Lakers got Davis.

[TorturedBlazerFan]

Lowe is probably the best at what he does.

I think Lowe is good at his job, and knowledgeable, which is rare at ESPN these days... I think there are a lot of good basketball minds and opinions and their are valid arguments on both sides. It's not about "knowing more" than Lowe, it's about that we have different opinions on things and if we all just had to take Zach's opinion and conformed to that, places like this would get real boring because there wouldn't be anything to discuss.

 

[PCmor7]

Lowe is probably the best at what he does.

<end forum>

 

[kjironman1]

<end forum>

Or the forum could just be about who knows more about what. Maybe even every idea that doesn't match Zach Lowe?

 

[PCmor7]

Or the forum could just be about who knows more about what. Maybe even every idea that doesn't match Zach Lowe?

Zach Lowe knows all. There's really no point in further discussion once he's told us how it is.

 

[oldmangrouch]

Yeah but people in here know more than Zach Lowe

Oh please. PR spin is not thoughtful analysis. This view of the deal is just as unrealistic as that of the worst gloom-and-doom poster.

 

[Cugel]

Lonzo Ball sucks. A PG that shoots < 50% from the FT line.

He is the guy you foul when the game is on the line. Absolutely fucking pathetic. Given his inability to shoot and play even close to a complete season, I would trade him immediately and get some scoring. Andre Drummund is a better shooter for fux sake.

 

[THE HCP]

That was fun

You're better than this FAMS.

 

[calvin natt]

Oh please. PR spin is not thoughtful analysis. This view of the deal is just as unrealistic as that of the worst gloom-and-doom poster.

Huh? Why is Zach Lowe going to “PR spin” his analysis of a trade? And why spin it against the LA Lakers?

 

[hoopsjock]

Yeah but people in here know more than Zach Lowe

I'm sorry but your post is stupid. He's no different than any poster in here except that he gets paid for his opinions and writing and that gives him access to more information. I'm not claiming he's not good at what he does but c'mon man this is silly that his opinion makes other opinions wrong. The only thing that can prove either side is what actually happens.

Let's see what he had to say about the Boston Celtics trading Pierce and Garnett to Brooklyn. Oh look at that, he put Boston in his loser category for off season moves and thought it was a big risk since the Brooklyn picks might not be very valuable because he expected Brooklyn to be good for awhile.

 

[calvin natt]

I'm sorry but your post is stupid. He's no different than any poster in here except that he gets paid for his opinions and writing and that gives him access to more information. I'm not claiming he's not good at what he does but c'mon man this is silly that his opinion makes other opinions wrong. The only thing that can prove either side is what actually happens.

Let's see what he had to say about the Boston Celtics trading Pierce and Garnett to Brooklyn. Oh look at that, he put Boston in his loser category for off season moves and thought it was a big risk since the Brooklyn picks might not be very valuable because he expected Brooklyn to be good for awhile.

I didn’t say NOP did well ‘because” Zach Lowe said so. I stated it myself. Others did too. Then I saw Lowe’s take. And so a guy who is considered great at his job, who gets paid well to do it and knows a shit ton about the league thought NOP did well. That’s all. He’s no different than any poster in here? Um, yeah.

 

[Wizard Mentor]

Stats:
2018-19 Anthony Davis: Played 56 games (current age:26, but played 70+ games in only 2 of 7 seasons).
2018-19 LBJ: Played 55 games (current age:34).

Pic:

 

[blazerfan11]

As we are Trail Blazer fans, we're hoping they both are mediocre. Middle of the road for both teams would be the best outcome. Nobody pans out for New Orleans, but the Lakers are good enough to be an 8th. They have no motivation to tank for several years.

 

[oldmangrouch]

Huh? Why is Zach Lowe going to “PR spin” his analysis of a trade? And why spin it against the LA Lakers?

Would you agree that the media and the league have a symbiotic relationship?

The other view of this trade, is that an aging star, a high powered agent, and a (poorly run) big market team bullied a small market team into trading their best player. Meanwhile, the NBA was either powerless to do anything or were silently in the Lakers' corner. Not exactly good for the credibility of the NBA. The league (and the media that covers them) need to maintain the image of fairness and competitive balance.

If you honestly believe Ball and/or Ingram (or Garland with the 4th pick) are going to be stars - cool. That's the sort of debate we are here for. Trying to ridicule people because they disagree with media hype? That came across as really condescending.

 

[oldmangrouch]

As we are Trail Blazer fans, we're hoping they both are mediocre. Middle of the road for both teams would be the best outcome. Nobody pans out for New Orleans, but the Lakers are good enough to be an 8th. They have no motivation to tank for several years.

That's true with one caveat. Next time, the Blazers could be the small market team getting bullied.

 

[BonesJones]

Guys, I'm Zach Lowe. Conform.

 

[calvin natt]

Would you agree that the media and the league have a symbiotic relationship?

The other view of this trade, is that an aging star, a high powered agent, and a (poorly run) big market team bullied a small market team into trading their best player. Meanwhile, the NBA was either powerless to do anything or were silently in the Lakers' corner. Not exactly good for the credibility of the NBA. The league (and the media that covers them) need to maintain the image of fairness and competitive balance.

If you honestly believe Ball and/or Ingram (or Garland with the 4th pick) are going to be stars - cool. That's the sort of debate we are here for. Trying to ridicule people because they disagree with media hype? That came across as really condescending.

I do not believe that Zach Lowe is trying to pump up the NOP end of the deal to make the NBA look good. No. I do not. That is completely asinine. It’s weird that you think I’m ridiculing people for not agreeing with Lowe. I’m simply saying that the NOP didn’t get hosed on this deal, like some wrote here, and a pretty well respected NBA writer happens to agree. They got picks and three good young players. They were given control of several years worth of Laker picks. A team that is now completely and totally at the mercy of two people, one who is getting old (Father Time is undefeated) and the other who is a tremendous player who seems injury prone. They have no depth and the brainiac who (with Magic) surrounded Lebron with gems like Stevenson, Beasley, Rondo and Javale McGee,and traded Zubac for Mike Muscala is still there. So yeah. I think NOP did well.

 

[calvin natt]

Guys, I'm Zach Lowe. Conform.

Gimme a break

 

[craigehlo]

I'm worried that the Lakers will do something smart like hire solid role players with their remaining cap like Pat Beverly. But it's the Lakers so they will swing for the fences again and get another ball-dominant player to hurt any chance of chemistry.

 

[Sarni]

Would you agree that the media and the league have a symbiotic relationship?

The other view of this trade, is that an aging star, a high powered agent, and a (poorly run) big market team bullied a small market team into trading their best player. Meanwhile, the NBA was either powerless to do anything or were silently in the Lakers' corner. Not exactly good for the credibility of the NBA. The league (and the media that covers them) need to maintain the image of fairness and competitive balance.

If you honestly believe Ball and/or Ingram (or Garland with the 4th pick) are going to be stars - cool. That's the sort of debate we are here for. Trying to ridicule people because they disagree with media hype? That came across as really condescending.

They had to trade him because he wanted to leave and he had valid reasons considering their record during his era.

It’s really not like they traded him for crap. They got a huge, huge deal. Lakers have given everything they had for him and bet their entire future on him, up until 2025. Five years of tanking and 7 years of future to get AD. That’s a huge effort regardless whether you like Ball, Ingram, Hart and essentially five drafts picks or not.

They got 7 years out of AD, time to part ways. At least they were able to get themselves into position where their outlook for future looks bright. Imagine if they traded him for someone like DeRozan with a view of being at best fairly decent for the next 2-3 years.

 

[Sarni]

I'm worried that the Lakers will do something smart like hire solid role players with their remaining cap like Pat Beverly. But it's the Lakers so they will swing for the fences again and get another ball-dominant player to hurt any chance of chemistry.

I hope they give out multiple 3-4 year deal to guys like Beverley, Green etc. They will make them good next season but it will steadily get worse and they will have zero means of trading them because they cannot offer any picks until 2026 or 2027.

 

[hoopsjock]

I do not believe that Zach Lowe is trying to pump up the NOP end of the deal to make the NBA look good. No. I do not. That is completely asinine. It’s weird that you think I’m ridiculing people for not agreeing with Lowe. I’m simply saying that the NOP didn’t get hosed on this deal, like some wrote here, and a pretty well respected NBA writer happens to agree. They got picks and three good young players. They were given control of several years worth of Laker picks. A team that is now completely and totally at the mercy of two people, one who is getting old (Father Time is undefeated) and the other who is a tremendous player who seems injury prone. They have no depth and the brainiac who (with Magic) surrounded Lebron with gems like Stevenson, Beasley, Rondo and Javale McGee,and traded Zubac for Mike Muscala is still there. So yeah. I think NOP did well.

That same person thought Boston got ripped off in the Brooklyn heist.

 

[BonesJones]

Gimme a break

Okay, you can take a break. I'll continue getting these zeroes to conform!

 

[Lanny]

Perhaps Davis will have another serious injury. Then where will they be. That's right up shit creek with no paddle.

 

[craigehlo]

I hope they give out multiple 3-4 year deal to guys like Beverley, Green etc. They will make them good next season but it will steadily get worse and they will have zero means of trading them because they cannot offer any picks until 2026 or 2027.

Green is washed. Pat still has a couple good years left and doesn't need the rock to be effective IMHO.

The real brick wall the Lakers running into is LeBron turning 35. The window is slamming shut.

 

[Sarni]

Green is washed. Pat still has a couple good years left and doesn't need the rock to be effective IMHO.

The real brick wall the Lakers running into is LeBron turning 35. The window is slamming shut.

Green was quite good in the Finals. I meant Danny not Jeff.

 

[hoopsjock]

They had to trade him because he wanted to leave and he had valid reasons considering their record during his era.

It’s really not like they traded him for crap. They got a huge, huge deal. Lakers have given everything they had for him and bet their entire future on him, up until 2025. Five years of tanking and 7 years of future to get AD. That’s a huge effort regardless whether you like Ball, Ingram, Hart and essentially five drafts picks or not.

They got 7 years out of AD, time to part ways. At least they were able to get themselves into position where their outlook for future looks bright. Imagine if they traded him for someone like DeRozan with a view of being at best fairly decent for the next 2-3 years.

Why didn't they make the Lakers take Solomon Hill though? It would have made it much harder for the Lakers to build a good team thus probably making their draft picks worth more.

 

[blazerfan11]

They had to trade him because he wanted to leave and he had valid reasons considering their record during his era.

It’s really not like they traded him for crap. They got a huge, huge deal. Lakers have given everything they had for him and bet their entire future on him, up until 2025. Five years of tanking and 7 years of future to get AD. That’s a huge effort regardless whether you like Ball, Ingram, Hart and essentially five drafts picks or not.

They got 7 years out of AD, time to part ways. At least they were able to get themselves into position where their outlook for future looks bright. Imagine if they traded him for someone like DeRozan with a view of being at best fairly decent for the next 2-3 years.

Huge in what sense? The Lakers got the huge deal. The pelicans got a lot of stuff and how much value there is remains to be seen. If it’s me, if you give quality you have to get back as much quality as possible.
Would people look at this trade differently if the Pelicans didn’t have the #1 pick in the upcoming draft? Getting many parts would not look as good in my opinion.

 

[craigehlo]

The Pels will be clear winner on one condition, if they can trade Ball for some actual talent. He's backup at best and if Griffin know what he's doing, he'll dump him ASAP.

 

[BonesJones]

The Pels will be clear winner on one condition, if they can trade Ball for some actual talent. He's backup at best and if Griffin know what he's doing, he'll dump him ASAP.

Ball+Moore for Covington, then they sign D'Angelo Russell.

Russell / Holiday / Covington / Zion / ?

With Hart and Ingram off the bench.

Thatd be insane.

 

[Lanny]

Huge in what sense? The Lakers got the huge deal. The pelicans got a lot of stuff and how much value there is remains to be seen. If it’s me, if you give quality you have to get back as much quality as possible.
Would people look at this trade differently if the Pelicans didn’t have the #1 pick in the upcoming draft? Getting many parts would not look as good in my opinion.

Pelicans got the number four draft pick in the upcoming draft. That ain't nothin' you know.