Jump to content


Photo

There are reasons to get excited about Julius Randle this year


  • Please log in to reply
638 replies to this topic

#121 Disaster in Paradise

Disaster in Paradise

    Do you wanna tickle my big ol' long toes?

  • Member
  • 11,559 posts

Posted August 05, 2017 - 07:13 PM

We see videos of Randle shooting every season.


But this year he is strong.
  • Busty Bluth likes this

I like to dip my feet in toilet water & smell them.


#122 JGuez

JGuez

    All-Star

  • Member
  • 6,008 posts

Posted August 06, 2017 - 10:31 AM

Every year we say the same thing... we should be excited for this coming year coz of him and we end up with inconsistent work...

 

Well his rookie year was a wash. So even if you heard things about his shooting that summer, we don't know what the result of that would have been.

 

The only data there would be is 2 summers of seeing him shooting, then seeing the results of not having much of a jump shot. That would be the '15-'16 and '16-'17 seasons, which were essentially his rookie and sophomore seasons. Your post comes across as if this is some sort of BS we've been hearing for 7 years and not seeing results. That just isn't the case.

 

He actually did improve year over year in scoring efficiency. He got his FG% from 42.9% to 48.7% on the same minutes and shot attempts which resulted in 2 more points per game. (Let alone all the other things that factors, like the other team getting more possessions of the ball off a miss.) 

 

FG% on shots not in the restricted area had a slight improvement:

 

'15-'16: 29.8%, 116 out of 388

'16-'17: 35.9%  136 out of 378

 

Mid Range had a slight improvement: 

 

'15-'16: 22.9%, 39 out of 170

'16-'17: 37.4%  37 out of 99

 

For the record, DeMar DeRozan who is considered the best mid range in the game today shoots 41% (but on way higher volume obviously) from mid range. Aldridge in his best years shot (and still does) 41% from mid range.

 

It's still not great, but it's improvement from a rookie to sophomore year. The 3rd year should really settle this once and for all IMO.

 

This is the year where we truly find out what Randle's true ceiling is. I don't mean he'll reach his ceiling this year, I mean we'll know if the potential we've seen in spurts is actually something we think he'll reach one day or perhaps he's just a rebound cleanup guy who can get you 10 and 10.

 

And hey...that isn't a bad thing to have, but it obviously wouldn't be worth a max or anything like that.

 

I think Randle has a very good chance to breakout this season....


  • DanishLakerFan and K-Kris like this

#123 Rekal

Rekal

    Rookie

  • Member
  • 1,150 posts
  • Name:J
  • Fan Since:Years
  • Fav. Laker:KB24

Posted August 06, 2017 - 11:08 AM

why wasn't he shooting at his wedding?

jk

#124 GCMD

GCMD

    Legend

  • Member
  • 13,358 posts
  • Fav. Laker:Magic Johnson

Posted August 10, 2017 - 10:42 PM

yes and in GCMD's mind 28/18 and 5 blocks against Drew League competition isn't looking "better" against lower competition.  Now I see why I decided to never discuss Randle with you.  Anyway moving on.  For the record he showcased a right hand plenty of times and hit a few jumpers as well, but I doubt that'd be enough to sate you.  If Randle had hit 4 threes you'd likely say "yeah against Drew League competition, let's see how it works against NBA competition.  I Know you want to believe..but I just don't see it.".  So no point in getting into it with you when it comes to Randle.   Moving on now however to better news. 

 

You HAVE discussed Randle with me and it goes the same way every time:

 

You pretend to know what Randle WILL become and I tell you that's not who he is right now.

 

 

You keep making Randle out to be a player that is much better than Randle actually is...that's the problem.  Does he have natural talent?  Yes.  Could he become a better player?  Yes...but that could be said about any player in the league.

 

The example I always use is Clarkson...if Clarkson passed more (6-9apg), shot better from 3 (>40%) and was a lock-down defender, he COULD become one of the best SGs in the NBA...top 5 actually...does that mean that's going to EVER happen?  No...nor is that the point.  Clarkson is who he is.  If he improves, great...if he tries to improve, great...but that's not evidence that he WILL improve.  We have been talking about Randle improving and working to improve his shot for 3 years...you're the one making the claim that his work means he's destined to EVER become a good shooter.  My claim has NOTHING to do with the future...it's always been about who and what he is right now.

 

Stop giving certain players the Lakers Fans "OverShine".  Just because you want to see something happen or see a player a certain way doesn't mean that's how it is or will be.  It's also not a reason to argue the same point incessantly nor create this false narrative that "something is wrong with a person" who disagrees.

 

 

In another world where Clarkson was the "favored son" over Randle, Lakers fans would be giving Clarkson all of the same "OverShine" that they currently give Randle and we'd be having the exact same conversation with me saying that's not who he IS.  It's literally that close between them.  They BOTH have natural gifts that should excel in the NBA but neither has actually put it together to become more than role players.

 

Only difference?  You hate one and love the other.

 

 

 

I’m not shrinking the sample size at all.

 

 

You say this, then immediately say this:

 

 


The was a significant uptick in 3pt attempts the two last months of the season where he started shooting close to 2 per game

 

 

 

 

That's why we never get anywhere.  You disagree with me because I call you out on logic shenanigans and then you try to explain why it's ok to do exactly what I said you're doing...

 

And you wonder why we never get anywhere?

 


I’ve never argued that Randle will be a good shooter, but looking at the numbers suggest that he has a chance to be a good – or passable – shooter.

 

What numbers?

 

16% at UK

27.8% his 1st season

27.0% last season...

 

If that indicates PASSABLE, Nance Jr.'s 30.8% career 3 at WYOMING, 10% then 27.8% last year SCREAMS Stretch 4...at least, by YOUR logic.  And that's where our debates go off the rails.  You interpret data any way you want to make Randle look better than what he is.

 

You could LITERALLY do that with ANY YOUNG PLAYER, not just Randle.  If ANY young player put in the work and transformed their body, they COULD become and ALLSTAR or a LOCKDOWN DEFNDER or a GOOD PASSER or a PASSABLE SHOOTER...that's theoretically possible for EVERYONE.  For some reason, to you, the likelihood that this offseason work WILL end in those results ONLY applies to RANDLE...and that's where I call BullS---...(please, excuse my language...insert STUFF if it makes you feel better)...your claim ignores the fact that a LOT of OTHER PLAYERS are doing the same exact stuff to get better in the offseason...doesn't mean we see it pay off every year or at all.

 

 

You’re saying he won’t be based on the fact that he isn’t right now, which imo is the wrong way of looking at things. Not sure why you think Clarkson’s draft position is relevant.

 

I never said he will never be a good shooter.  I said he doesn't have a better chance than any other young player who isn't a good shooter right now.  YOU are the one that seems to think your logic only applies to Randle...getting better during the offseason ONLY applies to Randle...becoming a better shooter ONLY applies to Randle.  If these statements weren't true (exclusivity to Randle), you'd feel the same way about almost ALL of our young players...but you don't.  In fact, you invent arbitrary and capricious reasons why it doesn't apply to Clarkson or Zubac or some other young player but it DOES apply to Randle...what?

 

And if you can't understand how comparing a mid-2nd round pick to the #7 pick IN THE SAME DRAFT CLASS is unfair or "statistically relevant", I don't know what else to say.

 

 


Discussing this [expletive] with you really gets tiring, since you’ve proven time and time again, that you hold a grudge against the guy.

 

I have not.  I call a spade a spade...you want to interpret it as hate just like some GOP Senator interpreted McCain's "no vote" on Repeal as a "affected by his his brain tumor"...

 

You want to see him a certain way.  You can't understand why I don't see the same...so something must be wrong with me?  LOL.  With "LOGIC" like that, there is no wonder why this country is so polarized.  I can have my own opinion without there being something "wrong" with me nor do I need "nefarious intentions" to disagree.

 

I disagree with you because your stance takes is replete with CONFORMATIONAL BIAS.  You don't see things as they are.  You have a view of Randle and you go FIND THINGS and DISTORT THINGS to confirm that view.

 

I don't like Randle's GAME for one simple reason:  Randle doesn't understand how TEAM CONCEPTS work.  Everything else could be worked on and he could be utilized as a role player weapon OR have an offense that is BUILT AROUND HIS STRENGTHS with him as the focal point.

 

I have said this time and time again but you miss this INTENTIONALLY.  Know why?  Because it doesn't fit your narrative.  It doesn't help your claim that I have a "PERSONAL GRUDGE" against Randle if I have even ONE LOGICAL reason for criticizing his game...ONE.  

 

Ignore his poor fit.  

Ignore his poor defense.  

Ignore his poor shooting.  

Ignore his lack of fundamental post moves as a PF or perimeter skills as a Stretch 4 outside of Bully Ball.  

Ignore his INABILITY to play without the basketball in his hands...ignore ALL of that.  

 

He still doesn't understand how or why you move without the basketball to help anyone other than yourself score. 

 

That one FACT is enough to SELL on Randle.  You will inevitably say "he can learn how to do that"...he's been out of UK for 3 years...wake me when he does.


I mean, if Blake Griffin is a “sniper” like you suggest, then it’s tough to take you seriously. 

 

Another reason this conversation gets old.

 

You lie about things when it suits you.  That's harsh.  What I should say is you ignore context when it suits you and pull out part of a sentence to make a point that doesn't hold up to cursory scrutiny.

 

I said Blake Griffin is like a "sniper" compared to RANDLE...better mechanics, consistent form/release, better balance, more fluid, better results and more comfortable shooting it...

 

 

 

I NEVER said Blake Griffin is a sniper - full stop.  It was always relative to Randle...you ignored the qualification and context to present a straw man argument to justify why "it’s tough to take you seriously."

 

Yep, that's bang up logic there...no wonder why we have the same conversations over and over.

 

 

Regarding the offseason. Randle is a RFA, not a team option. There’s a difference since we can use his 12.4M cap hold if we want to be able to match whatever offer he gets. In my opinion the best chance we have to make a splash in free agency in 2018 is if we work hard towards moving both Clarkson and Deng this season because that gives us the most options. 

 

So you don't understand what "RFA" means?  Restricted Free Agents are ONLY restricted because we have the right of first refusal.  We can match anything anyone offers so we have the best chance to keep him.

 

Now here's the part you got SO WRONG.  

 

The only way he becomes a RFA is if we make the QUALIFYING OFFER!  If we don't make that offer, there IS NO RFA!  He IMMEDIATELY becomes an UNrestricted Free Agent!  Which essentially means the Lakers DO own a TEAM OPTION on Randle this year.  All they have to do is RENOUNCE HIM and he's off our books.

 

 

So I agree we have to put more energy in trading Clarkson/Deng...but that doesn't mean we have to, need to or should keep Randle by offering the QUALIFYING OFFER which eats up ADDITIONAL cap space.  Doesn't make sense if the idea is MORE.

 

 

Same stuff

Different day.

 

You see what you want to see and bash me because I say it doesn't exist.  C'est La Vie...


Edited by GCMD, August 10, 2017 - 10:53 PM.

tenor.gif


#125 DanishLakerFan

DanishLakerFan

    Hall Of Fame

  • Member
  • 8,715 posts
  • Fan Since:1998
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe

Posted August 10, 2017 - 11:28 PM

Not even going to bother to answer this entire phone book post of yours.

 

I look at Randle's numbers the same way i'd look at data in my professionel life and i'm not interested in his [expletive]ing 3pt percentage from college when he hardly took any 3s. I am however interested in looking at his numbers from when he actually starting taking 3s at a regular basis in an nba setting. Small sample size, sure, but i've never argued that he's a lock to become a good shooter. But i am saying he has a chance.  

Restriced free agency and team options are not the same thing at all, although it may seem that way. And it's true that the Lakers essentially can just let Randle walk. But a team option is different in that it has to be used before the deadline making them difficult to re-sign, whereas the QO often is very small.



#126 GCMD

GCMD

    Legend

  • Member
  • 13,358 posts
  • Fav. Laker:Magic Johnson

Posted August 11, 2017 - 12:26 AM

Not even going to bother to answer this entire phone book post of yours.

 

I look at Randle's numbers the same way i'd look at data in my professionel life and i'm not interested in his [expletive]ing 3pt percentage from college when he hardly took any 3s. I am however interested in looking at his numbers from when he actually starting taking 3s at a regular basis in an nba setting. Small sample size, sure, but i've never argued that he's a lock to become a good shooter. But i am saying he has a chance.  

Restriced free agency and team options are not the same thing at all, although it may seem that way. And it's true that the Lakers essentially can just let Randle walk. But a team option is different in that it has to be used before the deadline making them difficult to re-sign, whereas the QO often is very small.

 

 

QO doesn't remove the cap hold.

 

There IS a deadline to offer the QO, just like the deadline for a TO.  If you miss it, he becomes a UFA, just like a team option...

 

Semantics.  Stick to it because there is no data to refute what I said.  You see Randle the way you want.  If that wasn't true, you'd be higher on guys who were taken a lot later in the draft and who have shown more aptitude for TEAM BASKETBALL than Randle (like Nance)...but you're not.

 

I'm not a hater.  I want him to succeed.  I'm just not kidding myself that he will change who he is to become what I want him to be nor am I trying to shoehorn what he is into what the rest of the team needs.

 

At BEST, he's a small ball 5 for us (rebound, set picks, bully ball post play).  If that changes, I will acknowledge that.  Until it does, I'm not a hater because I state what is and don't buy into your fantasy of what he could become.


Edited by GCMD, August 11, 2017 - 12:29 AM.

tenor.gif


#127 DanishLakerFan

DanishLakerFan

    Hall Of Fame

  • Member
  • 8,715 posts
  • Fan Since:1998
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe

Posted August 11, 2017 - 12:58 AM

QO doesn't remove the cap hold.

 

There IS a deadline to offer the QO, just like the deadline for a TO.  If you miss it, he becomes a UFA, just like a team option...

 

Semantics.  Stick to it because there is no data to refute what I said.  You see Randle the way you want.  If that wasn't true, you'd be higher on guys who were taken a lot later in the draft and who have shown more aptitude for TEAM BASKETBALL than Randle (like Nance)...but you're not.

 

I'm not a hater.  I want him to succeed.  I'm just not kidding myself that he will change who he is to become what I want him to be nor am I trying to shoehorn what he is into what the rest of the team needs.

 

At BEST, he's a small ball 5 for us (rebound, set picks, bully ball post play).  If that changes, I will acknowledge that.  Until it does, I'm not a hater because I state what is and don't buy into your fantasy of what he could become.

No, but it allow us to match, which we wont be able to if he becomes a UFA.



#128 GCMD

GCMD

    Legend

  • Member
  • 13,358 posts
  • Fav. Laker:Magic Johnson

Posted August 11, 2017 - 03:42 AM

No, but it allow us to match, which we wont be able to if he becomes a UFA.

 

 

TO is more powerful because it allows the team to decide the player's worth, not the player.

 

QO allows you to match but it doesn't help you with the cap situation.  Offering the QO doesn't mean you will WANT to match.  Randle isn't a player that we will match any offer so the ability to match is not NEARLY as important as his CapHold AND what Offer Sheet he signs.  We have no control over those once we make the QO.

 

That's 12.4M that we don't have in cap space.

We will NOT be able to sign Randle for 12.4M.

If LeBron says we wants to play with PG13 but he also wants us to resign KCP, that 12.4M will be needed.

 

The QO is deadspace...holding on to it doesn't guarantee we re-sign Randle and it prevents us from pursuing better players.  Not sure why anyone thinks it's good.  Only situation in which we need to consider Randle is if we don't think we sign 2 Max Free Agents this year.  Even then, you let Randle go.  He will cost too much and I'd rather resign KCP and Lopez longterm while trying to find someone to take Deng/Clarkson trade deadline 2019 while trying to free up another Max slot for summer 2019.

 

Point being, Randle limits adding legit STARS.  He's not proven and even if he looks better, his inconsistent history doesn't lend credence to the establishment of his worth based on 1 year.  Any scenario where we move anyone outside of Clarkson/Deng and try to keep Randle is not wise...

 

Seriously...so we get to match any Randle offer.  If we land PG13/LeBron, move some of the other players to keep space for Randle's QO and Randle gets a 4yr/75M contract offer, do we match it for Randle to come off the bench?  Because there is absolutely NO WAY Ingram comes off the bench...

 

That's close to 19M/year for Randle...would it not make more sense to try to resign LOPEZ at around 18M/year?  We have his Bird Rights too...


Edited by GCMD, August 11, 2017 - 03:44 AM.

tenor.gif


#129 LACAS

LACAS

    Off The Bench

  • Member
  • 2,398 posts
  • Location:When the La-La hits you...
  • Name:CAS
  • Fan Since:Birth
  • Fav. Laker:Magic-Kobe or Kobe-Magic

Posted August 11, 2017 - 05:24 AM

 

I'm not a hater.  I want him to succeed.  I'm just not kidding myself that he will change who he is to become what I want him to be nor am I trying to shoehorn what he is into what the rest of the team needs.

 

At BEST, he's a small ball 5 for us (rebound, set picks, bully ball post play).  If that changes, I will acknowledge that.  Until it does, I'm not a hater because I state what is and don't buy into your fantasy of what he could become.

 

My thoughts exactly, Im not a fan of Randle's but Im also not a hater... I want nothing more than for him to succeed in the hope that his success benefits the Lakers.

 

Agreed, I don't understand why with the direction of todays game we aren't utilizing Julius more at the 5, his game may be better suited as a small ball 5.


Edited by LACAS, August 11, 2017 - 05:24 AM.

  • GCMD likes this

#130 GCMD

GCMD

    Legend

  • Member
  • 13,358 posts
  • Fav. Laker:Magic Johnson

Posted August 13, 2017 - 03:04 PM

My thoughts exactly, Im not a fan of Randle's but Im also not a hater... I want nothing more than for him to succeed in the hope that his success benefits the Lakers.

 

Agreed, I don't understand why with the direction of todays game we aren't utilizing Julius more at the 5, his game may be better suited as a small ball 5.

 

 

He's tall enough and strong enough to play the 5...especially as Lopez's primary backup.  He's already the best rebounder so that fits.  At the 5, he's much faster than almost every other C.  He doesn't spread the floor but if he can consistently set hard screens and play decent D (he's done neither consistently), I could see a Ball/KCP/Ingram/Kuzma/Randle lineup being a nightmare for most teams.


tenor.gif


#131 DanishLakerFan

DanishLakerFan

    Hall Of Fame

  • Member
  • 8,715 posts
  • Fan Since:1998
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe

Posted August 13, 2017 - 10:27 PM

TO is more powerful because it allows the team to decide the player's worth, not the player.

 

QO allows you to match but it doesn't help you with the cap situation.  Offering the QO doesn't mean you will WANT to match.  Randle isn't a player that we will match any offer so the ability to match is not NEARLY as important as his CapHold AND what Offer Sheet he signs.  We have no control over those once we make the QO.

 

That's 12.4M that we don't have in cap space.

We will NOT be able to sign Randle for 12.4M.

If LeBron says we wants to play with PG13 but he also wants us to resign KCP, that 12.4M will be needed.

 

The QO is deadspace...holding on to it doesn't guarantee we re-sign Randle and it prevents us from pursuing better players.  Not sure why anyone thinks it's good.  Only situation in which we need to consider Randle is if we don't think we sign 2 Max Free Agents this year.  Even then, you let Randle go.  He will cost too much and I'd rather resign KCP and Lopez longterm while trying to find someone to take Deng/Clarkson trade deadline 2019 while trying to free up another Max slot for summer 2019.

 

Point being, Randle limits adding legit STARS.  He's not proven and even if he looks better, his inconsistent history doesn't lend credence to the establishment of his worth based on 1 year.  Any scenario where we move anyone outside of Clarkson/Deng and try to keep Randle is not wise...

 

Seriously...so we get to match any Randle offer.  If we land PG13/LeBron, move some of the other players to keep space for Randle's QO and Randle gets a 4yr/75M contract offer, do we match it for Randle to come off the bench?  Because there is absolutely NO WAY Ingram comes off the bench...

 

That's close to 19M/year for Randle...would it not make more sense to try to resign LOPEZ at around 18M/year?  We have his Bird Rights too...

 

Lopez? Check his cap hold, dude.



#132 GCMD

GCMD

    Legend

  • Member
  • 13,358 posts
  • Fav. Laker:Magic Johnson

Posted August 15, 2017 - 10:45 AM

Lopez? Check his cap hold, dude.

 

 

In that scenario, you resign Lopez early instead of waiting for some other team to make an unrealistic offer to Randle...the point being Lopez is more likely to be worth 18M/y at CENTER than Randle to play well enough and consistent enough to be worth 19M for Randle AND bring Ingram off the bench (Ball/PG13/LeBron/Randle/Center)...

 

Lopez knows his worth...I'm not sure Randle negotiates an extension or takes something we would think is reasonable that allows us to keep 2 max slots without going on the Free Market first...and I'm not jettisoning any cheaper players on the HOPE that Randle wants to come back on the cheap.


Edited by GCMD, August 15, 2017 - 10:45 AM.

tenor.gif


#133 GCMD

GCMD

    Legend

  • Member
  • 13,358 posts
  • Fav. Laker:Magic Johnson

Posted August 15, 2017 - 10:48 AM

I'm hoping to see this lineup:

 

Ball

KCP

Ingram

Kuzma

Randle

 

Randle at 5 makes sense, IMHO.  That lineup plays fast and loose and is exciting.  Speed and versatility on D could be the key for us this year.


tenor.gif


#134 DanishLakerFan

DanishLakerFan

    Hall Of Fame

  • Member
  • 8,715 posts
  • Fan Since:1998
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe

Posted August 16, 2017 - 05:34 AM

In that scenario, you resign Lopez early instead of waiting for some other team to make an unrealistic offer to Randle...the point being Lopez is more likely to be worth 18M/y at CENTER than Randle to play well enough and consistent enough to be worth 19M for Randle AND bring Ingram off the bench (Ball/PG13/LeBron/Randle/Center)...

 

Lopez knows his worth...I'm not sure Randle negotiates an extension or takes something we would think is reasonable that allows us to keep 2 max slots without going on the Free Market first...and I'm not jettisoning any cheaper players on the HOPE that Randle wants to come back on the cheap.

I could see Lopez staying with the team, but since his cap hold is at like 30 million he'd have to be renounced and then re-signed using cap space, which may be difficult.

 

I'm hoping to see this lineup:

 

Ball

KCP

Ingram

Kuzma

Randle

 

Randle at 5 makes sense, IMHO.  That lineup plays fast and loose and is exciting.  Speed and versatility on D could be the key for us this year.

 

That lineup would be a lot of fun and perhaps a lineup that can get wins by simply outrunning the other team.


  • GCMD likes this

#135 Majesty

Majesty

    Luol Deng's cousin is awesome. Thanks for the pizza!!

  • Gameday
  • 54,338 posts
  • Name:Jay
  • Fan Since:1987
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe present, Magic past

Posted August 16, 2017 - 08:17 AM

Randle's cap hold is 12.4m. That's essentially "you move Clarkson and you're fine."

If you move Clarkson for a pick such as late first, early second, mid 2nd. You can have space for your two max slots AND Randle simply by stretching Deng if you can't move him.

Thats the benefit of drafting someone.

"Bryant had come to rage against the idea that Howard's clownish disposition could overtake the locker room, the Lakers' culture, and had warned Howard that he would never, ever let it happen." 


#136 DaSmoothOperator

DaSmoothOperator

    DaSmoothOperator

  • Member
  • 2,797 posts
  • Fan Since:1965
  • Fav. Laker:Jerry West

Posted August 17, 2017 - 05:54 AM

As per usual most players in contract years have very good seasons, expect the same from him esp. with his physical work off season. But with new strength comes finding your game again. Let's see him first after the makeover

#137 GCMD

GCMD

    Legend

  • Member
  • 13,358 posts
  • Fav. Laker:Magic Johnson

Posted August 17, 2017 - 09:38 AM

I could see Lopez staying with the team, but since his cap hold is at like 30 million he'd have to be renounced and then re-signed using cap space, which may be difficult.

 

 

That lineup would be a lot of fun and perhaps a lineup that can get wins by simply outrunning the other team.

 

We will know by the end of the season whether Lopez projects as a future starter for us.  I think we will have a good idea of which star we COULD get (meaning which ones didn't sign an extension) and if he makes sense with them.  

 

If those 3 things work in his favor, I could see Lopez angling for a "12:01" signing with us next year at a lower rate assuming the Lakers create enough space to sign 2 max players and keep him.  Don't have to renounce your own player to sign him first.  Cap hold goes away immediately once he's signed, unlike Randle who will likely spend time driving his own worth up with the Lakers having no control of the timetable in which he signs an offer sheet.

 

That lineup (Ball/KCP/Ingram/Kuzma/Randle) will be fast and versatile.  That's a "fast break on makes" type lineup.  Definitely hoping Luke finds a way to run it or something like it (Nance instead of Kuzma or Randle).

 

Randle's cap hold is 12.4m. That's essentially "you move Clarkson and you're fine."

If you move Clarkson for a pick such as late first, early second, mid 2nd. You can have space for your two max slots AND Randle simply by stretching Deng if you can't move him.

Thats the benefit of drafting someone.

 

 

Once again, check the math.  It doesn't work.

 

 


You're ASSUMING we aren't targeting LeBron or Westbrook...either one of these guys are our target and it is IMPOSSIBLE to max either one and keep Randle.

 

Randle's not accepting anything less than 15M.  

 

LeBron and Westbrooks's Max is around 35.7M/yr.

PG13 and DMC's max is around 30.6M/year.  

 

Deng's contract will still be around 7M for the next 5 years (2 yrs x 2 = 4 + 1 equals 5 years divided into ~37M (36.81M) = ~7.4M (7.36M)/yr for 5 years)

 

The rest of the players (Ball/Ingram/Nance/Kuzma/Hart/Zubac) would cost around 20.4M (20.38M)...

 

Even at a conservative estimate of 66.3M for PG13 or DMC + LeBron or Westbrook, 7.4M (Deng) + 20.4M (rest of roster) = ~94M.  You need 12.4M to sign those guys and keep Randle as a RFA (12.4M cap hold) and you only have ~9M.  And don't forget that DMC and Randle on the same team is the OPPOSITE of what a successful 2018-2019 starting lineup would look like with Ball at PG, PG13 at SG and Ingram at SF...

 

If you think Randle won't get offered MORE than 8.9M, you're kidding yourself...and that's what we'd have left to offer if we signed a 35%/30% max duo...which is what the Lakers are trying to do.

 

Must move Clarkson and Deng to keep Randle.  Trading Clarkson and stretching Deng doesn't cut it.


Edited by GCMD, August 17, 2017 - 09:40 AM.

tenor.gif


#138 dazz

dazz

    ..............

  • Member
  • 1,212 posts

Posted August 18, 2017 - 01:43 AM

Hey guys, just dropping by to check what's new about...

 

*notices tons of colorful long winded posts by GCMD*

 

giphy.gif


  • Busty Bluth, Majesty and Rekal like this

hsl17b.jpg


#139 Majesty

Majesty

    Luol Deng's cousin is awesome. Thanks for the pizza!!

  • Gameday
  • 54,338 posts
  • Name:Jay
  • Fan Since:1987
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe present, Magic past

Posted August 18, 2017 - 03:36 AM

Anyway onward. 

Randle's dropped down to 240 and is at about 6% body fat right now.  So it's basically about just maintaining it. He was at the facility working on his right and his middie among all other things as per usual.  

But Randle being down to 240 is pretty solid if I do say so myself. 


Edited by Majesty, August 18, 2017 - 03:37 AM.

"Bryant had come to rage against the idea that Howard's clownish disposition could overtake the locker room, the Lakers' culture, and had warned Howard that he would never, ever let it happen." 


#140 GCMD

GCMD

    Legend

  • Member
  • 13,358 posts
  • Fav. Laker:Magic Johnson

Posted August 18, 2017 - 08:08 AM

Hey guys, just dropping by to check what's new about...

 

*notices tons of colorful long winded posts by GCMD*

 

giphy.gif

giphy.gif

 

And to the rest of LN:

 

 

Since+op+is+kind+of+a+[expletive]+heres+the+s

 

Anyway onward. 

Randle's dropped down to 240 and is at about 6% body fat right now.  So it's basically about just maintaining it. He was at the facility working on his right and his middie among all other things as per usual.  

But Randle being down to 240 is pretty solid if I do say so myself. 

 

 

Because the arbitrary "240" mark means what?


Edited by GCMD, August 18, 2017 - 10:52 AM.

  • Jody Smokes likes this

tenor.gif





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users