NardDogNation wrote:There is nothing I like about Russell Westbrook. He comes across as an incredibly abrasive personality and even at his peak, I thought he was nothing more than an empty-caloire, stat-stuffer. It seems like even his biggest supporters have trended more toward this POV since his recent play with the Lakers, which would give us excellent leverage in a trade.

While Westbrook's contract makes it incredibly difficult to match salaries in a trade, it seemed that the Lakers' real apprehension came from their reluctance to lose future draft picks. But how comfortable would they feel dumping him for pick-swaps? We haven't exactly been a pillar of stablility in the recent past, so it's very well possible that the risk involved for them could be minimal. And even our big-monied castoffs would be an on-court improvement over anything Westbrook gave them, which would make for a nice compromise. And the beauty about pick-swaps for the Lakers is that they'd still have the ability to trade picks in the future, if need be (probably for Jerami Grant).

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. It feels like this could be reminiscent of the pieces the Celtics got from the Nets in the KG trade a few years back to draft Jayson Tatum and Jaylen Brown. The prospect of being in that type of position is worth the sacrifice of whatever mediocre play we can expect from what we'd lose in a trade. So...

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?

Spurs probably say no if you demand their pick, but I'm warming up to the idea of a Westbrook swap. Depends on his willingness to pull a John Wall next year and maybe a buyout later in the season.

BigDaddyG wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:There is nothing I like about Russell Westbrook. He comes across as an incredibly abrasive personality and even at his peak, I thought he was nothing more than an empty-caloire, stat-stuffer. It seems like even his biggest supporters have trended more toward this POV since his recent play with the Lakers, which would give us excellent leverage in a trade.

While Westbrook's contract makes it incredibly difficult to match salaries in a trade, it seemed that the Lakers' real apprehension came from their reluctance to lose future draft picks. But how comfortable would they feel dumping him for pick-swaps? We haven't exactly been a pillar of stablility in the recent past, so it's very well possible that the risk involved for them could be minimal. And even our big-monied castoffs would be an on-court improvement over anything Westbrook gave them, which would make for a nice compromise. And the beauty about pick-swaps for the Lakers is that they'd still have the ability to trade picks in the future, if need be (probably for Jerami Grant).

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. It feels like this could be reminiscent of the pieces the Celtics got from the Nets in the KG trade a few years back to draft Jayson Tatum and Jaylen Brown. The prospect of being in that type of position is worth the sacrifice of whatever mediocre play we can expect from what we'd lose in a trade. So...

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?

Spurs probably say no if you demand their pick, but I'm warming up to the idea of a Westbrook swap. Depends on his willingness to pull a John Wall next year and maybe a buyout later in the season.

Why though? They don't seem inclined to tank (evident by them pushing to make the play-in) and key young players are already in their mid-20s. Seems like Julius Randle fits that timeline and is the type of possessions-eater they lack and would need.

NardDogNation wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:There is nothing I like about Russell Westbrook. He comes across as an incredibly abrasive personality and even at his peak, I thought he was nothing more than an empty-caloire, stat-stuffer. It seems like even his biggest supporters have trended more toward this POV since his recent play with the Lakers, which would give us excellent leverage in a trade.

While Westbrook's contract makes it incredibly difficult to match salaries in a trade, it seemed that the Lakers' real apprehension came from their reluctance to lose future draft picks. But how comfortable would they feel dumping him for pick-swaps? We haven't exactly been a pillar of stablility in the recent past, so it's very well possible that the risk involved for them could be minimal. And even our big-monied castoffs would be an on-court improvement over anything Westbrook gave them, which would make for a nice compromise. And the beauty about pick-swaps for the Lakers is that they'd still have the ability to trade picks in the future, if need be (probably for Jerami Grant).

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. It feels like this could be reminiscent of the pieces the Celtics got from the Nets in the KG trade a few years back to draft Jayson Tatum and Jaylen Brown. The prospect of being in that type of position is worth the sacrifice of whatever mediocre play we can expect from what we'd lose in a trade. So...

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?

Spurs probably say no if you demand their pick, but I'm warming up to the idea of a Westbrook swap. Depends on his willingness to pull a John Wall next year and maybe a buyout later in the season.

Why though? They don't seem inclined to tank (evident by them pushing to make the play-in) and key young players are already in their mid-20s. Seems like Julius Randle fits that timeline and is the type of possessions-eater they lack and would need.

Where does Julius take them? They still probably miss the playoffs and he's proven , more or less, that he can't carry a team. Cap space is one thing. But Jules is a distressed asset and obvious salary dump. I don't think a FRP is out of the question, but a lottery pick is bit much. They can just say the heck with it and maintain the same level of mediocrity without Julius.

This team isn’t going anywhere but keeping the young assets, adding another pick and then sending Noel to a Denver would be interesting.

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.

NardDogNation wrote:I understand that. But historically, what has been the success rate of a 9th pick or worse especially in top-end drafts? You're basically hoping to get a player as good as Julius Randle albeit at cheaper pricetag and earlier in his development. At least in this scenario, you avoid the risk of drafting a Dennis Smith Jr, Rui Hachimura or Kevin Knox.

I think a rotation that has Dejounte Murray (G), Devin Vassell (G/F), Keldon Johnson (G/F), Julius Randle (F/C), Jakob Poetl/Zach Collins (F/C) and +$70 million in cap space to flesh out the roster could be significantlt better than the team they fielded this season; especially when factoringbin internal improvement as a younger team. They are lengthy, switchable and can space the floor.

Can't think that way. I recognize the relative odds of the NBA draft. In that regard, I agree with you, it's a complete and total crap shoot. Even the so called "best" of the known evaluators in front offices miss quite a bit.

But fixed cost certainty and a natural pathway towards full Bird Rights is a very powerful incentive to just draft with your picks and hope for the best. I'm not saying teams should NEVER trade their draft picks, I am saying the conditions under which the situation would be favorable as such would be very rare. Put it this way, if you just said "No" to trading your draft picks for veterans, then 95 times out of 100, you are probably going to end out ahead if you didn't even hear the offer first.

The same problems the Knicks quietly have with Randle ( i.e. he's a complete and total ******* who played like a complete and total ******* this past season and quit on this team, while telling everyone to go **** themselves) is the same apprehension the Spurs would have. Also they invested very heavily in Josh Primo and I think they want to give him minutes and see what he can do. He's a very talented player and he simply has more upside and fits in the modern game better than current Randle.

Randle had one extremely elite year while playing in what amounts to Empty Gyms in a big contract year. I think that measures other teams practical interest in him.

You are absolutely right, the Spurs could end up with another Kevin Knox instead of a known quantity compared to Randle. But it's not just Randle is it? That cap space chewed up by taking in BeyBlade's contract kills their flexibility to sign someone or several someones. So it's really No#9 plus FA1 and/or FA2 or resigning Existing Player X instead.

The Lakers in a simple two team trade with RWB involved is really the best dump for Randle's contract. Clear future money and get a first round pick and dump some of these Middle Class contracts. I love home runs. I love when the Yankees get a masher lineup and go yard all the time. But sometimes you settle for a walk, a steal and a ground rule double to scratch out scoring a run and that's perfectly OK too.

Big wins are great in personnel moves. But barring that, moderate wins or pushes are sometimes going to happen.

I just don't see anyone giving a top 10 pick for Randle. And it is a gamble for the Spurs to possibly miss on that pick. But the salary structure and CBA are built to reward teams who draft and draft well. Randle has tanked his own value and first round picks have increased in value over time. That divergence will close out some of the Knicks options.

But here's a though Nard, look at Dallas. They love former Knicks players. See if there's a fit there for a possible deal with the Mavericks or maybe a three team deal with the Knicks/Dallas/Lakers trio.

Knicks should just stick to drafting with their picks. They aren't in a true surplus situation to package 2-4 assets together for one player who is going to eat up big cap space. OKC is in a surplus situation, they can do something like that and shrug it all off.

Knicks have 2 firsts and 4 seconds in 2023.

gradyandrew 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

No reason to muck this up with a 3rd team. Randle and Fournier for Westbrook works and gives everyone what they want. You can toss on picks, swaps and THT as salad dressing not that it matters. The point is to get a clear cap sheet going into next summer, sign two marquee FAs and then fill the roster out with our 2 first round picks and four second rounders.

Fournier has more value to other teams in trades than Walker, Noel and Burks.

While I wish the Knicks never signed Fournier, especially overpaying him as they did, they should try to get rid of the ugliest money first. Walker is completely and totally ugly money on the cap sheet. Noel is a perpetual injury risk at this point, I like him but he's going to rehab on the Knicks time. Burks gave the Knicks a lot two years ago but again he was grossly overpaid.

Dump Fournier in a different deal if you can and just focus on getting rid of the worst money onto the Lakers. LA needs a public win here. Their fans are angry. And LBJ is stupid enough to see Kemba Walker and think about the player he was 7 years ago versus today.

The Lakers will bite on Walker/Burks/Noel because it's better depth than they have and none of those contracts hang around their neck for long. All those guys are there for one season and will be cut loose ( Maybe LA will resign Noel, hard to say)

It's like having a rotation of women you picked up off of Tinder. You only have so many hours in a week. As new better prospects climb into your bed, you start jettisoning off the riff raff. The slump busters.

Middle Class Contracts are cap poison because they tend to ride the Slump Buster tier. You don't commit to an obvious Pump And Dump.