Yeah and people laugh and laugh and then one day that massive trainwreck gets to be President.

He's got ESPN covering him 24/7, must be doing something right.

He would have dwarfed that by even more if his dad hadn't pissed off the big shoe companies already. Money that he doesn't make in the next couple years is gone forever, and going about this on his own loses dollars. It's even worse if just an okay player, because he will have lost out on the first shoe contract in it's entirety.

LavarZo has very little outs to making a ton of money off the court unless he turns into a great player, money he still would have made had he just signed a shoe deal.

Big Baller lifestyle is about going big or going home, that's 1 thing LaVar has already taught me.

Maybe he flames out, and? Doubt he's gonna be starving, even decent NBA players get huge contracts now.

If he doesn't flame out and is a star, he revolutionizes the game forever.

ESPN is covering him 24/7, yet he sold less than 300 pairs of shoes on opening day ffs. How many of those were bought because of the novelty?

It's one thing for people to tune in via TV/Internet, hell they may even vote for you in an election. It's a completely different animal to ask those same people to shell out $200 for a pair of flip-flops and mock them when they don't. Let's not forget the fact that his production costs are probably 3-400% of what the big shoe companies pay and it's just lol.

Nobody is denying it could backfire, the point is, so what? He is still going to be very rich unless he is the next Dante Exum or something along those lines.

And I have no clue about how the manufacturing/supply chain of shoes works but I'm guessing if he can start moving units because he is the star point guard of the Lakers then all of that stuff will fall into place nicely.

"The Man" wants you to think he is going to fail.

who's going to be rich? Larva?

Lonzo is not a lock to be very rich either, if he keeps listening to daddy, who knows what other outlandish ideas he has in store.

Nah it's a dumb move imo. He raises his ceiling a bit but lowers his floor and when we're talking tens to hundreds of millions the floor is a lot more important

Odds are he'll be super rich either way obviously.

Butler is a harder choice because there hasn't been any indication that he wants to leave, so trading him for someone who might in a best case scenario be as good as him now in 5 years time makes a lot less sense

It makes sense because it takes the bulls outside of being a middle ground team into tank mode where they can actually have a higher ceiling in the future.

Sure but teams don't think like that. Tanking is pretty much always the last choice when your Star walks out on you/makes you trade him

We'll see. If he is an all-star level player and on the Lakers then he is going to hit a homerun. And it isn't like he can never sign with Nike, Adidas or UA, he just isn't right now.

I can already see the "We're a family brand, not a big corporation" stuff working in his favor.

Not going to bring politics in here, but his dads promotion/savvy honestly reminds me a ton of Trump. Just someone who knows it is about dominating the news cycle.

Honestly, and this was my opinion before last nights game, but it would probably be better if they got boatraced in this series.

This half-measure stuff of having future stars on the bench but trying to be a 50-55 win team that can't really compete just doesn't do much for me.

If it were me (and this is easy to say because I'm not thinking from a business perspective) I'd deal IT/Horford/Crowder/Bradley for a ton of picks and build around Fultz/Ball/Brown/nets pick/your own 2018 pick/all the picks from dealing those guys and just Hinke it.

Only way I maybe don't do that is if I can sign Hayward, but even then are you then going to sign AB/IT? You're gaining some equity the next 2-3 years doing that, but you're probably losing some years 4-10.

How's that working out for the 76ers?

You aren't signing any free agents if you consistently tank for a decade

Well their title equity is the same as Boston and 26 other teams in the league.

Celts are starting out with assets they can deal for picks (before they decline further), a top tier coach and Jaylen Brown/#1 pick/Nets pick.

Sixers started out with Spencer Hawes, Thad Young and Evan Turner, not really apples to apples.

The top tier coach won't be around if they tank every year

I see nothing wrong with how they are currently rebuilding. They are probably 2-3 years ahead of schedule. I do agree with trading IT while his value is high. He shouldn't be a max player

If you're gonna deal IT then why keep Horford in his age 31 season as a declining asset?

Why keep Bradley when he is about to be a FA and is going to command 4/90ish?

Then if you do that, why keep Crowder at 3/20 when that isn't really the tremendous value to you that it would be for a contending team?

If you're not going to keep IT and replace him with a 19 year old, you're probably winning 10 less games anyway. Then what? You lose rd 1? Seems pointless.

And when you've got guys like Fultz, Brown, other young players, it isn't like you are the Sixers. You're more like the TWolves. A team of young up and coming guys, you can sell that to fans and I'm sure Brad is on board with that.

Blowing up teams that are consistently winning 50 games is incredibly dumb.

So pay IT/AB 250 million combined? If you think that is a good idea then I guess you just keep it going. But you can position yourself to be a powerhouse by pulling the cord on that early.

I'd rather blow it up a year early then run the drill next year just to blow it up a year later.

Top 4 pick in 2018, extra picks from blowing it up > 53 win season followed by 2nd rd exit.

It's like spending all your modest wealth on lotto tickets because you don't have Gates money.

The T wolves went from 15th in attendance in 2012 to 29th this year. Whatever they are selling to fans isn't working.

yeah but I don't think the Celts would have that problem. TWolves have sucked since KG left, gotta be some fatigue from that.

I think Ainge would be able to sell it a lot better. Attendance probably not going to be the Celts issue.

Maybe you run this back for another year but then all those assets are worth less.

People forget the ways to construct a team are limited. Ainge ran into this problem several times over the last few years. Your assets are only as good as what the buyer is willing to pay for them. Not every team has the same goal (or run efficiently) leading to an unbalanced market.

Nobody is saying you are getting a ton for these guys but you will get some picks from contender type teams. Horford is only going to get older and AB/IT are expiring contracts in 2 weeks.

You aren't going to get a KG/Pierce haul but you won't get nothing either.

So they pick up late 1st or second round picks? They just did that and got to decide who to release between RJ Hunter and James Young. Acquiring all these picks and you end up giving guys like Noel away for nothing. That doesn't work either IMO