Jump to content


Photo

Transform Jordan Clarkson into a 6th man?


  • Please log in to reply
539 replies to this topic

#41 DanishLakerFan

DanishLakerFan

    Superstar

  • Member
  • 8,391 posts
  • Fan Since:1998
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe

Posted May 18, 2016 - 08:14 PM

No to Derozan, yes to having Clarkson come off the bench.

 

Russell / Batum / Ingram / Randle / Whiteside



#42 Ventiquattro

Ventiquattro

    All-Star

  • Member
  • 6,555 posts
  • Location:Unknown

Posted May 18, 2016 - 08:14 PM

Teague, Rondo, Walker, Porzingis, Milisap, Howard, Lopez, Middleton, Beal...dude damn near half the list is a reach. I didn't even finish I just got tired of listing names.

 

I'd understand anyone arguing Derozan is better than Teague, Lopez or Rondo.

 

Walker, Milsap and Middleton are hands down better.

 

Id take any of them over Derozan easily.

 

 

Anyways: the point is, he shouldnt be a Laker nor does he deserve anywhere near 20M a year. Besides, I doubt he'd leave his status in Toronto(he's a champion over there) and the money to play for the Lakers.

 

 

Lets agree to disagree.


Edited by Ventiquattro, May 18, 2016 - 08:16 PM.


#43 JayTheGreat

JayTheGreat

    Sixth Man

  • Member
  • 3,287 posts
  • Fan Since:1994
  • Fav. Laker:Magic

Posted May 18, 2016 - 08:15 PM

lol you would max Fourier?


Hell yes. So people here would give Clarkson 16 mill but wouldn't give Fournier who's a way better shooter and can create for himself 17 to 18 mill? I said damn near a max. Fournier is a guard I would be happy with playing next to Russell. If we have to suck it up and overpay a player I would damn sure overpay Fournier. You know what he brings to the table. A back court of him and Russell would be deadly shooters.

Edited by JayTheGreat, May 18, 2016 - 08:19 PM.


#44 Ventiquattro

Ventiquattro

    All-Star

  • Member
  • 6,555 posts
  • Location:Unknown

Posted May 18, 2016 - 08:18 PM

Hell yes. So people here would give Clarkson 16 mill but wouldn't give Fournier who's a way better shooter and can create for himself 17 to 18 mill? I said damn near a max. Fournier is a guard I would be happy with playing next to Russell. If we have to suck it up and overpay a player I would damn sure overpay Fournier. You know why he brings to the table. A back court of him and Russell would be deadly shooters.

Clarkson isnt making 16M.

 

His max would be around 5-8M next year. The max a team can offer him is 55M over 4 years or so(not sure) meaning 13.5M a year.


Edited by Ventiquattro, May 18, 2016 - 08:19 PM.


#45 kidpolean

kidpolean

    Superstar

  • Member
  • 7,946 posts
  • Fan Since:I was born
  • Fav. Laker:KB24 or 8

Posted May 18, 2016 - 08:20 PM

I'd understand anyone arguing Derozan is better than Teague, Lopez or Rondo.

Walker, Milsap and Middleton are hands down better.

Id take any of them over Derozan easily.

lol no....give any of them their own team and Derozan's team would easily finish with a better record. You are comparing a number 1 option type of player (not a good one) to role players. Guys like Middleton would fail miserably if you used them as a number 1 option. Derozan can carry a team because of his skillset but he isn't good enough to carry a team to a title. The other players you just named don't even have the skillset to be a number 1 option at all. Some of them struggle to create for themselves!

You are comparing players that are good in specific roles to Derozan as a number 1 option. That's not a fair comparison.

Batum as a number 1 wouldn't even make the playoffs in the east

Edited by kidpolean, May 18, 2016 - 08:23 PM.


#46 Klewfish

Klewfish

    Reppin' LA on the East Coast

  • Member
  • 2,195 posts
  • Location:Upstates' Finest.
  • Name:Chris
  • Fan Since:Game 4 of 2000 NBA Finals

Posted May 18, 2016 - 08:20 PM

I think Clarkson may settle into a 6th man role eventually or could turn into one of the better SGs in the NBA. It's too early to tell yet. Given the current talent he should be starting, but if we acquired an elite SG than Clarkson would make a great 6th man. 


Strength does not come from physical capacity. It comes from an indomitable will.

#47 JayTheGreat

JayTheGreat

    Sixth Man

  • Member
  • 3,287 posts
  • Fan Since:1994
  • Fav. Laker:Magic

Posted May 18, 2016 - 08:20 PM

Clarkson isnt making 16M.

His max would be around 5-8M next year. The max a team can offer him is 55M over 4 years or so(not sure) meaning 13.5M a year.


Ok 13.5 for clarkson. 17-18 gets us Fournier. I would be perfectly fine with giving him 17-18.

#48 lakerfan98

lakerfan98

    Vice President of Interneting Operations

  • Member
  • 3,357 posts
  • Location:New Jersey
  • Name:Ryan
  • Fan Since:1998
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe

Posted May 18, 2016 - 08:22 PM

Honestly I'd only take about 8 or so names off that list in favor of DeRozan so for me he's not a top 30 player.  Neither is Batum for what it's worth.  Man why does this free agent class have to suck so bad lol  



#49 Jody Smokes

Jody Smokes

    Legend

  • Member
  • 11,970 posts
  • Fan Since:2003
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe

Posted May 18, 2016 - 08:24 PM

I dont want either on a max lol

 

has nothing to do with Derozan...I simply wouldn't max Fournier


"Blake and Parker are good at canceling each other out till our bench point guard comes in"  - Majesty aka Bird Ish (12/4/13)


#50 kidpolean

kidpolean

    Superstar

  • Member
  • 7,946 posts
  • Fan Since:I was born
  • Fav. Laker:KB24 or 8

Posted May 18, 2016 - 08:25 PM

I dont want either on a max lol

That's fair

#51 Ventiquattro

Ventiquattro

    All-Star

  • Member
  • 6,555 posts
  • Location:Unknown

Posted May 18, 2016 - 08:39 PM

lol no....give any of them their own team and Derozan's team would easily finish with a better record. You are comparing a number 1 option type of player (not a good one) to role players. Guys like Middleton would fail miserably if you used them as a number 1 option. Derozan can carry a team because of his skillset but he isn't good enough to carry a team to a title. The other players you just named don't even have the skillset to be a number 1 option at all. Some of them struggle to create for themselves!

You are comparing players that are good in specific roles to Derozan as a number 1 option. That's not a fair comparison.

Batum as a number 1 wouldn't even make the playoffs in the east

 

Im not necessarily stating 40 players who would fare better as a 1st option( Lowry is their first option btw). Most of those players brought more value to their teams in addition to being better players. If i were to list a starting lineup, I'd be able to make around 1600 combinations that fare better than having Derozan in it. 

 

I may be slightly off with some names(not more than 5 or 6) but still, 37 players are better than Derozan in this league imo.

 

 

""CJ Mccollum ""


Edited by Ventiquattro, May 18, 2016 - 08:45 PM.


#52 JayTheGreat

JayTheGreat

    Sixth Man

  • Member
  • 3,287 posts
  • Fan Since:1994
  • Fav. Laker:Magic

Posted May 18, 2016 - 08:40 PM

Maxing either isn't ideal but hell I would deal with maxing Fournier. I would max him over Batum and Derozan

#53 last stand 2.0

last stand 2.0

    Legend

  • Member
  • 23,200 posts
  • Location:LA

Posted May 18, 2016 - 09:08 PM

I mean Evan Fournier would be interesting with Ingram here. Especially if you land whiteside because the spacing would be incredible for guys like Randle down low but also for Russell on the pick and roll

Imagine Russell getting a pick with Fournier and Ingram waiting in the wings to drill a 3

I wonder if we could find a way to have Fournier and clarkson here

I just think this roster would be a fighter with something like

Whiteside/ black
Randle/nance
Ingram/ brown
Fournier/ Williams
Russell/ clarkson

Probably would only win in the 30s but they'd be a fighter
Posted Image

#54 last stand 2.0

last stand 2.0

    Legend

  • Member
  • 23,200 posts
  • Location:LA

Posted May 18, 2016 - 09:09 PM

Maxing either isn't ideal but hell I would deal with maxing Fournier. I would max him over Batum and Derozan


Depends

If we land Simmons then I think maxing batum would be very beneficial.

But obviously it all depends on the draft
Posted Image

#55 bigvee

bigvee

    Legend

  • Member
  • 12,529 posts
  • Location:LA
  • Fav. Laker:Samaki Walker

Posted May 18, 2016 - 09:17 PM

It obviously depends on free agency, but Clarkson has shown that he will be a real pro in this league for years to come. Obvious comparison is Monta Ellis. So no, I don't think we should limit him to a bench role just yet. Again, that depends on free agency. If we're getting someone who can contribute now to a winning record, Clarkson goes to the bench.

 

Then again, with all these young players and a new coach, it's not really obvious as to who's gonna be starting and who's not. 


  • kball likes this

#56 last stand 2.0

last stand 2.0

    Legend

  • Member
  • 23,200 posts
  • Location:LA

Posted May 18, 2016 - 09:24 PM

It obviously depends on free agency, but Clarkson has shown that he will be a real pro in this league for years to come. Obvious comparison is Monta Ellis. So no, I don't think we should limit him to a bench role just yet. Again, that depends on free agency. If we're getting someone who can contribute now to a winning record, Clarkson goes to the bench.

Then again, with all these young players and a new coach, it's not really obvious as to who's gonna be starting and who's not.


I think clarkson would be better with the ball constantly in his hands. However it's not a necessity obviously that he goes there.

But I do want a sniper next to Russell if possible. It'd just be nice. Especially if we draft Ingram because then out of nowhere our roster is full of guys who can drain the 3. Good luck keeping guys out of the paint with Russell, Fournier and Ingram out there. Also that makes Ingram and Russell's development easier
Posted Image

#57 BasketballIQ

BasketballIQ

    Legend

  • Member
  • 16,427 posts
  • Name:Julius Jordan
  • Fav. Laker:24

Posted May 18, 2016 - 09:29 PM

Teague, Rondo, Walker, Porzingis, Milisap, Howard, Lopez, Middleton, Beal...dude damn near half the list is a reach. I didn't even finish I just got tired of listing names.

Who is CJ?



#58 bigvee

bigvee

    Legend

  • Member
  • 12,529 posts
  • Location:LA
  • Fav. Laker:Samaki Walker

Posted May 18, 2016 - 09:36 PM

I think clarkson would be better with the ball constantly in his hands. However it's not a necessity obviously that he goes there.

But I do want a sniper next to Russell if possible. It'd just be nice. Especially if we draft Ingram because then out of nowhere our roster is full of guys who can drain the 3. Good luck keeping guys out of the paint with Russell, Fournier and Ingram out there. Also that makes Ingram and Russell's development easier

 

I don't really agree with that argument. Same goes with GCMD and his mile long posts about Randle. In a real offensive system, players can change style.

 

What we know about Clarkson is that he can be an above-average shooter, he can create off the dribble, has above-average athleticism, meaning that he can be a scoring 1 or 2. 

 

From what we've seen, we know that Clarkson can score with the ball in his hands. I don't think that means that he, or Randle for that matter, become lesser players when the ball is moving. I'm sure Clarkson won't be able to score 20ppg in an offense that frowns on ISO play, but that doesn't mean he can't become a shooter/slasher. He has the ability to post on smaller guys like Livingston, and the ability to slash and create off the catch like Klay. We're obviously not the Warriors, and those opportunities won't come as easy to us as it does to them, but that's the point of a rebuild. 



#59 manaro90

manaro90

    Starter

  • Member
  • 5,095 posts
  • Location:Cologne, Germany
  • Fan Since:2000
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe Bryant, Magic, Nick Young

Posted May 19, 2016 - 12:52 AM

What the [expletive] is wrong with you people?! Where's the derozan love coming from ?

 

i have an opinion right???

 

And no nothing is wrong with me!!!!!!

 

thank you!


Edited by manaro90, May 19, 2016 - 12:52 AM.

Cologne, Germany Baby! LAKERS FOR LIFE.  |   Add me Instagram: princealaddin90

 

 


#60 kball

kball

    Mocker-in-Chief

  • Member
  • 6,809 posts
  • Fan Since:'71
  • Fav. Laker:kobe, magic, logo

Posted May 19, 2016 - 04:53 AM

I don't really agree with that argument. Same goes with GCMD and his mile long posts about Randle. In a real offensive system, players can change style.

 

What we know about Clarkson is that he can be an above-average shooter, he can create off the dribble, has above-average athleticism, meaning that he can be a scoring 1 or 2. 

 

From what we've seen, we know that Clarkson can score with the ball in his hands. I don't think that means that he, or Randle for that matter, become lesser players when the ball is moving. I'm sure Clarkson won't be able to score 20ppg in an offense that frowns on ISO play, but that doesn't mean he can't become a shooter/slasher. He has the ability to post on smaller guys like Livingston, and the ability to slash and create off the catch like Klay. We're obviously not the Warriors, and those opportunities won't come as easy to us as it does to them, but that's the point of a rebuild. 

Thank the Lord for the scroll down feature. Woo Hoo.

Almost like Maj assimilated GCMD (like the Borg)...but even Maj has toned it way back of late.


Praying for  1. Youngsters Ballin (Didn't really happen on a consistent basis at all) 2. Miracle Trade (Also didn't happen. And we traded our best player for chump change) 3. Kick Ass Rooks (Zubac exceeded, Ingram tried but disappointed overall)

READY FOR SEASON TO BE OVER!!!

 

 





3 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users


    Bing (1)