franco12 wrote:I don't see the Spurs taking Randle. They are a well run organization.

Corrected.

The price to “dump” Randle is not justified at this point. I doubt the knicks are shopping him unless there is so much more to things than fans know.

His extension has yet to even begin and we talking 15% trade kicker. I guess he can waive if he really wants out.

Panos wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

From our perspective, the Lakers have been a dumpster-fire of a franchise. They are possibly the only team in the league that could build a LeBron James-led roster that misses the playoffs...TWICE! With LeBron in his 40s and likely out of the league by 2027, those picks swaps could be especially enticing, coming from a franchise with their history of ineptitude.

This is hilarious to me
A franchise with their history of ineptitude.
Remind me how many different championship squads the Lakers have built since the Knicks last won a chip?
What planet are you from?
You're going to make a trade banking on Laker "ineptitude"?

Clearly you don't pay attention to the league or you're new to the sport. The Jim/Jeanie Buss Lakers were a perennial lottery team before LeBron and Klutch Sports saved them from themselves. They couldn't even get a meeting with elite free agents like Kevin Durant at one point because of how damaged their credibility became....rightly so, when you consider they went on to miss the playoffs TWICE with a talent considered to be one of the two best of all-time...still in his prime.

LeBron, however talented he is, is mortal. And when he finally decides to retire or his game falls off, they'll return right back to signing the Timofey Mozgov and Loul Deng's of the world to toxic contracts. When that happens, between the 2027-2029 seasons, we'd have control of picks that would likely be in the lottery. And all we'd lose from that are marginal players that make no sense for our team.

TripleThreat wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

If the Lakers were willing to give us the right to swap picks in 2027, 2028 and 2029, I'd easily make this trade:
http://www.espn.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=y37l2gdx

Josh Richardson seems like a reasonable facsimile to KCP; Fournier can operate similarly to Kuzma on offense; Noel is the type of rim-running/rim protector they've favored next to AD and Derrick Rose is better suited to fit the role they intended Westbrook to. Seems like they'd be made whole after last offseasons blunder.

As for us, I'd also demand the Spurs lottery pick this year in exchange for Randle. As much as we're down on him, JR was all-NBA just last season and should be able to at get us the 9th pick in a draft. After all, his game seems to be the type the Spurs love as they did with DeRozan and Aldridge a few years back. They have some pretty intriguing young players that would be great complimentary pieces next to a DeJounte Murray and Julius Randle core.

So, who says no?

FYI, I'd be inclined to simply buyout Westbrook before the season starts. He's a cancer and I'd hate to have him around our youth. Dumping him wouldn't big much of a big deal anyway, as an expiring contract.

Good write up
Good to still see you around/back. Your proposal for a trade for DeMarre Carroll years ago was very good and was good predictive modeling for resource management. If the Knicks could have done that back then, absorbed Carroll and a protected pick, then flipped Carroll, as you proposed years ago, this franchise would be in a better place now.

I don't think other teams will value Randle as much as you've proposed here. I wish that they did.

Lakers need roster depth. So IMHO it's too complicated to involve the Spurs in this. Knicks want to dump Randle and some middle class contracts and Lakers desperately need practical roster depth and to get RWB out of there.

Dump Randle, Noel, Burks and Walker on them. Ask for the 2027 1st round pick. The Lakers want cap clearance as much as the Knicks do here. Noel, Burks and Walker can be disposed of after one season.

Fournier and Rose can still help this team. Rose is IMHO overpaid but he's still more useful than everyone else on that above list. Fournier is also grossly overpaid but at least he gives you floor spacing and I think he's easier to move in a different trade than the guys listed above.

Good write up. Try exploring other third teams rather than the Spurs, maybe there is still a good three team trade out there.

The Lakers front office needs a "public victory" in a RWB trade. Randle gives them that, well kind of and sort of but only for a little while. But a little while is enough here. They can spin that as "Randle Comes Home To LA, An NBA All Teamer and All Star"

Teams can't trade picks past 7 years in the future. Stack in the Stepien Rule and you'll start to find some road blocks with the Lakers future pick options.

I certainly appreciate the compliment. I've always held your opinion in high regard, so it means alot. I geniunely feel like I'm learning something from your insights and to be perfectly honest, I don't think you got to this point by moonlighting as a casual fan. I've suspected for the longest time that you have been professionally afflitated with a franchise or the league office, at the very least. It's not just the basketball with you but the business acumen as well that make your posts standout. If I'm right, my bad; I know how problematic this could be if it drew too much attention. But I find myself wondering if I'd have what it takes to work my up the ladder from an entry level-gig if I wanted to change careers.

That aside, do you think Randle fits what the Lakers have? Him having blinders on is fine with a subpar team like the Knicks that needs a possession-eater. On the Lakers, I think he'd be replicating some of the same issues that made the Russell Westbrook experience so untenable on offense. Defensively, however, I'd be a bit intrigued. I think he'd give the Lakers more of an opportunity to switch everything, which would help preserve both AD and LeBron. And as much as he has T-rex arms, I think he'd have the physical build to wrestle with 5-men; provided AD returns to form and uses his length for weak-side help. I guess we'll have to wait-and-see what their philosophy will become with a new head coach. If the Lakers are amendable to this though, I'd accept; provided we dump our worst contracts like you said.

I appreciate your points about Rose and Fournier but as useful as they may be, we don't have the infrastructure in place to make their contributions relevant. And I'm definitely worried that their games will continue to regress as they age. As much as all teams need veterans, I don't like that proposition at their pricetag with the added risk that they can become deadweight. But if the Lakers are willing to give us that 2027 first round pick outright for Burks and Walker instead, sign me up! Couldn't they just approach the Pistons with that offer for Jerami Grant though? DET might struggle to get to the salary floor, so taking the Westbrook contract would be a moot point. And with Grant set to re-enter free agency, I don't think the Pistons will have the leverage to demand more draft equity than the pick.

As for the Stepien Rule, I thought it wasn't applicable to pick swaps, which could be done for consecutive drafts. A 7-year window should allow them to do pick swaps in 2027, 2028 and 2029 theoretically.

NardDogNation wrote:That aside, do you think Randle fits what the Lakers have? Him having blinders on is fine with a subpar team like the Knicks that needs a possession-eater. On the Lakers, I think he'd be replicating some of the same issues that made the Russell Westbrook experience so untenable on offense. Defensively, however, I'd be a bit intrigued. I think he'd give the Lakers more of an opportunity to switch everything, which would help preserve both AD and LeBron.

Couldn't they just approach the Pistons with that offer for Jerami Grant though? DET might struggle to get to the salary floor, so taking the Westbrook contract would be a moot point. And with Grant set to re-enter free agency, I don't think the Pistons will have the leverage to demand more draft equity than the pick.

As for the Stepien Rule, I thought it wasn't applicable to pick swaps, which could be done for consecutive drafts. A 7-year window should allow them to do pick swaps in 2027, 2028 and 2029 theoretically.

Honestly I don't think the Randle we saw in Year 3 and Year 1 with the Knicks fits in with any team. But he fits the kind of media narrative they need to dump Westbrook and appease their fan base. I'm not sure AD ever sees the ball with LBJ and Randle in the same starting lineup. The reality of the situation is the Lakers can't run out three PFs on the same night all the time. Something has to give. Randle thus would have to be a Jumbo Wing. He'd have to cut some weight and play much in the vein of Year 2 with the Knicks. LBJ is probably a full time center at this point. He's just too lazy/uncommitted to play elite wing defense or even average wing defense. I have a hard time seeing AD staying in LA and that team getting better. He's probably their best overall trade piece and they don't have anything else to give people to get something they need.

I don't think Troy Weaver in Detroit will take on Westbrook. He's got a lot of young players that need minutes.

It's just about a foregone conclusion at this point that if the Lakers dump Westbrook, they will need to trade off their 2027 first round pick to do it, so the Stepien Rule will limit them at that point. If they trade 2027, they can't trade the 2028. I believe they will have to wait until draft night in the next upcoming draft to move the 2029. You are right, pick swaps aren't held to the Stepien Rule. But I have a hard time seeing them move three in a row. Would be nice if that was an option for the Knicks. I don't believe they can pick swap the 2029 until the upcoming draft night though.

The best advice I can give to someone who wants to enter into some kind of work into professional sports is to maximize what you are doing already. So if someone is a Statistics teacher, OK, that's a good start as a numbers cruncher. However asking someone who is a car mechanic to become a numbers cruncher over a few years later in life is a big ask. But think about what you can do now and what you have experience in right now. Maybe that car mechanic can work on the league's fleet of internal vehicles. Even if you know someone and even if you have played that sport at a professional level, it's still pretty tough to crack into a front office. My casual advice is to go to the MIT Sloan Sports Conference ( when the pandemic clears a little more) and see what people are saying and how they talk and what they cover. It will give you a basic idea of the kind of discussion points you need to deal with while working in a front office. There's more opportunity in MLB than in the NBA by miles ( bigger rosters, bigger draft, huge farm system, bigger international player pool, etc, etc) But you have to pick something you are passionate about, not what has the most work opportunity. You have to be willing to love to hate something. That's what working in a front office is like. It's like a co-dependent relationship that you can stomach. I've never worked in an NBA front office. I know a decent amount of the league because many things cross over to football. I'm retired on a league pension from a different sport but do part time contracting as a positional draft consultant. The basic asset management principles in all major sports is pretty much the same though. I'm a fairly good talent evaluator for NBA guys because I use some pretty basic sports principles that apply to all sports. When I said the Knicks should draft Saddiq Bey before his draft or trade for Jordan Poole/Keldon Johnson two offseasons ago, I'm not the greatest basketball X and O's guy in the entire world. But I understand that all sports are really a proxy for what amounts to non lethal competitive combat, and all combat is dictating how to control the space around you. I had a good gut feeling Saddiq Bey would translate because his skill set fit league trends but also his game tape shows a fundamental understanding on how to control his space while being very fundamental. I'm a big stickler on things like footwork and situational awareness. Goran Dragic is not the most athletic guy in the entire world, but he had a huge bag of tricks and he understood space. He could **** you up because people who understand control of space are really moving at a different speed, even if they are the slowest person on the field or the court. I've been to several MIT Sloan Sports Conferences and they are fun. When the pandemic stops turning the world into a huge ****fest, I promised Briggs I would take him to the Conference on my dime. Plan a trip there and see how you like it. If you find you have passion for it, then start your own website were you talk about your research and projects and keep going. A lot of people get noticed and sometimes hired just by being online evaluators. It's not all the time and it's not fool proof, but it's an opportunity to impress people if you have something that can impress people. If you don't have passion for it, then just stop. Because this kind of grind without passion for something is basically prison. I watch game tape 14-16 hours a day leading up to the draft and I have to hard prep guys for the Combine from my alma mater. I don't have too many discussion restrictions, I can't talk about guys I evaluate but I find it easier just to not talk any of the prospects period. For example, a year or two ago someone here asked me about Zach Wilson. It's just better to leave that alone. Go to Sloan and see how you like it or don't.