For the second time in 6 days, Jose Calderon has been traded. After being part of the deal which sent Derrick Rose from the Bulls to the Knicks, Calderon was again dealt, this time to the Lakers, in a deal which helps the Bulls clear cap space to sign Dwyane Wade (coincidentally, another Chicago legend) in free agency.
Chicago has traded guard Jose Calderon to the Los Angeles Lakers, league sources tell @TheVertical.
— Adrian Wojnarowski (@wojespn) July 7, 2016
Lakers will get two future second round picks from Bulls and will give up rights to an undetermined player
— Mark Medina (@MarkG_Medina) July 7, 2016
As Mark Medina notes above, the Lakers receive two 2nd-round picks for their trouble. Eating Calderon’s salary for future draft picks, even if only 2nd rounders is simply good business. The Lakers have cap space to burn and this is why “flexibility” is often touted by GM’s. There is more than one way to utilize that space and like the Lakers did with Jeremy Lin two seasons ago, they get draft considerations in order to take on money.
As for the fit, as we wrote, the Lakers still have a need for a backup point guard and Calderon will fill that role nicely. He’s not a good defender and his days as the type of dynamic assist man where he could average 7-9 dimes a night are behind him, but he is the type of veteran PG whose experience is what the Lakers sought from Marcelo Huertas, but actualized at the NBA level.
Calderon is also still the type of shooter who can provide spacing and work as an off-ball sniper who can do well as a spot up option. He is a career 41.2% three-point shooter and has not hit under 41% of his long range shots since 2012. He’s also a good mid-range and long two point shooter who can take a step in against hard closeouts and still knock down shots.
This level of accuracy can prove valuable in any offense, but especially in one where ball movement and hitting the open man will be a key principle. Calderon’s ability to play on or off the ball will also be a key asset, especially in lineups where he’s playing with either D’Angelo Russell or Jordan Clarkson.
As noted above, Calderon does have his weaknesses and just as his strengths can be accentuated, his flaws will also shine through. He is no longer an NBA level defender and there will be nowhere to hide him on that end of the floor. He lacks the quickness to defend PG’s and doesn’t have the size nor strength to defend wings. Even if you put him on a non-shooting wing, that player can still attack the offensive glass or work as a cutter to beat him.
Even with all this, though, I like this move even though it will likely mean Huertas does not return. Calderon only has one year left on his deal so his contract is not a long term burden. He’s already 34, but his experience at this level can be used as an asset on such a young team — especially a young backcourt like the Lakers’. At this stage of his career, he might not be the dynamic passer Huertas is, but offensively he’s a much superior shooter which might matter more in Walton’s offense. And, defensively, they are both disasters so that is probably a wash.
In the end, then, the Lakers have filled another need with a veteran who can help in some ways and will likely be a negative in others, but that’s what you get with a 34 year old backup. The fact that the Lakers will get a couple of picks out of this deal sways this towards a positive move, however, and makes it well worth the one-year investment.
Altemawa says
Calderon’s a consistent shooter from perimeter. 🙂 we need that shooting more with Luke’s system.
and he’s a proven veteran with wide range of experiences that he can share to our guards. a really good pickup together with the picks 🙂
and what position are we still looking at for FAs?
2:41 p.m. ET: http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/1713/nene-hilario has agreed with the http://espn.go.com/nba/team/_/name/hou/houston-rockets to terms on http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/16831474/houston-rockets-add-depth-center-sign-nene, according to The Undefeated’s Marc J. Spears. Nene, 33, averaged 9.2 points and 4.5 rebounds in 57 games last season in Washington.
thats very cheap for Nene right? could have been decent rotation player for us.. but thats just me.
barath_s says
The bulls give up 2 2nd rd picks, likely including one from the cavs for dunleavy and get one unnamed player from the lakers
While it could be someone on the rostee like kelly etc, the need to clear cap space suggests it might be a stash
Someone like
Ater Majok
Or
Chinemelu Elonu
And no, they aren’t taking swaggy p. They need to pay d wade under the cap.
Renato Afonso says
While Mozgov isn’t a bad defender and Deng was actually a good defender (let’s see how he is next season), I don’t think Calderon is the best option. We shouldn’t stereotype Calderon because he’s a white european as, in the context of team defense, I’ve seen him be very efective on the defensive end in international play. However, he was never very good on defense and he’s certainly not getting better.
On offense, there’s nothing more to add: he can shoot, he can control the tempo and he can find the open man. But we need players who are a positive on defense. Still, a much better option than Huertas.
Vasheed says
Renato Afonso
Maybe not the best option as he isn’t a great defender but this is a really good deal for the Lakers. They aren’t spending money they didn’t have to already to meet the cap floor and he comes off the books at the end of the season. If Huertas is the benchmark, Calderon is an upgrade. Those 2 second round picks though really make this a good forward looking move. I can forgive Calderon’s short comings while looking at the whole trade package.
TellMyWifeISaidHello says
Altemawa he probably wanted to go somewhere he could win
_Craig W says
As I see this we are shooting for wins in the 30+ range next year. We also have a plethora of very young players. The ability to also have a stable veteran at every position is very exciting to me. It means we aren’t the 76ers – with all youngsters in jumbled positions. It means all our young players will have someone to go to and someone who can take them aside and explain how the NBA game is played and lived – why we need to eliminate Young. This means probable quicker development by all our young players – off and on the court. With Walton instituting more of a passing/cutting offense there will be plenty of incentive to develop on-court chemistry – further pushing development.
I am all for bringing in a veteran presence at all our positions and thus am very optimistic about next year. It doesn’t mean I think all our troubles are behind us or that we will compete for a playoff spot, but we will probably see development from day one of our next season.
Travis Y says
Another solid move by the front office that helps the present as well as the future.
Seeing that the cap is moving from $94 M to $100+ M, 1st and 2nd round draft picks should be valued now more than ever.
When considering progress, I like the phrase, “Leaving it in better condition than when you found it.”
We’re used to championships and hate settling for less. However after 2010, we were in shambles. A first round exit in 2011, deteriorating stars, coaching nightmares, etc.
For us to think we would rise to the top so quickly during these last six years was unrealistic.
To think we could get two max players to sign with us after bottoming out without having a star or competent supporting cast was again unrealistic.
It appears the worst is behind us and we are now beginning our ascent to the top of the mountain.
Do I love all the moves? No, but I feel like we’re in a much better position than the last three years.
Renato Afonso says
Vasheed Renato Afonso Yeah, I agree. The trade itself is a very good deal.
Alexander_ says
It’s a nice acquisition. We rented a better shooting, less turnover prone 1/2 player than LWill for 2016-17 and bought 2 2nds for $7.7m. With next year’s cap lower than expected, from 112 to 100, we would need to move Lou to get close to a max slot. Lou has a reasonable contract and by mid-season he may draw interest. We will know by then if he is expendable.
The problem with our backcourt is defense. Hard to win when all our rotation players are below average defenders. This may be why we could see more BI there, if he’s capable, as opposed to needing to protect his body from physical 3s. I hope AB develops this year, he seemed to have two way potential, if he ever adjusts.
_ Robert _ says
The Calderon deal was by far the best of the 3 FA signings.
SSR has a piece up which grades the Laker FA actions. The 5 writers gave the Lakers a D, 3 C’s, and B-. This is worth noting because SSR has been very pro FO in their previous appraisals (part of this is that relatively new writers were mostly taking part – the B- being the exception). Some of the descriptions they used about the Mosgov deal were not very complimentary.
My take is closer to C- or D. Signing Clarkson, while done quickly and efficiently, was not exactly a revolutionary move. The Calderon move was good, but is dwarfed by the Mosgov and Deng deals in importance due to the length of their contracts. And even if we go with a grade of “C-“, this is not what you need when you have a as low of a grade point average as the Lakers do over the past few years. We need to start getting some “A+’s” in order to bring ourselves out of this. As others have stated – I think the chips are on the table with DAR and Ingram to come through with those high grades.
matt24 says
The whole free agency process this year is focused on the development of our young players, and it’s a relief, that they didn’t do anything drastic, because the way I see it is the only way back to being a contender is to trust that the young men will become great players, alot of teams out there making drastic moves to contend now, are being foolish. It will be interesting to see the development of this squad.
mattal says
The FO
is betting heavily that at least two of the core (Randle/Clarkson/Russell/Ingram)
will be All Stars or better.With the Mozgov/Deng
signings the Lakers have much less financial leeway going forward. And what did the FO get for giving away this flexibility?
Two older mediocre veterans whose anticipated productivity will decline over
the life of their contracts.In fact
they may become financial liabilities as early as year two of their deals
(Mozgov/Deng take up 30% of the cap).
Added
to this is the fact that the FO didn’t even take a chance to get another young
talented vet to add to the core. They
settled and in doing so they gave away one of our best assets: cap space.
Going
into free agency the Lakers needed a Center and a Wing. To me, the best FA available was Fournier. Yes, he was restricted but he ended up signing
for far less than the max. Fournier plays the 2 and the 3 and is
young/productive. I would have also pursued Meyers Leonard, also
restricted, who can play the 5 and the 4. He’s also 24. To my
knowledge he hasn’t been offered yet.
Folks
will say that by waiting for Fournier and Leonard we would have missed on
Mozgov and Deng. My response is, ‘so what?’ Mozgov, Deng and now
Calderon make the Lakers a 30 win team.
If the
Lakers had to settle for Hibbert or Nene at the 5 and Bass as a 4 (note Deng is
more of a 4 now anyway) the Lakers would have been a 25 – 30 win team. In
other words waiting would not have changed the trajectory of next year’s club. Except that Hibbert or Nene and Bass would have
been far cheaper and signed for fewer years. If our current core doesn’t
end up producing multiple All Stars then the team would have the financial
flexibility to pursue other stars via free agency starting next year.
I think
the FO’s goal this summer was to create an 8th seed team this season.
Mozgov/Deng’s contracts are liabilities
that Jim and Mitch will gladly deal with after their current positions are
extended. They both know that if they aren’t successful these
liabilities will be someone else’s problem.
FredP says
_ Robert _ It depends on who you consider to be an A+ signee. The worst thing the Lakers could have done would have been to bring in a starter who is a high volume shooter. Walton has yet to coach a game and already the FO would be dictating the Lakers style of play. Clarkson could have signed for 10 million more, so the Lakers did get a home town discount. Mozgov and Deng came to the Lakers knowing the team is not going anywhere for a few years. They are accepting that they did not come to chase a title. Walton knows both of their games and wanted them. Who did you prefer? Calderon has a terrific assist to turnover ration and should help keep the ball moving in the post Byron offense. The environment is set for the younger players to develop. They are the future of the team.
Mid Wilshire says
As most commenters have noted, this move is a net positive.
I expect Calderon’s minutes to be fairly limited since D’Angelo Russell will probably be playing approx. 32 minutes per game. Also, bear in mind, Clarkson can play either the 1 or the 2 (although he’ll probably be primarily a 2 this year).
Therefore, Calderon should play maybe 16 minutes per game. If the Lakers manage their rotations wisely, Calderron will be facing the opposition’s 2nd-string PG, thus minimizing his defensive deficiencies. So, over all, this could work.
In any event, the Lakers just improved their backup PG for this next year and acquired an expiring contract and two 2nd-round picks in the process. Not a bad move by Mitch.
Vasheed says
_ Robert _
Calderon doesn’t cost the Lakers any money more than the cap floor, is an upgrade over Huertas and brings in 2 future 2nd round picks. – Pretty Good
Deng- Fills the need to have someone who will start at SF as Ingram develops and then fade behind him. I would have prefered to pay him more upfront for 1 less year at least but still not a horrible move.
Mozgov- I’ll point out that in his first year with the Cavs he single handledly shored up the Cavs defense. But, he isn’t nor has he ever been very good guarding the Pick N Roll. Something as basic as that I think could reduce Mozgov very quickly to being a bench guy. Add to that that his health is questionable and the size and length of his contract and I consider this signing as horrible. At least Zubac looks like he could be a really good pick. Bigs usually take a while but, I like a lot of things about Zubac and that might dull the pain of paying Mozgov.
AnonLakerFan says
mattal I think your expectations are set way too high. The Lakers have been a lottery team for two years. They will probably be a lottery team next year. That fact will not change even if we put Lebron on this roster. The young core of this team is, at a minimum, 3-4 years away from being productive and hopefully toward the road to becoming star players. Under those realities, the Mozgov and Deng contracts make sense as they will be coming off the books right at the time the Lakers need the cap space to secure long term deals for the young core and, hopefully, be in a position to make other signings designed to move the team closer to becoming a real contender. Right now, we are not a contender. We are a team that needs veteran leadership to help the young core grow into superstars. That’s it.
new rr says
_ Robert _
Yes, there was some new blood making those calls, and these grades were a lot lower than last year’s grades in a similar piece.
mattal says
AnonLakerFan mattal
We agree that the Lakers core would dictate that the team is 2 to 3 years away from making an impact in the standings. All the more reason to at least take advantage of the opportunity to add an appreciating asset to the core. My point is that the FO did not even try to do so.
It is the FO, not me, that is setting the bar too high. Jim’s promise has motivated he and Mitch to push for short term wins even if they handicap the team going forward. Calderon, however, was a good deal, he’s a vet on an expiring.
Mosgov and Deng will not add sufficient value/floor production to justify the length of their deals. I suspect that their year one production will be the high water mark for their Lakers career. How is that a good investment?
Kareemez says
mattal AnonLakerFan mattal, your argument rests on huge assumptions about what the Lakers could and couldn’t do. The fact is, you don’t know what they did or didn’t try to accomplish during free agency. The fact is, the Lakers FO knows much better what were possibilities, especially among RFAs. You can criticize these signings, but your solution sounds similarly improbably. As fans, we tend to play armchair GM with very little knowledge of the driving forces leading to personnel decisions. For example, Hibbert may not have wanted to return to the Lakers. Luke Walton may not have wanted Hibbert. Luke Walton may have wanted Mozgov. Cole Aldridge may not have wanted to come to the Lakers. The team may not be convinced of Aldridge’s abilities as a starting center. The FO could have had inside knowledge about the likelihood of prying Fournier away from his club. All these possibilities are very possible possibilities. But you (and others) seem to have the answers while lacking insider knowledge of the free agency context. Chips are falling, and we don’t really know why they fall how they do. As you said, this is a 30 win team. We can all agree on that.
KevTheBold says
I like this deal, as it gives someone with deep experience, to teach D’Angelo some tricks of the NBA PG trade, plus Calderon allows us to spread the floor even further.
As for defense, I think Walton knows that this will develop over time.
If by chance our young players mature into a formidable group on the offensive end, yet their defense is still not up to par, then we can look to the open market to add defensive specialist free agents eager to fill in the voids which can propel us, and them into a championship contender.
mattal says
Kareemez mattal AnonLakerFan
You are correct I don’t know what Jim and Mitch did or didn’t try. We do know that many unrestricted free agents had their agents inform teams about who would be included or not included in meetings. Did the FO not contact any restricted free agents? Were the Lakers overtures rebuffed by restricted free agents (hard to believe)?
Based on the speed that Mosgov and Deng were signed makes me feel that the FO prioritized these guys. My question is, why?
Roy Hibbert, Mozgov’s statistical equal signed for 1 year $5 million. Nene, statistically superior to Mozgov signed a one year deal for $2.9 mil. What was so intriguing about Mozgov to warrant a 4 year deal for $64 mil?
Brandon Bass had a higher PER than Deng and is his statistical equal based on per 36 min stats. He remains unsigned and will likely sign for less that Deng’s 4 year $72 mil deal. Deng’s stats have slipped each year for the past three seasons. It’s not hard to see him being a back of the rotation player in years 3 and 4 of his deal. Why was he such an important get?
In a vacuum these deals are fine, but in a fixed cap environment when their signings don’t move the win needle in a big way — they use resources (cap space) that should have been either used on an appreciating asset(s) or saved for next summer.
_ Robert _ says
Vasheed: Well – I think we agree.
If I am interpreting your post correctly, we are giving the
Calderon deal an “A” (2 picks incoming and a short term contract)
Deng deal a “C” (OK place filler but the deal is too long)
Mozgov deal gets an F for the reasons cited. Many are citing this as the single
worst FA move for the entire NBA
So there we are. As to your comment with regard to being able to “dull the pain” :
I used to depend on Kobe to do that for me so please keep coming up with ideas. I am not sure that Zubac is going to fill that bill for me : )
Vasheed says
_ Robert _
I think we are closely agreed. I’m think most of our moves have been net positives. Walton, Ingram, Zubac, Deng, and even Calderon with those 2 picks. I weigh that against the one move I truly hated that is Mozgov.
Kareemez says
mattal Kareemez AnonLakerFan Lakers currently have about $14 million in free cap space and potentially an additional $25 million next year (+ Calderon’s $7 million) based on current cap projections. That’s a max and a half. The dire picture of Lakers destroying their cap advantage, I feel, is unwaranted. The fact is that half the teams in this league have tons of money to throw around. What gives the Lakers a competitive advantage in using this space with a roster full of one year rentals, as you suggest. The Lakers need to sign longer term contracts to have any semblance of a team that top-tier talent might even consider joining. I agree and I think everyone agrees that the last 1-2 years for Deng and Mozgov will likely hurt.
I also think that your arguments about Deng and Mozgov are Cunfair and hyperbolic. Mozgov had a down year coming off of an injury and with Tristan Thompson signing his major contract and KLove being healthy the whole year. Mozgov is a better player than Hibbert and you probably know it. Further, comparing Brandon Bass to Deng is ridiculous. I’m not even sure it warrants a response. Deng has greater range, is a better defender across multiple positions, and fulfills a gaping need at the wing. Bass does none of that. I feel like talking about the state of the Lakers when critical fans are constantly flaming the team is a hard task.
mattal says
Kareemez mattal AnonLakerFan
I stand by my comments about Mozgov and Deng. Yes, Deng was a better player than Bass in his prime. That was awhile ago. I see no value in paying for the downside of these guys careers.
Just because I don’t think they spent wisely on Mozgov and Deng doesn’t mean I’m flaming the team.
fern16 says
So the Lakers signed Marcelo Huertas to a 2 year deal…
LT Mitchell says
If anybody was concerned about the four safety cones in the Lakers backcourt, don’t be. Finally, some defensive reinforcements have arrived. Huertas to be resigned as the fifth guard.
the other Stephen says
Never forget: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1vkqHZhjuhM
Macman1000 says
I feel to install his offense, Luke needs older players like Calderon to teach the younglings more than he needs defensive players who will tire them out and what BS preferred. take a look at players who played under thibs in Chicago, all have injury issues, don’t want that happening our young core.
_Craig W says
Macman1000
I’m with you.
I really have a hard time with fans who just will not give the front office any credit and emphasize the downside of anything we do do. There are enough mistakes to draw criticism, but there have been good moves also. I see the criticism that the front office didn’t realize the top free agents were not going to consider the Lakers and those same fans turn around an criticize the front office for top free agents not signing with us. Good Grief! For that last two years people have been saying the front office shouldn’t swing for the fences and get passed by on all the next level talent. This year they did that and all the ‘talking heads’ insist they reacted too quickly. Within 24hrs much of the top talent was committed on 1 July – IMO, they didn’t act too quickly. Also, it is highly probable that both Walton and Shaw had input as to the value of the players they went after.
Also, the analytic fans among us need to realize that basketball is much more than the numbers. Numbers are useful to help define strengths and weaknesses and differentiate players of a similar skill set, but they cannot – of themselves – determine who you should go after.
_ Robert _ says
Can someone give me the positive spin on the Huertas signing?
Lt Mitchell’s joke below was hilarious, but in all seriousness, what up with this. Calderon and Huertas? And we are keeping Williams? What’s next? Are we going to re-up on Young?
This is another head scratcher.
LT Mitchell says
Thibs is notorious for over playing his studs, which can lead to injury……. but it’s silly to associate coaching defense with injuries.
There needs to be at least a little balance between offense and defense. All five of our guards are very poor defensive players. That’s a major concern when not a single guard is even close to being an average defender…. and if you think our famous Paul Piece Stopper can coach these guards into being good defensive players, you are in for a rude awakening.
HaroldSeokohYun says
_ Robert _ Do we know for how much? Depending on the money, it’s another body to fill the roster with.
Drew Gordon says
Welp, Ezeli just signed a two year deal for roughly 15 mil. Second year is a team option.
Vasheed says
_ Robert _
Team shows loyalty to guy they brought over from Europe by extending a second contract? I think he is kinda redundant though with Calderon.
new rr says
Calderon is a solid and opportunistic move by the the FO.
Mid Wilshire says
Vasheed _ Robert _
The signing of Huertas is nothing to hyperventilate over — one way or the other. He’s simply going to serve as an emergency back up PG and the 13th player on the team. Considering that the team is only allowed to dress 12 players for a game, the signing of Huertas seems pretty harmless and benign.
He probably won’t play much this year. In effect, he replaces Robert Sacre as our chief towel waver. That’s all.
Welcome back, Marcelo.
new rr says
Drew Gordon
Ezeli’s deal is with Portland, which now has Ezeli and Ed
Davis for less money per year and for two fewer years than the Lakers will be
paying Mozgov. So:
1.The FO and Walton know some things about Mozgov
that most observers don’t and will be proven right about him.
Or
2.They place a very high value on the whole
mentoring concept.
Or
3.They were worried about striking out, and therefore committed too big and too early,
and to the wrong guy.
In fairness, of course, most thought Durant would stay in
OKC. But as I said a few days ago, I am still not seeing the need to give
Mozgov that deal that early in free agency.
One thing to keep in mind: some people seem OK with these
moves because Walton presumably backed them, but Walton is a coach, not a GM, and I think if the Lakers had kept Scott and
then done the exact same things in FA, a
lot of people in the fanbase would be apoplectic.
Still R says
I just read loyalty mentioned as a possible reason for re-signing Huertas, and it reminded me that one of the reasons given (here and elsewhere) for Kobe’s final deal was to show that the Lakers take care of their own. You know, showing loyalty to a Lakers mainstay for many many years.
Since I’m feeling irritable tonight, I would like to mention that – if showing loyalty truly was a reason to crater the franchise for two years – it really attracted some top FAs to the Lakers didn’t it?
jetjaz says
will nick young remain a laker
matt24 says
Team has tremendous tank potential
bluehill says
Wow. Our deal for Clarkson looks really good.
https://twitter.com/WojVerticalNBA
Sources: Portland RFA Allen Crabbe has signed a four-year, $75M offer sheet with the Brooklyn Nets. Bonuses could reach $83M.
matt24 says
Brandon ingram, will play his first game in a lakers uniform tomorrow.
Mid Wilshire says
Here’s a nice video on the Lakers’ young core including an interesting look at both Ingram and Zubac. It’s strictly a PR piece. But it’s fun. Enjoy:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxvI3R77eUs
Mid Wilshire says
Some Zubac highlights — good hands, soft touch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXrIjLzAZl4
A Horse With No Name says
@ new rr
Let’s go through your points:
1. Who exactly are your “most observers”? The hacks on ESPN who ensure their employment by ripping the lakers? According to many reports, a number of top tier teams, including the Spurs and Warriors, had serious interest in signing in him. Tyrone Lue holds him in high regard, as do the Nuggets organization. The lakers had to overpay to land him. Given their low status, that doesn’t need to be defended. Further, there are plenty of questionable deals that went down around the league that didn’t invite the ridicule this deal did; simply because they weren’t the lakers.
2. I think they do. But it’s more than mentoring, it’s also about having a critical mass of high character, veteran guys to help develop the team culture. Neither Ezeli or Davis have ever been NBA starters or would be considered leaders (and I like Ed Davis as a guy off the bench).
3. As I already noted, when you are a bottom feeder, you will need to pay more to land someone. You will also need to move decisively to get your guy. And to your remark that they signed “the wrong guy”, I guess you think Ezeli is a better get than Mozgov? In case you missed it, Ezeli was really bad in the playoffs. Clearly the Warriors didn’t mind letting him walk, and clearly the rest of the league thought very little of him, as he signed a cheap two year deal that has only has a one year guarantee !
Finally, your comment that had the lakers made the same FA signings with Scott as the head coach, then the fans would be very angry is probably accurate. But so what; I think most fans get that these signings wouldn’t have happened without Walton’s approval (see Mozgov’s comments that it was his conversation with Walton that sold him on signing), and it’s precisely because they get that Walton is an immensely better basketball coach than his predecessor. So yes, Walton isn’t the GM, but clearly he is working in concert with management on player aquisition. So your point doesn’t really stand.
new rr says
A Horse With No Name
Dealing with the points:
1.538, SI.com, and yes, some of the hacks at ESPN,
a lot of Lakers fans, other places around the net. I think it’s fair to say
that most of the people who think signing Mozgov to this deal is a great idea
are a subset of the Lakers fanbase. As to Lue, Lue just won an historic title
with Mozgov on the roster, so it would be pretty classless to bash him on the
way out. Lue didn’t put Mozgov on the floor last year with the money on the
table. I would take that over a quote. As to the reports: Have you confirmed
the sources? Do you know they weren’t put out by Mozgov’s agent? And the answer
is: you don’t know the answer to those questions, and you never will. And, in
any case, that is not relevant. What is relevant is that the Lakers are the
team that has committed the money to the guy, not those other teams, and
whether it is a good deal. Make that case with specifics, or don’t.
2.I watch a lot of basketball, but I also look at
the numbers and the basics. I am into specifics, not stuff like “a critical
mass of high character veterans to develop the team culture” for many reasons,
one being that I am not in the clubhouse. I can only see what I can see, so I
try to avoid vague narratives designed to support an agenda. Here are some of
those basics: The Lakers are committed to Mozgov for his age 30-34 seasons for
64M. He has had knee trouble; he is not an especially good player. He is not
especially mobile. As I said a few days ago, there are some things to like
about him: some of his defensive numbers, his hard screens, his size, his PnR
finish numbers. He seems to be a good guy. But as I also said: I didn’t see a
lot of people saying, “Mozgov is the guy because the Lakers need him as a
mentor” before free agency. But I am seeing it now. As to Ezeli, yes, I would
rather have him at 2/16 with a team option in year 2 than Mozgov at 4/64 with
all four years guaranteed. Ezeli is not the answer to anything, but having him
and Tarik Black on short deals as a center platoon appeals to me more than a
long-term commitment to Mozgov does. YMMV and clearly does.
3.My point holds exactly, and you actually made it
for me: my point was that some people are backing the deal because they are putting
faith in Walton’s talent judgment. Fine. But as you well know from how many
times you have trashed Phil Jackson, being an awesome coach (and we don’t know
whether Walton will be a great or even good coach or not at this point,
although I backed the hire and think he will be a good coach) doesn’t mean that
a guy is necessarily good at identifying and valuing talent in a chaotic
market. And one reason for that is that coaches tend to look at shorter windows
than is sometimes optimal. We will see if Shaw and Walton have read this right.
I am also confident that if Scott were still here, that he would have backed
these moves—veteran guys, guys who have been there, character guys, etc.
The bottom line for me is this: I do not see the Deng and
Mozgov deals as glaring, obvious mistakes, like Young’s deal, Kobe’s extension,
or the Scott hire. I think they are marginally better ideas than signing Lou
Williams was. But I see the negatives as probably outweighing the positives on
both deals, and I also think the fact that people backing the deals are relying
so heavily on terms like mentoring and culture to support them suggests as
much.
KevTheBold says
new rr
In short, the New rr is the Old rr, pessimist to the bone, popping bubbles on a pogo stick.
I’m with Horse, and my opinion has nothing to do with Walton’s decisions. I know you are loathe to admit it, but the FO must have had a plan in mind before these moves, as to me it looks very consistent across the board.
Every young gun has a mentor to work with, and in the case of D’Angelo, there are two.
new rr says
KevTheBold new rr
Like I
said, the moves have positives and negatives, like most moves. I think the
negatives will probably outweigh the positives.
Breaking
it down:
MOZGOV/POSITIVES
PnR
offensive numbers, granular defensive data, size, lack of mileage, playoff
experience, possible role as mentor.
MOZGOV/NEGATIVES
Length
and amount of contract could limit future flexibility, knee issues, age, weak
basic metrics, questionable mobility, limited offensive game, other guys probably
could have been signed for less money and fewer years.
As to
the tone of your post, you should note the fact that your points are based on
negative characterizations of me (pessimist to the core, loathe to admit it) and
vague hopes and conditional assertions (the FO must have had a plan, as to me
it looks, seems to me) etc. Your specific claim is that everybody now has a mentor,
and Russell has two. So you are assuming that two marginal international
players in their 30s will have a big and positive influence on a 20-year-old
American guy who was picked #2 in the draft. If you are talking about Williams
as a mentor, I saw little indication that that is how things went down last
year. Is the mentoring scenario possible? Sure. But there is no way for us to
know that, and none of the three guys in question is a good defensive player,
and defense is one of Russell’s issues.
Thereis
also an assumption that Mozgov will mentor Zubac. This seems more likely than
the Calderon/Huertas/Williams and Russell, but there is no way for us to know.
We do know about Mozgov’s recent on-court performance and how long his contract
is.
The
best mentoring argument by far is, of course, Deng and Ingram, given Deng’s
gravitas, Ingram’s age, and their shared Duke pedigree. But Andy Kamenetzky,
who supports the deals, pointed out that finding playing time for Deng, Ingram,
Randle, and Nance as well as the bigs may at times be a challenge for Walton.
As to
the issue of a larger plan: Neither of us knows what motivated the FO here, but
given the timeline issue and the tension between Jeanie and Jim, it is
certainly possible that the Mozgov and Deng deals were motivated in-part by
quick-fix considerations. Some people outside the bubble of the Lakers’
blogosphere believe that, and some people inside it believe it as well.
KevTheBold says
new rr KevTheBold
You list your points as if fact, though they are based upon your own opinions which are imo jaded {as usual}.For example, Mozgov: You mention the length of the contract as a pure negative, however as Kareemez pointed out, and I agree with, shorter contracts at their age could be a detriment to their mentoring process in terms of their feeling rooted in our club and therefore giving all they have and know to our youngsters; knowing that whatever gems they impart will not be used against them at some later date.You also mention his knee, however fail to mention how it reflected in the negative on his recent play and mobility. You then mention other players and shorter contracts, which imo would go against the logic of investing in our youth, but more into the side of winning games now, which is a shortsighted and fruitless goal.As for the size of the impact of their presence, I assumed nothing, yet did hear Kupchak mention that this was his reasoning for having a mix of vets and youth. It’s only logical to believe that they will if not mentor, will influence, and no matter their national origin.As to ‘quick fix’ considerations from the front office,.. the deals and players chosen fly against that notion.Lastly to my ‘tone’ I don’t know what you expect, when your whole slant on posting is to put a damper on enthusiasm, slamming the front office, while, to protect yourself in against future embarrassment, begrudgingly placing a pinky toe on the other side of the fence,…just in case.
KevTheBold says
new rr KevTheBold
You list your points as if fact, though they are based upon your own opinions which are imo jaded {as usual}.For example, Mozgov: You mention the length of the contract as a pure negative, however as Kareemez pointed out, and I agree with, shorter contracts at their age could be a detriment to their mentoring process in terms of their feeling rooted in our club and therefore giving all they have and know to our youngsters; knowing that whatever gems they impart will not be used against them at some later date.You also mention his knee, however fail to mention how it reflected in the negative on his recent play and mobility. You then speak of other players and shorter contracts, which imo would go against the logic of investing in our youth, but more into the side of winning games now, which is a shortsighted and fruitless goal.As for the size of the impact of their presence, I assumed nothing, yet did hear Kupchak mention that this was his reasoning for having a mix of vets and youth. It’s only logical to believe that they will if not mentor, will influence, and no matter their national origin.As to ‘quick fix’ considerations from the front office,.. the deals and players chosen fly against that notion.Lastly to my ‘tone’ I don’t know what you expect, when your whole slant on posting is to put a damper on enthusiasm, slamming the front office, while, to protect yourself in against future embarrassment, begrudgingly placing a pinky toe on the other side of the fence,…just in case.
A Horse With No Name says
new rr A Horse With No Name
Very solid reply, thanks.
The community of critics you cite know no more (and perhaps less) than the informed fans at this and other fan sites. That’s my view based on reading everything, more or less, laker related on the net. Mozgov is still a very good player. He isn’t perfect; you’ve described some of his attributes and his short comings, and he is a very good fit for what Luke is going to run. He is a much better player than Ezeli, and will demonstrate that quickly.
Signing Ezeli to a short deal would have yielded more cap space going forward, and of course that has value. But Ezeli would provide so little, that he would hinder the progress of the young players, which of course, means even fewer wins than they would likely have with Mozgov as their starting center. So if you sign Ezeli, you trade cap space for likely less measurable progress–if you’ve correctly assessed the respective players and their impact on the roster. Since it is imperative that the team show progress this season so that FAs will at least consider signing with them, (tons of cap space doesn’t bring players without a winning environment) the laker’s signing of Mozgov makes sense given where they are at. Is any one giddy about signing Mozgov? No, of course not. As I said before, I wanted Biyombo; but I can see the context as to why the lakers signed Mozgov, and that frankly, is what is lacking with most critiques of the move.
p.s. I don’t think I’ve ever said much at all about Jackson’s ability to evaluate talent. But since you bring it up, I think he was very good at identifying veterans who would thrive in his system. I’m guessing Luke will be able to do the same.
Kareemez says
KevTheBold new rr
I just wanted to clarify. I think that the longer contracts for Deng and Mozgov were due to multiple factors: 1) No one was jumping to join the Lakers (i.e. Bazemore took less to stay in Atlanta) so there needed to be some greater incentive; 2) longer term, the team has to be viewed as a destination for FAs, not as a revolving door club, as has been the case for the past 4 years; 3) The Lakers FO was probably afraid of striking out, once again, and jumped to overpay middling talent (Mozgov, case in point); and relatedly, 4) these vets were who the FO thought they had the best chance of getting.
I think that an Ezeli pickup would have been better than Mozgov, in particular. However, that rationale is judging the move too harshly in hindsight. As a member of the GSW staff, Walton likely had a good pulse on Ezeli’s plans. The KD move changed all assumptions about the FA environment that the FO were likely operating under. And waiting for a KD decision would have only added pressure and fears of striking out again. Even so, if given an equal contract, I doubt Ezeli would choose the Lakers over Portland. Further, the fact that Ezeli was won with such a small contract shows how the league values him (whether appropriately or not). Before last year, it was assumed that Mozgov would receive a contract similar to what the Lakers gave him, particularly for how well he performed during the 2014-15 season for Cleveland.
All that said, I agree overall with rr and Robert, although I am not as gloomy about the outcome. We should be judging the Mozgov deal harshly. We overpaid on a gamble. The gamble might pan out. But even if Mozgov achieves his potential and maintains best case scenario levels of performance, we still overpaid. I acknowledge that it is possible that we had to overpay. But if we needed to overpay, its better to do that with someone of Deng’s character, who has been a starter for a long time and does not have the same question marks coming off of an injury plagued year.
I am not concerned about the two 4-year contracts, because I recognize that the Lakers are on a 4 year timeline, and they still have quite a bit of cap room now and going into next year to sign young up and coming free agents. It is important that we win enough games to have mid-tear FAs feel like they want to come to the Lakers, all financial considerations being the same. Mozgov, Deng, and Calderon will help us break the 25-win mark and potentially the 30-win threshold. They will also support a team culture not headlined by Young and Williams. That may be enough to help in free agency next year. That’s my optimistic take.
Mid Wilshire says
Kareemez KevTheBold new rr
This is a good discussion.
Obviously, there’s much that we don’t know re: the relatively bloated 4-year contracts to Mozgov and Deng. What follows on my part is mere speculation. Nothing more. Nothing less.
I strongly suspect that the Lakers did not lead with 4-year contract proposals for either player. Although I was obviously not present at the meeting(s) in question, there is always some negotiating that goes on.
With regard to Mozgov, the Lakers may, for all I know, have offered a 3-year contract for $12 Mill per year with the 3rd year as a Team Option. But Mozgov may have been promised 4-year contracts by other teams. (Reportedly, there was a great deal of surreptitious contact going on between teams and agents.) So the Lakers may have had to match this.
This is not beyond the realm of possibility. We have seen other players (Biyombo, Allen Crabbe, several others) also receive 4-year guaranteed contracts. So, there appears to be something of a pattern here. A 4-year contract, then, may be the new normal. The Lakers had to match that or lose Mozgov. I think something very similar to this may have occurred.
But then that brings up the question: Why Mozgov? My speculation is as follows. The Lakers may have known ahead of time (by whatever means) that they would not be getting meetings with either Whiteside or Horford. But they needed a center — in the worst way. So, who was available? It was a short, if somewhat underwhelming, list. Mozgov, Biyombo, Mahinmi, Ezeli. That’s about it.
Mahinmi is close to Mozgov’s age and is a career back up. Would the Lakers want to spend $64 Million on him? The answer: No (which I applaud). How about Ezeli? He seemed to be a possible option until he flamed out in the NBA finals and did a great imitation of a D-League center. No to him as well (which I also applaud).
So that leaves Biyombo and Mozgov. Biyombo’s strengths are substantial: youth, athleticism, rebounding skills, defense, and blocking shots. But on offense he is virtually invisible (except for the occasional put back). His ball-handling is atrocious. And he couldn’t pass (let alone shoot) the ball to save his life. Should the Lakers spend $64 Million on a player as one-dimensional as Biyombo?
So, that leaves us with Mozgov. Is he athletic? Not really. Agile? Mobile? Young? No. None of the above. But unlike the other players, he actually has fairly substantial experience as a starting center. This sets him apart. Also, Luke undoubtedly remembers the 2015 NBA Finals when Mozgov had 4 double-doubles in 6 games including a 28 point, 10 rebound performance in one of those games in which the Warriors had absolutely no answer for him. Furthermore, this is not ancient history. That happened just one year ago.
But how about Mozgov’s knee? Is it healed? Does he have a bad wheel? Can Mozgov be relied upon? I would suspect that the Lakers looked into Mozgov’s health in-depth. After all, if Mozgov were to fail the inevitable physical, the entire deal would be invalidated. So, I suspect that the Lakers have considerably more information than we do on this issue.
Is the Mozgov contract ideal? No. Of course not. I find it rather onerous myself. And I wish a better center had been available. But it may have been what the Lakers could get given the circumstance of the new reality. The Lakers had to make a play or lose out. So they moved.
If Mozgov starts for 2 years, say, and Zubac (or another young body) then takes over, I’ll be fine with that. Is this the best of all possible worlds? No. But these are the cards that we’ve been dealt. The Lakers FO may actually have made the best deal possible given the circumstances. Let’s accept it and move on.
KevTheBold says
Mid Wilshire Kareemez KevTheBold new rr
As always, Mid is the voice of reason.
I don’t know how you manage to stay positive, yet tactful, with regards to those who are polar opposite in outlook.
Great game tonight huh? Our rookies are looking good !
A Horse With No Name says
Mid-W,
Pic a nit: actually Mozgov has above average mobility for a true big man. He is also a surprisingly effective rim runner, able to change ends and impact the game at both ends.