It's not difficult at all. Kobe + Randle + Young + Clarkson + Black + Brown + Kelly + Top 5 pick (avg 4 million) + #27 pick = 42.55 + 2 million in cap holds= 22.85 million to spend. Draft Stanley Johnson Draft Dakari Johnson Asik- 4/40 million Mo Williams- 3/15 million Davis- 4/20 million Ellington- 3/9 million Ronnie Price- vet. min Jordan Clarkson/Mo Williams/Ronnie Price Kobe Bryant/Wayne Ellington/Jabari Brown Stanley Johnson/Nick Young Julius Randle/Tarik Black/Ryan Kelly Omer Asik/Ed Davis/Dakari Johnson Boom.
I'm actually starting to agree with trodgers. Let's go for Upshaw with the 27th pick if we draft a sf with our pick. The 27th pick is expected to be a backup. Upshaw has good to great starter ability. If he ends up being a trainwreck, those rookie contracts are only guaranteed for a couple years now. But imagine if he gets his act together and we walk out of the last two drafts with our starting center, pf, sf and pg of the future.
Ideally, I would rather we draft WCS than either Winslow or Johnson because there are options at sf this offseason in free agency AND in the off chance Durant wants to come here, we have a spot for him. Randle can also play sf I think if we end up going after Aldridge or Love to man the pf spot. I know you take best player available, but I don't think WCS is "worse" than Johnson or Winslow, and if he is, it's very close. It's not a Sam Bowie/Jordan scenario. But to be honest, Okafor, Towns, WCS, Russell, Johnson, Mudiay and Winslow all would make happy. Any one of the top 7 prospects all fit with our two young studs. And like I said, Upshaw could be our center of the future, and I'd be willing to burn 27 on him in the off chance he gets his head on straight and we have a defensive beast behind Randle AND Winslow. I'd hope that playing with a top 10 all time player would be enough to get him thinking straight. Imagine if we landed Middleton in FA with those two in the draft. Our 2016 Lakers could be Upshaw/Randle/Winslow/Middleton/Clarkson. Potential wise, that team could be a dynasty.
^^^ I'd like to add that if we were to lose our pick, I would DEFINITELY roll the dice on Upshaw because we would need to gamble (not that taking a shot with the 27th pick is really that much of a gamble) to try and land another impact player.
Middleton is not going anywhere. If he keeps performing the way he did tonight, you're absolutely right. On that note, somebody mentioned the idea of Monta Ellis a few weeks ago; good option. I also like Jeff Green. Player Option that he'll opt out of this year, but now that I think about it, he might not considering the spike will increase the following year. Anyways, Monta Ellis, Jeff Green on my radar...
I don't see how anyone can say with certainty Middleton isn't going anywhere. Is Mil going to match a Chandler Parsons type contract when Jabari and Giannis are being groomed to be their franchise players? I don't think so. They might not even match 10-12 per year. And incase you think Middleton isn't worth that contract, at 23 years old his post all star break numbers: 17.5 ppg 4.7 rebounds 2.9 assists 44% from 3 on 4 attempts per game 45.2% from the field on 14.5 attempts per game. All while playing stellar defense. The kid is a baller with nowhere to go but up. Even at his max starting over 14M I'd be on board, considering the 20-30M the cap is about to jump, but hopefully it doesn't come to that. 4/40-4/44 would be great value. I'm not in favor of Jeff Green, but I agree about Monta. Not at the top of my list but he should definitely be on our radar. As for Rondo, if he keeps playing like this he might actually work his way back on my radar. If he ends up playing himself into a major pay cut, he might become a gamble worth taking. I like the idea of Rondo with a chip on his shoulder eager to show teams they should have made better offers.
Ok; there's two different issues here; let me address the first. @Doc already posted the salaries for Milwaukee and broke down that the Bucks have finally positioned themselves to give Khris max type money, so if a team wants to go after him, Milwaukee has the resources to match. Now, if he's thrown a Chandler Parsons type contract, you're right; Milwaukee may choose to pass on that, but I don't think a team this summer will do what Dallas did for Khris. Well, I do like his game, I think Chandler was the exception in that scenario. Remember, Brandon Knight was traded. He had to be re-signed. Milwaukee traded him. I think they traded him so they'd get something for him and he wouldn't leave them this summer when they failed to get anything for him & because they knew Khris' contract was coming up; essentially, they traded Knight and created the necessary financial space to re-sign him. Now, is he worth a max contract? Absolutely. You don't have to give me his post-ASB averages. I've known about Khris since his days at Texas A&M and when he was drafted into the league at 39; as a matter of fact, I wished the Lakers would have taken a flyer on him because of his shooting but we couldn't move up that year. Additionally, with the salary cap spike, a max contract would be about 14-17% of your salary cap for Khris. I'd do it in a nanosecond. As far as Jeff Green; if we don't draft a wing, I'll take anybody that will resemble & play like one. Unless we're willing to watch Wes for another season...no thanks.
Losing the top 5 pick isn't the only way to create the space for LMA + Middleton. Young probably isn't hard to move, his production for 5.2M gives him positive value in my opinion. We'd need to dump Kelly too so we'd have to sweeten the pot with the #27 or #32 pick. While I don't like giving Young away and losing yet another pick, it'd be the right move in this case. Middleton is already superior to Young in nearly every way, and he just turned 23 so it's not like we're giving away a pick for another vet that's about to break down. I don't agree with your point that we'd need to add a player like Durant to be contenders. Clarkson Kobe Middleton Randle Aldridge + top 5 pick, #27 or #32 pick, Black, Room Exception FA, minimum contracts. We'd need some extremely poor luck with injuries and young players not contributing for that team not to make the playoffs. They might not win a title, but it'd be a step in that direction. Putting a playoff team on the floor with a great young core like that and an Allstar big still in his prime would make us very appealing for the top free agents in 2016. My main objection to Love instead of Aldridge is Randle. I don't know where this notion that he can just slide over to SF comes from. He has good handles and agility for a big but he's years away from having the skillet to be a successful SF. Aldridge prefers playing PF but he's very capable of playing minutes at C on both sides of the ball, unlike Love who is basically a great SF in a PF's body. Maybe if our top 5 pick ends up being Towns it works out, but I still think it's a bad idea to force Randle to become a SF. If he develops into a SF then we cross that bridge when we come to it, but he's too talented to risk killing his potential by forcing him to play out of position just to make the pieces fit.
I would not mind either of those guys. Rondo is playing like garbage. Being on the Mavs has really exposed every flaw in his game. Just don't see how or why we bring him in even at a low price.
My thoughts on it as well. I certainly wouldn't boycott the team or anything if we got Love. I still think he has a lot of talent, but Aldridge strikes me as a better fit.
How is Love s a great SF in a PF's body? Over his career, despite the last two seasons, his main weapon was rebounding inside and scoring around the rim at a high clip. He was averaging nearly 20 and 15 at some point until he was being used in pick and roll situations with Rubio/Lebron...etc. If Lebron can play SF, so can Randle. They're basically the same size, minus Lebron's unworldly athleticism. Lebron started with a terrible shot, but he developed a good jumper over his career. Randle has a pretty good shot to start, with his handling ability gives him multiple options offensively. What makes Randle more intriguing at SF is that he presents that size/strength mismatch at that position, and still has the footspeed would still be able to defend most SF's. At PF, he'll likely see more players who are longer and taller than he is, which wouldn't bode well defensively. A front court of SF: Randle/Young PF: Love/Davis/ C: (Okafor/Towns)/Davis Doesn't intrigue you the least? Also, consider the age difference of the two: Love - 26 Aldridge - 29. Love has still yet reached his prime, whereas Aldridge is probably peaking and will more likely be on the declining end of his career moving into his 30's.
I am not so much questioning Love at the four, but Randle at the three. The differences between Randle and Lebron are too numerous for me to go through. Just not sold on that yet.
I like Kevin Love a lot. But I think Randle is a lot closer to being Love than Lebron. Love and Randle is having two 4's to me. It might work out, but I still feel like they are both 4's.
I mean, Lebron has much better handling ability and vision for his size, sure. But I'm not sure what differences you're trying to get at either offensively or defensively. Lebron and Randle have quite similar measurements and approach offensively if you think about it. Each player has a significant strength advantage for players around their size, and can impose their power to get to the rim. Lebron's athleticism allows him to finish over most players. Randle is more strength reliant, usually willing his shots through, much like Zach Randolph. Lebron then started developing a jumper which really opened up his offensive options keeping defenders honest, making it a lot more difficult for defenders to decide to give him space or make him drive. I know comparing him to Lebron seems farfetched, but I see a little similarity in their bodies and skill sets which can be compared, and hence, Randle's ability to play SF.
Honestly I do not want Love unless he's going to play center which would be kind of strange. I just don't see going after Love, really.
Around Rondo, the energy is toxic. The Rockets' and Mavericks' interests intersect everywhere, including with the trade pursuit for Rondo in December. Rondo's agent never wanted Rondo in Houston, partly because it would've cost another client, Patrick Beverley, his job and payday to re-sign with the Rockets this summer. In the end, the Rockets kept bidding on Rondo to try to push the price higher for the Mavericks, which was ultimately unsuccessful. When Rondo realized his run with the C Bags was over this year, he planned to sign with the Los Angeles Lakers in the summer, league sources told Yahoo Sports. He expected a maximum contract. Once Dallas made the trade, he was open to re-signing with the Mavericks – only there are no max contract offers for Rondo on the market. Not in Dallas, nor Los Angeles. He's played his way out of that payday – not just this year, but since that terrible ACL injury two years ago. Everyone can insist that Rondo no longer cares, that he's stopped trying, and Game 2's debacle made a case for it. Rondo is the prince of moody, yes, but he's lost with these Mavericks – and they're lost with him. Nevertheless, Rondo hasn't given up on salvaging this season, nor his Mavericks career. On Monday evening, Josh Smith stopped over to the Toyota Center to take extra shots. There was a ball bouncing inside the arena, and as he ducked inside, Smith found a familiar face getting up shots: Rajon Rondo. Rondo always does the work, the preparation, but everyone could see again in Game 2 that his struggles with Mavericks coach Rick Carlisle remain an immense hurdle. On the court, there were those who believed Rondo's eight-second violation for failing to cross the midcourt line was an act of protest on the coach's calling of plays. Rondo played 10 minutes, picking up fouls for slapping at James Harden, and finally a technical to start the third quarter for shoving Harden out of sheer frustration. http://sports.yahoo.com/news/josh-s...rajon-rondo-unravels-with-mavs-082337854.html Scott and Rondo? What a disaster that will be...
