>"It's not a sure thing, so let's not even try. OK.
>Sensible."
>
>It's so insanely misguided and devoid of context.

It's a pretty accurate summary of this "let's hang onto everyone and not sacrifice anything to get sure talent" approach is what it is.

>Paul George wanted to come to the Lakers last year and by some
>accounts Ingram would have completed that trade. But he said
>publicly he wanted to sign with the Lakers... during an
>offseason where the Lakers could offer him the max.

Remains to be seen if that strategy will pay off or not. If he signs somewhere else, then it was an L, because they could have secured him and very likely extended him. It was a sure thing versus now a wait-and-see thing as LeBron's decision is guaranteed to have a domino effect.

>Kawhi Leonard wants to the come to the Lakers this year and by
>some accounts Ingram (and/or Kuzma and/or Lonzo) would
>complete that trade. But he is sorta saying publicly he wants
>to sign with the Lakers... during an offseason where the
>Lakers could offer him the max.

Sorta, but the Clippers are also on his list and well-positioned to sign him. Some of these rumored deals are ridiculous (Ingram/Hart/Kuzma/1sts/Randle for Kawhi and a shitty contract LMAO) but if they could get a fair deal with say Randle, Ball and another asset, they should take it. It'll be tough to keep Randle anyway with two big-ticket players coming in either this year or next.

>> A LeBron push means, on its face, losing Randle, anything
>else may or may not happen.
>
>Signing both George and Lebron to max contracts necessitates
>giving up Randle AND trading Deng. How do you get someone to
>take Deng? By trading assets.

You wouldn't give up a first-rounder to dump a shitty contract and sign a max player? That's just part of doing business, and they already got saved by the Nets last year in being able to get rid of Mozgov's deal at what may very well turn out to be a net benefit with Kuzma coming from Russell.

>This whole thing is fucking hilarious because the Lakers
>didn't even make the playoffs this year. Lebron's not even on
>the team and already you're accusing the Lakers of
>"cowtow"-ing to the Warriors. The current four best players
>are all still on (or just came off) rookie contracts and have
>zero playoff experience. Get some perspective here.
>
>> What is the alternative? Signing inferior FAs? Sticking it
>out with these young guys? Signing inferior FAs next year?
>
>Sign Paul George and Randle this year? Sign Kawhi or Klay next
>year? Keep all the young guys? Dunno, sounds pretty good to
>me.

Klay is not going anywhere, more 710 ESPN Radio wet dreams there. If they have the opportunity to purse LeBron and/or Kawhi, they should, and they will, just listen to Magic's statements. He understands the mission. You're looking at a scenario where they sign George now, keep all their young guys and sign Leonard next year. Sounds great but probably isn't feasible. If they could sign George and LeBron now they would be in a much better position, if the cost is Randle (for whom they could potentially salvage some asset) and a first-rounder (to dump Deng's deal), so be it. If they don't get LeBron what exactly is attracting George there? They'd be wise to turn their efforts to Leonard at that point. You're making huge assumptions that these guys will sign when their deals are up. It could go the other way completely. OKC remains in the mix for George and if he signs there or really anywhere else, it will have been a bad gamble not to have made a deal for him.