|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
32
Retired Number
Joined: 04 Nov 2009
Posts: 73074
|
 Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2017 2:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Griffin is loser.
_________________
Nobody in the NBA can touch the Laker brand, which, like the uniform color, is pure gold. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Mini Mamba
Star Player
Joined: 06 May 2013
Posts: 6006
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2017 2:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Randle is the future. No need for a declining player whose body is breaking down. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sentient Meat
Franchise Player
Joined: 04 Jul 2014
Posts: 12978
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2017 2:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I can't believe so many people would prefer Randle to Griffin. Are we watching the same NBA? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
repandpresent
Starting Rotation
Joined: 20 Jul 2010
Posts: 552
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2017 2:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sentient Meat wrote: | | I can't believe so many people would prefer Randle to Griffin. Are we watching the same NBA? |
One junk time triple double will hold some of these people for the duration of his career.
I'm with you. Griffin is superior in every way. Although, he is getting up there in age and the injuries are piling up. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nash
Star Player
Joined: 23 Oct 2001
Posts: 8194
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2017 2:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sentient Meat wrote: | | I can't believe so many people would prefer Randle to Griffin. Are we watching the same NBA? |
Griffin is declining.
I'm not really high on Randle, but he is improving and has a lot of run to grow while Griffin without supreme hoops is ... well another average talent that will cost a lot kinda Derik Rose and probably Westbrook as he ages. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bard207
Star Player
Joined: 08 Jan 2013
Posts: 7713
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2017 2:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| tox wrote: | | Bard207 wrote: | | tox wrote: | | yinoma2001 wrote: | It's sort of a catch 22 (for the FO). If Jules plays well to deserve a max, that obliterates the 2 max 2018 plan.
Obviously I'm cheering for him to ball out, but for the FO, that presents them a dilemma. |
I believe they will have enough space to sign 2 max free agents while holding Randle's cap hold. And then they can sign him afterwards.
I'm not 100% sure as I haven't run the math, though. |
I think they will be about $3 million short of having enough for two $30.9 million Max contracts if:
1. Clarkson is gone with no salary coming back beyond this season
2. Deng stretch waived next summer
3. Randle put on hold as a RFA and thus his cap hold goes as a charge against the team salary |
I just ran the numbers, they have enough space.
FYI, one key thing that made me realize the Lakers could sign LeBron and George even by stretching MozDeng is that max contracts aren't percent of the salary cap but of another figure slightly smaller than the salary cap. So if the salary cap is $100M and LeBron is eligible for a 35% max, his actual max would be closer to $33M than the $35M you might expect.
That opens up a lot of room if you hadn't previously considered it. |
| tox wrote: | Actually I'll do that math. Assuming a $103M salary cap and $125M luxury tax:
I'm going to guess $8M for Nance, Zubac, and our three later rookies.
It's about $62.8M for LeBron and George.
It's less than $12M for Ingram and Ball.
It's about $10.4M for Randle's cap hold (according to Forum Blue and Gold).
And it's about $7.4M for a stretched Deng.
With 10 guys in the above calculation, we need $1.6M more for cap holds.
So we have a grand total of: $102.2M. I think I overestimated Ingram and Ball and underestimated Nance, Zu, the 3 later picks but it should mostly wash out.
So it does seem like there's enough to eke Randle in while keeping the 2 max dream alive. Though then we have to question roster construction (Ingram, Randle, Nance, LeBron, George on one roster) |
I sourced Randle's cap hold from here:
Los Angeles Lakers Team Salary
Then scroll to the bottom of the web page.
| Quote: |
Julius Randle $12,447,727
|
In the new CBA that is about to start, they have a grid with the rookie salary scale that is called
Exhibit B - 1
2017-18 NBA ROOKIE SCALE
It has the second year salary for the #2 pick at $6,218,300. I went 120% above that as is traditional and came up with Ball's second year salary at $7,461,960. Ingram should be about $5,757,120 and that would put Ball and Ingram over $13 million in combined salary. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bard207
Star Player
Joined: 08 Jan 2013
Posts: 7713
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2017 2:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| tox wrote: | | PG13 wrote: | | tox wrote: | | Bard207 wrote: | | tox wrote: | | yinoma2001 wrote: | It's sort of a catch 22 (for the FO). If Jules plays well to deserve a max, that obliterates the 2 max 2018 plan.
Obviously I'm cheering for him to ball out, but for the FO, that presents them a dilemma. |
I believe they will have enough space to sign 2 max free agents while holding Randle's cap hold. And then they can sign him afterwards.
I'm not 100% sure as I haven't run the math, though. |
I think they will be about $3 million short of having enough for two $30.9 million Max contracts if:
1. Clarkson is gone with no salary coming back beyond this season
2. Deng stretch waived next summer
3. Randle put on hold as a RFA and thus his cap hold goes as a charge against the team salary |
I just ran the numbers, they have enough space.
FYI, one key thing that made me realize the Lakers could sign LeBron and George even by stretching MozDeng is that max contracts aren't percent of the salary cap but of another figure slightly smaller than the salary cap. So if the salary cap is $100M and LeBron is eligible for a 35% max, his actual max would be closer to $33M than the $35M you might expect.
That opens up a lot of room if you hadn't previously considered it. |
isn't 35% of 100 million 35 million? |
Yes, sorry if it was unclear. If the salary cap is $100M, then LeBron's max is 35% of a slightly smaller number. |
Do you have a good source for that method of calculating Max salaries?
| Quote: |
Section 7. Maximum Annual Salary.
(i) for any player who has completed fewer than seven (7)
Years of Service, the greater of (x) twenty-five percent
(25%) of the Salary Cap in effect at the time the Contract is
executed, or (y) one hundred five percent (105%) of the
Salary for the final Season of the player’s prior Contract;
|
| Quote: |
Section 7. Maximum Annual Salary.
for any player who has completed at least seven (7) but
fewer than ten (10) Years of Service, the greater of (x)
thirty percent (30%) of the Salary Cap in effect at the time
the Contract is executed, or (y) one hundred five percent
(105%) of the Salary for the final Season of the player’s
prior Contract;
|
| Quote: |
Section 7. Maximum Annual Salary.
for any player who has completed ten (10) or more Years
of Service, the greater of (x) thirty-five percent (35%) of
the Salary Cap in effect at the time the Contract is
executed, or (y) one hundred five percent (105%) of the
Salary for the final Season of the player’s prior Contract.
|
With a salary cap of $103,000,000, this is what I came up with.
Less than seven years of NBA service Maximum Contract
$103,000,000 * 25% = $25,750,000
At least seven years of NBA service contract Maximum Contract
$103,000,000 * 30% = $30,900,000
At least 10 years of NBA service Maximum Contract
$103,000,000 * 35% = $36,050,000 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tox
Franchise Player
Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 17880
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2017 3:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
One more thing about Randle that I think people might not realize.
If we can keep Randle and sign LeBron and George, then Randle's contract can be used to help bring back another star.
For example, suppose the Lakers win 32 games. Ingram, who isn't a great fit with Bron and George, has a promising year but he's still far from being a starter on a championship team. LeBron says he'll come, but only if the Lakers can get a 3rd star with him and George.
It's not going to be possible to find that guy in free agency. However, suppose Randle played well this year and he gets signed to a reasonable 4 years / $64M deal. The Lakers can then turn around and trade Randle and Ingram for another star, and receive someone with roughly a $21M contract back. So let's say Kyrie is disgruntled after LeBron's departure. The Lakers could flip Ingram and Randle for Kyrie, and trot out:
Irving/ Ball/ George/ James/ Zubac
Does that team beat the Warriors? Who knows, but it'd attract LeBron. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
VicXLakers
Franchise Player
Joined: 08 Feb 2006
Posts: 11823
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2017 3:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sentient Meat wrote: | | I can't believe so many people would prefer Randle to Griffin. Are we watching the same NBA? |
I do...  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tox
Franchise Player
Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 17880
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2017 3:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bard207 wrote: |
Do you have a good source for that method of calculating Max salaries?
| Quote: |
Section 7. Maximum Annual Salary.
(i) for any player who has completed fewer than seven (7)
Years of Service, the greater of (x) twenty-five percent
(25%) of the Salary Cap in effect at the time the Contract is
executed, or (y) one hundred five percent (105%) of the
Salary for the final Season of the player’s prior Contract;
|
| Quote: |
Section 7. Maximum Annual Salary.
for any player who has completed at least seven (7) but
fewer than ten (10) Years of Service, the greater of (x)
thirty percent (30%) of the Salary Cap in effect at the time
the Contract is executed, or (y) one hundred five percent
(105%) of the Salary for the final Season of the player’s
prior Contract;
|
| Quote: |
Section 7. Maximum Annual Salary.
for any player who has completed ten (10) or more Years
of Service, the greater of (x) thirty-five percent (35%) of
the Salary Cap in effect at the time the Contract is
executed, or (y) one hundred five percent (105%) of the
Salary for the final Season of the player’s prior Contract.
|
With a salary cap of $103,000,000, this is what I came up with.
Less than seven years of NBA service Maximum Contract
$103,000,000 * 25% = $25,750,000
At least seven years of NBA service contract Maximum Contract
$103,000,000 * 30% = $30,900,000
At least 10 years of NBA service Maximum Contract
$103,000,000 * 35% = $36,050,000 |
Bard, yes I do. It's in Larry's CBA writeup.
http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q16
See footnote 2.
I do not believe this was changed in the 2017 CBA. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakerSanity
Moderator
Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 33474
Location: Long Beach, California
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2017 3:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Tox, that would be the dumbest thing in the world to do and my worst nightmare. You don't mortgage your future for 2 years of prime LeBron (if that). Just the thought of that is getting me just as angry as the Russell trade.
But you do make a good point that, if Randle earns that kind of contract, it also means he is a trade asset. There is absolutely no down side to having a Randle who deserves a max contract.
_________________
LakersGround's Terms of Service
Twitter: @DeleteThisPost
Last edited by LakerSanity on Fri Jun 23, 2017 3:04 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr. Funkbot
Star Player
Joined: 24 Sep 2001
Posts: 8188
Location: Eagle Rock
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2017 3:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mini Mamba wrote: | | Randle is the future. No need for a declining player whose body is breaking down. |
Agreed!
_________________
R.I.P. Doc Buss |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Truck Turner
Star Player
Joined: 28 Apr 2011
Posts: 3937
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2017 3:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| repandpresent wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | I can't believe so many people would prefer Randle to Griffin. Are we watching the same NBA? |
One junk time triple double will hold some of these people for the duration of his career.
I'm with you. Griffin is superior in every way. Although, he is getting up there in age and the injuries are piling up. |
Blake is Griffin is 28 years old with questionable knees. He's declining, his athleticism isn't what it used to be.
Randle is 22 and showing improvement from season to season. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sentient Meat
Franchise Player
Joined: 04 Jul 2014
Posts: 12978
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2017 3:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nash wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | I can't believe so many people would prefer Randle to Griffin. Are we watching the same NBA? |
Griffin is declining.
I'm not really high on Randle, but he is improving and has a lot of run to grow while Griffin without supreme hoops is ... well another average talent that will cost a lot kinda Derik Rose and probably Westbrook as he ages. |
I just noticed that Blake has got his FT% up to 76% compared to being closer to 50% when he was a rookie. This tells me that he's still working on his game. I agree he's not a leader and kind of a b---h, but he's a far better player than Julius. Even with less elevation he's still got a better body for basketball than Randle and probably still gets up higher. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr. Funkbot
Star Player
Joined: 24 Sep 2001
Posts: 8188
Location: Eagle Rock
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2017 3:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sentient Meat wrote: | | nash wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | I can't believe so many people would prefer Randle to Griffin. Are we watching the same NBA? |
Griffin is declining.
I'm not really high on Randle, but he is improving and has a lot of run to grow while Griffin without supreme hoops is ... well another average talent that will cost a lot kinda Derik Rose and probably Westbrook as he ages. |
I just noticed that Blake has got his FT% up to 76% compared to being closer to 50% when he was a rookie. This tells me that he's still working on his game. I agree he's not a leader and kind of a b---h, but he's a far better player than Julius. Even with less elevation he's still got a better body for basketball than Randle and probably still gets up higher. |
We would massively over pay for his one way contributions. Guy sucks at D and D is a big focus of the new regime.
Not saying that Randle plays D either, but he is still young and could learn. Griffin is not ever going to play D.
_________________
R.I.P. Doc Buss |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tox
Franchise Player
Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 17880
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2017 3:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LakerSanity wrote: | Tox, that would be the dumbest thing in the world to do and my worst nightmare. You don't mortgage your future for 2 years of prime LeBron (if that). Just the thought of that is getting me just as angry as the Russell trade.
But you do make a good point that, if Randle earns that kind of contract, it also means he is a trade asset. There is absolutely no down side to having a Randle who deserves a max contract. |
Yeah I'm not advocating for it at all. It's literally the Russell trade part 2, and I'm not happy about the first part of this terrible series. But the Russell trade just looks thoroughly incompetent to me otherwise (even if you wanted to ditch him, get a lottery pick back instead of attaching Mozgov and getting #27 back). If this is the plan, it means at least the FO has a competent vision, even if I disagree with it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sentient Meat
Franchise Player
Joined: 04 Jul 2014
Posts: 12978
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2017 3:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dr. Funkbot wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | nash wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | I can't believe so many people would prefer Randle to Griffin. Are we watching the same NBA? |
Griffin is declining.
I'm not really high on Randle, but he is improving and has a lot of run to grow while Griffin without supreme hoops is ... well another average talent that will cost a lot kinda Derik Rose and probably Westbrook as he ages. |
I just noticed that Blake has got his FT% up to 76% compared to being closer to 50% when he was a rookie. This tells me that he's still working on his game. I agree he's not a leader and kind of a b---h, but he's a far better player than Julius. Even with less elevation he's still got a better body for basketball than Randle and probably still gets up higher. |
We would massively over pay for his one way contributions. Guy sucks at D and D is a big focus of the new regime.
Not saying that Randle plays D either, but he is still young and could learn. Griffin is not ever going to play D. |
I agree with your economic reasons... what you say make sense although if Randle starts playing at a Griffin level then he's not going to accept Mozgov/Clarkson level pay. So it's a Catch-22... if he plateaus where he is, then we could do what Tox said... but if he improves then he's going to want max money. All I was going by was basketball ability... and in that department Blake still is better just like PG13 right now is miles ahead of Ingram. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tox
Franchise Player
Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 17880
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2017 3:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| tox wrote: | Actually I'll do that math. Assuming a $103M salary cap and $125M luxury tax:
I'm going to guess $8M for Nance, Zubac, and our three later rookies.
It's about $62.8M for LeBron and George.
It's less than $12M for Ingram and Ball.
It's about $10.4M for Randle's cap hold (according to Forum Blue and Gold).
And it's about $7.4M for a stretched Deng.
With 10 guys in the above calculation, we need $1.6M more for cap holds.
So we have a grand total of: $102.2M. I think I overestimated Ingram and Ball and underestimated Nance, Zu, the 3 later picks but it should mostly wash out.
So it does seem like there's enough to eke Randle in while keeping the 2 max dream alive. Though then we have to question roster construction (Ingram, Randle, Nance, LeBron, George on one roster) |
Sorry folks, the CBA changed Randle's cap hold. It used to be 250% of his last year's salary ($4.2M), so about $10.5. But they changed it in the 2017 CBA to be 300%, or $12.6M.
That extra $2M I believe makes keeping Randle impossible, unless cap is higher than projected. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144474
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2017 3:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bard207 wrote: | | tox wrote: | | yinoma2001 wrote: | It's sort of a catch 22 (for the FO). If Jules plays well to deserve a max, that obliterates the 2 max 2018 plan.
Obviously I'm cheering for him to ball out, but for the FO, that presents them a dilemma. |
I believe they will have enough space to sign 2 max free agents while holding Randle's cap hold. And then they can sign him afterwards.
I'm not 100% sure as I haven't run the math, though. |
I think they will be about $3 million short of having enough for two $30.9 million Max contracts if:
1. Clarkson is gone with no salary coming back beyond this season
2. Deng stretch waived next summer
3. Randle put on hold as a RFA and thus his cap hold goes as a charge against the team salary |
And Lebron gets the 35% ten year max. If PG is coming here to be the man and this to be his team, would he play second fiddle to Lebron?
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023.
Last edited by venturalakersfan on Fri Jun 23, 2017 3:17 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chase.button07
Star Player
Joined: 19 Feb 2017
Posts: 4996
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2017 3:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| tox wrote: | One more thing about Randle that I think people might not realize.
If we can keep Randle and sign LeBron and George, then Randle's contract can be used to help bring back another star.
For example, suppose the Lakers win 32 games. Ingram, who isn't a great fit with Bron and George, has a promising year but he's still far from being a starter on a championship team. LeBron says he'll come, but only if the Lakers can get a 3rd star with him and George.
It's not going to be possible to find that guy in free agency. However, suppose Randle played well this year and he gets signed to a reasonable 4 years / $64M deal. The Lakers can then turn around and trade Randle and Ingram for another star, and receive someone with roughly a $21M contract back. So let's say Kyrie is disgruntled after LeBron's departure. The Lakers could flip Ingram and Randle for Kyrie, and trot out:
Irving/ Ball/ George/ James/ Zubac
Does that team beat the Warriors? Who knows, but it'd attract LeBron. |
hey Tox, how are you planning to sign Lebron, PG and then Randle(with zo and ingram) on the squad
_________________
Now Playing: The Zo Show @Staples |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Roon
Star Player
Joined: 29 Sep 2012
Posts: 1816
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2017 3:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sentient Meat wrote: | | I can't believe so many people would prefer Randle to Griffin. Are we watching the same NBA? |
I don't think many of those people think Randle will be a better player than Griffin next year.
They probably know that Griffin has played 67, 35, 61 games in his past three seasons.
I don't want to be paying BG 30 million on the other side of thirty. Without his elite athleticism his best case scenario is a better ballhandling, maybe better shooting Milsap with less length, worse defense and worse durability.
Still a good player no doubt, but I don't want to pay that player the max, with his potential injury and attitude problems. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bard207
Star Player
Joined: 08 Jan 2013
Posts: 7713
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2017 3:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| tox wrote: | | Bard207 wrote: |
Do you have a good source for that method of calculating Max salaries?
| Quote: |
Section 7. Maximum Annual Salary.
(i) for any player who has completed fewer than seven (7)
Years of Service, the greater of (x) twenty-five percent
(25%) of the Salary Cap in effect at the time the Contract is
executed, or (y) one hundred five percent (105%) of the
Salary for the final Season of the player’s prior Contract;
|
| Quote: |
Section 7. Maximum Annual Salary.
for any player who has completed at least seven (7) but
fewer than ten (10) Years of Service, the greater of (x)
thirty percent (30%) of the Salary Cap in effect at the time
the Contract is executed, or (y) one hundred five percent
(105%) of the Salary for the final Season of the player’s
prior Contract;
|
| Quote: |
Section 7. Maximum Annual Salary.
for any player who has completed ten (10) or more Years
of Service, the greater of (x) thirty-five percent (35%) of
the Salary Cap in effect at the time the Contract is
executed, or (y) one hundred five percent (105%) of the
Salary for the final Season of the player’s prior Contract.
|
With a salary cap of $103,000,000, this is what I came up with.
Less than seven years of NBA service Maximum Contract
$103,000,000 * 25% = $25,750,000
At least seven years of NBA service contract Maximum Contract
$103,000,000 * 30% = $30,900,000
At least 10 years of NBA service Maximum Contract
$103,000,000 * 35% = $36,050,000 |
Bard, yes I do. It's in Larry's CBA writeup.
http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q16
See footnote 2.
I do not believe this was changed in the 2017 CBA. |
I have a PDF copy of the new CBA 2017 open in Adobe and that is what I was quoting from.
Let me go to the NBAPA web site and download a fresh copy to see if they revised it in the past few months. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bard207
Star Player
Joined: 08 Jan 2013
Posts: 7713
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2017 3:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
NBA CBA 2017
| Quote: |
Section 7. Maximum Annual Salary
(i) for any player who has completed fewer than seven (7)
Years of Service, the greater of (x) twenty-five percent
(25%) of the Salary Cap in effect at the time the Contract is
executed, or (y) one hundred five percent (105%) of the
Salary for the final Season of the player’s prior Contract;
|
| Quote: |
Section 7. Maximum Annual Salary
(ii) for any player who has completed at least seven (7) but
fewer than ten (10) Years of Service, the greater of (x)
thirty percent (30%) of the Salary Cap in effect at the time
the Contract is executed, or (y) one hundred five percent
(105%) of the Salary for the final Season of the player’s
prior Contract; provided,
|
| Quote: |
Section 7. Maximum Annual Salary
(iii) for any player who has completed ten (10) or more Years
of Service, the greater of (x) thirty-five percent (35%) of
the Salary Cap in effect at the time the Contract is
executed, or (y) one hundred five percent (105%) of the
Salary for the final Season of the player’s prior Contract.
|
Perhaps I missed some small nuance, but otherwise it looks quite similar to what I posted earlier. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144474
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2017 3:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sentient Meat wrote: | | nash wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | I can't believe so many people would prefer Randle to Griffin. Are we watching the same NBA? |
Griffin is declining.
I'm not really high on Randle, but he is improving and has a lot of run to grow while Griffin without supreme hoops is ... well another average talent that will cost a lot kinda Derik Rose and probably Westbrook as he ages. |
I just noticed that Blake has got his FT% up to 76% compared to being closer to 50% when he was a rookie. This tells me that he's still working on his game. I agree he's not a leader and kind of a b---h, but he's a far better player than Julius. Even with less elevation he's still got a better body for basketball than Randle and probably still gets up higher. |
He has played 67, 35 and 61 games the last 3 seasons while not finishing any of them.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sentient Meat
Franchise Player
Joined: 04 Jul 2014
Posts: 12978
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2017 3:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Roon wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | I can't believe so many people would prefer Randle to Griffin. Are we watching the same NBA? |
I don't think many of those people think Randle will be a better player than Griffin next year.
They probably know that Griffin has played 67, 35, 61 games in his past three seasons.
I don't want to be paying BG 30 million on the other side of thirty. Without his elite athleticism his best case scenario is a better ballhandling, maybe better shooting Milsap with less length, worse defense and worse durability.
Still a good player no doubt, but I don't want to pay that player the max, with his potential injury and attitude problems. |
These are all good points but his injuries seem more like flukes than congenital issues like stress fractures in the feet. Maybe he needs to alter his game until he returns to full health. I can't argue with the economic or injury arguments as they do make sense, but perhaps we might get a bargain because of that perception. As I said, a hobbled Griffin still gets off the ground more than the Randle, Draymond, Millsap type players. |
|
| 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
|
|
