OFFICIAL 2016 FREE AGENCY (PINCUS states 2017-18 salary cap falling to $102m; Lakers get Calderon, pg.2432; sign Deng 4 yr/$72M; Mozgov 4 yr/$64M; Tarik Black 2 yr/$12.85M)
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 356, 357, 358 ... 2682, 2683, 2684  Next
 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Megaton
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 18 Feb 2015
Posts: 25624

PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2016 12:12 pm    Post subject:

dmorans1 wrote:
If getting Paul George means getting Durant and Indy is asking for Russell, Randle, Clarkson, and the top 3 pick, do you guys say no?


Absolutely not. Because two star players with zero stuff around them and zero depth. And we don't know how those two players would fit at all with them needing the ball in their hands.

People are just putting together names down and assuming that we would be suddenly contenders against the likes of the Spurs/Warriors.

People should look at the current Rockets team right now and see how just putting together big names on one team has worked out for them. (Answer: it hasn't).

And also look at our own Lakers when we got Nash and Howard, along with having Kobe and Pau and Metta. How did that work out? (Answer: it didn't)
_________________
Darvin Scam: https://media.tenor.com/images/3c15249955860a4b16b59e8ae035fb75/tenor.gif
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2016 12:13 pm    Post subject:

Megaton wrote:
dmorans1 wrote:
If getting Paul George means getting Durant and Indy is asking for Russell, Randle, Clarkson, and the top 3 pick, do you guys say no?


Absolutely not. Because two star players with zero stuff around them and zero depth. And we don't know how those two players would fit at all with them needing the ball in their hands.

People are just putting together names down and assuming that we would be suddenly contenders against the likes of the Spurs/Warriors.

People should look at the current Rockets team right now and see how just putting together big names on one team has worked out for them. (Answer: it hasn't).

And also look at our own Lakers when we got Nash and Howard, along with having Kobe and Pau and Metta. How did that work out? (Answer: it didn't)


You sincerely think the Lakers turn down Paul George AND KD for the young players?

Whether it's the wrong/right thing is one thing, but from the Lakers standpoint, I don't think it's even a question. They'd still have a good amount of cap space to surround these players.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
saetarubia
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 06 Jul 2014
Posts: 6208

PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2016 12:19 pm    Post subject:

For PG AND KD, I'd do it. That's four youngsters for two top 10 players. We'd have the cap space to add another max and few other pieces.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2016 12:21 pm    Post subject:

saetarubia wrote:
For PG AND KD, I'd do it. That's four youngsters for two top 10 players. We'd have the cap space to add another max and few other pieces.


Yeah. I don't see how the FO would decline that.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Megaton
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 18 Feb 2015
Posts: 25624

PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2016 12:22 pm    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
Megaton wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
focus wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
Either way, I think the product is going to be much more improved in 2016-18.


Good lord, that's depressing.

Especially given the years of terribleness we've had already.

But I can't believe you're right.


I think folks have the wrong timetable. People assume that year 1 of the Rebuild starts post-Kobe; we will miss our 3rd consecutive playoffs. I think the FO sees that we are entering year 4 of the rebuild, and it's time to start making the playoffs.

As much as I love the notion of DLO/JC/Randle/top 3 running in their grass-fed, cage free environment, that will just put is into years 5 and 6 of lottery-ville. Not sure the FO can stomach that.


No. What would really put this team in a lottery situation for more years is either keeping Byron Scott aboard, or hiring another retread coach like Scott Brooks.

Talent wise, we have enough to be a very competitive team. ESPECIALLY next season. It will however come down to having the fresh face and better coach to make the incredible talent the young core has put together correctly. Or at the very least, have a system on both ends of the court, followed by logical rotations that are not stunted.


Define competitive. I don't see a sure-fire playoff team with that young core. Too many young guys who still need some time and seasoning. Remember, for a player like JC, all he's seen in his short NBA career is losing. And lots of it. It takes some time to start adopting habits to win games. And 2016 would be a lot of losing IMO though we could see progress indeed.

I'm not disputing the talent. It's just the timetable.

If this year was the first year we missed the playoffs it's one thing, but we will now miss 3 playoffs in a row. You bet your bottom dollar that the FO is trying to get them in the playoffs next year.


Competitive as in yes a playoff team. Or at the very least, fighting for one anyway.

Time and time again, Byron Scott with his moronic game changing substitutions, rotations and lack of any system on both ends of the court have costed this team more games than people can count with both hands.

COMBINE THAT with the fact that the West as predicted is not as competitive anymore in the 7th and 8th seeds front, and you got yourselves a very nice chance at making the playoffs. Or at least, should anyway. Don't believe me? Look at the freaking Blazers and explain how a team that lost 4 of their starters, and were expected coming in to the season after only signing a couple of role players to be one of the worst teams in the league, are now suddenly in the playoffs if the season ended today?

Explain how a team like the Celtics, being as young as they are, and with all their players individually, are about above average/role player level, are now somehow a top 5 seed in the East? If Brad Stevens wasn't coaching there, that team would be a bottom feeder right now. That Celtics team has no business being where they are right now and are clearly overachieving.

What does young players only seeing losing have to do with it? So explain how the Thunder and Warriors team when they are young suddenly started winning after years and years of losing? That (bleep) doesn't matter. If we put together the right culture, right coach with the right system, and have the chemistry, players can go from a losing culture to a winning one in just one season. Happens all the time in Football too.

This roster has been held back tremendously, we all know this (or most with some trolls here and there). And a lot of this is on the coach, as well as the FO for letting this (bleep) show to go on in a period where a couple of teams are firing their coaches for even winning. I would say with the right coach for this current roster, we would be fighting for a playoff spot right now and no one can tell me otherwise. The only disappointing player in this roster is Roy Hibbert.
_________________
Darvin Scam: https://media.tenor.com/images/3c15249955860a4b16b59e8ae035fb75/tenor.gif


Last edited by Megaton on Fri Feb 12, 2016 12:24 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Lakers_Jester
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 17 Sep 2012
Posts: 5366

PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2016 12:23 pm    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
focus wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
Either way, I think the product is going to be much more improved in 2016-18.


Good lord, that's depressing.

Especially given the years of terribleness we've had already.

But I can't believe you're right.


I think folks have the wrong timetable. People assume that year 1 of the Rebuild starts post-Kobe; we will miss our 3rd consecutive playoffs. I think the FO sees that we are entering year 4 of the rebuild, and it's time to start making the playoffs.

As much as I love the notion of DLO/JC/Randle/top 3 running in their grass-fed, cage free environment, that will just put is into years 5 and 6 of lottery-ville. Not sure the FO can stomach that.


Agreed. There's a very high likelihood some of the youngsters get traded for a ready now player. I would like to grow w these kids though but it doesn't seem likely. Even less considering the fact that Jim gave himself a deadline to win.

I would love pg3 but doubt pacers trade him. They've been looking good with him and there's absolutely no reason to look at rebuilding so soon. Only star we can get is one in a bad environment where a team may see themselves close to a rebuild anyway for lack of wins. Cousins? Dare I say..Anthony davis?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2016 12:26 pm    Post subject:

I don't disagree with you Megaton. I just don't think that's the timetable that the FO has. You know I think Byron is one of the worst coaches ever. But having a new coach, a bunch of 19-23 year olds may at best, give you a shot at the 9-11 seed range in the West. In due time, that could increase to 8-10, then 7-9, and so on.

But that would mean a 5-6 year rebuild (and we are in year #3). If we had a patient fanbase, no history of winning, lower ticket prices, non-TWC pressures, etc., I'd agree. For better or worse, I'm just saying they will look to expedite that. And if that means getting a top 10 player like Paul George, they'll do it. In the end I think they will mix it up by keeping some young pieces. I don't see them emptying the cupboard. Or we may keep the young core and add free agents, and think of trading them the year after when the pressure will be greater on prospective 2018 free agents.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2016 12:28 pm    Post subject:

Lakers_Jester wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
focus wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
Either way, I think the product is going to be much more improved in 2016-18.


Good lord, that's depressing.

Especially given the years of terribleness we've had already.

But I can't believe you're right.


I think folks have the wrong timetable. People assume that year 1 of the Rebuild starts post-Kobe; we will miss our 3rd consecutive playoffs. I think the FO sees that we are entering year 4 of the rebuild, and it's time to start making the playoffs.

As much as I love the notion of DLO/JC/Randle/top 3 running in their grass-fed, cage free environment, that will just put is into years 5 and 6 of lottery-ville. Not sure the FO can stomach that.


Agreed. There's a very high likelihood some of the youngsters get traded for a ready now player. I would like to grow w these kids though but it doesn't seem likely. Even less considering the fact that Jim gave himself a deadline to win.

I would love pg3 but doubt pacers trade him. They've been looking good with him and there's absolutely no reason to look at rebuilding so soon. Only star we can get is one in a bad environment where a team may see themselves close to a rebuild anyway for lack of wins. Cousins? Dare I say..Anthony davis?


The only reason I bring up Paul George is that he's 25 (turning 26), and their young up and comer is Myles Turner (19). If the Pacers could rebuild with DLO (19) and Simmons (18 or 19), you have an amazing trio that will need a few years together but blossom in 2-3 years.

I would LOVE to have that luxury as a Lakers fan, but I understand if they want to expedite that. To be frank, it's not an unreasonable trade, assuming that the Pacers want to build a younger and more sustainable core.

For better or worse, that's the gift/curse of being in a market that the Lakers are in.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2016 12:29 pm    Post subject:

Quote:
What does young players only seeing losing have to do with it? So explain how the Thunder and Warriors team when they are young suddenly started winning after years and years of losing? That (bleep) doesn't matter. If we put together the right culture, right coach with the right system, and have the chemistry, players can go from a losing culture to a winning one in just one season. Happens all the time in Football too.


Sure. But we're talking about KD, Harden, Westbrook, Ibaka. (3 future HOFers).

I love our young core, but DLO/JC/Randle do not equate to that group.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Megaton
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 18 Feb 2015
Posts: 25624

PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2016 12:38 pm    Post subject:

Here's another question then: What makes any of us sure that the FO actually gives a flying (bleep) about the timetable?

I ask this because if they did, why is Byron Scott still here? And why is there still doubts of him getting fired after this season ends? He has clearly show for the last 6 coaching years that he is clearly incapable of taking a team to the playoffs, but clearly not a fit for this roster.

So why is he still here? And why is still being considered to coach again next season by some reports? Why? Knowing that keeping him would just result in more locker room trouble, zero chance of signing any good free agents in the offseason, and having more lottery seasons with him again?

Now getting back to the current team again and this offseason, this team can still, again, be very competitive come next season if we do well in signing the right players in the offseason. And we are able to do that without making a single trade.

Let's say we signed Derozen and Whiteside, as well as having Byron fired, and hiring a Luke Walton, Atkinson, Blatt, whatever. I mean, it's an upgrade as long as it's not someone like (bleep) Scott Brooks.

Russell
Clarkson
Derozen
Randle
Whiteside
6th man: Simmons or Ingram or whoever we draft with the 1st pick.

With better coaching, coming off another year's experience with the young core, as well as signing an all star and a very solid center that plays well in PnRs, would you really say this is not a playoff team? Especially with Russell and Randle and Clarkson getting better again with an entire offseason assuming that they have the work ethic that we think they do?

If that is not a playoff team, than trading all of them for one big name ain't gonna (bleep) for us. Just like how Cousins ain't helping (bleep) on the Kings despite how good he is and how his team is much better than he had before.
_________________
Darvin Scam: https://media.tenor.com/images/3c15249955860a4b16b59e8ae035fb75/tenor.gif
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2016 12:42 pm    Post subject:

Quote:
Let's say we signed Derozen and Whiteside, as well as having Byron fired, and hiring a Luke Walton, Atkinson, Blatt, whatever. I mean, it's an upgrade as long as it's not someone like (bleep) Scott Brooks.

Russell
Clarkson
Derozen
Randle
Whiteside
6th man: Simmons or Ingram or whoever we draft with the 1st pick.


I don't disagree with this concept. I'm just saying, don't foreclose the possibility of trading some young assets for a top 10 player (which DRoz and Whiteside aren't).

To me there are multiple ways to do this:

1. mix young core with FA signings (so don't have to give up young pieces);
2. trade young assets to get a top 10 player + FA signings + keep some young pieces;

etc.

I don't see the polar extremes of: 1) totally trading young assets to get top heavy with vets; or 2) just rolling with young players.

So yeah, I think the only point of contention is my openness, within reasonable parameters, to trade young assets to get a top 10 player (and not just a more humble top 30-40 player).
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Megaton
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 18 Feb 2015
Posts: 25624

PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2016 12:44 pm    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
Quote:
What does young players only seeing losing have to do with it? So explain how the Thunder and Warriors team when they are young suddenly started winning after years and years of losing? That (bleep) doesn't matter. If we put together the right culture, right coach with the right system, and have the chemistry, players can go from a losing culture to a winning one in just one season. Happens all the time in Football too.


Sure. But we're talking about KD, Harden, Westbrook, Ibaka. (3 future HOFers).

I love our young core, but DLO/JC/Randle do not equate to that group.


I'm not equating anything. I asked a simple question and never said we would suddenly become a 55+ winning team in a season like the Thunder did. Because the Warriors sure as hell did not either but went through a similar rebuild.

With the 7th seed and 8th seed in the West being weaker and weaker, especially next season as well, there is no reason to think after another year of experience, signing some good players in free agency, getting that top pick in the draft, that we would not reach that 8th seed in the playoffs.
_________________
Darvin Scam: https://media.tenor.com/images/3c15249955860a4b16b59e8ae035fb75/tenor.gif
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2016 12:45 pm    Post subject:

Megaton wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
Quote:
What does young players only seeing losing have to do with it? So explain how the Thunder and Warriors team when they are young suddenly started winning after years and years of losing? That (bleep) doesn't matter. If we put together the right culture, right coach with the right system, and have the chemistry, players can go from a losing culture to a winning one in just one season. Happens all the time in Football too.


Sure. But we're talking about KD, Harden, Westbrook, Ibaka. (3 future HOFers).

I love our young core, but DLO/JC/Randle do not equate to that group.


I'm not equating anything. I asked a simple question and never said we would suddenly become a 55+ winning team in a season like the Thunder did. Because the Warriors sure as hell did not either but went through a similar rebuild.

With the 7th seed and 8th seed in the West being weaker and weaker, especially next season as well, there is no reason to think after another year of experience, signing some good players in free agency, getting that top pick in the draft, that we would not reach that 8th seed in the playoffs.


Right. But I think we are advocating on the whole, the same position (i.e. keep most of the young core + add FAs).

I'm just saying that if Paul George is on the table and the price is DLO/Top 3, the Lakers wouldn't be wrong to do that deal. (And still then keep Randle/JC for example).
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
22
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 05 Apr 2013
Posts: 17063

PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2016 12:46 pm    Post subject:

I think the FO stays patient and won't mortgage the future.

Another thing to consider is GSW. Say we dump all our young guys for PG, KD, and Whiteside. Our bench will be pretty slim. And our contention window will overlap with GSW.

Will that team have enough chemistry or depth to beat GSW? I doubt it. Whereas is we keep our young gore, they will be maturing when GSW starts to downswing.

Let the young guns run free IMO!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Bard207
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 08 Jan 2013
Posts: 7713

PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2016 12:49 pm    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
Megaton wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
focus wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
Either way, I think the product is going to be much more improved in 2016-18.


Good lord, that's depressing.

Especially given the years of terribleness we've had already.

But I can't believe you're right.


I think folks have the wrong timetable. People assume that year 1 of the Rebuild starts post-Kobe; we will miss our 3rd consecutive playoffs. I think the FO sees that we are entering year 4 of the rebuild, and it's time to start making the playoffs.

As much as I love the notion of DLO/JC/Randle/top 3 running in their grass-fed, cage free environment, that will just put is into years 5 and 6 of lottery-ville. Not sure the FO can stomach that.


No. What would really put this team in a lottery situation for more years is either keeping Byron Scott aboard, or hiring another retread coach like Scott Brooks.

Talent wise, we have enough to be a very competitive team. ESPECIALLY next season. It will however come down to having the fresh face and better coach to make the incredible talent the young core has put together correctly. Or at the very least, have a system on both ends of the court, followed by logical rotations that are not stunted.


Define competitive. I don't see a sure-fire playoff team with that young core. Too many young guys who still need some time and seasoning. Remember, for a player like JC, all he's seen in his short NBA career is losing. And lots of it. It takes some time to start adopting habits to win games. And 2016 would be a lot of losing IMO though we could see progress indeed.

I'm not disputing the talent. It's just the timetable.

If this year was the first year we missed the playoffs it's one thing, but we will now miss 3 playoffs in a row. You bet your bottom dollar that the FO is trying to get them in the playoffs next year.


Last offseason, Mitch sounded optimistic about being somewhat competitive and looking to making the Playoffs.

If they have to settle for Plan D in Free Agency and Mitch doesn't make at least one major trade, will he be able to convince people to be optimistic again or has he used up too much goodwill from what he said last season?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Megaton
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 18 Feb 2015
Posts: 25624

PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2016 12:51 pm    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
Quote:
Let's say we signed Derozen and Whiteside, as well as having Byron fired, and hiring a Luke Walton, Atkinson, Blatt, whatever. I mean, it's an upgrade as long as it's not someone like (bleep) Scott Brooks.

Russell
Clarkson
Derozen
Randle
Whiteside
6th man: Simmons or Ingram or whoever we draft with the 1st pick.


I don't disagree with this concept. I'm just saying, don't foreclose the possibility of trading some young assets for a top 10 player (which DRoz and Whiteside aren't).

To me there are multiple ways to do this:

1. mix young core with FA signings (so don't have to give up young pieces);
2. trade young assets to get a top 10 player + FA signings + keep some young pieces;

etc.

I don't see the polar extremes of: 1) totally trading young assets to get top heavy with vets; or 2) just rolling with young players.

So yeah, I think the only point of contention is my openness, within reasonable parameters, to trade young assets to get a top 10 player (and not just a more humble top 30-40 player).


I'm not forclosing the possibility, I'm just saying it would be very foolish to try and rush anything when we have the goods already, despite the constant (bleep) from the Showtime cartel and a couple of terrible coaching hires.

With the Front Office making themselves clear that Russell and Clarkson are the future backcourt for this team, it's more likely that they stay here then giving all of them away in a deal even for someone like Paul George.

HOWEVER, if we were to only give one of our young core players like a Clarkson + filler (filler as in literally anything but DLO, Randle, etc) trade for Westbrook kind of shtick, then obviously we would do that. And as would I. I think anybody here would. We would be foolish not too. But trades like giving away THE ENTIRE young core for one player? Russell, Randle, Clarkson, top 3 pick? No. I don't do that nor do I believe the front office would unless some freaking magic happened where we also have two other stars in the back pocket before such a deal.
_________________
Darvin Scam: https://media.tenor.com/images/3c15249955860a4b16b59e8ae035fb75/tenor.gif
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Roon
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 29 Sep 2012
Posts: 1816

PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2016 12:51 pm    Post subject:

Megaton wrote:
Here's another question then: What makes any of us sure that the FO actually gives a flying (bleep) about the timetable?

I ask this because if they did, why is Byron Scott still here? And why is there still doubts of him getting fired after this season ends? He has clearly show for the last 6 coaching years that he is clearly incapable of taking a team to the playoffs, but clearly not a fit for this roster.

So why is he still here? And why is still being considered to coach again next season by some reports? Why? Knowing that keeping him would just result in more locker room trouble, zero chance of signing any good free agents in the offseason, and having more lottery seasons with him again?

Now getting back to the current team again and this offseason, this team can still, again, be very competitive come next season if we do well in signing the right players in the offseason. And we are able to do that without making a single trade.

Let's say we signed Derozen and Whiteside, as well as having Byron fired, and hiring a Luke Walton, Atkinson, Blatt, whatever. I mean, it's an upgrade as long as it's not someone like (bleep) Scott Brooks.

Russell
Clarkson
Derozen
Randle
Whiteside
6th man: Simmons or Ingram or whoever we draft with the 1st pick.

With better coaching, coming off another year's experience with the young core, as well as signing an all star and a very solid center that plays well in PnRs, would you really say this is not a playoff team? Especially with Russell and Randle and Clarkson getting better again with an entire offseason assuming that they have the work ethic that we think they do?

If that is not a playoff team, than trading all of them for one big name ain't gonna (bleep) for us. Just like how Cousins ain't helping (bleep) on the Kings despite how good he is and how his team is much better than he had before.


Scott's still the coach because he'll maintain the tank and can remain a scapegoat and the Coach they want isn't available yet. I think at this point, firing Scott in the middle of the season isn't worth the publicity/showtime/media action. As well as having to find new coaches and all that crap.

If they don't fire him in the off-season, however, then I will boycott watching the Lakers until whoever's decision to keep him is gone. If we go into 2016-2017 with Scott, that is unacceptable.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2016 12:54 pm    Post subject:

22 wrote:
I think the FO stays patient and won't mortgage the future.

Another thing to consider is GSW. Say we dump all our young guys for PG, KD, and Whiteside. Our bench will be pretty slim. And our contention window will overlap with GSW.

Will that team have enough chemistry or depth to beat GSW? I doubt it. Whereas is we keep our young gore, they will be maturing when GSW starts to downswing.

Let the young guns run free IMO!


I think the more likely approach is keep 3/4 of the young guys, add 2-4 pieces via FA. Healthy dose of young + veterans.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2016 12:56 pm    Post subject:

Quote:
Last offseason, Mitch sounded optimistic about being somewhat competitive and looking to making the Playoffs.

If they have to settle for Plan D in Free Agency and Mitch doesn't make at least one major trade, will he be able to convince people to be optimistic again or has he used up too much goodwill from what he said last season?


If we have to do Plan Ds this FA, then yes, we have some major problems that may require new leadership. As I've personally maintained, I'm giving the FO until 2017 to get the team back into contention.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Bard207
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 08 Jan 2013
Posts: 7713

PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2016 1:14 pm    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
Quote:
Last offseason, Mitch sounded optimistic about being somewhat competitive and looking to making the Playoffs.

If they have to settle for Plan D in Free Agency and Mitch doesn't make at least one major trade, will he be able to convince people to be optimistic again or has he used up too much goodwill from what he said last season?


If we have to do Plan Ds this FA, then yes, we have some major problems that may require new leadership. As I've personally maintained, I'm giving the FO until 2017 to get the team back into contention.



That sounds right and there won't be a KFT to shelter them next season.

I don't know if the fanbase would tolerate another season with less than 30 wins after Mitch probably tries to sell the idea again of having a good shot at making the Playoffs (2016 - 2017 this time).

Yet, it would be hard for him to come out and tell everybody to be patient (sub 30 wins outlook) because the youngsters will be going through some growing pains.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2016 1:16 pm    Post subject:

Bard207 wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
Quote:
Last offseason, Mitch sounded optimistic about being somewhat competitive and looking to making the Playoffs.

If they have to settle for Plan D in Free Agency and Mitch doesn't make at least one major trade, will he be able to convince people to be optimistic again or has he used up too much goodwill from what he said last season?


If we have to do Plan Ds this FA, then yes, we have some major problems that may require new leadership. As I've personally maintained, I'm giving the FO until 2017 to get the team back into contention.



That sounds right and there won't be a KFT to shelter them next season.

I don't know if the fanbase would tolerate another season with less than 30 wins after Mitch probably tries to sell the idea again of having a good shot at making the Playoffs (2016 - 2017 this time).

Yet, it would be hard for him to come out and tell everybody to be patient (sub 30 wins outlook) because the youngsters will be going through some growing pains.


Yeah. Even people like me would start to question if we need changes in the FO if we have to resort to Plan D FAs in 2016.

While there won't be a KFT to cover a lot of the ugliness, there also won't be the excuse of Kobe's contract being prohibitive either.

This will be an unbelievably important summer (draft pick, FAs).
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
pjiddy
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Dec 2005
Posts: 29017

PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2016 1:18 pm    Post subject:

Assuming this is all coming not from an actual rumor but a 'hey would you guys trade x for Paul George?"... Randle/Russell/Clarkson and a pick is too much to give up for PG. What's left when he comes here?

Even if you get Durant and Whiteside (or whoever), what does the rest of the team look like? Guys on minimum deals? While KD/George/Whoever have to play 38-40 mgp? Didn't we JUST do this?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
panamaniac
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 28 May 2011
Posts: 11238
Location: PTY

PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2016 1:22 pm    Post subject:

pjiddy wrote:
Assuming this is all coming not from an actual rumor but a 'hey would you guys trade x for Paul George?"... Randle/Russell/Clarkson and a pick is too much to give up for PG. What's left when he comes here?

Even if you get Durant and Whiteside (or whoever), what does the rest of the team look like? Guys on minimum deals? While KD/George/Whoever have to play 38-40 mgp? Didn't we JUST do this?


Yep not worth it. Isn't PG a FA in a couple of years?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2016 1:23 pm    Post subject:

pjiddy wrote:
Assuming this is all coming not from an actual rumor but a 'hey would you guys trade x for Paul George?"... Randle/Russell/Clarkson and a pick is too much to give up for PG. What's left when he comes here?

Even if you get Durant and Whiteside (or whoever), what does the rest of the team look like? Guys on minimum deals? While KD/George/Whoever have to play 38-40 mgp? Didn't we JUST do this?


My BATNA (i.e. final offer) would be #1/DLO (and you know how much of a DLO guy I am) for George.

I'd start with just #1...then #1/JC...etc. until we reach that BATNA.

Presumably you'd have:

JC/32nd pick
George/Lou
KD/Brown/Swaggy
Randle/Nance
platoon center rotation

Still would have plenty of cap space to fill out the rest.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
pjiddy
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Dec 2005
Posts: 29017

PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2016 1:25 pm    Post subject:

I'd offer anything but DLO. If the pick is the #1, maybe I offer DLO but keep the #1. I don't offer both. I think DLO and Simmons have all-star potential and there's no reason to give that up to get George. #2 or 3/Clarkson/Randle is all I'd offer.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 356, 357, 358 ... 2682, 2683, 2684  Next
Page 357 of 2684
Jump to:  

 
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






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB