Jordan Hill Discussion: Back for 2 yr/$18 mil

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion Thread

Postby tttppp on Mon Mar 19, 2012 2:33 pm

MusixFinest wrote:
tttppp wrote:
khmrP wrote:^^^Like I said bro, I have NEVER seen a team trade a 1st rd pick to dump an expiring before like we did with Sasha, so it is what it is, they doing whats best finacially for them. Whether that will turn around and bite us in the butt will remain to be seen, as of now these late picks that they're selling or shipping away hasn't turned into much, at least I dont think it has.


I think it is hurting us. Thats two first round picks we know they have burned so far. A first round pick usually gets you an impact player. Outside of the Laker big 3 or now 4 (i guess), the Lakers have plenty of room for good young players.

In 2008, I could understand giving away a pick because the roster was full. But there are plenty of openings now.


I'm of the opinion that the front office saw a better return for their picks in Ramon Sessions and Jordan Hill. You get an NBA ready PG (how many of those are out there in next year's draft?) and a big man that's been in the league a few years (big men typically are slower to develop). They probably couldn't guarantee doing as well in the draft so they seized on the opportunity. Plus they got to unload some dead weight. It was a win-win in their mind's eye.



I don't have a problem with trading a pick for Sessions if he turns out to be our answer at pg. That could be a good deal. But trading a pick for a guy who is not expected to play much, and is not expected to be resigned, does not sound like a good deal.
tttppp

 
Posts: 2096
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2006 10:39 pm

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion Thread

Postby tttppp on Mon Mar 19, 2012 2:35 pm

Doc Brown wrote:
tttppp wrote:
Doc Brown wrote:The best we could have done last year in the draft was Norris Cole, Chandler Parsons and Isaiah Thomas.

The best we could have done in 2010 looking back was Landry Fields.

The best we could have done in 2009 looking back was Marcus Thorton or Dejuan Blair

The best we could have done in 2008 looking back was Mbah a Moute or Mario Chalmers.

With the exception of Norris Cole those were all second rounders. In the positions we would have drafted in the 1st round, we would have not been able to draft anyone, except Cole, that we couldn't get in the 2nd round.

1st round picks for us are moot because we are always at the bottom of the round.


I disagree, first round picks usually get you contributors. You have a very good percentage with first rounders. Even if you are picking in the second round, you still have a chance at getting very good players. The guy we traded a 1st for (Sessions), was a second rounder. Marc Gasol was a second rounder, Ginobli was a second rounder. It happens all the time.


Wait what???

I just showed you that the positions the Lakers were in, in the 1st round, we would have netted no one of any impact until the 2nd round. Your second part of your statement just proves why 1st rounders are worthless in the positions the Lakers are usually drafting.


I just showed you you can get good players late in the first round or even in the second round. In just about every draft there are good players available late in the first round and even second round.
tttppp

 
Posts: 2096
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2006 10:39 pm

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion Thread

Postby MusixFinest on Mon Mar 19, 2012 2:35 pm

tttppp wrote:
Doc Brown wrote:The best we could have done last year in the draft was Norris Cole, Chandler Parsons and Isaiah Thomas.

The best we could have done in 2010 looking back was Landry Fields.

The best we could have done in 2009 looking back was Marcus Thorton or Dejuan Blair

The best we could have done in 2008 looking back was Mbah a Moute or Mario Chalmers.

With the exception of Norris Cole those were all second rounders. In the positions we would have drafted in the 1st round, we would have not been able to draft anyone, except Cole, that we couldn't get in the 2nd round.

1st round picks for us are moot because we are always at the bottom of the round.


I disagree, first round picks usually get you contributors. You have a very good percentage with first rounders. Even if you are picking in the second round, you still have a chance at getting very good players. The guy we traded a 1st for (Sessions), was a second rounder. Marc Gasol was a second rounder, Ginobli was a second rounder. It happens all the time.


Have you actually looked at who gets drafted late in the 1st round? And how many of them didn't pan out?? Do you have THAT much faith in our scouts to find the rare gems?? Chaz and Bonnie say thanks for the vote of confidence.
MusixFinest

 
Posts: 311
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 4:24 pm

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion Thread

Postby therealdeal on Mon Mar 19, 2012 2:37 pm

1st Rounders usually net you impact players: false.

NBA Draft 2008:
#8: Joe Alexander
#14: Anthony Randolph
#23: Kosta Koufos
#29: DJ White
#30: J.R. Giddens

2009
#2: Hasheem Thabeet
#6: Johnny Flynn
#11: Terrence WIlliams
#14: Earl Clark
#15: Austin Daye
#22: Victor Claver
#23: Omri Casspi
#24: Byron Mullens
#27: Demarre Carrol
#28: Wayne Ellington
#30: Christian Eyenga

None of these guys are impact players. I don't have time to continue this list, but there are plenty of guys in the 1st round that don't work out.
Stu : "Yeah, that's an old fashioned whoopin'."
therealdeal
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 40322
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:03 pm

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion Thread

Postby tttppp on Mon Mar 19, 2012 2:39 pm

MusixFinest wrote:
tttppp wrote:
Doc Brown wrote:The best we could have done last year in the draft was Norris Cole, Chandler Parsons and Isaiah Thomas.

The best we could have done in 2010 looking back was Landry Fields.

The best we could have done in 2009 looking back was Marcus Thorton or Dejuan Blair

The best we could have done in 2008 looking back was Mbah a Moute or Mario Chalmers.

With the exception of Norris Cole those were all second rounders. In the positions we would have drafted in the 1st round, we would have not been able to draft anyone, except Cole, that we couldn't get in the 2nd round.

1st round picks for us are moot because we are always at the bottom of the round.


I disagree, first round picks usually get you contributors. You have a very good percentage with first rounders. Even if you are picking in the second round, you still have a chance at getting very good players. The guy we traded a 1st for (Sessions), was a second rounder. Marc Gasol was a second rounder, Ginobli was a second rounder. It happens all the time.


Have you actually looked at who gets drafted late in the 1st round? And how many of them didn't pan out?? Do you have THAT much faith in our scouts to find the rare gems?? Chaz and Bonnie say thanks for the vote of confidence.


The Lakers were doing a very good job of drafting when Phil Jackson was coach. I would say at least 50% of them turned out to be good picks. And thats taking into account second round picks as well.
tttppp

 
Posts: 2096
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2006 10:39 pm

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion Thread

Postby tttppp on Mon Mar 19, 2012 2:40 pm

therealdeal wrote:1st Rounders usually net you impact players: false.

NBA Draft 2008:
#8: Joe Alexander
#14: Anthony Randolph
#23: Kosta Koufos
#29: DJ White
#30: J.R. Giddens

2009
#2: Hasheem Thabeet
#6: Johnny Flynn
#11: Terrence WIlliams
#14: Earl Clark
#15: Austin Daye
#22: Victor Claver
#23: Omri Casspi
#24: Byron Mullens
#27: Demarre Carrol
#28: Wayne Ellington
#30: Christian Eyenga

None of these guys are impact players. I don't have time to continue this list, but there are plenty of guys in the 1st round that don't work out.


Get the list of the players the Lakers drafted since 2005. It turned out pretty well for the Lakers when they actually used their picks.
tttppp

 
Posts: 2096
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2006 10:39 pm

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion Thread

Postby MusixFinest on Mon Mar 19, 2012 2:44 pm

tttppp wrote:
therealdeal wrote:1st Rounders usually net you impact players: false.

NBA Draft 2008:
#8: Joe Alexander
#14: Anthony Randolph
#23: Kosta Koufos
#29: DJ White
#30: J.R. Giddens

2009
#2: Hasheem Thabeet
#6: Johnny Flynn
#11: Terrence WIlliams
#14: Earl Clark
#15: Austin Daye
#22: Victor Claver
#23: Omri Casspi
#24: Byron Mullens
#27: Demarre Carrol
#28: Wayne Ellington
#30: Christian Eyenga

None of these guys are impact players. I don't have time to continue this list, but there are plenty of guys in the 1st round that don't work out.


Get the list of the players the Lakers drafted since 2005. It turned out pretty well for the Lakers when they actually used their picks.


They've had 2 first round picks since 2005. Jordan Farmar and Javaris Crittenton. If you call these impact players, I think you need to define "impact".
MusixFinest

 
Posts: 311
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 4:24 pm

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion Thread

Postby Doc Brown on Mon Mar 19, 2012 2:50 pm

tttppp wrote:Get the list of the players the Lakers drafted since 2005. It turned out pretty well for the Lakers when they actually used their picks.


Darius Morris, Glock, Majok, Maduabum - all second rounders (2011)

Devin Ebanks, Derrick Caracter - all second rounders (2010)

Toney Douglas (1st round), Beverley, Eminu - second rounders (2009)

Joe Crawford - second round (2008)

Javaris Crittenton (1st rounder), Sun Yue, Marc Gasol - second rounders (2007)

Jordan Farmar (1st rounder), Samb - second rounder (2006)

Andrew Bynum (1st rounder), Turiaf, Von Wafer - second rounders (2005)

You were arguing trading 1st round picks, now you're trying to save face and go back to second rounders included as well.

I'll say this again. Look at the past drafts and where the Lakers drafted. They did the right thing and give away the pick because no one of any value got drafted until the 2nd round in those drafts. We would have been on the books with scrubs. They made the right move. There were no impact players that we could have gotten in the position we were in, in the draft in the 1st round. We have one impact player in the 1st round since 2005 and that's because we were in the top 10 because we sucked and where the impact players are at.
Rule of Thumb at ClubLakers - Never encourage people to check your post history.
User avatar
Doc Brown

 
Posts: 19446
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 10:11 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion Thread

Postby MusixFinest on Mon Mar 19, 2012 2:51 pm

2005 1 10 Andrew Bynum United States C St. Joseph HS (New Jersey)
2005 2 37 Ronny Turiaf (from New York via Atlanta and Charlotte)[r] France PF/C Gonzaga
2005 2 39 Von Wafer United States G Florida State
2006 1 26 Jordan Farmar (from Miami)[s] United States PG UCLA
2006 2 51 Cheikh Samb (traded to Detroit)[t] Senegal C WTC Cornellà (Spain, 2nd division)
2007 1 19 Javaris Crittenton United States PG Georgia Tech
2007 2 40 Sun Yue (from Charlotte)[u] China PG Beijing Olympians (ABA)
2008 2 58 Joe Crawford United States SG Kentucky
2009 1 29 Toney Douglas (traded to New York)[v] United States G Florida State
2009 2 42 Patrick Beverley (from Charlotte; traded to Miami)[r][w] United States G Arkansas
2009 2 59 Chinemelu Elonu United States PF/C Texas A&M
2010 2 43 Devin Ebanks (from Memphis)[x] United States F West Virginia
2010 2 58 Derrick Caracter United States PF/C UTEP
2011 2 41 Darius Morris (from Golden State Warriors via New Jersey Nets)[y] United States PG Michigan (So.)
2011 2 46 Andrew Goudelock (from New York Knicks)[v] United States SG College of Charleston (Sr.)
2011 2 56 Chukwudiebere Maduabum (traded to Denver Nuggets)[z] Nigeria SF Bakersfield Jam (D-League)
2011 2 58 Ater Majok (from Miami Heat)[w] Syria C So Cal Suryoyo League (Syria)

---

Who in the above list besides Drew and Jordan are getting meaningful minutes in the league today???
MusixFinest

 
Posts: 311
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 4:24 pm

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion Thread

Postby DirtySoap on Mon Mar 19, 2012 2:54 pm

People are reading waaaaay too into this. The Fisher/Jordan Hill trade was clearly made for salary purposes. By making this trade not only do we get out of Fisher's bad contract but we also save ourselves from having to commit guaranteed money to a late round pick (who may or may not contribute) for the next three years. By acquiring Hill, we get a young, former lottery pick, that can help on defense while still developing his offensive game. If the Lakers feel that he's not in their future plans they can refuse his option at the end of the season and we end up saving even more money in the future. These are the games we have to play if we want to field a top-heavy roster with three certified all-stars. With the harsh luxury tax penalties that essentially double salaries, it's easy to see why the Lakers would rather move their pick for cap flexibility than end up paying $7 million to Fisher next season.
User avatar
DirtySoap

 
Posts: 63
Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2006 12:40 pm
Location: Oakland, CA

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion Thread

Postby MusixFinest on Mon Mar 19, 2012 2:59 pm

MusixFinest wrote:2005 1 10 Andrew Bynum United States C St. Joseph HS (New Jersey)
2005 2 37 Ronny Turiaf (from New York via Atlanta and Charlotte)[r] France PF/C Gonzaga
2005 2 39 Von Wafer United States G Florida State
2006 1 26 Jordan Farmar (from Miami)[s] United States PG UCLA
2006 2 51 Cheikh Samb (traded to Detroit)[t] Senegal C WTC Cornellà (Spain, 2nd division)
2007 1 19 Javaris Crittenton United States PG Georgia Tech
2007 2 40 Sun Yue (from Charlotte)[u] China PG Beijing Olympians (ABA)
2008 2 58 Joe Crawford United States SG Kentucky
2009 1 29 Toney Douglas (traded to New York)[v] United States G Florida State
2009 2 42 Patrick Beverley (from Charlotte; traded to Miami)[r][w] United States G Arkansas
2009 2 59 Chinemelu Elonu United States PF/C Texas A&M
2010 2 43 Devin Ebanks (from Memphis)[x] United States F West Virginia
2010 2 58 Derrick Caracter United States PF/C UTEP
2011 2 41 Darius Morris (from Golden State Warriors via New Jersey Nets)[y] United States PG Michigan (So.)
2011 2 46 Andrew Goudelock (from New York Knicks)[v] United States SG College of Charleston (Sr.)
2011 2 56 Chukwudiebere Maduabum (traded to Denver Nuggets)[z] Nigeria SF Bakersfield Jam (D-League)
2011 2 58 Ater Majok (from Miami Heat)[w] Syria C So Cal Suryoyo League (Syria)

---

Who in the above list besides Drew and Jordan are getting meaningful minutes in the league today???


I would have added Toney Douglas but that was really New York's pick. We really need better scouts. Ugh.
MusixFinest

 
Posts: 311
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 4:24 pm

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion Thread

Postby KB24 on Mon Mar 19, 2012 3:04 pm

We also drafted JR Pinnock through a minor trade...
Image

"It is not how big you are, it is how big you play"
"Basketball doesn't build character. It reveals it"
"Be strong in body, clean in mind, lofty in ideals"
User avatar
KB24
Site Admin
 
Posts: 55531
Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2004 10:56 pm
Location: In Heaven

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion Thread

Postby tttppp on Mon Mar 19, 2012 4:14 pm

Doc Brown wrote:
tttppp wrote:Get the list of the players the Lakers drafted since 2005. It turned out pretty well for the Lakers when they actually used their picks.


Darius Morris, Glock, Majok, Maduabum - all second rounders (2011)

Devin Ebanks, Derrick Caracter - all second rounders (2010)

Toney Douglas (1st round), Beverley, Eminu - second rounders (2009)

Joe Crawford - second round (2008)

Javaris Crittenton (1st rounder), Sun Yue, Marc Gasol - second rounders (2007)

Jordan Farmar (1st rounder), Samb - second rounder (2006)

Andrew Bynum (1st rounder), Turiaf, Von Wafer - second rounders (2005)

You were arguing trading 1st round picks, now you're trying to save face and go back to second rounders included as well.

I'll say this again. Look at the past drafts and where the Lakers drafted. They did the right thing and give away the pick because no one of any value got drafted until the 2nd round in those drafts. We would have been on the books with scrubs. They made the right move. There were no impact players that we could have gotten in the position we were in, in the draft in the 1st round. We have one impact player in the 1st round since 2005 and that's because we were in the top 10 because we sucked and where the impact players are at.


Good Picks:

Bynum
Turiaf
Farmar
Critteron
Gasol
Ebanks
Glock

Bad Picks:

Wafer
Samb
Yue
Crawford
Douglas
Beverley
Eminu
Caracter
Morris
Majok
Maduabum

Thats 7 good picks, to 11 bad picks. Not quite 50% like I guessed, but a pretty decent return. If you look at just first round: Bynum, Farmar, Critteron vs. Douglas. Thats 3 good picks vs one bad pick. So there's a 75% chance you get a good player out of the first round. Why would you want to throw away a first round pick? There's a 75% chance you get an impact player.
tttppp

 
Posts: 2096
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2006 10:39 pm

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion Thread

Postby revgen on Mon Mar 19, 2012 4:41 pm

DirtySoap wrote:People are reading waaaaay too into this. The Fisher/Jordan Hill trade was clearly made for salary purposes.


For the most part, yes, but it was also done for practical purposes. With Sessions here, we'd have 4 PG's on the roster. That's too much payroll being spent on PG's. On top of that, we haven't had a deep reserve center since DJ Mbenga left. We get rid of the overload at the PG position and bring in a player to fill in as a deep reserve C in case Bynum and Pau pick up fouls.
"Every time he’s hurt, he always plays, he always comes through."

- Metta World Peace on teammate Kobe Bryant
revgen
HDTV/Multimedia Guru
 
Posts: 21722
Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 10:53 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion Thread

Postby Doc Brown on Mon Mar 19, 2012 4:52 pm

tttppp wrote:Thats 7 good picks, to 11 bad picks. Not quite 50% like I guessed, but a pretty decent return. If you look at just first round: Bynum, Farmar, Critteron vs. Douglas. Thats 3 good picks vs one bad pick. So there's a 75% chance you get a good player out of the first round. Why would you want to throw away a first round pick? There's a 75% chance you get an impact player.


Douglas we didn't draft, we drafted for New York Knicks. Never was our pick. Crittenton was a scrub, how you group him with Farmar and Bynum is beyond me. Ohh yeah you did it to prove your point about getting a good player in the 1st round. The fact that you put Critter as a good pick and Douglas as a bad one is just flat out wrong.

You seriously need to grasp the concept here, this is the last time I will say it, because you are blatantly ignoring my post. There is not a 75% chance we get an impact player. We got Bynum because we sucked and got a good pick. We are routinely in the 27-30 range in the 1st round. I've already went through the draft the last 3-4 years and pointed out the players that we could have gotten in our position.

How can you say their our impact players in the 1st round where we are at? All the good players I mentioned came in the 2nd round. We could have DONE NO BETTER IN THE 1ST ROUND GIVEN OUR POSITION IN THE DRAFT. There's not a 75% chance we get an impact player, that is just laughable. Take Douglas, Critter and Bynum out because we didn't draft Douglas for us, Critter was a bonafide scrub, Bynum was a pick we got because we sucked and have never been in that position to draft a player that high since then. So that leaves Farmar since 2005. You're logic on that is so flawed it's ridiculous.

Please go through and tell me in the last 6 years who the Lakers could have gotten in the 1st round, given their draft position in that 1st round that would have been an impact player. Please go ahead. You will find all second rounders. Please give me the names and not subjective bullcrap. I bet you can't.

To save yourself the time....don't list players that were taken ahead of the Lakers draft position because there is no way we could have gotten those players.
Last edited by Doc Brown on Mon Mar 19, 2012 5:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Rule of Thumb at ClubLakers - Never encourage people to check your post history.
User avatar
Doc Brown

 
Posts: 19446
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 10:11 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion Thread

Postby karacha on Mon Mar 19, 2012 5:07 pm

Crit and Ebanks are good picks? What exactly are those guys doing right now?

Also, Glock? He's a rookie. We don't have a clue if he's going to be productive or not.

Basically, on that list, there are 4 "good" picks: Bynum, Turiaf, Gasol and Farmar. And only two of those are really good players: Bynum (lottery pick) and Gasol (2nd round pick).

So, how many "good" non-lottery players did we get in the first round again? Farmar. I guess he qualifies as good these days.
"It's not realistic to get younger and better when you only have the veteran's minimum to offer free agents." :mhihi:

-Troll Kupchak
User avatar
karacha
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 37447
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 3:20 pm

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion Thread

Postby Vasashi17 on Mon Mar 19, 2012 6:04 pm

Ridiculous trade basketball wise.

This trade was SOLELY done to cut salary. We are not picking up Hill next season, which saves us 7.2M in salary and tax. We dealt away a 20+ pick 1st rounder which saves us another 2.5M in salary and tax. Paying Hill the prorated amount of his 2.8M contract compared to Fish's 3.4M saves us another 1.2M in salary and tax. So in terms of money, LA saves 11M with this deal.

But can someone tell me how that makes our team more championship worthy in the immediate future. Say what you want about Fish in the regular season, but a player like that definitely helps a team in the playoffs. The argument for Hill is that he's big man insurance. But lets say Drew or Pau go down, who gives a damn about insurance, cause our title hopes go down with them. Plus we had big man insurance in LO before we salary dumped him. Personally, I would've liked to pick up Turiaf as big man insurance with our final 15th roster spot. But LA clearly has a one track mind of shedding salary and again, how does that help the immediate chances of a title to a team sporting an aging star in Kobe that needs to supply him weapons for the now.

Fish reached a buyout agreement and in the process opted out of his final year. So tell me, how hard it would've been to have LA convince him to retire this summer. Meanwhile we keep the pick and use it as trade bait. That pick is much better trade bait than Jordan Hill, wouldn't you agree?

What this deal pretty much boiled down to was dumping salary of LO and Fish saving LA millions upon millions in cap and tax. But again, how does this help our team other than fattening up the owners wallet? LA is still way above the cap and shedding LO and Fish's salary still doesn't get us below the tax threshold.

Terrible terrible trades. LO and Fish deserved better, as do the LA fans. Buss and his kin are starting to really irk me...and it started with the mass firings to loyal Lakers employees this last summer and anybody else that was affiliated to Phil and the triangle. Once proud, I'm somewhat ashamed at the purple and gold, cause they're obviously thinking green.
Image
User avatar
Vasashi17
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 13008
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2003 11:38 am
Location: Anywhere Purple & Gold

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion Thread

Postby last stand on Mon Mar 19, 2012 6:38 pm

Lol you aren't looking at it correctly at all. Fisher obviously wasn't who brown wanted to play. Before sessions was even here Blake was seeing the bulk of the minutes. With sessions here he would have seen none. So you advocate paying 6 million for 0 minutes. Horrible idea

Lamar has done nothing but look like an idiot this year. Leaving the mavs for weeks, unable to produce even a little on the court, giving the lakers indications he may retire. Trading Lamar was also the right move.

Also cost cutting yet somehow the lakers have a better team right now. Weird how that happens. Your thinking emotionally not rationally. The mavericks pick was about as ridiculous a pick as possible. Top 20 protected and the mavericks can even choose when to give it up for the next 3 years. Useless pick for 3 years.

Cost cutting, cost cutting yet you don't even understand how strict the new luxury tax is or how the lakers essentially cut all of their deadweight. They cut 32 million in salary essentially because with the luxury tax you pay double. Why should buss have to pay 32 million for people who aren't doing anything. And if everything was about cost cutting buss would have used the amnesty on someone

But they didn't? Why? Because they aren't cost cutting. Lamar is a head case. He always has been. Winning kept it hidden but he's always a ticking time bomb. Fisher wasn't gonna relinquish his spot. No chance. The hope is for sessions to eventually win the starting job. With fisher that will never happen, fisher whined about gary payton why would he step aside for sessions.

Think logically not emotionally, look at the landscape of the roster and the moves that have been made. You'll see that the only cost cutting moves they made were in trying to make all their trades by giving up equal salary or more than what they get back. Simple as that. Also fisher was supposed to be traded for Beasley so again the lakers were prepared to take on salary.
everyone has their top 10 lists of women heres mine

1. emma watson
2. Natalie Portman
3. Mila Kunis
4. Emma Stone
5. Megan Fox
6. jessica biel
7. Teresa Palmer
8. Katy Perry
9. jessica alba
10. Olivia Wilde
last stand

 
Posts: 7501
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2008 11:43 pm

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion Thread

Postby karacha on Mon Mar 19, 2012 6:53 pm

Fish had to go, or retire... one of those things. We can't move forward with Fisher starting and most people understand that.

As for Odom -- he seems to be more interested in his reality show then showing up for training camp in shape. Look what he brings to Dallas. Absolutely nothing. Which is the same thing Fish was doing for us lately. He's DONE.
"It's not realistic to get younger and better when you only have the veteran's minimum to offer free agents." :mhihi:

-Troll Kupchak
User avatar
karacha
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 37447
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 3:20 pm

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion Thread

Postby karacha on Mon Mar 19, 2012 6:57 pm

Vasashi17 wrote:Once proud, I'm somewhat ashamed at the purple and gold, cause they're obviously thinking green.


I'm sorry, but you are way too emotional here. Why in the world would a basketball team make you "proud"? I don't get it.

And why would you suddenly become ashamed? There's nothing personal about this -- it's not about you or me or anyone else. It's an entertainment, and for the owners it's primarily business. Personally, I'm not proud, or ashamed because of the Lakers. I just happen to be a fan who enjoys watching the games. We don't have anything to do with Fisher, Mitch, the Buss family or any of that stuff. They don't even know who we are.

Was I proud because Bynum played well last night? Or ashamed that Kobe played poorly? Would that make any sense at all? :man3: Please help me understand your viewpoint, because I don't see how any of those things have anything to do with me, or you, or anyone on this forum. We did not play -- they did. We did not trade Fish or Odom -- they did.
"It's not realistic to get younger and better when you only have the veteran's minimum to offer free agents." :mhihi:

-Troll Kupchak
User avatar
karacha
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 37447
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 3:20 pm

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion Thread

Postby live and die in LA on Mon Mar 19, 2012 7:00 pm

IF we are going to assume we could easily make Fisher retire at seasons end, we might as well also assume we could trade for a late first round pick using cash in the upcoming draft. Something teams have done the past few seasons.

You have to throw emotions to the side, Fisher has done a lot for the Lakers but this franchise is about winning. Fisher was one of the worst players in the league playing 25+ mpg, possibly the very worst. He wouldn't play with the Sessions acquisition, might as well let him move on.

Trading him for an expiring was a good move, sacrificing the late 1st round pick was necessary to get it done. Of course salary cap implications come into play, that is part of the business.
User avatar
live and die in LA

 
Posts: 4842
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2004 6:23 pm

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion Thread

Postby Vasashi17 on Mon Mar 19, 2012 7:17 pm

Everybody is telling me to put my emotions to the side, but I'm thinking completely rationally here.

Probably the emotion of the hating variety needs to be put to the side. Once you do that, you'll realize that the moves done don't really make us an overwhelming fav for the title, even arguing that Fish's voice and locker room leadership (ie keeping Kobe in check from time to time) may be far more useful in the playoffs than spot minutes by Jordan Hill.

What cannot be ignored is how salary shaving has no implications toward winning now or even winning later, cause the salary dumps do not even position us to make a run at free agents this summer.

What moves we could make are via trade and with Pau as our major trading piece, we lost even more assets by jettisoning our 1st round picks in combination with expiring Ks. Our trade assets went to nil...and all really for Sessions.

I'm completely grounded and rational in stating that I like Sessions alot, but lets not act like he's the savior to this team. You guys are all hating on Fish way too much, blinding you that Sessions is at best a marginal starting PG.

Yet in a starting lineup that sports Kobe, Pau and Drew, only an ace at PG (like a CP3) can demand the ball out of Kobe's hands and setup the bigs as well as Kobe. A marginal guy like Sessions, will not demand the respect from Kobe and therefore will just continuously defer to Kobe out on the wing. Make no mistake about it, Kobe will not allow the ball to be dominated, unless it is by a player that he respects and that has "earned his stripes." Sessions has the potential, but as of right now is not that guy, so no matter how badly you want him with the starting lineup, it will not yield the results that you guys expect. His dribble penetration and ball control can be highlighted with the 2nd team, but with the starters, it will rarely be put on display.

The other guys that came in at the deadline are Eyenga and Hill and again, don't let the hype fool you. These guys will be given spot minutes and will not break a playoff rotation in an already condescended season, where they joined the team midway through.

Y'all need to check your emotions at the door and realize that once looking at the deal rationally, loyalty and player affiliations are just the tip of the ice berg. Salary shaving was the primary incentive by management and it really doesn't help us now nor in the future. So who exactly does it help? Not the fans and that's for damn sure.
Image
User avatar
Vasashi17
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 13008
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2003 11:38 am
Location: Anywhere Purple & Gold

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion Thread

Postby KareemTheGreat33 on Mon Mar 19, 2012 7:19 pm

All I can see is Luke Walton's contract being gone :jam2:
"Allons-y Lakers!"
User avatar
KareemTheGreat33

 
Posts: 7833
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2004 2:52 am
Location: Philippines

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion Thread

Postby JSM on Mon Mar 19, 2012 7:24 pm

Vasashi17 wrote:This trade was SOLELY done to cut salary.

I don't know if I'd go that far. Yes, it was largely financially motivated but Sessions would have had 0% chance of starting if Fish was still here. After getting Sessions, we had to do something with Fisher. He wasn't getting benched, only way Fish would've gotten benched was if we traded for CP3, Deron, etc.

Vasashi17 wrote:But can someone tell me how that makes our team more championship worthy in the immediate future. Say what you want about Fish in the regular season, but a player like that definitely helps a team in the playoffs. The argument for Hill is that he's big man insurance. But lets say Drew or Pau go down, who gives a damn about insurance, cause our title hopes go down with them. Plus we had big man insurance in LO before we salary dumped him. Personally, I would've liked to pick up Turiaf as big man insurance with our final 15th roster spot. But LA clearly has a one track mind of shedding salary and again, how does that help the immediate chances of a title to a team sporting an aging star in Kobe that needs to supply him weapons for the now.

As much as I like Fish and as grateful as I am for everything he's done for LA over the years, at this juncture, I feel losing him was addition by subtraction. I don't see how we were a championship team with him as our starting PG. We still might not be a championship team, but we won't have opposing PGs earning a career contract against us in the post-season. Wouldn't have minded bringing Ronny back because there's a familiarity there, but only thing over Hill he'd bring would be better dance moves and a better personality. But in Hill we did get a hustle, possible rotation big. That is a need this team had -- one of our smaller needs -- but still a need. Drew's health is always a question as far as I'm concerned. Murphy has a history of injuries. McRoberts had an injury this season. And then Pau has his "time of the month" and woman problems...so there's that. No if we lose Drew/Pau for an extended period, it doesn't matter, cause we are done. But if we lose them for a game or two -- like if Drew decided to body check another dwarf -- Hill would come in handy.

Vasashi17 wrote:Fish reached a buyout agreement and in the process opted out of his final year. So tell me, how hard it would've been to have LA convince him to retire this summer. Meanwhile we keep the pick and use it as trade bait. That pick is much better trade bait than Jordan Hill, wouldn't you agree?

Hill is a 5/5 big so no there are no guarantees that essentially a 2nd round pick (late 20s) 1st rounder would've netted us anything better than that. Possible...sure. Teams usually don't like to trade for late 1st round picks, unless they love a guy who they KNOW won't be there in the 2nd. Typically they'll buy a 2nd round pick from a team for much less and that contract isn't guaranteed, like a 1st round pick is. Making it a much sounder financial decision for that organization.

Also, I think there is no way in hell we were going to be able to convince Fish to retire. He's already said this year that he wants to play a couple more years. He gave up next year's salary so he can have complete control over which contender he signs with. I expect to see him backing up Rose or Cole/Chalmers for a couple years.

Vasashi17 wrote:What this deal pretty much boiled down to was dumping salary of LO and Fish saving LA millions upon millions in cap and tax. But again, how does this help our team other than fattening up the owners wallet? LA is still way above the cap and shedding LO and Fish's salary still doesn't get us below the tax threshold.

It helps cause it opens the opportunity for Sessions to start. Also, LO was a mess entering this season. After we attempted to trade him in the CP3 deal and failed, we had to move him somewhere for something. Not to mention the organization felt as though they had a small window to trade him, so while we could've gotten a better deal, we could've had a truncated timetable. After LO left Dallas for a couple weeks, reports came out of LA that we knew he was contemplating retirement. Having LO walk away from the game and leaving the Lakers with nothing in return would've been even worse.
User avatar
JSM
ClubLakers.com Administrator
 
Posts: 94033
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 3:40 pm
Location: Atlanta

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion Thread

Postby Vasashi17 on Mon Mar 19, 2012 7:31 pm

J...I respectfully disagree. Look at the money that management saved with the LO + Fish for Hill + TPE.

Looking at recent history, that TPE will not be used, so that trade stands as is. Terrible deal basketball wise...but in terms of salary shaving, management hit a homerun wouldn't you say?
Image
User avatar
Vasashi17
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 13008
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2003 11:38 am
Location: Anywhere Purple & Gold

PreviousNext

Return to Lakers Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests

cron
Advertise Here | Privacy Policy | ©2008 Sculu Sports. Come Strong.