Lakers willing to trade No.1 pick?

[size=32].[/size]

Lakers Trade Rumors: LA Reportedly Would Deal No. 1 Pick in 2016 NBA Draft By Alec Nathan on May 3, 2016

The NBA draft lottery is still two weeks away, but rumors are already swirling regarding what the Los Angeles Lakers will do with the No. 1 pick should the ping-pong balls bounce their way on May 17.

Citing sources, Fox Sports' Colin Cowherd (via SB Nation's Silver Screen and Roll) reported Tuesday that the Lakers will attempt to trade the top selection in this year's draft as a way to land an established star.

"I've now been told by two separate sources, even if the Lakers get the No. 1 pick, they're trading it," Cowherd said on The Herd. "They don't want to rebuild anymore. They want to get a star NBA player. They will call teams if they get the No. 1 pick and shop it around the league."

Cowherd's complete remarks can be viewed below, courtesy of his show's official Twitter account:

"I've been told by 2 separate sources -- even if the Lakers get the No. 1 pick, they're trading it." - @ColinCowherd 2:29 PM - 3 May 2016

147 128

Herd w/Colin Cowherd @TheHerd Follow

Before diving into the tantalizing trade possibilities that could emerge if the Lakers snag the No. 1 overall pick, it should be noted that there's a not-so-insignificant chance L.A. won't retain its pick.

According to Tankathon.com, the Lakers have a 55.8 percent chance of picking in the top-three and retaining the pick after finishing the regular season with the NBA's second-worst record (17-65).

However, that means there's a 44.2 percent chance that the pick falls outside picks Nos. 1-3 and is conveyed to the Philadelphia 76ers—who acquired the rights to the top-three protected selection in a 2015 trade deadline blockbuster trade with the Phoenix Suns and Milwaukee Bucks.

2016 NBA Draft Lottery Odds (Top 5 Picks)

Team Record Odds of 1st

Pick

Odds of Top-3

Pick

Philadelphia 76ers 10-72 25.0% 64.3%

Los Angeles Lakers 17-65 19.9% 55.8%

Boston Celtics (via Brooklyn

Nets) 21-61 15.6% 46.9%

Phoenix Suns 23-59 11.9% 37.8%

Minnesota Timberwolves 29-53 8.8% 29.1%

Source: Tankathon.com

On the flip side, there's a 19.9 percent chance that the Lakers will own the top pick in the draft. And if the odds shake out in their favor, then L.A. will have a delectable asset to dangle in front of prospective trade partners.

Because beyond the sheer fact that the pick could turn into LSU Tigers' Ben Simmons or Duke Blue Devils' Brandon Ingram, the No. 1 selection represents a cost-controlled asset. The Lakers may not be looking to engage in an arduous rebuild under new head coach Luke Walton. Another team could be intrigued by the possibility of parting with a high-priced star in exchange for a young stud who will be under team control and paid according to the league's rookie salary scale.

2016-17 NBA Rookie Scale (1st Overall Pick)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Option Year 5

Option

$4,919,300 $5,140,700 $5,362,100 26.1% increase

over Year 3

30% increase

over Year 4

Source: RealGM.com

However, this is all merely hypothetical for the time being.

The Lakers could still come up empty on lottery night and enter the 2016 draft with no first-round picks—in which case they'd be forced to scramble and determine other ways to try and expedite the developmental process in Year 1 under Walton.

But if the Lakers are the beneficiaries of some good fortune, then they figure to hold plenty of bargaining power entering the most compelling night of the offseason.

Isn't Cowherd sort of like Stephen A. Smith, trying to say outrageous stuff just so someone will pay attention? I don't recall him being a source of breaking news about the NBA in general or the Lakers in particular.

It also just doesn't make sense. If the Lakers get one of the first two picks, they get Simmons or Ingram, far and away the two most coveted guys in the draft. The only trade that makes sense according to Cowherd's thinking is to get a star, but a draft pick doesn't equal a star's salary, so a LOT has to be added to make the money work. It's not that it can't be done -- Cleveland did it by trading Andrew Wiggins for Kevin Love -- but that is a rare circumstance, and both parties had strong motivations to do the deal.

The Lakers aren't on any sort of ticking clock timeline like the Cavs were with LeBron's window being short (and the added pressure of LeBron having an opt-out after one year and pressuring the Cavs to do the deal). The Lakers have Clarkson, Russell, and Randle, young guys who will need time to develop, so drafting another young star to join that core is what makes sense, not going all-in on getting a star so they can win now.

Makes zero sense, except from a Cowherd self-promotion standpoint.

Outside wrote:Isn't Cowherd sort of like Stephen A. Smith, trying to say outrageous stuff just so someone will pay attention? I don't recall him being a source of breaking news about the NBA in general or the Lakers in particular.

It also just doesn't make sense. If the Lakers get one of the first two picks, they get Simmons or Ingram, far and away the two most coveted guys in the draft. The only trade that makes sense according to Cowherd's thinking is to get a star, but a draft pick doesn't equal a star's salary, so a LOT has to be added to make the money work. It's not that it can't be done -- Cleveland did it by trading Andrew Wiggins for Kevin Love -- but that is a rare circumstance, and both parties had strong motivations to do the deal.

The Lakers aren't on any sort of ticking clock timeline like the Cavs were with LeBron's window being short (and the added pressure of LeBron having an opt-out after one year and pressuring the Cavs to do the deal). The Lakers have Clarkson, Russell, and Randle, young guys who will need time to develop, so drafting another young star to join that core is what makes sense, not going all-in on getting a star so they can win now.

Makes zero sense, except from a Cowherd self-promotion standpoint.

This story makes a tremendous amount of sense to me.
First of all, Colin cowherd is absolutely nothing like Stephen A. Smith.
Colin does not make up things or say sensational things for attention or for ratings.
He had Jeanie Buss in the studio last week after the Byron Scott firing. He's one of the few people who regularly has Mitch Kupchak or Jeanie Buss in the studio.

As for trading the #1 pick, I can definitely see the Lakers being interested in doing this. If they package the number one pick with Nick Young and Lou Williams, salaries would work to trade for DeMarcus Cousins. I'm not saying that is enough to give to Sacramento but the Lakers don't have to worry about not being able to match salaries. And if they wait until July 1 when they are 60+ million dollars under the salary cap they could trade for anybody and not have to take back any salary.

If the Lakers can trade for Jimmy Butler or DeMarcus Cousins and trade away Lou Williams and Nick Young's contracts, they still would be able to sign two maximum salary free agents.

I definitely think Demarcus Cousins and James Harden will be made available in trade talks. I would not be surprised if Chicago presses the reset button and is willing to trade Jimmy Butler. It wouldn't even surprise me if Indiana is willing to trade Paul George because what they have been trying to do in Indiana for many, many years is just not working.

Outside wrote:Isn't Cowherd sort of like Stephen A. Smith, trying to say outrageous stuff just so someone will pay attention? I don't recall him being a source of breaking news about the NBA in general or the Lakers in particular.

It also just doesn't make sense. If the Lakers get one of the first two picks, they get Simmons or Ingram, far and away the two most coveted guys in the draft. The only trade that makes sense according to Cowherd's thinking is to get a star, but a draft pick doesn't equal a star's salary, so a LOT has to be added to make the money work. It's not that it can't be done -- Cleveland did it by trading Andrew Wiggins for Kevin Love -- but that is a rare circumstance, and both parties had strong motivations to do the deal.

The Lakers aren't on any sort of ticking clock timeline like the Cavs were with LeBron's window being short (and the added pressure of LeBron having an opt-out after one year and pressuring the Cavs to do the deal). The Lakers have Clarkson, Russell, and Randle, young guys who will need time to develop, so drafting another young star to join that core is what makes sense, not going all-in on getting a star so they can win now.

Makes zero sense, except from a Cowherd self-promotion standpoint.

It makes a lot of sense actually

This comes right after the Kings said they may be exploring a DeMarcus Cousins trade this summer. The Lakers would have moved the #2 pick AND Clarkson for Cousins last summer (the Kings reportedly also asked for Randle and LA said no), now LA would likely move a top 2 pick for Cousins once again.

All they have to do to get around the salary cap thing is not make the deal official until after the new league year begins July 1st, which teams do in draft night trades all the time. The Celtics/Nets trade with KG and Pierce was once such trade. Or LA can trade Nick Young, Lou Williams and the #1 pick for Cousins and it works $ wise.

I wonder if Danny would trade Amir Johnson (team option Kings can later decline) and one of the top 2 picks for Cousins?

Ha, nice work tj, I wrote the same thing right as you did

Okay, I'll defer to you guys. It still doesn't make sense to me, but we'll see.

The few times I've watched Cowherd, I couldn't stand it and turned him off pretty quickly, but I guess I'll give him another try sometime.

so the Lakers and Celtics may compete this off-season.

on lottery night and then for any possible trades for "star" players?

just a new part of the rivalry, I suppose.

Outside wrote:Okay, I'll defer to you guys. It still doesn't make sense to me, but we'll see.

The few times I've watched Cowherd, I couldn't stand it and turned him off pretty quickly, but I guess I'll give him another try sometime.

No worries. I'm not a fan of Cowherd either. I just think it makes a lot of sense for LA to try to trade the pick for Cousins and then try to sign big free agents. Westbrook is their end goal in 2017 I think. Unless they get Durant this year, in which case I doubt Russ wants to share the spotlight with him again. But I think Durant is more of a long-shot for them this offseason than Russ would be next summer. Either way, another kid like D'Angelo or Randle, who might be good 3rd/4th best players on a contender, is probably not something their front office is too pumped about. But those two can definitely be great starters on a future contender like Horace Grant and BJ Armstrong were for the early 90's Bulls.

One reason I think this makes sense is that Kobe's retirement leaves the Lakers without a name to put on the marquee. This is the LA Lakers we're talking about, not some random team in the midwest that's willing to build a young core over time, especially while the Clippers continue to field a strong team. It would be like the Yankees saying they aren't going to have a star player for a few years and rebuild from the minors while the Mets make it to the Series every year. Their fans would not tolerate it. If they don't think that Simmons or Ingram will give them enough star power to make their fan base happy, it makes sense from a business perspective to make a trade like this.

To be in the hunt for a championship you must have an elite player on the roster. Consider the following.
# 1 - Since the 1979-80 season(37 years)  the champ has had at least 1 elite player on the team - My definition of an elite player is an all-star that made the all-star team in at least 80% of his seasons prior to the championship year. The champ in 34 of those 37 years met that requirement.
# 2 - I also consider a player that was all-nba an elite player. And a team that has 2 or more all-nba players on its roster is also a legitimate contender.  On 2 of those 3 years when the champ did not meet the elite all-star requirement it was blessed with at least 2 all-nba players.
# 3 - The 2003-04 championship Pistons are the only team in the last 37 years that did not qualify on points #1 or #2.

    In addition to the need for ELITE players on the team it is also a fact that the elite player must be surrounded by a decent supporting cast. They can't do it alone. The fact is that ,,,,,,,,
#1 - In 36 of those 37 years the champ was playing on a team that played .560 ball or better during the previous season. For a full 82 game schedule that's a 46-36 or better record.
#2 - The only team to win a championship without the above requirement was the 2007-08 Celtics . And they added Allen and Garnett (elite players) to the roster prior to the start of the 2007-08 season.  31 of the 37 teams played .650 ball or better the previous year while 21 of the teams played at a .700 or better clip.
 The league is now, and always has been, driven by elite players.
 Go get a couple Danny! Gotta stay ahead of the Lakers who will also be looking for a quick turn-around.

swish

Lakers have a history of making moves like this.

However with their cap space they could keep the pick and also sign two high end players.

They have a lot of options similar to the Celtics.

dboss

gyso wrote:I guess we can hope that we sneak into the one or two positions and then have another team (western conference please) also get lucky with the ping pong balls.  If that puts the Laker pick outside the top three, it goes to the 6ers.

Yeah, that will work.

gyso

Be careful on this one gyso. Philly is putting together an impressive group of young players and if the new management team does a decent job of managing this young talent the Celtics could be facing some pretty tough competition right in there own division. Adding the Lakers #1 to their own #1 has the possibility of making the 76er's a major force to be reckoned with in the near future.

swish

gyso wrote:I guess we can hope that we sneak into the one or two positions and then have another team (western conference please) also get lucky with the ping pong balls.  If that puts the Laker pick outside the top three, it goes to the 6ers.

Yeah, that will work.

gyso

The Sixers are in our division and now run by the capable Colangelo family. I would not want to give them TWO top 5 picks this year and face that young nucleus for years to come just to spite the Lakers, a team we face twice a year and would not see until the Finals if they suddenly became great b/c of a top 2 pick. Embiid and Saric are joining them this year already.

I guess anything to keep the Lakers from getting #17 and tying us is a good thing. But if LA misses out on a top 3 pick this year it just makes out division and road to the playoffs harder for the next decade.

gyso wrote:

Ram wrote:

gyso wrote:I guess we can hope that we sneak into the one or two positions and then have another team (western conference please) also get lucky with the ping pong balls.  If that puts the Laker pick outside the top three, it goes to the 6ers.

Yeah, that will work.

gyso

The Sixers are in our division and now run by the capable Colangelo family. I would not want to give them TWO top 5 picks this year and face that young nucleus for years to come just to spite the Lakers, a team we face twice a year and would not see until the Finals if they suddenly became great b/c of a top 2 pick. Embiid and Saric are joining them this year already.

I guess anything to keep the Lakers from getting #17 and tying us is a good thing. But if LA misses out on a top 3 pick this year it just makes out division and road to the playoffs harder for the next decade.

Ram (and swish),

Point(s) taken, but I h8 the Lakers.  I am up for anything that keeps them down.

gyso

Whats with the I h8 the Lakers? No need for code words on this board to express your feelings toward the Lakers. Get it off your chest. Come out of the closet. You HATE the Lakers as do many other Celtic fans.
 
  swish[/quote]

gyso wrote:Swish,

My wife doesn't like that word, so I do the best I can to get around it.

Hey, it works. you said it without saying it.

swish