[:: LAKERS 2014 THREAD | POLL: Who Should Coach Next Year? ::]

[CP1708]

The last one I posted was similar to the Celtics mold of 2007-08, only difference is young upside + ages.

Boston in 2007 had loaded up on a wealth of young pieces.

Rondo
Perkins
Jefferson
Tony Allen
Powe
Telfair
Delonte West
Gerald Green

Pierce was just 29.

Traded Al Jeff for Garnett who was 31
Traded #5 pick for Ray Allen who was 32

But they still had a draft pick to add another young piece, which ended up being Baby Davis.

Then they added Cassell, PJ Brown, Eddie House, and James Posey thru vet buyouts, mid levels, etc.

Came out with the team that won the title,

Rondo
Allen
Pierce
Garnett
Perk

Cassell
Allen
Posey
Brown
Davis
Powe
House


We have 37 year old Kobe with a trillion miles and a crippling contract, an even more broken Nash, just the 1 top 5 pick, and no Rondo type player in place that is good enough to become a franchise player himself.

And I won’t even get into the fact that they won their title in 08 while two of our key starters were out with injury (Bynum-Ariza) A full squad might have beaten that 08 Boston team, and changed their fortunes completely.

We can probably match the young spare parts portion of the equation, but like I said, no Pierce in his prime, and no Rondo upside as well as no Davis extra pick to add as backup. (and as many of you would like to argue, no Doc Rivers) (Doc had Thibbs as his coordinator as well, should be noted)

 

[MVP]

Do you know that for sure though? Miami could implode and LBJ leave...does that change everything? Kobe could return to form (unlikely) but it could happen and him+Melo and Love could absolutely contend in the West. There's just too many moving parts with other teams to say that everything will remain status quo with everyone else.

Nobody saw Harden getting traded from sure fire every year Finals pick OKC. Or Harrison Barnes regressing from upstart GS and them taking a step back after losing Jarrett Jack. Or PHX coming out of nowhere. The Clippers until proven otherwise ate still the Clippers.

The CBA is 2 years old, yes. But who has had as much financial flexibility that we have even with Kobe's contract over the next two years as we do. Money has never been an issue with the Lakers, especially with the new TV deal they got. Now the front office regime is different and has to prove itself, but that's an entirely different issue. They didn't really seem to operate any differently in regards to the new CBA when they gave Kobe 48 mil now did they?

We can throw out infinite scenarios of what should happen, but it won't mean a damn thing. I want Nash to retire, get Lebron this summer, Love next and KD in 2016 after Kobe retires, but doesn't mean it's going to happen. So no need to stress over it, I'll still be a fan regardless.

 

[CP1708]

You need help knowing if Kobe-Melo-Love would win a title?

You know that trio wouldn't cut it. You know that quite well.

Absolutely everything goes out window if Bron calls us, but do you expect that? Me neither.

And Barnes regressing, Suns playing well, etc means zero to winning a title. We don't want to be good man, we want Titles.

If I just want to improve the Lakers, we could do that with our eyes closed and no draft picks.
If we want a Title(s) it takes much, much more.

You know that.

 

[CP1708]

Why does "money means nothing to the Lakers" and "new TV deal" keep getting thrown at me?

Those two phrases have a response, a sturdy one in fact.

C. B. A.

We are the Lakers, money is no object, and TV deal does not change the CBA restrictions.

Might help ease the pain, sure, but does not circumvent. It's quite real.

 

[MVP]

If they're theoretically close to title contention, money and signing those necessary final pieces to the puzzle won't be a deterrent and the penalties that may result from said moves won't scare them from making those decisions like other teams.

The CBA decreased length of player contracts and increased penalties of teams who are over the tax at a basic level among other things (exemptions). The cap itself wasn't effected as much, the penalization for going over said cap is much more severe though.

 

[senorroboto2k5]

The same basic rules are in place though. The Lakers won't be scared to add a final piece of the puzzle even with all the new penalties, but they're still bound by the same rules as the cheap-*** Phoenix Suns: you can only go over the cap with MLEs, minimum contracts, and to re-sign your own players for which you have Bird Rights.

The Nets, for example, were in position to add another piece (Jordan Hill) because they had a trade exception, ie existing space that they could absorb him into. Not because they were simply willing to spend.

 

[MVP]

I know we lost the bi annual exemption all together...so no more Karl Malone type signings. But I think it's nonsensical to think they won't be a tax team again or go after big time FAs and pay top dollar like they've always done. It was going to happen had Dwight stayed. Didn't we have a trade exemption for Lamar we never used? Outside of the MLE I don't see any deterrent from the Lakers doing what they've done. I'll actually have to see them do it to believe it.

 

[senorroboto2k5]

No doubt. But there are only so many ways to get there.

The Lakers would've remained a luxury tax team with Dwight because they had his Bird Rights.

If there were some other star on the market last summer, the Lakers couldn't have signed that guy with Dwight's money when he left. Because they wouldn't have had his Bird Rights - they only had Dwight's.

Again, that's why the lottery pick this year is so valuable. He's on a cheap contract, allowing the Lakers to build the rest of the team up with their cap space as if he's almost not there money-wise. Then in a couple of years, he can sign his extension even though the team is capped out, far above the cap line. Creating more room and spending - something not possible if the guy is traded away.

 

[MVP]

Yea I understand that, that draft pick could just as easily not end up being worth an extension. It is nice to have the option though, in case it does turn out to be a decent player to star. I'm just in such a cynical mode with this team expecting the worst of everybody. My mantra will continue to be Wiggins, Exum, Embiid, or Parker...keep it. If not, trade it for a really good player; that 3-4 million that rookie is making could be used elsewhere.

 

[kb8sandiego]

I'm just really disappointed the Lakers won last night.

 

[CP1708]

If not, trade it for a really good player.

Ok, but again, Randle for 20 mil over 4 years, or Love for 90 mil over 4 years? Randle being 19 and still developing, Love being 26 going on 27 and limiting our next moves?

Obviously Love is the better player, but who would be more beneficial to the Lakers, at this moment?

 

[senorroboto2k5]

Yea I understand that, that draft pick could just as easily not end up being worth an extension. It is nice to have the option though, in case it does turn out to be a decent player to star. I'm just in such a cynical mode with this team expecting the worst of everybody. My mantra will continue to be Wiggins, Exum, Embiid, or Parker...keep it. If not, trade it for a really good player.

Definitely. But if the Lakers are capped out and the guy is a bust, they can't offer that money to just anyone else. The rookie deal gives the Lakers an option to spend/build the team/get over the cap that they really can't get anywhere else. So it's a really good option to have.

Unless they're willing to extend guys they got on one-year deals, which is unlikely.

 

[had pants]

Report: Nick Young's house robbed during Lakers game

TMZ reports that Lakers star Nick Young had his house robbed... while he was at Staples Center playing in a win over the Magic.

Law enforcement confirms ... cops are investigating at the home Nick is renting in L.A. Sources tell us ... Nick came home after defeating the Orlando Magic at Staples Center around 11pm and noticed an upstairs window was broken. We're told the scumbag or scumbags ransacked the master bedroom -- taking several expensive items ... including Louboutin shoes, jewelry, clothes, Louis Vuitton luggage and more.

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/eye-on...t-nick-youngs-house-robbed-during-lakers-game

 

[lovehateself]

 

they didnt take iggy or his "$6000 Yeezys" ? 

inside job..."upstairs window" 

 

[sea manup]

 

TMZ reports that Lakers star Nick Young had his house robbed... while he was at Staples Center playing in a win over the Magic.
 

 

[MVP]

Ok, but again, Randle for 20 mil over 4 years, or Love for 90 mil over 4 years? Randle being 19 and still developing, Love being 26 going on 27 and limiting our next moves?

Obviously Love is the better player, but who would be more beneficial to the Lakers, at this moment?

Ummm...even if we keep Randle and Love comes to us in free agency, Love still gets that money and takes up space on the cap.

I don't see outside of a years time what's the difference unless we suck really bad again next year getting another top 5 pick then sure. We'll have two hopefully decent picks + Love and the last year of Bean's deal. Still not at chip level.

What is Love's salary assuming he signs as free agent rather than resigned if traded to us? I don't think LA will use the 5 yr max on him but throw that in as well. All I know is in 2015 if he makes it that far, the Knicks will have much more to work with than we will in cap space (maybe unless Melo resigns) and cache in Phil, assuming we've been sucking for 3 years at that point.

 

[grandtheftbike]

Imagine Mitch representing the Lakers in the draft swagged out in swaggy Ps gear

basketball reasons they say
got our lists of draft prospects in this LV bag they say

 

[senorroboto2k5]

Ok, but again, Randle for 20 mil over 4 years, or Love for 90 mil over 4 years? Randle being 19 and still developing, Love being 26 going on 27 and limiting our next moves?

Obviously Love is the better player, but who would be more beneficial to the Lakers, at this moment?

Ummm...even if we keep Randle and Love comes to us in free agency, Love still gets that money and takes up space on the cap.

I don't see outside of a years time what's the difference unless we suck really bad again next year getting another top 5 pick then sure. We'll have two hopefully decent picks + Love and the last year of Bean's deal. Still not at chip level.

What is Love's salary assuming he signs as free agent rather than resigned if traded to us. I don't think LA will use the 5 yr max on him but throw that in as well. All I know is in 2015 if he makes it that far. The Knicks will have much more to work with than we will.

In that situation Love would still take up the space, but Randle (or whoever else) would be in the back pocket to sign above the cap.

If he outright signed as a FA I think the safe assumption is max money. He can probably take less but given that it would be a bidding war, assume max.

 

[senorroboto2k5]

Imagine Mitch representing the Lakers in the draft swagged out in swaggy Ps gear

basketball reasons they say
got our lists of draft prospects in this LV bag they say

Is it gonna be Mitch or Jeannie "I'm the Boss" Buss?

 

[mrdieselfuel09]

Swaggy P about to leave the Lakers now since someone robbed him.



Shawne Williams..

 

[MVP]

I was just wondering what the starting number was to Love in 2015 as a FA vs the max as a traded player (similar to what Dwight would have gotten had he stayed). Is it a significant difference as far as ability to sign others in 2015 (Rondo, Marc, LMA) or KD in 2016?

I understand Randle would be in the back pocket, but if he's not going to develop for until 3-4 years down the road, that would waste at least a couple of Love + whoever's time together and that 3-4 mil could be used elsewhere to sign pieces that would put us closer to contention than on a raw rookie, that's all I'm saying. It's all good if he turns out to be a stud and difference maker, but if not, it'll be tough to swallow. I'm just not high on Randle/Smart at all and for us to settle for him when we could in theory maybe land a top 8 player in the league right now would be tough to take.

 

[grandtheftbike]

Imagine Mitch representing the Lakers in the draft swagged out in swaggy Ps gear

basketball reasons they say
got our lists of draft prospects in this LV bag they say

Is it gonna be Mitch or Jeannie "I'm the Boss" Buss?

probably thinking either/or. can't picture Jim doing it

unless they hire the kansas mascot to test silvers loyalty to the lakers

 

[essential1]

Starting number is always the same. Raises and years are what differs from current team and new team.

 

[CP1708]

I was just wondering what the starting number was to Love in 2015 as a FA vs the max as a traded player (similar to what Dwight would have gotten had he stayed). Is it a significant difference as far as ability to sign others in 2015 (Rondo, Marc, LMA) or KD in 2016?

I understand Randle would be in the back pocket, but if he's not going to develop for until 3-4 years down the road, that would waste at least a couple of Love + whoever's time together and that 3-4 mil could be used elsewhere to sign pieces that would put us closer to contention than on a raw rookie, that's all I'm saying. It's all good if he turns out to be a stud and difference maker, but if not, it'll be tough to swallow. I'm just not high on Randle/Smart at all and for us to settle for him when we could in theory maybe land a top 8 player in the league right now would be tough to take.

Max is a max. Difference is length. Like Dwight could sign with us for 5, but with Houston for only 4.

Love will be north of 16+ at minimum, Dwight got 20 to start, so somewhere in there is the starting point.

 

[pmatic]

This seems relevant:


[/video[]