SB Nation Los Angeles - How To Solve The Lakers' Point Guard Problem? A Look At Possible Tradeshttps://cdn.vox-cdn.com/community_logos/48949/la-fave.png2011-08-02T08:30:28-07:00http://losangeles.sbnation.com/rss/stream/20502972011-08-02T08:30:28-07:002011-08-02T08:30:28-07:00How To Solve The Lakers' Point Guard Problem? A Look At The Trade Possibilities
<figure>
<img alt="" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/jh9Z6YLoOn8RpIDEcry6r_S1VkQ=/0x26:400x293/1310x873/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/47828123/large_losangeles.sbnation.com.minimal.0.png" />
</figure>
<p>These days, the <a class="sbn-auto-link" href="https://www.silverscreenandroll.com/">Lakers</a> don't really "do" trades. I mean, obviously no one's doing trades during the lockout, unless you count David Stern trading a career's worth of accumulated goodwill for the bilious loathing of his league's fanbase. What I'm saying is, since the <span>Pau Gasol</span> deal over three years ago, the Lakers have largely excused themselves from the NBA trade market. In 2009 there was the <span>Shannon Brown</span> deal and the swap of Toney Douglas's draft rights for a few million dollars of James Dolan's money, and in 2010 there was the <span>Sasha Vujacic</span> salary dump, but that's about it. Such is life when management considers its core talent untouchable and everyone else is too old, expensive and/or mediocre to be foisted onto another team. It doesn't mean the front office has been doing anything wrong, but it hasn't been terribly fun or satisfying for a fidgety trade junkie like myself.</p>
<p>That could change this offseason. Nothing cures organizational complacency like getting bulldozed in the second round of the playoffs. There are needs to fill and precious little salary cap space with which to fill them, meaning the Lakers should at least find out who's available and at what price. Today we'll look at possible point-guard acquisitions. There are plenty of PG's who theoretically could hit the market either before the season or during it. They can be sorted into four broad categories.</p>
<p><b>Category One: Superstars Looking For A Change Of Scenery</b></p>
<p><i>Whom it includes... </i><span>Chris Paul</span> and <span>Deron Williams</span>. Both can opt out of their contracts after the 2011-12 season. Both are employed by teams that are nowhere near title contention.</p>
<p><i>Why the Lakers would want someone like this...</i> Because they're awesome at basketball, which is the sport the Lakers play. Both Williams and Paul are youngish Hall of Fame talents who could extend the Lakers' championship window into the middle of this decade and maybe beyond.</p>
<p><i>Why the Lakers wouldn't want someone like this...</i> No reason except for what they'd have to give up.</p>
<p><i>What would the Lakers have to give up?...</i> <span>Andrew Bynum</span> and more, though how much more is difficult to say.</p>
<p><i>If the deal's available, should the Lakers pull the trigger?...</i> Maybe, though it all depends on specifics. If it's just Bynum and salary filler, you probably have to say yes. As amazing as Drew can be when he's healthy and focused, both Williams and Paul are more mature talents and better bets to stay in one piece. (Yes, even CP3.) If the cost is Bynum <i>and</i> <span>Lamar Odom</span>, it becomes much less appealing unless there's a useful front-court player also coming back in the swap. Opportunity cost is an issue as well. Bynum would be the key to any trade for <span>Dwight Howard</span>, so if a deal for the Orlando big man seems feasible, you need to decide whom you want more. Personally I'd prefer Dwight.</p>
<p><b>Category Two: Aging Stars And Aging "Stars"</b></p>
<p><i>Whom it includes...</i> <span>Chauncey Billups</span>, <span>Baron Davis</span>, <span>Devin Harris</span>, <span>Andre Miller</span>, <span>Steve Nash</span> and <span>Mo Williams</span>.</p>
<p><i>Why the Lakers would want someone like this...</i> To varying degrees, all of these guys have something left in the tank. Talent-wise they're clear improvements on <span>Derek Fisher</span> and <span>Steve Blake</span>. None would entail a long-term salary commitment.</p>
<p><i>Why the Lakers wouldn't want someone like this...</i> Horrifying memories of the Gary Payton Experiment. Also, except for Nash and Miller, everyone in this category is offensively overpaid.</p>
<p><i>What would the Lakers have to give up?...</i> In all likelihood, Nash isn't available at any price. Even if the <a class="sbn-auto-link" href="https://www.brightsideofthesun.com/">Suns</a> came around to the idea of trading their franchise icon, they're not about to send him to the hated Lakers absent blackmail or extravagant bribery. For everyone else, assume Odom is the cost.</p>
<p><i>If the deal's available, should the Lakers pull the trigger?...</i> Ehhh. Putting aside the Nash fantasy, it's hard to see any of these guys being good enough to justify parting with Odom. Pass.</p>
<p><b>Category Three: Monta Ellis</b></p>
<p><i>Whom it includes...</i> Monta Ellis. A Monta-for-Odom deal was being talked about a couple months back. Since then, new Golden State coach Mark Jackson has made it sound as if Ellis isn't really for sale, but the <a class="sbn-auto-link" href="https://www.goldenstateofmind.com/">Warriors</a> could definitely benefit from the front-court oomph Lamar would provide.</p>
<p><i>Why the Lakers would want someone like this...</i> They need another guard who can create his own look. Monta would take some of the playmaking burden off <span>Kobe Bryant</span>'s shoulders and supply the offense with much-needed perimeter zip.</p>
<p><i>Why the Lakers wouldn't want someone like this...</i> If there's one thing Monta loves, it's having the ball in his hands. If there's another thing Monta loves, it's shooting. The Lakers already have someone like that. Also his defense is atrocious.</p>
<p><i>What would the Lakers have to give up?...</i> Odom, assuming Monta's available at all.</p>
<p><i>If the deal's available, should the Lakers pull the trigger?...</i> They'd at least have to think about it. Pairing high-usage perimeter scorers sometimes works out OK (<span>Dwyane Wade</span> and <span>LeBron James</span>) and sometimes underwhelms (<span>Carmelo Anthony</span> and <span>Allen Iverson</span>). I like that Monta's young (he turns 26 in November), athletic and on a fairly sensible contract (paying him $11 million annually for the next two seasons with an $11 million player option in 2013-14). How you feel about this idea depends partly on whether you think <span>Mike Brown</span> can get him to play some defense.</p>
<p><b>Category Four: Veteran Plug-Ins</b></p>
<p><i>Whom it includes...</i> <span>Jose Calderon</span>, <span>Kirk Hinrich</span>, <span>Ramon Sessions</span> and <span>Rodney Stuckey</span>.</p>
<p><i>Why the Lakers would want someone like this...</i> Only because their current point guards are so lacking. None of these guys will set Staples Center on fire, but each has talent and offers a marginal upgrade over Fish.</p>
<p><i>Why the Lakers wouldn't want someone like this...</i> Calderon and Hinrich both make upwards of $8 million a year, which is more than Dr. Buss is likely willing to fork over (and in any event could make a trade difficult to execute, assuming the new collective-bargaining agreement includes salary-matching rules similar to the last one). As a combo guard with an iffy outside shot and nothing like Monta's ability to break down a defense, Stuckey doesn't offer the skill set the Lakers are looking for.</p>
<p><i>What would the Lakers have to give up?...</i> Possibly not much. The Lakers have a trade exception left over from the Vujacic deal that could be used to acquire either Stuckey or Sessions. To sweeten the pot they could throw in some cash and a first-round draft prick, though I'd strongly prefer they not do the latter.</p>
<p><i>If the deal's available, should the Lakers pull the trigger?...</i> Calderon and Hinrich are a no, and Stuckey probably isn't the best use of the trade exception. Sessions, though, could be a nifty low-cost solution. He can manage an offense effectively without chewing up a lot of possessions and has a deft passing touch that would make the Laker big men happy. He's certainly worth at least a phone call from Kupchak to the Cleveland front office.</p>
<p>Up next in our series: a look at the free-agent market.</p>
<p><i>Follow Dex on Twitter <a href="http://twitter.com/#!/dexterfishmore">@dexterfishmore</a>.</i></p>
https://losangeles.sbnation.com/2011/8/2/2310948/lakers-nba-offseason-needs-point-guard-trades-deron-williams-chris-paul-monta-ellisDexter Fishmore2011-07-21T08:30:32-07:002011-07-21T08:30:32-07:00How To Solve The Lakers' Point Guard Problem?
<figure>
<img alt="" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/jh9Z6YLoOn8RpIDEcry6r_S1VkQ=/0x26:400x293/1310x873/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/47828123/large_losangeles.sbnation.com.minimal.0.png" />
</figure>
<p>At some point in the possibly quite distant future, the NBA lockout will come to an end. When it does, the <a class="sbn-auto-link" href="https://www.silverscreenandroll.com/">Lakers</a>' front office will set about the challenge of fine-tuning a roster that boasts star talent and useless deadweight in equal measure. Slots one through four - held down by <span>Kobe Bryant</span>, <span>Pau Gasol</span>, <span>Andrew Bynum</span> and <span>Lamar Odom</span> - look strong. It's the rest of the lineup that gets one's innards a-churning. If the Lake Show hopes to enlarge its collection of Larry O'Brien trophies before the grand rebuild starts in 2015, the supporting cast needs to get more productive and dynamic. And there's no position in more dire need of an upgrade than point guard.</p>
<p><span>Derek Fisher</span> is a beloved figure in Lakerdom, and for good reason. He's been a key element of five championship teams. He's responsible for three of the all-time greatest moments in Laker playoff history (his 0:00.4 shot against the <a class="sbn-auto-link" href="https://www.poundingtherock.com/">Spurs</a> in 2003, his dagger threes against the <a class="sbn-auto-link" href="https://www.orlandopinstripedpost.com/">Magic</a> in Game Four of the 2009 Finals and his coast-to-coast "and one" drive against the <a class="sbn-auto-link" href="https://www.celticsblog.com/">Celtics</a> in Game Three of the 2010 Finals). Amid the absurd turmoil that periodically afflicts the organization, he's a constant source of stability and quiet leadership.</p>
<p>But Fish is a lion in winter. He turns 37 next month, and his abilities are in decline. For a guy whose only offensive role the past few seasons has been to knock down open looks, his shooting numbers are unacceptably poor. He can't beat anyone off the dribble. On defense, he lacks the lateral mobility to check even average point guards, to say nothing of the elite PG's the Lakers face in the playoffs.</p>
<p>To make matters worse, the Lakers are abandoning the system that allowed them to mask many of Fish's shortcomings. In <span>Phil Jackson</span>'s Triangle offense, Fish was a semi-viable option because the system neither required nor could even really accommodate a classic, ball-dominating point. The Lakers won't have the same luxury under Mike Brown. His playbook calls for the point guard to assume a more traditional playmaking role, of which Fish is simply incapable.</p>
<p>Below him on the depth chart, solutions don't really present themselves. <span>Steve Blake</span>'s first season as a Laker was a small-scale disaster. He'll likely bounce back a touch and might feel more at home in the new offense than in the Triangle, but he's a terrible finisher and struggles mightily against quick opponents. If he's your backup, you can get by. If he's your starter, you need a new starter. As for rookie Darius Morris, the kid has skills that could make him the point guard of the future. For now, he's too green even to contemplate tossing him the keys to the offense.</p>
<p>The sickly status quo must have management thinking of outside cures. Flexibility, though, is constrained. The capped-out Lakers can't simply cut a check to a free agent of their choosing. The salary-cap exceptions they might previously have used for this purpose could well be eliminated in the new collective-bargaining agreement. And there are other, almost as pressing, needs to address. With <span>Shannon Brown</span> having opted out of his contract, the team needs a new backup shooting guard. They also have to find a big man to back up Andrew Bynum at center. This is roster management as triage. The front office has to decide which of these problems is most ominous and which is survivable, at least in the short term.</p>
<p>The trade market offers its own set of prickly dilemmas. Talent can be had, but at what price? Most everyone on the Lakers' roster falls into one of two categories: guys the team can't bear to part with, and guys nobody else wants. Gasol or Bynum could bring back a top point guard, but word is ownership considers them untouchable. The front office would be willing (delighted, even) to move <span>Ron Artest</span> or <span>Luke Walton</span>, but only the most gravely deluded GM would take on their heinous contracts. Lamar Odom is the one player who could allow you to thread the needle. He's coming off a career year, and his contract (which has only one more fully guaranteed year left, at $8.9 million) is quite reasonable. If the returns were appealing enough, you could see the Lakers learning to live without him.</p>
<p>In coming installments, we'll stare at and evaluate each of these options. We'll discuss their pros, their cons, their ins, outs and what-have-yous. We'll also try handicapping what the Laker front office will actually do once the lockout lifts.</p>
<p>A maddening irony here is that the Lakers <i>had</i> their point guard of the future and willingly sent him packing. In 2009 they selected <span>Toney Douglas</span> with the 29th pick in the draft. Even though they could've kept him on a cheap rookie-scale contract, the Lakers sold him to the <a class="sbn-auto-link" href="https://www.postingandtoasting.com/">Knicks</a> for a few million bucks. Douglas was productive from pretty much the moment he set foot on an NBA floor, and he's since developed into exactly the kind of athletic, two-way guard the Lakers now need. The trade was a horrid bit of penny-wisdom and pound-foolishness that the organization no doubt wishes it could have back.</p>
<p><i>Follow Dex on Twitter <a href="http://twitter.com/#!/dexterfishmore">@dexterfishmore</a>.</i></p>
https://losangeles.sbnation.com/2011/7/21/2338193/how-to-solve-the-lakers-point-guard-problemDexter Fishmore