Would you trade ...
- Thread starter idiot
- Start date
You’re absolutely right that Favors and JJ are much more significant assets than Deng. The problem is that those deals separate from a Kuzma deal are on a drastically lower level. It would be like Phoenix trying to trade us some draft picks and Greg Monroe for Mitchell, Burks and Rubio, but instead of focusing on the meat of the deal — Mitchell for some picks — they emphasize how much of a steal it is for us to trade two bad contracts for an expiring. Yes, trading our bad salary for an expiring is a great deal, but we’re not trading Mitchell for it.
Favors has ZERO value to the Lakers. Joe Johnson has ZERO value to the Lakers. They don't need to trade Deng for expiring contracts. What part of that don't you understand? You have to be trying to be this ignorant on the matter. You trolling?
Deng has negative value.
Deng is not a liability. He is can extended and stretched. He isn't an issue for the Lakers anymore. Why is that hard for your little brain to comprehend?
All the Lakers have to do to free up space is trade Clarkson (who has no place on a team adding two max contracts) and not extend Randle the QO (which again, no place on a team adding two max contracts). Why on the ****ing Earth would they want to trade Kuzma and keep those two clowns instead? A mid first rounder and Tony Bradley move ZERO needles for the Lakers.
All the Lakers have to do to free up space is trade Clarkson (who has no place on a team adding two max contracts) and not extend Randle the QO (which again, no place on a team adding two max contracts). Why on the ****ing Earth would they want to trade Kuzma and keep those two clowns instead? A mid first rounder and Tony Bradley move ZERO needles for the Lakers.
Handlogten's Heros
Well-Known Member
2019 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
2025 Award Winner
2025 Prediction Contest Winner
The extend and stretch of Deng would be clear cap circumvention and would likely not be allowed. It is a pure hypothetical. If they asked the league and they said okay they’d catch hell from 29 teams.
That said I do not think Lebron is headed there. If he is they will clear the space then. They could get really close to two max spots by waiving and stretching Deng and offloading clarkson. Could also save some on the fringes with moving guys like Zubac Nance for minimum guys.
Worst case they have PG and Lebron ready to trade and then they move Ingram or Kuzma to offload Lebron.
More likely scenario is they sign PG and DeMarcus for their max deals and I think they only need 30% each for those guys. Lebron say 35% causes issues.
It's allowed. It's not a hypothetical.
The only hypothetical part is if he agrees to it, which would be wild if he didnt because he would get paid more money over the long-run and could sign another contract w/ a team that actually wanted to play him (if that exist).
Last edited:
Handlogten's Heros
Well-Known Member
2019 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
2025 Award Winner
2025 Prediction Contest Winner
It’s allowed to extend him but they need to add money and it’s unclear how much they’d have to add to avoid it being deemed cba circumvention which is not allowed. Add too much money and it no longer makes sense.
If I was one of the other owners and I saw them adding a nominal amount of money to a deal in order to turn around and stretch that deal to signthe best player in the league I’d have a problem with the league determining that to not be circumvention.
You think dan Gilbert and other owners that have lost stars will sit on their hands while the nba approves a transaction that is clearly against the general CBA circumvention rules. Silver has a lot of good will but catering to one franchise might lose all that good will with the other 29 franchises.
They would need the transaction to be approved and no one really knows what that will take... extending a guy one week to waive and stretch him before he plays a game would be deemed circumvention in a court of law imo. So that is why I say it’s hypothetical at this point.
Handlogten's Heros
Well-Known Member
2019 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
2025 Award Winner
2025 Prediction Contest Winner
Also consider that you are asking a guy to take either 37 over 5 year’s or say 40 over 11... I’m not sure you’ve added enough to compensate for the time value of money and it’s likely you are going to waive and stretch him either way so the double dipping doesn’t have a huge effect.
3M like pincus suggests may not be enough... and the higher that money gets the less it will make sense. Making a modest 10% on that after tax amount for 6 years is a lot more than $3M. I’d make them add around 10M in guaranteed money for those terms.
3M like pincus suggests may not be enough... and the higher that money gets the less it will make sense. Making a modest 10% on that after tax amount for 6 years is a lot more than $3M. I’d make them add around 10M in guaranteed money for those terms.
LoPo
Well-Known Member
Regardless of how they spin it, Deng is a huge issue for the Lakers the next two seasons after this one. Imagine if the Warriors, Cavs or Rockets had an $18 million player they didnt play. No really good team has stretched a contract that large.
Every player minus maybe LeBron can be gotten via trade. Kuzma seems awesome to LA, but he is not untouchable. Too bad we don't have that OKC 1st or we could have added that asset too.
Sent from my VS995 using JazzFanz mobile app
Every player minus maybe LeBron can be gotten via trade. Kuzma seems awesome to LA, but he is not untouchable. Too bad we don't have that OKC 1st or we could have added that asset too.
Sent from my VS995 using JazzFanz mobile app
It's a non-issue. HH is being weird. It's a done deal. It's allowed in the CBA. All they have to do it add partial guarantee money on the extension. Everyone knows about this rule. Deng is good enough of a dude someone would get give him a vet minimum contract after the stretch. I bet you Thibs would add him to the Wolves right away.
I repeat its a non-issue. Only way they trade Deng is if some team really falls in love w/ Randle, which would be insane. No one in the league has any grounds to complain as this has been available to anyone doing the stretch provision. Lakers would still be paying him and his contract would still count against their books, just is a less significant, longer term way.
Also, do you really think the league is going to PREVENT the LAKERS from adding stars? That's their cash cow. Lakers do well and are talked about, the NBA gets high ratings.
Last edited:
Deng's contract extended and stretched would be about 4% of their capspace. You clearly have no idea how this works Lopo.