Jules or JC?
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Assuming the 2 max plan comes to fruition and you could only keep one, which do you keep?
JC (combo guard off the bench)
26%
 26%  [ 33 ]
Jules (combo PF/C)
73%
 73%  [ 91 ]
Total Votes : 124

Author Message
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:32 am    Post subject: Jules or JC?

Assuming the two max plan happens (2 of lbj/pg/boogie), and the cap math works where you can keep one, who would you prefer?
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
AirKobe8
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 30 Jan 2005
Posts: 8586

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:33 am    Post subject:

If it's for the same cash, I'll take Randle. The NBA is filled with scoring ball hogs at the guard position. Not so many good post defenders out there.
_________________
www.lakersbrasil.com
Fan site made by me and others, dedicated to posting Laker news and articles in portuguese.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
epak
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 34147

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:36 am    Post subject:

If we got one of those 3 guys, one would assume we wouldnt need a scoring guard as much. And a defensive big would be more important.

So in the premise of this question, sure I'll say Julius.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
greenfrog
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 02 Jan 2011
Posts: 36081
Location: 502 Bad Gateway

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:37 am    Post subject:

The team is sooo thin on guards...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LakerSD
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 10 Nov 2016
Posts: 23731

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:38 am    Post subject:

For this season (at least until trade deadline), we need both to win games.

Post trade deadline and next season, I would say Randle. His skillset and size is harder to replace. Nothing against JC, just that there are quite a few JC types around the league.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:42 am    Post subject:

greenfrog wrote:
The team is sooo thin on guards...


I think in 2019 we would remedy this with a full MLE and a 1st rounder we could trade. But yeah we are thin. It’s a genuine conundrum.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
AirKobe8
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 30 Jan 2005
Posts: 8586

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:57 am    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
greenfrog wrote:
The team is sooo thin on guards...


I think in 2019 we would remedy this with a full MLE and a 1st rounder we could trade. But yeah we are thin. It’s a genuine conundrum.


Right now we're thin, but since OP's premise is we get the 2 max players, there'll be a parade of journeyman scoring combo guards to sign for the min. That's just the way the NBA is built and they'll face a slower market next year.

Randle's game is harder to replace though, for teams pay this kind of player more than the vet min.
_________________
www.lakersbrasil.com
Fan site made by me and others, dedicated to posting Laker news and articles in portuguese.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Chronicle
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 21 Jul 2012
Posts: 31930
Location: Manhattan

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:58 am    Post subject:

Ill take both and george and cousins thanks
_________________
Kobe
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
bandiger
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 02 Apr 2014
Posts: 12555

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 12:00 pm    Post subject:

JC is easily replaceable with Kuz on the team. They can stagger the star players if they achieve the two max dream
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
trablos
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 10 May 2017
Posts: 3020

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 12:18 pm    Post subject:

If Randle can shot a consistent mid range J and occasional 3 ball, I wouldn't mind extending him and signing PG.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
AFireInside619
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 11 Dec 2015
Posts: 11447

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 12:20 pm    Post subject:

I'd like to keep both. But Randle has more upside and you see how good TT played along side Lebron pre Kardashian. Randle would get paid $100m next to Lebron. Although Clarkson would be a sniper from three if Lebron collapses the defense and kicks out to him.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 12:31 pm    Post subject:

Clarkson is a generic off-the-bench gunner. Lots of guys like him in the league. Randle has more upside.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
fontana3d
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 22 Mar 2013
Posts: 3794

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 12:37 pm    Post subject:

Neither because we can use the rest of the money after George and Cousins, and dump Deng, Randle, and Clarkson to fill needs that fit better.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 12:42 pm    Post subject:

Depends entirely on how the two max options are, but if it's only limited to 2 of the three, then there is no choice.

You drop Randle as he is more redundant at his position. Doesn't matter if you think he is better than JC since he will not see the court and we will have no one at the guard spots then.

If we signed two of Klay/Avery/Kemba, same thing. You move JC, not Randle.

Not about who you like, it's about skill redundancy and position availability.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Kjj10697X
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 02 Dec 2012
Posts: 375

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 12:46 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
Depends entirely on how the two max options are, but if it's only limited to 2 of the three, then there is no choice.

You drop Randle as he is more redundant at his position. Doesn't matter if you think he is better than JC since he will not see the court and we will have no one at the guard spots then.

If we signed two of Klay/Avery/Kemba, same thing. You move JC, not Randle.

Not about who you like, it's about skill redundancy and position availability.


I agree completely with the above. Once JR was relegated to the bench, then the choice became simple.

Backup PF (Nance - quality player)
Backup C (Zubac and Bryant - quality and potential)

vs.

Backup SG (Hart - unproven and can't shoot)
Backup PG (Ennis or Caruso - non-NBA players)

It seems easier just to keep JC and let JR go.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
fontana3d
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 22 Mar 2013
Posts: 3794

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 12:49 pm    Post subject:

Kjj10697X wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Depends entirely on how the two max options are, but if it's only limited to 2 of the three, then there is no choice.

You drop Randle as he is more redundant at his position. Doesn't matter if you think he is better than JC since he will not see the court and we will have no one at the guard spots then.

If we signed two of Klay/Avery/Kemba, same thing. You move JC, not Randle.

Not about who you like, it's about skill redundancy and position availability.


I agree completely with the above. Once JR was relegated to the bench, then the choice became simple.

Backup PF (Nance - quality player)
Backup C (Zubac and Bryant - quality and potential)

vs.

Backup SG (Hart - unproven and can't shoot)
Backup PG (Ennis or Caruso - non-NBA players)

It seems easier just to keep JC and let JR go.


That's why I'll still trade JC to use his salary to sign two players that fills both holes. Also I agree with losing Randle and Deng too.


Last edited by fontana3d on Mon Nov 20, 2017 12:50 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
CandyCanes
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 24 Dec 2007
Posts: 35750
Location: Santa Clarita, CA (Hell) ->>>>>Ithaca, NY -≥≥≥≥≥Berkeley, CA

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 12:50 pm    Post subject:

I’m guessing Clarkson’s current contract is more reasonable than whatever Randle is going to demand, so I’d keep Clarkson.
_________________
Damian Lillard shatters Dwight Coward's championship dreams:

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Kjj10697X
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 02 Dec 2012
Posts: 375

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 12:54 pm    Post subject:

fontana3d wrote:
Kjj10697X wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Depends entirely on how the two max options are, but if it's only limited to 2 of the three, then there is no choice.

You drop Randle as he is more redundant at his position. Doesn't matter if you think he is better than JC since he will not see the court and we will have no one at the guard spots then.

If we signed two of Klay/Avery/Kemba, same thing. You move JC, not Randle.

Not about who you like, it's about skill redundancy and position availability.


I agree completely with the above. Once JR was relegated to the bench, then the choice became simple.

Backup PF (Nance - quality player)
Backup C (Zubac and Bryant - quality and potential)

vs.

Backup SG (Hart - unproven and can't shoot)
Backup PG (Ennis or Caruso - non-NBA players)

It seems easier just to keep JC and let JR go.


That's why I'll still trade JC to use his salary to sign two players that fills both holes. Also I agree with losing Randle and Deng too.


I don't see the need to. Here are the rotations with my options:

C - Cousins, Nance, Zubac, Thomas
PF - Kuzma, Nance
SF - BI, PG, Kuzma
SG - PG, JC, Hart
PG - Zo, JC, Ennis

Bolded gets into the regular rotation. There is no need to sign anyone else.

There will be no more minutes to go around. Why would a quality backup SG or PG or PF come here to play 10 minutes a game?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Laker's Fan
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 27 Jun 2002
Posts: 12813

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 12:56 pm    Post subject:

I think you still go with Randle's upside. He's still pretty young (turns 23 in about a week), has continued to improve over the course of his first three seasons and is starting to show life in his 3pt shot. He also has an elite NBA skill (rebounding). By the time he's 26 he could grow into a top 3 player on a contender. Jordan is closer to his peak IMO and the thing he's best at (scoring) comes at an opportunity cost to the rest of the team. If you do add one or two stars Jordan gets less FGAs.

All that said it's starting to look like a good problem to have. Adding one star and keeping both is, if they continue to have strong seasons, by no means a poor option.
_________________
Austin Reaves keeps his game tight, like Kobe Bryant on game night.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
awntawn
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 29 Apr 2016
Posts: 953

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 12:56 pm    Post subject:

CandyCanes wrote:
I’m guessing Clarkson’s current contract is more reasonable than whatever Randle is going to demand, so I’d keep Clarkson.

In terms of cap hit for getting two maxes this summer, they're virtually identical
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Fastbreak32
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 11 Oct 2011
Posts: 4746

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 12:57 pm    Post subject:

I think Clarkson's skill set is more easily replaceable. JR is younger and still has more room for growth.
_________________
LeBron, AD, & _________. Stay tuned.

"...there was a time when the Israelites were wandering in the desert and all of a sudden, bread came down from heaven,” Pelinka said. “That’s kind of what today feels like for us to have KCP join.”
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
fontana3d
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 22 Mar 2013
Posts: 3794

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 12:58 pm    Post subject:

Kjj10697X wrote:
fontana3d wrote:
Kjj10697X wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Depends entirely on how the two max options are, but if it's only limited to 2 of the three, then there is no choice.

You drop Randle as he is more redundant at his position. Doesn't matter if you think he is better than JC since he will not see the court and we will have no one at the guard spots then.

If we signed two of Klay/Avery/Kemba, same thing. You move JC, not Randle.

Not about who you like, it's about skill redundancy and position availability.


I agree completely with the above. Once JR was relegated to the bench, then the choice became simple.

Backup PF (Nance - quality player)
Backup C (Zubac and Bryant - quality and potential)

vs.

Backup SG (Hart - unproven and can't shoot)
Backup PG (Ennis or Caruso - non-NBA players)

It seems easier just to keep JC and let JR go.


That's why I'll still trade JC to use his salary to sign two players that fills both holes. Also I agree with losing Randle and Deng too.


I don't see the need to. Here are the rotations with my options:

C - Cousins, Nance, Zubac, Thomas
PF - Kuzma, Nance
SF - BI, PG, Kuzma
SG - PG, JC, Hart
PG - Zo, JC, Ennis

Bolded gets into the regular rotation. There is no need to sign anyone else.

There will be no more minutes to go around. Why would a quality backup SG or PG or PF come here to play 10 minutes a game?


Well we have to fill out the rest of the roster and might as well sell high.on Clarkson and get some pieces for him.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
audioaxes
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 12573

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 1:00 pm    Post subject:

not exactly apples to apples as Jules will demand a higher salary than Clarkson as well
_________________
(bleep) Kawhi
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Baron Von Humongous
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 32979

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 1:08 pm    Post subject:

AirKobe8 wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
greenfrog wrote:
The team is sooo thin on guards...


I think in 2019 we would remedy this with a full MLE and a 1st rounder we could trade. But yeah we are thin. It’s a genuine conundrum.


Right now we're thin, but since OP's premise is we get the 2 max players, there'll be a parade of journeyman scoring combo guards to sign for the min. That's just the way the NBA is built and they'll face a slower market next year.

Randle's game is harder to replace though, for teams pay this kind of player more than the vet min.

Can you name a few?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
greenfrog
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 02 Jan 2011
Posts: 36081
Location: 502 Bad Gateway

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 1:20 pm    Post subject:

Baron Von Humongous wrote:
AirKobe8 wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
greenfrog wrote:
The team is sooo thin on guards...


I think in 2019 we would remedy this with a full MLE and a 1st rounder we could trade. But yeah we are thin. It’s a genuine conundrum.


Right now we're thin, but since OP's premise is we get the 2 max players, there'll be a parade of journeyman scoring combo guards to sign for the min. That's just the way the NBA is built and they'll face a slower market next year.

Randle's game is harder to replace though, for teams pay this kind of player more than the vet min.

Can you name a few?


Yeah, I'd love to know. Even if they were able to sign one that still wouldn't cover the loss of KCP.
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 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 1 of 6
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
© 1995-2018 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