What's new
By:

The Lakers, Kevin Love and the Utah Jazz

green said:
Fair point. So, we throw out all of the Minnesota crap, and keep Kanter and Burks. The only issue with that is, you would then have to decide between two of these three players:

Gortat
Kanter
Burks

The biggest problem with that, is that you sacrifice your future cap space by keeping Kanter and Burks. So you had better be sure that those two are who you want.

With how bad we were this year, I'm not sold on those two. I think I'd rather have Gortat, Randle and cap space over Kanter, Burks and no cap space.
Click to expand...

The main reasons we were bad this year:

1. We were designed to be, numb nuts!
2. GSW trade and those 3 who came with it.
3. Pace of play mixed with Hayfense, mixed with Corbin's defensive schemes.
4. JLIII was our FA signing.
5. Diante Garrett, who posted a PER of 7.10, was still clearly our best option as 2nd PG.
6. Trey was a rookie, and he logged major minutes.
7. EVERYONE played a new role.
8. Our bench.


Kanter and Burks both posted above average PER's, and career highs almost across the board. Both looked really good down the stretch, which is how you want them trending as they develop. Only imbeciles would blame this season on the core 5-7(Gobert+Evans).
 
Sexual Favors said:
These two will be the best of our current core in three years. Book it.
Click to expand...

Then I don't think we will be that good. Neither plays much defense. Kanter doesn't pass. Are you willing to sink 20 million (possibly more) per year (32% of the cap) on two players that took you all the way to the 4th worst record in the NBA?

I'm not sold on Burks and Kanter.

Like I mentioned above, I'd trade 26 pts, 4 assists, 11 rebs, 20 million + per year/4 years (no cap flexibility) for 20 pts, 3 assists, 13 rebs, plus Randle, plus cap flexibility.

Long term, I'm not sure Burks and Kanter are good enough to keep our draft pick. We need flexibility.

Imagine if year three, Wiggins, Hayward and Favors are leading us to a top three seed in the West. Or top 5. Then going into that summer, we suddenly have room for a max player. So, when Wiggins comes to his extension time, you can give him max money, plus bring in a max player to play with him versus, telling him "this is your team, we can't better, please stay with us."

Cap room is king. I'm not sure Kanter and Burks is worth getting rid of that. Especially if we can replace them with cheaper, better defending options.
 
The way our books are designed right now, we can keep all of our draftees and not have to worry about extending our 2014 draft class because Hayward and Favors' contracts will be coming off the books. That's five years away, and four seasons of play. Let's keep our guys. They're building chemistry, and before you know it, they will be vets as well.
 
Very few yong players are two way players. You should be grateful that Kanter and Burks have some offensive potency, since that is usually the side of the ball that cannot be taught.
 
Sexual Favors said:
The way our books are designed right now, we can keep all of our draftees and not have to worry about extending our 2014 draft class because Hayward and Favors' contracts will be coming off the books. That's five years away, and four seasons of play. Let's keep our guys. They're building chemistry, and before you know it, they will be vets as well.
Click to expand...

If you go my route, instead of no cap space, you would have 8 million after this year, then 15, then 30. If you keep Kanter and Burks, you are strapped cap wise, with no money for vet pieces. I'm not so sure you could say any chemistry was built last year.

Big gamble.
 
Sexual Favors said:
Very few yong players are two way players. You should be grateful that Kanter and Burks have some offensive potency, since that is usually the side of the ball that cannot be taught.
Click to expand...

This is true. BUT, the good news is, as good as Kanter and Burks MAY be, at this point, they are very easily (and cheaply) replaceable.

Like I said, you are giving up Kanter and Burks potential (and remember, if you can't extend them this year, then they are RFA's next and probably end up overpaying for both of them, further hurting your cap space) for Gortat (proven commodity, may not improve, but you know what you are getting), Randle (who probably ends up = to Kanter) and cap space (which means you can continue to improve your team).

I'd take proven commodity, Randle on a rookie deal, and cap space over potential (and potentially overpaying for that potential).
 
Also, if you go my route, in three years (2017) you have Wiggins, Randle, and two draft picks under contract vs Wiggins and two draft picks.

I guess it all really comes down to whether you feel Burks is going to blow up BIG time. Not be a role player, but probably your second best player.

Kanter = Randle (although over the next 4 years, Kanter costs you at least 36 million vs 12 for Randle).

This means that you feel Burks is better than cap space and Gortat. Over the next 4 years, you would save 24 million (probably over 30) just in Kanter vs Randle. Is Burks THAT good? I'm not sure he is.
 
green said:
If you go my route, instead of no cap space, you would have 8 million after this year, then 15, then 30. If you keep Kanter and Burks, you are strapped cap wise, with no money for vet pieces. I'm not so sure you could say any chemistry was built last year.

Big gamble.
Click to expand...


You can add vets who are at decent prices. Marvin Williams is one such vet who wants to be here, and who will be at the MLE. The salary cap has increased for next season, and will do so the following season. Signing Burks and Kanter now, before the next hike up, would be wise. Decent contracts signed now will be really good contracts next offseason.

Our team isn't really in need of vets, they are in need of a system that suits their strengths, a coherent defensive system with checks and balances, and some shooters to plug in and out of the game.
 
green said:
Also, if you go my route, in three years (2017) you have Wiggins, Randle, and two draft picks under contract vs Wiggins and two draft picks.

I guess it all really comes down to whether you feel Burks is going to blow up BIG time. Not be a role player, but probably your second best player.

Kanter = Randle (although over the next 4 years, Kanter costs you at least 36 million vs 12 for Randle).

This means that you feel Burks is better than cap space and Gortat. Over the next 4 years, you would save 24 million (probably over 30) just in Kanter vs Randle. Is Burks THAT good? I'm not sure he is.
Click to expand...

Don't see it the same way as you.

Anyways, Gortat is 30 bro. He was never that good, and this season was probably the last of his prime. All downhill from there.

Also, Randle is not Kanter. Randle is like Kanter's little cousin potential wise. Kanter has him beat in all measureables.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top