The Era of Lebron James Anothony Davis & Russell Westbrook

[Kilroy]

You'd have to imagine/hope that AD's at home right now taking a hard look at his decisions, commitment, and wondering where he wants to be in all this if LeBron steps...
My interest in this team probably hinges most on that particular internal dialogue...
AD becomes a true Laker if he comes back next year with a f-lebron, I'm carrying this team attitude and starts demanding his place on the franchise, instead of letting it be dictated by LeBron...
If I'm AD, I'm having my own meetings with Pelinka and issuing my own demands... Build the team around me and we can still go all the way... then come out in shape and play like it.

[zimpy27]

You'd have to imagine/hope that AD's at home right now taking a hard look at his decisions, commitment, and wondering where he wants to be in all this if LeBron steps...
My interest in this team probably hinges most on that particular internal dialogue...
AD becomes a true Laker if he comes back next year with a f-lebron, I'm carrying this team attitude and starts demanding his place on the franchise, instead of letting it be dictated by LeBron...
If I'm AD, I'm having my own meetings with Pelinka and issuing my own demands... Build the team around me and we can still go all the way... then come out in shape and play like it.

Davis absolutely should have this attitude. Just not sure that's his personality.

[Kilroy]

You'd have to imagine/hope that AD's at home right now taking a hard look at his decisions, commitment, and wondering where he wants to be in all this if LeBron steps...
My interest in this team probably hinges most on that particular internal dialogue...
AD becomes a true Laker if he comes back next year with a f-lebron, I'm carrying this team attitude and starts demanding his place on the franchise, instead of letting it be dictated by LeBron...
If I'm AD, I'm having my own meetings with Pelinka and issuing my own demands... Build the team around me and we can still go all the way... then come out in shape and play like it.

Davis absolutely should have this attitude. Just not sure that's his personality.

It clearly hasn't been up to this point, but if he doesn't realize he's at a crossroads and his legacy is on the line, he may never get it...

[zimpy27]

You'd have to imagine/hope that AD's at home right now taking a hard look at his decisions, commitment, and wondering where he wants to be in all this if LeBron steps...
My interest in this team probably hinges most on that particular internal dialogue...
AD becomes a true Laker if he comes back next year with a f-lebron, I'm carrying this team attitude and starts demanding his place on the franchise, instead of letting it be dictated by LeBron...
If I'm AD, I'm having my own meetings with Pelinka and issuing my own demands... Build the team around me and we can still go all the way... then come out in shape and play like it.

Davis absolutely should have this attitude. Just not sure that's his personality.

It clearly hasn't been up to this point, but if he doesn't realize he's at a crossroads and his legacy is on the line, he may never get it...

If LeBron leaves then Lakers have a ton of capspace in 2023. I think Davis not taking the "I'm the leader attitude" could be advantageous for attracting an FA that can see this as their team. That's a positive spin on it I guess.

[Kilroy]

Davis absolutely should have this attitude. Just not sure that's his personality.

It clearly hasn't been up to this point, but if he doesn't realize he's at a crossroads and his legacy is on the line, he may never get it...

If LeBron leaves then Lakers have a ton of capspace in 2023. I think Davis not taking the "I'm the leader attitude" could be advantageous for attracting an FA that can see this as their team. That's a positive spin on it I guess.

I can see that... I just wonder if having AD on the team if he doesn't see himself as an alpha makes any sense at all... If he's content to ride someone elses talents to the finals, then he's probably not committed enough to get his body right and stay in peak physical and mental shape for the season... Clearly coasting doesn't work for him.
If I'm Rob and if Davis hasn't already come to me talking about what he, himself, wants for next season, I'm already putting trade feelers out there, and moving him would be job 1, even before moving LeBron if he wants out.

[euphorbus]

I hate to say it, but LeBron, Ariza, Howard, and Anthony can no longer move their legs fast enough to get to their spots on defense. It's sad to watch.

And they scoffed when people said "The team is too old."

[Landsberger]

I know the "who's smarter" stuff relies on bending those terms but I've never seen the advantage in it.

Well it comes down to your premise, that the Laker brand is from a by-gone era...."this isn't the Lakers of 2000". Followed with the statement that AD wasn't a FA...which is technically true, but the comment that we "traded guys that they wanted" or whatever the exact words were. AD being a trade is the "facts" in the history book....but really doesn't tell the story from the people who lived it. The Pelicans didn't trade AD to the Lakers cause they know a good deal when they see one. And we all know why there weren't 6-7 teams trying to match our deals. Were there ANY teams trying to make deals with the Pelicans there at the last few months of negotiations?

Fine...Star free agents don't wanna come here. But star players want to force trades to get here. Doesn't that kinda feel like the same thing?

We're talking about 2 different things. The premiss that our super smart brain trust see's a top 5 ever player falling to a cellar dweller isn't the point. The fact is we traded players to make that happen... if it did happen that way.

The point I'm making about Davis is that we traded 3 years of rebuilding assets for him. So what if he wanted to come here? The cupboards are just as bare either way.

I just see little sense in the argument as the reality is the same.... the supporting story is all that's different.

[danfantastk32]

I know the "who's smarter" stuff relies on bending those terms but I've never seen the advantage in it.

Well it comes down to your premise, that the Laker brand is from a by-gone era...."this isn't the Lakers of 2000". Followed with the statement that AD wasn't a FA...which is technically true, but the comment that we "traded guys that they wanted" or whatever the exact words were. AD being a trade is the "facts" in the history book....but really doesn't tell the story from the people who lived it. The Pelicans didn't trade AD to the Lakers cause they know a good deal when they see one. And we all know why there weren't 6-7 teams trying to match our deals. Were there ANY teams trying to make deals with the Pelicans there at the last few months of negotiations?

Fine...Star free agents don't wanna come here. But star players want to force trades to get here. Doesn't that kinda feel like the same thing?

We're talking about 2 different things. The premiss that our super smart brain trust see's a top 5 ever player falling to a cellar dweller isn't the point. The fact is we traded players to make that happen... if it did happen that way.

The point I'm making about Davis is that we traded 3 years of rebuilding assets for him. So what if he wanted to come here? The cupboards are just as bare either way.

I just see little sense in the argument as the reality is the same.... the supporting story is all that's different.

"Collecting "available" stars every 3 years isn't a strategy.... and LA isn't the LA of the early 2000's either. Who wants to give up an additional 25% in taxes.... I'm not talking about just salary. A top star makes a couple times that in endorsements and that will be taxed in CA."

So this was your first statement. I'm not seeing anything here about 'bare cupboards'. Your painting the picture that stars don't see LA as a destination anymore. So then it's followed by your next paragraph:

"As for Davis.... he didn't come here via FA. He came here because we traded and we had picks and players that someone else wanted....you know... those picks we that created boarder line stars...."

So with the context of your first paragraph....I think it IS important to point out that while Davis was technically a trade, the WHOLE TRUTH behind what happened disproves the idea that this "isnt the LA of the early 2000's". And with that in mind, you ask 'so what if he wanted to come here, the cupboards are bare either way'. Well....the fact that he wanted to come here, and forced a trade tells me that if we had had nothing to trade to make the deal happen right then and there, then we'd have got him in free agency.

The root of my argument here, is that I disagree with your concept, that the appeal of LA isn't what it used to be. You used Davis as an example of us having to trade to get our stars.....when the REAL truth here, is that we were gonna get Davis either way. He wanted to come HERE. Not Philly, not Miami, not Portland....HERE. And so really in the end, that's the important thing. This splitting hairs, of it being a trade, it being this, it being that.....the part that matters to the Laker franchise is: do star players want to come here. And so far, the answer is still yes.

I don't think we need to build through the draft. Picks would definitely be nice, as they are options, if nothing else. I'd argue that the Lakers like the star route, and that the star route is still alive in LA. Trade or FA....doesn't matter to me. The real part that matters, is if said star player has made his mind up to be a Laker. Because if he has, then the rest sorts itself out.

[danfantastk32]

I'm not saying it's all peaches and roses. Your right that Lebron's don't grow on trees.

But besides winning a title, I think the Lebron and AD "era" showed future NBA mega stars this: Guys want to come to LA. So if you sign....others will come. And we will sell/trade all our assets to go all in, because the Lakers make it happen.

All the LA Lakers need, is to not be a dumpster fire. It just needs something shiny. We were utter garbage for 5-6 years, and all it took was getting Magic in the building....and wouldn't you know it?? Lebron suddenly wants to come. Oh what's that? Now Davis wants to come??

We may (prob will) go through a few stinky years moving forward....but the seeds have been sown. There were alot of questions after Jerry passed, and this team hit the skids like it had never done before. But all it took was a little sunshine....and it took off. Nobody thinks Jeanie "can't do it like here father" now. She did it.

She can now sit down with Ja Morant, or whoever it might be down the line....and put out a pitch with the goods to back it up.

[LAKESHOW]

Regardless of the Era. We will need a New Coach to Lead us into it. Someone who can coach both sides of the ball

[slifersd]

You'd have to imagine/hope that AD's at home right now taking a hard look at his decisions, commitment, and wondering where he wants to be in all this if LeBron steps...
My interest in this team probably hinges most on that particular internal dialogue...
AD becomes a true Laker if he comes back next year with a f-lebron, I'm carrying this team attitude and starts demanding his place on the franchise, instead of letting it be dictated by LeBron...
If I'm AD, I'm having my own meetings with Pelinka and issuing my own demands... Build the team around me and we can still go all the way... then come out in shape and play like it.

Problem is, do we as a team even want to build around AD? Even if you think AD is a top 5 talent, which is debatable at this point, his durability makes it almost impossible to construct anything around him. We can't build a team around him, play well for three weeks, and then suck for the next 4-6 weeks because AD slipped and fell and injured something again. Superstars need to be both talented and available, and AD most definitely doesn't have the available part down.

To me, this team needs to let basketball people run basketball departments. We cannot let Klutch be the driving force behind everything. If they want to help recruit players, then by all means feel free to do so, but they cannot be making decisions on our behalf. If our front office thinks Buddy Hield is a better fit, then we should be able to tell Klutch to kick rocks when they say they want Westbrook.

[Landsberger]

I'm not saying it's all peaches and roses. Your right that Lebron's don't grow on trees.

But besides winning a title, I think the Lebron and AD "era" showed future NBA mega stars this: Guys want to come to LA. So if you sign....others will come. And we will sell/trade all our assets to go all in, because the Lakers make it happen.

All the LA Lakers need, is to not be a dumpster fire. It just needs something shiny. We were utter garbage for 5-6 years, and all it took was getting Magic in the building....and wouldn't you know it?? Lebron suddenly wants to come. Oh what's that? Now Davis wants to come??

We may (prob will) go through a few stinky years moving forward....but the seeds have been sown. There were alot of questions after Jerry passed, and this team hit the skids like it had never done before. But all it took was a little sunshine....and it took off. Nobody thinks Jeanie "can't do it like here father" now. She did it.

She can now sit down with Ja Morant, or whoever it might be down the line....and put out a pitch with the goods to back it up.

Did you just imply that Jerry would have allowed Lebron to force the team into Westbrook in an attempt to say Jeanie can do what he did? It goes both ways. Jeanie was at the helm in all reality when we paid a ransom for Nash as well. She was there for Deng wasn't she?

Someone post the list of top FA's and even mid level FA's that used LA for leverage during the Kobe era. It's pretty lengthy if memory serves.

I think we need new ownership quite frankly. Having owners that live off the team will limit what we do to home run swings. Nothing I've seen since Jerry died shows me that's not the case. Waiting for another player to fall in love with LA isn't a strategy.

[danfantastk32]

Waiting for another player to fall in love with LA isn't a strategy.

There's prob a shade of gray somewhere in there where we're not purely "waiting for another player to fall in love with LA". My point of contention has been all along that the "Laker way" (signing or TRADING) top players is not dead.

I don't think it's a particularly horrible plan, for what it's worth. We go all in, and either trade picks, or have pretty high picks, that rarely pan out. Signing Shaq, drafting (I'll call it drafting) Kobe, getting Phil to come to LA, and bringing guys like Harper, Grant, with him. Somehow Turning Kwame into Gasol. Getting Dwight in his prime, And CP3...I mean old ass Nash. Signing Lebron, getting AD. I've prob missed a couple....Oh, Artest wanting to come. Don't know if that was sign or Trade. Anyhow....point is, I think the Lakers have done alright by that game plan. Our biggest drought was the 2010's. I'll argue that we did get interviews with star players during that period there for a bit, and I guess it remains to be seen if that was purely Jim and Mitch's ineptitude, or maybe the luster of the Lakers has worn off a little. Again...it doesn't look good for Jim that Magic rolls in, and just happens to sign the biggest name in the game the next year.

Yes, I will be fair, and admit that by that point we had amassed some nice potential talent. There are "realities" to everything. Magic didn't sign Lebron in a vacuum. But even with all that, point is the Lakers seem to pull it off, and pull it off more than most. At the end of the day, I can look back at the last quarter of a century, and say the "Laker ride" has been better than any other team.

Oh...yeah, totally forgot Malone and Payton. I mean....come on. You have to admit, we've at least done "well" since Showtime ended.

[Hans1984]

...is over soon! Thank god.

[LAKESHOW]

I will take credit for this, I called it from the get, Malik Monk turned out to be a very solid player for our team.
That and 50 cents won't be able to get you a cup of coffee. But what the heck, I gotta grab onto something this season

[Landsberger]

Waiting for another player to fall in love with LA isn't a strategy.

There's prob a shade of gray somewhere in there where we're not purely "waiting for another player to fall in love with LA". My point of contention has been all along that the "Laker way" (signing or TRADING) top players is not dead.

I don't think it's a particularly horrible plan, for what it's worth. We go all in, and either trade picks, or have pretty high picks, that rarely pan out. Signing Shaq, drafting (I'll call it drafting) Kobe, getting Phil to come to LA, and bringing guys like Harper, Grant, with him. Somehow Turning Kwame into Gasol. Getting Dwight in his prime, And CP3...I mean old ass Nash. Signing Lebron, getting AD. I've prob missed a couple....Oh, Artest wanting to come. Don't know if that was sign or Trade. Anyhow....point is, I think the Lakers have done alright by that game plan. Our biggest drought was the 2010's. I'll argue that we did get interviews with star players during that period there for a bit, and I guess it remains to be seen if that was purely Jim and Mitch's ineptitude, or maybe the luster of the Lakers has worn off a little. Again...it doesn't look good for Jim that Magic rolls in, and just happens to sign the biggest name in the game the next year.

Yes, I will be fair, and admit that by that point we had amassed some nice potential talent. There are "realities" to everything. Magic didn't sign Lebron in a vacuum. But even with all that, point is the Lakers seem to pull it off, and pull it off more than most. At the end of the day, I can look back at the last quarter of a century, and say the "Laker ride" has been better than any other team.

Oh...yeah, totally forgot Malone and Payton. I mean....come on. You have to admit, we've at least done "well" since Showtime ended.

So, who's the odds on favorites this year? PHX?, Bucks?, GS?, Memphis?.... the C's are hot. Where did the core of those teams come from?

Look, I was for trading our young guys because there was no leader in there. Some good players but the type that franchises cling to for too long hoping that they grow. Russell, Ingram, Ball and Randle are all going to make a crap load of money but none of them will be a reason a team wins a championship. The only pick you could say we could have done better at our slot with is missing Booker. Russell redefines unremarkable player with minimal impact.

I actually questioned the Davis trade in the face of the hurricane of "he's a generational player" wind from most here. I just looked at that thread for giggles the other day....

In the one and done era there is little to go on with the kids coming in. You combine that with a league that believes 35% shots are the most important thing a player can do and you get the decline if the game we're seeing.

There is no talent like a Kobe, LeBron, Jordan or even Shaq around right now. The Freak is very good as is Durant but they are not in that group. It will be the first time the NBA won't have a generational player playing when LeBron retires or declines.

[LAKESHOW]

Worst Trade in Laker History
-Magic

[Landsberger]

Worst Trade in Laker History
-Magic

Nash trade wasn't good. Dantley for Haywood wasn't good. Butler for Brown wasn't good either.

[sonnyhill]

Well it comes down to your premise, that the Laker brand is from a by-gone era...."this isn't the Lakers of 2000". Followed with the statement that AD wasn't a FA...which is technically true, but the comment that we "traded guys that they wanted" or whatever the exact words were. AD being a trade is the "facts" in the history book....but really doesn't tell the story from the people who lived it. The Pelicans didn't trade AD to the Lakers cause they know a good deal when they see one. And we all know why there weren't 6-7 teams trying to match our deals. Were there ANY teams trying to make deals with the Pelicans there at the last few months of negotiations?

Fine...Star free agents don't wanna come here. But star players want to force trades to get here. Doesn't that kinda feel like the same thing?

We're talking about 2 different things. The premiss that our super smart brain trust see's a top 5 ever player falling to a cellar dweller isn't the point. The fact is we traded players to make that happen... if it did happen that way.

The point I'm making about Davis is that we traded 3 years of rebuilding assets for him. So what if he wanted to come here? The cupboards are just as bare either way.

I just see little sense in the argument as the reality is the same.... the supporting story is all that's different.

"Collecting "available" stars every 3 years isn't a strategy.... and LA isn't the LA of the early 2000's either. Who wants to give up an additional 25% in taxes.... I'm not talking about just salary. A top star makes a couple times that in endorsements and that will be taxed in CA."

So this was your first statement. I'm not seeing anything here about 'bare cupboards'. Your painting the picture that stars don't see LA as a destination anymore. So then it's followed by your next paragraph:

"As for Davis.... he didn't come here via FA. He came here because we traded and we had picks and players that someone else wanted....you know... those picks we that created boarder line stars...."

So with the context of your first paragraph....I think it IS important to point out that while Davis was technically a trade, the WHOLE TRUTH behind what happened disproves the idea that this "isnt the LA of the early 2000's". And with that in mind, you ask 'so what if he wanted to come here, the cupboards are bare either way'. Well....the fact that he wanted to come here, and forced a trade tells me that if we had had nothing to trade to make the deal happen right then and there, then we'd have got him in free agency.

The root of my argument here, is that I disagree with your concept, that the appeal of LA isn't what it used to be. You used Davis as an example of us having to trade to get our stars.....when the REAL truth here, is that we were gonna get Davis either way. He wanted to come HERE. Not Philly, not Miami, not Portland....HERE. And so really in the end, that's the important thing. This splitting hairs, of it being a trade, it being this, it being that.....the part that matters to the Laker franchise is: do star players want to come here. And so far, the answer is still yes.

I don't think we need to build through the draft. Picks would definitely be nice, as they are options, if nothing else. I'd argue that the Lakers like the star route, and that the star route is still alive in LA. Trade or FA....doesn't matter to me. The real part that matters, is if said star player has made his mind up to be a Laker. Because if he has, then the rest sorts itself out.

Sadly, the Lakers are becoming to LA what the Knicks are to NY. The Knicks lost out on KD and Kyrie to the Nets; the Lakers lost out on Kawhi to the Clippers, and it only looks to get worse with the superior ownership, soon-to-be-built better arena, better coaching, and more investments into player development all being done by the Clippers.

The Laker brand is still magical; yet, it is tarnished and needs to be refreshed. Do Jeanie and Rob have the courage to go full rebuild or are they going to try to build around an aging LeBron and fragile AD? Also, do Jeanie and Rob have the necessary skill-sets to do this evaluation?

Is anyone else feeling like the franchise is at a cross-roads and needs to make some bold and decisive decisions this off-season?

[danfantastk32]

Sadly, the Lakers are becoming to LA what the Knicks are to NY. The Knicks lost out on KD and Kyrie to the Nets; the Lakers lost out on Kawhi to the Clippers, and it only looks to get worse with the superior ownership, soon-to-be-built better arena, better coaching, and more investments into player development all being done by the Clippers.

Man....get outa here with the clipper crap. Who cares what they're doing?

As for the Knicks....give me a break. The Knicks have won 2 finals. 70 and 73....like a billion years ago. The Lakers just won their 17th title a couple years ago. The two franchises are nothing alike....except popular in their respective region.