Nets/Lakers getting LA a center

[Texas Chuck]

Cut kleber and Vincent. They are just off-season salary matching which is why they aren't mentioned in why Brooklyn considers it.

Sent from my SM-A156U using RealGM mobile app

[JKiddy]

Texas, why are you pushing for Claxton to LAL so hard?

This trade does not help BK and only helps LAL.

[oldncreaky]

With NBA revenues and contracts going up over the next couple years that Claxton contract will only look better.

He is at least fairly priced for a player his age that can contribute what he does already with the upside he has going forward.

With the NBA minimum salary requirement that the Nets will be stretching to meet next year they really have little incentive to get off his contract.

I can see why the Lakers would want him but they will not get him for free.

\

Couldn't agree more with the bolded

A quick look at BRK cap sheet for 2025-26 shows 9 players under contract for $63.4M -- and needing to spend another $76M or so to reach the salary floor.

Add in a few rookies (2? 3?, 4?), and you're looking at having just 1 or 2 spots available, and needing to spend $65-75M on those 1 or 2 roster spots, to reach the salary floor of $140M. There's no way BRK will want to make this problem more difficult by using up roster spots by trading one of their 2 high salary guys (Claxton) in a 3-for-1 trade.

I expect BRK to be interested in the kinds of trades DET did last summer, where they take on higher salary expiring contracts and get picks in compensation. I'll be really surprised if they ship out either of their high-salary players (Claxton, Johnson) unless they are also taking back a lot ($50M+) in salary.

[JKiddy]

With NBA revenues and contracts going up over the next couple years that Claxton contract will only look better.

He is at least fairly priced for a player his age that can contribute what he does already with the upside he has going forward.

With the NBA minimum salary requirement that the Nets will be stretching to meet next year they really have little incentive to get off his contract.

I can see why the Lakers would want him but they will not get him for free.

\

Couldn't agree more with the bolded

A quick look at BRK cap sheet for 2025-26 shows 9 players under contract for $63.4M -- and needing to spend another $76M or so to reach the salary floor.

Add in a few rookies (2? 3?, 4?), and you're looking at having just 1 or 2 spots available, and needing to spend $65-75M on those 1 or 2 roster spots, to reach the salary floor of $140M. There's no way BRK will want to make this problem more difficult by using up roster spots by trading one of their 2 high salary guys (Claxton) in a 3-for-1 trade.

I expect BRK to be interested in the kinds of trades DET did last summer, where they take on higher salary expiring contracts and get picks in compensation. I'll be really surprised if they ship out either of their high-salary players (Claxton, Johnson) unless they are also taking back a lot ($50M+) in salary.

BINGO

[Astaluego]

Texas, why are you pushing for Claxton to LAL so hard?

This trade does not help BK and only helps LAL.

I think a trade makes a lot of sense for both teams (we can argue about value). Claxton is a perfect fit for the LAKERS and the NETS at the start of their rebuild (this is why they overpaid to get their picks back, right?).
They need the assets they can get more than a good role player (who, by the way, has seen a significant drop in production due to a lack of competitive motivation/players who can feed him). So what's the point of keeping him if
1You don't want him to help you win.
2. His value is trending downwards in a rebuilding situation.
3. Plus, the Nets have Sharpe/Clowney and up to 4 RPF from the upcoming Draft, which, by the way, is loaded with Centers.

[JKiddy]

I have been trying to explain the Nets need money on the salary cap for CBA rules. They also want to either keep Claxton or trade him for a better player. None of these Lakers are better than him. So, it would not go any further between the LAL and BK GMs and Ownership. That is what likely happens in the real world of the NBA.

But, this was definitely an interesting scenario for sure.

[nzahir]

Texas, why are you pushing for Claxton to LAL so hard?

This trade does not help BK and only helps LAL.

I think a trade makes a lot of sense for both teams (we can argue about value). Claxton is a perfect fit for the LAKERS and the NETS at the start of their rebuild (this is why they overpaid to get their picks back, right?).
They need the assets they can get more than a good role player (who, by the way, has seen a significant drop in production due to a lack of competitive motivation/players who can feed him). So what's the point of keeping him if
1You don't want him to help you win.
2. His value is trending downwards in a rebuilding situation.
3. Plus, the Nets have Sharpe/Clowney and up to 4 RPF from the upcoming Draft, which, by the way, is loaded with Centers.

Is Claxton a perfect for for us?

Genuinly asking

He isn't a great rebounder and doesn't have mass, but he would be great in our switch system and can defend guys on the perimeter

Our rebounding worries me though

If we keep Hayes (as a bench C), then I want a bigger C I think

[Astaluego]

Texas, why are you pushing for Claxton to LAL so hard?

This trade does not help BK and only helps LAL.

I think a trade makes a lot of sense for both teams (we can argue about value). Claxton is a perfect fit for the LAKERS and the NETS at the start of their rebuild (this is why they overpaid to get their picks back, right?).
They need the assets they can get more than a good role player (who, by the way, has seen a significant drop in production due to a lack of competitive motivation/players who can feed him). So what's the point of keeping him if
1You don't want him to help you win.
2. His value is trending downwards in a rebuilding situation.
3. Plus, the Nets have Sharpe/Clowney and up to 4 RPF from the upcoming Draft, which, by the way, is loaded with Centers.

Is Claxton a perfect for for us?

Genuinly asking

He isn't a great rebounder and doesn't have mass, but he would be great in our switch system and can defend guys on the perimeter

Our rebounding worries me though

If we keep Hayes (as a bench C), then I want a bigger C I think

I mean perfect among those available (I would prefer Zubac, but I doubt it's possible)... when the NETS were contenders... he was a DPOY candidate, that makes me think that his drop in performance was due to a lack of competitiveness and I suppose that due to that drop in performance, the cost would be affordable.

[JKiddy]

CORRECT.

I cannot lie, it feels good to get validation sometimes on the internet.

Thank you.

I think it is obvious to the league right now that LAL is also very desperate for a player just like Claxton as it is obviously exactly what the Lakers need to contend.

[TheNetsFan]

I have been trying to explain the Nets need money on the salary cap for CBA rules. They also want to either keep Claxton or trade him for a better player. None of these Lakers are better than him. So, it would not go any further between the LAL and BK GMs and Ownership. That is what likely happens in the real world of the NBA.

But, this was definitely an interesting scenario for sure.

I would move him for something, and sign a stretch big that would be a more versatile fit like Reid or Turner. Claxton needs a PG that can set him up and shooting all around. LA can offer that next season. TBD on the Nets. Claxton did ok with DLo, but terrible with just about any other PG we had this season.

As for the salary floor, I see the Nets either taking on dumps for compensation, or trying to buy good players at a discount from teams that need to shed salary.

[JKiddy]

I can see a 3 way deal where Claxton gets to LAL if Giannis truly wants to come to BK. The Nets would have to depart with either Claxton and/or Cam Johnson unless they sign and trade other players they bring in this summer.