I know I know...how the heck are all these FAs signing contracts and we are on the outside looking in for the second consecutive year...Howard, Melo and now Aldridge... 1. Superstars rarely change teams...they usually stay where they are or get tired of losing and ask for a trade. Not a lot of them switch teams in FAs, it is what it is because nobody can offer them the same dough as their respective team. When you move, its either because of more money or better chance at winning. Given the fact that we cannot offer more than max, which is what other teams also offer, it comes down to winning. And its not easy to convince a superstar on the fence of 30 to come to a team, that has won just 21 games last season, it just isn't. We cannot offer more money and we cannot offer more winning chances...whether this guy liked our presentation or that guy loved the analytics etc. is just bla bla...fact is, if you have a winning team, people want to join you and vice versa. 2. I would rather do no deal than do a bad move just to do something. That is how Isiah Thomas used to run the Knicks...and with horrible results. You don't do a move, if you aren't convinced that this is part of the puzzle... 3. Where does the myth come from that you rebuild slowly? This has never been successful. Look at all the teams like the C Bags, Knicks etc...they have been rebuilding for ages with no success. If you want to win, you have to make a splash, simple as that. GS was horrible 2 years ago and voila...they got Green, traded for Iggy, Curry jumped in performance, Bogut stayed healthy, a new coach and bang! Teams don't win championships by building slowly...thats nonsense. Miami made a splash with the big 3...this year Cleveland made a splash with James and Love...The C Bags came out of nowhere to pick KG and Allen and win one...the Pistons came out of nowhere with Rasheed Wallace making them go from average to great within a day. 4. Lady luck....nobody said its easy to win a championship. Most teams have never done it or done it like once or twice in their entire history. You have already 16 under the belt so please don't act like a spoiled chicken. We have a team that is extremely young and not any good right now at least we don't have to worry about dumb 5 year max contracts being given to guys that are hurt or not very good or something. Relax I really think this is getting out of hand. Its ridiculous IMO. We are TRYING...can't ask for more. If it works the Lakers are a genuis and if it doesn't, they are the laughing stock of the nation...but at the very least...they take a chance. Jerry Buss used to be the same way...he took chances when nobody believed in it. He might not be here but his family is handling business the same way. If you take a chance...you can't ALWAYS win. But the Lakers have won often enough to justify that its worth taking a chance...its championship or bust. We ain't going for the single, we want a HR everytime we take a swing. And honestly...I prefer it. Imagine if they could get Aldridge and add 2 max contracts next off-season...at the same time Russell, Clarkson and Randle progress a little bit. All of a sudden you have a crazy team. Its probably not going to happen but if there is a chance, you give it a try.
Thing is you can't attract a "superstar" if you don't already have promising players on your roster .... It took us nearly half a decade to attract big FAs again after Magic 1st retirement ... Shaq came to LA not only because it was LA ... but because there were already some young talents and a promising team ... It's hard to replicate this scenario with the current FO strategy i.e superstars or busts aka one year rentals ... We need to build an "average/above average " team in order to attract a star player who will be able to take the squad to the next level ... or hoping Russell and Randle become stars to attract major talent . Teams don't go quickly from "lottery teams" to "great teams" in a short period of time barring some very rare scenarios ( Lebron coming home). By the way, with the current FO vision , the latest two seasons were completely useless in terms of finding talent ( except for Clarkson) or developping skills for the players on our roster ...
I don't agree with you. I feel like i could've done a better job bringing players to the team, on my free time after job, and i don't live in the US.
It's late, and there are many good points here, but I'm going to attempt to make this a short reply for now. Yes, big splashes make teams champions, but the framework has to be put in place first over time, the assets have to be gathered to make these trades, the players have to be on the roster to attract these free agents. Just going off the last handful of champions, I'll start sign the Spurs. They set up a culture over a decade, and they carefully built around Duncan and Ginobili and then Parker in the draft. They seemed to play it smart every offseason with signings and draft picks. Boston, had to gather the assets over years of sucking in order to trade for Garnett and Ray Allen, and THEN the veteran free agents flocked there and they won immediately. That and Rondo was a surprise for them. Us, the Lakers, had put together a very decent set of role players and bench players. When Pau came we had already started clicking and we're playing great with Bynum before he got hurt. We had Odom, Fisher, Ariza, Farmar, Brown, Sasha and Powell and had a pretty solid foundation built with good chemistry. Pau put us over the top, and Bynum coming back healthy only added to that. Then the next season as champs we were attractive again, and a guy like Ron Artest was eager to come play for us for a reasonable price. Then you look at a team that hasn't won yet, but has been at the top a lot before injuries this season in the Thunder. They started building what they are now when they were the Sonics by drafting Durant, then Jeff Green. Then Westbrook and Ibaka. Then Harden. It took years, but they kept building, they collected assets. They may have messed up with the Harden trade, and even the Green trade, but they still had the asset to trade in the first place, and they got decent players and picks in return. Miami, I kinda throw out, because those 3 conspired to play together and Riley was easily able to get guys to sign to play around them that wanted to win a title. And lastly, GS was also built over years. Drafted Curry and Klay. Drafted Green and Barnes. Developed these players, signed quality role players around them. Had collected the assets to trade for Iggy. All we have done to this point is potentially draft very well (Clarkson looks good, but we haven't seen more than one real game of Randall, and not one of Russell), and continue to keep a max FA slot open each offseason. Maybe had we signed one of the 2nd tier guys to a decent deal last offseason instead of going after Melo and ending up with nothing, we look more appealing this offseason. Now yet again we're sitting and waiting on the top FA while quality 2nd tier guys get snatched up, and we lose our own quality guys that could be had for relatively cheap, like Ed Davis. I can only hope that we are pursuing Tobias Harris behind the scenes and we just haven't heard about it, because that's a move that makes you more attractive next offseason. If we end up with scraps on one year deals again, we look the same next offseason, zero progress. And if we trade any of this core of youth, unproven as they are, IMO it will be a mistake, because for all we know, we could be building something special with them, and to get impatient and trade them away for big names to TRY and win now, not smart. That sort of thinking got us Dwight for one season, stuck with the corpse of Nash for 3 years, and lost us a bunch of 1st round picks that might have developed into good players by now, or been trade assets to go after better, younger players than Nash. So yes, big splashes can win titles or put you over the top, but you have to build the foundation first, solid moves are important too, doesn't always have to be huge moves. Well, my attempt at a short reply failed, and I may have rambled in the middle there, but I think I stuck to my main point and got it across. The FO doesn't deserve a break, they've made mistake after mistake other than drafting really well. They're behind the times and relying on our franchise history too much, to the point of delusion. The Chris Paul veto hurt us big time, but so did the FO's mad scramble to recover after it happened, especially with the awful Odom trade, and then holding onto Pau for years too long after knowing he'd been traded, not able to get a thing of value for him in a trade in the end.
I don't agree with point #3. Golden State, OKC, and San Antonio are teams that were "slowly" built through the draft. None of them really made any "splashes." Almost the entire starting lineup consists of their own draft picks, and they are the best teams in the league. GSW: Curry, Thompson, Green, H.Barnes OKC: Durant, Westbrook, Ibaka, Harden (could have kept him with 2016+ cap) SAS: Duncan, Ginobili, Parker, Splitter, Kawhi The problem with making a "splash" to rebuild is that the success doesn't last too long. It's usually a 2-3 year run. Teams that are built slowly through the draft seemingly last forever. The Spurs have been relevant for like 20 years. The Thunder have been relevant since 2009 and still have a good 5 years if Durant/Westbrook stays. The Warriors have a similar situation. We have a great young core of D'Angelo, Randle, Clarkson, and Black. We just have to be patient. Believe in these kids and hope that most, if not all, of them will pan out. I am against taking shortcuts, especially with the current CBA.
Wait, wait, wait... GS can afford to "draft all their own players". Same with Hawks, Thunder or Clippers or what not...but it takes 10 lottery trips then to do it. Unimaginable in LA. But even if you trade all your players...you never see a championship team "coming". Its almost always out of nowhere....who would have put their money on GS before the season? NOBODY. And thats exactly what I mean. It comes out of nowhere. And its also easy to build like SA when you have 3 players that are great, complement each other in a great way, have great chemistry and are all unselfish enough to take a huge pay cut in order to win...honestly, thats just getting lucky. And then its easy to pick role players that come in with a specific purpose like defense or shooting or whatever. SA is an exception to the rule. @Weezy I agree that you need a foundation to attract top tier FAs...but honestly...I didn't find a single "second tier" FA that I thought would be a great fit at a great price. None. Koufus? Tyson Chandler at 32? Carroll at 60 mio.? Asik at 60 mio.? The only guy I liked was Middleton and he didn't even consider to leave. We need a starting SF and a starting C...at those 2 positions I didn't find any second tier players that I liked so far. I still think accumulating assets is very important and no better way then getting talent for "free" (without a trade). But its not really easy. We signed one of those guys (Nick Young) and you see how that turned out...imagine we had 10 of those...we would be screwed for the next few years.
To be fair, Young had a bad season. I'm not a big fan because he doesn't seem very bothered by losing, but if he has a good year again this season, the contract suddenly doesn't look bad anymore considering the money teams are throwing around right now, for a guy like Wes Matthews for example. And actually yes, I'd be happy to sign an Asik, Robin Lopez, or Koufos. The second tier guy at the SF spot we need though, is Tobias Harris. The issue is that he's restricted, but I'd still go after him and hope Orlando doesn't match.
I like Harris. But we have to either overpay (max) to get him or Orlando will match. Which is not a very good position. Also consider this...once you sign him to an offer sheet...you are basically out of the FA market for a week. Would you have done that? signed Harris to a max or close to max offer sheet and wait a week? if Mitch had done that, I would lose hope in his IQ...and he would have been teared apart for crippling the team during the FA period and missing all those premium FAs and putting his eggs in the restriced Harris' basket...and imagine Orlando matching after a week...then you are royally screwed. Its easy to say go get Harris...its tough to do. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
I'm sorry but this makes no sense. Please elaborate. And no, it doesn't take 10 lottery trips to start succeeding. The success comes rather quick. Golden State 2009-10: 29-53 (Curry's rookie season) 2010-11: 36-46 2011-12: 23-43 (lockout, alot of injuries, drafted Thompson) 2012-13: 47-35 (drafted Green and Barnes) 2013-14: 51-31 2014-15: 67-15 OKC 2007-08: 20-62 (Durant's rookie season) 2008-09: 23-59 (drafted Westbrook and Ibaka) 2009-10: 50-32 (drafted Harden) 2010-11: 55-27 I've left out the Spurs because you say they're lucky, but see how quickly things can turn around? We can be at 45-50 wins in a couple of years if all of our rookies pan out.
Valid points, and no I wouldn't have given Harris an offer day one and be out of free agency talks. I would move on from Aldride and Jordan once it's clear we are out though, and not wait forever on them while every player out there gets snatched up. By the time they make their decisions, we're going to have to sign players from the D-League to even field a team. I would overpay for Harris though, I'd offer him his max and hope Orlando doesn't match. We've got nothing to lose, we suck already. If he doesn't work out we can trade him, and even with him Kobe comes off the books and the cap goes up and we may have 2 max slots to offer next season still. No damage done. We have to start taking a chance and signing some decent players for more than one season, not continuing to hope each offseason that a star will come join our barren roster just for money and the LA lifestyle. If we keep going the way we are we are going to turn into the 76ers or T-Wolves where every season is about potential that never gets reached. Always building towards something that never happens.
The only problem I have with Harris, and it's a minor one, is that he's a SF-PF tweener. And we have 2 of those already in Randle and Nance. I would prefer a SG-SF type wing or a prototypical SF with quicker feet.
I think Randle is mostly a PF, unless he's greatly improved his shot. He's at his best down low, and although he has nice handles, I don't think he has typical SF handles. But then, maybe Harris doesn't either. As for Nance, he's unproven, I'm not staying away from a guy like Harris for what Nance might bring. Harris has 4 years of NBA experience, the last 3 of which have been pretty consistently good. He is a sort of a tweener, but I think next to Russell, Clarkson, and Kobe, he won't do a lot of dribbling. And although I don't think Randle is a SF at all, he and Harris are similar is height, so they could switch a lot on defense and kinda be interchangeable out there from play to play. I'd like a quicker, more typical SF as well, but I don't really know one that's available, not better than Harris anyway.
Randle is definitely a PF...since people compare him to Lamar...Lamar was also a SF/PF tweener but he was way way better at PF than he was at SF. Harris is a tweener but he is definitely more a SF than a PF and he is a jumpshooter, not a back to the basket guy. I think Harris is a very servicable player and starter material. He is also just 22 years old. I'm not sold on his defense, thats my main gripe with him. And his shot, although not bad, doesn't have the necessary range. He is more of a 20 foot jumpshooter than a 25 foot one. In short: good player, not a great fit. Everybody is these days talking about small ball, position less basketball, 3 and d wings, star guard etc...to me, you can win with any style if executed properly. These are all buzz words with no real substance. But in that sense, Harris is a prototypical player who can play 3,4 and some 5....like Draymond Green.
I'm really intrigued by your idea of interchanging Randle and Harris. With Clarkson and Russell also capable of switching, that could make for a really dynamic frontcourt/backcourt with Black/Bismack (my guy) patrolling the paint. I still prefer DeAndre over Harris because of his fit and balance he brings to team, but I would be OK with Harris over LMA. I don't like signing LMA because it involves too many moving pieces.
No one is going to agree with all the points but the point is this is the most valuable thread we have going now. The fan panic is over the top and actually hurts our team.
I agree with some of the sentiment, and I'm not going to get into the "how to build a team" debate, as I think there are myriad ways. I do, however, think that there is a bit of contradiction in the original post. if we grant that the lakers aren't good enough to attract FAs in a market where everyone has equal cash, it would seem the smart move is to try to fix that, rather than show up annually expecting someone to buck the trend. in other words, if la doesn't have the ability to land Aldridge, maybe they shouldn't be prioritizing Aldridge. there are other ways to gamble, and signing young guys with potential on value deals is one. at the very least, the backup plan needs to be better than last year's (which was awful, imo). I don't think losing out on the big FAs is the end of the world, but being a passive participant in the rest of the market has been a problem and looks like it could be again. the lotto balls likely won't be so kind again, and the only thing to show for another lost season will be a chance to pitch to max FAs in the exact same situation next year. that said, I'm willing to wait out the rest of the FA period before going nuclear. but I reserve the right to do so if we get another Jeremy lin, ed davis, Jordan hill offseason.
I'm disappointed we haven't made any progress with any FA, but I'm not melting down over it. The tail end of Kobe's career was always going to be difficult to navigate both for $$$ reasons and for passing the baton reasons. It's somewhat amusing to me though that almost everyone has jumped off the Mitch train. Name me another GM outside of San Antonio that has Mitch's resume. He's earned my patience. If he doesn't get it done by FAs, then he will find a way to do it through the combo of the draft (already done a great job) and trades (proven he can). I'll wait until training camp to evaluate. Until then, things are still in flux. The current roster will not be our opening night roster.
