Free Agency Thread

[J-ALL-DAY]

47 minutes ago, 11sanchez11 said:

Yes. You are probably the only person I've seen suggest he play PF. 

I think he could play PF like Horford can. But now he will have to primarily be a C with this team. How good of a rebounder is Carter Jr? Lauri isn't bad in that area but Parker has never been a plus rebounder. 

 

[CWood21]

3 hours ago, BAConrad said:

And I still find it hilarious that people love to praise the Lakers and Magic and company simply because they signed Lebron. And literally the only reason they got him is their location and their history, even though they havent been relevant since like 2010. In the past few drafts they have done pretty damn badly.  The guys they took at 7 and 2 in 2014 and 2015 (Randle and Russell) were both terrible. Ingram was the one pick that you could make a case for as one that was a smart one by them, as opposed to an obvious one or something. Lonzo, their 2nd overall pick a year ago who went from getting ready to be the face and identity of the team, to basically just being dumped to the trash the moment Lebron signed. Anyone remember the Lee Jenkins article when Lebron signed with CLE and he notably left Wiggins out of the column entirely? And people who said anything were accused of looking into it too much etc. Except they werent, and it absolutely was true that he was left out because Lebron and his people told Jenkins (who will just write what LBJ tells him) about what was gonna happen to Wiggins and Love. Then this recent article by Jenkins which is soooo eerily similar....one in which he refers to the Lakers' young nucleus as "Ingram/Hart/Kuzma". No Lonzo anywhere. (Note I could be totally wrong here , so dont attack me @CWood21). 

Then this whole Kuzma thing where every body keeps acting like hes some future stud who is going to be an All Star and had some amazing rookie season. I mean he shot 35/36/70 with a -2.0 net rating and +/- of -1.6. I mean I like Kuzma and see him becoming a good like 6th or 7th guy on a contender one day, but he isnt anyone Id want my team calling one of its core pieces. 

Hart is the other pick I give them props for though. I was shocked he fell like he did (Nova fan so I watched a lot of him). But he IMO is gonna be a top 7-8 SG (maybe better) in a year or two. 

And then theres the 2016 offseason. And yeah, sure I get it....It was a weird offseason thanks to the idiotic decision by the NBAPA regarding the cap spike.....but the Deng and Mozgov contracts are legitimately the worst of the last decade maybe. And dont even get me started on their horrendous post Lebron signings....which were atrocious even if they are 1 year deals...

So many things comically wrong about this, I really don't know where to begin.  Probably best to start at the beginning.

Are the Lakers a beneficiary of situation?  I think everyone would be foolish to think otherwise.  But chalking it purely up to the Lakers being in the right destination and having an illustrious history is downright wrong on so many different levels.  I mean, if that was the case wouldn't have Kevin Durant at least granted the Lakers a meeting before he signed with Golden State?  Wouldn't have LaMarcus Aldridge have been dumb not to sign with the Lakers?  It's a part of it, but the only reasons why LeBron chose the Lakers is fictional.  Go compare the rosters from this past season and go back 2 or so years.  It's night and day.  I'll go into this more, but the situation is completely different.

It's comical that you say the Lakers have been poor drafters.  They're consistently getting production out of their picks.  You talk about Julius Randle being a bad pick, yet he's 8th in career WS among players who averaged at least 20 MPG and 11th in VORP among players who averaged at least 20 MPG.  Not great, but that's a solid return for the 7th overall pick.  D'Angelo Russell never took that next step that most thought he would, and his value has plateaued.  But the fact that the Lakers also managed to pick out Larry Nance Jr., Kyle Kuzma, and Josh Hart in 27-30 range is nothing short of wildly impressive.  To me, you're giving way too much credit to the Lakers for the Brandon Ingram pick.  He was the obvious pick once the Sixers took Ben Simmons.  He was the clear second best player in that draft.  As for Lonzo Ball, he's a jump shot away from being a top 10 impact guard.  He's that good.  He plays good defense, rebounds at a high rate, and is a tremendous passer.  Despite how awful Lonzo shot last year, he was 8th in WS for players with 20+ MPG and 4th in VORP.  His impact can't be understated.  If he becomes even a halfway decent shooter, that's a tremendous player.  The worst pick the Lakers made in the last half decade is D'Angelo Russell, and he was used to create enough cap space to offer LeBron James a max contract.  That's a HUGE win for the Lakers.  You are wrong about Lonzo.  Even if he doesn't figure out the whole shooting thing, he can impact in a whole different way.  If he figures out to be a halfway decent shooter, he's Jason Kidd.  In terms of core, I'd rank them Ingram, Lonzo, Kuzma, and Hart in that order.

As for Kyle Kuzma, using those same standards that we used early, he was 4th in WS and 6th in VORP.  May I remind you that the Lakers picked him 27th?  That's a ridiculous return on investment.  Nobody is arguing that he's some franchise player, but you generally don't get that kind of return on a rookie.  Not sure where you got that Kuzma shot 35/37/70 is inaccurate.  He shot 45/37/71, which is pretty darn good especially for a rookie.  I mean, Lauri Markkanen shot 43/46/84 and nobody is complaining about his shooting percentages.  Where you think his future lies probably depends on how much more upside you think he has.  I don't really have any issues if you think he's a 6th man, because that's probably his floor right now.

It's a lot less impressive when you pick and choose what to focus on.  But when you look at the entire picture, it's actually rather impressive they've rebuilt as fast they have.  Kobe Bryant tore his Achilles during the 2013-14 season, which saw the Lakers tumble to the 6th worst team in the league and ended up picking 7th, the highest they had pick since they selected Andrew Bynum 10th overall back in 2005.  With Kobe Bryant missing most of the 2014-15 season recovering from injury, the Lakers finished with the 4th record as their top pick from the previous year, Julius Randle, missed almost the entire season because of a broken leg, which led to them drafting D'Angelo Russell.  Unfortunately, they were plagued by terrible coaching from Byron Scott and the D'Angelo Russell/Nick Young debacle, they ended up with the 2nd pick again and selected Brandon Ingram.  The offseason before the 2016 season was supposed to be the Lakers HUGE break, and instead they threw $136M at Luol Deng and Timofey Mozgov.  And the self-imposed deadline by Jim Buss pretty much was the nail in the coffin that should have sunk the franchise for the next decade.  Instead, the Lakers managed to create not one, but space for two max contracts.  And they did that without gutting their roster.  Their roster is full of good, young talent that was clearly appealing to LeBron James.

[jrry32]

1 hour ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

I think he could play PF like Horford can. But now he will have to primarily be a C with this team. How good of a rebounder is Carter Jr? Lauri isn't bad in that area but Parker has never been a plus rebounder. 

 

He seems like a solid rebounder.

[YoungJefe]

6 hours ago, sdrawkcab321 said:

 

poor bulls fans

Basically a 1 year prove it deal with an option for a second year if he plays well. They needed to use their cap space at least they used it on someone with potential. 

[Deadpulse]

2 hours ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

I think he could play PF like Horford can.

Horford's natural position is PF. He has been playing out of position since he became a pro. 

[jrry32]

8 minutes ago, Deadpulse said:

Horford's natural position is PF. He has been playing out of position since he became a pro. 

This isn't a particularly novel opinion, but in today's NBA, I don't think there's a "natural position" for a lot of players. That includes Horford.

[Deadpulse]

2 minutes ago, jrry32 said:

This isn't a particularly novel opinion, but in today's NBA, I don't think there's a "natural position" for a lot of players. That includes Horford.

That's really irrelevant to why I mentioned it. @J-ALL-DAY was suggesting that Carter could switch to PF from C and compared the transition to Horford when in fact Horford made the exact opposite move when coming into the league. 

[jrry32]

1 minute ago, Deadpulse said:

That's really irrelevant to why I mentioned it. @J-ALL-DAY was suggesting that Carter could switch to PF from C and compared the transition to Horford when in fact Horford made the exact opposite move when coming into the league. 

The conversation was about whether Carter could play PF or C. What I'm saying is that, like Horford, he can do both because neither really have a "natural position" in today's NBA.

[titans0021]

Wouldn't be surprised to see Jabari average 25 ppg next year, issue being that even at that rate, he's at best a net-neutral because of just how entirely lost he is on the defensive end. If something were to ever miraculously click and he suddenly became a semi-intelligent basketball player, he could certainly become a useful piece. But that's a massive if. I could see this burning the Bulls not in the sense that the contract itself is all that rough, but in the sense that in 2020, when he's still only 25 and led the team in scoring for two straight seasons, they may end up having to max out a guy that can't be a top two or three piece on a contending team.

[Deadpulse]

30 minutes ago, jrry32 said:

The conversation was about whether Carter could play PF or C. What I'm saying is that, like Horford, he can do both because neither really have a "natural position" in today's NBA.

Even in today's NBA, a traditional C would still be hard pressed to be "positionless"

[jrry32]

2 minutes ago, Deadpulse said:

Even in today's NBA, a traditional C would still be hard pressed to be "positionless"

Traditional Cs are going the way of the dinosaur.

[Utley]

1 hour ago, jrry32 said:

The conversation was about whether Carter could play PF or C. What I'm saying is that, like Horford, he can do both because neither really have a "natural position" in today's NBA.

I generally agree with this

[J-ALL-DAY]

1 hour ago, Deadpulse said:

That's really irrelevant to why I mentioned it. @J-ALL-DAY was suggesting that Carter could switch to PF from C and compared the transition to Horford when in fact Horford made the exact opposite move when coming into the league. 

I didn't say Horford didn't go from PF to C. I just said like Horford, I think Carter Jr can play PF. But if he's a good enough rebounder, then he should be fine at C. He will have more mismatches playing C anyways. Want to see how he is able to bang with guys like Embiid though. Celtics preferred Baynes starting on Embiid and then putting Horford on him late in games. 

[mm6492]

10 hours ago, seminoles1 said:

You're thinking of the wrong Lopez.  The Bulls have Robin Lopez.  Brook Lopez is on the Bucks.

Haha yea my bad, thought of that right after I posted and logged off. 

[YoungJefe]

3 hours ago, jrry32 said:

The conversation was about whether Carter could play PF or C. What I'm saying is that, like Horford, he can do both because neither really have a "natural position" in today's NBA.

Carter has range on his jumper out to the 3 point line.