2021-22 regular season thread

[jbk1234]

1) His age fits the timeline
2) He shoots 36% from three
3) He can play both SG/SF
4) He can handle the basketball if/when something happens to Garland/Rubio
5) I understand there is bigger/better options, but this option is free.

Read on Twitter

I like free, but he has to want to come here. We don't have the cap space to claim him off of waivers.

[LivingLegend]

1) His age fits the timeline
2) He shoots 36% from three
3) He can play both SG/SF
4) He can handle the basketball if/when something happens to Garland/Rubio
5) I understand there is bigger/better options, but this option is free.

Read on Twitter

I like free, but he has to want to come here. We don't have the cap space to claim him off of waivers.

We dont have 3.5M in cap space? That seems as cheap as any contract is going to get

[Harper4Ferry?]

We must not want him because we have that trade exception and apparently all it would take is offering a top 55 protected #2 to get him.

[toooskies]

First Okoro, now Mobley out due to health & safety protocols.

[JonFromVA]

1) His age fits the timeline
2) He shoots 36% from three
3) He can play both SG/SF
4) He can handle the basketball if/when something happens to Garland/Rubio
5) I understand there is bigger/better options, but this option is free.

Read on Twitter

I like free, but he has to want to come here. We don't have the cap space to claim him off of waivers.

Well our roster is full, so we'd have to cut someone and if that someone has a non-guaranteed contract we might be able to take him on? Not sure how the numbers work exactly and I'd want that confirmed.

So the question may really be, do we prefer House over Ed Davis?

I don't think so. The protection Davis provides us at C is pretty important, and whatever keeps Mobley and Love healthy is paramount.

[jbk1234]

1) His age fits the timeline
2) He shoots 36% from three
3) He can play both SG/SF
4) He can handle the basketball if/when something happens to Garland/Rubio
5) I understand there is bigger/better options, but this option is free.

Read on Twitter

I like free, but he has to want to come here. We don't have the cap space to claim him off of waivers.

Well our roster is full, so we'd have to cut someone and if that someone has a non-guaranteed contract we might be able to take him on? Not sure how the numbers work exactly and I'd want that confirmed.

So the question may really be, do we prefer House over Ed Davis?

I don't think so. The protection Davis provides us at C is pretty important, and whatever keeps Mobley and Love healthy is paramount.

Or Tacko Fall.

[LivingLegend]

1) His age fits the timeline
2) He shoots 36% from three
3) He can play both SG/SF
4) He can handle the basketball if/when something happens to Garland/Rubio
5) I understand there is bigger/better options, but this option is free.

Read on Twitter

I like free, but he has to want to come here. We don't have the cap space to claim him off of waivers.

Well our roster is full, so we'd have to cut someone and if that someone has a non-guaranteed contract we might be able to take him on? Not sure how the numbers work exactly and I'd want that confirmed.

So the question may really be, do we prefer House over Ed Davis?

I don't think so. The protection Davis provides us at C is pretty important, and whatever keeps Mobley and Love healthy is paramount.

I think it's more like House or Pangos/Fall

Frankly, if we have Garland/Rubio/Sexton/House on this roster I don't think Pangos is worth carrying. At least Davis provides great veteran leadership and is more than capable of filling in when needed.

[JonFromVA]

I like free, but he has to want to come here. We don't have the cap space to claim him off of waivers.

Well our roster is full, so we'd have to cut someone and if that someone has a non-guaranteed contract we might be able to take him on? Not sure how the numbers work exactly and I'd want that confirmed.

So the question may really be, do we prefer House over Ed Davis?

I don't think so. The protection Davis provides us at C is pretty important, and whatever keeps Mobley and Love healthy is paramount.

I think it's more like House or Pangos/Fall

Frankly, if we have Garland/Rubio/Sexton/House on this roster I don't think Pangos is worth carrying. At least Davis provides great veteran leadership and is more than capable of filling in when needed.

If we get him for the minimum, rather than off waivers we will have other options; but doesn't Pangos have guaranteed money and isn't Tacko on a 2way?

[toooskies]

Well our roster is full, so we'd have to cut someone and if that someone has a non-guaranteed contract we might be able to take him on? Not sure how the numbers work exactly and I'd want that confirmed.

So the question may really be, do we prefer House over Ed Davis?

I don't think so. The protection Davis provides us at C is pretty important, and whatever keeps Mobley and Love healthy is paramount.

I think it's more like House or Pangos/Fall

Frankly, if we have Garland/Rubio/Sexton/House on this roster I don't think Pangos is worth carrying. At least Davis provides great veteran leadership and is more than capable of filling in when needed.

If we get him for the minimum, rather than off waivers we will have other options; but doesn't Pangos have guaranteed money and isn't Tacko on a 2way?

He probably takes Valentine's role on the roster as the end-of-bench wing so for me I think we'd drop him if we want House. With Sexton out, and if we drop Pangos, we don't have an emergency PG if both Garland and Rubio are unavailable.

That said, if House wants to sign a minimum contract he might see more playing time for the Lakers.

[jbk1234]

Well our roster is full, so we'd have to cut someone and if that someone has a non-guaranteed contract we might be able to take him on? Not sure how the numbers work exactly and I'd want that confirmed.

So the question may really be, do we prefer House over Ed Davis?

I don't think so. The protection Davis provides us at C is pretty important, and whatever keeps Mobley and Love healthy is paramount.

I think it's more like House or Pangos/Fall

Frankly, if we have Garland/Rubio/Sexton/House on this roster I don't think Pangos is worth carrying. At least Davis provides great veteran leadership and is more than capable of filling in when needed.

If we get him for the minimum, rather than off waivers we will have other options; but doesn't Pangos have guaranteed money and isn't Tacko on a 2way?

Yeah, it's simply not clear that Tacko is an NBA player. I don't know how this is a debate. If House will come here, you sign him and cut Tacko.

[JonFromVA]

I think it's more like House or Pangos/Fall

Frankly, if we have Garland/Rubio/Sexton/House on this roster I don't think Pangos is worth carrying. At least Davis provides great veteran leadership and is more than capable of filling in when needed.

If we get him for the minimum, rather than off waivers we will have other options; but doesn't Pangos have guaranteed money and isn't Tacko on a 2way?

Yeah, it's simply not clear that Tacko is an NBA player. I don't know how this is a debate. If House will come here, you sign him and cut Tacko.

If Tacko is on a 2-way then cutting him only opens up a 2-way spot. According to spotrac, Davis, Stevens, Wade, Nembhard, and Valentine all have guaranteed money that goes to them past 1/10/2022. So there may be some low hanging fruit - the question is - is House the guy we want/need .vs. waiting to see what shakes loose later.

[jbk1234]

If we get him for the minimum, rather than off waivers we will have other options; but doesn't Pangos have guaranteed money and isn't Tacko on a 2way?

Yeah, it's simply not clear that Tacko is an NBA player. I don't know how this is a debate. If House will come here, you sign him and cut Tacko.

If Tacko is on a 2-way then cutting him only opens up a 2-way spot. According to spotrac, Davis, Stevens, Wade, Nembhard, and Valentine all have guaranteed money that goes to them past 1/10/2022. So there may be some low hanging fruit - the question is - is House the guy we want/need .vs. waiting to see what shakes loose later.

Maybe I misunderstand the rule, but I thought the purpose of a two-way slot was to help teams limit in-season salary obligations with developmental guys. So while you can have up to 2 two-way contracts, you don't need to. You could have no two-way contracts.

[toooskies]

Yeah, it's simply not clear that Tacko is an NBA player. I don't know how this is a debate. If House will come here, you sign him and cut Tacko.

If Tacko is on a 2-way then cutting him only opens up a 2-way spot. According to spotrac, Davis, Stevens, Wade, Nembhard, and Valentine all have guaranteed money that goes to them past 1/10/2022. So there may be some low hanging fruit - the question is - is House the guy we want/need .vs. waiting to see what shakes loose later.

Maybe I misunderstand the rule, but I thought the purpose of a two-way slot was to help teams limit in-season salary obligations with developmental guys. So while you can have up to 2 two-way contracts, you don't need to. You could have no two-way contracts.

They're accounted for separately. You can have 15 regularly rostered players and two 2-way contracts. If you cut a 2-way guy, you can only add another 2-way guy unless you haven't filled your 15-man roster. (In which case you wouldn't need to cut the 2-way guy to add a regular roster player.)

I believe injury/hardship exceptions and the like allow you an additional roster spot if you'd like one. So we currently have Justin Anderson and Luke Kornet on the roster under the new COVID hardship roster rules. We might be able to add House under an injury exception for Sexton, actually.

[jbk1234]

So this happened.

Read on Twitter

?s=20

[toooskies]

So this happened.

Read on Twitter

?s=20

Bill Simmons has been on this train already:

Read on Twitter

[JonFromVA]

That'd be a new milestone for James. He's never demanded or even asked to be traded before and walking out on Davis while he's out hurt and presumably will be back would tarnish his reputation in a new direction.

And unlike last time in Miami, I haven't seen any reports that his family was unhappy in LA. Supposedly that's where they want to be, especially after some bridges were apparently scorched at SVSM.

[jbk1234]

That'd be a new milestone for James. He's never demanded or even asked to be traded before and walking out on Davis while he's out hurt and presumably will be back would tarnish his reputation in a new direction.

And unlike last time in Miami, I haven't seen any reports that his family was unhappy in LA. Supposedly that's where they want to be, especially after some bridges were apparently scorched at SVSM.

It was later refuted by Paul, but it wouldn't surprise me if LBJ let the Lakers know they need to add that 2027 1st to potential trade packages if that's what it takes to get something done. They're going to have quite the hangover out in L.A.

[JonFromVA]

That'd be a new milestone for James. He's never demanded or even asked to be traded before and walking out on Davis while he's out hurt and presumably will be back would tarnish his reputation in a new direction.

And unlike last time in Miami, I haven't seen any reports that his family was unhappy in LA. Supposedly that's where they want to be, especially after some bridges were apparently scorched at SVSM.

It was later refuted by Paul, but it wouldn't surprise me if LBJ let the Lakers know they need to add that 2027 1st to potential trade packages if that's what it takes to get something done. They're going to have quite the hangover out in L.A.

Assuming he remains professional, what's his play at this point in his career besides retiring if the Lakers don't do what he wants?

If the Lakers are looking forward to giving LeBron a full-max extension at 39 years old, more power to them I suppose. Alas, unlike the Cavs they can endure without their picks by snagging free-agents as long as they don't completely wreck their financial flexibility with ridiculous max contracts to over-the-hill always injured players...

Hmm, they need to be careful ...

[jbk1234]

That'd be a new milestone for James. He's never demanded or even asked to be traded before and walking out on Davis while he's out hurt and presumably will be back would tarnish his reputation in a new direction.

And unlike last time in Miami, I haven't seen any reports that his family was unhappy in LA. Supposedly that's where they want to be, especially after some bridges were apparently scorched at SVSM.

It was later refuted by Paul, but it wouldn't surprise me if LBJ let the Lakers know they need to add that 2027 1st to potential trade packages if that's what it takes to get something done. They're going to have quite the hangover out in L.A.

Assuming he remains professional, what's his play at this point in his career besides retiring if the Lakers don't do what he wants?

If the Lakers are looking forward to giving LeBron a full-max extension at 39 years old, more power to them I suppose. Alas, unlike the Cavs they can endure without their picks by snagging free-agents as long as they don't completely wreck their financial flexibility with ridiculous max contracts to over-the-hill always injured players...

Hmm, they need to be careful ...

LBJ isn't getting a max deal from anyone at 39. He's barely a full time player at 37 and not team is going to be competitive using a full max slot on LBJ at that age. The Lakers didn't even give Kobe a max deal at the end.

[JonFromVA]

So, House signed a 10-day with another team. Perhaps we'll revisit the idea of offering him a contract, but like we've discussed it's a bit early to be committing roster spots when there may be a better deal to pull off.

January 10th is a date to watch ... that's when a bunch of non-guaranteed contracts become guaranteed.