NBA Teams Wonder If LeBron James Would Be Open To A Trade

Moderators: bwgood77, Domejandro

YourGM99
Junior
Posts: 444
And1: 73
Joined: Oct 04, 2021

Re: NBA Teams Wonder If LeBron James Would Be Open To A Trade 

Post#21 » by YourGM99 » Tue Dec 10, 2024 5:36 pm

zimpy27 wrote:
YourGM99 wrote:The Lakers misjudged their window for winning with LeBron and AD. Probably because they were using Kobe as a gauge of how LeBron’s decline would be. They literally have a formula for what’s needed to win a championship with LeBron and AD and it’s exactly what the team has been in desperate need of the past few seasons; a center so AD can play the 4 and a legitimate 3 and D player that can guard the best perimeter player on the opposing team. Most people will blame LeBron for the lakers roster moves but if you pay close attention you will notice that the lakers roster decisions have all been based on not committing long term salary to players and trying to persevere future draft capital for the eventual rebuild. This goes all the way back to at least the decisions to not pay Caruso and not pay Schroder. The Schroder decision is really what resulted in the Westbrook trade which also allowed them to offload long term salary (KCP and Kuzma) and a player (Montrez) who about to be a free agent.


Yeah you nailed it and it goes deeper.

After their championship Rondo was offered $9m, they needed another playmaker and targeted Schroeder with Danny Green and FRP.

They offered Schroeder $80m/4 during 20-21 season, he declined, they then went looking for another playmaker in Westbrook. They lost KCP and Kuzma in the trade but that wasn't the main issue, main issue was losing Caruso who wanted $10m per year while Lakers would only go to $7m per year for 3 seasons. Lakers paid THT $10m per year for 3 seasons, this was the big mistake because at least an expiring Westbrook provided potential for a rebuild but Caruso was gone forever and he provided the transition defense, extra playmaking and athleticism on the perimeter that the Lakers never got back.

The 21-22 season proved the Lakers had no idea what they were doing. They surrounded Westbrook, LeBron, Davis with terrible defenders and yeah it was a disaster.

In 22-23 they move Westbrook for DLo and Vando. This was a good decision but only while Vando is healthy do they have a perimeter defender. They also have Schroeder. Their perimeter athleticism is decent and they make WCF.

In 23-24, no Vando or Gabe or Schroeder. Absolutely no perimeter athleticism. They fail.

In 24 offseason they tried and failed to bring I perimeter athleticism. We now sit and wait for them to realise that they need perimeter athleticism.



It was reported that Schroder stated the offer that was circulating was never actually on the table. And it’s believable, considering how they were pinching pennies at the time. The Westbrook trade saved them by not having to pay Schroder, they were able to off load the long term contracts of KCP and Kuzma, and get rid of Montrez who they didn’t want to pay either. Also, they didn’t have to trade for other players who they allegedly had interest in but were looking for extensions like Derozen, Kyle Lowery, and the center off the pacers. Westbrook’s contract expiration aligned perfectly with LeBron’s and AD’s if I’m not mistaken before they signed extensions. This would have allowed the lakers to significantly clear their books if they really wanted to. It was basically a trade to show they were doing something to improve the team but in reality it was about cutting costs and avoiding taking on long term contracts.
puja21
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,715
And1: 282
Joined: Feb 08, 2013

Re: NBA Teams Wonder If LeBron James Would Be Open To A Trade 

Post#22 » by puja21 » Tue Dec 10, 2024 6:33 pm

YourGM99 wrote:
PaulGaston wrote:
YourGM99 wrote:The Lakers misjudged their window for winning with LeBron and AD. Probably because they were using Kobe as a gauge of how LeBron’s decline would be.


What do you mean? If they were using Kobe as a gauge, LeBron would have been washed up 6 years ago


Exactly. Which is why I feel they didn’t go all in after they won the championship. Obviously the year after they dealt with injuries but it seems after that they went in a different direction. Maybe I worded that statement poorly or maybe I didn’t lol.


You could argue not going all-in for a reload means you think his window is LONGER, a la Dallas in 2011 with Dirk

You imagine your guy has a longer prime so you don't do the typical Lebron fix (mix of expensive guys and ring chasers)
Pickled Prunes
General Manager
Posts: 8,821
And1: 1,389
Joined: Sep 14, 2010

Re: NBA Teams Wonder If LeBron James Would Be Open To A Trade 

Post#23 » by Pickled Prunes » Tue Dec 10, 2024 7:35 pm

YourGM99 wrote:
Pickled Prunes wrote:
Vegeta10176 wrote:
All this is 100% correct how the heck does pelinka still have a Job it's a joke.. The man should be fired

I don't disagree with the premise that Pelinka has screwed the pooch on multiple occasions... but there is nothing stopping the Lakers from signing minimum deals. Those two contracts (Woods/Reddish) total a combined $5.5m. That's nothing. The thing preventing the Lakers signing vet minimum guys is a lack of vets interesting in signing a minimum deal with the Lakers. There are a dozen better situations.


Once woods and Reddish opted into their contracts the lakers had no open roster spots, and they didn’t want to waive them because they were trying to avoid certain luxury tax thresholds. This is why they were looking to trade players in the offseason but at the same time they were unwilling to pay the necessary draft capital to do so. This is also why LeBron took less money to help with the cap situation.

DET will take both of them into space if LAL include a 2nd. Pelinka is a bad GM, but he could figure a way out of this if an impactful veteran had wanted to come to LAL.

I honestly don't think they could have gotten a vet-min player to come that would be any more impactful than Reddish. (No, Tyus Jones was not coming to LAL. Dinwiddie, not interested. Have you seen Lowry's stats or PHI's record? Gary Tren? Westbrook? :roll: ) And aren't the Lakers old enough as it is?

No, the Lakers are not just a couple of vet-min deals away, but they could make it happen if the right vet came knocking.
YourGM99
Junior
Posts: 444
And1: 73
Joined: Oct 04, 2021

Re: NBA Teams Wonder If LeBron James Would Be Open To A Trade 

Post#24 » by YourGM99 » Tue Dec 10, 2024 9:44 pm

Pickled Prunes wrote:
YourGM99 wrote:
Pickled Prunes wrote:I don't disagree with the premise that Pelinka has screwed the pooch on multiple occasions... but there is nothing stopping the Lakers from signing minimum deals. Those two contracts (Woods/Reddish) total a combined $5.5m. That's nothing. The thing preventing the Lakers signing vet minimum guys is a lack of vets interesting in signing a minimum deal with the Lakers. There are a dozen better situations.


Once woods and Reddish opted into their contracts the lakers had no open roster spots, and they didn’t want to waive them because they were trying to avoid certain luxury tax thresholds. This is why they were looking to trade players in the offseason but at the same time they were unwilling to pay the necessary draft capital to do so. This is also why LeBron took less money to help with the cap situation.

DET will take both of them into space if LAL include a 2nd. Pelinka is a bad GM, but he could figure a way out of this if an impactful veteran had wanted to come to LAL.

I honestly don't think they could have gotten a vet-min player to come that would be any more impactful than Reddish. (No, Tyus Jones was not coming to LAL. Dinwiddie, not interested. Have you seen Lowry's stats or PHI's record? Gary Tren? Westbrook? :roll: ) And aren't the Lakers old enough as it is?

No, the Lakers are not just a couple of vet-min deals away, but they could make it happen if the right vet came knocking.


I think they were only willing to give up the draft capital to get Klay. I don’t think they were willing to give up any for any of the other options who could have been signed had reddish and woods not opted in. I’d take Gary Trent Jr. over reddish because his a better fit and he can at least shoot the ball. The same goes for resigning Prince instead of having to keep Woods who hasn’t been healthy. Also, I think Hayes had a player option as well. The lakers are actually not that old, no one is older than 28 years old besides AD and Lebron.

The whole narrative that players didn’t want to sign with LA made no sense to me, it was clear why no one was signing and it was because they had no roster spots.
Pickled Prunes
General Manager
Posts: 8,821
And1: 1,389
Joined: Sep 14, 2010

Re: NBA Teams Wonder If LeBron James Would Be Open To A Trade 

Post#25 » by Pickled Prunes » Wed Dec 11, 2024 3:31 am

YourGM99 wrote:
Pickled Prunes wrote:
YourGM99 wrote:
Once woods and Reddish opted into their contracts the lakers had no open roster spots, and they didn’t want to waive them because they were trying to avoid certain luxury tax thresholds. This is why they were looking to trade players in the offseason but at the same time they were unwilling to pay the necessary draft capital to do so. This is also why LeBron took less money to help with the cap situation.

DET will take both of them into space if LAL include a 2nd. Pelinka is a bad GM, but he could figure a way out of this if an impactful veteran had wanted to come to LAL.

I honestly don't think they could have gotten a vet-min player to come that would be any more impactful than Reddish. (No, Tyus Jones was not coming to LAL. Dinwiddie, not interested. Have you seen Lowry's stats or PHI's record? Gary Tren? Westbrook? :roll: ) And aren't the Lakers old enough as it is?

No, the Lakers are not just a couple of vet-min deals away, but they could make it happen if the right vet came knocking.


I think they were only willing to give up the draft capital to get Klay. I don’t think they were willing to give up any for any of the other options who could have been signed had reddish and woods not opted in. I’d take Gary Trent Jr. over reddish because his a better fit and he can at least shoot the ball. The same goes for resigning Prince instead of having to keep Woods who hasn’t been healthy. Also, I think Hayes had a player option as well. The lakers are actually not that old, no one is older than 28 years old besides AD and Lebron.

The whole narrative that players didn’t want to sign with LA made no sense to me, it was clear why no one was signing and it was because they had no roster spots.

Klay signed for 3yr/$50m... that is not a minimum deal. They had no shot.

Reddish has better shooting splits than Trent, and that is with all the spacing that Giannis/Lillard provide. Prince is a great example of a career journeyman that stepped into a good situation in MIL this season. Both Trent and Prince would be far worse if they were in LAL, and with Prince we have the history to prove it.

As I said in my previous post, it is easy to free up a roster spot, particularly when you have cheap players that you don't want. Maybe Pelinka isn't creative enough to make that happen. I agree that he's a crappy GM. All I'm saying is that to any decent GM, the two minimum contracts we're talking about wouldn't hinder them from doing anything.

Return to Wiretap Discussion