2022-23 Team Developments: News / Trades / Free Agents / Rumors

Rob has posters on his wall of Hield. Like I've said, I've never seen an exec this enamored with a meh player. You would think this is Steph Curry or another all time elite shooter. He's tried to get him at least four times since last summer. That's nearly a fireable offense by itself.

I'm giving a first + asset for Turner. Then a first to satisfy Rob for a year and to come off Russ who I don't think we can allow in the gym come training camp. There's definitely a Laker tax here, but that's nothing new.

That's not my preference. I'd rather move a 1st to Indy and maybe a couple 2nds. Then save the other first for a THT trade to get us some additional depth elsewhere. But for the sake of this thought exercise, I'm dumping them both with as much protection as I can put on at least one of them.

 

I'm not gonna argue that. Hield does have a better track record than Monk but Monk moving forward should be at this level. He has all the talent and is cost effective. Hield would be an adequate replacement while getting rid of some bad/negative parts and creating better roster balance.

An Irving deal will always be my first choice but Hield would be a solid pivot if we plan on giving the Lebron/AD duo another year.

THT might eventually have some value but it's hard to see it with this roster. He is a neutral to slight positive defender and a terrible offensive player. He is a poor shooter and has a bad case of tunnel vision.

As for Kuzma, it'd be nice to have him due of our lack of wings but at this point he is still the same guy he was in LA. He just increased his usage due to the Wizards having limited talent. While he always shows flashes the fact remains he's been a negative player (both sides) every year of his career. I'd hardly count him as a significant loss for a good team.

 

just don't see a fair deal for us involving only hield returning.

he's also 21 and hasn't really gotten a chance to develop like other young players do. i don't think he'll be a terrible offensive player in new situation. not at all, actually.

it's a significant loss when you realize you can't replace him at his cost without downgrading. and i agree he's the same guy in washington that he was here. but he looked worse here. washington could trade him for more now than we could when we moved him.

THT will be the same.

 

Make the trade already

 

One thing I'll say is that the pressure of playing in LA and being Lebron's teammate is another kind of animal. Those younger players play more loosely and free in low expectation situations.

On paper, I think Hield would be a great addition but it's also possible that he can be overwhelmed and start shooting worse than expected in LA. He's only known low expectation situations through out his career as he hasn't sniffed the playoffs. That would be a move not without risk but as currently constructed I'd be on board with it as our options are limited in putting logical pieces around LeBron/AD.

 

i really think we would have made the kyrie trade already if bkn would take any offer we had.

 

on board with what, though?

THT/nunn/1st for hield (which still requires some cap tricks)?

now you're out a 1st and out your other two ballhandlers aside from russ and lebron (unless you count lonnie?). meanwhile, you're back where we were last year with eleventy sgs. if turner's coming or russ is going and nunn isn't, i understand it more. but i just can't figure out a deal for just hield that i like.

 

I think the Nets are definitely the hold up.

 

absolutely. and our talks with indy and whomever are to try to put pressure on the nets, too, imo. irving's the one we want. it's very lakers.

 

Russ/THT/ negotiate 2nd rounders and if not possible one 1st is as far as I'd go. It's important for Pelinka to negotiate the draft compensation.

for Hield and Filler.

Pacers have room to absorb salary.

Edit: Filler can be maybe McConnell and/or Nesmith

Bear with me.. Run it back with Schroder??

Schroder/Nunn/McConnell
Hield/Reaves/Brown
Lebron/Walker/Anderson
AD/Johnson/Gabriel
Jones/Bryant

 

I get it from the Nets perspective on being reluctant to take on Westbrook. They won’t keep him and end up buying him out, and he makes $10 million more than Kyrie. This is magnified by the Nets being a luxury tax team, that extra $10 mil will be like $30 mil in luxury tax.

From a financial standpoint, the Nets might be better off negotiating a buy out with Kyrie than taking on Westbrook, it would cost them less if the deal was straight up.

In a way, I can comprehend why they feel 1 draft pick isn’t worth it because it’ll basically cost them a extra $30 mil in tax on top of the Westbrook buyout cost (call it another $40 million). That’s a lot of money for 1 draft pick, I don’t care how rich a owner is.

I think it’s fair for both sides that if we need to include our 2 picks, we get both Harris/Curry and the Nets get THT/Nunn.

The Nets will shave off $2 million from their salary cap based on that package, plus they “get off” Harris’ contract for next season. However, I kind of also get it if the Nets just like Harris as being part of the organization and prefer to keep him. He seems like a good, no drama, starting caliber role player who is automatic from 3. You can plug a guy like this onto any team, including a rebuild.

This is a long way of saying….. the Lakers may actually end up punting on next season and using their cap space for next summer instead to go for one final run with Lebron at age 39.

This season is going to suck if that’s the case.

We will have super disgruntled Westbrook, AD who can miss time at any moment, and Lebron a year older. We will have Lonnie Walker instead of Monk. We have gotten more athletic, defensive (sort of) with our other minimum signings, and we are likely just as bad a 3 point shooting team as last year

Thanks Rob/Klutch/whoever had ANY part of the Westbrook deal. The deal was basically a “all in” play that ended up being a bust, and the cost is 2 years of misery.

 

picks are all bkn could possibly get for kyrie, so of course they want as many as possible (again, i think they're not just asking for our two--they want us to go get more). but we can also just say no.

i get that everyone's mad about the russ trade being such a bust. maybe nobody's madder than me. but doubling down on it could end the franchise. it's possible that other teams' high asking prices are saving us from ourselves right now.

 

BRK can get rid of Kyrie, get some picks and still not take on Westbrook. Like with what is (allegedly) being proposed now is sending BRK LA's 2027 FRP along with 2 SRPs and THT and Pacers receive LA's 2029 FRP and Westbrook
Lakers get Kyrie and Buddy. - this is what's predicted by CBS Sports Sam Quinn so who knows but it certainly serves our purposes including keeping Nunn as backup.

 

The only thing that could be better is somehow to direct Westbrook and Draymond Green both to Boston with KD too.

 

How many Other NBA players who have scored 40 points in a game before the age of 22 can we label as a “terrible offensive player?”
He may be a bad fit alongside LeBron and The Worst black hole of a PG the Lakers ever traded for, but the kid is definitely not basura.

 

I think people make comments like that when the pay does not equal results.

 

This isn’t how birds rights work. They carry a cap hold so they can’t be abused like in your example.

The 45m in contracts we’d have would also have to include another 75m in Turner and Lebron’s cap holds. So you’d only have 13m in space to offer anyone (less than that because I assume they’ll resign Reaves).

 

i really don't think bkn "doesn't want to take on westbrook". the word is they want to win, which makes sense as they don't control their own picks for like...ever (that harden trade was awful coming and going btw--just awful, we need to keep that in mind with westbrook). but nobody is offering them good players for irving like they are for durant.

i think the "nobody wants to pay westbrook" think is a negotiating tactic more than anything. he's an expiring contract and teams buy guys out all the time (especially bad teams).

quinn's idea works for indy, i think (they are paid a first to rent their space for a year), but bkn is surely demanding more than a single first for kyrie. just feel like if the price for irving was a single first, this would be done already.

yeah, i didn't engage on that point fully because advanced stats suggest THT is like, the worst offensive player ever. but this is a case where my eyes say that's just really far from the truth. he was hurt for a while and was given a weird/bad role. i mean, why invest that money if you're going to bring in a high usage veteran with the same flaw profile who's going to eat up 35mpg? my god that trade was nuts.

i think his argument was that with space, you don't need bird rights (in fact, they work against you). the order of the signings matter, but teams routinely do this (it's what happened in philly this year, albeit in a slightly modified version). the part of jsm's plan that didn't make sense to me was that we'd just magically get off all of hield's money after having given up 2 1sts to get turner/hield. it would take another 1st, and we're the lakers, so teams would hold our offseason hostage if the plan required offloading money.

if you could strip the roster down to AD and our minimums/holds (stan, reaves, christie, jones, etc.)--which is possible--you have maybe 75 million to split among the 3 of lebron/turner/irving. irving's young and will want his max. turner could go for a lot if he had a good year, but let's be conservative and say 20 per (roughly his current rate). that only leave about what, 10 million for lebron?

i don't think it can happen.