Stop me if you have heard this one before: The Lakers entered free agency with high hopes of landing a superstar but after striking out, quickly moved on to Plan B which entailed trading for a big name player with only one year remaining on his contract and committing a multi-year contract to a sixth man.
-== 3 Things the Lakers Can Take From the Warriors & Cavaliers ==-
That’s obviously a succinct version of what happened this offseason with the Lakers. But doesn’t that sound familiar? It should, because that is exactly what the Lakers did last offseason as well. This, of course, begs the question: Is this the right way for the Lakers to rebuild?
For the sake of a quick refresher, let’s look at what happened during last year’s free agency. The Lakers swung for the fences by meeting with Carmelo Anthony who, according to reports, was extremely impressed with the Lakers’ pitch and was considering signing with them. After what felt like an eternity, Anthony spurned the Lakers and predictably decided to take the deal that gave him the most money. Immediately after this happened, Plan B went into effect and the Lakers traded for Jeremy Lin (who had 1 year left on his deal at about $15 million) and resigned sixth man Nick Young to a 5 year, $21.5 million deal.
This offseason, the Lakers swung for the fences with LaMarcus Aldridge (among others) who, as has been well documented, felt very different about the Lakers’ pitch than Anthony had the year prior. After striking out, a similar Plan B went into effect, as the Lakers traded for Roy Hibbert (who has 1 year left on a his deal at about $15 million) and signed reigning sixth man of the year Lou Williams to a 3 year, $21 million deal.
Deja vu, am I right? Now to be fair, the difference between the 2014 and 2015 offseasons for the Lakers is that, on the surface, the Lakers acquired/signed much better players this go around. There is no doubting the effect that Hibbert will have on the Lakers defense this upcoming season, which should easily outweigh Lin’s contributions to the team last year. And Williams has a much better career track record as a quality sixth man than Young, culminating in him winning the NBA sixth man of the year award this past season.
More from Lake Show Life
- Darvin Ham adds to Max Christie hype train after Lakers preseason opener
- Is LeBron James playing tonight? Latest Lakers vs Warriors update
- Can Darvin Ham put all of the Lakers puzzle pieces together?
- Lakers news: Darvin Ham knows his fifth starter, LeBron James and Rui Hachimura, Jalen Hood-Schifino praise
- Michael Malone’s painfully ironic comment has Lakers fans heated
So what was the thinking behind those two offseasons? In my mind, it seems that the front offices’ main priority was, you guessed it, preserving cap space so that they will have the opportunity to pitch future top free agents. But they know that Lakers’ fans will not be appeased by an offseason that merely preserves cap space. So what did they do?
They traded for big name, instantly recognizable players with one year left on their deals for fans to get excited about. They also committed multi year deals to sixth man caliber players who are also instantly recognizable but can be had for fairly cheap as a direct result of their sixth man status.
But as I questioned above, is that the right way to go about the rebuild for the Lakers? After striking out two years in a row, why would the Lakers’ front office think that next offseason will go differently in terms of landing a superstar free agent? As is becoming increasingly clear, top NBA players want to go to teams with talent.
That’s exactly what Aldridge, Greg Monroe and, eventually, DeAndre Jordan did. So any hope the Lakers’ front office has of landing a superstar next year must be based on a strong belief that Jordan Clarkson will continue to develop, and that Julius Randle and D’Angelo Russell will make huge strides in what will essentially be their first year in the league.
That’s putting a lot of eggs in one basket.
So what could the Lakers have done instead this offseason? They could have committed multi year deals to young free agents who, depending on their development, could become quality starters down the road. For example, given how much the salary cap will increase over the next few years, I would have had no issue with the Lakers giving Kosta Koufos the 4 year, $33 million deal he got. Or giving Cory Joseph the 4 year, $30 million deal he got. Or throwing a 3 year, $15 million dollar offer sheet at K.J. McDaniels. Sure, none of these players have demonstrated that they can be counted upon to be quality starters in the NBA yet, but the potential for that is definitely there.
And that’s the point: Instead of locking up young free agents to multi year deals and banking on their development, the Lakers’ brass seems committed to the cap space preserving approach, giving them the substantial flexibility to be big time players during future free agency periods.
Who knows, maybe Clarkson, Randle and Russell will exceed expectations this upcoming season, convincing future free agents to jump ship. Or maybe the Lakers’ front office believes that having the ability to offer two max salary contracts next summer will tip the free agency scales in their favor this time around.
Indeed, having all that money available next summer will certainly give Lakers fans’ an offseason to look forward. But haven’t we heard that song before?
So here’s hoping that money is used differently than how it was these past two offseasons.