re: Is there value in not taking "the better deal" from the Lakers...

quote:

---

I mean the only real value is not setting a precedent of letting slimeball agents determine teams rosters.

I Hope the league puts a clamp on this type of stuff moving forward because this is a really bad look for the NBA.

---

Exactly what I was thinking.

I don't know if I don't take a considerable lesser deal (within reason) to not give Rich Paul and James what they conspired to create. They deliberately set about to create a controversial situation to force the Pelicans hands and essentially force the Pelicans to send AD to situation that was best for "Klutch Sports".

I mean a few weeks ago the main piece of a AD trade was likely going to be the #1 overall pick (i.e. Zion Williamson) Well, the pelicans have that now and didn't even have to give up AD to get it.

I just really don't buy into all this "AD and the Lakers have the upper hand now" crap. I think the upper hand is and has been firmly in New Orleans ever since they picked that ping pong ball. It was really a worst case scenario for the Lakers and to some extent AD if he is really dead set on playing for the Lakers that the Pelicans basically got Zion for free. (so to speak). I believe Klutch drummed up all the BS about Zion maybe, sorta not being thrilled about playing in NOLA. Klutch is likely the reason for the young Lakers players having a less than favorable opinion of New Orleans.

I would definitely take less to frick over RP, Klutch, James and the Lakers. Unfortunately AD got wrapped up in they're BS games but he did so now he's got to lay on their bed with them.