| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
A Mad Chinaman
Star Player
Joined: 07 Apr 2005
Posts: 6142
|
 Posted: Fri May 19, 2017 11:43 pm Post subject: What will Magic/Rob/Luke do with Mosgov and Deng |
|
|
Quotes from LakeShow Life Article
http://lakeshowlife.com/2017/03/10/lakers-front-office-urgent-work/
Deng has underperformed and at 31 years old it would be hard to imagine his production increasing over the next few seasons. Mozgov, on the other hand, has done what he was expected to do in Luke Walton’s system, but his contract is still simply too much money for that.
Both players made sense in Walton’s system and the only way to lure them to LA was to offer money they would have never seen anywhere else.
Next year the salary cap is projected to reach $102 million
Julius Randle, being in the final year of his rookie contract, is gonna be a restricted free agent. Provided that he does not immediately sign with another team giving LA two days to match, he will have a cap hold of about $10 million.
Attaching Houston’s first round pick to one of the dead weights in the upcoming draft night seems the most sensible and effective strategy. Teams in need of a big man could acquire Mozgov (still the most appealing of the two) and get a promising young player with the pick. Harder to find, a team which still thinks Deng has something of his All-Star self left in the tank, could take the risk to absorb him and add the pick to its pocket.
===
If Ball is the PG, would Deng and Mosgov have better seasons?
If Mosgov plays well, what is TBlack's future?
Would Luke play Deng off the bench or starting?
Would a S&T with Swaggy (assuming that he opts outhttp://www.spotrac.com/nba/los-angeles-lakers/nick-young-2770/) allow Magic/Rob trade either Mosgov or Deng - acknowledging the large size of their contracts. Maybe a team like the Celtics who obviously need a shooter (besides Bradley and IT, who are their dependable shooters) and a big man (since their only 5 is Zeller who they haven't played much/http://www.nba.com/celtics/roster/) plus they have assets.
Maybe Deng can defend LeBron better than the current Celtics (Kelly Olynyk, Amir Johnson, Marcus Smart, Jae Crowder).
This is based on the assumption that Ainge is wanting to win within the next upcoming years instead of waiting till LeBron retires. This deal might make be mutually beneficial to all parties involved
Wouldn't it be strange to have 2-3 former Lakers playing for the Celtics next season? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Yong
Star Player
Joined: 08 Oct 2009
Posts: 9024
|
| Posted: Sat May 20, 2017 2:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Attach Clarkson and 28th pick to either of them for Lopez |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
awntawn
Starting Rotation
Joined: 29 Apr 2016
Posts: 953
|
| Posted: Sat May 20, 2017 2:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
There's absolutely no reason to get rid of them until you actually need the cap space. The longer we hold onto them, the more bearable their contracts get. This Summer, it would take one of our core assets to unload each one. Next Summer, it would probably take a mid-late first. The Summer after that, you can unload an expiring contract for a 2nd rounder. Same deal applies to stretching them; each year that ticks off lessons the long term impact significantly.
Since the Lakers aren't planning to do anything this offseason, there's no reason to get rid of them. Remember what happened with Swaggy? We thought he was dead weight, then all of a sudden he's a starter. It's pretty much impossible for them to lessen their value this year. There's literally no reason to get rid of them until next year at the earliest. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
richmorgan12
Starting Rotation
Joined: 13 Feb 2017
Posts: 595
|
| Posted: Sat May 20, 2017 3:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| awntawn wrote: | There's absolutely no reason to get rid of them until you actually need the cap space. The longer we hold onto them, the more bearable their contracts get. This Summer, it would take one of our core assets to unload each one. Next Summer, it would probably take a mid-late first. The Summer after that, you can unload an expiring contract for a 2nd rounder. Same deal applies to stretching them; each year that ticks off lessons the long term impact significantly.
Since the Lakers aren't planning to do anything this offseason, there's no reason to get rid of them. Remember what happened with Swaggy? We thought he was dead weight, then all of a sudden he's a starter. It's pretty much impossible for them to lessen their value this year. There's literally no reason to get rid of them until next year at the earliest. |
Agree, and as you suggest, why waste assets doing something that isn't necessary yet? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chronicle
Retired Number
Joined: 21 Jul 2012
Posts: 31935
Location: Manhattan
|
| Posted: Sat May 20, 2017 4:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Take em out back
_________________
Kobe |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mporter
Starting Rotation
Joined: 30 Oct 2005
Posts: 628
|
| Posted: Sat May 20, 2017 4:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Package the 2nd pick and Moz/Deng to a team like Sacramento, for its lotto pick (5th I think), and a player??? Vlade would have to be enamoured with one of the top players for this to work of course. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
richmorgan12
Starting Rotation
Joined: 13 Feb 2017
Posts: 595
|
| Posted: Sat May 20, 2017 4:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mporter wrote: | | Package the 2nd pick and Moz/Deng to a team like Sacramento, for its lotto pick (5th I think), and a player??? Vlade would have to be enamoured with one of the top players for this to work of course. |
Divac would have to be an idiot to make that deal. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Annihilator
Star Player
Joined: 02 Jul 2001
Posts: 4035
|
| Posted: Sat May 20, 2017 5:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| richmorgan12 wrote: | | mporter wrote: | | Package the 2nd pick and Moz/Deng to a team like Sacramento, for its lotto pick (5th I think), and a player??? Vlade would have to be enamoured with one of the top players for this to work of course. |
Divac would have to be an idiot to make that deal. |
Although it isn't clear, I think mporter was referring to the #2 pick not the #28 pick (both could be referred to as the 2nd pick). Assuming mporter is referring to the #2 pick, I would be very disappointed if the Lakers made this trade.
_________________
“When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.”
--Anonymous |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
richmorgan12
Starting Rotation
Joined: 13 Feb 2017
Posts: 595
|
| Posted: Sat May 20, 2017 5:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Annihilator wrote: | | richmorgan12 wrote: | | mporter wrote: | | Package the 2nd pick and Moz/Deng to a team like Sacramento, for its lotto pick (5th I think), and a player??? Vlade would have to be enamoured with one of the top players for this to work of course. |
Divac would have to be an idiot to make that deal. |
Although it isn't clear, I think mporter was referring to the #2 pick not the #28 pick (both could be referred to as the 2nd pick). Assuming mporter is referring to the #2 pick, if Vlade could pull it off, he would be a genius. |
A genius of idiocy perhaps. Taking on two bad contracts with 3 years remaining to swap the #5 pick AND a player for the #2 pick? He'd be an utter fool to do that. The player he'd get at #2 is likely no better than what he'd get at #5. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
M2K
Star Player
Joined: 20 Feb 2011
Posts: 2432
|
| Posted: Sat May 20, 2017 5:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| awntawn wrote: | There's absolutely no reason to get rid of them until you actually need the cap space. The longer we hold onto them, the more bearable their contracts get. This Summer, it would take one of our core assets to unload each one. Next Summer, it would probably take a mid-late first. The Summer after that, you can unload an expiring contract for a 2nd rounder. Same deal applies to stretching them; each year that ticks off lessons the long term impact significantly.
Since the Lakers aren't planning to do anything this offseason, there's no reason to get rid of them. Remember what happened with Swaggy? We thought he was dead weight, then all of a sudden he's a starter. It's pretty much impossible for them to lessen their value this year. There's literally no reason to get rid of them until next year at the earliest. |
Right on target.
_________________
A three headed monster... Jeannie, Pelinka, and Ham... another terrible season. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
deal
Franchise Player
Joined: 17 Aug 2008
Posts: 14903
Location: Earth
|
| Posted: Sat May 20, 2017 5:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Chronicle wrote: | | Take em out back |
Sounds like a plan, hush...
_________________
Lakers need to build a freaking team ! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
crucifixion
Starting Rotation
Joined: 05 May 2005
Posts: 909
|
| Posted: Sat May 20, 2017 6:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| M2K wrote: | | awntawn wrote: | There's absolutely no reason to get rid of them until you actually need the cap space. The longer we hold onto them, the more bearable their contracts get. This Summer, it would take one of our core assets to unload each one. Next Summer, it would probably take a mid-late first. The Summer after that, you can unload an expiring contract for a 2nd rounder. Same deal applies to stretching them; each year that ticks off lessons the long term impact significantly.
Since the Lakers aren't planning to do anything this offseason, there's no reason to get rid of them. Remember what happened with Swaggy? We thought he was dead weight, then all of a sudden he's a starter. It's pretty much impossible for them to lessen their value this year. There's literally no reason to get rid of them until next year at the earliest. |
Right on target. |
Not quite. In today's day expiring contracts don't add the same value. Just like when Houston gave us lin for us to absorb, Houston threw in the first rounder. So in a couple years when Moz is expiring we'll still have to attach a first round pick.
So right now if we can get rid of Moz for JC or something then we have years of flexibility in front of us |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
davidse
Franchise Player
Joined: 03 Jul 2005
Posts: 14302
|
| Posted: Sat May 20, 2017 6:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Deng needs to go to the Kings who can actually use him to mentor the many young players they'll have next season and have no cap room concerns.
You trade a top 3 protected 2020 pick with cash, and I think you have a decent shot of getting them to bite.
Mozgov needs to go to Brooklyn with Randle in a deal that will allow the Nets to cash in on Brook Lopez in a seperate deal.
Hopefully we can get back Booker + 22, but if I'm being too optimistic here, there's room to tweak the deal with either us sending 28, or them sending Nicholson's useless deal instead of Booker's expiring. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
davidse
Franchise Player
Joined: 03 Jul 2005
Posts: 14302
|
| Posted: Sat May 20, 2017 6:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| awntawn wrote: | There's absolutely no reason to get rid of them until you actually need the cap space. The longer we hold onto them, the more bearable their contracts get. This Summer, it would take one of our core assets to unload each one. Next Summer, it would probably take a mid-late first. The Summer after that, you can unload an expiring contract for a 2nd rounder. Same deal applies to stretching them; each year that ticks off lessons the long term impact significantly.
Since the Lakers aren't planning to do anything this offseason, there's no reason to get rid of them. Remember what happened with Swaggy? We thought he was dead weight, then all of a sudden he's a starter. It's pretty much impossible for them to lessen their value this year. There's literally no reason to get rid of them until next year at the earliest. |
Randle's contract situation and decreasing value because of it is one such reason. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mporter
Starting Rotation
Joined: 30 Oct 2005
Posts: 628
|
| Posted: Sat May 20, 2017 7:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Annihilator wrote: | | richmorgan12 wrote: | | mporter wrote: | | Package the 2nd pick and Moz/Deng to a team like Sacramento, for its lotto pick (5th I think), and a player??? Vlade would have to be enamoured with one of the top players for this to work of course. |
Divac would have to be an idiot to make that deal. |
Although it isn't clear, I think mporter was referring to the #2 pick not the #28 pick (both could be referred to as the 2nd pick). Assuming mporter is referring to the #2 pick, I would be very disappointed if the Lakers made this trade. |
Yeah I meant the 2nd overall pick...But the kings would take back either Moz or Deng (likely Deng), not both. It's reasonable if vlade thinks someone like Ball is a star and LA doesn't see a huge difference in the top players in terms of value. Not saying it's the best move (i favor keeping all the young guys this year, no trades for George or Butler), but it's a way to move one of those bad contracts while compiling assets. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
andree
Starting Rotation
Joined: 05 May 2014
Posts: 519
|
| Posted: Sat May 20, 2017 7:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| crucifixion wrote: | | M2K wrote: | | awntawn wrote: | There's absolutely no reason to get rid of them until you actually need the cap space. The longer we hold onto them, the more bearable their contracts get. This Summer, it would take one of our core assets to unload each one. Next Summer, it would probably take a mid-late first. The Summer after that, you can unload an expiring contract for a 2nd rounder. Same deal applies to stretching them; each year that ticks off lessons the long term impact significantly.
Since the Lakers aren't planning to do anything this offseason, there's no reason to get rid of them. Remember what happened with Swaggy? We thought he was dead weight, then all of a sudden he's a starter. It's pretty much impossible for them to lessen their value this year. There's literally no reason to get rid of them until next year at the earliest. |
Right on target. |
Not quite. In today's day expiring contracts don't add the same value. Just like when Houston gave us lin for us to absorb, Houston threw in the first rounder. So in a couple years when Moz is expiring we'll still have to attach a first round pick.
So right now if we can get rid of Moz for JC or something then we have years of flexibility in front of us |
Today, you are right. But after next year when the cap remain the same, these type of contracts have value. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Four Decade Bandwagon
Star Player
Joined: 18 Jul 2014
Posts: 8150
|
| Posted: Sat May 20, 2017 7:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| M2K wrote: | | awntawn wrote: | There's absolutely no reason to get rid of them until you actually need the cap space. The longer we hold onto them, the more bearable their contracts get. This Summer, it would take one of our core assets to unload each one. Next Summer, it would probably take a mid-late first. The Summer after that, you can unload an expiring contract for a 2nd rounder. Same deal applies to stretching them; each year that ticks off lessons the long term impact significantly.
Since the Lakers aren't planning to do anything this offseason, there's no reason to get rid of them. Remember what happened with Swaggy? We thought he was dead weight, then all of a sudden he's a starter. It's pretty much impossible for them to lessen their value this year. There's literally no reason to get rid of them until next year at the earliest. |
Right on target. |
Agree with this premise. If trades and moves dictate the need for extra cap space then sure ... move them immediately. Attempt to unload them the best you can. But is that necessary this year?
I tend to be more optimistic of the contributions both can still give the Lakers over the next couple seasons. Overall roster is incredibly young and inexperienced. Having two playoff battle tested professionals on the roster is still valuable IMO. Yes, I agree the contracts are crazy but have accepted the need to separate the contracts from the players.
Also think that if they make the trades to become a "win now" type of team. ( trade for George for example) they will want the experience on the roster to compete. Look around the playoffs rosters. There were a lot of 30+ vets contributing a lot of critical plays throughout.
I am not writing off Deng and Mozgov just yet. Keep them on the roster for now IMO. Keep all the suggested "disposable assets" attached to dump them for as long as possible. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakersRGolden
Star Player
Joined: 13 Jan 2002
Posts: 7922
Location: Lake Forest
|
| Posted: Sat May 20, 2017 7:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Play them, and trade them in 1.5 years if you might need some cap. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dilla_
Star Player
Joined: 25 Oct 2015
Posts: 1274
|
| Posted: Sat May 20, 2017 7:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Try and trade them without giving up Russell, Randle, Ingram and whoever the Lakers draft with the second pick if they can't trade them this summer then wait until next off-season and look to stretch and waive them.
_________________
Coach MWP. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
audioaxes
Franchise Player
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 12573
|
| Posted: Sat May 20, 2017 8:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
just let their contracts expire in 3 years. Thats how much time we need to develop our youth and we are not touching the Warriors for 3 years so no need loading up the teams salary cap until then.
_________________
(bleep) Kawhi |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Lebrons
Star Player
Joined: 30 Mar 2009
Posts: 4778
|
| Posted: Sat May 20, 2017 8:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Hopefully trade them and free up cap space, somehow. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DShotMaker1824
Star Player
Joined: 16 Feb 2012
Posts: 8768
|
| Posted: Sat May 20, 2017 8:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Trade Deng with Russell for George.
Keep Mosgov to start.
_________________
"Through the legs to the left, through the legs to the right, we don't run them Laker plays, we just Kobe fadeaway..."
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144461
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Sat May 20, 2017 8:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
As of now play them
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AFireInside619
Franchise Player
Joined: 11 Dec 2015
Posts: 11447
|
| Posted: Sat May 20, 2017 9:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| richmorgan12 wrote: | | awntawn wrote: | There's absolutely no reason to get rid of them until you actually need the cap space. The longer we hold onto them, the more bearable their contracts get. This Summer, it would take one of our core assets to unload each one. Next Summer, it would probably take a mid-late first. The Summer after that, you can unload an expiring contract for a 2nd rounder. Same deal applies to stretching them; each year that ticks off lessons the long term impact significantly.
Since the Lakers aren't planning to do anything this offseason, there's no reason to get rid of them. Remember what happened with Swaggy? We thought he was dead weight, then all of a sudden he's a starter. It's pretty much impossible for them to lessen their value this year. There's literally no reason to get rid of them until next year at the earliest. |
Agree, and as you suggest, why waste assets doing something that isn't necessary yet? |
According to some reports, this is exactly what the Lakers will do. Unless space is absolutely needed, they'll hold them till next season and probably move or stretch them then.
Really, these contracts still piss me off. No team option on the 4th year? They couldn't offer them just a 3 year contract? Moz signed sealed and delivered by 12:01. They couldn't just spend the money on different players, or hold onto the money and spread it around if they didn't hit the cap minimum? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
richmorgan12
Starting Rotation
Joined: 13 Feb 2017
Posts: 595
|
| Posted: Sat May 20, 2017 9:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| AFireInside619 wrote: | | richmorgan12 wrote: | | awntawn wrote: | There's absolutely no reason to get rid of them until you actually need the cap space. The longer we hold onto them, the more bearable their contracts get. This Summer, it would take one of our core assets to unload each one. Next Summer, it would probably take a mid-late first. The Summer after that, you can unload an expiring contract for a 2nd rounder. Same deal applies to stretching them; each year that ticks off lessons the long term impact significantly.
Since the Lakers aren't planning to do anything this offseason, there's no reason to get rid of them. Remember what happened with Swaggy? We thought he was dead weight, then all of a sudden he's a starter. It's pretty much impossible for them to lessen their value this year. There's literally no reason to get rid of them until next year at the earliest. |
Agree, and as you suggest, why waste assets doing something that isn't necessary yet? |
According to some reports, this is exactly what the Lakers will do. Unless space is absolutely needed, they'll hold them till next season and probably move or stretch them then.
Really, these contracts still piss me off. No team option on the 4th year? They couldn't offer them just a 3 year contract? Moz signed sealed and delivered by 12:01. They couldn't just spend the money on different players, or hold onto the money and spread it around if they didn't hit the cap minimum? |
Agree. If the contracts had been 3 years, they would have been a lot more manageable. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
