The terribly mediocre Lakers

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,405
around the way
How do you define "empty points?" Kuzma isn't dropping 15 of his 18 in the 4th quarter of blowouts like a Nick Young, which is the very definition of that term, he's scoring throughout the game against both starters and reserves. We used to hear the same about Jamal Crawford and Jordan Clarkson when they scored against whatever defenses were thrown at them as well.......damn, we heard it about Isaiah when he was in Sacramento. Kuzma would be an optimal second unit option on a playoff team who struggles to create shots which is always a challenge and a role that these teams badly need.
No doubt, points are points. But if you're responsible for the other team scoring tons of them too--which he seemingly is--then your rose comes with some nontrivial thorns. I'm far from the patron saint of advanced metrics, but Kuzma delivers in only one part of the game. Anybody who has watched him has seen that. Some just don't seem to care.

Ball is capable of affecting the game at both ends. I certainly didn't see that coming, since he doesn't have a ton of explosiveness. But high BB IQ and giving a shit goes a long way.
 

Imbricus

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 26, 2017
4,810
BPI's latest projection put the Lakers 10th, and give us a 4.1% chance at the 2-5 pick.
If you want to see the glass as half full, it would be the 2-3 pick. As I understand it, there's no way the Celts could get the #4 or #5 if the Lakers finish 10th worst.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Moderator
SoSH Member
If you want to see the glass as half full, it would be the 2-3 pick. As I understand it, there's no way the Celts could get the #4 or #5 if the Lakers finish 10th worst.
Also, assuming you don’t think the Pelicans will imminently be ready to trade Davis, SAC 2019 is a more versatile trade asset than the 4th or 5th pick in this year’s draft would’ve been. (If we get lucky with the ping-pong balls, of course we’ll take that and never look back.)
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
I could go either way on Ingram v. Kuzma, but give me Ben Simmons every day and twice on Sunday over either of them (if that's even a discussion).
It isn't a discussion atm and was mostly said in jest. I said it could potentially be in a year or two but things would really have to break right for Ingram. He has a ton of potential, but obviously so doesn't Simmons. I would take Ingram every day and twice on Sunday over Kuzma tho. Ingram is a full 2 years younger than Kuzma and has a much better overall game. He also plays at a less important position defensively. Year over year, he has all the signs you look for in a developing player.

Kuzma I'm just not that high on. He'll have a long NBA career as 1st or 2nd guy off the bench. That has value but the ceiling isn't there like it is with Ingram.
 

BigMike

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Sep 26, 2000
23,244
Also, assuming you don’t think the Pelicans will imminently be ready to trade Davis, SAC 2019 is a more versatile trade asset than the 4th or 5th pick in this year’s draft would’ve been. (If we get lucky with the ping-pong balls, of course we’ll take that and never look back.)
Really? I look at 4, 5 and you are talking about someone like Bagley, Porter, or Bamba. There will be like 2-3 potential franchise players available at 4/5. The 2019 pick is much fuzzier, and can't be #1. So I just can't see how Kings 2019 could be considered a more versatile. Unless of course you are saying that because it will still be a pick, a futures item at the 2019 deadline.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Moderator
SoSH Member
Really? I look at 4, 5 and you are talking about someone like Bagley, Porter, or Bamba. There will be like 2-3 potential franchise players available at 4/5. The 2019 pick is much fuzzier, and can't be #1. So I just can't see how Kings 2019 could be considered a more versatile. Unless of course you are saying that because it will still be a pick, a futures item at the 2019 deadline.
That’s exactly what I’m saying. There’s not much chance the Kings won’t suck, so the right to roll their lottery dice should hold its value until the 2019 deadline.
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
51,291
That’s exactly what I’m saying. You can either roll the lottery dice, or you can trade the right to roll between now and the 2019 deadline. There’s not much chance the Kings won’t suck.
I believe Ainge himself once said “You can always trade draft picks” in one of many discussions over the years about asset accumulation. The man understands nothing if not asset value.

The only real difference between the current long-range targeting of Davis and that of Garnett is that he’s already got a top team locked in for a while and isn’t nearly as reliant on landing that big fish.
 

Sprowl

mikey lowell of the sandbox
Dope
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2006
34,440
Haiku
I believe Ainge himself once said “You can always trade draft picks” in one of many discussions over the years about asset accumulation. The man understands nothing if not asset value.
True, except that when Ainge really had draft choices burning a hole through his pockets (the five 2nd round picks of 2016), he couldn't do much with them. That one year at least, he collected more nickels than could be spent.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
8,094
True, except that when Ainge really had draft choices burning a hole through his pockets (the five 2nd round picks of 2016), he couldn't do much with them. That one year at least, he collected more nickels than could be spent.
If you had the entire 2nd round to offer in a trade, how far up into the first round could you get? Mid twenties?
 

chilidawg

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 22, 2015
5,934
Cultural hub of the universe
Ainge got the Clippers pick for two early 2nd's. It's possible it may not convey, but it might also turn into something pretty valuable. I've thought that early 2nds can be worth more than late firsts to some teams because the contracts aren't guaranteed.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Moderator
SoSH Member
Ainge got the Clippers pick for two early 2nd's. It's possible it may not convey, but it might also turn into something pretty valuable. I've thought that early 2nds can be worth more than late firsts to some teams because the contracts aren't guaranteed.
I think that’s changing a bit now that teams are more focused on stockpiling cost-controlled talent. These days, I suspect most GMs would take the benefit of picking, say, 29th instead of 35th over the flexibility to cut bait on the later pick after a year if he’s a bust.
 

Carmine Hose

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 2, 2001
5,046
Dorchester, MA
The Lakers, in true rival fashion, have taken the shine of the Ainge swap. Celts got the better player in Tatum over Fultz, but the chance to "win" the trade was to get the 2-5 in this year's big man heavy draft. By pushing it to 2019, the gamble really heats up in that the Kings could land the #1 pick, then we get the Sixers pick, which could be in the 20s.
 

Marbleheader

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2004
11,726
Was it ever publicized if Danny chose to include the Brooklyn pick over the LAL/SAC pick or if either was offered CLE preferred the Brooklyn pick?
 

Sam Ray Not

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
8,848
NYC
The Lakers, in true rival fashion, have taken the shine of the Ainge swap. Celts got the better player in Tatum over Fultz, but the chance to "win" the trade was to get the 2-5 in this year's big man heavy draft. By pushing it to 2019, the gamble really heats up in that the Kings could land the #1 pick, then we get the Sixers pick, which could be in the 20s.
Assuming they're in the bottom eight next year, the Kings' chances of landing the #1 pick will range from 3% (as the #23 seed) to 25% (as the #30 seed). Much better chance the Cs end up with a pick in the #2-8 range.

And heck, even if Sac plucks the #1 and they end up with Philly's #20-ish pick, they still won the trade pretty handily.
 

HowBoutDemSox

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2009
10,103
Assuming they're in the bottom eight next year, the Kings' chances of landing the #1 pick will range from 3% (as the #23 seed) to 25% (as the #30 seed). Much better chance the Cs end up with a pick in the #2-8 range.

And heck, even if Sac plucks the #1 and they end up with Philly's #20-ish pick, they still won the trade pretty handily.
Don’t the new lottery odds go into effect for 2019? Looks like the bottom three teams each have a 14% chance:

The new system will level the odds at the top of the NBA Draft Lottery so that the teams with the three worst regular-season records will each have a 14 percent chance of winning the lottery. In the current structure, the top seed has 25 percent of the lottery odds, the second seed has 19.9 percent and the third seed has 15.6 percent.

The odds for the remaining participants in the 14-team lottery will be reduced gradually after the top three. For instance, the difference in lottery odds between the first three seeds (14 percent) and the fourth seed (12.5 percent) will be 1.5 percent. The difference between the fourth seed and the fifth seed (10.5 percent) will be 2 percent, and the difference between the fifth seed and the sixth seed (9 percent) will be 1.5 percent.
http://www.nba.com/article/2017/09/28/nba-board-governors-approves-changes-draft-lottery-system

If I understand the changes, that’s better (for the Celtics) if the King’s finish in the bottom three next year, since they’ll have a lower probability of getting the top spot and settling for the Sixer’s pick, but slightly worse if the Kings make some improvements and finish more towards the better tier of lottery teams.
 

Imbricus

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 26, 2017
4,810
My recollection was that Cleveland asked for one of Jaylen, Jayson, Bkn 1 or Lakers/Sac pick and Danny chose Bkn 1.
I don't recall ever seeing this anywhere, but would love to know if someone did. I would've traded Lakers/Sac before the Nets pick. My guess is that Cleveland didn't give him a choice.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Moderator
SoSH Member
I don't recall ever seeing this anywhere, but would love to know if someone did. I would've traded Lakers/Sac before the Nets pick. My guess is that Cleveland didn't give him a choice.
I agree. The pick was the centerpiece of the deal, even if CLE tried to spin it was IT-plus for Kyrie. I can’t imagine CLE was indifferent as to which pick they received.

The #1 overall protection on the LAL/SAC pick made the BKN pick the more valuable asset of the two — especially assuming you thought the LAL pick was never terribly likely to convey, which I think was the conventional wisdom. Maybe Danny had a contrarian view of the 2018 or 2019 Kings and preferred to deal the BKN pick, but I doubt he could’ve swapped one asset for the other without altering other parts of the deal as well.
 

Montana Fan

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 18, 2000
8,880
Twin Bridges, Mt.
I recall reading that Ainge had his choice of including Tatum/Brown/Bkn 1 or LAL/Sac, in the Kyire trade thread but couldn't find it in 5 minutes and don't have time to search further.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Moderator
SoSH Member
I recall reading that Ainge had his choice of including Tatum/Brown/Bkn 1 or LAL/Sac, in the Kyire trade thread but couldn't find it in 5 minutes and don't have time to search further.
I don’t have the time to look either, but I recall reading the same thing. I’m saying I’m deeply skeptical that the report is true. Of course the Cavs would’ve taken Tatum instead of the pick (the #3 pick in a rich draft is a lot better than the median projection for any future draft pick), and it probably didn’t make sense for either side to include Jaylen in the trade (fewer years of control for CLE, loss of a current contributor for BOS), but I can’t imagine the Cavs were agnostic as to which pick they received.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,405
around the way
I don’t have the time to look either, but I recall reading the same thing. I’m saying I’m deeply skeptical that the report is true. Of course the Cavs would’ve taken Tatum instead of the pick (the #3 pick in a rich draft is a lot better than the median projection for any future draft pick), and it probably didn’t make sense for either side to include Jaylen in the trade (fewer years of control for CLE, loss of a current contributor for BOS), but I can’t imagine the Cavs were agnostic as to which pick they received.
The fact that it was unprotected had to be a big selling point. First, not only can't the LAL or SAC picks be #1, but if the LAL pick is below #5, you wait a year. The Brooklyn pick probably wasn't ever going to be #1, but it COULD be. That counts.
 
Last edited:

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,096
I have to believe Cleveland perceived the Brooklyn pick as being more valuable to them. No matter what the win-loss projections were for the Lakers, the protections did mean that the chance was real that it would not convey in 2018. And the Cavs really needed certainty around having a lottery pick in strong draft year.

Can't really fault Ainge. Neither Lin getting hurt nor Kuzma playing well were predictable.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,494
I recall reading that Ainge had his choice of including Tatum/Brown/Bkn 1 or LAL/Sac, in the Kyire trade thread but couldn't find it in 5 minutes and don't have time to search further.
I don’t have the time to look either, but I recall reading the same thing. I’m saying I’m deeply skeptical that the report is true. Of course the Cavs would’ve taken Tatum instead of the pick (the #3 pick in a rich draft is a lot better than the median projection for any future draft pick), and it probably didn’t make sense for either side to include Jaylen in the trade (fewer years of control for CLE, loss of a current contributor for BOS), but I can’t imagine the Cavs were agnostic as to which pick they received.
I think it was mentioned by some of the talking heads reporting on the trade at the time. Here's one reference I found from the locked trade thread: http://sonsofsamhorn.net/index.php?threads/kyrie-irving-traded-to-celtics-for-it-crowder-zizic-bkn-1st-2020-2nd.20638/page-6#post-2393514
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
51,291
I doubt Ainge has any regrets, and I follow his lead. He probably already knows who he wants in 2019.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
24,652
where I was last at
IIRC part of the Cavs need was a magnet to attract LBJ and keep him in Cleveland. The Nets pick in '18 projected to do that a lot better than a Lakers/King pick in '19.
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
21,759
Pittsburgh, PA
The interesting question in my mind is, if we could go back and unilaterally change the window on the LAL pick from 2-5 to 2-N, what would we select as N? Clearly there's an N above which we'd prefer the SAC 2019 pick. Is it 7? 10?

I assume the conversation went,

Ainge: If it's above 5, I want SAC 2019 instead.
Colangelo: OK, but it'll cost you a counter-protection for #1 overall.

So I bet Ainge could have had a number other than 5.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
8,125
New York, NY
The interesting question in my mind is, if we could go back and unilaterally change the window on the LAL pick from 2-5 to 2-N, what would we select as N? Clearly there's an N above which we'd prefer the SAC 2019 pick. Is it 7? 10?

I assume the conversation went,

Ainge: If it's above 5, I want SAC 2019 instead.
Colangelo: OK, but it'll cost you a counter-protection for #1 overall.

So I bet Ainge could have had a number other than 5.
I think 6 or 7 is probably right but that's with hindsight regarding the fact that this draft looks even deeper now than it did last summer. Assuming the Lakers end up at 10 or 11, as seems likely, I am very happy we have the downside protection. There's still risk, but it seems like the downside protection paid off significantly as things turned out. I mean, there is still the chance Sacramento lands the #1 pick and we get a late first from Philly, but there's a much better chance we end up with a 2-4 pick instead of #11.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Moderator
SoSH Member
I’m guessing both sides expected SAC 2019 to be the pick that would convey, and the rights to this year’s LAL pick if it lands 2-5 was the price PHI paid for the #1 overall protection on the SAC pick. But none of us knows.
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
21,759
Pittsburgh, PA
I think a lot of the angst in this thread - certainly a lot of mine - is that the top of the 2018 draft class feels like a bird in the hand, whereas the 2019 class still feels like a bird in the bush. But for purposes of sustaining our contending window, it may not make much of a difference whether the Irving core is reinforced with a high lottery pick in 2018 or reinforced in 2019. We get a player - likely a starter - on a rookie contract one year longer, so just as Tatum and Brown get expensive, we get some cap relief.

I just wish we could extend Hayward's contract a year, effectively tolling it without shorting him any dollars.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
8,125
New York, NY
I think a lot of the angst in this thread - certainly a lot of mine - is that the top of the 2018 draft class feels like a bird in the hand, whereas the 2019 class still feels like a bird in the bush. But for purposes of sustaining our contending window, it may not make much of a difference whether the Irving core is reinforced with a high lottery pick in 2018 or reinforced in 2019. We get a player - likely a starter - on a rookie contract one year longer, so just as Tatum and Brown get expensive, we get some cap relief.

I just wish we could extend Hayward's contract a year, effectively tolling it without shorting him any dollars.
But, as it turns out, there doesn't seem to have been a scenario where we got a top pick this year. Barring a longshot lottery result, Brooklyn will be drafting around 8, in all likelihood, and LA around 11. I'd love to have a top 5 (7?) pick this year too, but there's no cause for angst. The way things turned out, I'm glad we have the Kings #1 in 2019 with the #1 protection as opposed to just the Nets or Lakers 2018 pick.
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
51,291
I think a lot of the angst in this thread - certainly a lot of mine - is that the top of the 2018 draft class feels like a bird in the hand, whereas the 2019 class still feels like a bird in the bush. But for purposes of sustaining our contending window, it may not make much of a difference whether the Irving core is reinforced with a high lottery pick in 2018 or reinforced in 2019. We get a player - likely a starter - on a rookie contract one year longer, so just as Tatum and Brown get expensive, we get some cap relief.

I just wish we could extend Hayward's contract a year, effectively tolling it without shorting him any dollars.
At this point I’m ignoring the talent in the draft and hanging my acceptance on loving the idea of rolling into next season with Hayward as the only major addition and not needing to integrate another young player who needs minutes. Full steam ahead to try to win a title next season, and go from there with the 2-4* first rounders in 2019.

*Best case, of course, involves the Grizz continuing to spiral and not sending theirs over until it’s unprotected. I think chances are pretty good, too, as bad teams that are close to falling outside their pick’s protection zone have a way of finding themselves within it by season’s end. The only hitch is that Conley and Gasol will be tough to unload, even if they decide they want to.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,997
At this point I’m ignoring the talent in the draft and hanging my acceptance on loving the idea of rolling into next season with Hayward as the only major addition and not needing to integrate another young player who needs minutes. Full steam ahead to try to win a title next season, and go from there with the 2-4* first rounders in 2019.

*Best case, of course, involves the Grizz continuing to spiral and not sending theirs over until it’s unprotected. I think chances are pretty good, too, as bad teams that are close to falling outside their pick’s protection zone have a way of finding themselves within it by season’s end. The only hitch is that Conley and Gasol will be tough to unload, even if they decide they want to.
A Celtics team with Hayward actually has a pretty hard time integrating a raw top pick, in terms of minutes. Tatum's minutes have plummeted since the all-star break, with Morris, Rozier, and Smart all playing great. If Hayward were healthy, the minutes crunch would be even worse.

It's definitely the case that getting the pick delivered earlier is important for Cleveland, but I think that putting things off a year actually helps the Celtics significantly. That's before you get into the value of the pick as an asset, and the value of having picks spaced out: stars become available at unpredictable times.
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
51,291
A Celtics team with Hayward actually has a pretty hard time integrating a raw top pick, in terms of minutes. Tatum's minutes have plummeted since the all-star break, with Morris, Rozier, and Smart all playing great. If Hayward were healthy, the minutes crunch would be even worse.

It's definitely the case that getting the pick delivered earlier is important for Cleveland, but I think that putting things off a year actually helps the Celtics significantly. That's before you get into the value of the pick as an asset, and the value of having picks spaced out: stars become available at unpredictable times.
I was actually going to include a hypothetical minutes distribution with that in mind but ended up not. But yeah I think you’re absolutely right, especially with the offense I believe Stevens would like to run more often with Tatum/Morris as the 4s instead of more traditional bigs.

Hayward and a solid MLE signing make you pretty deep, then whatever you can get in the draft and even potential splurging to keep Smart (not ruling this out for what will be a GFIN year).

Would I trade one of the top bigs in this draft for one the following year? No. But I agree it’s not all bad.
 

Gunfighter 09

wants to be caribou ken
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2005
8,548
KPWT
IT is the pettiest human on the planet. He just scored on 4 straight possessions against the Cavs bench and stared down TyLue after each made basket. Man, the IT experience is a roller coaster.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,091
IT is the pettiest human on the planet. He just scored on 4 straight possessions against the Cavs bench and stared down TyLue after each made basket. Man, the IT experience is a roller coaster.
Honestly, I think that’s hilarious. NBA drama is the best.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Moderator
SoSH Member
IT is the pettiest human on the planet. He just scored on 4 straight possessions against the Cavs bench and stared down TyLue after each made basket. Man, the IT experience is a roller coaster.
That’s an indictment of both men. As an impending free agent, IT should be taking the high road, and it wouldn’t kill him to be a little embarrassed about how things worked out (or rather, didn’t) in Cleveland. But if you’re Ty Lue, you’re supposed to do your job and make the best of the talent your front office — how the hell do you let the guy who was supposed to be your second-best player get so sour on you after just 15 games??
 

Gunfighter 09

wants to be caribou ken
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2005
8,548
KPWT
I a bit disappointed to report that IT was apparently staring down gigantic douchebag and woman beater Floyd Mayweather, not Ty Lue, as the Laker's broadcasters were speculating during the game:

Thomas' parting with Cleveland wasn't harmonious, and the 5-foot-9 dynamo took a few portentous looks in the direction of the Cavs' bench -- but he claimed he was only talking smack to Floyd Mayweather, his good friend sitting next to Jack Nicholson.

"I don't need to show anybody anything," Thomas said. "They know what I can do. I only played 15 games with them, so it's really not about showing them what I can do. The world knows what I can do."
 
Last edited: