Russell Westbrick Discussion: Clipper Gonna Clip

can we do a sign and trade with him at the end of the year if he isn't in our long term plans?

 

yes. assuming he finds a place that wants him at a price we can facilitate. we've got more options than people think, imo.

 

That's unfair. AD was the first to get the ball, but then we saw an opportunity to move the ball. Ham didn't call it, AD got rid of the ball and then we passed it around. After Russ we had 2 guys alone behind the basket, so it could have paid off.
I would have prefer AD to hold it but it's on him to pass it and set up the rest of the play.

 

I struggle to find which team would role the dice.
Maybe the Mavs? Pels? OKC? I don't see many options

 

yeah, it's more likely we keep him at around the MLE, tbh. throw a team option or partial guarantee on a 2 year deal, makes him very tradeable if things go south again. opens up ability to use full MLE to add one more useful player.

main point is that since he's not actively harming the team, it's not a war crime to not trade him. particularly if it's not going to bring back a real difference maker. flexibility is important, and the lack thereof has been our problem since we traded for russ.

 

Sign and trade him to Chicago for Caruso.

 

why would chi do that?

 

they wouldn't. moving him in a s&t would likely be a vehicle to take on unwanted long-term salary, just like trading him now would be. it's not very likely, but not impossible.

 

I know I’ll get called a Russ stan by LBVD but I’m not trading Russ if he is playing like this. He really super charges our bench with his playmaking.

 

Good table setting game with 15 dimes.

Sloppy with the turnovers, so was Bron...especially after such a clean Milwaukee game. And as a scorer, Russ was bad tonight.

 

He's a trick and treat player. Indiana disaster is followed by Milwaukee great game. Even in that game bricks two critical FTs.

He is what he is. Him coming off the bench narrows the range to make mistakes but Ham still trusts him way too much in 4th quarters. This is not to take away this is still a significant improvement where he was a straight negative across the board

 

Good dimes. Too sloppy again during that run when Washington got back in it.
Still trade.

 

i'm still open to moving him, but with each passing week, my asking price is going up.

 

again, depends on other factors? do we move bevs and nunn and add salary in the process? are they moved for a big or a wing, such that we need to have russ around as another ballhandler?

and once again, if russ warms to a bench role, who says we don't re-sign him next year?

let's just game it out a bit for fun. salary cap projected at 134, luxury tax apron at 167. lebron and AD make 87 combined. let's say you trade for a myles turner-level player using bevs/nunn/jones (or at least a 20-25 million dollar salary). call it 25.

you're at 112 without factoring in cap holds, which means you're sort of already about of the FA running. in an optimistic scenario, you hang onto lonnie and reaves' cap holds (i think about 11 million total). now you're basically limited to the MLE. if you just re-sign russ at mle numbers, you get him PLUS you can use the MLE because you technically never went under the cap. this gets jeanie out from under the repeater tax while turning russ from one big contract into two smaller contracts on rotation players (one being, ironically, russ himself).

now this is your team:

AD (42)
lebron (46)
player x (20-25)
russ (new deal starting at 10, team option or partial guarantee on year 2)
reaves (new deal starting at 8)
lonnie (new deal starting at 8 with player option on year 2--we could offer him up to 14 the following year using bird rights, think kcp)
full MLE player
christie
vet mins and BAE (maybe bring back bryant and brown)

that gives you six returning rotation-quality players at non-minimum salary slots, plus whomever we get to take the full MLE (feel like we can do well here or even split it up--perhaps use it to retain guys we like from this year in a worst-case scenario).

that's a much more balanced roster, and we might have retained our picks in doing so, too (depending on player x's identity).

anyway, a lot of ifs there, just trying to show one possibility.

 

For the 500th time...Russell Westbrook is not getting traded.

 

I use to think of trading Russ as an “all in/win now” move, whereas preserving assets and standing pat as a “long term/punt” move.

I’m not sure that’s the case anymore.

I get the idea that we don’t want his expiring contract to go to waste, but I think that’s a better alternative for our hopes for this current season than converting him into worse players (AND giving up draft compensation in the process).

For example, if the leverage has flipped and San Antonio calls us back up regarding a Richardson/McDermott for Russ trade, but now they’d GIVE us some second rounders instead of demanding a first from us … I’d still hang up the phone.

Sure on paper “shooting” and “wings” are some big needs currently, but those players don’t move the needle nearly enough in those areas to make up for the big hit we’d take to our playmaking. Even the Hield/Turner trade, with the way AD is playing I think the idea of another big man is going from a necessity to an expensive luxury. Does renting that luxury and paying FRPs make up for the loss of Russ? I’m not sure anymore.

Sure Russ still has his problems. There will inevitably be moments to come where he makes a boneheaded play leaving us extremely frustrated.

But his PG play has been elite for us. Sure he has an “out of control” style that will lead to turnovers, but for the most part it’s remained very effective for us. Feels like I’m each game there are some bursts where he starts pushing the pace, running the floor, finding players for easy buckets, and it gets the crowd going and changes the momentum.

He’s developing great chemistry with so many players. Getting rid of him would also come with a hit to the efficiency of everyone else. AD and Gabriel, for example, aren’t getting as many easy dunks and layups without Russ.

Let’s not forget, while trading for Russ in the first place was always a mistake, the idea for why we traded for him was still valid; we wanted a legit PG to take the playmaking burden off Lebron.

That doesn’t mean I’m NOT trading him, but the math has changed significantly. I’m not trading him just for the sake of trading him. And I’d prioritize getting back another playmaker in return for him.

For example, I’d be less interested in giving up 2 FRPs for Hield and Turner. More interested in giving up (at most) 1 FRP for an Utah package of Conley, Beasley, Gay or Charlotte package of Rozier, Oubre, Plumlee. Zero interest in a San Antonio package.

Overall, I think a Nunn/Bev/FRP package should hopefully be able to bring back an impact player in one of our areas of needs. And if we convert those useless players into a nice player and we keep the momentum rolling, shaking things up even further by trading Russ MAY very well be both unnecessary and risky.

 

I agreed after the 493 time. I have to admit I'm enjoying watching him play.