34 replies to this topic

[kball]

Well, I don't want to trade Russell or Ingram unless they are for ALL STARS or possibly former all stars from a year or 2 ago. Or better, near all stars on the cusp.

 

I'd look at trades of Nance and maybe Clarkson for quality vets 4+ years in the league.

 

Randle and Zu i'm on the fence as to what to do with them.

Both to me have the possibility of giant upside within 2 years.

 

Randle seems like a guy that MAY be able to reach 20/10 or 18/9 which don't come around all that often and his passing is improving. That's tough to give up for another role player.

 

Honestly wouldnt shock me if he's the laker with the biggest jump next season because for some reason expectations are more negative on him.

 

In short, I'd be WILLING to trade everyone depending on the incoming.

But RELUCTANT to part with primarily BI and D'lo

[kball]

Also offloading one of our better young guys with one of our really bad contracts may pay dividends not immediately but 1 or 2 moves later.

 

So that may work too.

 

(DISCLAIMER: I'm not as good a GM as some of the others here seem to think they are)

[LakeShow1o1]

Here's my take on this topic.

Simply analyzing the structure of the most successful basketball teams as of late, you're going to need a combination of both young talent as well as veteran leadership.  At the moment the Lakers have neither.

For that reason, the best route to take, in my opinion, is to continue to develop your youngsters until one of them proves to be a potential cornerstone of your franchise.  Russell, Ingram, and upcoming #2 overall pick all have the potential to be that cornerstone.

 

At the moment, none of our prospects alone would net us a Franchise altering player that would place us in playoff contention.  Either Ingram or the #2 pick are likely our most coveted trade chips, yet at best, they'd net us either Paul George (a player whom we may be able to obtain in 2018 free agency), or Jimmy Butler (a player whom I feel doesn't fit out system and barely lead his Bulls team to an 8th seed in the East).

 

The Lakers have nothing to lose when banking on these youngsters potential unless god forbid some career altering injury occurs.  

[BasketballIQ]

We have young talent and veteran leadership.

Our core is far too young to compete in the worlds best league. Simple math

[fido]

Veteran leadership?

 

Where?!  Exactly what time are or have you been watching?

[Klewfish]

I definitely think we trade away part of the core for a vet. How many teams have successfully developed a full roster of young players with no veterans? As it stands this moment, we have D'Lo, Randle, Ingram, Nance, Clarkson, Zubac, Black,  #2, #28. That's 9 players with a lot of potential but very little experience. I'd prefer to trade Randle and the #2 pick for a better big man, but I don't think anyone worthwhile is available. 

[DLN]

I definitely think we trade away part of the core for a vet. How many teams have successfully developed a full roster of young players with no veterans? As it stands this moment, we have D'Lo, Randle, Ingram, Nance, Clarkson, Zubac, Black,  #2, #28. That's 9 players with a lot of potential but very little experience. I'd prefer to trade Randle and the #2 pick for a better big man, but I don't think anyone worthwhile is available. 

Two teams that come to mind are OKC and GS. They did add veterans, but never traded for a star.

 

What to do with the guys we have really should depend on the players we can get in free agency and i think Pelinka has a much better feel for who we might be able to get, than Mitch and Jim.

 

IF there's a legit FA that would sign with the Lakers i think we could consider moving one of the key assets if it brings us back a star like George.

[GCMD]

Anyone re-thinking their answer now that you've digested the PG13 news?

[Ventiquattro]

Anyone re-thinking their answer now that you've digested the PG13 news?

With PG possibly coming, Im all in for drafting Lonzo, I can tell you that much lol..

 

Lonzo

Russell

PG

Ingram

 

That would be a nice core.. You can add DMC next year or LeBron(if he's actually thinking of signing here).. or even wait for Harden/Westbrook..

 

Or simply roll with this group, assuming the young guys ball out and show chemistry.. Magic/Pelinka cannot ask for a better ""Pending"" situation..

[BasketballIQ]

Cousins or LeBron or the Harden or Westbrook.

Which fits?

[GCMD]

Cousins or LeBron or the Harden or Westbrook.

Which fits?

 

 

Obviously Cousins...but you don't say no to LeBron...get him in and figure out the rest later.

[Ventiquattro]

Cousins or LeBron or the Harden or Westbrook.

Which fits?

 

Certain players, you just build around. LeBron gonna be 33 when he hits FA next year. Im not banking on him coming, but LeBron is great for basketball and for business.. As a free agent, he wont cost you anything but require a championship caliber team. With PG, thats not enough. It'll depend how the rest develop(DAR,BI, 2nd pick)..

 

But to answer your q: IMO, Cousins make the least sense( in relative terms obviously)..

 

The base scenario: Lakers dont acquire or sign PG, but develop the young core.. Im fine with that. Pick, Russell, Ingram, Randle isnt a bad combination( though we need perimeter defense and shooting: aspects can be filled via free agency)..

[BasketballIQ]

Lonzo
Russell
George
LeBron
Mosgov

No kids remaining. Deng off the books.


I rather have the kids than that joke of a 3rd seed

[Ventiquattro]

This team + Ingram is not what the most optimistic laker ever imagined. Lebron falls off? Ingram is still here.

It will take chemistry and growth for this team to win. With lebron here and the glamour of LA, I bet we'll fill the 2nd unit with quality players taking a discount.

Small ball would consist of: Lonzo Russell Ingram pg lebron.


This is a long shot though. Won't believe it till he does the press conference.

Edited by Ventiquattro, June 19, 2017 - 07:53 PM.

[GCMD]

Certain players, you just build around. LeBron gonna be 33 when he hits FA next year. Im not banking on him coming, but LeBron is great for basketball and for business.. As a free agent, he wont cost you anything but require a championship caliber team. With PG, thats not enough. It'll depend how the rest develop(DAR,BI, 2nd pick)..

 

But to answer your q: IMO, Cousins make the least sense( in relative terms obviously)..

 

The base scenario: Lakers dont acquire or sign PG, but develop the young core.. Im fine with that. Pick, Russell, Ingram, Randle isnt a bad combination( though we need perimeter defense and shooting: aspects can be filled via free agency)..

 

I hate Cousins...but he'd make the most sense #2 / Russell / PG13 / Ingram / Cousins...all of them can shoot and pass.

 

LeBron would make sense because he's still a Superstar and would INSTANTLY make us a contender...Ingram would just have to come off the bench for now and that's OK...

 

#2

Russell

PG13 / Ingram

LeBron

???

 

If you can trade Russell for Cousins now, you get

 

#2

PG13

Ingram

LeBron

Cousins

 

That's a contender...

 

Lonzo
Russell
George
LeBron
Mosgov

No kids remaining. Deng off the books.


I rather have the kids than that joke of a 3rd seed

 

 

?  I was going to try to discuss your opinion but I'm not sure where to even begin.  Never mind.