Hypothetical: Guarantee #3 Pick Or Take Chances With Lottery?

someone drafted much later than ball is almost certainly going to be better than him. the pain this year is not missing out on a top pick; it's missing out on the flexibility any pick provides.

this is why the hypothetical is a no-brainer for me.

 

"My Dad" told me

 

Regardless of how you feel about the talent lvl, its better to keep the pick than not. Its an asset, theres lots of things you can do with it and again not keeping the pick doesnt mean we get a better pick/player next yr either and not to mention not having to convey another possible lottery pick to Orl in 19'

And yes I was wrong other way, i thought deng signing was less terrible than Mozgov due to his track record. Mozgov best season was just your avg role player C, he did not deserve that much $ and I don't care if thats the "avg" salay for being 7ft. He had a terrible yr in clev, all that stuff clev talked bout his injury was just lip service so he wouldn't get a bad deal but clev knew what Mozgov was

 

Lonzo or Buss. I mean Lonzo or bust.

 

It wouldn't be a stretch if that's what he means. Invariably someone selected later ends up shining brighter and making people wonder how they missed him.

 

No one would enjoy eating crow more than I if we end up getting Ball and he and Russell become the next Steph and Klay. Believe me. If that happens, I'm standing at Staples smiling up at Shaq's dong after the games. Lakers are eventually going to lose this pick. Next year its top pick protected, so this will be the last shot in all intense purposes for us to draft another top 3 talent in a draft. I just hope it results in playoff potential regular season whether the Lakers keep the pick or trade the pick.

Ideally if Ball becomes what so many hope and the Lakers get him, than the Lakers will not only have flexibility but an abundance talent. If there is progression next year and the Lakers decide to keep their picks, progression meaning winning games towards the playoff spot, than PG coming in 2018 becomes a reality if he isnt on an All NBA team this summer. The true test for this new regime is this summer regardless of trades. bringing in Bake Griffin without a PG trade would set the league on fire. I know many dont like Biff but he is a star and if he is willing to commit to a mid 20 game winner, that means pelinka and magic are here to stay and the good ole times are a coming. That is what I will be paying attention to this off season.

 

John, a "Ball guy" with the safe option?

 

Like everyone else take #3 although I'm big fans of Fultz and Ball. Definitely see potential stars there. No guarantee though. I thought Russell had the same potential and Ingram although haven't given up on them just yet. Draft is a crap shoot.

 

Damn you people with research and facts to back up your position



Why, back in the day people just spoke opinions and they were honored as quality arguments. The internet is total b*******

 

I'd take the guarantee.

I'd rather not take the chance at losing it, and the #3 would still be a solid asset in a trade.

Randle+Deng+#3 for PG? Yeah Indy has to take Deng, but they get Randle and could possible fill George with Josh Jackson.

That might do it.

 

i never said second round. i said much later, and the stats are going to support the argument that a player taken, say, outside the lotto is going to be better than ball. this is generally true in all drafts except your lebron, duncan, anthony davis type drafts.

ball is not even in the same zip code as those dudes, nor is fultz. thus, #3 is fine with me.

i also didn't say guard. i said someone drafted later was almost certainly going to be better. the odds are in my favor, as it's rare that the 2nd overall pick is better than everyone taken after. you only feel this way in the oden/durant draft. this isn't one of those.

i mean, i guess mcconnell wasn't drafted...

http://www.basketball-reference.com...os_is_fc=Y&pos_is_c=Y&pos_is_cf=Y&order_by=ws

depending on the metric, but the larger point is that you can look at a bunch of these, using any sorting metric, and you'll find your top picks all over the board.

http://www.basketball-reference.com...os_is_fc=Y&pos_is_c=Y&pos_is_cf=Y&order_by=ws

i won't keep going; i think you understand the point.

there's always a LOT of misses.

sometimes it's faulty scouting. everyone thought mike dunleavy and adam morrisson were great picks at #3. hasheem thabeet was considered sensible at #2. hindsight is super powerful.

sirron said 2nd round. i just meant "later". what is "much"? hell, i don't know. with the way people prize top 5 around here, let's just cut it there. or the lotto. doesn't matter, really.

the hypothetical that kicked this off is: would you rather not pick if you couldn't have fultz or ball (i mean, that was the implication)? i said i'd easily rather pick, because i've got a good shot at drafting someone as good or better somewhere between 3 and 20.

the sticking point seems to be that the above statement will be translated to "i have a good shot at drafting a star at #20", but that's not what i'm saying. i'm saying i have nearly as good a shot at drafting a star at many points in the draft--because they're all low probabilities.

again, the lakers have drafted well over a long period of time (including recent picks), and half the fan base wants to run these dudes out of town because they're not all-nba-ers. it's likely true for fultz and ball, too, but that doesn't mean i don't want a pick.

 

Ah, the Jahlil Okafor move.

 

worked out so well for him...