We have discussed at length the Lakers looking to use the mechanics of the collective bargaining agreement to their advantage to keep cap space open. The key to holding that space open is Tarik Black and the difference between his cap hold and the contract the Lakers have agreed to with him, but the deals for Marcelo Huertas and Brandon Ingram also play a role in this.
With Ingram, though, the difference actually isn’t all that much. His cap hold, dictated by the collectively bargained and already established salary slotted to the the #2 overall pick is roughly $4.4 million for this upcoming season. Rookie 1st rounders can sign for anywhere between 80% – 120% of that amount with most picks getting 120% based on historical standard.
The difference between his cap hold and the 120% standard is roughly $820K. Not a small sum of cash in real world standards and certainly enough where it could be meaningful in any sort of deal which the team wants to leverage its cap space, but it’s also not a huge enough where it is likely to make a big difference.
Ingram, though, isn’t the only 1st round pick who is unsigned. He is, in fact, one of three:
Still 3 rookie scale contracts (not players stashed) unsigned; Brandon Ingram (LAL), Thon Maker (MIL) and Domantas Sabonis (OKC).
— Bobby Marks (@BobbyMarks42) July 29, 2016
It’s hard to know why any of these guys remain unsigned. My thought process on Ingram has always been tied to the article I linked to above — that the Lakers are trying to keep open cap space should an advantageous trade pop up. This makes sense and I have no reason to actually believe it is anything else. Let me repeat, there is no reason to actually believe anything else.
However, if I put on my tin foil hat and conspiracy theory glasses, there might be another reason. After 1st round picks are signed they cannot be traded for 30 days. The rule, which rarely comes into play, was last most famously applied to the trade between the Timberwolves and Cavs when they swapped Andrew Wiggins and Kevin Love. If you recall, Wiggins signed his rookie contract with the Cavs in late July. They then had to wait until late August to trade him.
So, am I saying the Lakers haven’t signed Ingram because they might trade him? No. That is not what I am saying.
But, if I believed in conspiracies I might say that. Especially when I review the list of other rookies Bobby Marks lists above. You will notice another player on that list is Domantas Sabonis whose rights below to…the Thunder. Of course the Thunder have a certain unnamed player, after the departure of Kevin Durant, whose future with the Thunder is murky. This player isn’t on the trade block per se, but the history of how the Thunder handle situations like this has been to trade players who they do not think they can keep long term. (Unless your name is Durant. Then you lose him for nothing. Sorry, OKC.)
What does this have to do with Sabonis? One one hand, nothing. I would imagine that if Westbrook is traded, keeping a player like Sabonis — talented with a good pedigree and cheap for the next 4 years — would be a priority. On the other hand, with him remaining unsigned, he could also be included in any trade without having to deal with the 30 day rule.
You know, just like Brandon Ingram.
That’s a lot of dots I just connected and I had to wear a funny tinfoil hat and weird conspiracy glasses to even connect them. In other words, this is more than likely/almost certainly/pretty much for sure just a random coincidence. After all, the Lakers really like Ingram and the Thunder are still really working on getting Westbrook to accept a raise and extend scenario that boosts his salary this season to the max and then gives him the max for several more years.
But if you believe in conspiracy theories and have nothing better to do than try to read tea leaves…
Jayjohnson1001 says
I sure hope this isnt the case! Trading for westbrook would be dumb
FredP says
Somewhat related, OKC needs their cap space to offer Westbrook a max salary extension this season. They cannot go over the cap to do this. That factored into renouncing Waiters and I do not know if they need to wait on Sabonis.
KevTheBold says
I have been wondering about this situation. I hope it’s nothing, yet even if it isn’t, unless they have been communicating to Ingram, it’s damaging not only to Ingram’s trust in our front office, but possibly his self confidence.
The uncertainty of being a potential trading piece is unsettling to anyone, but as a number #2 pick it must be a bit of an insult.
matt24 says
Lakers and kupcheck are always very difficult to read we wont know until it happens, i do have believed okc is gonna make a big trade of some kind and they will not be trading away westbrook, they will be bringing in a big player
matt24 says
Okc has alot of expiring contracts, only kanter and singler, are singed through
KevTheBold says
I’ve been doing some research, yet it’s still a bit murky.
If its true that the Lakers cannot touch the money set aside for Ingram, I’m not clear how waiting helps them, unless they plan on giving him more, in which case if no deals are forthcoming, they can cut him a larger check.
If that is indeed the case, I’m sure they have let him know that patience on his part could be to his benefit.
A Horse With No Name says
Okay, I’ll bite. Brandon Ingram is the likeliest player on the roster to reach superstar status (analytics somewhat favoring D’Angelo notwithstanding). Why on earth would the lakers trade away a prospect with such a high ceiling who will be a cost controlled asset for many years? Let’s also not lose sight of his perfectly tailored skill set for the modern offense the lakers will be running. The kid is going nowhere. He remains unsigned so that the lakers can entertain all possibilities potentially available to them. A hypothetical deal may require all the cap space they can muster; so why not hang onto all of it as long as they feel it’s advantageous to do so? That is the most logical reason. The Westbrook trade scenarios are problematic for many reasons that I haven’t even touched on (e.g. Westbrook remains resolute in saying he wants to exercise his free agency). Make that tin foil hat into sandwich wrap.
KevTheBold says
A Horse With No Name
Agree, (besides the most likely star) however,.. I wonder why they’ve not stretched Nick to gain extra green?
He definitely is out of place on this team, and with this coach.
wwlofficial says
Reading the tea leaves… sure does look like Westbrook won’t be in OKC at the start of the season. Teams rarely do big trades mid-season that involve big time superstars, and you don’t trade for Westbrook (without an extension or commitment) mid-season when there are 32 games left to play and your record is 18-32.
For the record, I would love to see Westbrook own OKC and average 32-9-9 for an entire season. Then sign him next year as we slowly move D1gelo to SG.
Elephant in the room, however, suggests that OKC and LAL are prepping for deals. Could be mutually exclusive, could be w/ one another and with other teams somehow involved.
The fan in me would love to keep the young core and just add a new dimension every year via cap space. I fully expect the Lakers to lose the pick to Philly this year and Orlando in 2019. In that case, why not make your team better already? Why wait for a crapshoot of 2017 summer, or risk having RW traded to a team he will call his next home for the next 5 years? Do we then just shift focus on prying away Curry? Good luck with that.
Being a businessman, I must assess my situation and absorb risks. You don’t grow if you don’t do that. We gambled and lost with Dwight and Nash, doesn’t mean we’ll lose everytime. We play the odds, we assess the situation and we move forward if there is opportunity.
Lets discuss some permutations:
1. Russell, Ingram and Randle – no go. You don’t sacrifice 3 ugly years for 1 guy who might just leave you cold the year after.
2. Russell, Ingram and Nance – still a no go to me. You need to keep atleast 1 high end prospect, preferably D1gelo Russell.
3. Russell, Randle and Zubac – I think OKC looks at this deal and bets on Russell’s future. I, however, won’t.
4. Ingram and Randle and Zubac – this is going to hurt but I would be willing to listen IF and only if, RW commits for the max w/ his salary restructured this season. OKC would benefit from Ingram’s cheap contract and high end talent for 4 years, he would represent change in the organization and he is quite similar to a name that is not allowed to be mentioned, not even a whisper in OKC.
Ergo, trading for a signed Westbrook using Ingram, Randle and Zubac would be the best course of action. I would venture that Calderon and Williams are inserted in the deal to make the $$ work and thus allowing us to have the space to give Westbrook his extension and restructured contract.
For what its worth, trading Westbrook is the best move for OKC. It would lessen the hit if he decided to go elsewhere, it would also lessen the negative media RW gets by deciding to leave.
What doesn’t make sense is where we’ll be after the deal, but 1 thing is for sure, we would be closer to the playoffs than keeping another top 3 pick from going to Philly.
Busboys4me says
Yes, NickY’s comments and disdain for the way the Dubs pass often and the way the play should be reason enough to eliminate him from our equation.
Busboys4me says
I’m sure they have told him they are giving him the 120% for allowing them to postpone his signing. He isn’t going anywhere.
HumanLakers says
wwlofficial
Option 4 : I think this is 2 much. What about JClarkson + Randle + Zubac and 2 or 3 2nd rounders. I would do that trade without commitment from RW.DRuss + Ingram + RW is a really nice core. OKC still gets 3 good young pieces with potential upside.
But i really loved to see the Lakers stick to their young core and give them time to grow. If they dont fit, you can still trade most of them next year.
wwlofficial says
HumanLakers wwlofficial That would be too little. Emphasis on TOO LITTLE.
mattal says
The FO’s missteps at the beginning of this decade virtually cratered the organization. Now, with a young foundation in place there are sufficient rumors to believe that some of these youngsters may be in motion for Westbrook. In my mind this has the potential for disaster sending the rebuild well into the next decade.
This is Jim trying to make good on his promise at the expense of the long term future of the team. First the FO over spends on Mozgov and Deng who between them have a productivity window of 1 to 2 years. Why give up so much cap flexibility for so little upside is beyond me. Adding Westbrook for anyone of the young core is foolish when he could be signed for free next year.
I like to watch Westbrook play — on another team. I just don’t want him on my team. He is a PG version of Kobe an ‘I eat first’ type of player. Ask yourself, would GS go out of their way to add him? I think the answer is no.
Additionally, no player plays as hard as Westbrook. While he is young his mileage and wear/tear are issues considering his multiple knee injuries. He won’t age well and is likely to hit a wall at some point soon.
The Kobe Lakers always operated with a win now mentality. We now have team that has a long window to compete — although signing two win now free agents hurts in light of the cap hit going forward. The team still owes 2 of the next 3 first round picks to other teams. Giving up kids for Westbrook gets us right back into the win now mode.
Why would the FO do this unless there was significant pressure to show dramatic progress versus the organic development a young team would naturally show.
Dysfunctional organizations have trouble developing a plan and sticking to it. Jim the owner should care about the long term viability of the franchise and keep as much flexibility in place (cap/assets/ draft picks). Jim the head of basketball ops has always acted short term (drafting kids was never his plan it was always the right one but Jim would have been happier with older free agents and a 6th seed).
I am very afraid that Jim will throw away our future — all for the sake of fulfilling a silly promise he made to Jeanie and his other siblings.
LT Mitchell says
I agree with Horse. Ingram has the most superstar potential and should be off limits.
If this trade were to happen, I think it’s virtually a lock that OKC would demand DAR as part of the package. They are trading away a PG, and would want one in return. I think they will also want their Ibaka replacement in Randal, as well as their Durant replacement in Ingram. I would assume that Ingram has higher trade value than Randal, but Randal provides more of a position of need for OKC. This is where Jimbo has to hold his ground and offer Randal plus other incentives, but refuse to let go of Ingram. Presti will likely ask (or has already asked) for all three young Lakers to start off the negotiating process. By the end of negotiations, Ingram better be out of the conversstion.
I would trade DAR and Randal plus extras for Westbrook, assuming that there is a handshake agreement that he will resign with the Lakers. Unfortunately, Jimbo’s self imposed timeline might force him to make this trade without a promise. Yikes!
wwlofficial says
LT Mitchell Just one request, please spell it Randle.
Clay Bertrand says
Thon Maker (more famous than his brother ICE) will be signing today. That makes Sabonis and Ingram the only unsigned 1st rounders.
Just thought I’d open a new roll of Reynolds Wrap foil for y’all………
KevTheBold says
wwlofficial LT Mitchell
So glad you two are not Lakers GMs. Westbrook doesn’t fit with Walton, nor our goals.
I wouldn’t give up anything for a ball gordging one speed, twice rebuilt, 3-less, roughly used max salary player, especially not a 20 year old point guard, that plays smarter, shoots 3s, amazing passing floor visionary with upside that could make history, nor an 18 year old phenom that shoots from anywhere, has length to disrupt and disturb and star written all over him.
Lastly who would trade a giant baby center that’s as smart as a prodegy, shoots like a silk machine and blocks like a skyscraper?
Are you kidding me?
Is this your way of bruising the fo for not picking your draft choices, or are you incapable of keeping your investments in your portfolio, like a kids with cash in a toy store?
A Horse With No Name says
Clay Bertrand
Put your Reynolds Wrap boogeyman back in the drawer. Means ziploc.
A Horse With No Name says
wwlofficial With all due respect, you are way over valuing OKC’s hand and undervaluing the Lakers cost controlled young talent. No way OKC commands Ingram plus assorted assets for Westbrook. That’s really bad business. Lakers have made mistakes, but your trade scenarios would be unprecedentedly bad.
J C hoops says
wwlofficial nice provoative post.
i’d give up clarkson, randle and either zubac or nance
if they insist on dar it’s a non-starter for me
i want to hold onto both dar and ingram, personally.
just too much poortential to give up
also i would ask for westbrook’s long term commitment before i trade anyone
smokedaddy says
J C hoops wwlofficial Your proposal is the one trade even halfway plausible. WW and most of these others are like five year olds in the candy store wanting to spend mommy and daddy’s hard earned cash on a bunch of sugary crap that lasts all of ten minutes. But even your proposal is too much JC. Randle alone is actually a pretty good haul for OKC given their lack of leverage. Randle and Clarkson at the very most.
Westbrook is at the very peak of his career right now. Yes, he still has 3-5 good years left but with DLO and Ingram still barely out of their teens, they will not yet be in their primes and there’s likely still no championship possibility. Its simple, if OKC can get a better package from Boston or elsewhere, LET IT GO. Time is on our side, even without 2 of our 3 next 1st rounders.
J C hoops says
Another solid analogy about the kids wanting sugar.
You must be a parent! Haha
Yeah I’d say Randle and Clarkson should suffice too except I’m keeping in mind that OKC will probably expect a kings ransom. Maybe a future second rounder instead of Zubac or Nance.
And we could offer to make the draft pick for them since obviously our second round picks are as good as most team’s first rounders.
BuckFoston says
If the Lakers are working on a Westbrook for Ingram trade, I’m changing my nom de plume to Buck Fuss.
Clay Bertrand says
BuckFoston
WORD!!
KenOak says
wwlofficial I wouldn’t like a trade for RW if it cost us more than either DAR + a couple 2nd rounders or DAR + Zubac and a 2nd rounder maybe. I just don’t think that OKC’s position is strong enough to command very much for RW. I could maybe go as far as JC, Randle, and a 2nd rounder for RW, but only if he commits to resigning with LAL. No trades whatsoever unless there’s a contract commitment.
J C hoops says
Clay Bertrand i object! the ice maker is far more famous.
when’s the last time you needed a thon?
KenOak says
KevTheBold wwlofficial LT Mitchell You’re underrating RW and overrating DAR. Right now DAR is an intriguing prospect that shows some signs of stardom. RW is a superstar right now.
I agree with you in one way though. It makes zero sense to gut the team for RW, even if we got a commitment to resign because he isn’t going to get LAL into the playoffs by himself.
DAR + a couple 2nd rounders for RW with a commitment to resign with LAL? Absolutely. There would be a team that could contend next year for the playoffs and make serious noise if Ingram and Randle make the leaps we think they are capable of.
KevTheBold says
KenOak KevTheBold wwlofficial LT Mitchell
That’s your opinion.
On Westbrook’s stardom however agree, yet that’s not the question. The question is, with his bone to the metal style of play, combined with his past injuries, for how long?
In addition, he is NOT the star for our team, for the same reason Durant left him behind.
Trading for him would be wrong on so many levels that logic has no place in any argument to justify it.
Clay Bertrand says
J C hoops Clay Bertrand
LOL…..You know he goes by his middle name right?????
His first name is “MARA”………. ; )
J C hoops says
Clay Bertrand J C hoops
haha not bad
wwlofficial says
I understand the sentiments. My personal favorite Laker right now is Ivica Zubac and if I was Lakers GM I would be hard-pressed to trade him as well. But we have to understand value and business, something some of you don’t seem to grasp quite well. Youth movement in LA is awesome, alot of people have even forgiven Jim and want him to continue because of the amount of youth we’ve accumulated. But LA is about stars… and if you don’t quite get that, well…
We are not the Spurs. We don’t play the right way. We don’t bring in international players on gambles and hope one of them pan out like Manu Ginobili, while we tank for Duncan while we have David Robinson.
We are not the OKC Thunder (pun intended) that we draft Durant, Westbrook and Harden, Ibaka and Adams in consecutive years. We are not the OKC Thunder that shy away from paying James Harden his max money because he is only a 6th man.
We are not the Golden State Warriors, who give Stephen Curry a ridiculous contract because he was injured for 1 season. In turn, it became the reason why the big four is present today. We are not GSW who prides in “most advanced” front office when most of what they were doing was attributed to luck. Good drafting, I commend… but how each and every piece fit, was not skill.
We are the Lakers. We sign stars, we sign former stars and we sign Mozgovs. We trade for Westbrook and we trade for Cousins even though our assets can only afford 1 of them. We offer our 6th best asset and some 2nd rounders – because we’re the Lakers – and every team will bow down to that because of who we are.
At the end of the day, our GMs misspell our own players’ names and we call other teams and offer crap like terrorists – “take our crap or else…” and we expect other teams to just tremble.
We are the Lakers.
A Horse With No Name says
“But we have to understand value and business, something some of you don’t seem to grasp quite well.” Au contraire, it is you who understands neither. Take a look at the comments in response to your lop-sided trade proposals! Propping yourself up as a “business man” to bolster your remarks and insulting your readers for not grasping your vacuous point, brings to mind the old saying: A man never appears so small as when he puffs himself up.”
KevTheBold says
wwlofficial
You need to brush up on your Laker history.
The vast majority of our stars were draft picks, not free agents.
Drafting has always been our base, and whenever we forget it, we get burned to the ground.
wwlofficial says
Looks like sarcasm is not effective in the internet. Ha.
wwlofficial says
My proposal always comes with a re-structured contract plus extension. Otherwise, no one would be foolish to give up even just Zubac alone for Weetbrook.
A Horse With No Name says
Please re-read my comment preceding your reply: Note that I did not take issue with your laker exceptionalism sarcasm. From that you might surmise that I did indeed understand your intent, and did not find it worth commenting on ( a topic beaten into the ground here).
Vasheed says
I agree with your sentiments but, even a superstar on a one year rental with no assurance of staying has very limited value. I would never offer nearly as much as you have suggested. Trades like that could very well set the Lakers back a decade.
JuanJ says
` if I put on my tin foil hat and conspiracy theory glasses ´
___
hilarious!
___
I agree with Buck Fuss 😉 No way we should ship Ingram out! Nor should D´AR be even remotely considered as a bargaining chip any time within the next three or four years.
If Darius´ `secret, well-behind impenetrable steel doors´ conspiracy theory comes to fruition, then, heck, wwlofficial wasn´t lost in some blind man´s holliday of a bygone era in the least! – again: 😉
Gunslinger3 says
Do NOT trade for Westbrook. If he wants to come here as a Free Agent great, but we should keep all our young assets.
However, I do REALLY like Sabonis and would give a player of the Randle level for him.
matt24 says
Let me get this right, your assuming the lakers will trade 3 prospects, 2 top prospects and 1 prospect who looks good, for a superstar on an expiring contract. Our would never win with westbrook and 1 top prospect
wwlofficial says
Vasheed Forgot the part where we mentioned that we would ONLY do it with an extension?
wwlofficial says
I don’t expect anyone to believe anything until some form of mainstream report or rumor comes out, but the reason Sabonis and Ingram aren’t signed yet is very daunting to atleast NOT consider that these 2 sides are in discussion. Maybe a 3rd team is involved that had signed their rookie deal that these 2 teams are waiting on… 30 days is up in 5-7 days.
Vasheed says
wwlofficial Vasheed You only included that in scenario 4. I would consider that important but I also would say extremely unlikely.
A Horse With No Name says
Per Pincus Twitter : @the_ Bowery unlikely related, Lakers allowing themselves just in case room
3:44pm 31 Jul 2016
Stay calm fellas…
Altemawa says
so guys, any news/development on this ?
i am intrigued by the silence by our FO, they really are up to something.
I just hope that whatever happens, it will not be vetoed. 🙂
LordMo says
I understand why the Lakers are playing cap games. However, not understanding why Ingram ‘s peeps is letting this kid play a lick of ball without a deal in place.
Its cool @ the end of the day it’s business but Ingram needs to play the same game. You going to dangle my guy out there as trade bait then I’m going to hold out and use his promise and potential to build up that anticipation and try to inflate his value.
LordMo says
Mitch and Presti both very smart guys. We got to give Mitch credit he has managed to get assets even with Jimbo around. The Lakers I suspect are keeping DAR or Ingram in any scenario. Clarkson, Ingram and Zubov for Westbrook & Sabonis plus whatever & whoever else I believe is basically what you are looking at. The players might change but I believe that would be the structure of any deal between the two.
This all depends on Westbrook signing an extension of course. And considering the FO track record lately…. Hmmmmm.
Basically, does he want to be a Laker, Clipper or dare I say it a Celtic? Stay tuned but Mitch thanks bro for even getting the Lakers back in the mix!
A Horse With No Name says
LordMo
Step back for a moment, and ask yourself if maybe the reason OKC hasn’t signed Sabonis is the same reason the lakers haven’t signed Ingram: to whit, both teams want to give themselves maximum flexibility for any and all trade possibilities. For OKC, this of course means seeing what they can get for Westbrook (signed or unsigned to an extension). For the Lakers, it means the chance to to acquire Westbrook or perhaps another players altogether–Cousins, for example. The fact that Sabonis and Ingram both are unsigned does not link them in a deal for Westbrook to the Lakers. Don’t mistake correlation for causation.
A Horse With No Name says
LordMo
Without a doubt, Ingram’s agent is fully in the loop as to why the Lakers haven’t signed Ingram yet. After all, this is the number two pick in the draft. The fact that there is no squawking from his representation suggests they are on board with the lakers’ intentions.
That means that he knows he will remain a Laker; or is comfortable with moving on in a trade–likely to OKC. I’m pretty confident it’s the former.
A Horse With No Name says
https://twitter.com/EricPincus https://twitter.com/EricPincus/status/760198215467544576https://twitter.com/EricPincus/status/760198215467544576
Eric Pincus Retweeted Lander
When the Lakers feel like there’s no better use of their cap room – they’ll lock in Ingram, Black and Huertas
Just say’in, say’in it all along . . . breathe Laker brethren!
LordMo says
Agreed just pure speculation at this point.
LordMo says
His agent is an idiot. Simmons did not move without a deal and neither will any of the euros. Judging from his agents non impressive client list some former greats but basically below average to some above average players on his list. He is out of his league handling the number 2 pick.
Clay Bertrand says
LordMo
“His agent is an idiot.”
________________________________________
Surely you Jest…….
Jeff Schwartz to date has negotiated contract revenues for his clients totaling well over $1 Billion and his varied client list includes, Aldridge, Love, Drummond, and Harrison Barnes— 3 of which all inked MAX deals in the last year or so. He’s been the #1 or #2 agent in contract revenues for YEARS and he started Excel Sports in 2002 after working for other agencies. This guy is a SENIOR agent.
But yeah bro, I’m sure he is really “OUT OF HIS LEAGUE handling Ingram on a predetermined Rookie contract negotiation.
I’m SURE his agent arranged INSURANCE coverage for Ingram to play in Summer League which is very common. The Lakers could have perhaps contributed (although admittedly, I don’t know if that is technically allowed if he is not yet under contract).
You make it sound like his agent is gonna pull a KOSMO KRAMER and just have Ingram agree to sign for FREE COFFEE for a YEAR!!!!!!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gORMNmZgE3E
(said Seinfeld reference found at the :41 sec mark of the above clip)
I would counter that Ingram is in very good hands. ; )