Neither guy posted a good DRPM last season. Randle -1.30, 91st among PFs - and worse than Nance, Kelly, and Bass. WCS was -1.01 on the season. I don't really believe, though, that anyone could defend Julius's defense. It might get better, but it's awful. Especially his help defense.
for clarification, i think tada was implying that centers like wcs can be had; in fact, the lakers are going to get a better one this summer.
I totally admit that they can be had. Young seven footers who play D and shoot effectively? I wouldn't trade Randle for WCS and the 8 (if that's the deal; I haven't even read it, because we're not trading Randle), but I really was a fan of WCS's game in college, and it looks like it's translating beautifully to the NBA.
if the lakers slipped to 4 or 5 last year, i think i advocated picking WCS. but i do agree with tada that this year's FA crop of centers presents an opportunity to get an established player at that spot. and i also agree that it doesn't seem like the lakers would move randle for anything short of a current allstar player.
Advanced metrics don't win you championships and your assertion that Randle can't improve is absurd. He's a freaking rookie dude and Randle is already far above WCS offensively. It's a big down grade in talent and ability and skillset. It makes no sense.
No it wouldn't and not in a weak draft. WCS is pretty limited offensively. Much more so than Randle so I just don't see a huge growth of improvement.
devil's advocate on weak draft: one of: simmons, ingram (first two unlikely), hield, bender, dunn, brown, murray, chriss, or labissiere is going to be available at 8. the lakers are working some of them out; maybe they make a deal hinging upon the availability of one guy at that spot. in other words, there's not much consensus on who's the third pick. really, picks 3-8 jump all over in the mocks, so it's possible in this draft that #8 is (essentially) as good as having #3, in terms of pure talent. i don't want to move randle, but if the lakers fall in love with another prospect, maybe that happens. the real reason i don't see randle moving in a deal like this, though, is that i'm pretty sure the lakers don't want to add MORE youth. they seem almost reluctant to even draft someone at 2.
I dont really buy into the "weak draft" stuff...look back randle draft yr....they said it was one of the better ones in years prior to the actual draft and thus far no one from that yr is all that impressive not even Wiggins. Last yr we heard it was top 4 heavy but guys who were picked later like booker and turner looked as good if not better than those guys pucked in top 5, hell id even go as far as saying id take Turner easily over Ok4 at the present and booker lmhas looked better than russell at times
Whats so impressive bout wiggins? He is puts up points on poor efficiency as he has a weak 3pt shot, isnt that good of a rebounder for his height/athleticism, doesnt pass and for all the fluff that hes a good defender, he actually has a poor defensive rating and it actually regressed from his rookie yr in regards to defensive metrics. There was an espn article earlier this yr noting all of Wiggins poor season and he really hasnt improved much from his rookie yr.
And you were unimpressed with what Randle did as a rookie last year, looking better than Charles Barkley..... the stud rebounder / push the ball up the court HOF player..... did in his rookie year 2-3 years older than Randle? Under Boron Scott the a-hole and expert at mismanaging his lineups and his talent and with no real coaching communication that these guys all needed. Now we got Luke coming in.
If anyone can give Draymond Green a physical run for his money this coming year and in the future on our team it's Randle.
I didnt say i wasn't impressed by randle...i feel wcs/8 would do more for the TEAM and if the trade offer is real id take it and not think twice....everbody has varying opinion and i dont feel randle bully ball offense is conducive to winning ball gms
Bingo. How many young guys do we want? Orlando has 16 and they are on a treadmill right now trying to develop them all. The Nuggets have been doing it since Carmelo left. With 4-5 young players on the team, we've got PLENTY of youth to develop. Trading Randle for two guys that is at best a lateral step and at worst a mistake does what for us exactly? Give is a worse player and a prospect? So we are worse now and are even further behind in our rebuild. I say again: no thank you. And impressive players from the 2014 draft class: Wiggins, Randle, Clarkson, LaVine, Jokic, and even guys like Payton, Hood, Parker, Harris, and Gordon have shown great flashes. Guys like McDermott, Smart, Vonleh, Capela, McDaniels, and even Jerami Grant have shown role player potential. It was a good draft class.
i think the reference was to the top of the draft. wiggins, parker, embiid, randle, gordon were all supposed to be really good, and only wiggins has done enough to make people outside of the team that drafted him sit up and take notice. his point was that calling draft classes "strong" and "weak" hasn't been particularly diagnostic. i agree. doesn't mean i want to trade for the #8, just that we don't know much right now. we could all look back laughing at this being the simmons/ingram draft when it turns out to be the bender/patrick mccaw draft or some crazy nonsense.
I think Randle and Gordon have done enough to make people notice, too. Not stars, but both could become all-stars.
Lets look at the west Towns, Cousins, Jordan, Aldridge, Anthony Davis, Draymond Green, Blake Griffin and a bunch of SFs like Durant and Leonard and guys like Wiggins etc. growing, I don't see how Julius could be an all-star any time soon, especially since the all-star game is rather "guard-heavy". All-star caliber? hopefully. But at the end of the day, if you are all-star caliber but not an all-star you are not all-star caliber if that makes any sense.
