That isn't all we traded though. we also took westbrooks contract off their hands. That is something the jazz did for the lakers along with improving their team. You say "all we traded" as if we didn't trade much. We traded 4 players and 2 picks and took on a horrible contract for 1 protected pick. That is 7 assets for 1 protected pick. None of those assets from us could be good assets or it wouldn't have took so much to aquire a protected pick. I remember when we could get an unprotected pick for taking westbrook without giving up anything else. The fact that we had to use 7 parts to get 1 protected pick shows how conley was viewed. If conley was a positive then we should have been able to get that protected pick for less than 6 MORE assets on top of conley. We had to add 6 more pieces to get 1 protected pick. +
I would go further. That is comparing airplanes to bumblebees because they both have wings. Luka is a top 5 player and should be for a number of years to come if he can avoid injury and decide to stay in shape.
You know they could have just waived him… right?
I think it was just a very bad trade, just like the Bogey trade. In spite of the Ainge worship the FO made a few moves that were bad, if not really bad. The spin on it even from the media is funny. We are at a point were every move and every decision is given a pass because of what we got for Rudy and Donny.
I guess you can remember something that isn’t true. But that wasn’t a thing, dear fish.
Man I wish I could find the thread when everyone was talking about it. Hell, some were saying we could get 2 first round picks for taking him off the lakers hands. I would be surprised if you weren't actually involved in these discussions. The usual folks were. This was before the season started.
It was fine... the Bogey deal was rough but it was about more than just one player for another. The money they saved got them out of the tax in that one. I think Ainge overplayed his hand a bit and may have done better making a move for Westbrook in the offseason. Maybe we get one pick unprotected and end up losing 5 or so more games without KO. The deal he ended up making was fine but I think he went for a homerun and had to pivot a bit.
We would have had to give up good players though. I had pitched a preseason deal where they could essentially have whatever combo of Conley, Bogey, Vando, Beasley, JC they wanted for two picks and Westbrook. Said I would do it for 1 if they weren't with it. It was partly because I knew we were still too good to get to the bottom 5 of the league and partly cuz the Westbrook deal helps clear the salary deck essentially.
I remember the conversations. The deal would’ve went some combination of Quin/Conley/Bogey/Clarkson/Vando/Beasley (this basic idea was being kicked around for several months which is why there is such a range) for Westbrook (and maybe other garbage salary of theirs).
Jeez apples to staplers.
I’ll own up to this. I thought the floor for taking on Westbrook and giving up decent roleplayers was one unprotected or lightly protected draft pick.
You don’t have to “own up” to anything. I bolded the operative difference: we were talking about the Lakers actually receiving useful players. They were looking for actual players, not just trying to get rid of Westbrook.
Malik costs himself a lot of money because he started shooting bricks. Vandy stopped rebounding and now both are out of the rotation.
That's too rich for the Jazz. Heat probably wouldn't do it even if the Jazz straight absorbed Lowry.
