My goodness what has Magic done? We could of had Paul George, Kawhi + Randle...

[Hey Yo]

You're too high on that Kush if you really think Bran is better than today's Paul George and Kawhi Leonard - two-way players in their prime. Defense is half the game. Not to mention these players can actually adapt to coach systems and are coachable.

Randle is a young energetic, grit type asset home built that you shouldn't let go, period.

If you made that statement 6-8 years ago I would agree, but you seem still stuck in 2012.

"LA could have had him, but LA turned down the Spurs trade offer"

[PickernRoller]

Lakers "could have had" Kawhi?? What deal did they turn down from the Spurs? Who was involved in the trade that made LA say no??

The truth is, anyone who thinks SA would have traded Kawhi to LA are delusional fools. Yeah, lets trade our superstar to our biggest rival for unproven players.

OP = dumb and desperate

As always putting the cart before the horse. I always said a trade for Kawhi that required trading Ingram and Kuz for him was a big fat NO-NO. And that it was better to get him in free-agency if the Spurs were that high on the Kush.

Do a bit of research on my post history like the sad little dog that you're to find the quotes.

Fact is, in prime all-stars/superstars trying to make a name for themselves don't wanna play in the shadow of Lebron James and hurt their stock in the process. Paul George was one such casualty. Kevin Durant pretty much buried all the talk and Kawhi Leonard is sure as hell suspect.

Bran is a big fat problem. Dealing with the problem opens our options substantially. Aka ship his @ss out.

[Hey Yo]

As always putting the cart before the horse. I always said a trade for Kawhi that required trading Ingram and Kuz for him was a big fat NO-NO. And that it was better to get him in free-agency if the Spurs were that high on the Kush.

Do a bit of research on my post history like the sad little dog that you're to find the quotes.

Fact is, in prime all-stars/superstars trying to make a name for themselves don't wanna play in the shadow of Lebron James and hurt their stock in the process. Paul George was one such casualty. Kevin Durant pretty much buried all the talk and Kawhi Leonard is sure as hell suspect.

Bran is a big fat problem. Dealing with the problem opens our options substantially. Aka ship his @ss out.

How about if I read the thread title instead where it says:

"we could have had Kawhi."

That implies you turned down a trade offer from SA for Leonard before the season started.

It also implies what's been confirmed long ago...... you're dumb.

[PickernRoller]

No what it means is that my assessment of not offering Ingram was wrong and that Ingram should have been offered for Kawhi Leonard just to be sure. There is still always the option of getting him in free agency. But that option becomes an issue, which shouldn't be, the moment we got Lebron James.

But but.... we can sign Kawhi with Lebron? Just like we can sign KD. Ask him and see what he says... Paul George already balked. It's becoming a pattern which Bran stans scream in rage to deny.... I wouldn't expect less from a LeTard.

[Hey Yo]

No what it means is that my assessment of not offering Ingram was wrong and that Ingram should have been offered for Kawhi Leonard just to be sure. There is still always the option of getting him in free agency. But that option becomes an issue, which shouldn't be, the moment we got Lebron James.

But but.... we can sign Kawhi with Lebron? Just like we can sign KD. Ask him and see what he says... Paul George already balked. It's becoming a pattern which Bran stans scream in rage to deny.... I wouldn't expect less from a LeTard.

LOL @ your scrambling and looking even dumber.

Thread title..... "we could have had Kawhi," yet you have no facts to back up your claims. There was no offer that LA turned down for Kawhi. There was never an offer from SA to begin with.

Like I said in my first post, only delusional fools would think that SA ever entertained the idea of trading him to LA.

take the L and move along, Immortal.

[PickernRoller]

LOL @ your scrambling and looking even dumber.

Thread title..... "we could have had Kawhi," yet you have no facts to back up your claims. There was no offer that LA turned down for Kawhi. There was never an offer from SA to begin with.

Like I said in my first post, only delusional fools would think that SA ever entertained the idea of trading him to LA.

take the L and move along, Immortal.

Lol that's not saying much... no one except Magic and the Spurs know exactly which pieces they considered exchanging and which pieces they did not. The only thing we know for a fact is that talks did took place and nothing came of it. Even media articles citing "insiders" mentioning names etc are always to be taken with a big fat grain of salt. Multiple sauces is not a meme for no reason.

So in that context and on that basis I can speculate whatever the fvck I want kiddo.... This is after all a thread about perceived Magic failures as a GM.
I could even trade Kawhi for your slut momma and it would check out by the league's office.

But back to semi-seriousness we can speculate with a high degree of certainty that the Spurs would have accepted Ingram, Kuzma, Hart + fillers in a heartbeat. The simple fact is that trade beats the shit out of what they got from the Raptors and ain't no conference rivalship that's gonna beat a great deal. Lakers "success" =/= Spurs failure. But of course I'm offering this trade for argumentation sake since you made the dumb outlandish claim that the Spurs wouldn't entertain the idea of ever trading with the Lakers... despite them actually doing so.

http://www.nba.com/article/2018/06/2...rd-trade-talks

Now that I've put you back safely in my pocket, and tightened my leash around that thin neck. Shut the fvck up.

[Hey Yo]

Lol that's not saying much... no one except Magic and the Spurs know exactly which pieces they considered exchanging and which pieces they did not. The only thing we know for a fact is that talks did took place and nothing came of it. Even media articles citing "insiders" mentioning names etc are always to be taken with a big fat grain of salt. Multiple sauces is not a meme for no reason.

So in that context and on that basis I can speculate whatever the fvck I want kiddo.... This is after all a thread about perceived Magic failures as a GM.
I could even trade Kawhi for your slut momma and it would check out by the league's office.

But back to semi-seriousness we can speculate with a high degree of certainty that the Spurs would have accepted Ingram, Kuzma, Hart + fillers in a heartbeat. The simple fact is that trade beats the shit out of what they got from the Raptors and ain't no conference rivalship that's gonna beat a great deal. Lakers "success" =/= Spurs failure. But of course I'm offering this trade for argumentation sake since you made the dumb outlandish claim that the Spurs wouldn't entertain the idea of ever trading with the Lakers... despite them actually doing so.

http://www.nba.com/article/2018/06/2...rd-trade-talks

Now that I've put you back safely in my pocket, and tightened my leash around that thin neck. Shut the fvck up.

Hey dumbphuck.

Where's the part in the link that says "LA could have traded for Kawhi, but they turned SA down" like you claimed happened??

What was the specific offer that LA turned down that would have landed them Kawhi??

I've asked for a while now...... yet you have no answers for your stupid claim.

Only dumbphucks use speculation and try to pass it off as facts..... which is exactly what you're doing.

[PickernRoller]

Hey dumbphuck.

Where's the part in the link that says "LA could have traded for Kawhi, but they turned SA down" like you claimed happened??

What was the specific offer that LA turned down that would have landed them Kawhi??

I've asked for a while now...... yet you have no answers for your stupid claim.

Only dumbphucks use speculation and try to pass it off as facts..... which is exactly what you're doing.

https://www.silverscreenandroll.com/...de-san-antonio

“They clearly do not want to do business with the Lakers but if the Lakers could assembly the best deal…if the Lakers could use their assets to bring in a 3rd team & San Antonio gets the most out of a trade from the Lakers…they would do it.”

This is good news for the Lakers, and wasn’t made clear in earlier reports on the situation. The Spurs not wanting to trade Leonard to the Lakers is understandable, but this would seem to confirm that cooler heads are prevailing, and the Spurs won’t just take a worse return simply to spite Leonard and his management.

https://www.sbnation.com/nba/2018/6/...n-ingram-lonzo

The Lakers have the assets. It’s a matter of how many they’re willing to part with.

According to ESPN’s Adrian Wojnarowski, the Lakers are willing to include Brandon Ingram and a future first-round pick, but San Antonio wants more.

https://www.express.co.uk/sport/othe...Kyle-Kuzma-Woj

Kawhi Leonard trade: Lakers refusing to include crucial player in Spurs deal

That’s according to ESPN reporter Adrian Wojnarowski, who claims Kyle Kuzma is yet to be included in any offers and that is why talks have slowed down recently.

http://www.nba.com/article/2018/06/2...rd-trade-talks

The Los Angeles Lakers and San Antonio Spurs reportedly re-engaged in trade discussions surrounding Kawhi Leonard on Wednesday.

ESPN's Ramona Shelburne, Adrian Wojnarowski and Brian Windhorst reported that despite the Spurs' attempts to make peace with their disgruntled star, an overwhelming offer from the Lakers could spark a deal.

And that's just a quick google search. Getting yourself into more than you can manage kiddo..... but you're not a retard for no reason.

[bladefd]

you act like kawhi, randle and PG were nobodies before this year.


theres no hindsight about it

Pop didn't want to trade Kawhi to Lakers without Kuzma. You don't think Lakers tried?

Not trading Ingram for PG was a mistake, yes. PG was saying he will sign with the Lakers so his trade value plummeted if you remember. So we took the bluff, thinking why trade our most valuable piece for PG if he would sign with us anyways? We didn't know he wouldn't even take a meeting. I think Westbrook knew PG would leave them if Magic got in his ear so he pressurized PG to stay by throwing the party before he could legally speak with Magic - smart move by Westbrook.

Randle or Lopez we should have kept. I said that from day 1. Go check the Lakers forum.

[bladefd]

Randle didn't want out, he just wanted more than a 1 season deal and you're gone for a super star. That's all the Laker signings are for this season, kids and rentals to clear cap for whichever all star can join Bron.

That's true too. Since Lakers refused to give him long-term deal to keep space for a 2nd max deal, he wanted out. I feel like he took less with Pelicans just to give him ability to opt out for new bigger contract this summer. I wish we could have signed him to same contract he signed with Pelicans, but that's not what he wanted from the Lakers. He wanted bigger long-term deal.

BTW - Lakers extended qualifying offer to Randle but he wanted it renounced once he realized they won't offer him big long-term deal.. Lakers renounced it, making him unrestricted FA.
[QUOTE]According to multiple sources Julius Randle asked to be renounced by the the Lakers once it became clear his role could dramatically change this season and the team wasn

[DMAVS41]

That's true too. Since Lakers refused to give him long-term deal to keep space for a 2nd max deal, he wanted out. I feel like he took less with Pelicans just to give him ability to opt out for new bigger contract this summer. I wish we could have signed him to same contract he signed with Pelicans, but that's not what he wanted from the Lakers. He wanted bigger long-term deal.

BTW - Lakers extended qualifying offer to Randle but he wanted it renounced once he realized they won't offer him big long-term deal.. Lakers renounced it, making him unrestricted FA.

https://twitter.com/ramonashelburne/...16688247472129

Had we given Randle what he wanted, Lakers would not have space to add a 2nd max deal.

This, of course, ignores that he was a restricted free agent and the Lakers could have simply said we'll match what he gets on the open market unless it gets absurd.

But they were stupid...so they lost a young and talented player or nothing.

[bladefd]

It's all hindsight but the biggest screwup was putting so much stock in Ingram. Whatever they thought he was supposed to be, I'm not seeing it. There's an argument that 'Lebron-ball' is holding him back but at a certain point, if you're going to be great then.....you're going to be great. Kobe started his career off the bench behind Eddie Jones and Van Exel in the backcourt, and the entire offense running through Shaq. And yet he emerged anyway. Greatness finds a way.

Ball has the playmaking and defensive tools, but not the consistent offensive aggressiveness needed to thrive as a modern day starting PG. Shooting is something you can work on over time, hell even Jason Kidd could stroke the 3 by the end, but his FT shooting makes him too much a liability so if the ball has to be taken out of his hands late game....there goes any value. Not like he can act like a spotup shooter off-ball to compensate

This team would have been nice with Russell, Randle, Kuzma and PG. Oh well....

We had to dump Mozgov so only way we could do it was by unloading either Russell or 2nd overall pick. If we don't do that then we don't get the pick from Nets that became Kuzma.

What team is trading 2nd overall pick just to dump a bad contract?? Nobody is doing that so the alternative is trading Russell to dump Mozgov.

[bladefd]

As always putting the cart before the horse. I always said a trade for Kawhi that required trading Ingram and Kuz for him was a big fat NO-NO. And that it was better to get him in free-agency if the Spurs were that high on the Kush.

Do a bit of research on my post history like the sad little dog that you're to find the quotes.

Fact is, in prime all-stars/superstars trying to make a name for themselves don't wanna play in the shadow of Lebron James and hurt their stock in the process. Paul George was one such casualty. Kevin Durant pretty much buried all the talk and Kawhi Leonard is sure as hell suspect.

Bran is a big fat problem. Dealing with the problem opens our options substantially. Aka ship his @ss out.

So what do you suggest doing?

LeBron -the best player in nba, 2nd best in nba history- wants to come to Lakers. Do you tell him to get lost?

[bladefd]

As always putting the cart before the horse. I always said a trade for Kawhi that required trading Ingram and Kuz for him was a big fat NO-NO. And that it was better to get him in free-agency if the Spurs were that high on the Kush.

Do a bit of research on my post history like the sad little dog that you're to find the quotes.

Fact is, in prime all-stars/superstars trying to make a name for themselves don't wanna play in the shadow of Lebron James and hurt their stock in the process. Paul George was one such casualty. Kevin Durant pretty much buried all the talk and Kawhi Leonard is sure as hell suspect.

Bran is a big fat problem. Dealing with the problem opens our options substantially. Aka ship his @ss out.

There were rumors that Spurs wanted both Ingram AND Kuzma. They didn't want Lonzo. Lakers refused to give them Kuzma, and the talks died... Again, those were the rumors. We don't know for certain as outsiders.

[bladefd]

This, of course, ignores that he was a restricted free agent and the Lakers could have simply said we'll match what he gets on the open market unless it gets absurd.

But they were stupid...so they lost a young and talented player or nothing.

What? You keep a player against his wishes if he wants a big role and long-term money?

We went over this already few months back, dmavs..