|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Lakers2015
Star Player
Joined: 16 Feb 2015
Posts: 2315
|
 Posted: Sun May 24, 2015 3:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| misterrunon wrote: | | tom wrote: | | Hill I believe is gone,but why trade Sacre? He's on a cheap contract and our new rookie big will need a back-up. |
Because we have Tarik Black, likely Ed Davis, JR and Rkelly already. If we can get a mid 2nd rounder for him, then it's a win. |
Davis is a free agent and there's really no reason to bring him back because of Black so then we have no true backup center.
Rather keep Sacre if we can't get a pick which I doubt any team would give up for him. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144464
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Sun May 24, 2015 3:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| HumanVictoryCigar wrote: | | venturalakersfan wrote: | | USCandLakers wrote: |
Nice little insult. Not surprised.
Love and Randle play the same position. There is no getting around that. There is no versatility to be had in lineups with two true power forwards, neither particularly good defensively. Love is not a Center, Randle is not a SF.
You're doing yourself a disservice by holding onto Randle after signing Love. If you're doing it as some insurance thing, that's one thing, but I'd rather avoid the half measures and go all out to win if we're going to sign a guy like Love who is in his prime.
You either buy into Randle or you sign Love. Anything else really doesn't make any sense, especially when Randle's value can only go down from where it is right now by having him play behind Love. |
Love and Randle don't place close to the same position. Randle is an attacker from the wing, Love plays in the paint or shoots long jumpers. Completely different, that is where the lack of creativity comes iin, just because there might be a "PF" next to their names it doesn't mean they play the same position. Mitch thinks that Randle will be a star so unless we get a star player in return, he won't be trading him. |
I'm curious, are you projecting Randle as an "Odom" type player, obviously, not exactly, but a big guy who can bring the ball up but also can get into the paint? Would Julius be happy letting others score with him getting say, 13-15 points/game? If Love leaves Cleveland, it's because he's tired of playing 2nd fiddle and wants the ball in his hands. Julius will want the ball in his hands too but if he's scoring and Love isn't, once again, Love isn't going to be happy. |
Randle will be attacking from the wing but mainly creating for himself, though that should give him opportunities to assist his teammates. I think he is a 20+ ppg scorer eventually.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144464
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Sun May 24, 2015 3:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| USCandLakers wrote: | | venturalakersfan wrote: | | USCandLakers wrote: |
Nice little insult. Not surprised.
Love and Randle play the same position. There is no getting around that. There is no versatility to be had in lineups with two true power forwards, neither particularly good defensively. Love is not a Center, Randle is not a SF.
You're doing yourself a disservice by holding onto Randle after signing Love. If you're doing it as some insurance thing, that's one thing, but I'd rather avoid the half measures and go all out to win if we're going to sign a guy like Love who is in his prime.
You either buy into Randle or you sign Love. Anything else really doesn't make any sense, especially when Randle's value can only go down from where it is right now by having him play behind Love. |
Love and Randle don't place close to the same position. Randle is an attacker from the wing, Love plays in the paint or shoots long jumpers. Completely different, that is where the lack of creativity comes iin, just because there might be a "PF" next to their names it doesn't mean they play the same position. Mitch thinks that Randle will be a star so unless we get a star player in return, he won't be trading him. |
The position matters defensively, not offensively. I don't care how creative you get, Randle is not the guy you want guarding wings in this league and Love is not the guy you want guarding centers or being tasked with protecting the paint.
Construct a lineup where having both on the floor together doesn't equal us getting killed defensively.
You think you're going to take out teams like the Clippers/Rockets/Thunder/Warriors/Grizzles with Love playing Center and Julius playing SF? |
I haven't seen Randle defending SFs, none of us have. And man D in the paint is Loves strength along with defensive rebounding. I prefer a FA other than Love, but if they sign him they won't be giving up on a guy Mitch thinks will be a star.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144464
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Sun May 24, 2015 3:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Lakers2015 wrote: | | misterrunon wrote: | | tom wrote: | | Hill I believe is gone,but why trade Sacre? He's on a cheap contract and our new rookie big will need a back-up. |
Because we have Tarik Black, likely Ed Davis, JR and Rkelly already. If we can get a mid 2nd rounder for him, then it's a win. |
Davis is a free agent and there's really no reason to bring him back because of Black so then we have no true backup center.
Rather keep Sacre if we can't get a pick which I doubt any team would give up for him. |
Black would be the backup center once our pick is ready to start. The pick will be at the start.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
K0BEE 2.0
Franchise Player
Joined: 17 May 2013
Posts: 10949
Location: I wish I knew
|
| Posted: Sun May 24, 2015 3:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I'm still shocked sacre is in the NBA .. And the fact that the lakers think he has value is really focking laughable... The lakers can easily just waive his contract and use that additional 1.2M whatever on a big man veteran. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Omar Little
Moderator
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90306
Location: Formerly Known As 24
|
| Posted: Sun May 24, 2015 3:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| K0BEE 2.0 wrote: | | I'm still shocked sacre is in the NBA .. And the fact that the lakers think he has value is really focking laughable... The lakers can easily just waive his contract and use that additional 1.2M whatever on a big man veteran. |
His salary for next year is 981k, not 1.2 mil, and if LA dumps him, they still have a minimum cap hold of 525k, so they free up only a bit over 450k |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
K0BEE 2.0
Franchise Player
Joined: 17 May 2013
Posts: 10949
Location: I wish I knew
|
| Posted: Sun May 24, 2015 3:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| This is the main problem 24 if he's traded he's just gonna be a filler for a hill or young trade. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laker50
Star Player
Joined: 07 Mar 2014
Posts: 2140
|
| Posted: Sun May 24, 2015 4:13 pm Post subject: Hill can be a valuable backup and filler |
|
|
I don't know why sometimes the Lakers FO is so delusional.
Yes.
How can lakers as M Gasol is coming when they dissed his brother?
They did the same to Howard.
Couldn't even decide on a coach. Keep Scott.
The Lakers have to learn to treat its players with respect like the other teams.
For instance, GS, spurs.
No really good FA would want to come to the Lakers right now. Treat Hill with respect especially in a everyone tank season.
Keep the core and take the knocks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HumanVictoryCigar
Star Player
Joined: 28 Apr 2014
Posts: 7601
|
| Posted: Sun May 24, 2015 4:24 pm Post subject: Re: Hill can be a valuable backup and filler |
|
|
| laker50 wrote: | I don't know why sometimes the Lakers FO is so delusional.
Yes.
How can lakers as M Gasol is coming when they dissed his brother?
They did the same to Howard.
Couldn't even decide on a coach. Keep Scott.
The Lakers have to learn to treat its players with respect like the other teams.
For instance, GS, spurs.
No really good FA would want to come to the Lakers right now. Treat Hill with respect especially in a everyone tank season.
Keep the core and take the knocks. |
yeah, the Lakers totally disrespected Kobe on the downside of his career... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laker50
Star Player
Joined: 07 Mar 2014
Posts: 2140
|
| Posted: Sun May 24, 2015 4:26 pm Post subject: You need more than one player to make a team |
|
|
Yes, Kobe is the greatest.
But basketball is a team game. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Omar Little
Moderator
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90306
Location: Formerly Known As 24
|
| Posted: Sun May 24, 2015 4:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| K0BEE 2.0 wrote: | | This is the main problem 24 if he's traded he's just gonna be a filler for a hill or young trade. |
So in other words, forget what you said last post, and my response to it, and just stumble on to another idea? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Sun May 24, 2015 8:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| K0BEE 2.0 wrote: | | This is the main problem 24 if he's traded he's just gonna be a filler for a hill or young trade. |
Why is that a problem????? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kingpin2010
Star Player
Joined: 04 May 2013
Posts: 1260
|
| Posted: Sun May 24, 2015 8:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| If we get anything for Sacre then mitch is a wizard. But unless he gets some outrageous offer I don't see any reason to move Sacre. He's cheap, plays his role and seems to be a good locker room guy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
captain jack
Starting Rotation
Joined: 17 Apr 2001
Posts: 687
|
| Posted: Mon May 25, 2015 7:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| USCandLakers wrote: | | venturalakersfan wrote: | | USCandLakers wrote: | | wyominglaker wrote: | | 2019 wrote: | | lakurluv wrote: | Speculation or not, the Lakers will need to overhaul their front court simply because there will be too much redundancy.
I think the FO is going to try to lure Love to the Lakers and if that happens, which is a BIG IF, they will definitely need to make room for him.
Love is a 4/5 depending on the lineup and with a Center like Okafor or Towns coming in, he will more than likely be at the 4 spot, which IMO would mean Randle would have to slide over to the 3. I totally believe he can play the 3 in this league especially if he's slimmed down a bit, but it remains to be seen.
Let's just say for the sake of argument that the lineup will look like this with Love being the only FA added, but obviously we have room to add more than just one.
Clarkson + Kobe + Randle + Love + Okafor
From a future perspective that starting lineup looks great, but from a playoff and contention perspective, too young and not enough time to gel. |
I think they are 100% going after Love and I think there is a good chance we land him. Love knows what being in LA means to his brand, he knows we now have a potentially great C, Clarkson, Randle, and of course 2 more max spaces over the next couple years.
My question is where they see Randle fitting though. Clearly, they are VERY high on him. I can see Randle playing mins here and there at the 3 but to start at SF seems like a bad idea. I also assume they want to keep Black and Kelly so PF would be awfully crowded.
Unless they want to go and draft Russell, I'm curious how they'd make it work with so many guys at PF/C |
Completely disagree. In listening to the Lakers speak of of Julius Randle, they are high on him and he is considered a building block. If they didn't want Randle, he would still need to play this year to show off his potential and maximize his trade value. Signing Love would destroy that. |
If the Lakers do sign Love, Randle needs to be traded. It's the only sensible thing to do. Fortify another spot in our starting lineup. I'm wondering what kind of value he has. It's at a high right now, and like Harrison Barnes losing value when the Warriors got Iggy, it's only going to go lower when he's not getting the minutes.
Would the Kings or Magic give up their pick for Randle? |
For Mitch he has star value, picks aren't going to get it done. And even if you sign Love you don't trade Randle. I swear some have the creativity of the guy who discovered beige. |
Nice little insult. Not surprised.
Love and Randle play the same position. There is no getting around that. There is no versatility to be had in lineups with two true power forwards, neither particularly good defensively. Love is not a Center, Randle is not a SF.
You're doing yourself a disservice by holding onto Randle after signing Love. If you're doing it as some insurance thing, that's one thing, but I'd rather avoid the half measures and go all out to win if we're going to sign a guy like Love who is in his prime.
You either buy into Randle or you sign Love. Anything else really doesn't make any sense, especially when Randle's value can only go down from where it is right now by having him play behind Love. |
Positions today in the NBA are not your traditional positions of the past. Love and Randle are PFs, but they play the position totally different. Look at Golden State for example... If you're able to get Love, I would not trade Randle. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
USCandLakers
Franchise Player
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 19955
|
| Posted: Mon May 25, 2015 7:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| captain jack wrote: | | USCandLakers wrote: | | venturalakersfan wrote: | | USCandLakers wrote: | | wyominglaker wrote: | | 2019 wrote: | | lakurluv wrote: | Speculation or not, the Lakers will need to overhaul their front court simply because there will be too much redundancy.
I think the FO is going to try to lure Love to the Lakers and if that happens, which is a BIG IF, they will definitely need to make room for him.
Love is a 4/5 depending on the lineup and with a Center like Okafor or Towns coming in, he will more than likely be at the 4 spot, which IMO would mean Randle would have to slide over to the 3. I totally believe he can play the 3 in this league especially if he's slimmed down a bit, but it remains to be seen.
Let's just say for the sake of argument that the lineup will look like this with Love being the only FA added, but obviously we have room to add more than just one.
Clarkson + Kobe + Randle + Love + Okafor
From a future perspective that starting lineup looks great, but from a playoff and contention perspective, too young and not enough time to gel. |
I think they are 100% going after Love and I think there is a good chance we land him. Love knows what being in LA means to his brand, he knows we now have a potentially great C, Clarkson, Randle, and of course 2 more max spaces over the next couple years.
My question is where they see Randle fitting though. Clearly, they are VERY high on him. I can see Randle playing mins here and there at the 3 but to start at SF seems like a bad idea. I also assume they want to keep Black and Kelly so PF would be awfully crowded.
Unless they want to go and draft Russell, I'm curious how they'd make it work with so many guys at PF/C |
Completely disagree. In listening to the Lakers speak of of Julius Randle, they are high on him and he is considered a building block. If they didn't want Randle, he would still need to play this year to show off his potential and maximize his trade value. Signing Love would destroy that. |
If the Lakers do sign Love, Randle needs to be traded. It's the only sensible thing to do. Fortify another spot in our starting lineup. I'm wondering what kind of value he has. It's at a high right now, and like Harrison Barnes losing value when the Warriors got Iggy, it's only going to go lower when he's not getting the minutes.
Would the Kings or Magic give up their pick for Randle? |
For Mitch he has star value, picks aren't going to get it done. And even if you sign Love you don't trade Randle. I swear some have the creativity of the guy who discovered beige. |
Nice little insult. Not surprised.
Love and Randle play the same position. There is no getting around that. There is no versatility to be had in lineups with two true power forwards, neither particularly good defensively. Love is not a Center, Randle is not a SF.
You're doing yourself a disservice by holding onto Randle after signing Love. If you're doing it as some insurance thing, that's one thing, but I'd rather avoid the half measures and go all out to win if we're going to sign a guy like Love who is in his prime.
You either buy into Randle or you sign Love. Anything else really doesn't make any sense, especially when Randle's value can only go down from where it is right now by having him play behind Love. |
Positions today in the NBA are not your traditional positions of the past. Love and Randle are PFs, but they play the position totally different. Look at Golden State for example... If you're able to get Love, I would not trade Randle. |
The NBA has not changed to where you can get away with Love being tasked with protecting the rim or Randle guarding guards and small forwards.
_________________
A banana is killed every time a terrible thread or post is made.  Save the bananas. Stop creating terrible posts! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LAkers 4 Life
Franchise Player
Joined: 12 Apr 2001
Posts: 14629
|
| Posted: Mon May 25, 2015 9:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| USCandLakers wrote: | If the Lakers do sign Love, Randle needs to be traded. It's the only sensible thing to do. Fortify another spot in our starting lineup. I'm wondering what kind of value he has. It's at a high right now, and like Harrison Barnes losing value when the Warriors got Iggy, it's only going to go lower when he's not getting the minutes.
Would the Kings or Magic give up their pick for Randle? |
Interesting scenario. Who would be the ideal pickup with either of those picks? I'm assuming a wing player gets drafted with that pick. I agree that Randle would need to be traded if the Lakers sign Love. Okafor/Towns will be the center. Love is the PF. Randle is wasted coming off the bench and he's no SF. Hell, the Lakers should just throw in Nick Young with Randle if it can get them a top wing prospect. Along with a healthy Kobe and an improving Clarkson, that lineup could be just enough where it won't hurt giving up that first rounder to the Sixers. Because ultimately, the Lakers have to go boom or bust so that potentially losing that pick doesn't hurt as bad. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wildchild027
Star Player
Joined: 17 Jul 2002
Posts: 3846
Location: A-T-L-A-N-T-A
|
| Posted: Mon May 25, 2015 11:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
I have read all 6 pages, and no one but 24 has come up with the reason the Lakers would trade Sacre, and that is the extra 450K they will get in capspace.
Instead of comparing Sacre to a low second round pick, compare Sacre to whomever we sign with the vet min, while also getting a pick for him that we can sign after we use all our capspace.
So something like this:
Okafor/McGee/Black (54) or Okafor/Perkins/Black (54) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144464
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Mon May 25, 2015 11:53 am Post subject: Re: Hill can be a valuable backup and filler |
|
|
| laker50 wrote: | I don't know why sometimes the Lakers FO is so delusional.
Yes.
How can lakers as M Gasol is coming when they dissed his brother?
They did the same to Howard.
Couldn't even decide on a coach. Keep Scott.
The Lakers have to learn to treat its players with respect like the other teams.
For instance, GS, spurs.
No really good FA would want to come to the Lakers right now. Treat Hill with respect especially in a everyone tank season.
Keep the core and take the knocks. |
First day as a Laker fan?
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lakersken80
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Posts: 38789
|
| Posted: Mon May 25, 2015 12:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| venturalakersfan wrote: | | Lakers2015 wrote: | | misterrunon wrote: | | tom wrote: | | Hill I believe is gone,but why trade Sacre? He's on a cheap contract and our new rookie big will need a back-up. |
Because we have Tarik Black, likely Ed Davis, JR and Rkelly already. If we can get a mid 2nd rounder for him, then it's a win. |
Davis is a free agent and there's really no reason to bring him back because of Black so then we have no true backup center.
Rather keep Sacre if we can't get a pick which I doubt any team would give up for him. |
Black would be the backup center once our pick is ready to start. The pick will be at the start. |
Black's ceiling is also a lot higher despite being 1 inch shorter than Sacre. I would keep Black as a backup if we do end up drafting a center. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lewis
Star Player
Joined: 23 Oct 2013
Posts: 1165
|
| Posted: Mon May 25, 2015 12:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LAkers 4 Life wrote: | | USCandLakers wrote: | If the Lakers do sign Love, Randle needs to be traded. It's the only sensible thing to do. Fortify another spot in our starting lineup. I'm wondering what kind of value he has. It's at a high right now, and like Harrison Barnes losing value when the Warriors got Iggy, it's only going to go lower when he's not getting the minutes.
Would the Kings or Magic give up their pick for Randle? |
Interesting scenario. Who would be the ideal pickup with either of those picks? I'm assuming a wing player gets drafted with that pick. I agree that Randle would need to be traded if the Lakers sign Love. Okafor/Towns will be the center. Love is the PF. Randle is wasted coming off the bench and he's no SF. Hell, the Lakers should just throw in Nick Young with Randle if it can get them a top wing prospect. Along with a healthy Kobe and an improving Clarkson, that lineup could be just enough where it won't hurt giving up that first rounder to the Sixers. Because ultimately, the Lakers have to go boom or bust so that potentially losing that pick doesn't hurt as bad. |
I don't think is smart to trade Randle right now. He's value is really low because of the injury. If you want to trade him because you sign Love or draft Okafor and they don't fit, at least play him off the bench for 1 year as a 6th man. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
USCandLakers
Franchise Player
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 19955
|
| Posted: Mon May 25, 2015 12:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| lewis wrote: | | LAkers 4 Life wrote: | | USCandLakers wrote: | If the Lakers do sign Love, Randle needs to be traded. It's the only sensible thing to do. Fortify another spot in our starting lineup. I'm wondering what kind of value he has. It's at a high right now, and like Harrison Barnes losing value when the Warriors got Iggy, it's only going to go lower when he's not getting the minutes.
Would the Kings or Magic give up their pick for Randle? |
Interesting scenario. Who would be the ideal pickup with either of those picks? I'm assuming a wing player gets drafted with that pick. I agree that Randle would need to be traded if the Lakers sign Love. Okafor/Towns will be the center. Love is the PF. Randle is wasted coming off the bench and he's no SF. Hell, the Lakers should just throw in Nick Young with Randle if it can get them a top wing prospect. Along with a healthy Kobe and an improving Clarkson, that lineup could be just enough where it won't hurt giving up that first rounder to the Sixers. Because ultimately, the Lakers have to go boom or bust so that potentially losing that pick doesn't hurt as bad. |
I don't think is smart to trade Randle right now. He's value is really low because of the injury. If you want to trade him because you sign Love or draft Okafor and they don't fit, at least play him off the bench for 1 year as a 6th man. |
He still holds top 10 value. That number will only go lower(or higher, whatever way you look at it) once he starts coming off the bench for a star player.
_________________
A banana is killed every time a terrible thread or post is made. Save the bananas. Stop creating terrible posts! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
USCandLakers
Franchise Player
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 19955
|
| Posted: Mon May 25, 2015 12:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LAkers 4 Life wrote: | | USCandLakers wrote: | If the Lakers do sign Love, Randle needs to be traded. It's the only sensible thing to do. Fortify another spot in our starting lineup. I'm wondering what kind of value he has. It's at a high right now, and like Harrison Barnes losing value when the Warriors got Iggy, it's only going to go lower when he's not getting the minutes.
Would the Kings or Magic give up their pick for Randle? |
Interesting scenario. Who would be the ideal pickup with either of those picks? I'm assuming a wing player gets drafted with that pick. I agree that Randle would need to be traded if the Lakers sign Love. Okafor/Towns will be the center. Love is the PF. Randle is wasted coming off the bench and he's no SF. Hell, the Lakers should just throw in Nick Young with Randle if it can get them a top wing prospect. Along with a healthy Kobe and an improving Clarkson, that lineup could be just enough where it won't hurt giving up that first rounder to the Sixers. Because ultimately, the Lakers have to go boom or bust so that potentially losing that pick doesn't hurt as bad. |
It depends on the pick. I'd personally go with Russell over Towns and Okafor with the #2, so my pick would be WCS to fill the Center position. He's the ideal player next to Love.
_________________
A banana is killed every time a terrible thread or post is made. Save the bananas. Stop creating terrible posts! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
deal
Franchise Player
Joined: 17 Aug 2008
Posts: 14911
Location: Earth
|
| Posted: Mon May 25, 2015 1:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 24 wrote: | | K0BEE 2.0 wrote: | | This is the main problem 24 if he's traded he's just gonna be a filler for a hill or young trade. |
So in other words, forget what you said last post, and my response to it, and just stumble on to another idea? |
Sacre is a cheap bench guy or a filler in a trade; either way his salary / talent level is not something that is holding the Lakers back...
_________________
Lakers need to build a freaking team ! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
32
Retired Number
Joined: 04 Nov 2009
Posts: 73070
|
| Posted: Mon May 25, 2015 1:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LandsbergerRules wrote: | | MIMLaker wrote: | | What the heck is the LA Sun Times, anyway? This guy sounds like he's recycling rumors and old reports. |
|
_________________
Nobody in the NBA can touch the Laker brand, which, like the uniform color, is pure gold. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
adkindo
Retired Number
Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 40345
Location: Dirty South
|
| Posted: Mon May 25, 2015 9:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I think the 2015 #27 will be shopped for a 2016 first round pick if it cant be packaged in a trade for a player. I would prefer we keep all three, but I do not see it happening. Sacre will likely be on the roster....a big body and 6 fouls for a minimum contract....it does not matter who we draft or sign, those qualities will always have value at some point in the season. |
|
| 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
|
|
