Define what you mean by "long term"? For several seasons I'll grant you the franchise may be challenged. If you're talking a decade or more, well then I think you need to examine the record more closely. It hasn't taken the Lakers that long to recover from very many setbacks including the previous crisis involving the Shaq departure. Again short term, long term, I can't read your mind. The Chris Paul deal would have left the Lakers with no Power Forward so obviously we don't know how significant that hole on the front line would have been or how long it would have taken to satisfactorily fill it. You may be right that Kupchak holds Lowry in high enough esteem that he may be prepared to sweeten the deal with picks. That wouldn't surprise me really. Oh and the deal doesn't take $20M off the Lakers books if Lowry makes $6M and Scola make $8M. The net cap savings could be approximately $6M in that case.
You couldnt have watched last years finals He's also soft, lazy & sensistive to any criticism from teammates & media This might be the most grossly comment I've read The Lakers couldnt win with Gasol at 30, yet our less talented Kobeless team can somewhow form a contender within the 5 years it'll take us to rebuild. How much basketball have you really watched? People get frustrated because fans like you justify terrible moves like this with useless +/- stats and baseless basketball logic. Why would a GM rebuild his team around a 31yr old center who takes plays off and disappears in playoff series? If Gasol's the best we can get at the trade deadline, then we should stay pat and shoot for the offseason.
Hard to say that they have no plan B or C... you never really know what Morey is thinking. That being said, based on past years, I'm not getting my hopes up about a big splash at the deadline.
I do think there is a plan B or C but like you said, I doubt its a big trade. Morey isnt going to pass on plan A until he knows there is no chance. Considering the direction the team is going and Morey's constant transactions, I think he knows the team needs some new blood. Then again the direction of the team could be related to the constant trade rumors messing with the players minds.
CDave: You make some great points, but to answer your question about D Williams, D Rose, etc..... YES! They would move Pau to bring int he next generation of LA Lakers. I don't think they are moving players who failed them in the past, they are moving players who are expensive and expendable. Don't try to change your argument, I called you on that trade exception BS and it stands, they had less need for a trade exception than a 2nd round draft pick, and even less need for a 2nd round draft pick than a 7-footer with trade value around the entire league as the reigning 6th man of the year. I'm not letting you back down from this point because the Lamar Odom trade is the single biggest and most recent indication of a shift in FO mentality and the best rationale you had to offer was "buy low sell high" and "they got a trade exception." LISTEN TO YOURSELF! Your rationalizing the very instance that shows you how the Lakers are going to fix their salary cap issues. They moved Odom for a late 2nd round draft pick and a trade exception they definitely don't need with the numerous contracts they have. This is the rule.... CP3, Deron Williams, etc. are the exception if pursued. Lamar Odom falling apart was unpredictable by ANYONE who follows basketball before that trade went down. Don't you dare try to claim that as an LA victory, as if they traded him knowing he would be a mental basket-case and never get on track to give a consistent 10 mpg just a few months after he hits hsi peak of production for a career where he has always unused potential (gerneally agreed upon for years around the NBA)... if you seriously think that the Lakers traded him because they knew he would fall apart then there is no point discussing the Lakers because Jesus must run that organization in your eyes. I don't understand why you think the Lakers are exactly what they have been for years. It's new ownership.... you don't have a GM making the for roster moves, you have a newly empowered silver-spooned owner that isn't about to pay $20mil/year in luxury tax just to be bounced in the first round like his father may have. Short term vs. long term: They have a short term salary issue next year and the following year with Pau/Kobe/Bynum scheduled to make $45 mil/year.... CP3 could solve that if you move on from Kobe or pay the one time salary tax as a bridge. Long term they have an issue in terms of keeping LA a competitive team with Kobe Bryant and CP3 was one of the FEW acquisitions that allows you to move on from the Bryant era with Bynum/CP3 signing for around $35/year with brand new deals combined leaving you with around $20 (less than Kobe's cap number) to build a roster around. It's nice that you think Kobe will restructure, but in business you don't make plans based on great occurences, you plan to keep your business afloat through rough times. Why on earth would a GM plan for their star player to take a pay cut 2 years later as justification for a move now? That's quite presumptuous and my argument here is that GMs and owners of businesses can't make these kinds of assumptions so why can you? CP3 was unique..... just like a D Williams or Derrick Rose trade.... it's about cache as well as production and those kinds of stars have it so justify a one or two time harsh salary cap hit to keep the Hollywood team with $10,000 floor seats even if they trade Kobe next summer. That's what I mean when I say long term vs. short term. LAL has to rebuild in the right way, CP3 allowed them to do it in a way Lowry or Gasol really can't. So if LAL wants a PG that can give them 15/8/5 that they can afford to pay alongside Kobe/Bynum then they need to give up more than Gasol..... 2 draft picks included and we can do some business... other than that, Lakers have to find another organization to be their bridge into the new era of the NBA. You bring up the Yankees... but after the seroids era baseball changed and it took them a while to adjust their approach and Joe Girardi was a great first step. All I'm saying now is that new Lakers ownership and a new CBA means a shift in how LA builds relevant teams and we do agree that it should be centered around Bynum. Why do you keep bringing up trading Dragic to LA? I've never said anything remotely close to that. My argument is Dragic is good enough to start on an NBA roster and if we move Kyle for Gasol + draft picks he is good enough to be signed to a better offer sheet that Kyle has, something like 4 years, $20 mil to be OUR starting PG as we rebuild. I'm actually agreeing with you that since Dragic isn't enough, we have to call our own bluff and use our assets. He is an expiring that would resign to be the starter here... I'm confused on how any of that is hard to understand or debatable.... that's why I didn't respond. You called Dragic a career backup and I explained why that's just a lazy insult since future career starters like Evan Turner were first career backups.... it's the NBA process, son.
You're talking Steve Nash and Kyle Lowry. He's already outplayed Lowry at times but has not shown a consistently better game as a backup. Funny thing is Lowry hadn't either against Brooks. It took a major injury to Brooks for him to get the starting spot and then he shined.
Basketball isn't checkers.... why do you take such a simplistic approach to assessing Gasol's potential? Playing with Courtney Lee/Kyle Lowry and no dominant center is significantly different then playing with Kobe/Fisher and Bynum in the middle. Gasol could be the best player on a team and take them to the Western conference finals this year..... put him on Denver and they are taking OKC to 7 games in the Western Conference Finals... book it. They can play Gasol with Nene like we wanted to, or play him alongside Harrington which gives you amazing frontcourt versatility and offense. NBA roster moves is a dynamic exercise because removing one player can be like removing a weed and letting the flowers bloom. Remove Kevin Martin and Luis Scola from our roster and watch the Rockets bloom.... If we could trade Martin/Scola for Pau you would see his ability to be the #1 option on a team and carry them, maybe not to a trophy with the Rockets supporting cast, but in Denver he could be dangerous with George Karl.... think about that: Front court of Nene/Gasol/Harrington with Danilo/Afflalo on the wing and Lawson as your point--that's a sexy lineup to me. Think outside the box bro!
Don't even dignify that argument with a response.... I never said we could get Gasol with Dragic so I don't get why he keeps saying it's absurd since I agree. I even listed other PGs the Lakers would go after if they couldn't get Lowry or didn't want to pony up more than Gasol to get him: Jose Calderon & Ramon Sessions would be pursued way before Dragic. I agree he doesn't have value which is a Morey strategy for not giving players who have starter's talent, starter's minutes so the starter's trade value remains high.... Brooks.... Lowry..... Courtney Lee.... etc.
I sort of fall into your position a little bit. I wouldn't mind a trade for Gasol as much, if he were younger and cheaper. It seems more like win now mode sort of move. Honestly, it wouldn't be the worst thing in the world, if we missed the playoffs. Fans already aren't coming to the game and currently a minor move for Gasol isn't going to change a whole lot. It's more of a horizontal move than vertical. Gasol has a more value than Lowry, but neither player can put you over the top on a team with a thinner roster and lack of a real solid #1 or multiple #2s. Showed that both teams got worse. http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=7ftbzbn http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=7jdxeys The Lakers do not need any of our other players bad enough to give up Gasol in return. Moreover, Gasol is not a part of their woes, it's a lack of quality role players and depth. You can thank Mitch Kupachak for that. Though, they are capped out and are seeking relief. Still, I do not think Houston presents the best offer on the table. Most of all, I doubt Gasol is interested in coming to Houston. It's like landing in Carson City, instead of Las Vegas. It would almost be like going back to Memphis.
Of course.it is going to be different... Texas should be more interesting than Memphis as there are more Spanish speakers. .. Gasol is no superstar, not in LA... he gives us the opportunity to trade the logjam for one or two players. again we have too many players that are not playing but could very well play because they are close to the same level, so a trade is necessary regardless of playoffs or not!
This might be the most grossly comment I've read The Lakers couldnt win with Gasol at 30, yet our less talented Kobeless team can somewhow form a contender within the 5 years it'll take us to rebuild. How much basketball have you really watched? People get frustrated because fans like you justify terrible moves like this with useless +/- stats and baseless basketball logic. Why would a GM rebuild his team around a 31yr old center who takes plays off and disappears in playoff series? If Gasol's the best we can get at the trade deadline, then we should stay pat and shoot for the offseason.[/QUOTE] The lakers also didnt win with kobe being their number 1 so by your logic does that mean that if the opportunity comes up, should we not obtain kobe (i know the opp wont come but I am speaking hypothetically)
Gasol as a Rocket will post better numbers than the Lakers, the reason the Lakers are struggling is because Kobe is playing selfish. They have 2 of the baddest center, yet they don't contribute much because Kobe wants to shoot more than let their teammates win it for them. Lakers lose to Pistons and Wizards because Kobe took over 26 shots, or more each game and making only 30% of them, basically he is shooting the Lakers to losses. If we get a committed Gasol, it will be a positive move. If Gasol is traded to anywhere, it will be a Lakers loss, more than they know unless their target is Dwight, but I do not think Superman can handle Kobe, the kryptonite.
I agree. At this point, I only like threads with Twitter updates, because they are exciting. No offense, but reading these posts is a waste of everyones time.
Gasol would only hurt this team in the long term. We have no Kobe to pair with he....and Gasol has already proven that he can't lead a team. No big name star is foaming at the mouth the just play with Gasol. So we would have an old, unmotivated, overpaid soft player. BAD MOVE.
