- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The national media still thinks AD to Lakers.. I just dont get it
Posted on 2/28/19 at 9:24 am to brmark70816
Posted on 2/28/19 at 9:24 am to brmark70816
quote:You cannot honestly believe that and convince anyone you actually follow the NBA. It was not even close to Godfather good. If that is the best deal that the Pelicans get offered, is there any reason to think it will not be available this summer?
The Lakers package was good, really good. It was a Godfather level good. We won't get a better offer.
This post was edited on 2/28/19 at 9:28 am
Posted on 2/28/19 at 9:24 am to jrobic4
quote:
Riddle me this, if Davis played for them the second half of the season, do you really think that they would end up with a better pick than Boston or the Grizzlies?
Well I just promised someone that I wouldn't do anything crazy or say anything too outlandish. So, I'll just say, I don't know..
Posted on 2/28/19 at 9:29 am to NOSHAU
It seems like the thing this guy is not factoring in is their next contract.
I mean, Kuzma and Ingram are okay. And on the contracts they have now, they are fine. But imagine having to give them 4/80 or even more. Now, all of a sudden they are negative assets. Or, you have to let them go.
So, you are trading AD for guys who will either soon be negative assets or be gone. Maybe if he understood that, he would understand why most Pelicans fans would hate the deal.
I mean, Kuzma and Ingram are okay. And on the contracts they have now, they are fine. But imagine having to give them 4/80 or even more. Now, all of a sudden they are negative assets. Or, you have to let them go.
So, you are trading AD for guys who will either soon be negative assets or be gone. Maybe if he understood that, he would understand why most Pelicans fans would hate the deal.
Posted on 2/28/19 at 9:35 am to BetOnIt
quote:Exactly, and Ingram sooner than later. Does Ingram then become our next Gordon situation where management feels that we have to overpay to keep him simply because he is the main asset of the AD trade. (He even has the Gordon look at times )
It seems like the thing this guy is not factoring in is their next contract.
I mean, Kuzma and Ingram are okay. And on the contracts they have now, they are fine. But imagine having to give them 4/80 or even more. Now, all of a sudden they are negative assets. Or, you have to let them go.
So, you are trading AD for guys who will either soon be negative assets or be gone. Maybe if he understood that, he would understand why most Pelicans fans would hate the deal.
This post was edited on 2/28/19 at 9:37 am
Posted on 2/28/19 at 9:39 am to NOSHAU
Yeah. It seems like one of this guys main arguments is that two pretty good guys is better than having one really good guy (Tatum). Which I disagree with, but whatever.
But if we put contracts in the mix and say: Would you rather have Tatum on a 4 year/100 million dollar deal or Ingram and Kuzma, both on 4/80?
I'd rather have Tatum and $15 mil in cap room, personally. Once you start talking about next contracts, you see why the Lakers deal is trash. Either you overpay the guys or you lose them. Both are bad.
But if we put contracts in the mix and say: Would you rather have Tatum on a 4 year/100 million dollar deal or Ingram and Kuzma, both on 4/80?
I'd rather have Tatum and $15 mil in cap room, personally. Once you start talking about next contracts, you see why the Lakers deal is trash. Either you overpay the guys or you lose them. Both are bad.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News