FanPost

The Other Offseason of 2018 Plan the Lakers Should Consider


We all know Plan A for the Lakers, which is irksome for some of us in Lakerland. They are going to trade away Jordan Clarkson & Julius Randle, then find a sucker stretch Luol Deng so that the Lakers can offer the max (minus a small discount) to two organization changing talents of the free agent class of 2018. The pitfalls to this plan seem to be well known, but to recap.

Pitfall #1 – The Lakers could be dismissed for other options, by the unrestricted free agents worth paying the max to. This would be devastating to company morale, because beloved teammates and young building blocks would have been jettisoned for figuratively nothing.


Pitfall #2 – The Lakers could sign only an aging LeBron (I’m assuming to a 4 year deal), whose star production in the first two years would still be All-NBA, but the next two years I fear that his production would no longer outpace his superstar paycheck and HOF off-court/locker room shenanigans. The Lakers effectively become the answer to the question ‘What if the Cavs played in the East with Ball as the point guard?’.


Pitfall #3 – Paul George comes solo. Paul George couldn’t even get to the second round of the playoffs, in the Eastern Conference last year, as the lone star paying with a young squad. Do we think he’s going to fare better in the West? Can you imagine the embarrassment of the Lakers’ front office if the best option moving forward is to tank in the first year of Paul George’s contract? I imagine that would leave some people in the Lakers’ braintrust unemployed.


Pitfall #4 - The Lakers sign a hurt Boogie Cousins/DeAndre Jordan so people can’t say they totally struck out in free agency. The issue with Boogie is that we don’t know how good post-Achilles Boogie can be. DJ clogs the paint which stifles or eliminates some of the non-center pick n rolls the Lakers thrive on.

These are the main concerns of mine and I think it concerns fellow Laker fans as well. I’ve been thinking about what alternate plan would allow the Lakers to add significant talent in order to continue the team’s upward trajectory, but doesn’t leave them on such a perilous predicament with Father Time.


Just in case you haven’t memorized the cap space numbers based on what happens I’ll do a quick refresher. This summer, after the rights of all the vets (except Randle) are renounced the Lakers stand to have $35 million in cap room. Renouncing Randle bumps up the total to $47 million. If Luol Deng is stretched as well, the Lakers will have $57 million of cap room. The Lakers could get to $69 million if Jordan Clarkson is traded for equivalent expiring contracts.*


My main issue with Magic’s Plan A is that even if it works it’s not a slam dunk probability that the Lakers end up in the Finals. By aiming for the necessary $69 million dollar cap room figure is that the Lakers would have to part with Jordan Clarkson and Julius Randle. Neither player projects as being an All-NBA talent, so why the hesitation on my part?


Jordan Clarkson and Julius Randle have shown that they perform above average in their respective roles. This has proven to be a necessary ingredient in championship teams time and time again. Swapping them for LeBron & Paul George undoubtedly improves the Lakers for the next two years, but what then? Do those teams outperform Golden State, Houston or San Antonio in this two year window? Why structure the team so that due to the decline of LeBron, it’s stuck as a second round team? Why accelerate the Lakers timeline of contention to match the Warriors?


Curry and Durant will both be 30 next year. Iguodala & Livingston will be 35 & 33 respectively. Thompson and Green will only be 28, but with the punitive luxury tax climbing higher & higher how much longer can we expect this incarnation of the Warriors to stay together and play at their current level? 3 years as long as Thompson is offered and accepts his extension? What if Thompson is allowed to walk? Do we have any logically sound reasons why we think LeBron will continue to be able to play at his current level for 3 more years after this one?


The second issue is striking out on both LeBron and Paul George places the Lakers where they were two years ago. Two promising building blocks on a roster with a whole lot of mid tier or worse vets that are happy about the check & weather. Now a 5 year rebuild could possibly turn into 10. Do we really want the Lakers to walk down the same path of the Old Hornets/New Pelicans post Chris Paul?


My alternate plan allows the Lakers to keep Randle & Clarkson. Deng still gets stretched, so that leaves me, the pretend GM of the Lakers, with $45 million to play with this summer. I would offer Randle a 4 year, $70 million deal with Randle getting paid $10 to $12 million in the first year. If he doesn’t like the deal, I submit a qualifying offer. I’ll assume it’s a $5 million contract, which is a generous estimation based on the numbers I could find.


The cap is projected to go up 6% to $108 million from $102 million.** Nerlens Noel’s & Alex Len’s qualifying offer this year was roughly $4.2 million. A 6% increase leads us to a $4.5 million dollar offer. I added another $500k just in case.


I’ll assume Randle accepts the longer contract because that eats more cap. This is where we roll the dice with the remaining $33 million that’s burning a hole in Lakerland’s pocket. Three words for you. Restricted. Free. Agents. Let’s look at Jabari Parker & Aaron Gordon. What if the Lakers made their competitors spend at least $16.5 million a year, for four years on each player?

  • Caveat 1: Jabari Parker will have a $20 million cap hold & Aaron Gordon will have a $16.5 million. Both of their respective clubs may find the offers of no consequence.
  • Caveat 2: Jabari Parker & Aaron Gordon not only play the same position, but neither player would likely be thrilled to play off the bench, so Luke would have several egos to soothe once again.
  • Caveat 3: Parker is a big injury risk, but the upside is that unlike Milwaukee the Lakers can get away with fitting him into the super bench, because they didn't draft him at 2.
  • Caveat 4: Gordon’s shooting could be a contract year mirage, but he’d be the best athlete on the team who can also switch 1-5.

You don’t like the idea of replacing Nance with another hybrid forward who can get buckets? Ok, I can dig it.


Let’s look at the semi available rim protectors. Clint Capela is a very important piece to the Rockets. His cap hold is $5.8 million. With Houston looking to woo LeBron, what if the Lakers made the Rockets pay Capela $16+ million to keep him? I’m sure that puts a crimp in Morey’s plan to get Chris Paul and LeBron to play in Houston next year.


Portland will be paying both Damian Lillard & CJ McCollum $25 million plus & Evan Turner $17 million. Do they want to pay Jusuf Nurkic $15 million too? That’s a lot of money to pay for a squad that would need a stroke of luck to realistically reach the Western Conference Finals. There are other younger restricted free agent options that play the wing on the market. What about making the Bulls pay Zach LaVine? Are the Jazz ready to pay Rodney Hood?


I believe that the positives of this approach significantly outweigh the negatives. Let’s take a look...the Lakers would be have an amazing core, who all would be under 27. Ball, Ingram, Randle, Kuzma, and some combo of Gordon, Parker, Capela, LaVine, Hood and Nurkic. That core would have a devastating offensive potential that would be realized just as the Warriors were losing a step to Father Time.


That core can post/shoot/dunk over smaller mismatches and blow by bigger opponents. The defense can switch everything & rebound. What if the top 7 players of our squad could all be depended on to score at least 15 ppg a night for the next 8 years versus having two players than can drop 30+ any given night for 2 years?


I hear the doubters & naysayers. "Well, what if you strike out? Doesn’t that leave the Lakers in just a big a hole as Magic striking out? Yes and no. If Plan A goes up in flames the Lakers’ competition will have signed the restricted free agents to either low one year qualifying offers or extensions that both have a price point that’s comfortable to them AND the Lakers won’t have Randle or Clarkson either.


If my alternate plan leads to none of these younger talents signing...the competition will have signed the talent to price points the Lakers dictated BUT the Lakers will still retain the services of Randle and Clarkson. Which means I’ve eliminated some competition in future free agent classes.


My plan is to either acquire premium young talent now in hopes of developing them into a future All-Star, or eliminate the bidders for All-Star talent in the future. Maybe playing chicken with the league is too much for your heart to take. What if the Lakers targeted one restricted free agent and one unrestricted free agent?


At the wing position the Lakers have options. Avery Bradley for his bulldog defense? Tyreke Evans for his ability to be both facilitator and finisher? Mario Hezonja is only 22, he could be a late bloomer who needs a stable situation. On the rim protector aisle we have Nerlens Noel & Alex Len as age friendly options. As we all know Brook Lopez will also be available, he doesn’t protect the rim but he spaces the floor at the 5. So a combo free agent class would also work well as a talent injection.


Do any of these combinations & concoctions guarantee the Lakers a playoff spot in the 2018-2019 season, just like Magic’s plan A? No. What I’m asking you, dear reader is...should that be the goal? Is it really playoffs next year or bust? Should having an All-Star wear a Laker jersey next year be the new benchmark for this proud organization?


I’m tired of the Lakers winning headlines and nothing else. I want the Lakers to win young, exciting talent. This argument is so much more than choosing Randle and Clarkson over LeBron and Paul George. It’s choosing a four to eight year window of solid talent development over a two to four year window of being the Thunder after Harden was traded away.


Signing young talent away from your competition, or forcing your competition to redesign their spreadsheets and 3 year plans (Class of The Brow) I think is the smarter play. Paying a premium cost for two All-Stars on the back-end of their prime isn’t the worst idea, but there are more efficient ways to build a contender that wreaks havoc on the league, for a longer time period. Again, Golden State won’t always be this deep or devastating.


Therefore, the Lakers should position themselves to be more like the 2010 Thunder team than the 2013 Brooklyn Nets. Right now the Golden State Warriors are more imposing than the 2010 Lakers, but as we know, superstars don’t stay superstars forever. Super-teams eventually implode or get old. Let’s not build an aging super-team. Let’s build a young squad that’ll collectively have the potential to restore the league back to what it should be. A league that cowers before the might of purple and gold.


*numbers via http://www.spotrac.com/nba/los-angeles-lakers/cap/2018/


**numbers from https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nba/2016/07/07/nba-salary-cap-projections-lebron-james/86808464/