Forum Blue And Gold

A Lakers Blog. Thoughts, reflections, and the odd rant on the Los Angeles Lakers and the NBA (even the Clippers).

Links from the Forum: The Lakers go streaking

by


Happy Monday, everybody. Here are this week’s top Laker-centric reads, news and notes from around the web:

  • RIM, MEET ROY: While the Lakers were dunking all over the Suns last night, Roy Hibbert got in on the action by driving down the lane, faking a pass and finishing with a one-handed throw down over Tyson Chandler. He also drew a foul and drained the free throw. I’m not quite sure where this came from but it was fun and I’m pretty sure we’ll never see it again from Roy, so enjoy:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTp8zeTKAqg

Lakers’ schedule for the week:

  • The new and improved 2016 Lakers continue their quest for greatness at home, where they’ll look to conquer the Golden State Warriors on Tuesday, January 5th (7:30 p.m. PT, NBATV and TWCSN) before heading north to face the Sacramento Kings on Thursday, January 7th (7:30 p.m. PT, TNT and TWCSN). LA then closes out the week with home dates against the Thunder on Friday, January 8th (7:30  p.m. PT, ESPN and TWCSN) and the Jazz on Sunday, January 10 (6:30 p.m. PT, TWCSN).

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Fulofunk says

    THIS win felt very good…..for 3 quarters, then it just got ugly. The Suns just looked like a very bad team, but in the 4th we looked like our 20something losses.
    -Nance jr. continues to shine, no doubt the 4 years of college ball is payin off as JW eluded to in the post game . Bill Mac may have coined a fitting phrase for him after a monster dunk…”On the Elevator, going DOWN!!!!!” Chick couldn’t have said it better….
    -Hibbard’s play was a little better, but I get the feeling he is becoming a laughing stock, again eluding to post game with JW & AJ. I wonder how much love he gets from his teammates….I don’t know, but he is definitely an enigma
    -Lou W. had a monster game, but I still wish I could see more of JC & DAR on the floor at the same time as well as JR & LNjr
    – It was nice to see Ronnie Price…he was one of my favorites for us last year
    – A TARIK BLACK sighting!!! He was on the bench, but no minutes and absolutely no mention.

    A win is a win, so here is my two cents worth on the are we tanking/should we tank/can we grab a top 3 pick…..
    I would love to get a top 3 pick, as would everyone here, if it falls to us, but above everything else…..I would rather our guys play hard and try to win every game and maybe even win us out of a draft pick, then even consider tanking. I prefer the arguments mentioned already about teams with multiple picks in successive years who are still at the bottom, it is a futile, disappointing exercise to lose lose lose. For three quarters, it was nice to see the potential our young fellas have. DAR is really starting to grow on me, he makes mistakes, but his composure is amazing. BS should let the kid play, but BS is like Hibbard to me, another enigma.
    I’m all in for the Laker FB&G. Play hard fellas, no matter what. If we don’t make any playoffs for several more years ( which I seriously doubt)’ I’ll still keep believin, still keep rootin, still keep watchin, just keep playin hard.

    • Busboys4me says

      They won’t tank but inconsistency is around the corner when Kobe returns. The rotation changes and that free flowing run and gun will be gone. Even Mitch alluded to it when he stated “we can’t do anything until Kobe leaves”. Truth.

  2. BigCitySid says

    – One question I poised early in the season “what happens when the Lakers finds out the team actually performs better w/o Kobe on the floor?” Looks like were going to find out.

  3. Curious says

    A surprising number of Lakers fans are content that the vets (Williams/Young/Bass/Hibbert), who have no future here, are helping the team accumulate meaningless wins. Note, Randle and Russell played 16 and 22 minutes respectively last night.

    Yet, the mere suggestion that the Lakers should trade the vets and play the kids — who’s performance will dictate the future of the franchise — is met with cries of indignation.

    Yes, trading the vets will mean more losses. However, there is upside to doing so:
    a) We’ll get to really see how the kids perform
    b) We might get a future/usable asset from the trades
    c) we’ll put ourselves in a position to keep your pick (which is an asset that can be kept or traded)

    This summer Hibbert will be gone (contract expires) and Bass will opt out of his. The FO will likely try to trade Wiliams and Young. Why is there such an uproar about moving these guys now? And don’t say because the youngsters need the vets to show them the ropes. The vets are helping the team to a .230 winning percentage. The kids can’t do much worse on their own. Plus, you’ll still have Kobe and Meta around.

  4. Fern says

    No matter, he is still going to play, and its not like we beat GS or the Cavs, of the 3 teams we have beaten in a row the Celtics was the best team and it took Kobe to put them away, the Sixers are a joke and the Suns are in disarray, i guess the dislike for Kobe makes people to see things, these 3 teams were beatable, the Lakers won that’s the most important thing…

    • Busboys4me says

      The Sixers are finding out who they are. They won again tonight. They are an athletic, young team that can be dangerous. Covington, Okafar, Noel and Ish aren’t that bad. A couple veterans and they can be a force in the East like Orlando.

  5. rr says

    – One question I poised early in the season “what happens when the Lakers finds out the team actually performs better w/o Kobe on the floor?” Looks like were going to find out.

    __________

    Couple of points:

    1. DS Tweeted this two days ago:

    Jan 2
    In the last 14 games, the Lakers’ OEff is 5.2 points better w/ Russell on the floor vs. when he sits. Only Laker better is Kobe (+5.5).

    2. As I said in the other thread, if you (or anyone else) allows yourself to get fixated on a narrative (Byron is dumb, Kobe is cancerous, the FO never does anything right) that gets in the way of being objective and seeing the big picture. The wins over the last two games came against the two worst teams in the NBA at the moment. PHX has internal issues, was on a B2B, just lost Bledsoe, and over the last two weeks has lost at home to Philly and gotten blown out by Sacramento and the Lakers. They are a mess. Last night was as much about them as it was about the Lakers, and was much more about them than it was about any one Laker.

    And I can apply to this myself: I have been very critical of the FO, but the Nance Jr. pick looks good right now. Over time, it may not prove to be a great move—depends on a lot of variables, like what happens with Looney and Hernangomez over time. But clearly the FO saw something in Nance Jr., and I give them props for that.

  6. Fern says

    Good post rr, numbers don’t lie and the Lakers beat 2 teams with a ton of issues at home without Kobe, so what’s the narrative? just a dislike…

  7. KevTheBold says

    @rr,

    Highly objective post, made so by including your own bias.
    Kudos !

    While we are giving them credit for Nance, we should include
    Clarkson, Randle, and DAR, as well, with others possibly on the horizon.

    Mind you, draft picks and loyalty (often misguided) are the only areas I find admirable at the moment.

    The remaining, I’m with you all the way.

  8. Craig W. says

    I second both Fern and rr

    We all bring our biases into any discussion. The problem here – sometimes – is that we are dealing with extremes, and that muddies the discussion considerably. It is better when we can examine a smaller situation and make specific, local comparisons.

    We played against probably the two worst teams in the NBA – at this specific time. We won both games – that’s good. Our young players played generally well – that’s also good. We built a humongous lead and lost most of it before the end of the game, where we improved a bit – this is a very good learning experience and should help development. We both won and showed some real problems that can be worked on.

    All that said, we are not a very good team, but we seem to be trending up.- indicating we may have made some good choices in our young players. Having veterans has also helped our young players deal with things like the loss of a large lead – so let’s not go the 76er way and ‘lose’ all of our veterans.

    We apparently have a core to build upon – the real question is how big is that core. This is – IMO – a better situation than exists with either the Suns or 76er’s, regardless how many draft choices we do or don’t have. How we move on from this is the important thing.

  9. 24hrx. says

    Lakers need to help Brooklyn win games, because Buck Foston, and Jack is out for the season.
    Roughly, send Hibbs, Sweet Lou, Swaggy, & Bass, for Joe Johnson & “change” (Hollis-Jefferson in the dream scenario.)
    Trade Machina: http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=zejpekn
    Waive Joe, sign & call-up Upshaw, and claim Christian Wood off waivers for the D-Fenders.
    Lakers need to get back to losing for this year.

    1. Huertas/Russell
    2. Mamba/Clarkson
    3. Peace/Randle
    4. Nance/Kelly
    5. Black/Upshaw

  11. Fern says

    The Lakers have done pretty good in the last two years with the Draft, what the Sixers have to shown for it after getting pick after pick after pick? Nothing, in 2 years we have 4 players maybe five, that could be vital pieces of the future, as far as im concerned we have a core, if we somehow get “lucky” and keep that pick, it could be moved for pieces that complement that core no a imaginary “savior” that some people expect here that would come in and miraculously make this team a contender. A veteran has a good game and some comments are “trade him” for what? a second round pick? more young guys, and then what you end up with? the Sixers, that’s the result, we need a veteran presence on this team. Remember all those picks the Suns had not long ago? How’s that working for them? As far as im concerned our foray into the Draft is done and we made the best of it. This team needs to win games and start improving now, not next season or the season after, i leave that the Sixers, we need to build around what we have in place…

  12. Robert says

    BCS: The question is poorly timed. Whether it was pre-season, or when the team was 0-4 without Kobe, or now that it is 2-4 without Kobe – the point is moot. The question should have been raised before Kobe was signed to a $48 million extension. Many of us questioned that, but to think that the Lakers are going to sign that contract and then sit Kobe so Lou Williams can be the man, well – I am not sure why you are asking that question (actually I am).
    Tanking: I do not care how people feel about tanking I just ask for consistency. If you want the tank then you should want guys like Lou off the roster. If you want the coach changed then why? More wins? What about the tank? If you want Byron to play the youngsters and not worry about wins – are you sure the FO is on that page?

  13. Keith says

    The FO has done a nice job on their draft selections. I like Clarkson, Randle, Russell and Nance. We don’t know their ceiling but that will come with time. But the FO has done a nice job. Which is why I don’t understand that so many folks are just fine with losing our pick this year. You’d think you’d want the FO to go get another chance to get a good young player.

    So many folks are saying that ‘we can’t trade the vets’, ‘we need the vets’, ‘the kids need the vets’, ‘they help the kids get over losing a big lead’. Goodness, you’d think Williams, Bass, Hibbert and Young were all hall of famers and not a hodgepodge of role players better suited to a contending team bench than one struggling to get out of being the 15th seed in the West.

    You all cling to this Lakers exceptionalism as if taking advantage of the rules is some great punishable offense. I tend to agree with Todd and Kevin from yesterday’s thread. Trading the vets is not tanking — its good business. We are short on talent. I don’t have confidence that Jim can attract an elite free agent and we have nothing to trade — all we have is the hope to keep our pick.

    We are a 15th seed on the heels of being a 14th seed which was on the heels of 14th seed. We need talent. We have four young players which are never on the court together so that tells me that we’ve got a lot of spots on our roster to upgrade. How are you going to do that?

    It strikes me that if you kiss your draft pick away this year chasing moral victories and you can’t attract good free agents plus you have nothing to trade — then you’re in a bind. Because you only have 4 young kids and seemingly only two of them can be on the floor together. How are you going to get better for next year?

    Bottom line: there is no upward trend that assures we get out of the 15th seed unless we only play a schedule with the two worst teams in the NBA on it. And that’s not going to happen.

    Trade some vets (they’re not all peaches). Keep the pick. We need the talent.

  14. AusPhil says

    Just on Hibbert, at the game I went to (v Bucks) he seemed to get along with his teammates well. Unsurprisingly he seemed closest to Kobe, and those 2 talked a LOT when on the bench together and during time outs.

  15. Mid-Wilshire says

    I almost hate to mention this because this will almost certainly get the tank-enthusiasts drooling at the mouth. But tonight, Brice Johnson, a 6-10, 230 PF/C for the Univ. of North Carolina had the following stat line:

    39 pts. (14-16 shooting)
    23 rebounds (7 off., 16 def.)
    1 assist
    3 steals
    3 blocks

    And he’s a senior. Just thought I’d mention it. Now you can put it out of your mind.

  17. Busboys4me says

    The Suns are a perfect example of tinkering too much with a good thing and breaking it. The three headed monster should never have been split up. All they needed to do was add Tyson Chandler. But they broke that up, let Gerald Green leave and fractured the locker room by trading one of the Morris brothers. Phoniex has always had a patience problem and again it bit them in the ass.

    I hope our letting Hill, Davis and Price walk doesn’t bite us. I would rather them still be here instead of Hibbert, Sacre and Hurt Us.

  18. BigCitySid says

    – Young players gain confidence w/ playing time & wins, regardless who it comes against. You guys continue to miss the point, not me. For those of you who want to see the last days of Kobe, fine. Let him play in the 1st 3 quarters, and let those who are possibly the future of the Lakers finish the game so this franchise can get a better idea of what these young men can do.

  19. Craig W. says

    BigCitySid,
    You know us, we know you. Our discussion isn’t about Kobe, but what is going on with the other players. We don’t need a constant reminder of how Kobe hurts this club – a number of us may disagree with you, but that isn’t going to change any organizational decisions. It is fun to discuss how players are developing – never mind Kobe’s situation/health.

  20. Vasheed says

    @ Fern,

    Well when we speak of trades on this forum there will always be an open ended answer as to for what as it is against this forum’s rules to discuss trade speculation that hasn’t had a credible news source. So the for what aspect is sort self-fulfilling.

    The Lakers have built in a number of redundancies. We have way too many PF’s so much that half don’t get to play and Bass fills in at Center. We could easily trade 1 or 2 and greatly benefit from it.

    We also have redundancies like Young and Williams who both provide offense in a bottle off the bench or as has been the case in the starting line up lately.

    We have a center in Hibbert whom I applaud for his positive presence and doing what was asked of him, guard the rim, hasn’t exactly solved the issues at center. I doubt the Lakers or anyone else is going to offer him a bigger long term contract next year so we’re not exactly benefiting by holding his rights. We gave up a 2nd round pick to try him out. If we could get something of value in a trade for him even if somehow it were just another 2nd round pick that would be something.

    The short of it is the Lakers have a number of redundancies, and contracts that don’t make sense heading into next year. The team could benefit from trading assets they can’t utilize to ones they can use. If they are willing to flip some of their younger players some of these acquisitions could be substantial. The as for what aspect as I said before we just cannot go into.

  21. Mid-Wilshire says

    Everyone talks about trading the vets as if that can be accomplished with a snap of the fingers.

    Not so. It’s simple economics. In order to sell something, you need a buyer. Do you really think there’s demand for such “assets” as Nick Young, Roy Hibbert, and Robert Sacre? Brandon Bass might be able to bring a 2nd round draft pick. But that’s about it. The others are seen as either limited or useless.

    The Lakers’ veterans are not in demand. It’s that simple. If no one wants them, there’s little that the Lakers can do but wait it out.

  22. Marques says

    I know B Scott does confusing things, but….if you like the young players and want them to succeed then he is doing the right thing. Randlea quotes show he still doesn’t get it, he thinks getting rebounds so he can push the rock counts as hustle and defense.

    Scott has to punish lack of effort as much as he can.

    Four young guys, all are horrible defenders and only Nance gives continous effort on that end. I don’t see how the answer is “let them play” .

    The games will get out of control too fast for them to learn anything except to get numbers.

    If they are indeed future starters, at least one has to become a defensive stopper, the other 3 need to be at least good team defenders.

  23. Anonymous says

    Isn’t the Hibbert 2nd Round pick going to end up being the 32nd selection in this year’s draft? That trade is looking to be a good one for Indiana and a bad one for the Lakers.

  24. pat oslon says

    Not really An, Roy has done as much or more than you could expect from an unknown commodity. Plus he comes with a huge expiring contract which is one of the main reasons we signed him in the first place.

  25. rr says

    You guys continue to miss the point, not me.
    —

    No. The main point in this case is that the Lakers didn’t beat Philly and Phoenix mostly because Kobe was out; they beat Philly and Phoenix mostly because Philly and Phoenix are terrible. That conversation has nothing to do with your pet rock idea of sitting Kobe in crunch time.
    In addition to your own very intense feelings about KB, this comes back to something I said weeks ago: fans obviously don’t want to watch a team go 8-27, but it is more tolerable for them if said team is coached by a youngish coach whom they like and the minutes are going to young players. That is what is bothering some people, so they take it out on Byron and Kobe.

  26. rr says

    Mid,
    I don’t think people are presuming that small trades of vet role players can be done simply and easily; I think they are just saying that they want such trades to happen.

    Byron/young guys: I don’t think we really can know for sure whether Byron is hurting the young guys with the usage patterns and the call-outs in the media. Personally, I wish he were doing some things differently, but it was known going in that he was old-school hard-nosed type, so either he should be canned for not changing, told to change, or the FO is OK with him doing things the way that anyone who knew anything about him would have expected him to.

  27. Fern says

    Mid gets it, and im more than aware about the redundancies this team have, and they can be exploited, but for example Bass score 10 points Young gets hot one game and the talk is “trade him” for what? a late second round pick? and what else? Lakers exceptionalism is thinking that we can trade those vets and we are going to get a honey pot of talent in return, we might get a late second round pick and some end of bench refuse, so where is the benefit of that? Im not opposed to trades as long they made sense and help the team, not trade because people here want the Lakers to finish 8-74, and again, i dont give a crap about the pick, if we get it fine if we don’t good, my hope is that we get away from having to resort to the damn draft again. If we finish in the lottery with the second worst record and end up with the 4th pick i will burst out laughin…

  28. Fern says

    anon, i rather have the 17 million that Hibbert contract is going to add in capspace than that pick…

  29. Rob says

    So do we have 4 future starters in Randle, Clarkson, Russel and Nance? How good are they really?

    As I see it we have three starters and one backup as Randle/Nance don’t seem to be complementary — just different strengths/weaknesses at the same position. Clarkson/Russell can play together but they would be more impactful if one or the other became lights out from beyond the arc.

    For me, we have a ways to go before we are truly moving forward. That’s why I’d like to keep the pick. I don’t think we have enough data to say we’ve already got the core and all we need to do is give them time to develop. We simply don’t know, yet, if Randle, Clarkson Russell and Nance are future stars. And to compete in true Lakers fashion we need at least two of them to be All Star or near All star level and the other two to be very good.

    Because of that uncertainty, I think we’re still in the talent acquisition phase and its silly in my mind to discount the absolute best way to acquire young, cost controlled talent is through the draft. I’m not advocating tanking, however, if the FO wants to keep the pick they have tools available to them to help guide the process.

  30. Clay Bertrand says

    I’ve decried Byron’s coaching and know he has to go AND WILL eventually. But NOT NOW so why GRIPE anymore about firing Byron now?

    I’d LOVE for the Lakers to Trade Lou, Nick, Sacre, Kelly and maybe even Hibbert but to echo MID WILSHIRE, Trades need TWO PARTIES!! Not only that, but ANY trades for these guys are going to have to include SALARY coming back in the form of someone else’s GARBAGE player(s). Its especially the case if Hibbert were to ever be moved (which is why he wont be). So why GRIPE anymore about trades?

    To paraphrase the Manager in Major League, “This is a big FECES SANDWICH and we all have to take a bite…” UNTIL KOBE LEAVES. Even Mitch says the same……..

    IMO the ONLY focus should be on developing the young guys and letting them play through their growing pains while also allowing us to retain our pick AND BEAT THE CELTICS TWICE. That’s it. Byron embarrasingly trying to “WIN GAMES” as his stated FIRST PRIORITY is what irritates me the most. But again, now is not the time.

    ***IF after the season, Mitch somehow says they’ve decided to let Byron have the chance to COACH without Kobe there or he is staying on supported by some other lame reasoning, THEN THAT’LL be the time for pitchforks and torches….

  31. Mid-Wilshire says

    Rob,

    You’re correct. We’re still in talent acquisition mode. Furthermore, we may be in talent acquisition mode for another two years.

    The problem is that we could finish dead last in the NBA in terms of won-loss record and still not retain our pick. That could easily happen. There’s no guarantee when it comes to ping pong balls. Lady Luck can be a cruel mistress.

    For that reason, lusting after draft position could very well be fool’s gold. There may be no there there.

    But…there are other ways of acquiring talent. Free agency is one. Making excellent trades (which is part of the Lakers’ tradition) is yet another. Teams that have been successful such as the Miami Heat, the Boston Celtics when Garnett and Pierce were in their prime, and the Lakers themselves have used a variety of methods, not just one. If you choose just one method (as Philly has with the draft), then you limit yourself unnecessarily.

    So, there’s more than one way to skin the cat. The draft is one avenue. And it may not necessarily be ideal (especially when we could loose our pick even if we were to finish in the bottom 3).

  32. Anonymous says

    anon, i rather have the 17 million that Hibbert contract is going to add in capspace than that pick…
    __

    The Lakers aren’t freeing up anything. They already had the cap space when they traded the 2nd round pick for Hibbert.

    All part of Jim’s ‘we’ve turned the corner’ dream. That’s why having an FO with a better understanding of where you are in relation to where you want to go is essential. Can’t craft the right course if you don’t really know where you are.

    I’d honestly take the pick over Hibbert’s contributions. Black could put up Hibbert’s numbers for 1/16 the price.

  33. Vasheed says

    I’m saying there are lots of trade options. They could do a rather unsexy trade of veteran roleplayer for veteran roleplayer who fits better. They can try to acquire picks. That could make a package deal. And the thing about it is that it makes so much sense to at least make some sort of trade because the Lakers built into their roster LOTS of redundancy. Over simplification of trade scenarios leads to a specious argument that it is not a viable method to acquire talent.

    I’m also not exactly sold on cap space. I’m sure someone will take their money but who? The Lakers have tried that every year for like the last 3 years. The last time they signed a big name it was Shaq. I see trades as a a legitimate alternative to acquiring talent which has worked in years past.

  34. KevTheBold says

    @ Keith “You all cling to this Lakers exceptionalism as if taking advantage of the rules is some great punishable offense. I tend to agree with Todd and Kevin from yesterday’s thread. Trading the vets is not tanking — its good business. We are short on talent. I don’t have confidence that Jim can attract an elite free agent and we have nothing to trade — all we have is the hope to keep our pick.

    It strikes me that if you kiss your draft pick away this year chasing moral victories and you can’t attract good free agents plus you have nothing to trade — then you’re in a bind. Because you only have 4 young kids and seemingly only two of them can be on the floor together. How are you going to get better for next year?”
    ————————–

    Keith, the Lakers ARE, exceptional; our brand is the most recognized in all of sports and our history is unmatched in the NBA.

    Our brand is our bank vault, our shield, our armor, and most important, our future.

    Keeping our brand has less to do with win/loss record during rebuild seasons, than HOW, we go about the process.

    We cannot simply let go and follow Philly down the rabbit hole.
    Philly was so rotten that their cancer was seeping into the NBA as a whole, thus other team owners demanded the NBA step in make changes to their management, and process.

    What free agent would like to go to a brand like Philly?

    We need our respectability, and our players need their self respect, which means that we must stand behind them and trust in their potential.

    Nothing could be more damaging than placing the label of ‘insufficient’ on their backs, which a deliberate tank accomplishes in neon.

    That said, I don’t believe that anyone here said that we simply kiss off our draft pick, only that the chances are not in our favor, thus why chase a lotto ball, at the expense of our brand and our current core’s self respect?

    I for one am all for placing up our redundant vets for trades, and playing our core, however even that does not guarantee a draft pick because the fact is that our core is loaded with potential and talent, and will win some games on good days.

    Lastly with the Nets and Suns losing key players to injury, that lotto ball became much more slippery.

  35. Rob says

    Free agency is one. Making excellent trades (which is part of the Lakers’ tradition) is yet another.
    __

    Free agency isn’t a real option until the summer of 2017. The kids have questions to answer, the team needs a relevant new coach and the FO has to be able to articulate a vision in order to attract an elite free agent.

    Trades take assets. If you want a really good player in their prime then you’ll have to give up young talent and or picks. We have neither to spare.

    I made my comment in the here and now. If you want to get better this summer then, even with the risks, the draft pick is the best path before us. If we are content to rebuild slowly then yes let’s wait for the team to be attractive for elite free agents and wait for there to be picks/young talent to trade. My gut says that path is 3 plus years long.

  36. Darius Soriano says

    RE the Lakers’ 2nd round pick from the Hibbert trade – here is what is actually owed:

    2019 second round draft pick to Cleveland
    Cleveland will receive the less favorable of the L.A. Lakers’ 2019 2nd round pick (via Indiana) and Minnesota’s 2019 2nd round pick and Portland will receive the more favorable of these two picks (via Cleveland) [Cleveland-Minnesota, 6/25/2015; Indiana-L.A. Lakers, 7/9/2015; Cleveland-Indiana, 7/23/2015; Cleveland-Portland, 7/27/2015]; this pick conveyance is the same as the one described in “2019 second round draft pick from Minnesota” on Cleveland Credits

  37. Darius Soriano says

    In other words, no, the pick the Lakers gave up for Hibbert isn’t next year’s 2nd round pick which will be high. And, they won’t surrender it until 2019. So, I don’t know why anyone is really focusing on that pick now. Not to say it won’t have value, but we’re 3 years away from that point and speculating on how much value it may/may not have seems pretty pointless.

  38. Mid-Wilshire says

    “Free agency isn’t a real option until the summer of 2017.”
    __________________________

    I think that’s very much an open question. For one thing, we have another 47 games to be played in this season. Who’s to say how the kids will perform in those games? Remember Jordan Clarkson’s emergence in the 2nd half of last season? Anything could happen.

    I, for one, think that the Lakers have a very interesting and appealing core, much more so than last year. A top FA or 2 could actually look at that and say, “Sure. I’d love to play with those guys.”

    It could happen.

    But to say that the Lakers will not be a target for FAs until 2017 is presumptuous. At this point, we really don’t know, especially with another 47 games to be played.

    There’s a lot of basketball to played this season. Let’s see what happens. Let’s give it a chance.

  39. Keith says

    Trading the vets does not mean the Lakers are following Philly down the Rabbit hole. Geesh – Not one poster that has advocated trading the vets has said, ‘We need to follow the 76ers lead.”

    Its only FO supporters that push back with that argument. The Lakers are like a baseball team that thought they were going to compete. In order to do so they acquired a number of win now players to help them. Then come July it turns out the team is not competing. Its not a surprise that these win now players are traded for assets that may help in the future. No one looks at the GM and says your tanking don’t trade away those players.

    This argument about how fragile our core is really gets me. The arguments of: ‘Oh my, without the vets the core’s self respect will be damaged.’ or ‘What will they do when they blow a big lead?’ are just silly.

    Who did we draft — a bunch of 3rd graders? My bet is that they would prefer to play and develop. You’ve got Kobe and MWP on the roster to help dry their tears when their feelings are hurt. Plus your not going to trade every vet — not all of them have value.

    Yes, keeping the pick comes down to lottery balls. I’d rather have that chance than not by getting 5 – 10 extra meaningless wins at the hands of players that won’t be on the team next year.

    Note: The Jim Buss FO is damaging the Lakers brand more than anything.

  40. Craig W. says

    Hibbert’s salary impacts the team this year, not in the future. There were two reasons for taking on Hibbert: 1) we needed a defensive center and 2) we needed some salary ballast so that we wouldn’t have any possibility of falling below the minimum salary line.

    As Darius said, the pick isn’t until 2019 and the salary was desired this year. How is any of this a problem the front office didn’t foresee?

    This sounds like carping to complain or simply not understanding NBA rules.

  42. rr says

    Craig,
    Like I have said, the salary floor is irrelevant. All that happens if a team is below it at the end of the year is that the money gets distributed among the guys who were on the team, so if the FO is actually making moves specifically to avoid falling below the salary floor before the season starts (which would have been hard to do anyway—Kobe is making 25M) then that is a mistake.

    The FO probably picked up Hibbert because he fit the multiple FO agendas, in that they saw him as a guy who could help them compete this year and he still leaves them free to chase FAs next summer since there is only one year on his deal. Plus there is possible tactical value in his expiring deal.
    —-
    As to the value of the pick, yes, it is just a second-rounder, and no, it is not due until a few years down the road. But:
    a) Indiana really wanted to dump Hibbert.
    b) The Lakers have already traded away a lot of picks and while one second-rounder might not matter, that is sort of like saying you don’t really any one particular pint of blood. You should keep picks if you can.

  43. Todd says

    we needed some salary ballast so that we wouldn’t have any possibility of falling below the minimum salary line.
    __

    There is no penalty for falling below the salary line. The ‘punishment’ for missing the minimum salary threshold is merely that you get charged up to the amount of it anyway. That’s it. The excess is divided up amongst the players on the roster at a percentage determined by the NBA Player’s Association, and that’s all that happens. That’s not a punishment at all. That’s not even really a penalty. And thus, going over it for the sake of going over it would be meaningless.

    Regarding Hibbert. I wasn’t supportive of the move — more in the can’t teach an old dog new tricks vein than anything. He hadn’t played well in a few years. Bt I suppose the FO hoped he found his game which might make him valuable to the Lakers or attractive as a trade chip. As moves go it wasn’t a bad gamble.

  44. Anonymous says

    Man, when I read some of this stuff I’m happy that the Lakers have a professional FO and not just a bunch of amateurs who think they understand how the NBA works. It doesn’t even need to be a particularly good FO, but at least they’re not as incompetent as some of the stuff that gets repeated here again and again.

    It would take too much time to reply to everything but what stands out is that many armchair GMs seem to think they can control all sorts of things that RL GM can’t control. They think

    – more ping pong balls will surely lead to a better pick,
    – the team with the most ping pong balls will get the best player,
    – they can lose every game this season, but next season the same young players will suddenly know how to win games,
    – young players don’t need vets who they can learn the game from,
    – contracts don’t involve negotiations, so every contract could be a year shorter,
    – every player that they are interested in would want to join their team,
    – FAs will love to join their team even if it doesn’t have any vets,
    – cap room means nothing,
    – Upshaw will surely be the next Whiteside,
    – rebuilds happen through the lottery, trades and FA signings mean nothing,
    – if Aldridge is good enough for the Spurs he’s not good enough for them because acquiring one of the best players at his position as an asset means nothing. They couldn’t possibly find other pieces to build around him or trade him for other valuable pieces. Assets just don’t mean anything,
    – etc. etc.

    But I guess I’m gonna be labeled a “FO apologist” now, which effectively ends the discussion.

  45. Fern says

    So now the narrative is ” the Lakers traded for Hibbert and his 17 million expiring deal for a 2nd round pick, what the FO was thinking” really, seriously? thats how far the freaking nitpicking has gone? Without Hibbert salary coming off the books, the Lakers would not had near the 60+ million they will have this summer, is that so hard to understand? And as Darius said, it’s a freaking 2019, second round pick, I didn’t knew that, so it tells you how desperate the Pacers wanted to get rid of him, i always knew he was a overpaid bum, his value is how much he will free up in cap next summer and we are going to get all that space for peanuts , with his money we could get 3 good role players, and thats not even counting Kobe’s gargantuan contract coming off the books, I don’t know where people keep thinking that we are going to rebuild thru the Draft entirely, and now? i really REALLY hope we lose that pick this summer, the Lakers don’t need to Draft a transcendent player, because thats what fools here want, what we need is to spend all that cap space wisely in players that complement what we have and build a team, not hoping for a new Magic or Kobe to save us.

  46. KevTheBold says

    @Keith, for the record, I too want the redundant vets traded.

    However this other: “Not one poster that has advocated trading the vets has said, ‘We need to follow the 76ers lead.” I don’t have confidence that Jim can attract an elite free agent and we have nothing to trade — all we have is the hope to keep our pick.”

    Not only is that statement conflicting, no one has to explicitly state the obvious. Per your words: “You all cling to this Lakers exceptionalism as if taking advantage of the rules is some great punishable offense.” Which would, if any logic is to be found there, equate to Tanking.

    Well, Philly’s IS taking advantage of the rules, and you obviously want us to follow along, and do the same.

    Lastly, who is it that said: ‘Oh my, without the vets the core’s self respect will be damaged.’ ?

    If you going to retort, please do so with the actual opinions, and who said them at hand, otherwise it leaves you to twist the questions or statements, and mislead those who are too busy to find the truth for themselves.

  47. KevTheBold says

    @Anonymous – Though I have less respect for anonymous posts:

    Your’s did contain some interesting notes:

    Agree totally with you taking issue with the following:

    – they can lose every game this season, but next season the same young players will suddenly know how to win games,
    – young players don’t need vets who they can learn the game from,
    – contracts don’t involve negotiations, so every contract could be a year shorter,
    – every player that they are interested in would want to join their team,
    – FAs will love to join their team even if it doesn’t have any vets,
    – cap room means nothing,

    The questionable:
    – Upshaw will surely be the next Whiteside,

    {Who knows, but enough potential is there not to dismiss the possibility out of hand.}

    The Wrong Imo:

    – rebuilds happen through the lottery, trades and FA signings mean nothing,

    {Unless I’m mistaken, the only free agent the Laker ever snagged was Shaq. Can you name another?}

    The issue for me is Not that free agents are impossible to sign, but the fact that it rarely happens that a team signs one which makes the difference in championships.

    The Heat is a lone exception with Lebron, as the Lakers, Spurs, Warriors, Celtics, all did it with not just with drafts and trades, but keeping their core, trusting in them, training them, and building around them.

    Premier FA’s are in most cases a distraction, or worse cap space, attention, and ball hogging stones, that can pull a team under.

  48. Clay Bertrand says

    Fern, the Lakers DO NEED the LUCK of retaining their pick THIS YEAR to draft the most talented young player they can be it Simmons, or Ingram or FILL IN THE BLANK. IF we can draft a transcendent player, GREAT!! How bout just a PRETTY GOOD player like an Eddie Jones caliber?? That’d be great as well. We need talent/assets. Period.

    MY REASONING: THIS year is the ONLY year they are likely to be THIS bad and it would be helpful if they could take advantage. They may not make the playoffs again next year or even the year after, but they won’t be BOTTOM 3. Therefore IMO, if we are going to be THIS BAD, we need the LUCK…..We need to be able to pick as high as we can THIS YEAR. If we lose the pick this year, we keep our pick next year (or we COULD trade the PLAYER we draft) under the “Stepien Rule” but our pick next year WON’T LIKELY BE AS GOOD as our record improves and other teams fall into tank mode thus pushing our pick further down in the draft order..

    Yes it is a total LUCK thing to a great degree. BUT if we keep our pick this year, its TOP 3. If we lose it and therefore must keep our pick under the Stepian Rule NEXT YEAR, I would be willing to bet it WON’T BE TOP 3. It will be later/lower.

    I see this year as the last real year to CASH IN on how bad we are because going forward, I see us improving with BETTER COACHING, MATURING PLAYERS (age-wise and experience wise), FA ADDITIONS, and the natural decline of some of the teams that are currently better than us. If we are LUCKY (in more ways than one) this will be the last year we are looking at the TOP of the lottery and wishing!!

    But as it is now, I’m wishing for the highest pick we can get THIS YEAR.

  49. rr says

    Fern,
    Cap space will probably help the Lakers at some point, but if fans of any franchise should understand the value of superstars, those fans are Lakers fans. The main thing the Lakers need is high-end talent. People who want to keep the pick simply think the pick is the best way to get that. Also, as noted, about 20 teams will have cap space next year, and having more may not really be an advantage.

  50. rr says

    Premier FA’s are in most cases a distraction, or worse cap space, attention, and ball hogging stones, that can pull a team under.
    —

    I guess you are thinking of Howard, or maybe Monroe. But the weakness of your argument aside, the fact is that most max and near-max FAs don’t change teams through FA. Howard did, because he didn’t like Kobe, Buss, and D’Antoni, and because he wanted to play on a better team. James and Bosh did, but that was an aberration, and then later James went back to the team that drafted him while Bosh stayed in Miami. Aldridge moved, but that worked mostly because SA is a unique org and Duncan was willing to take a huge pay cut. Monroe made an unusual decision as well, playing on a one-year for 5.5M so he could hit UFA in his prime.

    But those kinds of guys mostly have been getting traded the year before they hit FA and/or staying where they are–and that has been one of the big problems with Jim’s ideas on the subject, as we have seen. Also, as I and others have explained, people who are down on the idea of building the roster through free agency should be calling out the FO, not other fans. Jim said publicly that he wanted to sign two max FAs and has been pursuing roster-building strategies in accordance with that.

  51. rr says

    But I guess I’m gonna be labeled a “FO apologist” now, which effectively ends the discussion.
    —

    Nah. What ends the discussion is that your post is a semi-coherent, anti-fan rant. It’s cool if you don’t like reading what random fans have to say, but if that is the case then you should just hang out at big media sites and at the Lakers official site and let the professionals fill you in on what the Lakers are doing.

  52. Fern says

    Maybe that future high end superstar is already in the roster, we have 4 maybe 5 pretty good players thru the Draft the last 2 summers, and we got a number #2 pick( teams would kill to have the chance to re-do the Draft and draft as well as we did) and i was on board with that.All that BS about “tracendent player” i heard it all last season, last season was a “Draft class for the ages”now it’s this season. We would look pretty stupid if we get the fourth pick after all the losing and what that means? back to the drawing board. This time we have assets in place, we can’t discount the Draft but it’s foolish to be counting on the Draft as a cure all solution, we need to move fwd with what we have, all this “trancendent player” BS is a pipe dream, like i said a thousand times already, we have a young core in place and tons of money and a wide open Laker team, i don’t even want to spend in a max contract we can build around what we have if we crap out in the Draft…

  53. KevTheBold says

    @rr,

    My wording was “Premier” free agents, the likes of Howard, Monroe or even Aldridge are not.
    More like Lebron, Curry, KD, RW.

    As for the ‘weakness’ in my argument, It was my exact contention that most top agents Do Not leave their teams.

    Why do people read to their assumptions versus the print that’s actually there?

    Speaking of Howard, imo, he left because his reflection here showed a big body with a small heart.

  54. Fern says

    rr you can’t have Superstar without the cap space to sign him, or did we forget how this team was in a cap straitjacket and we could not do anything because of that? thats one of the main reasons the Lakers went down the toilet, like i been saying we dont need to blow our load in a superstar right away, we need to build this team and now we can…

  55. rr says

    Fern,

    It is very simple: a lot of people think Ben Simmons is going to be a generational talent, and the worse the Lakers’ record is, the better their chances are of getting him.

    As to the cap space issue, the Lakers have had some cap space the last couple of years, and to the degree that they haven’t, look no further than Kobe’s extension. As I said at the time, giving KB that kind of money was incompatible with chasing FAs, since given how emaciated the talent base has been, the Lakers would have needed to sign two or three at the same time and the size of KB’s deal precluded that.

    You seem to be advocating spending money on second and third-tier guys. I don’t have a problem with that, but doing that is not exclusive of hoping that the Lakers keep the draft pick.

  56. Clay Bertrand says

    Fern, I’m totally with you (and a number of others) and I like our young core……Could be one of them or a couple really become superstars. I’m just HELL BENT on us being able to keep our pick because its our best shot at a decent asset this year. I don’t see us being in this position perpetually like the Clippers were or the Kings or any of the perennial LOSERS of the league. That said, obviously it isn’t within our power to ensure we keep the pick.

    AND I totally agree with your assertion that the draft tends to be overhyped year after year with pundits labeling every top guy the next big thing or the next Lebron or Kobe etc. I am personally not IN LOVE with any of the players in any of these classes. No Savior is coming….

    My point is that the draft is the most certain way of us being able to benefit from being so bad if we can be so fortunate to keep the pick. The better FAs will not find a loser very appealing unless its just an LA guy looking to come home (like Brandon Jennings–YIKES! or DeRozan). A Draftee has no choice who he goes to these days. Trades will require parting with VALUE these days.

    Of the three ways to get players (Free Agency, Trade Possibilities, and the Draft), A TOP Draft 3 pick is really our best NEW PLAYER option because we don’t give anything up. Just so long as we don’t draft the next Darko……….

  57. Anonymous says

    Nah. What ends the discussion is that your post is a semi-coherent, anti-fan rant. It’s cool if you don’t like reading what random fans have to say, but if that is the case then you should just hang out at big media sites and at the Lakers official site and let the professionals fill you in on what the Lakers are doing.
    _________
    I don’t mind fans discussing their team. But people can start taking their expertise a little too seriously and things can take on an unhealthy dynamic. That’s where a little sarcasm may help get a point across.

    This was not a post for people who venture an opinion on this or that specific point. It’s more about people who keep talking for months about how the FO needs to be replaced and the best suggestion they come up with themselves is to trade all vets for picks (most likely late first and early second rounders). I would say they can’t complain about a little sarcasm.

  58. Anonymous says

    As for the ‘weakness’ in my argument, It was my exact contention that most top agents Do Not leave their teams.
    _________
    IMO it’s good enough if someone like Aldridge leaves his team for another. Of course you need to be able to offer a good situation. Which is why rebuilding only through free agency alone doesn’t work, especially if your roster is already depleted. But if you have a strong core and some serviceable vets on reasonable contracts I don’t see why it should be discarded out of hand as a possible piece of the puzzle. Of course it’s impossible if you have spent all your cap room on mediocre players. That’s why Pelton pointed out in one of the articles that were quoted here that it is a good thing the Lakers haven’t done that.

  59. rr says

    Kev–

    Then you could have clarified what you meant by “premier.” Also, note that I was guessing who you meant, since you didn’t. But even so, you said that such players are ball-hogging stones, etc. I don’t think that describes LeBron James very well.