Rashidi wrote:The Lakers want to make money, first and foremost. Just like every other NBA organization. This wasn't the first time they brought in a big name that didn't fit with the rest of the on-court product, and it's far from the last time.
Are you suggesting the Lakers felt Westbrook was a poor fit, but they thought he would bring in a bigger following / make more money than the team already would without him? That seems pretty nonsensical. LeBron believed in the 3 star system and wanted Westbrook, it's more or less that simple.
Pelinka's signature move (aside from Westbrook) was trading every single asset they had for AD (who made it clear he would have signed as an UFA in a year anyway - i.e. pulled a "Melo"). They won the title that year, so on the one-hand it worked, but it's not surprising they weren't able to run longer with such a bare cupboard. He also let Caruso walk due to $$$, in favor of paying Talen Horton-Tucker. He did not exactly coat himself in glory this past off-season or trade deadline either.
Yeah, the THT thing vs Caruso was hilariously bad. Also not taking Conley over Russell was probably bad (though Russell has certainly had his moments). I don't think Pelinka's so great, but he seems to be a hit/miss guy. His dumping Russell seemed amazing.
Maybe the Lakers could have waited on AD, maybe not, but again, LeGM was pushing hard for that to happen immediately too. I think you underestimate the massive amount of pressure he puts on the front office at all times to do things immediately even if it creates unsustainable situations or bad long term outcomes. He's a dumbass as a GM, but he's one of the top few players ever, so you just have to put up with it.
Not sure anyone but Riley could really stand up to him, and hell, he left Riley after 4 years too.