RealGM

When the Los Angeles Lakers traded for Anthony Davis for Luka Doncic, they knew they would need to add depth in their frontcourt. The team approached Doncic for his thoughts on the type of center that he would like to play with. That, in part, motivated the now-rescinded trade for Mark Williams.

That the Lakers approached Doncic for feedback wasn't lost on LeBron James. It's now clear that Doncic will have a say in personnel, including influencing the team to trade draft picks. That's an approach James has wanted Los Angeles GM Rob Pelinka to take for years.

James was said to have understood the decision behind trading Davis for Doncic. Pelinka also knew that James was a fan of Doncic, and believed his veteran star would see it as a basketball move, beyond a long-term business decision.

Via Dave McMenamin/ESPN

Oh no! LBJ has someone else in his sandbox now.

LeBron is not the man anymore.

He got his son a job. He will get the retirement tour. He won a bubble tournament and a NBA Cup.

The Lakers owe him nothing else.

I really love the trade for both sides.. it will be hard to label one team a winner until we see if Dallas wins a championship. I think if Dallas wins with AD and Luka never wins in a lakers uniform that will be the only way you can call Dallas the winner of this trade. Second Apron has really changed everything.

LeRobin

Salty1 wrote:I really love the trade for both sides.. it will be hard to label one team a winner until we see if Dallas wins a championship. I think if Dallas wins with AD and Luka never wins in a lakers uniform that will be the only way you can call Dallas the winner of this trade. Second Apron has really changed everything.

If both win or neither win, than it's a wash. The other thing that it is important to take into consideration if Luka wins with players that sign with LAL that might not have signed with DAL. DAL has always had a hard time signing free agents, even while Luka was there. There is no guarantee that DAL gets that title, especially if they don't have a championship core before Luka signed a supermax.

I have agreed with Lakers not listening to LeBron since he made them get Westbrook and LeBron expected Westbrook to change, but LeBron didn't change his game enough either. Then they had to use other assets to revamp that mistake.

Pickled Prunes wrote:

Salty1 wrote:I really love the trade for both sides.. it will be hard to label one team a winner until we see if Dallas wins a championship. I think if Dallas wins with AD and Luka never wins in a lakers uniform that will be the only way you can call Dallas the winner of this trade. Second Apron has really changed everything.

If both win or neither win, then it's a wash. The other thing that it is important to take into consideration if if Luka wins with players that sign with LAL that might not have signed with DAL. DAL has always had a hard time signing free agents, even while Luka was there.

I mean, the fact that AD is 6 years of prime older makes the field very uneven. AD is going to have to perform at a ridiculous rate and produce much more than Luka to make up for that fact.

HotelVitale wrote:

Pickled Prunes wrote:

Salty1 wrote:I really love the trade for both sides.. it will be hard to label one team a winner until we see if Dallas wins a championship. I think if Dallas wins with AD and Luka never wins in a lakers uniform that will be the only way you can call Dallas the winner of this trade. Second Apron has really changed everything.

If both win or neither win, then it's a wash. The other thing that it is important to take into consideration if if Luka wins with players that sign with LAL that might not have signed with DAL. DAL has always had a hard time signing free agents, even while Luka was there.

I mean, the fact that AD is 6 years of prime older makes the field very uneven. AD is going to have to perform at a ridiculous rate and produce much more than Luka to make up for that fact.

I honestly think DAL looked around at young teams like OKC, DAL, CLE, etc. and saw that they would never be able to compete with that depth. If they gave Luka the supermax, they would be committed to this team structure into the 2030's. The idea of spending the next five years trying to sign players off the scrap heap was unappealing. Exum, Dinwiddie, Klay, Kyrie... these were all damaged goods looking for redemption. If these are the only players you can attract, you have issues, and Luka was at the center of that. As great as he is, it seems that players aren't jumping up and down to play with him. How fast did Fox name Wemby as the guy? Jimmy was all about playing in PHX with KD and Booker. DAL saw this and they pulled the ripcord.

Bron does not need AD. He needs someone to take the ball out of his hands and run the offense. AND HOLY CRAP!! DALLAS HAVE US LUKA! So he's totally bought in and has been ready to slide over and lighten his load as a 40 year old man.

Pickled Prunes wrote:

HotelVitale wrote:

Pickled Prunes wrote:If both win or neither win, then it's a wash. The other thing that it is important to take into consideration if if Luka wins with players that sign with LAL that might not have signed with DAL. DAL has always had a hard time signing free agents, even while Luka was there.

I mean, the fact that AD is 6 years of prime older makes the field very uneven. AD is going to have to perform at a ridiculous rate and produce much more than Luka to make up for that fact.

I honestly think DAL looked around at young teams like OKC, DAL, CLE, etc. and saw that they would never be able to compete with that depth. If they gave Luka the supermax, they would be committed to this team structure into the 2030's. The idea of spending the next five years trying to sign players off the scrap heap was unappealing. Exum, Dinwiddie, Klay, Kyrie... these were all damaged goods looking for redemption. If these are the only players you can attract, you have issues, and Luka was at the center of that. As great as he is, it seems that players aren't jumping up and down to play with him. How fast did Fox name Wemby as the guy? Jimmy was all about playing in PHX with KD and Booker. DAL saw this and they pulled the ripcord.

Feels like you're doing a lot of mental gymnastics here to make this trade a good ideas. AD is going to make roughly the same as Luka in his next extension so they're not going to have significantly more money to play around with than they would have had with Luka.

Also the point about no one wanting to play with Luka seems pretty strained. For one we have no idea if that's true, and it also doesn't really matter if Luka's not the most beloved star. The Mavs won't have huge cap space at any point in the next couple years so they'd have to bring players in via trade, and I don't see any evidence to support the idea that players were aggressively barring any trades to Dallas. In your examples Fox was cool with going to SA because they have no real point guard and are a promising team willing to pay him, but the Spurs also gave up a good package for him. I don't see any reason to think that a similar player who was a wing or big wouldn't want to pair up with Luka as long as the Mavs could pay the price. (Also Butler didn't end up in PHX...he ended up with the team who gave the best offer for him). Harden was seen as at least as ball dominant as Luka and he still got paired up with various second stars for years.

I'm not a Mavs or Lakers fan so have no stake in this. I just don't think these justifications hold up at all, you keep pointing out flaws with Luka without saying how having a 31 year-old AD instead of a 25 year-old Luka provides an advantage anywhere. That's the actual thing we're talking about, not 'is Luka a totally dominant and flawless player who will deliver you titles without any issue or complication.'

LePippen

HotelVitale wrote:

Pickled Prunes wrote:

HotelVitale wrote:I mean, the fact that AD is 6 years of prime older makes the field very uneven. AD is going to have to perform at a ridiculous rate and produce much more than Luka to make up for that fact.

I honestly think DAL looked around at young teams like OKC, DAL, CLE, etc. and saw that they would never be able to compete with that depth. If they gave Luka the supermax, they would be committed to this team structure into the 2030's. The idea of spending the next five years trying to sign players off the scrap heap was unappealing. Exum, Dinwiddie, Klay, Kyrie... these were all damaged goods looking for redemption. If these are the only players you can attract, you have issues, and Luka was at the center of that. As great as he is, it seems that players aren't jumping up and down to play with him. How fast did Fox name Wemby as the guy? Jimmy was all about playing in PHX with KD and Booker. DAL saw this and they pulled the ripcord.

Feels like you're doing a lot of mental gymnastics here to make this trade a good ideas. AD is going to make roughly the same as Luka in his next extension so they're not going to have significantly more money to play around with than they would have had with Luka.

Also the point about no one wanting to play with Luka seems pretty strained. For one we have no idea if that's true, and it also doesn't really matter if Luka's not the most beloved star. The Mavs won't have huge cap space at any point in the next couple years so they'd have to bring players in via trade, and I don't see any evidence to support the idea that players were aggressively barring any trades to Dallas. In your examples Fox was cool with going to SA because they have no real point guard and are a promising team willing to pay him, but the Spurs also gave up a good package for him. I don't see any reason to think that a similar player who was a wing or big wouldn't want to pair up with Luka as long as the Mavs could pay the price. (Also Butler didn't end up in PHX...he ended up with the team who gave the best offer for him). Harden was seen as at least as ball dominant as Luka and he still got paired up with various second stars for years.

I'm not a Mavs or Lakers fan so have no stake in this. I just don't think these justifications hold up at all, you keep pointing out flaws with Luka without saying how having a 31 year-old AD instead of a 25 year-old Luka provides an advantage anywhere. That's the actual thing we're talking about, not 'is Luka a totally dominant and flawless player who will deliver you titles without any issue or complication.'

I didn't say it was a good idea. I don't know Luka or have to deal with him day to day. I don't think I would have done it. All I'm saying is I can see reasons why DAL thought it was a good idea.

Kuzma asked not to be traded to DAL last season, and if a player at his level feels that way, I can imagine he isn't the only one. We also saw Brunson walk away and know that he would have never reached this potential in DAL. But I didn't actually say that players didn't want to play with Luka; I said free agents rarely go to DAL and Luka wasn't enough of a draw to change that.

I think players genuinely like Harden and enjoy playing with him. I think fans and players have opposite takes on these two guys. Harden's career USG% is high, but still 5.9% lower than Luka's.

Pickled Prunes wrote:

HotelVitale wrote:

Pickled Prunes wrote:
I honestly think DAL looked around at young teams like OKC, DAL, CLE, etc. and saw that they would never be able to compete with that depth. If they gave Luka the supermax, they would be committed to this team structure into the 2030's. The idea of spending the next five years trying to sign players off the scrap heap was unappealing. Exum, Dinwiddie, Klay, Kyrie... these were all damaged goods looking for redemption. If these are the only players you can attract, you have issues, and Luka was at the center of that. As great as he is, it seems that players aren't jumping up and down to play with him. How fast did Fox name Wemby as the guy? Jimmy was all about playing in PHX with KD and Booker. DAL saw this and they pulled the ripcord.

Feels like you're doing a lot of mental gymnastics here to make this trade a good ideas. AD is going to make roughly the same as Luka in his next extension so they're not going to have significantly more money to play around with than they would have had with Luka.

Also the point about no one wanting to play with Luka seems pretty strained. For one we have no idea if that's true, and it also doesn't really matter if Luka's not the most beloved star. The Mavs won't have huge cap space at any point in the next couple years so they'd have to bring players in via trade, and I don't see any evidence to support the idea that players were aggressively barring any trades to Dallas. In your examples Fox was cool with going to SA because they have no real point guard and are a promising team willing to pay him, but the Spurs also gave up a good package for him. I don't see any reason to think that a similar player who was a wing or big wouldn't want to pair up with Luka as long as the Mavs could pay the price. (Also Butler didn't end up in PHX...he ended up with the team who gave the best offer for him). Harden was seen as at least as ball dominant as Luka and he still got paired up with various second stars for years.

I'm not a Mavs or Lakers fan so have no stake in this. I just don't think these justifications hold up at all, you keep pointing out flaws with Luka without saying how having a 31 year-old AD instead of a 25 year-old Luka provides an advantage anywhere. That's the actual thing we're talking about, not 'is Luka a totally dominant and flawless player who will deliver you titles without any issue or complication.'

I didn't say it was a good idea. I don't know Luka or have to deal with him day to day. I don't think I would have done it. All I'm saying is I can see reasons why DAL thought it was a good idea.

Kuzma asked not to be traded to DAL last season, and if a player at his level feels that way, I can imagine he isn't the only one. We also saw Brunson walk away and know that he would have never reached this potential in DAL. But I didn't actually say that players didn't want to play with Luka; I said free agents rarely go to DAL and Luka wasn't enough of a draw to change that.

I think players genuinely like Harden and enjoy playing with him. I think fans and players have opposite takes on these two guys. Harden's career USG% is high, but still 5.9% lower than Luka's.

You gonna get hate for this -

CobraCommander wrote:

Pickled Prunes wrote:

HotelVitale wrote:
Feels like you're doing a lot of mental gymnastics here to make this trade a good ideas. AD is going to make roughly the same as Luka in his next extension so they're not going to have significantly more money to play around with than they would have had with Luka.

Also the point about no one wanting to play with Luka seems pretty strained. For one we have no idea if that's true, and it also doesn't really matter if Luka's not the most beloved star. The Mavs won't have huge cap space at any point in the next couple years so they'd have to bring players in via trade, and I don't see any evidence to support the idea that players were aggressively barring any trades to Dallas. In your examples Fox was cool with going to SA because they have no real point guard and are a promising team willing to pay him, but the Spurs also gave up a good package for him. I don't see any reason to think that a similar player who was a wing or big wouldn't want to pair up with Luka as long as the Mavs could pay the price. (Also Butler didn't end up in PHX...he ended up with the team who gave the best offer for him). Harden was seen as at least as ball dominant as Luka and he still got paired up with various second stars for years.

I'm not a Mavs or Lakers fan so have no stake in this. I just don't think these justifications hold up at all, you keep pointing out flaws with Luka without saying how having a 31 year-old AD instead of a 25 year-old Luka provides an advantage anywhere. That's the actual thing we're talking about, not 'is Luka a totally dominant and flawless player who will deliver you titles without any issue or complication.'

I didn't say it was a good idea. I don't know Luka or have to deal with him day to day. I don't think I would have done it. All I'm saying is I can see reasons why DAL thought it was a good idea.

Kuzma asked not to be traded to DAL last season, and if a player at his level feels that way, I can imagine he isn't the only one. We also saw Brunson walk away and know that he would have never reached this potential in DAL. But I didn't actually say that players didn't want to play with Luka; I said free agents rarely go to DAL and Luka wasn't enough of a draw to change that.

I think players genuinely like Harden and enjoy playing with him. I think fans and players have opposite takes on these two guys. Harden's career USG% is high, but still 5.9% lower than Luka's.

You gonna get hate for this -

Oh no, not that...

Pickled Prunes wrote:

HotelVitale wrote:

Pickled Prunes wrote:
I honestly think DAL looked around at young teams like OKC, DAL, CLE, etc. and saw that they would never be able to compete with that depth. If they gave Luka the supermax, they would be committed to this team structure into the 2030's. The idea of spending the next five years trying to sign players off the scrap heap was unappealing. Exum, Dinwiddie, Klay, Kyrie... these were all damaged goods looking for redemption. If these are the only players you can attract, you have issues, and Luka was at the center of that. As great as he is, it seems that players aren't jumping up and down to play with him. How fast did Fox name Wemby as the guy? Jimmy was all about playing in PHX with KD and Booker. DAL saw this and they pulled the ripcord.

Feels like you're doing a lot of mental gymnastics here to make this trade a good ideas. AD is going to make roughly the same as Luka in his next extension so they're not going to have significantly more money to play around with than they would have had with Luka.

Also the point about no one wanting to play with Luka seems pretty strained. For one we have no idea if that's true, and it also doesn't really matter if Luka's not the most beloved star. The Mavs won't have huge cap space at any point in the next couple years so they'd have to bring players in via trade, and I don't see any evidence to support the idea that players were aggressively barring any trades to Dallas. In your examples Fox was cool with going to SA because they have no real point guard and are a promising team willing to pay him, but the Spurs also gave up a good package for him. I don't see any reason to think that a similar player who was a wing or big wouldn't want to pair up with Luka as long as the Mavs could pay the price. (Also Butler didn't end up in PHX...he ended up with the team who gave the best offer for him). Harden was seen as at least as ball dominant as Luka and he still got paired up with various second stars for years.

I'm not a Mavs or Lakers fan so have no stake in this. I just don't think these justifications hold up at all, you keep pointing out flaws with Luka without saying how having a 31 year-old AD instead of a 25 year-old Luka provides an advantage anywhere. That's the actual thing we're talking about, not 'is Luka a totally dominant and flawless player who will deliver you titles without any issue or complication.'

I didn't say it was a good idea. I don't know Luka or have to deal with him day to day. I don't think I would have done it. All I'm saying is I can see reasons why DAL thought it was a good idea.

Kuzma asked not to be traded to DAL last season, and if a player at his level feels that way, I can imagine he isn't the only one. We also saw Brunson walk away and know that he would have never reached this potential in DAL. But I didn't actually say that players didn't want to play with Luka; I said free agents rarely go to DAL and Luka wasn't enough of a draw to change that.

I think players genuinely like Harden and enjoy playing with him. I think fans and players have opposite takes on these two guys. Harden's career USG% is high, but still 5.9% lower than Luka's.

It sounds like maybe you’re giving bad arguments and saying ‘they’re not good arguments but maybe a fool would make them?’ It doesn’t feel like this to me but no need to argue if all you’re trying to do is say how the Mavs FO talked themselves into a bad idea.

To that end, the point on FA is a red herring. Star free agents almost never go anywhere in FA, and good teams almost never have cap space for them. It’s just not how contenders get built around a star now, so it’s pretty irrelevant. (There have been like two examples of franchise-changing FA moves in the last 15 years, and both of them involved lebron james.) I also don’t think there’s anything to players avoiding Dallas more than other teams in FA— all other things being equal I would list it as maybe the 6-10th beat FA destination, it’s not LA but it’s a huge market and has good weather and no state taxes.

Kuzma thing is one player a year ago and he didn’t want to go for other reasons. Many many other players have been traded to Dallas since Luka established himself, and we haven’t heard any consistent refrain about not wanting to play there.

HotelVitale wrote:

Pickled Prunes wrote:

HotelVitale wrote:
Feels like you're doing a lot of mental gymnastics here to make this trade a good ideas. AD is going to make roughly the same as Luka in his next extension so they're not going to have significantly more money to play around with than they would have had with Luka.

Also the point about no one wanting to play with Luka seems pretty strained. For one we have no idea if that's true, and it also doesn't really matter if Luka's not the most beloved star. The Mavs won't have huge cap space at any point in the next couple years so they'd have to bring players in via trade, and I don't see any evidence to support the idea that players were aggressively barring any trades to Dallas. In your examples Fox was cool with going to SA because they have no real point guard and are a promising team willing to pay him, but the Spurs also gave up a good package for him. I don't see any reason to think that a similar player who was a wing or big wouldn't want to pair up with Luka as long as the Mavs could pay the price. (Also Butler didn't end up in PHX...he ended up with the team who gave the best offer for him). Harden was seen as at least as ball dominant as Luka and he still got paired up with various second stars for years.

I'm not a Mavs or Lakers fan so have no stake in this. I just don't think these justifications hold up at all, you keep pointing out flaws with Luka without saying how having a 31 year-old AD instead of a 25 year-old Luka provides an advantage anywhere. That's the actual thing we're talking about, not 'is Luka a totally dominant and flawless player who will deliver you titles without any issue or complication.'

I didn't say it was a good idea. I don't know Luka or have to deal with him day to day. I don't think I would have done it. All I'm saying is I can see reasons why DAL thought it was a good idea.

Kuzma asked not to be traded to DAL last season, and if a player at his level feels that way, I can imagine he isn't the only one. We also saw Brunson walk away and know that he would have never reached this potential in DAL. But I didn't actually say that players didn't want to play with Luka; I said free agents rarely go to DAL and Luka wasn't enough of a draw to change that.

I think players genuinely like Harden and enjoy playing with him. I think fans and players have opposite takes on these two guys. Harden's career USG% is high, but still 5.9% lower than Luka's.

It sounds like maybe you’re giving bad arguments and saying ‘they’re not good arguments but maybe a fool would make them?’ It doesn’t feel like this to me but no need to argue if all you’re trying to do is say how the Mavs FO talked themselves into a bad idea.

To that end, the point on FA is a red herring. Star free agents almost never go anywhere in FA, and good teams almost never have cap space for them. It’s just not how contenders get built around a star now, so it’s pretty irrelevant. (There have been like two examples of franchise-changing FA moves in the last 15 years, and both of them involved lebron james.) I also don’t think there’s anything to players avoiding Dallas more than other teams in FA— all other things being equal I would list it as maybe the 6-10th beat FA destination, it’s not LA but it’s a huge market and has good weather and no state taxes.

Kuzma thing is one player a year ago and he didn’t want to go for other reasons. Many many other players have been traded to Dallas since Luka established himself, and we haven’t heard any consistent refrain about not wanting to play there.

Not what I'm saying at all. Here's my point in a nutshell:

Luka is better and younger than AD.
Both have had a history of injuries.
AD's struggles to stay on the court began when he was older than Luka.
AD has always kept himself in dramatically better shape than Luka.
Luka has a lot of miles on him already.
Luka is clearly a pain in the butt, but how big of a pain in the butt we have no way of knowing.
AD has been elite for the past two seasons, putting up 26/12 and 2.2 BLK this season.
DAL was not a realistic contender as constructed, they are not a FA destination and they are asset poor.
If DAL thought they could build a contender around Luka they would have kept him.
DAL could flip AD and increase their haul, which might be part of their plan.

I probably would not have done this deal, but I definitely understand it. It isn't as one-sided as media/fans are making it out to be. If I was in DAL, watching him be a diva, and witnessing his lack of work ethic first hand, I could be swayed.

I am just discussing the deal from both sides. It is hard to remain objective if you come into it with the predetermined notion that one side out and out won a deal. We likely won't know who won for several years. How many (if any) rings Luka win? Does DAL build around AD or do they flip him for parts? What do Max Christie, that pick and the potential return in an AD trade develop into.