D'Angelo Russell Discussion: Adopting A Professional Attitude

That's fine, but the fact that we're in there throwing some value into the mix means other teams have to raise their price. The worst case scenario is everybody is scared off by the lack of commitment and he walks to a team like Boston without having to give up anything of value. If we're in the mix (with all the smoke surrounding him wanting to be in LA), then other teams must up their bid to get him. If he walks to Boston for just the Brooklyn picks, then we're out of the picture probably for Westbrook for the future. A chance to play in the cakewalk East with Horford, Thomas, and room to add more on top of more money in a biggish media market? He likely stays. If we force Boston's hand and make them give up those assets you're talking about, then we still keep our guys and we take our chances in FA.

 

I just don't see the sense in trading any of our young core for Westbrook right now, and I really like him as a player. Westbrook is a force in the league. He will continue to be for the next 4 or so years. But he won't get us a championship alone, and especially won't get us a championship while GS in in the same division.

This is about timing to me. The team is young. We need to be peaking just after GS starts to decline. We have the perfect setup to do exactly that if we keep our young core, but if we trade for Westbrook, he will probably start declining around the same time Curry and Durant start declining. No thanks.

IMO, we need to focus on having a well oiled machine with young players that developed together, led by a young progressive coach, that is on the rise right when GS is starting to falter. Westbrook would not help that plan.

 

That means we wait 5 years for a group of youngsters who might never be enough to win a Championship. I love our young group and I see all the potential in the world with them, but it's entirely possible they win nothing and we wait 5 years to figure that out. Then we're stuck in no man's land waiting for our next savior to come through the draft.

I'd rather expedite that process if I can. Westbrook may never win a title alone, but nobody ever does. We'd have a decently competitive team and while he declines our youngsters improve. It's difficult to say how long Golden State will last. I'd rather be competitive right away than wait for half a decade to find out we aren't good enough. There's many teams that are in that spot and have been in that spot for years... Atlanta, Indiana, Phoenix was there, Toronto is there, the Clippers are there... Houston was there, now I don't know where they'll be. I understand the opinion isn't a popular one though.

 

So your trade scenario for Westbrook to Boston doesn't include Thomas going to OKC? Yeah I don't see how that's possible, OKC would be morons to give up a top 5 player and not even get a 2nd tier all-star.

As for waiting on our youth to develop vs shipping them off for a Westbrook rental, patience is key here, perspective is key here. What if the Warrior had been impatient and traded us Klay and Barnes for Dwight? No title. What if OKC had been impatient and traded young Durant and Westbrook for Chris Paul or some bigger name? No Finals, no multiple WCF. I'm of the mindset that you don't give away or break up something potentially special that is brewing for even a top 5 player until you see what you actually have, or you may REALLY regret it in 5 years. Only players like Kobe in his prime and LeBron are worthy of giving up everything you have for, because they are franchise changers.

 

1. Westbrook for Russell [OK with it] - not happening realistically...will not be enough for OKC...Presti laughing his behind off.
2. Westbrook for Russell/Randle [OK with it but not thrilled] - not happening realistically...still will not be enough for OKC [see #1]
3. Westbrook for Russell/Randle/Ingram [f**k no!] - definitely not happening realistically...OKC might give us a look...happens Lakers screwed.
4. Westbrook not traded during regular season - realistic [the lone fan and FA draw for OKC so Presti hangs on...alpha dog has point to prove]
5. Westbrook traded to some desperate team - possible [if he indicates he does not want to stay there but I the get feeling he will...]
6. Westbrook opts out - possible [signs with Lakers]...trade Russell for a SG, draft picks, whatever in return like value. BEST scenario...

I'm not against trading for Westbrook whom I like yet we have to do our due diligence to gauge what kind of offer it will take [delusional, maybe, hell yes]... I'd rather grow ours then see if any potential "superstar" would want to come in and lead once they collectively serve notice. If I had my druthers, Lakers sit out the Westbrook sweepstakes and go after Paul George...

PG - Russell
SG - Twiggy
SF - George
PF - Randle
C - Zulander

6th man - Clarkson...
...Nance Jr.

 

Well in those cases you mentioned, maybe I'm misremembering this but didn't WE turn down that Klay/Barnes deal? Also I believe it was only a year or two ago Love for Klay was mentioned and almost done until some higher ups nixed the deal.

In my trade scenario everyone is scared off by Westbrook's lack of commitment to the future. When that happens, his trade value plummets, and somebody could sneak in there with a cheaper offer. That's WHY @abeer3 and I are talking about this deal. You push the deal forward and make sure Westbrook's value is protected. If we get him for just 2 of our now 6-7 young assets then I don't see that as a loss. I don't even see that as giving up our future. I see that as a necessary gamble. Besides, if someone beats the offer of Russell/Randle, it means that team has given up real assets to get Westbrook. Isn't that what we want? All of this "we shouldn't even entertain the trade" talk means we're not even willing to admit that it's likely D'Angelo never achieves the heights Westbrook has achieved?

I'm all for growing the youth, but that doesn't mean letting great talent pass us by without looking and seeing what the cost would be. That's crazy to me. I'm okay with building the youth program, but don't you agree it's entirely possible these kids amount to a 2nd round exit for a few years and that's it? If we can do better than that, we should. I don't think Russell/Randle guts the team when Westbrook would replace Russell and Nance Jr. can start in Randle's place. You lose some talent sure, but you just got a Top 5 player along with our solid veterans and you still have Clarkson, Nance Jr., Ingram, Zubac, and maybe include Tarik Black in there. I mean there's still plenty of youth movement there to grow with and the team gets better.

If that offer isn't enough, then fine let's go to FA and convince him to just sign here. I'd love if we could do that. I don't think it's likely he joins a 30 win team when he can join some 50 win team, but I'd rather do that then gut the team. I'm not trying to be NY, but I'm also not trying to be Orlando or Denver or even Toronto either.

 

Not how I remember it. I remember the Warriors refusing to part with Klay in any trade, and they were right. And this was when he was like a 16/17 PPG guy, a pretty good player, before the crazy shooting and scoring outbursts.

See, this is where we part ways, and we aren't going to agree, and that's fine. Yes, I am scared off by Westbrook's lack of commitment, it really is that simple. If he were on a 3 year deal, I'd trade Russ and Randle for him in a second. But he's not. I'm not trading 2 players that good for a one season rental. If in your scenario, you want to gamble on trading for Westbrook for 2 of our core, maybe the best 2, weakening our roster, and you think Westbrook is then more likely to re-sign here? Yet you don't think he is willing to join this roster at full strength not weakened or gutted at all in the offseason? This is where we go in different directions. I can't get into your mode of thinking here, I can't see this through your eyes, I just can't ha ha. And that's fine, we'll have to agree to disagree. I'm not saying at all that Russ is ever going to be reach Westbrook's level, I'm saying I don't trade him for Westbrook without a guarantee Westbrook stays. Give me that guarantee, and I'll pack Russ' bags and drive him to the airport.

 

I'm with Weezy. This also doesn't address our ability to get better from there. With Russ and Randle gone, you have to hope Clarkson and Ingram become stars...quickly. Because we just used up over 30 million in cap space to sign Deng and Mozgov, we would be able to sign one player next offseason after Westbrook's extention, but not a max player. So we are stuck with a team of Mozgov, Deng, Ingram, Clarkson and Westbrook. We have Nance, Zubac and Black and Lou as reserves? There is no player we could sign next offseason with the amount of extra space we have that would put that team in the title hunt. And we'd be capped out for the foreseeable future.

 

Yes I think he's more willing to re-sign here without Russell and Randle than with them on the roster because a) he'd be here so he'd understand the type of culture we're building and how he can be a part of it, b) we'd be able to offer that 5th year worth stupid amounts of money (or the 7.5% raise for two years however he wants to play it), and lastly c) nobody else would get that head start.

If you were him, would you join a 30 win team full of teenagers and young 20 year olds who won 30 games? Or would you stay in Boston where you've got Al Horford and a weak Eastern Conference plus the money? I'd stay in Boston if I were him on a two year deal probably and then revisit FA maybe when I get my mega-full-size max.

Yeah I guess we just separate on the risk. I'm willing to risk it because I think there's still plenty of young core left and at that point I'm not sure he leaves. I'm leaning on Luke and on our youngsters to be attractive enough to keep him around. All in all though my real thought would be to wait until the deadline. I'm not sure Westbrook lasts that long, but by the trade deadline we at least know more about our young core. I'm as high on them as almost anybody, but just because they're mowing down SL competition doesn't mean we'll see that translate to the NBA. I mean look at the last two years with Kyle Anderson being a monster Summer Leaguer.

The same way you feel about weakening the team is how I feel about people thinking we have a shot at him in FA. I mean really after three years of utter disappointment, you'd think the fanbase would expect differently. We're not an attractive FA destination right now, but most players seem to love playing in LA. Davis wanted to stay, Bazemore wanted to stay, Thomas wanted to come here. The only one to truly spurn us was Howard and I think he's an anomaly. The rest we weren't going to get in FA and our pitches were increasingly embarrassing until Durant wouldn't even give us a chance. Not just him but Whiteside and Horford too. I mean s*** what's to stop Westbrook from being the same way?

 

I think Westbrook is mentally a Kobe, not a Durant or LeBron. So in that sense, yes I do think he would be interested in joining the Lakers if the young guys impress this season, because he's so cocky he thinks he can win with anyone. I think unlike DeRozan, the challenge of bringing the Lakers back from the dead wound be appealing to him. I don't see him as a guy to bolt for the East and take the easy path. He's played the Kobe role before when Durant went down, he excelled and played at an MVP level. I just can't risk maybe our 2 best young pieces for a rental, I would need a guarantee. If he wants to be a Laker, he can be. If he gets traded to the C Bags and then stays there, well then I'm glad we never got him and he's another Paul Pierce traitor to LA.

 

But we all thought that about Durant too! For a long time everyone figured Durant would love LA, but he's not that guy. We've seen Russell for about 8 years and I agree that he's got a different mentality, but we just can't assume he'd be so different that he'd come here to a team that's not competitive. If we were competitive the last three years, we'd at least have gotten meetings with teams. I maintain that the C Bags really weren't/aren't that far ahead of us. The fact that they got Horford was due entirely to their record and not their team. Their roster of misfits sucks compared to ours, but playing in the East is so damn easy right now that they're winning 50 games. Honestly if you put that team in the West they're not making the playoffs. If you put the Jazz in the East they probably are in the playoffs. I'd love to believe Westbrook wants to be that guy, but three years in a row of not just failure, but embarrassing failure has me jaded. In order to lure Westbrook we'd have to probably win 40 games and I'm not sure we've got that right now. I hope we do, but I don't think we do.

And I really don't want him in Boston because he'd make them immediately a very good team out East and he'd probably stay there to be competitive with LeBron. I really don't want to think about one of my favorite non-Lakers in a C bag jersey, but if we forced the C Bags to part with some good pieces to make this trade happen then I'd live with it. We can't force that unless we enter the conversation though!

 

I never thought that about Durant, never thought we were getting him. He took a backseat to Westbrook at times and didn't demand the ball, he let LeBron own him in head to head matchups while Westbrook went off for crazy finals games. He has no ties to LA, from DC, college at Texas. Westbrook is from here, he worked his tail off to become the player he is compare to the player he was at UCLA, similar to Kobe who worked to get everything he has like no other. I just think if there is any star we have a shot at became of his mentality, ties to LA, it's Westbrook. He would be the instant king of LA here, he would be celebrated to unbelievable levels, even more than Durant because again, he has the Kobe mentality, and we love that. I don't know if it happens, but I roll the dice on it over a trade, just my stance.

 

No reason to trade. None.

 

You are you, but there were (and now are) millions of Laker fans that think differently including possibly Mitch and Jim which is really disconcerting. Personally I think if we let it get to FA, he's not coming here and we're 100% going forward with the young kids. I'm okay with that, but not ecstatic about it. I understand the Warriors have a great lineup on paper, but I'd still rather be competitive asap.

Whatever though. I find it doubtful anything happens and I'm more than happy to watch the young guys grow. If he ends up a C bag and goes on to lead them to the Finals, that thumping sound you'll hear is my brain being beaten into a wall somewhere.

 

I've outlined at least a few reasons.

 

Nope there's none... none I say