Thought Starter...
Time’s up?
Before the season started, Lakers GM Rob Pelinka discussed the team’s lack of activity and noted that while they’re always interested in improving at any time, at this point he’d need a little time to assess. “I think that’s really a question that I think we’ll have a better sense on after 30 games,” Pelinka said.
Well, after LA’s 115-113 win over Golden State on Christmas, the Lakers officially hit that 30 game threshold. And according to ESPN’s Shams Charania, the Lakers are in fact open to a deal... but have some parameters in mind. “They want a player or players that they feel can get into this iteration of this team now with LeBron James and Anthony Davis but can also play for three, four, five more years under JJ Redick as the coach,” Shams reported.
So at 17-13, does Pelinka have a good idea now of where they are and what they need? Is it any different than anything that folks noted before the start of the year? Are the chips the team has for a deal—and the impact trading certain players might have—substantively changed? Has the context around trade-making shifted in the era of a new CBA?
The answer to the first probably depends on the eye of the beholder—though moving D’Angelo Russell to the bench while inserting Max Christie is significant, as is the fact that Jarred Vanderbilt still hasn’t returned, but at the same time the roster has basically been the same for two years—but hat last one might end up to be the most significant question. It’s very hard to know at this point whether the trade market will be favorable to the Lakers or not. Guys like Miami’s Jimmy Butler and Chicago’s Zach LaVine are on the market, but will be exceedingly hard to trade in part because of how large their contracts are, and the limited number of teams that might even be interested in them to begin with.
Combined with the report that the Lakers want a player/players that fit now and down the road (I mean, sure, why wouldn’t they), are the Lakers setting themselves up to be players, or are they actually creating the structure by which they’ll again do nothing? The most challenging moment for Pelinka won’t be an opportunity that neatly fits this transactional ideal, but one that doesn’t. Say the Lakers can’t acquire a player who helps them down the road, but one that would definitively improve them now? What does Pelinka do?
Since the Russell Westbrook deal went so wildly (and predictably) wrong, it’s felt like the Lakers have been afraid to make bold and decisive moves. But the lesson of the Russ deal shouldn’t have been “don’t make big trades,” but “don’t make obviously stupid trades.”
The time is coming for the Lakers to fish or cut bait on the roster they have. Or, failing that, to be as good as they can be to round out the LeBron James Era, without sacrificing the future.
--BK
Overheard In This Episode...
“If you are not willing to make a big win now move, with LeBron pushing 40 and Anthony Davis at the back end of his prime, then really what are you doing?”
“Lesson (of the Westbrook trade) wasn’t “Don’t make bold trades,” it should be “Don’t make stupid trades that anybody could see were stupid before they were made.”
“What is obvious though is that now is the time to do something definitive. You cannot put it off any longer. No matter what you decide to do. You cannot kick this thing down. It makes no sense to kick it down the road any further. That’s just cowardice.”
