Woj: Celtics and Lakers Engaged with Pelicans on Anthony Davis Trade

[Slim Charless]

Just a thought:

I think he wants to win and be "the man" responsible for those wins. Since he didnt do it in Boston, maybe he thinks the team was the problem and not him. So, he will try again with the nets.

You aremost likely right, but just a really bizarre mindset imo. Ainge could easy shuffle his roster and retool around Kyrie.

Maybe, but he gave two years and all Ainge did was punt on moves and hold on to his assets.

I wonder if they miss on AD and Kyrie/Rozier leave will Ainge go all-in on someone like Beal? Wiz arent gonna try and win next year. Tatum and picks gets it done. If they can hold onto to Smart thats a nice backcourt

[LipSkinMatter]

What more does Kyrie want? Ainge has allowed him full control of the franchise and is also doing his best to acquire talents to help him. Leaving the Celtics would be a mistake imo.

SO much this. But, he wants to go home so really nothing more we could do.

Nobody in their right mind wants to play with a max'd Gordon Heyward and Al Horford. Sorry, your boy Ainge dropped the ball.

[durden_tyler]

Why are people still worried with one-year rentals?

We saw that with Kawhi, if you're a good enough team and getting a star puts you in another higher level (or title contender), you do it because the window of being legit contenders is really small.

[Blacksheep25]

Never underestimate the sense of urgency a second heart attack brings about. Ainge has been really conservative, but he may be thinking life is short and it’s time to take a shot and hope to get lucky. It’s dumb from a basketball standpoint, but he could get impatient given what the expectations were a year ago.

[reload141]

What more does Kyrie want? Ainge has allowed him full control of the franchise and is also doing his best to acquire talents to help him. Leaving the Celtics would be a mistake imo.

SO much this. But, he wants to go home so really nothing more we could do.

Nobody in their right mind wants to play with a max'd Gordon Heyward and Al Horford. Sorry, your boy Ainge dropped the ball.

Sorry but you really have NO idea what you're talking about.

[ballbrah]

Why are people still worried with one-year rentals?

We saw that with Kawhi, if you're a good enough team and getting a star puts you in another higher level (or title contender), you do it because the window of being legit contenders is really small.

It is a major risk. One injury, or just rough season and you just mortgaged your future for nothing. Raptors situation is rare. If Toronto lost to Philly (one shot away), Kawhi would be in LA right now ready to sign.

[Blacksheep25]

Plus the Raps gave up what could be viewed as a bad contract. They were close to just blowing it up and gave it a shot but it really wasn’t much risk. Tatum has a better post season as a rookie than Derozan has ever had. That’s a much bigger risk.

[Pointgod]

You admitted you're a Lakers' cheerleader so what's the point? This thread is full of trade ideas that are better than that poo poo platter so look for yourself. You think one thing while proclaiming that others know nothing about these situations and genuinely believe BI, Ball and #4 is the best offer.

Ever try talking to a wall?

Come on smart guy give me a trade offer. There are a lot of dumbasses on the general board that believe Ball and Ingram have no value, they certainly have their flaws but I’m going to take the opinions of NBA executives and actual talent evaluators over the arm chair GMs on this board. But please since you think you’re so knowledgeable let’s see these 1 year rental trades that beat that Lakers offer.

You opened the door, don’t chicken out now. I have some ideas of one year rentals in my mind but the fact the AD is going to explore free agency will dry up the market, but let’s see what you’ve got in mind. The Lakers offer is the best that we know of, those are the key words and to be honest it’s a more than fair offer for s guy that they know will 100% be a free agent next summer

[Das]

No one is going to offer more than the Lakers for a 1 year rental. This is not the same as the PG situation. Aaron Mints hates the Lakers after how they handled DLO and Randle. Kawhi is still up in the air. But AD and Rich Paul is adamant about being a Laker and theres no bad blood there. Ainge is not stupid enough to trade Tatum (who is very overrated here on RGM btw, although I wanted the Lakers to draft him).

[DusterBuster]

Why are people still worried with one-year rentals?

We saw that with Kawhi, if you're a good enough team and getting a star puts you in another higher level (or title contender), you do it because the window of being legit contenders is really small.

Each situation is different though. The Raptors got an insanely good deal for Kawhi because he was somewhat unknown/damaged goods when the Spurs were forced to move him. That deal was basically a "star for a star" trade. The Spurs weren't asking for half of another teams roster for Kawhi, in fact, they were the ones to add in additional value to the deal instead of the other way around when they included Green into the deal.

The Pelicans meanwhile are asking for half of a teams roster for a rental, which ends up putting the team renting him at a much more severe disadvantage to be able to contend for that upcoming year.

That said, you're right overall that teams should be less concerned about rentals nowadays. With NBA contracts only ever being 4-5 years anymore, it's increased the level of player movement dramatically every summer than what it was when teams could hand out 6 year deals.

[nickgammon]

Why are people still worried with one-year rentals?

We saw that with Kawhi, if you're a good enough team and getting a star puts you in another higher level (or title contender), you do it because the window of being legit contenders is really small.

Each situation is different though. The Raptors got an insanely good deal for Kawhi because he was somewhat unknown/damaged goods when the Spurs were forced to move him. That deal was basically a "star for a star" trade. The Spurs weren't asking for half of another teams roster for Kawhi, in fact, they were the ones to add in additional value to the deal instead of the other way around when they included Green into the deal.

The Pelicans meanwhile are asking for half of a teams roster for a rental, which ends up putting the team renting him at a much more severe disadvantage to be able to contend for that upcoming year.

That said, you're right overall that teams should be less concerned about rentals nowadays. With NBA contracts only ever being 4-5 years anymore, it's increased the level of player movement dramatically every summer than what it was when teams could hand out 6 year deals.

The Raptors had nothing to lose on that one. They dumped DeRozan’s bad contract and traded away a bench big. Also, Kawhi’s situation was a bit different. His agent never publicly came out and said if he gets traded to the Raptors “it’s a 1-year rental.” It kinda makes you think AD is going to half-ass it and probably fake a lot of injuries. If he cared about winning, he’d be happy to go to the Celtics and would do anything in his power to avoid be trading to the Lakers or Knicks. The guy wants the limelight.

I’m still very high on Tatum and Brown, so I don’t think it’s worth the risk. I’d rather see Ainge go for guys like Beal or Aaron Gordon if he becomes available.

[DusterBuster]

Why are people still worried with one-year rentals?

We saw that with Kawhi, if you're a good enough team and getting a star puts you in another higher level (or title contender), you do it because the window of being legit contenders is really small.

Each situation is different though. The Raptors got an insanely good deal for Kawhi because he was somewhat unknown/damaged goods when the Spurs were forced to move him. That deal was basically a "star for a star" trade. The Spurs weren't asking for half of another teams roster for Kawhi, in fact, they were the ones to add in additional value to the deal instead of the other way around when they included Green into the deal.

The Pelicans meanwhile are asking for half of a teams roster for a rental, which ends up putting the team renting him at a much more severe disadvantage to be able to contend for that upcoming year.

That said, you're right overall that teams should be less concerned about rentals nowadays. With NBA contracts only ever being 4-5 years anymore, it's increased the level of player movement dramatically every summer than what it was when teams could hand out 6 year deals.

The Raptors had nothing to lose on that one. They dumped DeRozan’s bad contract and traded away a bench big. Also, Kawhi’s situation was a bit different. His agent never publicly came out and said if he gets traded to the Raptors “it’s a 1-year rental.” It kinda makes you think AD is going to half-ass it and probably fake a lot of injuries. If he cared about winning, he’d be happy to go to the Celtics and would do anything in his power to avoid be trading to the Lakers or Knicks. The guy wants the limelight.

I’m still very high on Tatum and Brown, so I don’t think it’s worth the risk. I’d rather see Ainge go for guys like Beal or Aaron Gordon if he becomes available.

He didn't say it as openly and explicitly as Paul has, but it was made pretty clear that he was going to be a 1-year rental for anyone that's not a LA team. That is still the overwhelming likelihood right now, the only saving grace keeping the Raptors as a player here is the fact they've been so good with him and are on the cusp of a title.

If AD cared about winning, there's plenty of teams he'd be happy to goto - not just the Celtics can offer him a winning franchise. His whole "I only care about winning" line is a pile of horse-s when the only two teams you're willing to goto have been perpetual losers for 5-10 years now. He and his agent only care about going to a big market.

[TheRealKaboom]

Each situation is different though. The Raptors got an insanely good deal for Kawhi because he was somewhat unknown/damaged goods when the Spurs were forced to move him. That deal was basically a "star for a star" trade. The Spurs weren't asking for half of another teams roster for Kawhi, in fact, they were the ones to add in additional value to the deal instead of the other way around when they included Green into the deal.

The Pelicans meanwhile are asking for half of a teams roster for a rental, which ends up putting the team renting him at a much more severe disadvantage to be able to contend for that upcoming year.

That said, you're right overall that teams should be less concerned about rentals nowadays. With NBA contracts only ever being 4-5 years anymore, it's increased the level of player movement dramatically every summer than what it was when teams could hand out 6 year deals.

The Raptors had nothing to lose on that one. They dumped DeRozan’s bad contract and traded away a bench big. Also, Kawhi’s situation was a bit different. His agent never publicly came out and said if he gets traded to the Raptors “it’s a 1-year rental.” It kinda makes you think AD is going to half-ass it and probably fake a lot of injuries. If he cared about winning, he’d be happy to go to the Celtics and would do anything in his power to avoid be trading to the Lakers or Knicks. The guy wants the limelight.

I’m still very high on Tatum and Brown, so I don’t think it’s worth the risk. I’d rather see Ainge go for guys like Beal or Aaron Gordon if he becomes available.

He didn't say it as openly and explicitly as Paul has, but it was made pretty clear that he was going to be a 1-year rental for anyone that's not a LA team. That is still the overwhelming likelihood right now, the only saving grace keeping the Raptors as a player here is the fact they've been so good with him and are on the cusp of a title.

If AD cared about winning, there's plenty of teams he'd be happy to goto - not just the Celtics can offer him a winning franchise. His whole "I only care about winning" line is a pile of horse-s when the only two teams you're willing to goto have been perpetual losers for 5-10 years now. He and his agent only care about going to a big market.

He's going to a team with LeBron James, another max FA, and supporting players. That's the definition of wanting to win.

And it was never "an L.A. team". It has been, is, and always will be the Lakers.

[DusterBuster]

The Raptors had nothing to lose on that one. They dumped DeRozan’s bad contract and traded away a bench big. Also, Kawhi’s situation was a bit different. His agent never publicly came out and said if he gets traded to the Raptors “it’s a 1-year rental.” It kinda makes you think AD is going to half-ass it and probably fake a lot of injuries. If he cared about winning, he’d be happy to go to the Celtics and would do anything in his power to avoid be trading to the Lakers or Knicks. The guy wants the limelight.

I’m still very high on Tatum and Brown, so I don’t think it’s worth the risk. I’d rather see Ainge go for guys like Beal or Aaron Gordon if he becomes available.

He didn't say it as openly and explicitly as Paul has, but it was made pretty clear that he was going to be a 1-year rental for anyone that's not a LA team. That is still the overwhelming likelihood right now, the only saving grace keeping the Raptors as a player here is the fact they've been so good with him and are on the cusp of a title.

If AD cared about winning, there's plenty of teams he'd be happy to goto - not just the Celtics can offer him a winning franchise. His whole "I only care about winning" line is a pile of horse-s when the only two teams you're willing to goto have been perpetual losers for 5-10 years now. He and his agent only care about going to a big market.

He's going to a team with LeBron James, another max FA, and supporting players. That's the definition of wanting to win.

And it was never "an L.A. team". It has been, is, and always will be the Lakers.

The same LeBron James led team that couldn't crack 40 wins and what "supporting players" if the Lakers trade them all for AD? You're putting a lot of hope on them being able to cobble together a competent roster around AD and LeBron when competence hasn't exactly been the name of the game for the Lakers for awhile now.

[donato]

[/quote]
He's going to a team with LeBron James, another max FA, and supporting players. That's the definition of wanting to win.

And it was never "an L.A. team". It has been, is, and always will be the Lakers.[/quote]


That's fine, but you gotta pay the price. Otherwise somebody else gets AD and LeBron forces his way out.

[Roscoe Sheed]

If he wants to win he should stay in New Orleans. Zion is supposed to be the best prospect since Lebron and Holliday is a very good guard. That situation may be better than the lakers situation 2-3 years down the road. It’s not like Davis is an older player. He should see how things go with Zion before he demands a trade

[An Unbiased Fan]

He's going to a team with LeBron James, another max FA, and supporting players. That's the definition of wanting to win.

And it was never "an L.A. team". It has been, is, and always will be the Lakers.[/quote]


That's fine, but you gotta pay the price. Otherwise somebody else gets AD and LeBron forces his way out.[/quote]
LA would be fine with Lebron forcing his way out. Only reason he's not being traded is because it would be a bad look for the franchise.

[durden_tyler]

Why are people still worried with one-year rentals?

We saw that with Kawhi, if you're a good enough team and getting a star puts you in another higher level (or title contender), you do it because the window of being legit contenders is really small.

It is a major risk. One injury, or just rough season and you just mortgaged your future for nothing. Raptors situation is rare. If Toronto lost to Philly (one shot away), Kawhi would be in LA right now ready to sign.

Yeah, it's a risk (you can win a title and Kawhi still leaves). But it's a risk you're going to have to take because you know the championship window is small (unless your team is named the Warriors)

[iggymcfrack]

He's going to a team with LeBron James, another max FA, and supporting players. That's the definition of wanting to win.

And it was never "an L.A. team". It has been, is, and always will be the Lakers.

That's fine, but you gotta pay the price. Otherwise somebody else gets AD and LeBron forces his way out.[/quote]
LA would be fine with Lebron forcing his way out. Only reason he's not being traded is because it would be a bad look for the franchise.[/quote]

That’s one reason not to trade him. Another reason is that the Lakers are probably going to be co-favorites in the West next year with Kyrie and AD.

[iggymcfrack]

Why are people still worried with one-year rentals?

We saw that with Kawhi, if you're a good enough team and getting a star puts you in another higher level (or title contender), you do it because the window of being legit contenders is really small.

Honestly, Ball, Ingram, and the #4 pick are probably each more valuable than the entire trade package Toronto gave up combined. And they got a good starter in Danny Green plus Kawhi. If you’re going to try to actually beat out that Lakers package for a rental, you better be REALLY close to a title. The only team close enough to a title with enough assets for that to even be an option is Philly if they throw in Simmons and they don’t seem to have interest in going that wild on a trade package.