My problem with the contract is this -- regardless of what state the franchise is in, I don't like handing out contacts double what someone is worth (give or take a million). Hill isn't what we need up front as a starter and that's the worst contract of the summer if you're giving him that to come off the bench. Loyalty and keeping some of the band together is great and all, most laker role players over stay their welcome. We have a very bad track record of keeping players past their value for non basketball reasons. I like Hill, he's a great first big off the bench. He hustles his butt off, he attacks the boards, he's a team first guy you don't have to run plays for or worry about his touches. But with that motor comes a limitation of 28 minutes, at best. He can't sustain his level of play playing starter minutes, try it and he'll flame out mid season and/or get hurt again. Not to mention with the level he plays at, he's more susceptible to foul trouble.
I also don't like him next to Randle on D. Hill is a weak side defender. With Randle you need a man defender more so than a weak side shot blocker.
I agree Hill is our only defender, but if you only have one, you might as well have none. You can't design a system around him and he can't anchor your D. So if you're going to not worry about D, you might as well go all in. Hell, could've gotten Kaman back at half Hill's price.
And if we can't trade him, the contract makes even less sense. Why would he waive his no trade clause? He'll be starting for the LA Lakers (prestigious gig), in LA (desirable living destination), and with how few options we have, he might be able to put up numbers good enough to get a similar deal elsewhere when this one runs out. Contenders like him, but he wouldn't get the PT from them and they wouldn't want to pay a backup that kind of cash.