Max Christie the Lakers 35th Pick
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 13, 14, 15

 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
vasashi17+
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 13 Dec 2019
Posts: 3468

PostPosted: Sun Jul 24, 2022 3:54 pm    Post subject:

@MikeLG: appreciate your insight on collegiate kids going pro, but a 2yr deal to develop a kid is kind of a misnomer. Most of these kids is one&done, but put them on 2 more years to stay in college and they still juniors. 3yrs puts them at graduating seniors where they’re either ready to step onto the pro level and get drafted in the 1st round, essentially guaranteeing a team keeps them on for a minimum of 5 years on a 1st round rookie scale contract….at which point they can match what the market values them at as a RFA. It’s either that, or they let the player walk if they don’t value him as such. Ir finally, if these 4yr college kids don’t go in the 1st round, teams essentially don’t believe they developed enough, cause they obviously have plenty of tape to make that decision on.

And let’s say it’s a one&done kid, getting drafted in the 1st round via the fixed rookie scale contract. That means, a team is ready to develop that particular kid for up to 5 years before they get paid above the NBA average. There’s a reason to why these 1st round draft picks are set up for that potential 5yr prefixed deal: development!

MaxC is a 19y/o one & done freshman. You’re going to fast track his development these next 2 years & at that time we could offer MLE type money like we did THT. I still value THT as an asset, but some fans are completely out on the kid as a sunk cost. Why do we want to put that same pressure on our new 19y/o. Makes no sense, and most likely this kid shouldn’t be making more cents after an expedited 2yr development plan where yr1 has title aspirations attached to it due to Bron/AD.

Imho it’s such poor planning our part and frankly I see no benefit in putting a 2yr time line towards the kids development.
_________________
Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Mike@LG
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 10 Apr 2001
Posts: 64975
Location: Orange County, CA

PostPosted: Mon Jul 25, 2022 6:05 am    Post subject:

vasashi17+ wrote:
@MikeLG: appreciate your insight on collegiate kids going pro, but a 2yr deal to develop a kid is kind of a misnomer. Most of these kids is one&done, but put them on 2 more years to stay in college and they still juniors. 3yrs puts them at graduating seniors where they’re either ready to step onto the pro level and get drafted in the 1st round, essentially guaranteeing a team keeps them on for a minimum of 5 years on a 1st round rookie scale contract….at which point they can match what the market values them at as a RFA. It’s either that, or they let the player walk if they don’t value him as such. Ir finally, if these 4yr college kids don’t go in the 1st round, teams essentially don’t believe they developed enough, cause they obviously have plenty of tape to make that decision on.

And let’s say it’s a one&done kid, getting drafted in the 1st round via the fixed rookie scale contract. That means, a team is ready to develop that particular kid for up to 5 years before they get paid above the NBA average. There’s a reason to why these 1st round draft picks are set up for that potential 5yr prefixed deal: development!

MaxC is a 19y/o one & done freshman. You’re going to fast track his development these next 2 years & at that time we could offer MLE type money like we did THT. I still value THT as an asset, but some fans are completely out on the kid as a sunk cost. Why do we want to put that same pressure on our new 19y/o. Makes no sense, and most likely this kid shouldn’t be making more cents after an expedited 2yr development plan where yr1 has title aspirations attached to it due to Bron/AD.

Imho it’s such poor planning our part and frankly I see no benefit in putting a 2yr time line towards the kids development.


Two years works because the depth of the draft has been so deep, that if buying a 2nd rounder next year equates to getting a better player than Christie (hypothetically), then Christie isn't tied to the team for much longer.

The reason why 1st round picks are tied up for 3 years isn't development. It's so owners can keep cheap contracts on the team for an extra year or so.

There's also an advantage to LAL financially in this aspect. How much difference in contract do you think Brandon Ingram would have had if he had to sign a new contract after his 2nd year, vs his 3rd or 4th?

How much money do you think the team saves long term?

Quote:
That means, a team is ready to develop that particular kid for up to 5 years


Players are so good now, that it would be foolish for a team to hang onto a player for this long for development. Mitchell Robinson got ripped off by NYK, and because he was a "4-year vet min" contract from the jump, there really wasn't much pressure for him to develop much in his first two years vs his last two.

Unfortunately, lesser habits kick in and then the guy stays the same guy instead.

Quote:
Why do we want to put that same pressure on our new 19y/o. Makes no sense, and most likely this kid shouldn’t be making more cents after an expedited 2yr development plan where yr1 has title aspirations attached to it due to Bron/AD.


This isn't the 90s. How many 18/19 year olds get selected lottery? How much *more* pressure do they have with the expectations of a lottery player?

The idea of this pressure, exists for all players, not just young ones. You don't think a 24yo player doesn't have pressure to try and stay in the league either? Austin sure as hell did, but we didn't think anything of it because he wasn't seen as a high upside player (even if I mildly disagree depending on how the term upside is used).

Basically, if a player doesn't really show something in 2 years anyway, chances are, there's another 2nd rounder or UDFA in a following year, that will.
_________________
Resident Car Nut.

https://lakersdraft.substack.com/

I am not an economic advisor nor do I advise economic strategies or plans.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vasashi17+
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 13 Dec 2019
Posts: 3468

PostPosted: Mon Jul 25, 2022 6:16 am    Post subject:

@Mike: so you expect MaxC to develop completely in the next 2 seasons on this roster. We will have dude’s RFA status, so we can match any team’s offer even if it traps us into a Gilbert Arenas poison pill type deal?

Also do you believe THT is near complete development? Is his 10m per (3yr/30m) deal justified?

I’m sorry, bro but I disagree. The contract structures allowing young kids on “team friendly deals” is to exploit their potential for sure, but also to get a good enough window/read as to how much more development they need before earning the bag.

The way we claim player development as some sort of summer narrative and then set up these kids on 2 yr deals is an absolute mindF *** for me.
_________________
Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Mike@LG
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 10 Apr 2001
Posts: 64975
Location: Orange County, CA

PostPosted: Mon Jul 25, 2022 6:18 am    Post subject:

vasashi17+ wrote:
@Mike: so you expect MaxC to develop completely in the next 2 seasons on this roster. We will have dude’s RFA status, so we can match any team’s offer even if it traps us into a Gilbert Arenas poison pill type deal?

Also do you believe THT is near complete development? Is his 10m per (3yr/30m) deal justified?

I’m sorry, bro but I disagree. The contract structures allowing young kids on “team friendly deals” is to exploit their potential for sure, but also to get a good enough window/read as to how much more development they need before earning the bag.

The way we claim player development as some sort of summer narrative and then set up these kids on 2 yr deals is an absolute mindF *** for me.


It doesn't have to be "completely," it just has to be productive.

So much has changed in the draft man, and drafts are so deep with players so talented and competitive, that if he doesn't show *something* within those two years, there's another guy that will.

That's how hard the NBA is.

But if you followed my substack, you would have seen why I preferred guys that were more polished/NBA ready so this wasn't even an issue.
_________________
Resident Car Nut.

https://lakersdraft.substack.com/

I am not an economic advisor nor do I advise economic strategies or plans.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vasashi17+
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 13 Dec 2019
Posts: 3468

PostPosted: Mon Jul 25, 2022 8:11 am    Post subject:

Thanks for the exchange @Mike. I’m not a collegiate head, so I’ll definitely take your word on it. It just seems counterintuitive to me to be about developing a young player, only to sign them to 1-2yr deals. The TB reunion was another one that seemed wild to me. We dumped him for 2018 cap space (or that’s what it seemed as at the time), when he was a mere 1.5m caphold. I’m surprised we didn’t lock him up on the cheap much earlier and at the very least, he’s another asset we could have sent or spared in the AD purge. Same goes for Zu or heck even Jules. And now here we are with Ky where we have no young assets on team friendly deals to send out as assets. It’s literally Nunn/THT on essentially expiring deals (via THT’s PO out on his 3rd year), so we can only turn to MaxC when he’s eligible for trade in August and our 2 picks that are still 5 years out.

All I’m saying is that these 2yr deals show a lack of a plan and water down the potential of assets via trade imho. You’re about winning now with Bron/AD, then a dude like MaxC should be held onto on the margins on a much longer deal since we need to develop him accordingly. I highly doubt he sees much run this year, but maybe his defense is what gets him PT with Ham.

Either way, thanks for the substack mention in your sig. I actually did check it out already, which is why I know you know your ish (see: which is why I’ll take your word on it )
_________________
Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Mike@LG
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 10 Apr 2001
Posts: 64975
Location: Orange County, CA

PostPosted: Mon Jul 25, 2022 8:12 am    Post subject:

vasashi17+ wrote:
Thanks for the exchange @Mike. I’m not a collegiate head, so I’ll definitely take your word on it. It just seems counterintuitive to me to be about developing a young player, only to sign them to 1-2yr deals. The TB reunion was another one that seemed wild to me. We dumped him for 2018 cap space (or that’s what it seemed as at the time), when he was a mere 1.5m caphold. I’m surprised we didn’t lock him up on the cheap much earlier and at the very least, he’s another asset we could have sent or spared in the AD purge. Same goes for Zu or heck even Jules. And now here we are with Ky where we have no young assets on team friendly deals to send out as assets. It’s literally Nunn/THT on essentially expiring deals (via THT’s PO out on his 3rd year), so we can only turn to MaxC when he’s eligible for trade in August and our 2 picks that are still 5 years out.

All I’m saying is that these 2yr deals show a lack of a plan and water down the potential of assets via trade imho. You’re about winning now with Bron/AD, then a dude like MaxC should be held onto on the margins on a much longer deal since we need to develop him accordingly. I highly doubt he sees much run this year, but maybe his defense is what gets him PT with Ham.

Either way, thanks for the substack mention in your sig. I actually did check it out already, which is why I know you know your ish (see: which is why I’ll take your word on it )


You're referring to deals as to why LAL tries to avoid the luxury tax. But guys like Zu and TB did show *something* within their time as Laker players.

If LAL bothered to just pay the luxury tax and keep a lot of their own players, it would be 2 rings by now.

When I saw Christie get drafted, not once did I think he would productive during LeBron's playoff window.
_________________
Resident Car Nut.

https://lakersdraft.substack.com/

I am not an economic advisor nor do I advise economic strategies or plans.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
pio2u
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 26 Dec 2012
Posts: 46717

PostPosted: Sat Aug 06, 2022 7:57 am    Post subject:

In Max Christie, Lakers make a big bet on development: ‘All the tools are there
Quote:
Christie’s rawness showed itself in his offensive struggles during his eight summer-league games (7.4 points per game on 27.3 percent shooting). That level of shooting would make him an offensive liability in the NBA. Nonetheless, the Lakers are committed to developing Christie, signing him to a fully guaranteed two-year, $2.74 million deal in early July.
.
https://theathletic.com/3414219/2022/07/22/max-christie-lakers/


Realistic expectations for Los Angeles Lakers rookie Max Christie

Quote:
It’s been an exciting offseason for the Los Angeles Lakers. There are a ton of new faces for new head coach Darvin Ham to use. Most of these new faces were added via free agency.

That is all except the Lakers’ lone draft selection, Michigan State guard Max Christie. What should we expect out of the Lakers’ first draft selection since Talen Horton-Tucker?


https://lakeshowlife.com/2022/07/29/los-angeles-lakers-max-christie-expectations/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 13, 14, 15
Page 15 of 15
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