Joined: 20 Jul 2006 Posts: 8518 Location: Left coast
Posted: Fri May 20, 2016 11:09 am Post subject:
LakerEric wrote:
Another Ireland. Bunch of hacks who have opinions based on nothing.
Yep. I remember Ireland, Ramona, and M. Thompson 2 seasons ago, arguing against the value of tanking. Ireland kept saying it didn't matter if you got the 1st or 30th pick because there was no guarantee the player wouldn't become Hasheem Thabeet. Now I don't hear them complaining about the Lakers having Randle, Russell, and this year's # 2. Ramona said it's important for the Lakers to win every game because the franchise has a winning culture and that's the only way to attract free agents. Thompson said a team should try to win every game, no matter what. Wiinning 5 or 6 more games during the last few years wouldn't have attracted any free agents, but it could have cost them getting the #2 pick two years. Fortunately, everything the Lakers did towards the end of the last 2 seasons gave the appearance of tanking.
Last edited by lakersboy on Fri May 20, 2016 11:30 am; edited 1 time in total
Joined: 20 Jul 2006 Posts: 8518 Location: Left coast
Posted: Fri May 20, 2016 11:24 am Post subject:
The Lakers are potentially set at positions 1, 2, and 4. If they are able to draft Ingram, they can add # 3 to that AND still have all the cap space they need to add veterans/free agents as needed over the next couple of years. If they trade the pick for a high salaried player, it would be equivilant to expanding free agent options to fill some of the 60 mil in cap space without being able to add top rated, soon to be a star, rookie talent. I don't want two 30 mil players only. I want a top rookie, AND three 20 mil players, or two 25 mil and a 10 mil player, when they are identified and availble in the next couple of years. The Lakers should learn from the Knicks' past and not take on large contracts just to spend money.
Translation: Cowherd doesn't know what he's talking about.
You could go the opposite direction of what he says and generally end up better off. _________________ Austin Reaves keeps his game tight, like Kobe Bryant on game night.
I definitely do not want to trade this pick. The Lakers need to patiently develop a championship level team. The best way to do that is with the combination of our young players AND picking up stars through free agency. Within 3-4 years, our young players will all be hitting their primes. Even if we just pick up one good to great free agent a year for the next 3-4 years, we can compete for multiple championships then. Imagine getting Whiteside (or someone of his caliber) this year and Westbrook next year. That, combined with Dlo, Simmons/Ingram, Clark, Randall, and Nance developing, would put us in a great position to sign other stars such as Cousins or Paul George in the following couple of years. By 2019 we could have an amazing team, with everyone from 22 to 30 years of age.
Joined: 20 Jul 2006 Posts: 8518 Location: Left coast
Posted: Fri May 20, 2016 4:24 pm Post subject:
markjay wrote:
I definitely do not want to trade this pick. The Lakers need to patiently develop a championship level team. The best way to do that is with the combination of our young players AND picking up stars through free agency. Within 3-4 years, our young players will all be hitting their primes. Even if we just pick up one good to great free agent a year for the next 3-4 years, we can compete for multiple championships then. Imagine getting Whiteside (or someone of his caliber) this year and Westbrook next year. That, combined with Dlo, Simmons/Ingram, Clark, Randall, and Nance developing, would put us in a great position to sign other stars such as Cousins or Paul George in the following couple of years. By 2019 we could have an amazing team, with everyone from 22 to 30 years of age.
Agreed. Be patient. It occured to me while listenting to impatient media guys on Mike and Mike this morning who don't like instant replay because it slows down "the game." They don't have a rooting interest in a specific team so they want the "human element." That's why they encourage instant gratification by doing trades of people fans have grown to like. They make up garbage, claiming that Lakers fans wont watch unless they have a superstar. That's nonsense.
I hated when they replaced 24 y/o Ariza with 29 y/o Artest. Ariza helped bring the team to a certain level and they gave up 5 years of youth in that deal, which had value. Each of the young guys who are being proposed as trade bait for much older players can grow into something special, just as we saw Draymond, Klay, Barnes, and others do from being SPL champs to NBA champs.
When the hard work pays off and what Luke preaches starts sinking into these guys, along with Ingram/Simmons and the right hand picked free agents, it's going to be a beautiful thing to watch.
Last edited by lakersboy on Fri May 20, 2016 4:36 pm; edited 2 times in total
I think they need to keep this pick and take a chance on one of these kids (I can call them that at my advanced age) and see what happens.
I think both could prove to be very good NBA players and I think the outright bust potential is very low on each. To me it is more a question of which one is going to be better long term?
I haven't seem enough of Simmons to make a great determination, but I really like what I have seen of Ingram, admittedly in limited viewing also. _________________ Love, Laker Lanny
Joined: 20 Jul 2006 Posts: 8518 Location: Left coast
Posted: Fri May 20, 2016 4:33 pm Post subject:
LakerLanny wrote:
markjay wrote:
I definitely do not want to trade this pick.
Me either.
I think they need to keep this pick and take a chance on one of these kids (I can call them that at my advanced age) and see what happens.
I think both could prove to be very good NBA players and I think the outright bust potential is very low on each. To me it is more a question of which one is going to be better long term?
I haven't seem enough of Simmons to make a great determination, but I really like what I have seen of Ingram, admittedly in limited viewing also.
I like what limited ability I've seen from Ingram more than the game and clips I've seen of Simmons. Ingram can create his own shot, can impact the game on both sides of the court, and potentially could be a better version of what Ariza brought, imo. If they get him, I'd be really happy.
I think Simmons' game will be dependent on a lot of other players being able to move with him and make shots. I've heard that when you watched him before a game, he didn't even attempt outside shots, as if he knew scouts were watching. It's a major indication that his shot is broken and he has no idea how to fix it. If they determine he's the best fit for this team, I'll go with it, as I did with last year's pick, but Simmons wouldn't be my #1 choice. Hopefully Philly takes him.
One year of Kevin Love cost Wiggins plus. Any of the guys you may trade the no. 2 pick for are going to cost Russell and/or Randle as well. And they'll eat away some cap room, too.
Besides, any team interested in the pick is going to draft Simmons/Ingram, so it's not as if the Lakers need to make the trade on draft night or make a pick based on another team's preference. The Lakers can see how they do in free agency first. Trading for a veteran prior to free agency in order to lure players seems like a dangerous proposition. They could strike out on the big names and be left with a mediocre team that's older and more expensive than the one they'd otherwise put on the floor.
The cavs and Love are doing pretty well for themselves.
If we trade the pick, we should trade most/all of our young guys as well. Don't want 1 trade. It would have to be two trades, for two vet all stars. 1 isn't enough.
In an imaginary world, where Indy would trade PG13 for a trade package surrounding our #2 pick. I wouldn't be too excited. PG13 on his own isn't enough.
We'd still be a team without a realistic shot to hit the 2nd round of the playoffs.
However, if we traded our #2 pick, DLO, Randle, Clarkson and/or Nance away in 2 trades and got PG13 and Jimmy Butler back. I'd be down for that. Feel free to swap Cousins for PG13 or Butler, and I'd still be cool with that.
Trading some of our young guys away for vet all star talent while still keeping inconsistent 1st and 2nd year players is less appetizing.
So long story short, either sacrifice all of our young talent or none of it. The in between isn't that appealing.
I agree, but don't think we have enough assets to pull both of them off. I think we can agree that the value of our assets go: #2>D'Lo>>Randle>>Clarkson>Nance. I don't see any way you can split them up to have enough to pull off both trades. If we could somehow pull it out to get 2 of Boogie, PG, and/or Butler we'd be insane not to do it. We'd be pulling in 2 top 20 players while still having max+ of cap room.
The Lakers are potentially set at positions 1, 2, and 4. If they are able to draft Ingram, they can add # 3 to that AND still have all the cap space they need to add veterans/free agents as needed over the next couple of years. If they trade the pick for a high salaried player, it would be equivilant to expanding free agent options to fill some of the 60 mil in cap space without being able to add top rated, soon to be a star, rookie talent. I don't want two 30 mil players only. I want a top rookie, AND three 20 mil players, or two 25 mil and a 10 mil player, when they are identified and availble in the next couple of years. The Lakers should learn from the Knicks' past and not take on large contracts just to spend money.
Translation: Cowherd doesn't know what he's talking about.
Kevin Durant, Al Horford, Hasaan Whiteside, Rondo, Anderson, Noah, Green, Jennings, Conley, DeRozan, Courtney Lee, and Pau Gasol to name a few are all Unrestricted Free Agents... DeRozan and Gasol have player options which would make them unrestricted and this is not counting the list of Restricted Free Agents the Lakers might be able to lure away from their respective teams because they won't be able to Max them out.
So why trade your #2 draft pic? What or who would you be trading them for?
There will be a lot of top tier talent this upcoming Free Agency, so the Lakers will have plenty to choose from to round out their team. My bet is that they only Max one Free Agent and then look to Max another one next year.
If Durant makes it to the finals and falls short we have a shot, or if he folds in the semi's, but if he wins it all, we can forget about it! Something Tells me Horford might be a target on OKC's radar simply because of Donovan.
I trust the FO with drafting, no so much with free agents. I think all of us were a little unsure about DLO and Randle early in the year. But at the end of the day I think DLO>Okafor and Randle>Smart and both are going to be good. They were terribly miscast in Byron's "system" and were at their best just playing. I for one thought Nance was an odd pick, but again, he is actually pretty good. Clarkson was a steel. They can pick talent.
Now the free agents??? Why would you waste any time going after Aldridge? Made no sense. Try and sign Carmelo?? Either move would have hamstrung the team and done nothing to help them win. In both cases you would have thought Kobe was 28 and not coming off of achilles, kneecap & shoulder issues. Were they trying to appease Kobe or were they really that stupid?
Only trade the pick for real talent that is still young. Don't waste it on an end of their prime super star that is going to crash and burn in a few years. Not enough talent on this roster just yet.
We have 60m cap space to add talent by signing FAs. Why we have to trade our pick for talent, especially when we lock up with talent like Simmons or Ingram. It would eat up the cap but would not improve our talent. I would trade the #2 only for a few top talent like Westbrook, George, Butler, Davisetc
My favorite part is how he talks about how bad the east is and how good the west is ( while very true ) he then follows that up saying we should trade our whole team away for the star of a team that didn't make the playoffs in the east _________________ "Bryant has been the second best player in the NBA for over a decade, but the number 1 player changes every other year. Somehow the number 1 player always seems to fall down the list but Kobe just never moves up. ". The Art of Hating Kobe Bryant
.... _________________ "I don’t give a [expletive] what you say. If I go out there and miss game winners, and people say, 'Kobe choked, or Kobe is seven for whatever in pressure situations.' Well, [expletive] you. Because I don’t play for your [expletive] approval."
We have 60m cap space to add talent by signing FAs. Why we have to trade our pick for talent, especially when we lock up with talent like Simmons or Ingram. It would eat up the cap but would not improve our talent. I would trade the #2 only for a few top talent like Westbrook, George, Butler, Davisetc
Exactly. This point can't be emphasized enough. Why would we trade our players away when we have 60 mil in cap space. That makes no sense. Unless a player that you REALLY want is offered for just the #2 and a small piece on top of that then you pass and continue course by stockpiling young talent and adding through FA _________________ "Bryant has been the second best player in the NBA for over a decade, but the number 1 player changes every other year. Somehow the number 1 player always seems to fall down the list but Kobe just never moves up. ". The Art of Hating Kobe Bryant
How many times does this moron have be proven wrong before some of you stop making threads about him. He doesn't know anything, he doesn't have any inside info on the Lakers, he just saying things to get attention.
The guy isn't even a sports journalist, he's just a media personality.
He has always been a total zero. He got way too much respect in here back when the Lakers were winning and he was pretending to be their #1 fan.
Saw my buddy, a lifelong Pacers fan, last night. He agreed that #2, Randle and Nick Young for PG13 was a good deal for both teams...so we're not crazy by suggesting that deal.
For now, I hope we take Ingram. However, if it looks like we can land Durant by making that trade, I think we have to do it. We'd then still have enough money to add a C and bring back Clarkson.
Didnt Cowherd go on a rant right before the lottery decrying the NBA saying the Lakers better get their pick, this is a stars market and they need to draft a star.
Now we have the pick and we have to trade the star he was angling for the Lakers to get. Total blow hard windbag contradicting himself from day to day, and I used to like listening to him!
Wish the Mods on here could do a radio show, they are far more invested, informed, and intelligent. _________________ Magic*Kobe*LBJ*AD*Cap
We have 60m cap space to add talent by signing FAs. Why we have to trade our pick for talent, especially when we lock up with talent like Simmons or Ingram. It would eat up the cap but would not improve our talent. I would trade the #2 only for a few top talent like Westbrook, George, Butler, Davisetc
Exactly. This point can't be emphasized enough. Why would we trade our players away when we have 60 mil in cap space. That makes no sense. Unless a player that you REALLY want is offered for just the #2 and a small piece on top of that then you pass and continue course by stockpiling young talent and adding through FA
We've had cap room the last 2 years and the best player we could sign was Lou freaking Williams. Now like 20 teams are going to have max cap space, and with just a bunch of young guys coming off a 17 win year, we'll be signing guys from the bottom of the barrel again.
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
