ImageImageImageImageImage

What IF Russell was in Phi?

Moderators: Kilroy, Danny Darko, TyCobb

mksp
Analyst
Posts: 3,193
And1: 2,663
Joined: May 31, 2012
     

Re: What IF Russell was in Phi? 

Post#41 » by mksp » Wed Jan 20, 2016 4:15 pm

Slava wrote:
mksp wrote:The argument that Okafor was a bad fit because the Lakers already had Randle seems flawed. I'm just not sure Randle has enough talent to warrant consideration on this front.

Even with Jahlil's horrible start to the season, he's crushing Randle in terms of advanced stats:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&p1=okafoja01&p2=randlju01&p3=&p4=&p5=&p6=

So question is would you rather build around Clarkson + Okafor (moving Randle for some value) or Russell + Randle (moving Clarkson for some value).


I don't understand, why do we have to trade anyone now when they don't have much value? We would rather develop them a while longer and sell at peak value if we have to.


I guess that all depends whether you think they've actually already hit their peak value or not.

Hinkie aggressively decided the LAL 2016 pick was peak value for MCW, and we're all pretty happy with that trade, even though he's been playing a bit better lately.

It's a risk I suppose. Another two years of similar production and Randle will have very little value.

Never said it was an easy call!
Slava
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 61,128
And1: 33,799
Joined: Oct 15, 2006
     

Re: What IF Russell was in Phi? 

Post#42 » by Slava » Wed Jan 20, 2016 4:22 pm

mksp wrote:
Slava wrote:
mksp wrote:The argument that Okafor was a bad fit because the Lakers already had Randle seems flawed. I'm just not sure Randle has enough talent to warrant consideration on this front.

Even with Jahlil's horrible start to the season, he's crushing Randle in terms of advanced stats:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&p1=okafoja01&p2=randlju01&p3=&p4=&p5=&p6=

So question is would you rather build around Clarkson + Okafor (moving Randle for some value) or Russell + Randle (moving Clarkson for some value).


I don't understand, why do we have to trade anyone now when they don't have much value? We would rather develop them a while longer and sell at peak value if we have to.


I guess that all depends whether you think they've actually already hit their peak value or not.

Hinkie aggressively decided the LAL 2016 pick was peak value for MCW, and we're all pretty happy with that trade, even though he's been playing a bit better lately.

It's a risk I suppose. Another two years of similar production and Randle will have very little value.

Never said it was an easy call!


MCW was a 23 year old sophomore when Hinkie traded him, that's the equivalent of Clarkson. Randle just turned 21, effectively a rookie and raw. We can afford to wait on him and sign a PF in free agency or just play Nance until we know what we can get.

Take your doom mongering elsewhere.
:king: + :angry: = :wizard:
mksp
Analyst
Posts: 3,193
And1: 2,663
Joined: May 31, 2012
     

Re: What IF Russell was in Phi? 

Post#43 » by mksp » Wed Jan 20, 2016 4:43 pm

Slava wrote:
mksp wrote:
Slava wrote:
I don't understand, why do we have to trade anyone now when they don't have much value? We would rather develop them a while longer and sell at peak value if we have to.


I guess that all depends whether you think they've actually already hit their peak value or not.

Hinkie aggressively decided the LAL 2016 pick was peak value for MCW, and we're all pretty happy with that trade, even though he's been playing a bit better lately.

It's a risk I suppose. Another two years of similar production and Randle will have very little value.

Never said it was an easy call!


MCW was a 23 year old sophomore when Hinkie traded him, that's the equivalent of Clarkson. Randle just turned 21, effectively a rookie and raw. We can afford to wait on him and sign a PF in free agency or just play Nance until we know what we can get.

Take your doom mongering elsewhere.


You guys really aren't a lot of fun here. Whatever, I'm not the one that started a Philly thread on the board. I'll leave y'all alone to wallow in the mediocrity of the Lakers.


Warned for trolling.

-Slava
User avatar
Renegade_H
Senior
Posts: 610
And1: 302
Joined: Nov 16, 2015
       

Re: What IF Russell was in Phi? 

Post#44 » by Renegade_H » Fri Jan 22, 2016 7:00 pm

Sofa King wrote:
Michael Lucky wrote:
Sofa King wrote:Russell would probably eventually be traded if you look what Philly did to previous picks MCW and Turner.

Not really comparable. Turner played four years with Phil before trading him and MCW was a 22 year old rookie with a low ceiling. The MCW trade was actually a very good trade for Phi.


Whatever. Just going by history of their franchise and how poorly run they are especially at developing talent. Also throw in the Embiid saga in the mix.


Image
Slava
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 61,128
And1: 33,799
Joined: Oct 15, 2006
     

Re: What IF Russell was in Phi? 

Post#45 » by Slava » Fri Jan 22, 2016 7:09 pm

Yeah, the Lakers find a need to hate on the purgatory that the 76ers have been in over the past decade. Anyways this has run its course.
:king: + :angry: = :wizard:

Return to Los Angeles Lakers