Discussion in 'Lakers Discussion' started by BangBoomPow, Jun 3, 2021.
That means if we got CP3, we wouldn't get AD.
Great points! It ultimately came down to a pretty egregious tampering job on our part and the historic fines/penalties that would’ve followed, which made us back off. And we could have still gotten away with it if we were patient. But JB was upset we were getting penalized unfairly. At least Stern was willing to take the fall!
it's a fair point, but i remember folks at the time being concerned that a star-less franchise was worth less than one with cp.
tbh, buying a franchise is a long-term investment, so the current roster should probably have very limited impact on the purchase price.
also, you couldn't have been guaranteed you're getting AD unless you're heavy into the conspiracy stuff, which i'm not.
With the haul that the Nets are trying to get for KD, it kind of made me reminisce and look back at what the Lakers had to give up for AD 3 years ago. In hindsight, New Orleans did incredibly well in the trade. It was:
Brandon Ingram, Lonzo Ball, Josh Hart, 3 first round picks and 2 pick swaps. One of the first round picks given was the #4 overall pick in the 2019 draft. The Pelicans ultimately traded away that pick to the Hawks, who used it on DeAndre Hunter. However, I remember there was chatter that if the Lakers were able to keep #4 that they would have used it on Darius Garland (Klutch client lol).
Hindsight is 20/20 but New Orleans didn’t even have a lot of leverage because AD was in the last year of his contract, if they had ended up keeping #4 and used it on Garland there could be a legitimate argument they won the trade…. Especially with AD missing over 40 games the past 2 seasons.
Maybe. There could be "An Officer And A Gentleman" moment in there like Louis Gossett Jr and Richard Gere. Pop breaking down Russ. Contract year you know.
AD was 26. Not even dead-center prime (generally considered to be 27). And up until that point AD had one year where he missed 26 games. Until then he averaged around 70 games per season. Lakers were probably looking at 8-9 fruitful years (and may still be).
KD is 34 before the season begins. Coming off 2 shortened years. No comparison. Any team would take the younger AD at that time. It's a crapshoot at this point whether the guy even plays another full season. And at best he has a couple of seasons.
Just a bit of trivia, NO burned away that #4 pick for AD. They traded to Atlanta for the 8, 17 and 35 picks which all turned out to be garbage. Atlanta took D'Andre Hunter with the #4 who's turned out fine. We could use the guy in fact. Good size and 3&D.
Stein said that the Lakers may potentially engage the Knicks in a deal for Julius Randle if the Knicks successfully trade for Utah Jazz star Donovan Mitchell. Stein added that the Lakers would not mind taking on the long-term money that Randle is owed.
– via Darryn Albert @ Larry Brown Sports
Oh hell to the naw.
I highly doubt this. Maybe put out there by our FO to accelerate dealings with BRK. I doubt BRK buys this smoke screen ftm. Sounds like complete malarky, we need stretch and/or big around AD, wtf do we want Randle for?
Watch the Knicks deny it.
as the trade recedes, it gets harder to judge. lonzo ball was an absolute bust as a trade piece, as he got hurt and then just walked. like he was never there.
ingram's been good, but nowhere near AD good, and he makes a similar salary now.
the #4 pick was a high value, but they didn't get any value out of it, really, so how do you judge it?
hart (and other stuff) was traded for mccollum? is that part of the trade figuring? if mccollum suddenly gets old next year (happens to small scoring guards in a hurry), is that now a negative?
anyway, i contend that when you trade a superstar in his prime away, you lose. the question is just how badly you lose.
i know there's no way i want to undo that trade. again, being thrilled about finishing 9th is worse than being pissed about finishing 11th.
it's funny, i was on the randle train back at the deadline and even into pre-FA. but we signed a couple useful vet min centers, and it's less appealing to me now, which sounds ridiculous as i type it.
i'm now in love with my conley idea and shan't be swayed until i decide that it, too, is silly.
He's an ill-fit this year, but if you're acquiring someone on a 4 year deal you have to look past the one year minimum signings. I prefer the Nets, Pacers, and Jazz options BUT I wouldn't be completely against it. Regardless of fit, Randle is a better impact player and another case of us able to buy low. A Knicks deal is all about what we're giving up and what else they're giving us. Randle doesn't address any roster need so the rest of the package has to address that -- wings, shooting, D, roster depth with NBA rotation level players and a replacement guard.
I would do this deal: Russ, THT, one 1st for Randle, Fournier, Cam, and Rose.
I’ll play along. What if we did this….
Knicks get Donovan Mitchell, Rudy Gay
Utah gets Westbrook, THT, Cam Reddish, multiple picks from the Knicks, Lakers 2027 pick
Lakers get Randle, Mike Conley, Jordan Clarkson
I think players like Conley and Clarkson would fit in fine with the Lakers, and Randle might actually fit with AD playing center but it’s a bit awkward how you do this. AD doesn’t want to be known as a starting center, so maybe you say Randle starts at center but when they are on the court it’s interchangeable.
It’s intriguing but I’m not sure if this team wins a championship either.
I think you have to get a shooter back, either Fournier or Bogdanovic if you're going to hamper the shooting you already don't have by adding Randle into the fold. But in general, I like to notion of getting in on the 3 team deal.
if you sign Randle, you probably need to trade AD since neither can effectively play long minutes at center
Sure, we can watch Randle clank 3's.
AD clanks 3's. And midrange shots.
But he plays a lot more games too, and nobody calls the man soft.
So there's that.
He did last year, unfortunately.
It will be fun watching Randle and AD clank shots together.
Damn. He's a C bag but still have a ton of respect for that man.
Even at 88, this hurts. He was such an icon.