Mike1989

Be difficult to see which team he could join that are in a better position to compete. I guess there are teams like the Mavericks or Hawks that are in need of a player like him, but him joining alone would not make either team any more of a legitimate contender than the Clippers are right now. Personally I think the Clippers will keep hold of him. All they need to do is find another dominant player to go alongside him and Blake Griffin and they might be in a better position. Not sure about their cap space and who they could get this off season, but if they could manage to persuade a guy like JJ Hickson ©, Josh Smith (SF), Al Jefferson (PF/C), or Monta Ellis (SG); then they could improve their scoring prowess and defense with the right addition. Like you say, the Clippers need help for CP3 and Griffin if they are to lift their first NBA title.

He vetoed the Chris Paul trade, and he doesn't seem to have a Lakers bias. If he did he would have let the Paul trade go through. Dwight could still be a good cornerstone in a team as long as he is under the right coach. I couldn't see him doing what he has done under SVG and D'Antoni under a head coach like Phil Jackson, Pat Riley or Greg Popovich. Those three head coaches wouldn't let him get away with it, they are not pushovers. Even with his issues I don't see any shortage of teams wanting a guy like him. The Mavs will push hard to grab him to pair alongside an ageing but still effective Dirk; or the Rockets might be interested in putting him that team to help them improve defensively. He might be a lousy team mate, but when he's in the right situation he can still be a dominant player in the NBA. He just needs the right head coach to handle him, and motivate him to get the best out of him.

While I agree that Burke is not the best player in the draft, he is a potentially a top five pick, and the reason why people might say we should take him is because we need to find a long term successor for Nelson. I don't think we will take Burke if we have the first or second pick, he is more likely if we have the third or forth. Instead, I think we'll take Noel or McLemore if we pick inside the top two. But if Henny and co believe that Burke is the best player for us, then I am willing to accept what he chooses to do because he does this for a living. The main reason people on this forum are debating who we should pick is because there is no overall consensus on who will go first overall. It isn't like the 2011 draft where Irving was pretty much set to go first overall, or last year with Davies. This year each team that goes first overall might take a different player because of their needs, and while I think we'll probably pass on Burke, it isn't beyond possibility that we decide to take him.

We do have a talented roster, and the Lakers might be tempted to swap their team for it. I believe that in Vuc we have a future all star center, and in Harkless and Harris we have two immensely talented forwards. We do have some really talented back up players. But this team is still far away from being a legitimate contender for the play offs, let alone an NBA title. But if we have a good 2013 and 2014 draft, and also a good free agency in 2014, then we could become a play off contender, and in the years to come, a title contender. So we are in an excellent position talent wise, and cap wise. That said, the Lakers aren't in a bad position cap wise. This off season Howard, Jamison and Clark are out of contract. Then in 2014 Gasol, Kobe, World Peace, Blake, Duhon and Hill are all out of contract. So if none of them are retained, then they will have a LOT of cap space available to them in 2014, and potentially there are some big names available in 2014 like LeBron James, Carmelo Anthony, Chris Bosh, John Wall, Kyrie Irving and some other borderline all star players as well. So by the 2014 off season they could be in a good position cap wise to make a run at a couple of star players, and build a supporting cast for them. I suppose it comes down to what you'd rather have. A team like ours that is in development and might take a good few years before it becomes truly competitive. Or a team like the Lakers which will have (potentially) a lot of cap space available to them to bring in a 'big three' to lead them into the future. As it stands I can't make a judgement on which would be best, because our situation depends on our current players developing, our future draft picks developing, and moves in free agency. Whereas theirs is dependant on them grabbing a few stars and moulding them into a unit like the Celtics and Heat did. Both have their risks, and both have their rewards. I look forward to seeing what route the Lakers take, though I suspect they'll try to land a few stars in 2014 free agency.

Forgot about Howard. But if Howard did leave in free agency, then it would open the window for JJ to go and join them. But I think he'd be a good fit in Chicago as an impact player off the bench, and the chance to go to an offense like Denver might be very appealing also.

He should have no shortage of people vying for his services. I wouldn't be surprised to see him go to a contender and have another bench role. For me a team like Chicago or Brooklyn could use his services, especially Brooklyn. An outside bet might be the Lakers. Might sound silly but with Kobe out for a long period of time, they are in need of a shooting guard that can put up decent points and contribute. Pair him with Nash for the start of the season could work, and then when Kobe returns Redick would give them a legit three point threat off the bench and a good scoring option as well. Not sure what their cap space is like, but it might be a good landing spot for him.

It's certainly a possibility that LeBron might want to go home. But if he opts out then I think the Lakers could be serious contenders for his signature. Kobe said last summer that he saw himself playing for two more seasons (2012-13 and 2013-14). In 2014 Bryant's contract expires, as does Pau Gasol's, Metta World Peace, Steve Blake, and Jordan Hill. Becoming a part of the next era in Lakers' basketball might appeal more to LeBron than going home to Cleveland. But I guess bringing a championship to Cleveland could help heal some wounds he opened by the way he left, and he can retire having delivered what he went there to deliver in the first place.

I'd have to agree, because as much potential as Harkless and Harris may have at the forward position, the chance to grab a (potentially) franchise changing star like Wiggins or Parker might be too good to miss, and that is why I feel that in the 2014 draft we won't target a PG in the first round unless we get an extra first round pick in a trade. For me, I think we'll either end up taking Burke or Noel with our pick this year. Burke gives us the potential replacement for Jameer; though if we go for Noel, he gives us a dominant defensive presence on the court. I'm not sure which we'll go for, or for that matter, which I prefer. But both guys could be good fits with this team, though if we do go for the latter we do have options in trading for a PG or signing one in the 2014 free agency: John Wall, Eric Bledsoe, Ricky Rubio, or Norris Cole. Some are more realistic than others, but all of them could be options to replace Nelson with. Of the lot I think we could perhaps persuade the Clippers to trade Bledsoe for Nelson, because Bledsoe could be our answer at PG for the future, while Nelson could be an excellent impact player for them; and the same goes for the Heat, though I don't think they would have the cap space to take on a contract like Nelson's. So while we could go for a PG in the 2014 draft, I think it is more likely we will go for one in this year's draft if we take the drafting route. If we don't, then I'd expect us to trade for one (perhaps Bledsoe or Cole), or go for one in free agency (Wall, Bledsoe if he gets that far, Rubio if he hits the market, or Cole). Any of them would do for me, but I'll back whatever decision Henny makes. If he goes for Noel this year and takes a PG next year, then so be it.

What was trolling about my post? Or are you not able to comprehend that I created a fictional (i.e. made up) team that might make us a borderline play off contender in response to 'the notorious S.A.C.'? I never said that we are seriously going to pursue Chris Paul and/or Josh Smith in free agency, and I honestly don't think that we will pursue a big name free agent because we'll want to keep as much cap space free for 2014 as possible. Also, it will help towards the team tanking another season in order to land another top pick and a (potentially) franchise changing talent like Wiggins or Parker. Now my opinion is that we will build through the draft this year and next year, and then we may bring in a star free agent in 2014. Now you might disagree with my opinion; and you may have misread or misunderstood that the team with CP3 and Smith was in fact fictional, and not what I think will actually happen; but none of my post is trolling. I am not trying to wind people up with outlandish claims of what will and won't happen. It was banter, it was debate; and if we can no longer do that, what is the point of a message board? :rolleyes:

I'd have to agree in terms of sheer talent. It could work as a pick if we shift T12 to SF, bring Noel in at PF, and keep Vuch at C, then that could give us decent size and some increased defensive ability. But personally I hope we go for Burke, and if he's gone, McLemore.

As talented as Wiggins is, I would not want to see this team sacrifice and trade away Vuc, Harkless and Harris to put all our eggs in the Andrew Wiggins basket. Sure, he has the potential to be a franchise changer and a star in the NBA, and he might be the next 'must not miss' player. But at the same time you don't give away a potential all-star center in Vuc, and two very talented young forwards (one of whom in Harris if he continues to improve could become a borderline all star PF) in order to secure one prospect. You might see Harkless being traded in order to secure another top pick next season (i.e. if we go for McLemore this year at SG, we might want to try and get a pick that will get us Smart for the PG position; or if we go for Burke at PG, then whoever is the top SG prospect). But outside of that I don't see us giving away all three guys for draft picks, I see us building around them even if that means missing out on Wiggins. That being said, I don't see this team becoming a borderline play off contender unless we do something like this: Chris Paul (PG), Ben McLemore (SG), Josh Smith (SF), Harris (PF), Vuc © That line up might make us a play off team, but personally I don't see that scenario playing out. I think we'll probably go young again and move the likes of Nelson, Afflalo and Big Baby out before the end of the season - though we might keep Nelson for experience. For me our starting line up could be something like: Burke (PG), Afflalo (SG), Harkless (SF), Harris (PF), Vuc ©; or Nelson (PG), McLemore (SG), Harkless (SF), Harris (PF), Vuc © That to me is a developmental team, and while they might take a step forward, I don't see us playing our way out of a top five pick.

The guy's got a very good record with the Cavs, so I'm not too surprised that he is under consideration. But if I was going for any free agent head coach I would take a look at Stan Van Gundy, he did an excellent job at the Heat and with us.

In west I'd like to see the Spurs and OKC make the conference final. it would be nice to see either of them make the NBA finals and beat the Heat, and it would give some further credence to what we are trying to do here (i.e. build a winning team with young talent). In the east I'd like to see the Bulls cause the ultimate upset and get to the NBA final, but as much as I'd like to see the Heat ousted I don't think that it will happen. So the teams I'm calling for is Spurs, OKC in the west; and the Bulls in the east.

I think that Albert could fill a big hole at LT. The guy's an excellent left tackle, I don't think he's an improvement on Long, but he's certainly a good replacement. An alternative is to trade up. I saw a mock where we trade up to 6 and take Lane Johnson, and based on the points scale all we would need to put up is 400 and that is one of our second round picks. So that could be an option if we decide against taking Albert.

My predictions to get through the first round are: - Miami, Boston, Indiana, and Chicago - OKC, Lakers, Denver, Clippers Then to make the finals: - Miami, Indiana (though I would love to see the Celtics get past them so we see another Celtics/Heat conference championship series) - OKC, Denver And as for the NBA championship I think it will be between OKC and Miami, and while I think the Heat will probably win it 4-2 or 4-3, I would like to see OKC win the title this year. It would certainly give this organisation the boost it needs to prove that the road we are taking by going for young talent, and high picks in the lottery, is the right way to go; rather than take the Heat approach and bring in a big three. That said, a Miami versus Denver series could be exciting. Also, the Bulls might be a dark horse to get to the finals if Rose returns, but as to whether he'll be enough to overcome the Heat is very debatable. But personally I think it will be a Miami/OKC rematch.

Eastern Conference (1) Miami - versus - (8) Milwaukee Regular season series, Heat lead 3-1. (2) New York Knicks - versus - (7) Boston Regular season series, Knocks lead 3-1. (3) Indiana - versus - (6) Atlanta Regular season series is tied, 2-2. (4) Brooklyn - versus - (5) Chicago Regular season series, Bulls lead 3-1. Western Conference (1) OKC - versus - (8) Houston Regular season series, OKC lead 2-1. (2) San Antonio - versus - (7) LA Lakers Regular season series, Spurs lead 2-1. (3) Denver - versus - (6) Golden State Regular season series, Nuggets lead 3-1. (4) LA Clippers - versus (5) Memphis Regular season series, Clippers lead 3-1.

If we land a top two pick, then I think we'll go for either Ben McLemore or Trey Burke. I think both guys could contribute to the team in a big way. McLemore perhaps has the high ceiling, though Burke seems to have the better mentality. So I think I'd edge towards taking Burke, and if he was gone, then go for McLemore. But if we come to the board at 3 or 4 and those two guys are gone, then I'd like to see us consider Alex Len, the 7'1 center. The kid has a lot of upside at both ends of the court, and if we landed him at 3 or 4, we can always shift Vuc to PF, and then have Harkless or Harris in at SF which would give us excellent size. Another option would be Porter and Bennett, two SFs with a lot of upside, and I think they have the ability to compete with (and potentially oust) Harkless. My top four targets would be: 1. Trey Burke, PG 2. Ben McLemore, SG 3. Alex Len, C 4. Bennett/Porter, SF I think one of those five players could be an excellent addition to our team.

I would be opposed to us trading our solid young prospects for future lottery picks. I can appreciate that as the 'worst' team in the NBA no one should be above being traded for the right price, but I think those three guys will play a big part in this team's future. Vuc is the second best rebounding center in the NBA behind Dwight Howard, and he's shown the ability to contribute to the offense and I think that side of his game could increase to Brook Lopez type levels without too much trouble. I don't see another center in this year's or next year's draft that could displace him, and I include a pre-knee injury Noel. So why trade a center that has shown as much development as Vuc has this season, and to top it off, hasn't reached his ceiling yet? I don't see the point unless you get Dwight Howard in return. For me, Vuc is a big part of this team's future, and I am confident that he will become at least a borderline all star if not an all star center. T12 has shown since coming here that he can be a very good starting power forward in this league, and perhaps even has the ability to become a borderline all star. Now I guess he could be tradable for a top lottery pick for either this or next year's draft. So hypothetically if we land McLemore with our pick this year, then we could go for Cody Zeller or Noel as our PF-come-C, but neither are really as explosive or have the offensive ability that Harris possesses. Next year we could take Wiggins or Parker with our pick at SF, and then we might go for someone like Noah Vonleh or Julius Randle to go in at PF, both lads are talented, and Vonleh has shown signs he could have all star potential, but both will take a year or two before they really hit the ground running. So for me, I would rather see us keep a hold of Harris and see what he does next year, does he push on or regress? I think he'll push on because he is not only very talented, but he has the desire, determination and heart to be a winner. I wouldn't trade him unless we decide to pursue a PF in free agency like Al Jefferson this off season, or Chris Bosh if he opts out in 2014, but personally I'd like to see us continue to develop T12. The only one that might be expendable is Harkless, because if we tank next season and land a top two pick then we will probably take Wiggins or Parker, and that would mean that Harkless would drop to the bench because those two guys are franchise changing small forwards. Now Harkless is a very talented player, but if he stays here then he really needs to breakout next year and prove that he is our long term starting small forward, because if he doesn't and we tank, then I can see us taking Wiggins or Parker and they will probably be franchise changing small forwards. If that happens then he'll either end up as our 6th man, or backup SF/PF. So perhaps he could be traded away at the trade deadline next season for a lottery pick so we could then go for another top player, perhaps Marcus Smart because he could compliment Trey Burke or Ben McLemore if we draft them for PG or SG respectively. I'd personally like to see us build around those three guys, but I guess any player could have his price. Wiggins has significantly better ball handling skills than Harkless, and is a much better scorer. The lad also has elite level athleticism, and although Harkless is very athletic, I think Wiggins has the edge. Wiggins is a franchise changing talent, and many see him as the best high school prospect in the past ten years. Granted this argument is based on the word 'potentially', and the issue with potential is that some guy's never make the grade. So with that in mind Harkless has proved in his rookie year that he could be a very good player in the NBA, and with some more coaching, could develop into a very good starting small forward. Now Tobias Harris seems to be our power forward, and Wiggins and Parker are both small forwards. So I don't see why T12 comes into the argument because the only way T12 becomes our small forward is if we sign Al Jefferson or Chris Bosh in 2013 or 2014 respectively to play at PF or C (if they play C then Vuc becomes our PF), draft Noel to take the PF position which will see us shift T12 to SF to compete with Harkless, or trade Harkless in the off season and shift T12 to SF and sign or draft someone for PF. Personally, Harris is our PF going forwards, but the part I do agree with is that he is a player that could represent this organisation in a positive way. But to bring this back to the future of our SF position. I think that Harkless is in with a shout to make the position his, but he needs to take a HUGE step forward next season. Currently he's averaging 8.2 PPG, with a field goal percentage of 46.1, three point percentage of 27.4, and he contributes 0.7 assistants and 4.4 rebounds. Now those are ok stats for a rookie year, but a guy like Wiggins is tipped to be a power scorer, and he also contributes a fair whack of rebounds as well. So Harkless will need to average at least double figures, if not bring himself into the late teens to give himself a good chance to remain our starting SF. He's very talented, but is it realistic to expect him to put ten onto that PPG, and push up his FGP and TPP? Maybe, but it's going to be tough, and I think he'll likely find himself benched, traded, or at a stretch, shifted to SG which is unlikely if we go for McLemore or go for someone like Monta Ellis in FA.

That could be potentially an excellent starting line up. But I don't think there is a guarantee that we will take McLemore, now that Smart has decided to go back to school. Another choice might be to take Trey Burke. He's been very impressive. He can score well, got a good jump shot. He can run the floor pretty successfully, and has shown he has clutch ability. For me, he could be an excellent option to take if we're looking for a replacement to Jameer, because as it stands we could get picks or more young pieces in return if we decide to trade him instead of letting him walk for free. Some question his height, but he's got a good enough game to compensate. I suppose McLemore might have a higher ceiling, and better size. But there are big questions around him having that killer instinct, and him going missing could be an issue. I don't see that being a major issue because mentality has been a question mark surrounding certain top players. Take Durant and Lebron, both guys at one point or another had question marks over being 'too nice', but both guys have made huge steps and have become dominant players. Now I'm not saying McLemore is on their talent level, but a guy can develop a killer instinct in the right environment. That being said, the kid has a high ceiling and could be an excellent shooting guard. Not sure which guy I would take, but either Burke or McLemore will be the guys I think we'll end up targeting. I guess it depends whether we want to keep Jameer or Afflalo in the starting line up next year, or which guy has more value, but whichever we decide to keep I think the other will be gone. As for John Wall, he would be an excellent replacement for Jameer. He's an extremely talented guard though he would be wanting a max deal or at least a very big pay day. Personally I see him staying in Washington, but we could be an appealing prospect if Harris, Vuc and Harkless take big strides forwards next season. He might find being on that team more appealing than staying in Washington, unless they bring in more pieces. I think we might have a chance if we go into free agency and sign a big name or two. For example: - Chris Paul (PG), Monta Ellis (SG), Harkless (SF), Harris (PF), Vucevic ©; or Chris Paul/Monta Ellis (PG), McLemore (SG), Josh Smith (SF), Harris (PF), Vucevic © I think both of those two teams could compete for a play off spot, but I'm not convinced that they will happen since we'll probably try to tank one more season, or at least leave ourselves with significant cap space for 2014. But if we did try to make a splash in free agency and landed a couple of borderline star players, then we could make a run at the play offs, though we might be best waiting for a franchise changing talent like Wiggins. With that in mind if our line up next year is: - Trey Burke (PG), Afflalo (SG), Harkless (SF), Harris (PF), Vucevic ©; or Nelson (PG), McLemore (SG), Harkless (SF), Harris (PF), Vucevic © Then I don't see us making the play offs. Sure if Harkless, Harris and Vuc all make a huge step forwards, and then our latest first round pick contributes as well whoever fills the remaining spot (be it a vet or another young piece), then we could have an outside chance of making it. The 8th spot is probably going to be up for grabs, but personally I don't see that happening. We'll improve our record and might not be the worst team, but I think we'll still be among the top five worst teams next season.

I think the injury to Kobe might make it a challenge for the Lakers to qualify for the play offs. They have two tough games at home against the Spurs and Rockets, and neither is an easy game. If Dwight and Gasol step up and play at their dominant best, then they'll have a good chance at potentially winning both games, but it will be a tough ask for them. The further problem is that the Jazz own the tiebreaker. So the only way to ensure the play offs is to win both games, unless of course the Lakers win their next game and the Jazz lose. Though personally I don't see the Lakers winning one game, let alone both. The Spurs still have a very limited chance at securing the top seed if OKC falter, and the Rockets will probably want to beat Golden State to 6th place to avoid facing the Spurs or OKC - though Denver isn't exactly a pushover or easy series. With that in mind the Lakers are facing two teams with something left to play for, whereas the jazz don't to an extent. So as it stands I think the scales are tipped in the favor of the Jazz, but it is the Lakers place to lose. That said, neither really have a good chance to get past OKC. I see both teams getting swept (and I include in this a Kobe Bryant led Lakers team). For me, I'm going for the Jazz to oust them after going 1-1 in their remaining games, and the Lakers going 0-2.

Or re-signs with us? :ph34r:

Another good move by the Fins. I'd like to see Gibson added as well, that will give them four decent receivers. But like you I think they need to draft a running back, and perhaps not her tight end as well. As for Long he's left the rams without a deal. I wonder if the Fins will make a serious move to keep him? If not I'd like to see them trade up to grab Eric Fisher, or wait and see if Lane Johnson is on the board. It could be financially more prudent to draft one than give Long $10 + million.

I kinda agree that the Fins might go with a CB like Rhodes, but equally they need a replacement for Long at LT. So they might trade up to land a top tackle, or they might take the next best at 12. Overall I'm happy with the Dolphins signings so far. I like the look of the new linebackers in Ellerbe and Wheeler. Resigning Clemons was a good move. And I think Wallace is potentially an excellent pickup that will give Tannehill a new weapon to stretch the field, my only concern is his contract is large but hopefully he'll have the same effect as Jackson had in Tampa last season.

I don't think the bitter taste of Howard's departure will ever truly leave for some fans. It is just like there are still Cleveland fans that are bitter towards LeBron James, and even if LeBron returned I don't think they'd accept it initially, but they would as soon as they returned to contender status. That said, for me I am not happy in the way he handlded his departure. But at the same time I can appreciate everything he did for this franchise while he was here. He was a damn good player for us, and he helped us become a contender again. It is just a shame we never won a championship with him, but if he had a stronger supporting cast with another star, then we may very well have won at least one NBA championship (eg. Miami had Dwyane Wade and Shaq; the Spurs had Parker, Duncan, Ginóbili and Bowen; the Celtics had Pierce, Allen, Garnett and Rondo; and the Lakers when they beat us had Kobe, Pau Gasol, and Bynum). Now I am not agreeing entirely with Dwight in that he had team mates that no one wanted, but when it comes down to it, he did carry a heavy load with this team, much like LeBron did in Cleveland. If Cleveland and ourselves had brought in another star player to make it a big two, or done like the Celtics did and got a big three, then I think we would have won a championship with Dwight. As for retiring his number, as good as he was, I don't think he has earned it. It's not like he won a championship, or that he did something overly impressive to warrant a retirement for that jersey. He's just like Shaq. We had a great player, but ultimately they'll be remembered for what they did elsewhere more than what they did with us.

I can see what you are trying to argue, and I do agree with you that we've had some impressive players down the years, and had a good contingent of star players. The issue I have with such a list, though is that even if we have had more stars on our roster than the Lakers, what do they have since 1989 that we don't? - 9 finals appearances, with 5 NBA championships wins. - We've had 2 final appearances, and 0 NBA championships. So I guess it comes down to what people value more: having more star players, or having more success via winning championships. Now I might have touched on an issue here that you didn't want to address, but I think this has to come into any argument regarding which team has had the most stars, but most importantly, the stars that came together to win championships. Personally I would still think the Lakers have had more stars than us, and more impressive but not star players than us. That said, we've still got a very proud history, and a bright future ahead of us.