PDA

View Full Version : Reason for the Lakers to tank again



Scoots
07-06-2016, 02:18 PM
If the Lakers finish with a bottom 3 record they get to keep not 1 but 2 first round picks ... sort of.

If the Lakers send their 2017 pick to the Sixers then the Magic get their 2019 pick, but if they DON'T send the 2017 pick to the Sixers (top 3 protected) then the Magic pick gets turned into 2 2nd round picks.

If they don't send the 2017 pick to the Sixers the Sixers automatically get the 2018 pick.

I really doubt they tank again ... but it's a shame to see a bad team having traded away 2 of their next 3 first round picks.

Hawkeye15
07-06-2016, 02:27 PM
Lakers probably don't keep their pick next year. They will be bad again, but not bad enough. The team could sniff 30 wins potentially. That won't get you a top 3 pick. Philly will get another crack at a very high lottery pick with so much youth starting. Nets will suck still.

Chronz
07-06-2016, 02:31 PM
Its fine, they have the core in place and just need to let them grow so that they can move to phase 2, using that promising core to entice a premier FA.

If they wanted to keep losing they would've kept the guy dumb enough to bench Jeremy Lin, really doubt Walton is the type to sabotage the team.

RLundi
07-06-2016, 02:34 PM
Yeah I doubt LAL is that bad again next year without Bean bringing them down. That pick is as good as Philly's.

As far as the Magic go, I'm betting on that 2019 pick being trash. I think it's top-3 protected, but either way, I don't expect LA to be bad for 2 more seasons. They'll sign somebody I'm free agency and their young guys will show enough improvement for the Magic pick to be at the highest a late lottery selection.

PowerHouse
07-06-2016, 02:40 PM
Just like Chronz said they're past the need for a young core, its already there. Free agency time come 2017.

FraziersKnicks
07-06-2016, 05:20 PM
Lakers probably don't keep their pick next year. They will be bad again, but not bad enough. The team could sniff 30 wins potentially. That won't get you a top 3 pick. Philly will get another crack at a very high lottery pick with so much youth starting. Nets will suck still.

It's absolutely mind boggling to think the C's have the Nets 1st round picks for the next TWO seasons. There's a very good chance both of those picks are gonna be top 6 at least since the Nets are so bad.

IndyRealist
07-06-2016, 05:26 PM
Yes, they should have tanked another year, surround Ingram with the bare minimum and get him loads of minutes. Instead they went out and signed a bunch of 4yr contracts. They would break even with the Sixers (since they have to send them a pick regardless) but would have saved a 1st from being sent to the Magic.

They probably think they're good with Russell and Ingram. More 1st round picks is never bad.

Chronz
07-06-2016, 07:37 PM
Yes, they should have tanked another year, surround Ingram with the bare minimum and get him loads of minutes. Instead they went out and signed a bunch of 4yr contracts. They would break even with the Sixers (since they have to send them a pick regardless) but would have saved a 1st from being sent to the Magic.

They probably think they're good with Russell and Ingram. More 1st round picks is never bad.

Its what I would have done but isn't their newly minted coach going to get them to overachieve regardless? Or would you have been up front with Luke from the get go and tell him you're putting the winning on hold for one more year.

Teeboy1487
07-06-2016, 07:59 PM
No more Tanking. I can't take another year of that. Seriously, tanking sucks.

jimm120
07-06-2016, 08:30 PM
Reason #1 for the Lakers to tank:

Their team isn't good enough to compete and WILL be a sub 25 win team.


Dude, it isn't like they're choosing to suck. They will suck because of the personnel. They couldn't attract anyone this offseason.

RaiderLakersA's
07-06-2016, 09:58 PM
No more Tanking. I can't take another year of that. Seriously, tanking sucks.

Agreed!!!

More-Than-Most
07-06-2016, 10:17 PM
Its already year 3 of the lakers tank. Time flys when you are riding the tank lol.. Sixers will win 28-32 games this year on top of getting the lakers pick and switching their pick with the kings lottery pick.. LIFE IS GOOD

More-Than-Most
07-06-2016, 10:18 PM
Lakers probably don't keep their pick next year. They will be bad again, but not bad enough. The team could sniff 30 wins potentially. That won't get you a top 3 pick. Philly will get another crack at a very high lottery pick with so much youth starting. Nets will suck still.

We will be much better because we wont be forcing the oka/noel same lineup combo like last year.... That literally killed us. One will likely be shipped out.

shep33
07-06-2016, 10:18 PM
We have our young core. Time to build a winning atmosphere and develop our guys.

More-Than-Most
07-06-2016, 10:38 PM
Lakers probably don't keep their pick next year. They will be bad again, but not bad enough. The team could sniff 30 wins potentially. That won't get you a top 3 pick. Philly will get another crack at a very high lottery pick with so much youth starting. Nets will suck still.

Also **** you... **** YOU... You dont get to speak on this topic when you ****ing have levine/wiggins/towns/Dunn... **** off lol

Aust
07-06-2016, 10:47 PM
We'll prob be a bottom 5 team, but I don't see the ping pong balls going our way this time.

Bostonjorge
07-06-2016, 11:29 PM
Harry Gilas from duke is the reason why. Lakers need a C.

LA_Raiders
07-07-2016, 12:17 AM
No reason to tank, they will suck anyway. Bunch or rookies playing with euros.

Scoots
07-07-2016, 12:30 AM
No reason to tank, they will suck anyway. Bunch or rookies playing with euros.

To be reasonably assured of getting a top 3 pick they need to work at sucking.

What I really don't understand is Luol Deng and Mozgov and Lou Williams and Nick Young. If you are a young team looking to build you don't sign those deals, and if you are a team looking to win you don't sign those deals, and if you are team looking to tank you don't sign those deals. Sure it's nice to have veteran leaders but Deng at $18M a year?

lakerfan85
07-07-2016, 12:37 AM
What a worthless thread..

GREATNESS ONE
07-07-2016, 12:42 AM
What a worthless thread..

Right what's worse is that "Lakers" fans are actually involved in this nonsense.

numba1CHANGsta
07-07-2016, 12:57 AM
No way the Lakers keep their pick next year unless we get some "luck" from those draft balls on lottery night lol It's alright tho, the Lakers will try to trade up into the 1st round cuz next years draft will be pretty deep.

TheDish87
07-07-2016, 08:53 AM
fully expect to get that Lakers pick in the 4-8 range and also expect the Sixers to be better than than the Kings who and give us another top 10 pick.

PowerHouse
07-07-2016, 06:29 PM
Also **** you... **** YOU... You dont get to speak on this topic when you ****ing have levine/wiggins/towns/Dunn... **** off lol

Easy man easy. Towns is the only nice player in that group. Wiggins is still a VORP in the negatives. LaVine not much better.

Scoots
07-07-2016, 07:06 PM
What a worthless thread..

I wasn't aware the Lakers could effectively get a 1st round pick by sucking this year.

ciaban
07-07-2016, 08:11 PM
They could still finish with a top 3 pick if they only win 25 games, they're going the right direction, but the team is still really young, and the bench sucks, plus Mozgov sucks, I'd like to think they could be better, but there is no guarantee.

MILLERHIGHLIFE
07-07-2016, 08:14 PM
Lakers could trade three young guys and maybe land Westbrook early just to have Bird rights. Instead trying to pull him away from Thunder in free agency. Even though reports he's leaving Thunder no matter what. So now off to the races for best bid to get him from now till trade deadline. Thunder wants tons of assets.

ciaban
07-18-2016, 07:41 AM
To be reasonably assured of getting a top 3 pick they need to work at sucking.

What I really don't understand is Luol Deng and Mozgov and Lou Williams and Nick Young. If you are a young team looking to build you don't sign those deals, and if you are a team looking to win you don't sign those deals, and if you are team looking to tank you don't sign those deals. Sure it's nice to have veteran leaders but Deng at $18M a year?
They had to get to the salary floor, and they really did need the vet leadership, the problems more the length of the contract, since even together their contracts aren't going to prevent the lakers from doing what they want to do.

warfelg
07-18-2016, 08:08 AM
They had to get to the salary floor, and they really did need the vet leadership, the problems more the length of the contract, since even together their contracts aren't going to prevent the lakers from doing what they want to do.

Eh....It's not like the penalty for not reaching the floor is really all that bad. All they do is take the money you are under, and split it between all the players on the team at the end of the season. The salary floor is no excuse for overspending.

Plus I really really do not get that Deng signing.

Bring in a vet at almost $20mil a year, at a position you just drafted a #2 overall pick at? That's almost as silly to me as resigning Clarkson and not moving Williams or Young.

BoSox47
07-18-2016, 08:35 AM
This belongs in the lakers forum.

Vinylman
07-18-2016, 08:56 AM
Eh....It's not like the penalty for not reaching the floor is really all that bad. All they do is take the money you are under, and split it between all the players on the team at the end of the season. The salary floor is no excuse for overspending.

Plus I really really do not get that Deng signing.

Bring in a vet at almost $20mil a year, at a position you just drafted a #2 overall pick at? That's almost as silly to me as resigning Clarkson and not moving Williams or Young.

Deng will probably eat more minutes at the 4 than the 3 so the young guy whose time he will be cutting into is Nance not Ingram.

Also, Young didn't play at all in the second half of the year and they are just looking for someone to take his deal...

Williams is another guy who can get traded on a fairly cheap deal.

Lakers are no better than 5th worse this year despite the fanbases optimism. A couple injuries here and there to key guys and they can easily be in the bottom 3 again.

warfelg
07-18-2016, 09:07 AM
Deng will probably eat more minutes at the 4 than the 3 so the young guy whose time he will be cutting into is Nance not Ingram.

Also, Young didn't play at all in the second half of the year and they are just looking for someone to take his deal...

Williams is another guy who can get traded on a fairly cheap deal.

Lakers are no better than 5th worse this year despite the fanbases optimism. A couple injuries here and there to key guys and they can easily be in the bottom 3 again.

Deng - Then he would be eating into Nance and Julius Randles minutes. Taking away from 2 young guys.

Young - I doubt anyone would take him unless he was a "toss in" with a deal around a young player.

Williams - Ditto

Mostly I think it's just an odd collection of players who's skills don't match a whole lot. 4 guys in the back court who all do best with the ball in their hands, and aren't high assist guys (as of right now). A couple of wing guys who a better off being set up by a pass first PG. An overpaid big. A skilled big who they drafted #4 overall but seemingly have 0 interest in developing.

It's just really strange collection of players. This could be one of those teams where it strangely works, or is a complete and utter collapse.

PhillyFaninLA
07-18-2016, 09:25 AM
edit - misread what I quoted

Vinylman
07-18-2016, 09:45 AM
Deng - Then he would be eating into Nance and Julius Randles minutes. Taking away from 2 young guys.

Young - I doubt anyone would take him unless he was a "toss in" with a deal around a young player.

Williams - Ditto

Mostly I think it's just an odd collection of players who's skills don't match a whole lot. 4 guys in the back court who all do best with the ball in their hands, and aren't high assist guys (as of right now). A couple of wing guys who a better off being set up by a pass first PG. An overpaid big. A skilled big who they drafted #4 overall but seemingly have 0 interest in developing.

It's just really strange collection of players. This could be one of those teams where it strangely works, or is a complete and utter collapse.

Deng will eat Nance's minutes... can't see him taking much from Randle... I am not that high on Nance anyway... unless he learns to shoot the 3 he will be worthless in Walton's offense

No doubt on Young... I posted in the Laker forum that he probably gets included in a deal at the deadline with the odd man out YOUNGER Player (don't know who that will be exactly).

Lou doesn't fit but does have value

As for the PG position... I agree that Russell isn't going to be an efficient distributor and that is why I think Calderon will end up starting at PG and Russell moves to the 2 ... If that works they probably trade Clarkson and a piece for an established PG

The roster is actually better balanced this year than last year but that really doesn't say much... The Lakers are installing an offense that requires good shooters and they were pretty much the worse shooting team in the league last year and didn't add any shooters other than Calderon (I guess they are hoping the young guys develop).

The good news is that a lot of questions on the young guys will be answered this year and we will be able to either move forward with them or dump 1 or 2

like I said they are pretty much a bottom 5 team again this year.

Hawkeye15
07-18-2016, 10:20 AM
We will be much better because we wont be forcing the oka/noel same lineup combo like last year.... That literally killed us. One will likely be shipped out.

you will be relying on too many young players with no experience. 20 wins is about right for Philly this year. I would expect the leap to come in the 2019-20 season honestly.

Hawkeye15
07-18-2016, 10:21 AM
Also **** you... **** YOU... You dont get to speak on this topic when you ****ing have levine/wiggins/towns/Dunn... **** off lol

yeah dude, it's finally a good time to be a Wolves fan...I am pumped

Tony_Starks
07-18-2016, 10:47 AM
You really think the Lakers are going to tank?

Byron Scott ain't walkin through that door, sorry.

Don't sleep on Zubac btw, could be the steal of the draft.

Hawkeye15
07-18-2016, 10:58 AM
You really think the Lakers are going to tank?

Byron Scott ain't walkin through that door, sorry.

Don't sleep on Zubac btw, could be the steal of the draft.

obviously the offseason isn't over, there are still some moves to be made. But what do you think the realistic win total is for the Lakers? What is your over/under for betting purposes?

TylerSL
07-18-2016, 11:09 AM
While it is true that it would be in the best interest of the franchise for the Lakers to get a top 3 pick again this season I do not believe they will. While not game changing, adding Deng/Mozgov will make them better than they were a year ago. Russell/Randle/Clarkson will all probably be improved in some fashion and above all Ingram may already be their best player. The Lakers look like they can win 30-35 games next year. That's wont be bad enough for top 3 (unless they really luck out in the lottery).

That said it's just as important for the Lakers young players to show improvement so the Lakers can look as respectable as possible. They need to go out this year and prove that if they add one or two star players they are right back in the conversation. When they get serious on the court is when star players will begin taking them serious as a destination again, and that can happen if they go out and play well this year. That's not to say they have to make the playoffs, but a 34-48 record would be a good year. That's not good by means, but it would show that their young talent can play and they could become over night contenders with a star or two.

Tony_Starks
07-18-2016, 11:21 AM
obviously the offseason isn't over, there are still some moves to be made. But what do you think the realistic win total is for the Lakers? What is your over/under for betting purposes?

I'm thinking 30-something wins, with a ceiling of .500 ball or slightly above if Luke can really get the kids to buy in similar to what Hornachek pulled off initially in Phoenix.

That's all contingent on adding a couple pieces tho, specifically a spot up shooter and a reliable Big off the bench.

Will be interesting to see what we get in return for Swaggy...

Like Tyler mentioned this season is strictly about competing and showing the makings of a respectable team with promise.

If they can come out and be exciting and competitive every night that will go a loooong way toward our future especially with Russ on the brink.

SeoulBeatz
07-18-2016, 11:22 AM
you will be relying on too many young players with no experience. 20 wins is about right for Philly this year. I would expect the leap to come in the 2019-20 season honestly.

Yeah i see a lot of Sixer fans on libertyballers.com thinking we'll end up being in the 30-35 win range. I'm predicting 15-25 tops. This will be another rough one for my Sixers, but with the addition of Simmons, Saric, Embiid, Luwawu, Sergio Rodriguez, Gerald Henderson, and Jeryd Bayless, I think we'll finally play some NBA caliber basketball and begin the trend upwards after 3 years of tanking.

sjbirds
07-18-2016, 11:35 AM
you will be relying on too many young players with no experience. 20 wins is about right for Philly this year. I would expect the leap to come in the 2019-20 season honestly.

Yeah i see a lot of Sixer fans on libertyballers.com thinking we'll end up being in the 30-35 win range. I'm predicting 15-25 tops. This will be another rough one for my Sixers, but with the addition of Simmons, Saric, Embiid, Luwawu, Sergio Rodriguez, Gerald Henderson, and Jeryd Bayless, I think we'll finally play some NBA caliber basketball and begin the trend upwards after 3 years of tanking.
I think 30 is absolutely the highest if they got lucky. I think the sixers are good for 23 to 27 wins but are gonna be fun to watch

Hawkeye15
07-18-2016, 11:42 AM
Yeah i see a lot of Sixer fans on libertyballers.com thinking we'll end up being in the 30-35 win range. I'm predicting 15-25 tops. This will be another rough one for my Sixers, but with the addition of Simmons, Saric, Embiid, Luwawu, Sergio Rodriguez, Gerald Henderson, and Jeryd Bayless, I think we'll finally play some NBA caliber basketball and begin the trend upwards after 3 years of tanking.

I see it more like my Wolves this year, where you will suck early, and pick up a little steam late. I am guessing 20ish wins for the Sixers. The biggest difference is, they will be a bit more competitive, and there is finally some actual talent that they can develop.

Hawkeye15
07-18-2016, 11:45 AM
I'm thinking 30-something wins, with a ceiling of .500 ball or slightly above if Luke can really get the kids to buy in similar to what Hornachek pulled off initially in Phoenix.

That's all contingent on adding a couple pieces tho, specifically a spot up shooter and a reliable Big off the bench.

Will be interesting to see what we get in return for Swaggy...

Like Tyler mentioned this season is strictly about competing and showing the makings of a respectable team with promise.

If they can come out and be exciting and competitive every night that will go a loooong way toward our future especially with Russ on the brink.

I think the ceiling is more like 32 wins myself, but everything you are saying is exactly right. Being competitive, stealing a win here or there, and beating the bottom teams consistently is what you want to see. Plus a leader or two emerging in the young core.

I am curious as to how Walton does. Who doesn't root for a Walton haha?

PhillyFaninLA
07-18-2016, 12:16 PM
I think 30 is absolutely the highest if they got lucky. I think the sixers are good for 23 to 27 wins but are gonna be fun to watch

Mu number is 30 for both us (assuming healthy) and the Lakers.

I want to see what we get for whichever big we trade.

Things brings up an interesting issue....at what point is it not a tank, we can be bad again and probably will, but it won't be taking IMO because tanking to me is about intent and not result. I'd make the case the Lakers weren't tanking and the Knicks weren't 2 years ago, they just weren't very good.

PhillyFaninLA
07-18-2016, 12:18 PM
I see it more like my Wolves this year, where you will suck early, and pick up a little steam late. I am guessing 20ish wins for the Sixers. The biggest difference is, they will be a bit more competitive, and there is finally some actual talent that they can develop.


I think the ceiling is more like 32 wins myself, but everything you are saying is exactly right. Being competitive, stealing a win here or there, and beating the bottom teams consistently is what you want to see. Plus a leader or two emerging in the young core.

I am curious as to how Walton does. Who doesn't root for a Walton haha?

Real question, how do you have the Sixers at 20ish and the Lakers around 32? I don't see them with much more talent then we have (if they even have more talent).

Tony_Starks
07-18-2016, 12:28 PM
Mu number is 30 for both us (assuming healthy) and the Lakers.

I want to see what we get for whichever big we trade.

Things brings up an interesting issue....at what point is it not a tank, we can be bad again and probably will, but it won't be taking IMO because tanking to me is about intent and not result. I'd make the case the Lakers weren't tanking and the Knicks weren't 2 years ago, they just weren't very good.

Lakers and Knicks weren't tanking, just criminally incompetent management.

Jimmy Buss and James Dolan truly believed in their heart of hearts those teams would compete. They also both struck out on Free Agents numerous times.

That's not tanking, they're actually trying to get the talent to compete but the word is out they don't know what the hell they're doing.

Hawkeye15
07-18-2016, 12:41 PM
Real question, how do you have the Sixers at 20ish and the Lakers around 32? I don't see them with much more talent then we have (if they even have more talent).

because they will have players that have actually played NBA games in their youth. I think Russell takes a nice step this year. You will have 3 players (2 starting) that have never played an NBA game. That means a lot of losses.

warfelg
07-18-2016, 01:31 PM
because they will have players that have actually played NBA games in their youth. I think Russell takes a nice step this year. You will have 3 players (2 starting) that have never played an NBA game. That means a lot of losses.

Where the 2 starters coming from?

Our most likely starting lineup is:
Bayless-Henderson-RoCo-Simmons-Noel/Okafor

And yes Saric hasn't played an NBA game but he's been playing professionally for a while, at a high level for 2 years, and just carried his national team to the olympics.

PhillyFaninLA
07-18-2016, 01:32 PM
because they will have players that have actually played NBA games in their youth. I think Russell takes a nice step this year. You will have 3 players (2 starting) that have never played an NBA game. That means a lot of losses.


Fair enough. I also think we might start 3 rookies (Saric, Simmons, and Embiid at least by the end of the year). I think our starting 5 will be Bayless, Henderson, Saric, Simmons, Embiid by mid season

My number is 30 wins but I am a fan so there may be some bias there. Depending on what happens in the rest of the offseason things could be adjusted.

warfelg
07-18-2016, 01:32 PM
I see it more like my Wolves this year, where you will suck early, and pick up a little steam late. I am guessing 20ish wins for the Sixers. The biggest difference is, they will be a bit more competitive, and there is finally some actual talent that they can develop.

I think we steal a few early when teams are unsure of what guys like Simmons/Saric/Embiid can do.

Hawkeye15
07-18-2016, 02:13 PM
Where the 2 starters coming from?

Our most likely starting lineup is:
Bayless-Henderson-RoCo-Simmons-Noel/Okafor

And yes Saric hasn't played an NBA game but he's been playing professionally for a while, at a high level for 2 years, and just carried his national team to the olympics.

Embiid won't start? Anyways, you will depend on 3 players with zero NBA experience. That matters. I think you will suck the first 30 games while everyone gets their feet wet, which puts you way behind the 8 ball. But there will be hope as the season goes on, I think they will start looking much more competitive the 2nd half.

warfelg
07-18-2016, 02:16 PM
Embiid won't start? Anyways, you will depend on 3 players with zero NBA experience. That matters. I think you will suck the first 30 games while everyone gets their feet wet, which puts you way behind the 8 ball. But there will be hope as the season goes on, I think they will start looking much more competitive the 2nd half.

I would like to see Embiid start but he's coming off 2 years of not playing.

Hawkeye15
07-18-2016, 02:22 PM
Fair enough. I also think we might start 3 rookies (Saric, Simmons, and Embiid at least by the end of the year). I think our starting 5 will be Bayless, Henderson, Saric, Simmons, Embiid by mid season

My number is 30 wins but I am a fan so there may be some bias there. Depending on what happens in the rest of the offseason things could be adjusted.

ask yourself this-are this years Sixers as good as last year's Wolves? They won 29 games, with a young roster that had a year under its belt, and the best rookie in years. I think Philly's big jump comes 2 seasons later than this year.

Hawkeye15
07-18-2016, 02:22 PM
I would like to see Embiid start but he's coming off 2 years of not playing.

good point. May as well use that depth up front to ease him in..

DODGERS&LAKERS
07-18-2016, 03:44 PM
I never liked the usage of the word tank. To me, a tank embodies being strong. There's nothing strong about the Lakers this year. They will probably be the worst team in the west again and we will just have to see how it develops in the east. I think there is a very good chance they have one of the worst records in the league if not the worst. If they get another top 3 pick, they have to start trading some of these guys away. You cannot develop five players at once without hindering the majority of them

Mave1002
07-19-2016, 05:48 AM
I don't see the team tanking that hard this year. It's gona be more like a year of mentoring plus trial and error.

Question is: Should the Lakers retain another top 3 pick for 2017, would they be willing to wait til then to make some moves OR just til this years' trade deadline?

If Mozgov can be healthy this year, I see teams who are fighting for deep playoff spots would want his services (and possibly Lou Williams) by the deadline. I'd like to see Luke developing the P&R game between Moz/DLO increasing the value of the former.

Vinylman
07-19-2016, 11:45 AM
I'm thinking 30-something wins, with a ceiling of .500 ball or slightly above if Luke can really get the kids to buy in similar to what Hornachek pulled off initially in Phoenix.

That's all contingent on adding a couple pieces tho, specifically a spot up shooter and a reliable Big off the bench.

Will be interesting to see what we get in return for Swaggy...

Like Tyler mentioned this season is strictly about competing and showing the makings of a respectable team with promise.

If they can come out and be exciting and competitive every night that will go a loooong way toward our future especially with Russ on the brink.

no chance at .500 ... 30 wins is the ceiling...

additionally, Lakers aren't adding anyone significant unless something falls into their lap... they have WAY to many guys that need minutes at this point...

Hawkeye15
07-19-2016, 11:52 AM
no chance at .500 ... 30 wins is the ceiling...

additionally, Lakers aren't adding anyone significant unless something falls into their lap... they have WAY to many guys that need minutes at this point...

exactly how I see it. I mean, are this years Lakers any better than last years Wolves? They won 29.

Tony_Starks
07-19-2016, 12:09 PM
exactly how I see it. I mean, are this years Lakers any better than last years Wolves? They won 29.

I'm more confident in our overall talent and definitely our coaching over last years Sam Mitchell coached Wolves.

Luke instead of Sam is a + 5 win easy IMO....

A lot of you guys wins were just on the strength of KAT being a baller, but they came in spite of Mitchell.

Tony_Starks
07-19-2016, 12:30 PM
no chance at .500 ... 30 wins is the ceiling...

additionally, Lakers aren't adding anyone significant unless something falls into their lap... they have WAY to many guys that need minutes at this point...

I don't agree about the "need minutes" line. The majority of the minutes will go to Russell, Randle, Clarkson, Ingram, Deng, Nance, Mozzy. I'd imagine Ingram will sometimes split minutes with Deng and sometimes play in tandem with Deng playing stretch 4. That's perfect for Luke's system.

The rest of the guys like Calderon, Swaggy and crew will just get minutes as needed with Lou being the super sub as usual.

Vinylman
07-19-2016, 12:30 PM
exactly how I see it. I mean, are this years Lakers any better than last years Wolves? They won 29.

yep

The Lakers were the worse shooting team in the league last year... Walton's offense is highly reliant on being able to shoot... what shooters did the Lakers add? Calderon? Ingram? ... will some of the young guys shoot better? I hope so but I will believe it when I see it.

Not to mention that they will really suck the first 15 games as they implement the new system

29 wins is a 12 game improvement and should be appreciated... it will be more important to see how they perform the last month of the season than their overall record.

Tony_Starks
07-19-2016, 12:31 PM
yep

The Lakers were the worse shooting team in the league last year... Walton's offense is highly reliant on being able to shoot... what shooters did the Lakers add? Calderon? Ingram? ... will some of the young guys shoot better? I hope so but I will believe it when I see it.

Not to mention that they will really suck the first 15 games as they implement the new system

29 wins is a 12 game improvement and should be appreciated... it will be more important to see how they perform the last month of the season than their overall record.

You know Russell was shooting over 40% from three at some point last season when Scott took the cuffs off right?

Vinylman
07-19-2016, 12:40 PM
I don't agree about the "need minutes" line. The majority of the minutes will go to Russell, Randle, Clarkson, Ingram, Deng, Nance, Mozzy. I'd imagine Ingram will sometimes split minutes with Deng and sometimes play in tandem with Deng playing stretch 4. That's perfect for Luke's system.

The rest of the guys like Calderon, Swaggy and crew will just get minutes as needed with Lou being the super sub as usual.

huh?

you just made my point for me... they won't pick up anyone else because there are no minutes to go around... the young guys will take all of them until they prove they can't do it.

Also, you are forgetting Zubac as another young guy who needs minutes...

Anyway, this team's ceiling is 30 games

Hawkeye15
07-19-2016, 12:52 PM
yep

The Lakers were the worse shooting team in the league last year... Walton's offense is highly reliant on being able to shoot... what shooters did the Lakers add? Calderon? Ingram? ... will some of the young guys shoot better? I hope so but I will believe it when I see it.

Not to mention that they will really suck the first 15 games as they implement the new system

29 wins is a 12 game improvement and should be appreciated... it will be more important to see how they perform the last month of the season than their overall record.

that is exactly how I viewed last years Wolves season going in, and they played pretty well late, giving hope for this upcoming year. I think that is the exact hope Laker fans should have. If they are still not very competitive late, there is a problem...

Vinylman
07-19-2016, 01:07 PM
You know Russell was shooting over 40% from three at some point last season when Scott took the cuffs off right?


I guess I was just talking about Russell :rolleyes:

give me that stretch...

he shot 35.7% over his last 10 games

was that stretch after the game he shot 8-12 against Memphis in garbage time when they got blown out?

I'll say it one more time .... the Lakers were the worse shooting team in the league last year...

Vinylman
07-19-2016, 01:08 PM
that is exactly how I viewed last years Wolves season going in, and they played pretty well late, giving hope for this upcoming year. I think that is the exact hope Laker fans should have. If they are still not very competitive late, there is a problem...

yep...

Laker fans are fundamentally delusional on this teams prospects just like they were last year.

Tony_Starks
07-19-2016, 03:24 PM
huh?

you just made my point for me... they won't pick up anyone else because there are no minutes to go around... the young guys will take all of them until they prove they can't do it.

Also, you are forgetting Zubac as another young guy who needs minutes...

Anyway, this team's ceiling is 30 games

Forgot about Zubac.

My point is that outside the kids and Deng/ Mozgov those are the only ones that's minutes are in cement. That's a pretty short rotation, it's not like the kids are going to be playing 40 minutes. Swaggy Ps minutes are definitely up for grabs, is it so out of the question that they get a Steve Novak of the world to spot up shoot off the bench?

Anyways it's not like I expect great things. Competitive play, anything from 30 wins to .500 ball. Young teams with comparable talent have done that in the west in recent memory, a lot of it will boil down to Luke and Shaws coaching.

Wrigheyes4MVP
07-19-2016, 03:29 PM
It's not like the players and coaching staff are going to lose on purpose. Just let the young players play and if they suck, they suck. Then you keep rebuilding. You don't do the whole Free Agency thing until the team shows they are heading in the right direction and the results start coming. That hasn't happened yet.

Unless there is a special, special player like Durant available, then you try to sign him.

shep33
07-19-2016, 05:33 PM
I love the young core we have on our team. I think it's top 2-3 in the league right now when you look at young talent. Randle, Russ, Ingram, Clarkson, Nance, and maybe a steal with Zubac. Also a big fan of Tarik Black.

30 wins tops, but that's a hell of an improvement, and with a core having such a young age, the future is bright.

tp13baby
07-19-2016, 06:57 PM
I love the young core we have on our team. I think it's top 2-3 in the league right now when you look at young talent. Randle, Russ, Ingram, Clarkson, Nance, and maybe a steal with Zubac. Also a big fan of Tarik Black.

30 wins tops, but that's a hell of an improvement, and with a core having such a young age, the future is bright.

Depends on what you consider young talent. Say 24 and under since Clarkson is the oldest.

Minny is obviously first.
I would put Utah with Gobert/Exum/Burks/Lyles/Hood
Suns with Booker/Knight/Bender/Chriss/Warren/Len and Ulis who looked as good as anyone in the summer league
Philly is loaded with guys.
Denver with Nurkic/Murray/Mudiay/Harris/Jokic/Hernangomez/Beasley
Milwaukee with the Greek Freak/Middleton/Jabari/Maker/Ennis/MCW

I don't think I would put them top 3, but their potential from Russell and Ingram could easily make an argument for it

LaLa_Land
07-19-2016, 06:58 PM
If they play defense, and one of the young guys enters into the fringe all-star realm, they can strive to win 30-35 games.

With that said, it would be an incredible improvement and it'd provide some fodder for a vision moving forward.

The lows of the last few years have been really low. This year though, the games should finally be watchable and fun.

Scoots
07-19-2016, 08:45 PM
Mu number is 30 for both us (assuming healthy) and the Lakers.

I want to see what we get for whichever big we trade.

Things brings up an interesting issue....at what point is it not a tank, we can be bad again and probably will, but it won't be taking IMO because tanking to me is about intent and not result. I'd make the case the Lakers weren't tanking and the Knicks weren't 2 years ago, they just weren't very good.

If the Lakers play their young players a LOT and don't play their vets even with the youngsters playing badly (assuming some of them do) then they are not trying to maximize wins which is, by some definitions, tanking. They will be developing for the future hopefully which is not, but some definitions, tanking.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Now, if they only play the vets and suck anyhow ... I would say that's tanking AND stupid.

McAllen Tx
07-19-2016, 09:35 PM
IMO it would be stupid for the Lakers to not tank. And from our FA signings I think the FO feels the same way. Mozgov & Deng does nothing to make us better. They bring stability and professionalism to our locker room and hopefully makes our young players better.

They're both just keeping spots filled till Ingram & Zubac are ready.

Cant depend on FA to save us and trading 2-3 key young players for 1 all star who's already 28+ years old makes no sense.

We have to depend on the draft and the fact that we can still keep our pick again next season and by doing so we keep our 2019 first round pick also - we have to seriously think about tanking.

We just won the ship 6 years ago, in the playoffs 4 years ago, was decimated with injuries 3 years ago (KB & Nash) - so we're really just tanked for the last 2 years. A proper rebuild from the bottom up takes at least 3 years of collecting assets from the draft. We 2 years in already might as well do it properly and do the whole 3 years.

Of course it would be different if we for sure didn't have our pick next season. Also if we would've hit in FA but we didn't. As of right now we're still a bottom 5 team so might as well try and get as low as possible in the last 30 games.

Shlumpledink
07-19-2016, 09:58 PM
The objective is to make that 2019 pick a mid to late 20s pick.

They won't be tanking this year, barring injuries.

DanG
07-19-2016, 10:08 PM
Depends on what you consider young talent. Say 24 and under since Clarkson is the oldest.

Minny is obviously first.
I would put Utah with Gobert/Exum/Burks/Lyles/Hood
Suns with Booker/Knight/Bender/Chriss/Warren/Len and Ulis who looked as good as anyone in the summer league
Philly is loaded with guys.
Denver with Nurkic/Murray/Mudiay/Harris/Jokic/Hernangomez/Beasley
Milwaukee with the Greek Freak/Middleton/Jabari/Maker/Ennis/MCW

I don't think I would put them top 3, but their potential from Russell and Ingram could easily make an argument for it

Potential wise the Lakers/76ers clearly have the best young core besides Minny.

Utah: I don't see any potential all-stars. Gobert, Burks, Hood are 23-24 already.
Suns: Booker is a potential all-star, but other than him i'm not that impressed.
Philly: 1. Simmons 2. Embiid 3. Okafor 4. Noel in that order are potential all-stars. Very impressive group.
Denver: Jokic is impressive, could be an all-star. Murray/Mudiay are going to be good players.
Milwaukee: Greek Freak, Parker are potential all-stars. Middleton/MCW just really good players.
Lakers: 1. Russell 2. Ingram 3. Randle 4. Clarkson in that order are potential all-stars. I'm not going to throw him into this yet, but Zubac looks very impressive also.
Minny: Towns is a guaranteed all-star. Wiggins a very likely one. LaVine/Dunn potential all-stars.

1. Minnesota
2. 76ers/Lakers
3. 76ers/Lakers

tp13baby
07-20-2016, 02:00 AM
Potential wise the Lakers/76ers clearly have the best young core besides Minny.

Utah: I don't see any potential all-stars. Gobert, Burks, Hood are 23-24 already.
Suns: Booker is a potential all-star, but other than him i'm not that impressed.
Philly: 1. Simmons 2. Embiid 3. Okafor 4. Noel in that order are potential all-stars. Very impressive group.
Denver: Jokic is impressive, could be an all-star. Murray/Mudiay are going to be good players.
Milwaukee: Greek Freak, Parker are potential all-stars. Middleton/MCW just really good players.
Lakers: 1. Russell 2. Ingram 3. Randle 4. Clarkson in that order are potential all-stars. I'm not going to throw him into this yet, but Zubac looks very impressive also.
Minny: Towns is a guaranteed all-star. Wiggins a very likely one. LaVine/Dunn potential all-stars.

1. Minnesota
2. 76ers/Lakers
3. 76ers/Lakers

I like LA's core. I am not saying anything against it. I don't believe Clarkson is going to be a star in any way. Randle to me looks like a double double machine. Ingram I want to see play. Russell should be much better this year cause last year he was brutal. Randle and Clarkson are not all star potential. Just good role player potential.

shep33
07-20-2016, 02:56 AM
To me, it's clearly Minny, then tight between the Sixers and Lakers. Phoenix and Denver next, Jokic is a beast, I hope Mudiay continues to develop from that nightmarish rookie year. Love me some Booker... Not convinced on Len and honestly I'm not sure Phoenix is either since they drafted Bender (who needs a lot of work) and Chriss (who i think can be a stud).

Clarkson is the interesting one on our team. He can blow up next year and average 20 5 and 5, or else slightly develop some more and be a decent starter or really good sixth man. I think Randle, if he develops his jumper is gonna be sick. Averaged a dub-dub last year and didn't start all the time, and i consider it to be his rookie year last season.

DanG
07-20-2016, 05:48 AM
Randle if he can develop a decent mid-range jumper and the ability to finish with his right hand he's going to be a BEAST. He has one of the quickest first steps in the league when it comes to PF's and C's. I believe he can pull off a 15/11/3 per game next year. And the dude is only 21!

I may be slightly homer when it comes to Clarkson, but he has a very good work ethic. 17/4/3 Per 36 last year. I can definitely see him having a similar year to what CJ McCollum had last season.

I'm sure atleast one of DLo/Randle/JC will impress the heck out of people. Kobe/Byron held those guys back last year so bad it's not even funny.

Tony_Starks
07-20-2016, 08:49 AM
Randle if he can develop a decent mid-range jumper and the ability to finish with his right hand he's going to be a BEAST. He has one of the quickest first steps in the league when it comes to PF's and C's. I believe he can pull off a 15/11/3 per game next year. And the dude is only 21!

I may be slightly homer when it comes to Clarkson, but he has a very good work ethic. 17/4/3 Per 36 last year. I can definitely see him having a similar year to what CJ McCollum had last season.

I'm sure atleast one of DLo/Randle/JC will impress the heck out of people. Kobe/Byron held those guys back last year so bad it's not even funny.

I think the select team action is really going to help them too. KD was saying yesterday that looking at Ingram was like looking in the mirror and even remarked that he is already further along than he was at that age, as far as his handle and ability to create.

Just letting that young core play together with a coach that will actually have a system all year is almost a win in itself.

Plus with Kobe out of the mix they will finally be able to hold ALL the players accountable, especially on D. That is HUGE.

I'm looking forward to this season.

mrblisterdundee
07-20-2016, 12:43 PM
I'd say the Lakers are set as far as a young core. See what they can do, and then try and add someone like Russell Westbrook and a big man next summer.

Ishkabibble
07-21-2016, 11:32 AM
It's absolutely mind boggling to think the C's have the Nets 1st round picks for the next TWO seasons. There's a very good chance both of those picks are gonna be top 6 at least since the Nets are so bad.

Funny but I was just saying the other day that Boston should just hang on to both of those Nets picks; don't trade 'em under any circumstances. Obviously they could package them separately or together get an outstanding player if not a superstar. But in the short term, what good would it really do? For a couple seasons at minimum, I don't see anyone not named Cleveland being able to hang w/ Golden State. And even then, as it stands, I think the Cavs need to add another quality player.
The Celtics should just add two Top 5 picks (who knows maybe a #1 overall?) and look to be ready to roll three years down the road.

Vinylman
07-21-2016, 12:31 PM
Forgot about Zubac.

My point is that outside the kids and Deng/ Mozgov those are the only ones that's minutes are in cement. That's a pretty short rotation, it's not like the kids are going to be playing 40 minutes. Swaggy Ps minutes are definitely up for grabs, is it so out of the question that they get a Steve Novak of the world to spot up shoot off the bench?

Anyways it's not like I expect great things. Competitive play, anything from 30 wins to .500 ball. Young teams with comparable talent have done that in the west in recent memory, a lot of it will boil down to Luke and Shaws coaching.

The Math is pretty straightforward

Russell 30
Clarkson 28
Ingram 22
Randle 30
Deng 28
Mozgov 22
Zubac 14
Nance 16

All of those are low pretty much


So that leaves 50 minutes for

LOU
CALDERON
BLACK
BROWN

and nothing for Huertas and Swaggy piss ant

Tony_Starks
07-21-2016, 01:08 PM
The Math is pretty straightforward

Russell 30
Clarkson 28
Ingram 22
Randle 30
Deng 28
Mozgov 22
Zubac 14
Nance 16

All of those are low pretty much


So that leaves 50 minutes for

LOU
CALDERON
BLACK
BROWN

and nothing for Huertas and Swaggy piss ant

Well that being said do you think Swaggy has a legit shot to earn PT under Luke or is he still doghoused?

Luke is going to want shooting, Nick had a horrid shooting year last season but that was on a leash. He's still capable.

Vinylman
07-21-2016, 02:05 PM
Well that being said do you think Swaggy has a legit shot to earn PT under Luke or is he still doghoused?

Luke is going to want shooting, Nick had a horrid shooting year last season but that was on a leash. He's still capable.

In all seriousness they should play him so they can showcase him for a trade ...

I doubt Luke will hold last year against him but I am pretty sure the organization just wants him gone

He still is a good piece on a vet team.

ciaban
07-21-2016, 02:15 PM
Eh....It's not like the penalty for not reaching the floor is really all that bad. All they do is take the money you are under, and split it between all the players on the team at the end of the season. The salary floor is no excuse for overspending.

Plus I really really do not get that Deng signing.

Bring in a vet at almost $20mil a year, at a position you just drafted a #2 overall pick at? That's almost as silly to me as resigning Clarkson and not moving Williams or Young.
They like Williams the person a lot and want his leadership, if they could have moved swaggy p by now they would have.

ciaban
07-21-2016, 02:41 PM
exactly how I see it. I mean, are this years Lakers any better than last years Wolves? They won 29.

Looking at last years Wolves, and this years 76ers and lakers, I think the lakers are the most balanced, you know who the starting Gaurds, Forward and Center all are (youth wise). The players they landed in free agency will be there to help the new guys Ingram-Zubac and with Russel and Randle each having a year under their belts, I expect we'll see much better play out of both, and much more confidence since they wont have Byron Scotts mind games.

Don't think of it as the difference between last year's wolves and this years lakers, think of the difference between a young team coached by Byron Scott (not to mention the shadow of Kobe looming large), and one coached by Luke Walton.
I think replacing Scott with Walton will be worth 10 wins by itself, plus improved play by the young core. The other thing is while they way overpaid for Deng and Mozgov, I think the lakers had the worst production in the league last year at SF and C, there is no way the combo of Deng/Ingram/Brown or Moz/Zubot/Auguste could possibly play worse than what the team had last year, in Swaggy P. Metta World Peace, Roy Hibbert and Robert Scarce.

In particular Hibbert may have been the worst pick and roll center in all of basketball last year, he was a contributing factor in D'Lo early struggles.

ciaban
07-21-2016, 02:43 PM
In all seriousness they should play him so they can showcase him for a trade ...

I doubt Luke will hold last year against him but I am pretty sure the organization just wants him gone

He still is a good piece on a vet team.
I mean, it's not as though they can trade him, so maybe.

ciaban
07-21-2016, 02:47 PM
I guess I was just talking about Russell :rolleyes:

give me that stretch...

he shot 35.7% over his last 10 games

was that stretch after the game he shot 8-12 against Memphis in garbage time when they got blown out?

I'll say it one more time .... the Lakers were the worse shooting team in the league last year...
It would be worse if they only won 17 games and WEREN'T the worst shooting team. There's nowhere to go but up.

that is exactly how I viewed last years Wolves season going in, and they played pretty well late, giving hope for this upcoming year. I think that is the exact hope Laker fans should have. If they are still not very competitive late, there is a problem...

I think your average lakers fan is hoping for/expecting around 30, while secretly praying for 40, but even I would be pretty disappointed with a 20 win season, they really have no excuse improving by 3 wins over last years abortion of a season.
Personally somewhere between 25-35 wins seems reasonable.

Tony_Starks
07-21-2016, 03:05 PM
I mean, it's not as though they can trade him, so maybe.

I think if he can get his confidence back and go back to getting buckets someone may take him.

Instant offense guys are always valued come playoff time. If he gets a shot the main thing he will have to control are the off court shenanigans because that's a deal breaker.

ciaban
07-21-2016, 03:09 PM
I like LA's core. I am not saying anything against it. I don't believe Clarkson is going to be a star in any way. Randle to me looks like a double double machine. Ingram I want to see play. Russell should be much better this year cause last year he was brutal. Randle and Clarkson are not all star potential. Just good role player potential.
He averaged 15.5 points 4 TRB and 2.5ass (and that's as a shooting guard) last season, if he can improve his 3% above 34% he has the chance to be a pretty elite scorer in the league, the real question will be how his defense comes along. He might never be the kind of star who anchors a team for a decade, but he could be much more than a role player.

ciaban
07-21-2016, 03:11 PM
I think if he can get his confidence back and go back to getting buckets someone may take him.

Instant offense guys are always valued come playoff time. If he gets a shot the main thing he will have to control are the off court shenanigans because that's a deal breaker.
He has a player option, I could see him being more valuable next off season with an expiring contract.