|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144461
Location: The Gold Coast
|
 Posted: Sun Apr 12, 2015 10:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | I don't want to fall into the trap of trashing our own players to make a point, so take these comments in the right spirit. I would like to see Clarkson and Randle emerge as star quality players. However . . . .
What do you really think that Clarkson's ceiling is? Honestly, I don't think it's very high. He got a chance to play a bunch of minutes on a bad team, and he did pretty well. He should have a long NBA career ahead of him, which is fantastic for a guy who got picked in the middle of the second round. I don't see star quality, though.
Does anyone really know what Randle is going to be? I don't think I've ever seen anyone get so hyped after 14 minutes, two points, and a broken leg.
As for the top 5 pick, that all depends on the ping pong balls. If we come out with a top 5 pick, and if we avoid picking a surprise bust, that's great. But if we wind up at 6 and lose the pick, it is a freaking disaster of the first magnitude. If we pick someone who turns out to be overhyped, or who pulls an Oden, we're screwed. I don't care how many other picks we have.
So, how lucky do you feel?
Ainge is doing business the same way he did last time. He's going to look to wheel and deal, and he needs pieces to do it. I think he's going to have a tougher go of it this time, but we shall see. |
And the Lakers are doing business they way the did last time (1990's). Ainge's way resulted in a title, the Lakers resulted in 5.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144461
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 12, 2015 10:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | Chronicle wrote: | | Be that as it may, I agree with 22 that the Celtics would do that trade |
Really? The Celtics passed on Randle in the draft, in large part because of health concerns. He just missed his entire rookie season with an injury (albeit not a foot injury, which is what they were worried about). So now you think that the Celtics would trade for him?
Anyway, I'm fairly sure that the Celtics would decline that trade, but for a different reason. It doesn't fit with Ainge's rebuilding strategy. He wants tradeable pieces, not guys who might have "upside." Even if Ainge evaluated Clarkson and Randle in the same way as some of the posters on this board (which is questionable), they wouldn't fit with what he is trying to do. |
And then the Celtics tried to trade for Randle after he was out for the season.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 12, 2015 10:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| venturalakersfan wrote: | | And the Lakers are doing business they way the did last time (1990's). Ainge's way resulted in a title, the Lakers resulted in 5. |
If that is the case, we're in serious trouble. Over the past 20 years, the CBA has been changed to make it harder, if not impossible, to do what we did in the '90s.
More realistically, "last time" was '08, not '96. In the end, we won a couple more titles because Dr. Buss was willing to pay a fortune in luxury tax. The latest version of the CBA would make that a lot harder, too.
At the moment, we are back to a modified version of the old 2007 plan. We're clearing cap space and hoping that a free agent will bite. It didn't work last time. We have to hope that the ping pong ball gods favor us, and we have to hope that Randle lives up to the optimistic appraisals of some of the posters on this board. If that happens, then we could go into the free agent markets of '16 and '17 with something to offer.
It could all work out that way. I hope it does. But it could also get buried under an avalanche of ping pong balls. As of right now, May 20 is the most important date for the immediate future of the franchise. Do you feel lucky? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 12, 2015 10:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| venturalakersfan wrote: | | And then the Celtics tried to trade for Randle after he was out for the season. |
Sure, when they were dumping Rajon Rondo. That fits with Ainge's strategy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
22
Franchise Player
Joined: 05 Apr 2013
Posts: 17063
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 12, 2015 4:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | Chronicle wrote: | | Be that as it may, I agree with 22 that the Celtics would do that trade |
Really? The Celtics passed on Randle in the draft, in large part because of health concerns. He just missed his entire rookie season with an injury (albeit not a foot injury, which is what they were worried about). So now you think that the Celtics would trade for him?
Anyway, I'm fairly sure that the Celtics would decline that trade, but for a different reason. It doesn't fit with Ainge's rebuilding strategy. He wants tradeable pieces, not guys who might have "upside." Even if Ainge evaluated Clarkson and Randle in the same way as some of the posters on this board (which is questionable), they wouldn't fit with what he is trying to do. |
They didn't pass on him because of injury concerns. They passed on him because he refused to do a second workout with them. He opted to do a GQ interview instead 
It was clear Randle never wanted to go there, and I'm sure they picked smart because at the time he was perceived to have just as much potential as Julius. So why go with the guy who obviously doesn't want to be on your team?
It's not optimism and it doesn't take a basketball genius to see that Clarkson and Randle have more skills and athleticism than any of the young pieces on Boston's roster. Optimism is hoping that any of Boston's young pieces become anything more than role players. None of them has any type of game that will make them an all star in the future. If you think so I'd love to hear the argument.
"2017 all-star Jared sullinger!!" Nope. Lol
Their best hope is if they strike gold with their mid to late firsts. Doubtful |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
22
Franchise Player
Joined: 05 Apr 2013
Posts: 17063
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 12, 2015 4:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Chronicle wrote: | | Be that as it may, I agree with 22 that the Celtics would do that trade |
Deep down AH does too. But for whatever reason people feel they need to be "realists" and bring all the other "optimists" and homers back down to earth. And maybe if this thread was about if the Lakers have the best assets in the league there would be a need for that. But this thread is simply comparing us and the celtics. And as far as roster and picks are concerned we're ahead by a mile.
They have more picks by quantity, while ours are far better in quality (86% chance for a top 5). Clarkson/Randle/Black/Kelly/Brown are better with more upside than thomas/olynik/sullinger/smart/Bradley. None of those C's have all star potential except maybe smart. And it doesn't look that good for him so far. Clarkson is far ahead in development than him and putting up efficient numbers to prove it so the good player on a bad team argument doesn't hold water. The flashes Randle showed in SPL and preseason were better than what we've seen from the other C's players. Thomas is a guy we passed up on and Phoenix dumped when they didn't have to. He's too small to be anything other than a spark plug Nate Robinson type player.
I'm not impressed with the celtics rebuild other than Brad Stevens |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
