|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144456
Location: The Gold Coast
|
 Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2017 2:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nash wrote: | | venturalakersfan wrote: | | nash wrote: | | venturalakersfan wrote: |
We won't trade Deng with nothing coming back. We had to take $22 mil Lopez to dump Mozgov, and I would argue he brings more on the court than Deng does. Stretching is likely the only way. |
Not next offseason, it has to be for an expiring contract at the trade deadline, after that we sign him or we let him go for nothing.
I'm confident we can move his contract for a late first or maybe a second round pick, so we are not losing a high lottery pick for nothing.
Considering the gems we are drafting late in the draft we may end up with the best player in the long run. |
We can't let Deng go for nothing |
I was talking about Julius. |
That is random
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kevin61
Star Player
Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 1332
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2017 2:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I wouldn't be shocked if Wade came in 2018-19, though honestly, I'm not crazy about the idea. If LeBron comes I could see it. It's not really worth getting worked up over, just a pre-season amusement to consider. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144456
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2017 2:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 22 wrote: | | venturalakersfan wrote: | | 22 wrote: | interesting! I assumed he was playing out the year there.
He'll try to get as close to the $24m as he can and then go to a contender.
If he comes here I'll laugh my butt off. Would be so out of left field lol |
I don't see any reason he would want to come here. |
agreed VLF |
Looking at space on potential title teams for this season, Houston has the room exception, Spurs have the $3.3 mil BLE, Cleveland has a $4.8 mil trade exception and OKC has a $4.9 mil trade exception.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Roon
Star Player
Joined: 29 Sep 2012
Posts: 1816
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2017 2:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Uh, how much would the Lakers have to offer Deng for a buyout?
Could we even do that? I looked at the CBAFAQ but didn't see any mention of a multiyear deal. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144456
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2017 2:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Roon wrote: | Uh, how much would the Lakers have to offer Deng for a buyout?
Could we even do that? I looked at the CBAFAQ but didn't see any mention of a multiyear deal. |
We could and could schedule the payments similar to stretching him. But if I am Deng, I get my money.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zubolo
Starting Rotation
Joined: 09 Jun 2017
Posts: 402
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2017 3:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So question guys: If hypothetically, Randle averages 17ppg, 11rpg, 4apg with much improved defense (not Draymond Green but above average for his position), can you see a scenario where we trade him and Luol Deng to the Nets for Demarre Carolle (1 more year at $16m through 2018-19) and Trevor Booker (expires 2018)?
This to me is a Doable Deng Dumping Deal! Thoughts? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PRLakeShow
Franchise Player
Joined: 07 Oct 2016
Posts: 10460
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2017 3:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Zubolo wrote: | So question guys: If hypothetically, Randle averages 17ppg, 11rpg, 4apg with much improved defense (not Draymond Green but above average for his position), can you see a scenario where we trade him and Luol Deng to the Nets for Demarre Carolle (1 more year at $16m through 2018-19) and Trevor Booker (expires 2018)?
This to me is a Doable Deng Dumping Deal! Thoughts? |
That's a horrible trade. Then you'll have to find a taker for Carroll. If you don't, you would have to stretch him and have a 5+ mill cap hit for three years. Deng is 7+ mill for 5. So dumping Randle for an extra 2 mill. Yeah no way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kevin61
Star Player
Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 1332
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2017 3:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| venturalakersfan wrote: | | Roon wrote: | Uh, how much would the Lakers have to offer Deng for a buyout?
Could we even do that? I looked at the CBAFAQ but didn't see any mention of a multiyear deal. |
We could and could schedule the payments similar to stretching him. But if I am Deng, I get my money. |
Yes sir, no reason for charity, it's gonna be stretch or trade. Deng won the lottery last July when a couple of suckers gave him the moon. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Inspector Gadget
Retired Number
Joined: 18 Apr 2016
Posts: 46613
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2017 3:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| If Wade's wife still has a desire to be in LA I see why other teams will be on Wades wishlist... I only see the Clippers and Lakers as his destination. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chase.button07
Star Player
Joined: 19 Feb 2017
Posts: 4996
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2017 3:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Inspector Gadget wrote: | | If Wade's wife still has a desire to be in LA I see why other teams will be on Wades wishlist... I only see the Clippers and Lakers as his destination. |
don't want him anyways. what does he add to this team?
_________________
Now Playing: The Zo Show @Staples |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chase.button07
Star Player
Joined: 19 Feb 2017
Posts: 4996
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2017 3:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Inspector Gadget wrote: | | If Wade's wife still has a desire to be in LA I see why other teams will be on Wades wishlist... I only see the Clippers and Lakers as his destination. |
don't want him anyways. what does he add to this team?
_________________
Now Playing: The Zo Show @Staples |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Inspector Gadget
Retired Number
Joined: 18 Apr 2016
Posts: 46613
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2017 3:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Chase.button07 wrote: | | Inspector Gadget wrote: | | If Wade's wife still has a desire to be in LA I see why other teams will be on Wades wishlist... I only see the Clippers and Lakers as his destination. |
don't want him anyways. what does he add to this team? |
He adds a lot:
A guy who can convince LeBron to join the banana boat crew
He adds championship experience to a roster that lacks in that
He's a talent upgrade |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lakesh0wtime
Star Player
Joined: 28 Mar 2016
Posts: 5346
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2017 3:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| PG and Boogie are my top 2 targets. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jankobe
Starting Rotation
Joined: 12 Jun 2010
Posts: 781
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2017 4:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LAKERS should start recruiting Lebron now w/o tampering by asking sponsors, or other LA company's to invest, partnership w/ Lebrons business ventures. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pio2u
Retired Number
Joined: 26 Dec 2012
Posts: 54570
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2017 4:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
FYI:
Norris Cole signs to play in Israel
Jordan McRae signs to play In Spain
Kyle Wiltjer sign w/ Raptors
Warriors Sign Georges Niang |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nash
Star Player
Joined: 23 Oct 2001
Posts: 8194
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2017 5:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| venturalakersfan wrote: | | yinoma2001 wrote: | | venturalakersfan wrote: | | yinoma2001 wrote: | | venturalakersfan wrote: | | yinoma2001 wrote: | | kevin61 wrote: | | yinoma2001 wrote: | | It's a big gamble but if Jules wants to stay here, and be a part of a championship core, that may be the ultimate price (i.e. taking QO and letting the Lakers sign him over the cap in 2019). Then again, he would also be a UFA in 2019 so he could leave too. |
Im the eternal optimist, but I'd be shocked if he took that route. Once you get to that point, you have to take "money for life", it's just too big a risk not to. If I was advising him, I'd tell him that, especially considering his injury history. |
Sure. But if no team is willing to pay him the amount he wants (i.e. 18-20m/year), isn't he going to go that route anyways (unless the Lakers renounce him)? |
JR checks many of the boxes that Dallas needs, I would be surprised if there is no interest. If Matthews opts out or signs a smaller deal they can have $40-50 mil in cap space. Cuban will be active. |
So kind of like how they haven't signed their own RFA Noel?  |
I don't know what Noel has to do with anything. Cuban will be looking at a potential post-Dirk rebuild with cap space. |
He has everything to do with it. If they keep him, a Jules/Noel pairing is antithetical to what the Mavs like at PF. Plus, Barnes is functionally their PF at many times.
I would say Noel's value is greater or equal to Jules, and the Mavs aren't paying him 20m/year. What makes you think they would do that for Jules? |
Randle fits what it has been reported they are looking for, a scoring big who can help their anemic rebounding. I think they are treating Noel correctly, $8-10 mil should be his max. |
Is Randle a scoring big?
He is a better scorer than defender, but I wouldn't call a 13.2 player a big time scorer.
I really don't like Noel's game, but the dude is a 2.5 BPM and 19.8 PER player, if 8-10 mil is the high price for him something I wouldn't disagree, we must be able to re-sign our player for 5.5-7.5 mil, after all 2.5/19.8 > 0.0/15.9 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LaxT
Star Player
Joined: 23 Sep 2002
Posts: 2536
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2017 5:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| yinoma2001 wrote: | | LaxT wrote: | | nash wrote: |
They worked under the premise that we would like to let KCP and Lopez go, move JC and Deng and keep Randle, it looks more like a LG debate than a real analysis of the scenario, but it helps us to visualize how much we have in those scenarios. |
The two-max dream again.
If James and PG do sign here, how will Randle fit? I don't think he does.
After reading the article, I feel the best option is to do a Moz+Russell type of trade again. Deng+Randle for expiring contracts. May have to throw in cash, young assets and/or picks, but that's the main package.
If not, it might be better to sign one max and pieces that fit. |
That's not the same. Jules is going to be a RFA next year. So you're asking a team to basically take 35-40m/year on Jules/Deng in 2018 and beyond. |
Right, more difficult to find a taker for Deng+Randle. That's why you get a pick/Kuzma in the Moz+Russell trade, but may have to throw in more assets in a Deng+Randle trade.
Despite the difficulty, it is a better option than stretching Deng+ JC for nothing. More space created, less financial commitment in the future. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LaxT
Star Player
Joined: 23 Sep 2002
Posts: 2536
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2017 6:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kevin61 wrote: | | LaxT wrote: | | kevin61 wrote: | | LaxT wrote: | | nash wrote: |
They worked under the premise that we would like to let KCP and Lopez go, move JC and Deng and keep Randle, it looks more like a LG debate than a real analysis of the scenario, but it helps us to visualize how much we have in those scenarios. |
The two-max dream again.
If James and PG do sign here, how will Randle fit? I don't think he does.
After reading the article, I feel the best option is to do a Moz+Russell type of trade again. Deng+Randle for expiring contracts. May have to throw in cash, young assets and/or picks, but that's the main package.
If not, it might be better to sign one max and pieces that fit. |
Why would you want to give up that much for $7mil in cap savings? They'll stretch him and keep Randle. He plays 3,4 and 5, that fits LBJ and PG fine. |
Then what?
If you stretch Deng and trade JC for nothing, you still don't get under the cap. Then if Randle signs an offer elsewhere, what do you do?
If you think Randle fits with Ball/Ingram/PG/LBJ, we will have to agree to disagree.
| Quote: |
As you can see, this doesn’t bring the Lakers under the cap. And short of trading some three-person combination of Larry Nance, Kyle Kuzma, Josh Hart and Ivica Zubac, it won’t get them under the cap.
Quite simply, the Lakers have to trade Deng. |
|
Getting two max FA's is very doable.
You can stretch Deng, trade Clarkson for picks and stay under the cap if: LeBron takes $4.2mil less than his max, or we sign another $30mil FA like Cousins.
Read the article in the link, it explains all the options very clearly. |
Everything starts with Deng because there is no way to have two max without moving him.
Two options with Deng-- trade or stretch. Clearly trade is better. More space created and another team pays his 2yr/36M remaining.
Difficult? Sure. That's why somebody valuable has to be involved. Ball and Ingram are untouchable, so it comes to Randle whose free agency is another factor in cap management. If a team offers him a front-loaded contract in early July? How do you react?
Another option of stretch + JC for nothing presents two downsides: not enough space cleared, and the possibility of Randle leaving for nothing. It is hardly a plan A in my book. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kevin61
Star Player
Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 1332
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2017 6:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LaxT wrote: | | kevin61 wrote: | | LaxT wrote: | | kevin61 wrote: | | LaxT wrote: | | nash wrote: |
They worked under the premise that we would like to let KCP and Lopez go, move JC and Deng and keep Randle, it looks more like a LG debate than a real analysis of the scenario, but it helps us to visualize how much we have in those scenarios. |
The two-max dream again.
If James and PG do sign here, how will Randle fit? I don't think he does.
After reading the article, I feel the best option is to do a Moz+Russell type of trade again. Deng+Randle for expiring contracts. May have to throw in cash, young assets and/or picks, but that's the main package.
If not, it might be better to sign one max and pieces that fit. |
Why would you want to give up that much for $7mil in cap savings? They'll stretch him and keep Randle. He plays 3,4 and 5, that fits LBJ and PG fine. |
Then what?
If you stretch Deng and trade JC for nothing, you still don't get under the cap. Then if Randle signs an offer elsewhere, what do you do?
If you think Randle fits with Ball/Ingram/PG/LBJ, we will have to agree to disagree.
| Quote: |
As you can see, this doesn’t bring the Lakers under the cap. And short of trading some three-person combination of Larry Nance, Kyle Kuzma, Josh Hart and Ivica Zubac, it won’t get them under the cap.
Quite simply, the Lakers have to trade Deng. |
|
Getting two max FA's is very doable.
You can stretch Deng, trade Clarkson for picks and stay under the cap if: LeBron takes $4.2mil less than his max, or we sign another $30mil FA like Cousins.
Read the article in the link, it explains all the options very clearly. |
Everything starts with Deng because there is no way to have two max without moving him.
Two options with Deng-- trade or stretch. Clearly trade is better. More space created and another team pays his 2yr/36M remaining.
Difficult? Sure. That's why somebody valuable has to be involved. Ball and Ingram are untouchable, so it comes to Randle whose free agency is another factor in cap management. If a team offers him a front-loaded contract in early July? How do you react?
Another option of stretch + JC for nothing presents two downsides: not enough space cleared, and the possibility of Randle leaving for nothing. It is hardly a plan A in my book. |
I don't think you're clear on what I'm saying.
I never proposed JC for nothing in return. Obviously, the team would try to get as much back as possible for him. Clarkson would be moved for picks, the same as Williams was. At this point all that can be said is that it seems likely that someone would take him in exchange for draft picks, his play would dictate how much, or how little, that would be.
Randle can be kept by allowing a cap hold for $12.4mil. This amount is almost exactly what Clarkson's salary would be.
Deng can be stretched at $7.6mil and either Clarkson or Randle can be kept leaving $62.8mil in cap space. PG is eligible for a max deal of $30.9mil, which leaves $31.9 for another player. Only LeBron is eligible to make more than this ($36mil) and it's my belief that he'd take the slightly lower amount if he wanted to play here. Any other FA would only be eligible for a contract of $30.9mil.
With this plan we keep Lonzo, Ingram, Randle, Nance, Kuzma, Zubac and Hart, as well as whatever Clarkson might bring in the way of picks.
That's a lot of talent with two max FA's and I don't think any other team can come close to what we'll offer. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LaxT
Star Player
Joined: 23 Sep 2002
Posts: 2536
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2017 7:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kevin61 wrote: | | LaxT wrote: | | kevin61 wrote: | | LaxT wrote: | | kevin61 wrote: | | LaxT wrote: | | nash wrote: |
They worked under the premise that we would like to let KCP and Lopez go, move JC and Deng and keep Randle, it looks more like a LG debate than a real analysis of the scenario, but it helps us to visualize how much we have in those scenarios. |
The two-max dream again.
If James and PG do sign here, how will Randle fit? I don't think he does.
After reading the article, I feel the best option is to do a Moz+Russell type of trade again. Deng+Randle for expiring contracts. May have to throw in cash, young assets and/or picks, but that's the main package.
If not, it might be better to sign one max and pieces that fit. |
Why would you want to give up that much for $7mil in cap savings? They'll stretch him and keep Randle. He plays 3,4 and 5, that fits LBJ and PG fine. |
Then what?
If you stretch Deng and trade JC for nothing, you still don't get under the cap. Then if Randle signs an offer elsewhere, what do you do?
If you think Randle fits with Ball/Ingram/PG/LBJ, we will have to agree to disagree.
| Quote: |
As you can see, this doesn’t bring the Lakers under the cap. And short of trading some three-person combination of Larry Nance, Kyle Kuzma, Josh Hart and Ivica Zubac, it won’t get them under the cap.
Quite simply, the Lakers have to trade Deng. |
|
Getting two max FA's is very doable.
You can stretch Deng, trade Clarkson for picks and stay under the cap if: LeBron takes $4.2mil less than his max, or we sign another $30mil FA like Cousins.
Read the article in the link, it explains all the options very clearly. |
Everything starts with Deng because there is no way to have two max without moving him.
Two options with Deng-- trade or stretch. Clearly trade is better. More space created and another team pays his 2yr/36M remaining.
Difficult? Sure. That's why somebody valuable has to be involved. Ball and Ingram are untouchable, so it comes to Randle whose free agency is another factor in cap management. If a team offers him a front-loaded contract in early July? How do you react?
Another option of stretch + JC for nothing presents two downsides: not enough space cleared, and the possibility of Randle leaving for nothing. It is hardly a plan A in my book. |
I don't think you're clear on what I'm saying.
I never proposed JC for nothing in return. Obviously, the team would try to get as much back as possible for him. Clarkson would be moved for picks, the same as Williams was. At this point all that can be said is that it seems likely that someone would take him in exchange for draft picks, his play would dictate how much, or how little, that would be.
Randle can be kept by allowing a cap hold for $12.4mil. This amount is almost exactly what Clarkson's salary would be.
Deng can be stretched at $7.6mil and either Clarkson or Randle can be kept leaving $62.8mil in cap space. PG is eligible for a max deal of $30.9mil, which leaves $31.9 for another player. Only LeBron is eligible to make more than this ($36mil) and it's my belief that he'd take the slightly lower amount if he wanted to play here. Any other FA would only be eligible for a contract of $30.9mil.
With this plan we keep Lonzo, Ingram, Randle, Nance, Kuzma, Zubac and Hart, as well as whatever Clarkson might bring in the way of picks.
That's a lot of talent with two max FA's and I don't think any other team can come close to what we'll offer. |
A strategy based on LBJ taking less money? It's a wish, not strategy.
When I say JC for nothing, I mean no salary beyond. That's what you advocate. While JC and Randle have nearly identical cap hold, the team do not really control Randle, a FA.
You still refuse to consider the possibility of Randle signing an offer sheet elsewhere. If he signs a front-loaded offer, his cap hold goes up. That is exactly what a team will do to keep the Lakers away from matching.
Bottom line-- trading Deng is better than stretching. If Randle is the cost, so be it. For me, it's a better option than stretching+ JC out.
Last edited by LaxT on Wed Aug 16, 2017 7:30 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kevin61
Star Player
Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 1332
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2017 7:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LaxT wrote: | | kevin61 wrote: | | LaxT wrote: | | kevin61 wrote: | | LaxT wrote: | | kevin61 wrote: | | LaxT wrote: | | nash wrote: |
They worked under the premise that we would like to let KCP and Lopez go, move JC and Deng and keep Randle, it looks more like a LG debate than a real analysis of the scenario, but it helps us to visualize how much we have in those scenarios. |
The two-max dream again.
If James and PG do sign here, how will Randle fit? I don't think he does.
After reading the article, I feel the best option is to do a Moz+Russell type of trade again. Deng+Randle for expiring contracts. May have to throw in cash, young assets and/or picks, but that's the main package.
If not, it might be better to sign one max and pieces that fit. |
Why would you want to give up that much for $7mil in cap savings? They'll stretch him and keep Randle. He plays 3,4 and 5, that fits LBJ and PG fine. |
Then what?
If you stretch Deng and trade JC for nothing, you still don't get under the cap. Then if Randle signs an offer elsewhere, what do you do?
If you think Randle fits with Ball/Ingram/PG/LBJ, we will have to agree to disagree.
| Quote: |
As you can see, this doesn’t bring the Lakers under the cap. And short of trading some three-person combination of Larry Nance, Kyle Kuzma, Josh Hart and Ivica Zubac, it won’t get them under the cap.
Quite simply, the Lakers have to trade Deng. |
|
Getting two max FA's is very doable.
You can stretch Deng, trade Clarkson for picks and stay under the cap if: LeBron takes $4.2mil less than his max, or we sign another $30mil FA like Cousins.
Read the article in the link, it explains all the options very clearly. |
Everything starts with Deng because there is no way to have two max without moving him.
Two options with Deng-- trade or stretch. Clearly trade is better. More space created and another team pays his 2yr/36M remaining.
Difficult? Sure. That's why somebody valuable has to be involved. Ball and Ingram are untouchable, so it comes to Randle whose free agency is another factor in cap management. If a team offers him a front-loaded contract in early July? How do you react?
Another option of stretch + JC for nothing presents two downsides: not enough space cleared, and the possibility of Randle leaving for nothing. It is hardly a plan A in my book. |
I don't think you're clear on what I'm saying.
I never proposed JC for nothing in return. Obviously, the team would try to get as much back as possible for him. Clarkson would be moved for picks, the same as Williams was. At this point all that can be said is that it seems likely that someone would take him in exchange for draft picks, his play would dictate how much, or how little, that would be.
Randle can be kept by allowing a cap hold for $12.4mil. This amount is almost exactly what Clarkson's salary would be.
Deng can be stretched at $7.6mil and either Clarkson or Randle can be kept leaving $62.8mil in cap space. PG is eligible for a max deal of $30.9mil, which leaves $31.9 for another player. Only LeBron is eligible to make more than this ($36mil) and it's my belief that he'd take the slightly lower amount if he wanted to play here. Any other FA would only be eligible for a contract of $30.9mil.
With this plan we keep Lonzo, Ingram, Randle, Nance, Kuzma, Zubac and Hart, as well as whatever Clarkson might bring in the way of picks.
That's a lot of talent with two max FA's and I don't think any other team can come close to what we'll offer. |
A strategy based on stars taking less money? It's a wish, not strategy.
You still refuse to consider the possibility of Randle signing an offer sheet elsewhere. If he signs a front-loaded offer, his cap hold goes up. That is exactly what a team will do to keep the Lakers away from matching.
Bottom line-- trading Deng is better than stretching. If Randle is the cost, so be it. |
Read what I wrote, only LeBron would need to take less, no other FA can be paid $36mil. LeBron is a unique situation, he's already very wealthy, has career aspirations in Los Angeles and knows the value of having as much talent as possible surrounding him. I don't think suggesting he'd take a small cut is a stretch at all.
Cousins, Westbrook, George can only be paid $30.9mil. LeBron doesn't even have to be the second max player.
Randle can't sign an offer sheet if we extend a qualifying offer, period. A cap hold of $12.4mil is the cost for this. We will have his Bird Rights and can pay him whatever is needed after the max FA's sign.
Last edited by kevin61 on Wed Aug 16, 2017 7:37 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zubolo
Starting Rotation
Joined: 09 Jun 2017
Posts: 402
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2017 7:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| PRLakeShow wrote: | | Zubolo wrote: | So question guys: If hypothetically, Randle averages 17ppg, 11rpg, 4apg with much improved defense (not Draymond Green but above average for his position), can you see a scenario where we trade him and Luol Deng to the Nets for Demarre Carolle (1 more year at $16m through 2018-19) and Trevor Booker (expires 2018)?
This to me is a Doable Deng Dumping Deal! Thoughts? |
That's a horrible trade. Then you'll have to find a taker for Carroll. If you don't, you would have to stretch him and have a 5+ mill cap hit for three years. Deng is 7+ mill for 5. So dumping Randle for an extra 2 mill. Yeah no way. |
If you're the Lakers, how do you not justify 5 mill for 3 being significantly better than 7 mill for 5? Also, Carolle's 1 year deal is a lot more easy to trade than Deng's 2 years remaining. Perhaps an additional first round pick could completely clear Carolle's remaining deal.
The other reason I am advocating packaging Randle in a deal with Deng is that Randle becomes redundant should the Lakers be able to acquire Lebron. I would much prefer to keep Brook Lopez if we are able to acquire Lebron and PG13.
Last edited by Zubolo on Wed Aug 16, 2017 7:37 pm; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Inspector Gadget
Retired Number
Joined: 18 Apr 2016
Posts: 46613
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2017 7:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ToastedMuffins wrote: | | Inspector Gadget wrote: | | I might get bashed for this, but it seems pretty weird that we haven't been linked to Carmelo or Irving despite the fact that winning is a goal right now, the more talent we add the more wins we get and thus the better chance that FAs are enticed next summer to join the Lakers empire, I understand the desire not to go after Irving since it looks like we are getting LeBron and both despite each other, I just think we can use another bold move before the season starts, we are the Lakers after all and through out our history we have always made unexpected moves that made the NBA turn. |
Carmelo is a non-starter. He has a no-trade clause in his contract so unless he wants to come to the Lakers, and all reports suggest that's not the case, he won't be coming here.
For Kyrie, you need to answer what you're willing to give up. The going price for him that Phoenix is offering is Bledsoe+Bender+1st round pick. What package do you propose offering that beats that one? Lonzo+Ingram? No thanks. |
Just to make things interesting the only reason why Carmelo isn't a Cav right now is because of the bleak LeBron situation, if LeBron is coming next year I'm pretty damn certain that Melo will use his no trade clause to come to the Lakers. if the Lakers and Knicks potentially started trade talks, 1 thing that gives us a advantage is that Melo has had a long desire to play with LeBron and if he knows he's gonna team up with him next year then I see Melo to LA being possible. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LaxT
Star Player
Joined: 23 Sep 2002
Posts: 2536
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2017 7:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kevin61 wrote: | | LaxT wrote: | | kevin61 wrote: | | LaxT wrote: | | kevin61 wrote: | | LaxT wrote: | | kevin61 wrote: | | LaxT wrote: | | nash wrote: |
They worked under the premise that we would like to let KCP and Lopez go, move JC and Deng and keep Randle, it looks more like a LG debate than a real analysis of the scenario, but it helps us to visualize how much we have in those scenarios. |
The two-max dream again.
If James and PG do sign here, how will Randle fit? I don't think he does.
After reading the article, I feel the best option is to do a Moz+Russell type of trade again. Deng+Randle for expiring contracts. May have to throw in cash, young assets and/or picks, but that's the main package.
If not, it might be better to sign one max and pieces that fit. |
Why would you want to give up that much for $7mil in cap savings? They'll stretch him and keep Randle. He plays 3,4 and 5, that fits LBJ and PG fine. |
Then what?
If you stretch Deng and trade JC for nothing, you still don't get under the cap. Then if Randle signs an offer elsewhere, what do you do?
If you think Randle fits with Ball/Ingram/PG/LBJ, we will have to agree to disagree.
| Quote: |
As you can see, this doesn’t bring the Lakers under the cap. And short of trading some three-person combination of Larry Nance, Kyle Kuzma, Josh Hart and Ivica Zubac, it won’t get them under the cap.
Quite simply, the Lakers have to trade Deng. |
|
Getting two max FA's is very doable.
You can stretch Deng, trade Clarkson for picks and stay under the cap if: LeBron takes $4.2mil less than his max, or we sign another $30mil FA like Cousins.
Read the article in the link, it explains all the options very clearly. |
Everything starts with Deng because there is no way to have two max without moving him.
Two options with Deng-- trade or stretch. Clearly trade is better. More space created and another team pays his 2yr/36M remaining.
Difficult? Sure. That's why somebody valuable has to be involved. Ball and Ingram are untouchable, so it comes to Randle whose free agency is another factor in cap management. If a team offers him a front-loaded contract in early July? How do you react?
Another option of stretch + JC for nothing presents two downsides: not enough space cleared, and the possibility of Randle leaving for nothing. It is hardly a plan A in my book. |
I don't think you're clear on what I'm saying.
I never proposed JC for nothing in return. Obviously, the team would try to get as much back as possible for him. Clarkson would be moved for picks, the same as Williams was. At this point all that can be said is that it seems likely that someone would take him in exchange for draft picks, his play would dictate how much, or how little, that would be.
Randle can be kept by allowing a cap hold for $12.4mil. This amount is almost exactly what Clarkson's salary would be.
Deng can be stretched at $7.6mil and either Clarkson or Randle can be kept leaving $62.8mil in cap space. PG is eligible for a max deal of $30.9mil, which leaves $31.9 for another player. Only LeBron is eligible to make more than this ($36mil) and it's my belief that he'd take the slightly lower amount if he wanted to play here. Any other FA would only be eligible for a contract of $30.9mil.
With this plan we keep Lonzo, Ingram, Randle, Nance, Kuzma, Zubac and Hart, as well as whatever Clarkson might bring in the way of picks.
That's a lot of talent with two max FA's and I don't think any other team can come close to what we'll offer. |
A strategy based on stars taking less money? It's a wish, not strategy.
You still refuse to consider the possibility of Randle signing an offer sheet elsewhere. If he signs a front-loaded offer, his cap hold goes up. That is exactly what a team will do to keep the Lakers away from matching.
Bottom line-- trading Deng is better than stretching. If Randle is the cost, so be it. |
Read what I wrote, only LeBron would need to take less, no other FA can be paid $36mil. If my scenario only includes one max player making a small concession and every other getting their full max deal, it isn't much of a stretch. Cousins, Westbrook, George can only be paid $30.9mil.
Randle can't sign an offer sheet if we extend a qualifying offer, period. A cap hold of $12.4mil is the cost for this. We will have his Bird Rights and can pay him whatever is needed after the max FA sign. |
You need to read this.
http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q13
http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q42 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PRLakeShow
Franchise Player
Joined: 07 Oct 2016
Posts: 10460
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2017 7:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Zubolo wrote: | | PRLakeShow wrote: | | Zubolo wrote: | So question guys: If hypothetically, Randle averages 17ppg, 11rpg, 4apg with much improved defense (not Draymond Green but above average for his position), can you see a scenario where we trade him and Luol Deng to the Nets for Demarre Carolle (1 more year at $16m through 2018-19) and Trevor Booker (expires 2018)?
This to me is a Doable Deng Dumping Deal! Thoughts? |
That's a horrible trade. Then you'll have to find a taker for Carroll. If you don't, you would have to stretch him and have a 5+ mill cap hit for three years. Deng is 7+ mill for 5. So dumping Randle for an extra 2 mill. Yeah no way. |
If you're the Lakers, how do you not justify 5 mill for 3 being significantly better than 7 mill for 5? Also, Carolle's 1 year deal is a lot more easy to trade than Deng's 2 years remaining. Perhaps an additional first round pick could completely clear Carolle's remaining deal.
The other reason I am advocating packaging Randle in a deal with Deng is that Randle becomes redundant should the Lakers be able to acquire Lebron. I would much prefer to keep Brook Lopez if we are able to acquire Lebron and PG13. |
5 for 3 is better than 7 for 5 obviously, but it is not worth giving up on Randle even before FA starts, even before the season ends for that matter since you have Booker coming to us.
Plus Randle allows us to maximize cap space since his cap hold is smaller than what he would likely get on the market. There's no indication that Lopez would sign for Randle's cap hold amount, and pretty sure you wouldn't know that midseason by the trade deadline.
On top of that, Lopez over Randle is ridiculous. Lopez guarding Green... yeahhh... At this point, centers on championship teams can be minimum guys, just ask Pachulia and McGee.
Oh and just saw the numbers that Randle would average. Those numbers are great. Trading him for nothing is just laughable. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
