but according to some we dont get Lebron....cause you know only way to dump ugly contracts is to attached a high upside lotto pick...cough *dho/mozgov* cough
btw all this Zo drama, we should trade him even if its not part of an AD pkg. This guy hasnt done much in 2 yrs for us to cont to deal with all his baggage n injury issues...n no this wont be a steph curry like scenario i can say that with 99.9% certainty
Y'all think Bron comes alone when history has said otherwise? Y'all think MozDeng comes off the books last summer when it was so easy by others to have Knight, Noah, Baze, Anderson come clean off the books last summer? Yall think a stretch of MozDeng doesn't leave 15m annual of dead cap for the next five years as opposed to 5m for the next 3? Y'all think Bron, Jules (extension), DLo (extension), BI, Zo and either Kuz or Hart are enough to win it all...with 15m in dead cap limiting any key adds during the summer? Pardon me for all the rhetorical questions, but some of y'all need to tune into Game of Thrones tonight so y'all can limit the Game of Groans here. Yall wanna talk about how we can come up with solutions from our present predicament, then I'm game... otherwise "some" need to leave that discussion to the Game of Growns. Seeing how your boy is man-child Lavar, see yourself out... otherwise... #ComeGet"Some"
I cannot emphasize this enough. Folks on this board need to understand that if we gave Randle a 2 year deal and maxed Russell, we'd be in a much worse position for the future (even if we had James). Please do not fall for the allure of their elevated yet inefficient numbers on mediocre teams. Trading Russell, letting Randle go, and getting rid of Mozgov was the correct move, even in hindsight. For the same reason, Ingram is going to want a max deal soon. No point in keeping him around this season, since maxing him would effectively ruin this franchise's future.
I don't think anybody who is sane would have "maxed out" Russell...prior to this year his value was maybe 10-12 mio. a year. And I don't think people here thought we should have kept Russell because he was probably not going to get the freedom now that he has and his reputation was ruined. As for Randle...I do think signing him to a 2 year 25 mio. deal would have benefited us. But lets assume his salary would be an issue...we could have still gotten something for him...like a bag of peanuts. We got literally nothing. In other words...we gave away 2 years of tanking (Russell and Randle) and have nothing to show for it. The Kuzma or Hart pick (result of the Russell trade) was certainly a great pick but much cheaper to obtain than having to give away Russell... especially if we don't sign anyone this summer...You have to ask yourself what you gained from cutting MozDeng. The answer is nothing, except that Deng will be on the books for 2 more years.
Hold on. Inefficient but elevated? Do you realize how terrible the Lakers have vbeen? 27, 21, 17, 26, 35, 37. Those are their win totals over the last six seasons. That used to be three years worth of wins for them. They are inefficient and not elevated. Lakers were 29th in TOs, 29th in FT%, average at best on O, below average on D. And if the improvement doesn't come from outside, it's going to be awhile still before it comes. Ingram has one season left before he hits the market. Ball has two, and he hasn't managed to play 100 games yet. I don't think Kuzma has much of a ceiling left, but we can disagree on that. I don't like defending Randle, but he shot better on FGs, 3s, and FTs than LeBron. Randle might continue to improve a bit, but LeBron is almost certainly on the decline. I would have moved Randle, honestly, but I wouldn't have let him walk. Russell and Allen are the only major additions in the last year and a half for the Nets, but they've won 70 games over their last two - their most since 13-14 and 42 games this season, their best SRS since 12-13. They're in the playoffs, and they're suddenly attractive to FAs. Current Lakers
LeBron and this squad and sub 40 wins vs. Randle, other players, and more wins and something to build on? Probably. Wouldn't you?
There is so much more to it than this simple trade-off. Does PG13 come to the Lakers with Randle and DLo (all three Mintz clients) on the roster? Was Lebron part of the reason PG13 didn't come? Would the momentum gained at the end of last season have continued to grow with this squad still relatively intact? We'd also only be one season away from MozDeng being completely off the books had we kept D-Lo and Randle and we'd still have enough room to sign one max.
It's important to watch how these guys play. Context is extremely important. If you just look at numbers, you will get some very skewed perceptions. Randle was a cap space move. We couldn't sign a max FA this summer if we were paying him. If we were moving him, it would have to be for cap space and maybe a player on a 1 year deal. At that point, it would have been better to just let him walk anyways. Saying Randle, a player that came off the bench most games shot more efficiently than LeBron just proves how blindly looking at stats doesn't tell you much. You have to compare a primary option to a primary option, not a bench player. Russell can't play like he is on the Nets. He won't get to shoot the ball 19 times a game at 43% from the field with LeBron James running the show. It's just not going to happen. And he's going to want big money this offseason. Locking him up on a max or near max deal would be the kiss of death for this franchise moving forward, IMO. I agree with the young core. The main bright spot is Lonzo Ball's elite defense. Otherwise, there's not much to go off. Ingram is going to want max or near max money next season and has a significantly diminished trade value due to the DVT. I would be perfectly fine with shipping him and Kuzma or even Ingram/Kuzma/Ball out for Davis or that type of player this offseason.
This is arguably the most ridiculous thing I have ever read on this board. I would much rather have LeBron and cap room for a max FA vs. f***ing Julius Randle and Russell and these "other players" locked up on a multi-year deals with flexibility to improve. This is why most fan bases don't take the Lakers seriously. Randle over LeBron James? Seriously?
