- Sep 5, 2010
- 11,513
- 5,897
he ain't worth that yet. that's for sure. WE NEED TO GIVE HIM THE FREAKIN MINUTES.
**LA LAKERS THREAD** Sitting on 17! 2023-2024 offseason begins
- Thread in 'Sports & Training' Thread starter Started by licensed to ball,
- Start date
- Feb 8, 2009
- 17,728
- 24,932
He's going to get a contract worth $16m-$20m/year this summer and we need to decide now if we're going to give it to him. If we decide not to pay the man then we need to get rid of him to salvage some type of assets because he's going to walk away for nothing soon.
MVP
Supporter
- Feb 28, 2008
- 83,040
- 85,631
He's getting the minutes, he's starting, it's honestly not about what he's doing right now per se, it's what role he would have going forward should they hit on those max free agents. I think all that nonsense about management sabotaging him should be put to rest soon since he's continued to start and his QO will be more now should we keep him beyond the trade deadline.
MVP
Supporter
- Feb 28, 2008
- 83,040
- 85,631
He can't walk away for nothing. He's a RFA.
- Jan 4, 2012
- 11,411
- 12,654
Who's giving Randle $100 million?
The same Randle that's and I quote "inconstant; next game he'll go out there and turn it over 5 times and force awful shots.?
- Apr 24, 2006
- 18,755
- 13,108
Or they could have given him a qualifying offer by now or they can wait and see what other teams offer and match
Not a lot of teams with cap space to give him a max deal
Not a lot of teams with cap space to give him a max deal
- Feb 8, 2009
- 17,728
- 24,932
Who's giving Randle $100 million?
The same Randle that's and I quote "inconstant; next game he'll go out there and turn it over 5 times and force awful shots.?
Ryan Anderson signed a 4 year/$80m contract, heck look what we did with Deng and Mozgov. I can go on and on about the number of bad contracts that are handed out each offseason. Bad teams are known for handing out awful contracts. Some team will offer Randle near max money.
- Oct 28, 2013
- 42,742
- 178,556
MVP
Supporter
- Feb 28, 2008
- 83,040
- 85,631
While true there are far less teams that could offer him that kind of money this summer than there was in 2016.
Yes. 1 billion percent, yes.
- Mar 28, 2009
- 18,488
- 6,333
Lol right. There’s dudes in here that legit were mad about his haircuts and eyebrows smh
- Feb 5, 2013
- 39,385
- 40,877
unless the team renounces him ( ala detroit KCP)
only way they do that is if they have deals in place with Free agents...
Magic is on the clock
Random C/Backup C
Randle/Kuzma/Nance
PG/Ingram
Starting SG/Clarkson
Lonzo/Hart
Knowing you can fill in SOME minutes at Center with Randle or Nance, you'd merely need to find a 3&D type starter at SG, a Danny Green type, so Clarkson/Ingram/Kuzma can run other teams off the floor off the bench.
That team can grow, Randle, Kuzma, Ingram, Lonzo, Hart all still improving, they can run, you add a lil more shooting with PG and the 3&D SG, you have depth, and you of course still have pieces you could flip if a "Harden/Pau unexpected star just became available" type player hits the trade market.
There's no reason to go all in for "2 stars" when all it takes is one of them to get hurt and you're back to bein worthless. And in the case of Bron, your window is 2 years max, and Golden State will be far better than us both years.
Draft, and develop. Draft, and develop. Not draft and give up. That's beyond lunacy.
Add PG ON TOP of the core, don't tear the core down to add one extra star player that still doesn't make you better than Golden State. If we were neck and neck with GS and you could add a star, Ok I get that, but that wouldn't be the case. PG/Bron, PG/Boogie, Bron/Boogie, none of those combos make us better than Warriors, not even close. Keep growing the core, add a star that fits and get that big fish finally to lure guys later on down the line. Then make your run. Don't try to short cut the process.
Randle/Kuzma/Nance
PG/Ingram
Starting SG/Clarkson
Lonzo/Hart
Knowing you can fill in SOME minutes at Center with Randle or Nance, you'd merely need to find a 3&D type starter at SG, a Danny Green type, so Clarkson/Ingram/Kuzma can run other teams off the floor off the bench.
That team can grow, Randle, Kuzma, Ingram, Lonzo, Hart all still improving, they can run, you add a lil more shooting with PG and the 3&D SG, you have depth, and you of course still have pieces you could flip if a "Harden/Pau unexpected star just became available" type player hits the trade market.
There's no reason to go all in for "2 stars" when all it takes is one of them to get hurt and you're back to bein worthless. And in the case of Bron, your window is 2 years max, and Golden State will be far better than us both years.
Draft, and develop. Draft, and develop. Not draft and give up. That's beyond lunacy.
Add PG ON TOP of the core, don't tear the core down to add one extra star player that still doesn't make you better than Golden State. If we were neck and neck with GS and you could add a star, Ok I get that, but that wouldn't be the case. PG/Bron, PG/Boogie, Bron/Boogie, none of those combos make us better than Warriors, not even close. Keep growing the core, add a star that fits and get that big fish finally to lure guys later on down the line. Then make your run. Don't try to short cut the process.
MVP
Supporter
- Feb 28, 2008
- 83,040
- 85,631
Thinking about this a bit more I don't think they'll move anyone outside of JC at the trade deadline, it's the prudent move to remain ready if the two max guys hit (by having that extra cap space) or still be in position should only one guy be available for whatever reason and they can resign Juju.
- Apr 24, 2006
- 18,755
- 13,108
I wouldn’t want Lebron even if he says he’s coming
It’s a shortsighted move. He doesn’t get us past the dubs at age 34-36. It’s just a “look what we did” for the new regime to show how great they are.
It’s a shortsighted move. He doesn’t get us past the dubs at age 34-36. It’s just a “look what we did” for the new regime to show how great they are.
- Sep 5, 2010
- 11,513
- 5,897
EXACTLY. The chance to grab Bron and PG is nothing compared to what is already built.
We don't really need two stars, we only need one.
We got BI and Zo, we realy only need one more.
- Feb 5, 2013
- 39,385
- 40,877
i like what youre saying but BI on the bench is
BI at the 3 and PG at the 2 is how i would see it.
give me a rim running starting C
nance / randle can split time at the backk up 5 but could be a problem against the elite big men
- Feb 8, 2009
- 17,728
- 24,932
I'll play Devil's Advocate and ask what exactly have we built? We are bottom three team in the league currently who two or three years away for making the playoffs.
i like what youre saying but BI on the bench is
BI at the 3 and PG at the 2 is how i would see it.
give me a rim running starting C
nance / randle can split time at the backk up 5 but could be a problem against the elite big men
Hey, if PG can handle bein the 2 guard, I'd be fine with that. I'm simply going off the assumption he'd want to be a 3 and occasional 4, kinda like Kuz can be the 4 and the occasional 3.
I def don't see Ingram at the 2, so I slotted him behind PG at the 3 for the purpose of that post is all.
MVP
Supporter
- Feb 28, 2008
- 83,040
- 85,631
Copping a #0
You realize kids do grow, right?
OKC was dead last for a bit, so were the Warriors. The young talent grows, you move up the standings, that's how building works. Maybe we just might not be in last place anymore when Lonzo/Kuz/Hart aren't rookies, and Ingram isn't in his 2nd season, not to mention adding PG to the group as well.
- Sep 5, 2010
- 11,513
- 5,897
Standings and actually seeing them play and noticing things here and there are two completely different things though.
and I'd say we're 1 year away from making the Playoffs. See you next year fam.
Zo with a shot.
BI with actual mass.
Kuz with the Mamba bail out shots.
We're coming for #8 next season.
- Feb 23, 2010
- 23,404
- 26,483
fixed. and that one dude is gone.
- Feb 29, 2000
- 88,764
- 47,978
big juicy jewls!!!
