RealGM

In the West, the Lakers have to be part of the conversation because of the LeBron James factor, though it's not clear to rival executives whom they're willing to trade in any deal and whom they aren't.

"At one point a month ago, they were dangling Lonzo [Ball] a little bit, but now they don't want to trade him," one of the execs said.

Josh Hart, Ivica Zubac and Moritz Wagner are available, rival executives say, while pretty much everyone else is off the table. To get Beal, it's going to take a lot more than that.

Michael Lucky wrote:At what point do we start shopping Ingram?

Laker_Kid wrote:I’d trade them for Vucevic. works short term and he’s also an expiring if he doesnt pan out

stan francisco wrote:Jokic/Nurkic/Vucevic in that order. Zubac might get to their level soon so we don’t exactly need to panic. If he boxes out more fiercely on defensive rebounds like they do, he’ll be an inch closer.

TJM217 wrote:I don’t see the point of trading for an expiring contract. Unless we get Davis we aren’t beating GS this year. Unless it’s a championship move I wouldn’t make a trade.

Kilroy wrote:

stan francisco wrote:Jokic/Nurkic/Vucevic in that order. Zubac might get to their level soon so we don’t exactly need to panic. If he boxes out more fiercely on defensive rebounds like they do, he’ll be an inch closer.

The flip side of that is that those guys are almost not as good a fit next to LeBron/Superstar 1/Superstar 2/Ball as Zubac is... We don't really need an all-star level C, we just need a guy that does exactly what Zu does... Run the floor, box out and rebound well, and has great hands/touch around the rim... Whoever we get likely isn't going to get the chance to do more than that anyway.

Assuming of course his trajectory is less Bynum and more Marc Gasol...

Pythagoras wrote:

Laker_Kid wrote:I’d trade them for Vucevic. works short term and he’s also an expiring if he doesnt pan out

Me too. I thought it was a mistake to let BroLo go, and Vuc is basically a rich man’s version of him.

ardee wrote:

Pythagoras wrote:

Laker_Kid wrote:I’d trade them for Vucevic. works short term and he’s also an expiring if he doesnt pan out

Me too. I thought it was a mistake to let BroLo go, and Vuc is basically a rich man’s version of him.

We should have kept Lopez AND Randle. Then try and trade Ingram for someone like Beal, that's not an unrealistic move if we throw in incentives.

Ball/Beal/LeBron/Randle/Lopez is a super balanced and devastating lineup. We'd still have Rondo/Hart/Kuzma/Zubac off the bench. Legit second option for LeBron in Beal, and a third in Randle. Very deep. That would have been a title worthy team IMO if Ball keeps improving, not really worse than the Bucks who are the best team in the league rn, thanks in a good part to how transformative Lopez has been for their offense.

Slava wrote:

ardee wrote:

Pythagoras wrote:
Me too. I thought it was a mistake to let BroLo go, and Vuc is basically a rich man’s version of him.

We should have kept Lopez AND Randle. Then try and trade Ingram for someone like Beal, that's not an unrealistic move if we throw in incentives.

Ball/Beal/LeBron/Randle/Lopez is a super balanced and devastating lineup. We'd still have Rondo/Hart/Kuzma/Zubac off the bench. Legit second option for LeBron in Beal, and a third in Randle. Very deep. That would have been a title worthy team IMO if Ball keeps improving, not really worse than the Bucks who are the best team in the league rn, thanks in a good part to how transformative Lopez has been for their offense.

I think the question they asked themselves was what does it take to beat a team with 4 all stars? In a series, after LeBron, the 2nd and 3rd best players are on the Warriors, then its down to how you evaluate Klay/Draymond vs Beal for the 4th best player.

Is the gap between LeBron and Curry greater than the gap between Klay, KD, Dray & Warriors bench vs Beal/Lopez/Randle & Lakers bench? That's what it comes down to. Lakers kind of needed a scenario where they could have the best of both worlds in the sense that they could use their cap to sign a max free agent while also getting above $/min production from the rookie contracts. That's what they went for, but obviously that didn't completely work out.

Now if you go ahead and lock yourself into a LeBron/Beal/Randle core, this gives someone like the Clippers an open run at adding Durant and Leonard in the summer and adding another obstacle in the same conference. That's what you give up by going all in, in the first year of LeBron in LA.

Of course this was all more avoidable if at least didn't offer one of Mozgov or Deng long term money in 2016, but that's hindsight.

ardee wrote:

Slava wrote:

ardee wrote:
We should have kept Lopez AND Randle. Then try and trade Ingram for someone like Beal, that's not an unrealistic move if we throw in incentives.

Ball/Beal/LeBron/Randle/Lopez is a super balanced and devastating lineup. We'd still have Rondo/Hart/Kuzma/Zubac off the bench. Legit second option for LeBron in Beal, and a third in Randle. Very deep. That would have been a title worthy team IMO if Ball keeps improving, not really worse than the Bucks who are the best team in the league rn, thanks in a good part to how transformative Lopez has been for their offense.

I think the question they asked themselves was what does it take to beat a team with 4 all stars? In a series, after LeBron, the 2nd and 3rd best players are on the Warriors, then its down to how you evaluate Klay/Draymond vs Beal for the 4th best player.

Is the gap between LeBron and Curry greater than the gap between Klay, KD, Dray & Warriors bench vs Beal/Lopez/Randle & Lakers bench? That's what it comes down to. Lakers kind of needed a scenario where they could have the best of both worlds in the sense that they could use their cap to sign a max free agent while also getting above $/min production from the rookie contracts. That's what they went for, but obviously that didn't completely work out.

Now if you go ahead and lock yourself into a LeBron/Beal/Randle core, this gives someone like the Clippers an open run at adding Durant and Leonard in the summer and adding another obstacle in the same conference. That's what you give up by going all in, in the first year of LeBron in LA.

Of course this was all more avoidable if at least didn't offer one of Mozgov or Deng long term money in 2016, but that's hindsight.

Well with the benefit of hindsight at least we can say Klay and Dray have been pretty bad this year. Neither are All-Star caliber, in particular Dray. I would easily take Beal over either.

It's more like LeBron, Curry, Durant, Beal as the top 4, then poorer versions of Klay and Dray, whatever they get from Cousins who honestly I don't think moves the needle very much given their style of play, Igoudala who is basically done and a bunch of mediocre bench players, vs. Ball (who I think would flourish with a good amount of creative pressure taken off him if we had Beal/Randle), Randle, Kuzma (who'd get even more open looks), Lopez, Rondo, KCP, McGee. I honestly like our hypothetical group a good bit more after the top 2.

Again, I think the Bucks comparison is a good one. They're the best team in the league, built around a dominant superstar at the 3/4 (Giannis is better in the RS, LeBron will be in the Playoffs), a secondary star perimeter player in Middleton (Beal is better), a shooting center (Lopez in both cases), and well fitting role players (they have mainly Bledsoe, Brogdon and Ilyasova). Plus the team would be a lot deeper.

If the Bucks can be a 9 SRS team, even if LeBron doesn't keep at it as hard as Giannis, that team I think could still at least reach a level that has them contending for a title.

As for going all in, we kind of have to. He's not a spring chicken. If he came here right after Miami, I'd say cool, we can wait a year. But I think we'd have as good or probably a better chance of winning the title with LeBron having a deep, Bucks-like team around him as we would of getting another superstar free-agent in the offseason. We'd be hoping that not only do we get the superstar, but that LeBron's own level doesn't fall off to the point where he can't beat the Warriors anymore.

LeBron doesn't need an All-NBA player to beat the Warriors: he did it with '16 Kyrie, against a better Warriors team than the current one, who IMO was basically a medium level All-Star. He just needs a reliable second star, and a deep team of defenders and shooters. And even if he doesn't, I'd rather spend these years as a top seed, possibly losing in the WCF in a close series, than in the current situation, holding out a small hope we somehow get another superstar.

ardee wrote:

Slava wrote:

ardee wrote:
We should have kept Lopez AND Randle. Then try and trade Ingram for someone like Beal, that's not an unrealistic move if we throw in incentives.

Ball/Beal/LeBron/Randle/Lopez is a super balanced and devastating lineup. We'd still have Rondo/Hart/Kuzma/Zubac off the bench. Legit second option for LeBron in Beal, and a third in Randle. Very deep. That would have been a title worthy team IMO if Ball keeps improving, not really worse than the Bucks who are the best team in the league rn, thanks in a good part to how transformative Lopez has been for their offense.

I think the question they asked themselves was what does it take to beat a team with 4 all stars? In a series, after LeBron, the 2nd and 3rd best players are on the Warriors, then its down to how you evaluate Klay/Draymond vs Beal for the 4th best player.

Is the gap between LeBron and Curry greater than the gap between Klay, KD, Dray & Warriors bench vs Beal/Lopez/Randle & Lakers bench? That's what it comes down to. Lakers kind of needed a scenario where they could have the best of both worlds in the sense that they could use their cap to sign a max free agent while also getting above $/min production from the rookie contracts. That's what they went for, but obviously that didn't completely work out.

Now if you go ahead and lock yourself into a LeBron/Beal/Randle core, this gives someone like the Clippers an open run at adding Durant and Leonard in the summer and adding another obstacle in the same conference. That's what you give up by going all in, in the first year of LeBron in LA.

Of course this was all more avoidable if at least didn't offer one of Mozgov or Deng long term money in 2016, but that's hindsight.

Well with the benefit of hindsight at least we can say Klay and Dray have been pretty bad this year. Neither are All-Star caliber, in particular Dray. I would easily take Beal over either.

It's more like LeBron, Curry, Durant, Beal as the top 4, then poorer versions of Klay and Dray, whatever they get from Cousins who honestly I don't think moves the needle very much given their style of play, Igoudala who is basically done and a bunch of mediocre bench players, vs. Ball (who I think would flourish with a good amount of creative pressure taken off him if we had Beal/Randle), Randle, Kuzma (who'd get even more open looks), Lopez, Rondo, KCP, McGee. I honestly like our hypothetical group a good bit more after the top 2.

Again, I think the Bucks comparison is a good one. They're the best team in the league, built around a dominant superstar at the 3/4 (Giannis is better in the RS, LeBron will be in the Playoffs), a secondary star perimeter player in Middleton (Beal is better), a shooting center (Lopez in both cases), and well fitting role players (they have mainly Bledsoe, Brogdon and Ilyasova). Plus the team would be a lot deeper.

If the Bucks can be a 9 SRS team, even if LeBron doesn't keep at it as hard as Giannis, that team I think could still at least reach a level that has them contending for a title.

As for going all in, we kind of have to. He's not a spring chicken. If he came here right after Miami, I'd say cool, we can wait a year. But I think we'd have as good or probably a better chance of winning the title with LeBron having a deep, Bucks-like team around him as we would of getting another superstar free-agent in the offseason. We'd be hoping that not only do we get the superstar, but that LeBron's own level doesn't fall off to the point where he can't beat the Warriors anymore.

LeBron doesn't need an All-NBA player to beat the Warriors: he did it with '16 Kyrie, against a better Warriors team than the current one, who IMO was basically a medium level All-Star. He just needs a reliable second star, and a deep team of defenders and shooters. And even if he doesn't, I'd rather spend these years as a top seed, possibly losing in the WCF in a close series, than in the current situation, holding out a small hope we somehow get another superstar.