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

Nooooooooooooo!

 

Apparently there were some delusional folks in the organization who thought if things went south for the Thunder, we could go after SGA.

Aside from the 3 star model not working, this is an example of why I'm so against us chasing that path. We don't seem to understand what it takes to get a star player. If we keep underestimating their value at the cost of putting together a team that gives Bron and AD a chance, we're going to end up missing any and all windows in pursuit of this great white buffalo we have no way of obtaining.

Dame and Beal two summers ago. Mitchell this off-season. The Bulls duo and Beal during the off-season/early part of the season. Now word comes out of SGA. We don't have the assets. Not even close. It's a colossal waste of time.

 

Again...barring injury...when has the 3 star model not worked? This take keeps getting parroted about as if it's a fact...it most definitely is NOT some kind of fact, as a matter of fact, most chips have been won with a 3 star model since KG, Pierce and Allen. Yeah if one of the 3 gets hurt, it hasn't worked, but that isn't some kind of definitive declaration...the two star model doesn't work if one of the stars are hurt either.


FWIW...The media " insiders" haven't correctly predicted one single trade all season, going back to the summer. The trades that have occurred all caught them off guard, if we make one, it most likely won't be anything mentioned so far.

 

Russel is young and overrated, Lowry is old, fat and on a 3 year 85 million dollar contract. Rozier...meh he's youngish, but he's shooting 38% from the field on 20 attempts per game with 29% from 3. I'm not sure that is worth 4 years and 95 million.

keep Russ...hope Dennis plays well and dump Bev/Nunn for whatever we can get. Best move I can think of unless Kyrie is on the table. This hypothetical Russ playoff strategy...when exactly did Russ lack of shooting cost his team the series? He's shot 40 and 30 all of his career. It should be easy to point out these playoff series, where his shooting was the most important factor in his team's loss. Folks love to throw that out there, while totally ignoring all those double digit dimes/reb games in those very same series, as if they somehow don't count.

 

Don't be that guy that over exaggerates the truth to get his point across, especially writing in "delusional". Every front office has a dream player they want but they know it's not going to happen, so they put it out there just to show interest if that team ever decides to do something with said player, then they at least know the Lakers are interested. It's nothing more then that and we are not putting off trades or making decisons on other players cause we think we can get him.

Now barring injury the 3 star model can work and has worked in the past but injury and luck can also factor in too. Boston and Miami had very successful 3 star teams that at the very least won a ring and made multiple finals. It can and has worked in the past and it can work in the future. At this very moment, it seems we have the best player in the league in AD so our best trade is to get rid of Nunn/Beverly/Jones and keep Russ. That may change but i like the way Russ has been giving AD the ball and playing off him. WHen Lebron is sitting this maybe our best way to get to have success in the playoffs. Lebron is still playing hurt and he may not be 100% come the playoffs, so he may have to sit more then he wants and Russ would help in getting AD the ball.

 

Sure, every team has that guy written on their board. I just listed five in the past two years. It's the entire "3rd star" model we refuse to give up on. If that is not the text book definition of delusional, I don't know what is. We. Do. Not. Have. The. Assets. To. Get. A. Top. 20. Player.

Just for context, one of the above names I listed who we thought we could get in the hunt for went for the following: Collin Sexton, Lauri Markkanen, Ochai Agbaji (14th pick), three unprotected first-round picks in 2025, 2027 and 2029, and two pick swaps in 2026 and 2028.

That's two young, good starters under 25, essentially 4 1sts and two swaps. They control the Cavs drafts for the back half of the decade.

Look at our war chest. You're not getting a meeting. Not a FaceTime. Nothing.

Can under rare circumstances. Boston was a failure. To only get one ring from 4 hall of Famers when you're the second most storied franchise in the NBA is a failure. It's partly that Doc is one of the most overrated coaches in the modern era and part PP being one of the most overrated wings in the 00s. Still a failure when measured against expectations.

Your other example was when statistically the best player ever was in his prime. Need i go on?

I'll even include another example for you. GS with KD. That is a rare example because they bought that team and had a luxury tax of elevendy billion dollars.

A broad statement of it doesn't work is fair when the counter is a few of the rarest cases in the league over the past 15 years. If you have 30 teams and 15 years of data, you have 450 cases. I'll take my conclusion and the Vegas numbers.

 

I wonder which geniuses in the FO are still pushing for the third star? Inquiring minds want to know!

 

I actually still look back at that Mitchell trade as something that actually gives me hope for our “war chest”.

The core of that Mitchell trade package IMO was the 3 unprotected FRP (including 2027 and 2029). We can currently offer 2/3 of that.

I really don’t think the Jazz put much value on the players themselves. I STILL don’t think Sexton is very good, and would NOT want him on his current contract unless I was a tanking team where it didn’t matter. Markkanen has been amazing, but that’s been a shock to most from what I can tell, as he hadn’t looked that great in the past few years. Maybe Ainge had a different outlook, but I really don’t think he was seen as a franchise player type of building block.

Overall, I agree with the notion of not reading too much into these types of reports. Some source telling Amick that the team brought up the pipe dream of Shai isn’t enough proof to me that they’re actually stuck on the three-star model. The fact that we HAVEN’T made any moves and seem to be conservative with our assets actually suggests the opposite to me. Maybe I’m wrong and that’s because the FO is foolishly preserving their assets in desperate hope for a home run trade, but that’s really not the vibe I get.

I wasn’t really trying to get into this argument though, seeing you being up the package that got traded for Mitchell actually brought to mind a question I’ve been meaning to ask: I know currently we can only trade the 2027 and 2029 FRPs but what is the situation with pick swaps? Not that I’m advocating to build a package with them, I’m just curious what years we’d be allowed to trade pick swaps for or if there any restrictions with that? Anyone know the rules around this?

 

I agree, but that's the difference in value in terms of players. They can and likely will flip those guys for even more picks as Ainge tries to go the OKC route in Utah. You can't really flip an expiring for a higher value than you paid for them and if we included any of our kids, they're not established enough to have much flip value.

I don't think that route is leading the way. It seems we're leaning more towards flipping Bev and Nunn at least for now. But there is clearly someone with a loud voice at the table in the FO who cannot move on from this 3 star idea. It's not just this report. It's this plus the last one and the one before that and the one before that. If there's enough smoke coming from different places, there's usually fire.


Regarding the swaps, there are not any restrictions that I have seen. I do wonder if a team tried to include a massive number of swaps, if the league would intervene. You can only trade picks up to 7 years out, but can you swap the next 12? I'd be curious on that one.

 

I'm running every trade through that microscope and asking that question, is it better than the version of Russ that we have now? Because in a lot of cases it isn't. But also I am torn between possibly getting someone's bird rights (Turner/Hield) who can go on this couple-year run with LBJ and AD or keeping Westbrook who will probably walk on our low-ball offer this off-season anyways. Or some other combo like Turner with 1 FRP and some killer 3 & D wing with the other.

And as good as Russ looks, the reality is he is still giving us 38% overall and 29% from 3 since AD's run started. 0.55 blocks and 0.37 steals is nothing to get excited about either. His 9 assists since this run began is great but with Russ you must balance everything including 3.5 turnovers on a 26.8 minute average despite his recent carefulness with the ball. He is burning 13 attempts per game. By comparison the Joker gives over 23 points on 13 attempts. Russ gives 13 points on 13 FGA. Austin Reaves for instance would give us 22+pts on 13 FGA with his attempts/points ratio. This is the best we will ever get from Russ. If those numbers dip a bit in the playoffs it's not such a good option is it?

 

I really hate when anyone says our players are garbage and so on when NBA history has shown us lesser players plus picks has sometimes gotten a star in return. We had garbage and got Gasol which is what those picks are for. We did the same with the Kareem trade. The problem is not the players or picks we have it's that fact that other then maybe Dame (possibly in a few months) or Kyrie there is no other 3rd star available or any player available that's considered a 3rd star for us to go after.

I gave 2 examples but c'mon man, Boston was not a failure for god's sake. Garnett was at the end of his prime and so was Allen and they still got their ring plus a chance at another one before they ran into the other big 3 and a in prime Lebron but by then Garnet, Allen and Peirce were past their prime and ROndo was the only star keeping it all together. MAKE NO MISTAKE, WINNING A RING AND MAKING THE FINALS 2 OUT OF 3 YEARS IS NOT A FAILURE. WTF logic is that?

Bulls got 3 rings from their big 3 (Rodman, Pippen, Jordan), Spurs got 3 rings from their big 3 (Parker Ginobli, Duncan...the 99 title was a big 2 and their 15 title was Leonard plus a really past their prime big 3), Lakers other big 3 got 3 titles (WOrthy, Magic, Kareem), Boston got 3 from their big 3 (Mchale, Parish and Bird) and Cleveland got a big 3 and won a ring (Lebron, Love, Kyrie)....there's more but if done right and with some luck, 3 stars can win a ring and usually it's an easy ride all the to the title.

 

I don't know....Turner can be a walking injury and the more i see him the more he looks winded by the end of games. He's just so inconsistant coming off last season's injury, i just don't want another player to worry if their body will hold up for a whole season. Buddy is a great shooter and terrible at everything else. The guy can shoot 3's but his defense is so bad that we will be worrying about the guy he's guarding getting 30 a game in the playoffs. As we all know for some reason when any good 3 point shooter comes to LA they always seem to lose their 3 pt touch. Buddys shooting 37% for 3 so far and if he comes to us he'll lose a couple of percentage point and i don't want him if hes shooting 35% from 3 along with his awful defense. They are not worth the picks but they are worth other players, especially since 1 is on a bad contact and the other is a free agent. I beleive after the 15th we will have more options available.

 

Is that SO different to trading Reaves, Lonnie Walker, Christie, two firsts and two swaps? We’re missing a first.

I wouldn’t trade all that as I don’t want a three star model personally. I’d much prefer to go for a 3&D wing. But it’s not like we don’t have any assets.

 

Based on that metric alone, Russ would grade out as a non NBA player. He isn’t a great shooter. And by the end of the season we should expect a FG of about 45% and 3pt% at about 30%.

But AD will have a career year alongside him. And we’ll also have one of the best benches in the league. That’s where he generates value for our team. His playmaking and the way he raises the level of our bench.

 

And we need to pay 47 million, some of that going into the repeater tax. Moving him for a few good players with bird rights is something we can not do come this off-season. This is a time to make our roster competitive and it does not need to be too far into a tax team either.

 

I’m happy to pay 47m if AD has a career year and our bench takes up the slack so Lebron gets healthy.

Also I’m not rating a lot of these packages. I think they were only appealing from the lens of Russ being a negative player. Now a lot of these players are the negative ones and aren’t having good seasons.

I remember debating abeer about my belief that Russ would return to a decent level and last year was an outlier. From that view, Russ might be the most impactful player in every one of these trades.

 

helljumper beat me to my full response to this stuff, but i agree with all his points.

1. "lakerz r dumb" is great clickbait. i can imagine many contexts where SGA's name comes up as a for instance. running to okc and being like "lakers said they were comin' for your boy" so you can all have a laugh is some seriously stupid s***. how many teams had AD on their wish list this year before the season? how many savvy laker fans wanted to make their wish come true? of course if there was a piece about the sixers planning to go after AD using tobias harris, it would be framed as that wily genius morey thinking outside the box! that guy really goes for it! go big or go home! he's all about the championships he's never won!

2. also agree that the mitchell trade is a great example of a young star going for basically what we have. rewriting that trade as if sexton (whom nobody wanted as a FA) and markannen (who has been traded thrice in 4 years or whatever) were the headliners is disingenuous. everybody knows it was about the picks, which is why you don't use them for turner/hield.

real question: if simply ignoring russ is the royal road to 100% victory then why would it only be employed in the playoffs? it's not like it's a taxing or complicated strategy. if it works that well, we should be 0-21 right now.

you'd be buying low on rozier. he's shot 37% or greater from three for 5 of the past 6 years. he's just been thrust into a starring role on a very, very bad team. if we can get him, we should, imo. i wish his contract was one year shorter, though. i'm not giving up a 1st for him, but for expirings and 2nds, i'm in.

i'm out on lowry (miami should have called me over the summer), and i don't think russell is even an option (not that i'd take it, tbh--i watched the playoffs last year and his entire stint with us and saw the exact same dude).

finally, i agree with jsm re: 3 stars. yes, on the rare occasion you get three stars in their prime at the same time, it can work. but nobody's ever won with three stars and a roster full of vet mins as we've been attempting (and this is ignoring that two of our stars are years past their primes). even the heat weren't constructed that way. the successful three star teams had some reasonably expensive/talented players behind them who had some years of experience playing together. the frankenstein/vet min three star approach has never worked once.

that said, to me, our reluctance to move our future picks is about hoping to have two stars, post-lebron, not three stars now.