It's been a good year so far. Best record in the league? Check. Kobe playing at MVP level? Check (although his injuries have been a concern). Pau back from his early season injury, playing great, and signing an extension? Check. Andrew Bynum giving himself a shot at the all-star team? Check (although his recent play has been underwhelming). Ron Artest blending in on the floor and saying outlandish things to the press off the floor? Check. Bench playing great? Uh, no, actually, not really.
That's been the one thing to worry Laker fans: the play of the bench. How many times this year have we seen them come in with a big lead only to blow it and force PJ to bring Kobe and Pau back late in the game? WIth the team winning 85% of their games, it's hard to get too worried, but it does raise the question: what can we do to fix the bench?
Well, the only tradeable asset we have who isn't playing regularly is Adam Morrison. Yes, that's right. Morrison's expiring $5.3 million contract is a desirable chip, especially in these economic times. So what can we get for him? I came up with 4 options: financial relief, offense, defense, and sentimentality.
Financial Relief - it's the reason why expiring contracts are so desirable. No one has a higher payroll than the Lakers. The most likely scenario is that the Lakers hold onto Morrison for the remainder of the year and let his contract expire. They'll replace him with a rookie scale player next year and net pretty close to $5 million in savings ($10 million if you factor in the luxury tax). If it's your money, that's a pretty attractive scenario. Since it isn't, here's a couple of more fun scenarios.
Offense (Jason Kapono, Philadelphia): A straight up deal of Morrison for Kapono works under the cap. It would be a costly maneuver for the Lakers. Kapono is owed $6.2 million this year and $6.6 million next year. The difference in salary between him and Morrison would cost the Lakers an extra $1.25 million in luxury tax at the end of the year. But man, it would fix the offensive production of the bench! He's 45% from the 3 point line for his career. Compare that to Sasha, who's a 38% 3 point shooter for his career. You could send Kapono out with Lamar, Farmar, Brown, and either Bynum or Gasol and he'd get enough open looks to hit 2 or 3 threes per game. That would be a big boost to the bench. It's the role that Sasha is supposed to play, but hasn't this year or last. Why would the Sixers do the deal, you ask? Because they're collapsing under the weight of Elton Brand's untradeable contract. They're going nowhere fast and paying a fortune to get there. They need financial relief somewhere. No one is going to take on Brand or Samuel Dalembert. Why not trade Kapono for Morrison? For that matter, why not send the Lakers an extra million or two to offset the difference in salaries? Stranger things have happened...
Defense (Jared Jeffried, NY Knicks): This deal is more complicated. To make it work under the cap, the Lakers would have to send Morrison, DJ Mbenga, and Josh Powell to the Knicks for Jared Jeffries and Marcus Landry. That would leave the Lakers under the league minimum of 13 players on their roster so they'd have to go sign a free agent (Mark Madsen? Chris Mihm? Maybe even Mbenga or Powell after the Knicks waive one of them...) Why should the Lakers decimate the end of their bench for a player who's been so maligned for the past few years? Because Jeffries is a fantastic defender. He's over-paid and tainted by his association with Isiah Thomas, but he's been showing this year that he can contribute significantly on a good team. With Jeffries on the second unit, I don't think the Lakers give up big leads any more. Imagine putting him on the floor with Bynum and Lamar. The Lakers would have overwhelming size on both their first and second units. Why would the Knicks do the deal? To clear cap space for LeBron and a second max free agent. It's very hard to imagine anyone taking the far less productive Eddie Curry off their hands. That leaves Jeffries. I think the Knicks do this deal if the Lakers offer it.
Sentimentality (Ronny Turiaf, Golden State): I admit that this one doesn't make a lot of sense basketball-wise. A straight up trade of Morrison for Turiaf works under the cap. It would actually save the Lakers some luxury tax this season since Ronny is paid a bit less than Morrison. But the Lakers would still be paying a lot for Ronny to sit on the bench for the next two years. That said, it's not my money and Turiaf (like Fisher before him) is meant to be a Laker. Let's rescue him from the Golden State insane asylum. I mean, poor Ronny. You can't blame him for taking the money and promise of playing time from Golden State. Then, he misses out on the Lakers' championship, doesn't play much anyway, and wakes up in the middle of One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest. Rescue him, I say. He'll be our modern version of ML Carr when we beat the Celtics this spring - sitting at the end of the bench, waving a towel with style, and chest bumping his teammates when they come off the floor. You've got to admit, that has sentimental appeal... Oh, and why would Golden State do it? Who the hell knows why Golden State does anything? Maybe Nellie thinks Adam Morrison would be the perfect center in NellieBall...
That's been the one thing to worry Laker fans: the play of the bench. How many times this year have we seen them come in with a big lead only to blow it and force PJ to bring Kobe and Pau back late in the game? WIth the team winning 85% of their games, it's hard to get too worried, but it does raise the question: what can we do to fix the bench?
Well, the only tradeable asset we have who isn't playing regularly is Adam Morrison. Yes, that's right. Morrison's expiring $5.3 million contract is a desirable chip, especially in these economic times. So what can we get for him? I came up with 4 options: financial relief, offense, defense, and sentimentality.
Financial Relief - it's the reason why expiring contracts are so desirable. No one has a higher payroll than the Lakers. The most likely scenario is that the Lakers hold onto Morrison for the remainder of the year and let his contract expire. They'll replace him with a rookie scale player next year and net pretty close to $5 million in savings ($10 million if you factor in the luxury tax). If it's your money, that's a pretty attractive scenario. Since it isn't, here's a couple of more fun scenarios.
Offense (Jason Kapono, Philadelphia): A straight up deal of Morrison for Kapono works under the cap. It would be a costly maneuver for the Lakers. Kapono is owed $6.2 million this year and $6.6 million next year. The difference in salary between him and Morrison would cost the Lakers an extra $1.25 million in luxury tax at the end of the year. But man, it would fix the offensive production of the bench! He's 45% from the 3 point line for his career. Compare that to Sasha, who's a 38% 3 point shooter for his career. You could send Kapono out with Lamar, Farmar, Brown, and either Bynum or Gasol and he'd get enough open looks to hit 2 or 3 threes per game. That would be a big boost to the bench. It's the role that Sasha is supposed to play, but hasn't this year or last. Why would the Sixers do the deal, you ask? Because they're collapsing under the weight of Elton Brand's untradeable contract. They're going nowhere fast and paying a fortune to get there. They need financial relief somewhere. No one is going to take on Brand or Samuel Dalembert. Why not trade Kapono for Morrison? For that matter, why not send the Lakers an extra million or two to offset the difference in salaries? Stranger things have happened...
Defense (Jared Jeffried, NY Knicks): This deal is more complicated. To make it work under the cap, the Lakers would have to send Morrison, DJ Mbenga, and Josh Powell to the Knicks for Jared Jeffries and Marcus Landry. That would leave the Lakers under the league minimum of 13 players on their roster so they'd have to go sign a free agent (Mark Madsen? Chris Mihm? Maybe even Mbenga or Powell after the Knicks waive one of them...) Why should the Lakers decimate the end of their bench for a player who's been so maligned for the past few years? Because Jeffries is a fantastic defender. He's over-paid and tainted by his association with Isiah Thomas, but he's been showing this year that he can contribute significantly on a good team. With Jeffries on the second unit, I don't think the Lakers give up big leads any more. Imagine putting him on the floor with Bynum and Lamar. The Lakers would have overwhelming size on both their first and second units. Why would the Knicks do the deal? To clear cap space for LeBron and a second max free agent. It's very hard to imagine anyone taking the far less productive Eddie Curry off their hands. That leaves Jeffries. I think the Knicks do this deal if the Lakers offer it.
Sentimentality (Ronny Turiaf, Golden State): I admit that this one doesn't make a lot of sense basketball-wise. A straight up trade of Morrison for Turiaf works under the cap. It would actually save the Lakers some luxury tax this season since Ronny is paid a bit less than Morrison. But the Lakers would still be paying a lot for Ronny to sit on the bench for the next two years. That said, it's not my money and Turiaf (like Fisher before him) is meant to be a Laker. Let's rescue him from the Golden State insane asylum. I mean, poor Ronny. You can't blame him for taking the money and promise of playing time from Golden State. Then, he misses out on the Lakers' championship, doesn't play much anyway, and wakes up in the middle of One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest. Rescue him, I say. He'll be our modern version of ML Carr when we beat the Celtics this spring - sitting at the end of the bench, waving a towel with style, and chest bumping his teammates when they come off the floor. You've got to admit, that has sentimental appeal... Oh, and why would Golden State do it? Who the hell knows why Golden State does anything? Maybe Nellie thinks Adam Morrison would be the perfect center in NellieBall...
Comments