Lebron to the Lakers

[jterrell]

That projection model is why the Lakers absolutely can not play out the season with their roster as is.

 

[Roadtrip635]

It's true, a lot of things can change but I don't think that it's HS Basketball. It's James' business partners and where they reside. They are all in Cali and so, his business, outside of Basketball is also in Cali. Nike has been pushing this for a while as well. They want James in L.A. so I think it's more business related. I see James in Cali, even after his Basketball career.

Lets say you did get Leonard. James, Leonard and even George, had he come here, would not be enough to win the West. To win the West, you have to beat Golden State and to do that, you gotta have starters and you gotta have bench. This year, if you got Leonard and George, you would have to give away all your young talent. Next year, you don't have to do that. So honestly, I just don't think that whole argument of get Leonard now at any cost holds water. If James is here to win, then that doesn't happen for at least two years IMO. I think he knows that. You wanna keep James happy, win a championship and the only way for LA to do that, IMO, is to be patient and wait. Next year, all those young guys have another years experience and the Lakers are once again, loaded with cap. That's when you make your move to me. They do that this year and they are over the cap again. That's no good to me.

Again the prudent thing is to be patient, but I also think they thought they would be able to get PG this off season, which would have cost 0 in assets, which makes it easier to attract another big name next season. Attracting 2 big name FAs in the same off season is harder than 1. That is the risk, other teams may look more attractive next year, especially with a 35 yr old LBJ and tougher road in the West. It would also be tougher if the team struggles or Father Time catches up with LBJ and he starts getting injuries. Kawhi is an option, but it will cost them and more than likely require another team to make it all work. It comes down to if LBJ and his ego can be patient, but don't be surprised if his patience wears thin as the season goes on and his ego wins out.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Completely disagree on team building stuff there.
LAL is best off going over the cap and having an over the cap but not luxury tax 9M MLE next off-season IMHO.
A team with LeBron and Kawhi with a 9m slot can get a 3rd very quality player in and resign everyone to large amounts... See Golden State/HOU.

The kids aren't likely going to play enough minutes to raise their value and their value may very well go down.
This is inarguable when judged as a collective.

AND if you resign them using cap space you wanted to "save" or lose them for nothing (see Randle who would have drawn a decent return at the trade deadline) what good did holding them do you?
I absolutely agree about LA for the business interests and life after basketball. LeBron has had this choice to make many times and he chose LA this time for a reason.
He is absolutely planning for life after basketball.

But I also agree with RT that LeBron may feel very differently when those losses come.
He has always been miserable when the team loses.

Right now I think LAL is a 4 or 5 seed in the West.
Likely a bit better playoff team than regular season team as LBJ shoulders playoff load and I'm not sure that many of the guys who get actual minutes are on an arrow moving up.
Rondo, Lance and LeBron are not getting better.
A resigned Brook Lopez is not getting better.
KCP and Kuz/Ingram are NOT getting as many shots so may get better in efficiency but not stats.
Lonzo has all the pressure in the world and now must beat out a veteran NBA champion.

At the end of the day Lakers have trade assets in young kids and I believe Magic is trying to max those out.
One such move could be Brandon Ingram and Luol Deng to the Mavs for Wes Mathews.
That would provide an immediate upgrade for LAL of a 3 and D wing plus remove a very bad contract they haven't been able to offload.
And Wes is a FA next year LAL could likely resign at a big discount or rescind for his salary slot.
LAL may have better offers but those are the types of deals a win now team makes.

One of the missed talking points thus far is teams will not want to be 3rd or lower in the WC.
Because then you likely have to play BOTH GSW and HOU to advance.
And that likely means collecting 60 wins this year.
LBJ has not missed a Finals in forever.
If he does his shine and appeal will fade as far as drawing teammates IMHO.
Sitting back hoping to do so next year after a middling 50 win year? Not a great plan imo.
35 year old LeBron? Plus who? Their isn't a second All-Star caliber player.

I would never trade Mathews for Engram. How would that be any kind of upgrade? Yeah, we disagree for sure.

James' appeal is not going to fade in one year. That's silly. Stay under the cap. You can extend next year and there are more decent players to chase. Wait San Antonio out and see what happens. If Leonard signs next year, that great, your better off. If he doesn't and you sign another Max player, your still better off.

BTW, even with Deng's contract, the lakers are going to have something like 65 to 70 million free next year. They don't need to make a crappy trade like Ingram for Mathews. That's what I'm talking about. That would just be stupid. Why would they do that? Why would you trade a young developing player for somebody who scores less, rebounds less, averages fewer Assists, shoots a lower percentage from the floor and the arc? The only thing Mathews does better is shoot free throws. This is not a serious conversation. Why would the Lakers decide to trade a player that, if they would simply agree to trade now, to San Antonio, they could probably land Leonard for. Why would they turn around and trade that player for Mathews? That just makes no sense at all.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Again the prudent thing is to be patient, but I also think they thought they would be able to get PG this off season, which would have cost 0 in assets, which makes it easier to attract another big name next season. Attracting 2 big name FAs in the same off season is harder than 1. That is the risk, other teams may look more attractive next year, especially with a 35 yr old LBJ and tougher road in the West. It would also be tougher if the team struggles or Father Time catches up with LBJ and he starts getting injuries. Kawhi is an option, but it will cost them and more than likely require another team to make it all work. It comes down to if LBJ and his ego can be patient, but don't be surprised if his patience wears thin as the season goes on and his ego wins out.

They can sign Leonard next year with no help. That will not be an issue, as it stands today. If James explodes this year, big deal. I am not a huge James fan. Great player but he's not live or die for me. If he wants to win then be patient. If he wants to run a team, then talk to Nike about more money and buy one. That's how I see it.

 

[jterrell]

I would never trade Mathews for Engram. How would that be any kind of upgrade? Yeah, we disagree for sure.

James' appeal is not going to fade in one year. That's silly. Stay under the cap. You can extend next year and there are more decent players to chase. Wait San Antonio out and see what happens. If Leonard signs next year, that great, your better off. If he doesn't and you sign another Max player, your still better off.

BTW, even with Deng's contract, the lakers are going to have something like 65 to 70 million free next year. They don't need to make a crappy trade like Ingram for Mathews. That's what I'm talking about. That would just be stupid. Why would they do that? Why would you trade a young developing player for somebody who scores less, rebounds less, averages fewer Assists, shoots a lower percentage from the floor and the arc? The only thing Mathews does better is shoot free throws. This is not a serious conversation. Why would the Lakers decide to trade a player that, if they would simply agree to trade now, to San Antonio, they could probably land Leonard for. Why would they turn around and trade that player for Mathews? That just makes no sense at all.

Matthews is a far superior defender.

But you do it to clear Deng's cap space.
As noted you may find better offers but Matthews would help the Lakers win right now. He's substantially better at the stuff the player will be asked to do. Defend the wing and stretch the floor.
He also shoots a lot more 3's per game and essentially the same % as Ingram meaning he stretches the floor on offense.
Wes actually has a higher effective FG % so he scores more efficiently and plays better defense.

You are judging Ingram as if the team will use him as a primary scorer with the ball in his hands a lot. They won't.

Also might not hurt that Wes's dad won two titles with the Lakers.

 

[jterrell]

I would never trade Mathews for Engram. How would that be any kind of upgrade? Yeah, we disagree for sure.

James' appeal is not going to fade in one year. That's silly. Stay under the cap. You can extend next year and there are more decent players to chase. Wait San Antonio out and see what happens. If Leonard signs next year, that great, your better off. If he doesn't and you sign another Max player, your still better off.

BTW, even with Deng's contract, the lakers are going to have something like 65 to 70 million free next year. They don't need to make a crappy trade like Ingram for Mathews. That's what I'm talking about. That would just be stupid. Why would they do that? Why would you trade a young developing player for somebody who scores less, rebounds less, averages fewer Assists, shoots a lower percentage from the floor and the arc? The only thing Mathews does better is shoot free throws. This is not a serious conversation. Why would the Lakers decide to trade a player that, if they would simply agree to trade now, to San Antonio, they could probably land Leonard for. Why would they turn around and trade that player for Mathews? That just makes no sense at all.

yikes.. no the Lakers won't have 65 to 70 million.
The cap is ~105. LBJ ALONE is ~38.
Deng is ~18
Those 2 alone take you to below 50 FREE.
That's without Lonzo's 8M, Mo Wagner's 2M, Hart 2M, Ingram 7M, Kuz 2M.

When you add the guys up they almost certainly keep if they haven't traded them the team is ~30M and it takes 35M to get Kawhi.

And they'd have NO cap room and only a room MLE of 5M and vet min slots.


So you'd rescind any rights to Rondo, Stephenson, McGale, anyone else they sign this year. PLUS need 4-5M from the young guys above to even offer within a mil or so of Kawhi Max.

you'd have 3 man roster:
LeBron 38
Kawhi 35
Deng 18.
accountign for 91M of your 105M salary cap.
Add Ingram and Lonzo and you are AT the CAP.

https://www.spotrac.com/nba/los-angeles-lakers/cap/2019/

Which again is why the Lakers should trade for Kawhi now, operate OVER the cap as a cap team. Dump Deng and free up a 9M MLE next year for another quality starter.

LeBron is the team. When he signed for 4 years that was clear. He's 35% of the team's cap space each of those years.
So of course he matters.

The Lakers already went away from building through the draft and went to the FA quick fix with the league's best player.

 

[jterrell]

And to correct myelf it doesn't just have t be Kawhi.
They can also trade for Dame or Wall or other very good players.
If it's not Kawhi maybe you can trade for 2 pieces.
Maybe you get Dame Lilliard plus Bradley Beal.
Maybe trade for Gordan Hayward.
Key is go get a star and don't expect FA to be the answer as it will force too many roster building limitations to sit under the cap.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Matthews is a far superior defender.

But you do it to clear Deng's cap space.
As noted you may find better offers but Matthews would help the Lakers win right now. He's substantially better at the stuff the player will be asked to do. Defend the wing and stretch the floor.
He also shoots a lot more 3's per game and essentially the same % as Ingram meaning he stretches the floor on offense.
Wes actually has a higher effective FG % so he scores more efficiently and plays better defense.

You are judging Ingram as if the team will use him as a primary scorer with the ball in his hands a lot. They won't.

Also might not hurt that Wes's dad won two titles with the Lakers.

With way less upside. Ingram is a 6'9" wing player who is only going to continue to get better. You can clearly say that Ingram is a better offensive player right now. For all we know, he could end up being a better defensive player as well. Right now, Ingram is ranked 75 Defensively, according to NBA.com. Matthews is ranked 343rd, in terms of Defensive WS. Matthews is going into his 10th season. I mean, there is no way to look at Matthews and say that a trade for Matthews for Ingram is a good trade. Matthews helps nothing in a league where scoring trumps everything.

You don't know how the Lakers will use Ingram. You are acting as if you do and nothing could be further from the truth. James is 3 and an option. The Lakers will be playing basketball long after James is done and Ingram could very well be the guy that is the star. Have you actually watched Ingram play much?

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

yikes.. no the Lakers won't have 65 to 70 million.
The cap is ~105. LBJ ALONE is ~38.
Deng is ~18
Those 2 alone take you to below 50 FREE.
That's without Lonzo's 8M, Mo Wagner's 2M, Hart 2M, Ingram 7M, Kuz 2M.

When you add the guys up they almost certainly keep if they haven't traded them the team is ~30M and it takes 35M to get Kawhi.

And they'd have NO cap room and only a room MLE of 5M and vet min slots.


So you'd rescind any rights to Rondo, Stephenson, McGale, anyone else they sign this year. PLUS need 4-5M from the young guys above to even offer within a mil or so of Kawhi Max.

you'd have 3 man roster:
LeBron 38
Kawhi 35
Deng 18.
accountign for 91M of your 105M salary cap.
Add Ingram and Lonzo and you are AT the CAP.

https://www.spotrac.com/nba/los-angeles-lakers/cap/2019/

Which again is why the Lakers should trade for Kawhi now, operate OVER the cap as a cap team. Dump Deng and free up a 9M MLE next year for another quality starter.

LeBron is the team. When he signed for 4 years that was clear. He's 35% of the team's cap space each of those years.
So of course he matters.

The Lakers already went away from building through the draft and went to the FA quick fix with the league's best player.

James at 37 Mil
Ingram at 7.2
Wagner at 2
Kuzma at 2
Hart at 2

That's 50 Mil.

Now, the Lakers can stretch his cap hit as well. I don't know if I'd like to do this but, the rule for the waive and stretch basically takes the contract year and then you double the length, plus one.
Deng is only on the books for two more years. Which becomes five years via the stretch provision. However, the Lakers could just take the hit this year. Deng is interested in a buy out because he wants to play and he knows that he won't in LA. The cap hit could be negotiated down, that's not out of the question and there have been talks around this. Lakers would not be off the hook, but they could drive that number down in a trade. That could happen for sure.

130 Million, minuse 50, plus 5 million stretch (or less perhaps) is 80 Million. Ball is gone IMO but lets say they keep Ball, and Zubic, between them thats another 9 Million in cap so that brings you to roughly 71 Million. Yes, it can be 65 to 70 pretty easily. That's not even a question and that doesn't even consider a trade involving picks where you get another team to take on Deng's Salary.

 

[jterrell]

James at 37 Mil
Ingram at 7.2
Wagner at 2
Kuzma at 2
Hart at 2

That's 50 Mil.

Now, the Lakers can stretch his cap hit as well. I don't know if I'd like to do this but, the rule for the waive and stretch basically takes the contract year and then you double the length, plus one.
Deng is only on the books for two more years. Which becomes five years via the stretch provision. However, the Lakers could just take the hit this year. Deng is interested in a buy out because he wants to play and he knows that he won't in LA. The cap hit could be negotiated down, that's not out of the question and there have been talks around this. Lakers would not be off the hook, but they could drive that number down in a trade. That could happen for sure.

130 Million, minuse 50, plus 5 million stretch (or less perhaps) is 80 Million. Ball is gone IMO but lets say they keep Ball, and Zubic, between them thats another 9 Million in cap so that brings you to roughly 71 Million. Yes, it can be 65 to 70 pretty easily. That's not even a question and that doesn't even consider a trade involving picks where you get another team to take on Deng's Salary.

bro you gotta cut out the dishonesty man....

you stated " BTW, even with Deng's contract, the lakers are going to have something like 65 to 70 million free next year."
That is simply untrue.
Now you are just repeating what I stated. They need to move off Deng's deal. And making up fantasies about how they will do it.
Deng is worth like 4-5M a year. He's not taking a buy out on 37M of chump change.
Stretch provision was there BEFORE this off-season.
That would have netted them significantly more space and they could have kept Randle or forced a trade but my guess is they don't want to eat 7.4M a year for the next 5 years on the cap.
Not only would that likely hurt them in team building now it could last POST LEBRON.
Lakers thought they could boost Randle's trade value by giving him the ball and then trade him with Deng attached. That didn't work.
Largely because Randle wasn't worth more than the 9M he was able to get on the free agent market.
He is a 6'9" Center.

So to keep the same basic plan the Lakers will need to attach a young, cheap asset to Deng.
Thus the Ingram idea.
If someone was chomping at the bit for any lesser player the deal would have already been made.

The cap isn't 130M it is 109M. 130M is LUXURY TAX.
A real-time look at the 2019-2020 salary cap totals for each NBA team, including estimated cap space.

Cap Maximum: $109,000,000
Luxury Tax Threshold: $132,000,000

Teams that are under the cap will have their cap holds applied to their overall cap while teams that are over the cap will not have their cap holds applied but must use any exceptions they possess. If a team uses their Bi-Annual, Non-Taxpayer Mid-Level, Taxpayer Mid-Level exceptions, or Sign-and-Trade they will be considered to be hard-capped and must keept below the Luxury Tax Apron ($138,000,000).

Lakers are currently set with 79M in ACTIVE CAP HITS. 118M is total cap hits (this means with the holds on guy they can renounce).
Reality-wise they have about 30M in Cap Space. IF they move Deng they get to 48M.
Thus again why moving Deng is a VERY VERY valuable move for them.

Again re-read:
Teams that are under the cap will have their cap holds applied to their overall cap while teams that are over the cap will not have their cap holds applied but must use any exceptions they possess. If a team uses their Bi-Annual, Non-Taxpayer Mid-Level, Taxpayer Mid-Level exceptions, or Sign-and-Trade they will be considered to be hard-capped and must keept below the Luxury Tax Apron ($138,000,000).

This is why the Lakers should go over the cap but remain below 132M. Operate at about 115M and get the 9M MLE and the bi-annual exception for rotation guys.

OR they have to free up a lot more space to operate WELL below the salary cap.

The current rules are insane and make teams being anywhere from the cap to below by 40M a penalty unless you are the once in a generation team like the GSW that have a core signed, under contract and can add KD.

 

[jterrell]

With way less upside. Ingram is a 6'9" wing player who is only going to continue to get better. You can clearly say that Ingram is a better offensive player right now. For all we know, he could end up being a better defensive player as well. Right now, Ingram is ranked 75 Defensively, according to NBA.com. Matthews is ranked 343rd, in terms of Defensive WS. Matthews is going into his 10th season. I mean, there is no way to look at Matthews and say that a trade for Matthews for Ingram is a good trade. Matthews helps nothing in a league where scoring trumps everything.

You don't know how the Lakers will use Ingram. You are acting as if you do and nothing could be further from the truth. James is 3 and an option. The Lakers will be playing basketball long after James is done and Ingram could very well be the guy that is the star. Have you actually watched Ingram play much?

Matthews has played Ingram 7 times. He primarily guards him and has limited him to an average of 9 PPG. The Mavs have went 5-2 in those games.

Ingram has WAYYYY more upside. That's the value any team receives in the trade.
They need that to take on Deng's money.

Matthews guards the best wing or guard player on the opposing team.
He is an outstanding defender beyond the one year he was recovering from an Achilles.

In the trade LAL would only be banking on 1 season of Matthews then on his 18M in freed up cap space. Or in his value as a trade expiring at the trade deadline if he didn't mesh.

Right now if LAL had a lineup of:
Rondo
KCP
Kuz
LeBron
Javale/Lopez

Matthews would come in with Lonzo and Stephenson on the 2nd unit and be the lead guard defender of that group.

And in the playoffs when the offense ran through LeBron, he'd play heavy minutes as your best Guard defender.
Having seen both him and Rondo believe me, you want Matthews on defense.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

bro you gotta cut out the dishonesty man....

you stated " BTW, even with Deng's contract, the lakers are going to have something like 65 to 70 million free next year."
That is simply untrue.
Now you are just repeating what I stated. They need to move off Deng's deal. And making up fantasies about how they will do it.
Deng is worth like 4-5M a year. He's not taking a buy out on 37M of chump change.
Stretch provision was there BEFORE this off-season.
That would have netted them significantly more space and they could have kept Randle or forced a trade but my guess is they don't want to eat 7.4M a year for the next 5 years on the cap.
Not only would that likely hurt them in team building now it could last POST LEBRON.
Lakers thought they could boost Randle's trade value by giving him the ball and then trade him with Deng attached. That didn't work.
Largely because Randle wasn't worth more than the 9M he was able to get on the free agent market.
He is a 6'9" Center.

So to keep the same basic plan the Lakers will need to attach a young, cheap asset to Deng.
Thus the Ingram idea.
If someone was chomping at the bit for any lesser player the deal would have already been made.

The cap isn't 130M it is 109M. 130M is LUXURY TAX.
A real-time look at the 2019-2020 salary cap totals for each NBA team, including estimated cap space.

Cap Maximum: $109,000,000
Luxury Tax Threshold: $132,000,000

Teams that are under the cap will have their cap holds applied to their overall cap while teams that are over the cap will not have their cap holds applied but must use any exceptions they possess. If a team uses their Bi-Annual, Non-Taxpayer Mid-Level, Taxpayer Mid-Level exceptions, or Sign-and-Trade they will be considered to be hard-capped and must keept below the Luxury Tax Apron ($138,000,000).

Lakers are currently set with 79M in ACTIVE CAP HITS. 118M is total cap hits (this means with the holds on guy they can renounce).
Reality-wise they have about 30M in Cap Space. IF they move Deng they get to 48M.
Thus again why moving Deng is a VERY VERY valuable move for them.

Again re-read:
Teams that are under the cap will have their cap holds applied to their overall cap while teams that are over the cap will not have their cap holds applied but must use any exceptions they possess. If a team uses their Bi-Annual, Non-Taxpayer Mid-Level, Taxpayer Mid-Level exceptions, or Sign-and-Trade they will be considered to be hard-capped and must keept below the Luxury Tax Apron ($138,000,000).

This is why the Lakers should go over the cap but remain below 132M. Operate at about 115M and get the 9M MLE and the bi-annual exception for rotation guys.

OR they have to free up a lot more space to operate WELL below the salary cap.

The current rules are insane and make teams being anywhere from the cap to below by 40M a penalty unless you are the once in a generation team like the GSW that have a core signed, under contract and can add KD.

So, are you saying that the lakers can not spend 132 million next year? Is that what you are saying to me?

Who's being dishonest in this thread. You and I agreed earlier that if you sign James, then you are basically signing up for exceeding the threshold. It's really only a question of when you do this. The numbers I gave you are not wrong. They are completely accurate. You, trying to say that the cap is 109 is wrong.

Your statement of Deng taking chump change is dishonest. I said he would take a buy out, I didn't say he would give away 38 million. You said that because it helps your argument but totally dishonest of you to present it that way. You know Deng wants out of LA, it's common knowledge. His agent has already brought up the idea of taking less, in exchange for a trade or release. This has already been discussed so where is your chump change thing coming from? It's nothing I said. It's something you made up.

BTW, it's not 7.4 for five years. It would be like 18 million over 5 years, which works out to less then 4 million over 5 years. He is getting paid his salary this year so really, what you are talking about is what's left. That's 18 million. Again, who needs to be honest here?

They don't need to move Deng, that just fits your narrative so that's why you are pushing it but the Lakers don't need to do any of that. They can have 65 to 70 million next year easily. Not 30, you know the contract holds don't mean jack because everybody is on a one year deal and I've already lined out the guys they might keep so there is no real effect there. You know that JT. It just doesn't help your argument, which is why you won't recognize it. They already put themselves in position by letting Randell and a lot of other contracts go and they will do the same next year. You are basing everything on the idea that the Lakers can't extend Deng and that he is going to cost them 36 million next year. Both of those assumptions are wrong.

You don't want to believe that the Lakers will have a lot of cap, thats fine. You don't have to but they will. Unless it's a favorable deal for the Lakers, there is no reason to make a bad trade now. Deng isn't a must to get rid of and it doesn't justify trading a much, much better player like Ingram for a scrub like Matthews. Lakers don't have to do that, especially if they are not bringing in a player like Leonard. There is no hurry and the Lakers have plenty of money to make it happen next year.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Matthews has played Ingram 7 times. He primarily guards him and has limited him to an average of 9 PPG. The Mavs have went 5-2 in those games.

Ingram has WAYYYY more upside. That's the value any team receives in the trade.
They need that to take on Deng's money.

Matthews guards the best wing or guard player on the opposing team.
He is an outstanding defender beyond the one year he was recovering from an Achilles.

In the trade LAL would only be banking on 1 season of Matthews then on his 18M in freed up cap space. Or in his value as a trade expiring at the trade deadline if he didn't mesh.

Right now if LAL had a lineup of:
Rondo
KCP
Kuz
LeBron
Javale/Lopez

Matthews would come in with Lonzo and Stephenson on the 2nd unit and be the lead guard defender of that group.

And in the playoffs when the offense ran through LeBron, he'd play heavy minutes as your best Guard defender.
Having seen both him and Rondo believe me, you want Matthews on defense.

If the Lakers only played the Mavs and Ingram was going to stay at the level he is now and not get better, if Matthews was going to be an 8 year vet instead of going into his 10th season and that continuing, you might have a point. However, none of those things are going to happen and so you don't. It's a bad trade and I've already explained that the Lakers and Deng aren't that big of a deal so why would they do it? If it were such a matter of importance, why wouldn't the Lakers have already done it?

I don't want Matthews on this team at all, if it means making such a horribly bad trade.

 

[Sarek]

@ABQCOWBOY what i don't understand is why you keep practicing futility with that person? Most of what that person is saying is off the wall and filled with agenda for the self or their hate for the Lakers. Good Luck, but i doubt that person will ever see it the right way, and will just keep insisting that they know better when the truth is closer to them actually knowing nothing.

Round and round, I would engage, but i don't have that kind of time to spend on vanity.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

@ABQCOWBOY what i don't understand is why you keep practicing futility with that person? Most of what that person is saying is off the wall and filled with agenda for the self or their hate for the Lakers. Good Luck, but i doubt that person will ever see it the right way, and will just keep insisting that they know better when the truth is closer to them actually knowing nothing.

Round and round, I would engage, but i don't have that kind of time to spend on vanity.

Because, believe it or not, JT and I go back a long way and I actually like the guy. He's not always wrong. He's just wrong on this. But you are right, I need to finish up and get on to more important things, like the Weekend!

Be well Sarek.

 

[Sarek]

Because, believe it or not, JT and I go back a long way and I actually like the guy. He's not always wrong. He's just wrong on this. But you are right, I need to finish up and get on to more important things, like the Weekend!

Be well Sarek.

Thank you, you also.

 

[Corso]

Lakers suck and they'll continue to bomb even with Lebron.
Golden State is too strong for the next few years and anyone wanting Durant next year?
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!!

Good luck.

 

[darthseinfeld]

And to correct myelf it doesn't just have t be Kawhi.
They can also trade for Dame or Wall or other very good players.
If it's not Kawhi maybe you can trade for 2 pieces.
Maybe you get Dame Lilliard plus Bradley Beal.
Maybe trade for Gordan Hayward.
Key is go get a star and don't expect FA to be the answer as it will force too many roster building limitations to sit under the cap.

They dont want hear that. I was pitching Dame for Ball and FRPs and got shot down. Get Dame now. Trade Ingram to get out of Deng's deal and get Boogie of Kawhi next season. Boogie would be a great fit with Dame because he is a good rim protector and helps hide Dame defensively.

A team of Lebron, Dame and either of those two are very compelling. And if you put right vet role players around them, could go all the way

 

[jterrell]

So, are you saying that the lakers can not spend 132 million next year? Is that what you are saying to me?

Who's being dishonest in this thread. You and I agreed earlier that if you sign James, then you are basically signing up for exceeding the threshold. It's really only a question of when you do this. The numbers I gave you are not wrong. They are completely accurate. You, trying to say that the cap is 109 is wrong.

Your statement of Deng taking chump change is dishonest. I said he would take a buy out, I didn't say he would give away 38 million. You said that because it helps your argument but totally dishonest of you to present it that way. You know Deng wants out of LA, it's common knowledge. His agent has already brought up the idea of taking less, in exchange for a trade or release. This has already been discussed so where is your chump change thing coming from? It's nothing I said. It's something you made up.

BTW, it's not 7.4 for five years. It would be like 18 million over 5 years, which works out to less then 4 million over 5 years. He is getting paid his salary this year so really, what you are talking about is what's left. That's 18 million. Again, who needs to be honest here?

They don't need to move Deng, that just fits your narrative so that's why you are pushing it but the Lakers don't need to do any of that. They can have 65 to 70 million next year easily. Not 30, you know the contract holds don't mean jack because everybody is on a one year deal and I've already lined out the guys they might keep so there is no real effect there. You know that JT. It just doesn't help your argument, which is why you won't recognize it. They already put themselves in position by letting Randell and a lot of other contracts go and they will do the same next year. You are basing everything on the idea that the Lakers can't extend Deng and that he is going to cost them 36 million next year. Both of those assumptions are wrong.

You don't want to believe that the Lakers will have a lot of cap, thats fine. You don't have to but they will. Unless it's a favorable deal for the Lakers, there is no reason to make a bad trade now. Deng isn't a must to get rid of and it doesn't justify trading a much, much better player like Ingram for a scrub like Matthews. Lakers don't have to do that, especially if they are not bringing in a player like Leonard. There is no hurry and the Lakers have plenty of money to make it happen next year.

dude.. you have been proven completely wrong now twice.
Not about opinion laden stuff or anything difficult but basic facts essentially found on a million sites.
and your insane tilting and pivoting is just basically lying.

as there is no hard cap any team in the league can spend any amount in theory.
but NO the Lakers can't count anything under 130M as cap space. The cap is 105M now and 109M estimated for next year.
And in fact being under means they lose the ability to go over in many scenarios available to over the cap teams.

1. The Lakers will not have 60M of cap space next year 'even with Deng'.
2. The Salary cap is not 130M.

Those two facts are essentially why you should stop posting and read and learn. LOL.

I do not hate the Lakers.
I think they are the most interesting team to sim-manage right now.

I am not crapping on them.
I am posting common sense stuff that will likely play out sooner rather than later.
No, the Lakers didn't sign LeBron to a 38m a year deal to sit back and play for 5th place in the West next year.

 

[Corso]

The Lakers will have about 29 mill right now. That's it, until something changes.