>Look, if we strike out on Durant than we're in bad position
>anyways. At least now we have quality players in place so
>that we're not truly terrible when it's time to go after free
>agents next year, and Hibbert is a guy who can be signed last
>because we (should) have his bird rights.

Good point about the Bird rights, but I am still not really inspired by the move. For Durant to show even a modicum of interest, both Russell and Randle have to show a lot this year, and the Thunder have to be very iffy. I don't think either of those conditions will be met, let alone both.

>These additions will help a young team like ours by relaxing
>some of the pressure. Hibbert gets a second chance, Upshaw
>gets to develop with significant minutes at backup, Lou can
>score enough to lighten the load a little, and Bass gives us
>quality minutes at the 4/5, depending on the team we're
>playing.

I don't have any doubt that these guys improve the team in the short run, that is not the issue. The issues are two-fold: What impact they have in the long run and if it's worth forfeiting a high pick this year for that potential (as well as the immediate salvation of undoubtedly declining ticket sales).

>The only way we overpay to keep Hibbert is if we get Durant
>and Randle/Russell have good years.

I mean I think if he plays well, they will keep him. He is the master of his own destiny in L.A.

>If JC improves even a little over last year and any of our
>other rooks have a good year we'll have built a solid core
>that a single signed star could elevate in a big way. Then,
>having Hibbert is a luxury, quite literally, because he'd be
>the guy we start paying tax on.
>
>Either way he'll most likely get a short term deal at a team
>option.

It all depends how he performs but like I said I look at him as a bad investment over the long haul and if that is the case then this just seems like a wheel-spinning move. That said, absent a commitment to tanking and #AssetLife, I probably would have made the same move.