2017 Lakers Off Season Thread

[kobesgame]

Waiting for that #4 to pop up Phoenix or Boston was nervewracking! Glad it did though. Finally a season next year where there's no reason to discuss the merits of tanking. And keeping the 2019 pick is an added bonus!

 

[kobesgame]

Also, I laughed out loud when that ESPN dude said before the lottery that it was really important for the Lakers to keep the pick because there's no one currently on that team to build around. Fucking idiot.

 

[Retroram52]

Yep, the Dwightmare and Nash trades are finally dissipating and keeping that 2019 pick was huge as well. The Lakers continue their "lucky" ways with the draft lottery and it'll be interesting to see who Magic and Pelinka select in the first and second rounds with the new FO infrastructure in place.

 

[trojanfan12]

Also, I laughed out loud when that ESPN dude said before the lottery that it was really important for the Lakers to keep the pick because there's no one currently on that team to build around. Fucking idiot.

I laughed at that too. The Lakers not keeping the pick this year wouldn't have been near as much of an issue as missing 2 or 3 years ago when the roster was basically half of Kobe and a bunch of castoffs.

 

[Retroram52]

Frikin' drive-by media are a bunch of mindless dopes even in the sports world.

 

[LALakersboy24.7]

Waiting for that #4 to pop up Phoenix or Boston was nervewracking! Glad it did though. Finally a season next year where there's no reason to discuss the merits of tanking. And keeping the 2019 pick is an added bonus!

When Phoenix was out of the top 3 clearly we were going in to the top 2 slot. Thank the basketball God's, and a little bit of a Magic touch to bring it home. It will interesting to see what we do with free agency this coming season, and next season. Those Mosgov and Deng contracts take 1/3 of our cape space.

 

[trojanfan12]

When Phoenix was out of the top 3 clearly we were going in to the top 2 slot. Thank the basketball God's, and a little bit of a Magic touch to bring it home. It will interesting to see what we do with free agency this coming season, and next season. Those Mosgov and Deng contracts take 1/3 of our cape space.

I doubt they do much in FA this off season. I think they might pick up a role player or 2...if that. I think they want to preserve cap space to sign PG-13 next off season. I also think they will try to move at least one of the Deng and Mozgov contracts, even if they have to give up a young guy to do it.

 

[LALakersboy24.7]

I doubt they do much in FA this off season. I think they might pick up a role player or 2...if that. I think they want to preserve cap space to sign PG-13 next off season. I also think they will try to move at least one of the Deng and Mozgov contracts, even if they have to give up a young guy to do it.

Well now that Gordon Hayward didn't make All Nba Team, I wouldn't mind if we went after him. I love his game, and we give up no assets. I don't think he stays in Utah.

 

[trojanfan12]

Well now that Gordon Hayward didn't make All Nba Team, I wouldn't mind if we went after him. I love his game, and we give up no assets. I don't think he stays in Utah.

Problem with that is PG-13 is the better player. If they take Hayward this off season and can't unload Deng or Mozgov, I don't think they can clear the cap space to get PG-13.

 

[tomodach10]

Problem with that is PG-13 is the better player. If they take Hayward this off season and can't unload Deng or Mozgov, I don't think they can clear the cap space to get PG-13.

Rather wait for George. I would move Russell for george or wait till end of next season and get him as freeagent.

 

[trojanfan12]

Rather wait for George. I would move Russell for george or wait till end of next season and get him as freeagent.

Agree.

 

[Retroram52]

Nah, I'd keep Russell and, if possible add George. If we take a SG in the draft, then I see Clarkson as the odd man out.

 

[LALakersboy24.7]

Throw in Mozgov & Deng and the 28th pick , and Jim Buss to replace Bird. That's should do it.

 

[tomodach10]

Throw in Mozgov & Deng and the 28th pick , and Jim Buss to replace Bird. That's should do it.

 

[trojanfan12]

Nah, I'd keep Russell and, if possible add George. If we take a SG in the draft, then I see Clarkson as the odd man out.

Honestly, if it means adding PG-13, I'd rather lose Russell than Clarkson. Clarkson is ideal coming off the bench (a role I don't see Russell accepting) and can back up both guard positions. I think PG-13 at the 2 with Ingram at the 3, could be a deadly combo. I don't think there are many 2's in the league who could handle PG-13 and if an opponent puts their 3 on PG-13, they have to try to stop Ingram with their 2.

 

[tomodach10]

Honestly, if it means adding PG-13, I'd rather lose Russell than Clarkson. Clarkson is ideal coming off the bench (a role I don't see Russell accepting) and can back up both guard positions. I think PG-13 at the 2 with Ingram at the 3, could be a deadly combo. I don't think there are many 2's in the league who could handle PG-13 and if an opponent puts their 3 on PG-13, they have to try to stop Ingram with their 2.

I agree. I would get rid of Russell. He was drafted to be our point guard and he appears to be an Sg. That makes him expendable with P-G 13 and Clarkson IMO. I think they need to draft Ball or Fultz , who are point guards. I like ball because he makes players better around him like magic and kidd. He is a pass first true pg. If they go Sg in the draft, that will create a host of issues, you would have no true point guard. It would also probably spell the end of the pg13 to LA . I never wanted Russell, but hoped he would be our Chris Paul. That hope is gone. No problem trading Russell. Keep Randle and ingram.

 

[wildturkey]

Y'all are nuts. Clarkson is totally expendable. You can find 6th men. Randle is expendable too (hell, Nance outplays quite a bit). He's not some Draymond Green type player, he's Markieff Morris. He's good, but what his ceiling is isn't what a lot seem to think it is. Russell, on the other hand, is the best player the Lakers have and there's this line of thought in the fan base that he's some bum or a bust. All he's done is improve since he first stepped on the court and he's this ( ) close to figuring it all out and hitting that gear to take him on the star track. You shouldn't be so quick to toss him aside. LA should try to keep him as much as possible. Prioritizing someone like Clarkson over Russell is just being short sighted.

 

[tomodach10]

Y'all are nuts. Clarkson is totally expendable. You can find 6th men. Randle is expendable too (hell, Nance outplays quite a bit). He's not some Draymond Green type player, he's Markieff Morris. He's good, but what his ceiling is isn't what a lot seem to think it is. Russell, on the other hand, is the best player the Lakers have and there's this line of thought in the fan base that he's some bum or a bust. All he's done is improve since he first stepped on the court and he's this ( ) close to figuring it all out and hitting that gear to take him on the star track. You shouldn't be so quick to toss him aside. LA should try to keep him as much as possible. Prioritizing someone like Clarkson over Russell is just being short sighted.

You are in the minority on Russell IMO. That's ok. IMO Russell is not the best player on the lakers. He is wildly inconsistant. He will give you 20 points one night and 2 the next. He is not a leader IMO. He may grow into one, but at this point I don't see it. If he was the point guard, we had hoped he would be, then I would say he is untouchable. Clarkson is not totally expendable. He is a good six man off the bench. Players with his versitility don't grow on trees!!! And you loss me at Randle being expendable. What??? Randle is a beast!! and getting better. He and Ingram are valuable members of this young team. No one is trying to throw away Russell. If he is our two with Ball as the PG, I have no problem with that, but if we can get PG-13 for Russell, you do that in a heart beat.

 

[trojanfan12]

Y'all are nuts. Clarkson is totally expendable. You can find 6th men. Randle is expendable too (hell, Nance outplays quite a bit). He's not some Draymond Green type player, he's Markieff Morris. He's good, but what his ceiling is isn't what a lot seem to think it is. Russell, on the other hand, is the best player the Lakers have and there's this line of thought in the fan base that he's some bum or a bust. All he's done is improve since he first stepped on the court and he's this ( ) close to figuring it all out and hitting that gear to take him on the star track. You shouldn't be so quick to toss him aside. LA should try to keep him as much as possible. Prioritizing someone like Clarkson over Russell is just being short sighted.

I like Russell and the best option, imo, would be to keep the young guys intact, add PG-13 as a free agent and
then worry about other roster moves. The problem there is, as we saw with Kevin Love (who was also supposedly a "sure thing" going to the Lakers), a lot can happen between now and FA. He gets picked up by a contender or the Pacers add players who can make them contenders and the Lakers could miss out on him.

The reason I see Russell as expendable is because if they bring in PG-13, he can play the 2. I don't see Russell accepting a role coming off the bench and with PG-13 at the 2, Ingram can stay at the 3.

I agree that the team can find a 6th man if necessary, but they have a pretty darn good one in Clarkson who already knows the team, system, etc.

Imo, it's not really about prioritizing Clarkson over Russell as much as it is prioritizing PG-13 over Russell.

 

[shopson67]

Well now that Gordon Hayward didn't make All Nba Team, I wouldn't mind if we went after him. I love his game, and we give up no assets. I don't think he stays in Utah.

Most likely headed to the Celtics to team up with his college coach.