ESPN: We are next Miami-like superteam
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

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


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 19127

PostPosted: Fri Aug 04, 2017 10:56 pm    Post subject:

Chase.button07 wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
I don't think Magic wants to sever a possible longer run (fueled later by Lonzo/Ingram) just to placate LBJ's 2-3 year run. That would be foolish and i don't think the Lakers will do that. If LBJ is dictating that Lonzo and/or Ingram are moved for short term players, i don't see them cowing to that.


This is why I was opposed to the 2 superstar plan.

Now, 1 star caliber player who is in it for the long term plus multiple contributing pieces? Sign me up for that.


Cavs didn't win with 3 all-star and u think we are winning anything with 1 all-star and change?

Not even talking teams with 2 all stars yet


No but we're not winning with 2 all-stars and change either.

We've discussed this. I play for the long game.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 25278

PostPosted: Sat Aug 05, 2017 9:48 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
Chase.button07 wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
I don't think Magic wants to sever a possible longer run (fueled later by Lonzo/Ingram) just to placate LBJ's 2-3 year run. That would be foolish and i don't think the Lakers will do that. If LBJ is dictating that Lonzo and/or Ingram are moved for short term players, i don't see them cowing to that.


This is why I was opposed to the 2 superstar plan.

Now, 1 star caliber player who is in it for the long term plus multiple contributing pieces? Sign me up for that.


Cavs didn't win with 3 all-star and u think we are winning anything with 1 all-star and change?

Not even talking teams with 2 all stars yet


No but we're not winning with 2 all-stars and change either.

We've discussed this. I play for the long game.


The Cavs could have played for the long game with Kyrie and Wiggins. I think they made a good decision trading that for three final appearances in a ring
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 83737

PostPosted: Sat Aug 05, 2017 9:50 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
Chase.button07 wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
I don't think Magic wants to sever a possible longer run (fueled later by Lonzo/Ingram) just to placate LBJ's 2-3 year run. That would be foolish and i don't think the Lakers will do that. If LBJ is dictating that Lonzo and/or Ingram are moved for short term players, i don't see them cowing to that.


This is why I was opposed to the 2 superstar plan.

Now, 1 star caliber player who is in it for the long term plus multiple contributing pieces? Sign me up for that.


Cavs didn't win with 3 all-star and u think we are winning anything with 1 all-star and change?

Not even talking teams with 2 all stars yet


No but we're not winning with 2 all-stars and change either.

We've discussed this. I play for the long game.


What is the long game here? It's utterly dependent on Lonzo and Ingram becoming stars, which may or may not happen.
_________________
2018:
Ball
PG13
BI
Kuz
Boogie

Keep Jules
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 19127

PostPosted: Sat Aug 05, 2017 10:34 am    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Chase.button07 wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
I don't think Magic wants to sever a possible longer run (fueled later by Lonzo/Ingram) just to placate LBJ's 2-3 year run. That would be foolish and i don't think the Lakers will do that. If LBJ is dictating that Lonzo and/or Ingram are moved for short term players, i don't see them cowing to that.


This is why I was opposed to the 2 superstar plan.

Now, 1 star caliber player who is in it for the long term plus multiple contributing pieces? Sign me up for that.


Cavs didn't win with 3 all-star and u think we are winning anything with 1 all-star and change?

Not even talking teams with 2 all stars yet


No but we're not winning with 2 all-stars and change either.

We've discussed this. I play for the long game.


The Cavs could have played for the long game with Kyrie and Wiggins. I think they made a good decision trading that for three final appearances in a ring


Well a lot of laker fans would disagree calling 1 ring in 3 appearances an utter failure. I don't, but many do.

That's a different situation anyhow. Lebron was younger. There was a chance at a longer window.

At his age, we are talking 1-2 seasons max. If Lebron was 30, there'd be a potential for a longer window.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LonzoLegend2
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 05 Aug 2017
Posts: 132

PostPosted: Sat Aug 05, 2017 11:14 am    Post subject:

LeBron's built like The Mailman and barring freak injury can play at a high level into his 40's. Still having George and Ingram would be redundant since neither of them can shoot deep so the spacing would be poor even with Lebron at the 4.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 25278

PostPosted: Mon Aug 07, 2017 6:38 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
activeverb wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Chase.button07 wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
I don't think Magic wants to sever a possible longer run (fueled later by Lonzo/Ingram) just to placate LBJ's 2-3 year run. That would be foolish and i don't think the Lakers will do that. If LBJ is dictating that Lonzo and/or Ingram are moved for short term players, i don't see them cowing to that.


This is why I was opposed to the 2 superstar plan.

Now, 1 star caliber player who is in it for the long term plus multiple contributing pieces? Sign me up for that.


Cavs didn't win with 3 all-star and u think we are winning anything with 1 all-star and change?

Not even talking teams with 2 all stars yet


No but we're not winning with 2 all-stars and change either.

We've discussed this. I play for the long game.


The Cavs could have played for the long game with Kyrie and Wiggins. I think they made a good decision trading that for three final appearances in a ring


Well a lot of laker fans would disagree calling 1 ring in 3 appearances an utter failure. I don't, but many do.
.


If you don't believe that, and I don't believe that, I don't see any reason for you and I to discuss it
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Bishop*
Sixth Man
Sixth Man


Joined: 01 Nov 2016
Posts: 35

PostPosted: Mon Aug 07, 2017 7:07 am    Post subject:

nash wrote:
LakerSanity wrote:
If Randle shows he can be at least a 18/10/5 guy with solid D, solid TS% and decent 3pt shooting (>30% from 3), you keep him over signing a 33-34 year old Lebron, especially when you can likely keep Randle while also signing both George/Cousins or George/Westbrook, or even re-signing Lopez/KCP over Lebron.

All-star Randle/Westbrook/George > George/Lebron
All-star Randle/Cousins/George > George/Lebron
All-star Randle/KCP/Lopez/George > George/Lebron

It would be one thing if Lebron was young, but he isn't. So, if Randle shows all-star talent, even if he's not as good as Lebron this second, you take longevity plus a another lower tier max guy (or KCP/Lopez) over a year or two of good Lebron. That Randle will be the better player in 3 years. We should prioritize something sustainable, not quick temporary fixes (especially without any real guarantee that the temporary fix will actually be a fix at all). Now, that said, the big IF in there is whether Randle can prove he can be that guy. It's fair to be skeptical about whether he can be.

As far as the article goes, its just another stupid and lazy ESPN article that any average NBA fan who graduated high school could write in their sleep. ESPN really is pathetic.


I agree.

The all-star Randle you described is Draymond Green, this is a player you want to keep, but you still need someone of LeBron caliber to compete. Green is the 4th offensive option at best, they have Curry and now Durant with Klay behind them taking most of the offensive load.

I love Ball and believe he is our most promising young player since Kobe, but I don't think he is one taking over games, he is the supreme catalyst.

I'm as high on Ingram as I can, but I look at him as Worthy, Pipen, Grant Hill in his prime, I don't think he is going to take Durant/Kobe/Jordan's role.

Draymond Green without superstars would not be so effective IMO.

Let's see what happens, I'd like Julius over LeBron if he can become a 24-10-5 player with great advanced stats and solid defense alongside the raw scoring/rebounding numbers.

Magic seems to be one thinking big, I enjoy his mindset.


I tot so too initially. But the game he played against Sixers changed my mind on that. That was a game you could tell he wanted to take over and he did and did it effortlessly.

Granted it was just one game and just the summer league but that tells you a lot about a player. Taking over games is not just about skill set, it is more about mind set and for a player at his age to do that was very impressive.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
audioaxes
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 9182

PostPosted: Mon Aug 07, 2017 8:19 am    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Chase.button07 wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
I don't think Magic wants to sever a possible longer run (fueled later by Lonzo/Ingram) just to placate LBJ's 2-3 year run. That would be foolish and i don't think the Lakers will do that. If LBJ is dictating that Lonzo and/or Ingram are moved for short term players, i don't see them cowing to that.


This is why I was opposed to the 2 superstar plan.

Now, 1 star caliber player who is in it for the long term plus multiple contributing pieces? Sign me up for that.


Cavs didn't win with 3 all-star and u think we are winning anything with 1 all-star and change?

Not even talking teams with 2 all stars yet


No but we're not winning with 2 all-stars and change either.

We've discussed this. I play for the long game.


The Cavs could have played for the long game with Kyrie and Wiggins. I think they made a good decision trading that for three final appearances in a ring


Clearly a much different scenario that what the Lakers are currently in. The Cavs already had Irving who already had a couple of seasons in the NBA to develop up and a legit top player in his own right, Lebron was younger and would still be in his prime if it took them a few seasons to gear up, and the Warriors at that point were not the unbeatable juggernaut that they are now.
_________________
tank.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 25278

PostPosted: Mon Aug 07, 2017 9:10 am    Post subject:

audioaxes wrote:
activeverb wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Chase.button07 wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
I don't think Magic wants to sever a possible longer run (fueled later by Lonzo/Ingram) just to placate LBJ's 2-3 year run. That would be foolish and i don't think the Lakers will do that. If LBJ is dictating that Lonzo and/or Ingram are moved for short term players, i don't see them cowing to that.


This is why I was opposed to the 2 superstar plan.

Now, 1 star caliber player who is in it for the long term plus multiple contributing pieces? Sign me up for that.


Cavs didn't win with 3 all-star and u think we are winning anything with 1 all-star and change?

Not even talking teams with 2 all stars yet


No but we're not winning with 2 all-stars and change either.

We've discussed this. I play for the long game.


The Cavs could have played for the long game with Kyrie and Wiggins. I think they made a good decision trading that for three final appearances in a ring


Clearly a much different scenario that what the Lakers are currently in. The Cavs already had Irving who already had a couple of seasons in the NBA to develop up and a legit top player in his own right, Lebron was younger and would still be in his prime if it took them a few seasons to gear up, and the Warriors at that point were not the unbeatable juggernaut that they are now.



That's true. Of course, everything right now is a fingers crossed-- will Ball and Ingram pan out; will Randle improve; will we be able to lure superstars. (Everything is a if this happens, and that happens, and then that happens and then this other that happens, we'll be in great shape.)

At this point, I'd say no approach has a particularly high chance of resulting in a ring over the next 5-7 years. So I'm content to sit back and see how it all plays out.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Dr. Funkbot
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 24 Sep 2001
Posts: 7124
Location: Eagle Rock

PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 7:36 am    Post subject:

LonzoLegend2 wrote:
LeBron's built like The Mailman and barring freak injury can play at a high level into his 40's. Still having George and Ingram would be redundant since neither of them can shoot deep so the spacing would be poor even with Lebron at the 4.


Ingram will be a deadly outside shooter in the near future. He shot 40% from 3 in college. Obviously he was over matched as a skinny 19 year old in the NBA, but he will get that shooting touch back. Kid is a super hard worker, I do not doubt that he will get his shot working again.
_________________
R.I.P. Doc Buss

"I think we often overlook the best way for a team like these Lakers to obtain star level players is to turn their current players into stars, rather than looking for outside help."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 83737

PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 7:40 am    Post subject:

Dr. Funkbot wrote:
LonzoLegend2 wrote:
LeBron's built like The Mailman and barring freak injury can play at a high level into his 40's. Still having George and Ingram would be redundant since neither of them can shoot deep so the spacing would be poor even with Lebron at the 4.


Ingram will be a deadly outside shooter in the near future. He shot 40% from 3 in college. Obviously he was over matched as a skinny 19 year old in the NBA, but he will get that shooting touch back. Kid is a super hard worker, I do not doubt that he will get his shot working again.


Not sure about "deadly."

He has already had several years of poor FT shooting, and it is possible his 41% from 3 in college was a fluke year. He seems to like playing in the high post on a triple threat sort of way ala Kobe/DRoz. He needs to get that FT and 3% up though to be a 20ppg scorer.
_________________
2018:
Ball
PG13
BI
Kuz
Boogie

Keep Jules
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
22
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 05 Apr 2013
Posts: 15300

PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 8:10 am    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
Dr. Funkbot wrote:
LonzoLegend2 wrote:
LeBron's built like The Mailman and barring freak injury can play at a high level into his 40's. Still having George and Ingram would be redundant since neither of them can shoot deep so the spacing would be poor even with Lebron at the 4.


Ingram will be a deadly outside shooter in the near future. He shot 40% from 3 in college. Obviously he was over matched as a skinny 19 year old in the NBA, but he will get that shooting touch back. Kid is a super hard worker, I do not doubt that he will get his shot working again.


Not sure about "deadly."

He has already had several years of poor FT shooting, and it is possible his 41% from 3 in college was a fluke year. He seems to like playing in the high post on a triple threat sort of way ala Kobe/DRoz. He needs to get that FT and 3% up though to be a 20ppg scorer.


Agreed yinomes.

I think his outside shooting will the difference in whether he can be an elite player or not. I think whether or not he can shoot it efficiently is still very much up for debate at this point in time
_________________
Blake Griffin's ankles beware....Randle is coming
The youngins are YOUNG, let them learn.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 83737

PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 8:18 am    Post subject:

22 wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
Dr. Funkbot wrote:
LonzoLegend2 wrote:
LeBron's built like The Mailman and barring freak injury can play at a high level into his 40's. Still having George and Ingram would be redundant since neither of them can shoot deep so the spacing would be poor even with Lebron at the 4.


Ingram will be a deadly outside shooter in the near future. He shot 40% from 3 in college. Obviously he was over matched as a skinny 19 year old in the NBA, but he will get that shooting touch back. Kid is a super hard worker, I do not doubt that he will get his shot working again.


Not sure about "deadly."

He has already had several years of poor FT shooting, and it is possible his 41% from 3 in college was a fluke year. He seems to like playing in the high post on a triple threat sort of way ala Kobe/DRoz. He needs to get that FT and 3% up though to be a 20ppg scorer.


Agreed yinomes.

I think his outside shooting will the difference in whether he can be an elite player or not. I think whether or not he can shoot it efficiently is still very much up for debate at this point in time


I was surprised how much more comfortable he looks at the triple threat high post than shooting 3s. He really doesn't look like he has that 3 point shooting touch. I was optimistic about him being a high 30s 3 point shooter but so far not looking great. Of course he's so young that we don't know yet, but i'm thinking he's more of an iso attack player ala Kobe/DRoz.
_________________
2018:
Ball
PG13
BI
Kuz
Boogie

Keep Jules
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
audioaxes
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 9182

PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 8:49 am    Post subject:

LonzoLegend2 wrote:
LeBron's built like The Mailman and barring freak injury can play at a high level into his 40's. Still having George and Ingram would be redundant since neither of them can shoot deep so the spacing would be poor even with Lebron at the 4.

Lebron has no where near Karl Malone's mid-range/post skills. His ability to be a crash into the paint is what opens up everything else for him. Once he becomes less athletic to be a threat for that his game will suffer.
_________________
tank.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 25278

PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 10:26 am    Post subject:

audioaxes wrote:
Once he becomes less athletic to be a threat for that his game will suffer.



Seems like people have been saying that for 10 years. It will be interesting to see if/when it actually ever happens.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 83737

PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 10:41 am    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
audioaxes wrote:
Once he becomes less athletic to be a threat for that his game will suffer.



Seems like people have been saying that for 10 years. It will be interesting to see if/when it actually ever happens.


Ha. Seriously. I've been saying that for about 5 years now.

I think his game will age well. He sees the court so well that once his athleticism starts waning, he will still be a deadly passer.
_________________
2018:
Ball
PG13
BI
Kuz
Boogie

Keep Jules
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 121500
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 10:53 am    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
audioaxes wrote:
Once he becomes less athletic to be a threat for that his game will suffer.



Seems like people have been saying that for 10 years. It will be interesting to see if/when it actually ever happens.


I don't think it will, I wouldn't be surprised if he walks away before that happens. I wouldn't be surprised if his next contract is his last.
_________________
#lakerclownshow
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
audioaxes
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 9182

PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:29 am    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
audioaxes wrote:
Once he becomes less athletic to be a threat for that his game will suffer.



Seems like people have been saying that for 10 years. It will be interesting to see if/when it actually ever happens.

I never been the one to say he would lose his athleticism prematurely, Im saying that once he slows down enough he hasnt showed he can convert into a player who can still be effective. Lebron is such a freak of nature that even during his slow down he will still have enough athleticism to be plenty good and at 32 ofcourse he has plenty left to be a MVP level player.
_________________
tank.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 121500
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:46 am    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Chase.button07 wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
I don't think Magic wants to sever a possible longer run (fueled later by Lonzo/Ingram) just to placate LBJ's 2-3 year run. That would be foolish and i don't think the Lakers will do that. If LBJ is dictating that Lonzo and/or Ingram are moved for short term players, i don't see them cowing to that.


This is why I was opposed to the 2 superstar plan.

Now, 1 star caliber player who is in it for the long term plus multiple contributing pieces? Sign me up for that.


Cavs didn't win with 3 all-star and u think we are winning anything with 1 all-star and change?

Not even talking teams with 2 all stars yet


No but we're not winning with 2 all-stars and change either.

We've discussed this. I play for the long game.


What is the long game here? It's utterly dependent on Lonzo and Ingram becoming stars, which may or may not happen.


No, the long game would be to add talent relatively close in age to Ball and Ingram. The quick fix would be to add some 28-30+ yo players to two 19 yo players. Not a good mix but names make fans happy.
_________________
#lakerclownshow
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 121500
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:47 am    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
Dr. Funkbot wrote:
LonzoLegend2 wrote:
LeBron's built like The Mailman and barring freak injury can play at a high level into his 40's. Still having George and Ingram would be redundant since neither of them can shoot deep so the spacing would be poor even with Lebron at the 4.


Ingram will be a deadly outside shooter in the near future. He shot 40% from 3 in college. Obviously he was over matched as a skinny 19 year old in the NBA, but he will get that shooting touch back. Kid is a super hard worker, I do not doubt that he will get his shot working again.


Not sure about "deadly."

He has already had several years of poor FT shooting, and it is possible his 41% from 3 in college was a fluke year. He seems to like playing in the high post on a triple threat sort of way ala Kobe/DRoz. He needs to get that FT and 3% up though to be a 20ppg scorer.


Yes, it is a big climb from bad to deadly
_________________
#lakerclownshow
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 83737

PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:48 am    Post subject:

venturalakersfan wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Chase.button07 wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
I don't think Magic wants to sever a possible longer run (fueled later by Lonzo/Ingram) just to placate LBJ's 2-3 year run. That would be foolish and i don't think the Lakers will do that. If LBJ is dictating that Lonzo and/or Ingram are moved for short term players, i don't see them cowing to that.


This is why I was opposed to the 2 superstar plan.

Now, 1 star caliber player who is in it for the long term plus multiple contributing pieces? Sign me up for that.


Cavs didn't win with 3 all-star and u think we are winning anything with 1 all-star and change?

Not even talking teams with 2 all stars yet


No but we're not winning with 2 all-stars and change either.

We've discussed this. I play for the long game.


What is the long game here? It's utterly dependent on Lonzo and Ingram becoming stars, which may or may not happen.


No, the long game would be to add talent relatively close in age to Ball and Ingram. The quick fix would be to add some 28-30+ yo players to two 19 yo players. Not a good mix but names make fans happy.


What FAs are out there who are in the 19-22 year old range?

Quick answer: none.
_________________
2018:
Ball
PG13
BI
Kuz
Boogie

Keep Jules
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 121500
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:53 am    Post subject:

Why limit yourself to FAs? We have seen some guys in their mid-20's traded this offseason. We actually have several already on the roster.
_________________
#lakerclownshow
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 83737

PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:55 am    Post subject:

venturalakersfan wrote:
Why limit yourself to FAs? We have seen some guys in their mid-20's traded this offseason. We actually have several already on the roster.


So what assets are you trading for said players who are closer in age to our 19 year old kids?
_________________
2018:
Ball
PG13
BI
Kuz
Boogie

Keep Jules
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 121500
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 12:08 pm    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
venturalakersfan wrote:
Why limit yourself to FAs? We have seen some guys in their mid-20's traded this offseason. We actually have several already on the roster.


So what assets are you trading for said players who are closer in age to our 19 year old kids?


That depends on who we are trading for. We have picks and guys like JC, Nance, Kuzma, Zubac and others to offer. Randle too if he wasn't looking at free agency. If things look good this season and Ball and KCP are a great pairing, create cap space to re-sign KCP. That would be a good step toward a long run rebuild.
_________________
#lakerclownshow
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 25278

PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 12:08 pm    Post subject:

venturalakersfan wrote:
Why limit yourself to FAs? We have seen some guys in their mid-20's traded this offseason. We actually have several already on the roster.


I guess you're talking about Butler and George, who are both 27.

Trouble is guys like that (1) are usually coming to the end of their contract, which is why they're available, so you risk giving up assets for guys who will bolt; and (2) Not sure whether other GMs are excited about our assets other than Ingram and Ball.
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, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Page 6 of 7
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