Jump to content

2019 NBA Offseason Thread -- Trades, Free Agents, Firings, Retirements, Etc


Patrick Bateman

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

It's not so much that.  Although the team gets some cap help, Al getting more guaranteed money at age 33 is the thing here.

Tomorrow isn't promised to anyone.  Al could have a torn Achilles this season, and no one would offer him even close to what he could be getting today.

Now, if Al were 28, then sure...it's a questionable move on his part.  But he's not, and this probably will be his last big payday as a professional.  

 

Oh, I know.  That is what I said to start.   Tejas tried to make into an altruistic move

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, ztejas said:

Anyone who thinks LA won that trade is fucking delusional. If they aren't a top 4 team this season and don't win a title with LeBron/AD at somepoint it has a decent chance at being one of the worst trades in NBA history. 

LeBron isn't getting any younger. He's 34. You saw what just happened to Durant. LA is a season-ending LeBron or AD injury away from being completely irrelevant again and having zero practical assets to try and rebuild. 

Yeah, LeBron will be 35 by the end of 2019 (DOB Dec 30, 1984).  KD is about to be 31 (DOB Sept 29, 1988).

Lakers better win a Championship in next couple years or Laker fans will feel like Viking fans did after giving away so much in the Herschel Walker trade....

Edited by LTtxfan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing that is so baffling about the AD trade isn't particularly what the Lakers gave up for a transcendent player entering his prime, those deals almost always end up favoring the team getting the star. Historically, the only one I can think of that didn't work out was Carmelo and that's because he sucks plus the Knicks completely gutted themselves for him. The amazing thing is that the Lakers were bidding entirely against themselves. Boston wasn't offering shit. Nobody else was coming close to the package of Hart, Ball, Ingram and #4 alone, disregarding all the other picks and ridiculous swaps. I understand the pressure the Lakers are under to land a star to play with Lebron, but NO was backed up into a much worse corner. AD demanded a trade and wouldn't re-sign anywhere but LA. They were the only game in town and they decided to pay $20 for something they could have bought for $4. Pelinka is a clown. He got played by Rich Paul. He got played by David Griffin. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, ztejas said:

Anyone who thinks LA won that trade is fucking delusional. If they aren't a top 4 team this season and don't win a title with LeBron/AD at somepoint it has a decent chance at being one of the worst trades in NBA history. 

LeBron isn't getting any younger. He's 34. You saw what just happened to Durant. LA is a season-ending LeBron or AD injury away from being completely irrelevant again and having zero practical assets to try and rebuild. 

I completely disagree.  Of Ball, Ingram, and Hart, there may be ONE All-Star game in their collective futures.  Maybe.  What comes of the various picks in the future is anyone's guess.  But neither Ball nor Ingram appears to have the killer instinct that takes talented players and makes them great.  And Hart just doesn't have the talent.  AD is a transformational player. Those are VERY rare.  Sticking with what we had was never going to take us to a championship.  First, we would not have been able to attract a tier 1 FA to play with this team.  And probably would have ended up paying tier 1 money to a tier 2 player, further cementing our mediocrity.  With this move, we have moved into a very legitimate shot at the title, which is what every team is shooting for.  Of course it is assuming we can fill in the rest of the roster with average to above average players.  But if we can get a couple of shooters and a couple key defenders, we don't need another AS player.  In fact, historically, the 3rd star in a LeBron dominated team tends to get marginalized (Bosh/Love).  I think two tier 1+ players and a good supporting cast puts us in position to contend, which we would NEVER be able to do without this deal.  Standing pat guarantees we will not win.  Was it a steep price?  Yes.  But you are going to land a player of AD's caliber without paying through the teeth.  But Being a perennial 1st or 2nd round ouster team is not what the Lakers are about.  The Lakers are about championships.  And this gives us a shot at it.  

So again, WHY would we not? 

And as to injuries, any team who loses one of their top 2 players to injury probably kills their chances at a title, so you can't worry about that.  That's life.

Edited by Sbbruin
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The kneejerking to call this a bad deal is wild.     It's way too early to make that call.   Right now LA got BY FAR the best piece in the trade.  People saying anything more are either wildly speculating or just hoping that it blows up on the Lakers.   Picks mean nothing without knowing where they will fall and how the team that has them can evaluate talent.

 

Take this trade somewhat similar trade:

November 17, 1994: Traded by the Golden State Warriors to the Washington Bullets for Tom Gugliotta, a 1996 1st round draft pick (Todd Fuller was later selected), a 1998 1st round draft pick (Vince Carter was later selected) and a 2000 1st round draft pick (Chris Mihm was later selected).

 

GSW got a player who was a borderline AS at the time and 3 firsts.   They basically ended up with Antawn Jamison out of the deal.

 

The known quantity is the winner of the trade.  AD is a known quantity.  The thought that the Lakers will fall off the face of the Earth when LBJ retires is silly.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think LA didn't handle this as well as they should have, but the reality is that they have a legitimate shot at contending for a title in the next couple of years, while New Orleans probably got as good a haul as they dared to dream of. A win-win is not off the table.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Mitch Cumsteen said:

The thing that is so baffling about the AD trade isn't particularly what the Lakers gave up for a transcendent player entering his prime, those deals almost always end up favoring the team getting the star. Historically, the only one I can think of that didn't work out was Carmelo and that's because he sucks plus the Knicks completely gutted themselves for him. The amazing thing is that the Lakers were bidding entirely against themselves. Boston wasn't offering shit. Nobody else was coming close to the package of Hart, Ball, Ingram and #4 alone, disregarding all the other picks and ridiculous swaps. I understand the pressure the Lakers are under to land a star to play with Lebron, but NO was backed up into a much worse corner. AD demanded a trade and wouldn't re-sign anywhere but LA. They were the only game in town and they decided to pay $20 for something they could have bought for $4. Pelinka is a clown. He got played by Rich Paul. He got played by David Griffin. 

Great point.  It is interesting that a lot of the media is acting like the Lakers did something unbelievably great here.  It kinda feels like the Lakers went to Vegas, placed a bet on #23 at roulette, and just spun the wheel...

giphy.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, LTtxfan said:

Great point.  It is interesting that a lot of the media is acting like the Lakers did something unbelievably great here.  It kinda feels like the Lakers went to Vegas, placed a bet on #23 at roulette, and just spun the wheel...

giphy.gif

 

Actually, I'm pretty sure it was 22.

Julie-Hagerty-Lost-in-America.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Sbbruin said:

I completely disagree.  Of Ball, Ingram, and Hart, there may be ONE All-Star game in their collective futures.  Maybe.  What comes of the various picks in the future is anyone's guess.  But neither Ball nor Ingram appears to have the killer instinct that takes talented players and makes them great.  And Hart just doesn't have the talent.  AD is a transformational player. Those are VERY rare.  Sticking with what we had was never going to take us to a championship.  First, we would not have been able to attract a tier 1 FA to play with this team.  And probably would have ended up paying tier 1 money to a tier 2 player, further cementing our mediocrity.  With this move, we have moved into a very legitimate shot at the title, which is what every team is shooting for.  Of course it is assuming we can fill in the rest of the roster with average to above average players.  But if we can get a couple of shooters and a couple key defenders, we don't need another AS player.  In fact, historically, the 3rd star in a LeBron dominated team tends to get marginalized (Bosh/Love).  I think two tier 1+ players and a good supporting cast puts us in position to contend, which we would NEVER be able to do without this deal.  Standing pat guarantees we will not win.  Was it a steep price?  Yes.  But you are going to land a player of AD's caliber without paying through the teeth.  But Being a perennial 1st or 2nd round ouster team is not what the Lakers are about.  The Lakers are about championships.  And this gives us a shot at it.  

So again, WHY would we not? 

It has little to do with the players. Look at this absurd haul of draft picks they just got for ONE year of a guy that wasn't resigning anyway:

The No. 4 pick in this draft; the Lakers' 2021 pick only if it falls within the top eight, otherwise converting into the Lakers' unprotected 2022 first-round pick; swap rights on first-rounders in 2023; and the Lakers' unprotected first-round pick in 2024, with New Orleans holding the option (at some agreed-upon date) to pass on that 2024 pick in favor of the Lakers' unprotected 2025 selection.

That many first rounders, swaps and options is fucking insane. There is no guarantee the Lakers will be any good past LeBron's decline. They just sucked shit through a straw for 7 seasons.

Then, WHEN you consider that the 2 of the players they got have solid potential - no matter how you are trying to paint it - it seems even nuttier. Lonzo is a plus defender ball handler and passer and just 21 and now has a huge chip on his shoulder. Ingram put these numbers up in 55 games this season and is also just 21:

33.8 7.0 14.0 .497 0.6 1.8 .330 6.4 12.2 .521 .518 3.8 5.6 .675 0.8 4.3 5.1 3.0 0.5 0.6 2.5 2.9 18.3

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What in the world makes you think he isn't re-signing?  The Lakers were the ONLY team he has indicated he WOULD re-sing with.

 

I'm not saying Ball or Ingram aren't good players.  They are. Shit, they better pretty decent for being #2's overall.  But they are #2 overall talent.  And good players are much easier to come by than super-elite players.  I would rather win a championship and suck for 5 years than get bounced in the 2nd round 6 straight years.

Edited by Sbbruin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Sbbruin said:

What in the world makes you think he isn't re-signing?  The Lakers were the ONLY team he has indicated he WOULD re-sing with.

 

I'm not saying Ball or Ingram aren't good players.  They are. Shit, they better pretty decent for being #2's overall.  But they are #2 overall talent.  And good players are much easier to come by than super-elite players.  I would rather win a championship and suck for 5 years than get bounced in the 2nd round 6 straight years.

But if the Lakers implode this yr... AD is a free agent and could leave Lakers July 2020. 😕 

 

Edited by LTtxfan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Sbbruin said:

What in the world makes you think he isn't re-signing?  The Lakers were the ONLY team he has indicated he WOULD re-sing with.

 

I'm not saying Ball or Ingram aren't good players.  They are. Shit, they better pretty decent for being #2's overall.  But they are #2 overall talent.  And good players are much easier to come by than super-elite players.  I would rather win a championship and suck for 5 years than get bounced in the 2nd round 6 straight years.

Wasn't re-signing - not isn't re-signing. As in, he was never re-signing in New Orleans. 

Also New Orleans is probably getting an elite player and is now set for the future. 

Obviously you trade for AD - you can't afford to wait a year. But that many draft picks? They are going to regret that. Promise you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

13 minutes ago, ztejas said:

It has little to do with the players. Look at this absurd haul of draft picks they just got for ONE year of a guy that wasn't resigning anyway:

The No. 4 pick in this draft; the Lakers' 2021 pick only if it falls within the top eight, otherwise converting into the Lakers' unprotected 2022 first-round pick; swap rights on first-rounders in 2023; and the Lakers' unprotected first-round pick in 2024, with New Orleans holding the option (at some agreed-upon date) to pass on that 2024 pick in favor of the Lakers' unprotected 2025 selection.

That many first rounders, swaps and options is fucking insane. There is no guarantee the Lakers will be any good past LeBron's decline. They just sucked shit through a straw for 7 seasons.

Then, WHEN you consider that the 2 of the players they got have solid potential - no matter how you are trying to paint it - it seems even nuttier. Lonzo is a plus defender ball handler and passer and just 21 and now has a huge chip on his shoulder. Ingram put these numbers up in 55 games this season and is also just 21:

33.8 7.0 14.0 .497 0.6 1.8 .330 6.4 12.2 .521 .518 3.8 5.6 .675 0.8 4.3 5.1 3.0 0.5 0.6 2.5 2.9 18.3

 

 

 

Alright, let's break it down.   They get #4 and two more picks during that time.    The swaps mean little as LA should have a better record than NO during that time.

So basically NO gets the Lakers pick in 22 (which barring major injuries will be in the high 20's) and 24 or 25.  LBJ will be gone by 25 but AD will 32 and Lakers will have any other players they draft during that time and a huge amount of cap space when LBJ leaves.     To assume that they will just turn into bottom feeders after LBJ leaves is silly.    So its not like that pick is going to be great.

Edited by d2o
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ztejas said:

Wasn't re-signing - not isn't re-signing. As in, he was never re-signing in New Orleans. 

Also New Orleans is probably getting an elite player and is now set for the future. 

Obviously you trade for AD - you can't afford to wait a year. But that many draft picks? They are going to regret that. Promise you. 

Maybe.  But maybe we can cry into our 17th Larry O'Brien.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, d2o said:

 

 

Alright, let's break it down.   They get #4 and two more picks during that time.    The swaps mean little as LA should have a better record than NO during that time.

So basically NO gets the Lakers pick in 21 (which barring major injuries will be in the high 20's) and 24 or 25.  LBJ will be gone by 25 but AD will 32 and Lakers will have any other players they draft during that time and a huge amount of cap space when LBJ leaves.     To assume that they will just turn into bottom feeders after LBJ leaves is silly.    

Well, they have been pretty shit for almost a decade under the current ownership, so...

The thing is, with the flexibility and protections allotted to New Orleans, LA doesn't have to turn to shit for them to benefit. They just need to have a random bad year--say LeBron decides he wants to retire in Cleveland, and AD gets hurt--here or there, and New Orleans can jump in. Now, I can't see those picks turning into a bunch of Top 5 selections, but they do have real value, be it holding onto them or in trades.

The Lakers don't--and shouldn't--care because they got a player they had to have. But I'm not sure how New Orleans could have done any better with only one serious bidder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, aggie08 said:

 

The Lakers don't--and shouldn't--care because they got a player they had to have. But I'm not sure how New Orleans could have done any better with only one serious bidder.

People keep focusing on this one-bidder concept.  There were no doubt other bidders.  But more importantly, NO just wasn't going to do the deal unless they were overwhelmed, plain and simple.  There could have been NO other bidders, but unless the Lakers godfathered them, it wasn't happening.  No team in this league is interested in helping the Lakers regain their place as the crown jewel of the NBA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, aggie08 said:

Well, they have been pretty shit for almost a decade under the current ownership, so...

The thing is, with the flexibility and protections allotted to New Orleans, LA doesn't have to turn to shit for them to benefit. They just need to have a random bad year--say LeBron decides he wants to retire in Cleveland, and AD gets hurt--here or there, and New Orleans can jump in. Now, I can't see those picks turning into a bunch of Top 5 selections, but they do have real value, be it holding onto them or in trades.

The Lakers don't--and shouldn't--care because they got a player they had to have. But I'm not sure how New Orleans could have done any better with only one serious bidder.

They never had a player near AD during that time.   Kobe was a shell after the Achilles injury.

That is a fine assessment.   It could turn into a single top 5 pick........maybe.   And then another pick that is probably in the 20s.    Should any of those maybes be a reason you don't get a definite top 5 player right now?

Edited by d2o
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Sbbruin said:

People keep focusing on this one-bidder concept.  There were no doubt other bidders.  But more importantly, NO just wasn't going to do the deal unless they were overwhelmed, plain and simple.  There could have been NO other bidders, but unless the Lakers godfathered them, it wasn't happening.  No team in this league is interested in helping the Lakers regain their place as the crown jewel of the NBA.

Its been reported that the Nets, Knicks, Celts and another "mystery" team were in the bidding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ztejas said:

Maybe you can cry when we win our 6th 😉

OK, but honestly, looking objectively at the landscape.  If you had to wager everything you own on which of the two teams will win a championship first, who are you betting on?  And if you say SA, well then this whole conversation is moot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Sbbruin said:

OK, but honestly, looking objectively at the landscape.  If you had to wager everything you own on which of the two teams will win a championship first, who are you betting on?  And if you say SA, well then this whole conversation is moot.

If you don't win one this year with LeBron I might take the Spurs. 

Then again Pop has to retire at somepoint, so if I'm in Vegas yeah probably the Lakers. 

But hey - this is all conjecture - let's just meet in the WCF and we can sort it out properly. 

Edited by ztejas
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Went back and reviewed the entire NO/Laker trade specifics. No mention about the Lakers 2020 Draft picks. Do the Lakers still own their rights to their 2020 1st Rd Draft pick??

If so and the Lakers struggle in the 2019-2020 season, the Lakers could be right back in the NBA lottery next summer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, LTtxfan said:

Went back and reviewed the entire NO/Laker trade specifics. No mention about the Lakers 2020 Draft picks. Do the Lakers still own their rights to their 2020 1st Rd Draft pick??

If so and the Lakers struggle in the 2019-2020 season, the Lakers could be right back in the NBA lottery next summer.

hhahahahahahahahahhahahahaahhahahahahahaha (barring major injury of course)

 

They cannot trade picks in back to back yrs so they have at least one first in 2020.  It could be someone else's but they should have one.

Edited by d2o
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, LTtxfan said:

Went back and reviewed the entire NO/Laker trade specifics. No mention about the Lakers 2020 Draft picks. Do the Lakers still own their rights to their 2020 1st Rd Draft pick??

If so and the Lakers struggle in the 2019-2020 season, the Lakers could be right back in the NBA lottery next summer.

This was the year that they should be the strongest though. When they re-sign Davis they'll be losing a lot of the cap room that's available now (or July 6th or whenever the trade goes through). From the Pelicans perspective that makes the most sense

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, d2o said:

hhahahahahahahahahhahahahaahhahahahahahaha (barring major injury of course)

Just spitballin' if Lakers get the injury Bug.  Adding another Top 5 Draft pick in 2020 to a team with LeBron and AD could be HUGE.

May seem funny to you, but when David Robinson got hurt and the Spurs ended up with Tim Duncan it completely changed the NBA's landscape for years to come.....  

5 NBA Championships !!

 

 

Edited by LTtxfan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, angelfacedmongoloid said:

This was the year that they should be the strongest though. When they re-sign Davis they'll be losing a lot of the cap room that's available now (or July 6th or whenever the trade goes through). From the Pelicans perspective that makes the most sense

Oh I get that from the Pelicans perspective... Just interesting to note that if Lakers catch the injury bug this season, the Lakers may still own their 2020 1st Rd Draft Pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, LTtxfan said:

Adding another Top 5 Draft pick in 2020 to a team with LeBron and AD could be HUGE.

May seem funny to you, but when David Robinson got hurt and the Spurs ended up with Tim Duncan it completely changed the NBA's landscape for years to come.....  

5 NBA Championships !!

 

 

Unless LBJ is the one that gets hurt, I cannot see him punting on another season like he did this yr.   Anything is possible but that sounds like a pretty remote possibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, LTtxfan said:

Went back and reviewed the entire NO/Laker trade specifics. No mention about the Lakers 2020 Draft picks. Do the Lakers still own their rights to their 2020 1st Rd Draft pick??

If so and the Lakers struggle in the 2019-2020 season, the Lakers could be right back in the NBA lottery next summer.

Stepien rule. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, d2o said:

The kneejerking to call this a bad deal is wild.     It's way too early to make that call.   Right now LA got BY FAR the best piece in the trade.  People saying anything more are either wildly speculating or just hoping that it blows up on the Lakers.   Picks mean nothing without knowing where they will fall and how the team that has them can evaluate talent.

 

Take this trade somewhat similar trade:

November 17, 1994: Traded by the Golden State Warriors to the Washington Bullets for Tom Gugliotta, a 1996 1st round draft pick (Todd Fuller was later selected), a 1998 1st round draft pick (Vince Carter was later selected) and a 2000 1st round draft pick (Chris Mihm was later selected).

 

GSW got a player who was a borderline AS at the time and 3 firsts.   They basically ended up with Antawn Jamison out of the deal.

 

The known quantity is the winner of the trade.  AD is a known quantity.  The thought that the Lakers will fall off the face of the Earth when LBJ retires is silly.

We haven even hit free agency yet. The instant reactions to everything is hilarious.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether or not you think this trade is good or bad really depends on what you think of AD as a player. If you think he's "transcendental", league MVP type, then the Lakers probably did okay. If not, then the Lakers got fleeced.

I'm in the camp that thinks Davis is an amazing talent who will never rise above all-star/top 10 player tier. But I know that could end up being proven stupid. He just doesn't seem to be in the #1 player on a championship team mold. I think Giannis makes the playoffs if you swapped him in for AD on the Pels roster last year.

Edited by BradInATX
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

Whether or not you think this trade is good or bad really depends on what you think of AD as a player. If you think he's "transcendental", league MVP type, then the Lakers probably did okay. If not, then the Lakers got fleeced.

I'm in the camp that thinks Davis is an amazing talent who will never rise above all-star/top 10 player tier. But I know that could end up being proven stupid. He just doesn't seem to be in the #1 player on a championship team mold. I think Giannis makes the playoffs if you swapped him in for AD on the Pels roster last year.

So he's meditating now as well?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After giving this a bit more thought, I'm pretty sure the Lakers underpaid for the sole reason they got to rid themselves of Lavar Ball in this deal.

There's also this, for those who think Davis isn't transcendental (sic):

NBA career leaders in PER:

Rank Player PER
1. Michael Jordan* 27.91
2. LeBron James 27.59
3. Anthony Davis 27.42
4. Shaquille O'Neal* 26.43
5. David Robinson* 26.18
6. Wilt Chamberlain* 26.13
7. Bob Pettit* 25.35
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LTtxfan said:

Went back and reviewed the entire NO/Laker trade specifics. No mention about the Lakers 2020 Draft picks. Do the Lakers still own their rights to their 2020 1st Rd Draft pick??

If so and the Lakers struggle in the 2019-2020 season, the Lakers could be right back in the NBA lottery next summer.

Yes, they control it, you can't trade consecutive 1st round picks in the same year. You get around that with pick swaps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ztejas said:

Wasn't re-signing - not isn't re-signing. As in, he was never re-signing in New Orleans. 

Also New Orleans is probably getting an elite player and is now set for the future. 

Obviously you trade for AD - you can't afford to wait a year. But that many draft picks? They are going to regret that. Promise you. 

LA’s best chance at signing him required them to trade for him or blow this coming year to keep money free for another year. With the restrictions on the cap related to other team’s free agents, you have to get the guy before signing him. Plus, with the West more open, they weren’t going to skip out on this year. You can’t judge trades in a box, you have to look at what’s going on all around them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SA-KC_Horn said:

The Lakers live off free agency. So giving up the draft pick shouldn't matter. When was the last time the Lakers had a top 10 pick come to fruition? Mamba?

The Lakers have struck out in FA a lot lately, and the tax laws in California don't help when signing FA's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SA-KC_Horn said:

The Lakers live off free agency. So giving up the draft pick shouldn't matter. When was the last time the Lakers had a top 10 pick come to fruition? Mamba?

Technically D'angelo Russell

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, SA-KC_Horn said:

The Lakers live off free agency. So giving up the draft pick shouldn't matter. When was the last time the Lakers had a top 10 pick come to fruition? Mamba?

Kobe was the #13 pick (by Charlotte, traded for Vlade- greatest trade in the history of history).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Machinator said:

Here's the original tweet. I assume he's going the Horford route, trading down on APY for increased guaranteed money.

 

If SAC gives him more than 25M TOTAL they are dumber than I thought they were and I think Vlade is pretty fucking dumb

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, SA-KC_Horn said:

The Lakers live off free agency. So giving up the draft pick shouldn't matter. When was the last time the Lakers had a top 10 pick come to fruition? Mamba?

Kobe wasn't even a Top 10 pick -- and wasn't made by the Lakers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SA-KC_Horn said:

The Lakers live off free agency. So giving up the draft pick shouldn't matter. When was the last time the Lakers had a top 10 pick come to fruition? Mamba?

Kobe wasn't a top 10 pick but he was their last Finals MVP. What have they done since then? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...