dougthonus wrote:tigerae wrote:ShazamDaShiznt wrote:Well of course they would ask this kind of question. They are stuck with him, nobody wants this guy other than I guess a random tanking team using him to sell more tickets while playing for a lottery ping pong balls.
With his expiring contract, I could actually see some teams willing to trade for him to get some cap relief next season or have the ability to do a complete rebuild.
I heard the Hornets were interested. I'm sure some other teams who are in that limbo spot might be as well, not good enough to be a contender but not bad enough to get top picks either.
If I were the Hornets, I'd rather have Hayward than Westbrook even given the contracts, but it's a trash for trash trade either way. Charlotte has no other bad salary to toss in the deal, and the move only saves them 13M over two seasons (and costs them 17M more this year) to take on a worse player.
What team has 40M in bad salary they want to unload that the Lakers would be willing to take to improve their situation? That seems like an unlikely fit for anyone.
I think the Lakers could find a trade for a better player, but the sacrifice would be cap flexibility in a year.
If Lebron stays, then trading WB for a better player but longer contract is plausible scenario because with Lebron and AD's contracts they wouldn't have cap space for signings anyway.So flip WB for whatever you can, they would at least make the playoffs.
OTOH if Lebron is gone after this upcoming season, they will only have AD's contract (plus some other minor stuff) and could pursue a big FA to play alongside AD. They just have play out the season with Westbrook.
The worst case scenario would be to trade Westbrook for say a Hayward package, and then Lebron leaves next offseason. Lakers then are capped out with a Hayward/AD combo leading the team. I don't mean to say Hayward is bad, but the overall team outlook at that point would be pretty grim for multiple reasons.