2017 Lakers Draft Pick Discussion

Michael Lucky · Post #1601 » by **Michael Lucky** » Sun Jun 18, 2017 2:51 am

Really Ty? :lol:

It is ok to admit that Fultz is at the top of our board. You are still going to get Ball at the end of the day.

iamworthy · Post #1602 » by **iamworthy** » Sun Jun 18, 2017 2:51 am

So per Woj Lonzo is the Lakers second option...which they will get.

Post #1603 » by **TyCobb** » Sun Jun 18, 2017 2:53 am

Michael Lucky wrote:Really Ty?

It is ok to admit that Fultz is at the top of our board. You are still going to get Ball at the end of the day.

Yeah, really. You think Philly needed to hand over that much to top a Lakers offer? Hell no. We don't have much to offer ourselves outside of players. This is straight politics, whether you believe it or not.

Leor_77 · Post #1604 » by **Leor_77** » Sun Jun 18, 2017 2:54 am

TyCobb wrote:
Leor_77 wrote:Yeah, I'm not gonna lie, seeing how badly we wanted Fultz and that we were willing to trade up...It doesn't speak very well of Lonzo. Doesn't look like we are that high on him.

The Celtics could have told the Lakers this:

"Look, we're not high on Fultz and we're leaning on taking Ball here with the #1. Meanwhile, Philly is really high on Fultz. If you go public with your admiration for Fultz and draw up the price for us, then we won't select Ball and we'll trade the pick to Philly so you guys can have Lonzo to yourselves."

+

#3 spot is such a pivotal spot in this draft. That is where we were hearing Philly and Kings trade talks. Boston's endgame is to stockpile assets for a 'consensus' #1 player who wasn't an ideal fit for them.

Your post makes no sense, man - they value Fultz over Ball, and even tried to trade up to get him.

Post #1605 » by **TyCobb** » Sun Jun 18, 2017 2:56 am

Leor_77 wrote:Your post makes no sense, man - they value Fultz over Ball, and even tried to trade up to get him.

Leaking Randle's name makes no sense. All the Lakers had to do was say they loved him and he murdered the workout. The trade proposals is nonsense.

Michael Lucky · Post #1606 » by **Michael Lucky** » Sun Jun 18, 2017 2:56 am

TyCobb wrote:
Michael Lucky wrote:Really Ty?

It is ok to admit that Fultz is at the top of our board. You are still going to get Ball at the end of the day.

Yeah, really. You think Philly needed to hand over that much to top a Lakers offer? Hell no. We don't have much to offer ourselves outside of players. This is straight politics, whether you believe it or not.

Philly does not know how much we are willing to offer and we might never know ourselves. Not to mention the 2 pick is still better than the third.

Pythagoras · Post #1607 » by **Pythagoras** » Sun Jun 18, 2017 2:56 am

Leor_77 wrote:Yeah, I'm not gonna lie, seeing how badly we wanted Fultz and that we were willing to trade up...It doesn't speak very well of Lonzo. Doesn't look like we are that high on him.

They could be high on Lonzo just higher on Fultz. That would describe my feelings about the two. Fultz look like a Derrick Rose/Russell Westbrook level prospect. Ball looks more like a Kidd level prospect. Still hardly a bad consolation prize.

Optms · Post #1608 » by **Optms** » Sun Jun 18, 2017 2:57 am

We have to believe Boston isn't done here, right? They're probably gonna package that 3rd and other picks to go after Butler or PG.

Michael Lucky · Post #1609 » by **Michael Lucky** » Sun Jun 18, 2017 3:00 am

Pythagoras wrote:
Leor_77 wrote:Yeah, I'm not gonna lie, seeing how badly we wanted Fultz and that we were willing to trade up...It doesn't speak very well of Lonzo. Doesn't look like we are that high on him.

They could be high on Lonzo just higher on Fultz. That would describe my feelings about the two. Fultz look like a Derrick Rose/Russell Westbrook level prospect. Ball looks more like a Kidd level prospect. Still hardly a bad consolation prize.

Pretty much this. I expect to see the Lakers leaking out that Lonzo is their pick after Monday. The only way I would start worrying is if Lonzo starts having workouts tomorrow or Monday with other teams. But there are worse reports about Jackson's workout with the Lakers going as far as saying he was bad.

Optms · Post #1610 » by **Optms** » Sun Jun 18, 2017 3:00 am

Pythagoras wrote:
Leor_77 wrote:Yeah, I'm not gonna lie, seeing how badly we wanted Fultz and that we were willing to trade up...It doesn't speak very well of Lonzo. Doesn't look like we are that high on him.

They could be high on Lonzo just higher on Fultz. That would describe my feelings about the two. Fultz look like a Derrick Rose/Russell Westbrook level prospect. Ball looks more like a Kidd level prospect. Still hardly a bad consolation prize.

True but I would rather have the Kidd level prospect who can actually shoot. Court vision isn't something you can teach. If all else fails, Ball is going to have a long career just based on his ability to find players. He's really special in that aspect.

Pythagoras · Post #1611 » by **Pythagoras** » Sun Jun 18, 2017 3:02 am

Optms wrote:We have to believe Boston isn't done here, right? They're probably gonna package that 3rd and other picks to go after Butler or PG.

I would think it's either A) Use their shiny new assets to put together a package for Butler, B) Draft Tatum, or C) Trade down again and get 5 and 10. I'd rank those scenarios in that order for their potential plans. I don't buy them wanting Jackson at all.

Post #1612 » by **Goudelock** » Sun Jun 18, 2017 3:02 am

wtf is Boston doing? How many freaking picks do you need?

Post #1613 » by **TyCobb** » Sun Jun 18, 2017 3:03 am

Optms wrote:True but I would rather have the Kidd level prospect who can actually shoot. Court vision isn't something you can teach. If all else fails, Ball is going to have a long career just based on his ability to find players. He's really special in that aspect.

Not to mention a Fultz + Russell backcourt would be the laziest in the league defensively. Ball is full of energy and is constantly in motion on both sides of the ball.

Pythagoras · Post #1614 » by **Pythagoras** » Sun Jun 18, 2017 3:07 am

Optms wrote:
Pythagoras wrote:
Leor_77 wrote:Yeah, I'm not gonna lie, seeing how badly we wanted Fultz and that we were willing to trade up...It doesn't speak very well of Lonzo. Doesn't look like we are that high on him.

They could be high on Lonzo just higher on Fultz. That would describe my feelings about the two. Fultz look like a Derrick Rose/Russell Westbrook level prospect. Ball looks more like a Kidd level prospect. Still hardly a bad consolation prize.

True but I would rather have the Kidd level prospect who can actually shoot. Court vision isn't something you can teach. If all else fails, Ball is going to have a long career just based on his ability to find players. He's really special in that aspect.

I'm not going to complain about getting Ball at all. I think he's a very good/near elite prospect who fits the team just a little bit better than Fultz (although I think Fultz would have been a better fit than some realized).

MAMBAEMD · Post #1615 » by **MAMBAEMD** » Sun Jun 18, 2017 3:16 am

This is great news for us.
We get Ball. I think he is a much better fit for us than Fultz.
Court vision, pass first mentality, active on D. Just the glue type player that has star potential.

jay51024 · Post #1616 » by **jay51024** » Sun Jun 18, 2017 3:22 am

Read on Twitter

Princeinrevolt · Post #1617 » by **Princeinrevolt** » Sun Jun 18, 2017 3:22 am

Read on Twitter

jigga_man · Post #1618 » by **jigga_man** » Sun Jun 18, 2017 3:26 am

Edit: nvm. misread tweet

Post #1619 » by **TyCobb** » Sun Jun 18, 2017 3:29 am

Wow, that is pretty weak for the Celtics. Celtics fans pissed. :laugh:

Wonder if Fultz's poor workout in Philly lessened the return.

iamworthy · Post #1620 » by **iamworthy** » Sun Jun 18, 2017 3:29 am

Read on Twitter

Who do the Lakers draft on June 22nd with the 2nd overall pick?