View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
PHILosophize Franchise Player
Joined: 05 Nov 2012 Posts: 10758
|
Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2017 10:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
activeverb wrote: | PHILosophize wrote: | Joe Pesci wrote: | I’m basically asking some of you all how deeply and firmly you're willing to hold on to personal ideology instead of embracing humility, a perpetual recognition that you could be wrong at any given moment. |
This is why I love you Joe |
Just think what Gandhi could have accomplished if he possessed this eloquence |
WW2 would not have even been a thing _________________ one dog goes that way the other dog goes the other way |
|
Back to top |
|
|
activeverb Retired Number
Joined: 17 Jun 2006 Posts: 37470
|
Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2017 11:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
PHILosophize wrote: | activeverb wrote: | PHILosophize wrote: | Joe Pesci wrote: | I’m basically asking some of you all how deeply and firmly you're willing to hold on to personal ideology instead of embracing humility, a perpetual recognition that you could be wrong at any given moment. |
This is why I love you Joe |
Just think what Gandhi could have accomplished if he possessed this eloquence |
WW2 would not have even been a thing |
I can't believe no one ever thought to tell Nazis they should embrace a perpetual recognition that you could be wrong at any given moment. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
activeverb Retired Number
Joined: 17 Jun 2006 Posts: 37470
|
Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2017 11:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Fortysixn2 wrote: | I don't see trading JC to any of these teams. He's a good bench player on a very good contract. I don't want picks in return...he is better than 95% of the players picked outside of the lottery.
If someone wants JC then take him with Deng for an expiring, or hey..Pelicans...take JC/Randle for Cousins if things don't work out (which they aren't). Brooklyn, Portland, Charlotte can't give us a big expiring contract.
Pelinka isn't going to give either of these players away for free...they are both decent and have good contracts (JC moreso than JR, who will demand a raise). |
It's hard for me to get a handle on what JC's perceived value is around the league. He's on a good contract and having a very good season.
But if I were a GM, I'd realize that he only needs to go through one cold spell, which is not uncommon throughout his career, to bring him back to his career averages. Also, JC seems like a guy who wants a bigger role and bigger paycheck down the line, and he may be is a less-is-more guy. He's a mixed back -- good scorer, mediocre shooter, poor defender. He looks good on a crappy team, but can he help a good team?
So, yeah, I think a lot of teams would welcome him as a scorer off the bench. But that doesn't mean they'll open the vaults to get him. Then the issue for the Laker might be less about getting maximum value for JC then moving his contract to create cap space. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Kjj10697X Starting Rotation
Joined: 02 Dec 2012 Posts: 375
|
Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2017 2:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
activeverb wrote: | Fortysixn2 wrote: | I don't see trading JC to any of these teams. He's a good bench player on a very good contract. I don't want picks in return...he is better than 95% of the players picked outside of the lottery.
If someone wants JC then take him with Deng for an expiring, or hey..Pelicans...take JC/Randle for Cousins if things don't work out (which they aren't). Brooklyn, Portland, Charlotte can't give us a big expiring contract.
Pelinka isn't going to give either of these players away for free...they are both decent and have good contracts (JC moreso than JR, who will demand a raise). |
It's hard for me to get a handle on what JC's perceived value is around the league. He's on a good contract and having a very good season.
But if I were a GM, I'd realize that he only needs to go through one cold spell, which is not uncommon throughout his career, to bring him back to his career averages. Also, JC seems like a guy who wants a bigger role and bigger paycheck down the line, and he may be is a less-is-more guy. He's a mixed back -- good scorer, mediocre shooter, poor defender. He looks good on a crappy team, but can he help a good team?
So, yeah, I think a lot of teams would welcome him as a scorer off the bench. But that doesn't mean they'll open the vaults to get him. Then the issue for the Laker might be less about getting maximum value for JC then moving his contract to create cap space. |
Bigger role and bigger paycheck down the line? There is a player on the bubble this summer based on the 2 Max Plan that wants the bigger role and paycheck this summer. And it’s not JC.
I’ve said it before, it’s bad business to trade JC during the season. Maybe during the summer after we get commitment from 2 max players and have not lost JR to another team (if we wait too long to resign him). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Iversondalivest1 Starting Rotation
Joined: 06 Dec 2013 Posts: 293
|
Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2017 2:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Trading JC to Philly makes Philly scary. Imagine a future lineup of JC, Fultz, Simmons, Embiid...
Trading JC to Utah will give the Jazz a steady offensive threat they lost with Hayward. JC, D. Mitch, Favors, and a healthy Gobert. Assuming we're trying to get their draft picks, theyd have a bench cast starring Rubio and Hood. Also pretty scary.
If i'm JC, i would be liking those destinations. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
PHILosophize Franchise Player
Joined: 05 Nov 2012 Posts: 10758
|
Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2017 2:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Kjj10697X wrote: | activeverb wrote: | Fortysixn2 wrote: | I don't see trading JC to any of these teams. He's a good bench player on a very good contract. I don't want picks in return...he is better than 95% of the players picked outside of the lottery.
If someone wants JC then take him with Deng for an expiring, or hey..Pelicans...take JC/Randle for Cousins if things don't work out (which they aren't). Brooklyn, Portland, Charlotte can't give us a big expiring contract.
Pelinka isn't going to give either of these players away for free...they are both decent and have good contracts (JC moreso than JR, who will demand a raise). |
It's hard for me to get a handle on what JC's perceived value is around the league. He's on a good contract and having a very good season.
But if I were a GM, I'd realize that he only needs to go through one cold spell, which is not uncommon throughout his career, to bring him back to his career averages. Also, JC seems like a guy who wants a bigger role and bigger paycheck down the line, and he may be is a less-is-more guy. He's a mixed back -- good scorer, mediocre shooter, poor defender. He looks good on a crappy team, but can he help a good team?
So, yeah, I think a lot of teams would welcome him as a scorer off the bench. But that doesn't mean they'll open the vaults to get him. Then the issue for the Laker might be less about getting maximum value for JC then moving his contract to create cap space. |
Bigger role and bigger paycheck down the line? There is a player on the bubble this summer based on the 2 Max Plan that wants the bigger role and paycheck this summer. And it’s not JC.
I’ve said it before, it’s bad business to trade JC during the season. Maybe during the summer after we get commitment from 2 max players and have not lost JR to another team (if we wait too long to resign him). |
But we lose a ton of leverage if teams know we have those commitments + need to get rid of him to free up the necessary space.
Also, when reading this post or any of my other posts, please remember:
"I’m basically asking some of you all how deeply and firmly you're willing to hold on to personal ideology instead of embracing humility, a perpetual recognition that you could be wrong at any given moment." _________________ one dog goes that way the other dog goes the other way |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Inspector Gadget Retired Number
Joined: 18 Apr 2016 Posts: 46625
|
Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2017 2:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Iversondalivest1 wrote: | Trading JC to Philly makes Philly scary. Imagine a future lineup of JC, Fultz, Simmons, Embiid...
Trading JC to Utah will give the Jazz a steady offensive threat they lost with Hayward. JC, D. Mitch, Favors, and a healthy Gobert. Assuming we're trying to get their draft picks, theyd have a bench cast starring Rubio and Hood. Also pretty scary.
If i'm JC, i would be liking those destinations. |
IMHO, Lakers are gonna want a player who can help the team, if we decide to move Clarkson... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Iversondalivest1 Starting Rotation
Joined: 06 Dec 2013 Posts: 293
|
Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2017 2:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
PHILosophize wrote: | Kjj10697X wrote: | activeverb wrote: | Fortysixn2 wrote: | I don't see trading JC to any of these teams. He's a good bench player on a very good contract. I don't want picks in return...he is better than 95% of the players picked outside of the lottery.
If someone wants JC then take him with Deng for an expiring, or hey..Pelicans...take JC/Randle for Cousins if things don't work out (which they aren't). Brooklyn, Portland, Charlotte can't give us a big expiring contract.
Pelinka isn't going to give either of these players away for free...they are both decent and have good contracts (JC moreso than JR, who will demand a raise). |
It's hard for me to get a handle on what JC's perceived value is around the league. He's on a good contract and having a very good season.
But if I were a GM, I'd realize that he only needs to go through one cold spell, which is not uncommon throughout his career, to bring him back to his career averages. Also, JC seems like a guy who wants a bigger role and bigger paycheck down the line, and he may be is a less-is-more guy. He's a mixed back -- good scorer, mediocre shooter, poor defender. He looks good on a crappy team, but can he help a good team?
So, yeah, I think a lot of teams would welcome him as a scorer off the bench. But that doesn't mean they'll open the vaults to get him. Then the issue for the Laker might be less about getting maximum value for JC then moving his contract to create cap space. |
Bigger role and bigger paycheck down the line? There is a player on the bubble this summer based on the 2 Max Plan that wants the bigger role and paycheck this summer. And it’s not JC.
I’ve said it before, it’s bad business to trade JC during the season. Maybe during the summer after we get commitment from 2 max players and have not lost JR to another team (if we wait too long to resign him). |
But we lose a ton of leverage if teams know we have those commitments + need to get rid of him to free up the necessary space.
Also, when reading this post or any of my other posts, please remember:
"I’m basically asking some of you all how deeply and firmly you're willing to hold on to personal ideology instead of embracing humility, a perpetual recognition that you could be wrong at any given moment." |
Its a big gamble to bank on these "2 max free agents". What are the percentages of the Lakers getting these "2 max free agents". Not being pessimistic, but I think its pretty low. I dont think LA is an attractive location as we think it is through our eyes. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
PHILosophize Franchise Player
Joined: 05 Nov 2012 Posts: 10758
|
Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2017 2:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Iversondalivest1 wrote: | PHILosophize wrote: | Kjj10697X wrote: | activeverb wrote: | Fortysixn2 wrote: | I don't see trading JC to any of these teams. He's a good bench player on a very good contract. I don't want picks in return...he is better than 95% of the players picked outside of the lottery.
If someone wants JC then take him with Deng for an expiring, or hey..Pelicans...take JC/Randle for Cousins if things don't work out (which they aren't). Brooklyn, Portland, Charlotte can't give us a big expiring contract.
Pelinka isn't going to give either of these players away for free...they are both decent and have good contracts (JC moreso than JR, who will demand a raise). |
It's hard for me to get a handle on what JC's perceived value is around the league. He's on a good contract and having a very good season.
But if I were a GM, I'd realize that he only needs to go through one cold spell, which is not uncommon throughout his career, to bring him back to his career averages. Also, JC seems like a guy who wants a bigger role and bigger paycheck down the line, and he may be is a less-is-more guy. He's a mixed back -- good scorer, mediocre shooter, poor defender. He looks good on a crappy team, but can he help a good team?
So, yeah, I think a lot of teams would welcome him as a scorer off the bench. But that doesn't mean they'll open the vaults to get him. Then the issue for the Laker might be less about getting maximum value for JC then moving his contract to create cap space. |
Bigger role and bigger paycheck down the line? There is a player on the bubble this summer based on the 2 Max Plan that wants the bigger role and paycheck this summer. And it’s not JC.
I’ve said it before, it’s bad business to trade JC during the season. Maybe during the summer after we get commitment from 2 max players and have not lost JR to another team (if we wait too long to resign him). |
But we lose a ton of leverage if teams know we have those commitments + need to get rid of him to free up the necessary space.
Also, when reading this post or any of my other posts, please remember:
"I’m basically asking some of you all how deeply and firmly you're willing to hold on to personal ideology instead of embracing humility, a perpetual recognition that you could be wrong at any given moment." |
Its a big gamble to bank on these "2 max free agents". What are the percentages of the Lakers getting these "2 max free agents". Not being pessimistic, but I think its pretty low. I dont think LA is an attractive location as we think it is through our eyes. |
I think the odds are pretty low as well. But I'd like to keep Julius - and I'm in favor of stretching Deng rather than giving up assets to get rid of him - on top of signing PG (whom I think we have a good chance of signing). In that scenario, it makes sense to trade JC and might even be necessary (I'm not sure of the exact cap numbers). _________________ one dog goes that way the other dog goes the other way |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Kjj10697X Starting Rotation
Joined: 02 Dec 2012 Posts: 375
|
Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2017 2:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Iversondalivest1 wrote: | PHILosophize wrote: | Kjj10697X wrote: | activeverb wrote: | Fortysixn2 wrote: | I don't see trading JC to any of these teams. He's a good bench player on a very good contract. I don't want picks in return...he is better than 95% of the players picked outside of the lottery.
If someone wants JC then take him with Deng for an expiring, or hey..Pelicans...take JC/Randle for Cousins if things don't work out (which they aren't). Brooklyn, Portland, Charlotte can't give us a big expiring contract.
Pelinka isn't going to give either of these players away for free...they are both decent and have good contracts (JC moreso than JR, who will demand a raise). |
It's hard for me to get a handle on what JC's perceived value is around the league. He's on a good contract and having a very good season.
But if I were a GM, I'd realize that he only needs to go through one cold spell, which is not uncommon throughout his career, to bring him back to his career averages. Also, JC seems like a guy who wants a bigger role and bigger paycheck down the line, and he may be is a less-is-more guy. He's a mixed back -- good scorer, mediocre shooter, poor defender. He looks good on a crappy team, but can he help a good team?
So, yeah, I think a lot of teams would welcome him as a scorer off the bench. But that doesn't mean they'll open the vaults to get him. Then the issue for the Laker might be less about getting maximum value for JC then moving his contract to create cap space. |
Bigger role and bigger paycheck down the line? There is a player on the bubble this summer based on the 2 Max Plan that wants the bigger role and paycheck this summer. And it’s not JC.
I’ve said it before, it’s bad business to trade JC during the season. Maybe during the summer after we get commitment from 2 max players and have not lost JR to another team (if we wait too long to resign him). |
But we lose a ton of leverage if teams know we have those commitments + need to get rid of him to free up the necessary space.
Also, when reading this post or any of my other posts, please remember:
"I’m basically asking some of you all how deeply and firmly you're willing to hold on to personal ideology instead of embracing humility, a perpetual recognition that you could be wrong at any given moment." |
Its a big gamble to bank on these "2 max free agents". What are the percentages of the Lakers getting these "2 max free agents". Not being pessimistic, but I think its pretty low. I dont think LA is an attractive location as we think it is through our eyes. |
Personal ideology? Perpetual recognition? What the?
I’m stating the obvious and being pragmatic. It’s a business. It’s like saying I am going to fire one of my most productive workers because I think I can hire 2 high profile employees and I need to pay them hansomely. It doesn’t make sense. Just stay with status quo until the high profile workers have been signed sealed and delivered. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
PHILosophize Franchise Player
Joined: 05 Nov 2012 Posts: 10758
|
Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2017 2:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Kjj10697X wrote: | Iversondalivest1 wrote: | PHILosophize wrote: | Kjj10697X wrote: | activeverb wrote: | Fortysixn2 wrote: | I don't see trading JC to any of these teams. He's a good bench player on a very good contract. I don't want picks in return...he is better than 95% of the players picked outside of the lottery.
If someone wants JC then take him with Deng for an expiring, or hey..Pelicans...take JC/Randle for Cousins if things don't work out (which they aren't). Brooklyn, Portland, Charlotte can't give us a big expiring contract.
Pelinka isn't going to give either of these players away for free...they are both decent and have good contracts (JC moreso than JR, who will demand a raise). |
It's hard for me to get a handle on what JC's perceived value is around the league. He's on a good contract and having a very good season.
But if I were a GM, I'd realize that he only needs to go through one cold spell, which is not uncommon throughout his career, to bring him back to his career averages. Also, JC seems like a guy who wants a bigger role and bigger paycheck down the line, and he may be is a less-is-more guy. He's a mixed back -- good scorer, mediocre shooter, poor defender. He looks good on a crappy team, but can he help a good team?
So, yeah, I think a lot of teams would welcome him as a scorer off the bench. But that doesn't mean they'll open the vaults to get him. Then the issue for the Laker might be less about getting maximum value for JC then moving his contract to create cap space. |
Bigger role and bigger paycheck down the line? There is a player on the bubble this summer based on the 2 Max Plan that wants the bigger role and paycheck this summer. And it’s not JC.
I’ve said it before, it’s bad business to trade JC during the season. Maybe during the summer after we get commitment from 2 max players and have not lost JR to another team (if we wait too long to resign him). |
But we lose a ton of leverage if teams know we have those commitments + need to get rid of him to free up the necessary space.
Also, when reading this post or any of my other posts, please remember:
"I’m basically asking some of you all how deeply and firmly you're willing to hold on to personal ideology instead of embracing humility, a perpetual recognition that you could be wrong at any given moment." |
Its a big gamble to bank on these "2 max free agents". What are the percentages of the Lakers getting these "2 max free agents". Not being pessimistic, but I think its pretty low. I dont think LA is an attractive location as we think it is through our eyes. |
Personal ideology? Perpetual recognition? What the?
I’m stating the obvious and being pragmatic. It’s a business. It’s like saying I am going to fire one of my most productive workers because I think I can hire 2 high profile employees and I need to pay them hansomely. It doesn’t make sense. Just stay with status quo until the high profile workers have been signed sealed and delivered. |
Read up the page a bit _________________ one dog goes that way the other dog goes the other way |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Kjj10697X Starting Rotation
Joined: 02 Dec 2012 Posts: 375
|
Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2017 2:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
PHILosophize wrote: | Kjj10697X wrote: | Iversondalivest1 wrote: | PHILosophize wrote: | Kjj10697X wrote: | activeverb wrote: | Fortysixn2 wrote: | I don't see trading JC to any of these teams. He's a good bench player on a very good contract. I don't want picks in return...he is better than 95% of the players picked outside of the lottery.
If someone wants JC then take him with Deng for an expiring, or hey..Pelicans...take JC/Randle for Cousins if things don't work out (which they aren't). Brooklyn, Portland, Charlotte can't give us a big expiring contract.
Pelinka isn't going to give either of these players away for free...they are both decent and have good contracts (JC moreso than JR, who will demand a raise). |
It's hard for me to get a handle on what JC's perceived value is around the league. He's on a good contract and having a very good season.
But if I were a GM, I'd realize that he only needs to go through one cold spell, which is not uncommon throughout his career, to bring him back to his career averages. Also, JC seems like a guy who wants a bigger role and bigger paycheck down the line, and he may be is a less-is-more guy. He's a mixed back -- good scorer, mediocre shooter, poor defender. He looks good on a crappy team, but can he help a good team?
So, yeah, I think a lot of teams would welcome him as a scorer off the bench. But that doesn't mean they'll open the vaults to get him. Then the issue for the Laker might be less about getting maximum value for JC then moving his contract to create cap space. |
Bigger role and bigger paycheck down the line? There is a player on the bubble this summer based on the 2 Max Plan that wants the bigger role and paycheck this summer. And it’s not JC.
I’ve said it before, it’s bad business to trade JC during the season. Maybe during the summer after we get commitment from 2 max players and have not lost JR to another team (if we wait too long to resign him). |
But we lose a ton of leverage if teams know we have those commitments + need to get rid of him to free up the necessary space.
Also, when reading this post or any of my other posts, please remember:
"I’m basically asking some of you all how deeply and firmly you're willing to hold on to personal ideology instead of embracing humility, a perpetual recognition that you could be wrong at any given moment." |
Its a big gamble to bank on these "2 max free agents". What are the percentages of the Lakers getting these "2 max free agents". Not being pessimistic, but I think its pretty low. I dont think LA is an attractive location as we think it is through our eyes. |
Personal ideology? Perpetual recognition? What the?
I’m stating the obvious and being pragmatic. It’s a business. It’s like saying I am going to fire one of my most productive workers because I think I can hire 2 high profile employees and I need to pay them hansomely. It doesn’t make sense. Just stay with status quo until the high profile workers have been signed sealed and delivered. |
Read up the page a bit |
Oh. That was from Joe. Sorry. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
pjiddy Retired Number
Joined: 12 Dec 2005 Posts: 29053
|
Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2017 3:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Baron Von Humongous wrote: | ChickenStu wrote: | Kuzzkontrol wrote: | Jordan-esque wrote: | From the QFTOS thread, Sixers fans want to trade for JC too. |
Clarkson for t Booker(expired)/saric |
Since they just gave up a 2nd round pick (along with Okafor and Stauskas) for Booker, that means that they actually had interest in him. They won't be trading him. However, they would move Amir Johnson and his $11MM expiring for sure, since he's now more expendable with Booker around.
I think this is a deal involving JC that makes sense, if both sides would agree to it. JC and Johnson's salaries match almost exactly, so there's no issue there, and it fits our plan of only taking back expiring salary. I heard Keith Pompey, a 76ers beat reporter, on LA radio today, and he echoed a lot of what the Sixer fans in that QFTOS thread were saying. Namely, that the team needs to acquire a guard with ball-handling skills, because Redick can't do that, and "that's what they were counting on from Fultz", which indeed suggests that this is probably a lost year for him with the shoulder injury. JC genuinely could be a great fit for them. Bayless is garbage, and McConnell can't break down a defense (though he hasn't been awful at all in his limited playing time).
The issue is, would they give up their '18 1st rounder? If not, would the Lakers accept multiple 2nd rounders in return instead, or maybe a player like TLC and one 2nd? If I'm the Lakers, I'm really holding out for that 1st rounder. I think the value is too good to pass up if they cave on that. And perhaps we could give the Sixers back our 2020 2nd round pick (but not the Denver '18 2nd or the CHI '19 2nd) in the deal to balance it out.
JC/2020 Lakers' 2nd for Johnson/2018 PHI 1st. |
Would you settle for a 2019 1st from Philly? |
Absolutely, but Philly wouldn't. Especially when that pick can you get a Clarkson-caliber player at a fraction of the cost. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
pjiddy Retired Number
Joined: 12 Dec 2005 Posts: 29053
|
Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2017 3:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I see Clarkson going for, at best, multiple 2nd rounders.
Some teams that fit that bill:
Knicks (Bulls pick + Their own)
76ers (Brooklyn, Clippers, their own pick, Rockets pick)
Nets (indy pick, least favorable of ORL/LAL pick)
One team i can maybe see giving up a 1st rounder for Clarkson is Minnesota. They have OKC's 1st, which is top 14 protected. Right now it would be the 13th pick. But if OKC can pick it up, it could be a pick in the late teens. Minny really needs some bench scoring from a guy who doesn't give it all back on defense and Thibs is just shortsighted enough to make a win-now move. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Laker's Fan Franchise Player
Joined: 27 Jun 2002 Posts: 12849
|
Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2017 4:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
pjiddy wrote: | I see Clarkson going for, at best, multiple 2nd rounders.
Some teams that fit that bill:
Knicks (Bulls pick + Their own)
76ers (Brooklyn, Clippers, their own pick, Rockets pick)
Nets (indy pick, least favorable of ORL/LAL pick)
One team i can maybe see giving up a 1st rounder for Clarkson is Minnesota. They have OKC's 1st, which is top 14 protected. Right now it would be the 13th pick. But if OKC can pick it up, it could be a pick in the late teens. Minny really needs some bench scoring from a guy who doesn't give it all back on defense and Thibs is just shortsighted enough to make a win-now move. |
I think the market will be better than that. There isn't a lot of cap room this summer so teams will reshuffle more via trade. An expiring doesn't mean cap room for a team already over the cap. A lot of rfas looking to get paid this July not as good as JC. _________________ Austin Reaves keeps his game tight, like Kobe Bryant on game night. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
MJST Retired Number
Joined: 06 Jul 2014 Posts: 26309
|
Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2017 4:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Stop trading away Clarkson for pieces that don't give the Lakers any kind of value because you just want cap space back cause you're convinced that all we need is cap space to get two maxes.
Here's the reality.
Better players cost more money than Clarkson currently is making, and players on a rookie contract that are putting up anything close aren't going to be traded by their teams because those teams are smart.
Here is how you approach trades and free agency.
You have no guarantees that any of the max guys are coming.
So the only trades you make are ones that strengthen the team. If you can't get equal value for JC you don't trade him. Simple as that.
Same goes for Randle or anyone else ya'll want to trade.
Because the reality is, for their production they're a bargain. The only player making less money than JC right now with the same or higher production is Lou Williams, and that's a contract WE handed out.
So if you're trading Clarkson for players that you know won't be as productive, just because it shaves off a few million, then that's a non productive way of looking at things.
Here's something not a lot of people are considering.
The market for JC is what it is now, and as he keeps playing well, it will only get better, Deals aren't going to "Vanish" just because you don't do them at the trade deadline for players being as productive as him, if anything the value increases, especially in an impending free agency where money is what it's going to be, and space is going to be what it will be.
The fact of the matter is, you'll have deals on the table for JC both during the season and ESPECIALLY after it.
The reality is this. IF two max free agents tell the Lakers in free agency they're on board if the Lakers can make the space, then the Lakers will make the space. Simple as that.
But the other reality is, if the Lakers strike out in free agency (which is expected as the wins/losses won't be enough to entice max free agents) then they'd still have JC and all the other young talent on the roster to go forward continuing to build.
What needs to STOP is this constant flux of "this free agency we'll be players.. this free agency we'll be players." Because it creates a non-committal attitude to the talent you've already groomed, instead of going with them from the get go and treating free agency as a "great if it happens, but we'll be fine building even if it doesn't." instead of acting like all your hopes and dreams are on a guy that isn't even free to leave their team for another season. Nor should you be making deals as if it's all but assured that these 'max guys' are coming.
Much as people hate the word Boston. The Celtics had the right idea, they waited till Hayward signed on before doing anything to free up the space necessary to sign him.
The Lakers should take the same approach for this free agency.
People all locked up into "NO ONE IS GONNA WANNA HELP THE LAKERS! LETS DO IT NOW!" is a fabrication at this point.
If teams didn't want to "help" the Lakers, then we never would have gotten Nash and Dwight.
This mentality that the league is against the Lakers so much that other GMs would actively turn down trades to free up cap if the Lakers had two max free agents on board is the stuff that only exists in Hollywood fantasies.
In reality, if the Lakers got two max agent commits, and needed to clear space, they'd clear space and sign the players, simple as that. If anything the phones would start ringing louder trying to get other talent from us while we're on the market to make space. because that's how it actually works. More GMs will call the moment they hear we have to make space as opposed to letting the phone ring cause they 'haaaaaaate' us. _________________ How NBA 2K18 failed the All-Time Lakers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxMBYm3wwxk |
|
Back to top |
|
|
PHILosophize Franchise Player
Joined: 05 Nov 2012 Posts: 10758
|
Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2017 6:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
MJ! my man! _________________ one dog goes that way the other dog goes the other way |
|
Back to top |
|
|
yinoma2001 Retired Number
Joined: 19 Jun 2010 Posts: 119487
|
Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2017 6:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Great Wall of text. _________________ From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals |
|
Back to top |
|
|
BennyLava Star Player
Joined: 14 Dec 2012 Posts: 3582
|
Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2017 9:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
yinoma2001 wrote: | Great Wall of text. |
The Return of PnP. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
LonzoLegend2 Starting Rotation
Joined: 05 Aug 2017 Posts: 680
|
Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2017 9:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ok with Jordan and Julius being shipped with Deng attached for late picks and expirings. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001 Posts: 144461 Location: The Gold Coast
|
Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2017 9:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
LonzoLegend2 wrote: | Ok with Jordan and Julius being shipped with Deng attached for late picks and expirings. |
Tanker? Making us a worse team that is less attractive to FAs? Interesting strategy. _________________ RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
fontana3d Star Player
Joined: 22 Mar 2013 Posts: 3794
|
Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2017 9:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
venturalakersfan wrote: | LonzoLegend2 wrote: | Ok with Jordan and Julius being shipped with Deng attached for late picks and expirings. |
Tanker? Making us a worse team that is less attractive to FAs? Interesting strategy. |
We have to clear cap anyways. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Halflife Franchise Player
Joined: 15 Aug 2015 Posts: 16702
|
Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2017 9:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
fontana3d wrote: | venturalakersfan wrote: | LonzoLegend2 wrote: | Ok with Jordan and Julius being shipped with Deng attached for late picks and expirings. |
Tanker? Making us a worse team that is less attractive to FAs? Interesting strategy. |
We have to clear cap anyways. |
Lopez and pope are expiring |
|
Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001 Posts: 144461 Location: The Gold Coast
|
Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2017 10:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
fontana3d wrote: | venturalakersfan wrote: | LonzoLegend2 wrote: | Ok with Jordan and Julius being shipped with Deng attached for late picks and expirings. |
Tanker? Making us a worse team that is less attractive to FAs? Interesting strategy. |
We have to clear cap anyways. |
No we don’t _________________ RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
activeverb Retired Number
Joined: 17 Jun 2006 Posts: 37470
|
Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2017 10:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
venturalakersfan wrote: | fontana3d wrote: | venturalakersfan wrote: | LonzoLegend2 wrote: | Ok with Jordan and Julius being shipped with Deng attached for late picks and expirings. |
Tanker? Making us a worse team that is less attractive to FAs? Interesting strategy. |
We have to clear cap anyways. |
No we don’t |
We all know the situation: The Lakers wet dream is to get two free gents among Lebron, George and Cousins.
Doing that requires us to create more cap space.
Getting only one of them, probably George, doesn't, but that wouldn't be ideal from Magic's viewpoint. In fact, I'd say ending up with George and our current roster would be the minimum of what Magic was shooting for.
Anyway, what makes us more appealing from free agent's POV is a bit of a Rubik's cube. In a vaccumm, sure, getting rid of Clarkson and Randle is a negative. But this isn't a vacuum (and you know that, ever-contentious ventura, a man who loves nothing more arguing for the sake of arguing over technicalities while pretending not to understand the real discussion that's going on). Lebron, if we could snag him, would be happy to lose Clarkson or Randall if that meant getting George). |
|
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
|
|