Yeah, that's how I'm starting to feel too. For starters, there's no FA out there that I absolutely want. Well, there's the impossible gets like Butler or Leonard, but that's about it. We also have no idea of what to expect out of our core. We're just assuming Randle/Towns/Towns are studs and servicable. Kobe's health and Clarkson's chemistry with Kobe is questionable too. Perhaps we should let this core play a bit before we start altering with huge long-term contracts. I would prefer to sign 1 or 2 year contracts to solid vets like Pierce, and spend big next year. Or we could bundle the new signings and trade them in February.
man, love would make a ton of sense in phx. I generally agree with tada on many things, but i'll be disappointed if the FO opts for short deals on stopgap players again this year. even if it's third-tier guys, I want to start spending on players we at least plan on keeping. I liked the nick young signing last year, for example. sure he had a bad year, but I still think he's a productive nba player on a bargain deal who wants to be in la. go get a couple more of those this summer. you'll still have max space next year. but you can't just roll that over in perpetuity, which seems to be the smart guy plan for the new era. nobody has been successful with that, save Miami's weird circumstance. and btw, that Miami team would have been in big trouble had they not cultivated a long-term relationship with haslem that allowed them to keep on the cheap when they signed the others. the lakers need some haslems.
I certainly understand your stance too, and I wouldn't be against signing second -or third-tier players, especially at the SF spot. But I think we're in a much different situation from last year, where we knew that all the signings amounted to a lateral move. We knew we'd suck even before the season started. This year we're already adding Randle, Okafor/Towns, and a post-allstar Clarkson. Those are huge additions and we can say with certainty that the Lakers will be better this year. As for the short deals, we witnessed how much Clarkson grew as a player under the mentoring of Kobe and Nash. As much as I'd like signing young proven talent to generate competition within the team, I'm also intrigued to see how experienced players like Pierce, Boozer, or even Jameer Nelson, can accelerate the growth of our young core. If we strike out on RFAs like Butler, Leonard or Middleton, I'd wouldn't mind going the aforementioned route. And I'm now against signing any big contract for a non-wing player.
Sorry man but there's no way I'll be satisfied with short deals this summer unless it's a max player looking for the pay increase next summer. I'd understand Aldridge or Gasol or someone of that caliber signing a 1 + 1 player option deal to capitalize on the rising cap figures. Otherwise it makes absolutely zero sense to not sign a guy to a huge contract this summer if we feel like he's a good fit. 1. The cap blows up so anyone we get this summer, even a max deal, will look like a steal. 2. If we spend every last dime this summer on long-term deals, we'll still have two max contracts to offer next summer. How many max contracts do we need when we've got 3 rookies that could develop into stars/starters in this league? No this summer we spend hard on valuable players. Unless we can get Aldridge or Gasol though, I'd be fine just going hard after DeMarre Carroll and some other veterans.
Just thought I'd throw this Love article by Zach Lowe in this thread. Lowe is probably the best basketball writer in the business as it pertains to X's and O's. He doesn't really mention the Lakers at all, but it is possible to gather what kind of fit Love could be here. http://grantland.com/the-triangle/whats-next-for-kevin-love/ What I gathered from the article is we are far better off with Randle as our pf of the future with this new NBA. It talks a lot about Draymond Green's ability to switch on defense onto smaller players; limiting mismatch opportunities for the other team on the pick and roll. Randle seems like he could be Draymond with a slightly shorter reach, but way more offensive upside. Love and Randle just scares the crap out of me from a defensive perspective, especially if we get Okafor who is probably being unfairly criticized for his defense, but is still not an elite shot blocker/help defender to break-up the inevitable parade of players that would march into our lane.
I agree on principle, but like you mention, only "if we feel like he's a good fit" I'm not so sure about Gasol, for example, if we draft Okafor. Both players can only play center, so Okafor would only get to play like 15 min per game as Gasol's backup, and that situation likely won't change for 2-3 years. That's a waste of talent and I'd imagine he'd demand a trade by year 3. Not sure such a signing would be good for us in the long-run. Carroll is the definition of a 2nd/3rd tier wing, and I would welcome such a signing. I just can't see the benefit of signing bigs (especially the old ones) anymore, just for the sake of spending.
As much as I love Okafor there's a possibility he's a bust. I know it doesn't seem like it now, but nobody ever really predicts those kinds of things. Michael Kidd-Gilchrist, Darko Milicic, and Greg Oden were all guys with high expectations that went way up in the draft. Maybe Okafor never pans out, well then we better have another plan. Also: Marc Gasol plays with Zach Randolph right now so he clearly can play with another post player. Push come to shove, if Okafor is really great you put them together in the front court and have a massive line for guys to try to get the rim against. That shouldn't happen for a couple of years anyway because as great as Okafor is, I'm skeptical he'll average 30 minutes a game. There's ways to make it work. I'm not going to turn away top tier level right now at any position if we can get it.
Having Gasol AND Okafor wouldn't be a bad thing. First off, Okafor is going to need some time acclimating to the game. Do I think he can start off the bat? Sure he can. But he can thrive greatly behind an intelligent center like Marc. Don't you think he could maybe learn a few things especially defensively from Gasol who is quite similar to himself in terms of size and lack of explosiveness? Help him develop better vision in the post and using both hands offensively? Both players are tremendously smart and I don't think there would be any issues with them playing together. Marc does have a jumper too. If Okafor turns into the dominant player we think he is, Marc would then be an asset for a team looking his services, and we can find a system player to surround Jah. If Jah is a bust, then we have Marc.
Mavericks, Not Spurs, Could Be the Texas Team to Lure LaMarcus Aldridge Away | Bleacher Report (via http://ble.ac/teamstream-) http://teamstre.am/1GoD97t
Yeah, I just don't want Kevin Love here. I think it takes too much away from Randle and even though Love has had great numbers thus far in the NBA I just don't feel his impact. Even Cleveland is arguably playing better without him than with him. And his injury history scares me the most.
Gasol and Z-Bo are totally different than Gasol and Okafor. Z-Bo actually plays pf and has his entire career. I totally agree with tttttada as it pertains to those two being a bad pairing and quite honestly, a waste of our cap space. Towns on the other hand would probably be a decent fit next to Gasol. It doesn't matter though. Gasol is not leaving Memphis. He loves it there and he's old enough that his window might close before ours realistically opens. Aldridge is a much better fit than Gasol. Gasol is probably the one top talent player I wouldn't even waste my time with if I were the Lakers. I get the whole "can't turn away top talent" argument, but at some point you have to trust your scouting department a little bit with the rookies and use your cap space to fill in gaps. I know the cap explodes next season, but it doesn't mean we should just spend it on bad fits. We desperately need wings. Are we going to spend every dime on Gasol and then have Wes Johnson and Xavier Henry back as our wings? That's a bad roster.
I totally get that - LMA is certainly the best prospect of the UFA's outside of Gasol who just isn't likely in anyway to come here. There's no way he gives up what he has in Memphis right now. They are getting very close to getting to the WCF. LMA is an amazing talent. I just don't think he's realistically coming here. Makes much more sense to go to Dallas or SA. We are rebuilding and they are re-loading. Big difference. We're years away from contending and he's in his prime right now. He'd have a shot at a championship on either one of those teams in the next few years.
Yeah I get that, but I think we should be real cautious signing players that play the same position as our promising young core. What kind of team are we trying to build? One that contends for 3-4 years and then rapidly falls off the radar? Or are we trying to build a 15 year dynasty like the Spurs? If given the chance, do you think the Spurs would have signed Karl Malone and benched a rookie Duncan? I think we have something real special with Randle and (hopefully) Okafor. Not sure I'd want to mess with that.
I don't disagree we need other things, but if there's a top tier All-NBA talent out there you can sign, just sign him. You need talent to win in the NBA and we have very little of it right now. If Portland had just taken Jordan all those years ago, the NBA would be a different place but they had Clyde Drexler already so they went a different route. I'm not going to turn back Gasol or Okafor because I have one or the other. I'm going to figure out how to win with both and I'll be happier for it.
Well I know from your past posts that you prefer a quick rebuild, and I respect that, but I'm intrigued by how teams like the Spurs and OKC trusted in their players and slowly developed them. I just feel like that's the road we should take this time around. I have faith that Clarkson, Black, Randle, and Okafor will all pan out.
A young core is nice, but you need veterans to show them the ropes. Players who are already established and have the resume to back it up. Do you think Duncan would have been as successful without the tutelage of David Robinson? And yes, I think the Spurs would have jumped on Karl given the chance. That would've given the threepeat Lakers are HARD run at their money. Look at it this way. An old Karl helped push a brash young Kobe and a out of shape Shaq back to the cusp. That's how good Malone was. That's why you never pass up on talent that's already there. Clarkson, Randle, Okafor/Towns, are all great prospects, but they still haven't proved anything yet.
They have not, but at some point you have to plan on them being major contributors because if they aren't, it doesn't really matter what you do in free agency any way.
