Trade & FA 2023-24: Stein-Ingram Trade Inevitable| LAL Want Lebron Back On Any Terms

[DanSchwartzgan]

 
Look how much better this all looked RIGHT AWAY, the second they stopped making (their version of) short-sighted moves. It's a little ironic, but them stepping back and playing for the future just a bit has actually made the team better RIGHT NOW. I would keep going that direction, not change course, but I admit it gets a little tougher to sell when it's possible to delude ourselves into the idea that this team could compete this year. I still don't believe that will be the case, but I'm sure that camp has more people joining as time goes by. 

I'm enjoying this conversation.  I do want to challenge the bolded statement.  Being better this season is probably mostly the result of trading for Kyrie.  It feels really good that they turned the #10 pick into two younger assets (and didn't trade it for some over-the-hill star).  It feels good that our MLE level signing isn't some 30 year old.  But, Kyrie is the biggest difference and he probably falls in the win-now category more than he does "playing for the future" catagory...no?

Not directed at you necessarily as many people throw these terms around, but could someone come up with a definition for terms like "true contender" and "Championship Caliber" and the like.  Where do we need to finish to be a true contender?  We got to the final four a few years ago and people then said "yeah, but...".  Would final four this year with two stars be enough to warrant true contention.  Do you have to make the NBA finals to make a win-now trade worthwhile?  This kind of matters to these conversations IMHO.  If one thinks we are a 9 seed and a good trade might get us to 6, that is far different than someone who thinks we are a 4/5 seed and a good trade might get us to 2.

I think we end up vying for 4th/5th seed as constructed.  Making the West Finals would be dependent on matchup.  So, similar to 21-22.  If we made a trade (call it Grant) and it cost us 2027 unprotected, but that probably ensured a WCF appearance.  Is that good enough to be "true"?  What is the line where it is OK to give up a pick and an asset?  What is the line where it is pick, but not one of the kids?