If we could guarantee WCS, I'd be fine taking Russell 1 and trading Ricky for WCS and Darren Collison. It can't hurt to keep adding scoring and shooting to the team with Russell and WCS helps with the defense. Collison also plugs the backup PG hole. Ricky's inability to score while being a primary ball handler will always be a problem at the end of games. If he's not a good spot up shooter and he's not a big threat to score with the ball we'd just be playing 4-5 at the end of games.
khans2k5 wrote:If we could guarantee WCS, I'd be fine taking Russell 1 and trading Ricky for WCS and Darren Collison. It can't hurt to keep adding scoring and shooting to the team with Russell and WCS helps with the defense. Collison also plugs the backup PG hole. Ricky's inability to score while being a primary ball handler will always be a problem at the end of games. If he's not a good spot up shooter and he's not a big threat to score with the ball we'd just be playing 4-5 at the end of games.
khans2k5 wrote:If we could guarantee WCS, I'd be fine taking Russell 1 and trading Ricky for WCS and Darren Collison. It can't hurt to keep adding scoring and shooting to the team with Russell and WCS helps with the defense. Collison also plugs the backup PG hole. Ricky's inability to score while being a primary ball handler will always be a problem at the end of games. If he's not a good spot up shooter and he's not a big threat to score with the ball we'd just be playing 4-5 at the end of games.
so in turn you want Willie Cauley Stein?
I'm not sure what you mean. We'd get Russell and WCS in this scenario, but I'd only take Russell 1 if I knew we could get WCS. Otherwise I'm taking a big.
A more likely draft day deal is acquiring a veteran backup PG. Last year Mo Williams was acquired with part of our MLE money. But with a good chance our MLE goes to Bjelica this year, our best chance at a veteran backup PG is via a trade. And draft day provides a decent opportunity to get it done.
I wouldn't be surprised if Randle is moved. I think Love will be a Laker and he will be an option. If we think Randle is a good fit for us I would consider Rubio for Randle and Clarkson.
That would make us a young team with a lot of potential across the board.
While Rubio is imperfect just looking at this teams performance when he plays vs. doesn't I'm not trading him. I don't remotely see how Russell + WCS ends up better than Rubio + Towns.
TheSP wrote:While Rubio is imperfect just looking at this teams performance when he plays vs. doesn't I'm not trading him. I don't remotely see how Russell + WCS ends up better than Rubio + Towns.
Very good point. I want to see Ricky one more year before I consider moving him.
TheSP wrote:While Rubio is imperfect just looking at this teams performance when he plays vs. doesn't I'm not trading him. I don't remotely see how Russell + WCS ends up better than Rubio + Towns.
If Russell is the next Harden and WCS the next Tyson Chandler I think that is just as good as anything Rubio/Towns can become. The plus/minus stats are great, but we've been .500 at best with him healthy so I don't get the need to keep him. We're going into year 5 and it's been all excuses to this point even if some are valid. If we were ever a great team with him I'd say we need to keep him, but he's only helped us be a middle of the pack team at best.
