@MikeLG: appreciate your insight on collegiate kids going pro, but a 2yr deal to develop a kid is kind of a misnomer. Most of these kids is one&done, but put them on 2 more years to stay in college and they still juniors. 3yrs puts them at graduating seniors where they’re either ready to step onto the pro level and get drafted in the 1st round, essentially guaranteeing a team keeps them on for a minimum of 5 years on a 1st round rookie scale contract….at which point they can match what the market values them at as a RFA. It’s either that, or they let the player walk if they don’t value him as such. Ir finally, if these 4yr college kids don’t go in the 1st round, teams essentially don’t believe they developed enough, cause they obviously have plenty of tape to make that decision on.
And let’s say it’s a one&done kid, getting drafted in the 1st round via the fixed rookie scale contract. That means, a team is ready to develop that particular kid for up to 5 years before they get paid above the NBA average. There’s a reason to why these 1st round draft picks are set up for that potential 5yr prefixed deal: development!
MaxC is a 19y/o one & done freshman. You’re going to fast track his development these next 2 years & at that time we could offer MLE type money like we did THT. I still value THT as an asset, but some fans are completely out on the kid as a sunk cost. Why do we want to put that same pressure on our new 19y/o. Makes no sense, and most likely this kid shouldn’t be making more cents after an expedited 2yr development plan where yr1 has title aspirations attached to it due to Bron/AD.
Imho it’s such poor planning our part and frankly I see no benefit in putting a 2yr time line towards the kids development. _________________ Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE!
Joined: 10 Apr 2001 Posts: 65135 Location: Orange County, CA
Posted: Mon Jul 25, 2022 6:05 am Post subject:
vasashi17+ wrote:
@MikeLG: appreciate your insight on collegiate kids going pro, but a 2yr deal to develop a kid is kind of a misnomer. Most of these kids is one&done, but put them on 2 more years to stay in college and they still juniors. 3yrs puts them at graduating seniors where they’re either ready to step onto the pro level and get drafted in the 1st round, essentially guaranteeing a team keeps them on for a minimum of 5 years on a 1st round rookie scale contract….at which point they can match what the market values them at as a RFA. It’s either that, or they let the player walk if they don’t value him as such. Ir finally, if these 4yr college kids don’t go in the 1st round, teams essentially don’t believe they developed enough, cause they obviously have plenty of tape to make that decision on.
And let’s say it’s a one&done kid, getting drafted in the 1st round via the fixed rookie scale contract. That means, a team is ready to develop that particular kid for up to 5 years before they get paid above the NBA average. There’s a reason to why these 1st round draft picks are set up for that potential 5yr prefixed deal: development!
MaxC is a 19y/o one & done freshman. You’re going to fast track his development these next 2 years & at that time we could offer MLE type money like we did THT. I still value THT as an asset, but some fans are completely out on the kid as a sunk cost. Why do we want to put that same pressure on our new 19y/o. Makes no sense, and most likely this kid shouldn’t be making more cents after an expedited 2yr development plan where yr1 has title aspirations attached to it due to Bron/AD.
Imho it’s such poor planning our part and frankly I see no benefit in putting a 2yr time line towards the kids development.
Two years works because the depth of the draft has been so deep, that if buying a 2nd rounder next year equates to getting a better player than Christie (hypothetically), then Christie isn't tied to the team for much longer.
The reason why 1st round picks are tied up for 3 years isn't development. It's so owners can keep cheap contracts on the team for an extra year or so.
There's also an advantage to LAL financially in this aspect. How much difference in contract do you think Brandon Ingram would have had if he had to sign a new contract after his 2nd year, vs his 3rd or 4th?
How much money do you think the team saves long term?
Quote:
That means, a team is ready to develop that particular kid for up to 5 years
Players are so good now, that it would be foolish for a team to hang onto a player for this long for development. Mitchell Robinson got ripped off by NYK, and because he was a "4-year vet min" contract from the jump, there really wasn't much pressure for him to develop much in his first two years vs his last two.
Unfortunately, lesser habits kick in and then the guy stays the same guy instead.
Quote:
Why do we want to put that same pressure on our new 19y/o. Makes no sense, and most likely this kid shouldn’t be making more cents after an expedited 2yr development plan where yr1 has title aspirations attached to it due to Bron/AD.
This isn't the 90s. How many 18/19 year olds get selected lottery? How much *more* pressure do they have with the expectations of a lottery player?
The idea of this pressure, exists for all players, not just young ones. You don't think a 24yo player doesn't have pressure to try and stay in the league either? Austin sure as hell did, but we didn't think anything of it because he wasn't seen as a high upside player (even if I mildly disagree depending on how the term upside is used).
Basically, if a player doesn't really show something in 2 years anyway, chances are, there's another 2nd rounder or UDFA in a following year, that will. _________________ Resident Car Nut.
@Mike: so you expect MaxC to develop completely in the next 2 seasons on this roster. We will have dude’s RFA status, so we can match any team’s offer even if it traps us into a Gilbert Arenas poison pill type deal?
Also do you believe THT is near complete development? Is his 10m per (3yr/30m) deal justified?
I’m sorry, bro but I disagree. The contract structures allowing young kids on “team friendly deals” is to exploit their potential for sure, but also to get a good enough window/read as to how much more development they need before earning the bag.
The way we claim player development as some sort of summer narrative and then set up these kids on 2 yr deals is an absolute mindF *** for me. _________________ Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE!
Joined: 10 Apr 2001 Posts: 65135 Location: Orange County, CA
Posted: Mon Jul 25, 2022 6:18 am Post subject:
vasashi17+ wrote:
@Mike: so you expect MaxC to develop completely in the next 2 seasons on this roster. We will have dude’s RFA status, so we can match any team’s offer even if it traps us into a Gilbert Arenas poison pill type deal?
Also do you believe THT is near complete development? Is his 10m per (3yr/30m) deal justified?
I’m sorry, bro but I disagree. The contract structures allowing young kids on “team friendly deals” is to exploit their potential for sure, but also to get a good enough window/read as to how much more development they need before earning the bag.
The way we claim player development as some sort of summer narrative and then set up these kids on 2 yr deals is an absolute mindF *** for me.
It doesn't have to be "completely," it just has to be productive.
So much has changed in the draft man, and drafts are so deep with players so talented and competitive, that if he doesn't show *something* within those two years, there's another guy that will.
That's how hard the NBA is.
But if you followed my substack, you would have seen why I preferred guys that were more polished/NBA ready so this wasn't even an issue. _________________ Resident Car Nut.
Thanks for the exchange @Mike. I’m not a collegiate head, so I’ll definitely take your word on it. It just seems counterintuitive to me to be about developing a young player, only to sign them to 1-2yr deals. The TB reunion was another one that seemed wild to me. We dumped him for 2018 cap space (or that’s what it seemed as at the time), when he was a mere 1.5m caphold. I’m surprised we didn’t lock him up on the cheap much earlier and at the very least, he’s another asset we could have sent or spared in the AD purge. Same goes for Zu or heck even Jules. And now here we are with Ky where we have no young assets on team friendly deals to send out as assets. It’s literally Nunn/THT on essentially expiring deals (via THT’s PO out on his 3rd year), so we can only turn to MaxC when he’s eligible for trade in August and our 2 picks that are still 5 years out.
All I’m saying is that these 2yr deals show a lack of a plan and water down the potential of assets via trade imho. You’re about winning now with Bron/AD, then a dude like MaxC should be held onto on the margins on a much longer deal since we need to develop him accordingly. I highly doubt he sees much run this year, but maybe his defense is what gets him PT with Ham.
Either way, thanks for the substack mention in your sig. I actually did check it out already, which is why I know you know your ish (see: which is why I’ll take your word on it ) _________________ Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE!
Joined: 10 Apr 2001 Posts: 65135 Location: Orange County, CA
Posted: Mon Jul 25, 2022 8:12 am Post subject:
vasashi17+ wrote:
Thanks for the exchange @Mike. I’m not a collegiate head, so I’ll definitely take your word on it. It just seems counterintuitive to me to be about developing a young player, only to sign them to 1-2yr deals. The TB reunion was another one that seemed wild to me. We dumped him for 2018 cap space (or that’s what it seemed as at the time), when he was a mere 1.5m caphold. I’m surprised we didn’t lock him up on the cheap much earlier and at the very least, he’s another asset we could have sent or spared in the AD purge. Same goes for Zu or heck even Jules. And now here we are with Ky where we have no young assets on team friendly deals to send out as assets. It’s literally Nunn/THT on essentially expiring deals (via THT’s PO out on his 3rd year), so we can only turn to MaxC when he’s eligible for trade in August and our 2 picks that are still 5 years out.
All I’m saying is that these 2yr deals show a lack of a plan and water down the potential of assets via trade imho. You’re about winning now with Bron/AD, then a dude like MaxC should be held onto on the margins on a much longer deal since we need to develop him accordingly. I highly doubt he sees much run this year, but maybe his defense is what gets him PT with Ham.
Either way, thanks for the substack mention in your sig. I actually did check it out already, which is why I know you know your ish (see: which is why I’ll take your word on it )
You're referring to deals as to why LAL tries to avoid the luxury tax. But guys like Zu and TB did show *something* within their time as Laker players.
If LAL bothered to just pay the luxury tax and keep a lot of their own players, it would be 2 rings by now.
When I saw Christie get drafted, not once did I think he would productive during LeBron's playoff window. _________________ Resident Car Nut.
In Max Christie, Lakers make a big bet on development: ‘All the tools are there
Quote:
Christie’s rawness showed itself in his offensive struggles during his eight summer-league games (7.4 points per game on 27.3 percent shooting). That level of shooting would make him an offensive liability in the NBA. Nonetheless, the Lakers are committed to developing Christie, signing him to a fully guaranteed two-year, $2.74 million deal in early July.
Realistic expectations for Los Angeles Lakers rookie Max Christie
Quote:
It’s been an exciting offseason for the Los Angeles Lakers. There are a ton of new faces for new head coach Darvin Ham to use. Most of these new faces were added via free agency.
That is all except the Lakers’ lone draft selection, Michigan State guard Max Christie. What should we expect out of the Lakers’ first draft selection since Talen Horton-Tucker?
I know the kid has haters already (which is pretty pathetic).
But I got a feeling this kid is gonna be good (as in an important starter on a contending team) down the line.
The defense and vision is what I'm liking.
Hopefully that continues to improve while he gets used to the NBA 3pt line. _________________ 💜💛 🏆 👀 🍖 #18!!!
Max shows (early) signs of being an Eddie Jones type player..certainly being able to D up on stronger players..
I just wish there were more John Chaneys (and fewer Caliparis) in College Hoops, so kids like Max could develop.
Brings me to the next point: If you draft a one-and-done-college-kid, there outta be a no-trade-clause so teams have to put their money where there mouth is. Even more so, for second round.
Last thing: being that drafts are getting deeper and deeper: would it make sense to expand NBA rosters and add a third round? Sure, there'll be some initial dilution (kind of like when the NBA expands # teams) but the steady state would seem a whole lot more appealing (at least to me) _________________ Starting Lakers Dynasty6.0! NOW!!
------
....." each year in Lakerland is marked by four seasons: Kobe’s Mad at His Teammates; Kobe’s Shooting Too Much; Kobe Leads the Victory Parade; Kobe Receives His Championship Ring."
Next season, we may again, have a massive roster turnaround and he gets 12-15mpg. Then he's up as a RFA already b/c the Lakers didn't sign him to a 3 or 4 year deal. _________________ From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Max shows (early) signs of being an Eddie Jones type player..certainly being able to D up on stronger players..
I just wish there were more John Chaneys (and fewer Caliparis) in College Hoops, so kids like Max could develop.
I hear you on that. It would also greatly benefit a team like ours who are in a win now mold. Typically that means either trading draft picks to advance the current state of our team, or keeping the pick and choosing in the latter part of the rounds where the pickings are still good because more players remained in college and developed.
Brings me to the next point: If you draft a one-and-done-college-kid, there outta be a no-trade-clause so teams have to put their money where there mouth is. Even more so, for second round.
Re: yeah, but more than a few players will either be w/o jobs, or picked lower because, as a team, I'm not going to be forced to keep a player longer than I want just because he's a one and done.
Last thing: being that drafts are getting deeper and deeper: would it make sense to expand NBA rosters and add a third round? Sure, there'll be some initial dilution (kind of like when the NBA expands # teams) but the steady state would seem a whole lot more appealing (at least to me)
Re: Nah, the market is brutal as it is for those not drafted in the second round. The only way for a market to get "deeper and deeper" as you say, is for there to be a great influx of international talent. A third round would, as you state, dilute the market. It's already diluted enough.
Also, again, as a team in win now mode, I want only two rounds because it leaves talent at the bottom end that a team winning now would benefit from.
I am not looking at his numbers, but what he does on the floor and his activity man.....He looks GOOD at 19! On offense he looks VERY comfortable doing uncomfortable things which is a great sign that we saw with Ingram. He is out there trying everything...Mid range, 3s, posters, pick and rolls...I like it.
His frame and the way he moves reminds me of Tatum and Cam Johnson but a bit shorter
I think defensively he is already a monster and you guys will see. His IQ is super high. I want to see what he can do next to AD, Bron and Nunn. where we can hide him on offense and see his defense.
I still believe in this kid. He's so young that his body/coordination is off.
But his defense/rebounding jump off the page, and that's usually not the case for 19 year old guards. _________________ From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Better than Anthony brown right? Kinda remind me of him
Much better. Brown was also older when he was drafted. He couldn't put the ball on the floor either and Max has that (though he's too weak to finish right now). _________________ From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Whatever kind of player Christie turns about to be, it looks like he's a few years away. Not a knock on him. He needs playing time to learn and not sure how much he's going to get on a "win now" team.
Christie is in an incredible position. On a high profile team with zero wing depth and hits free agency in 20 months as a 21 year old right when the cap is set to spike. I’d sleep in the gym if I were him. _________________ Austin Reaves keeps his game tight, like Kobe Bryant on game night.
He loos like a baby deer out there. But you can also see the flashes of really good instincts, athletic ability, and some skills.
Hopefully one day he can be a poor mans version (or better) of Bridges.
Good comp, though Bridges has about 1-2 inches more length on his wingspan.
Bridges is the prototype of the perfect 3rd/4th guy on a team. Can't believe Philly gave him away. Hopefully we are patient and give it a couple years and see how he grows but by having Handy, LeBron, AD, Beverly, and Ham around him, he's got great mentors.
Darvin Ham Pleased With Progress Max Christie Has Made So Far
Quote:
While his offensive game needs work, Christie has shown a lot of potential as a wing defender, doing an excellent job at forcing tough shots while also crashing the boards well.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum