|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144462
Location: The Gold Coast
|
 Posted: Sun May 21, 2017 12:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LakerFan1972 wrote: | | venturalakersfan wrote: | | So the better idea is to let our young players walk? We won't have cap space after 2018 unless we do that. We didn't tank for 4 years to let our picks just walk away. |
It means the Lakers will need to be open in moving those players (like Randle) sooner who are at or near the end of their rookie contract assuming there is a trade that fits there long term plans. |
I don't get why posters.here are so afraid of paying our young players. Free agency fantasy? Keep in mind the last big FA we signed was Shaq. 21 years ago. We should hope that they play well, we compensate them accordingly, and we have a nice base to improve via trade.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023.
Last edited by venturalakersfan on Sun May 21, 2017 12:33 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Megaton
Retired Number
Joined: 18 Feb 2015
Posts: 25636
|
| Posted: Sun May 21, 2017 12:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| venturalakersfan wrote: | | LakerFan1972 wrote: | | venturalakersfan wrote: | | So the better idea is to let our young players walk? We won't have cap space after 2018 unless we do that. We didn't tank for 4 years to let our picks just walk away. |
It means the Lakers will need to be open in moving those players (like Randle) sooner who are at or near the end of their rookie contract assuming there is a trade that fits there long term plans. |
I don't get why posters.here are so afraid of paying our young players. Free agency fantasy? Keep in mind the last big FA we signed was Shaq. 21 years ago. |
Not really young players. Just Randle in general. In 2 years, no one will bat an eyelash in paying Russell his money, or 3 years paying Ingram. Just like how there was excitement when Clarkson was resigned.
_________________
Darvin Scam: https://media.tenor.com/images/3c15249955860a4b16b59e8ae035fb75/tenor.gif |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144462
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Sun May 21, 2017 12:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Megaton wrote: | | venturalakersfan wrote: | | LakerFan1972 wrote: | | venturalakersfan wrote: | | So the better idea is to let our young players walk? We won't have cap space after 2018 unless we do that. We didn't tank for 4 years to let our picks just walk away. |
It means the Lakers will need to be open in moving those players (like Randle) sooner who are at or near the end of their rookie contract assuming there is a trade that fits there long term plans. |
I don't get why posters.here are so afraid of paying our young players. Free agency fantasy? Keep in mind the last big FA we signed was Shaq. 21 years ago. |
Not really young players. Just Randle in general. In 2 years, no one will bat an eyelash in paying Russell his money, or 3 years paying Ingram. Just like how there was excitement when Clarkson was resigned. |
I get that, fans get their favorites and are blind to all else. I expect our FO to put the health of the team over personal feelings.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Megaton
Retired Number
Joined: 18 Feb 2015
Posts: 25636
|
| Posted: Sun May 21, 2017 12:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| venturalakersfan wrote: | | Megaton wrote: | | venturalakersfan wrote: | | LakerFan1972 wrote: | | venturalakersfan wrote: | | So the better idea is to let our young players walk? We won't have cap space after 2018 unless we do that. We didn't tank for 4 years to let our picks just walk away. |
It means the Lakers will need to be open in moving those players (like Randle) sooner who are at or near the end of their rookie contract assuming there is a trade that fits there long term plans. |
I don't get why posters.here are so afraid of paying our young players. Free agency fantasy? Keep in mind the last big FA we signed was Shaq. 21 years ago. |
Not really young players. Just Randle in general. In 2 years, no one will bat an eyelash in paying Russell his money, or 3 years paying Ingram. Just like how there was excitement when Clarkson was resigned. |
I get that, fans get their favorites and are blind to all else. I expect our FO to put the health of the team over personal feelings. |
Pot meet kettle.
_________________
Darvin Scam: https://media.tenor.com/images/3c15249955860a4b16b59e8ae035fb75/tenor.gif |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lovefool
Starting Rotation
Joined: 05 May 2017
Posts: 275
|
| Posted: Sun May 21, 2017 12:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Thank god our fo has made a commitment to our young core. If we resign julius, its because he earned the contract. And i fully expect him to be signed next summer. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144462
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Sun May 21, 2017 12:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Megaton wrote: | | venturalakersfan wrote: | | Megaton wrote: | | venturalakersfan wrote: | | LakerFan1972 wrote: | | venturalakersfan wrote: | | So the better idea is to let our young players walk? We won't have cap space after 2018 unless we do that. We didn't tank for 4 years to let our picks just walk away. |
It means the Lakers will need to be open in moving those players (like Randle) sooner who are at or near the end of their rookie contract assuming there is a trade that fits there long term plans. |
I don't get why posters.here are so afraid of paying our young players. Free agency fantasy? Keep in mind the last big FA we signed was Shaq. 21 years ago. |
Not really young players. Just Randle in general. In 2 years, no one will bat an eyelash in paying Russell his money, or 3 years paying Ingram. Just like how there was excitement when Clarkson was resigned. |
I get that, fans get their favorites and are blind to all else. I expect our FO to put the health of the team over personal feelings. |
Pot meet kettle. |
Not really. What young players have I wanted traded just because? Put up or shut up.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
av3773
Star Player
Joined: 11 Dec 2011
Posts: 3751
|
| Posted: Sun May 21, 2017 12:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If the right set domino's are lined up, not a bad idea.
Say if the Lakers are confident in getting George, who I'm going to guess is playing 4 for us....you can trade randle for another asset which would better complement the team, get a pick for 2018, etc
Not saying this is what the lakers should do, lot of ways they can go, but it's not crazy |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lovefool
Starting Rotation
Joined: 05 May 2017
Posts: 275
|
| Posted: Sun May 21, 2017 1:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| av3773 wrote: | If the right set domino's are lined up, not a bad idea.
Say if the Lakers are confident in getting George, who I'm going to guess is playing 4 for us....you can trade randle for another asset which would better complement the team, get a pick for 2018, etc
Not saying this is what the lakers should do, lot of ways they can go, but it's not crazy |
Its not happening. Pg isnt playing the four. He's been adamant and it has been reitterated here ad naseum. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
av3773
Star Player
Joined: 11 Dec 2011
Posts: 3751
|
| Posted: Sun May 21, 2017 1:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It was a couple of years ago when he didn't want to play 4, times change, my guess in Lukes system he'd be open to it, not to mention there aren't a lot of 4s who are going to be really pounding him
| Lovefool wrote: | | av3773 wrote: | If the right set domino's are lined up, not a bad idea.
Say if the Lakers are confident in getting George, who I'm going to guess is playing 4 for us....you can trade randle for another asset which would better complement the team, get a pick for 2018, etc
Not saying this is what the lakers should do, lot of ways they can go, but it's not crazy |
Its not happening. Pg isnt playing the four. He's been adamant and it has been reitterated here ad naseum. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144462
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Sun May 21, 2017 1:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It was this past season that PG refused to play the 4.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Megaton
Retired Number
Joined: 18 Feb 2015
Posts: 25636
|
| Posted: Sun May 21, 2017 1:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Lovefool wrote: | | Thank god our fo has made a commitment to our young core. If we resign julius, its because he earned the contract. And i fully expect him to be signed next summer. |
I hope so too. It is his contract year after all so I except the jump in his jumpshot (pun intended) to happen next season.
_________________
Darvin Scam: https://media.tenor.com/images/3c15249955860a4b16b59e8ae035fb75/tenor.gif |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RI Laker
Star Player
Joined: 27 Jun 2005
Posts: 7148
|
| Posted: Mon May 22, 2017 12:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I would not invest a lot of money on Randle jerseys. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dao
Star Player
Joined: 02 Jan 2013
Posts: 5572
|
| Posted: Mon May 22, 2017 1:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| venturalakersfan wrote: | | It was this past season that PG refused to play the 4. |
I googled the George at PF situation. It seemed that he was not excited about the move initially but said that he'd be willing to give it a chance. I think he'd give Luke the same benefit of a doubt. And now that the league has gone small ball even more so than it had a couple years ago, I doubt he'd be so stubborn now in 2017. Also, it seems that they wanted him to make the switch after he had that big injury. So he felt that they didn't trust him to get back to his pre-injury form.
| Quote: | "I’m not too thrilled about it, but I told them I’m open to the situation. I’m open to the change, so we’ll see how it goes. We’ll see how it goes during training camp."
"Because that’s what I am (a small forward), I pride myself on being a ballplayer first and foremost. But there’s a difference playing the four, and I know that’s the way the league is going, having stretch fours and perimeter-oriented big men, but those guys have been doing that for years and have size on me and strength on me. So it’s gonna be an adjustment. And I’m just used to being at the three, and that’s what made me special is just being able to guard perimeter guys." |
http://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/paul-george-not-thrilled-with-pacers-plan-to-start-him-at-power-forward/
| Quote: | | “I would say it bothered me a little bit,” George allows. “I was like, man, I worked so hard to get back, playing the three, and now you’re putting me at a new position. You guys don’t trust me? So it took some time to get that through my head. But now, everything is working out fine, and I’m happy with what we’ve got going right now.” Into the breach stepped veteran C.J. Miles, who agreed to play the four and allow George to stay at the three. With Miles, who’s played the two and three most of his career, the Pacers still get the mismatches at the four they wanted for George, but allow George the peace of mind of staying at his old spot. |
http://hoopshype.com/storyline/paul-george-playing-power-forward/
I think Luke can talk him into giving the 4 spot a chance. We don't really need him to "play PF". We just need him to defend the second largest player on the opposing team. And now that most 4's are around George's size anyway, I don't think it should be too big of a deal. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jiggling Jello
Sixth Man
Joined: 22 May 2017
Posts: 87
|
| Posted: Mon May 22, 2017 2:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
There's something to be said for at least 4 out of 5 players on the starting roster being triple threats, which is what Luke is probably trying to achieve with this roster - IF Randle and Ingram are able to make that jump (and to a smaller extent, Zubac).
I really dislike Randle's overall basketball IQ, but I give him a pass because he's essentially just finished his second year as an NBA player. This is the year where we see if the game actually slows down for him. If it doesn't, then it may behoove the Lakers not to be stuck with him on a large, 4+ year contract.
I will say that 2018 Free Agency is pretty bereft of good PF talent (Derrick Favors is probably the best unrestricted free agent PF, and he's been injury-riddled this season), so it would probably be better for the Lakers to offer Randle smaller, 3-year contract (if he doesn't get offered something bigger) if he ends up not reaching his potential as much as we would hope, since he is still one of the more talented young Power Forwards in the league. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nash
Star Player
Joined: 23 Oct 2001
Posts: 8194
|
| Posted: Mon May 22, 2017 5:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jiggling Jello wrote: | There's something to be said for at least 4 out of 5 players on the starting roster being triple threats, which is what Luke is probably trying to achieve with this roster - IF Randle and Ingram are able to make that jump (and to a smaller extent, Zubac).
I really dislike Randle's overall basketball IQ, but I give him a pass because he's essentially just finished his second year as an NBA player. This is the year where we see if the game actually slows down for him. If it doesn't, then it may behoove the Lakers not to be stuck with him on a large, 4+ year contract.
I will say that 2018 Free Agency is pretty bereft of good PF talent (Derrick Favors is probably the best unrestricted free agent PF, and he's been injury-riddled this season), so it would probably be better for the Lakers to offer Randle smaller, 3-year contract (if he doesn't get offered something bigger) if he ends up not reaching his potential as much as we would hope, since he is still one of the more talented young Power Forwards in the league. |
Julius missed rookie season was a shame.
At this point I don't want to give a player like him a long term expensive contract neither lose a 7th pick for nothing.
Trading him could be the best option, but since he has improved in most areas we can't let a talented player go.
Not all, but most great players had it going at this point of their careers. I'd like to see how Julius play next season trading him at the deadline if he doesn't improves enough to justify keeping him long term.
We can't keep a player that can't shoot and don't have a positive impact on defense.
Last edited by nash on Mon May 22, 2017 6:54 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Four Decade Bandwagon
Star Player
Joined: 18 Jul 2014
Posts: 8151
|
| Posted: Mon May 22, 2017 5:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Curious what the expectations are for those opposed to paying Randle his likely market value? I think this season will be a big season for him to either prove he deserves a sizable contract or will move on in trade or free agency.
But what improvements are you looking for? What stats would make his contract a good value in your opinions?
Basically he has played two years. His stats were solid last season. 28mpg/ 13pts/ 8.6 reb / 3.6 asst/ 51% fg%/ 27% from 3pt. Plays hard. Had his ups and downs but showed some nice development at times both defensively and offensively. Had a few times he took over games late or made some game changing defensive plays. Showed signs of improving his 3pt atts.
No argument he needs to be more consistent. He has to improve his defensive effort and results. He has to be more reliable on his jump shot, preferably out to 3pt range.
IMO he is a keeper. An important foundation piece of the puzzle. Even if the Lakers have to pay him and it limits the endless quest for marquee free agents. I am of the opinion that if the Lakers can be patient the marquee difference makers may already be on the team. Randle being one of them.
Going to be interesting to see if and how much he improves this next season. Third year, second with the new HC and system.... I'm excited about the possibilities. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jiggling Jello
Sixth Man
Joined: 22 May 2017
Posts: 87
|
| Posted: Mon May 22, 2017 6:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Four Decade Bandwagon wrote: | Curious what the expectations are for those opposed to paying Randle his likely market value? I think this season will be a big season for him to either prove he deserves a sizable contract or will move on in trade or free agency.
But what improvements are you looking for? What stats would make his contract a good value in your opinions?
Basically he has played two years. His stats were solid last season. 28mpg/ 13pts/ 8.6 reb / 3.6 asst/ 51% fg%/ 27% from 3pt. Plays hard. Had his ups and downs but showed some nice development at times both defensively and offensively. Had a few times he took over games late or made some game changing defensive plays. Showed signs of improving his 3pt atts.
No argument he needs to be more consistent. He has to improve his defensive effort and results. He has to be more reliable on his jump shot, preferably out to 3pt range.
IMO he is a keeper. An important foundation piece of the puzzle. Even if the Lakers have to pay him and it limits the endless quest for marquee free agents. I am of the opinion that if the Lakers can be patient the marquee difference makers may already be on the team. Randle being one of them.
Going to be interesting to see if and how much he improves this next season. Third year, second with the new HC and system.... I'm excited about the possibilities. |
I think that the Lakers should keep Randle regardless of how he ends up doing this season, just because there is so little PF talent out there, but his contract amount and length should depend entirely on how he does this season. If he can actually maintain some level of consistency with his defense and making good decisions on the court, the Lakers should match whatever offer he's given in restricted free agency. I couldn't care less about whether he has a 3-point shot this season if he can get better at those two things. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Judah
Star Player
Joined: 23 Jun 2015
Posts: 4759
|
| Posted: Mon May 22, 2017 7:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
It's a crying shame that folks are so low on Randle that they'd rather get rid of him and play George or Ingram out of position at the 4. All this talk about Randle's defensive woes, like his inability to protect the rim, yet we're carving out fantasies of George or Ingram doing it? Seriously?
I doubt Zubac will be starting next year, but even if he does, he's a poor rebounder at this point and so is Mozgov. You can't play George next to either of them. You'll be eaten alive on the boards.
Has the league gone away from "traditional" 4's? Of course, but even if the 4 on the opposing team isn't 6'10 or 6'11 he'll still have strength and grit to battle in the paint. Neither George or Ingram can match up with bruisers in the paint. George just isn't that kind of player. And while people speak of Ingram moving to the 4 as something that's supposedly inevitable, it seems a lot more like wishful thinking imo. I don't think he'll ever be strong enough or big enough to play the 4 full time. If he ever plays the 4 it'll be during small stretches when the opposing team goes small and doesn't have a guy at that spot who does any dirty work. That was the only time Luke played Ingram at the 4 last year. I do expect him to get stronger, but that's different from becoming strong enough to play the 4 full time. Neither he or George can handle it.
Also, it's a little humorous to me that people who want the Lakers to trade for George are completely ignoring what George wants:
1) He doesn't want the Lakers to gut the team for him. No problem. Let's ignore him and trade at least two of Russell, Randle, and the second pick anyways.
2) George didn't like being moved to the 4. No problem. Let's ignore him and play him at the 4 anyways (since he'll protect the rim better than Randle!).
So you're just gonna blatantly ignore the guy's wishes and still expect him to re-sign once the season is over? That kind of idiocy is exactly what the last regime did with Dwight that played a pivotal role in him leaving. If you're the one who wants to give away assets to rent a guy for one year, you better do everything you possibly can to keep him happy. Presumptiously gutting the team for George and playing him at the 4 would be the first dominoes in causing the new relationship to turn sour.
_________________
“Christ did not die to forgive sinners who go on treasuring anything above seeing and savoring God. And people who would be happy in heaven if Christ were not there, will not be there."
- John Piper |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dao
Star Player
Joined: 02 Jan 2013
Posts: 5572
|
| Posted: Mon May 22, 2017 7:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Judah wrote: | It's a crying shame that folks are so low on Randle that they'd rather get rid of him and play George or Ingram out of position at the 4. All this talk about Randle's defensive woes, like his inability to protect the rim, yet we're carving out fantasies of George or Ingram doing it? Seriously?
I doubt Zubac will be starting next year, but even if he does, he's a poor rebounder at this point and so is Mozgov. You can't play George next to either of them. You'll be eaten alive on the boards.
Has the league gone away from "traditional" 4's? Of course, but even if the 4 on the opposing team isn't 6'10 or 6'11 he'll still have strength and grit to battle in the paint. Neither George or Ingram can match up with bruisers in the paint. George just isn't that kind of player. And while people speak of Ingram moving to the 4 as something that's supposedly inevitable, it seems a lot more like wishful thinking imo. I don't think he'll ever be strong enough or big enough to play the 4 full time. If he ever plays the 4 it'll be during small stretches when the opposing team goes small and doesn't have a guy at that spot who does any dirty work. That was the only time Luke played Ingram at the 4 last year. I do expect him to get stronger, but that's different from becoming strong enough to play the 4 full time. Neither he or George can handle it.
Also, it's a little humorous to me that people who want the Lakers to trade for George are completely ignoring what George wants:
1) He doesn't want the Lakers to gut the team for him. No problem. Let's ignore him and trade at least two of Russell, Randle, and the second pick anyways.
2) George didn't like being moved to the 4. No problem. Let's ignore him and play him at the 4 anyways (since he'll protect the rim better than Randle!).
So you're just gonna blatantly ignore the guy's wishes and still expect him to re-sign once the season is over? That kind of idiocy is exactly what the last regime did with Dwight that played a pivotal role in him leaving. If you're the one who wants to give away assets to rent a guy for one year, you better do everything you possibly can to keep him happy. Presumptiously gutting the team for George and playing him at the 4 would be the first dominoes in causing the new relationship to turn sour. |
You don't force George to play the 4 against his will. You pitch the idea to him, try to convince him that it's the best position for both him and the team. And if he doesn't buy it, then just let him play the three. Ultimately though, if/when we acquire George, Ingram and George will almost certainly be our longterm starting forwards.
As it pertains to Randle's defense at the 4, it is horrendous. And it has nothing to do with "protecting the rim." It has to do with making basic defensive rotations, closing out on shooters, and completing general team defensive tasks without hesitation. His lack of defensive awareness makes him a step slow on these sort of tasks. Look at how much better the team defends when Nance is in instead of Randle.
Last edited by dao on Mon May 22, 2017 7:47 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dao
Star Player
Joined: 02 Jan 2013
Posts: 5572
|
| Posted: Mon May 22, 2017 7:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| nash wrote: | | Jiggling Jello wrote: | There's something to be said for at least 4 out of 5 players on the starting roster being triple threats, which is what Luke is probably trying to achieve with this roster - IF Randle and Ingram are able to make that jump (and to a smaller extent, Zubac).
I really dislike Randle's overall basketball IQ, but I give him a pass because he's essentially just finished his second year as an NBA player. This is the year where we see if the game actually slows down for him. If it doesn't, then it may behoove the Lakers not to be stuck with him on a large, 4+ year contract.
I will say that 2018 Free Agency is pretty bereft of good PF talent (Derrick Favors is probably the best unrestricted free agent PF, and he's been injury-riddled this season), so it would probably be better for the Lakers to offer Randle smaller, 3-year contract (if he doesn't get offered something bigger) if he ends up not reaching his potential as much as we would hope, since he is still one of the more talented young Power Forwards in the league. |
Julius missed rookie season was a shame.
At this point I don't want to give a player like him a long term expensive contract neither lose a 7th pick for nothing.
Trading him could be the best option, but since he has improved in most areas we can't let a talented player go.
Not all, but most great players had it going at this point of their careers. I'd like to see how Julius play next season trading him at the deadline if he doesn't improves enough to justify keeping him long term.
We can't keep a player that can't shoot and don't have a positive impact on defense. |
A lot of players break out in their third seasons, and Randle deserves a shot at a breakout season this year. The tricky part though is that this is essentially a contract year for him. If he doesn't show much improvement and the Lakers decide that they want to trade him at the deadline rather than giving him a 20+ million dollar contract, his trade value will be extremely low. Look at what Philly got for Noel under similar circumstances: a bag of chips. If you want to trade Randle, now would be the best time. However, I do think it makes more sense to keep him and see if he has a breakout season. If he doesn't show much improvement, cut your losses and trade him at the deadline. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144462
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Mon May 22, 2017 8:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| nash wrote: | | Jiggling Jello wrote: | There's something to be said for at least 4 out of 5 players on the starting roster being triple threats, which is what Luke is probably trying to achieve with this roster - IF Randle and Ingram are able to make that jump (and to a smaller extent, Zubac).
I really dislike Randle's overall basketball IQ, but I give him a pass because he's essentially just finished his second year as an NBA player. This is the year where we see if the game actually slows down for him. If it doesn't, then it may behoove the Lakers not to be stuck with him on a large, 4+ year contract.
I will say that 2018 Free Agency is pretty bereft of good PF talent (Derrick Favors is probably the best unrestricted free agent PF, and he's been injury-riddled this season), so it would probably be better for the Lakers to offer Randle smaller, 3-year contract (if he doesn't get offered something bigger) if he ends up not reaching his potential as much as we would hope, since he is still one of the more talented young Power Forwards in the league. |
Julius missed rookie season was a shame.
At this point I don't want to give a player like him a long term expensive contract neither lose a 7th pick for nothing.
Trading him could be the best option, but since he has improved in most areas we can't let a talented player go.
Not all, but most great players had it going at this point of their careers. I'd like to see how Julius play next season trading him at the deadline if he doesn't improves enough to justify keeping him long term.
We can't keep a player that can't shoot and don't have a positive impact on defense. |
Yeah, at the same point in his career Draymond Green put up 6.2, 5 and 1 with an eFG% of .467. I guess trading him would have been the best optio, right? Smfh at the total lack of patience and understanding of the NBA in 2017. If you did you would know that at this point we don't have to give him a long and expensive contract.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144462
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Mon May 22, 2017 8:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| dao wrote: | | Judah wrote: | It's a crying shame that folks are so low on Randle that they'd rather get rid of him and play George or Ingram out of position at the 4. All this talk about Randle's defensive woes, like his inability to protect the rim, yet we're carving out fantasies of George or Ingram doing it? Seriously?
I doubt Zubac will be starting next year, but even if he does, he's a poor rebounder at this point and so is Mozgov. You can't play George next to either of them. You'll be eaten alive on the boards.
Has the league gone away from "traditional" 4's? Of course, but even if the 4 on the opposing team isn't 6'10 or 6'11 he'll still have strength and grit to battle in the paint. Neither George or Ingram can match up with bruisers in the paint. George just isn't that kind of player. And while people speak of Ingram moving to the 4 as something that's supposedly inevitable, it seems a lot more like wishful thinking imo. I don't think he'll ever be strong enough or big enough to play the 4 full time. If he ever plays the 4 it'll be during small stretches when the opposing team goes small and doesn't have a guy at that spot who does any dirty work. That was the only time Luke played Ingram at the 4 last year. I do expect him to get stronger, but that's different from becoming strong enough to play the 4 full time. Neither he or George can handle it.
Also, it's a little humorous to me that people who want the Lakers to trade for George are completely ignoring what George wants:
1) He doesn't want the Lakers to gut the team for him. No problem. Let's ignore him and trade at least two of Russell, Randle, and the second pick anyways.
2) George didn't like being moved to the 4. No problem. Let's ignore him and play him at the 4 anyways (since he'll protect the rim better than Randle!).
So you're just gonna blatantly ignore the guy's wishes and still expect him to re-sign once the season is over? That kind of idiocy is exactly what the last regime did with Dwight that played a pivotal role in him leaving. If you're the one who wants to give away assets to rent a guy for one year, you better do everything you possibly can to keep him happy. Presumptiously gutting the team for George and playing him at the 4 would be the first dominoes in causing the new relationship to turn sour. |
You don't force George to play the 4 against his will. You pitch the idea to him, try to convince him that it's the best position for both him and the team. And if he doesn't buy it, then just let him play the three. Ultimately though, if/when we acquire George, Ingram and George will almost certainly be our longterm starting forwards.
As it pertains to Randle's defense at the 4, it is horrendous. And it has nothing to do with "protecting the rim." It has to do with making basic defensive rotations, closing out on shooters, and completing general team defensive tasks without hesitation. His lack of defensive awareness makes him a step slow on these sort of tasks. Look at how much better the team defends when Nance is in instead of Randle. |
So we ignore how bad Ingram was defensively? Along with being a horrible offensive player most of the season? Of course we do, because we just want him to get better
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
VicXLakers
Franchise Player
Joined: 08 Feb 2006
Posts: 11823
|
| Posted: Mon May 22, 2017 8:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| what has this got to do with DLO? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chase.button07
Star Player
Joined: 19 Feb 2017
Posts: 4996
|
| Posted: Mon May 22, 2017 8:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| venturalakersfan wrote: | | dao wrote: | | Judah wrote: | It's a crying shame that folks are so low on Randle that they'd rather get rid of him and play George or Ingram out of position at the 4. All this talk about Randle's defensive woes, like his inability to protect the rim, yet we're carving out fantasies of George or Ingram doing it? Seriously?
I doubt Zubac will be starting next year, but even if he does, he's a poor rebounder at this point and so is Mozgov. You can't play George next to either of them. You'll be eaten alive on the boards.
Has the league gone away from "traditional" 4's? Of course, but even if the 4 on the opposing team isn't 6'10 or 6'11 he'll still have strength and grit to battle in the paint. Neither George or Ingram can match up with bruisers in the paint. George just isn't that kind of player. And while people speak of Ingram moving to the 4 as something that's supposedly inevitable, it seems a lot more like wishful thinking imo. I don't think he'll ever be strong enough or big enough to play the 4 full time. If he ever plays the 4 it'll be during small stretches when the opposing team goes small and doesn't have a guy at that spot who does any dirty work. That was the only time Luke played Ingram at the 4 last year. I do expect him to get stronger, but that's different from becoming strong enough to play the 4 full time. Neither he or George can handle it.
Also, it's a little humorous to me that people who want the Lakers to trade for George are completely ignoring what George wants:
1) He doesn't want the Lakers to gut the team for him. No problem. Let's ignore him and trade at least two of Russell, Randle, and the second pick anyways.
2) George didn't like being moved to the 4. No problem. Let's ignore him and play him at the 4 anyways (since he'll protect the rim better than Randle!).
So you're just gonna blatantly ignore the guy's wishes and still expect him to re-sign once the season is over? That kind of idiocy is exactly what the last regime did with Dwight that played a pivotal role in him leaving. If you're the one who wants to give away assets to rent a guy for one year, you better do everything you possibly can to keep him happy. Presumptiously gutting the team for George and playing him at the 4 would be the first dominoes in causing the new relationship to turn sour. |
You don't force George to play the 4 against his will. You pitch the idea to him, try to convince him that it's the best position for both him and the team. And if he doesn't buy it, then just let him play the three. Ultimately though, if/when we acquire George, Ingram and George will almost certainly be our longterm starting forwards.
As it pertains to Randle's defense at the 4, it is horrendous. And it has nothing to do with "protecting the rim." It has to do with making basic defensive rotations, closing out on shooters, and completing general team defensive tasks without hesitation. His lack of defensive awareness makes him a step slow on these sort of tasks. Look at how much better the team defends when Nance is in instead of Randle. |
So we ignore how bad Ingram was defensively? Along with being a horrible offensive player most of the season? Of course we do, because we just want him to get better |
rookie who is 19yrs old? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr. Funkbot
Star Player
Joined: 24 Sep 2001
Posts: 8188
Location: Eagle Rock
|
| Posted: Mon May 22, 2017 9:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| dao wrote: | | Judah wrote: | It's a crying shame that folks are so low on Randle that they'd rather get rid of him and play George or Ingram out of position at the 4. All this talk about Randle's defensive woes, like his inability to protect the rim, yet we're carving out fantasies of George or Ingram doing it? Seriously?
I doubt Zubac will be starting next year, but even if he does, he's a poor rebounder at this point and so is Mozgov. You can't play George next to either of them. You'll be eaten alive on the boards.
Has the league gone away from "traditional" 4's? Of course, but even if the 4 on the opposing team isn't 6'10 or 6'11 he'll still have strength and grit to battle in the paint. Neither George or Ingram can match up with bruisers in the paint. George just isn't that kind of player. And while people speak of Ingram moving to the 4 as something that's supposedly inevitable, it seems a lot more like wishful thinking imo. I don't think he'll ever be strong enough or big enough to play the 4 full time. If he ever plays the 4 it'll be during small stretches when the opposing team goes small and doesn't have a guy at that spot who does any dirty work. That was the only time Luke played Ingram at the 4 last year. I do expect him to get stronger, but that's different from becoming strong enough to play the 4 full time. Neither he or George can handle it.
Also, it's a little humorous to me that people who want the Lakers to trade for George are completely ignoring what George wants:
1) He doesn't want the Lakers to gut the team for him. No problem. Let's ignore him and trade at least two of Russell, Randle, and the second pick anyways.
2) George didn't like being moved to the 4. No problem. Let's ignore him and play him at the 4 anyways (since he'll protect the rim better than Randle!).
So you're just gonna blatantly ignore the guy's wishes and still expect him to re-sign once the season is over? That kind of idiocy is exactly what the last regime did with Dwight that played a pivotal role in him leaving. If you're the one who wants to give away assets to rent a guy for one year, you better do everything you possibly can to keep him happy. Presumptiously gutting the team for George and playing him at the 4 would be the first dominoes in causing the new relationship to turn sour. |
You don't force George to play the 4 against his will. You pitch the idea to him, try to convince him that it's the best position for both him and the team. And if he doesn't buy it, then just let him play the three. Ultimately though, if/when we acquire George, Ingram and George will almost certainly be our longterm starting forwards.
As it pertains to Randle's defense at the 4, it is horrendous. And it has nothing to do with "protecting the rim." It has to do with making basic defensive rotations, closing out on shooters, and completing general team defensive tasks without hesitation. His lack of defensive awareness makes him a step slow on these sort of tasks. Look at how much better the team defends when Nance is in instead of Randle. |
Again, I don't see why Nance can't just be our starting 4. He is so much better on D, more athletic and always moving the ball.
I think that Randle will improve for sure, but he is in a big hole compared to nance.
_________________
R.I.P. Doc Buss |
|
| 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
|
|
