I can see Monta easily being the 6th man of the year. Microwave offense. At his height, I think it's the ideal role. He can cover behind Kobe/Clarkson in either capacity and take the rest of those minutes. Would also allow for a pretty dang interesting small ball type of lineup with all three if needed.
part of why monta might be available is that he made a lot of locker room noise about not being "the guy" and making less money than parsons. not sure if he'll embrace the sixth man role.
Yep some definitely maturity issues here. It wasn't just Rondo who didn't get along with that locker room.
Good - because he'd probably play more minutes than either JC or Kobe, so he wouldn't really be a sixth man.
If we did sign Monta, he'll be starting; worried about the fit next to Kobe? Not really. Kobe can adapt. I'm more interested in upgrading the talent on this team.
a monta/Clarkson/kobe guard/wing combo...better get some backup bigs, because they're going to be in foul trouble all game long. also some concerns on offense with Clarkson and monta both being spotty distance shooters at best, which be in combination with a bevy of bigs who can't shoot. I like monta, but I think he only works in very specific situations. I'm not sure the lakers have the right conditions.
I like the condition of off the bench where he can be "The Man" He's best with the ball in his hands a lot, and that's not a bad thing on a bench unit. But yes, that may not be of interest to him. Early in the year, he was the Mavs best player before getting hurt
I'm loving the Monta news & I'm fully on board with him playing the most minutes in our G rotation. Jordan still has a lot to learn & Kobe needs the rest. We'd have Monta & Clarkson around 4 APG each, Kobe around 6 APG. We should have good ball movement at all times. Sign a few SF's & a 3rd string PG who will shoot 40% from 3 on good volume (Gerald Green, Dunleavy, Brooks). Randle & Okafor down low with some defensive beasts backing them up(Black & Biyombo). Sounds like a recipe for success.
Foul trouble is perfect for our bigs (jk), but we'd have a bunch of guys young and learning. I'd have Beverley at backup PG, too. Randle/Black/Kelly Okafor/Dalembert/Upshaw/Sacre We good.
They might get in foul trouble on occasion, but they would put opposing wings in foul trouble regularly.
I like Monta in theory, but keep in mind, he was a net-negative chucker before he got to Dallas where he played for a top 4 coach that had an unquestioned leader (Dirk). Not sure we have the veteran infrastructure or a good enough coach to get anything more than that old chucker out of him. I have a bad feeling that he would revert back to his pre-Dallas game if he left them. If we already have one of the sfs locked up and he is willing to play for our remaining cash, I'd hesitantly say yes. But he should be more of a secondary signing after we've filled the gaping holes in our roster. Right now, guard is a secondary concern. Even though Kobe will likely get hurt, we still have 3 guards in Clarkson, Kobe and Brown. All we have is Swaggy at the 3.
In my mind Gerald Green is on the team at this point. I don't see the net negative chucked nor the contrast between Dallas and GS. He's the same player in my view. An above average combo guard.
How is Gerald Green on the team? Is there a rumor out there that he wants to be a Laker? Do we want him? He's not that much more impressive than Wes Johnson. And when I say net-negative, I'm talking about the fact that he puts up big numbers on bad teams. I don't trust that. I'll readily admit I have no advanced statistics on it, but I've been watching him since his rookie year and every time I saw him I never worried about him winning a game for the other team until he got to Dallas. It's a totally non-objective eyeball test.
I wrote something a few days ago but didn't post it. It's a totally realistic thing we could do for next season. Involves Beverley, Monta, Green, and Dalembert. I do see Green and Ellis as huge pickups. Same for Beverley and Dalembert. Positions us for the Kobe to other star transition.
Not sure about Green. I mean, statistically 42/36/82% shooting is not very good. I know he shot much better the year before, but that season looks more like an anomaly than anything else. He isn't known as a lockdown defender, or anything close. He was being benched earlier in the year because of his defense, iirc. As for Beverley, I think we'd have to pay quite a bit to pry him from Houston. Not having him against GS showed how valuable he is to that team. If we want to get him, we'd probably have to overpay by a significant enough margin it may not be worth it. I would like Dalembert as a backup for Okafor. And like I said, as long as we fill the gaping hole at sf first, I'm OK with Monta.
I don't like Beverley... I think he's a black version of Dirtyvedova. Also isn't he an RFA? I think Houston retains him.
for the record, I'm pretty sure gs smacked Houston around with or without Beverley (who's overrated as a defender, imo--too small). he's a backup, imo. dalembert should come cheap, but there's a reason he's run out of town everywhere he plays. I like green as a value bench player, but I feel like he's redundant with young. and again, I like monta, I just think he doesn't mesh with guys we plan on having around.
SUPPOSING we whiff on all the big FAs. 1. Sign CJ Watson for defense at the PG spot. 2. Sign Mike Dunleavy to hold down the SF spot. 3. Sign Alonzo Gee to bring defensive toughness. -these moves give us back court versatility (JG can play 1/2, CJ can play 1/2, MD can play 2/3, Kobe can play 2/3, AG can play 2/3). 4. Sign Dalembert as defense and mentorship. Clarkson/Watson Kobe/Gee Dunleavy/Young/Luwawu Randle/Black/Hill Okafor/Dalembert/Upshaw/Sacre (In my mind we draft Upshaw 27 and Luwawu 34, no matter what.) PROs It all seems possible. It improves our team. It allows us to attract a top tier player at the 1, 2, or 3, I think, because of roster versatility. CONs We wouldn't make too much noise next year. We'd have a fight for the playoffs. It's a team with three very young and inexperienced starters.
As a fall back plan that isn't too bad, sure it might not seem as successful as we'd hope it would be but we would be much better than the past two years.
