The Lakers are going to draft ball, although they just drafted a PG who almost mirrors the same skills russell has, just 2 yrs ago, in the top 5 and hasn't even develop him yet, Same with philly.

To me you draft by need, the spurs had Parker and hill, instead of keeping two quality starting PG's, they turned hill into Leonard. If the knicks can't draft the PG that they need (a pass first pg who can penetrate and shoot open perimeter shots) I think they should reach out to the lakers and trade that pick for russell.

having the 2 of the top 5 picks from the same draft class would be a very good start to a future core, resign rose to a 1 and 1 player opp if you can't trade for rubio, leave melo right where he is, and now you have a good mix of vets and youth, and vets on a 2 yr contracts.

yellowboy90 wrote:I think they keep D'angelo and trade Clarkson. They can move Russell to the two and try to have a bigger version of what Portland is doing.

Why not move Clarkson to the bench and have him play either guard spot?

GustavBahler wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:I think they keep D'angelo and trade Clarkson. They can move Russell to the two and try to have a bigger version of what Portland is doing.

Why not move Clarkson to the bench and have him play either guard spot?

Might get more value trading him for help in the frontcourt as they have Ingram as well.

Given the trends in the league toward perimeter based play, should they be looking to trade smalls for (quasi)bigs?

yellowboy90 wrote:I think they keep D'angelo and trade Clarkson. They can move Russell to the two and try to have a bigger version of what Portland is doing.

A Russell/Ball backcourt would be putrid defensively. It would work offensively because it would alleviate some of the pressure on Ball to create and lessen the playmaking burden on Russell. But Clarkson becomes redundant in that scenario and he doesn't address the defensive problems that backcourt will have.

Lonzo Ball — or his father — has created so much hype in Hollywood, a position battle already seems to be brewing.

The point guard from UCLA, whom many expect the Lakers will take at No. 2 in June 22’s NBA draft, pointed to a hole in the team’s lineup when asked what he could offer the struggling Lakers after an individual pre-draft workout Wednesday. It’s one Ball insists he can fill if drafted — unless third-year guard D’Angelo Russell has anything to do about it.

“They have a lot of good players,” Ball told reporters following the private session. “I just think they need a leader, a point guard, and I feel I can bring that to the team.”

The Lakers technically have their court general in Russell, a second-overall pick himself out of Ohio State in 2015, who has averaged 14.3 points and four assists in his two seasons mainly running the point. But he hasn’t lifted the storied franchise out of its doldrums, and has made just as much noise off the court as on it.

The 21-year-old sent Twitter into a frenzy in May, when fans saw he liked a tweet that called drafting Ball a “stupid” idea for the Lakers. Russell quickly backtracked on his “like,” but the damage had already been done.

All signs have pointed to the Lakers scooping up Ball and making LaVar a happy Big Baller, though a report Monday indicated the front office had concerns over Ball’s star potential and his dad’s disruptive antics.

Head coach Luke Walton played down those rumors ahead of Ball’s workout, even extending LaVar an invite to dinner Wednesday night.

“We’re in the NBA, to me, that’s not an issue,” Walton said on “The Jim Rome Show.” “Parents are always gonna have their opinions. They’re gonna be outspoken at times. As you know, Jim, I have a very outspoken father myself. It doesn’t bother me.”

If Ball impresses the Lakers, Russell might have to get used to sharing the ball — and the fame. If he’s still a Laker.

BigDaddyG wrote:We

GustavBahler wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:I think they keep D'angelo and trade Clarkson. They can move Russell to the two and try to have a bigger version of what Portland is doing.

A Russell/Ball backcourt would be putrid defensively. It would work offensively because it would alleviate some of the pressure on Ball to create and lessen the playmaking burden on Russell. But Clarkson becomes redundant in that scenario and he doesn't address the defensive problems that backcourt will have.

I could be wrong, but I read that Russell was statistically one of the better defenders on the team. They werent good as a team defensively I believe, but he might not be that far off from being a good defender. With a coach that gets him to buy in.

This article touches on some of the strengths and weaknesses of a potential Ball/Russell backcourt.

https://theringer.com/the-continuing-dangelo-russell-experiment-a0b422629fc9

The greatest problem of all could be defense. The Russell-Clarkson pairing has failed so far because the Lakers allow opponents to score 121.4 points per 100 possessions with the duo on the floor. Clarkson is a sieve. Russell isn’t much better. Both have poor defensive fundamentals and generally don’t show an understanding of how and when to rotate, fight over screens, or communicate.
Fultz has elite defensive potential, but his effort can wane. Ball competes but has a thin frame that could limit him against stronger guards. They are guys you want to hide on a more limited scorer. A Russell-Ball or Russell-Fultz duo could theoretically become as potent as Portland’s Damian Lillard and C.J. McCollum, but as the Portland pair has shown, offense isn’t everything. The best NBA teams generally have stout perimeter defenders on their roster, and in a league flooded with talented scoring guards, it’s important to have one who can neutralize the opponent’s best perimeter scorer. That aspect is what makes the James Harden–Patrick Beverley and Isaiah Thomas–Avery Bradley backcourt pairings so good.
Otherwise, the Lakers would need other players on the floor to pick up the slack. They don’t have that. Ingram is long and quick enough to switch screens, but he’s so thin that he’s years away from sniffing lockdown-defender status. Larry Nance Jr. is not a needle mover. Randle is still an eyesore. Ivica Zubac has made strides as a positional defender but doesn’t project as an elite rim protector or shot blocker.

Russell improved defensively from last year. Probably not as much as he or the team would have liked. But Walton did praise Russell at times for playing better D.

Its important to factor in that Russell has learned under 2 coaches in his first two seasons, with very different styles. His rookie season was the "Kobe farewell tour". Dealt with a major roster overahul in his sophomore season as well. I'd say its way too early to write off someone as talented as Russell. Give this kid some stability, and Im pretty sure he will deliver on both ends of the court.

BigDaddyG wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:We

GustavBahler wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:I think they keep D'angelo and trade Clarkson. They can move Russell to the two and try to have a bigger version of what Portland is doing.

A Russell/Ball backcourt would be putrid defensively. It would work offensively because it would alleviate some of the pressure on Ball to create and lessen the playmaking burden on Russell. But Clarkson becomes redundant in that scenario and he doesn't address the defensive problems that backcourt will have.

I could be wrong, but I read that Russell was statistically one of the better defenders on the team. They werent good as a team defensively I believe, but he might not be that far off from being a good defender. With a coach that gets him to buy in.

This article touches on some of the strengths and weaknesses of a potential Ball/Russell backcourt.

https://theringer.com/the-continuing-dangelo-russell-experiment-a0b422629fc9

The greatest problem of all could be defense. The Russell-Clarkson pairing has failed so far because the Lakers allow opponents to score 121.4 points per 100 possessions with the duo on the floor. Clarkson is a sieve. Russell isn’t much better. Both have poor defensive fundamentals and generally don’t show an understanding of how and when to rotate, fight over screens, or communicate.
Fultz has elite defensive potential, but his effort can wane. Ball competes but has a thin frame that could limit him against stronger guards. They are guys you want to hide on a more limited scorer. A Russell-Ball or Russell-Fultz duo could theoretically become as potent as Portland’s Damian Lillard and C.J. McCollum, but as the Portland pair has shown, offense isn’t everything. The best NBA teams generally have stout perimeter defenders on their roster, and in a league flooded with talented scoring guards, it’s important to have one who can neutralize the opponent’s best perimeter scorer. That aspect is what makes the James Harden–Patrick Beverley and Isaiah Thomas–Avery Bradley backcourt pairings so good.
Otherwise, the Lakers would need other players on the floor to pick up the slack. They don’t have that. Ingram is long and quick enough to switch screens, but he’s so thin that he’s years away from sniffing lockdown-defender status. Larry Nance Jr. is not a needle mover. Randle is still an eyesore. Ivica Zubac has made strides as a positional defender but doesn’t project as an elite rim protector or shot blocker.

Russell improved defensively from last year. Probably not as much as he or the team would have liked. But Walton did praise Russell at times for playing better D.

Its important to factor in that Russell has learned under 2 coaches in his first two seasons, with very different styles. His rookie season was the "Kobe farewell tour". Dealt with a major roster overahul in his sophomore season as well. I'd say its way too early to write off someone as talented as Russell. Give this kid some stability, and Im pretty sure he will deliver on both ends of the court.

I'm not writing him off. I'm questioning if he's a good match with Ball. I think it would work offensively, Russell would have to make tremendous strides on defense to compensate for Ball, and vice versa.

You were totally writing him off, totally. Seriously, maybe the answer is to draft a better defensive PG. There is also the added bonus of a LaVar free Lakers, lol.