skyblog: 8 Questions

Phil Jackson has signed a two-year 25M extension. Defensive ace Stephane Lasme and summer leaguer Coby Karl have been added to the D-Fenders. A three-game losing streak was stopped with an unimpressive win over Seattle. Denver is in town tonight in a game that should give the Lakers a good idea of where they stand within the top half of the west. Time for eight questions…

1. Should anything be read into Jackson signing the extension?

Just the timing. The contract runs through 2010 while Kobe can bolt in summer 2009. Once upon a time Dr. Buss was no fan of the triangle, yearning for the epic days of Showtime, transition, excitement, an actual point guard. Now he’s apparently more content with stability than playing style.

A personnel shift away from triangle fit to athleticism and a greater willingness to run may have assuaged Buss’ concerns as well.

2. Is the triangle a good fit with the new rules?

It can be, if the lead guard is allowed to act as a penetrate and create point. Jordan Farmar and Javaris Crittenton can do that; Derek Fisher, uh no.

3. Speaking of Crittenton, why isn’t he getting minutes?

Rumor has it Critt is being hidden to keep him out of trade talks. The more tangible reason is he needs to bulk up. His upper body isn’t ready for prime time yet. Add NBA level power to his speed then Crittenton will be a force.

4. Why is the second unit fading from its earlier production?

Andrew Bynum was a big part of the second unit’s success, he and Jordan Farmar were very effective together. Now Bynum starts and that second unit chemistry isn’t what it was. Once Kwame Brown returns, and Trevor Ariza understands the offense enough to play, then the bench should return to the game changing unit of the early games.

Jackson’s late 3rd-early 4th matador rotations of recent games are partially a function of not wanting to burn out the starters. Get Kwame back, give Ariza minutes, that’ll help. Significantly.

5. Should Lamar Odom be dealt?

Yes. The defense of Odom always goes back to potential, versatility and stats. Somehow floor impact is left out of that debate. A second option needs to optimize Kobe by drawing the defense, he also needs to deliver when Bryant sits or is ineffective. Odom delivers stats, but not the 2nd option floor impact when it is needed most.

Lamar says he will be looking to take more shots, but we’ve heard that before. Odom is likely to be effective against teams with weak interior defense that allow cut/finish lanes. Against teams with anchors and smart rotation Odom disappears.

6. Can Lamar Odom be dealt?

No. That’s the irony of the Odom debate. It’s taken for granted that Odom can be dealt for value and need. He can’t. The Lakers biggest need is defensive anchor, followed by a back to the basket scorer with triangle skills. The number of players that fit that criteria are in very short supply and can’t be had for Lamar Odom.

Unless an Odom-led package for Jermaine O’Neal can be found that keeps Andrew Bynum and Javaris Crittenton in LA then no Odom deal can be made. The Busses will not deal Odom for Ron Artest. Seattle will not deal Chris Wilcox and Damien Wilkins for Odom, Detroit won’t pull the trigger on Sheed for Odom, Lamar and change can’t get Gasol, Atlanta won’t deal period.

The Lakers won’t deal Odom for last years because next summer’s free agent crop has far too few unrestricted impact free agents. Odom’s market value is too low right now to get what LA needs most.

7. So what happens with Odom?

He becomes the primary Laker trade bait at the deadline, but is likely to stay put. Unless he elevates his game significantly he still won’t be able to retrieve what the Lakers need.

One thing to keep in mind with Odom is that he’s still not up to 100% game shape yet. Give him to mid-December and maybe his game will have taken the next step to deliver as 2nd option.

Another aspect to remember is that Odom’s contract runs out in 2009 and the Lakers may be counting on that for payroll management and to have cap space in summer 2009 or 2010.

Much as fans hate future plans based on cap room the organization will want a fiscal safety net to get a marquee player if Kobe should be dealt or opt out. Odom’s contract is a part of those plans.

8. Which Heroes die in the Volume 2 finale on Monday?

My money is on Niki and Maya, with Molly as a darkhorse. Nathan will no doubt be tied to a cliffhanger into Volume 3.

At the Heroes reference.

Great Q&A. I agree with everything but the 2nd option concept.

I think we got scoring on this team with Fisher, Vlad, Farmar and Bynum. I would much rather have Odom not force the issue (leading to bad shots and moving away from a team dynamic) and just rely on a scoring by committee concept.

I rather see Kobe with ~27 and 3-5 other players all in low double digits than seeing Kobe with 35, Odom with 20-25 and then the rest of the team figuring out the rest of the scoring.

Our offensive numbers are good (when we are healthy). I rather we focus on our D instead of finding a consistent 2nd option scorer. Kobe was forced to play out of role during the preseason (and even though some of it was experimental on his part) his TOs were a direct result of unfamiliarity. You do the same thing with possibly the same results if you try to change LOs role in the offense.

I can see it now: "Why is LO shooting all those 3s...he's got a teammate open? He used to make that extra pass. Is it cause he's sitting on 17pts and trying to meet a 2nd option scoring quota?"

On the last part of number six, if word comes out that more players are planning to exercise their options, would the Lakers reconsider moving Odom for expiring Ks?

If certain players decide to exercise their clauses, it would be an interesting summer class.

Vash - It's not a stat baseline that Odom has to meet, it's production when a 2nd option is needed to carry the team. Odom fails at that. Repeatedly. The timing is the key.

L4L - Even if they say they will opt out the overwhelming majority of the summer 2008 woudl-be free agents are coming off rookie contracts. Their current team has enormous fiscal advantage in extension talks. Higher raises and an extra contract year.

Beyond that it sends the wrong signal to Kobe to cash in Odom for last years in-season. imo LA doesn't risk that. They had a cap room plan before, failed utterly.

I can see a cap room plan as a fallback to replace Kobe with a star if needed, but not in an Odom deal unless they got word from Brand that he would be willing to take a paycut to come here.

I think the chances are very high that Odom for last years is NOT an option that LA will consider.

The decision to trade Odom basically comes down to Kobe leaving or not which in itself is dependent on immediate success (Lakers going beyond the second round). At the same time, the front office has no other pieces to trade in order to substantially improve the roster (Odom is untouchable). We basically have Kobe's future in the hands of the current team. Hmmmmm

I'm glad management has a backup plan for 2009 and not just Bynum as the face of the franchise.

No I'm with you Sky. I got the wrong idea of what you meant by 2nd option.

He needs to make more of an imprint/impact to give Kobe a little leeway. I completely agree with that. I just remember that a couple years back, Odom gave himself a scoring quota during a road trip and that is because everybody was asking him to be more aggressive on offense. I don't want him to use that same concept.

He needs to be himself on offense, but more assertive in establishing himself when Kobe needs a breather. He admitted that he second guessed himself in the Boston game and he was very hard on himself for that. As long as he's confident in his operations out there, I think his aggressiveness and impact will follow suit.

As for L4L's 2008 cap idea, I think it would rub Kobe the wrong way. You are basically going to tank yet another year of his prime for no guarantee next summer. I like your ideas L4L, but like Sky said, I doubt the Lakers take that route. The summers of 09 and 10 is when the Lakers plan to become fully flexible.

Sky- It most certainly would send out the wrong signals to Bryant. However, he couldn't leave at that point. We certainly aren't going to be contenders without a defensive anchor, and Lamar, nor anyone else on this roster, is that player. Bryant has seemingly demonstrated that winning cures his wounds. He may be upset with the moving of Lamar, but if we end up landing a star talent in the off-season, and consequently start off the season playing well, I'd imagine that he'd have a change of heart(again).

Josh Smith, Restricted
Baron Davis, Player Option
Jermaine O'Neal, Player Option
Gilbert Arenas, Player Option
Ron Artest, Player Option
Shawn Marion, Player Option
Andre Iguodala, Restricted
Elton Brand, Player Option

If Ariza opts out, as many expect, we could renounce his rights. Additionally, we could move Mihm at the deadline with Odom, or to another team looking for post offense such as Chicago. Obviously, he would need to be moved for an expiring such as Khyrapa.

If we tender Ronny a qualifying offer, we should have approximately 14.8 million in space.

Is that too much of a paycut for any of these players to consider coming here?

Vasashi17 wrote:As for L4L's 2008 cap idea, I think it would rub Kobe the wrong way. You are basically going to tank yet another year of his prime for no guarantee next summer. I like your ideas L4L, but like Sky said, I doubt the Lakers take that route. The summers of 09 and 10 is when the Lakers plan to become fully flexible.

Didn't we already decide to tank this year by not trading Bynum?

L4L wrote:Josh Smith, Restricted
Baron Davis, Player Option
Jermaine O'Neal, Player Option
Gilbert Arenas, Player Option
Ron Artest, Player Option
Shawn Marion, Player Option
Andre Iguodala, Restricted
Elton Brand, Player Option

Is that too much of a paycut for any of these players to consider coming here?

Red = Re-sign with team
Green = Good Possibility
Blue = Won't resign but will be too high for our price tag

Most of the guys you listed will most likely re-sign or sign with a team for more money.

L4L wrote:

Vasashi17 wrote:As for L4L's 2008 cap idea, I think it would rub Kobe the wrong way. You are basically going to tank yet another year of his prime for no guarantee next summer. I like your ideas L4L, but like Sky said, I doubt the Lakers take that route. The summers of 09 and 10 is when the Lakers plan to become fully flexible.

Didn't we already decide to tank this year by not trading Bynum?

Well we offered Bynum for KG. It didn't work out.

Didn't pull on Kidd for Bynum and even though a Kidd, LO and Kobe trio would look really good, we still don't have a low post presence (offensively or defensively with that deal). I can understand why management didn't pull and that old cliche certainly holds some truth (ie you don't trade big for small, even though that was far from the truth in regards to salary, which was also another red flag for management).

Lastly there was LO and Bynum for JO. Taking away your potential 2nd and 3rd options for a JO that continues to digress from his post game.

I think the Lakers want to avoid another 1st round playoff exit, but you just don't trade Drew for anything but a next to guaranteed 2nd round appearance.

Like I said, your ideas are creative and I agree with alot of stuff you post ou in the forums, but this idea doesn't seem to be something that the FO will look towards. Everything from hanging on to LO, to dealing Cook, to Mihm's and Fish's contract points to slight flexibility in '09 and max flexibility in '10.

I realize that an attempt to move Bynum was made. However, by not moving him we still sent the signal that we are not going to sacrifice his potential for winning now. Lamar does not have the same potential. This roster cannot win a championship this year or for the foreseeable future. I know that. You know that. I would like to think the FO knows that. Kobe certainly knows that or he wouldn't have demanded a trade. I don't believe the FO will pull the trigger on any deal, but moves need to be made. If they aren't, we are simply accepting the status quo, and, in my opinion, this is indicative of lunacy and/or tanking.

I don't see moving Lamar as a sacrifice because he is a piece for a contending team. We are not contenders. His moving might allow us to become contenders, but if it doesn't, we are set on the correct rebuilding course, and none of the Laker's future cap space plans are affected because no varying contract will fill the void left by Lamar. Not only that, but if we fail Kobe will be in the final year before his opt out, and, with the state of the roster, we'd be in perfect position to move him and complete the restart process.

Well after Dec. 15th, alot more options become available. We have already made a deal that opens up a roster spot, yet we haven't filled it with a FA big even with a Kwame injury.

Maybe something is in the works or gets revisited when the options present themselves.

I just think LO gets moved for a team that can contend in the playoffs this year, and not the next. Your '08 plan is intriguing, but way too many components have to work out to appease Kobe and it comes at the expense of really limiting the squad for this year's playoffs....something I'm sure Kobe doesn't want to sacrifice.

If you can bring in an expiring player that can do what LO and Mihm can do in terms of stats and depth, than I can see FO possibly doing it. Maybe a Jamison deal with the Wiz? Which would open up a possibility for Brand this summer.

But if that were the case, we probably would have got slight wind of it. I think LO stays unless a team has an expiring K and believes that LO is the answer for their org. With LO coming off a shoulder surgery and with his desire to remain a Laker, other teams just might not want to mortgage their immediate cap flexibility for a player like Lamar who can choose to bolt in 2 years anyways.

Vasashi17 wrote:I just think LO gets moved for a team that can contend in the playoffs this year, and not the next. Your '08 plan is intriguing, but way too many components have to work out to appease Kobe and it comes at the expense of really limiting the squad for this year's playoffs....something I'm sure Kobe doesn't want to sacrifice.

Why do we have to appease Kobe, Vash? That is my question. We can't win with this roster. Where are we going with it? If we appease Kobe and accomplish nothing, what does that mean? To me, it means nothing; it's worthless. If we at least try, and we fail, well, we are still in good position to move Kobe and restart the building process. The capspace plans are not affected.

What do we have to lose?

If you can bring in an expiring player that can do what LO and Mihm can do in terms of stats and depth, than I can see FO possibly doing it. Maybe a Jamison deal with the Wiz? Which would open up a possibility for Brand this summer.

But if that were the case, we probably would have got slight wind of it. I think LO stays unless a team has an expiring K and believes that LO is the answer for their org. With LO coming off a shoulder surgery and with his desire to remain a Laker, other teams just might not want to mortgage their immediate cap flexibility for a player like Lamar who can choose to bolt in 2 years anyways.

Miami currently has a three year cap space plan structured around the year Shaq expires. They should certainly be interested in making one last gasp with Flash and the Big Aristotle. They also have the expiring contracts to make it work. They also have the need, and the history with the player. If we get Davis, we might even be able to salvage the season. However, it's more likely that we could only make it appealing if we take Williams and Wright.

Again though, what do we have to lose?

Landing Brand, though very improbable, would be incredible. He defends and anchors and scores. I'm sure he would like to keep his address and play with Kobe and Socks. Problem is he would either have to A) get short changed by Sterling and B) not get a better offer elsewhere (Philly). I suppose it isn't crazy since Sterling is frugal and it's tough to give a player approaching 30 a $100 million contract coming off an achilies injury.

Who knows. If Brand would come at a discount maybe you could send Odom/'08 pick to Philly for a future first (maybe even this year's lottery pick if it drops out of the top 8). Mihm probably opts out (or is easily moved to the likes of Charlotte). Now if we could only get Slalom to void his deal.

L4L:

Josh Smith, Restricted
Given the mess in Atlanta he may leave, but he's also the reason why fans come to the games. The bottom line obsessed Atlanta ownership has a choice to make. Pure cost focus or weigh costs against revenues. Belkin was the former in industrial strength, but the other partners are buying him out.

Baron Davis, Player Option
Baron won't get more in free agency than he's paid now and the Dubs are an ideal fit for his game. I'll also remind you that Phil Jackson vetoed Baron deals. Twice.

Jermaine O'Neal, Player Option
He won't leave his contract, which is well above his impact. He wants to be dealt and keep the golden K. He opts out he never sees that money again. Can only be traded and likely will be, just not to LA.

Gilbert Arenas, Player Option
Gilbert opted out to max out. It's about the cash. So LA in free agency is not an option. S&T only.

Ron Artest, Player Option
The Busses don't trust him. Jackson wants him, but the Busses have the upper hand.

Shawn Marion, Player Option
He only opts out if he gets the max extension. No one in the league is willing to pay it. It's why they can't deal him. Marion is not a max player, but thinks he is. Dangerous combination.

Andre Iguodala, Restricted
Philly can't afford to let him walk and matches anything.

Elton Brand, Player Option
No doubt he'd like to be a Laker, but with his cointract intact. Sterling is NEVER dealing Brand in S&T here. As a result imo Brand stays a Clipper.

What hurts LA in FA shopping is very simple. Players want it all in free agency, but in this priority order:

1. Money
2. Money
3. Money
4. The Man
5. Team
6. Money
7. City

So of your list the only guy they'd have any shot at imo is Josh Smith. However he's restricted, only becomes a possibility if Atlanta decides not to match. The Lakers have avoided RFAs like the plague in the past. No interest in Charlie Bell this summer as the most recent example.

Therefore as I said earlier in the thread, if they get inside word that Brand is willing to sign here for less, fine Odom for last years at the deadline. Short of that, no chance. None.

I understand they need an anchor, but their plan will be to develop Bynum into that. Unless they can luck into a JO trade while he's damaged goods. Problem there is the Milkman. If Bynum is out he'll insist on Crittenton and that becomes a deal breaker as well. Jackson wants JO, but at the right price. Front office isn't as sold on him.

^^^Haha, L4L you are a good salesman.

I like your pitch, I really do. I'm a LO guy, but one player I would certainly take the risk at replacing LO with is Brand. I'm totally with an '08 plan if it was somewhat a reality.

If Brand was disgruntled with the Clips but wanted to stay in LA.

If Kobe decides that he's overreacting and will totally buy into what management does as they try to dip into free agency for '08-'10.

If another team actually expressed in giving up their key expirings for LO.

You see there are alot of ifs and that is why I don't think it is highly probable. Your Miami scenario is interesting, but what message would that send to the fans and Kobe's continued trade stance if we moved for that Miami package, bolster yet another Shaq title opportunity and then see the '08 FAs sign elsewhere.

That's very risky and we have plenty to lose if the worst case scenario happens. At that time Kobe will be one more year closer to an opt out. He will continue to make this organization more of a circus rather than a team. You also lose LO's expiring K that could be of some worth next season, in terms of keeping Kobe and Bynum and then adding to that dynamic.

This isn't about Kobe. This is about winning. We will tank this season for a risk this summer. If this summer doesn't work out like '07 (Yao and Amare), then what?

All the '08 FAs are either aging or banged up. Diddy has a bad back. Brand is out indefinitely. Jamison has had his share of injuries. Arenas has too and would a Kobe Arenas backcourt even be a good thing in terms of team success? JO has that chronic knee. Artest is a malcontent destroying every organization he has touched. Kobe already wants out, why add another player like him in Marion?

The '10 crop has Bosh and Lebron. Easily better and more influential at that time, then this '08 crop. Plus those guys could somewhat replace Kobe. The '08 crop really can't.

What we have to lose is alot L4L. If it all pans out, then its a great scenario. But again, alot of ifs have to happen for this to turn out into a Lakers squad being '08-'09 title favorites.

I'm not knocking your idea, I just think its way to risky to put all your chips in.

Next year, Brand could earn 30% of the salary cap, with raises of 10.5%, AND 6 years if he stays with the Clippers.

Theoretically, the Clippers could sign him to a $131kk / 6 year deal worth an average of 21.8 million dollars a year(104 million over the first 5 years).

Theoretically, if we moved Mihm AND renounced Ariza, we'd be able to offer him a $86kk / 5 year deal worth an average of 17.2 million dollars.

The difference is extremely significant to say the least.

The real question, though, is whether or not the money pinching Clipper's FO would be willing to pay anything remotely close to that maximum deal.

The Lakers can't renounce Ariza, iirc he's player option not team option. Given that he would be coming home to LA I doubt he opts out. So that takes the LA ceiling under 15 and the Clippers easily beat that. Sterling was cheap, but he maxed out Brand and paid Kaman well.

Sky wrote:The Lakers can't renounce Ariza, iirc he's player option not team option. Given that he would be coming home to LA I doubt he opts out. So that takes the LA ceiling under 15 and the Clippers easily beat that. Sterling was cheap, but he maxed out Brand and paid Kaman well.

Yep Sky it was a player option. It seems that part of the deal for Ariza is that he exercises it instead of opting out from it.

Vash-

If it doesn't work, you move Kobe. It's that simple. You still have all the cap space in the world, and you can bring in expirings and talent for Kobe to still be set perfectly for the 2010-2011 FA spending spree. Not only that, but we'd be terrible in 2009-2010, and should end up with a great draft pick to add to the core of Bynum, Crittenton, and whatever FA they court that off-season.

If you don't get the guy you want, on a contract you can agree to, you blow it all up and start preparing for 2010-2011 instead of pretending you can win now.

If we don't win soon, Kobe is going to opt out, or be traded that season, anyways. Yes, Lamar is an expiring contract next year. However, Lamar is not going anywhere without one of our young pieces attached. As Sky has now alluded to, the Lakers HIGHLY value this Crittenton kid, and that would be the first piece asked for in any potential trade involving Lamar for a star. You don't trade a star for expirings without young talent coming back in the deal.

That's my point. We've already started down a road with cliffs on both sides, and one at the end as well. Not to mention, we're going fullspeed toward it. Turning around isn't easy. We might fail and fall off the cliff. However, if you've got a chance to save yourself, it might be worth the risk.

Would you rather take a chance on an player with injury concerns or take a chance on Bynum becoming an anchor in two years? If neither of those things happen, Kobe is gone. If we have a last gasp chance to save ourselves from losing Kobe, and it doesn't affect the 2010-2011 plan, there might not be a better option.

Sky wrote:The Lakers can't renounce Ariza, iirc he's player option not team option. Given that he would be coming home to LA I doubt he opts out. So that takes the LA ceiling under 15 and the Clippers easily beat that. Sterling was cheap, but he maxed out Brand and paid Kaman well.

Coming home is enough to entice Ariza from opting out and earning signficantly more money elsewhere? If Ariza did opt out, we could renounce his rights to avoid the salary cap hit.

If that is truly a problem, I have a hard time imagining that there isn't a single team out there who would want him straight up for an expiring.

Well you plan does have its perks, its just that you need more confirmation.

You hold onto LO till the deadline. Maybe by then you get more wind on Brand's rehab and his intentions this coming summer. You get an idea if the restricted FAs will entertain extensions or plead with management to let them go elsewhere.

At the very least, you open up more possibilities with the FAs that were signed this summer after Dec. 15th. I think LO should be held onto till the deadline where potential deals get juicy.

But the bottomline is that you can't just trade LO for moves that might not come to fruition and enable the best player in the league to push even harder on the exit door.

Not all fans know the cap and its restrictions. If the Lakers make a deal that makes no sense for present success, and then it leads to Kobe acting up again, there will be an uprising.

As long as you have Kobe and versatile players around him, with Phil at the helm, you have a fighting chance in the playoffs.

That is why I can see an LO deal for Jamison and then pursuing Brand this summer with health in tact, but you only deal LO this year if you can still remains somewhat competitive in the playoffs this year.

You won't win over the fans or Kobe with a deal for J-Will. Again, it really isn't about appeasing Kobe, its about good business. Fans will not like a move that literally forces Kobe out. It will actually give the fans validation that Buss "betrayed and lied" to Kobe.

Presently, management is trying to remain semi-competitive until the summer of '10 comes around. They only deal LO this season if that blueprint remains. They will deal LO for an expiring player that can still keep them competitive for this season's playoff push. That way, they can appease Kobe, try to add a "now" player this summer and sill have the fans (and their wallets) on their side.

You see what I'm saying?

Significantly more money elsewhere? Ariza is a defensive specialist. That doesn't get paid well unfortunately.

I just don't see the Lakers dealing Odom for last years unless Brand gives them the go ahead through his agent or in conversation with Kobe.

Unlike you and I, LA is still under the belief that the kids are growing up fast enough to take Kobe and the Jets to contention near term. As a result they don't jettison Odom for cap room.

Sky, I completely understand what you're saying and I agree.

Odom is essentialy immovable. Unless they come to the conclusion that Bynum won't be ready soon enough, I have a better chance of winning the lottery than this happening, then a desperation move like this would never be attempted.

As far as Ariza, I was assuming an athletic SF defender with "potential" would be able to command more than a 2 year / 6 million dollar deal.

Sky wrote:One thing to keep in mind with Odom is that he’s still not up to 100% game shape yet. Give him to mid-December and maybe his game will have taken the next step to deliver as 2nd option.

Another aspect to remember is that Odom’s contract runs out in 2009 and the Lakers may be counting on that for payroll management and to have cap space in summer 2009 or 2010.

Sky, this is my biggest fear. Tell me what you think the probabilty of this scenario:

Lakers keep Odom, let him expire in 2009. Kobe doesn't get traded. Come summer of 2009, Lakers are thinking Kobe opts out. Kobe says he wants time to think about what he should do, so a month of FA goes by and Kobe still hasn't opted out.

In the meantime, Odom expired, and Odom takes a deal, even if its MLE its probably starting around $6M/year, so Odom is gone.

Then Kobe decides NOT to opt out. Publicly will say he loves the Lakers blah blah, but privately its because no one can pay him $20M/yr for the rest of his life like the Lakers can.

So Kobe stays a Laker and with Vlad, Luke, Bynums extension, Farmar, Critt, Ronny, etc all deals and Kobe means Lakers basically only have MLE to spend, and again, their 'cap plan' fails and no marquee player comes...AGAIN