# Lakers moving'up for Roy or M. Williams?



## GuYoM (Jun 2, 2005)

All is in the title : 
The Lakers are exploring the option of moving up in the draft and are interested in Brandon Roy and Marcus Williams

source HoopsHype.com


----------



## Cris (Jun 18, 2003)

well i hoped they would, kind of a no brainer. just in reality its just not happening


----------



## LamarButler (Apr 16, 2005)

I really like Roy but not Williams. I dont wanna trade Odom though.


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

The Lakers wouldn't trade Odom to move up to the range of selecting these players, because the draft isn't that deep.

However, who in their right mind would be willing to deal a top pick for guys like Mihm, McKie, Parker, Cook, or the 26th pick?

Maybe a three-way trade?

*Lakers Trade:* 
Chris Mihm
Aaron McKie
26th Overall Pick

*Lakers Receive:* 
Derek Fisher
9th Overall Pick 

*Bulls Trade:* 
Chris Duhon
16th Overall Pick

*Bulls Receive:* 
Chris Mihm

*Warriors Trade:* 
Derek Fisher
9th Overall Pick

*Warriors Receive:* 
Chris Duhon
Aaron McKie
16th Overall Pick
26th Overall Pick

The only issue is that Duhon has a clause in his contract where he has to agree to any trade prior to 8/15/06.


----------



## Silk D (Feb 6, 2006)

> DraftExpress has been told by numerous sources on the West coast over the past few weeks that the Lakers are exploring the option of moving up, and are interested in both Marcus Williams of UConn and Brandon Roy of Washington.



LOL, who isn't?


----------



## West44 (Jun 29, 2005)

If we want to get one of the guys mentioned we need to move up to around Portland's spot at #4. Portland doesn't really need another young guy and may not mind trading down especially if they don't think they can land Adam Morrison. Portland may want to rid themselves of Darius Miles. 

The Lakers receive: Darius Miles, and #4 pick

The Blazer receive: Chris Mihm, Aaron Mckie, #26 pick

RealGM Trade Checker: 3117119

this also works...

The Lakers receive: Darius Miles, and #4 pick

The Blazer receive: Kwame Brown, #26 pick

RealGM Trade Checker: 3117150


----------



## Laker Superstar 34 (Aug 8, 2005)

Damian Necronamous said:


> The Lakers wouldn't trade Odom to move up to the range of selecting these players, because the draft isn't that deep.
> 
> However, who in their right mind would be willing to deal a top pick for guys like Mihm, McKie, Parker, Cook, or the 26th pick?
> 
> ...


Not bad at all. It's too bad that Douby doesn't have the Prototype NBA body, otherwise I'd definitely select him as he could be another Steve Kerr, and we all know how well he did with MJ.


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

West44 said:


> If we want to get one of the guys mentioned we need to move up to around Portland's spot at #4. Portland doesn't really need another young guy and may not mind trading down especially if they don't think they can land Adam Morrison. Portland may want to rid themselves of Darius Miles.
> 
> The Lakers receive: Darius Miles, and #4 pick
> 
> ...


The Blazers won't trade the #4 pick...and we don't have the ammo to get a 1-5 pick w/o trading Kobe, Odom or Kwame...and we don't want to do that.


----------



## West44 (Jun 29, 2005)

Damian Necronamous said:


> The Blazers won't trade the #4 pick...and we don't have the ammo to get a 1-5 pick w/o trading Kobe, Odom or Kwame...and we don't want to do that.


Ok, I'll ask the obvious - If we have no chance to move up in the draft to get one of the players mentioned in the thread title, then why does the thread exist and why is the story on every bball site. How is it going to happen? Just not move up to #4 maybe 6-8 and see if we can land one of these guys?

Why wouldn't Portland be likely to trade down? They have a glut of young guys and it looks like Adam Morrison will be gone by #4.

How did stink'n Kwame get to be untouchable? I'd trade him for a #4 pick every yr.


----------



## 22ryno (Mar 17, 2003)

Man if we get one of those guys I will be overly excited. Roy is such complete player. His defense, athleticism, and play making ability will be very remniscent of a young Ron Harper. With devolopment of his ball handling he would be able to play point guard in the triangle.

Williams on the other hand is simply put the best passer and penetrator in the draft. His presence would create easier opportunities for any big man he plays with. I'm praying that this rumor is true and we can do this.


----------



## DANNY (Aug 9, 2005)

Roy, I would definitely trade up to get him. 

Not Marcus Williams.


----------



## Shady* (Jul 3, 2005)

I want Roy.


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

West44 said:


> Ok, I'll ask the obvious - If we have no chance to move up in the draft to get one of the players mentioned in the thread title, then why does the thread exist and why is the story on every bball site. How is it going to happen? Just not move up to #4 maybe 6-8 and see if we can land one of these guys?
> 
> Why wouldn't Portland be likely to trade down? They have a glut of young guys and it looks like Adam Morrison will be gone by #4.
> 
> How did stink'n Kwame get to be untouchable? I'd trade him for a #4 pick every yr.


The top 4 players are supposedly LaMarcus Aldridge, Adam Morrison, Tyrus Thomas and Andrea Bargnani. Do you honestly think any of those GMs would trade their pick for frickin Chris Mihm and #26? If you do...you have no idea what you are talking about.

Did I say we had no chance to get one of the 2 mentioned in the thread title? Uhh...no... I said we couldn't get 1-5...and that's obvious. And that doesn't matter because Williams and Roy will not go as high as 5.

Why is Kwame untouchable? We wouldn't be able to trade him to get LaMarcus Aldridge, and it wouldn't be worth trading Kwame to get any other big man or player in this draft after the top 5 picks (as once again, we wouldn't be able to land one of those 5 picks with Kwame).

Our only chance at getting one of the very top picks would be dealing Odom to Chicago in a deal involving the #2 overall pick...and that's not worth the risk.


----------



## Tyrellaphonte (Feb 21, 2004)

why would we trade Odom for the #2 anyway? So we ccan draft Tyrus Thomas or Aldridge and have 3 starting big men and Luke Walton at the 3 position instead of havin Odom, Brown and Mihm? I would rather have Mihm starting at center instead of Walton starting at the 3, IMO. Maybe not later, but now, Mihm is a better player.


----------



## West44 (Jun 29, 2005)

Damian Necronamous said:


> The top 4 players are supposedly LaMarcus Aldridge, Adam Morrison, Tyrus Thomas and Andrea Bargnani. Do you honestly think any of those GMs would trade their pick for frickin Chris Mihm and #26? If you do...you have no idea what you are talking about.
> 
> Did I say we had no chance to get one of the 2 mentioned in the thread title? Uhh...no... I said we couldn't get 1-5...and that's obvious. And that doesn't matter because Williams and Roy will not go as high as 5.
> 
> ...


I understand now - we can get D. Fisher and a #9 pick for "fricken" Chris Mihm and #26 but Darius Miles and a #4 pick for "fricken" Chris Mihm and #26 is don't know what you're talking about territory. I got a feeling both of our scenarios are a little optimistic but mine moreso I admit. 

Hey, I was just happy I made the box turn green in a successful salary trade w\Portland - it took alot of tries. I felt "fricken" Chris was a little light too which is why I included the Kwame scenario. My comments were also contingent on the fact the Portland may want to rid itself of Miles which factors into the equation as well.

According to you, we can get a #9 and D Fish for Mihm and #26 and Kwame is much better but we absolutely can't get a #5 for Kwame. So where does Kwame rate? #8, #7, or #6.

I believe Roy will be drafted right around #5. 5th is probably the current mock draft ave. 9th pick will probably be too low to get either player. 

If you're going to make a trade to move up, you better go higher than 9th or you'll have traded something and maybe not gotten what you went after in exchange...that would be like the dumbest thing you could do right?

And, as you spell out the names of the top draft picks with obvious awe, just remember alot of these guys flop even at the top and this group has a chance to be one of the worst top 4 in recent times.

Tyrus Thomas...lol. He's dropped to 7th on the last one I looked at. Too bad, he could have made Joe Smith, Kwame Brown, and Larue Martin look like strokes of genius.

ps: I did hear da bulls had the hots for Odom bad.


----------



## Charlotte_______ (May 18, 2003)

I dont understand why you guys would want Roy, would he play the 3? Or move Kobe to the 3?


----------



## Shady* (Jul 3, 2005)

"Frickin" Chris Mihm. :laugh:


----------



## Silk D (Feb 6, 2006)

Charlotte_______ said:


> I dont understand why you guys would want Roy, would he play the 3? Or move Kobe to the 3?


That's exactly what I was thinking. If there is one position that we are set at for at least the next 7 years, it's the 2. Roy is no PG.


----------



## DANNY (Aug 9, 2005)

It would be very questionable move to trade a servicable big like Chris Mihm to trade up for Roy. Then make him a PG. However, he is very capable if he ever decides to become one.


----------



## 22ryno (Mar 17, 2003)

Roy is an excellent passer and a really good post up guard. In the triangle he could play some point guard. On defense he can defend the point as he showed this season guarding Dee Brown and Jordan Farmar. I like him a lot. That being said I don't know if I would give up Odom for him. We would need something else.


----------



## GuYoM (Jun 2, 2005)

Chicago could trade it number 2 too, the lakers and the suns seems interested about it, Tyrus in LA, why not


----------



## LamarButler (Apr 16, 2005)

> I dont understand why you guys would want Roy, would he play the 3? Or move Kobe to the 3?


The triangle doesnt need a true point guard. Jackson likes big guards and Roy can shoot the ball well.


----------



## onelakerfan (Nov 11, 2004)

well, we are in a small player era, need a small guard. too many rules prevent big from doing their thing


----------



## Sean (Jun 7, 2002)

Portland doesn't necessarily need Roy, having already pegged Martell Webster as their two guard of the future, but will still take the best player available. *We've heard rumors that the Lakers love Roy, so don't be surprised if an L.A./Portland trade goes down sometime in the near future.*

http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/5652470


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

So we are trying to move up in a draft with not only no super-stars, but no perenial all-stars either. Great!


----------



## Laker Superstar 34 (Aug 8, 2005)

Jamel Irief said:


> So we are trying to move up in a draft with not only no super-stars, but no perenial all-stars either. Great!


We do have some players that only have one little or possibly big thing going against them from being at least a perenial all-star.

Andrea Bargnani- History of International Players

Adam Morrison- Athletic ability

Rudy Gay- Killer Instinct

JJ Redick- Athletic Ability

Randy Foye- True PG Skills

Those are a good ammount of them. I know Morrison and Redick do have a defensive problem, but with their work ethic, they could have great "D" if it weren't for the athletic ability.


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

I'm with Jemel on this, this is a crap draft.

It's not that I am against trading up. During the Marcus Banks, Wade, Hinrich draft I was for moving up to get the tough defensive PG. I liked Wade for his long arms at the time (had no idea he would end up like this offensively). If you look it up, you can find me making like 10 seperate threads pre 2003 draft to get one one of those 3 as lakers next pg.

However, there is nothing I think that can really improve the Lakers this draft. I don't see think the big men are going to be substantially better then what the lakers have right now. There are a couple shooters in this draft that I think would be good for 15 min off the bench, but in 3 years, I see no one from this draft in the all star game. In 5 years, I see no one in the all star game.


----------



## Laker Superstar 34 (Aug 8, 2005)

KennethTo said:


> I'm with Jemel on this, this is a crap draft.
> 
> It's not that I am against trading up. During the Marcus Banks, Wade, Hinrich draft I was for moving up to get the tough defensive PG. I liked Wade for his long arms at the time (had no idea he would end up like this offensively). If you look it up, you can find me making like 10 seperate threads pre 2003 draft to get one one of those 3 as lakers next pg.
> 
> However, there is nothing I think that can really improve the Lakers this draft. I don't see think the big men are going to be substantially better then what the lakers have right now. There are a couple shooters in this draft that I think would be good for 15 min off the bench, *but in 3 years, I see no one from this draft in the all star game. In 5 years, I see no one in the all star game.*




I could see Randy Foye, Andrea Bargnani, & Rudy Gay all in the all-star game in 5 years. Mostly Randy Foye though. The other 2 have to either pan out unlike some others who were named the next Nowitski or come out like a Charlie Vilanueva.


----------



## afobisme (Apr 29, 2006)

hm, would it be absurd if we tried to trade a first rounder for carlos delfino?


----------



## West44 (Jun 29, 2005)

afobisme said:


> hm, would it be absurd if we tried to trade a first rounder for carlos delfino?


Honestly have seen him play much...heard he was good and didn't have much chance to get unburied on Pistons bench. 

Like the angle...there are definitely guys we can get that are in the league and safer choices than this year's draft.

Always liked Tony Delk though...no choke there. Came off the bench, made shots (3's too), took it to the hole, great energy, great "D", and was one of the best Pistons on the floor in the 2nd half trying to give his team a chance. I'd take him next to Kobe fighting it out in a game 7.


----------



## Laker Superstar 34 (Aug 8, 2005)

West44 said:


> Honestly have seen him play much...heard he was good and didn't have much chance to get unburied on Pistons bench.
> 
> Like the angle...there are definitely guys we can get that are in the league and safer choices than this year's draft.
> 
> Always liked Tony Delk though...no choke there. Came off the bench, made shots (3's too), took it to the hole, great energy, great "D", and was one of the best Pistons on the floor in the 2nd half trying to give his team a chance. I'd take him next to Kobe fighting it out in a game 7.


I don't think Delk would be the answer. How long do you think he'll last. If we could get him without this years pick and possibly take Rajon Rondo then I'd be fine with it. That way we could get Delk to teach him how to shoot. It would possibly work out as well since they both are from the University of Kentucky.


----------



## West44 (Jun 29, 2005)

Laker Superstar 34 said:


> I don't think Delk would be the answer. How long do you think he'll last. If we could get him without this years pick and possibly take Rajon Rondo then I'd be fine with it. That way we could get Delk to teach him how to shoot. It would possibly work out as well since they both are from the University of Kentucky.


Yeah, that's the biggest key - make sure you get guys from the same college then it will definitely work out well. Better go tell the GM's they've been doing it all wrong.

43% from 3 pt range last yr and a career 40% 3 pt shooter in the playoffs although he is already a 10 yr vet. Sure liked the way he stepped up at the end of a tough game to try and help his team.


----------



## afobisme (Apr 29, 2006)

delk is too old, delfino is a younger 24 and hasn't completely matured yet.


----------



## DaFranchise (Jun 29, 2005)

Roy is gonna be a player, however, Im not sold on Williams. If Roy is available you have to take him but his stock his rising as we speak


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Why is it Portland would trade the 4th pick for two journeymen and the 26th pick again?


----------



## Sean (Jun 7, 2002)

Roy's stock surges higher
Former Husky looks like top-four pick

By DAN RALEY; P-I REPORTER

Charlotte and Portland, with the third and fourth picks in the NBA draft, have shown the most interest.

While other teams scheduled workouts with Brandon Roy in Los Angeles, the Hornets arranged for him to fly to Virginia last week. The Blazers made a trip north and met with him at Mercer Island's Jewish Community Center, which offers an NBA 3-point line.

Yet the Chicago Bulls, who have the No. 2 selection, recently rescheduled a workout with Roy so the team owner could be present, a sure sign the organization is giving the former Huskies guard full consideration.

Boston, which is seventh up, will take a long look at him next week, but fans on the message boards in that city already are urgently clamoring for the Celtics to add him to the roster.

*Then there are the Los Angeles Lakers. They have the 26th pick, far too low to be in the running for his services, but when coach Phil Jackson and others met with Roy they suggested they might trade up for him.*

more in link...
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/cbasketball/272874_roy06.html


----------



## West44 (Jun 29, 2005)

mediocre man said:


> Why is it Portland would trade the 4th pick for two journeymen and the 26th pick again?


Well, if you'd read the thread you'd notice that the author of the suggestion mentioned that it was "light" and very optimistic and was just happy that it made the box turn green in a successful trade scenario...but you missed that part, right?

You may have also noticed that at the same time, the author of the suggestion also mentioned Kwame Brown and #26 for your #4 pick and Darius Miles. Darius Miles, remember? Someone your team wants to unload at all costs. And Kwame Brown, although never living up to #1 pick status, would be an improvement to your starting center position and their aren't any centers at the top of the draft...did you miss that part, too?

This article and many others describe Portland's biggest need as center:
http://www.collegehoopsnet.com/Draft/teams/portlandtrailblazers.htm

But since it looks like Roy might be gone before your pick, take a hike.

I'm sure Portland will continue to use the usual amount of brilliance when selecting draft choices.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

West44 said:


> Well, if you'd read the thread you'd notice that the author of the suggestion mentioned that it was "light" and very optimistic and was just happy that it made the box turn green in a successful trade scenario...but you missed that part, right?
> 
> You may have also noticed that at the same time, the author of the suggestion also mentioned Kwame Brown and #26 for your #4 pick and Darius Miles. Darius Miles, remember? Someone your team wants to unload at all costs. And Kwame Brown, although never living up to #1 pick status, would be an improvement to your starting center position and their aren't any centers at the top of the draft...did you miss that part, too?
> 
> ...




I'm not sure how much of an improvement Kwame would be. Not to say he's not tremendously more skilled than Przybilla or Ratliff, but he's not even close to the worker either one of them are either. Trading Miles for Kwame seems to be a wash to me. With the number 4 pick at least Portland has the opportunity to come out of the draft with a future all star. So in a sense it's number 4 for number 16 and Mckey?


Portland has made great draft selections.

I'd like to remind you also that if Portland re-signs Przybilla they will have 2 decent centers on their team. I would assume you see the true value of having a center which is none really. Few teams really have them, and the league is starting to run more like in the 80's.


----------



## West44 (Jun 29, 2005)

mediocre man said:


> I'm not sure how much of an improvement Kwame would be. Not to say he's not tremendously more skilled than Przybilla or Ratliff, but he's not even close to the worker either one of them are either. Trading Miles for Kwame seems to be a wash to me. With the number 4 pick at least Portland has the opportunity to come out of the draft with a future all star. So in a sense it's number 4 for number 16 and Mckey?
> 
> 
> Portland has made great draft selections.
> ...


Nice response! btw - I lived in Oregon for many yrs and followed the Blazers more than the Lakers for a few yrs. 

Kwame rounded into a pretty good player towards the end of the season for us. Is very strong and plays good post 'D'. I've consistently read that Miles is such a cancer to your team that equal value is not expected. I see Kwame as a much more marketable commodity than Miles at this time but respect your opinion. If you think your cancer rates as high as our starting center then I guess you wouldn't do the trade. Even Kwame level big men are hard to find and get paid alot. I thought accepting Miles was doing Portland a favor that added value through subtraction. It also seemed to me that Portland may rather have a veteran than another young guy.

All star at #4 in this draft? That would be a great draft pick. How many other future all-stars are on your roster? 

The articles I read, such as the link I included, say Portland needs a center. 

If Portland's centers are not the problem and Portland's draft picks are not the problem, then what is the problem?


----------



## Laker Superstar 34 (Aug 8, 2005)

West44 said:


> Nice response! btw - I lived in Oregon for many yrs and followed the Blazers more than the Lakers for a few yrs.
> 
> Kwame rounded into a pretty good player towards the end of the season for us. Is very strong and plays good post 'D'. I've consistently read that Miles is such a cancer to your team that equal value is not expected. I see Kwame as a much more marketable commodity than Miles at this time but respect your opinion. If you think your cancer rates as high as our starting center then I guess you wouldn't do the trade. Even Kwame level big men are hard to find and get paid alot. I thought accepting Miles was doing Portland a favor that added value through subtraction. It also seemed to me that Portland may rather have a veteran than another young guy.
> 
> ...


IMO, I think that the Blazers need another developing big man and to get rid of Miles. Ratliff will help tutoring the future big as well as Prysbilla. Miles though is having a negative impact on the guards of the team I'm sure. He's just not a worker, otherwise we would have seen much more out of him as a player. He has/had the potential, but is/had wasted it. Also, I think giving Kwame and the #26 draft pick would benifit Portland. Portland would get a decent big in Kwame as well as a shot at a SG who'll put up the same numbers as Miles without hendering the team. Then they can sign a decent SG vet, that was at one point pretty good, to be a tutor to the rookie and Martell Webster. I didn't mention Telfair or Jack because Blake or Dixon could help them. All this is my oppinion though.

Sorry for so much about the Blazers. Back to the Lakers for me. If we don't get Roy, Roye or Marcus Williams or possibly O'Bryant, I see no reason for us to trade up. We can get the sort of Defensive PG we need in this draft with a good number of options, but the ones that have an offensive game are the ones that are hard to come by this draft. I wonder whats going on with Jay Will. I think if the Lakers picked him up, Phil can get him to play the way the Lakers want him to play.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

West44 said:


> Nice response! btw - I lived in Oregon for many yrs and followed the Blazers more than the Lakers for a few yrs.
> 
> Kwame rounded into a pretty good player towards the end of the season for us. Is very strong and plays good post 'D'. I've consistently read that Miles is such a cancer to your team that equal value is not expected. I see Kwame as a much more marketable commodity than Miles at this time but respect your opinion. If you think your cancer rates as high as our starting center then I guess you wouldn't do the trade. Even Kwame level big men are hard to find and get paid alot. I thought accepting Miles was doing Portland a favor that added value through subtraction. It also seemed to me that Portland may rather have a veteran than another young guy.
> 
> ...



I would guess that on our current roster Webster and Telfair at some point will be all stars. Webster has the ability to be a perenial all star. As far as all atars in this draft I would think that Aldridge, Morrison, Gay and Thomas have a good chance at making the all star team at some point. They say Portland needs a center because everyone assumes Przybilla is leaving. Portland has many many many problems. They have a lazy PF that doesn't play defense and is somewhat of a black hole on offense. They have a lazy SF that drifts in and out of conciousness. All of their truly talented players are too young to get the job done at this point. 

Get rid of Randolph, Miles, Ratliff, Dixon and Blake. add a player like Morrison in the draft and use the cap space provided by trading those players I mentioned to sign a player that will put the team back into the playoffs consistantly like they had been for 22 years. In 3 years players like Telfair, Jack, Webster and Morrison will all be pretty damn good while players like Khryapa and Outlaw will be solid role players. add a star vet through free agency like Phoenix did with Nash and then things will be normal again.

Sorry Laker fans this wasn't meant to be all Blazers all the time. Good luck next season except when you are playing the Crimson and black. Hopfully someday both our franchises will renew their rivalry to where it means something.


----------



## DaFranchise (Jun 29, 2005)

The problem for the Blazers is that no one wants Randolph, Miles, or Ratliff. Their value decreases every day.


----------

