Can this be the Westbrook trade we waited for - MIA/LAL

[Texas Chuck]

Don’t take it personally Chuck (this isn’t aimed at you), it’s the general trend. Westbrook needs to have a pick or two attached for every deal he gets proposed in. Lakers fans are adamant that it should only be with a deal that actually changes the landscape for them. This is true, but they get hammered on how bad his contract is and how worthless he is.

Sure. I agree with Lakers fans and Heat fans btw. I agree the Lakers should only attach value to Westbrook if they get pieces back that give them a meaningful chance to compete. I agree with Heat fans that they shouldn't be paying to salary dump Robinson.

My larger point is value and direction can be different. Take my Mavs. Lots of deals on this board that have Dallas attaching value to Bertans (in a similar fashion to Robinson deals for Miami) in order to get a marginal upgrade somewhere. I can look at those deals and see that the value is good(often too good honestly) for Dallas, and still have zero interest in the deal directionally.

I hate this deal for Miami. I just think in terms of value, they are winning because as much as I like both Lowry and Robinson, I think both of them are due more money than their play warrants.

So I don't think "RealGM" is wrong to say Miami would owe value in a swap like this. I think they are right. I also think Miami should never consider a deal like this at all because directionally its wrong.

And back to Westbrook. If he gets traded for long-term contracts that have "bad money" attached to them, I do think the Lakers could be entitled to incentive. Just like if he gets traded for good or neutral contracts, they would owe value. There is no one size fits all value to a contract, because the money flowing the other direction is highly relevant.

Cheers

[BBallFreak]

Don’t take it personally Chuck (this isn’t aimed at you), it’s the general trend. Westbrook needs to have a pick or two attached for every deal he gets proposed in. Lakers fans are adamant that it should only be with a deal that actually changes the landscape for them. This is true, but they get hammered on how bad his contract is and how worthless he is.

Sure. I agree with Lakers fans and Heat fans btw. I agree the Lakers should only attach value to Westbrook if they get pieces back that give them a meaningful chance to compete. I agree with Heat fans that they shouldn't be paying to salary dump Robinson.

My larger point is value and direction can be different. Take my Mavs. Lots of deals on this board that have Dallas attaching value to Bertans (in a similar fashion to Robinson deals for Miami) in order to get a marginal upgrade somewhere. I can look at those deals and see that the value is good(often too good honestly) for Dallas, and still have zero interest in the deal directionally.

I hate this deal for Miami. I just think in terms of value, they are winning because as much as I like both Lowry and Robinson, I think both of them are due more money than their play warrants.

So I don't think "RealGM" is wrong to say Miami would owe value in a swap like this. I think they are right. I also think Miami should never consider a deal like this at all because directionally its wrong.

And back to Westbrook. If he gets traded for long-term contracts that have "bad money" attached to them, I do think the Lakers could be entitled to incentive. Just like if he gets traded for good or neutral contracts, they would owe value. There is no one size fits all value to a contract, because the money flowing the other direction is highly relevant.

Cheers

Owe value though is where I disagree.

In a vacuum, you make a valid point, but none of this is in a vacuum. Value isn't determined by some market standard like the draft pick chart in the NFL. Value has to be agreed upon. And even that is subject to a team's needs. When Joe Burrow was coming out, Miami desperately wanted him. They had a bevy of picks that exceeded the chart value, but Cincinnati wouldn't budge because they valued the player they were going to get far more than the market standard.

What holds value for you won't hold value for everyone, so saying you owe value for something that you don't hold valuable makes no sense. Sure, you could say another team would give more. That's fine. That doesn't mean you owe what they're willing to give. It just means this isn't a good match.

The Lakers and Heat are not good trading partners. That's all it means.

[gom]

LA has to get the deal done with the Pacers. The sooner the better for the Lakers and the worse for the Pacers, because of $$$. I suspect they already have an agreemeent. The Lakers just need to be in playoff shooting distance by the deadline. They don't need that many wins. If Lakers do decide to blow it up, though, I'd rather trade for Lebron than Westbrook.

Real life though: Moving Westbrook to Charlotte might make more sense.

Read on Twitter

[jbk1234]

Lakers are better off cutting Westbrook than making this trade.

Personally, Lowry looks pretty washed to me, but it might take 20-30 more games for Riley to process that. I also don't have the Heat as true contenders this year. I don't think they finish top 4 in the East. Butler might get them an upset in the first round, but that's it. It wouldn't shock me if they're a play-in team.

Long story short, I think the Heat are either going to have to attach picks to Lowry/Duncan for cap relief/upgrade, or they're going to have to put Butler on the market and start the retool around Bam and Herro.

[Scoot McGroot]

LA has to get the deal done with the Pacers. The sooner the better for the Lakers and the worse for the Pacers, because of $$$. I suspect they already have an agreemeent. The Lakers just need to be in playoff shooting distance by the deadline. They don't need that many wins. If Lakers do decide to blow it up, though, I'd rather trade for Lebron than Westbrook.

Real life though: Moving Westbrook to Charlotte might make more sense.

Read on Twitter

If they already had an agreement, the deal would be done and Called into the league. If a deal is agreed upon but waiting, both teams would hold all players involved out until it’s complete, because they wouldn’t want to risk blowing up their “agreement” with a twisted ankle.

[BBallFreak]

Lakers are better off cutting Westbrook than making this trade.

Personally, Lowry looks pretty washed to me, but it might take 20-30 more games for Riley to process that. I also don't have the Heat as true contenders this year. I don't think they finish top 4 in the East. Butler might get them an upset in the first round, but that's it. It wouldn't shock me if they're a play-in team.

Long story short, I think the Heat are either going to have to attach picks to Lowry/Duncan for cap relief/upgrade, or they're going to have to put Butler on the market and start the retool around Bam and Herro.

Yeah, we know what you think. We don't agree now, on any level.

Lowry is rounding into form. 17 and 6 over the last couple of games on 42.9% three point shooting. I know it's a terrible sample size, but those numbers don't scream washed to me. He's played in three games so far and had one bad game. I'm not too worried about him. At no point last year did a healthy Lowry look washed.

[gom]

LA has to get the deal done with the Pacers. The sooner the better for the Lakers and the worse for the Pacers, because of $$$. I suspect they already have an agreemeent. The Lakers just need to be in playoff shooting distance by the deadline. They don't need that many wins. If Lakers do decide to blow it up, though, I'd rather trade for Lebron than Westbrook.

Real life though: Moving Westbrook to Charlotte might make more sense.

Read on Twitter

If they already had an agreement, the deal would be done and Called into the league. If a deal is agreed upon but waiting, both teams would hold all players involved out until it’s complete, because they wouldn’t want to risk blowing up their “agreement” with a twisted ankle.

Scoot, under most circumstances, I would agree, but in this case, the longer it takes to do the deal, the better it is for the team that is trading for Westbrook, because more of his money will be paid by the Lakers. So the Lakers trade money for potential losses, which is an equation that makes sense only until they are out of the playoff picture. The Lakers have LeBron James, though, so that's a long ways off!

[puppa bear]

Lakers are better off cutting Westbrook than making this trade.

Personally, Lowry looks pretty washed to me, but it might take 20-30 more games for Riley to process that. I also don't have the Heat as true contenders this year. I don't think they finish top 4 in the East. Butler might get them an upset in the first round, but that's it. It wouldn't shock me if they're a play-in team.

Long story short, I think the Heat are either going to have to attach picks to Lowry/Duncan for cap relief/upgrade, or they're going to have to put Butler on the market and start the retool around Bam and Herro.

Yeah, we know what you think. We don't agree now, on any level.

Lowry is rounding into form. 17 and 6 over the last couple of games on 42.9% three point shooting. I know it's a terrible sample size, but those numbers don't scream washed to me. He's played in three games so far and had one bad game. I'm not too worried about him. At no point last year did a healthy Lowry look washed.

My main concern with Lowry is his attitude. It didn’t look good during interviews in preseason, but hopefully that more his reaction to the constant questions about his “fitness”.

[Scoot McGroot]

LA has to get the deal done with the Pacers. The sooner the better for the Lakers and the worse for the Pacers, because of $$$. I suspect they already have an agreemeent. The Lakers just need to be in playoff shooting distance by the deadline. They don't need that many wins. If Lakers do decide to blow it up, though, I'd rather trade for Lebron than Westbrook.

Real life though: Moving Westbrook to Charlotte might make more sense.

Read on Twitter

If they already had an agreement, the deal would be done and Called into the league. If a deal is agreed upon but waiting, both teams would hold all players involved out until it’s complete, because they wouldn’t want to risk blowing up their “agreement” with a twisted ankle.

Scoot, under most circumstances, I would agree, but in this case, the longer it takes to do the deal, the better it is for the team that is trading for Westbrook, because more of his money will be paid by the Lakers. So the Lakers trade money for potential losses, which is an equation that makes sense only until they are out of the playoff picture. The Lakers have LeBron James, though, so that's a long ways off!

Would really suck to have it all lined up, with picks coming to Indy, but in waiting to save money, Myles lands on a ballboys foot and the entire thing is scuttled.