Jump to content


Photo

Report: Lakers Actively Seeking Trade Offers For Jordan Clarkson


  • Please log in to reply
61 replies to this topic

#21 Ventiquattro

Ventiquattro

    All-Star

  • Member
  • 6,378 posts
  • Location:Unknown

Posted June 02, 2017 - 03:38 PM

Im gonna have a few drinks and re-read it.

hahaha

 

To be fair, I understand why people dislike him. His attitude and effort cant turn lots of people off. I think if he had a quiet or shy personality, people would view him differently..


  • lakerfan98 and LACAS like this

#22 BasketballIQ

BasketballIQ

    Legend

  • Member
  • 16,261 posts
  • Name:Julius Jordan
  • Fav. Laker:24

Posted June 02, 2017 - 04:03 PM

I think they dislike him because they are stupid

#23 DaSmoothOperator

DaSmoothOperator

    DaSmoothOperator

  • Member
  • 2,497 posts
  • Fan Since:1965
  • Fav. Laker:Jerry West

Posted June 02, 2017 - 04:50 PM

I'm just gonna have a few drinks ain't reading nuthin

#24 GCMD

GCMD

    Legend

  • Member
  • 12,369 posts
  • Fav. Laker:Magic Johnson

Posted June 02, 2017 - 11:32 PM

I like JC but I'm not even close to being married to him longterm.  If he goes, he goes...as long as it helps the Lakers, cool.  Wish people understood that that's the appropriate stance for almost ALL of our players, including Russell and Randle.  In fact, the only 2 players I'm not listening to offers for are Ingram and Zubac.  If someone wants to offer something ridiculous for either, I'll listen...but most offers, I wouldn't entertain, not yet.


  • LACAS likes this

tenor.gif


#25 LakeShow1o1

LakeShow1o1

    All-Star

  • Member
  • 6,831 posts
  • Name:The Black Mamba Will Rise
  • Fan Since:1996
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe Bean Bryant

Posted June 02, 2017 - 11:54 PM

Don't get me wrong.  Clarkson is a terrible player by any means and while I thought the $13 million we gave him last season was going to be a steal, he really hasn't shown anything to boast about this season.  At best I think he's a spark plug off the bench that can provide you with some streaky scoring.  The athleticism has always been there, it's just unfortunate because he seems to have strayed away from the things that made him a promising player as a rookie.  

 

He's one of those players on this roster where I don't mind keeping, but at the same time I wouldn't be upset one bit to see him go (of course if the deal is reasonable).

 

This is going to be a very important season in terms of evaluating all of your young guys, especially Clarkson, Randle, and Russell.  They better show they're worth cause I'm certain one of them will be gone before the 2017-2018 season.


  • lakerfan98 and LACAS like this

#26 LACAS

LACAS

    Off The Bench

  • Member
  • 1,950 posts
  • Name:CAS
  • Fan Since:1974
  • Fav. Laker:Magic Johnson

Posted June 03, 2017 - 06:51 AM

I like JC but I'm not even close to being married to him longterm.  If he goes, he goes...as long as it helps the Lakers, cool.  Wish people understood that that's the appropriate stance for almost ALL of our players, including Russell and Randle.  In fact, the only 2 players I'm not listening to offers for are Ingram and Zubac.  If someone wants to offer something ridiculous for either, I'll listen...but most offers, I wouldn't entertain, not yet.

 

This is basically how I feel... I don't get attached to players, for me its all business keeping the franchise not the player at the forefront, at all times... shoot I wanted to trade Kobe prior to 2/48 in order to begin the rebuild if he didn't give us a huge home team discount nevertheless Im glad he stayed.

 

That said the only players Im not discussing are Ingram and Zubac, the rest are on the table for discussion, in regards to JC his contract is worth keeping however if you can get something more fitting in return I would pull the trigger or if moving his contract is needed in order to get someone we want and need I would do it or lastly if JC is needed to part with Moz or Deng I would do it but if he stays Im fine with that as well.

 

Franchise first, Lakers til' I die. 


Edited by LACAS, June 03, 2017 - 07:26 AM.

  • GCMD likes this

#27 kidpolean

kidpolean

    Superstar

  • Member
  • 7,613 posts
  • Fan Since:I was born
  • Fav. Laker:KB24 or 8

Posted June 03, 2017 - 07:19 AM

I don't see the problem with some wanting to keep only Ingram and Zubac while others add Russell to the mix. One player doesn't make much of a difference to continuously argue about it.

Most likely all three are still Lakers next season either way.

It's kind of hypocritical to tell people not to fall in love with players, mostly Russell, then turn around and display that same mindset when mentioning Zubac/Ingram. I haven't seen a single person say that they aren't willing to trade ANY of our youth. Whether Russell is or isn't included in your "untouchable" list is simply a matter of opinion. However, including Russell on the list is at least logical and can be defended. It's not like people are saying that Nance is untouchable.

Edited by kidpolean, June 03, 2017 - 07:22 AM.


#28 LACAS

LACAS

    Off The Bench

  • Member
  • 1,950 posts
  • Name:CAS
  • Fan Since:1974
  • Fav. Laker:Magic Johnson

Posted June 03, 2017 - 07:26 AM

I don't see the problem with some wanting to keep only Ingram and Zubac while others add Russell to the mix. One player doesn't make much of a difference to continuously argue about it.

Most likely all three are still Lakers next season either way.

It's kind of hypocritical to tell people not to fall in love with players, mostly Russell, then turn around and display that same mindset when mentioning Zubac/Ingram. I haven't seen a single person say that they aren't willing to trade ANY of our youth. Whether Russell is or isn't included in your "untouchable" list is simply a matter of opinion. However, including Russell on the list is at least logical and can be defended. It's not like people are saying that Nance is untouchable.

 

If Russell stays Im good, if he's traded it better make sense and it better work.

 

Im not in love with Ingram or Zubac, I just believe in them a bit more, shoot make me an offer I cant refuse and they'll both be gone. 

 

I dont fall in love with the names on the jersey, the love is for the jersey.

 

As for Russ, I think he's going to have a solid year, if he's kept great, Im not in any rush to move him, like I said above, it has to make sense and it better work.


  • GCMD likes this

#29 KobeWillReturnTriumphant

KobeWillReturnTriumphant

    TEIAM

  • Member
  • 2,431 posts
  • Fan Since:Showtime
  • Fav. Laker:Magic/Kobe/Tony Smith

Posted June 03, 2017 - 07:26 AM

Say what?

I was being sarcastic.  Russell has gotten better his two years, Clarkson...meh.  


  • LACAS likes this

#30 LACAS

LACAS

    Off The Bench

  • Member
  • 1,950 posts
  • Name:CAS
  • Fan Since:1974
  • Fav. Laker:Magic Johnson

Posted June 03, 2017 - 07:28 AM

I was being sarcastic.  Russell has gotten better his two years, Clarkson...meh.  

 

Ha for a second I thought you were hitt'n some under the bridge stuff ;)



#31 KobeWillReturnTriumphant

KobeWillReturnTriumphant

    TEIAM

  • Member
  • 2,431 posts
  • Fan Since:Showtime
  • Fav. Laker:Magic/Kobe/Tony Smith

Posted June 03, 2017 - 07:49 AM

With the way the last few years have been, could you blame me? 


  • LACAS likes this

#32 Jody Smokes

Jody Smokes

    Legend

  • Member
  • 11,635 posts
  • Fan Since:2003
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe

Posted June 03, 2017 - 09:16 AM

Only fans think like this.  You dont trade for a guy and have no backcourt to "lure" another star player away from his team.  If he doesnt come then what?  

 

I wouldn't be surprised to see Russ and clarkson go in favor of George and then try to lure Westbrook here


Edited by Jody Smokes, June 03, 2017 - 09:16 AM.

  • LakeShow1o1 and kidpolean 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)


#33 LakeShow1o1

LakeShow1o1

    All-Star

  • Member
  • 6,831 posts
  • Name:The Black Mamba Will Rise
  • Fan Since:1996
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe Bean Bryant

Posted June 03, 2017 - 01:15 PM

Trading away a quality prospect simply to open up a roster spot with hopes that a Star caliber player will join is a recipe for disaster...

 

What we've done thus far in terms of rebuilding has involved all the right ingredients (outside of the contracts of Mozgov and Deng).  Simply continue this process and hope that it eventually yields some quality production.



#34 GCMD

GCMD

    Legend

  • Member
  • 12,369 posts
  • Fav. Laker:Magic Johnson

Posted June 03, 2017 - 01:27 PM

Don't get me wrong.  Clarkson is a terrible player by any means and while I thought the $13 million we gave him last season was going to be a steal, he really hasn't shown anything to boast about this season.  At best I think he's a spark plug off the bench that can provide you with some streaky scoring.  The athleticism has always been there, it's just unfortunate because he seems to have strayed away from the things that made him a promising player as a rookie.  

 

He's one of those players on this roster where I don't mind keeping, but at the same time I wouldn't be upset one bit to see him go (of course if the deal is reasonable).

 

This is going to be a very important season in terms of evaluating all of your young guys, especially Clarkson, Randle, and Russell.  They better show they're worth cause I'm certain one of them will be gone before the 2017-2018 season.

 

Clarkson played a lot of PG his first year...very low expectations and a reliable role allowed him to progress...didn't happen after that with Lou and Russell both being shuffled into and out of the starting lineup along with Clarkson.

 

Clarkson is still a steal for where he was drafted...the other 2 are not.

 

I don't see the problem with some wanting to keep only Ingram and Zubac while others add Russell to the mix. One player doesn't make much of a difference to continuously argue about it.

Most likely all three are still Lakers next season either way.

It's kind of hypocritical to tell people not to fall in love with players, mostly Russell, then turn around and display that same mindset when mentioning Zubac/Ingram. I haven't seen a single person say that they aren't willing to trade ANY of our youth. Whether Russell is or isn't included in your "untouchable" list is simply a matter of opinion. However, including Russell on the list is at least logical and can be defended. It's not like people are saying that Nance is untouchable.

 

 

LOL...you still haven't realized that Ingram is better than Russell as a prospect or that Ingram's potential, based on his physical tools, is far past Russell's?  And Ingram was a rookie and wasn't expected to take over right away because of his slight build?

 

How about Zubac being drafted 32nd, being the ONLY reliable defensive BIG we had and showing lots of promise in a Marc Gasol type role for us?

 

I don't HAVE to justify not discussing Ingram or Zubac but if I wanted to, I could go on for days...they are still young and it was their first year.  I'm sure you're going to counter with Russell or Randle's "2nd" year, fine...but both of these guys (Ingram/Zubac) have shown both the physical tools AND SKILLS needed to be successful.  Randle has the physical tools but not the skill...Russell has the skill but not the physical tools...

 

Basic logic...common sense.  Ingram and Zubac deserve more time to see if they can work on their bodies and develop their skills to match their natural physical tools.  They have the mentality to do so and they play the game the right way.  Not discussing trading them until they give me a reason to.


Edited by GCMD, June 03, 2017 - 01:29 PM.

tenor.gif


#35 FranklinPeanuts

FranklinPeanuts

    Legend

  • Member
  • 10,606 posts
  • Location:Los Angeles
  • Fan Since:Since 1989
  • Fav. Laker:Magic Johnson

Posted June 03, 2017 - 04:22 PM

I dig JC. He maybe a one trick pony, but he is good at it. Not too bad on defense either. He isn't as bad as some people say he is. He's been shuffled around and has not done bad. PG, SG, PG, starting, benched and what have you. I think he had done what he could.
  • GCMD likes this

#36 GCMD

GCMD

    Legend

  • Member
  • 12,369 posts
  • Fav. Laker:Magic Johnson

Posted June 03, 2017 - 05:15 PM

I dig JC. He maybe a one trick pony, but he is good at it. Not too bad on defense either. He isn't as bad as some people say he is. He's been shuffled around and has not done bad. PG, SG, PG, starting, benched and what have you. I think he had done what he could.

 

 

He has vastly outperformed his draft position and still has room to improve with the tools to be a great complementary player in this system.  The hate for him is baffling.  If he gets traded, it is what it is...but I'm perfectly happy keeping until we land that franchise changing player...


Edited by GCMD, June 03, 2017 - 05:15 PM.

  • FranklinPeanuts likes this

tenor.gif


#37 Jody Smokes

Jody Smokes

    Legend

  • Member
  • 11,635 posts
  • Fan Since:2003
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe

Posted June 03, 2017 - 05:25 PM

I find this type of thinking weird from someone that's been ranting about Randle for 2 years.  First off I dont think anybody Hates Jordan Clarkson.  Secondly if you actually watch his game and seen the advanced stats on him he's regressed this year AND hes not very good.  Solid at best as a bench scoring option.  He literally does nothing well outside of penetrating.  Below average shooter, playmaking has regressed and he's overall a bone head on offense a lot of times. 

 

I also don't think anybody here is advocating trading him for the sake of trading him.  If he can be moved to open up room for a better option or return something that fits better then why not?  He's the oldest of the group on a market friendly deal for a bench scorer and at 25 he's likely not going to improve on the things that are vital for his position.  

 

He has vastly outperformed his draft position and still has room to improve with the tools to be a great complementary player in this system.  The hate for him is baffling.  If he gets traded, it is what it is...but I'm perfectly happy keeping until we land that franchise changing player...


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


#38 GCMD

GCMD

    Legend

  • Member
  • 12,369 posts
  • Fav. Laker:Magic Johnson

Posted June 03, 2017 - 05:45 PM

I find this type of thinking weird from someone that's been ranting about Randle for 2 years.  First off I dont think anybody Hates Jordan Clarkson.  Secondly if you actually watch his game and seen the advanced stats on him he's regressed this year AND hes not very good.  Solid at best as a bench scoring option.  He literally does nothing well outside of penetrating.  Below average shooter, playmaking has regressed and he's overall a bone head on offense a lot of times. 

 

I also don't think anybody here is advocating trading him for the sake of trading him.  If he can be moved to open up room for a better option or return something that fits better then why not?  He's the oldest of the group on a market friendly deal for a bench scorer and at 25 he's likely not going to improve on the things that are vital for his position.  

 

 

If you don't think there has been undue hate for a guy who played best off the bench at PG, was drafted at 45th, took a very good deal to stay and who HAS TOOLS that can be improved, unlike Randle who has been in the NBA just as long as Clarkson but hasn't DEVELOPED:

 

A post game

Off ball game

Outside J

Mid range J

Consistency on D

Consistency setting picks

 

All out of a player taken in the middle of the lottery?  Vs a player taken in the middle of the 2nd round?  LOL.

 

My expectations of Clarkson are not the same as yours.  My expectations of Randle are right in line with where he was drafted...if you think they should be equal in any way, we might as well stop talking...28 picks separate Randle (7) and Clarkson (45)...

 

Clarkson has more tools than Randle and that's a FACT.  Clarkson has good handles, can hit the 3, midrange and finish at the rim.  Clarkson is decent P&R player with the ability to make good passes but he's not a pure PG.  Clarkson is a GREAT ATHLETE with the length and speed to become a good defender, though he's not nearly as bad as people claim he is.

 

Outside of rebounding, name one tool than Randle HAS, not can develop, has right now.

 

Clarkson HAS guard skills.  As long as he keeps working out in the summer, there is no reason to believe those skills won't get better.  

Randle does NOT have the skills it takes to play PF - in the paint or as a floor spacer.

 

 

I'm getting sick and tired of people bringing up my criticism of Randle to try to prove a point about another player.  You lose every time.  You try to equate things like my opinions aren't based on RATIONAL thought or REAL DEFICIENCIES in Randle's game.  That's not even close to being true.


Edited by GCMD, June 03, 2017 - 05:46 PM.

tenor.gif


#39 Jody Smokes

Jody Smokes

    Legend

  • Member
  • 11,635 posts
  • Fan Since:2003
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe

Posted June 03, 2017 - 05:55 PM

Just like Randle has deficiencies so does Clarkson.  Except right now Randle isn't getting paid 12M a year.  He also did improve his game this past year.  He's not where we want him but he became a solid secondary playmaker and started to shoot the 3 ball at the end of the year.  A lot of what pains Randle has been attributed to effort.  I think all the young guys work hard but Clarkson is simply the odd man out if they feel they need change.  He has the lowest ceiling of this bunch.  Who cares if he outplayed his draft position.  He's on his second contract now and will be 25 before the reg season starts.  If there is a chance to improve start by moving him.  He's certainly not better than what's left and who will be drafted.  

 

If you don't think there has been undue hate for a guy who played best off the bench at PG, was drafted at 45th, took a very good deal to stay and who HAS TOOLS that can be improved, unlike Randle who has been in the NBA just as long as Clarkson but hasn't DEVELOPED:

 

A post game

Off ball game

Outside J

Mid range J

Consistency on D

Consistency setting picks

 

All out of a player taken in the middle of the lottery?  Vs a player taken in the middle of the 2nd round?  LOL.

 

My expectations of Clarkson are not the same as yours.  My expectations of Randle are right in line with where he was drafted...if you think they should be equal in any way, we might as well stop talking...28 picks separate Randle (7) and Clarkson (45)...

 

Clarkson has more tools than Randle and that's a FACT.  Clarkson has good handles, can hit the 3, midrange and finish at the rim.  Clarkson is decent P&R player with the ability to make good passes but he's not a pure PG.  Clarkson is a GREAT ATHLETE with the length and speed to become a good defender, though he's not nearly as bad as people claim he is.

 

Outside of rebounding, name one tool than Randle HAS, not can develop, has right now.

 

Clarkson HAS guard skills.  As long as he keeps working out in the summer, there is no reason to believe those skills won't get better.  

Randle does NOT have the skills it takes to play PF - in the paint or as a floor spacer.

 

 

I'm getting sick and tired of people bringing up my criticism of Randle to try to prove a point about another player.  You lose every time.  You try to equate things like my opinions aren't based on RATIONAL thought or REAL DEFICIENCIES in Randle's game.  That's not even close to being true.


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


#40 GCMD

GCMD

    Legend

  • Member
  • 12,369 posts
  • Fav. Laker:Magic Johnson

Posted June 03, 2017 - 06:59 PM

Just like Randle has deficiencies so does Clarkson.  Except right now Randle isn't getting paid 12M a year.  He also did improve his game this past year.  He's not where we want him but he became a solid secondary playmaker and started to shoot the 3 ball at the end of the year.  A lot of what pains Randle has been attributed to effort.  I think all the young guys work hard but Clarkson is simply the odd man out if they feel they need change.  He has the lowest ceiling of this bunch.  Who cares if he outplayed his draft position.  He's on his second contract now and will be 25 before the reg season starts.  If there is a chance to improve start by moving him.  He's certainly not better than what's left and who will be drafted.  

 

 

Questions were:

 

What are the skills Randle possesses that both fit his position and he can improve, NOT acquire?

Why is a 2nd rounder who was best coming off the bench and has tools that he can improve being compared to a lottery pick that doesn't?

 

Not all of your players have to have the HIGHEST CEILING to be productive and have potential.  I think Clarkson can become a better player.  I think we can say that if you put Clarkson as the 6th man or first guard off the bench, he's likely to have a long career and help a LOT of teams.  Why is that not worth 12M?

 

He regressed...is that not a statement in a VACUUM?  Did he have the same role with this team from the previous years?  No...Randle does.  Did he have an off year shooting?  Maybe, but so did Ingram...Randle shot 27% from 3 this year and 27.8% last year...at UK he shot 16.7% from 3...and you STILL think he's going to stretch the floor?  Eventually?  Yeah.

 

How about post moves?  Or even attempts at playing in the post?  Randle didn't do it a lot at UK but he did it a LOT MORE than he did here over the last 2 seasons...and he's doing it less and less...but you think he's improving his post game?

 

Mid range shots?  LOL.

 

 

Clarkson showed that he COULD do everything he needed to do over his first 2 season.  What he needs to do is get comfortable in a consistent role, work on honing the skills he will need to be a complementary role player and try to expand his role while giving better effort on D.

 

Randle's effort is bad, as you pointed out.  Being a secondary playmaker is nothing...CLARKSON is a secondary playmaker.  LOU WILL was a secondary playmaker.  INGRAM was a secondary playmaker.  Give me a REAL SKILL, not some non-descript title that you think passes as a skill.

 

 

Clarkson has things to work on, true...but he also has things we can work with.  Randle does not...not outside of rebounding.


tenor.gif





6 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 5 guests, 1 anonymous users