I know it's weird to see Randle as a deal breaker... but (healthy) Randle and Smart are about even in trade value in my opinion. If you're the Lakers, why would you bother to include Randle? Nobody is outbidding you if you give up the #2 pick.
Lakers should stand firm on refusing to give up Randle. Kings are playing hardball... they'll cave. You got this in the bag, LA. Just offer the #2 and nothing else. Trust me on this. I know what I'm talking about. When Vlade calls and says, "Seriously... include Randle or I'm trading Cousins to Boston", just call his bluff. There's no way he passes up the opportunity to get the #2 pick. You win, Lakers. You win.
This is just as ridiculous as when you said it a few days ago. Randle dropped to 7 specifically because of injuries
Heh... listen to the podcast between Lowe and Ford from today... they specifically talked about how Danny agonized over whether to select Randle or Smart. Randle was more talented. He liked Smart's attitude. Methinks the fact we already had Olynyk and Sully combined with the fact Rondo was a dead man walking had a lil somethin to do with that pick. We reportedly tried to trade Rondo for Randle months after his injury.
Healthy... they are even trade value.
I highlighted the key word for you. Randle could never play a full NBA season without injuries. That's what widens the initially minor separation between Smart and Randle.
They both lost trade value. Smart, because of his underwhelming rookie campaign. Randle, because he got injured. I'd guess that Smart has a bit more trade value right now... if Randle is healthy. Both really good prospects. Pre-draft, I think Randle was more valuable honestly.
Guess it doesn't matter anyways. Neither has value comparable to the #2 pick. So if Lakers are including it, this is donezo.
Underwhelming rookie campaign? As one of the youngest rookies in the draft, Smart received the 6th most votes for the All-Rookie teams and was picked 6th. Of top 10 picks, only Wiggins and Smart made the All-Rookie team, which means at least based on rookie seasons alone, 8 of the 10 first picks in the 2014 NBA Draft have proven to be less valuable than where they were selected. The argument you're making is legitimately false unless you're seriously ignoring the relativity of Smart to his 2014 Draft peers.
And by the way, there's no question in my mind Smart got snubbed in place of Jordan Clarkson (making Smart the 5th best rookie after one season) because the league felt Boston received its praise for making the playoffs and needed some storyline to entertain one of the country's biggest markets. There's no way a guy on one of the most pathetic teams in the league should get 1st team over a guy that started for a playoff team because he put up pretty good stats as the number one offensive option during the second half of the season. If that's the standard for the last spot on the 1st team, the league should apologize to Kelly Olynyk.
That entire draft has, thus far, been a massive disappointment. Two of the the guys picked ahead of Smart are 19 and we will not see what they will become for a while. Randle, Embiid and Parker all were hurt. I like Smart. I think he's a comparable asset to Julius Randle, but a year from now that might be a ridiculous statement... one way or the other.
Of those picked in the top 6 only Exum and Gordon are more than a year younger than Smart and they had what were truly underwhelming rookie seasons. Smart is in the same age group as Wiggins and Parker and Embiid despite staying for his sophomore year at Oklahoma State.
Smart also dealt with a persisting ankle injury that he said at the end of the season greatly prohibited his ability to get to the rim and kept him out completely for over 10 games.
So now that we've established that Smart is a) young, just like most of his rookie peers and b) dealt with injuries like his a lot of his equally highly-touted rookie peers, why is it that they get a pass despite showing absolutely nothing (aside from Parker, who obviously we can agree is a better asset than Smart) while Smart's first year is characterized as "underwhelming" despite having the second best rookie season of those selected in the top 10 while battling through inexperience and pain? Why is it that the ceilings of Dante Exum and Julius Randle didn't drop because of poor play or injury as much as Smart's ceiling did for actually showing something but not lighting the world on fire? Did we expect him to be Gary Payton or Dwyane Wade right away? If so, maybe he should have been picked #1.
edit: ultimately the fallibility in your claim lies in your refusal to compare Smart to his fellow rookies and instead insisting upon holding Smart up to the standard of some of the best rookies to ever play the game. Sure, Smart isn't an All-Star yet, or even part of the All-Defense team. But when you look at the performance of guys around him who were supposed to be close to, as good or even better than him in year 1, it's quite clear that Smart had a
relatively successful rookie year.
Topic: Lakers actively looking to acquire Cousins - Per ESPN (Read 34246 times)