**LA LAKERS THREAD** Sitting on 17! 2023-2024 offseason begins

Trade grades: Do Lakers or Nets win the Lopez for Russell deal?

The deal

Lakers get: Center Brook Lopez, No. 27 pick of 2017 NBA draft

Nets get: Guard D'Angelo Russell, center Timofey Mozgov

Brooklyn Nets: A-

From a value standpoint, this is not a great trade for the Nets. Because Mozgov projects as no better than a replacement player over the remaining three seasons of his contract, during which he'll be paid $48 million (thanks, Mitch Kupchak), his negative surplus value is far greater than the positive surplus value Russell figures to provide over the final two seasons of his rookie contract.

And yet I'm still a fan of this trade. Whatever the appropriate geographic location is for Russell supporters (Is it an island? A small city?), I'm a resident. I get the criticisms: His attitude is questionable, his defense is worse and he hasn't proven an explosive athlete against NBA opponents. Despite all that, he submitted one of the 25 best offensive seasons by a point guard 21 or younger as measured by Basketball-Reference.com's box plus-minus metric.

Point guards tend to continue developing later than players at other positions -- particularly bigger points, like the 6-foot-5 Russell -- and there's reason to believe he's still just scratching the surface of his potential. Of the 10 players my SCHOENE projection system rates most similar to Russell at the same age, three (Gilbert Arenas, Chauncey Billups and Jrue Holiday) developed into All-Stars, and Mike Conley is perhaps the best player ever not to make an All-Star team.

Becoming a dangerous 3-point shooter off the dribble could unlock the rest of Russell's game by forcing defenders to play over screens, much as it has for Conley, Kyle Lowry and Kemba Walker, to name three. His 38.7 percent shooting on pull-up 3s after the All-Star break (having shot 30.1 percent on them before the break) offered a glimpse of what Russell could become if he adds that shot on a consistent basis.

Because the team hasn't had its own draft picks, Brooklyn simply hasn't had any ability to acquire a young player as talented as Russell, and probably won't until at least the 2019 draft. (That's the first time the Nets control their own pick again.)

Yes, the Nets have been able to get their hands on some later first-round picks, including the pick they sent the Lakers in the deal, the price for taking on Andrew Nicholson's contract in the deadline trade that sent Bojan Bogdanovic to the Washington Wizards. Given the limited trade market for centers, I suspect the return for Lopez would have been similarly modest, and the same with using the cap space they'll now spend on Mozgov to take on other bad contracts in exchanges for picks.

Only by taking on this much salary, and sending back their own best player in Lopez, could Brooklyn add a player with this much upside. I think that's a move well worth making.

Los Angeles Lakers: B

This trade serves dual functions for the Lakers, who were able to improve next season and quite possibly beyond.

In the short term, Lopez is a huge upgrade over the flotsam they've been running out at center since Pau Gasol's departure three summers ago. The appalling thing about the Mozgov contract wasn't just how shortsighted it was, given the value of cap space to the Lakers. It was also the fact that Mozgov wasn't even good in the short term. The Lakers played better after shutting Mozgov down for the season after the All-Star break, ostensibly to tank.

Whichever teammates end up around him, Lopez should make the Lakers' offensive attack more potent. Always a high-volume scorer from the post and midrange, Lopez unexpectedly added 3-point range last season, making 134 3-pointers at a 34.6 percent clip after attempting only 31 3s in his first eight NBA seasons. Russell (135) and Nick Young (170), now a potential free agent, were the only Lakers to surpass Lopez's total.

Lopez is an underrated rim protector when he's in position to contest shots. He held opponents to 47.0 percent shooting within five feet as a primary defender last season, per SportVU tracking on NBA.com/Stats, putting him just outside the league's top 10 and far better than Mozgov (53.4 percent) or any other Lakers player. Mobility is probably no more of an issue for him than it is for Mozgov, though Lopez's defensive rebounding could be an issue depending who's at power forward.

Still, the real benefit of this trade for the Lakers comes in the summer of 2018, when Lopez's contract expires. That will potentially leave only the No. 27 pick on the books for 2018-19 from this trade, meaning the Lakers will have successfully cleared $21.6 million in cap space. That puts them in position to make at least one max offer and gives them a realistic path to having two max spots if they trade Jordan Clarkson and trade or waive and stretch Luol Deng.

I'm not certain that was worth giving up on Russell. Mozgov would have been easier to move in a year, when he would have had one less season on his contract, and frankly I'd probably have rather seen what I could get for attaching Mozgov's contract to Brandon Ingram instead given my skepticism about Ingram's future after an inefficient rookie season.

That noted, the new Lakers front office clearly did not agree with me about Russell's potential, and the expected arrival of Lonzo Ball as the No. 2 overall pick on Thursday could have crowded him out of the backcourt rotation. In that case, Russell's value might have declined further from here, so now was probably the time to move him.
http://www.espn.com/nba/insider/sto...yn-nets-trade-dangelo-russell-brook-lopez-nba
 
PMatic said:
Trade grades: Do Lakers or Nets win the Lopez for Russell deal?

The deal

Lakers get: Center Brook Lopez, No. 27 pick of 2017 NBA draft

Nets get: Guard D'Angelo Russell, center Timofey Mozgov

Brooklyn Nets: A-

From a value standpoint, this is not a great trade for the Nets. Because Mozgov projects as no better than a replacement player over the remaining three seasons of his contract, during which he'll be paid $48 million (thanks, Mitch Kupchak), his negative surplus value is far greater than the positive surplus value Russell figures to provide over the final two seasons of his rookie contract.

And yet I'm still a fan of this trade. Whatever the appropriate geographic location is for Russell supporters (Is it an island? A small city?), I'm a resident. I get the criticisms: His attitude is questionable, his defense is worse and he hasn't proven an explosive athlete against NBA opponents. Despite all that, he submitted one of the 25 best offensive seasons by a point guard 21 or younger as measured by Basketball-Reference.com's box plus-minus metric.

Point guards tend to continue developing later than players at other positions -- particularly bigger points, like the 6-foot-5 Russell -- and there's reason to believe he's still just scratching the surface of his potential. Of the 10 players my SCHOENE projection system rates most similar to Russell at the same age, three (Gilbert Arenas, Chauncey Billups and Jrue Holiday) developed into All-Stars, and Mike Conley is perhaps the best player ever not to make an All-Star team.

Becoming a dangerous 3-point shooter off the dribble could unlock the rest of Russell's game by forcing defenders to play over screens, much as it has for Conley, Kyle Lowry and Kemba Walker, to name three. His 38.7 percent shooting on pull-up 3s after the All-Star break (having shot 30.1 percent on them before the break) offered a glimpse of what Russell could become if he adds that shot on a consistent basis.

Because the team hasn't had its own draft picks, Brooklyn simply hasn't had any ability to acquire a young player as talented as Russell, and probably won't until at least the 2019 draft. (That's the first time the Nets control their own pick again.)

Yes, the Nets have been able to get their hands on some later first-round picks, including the pick they sent the Lakers in the deal, the price for taking on Andrew Nicholson's contract in the deadline trade that sent Bojan Bogdanovic to the Washington Wizards. Given the limited trade market for centers, I suspect the return for Lopez would have been similarly modest, and the same with using the cap space they'll now spend on Mozgov to take on other bad contracts in exchanges for picks.

Only by taking on this much salary, and sending back their own best player in Lopez, could Brooklyn add a player with this much upside. I think that's a move well worth making.

Los Angeles Lakers: B

This trade serves dual functions for the Lakers, who were able to improve next season and quite possibly beyond.

In the short term, Lopez is a huge upgrade over the flotsam they've been running out at center since Pau Gasol's departure three summers ago. The appalling thing about the Mozgov contract wasn't just how shortsighted it was, given the value of cap space to the Lakers. It was also the fact that Mozgov wasn't even good in the short term. The Lakers played better after shutting Mozgov down for the season after the All-Star break, ostensibly to tank.

Whichever teammates end up around him, Lopez should make the Lakers' offensive attack more potent. Always a high-volume scorer from the post and midrange, Lopez unexpectedly added 3-point range last season, making 134 3-pointers at a 34.6 percent clip after attempting only 31 3s in his first eight NBA seasons. Russell (135) and Nick Young (170), now a potential free agent, were the only Lakers to surpass Lopez's total.

Lopez is an underrated rim protector when he's in position to contest shots. He held opponents to 47.0 percent shooting within five feet as a primary defender last season, per SportVU tracking on NBA.com/Stats, putting him just outside the league's top 10 and far better than Mozgov (53.4 percent) or any other Lakers player. Mobility is probably no more of an issue for him than it is for Mozgov, though Lopez's defensive rebounding could be an issue depending who's at power forward.

Still, the real benefit of this trade for the Lakers comes in the summer of 2018, when Lopez's contract expires. That will potentially leave only the No. 27 pick on the books for 2018-19 from this trade, meaning the Lakers will have successfully cleared $21.6 million in cap space. That puts them in position to make at least one max offer and gives them a realistic path to having two max spots if they trade Jordan Clarkson and trade or waive and stretch Luol Deng.

I'm not certain that was worth giving up on Russell. Mozgov would have been easier to move in a year, when he would have had one less season on his contract, and frankly I'd probably have rather seen what I could get for attaching Mozgov's contract to Brandon Ingram instead given my skepticism about Ingram's future after an inefficient rookie season.

That noted, the new Lakers front office clearly did not agree with me about Russell's potential, and the expected arrival of Lonzo Ball as the No. 2 overall pick on Thursday could have crowded him out of the backcourt rotation. In that case, Russell's value might have declined further from here, so now was probably the time to move him.
http://www.espn.com/nba/insider/sto...yn-nets-trade-dangelo-russell-brook-lopez-nba
Click to expand...
So both win out? I like it.
 
Mamba MVP said:
It was a good trade. It's being praised almost universally. Get over it.
Click to expand...

Guess this is where we differ. Most of the national bball journalists that I follow feel like, at the very least, this was a short sighted move by the Lakers.

Even if we end up with a couple of super stars, it was poor asset management. Process over results. That's how u build lasting success. Magic n pelinka showed they're more worried about luring stars instead of building gradually, which contradicts what they've been preaching for the past 4 months.

It's not about dlo himself, it's about how they got to this point.

Defending a trade of a 2nd overall pick that put up pretty good numbers for a salary dump and brook Lopez is idiotic.

You and the other dlo haters feel vidicatated by this move, that's cool. Just wish u could see past the hate u have for him and see it was a poor use of assets.
 
From a PER standpoint, Brook is better than DLo, and also better than Mozgov.
You can take that with a grain of salt but just sayin.
 
ToneLow said:
Guess this is where we differ. Most of the national bball journalists that I follow feel like, at the very least, this was a short sighted move by the Lakers.

Even if we end up with a couple of super stars, it was poor asset management. Process over results. That's how u build lasting success. Magic n pelinka showed they're more worried about luring stars instead of building gradually, which contradicts what they've been preaching for the past 4 months.

It's not about dlo himself, it's about how they got to this point.

Defending a trade of a 2nd overall pick that put up pretty good numbers for a salary dump and brook Lopez is idiotic.

You and the other dlo haters feel vidicatated by this move, that's cool. Just wish u could see past the hate u have for him and see it was a poor use of assets.
Click to expand...

Bad asset management? Magic & Pelinka are dealing with mistakes from the previous front office management of the Mitch & Jim Buss era with those horrible contracts in Deng & Mozgov. Everything points to them actually having confidence in being able to get not 1 but 2 superstar players next summer.It's clear Magic & Pelinka's main concern that had to be addressed and dealt with was freeing up cap space.

I'm sorry but you and other people in this thread are seriously delusional if you think by holding onto Mozgov longer in hopes of finding a better deal be it a higher draft pick or more future draft picks without taking on a longer bad contract from another team just to get the salaries to match. Simply was not got to happen.

You can take shots and call me a "D'Lo hater" all you want. I'm one of the guys on here who rooted for him and wanted him to succeed. I even have a Lakers home purple & gold Russell jersey hanging in my closet right now.I posted his strengths and weaknesses on the court. But also was not blind to the issues being reported about him or the nice stats he put up on a bad team.
 
Last edited:
What should Lakers trade (and not trade) for Paul George?
What should the Los Angeles Lakers be willing to give up in a trade for Indiana Pacers All-Star Paul George?

Answering that question is complicated by the possibility that the Lakers will be able to sign George outright next summer, when he can become an unrestricted free agent. However, if the Lakers don't trade for George, another team almost certainly will make a deal with the Pacers, and the Lakers will then risk George's new team convincing him to re-sign with the promise of an extra year and slightly larger raises.

So, taking that all into account, what picks or players from their current roster should the Lakers be willing to offer?

The value of renting George

For most teams, determining George's trade value is simple: It's a matter of valuing his projected production and comparing that to his relatively small $19.5 million salary.

Based on his performance over the past three years in terms of my wins above replacement player (WARP) statistic and ESPN's real plus-minus, I project George to produce at an 11.4-win level as compared to replacement level in 2017-18, somewhere between the 13.4 WARP George produced in 2015-16 and his 10.1 WARP last season.

My current projection is that a win will cost about $3.2 million above the minimum salary in free agency this summer. Add in the minimum and that means George's production would be worth nearly $38 million, almost twice his salary. That makes George's surplus value worth $18.3 million. To put that in context, that's between the surplus value I estimate the 10th ($19.1 million) and 11th ($17.8 million) picks will provide their teams (over their first nine seasons).

Of course, that production isn't equally valuable to all teams. For the Cleveland Cavaliers, George could make the difference in competing against the Golden State Warriors in a fourth consecutive NBA Finals matchup.

For the Lakers, George would likewise help but the impact might seem less meaningful. After reportedly trading for Brooklyn Nets center Brook Lopez on Tuesday, the Lakers would have a realistic chance at making the playoffs if they added George. And if they look like a competitive team, the Lakers might be more appealing to other free agents (read: LeBron James) in the summer of 2018. But winning a playoff series next season probably isn't realistic.

Still, the main question the Lakers have to answer is how much it's worth to block George from getting traded elsewhere.

What's George worth on his next contract?

Projecting George's value beyond next season gets progressively more difficult because of uncertainty about his performance and future growth in the salary cap. Still, let's take a shot at it.

On average, the 28 players with a similarity score of at least 92.5 to George at the same age via my SCHOENE projection system declined by 0.7 WARP two seasons later. Applying that to George's projection puts his value for 2018-19, the first season of a new contract, at 10.7 wins above replacement.

Repeating that process over the full five-year contract the Lakers could offer George to re-sign if they acquired him now yields the following projections for his value:

View media item 2471457
By the end of a five-year deal, players similar to George saw their value decline nearly by half. For context, 10-plus WARP typically translates into an All-Star appearance. Meanwhile, George's projected production on the back half of his contract would be more typical of an average starter like Jonas Valanciunas (6.9 WARP in 2016-17).

Problematically, as George's production declines his salary will be increasing by almost $2.5 million per season if the Lakers offer full 8 percent raises to re-sign him. By the end of a five-year maximum deal, George would likely be making more than $40 million. (The exact figure depends where the 2018-19 salary cap is set.)

As a result, I project George to make about $14 million more than his statistical value in the fifth season of his contract if he re-signs with the Lakers. This is the strongest argument against trading for George. While the four-year max contract with 5 percent raises the Lakers could offer if he's on another team projects about neutral in terms of surplus value (a projected minus-$5.3 million over the life of the contract), I estimate George would provide nearly $25 million less value than the salary he would make on a five-year max.

Put in that context, the risk of giving George a five-year max is greater than the risk he re-signs with another team next summer.

Making an offer for George

So why trade for George at all? There are still a couple of cases for it. The first, as noted, is the possibility that having George on the books makes the Lakers a more desirable destination in 2018 free agency. Another, more subtle potential benefit is that George's cap hold as a free agent ($29.3 million) might end up less than his maximum salary (currently estimated at $30.6 million based on a projected $102 million salary cap), giving the Lakers a little extra cap space in the summer of 2018.

The last potential upside to a George trade is the possibility of shedding some bad contracts in the process. To match salaries with the Pacers -- necessary if a trade is completed prior to the end of the July moratorium -- the Lakers would almost certainly need to include either Jordan Clarkson or Luol Deng, who have significant negative surplus value (minus-$33 million for Deng and minus-$37 million for Clarkson).

Since the Lakers would need to move at least one of those salaries to make room for two max offers in the summer of 2018, including Clarkson or Deng in this trade would be a benefit to them. The same need to clear cap space implies the availability of Julius Randle, whose Bird rights as a restricted free agent the Lakers might have to renounce to make room for two max offers.

Ultimately, the most I'd be willing to offer in a George trade would be Clarkson or Deng, Randle, and the 27th and 28th picks in this year's draft. Brandon Ingram and this year's No. 2 pick would be off the table.

That might not be able to trump the best offer for George from a team intending to rent him, but given the potential downside of a five-year max deal for George, that's a risk I'd be willing to take.
http://www.espn.com/nba/insider/story/_/id/19689881/what-lakers-willing-give-paul-george-trade
 
NobleKane said:
about as good as me and you winning powerball the same week
Click to expand...
Which is my biggest issue with this.  We are basically banking on players eligible for the DPV exception to take a $70M paycut.  Good luck including that in your pitch to the russell westbrooks and boogies of the world.  "We just need you to take a small, tiny, paycut to come here and lose to the warriors."
 
I'm okay with this trade after sleeping on it.

We got rid of pointsnitch and team D'slow (who said he would never be traded) is in shambles.

win win.




mrdieselfuel09 said:
Can someone get me a new avy. Zu works instead of Lopez
Click to expand...

900x900px-_LL-a0ab2e6a_image.jpg

900x900px-_LL-a0ab2e6a_image.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

therealest1
Jordan XI Low Diffused Blue - August 17, 2024
2 3
Replies
50
Views
11K
rainking
rainking
therealest1
Nike Air DT Max 96 (Deion Sanders)
8 9 10
Replies
232
Views
33K
justincredible7
justincredible7

Latest News

View All News

Thread Gallery

View Full Gallery

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

Site contents may not be incorporated into AI training data or any other derivative works without prior express written consent.

Links to participating merchants may generate referral or affiliate commissions that help support our community. See our policies for details. NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom