Whose rebuild is better? BOS vs LAL

[TheFlex]

Our pick stash vs. their's isn't being talked about as much as it should.

Boston wins easily.

[Granath]

It's very simple.

If D'Angelo Russell is a star the Lakers are ahead. If not, the Celtics are far and away in a better position. Any team that has a top notch superstar in a rebuilt is automatically ahead.

But here's the rub. Even if Russell is a star, the Celtics still have the firepower (in picks and other assets) to retake the lead and end up as the better team. If Russell is not a star it would take an exceptional amount of luck for the Lakers to retake that lead. The Lakers have put almost all their chips on the table already. They've got entirely unproven assets in Russell and Randle and nothing else, not even a 1st round pick this coming year unless they happen to hit a top 3 pick. That's it. They're essentially all in. The Cs are loaded with picks in future drafts and have a far larger number of players who are still developing and who haven't hit their ceilings. They still have many cards left in their hand before they have to put their cards on the table. 

[Moranis]

LA has Randle and Russell.  That  alone means they have the better rebuild right now.  That said, they don't own their 1st this year and Boston has a ton of future 1sts coming its way so Boston has a lot more future assets in place, but as of now Randle and Russell give LA the edge.

Why is having Julius Randle, a guy who has never played an NBA game coming off a broken leg, better than having Marcus Smart?

Randle and Russell.  Did you not see the word AND?

[Monkhouse]

It's very simple.

If D'Angelo Russell is a star the Lakers are ahead. If not, the Celtics are far and away in a better position. Any team that has a top notch superstar in a rebuilt is automatically ahead.

But here's the rub. Even if Russell is a star, the Celtics still have the firepower (in picks and other assets) to retake the lead and end up as the better team. If Russell is not a star it would take an exceptional amount of luck for the Lakers to retake that lead. The Lakers have put almost all their chips on the table already. They've got entirely unproven assets in Russell and Randle and nothing else, not even a 1st round pick this coming year unless they happen to hit a top 3 pick. That's it. They're essentially all in. The Cs are loaded with picks in future drafts and have a far larger number of players who are still developing and who haven't hit their ceilings. They still have many cards left in their hand before they have to put their cards on the table.

Why does everyone act as if the Lakers are guaranteed to lose that pick?

Brandon Bass, Hibbert, and Lou Williams are a huge upgrade, but they are by no means world beaters... I still see them ending up in the 8th worst position, and eventually succumbing to tanking after they realize how far away they are from playoff contention.

Also I would take BOS's simply cause the Lakers future doesn't look too good. Randle and Russell must rock out their rookie year, because the Lakers will only have FA to rely on if they don't develop quick enough.

[crimson_stallion]

We already know Ainge was willing to give up all our draft picks (Rozier, Hunter, MIckey) + an unprotected Brooklyn pick just to trade up to take Winslow.   It seems he was willing to include Marcus Smart in a similar package to get his hands on Okafor.   

Regarding Winslow that is true, but then Danny Ainge has also gone on record saying that in hindsight he's glad the trade never happened, because he felt it was a lopsided trade in Charlotte's favor.

To be honest, I tend to agree with him.  I always felt Winslow was over-hyped and that he looked like he would be a nice role player at best.  Obviously it's too early to draw conclusions, but his play so far has supported that since he has looked horribly mediocre.  Out three guys all seem to look better than Winslow right now, so at this point in time it looks like that trade would have been a terrible ones if Danny did make it.

We'll have to wait and see if that proves true.

Regarding Okafor, I don't recall hearing about that trade.  The only trade I heard about regarding Smart was one that involved trading Smart for Nerlens Noel - which is fair enough given that we already had Isaiah Thomas at PG and we were in desperate need for a rim protector.  I never really heard anything about a Smart-for-Okafor deal.

Honestly i was pretty high on Okafor prior to the draft.  I was looking at his as a DeMarcus Cousins 2.0 potentially.  Now after seeing him play in SL and in preseason he looks more like an less mobile, out-of-condition Greg Monroe.

... and as I've been saying in this thread, I'm not sure Smart vs Randle is even a finished debate (though I'd obviously side witH Smart at this early juncture). 

Certainly we can't make any conclusions this early, but I would be very, very surprised if Randle becomes as good a player as Smart.  I was never high on Randle, even before the draft.  He seems to lack the skills (passing, shooting range, perimeter defense, etc) to be effective an effective PF in today's NBA, yet he lacks the size and length to be competitive at the C spot and doesn't have standout athleticism to offset those limitations.

I look at Randle and I basically see David Lee minus the jumper, the passing skills and the basketball IQ.

Problem is those three are all key pieces to Lee's game, and you have to wonder how good Lee would ever have been if he never had that jumper, the passing game and his basketball IQ.  Would he have ever been good enough to start? I doubt it.

That's where I see Randle, in a nutshell.  A solid backup PF who can come in as a rebounder, post scorer and energy guy off the bench.

[colincb]

It's very simple.

If D'Angelo Russell is a star the Lakers are ahead. If not, the Celtics are far and away in a better position. Any team that has a top notch superstar in a rebuilt is automatically ahead.

But here's the rub. Even if Russell is a star, the Celtics still have the firepower (in picks and other assets) to retake the lead and end up as the better team. If Russell is not a star it would take an exceptional amount of luck for the Lakers to retake that lead. The Lakers have put almost all their chips on the table already. They've got entirely unproven assets in Russell and Randle and nothing else, not even a 1st round pick this coming year unless they happen to hit a top 3 pick. That's it. They're essentially all in. The Cs are loaded with picks in future drafts and have a far larger number of players who are still developing and who haven't hit their ceilings. They still have many cards left in their hand before they have to put their cards on the table.

Why does everyone act as if the Lakers are guaranteed to lose that pick?

Brandon Bass, Hibbert, and Lou Williams are a huge upgrade, but they are by no means world beaters... I still see them ending up in the 8th worst position, and eventually succumbing to tanking after they realize how far away they are from playoff contention.

Also I would take BOS's simply cause the Lakers future doesn't look too good. Randle and Russell must rock out their rookie year, because the Lakers will only have FA to rely on if they don't develop quick enough.

If the Lakers don't lose the pick this year, then their current assets are worse than we think. In any case they have to lose a couple of 1sts and a couple of seconds in the next 3 -5 years and are at a big disadvantage to us,

[Granath]

It's very simple.

If D'Angelo Russell is a star the Lakers are ahead. If not, the Celtics are far and away in a better position. Any team that has a top notch superstar in a rebuilt is automatically ahead.

But here's the rub. Even if Russell is a star, the Celtics still have the firepower (in picks and other assets) to retake the lead and end up as the better team. If Russell is not a star it would take an exceptional amount of luck for the Lakers to retake that lead. The Lakers have put almost all their chips on the table already. They've got entirely unproven assets in Russell and Randle and nothing else, not even a 1st round pick this coming year unless they happen to hit a top 3 pick. That's it. They're essentially all in. The Cs are loaded with picks in future drafts and have a far larger number of players who are still developing and who haven't hit their ceilings. They still have many cards left in their hand before they have to put their cards on the table.

Why does everyone act as if the Lakers are guaranteed to lose that pick?

Brandon Bass, Hibbert, and Lou Williams are a huge upgrade, but they are by no means world beaters... I still see them ending up in the 8th worst position, and eventually succumbing to tanking after they realize how far away they are from playoff contention.

Also I would take BOS's simply cause the Lakers future doesn't look too good. Randle and Russell must rock out their rookie year, because the Lakers will only have FA to rely on if they don't develop quick enough.

If the Lakers don't lose the pick this year, then their current assets are worse than we think. In any case they have to lose a couple of 1sts and a couple of seconds in the next 3 -5 years and are at a big disadvantage to us,

Bingo and TP.

[GC003332]

The Celtics future draft picks would appear to be the ace in the hole at this stage, Not to downplay Boston's playoff appearance last year, if the Celtics were in the West the appearance that we are well and truly ahead of the Lakers would be narrowed I believe.
Once Kobe's time is over will give a better indication as to whether top flight free agents will flock to the bright lights of LA.Whether it be next summer or the one after I think that one or two of the best free agents will join them.It remains to be seen if that catapults them into the top flight teams in the West.
Hopefully the Nets and Mavs picks fast forward the Celtics rebuild and we can become a permanent fixture in the upper ranks of the East for the remainder of Stevens time in Boston and beyond.

[greece66]

As long as Kobe stays there, it is not a rebuild.

Sucking big time is one thing, rebuilding another 

[Redz]

As long as Kobe stays there, it is not

Agreed

[LarBrd33]

We already know Ainge was willing to give up all our draft picks (Rozier, Hunter, MIckey) + an unprotected Brooklyn pick just to trade up to take Winslow.   It seems he was willing to include Marcus Smart in a similar package to get his hands on Okafor.   

Regarding Winslow that is true, but then Danny Ainge has also gone on record saying that in hindsight he's glad the trade never happened, because he felt it was a lopsided trade in Charlotte's favor.

To be honest, I tend to agree with him.  I always felt Winslow was over-hyped and that he looked like he would be a nice role player at best.  Obviously it's too early to draw conclusions, but his play so far has supported that since he has looked horribly mediocre.  Out three guys all seem to look better than Winslow right now, so at this point in time it looks like that trade would have been a terrible ones if Danny did make it.

We'll have to wait and see if that proves true.

Regarding Okafor, I don't recall hearing about that trade.  The only trade I heard about regarding Smart was one that involved trading Smart for Nerlens Noel - which is fair enough given that we already had Isaiah Thomas at PG and we were in desperate need for a rim protector.  I never really heard anything about a Smart-for-Okafor deal.

Honestly i was pretty high on Okafor prior to the draft.  I was looking at his as a DeMarcus Cousins 2.0 potentially.  Now after seeing him play in SL and in preseason he looks more like an less mobile, out-of-condition Greg Monroe.

... and as I've been saying in this thread, I'm not sure Smart vs Randle is even a finished debate (though I'd obviously side witH Smart at this early juncture). 

Certainly we can't make any conclusions this early, but I would be very, very surprised if Randle becomes as good a player as Smart.  I was never high on Randle, even before the draft.  He seems to lack the skills (passing, shooting range, perimeter defense, etc) to be effective an effective PF in today's NBA, yet he lacks the size and length to be competitive at the C spot and doesn't have standout athleticism to offset those limitations.

I look at Randle and I basically see David Lee minus the jumper, the passing skills and the basketball IQ.

Problem is those three are all key pieces to Lee's game, and you have to wonder how good Lee would ever have been if he never had that jumper, the passing game and his basketball IQ.  Would he have ever been good enough to start? I doubt it.

That's where I see Randle, in a nutshell.  A solid backup PF who can come in as a rebounder, post scorer and energy guy off the bench.

heh... Solid backup PF for randle, eh?

Barring another injury he will start this year and he might immediately be more impressive than Smart.  Kid is looking like a future superstar right now.  You are right that he isn't displaying any jump shot to speak of, but his rebounding, interior scoring and ball handling make him the likely second highest scorer on the team this year behind Kobe.   

[PhoSita]

Let's calm down with the future superstar stuff.

Randle is playing pretty well in preseason but he still looks like a cross between Carl Landry and Paul Millsap.

He'll need to develop range and learn to play defense in order to become a decent starter, let alone a star.

[LarBrd33]

Let's calm down with the future superstar stuff.

Randle is playing pretty well in preseason but he still looks like a cross between Carl Landry and Paul Millsap.

He'll need to develop range and learn to play defense in order to become a decent starter, let alone a star.

I don't expect smart or randle to ever be superstars.  My guess is smart develops into an elite defensive player with mediocre offensive skills. My guess is randle develops into a elite interior scorer/rebounder with mediocre defensive skills.   

[Moranis]

Randle seems like a Zach Randolph clone to me.  No idea if he ever becomes that good, but I think that is his potential.

Smart looks like a Alvin Robertson clone to me.  Again no idea if he ever becomes that good, but I think that is more in line with his potential.

Both very good players, but I think Randle would have slightly more value if they hit their peaks.

[oldtype]

Assuming that Smart and Randle are roughly equal (which I don't believe in a million years, but let's assume that).

Completely discounting future picks.

The only way you could possibly argue that the Lakers have a better rebuild than the Celtics is if you're that high on D'Angelo Russell.

But if having that top-3-pick talent is all that matters to you, we could have it in an instant. Just dump everyone on the roster except for Smart, Young, and the Rookies, tank the season, and go pick Ben Simmons or Dragan Bender or that dude with the weird name I can't pronounce.

The Celtics have the flexibility to do that if they want. Alternatively, they have the flexibility to build on their current roster and the draft picks we have. How can they be behind the Lakers when we could have whatever they have in a year if we put our minds to it?