>First off, Lebron is the best player in the league. Bar
>none. But, like I said in the other post, with Lebron (and PG
>or PG/KL or some other voltron formation)... do the Lakers
>beat THIS Warriors team? I'm really not sure.

They are a fuck of a lot closer than being a lottery team, which they would be again if they return the same group.

>So is it worth tearing up this young core to try and challenge
>a historically dominant team at the peak of their powers? Or
>just wait a single year for another chance at a big FA class,
>after the intact core gets another shot at cracking the
>playoffs?

How much bigger is next year's FA class going to be? LeBron, PG, Boogie, Kawhi and more all potentially in play this year. This is the biggest offseason since 1976, or 1996 at least.

>So that Markazi poll is less about Lebron's ability and more
>about the expectations that comes with him if he's on the
>team. Because, if he's on the team, the Lakers fail if they
>don't *win now*. And if the Lakers' core are all 1st/2nd/3rd
>years... why not wait till next year when the Warriors roster
>will likely change drastically?

The question was simple and unqualified: Do you want the Lakers to sign LeBron James?

>Context matters. If the Warriors weren't THIS GOOD then yeah,
>getting Lebron makes a whole lot more sense. But saying "no"
>to Lebron isn't solely because of Lebron.

Why are they so scary? The Rockets just had them on the ropes. The Spurs could have challenged them last year with a healthy Leonard. They are a great team and a potential dynasty but you can't cowtow to them. Even the '60s Celtics and Showtime Lakers were challenged successfully, and as good as the Dubs are, they aren't as good as those teams were.

I just don't understand the idea that signing LeBron, the fastest track to challenging the Dubs and a guy who managed to beat them just a couple seasons ago, would be met with any resentment. I suspect there are the people who think Kobe could still drop 50 in there and the straight-up LeBron haters but they can't comprise over 60% of the fans. That's just crazy to me. What is the alternative? Signing inferior FAs? Sticking it out with these young guys? Signing inferior FAs next year?

I mean, if guys like Ingram and Ball were up for new contracts, *maybe* I could understand, but they aren't. A LeBron push means, on its face, losing Randle, anything else may or may not happen.