What the bleep do we do with Julius Randle?

[trojanfan12]

Why would IT sign a 1-2 year deal ? I think he signs a 4-year deal for the most he could get. (even if the per yield amount is lower than a 1-year deal) Someone will give him $50M-70M total for 4 years.

As I said in an earlier post, I don't think he's going to be offered what he thinks he's worth. He thinks he's worth a max to near max contract.

I also don't know if teams will consider his 15 games in Cleveland (which cost him a lot of money) and his 20+ games with the Lakers (where he seems to be earning some of it back) will be considered a big enough sample size on his hip injury for teams to be willing to give him what he's looking for.

Under your scenario, if he truly believes he's worth a max or near max, Why settle for 4 years at $12.5 - $17.5 million when he can sign a 1 year for $20 million with the possibility of earning a 4 year $80 million+ contract?

 

[trojanfan12]

On a sidenote, I just wanna put an APB OUT on tge people that said Lonzo was a bust after a few games.
Oh and another one out for all the Brandon Ingram doubters

They've been awfully quiet...haven't they?

Funny thing is, if Lonzo and Ingram were still playing sub par...they'd be on here crowing about how they were right and knew it all along.

But since they're playing well...crickets.

 

[trojanfan12]

Would you really want them to bring those 3 back?

On a 1 year deal...absolutely. The whole team got off to a slow start because no one knew anyone else or really how to play together. Since then, they have figured a few things out and are playing really well together.

It surely would not be on 1 year deals.

Which is why I said..."This won't happen" and "I don't see them being able to bring those 3 back specifically. But they may be able to bring in 3 comparable FA's."

You really should read the entire post before you respond.

 

[tlance]

On a 1 year deal...absolutely. The whole team got off to a slow start because no one knew anyone else or really how to play together. Since then, they have figured a few things out and are playing really well together.



Which is why I said..."This won't happen" and "I don't see them being able to bring those 3 back specifically. But they may be able to bring in 3 comparable FA's."

You really should read the entire post before you respond.

I did read your whole post. No need for the snarkiness on the end. Was a legit question.

Think you need to get 1 long term piece this summer, and if you pay Randle, you won't have enough to sign 3 1 year deals because you have to pay well above market to get a player to accept it. See KCP and Reddick.

Well, I shouldn't say that. You just won't be able to get guys anywhere near comparable to the ones you have. At least not IT.

 

[larryjohn]

As I said in an earlier post, I don't think he's going to be offered what he thinks he's worth. He thinks he's worth a max to near max contract.
I also don't know if teams will consider his 15 games in Cleveland (which cost him a lot of money) and his 20+ games with the Lakers (where he seems to be earning some of it back) will be considered a big enough sample size on his hip injury for teams to be willing to give him what he's looking for.
Under your scenario, if he truly believes he's worth a max or near max, Why settle for 4 years at $12.5 - $17.5 million when he can sign a 1 year for $20 million with the possibility of earning a 4 year $80 million+ contract?

I'm guessing he knows it is time to get paid and ensure he has long-term security. (never know when the hip may go again) This could be his last big contract. (if he signs for 4/5 years)

He may want to get max/near max -- but if the most he can get for 4 years is something like $15M / year -- I think he takes it. (instead of a 1-year ... $22M deal) $60M would ensure he has long-term security -- even if he thinks he is worth more.

 

[bksballer89]

I'm guessing he knows it is time to get paid and ensure he has long-term security. (never know when the hip may go again) This could be his last big contract. (if he signs for 4/5 years)

He may want to get max/near max -- but if the most he can get for 4 years is something like $15M / year -- I think he takes it. (instead of a 1-year ... $22M deal) $60M would ensure he has long-term security -- even if he thinks he is worth more.

I would give him 4 yr/80 mil in the right situation.

 

[Mecca]

I would give him 4 yr/80 mil in the right situation.

Isiah?

Oh, hell no...lol

I'd give that to Randle if I'm a Team like Dallas.

 

[Kold]

Bks probably said that. Sounds like something he'd say just because I'm a Lakers fan

Well I don't remember exactly what thread, or who it was, but BK wasn't one of em

 

[bksballer89]

Well I don't remember exactly what thread, or who it was, but BK wasn't one of em

Of course I wasn't. I'm not big on calling any rookies a bust in year 1. I usually wait to see them struggle in their first 2 years before making that claim

 

[Mecca]

Well I don't remember exactly what thread, or who it was, but BK wasn't one of em

It wasn't him.

 

[larryjohn]

I would give him 4 yr/80 mil in the right situation.

What team do you think will offer IT $80M in the off-season?

I think the only type of team who would do it is one who doesn't have many other options on offense ... and they mainly want to have a more interesting team and someone who can score. (and know they don't have a chance to go deep in playoffs) The only team that comes to mind is the Kings ... and I don't see them doing it. (given history with IT) I don't see any playoff-ready teams doing it. Then other teams that suck (Bull, Suns, Nets) already have young guards that they are building around. I guess I could see Magic paying also.

 

[Black Adam]

I would give him 4 yr/80 mil in the right situation.[/QUOTE

long as he ain't getting it here...

 

[trojanfan12]

I did read your whole post. No need for the snarkiness on the end. Was a legit question.

lol No it wasn't. The answer was in the post you supposedly read.

Think you need to get 1 long term piece this summer, and if you pay Randle, you won't have enough to sign 3 1 year deals because you have to pay well above market to get a player to accept it. See KCP and Reddick.

I disagree about a long term piece this summer. I think they can do fine with a similar situation as this year. If Lebron drags shit out like he always does, there may not be anyone left that's worth a long term deal.

Yeah, the Randle situation is going to be interesting. If the Lakers sign him long term to what he's likely going to be offered from other teams, not only would they not be able to do three 1 year deals...it would be very, very difficult to get the 2 max guys they want this year and maybe not next year either unless the cap jumped significantly.

 

[trojanfan12]

I'm guessing he knows it is time to get paid and ensure he has long-term security. (never know when the hip may go again) This could be his last big contract. (if he signs for 4/5 years)

Agree. But what you and I consider a big contract and what an NBA player considers a big contract are not necessarily the same.You and I look at 4 yrs at $12.5 - $17.5 million per year and think "That's a helluva lot of money" (cuz it fucking is lol). But IT is looking for at least a near max. He's looking for north of $20 million per year.

He may want to get max/near max -- but if the most he can get for 4 years is something like $15M / year -- I think he takes it. (instead of a 1-year ... $22M deal) $60M would ensure he has long-term security -- even if he thinks he is worth more.

He may very well take it. I'm not saying he won't. I'm just saying that for a guy looking for the kind of money he is, that's a pretty big pay cut. If he's not willing to do that, then gambling on himself with 1 year at $20 million to earn a long term deal closer to what he's looking for, may be something he's willing to try.

He certainly wouldn't be the first guy to do it. Some succeed and some end up wishing they'd taken the smaller deal.

 

[GNG]

Only NBA guy I know that can speak backwards.

That should be worth at least another 20 million.

 

[GNG]

And you're telling me star players haven't accepted less money in order to play with each other? Really?

I hope you mean that in a basketball context and not in a sexual way.

 

[Sparhawk]

They've been awfully quiet...haven't they?

Funny thing is, if Lonzo and Ingram were still playing sub par...they'd be on here crowing about how they were right and knew it all along.

But since they're playing well...crickets.

Trolls are gonna troll.

If Ingram continues to shoot 12-23 from beyond the arc like he did in February, you're going to be very happy. It comes down to consistency now. Same thing for Simmons. Can Simmons maintain his numbers without a jumpshot? Can Ingram continue to score efficiently? Can Embiid stay healthy? Can Lonzo shoot? Will the Lakers draft pick ever convey....

As for Julius, you probably want a Covington-like deal for him. However, you're at the mercy of Julius and/or his agent. I do have questions about FA. Will LBJ make it known what's going on before FA starts? Do you think we'll know right after the finals? The reason I ask is how do you think this will play out? What's the play for a team like Dallas? Make an offer right out of the gate to force the hand of the Lakers? What happens if Julius accepts a RFA offer from Dallas for 4/80? Or what happens if Dallas lowballs him with 4/50 and no other team shows any interest (though I doubt that happens)? Would Julius accept that offer? What price would the Lakers match and look to 2019 for a single FA???

 

[tlance]

Agree. The problem though is that folks seem to think we're talking about just the Lakers kids. We also have to consider who the Lakers may get as veteran FA's if they don't land 2 max guys.

This won't happen, but look how they are playing now. If they were able to bring back Lopez, KCP and IT along with the natural progression of the kids, they are a playoff team, imo.

I don't see them being able to bring back those 3 specifically. But they may be able to bring in 3 comparable FA's.

Wrong. This was your original post.

Again, it was a legit question.

You said if they were able to bring back all 3 they would be a legit playoff contender. You did not say that you WANTED the Lakers to bring back all 3. It is a good question because I think most Laker fans would say they want no part of Brook or IT.

But go ahead and play it like you were right to get snarky if you want.

 

[trojanfan12]

Trolls are gonna troll.

True. Some were posters that most of us wouldn't consider trolls. I'm not one to go back and dig up months old posts, so I'm not gonna bother trying to call anyone out. They know who they are. lol

If Ingram continues to shoot 12-23 from beyond the arc like he did in February, you're going to be very happy. It comes down to consistency now. Same thing for Simmons. Can Simmons maintain his numbers without a jumpshot? Can Ingram continue to score efficiently? Can Embiid stay healthy? Can Lonzo shoot? Will the Lakers draft pick ever convey....

Agree 100%. They've shown they can play...now the question is...can they do it consistently and since none of them are in their primes...can they keep building on it and adjust to teams focusing on them more. Teams are going to adjust the way they defend these guys, they'll have to show they can adjust.

As for Julius, you probably want a Covington-like deal for him. However, you're at the mercy of Julius and/or his agent.

That and what other teams offer him. He may get offers that the Lakers can't/won't match.

Will LBJ make it known what's going on before FA starts?

I doubt it. He seems to like the drama/ring kissing that teams will do. He has dragged out his free agency as long as possible pretty much every season, no reason to think it'll be any different this time. At most he may eliminate a team or 2 before FA, but that's about it.

The reason I ask is how do you think this will play out? What's the play for a team like Dallas? Make an offer right out of the gate to force the hand of the Lakers?

Teams that are in the running for Lebron will all get a chance to make a presentation and all of them are going to offer him the maximum amount of money allowed. So there really won't be any forcing anyone's hand. It'l likely come down to which team he feels offers him the best chance to win another title and allows him to carry a lighter load. He'll likely also consider the city itself and what it offers, but that will be secondary to the basketball aspect.

He may consider what city his family wants too. From what I've read and heard, they weren't exactly thrilled to return to Cleveland.

What happens if Julius accepts a RFA offer from Dallas for 4/80?

If they do, I doubt the Lakers will match it unless they can find a way to keep enough cap space for 2 max FA's. @Mecca posted an article a few days ago on how they could do it. If memory serves, it would take some serious financial gymnastics and a little bit of luck for that to happen though. The fly in the ointment is the Luol Deng contract (thanks Short Buss). If they can unload the whole thing, that makes keeping him a little easier. But if they have to stretch him, then I don't think they can keep him. If they have to stretch him, then their best case scenario would be a sign and trade (hopefully for picks) so they get something for him.

Or what happens if Dallas lowballs him with 4/50 and no other team shows any interest (though I doubt that happens)? Would Julius accept that offer? What price would the Lakers match and look to 2019 for a single FA???

If I understand the RFA process correctly (and someone will hopefully correct me if I don't), that would essentially be a dream scenario for the Lakers. I think they would be able to match it and still have room for 2 max guys. I don't think he would have much option but to take that deal because all the Lakers have to do is match and he remains a Laker even if he accepted the Dallas offer.

 

[trojanfan12]

Wrong. This was your original post.

Again, it was a legit question.

You said if they were able to bring back all 3 they would be a legit playoff contender. You did not say that you WANTED the Lakers to bring back all 3. It is a good question because I think most Laker fans would say they want no part of Brook or IT.

But go ahead and play it like you were right to get snarky if you want.

No, it wasn't a legit question. Whether I wanted them back or not wasn't part of the discussion and I had clearly stated that I don't think it would happen. Whether I want it to happen or not has literally nothing to do with it.

And your question didn't bring in the little tidbit about what "most Lakers fans would want" that's something you threw in after the fact to try to "win the internet."

But go ahead and play it like it was a legit question.