Jump to content


Photo

A new (old) direction?


  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 Tensai

Tensai

    █▄█▄█ █ █▀█

  • Member
  • 6,725 posts

Posted February 12, 2017 - 04:53 AM

Luke came to pave way to the Warriors style with Russell / Randle core. But a lot of people are buying into the promise of Zubac at the expense of Randle. And FO might not be that far from it too.

 

Jerry West / Wilt Chamberlain

Magic Johnson / Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

Kobe Bryant / Shaquille O'Neal

Kobe Bryant / Pau Gasol

 

Is the formula at its work again? Are we upon another era of a dynamic frontcourt/backcourt duo with D'Angelo or Ingram with Zubac at the center? The formula brought us 16 titles. I don't know about you but it sure is fun to watch a traditional lineup with a skiilled big man at work.


fXlFKv8.gif

 


#2 kball

kball

    Mocker-in-Chief

  • Member
  • 6,051 posts
  • Fan Since:'71
  • Fav. Laker:kobe, magic, logo

Posted February 12, 2017 - 07:43 AM

If i had to guess a couple years out, it will be a starting lineup and core of Russell/Ingram/Zu

 

with the addition of an all-star in exchange for other pieces on team currently and/or free agency


Praying for  1. Youngsters Ballin (Hockey stick growth curve for Randle, D'lo, Nance and Clarkson ASAP) 2. Miracle Trade (Lakers need a top 10 player...or maybe 2 to compete w bigboys) 3. Kick Ass Rooks (Ingram and Zubac getting playing time and impacting games)

READY FOR SEASON!

 

 


#3 Jody Smokes

Jody Smokes

    Legend

  • Member
  • 11,265 posts
  • Fan Since:2003
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe

Posted February 12, 2017 - 09:01 AM

Refresh my memory but I dont think Luke said anything about bringing the Warriors offense to the Lakers with Russell and Randle as the core foundation at all.  The formula that brought the Lakers 16 rings was mostly by having the best players in the NBA.  Magic, Kobe, Shaq, Kareem and even Pau were arguably the best players at their positions and some even the best in the game overall.  

 

Don't think that's something you can plan around.  


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


#4 Jody Smokes

Jody Smokes

    Legend

  • Member
  • 11,265 posts
  • Fan Since:2003
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe

Posted February 12, 2017 - 09:04 AM

I think traditional lineups are thing of the past.  The new era players are just too skilled to be put in boxes like yesteryear.  Players like PG, Greek Freak, Lebron, Draymond, KD and even hopefully for us Ingram just cause too many issue when trying to compete with a traditional lineup.  The closest good team you have to that in the NBA right now is the Spurs and Grizz but even they try not to run both their traditional bigs together at the same time.  Even during the 09-10 years Pau played more key minutes with Odom than he ever did with Bynum. 


Edited by Jody Smokes, February 12, 2017 - 09:05 AM.

  • The Big Fish and lakerfan98 like this

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


#5 Jody Smokes

Jody Smokes

    Legend

  • Member
  • 11,265 posts
  • Fan Since:2003
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe

Posted February 12, 2017 - 09:59 AM

Anyone can feel free to disagree with this but from what I've seen this year the players I want them to invest in are Russell, Nance, Zubac and Ingram.  JC being the older of the bunch should be a lot better and I just don't think Randle is a good fit with the other guys.  The things he's good at don't exactly fit and the things he needs to do to add value to what the other guys can do he doesn't do well.  Like cutting, setting good and being at least some kind of threat from the perimeter since he loves to play from there.  

 

All the young players have consistency issues but not all of them have fit issues.  This is where I believe that Randle is the odd man out and JC could be out due to his age and regression as a player.  


  • DanishLakerFan, Olabebeh and lakerfan98 like this

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


#6 DanishLakerFan

DanishLakerFan

    Superstar

  • Member
  • 7,842 posts
  • Fan Since:1998
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe

Posted February 12, 2017 - 10:10 AM

Anyone can feel free to disagree with this but from what I've seen this year the players I want them to invest in are Russell, Nance, Zubac and Ingram.  JC being the older of the bunch should be a lot better and I just don't think Randle is a good fit with the other guys.  The things he's good at don't exactly fit and the things he needs to do to add value to what the other guys can do he doesn't do well.  Like cutting, setting good and being at least some kind of threat from the perimeter since he loves to play from there.  

 

All the young players have consistency issues but not all of them have fit issues.  This is where I believe that Randle is the odd man out and JC could be out due to his age and regression as a player.  

I wouldn't go as far as to say that Randle is the odd man out, but his game is clearly polarizing and between him and Nance i think Nance is much easier to fit into an offense. On the other hand you see Randle do stuff that is extremely rare for a player his size, so i'd say we should invest in Russell, Nance, Zubac, Ingram AND Randle.

 

But of obviously at some point we have to chose between Randle and Nance, so if something comes along for one of them, i think we'd have to pull the trigger. Saw a Wolves fan post a trade idea regarding Nance for Dunn, which would be interesting.

 

I've had the same stance on Clarkson for two years now: Nice backup guard that can play 1 and 2. Cant defend much and therefore cant be trusted as a starter, which makes him a nice 6th man. Wouldnt' mind keeping him, but would probably check the market for him.


Edited by DanishLakerFan, February 12, 2017 - 10:30 AM.


#7 last stand 2.0

last stand 2.0

    Legend

  • Member
  • 22,640 posts
  • Location:LA

Posted February 12, 2017 - 10:26 AM

Anyone can feel free to disagree with this but from what I've seen this year the players I want them to invest in are Russell, Nance, Zubac and Ingram. JC being the older of the bunch should be a lot better and I just don't think Randle is a good fit with the other guys. The things he's good at don't exactly fit and the things he needs to do to add value to what the other guys can do he doesn't do well. Like cutting, setting good and being at least some kind of threat from the perimeter since he loves to play from there.

All the young players have consistency issues but not all of them have fit issues. This is where I believe that Randle is the odd man out and JC could be out due to his age and regression as a player.


I agree though I'm in the middle with Randle

I wanted Fournier over clarkson this offseason. Just a smarter player and same age

Would take smart over clarkson since he's more of what we need

Randle I'm on the fence because he's young, talented and has improved but for the right package? Maybe even combing him with clarkson, I'd be on board. I'm against trading Russell completely right now and Ingram

Zubac is leaning towards that area too. I'm not in love with him yet but I do like what he's shown a lot. There's no reason if he continues on this trend at his age that he can't be a starter by next year. I'm not ready to throw Marc gasol or jokic out there. But there's been a recent trend of euro big men being drafted late 1st early 2nd performing well in the NBA

I think he's smart, skilled, big and effective.

Nance is just a guy you don't need to trade. The value you'll receive is never going to match the value he gives. He can start if you have the right guys on the perimeter. If I'm the lakers I do call Chicago and see if Randle, clarkson, Lou even gets a bite

Though I'd imagine butler will draw more

I'm personally ok with nance starting if Randle can net us something good in return. But I think you almost have to wait until we know what's happening with the pick.

Let's say we land the #1 overall. We get fultz. Well then do you suddenly package Randle with either fultz or Russell?

Do you then make a Randle for Gordon swap to add defense?

I think we have to wait until the offseason to entertain trading Randle unless something comes along that we have to bite
Posted Image

#8 last stand 2.0

last stand 2.0

    Legend

  • Member
  • 22,640 posts
  • Location:LA

Posted February 12, 2017 - 10:29 AM

I wouldn't go as far as to say that Randle is the odd man out, but his game is clearly polarizing and between him and Nance i think Nance is much easier to fit into an offense. On the other hand you see Randle do stuff that is extremely rare for a player his size, so i'd say we should invest in Russell, Nance, Zubac, Ingram AND Randle.


Yes, but I hesitate to put Randle in the do not trade category. For example. What if Randle and clarkson IS enough for butler? Then I think the benefit of putting a 2nd tier star with your 2 blue chip guys outweighs randles potential.

I'm against Randle and Russell or Randle and Ingram but if Randle and clarkson can net something like that? You almost have to do it.

But it's all conjecture. Like I said in another thread. Randle and clarkson imo are the main trade pieces. Doesn't mean they will be traded. But I start any package for any player with those 2
Posted Image

#9 DanishLakerFan

DanishLakerFan

    Superstar

  • Member
  • 7,842 posts
  • Fan Since:1998
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe

Posted February 12, 2017 - 10:34 AM

Yes, but I hesitate to put Randle in the do not trade category. For example. What if Randle and clarkson IS enough for butler? Then I think the benefit of putting a 2nd tier star with your 2 blue chip guys outweighs randles potential.

I'm against Randle and Russell or Randle and Ingram but if Randle and clarkson can net something like that? You almost have to do it.

But it's all conjecture. Like I said in another thread. Randle and clarkson imo are the main trade pieces. Doesn't mean they will be traded. But I start any package for any player with those 2

I'm not putting Randle in that category and would check the market for both him and Nance and if the right deal comes along this season i'd pull the trigger.

 

But it wont be enough for Butler at all because other teams will be able to outbid that offer.



#10 Ventiquattro

Ventiquattro

    All-Star

  • Member
  • 5,734 posts
  • Location:Unknown

Posted February 12, 2017 - 03:06 PM

I'm not putting Randle in that category and would check the market for both him and Nance and if the right deal comes along this season i'd pull the trigger.

 

But it wont be enough for Butler at all because other teams will be able to outbid that offer.

Worst case scenario you keep both. I dont think the Lakers need to choose between them.

 

I'd still look to trade for Butler If it means parting with the pick, Randle and JC. I'm not very sure what is his market value but If Chicago are open to do it, I dont see a reason not to pull the trigger.

 

People contend that the Lakers arent winning within Butler's timeframe but Butler is 27. We could easily get 5 good years out of him + 2 more years.



#11 LakeShow1o1

LakeShow1o1

    All-Star

  • Member
  • 5,964 posts
  • Name:The Black Mamba Will Rise
  • Fan Since:1996
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe Bean Bryant

Posted February 12, 2017 - 03:21 PM

Worst case scenario you keep both. I dont think the Lakers need to choose between them.

 

I'd still look to trade for Butler If it means parting with the pick, Randle and JC. I'm not very sure what is his market value but If Chicago are open to do it, I dont see a reason not to pull the trigger.

 

People contend that the Lakers arent winning within Butler's timeframe but Butler is 27. We could easily get 5 good years out of him + 2 more years.

So you'd trade (Fultz, Lonzo, or Jackson), Randle, and Clarkson for Butler?  I have trouble giving up Randle and the pick for Butler, all three is a whole lot.



#12 Ventiquattro

Ventiquattro

    All-Star

  • Member
  • 5,734 posts
  • Location:Unknown

Posted February 12, 2017 - 03:23 PM

So you'd trade (Fultz, Lonzo, or Jackson), Randle, and Clarkson for Butler?  I have trouble giving up Randle and the pick for Butler, all three is a whole lot.

 

This can be rephrased as : No pick(lost) Randle and JC. Now wouldnt that be a good deal for the Lakers?


Edited by Ventiquattro, February 12, 2017 - 03:23 PM.


#13 Tensai

Tensai

    █▄█▄█ █ █▀█

  • Member
  • 6,725 posts

Posted February 12, 2017 - 04:51 PM

I don't think traditional lineups are a thing of past. The NBA just did not have many skilled big man post Duncan/KG/Sheed/Webber/Dirk/Shaq/Pau era. You see more players in the mold of Ben Wallace, and less finesse players. That is why it became important for big players to at least shoot the ball from range at a decent rate. But the league is also changing with incoming young players. Embiid, Towns, Jokic, Porzingis, Zubac, Turner can be the this era's dominant core. The 5 of those 6 names already dominate for their own respective teams. The skilled big man always change the rules of this game. Always.


fXlFKv8.gif

 


#14 Jody Smokes

Jody Smokes

    Legend

  • Member
  • 11,265 posts
  • Fan Since:2003
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe

Posted February 12, 2017 - 05:32 PM

You can't find any team in the NBA right now using 2 traditional bigs at the same time having success.  Those bigs you mentioned outside of Shaq were extremely versatile.  So they weren't exactly the best examples but post 2010 TD played C and won again with Diaw playing the 4.  KG was ahead of his time and pretty much couldn't be guarded by any big or perimeter player.  

 

All the those new guys you mentioned are 5s and their teams have had more success when they didn't try to pair them with another traditional big.  

 

Nuggets: Traded Nurkic after realizing that Nurkic/Jokic was not gonna work.  

NY: Zingis should be playing 5 with Melo at the 4

LA: Our 4s aren't traditional 4s.  

Indy; Thad Young is definitely not a traditional 4.  

 

It sounds like you want an era to be here that's long gone man.  The game has evolved.  You can't force a square peg into a round hole. 

 

I don't think traditional lineups are a thing of past. The NBA just did not have many skilled big man post Duncan/KG/Sheed/Webber/Dirk/Shaq/Pau era. You see more players in the mold of Ben Wallace, and less finesse players. That is why it became important for big players to at least shoot the ball from range at a decent rate. But the league is also changing with incoming young players. Embiid, Towns, Jokic, Porzingis, Zubac, Turner can be the this era's dominant core. The 5 of those 6 names already dominate for their own respective teams. The skilled big man always change the rules of this game. Always.


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


#15 Jody Smokes

Jody Smokes

    Legend

  • Member
  • 11,265 posts
  • Fan Since:2003
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe

Posted February 12, 2017 - 05:34 PM

Not say there aren't some exceptions but the Grizz and Spurs are the only teams as of late to use 2 traditional bigs but when it was time to play against teams like GS and OKC they would have to change their approach or get ran off the floor.  

 

Some cite OKC using Adams and Kanter vs GS as a possible success of 2 bigs but neither of them ran a lot of minutes together that series and having KD and Russ going crazy makes up for a lot of [expletive]


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


#16 Jody Smokes

Jody Smokes

    Legend

  • Member
  • 11,265 posts
  • Fan Since:2003
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe

Posted February 12, 2017 - 05:48 PM

Outside of being good enough after to be in contention I just don't see a lot of value in trading for a prime aged star player that isn't top 3-5 elite.  Trading for Jimmy Butler doesn't close the gap on competing vs GS or CLE and forces you to make other moves in conjunction to TRY to be a top team that likely you end up being slightly above average after it's over.  

 

Outside of Lebron, KD, Harden and maybe Russ and Steph.  I don't see any of the post 26-27 year old guys worth building around.  They can be great 2nd pieces or if you have multiple of them on one team like a mix of Jimmy/Boogie then you might have something but even then, not really.  

 

I'd rather keep building a new culture and see how things shake out with the young core, add and subtract what doesnt fit and see where it goes.  Outside of getting a top 5 guy you need a lot of guys to be super good at the same time a la the Warriors.  


  • LakeShow1o1 likes this

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


#17 LakeShow1o1

LakeShow1o1

    All-Star

  • Member
  • 5,964 posts
  • Name:The Black Mamba Will Rise
  • Fan Since:1996
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe Bean Bryant

Posted February 12, 2017 - 05:54 PM

Outside of being good enough after to be in contention I just don't see a lot of value in trading for a prime aged star player that isn't top 3-5 elite.  Trading for Jimmy Butler doesn't close the gap on competing vs GS or CLE and forces you to make other moves in conjunction to TRY to be a top team that likely you end up being slightly above average after it's over.  

 

Outside of Lebron, KD, Harden and maybe Russ and Steph.  I don't see any of the post 26-27 year old guys worth building around.  They can be great 2nd pieces or if you have multiple of them on one team like a mix of Jimmy/Boogie then you might have something but even then, not really.  

 

I'd rather keep building a new culture and see how things shake out with the young core, add and subtract what doesnt fit and see where it goes.  Outside of getting a top 5 guy you need a lot of guys to be super good at the same time a la the Warriors.  

 

To bad Laker fans don't understand this thought process.  Many fans are shortsighted and would much rather push for a move that makes us relevant again but mediocre at best in the long run rather than waiting for talent to develop.



#18 BasketballIQ

BasketballIQ

    Legend

  • Member
  • 15,677 posts
  • Name:Julius Jordan
  • Fav. Laker:24

Posted February 12, 2017 - 05:58 PM

Will Randle get better.
All players usually do

#19 kball

kball

    Mocker-in-Chief

  • Member
  • 6,051 posts
  • Fan Since:'71
  • Fav. Laker:kobe, magic, logo

Posted February 12, 2017 - 06:00 PM

But every team but 2-3 are mediocre to good at best.

 

Unless we get or develop 2 superstars within 3-5 years of each other in age the best we will ever be is mediocre to good, and not a good bet to win the whole thing.

 

I think its more likely we end up in that group than championship caliber team


Edited by kball, February 12, 2017 - 06:01 PM.

Praying for  1. Youngsters Ballin (Hockey stick growth curve for Randle, D'lo, Nance and Clarkson ASAP) 2. Miracle Trade (Lakers need a top 10 player...or maybe 2 to compete w bigboys) 3. Kick Ass Rooks (Ingram and Zubac getting playing time and impacting games)

READY FOR SEASON!

 

 


#20 Jody Smokes

Jody Smokes

    Legend

  • Member
  • 11,265 posts
  • Fan Since:2003
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe

Posted February 12, 2017 - 06:26 PM

Im sure he will but it's not just a matter of him getting better but about fitting.  Randle has been a focal point of a team his entire career and now he's in a position where a team needs the little things done from him.  He doesn't have the skills to be a go to guy.  Just watching him play I feel that he struggles with this.  GCMD said this awhile back, Randle might need to be on a team that's willing to make him a bigger focus.  He in a lot of ways plays like Boogie but he's not nearly physically imposing enough to pull some of that stuff off and still be productive.  

 

Some fans keep trying to make a Draymond connection but Draymond and Randle aren't really ANYTHING alike and Draymond was a glue guy in college and a leader.  He wasn't the focal point of his team as far as scoring.  Totally different approaches.  

 

Will Randle get better.
All players usually do


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





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users