Rumor: Bucks and Lakers considering MCW/Young/Lou-wil swap

Post #1 » by **Danny Darko** » Fri Oct 7, 2016 10:47 pm

http://www.inquisitr.com/3567374/nba-rumors-los-angeles-lakers-close-to-acquiring-michael-carter-williams-from-milwaukee-bucks/

More evidence of the Los Angeles Lakers having an interest in Michael Carter-Williams comes in the form of another one of the NBA rumors generating some steam. A Syracuse.com report has confirmed that the Lakers and Bucks have discussed a Carter-Williams and Nick Young swap.
It is most likely that if this deal were to take place, the Los Angeles Lakers will include a second round pick also.
It was reported by CBS Sports that the Lakers will consider reaching a buyout for Young if they cannot trade him. The Bucks would be doing the Lakers a favor by taking on Young’s contract. Because of how the Bucks are set up with their roster, they could use a shooter like Nick Young. The Lakers can obviously use Michael Carter-Williams. There is not a true point guard on the Lakers’ roster.

Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/3567374/nba-rumors-los-angeles-lakers-close-to-acquiring-michael-carter-williams-from-milwaukee-bucks/#m7Op8seDgYdRVeGG.99

Sees like a wild rumor but if we could drop Young and Lou-will for a single player I'd take it, cut Huertas and keep an extra bubble player. The thing that doesn't make sense to me here, though is losing perimeter shooting in this system.

gts1 · Post #2 » by **gts1** » Fri Oct 7, 2016 11:01 pm

I could see the Lakers moving Young but not Williams... Still need some adults/vets on the team and trading Williams for MCW does nothing but get them further away from that.

As for Huertas sounds like the coaching staff is in love with what he brings to the squad and is pretty much guaranteed to be part of their future at least for the coming season

Landsberger · Post #3 » by **Landsberger** » Fri Oct 7, 2016 11:10 pm

Why would anyone trade for Young? We've all but chiseled it in stone that we're going to buy him out if we can't trade him. Just wait and get him at a league min. deal in a month. Oh.... and for god's sakes! Why would we trade a pick just to get rid of him?

lake_show · Post #4 » by **lake_show** » Fri Oct 7, 2016 11:19 pm

Landsberger wrote:Why would anyone trade for Young? We've all but chiseled it in stone that we're going to buy him out if we can't trade him. Just wait and get him at a league min. deal in a month. Oh.... and for god's sakes! Why would we trade a pick just to get rid of him?

If we buy him out he can go anywhere he wants. No guarantees he even wants to be in Milwaukee. I guess the thinking is, if you're going to pay him anyway, by trading for him you guarantee he ends up on your roster and you pick up a 2nd round pick along with Nick.

The only question is who in their right minds could want Nick that much? :lol:

J/k... He does have talent. Just how much focus is left up there is the only concern.

Post #5 » by **Danny Darko** » Fri Oct 7, 2016 11:22 pm

Landsberger wrote:Why would anyone trade for Young? We've all but chiseled it in stone that we're going to buy him out if we can't trade him. Just wait and get him at a league min. deal in a month. Oh.... and for god's sakes! Why would we trade a pick just to get rid of him?

I think this is a fairly unfounded rumor despite the multiple articles, but I think there would be a few reasons the Bucks would not simply wait for Young (if they wanted him at all):
1. (also a reason to not do it) they are over the cap.
2. 2nd round pick
3. fear of another team signing him... yeah i had to laugh at reading that too.

Landsberger · Post #6 » by **Landsberger** » Sat Oct 8, 2016 12:48 am

It may be that the Bucks like him. They are the Bucks after all. Personnel decisions really haven't been their strength. The article was interesting in that it looked like we were taking a disappointing player off their hands for a disappointing player we have and yet we still had to part with a pick. If it's unwanted for unwanted that's OK. To pay an additional price seems like a significant risk based on the value picks have for us at this point.

yanuary · Post #7 » by **yanuary** » Sat Oct 8, 2016 1:34 am

gts1 wrote:I could see the Lakers moving Young but not Williams... Still need some adults/vets on the team and trading Williams for MCW does nothing but get them further away from that.

We have many vets - Jose, Huertas, Deng, Mozgov, MWP (?) Last year when we have D'Angelo-phone-Young drama Lou wasnt good teammate for DAR.

Lou is one big problem in Lakers. He doesnt fit to our players, new system - in offense, he is horrible defender. And Luke cant just permanently sit him on the bench its problem too. TBH he sux. So trading him wherever is good idea.

MCW is low risk (rookie contract) player, would be best Laker defender on 1-2 spots, excellent fit to DAR/Clarkson. He has much more value for Lakers than Lou and still i can see little upsid ehere. Dont forget that last year he had inj problems and he played with team without any spacing - we have many shooters,

SlimShady83 · Post #8 » by **SlimShady83** » Sat Oct 8, 2016 2:37 am

GM of the year if he can trade Young. But not my "boy Lou" noooooooooo not Lou - I just loving saying "My Boy Lou" can't touch this.

Marionettetc · Post #9 » by **Marionettetc** » Sat Oct 8, 2016 2:47 am

Inquistr is a pretty well known click farming website

K_chile22 · Post #10 » by **K_chile22** » Sat Oct 8, 2016 3:00 am

Nick young and Beasley on the same team would sure be something

sonic the laker · Post #11 » by **sonic the laker** » Sat Oct 8, 2016 5:06 am

I sure hope that's nothing but a wild rumor. Nick Young is a firepower that this team needs, off the bench. Anthony Brown needs to prove he can be consistent, and I'm not going to bother cataloging the various maladies Lou Williams brings to the court. If anyone is to get moved, let it be "Sweet Lou".

ZOOM!!!!

gts1 · Post #12 » by **gts1** » Sat Oct 8, 2016 5:16 am

sonic the laker wrote:I sure hope that's nothing but a wild rumor. Nick Young is a firepower that this team needs, off the bench. Anthony Brown needs to prove he can be consistent, and I'm not going to bother cataloging the various maladies Lou Williams brings to the court. If anyone is to get moved, let it be "Sweet Lou".

ZOOM!!!!

I wouldn't get too attached to Nick Young...lol I can easily see him being waived by the end of camp

TKainZero · Post #13 » by **TKainZero** » Sat Oct 8, 2016 5:30 am

Bucks are thee only team I can see trading for swaggy.

Do this. Fast.

Mcw would be fine.
Clarkson goes to the 6th man role.

Vae Victus · Post #14 » by **Vae Victus** » Sat Oct 8, 2016 8:51 am

MCW for Lou Will would be a dream come true. Get some more size and passing into the backcourt and more importantly some goddamn defense. If we dont have to give up a 2nd, then we take the deal and run.

Swaggy P if he's truly fallen out to the point of no return, eating his remaining deal is alot more palatable (2 years 8 mil, stretches to 5 years 1.6 mil a year payments is NOTHING with the current cap). Personally i'm more willing to give him a shot as he plays positions more in need 2/3 and is a purer shooter. If he goes back to his Dantoni year role of catch shooter AND DO NOT DRIBBLE just pass if he doesnt have the shot, he'd be goldne in the new offensive system we're running.

larry14r · Post #15 » by **larry14r** » Sat Oct 8, 2016 8:59 am

[vine][/vine]

Vae Victus wrote:MCW for Lou Will would be a dream come true. Get some more size and passing into the backcourt and more importantly some goddamn defense. If we dont have to give up a 2nd, then we take the deal and run.

Swaggy P if he's truly fallen out to the point of no return, eating his remaining deal is alot more palatable (2 years 8 mil, stretches to 5 years 1.6 mil a year payments is NOTHING with the current cap). Personally i'm more willing to give him a shot as he plays positions more in need 2/3 and is a purer shooter. If he goes back to his Dantoni year role of catch shooter AND DO NOT DRIBBLE just pass if he doesnt have the shot, he'd be goldne in the new offensive system we're running.

Not anymore because the August 31st deadline passed. So if we waive Nick the we pay his whole salary this year, and the last year will be stretched out for 3 years at $1.87 mil each till 2020.

Post #16 » by **dockingsched** » Sat Oct 8, 2016 12:23 pm

This is a guy who shoots below 30% from three. Unless you have two bigs that are spacing the floor or mcw brings some time of unique and elite talenr that makes up for his horrendous shot, he has no business being in anyone's regular rotation.

I wouldn't mind a move for Lou just cause I hate Lou's game so much but that would be more of addition by subtraction in my mind, nothing to do with wanting mcw.

Kentavicius · Post #17 » by **Kentavicius** » Sat Oct 8, 2016 2:22 pm

The Lakers can obviously use Michael Carter-Williams. There is not a true point guard on the Lakers’ roster.

WTF.

dAdo dA dEvil · Post #18 » by **dAdo dA dEvil** » Sat Oct 8, 2016 2:51 pm

Kentavicius wrote:
The Lakers can obviously use Michael Carter-Williams. There is not a true point guard on the Lakers’ roster.

WTF.

I believe Huertas and Calderon are true point guards.

One Love · Post #19 » by **One Love** » Sat Oct 8, 2016 4:18 pm

Some of your feedback is amazing... If we can get a 6'6" PG 25 year old that plays defense, rebounds and passes the ball for Loui or Nick, we do it ALL DAY LONG... Young is DONE in LA & Loui is a ball stopping tweeter that plays no defense and lives off of a jerky jerk move threat free throws... I would do this deal ALL DAY LONG... He may struggle behind the arc but he makes only $4.0 million a year (1/4 if Mozgov) for 2 years... He could be our defensive anchor as well on the perimeter...

ArC_man · Post #20 » by **ArC_man** » Sat Oct 8, 2016 5:55 pm

This article is terrible, I can't believe I wasted coffee skimming it.