I think a big part of Vogel’s comments was because we literally didn’t have an open roster spot at the time of his comment. Vogel wasn’t allowed to comment on the Rondo trade or the roster spot it opened up before the trade was made official.
Bigger picture… He needs to be signed. If we don’t sign him and another team snatches him up I’m gonna be pissed.
ron was such a unique player. i admit i didn't think he'd be as successful an nba player as he was, and i agree that stan has a lot of similar qualities. but ron really worked on his ballhandling and was basically a sg/initiator on offense by the time he was stan's age, defying all logic if you watched his mechanical a** in college. he also developed a shot standing still and off the dribble, not as good but not unlike kawhi did. so, no, stan won't be 2004 artest. ever. but he might approximate 2010 artest at his apex, and that was useful! me too. he's shown enough. the fuss should only be about getting him to agree to two years instead of one, imo.
I still think Stanley is better off used like PJ Tucker. Those tree trunk legs and strong lower body along with defensive instincts make him effective against bigger scorers. I've never seen PJ Tucker switch onto Curry or CP3 or other small PGs and win battles. 2012/2013 Ron maybe. He was guarding Al Horford and played C often when Dwight or Pau sat. Ron also was a capable offensive player with a decent post game, initiating and leading in transition. Remember he gave us some problems when he was in Houston?
They'd love to give him two more 10 day contracts, it saves them a lot of tax (no tax multipliers on 10 day contracts). But from Stanley's side, what happens if he has a bad 10 day stretch and they cut him outright?
Jeanie needs to stop being cheap and playing games. Just sign him outright for the rest of the season. His skill set is something we desperately need.
He risks injury too which I’d think would be the biggest risk for him. But if the Lakers want him which they’d be nuts not to from what I’ve seen …. and he’s been a hard core Laker fan since a kid …. I guess I won’t stress over it.
yeah, the injury risk to him is real. i wonder if they're offering two-year minimum with a team option on the 2nd to take some of the risk out? if i were him, i'd want two-years with a PO. a good middle ground would be a straight two-year min, imo. if he signs another 10-day, my guess is it's this haggling.
If I'm him I'm leery of taking 2 more 10 day contracts unless there's a gentleman's agreement with Rob that by saving them money on that front that A) if he gets hurt during, he still gets a contract. B) the Lakers don't get to hold all the cards for his future (2 year, 2nd is a PO).
Remember when last time we “rioted” (well, small protest outside of Staples) … a few weeks later Rob put together a championship team in a manner of days despite being strung along by Kawhi? At the risk of me being a snarky jerk on a high horse, the sentiment over us not signing Stanley Johnson already seems a little absurd. And this isn’t directed towards anyone here personally, just feels like our fanbase is so on edge, that we’re looking for saviors or scapegoats at every turn. This season is not going to be won or lost with Stanley Johnson. I personally don’t think he has as much leverage as some of you are making it out to be. Maintaining flexibility in our roster spot via 10 day contracts and/or seeing if we could get him to bite on a second year team option seems more astute than locking up our final roster spot already. I want to keep him. But I trust our front office has a feel for where he’s at, and have bigger picture ideas that aren’t necessarily worth locking up Johnson ASAP. I could realistically see a sequence of events where we end up giving Johnson a few 10 day contracts, and that flexibility buys us some room to make another move that helps our team before we actually lock him up. Then the fans celebrate Rob’s shrewd cap maneuvering… until months later we realize that he’s not the defensive maestro some are portraying him as, and his offensive limitations end up hurting us. And suddenly with 20/20 hindsight, now we’re denouncing the FO’s roster construction for signing him and want him gone. Or maybe not. Maybe we sign him tomorrow and he ends up being an instrumental component of our team defense. Just saying, let’s take a chill pill.
We are 19-19, we suuuuuck, we beat a Wolves team with no Russ or Towns by 5. Our defense is so bad that an average player overall, and someone who can’t shoot at all in Johnson looks like prime Ron Artest on our team in contrast to everyone on the roster not named Reaves. But no, we are cheap, and because of that we may very well lose to the Kings tomorrow as we wait for Wednesday to sign Stan to another 10-day. And we suck so much, that loss might cost us a playoff spot when it comes down to it, it might be that close, we never know. You don’t throw your best chances at winning games away to save some tax money. Pinching pennies as THE franchise of the NBA, the standard of championships and excellence is a bad look, it cost us Caruso, and it could very well cost us Johnson if he doesn’t want to keep playing on 10-days and risking injury. Is it that big of a deal in the end? Is Johnson THAT good? No, but it’s what this means, what it says we’re willing to do to win, and it’s not a good look, I don’t like it myself. We’re the Lakers, not the Thunder or Pacers, some small market team. If the things you bring up are in fact what’s going on, great, but I think it’s ok to be leery of the FO with how we have cheaped out in some areas for a while now.
I hear you, but I think there is a middle ground here between the cheapness we exhibited in not retaining Caruso, and the idea of locking up Stanley Johnson ASAP. Letting Caruso walk was a colossal mistake. I have to imagine that message has been loud and clear to the front office. But that’s passed us by, and right now we have one roster spot. It took some luck for us to get rid of Rondo for free and obtain that free roster spot. Sure, Johnson makes sense to fill that spot for now. But if someone else shakes free on the buyout market, or a trade opportunity arises that requires us to have an open spot, at that point my understanding is that it would cost ownership another ~$15 million to just cut Bazemore or DJ and eat their salary to free an additional spot. In an ideal world, I wish that wouldn’t be a factor. But it is; $15 million is beyond penny pinching. That’s a real variable that Rob has to account for when it comes to viable moves for the chess pieces on the board. All I’m saying is that taking a few days to decide on Stanley is not the catastrophic indictment on our franchise that the internet seems to be trying to portray. Like in a vacuum if we were less desperate, I think we would be applauding Rob for his flexible cap maneuvering on a guy who is fighting for a spot in the league.
i mean, i guess. i promise our main competitors wouldn't bat an eyelash at it, though. anyway, i wouldn't say this thread has much freaking out in it, tbh. alam was clearly joking. i think as weezy said, folks are just pretty fed up with the season already, and inaction on the johnson front is just sort of more of the same. and pretty much every time we've been told to be patient this year, that's kind of blown up on us as fans.
