Which team "rebounded" better from LeBron James' free-agency decision this offseason, the Los Angeles Lakers or the Cleveland Cavaliers? To begin answering this question, it's worth noting that the Lakers and Cavs weren't approaching LeBron with the same thought process. While Cleveland was, by all reports, 100% down for a LeBron reunion and hoping it would happen, there's reason to believe that the Lakers were fully willing to move on from Bron and even happy to begin a new era built around Luka Doncic.
That being said, one can still determine which of these two teams had a better offseason amid the process of "losing" LeBron. In this sense, I give the Lakers a slight edge.
Lakers edge Cavaliers when it comes to which team had a better response to losing LeBron James
While Cleveland's recent acquisition of Peyton Watson was no small matter, and while the Cavs have also made some other moves, it's the clarity of the Lakers' offseason plan and the speed at which they moved to put that plan into action that places them above the Cavs for me.
As soon as LeBron's announcement that he wouldn't be returning to the Lakers arrived, the Lakers pivoted immediately and made decisive moves. By the looks of it, they were fully prepared to execute a well-thought-out plan in the event that LeBron went elsewhere.
The Lakers didn't hesitate to sign Austin Reaves to a new deal, locking in their new star duo. They then made sure to sign a franchise center for Doncic in the form of Walker Kessler, paired with a flurry of other moves that improved depth and made the team younger and more dynamic.
Was it a perfect offseason for Lakers general manager Rob Pelinka? No. For one thing, the Kessler deal exhausted Pelinka of most of his draft capital, leaving the Lakers in a "this better work out" situation with Kessler. But at the same time, the Lakers picked a path and forged ahead without fear. You have to appreciate that they chose a vision and committed to it wholeheartedly.
The Cavaliers' offseason was a tad more all over the place, even if they landed in a good spot.
Cavaliers' offseason was a drawn-out waiting game
Contrary to a Lakers front office that looked fully prepared and equipped to move on from LeBron, the Cavs came across as a franchise that was sort of fully expecting James to return to Cleveland.
Their contingency plan(s) in the wake of LeBron choosing Philly weren't executed with any urgency or swiftness, suggesting that maybe some aspects of those plans were being created -- or at least adjusted -- on the fly. You can also use this situation to credit Koby Altman and Cleveland's front office for being adaptable and light on their feet.
Extending Donovan Mitchell was a decision that the Cavs had to make now that they've committed to their "core four" moving forward. Some people believe Cleveland will regret the Mitchell decision down the line, but in terms of trying to win a title over the next season or two, it was a more than defensible move.
Trading Dennis Schroder and Max Strus was a to-do that I called for months ago, and I'm impressed that the Cavaliers were able to accomplish this aim. I'm also a believer that Dean Wade is a tad overrated, so I was okay with the Cavs moving on from him.
On the other hand, I would've liked to see Cleveland retain Keon Ellis and his versatility/athleticism. I also don't think a Mitchell-James Harden backcourt can win a title, so I didn't like the fact that the Cavs seemingly didn't even entertain the thought of moving on from Harden.
Watson was a great get, but I'm still not sure this was a tremendous offseason for Cleveland overall. I give the slight edge to the Lakers in grading their offseason, mostly due to their clear blueprint and willingness to lean into a vision that all of their fans can stand behind and be genuinely excited about.
Add us as a preferred source on Google