Yes but not at 2 though....how come people say Hield isn't undersized as a sg but call JC undersized? I see both listed as 6'5". As for Hield i see his lvl of impact as a Cj McCollym type, all O and every little of anything else, worse case is a JJ Reddick type career
Awful trade for us. Awful. Awful awful awful. Ford is a hack and makes a living spewing nonsense like this before every draft.
I'll never read anything from the NBA's version of Mel Kiper/Todd McShay. And he changes his draft boards from previous years which tells me this guy doesn't know s***.
wow that was one of the worst trade suggestions either. Both Russell and Randle would go top 3 this year IMO. so we trade BOTH of them for that pick plus a few potential role players? Get outta here with that garbage ford.
I've got an idea to ease my tension here with who we draft between Ingram and Simmons. As I conceded above, ok the Lakers no way do not take him at 2, and then said he'd be a great "consolation prize". I simply need to binge watch all the Simmons clips I can. Have really only seen 2 or 3 but by then had seen enough. Yeah he's amazing. But that length and alpha dog and sweet stroke with Ingram, and the footwork already ....are you kidding ...... give me Ingram. So who's got favorites for the best Ben Simmons clips to watch and get excited all over again?
You could trade down and get him, but he could contribute right away. Lakers also might be hearing from Kobe on offseason work he's putting in.... I'd actually love to get him and Bender. Personal pipe dream, along with two max FA.
If anything, the Lakers would trade down for Hield. But as great as a shooter that Hield may be, and whatever offensive prowess he has, Ingram's two way ability is what excites me most.
If we had traded down last yr i wouldve like to have gotten mudiay and winslow somehow...this yr if we could trade down id like to get a combo of dunn/skal, brown/bender or chriss/skal...all unlikely lol
ok, so i know i shouldn't dignify this with a response, but... what was the hope, exactly? that a 19 year old pg would lead the team to the playoffs on the heels of his allstar selection? you can't be this out of touch, can you? 1. you haven't actually established why the lakers would want to move him, unless you think placating nick young is high on the list of organizational priorities. this is just terrible argumentation. it saddens me that he left espn to become a professor. he gives us a bad name. 2. the operative word here is comparable. even if the lakers wanted to move him, finding comparable value would be tricky. and a lower draft spot than the one at which russell was taken isn't selling me. first i've heard of chriss being on the lakers radar. then again, ford's primary source is his own anus... stronger than the non-disappointing #2 pick in last year's draft and a guy who averaged double figures in rebounding in his rookie season? but no, hunter and mickey are foundational pieces, whereas russell and randle are garbage. cuz i mean, the latter pair proved nothing and...wait...wtf are you talking about? ooh ooh, i know! because they're not braindead? wait, i thought he sucked and needed to be run out of town and wasn't a foundational piece. and la's, too! if the premise is that russell is worth the #3 only (disagree, wouldn't do it), then randle must be worth jerebko, 16, some guy named jordan mickey, and rj hunter. i mean, i guess mickey and hunter are good foundational pieces, as we've already established. oh, you want proof? mickey put up a single single last year. that is, he averaged a single point and less than one of everything else. luckily, he did this on 36% shooting. did i mention he's small for his position? hunter, on the other hand, impressed with 3pts and a board on 37% shooting. this despite only having three years of college experience prior to last year! his three point marksmanship (for which he was drafted) was on full display at 30%. that's greater than 29%! all this plus a mid-first (that just might yield another rj hunter) and a journeyman tweener forward with GREAT hair and a very nice jawline?! together, the three established pros put up as many points as randle and about half as many rebounds per game! so, it's a wash, right? then the mediocre pick (that they're certainly NOT desperate to unload given its position and their roster constitution)?! sign me the f*** up! nonsense! they'll have to decide between curry or westbrook using that package. maybe get a future first, too. so are they good or not? do they become good when the jersey color switches to green? seems like that's the only possible explanatory mechanism for the mental diarrhea preceding this concluding sentence.
That "so far it hasn't gone as hoped" line is f***ing precious. Russell was already at times the best player on the court. At 19.
