|| LocK Dis Up ||

How Many Games Do You Project The Lakers Will Win This Season?

  • 15-20

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 21-25

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 26-30

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 31-35

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 36-40

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 41-45

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 46-50

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 51-55

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 56-73

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • They Will Break the NBA Record with 74+ Wins

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
Status
Not open for further replies.
because boogie can give a free agent like durant more reason to sign. kd doesnt want to wait for all the young guys to develop. if LA doesnt have a core that can contend next season, he is not signing with LA. gotta swing for the fences.

Not really..

Goes and looks at Sacramento's records the last few years....
 
1996 and 2016 disgusts you?

Cleveland had 4 in a dozen years.

My bad for my lack of draft knowledge. It just seems like they been on the lottery for way too long. They still disgust me
 
1996 and 2016 disgusts you?

Cleveland had 4 in a dozen years.

My bad for my lack of draft knowledge. It just seems like they been on the lottery for way too long. They still disgust me

dont feel bad. Not all of us were grandfathers in 1996 bonding over the nba draft live with our kids and grandkids in our Oregon farm land
 
Ingram measured out 6'9.5 and weighed 195 at the 2015 hoop summit. I'm sure he's a tad bigger now
 
because boogie can give a free agent like durant more reason to sign. kd doesnt want to wait for all the young guys to develop. if LA doesnt have a core that can contend next season, he is not signing with LA. gotta swing for the fences.

Not really..

Goes and looks at Sacramento's records the last few years....

while looking, take a look at sacs players and coaching as well 8o
 
Other than finishing with both hands isn't Simmons basically Julius randle 2.0?

I don't mind two of the same type of player but building around two guys who can't spread the floor seems like a bad idea.

From the notably limited knowledge I have it seems like Ingram is a better option both for our roster and how modern offences work
Ingram is definitely a better fit, and for the most part Simmons ironically rarely finishes with his left hand even though he is left handed.  He almost always finishes with his right.  I would say Simmons is a bit more polished and a much better passer though.
 
while looking, take a look at sacs players and coaching as well
nerd.gif
Doesn't that prove his point that Boogie doesn't attract free agents?
 
so the players, coaching and the city of sacramento have nothing to do with it
nerd.gif
So you are saying Boogie will attract KD, but in all his time in Sacramento he attracted 0 good free agents?

And if you want to blame coaching, don't you have to blame Boogie for the constant coaching carousel?    Being coachable is kind of a part of the reason they are where they are.
 
leemealone wants to trade a guy who  we dont have/want 

?

did i skim read that right

wade gotta be rolling over in his grave to hear riles say that.

but riles is a smart man, he knows he has to say that to feed into hassans ego.

he knows wade wont leave, unless LBJ snakecharms another super team
 
Even when Sacramento was good...it didn't happen through free agency. Some cities/franchises are just hard sells. The dysfunction obviously doesn't help but they're never going to be a major free agent destination.
 
Draft Express guy who I think called D'Lo last year thinks Ingram is going #1.
 
Last edited:
max kellerman kept saying draft express was the only site that had him going #1

phlly better do their thang and take simmons
 
Even if they take Ingram, getting Simmons is not exactly a letdown. Both are the goods. Ingram might be the better fit, Simmons may be the better player (in time, if he learns to shoot from at least 15-16 feet)

Bottom line, this is the 07 Draft. At 1, you agonize between the two. At 2, you rush to the stage and take the leftover with glee. :lol
 
leemealone wants to trade a guy who  we dont have/want 
?

did i skim read that right

I don't get why it's such a bad idea under the following circumstances:

-we have to sign somebody
-we're probably going to sign him anyway
-if you're trying to make a deal for cousins/George/Butler and it's a choice between moving dlo/Randle/#2 or derozan/Lou/future pick...that's a no brainer

I don't care about derozan the player. I do admit he would at least improve the team record, probably while hurting the development of the youngsters tho.

But derozan the asset? I'm all for it. You should be able to get a decent return for him especially when you consider the cap is still going to go up and he'll be somewhat of a bargain even with a max
 
Max him.

Realize he's trash.

Try to flip him.

I award you zero points, and may god have mercy on your soul.
 
Franc and leemelone battling for worst of the worst?


Terrible idea that would never happen...

No team would trade for somebody with over $60 million and 3+ years on his contract especially if said guy is "trash"
 
Last edited:
Max him.

Realize he's trash.

Try to flip him.

I award you zero points, and may god have mercy on your soul.

That part was just for special effect. He'll put up the same numbers he did in Toronto. Somewhere down the line the Kings will make boogie available, or a similar scenario with another team. Philly will have already traded what they have. Teams will have to choose between derozan or Boston's pile of trash, which they will have probably traded to Philly already. Then we flourish.

This is under the condition that you can't pick up anyone better than derozan anyway. Plan b.

You guys would really rather trade basically the whole core for jimmy butler? Is that what it is?
 
Last edited:
I don't think he'll put up the same numbers here. He'll be worse. It's a stupid idea.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom