Have you ever wished NBA GMs would just say what they mean? Between cryptic comments, posturing, and intentional misinformation, the Lakers have succeeded in convincing everybody what they’re not going to do.
They‘re not going to take back more salary than they send out in a trade. They’re not going to take back multi-year contracts. They’re not going to give up two picks unless it makes them a true championship contender. What the Lakers do not tell you is what they’re going to do with respect to Russell Westbrook. Unlike the situation with Kevin Durant in Brooklyn, don’t expect the Lakers to make a formal announcement about Russ.
Let’s take quick trip to the multiverse and alternative world where NBA front office executives must answer all media and fan question directly and honestly in this secret imaginary interview of Rob Pelinka by LakerTom.
LakerTom: “What are the Lakers going to do with Russell Westbrook and when can we expect something to happen?”
Rob Pelinka: “We’ve been trying to trade Westbrook but teams aren’t going to make their best offer until we’re close to training camp, which is when we expect to be able to consummate an acceptable deal to trade him.”
LakerTom: “You’ve said you would not give up both available first round picks unless it made the Lakers a legitimate championship contender. With Kyrie no longer available, is there any acceptable trade that would warrant two picks?”
Rob Pelinka: “First, Kyrie was probably the only trade that could conceivably made the Lakers a legitimate championship contender. However, that doesn’t mean the Lakers won’t give up two picks to significantly improve the team. The difference is the two picks have to be used for players who fit AD’s timeline.”
LakerTom: “The Lakers’ current roster appears to be an unfinished product that desperately needs 3-point shooting and better depth and backups behind forwards LeBron James and Anthony Davis that could only come from trading Westbrook. Are the Lakers serious about bringing back Russell Westbrook?”
Rob Pelinka: “Frankly, the last thing in the world we want to do is run it back with Westbrook. Fortunately, we’re confident we can find multiple trades that offer a better outcome than bringing back Russ. We’re just waiting for teams to get to the point where they’re ready to make their best offer.”
“We knew when we started rebuilding the roster this offseason, that the only way we were going to be able to get elite volume 3-point shooters and invaluable 3&D wings we needed was by trading Russ. Those kinds of players simply aren’t available as minimum salary players. This was all part of our original plan.”
LakerTom: “We keep hearing rumors about the Lakers being unwilling to take back anything but expiring contracts in Westbrook trade so that they can keep the $35 million they’re projected to have in cap space next summer to pursue Kyrie. How important is cap space for next summer to chase Kyrie Irving?”
Rob Pelinka: “While we do have a goal of having as much cap space as possible to pursue free agents next summer, we would like to limit any contracts coming back to a maximum of two years so they matchup with LeBron’s and AD’s deals. Fortunately, the top two players the Lakers are targeting — Myles Turner and Bojan Bogdanovic — are both on expiring contracts so in a perfect world, we would love to be able to have as much open cap space as possible.”
“Finally, you have to remember that we are not going to trade two very valuable first round draft picks along with Westbrook for two or three legitimate starters or rotation players unless we’re able and willing to re-sign them to an extension. One of the reasons why we want to trade Westbrook this offseason is we need the starters and rotation players we can get back for him. They’re not only critical to completing this roster but also to serve if needed as trading chips at the deadline.”
LakerTom: “What is your thought about whether a superstar big three or a superstar big two with a deeper more talented roster is the better path to another Lakers’ championship? And would the Lakers be interested in a midseason trade before the deadline that sent Turner and Hield to Brooklyn for Kyrie Irving?”
Rob Pelinka: “The general answer to your question is it depends on the superstars and how they fit. The specific answer to your question is yes, we would love to trade Turner and Hield for Kyrie Irving at the trade deadline. In fact, the Nets’ coveting of Turner is one of our reasons for wanting to trade for him now.”
Thanks for the laugh JS! Super funny!
I like the imaginary conversation with Rob. Good job, Tom.I’m not so convinced that he is fervently hoping for Russ to be gone. I think he will exploit any good trade for him, but may be content to bring him back, if he accepts some new rules. For example, as Russ is frustrated about his future, Ham (and RP) might be able to get him to come off the bench. Will that be enough of a change? It will certainly be better than last year.
Thanks for reading and commenting, Dean.
It’s more like my answers coming out of Rob’s mouth than his but I have very little faith in Westbrook to change his spots. That’s going to be up to him and I just don’t see it.
The problem is the roster has been built with the idea that the Russ trade finishes the job. If no trade, then we go with a roster that’s not finished. That will be disaster.
In the end, the Lakers had to promise LeBron to use those two picks. There is no way we’re going to waste next season to get out of the repeater tax and tank for a lottery pick. Not with LeBron.
“It’s more like my answers coming out of Rob’s mouth than his …” I wanted to write what you just said as a comment but thought better of it. It’s the perfect LakerTom echo chamber, though.
I’m not so sure any promises were made to LeBron other than “we’ll do our best to be competitive but we’re kind of backed into a corner this season”. Honestly, I think the issue that gets brushed over the most is why the Lakers are so very and obviously keen to preserve cap space for next summer.
I’m not saying I’m thrilled with the idea of another season of Russ because it could go very, very, very, very badly. It could also improve and with the less than AARP roster we have, maybe a step forward from a couple dudes, we could be a surprise. I really don’t see auto-contender with staying as-is but I also don’t see any trade, even a Irving trade, changing that.
I’m not saying there’s a player we can get next summer that changes that, either, because the main thing in all of this is the health and efficiency of LeBron and AD without which this is all pedantic anyhow. What I think we can do is assemble a roster of impact players who are either entering or in their prime on more modular deals. That, with the picks we would still have, would make the Lakers a threat to acquire top tier talent at the drop of a hat. Unlike our current situation.
Could go down like that Dean or just as easily we see a full bore repeat of last season. Off the bench isn’t as concerning as if he’s on the floor to finish the games, at least to me. We need him to be better at the rim and better in crunch time for the narrative to have a chance of changing. But I don’t see him changing the approach that has led him to be a triple-double machine, All Star, etc.
Indeed, Jamie, it could be like last season. Russ will never change the game for anyone. I think he was the reason KD left OKC for better pastures in the bay area.
Good lord, man. Is this what happens when you retire? First the body goes, then the mind? Bruh, imaginary conversations putting the words you so desperately wish he’d utter into his mouth, that’s just beyond. We’ve moved off confirmation bias and straight into cognitive dissonance. Outside you and a couple Bron nut-huggers, no one thinks this team has even that punchers chance you so desperately cling to.
Hey I get it, I’d love to see another Lakers championship. No way did I have a baby just to see her wait to see a Lakers team win it all, but this foolhardy bet on this version of Lebron will leave them in the desert for that much longer. Look at it this way? What’s the over/under on games played for Bron and AD together? Optimistically? 60? 65? Let’s say 62. Whether it’s this buncha scrubs or throw Turner and Hield into there, and you’ve got around 48 wins. Squarely in play-in territory off to a probable 1st round faltering against a top seed with an actual NBA star in his prime and a well-rounded squad that plays defense and is overall cohesive. Time to stop betting whatever future you might have on a flawed premise.