All things number 4. Trade or draft? Let the rumors begin

myersia · Post #1 » by **myersia** » Wed May 15, 2019 1:07 am

Here we go fellas!!!!!!

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

myersia · Post #2 » by **myersia** » Wed May 15, 2019 1:10 am

Mocks have us with garland

Watch on YouTube

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

ChiCitySPORTS#1 · Post #3 » by **ChiCitySPORTS#1** » Wed May 15, 2019 1:18 am

Would you entertain #7 for ball?

Michael Lucky · Post #4 » by **Michael Lucky** » Wed May 15, 2019 1:19 am

Most Mocks ive seen dont have Garland at 4. It's a bit of a cluster there.

TKainZero · Post #5 » by **TKainZero** » Wed May 15, 2019 1:19 am

I think we need to let the dust settle for a while

Post #6 » by **dockingsched** » Wed May 15, 2019 1:21 am

ChiCitySPORTS#1 wrote:Would you entertain #7 for ball?

Laughably bad for the Lakers

Michael Lucky · Post #7 » by **Michael Lucky** » Wed May 15, 2019 1:22 am

Also if you did get Garland it would likely mean the Lakers would be looking to trade Lonzo, so im not sure how that works.

Pythagoras · Post #8 » by **Pythagoras** » Wed May 15, 2019 1:23 am

ChiCitySPORTS#1 wrote:Would you entertain #7 for ball?

Nah

ChiCitySPORTS#1 · Post #9 » by **ChiCitySPORTS#1** » Wed May 15, 2019 1:25 am

dockingsched wrote:
ChiCitySPORTS#1 wrote:Would you entertain #7 for ball?

Laughably bad for the Lakers

Yeah - I wouldn’t go that far. Might have an inflated sense of Lonzos value. But nonetheless thanks for the info.

Ball so hard · Post #10 » by **Ball so hard** » Wed May 15, 2019 1:25 am

Michael Lucky wrote:Also if you did get Garland it would likely mean the Lakers would be looking to trade Lonzo, so im not sure how that works.

Ball could easily play the 2. He would actually fit quite well with Ball.

Ball so hard · Post #11 » by **Ball so hard** » Wed May 15, 2019 1:27 am

I'm in favor of trading the pick for AD.

RamonSessions7 · Post #12 » by **RamonSessions7** » Wed May 15, 2019 1:28 am

ChiCitySPORTS#1 wrote:
dockingsched wrote:
ChiCitySPORTS#1 wrote:Would you entertain #7 for ball?

Laughably bad for the Lakers

Yeah - I wouldn’t go that far. Might have an inflated sense of Lonzos value. But nonetheless thanks for the info.

Naw it’s bad.

Post #13 » by **dockingsched** » Wed May 15, 2019 1:29 am

ChiCitySPORTS#1 wrote:
dockingsched wrote:
ChiCitySPORTS#1 wrote:Would you entertain #7 for ball?

Laughably bad for the Lakers

Yeah - I wouldn’t go that far. Might have an inflated sense of Lonzos value. But nonetheless thanks for the info.

Not so much inflated sense of Lonzo’s worth, more so absolutely no interest in players in this draft outside the very top.

Michael Lucky · Post #14 » by **Michael Lucky** » Wed May 15, 2019 1:30 am

From a player value yeah Lonzo is better than the 7th pick of this draft. Having said his injuries and how brittle he is does deflate his value some.

jigga_man · Post #15 » by **jigga_man** » Wed May 15, 2019 1:30 am

ChiCitySPORTS#1 wrote:Would you entertain #7 for ball?

Are you talking about the the same Lonzo Ball that has a broken jumpshot (career 44% free throw shooting where Steph Curry has a higher FG% being guarded) that's injury prone, with an obnoxious self promoting parent who's using the team to elevate his brand?

Yes, I'll entertain that.

Vae Victus · Post #16 » by **Vae Victus** » Wed May 15, 2019 1:33 am

dockingsched wrote:
ChiCitySPORTS#1 wrote:Would you entertain #7 for ball?

Laughably bad for the Lakers

Is it? Lonzo only has 2 rookie years left and he's barely improved a lick in his 2nd year and has proven to be fragile and injury prone.

If a great prospect is available at #7 and the Lakers could use a few extra mil in cap room to make a move... i say pull the trigger.

Lonzo's gross inability to shoot is just a liability a good team cant tolerate from their PG.

RamonSessions7 · Post #17 » by **RamonSessions7** » Wed May 15, 2019 1:37 am

Vae Victus wrote:
dockingsched wrote:
ChiCitySPORTS#1 wrote:Would you entertain #7 for ball?

Laughably bad for the Lakers

Is it? Lonzo only has 2 rookie years left and he's barely improved a lick in his 2nd year and has proven to be fragile and injury prone.

If a great prospect is available at #7 and the Lakers could use a few extra mil in cap room to make a move... i say pull the trigger.

Lonzo's gross inability to shoot is just a liability a good team cant tolerate from their PG.

Definitely improved this past year. Shot and injuries a question mark sure but “great prospects” are usually not falling to 7.

Michael Lucky · Post #18 » by **Michael Lucky** » Wed May 15, 2019 1:40 am

Honestly, if NO keeps AD, i would call the knicks and trade Lebron for #3 so we arent stuck in Limbo another 2 years and we can have a head start on having a solid young core.

myersia · Post #19 » by **myersia** » Wed May 15, 2019 1:42 am

RamonSessions7 wrote:
Vae Victus wrote:
dockingsched wrote:Laughably bad for the Lakers

Is it? Lonzo only has 2 rookie years left and he's barely improved a lick in his 2nd year and has proven to be fragile and injury prone.

If a great prospect is available at #7 and the Lakers could use a few extra mil in cap room to make a move... i say pull the trigger.

Lonzo's gross inability to shoot is just a liability a good team cant tolerate from their PG.

Definitely improved this past year. Shot and injuries a question mark sure but “great prospects” are usually not falling to 7.

Why did we bring in kidd if we trade away zo? Only way I trade zo is if pelicans ask for 4 and 7 and Ingram for Davis. Zo should be even better defensively with Vogel. Not really worth it unless pelicans want another pick. In that case we could entertain a three team trade with the bulls.

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

Showtime:Part2 · Post #20 » by **Showtime:Part2** » Wed May 15, 2019 1:43 am

Plot twist: lebron and 4 for Zion. Lbj/ad/holiday/mirotic/Randle/garland. That team can compete