LakersGround.net To Go | Trade and Free Agency Discussion


Irving for Westbrook?

Irving for Westbrook? 
Author: unleasHell 
Posted: 12/07 2:02 AM 
 
Headcase but would he be a better fit?


 
Author: jodeke 
Posted: 02/12 8:08 PM 
 
Hell to da NO!! You know Westbrook's going to come to work. With Kyrie you never know. I don't think he'd fit chemistry wise and that's a very important element.


 
Author: LuciusAllen 
Posted: 06/05 7:42 PM 
 
jodeke wrote:
Hell to da NO!! You know Westbrook's going to come to work. With Kyrie you never know. I don't think he'd fit chemistry wise and that's a very important element.

He literally already played and won a title with Lebron. Yeah, he's got his quirks and then some, but he'd be a lot better than Westbrook for this team. I would become a flat-earther if it meant a trade like this could go through.


 
Author: cathy78 
Posted: 06/05 8:13 PM 
 
I'd rather take Durant than Irving....


 
Author: ChickenStu 
Posted: 06/07 8:39 AM 
 
Complete and utter no-brainer. Irving obviously has his warts and is a space cadet. However, he is really, really skilled offensively, and the fit works from a basketball perspective. The fit with Westbrook is beyond disastrous. Since we're going to be picking up the pieces after the LeBron era anyway, I am of the opinion that if we're going to keep LeBron and AD, that we have to go for it, within reason. Irving is a top-echelon offensive player in the league and at least in this case, where we're making another major addition, we shouldn't have as many issues with an adjustment period to integrate the "stars" together, as LeBron and Kyrie obviously have prior chemistry together. I deeply believe that you're either going for it or you're not. I view keeping RW as the absolute worst thing that we can do, if we're keeping LeBron and AD, because I don't believe we have any chance of winning a title with RW on the team. So if there's not the right trade to make, rather than wasting a year of LeBron's limited time left, I'd pivot to a re-tool and deal LeBron and at least get assets and just let RW expire and look to 2023-24 and beyond. Don't half-ass it. One path or the other.

I don't expect this to happen but if there was a way for us to land Kyrie even if we have to give up our two future 1st's, I'd take the gamble and I'd go for it. I assume the Nets wouldn't take RW though, as that seems antithetical to how they want to play, plus the whole KD reuniting with RW thing. However, perhaps a third team could take RW if they could get draft assets and/or a young player or two, with the Nets getting back useful pieces that they'd rather have instead of extending Kyrie, if ownership is really done with him, since they should also be in win-now mode with KD. If KD is also fed up with Kyrie, I suppose it's something Nets management could consider.


 
Author: venturalakersfan 
Posted: 06/07 3:37 PM 
 
Would a kick to the knee be better than a kick to the nuts? It’s sad that the future of the Lakers includes this discussion.

LakersGround.net To Go | Trade and Free Agency Discussion