or possibly stem cell treatment.
The reality is...
1. If we are going to target anyone (which already was a mistake) there is someone better... D Howard, and no on is clamoring for him like CP3 (because they are gassed again regarding a wedding toast and believe D12 doesn't want to be here, although they claim players want to be here, and for cheap... go figure)
2. No quality big = no chip. We aren't into making horizontal moves.
SMH... is an understatement.
The argument as you stated is really putting our eggs in one basket (PG), or spreading the wealth to acquire possibly more than one player- starting with a center.
We can name centers who are available through FA, centers who we covet based on their skill set, and future projected FA.
IT's about the approach. Once we decide on the approach (really priorities) then choices can be made.
CP3 is NOT worth standing pat would mean...
We can shop/trade for a center who matches contracts either alone or combined between Billups, Fields, TD, Turiaf, Rautins, Shump, Balkman, or Jorts.
In effect it saying (admitting) NONE of these players is a keeper. EVERYONE of theses players (including a 2nd round pick if we still have that) is expendable and SHOULD be prioritized less than A STARTING CENTER.
You see? Then like ALL THE CP3 supporters are willing to concede... we will have to fill out our roster with cheap role players/vets.
THE DIFFERENCE IS: by sacrificing an EXPENDABLE player for a STARTER the replacement can be another expendable player (non starter).
SO the list of possible centers is longer than you think. BUT the point is it starts by ADMITTING a starting center minus ANYONE but STat & Melo would be better both long and short term.
A Starting Center
A Max Starting PG on the horizon.
Both have built-in sacrifices.
The last point I would like to make is this...
Earlier this year before we traded Felton Gallo and co. we were proposing trades.
I proposed trading Gallo, Curry, (maybe Chandler and more)- whoever matched contracts $, but basically the same trade we made BUT FOR ANDREW BYNUM.
I know some were/are saying the Lakers wouldn't do it etc... I offered reasons why they might consider it. Gallo was emerging, Chandler could help, maybe Felton could replace Fisher, they still had Pau, Bynum's contract was ending, etc...
People said he was injury prone, some LIKE TRILL considered it.
BUT HERE'S MY POINT.
WE acquired MELO for basically that exact same trade (!!!!!), and I know partly because MELO forced his way, but look at it like this....
A team would rather get rid of a top prolific scorer and get depth and some scoring in return than a big like Bynum who is still very young. Not exactly cheap but cheaper than Melo.
In effect, if you argued that the Lakers wouldn't do this... then you are arguing the point that a CENTER is probably the most coveted position on WINNING squads- short of being led by Michael Jordan.
Think about that.
Prioritize the center, get creative, sacrifice whoever/whatever besides STAT & MELO to continue building our core with a less than MAX center and let the rest follow.
Open your eyes to the possibility to a viable center to continue our positive direction. All we need is a team to bite. we have time, so don't assume its CP3 or bust just yet.
Think about that.