Lakers Roundtable: NBA Trade Deadline Reactions

The NBA Trade Deadline came and went on Thursday afternoon without more than a peep from the Lakers, who chose to stay the course to finish this season rather than change the route in the middle.

This decision was hard to swallow for many fans who were tantalized by the rumors of Ty Lawson drawing interest from the Lakers or that Goran Dragic favored the Lakers as one of his preferred destinations. In the end, the asking prices were too high and the Lakers asset value was too low for any deal to work.

We asked our staff to react to the trade deadline decisions and what it means for the Lakers going forward.

Do you approve/disapprove of the Lakers standing pat at the trade deadline?

Mike Garcia – I approve of the Lakers standing pat.  They played the patience card like Dr. Buss would have, and didn’t put themselves in a worse situation.  If the Lakers acquired Dragic and gave up the lottery pick, that essentially would have ruined the best part of what “The Plan” is.

What is the plan?  Randle. Lottery pick. Available MAX FA this summer.  Available MAX FA next summer.

More from Lakers News

• Lakers’ current projected closing lineup is sickening
• Lakers’ best-case starting 5 in 2022-23 without Kyrie Irving
• Should the Lakers make any of these ‘brutal’ proposed Westbrook trades?
• Mike James takes shots at Steph Curry in favor of Lakers’ LeBron James
• Ryen Russillo sums up Lakers’ Russell Westbrook problem perfectly

In the best of cases, if the Lakers acquire Dragic [in the off-season] and any combination of Okafor/Towns/Willie Cauley-Stein and hopefully Durant next summer, the foundation is built for a dynasty in 2016.

Jacob Rude – Yes, I approve of the Lakers sticking to their plan. As I wrote yesterday, this was the right move given their circumstances. If the offers weren’t there for the Lakers, then forcing the issue and selling off the few assets you have for below market-value is a bad move. Trading for the sake of trading isn’t going to accomplish anything. The Lakers have a plan – retaining their 2015 draft pick – and are sticking to it.

Brendan Gilbert – Disapprove only in the sense that the Lakers weren’t sellers at the deadline.  Despite Lakers beat writers like Eric Pincus swearing that the Lakers weren’t offered anything of value for any of their players, I find it hard to believe that deals couldn’t have been made for Hill, Davis, etc.  I mean, the Knicks got two second round picks for Pablo Priogini! So once again, I think the Lakers had too high of expectations in terms of returns they could get with some of their players, something that is now becoming a reoccurring trade deadline theme for them.

If the Lakers are really are serious about keeping their 1st round pick this year (which will now go to the 76ers if it falls outside the top 5), why didn’t they ship out players to aid in that effort?  Because from here on out every win/loss matters, especially considering that the three teams with more losses than the Lakers (Knicks, 76ers and Timberwolves) all wisely made moves at the deadline that made them worse.

Daniel Tran – They say that it is better to do nothing than to do something stupid.  If they don’t say that, they really should.  Rather than give away assets for nothing, the Lakers kept the team intact and are waiting for the NBA Draft to build their team, which is a lot better than trading just to trade and losing a draft pick.

Matt Patterson – I 100% approve of the Lakers standing pat at the trade deadline. The odds are that Ed Davis is going to opt out of his contract this summer, but that won’t that won’t be much of a hit. Jordan Hill, however, I am still a huge fan of, and would love to see the Lakes lock him up for the next four or so years.

Like I stated in my previous article, Dragic would have completely ruined the rebuilding process. Not only would the Lakers sign the then 29 year old to a near max contract this summer, but Dragic could have potentially played the Lakers out of their top five pick.

Hannah Kulik – The Lakers standing pat at the trade deadline does not bode well for this off-season. It means that rather than gathering assets and then trying to attract a top free agent, they will repeat their disastrous 2014 off-season, which led to where the team is today. They will again try to sign the star player first, and when that doesn’t happen, and other good players have already signed elsewhere, they will scramble to fill the roster with whomever is left.

Even those few current Laker players the team might want back (e.g., Davis) will get impatient and sign elsewhere, which is what happened with Jodie Meeks and Jordan Farmar last summer. This pattern is going to keep repeating itself until the Lakers accept the fact that no franchise-defining star is going to commit until the team has  solid assets already in place.

Next: Acquiring More Draft Picks?