Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





View Poll Results: Should the Lakers trade for Paul George or wait until 2018?

Voters
17. You may not vote on this poll
  • Trade

    3 17.65%
  • Wait till 2018

    14 82.35%
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 47
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    6,599
    Quote Originally Posted by MILLERHIGHLIFE View Post
    I bet Ingram,Russell,#2 would get the Pacers listening. That be a good offer. Cause early on it seemed like PG13 kinda regressed. But then picked up his game end of the season.
    He does that every year, coasts through the regular season. No one seems to believe me though.

    Ingram and #2 would probably get it done. The Pacers would likely pass on Ball, causing him to slip even further, since they have Teague. Likely Jackson or Tatum.

    As I said elsewhere, if the Lakers don't trade for him, they'd better be prepared not to get him. If the Pacers don't trade him they WILL throw max money at him and his endrosement money is already pretty high for a basketball player not named Lebron. He's not likely to make up that money in additional endorsements. Waiting is the type of gamble people lose their jobs over. If you trade for him, at least you can say "yeah the pick would have been great, but we got the guy we wanted".

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    22,701
    Also draft picks aren't a given to be super stars. So there's always a chance of a bust or long development. At least trading for PG13 you know what you get right now.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Bushwood Country Club
    Posts
    71,597
    Quote Originally Posted by warfelg View Post
    They are in a tough situation:

    If they trade for him they are likely in a position where they give up a whole lot of their assets.

    But if they wait to sign him that means they will have to create cap room, which means giving up assets to move high salary guys off the team.

    So in both cases they are going to have to give up assets. They are a no win situation.

    well, if they think (and I do) that some of their assets are not really good long term assets, sell now.

    Example- I don't think Ingram is a star potential player at all. Randle either (but I think the league knows that now). Why not toss them Ingram, a future pick, and Nance. Throw salary relief in if needed.

    Obviously with PG's impending FA, you don't over sell, but if you can get rid of a future problem without too much pain, do it. If they demand the house, you can then peel off assets for cheaper later.

    If you want the ultimate, you've got to be willing to pay the ultimate price. It's not tragic to die doing what you love.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Bushwood Country Club
    Posts
    71,597
    Quote Originally Posted by IndyRealist View Post
    He does that every year, coasts through the regular season. No one seems to believe me though.

    Ingram and #2 would probably get it done. The Pacers would likely pass on Ball, causing him to slip even further, since they have Teague. Likely Jackson or Tatum.

    As I said elsewhere, if the Lakers don't trade for him, they'd better be prepared not to get him. If the Pacers don't trade him they WILL throw max money at him and his endrosement money is already pretty high for a basketball player not named Lebron. He's not likely to make up that money in additional endorsements. Waiting is the type of gamble people lose their jobs over. If you trade for him, at least you can say "yeah the pick would have been great, but we got the guy we wanted".
    Ingram and #2 would have to get PG, wouldn't it?

    I think PG is fantastic, but the Pacers basically have Kevin Love, a top 10 player surrounded by not enough to matter. Time to move him, or he ends up walking, or you end up paying him to be a star on a meh team.

    If you want the ultimate, you've got to be willing to pay the ultimate price. It's not tragic to die doing what you love.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Still1Ballin's basement
    Posts
    24,505
    Lol no ****ing way are we giving up #2 and Ingram, that's just absurd.

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Bushwood Country Club
    Posts
    71,597
    Quote Originally Posted by GREATNESS ONE View Post
    Lol no ****ing way are we giving up #2 and Ingram, that's just absurd.
    I wouldn't do that either, I don't think. And I am very low on Ingram. I just can't imagine he doesn't hold a decent amount of value.

    If you want the ultimate, you've got to be willing to pay the ultimate price. It's not tragic to die doing what you love.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    8,881
    Yea the Lakers definitely wouldn't give up Ingram and the 2nd. And Russell? Goodness.
    https://s26.postimg.org/a20wgmf49/20969116_474690526257462_6125363099198291968_n.jpg

    Looks good in that wine and gold, CavsNation were coming!!!!

  8. #23
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    In a house in a Coldesac in Lake in the Hills, Il
    Posts
    21,633
    Personally i think he is gonna walk there anyway.

    That said. Im not sure if i would draft a player or trade #2 for a stud player to entice him to come more.


    ‎"If your going to be thinking anyway, you might as well think big"

    -Rem Koolhaas

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    41,575
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawkeye15 View Post
    well, if they think (and I do) that some of their assets are not really good long term assets, sell now.

    Example- I don't think Ingram is a star potential player at all. Randle either (but I think the league knows that now). Why not toss them Ingram, a future pick, and Nance. Throw salary relief in if needed.

    Obviously with PG's impending FA, you don't over sell, but if you can get rid of a future problem without too much pain, do it. If they demand the house, you can then peel off assets for cheaper later.
    They got to use some of those guys to unload Mozgov and Deng.

    Like a Deng+Randle or Mozgov+1st (not this years) or Clarkson+2nds.

    I think personally a pick of Isaacs would be really really interesting for them. He would give them a guy that can play 3/4/5 and keep some of their better assets in house without having to shuffle around. Sign PG next next year.

    DLo Russell
    Ingram
    PG
    Isaacs
    Zizic

    PROCESSING

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    4,881
    Don't be like the Knicks.

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Still1Ballin's basement
    Posts
    24,505
    Quote Originally Posted by warfelg View Post
    They got to use some of those guys to unload Mozgov and Deng.

    Like a Deng+Randle or Mozgov+1st (not this years) or Clarkson+2nds.

    I think personally a pick of Isaacs would be really really interesting for them. He would give them a guy that can play 3/4/5 and keep some of their better assets in house without having to shuffle around. Sign PG next next year.

    DLo Russell
    Ingram
    PG
    Isaacs
    Zizic
    You spelled Ivica Zubac wrong and we have to take Fultz or Ball. DLO is more a SG than PG.

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    41,575
    Quote Originally Posted by GREATNESS ONE View Post
    You spelled Ivica Zubac wrong and we have to take Fultz or Ball. DLO is more a SG than PG.
    Couldn't remember quite what his name was lol.

    As for DLo more of a SG than PG: he could bring the ball down but then you put it into PG's hands to initiate the offense. Pacers with Hill (a more shooting style pg) played better than with Teague (more of a passing pg).

    PROCESSING

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    2,482
    Depends on the trade package but theres much more advantage to trading for him vs fa

    Dlo+deng+28 is what i offer

    The pluses when it comes to this are

    1.) We get pg13
    2.) We rid ourselves of dengs horrendous contract
    3.) When it comes to resgining him in 2018, we can sign another star and then sign george over the cap w bird rights
    4.) We can offer pg more money this way to incentivise him to stay
    5.) George significantly improves our team next year, thus the 2018 1st we send to 6ers is in the teens somewhere vs being a top 10
    3+.) Having a star in george already here vs thinking of coming here gives us a better chance (not saying they will) of drawing another 2018 free agent ie Westbrook, cousins (2 biggest i believe)

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,005
    I just facepalm at the idea of trading for a guy that you'll still be a lottery team with. Keep the young guy you're playing 4 million dollars to as you build. Don't throw it away to be a 30 win team.


    The Truth Hurts.

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    7,776
    Quote Originally Posted by LOb0 View Post
    I just facepalm at the idea of trading for a guy that you'll still be a lottery team with. Keep the young guy you're playing 4 million dollars to as you build. Don't throw it away to be a 30 win team.
    Exactly my point. I want to Lakers to stand pat. I believe in the young guys for the lakers. They need time and experience. I want them to draft either Ball or Jackson and roll with that.


Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •