OFFICIAL 2017 FREE AGENCY (PG13/Hayward Do Not Make All-NBA Teams)
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 393, 394, 395 ... 699, 700, 701  Next

 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Bard207
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 08 Jan 2013
Posts: 4030

PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 9:34 pm    Post subject:

Inspector Gadget wrote:
Bard207 wrote:
Inspector Gadget wrote:
Laker's Fan wrote:
I think Pelinka shouldn't extend Jules for more than Clarkson money (which Jules shouldn't accept). Better for both sides to take things to Rfa. That's partially about '18 free agency (which also gives LA plausible deniability), but perhaps even more about needing another year to get a read on Randle's worth.


RFA makes things a little tricky so they might end up just trading him instead of giving him a extension.



If he is traded this summer, have modest expectations on the incoming assets.


there is no simple alternative on just trading Randle for another talented player, because he has a low salary cap, so we would need to use our cap space or assets to pull off a trade.



I don't think it matters if the trade is configured with Randle going out by himself or as part of a package.


Just be conservative in expectations on what his value will be in the trade.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Inspector Gadget
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 18 Apr 2016
Posts: 8644
Location: L.A.

PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 9:43 pm    Post subject:

Bard207 wrote:
Inspector Gadget wrote:
Bard207 wrote:
Inspector Gadget wrote:
Laker's Fan wrote:
I think Pelinka shouldn't extend Jules for more than Clarkson money (which Jules shouldn't accept). Better for both sides to take things to Rfa. That's partially about '18 free agency (which also gives LA plausible deniability), but perhaps even more about needing another year to get a read on Randle's worth.


RFA makes things a little tricky so they might end up just trading him instead of giving him a extension.



If he is traded this summer, have modest expectations on the incoming assets.


there is no simple alternative on just trading Randle for another talented player, because he has a low salary cap, so we would need to use our cap space or assets to pull off a trade.



I don't think it matters if the trade is configured with Randle going out by himself or as part of a package.


Just be conservative in expectations on what his value will be in the trade.


His value in a trade will be solely on a team taking him on and getting the benefit of signing him to a extension either by the October deadline or by the summer of 2018.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
The Logo
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 25 Jul 2013
Posts: 8468
Location: Salem, OR

PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 9:50 pm    Post subject:

Call me crazy but I think I'd trade the pick, should we keep it first, before I trade Russell/Ingram. If we part with one, I think I'm trading the pick, no matter if it's 1, 2, or 3 for George over Russell/Ingram.
_________________
Laker 2015-2016 Advanced Stats
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Bard207
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 08 Jan 2013
Posts: 4030

PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 10:07 pm    Post subject:

Inspector Gadget wrote:
Bard207 wrote:
Inspector Gadget wrote:
Bard207 wrote:
Inspector Gadget wrote:
Laker's Fan wrote:
I think Pelinka shouldn't extend Jules for more than Clarkson money (which Jules shouldn't accept). Better for both sides to take things to Rfa. That's partially about '18 free agency (which also gives LA plausible deniability), but perhaps even more about needing another year to get a read on Randle's worth.


RFA makes things a little tricky so they might end up just trading him instead of giving him a extension.



If he is traded this summer, have modest expectations on the incoming assets.


there is no simple alternative on just trading Randle for another talented player, because he has a low salary cap, so we would need to use our cap space or assets to pull off a trade.



I don't think it matters if the trade is configured with Randle going out by himself or as part of a package.


Just be conservative in expectations on what his value will be in the trade.


His value in a trade will be solely on a team taking him on and getting the benefit of signing him to a extension either by the October deadline or by the summer of 2018.


Based on expectations that his game will be relatively unchanged over the remainder of this season, what would you expect him to be making in the 2018 - 2019 season?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
nickuku
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 09 Jul 2010
Posts: 3775
Location: Orange County

PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 10:11 pm    Post subject:

No way in hell I trade a top 3 pick for PG.
_________________
"Russell’s ceiling remains unclear — he resembles a Rajon Rondo–Dion Waiters hybrid" - Matt Borcas 2016
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LakerSD
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 10 Nov 2016
Posts: 1031

PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 10:27 pm    Post subject:

nickuku wrote:
No way in hell I trade a top 3 pick for PG.


I'm not trading top 3, DLO, Ingram or Zu. If bird don't like it, he can you know what
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ToastedMuffins
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 14 Apr 2016
Posts: 222

PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 10:32 pm    Post subject:

Bard207 wrote:
Inspector Gadget wrote:
Bard207 wrote:
Inspector Gadget wrote:
Bard207 wrote:
Inspector Gadget wrote:
Laker's Fan wrote:
I think Pelinka shouldn't extend Jules for more than Clarkson money (which Jules shouldn't accept). Better for both sides to take things to Rfa. That's partially about '18 free agency (which also gives LA plausible deniability), but perhaps even more about needing another year to get a read on Randle's worth.


RFA makes things a little tricky so they might end up just trading him instead of giving him a extension.



If he is traded this summer, have modest expectations on the incoming assets.


there is no simple alternative on just trading Randle for another talented player, because he has a low salary cap, so we would need to use our cap space or assets to pull off a trade.



I don't think it matters if the trade is configured with Randle going out by himself or as part of a package.


Just be conservative in expectations on what his value will be in the trade.


His value in a trade will be solely on a team taking him on and getting the benefit of signing him to a extension either by the October deadline or by the summer of 2018.


Based on expectations that his game will be relatively unchanged over the remainder of this season, what would you expect him to be making in the 2018 - 2019 season?


A max contract for Randle would put him at $25,750,000 based on current salary cap projections. I'd be surprised if he was tendered a max offer sheet in restricted free agency though. If he doesn't sign an extension earlier he may very well be the best restricted free agent on the market. That could drive his price up. I'd hazard a guess of somewhere between 18 and 22 million starting salary.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 75465

PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 5:35 am    Post subject:

The Logo wrote:
Call me crazy but I think I'd trade the pick, should we keep it first, before I trade Russell/Ingram. If we part with one, I think I'm trading the pick, no matter if it's 1, 2, or 3 for George over Russell/Ingram.


#1-2 picks I wouldn't trade.

#3...I would do it, and def keep DLO/Ingram. If Bird doesn't like it then we walk away.
_________________
Let the youngsters play in 2017-18. Keep:

-#2/DLo/Ingram/Jules/Zub/Nance/#28.
-save enough for a max in 2018 (PG13).
-sign reasonable 1 year deals for veterans in 2017.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Chase.button07
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 19 Feb 2017
Posts: 2234

PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 5:51 am    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
The Logo wrote:
Call me crazy but I think I'd trade the pick, should we keep it first, before I trade Russell/Ingram. If we part with one, I think I'm trading the pick, no matter if it's 1, 2, or 3 for George over Russell/Ingram.


#1-2 picks I wouldn't trade.

#3...I would do it, and def keep DLO/Ingram. If Bird doesn't like it then we walk away.


PG by himself doesn't take us anywhere. I'll just keep everybody and dangle randle + Houston pick. That's it

Let him join in an year if he wants too
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 75465

PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 5:54 am    Post subject:

Chase.button07 wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
The Logo wrote:
Call me crazy but I think I'd trade the pick, should we keep it first, before I trade Russell/Ingram. If we part with one, I think I'm trading the pick, no matter if it's 1, 2, or 3 for George over Russell/Ingram.


#1-2 picks I wouldn't trade.

#3...I would do it, and def keep DLO/Ingram. If Bird doesn't like it then we walk away.


PG by himself doesn't take us anywhere. I'll just keep everybody and dangle randle + Houston pick. That's it

Let him join in an year if he wants too


I don't think that's the calculus the FO will use. If they can keep several of our top tier assets AND add PG13, they likely see next year as step 1 in building a contending team. I don't think they expect to be contenders in year 1.
_________________
Let the youngsters play in 2017-18. Keep:

-#2/DLo/Ingram/Jules/Zub/Nance/#28.
-save enough for a max in 2018 (PG13).
-sign reasonable 1 year deals for veterans in 2017.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Tony Anapolis
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 05 Jan 2015
Posts: 3162

PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 5:57 am    Post subject:

Chase.button07 wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
The Logo wrote:
Call me crazy but I think I'd trade the pick, should we keep it first, before I trade Russell/Ingram. If we part with one, I think I'm trading the pick, no matter if it's 1, 2, or 3 for George over Russell/Ingram.


#1-2 picks I wouldn't trade.

#3...I would do it, and def keep DLO/Ingram. If Bird doesn't like it then we walk away.


PG by himself doesn't take us anywhere. I'll just keep everybody and dangle randle + Houston pick. That's it

Let him join in an year if he wants too


The main assets I like for them to get rid of is Clarkson/Randle/ Hou pick.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LakerSD
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 10 Nov 2016
Posts: 1031

PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 6:00 am    Post subject:

It would be pretty foolish to give up the top 3 pick for George. Lakers aren't in position to do this and move the needle. Boston is in a position to do so but if they weren't willing to do it at deadline, they won't do it over the summer.

I'm not trading a top 3 pick if I'm Boston and for sure the lakers shouldn't even be thinking about it whatsoever.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 75465

PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 6:02 am    Post subject:

LakerSD wrote:
It would be pretty foolish to give up the top 3 pick for George. Lakers aren't in position to do this and move the needle. Boston is in a position to do so but if they weren't willing to do it at deadline, they won't do it over the summer.

I'm not trading a top 3 pick if I'm Boston and for sure the lakers shouldn't even be thinking about it whatsoever.


Of course it moves the needle substantially. I don't see this FO standing pat this summer and just letting a bunch of kids try to make the playoffs next year. Believe it or not, the Lakers would like to make the playoffs once this back part of the decade.
_________________
Let the youngsters play in 2017-18. Keep:

-#2/DLo/Ingram/Jules/Zub/Nance/#28.
-save enough for a max in 2018 (PG13).
-sign reasonable 1 year deals for veterans in 2017.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Tony Anapolis
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 05 Jan 2015
Posts: 3162

PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 6:04 am    Post subject:

I know I will be hated for this, but I would do Clarkson/Randle/ Deng for Melo. And yes NY has the cap space to absorb the extra salary. I think it is a good deal for both teams. We get Melo and open up roughly 7 million of cap space this offseason.

Ball
DLO
Ingram
Melo
Moz

Try to tell me that team is not better then what we have. After signing Ball we still have roughly 23 million give or take in cap space. Bring in Sefalosha, resign Young, still should have some space.

Ball/?
DLo/Young
Ingram/Sefalosha/Brewer
Melo/Nance
Moz/Zubac

Maybe bring back Black just to see if we can trade? If not then we have max money this offseason.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 75465

PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 6:06 am    Post subject:

Tony Anapolis wrote:
I know I will be hated for this, but I would do Clarkson/Randle/ Deng for Melo. And yes NY has the cap space to absorb the extra salary. I think it is a good deal for both teams. We get Melo and open up roughly 7 million of cap space this offseason.

Ball
DLO
Ingram
Melo
Moz

Try to tell me that team is not better then what we have. After signing Ball we still have roughly 23 million give or take in cap space. Bring in Sefalosha, resign Young, still should have some space.

Ball/?
DLo/Young
Ingram/Sefalosha/Brewer
Melo/Nance
Moz/Zubac

Maybe bring back Black just to see if we can trade? If not then we have max money this offseason.


I'm not going to say that it would be crazy for this FO to do something like that if they couldn't get a "big name "this summer.
_________________
Let the youngsters play in 2017-18. Keep:

-#2/DLo/Ingram/Jules/Zub/Nance/#28.
-save enough for a max in 2018 (PG13).
-sign reasonable 1 year deals for veterans in 2017.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Tony Anapolis
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 05 Jan 2015
Posts: 3162

PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 6:11 am    Post subject:

For the record I would do #3 for PG. If you say otherwise you are crazy imo.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LakerSD
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 10 Nov 2016
Posts: 1031

PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 6:13 am    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
LakerSD wrote:
It would be pretty foolish to give up the top 3 pick for George. Lakers aren't in position to do this and move the needle. Boston is in a position to do so but if they weren't willing to do it at deadline, they won't do it over the summer.

I'm not trading a top 3 pick if I'm Boston and for sure the lakers shouldn't even be thinking about it whatsoever.


Of course it moves the needle substantially. I don't see this FO standing pat this summer and just letting a bunch of kids try to make the playoffs next year. Believe it or not, the Lakers would like to make the playoffs once this back part of the decade.


Paul George doesn't move the needle enough. The pacers are proof.

Why do we want to give up a Lonzo Ball or fultz for a guy who MIGHT get the lakers an 8-11 seed in the west? Just not worth it, especially when we factor in that he has threatened to leave Indiana and join the lakers in FA anyway. Sorry but Paul George isn't in that tier where you give up a top 3 pick. Neither is jimmy butler. I hope Magic and pelinka aren't dumb enough to bail out Larry Bird or Forman/Paxson.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 75465

PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 6:13 am    Post subject:

Tony Anapolis wrote:
For the record I would do #3 for PG. If you say otherwise you are crazy imo.


No doubt. If you could theoretically have a core of:

PG13/DLO/Ingram...you are well on your way up.
_________________
Let the youngsters play in 2017-18. Keep:

-#2/DLo/Ingram/Jules/Zub/Nance/#28.
-save enough for a max in 2018 (PG13).
-sign reasonable 1 year deals for veterans in 2017.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Tony Anapolis
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 05 Jan 2015
Posts: 3162

PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 6:15 am    Post subject:

I am really starting to believe in Ingram as well. That little backdoor he pulled on LBJ was nice, not many players get away with that.

That is my only conflict with bringing in PG is what happens with Ingram? I think he is many years away from being a dependable 4. PG does not like 4, so what do you do?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Tony Anapolis
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 05 Jan 2015
Posts: 3162

PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 6:17 am    Post subject:

LakerSD wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
LakerSD wrote:
It would be pretty foolish to give up the top 3 pick for George. Lakers aren't in position to do this and move the needle. Boston is in a position to do so but if they weren't willing to do it at deadline, they won't do it over the summer.

I'm not trading a top 3 pick if I'm Boston and for sure the lakers shouldn't even be thinking about it whatsoever.


Of course it moves the needle substantially. I don't see this FO standing pat this summer and just letting a bunch of kids try to make the playoffs next year. Believe it or not, the Lakers would like to make the playoffs once this back part of the decade.


Paul George doesn't move the needle enough. The pacers are proof.

Why do we want to give up a Lonzo Ball or fultz for a guy who MIGHT get the lakers an 8-11 seed in the west? Just not worth it, especially when we factor in that he has threatened to leave Indiana and join the lakers in FA anyway. Sorry but Paul George isn't in that tier where you give up a top 3 pick. Neither is jimmy butler. I hope Magic and pelinka aren't dumb enough to bail out Larry Bird or Forman/Paxson.


What do you do if you get the 3rd pick doe? Fultz and Ball are gone?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 75465

PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 6:21 am    Post subject:

Tony Anapolis wrote:
I am really starting to believe in Ingram as well. That little backdoor he pulled on LBJ was nice, not many players get away with that.

That is my only conflict with bringing in PG is what happens with Ingram? I think he is many years away from being a dependable 4. PG does not like 4, so what do you do?


That is why I think he would be traded for PG13 if they did a deal. Just plug him right into that lineup.

However, I'm also OK with the team not doing the trade, but fans need to realize in doing so, the chances of PG13 coming to LA would diminish IMO.
_________________
Let the youngsters play in 2017-18. Keep:

-#2/DLo/Ingram/Jules/Zub/Nance/#28.
-save enough for a max in 2018 (PG13).
-sign reasonable 1 year deals for veterans in 2017.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LakerSD
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 10 Nov 2016
Posts: 1031

PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 6:28 am    Post subject:

Tony Anapolis wrote:
LakerSD wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
LakerSD wrote:
It would be pretty foolish to give up the top 3 pick for George. Lakers aren't in position to do this and move the needle. Boston is in a position to do so but if they weren't willing to do it at deadline, they won't do it over the summer.

I'm not trading a top 3 pick if I'm Boston and for sure the lakers shouldn't even be thinking about it whatsoever.


Of course it moves the needle substantially. I don't see this FO standing pat this summer and just letting a bunch of kids try to make the playoffs next year. Believe it or not, the Lakers would like to make the playoffs once this back part of the decade.


Paul George doesn't move the needle enough. The pacers are proof.

Why do we want to give up a Lonzo Ball or fultz for a guy who MIGHT get the lakers an 8-11 seed in the west? Just not worth it, especially when we factor in that he has threatened to leave Indiana and join the lakers in FA anyway. Sorry but Paul George isn't in that tier where you give up a top 3 pick. Neither is jimmy butler. I hope Magic and pelinka aren't dumb enough to bail out Larry Bird or Forman/Paxson.


What do you do if you get the 3rd pick doe? Fultz and Ball are gone?


I still keep the pick. Another year and maybe I think about it, especially Russell's or Ingram's draft class. We see how the 3rd pick in those years is doing. This year, though, I'm taking Jackson or Tatum.

I get your point, but I still wouldn't move it even for 3. Anyway, I think lakers will be landing a top 2 pick.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Tony Anapolis
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 05 Jan 2015
Posts: 3162

PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 6:30 am    Post subject:

LakerSD wrote:
Tony Anapolis wrote:
LakerSD wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
LakerSD wrote:
It would be pretty foolish to give up the top 3 pick for George. Lakers aren't in position to do this and move the needle. Boston is in a position to do so but if they weren't willing to do it at deadline, they won't do it over the summer.

I'm not trading a top 3 pick if I'm Boston and for sure the lakers shouldn't even be thinking about it whatsoever.


Of course it moves the needle substantially. I don't see this FO standing pat this summer and just letting a bunch of kids try to make the playoffs next year. Believe it or not, the Lakers would like to make the playoffs once this back part of the decade.


Paul George doesn't move the needle enough. The pacers are proof.

Why do we want to give up a Lonzo Ball or fultz for a guy who MIGHT get the lakers an 8-11 seed in the west? Just not worth it, especially when we factor in that he has threatened to leave Indiana and join the lakers in FA anyway. Sorry but Paul George isn't in that tier where you give up a top 3 pick. Neither is jimmy butler. I hope Magic and pelinka aren't dumb enough to bail out Larry Bird or Forman/Paxson.


What do you do if you get the 3rd pick doe? Fultz and Ball are gone?


I still keep the pick. Another year and maybe I think about it, especially Russell's or Ingram's draft class. We see how the 3rd pick in those years is doing. This year, though, I'm taking Jackson or Tatum.

I get your point, but I still wouldn't move it even for 3. Anyway, I think lakers will be landing a top 2 pick.


Good for us! Either way!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
richmorgan12
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 13 Feb 2017
Posts: 412

PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 6:30 am    Post subject:

Tony Anapolis wrote:
I know I will be hated for this, but I would do Clarkson/Randle/ Deng for Melo. And yes NY has the cap space to absorb the extra salary. I think it is a good deal for both teams. We get Melo and open up roughly 7 million of cap space this offseason.

Ball
DLO
Ingram
Melo
Moz

Try to tell me that team is not better then what we have. After signing Ball we still have roughly 23 million give or take in cap space. Bring in Sefalosha, resign Young, still should have some space.

Ball/?
DLo/Young
Ingram/Sefalosha/Brewer
Melo/Nance
Moz/Zubac

Maybe bring back Black just to see if we can trade? If not then we have max money this offseason.


The Lakers finally get rid of 36% shooting, no defense playing old Kobe and you want to get him back? And trade assets for him? Good grief.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Chase.button07
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 19 Feb 2017
Posts: 2234

PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 6:39 am    Post subject:

Tony Anapolis wrote:
For the record I would do #3 for PG. If you say otherwise you are crazy imo.


Tatum or Jackson is better on this team then 1yr of PG13.

Why should we trade to asset when he had said he wants to compete for championship and we will be in cap hell because of Deng/mozgov

I like PG but he doesn't move a needle for the Lakers
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 393, 394, 395 ... 699, 700, 701  Next
Page 394 of 701
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2010 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB