CHI | LAL | WAS: Is this the solve to the LaVine trade?

[drosestruts]

Deal can't happen till October 4th and would require teams like Chicago and Washington to buy out some current players, but it's still the offseason where teams can carry up to 20 players so hopefully can work.


Chicago in: Rui Hachimura, Gabe Vincent, Jarred Vanderbilt, and Christian Wood
Chicago out: Zach LaVine and Torrey Craig

To complete the trade Chicago releases Bitim and buys out Duarte. It gets them off Zach's deal which seems to be their primary goal along with getting younger - which is accomplished via the additions of Vanderbilt and Rui.

Bulls create additional room below the tax which could prove useful if they find any takers for Vucevic in a future trade.


Lakers in: Zach LaVine, Malcolm Brogdon, and Torrey Craig
Lakers out: D'Angelo Russell, Rui Hachimura, Gabe Vincent, Jarred Vanderbilt, Max Christie, Christian Wood, and Maxwell Lewis

Lakers add a third star and players capable of scoring a lot of points on great efficiency in LaVine. They also add two players that should fit pretty seamlessly in Brogdon and Craig. I personally really like the idea of a Brogdon-LaVine-Craig-James-Davis starting 5 with Reaves and Knecht coming off the bench. Lakers after the trade will need to round out the roster with some vet min signings.

It's an aggressive move to maximize the remaining years of LeBron James' career.


Washington in: D'Angelo Russell, Max Christie, and Maxwell Lewis
Washington out: Malcolm Brogdon

Washington will have to release some non-guranteed players or buyout some players (they have a few players on expiring deals that don't appear to be part of any long-term plans that would make sense i.e. Gill and Omoruyi).

Washington exchanges expiring veteran point guards while adding two young prospects in Christie and Lewis to continue adding young talent to their roster. They take on money while staying below to the tax to help facilitate the trade, and for doing so get two young players. They remain below the tax.

[Godaddycurse]

Too much money incoming for LAL. I think after accounting for roster hold they go over 2nd apron

[Colbinii]

I don't get the Russell/Brogdon swap.

[Scoot McGroot]

Deal can't happen till October 4th.

Why October 4th?

If Max Christie is involved, the deal can’t happen until December 15, as he signed a new contract as a free agent this offseason.

[drosestruts]

Deal can't happen till October 4th.

Why October 4th?

If Max Christie is involved, the deal can’t happen until December 15, as he signed a new contract as a free agent this offseason.

Probably true - this is what FanSpo says about Christie:

Max Christie cannot be traded because 3 months have not passed since he was signed. He will be eligible to be traded after Oct 04, 2024

[drosestruts]

I don't get the Russell/Brogdon swap.

I have Brogdon as a better fit in LA

[Colbinii]

I don't get the Russell/Brogdon swap.

I have Brogdon as a better fit in LA

I feel like they want the better shooter. But I have Russell > Brogdon, and adding value makes no sense for me.

[gswhoops]

I feel like this is over-complicating things. If both sides are into the Lavine to LAL concept, something like Dlo/Rui/Vincent or Vando for Lavine/Craig is fine IMO.

Chicago gets off Lavine's contract and gets some playable vets that they can maybe flip at the deadline, LAL gets their third star.

[TGW]

That's really bad for Washington. Christie and Lewis are completely valueless. The Lakers would need a protected FRP to actually make this worthwhile for Washington.

[Scoot McGroot]

Deal can't happen till October 4th.

Why October 4th?

If Max Christie is involved, the deal can’t happen until December 15, as he signed a new contract as a free agent this offseason.

Probably true - this is what FanSpo says about Christie:

Max Christie cannot be traded because 3 months have not passed since he was signed. He will be eligible to be traded after Oct 04, 2024

Fanspo is inaccurate in this case. I’m not sure where they would have gotten that?

[gswhoops]

Why October 4th?

If Max Christie is involved, the deal can’t happen until December 15, as he signed a new contract as a free agent this offseason.

Probably true - this is what FanSpo says about Christie:

Max Christie cannot be traded because 3 months have not passed since he was signed. He will be eligible to be traded after Oct 04, 2024

Fanspo is inaccurate in this case. I’m not sure where they would have gotten that?

Me neither. My understanding is that a player who signs in the offseason can't be traded until 3 months or Dec. 15, whichever is later. So unless a player signed after September 15, December 15 would control.

Maybe Fanspo got confused with the two-way rules? But that's 30 days and that would suggest that Lewis signed on September 4, which (obviously) isn't true.

[Scoot McGroot]

Probably true - this is what FanSpo says about Christie:

Fanspo is inaccurate in this case. I’m not sure where they would have gotten that?

Me neither. My understanding is that a player who signs in the offseason can't be traded until 3 months or Dec. 15, whichever is later. So unless a player signed after September 15, December 15 would control.

Maybe Fanspo got confused with the two-way rules? But that's 30 days and that would suggest that Lewis signed on September 4, which (obviously) isn't true.

Yeah. I’m guessing they just programmed “3 months after signing” rather than actually having to take a look at the data set it’s producing and adjusting when need be?

[kobe_vs_jordan]

Don't think there is a logical way to bring LaVine to LA. How much better is LaVine going to be on 15 shots a game vs Russell ? I don't think that delta is worth sacrificing depth on.

My boring counter would be Lewis for Craig based deal.

[xdrta+]

Fanspo is inaccurate in this case. I’m not sure where they would have gotten that?

Me neither. My understanding is that a player who signs in the offseason can't be traded until 3 months or Dec. 15, whichever is later. So unless a player signed after September 15, December 15 would control.

Maybe Fanspo got confused with the two-way rules? But that's 30 days and that would suggest that Lewis signed on September 4, which (obviously) isn't true.

Yeah. I’m guessing they just programmed “3 months after signing” rather than actually having to take a look at the data set it’s producing and adjusting when need be?

I believe it's actually January 15 before Christie can be traded. He meets all the criteria:
re-signed with previous team; got a raise of at least 20%; salary is worth more than the minimum; team was over the cap, and used Bird or Early Bird rights to sign him.

[drosestruts]

Don't think there is a logical way to bring LaVine to LA. How much better is LaVine going to be on 15 shots a game vs Russell ? I don't think that delta is worth sacrificing depth on.

My boring counter would be Lewis for Craig based deal.

Both Russell and LaVine had potentially career-best stretches during the Post All-Star Break in 2023.

For Lavine that translated to 27 points per game on 64.5% TS%

For Russell that was 17.4 points on 62% TS%

Both are objectively good, but when you talk about how much better Zach can be, and has been, I think the difference is quite significant.

What the Lakers, or any other team, are willing to pay to hope that that is the Zach LaVine they get? Well that's been one of the bigger questions of the offseason.

It seems the Bulls front office is pretty open to trading LaVine at the moment. He starts putting up numbers like that again, and well, the price is likely to change.

[ChettheJet]

It's a different version with the same flaw for the Bulls. You treat Gabe Vincent like an $11.5M poker chip amd nothing more. Take a look at the Bulls roster, they have Jevon Carter at $6.5M and then a player option. so you're sending them Vincent at $11.5M with 2 years, so they need 2 6 foot PG who are or used to be good defenders but aren't great shooters of late. They can't buy them out but would probably be better off with neither of them and keeping Duarte at 6-7. Add to that the not as remote chance that Lonzo Ball returns and Vincent and Carter never play. Getting Hachimura, Vanderbilt and Wood shores up their front court by volume but they take minutes from Phillips and Buzellis who were just drafted and are the future.

That's really bad for Washington. Christie and Lewis are completely valueless. The Lakers would need a protected FRP to actually make this worthwhile for Washington.

The Bulls wound be more than happy to alter this to have Vincent end up in WASH and Christie and Lewis come to the Bulls valueless or not (see above)

[kobe_vs_jordan]

Don't think there is a logical way to bring LaVine to LA. How much better is LaVine going to be on 15 shots a game vs Russell ? I don't think that delta is worth sacrificing depth on.

My boring counter would be Lewis for Craig based deal.

Both Russell and LaVine had potentially career-best stretches during the Post All-Star Break in 2023.

For Lavine that translated to 27 points per game on 64.5% TS%

For Russell that was 17.4 points on 62% TS%

Both are objectively good, but when you talk about how much better Zach can be, and has been, I think the difference is quite significant.

What the Lakers, or any other team, are willing to pay to hope that that is the Zach LaVine they get? Well that's been one of the bigger questions of the offseason.

It seems the Bulls front office is pretty open to trading LaVine at the moment. He starts putting up numbers like that again, and well, the price is likely to change.

Lavine definitely a better first/ 2nd option but We are talking about Lavine being a 3rd option spot up shooter behind LeBron and AD touches. Hard seeing him coming anywhere close to averaging 27 PPG in LA.

[Scoot McGroot]

Me neither. My understanding is that a player who signs in the offseason can't be traded until 3 months or Dec. 15, whichever is later. So unless a player signed after September 15, December 15 would control.

Maybe Fanspo got confused with the two-way rules? But that's 30 days and that would suggest that Lewis signed on September 4, which (obviously) isn't true.

Yeah. I’m guessing they just programmed “3 months after signing” rather than actually having to take a look at the data set it’s producing and adjusting when need be?

I believe it's actually January 15 before Christie can be traded. He meets all the criteria:
re-signed with previous team; got a raise of at least 20%; salary is worth more than the minimum; team was over the cap, and used Bird or Early Bird rights to sign him.

Yeah, you’re probably right. I didn’t follow exactly what mechanism LA used to sign him, but It would make sense they would’ve used their early Birds.

[Colbinii]

Don't think there is a logical way to bring LaVine to LA. How much better is LaVine going to be on 15 shots a game vs Russell ? I don't think that delta is worth sacrificing depth on.

My boring counter would be Lewis for Craig based deal.

Both Russell and LaVine had potentially career-best stretches during the Post All-Star Break in 2023.

For Lavine that translated to 27 points per game on 64.5% TS%

For Russell that was 17.4 points on 62% TS%

Both are objectively good, but when you talk about how much better Zach can be, and has been, I think the difference is quite significant.

What the Lakers, or any other team, are willing to pay to hope that that is the Zach LaVine they get? Well that's been one of the bigger questions of the offseason.

It seems the Bulls front office is pretty open to trading LaVine at the moment. He starts putting up numbers like that again, and well, the price is likely to change.

Lavine definitely a better first/ 2nd option but We are talking about Lavine being a 3rd option spot up shooter behind LeBron and AD touches. Hard seeing him coming anywhere close to averaging 27 PPG in LA.

LaVine is very much a #2 or 2B at the least with LeBron and AD.

[kobe_vs_jordan]

Both Russell and LaVine had potentially career-best stretches during the Post All-Star Break in 2023.

For Lavine that translated to 27 points per game on 64.5% TS%

For Russell that was 17.4 points on 62% TS%

Both are objectively good, but when you talk about how much better Zach can be, and has been, I think the difference is quite significant.

What the Lakers, or any other team, are willing to pay to hope that that is the Zach LaVine they get? Well that's been one of the bigger questions of the offseason.

It seems the Bulls front office is pretty open to trading LaVine at the moment. He starts putting up numbers like that again, and well, the price is likely to change.

Lavine definitely a better first/ 2nd option but We are talking about Lavine being a 3rd option spot up shooter behind LeBron and AD touches. Hard seeing him coming anywhere close to averaging 27 PPG in LA.

LaVine is very much a #2 or 2B at the least with LeBron and AD.

How many shot attempts you see available for him? Would get the shot opportunities of a 3rd option playing behind LeBron and AD.