No.1 pick

[ALL HAIL]

You're the only one who implied "all" or almost all of anything dude.

From the beginning I've only been saying there are "exceptions" to the BPA rule.

Sounds like you now agree.

[Pointgod]

Orlando had the number one pick and drafted for need, opting to go with Penny Hardaway instead of the consensus best player, Chris Webber.

Orlando got three first round picks for their #1 pick. It's possible that they weren't sold on Webber as the number one guy anyways. And you can't honestly tell me they wouldn't have at least been better off long term with Shaq and Webber vs Shaq and Penny

So the Lakers should have drafted Okafor instead of Russell by your logic. Okafor was considered the Lakers pick over Russell by many in the media. Then the Lakers took a look at Okafor and didn't find him impressive.

You have Randle now. He's a beast in the making. 2015-2016 was really his rookie year and he'll only get better.

The Lakers are horrible at spacing and shooting. Drafting Simmons won't help this. Ingram is by far the most likely choice. We won't know for sure until 1) The Lakers secure one of the top 2 picks and 2) work out these guys. So lets wait until then.

Except Okafor wasn't the BPA pick according to the Lakers after workouts. Furthermore, based on advanced stats Russell was determined most likely to be a superstar out of anyone in the draft. So your example doesn't really hold up. Imagine if the Lakers got the #4 pick and missed out on Porzingis because they already had Randle at the four.

[guille_4]

I see Ingram a better fit especially for Julius Randle. My reasoning is Simmons and Randle have simliar game, both can't shoot and they drive almost every time. Ingram is tall, very lengthy, and has the ability to shoot from anywhere as well as drive. We gotta go with Ingram.

You don't make draft decisions based on fit with a player like Julius Randle.

[ALL HAIL]

Orlando got three first round picks for their #1 pick. It's possible that they weren't sold on Webber as the number one guy anyways. And you can't honestly tell me they wouldn't have at least been better off long term with Shaq and Webber vs Shaq and Penny

So the Lakers should have drafted Okafor instead of Russell by your logic. Okafor was considered the Lakers pick over Russell by many in the media. Then the Lakers took a look at Okafor and didn't find him impressive.

You have Randle now. He's a beast in the making. 2015-2016 was really his rookie year and he'll only get better.

The Lakers are horrible at spacing and shooting. Drafting Simmons won't help this. Ingram is by far the most likely choice. We won't know for sure until 1) The Lakers secure one of the top 2 picks and 2) work out these guys. So lets wait until then.

Except Okafor wasn't the BPA pick according to the Lakers after workouts. Furthermore, based on advanced stats Russell was determined most likely to be a superstar out of anyone in the draft. So your example doesn't really hold up. Imagine if the Lakers got the #4 pick and missed out on Porzingis because they already had Randle at the four.

Horrible exampke at the end there buddy.

Clearly, Randle and Porzingis can play together.

[DTouch]

So the Lakers should have drafted Okafor instead of Russell by your logic. Okafor was considered the Lakers pick over Russell by many in the media. Then the Lakers took a look at Okafor and didn't find him impressive.

You have Randle now. He's a beast in the making. 2015-2016 was really his rookie year and he'll only get better.

The Lakers are horrible at spacing and shooting. Drafting Simmons won't help this. Ingram is by far the most likely choice. We won't know for sure until 1) The Lakers secure one of the top 2 picks and 2) work out these guys. So lets wait until then.

Except Okafor wasn't the BPA pick according to the Lakers after workouts. Furthermore, based on advanced stats Russell was determined most likely to be a superstar out of anyone in the draft. So your example doesn't really hold up. Imagine if the Lakers got the #4 pick and missed out on Porzingis because they already had Randle at the four.

Horrible exampke at the end there buddy.

Clearly, Randle and Porzingis can play together.

his example was fine its you who keeps changing the argument.

[Pointgod]

So the Lakers should have drafted Okafor instead of Russell by your logic. Okafor was considered the Lakers pick over Russell by many in the media. Then the Lakers took a look at Okafor and didn't find him impressive.

You have Randle now. He's a beast in the making. 2015-2016 was really his rookie year and he'll only get better.

The Lakers are horrible at spacing and shooting. Drafting Simmons won't help this. Ingram is by far the most likely choice. We won't know for sure until 1) The Lakers secure one of the top 2 picks and 2) work out these guys. So lets wait until then.

Except Okafor wasn't the BPA pick according to the Lakers after workouts. Furthermore, based on advanced stats Russell was determined most likely to be a superstar out of anyone in the draft. So your example doesn't really hold up. Imagine if the Lakers got the #4 pick and missed out on Porzingis because they already had Randle at the four.

Horrible exampke at the end there buddy.

Clearly, Randle and Porzingis can play together.

One bad defender and one okay defender in the front court? Sure...

[DTouch]

IF workouts can show Simmons is clearly the better prospect and we're picking 1st, we take him and leverage him for trades if we think Ingram is the better fit long term. As most have stated, Randle isn't someone we need to take into consideration when drafting a potential franchise lvl player...Randle at best will be a solid 15-18ppg guy with 10-13 boards, Randle is lucky himself that Hibbert is such a waste of space and can't reb. worth a dam.

[madmaxmedia]

Like I said, BPA is not an exact science, nothing is, when you think about it.

It's all very relative as well. When people say 'BPA', I think there's an assumption that it means there's a clear consensus BPA, when more often than not there's not.

Fit is also relative, about the only thing for sure you don't want to do is pull a Wolves and draft 2 identical positions high in the same year, or in consecutive years.

The Lakers drafted Magic Johnson when they already had a pretty good point guard.

[chefy12]

i think i like ingram better. but yea lets that pick first

[zimpy27]

Simmons is going to LA. The heir of Magic is bringing back showtime. It just fits too perfectly and the NBA relies on the LA market.

That being said, Ingram is the better fit.



If you get Simmons then you want to get Whiteside and Batum. Trade Randle for some bench pieces.

Russell, Clarkson, Batum, Simmons, Whiteside. Bench: Williams, Nance, Bass, Randle's bench pieces.

[ak7]

Simmons is going to LA. The heir of Magic is bringing back showtime. It just fits too perfectly and the NBA relies on the LA market.

That being said, Ingram is the better fit.



If you get Simmons then you want to get Whiteside and Batum. Trade Randle for some bench pieces.

Russell, Clarkson, Batum, Simmons, Whiteside. Bench: Williams, Nance, Bass, Randle's bench pieces.

Sorry, bud, but the Lakers aren't trading Randle for "bench pieces" just so that they can sign Batum and slide him to the 3. Simmons has no business playing the 4 either.

[zimpy27]

Simmons is going to LA. The heir of Magic is bringing back showtime. It just fits too perfectly and the NBA relies on the LA market.

That being said, Ingram is the better fit.



If you get Simmons then you want to get Whiteside and Batum. Trade Randle for some bench pieces.

Russell, Clarkson, Batum, Simmons, Whiteside. Bench: Williams, Nance, Bass, Randle's bench pieces.

Sorry, bud, but the Lakers aren't trading Randle for "bench pieces" just so that they can sign Batum and slide him to the 3. Simmons has no business playing the 4 either.

Randle looks like the second coming of Josh Smith without the blocks. But ok, don't trade Randle, keep him around.

Regardless, Simmons is a 4 and I believe he'd be the best bait you could ever have to get guys like Durant to your team. Taking the potential of Ingram (even though he is a better fit now) over a guy who will attract the best offensive talent in the league is moronic. Especially because Simmons already fits so well with your best young talent in Russell and Clarkson.

[Sofa King]

Orlando got three first round picks for their #1 pick. It's possible that they weren't sold on Webber as the number one guy anyways. And you can't honestly tell me they wouldn't have at least been better off long term with Shaq and Webber vs Shaq and Penny

So the Lakers should have drafted Okafor instead of Russell by your logic. Okafor was considered the Lakers pick over Russell by many in the media. Then the Lakers took a look at Okafor and didn't find him impressive.

You have Randle now. He's a beast in the making. 2015-2016 was really his rookie year and he'll only get better.

The Lakers are horrible at spacing and shooting. Drafting Simmons won't help this. Ingram is by far the most likely choice. We won't know for sure until 1) The Lakers secure one of the top 2 picks and 2) work out these guys. So lets wait until then.

I don't think he is saying that at all, he's saying that like magic with Webber, after workouts we didn't view okafor as the BPA at our pick?

Youre probably right. I dont even remember making that post.

[Karmaloop]

You don't make draft decisions based on fit with a player like Julius Randle.

You don't draft players based on fit, that's how you end up in the lottery for years. You take the BPA and go with him. Figure out the fit later, or trade the redundant player. IF the Lakers feel Simmons is the BPA, take him and worry about making he and Randle work later.

[Spens1]

My personal bias says Simmons, better fit is obviously Ingham but i'd say whoever shows more potential.

If a player like Cousins became available suddenly, then i would be hard pressed to pass up on him (as long as he committed long term immediately)

[AcecardZ]

I want the best player available and think both Mitch and Jim should call Jerry West to figure out exactly who that player is.

[AcecardZ]

Ingram looks nice and at this point looks a little more polished than Ben Simmons but Ingram's lankiness concerns me a little. I'd like to see Ben Simmons in a Lakers uniform next year.

[Westbreezy]

You don't make draft decisions based on fit with a player like Julius Randle.

You don't draft players based on fit, that's how you end up in the lottery for years. You take the BPA and go with him. Figure out the fit later, or trade the redundant player. IF the Lakers feel Simmons is the BPA, take him and worry about making he and Randle work later.

Bingo. Not an exact comparison by any stretch but imagine if GSW passed on Steph since they had Monta and had a need in the front court... Wonder if they regret not taking Jordan Hill?

[guille_4]

You don't make draft decisions based on fit with a player like Julius Randle.

You don't draft players based on fit, that's how you end up in the lottery for years. You take the BPA and go with him. Figure out the fit later, or trade the redundant player. IF the Lakers feel Simmons is the BPA, take him and worry about making he and Randle work later.

Bingo. Not an exact comparison by any stretch but imagine if GSW passed on Steph since they had Monta and had a need in the front court... Wonder if they regret not taking Jordan Hill?

Exactly.

The only situation I'd draft players based on fit is if I had a top young stud. E.g. Karl Anthony Towns, Anthony Davis. Otherwhise its BPA.

P.S. Excellent example Westbreezy.

[RingsDontLie]

I like Ingram better, and don't trade him. This guy moves like Kobe, but he looks longer and lengthier out there kind of like Durant. I'm not sure if Ingram has Durant/Kobe athleticism however.