| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
 Posted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 4:59 am Post subject: If no max slot, who would we have signed? |
|
|
Let's assume we could not have made that final move to get us into a max slot. And as a result, AD does not waive his trade kicker. That would have left us with $23M.
Who would we have signed given that scenario? We know now the salaries of many of the FAs that were available.
Here's a list -- https://www.spotrac.com/nba/free-agents/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
LakersRGolden
Star Player
Joined: 13 Jan 2002
Posts: 7922
Location: Lake Forest
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 5:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Bogdonovic or Dlo if he would agree. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cassano18
Sixth Man
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Posts: 81
Location: Turkey
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 5:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LakersRGolden wrote: | | Bogdonovic or Dlo if he would agree. |
Dlo? Oh man.. I got some bad news.
_________________
Lakers Turkey!
http://www.lakerstr.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Annihilator
Star Player
Joined: 02 Jul 2001
Posts: 4035
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 6:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Cassano18 wrote: | | LakersRGolden wrote: | | Bogdonovic or Dlo if he would agree. |
Dlo? Oh man.. I got some bad news. |
Dlo signed for four years and $117 million; that is more than the Lakers could have offered. I don't think the Lakers could have gotten him.
Utah gave Bogdonovic 4 years and $73 million. The Lakers could have beaten that.
_________________
“When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.”
--Anonymous |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 6:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LakersRGolden wrote: | | Bogdonovic or Dlo if he would agree. |
Dlo signed for the max ($27M). Out of our price range.
Use the salaries people actually signed for. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Four Decade Bandwagon
Star Player
Joined: 18 Jul 2014
Posts: 8156
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 7:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
Your point of there are not a lot of good options with only $23M is a great one that most will agree with. I do. It is just debating which bad option you prefer.
IMO the issue should be backed up to the AD trade. Or even pushed back to the James signing. Both were moves that were like a raft on a rushing river with no paddles. Just gaining speed with no control.
Lakers put on the brakes on the AD trade then they have options left. Once they made the trade we are just along for the ride. Hopefully it ends in a nice tranquil lake and not a towering waterfall. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 7:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Four Decade Bandwagon wrote: | Your point of there are not a lot of good options with only $23M is a great one that most will agree with. I do. It is just debating which bad option you prefer.
IMO the issue should be backed up to the AD trade. Or even pushed back to the James signing. Both were moves that were like a raft on a rushing river with no paddles. Just gaining speed with no control.
Lakers put on the brakes on the AD trade then they have options left. Once they made the trade we are just along for the ride. Hopefully it ends in a nice tranquil lake and not a towering waterfall. |
Well, I created this because people are saying all of the other options are drying up.
Ok, so, if we didnt have a chance to Kawhi, we’d have jumped right into the mix so I am curious which players, at the salaries they signed for, would have been the path to go down.
We could have done say, Terrence Ross and Reggie Bullock for our $23M. Would it be better to have them in hand right now versus not having them and a solid chance at Kawhi? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Four Decade Bandwagon
Star Player
Joined: 18 Jul 2014
Posts: 8156
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 7:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: | | Four Decade Bandwagon wrote: | Your point of there are not a lot of good options with only $23M is a great one that most will agree with. I do. It is just debating which bad option you prefer.
IMO the issue should be backed up to the AD trade. Or even pushed back to the James signing. Both were moves that were like a raft on a rushing river with no paddles. Just gaining speed with no control.
Lakers put on the brakes on the AD trade then they have options left. Once they made the trade we are just along for the ride. Hopefully it ends in a nice tranquil lake and not a towering waterfall. |
Well, I created this because people are saying all of the other options are drying up.
Ok, so, if we didnt have a chance to Kawhi, we’d have jumped right into the mix so I am curious which players, at the salaries they signed for, would have been the path to go down.
We could have done say, Terrence Ross and Reggie Bullock for our $23M. Would it be better to have them in hand right now versus not having them and a solid chance at Kawhi? |
OK, Leonard off the table. And Davis still refuses to waive his trade kicker.
Current salary. I would have focused on Brogdan. Young PG that plays defense and works his ass off. Creates a future for pairing with Davis. Would use same strategy with Russell if $4m trade kicker was available.
Who knows, maybe Russell agrees to less if not treated as a pitiful back up plan. Arguably how Leonard is treating the Lakers now.
Likely the rest of the bargain bin players are exactly the same as they will be looking at if Leonard chooses the Lakers. Just a day or two earlier for potentially a team friendly deal or two that is likely lost waiting on Leonard's indecision.
I agree with your concept though. Waiting on Leonard is the only thing the Lakers can do at the moment. There is no other viable option at this point. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 9:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Four Decade Bandwagon wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | Four Decade Bandwagon wrote: | Your point of there are not a lot of good options with only $23M is a great one that most will agree with. I do. It is just debating which bad option you prefer.
IMO the issue should be backed up to the AD trade. Or even pushed back to the James signing. Both were moves that were like a raft on a rushing river with no paddles. Just gaining speed with no control.
Lakers put on the brakes on the AD trade then they have options left. Once they made the trade we are just along for the ride. Hopefully it ends in a nice tranquil lake and not a towering waterfall. |
Well, I created this because people are saying all of the other options are drying up.
Ok, so, if we didnt have a chance to Kawhi, we’d have jumped right into the mix so I am curious which players, at the salaries they signed for, would have been the path to go down.
We could have done say, Terrence Ross and Reggie Bullock for our $23M. Would it be better to have them in hand right now versus not having them and a solid chance at Kawhi? |
OK, Leonard off the table. And Davis still refuses to waive his trade kicker.
Current salary. I would have focused on Brogdan. Young PG that plays defense and works his ass off. Creates a future for pairing with Davis. Would use same strategy with Russell if $4m trade kicker was available.
Who knows, maybe Russell agrees to less if not treated as a pitiful back up plan. Arguably how Leonard is treating the Lakers now.
Likely the rest of the bargain bin players are exactly the same as they will be looking at if Leonard chooses the Lakers. Just a day or two earlier for potentially a team friendly deal or two that is likely lost waiting on Leonard's indecision.
I agree with your concept though. Waiting on Leonard is the only thing the Lakers can do at the moment. There is no other viable option at this point. |
Brogdon, not a bad choice. But we are waiting just the same now except potentially until what, July 9th to see if MIL matches?
I feel like if the complaints (not from you) is on waiting for Kawhi, then RFAs should certainly be off the board in this exercise. I just think it helps to show people, that there is was no other desirable option really. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mhan00
Retired Number
Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 32067
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 9:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Yep. The contracts that were handed out yesterday were NUTS. The only thing yesterday proved was that every plan B we came up with was far too optimistic. Essentially every guy we wanted for room exception or vet min got 8-12 million. I can’t say I’m sorry we missed out on that. It’s looking like another 2016 where a lot of teams are going to be regretting those contracts in a year or two. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AY2043
Franchise Player
Joined: 26 Feb 2012
Posts: 10621
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 9:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Given the contracts that were given out yesterday, I'm happy we're stuck waiting on Kawhi. I'd rather pick up the leftovers for cheaper and preserve some space for next year. There aren't any max guys next year that I'd like to sign, but there should be some better role players available for cheaper contracts than the ones given out yesterday.
Feels like 2016 all over again. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
YSong
Star Player
Joined: 16 Sep 2016
Posts: 2329
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 9:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Bojan for $18mm
Curry or Ish Smith for $6mm
_________________
💯.... Not an Insider |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 10:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| YSong wrote: | Bojan for $18mm
Curry or Ish Smith for $6mm |
Exceeds cap space of $23M.
You can have Bojan and Garrett Temple or you can wait for Kawhi. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
