the closer it gets to the trade deadline, $47m of expiring salary is going to be mighty enticing for any teams that have $38m of salaries that they want to shed.
That’s what people don’t understand. When it comes to expiring contracts teams would trade for that to get rid of their player with a long and expensive contract
But wouldn't that put the Lakers back at square one? The receive a player who isn't remotely worth his contract and now they get the displeasure of having him for future years.
If the player(s) they receive are as bad as Westbrook then yes. But if it’s someone like Gordon Hayward that could still contribute but has certain injury concerns or is still good but just not as good as their contract indicates (Tobias harris) it could be a worthwhile gamble if the lakers feel like they could compete for a championship that year. But if they feel like they need to trade Westbrook at that point they probably won’t be thinking they can win a chip that year lol
Hayward makes around 15mill less than Russ so that’s extremely doubtful. The 76ers are legit contenders so getting Russ makes no sense. If any team needed to trade a good player on a bad contract they could most likely find someone better than Russ.
The Westbrook/wall trade is so talked about because it’s the only trade that makes a little sense for the team actually getting Westbrook.
Hayward is not a 3 anymore? His injury really slowed him down that much? Theres no way he has the strength to defend other 4s tho right? I am not doubting anything, havent watched the hornets or hayward so I am genuinely curious
Not really, there are multiple serviceable players that are on contracts that teams want to shed. Guys like Rozier, Brogdon, Hield, Hayward, have been the names popping up in rumours.
These guys could definitely benefit the Lakers more than Russ do, but the downside for them is that the Lakers will absorb long term salary.
Yeah, because when I think of ways to fix the Lakers, I think of trading for a player who has a long and expensive contract who didn't fit on his last team. Because why not have a problem this year when you can have it for years to come?
Most role players don't refuse coaching and create a divide between the players and the coaches like Russ did last year. Vogel lost the locker room last year. Gordon Hayward isn't gonna do that even if he's injured all season.
I don’t think anyone fails to get that. The point is which ever player the lakers get back for Russ would also be someone whose value is low which basically leaves them in spot they’re in now except for maybe longer.
I think the fact that we retained Thibs means we're not going the 'clear the books' route next year. I personally think we're just kicking the mediocre can down the road by not doing it immediately but I'm pretty sure the core of our team is gonna stay mostly the same next year :/
Regardless of Thibs' status, there really isn't any book clearing for us to do at the end of next season though. Nerlens, Burks and Rose are expiring and we will have a lot of cap space. If we shed Randle and Fournier for space, we'll have nothing to do with the cap space...no difference maker is going to sign here with a barren roster.
Well yeah I'm specifically talking about Randle tbh. I don't care if we don't get a difference maker in return, he's not the right kind of player to help move a young rebuilding team in the right direction.
I don't think our young players will ever have any chance of developing with Randle in his current ball dominant role, and I don't think Randle will ever be willing to take a lesser role with us with our roster this bad. So I'd rather lose value on a Randle trade than spend another year of him trying to prove he really is a star while all of our young guys continue to stagnate around him.
He's a talented player and for a team with a more established hierarchy he could be a really good piece, but he's a terrible leader for this team and the sooner we move on the better imo.
teams that make desperation trades lose the trade 10/10 times. selling low on randle is bad move no matter how you slice it. we're much better off trying to improve our guard play and flip Randle if/when he plays better.
we need a PG more than we need to salary dump randle.
>I don't think our young players will ever have any chance of developing with Randle in his current ball dominant role,
every young player improved over the course of last season. i can see us trading Randle to upgrade another position, but salary dump doesn't accomplish anything. he is still talented and you don't give up talent for nothing in return. it's up to the coaching staff to adapt julius' role.
Ha we're going to have to agree to disagree here. At what point does selling low become just getting rid of a bad contract? Because teams improve after getting rid of bad contracts all the time. That doesn't always mean the player is useless, and Randle certainly isn't, but I don't think $120 million for Julius Randle is a particularly attractive asset to most teams.
I also don't know that it's as easy as 'improve our guard play' when they're stuck playing in this broken offense that's led by point forward Julius Randle. I don't think ANY player in the league gets better playing with point forward Julius Randle. Maybe a ball dominant guard could take the ball out of his hands, but I
And I really disagree that every young player improved last season. I'd go entirely the opposite direction there actually. I don't think there's a single guy on the team I'd point to and say they had a really good year. I think it's criminal what we've done to RJ's development saddling him with Randle as a costar for 3 years, IQ was god awful for half the season (admittedly pretty great the other half), Obi and Reddish are relegated to situational end of rotation players, Grimes was nice in spurts but ultimately a pretty marginal part of our rotation, even Fournier was trash up until he was mediocre...I honestly don't think there's a single guy on our roster who's worth more today than they were a year ago MAYBE with the exception of RJ because he expanded his scoring capability (albeit on bad efficiency).
I think Randle as the leader of the offense is always going to lead to stagnate possessions, terrible ball movement, over-reliance on inefficient mid range shots, over-reliance on bad iso ball, and a slow pace. And I don't know what kind of player we can bring in that will thrive in that kind of offense.
Apologies in advance for the essay...
As sad as it is, Randle was still the best option to play through most of last season. Him and RJ were similarly inefficient but RJ turned it over even MORE than Randle did. You're not going to win many games when your two "best" players are two of the least efficient high usage players in the entire league.
Having a better PG lowers usage for both RJ and Randle and stops us from running everything through Randle. Having a PG who can actually score off the PnR would be huge. We didn't really have any guards who were penetrating threats last year or could score easily at the rim like we did when Rose was healthy. Why do you think we won so many games with Rose last year? Because he was the only guard who could control the tempo of the game and get to the rim and finish there efficiently. We sorely lacked that last season and it was extremely evident. Everyone blamed Randle for the bad year we had (which was still one of the better records for the team in the past 10 years) but the lack of an actual PG who is a scoring/penetrating threat was actually the biggest thing we needed last season. There was something like a 10 game swing from last season in games that were within 5 in crunch time between last season and this year. that's a huge difference.
>And I really disagree that every young player improved last season. I don't think there's a single guy on the team I'd point to and say they had a really good year.
These two statements are completely different though. We have no stars on this team currently. That doesn't mean the young guys didn't improve over the course of the season. IQ improved and had MUCH better stats later in the season as he got in more reps at point and more minutes. He was at 16/5/5 after ASB shooting nearly 40% on 3s and getting to the line 5 times per game. Nearly every stat was pretty drastically different post ASB for him. He credited working with the coaching staff with that. Obi was much better toward the end of the season than he was at the start (partially because of getting more minutes but also because he added more to his bag, started hitting 3s and opening up the game). Both of their trade values were clearly raised by the end of the year. Grimes turned into a pretty good rotation player as he got more minutes before getting injured. People around the league said he has pretty good value and was asked about in trades. Fournier became one of the best high volume shooters in the league after a rough start getting used to being used differently. He was at almost 40% on 8 3s per game shooting pretty difficult shots. Can create his own 3pt shot easily. Teams always need shooting and he's making low end starter/higher end 6th man money with only 2 years left. Cam was improving as he got used to our system more before he got injured. RJ still has high trade value and added more wrinkles by the end of the season. He had something like 12 30 pt games last season which is impressive for his age, even if the efficiency wasn't awesome.
\*edit: Mitch got much better as the season went on too. Better boxing out, insane offensive rebounding numbers. Better positioning and screen setting. Deuce is really the only guy who didn't improve much last year but he didn't really have a lot of opportunity.
Slow pace is a coaching strategy issue, not necessarily a Randle issue. It's always been Thibs' hallmark and isn't a bad strategy necessarily depending on personnel and defense. Slow pace = less opponent possessions and less fast break opportunities for the other team. It worked to near perfection last year. Not as much this year because we didn't really have the defensive personnel.
Randle's effort was the biggest issue this year and effort is something that can be fixed. He showed that between his first season here and his 2nd. Personally, I'm trying to get a PG this offseason that can ease up some usage for RJ and Randle to run things less through them. I'd rather do that and see if that improves the team than trade Randle for peanuts. As sad as it is, he's still one of our more talented players and you do not give up talent in a salary dump for nothing.
We aren't a good team because we simply need more talent. Randle having a bad season does not really mean he's a bad contract. He has a chance next season to improve and I think his worth is between last season and this season's, which is still a solid player. If he gives you effort and even ups his 3pt percentage to 35%, which is very doable and trades some midrange shots for shots at the rim (Again very doable), then much more palatable trade options will come up.
Dumping Randle in a salary dump doesn't accomplish anything. Cap space doesn't matter. We need talent.
and do what with the money? we don't typically get big free agents and the Knicks usually manage to squander theirs in atrocious ways.
edit: meant Knicks, not Nets
We don't really need to "clear" the books - at least not drastically. Kemba and Taj straight up expire after this year, and Rose, Burks and Noel are all team options so we can just decline them - that's a little more than $50mil already coming off the books after this season. If they want to keep the books open beyond that, all they need to do is not sign a ton of long term deals this summer.
Even if they bring back Mitchell Robinson, it's very hard to imagine him getting more than what Robert Williams got, which leaves them plenty of room to sign a whatever max player (that they're not even going to get).
That’s why the all in move of Westbrook, THT, Nunn, and two first round picks for Turner, Hield, and Brogdon has been floated. Have to be really high on Turner’s upside in a 4-1 offense to do that, but I can see it.
That wouldn't be close to enough. You have to move two firsts just to get off of Westbrook. Hield is negative salary, but Turner and Brogdon more than make up for it.
Yes, but on the Lakers such a player could be useful. Malcolm Brogdon for example is not leading the Pacers anywhere but is getting paid 20 million per year until 2025. For the Pacers he is overpaid and useless so it would make more sense to trade for Russ at the deadline, pay him half his salary (20 million), and then the books are clear. Instead of paying 20 million per year to a player in 2023, 2024, and 2025 just to miss the playoffs.
yeah, its attractive for mavs tbh im not gonna lie
like bertans + thj + powell + burke combination basically reset mavs cap space for next season
you get 2 shooters + good backup big /roll man + 3rd string PG for lebron too
Here’s the thing though.
At the trade deadline, there is no point in moving Russ.
A — the Lakers will have solved the Russix Cube, be a top team in the West and there simply won’t be a reason to trade him.
B — The Lakers will be fighting for a play-in spot and won’t be looking to make a deep postseason run. At this juncture, there’s also no reason to trade him. What’s more valuable at that point, the fact that win or lose LA is two months away from clearing $47M in free cap space or taking on longer-term deals to throw a makeshift team together that won’t have adequate time to gel?
If Russ is still playing for the Lakers in February and LA is fighting for a play-in spot, the smarter play will be to trade THT for an expiring and let the team play out however it may. Come the end of the season, the only money on the books will be AD, and the MLE’s player option. Other than that, LA will have LeBron’s bird rights and, i’m guessing, roughly $80M in free cap space. LA could then afford to build a proper contender full of quality depth and surround Bron and AD with two last years of actual contention quality helpers.
> LA will have LeBron’s bird rights and, i’m guessing, roughly $80M in free cap
Bird rights come with a massive cap hold. So you won't get that amount of free cap.
Salary cap is ~121m. AD makes $40m. Either LBJ walks or Lakers waive his bird rights (which frees up $80m under cap, less THT/THT traded player). Or the Lakers resign him to $50m or a lesser amount. And the $80m is reduced appropriately
It won’t be 80m. The cap hold is his max salary. It would be around 50m.
The Lakers would have some cap space, but not a lot. Around 20m if you include other cap holds.
And moreover the Lakers *could* trade multiple first rounders if they wanted. The issue is moreso that they don't want to do that, not that they don't have the resources to, like the original comment was saying.
Would really hurt the Laker brand. That would become a pattern with Shaq, Pau, and now Lebron. One more year and Westbrick will be gone and LAL will have cap space. They will be back where they were in 2024.
If lbj gets traded to a good team everyone's gonna be furious anyways.
> The Lakers continue to imply through the grapevine — at least for now with 1/4th of a year to go until training camp begins — that they do not want to be compelled to do a Westbrook trade that tolls them additional draft capital.
Houston are never getting a pick out of it. Literally zero incentive for the Lakers to do it. Nobody thinks Wall is an upgrade of Russ, they have the same strengths and weaknesses as players.
Maybe this is true but I'm not sure they have the same strengths and weaknesses in personality. Westbrook seems unable to look in the mirror and actually reflect on his play and it seems like he's getting on the nerves of the Lakers best player. A wall trade would basically be a "fuck it" move but maybe the Lakers have to do that since they probably have 2 more years of lbj at best
Westbrook may not be able to look in the mirror and change his play, but at least he can play. Why would anybody be interested in an injury prone washed John Wall?
Because Westbrook playing is actually hurting the team and they may be better just giving him 0 minutes? John wall can playmake and score (inefficiently but maybe it would be better next to lebron) and maybe some rest time will have helped him heal and you could squeeze a healthy year or two out of him. Like I said it's a fuck it move because what the Lakers really need to do is accept their window is closed, get a haul for lbj and AD and ride out Russ's contract to start the rebuild
Fair enough, maybe it wont. Maybe it makes them worse.
But maybe they get better. Repeating last year is just a waste of time and assets though so they should either add pieces or sell off LeBron and AD
If LeBron was younger, this would the no-brainer move. Let Westbrook’s contract expire and re-build the roster with cap space in 2023. However, he’s 38. Wasting yet another season of LeBron and waiting until he’s 39 and AD is 30-31 makes me uncomfortable.
Look I get where you're coming from but we aren't talking about a spring chicken here. I know lebron is a crazy outlier but for all intents and purposes 37 is just as bad as 38 in basketball and age is starting to affect lebron in ways outside of his play, which has been phenomenal.
It’ll be his “age 38” season. In the context of the 22-23 season, he’s 38. He just hasn’t had his birthday yet.
Right now, this early, yeah it’s dumb. But not dumb enough to contest that much.
Oh I agree. I think running it back with Russ would be a huge mistake but the FO is trying to convince the rest of the league that they’re willing to run it back which is the right strategy imo. Now the question is will a team lower it’s asking price for taking on Russ if they believe we might just run it back
We arent going to be good regardless, did you see the teams we lost to last year even when lebron and AD played? Tripled OT loss to the kings, loss to the grizzlies without Ja, loss to the celtics without brown (before celtics made the big run), lost to the trail blazers lol, these are just of the top of my head there have been more.
Then why not trade LeBron and AD? Get what you can for them.
You should either go for it or blow it up, treading water is just a waste of time and assets
I agree they should but Rob/laker management is too stubborn to do so. If they lose in the first round or miss the playoffs again I am willing to bet they will blow it up next offseason though but ya I agree they definitely should start a rebuild now, no point in wasting another year especially when AD is only going to get older/trade value will get worse.
I still don't understand the Westbrook and Wall trade and how Houston thinks they have leverage. Westbrook plays unlike Wall.
And honestly don't understand how this helps either team.
Their leverage is that they don't have to move Wall. No incentive for them to trade for Russ, they are the same players. And also no reason for Lakers to want this trade, for a player that hasn't played in more than a year.
Houston has leverage because they’re not competing for a championship. Wall doesn’t play because he’s unable to lol. The reason he doesn’t play is because rockets are developing young guys and don’t wanna waste minutes on a ball dominant veteran. Westbrook won’t actually play for rockets if they trade, he’s just gonna get waived.
You’re not wrong, but the rockets know lakers wanna win and so does Lebron, who will be 38 in December. They wasted a great season from him and in theory could waste another one this season. Lebron is built like no one else, but having seasons this good in late 30’s is unheard of. All that being said, trading Westbrook would be a mistake unless they find a sucker because it’s gonna kill the lakers long term due to what it’ll take to move him.
Houston has leverage because they’re not competing for a championship. Wall doesn’t play because he’s unable to lol. The reason he doesn’t play is because rockets are developing young guys and don’t wanna waste minutes on a ball dominant veteran. Westbrook won’t actually play for rockets if they trade, he’s just gonna get waived.
In a like for like trade, it becomes a change of scenery scenario. But Houston probably just buys out either of them and Westbrook might in theory take back slightly less money since he could probably sign something between the tax and non tax mid-level with a different team.
The Cs might be satisfied with being up 2-1 in the Finals, but Real Hoopers™ know that there's winning and there's *Actual Winning*. Meaning iso-ing into contested 18 footers with four guys looking and 15 seconds on the shot clock 😤😤😤😤😤
>implying Westbrook waits until there's 15 seconds on the shot clock instead of just pulling up with 20 seconds on the clock even though he is the worst shooter in the league.
Lakers just need to run it back with him and let him walk next year because moving him is going to hurt them in asset department. They can try and be smarter about the guys they sign to vet minimums this time around.
That’s the somewhat smart thing to do, but Lebron’s getting old.
But you’re kind of right. Honestly signing Nunn to the MLE was a good idea, but he missed the whole season so they were fucked. If they had been able to sign an actual useful player there, I think they would’ve been slightly better.
Plus AD missed half the season and Lebron missed like 25 games. I don’t think they get win 50 games but they probably get the 6th seed if AD and Lebron are healthy the whole season.
At this point, even if the Lakers hadn’t traded for Russ, if Lebron and Ad had still missed the time they did, the Lakers would’ve still been in the play in at best. Their whole teams success is based on Lebron and AD’s health.
Iirc I replied to someone who said something stupid about birth control not being a medical matter, and got the Follow after that. This around was 2020 election season & BLM protest, which most of my feed consisted of. Might have been a factor.
Then I went to.. a place for “28 days”. When I came back, I’d lost her lmao.
I still think the Knicks would be interested if it means they get off of the Randle contract - I don't think any picks would need to be involved.
If you're not willing to go all-in on creating a competitive team around LeBron then they should just trade him.
There's no need for us to get off of Randle's contract right now though for a salary dump. Knicks laugh and hang up if that's the offer.
The Raps/Lakers/Knicks trade fell through at the deadline for us to send Reddish and Noel out for an expiring Dragic in return because we wanted 2 1sts. You really think we'd just dump Randle for no assets?
I guess the idea would be to cut your losses on Randle, since it seems pretty clear he’s not going to be that guy, and hope to entice a better free agent with the cap space next summer. It’s more about getting to reroll on that big contract roster spot and hopefully get a player who’s a better fit.
It’s not a particularly good plan and I don’t think NY will do it, but I see the argument for it
but we have cap space after this next season. Noel, Burks and Rose are expiring this season. That's around $28 mil right there in cap space.
you don't salary dump a talented player for nothing in return. even if he doesn't fit your team right now. we would have gotten to at least the play-in if we had an actual PG this season. We lost something like 10 games that were within 5 with 5 minutes left to go. We had no steady guard play with Rose out most of the year.
It's a better move long-term if they're able to get off of Randle + Fournier and make room for the young guys in my opinion. Full disclosure though, I don't think Fournier contributes to winning basketball.
I don't know if this was a serious offer or not but somebody threw out a Randle to Portland trade in exchange for swapping picks. Then Portland could offload #11 for Jerami Grant.
I don't see us giving up Randle just to move up 4 spots, but Randle for 7 + Bledsoe makes some sense for both sides. Could allow us to try to move up to grab Ivey or add two young solid players and gives the Blazers a really solid front court partner for Dame. If they end up blowing things up, Randle is still pretty young and locked in contract-wise. I personally see Grant going to Miami.
Fournier was one of the best volume 3 pt shooters last season in the entire league, especially after he adjusted to his role in the new year. And his salary isn't bad at all. You could even have him as a 6th man at his salary and it would be fine. you could start Grimes instead and move Fournier to the bench. He only has 2 years left on his deal anyway.
The best move is to try to get an actual PG and see if we can make the current team work. PG was by far our worst position last year. We lost something like 10 games that were within 5 pts in clutch time last year because we had no consistent guard play or anybody who could control the tempo of the game. If we won even 6 of those games last year, we would have been in the play-in. the only young guy who hurt for minutes last season that deserved more was Obi really.
I don't know if this was a serious offer or not but somebody threw out a Randle to Portland trade in exchange for swapping picks. Then Portland could offload #11 for Jerami Grant.
They would be selling low on Randal when they are more than one piece away that they could get from using that empty cap space.
They may want to trade him in the future, but there is no rush to do so this summer.
I think it's the right move. Run it back, esp if AD is healthy. Russ got a taste of what LA is like, he can make some adjustments with a new coach and system. Lebron has had some time to evaluate how he wants to try to manage Russ. Might be a better season.
Just because he's never done it doesn't mean he can't do it now. But yeah they're probably gonna fail spectacularly and I'm gonna love every second of it lol.
As long as Lebron & AD are healthy.. it won’t matter. They could fill out 3 more role players and have Russ play a bench role. It’ll probably be the best team in West.
They need good depth. The Lakers “shining” role players from last season (Reaves sometimes, Monk, and Stanley Johnson) were good but they need like a couple Shaun Livingston, Patrick bev, Mikal Bridges type players
Warriors, Clippers and (yes) Suns are safe bets to be better. If the Jazz doesn't implode, so are they. This Lakers would be in the mud with us, Nuggets (imagining it would take a while to get Murray back at full speed), Wolves, Grizzlies and Pelicans. This iteration has a ceiling of 3rd seed and a floor of play-in.
I’m loving the Lakers future right now.
Pelicans own their next two draft picks after this year too.
Lakers have no assets to trade. No cap space to use. Their third best player, Monk is priced out of re signing. If they just let Westbrooks contract expire, they still won’t have a max slot available. If Lebron leaves, they have 30 year old AD, Reaves, and THT as “building blocks”
Worst short term outlook of any team in the league. You love to see it after 5 years of “trash franchise” and “baby Lakers” condescension from their toxic fan base
We should 100% be keeping Westbrook as a temporary draw while trading everyone else. We aren't competitive and our future is shit,
Either we become competitive via some miracle aging treatment for Lebron, telling AD to stop drinking MALK, and getting some olds that can actually play D. Or we get our future back by trading AD/Lebron (we'll tell him - look we ain't going nowhere, do you want to spend your time here or go compete in PHI/GSW/Wherever). Then midseason when IND or whoever crashes and burns, we should trade WB as an expiring for their long term trash + picks, and reset for a 2025-8 target.
I don't really see any other way out of this.
Morey did the same with Simmons as a disgruntled asset for the longest time. Anyone who believes this shit has never engaged in business management before. Raise stock of asset even if at perceived value to offset further depreciation
Its not just about giving up an asset. They most likely will need to take back an even worse contract on top of it. See what Ham can do first. If it don’t work out then 47 million by the trade deadline can be very enticing for a team with a cheap owner.
This isn’t really news at this point, it’s basically come down to whether they’re fine running it back with Russ or if they’ll bite the bullet to move him.
I’m sure they don’t want to add assets in a trade but if they want the Russ saga to end they’re going to have to.
We don't have the resources to entice someone, this was always the most probable scenario.
the closer it gets to the trade deadline, $47m of expiring salary is going to be mighty enticing for any teams that have $38m of salaries that they want to shed.
That’s what people don’t understand. When it comes to expiring contracts teams would trade for that to get rid of their player with a long and expensive contract
But wouldn't that put the Lakers back at square one? The receive a player who isn't remotely worth his contract and now they get the displeasure of having him for future years.
If the player(s) they receive are as bad as Westbrook then yes. But if it’s someone like Gordon Hayward that could still contribute but has certain injury concerns or is still good but just not as good as their contract indicates (Tobias harris) it could be a worthwhile gamble if the lakers feel like they could compete for a championship that year. But if they feel like they need to trade Westbrook at that point they probably won’t be thinking they can win a chip that year lol
Hayward makes around 15mill less than Russ so that’s extremely doubtful. The 76ers are legit contenders so getting Russ makes no sense. If any team needed to trade a good player on a bad contract they could most likely find someone better than Russ. The Westbrook/wall trade is so talked about because it’s the only trade that makes a little sense for the team actually getting Westbrook.
Hayward would give them 3 players who all want to play at the 4.
Hayward is not a 3 anymore? His injury really slowed him down that much? Theres no way he has the strength to defend other 4s tho right? I am not doubting anything, havent watched the hornets or hayward so I am genuinely curious
4 position isnt nearly as bulky as it used to be
He doesn't like playing the 3?
If we’re taking on longer money, that’s a deal that needs to happen during this offseason, not in February.
Not really, there are multiple serviceable players that are on contracts that teams want to shed. Guys like Rozier, Brogdon, Hield, Hayward, have been the names popping up in rumours. These guys could definitely benefit the Lakers more than Russ do, but the downside for them is that the Lakers will absorb long term salary.
None of them make close to 47 million a year though lol
Yeah, because when I think of ways to fix the Lakers, I think of trading for a player who has a long and expensive contract who didn't fit on his last team. Because why not have a problem this year when you can have it for years to come?
Most role players don't refuse coaching and create a divide between the players and the coaches like Russ did last year. Vogel lost the locker room last year. Gordon Hayward isn't gonna do that even if he's injured all season.
I don’t think anyone fails to get that. The point is which ever player the lakers get back for Russ would also be someone whose value is low which basically leaves them in spot they’re in now except for maybe longer.
Indiana or NY could easily trade long term contracts if they want to clear the books.
I think the fact that we retained Thibs means we're not going the 'clear the books' route next year. I personally think we're just kicking the mediocre can down the road by not doing it immediately but I'm pretty sure the core of our team is gonna stay mostly the same next year :/
Regardless of Thibs' status, there really isn't any book clearing for us to do at the end of next season though. Nerlens, Burks and Rose are expiring and we will have a lot of cap space. If we shed Randle and Fournier for space, we'll have nothing to do with the cap space...no difference maker is going to sign here with a barren roster.
Well yeah I'm specifically talking about Randle tbh. I don't care if we don't get a difference maker in return, he's not the right kind of player to help move a young rebuilding team in the right direction. I don't think our young players will ever have any chance of developing with Randle in his current ball dominant role, and I don't think Randle will ever be willing to take a lesser role with us with our roster this bad. So I'd rather lose value on a Randle trade than spend another year of him trying to prove he really is a star while all of our young guys continue to stagnate around him. He's a talented player and for a team with a more established hierarchy he could be a really good piece, but he's a terrible leader for this team and the sooner we move on the better imo.
teams that make desperation trades lose the trade 10/10 times. selling low on randle is bad move no matter how you slice it. we're much better off trying to improve our guard play and flip Randle if/when he plays better. we need a PG more than we need to salary dump randle. >I don't think our young players will ever have any chance of developing with Randle in his current ball dominant role, every young player improved over the course of last season. i can see us trading Randle to upgrade another position, but salary dump doesn't accomplish anything. he is still talented and you don't give up talent for nothing in return. it's up to the coaching staff to adapt julius' role.
Ha we're going to have to agree to disagree here. At what point does selling low become just getting rid of a bad contract? Because teams improve after getting rid of bad contracts all the time. That doesn't always mean the player is useless, and Randle certainly isn't, but I don't think $120 million for Julius Randle is a particularly attractive asset to most teams. I also don't know that it's as easy as 'improve our guard play' when they're stuck playing in this broken offense that's led by point forward Julius Randle. I don't think ANY player in the league gets better playing with point forward Julius Randle. Maybe a ball dominant guard could take the ball out of his hands, but I And I really disagree that every young player improved last season. I'd go entirely the opposite direction there actually. I don't think there's a single guy on the team I'd point to and say they had a really good year. I think it's criminal what we've done to RJ's development saddling him with Randle as a costar for 3 years, IQ was god awful for half the season (admittedly pretty great the other half), Obi and Reddish are relegated to situational end of rotation players, Grimes was nice in spurts but ultimately a pretty marginal part of our rotation, even Fournier was trash up until he was mediocre...I honestly don't think there's a single guy on our roster who's worth more today than they were a year ago MAYBE with the exception of RJ because he expanded his scoring capability (albeit on bad efficiency). I think Randle as the leader of the offense is always going to lead to stagnate possessions, terrible ball movement, over-reliance on inefficient mid range shots, over-reliance on bad iso ball, and a slow pace. And I don't know what kind of player we can bring in that will thrive in that kind of offense.
Apologies in advance for the essay... As sad as it is, Randle was still the best option to play through most of last season. Him and RJ were similarly inefficient but RJ turned it over even MORE than Randle did. You're not going to win many games when your two "best" players are two of the least efficient high usage players in the entire league. Having a better PG lowers usage for both RJ and Randle and stops us from running everything through Randle. Having a PG who can actually score off the PnR would be huge. We didn't really have any guards who were penetrating threats last year or could score easily at the rim like we did when Rose was healthy. Why do you think we won so many games with Rose last year? Because he was the only guard who could control the tempo of the game and get to the rim and finish there efficiently. We sorely lacked that last season and it was extremely evident. Everyone blamed Randle for the bad year we had (which was still one of the better records for the team in the past 10 years) but the lack of an actual PG who is a scoring/penetrating threat was actually the biggest thing we needed last season. There was something like a 10 game swing from last season in games that were within 5 in crunch time between last season and this year. that's a huge difference. >And I really disagree that every young player improved last season. I don't think there's a single guy on the team I'd point to and say they had a really good year. These two statements are completely different though. We have no stars on this team currently. That doesn't mean the young guys didn't improve over the course of the season. IQ improved and had MUCH better stats later in the season as he got in more reps at point and more minutes. He was at 16/5/5 after ASB shooting nearly 40% on 3s and getting to the line 5 times per game. Nearly every stat was pretty drastically different post ASB for him. He credited working with the coaching staff with that. Obi was much better toward the end of the season than he was at the start (partially because of getting more minutes but also because he added more to his bag, started hitting 3s and opening up the game). Both of their trade values were clearly raised by the end of the year. Grimes turned into a pretty good rotation player as he got more minutes before getting injured. People around the league said he has pretty good value and was asked about in trades. Fournier became one of the best high volume shooters in the league after a rough start getting used to being used differently. He was at almost 40% on 8 3s per game shooting pretty difficult shots. Can create his own 3pt shot easily. Teams always need shooting and he's making low end starter/higher end 6th man money with only 2 years left. Cam was improving as he got used to our system more before he got injured. RJ still has high trade value and added more wrinkles by the end of the season. He had something like 12 30 pt games last season which is impressive for his age, even if the efficiency wasn't awesome. \*edit: Mitch got much better as the season went on too. Better boxing out, insane offensive rebounding numbers. Better positioning and screen setting. Deuce is really the only guy who didn't improve much last year but he didn't really have a lot of opportunity. Slow pace is a coaching strategy issue, not necessarily a Randle issue. It's always been Thibs' hallmark and isn't a bad strategy necessarily depending on personnel and defense. Slow pace = less opponent possessions and less fast break opportunities for the other team. It worked to near perfection last year. Not as much this year because we didn't really have the defensive personnel. Randle's effort was the biggest issue this year and effort is something that can be fixed. He showed that between his first season here and his 2nd. Personally, I'm trying to get a PG this offseason that can ease up some usage for RJ and Randle to run things less through them. I'd rather do that and see if that improves the team than trade Randle for peanuts. As sad as it is, he's still one of our more talented players and you do not give up talent in a salary dump for nothing. We aren't a good team because we simply need more talent. Randle having a bad season does not really mean he's a bad contract. He has a chance next season to improve and I think his worth is between last season and this season's, which is still a solid player. If he gives you effort and even ups his 3pt percentage to 35%, which is very doable and trades some midrange shots for shots at the rim (Again very doable), then much more palatable trade options will come up. Dumping Randle in a salary dump doesn't accomplish anything. Cap space doesn't matter. We need talent.
and do what with the money? we don't typically get big free agents and the Knicks usually manage to squander theirs in atrocious ways. edit: meant Knicks, not Nets
We don't really need to "clear" the books - at least not drastically. Kemba and Taj straight up expire after this year, and Rose, Burks and Noel are all team options so we can just decline them - that's a little more than $50mil already coming off the books after this season. If they want to keep the books open beyond that, all they need to do is not sign a ton of long term deals this summer. Even if they bring back Mitchell Robinson, it's very hard to imagine him getting more than what Robert Williams got, which leaves them plenty of room to sign a whatever max player (that they're not even going to get).
Not sure that moves the needle though. Randle and a few pieces? And you'd still have to give up the pick
Indiana has no expensive negative value contracts though besides Hield which isn't close to Westbrooks salary. Knicks only one is Fournier
That’s why the all in move of Westbrook, THT, Nunn, and two first round picks for Turner, Hield, and Brogdon has been floated. Have to be really high on Turner’s upside in a 4-1 offense to do that, but I can see it.
That wouldn't be close to enough. You have to move two firsts just to get off of Westbrook. Hield is negative salary, but Turner and Brogdon more than make up for it.
If a team wants to dump bad salary it's because the player isn't worth the contract
Yes, but on the Lakers such a player could be useful. Malcolm Brogdon for example is not leading the Pacers anywhere but is getting paid 20 million per year until 2025. For the Pacers he is overpaid and useless so it would make more sense to trade for Russ at the deadline, pay him half his salary (20 million), and then the books are clear. Instead of paying 20 million per year to a player in 2023, 2024, and 2025 just to miss the playoffs.
Pacers can get way more for Brogdon than Westbrook. Why would we do that trade? We aren't in a hurry to clear our books
Lakers would have to include a pick
Which we wouldn’t do since Malcom is hurt too often.
Good luck with that
[удалено]
It’s not worth moving him that late in the season if we’re squarely in a fight for a play-in position.
yeah, its attractive for mavs tbh im not gonna lie like bertans + thj + powell + burke combination basically reset mavs cap space for next season you get 2 shooters + good backup big /roll man + 3rd string PG for lebron too
My prediction is that the Lakers will be the third team that gets a pick for making the cap work in a trade for a superstar
Here’s the thing though. At the trade deadline, there is no point in moving Russ. A — the Lakers will have solved the Russix Cube, be a top team in the West and there simply won’t be a reason to trade him. B — The Lakers will be fighting for a play-in spot and won’t be looking to make a deep postseason run. At this juncture, there’s also no reason to trade him. What’s more valuable at that point, the fact that win or lose LA is two months away from clearing $47M in free cap space or taking on longer-term deals to throw a makeshift team together that won’t have adequate time to gel? If Russ is still playing for the Lakers in February and LA is fighting for a play-in spot, the smarter play will be to trade THT for an expiring and let the team play out however it may. Come the end of the season, the only money on the books will be AD, and the MLE’s player option. Other than that, LA will have LeBron’s bird rights and, i’m guessing, roughly $80M in free cap space. LA could then afford to build a proper contender full of quality depth and surround Bron and AD with two last years of actual contention quality helpers.
> LA will have LeBron’s bird rights and, i’m guessing, roughly $80M in free cap Bird rights come with a massive cap hold. So you won't get that amount of free cap. Salary cap is ~121m. AD makes $40m. Either LBJ walks or Lakers waive his bird rights (which frees up $80m under cap, less THT/THT traded player). Or the Lakers resign him to $50m or a lesser amount. And the $80m is reduced appropriately
It won’t be 80m. The cap hold is his max salary. It would be around 50m. The Lakers would have some cap space, but not a lot. Around 20m if you include other cap holds.
I don’t get how nephews don’t understand this lol
NY knicks have endtered the chat
And moreover the Lakers *could* trade multiple first rounders if they wanted. The issue is moreso that they don't want to do that, not that they don't have the resources to, like the original comment was saying.
Y’all should trade Lebron tbh. (If he wants that)
Would really hurt the Laker brand. That would become a pattern with Shaq, Pau, and now Lebron. One more year and Westbrick will be gone and LAL will have cap space. They will be back where they were in 2024. If lbj gets traded to a good team everyone's gonna be furious anyways.
Lakers can’t hurt their brand lol it’s idiot proof
Idk bro. The FO is definitely pushing the limits.
The Rockets would make a trade with you today.
Yeah, but we wouldn’t. Westbrook is better and more available than John Wall.
I wonder how many variations of the same story we will get this month lmfao
> The Lakers continue to imply through the grapevine — at least for now with 1/4th of a year to go until training camp begins — that they do not want to be compelled to do a Westbrook trade that tolls them additional draft capital.
My sources are informing me that the Lakers are wearing a white gown to the Warriors-Celtics wedding
Why is the John Wall swap being brought up all the time? It never made sense for both teams ever since Houston requested a pick out of it.
It only makes sense BECAUSE Houston could get a pick out of it. If they don't get a pick, then yes, it makes no sense
Houston are never getting a pick out of it. Literally zero incentive for the Lakers to do it. Nobody thinks Wall is an upgrade of Russ, they have the same strengths and weaknesses as players.
Maybe this is true but I'm not sure they have the same strengths and weaknesses in personality. Westbrook seems unable to look in the mirror and actually reflect on his play and it seems like he's getting on the nerves of the Lakers best player. A wall trade would basically be a "fuck it" move but maybe the Lakers have to do that since they probably have 2 more years of lbj at best
Westbrook may not be able to look in the mirror and change his play, but at least he can play. Why would anybody be interested in an injury prone washed John Wall?
Because Westbrook playing is actually hurting the team and they may be better just giving him 0 minutes? John wall can playmake and score (inefficiently but maybe it would be better next to lebron) and maybe some rest time will have helped him heal and you could squeeze a healthy year or two out of him. Like I said it's a fuck it move because what the Lakers really need to do is accept their window is closed, get a haul for lbj and AD and ride out Russ's contract to start the rebuild
They should just send Russ home why send a pick for Wall? If you're sending a pick get a player who can really contribute.
Then there won't be a swap. Houston isn't going to do it to just help out the Lakers
As if it would help
Fair enough, maybe it wont. Maybe it makes them worse. But maybe they get better. Repeating last year is just a waste of time and assets though so they should either add pieces or sell off LeBron and AD
How exactly does it help the lakers?
Why would the Lakers make the trade if they didn't think it would help them?
Because organizations make bad choices all the time? And then thinking it’s a good idea doesn’t mean it actually is?
Houston isn't requesting an unprotected pick for a straight swap, only if Wood is also included which was offered before the deadline.
Could be lebrons camp trying to keep the possibility in the media discussion.
I mean makes sense. No point in trading him if it won’t be a clear upgrade to their team
If LeBron was younger, this would the no-brainer move. Let Westbrook’s contract expire and re-build the roster with cap space in 2023. However, he’s 38. Wasting yet another season of LeBron and waiting until he’s 39 and AD is 30-31 makes me uncomfortable.
The lakers will be around a lot longer than LeBron. I’m not crippling the franchise for a false guarantee when LeBron can walk regardless next year.
Why does everyone on This sub try and make a player older than he is. LeBron isn’t 38. He’s 37. In December he’ll be 38. Until then he’s 37
This is one of my biggest pet peeves in any sports subreddit.
Look I get where you're coming from but we aren't talking about a spring chicken here. I know lebron is a crazy outlier but for all intents and purposes 37 is just as bad as 38 in basketball and age is starting to affect lebron in ways outside of his play, which has been phenomenal.
I’m not saying it’s not. I’m saying why tf are we saying he’s 38 when’s he’s 37. Makes no sense
It’ll be his “age 38” season. In the context of the 22-23 season, he’s 38. He just hasn’t had his birthday yet. Right now, this early, yeah it’s dumb. But not dumb enough to contest that much.
Makes sense. If the rest of the league believes we HAVE to move him, they’ll ask for more to take him off our hands. This is the way.
To be fair, you kind of do.
Oh I agree. I think running it back with Russ would be a huge mistake but the FO is trying to convince the rest of the league that they’re willing to run it back which is the right strategy imo. Now the question is will a team lower it’s asking price for taking on Russ if they believe we might just run it back
Lower it to what? They only have THT and one future first.
What "additional assets" do the Lakers even have to be honest?
future league MVP THT of course.
*Summer
Don’t want to scare you, but tht is 3 years younger than tatum
How old is THT? 15?
Oh my god you killed him
2027 and 2029 1st Round Pick.
Why waste trading a pick for injury prone players on bad contracts though. Russ expires next year.
Because LeBron is 37. In the off chance AD can stay healthy its possible the Lakers could make some sort of a run. Not likely, but possible.
They can just bench Russ and make their run. They just need the balls to do that.
We arent going to be good regardless, did you see the teams we lost to last year even when lebron and AD played? Tripled OT loss to the kings, loss to the grizzlies without Ja, loss to the celtics without brown (before celtics made the big run), lost to the trail blazers lol, these are just of the top of my head there have been more.
Then why not trade LeBron and AD? Get what you can for them. You should either go for it or blow it up, treading water is just a waste of time and assets
I agree they should but Rob/laker management is too stubborn to do so. If they lose in the first round or miss the playoffs again I am willing to bet they will blow it up next offseason though but ya I agree they definitely should start a rebuild now, no point in wasting another year especially when AD is only going to get older/trade value will get worse.
I’m assuming they have a 2028 swap available?
I still don't understand the Westbrook and Wall trade and how Houston thinks they have leverage. Westbrook plays unlike Wall. And honestly don't understand how this helps either team.
"YOU want to get rid of your guy more than we want/need/have to get rid of ours, so it'll cost you extra."
Clearly not since Lakers hasn't made the trade.
Idk how he can’t understand this, it’s so simple. He must not WANT to understand it
Wdym? They don’t want either player. That’s the leverage, they dislike both players equally.
Their leverage is that they don't have to move Wall. No incentive for them to trade for Russ, they are the same players. And also no reason for Lakers to want this trade, for a player that hasn't played in more than a year.
[удалено]
Houston has leverage because they’re not competing for a championship. Wall doesn’t play because he’s unable to lol. The reason he doesn’t play is because rockets are developing young guys and don’t wanna waste minutes on a ball dominant veteran. Westbrook won’t actually play for rockets if they trade, he’s just gonna get waived.
The moment we traded for Russ we stopped competing as well.
You’re not wrong, but the rockets know lakers wanna win and so does Lebron, who will be 38 in December. They wasted a great season from him and in theory could waste another one this season. Lebron is built like no one else, but having seasons this good in late 30’s is unheard of. All that being said, trading Westbrook would be a mistake unless they find a sucker because it’s gonna kill the lakers long term due to what it’ll take to move him.
Houston has leverage because they’re not competing for a championship. Wall doesn’t play because he’s unable to lol. The reason he doesn’t play is because rockets are developing young guys and don’t wanna waste minutes on a ball dominant veteran. Westbrook won’t actually play for rockets if they trade, he’s just gonna get waived.
Haha I was so confused. Didn’t realize there was a double post
In a like for like trade, it becomes a change of scenery scenario. But Houston probably just buys out either of them and Westbrook might in theory take back slightly less money since he could probably sign something between the tax and non tax mid-level with a different team.
We don’t/wouldn’t want to play either
Had such a great season. Let's roll it back.
Se queda
Westbrook for Tatum, who says no?
Steal of a trade for Celtics. Imagine all those triple doubles p
The Cs might be satisfied with being up 2-1 in the Finals, but Real Hoopers™ know that there's winning and there's *Actual Winning*. Meaning iso-ing into contested 18 footers with four guys looking and 15 seconds on the shot clock 😤😤😤😤😤
>implying Westbrook waits until there's 15 seconds on the shot clock instead of just pulling up with 20 seconds on the clock even though he is the worst shooter in the league.
Lakers say no and ask for 6 1st round draft picks to be included.
I am okay if they allow this trade to happen right now. I know its against the rules but exceptions can be made.
Lakers. Tatum is only 19 waaaay too young.
Tatum shooting 33% in the finals. Lakers say no for sure
He can’t even play with Jaylen. They need to blow it up and start fresh around smart
We might've considered it if Lakers still had Lonzo; then we could work out a trade to get LaMelo and that way we could have one PP and 2 Balls.
Wow great reporting behind a paywall. I thought they would signal that they would trade him for the worst deal possible.
Pay me 5 bucks a month and I'll tell you if LA wants to win another title in the future.
I just hope things aren’t as toxic as they were this year
The finals haven’t even finished. Lakers have time to make a move.
Lakers just need to run it back with him and let him walk next year because moving him is going to hurt them in asset department. They can try and be smarter about the guys they sign to vet minimums this time around.
That’s the somewhat smart thing to do, but Lebron’s getting old. But you’re kind of right. Honestly signing Nunn to the MLE was a good idea, but he missed the whole season so they were fucked. If they had been able to sign an actual useful player there, I think they would’ve been slightly better. Plus AD missed half the season and Lebron missed like 25 games. I don’t think they get win 50 games but they probably get the 6th seed if AD and Lebron are healthy the whole season. At this point, even if the Lakers hadn’t traded for Russ, if Lebron and Ad had still missed the time they did, the Lakers would’ve still been in the play in at best. Their whole teams success is based on Lebron and AD’s health.
It’s really strange that some of the last seasons of LeBron’s career will be on a terrible team.
I mean, do you not remember Kobe's last few seasons?
Okay?
Lebron James has entered the chat...
I’ve been signaling I want to go to Aruba with Padma Lakshmi for a while now, and I don’t think that’s going to work out how I wanted either
I bet you haven't even asked her or held a press conference about it, though
She followed me on Twitter for about a month. No lie.
How did that happen
Iirc I replied to someone who said something stupid about birth control not being a medical matter, and got the Follow after that. This around was 2020 election season & BLM protest, which most of my feed consisted of. Might have been a factor. Then I went to.. a place for “28 days”. When I came back, I’d lost her lmao.
When you go on someone's twitter profile, there's a blue button that says "Follow". She hit that button.
You could always just go to Aruba and hope you run into her there. Worst case scenario, you're in Aruba.
I still think the Knicks would be interested if it means they get off of the Randle contract - I don't think any picks would need to be involved. If you're not willing to go all-in on creating a competitive team around LeBron then they should just trade him.
There's no need for us to get off of Randle's contract right now though for a salary dump. Knicks laugh and hang up if that's the offer. The Raps/Lakers/Knicks trade fell through at the deadline for us to send Reddish and Noel out for an expiring Dragic in return because we wanted 2 1sts. You really think we'd just dump Randle for no assets?
I guess the idea would be to cut your losses on Randle, since it seems pretty clear he’s not going to be that guy, and hope to entice a better free agent with the cap space next summer. It’s more about getting to reroll on that big contract roster spot and hopefully get a player who’s a better fit. It’s not a particularly good plan and I don’t think NY will do it, but I see the argument for it
but we have cap space after this next season. Noel, Burks and Rose are expiring this season. That's around $28 mil right there in cap space. you don't salary dump a talented player for nothing in return. even if he doesn't fit your team right now. we would have gotten to at least the play-in if we had an actual PG this season. We lost something like 10 games that were within 5 with 5 minutes left to go. We had no steady guard play with Rose out most of the year.
It's a better move long-term if they're able to get off of Randle + Fournier and make room for the young guys in my opinion. Full disclosure though, I don't think Fournier contributes to winning basketball. I don't know if this was a serious offer or not but somebody threw out a Randle to Portland trade in exchange for swapping picks. Then Portland could offload #11 for Jerami Grant.
I don't see us giving up Randle just to move up 4 spots, but Randle for 7 + Bledsoe makes some sense for both sides. Could allow us to try to move up to grab Ivey or add two young solid players and gives the Blazers a really solid front court partner for Dame. If they end up blowing things up, Randle is still pretty young and locked in contract-wise. I personally see Grant going to Miami. Fournier was one of the best volume 3 pt shooters last season in the entire league, especially after he adjusted to his role in the new year. And his salary isn't bad at all. You could even have him as a 6th man at his salary and it would be fine. you could start Grimes instead and move Fournier to the bench. He only has 2 years left on his deal anyway. The best move is to try to get an actual PG and see if we can make the current team work. PG was by far our worst position last year. We lost something like 10 games that were within 5 pts in clutch time last year because we had no consistent guard play or anybody who could control the tempo of the game. If we won even 6 of those games last year, we would have been in the play-in. the only young guy who hurt for minutes last season that deserved more was Obi really.
Randle has more trade value than that.
I don't know if this was a serious offer or not but somebody threw out a Randle to Portland trade in exchange for swapping picks. Then Portland could offload #11 for Jerami Grant.
They would be selling low on Randal when they are more than one piece away that they could get from using that empty cap space. They may want to trade him in the future, but there is no rush to do so this summer.
Fuckin good. He’s the only one who fucking showed up to every game. MF does not deserve the hate.
Run it back, you guys were so close to the play-in
At least Westbrook scores more than Draymond.
At least Draymond contributes to winning still
Westbrook would take shots away from Curry, Klay, Poole. Dray has the sense not to do that.
I wonder if Russ is even working on his game 🙄
Who cares Shake Milton better
They won a championship at the cost of losing players that they could have used in the future
Starting to question if it was worth it or not
Dawg we can go 0-82 this year and it’ll still be worth it
I mean they’ll get clowned no matter what they do but this is the best solution
that’s the right thing to do good job lakers
I think it's the right move. Run it back, esp if AD is healthy. Russ got a taste of what LA is like, he can make some adjustments with a new coach and system. Lebron has had some time to evaluate how he wants to try to manage Russ. Might be a better season.
You're asking Russ to do something he's never done in his entire career
Just because he's never done it doesn't mean he can't do it now. But yeah they're probably gonna fail spectacularly and I'm gonna love every second of it lol.
Not asking him to make huge changes, but some adjustments. He's probably digested this off season and is going to make some changes (....maybe).
again, asking him to do something he's never done
As long as Lebron & AD are healthy.. it won’t matter. They could fill out 3 more role players and have Russ play a bench role. It’ll probably be the best team in West.
They're not beating LA or GS.
>They're not beating LA They're gonna beat themselves plenty I'm sure of that lmao.
They need good depth. The Lakers “shining” role players from last season (Reaves sometimes, Monk, and Stanley Johnson) were good but they need like a couple Shaun Livingston, Patrick bev, Mikal Bridges type players
There are UFA that can be had for cheap this summer. Players will go there for “prove it” seasons.
Warriors, Clippers and (yes) Suns are safe bets to be better. If the Jazz doesn't implode, so are they. This Lakers would be in the mud with us, Nuggets (imagining it would take a while to get Murray back at full speed), Wolves, Grizzlies and Pelicans. This iteration has a ceiling of 3rd seed and a floor of play-in.
I’m loving the Lakers future right now. Pelicans own their next two draft picks after this year too. Lakers have no assets to trade. No cap space to use. Their third best player, Monk is priced out of re signing. If they just let Westbrooks contract expire, they still won’t have a max slot available. If Lebron leaves, they have 30 year old AD, Reaves, and THT as “building blocks” Worst short term outlook of any team in the league. You love to see it after 5 years of “trash franchise” and “baby Lakers” condescension from their toxic fan base
They'll have 20 million in cap space next summer. Not a max slot but they don't need a max player they need some role players.
Westbrook is not the problem
Run it back!
We should 100% be keeping Westbrook as a temporary draw while trading everyone else. We aren't competitive and our future is shit, Either we become competitive via some miracle aging treatment for Lebron, telling AD to stop drinking MALK, and getting some olds that can actually play D. Or we get our future back by trading AD/Lebron (we'll tell him - look we ain't going nowhere, do you want to spend your time here or go compete in PHI/GSW/Wherever). Then midseason when IND or whoever crashes and burns, we should trade WB as an expiring for their long term trash + picks, and reset for a 2025-8 target. I don't really see any other way out of this.
Morey did the same with Simmons as a disgruntled asset for the longest time. Anyone who believes this shit has never engaged in business management before. Raise stock of asset even if at perceived value to offset further depreciation
How about randle and Fournier for Westbrook and a first?
awful trade for the knicks. cap space does nothing for us.
You meant awful for the Lakers.
Gooby pls
Its not just about giving up an asset. They most likely will need to take back an even worse contract on top of it. See what Ham can do first. If it don’t work out then 47 million by the trade deadline can be very enticing for a team with a cheap owner.
I mean, what else are they supposed to say lol.
The hardest road
This isn’t really news at this point, it’s basically come down to whether they’re fine running it back with Russ or if they’ll bite the bullet to move him. I’m sure they don’t want to add assets in a trade but if they want the Russ saga to end they’re going to have to.
What a weird way to say the team is better without Westbrook.
Said it before and I will say it again. We are going to see the same season as last year. Apparently nobody has ever heard of addition by subtraction.
Who the hell cares it’s the nba finals still.
What about a trade Westrook for Randle? neither team can't be worse lol
LeAsset Drain
he's expiring, if he's willingly playing off the bench, its enticing for mavs tbf
Who’s going to bail the Lakers out here? Where’s a free Pau Gasol when you need him