LAL/NOP/DET/SAS: Ingram and Murray to LAL (too big to be real)

[babyjax13]

LAL trades: D'Angelo Russell, Austin Reaves, Rui Hachimura, Jarred Vanderbilt, Gabe Vincent, Max Christie, Jalen Hood-Schifino, Christian Wood, 2025 LAC 2nd, 2029 LAL 1st (unprotected), 2030 LAL 1st (swap, NOP receives higher of NOP/LAL 1st), 2031 LAL 1st (unprotected) [$84.4 million]

in: Brandon Ingram, DeJounte Murray, Simone Fontecchio, Jordan Hawkins, Marcus Sasser, Antonio Reeves [$81.7 million]

LA increases their top end talent and improves their depth. The starting five has several scoring options and should be able to absorb some injuries. This is championship or bust, and is probably too shortsighted to actually do, but they'd at least have a reasonable post-LeBron top-3 in Murray/Ingram/Davis. LA would, of course, need assurances that Ingram will stay, or, if it is possible, to solidify a below-max extension as part of the deal. I think a follow-up of Reddish + 2nd(s) for a power forward makes a lot of sense after this.

Lakers depth chart:
Davis/Hayes/Koloko
LeBron/Fontecchio/min.
Ingram/Reddish/Knecht
Hawkins/Knecht/Reeves
Murray/Sasser

NOP trades: Brandon Ingram, DeJounte Murray, Jordan Hawkins, Antonio Reeves

in: D'Angelo Russell, Rui Hachimura, Jarred Vanderbilt, Gabe Vincent, Jalen Hood-Schifino, Christian Wood, 2027 SAS 1st (1-5 protected thru 2028, otherwise 2028 2nd), 2029 LAL 1st (unprotected), 2030 LAL 1st (swap, NOP receives higher of NOP/LAL 1st), 2031 LAL 1st (unprotected)

The Pelicans get several picks and swaps for Ingram/Murray. They have to waive two players, but that ... shouldn't be a challenge, honestly (the Jazz could waive some, too).

DET trades: Simone Fontecchio, Marcus Sasser

in: Chris Paul [bought out to sign w/contender], Max Christie, 2025 LAC 2nd, 2026 UTA 2nd

Detroit gets some seconds for plausibly downgrading from Fontecchio to Christie and moving Sasser. Maybe another 2nd or two and/or cash gets added to balance, that should be doable.

SAS trades: Chris Paul, 2027 SAS 1st (1-5 protected thru 2028, otherwise 2028 2nd), 2026 UTA 2nd

in: Austin Reaves

For the sake of this scenario, let's say Paul has decided to retire after this season and would like to sign with a contender. San Antonio decides to use him as filler to get a guard who can fit in with the team in the medium to long term, while not appreciably affecting their ability to develop talent instead of focus on wins.

[Rustyman]

"SAS trades: Chris Paul, 2027 SAS 1st (1-5 protected thru 2028, otherwise 2028 2nd), 2026 UTA 2nd

in: Austin Reaves"

No one other than a Lakers supporter would suggest this trade. No Spurs fan would.

[One_and_Done]

Spurs are never doing that.

[babyjax13]

"SAS trades: Chris Paul, 2027 SAS 1st (1-5 protected thru 2028, otherwise 2028 2nd), 2026 UTA 2nd

in: Austin Reaves"

No one other than a Lakers supporter would suggest this trade. No Spurs fan would.

I mean, I don't like the Lakers at all...two years from now San Antonio will be damn good, so what is likely a low pick for Reaves (especially on his contract) is a steal. The only way to buy low like that is to also incorporate some risk by playing with those protections. Reaves seems like an excellent fit long term for San Antonio to me...

[Rustyman]

"SAS trades: Chris Paul, 2027 SAS 1st (1-5 protected thru 2028, otherwise 2028 2nd), 2026 UTA 2nd

in: Austin Reaves"

No one other than a Lakers supporter would suggest this trade. No Spurs fan would.

I mean, I don't like the Lakers at all...two years from now San Antonio will be damn good, so what is likely a low pick for Reaves (especially on his contract) is a steal. The only way to buy low like that is to also incorporate some risk by playing with those protections. Reaves seems like an excellent fit long term for San Antonio to me...

Reaves is essentially a worse version of Vassell and is logging below career averages in virtually every category . A year ago, before they had to make a decision on Vassell, the Spurs were interested in Reaves. Now, he is essentially a duplication of something the Spurs already have on the roster. While the Spurs might need a better SF, that better SF needs to be better than Champagnie who is registering very similar stats to Reaves just on lower usage and Champagnie only costs $3m/year.

[jayjaysee]

I would guess you can involve a different team to give up a first for Reaves. Even with the player option, he’s a young enough guard on a two year MLE. SAS isn’t giving up anything that would stop the deal from happening..

Would focus more on if NOP is willing to trade Murray for such a delayed return in order to finish the tank/reset. Or if LAL is willing to actually push in.

I don’t think either team would/should be so aggressive on those goals. But also, I like the idea of the trades for both teams. LAL would be set for however long LBJ can keep going. And NOP would be set to tank and by the time Bailey is a star, they’re getting the Lakers picks post-AD/Ingram/Murray prime..

[Kalamazoo317]

Detroit's not moving rotation players for 2nds. Or trading for Chris Paul just to cut him. No thanks.

[oldncreaky]

Detroit's not moving rotation players for 2nds. Or trading for Chris Paul just to cut him. No thanks.

100%

A SRP is probably fair value for Sasser, but I wouldn't bother because he is the closest thing we have to a backup PG and we've got squat else in the pipeline

A SRP is probably a bit light for Tec, and he has a clear role (backup F) at a reasonable contract, so I wouldn't bother for a pick that might turn into a similar level player in 5 years. Clear no until both Thompson and Holland learn to shoot.

Taking on an extra $8M in salary and using up most of our available cap space for nothing? Firm no. It's not really helped by the argument that the amount could be close to $0 if an incoming player might agree to a buy-out. Why would DET risk this? Cap management malpractice

As for the other teams:
- no way SAS does this for Reaves
- NOP only if they are going to tank for the next few years; maybe they should, and they get good value, but it seems an extreme reaction to their injuries
- LAL would be deluding themselves that they can contend while LeBron still plays because I really don't see a strong closing group within the resulting LAL line up

[Kalamazoo317]

Given that Sasser cost us a late first and Tech cost us a high second and neither is terribly expensive and both could reasonably still improve but play a role for us now, the asset management side of things just doesn't make any sense.

[Rustyman]

Would focus more on if NOP is willing to trade Murray for such a delayed return in order to finish the tank/reset.

Murray would be good for LAL but there is no way the Spurs look at getting him back based on the history between them.

[jayjaysee]

Would focus more on if NOP is willing to trade Murray for such a delayed return in order to finish the tank/reset.

Murray would be good for LAL but there is no way the Spurs look at getting him back based on the history between them.

Murray goes to LAL here.

SAS part isn’t really necessary for the trade, but has nothing to do with Murray.

Some team would pay that price for Reaves if SAS wanted to keep their pick. They should take Reaves though. But they should push for it to be Tre Jones and not CP.

But even if NOP just has to take Reaves and try to flip him on their own.. It still seems like a worthwhile deal. If they are okay fully bottoming out. Owning LAL’s picks at the end of this run would be a nice do over for them.

[Rustyman]

Would focus more on if NOP is willing to trade Murray for such a delayed return in order to finish the tank/reset.

Murray would be good for LAL but there is no way the Spurs look at getting him back based on the history between them.

Murray goes to LAL here.

SAS part isn’t really necessary for the trade, but has nothing to do with Murray.

Some team would pay that price for Reaves if SAS wanted to keep their pick. They should take Reaves though. But they should push for it to be Tre Jones and not CP.

But even if NOP just has to take Reaves and try to flip him on their own.. It still seems like a worthwhile deal. If they are okay fully bottoming out. Owning LAL’s picks at the end of this run would be a nice do over for them.

On the whole, I think just leave SAS out of the deal completely. There are better options for them if they want to make a trade.

[Texas Chuck]

"SAS trades: Chris Paul, 2027 SAS 1st (1-5 protected thru 2028, otherwise 2028 2nd), 2026 UTA 2nd

in: Austin Reaves"

No one other than a Lakers supporter would suggest this trade. No Spurs fan would.

This was needless. I appreciate your follow up post where you talked about why you don';t like it for the Spurs. This is just some bad assumptions and offers no constructive content at all. Let's start there next time, please.

[wemby]

A year ago, before they had to make a decision on Vassell, the Spurs were interested in Reaves.

Were they? I don't recall anything in that sense, in fact it would have been pretty easy for the Spurs to present Reaves with an offer sheet given the Lakers limitations in that sense, they would have had a pretty solid chance of snatching him if they were willing to offer 20 million or so a year, yet they didn't. I think it was mainly speculation by the media trying to find a team for Reaves and a teammate for Wemby, some were pretty openly critical of the Spurs for not going after Reaves. All in all he's not all that and a high upside pick sounds a bit rich for him.

[Rustyman]

A year ago, before they had to make a decision on Vassell, the Spurs were interested in Reaves.

Were they? I don't recall anything in that sense, in fact it would have been pretty easy for the Spurs to present Reaves with an offer sheet given the Lakers limitations in that sense, they would have had a pretty solid chance of snatching him if they were willing to offer 20 million or so a year, yet they didn't. I think it was mainly speculation by the media trying to find a team for Reaves and a teammate for Wemby, some were pretty openly critical of the Spurs for not going after Reaves. All in all he's not all that and a high upside pick sounds a bit rich for him.

There was a lot of buzz about Reaves and both Spurs fans and the media were lambasting the Spurs for not making an offer for him. I think the Spurs were fearful of locking up their money while they waited for the Lakers to match the offer.