Because I am a basketball nerd, one of the things which most interests me about the free agency period is how team execute their signings in order to maximize their cap space and get the most bang for their buck when building their team. Because of all the exceptions, triggers, and rules surrounding the execution of contracts, one of the things teams do is organize the order of how they execute the deals they agree to with players in order to ensure they operate within the confines of the collective bargaining agreement.
What does this have to do with the Lakers? Well, if you’ve been paying attention to the press releases, the Lakers haven’t actually executed all the deals they have reportedly agreed to this summer. Oh, you’ve seen the pictures of Luol Deng, Timofey Mozgov, and Jordan Clarkson signing their deals. They have even formally announced the acquisition of Jose Calderon via trade.
Other deals, however, have remain unannounced. And that’s because they technically have not yet been signed. I’ll let Eric Pincus of Basketball Insiders explain:
The team has held off on signing Tarik Black, Marcelo Huertas and second-overall pick Brandon Ingram, keeping an eye on what could be $13.6 million in cap room (assuming the team also waives and stretched Nick Young).
Without getting into too much detail, the Lakers tendered qualifying offers to Black and Huertas, making them restricted free agents. They also have “early-Bird” (Black) and “non-Bird” (Huertas) rights to both players, allowing the team to give them specific types of raises in their next contracts while also exceeding the salary cap. For now, though, only the amount of the qualifying offer counts against the Lakers’ cap.
As for Ingram, a not often discussed aspect of rookie contracts is that even though there is a slotted salary for each draft pick, teams can pay drafted players anywhere from 80% to 120% of that slotted amount. Typically players get 120%, but until they actually sign, their cap hit is only the amount that is predetermined by their draft slot.
This is the context to Pincus’ note about the Lakers not yet signing these players and why they maintain enough cap space to acquire a pretty good player. Why are they doing this, though? More from Pincus:
The Lakers do have an unnamed trade target in mind, but are also preserving space for another opportunistic Calderon-like deal.
Well, then.
It is interesting that Pincus is reporting the Lakers aren’t holding onto this cap space to actually sign anyone. Instead, he’s saying they want to use it to facilitate a trade. So, let’s explore Pincus’ two scenarios.
Starting with his second point first, a “Calderon-like deal” is pretty straight forward. In the deal for Calderon, the Lakers absorbed his salary into cap space to help the Bulls clear room to sign Dwyane Wade. For their trouble, they received two 2nd round draft picks from Chicago. With up to $13.6 million in space (assuming Young is stretched), the Lakers could eat that much salary and receive an asset for doing so.
It should be noted, however, that their aren’t many teams looking to clear cap space at this point. In fact, there may not be any. The free agent crop is nearly totally barren, save for some restricted free agents and guys who still want to get a good contract but don’t have many logical suitors (JR Smith, Lance Stephenson, etc). In other words, Don’t expect teams to come calling the Lakers to take on money in a deal to grease the wheels for their own free agent push. There just aren’t available guys who will require that*.
So, if there’s really not many “Calderon-like” deals left to make, that brings us to the Lakers and an “unnamed trade target” they have “in mind”. Without speculating too much, I can only imagine that target remains Russell Westbrook. The OKC point guard isn’t yet on the trading block and there is reason to believe he won’t ever get there. But my guess is that the Lakers likely feel they’d be wise to keep tabs on that situation and remain flexible enough with their roster and cap space to be able to facilitate a deal should the opportunity arise.
Now, if you are wondering about how the mechanics of such a deal might work, this is where the Lakers having cap space matters. By having, potentially, $13.6 million in space, the Lakers wouldn’t actually need to match salaries in this hypothetical trade. Westbrook currently only makes $17.7 million. The Lakers could absorb Westbrook into their cap space by only sending a little over $4 million back in salary.
I won’t speculate on what any deal might look like as that requires multiple moving parts and an understanding of what OKC might want and what the Lakers would be willing to give up. That’s too much to consider and only leads to fans on both sides shouting “that’s too much!” and “that’s too little!” and “Kupchak/Presti would NEVER do that!”. Which is all pretty pointless. I’m just noting the mechanics of how a deal would work, not what it would actually take to make it happen.
Now, I am on record saying the Lakers shouldn’t be worried about Westbrook. He is a free agent next year and if the Lakers are to actually be good enough to a) sign Westbrook outright or b). be a contender with him in the fold, they should probably worry about developing their own players and helping them reach their own potential. While getting the player now sounds great, executing it in a way where you do not give up so much talent that you repeat the mistake the Knicks made in trading for Carmelo Anthony would be difficult.
Ultimately, though, scenarios like this remain out there. And they will continue to as long as the Lakers keep holding onto some cap space by not signing Black, Huertas, and Ingram.
*There is an argument to be made that the Lakers could still take on a bad salary which runs beyond this season in order to get an add-on asset. But this doesn’t make much sense for them. Taking on any contract dollars that run beyond this upcoming season is likely a non-starter since the Lakers want to be a major player in free agency next summer. They have already structured the Deng, Mozgov, and Clarkson contracts in a way to maximize cap space for the summer of ’17. Eating into that space now to facilitate a salary dump for another team doesn’t make much sense.
Renato Afonso says
I’m not a cap expert nor do I care much about that but, from my perspective, the wise thing to do would be to roll out that cap space until near the trade deadline to see which young players can be a key part on a possible future contender. Knowing that would help netting a valuable player, such as Westbrook or Cousins or whomever is available and the Lakers want.
Making the trade now would be a bit of a crapshoot unless, due to more than a year of watching practice and off the court attitude, they already know whom of Russell, Clarkson, Randle, Brown, Nance and Black has a big future ahead of him…
PS: Should the FO be able to turn Nick Young and Lou Williams into Russell Westbrook without giving up any other player, I’ll personally make a website dedicated to Kupchak and start a new religion: Kupchism! Just sayin’…
Drew Gordon says
Renato Afonso If that isn’t a pie in the sky scenario, nothing is.
Altemawa says
im intrigued by the news that we’re still cooking a possible trade.
im not sure which players are involve, and who are we targeting. it feels like our lineup is complete.
unless a star power will be added, i am OK with this trade. if not, lets play this season, and make trades before deadline if we really need to. the FAs will come if they want, even if we force them via trade, we need to ensure that he’ll re-sign for longer deals, and not commit the same mistake we made before.
we need to establish our guys and team reputation first, and move from there.
Renato Afonso says
Drew Gordon Renato Afonso Let a man dream!
On a serious note, unless it involves Lou/Young, any other trade involves an unknown commodity…
adamv37 says
I do like the idea that the Lakers still have options to make a major move, but I just don’t see any teams giving a good deal. Boogie Cousins would be my number 1 trade target, which would likely require Randle going to the Kings, but what else would have to be included to make that deal happen?
As much as I want to see the Lakers back in contention sooner rather than later, the front office has to play the long game with the young talent on the current roster. If they want Westbrook, just wait a year. Cousins? Wait two years. Not saying the Lakers will automatically get either of the two or any other all star, but any major trades at this point seem like a reach. I just don’t see any value in trading the young talent right now until we get a sense of how the current roster looks on the court together in Walton’s system.
Drew Gordon says
Renato Afonso Drew Gordon Oh, absolutely. We have a lot of unproven youngsters. At least we will get our first real read on them this year.
Drew Gordon says
My sources have just confirmed the trade target, and it’s a big freaking deal–Slava Medvedenko!
wwlofficial says
[IMG]http://i63.tinypic.com/2vkfadc.png[/IMG]
Ingram, Huertas and Black unsigned; Nick Young waived/stretched.
[IMG]http://i68.tinypic.com/1079zwh.png[/IMG]
Ingram signed, Huertas and Black signed; Nick Young not waived.
HumanLakers says
Why not burn the remaining cap space even more for Deng and Mozgov? I mean make the deals really frontloaded and decreasing salaries for the whole length of the contract? So roll over the cap to 2017/18 and the futureand the contracts dont look that bad when the production of Deng and Mozgov go down cause of age.
Shaunis007 says
when all the talk has been would the lakers give up both Dlo and Ingram for Westbrook – the reality is it might only cost them DLO at most to get westbrook as WB has OKC bent over when it comes to trading him
teams are too smart now to just give up assets for nothing
now Cousins …. the kings draft made me think it could be very possible that they decide to trade him after drafting 3 top big man prospects in a row and having no point guards – a DLO – cousins swap could also be in the mix… where personally I would not give any other assets in that trade it would need to be a one for one
If we are able to pull off both trades where we get westbrook and cousins – not only would bill simmons have a heart attack but we could have a really interesting team
wwlofficial says
HumanLakers Because it is not allowed in the rules. Teams are only allowed to move up or down up to 4.5% per year. That is why, Deng’s contract went like:
18M
17.19M (down 4.5%)
18M (up 4.5%)
18.81M (up 4.5%)
wwlofficial says
Shaunis007 as “great” as that plan may be, I want no part of Demarcus Cousins. Keep him as far away as possible.
Alexander_ says
Cap rules allow for a symmetrical downsizing of a contract by 4.5%, so the most it could be for the 4 years is the 4th year first, etc.
wwlofficial says
Alexander_ In such a scenario, Deng/Moz would be paid the highest on year 1, 2nd highest on year 2, 3rd highest on year 3 and cheapest on year 4. In such scenario, you lose your cap maneuvering that brought down the contracts of Clarkson, Deng and Mozgov on year 2 because realistically, that will be the last year we’ll have space.
matt24 says
Players on expiring contracts and salary (over 10 mil) , westbrook 16.7, griffen 18.8, paul 21.4, hayward 15.4, milsap 18.6, holiday 11, ibaka 12.2, gallinari 14, gay 12.4, monroe 16.4, randolph 10, ty.evans 10.5
matt24 says
Here’s a couple guys on what could be considered as bad contracts, tobias harris, pekovic, wilson chandler, koufos, wes matthews, asik, tyson chandler, dragic, bosh, kid-gilchrist, love.
I’m probably wrong about some of these
_ Robert _ says
Salary Dumps: Darius is probably correct that the Lakers are not in a position to do another one of these. We should have been, but we have spent our money and it is too late in the process as mentioned above.
Trades: So if no salary dumps – then what? Trade youngsters? Trade more picks away? Do not think that matches our development plans does it? Which brings us to:
Nick and Lou: What are they worth? Nick is worth nothing and we might have to ship a pick to dump him, so I would just waive him. Lou is worth a little, but mostly as a fill in for an injury or an offensive deficiency for a playoff run. In other words – later in the year.
So – I do not want any trades. Like Renato said below, if Mitch somehow pulls off an amazing deal then I will be the first to say he deserves to be promoted to VP of Basketball Operations. However at this point – I would rather have us do nothing.
Nik K says
This is really an interesting topic this morning. We certainly need to be prepared and opportunistic when situations arise that we can capitalize on.
On a basketball note –
I have and will be focused on one area of DLo’s game – free throw shooting. I was disappointed in his consistency at the line and in the summer league wasn’t convinced he is an 80% free throw shooter which is where he should be. All of those flashes of talent, ball handling, shooting, & passing – is great, but when he is making greater than 80% from the line – I know he isn’t skipping steps and is become a complete ball player… These little things are what will prevent him from being an all star.
matt24 says
The kings draft never makes sense, so i take nothing from it, matter o fact they probably won’t trade a big, only trade rudy gay
matt24 says
New lakers look a likes
Zubac. .john cusak ,,,,, Calderón. .merry lord of the rings ,,,,,, mozgov. .white shrek
bluehill says
Maybe another possibility is if OKC trades Westbrook to another team who then needs to dump salary. Boston and Minny could be possibilities because they have assets OKC may want although I don’t know their salary cap situations offhand.
matt24 says
Boston gm doesn’t have the balls to cut a deal, they didn’t even draft dor a future trade
Darius Soriano says
_ Robert _ “We should have been, but we have spent our money” – this is not a real reason and it baffles me anyone would actually believe this. Actually, not anyone, I know why you believe it.
Clay Bertrand says
Darius is surgical in discussing trades without breaking his own rules by mentioning names hypothetically. Shrewdly done sir!!!!!!!!! : )
Darius Soriano says
matt24 I disagree with every one of those players save Chandler.
140ChrViolation says
Drew Gordon Is Dave Murphy your source… I’d take that
_ Robert _ says
Darius: I am not sure why this would not be a real reason. We could have been more aggressive in this area if we had wanted to be at the start of the FA period (we can’t anymore). We could have made it known we were willing to take on large contracts for let’s say 1-2 (or even 3 is better than 4) years in exchange for receiving picks/prospects. We did this with Calderon, and we could have possibly done it on a larger scale had we not wanted to sign Mosgov like we were Walmart shoppers at 12:01 AM on the day of a sale. As to why I believe it. Well – I have been let’s say a little negative towards the FO over the past several years and Laker results have yet to challenge my position. Much the same way you were less than enthusiastic with regard to Byron over the past 2 years and the results did not challenge your position. I wish we had both been wrong.
LT Mitchell says
I would assume that OKC is happy with Oladipo at SG, and at the very least, quite content with Steven Adams at center and Roberson at SF. These two guys are young defensive studs, and if they are surrounded by solid offensive players, their NBA careers look promising.
If OKC is forced to trade Westbrook, they will need a backcourt mate for Oladipo. They recently traded Ibaka, which leaves them with a gaping hole at PF. I wonder if there are any teams out there with young promising players who can score, at those positions? Hmm.
The only Lakers asset that is off limits should be Ingram.
Darius Soriano says
_ Robert _ Fact is, you don’t like this FO and find ways to discredit any move made. It’s pretty much that simple. It’s why I mostly ignore you after asking you to take your act somewhere else multiple times.
In any event, I’ve written extensively about what I don’t and do like about the Deng/Mozgov deals the Lakers’ made. If you’re arguing you would have been on board with taking on salary dumps for up to 3 years because it brought an asset, I…well, I don’t believe you. Your history of criticism of any approach this FO makes pretty much dictates that stance. Good day, man.
Also, you don’t know what was possible in regard to teams looking to dump salary. Can you even name more than 2-3 deals made this summer, besides the Calderon deal, where salary was dumped? Yeah.
_ Robert _ says
Darius: Your right – I do like the FO, however that does not cause me to dislike all their moves. This is what I said about Calderon from the archives:
“Calderon: Taking salary dumps with incoming picks is something I said we should be doing all along (unless you can get youthful talent). So this deal (in spite of his age is good….”
In any case, it appears we agree – on the trade issue – at this point. Not much attractive to do at this point.
fern16 says
Yeah let’s give Russell up, Randle,Clarkson and Nance Jr for a season rental. Trading for Westbrook is so stupid on so many level, we make that trade, the team will stink anyway, we be lucky if we win 25 games and then he is going to bolt for a contender and the Lakers will be left with nothing. That people think that we should sacrifice the future for a 1 year rental is ridiculous. Not even a 1 year rental, by the trade deadline Westbrook will be triying to force a trade and the Lakers will never get back an equivalent of what they gave away to get him. I don’t think we are going to get him as a FA either. People need to stop being so desperate and allow our kids to grow instead of these stupid pipe dreams. Nobody of note is coming to play with the Lakers unless we have a foundation. Is that so hard to understand?
Vasheed says
It does seem obvious from the fact the Lakers haven’t signed some of their players that they are trying to do something. The Lakers lineup is already pretty loaded. They can’t move guys they just signed like Deng and Mozgov so a trade for a Center or SF doesn’t make too much sense. I guess Russell for Westbrook could be a possibility but, I wouldn’t like that without an extension agreed to in advance. I guess speculation ends when the Lakers sign those contracts.
LakersMoJo says
IMHO The Lakers front office have done an incredible job with what they’ve got. Their draft picks have obviously shown a great amount of insight and shows they really did their homework on the draft. The talent they’ve picked up outside of the lottery the last few years is remarkable.
For me the only bad choices they’ve made have come from their coaching choices, specifically the D’Antoni hire, which may have been at the request of Jerry Buss. Their trades have all been good or at least defensible, and I feel the same way about their FA signings as well.
I think it’s time we get off bashing the FO because with the salaries they had, the Kobe situation, and the years of success they had doing things the “Laker way,” they realistically could not have done a much better job of rebuilding these past few years. I for one applaud them for getting us to where we are now, a young exciting team with multiple potential all stars who can all grow together for the future.
fern16 says
Despite what the NBA want us to believe teams talk to players before the FA period and viceversa. Im pretty sure the Lakers knew they had no shot at Whiteside, Biyombo and Hortford beforehand.
fern16 says
Yeah lets gut the team for two players and a skeleton crew im sure the wins will pile up like crazy…
fern16 says
The Thunder would want a kings ransom for RW as they should. They wouldn’t do a DAR/ Westbrook trade straight up in a million years. We have a better chance to sign him in FA even though i think the chances are next to none…
Alexander_ says
First of all, any basic MBA Finance course teaches you to retain cash for flexibility. The players have their agreements and know it’s a formality they’ll sign before the season starts, and by deferring they could be helping the team out. So, there is NO cost to waiting through this period to see if another opportunity develops. In other words, this makes sense even if there is a tiny chance that another trade becomes possible, *even if one is not anywhere in the works right now*, other than some long-shot flyers.
If there is a trade brewing, it could not be for a center. With Moz and Black, there are team commitments for minutes as well as $$, and we may have a gem in Zubac. We could use a legit SF or an upgrade at G. Unless it’s BI for George or DAR for Westbrook (with agreement to extend prior to deal), I can’t imagine another. Would Sacto do a fire sale on Gay? We could deal Lou and 2nds, but that couldn’t be the best Sacto can get. If we included Nance, maybe, but for a 1-year Gay rental, I don’t see it.
Honestly, I will be quite surprised if a trade happens now.
fern16 says
I think it’s a matter of retaining flexibility “just in case” Just due diligence, i doubt something will come out of this…
netgarden says
Mo Harkless is a guy that could fit in this scenario, though that would create a bit of a logjam at SF.
JMichaelHuls says
I am curious about the Knicks/Bucks trade talk, that PJ is looking for a third party to facilitate the deal for the Buck’s Monroe. Might there be another Calderon type deal in the making? Perhaps involving Laker odds and ends?
smokedaddy says
matt24 I’m with Darius in that a cursory look it appears the
players you list appear to offer decent value in today’s market. The exception
being Chandler, Tyson that is. Now, its true he’s on the downside of his
career, but it seems like it was only a couple of years ago with Dallas he was
a tremendous defender and was just a great dive man on the P&R. Probably
not so well suited for the Suns run & gun, floor spacing style. Great
locker room guy as well who’d be happy to get 10 min/gm behind Mozgov or Zubac
for that matter. With Bass gone it looks like we’ve got a spot. Were we to swap
Swaggy and/or Lou for the LA native I would be delirious. Alternatively, pick
up a 2nd rd pick or 2 or maybe a 1st. I suppose its too
much to hope they’d let us have the Nash pick back.
Vasheed says
fern16 Westbrook only has a lot of trade value if he isn’t a 1 year rental. As things are that would be a pretty good deal for OKC assuming Westbrook isn’t open to an extension with OKC. Without that extension promise though it doesn’t make much sense for the Lakers to offer anything of value.
Drew Gordon says
LT Mitchell Right, let’s be willing to gut our team for a possible 1 year rental. What is wrong with you people? Geeez. Think harder next time.
LT Mitchell says
Obviously, this is with the assumption that Westbrook will sign with the Lakers. I doubt the front office would even consider it without that assumption.
…. And if Westbrook does get traded to the Lakers, the odds of landing a top free agent next summer go up exponentially. Even after the trade scenario I hinted at, the Lakers could potentially still have Westbrook, Ingram, Nance, Deng, Mosgov, Zubac, possibly even Clarkson, coupled with an elite free agent next summer. That’s a team that can do some serious damage come playoff time.
smokedaddy says
The only player I’d trade for Westbrook without a commitment f rom him would be Clarkson. With a commitment I could maybe see Randle but that even that’s a stretch. The X factor here is RWs willingness to buy into Walton’s offense ala Curry. Like Fern, I continue to be amazed at the cluelessness out there on what we should be expected to give up. We’re not done paying for the Nash trade for god’s sake. The other factor here which no one is mentioning is whether RW would be willing to work within Walton’s offense. I’m not saying he wouldn’t, but the history there is, ah, problematic. So, yes, ideally we trade let’s say Clarkson for RW and he buys into sharing the ball with DLO, Ingram and the rest. If that’s what we get then go for it Mitch. If not then I’m keeping my chips right where they are.
Drew Gordon says
LT Mitchell No, it’s not. That team would get slaughtered by GS. Which means we would not be able to win a title. Which is all that matters. You will have mortgaged our future for no banners. Brilliant analysis. By the time Ingram is ready to dominate, Westbrook will be on the decline. As a player who relies on his speed/explosive athleticism, his game will not age that gracefully.
JeffT_ says
smokedaddy Westbrook is a first team all-NBA talent, 27 years old, and just had a huge year. For a legit trade to even happen, we would have to gut our youth movement. Our only chance is to hope and pray we get a sit down with him next June.
J C hoops says
I agree with this assessment. I trust the FO not to risk valuable assets on a rental.
I also agree with potential concerns about Westbrook’s ability to scale his game back for others. His former running mate just left him although allegedly not due to Westbrook’s style of play.
It’s all about the youth movement.
A Horse With No Name says
Westbrook is in the driver’s seat. Everyone else (lakers, OKC, Celtics etc) are riding in the cargo area with no seat belts. Why would Westbrook surrender his FA and sign for less (renegotiation), and gut the team he wishes to join? (Should he choose to leave OKC). It’s hard to see it. All interested parties understand this. OKC will get 25 cents on the dollar if they trade him now. No team is going to offer much without certainty from Westbrook, and he will likely not give his suitors that. Thus the stalemate it appears to be. My guess is that Westbrook stays in OKC this season and walks in free agency.
Kareemez says
_ Robert _ Robert, weren’t you one of the many who lambasted the FO for scaling back their player scouting team? I remember a couple years back that was a huge criticism of the FO, and now, a few years later, their scouting acumen is considered top flight.
They’ve handed out a couple bad contracts, hired a couple bad retread coaches. But it doesn’t seem they’ve had too many other options. Think back and be honest: if they hired every mid-tier FA in the last few years and hired someone like Adelman when there was the chance, the Lakers would be a 4th/5th/6th seed at best with few/no prospects and limited financial flexibility. The current trajectory started with the Veto and then the Nash/Howard trades. Those moves were almost universally considered amazing. They didn’t work out. And now we find ourselves 3 years later in probably the best position we could have been. I think that rr’s statement is correct in that the FO magooed their way into our current state. But magooing our way post-Nash trade may have been our only real option.
Obviously, this year if they had chances with better players than Deng and Mozgov, the FO probably would have pursued. I think that many of your criticisms amount essentially to the FO is dumb and doesn’t get basketball. Any context that might undermine these underlying assumptions you are quick to ignore, minimize, or dismiss.
J C hoops says
I feel Russell is borderline untouchable as well.
Unless a long term commitment from Westbrook is included.
And I would require a commitment to give up Randle and Russell. I don’t see any of this as realistic.
More likely a Calderon type exchange with minor players and draft picks added.
LT Mitchell says
Almost every team in the league will get slaughtered by GS, and nobody is suggesting that the Lakers will be contending by the end of next summer. The acquisition of Westbrook, however, is a giant leap forward towards contention. Add another top free agent next summer and the Lakers can be a top 5 team in less than two years from now.
By trading Randal, the Lakers can give more PF minutes to Nance, Deng and occasionally Ingram….. and Westbrook is a massive upgrade over DAR. This trade benefits both teams.
Again this is with the assumption that Westbrook will sign with the Lakers, as well as the assumption that he can only be acquired through a trade.
KevTheBold says
LT Mitchell
You mention a 4 year period,.. and forget to consider that our own core including their captain D’Angelo could also be contending seriously by that time.
You also ignore the real possibility that Westbrook, with his pedal to the metal style of play could be totally ruined by then.
The problem is, you are not thinking long term.
The Lakers are a team which builds dynasties, not one and done fast food teams.
In order to build a dynasty, Continuity is the name of the game.
Our core needs to grow together, bond and develop a team culture, which only comes from security and a place called home.
We bring in a ball hogging gunner 7 years older to take our young captain’s place, they will all know that no one is safe.
Bad Idea !!
FredP says
The thought of acquiring Westbrook still scares me:
1. The Lakers just went through 3 years of a ball dominant guard surrounded by young players – how did that go for player development?
2. Athletic guards who thrive by attacking the basket do not age well and Westbrook has already had three knee surgeries.
3. Westbrook shoots 30% on 3-point attempts from a position Luke needs a premier shooter.
4. The Lakers already have a potential star at PG in Russell who will reach his peak together with the other young Lakers.
If Russell has a horrible year and has serious flaws in his game then it would make sense to look at Westbrook after next season.
fern16 says
Dude even with Nance jr improved game Randle is the better player so let’s not get carried away. Randle is doing pretty good against better competition than summer league, Nance is a role player, whoever thinks he is going to be like Blake Griffin or someone like that is completely delusional.And Wesbrook don’t want to take “leaps” into contention. He is been in a contender for the last 6 years. He wants to win now. Unless somehow we grab him in free agency which is extremely doubtful it would be extremely “unwise” and im being polite here, to trade for him.
Clay Bertrand says
FredP
Awesome Post FredP!!!!! Now I don’t have to address these obvious issues!! ; )
I don’t want another ballhogging hero baller whose strengths do not necessarily make his teammates better. We don’t need a league MVP candidate. We need multiple all stars.
Further the cost would be ridiculous.
I vote HELL NO. Let Foston bucking over pay for him!!
Drew Gordon says
KevTheBold LT Mitchell Thanks you! This short sighted thinking is starting to get old. It makes no logical sense.
KevTheBold says
Drew Gordon KevTheBold LT Mitchell
No problem.
I almost think that some of these posters were not keen on the fact that we chose D’Angelo over some other player, so they are using this an excuse to get rid of him.
Either that, or they simply can’t keep still, have no patience or are shopaholics ,..Lol
KevTheBold says
J C hoops
For me D’Angelo is the Most Untouchable.
Ingram may turn into a star, but Russell imo has already demonstrated all of the intangibles that a star is born with. Freakish clutch scoring skill, the ability to take over games, maniacal work ethic, ability to lead, and hunger to be the best on the floor. He is also team captain.
Best case scenario, Russell, Ingram and Zubac will all become stars.
We know they all have the potential.
Joe Kerr says
FredP Here’s why you go after Westbrook. He’s a legit top 5 player and is one of the few players that are good offensively and defensively.
Russell would be lucky to reach the level that Westbrook is at currently. He has potential, I’m not denying that, but Westbrook is already at that level.
Btw, I’m against trading for Westbrook. I would love for the Lakers to sign him next off-season though.
Drew Gordon says
KevTheBold Drew Gordon LT Mitchell Are these pro Okafor clowns still rearing their moronic heads? Geeeez. They need to give it up already. We made the right choice.
KevTheBold says
Drew Gordon KevTheBold LT Mitchell
Lol, agree totally !!
KenOak says
Clay Bertrand FredP You crack me up. If Westbrook is a so-called ball hogging hero baller who does what our last so-called ball hogging hero baller did and brings 5 championships to LA….well then, I’m a yes please.
I agree with Darius though. I’m not a fan of trading for him unless it’s just one of our players plus draft picks. Otherwise we just become the Knicks. Why not just wait for him to come on the FA market next year and make a run at him then?
fern16 says
Let me say again i think the possibility of signing Westbrook next summer is next to none. And is simple, like i said, the Lakers should improve but not enough to be a situation that attracts him. People want “the quick fix”, “let’s get a superstar and all our troubles will be over” We trade half or more of the core for Westbrook (because if someone thinks that OKC would only take Clarkson or Russell and some 2nd round picks is stupid, im sorry),then what?We are going to have a superstar surrounded by a pos team ,sounds familiar?. Then he bolts and the Lakers are left holding the bag. I can’t think of a stupider scenario. Russell Westbrook is not interesed to go to a rebuilding team no matter how much future potential it has. He ain’t gonna sign with the Lakers as a free agent and if somebody thinks that is worth breaking up the young core for a player that is going to he a rental because make no mistake he ain’t signing an extension with anyone, if someone think is worth the risk then that person is a moron. Im sorry but damn!!!
Mid Wilshire says
Slightly off-topic, below is a link to an article on the web attempting to defend the Lakers signing of Timofey Mozgov. I find it interesting that it comes from the pen of a regular contributor to the Portland Trailblazers web site rather than a Lakers partisan. Whether or not one agrees with it, it’s food for thought:
http://www.blazersedge.com/2016/7/21/12250174/defending-the-mozgov-deal-ill-try-the-free-agent-premium
Clay Bertrand says
KenOak Clay Bertrand FredP
Bro, if my post cracks you up, you must have a very STRANGE sense of humor.
Read some history—we traded VLADE AND VLADE ALONE for the last HERO BALLER, and had him for a full 20 years including his prime. But that was ALL in a different era. Further, we didn’t GUT THE TEAM for a guy who had ALREADY PLAYED 8 seasons and had 2 knee surgeries. Lastly, we were already a 53 win team when we acquired the last hero baller ALONG WITH SHAQ (who kinda-sorta helped get 3 of those rings with the hero baller).
So laugh if you will. I am not on board with trading the last three years of misery’s draft picks all of them younger than 22 to OKC for a half used Westbrook who cannot shoot threes and monopolizes the ball. He also relies almost solely athleticism for most of his game. We would be getting the full downside of his impending athletic decline. Look at the teams that are successful right now and you’ll see that none of them are practicing hero ball. That recipe is tuna noodle casserole! No one eats it anymore.
Signing him outright with a young team around him is a slightly more palatable. As long as you are OK with paying him nearly 30% of the cap for 5 years and the rest of the team having to defer to his game.
KenOak, maybe you need to listen to some 90s music to help you better wax nostalgic. Might I suggest some nice GRUNGE??? ; )
KenOak says
Clay Bertrand KenOak FredP mwap mwap mwap. This post wasn’t quite as funny as the last, but still humorous! I’m not certain you read all of my post where I said, “I agree with Darius in that we shouldn’t trade all of our young pieces.”
If we only had to give up DLO and picks though? Yeah, I’m all over that. My reading of history is absolutely fine, my friend. We don’t win 3 championships with Shaq if ball-hogging Kobe isn’t on that team. Some people have amnesia when it comes to how much Kobe contributed in those years. And, then there’s the 3 straight finals that he helped take the team to with the 2 extra ‘chips on top.
Just think about that for a second. Tim Duncan is everyone’s consensus ‘Best Team Player in NBA History’ behind maybe Magic Johnson. TD never repeated. That’s on a Spurs team that was stacked for his entire career and was a contender every year. Never repeated. Never went to 3 consecutive Finals. Kobe did it twice with two different teams. Yes. Ball-hogging baller Kobe.
Some folks also forget that in the Finals this year there was a ton of “hero ball” played by Lebron and Kyrie and they bumped off the best ball movement team besides the Spurs…. Speaking of “hero ball,” I love how guys can pull up from 40 feet out with 18 seconds left on the shot clock and avoid the term “hero ball.” <cough cough> Steph.
Right now Westbrook is a top 5 player in this league. Do any of our young stars project to top 5 status? For real. Do any of our young players project to top 5? I’m not so sure, but RW is right now.
Again though.
I’m all for -> Picking RW up in FA.
I’m kinda for -> Picking up RW for one young’un and picks.
I’m against -> Picking up RW if we have to gut the team. That just doesn’t make sense because we’re not just a RW away from contention.
fern16 says
@Clay Bertrand I hate grunge except Nirvana, Soundgarden and Alice in Chains lol, that’s it. Im a metal guy lol. I agree with you totally. Oh and at 27 our “hero ball ballhog” was better than Westbrook will ever be. The thing about Westbrook is that he is a ballhog POINT GUARD. Our ballhog was a SHOOTING GUARD. Let’s not forget that said “ballhog” deferred a ton to Shaq back in the day. Im looking foward for all the shoot attemps records Westbrook will make this season, without KD? Oh boy, he will make Kobe looks like Ron Harper in the Bulls/Lakers.
KevTheBold says
You keep comparing Westbrook to Kobe, but bro, Kobe he’s not. If he were, OKC would have two titles by this time.
Bringing him here would be a futile gesture, to satisfy the myopic at the cost of a potential future dynasty.
I wouldn’t give anyone for Westbrook, even Young, let alone D’Angelo, simply because he would disrupt, and possibly destroy our core’s development, confidence and chemistry.
We don’t need him, and he doesn’t need us.
What we need is patience.
David9351 says
How did the Warriors build such a great team? By believing in and developing players acquired via the draft, surrounding them with great role players, firing a good coach (Mark Jackson) and replacing him with a great coach who could build a dynamic culture. Sounds like the Lakers are traveling a similar path. Giving up any of the young talent for a 1 year RW rental would be disastrous. Does anyone remember Dwight? Keep your talent, be patient, let Luke develop the core and let greatness unfold.
KenOak says
KevTheBold I didn’t make that comparison originally, but I picked it up to make a point. Clay said he doesn’t want another BHHB because we just got rid of our BHHB. I just wanted to remind him and others that our guy helped us win 5 championships.
If you wouldn’t trade Young for RW, then you really paint an extremely poor picture of your abilities as a GM. Every GM in the NBA would take RW except maybe 3. And, that’s only because those 3 have guys like Curry, CP3, or Kyrie. That’s it.
RW is a superstar right now.
Still R says
Some people are throwing around this idea of trading players and “picks” as if the Lakers have a storehouse of draft picks like, say, the Celtics (may they rot in …).
Let’s keep in mind the Lakers probably won’t have first round picks in ’17 or ’19, and cannot trade two first round picks in a row. Good thing too, or they probably would have traded for Sir Charles by now … hey, he could probably get back into shape and “mentor” the youngsters …
Hmmmmm, why do the Lakers find themselves in this predicament? Oh yeah, they traded first round picks for a washed up Steve Nash and a one year rental named Dwight Coward. Gee, that WAS fun; let’s do that again!
wwlofficial says
Still R The Lakers CANNOT trade a 1st round pick until 2021 at the earliest.
wwlofficial says
KenOak Clay Bertrand FredP I might be one of the few that would be willing to trade for RW, but get this, WITHOUT Russell.
But if you really think about it, the cost to land RW is too high and we’re beggars on that department right now. We need all that we’ve got and there’s no other way but to rebuild the right way, because we’re already here.
Let GSW and CLE swap the next 3 championships, and by the time they’re old and beat up, its our time. You just got to have faith.
KevTheBold says
No, I don’t believe every team would rent RW.
What good is a superstar without another two, or as GS believes, three additional superstars? NADA !
Durant will tell you the same.
Think.
He comes here, we still lose, and in the mean time, we kill the calf before she matures and gives milk.
It’s like renting a roughly used, twice rebuilt Ferrari, at the cost of your brightest child, to park outside of your low rent apartment.
Yeah, that’s smart GM-ing alright.
wwlofficial says
In the hot topic of Westbrook, I believe what we’re willing to offer and what OKC would like us to start with is a world apart. Like OKC would like both Russell and Ingram, and our realistic offer would be Randle + Clarkson. There simply is no middle ground.
The thought that Westbrook is a Laker excites me, but only if I have to overpay him next summer. We don’t need to give up D1gelo or Brandon to get him, esp that after we do, there’s simply no one left.
Notice though, if Russell comes out of the gates like a gangbuster, it would be OKC themselves who would take him + maybe Randle for Westbrook. That would really get me to thinking but I would much rather have D1gelo for 10+ more years than 5 more of RW esp that our supporting cast is nowhere near ready to compete and GSW/CLE are too dominant as of the moment.
rtrapsur says
Fire both Mitch and Buss if they trade for Westbrook. He will sign as FA so no need. Also, Westvrook too ball dominant. Doesn’t fit the new offense
wwlofficial says
I would like to see Westbrook stay in OKC atleast for this year for 2 reasons:
1. I would like to see him go 2001 Iverson on everyone, average 32-9-11-2-1.
2. He can’t and mustn’t go to Buck Foston.
uptmonsta says
Clay Bertrand FredP You know very little about professional b-ball. Name a team that has won a title without a “hero baller”? The Billups Pistons? Who else? Maybe your system works on the collegiate level, but not in the pros. Westbrook is one of maybe five players that can lead a team to the title as a top dog. Adding Westbrook means that a title level #2 big (Cousins?) is right around the corner.
RobertBass says
While I agree with you about not trading for him but him being ball dominant and not fitting in our offense should not be the main concern there are ways luke and the coaching staff could maximize all of our talent including Westbrook bring Clarkson off the bench have lineups of Westbrook Clarkson Nance randle and Zu on the floor at some point or Williams in place of Clarkson if u want to get technical
RobertBass says
I don’t know where u get were loaded from we will be happy to just get the 8th seed and that might be a stretch we have not seen this group play together Russell Clarkson Ingram randle zu and nance so you might want to temper your expectations
RobertBass says
Ingram ?? Who hasn’t played one meaningful minute yet lol smh
KenOak says
KevTheBold And that’s why-
1- this is a futile thought process. Because any team that trades for him would require an assurance that he would resign with them.
2- OKC isn’t in a position of power here if RW tells them he’s going to leave in FA, but then refuses to give that assurance to any teams. That means they have to accept much much lower costs.
3- However, the Lakers are in an unique position here since RW may actually want to play in his *home town*.
That’s why I don’t accept your analogies. We wouldn’t be ‘sacrificing our children at the altar of RW.’
Vasheed says
RobertBass I meant in terms of having roughly 3 guys to play every position. Although I am for the most part very happy with our young players.
smokedaddy says
fern16 Fern, what would you do if you were Westbrook after the season? I’d stay with OKC. To hell with the big city high fashion crap. If he’s at another good team like Boston, or yes, the Lakers, there will be a whole period of adjustment, either him adjusting to a new offense, coach, players. Or them adjusting to him. Both of which would be problematic. So, yes, if I’m OKC I’ll take that gamble unless I get a really good offer. But I’m not Russell Westbrook. If he gets stars in his eyes or is perceived by his team and others to be getting the I wants, then his trade value drops and OKC’s leverage goes way down. True, Boston has more chips to trade by way of picks. OTOH, we’ve got 3 young players who should become all star difference makers for an OKC team thats already pretty good. Boston would need to give up Isiah Thomas and maybe a couple of picks. Signing Westbrook to play alongside Thomas and other guards is to me not a given. So, a lot of dynamics and game playing here that I don’t think you’re taking into account.
I’m not advocating a trade where we give away even part of the store, far from it. Just saying RWs trade value may not be as high as everyone seems to think.
JuanJ says
There´s no doubt Westbrook can ball, but as far as our Lakers unloading young talent to acquire him, my thoughts are:
Heck no! let D´Angelo develop!!! He´s gonna be great. Let´s give our `young core´ the support they need to grow naturally together, and focus on working hard towards our main goal; & y´all know what that is.
Re. the piece above:
The FO has seemed to´ve awoken from its stupor and bolstered its ¨wheelin´ & dealin´¨ (wrote that with James Brown in mind, mind you 😉
We should only hope this´ll continue on an upward trend..
(btw, formerly PuprleBlood)
Clay Bertrand says
uptmonsta Clay Bertrand FredP
Great thinking!! Looks like Kevin Durant DOESN’T agree with you.
But sure we should ALWAYS aspire to do only what has worked in the past because it’ll be SURE to work now too right?? Since nothing in the world changes especially in NBA Basketball where do you park your H1 HUMMER??!!
Let’s go with a slow paced half court game with Twin Towers!!! That worked for the Spurs AGES ago!! AND the Houston Rockets before them did well too knocking us off in the WC playoffs.
Do you even watch NBA basketball??? How many ONE PLAYER teams are killing it these days??? How many A grade players are looking to join other A grade players versus those who want to go it alone as the HeroBaller Only Option surrounded by minions???
The Golden State Warriors have Ballers not HERO BALLERS. They play a game where the ball is shared and the assist totals are thru the roof!! AND now they have Durant.
Go play fantasy basketball and you can try to draft RW. It’s known he’s gonna HOG all season and blow up INDIVIDUALLY at least. Individual awards don’t get banners and rings dude.
Clay Bertrand says
fern16
Word!! I actually dislike Nirvana but lean toward Soundgarden and AIC too! Lol. I have an eclectic overall music taste from Slayer to Joan Baez. My Grunge faves other than those above are the less mainstream bands like: Mudhoney & Tad. I was actually listening to the AUDIOSLAVE channel today!! Nice blend of Chris Cornell and RATM sans Zack DeLaRocha…….digression ended.
RW is a good player don’t get me wrong. But people who want to build around the guy at this point in his career versus continuing our youth movement are living in the past IMO.
Clay Bertrand says
KenOak Clay Bertrand FredP
KenOak, lol, all good bro! I wasn’t trying to stress the trade particulars part as much as just painting the full picture of what we got out of Kobe having him for 20 years and adding him to a team that was relatively “LOADED” compared to our current team.
I am more on board with picking RW up as a FA than with trading anything for him. Being so asset poor, I would rather gamble that he may WANT to be here like Durant wanted to be in GS than trade away our promise just so that OKC doesn’t get screwed again for NOTHING.
The problem is that there are teams with more assets than we have that will pony them up and OKC will have to deal with the highest bidder to get the best return. Unless RW plays hard ball and a.) WILL NOT resign AND b.) WILL NOT give assurances to ANY team who trades for him, he will simply be shipped to Boston or some dark horse team for a package.
I have seen too many of the BS fairy tales about Lebron, Melo, DeRozan, Love, etc. really desiring to be in L.A. only to have these guys show almost ZERO interest in the Lakers when decision time comes. So I think that the only the way the Lakers get RW is via trade.
I would simply NOT be in favor of such a move. I’d rather gamble on our 3-5 young guys than have a sure thing that is sure to diminish rather than improve over the life of his contract.
I agree with you that we are not merely a RW away from greatness. I’m just really high on the youngins until they show me definitively that they are unworthy of any real optimism.
KevTheBold says
KenOak KevTheBold
If RW would give up the downhill slope of his prime years to a team which would not be ready to compete for years,.. just to play for his ‘home’ town, then RW would not the player we believe him to be.
However I don’t think he’s as unambitious as your scenario paints him.
Thus if he is traded this year, he would not be giving any assurances to our team, and that’s for sure.
Let me be clear, even if he ended up on a bargain basement sale isle this summer, or chose to languish in futility on our team next season, he would destroy our timeline and progress from the inside out.
Those that admit his ball hogging tendencies, and believe that Walton will solve that issue, are not aware of the reason Durant left him back at OKC.
Durant wanted to be with a team that shared the ball, something that RW is incapable of.
Those that ignore his past two knee surgeries, and turn a blind eye to his body be damned style of play, are asking to be hit by a mac truck.
Lastly, those still holding something against D’Angelo because he’s not Mudiay or Okafor, or are holding the excuse of Young’s immaturity over his head, thus are refusing to see just how talented he is, and how bright his future is, and with it, our future.
And that is the ultimate pettiness.
fern16 says
Russell Westbrook value will be sky high no matter how people try to slice it. Like someone wrote, he is the drivers seat. He have OKC in a vice grip by refusing to sign an extension and they know it. He is a top 5 talent no doubt about it. So if OKC see that there is no chance to keep him they will sell and they will sell high because they know teams will be willing to pay to adquire him. The Lakers don’t have the luxury to make a trade like this. We have no 1st round picks to trade so parting with our core would be suicidal and a huuuugee step back. We can’t waste three years of absolute misery to get a name. What he’ll do? Depends how that OKC team performs with him being the man. But i think OKC is heading to a rebuild and he wouldn’t want to be a part of that. I think he will leave…
new rr says
Westbrook is an outstanding player with a couple of faults; he is one of the best 10 or so in the league. But he is not a match for the Lakers, nor are they a match for him, for a variety of obvious reasons. Westbrook isn’t good enough to get the Lakers into contention, and the Lakers aren’t good enough to make a guy like Westbrook’s age and skill level an optimal add right now. Add that to the fact that the Lakers are heavily invested in a 20-year-old high-usage PG, drafted #2, who will need the ball in his hands, and it doesn’t make much sense for either side.
Boston might make sense, even as a possible rental, if Ainge can keep the asset exchange reasonable. Other teams that have reasons to roll the dice on a trade, even if they were were not sure that they could keep him:
San Antonio
Atlanta
Utah
Dallas
Long-term, I think Paul may move on, and if he does, then I think that Westbrook will end up with the Clippers.
quickster007 says
Russell Westbrook will stay in OKC to team up with Blake Griffin who will be a free agent in 2017. Griffin is from Oklahoma. He said he always wants to go back home and play for his hometown. Lakers front office should let the young core developed. I would like to see where the starting lineup will be Russell PG, Clarkson SG, Ingram SF, Randle PF, Zubac CTR. Hopefully, in two years.
fern16 says
How many teams has he led to a championship? My memory must be hazy. Last i checked when KD was injured the Westbrook led Thunder didn’t even made the playoffs. People that talk about getting Westbrook and then Boogie are just delusional.Even if the Lakers commit the monumental stupidity of trading for Westbrook after that trade is done, what the Lakers would have left to trade for Cousins? Some people are just…….
OldmanLakerfan says
Whiteside is a head case. Biyombo is an undersized backup who had one big game and Hortford is already over 30. There was one Durant in this FA class. Everyone else was a compromise at best. (Not including James because he was never going to leave CLE.)
What I am saying is, all things considered the Lakers have had a terrific offseason so far.
Vasheed says
new rr Boston might be able pull off a tade as they have more picks then they know what to do with.
140ChrViolation says
Vasheed new rr I’m not excited to see Westbrook go to Boston. I think he would actually be good for them. That said, if they don’t need to move Marcus Smart to get Westbrook, those practices would be bananas.