Future-Proofing the Lakers

Introduction:
Kobe Bryant's long, storied, and glorious career has finally come to a fitting end: dropping 60 points and dragging his team to a victory over the Utah Jazz. Prior to that, Kobe was basically on a perma-contract; you don't cut a guy like that, ever, no matter how old and beat-up he is, so $25 million of our cap space was permanently set aside for Kobe. But now that he's retired, and the Lakers' payroll is starting to clear off, we can talk about the future.

But first let's talk about the past. The Lakers are one of the greatest and most storied franchises not just in basketball history, but in sports history. We've won 16 championships and appeared in the Finals a staggering 31 times, stretching from 1949 to 2010 and featuring at least one appearance in every intervening decade. We've missed the playoffs only eight times in franchise history: Once in 1958, twice in the mid-70s, once in 1994, once in 2005, and in each of the past three seasons. This has been the longest dry stretch of the franchise's existence (although we have gone longer without winning a championship on several occasions). What's worse, the team doesn't have a superstar like George Mikan, Elgin Baylor, Jerry West, Wilt Chamberlain, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Magic Johnson, Shaquille O'Neal, or Kobe Bryant to carry it through; we're building from scratch. That means the playoffs, and the Finals, may not come again as soon as we'd like.

Lakers fans are trying to keep hope alive. After all, it's not by chance that the Lakers have been this great over the years, and the longest we've ever gone without having one of the above-mentioned players is six years, from 1991-97. (Although we technically had Magic back for a brief time in '96, he wasn't really Magic.) The fans have faith that our front office will reload. After all, we wouldn't be in such a bad position if it hadn't been for the unethical and unjustified veto of the Chris Paul trade back in 2011. Had it not been for "basketball reasons" and the whining of the hypocrite Dan Gilbert, we might have spent the past five years watching a Lakers team starring Chris Paul, Dwight Howard, and an aging Kobe. So our front office, and especially our brilliant GM Mitch Kupchak, are still very much in control of the franchise's direction. Three down years after getting completely screwed over by the league aren't exactly unexpected.

But even if we do manage to reload on talent, we're also playing in a Western Conference on par with the strongest conferences in history. Let's run down the talent. First, we've got the Golden State Warriors, who just completed a record-setting 73-win season; who look to be on the verge of sealing their second straight championship; who star two of the best shooters the league has ever seen, one of whom is Steph Curry, the back-to-back MVP who's easily the most gifted shooter (and one of the most gifted players) in league history; and who somehow still only have an average age of 27, with their stars trending even younger: Curry is 27, Thompson's 25, and Green's 25. Then we have the San Antonio Spurs, who lowkey finished seventh all-time in wins last year, and who star another top-five player in Kawhi Leonard, as well as a top-five all-time coach in Greg Popovich (better known as the coach of my alma mater, Pomona College). The Spurs are a little less scary, since a lot of their contributors are aging (including Pop), but their consistency makes them, in a sense, more scary, since they've won at least 50 games every season this millennium, including the shortened 2012 season (that's equivalent to 62 wins in an 82-game season, if you're wondering).

The third-biggest threat, at least for now, are the Oklahoma City Thunder, better known as Clay Bennett's bastardized version of the once-honorable Sonics. OKC has been painfully losing in the playoffs a lot recently, which makes most Seattle people (myself included) deliriously happy, but they also currently have two of the five best players in the league, in Kevin Durant and Russell Westbrook. Durant is a wild-card, though; he's a free agent, and if he leaves, the team will regress quite a lot (aka will turn into a slightly better Raptors, who in the West are a five seed). Fourth are the LA Clippers, a silly poser franchise that doesn't realize there's already a team in LA, nor that Chris Paul, Blake Griffin, and DeAndre Jordan isn't a particularly inspiring core.

Beyond the four big boys are solid teams, like the Blazers, the Mavericks (who I can't imagine sticking around very long once Dirk's gone), the Grizzlies, and the Rockets (AKA the Hatefest, since Dwight Howard and James Harden are maybe my two least-favorite non-Celtics in the league). Then are the up-and-comers, like the Pelicans (if they can figure out how to pair Anthony Davis with someone better than Eric Gordon, Tyreke Evans, or Jrue Holiday) and the Timberwolves, who are on the upswing, with two incredibly talented, incredibly young stars in Andrew Wiggins and Karl-Anthony Towns (who are 21 and 20 years old, respectively). Then you have the garbage teams (Utah, Sacramento, Denver, and Phoenix), and then you have the Lakers. That's what we're competing with. That's the incredibly stacked West I'm talking about.

Which brings me to my point: How can the Lakers possibly hope to compete with such a strong conference, including several teams that look like they'll be top contenders for the foreseeable future? There are really two ways: in free agency, and in the draft.

Free Agency: This is how everyone wrongly assumes the Lakers get all their talent. In fact we've only ever signed two big free agents: Jamaal Wilkes and Shaq. But many Lakers fans are enjoying the pipe dream that maybe, just maybe, Kevin Durant will leave Oklahoma to come out to Los Angeles and take up Kobe's torch. There's a lot of what is effectively astrology pointing at this. First, it's LA. And it's Oklahoma City. This isn't a hard choice. Second, the Lakers are up-and-coming (hopefully), and the Thunder are a stolen and cursed franchise which has struggled in the playoffs (and by "struggled" I mean "just beat a top-ten team of all time and lost to another"). Third, if Durant really wants to be great, LA is absolutely the best place to do it, especially now, when Lakers fans are chomping at the bit for another superstar to worship. Fourth, if Durant does come to the Lakers, the team suddenly looks much more legit (I'll outline the exact roster possibilities in a moment), meaning it's not like he'd be joining a bottom-feeder (even though he kinda would). Fifth, we have a lot of money and do not fear the luxury tax, so we'll pay him maxes forever and--more importantly, and this is the thing people fail to realize about stingy teams--we'll pay to surround him with as much top-level talent as we can. OKC won't (cough cough Harden trade cough). That being said, he can easily join any stacked team and play with superstars. If he comes to LA, it's because he wants to build his own legacy the hard way. Most players won't do this. It's a lot of weight to take on your shoulders, following the legacies of Mikan, Baylor, West, Chamberlain, Kareem, Magic, Shaq, and Kobe. We'll see if Durant wants that kind of a challenge.

The Draft: This is how the Lakers get about half their talent (see the same post I linked above), and we have a great opportunity to draft a future stud this year. We have the #2 pick in a draft with exactly two incredible prospects: Ben Simmons and Brandon Ingram. The Philadelphia 76ers have the first pick, and the consensus is that they'll take Simmons and the Lakers will take Ingram, but regardless I'll discuss both players and suggest potential looks the team could have with either.

Ben Simmons is somewhat of a unique prospect, both in his strengths and his weaknesses. He's 6'10, with a 6'11 wingspan, both of which are decent for a PF. He is strong and somewhere between very and extremely athletic, depending on who you ask, and he certainly has the body to be an NBA star. His big draw is his ability to handle the ball and distribute; he has great handles and is a great passer, especially on the fastbreak. He's also a strong finisher and an elite rebounder. By all accounts, he's extremely unselfish and a good person.

His glaring weakness is his jump-shot. It's virtually non-existent, leading some to speculate that he might even be shooting with the wrong hand. Which means that despite Simmons's ability to run the offense and distribute as a LeBron/Pippen-style point forward, he's absolutely no threat to shoot from three, or even the midrange. He's been able to get away with this weakness in high school and college by being bigger, stronger, and more athletic than almost everyone, but I have to imagine NBA defenders will do a better job preventing him from getting to the basket. I've seen some believers claim that not having a jump-shot is a "fixable problem," that Simmons has the work ethic to develop his shot and become an effective shooter in the NBA. Now, while I concede that it is possible to develop from a weak shooter into a dangerous one, I have two major concerns when it comes to Simmons's case: First, this evolution, weak-to-strong shooter, is very rare. And second, it mostly happens among players who already have at least a decent jump-shot; Simmons's jump-shot is not just weak, it's broken.

Brandon Ingram is the polar opposite of Simmons. Ingram is tall and incredibly long; at 6'9, and with a 7'3 wingspan, he has the length of a PF or a C. (Hilariously, even though both Simmons and Ingram have exactly the same measured height--6'9.5" in shoes--Simmons is generally listed at 6'10 and Ingram at 6'9, presumably because Simmons is supposed to be a PF and Ingram an SF.) But his natural position, and the one he'll play in the NBA, is small forward, a position at which he looks like a slightly-less-well-off man's Kevin Durant. Ingram is an exceptional shooter and a great scorer all-around. He's not quite the athlete that Simmons is, but with his length and skills, he doesn't have to be. Ingram's big weakness is his build; he's considered very skinny and they say he'll need to bulk up in order to succeed in the NBA. Of course, they've also been saying that about Durant his entire career.

From a Lakers perspective, Ingram is clearly the better fit for the team. Simmons requires spacing at the 1, 2, and 3, and the Lakers aren't a particularly great shooting team. We also already have a PF who can't shoot in Julius Randle, which is particularly annoying in the case that we get Simmons, since neither of them has the length to play center, and neither has the shooting ability to play SF. Even in a hypothetical positionless offense, having two forwards who can't shoot and can't play center is a bad position to be in (no pun intended).

Ingram, on the other hand, is an absolutely gorgeous fit. He has elite-tier shooting, with range that easily extends to the NBA 3-point line (he shot 41% from three in college and might approach those numbers in the pros), and he perfectly fills the gaping hole at SF that the Lakers have had basically forever. He's a quiet, team-oriented player who doesn't need the ball to function and who fits beautifully as a primary scorer and floor-spacer in the modern, three-happy NBA. You couldn't invent a better fit for the Lakers. Well, you could, but it would be Kevin Durant.

We're in the surprisingly fortunate position of picking second, meaning we don't actually have to make this decision. Philadelphia picks first, and all indications are that they'll be picking Simmons. So with any luck, we'll be sitting pretty with Ingram at #2 slotting in perfectly at SF.

Now that we've discussed the Big Three prospects--Durant, Simmons, and Ingram--let's look at what the Lakers' team actually looks like at the moment.

The Current Lakers: I'll just list all the players currently on contract for the '17 season. Keep in mind that the salary cap is going to be around $92 million.

Lou Williams: $7 million
Nick Young: $5.4 million
D'Angelo Russell: $5.3 million
Julius Randle: $3.3 million
Larry Nance Jr.: $1.2 million
Anthony Brown: $0.9 million
Total: $23.1 million. (Note that Brandon Bass has a player option for about $3 million, but all indications are that he'll opt out of it.)

So we've only used about 25% of our salary cap. Then there are Jordan Clarkson, Tarik Black, and Marcelo Huertas, all of whom are RFAs, giving us the ability to match any contract they're offered. Finally, Roy Hibbert, Ryan Kelly, Robert Sacre, and Metta World Peace are all UFAs (as, technically, is Kobe, but he'll stay retired).

So what does our roster look like at the moment? Assuming we keep a few of our free agents, it looks something like this:

PG: D'Angelo Russell, Marcelo Huertas
SG: Jordan Clarkson, Lou Williams, Nick Young
SF: (Vacancy), Anthony Brown
PF: Julius Randle, Larry Nance Jr., Ryan Kelly
C: (Vacancy), Tarik Black

As it is, that's a bad roster. Russell, Clarkson, and Randle are all rising talents, but none of them are there yet. We also have absolutely no one to start at SF and C; Brown and Black aren't close to being ready to start, Kobe's gone, Hibbert probably won't come back, and Metta is well past the time when he could be a real contributor. Hopefully, the draft will help fill one of those holes; with Ingram slotted in at the starting 3 position, our team suddenly looks much better. Notice, again, how there isn't a starting spot for Simmons, which means either he or Randle, who is one of our three starter-quality players, would be either riding the bench or clogging the floor.

Now let's talk about free agents.

Interesting Free Agents:

Kevin Durant is obviously the most exciting one, although I will once more characterize him coming to LA as a pipe dream. It's also worth noting that Durant and Ingram would play very much the same role for the team, which might lead you to think that they wouldn't both fit on the roster. But Ingram's skillset (great shooter, doesn't need the ball) is much more flexible than Simmons's (terrible shooter, great ball-handler/passer/rebounder, but needs the ball to function), so Durant and Ingram could conceivably play together as 2/3 or even 3/4. And of course getting a player like Durant is a much clearer step to contention than getting Simmons, so even if there is overlap, it's absolutely worth it. If we do somehow manage to wrangle Durant, we get one of the most efficient and dangerous scorers in NBA history, with the length to shoot over anyone, the athleticism to play solid defense, and a huge chip on his shoulder. But, again, pipe dream.

Joakim Noah is a good rebounder, a great defender, and a nice fit for us at our vacant center position. While he's not much to speak of on the offensive end (besides his rebounding), and his age at 31 means he won't be able to grow with the team, he's still a great choice at our weakest position.

Al Horford is an underrated option at center. He's a solid defender, a good passer, and just this past year developed impressive range, shooting 49% from the long midrange and 34% from three. Having that kind of range on our center would open the floor up a lot on offense for Julius Randle, and would also make Simmons a much stronger option if he were to fall to us. Horford's downside is his age; although he's barely 30, he's still not the guy who's going to be around for the next decade, as Russell/Clarkson/Randle may be. Still, he's still a very capable player and should remain so for the next several years, making him a great choice for us right now. The other hidden problem here is that Horford will probably prefer to go to a contender, but there's nothing we can do about that.

Luol Deng is an option at SF basically if we don't get Ingram or Durant. While he's no longer the two-way stud, Scottie Pippen-lite player he once was, he's still certainly a starter-quality SF, which we desperately need.

Bismack Biyombo is another option at C. He's young, with lots of room to grow, but he also hasn't quite proven himself to the extent of the other centers I've listed.

Hassan Whiteside is an intriguing prospect. Whiteside is listed at 6'11, but his wingspan is a staggering, unfathomable 7'7, one of the longest on record in NBA history. This length makes him a monster on the glass, a strong offensive presence, and an extraordinary shot-blocker. Whiteside averaged 3.7 blocks per game this year, but more impressive than that number is the three triple-doubles he put up, with 10+ points, rebounds, and blocks. Whiteside has had four such triple-doubles on four total occasions over his career, all in the past two years. For comparison, only five players have more P-R-B triple-doubles than Whiteside. Three of them, Dikembe Mutombo, Hakeem Olajuwon, and David Robinson, are all-time great, Hall of Fame centers who played long careers. Two of them, Shawn Bradley and Mark Eaton, are respectively 7'6 and 7'4, massive freaks of nature, who also played long careers (although they got their P-R-B triple-doubles in a short span each). Then comes Whiteside, who's still only 26 years old and is only beginning to come into his own as a player. Whiteside is the absolute dream at center, whose rim protection, rebounding, and overall presence in the paint would do wonders to cover any defensive deficiencies the Lakers may or may not (but definitely do) have. As for any questions of maturity, all I can say is that talent like this doesn't come around often, and it's not like he's a Robert Upshaw-level risk.

Lakers Final Roster Projections:

It's obviously hard to predict what's going to happen this offseason. We can't even know for certain which RFAs the Lakers will resign, or which prospect will fall to us in the draft, much less competing with 29 other teams for Durant, or a dozen other teams for each of the centers I want. But while this roster is certainly flexible, I also think it's a reasonable estimation of what the team might look like at the start of the season.

PG: D'Angelo Russell, Marcelo Huertas
SG: Jordan Clarkson, Lou Williams, Nick Young
SF: Brandon Ingram, Anthony Brown
PF: Julius Randle, Larry Nance Jr., Ryan Kelly
C: Hassan Whiteside, Tarik Black

Possible substitutions include: Simmons instead of Ingram, with potentially Deng or someone else starting at 3 and Randle on the bench; Noah, Horford, Biyombo, or even someone else starting at center; Kevin Durant at 3, pushing Ingram to the bench (or filling the vacancy in the case we get Simmons); and any number of depth players at any position who might end up changing. Most notably, I'd love to see Nick Young on a different team (I think he's very bad), and some veteran depth somewhere on the team wouldn't be out of place.

As for our prospects with this roster: Barring the improbabilities of Durant coming to LA, Simmons or Ingram turning into a rookie phenom, or Russell and Clarkson suddenly becoming superstars, I don't think this Lakers team is going to be contending in the West. I'd be pleasantly surprised if we snuck into an 8th seed and made the playoffs. But this is how a dynasty starts, with young talent figuring out how to play together. Yes, the Lakers are in the midst of one of the darkest stretches in franchise history, but there is light at the end of the tunnel. Russell, Ingram, and Randle may be the Big Three of the future. The Lakers will be back.