|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
cencio_999
Starting Rotation
Joined: 12 Nov 2019
Posts: 264
|
 Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2019 3:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Laker_Dynasty_01 wrote: | | vasashi17+ wrote: | Uh, there’s just too much to disagree with here, so I’m just going to keep it moving and agree to disagree otherwise we’ll just be going around in circles.
But I got to point out, Jules went to Nawlins while Rondo came here and we were interested in Boogie too obviously. Instead if renouncing Jules, there was a more creative way in dealing with the Pels and Jules yo get the players we wanted and have them all get paid a bit more with bird rights in tow.
Bottomline: our summer has us going out with Bron as our primary point guard in a year he was turning 35 and hadn’t played that type of role since the first 2 weeks of his rookie campaign. Then you look to the bench for any relief for dude and it’s only Rondo who came off two broken hands the season before and a G-leaguer in Caruso.
Nah, we had almost 34m in space, AD’s bird rights that didn’t need cap space for him to resign next summer and we still limiting free agency and outright options cause of some ‘21 plan that needs your superstar to opt out...yeah, the FO needs to do better. |
We can agree to disagree on what options our FO really had that were realistic, given the wants and needs of NBA players. But a logical alternative plan has not been presented, and most hypothetical situations have assumed us having the foresight to pass on Cousins and/or Cook, two of AD's friends, who both looked like smart signings.
I agree that Rondo and Caruso are not enough help, but disagree we needed/need anything but a minor tweak to get LeBron the rest/load management he needs.
All sign-and-trades have to be a minimum of 3 years, something the Lakers were not prepared to commit to Rondo or Cousins, and something Cousins wasn't going to sign unless it was for $25M/yr (he considered the Pels' offer of $20M insulting). Randle, of course, wanted more than he was worth, more than any NBA-caliber team would pay him. The Knicks, on the other hand... |
Randle signed for 9 mil with the pels.
All he asked was more than one year, and we refused to give it to him.
I understand the reasons for that, but I don't agree with it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Laker_Dynasty_01
Star Player
Joined: 06 Jun 2001
Posts: 1703
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2019 4:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| cencio_999 wrote: | Randle signed for 9 mil with the pels.
All he asked was more than one year, and we refused to give it to him.
I understand the reasons for that, but I don't agree with it. |
And even the Pelicans couldn't find a taker for him in the trade market, with his low $9M salary. If he only wanted a 1+1 from the Lakers at $9M/yr, which I doubt, chances are we end up waiving him should he opt in. Holding him against his will would leave us with his cap hold all summer.
What could he have done for the 2018-19 Lakers? Prevented us from getting the #4 pick once LeBron went down? Earned us a 1st round ass whoopin from Golden State? There was no significant playing time for him unless Ingram played full time at SG. Even then, Kuzma would lose significant playing time. Once LeBron went out for a month with an injury that prevented him from running/cutting even in drills, the season was over.
We also have to consider that signing Randle costs us KCP or Rondo last year and probably this year as well. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144461
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2019 7:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Laker_Dynasty_01 wrote: | | cencio_999 wrote: | Randle signed for 9 mil with the pels.
All he asked was more than one year, and we refused to give it to him.
I understand the reasons for that, but I don't agree with it. |
And even the Pelicans couldn't find a taker for him in the trade market, with his low $9M salary. If he only wanted a 1+1 from the Lakers at $9M/yr, which I doubt, chances are we end up waiving him should he opt in. Holding him against his will would leave us with his cap hold all summer.
What could he have done for the 2018-19 Lakers? Prevented us from getting the #4 pick once LeBron went down? Earned us a 1st round ass whoopin from Golden State? There was no significant playing time for him unless Ingram played full time at SG. Even then, Kuzma would lose significant playing time. Once LeBron went out for a month with an injury that prevented him from running/cutting even in drills, the season was over.
We also have to consider that signing Randle costs us KCP or Rondo last year and probably this year as well. |
Kuzma should lose playing time to Randle, Randle is the better player. And even better if keeping Randle cost us Rondo.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Laker_Dynasty_01
Star Player
Joined: 06 Jun 2001
Posts: 1703
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 01, 2020 12:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| venturalakersfan wrote: | | Laker_Dynasty_01 wrote: | | cencio_999 wrote: | Randle signed for 9 mil with the pels.
All he asked was more than one year, and we refused to give it to him.
I understand the reasons for that, but I don't agree with it. |
And even the Pelicans couldn't find a taker for him in the trade market, with his low $9M salary. If he only wanted a 1+1 from the Lakers at $9M/yr, which I doubt, chances are we end up waiving him should he opt in. Holding him against his will would leave us with his cap hold all summer.
What could he have done for the 2018-19 Lakers? Prevented us from getting the #4 pick once LeBron went down? Earned us a 1st round ass whoopin from Golden State? There was no significant playing time for him unless Ingram played full time at SG. Even then, Kuzma would lose significant playing time. Once LeBron went out for a month with an injury that prevented him from running/cutting even in drills, the season was over.
We also have to consider that signing Randle costs us KCP or Rondo last year and probably this year as well. |
Kuzma should lose playing time to Randle, Randle is the better player. And even better if keeping Randle cost us Rondo. |
Even keeping him under the QO would cost us those guys, but signing Jules to a multiyear deal could've encouraged AD to sign elsewhere next season. Rich Paul and MagRob wanted a chance to orchestrate the assembly of a superteam, but a series of unfortunate injuries to FA targets derailed that. Add to that Pop's pettiness and PG's BS in 2018.
Rondo was decent last year, just not next to Ingram and LeBron. Since he was signed to a very cheap contract this season and is producing beyond his value, he's been a smart signing.
And even if Kuzma isn't better than Randle (debatable), he's far cheaper (for now) and fits better next to LeBron/AD. Randle needs to be featured, have the chance to create for himself, and is unable to catch lobs at the rim. He's also a sporadic shooter. Even at his bargain contract last year, no GM offered NO anything at the deadline for him. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cencio_999
Starting Rotation
Joined: 12 Nov 2019
Posts: 264
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 01, 2020 1:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Laker_Dynasty_01 wrote: | | venturalakersfan wrote: | | Laker_Dynasty_01 wrote: | | cencio_999 wrote: | Randle signed for 9 mil with the pels.
All he asked was more than one year, and we refused to give it to him.
I understand the reasons for that, but I don't agree with it. |
And even the Pelicans couldn't find a taker for him in the trade market, with his low $9M salary. If he only wanted a 1+1 from the Lakers at $9M/yr, which I doubt, chances are we end up waiving him should he opt in. Holding him against his will would leave us with his cap hold all summer.
What could he have done for the 2018-19 Lakers? Prevented us from getting the #4 pick once LeBron went down? Earned us a 1st round ass whoopin from Golden State? There was no significant playing time for him unless Ingram played full time at SG. Even then, Kuzma would lose significant playing time. Once LeBron went out for a month with an injury that prevented him from running/cutting even in drills, the season was over.
We also have to consider that signing Randle costs us KCP or Rondo last year and probably this year as well. |
Kuzma should lose playing time to Randle, Randle is the better player. And even better if keeping Randle cost us Rondo. |
Even keeping him under the QO would cost us those guys, but signing Jules to a multiyear deal could've encouraged AD to sign elsewhere next season. Rich Paul and MagRob wanted a chance to orchestrate the assembly of a superteam, but a series of unfortunate injuries to FA targets derailed that. Add to that Pop's pettiness and PG's BS in 2018.
Rondo was decent last year, just not next to Ingram and LeBron. Since he was signed to a very cheap contract this season and is producing beyond his value, he's been a smart signing.
And even if Kuzma isn't better than Randle (debatable), he's far cheaper (for now) and fits better next to LeBron/AD. Randle needs to be featured, have the chance to create for himself, and is unable to catch lobs at the rim. He's also a sporadic shooter. Even at his bargain contract last year, no GM offered NO anything at the deadline for him. |
Have you any source for saying that no GM offered anything for randle?
Cause it's more likely that no GM offered what demps asked for randle, which is quite different. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wolfpaclaker
Retired Number
Joined: 29 May 2002
Posts: 58336
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 01, 2020 6:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
Julius Randle is shooting 29% from 3 this season and making a near max contract at 63M over 3 years.
Kyle Kuzma is shooting 35.4% from 3 this season and making 1.97M less than the league vet minimum.
I rather have Kuzma any day. For what Kuzma brings at the price he does with the fact that there is still some upside there, he is great value at less than the league minimum for the next 2 years. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DLaker
Star Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2005
Posts: 1539
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 01, 2020 7:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| wolfpaclaker wrote: | Julius Randle is shooting 29% from 3 this season and making a near max contract at 63M over 3 years.
Kyle Kuzma is shooting 35.4% from 3 this season and making 1.97M less than the league vet minimum.
I rather have Kuzma any day. For what Kuzma brings at the price he does with the fact that there is still some upside there, he is great value at less than the league minimum for the next 2 years. |
Thank you, he is very cheap for the contribution he is making. Don’t get why he is getting grilled here. I still see him becoming the 3rd scorer we need by the end of the season. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144461
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 01, 2020 9:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Laker_Dynasty_01 wrote: | | venturalakersfan wrote: | | Laker_Dynasty_01 wrote: | | cencio_999 wrote: | Randle signed for 9 mil with the pels.
All he asked was more than one year, and we refused to give it to him.
I understand the reasons for that, but I don't agree with it. |
And even the Pelicans couldn't find a taker for him in the trade market, with his low $9M salary. If he only wanted a 1+1 from the Lakers at $9M/yr, which I doubt, chances are we end up waiving him should he opt in. Holding him against his will would leave us with his cap hold all summer.
What could he have done for the 2018-19 Lakers? Prevented us from getting the #4 pick once LeBron went down? Earned us a 1st round ass whoopin from Golden State? There was no significant playing time for him unless Ingram played full time at SG. Even then, Kuzma would lose significant playing time. Once LeBron went out for a month with an injury that prevented him from running/cutting even in drills, the season was over.
We also have to consider that signing Randle costs us KCP or Rondo last year and probably this year as well. |
Kuzma should lose playing time to Randle, Randle is the better player. And even better if keeping Randle cost us Rondo. |
Even keeping him under the QO would cost us those guys, but signing Jules to a multiyear deal could've encouraged AD to sign elsewhere next season. Rich Paul and MagRob wanted a chance to orchestrate the assembly of a superteam, but a series of unfortunate injuries to FA targets derailed that. Add to that Pop's pettiness and PG's BS in 2018.
Rondo was decent last year, just not next to Ingram and LeBron. Since he was signed to a very cheap contract this season and is producing beyond his value, he's been a smart signing.
And even if Kuzma isn't better than Randle (debatable), he's far cheaper (for now) and fits better next to LeBron/AD. Randle needs to be featured, have the chance to create for himself, and is unable to catch lobs at the rim. He's also a sporadic shooter. Even at his bargain contract last year, no GM offered NO anything at the deadline for him. |
That’s today’s Lakers, go cheap. I sure miss Doc Buss.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144461
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 01, 2020 9:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| wolfpaclaker wrote: | Julius Randle is shooting 29% from 3 this season and making a near max contract at 63M over 3 years.
Kyle Kuzma is shooting 35.4% from 3 this season and making 1.97M less than the league vet minimum.
I rather have Kuzma any day. For what Kuzma brings at the price he does with the fact that there is still some upside there, he is great value at less than the league minimum for the next 2 years. |
He isn’t great value, he sometimes does one thing well and often does nothing to help the team win. But he is cheap, and for that very reason.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ziggy
Franchise Player
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 12712
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 01, 2020 10:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| venturalakersfan wrote: | | Laker_Dynasty_01 wrote: | | venturalakersfan wrote: | | Laker_Dynasty_01 wrote: | | cencio_999 wrote: | Randle signed for 9 mil with the pels.
All he asked was more than one year, and we refused to give it to him.
I understand the reasons for that, but I don't agree with it. |
And even the Pelicans couldn't find a taker for him in the trade market, with his low $9M salary. If he only wanted a 1+1 from the Lakers at $9M/yr, which I doubt, chances are we end up waiving him should he opt in. Holding him against his will would leave us with his cap hold all summer.
What could he have done for the 2018-19 Lakers? Prevented us from getting the #4 pick once LeBron went down? Earned us a 1st round ass whoopin from Golden State? There was no significant playing time for him unless Ingram played full time at SG. Even then, Kuzma would lose significant playing time. Once LeBron went out for a month with an injury that prevented him from running/cutting even in drills, the season was over.
We also have to consider that signing Randle costs us KCP or Rondo last year and probably this year as well. |
Kuzma should lose playing time to Randle, Randle is the better player. And even better if keeping Randle cost us Rondo. |
Even keeping him under the QO would cost us those guys, but signing Jules to a multiyear deal could've encouraged AD to sign elsewhere next season. Rich Paul and MagRob wanted a chance to orchestrate the assembly of a superteam, but a series of unfortunate injuries to FA targets derailed that. Add to that Pop's pettiness and PG's BS in 2018.
Rondo was decent last year, just not next to Ingram and LeBron. Since he was signed to a very cheap contract this season and is producing beyond his value, he's been a smart signing.
And even if Kuzma isn't better than Randle (debatable), he's far cheaper (for now) and fits better next to LeBron/AD. Randle needs to be featured, have the chance to create for himself, and is unable to catch lobs at the rim. He's also a sporadic shooter. Even at his bargain contract last year, no GM offered NO anything at the deadline for him. |
That’s today’s Lakers, go cheap. I sure miss Doc Buss. |
Dr. Buss would not have given Randle that contract. He only spent big money on championship teams/players. Also tax penalties have gotten much bigger now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Laker_Dynasty_01
Star Player
Joined: 06 Jun 2001
Posts: 1703
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 01, 2020 7:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cencio_999 wrote: | | Laker_Dynasty_01 wrote: | | venturalakersfan wrote: | | Laker_Dynasty_01 wrote: | | cencio_999 wrote: | Randle signed for 9 mil with the pels.
All he asked was more than one year, and we refused to give it to him.
I understand the reasons for that, but I don't agree with it. |
And even the Pelicans couldn't find a taker for him in the trade market, with his low $9M salary. If he only wanted a 1+1 from the Lakers at $9M/yr, which I doubt, chances are we end up waiving him should he opt in. Holding him against his will would leave us with his cap hold all summer.
What could he have done for the 2018-19 Lakers? Prevented us from getting the #4 pick once LeBron went down? Earned us a 1st round ass whoopin from Golden State? There was no significant playing time for him unless Ingram played full time at SG. Even then, Kuzma would lose significant playing time. Once LeBron went out for a month with an injury that prevented him from running/cutting even in drills, the season was over.
We also have to consider that signing Randle costs us KCP or Rondo last year and probably this year as well. |
Kuzma should lose playing time to Randle, Randle is the better player. And even better if keeping Randle cost us Rondo. |
Even keeping him under the QO would cost us those guys, but signing Jules to a multiyear deal could've encouraged AD to sign elsewhere next season. Rich Paul and MagRob wanted a chance to orchestrate the assembly of a superteam, but a series of unfortunate injuries to FA targets derailed that. Add to that Pop's pettiness and PG's BS in 2018.
Rondo was decent last year, just not next to Ingram and LeBron. Since he was signed to a very cheap contract this season and is producing beyond his value, he's been a smart signing.
And even if Kuzma isn't better than Randle (debatable), he's far cheaper (for now) and fits better next to LeBron/AD. Randle needs to be featured, have the chance to create for himself, and is unable to catch lobs at the rim. He's also a sporadic shooter. Even at his bargain contract last year, no GM offered NO anything at the deadline for him. |
Have you any source for saying that no GM offered anything for randle?
Cause it's more likely that no GM offered what demps asked for randle, which is quite different. |
I'm admittedly connecting the dots, but Zach Lowe reported Mirotic, Moore and Randle had been told they were on the block in his January 28th podcast.
New Orleans was losing Jules anyway and wasn't going to the playoffs, so even Demps had to know he couldn't ask for much and should take whatever he could get. The fact no deal was made is evidence Randle wasn't coveted even at 1yr/$9M.
If Randle were signed to a multiyear deal, he'd be coming off our bench right now, taking up money that would otherwise have been spent on Green or KCP/McGee. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Laker_Dynasty_01
Star Player
Joined: 06 Jun 2001
Posts: 1703
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 01, 2020 7:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| venturalakersfan wrote: | | Laker_Dynasty_01 wrote: | | venturalakersfan wrote: | | Laker_Dynasty_01 wrote: | | cencio_999 wrote: | Randle signed for 9 mil with the pels.
All he asked was more than one year, and we refused to give it to him.
I understand the reasons for that, but I don't agree with it. |
And even the Pelicans couldn't find a taker for him in the trade market, with his low $9M salary. If he only wanted a 1+1 from the Lakers at $9M/yr, which I doubt, chances are we end up waiving him should he opt in. Holding him against his will would leave us with his cap hold all summer.
What could he have done for the 2018-19 Lakers? Prevented us from getting the #4 pick once LeBron went down? Earned us a 1st round ass whoopin from Golden State? There was no significant playing time for him unless Ingram played full time at SG. Even then, Kuzma would lose significant playing time. Once LeBron went out for a month with an injury that prevented him from running/cutting even in drills, the season was over.
We also have to consider that signing Randle costs us KCP or Rondo last year and probably this year as well. |
Kuzma should lose playing time to Randle, Randle is the better player. And even better if keeping Randle cost us Rondo. |
Even keeping him under the QO would cost us those guys, but signing Jules to a multiyear deal could've encouraged AD to sign elsewhere next season. Rich Paul and MagRob wanted a chance to orchestrate the assembly of a superteam, but a series of unfortunate injuries to FA targets derailed that. Add to that Pop's pettiness and PG's BS in 2018.
Rondo was decent last year, just not next to Ingram and LeBron. Since he was signed to a very cheap contract this season and is producing beyond his value, he's been a smart signing.
And even if Kuzma isn't better than Randle (debatable), he's far cheaper (for now) and fits better next to LeBron/AD. Randle needs to be featured, have the chance to create for himself, and is unable to catch lobs at the rim. He's also a sporadic shooter. Even at his bargain contract last year, no GM offered NO anything at the deadline for him. |
That’s today’s Lakers, go cheap. I sure miss Doc Buss. |
Jerry Buss would never have signed Randle to a contract that wasn't easy to move if he needed flexibility. Jules would be coming off our bench next to AD/LeBron/our Center if he were on this team.
You point-of-view was that Randle and AD would make a great pairing when Jules signed there in 2018 (Believe you had them in the WCF). Many told you that Mirotic would be starting next to AD, not Randle, due to spacing issues. Nikola started his first 22 games until injuries knocked him out of the rotation. Kenrich Williams then replaced Mirotic at PF after he was sent to Milwaukee. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vasashi17+
Star Player
Joined: 13 Dec 2019
Posts: 5611
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 02, 2020 10:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm no Randle fan cause I value defense too much, but dude had value in this league (at least 2 future 2nds worth value)....and we got nothing for him.
Btw, Jules was actively recruited by AD to go to Nawlins and we all know why...AD wanted Bullyius to go up against all the 5s in the league so that he could stay at the 4.
Anyways, Magic helped our Lakers to 5 titles and without him, no Riles and no Showtime era....so naturally my patience with him was going to be higher as the PoBO.
But I knew he was just a figurehead. The second Jimmy/Mitch was out, suddenly you got guys demanding trades to the Lakers. Granted those dudes are now lames, but simply put, we weren't getting marquee names asking for trades to us when Jimmy/Mitch were here.
So Magic served his purpose, but I doubt dude had any CBA acumen and if he did, we would have known about it by now with just a simple browse of his twitter timeline.
So if dude appears to be a CBA novice and was leaked as an absentee exec, who exactly was responsible for constructing Zu/Beas for Musc and Svi/2021 2nd for Bullock deals? Who was telling Magic that the cap plan absolutely had to have Jules and TB renounced for nothing?
Speaking of Beas, remember those 1 year deals that were handed out for the meme team...well, aren't most of those guys back on this squad with defacto 1 year deals again (all of them have player options next year)? Wouldn't Lance be an absolute blessing for this team right now? Didn't all those 1 year deals limit our options to improve the team last year, but didn't they also serve a purpose to still have the leverage of holding a max slot for AD trade talks or to sign a free agent star to pair with Bron?
I understand that Magic wasn't the best exec, but lets not act like with him gone we're suddenly led by a GOAT FO....please! Rob and Rambii have next to no experience themselves. I suspect Rob's hire was similar to Magic's in that he's a figurehead hire due to his Kobe alliance.
Lets look at the common denominator: with Magic we were about a cap plan...without him we still have a cap plan in place.
With Magic we dumped assets for nothing....without Magic, we dumped assets (see Wiz package) for nothing and even overpaid with assets for a player that forced his way here.
With Magic we threw money at guys like Beas and Kcp....without Magic we threw money at guys that had next to no market in McGee, Boog, Cook and Kcp...even handing most of them de facto no trade clauses.
Folks...we're not operating any different with Magic gone....so either Rob needs to go in AD trade mode again and purge our entire CBA/capology dept or dude needs to have his hand held and kept in check by someone that has been in the game before.
Here's to hoping our FO can start operating with more swag...no different than hoping Bron/AD don't got down to injury in spite of their total minutes this season being so (bleep) high.
Oh what's that? Bron and AD played 38 minutes again last night....smfh! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144461
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 02, 2020 12:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The simple solution would be to hire a proven FO executive to oversee team operations. I doubt that Jeanie will ever get out of her comfort zone though. As long as the revenue keeps coming in the fans will be down on her list.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Laker_Dynasty_01
Star Player
Joined: 06 Jun 2001
Posts: 1703
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 02, 2020 3:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| vasashi17+ wrote: | | I'm no Randle fan cause I value defense too much, but dude had value in this league (at least 2 future 2nds worth value)....and we got nothing for him. |
When was this value at its peak? Certainly not in the 2018 off-season.
If Randle was worth even two second round picks, as Noel actually was, don't you think one team would've offered Jules a 4yr/$70M offer sheet in 2018, or something close to it?
The league could tell Randle wasn't in the Lakers' future, we needed cap space to attract two stars. Deng was still on the books as well, killing any flexibility.
Riley got two 2nds for Beasley, but the former #2 pick had two years left on his rookie deal.
| Quote: | | With Magic we dumped assets for nothing....without Magic, we dumped assets (see Wiz package) for nothing and even overpaid with assets for a player that forced his way here. |
Zu and TB weren't worth potentially going over the apron to sign, and TB needed minutes that weren't/aren't available here to develop him.
Dumping Wagner/Bonga/Jones was the only way to free up space to chase a 3rd max player. New Orleans couldn't take on the extra players, so Rob negotiated a stipulation giving him the chance to add the Wizards to the deal. The media led by Woj initially jumped all over Rob, but later Woj backed off.
As for overpaying...Griffin is an Ainge protege, and the two had met just before June 20th. Boston literally had more picks than they can develop, picks closer to the present than ours, even some belonging to other teams. We were trading three players coming off of season-ending surgeries. AD could've "forced his way" here all he wanted, but Griffin was making a trade by the draft that could've sent AD elsewhere for a year.
A "GOAT" Front Office isn't how I'd describe Rob, Magic, and Klutch and whoever else may be advising them, these guys are just mavericks/high rollers riding a lucky streak. The moves available have been mostly straightforward, as LeBron-centric teams don't have room for anyone but other All-NBA players sharing the ball. Everyone else has to come off the bench or play off the stars.
For having no market, I'd say Cousins played well in his last action, and KCP may opt out for more money. Cook was the only bad non-minimum signing. At the time, Bradley wasn't an option, nor was he expected to be. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mhan00
Retired Number
Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 32059
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 02, 2020 3:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| venturalakersfan wrote: | | Laker_Dynasty_01 wrote: | | venturalakersfan wrote: | | Laker_Dynasty_01 wrote: | | cencio_999 wrote: | Randle signed for 9 mil with the pels.
All he asked was more than one year, and we refused to give it to him.
I understand the reasons for that, but I don't agree with it. |
And even the Pelicans couldn't find a taker for him in the trade market, with his low $9M salary. If he only wanted a 1+1 from the Lakers at $9M/yr, which I doubt, chances are we end up waiving him should he opt in. Holding him against his will would leave us with his cap hold all summer.
What could he have done for the 2018-19 Lakers? Prevented us from getting the #4 pick once LeBron went down? Earned us a 1st round ass whoopin from Golden State? There was no significant playing time for him unless Ingram played full time at SG. Even then, Kuzma would lose significant playing time. Once LeBron went out for a month with an injury that prevented him from running/cutting even in drills, the season was over.
We also have to consider that signing Randle costs us KCP or Rondo last year and probably this year as well. |
Kuzma should lose playing time to Randle, Randle is the better player. And even better if keeping Randle cost us Rondo. |
Even keeping him under the QO would cost us those guys, but signing Jules to a multiyear deal could've encouraged AD to sign elsewhere next season. Rich Paul and MagRob wanted a chance to orchestrate the assembly of a superteam, but a series of unfortunate injuries to FA targets derailed that. Add to that Pop's pettiness and PG's BS in 2018.
Rondo was decent last year, just not next to Ingram and LeBron. Since he was signed to a very cheap contract this season and is producing beyond his value, he's been a smart signing.
And even if Kuzma isn't better than Randle (debatable), he's far cheaper (for now) and fits better next to LeBron/AD. Randle needs to be featured, have the chance to create for himself, and is unable to catch lobs at the rim. He's also a sporadic shooter. Even at his bargain contract last year, no GM offered NO anything at the deadline for him. |
That’s today’s Lakers, go cheap. I sure miss Doc Buss. |
Dr. Buss cut Brian Shaw one year after Shaw went nuts in the fourth quarter of game 7 against theBlazers to help us get our first ring in a decade so he could save some money and sign him back for a smaller contract after he cleared waivers. It was nothing except a money saving move that didn’t open up cap space, just saved Buss some money.
He was one of the greatest sports owners in history, but he sure as hell wasntabove saving a buck even at the expense of guys who got us rings. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MJST
Retired Number
Joined: 06 Jul 2014
Posts: 26309
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 02, 2020 3:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There's a reason Kuzma won't get the offers Randle got in free agency.
Kuzma is what he is, at his peak he's a 6th man lou williams type, and that's his height.
Randle however regardless if starting or coming off the bench has shown himself to be a 20/10/3 kind of player as his likely ceiling.
Randle has more value than Kuzma. Kuzma "I can hit threes" is having his best season since his rookie year shooting threes, when last season he was shooting 30% from them. What Kuzma can give you dependently is the occasional microwave, but what he goes off for occasionally off the bench, is what Randle averaged off the bench.
I'd have kept Randle, and if worst came to worst he'd have been traded to New Orleans for Anthony Davis anyway and the Lakers would have wound up keeping Ingram. So whether you want to argue value, or trade value.
The Lakers extend Randle for 2 seasons. Then he's either here, while we play the waiting game on Davis OR he's part of the package that gets moved for Davis to New Orleans and we have Ingram, Lonzo, or both still on the team.
So either way, it's a win win.
That's why a lot of people lament not getting anything for value for Randle, and extending him the 2 seasons would have given us even more value when we were going for Davis. And we may not have had to sell the farm for him, if Randle was putting up the numbers akin (the near 20/10 off the bench, or 20/10 as a starter, with one year on his contract after the previous). Those kinds of things matter.
So even if at the end of the day we'd have sent him to New Orleans in a trade for Davis anyway, there's a high chance we still have both Ingram and Lonzo. If the Pelicans wanted Randle, Our Pick and Kuzma. I'd have taken that for AD. Our team would look far better than it currently does.
_________________
How NBA 2K18 failed the All-Time Lakers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxMBYm3wwxk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wino
Star Player
Joined: 07 Jun 2002
Posts: 9674
Location: San Diego
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 02, 2020 4:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| wolfpaclaker wrote: | Julius Randle is shooting 29% from 3 this season and making a near max contract at 63M over 3 years.
Kyle Kuzma is shooting 35.4% from 3 this season and making 1.97M less than the league vet minimum.
I rather have Kuzma any day. For what Kuzma brings at the price he does with the fact that there is still some upside there, he is great value at less than the league minimum for the next 2 years. |
Exactly, end of story.
_________________
Never argue with stupid people! They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience!! - Twain |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr. Laker
Franchise Player
Joined: 12 Apr 2002
Posts: 17105
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 02, 2020 4:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yawn.
Lakers are 27-7.
Randle - lottery team.
Svi - lottery team.
Ingram - lottery team.
Lonzo - lottery team.
Hart - lottery team.
Thomas Bryant - lottery team.
Mo Wagner - lottery team.
DLo - lottery team.
LNJ - lottery team.
Zu - championship contender.
Clarkson - playoff team.
Lay off of the FO.
_________________
On Lakersground, a concern troll is someone who is a fan of another team, but pretends to be a Lakers fan with "concerns". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vasashi17+
Star Player
Joined: 13 Dec 2019
Posts: 5611
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 02, 2020 5:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
L_D_01: Again, I'm not concerned with how Jules was treated, how much money he could have had, whether we should have him here or not, etc....I'm just looking it as a previous #7 pick that walked away for nothing. As an asset, we (bleep) that one up. Before AD made the switch to Klutch, we wanted players from the Pels in Rondo and Boogie and they wanted Jules....so there could have been something more nuanced than renouncing a player's rights, which impacted both Jules and Boogie.
As for his value, I do know there were 4 teams with cap space in 2018 after we renounced him and none of them offered him a bag, so maybe its a Jules thing or maybe its a Mintz thing and teams just didn't want to break bread with him. Fast forward to today and its the dysfunctional Knicks that gave Jules the deal he got...so maybe his value is really sunk. But there were rumors way back to the 2018 deadline that could have at least netted us something instead of nothing at all.
| Quote: | | Before trading for Mirotic, New Orleans kicked the tires on trade talks with the Lakers. New Orleans proposed its 2018 first-round pick and Asik to the Lakers for guard Jordan Clarkson, league sources told The Athletic. New Orleans also proposed trading Alexis Ajinca and a second-round pick to the Lakers for forward Julius Randle, according to league sources. |
As for Zu and TB, their cap holds were 1m to 1.5m and had absolutely no bearing on the cap apron. I think what you meant to say is that it would have impacted our max cap space, but even then you can renounce them like you did Jules ONCE you lock up your max guy. And if you don't you still got those assets on the roster still. Its wild that such a trivial amount was crudely cut to make space for a guy that we didn't even have in the bag yet.
For example, the cLips did not have George waiting on the roster for Kawhi. They made their case and Kawhi wanted another star, so the cLips made a deal. If we come to Kawhi saying we can carve out a max spot for you, just commit to us and we got deals in place, how is that any different from the how the cLips approached it? We dumped assets for no good reason.
The bottomline: Magic wasn't very good at CBA/cap related moves....and it appears the trend is continuing with Rob. So someone has to do better up top.
And I'll yawn right back at others who disagree with that. But I'll tell you this, we'll all be perking right back up if Bron/AD take a spill on the floor and are slow to get up. Then you look at the roster and wonder, how did the FO fall asleep at the wheel in constructing a roster to help protect our duo and their health to getting to the playoffs. But Rob will just tell us another story of how the roster is perfect...and when he does, I'll make sure to grab a snuggie. #Yawn |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Judah
Star Player
Joined: 23 Jun 2015
Posts: 4759
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 02, 2020 5:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MJST wrote: | There's a reason Kuzma won't get the offers Randle got in free agency.
Kuzma is what he is, at his peak he's a 6th man lou williams type, and that's his height.
Randle however regardless if starting or coming off the bench has shown himself to be a 20/10/3 kind of player as his likely ceiling.
Randle has more value than Kuzma. Kuzma "I can hit threes" is having his best season since his rookie year shooting threes, when last season he was shooting 30% from them. What Kuzma can give you dependently is the occasional microwave, but what he goes off for occasionally off the bench, is what Randle averaged off the bench.
I'd have kept Randle, and if worst came to worst he'd have been traded to New Orleans for Anthony Davis anyway and the Lakers would have wound up keeping Ingram. So whether you want to argue value, or trade value.
The Lakers extend Randle for 2 seasons. Then he's either here, while we play the waiting game on Davis OR he's part of the package that gets moved for Davis to New Orleans and we have Ingram, Lonzo, or both still on the team.
So either way, it's a win win.
That's why a lot of people lament not getting anything for value for Randle, and extending him the 2 seasons would have given us even more value when we were going for Davis. And we may not have had to sell the farm for him, if Randle was putting up the numbers akin (the near 20/10 off the bench, or 20/10 as a starter, with one year on his contract after the previous). Those kinds of things matter.
So even if at the end of the day we'd have sent him to New Orleans in a trade for Davis anyway, there's a high chance we still have both Ingram and Lonzo. If the Pelicans wanted Randle, Our Pick and Kuzma. I'd have taken that for AD. Our team would look far better than it currently does. |
Except NOLA never would've agreed to your horrible trade. That would've been a laughable return for AD and David Griffin isn't some rook at this. Randle as the centerpiece of an AD deal is a disaster and you're living in a fantasy world if you think there was ever the slightest chance that BI, Zo, and the 4th pick weren't all going out for AD. That's the kind of sacrifice you make to get a superstar and the kind of deal that a rebuilding team would want. They don't want freaking Randle and Kuz to build around.
THE LAKERS DID NOT CHOOSE KUZMA OVER INGRAM
THE LAKERS DID NOT CHOOSE KUZMA OVER INGRAM
THE LAKERS DID NOT CHOOSE KUZMA OVER INGRAM
Ingram was the one NOLA wanted for AD. Griffin thought very highly of him even before he became part of their FO and this is apparently common knowledge to everyone on the planet except you. You can keep making up these narratives out of thin air or you can face reality. And reality is that THE KIDS ARE GONE. The young prospects you grew so attached to are outta here because the Lakers were able to acquire a real superstar by trading them. And now they're first in the West and contending for a championship. They were never going to be in this position had they kept the young core together because they weren't that good, even collectively. Go watch old highlights of them if you have to, but suck it up and just face reality already, dude. It's over with.
_________________
“Christ did not die to forgive sinners who go on treasuring anything above seeing and savoring God. And people who would be happy in heaven if Christ were not there, will not be there."
- John Piper |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144461
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 02, 2020 5:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MJST wrote: | There's a reason Kuzma won't get the offers Randle got in free agency.
Kuzma is what he is, at his peak he's a 6th man lou williams type, and that's his height.
Randle however regardless if starting or coming off the bench has shown himself to be a 20/10/3 kind of player as his likely ceiling.
Randle has more value than Kuzma. Kuzma "I can hit threes" is having his best season since his rookie year shooting threes, when last season he was shooting 30% from them. What Kuzma can give you dependently is the occasional microwave, but what he goes off for occasionally off the bench, is what Randle averaged off the bench.
I'd have kept Randle, and if worst came to worst he'd have been traded to New Orleans for Anthony Davis anyway and the Lakers would have wound up keeping Ingram. So whether you want to argue value, or trade value.
The Lakers extend Randle for 2 seasons. Then he's either here, while we play the waiting game on Davis OR he's part of the package that gets moved for Davis to New Orleans and we have Ingram, Lonzo, or both still on the team.
So either way, it's a win win.
That's why a lot of people lament not getting anything for value for Randle, and extending him the 2 seasons would have given us even more value when we were going for Davis. And we may not have had to sell the farm for him, if Randle was putting up the numbers akin (the near 20/10 off the bench, or 20/10 as a starter, with one year on his contract after the previous). Those kinds of things matter.
So even if at the end of the day we'd have sent him to New Orleans in a trade for Davis anyway, there's a high chance we still have both Ingram and Lonzo. If the Pelicans wanted Randle, Our Pick and Kuzma. I'd have taken that for AD. Our team would look far better than it currently does. |
Randle can be a very good defender, he has shown that. He needs to go where there is a coach who will hold him to performing on D. Gentry wasn’t that coach.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Laker_Dynasty_01
Star Player
Joined: 06 Jun 2001
Posts: 1703
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 02, 2020 9:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MJST wrote: | | There's a reason Kuzma won't get the offers Randle got in free agency. |
The reason is, there's only one Knicks franchise per universe.
Bulls and Nets were the other two teams making offers, and based on the Nets' cap room, their offer wasn't in the same ballpark as NY's. The Bulls traded picks for Satoransky, indicating they wanted a guard too, and used $12.9M to sign Thaddeus Young.
Ergo, it would seem Randle's next best offer was in the $15M range.
New York had struck out and needed to spend it's money somehow, and teams were done dumping salary. It was either give $21M to Randle or a guy like WCS or Dedmon.
| Quote: | I'd have kept Randle, and if worst came to worst he'd have been traded to New Orleans for Anthony Davis anyway and the Lakers would have wound up keeping Ingram. So whether you want to argue value, or trade value.
The Lakers extend Randle for 2 seasons. Then he's either here, while we play the waiting game on Davis OR he's part of the package that gets moved for Davis to New Orleans and we have Ingram, Lonzo, or both still on the team. |
If our offer were Randle/Kuzma/Hart, I could see NO sending their star out of conference rather than taking on a package centered around a guy who plays the same position as their #1 draft pick.
Worst comes to worst, Griffin hangs up in Rob's face and AD gets sent to Boston for Baynes/Smart/Theis and a half dozen draft picks+swaps. Once word got out of our weak offer, Rich Paul has AD waive his trade kicker and they retain Horford. At that point, LeBron's next meaningful game would be for the TuneSquad.
Haven't played 2K in a long time, but I'm beginning to suspect the virtual GMs in that game are really bad, based on some suggestions posted on here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Laker_Dynasty_01
Star Player
Joined: 06 Jun 2001
Posts: 1703
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 02, 2020 10:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| vasashi17+ wrote: | | I'm just looking it as a previous #7 pick that walked away for nothing. As an asset, we (bleep) that one up. Before AD made the switch to Klutch, we wanted players from the Pels in Rondo and Boogie and they wanted Jules....so there could have been something more nuanced than renouncing a player's rights, which impacted both Jules and Boogie. |
Boogie wasn't looking for a three year deal, the minimum years allowed in a S&T, unless the Lakers were offering over $20M. Which we weren't. He'd already turned down 2yr/$40M from NO.
Randle wasn't looking to sign for 3yr/$36M, and even if he were, we didn't want to take Rondo for 80% of that for 3 years. So where is the benefit to a S&T?
| Quote: | But there were rumors way back to the 2018 deadline that could have at least netted us something instead of nothing at all.
| Quote: | | Before trading for Mirotic, New Orleans kicked the tires on trade talks with the Lakers. New Orleans proposed its 2018 first-round pick and Asik to the Lakers for guard Jordan Clarkson, league sources told The Athletic. New Orleans also proposed trading Alexis Ajinca and a second-round pick to the Lakers for forward Julius Randle, according to league sources. |
|
So, by just trading JC and not Nance, we could've had a pick at #22 rather than #25, but Asik had $11.3M and one year left on his deal. Massive risk to simply keep Nance and pick a few spots higher.
The second proposed deal takes $5M out of our 2018-19 capspace (Ajincia was only a contract) for the 51st pick, not to mention that by trading Jules at the deadline, we'd have given ourselves a better chance of handing Boston or Philly a top-3 pick. We'd already traded JC+Nance, the depth chart was lacking.
| Quote: | | As for Zu and TB, their cap holds were 1m to 1.5m and had absolutely no bearing on the cap apron. I think what you meant to say is that it would have impacted our max cap space, but even then you can renounce them like you did Jules ONCE you lock up your max guy. And if you don't you still got those assets on the roster still. Its wild that such a trivial amount was crudely cut to make space for a guy that we didn't even have in the bag yet. |
I was thinking way ahead here.
Had we kept one or both and matched their offer sheets, we could find ourselves over the apron or even hard capped in future seasons, should we try to flip Kuzma in a S&T for a larger contract when he is due a raise. Matching Zu/TB also forces us to commit multiple years to whoever we signed this past summer, as we'd have no space in 2021 with those two young bigs on the books, plus (hopefully) Bron/AD.
It could also cost us the full MLE down the road, for two centers who wouldn't help us more than the ones we currently have. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vasashi17+
Star Player
Joined: 13 Dec 2019
Posts: 5611
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 02, 2020 11:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
First, the team getting hardcapped is the team receiving the S&t players. And frankly why even go that route with Kuz when he’s eligible for a contract extension next summer and we wound need Bron to opt out for Giannis or any other max type the following summer...so it’s not like Kuz’s deal would get in the way, since Bron’s already will. Also if you’re going to S&t Kuz, there’s a lot of obstacles: he has to consent in being part of that deal, the receiving team knows they’ll be hardcapped and we would have his cap hold on our books anyways which impacts our own cap space in the summer of 2021. So unless we’re planning a S&t with Kuz to Milwaukee for a S&t’d Giannis to us in 2021, I don’t see how it’s a good plan/strategy if the end game is clearing max cap for that summer.
Btw, TB & Zu could have been renounced if we needed more cap space in 2018/19. Their cap holds were trivial (1-2m). The plan should be for the free agent to agree on coming...then we renounce it salary dump those type of assets. I’m sorry, but what you’re proposing makes no sense to me...and the reason why is cause those dudes’ we’re making cents in salary.
As for S&t rules, as stated earlier the receiving team of the S&t’d player is hard capped at the apron. The contracts are a minimum of 3 years, with only the 1st year being fully guaranteed. The remaining years can all be partially or fully non-guaranteed. S&t deals can max out at 4yrs and at the players max amount, but only with 5% annual escalators as opposed to 8%.
I’m sorry, I don’t even know what we’re discussing now, but I just have to disagree with any notion that our FO (with or without Magic) isn’t (bleep) away assets unnecessarily. Imo they gotta do better, cause if a championship is the goal and we know our best chance at it is through Bron/AD, you gotta construct a roster that has them with enough juice when May comes...and right now they playing a bunch of minutes unnecessarily. But I guess that’s the theme of our FO. |
|
| 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
|
|
