Rumor: Nick Young And Julius Randle for Farried & Harris

Lakers Forum » Lakers Rumors

Quote:
Parent HeraldNBA Trade Rumors: LA Lakers Trading Nick Young And Julius Randle For Nuggets Kenneth Farried And Gay Harris?Parent HeraldFor those following Los Angeles Lakers, you would probably agree that the team is currently composed of young...

http://www.parentherald.com/articles/61003/20160814/nba-trade-rumors-la-lakers-trading-nick-young-julius-randle.htm

Heard this rumor several times lately- would you guys do such a trade?

I've been thinking about it for a couple of days and I'd do that trade only if we could then flip Manimal and Lou for KLove. Harris could start at the two and Clarkson could fill the super-sub role. Harris could defend the best guard on a nightly basis much the way Klay Thompson does for GS. With a three guard rotation of Russell/Harris and Clarkson with a smattering of Calderon I could see them easily averaging 38-40% from three and 50 points per night. With Love, Deng, Ingram and Nance all being capable of stretching the floor it would create a real matchup nightmare for other teams. We could go with a "small ball " lineup featuring Love at center that wouldn't necessarily be at a disadvantage on the boards when you consider the rebounding abilities of Love and Deng.

Another option would be to flip Faried for Milsap. A starting lineup of Russell, Harris, Deng, Milsap and Mozgov has the potential for being one of the best in the league without being a negative on the offensive end. I would prefer Love because he is younger and locked in for multiple years, but I'd do either deal. We could then use Lou to bolster another area, possibly center(Koufos).

kkennon1 wrote:
Just another rumor made up to get clicks.

Yeah I think so too- though I've seen similar rumors lately, so perhaps there might be something to it.

I wouldn't do this trade or make any other moves until trade deadline. How do you evaluate the team you currently have and make the necessary adjustments to improves when they haven't played a game yet?

OCLakerfan8 wrote:
I wouldn't do this trade or make any other moves until trade deadline. How do you evaluate the team you currently have and make the necessary adjustments to improves when they haven't played a game yet?

I honestly don't think you need to wait for the trade deadline to see that we could use a better defender than Lou Williams at the guard position of that Randle isn't a significant three point threat.

This would be a stupid trade. Downgrade in talent and an increase in cost.

Please stop the "MADNESS"......lmao.

ParentHerald has zero credit and they're literally a bunch of third rate writers making up random reports, rumors and trade scenarios for the clickbait. I stop myself from clicking on anything from ParentHerald.

Also sounds odd they'd would take NYoung in that scenario. Giving up 2 guys who can play and add value at their positions, for a relative unknown as yet, and a washed up pain in the azz.

Speaking of clic bait, I only opened up this thread to see that fine azz in the pic with Nick lol.

Dave wrote:
Yeah I think so too- though I've seen similar rumors lately, so perhaps there might be something to it.

Doubtful, I've seen 5 + rumors, using those same guys going to other teams. That same site had Cousins coming to us, and going to Bulls, Cavs, Celtics and Wolves at the same time.

mcbill wrote:
I honestly don't think you need to wait for the trade deadline to see that we could use a better defender than Lou Williams at the guard position of that Randle isn't a significant three point threat.

IMO a better defender at the backup shooting guard position won't necessarily improve the laker's defensive problem which I feel is more of a team defend thing.

You'd trade Randle just because he's not a three point threat? I guess the double double he averaged last year means squat?

Ummm, yeah, no....

OCLakerfan8 wrote:
IMO a better defender at the backup shooting guard position won't necessarily improve the laker's defensive problem which I feel is more of a team defend thing.

You'd trade Randle just because he's not a three point threat? I guess the double double he averaged last year means squat?

In the scenario I proposed Harris would start and Clatkson would be the backup. Either way, trading Lou's minutes for Harris has to improve the defense, regardless of the system. I do think Randle is good and can be a stud, but Love already is.

mcbill wrote:
In the scenario I proposed Harris would start and Clatkson would be the backup. Either way, trading Lou's minutes for Harris has to improve the defense, regardless of the system. I do think Randle is good and can be a stud, but Love already is.

Love is also a open door to the basket on defense. Pass!!!

hell no! Randle is already better than Farried offensively and much more talented!

mcbill wrote:
In the scenario I proposed Harris would start and Clatkson would be the backup. Either way, trading Lou's minutes for Harris has to improve the defense, regardless of the system. I do think Randle is good and can be a stud, but Love already is.

What I like about Lou is he's one of those guys who can score a bunch of points a blink of an eye and he knows how to draw fouls. Yeah his defense is suspect but he will score at least as much as the opposing guard if not outscore him so IMO his lack of defense isn't really that big of an issue. Personally I'd keep him but wouldn't be too mad if he's traded.

I find it interesting that you mentioned improving on defense but proposed a trade of PFs that are probably equally bad at defense just because one shoots 3's. Personally I'd take Randle's strength and mobility over Love's 3 point shot. You live and die by the 3. I think Golden State showed that.

Register Now
You are an anonymous user