Let’s talk about that Lakers trade

Moderators: bwgood77, zimpy27, infinite11285, Clav, Domejandro, ken6199, bisme37, Dirk, KingDavid, cupcakesnake

User avatar
Dr Aki
RealGM
Posts: 35,728
And1: 32,022
Joined: Mar 03, 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
   

Re: Let’s talk about that Lakers trade 

Post#81 » by Dr Aki » Wed Mar 15, 2023 8:51 am

GopherIt! wrote:
Dr Aki wrote:
GopherIt! wrote:
I also said DNo rehabbed his value. They tried to move him previously and had no takers.

I don’t feel like repeating myself.
I stand by what I have said.

Mike Conley has positive value.


And if he actually had positive value, he wouldn't have required assets to move his contract for cap space.

He would've returned positive value instead.

You've never even attempted to reconcile this.


i explained my position quite clearly.


All you've managed to explain is that there is a fundamental lack of logic behind your position
Image
GopherIt!
RealGM
Posts: 10,599
And1: 24,742
Joined: Oct 20, 2007
Location: bird watching
Contact:

Re: Let’s talk about that Lakers trade 

Post#82 » by GopherIt! » Wed Mar 15, 2023 8:58 am

Dr Aki wrote:
GopherIt! wrote:
Dr Aki wrote:
And if he actually had positive value, he wouldn't have required assets to move his contract for cap space.

He would've returned positive value instead.

You've never even attempted to reconcile this.


i explained my position quite clearly.


All you've managed to explain is that there is a fundamental lack of logic behind your position


Your being an ass at this point. I have given u credit on some points. You haven’t given me any credit on any of my points! your not even trying to dialogue. all u do every single post is talk at me.

I’m done with your insults. Grow up!
User avatar
Dr Aki
RealGM
Posts: 35,728
And1: 32,022
Joined: Mar 03, 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
   

Re: Let’s talk about that Lakers trade 

Post#83 » by Dr Aki » Wed Mar 15, 2023 9:06 am

GopherIt! wrote:
Dr Aki wrote:
GopherIt! wrote:
i explained my position quite clearly.


All you've managed to explain is that there is a fundamental lack of logic behind your position


I’m done with your insults. Grow up!


You've done more than I ever could
Image
GopherIt!
RealGM
Posts: 10,599
And1: 24,742
Joined: Oct 20, 2007
Location: bird watching
Contact:

Re: Let’s talk about that Lakers trade 

Post#84 » by GopherIt! » Wed Mar 15, 2023 9:11 am

Dr Aki wrote:
GopherIt! wrote:
Dr Aki wrote:
All you've managed to explain is that there is a fundamental lack of logic behind your position


I’m done with your insults. Grow up!


You've done more than I ever could


the polite thing would have been say something like, lets agree to disagree. try find common ground. telling a person they r illogical is insulting.
you’ve done that twice now.

don’t talk at people. try to understand their perspective. and certainly do not insult their intelligence
User avatar
Dr Aki
RealGM
Posts: 35,728
And1: 32,022
Joined: Mar 03, 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
   

Re: Let’s talk about that Lakers trade 

Post#85 » by Dr Aki » Wed Mar 15, 2023 9:14 am

GopherIt! wrote:
Dr Aki wrote:
GopherIt! wrote:
I’m done with your insults. Grow up!


You've done more than I ever could


the polite thing would have been say something like, lets agree to disagree. telling a person they r illogical insulting.
you’ve done that twice now.

don’t talk at people. try to understand their perspective.


That's the thing about basic mathematics, there actually is a right answer
Image
GopherIt!
RealGM
Posts: 10,599
And1: 24,742
Joined: Oct 20, 2007
Location: bird watching
Contact:

Re: Let’s talk about that Lakers trade 

Post#86 » by GopherIt! » Wed Mar 15, 2023 9:15 am

Dr Aki wrote:
GopherIt! wrote:
Dr Aki wrote:
You've done more than I ever could


the polite thing would have been say something like, lets agree to disagree. telling a person they r illogical insulting.
you’ve done that twice now.

don’t talk at people. try to understand their perspective.


That's the thing about basic mathematics, there actually is a right answer


you’ve been around almost as long as me, u should be above these types of posts. you disappoint me.
User avatar
Dr Aki
RealGM
Posts: 35,728
And1: 32,022
Joined: Mar 03, 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
   

Re: Let’s talk about that Lakers trade 

Post#87 » by Dr Aki » Wed Mar 15, 2023 9:20 am

GopherIt! wrote:
Dr Aki wrote:
GopherIt! wrote:
the polite thing would have been say something like, lets agree to disagree. telling a person they r illogical insulting.
you’ve done that twice now.

don’t talk at people. try to understand their perspective.


That's the thing about basic mathematics, there actually is a right answer


you’ve been around almost as long as me, u should be above these types of posts. you disappoint me.


Image
GopherIt!
RealGM
Posts: 10,599
And1: 24,742
Joined: Oct 20, 2007
Location: bird watching
Contact:

Re: Let’s talk about that Lakers trade 

Post#88 » by GopherIt! » Wed Mar 15, 2023 9:22 am

nice fella this aki guy!
User avatar
zimpy27
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 45,568
And1: 43,791
Joined: Jul 13, 2014

Re: Let’s talk about that Lakers trade 

Post#89 » by zimpy27 » Wed Mar 15, 2023 9:23 am

Dr Aki wrote:
GopherIt! wrote:
Dr Aki wrote:
That's the thing about basic mathematics, there actually is a right answer


you’ve been around almost as long as me, u should be above these types of posts. you disappoint me.




Give it up both of you. You can't agree. It's ok.
"Let's play some basketball!" - Fergie
Memories
Analyst
Posts: 3,451
And1: 6,014
Joined: Feb 18, 2016

Re: Let’s talk about that Lakers trade 

Post#90 » by Memories » Wed Mar 15, 2023 9:34 am

Ayt wrote:
SleepingDragon wrote:All 3 players the Lakers got from the Westbrook trade started tonight.


That isn't a good thing.


They’ve been winning with them on it so…what exactly is bad about it?
KuzControl
Sophomore
Posts: 229
And1: 74
Joined: Jan 09, 2019
       

Re: Let’s talk about that Lakers trade 

Post#91 » by KuzControl » Wed Mar 15, 2023 11:58 am

Not sure there's really a loser in this trade

Lakers: get a refreshed DLo (who so far has been great as a 3rd option that can shoot and score, with decent playmaking - perfect fit next to Bron/AD), as well as a couple of solid role players in Beasley and Vando to add to their previously non-existent depth. Also gained a ton more salary flexibility
TWolves: get rid of DLo, who seemed to have worn out his welcome with the Wolves, and replace him with a less dynamic, but better-fitting PG in Conley (also adds a veteran presence to the squad). They also replenish their lower-level assets
Utah: get a potentially quite valuable FRP as well as (likely) an improved chance at a better pick this year for three rotation pieces that weren't going to be there long-term

We can go on about positive and negative assets all we want, but each team seems to have gotten exactly what they wanted out of this deal
Pointgod
RealGM
Posts: 24,048
And1: 24,388
Joined: Jun 28, 2014

Re: Let’s talk about that Lakers trade 

Post#92 » by Pointgod » Wed Mar 15, 2023 12:03 pm

ConSarnit wrote:
Pointgod wrote:
Floody100 wrote:I still don’t understand how this version of Russell Westbrook & a first round pick that has protections on it can get you all of D’Lo, Beasley & Vanderbilt.
Their was talks about Vanderbilt costing a first round pick which is why I find it ridiculous that they were able to get both Beasley & Russell as well.
The Lakers FO has been atrocious for years & yet constantly get rewarded for it.

Rant over.


It was the classic Ainge attempt at a pump and dump. Beasley has just been bad as a Lakers there’s no way that guy was worth a first round pick. Vanderbilt is a great energy and hustle guy, but you can find those types for second round picks. It’s just that the Lakers were so devoid of depth that the incoming players make a bigger impact plus, Westbrook was addition by subtraction. Most GMs aren’t complete idiots(except for maybe the Wolves GM) and the market correctly gauged Vanderbilt and Beasleys value. Ainge got the fakest lottery pick ever, but he gets fluffed by the media for getting another asset so it’s all good. I’m still baffled by the trade from the Wolves perspective. I get the fit argument but Conley is a bad contract. The traded Russell for a worst contract, worse individual player without any additional compensation coming back.


How is it a fake lotto pick? It’s only top 4 protected in 2027 when Lebron will be 42 and Davis will be 34. Ainge is obviously playing the odds here. Maybe he could have gotten late 1sts for Beasley and Vanderbilt but what value are those when Utah already has like 7 extra 1sts in the next 5-6 years? Ainge is taking the chance that the ‘27 Lakers pick could be top 10, which is worth much more than 2 late firsts. It’s risky but it’s a calculated gamble.

There is also second order thinking going on here:

-the trade allows Utah to tank this year
-improves the Lakers record which kicks Utah out of the playoffs and possibly could kick MIN out too if Conley flops/can’t stay healthy (the Jazz own their unprotected 1st this year).

This Lakers trade gets Utah a higher pick this year, possibly a lotto pick in ‘27 and if everything breaks right could result in MIN missing the playoffs (adding another lotto pick for Utah). Maybe Conley acts as an upgrade for MIN this year but they’re now stuck with a 34 year old PG and no real way of improving that position going forward.

This trade helps the Lakers but it also accomplishes some of Utah’s goals. If Ainge doesn’t make this trade with a West play in team he can’t really hope to accomplish any of the above. Utah probably makes the playoffs (no lotto pick), they don’t get a lightly protected pick (Lakers) and MIN might not be staring at a giant hole at PG 2-3 years from now (something that would definitely benefit Utah going forward).


Look at the bold and just think for a second. Do you honestly expect Lebron to be playing on the Lakers at 42? Anthony Davis is injury prone and he looks a lot worse at 34. The pick is 4 years from now, Lebron is long gone and they would have traded Davis and whatever players they sign this off season for more picks. It’s a fake lottery pick because the Lakers could easily tank in 2026 and secure the worst record in the league or they sign some superstar free agents are a playoff team. If the pick doesn’t convey in 2027 it’s two second round picks. On the surface level people see top 4 protected pick but don’t read the fine print.

Your argument is that Ainge blowing up a playoff team for a low end lottery pick doesn’t make him a good gm or good move for Utah.
Pointgod
RealGM
Posts: 24,048
And1: 24,388
Joined: Jun 28, 2014

Re: Let’s talk about that Lakers trade 

Post#93 » by Pointgod » Wed Mar 15, 2023 12:10 pm

Dr Aki wrote:
Pointgod wrote:
Floody100 wrote:I still don’t understand how this version of Russell Westbrook & a first round pick that has protections on it can get you all of D’Lo, Beasley & Vanderbilt.
Their was talks about Vanderbilt costing a first round pick which is why I find it ridiculous that they were able to get both Beasley & Russell as well.
The Lakers FO has been atrocious for years & yet constantly get rewarded for it.

Rant over.


It was the classic Ainge attempt at a pump and dump. Beasley has just been bad as a Lakers there’s no way that guy was worth a first round pick. Vanderbilt is a great energy and hustle guy, but you can find those types for second round picks. It’s just that the Lakers were so devoid of depth that the incoming players make a bigger impact plus, Westbrook was addition by subtraction. Most GMs aren’t complete idiots(except for maybe the Wolves GM) and the market correctly gauged Vanderbilt and Beasleys value. Ainge got the fakest lottery pick ever, but he gets fluffed by the media for getting another asset so it’s all good. I’m still baffled by the trade from the Wolves perspective. I get the fit argument but Conley is a bad contract. The traded Russell for a worst contract, worse individual player without any additional compensation coming back.


TWolves got Nickeil Alexander-Walker and 3 SRPs (1 from LA, 2 from Utah)


Alexander Walker is an okay rotational player and given that 1,000 second round picks were traded at the deadline, they’re not really worth that much. If I was Minnesota I would have wanted a first round pick back for Conley, given then I’m trading the best individual player in the trade. For comparison, a Charlotte would have to attach at least one first to trade Gordon Hayward for an expiring contract because no one wants to pay for his extra year. I see Conley the same way despite me agreeing he’s a much better fit than D-Lo on the Wolves.
Hellcrooner
Analyst
Posts: 3,117
And1: 2,516
Joined: Aug 04, 2014
         

Re: Let’s talk about that Lakers trade 

Post#94 » by Hellcrooner » Wed Mar 15, 2023 12:32 pm

the fact that stupid haters have convinced themsleves that a 40 millions expiring was negativa asset and lakers had to give up 2 lottery unprotected picks to get out of it :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: doe snot make it true
and in the end what happened is that lakers got value for their expiring.
simple as that
it it had been charlotte who had westbrooks expiring no one would have expected less.
so
suck it haters yu had been warned months ago.viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2219314
BeatDaCavs420
RealGM
Posts: 27,245
And1: 22,592
Joined: Mar 11, 2012
       

Re: Let’s talk about that Lakers trade 

Post#95 » by BeatDaCavs420 » Wed Mar 15, 2023 2:00 pm

Optms wrote:
BeatDaCavs420 wrote:Ainge basically just did them a solid. This is not the first time teams have done this for the Lakers either....Pays to be a top franchise in this league I guess


Ah. The classic consiparcy where its proposed GM's are helping the Lakers despite there being zero incentive to do so. Some people just refuse to give the Lakers credit without it being "cause its LA" :lol:

Laker fans only think this :lol:
ConSarnit
Head Coach
Posts: 6,088
And1: 5,832
Joined: May 05, 2015
 

Re: Let’s talk about that Lakers trade 

Post#96 » by ConSarnit » Wed Mar 15, 2023 3:46 pm

Pointgod wrote:
ConSarnit wrote:
Pointgod wrote:
It was the classic Ainge attempt at a pump and dump. Beasley has just been bad as a Lakers there’s no way that guy was worth a first round pick. Vanderbilt is a great energy and hustle guy, but you can find those types for second round picks. It’s just that the Lakers were so devoid of depth that the incoming players make a bigger impact plus, Westbrook was addition by subtraction. Most GMs aren’t complete idiots(except for maybe the Wolves GM) and the market correctly gauged Vanderbilt and Beasleys value. Ainge got the fakest lottery pick ever, but he gets fluffed by the media for getting another asset so it’s all good. I’m still baffled by the trade from the Wolves perspective. I get the fit argument but Conley is a bad contract. The traded Russell for a worst contract, worse individual player without any additional compensation coming back.


How is it a fake lotto pick? It’s only top 4 protected in 2027 when Lebron will be 42 and Davis will be 34. Ainge is obviously playing the odds here. Maybe he could have gotten late 1sts for Beasley and Vanderbilt but what value are those when Utah already has like 7 extra 1sts in the next 5-6 years? Ainge is taking the chance that the ‘27 Lakers pick could be top 10, which is worth much more than 2 late firsts. It’s risky but it’s a calculated gamble.

There is also second order thinking going on here:

-the trade allows Utah to tank this year
-improves the Lakers record which kicks Utah out of the playoffs and possibly could kick MIN out too if Conley flops/can’t stay healthy (the Jazz own their unprotected 1st this year).

This Lakers trade gets Utah a higher pick this year, possibly a lotto pick in ‘27 and if everything breaks right could result in MIN missing the playoffs (adding another lotto pick for Utah). Maybe Conley acts as an upgrade for MIN this year but they’re now stuck with a 34 year old PG and no real way of improving that position going forward.

This trade helps the Lakers but it also accomplishes some of Utah’s goals. If Ainge doesn’t make this trade with a West play in team he can’t really hope to accomplish any of the above. Utah probably makes the playoffs (no lotto pick), they don’t get a lightly protected pick (Lakers) and MIN might not be staring at a giant hole at PG 2-3 years from now (something that would definitely benefit Utah going forward).


Look at the bold and just think for a second. Do you honestly expect Lebron to be playing on the Lakers at 42? Anthony Davis is injury prone and he looks a lot worse at 34. The pick is 4 years from now, Lebron is long gone and they would have traded Davis and whatever players they sign this off season for more picks. It’s a fake lottery pick because the Lakers could easily tank in 2026 and secure the worst record in the league or they sign some superstar free agents are a playoff team. If the pick doesn’t convey in 2027 it’s two second round picks. On the surface level people see top 4 protected pick but don’t read the fine print.

Your argument is that Ainge blowing up a playoff team for a low end lottery pick doesn’t make him a good gm or good move for Utah.


Question: have you seen what Pelinka and the Lakers looked like pre-Lebron? You do realize that if they tank in 2026 they have a 48% chance they lose that pick even if they have the worst overall record? If they even finish 3rd worst there is a 51% chance they lose the pick.

Let’s say the Lakers are good in 2026. Now Utah gets the 25th pick. Not great, they probably missed out on 1 extra late first (probably could have gotten 2 lates firsts for the Conley/Beasly/Vando trio).

Let’s say the 2026 Lakers are a lotto team but not a bottom 2 team. The odds are now in favor of Utah getting their pick.

I don’t get how you can’t understand this is a calculated risk by Ainge. If he gets the 9th overall pick in 2027 that’s worth far more than 2 late firsts he could have gotten this year. Utah has 9 extra 1sts over the next 6 years. More late firsts are not helpful right now.

There is a chance this is a fake lotto pick. If so, Ainge fails, but not horribly. There is also a realistic chance this becomes a good lotto pick. The Lakers haven’t been proven competent enough to stop that outcome. This is an upside play by Ainge, those always have more risk. It’s likely a worthwhile risk for a team already loaded with 1sts.
tamaraw08
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,632
And1: 2,071
Joined: Feb 13, 2019
     

Re: Let’s talk about that Lakers trade 

Post#97 » by tamaraw08 » Wed Mar 15, 2023 4:23 pm

Floody100 wrote:I still don’t understand how this version of Russell Westbrook & a first round pick that has protections on it can get you all of D’Lo, Beasley & Vanderbilt.
Their was talks about Vanderbilt costing a first round pick which is why I find it ridiculous that they were able to get both Beasley & Russell as well.
The Lakers FO has been atrocious for years & yet constantly get rewarded for it.

Rant over.

Lakers Rob Pelinka has a sex tape of ex Celtic and current Jazz exec Danny Ainge. And if Danny don’t cooperate, that video would be released to the public, plain and simple.
That or Rob is a disciple of Yoda and Jedi mind tricked Ainge.
User avatar
TimeisIllmatic
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,911
And1: 351
Joined: Aug 18, 2020
     

Re: Let’s talk about that Lakers trade 

Post#98 » by TimeisIllmatic » Wed Mar 15, 2023 4:26 pm

LAvision wrote:It will always makes me laugh that the only GM that managed to finessed Ainge was Pelinka of all people. :lol:


Not once but twice in the same season. They were able to get off THT's contract without giving up any picks.
shrink
RealGM
Posts: 59,308
And1: 19,322
Joined: Sep 26, 2005

Re: Let’s talk about that Lakers trade 

Post#99 » by shrink » Wed Mar 15, 2023 4:52 pm

Dr Aki wrote:On the one hand, you've previously said DLo was a negative contract. Well if he was negative, then Conley had to be MORE NEGATIVE, and thus required NAW and 3 SRPs to bridge the difference in value.

But apparently Conley's not negative, but is instead a positive contract. You would've kept Conley for LA and cut Minnesota out. So then explain why Utah and LA were willingly giving up assets to move him? On Ainge's end, it's because Utah clearly wanted the cap space. From Pelinka's end, he preferred youth.

Dr. Aki, your entire premise on trade value relies on the idea that the Lakers would still agree to the Jazz trade AFTER Kyrie became a possibility this summer. In fact you specifically said this:

Dr Aki wrote:The trade between the Lakers and Jazz had already been agreed to in principle (Westbrook/JTA/Jones/2027 FRP for Conley/Beasley/Vando) until Kyrie demanded a trade and the Lakers asked the Jazz to hold off a bit to see if they could land Kyrie

I think it’s highly likely that when Kyrie became available, the Lakers pulled the trade, because retaining an expiring Westbrook, and not Conley’s two year deal, kept that door open to get Kyrie next year.

So put yourself in Ainge’s shoes. If this trade doesn’t go through, he maintains a bunch of role players he doesn’t need, and an ex-All Star in Conley. He already traded both Gobert and Donovan Mitchell to try to rebuild, but these players are keeping him in contention. Plus he loses the chance to turn the pile into the lightly protected Lakers future 1st! OR .. he can throw some minor assets to Minnesota to save the trade. Love DLo or hate him, he is still an expiring, which keeps the Kyrie door open.

This valuation BY UTA does not mean DLo is positive overall, or that Conley is positive overall. We don’t know what Conley could have been traded for elsewhere. What we do know is that saving the trade and getting the Lakers 1st was worth NAW and seconds to Ainge. Moreover, the fact that Ainge couldn’t get Pelinka to help meet Connelly’s extra price (not even paying one of the three 2nds!) suggests that the Lakers don’t see DLo as incredibly valuable and were willing to walk away from the trade. But as I’ve mentioned, when all three teams have such widely different usage for the assets involved, there is a lot of extra value for each team to lap up, and the GM’s can negotiate to try to get more of it, hoping the other guy blinks first.
Warriors Analyst
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,872
And1: 2,707
Joined: May 16, 2005

Re: Let’s talk about that Lakers trade 

Post#100 » by Warriors Analyst » Wed Mar 15, 2023 4:55 pm

Floody100 wrote:I still don’t understand how this version of Russell Westbrook & a first round pick that has protections on it can get you all of D’Lo, Beasley & Vanderbilt.
Their was talks about Vanderbilt costing a first round pick which is why I find it ridiculous that they were able to get both Beasley & Russell as well.
The Lakers FO has been atrocious for years & yet constantly get rewarded for it.

Rant over.


The trades that the Lakers spun all would have been laughed at in our own trades and transactions board. Sometimes it's hard not to believe that the Lakers don't get favorable treatment in deals.

Return to The General Board


cron