clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Podcast: Which non-LeBron James offseason signing do the Lakers regret the most?

New, comments

The Lakers made some, um, interesting moves after signing LeBron James that have not panned out. Which was the worst, though?

If you buy something from an SB Nation link, Vox Media may earn a commission. See our ethics statement.

Minnesota Timberwolves v Los Angeles Lakers Photo by Harry How/Getty Images

Today’s podcasts across the site focus on the moves the Los Angeles Lakers made after signing LeBron James and the supposed partnership that was to exist between to of the most recognizable brands in the history of American professional sport.

Can You Dig It?

On July 1 at 5:05 p.m., Klutch Sports announced that James had agreed to a four-year, $154 million contract with the Lakers. Almost everything that has proceeded that announcement has been bad for the Lakers, and not because of James.

After signing James, the Lakers had roughly $29 million in cap space to fill out their bench and let’s just say they didn’t spend it as well as they could have. For context, they spent $21 million on Kentavious Caldwell-Pope and Rajon Rondo alone. Neither of them have been net positives for the Lakers this season.

On this week’s episode of “Can You Dig It?”, Christian and Grant Goldberg reflect on the moves the Lakers have made since signing James and break down which one was the worst. Was it the decision to renounce Julius Randle? Was it trading Ivica Zubac for Mike Muscala after letting Brook Lopez walk in free agency? There is no wrong answer.

To make sure you never miss an episode of “Can You Dig It?”, subscribe to the Silver Screen and Roll podcast feed on iTunes, Spotify, Stitcher or Google Podcasts. You can follow Christian on Twitter at @RadRivas.

Locked on Lakers

On today’s episode, I welcomed Greg Bergman (Executive producer of Mason & Ireland, Lakers Raw) on to talk about whether the Lakers have handed too much power in the organization over to LeBron given where he is in his career. This is more complicated than it might appear on its face.

For starters, this is kind of what the Lakers signed up for. We always knew James prefer to have his fingerprints all over various aspects of an organization. Maybe we thought things might be a little different given the respect he shares with Magic Johnson, but for the most part, complaining about James’ impact on a franchise and the way it’s run is like asking a sushi chef why your meal isn’t cooked.

To me, what’s a lot more dangerous is a scenario in which Magic and LeBron aren’t on the same page. There are some immense egos working here, and the last thing the Lakers can afford right now is any infighting at the top.

We get to all that, as well as a continued version of my analogy of the Lakers as a gold-plated organization whereas they used to be solid gold. Listen

Our full conversation can be listened to below. Make sure to subscribe on iTunes, where you can also leave questions in the form of a five-star review to guarantee your topic makes the show.