Dude, do you honestly believe Lakers have not called Thibs? That’s what you are implying here, right? There is a difference between Cod answering questions that *appears* to paint him into a corner, versus someone starting in that corner trying to escape. Codman never insisted on any timeframe, so maybe you are missing his point. From my seats, he was just explaining what the Lakers were interested in offering. He didn’t say 3rd team makes it work now, as he didn’t actually address a timeframe. You read that into it. And no one actually said Dec 15th to him, fwiw. It was obvious to me, Lakers could be saying 3rd team much like Morey is, ie. if they have to give up extra, they want extra back...or someone needs to eat salary, etc. Bottomline: if you don’t believe the LAL news, then you are just not believing that Lebron (‘er, Pelinka) would call Thibs to discuss his only options. I’m fine with excusing @Codman for not directly addressing the need for Lakers to wait, because any of his Ears might assume everyone knows that, since it’s their only option — especially on a day like today for Cod. Peace brother. Praying for you. Hell, maybe Cod’s Ears are hearing things from Lebron, who could easily dismiss CBA complexities, like a demanding King.
Soooooooooo happy we arent getting him.... thank GOD... 300+ pages of useless discussion..... We will win the ship and you guys will be happy. Yule sea.
You honestly believe the Lakers have not called Thibs with the only offers they can make. lulz at you strictly defining the meaning of Offer, in order to make a narrative work. You’re trying waaayy to hard, and it’s obvious. As @KlutchQT said, We get it. You’re boring. And your strict interpretation of the meaning of Offer as a way to insist that you know Lakers haven’t called Thibs is laughable.
I’ve never liked something so much, yet also wanted to make stop at the same time....well, aside from my dig licking my face.
I may be boring but I'm not out of line. You just pick and choose what parts to include in your argument to change the narrative. When I said its damn near impossible for any tempting offer to be made by LA, COD responded in a way as if he is sure the offer is out there and insisted his source is credible. Therefore, further explanation or what you saw as arguing ensued. Had he looked at the rosters and contracts and said "hmm, well I definitely heard that, don't know how it would work" or "maybe my source doesn't understand the complexities of the cap (which would in itself question the credibility of any source)" then I wouldn't have responded much. But instead he brings in a 3 team trade scenario so naturally I continued to argue because that doesn't change much. There's no bullying going on here.
Recess! I loved that show. Some of those guys went by to quick to make out but I'll rewatch here shortly to try and pin-point the others. JR Smith selling Supreme stickers is awesome. Harden as the athlete is pretty sweet too.
See, you’re trying too hard...and avoiding the actual news. Let me ask you again...Do you honestly believe the Lakers have not called Thibs or Taylor to discuss their only option?
I mean I honestly have no clue. At a minimum I would think they said "keep us in mind in December" or something.] Zoplicone did point out that none of the veterans on the Lakers can be traded right now. Cod responded by saying that by veterans he meant players with at least 1 year. You are right that I have to assume that means he actually knew what Zoplicone meant when he said they couldn't be traded. When it was pointed out that they couldn't get to $20 million to acquire Butler with any of their current players that can be traded he said they would use a third team to make it work. You are right that I'm assuming Cod knows that the reason they can't make the salary work is because they can't combine those salaries yet. I did mention aggregation I believe at some point. I think it's very possible Cod hear something like "The Lakers would give up a young piece to get Jimmy Butler" but that doesn't make it actually possible. If he meant December 15th he had multiple opportunities in this discussion to make that point. Instead he offered up ways around it. The third team being brought in was specifically brought up by him as a way to get around the fact that they don't have salaries that can be aggregated right now.
Do I think Minnesota/Lakers have had a conversation that included trading Ingram and Ball for Butler (There only current option)? Sure it's possible the Wolves made that call and got told no. Do I think Minnesota/Lakers have had a conversation about a three team trade they would execute in December? No. Not because they wouldn't do it, but because it's impossible to work out those details this far in advance due to potential injuries, performance, etc. on three different teams. Do I think the Lakers have called Minnesota and said "hey if nothing works out, keep us in mind as an option in December?" Sure that's definitely possible. I obviously can't confirm it, but I'd be shocked if they haven't done that.
And those of us that actually matter appreciate all that you give us. Well wishes and prayers for your health. When I read you were 46 that hit me home a bit as I am right around there.
You're the one avoiding "actual" news and insinuating every angle to avoid the simple fact that somewhere along in Cod's posts there was a mistake. But since you don't want to be reasonable, I'll answer your question in the most literal sense. Do I believe Lakers called and offered Ingram AND Lonzo? No I don't. Do I believe Lakers have made an offer of Lonzo and Kuzma and Hart and 3 more players for 1 Jimmy Butler in October? Actually no I don't. Do I believe the teams called to discuss a trade more than two months away? No I don't. Because, my friend, those are the only options. This isn't even a matter of what's realistic in trades, its whats possible.
Teams discuss Dec 15th deals prior to that date all the time...especially when it is their only option. Don’t be silly. imo, you misread Cod’s news from the get go. It’s like you did so in order to use technicalities as a way to say Lakers won’t be able to ruin our trade. None of that means Pelinka isn’t calling WITH HIS ONLY OPTION. And none of that means Minny cares right now, nor that Morey needs to worry. I heard it another way, and thus with my mindset did not actually read Cod being inconsistent, wrt the main point of the news. Him slipping up on technicalities on a day like today for him, doesn’t mean this is fabricated. It’s all very plausible to me
@heypartner The only option that can correlate with what you're saying is the Lakers could have called Thibs and asked if there is a chance they hold onto Jimmy (without discussing players and dates because you don't show your hand in trade talks) and Thibs responding with something along the lines of "yes if no one offers a good package we're going to hold onto him" If thats your point, then good on you to finding a possible scenario, but that was not what COD was saying.
