2016 Draft: Top Prospects

[Ohio]

And teams have to be willing to do that.

George is pure fantasy. There's no way the Pacers are trading him. Unless the Lakers want to give them Russell, the number 2 pick, and future picks. That would be the asking price if I'm the Pacers to even entertain this.

I don't think they'd do it either way.

Cousins is a luny. I'm not sure I'd be willing to bank my future on him.

The Lakers were easily one of the worst two teams in the league. You got a rookie coach coming in. If you blow your cap space on two all-stars, not superstars (they're not getting two superstars), and it all goes bad.

Then you've just dug yourself in a big hole.

This rebuilding on an instant fly to make a contender doesn't work very well. Just ask the Knicks how that's gone.

I don't necessarily disagree with you, but there's no way they are going into next season with last year's roster + Ingram.

They will make at least one major trade/signing. Likely more.

 

[godfather]

I don't necessarily disagree with you, but there's no way they are going into next season with last year's roster + Ingram.

They will make at least one major trade/signing. Likely more.

They probably will but I don't think it's a good decision. I think Ingram is the best player in this draft. I don't know if he has Durant upside, but I think he can be a legit star in this league.

I wouldn't trade him away. Not for Butler or Cousins even.

I'd trade him for George straight up, but the Pacers wouldn't consider that trade IMO.

Butler is a very good player, but he's not going to suddenly make them a title contender. He couldn't even get the Bulls into the playoffs in the shitty East. And the Bulls roster is still respectable.

Cousins has never even been in the playoffs.

The smart play would be to continue to develop the roster, keep the cap manageable. And when Ingram and Russell become better players, to then attract the bigger fishes to Hollywood.

No matter what they do they're not competing for a title in the next two years. They're operating on this delusional belief that they can be contenders in a few years.

Unless they can land both Durant and Westbrook in the next few seasons, which is doubtful, then this is not happening.

 

[Jordan]

@godfather, @Rob, interesting you guys are discussing this. I was "war gaming" it with a buddy this morning. Here's what we got:

Lakers' assets:
1) D'Angelo Russell
2) Julius Randle
3) 2016 #2 Overall Pick
4) Lou Williams
5) Nance Jr., Tarik Black, and a host of other filler players
6) Jordan Clarkson (currently unsigned)
7) Future picks

The best way to win in this league is to get stars. Right now, the Lakers are lagging in that department. If they want to be relevant next season, than they do have to trade...

Let's assume that the asking price to even entertain getting a Paul George or Jimmy Butler is astronomically high. Moreover, it would be easier and better off for both teams to make the move for Butler instead of George.

Lakers trade:
-D'Angelo Russell
-Julius Randle
-#2 overall pick
-Lou Williams

Bulls trade:
-Jimmy Butler

(aside, I think Lakers need to give up even more to make the salaries match, so let's just pretend this would work... I'll get to my main point in a second).

Afterwards, let's say the Lakers re-sign Clarkson and find a way to sign both DeRozan and Whiteside. Here is what their current roster would look like:

PG: Nobody
SG: Butler, Clarkson
SF: DeRozan (?), Nance Jr.
PF: Nance Jr., ___
C: Whiteside, Black

In that situation they have no point guard, no backup power forward, no real backup small forward, and DeRozan playing out of position... Even if they could find a way to grab Conley/Teague/Schroeder instead of DeRozan, the depth chart still looks like shit. At best this team is contending for a first round playoff exit with a limited future.

Consequently, it seems better to continue the rebuild and potentially make trades later. Let's examine that world:

PG: D'Angelo, Huertas
SG: Clarkson and potentially DeRozan
SF: Ingram
PF: Randle, Nance Jr.
C: ___ (Whiteside, Moz, etc.), Black

By no means is it a world-beater depth chart, but it has a lot more potential. I think Ingram will be a superstar on-par with KD, but even if he just becomes a basic all-star, that value is still great long-term. D'Angelo reminds me a lot of Lowry, and I think we'll see flashes of a core piece emerge this season. And finally, Randle looks like he can be a starting big in the modern NBA. Thus, in my reading, Lakers have two future stars, two future starters (Clarkson and Randle), and one future rotation player (Nance). In my estimation, that is much more to build around than three stars and no depth.

 

[godfather]

@godfather, @Rob, interesting you guys are discussing this. I was "war gaming" it with a buddy this morning. Here's what we got:

Lakers' assets:
1) D'Angelo Russell
2) Julius Randle
3) 2016 #2 Overall Pick
4) Lou Williams
5) Nance Jr., Tarik Black, and a host of other filler players
6) Jordan Clarkson (currently unsigned)
7) Future picks

The best way to win in this league is to get stars. Right now, the Lakers are lagging in that department. If they want to be relevant next season, than they do have to trade...

Let's assume that the asking price to even entertain getting a Paul George or Jimmy Butler is astronomically high. Moreover, it would be easier and better off for both teams to make the move for Butler instead of George.

Lakers trade:
-D'Angelo Russell
-Julius Randle
-#2 overall pick
-Lou Williams

Bulls trade:
-Jimmy Butler

(aside, I think Lakers need to give up even more to make the salaries match, so let's just pretend this would work... I'll get to my main point in a second).

Afterwards, let's say the Lakers re-sign Clarkson and find a way to sign both DeRozan and Whiteside. Here is what their current roster would look like:

PG: Nobody
SG: Butler, Clarkson
SF: DeRozan (?), Nance Jr.
PF: Nance Jr., ___
C: Whiteside, Black

In that situation they have no point guard, no backup power forward, no real backup small forward, and DeRozan playing out of position... Even if they could find a way to grab Conley/Teague/Schroeder instead of DeRozan, the depth chart still looks like shit. At best this team is contending for a first round playoff exit with a limited future.

Consequently, it seems better to continue the rebuild and potentially make trades later. Let's examine that world:

PG: D'Angelo, Huertas
SG: Clarkson and potentially DeRozan
SF: Ingram
PF: Randle, Nance Jr.
C: ___ (Whiteside, Moz, etc.), Black

By no means is it a world-beater depth chart, but it has a lot more potential. I think Ingram will be a superstar on-par with KD, but even if he just becomes a basic all-star, that value is still great long-term. D'Angelo reminds me a lot of Lowry, and I think we'll see flashes of a core piece emerge this season. And finally, Randle looks like he can be a starting big in the modern NBA. Thus, in my reading, Lakers have two future stars, two future starters (Clarkson and Randle), and one future rotation player (Nance). In my estimation, that is much more to build around than three stars and no depth.

Yep. I actually like their core going forward. I think D'Angelo will be a borderline star like Lowry. He's not going to be Kyrie, Westbrook, Lillard, and obviously not Curry. I like that pic better than Okafor, who I think will be nothing in this league personally.

They got a decent core in place. They can still sign a really good player this summer without breaking up assets. A team that lacks a lot of talent shouldn't be making these types of trades unless they're getting a sure fire superstar.

I don't consider Butler that at all. He's very good, but definitely not worth breaking the bank for IMO.

Cousins is really talented, but crazy. Too much baggage. That's cruel for a rookie head coach to have to take him on for his first head coaching gig.

 

[Jordan]

Yep. I actually like their core going forward. I think D'Angelo will be a borderline star like Lowry. He's not going to be Kyrie, Westbrook, Lillard, and obviously not Curry. I like that pic better than Okafor, who I think will be nothing in this league personally.

They got a decide core in place. They can still sign a really good player this summer without breaking up assets. A team that lacks a lot of talent shouldn't be making these types of trade unless they're getting a sure fire superstar.

I don't consider Butler that at all. He's very good, but definitely not worth breaking the bank for IMO.

Cousins is really talented, but crazy. Too much baggage. That's cruel for a rookie head coach to have to take him on for his first head coaching gig.

We agree 100%.

Butler = very, very good player. Top-20 in the NBA. But not a franchise changer.
PG13 = A superstar, but he is not going anywhere.
Cousins = A superstar, but can ruin your franchise just as much as he can benefit it. On top of the right coach, you need the right system too.

If all three of Russell, Randle, and Simmons/Ingram become your everyday star, that is a playoff team that can make some noise. If one of them becomes a starter, another an everyday star, and one a superstar, well, that becomes a team that can contend for championships.

The Lakers won't be done after they make their draft pick. Almost assuredly they are going to go after guys like DeRozan, Whiteside, Conley, etc. to fill out their roster. Lakers fans and management just need to accept it will take another season before they are ready to make the playoffs. If the team is patient, they will be in the playoffs during the 2017-18 season.

I'm usually open to the idea of trading a pick, or young potential, for a franchise changing star. But only two of those are available, and I don't think the likelihood is high that the Lakers would be better-off for doing so.

 

[Ohio]

@jking948 I think you are grossly overestimating how much it would take to get Butler in a trade. Ingram is one of the better prospects we've seen in years. That pick is incredibly valuable, easily more so than Randle and probably more so than Russell after last season's shenanigans.

Whether they should pull the trigger on a trade for Butler/George/Cousins completely depends on how much they would have to give up.

Cousins has been a headcase on a terrible team and is a free agent in a year. Butler and Chicago are apparently not seeing eye to eye. Both Sacramento and Chicago have poor front offices. George didn't seem pleased with how things went this year with the team and who knows how he feels about the coaching change.

I think LA could land one of these guys without having to give up much more than Williams, Young, and the pick. Maybe they have to give up one of Russell/Randle, but giving up both would be asinine and shouldn't be necessary.

All a matter of opinion of course. We'll know before long, I'm sure.

 

[Jordan]

@jking948 I think you are grossly overestimating how much it would take to get Butler in a trade. Ingram is one of the better prospects we've seen in years. That pick is incredibly valuable, easily more so than Randle and probably more so than Russell after last season's shenanigans.

Whether they should pull the trigger on a trade for Butler/George/Cousins completely depends on how much they would have to give up.

Cousins has been a headcase on a terrible team and is a free agent in a year. Butler and Chicago are apparently not seeing eye to eye. Both Sacramento and Chicago have poor front offices. George didn't seem pleased with how things went this year with the team and who knows how he feels about the coaching change.

I think LA could land one of these guys without having to give up much more than Williams, Young, and the pick. Maybe they have to give up one of Russell/Randle, but giving up both would be asinine and shouldn't be necessary.

All a matter of opinion of course. We'll know before long, I'm sure.

Perhaps you are correct. If it took Lou Williams, Russell, and the pick to land any of those three you absolutely have to think about it. I'd be more hesitant about trading for Butler compared to the other two. But that's for sure a possible move.

I was using Love's trade as a barometer... It took a can't miss prospect, a future first, and a guy with potential but who has shown nothing in the NBA so far.

Perhaps, then, Ingram/Simmons, Randle, Williams, and maybe a future pick is enough to land a guy like Boogie Cousins. In that situation you have starting point guard and starting center figured out, as well as a backup PF. If you could bring in a backup, experienced point guard, a star wing, and a few other spot-starters that team is solid. I just don't know if it is worth making the trade long-term, but I think you agree with me here and are simply stating the Lakers may try to make the move.

P.S., I think the Lakers will have to pay to move Nick Young. I don't think any team would look at him as additional value.

 

[Ohio]

I just threw in Young for salary purposes, although with all the cap space the salaries might not even matter.

 

[Ohio]

I'm just happy Boston didn't get a top 2 pick. #3 is still high, and they could probably still get a star if they really want to, but not as easily as they could have had they gotten top 2.

I honestly hope the Lakers do make a trade because that hurts Boston in their pursuit of a star.

 

[godfather]

I think the Sixers are getting the bust of the draft. I really don't like Simmons at all. Maybe I'll be wrong. I don't think he'll be bad, but I don't see superstar at all in him. I'm not even sure all-star.

He just doesn't enamor me personally.

He can pass well for his size? That's why he's going number one? That seems kinda silly.

This seems like a combine kind of pick. Has the size, athleticism, and a great skill as a passer. When he lacks everything else you'd want as a franchise player.

I'd easily draft Ingram over him. Ingram has some concerns, but the upside is way higher.

 

[AZ_]

I think the Sixers are getting the bust of the draft. I really don't like Simmons at all. Maybe I'll be wrong. I don't think he'll be bad, but I don't see superstar at all in him. I'm not even sure all-star.

He just doesn't enamor me personally.

He can pass well for his size? That's why he's going number one? That seems kinda silly.

This seems like a combine kind of pick. Has the size, athleticism, and a great skill as a passer. When he lacks everything else you'd want as a franchise player.

I'd easily draft Ingram over him. Ingram has some concerns, but the upside is way higher.

He runs the floor better than anybody his size since LeBron came into the league.

Point forward with elite handles and passing ability for his position. Gets to the hole and finishes at an elite level.

Literally the only thing he's missing is a consistent jumper, but he'e also 19 and the mechanics are there.

Elite, elite player who is suddenly becoming underrated because he went to play for a team that was hot garbage.

 

[Surge]

He runs the floor better than anybody his size since LeBron came into the league.

Point forward with elite handles and passing ability for his position. Gets to the hole and finishes at an elite level.

Literally the only thing he's missing is a consistent jumper, but he'e also 19 and the mechanics are there.

Elite, elite player who is suddenly becoming underrated because he went to play for a team that was hot garbage.

I think the Warriors and now the Cavs styles are starting to make people think differently of Simmons because he can't hit a three.

He will still be a very solid player. Giannis Atentekoumpo is another big guy that shoots 25% from 3 but is really effective at the point forward. Obviously he's much more of an athlete/defender at this point, but the point stands. Just talking offensive comp.

 

[AZ_]

I think the Warriors and now the Cavs styles are starting to make people think differently of Simmons because he can't hit a three.

He will still be a very solid player. Giannis Atentekoumpo is another big guy that shoots 25% from 3 but is really effective at the point forward. Obviously he's much more of an athlete/defender at this point, but the point stands. Just talking offensive comp.

Agree.

I think he'd be a much better fit for the Lakers, who can utilize him as a facilitator with Clarkson and Russell as the shooters making the offense work more smoothly.

Then add in whoever they can attract via free agency and that team could really be something.

In Philly, that team is just so devoid of any other talent in the backcourt. Granted they have two other first rounders, but putting an offense on Simmons back is going to turn out terribly.

 

[billmac91]

He runs the floor better than anybody his size since LeBron came into the league.

Point forward with elite handles and passing ability for his position. Gets to the hole and finishes at an elite level.

Literally the only thing he's missing is a consistent jumper, but he'e also 19 and the mechanics are there.

Elite, elite player who is suddenly becoming underrated because he went to play for a team that was hot garbage.

I can't speak for others, but I think the "devaluing" of Simmons is less about his ability and more about character concern.

His teammates hated him on the Australian National Team. His coaches at LSU actively saw him free-lance during games to increase his stats and go for double-doubles/triple-doubles vs. making the correct play (there was a game last year that Simmons literally quit shooting and only passed the ball as he attempted to get a triple double in a closely contested game).

And then the obvious concern people have is he appeared disinterested in many games, especially when they would get down early....so GM's are questioning his fit, especially in a situation where he will lose a lot early, in a place like Philly.

Personally, I'd take Ingram....I think Simmons is going to be more Tim Thomas-esque than LeBron-esque. At least with Ingram, from all accounts, you are getting a team-first kid who seems to play with heart and passion.

 

[Walter White]

I'd easily draft Ingram over him. Ingram has some concerns, but the upside is way higher.

I've been saying Ingram for quite awhile now. I don't know if the upside is way higher. But I think Ingram will be the better player. In a close race like this, I prefer the guy that can shoot and has go-to offensive moves. That usually bodes well in the league.

Simmons not having a consistent jumper will hurt him. That isn't even my biggest concern with him though. It's his attitude and heart. Seems like he can get disinterested in a lot of games.