I don't think this is possible. Unless you think someone is taking Deng. Even then, i dont think the math works
LeBron and Philly?
- Thread starter wade boggs chicken dinner
- Start date
The Lakers could get Kawhi from the Spurs (Kawhi and Forbes for Ingram, Kuzma, Deng, and picks), and follow up by signing LeBron and George. Trade Ball for someone useful who fits this line up better, and fill the rest of the roster with cheap ring chasers. Lakers +550 seems like a good bet
George and LeBron would have to agree to a bit less than max deals.
George and LeBron would have to agree to a bit less than max deals.
That horrible deal looks a little better this summer, when it will be expiring the season after. Any trade for Kawhi is probably going to be for at least one bad contract, unless it's superstar for superstar. Assuming Simmons isn't in play, and Boston isn't interested, are there any better available young pieces out there than Ingram and Kuzma?
New Orleans probably would if you threw in Ingram in a sign and trade for Cousins. Sign and trade with New Orleans and OKC for expiring deals (Lopez/Pope) or Deng allows them to then add LeBron. LA has just a ton of cap flexibility with all its expiring contracts (about 57 million).
New Orleans would have to seriously consider a deal with Ingram. OKC, I dunno if they’d be ok taking an expiring contract like Lopez’s. They likely won’t be competing next year anyway. Lakers can throw in a few picks maybe.
Last edited:
This article lists 5 ways LAL could get rid of Deng (doesn't even include Cousins). The two most intruiging suggestions are: (i) Deng and minor assets for DeAndre Jordan and (ii) Deng and Ball for Lillard.
As for (ii), not sure PDX would do Lillard but if LBJ and George are coming on board, would the teams do Deng and Ball for McCollum? McCollum might fit better anyways.
Plus, LAL gets to resign IT for their bench.
Oh dear, I have the years mixed up. So even better for the Lakers. They can probably fit George, LeBron, and Boogie under the luxury tax (121 million) without getting rid of Deng.
It's not the luxury tax they need to worry about, it is the salary cap. They do not have enough salary to send out to get three guys back, so they need to sign one or two of them while still staying under the cap.
They have 62 million to spend, so they can fit three, right? The issue does actually then appear to be the luxury tax, because three 30 million deals gets them up to 129 or so. Also fair to wonder if Boogie is a max guy, with his knee and attitude issues, but probably yes anyway.
I thought as long as you’re even a million under the cap, you can theoretically sign a max if you’re willing to take the luxury hit.
Nope. Outside the specified exceptions, you can’t go over the cap to sign any player other than those on your own roster.
If you're under the cap, you have to be at or under the cap after you sign a free agent. You cannot be $1M under the cap, and then sign a $30M free agent.
If the Lakers renounce all their free agents except IT4, they'll have just under $50M in cap space. Renouncing IT4 gets them up to $62M, which gives them space for 2 max contracts. A trade of Deng could either be used to free up additional space (may be theoretically able to free up to $15M or so), or use as a salary match in a trade. But I'm not sure there's enough there there to get them the 3rd bona fide superstar via trade.
Last edited:
The maneuvering BOS had to do in order to sign Hayward last year - most notably trading Avery for Morris - was done in order to be far enough under the cap to sign Hayward to the max.
Oh, it’s for guys on the roster. My apologies! So Deng would need to go for a third star from a bad team, which means Ingram would have to go, too, in order to entice said team to play along. Maybe Kuzma.
Maybe Deng/Ingram to New Orleans for Cousins and then sign George and LBJ? Salary would still be very tight, and I’m not sure New Orleans would play along.
You have the order backwards. But theoretically, yes. They renounce or move enough money to sign two max free agents. Then trade whoever is left for Cousins. That team woudl literally have no players though and Cousins isn't even coming back until after the beginning of the season.
I find any Lebron-as-mentor narrative entirely unconvincing. When has he ever taken on this role as a teammate, not as a summer workout buddy, but actual teammate?
He very well could go to Philly but the idea that he would do so in large part to personally pass the reigns to a younger player who isn't yet ready to compete on his level sounds ludicrous to me.
He very well could go to Philly but the idea that he would do so in large part to personally pass the reigns to a younger player who isn't yet ready to compete on his level sounds ludicrous to me.
Lillard may not be untouchable, but I'm reasonably certain there is no combination of players on the Lakers roster that would get Portland to trade him. They definitely aren't moving one of their guards (Lillard or McCollum) for another inferior guard in Ball, nor are they eating that Deng contract with their messed up cap situation. Zero percent chance any of that happens. That article is just a lot of Lakers wishcasting.
Well this Blazer website suggests McCollum for Ingram, Deng, and the 25th pick so maybe the idea isn't so unreasonable.
I mean how much trade value does McCollum really have given that he's owed $80+M over the next three years? I mean he's a nice player and all but he was the 19th highest paid player last year (and is projected to be the 17th highest paid player) plus the Blazers are in a horrible salary cap situation plus it's not looking like their team as currently constructed is going to go far in the playoffs.
That is Laker homer fanfiction; I don't think any of those proposals passes the laugh test for the other team. Why would Portland want to swap McCollum for Ball, much less eat Deng's contract for doing so?
For me Ingram is a much better fit (and better asset) than Ball even acknowledging contract timing. Not sure it is all that instructive what a fan offers, but Ingram and a 1 feels like much more return than Ball to me.
Last edited:
The Jordan idea is ridiculous, but it's inspired when contrasted with the two Portland scenarios. The league might even block those.
McCollum has less value than Lillard, and Ingram has more than Ball, so yes swapping McCollum for Ingram and a pick makes some sense. Still doesn't make the Lillard for Ball/Deng suggestion any less laughable.
With regards to McCollum's actual value... hard to say. I've heard Love/#8 as a package, but I don't think Cleveland would or should do that and I don't think that gets Portland excited either. I do think they could move him for a lottery pick and a nice complimentary piece if they decided to trade him. He's a perennial All-Star if he moves to the East.
Reasonable people can differ there, I guess. For me, Ingram is the one guy currently on the Lakers with a realistic chance (certainly no guarantee) to be an all-NBA player; there's shot-creation, passing, and 3 pt range already...albeit with some real gaps too. Ball has a theoretical upside to match, but guys who shoot 36% from the floor rarely get there, especially if they can't defend like Jason Kidd.
Given that he has extra year of control and position I recognize some will prefer Ball, but personally (and I suspect i"m not nearly alone) I'd take Ingram if I had a choice. That's especially true for a team like Portland who has guards and a ballhandler already.
As a 20 year-old rookie, Lonzo was a Top 5 (probably top 3) defensive point guard in the league. As for shooting, as bad as he was in his rookie year, his eFG% was only .002 worse than Ingram's was in his rookie year.
Ingram had basically the same eFG in his rookie season as Ball did- 44.2% v. 44.0%. Of course, he improved dramatically in his second season and it's probably safe to assume that Ball won't make that much of a jump. Also, Ball had a pretty remarkable year defensively by advanced metrics- for what they're worth- for a rookie.
Edit- lol, The Needler beat me to both points.
I think I'd take Ingram too, but I'm still pretty bullish on Ball. He'll always have his faults, but his intersection of size, vision and general BBIQ is really special. I didn't really expect to see it manifest more on the defensive side this year, but I think his offense will catch up.
Last edited:
eFG% is a way to assess shooting value, whereas shooting % is a way to assess the skill of shooting. When we're trying to project growth and upside I think the skill is more useful than the value metric. To say it a different way, sure it matters that Ball took a lot of threes, but he can't really take a lot more of them than he did, so unless we expect the % to go up he isn't in a good place. It would be surprising if he showed the improvement Ingram did, which to me is the point. That's especially true given his putrid shooting motion---for every Shawn Marion who makes ugly work there's plenty who do not. Thus, I don't have great optimism he'll shoot well enough to be an impact PG. Obviously, it could happen but I question why someone thinks it is likely to.
I do think defense matters, and he was better there than I expected. But my point is that if you shoot that poorly you need to be a truly elite defender, and he's not. If someone projects him to be, that's not crazy but again---as with the shooting, we're projecting a lot here.
Ingram today looks much better as an asset than he did a year ago; if Ball has a similar jump in shooting he will indeed be an even better asset than Ingram is today, given his position, defense, and other skills. But until he shows that leap, I think we have to assess what there is (strengths and gaps).
I do think defense matters, and he was better there than I expected. But my point is that if you shoot that poorly you need to be a truly elite defender, and he's not. If someone projects him to be, that's not crazy but again---as with the shooting, we're projecting a lot here.
Ingram today looks much better as an asset than he did a year ago; if Ball has a similar jump in shooting he will indeed be an even better asset than Ingram is today, given his position, defense, and other skills. But until he shows that leap, I think we have to assess what there is (strengths and gaps).
But then Ingram didn't much improve his shooting skill, he improved his shooting value. He shot .322 on jump shots as a rookie. He shot .376 this year. He got a lot more dunks and layups this year, which is not atypical in a player's second year, and can be expected from Lonzo, too. I would bet good money Lonzo's FG% increases significantly next year.
And I don't think we are projecting a lot. He had a nearly unprecedented rookie year in the traditional metrics (rebounds, assists, steals, a:t), and was elite according to the advanced defensive metrics. Literally his only weakness is his shooting. He aldready has a ton of value, arguably more than Ingram already (pretty clearly more according to most advanced metrics), and it's a little silly not expect improvement from here.
The Ball hate around here is crazy. I doubt there’s a single GM in the league who’d rather have Ingram than Ball, even accounting for Ball’s crazy family (which might be a renewed issue now that his brothers are back from Lithuania).
Ball’s trade value is a key reason I think the Lakers have a strong chance to land LeBron. Ball can be flipped for a better-fitting, cost-controlled talent, or bundled with Deng to land a high-priced veteran from a team looking to rebuild. Maybe even Kawhi — I think the Spurs are going to be underwhelmed by the offers they get for a guy with injury issues who’s a free agent after next season.
Ball’s trade value is a key reason I think the Lakers have a strong chance to land LeBron. Ball can be flipped for a better-fitting, cost-controlled talent, or bundled with Deng to land a high-priced veteran from a team looking to rebuild. Maybe even Kawhi — I think the Spurs are going to be underwhelmed by the offers they get for a guy with injury issues who’s a free agent after next season.
I think going from 32% to 37.6% is prety clearly improvement, though...what else would you call it? Also, why do you think Lonzo will get more dunks and layups, just because?
I realize there's people who hate Lonzo and don't think he's an NBA player. I am not one of those, I think he's an asset and a valuable player. However, I think the projections some have for him are equally unrealistic given a huge flaw in his game that looks worse after his first year than it did coming out of college. We typcially expect improvement, but that's where the motion comes in---it's a problem, imo. I don't see any statistical or scouting reason to think it will just go away. And the posts on this certainly do not present any reason to.
I suspect most GMs are nervous about his shot, while also recognizing the good things Ball does as well. And of those who are nervous, enough recognize the risk that he never improves to materially impact his value overall.
As I said before, I think reasonable people can differ on Ball vs Ingram....but personally, I think Ingram is ahead at the moment.
I actually think Ball would thrive with LeBron. People still don't get that Ball isn't a ball dominant guard. Offensively, Ball needs to be able to knock down open 3s to be able to play alongside LBJ, but if he could figure that part out they would be great together. This playoffs especially, ask Lebron how he feels about teammates who don't notice him open and then end up creating bad shots (or no shots) for themselves.
Because as I said it's not atypical for a second year player. In fact, I'd say it's to be expected. It looks like 8 or 9 of the rookies on last year's 1st and 2nd teams got more shots at the rim per minute or game played.
Again, it's not just projections. Objective statistical metrics, both traditional and advanced have Lonzo as a much more valuable player in his first year, even playing fewer minutes on the same team than Ingram was in his second. He's better than Ingram going by rebounding, assists, BPM, RPM, win shares, VORP, RPM wins, steals, blocks, deflections, turnovers...Ingram had a better FG and FT%. That is literally it. If Lonzo never improves his shooting over his entire career, Ingram has a long way to go to catch up, IMO.
Ball is so hard to value right now
In college we saw elite shooting and elite passing
In the NBA we saw sub NBA shooting and elite defense
I don't know I believe either side of the NBA stuff so far is real. I think he can shoot (I think he will be poor at the rim) but I am not sure he can be that good defensively, offball he will be a thorn (IQ and long arms etc) on... I just don't buy it.
Ingram everyone assumes will bulk up some, at which point he can be very good defensively and people can believe (or not) in his shot. His slashing ability and flashing running some point too will mean some have superstar grades on him. I'm not so sure but I think the odds are that one skill is very good and the others are at least ok which means star. With a shot at super stat but not buying that stock personally.
Kuzma I am not sure if he can play defense, like at all. Plus not sure his ego works for him trying too either. He's going to be a decent offensive player but he is so bad at defense his value was negative.
Kuzma is a guy I could see being viewed very differently by a team like the Spurs than is talked on message boards
In college we saw elite shooting and elite passing
In the NBA we saw sub NBA shooting and elite defense
I don't know I believe either side of the NBA stuff so far is real. I think he can shoot (I think he will be poor at the rim) but I am not sure he can be that good defensively, offball he will be a thorn (IQ and long arms etc) on... I just don't buy it.
Ingram everyone assumes will bulk up some, at which point he can be very good defensively and people can believe (or not) in his shot. His slashing ability and flashing running some point too will mean some have superstar grades on him. I'm not so sure but I think the odds are that one skill is very good and the others are at least ok which means star. With a shot at super stat but not buying that stock personally.
Kuzma I am not sure if he can play defense, like at all. Plus not sure his ego works for him trying too either. He's going to be a decent offensive player but he is so bad at defense his value was negative.
Kuzma is a guy I could see being viewed very differently by a team like the Spurs than is talked on message boards
The shooting certainly does require projection; I've explained why I land where i do there.
I've posted many times on the limitations (and the many uses) of rate and all-in stats...suffice to say, I think we need to put them in context especially wtih 20-22 year old players with developing games and highly different roles on the court.
The overall value of these two as assets, to me, is a combination of role and projection (as I already stated). There are not a ton of teams in the NBA with terrible PG play, and I question Ball's value as an off-guard because of the shooting---though I agree with LondonSox if he gets to a reasonable place shooting-wise he has defensive and other skills that might play as an off-guard. The NBA has far too few quality wings, and Ingram has a bunch of the skills to be a plus wing. He may not get there, but I think there's likely a bunch of teams willing to bet he does. Clearly, some have a different view and I respect why one might land there overall---though I think we should land there based on a realistic assessment of Ball's skills, too.
This is fair but remember the conversation started when people were claiming that McCollum for Ingram, Deng + #1 was reasonable value but Ball, Deng, & #1 was "laughable," or something descriptive along those lines.
Getting back to this thread, the overall point being that LAL has enough assets to sign LBJ and PG plus obtain another veteran asset.
Yeah, he can't pass to himself...
But seriously, I do wonder if some of Ingram's improved shooting is attributable to Ball. The Lakers team eFG% went from 50.1% (22nd overall) to 51.7% (16th) after Ball came on. I didn't watch enough Lakers to form too much of an opinion as to whether going from Clarkson and Russell getting the majority of the minutes at point guard to Ball running the show was a significant factor, but I did watch a lot of UCLA last year, and I'm convinced that Ball's impact on that team's efficiency was tremendous. They went from 48.8 2PT% (185th overall) and 36.3 3PT% (102nd), to 59.1% (3rd overall) and 40.6% (4th) in Ball's freshman season. TJ Leaf is a good shooter and all, but Ball transformed that team. His timing and accuracy in getting the ball to guys in rhythm for jump shots, and on cuts for lay-ups, and outlet passes after pulling down a rebound was something you really need to watch to appreciate fully.
If his passing improves overall team FG% significantly, he can still be a really valuable offensive player even while putting up Smartian shooting numbers himself. I don't know if his passing popped the same way for the Lakers, but I suspect it did, or at least it will. If it's true, I don't really know where it lands him in terms of trade value, and on the other hand, if it's true and he is propping up the efficiency of guys like Ingram, that may cause Ingram to be slightly over-valued. I do agree that Ingram's positional value gives him an edge, but I think Ball has paths to All-NBA type impact as well.
I still am of the belief that it is going to take a hell of a lot more than Ball/Ingram a pick for someone to take Deng. Especially if that team is giving back an asset like McCollum.
I used the word "laughable" but everything else is a distortion of what I wrote. To reiterate, the Blazers, who just finished 3rd in the West, are not trading their 1st team All-NBA PG for a project PG like Ball, and they 100% aren't eating that Deng contract in the process. If the Blazers make a trade it's going to be McCollum, and it's going to be for a wing or a big and salary relief. That's why I said Ingram and a pick (but not Deng) for McCollum was more reasonable. It balances the roster a bit, keeps them on the same timeline, and helps the cap situation. Still not overly likely, but more in line with what they would be looking to do in a trade.
The Lakers have the assets to dump the Deng contract. They also have the assets to get one more star player. It'll be hard to do both in the same trade unless they are moving two from the Ball/Ingram/Kuzma group.
First of all, I wasn't referring only to you and I certainly wasn't trying to summarize your post.
As for your specific points, if PDX is breaking up Lillard and McCollum, they are not doing it out of a position of strength so getting three years of Lonzo Ball and $40MM of salary relief may be the best they can do. Or maybe they'll want the extra year of Ball since they'd also be kind of rebuilding on the fly. At any rate, if PDX trades McCollum, It's hard to imagine that PDX will be getting equivalent value so they probably won't do it but OTOH, it's also hard to imagine that PDX is going to stay put when they have put together a team that is in cap hell plus doesn't have a shot of contending.
Wiz are in the same boat but analysis is much different since word is around my Wiz friends that WAS front office seems happy winning 50 games a year and may not have contending as their #1 priority.
Trading McCollum for Ball + Deng offers no immediate salary relief though. Their salaries are a wash over the next two years. POR is not looking for relief in 2020/2021, for all their iffy contracts with Turner, Harkless, Leonrad are off the books then.
Portland is also very happy winning 45-50+ games per year and being a top five team in the West. Neil Olshey has been very frank that he has no intention of breaking up that core. They are not a free agent destination, they don't have good draft assets and they are over the cap so an on-the-fly rebuild isn't really an option. Unless they are blown away by an offer they'll just keep their guards, wait for Collins to develop and tweak around the edges with the hope that they'll hit the right mix one year (the Dirk/Dallas method).
Lebron has some deep thinking to do. Has he even been given more GOAT ink than this year leading a supposedly inferior team the finals? Is there anyway he avoids the bad blood hard feelings like the last time he left the Cavs? Did he really get the credit he deserved for being part of one of the great teams of all time in Miami? If he leaves again, his brand will suffer, especially if he can't win a title. Some of the attention he gets is unfair to Lue, but he dominates timeouts, trades are made seemingly because he demands them etc. I believe his press conference last night was laying the groundwork to leave, but I am not convinced it is 100% he is leaving.
I think he reups with Cleveland and they try and revamp a bit?
They have few assets, but they do have some tradeable pieces I think. They are likely stuck with Hill, Smith , Clarkson, and JR.
But maybe able to reshuffle a bit by sending out some combination of Love, Thompson, Nance, Osman, Korver, Zizic, #8 pick, their own 2021 1st rounder. Not an easy job obviously.
They have few assets, but they do have some tradeable pieces I think. They are likely stuck with Hill, Smith , Clarkson, and JR.
But maybe able to reshuffle a bit by sending out some combination of Love, Thompson, Nance, Osman, Korver, Zizic, #8 pick, their own 2021 1st rounder. Not an easy job obviously.
Korver is a valuable piece to the Cavs while not carrying much value in any trade. I'd be shocked if he was moved while LeBron remained. Thompson is part of the LeBron circle so he'd have to be convinced on this and also wouldn't be much of a trade asset. Really the only significant pieces are Love and the two draft picks that you mention. A savvy rebuilding GM with job security should be all over that 2021 pick if at all possible.
If Memphis ever decides to move Gasol this could be a fit for Thompson, Zizic, Nance plus those two #1 picks this summer and in 2021. It allows Cleveland to then trade Love for a better fit while reshaping their defense. Who says no?
Cleveland owes its 2019 pick to Atlanta as a result of the Kyle Korver trade and it is 1-10 protected in both 2019 and 2020. Therefore the earliest first round pick they'd be eligible to trade is 2022 because of the Stepien rule.
Altman was bold at the deadline, but the cupboard is bare. The #8 pick could get something decent. So could Love. Maybe together they net a superstar, but that's not particularly likely. Griffin probably could have remade the team last year had he stuck through the draft, but it'll be tough for them to do so now.
Altman was bold at the deadline, but the cupboard is bare. The #8 pick could get something decent. So could Love. Maybe together they net a superstar, but that's not particularly likely. Griffin probably could have remade the team last year had he stuck through the draft, but it'll be tough for them to do so now.
Last edited:
Geez, that is a lot to give up for quickly aging Marc Gasol. MEM would/should be all over that.
But I like to make up trade scenarios so what the hell.
Love to LAC
Gasol + Beverly + Harris to CLE
Thompson + Nance + picks to MEM
But I like to make up trade scenarios so what the hell.
Love to LAC
Gasol + Beverly + Harris to CLE
Thompson + Nance + picks to MEM
The Cavs threw everything at this year bar the nets pick, Clarkson is another horrible contract. I don't see any way to add anything that tips the scales vs the west, or frankly the Celtics
That’s exactly the sort of deal I expect — Ball, Kuzma, and Deng (for salary matching purposes) to someone for a good veteran. I’m pretty sure the Wizards would take that package in a heartbeat for John Wall, and I think the Lakers would swallow hard and assume that godawful supermax contract if that’s what it takes to seal the deal with LeBron and George.
And as I said above, the Spurs might do that same deal for Kawhi. Deng only has two years left on that deal — it’s not the worst contract in the NBA by a long shot.
You think they'd trade wall for ball kuzma and a horrible contract?
I don't know man, maybe, but ball upside is sub wall at least in any sensible horizon, kuzma can't play defense and Deng well yeah.
I mean maybe, but it seems low.
Doing that for Kawhi is pretty nuts to me.
I'm not sure as I said previously how people view ball and kuzma but the later I think is not as highly thought of as NBA Twitter and Reddit etc imo. Esp to a team like the Spurs.
I don't know man, maybe, but ball upside is sub wall at least in any sensible horizon, kuzma can't play defense and Deng well yeah.
I mean maybe, but it seems low.
Doing that for Kawhi is pretty nuts to me.
I'm not sure as I said previously how people view ball and kuzma but the later I think is not as highly thought of as NBA Twitter and Reddit etc imo. Esp to a team like the Spurs.
Lonzo Ball is like Marcus Smart (not value wise). You are either going to love him or hate him and there's not much in between. I also think his lack of success at the FT line gives people pause on projecting his 3 point shot. He is considerably worse than Ingram and Jaylen Brown in that regard, granted he only got to the line 71 times in 52 games. The lack of FTA could signal another problem in itself.
I can see why people would prefer Ingram or Ball and to suggest there isn't a GM in the league who would prefer Ingram is nonsense. Ingram has the chance of being an alpha and greatly improved his passing and shooting this year. He's also only 50 days older than Ball despite being in the league a year longer. Ball offers something else completely, even if he does improve his shooting. Kyle Kuzma doesn't belong in the conversation, imo. He's going to have a long career as the first or 2nd guy off the bench, though.
As for McCollum, I think he would be a much better player away from Damien Lillard.
I can see why people would prefer Ingram or Ball and to suggest there isn't a GM in the league who would prefer Ingram is nonsense. Ingram has the chance of being an alpha and greatly improved his passing and shooting this year. He's also only 50 days older than Ball despite being in the league a year longer. Ball offers something else completely, even if he does improve his shooting. Kyle Kuzma doesn't belong in the conversation, imo. He's going to have a long career as the first or 2nd guy off the bench, though.
As for McCollum, I think he would be a much better player away from Damien Lillard.