've been interested in rozier for some time, that we've been reluctant to take on hayward, etc. and that's if you even believe those reports, as a lot of them are phrased as "sources from other places speculate that..."

they definitely want a 1st for bamba. you want to do that? i'd consider it, but it's a pretty big ask for a flameout lotto pick. also, can't happen for two weeks, as you said.

why would we get the sense that the team is serious about these avenues? do you want rob to go on tv and say who he's talking to about what?

the simplest and most probable answer is that the deals we're talking about have not been available, no matter how much we'd like them to be. the bad/tanking teams can afford to shop around, so if we make a deal now, it's likely to be a bad one for us. this is why i've been insistent on no deals involving picks until the deadline gets close. that's when people get serious and start looking toward next year. so that's when a russ deal could happen.

again, i'm down with doing the ny deal now for reasons you've stated. but even then i understand that that could blow up in our face. what if bogdanovic goes for expirings and 2 2nds in february, for example? cj mccollum went for hart, a 1st and two 2nds last february and changed NO completely.

clips got powell and covington for expirings on february 4th.

i'd hate to miss out on deals like that so that we could have an extra month of two guys who don't play for the knicks.

 

I think the preseason analysis of prepping for a Russ trade discounts the Bev's trade. They traded two guys with length. While both were flawed I thought Stan fit better than Gabriel and he actually impacted wins for yet another small PG type.

And even after that you get Schroeder for the same amount of money I believe as Warren.

 

right, but you're still acting as though you buy vet mins at the store when they have a choice in their destination.

i forgot to add schroder to the list of good vet min pickups, btw. he's outperforming his contract. our problem is that we have to rely on vet mins, not that we don't choose them well.

 

Great game last night, he was engaged on both nights and dominated. Need good body language and leadership like last night more often.

As far as making moves

1) Are Lebron/AD a title contending duo when healthy?

2) Can Lebron/AD stay healthy enough to get into playoffs?

If the FO genuinely think the answer is no to any of those questions then staying pat and not giving up picks is the best move. They may publicly say otherwise and that’s what they should do and play their cards close to their chest.

If there’s picks or young players or trade chips coming back then the Russ expiring contract can be moved otherwise they got to hang on to him and let him expire.

Actions speak louder than words and FO staying put says a lot

 

Maybe but if I had to pick I would choose Stan over Bev's, Schroeder, Brown, Gabriel. This is backed up by his advancement stats which showed he was a neutral player while basically else except Lebron, AD, Reaves and Monk are below replacement levels dudes.

Again I'm not oversells him he's a average NBA player at best but on the Lakers he was a great fit. And it goes back to the point that the Lakers off-season moves were concrete about fit but in the context of a post Russ trade

 

The worst possible outcome would be if Lebron gets injured and doesn’t get the scoring record this year.

they would have to do this dance all over again next year

passing Kareem’s record can’t come soon enough

 

The wings and bigs were probably targets either way. But I don't think there's any chance we get Bev AND sign Dennis unless we know we're moving Russ. Backcourt was way to crowded for even a bad GM not to be able to count on his fingers how many repetitive small guards he has. Also think he signs at least one shooter and doesn't rely on Uber Ryan to be our shooting savior during one of the worst Lakers shooting slumps in the history of the team. I think he had the Indy deal locked and the Buss bros and Harris or Kurt said no.

It doesn't have to, but every day that goes by and this roster is the same you are playing Russian roulette with 6 bullets in the chamber. I'll go into more detail in the following responses as to why. In short: health, Bron deserves better (other factors set aside), a rookie coach should be set up to success and protected from himself, chances in a playoff race that's as wide open as I can recall (maybe since 05?).

There will always been missed opportunity and a chase of the chance at something better. They can push that line to the 15th then to the deadline and then to the summer. All deals and negotiations are not handled the same, so even if the Pistons send Bogdanovic to the Mavs for free that doesn't mean that's what he'd cost us. You can only push the chips on on the hand you've got. I'll gladly take Knicks "scraps" for our scraps. Thibs isn't for everyone. Our assets should be DNPs because they can't play, their assets just don't fit what they're trying to do there.

Cam is a gamble but the talent and physical profile is there. He just turned 23 and Handy is the best player development coach in the game. That's a no brainer buy low for me. I don't actively watch Hawks games but probably see more of their games than any team that's not the Lakers since they're the local team. I'm not sure whether that makes me biased or smarter than the out of market fan. In the playoffs, especially game 6 vs the Bucks... the kid has the "it" factor.

Fournier might not be the best shooter on the market, but he has the reputation and gravity of one. One thing that Ham showed us during Ryan's stint is that he has a lot of plays in his playbook for shooters and currently those are buried in a folder at the bottom of his desk collecting dust cause we do not have any players who fit that bill.

So, sure a better deal might pass us by. But to me, this is a good deal and successfully addresses a lot of our needs -- bigger wings, shooter, rotation caliber depth, D potential with Cam, balanced rotations, no more Pat Bev, etc. With our available salaries to trade, I don't know of a potential trade out there that would have me up in arms if we did this one and missed out on that one. With such an awful balance to this roster, I feel I know the other team's rosters better than fans of those teams. Scouring them up and down and dreaming of getting some help is the only way I've been able to stomach some of these games especially ones you have Pat Bev playing 36 minutes.

Teams we need to look at if we want to deal now are the 5 in the race for the #1 pick. Theoretically, waiting hurts them and they're less likely to have a higher price now vs in a month. Spurs (12 wins), Rockets (10), Orlando (13), Hornets (10), Pistons (9). Pistons are going to wait for the deadline biding war. ORL is probably waiting till the 15th. Ball returning and clarity with Bridges should expedite things with the Hornets. Spurs need to deal today. McDermott and Richardson are both playing 20 mpg and are double digit scorers. We've been linked to all three of their available guys. I think they wait to move Poeltl and let the bids come in for him. I worry about a Pop tax there but I think they would come off of Dougie and J-Rich right now.

My problem with any excuses in delaying a Hornets deal is the number of tradeable assets they have. Just throw a dart. I don't think we will take Hayward at this point but with Rozier, Washington, Plumlee, and Oubre all out there... they can't figure something out? Hornets need to lose and now that Ball is back they are going to start winning a few accidentally. MJ wants to save money and stay in play for Wembanyama. Like I said above, maybe they were waiting on clarity on Ball's injury and Bridges situation but that's taking shape now. So if they're an option, chop chop. Dealing with them seems like a layup between MJ and Jeanie being business partners and our history with Mitch.

 

Latest report was they wanted a first but the value today is a couple seconds. If you can get him and Ross for three seconds or two seconds and a heavily protected first that we're all but guaranteed converts to a 2nd, I like that deal. I said in another thread that this and the Knicks deals are my favorite small deals. AD's status determines which one I prefer. Obviously the longer AD is out, the more front court help we'll need.

Mo's numbers look pretty good when he's getting minutes. I like a Mo + Ross deal because it gives us more playable size up front and on the wing. Mo gives us insurance when Bryant leaves this summer. When AD comes back, I would start Bryant next to AD and then have Mo as the backup. Ham can continue to run some of the same drop coverage with Mo as the backup when AD sits thanks to his 7-10 wingspan. Ross gives some wing size with a little 3&D boost. Like the Knicks, he's not in their plans and they have a zillion big young guys with size they're trying to play there.

There's enough local and national coverage where we get a general idea of the thought process of the front office. Priority one is another pie in the sky star. Priority two is an ideal small deal. I don't think that exists and kicking the can will risk this getting pushed out until the summer.

Even if the deals aren't available yet, the December ones before the magical date and the Jan 15th ones before then, doesn't mean you can't talk to those teams about those deals. Silver won't fine Rob. You can have the framework banged out so at 12:01 you can get it done.

I think the five teams in the tank mix do need to make moves sooner than later. I think sitting on their assets could cost them a generational talent. Is winning three extra games and sitting on Rozier, Richardson, Bogdanovic, Reddish, Bamba worth that risk? I don't think you can rationalize that as a GM.

As far as us waiting out a better deal, for what? I don't see anything that could shake loose. If it does, is it worth losing Bron for an extended stretch? Like I said with what AD was doing, it's not sustainable. Guess what. He got hurt. What Bron is doing isn't sustainable either. Does Rob want to f*** around and find out? Not one single player we've been linked to is a difference maker like to that degree where they alone lighten Bron's load, but they can unlock positive lineups that allow us to not get our a**** handed to us when Bron sits. We're what? A +7 with Bron on the floor and after that the rails come off.

 

ooh...at the risk of breaking my supposed rob pelinka defender role, i think you're giving him too much credit here. but again, we'll probably never know that.

again, i get it. there's a line between market value and value to me. i just ask that fans understand that if and when we make a deal and it's time to monday morning quarterback it, which is a specialty here.

i've definitely seen the insane talent flashes from cam. but this is now two teams who have spent a 1st on him and decided they shouldn't have. that's information one must take into account, and again, anthony irwin is going to cram that down your internet throat when <insert other player who was traded here> excels.

the other thing we saw is that you can't play him defensively. and fournier is a much more versatile and skilled offensive player than ryan, which is why i'd do the ny deal, but again, there's a reason three teams have played hot potato with his contract now.

i do russ for mcdermott/richardson yesterday and four months ago. i think the spurs are asking for BOTH firsts to do it, whereas i think we should offer zero firsts. again, we don't know.

we're in circles now, as again i agree and have agreed for months that many deals with the hornets make sense for both sides. but i represent neither side in any official capacity. as we've seen in other situations, our ideas don't always match those of the decision makers. indy's owner wanted to see his team before making a choice even though we all (incorrectly) knew they'd suck and were going nowhere. utah was going to sell off all its roster chopshop style...until they...inexplicably didn't (seriously, if you want to lose, you have to move conley--i think they thought he'd just get hurt or something). maybe the hornets see rozier as part of their rebuild, is my general point. we don't see why that makes sense, but we're just folks on the interwebs with no stake other than emotions.

 

there really hasn’t been a lot of fan fare on it.

 

This FO is going to continually put out fake information about making trades just to keep y’all interested while all the while having no intentions of doing a thing.

 

missed these parts:

i'd do this one for 2 2nds, for sure. again, not sure that's currently on the table. my feeling is that these deals have been discussed, and orlando's like, "give me a first and it's done today", knowing, as you said, that that's above market value. the way to get it done sooner is to overpay.

i know people have jumped on this narrative, but even the reports of this are very carefully worded. to me, the message is "unless it's damian lillard, don't expect to get both of our future firsts". my opinion is that beal's name is there because it's been there for years alongside lillard, not because it's the deal we're pining for or something. teams are trying to get two firsts for doug mcdermott, and our response is...that's doug mcdermott, a******.

as we know based on many years of nba trade history, these talks probably are ongoing, and they're just not being reported because none of the parties want them to be reported. it's not like shams is huddling in the garbage outside rob's office. he gets texts from his contacts when his contacts need a mouthpiece. or he calls his contacts and asks for speculation when he's heard nothing for a while. hence stein's "other front office sources think the lakers are likely to do x...". btw, still can't believe everyone got all upset about rival front office's ideas about what our plans might be. that's nuts.

they're all losing just fine and at a similar rate. with the flattened odds, it doesn't matter much. the bottom three records all have the same odds for #1 overall, and it doesn't drop of substantially until after 5. conveniently, there are 5 tanking squads this year (mabe six, i guess). still can't believe utah decided to compete, tbh.

the kinds of deals we've been talking about that could potentially happen right now will not save lebron from having to carry things. again, these are guys not playing for other teams that aren't very good. it's not like fournier or ross shows up and now we're up 20 and lebron gets to sit the 4th or something.

 

like that he didn't start jacking threes at the end with the 10 point lead. he kept attacking the rim, and it's why we didn't suffer another embarrassing loss, imo.

 

Luckily Brown is hitting open 3's - Bryant and Brown really helping him otherwise he's doing this while being handcuffed by Ham.
I would love for him just once go with just one of the midgets and then run Reaves, Brown, and Bryant with Lebron. That Lebron/REaves PnR was smooth as butter and they were spamming it till I actually have no clue why Ham stopped it