And for the record I have no idea how anyone can claim to know what Randle or any of our young guys' trade value is around the league, unless they have some inside info. Regardless, I don't think any of these guys are going to be traded. But I guess, as ever, we'll have to see how the off season plays out. It's going to be an interesting summer no doubt.
Randle is 1/2 a game away from finishing 2nd in Rookie of the Year voting. His progress is really overlooked because of a wasted rookie year.
I would say my knowledge that he can't be traded for an allstar comes from the fact that he hasn't. the lakers would rather be better now than wait, hence the cousins chase prior to the season.
The Raiders' rebuild has taken a lot of time, but the Reggie / Del Rio combo seems legit. They're building the right way. They haven't sold the future for the present, and now, finally, both are looking great. I can't say the same for the Lakers. I fear they would pull the trigger on so many deals that would hamper us for the future even at the cost of this solid core we're building. I mean, we've done it before - bringing on Nash/Howard, ditching Odom and Bynum (I know he had injuries).
I like the comparison Trodgers. The Lakers have also hoarded cap space like the Raiders to bring in free agents to win right away. The flexibility financially gives us the option to hold onto our young assets and fill the roster with free agents as opposed to trading any of them for an impact player. Bear in mind, I try to not get too attached to any of our young guys and realize in the right deal any one of them can be moved, IMO. I don't think that happens this summer, but I'm not surprised by anything...
I feel the need to reiterate this: I don't WANT to trade randle, Clarkson, or Russell. my point is just that we probably couldn't get what we would want, so it's moot. we're probably going to have these guys, so we just need to hope they pan out. I feel pretty good about all three, though only Russell (imo) shows real star potential. this doesn't mean I dislike the other two. in fact, I think the other two are better than whomever the lakers are likely to recruit in FA any time soon. to steer this back to randle: you know what I want to see? remember in the early going when he would occasionally use his dribble to make contact in the paint, then take that little dirk fade from about 10-12 feet? I feel like I haven't seen that shot in months. that's how he becomes a scorer, imo.
He took and made one of those last game. His shot looks the most pure when he shoots that shot and he's had success with it.
Yep agreed with both of you guys. I'm not sure why he went away from that move. In fact I'm not sure why he doesn't post up more often. He usually likes taking small guys off the dribble too.
He's showing some true patience after the break. The difference between this guy and the guy we saw in Summer League is just shocking.
he had a really nice turnaround jumper to his right shoulder last night. I don't think I've seen him turn that way all season. I don't think his jumpshot is quite as broken as it looks. With his work ethic I'm expecting him to come back with a respectable jumper next year. Not deadly, but good enough to at least force the defender to challenge it sometimes.
all he has to do is hit two or three a game to open up everything else. given his drive and kick ability, one might tell him to just work on that three point shot first. i think that's what draymond green did. you can bring it in a bit later. of course, that may not be possible.
The future of this core also depends on our draft pick this year. If the Lakers draft Simmons and see him as a PF, they will shop Randle for ane stablished player probably. I also think the Lakers at one point or another have to trade some future potential for stability. You can't win in this league by just developing young talent unless you find a LeBron, Curry, Kobe, Duncan etc. in the draft, which is clearly not the case with us.
I agree. As cool as Russell/Clarkson/Ingram/Randle sounds on paper, it seems like teams in total youth mode never make it over the hump. If Simmons is the pick, I could see us shopping Randle and Clarkson together for a really good player in his mid 20s, maybe even late 20s just to get some stability in here.
I completely disagree. Teams that have the patience to develop and build around their young core tend have a longer span of success. (dynasty in case of Spurs and possibly GSW) Spurs - Duncan, Ginobili, Parker, Leonard, Splitter OKC - Durant, Westbrook, Harden, Ibaka, Jackson GSW - Curry, Thompson, Green, Barnes Taking shortcuts and trading assets rarely leads to a sustained level of success.
It's not really taking a shortcut. It's about building a well diversified roster. Duncan was already a semi-veteran and champion when Ginobli and Parker showed up. GS didn't really get over the hump without Bogut, Iggy, etc. And let's be honest, none of our guys are going to become the unquestioned best player in the NBA (Steph). GS is kind of an outlier due to having a game changing (and I mean he is literally changing the way we watch basketball) player. OKC hasn't really done much to be honest. They have one Finals appearance. But they are a bad example either way because that team has severe financial limitations. They have no choice but to build with cheap young players, but they don't have the money to add veteran talent and have to actually trade their young talent because it gets too expensive. I'm not saying we should trade them all. But to run with 4 guys who are that young...they aren't going to simply learn by getting their brains bashed in. They need some vets to show them the ropes AND those vets still need to be able to play at a high level. Kobe is a vet, Artest is a vet, but both of them are barely functional on the court at this point. Say you get Simmons. You DO build around a young core of Simmons and Russell, but you do that building with some pieces that can provide experience. And I'm not saying give Randle and Clarkson away for an aging star like Melo. I'm saying for a really good player who has 6-7 years experience.
Right but you need to build the young group first. It's all about making sure you have the right young group and then you bring in veterans to keep the ship calm, not win the ring by himself. Iguodala couldn't get it done for how long in Philly as the #1? Bogut was never much in Milwaukee, partly due to injury but he couldn't get it done either. They had to come here and sacrifice and thus show the young guys what it takes to be champions. In this case, we need Randle and Russell and Clarkson to show initiative this summer and improve dramatically. Once that happens, you start looking for veterans to trade for (maybe using Lou and/or ONE of the young pieces that isn't meshing well) and go get an older guy in a trade. You don't trade the farm for one crop yield. That's not sustained success. If I'm Mitch, unless someone is willing to offer me an All-Star, I'm not moving any of the young players. I'll take my (bad) chances in FA and we'll just have to continue to rebuild the old-fashioned way. It's on the scouting department to make sure we have the most talent that fits together the best. Then find a coach that can get them to improve. The Utah roster is a little better than us, but they're WAY better coached. Snyder is a really talented coach, we need one of those. Go get Luke or Thibs or Ollie or even Scott Brooks. Go get anyone besides Byron, draft the best kid you can, then try to overpay for a 2nd or 3rd tier FA that will fit well around the young guys.
The Lakers cannot rebuild the team the "old fashioned" way in the new CBA. It's severely crippling to rebuild that way and almost impossible. We have to build through the draft, and hope that 1 or 2 of our young guys become franchise players. With Randle Nance Russell Clarkson and whoever our pick will be this summer (if we keep the god damn pick), you have 5 young guns to fire up and hopefully they'll all be up to the challenge of being that guy. I do think we need to bring in some solid 4-7 years in the league type of guys....not guys that are redundant though on this roster (yes, no more Lou Williams type players please). I think if the Lakers can somehow get Whiteside and Barnes this summer to go with our young core, that would be a step in the right direction. Fill 2 positions of need with young guys that have experience. Then, whoever our draft pick is, whether it's simmons or ingram, figure out what we're going to do with it, and plan accordingly. Now Lakers could go the vet route but I don't think they'll need to trade ALL of our young players to make it happen. I think if anything it'll be 2 of our young players packaged with Lou to get an all star in return. Maybe someone like Demarcus Cousins. Then, maybe KD and Derozan come to LA...who knows? But I'm leaning towards going with guys like Whiteside and Barnes/Batum/Parsons (although I don't want Parsons seems very injury prone).
good thoughts all around; obviously, the truth is in the middle. i come down slightly on the "trade prospects for established young vets in hopes of attracting FAs", mostly because LA might have a competitive advantage in the market if they had anything in place. of course, nobody trades tim duncan. but the lakers don't have a tim duncan. right now, only russell has shown real flashes of potential stardom, and nobody would be willing to go out on a limb and say he's going to be even a perennial allstar. to counter tada's examples, i think you run out of teams that grew up together and won big really fast. most of the recent title teams or even conference championship level teams didn't follow that model. and i'm not sure SA really qualifies, either. sadly, the only tried and true formula is draft an all-time great, then don't let them walk in FA. short of that, i think there are a lot of paths to winning, so you tailor it to your specific strengths and advantages.
I don't want to see any of our young guys gone till this happens. The guys we have and we some how land Ingram.. very nice. The coach we get will go along way in determining our success in FA. On a 1-10 scale things will go from a -10 to a 5 or 6 instantly with a good coach.
