Clarkson should be on World Team....Randle and Russell should both be in....and I agree...forget this stupid USA vs World crap. Go back to rooks vs sophomore game. Much more entertaining imo....
I think it's great that Randle is playing well right around the time of the trade deadline....lol. I love Randle but I dont' see him as a long term piece for us. The second we get the #1 pick...I think we trade him for someone else....and we get Simmons at the 4. I could see us dealing Randle for a 2-way center.
IF the lakers got the #1 pick, they'd be held over a barrel in randle trade talks. I think if you're a laker fan, you need to be all in on randle improving to allstar caliber. I don't think he actually has much trade value right now (i.e., his potential is more valuable here than it is elsewhere). same with Clarkson, really. need to just hope those guys find another gear. I liked that randle spent most of the game on offense last night ducking in around the rim. this is the way he needs to score right now. this and on the break. he can't be serious iso option until he improves his skills (which CAN happen). but the garbage stuff he can certainly do. took a page out of bass's book after he got stuffed initially and started just going up with two hands and slamming. more, please.
I had a chance to watch Simmons play against the number 1 team in the country on Saturday; he's a more polished product than Randle right now. I'd move Randle too make room for Simmons.
I think my point was that everyone would know the trade would have to happen, so the lakers would have a weak negotiating position. as a side note, I'm still not convinced simmons is a franchise changer. although I said the same about towns last year and was wrong. I don't like guys that can't shoot and aren't physical beasts. he'll have to get a lot stronger to play his game at the next level, imo. or he'll have to improve his shooting dramatically, particularly off the bounce.
^Gotcha. I like Simmons, and I'm coming around too him. However, I like Ingram more, and if the Lakers agree, Randle doesn't have to be moved. We have to keep our pick though for any of this happen, so this discussion is all moot too me until May when our fate is decided with our draft position...
For me it's those two guys. But I agree with abeer3. The league knows that Simmons + Randle would have a hard time working. We would get hosed in a Randle deal unless another team had a similar dilemma. I like the "idea" of Ingram better for this team because he's so smooth, and I think Russell and him both have the potential to be a deadly (and exciting) duo from outside. But I still take Simmons because he's a better player. I think the Lakers would try to make Simmons and Randle work, like they did with Campbell and Shaq. But in the end, without a miraculous turnabout, Randle would likely need to be dealt for someone who can shoot from further than 8 feet.
I mean if we get number 1 pick, you gotta go Simmons. If we get #2, then we basically take whichever play is left after the team with the 1st pick makes their pick....so we likely end up with Ingram by default. I would be happy with either.... I like Randle a lot....but I see that his potential is limited....small hands, and he'll struggle against length always. His motor is definitely there though. I'm hoping I'm wrong about him though and I just want him to be starting on this team so he can develop properly....and hopefully with Scott gone this off-season, Randle will learn better instincts next year with a better coach.
All players' potential is limited. How limited do you think his is? 15/10? 18/12? 13/13? Always a poor defender? Average defender? I think he's already a pretty good basketball player.
I see absolutely no reason why the Lakers would have to move a prospect right away. I find that kind of silly. All it would take is a jumper from Randle and Simmons/Randle fit fine.
Hey, what about this? If we get the #1 pick, trade for #2, and if it's to the 70centers, take one of their cost controlled centers and get Ingram,
You have to go with the best player available. None of this "filling the need" b*******. Simmons is the best prospect, period.
Positionless basketball makes that combo interesting to me actually. If both are good and willing passers, are both limited to only being 4's in the NBA? I'd rather have that problem than not enough talent. However, I don't think for a minute we are getting Simmons.
I don't see why Simmons can't play the three at times. If he's Lamar Odom, Lamar played the three on occasion. It'd be an awesome problem to have if Simmons and Randle were on the same team.
I don't think Simmons and Randle works, IMO. Plus, we're not running a farm system. I don't a want full youth movement. I like what we did last year with the additions of Lou, Bass, and Hibbert. Needless to say, I don't think they've been used correctly. Nevertheless, we need impact players and veterans, and I'm more than willing to trade our pick plus a young prospect and/or Lou for an impact vet. Trades are in Mitch's wheelhouse.
