Which Laker trade would GS do?

shagadelic45 · Post #1 » by **shagadelic45** » Sat Aug 30, 2008 5:29 pm

GS TRADES: Stephen Jackson, Al Harrington

LAL TRADES: Lamar Odom, Sun Yue and: Luke Walton or Vlad Radmanovic

DanniIce · Post #2 » by **DanniIce** » Sat Aug 30, 2008 5:32 pm

No one is taking the contracts of Walton and Radmanovic.

Post #3 » by **loserX** » Sat Aug 30, 2008 5:39 pm

Well, as dcash4 has (correctly) pointed out, it's dubious that the Lakers will trade Odom for Jackson/Harrington because of their luxury tax concerns next year no matter who's attached...but the Warriors won't take either Walton or Radmanovic in this trade either.

As I've said in various Kings threads about Artest/KT over the past year, it is virtually impossible to get any value by attaching a short-term asset (like Odom) to a long-term liability (like VladRad). Nobody really wants to pay for a package where they can lose the good part but have to keep the bad part.

The best way to move an expensive liability is to attach a CHEAP asset (picks or prospects) so that the total package comes out to neutral-or-better value. Attaching an EXPENSIVE asset just makes the asset more expensive and kills the return...and when that asset can walk for nothing, the idea becomes even more untenable. Unfortunately, the Lakers have taken themselves pretty much out of the running pick/prospect-wise...you'll probably just have to swallow Vlad and Luke's contracts. You certainly won't get better players on better contracts.

giberish · Post #4 » by **giberish** » Sat Aug 30, 2008 6:05 pm

shagadelic45 wrote:GS TRADES: Stephen Jackson, Al Harrington

LAL TRADES: Lamar Odom, Sun Yue and: Luke Walton or Vlad Radmanovic

As pointed out by others, GS would want some positive long-term asset for Jackson+Harrington. That is not Yue + Walton or Radman.

As GS doens't really need Odom at this point perhaps you can find another team willing to give value for him (but as Loser notes, Odom + Walton or Radman is a tough package to sell).

old rem · Post #5 » by **old rem** » Sat Aug 30, 2008 6:50 pm

the only thing GSW MIGHT do would be something like Odum+ farmar + pick for Harrington+ Jackson.
Harrington + Jackson produced about 35 pt per....Odum producd about 14,yet costs nearly as much as Harrington-jackson combined. When it's starters who are not real bad contracts,it's not a big plus for them to just expire and depart. in a year....do I want Harrington+ Jax on the roster....or Vlad Rad and whatever I can pick up MLE?

Trouble is that Farmar means more to the Lakers than to the Warriors. However....GSW needs VALUE,and in the context of a non contender,a year of Odum really does not do more than shuffle the furniture. We'd be better off getting some stiff like LaFrentz with a young player and a pick,that leaves some plus beyond the short term patch. I don't see any urgency to "salary dump' 2 starters who expire in just 2 years. If theres a talant return and SOME $$ incentive.....then perhaps. the Lakers really don't have the stuff to make a very good offer at best---and have avoided making even that offer,instead it's been a few dozen bad variations of these sucker deals.

And,no, Cleveland does not have much to offer either.

Post #6 » by **dockingsched** » Sat Aug 30, 2008 8:36 pm

farmar means more to the lakers than the warriors? farmar averaged 9.1 compared to m. williams 5.9 ppg. those numbers show a significant improvement in starting point guard when ellis is out and a significant improvement in back pg when ellis comes back. ppg don't lie man.

turk3d · Post #7 » by **turk3d** » Sat Aug 30, 2008 8:43 pm

I don't think that the Lakers should trade Farmar. I do think that Odom for Harrington and Jackson is a fair start. Probably Odom + Mihm for Jackson + Harrington + Perovic maybe but Idon't it gets done. Between the Lakers and the Ws, each team will want to rape the other, so I doubt that anything that is fair to both sides wil happen. Myabe a draft pick from the Lakers would even things up a little more. This not about the money on the Lakers standpoint, it's about improving their team (which doesn't need all that much improvement) for the next 2 years.

Post #8 » by **gswhoops** » Sat Aug 30, 2008 9:36 pm

The only way that the Warriors would take back Walton's or Radmonovic's contracts would be if Farmar was attached to it.

Jackson + Harrington -for- Odom + Luke/VladRad + Farmar

shagadelic45 · Post #9 » by **shagadelic45** » Sat Aug 30, 2008 9:39 pm

ok...that works too. done

Jackson + Harrington -for- Odom + Luke/VladRad + Farmar

Smills91 · Post #10 » by **Smills91** » Sun Aug 31, 2008 12:08 am

loserX wrote:Well, as dcash4 has (correctly) pointed out, it's dubious that the Lakers will trade Odom for Jackson/Harrington because of their luxury tax concerns next year no matter who's attached...but the Warriors won't take either Walton or Radmanovic in this trade either.

As I've said in various Kings threads about Artest/KT over the past year, it is virtually impossible to get any value by attaching a short-term asset (like Odom) to a long-term liability (like VladRad). Nobody really wants to pay for a package where they can lose the good part but have to keep the bad part.

The best way to move an expensive liability is to attach a CHEAP asset (picks or prospects) so that the total package comes out to neutral-or-better value. Attaching an EXPENSIVE asset just makes the asset more expensive and kills the return...and when that asset can walk for nothing, the idea becomes even more untenable. Unfortunately, the Lakers have taken themselves pretty much out of the running pick/prospect-wise...you'll probably just have to swallow Vlad and Luke's contracts. You certainly won't get better players on better contracts.

And thomas has a SHORTER contract and Artest is a BETTER player.