If we get Ben Simmons. Who's the PF that will go? LNJ or Randle?

[DEEP3CL]

Simply put you don't have to trade either of them. I like these hypothetical threads sometimes....but this isn't rocket science. The key here is amass as much talent as possible and make it work.

The Laker had this very same scenario happen to them in the early 80 with Rambis , Kupchak,Worthy and AC Green.

They make it work.

[DEEP3CL]

Simply put you don't have to trade either of them. I like these hypothetical threads sometimes....but this isn't rocket science. The key here is amass as much talent as possible and make it work.

The Laker had this very same scenario happen to them in the early 80 with Rambis , Kupchak,Worthy and AC Green.

They make it work.

[milesfides]

It's simple: Nance is the prototypical role player next to stars. You keep Randle if you believe he'll be a championship-winning elite player.

If he's not, you showcase him and trade him, because I doubt he accepts coming off the bench. Randle is an all-star in his own mind, so I think it's far more likely he'll become a problem and hurt his own value than accept a sixth man role like Lamar Odom did.

That's why it makes a lot more sense right now to start Randle, to see if there are really signs of becoming one of the top 10 players in the NBA. If it is, then Nance's role is a secondary concern. Nance is a consummate team-guy, he's already a pro, he'll accept his role if it's coming off the bench for an elite player.

Can't overstate the importance of letting Randle show all his stuff from now until the end of the season.

[TradeMach1ne]

Randle is likely not in the long-term plans. He wants to start and the Lakers might bring him off the bench next year depending on if they get Simmons or another PF.

[Laker_Lenny]

Randle is likely not in the long-term plans. He wants to start and the Lakers might bring him off the bench next year depending on if they get Simmons or another PF.

I love when posters seem to have inside knowledge of the Laker's long term plans.

[Westbreezy]

It's simple: Nance is the prototypical role player next to stars. You keep Randle if you believe he'll be a championship-winning elite player.

If he's not, you showcase him and trade him, because I doubt he accepts coming off the bench. Randle is an all-star in his own mind, so I think it's far more likely he'll become a problem and hurt his own value than accept a sixth man role like Lamar Odom did.

That's why it makes a lot more sense right now to start Randle, to see if there are really signs of becoming one of the top 10 players in the NBA. If it is, then Nance's role is a secondary concern. Nance is a consummate team-guy, he's already a pro, he'll accept his role if it's coming off the bench for an elite player.

Can't overstate the importance of letting Randle show all his stuff from now until the end of the season.

This is so accurate. We know what Nance is and probably what he'll be. He has a role-player floor but not a high ceiling while Randle is that guy whose floor is lower, but his ceiling is much higher if he ever improves enough and figures things out.

Like you said, Larry is a professional-- he won't even mind coming off the bench. Play Randle huge minutes and lets see what he can do. The sooner we figure out if he's in our future plans or not (which will obviously take longer than just this year), the sooner we can either cement his place in our future plans or conversely start planning on finding a replacement.

[TradeMach1ne]

Randle is likely not in the long-term plans. He wants to start and the Lakers might bring him off the bench next year depending on if they get Simmons or another PF.

I love when posters seem to have inside knowledge of the Laker's long term plans.

I think it makes sense to see what Randle can get value-wise in the trade market, it's not realistic to think we can sign 3 max players.. This summer and still pay Clarkson and the other young guys when there eligible to get a long term contract... we can't keep everyone it's just not possible.

[LApwnd]

Randle is likely not in the long-term plans. He wants to start and the Lakers might bring him off the bench next year depending on if they get Simmons or another PF.

I love when posters seem to have inside knowledge of the Laker's long term plans.

I think it makes sense to see what Randle can get value-wise in the trade market, it's not realistic to think we can sign 3 max players.. This summer and still pay Clarkson and the other young guys when there eligible to get a long term contract... we can't keep everyone it's just not possible.

what does signing max players have to do with Randle? Simmons should be a 3 even if he can't shoot. He's gona have the same issues on offense as Randle playing the 4 spot without a reliable jump shot. Simmons can have his sz and speed advantage at the 3 and would be better at creating for the team, we can play small ball line up of simmons/nance/randle....Randle sucks on D but I don't believe he can't get good or respectable at it.

[stan francisco]

If we get Ben Simmons, may he be the only one on the Lakers payroll with those initials.

How to react to that I'd prefer to worry about first when or "if" it happens...