Moderators: Clav, Domejandro, ken6199, bisme37, Dirk, KingDavid, cupcakesnake, bwgood77, zimpy27, infinite11285
Edrees wrote:Thread is useless without a suggestion of who to replace him with
bonita_the_frog wrote:The issue is not about wasting a roster spot (and i agree he isn't wasting it anyway), the issue is why you'd choose to put your son in such a horrific situation where everybody will be saying he doesn't belong in the NBA. What kind of father does this? And just after Bronny's heart problem too...
This is the complete opposite of what a good father does, as Bronny is being fed to the wolves, and with no way to save himself.
lambchop wrote:bonita_the_frog wrote:The issue is not about wasting a roster spot (and i agree he isn't wasting it anyway), the issue is why you'd choose to put your son in such a horrific situation where everybody will be saying he doesn't belong in the NBA. What kind of father does this? And just after Bronny's heart problem too...
This is the complete opposite of what a good father does, as Bronny is being fed to the wolves, and with no way to save himself.
He's showing his son how positions of power work. Hard work and talent are obviously still extremely important, but power and influence are huge too.
In addition, he's teaching his son how to handle scrutiny and the opinions of others in the face of adversity. Those are actually values that stoicism teaches. Fathers rarely teach that stuff and it becomes something that young adults have to learn by themselves.
So, props to Bron.
Lalouie wrote:Lockdown504090 wrote:i dont see the purpose of waiving him. who do you think they are going to fill the roster spot with that provides more value than adding to lebrons legacy. I can look at 20 other rosters and nitpick what reasons people have for players being on the floor other than their on-court production. This really doesnt matter.
if he ends up being a rotation player, its a miracle. if not, is this really altering the lakers as an organization?
because bronny is the nba version of jaden smith. the diff is SUPPOSEDLY that sports is a bottom line profession.
i would say from a culture pov, the lakers are faced with a zeitgeist that runs counter to their "superstar first" model
taking care of your players doesn't have to mean having to cowtow to an aged star. before they can defer to a superstar they have to get'em first,,,and btw, luka literally feel into their lap. it's not like they won him over
NZB2323 wrote:HMFFL wrote:There is a big difference between Kobe and Bronny, who is only on the team because of Dad.NZB2323 wrote:The Lakers brand is they take care of stars. When Kobe was injured and past his prime the Lakers gave him the max. Protecting that brand and showing the world that they take care of their stars is more important than whoever they use the 15th roster slot on.
Mark Walter, as I mentioned when he became owner, won't tolerate how the Lakers have been operating, so now you see who has their farewell tour activated. He's far from being the Buss family. He's much more powerful.
The Lakers gave Kobe the max when he was old and broken down to show that they take care of stars. The Lakers gave LeBron’s son a guaranteed contract to show that they take care of stars.
Maybe Walker operates differently, but I think the Lakers want to show the world that they take care of stars.
doogie_hauser wrote:NZB2323 wrote:HMFFL wrote:There is a big difference between Kobe and Bronny, who is only on the team because of Dad.
Mark Walter, as I mentioned when he became owner, won't tolerate how the Lakers have been operating, so now you see who has their farewell tour activated. He's far from being the Buss family. He's much more powerful.
The Lakers gave Kobe the max when he was old and broken down to show that they take care of stars. The Lakers gave LeBron’s son a guaranteed contract to show that they take care of stars.
Maybe Walker operates differently, but I think the Lakers want to show the world that they take care of stars.
Oh please, the Lakers didn't treat Shaq well when he had that infamous fall out with Kobe and Phil Jackson, and Dwight Howard (the first time around)
Also maybe they are too sentimental to their old aging cooked stars, Boston got at least one ring out of trading away an ageing PP and KG.
Being too loyal to Lebron and his needs doesn't sound like a solid plan if the goal is to win another championship imo.
MiamiBulls wrote:NZB2323 wrote:HMFFL wrote:There is a big difference between Kobe and Bronny, who is only on the team because of Dad.
Mark Walter, as I mentioned when he became owner, won't tolerate how the Lakers have been operating, so now you see who has their farewell tour activated. He's far from being the Buss family. He's much more powerful.
The Lakers gave Kobe the max when he was old and broken down to show that they take care of stars. The Lakers gave LeBron’s son a guaranteed contract to show that they take care of stars.
Maybe Walker operates differently, but I think the Lakers want to show the world that they take care of stars.
That would be incorrect on your part. The Lakers gave Kobe that near max contract 6 months after he finished 1st Team All NBA & finished 5th in MVP voting. They gave him that contract with the presumption that Bryant was going to return to form at least an All-Star Level Player, very much the same way the Brooklyn Nets gave Kevin Durant a Max contract coming off an Achilles injury with assumption KD was going to return to an All Star Level at 33 years of age.
And yes the Lakers do take of their stars, that star being Luka Doncic. LeBron James & Bronny James are simply a dog & pony show for the Lakers organization at this point in time.
At the end of the day the 14th-15th man on the roster are insignificant glorified mascots/cheerleaders for the teams they play on. Bronny isn't "wasting" a roster slot that isn't truly all that useful to begin with. Their job is to simply eat deadball/garbage time minutes for the players that actually matter.
Lockdown504090 wrote:i dont see the purpose of waiving him. who do you think they are going to fill the roster spot with that provides more value than adding to lebrons legacy. I can look at 20 other rosters and nitpick what reasons people have for players being on the floor other than their on-court production. This really doesnt matter.
if he ends up being a rotation player, its a miracle. if not, is this really altering the lakers as an organization?
Bologna Smasher wrote:He should be on a two-way contract, not the fully guaranteed four-year deal they signed him to. I think anyone with any sense knows that he wouldn't have gotten that deal if he wasn't LeBron's son. That's the only real issue I see with him.
Regardless of the LeBron impact, he would've still gotten some looks as a two-way guy. I still think he has the tools to become an NBA player, but it's obviously a work in progress.
lambchop wrote:bonita_the_frog wrote:The issue is not about wasting a roster spot (and i agree he isn't wasting it anyway), the issue is why you'd choose to put your son in such a horrific situation where everybody will be saying he doesn't belong in the NBA. What kind of father does this? And just after Bronny's heart problem too...
This is the complete opposite of what a good father does, as Bronny is being fed to the wolves, and with no way to save himself.
He's showing his son how positions of power work. Hard work and talent are obviously still extremely important, but power and influence are huge too.
In addition, he's teaching his son how to handle scrutiny and the opinions of others in the face of adversity. Those are actually values that stoicism teaches. Fathers rarely teach that stuff and it becomes something that young adults have to learn by themselves.
So, props to Bron.
These people... PlatinumState wrote:Edrees wrote:Thread is useless without a suggestion of who to replace him with
What do you mean who? RJ Davis and Nick Smith are better than him. They'll probably make the roster but lets see who gets waived within their 24 player roster right now. Having said all that, Bronny's not getting waived as long as Lebron is there
meekrab wrote:Bologna Smasher wrote:He should be on a two-way contract, not the fully guaranteed four-year deal they signed him to. I think anyone with any sense knows that he wouldn't have gotten that deal if he wasn't LeBron's son. That's the only real issue I see with him.
Regardless of the LeBron impact, he would've still gotten some looks as a two-way guy. I still think he has the tools to become an NBA player, but it's obviously a work in progress.
He wouldn't have been drafted if he wasn't LeBron's son. And he only did because the Lakers are now run like a family bed and breakfast instead of a major sports team.
Ball so hard wrote:I agree that Bronny James is a waste of a roster spot. I genuinely don’t understand the appeal of him. I don’t even believe he’s third-string quality. I recently heard Reddick and Reeves rave about him, and it made me realize I either know very little about basketball or the hype is simply unwarranted how.
bonita_the_frog wrote:The issue is not about wasting a roster spot (and i agree he isn't wasting it anyway), the issue is why you'd choose to put your son in such a horrific situation where everybody will be saying he doesn't belong in the NBA. What kind of father does this? And just after Bronny's heart problem too...
This is the complete opposite of what a good father does, as Bronny is being fed to the wolves, and with no way to save himself.
lambchop wrote:bonita_the_frog wrote:The issue is not about wasting a roster spot (and i agree he isn't wasting it anyway), the issue is why you'd choose to put your son in such a horrific situation where everybody will be saying he doesn't belong in the NBA. What kind of father does this? And just after Bronny's heart problem too...
This is the complete opposite of what a good father does, as Bronny is being fed to the wolves, and with no way to save himself.
He's showing his son how positions of power work. Hard work and talent are obviously still extremely important, but power and influence are huge too.
In addition, he's teaching his son how to handle scrutiny and the opinions of others in the face of adversity. Those are actually values that stoicism teaches. Fathers rarely teach that stuff and it becomes something that young adults have to learn by themselves.
So, props to Bron.