Tank Tank Or Tank Tank Tank?

Mashburn was an incredible post player, and his fade-away was killer. I really enjoyed watching that Charlotte squad making a playoff run with Baron. I still remember TNT opening their home playoff games with fans wearing headbands, putting headbands on statues etc. Fun team to watch.

As for Deng and Moz, we're stuck with them, until Mitch is ready to try and swing for a big trade in the postseason. I'm not totally out on the two players, but it burns because obviously we payed way too much for them. The biggest mistake we made was thinking Deng could play 3, while he is clearly a 4 at this stage of his career. Signing Deng as a 4 simply makes no sense with the log jam we had before the season even started

 

So if the goal is get a better pick, do you move Williams? He seems to be the best player.

 

I really like Lou, Ingram is his rookie too... but he'd probably have to be moved if a move is done midseason. Maybe we can shop him to the Cavs in a three-teamer and end up with picks? Dump Deng possibly?

Otherwise I don't think we HAVE to make a move to get closer to the top-3 pick. Mitch doesn't strike me as rash and I think he'd wait on the status of our pick before doing something drastic

 

Even making the playoffs as a low seed ala 06 and 07, will help that. And the you make moves get better and hopefully win a title. The Kings, Pistons, Mavs of the early 2000's did that.

 

Player Development

 

It's a PGs heavy draft ... The best PGs aren't the main factor in winning a title 9 times out of 10 ... unless there is a sure stud wing or modern big , I wouldn't actively tank...

HOWEVER losing the pick still would be kind of a disaster because we would lose two assets going forward ( don't forget about about the automatic loss of the 19 pick).

I'd roll with the young players at the latest after the ASG break to the end of the season , try to develop some chemistry ( DAR , Ingram, Zu need some significant time together ) between them and have a better understanding of what we have ... whether losses or wins come out of this , I'll be fine with it

 

yeah, the only solace i'm finding lately is that the #4 pick we hand to philly is unlikely to be a franchise changer, statistically speaking. tbh, the lou williams FA signing has been more valuable over two years than whomever drafted at 4 is likely to be. it's a bit odd to see us hungering for a pick when we can see what two solid #2 overall draft picks have done for the franchise of late (bupkus).

if we lose this pick, we'll bad enough again next year to have a high pick in what might be a better draft--despite the breathless bluster from the draftniks, i'm not seeing this as a stacked draft. the closest thing i've seen to an allstar is fultz, and to my eye, it's a good drop after that. the rest of the consensus top group leaves me thinking that the spurs will draft someone just as good at #27.

even our own lakers are great examples of the draft's crapshootery. clarkson, nance, and zubac are not as different in terms of impact from russell, ingram, and randle as draft position would suggest.

none of this makes me happier about having a miserable season topped off by no draft pick, but it helps with perspective. we all wanted to win more this season. we wanted that for a reason: that's how you get better. it creates a better situation for development, a better sense of morale in the organization, a more attractive place for free agents, etc.

i know everybody thinks philly is being proven right, but i disagree. they sucked for years and used a recent hot streak to pull ahead of our crappy team by a couple games in the standings. their uptick didn't come until they changed management and stopped intentionally sucking. and the recent surge really hasn't been led by the prized rookie of the year, but rather the undrafted FA pg--who could have been had by anyone and would have been avoided by the previous regime due to low upside.

and that man is the great tj mcconnell. FML.

 

Sometimes players just need a fair opportunity.

Thus.....

Quotas.

 

I agree with @abeer3 I don't see a Towns/Simmons/Ingram in this draft class.

 

After tonight 7 of the next 8 games are on the road on the East Coast, then Spurs after that. Tank rank could make greater strides, in the next couple weeks.

 

Honestly, there are about 4 or 5 guys I have been tracking and none of them have truly pulled away from the pack yet. If we keep the pick, I could convince myself to be happy with Fultz, Ball, and Jackson. Probably in that order.

 

I think Ball would be a best fit for the Lakers. Dennis Smith wouldn't. If C Bags go #1, Ainge could very well pull off a big trade.
I think D-Russ can play off the ball with Ball at point. While Fultz's aggressive scoring capabilities..kind of counters what Russel does too.

Then again Josh Jackson plugged into the 2 would be sweet with. Russell, Jackson, Ingram, Randle, Zubac, Clarkson, Nance

 

Fultz or trade the pick. Fultz will take awhile, but he's going to be a very good player.

 

I like Fultz but Jackson has grown on me a lot the last few weeks. I'm open to trading the pick though.

 

Isaac is growing on me a lot too. Need to see more, but I can see him creeping up draft boards especially if he has a good tournament.

 

Here's the way I see it:

No one likes losing or wants to lose. Prolonged losing does create a bad culture where losing is too commonplace and accepted. The Lakers tried to change that culture bringing in veterans this past offseason. It didn't work. In the end, what will help the Lakers turn the tide is adding talent and the best route for the Lakers in doing so remains the draft. It's how the Lakers acquired their best talent on the team right now (aside from signing Lou) because the Lakers have failed in luring prime talent via free agency and in all realism that's not going to change this offseason coming off another bad season. The new CBA will only make it harder to sign prime free agents and only raises the value of 1st round picks. Not just locking up talent to cheap 4 year contracts but also having the advantage in keeping them long-term. Which is an important note because, as I noted before, the Lakers losing their pick this year also means they lose their 2019 1st rounder to Orlando. Whereas if they keep their pick this year, they only lose one 1st rounder in 2018 (and the debt to Orlando becomes two 2nd rounders).

There may not be a locked in superstar in this draft class but there is definitely very solid talent in the top three, especially at a position of need in PG - assuming you are like me and don't view Russell as the long term answer there. Having a quality PG has proven important in today's perimeter-oriented NBA. Consider the Final 8 in the playoffs last year: Irving. Lowry. Curry. Westbrook. Parker. Lillard. Dragic. Teague - with the first four names being All-Stars who made the Final 4. Adding a Fultz or Ball or Smith at PG to go with the existing young core set at every other position (SG: Russell/Clarkson, SF: Ingram, PF: Randle/Nance, C: Zubac) gives the Lakers a solid base to work with for the future. This team does lack leadership and while some seem to think it should come in the form of a veteran, I think having a solid floor general at PG would also count. OR if the team wants someone else, like Josh Jackson, that works too. He is considered a "point forward", so while not a PG he certainly can fit in the lineup. Imagine Russell-Ingram-Jackson out there on the floor together!

The Lakers don't need to trade Lou and/or Young to maintain a high chance of keeping their pick. I don't favor trading them because I want to lose more games. The Lakers are on a 6-24 stretch, so they are doing just fine losing with productive veterans in the rotation. I favor trading them because they can return value that is beneficial to the team in the big picture. I like Lou a lot and appreciate Young's bounceback but their age and respective contract situations suggest they are not long term answers. This season is lost, so the Lakers do need to look long term. Moving Lou and/or Young also frees up playing time. Walton said he wants to be "fair" to the veterans, so as long as they are on the team they are going to eat into the PT that should be going Russell, Clarkson and Ingram. The Lakers will still have veterans on the team. The contracts of Moz/Deng ensure that plus there is still Huertas, MWP etc. To be clear though, I'm not saying trade them for the sake of trading them. Assuming a decent return is provided, I'm saying there is no downside to trading Lou and/or Young. It won't make the team less enjoyable (or more painful to watch depending on your stance). It's just a common sense move for the team.

Trading veterans and focusing on youth won't be a sign of tanking. That would suggest the team isn't giving 100% to try and win. The team will still go out there, play their best and try and win. It'll just do so with the youth and THAT is what the direction of the team should be going forward this season.

 

Yeah, I had read there was a hitch in his shot, but over the course of the season, the hitch has went away, and he's starting to hit jumpers at a good rate. I ready he was very good defensively, additionally.