Page 1 of 2

Lakers Waive G Vander Blue

Posted: Fri Jan 12, 2018 7:07 pm
by TyCobb
Read on Twitter

Re: Lakers Waive G Vander Blue

Posted: Fri Jan 12, 2018 7:38 pm
by Kilroy
That's another open roster spot, right?

Re: Lakers Waive G Vander Blue

Posted: Fri Jan 12, 2018 7:42 pm
by TyCobb
I can't help but think we're about to move a big or two for a real back up guard.

Re: Lakers Waive G Vander Blue

Posted: Fri Jan 12, 2018 8:07 pm
by Spanish_Laker
I liked him, hopefully he can join an Euroleague team to improve as a player.

Re: Lakers Waive G Vander Blue

Posted: Fri Jan 12, 2018 8:17 pm
by BBBKobe
One up roster spot and one open two way spot.

We have until the 15th to sign another two way contract with someone.

Re: Lakers Waive G Vander Blue

Posted: Fri Jan 12, 2018 8:18 pm
by Kilroy
TyCobb wrote:I can't help but think we're about to move a big or two for a real back up guard.


What's a little weird is if all we were looking for was draft picks (like rumors say), why open up spots? Blue and Bogut weren't great but both gave us some quality minutes.

I think we're gearing up for a multi-player trade.

Re: Lakers Waive G Vander Blue

Posted: Fri Jan 12, 2018 8:21 pm
by Slava
He's a two way player so it doesn't really effect the roster spots opening for trades. Only means we're signing someone else on a two way contract.

Re: Lakers Waive G Vander Blue

Posted: Fri Jan 12, 2018 8:57 pm
by milesfides
Give Caruso a real chance!

Re: Lakers Waive G Vander Blue

Posted: Fri Jan 12, 2018 10:11 pm
by iQon
Disappointed that it never worked out with him, but I wish him the best moving forwadd.

Re: Lakers Waive G Vander Blue

Posted: Sat Jan 13, 2018 5:54 pm
by Landsberger
TyCobb wrote:I can't help but think we're about to move a big or two for a real back up guard.


I'd be surprised if we did anything that added salary beyond the end of the year. The FO wants/needs those marquis names it seems and this year is going to be sacrificed to that end IMHO.

With that said, I have thought that we focus too much on big FA signings as a way to get those stars in here. We could do a swing for the fences trade as well with that cap space.

This team, this year, needs a backup PG for sure.... I don't think the FO is going to make any moves for "this" year however. They are thinking big. If we can get an expiring backup PG that would be great.

Re: Lakers Waive G Vander Blue

Posted: Sat Jan 13, 2018 6:10 pm
by TyCobb
Ramon Sessions available...

Re: Lakers Waive G Vander Blue

Posted: Sat Jan 13, 2018 8:56 pm
by JohnVancouver
why aren't we interested in Trey Burke?

Re: Lakers Waive G Vander Blue

Posted: Sat Jan 13, 2018 10:53 pm
by DEEP3CL
Spanish_Laker wrote:I liked him, hopefully he can join an Euroleague team to improve as a player.
His main weakness is his defense. He just can't guard at NBA level yet. Then second he has to improve on his playmaking and off ball work.

Re: Lakers Waive G Vander Blue

Posted: Sat Jan 13, 2018 11:20 pm
by stan francisco
Spanish_Laker wrote:I liked him, hopefully he can join an Euroleague team to improve as a player.


I hope so, too. That way I don't have to watch his d-less misery of a game, and oily hair, here. Seriously, good luck Vaner Blue.

Re: Lakers Waive G Vander Blue

Posted: Mon Jan 15, 2018 7:26 am
by danfantastk32
Landsberger wrote:
TyCobb wrote:I can't help but think we're about to move a big or two for a real back up guard.


I'd be surprised if we did anything that added salary beyond the end of the year. The FO wants/needs those marquis names it seems and this year is going to be sacrificed to that end IMHO.


Do you feel this year has been sacrificed? The youth are getting the minutes. Nobody had any notions about a title....so what has been "sacrificed" in the name of FA's? Other than the inevitable. I mean.....clearly this year was not going too far. I don't think anyone had any lofty expectations. That's a fair enough statement, right?

I'd say I'm 50/50 on this whole FA thing Magic and Rob are all about. To their defense.....PG does seem pretty hell-bent on coming here. I can't blame them for thinking that's gonna happen. But either way...I don't feel this season has been sacrificed. The young core has been getting the minutes. If so and so gets traded or waived......it's not like anyone's replacement has been riding the pine.

Re: Lakers Waive G Vander Blue

Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2018 12:25 am
by Landsberger
danfantastk32 wrote:
Landsberger wrote:
TyCobb wrote:I can't help but think we're about to move a big or two for a real back up guard.


I'd be surprised if we did anything that added salary beyond the end of the year. The FO wants/needs those marquis names it seems and this year is going to be sacrificed to that end IMHO.


Do you feel this year has been sacrificed? The youth are getting the minutes. Nobody had any notions about a title....so what has been "sacrificed" in the name of FA's? Other than the inevitable. I mean.....clearly this year was not going too far. I don't think anyone had any lofty expectations. That's a fair enough statement, right?

I'd say I'm 50/50 on this whole FA thing Magic and Rob are all about. To their defense.....PG does seem pretty hell-bent on coming here. I can't blame them for thinking that's gonna happen. But either way...I don't feel this season has been sacrificed. The young core has been getting the minutes. If so and so gets traded or waived......it's not like anyone's replacement has been riding the pine.


To be clear, the use of sacrificed was to emphasize that I believe the FO will view any move at the deadline through the 2 max guys this summer lens. Getting a piece to help us this year (say a backup PG for example) if it doesn't support that plan will most likely not happen.

As for your comment that the youth is getting minutes. 4 words. Lopez, Bogut, Bryant, Zubac.

Re: Lakers Waive G Vander Blue

Posted: Thu Jan 18, 2018 6:20 am
by danfantastk32
Landsberger wrote:To be clear, the use of sacrificed was to emphasize that I believe the FO will view any move at the deadline through the 2 max guys this summer lens. Getting a piece to help us this year (say a backup PG for example) if it doesn't support that plan will most likely not happen.


I hear what your saying. I think that not getting a back-up PG makes sense though, as this team isn't a backup-PG away from getting to the big dance. And while I do agree with you to an extent that the whole "2 FA's" plan is lofty, risky, and perhaps unrealistic....I think you could also say it's sort of the obvious route we have to take:

A) Our drafting situation is meager at best, for the next couple years.

B) We don't exactly have any players to make big moves with. I suppose you could take KCP, and trade him to Blazers for McCullum, if they wanted to try and get out from his contract. But that's pretty much part of "gettin 2 star FA's" right?

C) Nobody thinks it would be a good idea to to take KCP and Lopez and go trade for $40-mil worth of mid-level players with 3-4 years on their contracts, right? I think we can all agree that would be the worst thing to do.

D) We really saw a reluctance for a star player to come here alone. There sorta seems to be this "team-up" mentality. Either get 2 guys to come, or have 1-2 guys join your existing stars.

E) Really the only remaining option I see, is keep most of our guys together...and give it a few years.

So when you break it all down, your faced with 2 options really: Try and get 1 or 2 free-agents this offseason, and if you only get 1...try for the 2nd the following year. Or just sit tight. Wait 2 more years, and then Deng / Clarkson come off books....you should at this point REALLY know what you got, and go from there. <------- the 2 realistic options I see.

Now there is a big problem with Plan B (sitting tight, and letting the team grow) :You gotta pay Randle this year. You gotta pay Nance (admittedly it won't be huge...but prob 8-10 mil, right?) You will have a couple expendable guys leave....but your going to have to pay Ingram that same summer that Deng ends....which means you gotta pay him BEFORE any free-agents. So your FA pool is looking pretty sad at this point, right? You will only enough to sign 1 FA at best (I'll say it again...been very hard to do)....and may very well have to ship Randle out anyhow to be able to sign Ball / Kuzma the next year.

I think the best, most perfect thing the Lakers could have realistically hoped for was trading Randle and attaching Deng. Throw a pick in, a Nance or a Zubac....whatever...but get Deng out of here. I think the Lakers exhausted all avenues....and it's a no-go.


All that above is how I see our issue. So the question becomes: Taking KCP out of the equation (i don't think we can keep him, and resign our guys)....Do you think the rest of the team is good enough to be a contender....given 3-4 years to develop? If you do.....then I guess an argument for plan B can be made. I personally don't. That last part obviously becomes speculation, but you take our core under plan B (Randle, Ingram, Ball, Kuz) and do you have the chemistry, the Defense, the Outside-shooting, THE TALENT to compete for a title in 3-5 years?

The other option, the first option looks like this: You let Randle walk (or ideally trade for a pick, or something. I heard they tried to do that, and nobody was interested). You let KCP walk, you trade Clarkson.....and you get 2 FA's. It might be 1 this year/ 1 the next..but you get 2 top FA's.....and then you give the squad another 2 years to grow before contracts become an issue.

Just tossin names: Boogie Cousins, and Paul George. Not my choice....but let's go with that.

Ball / PG / Ingram / Kuz / Cousins. <-----best part is, you can go over the cap to resign all your guys. If all 5 become super-crazy max level....great problem to have, we'll deal with it when the time comes. If Kuz or Ball never make all-star level, or whatever...they are the expendable guy to make the 4-max contracts work.

I know I've written a long story here. But I kinda see those two options being the only realistic options....and I think the '2 FA's' option is better....short term, and long-term. I think it's the easiest to navigate. Furthermore....when you really look at it....let's just say it all fails and we don't sign a single FA: OK.....we let Randle go. If we're unable to land ANYTHING after 2-3 years, we're obviously a dumpster fire with no talent, and have much bigger problems than Randle left.

I'll grant you gotta get the right FA's...and if PG will come with Cousins...then your getting Cousins...for better or for worse. It's the deal you make with the Devil. It's why I would like 1 free agent at a time myself. But players are calling these shots more and more, and it's a reality Magic / Rob have to deal with. We got nothing but some youth, and a terrible record to sell. Oh...and a mouthy dad who's gonna call you out if you don't play well with his son. =0)

That said, I think Plan A is the obvious move. It has risk, but so does just waiting. I think Randle came back not a fit for us. I think he's limited....and you see signs that the league feels that way as well, based on our inability to really get any value for him on the trade market. Randle wasn't going to make this team long-term....not the way Luke wants to play. So with that....it makes sense that Magic and Rob have announced to the league that they are in the Market for 2 FA's. Let the star players dwell on it for a year...and start making plans. Don't tell the league your not sure....tell em! Bring it! We got room.

Let's throw this all another way: Do you even want to sign Randle to a 4-year $25-per deal? Guy's are improving their game....or they aren't. If Randle hasn't at least STARTED to develop an outside shot....I think it's fair to say that he won't at this point. Same with his left. He's better than last year, but he's not expanding his game. And if he hasn't even started to by now, It's fair to expect he won't appreciably grow anytime.

So in the end, I get the sacrifice. Is it being handled 100% perfect?? Of course not. But Magic and Rob inherited a plane that crashed 10 miles from the highway. This year is us walking towards that highway, so we can get back on track. It's obviously "sacrificed" to a certain extent.....but it also was an inevitable result. I'm completely ok with not signing backup PG's in the name of a plan.

Re: Lakers Waive G Vander Blue

Posted: Thu Jan 18, 2018 6:21 am
by danfantastk32
Damn....that long.

sorry 'bout that.

Re: Lakers Waive G Vander Blue

Posted: Thu Jan 18, 2018 6:32 am
by danfantastk32
I shortened it....but still long as F. Oh well....suffer through, or skip it. Up to you =0)

Re: Lakers Waive G Vander Blue

Posted: Thu Jan 18, 2018 6:36 am
by TyCobb
lmao.... I legit thought that was a dloading post.


Then I saw your double post and scrolled up again...thinking you had two accounts. Nope it was you! :laugh: