Comments on: What’s Mitch Kupchak doing these days?

By: drrayeye

drrayeye — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 02:26:03 +0000

The obvious Lakers in play for trade are Ammo and Jordan–both expiring contracts. There will be cap space opportunities to trade them for talented players (most likely a player and a “fill”) with two years remaining on their contract (who would become expiring contracts next year)–but it would not be a good way to shed costs.

I don’t see either Derek or Sasha in play for trade at all.

By: Kurt

Kurt — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 01:57:50 +0000

Suns preview finally up. I was engaged hanging Christmas lights outside the house and was up on a ladder too long.

By: chris h

chris h — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 01:54:51 +0000

don’t we have a game tonight? game preview?

By: sT

sT — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 01:54:31 +0000

Hey, there is a game tonight, is there not? Are we going to have a post for it?

By: Zephid

Zephid — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 01:46:11 +0000

Btw, anyone been checking out how well Chris Douglas-Roberts has been playing? He’s averaging 16 points, 5 boards a game. He may actually now be better off having been drafted in the 2nd round. His contract is one year shorter and only about $300k less than a late first-round pick, so he may be able to sign a lucrative big contract earlier than his peers.

By: Zephid

Zephid — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 01:35:17 +0000

34, TRad, that’s a great point. The later we trade, the less the receiving team will have to eat in salary, so it may be more amicable to them. However, I doubt that any intelligent team will help the Lakers out for a palty $350k. A smart team like OKC will charge the Lakers a first rounder or such for shaving almost $5 mil off the Lakers expense sheet.

40, Joel, if Kobe signs a max new contract (not an extension; It has to be a Bird exception contract after hitting free agency), he will be the highest paid player in any single season, ever. By my calculations, the maximum 10.5% raises each year will bring Kobe up to some $33.6 million in 2013-14, right before Kobe turns 36 and hits the Over-36 barrier. I would be willing to bet that Kobe knows this and wants this.

44, Snoopy, Memphis took on Mihm’s contract because they wanted his size off the bench. Since they were under the cap, and the Lakers paid them some $2-3 mil, they basically got a back-up big man for free for a season.

By: chibi

chibi — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 01:02:39 +0000

I tried to be as subtle as I could, but I understand if I’m censored.

1. Because they’re both triangle teams, I think Minnesota and LA are natural trading partners.

2. I don’t think OKC will make a free agent splash this summer; next summer, they’ll have more than enough cap space to make a run at Joakim Noah and/or Al Horford.

3. I thought Hollinger hit it right on the head: Roy struggled playing with Oden, who clogged the paint. On the one hand, there will be a delay in developing chemistry between them; on the other hand, they will actually improve on the offensive end. So, I think they’re still a playoff team.

4. DJ Augustine is in Larry Brown’s doghouse.

By: 13thirtyone

13thirtyone — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 00:58:31 +0000

Good read!

Although I would love us to get someone better to replace ammo or sasha (or farmar), I would prefer to keep this team until after this season ends (with the lakers as a repeat world champion of course)
Reason being, our triangle offense.
It might be too tough for any guards in the league to learn triangle offense in the middle of the season. Guard positions in triangle offense is the most complex position, IMO.

So I think it would be better if we just eat up the expiring contract at the end of this season. (Although some trade scenario like we did last year with Mihm should be good also, as long as we don’t take any new player in return this season – draft picks are totally welcome though)

By: Snoopy2006

Snoopy2006 — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 00:54:44 +0000

harold – lmao I missed that. You’d think I would have remembered, but he’s done a good job of playing nice lately.

Stupid question – what’s in it for Memphis, taking on Morrison or Mihm’s contracts? Obviously there must be some incentive because they did it with Mihm. But if they’re a cheap team, why would they take on an extra contract they won’t use?

Now that I think about it…didn’t we essentially pay Memphis the $2 mil for Mihm’s contract last year? And then we saved the $2 in luxury tax payments because Memphis was under the cap. If that’s true, then I guess I just answered my own question. Awfully nice of the Grizzlies to do it for no real benefit, just to help out Buss.

By: harold

harold — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 00:12:00 +0000

Snoopy, not EVERYONE wants Fish around long-term, ironic how your post came just after somebody who probably doesn’t

Since it’s not really my $91 million, I’m cool with the team as is. It’s not as if we’re in dire need of talent, I can picture about 25 teams who would love to have our talent and our problems.

So, to reiterate, to rehash, and to be very redundant, this is how I see the Lakers being:

1. We’re good
2. But Buss can’t be happy about paying $91 million…
3. But we’re good, so it’s somewhat mollified.
4. Still, $91 mil is $91 mil…
5. So we kinda want to shed some salary, but not really seeking any talent in return, so unless LeBron is miraculously available or something, I don’t see us trading for talent.
6. We’re definitely not desperate enough to shed talent to get rid of salary.

So… like mentioned earlier, unless somebody really sees some promise in Sasha that we haven’t, I don’t see us getting too far other than Morrison being given away like Mihm.