Aloha,
I’m sure everyone is hungry for a post on the a merits of a Buddy and Myles trade, I’m not going there. Sorry, it can’t be helped. The Stein article about helping to facilitate a Knicks Jazz trade was of interest to me because it, well, presented something different, from the same ole same ole.
The Lakers have stated that they will not give up both first round picks unless it catapults them into contention. Well if that’s the case, there won’t be a trade. Because frankly, there isn’t a known deal that does that. Unless of course some of the others have big break out years.
But what if the Lakers could grab a couple of young players with upside that they could build with. Would they be willing to give up those picks? To make room for Mitchell the Knicks would more than likely send out Fournier, Toppin and Reddish.
If I were Robb, I would say, yes we will take Fournier but we also want Reddish and Beasley from the Jazz. While I’m not a huge fan of Fournier, he is 6’ 7” and can play either wing spot. While he’s not quite the shooter Buddy is, he has shot .381 from 3 for his Career. He is overall a better player than Buddy.
Malik Beasley would be much better than Buddy. He actually defends, what a concept and he has shot better from Buddy from 3 for the last 3 years on 8 3’s a game. At 25, he still has room to grow. And if he doesn’t work out, there is a team option on his contract the following year.
Cam Reddish is a guy that the Lakers have been interested in for a while now. He’s a 22 year old, 6’ 8” SF with real 3 and D potential.
I actually like this better than the Buddy and Myles. You bring in 2 players better than Buddy and also address our biggest weakness, a defensive wing with size. I think this a bigger net gain, than Myles could provide. AD will more than likely be on the floor at the 5 to close games. So you won’t see a center in crunch time.
The one player we have that I’m the most curious about is Thomas Bryant. His star was rising before that injury, which caused him to miss the majority of the last 2 seasons. When he came back toward the end of last year he didn’t looks like himself. Which is understandable. Actually that injury is the only reason we could afford him. And he took less to come back to LA. If he does gets back to where he was, he is better then Myles in a few categories. First he is a better rebounder. He’s averaged 5.7 boards a game in 20 minutes. Myles has averaged 6.7 in 30 minutes. He also runs the floor better than Myles. He was recognized as one of the best bigs in the game at running the floor. He’s also know for his motor. It’s always 100mph. We saw that when he was a Laker. And has slightly better from 3 than Myles over his career. Last year returning from injury was his down year. And Myles has dropped. He has averaged only .333 over the last 3 years. While Myles is the best in league in blocking shot, both Bryant and Jones aren’t bad. Thomas averaged 1.1 blocks in 24 minutes his last healthy year. That’s about 1.6 with starter minutes. And Damien is slightly better than than that.
Overall I think that this Jazz trade would actually improve the team more than the Pacer trade would. It maybe the reason there has been no movement with the Pacers.
I think the Lakers will be very hard-pressed to find a taker for Russ before Feb without throwing two draft picks at the problem. For me Fournier is a non-starter because of his deal. Jazz might trade Beasley and I’d be fine with that since he has a team option. Same for Cam and his QO next summer.
To me, that’s still an overpay. I see the trade for Beverly not as an indicator that we’re moving Russ soon but rather that we will move him…eventually. Two draft picks…that’s one too many, IMO. Now, the Lakers may well feel differently. The climate around the team improves with any trade of Westbrook if not the playoff odds. That may be more important to them than it is to me.
Still, there are worse things for a roster to have than combustion from two alphas who don’t like each other. If Laker fans can’t think of a similar scenario they have short memories indeed. Last season everyone got along, laughing all game long while we were losing, buddies all season long. That needs to end and if Russ and Pat are on the same team I can all but guarantee it will.
The season starts on October 18th, the trade deadline should be somewhere in mid-February (usually a little before or after the ASG which is 2/17) so lets just say at least 55 games will have been played but probably closer to 60. 55 games is 67% of the season, a tick over 2/3s.
At 55 games (67%) the Lakers will have paid Westbrook $31,532,530.26 which, when subtracted from his salary for the season, equals $15,530,947.74. I’m no business man but anything listed as “NOW 67% OFF!!!!!” is attractive on every level. When the difference is over 31 million clams it looks and sounds even better. All the cap space from his deal for a fraction of the buyout cost.
Russ will pick up a vet minimum deal somewhere so you could even skip the negotiation of how much to give back and simply pay him to find another team. Or play hard ball and squeeze a couple more million out of your bottom line and onto his. I can see several scenarios where that situation is attractive to a lot more teams, especially if some playoff hopefuls last season have Knicks like slip or some key player gets hurt.
A lot depends on what the Lakers are hoping to do next summer, as well. Do they want to basically construct a team you’re locked into except on draft day for the next two seasons after this one? Or is it more attractive to have as much cap space as possible next summer? There will be a lot of mid to high level talent coming on the free agent market the next two summers but no elite players until LBJ, AD and Jaylen Brown hit free agency in 2025.
If it were me I’d take a hard line with everyone. I’d hold onto Russ and the picks, tell everyone to f@#%ing show up to work like a goldurn professional, that ego does not win jack, and that you will be benched if you don’t play hard or play well on both ends. I think that is what Ham has been empowered to do, at least at this point in time.
I would not take back any multiyear contracts unless you believe in your heart of hearts and peer-reviewed by your brain that that (those player(s) need to be Lakers until both your stars hit free agency. Once you burn those two picks you are pretty much locked into whatever deals you have going forward. Given the level of injuries we’ve been sustaining that stratagem doesn’t make a whole lotta sense to me.
Improve the team but don’t gut next summer by taking on any “gee I sure hope THIS volume three point shooter is the one!!!” guys on non-expiring deals, don’t bring in anyone who only plays hard on offense, and you better have a good reason to think they can play well alongside James and Davis. If you use picks to bring in players that aren’t needle-movers you’re really just overpaying to move Russ. He’s gone in less than a year.
In this scenario, and I know it’s not the sexy, fun opinion, I truly believe waiting this season out, looking for a fair deal at the deadline when Russ will cost a lot less to buy out, and holding onto at least one pick (swaps and second rounders are fine to trade) and not just throwing draft picks at a problem to make it go away like we’ve done the last three off-season’s is the smartest move for all concerned, LeBron included.