# Ballscientist recommend 5 available point guards for Lakers



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

I think Sessions and Flynn are not good enough. They can't help Lakers much.

my suggestion:

Raymond Felton

Darren Collison

Devin Harris

Mike Conley

Steve Nash

Any comments would be nice.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

none of those players qualify as 'available' in any meaningful way (other than maybe Devin Harris) without begging the question "for what?"


----------



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

Many young teams are interested in Lakers 2015 and 2017 unprotested first rounders.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

so you're saying that you think the Pacers would give up Collison for a pick in the draft 3 years from now?


----------



## Kidd (Jul 2, 2009)

lol


----------



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

e-monk said:


> so you're saying that you think the Pacers would give up Collison for a pick in the draft 3 years from now?


Not everything in the world is straight up.

Example, but not proposal

Cavs get Pacers first round

Lakers get Collison

Pacers get Cousins from Kings

Kings get Lakers unprotected fisrt round 2015

Additionally, any deal is possible if you provides with the excellent offer.


----------



## elcap15 (Aug 8, 2006)

I will respon in Haiku:

Do you even read
The nonsense that you write here?
You must be Jim Buss


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

> NBA PM: Rondo for Gasol a Possibility?
> 
> The Los Angeles Lakers lost their second-straight game on Monday night, a late collapse to the Philadelphia 76ers, to drop to 14-11 on the season.
> 
> ...


http://www.hoopsworld.com/nba-2-rondo-for-gasol-a-possiblity


----------



## Ben (Nov 7, 2006)

Ballscientist said:


> Not everything in the world is straight up.
> 
> Example, but not proposal
> 
> ...


A Lakers first rounder in exchange for Cousins? I know Cousins is a knucklehead, but you've outdone yourself here BS.


----------



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

Devin Harris - TPE and first round?
Gasol for Rendo and Bass would be a good idea.


----------



## Gonzo (Oct 14, 2004)

Pacers probably won't trade Collison unless they're getting a decent guard in return.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

this is an interesting statement 



> Well, if there were a way for us to get a *25*-year-old, All-Star, ball-handling guard we’d love to do it … but that’s not likely *in February*. So you look at other alternatives, and see if it’s better than what you have. That’s all.”


but there are several ways to look at it

he did just try to trade for a *26*year old all star ball fondling PG and got low bridged by Herr Stern - maybe he mispoke?

or then there's the "in February" part - there's a 27 year old all star ball fondler pg on the market this summer so...?

maybe he's thinking of past regrets? maybe he's thinking of future dreams?

that said I wouldnt totally hate Rondo and Bass (and about 3m more in filler) for Pau and a pick or whatever


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Gonzo said:


> Pacers probably won't trade Collison unless they're getting a decent guard in return.


good call, timing is everything


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

e-monk said:


> that said I wouldnt totally hate Rondo and Bass (and about 3m more in filler) for Pau and a pick or whatever


I'm of two minds here, one, Gashole has been one of my least favourite players since his days in Memphis, and I would hate having to root for him (it would be a sensation akin to that of rooting for Boston when Wally Szczerbiak Szczuperstar was here). 

_However_, Rondo is insanely overrated by the league's statheads (I swear to christ most of these guys start their days by rubbing one out to his boxscores), and they're conservative compared to Celtics' fans at large, who think that he's already a top 10 all time PG. So I'm predisposed to view any deal that gets Rondo out of town favourably. Any way to make this a three way with Gashole going to Houston and Kyle Lowry/New York #1/filler coming to Boston? (As much as I'll hater rooting for him in Houston.)


----------



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

E.H. Munro said:


> _However_, Rondo is insanely overrated by the league's statheads


True.

I take Ricky Rubio over Rondo.


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

> The Lakers will attend Arenas’ Los Angeles Workout
> 
> Lakers general manager Mitch Kupchak is awaiting word on details of a workout Gilbert Arenas is planning in Los Angeles later this week and is open-minded about attending, two people with knowledge of the situation told CBSSports.com Wednesday.
> 
> ...


http://www.lakerholicz.com/post/17280425290/the-lakers-will-attend-arenas-los-angeles-workout?7c33bb30


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

E.H. Munro said:


> I'm of two minds here, one, Gashole has been one of my least favourite players since his days in Memphis, and I would hate having to root for him (it would be a sensation akin to that of rooting for Boston when Wally Szczerbiak Szczuperstar was here).
> 
> _However_, Rondo is insanely overrated by the league's statheads (I swear to christ most of these guys start their days by rubbing one out to his boxscores), and they're conservative compared to Celtics' fans at large, who think that he's already a top 10 all time PG. So I'm predisposed to view any deal that gets Rondo out of town favourably. Any way to make this a three way with Gashole going to Houston and Kyle Lowry/New York #1/filler coming to Boston? (As much as I'll hater rooting for him in Houston.)


Where do you rank Rondo among point guards today? Top 5? I'm just curious.


----------



## SoCalfan21 (Jul 19, 2004)

Ballscientist still starting some ridiculous threads. Seems like things haven't changed in the couple of years since I have been on here


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

SoCalfan21 said:


> Ballscientist still starting some ridiculous threads. Seems like things haven't changed in the couple of years since I have been on here


Welcome back.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Wilt_The_Stilt said:


> Where do you rank Rondo among point guards today? Top 5? I'm just curious.


Top 5? No. His inability to shoot knocks him out of the box there. Even the other lead guards with suspect jumpers (like Westbrook) have compensating factors. Who of Paul, Rose, Williams, Westbrook, Lowry, Irving, Rubio, Wall etc. are you not pickling for your team so that you can build around a 6'1" guy that needs the ball in his hands as it's the only way for him to command a defender? I mean guys like Wall and Rubio can't shoot either, but have sufficient height/length that they can defend either guard spot.

Rondo's a top ten PG when he's focused on playing. But he's something of a diva, which is his biggest shortcoming. If he understood that he was a roleplayer he'd be considerably more valuable. Boston is 6-2 without him and 8-10 with him. In a perverse way I'm kind of hoping that he stays healthy the rest of the way and that Boston misses the postseason as a result. Followed by a draft day trade to Atlanta for Josh Smith. Because Smith, Pierce, and a top 10 pick would be a good starting point for a rebuild.

Anyways, the Rondo/Gashole talk is all BS, because Boston would never be able to add enough to make it work. I'm sure that if the subject ever got raised it was in the context of a three way deal with Houston, where LA would end up with Scola and Rondo and Boston ended up with Kevin Martin. Or something similar to that (like say Utah with Rondo and Milsap going to LA, Harris and a pick to Boston, etc.).


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

E.H. Munro said:


> Top 5? No. His inability to shoot knocks him out of the box there. Even the other lead guards with suspect jumpers (like Westbrook) have compensating factors. Who of Paul, Rose, Williams, Westbrook, Lowry, Irving, Rubio, Wall etc. are you not pickling for your team so that you can build around a 6'1" guy that needs the ball in his hands as it's the only way for him to command a defender? I mean guys like Wall and Rubio can't shoot either, but have sufficient height/length that they can defend either guard spot.
> 
> Rondo's a top ten PG when he's focused on playing. But he's something of a diva, which is his biggest shortcoming. If he understood that he was a roleplayer he'd be considerably more valuable. Boston is 6-2 without him and 8-10 with him. In a perverse way I'm kind of hoping that he stays healthy the rest of the way and that Boston misses the postseason as a result. Followed by a draft day trade to Atlanta for Josh Smith. Because Smith, Pierce, and a top 10 pick would be a good starting point for a rebuild.
> 
> Anyways, the Rondo/Gashole talk is all BS, because Boston would never be able to add enough to make it work. I'm sure that if the subject ever got raised it was in the context of a three way deal with Houston, where LA would end up with Scola and Rondo and Boston ended up with Kevin Martin. Or something similar to that (like say Utah with Rondo and Milsap going to LA, Harris and a pick to Boston, etc.).


Interesting. Most Boston fans have a much higher opinion of him. I'm guessing the Lakers trade Pau this season, but I'm not really thrilled with the prospect of getting back Rondo.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

I post at one of the few rational Celtic forums on the net, and there we have a thread entitled "The Ewing Theory v2: Rondo". But you're right, at large Celtics fans are insane where Rondo's concerned.


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

why would the Lakers need a new PG? They have Fisher who is shooting an amazing 35% from the floor. His clutchness in maing one of three shots in the 4th quarter will win a title for the Lakers according to most LA fans.

Bad shooting and defense don't matter when you have Fisher's intangibles.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Kenneth said:


> Bad shooting and defense don't matter when you have Fisher's intangibles.


Well, then, you're going to loooove Rajon "Cap'n Intangibles" Rondo.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Kenneth said:


> why would the Lakers need a new PG? They have Fisher who is shooting an amazing 35% from the floor. His clutchness in maing one of three shots in the 4th quarter will win a title for the Lakers according to most LA fans.
> 
> Bad shooting and defense don't matter when you have Fisher's intangibles.


I'm sorry, what Lakers fans are you talking about? are they made of straw? - I havent seen anyone around here defend him at all this year


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

Most Laker fans here wanted Fisher back.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Wilt_The_Stilt said:


> Most Laker fans here wanted Fisher back.


When? 6 years ago?

I doubt you'll find one Laker fan that said they wanted Fisher back as the starter this season. I'm happy he's on the team, but only if he was the 3rd string point guard. Or maybe if he was the backup to Chris Paul.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> When? 6 years ago?
> 
> I doubt you'll find one Laker fan that said they wanted Fisher back as the starter this season. I'm happy he's on the team, but only if he was the 3rd string point guard. Or maybe if he was the backup to Chris Paul.


When he re-signed last year.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Speaking for myself I certainly wanted him back, but not playing over 20 minutes a game.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> Speaking for myself I certainly wanted him back, but not playing over 20 minutes a game.


Did you really think Phil was going to do that?


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Wilt_The_Stilt said:


> Did you really think Phil was going to do that?


If there was a better option yes. Remember the 03-04 season?

That's certainly not Fisher's problem, and given the way Blake played it was a good thing we had him.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Fisher as starter 2 YEARs after he signed that contract (2010 was not 'last year') is not what anyone wanted not even management - he's making 3.4m this year, that's not much, it's certainly not 'PG starting for the Lakers money' - for that money coming off a title where he made some good plays Im all good

but

starting and playing significant minutes 2 seasons later? whole different story 

and again no one here is saying any different so be careful with those matches because those strawmen can be highly flammable


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> If there was a better option yes. Remember the 03-04 season?
> 
> That's certainly not Fisher's problem, and given the way Blake played it was a good thing we had him.


Yeah because Steve Blake is Gary Payton.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

e-monk said:


> Fisher as starter 2 YEARs after he signed that contract (2010 was not 'last year') is not what anyone wanted not even management - he's making 3.4m this year, that's not much, it's certainly not 'PG starting for the Lakers money' - for that money coming off a title where he made some good plays Im all good
> 
> but
> 
> ...


It's not about the money. Blake was our other point guard. Did you think he was going to be good enough to keep Fisher in a limited role?


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Wilt_The_Stilt said:


> It's not about the money. Blake was our other point guard. Did you think he was going to be good enough to keep Fisher in a limited role?


he clearly is now - and except for Herr Stern he'd be making _erek sit in the 3rd pg off the bench role to this very day


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Wilt_The_Stilt said:


> Yeah because Steve Blake is Gary Payton.


You just made my point. No Gary Payton so Fish needed to start. It's not his (or Phil's) fault he was their best PG, and the Lakers would of been worse off without him.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> You just made my point. No Gary Payton so Fish needed to start. It's not his (or Phil's) fault he was their best PG, and the Lakers would of been worse off without him.


So you wanted Fish back knowing that Phil would play him more than the 20 minutes you didn't want him to play?


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

e-monk said:


> he clearly is now - and except for Herr Stern he'd be making _erek sit in the 3rd pg off the bench role to this very day


So you are ok with Fish's current minutes?


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Wilt_The_Stilt said:


> So you wanted Fish back knowing that Phil would play him more than the 20 minutes you didn't want him to play?


Nope. I wanted Fish back and for Mitch to obtain a point guard that would keep Fisher to less than 20 minutes a game.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Wilt_The_Stilt said:


> So you are ok with Fish's current minutes?


have you hit your head recently? 

so no, quite the opposite and not only in this thread where I've stated NO ONE is defending Fisher's minutes (so you can deduce with that Sherlock Holmesian intellect of yours that 'no one' would include me) but in several other threads in these forums I have stated (to the point of being totally obnoxious) that I would like to see Fisher taken out of and not let back into the game 'ever ever ever again'


now since we are asking questions let me ask you one - are you familiar with the way the space-time continuum works wherein: '2 years ago' = '2 years ago'? 

because it seems like not which makes me think that you are either some kind of wierd extra dimensional alien type creature or a ****ing retard


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

e-monk said:


> have you hit your head recently?
> 
> so no, quite the opposite and not only in this thread where I've stated NO ONE is defending Fisher's minutes (so you can deduce with that Sherlock Holmesian intellect of yours that 'no one' would include me) but in several other threads in these forums I have stated (to the point of being totally obnoxious) that I would like to see Fisher taken out of and not let back into the game 'ever ever ever again'
> 
> ...


It's really not that hard. Fisher is garbage. He was garbage during the '10 season. It shouldn't have been that hard to see he would be garbage now. It also shouldn't have been hard to see that Blake isn't much better which means Fish is still going to get minutes.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

I've never understood this wierd internet phenomenon where people are actually able to type out words and post them while at the same time being (apparently) completely illiterate - how does that work?


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Wilt_The_Stilt said:


> It's really not that hard. Fisher is garbage. He was garbage during the '10 season. It shouldn't have been that hard to see he would be garbage now. It also shouldn't have been hard to see that Blake isn't much better which means Fish is still going to get minutes.


Got it. Fisher was garbage but since he was our best point guard we still shouldn't have brought him back, because the other point guard was garbage too. And we knew the garbage that is Derek Fisher would play over the garbage that was Steve Blake, and we don't want that garbage point guard Fisher starting? Maybe I don't get it.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> Got it. Fisher was garbage but since he was our best point guard we still shouldn't have brought him back, because the other point guard was garbage too. And we knew the garbage that is Derek Fisher would play over the garbage that was Steve Blake, and we don't want that garbage point guard Fisher starting? Maybe I don't get it.


They shouldn't have brought in he or Blake. Once Blake was brought it it made me want Fisher back even less because it was clear Fish would still be getting plenty of minutes.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

'back' when? get a friggin calendar


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

e-monk said:


> 'back' when? get a friggin calendar


When they signed him to his current contract. I didn't want him back. Because he is garbage. A lot of posters here did want him back. Why? Because they are willing to forgive his garbage play because of a few games. That's what Kenneth was talking about. It's not that hard.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

so you're beefin over a minimal contracts for marginal contributors from 2 years ago? the problem isnt what happened two years ago - the problem is what hasnt happened since


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

It's not about the salary. I don't know why you keep suggesting that. It's about a bad decision that is still haunting us. A decision that most fans here supported at the time.


----------

