|
>Oh I think that gives you a chance, just not a realistic one. >The Spurs looked done the last couple of years, despite Tony >playing well. They retooled with some youth and caught a >fortunate sequence of events in the playoffs (The Lakers >implosion, Kobe going down, David Lee being out of the GS >series, Westbrook going down and ensuring they met the Grizz >instead of the Thunder) and wound up within a hair of a 5th >title.
Right, but a big thing there was that youth. They got Leonard and also Splitter and Green. Leonard and Green in particular chewed up a lot of minutes, and Leonard played well consistently in those minutes, too. The Lakers need some sausage factory guys, guys who can grind and crank, run and jump, young legs basically. Where are those coming from? That Nash deal is hurting them again there and they have only managed to find a couple serviceable younger guys. One was hurt, the other is an FA.
>There are definite differences between the two franchises, the >personnel/personalities, coaches, etc.... but 's a reasonably >similar precedent. Asik/Lin/Parsons would be a pretty good >addition to that core, Earl Clark, and Jordan Hill.
Isnt Clark RFA? Gives them an OK chance of keeping him.
I agree that if they wind up losing Howard and they don't want to tear it down, then yes, go ahead and grab some guys in a trade to round out the lineup. The terms here are not huge commitments either, but if they want to be the 2014 FA destination, they need stuff to happen fast. If not, then sure, go for it.
>So while that chance isn't likely they win a title, there's a >solid chance of having a good run and being a lucky break or >two away. > >I think a franchise like the Lakers is such that the balance >of fiscal health+placating the fans/season ticket holders+the >TV contract+prestige doesn't really allow them to blow it all >up this year. I wouldn't be mad at it though, and there were >times I was so frustrated by the way this season panned out I >called for the exact scenario you laid to take place.
Yea I think you are right about that, I mean it would be an absolute shit storm even if it were the right move. Charlie Finley would blow it up, but the Lakers ain't the A's lol. They have to look competitive even if they aren't, basically. Maybe they will be, I am rooting for things to work out where they at least have some health and a fair shot to prove themselves or not.
>Agreed, but with all of them but Nash gone after this year >anyways, there's nothing that can be had for them that helps >us long term and would likely ruin our chances on the FA >market.
That's hard to say definitively, I think. You can always make a deal for filler (expiring) contracts and picks. Things that clean up finances and acquire futures. It's possible that deal isn't there, but more likely that some form of it is. I think teams would be interested in Gasol in particular.
>
>I agree on most of this, but I think the Lakers are a definite >draw to free agents. They rarely attract top free agents >because they rarely have the money to do so. I think there are >a few drawbacks right now, however. This isn't the Jerry Buss >regime anymore, and so that history of consistency can't be >counted on any longer. Pringles isn't a draw to anyone on the >horizon IMO, Dwight included. Mitch is the last real vestige >of the Buss/West era and indeed placed his own indelible stamp >on the franchise, and who knows how much power he wields >anymore. We hear whispers on many fronts regarding Jim and his >relationship with Mitch.
They make shrewd moves but a lot of big names have changed hands without cap space. They did get Gasol and Howard, but Howard is kind of questionable as a feather in their cap at this point. Let me put it this way, any LeBron talk is some funny ass shit. Still, they manage assets pretty well even if they do it unconventionally, and I am sure they will not spend much time in a rut.
>I don't think all the 2014 FA's will be signed up before we >get a shot at them though. The timing for us is perfect to >make a splash in that arena. I think the financial issues are >minor in the grand scheme; they want to shed payroll right >now, but I doubt that comes at the expense of the ability to >be players in the Lebron James/Paul George sweepstakes. Paul >is a long shot due to his restricted status, but perhaps he >could be had with a poison pill deal. Still, I doubt they shed >this years payroll in a way that jeopardizes such >possibilities in 2014.
I dont mean they will be signed, I mean how will the Lakers have a shot at them unless they manage all four of their stars' situations accordingly? I also don't think a rebuild thing is overly attractive to a big ass star, especially guys coming off of good teams like Indy and Miami like those examples.
>Agreed. All I care about is fielding a powerhouse contender >again in the near future. I still think a deal to nab Parsons, >Asik, and Lin in the vent Dwight bails would at least make for >an exciting season while giving us solid flexibility long >term. The downside is the golem that could create in Houston, >and I don't know that I'd want to compete with Harden, Howard, >and Paul every year.
I wouldn't be overly concerned about that, the rest of the league will always be trying to come up. They just have to concentrate on their own roster and they usually find a way to get rejuvenate their team with the right move.
And you will know MY JACKET IS GOLD when I lay my vengeance upon thee.
|