Official 2016 Free Agency Thread

not that I think it needs rehashing, but it's possible that the lakers were one of Aldridge's top choices, but that they didn't stand much of a chance.

my personal theory is that he went to the first meeting hoping to hear their plan to snag additional help via trade (as phx had done by getting chandler via FA), and he didn't hear it (as opposed to the odd narrative re: "analytics"). the second meeting was face saving for the lakers, but SA was sort of the obvious choice from day one. the deck was stacked.

 

not that I think it needs rehashing, but it's possible that the lakers were one of Aldridge's top choices, but that they didn't stand much of a chance.

my personal theory is that he went to the first meeting hoping to hear their plan to snag additional help via trade (as phx had done by getting chandler via FA), and he didn't hear it (as opposed to the odd narrative re: "analytics"). the second meeting was face saving for the lakers, but SA was sort of the obvious choice from day one. the deck was stacked.

 

I don't see any real reason to doubt the reports and his own interviews saying the presentation wasn't that great. He wasn't the only one who said that.

This is getting in the weeds now. My point was that I hope we have addressed some of the issues with our pitch to free agents. I stand by that.

 

Anyway, bad presentation or not, I hate the FO's Jim Carrey moments during the FA period. If it's a slim chance, it's not worth pursuing but I don't think Mitch and Jim will change their MO. They'll go after Durant and bombed again and probably will lead to a Mitch firing.

 

Don't know about anybody else, but this picture gives me goosebumps.

 

Brandon Bass is one. Probably will get more than we'd be willing to pay. Black should want to stay now though, with last year's a-hole coach gone and someone in Luke here that he truly respects and knows will use him properly.

 

I hope we don't get Westbrook.

I have a feeling he is going Derek Rose very very soon.

 

Westbrook is a top five player in the league. He's only 27 years old and right in his prime. A legit MVP candidate if it wasn't for Steph. He's a sensational talent.

Ramona couldn't be more wrong. I don't really see that lineup attracting Durant. Butler would be a great get, but we'd need more. We'd need another All Star. Noah is injury prone and I like Biyumbo, but he's better suited as a backup who plays 20-25 minutes a game. We need to get Whiteside. People think he's gonna go in the tank after he gets paid? Well that's certainly a possibility, but it's also a possibility he continues to work hard and improves and continues to be one of the best big man in the game. It's a risk we have to take.

 

What you just said applied even more to Rose. Just before he became oft-injured non-PG.

I truly believe Westbrook has may be 2 more healthy years left.

 

I don't see the comparison and I think Westbrook has five years left at least. I don't see why not. Yes he does attack the basket a lot, but he doesn't solely rely on that. Does a lot of his work in the post and has a great mid range game. Rose never really developed either and while Westbrook has had his injuries he's bounced back from them clearly. Rose never did. Again no brainer decision. We would be fools to pass up on a superstar in his prime:

 

We as organization? Sure.

Me personally? I have a bad feeling and would like to avoid having to drag Westbrook $100 millions corpse for the next 5 - 6 seasons.

 

Love Westbrook. His aggressiveness most of all. If we can get him I am in favor. And i think his role here would be different than in OKC. Maybe more an SG in a more fluent system and that would have to be worked out.

More generally, and i thought about this re. the H.Barnes discussion: i am glad we have Walton also with respect to his input on what FAs to get. I think he has a vision on how he wants to play and if he says he wants someone or does not want, i am inclined to trust his judgment. I hope Jim and Mitch listen!

 

I hope we get Whiteside. That would be amazing. He would fit nicely in Luke's hybrid Steve Kerr offense. Imagine the solid Screens he'll set and that top tier interior defense.

 

I've put some thought into Derozan and it makes absolutely no sense to bring him here.

OK so first, players under contract...
D'Angelo
Clarkson(RFA)/Lou
Young/Brown
Randle/Nance
N/A

If we bring in Derozan and resign Clarkson, we are going to be paying nearly 50 million for the SG position. Could someone explain why we'd want more than half our cap space tied up to one position?

And really, our SG and PF rotation is already quite decent. (probably a bit above league average) Meanwhile we have no backup PG (and no, I don't want Lou handling the ball), our SF situation is a disaster, and we have no center.

And we're looking to upgrade our SG rotation? What am I missing?

 

Clarkson just might be traded if we keep the pick. I'd put it at over 50 percent so we don't even know if he'll still be here. Even if he is as much as I like the guy he can't be our starting two guard if he doesn't vastly improve his defense. I don't see anything wrong with trying to upgrade our two guard spot. It needs upgrading.