Kyrie want to join LALA land?

[Rosque]

If that's the case, then we can have a trio of Kyrie, K-Love, and Kobe by next summer. That would be the fastest contender rebuild in NBA history.

Make that 2 times in 4 years. First was fail because of D'Antoni and Dwight and all the injuries(if we played whole year like we played in the run for playoff spot we would be legit contenders).

[ak7]

If that's the case, then we can have a trio of Kyrie, K-Love, and Kobe by next summer. That would be the fastest contender rebuild in NBA history.

I sincerely hope that is not our plan, as that team will play less defense than even the team that currently takes the floor for the Lakers - and that's saying something.

Matter of fact, should there ever be a statistic created that specifically depicts how often teams miss their rotations defensively, I'd bet my life savings that a trio of Kyrie, Love and Kobe would lead the league every year or place in the bottom 5 consistently.

I personally hope we stay far away from Kyrie assuming the product doesn't get much better (especially with his injury proneness). He just doesn't seem to be that upper echelon superstar that many thought he would be.

Give me Westbrook 10/10 times if I can get him.

[Big_Cat]

If that's the case, then we can have a trio of Kyrie, K-Love, and Kobe by next summer. That would be the fastest contender rebuild in NBA history.

There is basically ZERO Chance Kobe, Love, and Kyrie works financially under the CBA.

[Big_Cat]

Give me Westbrook 10/10 times if I can get him.

The problem with signing max free agents in successive years, is you can't spend your cap space at all!

So the message to Love would be, sign with us this year in 2015 and we will essentially throw the year away. It'll be you, Kobe, and a bunch of 1 year players that either can't get a roster spot somewhere else or has sucked so badly they need the year to prove themselves again. We're going to do all this, just to potentially sign Westbrook next offseason.


A lot can happen in a season. The player you are targeting might get a major injury, might be traded to an even better situation, they might win a title and want to stay, etc. And the whole time, by waiting for max free agents in successive years, you're going to be throwing away those seasons because Love + Kobe + 2014 Pick + 10 (1 year contracts) will be highly suspect in even making the playoffs.

[LApwnd]

If that's the case, then we can have a trio of Kyrie, K-Love, and Kobe by next summer. That would be the fastest contender rebuild in NBA history.

There is basically ZERO Chance Kobe, Love, and Kyrie works financially under the CBA.

uh yes it DOES, Irving is still under his rookie contract...it would work if he was traded for some how.

[ak7]

Give me Westbrook 10/10 times if I can get him.

The problem with signing max free agents in successive years, is you can't spend your cap space at all!

So the message to Love would be, sign with us this year in 2015 and we will essentially throw the year away. It'll be you, Kobe, and a bunch of 1 year players that either can't get a roster spot somewhere else or has sucked so badly they need the year to prove themselves again. We're going to do all this, just to potentially sign Westbrook next offseason.


A lot can happen in a season. The player you are targeting might get a major injury, might be traded to an even better situation, they might win a title and want to stay, etc. And the whole time, by waiting for max free agents in successive years, you're going to be throwing away those seasons because Love + Kobe + 2014 Pick + 10 (1 year contracts) will be highly suspect in even making the playoffs.

I don't know why you think we would only have 10 1 year contracts as there will be at least an LLE to use, with a good amount of flexibility between our cap number and the lux tax to take on players in trades as well. It is way, way, way too early to speculate how the roster make up will look like with a Kobe/Love core assuming they go that route.

[Big_Cat]

I don't know why you think we would only have 10 1 year contracts as there will be at least an LLE to use, with a good amount of flexibility between our cap number and the lux tax to take on players in trades as well. It is way, way, way too early to speculate how the roster make up will look like with a Kobe/Love core assuming they go that route.

That's because I'm not making the assumption of trading star players on their rookie contracts (when was the last time this even happened...)


The reason for 1 year contracts is because anything longer than 1 years, and you will be cutting into the following season's cap space. For example, IF Love is Laker's #1 target, than essentially all but $8-10 million, the rest of the contracts MUST be 1 year deals...or the Lakers will simply not have enough cap space to sign Love outright.

Now of course you can argue that you can always trade away a few million to get that cap space, what with as little assets as the Lakers currently have, you think it's worth it having to trade away an asset + player for pure cap space? I don't.

[ak7]

Now of course you can argue that you can always trade away a few million to get that cap space, what with as little assets as the Lakers currently have, you think it's worth it having to trade away an asset + player for pure cap space? I don't.

It's not a matter of whether I think it's worth it or even you or any other intelligent poster on this board, but merely a fact based on the history of the majority of salary dumping trades. You don't get to dump salary unless there is an incentive given to the team taking the salary in most cases. The fact remains that having a boatload of cap room is a much better asset to the Lakers than a draft pick in most cases, or a young player who they view as nothing more than a role player on a championship team.

Sometimes the way we as fans view an asset is not nearly in the same light as a front office does and because of this, they may be willing to dump an asset deemed "unworthy," despite the public thinking otherwise.

[Big_Cat]

Now of course you can argue that you can always trade away a few million to get that cap space, what with as little assets as the Lakers currently have, you think it's worth it having to trade away an asset + player for pure cap space? I don't.

It's not a matter of whether I think it's worth it or even you or any other intelligent poster on this board, but merely a fact based on the history of the majority of salary dumping trades. You don't get to dump salary unless there is an incentive given to the team taking the salary in most cases. The fact remains that having a boatload of cap room is a much better asset to the Lakers than a draft pick in most cases, or a young player who they view as nothing more than a role player on a championship team.

Sometimes the way we as fans view an asset is not nearly in the same light as a front office does and because of this, they may be willing to dump an asset deemed "unworthy," despite the public thinking otherwise.

I agree especially for a few franchises such as the Lakers, cap space is more valuable than a young player.

So why sign a hypothetical player like Hill maybe Kaman etc., to a 2 year contract, when you can get a slightly worse player, maintain the cap space and maintain future assets? My point is simply, IF the plan is to sign a max player 1 year from now, or 2 years from now, it's not very beneficial to sign anyone besides 1 year contracts.

[DEEP3CL]

You guys have to remember that LN is just a blog........started by fans of the team just like us.

[milesfides]

...a google search will pull up reports from even last year about Kyrie wanting to leave Cleveland. Again, cleveland's own radio and newspapers routinely discuss this, among other top media outlets. I'm not saying who's reputable or not, but guys like Chad Ford directly reported that Kyrie was privately telling people he wanted out. Brandon Tierney of CBS Sports Radio vehemently put his own reputation on the line when he stood by his story that a close source of Kyrie's said he was leaving.

And recently, from ESPN LA 710′s Mason & Ireland Show, Mychal Thompson: “My son Mychel, who is good friends with Kyrie since they played together in Cleveland, says that Kyrie said that if he did leave the Cavaliers, and the rookie-scale contract that he’s on right now, he would definitely do it for the Lakers.”

I've been arguing for a year now that I believe there's a reasonable chance Kyrie would opt out and take the qualifier for a year to leave Cleveland. The difference between the qualifier and a first year max contract would be negligible considering how much more Kyrie would earn through endorsements in Los Angeles and the new face of the Lakers. And the security of a long term contract is moot, because even if Kyrie hurts himself, he'd still get a max contract. And the reality is, if he doesn't sign an extension this summer, the Cavs would most likely trade him right away. What would be the point of losing him for nothing?

If Lebron comes to Cleveland, OK, I can see Kyrie Irving signing that extension. If he doesn't, I could easily see Cleveland trading Kyrie for Kendall Marshall and our top pick. Because if I were Cleveland, and I knew that Kyrie wanted to leave, that's what I would do.

[lunchboxAllStar]

http://www.lakersnation.com/lakers-rumors-kyrie-irving-willing-to-leave-cleveland-for-la/2014/02/11/

So...is it possible to have Love, Irving in Purple and Gold?

Is there anywhere else but the worlds worst blog site on this BS rumor is found? ANYWHERE at all??

[milesfides]

Try google, you might be surprised. Or maybe read my previous post.