Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 6 of 13 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 183
  1. #76
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Where my wife tells me
    Posts
    1,489
    Quote Originally Posted by McAllen Tx View Post
    LBJ definitely like the drama but I think it's more of him instilling his power more then anything. Dude is addicted to power. IMO he's gonna eventually re-sign with Cleveland but after he holds Cleveland hostage to do all the moves he wants. Starting with re-signing Hood no matter the cost.
    True. Power creates drama. See our present President. I just don't know how Cleveland will be able to afford the luxury tax hell that they would be in after signing Lebron. The Lakers and even Philly might be better options in that regard.

    I just hope Toronto takes them out this year. Tired of seeing him in the finals.

  2. #77
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    KOBE ROCKS
    Posts
    1,777
    Quote Originally Posted by McAllen Tx View Post
    I don't think so, I think it's more like 24 to start out
    The mavs currently can offer, 4 years 77mil, starting at 18mil unless they free up some more space!

  3. #78
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    5,897
    Quote Originally Posted by Vinylman View Post
    no way should randle get 5 years... let the market dictate...

    trying to trade him if he has a 5 year deal will be difficult
    I would agree with this if LA only had the cap to sign PG and re-sign Randle. But if we were to sign PG we will still have around $23 million to spend before actually having to sign Randle. Once we sign PG and Randle or cap flexibility is gone starting this summer and on.

    To me it's very important to use that $23 million before having to re-sign Randle. That's the reason I would have an agreement with Randle beforehand that would include the 5th year. But he has to wait till we do something with this extra cash before actually signing him.

    If we were to do something draft night where we would take on salary that eats into that $23 million then of course we let the market set Randles price for only 4 years.

  4. #79
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    5,897
    Quote Originally Posted by lakers squad View Post
    The mavs currently can offer, 4 years 77mil, starting at 18mil unless they free up some more space!
    Don't know how if they only have $60 million in committed salary next season. McBuckets cap hold should be about $12 million bringing their salary to $72 million, that still leaves them with around $30 million to spend. Hope you're not including cap holds of McRoberts, Noel and a couple of other scrubs cause they will all be rescinded. At worst u see them having 30 but without McBuckets it's over 40.

  5. #80
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Corona, Ca
    Posts
    12,175
    Quote Originally Posted by McAllen Tx View Post
    I would agree with this if LA only had the cap to sign PG and re-sign Randle. But if we were to sign PG we will still have around $23 million to spend before actually having to sign Randle. Once we sign PG and Randle or cap flexibility is gone starting this summer and on.

    To me it's very important to use that $23 million before having to re-sign Randle. That's the reason I would have an agreement with Randle beforehand that would include the 5th year. But he has to wait till we do something with this extra cash before actually signing him.

    If we were to do something draft night where we would take on salary that eats into that $23 million then of course we let the market set Randles price for only 4 years.
    Any one year contracts out there for around 23 million? We could take on a contract like that and get another pick.

    Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

  6. #81
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    In a crib
    Posts
    17,981
    Quote Originally Posted by KobeOwnSU View Post
    Any one year contracts out there for around 23 million? We could take on a contract like that and get another pick.

    Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
    Not sure about one year, but I do know the knicks have said that they will trade a 1st to anybody that takes joakim noah off their books. His contract is 2 years left at about 19mill/year (looks similar to dengs contract). I'd only consider that if lakers completely strike out this free agency and are also able to offload deng. You don't want both deng and noah on the roster.. So in other words, they'd be exactly where they are at now (as far as having a young roster plus an overly expensive player), but they'd also the knicks lottery pick.

    Your baby can't do this

  7. #82
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    KOBE ROCKS
    Posts
    1,777
    **** not wanting to take link...ill try and get this on here for you guys later on what the mavs can offer
    Last edited by lakers squad; 03-10-2018 at 06:07 PM.

  8. #83
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    5,897
    Quote Originally Posted by KobeOwnSU View Post
    Any one year contracts out there for around 23 million? We could take on a contract like that and get another pick.

    Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
    There's a few 1 year deals out there but honestly, I don't see any of them teams giving up picks to get rid of them. I don't see any teams giving up 1sts to dump salary unless they are in the LT & repeaters tax zone. That's only 2 teams, Cleveland & GS. And all their contracts are for 2 seasons. I really do think GS would be willing to give up two 1st to dump AI on someone. Probably one 1st to dump Livingston. Cleveland also to get rid of TT, JRS or KK but the soonest 1st they can trade is like 4-5 years away.

    Trading for players to acquire draft picks is just one route the Lakers could take. Another route is signing role players that fit the team and complement our young core. $23 million could probably get us both Tyreke Evans (6th man/back up PG) and Noel. Or other combinations of 2nd tier FAs that fit or team.

    I think they should do something with that money cause once PG & JR are signed that will be it having this kind of cap flexibility for at least a decade. They could probably come up with enough cap for 1 max player in 2019 but like I've mentioned before, we don't need any of Klay, Leonard or Butler. There won't be enough mins for PG, Ingram, Hart, Kuzma and one of them at the SG/SF positions.

  9. #84
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    5,897
    Quote Originally Posted by jaydubb View Post
    Not sure about one year, but I do know the knicks have said that they will trade a 1st to anybody that takes joakim noah off their books. His contract is 2 years left at about 19mill/year (looks similar to dengs contract). I'd only consider that if lakers completely strike out this free agency and are also able to offload deng. You don't want both deng and noah on the roster.. So in other words, they'd be exactly where they are at now (as far as having a young roster plus an overly expensive player), but they'd also the knicks lottery pick.
    Yeah I remember that being reported and have even mentioned it a couple of times. I really don't think that's the case anymore. I think it would've been an impulsive move on their part back then. I really can't see them doing it anymore.

    I would trade Deng for Noah and a 2nd. They have a way bigger need to get rid of Noah then us Deng. We can let Deng rot on the bench and still continue to improve. NY doesn't have that same luxury with Noah. His absence and contract are sticking out like a sore thumb. Deng would at least play for them.

  10. #85
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,909
    Randle is probably a 2nd tier type star, and therefore very likely to be overpaid and go to a 2nd tier type franchise like Dallas. Hes perfectly suited for a Dallas and does flash some possibly superstar upside at times, and as a 20-10 machine at that age hes definitely a solid max guy for Dallas

    However again hes not a Giannis, Simmons, Lebron, Westbrook, AD top ten player in the league type guy (for that matter either is pg13), so since the Lakers are aiming to be back in the Finals etc losing Randle is basicallly a done deal he will sign elsewhere Lakers cannot keep him. Only exception might be if Lakers strikeout on all free agency fronts and just decide to match because no other move... that would be value imo however they seem to fancy they are dealing on a grander scale so again unlikely.

    But I think if you just did commit to Randle, roll with Randle and develop him that could be great possibly. Besides him Lonzo has some longshot top ten possibilities and Ingram also, although both players are immature and have flaws

    Realistically this team needs a Kobe alpha. Ok so maybe PG13 could be that. However, PG13 is pretty ****ing far from being Kobe, and also as Kobe pointed out we dont even know if PG13 will take on the challenge of trying to be that in Los Angeles.

    I mean if PG comes hes gotta be The Man not just a nice piece, not just a complimentary that needs another superstar. I mean say if you put Ingram, Lonzo, Kuzma, Randle, Zubac etc around KOBE along with a great coach.... ok now we really ARE back in the Finals. So thats what PG13 would have to be, all talk of super teams aside. Personally I dont think he has enough scoring ability, but hey he could go next level in LA so lets see, first step is does he take the job

  11. #86
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    17,590
    Quote Originally Posted by McAllen Tx View Post
    I would agree with this if LA only had the cap to sign PG and re-sign Randle. But if we were to sign PG we will still have around $23 million to spend before actually having to sign Randle. Once we sign PG and Randle or cap flexibility is gone starting this summer and on.

    To me it's very important to use that $23 million before having to re-sign Randle. That's the reason I would have an agreement with Randle beforehand that would include the 5th year. But he has to wait till we do something with this extra cash before actually signing him.

    If we were to do something draft night where we would take on salary that eats into that $23 million then of course we let the market set Randles price for only 4 years.
    I doubt we do that with Randle unless there is a discount involved... there is no way a player like him deserves a 5 year deal when he can only get 4 in the market... cap can always be created later in a deng deal.

    Honestly, if pg and another top tier FA are signed it would be easy to just trade deng/kuzma/2nd to someone during the offseason and not take anyone back.

    I also think the Lakers will be loathe to renounce IT at such a low number... his cap hold is only $9.4 million

  12. #87
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    5,897
    Quote Originally Posted by Vinylman View Post
    I doubt we do that with Randle unless there is a discount involved... there is no way a player like him deserves a 5 year deal when he can only get 4 in the market... cap can always be created later in a deng deal.

    Honestly, if pg and another top tier FA are signed it would be easy to just trade deng/kuzma/2nd to someone during the offseason and not take anyone back.

    I also think the Lakers will be loathe to renounce IT at such a low number... his cap hold is only $9.4 million
    I'm sure the team has a plan already in place way before FA even gets here, with a back up plan also already in place.

    My idea of offering Randle the 5th year is only if plan A & B doesn't happen and they go into free agency with nothing but $53 million in cap space. Randle will have a handful of teams wanting him and they aren't gonna wait to see what we do to make Randle an offer. If the FO feels they need some time to fully get the most out of their cap space (flexibility) then yes I would offer Randle that 5th year in order for him not to sign an offer sheet and give us time actually use the cap space.

    What I don't get is how you're so against giving Randle a 5th year even if it gave us time to fully maximize our cap space but you seem so quick to just dump Kuzma just to get cap space.

    I do agree with you though that IT will most likely be in the teams plans going forward. I prefer T. Evans but IT would do for the right price.

  13. #88
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Corona, Ca
    Posts
    12,175
    The Lakers are at 30 wins now. 16 games left, I say they go 8-8 and end up 38-44. It isn't out of the question for them to go 11-5 and end up 41-41 though. They would just have to continue playing at the current pace they at now. However, we cam safely assume the playoffs aren't happening. It would take catastrophic meltdowns from 3 teams; Clippers, Jazz, and Nuggets.

  14. #89
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles Ca
    Posts
    7,247
    Quote Originally Posted by KobeOwnSU View Post
    The Lakers are at 30 wins now. 16 games left, I say they go 8-8 and end up 38-44. It isn't out of the question for them to go 11-5 and end up 41-41 though. They would just have to continue playing at the current pace they at now. However, we cam safely assume the playoffs aren't happening. It would take catastrophic meltdowns from 3 teams; Clippers, Jazz, and Nuggets.
    8 or 9 more wins would be great. For me the most important thing is devaluing that pick.

    The lost boys

  15. #90
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Corona, Ca
    Posts
    12,175
    Quote Originally Posted by Laker Legend42 View Post
    8 or 9 more wins would be great. For me the most important thing is devaluing that pick.
    I just want to win games. I don't like punching walls haha.

Page 6 of 13 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... 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
  •