The Lakers paid a steep price to partner Davis with LeBron James: sending Lonzo Ball, Brandon Ingram, Josh Hart and the picks -- including the No. 4 overall selection in Thursday's NBA draft -- to the Pelicans, sources said. The Lakers were able to hold on to forward Kyle Kuzma in the trade, which cannot be finalized until July 6. Lkaers also provided another 2 first round draft picks supposedly, which if true, means a mortgage of the future. ON the upside, LaVar takes his mouth back east.

Hershel Walker deal all over again? They have AD, LeBron, Kuzma and 32 million In cap space. They might get Kemba, Irvin, or Butler. They better break it up and get players. They need 3 players getting 10 million a year or may be this could be a bust of a team. Great 3 players. Need depth, and a bench.
Pelicans will be very good in the future.

And if Lebron gets injured at his age of 34, the Lakers are toast for years. They probably looked at the W's injuries and figured this next year is wide open. Let's go for it.

Or, Jeannie Buss was like, F it, I need to do something big!

I think its a good move for the Lakers. They were able to keep Kuzma (who I think may be the best of the bunch between Ball, Kuzma, Ingram) and they still have some money left over to fill out the roster.

Yes, you are giving up the 4th pick, but the other future 1st round picks will presumably be much later in the draft.

You have Lebron for 2-3 more good years. Might as well go for it now.

Getting rid of Ball is a great move. They NEVER should have drafted him in my opinion.
-not a fan.

Brandon Ingrahm: will he be healthy? Could be a heavy price, I dunno.
-not a doctor.

Josh Hart: replaceable, expendable
-no worries

Draft picks: #4 could be something. The other two are hopefully worthless, late round.
-not sure


I think it depends on who else they can bring in. That's the bigger move from a management standpoint. Getting AD didn't require the chops it'll take to finish the roster.

This is the biggest mistake the lakers have made in the past few seasons.

Why they never should have drafted Ball.

Those 23 and 25 swaps could be big.

concordtom said:

---

Or, Jeannie Buss was like, F it, I need to do something big!

---

Is she going to pose for Playboy again?

ducky23 said:

---

I think its a good move for the Lakers. They were able to keep Kuzma (who I think may be the best of the bunch between Ball, Kuzma, Ingram) and they still have some money left over to fill out the roster.

Yes, you are giving up the 4th pick, but the other future 1st round picks will presumably be much later in the draft.

You have Lebron for 2-3 more good years. Might as well go for it now.

---

projected number four pick is Darius Garland (vanderbilt)
don't know much about him

bearister said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Or, Jeannie Buss was like, F it, I need to do something big!

---

Is she going to pose for Playboy again?

---

Okay, forgot about that, and just searched google images on it for the first time.
That's just downright embarrassing.
Clearly no rack, so they just show her butt over and over again. But that's not the embarrassing part. Surely, plenty attractive enough. The embarrassing part is that she would even decide to do that in the first place.
And then, there's this 1995 article about it at the time, and the supposed reasons are not flattering at all. Read the link.

Her dad was constantly banging playboy bunnies, so she felt the need to fit in?

By the way, she never had that kid, and whoever heard of blade hockey in LA these days?
Both failures.
Not a good harbinger.

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1995-05-14-ls-376-story.html



I have so much less respect for the lakers right now.
She appears to have lived the quintessential Southern California "Image is Everything" life, which often leaves a person Lost.

philbert said:

---

Those 23 and 25 swaps could be big.

---

The swap picks....
Does that mean the pelicans have the option to swap draft picks if the lakers pick is better?
Or both teams have the option?
I don't get it.

HoopDreams said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

I think its a good move for the Lakers. They were able to keep Kuzma (who I think may be the best of the bunch between Ball, Kuzma, Ingram) and they still have some money left over to fill out the roster.

Yes, you are giving up the 4th pick, but the other future 1st round picks will presumably be much later in the draft.

You have Lebron for 2-3 more good years. Might as well go for it now.

---

projected number four pick is Darius Garland (vanderbilt)
don't know much about him

---

Garland is a 6'2" PG who can shoot the 3.
Do the lakers retain veteran Rajn Rondo?
Do the lakers sign Kemba Walker?
Or do they draft Garland?

If they get Kemba (who would take a slight pay cut to join), then maybe the Lakers draft DeAndre Hunter, 6'7" Soph from national champ Virginia.


Fun to read about players here:
https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/2019-nba-mock-draft-top-three-picks-appear-to-be-set-but-trades-could-create-chaos/

The Lakers traded the #4 pick in this year's draft to get AD, so no Garland or anyone else for them.

Kemba would be a nice free agent signing.

LaVar Ball:

Cal should add a one year grad degree in nba salary cap and trade deal negotiations. Extremely complex and perplexing

concordtom said:

---

philbert said:

---

Those 23 and 25 swaps could be big.

---

The swap picks....
Does that mean the pelicans have the option to swap draft picks if the lakers pick is better?
Or both teams have the option?
I don't get it.

---

Kemba stands to lose $61M if he bolts Charlotte (assuming they offer the super max). I personally think Kyrie is more gettable, since he wants out of Boston badly. If they can't land a star scoring PG, they should probably look to get 2 or 3 really good players instead, like JJ Redick on a 1 or 2 year deal and some other starter quality players that don't need to be ball-dominant to have an impact.

75bear said:

---

The Lakers traded the #4 pick in this year's draft to get AD, so no Garland or anyone else for them.

Kemba would be a nice free agent signing.

---

I remember when the Lakers gave up 7 players (or was it 8) to get Karem. No one remembers those guys but they remember the big fella. That worked out but obviously AD is not Karem...but he ain't chopped liver either. Lakers gave up a bunch but they had little choice if they wanted to improve. At least they busted the move.

A bunch of young talent and a bunch of top drafts picks means little if you don't know what you're doing. Look at Boston and Danny Ainge. Lots of young talent, a bunch of draft picks...but pulled all the wrong levers. The Lakers were never going to develop that core...so might as well trade them.

Of course the Lakers are totally dysfunctional but if they can get a one other FA, things could go okay. If they get Leonard, now that will be something. Who knows what he'll do but he's a Lakers fan and he's a loyalist. I think he wants to see his jersey retired as a Laker.

Lonzo is still a great talent, just not a fit playing with LeBron, who is basically a point forward and ball-dominant. His rookie year #'s compared pretty well to J-Kidd's rookie year.

Lonzo and Zion are going to be a lot of fun to watch.

For the #4 pick, they should pick the best talent available, and that's Bol Bol, IMO. A risky pick, but with Zion already in hand and a young wing like Ingram, he can fill the C spot and you can gamble with the #4 pick.

concordtom said:

---

Getting rid of Ball is a great move. They NEVER should have drafted him in my opinion.
-not a fan.

Brandon Ingrahm: will he be healthy? Could be a heavy price, I dunno.
-not a doctor.

Josh Hart: replaceable, expendable
-no worries

Draft picks: #4 could be something. The other two are hopefully worthless, late round.
-not sure


I think it depends on who else they can bring in. That's the bigger move from a management standpoint. Getting AD didn't require the chops it'll take to finish the roster.

---

concordtom said:

---

bearister said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Or, Jeannie Buss was like, F it, I need to do something big!

---

Is she going to pose for Playboy again?

---

Okay, forgot about that, and just searched google images on it for the first time.
That's just downright embarrassing.
Clearly no rack, so they just show her butt over and over again. But that's not the embarrassing part. Surely, plenty attractive enough. The embarrassing part is that she would even decide to do that in the first place.
And then, there's this 1995 article about it at the time, and the supposed reasons are not flattering at all. Read the link.

Her dad was constantly banging playboy bunnies, so she felt the need to fit in?

By the way, she never had that kid, and whoever heard of blade hockey in LA these days?
Both failures.
Not a good harbinger.

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1995-05-14-ls-376-story.html



I have so much less respect for the lakers right now.
She appears to have lived the quintessential Southern California "Image is Everything" life, which often leaves a person Lost.

---

the Lakers make one of the biggest trades in NBA history and your take is to rip the controlling owner for posing in Playboy 24 years ago? that's a hot take. nice analysis on the #4 pick. try to focus on the actual trade instead of grasping at straws.

When the Lakers signed LeBron, they had little choice but to do what they just did. They gave up a lot, but none what they gave up has proven to be star quality in this League yet. It made no sense to have LeBron and the young guys, who are still maybe 2-3 years from developing into the players that are needed to contend for championships.

Another Bear said:

---

I remember when the Lakers gave up 7 players (or was it 8) to get Karem. No one remembers those guys but they remember the big fella. That worked out but obviously AD is not Karem...but he ain't chopped liver either. Lakers gave up a bunch but they had little choice if they wanted to improve. At least they busted the move.

A bunch of young talent and a bunch of top drafts picks means little if you don't know what you're doing. Look at Boston and Danny Ainge. Lots of young talent, a bunch of draft picks...but pulled all the wrong levers. The Lakers were never going to develop that core...so might as well trade them.

Of course the Lakers are totally dysfunctional but if they can get a one other FA, things could go okay. If they get Leonard, now that will be something. Who knows what he'll do but he's a Lakers fan and he's a loyalist. I think he wants to see his jersey retired as a Laker.

---

concordtom said:

---

The swap picks....
Does that mean the pelicans have the option to swap draft picks if the lakers pick is better?
Or both teams have the option?
I don't get it.

---

The Pelicans will have the option to swap #1 picks with LA if they desire. Those picks in 23 and 25 will happen after Lebron is likely gone.

For history buffs, this is one of the ways the Celtics rebuilt their team when they traded away their aging stars to NJ/Brooklyn. They got the #1 overall pick in 2017 from the swap, which eventually turned into Jayson Tatum.

I don't think the Lakers are very good regardless of this trade or not.

From what I understand, they can't sign a max FA with at least 7 yeas of experience (Walker, Leonard, Butler, Durant, Klay etc) unless they sign them before making the trade for AD.

Ball is a terrible player. The comparisons to Kidd make me vomit. Not very high on Ingram as a player you extend for the max when he's due for it. It gives NO depth for the next two years, but they will have to hit home runs with the no 4 pick and the two future picks plus their swap draft picks, and Zion will need to be a super star.

I think the odds of MeBron staying healthy for 80% of games going forward is zero. Where does a team of Bron, AD, Kuzma and Butler/Kemba along with basically nothing else stack up in the West? I don't think that team is top 4.

How does a Laker team minus that 3rd max player but plus a shooter like Reddick or D Green stack up in the West? Barely top 8?

Frankly I don't see any max player coming to LAL to be the 3rd wheel.

Rich Paul is an amateur agent -- he'd still be selling jerseys out of his trunk if not for MeBron -- and AD took some bad advice from him, and will be wallowing in perpetual mediocrity during his prime years as LeBron's career winds down fast.

It was pretty fun to watch the debacle around the failed AD trade in Feb, but secretly I've been rooting for it, because it will create an even bigger letdown and sideshow when it doesn't result in a good Lakers team.

Quote:

---

When the Lakers signed LeBron, they had little choice but to do what they just did. They gave up a lot, but none what they gave up has proven to be star quality in this League yet. It made no sense to have LeBron and the young guys, who are still maybe 2-3 years from developing into the players that are needed to contend for championships.

---

Signing LBJ painted them into a corner. Personally I would have prefer keep the youngsters and wait for Kawhi Leonard. Again not their game and the Lakers got jumpy...but this might just work out. A lot depends on the third star they can sign. They need a guard who can shoot because they're heavy in the front court. That said, if they sign Leonard, I'm good. AD and Kawhi will simply take over the franchise once LBJ retires (in a couple of years).

All the great teams that won multiple championships had 2 superstars and at least one more half superstar:

Boston Celtics - Russel, Cousy, Havlicek and take your pick,
Showtime Lakers - Magic, Kareem, and Worthy, Scott,
Celtics - Bird, McHale and Parrish DJ
Bulls - MJ, Scottie and Grant/ Rodman
Spurs - Duncan, Parker or Manu and I'll add Popovich,
Lakers - Shaq, Kobe and lessers

The lakers are going to have a small cap available, with no bench and looking for the third half superstar. Kyle Kuzma, nah, doesn't make it for me.

And as others pointed out, If Lebron gets a knee, ankle or the current rend Achilles injury - at his age -they are history. As presently put together I think there will be room on th end of the bench for several scrubs at the NBA minimum.

I volunteer!

tsubamoto2001 said:

---

Lonzo is still a great talent, just not a fit playing with LeBron, who is basically a point forward and ball-dominant. His rookie year #'s compared pretty well to J-Kidd's rookie year.

Lonzo and Zion are going to be a lot of fun to watch.

For the #4 pick, they should pick the best talent available, and that's Bol Bol, IMO. A risky pick, but with Zion already in hand and a young wing like Ingram, he can fill the C spot and you can gamble with the #4 pick.

---

I just don't like the Ball family at all.
Horrible branding. Not fair to Alonzo, but neither is his shot a thing of beauty.

I like your thought to gamble on Bol Bol, though I've never seen him play.
I liked his dad, met him twice.
Excellent branding.

GBear4Life said:

---

I don't think the Lakers are very good regardless of this trade or not.

From what I understand, they can't sign a max FA with at least 7 yeas of experience (Walker, Leonard, Butler, Durant, Klay etc) unless they sign them before making the trade for AD.

Ball is a terrible player. The comparisons to Kidd make me vomit. Not very high on Ingram as a player you extend for the max when he's due for it. It gives NO depth for the next two years, but they will have to hit home runs with the no 4 pick and the two future picks plus their swap draft picks, and Zion will need to be a super star.

I think the odds of MeBron staying healthy for 80% of games going forward is zero. Where does a team of Bron, AD, Kuzma and Butler/Kemba along with basically nothing else stack up in the West? I don't think that team is top 4.

How does a Laker team minus that 3rd max player but plus a shooter like Reddick or D Green stack up in the West? Barely top 8?

Frankly I don't see any max player coming to LAL to be the 3rd wheel.

Rich Paul is an amateur agent -- he'd still be selling jerseys out of his trunk if not for MeBron -- and AD took some bad advice from him, and will be wallowing in perpetual mediocrity during his prime years as LeBron's career winds down fast.

It was pretty fun to watch the debacle around the failed AD trade in Feb, but secretly I've been rooting for it, because it will create an even bigger letdown and sideshow when it doesn't result in a good Lakers team.

---

How much would you like to bet?
On any of the above?

NVGolfingBear said:

---

All the great teams that won multiple championships had 2 superstars and at least one more half superstar:

Boston Celtics - Russel, Cousy, Havlicek and take your pick,
Showtime Lakers - Magic, Kareem, and Worthy, Scott,
Celtics - Bird, McHale and Parrish DJ
Bulls - MJ, Scottie and Grant/ Rodman
Spurs - Duncan, Parker or Manu and I'll add Popovich,
Lakers - Shaq, Kobe and lessers

The lakers are going to have a small cap available, with no bench and looking for the third half superstar. Kyle Kuzma, nah, doesn't make it for me.

And as others pointed out, If Lebron gets a knee, ankle or the current rend Achilles injury - at his age -they are history. As presently put together I think there will be room on th end of the bench for several scrubs at the NBA minimum.

I volunteer!

---

You're right at first, but wrong second.
The lakers need another, and will get another.
Free agent filler will do the job.

Somebody set me straight on Lonzo Ball.

I called bust before the draft, for many of the reasons we have seen his first two years. I've never seen so much apologetics from pundits and analysts regarding his deficiencies and red flags. I find it amusing when people have to point to his full court passing when asked about what they like about him. His age and social status seem to be invoked as well to justify his poor play. His assists were some of the most meaningless assists I've ever seen.

I see a PG who can't shoot off the dribble--it takes him a day and a half to settle and shoot off the dribble--I see a PG with no mid range game, no ability to use the pick and roll to score at the rim or be a threat, no ability to get to the line--or make them.

I see a back-up PG whose got some length to play some effective defense as his ceiling.

Somebody set me straight on this kid.

tsubamoto2001 said:

---

Kemba stands to lose $61M if he bolts Charlotte (assuming they offer the super max). I personally think Kyrie is more gettable, since he wants out of Boston badly. If they can't land a star scoring PG, they should probably look to get 2 or 3 really good players instead, like JJ Redick on a 1 or 2 year deal and some other starter quality players that don't need to be ball-dominant to have an impact.

75bear said:

---

The Lakers traded the #4 pick in this year's draft to get AD, so no Garland or anyone else for them.

Kemba would be a nice free agent signing.

---

---

Kyrie Irving doesn't seem likely to land with the Lakers after he just switched agencies to Roc Nation - that feels like he's Brooklyn bound.

I agree with you that if the Lakers whiff on the top tier free agents, spending money on quality guys (specifically 3 point shooters and ideally guys who can defend) can help fill out the roster.

This may be the first year in a while where we'll have a bunch of teams with legitimate title shots going into the season. That's a good thing.

Remind me, who is going to be bringing up the ball up court??? Who is that point guard? Now they need shooters and distributors. Kyrie is great but he is going to the Nets.

kyrie, kemba, rose, collison, brogdon, Beverly, russell, etc...

Who cares? The NBA has become a stupid circus. If you want to follow basketball, stick to college. The NBA is just plain boring.

GBear4Life said:

---

Somebody set me straight on Lonzo Ball.

I called bust before the draft, for many of the reasons we have seen his first two years. I've never seen so much apologetics from pundits and analysts regarding his deficiencies and red flags. I find it amusing when people have to point to his full court passing when asked about what they like about him. His age and social status seem to be invoked as well to justify his poor play. His assists were some of the most meaningless assists I've ever seen.

I see a PG who can't shoot off the dribble--it takes him a day and a half to settle and shoot off the dribble--I see a PG with no mid range game, no ability to use the pick and roll to score at the rim or be a threat, no ability to get to the line--or make them.

I see a back-up PG whose got some length to play some effective defense as his ceiling.

Somebody set me straight on this kid.

---

I think you're already straight - the bolded pretty much sums up what most pundits seem to be saying two years later (many over predicted his impact when drafted - happens a lot). I think he's an excellent back up to Jrue Holiday or play alongside him at times. I don't think anyone is thinking they can build a dynasty around him.

Basketball Bear said:

---

Remind me, who is going to be bringing up the ball up court??? Who is that point guard? Now they need shooters and distributors. Kyrie is great but he is going to the Nets.

---

Lebron is a point forward. He will bring the ball up court. They don't need a Kyrie, they need a backup PG.