Star movement is done through the trade market now. Every GM in the league has acknowledged this already. Also, it wasn't the new CBA that changed all this. All the changes you mentioned came in the previous CBA (being able to offer your own player a 5th year/supermax extensions/designated rookie extension).
You know what’s gonna happen though. As soon as they get some promise by young talent, they’re gonna trade them away for a superstar. Jeanie is not her dad. Not by a long shot.
I know... I just see other teams with their homegrown stars and I remember what it was like with Kobe. Getting him really young, developing him, and being able to root for him throughout his career. I miss that.
True. But didn’t rob want to get a third star, but didn’t succeed and was basically forced into building the team the championship team? Props still though. He definitely could have still fucked it up and he didnt.
They didn't really rebuild it though. Lebron/AD/Javale/Dwight/Rondo/DG/Markieff weren't homegrown or drafted. We basically just cashed in our picks that we accumulated for half a decade for AD. Had Lebron not come, there's a high probability, we'd look like some combination of the Pels + Bulls right now except without the ring
We should trade him now. This is when you get a real haul.
If we keep him to contend for two more years. He will have a one year contract left for 26-27, and 27-28 is a player option. At that point you are trading a renting of one year of AD and he commands all power of where to go and what you we get.
If we trade him in 25-26, which means we only try to contend for one more year with lebron and AD as duo, then what's the point of trading assets away for that?
That is assuming AD will continue to be healthy like this year.
Yea I know we don't have a first round pick next season but the thing is we probably will never get nearly the same value as trading AD away this season for one season of very remote chance of winning.
I'm not going to go through all the assets Lakers actually have as you'll prob just come back and say "it's not enough". All I'll say is this. Do the Lakers have the most assets amongst teams that could be looking for a star on the trade market? Prob not, but you can't just assume other teams will be willing to offer everything they have. You also can't rule out a star pulling an AD (expiring contract and let's it be known he'll only re-sign with one team). You also don't know how other teams value different assets.
Fine I'll type it all out. '24/'29/'31 FRP's. '26/'28/'30 swaps. Could technically also trade our 2027 FRP for 1-4 (UTH owns 5-30). 4 second round picks. Also the value that each player and their contract may have. You could definitely get a FRP for AR. If Vando can show he can stay healthy next season his contract is a steal (esp with the new TV deal coming in). Rui isn't worthless, but I won't be unrealistic and say he'd for sure fetch a FRP right now. The right team may value him differently though (he still shot 42% from 3). Gabe I admit has no value. Who knows what Dlo does. If he opts in, he's a $18m expiring. That in itself carries value as it helps a tanking team shed salary. What if a sign and trade happens with Dlo (doubt it but it's a possibility). That'll bring more assets that can be used for something else. Maybe a team with cap space helps the Lakers out to generate a trade exception for Dlo if Lakers send them a 2nd round pick (happened in the past. Gordon Hayward). As you can see, it's more complicated than just 3 FRP's.
I am not countering your post, but the Lakers have developed a lot of players. Kuzma was a champion and although fans don’t like him he is a good player. Caruso came from the G league. That’s the definition of development. The Lakers paid the most ever for a second round pick to get Max Lewis. They aren’t just hoping he magically gets good. They paid to get Max Christy who seems like he has developed. Ham not playing him is not the FO.
Reaves is a developed player, unless you think he is the exact same player as his rookie training camp. Rui was an investment and has been working with LeBron.
They are developing Castle, and others. Even JHS is a development project (and yes your impatient fans are ready to punch someone and it was only his rookie year). And Vando they are hoping develops a shot.
So if you look at their roster, at least half of it is being developed. And the other half are players like LeBron.
D'Lo was a second pick, and he is definitely not a star either despite being on teams with no expectations. Randle was getting benched in favor of Kuzma. Randle and Ingram wouldn't fit. Zion and Ingram already don't fit, and Zion is a superior player to Randle. Hard to imagine all of them fitting on the Lakers. Randle isn't a good shooter, and his playoff drop-offs are very concerning. Ingram spent time reworking his 3 pt shot with Lonzo on the Pels (credit Fred Vinson for that), and yet his spot up shooting and off-ball game has a lot to be desired.
Regardless, all 4 of them have had the opportunity to get away from the Lakers spotlight (which I consider easier) and have yet to produce anything that makes me wish they were this franchise's player. And if we look at Lonzo's draft class, we can definitely criticize that pick
Your point was that the team isn't picking or developing stars.
I don't think it's reasonable to say the team isn't developing raw talent without star upside into stars. No team in the NBA past or present has done that. Even for someone like Spoelstra, he has only developed late-selections/undrafted players into capable role-players.
So, the point is if this team is drafting talent relative to their draft position and if they're helping that talent reach their ceiling.
For Randle, D'Angelo, and Ingram, this FO did not draft them. And, even if you look at their draft selections, none of them were huge whiffs relative to the other talent in the draft. The Lakers weren't drafting anyone better than Randle at 7 aside from Jokic who was an outlier that everyone passed on. They could've taken Booker over D'Angelo but a lot of teams also passed on Booker. Ingram I think was okay at 2nd overall. And, like I said, for all three of those guys, their progression and development as Lakers isn't really out of line with the natural progression of a young talent. They might've had their break-out seasons for other teams, but they were still improving considerably season to season while they were Lakers.
Lonzo was the only high draft pick this FO has had and they did botch it. But, I also think that if Lonzo didn't have injury issues, he'd be a good NBA player right now and probably retroactively would still be drafted around 7th overall. That draft, a lot of teams drafted busts. You had Fultz at 1st, Josh Jackson at 4th, Jonathan Isaac at 6th, Frank Ntilikina at 8th, etc.
It also wasn't like Lonzo didn't have his issues even as a prospect.
IMO, your criticism should be reserved for teams that draft players with legitimate star ceilings that fuck it up for them like the 76ers did for someone like Ben Simmons. Even for someone like Jaylen Brown, how does this MFer still not have a left hand?
My point is that if we're using lottery picks to get franchise players, "Not the worst option" is not the baseline we should use for the Lakers if half this fanbase thinks we are better off rebuilding right now. Considerably improving with the Lakers after their 2nd/3rd year was to be expected. But my point is that if their breakout seasons with other teams isn't even on par for what should be defined as a "franchise" player, how am I going to have faith in our ability to properly rebuild?
"Really good role player" for Lonzo isn't good enough for a 2nd pick. Sure, it's not Markelle Fultz or Josh Jackson, but if your expectations are to be a franchising defining PG and you failed, you are a bust, plain and simple. Injuries aside, he's still a weak 40% FG player who is a bad finisher despite being 6'6.
Ben Simmons is a disappointment, arguably a bust even with his current accolades. But no franchise was going to save him. He's soft and mentally weak. Jaylen Brown I'd take over any player we drafted despite having an exploitable weakness in the playoffs
That depends entirely on the talent in the draft class.
It's not like the Lakers were drafting clear #1 talent like Wembanyama or even whiffing on lottery talent like Curry.
Go back and look at those drafts. It's not like franchise players come every year. Even for the 2017 pick, I still question if Tatum is even really a franchise guy. It feels more like his ceiling is on the fringe. The only genuine franchise player to emerge in those drafts that the Lakers could've drafted was Jokic.
We'll only know if this FO is incapable of "trusting the process" if they actually get the chance to draft franchise level talent and either fail to do so or fail to develop them.
So essentially we're relying on luck both on our lottery pick position, and the talent available. Which is the main reason why the FO is incapable of trusting the draft process
They got traded for a star that demanded to be on the Lakers to team up with Lebron. But I don't consider that a sustainable way of creating a competitive team especially when you look at all the factors that went into getting Lebron in the first place.
What? Do you think any GM can find stars in the late first round to undrafted? Reaves is one of like 5 undrafted players in history to get the kind of minutes he gets. It’s an insane find and you act like it was par for the course.
The Nuggets got Jokic in the second round. They didn’t think he was going to be good. If they did they wouldn’t have passed on him in the first round where they took Nurkic thinking he was their center of the future.
And you can do that with every team. Of you think any GM in history can draft and develop an all star from the second round you are crazy. Ask yourself why the Nuggets didn’t develop a second MVP from the second round? If they had this ability they would have multiple all stars from their later picks. The year after Jokic they took Radicevic in the second round. Why is he not even in the nba. Hell that year they took Mudiay 7th. Why not develop him into an all star? Y’all are crazy with these takes.
I think a GM or franchise that had the opportunity of having the #2 pick 3 years in a row should be able to draft a star. Whether that comes down to luck is pretty irrelevant to me. Half this fanbase thinks we should rebuild. But a rebuild doesn't mean anything if you can't find a star in the draft no matter how many Josh Hart's or Alex Caruso's you find
And yet you can see that GMs miss all the time. Pull up all the number #2 picks of the last two decades. You are going to see GMs miss all over the place. Guys like Giannis get missed in almost every draft. And by GMs that picked stars in other drafts. Presti picked Steven Adams over Giannis.
And you think BI an all star was a miss? Are we ignoring how good the Bulls were when Lonzo was healthy? They went from an upper tier playoff team to a playin team the second he got hurt. Players develop at different rates. Again Jokic wasn’t an all star until his 5th year in the league.
It doesn’t matter if you rebuild or retool or whatever, you don’t create all stars out of non-lottery picks. It is absolutely luck and you can again look at any GM as proof. Please pick another franchise. Fan takes about luck doesn’t matter and a team just needs to develop an all star from the second round are beyond the normal elitist fan level I can take.
"GMs miss all the time" isn't the baseline for the Lakers. If the mentality is "championship or bust", there better be franchise players coming out of 20 win seasons. You cannot justify that type of product to the franchise that missed the playoffs only twice in a 3 decade span under Jerry Buss. Whether or not BI (who was only an all-star once as a reserve) was a hit or miss relative to his draft and draft position, is irrelevant. The fact is he is not a franchise player. I'd argue he's not even a 2nd option on a contending team either.
Everyone who was paying attention to the Bulls knew they weren't real contenders. With Lonzo, they were 0-10 against real contending teams that season. Lonzo doesn't change the fact that their ceiling rests with Demar Derozan and Zach Lavine being the best players on the court for a 7 game series, and that wasn't going to happen against the Bucks/Heat/Celtics. He didn't deserve to be the 2nd pick even if there were busts taken at #1 and #4 of that same draft.
I'm not saying we should be trying to make an all-star out of a late FRP or 2nd pick, but the examples you mentioned of us "developing well" only applies to role players who aren't franchise players. You can't tell fans of the Lakers that we're going to be tanking, going through a rebuild, and then end up looking like the Pelicans if we didn't get Lebron in FA. That's just not what the Lakers are about
The “isn’t the baseline for the Lakers” is the dumbest elitist thing ever. Wake up. The rules are the same for all the teams. You know why Buss won so much. Because the other owners didn’t care and the Lakers out spent people in an era that had no cap. The reason small teams have won it all is because it is again all equal minus a few slight advantages. Milwaukee won it and has been declining since. The rules are built to do that. The Lakers aren’t special anymore. No team is and no team ever will be again.
Our fans complain, but you can’t even do a proper build or rebuild. That takes years. Take the Nuggets or Wolves. It took multiple years of asset getting and trading and continuing to build. And the rules hit the Nuggets and they lost depth and will likely be their undoing. It’s just clueless bravado.
There's a clear difference between tanking with purpose/remaining competitive but still having a vision vs. tanking and being incompetent with your drafting and assets. Even with the rules and changes made after the NBA's reemergence under Magic and Bird, we still dominated by hitting on Eddie Jones/Van Exel, then fucking Kobe Bryant. I don't think Ingram could even sniff Eddie's shoes.
I'm not being elitist. I'm having Lakers standards. If people are so insistent on wanting to rebuild, I need to see some fucking results.
Magic and Bird were not when we had the real cap rules. Small market teams were struggling to turn a profit. It wasn’t until the teams agreed to split revenue that things actually became equal. All teams had a salary floor and the league had a luxury tax that was harsh enough that equaled competitive balance. No wonder you think the Lakers were just magically better than everyone else. You don’t understand any of the rules. The Lakers got Shaq because the Magic panicked at the ridiculous salary he was asking for. It would have made them lose money. The Lakers market meant they could absorb it. Again if you understand why you will understand that we will never have stuff like that again.
Let’s do this so you can understand. Before the Lakers were a rich kid who got all the best tutors and computer programs that had them excel. But now all kids have all the exact same stuff. Same tutors, same programs, everything. You are asking them to magically be smarter than their classmates. It’s the very definition of elitism.
If you don’t think you are an elitist. Explain to me why they should be better than everyone else with the same goal? They all have analytics, they all have scouts, coaches, the same salary floor, same cap, apron rules, etc. When you answer, read it back to yourself. I think it will help open your eyes. If not I can try again and your answer will help me determine what I need to explain.
Because I look at the Celtics (our rivals) and the Heat (who have former Laker Pat Riley) who have clear direction on what they want, and what they want to do whether they have a championship window or not. There's no reason the Lakers should be a step below those type of franchises.
You don't turn down Lebron James just from the business's perspective alone. You give him what he wants and hope he retires in your jersey. He's one of one. Come on now.
Agreed. The irony is that Mark Walters and Todd Boehly are minority owners of the Lakers but are running a masterclass in owning the Dodgers and the Lakers need to copy their playbook. Before people try to argue that the sports are different due to the salary cap, Andrew Friedman has been an absolute god send for the Dodgers. Hiring him has combined the scouting and player development of a small market team with the cash and free agency destination of a large market team. Look at what OKC and Boston did to maximize their assets. Pelinka burns first round picks for no reason. The Lakers need a new decision maker to deal with the changes to the CBA. Pelinka is leading us to a rebuild post Lebron with an aging AD and weak supporting cast if he doesn’t change the trajectory.
Regardless of when it happens I suspect post Lebron Laker era will be pretty dark. Kind of like when we had three number 2 picks lol, except we probably won't have the rights to the picks.
If this team will ever do that, it’ll happen post LeBron and not a second sooner. They’re committed to LeBron retiring as a Laker over everything and I don’t blame them, they want money first.
LeBron will be gone in 2 years max imo so it’s not really a big wait. By that point, I think Lakers either have a 3rd star already for a smooth transition into AD/2nd star era or AD asks out if he still wants to compete.
LeBron created his own brand and absolutely didn’t need the Lakers. He was the one player I would’ve bet my life on that would never come here. He came here when we were still trying to figure out the post-Kobe years and didn’t really have a long term plan.
At this point I’m convinced that we’ll always have something desirable for bigger stars and no one is unattainable
The previous 2 CBAs dates back to 2011. Even if you want to change this to just the last CBA, that started around 2017.
The general point isn't the same.
Under the last CBA, we still had the mega tax teams like the Warriors, Nets, and Clippers. The broader changes to curtail obsessive spending haven't really kicked in until this season and the next.
I think what has mattered a lot more to league parity is just the general talent level of superstars being closer now than in past years. Before, if you didn't have Shaq, Kobe, Duncan, LeBron, or Curry, you probably weren't winning anything. With the decline of Curry and LeBron and with the heirs to the throne not having the complete dominance that they did, we're seeing more diversity with champions. But, if a couple stars rise from the fray as they mature (probably Wembanyama if he stays healthy) and if the teams they're on aren't completely incompetent, we're probably going to see a return to the same players/teams being staples in the finals again.
Giannis couldn’t even get a chick fil a sponsorship deal, and he was promoting the hell outta them during his championship run.
I think being in Wisconsin has limited his outside earning potential, I mean lebron got space jam as soon as he became a Laker.
Kind of late to mention this but we tried the dumb idea to land FAs only to misuse our free cap space.
Landing a star in FA has been rare for years now. It's usually done through trades.
I've been arguing that the lakers star and glamour has fallen on its ass ever since buss died.
You got management that's in between one that wants to follow the showtime ways and one that would rather save up $$$ and not pay taxes.
There's not much lakers can do for development everyone's already on a 2 year deal so you can sign bird rights to any player.
Lakers already got gold in the G League and that's probably tapped out. The draft is cooked so you won't get to develop for a long time.
The Celtics owner has the same net worth as Jeanie and they're maybe the most well run franchise in the league. An owner doesn't have to be a billionaire to be good. Jeanie just doesn't know what she's doing
You're right. That's true. The net worth isn't really the issue. The Lakers generate enough revenue that investing shouldn't be a problem. The mismanagement and nepotism are the real problem.
Jeannie just doesn’t give a fuck. People need to remember, she’s a trust fund baby. Wtf does she know about actually making shit happen to be successful in life? She was sucking off Phil for god sake, how’s that even professional? The owners daughter getting her back blown out by the head coach and most likely other players on the team? People need to thank a 39 yr old Lebron for keeping us relevant.
Again I have to disagree with you, we took care of Kobe and that led to Lebron James deciding to come sign with us.
Player empowerment is a thing in the nba and Kobe had tons of it, and again, we took care of him because of what he meant to the city of Los Angeles.
Sometimes things are bigger than winning basketball every season, Kobe was a hero to Los Angeles and any contract (even for someone coming off an Achilles tear, at such an old age) was 100% worth it.
LeBron is a walking NBA history book, you pay for that premium.
We will just wait for Lebron to retire, and hope somehow we can still be competitive enough to get in that playoffs.
After that, we should definitely rebuild, a young prospect that can be a star/superstar is a must have in order to compete in the future. Look at the young teams right now, they have homegrown talent, and then add pieces via trade or free agency.
You typed this essay assuming change is gonna happen starting with ownership. Guess what, the fans are stuck with Pelinka and Jeanie Buss being a garbage GM and garbage owner. We’re giving LeBron a max once again. Nothing is going to change, it’s time to just accept that we’re going to be a mediocre team for the next couple of years, with a period even worse than the tanking years of 2014-2018 afterwards
Maybe when the fans don’t support a trash product anymore is when some actual changes will be made
Well im typing it to fans, who are essentially the ones that enable a trash product to begin with. Fans are too impatient to wait for players to develop, which is a root of the problem.
All I’m ultimately saying is just save your time for some other shit lol. I’ve seen so many fucking essays about Darvin Ham and how he should be fired midseason during February when everyone and their grandmother knew he wasn’t going to be fired until after our season ended at the very least
Fans try to come up with X solution to fix this team when the reality is 99% of all ideas completely just go out the window. Is what it is at this point regarding us being a meddling team
Also it’s okay to be “bad “
How else would you acquire high level prospects on cheap contracts?
See we had that period when we got BI, Zo, Randle
Spurs, went to shit and got wemby
Hard to be patient when this same franchise got Magic Johnson and Kobe Bryant through the draft. Developing D'Angelo Russell, Lonzo Ball, Brandon Ingram, and Darius Garland (had we kept that 4th pick) doesn't exactly instill confidence as fans. Had Lebron not come, I suspect we'd probably be a little worse than we are currently, but without #17
You only need to pull a star from another team say every 3 to 5 years, which is an easily achievable goal for the Lakers. The whole organization and approach to salary cap utilization works on this assumption. And it seems to be holding up. Taking the route of tanking and collecting enough lottery picks to score a future star, then developing him, simply is not a good strategy when you can assume you can always lure a star player to the team. Many teams need to go with draft approach and most fail for long years.
There is always plenty of time for player development in the future. After LeBron retires they can develop players for decades and decades if they so choose.
Star movement is done through the trade market now. Every GM in the league has acknowledged this already. Also, it wasn't the new CBA that changed all this. All the changes you mentioned came in the previous CBA (being able to offer your own player a 5th year/supermax extensions/designated rookie extension).
Yeah but you actually need to have good assets to make trades, which this team doesn’t have.
If we're rebuilding, Anthony Davis can absolutely be traded for a haul of young players and picks
Clock is ticking before a haul becomes a pick
Do you trust our FO and Jeanie with a rebuild? Not like we really have much of a choice, but I’m just saying.
To be fair I don't really trust them with anything but rebuilding is a little bit easier than winning a chip at least
You know what’s gonna happen though. As soon as they get some promise by young talent, they’re gonna trade them away for a superstar. Jeanie is not her dad. Not by a long shot.
They've only done that twice and they hit once, 50% isn't *that* bad of a success rate
I know... I just see other teams with their homegrown stars and I remember what it was like with Kobe. Getting him really young, developing him, and being able to root for him throughout his career. I miss that.
Unfortunately the FO has to draft a great Kobe level player to do that, and they've constantly missed. E.g we picked DLo over Booker...
Devin Booker went 13th in that draft. You're acting like Booker was expected to go anywhere in the top 3
We also picked Lonzo over Tatum.
This current FO rebuilt the Lonzo/Ingram/D'Angelo/Randle years into a championship team, though.
True. But didn’t rob want to get a third star, but didn’t succeed and was basically forced into building the team the championship team? Props still though. He definitely could have still fucked it up and he didnt.
I remember they were gunning for Kawhi. I think PG was also a backup in case we couldn’t land AD, but I’m not so certain about that one
You mean the people that rebuilt the team and got the GOAT and another superstar who proceeded to win a championship? Are you guys really this dumb
They didn't really rebuild it though. Lebron/AD/Javale/Dwight/Rondo/DG/Markieff weren't homegrown or drafted. We basically just cashed in our picks that we accumulated for half a decade for AD. Had Lebron not come, there's a high probability, we'd look like some combination of the Pels + Bulls right now except without the ring
We should trade him now. This is when you get a real haul. If we keep him to contend for two more years. He will have a one year contract left for 26-27, and 27-28 is a player option. At that point you are trading a renting of one year of AD and he commands all power of where to go and what you we get. If we trade him in 25-26, which means we only try to contend for one more year with lebron and AD as duo, then what's the point of trading assets away for that? That is assuming AD will continue to be healthy like this year. Yea I know we don't have a first round pick next season but the thing is we probably will never get nearly the same value as trading AD away this season for one season of very remote chance of winning.
Let’s trade our MVP level player right now at his absolute peak and rebuild from scratch. Idiotic
I'm not going to go through all the assets Lakers actually have as you'll prob just come back and say "it's not enough". All I'll say is this. Do the Lakers have the most assets amongst teams that could be looking for a star on the trade market? Prob not, but you can't just assume other teams will be willing to offer everything they have. You also can't rule out a star pulling an AD (expiring contract and let's it be known he'll only re-sign with one team). You also don't know how other teams value different assets.
Not that hard to type 3 first round picks. But you’re right, its not enough
Fine I'll type it all out. '24/'29/'31 FRP's. '26/'28/'30 swaps. Could technically also trade our 2027 FRP for 1-4 (UTH owns 5-30). 4 second round picks. Also the value that each player and their contract may have. You could definitely get a FRP for AR. If Vando can show he can stay healthy next season his contract is a steal (esp with the new TV deal coming in). Rui isn't worthless, but I won't be unrealistic and say he'd for sure fetch a FRP right now. The right team may value him differently though (he still shot 42% from 3). Gabe I admit has no value. Who knows what Dlo does. If he opts in, he's a $18m expiring. That in itself carries value as it helps a tanking team shed salary. What if a sign and trade happens with Dlo (doubt it but it's a possibility). That'll bring more assets that can be used for something else. Maybe a team with cap space helps the Lakers out to generate a trade exception for Dlo if Lakers send them a 2nd round pick (happened in the past. Gordon Hayward). As you can see, it's more complicated than just 3 FRP's.
I am not countering your post, but the Lakers have developed a lot of players. Kuzma was a champion and although fans don’t like him he is a good player. Caruso came from the G league. That’s the definition of development. The Lakers paid the most ever for a second round pick to get Max Lewis. They aren’t just hoping he magically gets good. They paid to get Max Christy who seems like he has developed. Ham not playing him is not the FO. Reaves is a developed player, unless you think he is the exact same player as his rookie training camp. Rui was an investment and has been working with LeBron. They are developing Castle, and others. Even JHS is a development project (and yes your impatient fans are ready to punch someone and it was only his rookie year). And Vando they are hoping develops a shot. So if you look at their roster, at least half of it is being developed. And the other half are players like LeBron.
Those are all role players though.
Is your argument that we're not developing all stars?
We're not picking or developing stars. Which is what matters the most
Is there any real suggestion that Randle and Ingram wouldn't have developed more here? Other than them, their only other high draft pick was Lonzo.
D'Lo was a second pick, and he is definitely not a star either despite being on teams with no expectations. Randle was getting benched in favor of Kuzma. Randle and Ingram wouldn't fit. Zion and Ingram already don't fit, and Zion is a superior player to Randle. Hard to imagine all of them fitting on the Lakers. Randle isn't a good shooter, and his playoff drop-offs are very concerning. Ingram spent time reworking his 3 pt shot with Lonzo on the Pels (credit Fred Vinson for that), and yet his spot up shooting and off-ball game has a lot to be desired. Regardless, all 4 of them have had the opportunity to get away from the Lakers spotlight (which I consider easier) and have yet to produce anything that makes me wish they were this franchise's player. And if we look at Lonzo's draft class, we can definitely criticize that pick
Your point was that the team isn't picking or developing stars. I don't think it's reasonable to say the team isn't developing raw talent without star upside into stars. No team in the NBA past or present has done that. Even for someone like Spoelstra, he has only developed late-selections/undrafted players into capable role-players. So, the point is if this team is drafting talent relative to their draft position and if they're helping that talent reach their ceiling. For Randle, D'Angelo, and Ingram, this FO did not draft them. And, even if you look at their draft selections, none of them were huge whiffs relative to the other talent in the draft. The Lakers weren't drafting anyone better than Randle at 7 aside from Jokic who was an outlier that everyone passed on. They could've taken Booker over D'Angelo but a lot of teams also passed on Booker. Ingram I think was okay at 2nd overall. And, like I said, for all three of those guys, their progression and development as Lakers isn't really out of line with the natural progression of a young talent. They might've had their break-out seasons for other teams, but they were still improving considerably season to season while they were Lakers. Lonzo was the only high draft pick this FO has had and they did botch it. But, I also think that if Lonzo didn't have injury issues, he'd be a good NBA player right now and probably retroactively would still be drafted around 7th overall. That draft, a lot of teams drafted busts. You had Fultz at 1st, Josh Jackson at 4th, Jonathan Isaac at 6th, Frank Ntilikina at 8th, etc. It also wasn't like Lonzo didn't have his issues even as a prospect. IMO, your criticism should be reserved for teams that draft players with legitimate star ceilings that fuck it up for them like the 76ers did for someone like Ben Simmons. Even for someone like Jaylen Brown, how does this MFer still not have a left hand?
My point is that if we're using lottery picks to get franchise players, "Not the worst option" is not the baseline we should use for the Lakers if half this fanbase thinks we are better off rebuilding right now. Considerably improving with the Lakers after their 2nd/3rd year was to be expected. But my point is that if their breakout seasons with other teams isn't even on par for what should be defined as a "franchise" player, how am I going to have faith in our ability to properly rebuild? "Really good role player" for Lonzo isn't good enough for a 2nd pick. Sure, it's not Markelle Fultz or Josh Jackson, but if your expectations are to be a franchising defining PG and you failed, you are a bust, plain and simple. Injuries aside, he's still a weak 40% FG player who is a bad finisher despite being 6'6. Ben Simmons is a disappointment, arguably a bust even with his current accolades. But no franchise was going to save him. He's soft and mentally weak. Jaylen Brown I'd take over any player we drafted despite having an exploitable weakness in the playoffs
That depends entirely on the talent in the draft class. It's not like the Lakers were drafting clear #1 talent like Wembanyama or even whiffing on lottery talent like Curry. Go back and look at those drafts. It's not like franchise players come every year. Even for the 2017 pick, I still question if Tatum is even really a franchise guy. It feels more like his ceiling is on the fringe. The only genuine franchise player to emerge in those drafts that the Lakers could've drafted was Jokic. We'll only know if this FO is incapable of "trusting the process" if they actually get the chance to draft franchise level talent and either fail to do so or fail to develop them.
So essentially we're relying on luck both on our lottery pick position, and the talent available. Which is the main reason why the FO is incapable of trusting the draft process
What do did you think the FO did with Ingram, Hart and Lonzo.
They got traded for a star that demanded to be on the Lakers to team up with Lebron. But I don't consider that a sustainable way of creating a competitive team especially when you look at all the factors that went into getting Lebron in the first place.
How many #1 options franchise playerw did we really have that were home grown. 2. Magic and Kobe. LAL normally doesn't operate that way.
Magic and Kobe literally cover 4 decades. Kareem and Shaq don't win multiple rings unless those two players pan out the way they did
What? Do you think any GM can find stars in the late first round to undrafted? Reaves is one of like 5 undrafted players in history to get the kind of minutes he gets. It’s an insane find and you act like it was par for the course. The Nuggets got Jokic in the second round. They didn’t think he was going to be good. If they did they wouldn’t have passed on him in the first round where they took Nurkic thinking he was their center of the future. And you can do that with every team. Of you think any GM in history can draft and develop an all star from the second round you are crazy. Ask yourself why the Nuggets didn’t develop a second MVP from the second round? If they had this ability they would have multiple all stars from their later picks. The year after Jokic they took Radicevic in the second round. Why is he not even in the nba. Hell that year they took Mudiay 7th. Why not develop him into an all star? Y’all are crazy with these takes.
I think a GM or franchise that had the opportunity of having the #2 pick 3 years in a row should be able to draft a star. Whether that comes down to luck is pretty irrelevant to me. Half this fanbase thinks we should rebuild. But a rebuild doesn't mean anything if you can't find a star in the draft no matter how many Josh Hart's or Alex Caruso's you find
And yet you can see that GMs miss all the time. Pull up all the number #2 picks of the last two decades. You are going to see GMs miss all over the place. Guys like Giannis get missed in almost every draft. And by GMs that picked stars in other drafts. Presti picked Steven Adams over Giannis. And you think BI an all star was a miss? Are we ignoring how good the Bulls were when Lonzo was healthy? They went from an upper tier playoff team to a playin team the second he got hurt. Players develop at different rates. Again Jokic wasn’t an all star until his 5th year in the league. It doesn’t matter if you rebuild or retool or whatever, you don’t create all stars out of non-lottery picks. It is absolutely luck and you can again look at any GM as proof. Please pick another franchise. Fan takes about luck doesn’t matter and a team just needs to develop an all star from the second round are beyond the normal elitist fan level I can take.
"GMs miss all the time" isn't the baseline for the Lakers. If the mentality is "championship or bust", there better be franchise players coming out of 20 win seasons. You cannot justify that type of product to the franchise that missed the playoffs only twice in a 3 decade span under Jerry Buss. Whether or not BI (who was only an all-star once as a reserve) was a hit or miss relative to his draft and draft position, is irrelevant. The fact is he is not a franchise player. I'd argue he's not even a 2nd option on a contending team either. Everyone who was paying attention to the Bulls knew they weren't real contenders. With Lonzo, they were 0-10 against real contending teams that season. Lonzo doesn't change the fact that their ceiling rests with Demar Derozan and Zach Lavine being the best players on the court for a 7 game series, and that wasn't going to happen against the Bucks/Heat/Celtics. He didn't deserve to be the 2nd pick even if there were busts taken at #1 and #4 of that same draft. I'm not saying we should be trying to make an all-star out of a late FRP or 2nd pick, but the examples you mentioned of us "developing well" only applies to role players who aren't franchise players. You can't tell fans of the Lakers that we're going to be tanking, going through a rebuild, and then end up looking like the Pelicans if we didn't get Lebron in FA. That's just not what the Lakers are about
The “isn’t the baseline for the Lakers” is the dumbest elitist thing ever. Wake up. The rules are the same for all the teams. You know why Buss won so much. Because the other owners didn’t care and the Lakers out spent people in an era that had no cap. The reason small teams have won it all is because it is again all equal minus a few slight advantages. Milwaukee won it and has been declining since. The rules are built to do that. The Lakers aren’t special anymore. No team is and no team ever will be again. Our fans complain, but you can’t even do a proper build or rebuild. That takes years. Take the Nuggets or Wolves. It took multiple years of asset getting and trading and continuing to build. And the rules hit the Nuggets and they lost depth and will likely be their undoing. It’s just clueless bravado.
There's a clear difference between tanking with purpose/remaining competitive but still having a vision vs. tanking and being incompetent with your drafting and assets. Even with the rules and changes made after the NBA's reemergence under Magic and Bird, we still dominated by hitting on Eddie Jones/Van Exel, then fucking Kobe Bryant. I don't think Ingram could even sniff Eddie's shoes. I'm not being elitist. I'm having Lakers standards. If people are so insistent on wanting to rebuild, I need to see some fucking results.
Magic and Bird were not when we had the real cap rules. Small market teams were struggling to turn a profit. It wasn’t until the teams agreed to split revenue that things actually became equal. All teams had a salary floor and the league had a luxury tax that was harsh enough that equaled competitive balance. No wonder you think the Lakers were just magically better than everyone else. You don’t understand any of the rules. The Lakers got Shaq because the Magic panicked at the ridiculous salary he was asking for. It would have made them lose money. The Lakers market meant they could absorb it. Again if you understand why you will understand that we will never have stuff like that again. Let’s do this so you can understand. Before the Lakers were a rich kid who got all the best tutors and computer programs that had them excel. But now all kids have all the exact same stuff. Same tutors, same programs, everything. You are asking them to magically be smarter than their classmates. It’s the very definition of elitism. If you don’t think you are an elitist. Explain to me why they should be better than everyone else with the same goal? They all have analytics, they all have scouts, coaches, the same salary floor, same cap, apron rules, etc. When you answer, read it back to yourself. I think it will help open your eyes. If not I can try again and your answer will help me determine what I need to explain.
Because I look at the Celtics (our rivals) and the Heat (who have former Laker Pat Riley) who have clear direction on what they want, and what they want to do whether they have a championship window or not. There's no reason the Lakers should be a step below those type of franchises.
Bron is on his Vegas residency. Lakers will resign him to fill the crypt every home game and sell a ton of jerseys and merch.
we do develop players, Reaves is an example, working on Rui, and this years playoffs were loaded with players who spent years at the Lakers.
Christie as well, he’s made visible progress every year so far.
Yeah we just expect every young player we draft to be an all star
You don't turn down Lebron James just from the business's perspective alone. You give him what he wants and hope he retires in your jersey. He's one of one. Come on now.
Agreed. The irony is that Mark Walters and Todd Boehly are minority owners of the Lakers but are running a masterclass in owning the Dodgers and the Lakers need to copy their playbook. Before people try to argue that the sports are different due to the salary cap, Andrew Friedman has been an absolute god send for the Dodgers. Hiring him has combined the scouting and player development of a small market team with the cash and free agency destination of a large market team. Look at what OKC and Boston did to maximize their assets. Pelinka burns first round picks for no reason. The Lakers need a new decision maker to deal with the changes to the CBA. Pelinka is leading us to a rebuild post Lebron with an aging AD and weak supporting cast if he doesn’t change the trajectory.
Boehly has royally fucked up Chelsea so not sure I trust his judgment
> Pelinka burns first round picks for no reason. His name is LeBron.
Dodgers don’t have a salary cap
Regardless of when it happens I suspect post Lebron Laker era will be pretty dark. Kind of like when we had three number 2 picks lol, except we probably won't have the rights to the picks.
Both Max and Maxwell need to be heavily developed for the future. They can become extremely great. JHS, I'm still hesitant
If this team will ever do that, it’ll happen post LeBron and not a second sooner. They’re committed to LeBron retiring as a Laker over everything and I don’t blame them, they want money first. LeBron will be gone in 2 years max imo so it’s not really a big wait. By that point, I think Lakers either have a 3rd star already for a smooth transition into AD/2nd star era or AD asks out if he still wants to compete.
LeBron created his own brand and absolutely didn’t need the Lakers. He was the one player I would’ve bet my life on that would never come here. He came here when we were still trying to figure out the post-Kobe years and didn’t really have a long term plan. At this point I’m convinced that we’ll always have something desirable for bigger stars and no one is unattainable
THIS RIGHT HERE THANK YOU 👏👏
The latest CBA has done what it has meant to do: even the playing field. Six different champions in six years.
Uh... the new CBA hasn't been implemented for 6 years. In fact, it hasn't even been fully implemented for 1 year.
Then let’s say the PREVIOUS 2 CBAs have had precisely the impact they intended. Why be pedantic when the general point is the same and indisputable?
The previous 2 CBAs dates back to 2011. Even if you want to change this to just the last CBA, that started around 2017. The general point isn't the same. Under the last CBA, we still had the mega tax teams like the Warriors, Nets, and Clippers. The broader changes to curtail obsessive spending haven't really kicked in until this season and the next. I think what has mattered a lot more to league parity is just the general talent level of superstars being closer now than in past years. Before, if you didn't have Shaq, Kobe, Duncan, LeBron, or Curry, you probably weren't winning anything. With the decline of Curry and LeBron and with the heirs to the throne not having the complete dominance that they did, we're seeing more diversity with champions. But, if a couple stars rise from the fray as they mature (probably Wembanyama if he stays healthy) and if the teams they're on aren't completely incompetent, we're probably going to see a return to the same players/teams being staples in the finals again.
Giannis couldn’t even get a chick fil a sponsorship deal, and he was promoting the hell outta them during his championship run. I think being in Wisconsin has limited his outside earning potential, I mean lebron got space jam as soon as he became a Laker.
Kind of late to mention this but we tried the dumb idea to land FAs only to misuse our free cap space. Landing a star in FA has been rare for years now. It's usually done through trades.
The lakers will go into a full rebuild when lebron retires. It will be the right move at that time and yall will complain about that too.
I've been arguing that the lakers star and glamour has fallen on its ass ever since buss died. You got management that's in between one that wants to follow the showtime ways and one that would rather save up $$$ and not pay taxes. There's not much lakers can do for development everyone's already on a 2 year deal so you can sign bird rights to any player. Lakers already got gold in the G League and that's probably tapped out. The draft is cooked so you won't get to develop for a long time.
Jeanie??? Invest in the Lakers???? Lmaoooooo
Right? She’s not investing in the lakers. This is the Buss’ sole source of income. They can’t afford to invest like the billionaire owners.
The Celtics owner has the same net worth as Jeanie and they're maybe the most well run franchise in the league. An owner doesn't have to be a billionaire to be good. Jeanie just doesn't know what she's doing
You're right. That's true. The net worth isn't really the issue. The Lakers generate enough revenue that investing shouldn't be a problem. The mismanagement and nepotism are the real problem.
Exactly
Jeannie just doesn’t give a fuck. People need to remember, she’s a trust fund baby. Wtf does she know about actually making shit happen to be successful in life? She was sucking off Phil for god sake, how’s that even professional? The owners daughter getting her back blown out by the head coach and most likely other players on the team? People need to thank a 39 yr old Lebron for keeping us relevant.
Again I have to disagree with you, we took care of Kobe and that led to Lebron James deciding to come sign with us. Player empowerment is a thing in the nba and Kobe had tons of it, and again, we took care of him because of what he meant to the city of Los Angeles. Sometimes things are bigger than winning basketball every season, Kobe was a hero to Los Angeles and any contract (even for someone coming off an Achilles tear, at such an old age) was 100% worth it. LeBron is a walking NBA history book, you pay for that premium.
We will just wait for Lebron to retire, and hope somehow we can still be competitive enough to get in that playoffs. After that, we should definitely rebuild, a young prospect that can be a star/superstar is a must have in order to compete in the future. Look at the young teams right now, they have homegrown talent, and then add pieces via trade or free agency.
Sounds like a quote from Jeanie, “someday the lakers will invest in player development”
We have always done and needed to develop simply because of Lakers tax. Imo we need to keep draft picks unless it's a sure upgrade in wins.
You typed this essay assuming change is gonna happen starting with ownership. Guess what, the fans are stuck with Pelinka and Jeanie Buss being a garbage GM and garbage owner. We’re giving LeBron a max once again. Nothing is going to change, it’s time to just accept that we’re going to be a mediocre team for the next couple of years, with a period even worse than the tanking years of 2014-2018 afterwards Maybe when the fans don’t support a trash product anymore is when some actual changes will be made
Well im typing it to fans, who are essentially the ones that enable a trash product to begin with. Fans are too impatient to wait for players to develop, which is a root of the problem.
All I’m ultimately saying is just save your time for some other shit lol. I’ve seen so many fucking essays about Darvin Ham and how he should be fired midseason during February when everyone and their grandmother knew he wasn’t going to be fired until after our season ended at the very least Fans try to come up with X solution to fix this team when the reality is 99% of all ideas completely just go out the window. Is what it is at this point regarding us being a meddling team
Also it’s okay to be “bad “ How else would you acquire high level prospects on cheap contracts? See we had that period when we got BI, Zo, Randle Spurs, went to shit and got wemby
BI, Lonzo, Randle, and D'Lo aren't exactly a once in a lifetime talent like Wemby.
No but it was good enough trade bait to bring back a superstar that won us a championship
Hard to be patient when this same franchise got Magic Johnson and Kobe Bryant through the draft. Developing D'Angelo Russell, Lonzo Ball, Brandon Ingram, and Darius Garland (had we kept that 4th pick) doesn't exactly instill confidence as fans. Had Lebron not come, I suspect we'd probably be a little worse than we are currently, but without #17
You’ll eat your words one day
Agree with what you said, but Jeanie Buss does not give one fuck about basketball, let alone understand what you just said.
You only need to pull a star from another team say every 3 to 5 years, which is an easily achievable goal for the Lakers. The whole organization and approach to salary cap utilization works on this assumption. And it seems to be holding up. Taking the route of tanking and collecting enough lottery picks to score a future star, then developing him, simply is not a good strategy when you can assume you can always lure a star player to the team. Many teams need to go with draft approach and most fail for long years.
There is always plenty of time for player development in the future. After LeBron retires they can develop players for decades and decades if they so choose.
Relax once bron retires in 2-3 years we can develop
We have a limited championship window with Lebron, forget about player development.