Paul George informs the Pacers he is leaving next year

[DJ Fieri]

And if James comes next summer he could play PF....Randle could be dealt or moved to the bench.

 

[DJ Fieri]

Uh, where's Ingram?

On the bench.

 

[DJ Fieri]

Ingram didn't impress me much this past season.

 

[DJ Fieri]

Ingram could see 25-28 mpg off the bench playing a variety of positions.

 

[trojanfan12]

I think we take Jackson with the 2nd pick....just imagine a potential lineup of.....

G-Clarkson
G-George
F-Jackson
F-Randle
C-Zublacka

I like that. And Clarkson not being a true PG doesn't matter because we'd have 3 guys who can all handle the ball in Clark, George, and Jackson....

I'm not as high on Fultz as some. I prefer a lineup of:

PG: Ball/Fox
SG: PG-13
SF: Ingram
PF: Randle
C: Zubac

Clarkson, Nance and Black off the bench.

 

[DJ Fieri]

I'm not as high on Fultz as some. I prefer a lineup of:

PG: Ball/Fox
SG: PG-13
SF: Ingram
PF: Randle
C: Zubac

Clarkson, Nance and Black off the bench.

I like Jackson over Ball....

 

[trojanfan12]

Ingram could see 25-28 mpg off the bench playing a variety of positions.

He's the only one that Magic has said he won't consider trading. He'll be fine. He made some big strides over the last 20 or so games the end of the season.

 

[trojanfan12]

I like Jackson over Ball....

Jackson is an SF. I'll be a bit surprised if they take him. The need is at PG, not SF.

 

[DJ Fieri]

He's the only one that Magic has said he won't consider trading. He'll be fine. He made some big strides over the last 20 or so games the end of the season.

Oh, I don't think they trade him but I can see them babying him and bringing him along slowly....

 

[DJ Fieri]

Jackson is an SF. I'll be a bit surprised if they take him. The need is at PG, not SF.

In todays game, a pure PG isn't as needed if they have Clarkson, PG, and Jackson all who can handle the ball.

 

[trojanfan12]

Oh, I don't think they trade him but I can see them babying him and bringing him along slowly....

If you're going to do that, then you keep Deng and try to unload Mozgov's contract. Or you move Deng and try to get another older SF through FA to be a mentor.

You don't bring in a rookie SF because now you have 2 young guys (both #2 picks) that you have to bring along slowly that are playing the same position and are expecting to be the Lakers future at that position.

 

[tlance]

In todays game, a pure PG isn't as needed if they have Clarkson, PG, and Jackson all who can handle the ball.

True.

But at the same time, playing Zubica and Randle together is going to put you at a disadvantage against any perimeter oriented team (pretty much everyone good these days). I like Ingram better as a stretch 4.

 

[DJ Fieri]

If you're going to do that, then you keep Deng and try to unload Mozgov's contract. Or you move Deng and try to get another older SF through FA to be a mentor.

You don't bring in a rookie SF because now you have 2 young guys (both #2 picks) that you have to bring along slowly that are playing the same position and are expecting to be the Lakers future at that position.

I'd like them to keep Deng and move Mozgov.

 

[trojanfan12]

True.

But at the same time, playing Zubica and Randle together is going to put you at a disadvantage against any perimeter oriented team (pretty much everyone good these days). I like Ingram better as a stretch 4.

Actually, what could make @DJ idea of getting Jackson work, would be if they moved Randle and put Jackson at PF. He'd be a bit light for the position until he put on a little wight, but not as light as Ingram.

 

[DJ Fieri]

True.

But at the same time, playing Zubica and Randle together is going to put you at a disadvantage against any perimeter oriented team (pretty much everyone good these days). I like Ingram better as a stretch 4.

Randle has more range than you'd think.....isn't a player that stays within 5-10 feet of the basket.

 

[trojanfan12]

I'd like them to keep Deng and move Mozgov.

I would too, but Deng will be easier to move.

 

[Heatles84]

In todays game, a pure PG isn't as needed if they have Clarkson, PG, and Jackson all who can handle the ball.

I don't agree with this. You're probably referencing the Cavs and Warriors given that they both don't have a true PG that dominates the ball. The Cavs have Lebron who operates in that capacity. The Warriors offense focuses on ball movement and unselfish play. Otherwise, it's important to have a pure PG that can handle the ball and run an offense efficiently.

 

[DJ Fieri]

I don't agree with this. You're probably referencing the Cavs and Warriors given that they both don't have a true PG that dominates the ball. The Cavs have Lebron who operates in that capacity. The Warriors offense focuses on ball movement and unselfish play. Otherwise, it's important to have a pure PG that can handle the ball and run an offense efficiently.

A pure PG isn't needed for Walton's offense....

 

[trojanfan12]

I don't agree with this. You're probably referencing the Cavs and Warriors given that they both don't have a true PG that dominates the ball. The Cavs have Lebron who operates in that capacity. The Warriors offense focuses on ball movement and unselfish play. Otherwise, it's important to have a pure PG that can handle the ball and run an offense efficiently.

I think that the Warriors offense is where Luke wants to get eventually. However, getting more of a pure point guard would help with that while the young guys are developing and learning how to play that way.

The problem with Russell at PG was that he is more a 2 guard and has a 2 guard mentality. In fact, iirc, he never played point until he went to Ohio St.

Playing point, he just couldn't find the right balance. He was always either holding the ball too long or not long enough. That's why he did much better when Luke moved him to the 2.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

all good, but we can afford to wait the xtra year imo...

Yep but if the Lakers get Lonzo Ball i would offer them Mogov And Russell and that's the best they will get