Why are we targeting lebron?

[Lalouie]

I would be concerned less about his affect on the near future and more about what happens when he leaves because not only does he leave a huge hole to fill on the team, but the financial lux tax sink hole too. Miami and now Cleveland are not in a happy place.

Getting LeBron INSURES that the lakers MUST surround him with pricey aging vets because you don't really think he'll be happy playing with youngsters do you

[Landsberger]

Getting LeBron INSURES that the lakers MUST surround him with pricey aging vets because you don't really think he'll be happy playing with youngsters do you

This is what most are missing in the chase for the 2 max slots. I'm of the thinking that our FO views our youth as transaction pieces rather than a core to grow around. Ball may be the exception.

Let's say we get LeBron and George for giggles..... where does Ingram play? Randle is most likely gone just to get them. So there are 2 of our youth core displaced by those moves right there. If Ingram has a huge jump in production while improving his efficiency then what happens? Do we ask one of those guys to move to a new position?

Getting the 2 max guys puts this team in a win now mode and it will in all likelihood open the door to a parade of vets who will displace the youth if they are going to build a championship team in 2 years. I'd trade Randle but if Ingram progresses as a lot of us hope he does it makes things very interesting if you bring in 2 max priced win now vets. Next summer will be crazy.

[Dr Aki]

Getting LeBron INSURES that the lakers MUST surround him with pricey aging vets because you don't really think he'll be happy playing with youngsters do you

This is what most are missing in the chase for the 2 max slots. I'm of the thinking that our FO views our youth as transaction pieces rather than a core to grow around. Ball may be the exception.

Let's say we get LeBron and George for giggles..... where does Ingram play? Randle is most likely gone just to get them. So there are 2 of our youth core displaced by those moves right there. If Ingram has a huge jump in production while improving his efficiency then what happens? Do we ask one of those guys to move to a new position?

Getting the 2 max guys puts this team in a win now mode and it will in all likelihood open the door to a parade of vets who will displace the youth if they are going to build a championship team in 2 years. I'd trade Randle but if Ingram progresses as a lot of us hope he does it makes things very interesting if you bring in 2 max priced win now vets. Next summer will be crazy.

bball has evolved, it's all about skills and roles now.

ingram will still be a wing, the lakers with lonzo, ingram, lebron and george will simply play with 1 guard, 3 wings and a big man with ball handling duties shared between whoever can initiate the offense

quite likely, if lebron and george join, they're coming because they're intrigued by lonzo and the style of ball sharing, so there will even less need for defined roles

[Clemenza]

If ya'll get LeBron just be aware that Ball will become a roll player and the ball won't be in his hands

[-G-]

Is this really a question? You can be against signing him, but you can't think of one reason Magic/Pelinka want Lebron? Not one?

[LakersSoul]

Getting LeBron INSURES that the lakers MUST surround him with pricey aging vets because you don't really think he'll be happy playing with youngsters do you

This is what most are missing in the chase for the 2 max slots. I'm of the thinking that our FO views our youth as transaction pieces rather than a core to grow around. Ball may be the exception.

Let's say we get LeBron and George for giggles..... where does Ingram play? Randle is most likely gone just to get them. So there are 2 of our youth core displaced by those moves right there. If Ingram has a huge jump in production while improving his efficiency then what happens? Do we ask one of those guys to move to a new position?

Getting the 2 max guys puts this team in a win now mode and it will in all likelihood open the door to a parade of vets who will displace the youth if they are going to build a championship team in 2 years. I'd trade Randle but if Ingram progresses as a lot of us hope he does it makes things very interesting if you bring in 2 max priced win now vets. Next summer will be crazy.

Come on Landsberger. Stop being a party pooper.

Why in the world would we trade Ingram? Would you trade him if you were Magic? We need Ball and Ingram's inexpensive salary and contributions with the 2 MAX guys. When LBJ joined the Cavs, they traded Wiggins for the 2nd MAX guy (Love) but still kept Irving and Thompson. Ball and Ingram will be our Irving and Thompson. The Lakers should have room for the 2nd MAX guy with a few moves (Deng, Clarkson and/or Randle) thanks to the FO's moves.

The two max guys will take up 65 - 70 million of the 100+ million salary cap. Young guns like Ball, Ingram, Kuzma, Hart, Bryant, Nance, Zubac and other role players will take up another 25+ million. Thus leaving us with about 10 -15 million for MLE and vet minimum signings. I guarantee you if we can get 2 MAX guys with Ball and Ingram, there will be a few vet ring chasers to sign with the team. We will need them plus Ball, Ingram and Kuzma's cheap salary to make a run at the Warriors.

[Dr Aki]

If ya'll get LeBron just be aware that Ball will become a roll player and the ball won't be in his hands

the ball already isn't in his hands

[MelosSoreWrist]

If ya'll get LeBron just be aware that Ball will become a roll player and the ball won't be in his hands

the ball already isn't in his hands

I dont think Clemenza has seen Ball play.

[Landsberger]

Getting LeBron INSURES that the lakers MUST surround him with pricey aging vets because you don't really think he'll be happy playing with youngsters do you

This is what most are missing in the chase for the 2 max slots. I'm of the thinking that our FO views our youth as transaction pieces rather than a core to grow around. Ball may be the exception.

Let's say we get LeBron and George for giggles..... where does Ingram play? Randle is most likely gone just to get them. So there are 2 of our youth core displaced by those moves right there. If Ingram has a huge jump in production while improving his efficiency then what happens? Do we ask one of those guys to move to a new position?

Getting the 2 max guys puts this team in a win now mode and it will in all likelihood open the door to a parade of vets who will displace the youth if they are going to build a championship team in 2 years. I'd trade Randle but if Ingram progresses as a lot of us hope he does it makes things very interesting if you bring in 2 max priced win now vets. Next summer will be crazy.

Come on Landsberger. Stop being a party pooper.

Why in the world would we trade Ingram? Would you trade him if you were Magic? We need Ball and Ingram's inexpensive salary and contributions with the 2 MAX guys. When LBJ joined the Cavs, they traded Wiggins for the 2nd MAX guy (Love) but still kept Irving and Thompson. Ball and Ingram will be our Irving and Thompson. The Lakers should have room for the 2nd MAX guy with a few moves (Deng, Clarkson and/or Randle) thanks to the FO's moves.

The two max guys will take up 65 - 70 million of the 100+ million salary cap. Young guns like Ball, Ingram, Kuzma, Hart, Bryant, Nance, Zubac and other role players will take up another 25+ million. Thus leaving us with about 10 -15 million for MLE and vet minimum signings. I guarantee you if we can get 2 MAX guys with Ball and Ingram, there will be a few vet ring chasers to sign with the team. We will need them plus Ball, Ingram and Kuzma's cheap salary to make a run at the Warriors.

Not being a party pooper at all. I think the direction of the team took a hard turn when we changed leadership.
Look at the situation. I would trade Ingram if he doesn't take a nice step this year IF the goal is to truly create an instant contender. You have to sign him in a couple years anyway. If he does take a nice step I wouldn't sign George. This isn't about me or what I'd do. It's what I think ownership will do. Don't forget we will have to make decisions on Zubac, Randle and Nance in the next 2 years. Ingram the year after that and Ball the year after that. Let's say that we sign 2 max slots.... and Ingram is all that and he gets a max deal.... and Ball is the next coming and he gets one. We could be a team with 4 max deals for a year or two. If we're not winning championships in that time frame I'm not sure if we'd carry 4 max deals and be able to field much of anything else. I still think if/when we get the 2 max deals that they will want a veteran coach as well. We may very well not be running a GS offense when all of this goes down either.

To me this can go 2 ways. Early 2000's Knicks or "Superfriends" Heat. I'm hoping for the latter but wary of the former.

[Lalouie]

This is what most are missing in the chase for the 2 max slots. I'm of the thinking that our FO views our youth as transaction pieces rather than a core to grow around. Ball may be the exception.

Let's say we get LeBron and George for giggles..... where does Ingram play? Randle is most likely gone just to get them. So there are 2 of our youth core displaced by those moves right there. If Ingram has a huge jump in production while improving his efficiency then what happens? Do we ask one of those guys to move to a new position?

Getting the 2 max guys puts this team in a win now mode and it will in all likelihood open the door to a parade of vets who will displace the youth if they are going to build a championship team in 2 years. I'd trade Randle but if Ingram progresses as a lot of us hope he does it makes things very interesting if you bring in 2 max priced win now vets. Next summer will be crazy.

Come on Landsberger. Stop being a party pooper.

Why in the world would we trade Ingram? Would you trade him if you were Magic? We need Ball and Ingram's inexpensive salary and contributions with the 2 MAX guys. When LBJ joined the Cavs, they traded Wiggins for the 2nd MAX guy (Love) but still kept Irving and Thompson. Ball and Ingram will be our Irving and Thompson. The Lakers should have room for the 2nd MAX guy with a few moves (Deng, Clarkson and/or Randle) thanks to the FO's moves.

The two max guys will take up 65 - 70 million of the 100+ million salary cap. Young guns like Ball, Ingram, Kuzma, Hart, Bryant, Nance, Zubac and other role players will take up another 25+ million. Thus leaving us with about 10 -15 million for MLE and vet minimum signings. I guarantee you if we can get 2 MAX guys with Ball and Ingram, there will be a few vet ring chasers to sign with the team. We will need them plus Ball, Ingram and Kuzma's cheap salary to make a run at the Warriors.

Not being a party pooper at all. I think the direction of the team took a hard turn when we changed leadership.
Look at the situation. I would trade Ingram if he doesn't take a nice step this year IF the goal is to truly create an instant contender. You have to sign him in a couple years anyway. If he does take a nice step I wouldn't sign George. This isn't about me or what I'd do. It's what I think ownership will do. Don't forget we will have to make decisions on Zubac, Randle and Nance in the next 2 years. Ingram the year after that and Ball the year after that. Let's say that we sign 2 max slots.... and Ingram is all that and he gets a max deal.... and Ball is the next coming and he gets one. We could be a team with 4 max deals for a year or two. If we're not winning championships in that time frame I'm not sure if we'd carry 4 max deals and be able to field much of anything else. I still think if/when we get the 2 max deals that they will want a veteran coach as well. We may very well not be running a GS offense when all of this goes down either.

To me this can go 2 ways. Early 2000's Knicks or "Superfriends" Heat. I'm hoping for the latter but wary of the former.

I think you're disregarding how things are trending today. It's no longer about making a contender today. It's about building in house and with youth. Gsw and sas are the gold standard now.

Giving it all up for LeBron is not how this should happen because as I've said, LeBron has left Miami and Cleveland in dire situation. A move to the lakers is bad timing. If he plays with lal it will be with the understanding that Lal will NOT empty their bank for a bunch of old overpayed shooters or surrounding lbj with "his boys". that is not how lal wants to go forth into the future.

In fact I propose the tact lal should use is "LeBron you've done everything except lead a core of youth,,,, something mj never did"... Take it or leave it. But I don't think lbj takes it. He'll stay in Cleveland and be happy with representing the east every year.

I think Lal will definitely NOT go the superheat route and really I believe you should not hope for that either. Cuz you know what,,,, IT WON'T MATTER. IT'S GSW'S TIME!! That's the history of the nba

[Landsberger]

I think you're disregarding how things are trending today. It's no longer about making a contender today. It's about building in house and with youth. Gsw and sas are the gold standard now.

Giving it all up for LeBron is not how this should happen because as I've said, LeBron has left Miami and Cleveland in dire situation. A move to the lakers is bad timing. If he plays with lal it will be with the understanding that Lal will NOT empty their bank for a bunch of old overpayed shooters or surrounding lbj with "his boys". that is not how lal wants to go forth into the future.

In fact I propose the tact lal should use is "LeBron you've done everything except lead a core of youth,,,, something mj never did"... Take it or leave it. But I don't think lbj takes it. He'll stay in Cleveland and be happy with representing the east every year.

I think Lal will definitely NOT go the superheat route and really I believe you should not hope for that either. Cuz you know what,,,, IT WON'T MATTER. IT'S GSW'S TIME!! That's the history of the nba

I'm not disregarding it at all. I'm not advocating it either. I wouldn't bring LeBron in here personally either. This thread is about why are we targeting LeBron not about what one of us would do.

I would point out to you however that just drafting and hoping rarely works either. GS is a unicorn IMHO. A unicorn that added Durant.... they didn't draft him. Like the triangle and the Lakers I believe just emulating their system without the players will end in frustration. That system works for those players. If the thought is that we're drafting our own Klay or our own Curry etc. then I don't think we're going to get anywhere. How many teams emulated the triangle and tried to get Kobe's? A new championship era won't come by copying the previous one... never has.

Think of the series of drafts OKC had.... Durant, Westbrook, Harden, Ibake... Is any of our young guys going to be an MVP much less two of them finishing 1-2 in the same season while the 3rd one was the missing piece in a championship? Maybe one young guys does this but 3 of them? OKC didn't get a chip with all of them so you can still draft fantastically and not have a championship team.

You use San Antonio as an example. They are the poster child for trading key youth for grizzled vets. They have done it several times over their run actually. They have avoided paying some youngsters to get Vets on end of their career deals too.

I'm all for getting better and I wouldn't trade any of the young guys unless it makes the team better. But to just say that they will all be better every year until we're great is not really a plan to me. If we can get better by trading Ingram they I hope we do it. I have no attachment to any of this current group of players... I love the Lakers and have watched more than a 400 players in the P&G. I want the team to return to where it belongs IMO.... at the top. How we get there again isn't as important to me as getting there.

[Sushisensei26]

Watch on YouTube

Is there a realistic way for us to sign 3 superstars? Will we really have 70M? That doesn't sound right to me. If 2 of the 3 superstars take a little less can we manage it?

[danfantastk32]

I think you can play Ingram, Lebron, and PG together. I also think you can stagger them so that there are two guys on the floor at any given time...and each one would get to play 32 minutes...without ever having all 3 on the floor. In other words...there's plenty of minutes.

A reason to get Lebron? Best player in the league (2nd best by a hair, for all you Durant guys)....also a complete package of shooting, rebounds, assists, defense and leadership. Immediately makes us a playoff team, and all the good experience that comes with that, etc etc. Go look at our last season again....I can think of 56 reasons to get a player like Lebron.

Lastly....the word is out from "sources" that Lebron is interested in the Lakers. Could all be BS. I think the Houston theory is pretty strong myself. But either way....the Lakers would be fools not to put out feelers through back-channels. Anyone here married to PG, and can state with 100% certainty he's coming? I don't know of any other stars beating on our door right now....so it sounds like basic, sound management, that we'd be trying to gauge the authenticity.....and letting him know we're certainly receptive.

You think Rob is constantly reminding fans about our cap-space? Hell no....he's letting all the players know that we can bring in two of ya, no prob. There's alot of questions in the league, 'bout to be answered this season:

What if Ball doesn't really have that "it" at the NBA level?
What if Ingram has another stinker year? Peeps gonna start to get a little nervous? You can bet the FO will be.
Randle....what's he got?
Will Zubac make big strides....will he make any strides?
How's Lopez fit? Both could suck it up...or we might have a tough decision moving forward.
Do any of those later picks turn into something?
What if KCP goes off? Maybe we're sitting with a 22ppg legit defender at the end of the year?

How do Harden and CP3 play? Maybe Lebron want's nothing to do with that place next year?
Maybe PG and Westbrook turn into bff's this year, and George signs an extension?
Does Kyrie get moved?
Where's Carmelo ending up?

and on and on. Of course the Lakers are gonna show interest in signing Lebron. Way way way too many variables for our FO to go shooing the guy away at the start of the season. Who knows.....we might end up a very non-desirable destination in 8 months. Sometimes there's something to be said for "strike while iron is hot"

[danfantastk32]

Is there a realistic way for us to sign 3 superstars? Will we really have 70M? That doesn't sound right to me. If 2 of the 3 superstars take a little less can we manage it?

As of right now......the Lakers will have $41mil on the books next year. Now....that excludes some 'team options' for a couple guys we're sure to exercise (Ingram for instance)...so let's put us back to about $50mil. That prob give us about $55-56 mil to spend next year. A little depends on where the cap ends up exactly....but I think somewhere between $105-110 mil is right.

Our issue becomes the $30 we have tied up in Clarkson and Deng. If we can move those two....then we're looking at about $85 mil to spend. I'm a little curious to see how we think we can move a guy like Deng without throwing in something tasty in return. But I think you can prob get 3 guys to come with $85-mil. I think there's prob some tricks you can pull. Seems like other teams are way, way, over the "hard cap"....so there's some nuanced stuff I'm not aware of. I'd bet when it's all said and done, these guys get more (you can start it at $28...but goto $35 the next year....something like that)

Clarkson should be pretty movable. That would but us around $67-70mil cap space next year.

But the first thing you have to do then is look at guys like Lopez, Randle, and KCP.....and decide if your gonna resign any of them. It will be especially interesting to see how Randle does, and what we do with him.

[Lalouie]

I think you're disregarding how things are trending today. It's no longer about making a contender today. It's about building in house and with youth. Gsw and sas are the gold standard now.

Giving it all up for LeBron is not how this should happen because as I've said, LeBron has left Miami and Cleveland in dire situation. A move to the lakers is bad timing. If he plays with lal it will be with the understanding that Lal will NOT empty their bank for a bunch of old overpayed shooters or surrounding lbj with "his boys". that is not how lal wants to go forth into the future.

In fact I propose the tact lal should use is "LeBron you've done everything except lead a core of youth,,,, something mj never did"... Take it or leave it. But I don't think lbj takes it. He'll stay in Cleveland and be happy with representing the east every year.

I think Lal will definitely NOT go the superheat route and really I believe you should not hope for that either. Cuz you know what,,,, IT WON'T MATTER. IT'S GSW'S TIME!! That's the history of the nba

I'm not disregarding it at all. I'm not advocating it either. I wouldn't bring LeBron in here personally either. This thread is about why are we targeting LeBron not about what one of us would do.

I would point out to you however that just drafting and hoping rarely works either. GS is a unicorn IMHO. A unicorn that added Durant.... they didn't draft him. Like the triangle and the Lakers I believe just emulating their system without the players will end in frustration. That system works for those players. If the thought is that we're drafting our own Klay or our own Curry etc. then I don't think we're going to get anywhere. How many teams emulated the triangle and tried to get Kobe's? A new championship era won't come by copying the previous one... never has.

Think of the series of drafts OKC had.... Durant, Westbrook, Harden, Ibake... Is any of our young guys going to be an MVP much less two of them finishing 1-2 in the same season while the 3rd one was the missing piece in a championship? Maybe one young guys does this but 3 of them? OKC didn't get a chip with all of them so you can still draft fantastically and not have a championship team.

You use San Antonio as an example. They are the poster child for trading key youth for grizzled vets. They have done it several times over their run actually. They have avoided paying some youngsters to get Vets on end of their career deals too.

I'm all for getting better and I wouldn't trade any of the young guys unless it makes the team better. But to just say that they will all be better every year until we're great is not really a plan to me. If we can get better by trading Ingram they I hope we do it. I have no attachment to any of this current group of players... I love the Lakers and have watched more than a 400 players in the P&G. I want the team to return to where it belongs IMO.... at the top. How we get there again isn't as important to me as getting there.

Gotcha. My position is I am very very wary of the consequences. And I have both Miami and the cavs in the LeBron aftermath. Don't get me wrong about LeBron. He is historically a top impact player. It's just, you know, in the long term not something I see as ending well

[danfantastk32]

We are in a pretty decent position with our cap space to answer your question.

Word is, the Lakers received interest in Clarkson....and so they are confident in being able to trade him for a pick whenever they wanted. Next the Lakers can stretch Deng next year, and take about $11 mil off his annual salary (of course we are now spending about $7mil for 5 years on literally nothing). I think if you waived Nance, and Ennis, and traded Clarkson and stretched Deng, you'd actually be able to spend about $90 mil.

You could theoretically resign Randle for about $16, give Lopez something like $15-16, and still have $60 mil. It's a little confusing. Your able to add some of your midlevel exception to contracts...I think you can go like $6-mil over to resign Randle (only have to use $12 to hold him...but you can resign him for more like $15-16 afterwards), I think that's more or less accurate.

Not to mention...if everyone is balling....you may not even want 2 max-players. Maybe you just get 1, and don't stretch Deng. Help get him off the books faster.

We will have plenty of options though. You could try and get 3 stars. You'd be able to give them each about $30mil. You'd still keep Ball, and Ingram.

[doozyj]

If ya'll get LeBron just be aware that Ball will become a roll player and the ball won't be in his hands

With all do respect you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Ball will facilitate and get easy buckets for everyone. That's what he does. Period.

[LakersSoul]

Watch on YouTube

Is there a realistic way for us to sign 3 superstars? Will we really have 70M? That doesn't sound right to me. If 2 of the 3 superstars take a little less can we manage it?

No. We will not get 3 new MAX guys for 70 million.

Unless the guys are willing to take 6-10 million less than MAX each, I dont see this happening right off the bat. In years 2-4, the story might be a little different as some might want to take less to sign needed players like KD recently did. OTOH, there is a small chance that someone like Lopez might get a smaller 1 year contract with us in the summer of 2018 then use his birds rights in 2019-2020 to sign him for over the cap. I could see that happening as Lopez has made his money and might love the Lakers and the future success after struggling in NJ for so long.

[Penberthy]

Watch on YouTube

Is there a realistic way for us to sign 3 superstars? Will we really have 70M? That doesn't sound right to me. If 2 of the 3 superstars take a little less can we manage it?

No. We will not get 3 new MAX guys for 70 million.

Unless the guys are willing to take 6-10 million less than MAX each, I dont see this happening right off the bat. In years 2-4, the story might be a little different as some might want to take less to sign needed players like KD recently did. OTOH, there is a small chance that someone like Lopez might get a smaller 1 year contract with us in the summer of 2018 then use his birds rights in 2019-2020 to sign him for over the cap. I could see that happening as Lopez has made his money and might love the Lakers and the future success after struggling in NJ for so long.

Ball
George Hart
Ingram Kuzma
James Nance
Lopez Zu Bryant

[Sushisensei26]

Is there a realistic way for us to sign 3 superstars? Will we really have 70M? That doesn't sound right to me. If 2 of the 3 superstars take a little less can we manage it?

As of right now......the Lakers will have $41mil on the books next year. Now....that excludes some 'team options' for a couple guys we're sure to exercise (Ingram for instance)...so let's put us back to about $50mil. That prob give us about $55-56 mil to spend next year. A little depends on where the cap ends up exactly....but I think somewhere between $105-110 mil is right.

Our issue becomes the $30 we have tied up in Clarkson and Deng. If we can move those two....then we're looking at about $85 mil to spend. I'm a little curious to see how we think we can move a guy like Deng without throwing in something tasty in return. But I think you can prob get 3 guys to come with $85-mil. I think there's prob some tricks you can pull. Seems like other teams are way, way, over the "hard cap"....so there's some nuanced stuff I'm not aware of. I'd bet when it's all said and done, these guys get more (you can start it at $28...but goto $35 the next year....something like that)

Clarkson should be pretty movable. That would but us around $67-70mil cap space next year.

But the first thing you have to do then is look at guys like Lopez, Randle, and KCP.....and decide if your gonna resign any of them. It will be especially interesting to see how Randle does, and what we do with him.

Thanks for the detailed reply.

I had George, Lebron and Boogie in mind but didn't know if it could work cap wise. Like you said lots of teams find a way so we can as well.

Hypothetical scenario: Lebron has talks with Boogie and George and says lets team up. We roll out with these 3 plus Ball and Ingram. Lebron orchestrated **** before why can't he do it now.

Deng is biggest issue, short term and long term. I am not in the stretch camp unless its a last resort sort of thing. We'll have to add a good piece with him for someone to even discuss it with us but trading him should be priority number 1 for Rob.

With Deng and Clarkson gone and Randle waived we can sign George, Lebron and Boogie or Lebron, Geroge and Lopez (for less money) and still have money left over to surround them with good bench pieces and shooters.

As long it works cap wise I don't think this scenario is that far fetched.