First Look At The Trade Deadline

play in the trade deadline. Like I mean, I think people have to understand here that there's always a massive chasm between what people think a player is going to get traded for and what they actually get traded for, which is something that i've i've you know, pointed out many times over the course of the last couple of weeks as it pertains to the Jeremy Grant discussions. But today I want to divide the trade targets into three categories.

What I would call dream scenarios. Players that would be monumental to the Lakers, raising their talent and raising their ceiling, but might be somewhat unlikely, not completely impossible, but somewhat unlikely. And then the second category will look at are more likely scenarios, players that the Lakers absolutely could get if they wanted to, and that would absolutely make some sort of improvement to the roster. And then lastly, just kind

of like fringe type of trades. Think of these as like minimum contract for minimum contract type of deals, where you know, maybe flipping players that haven't necessarily fit into what the Lakers are trying to do into somebody who's also flawed, but that might fit a little bit better. So I wanted to start with Jeremy Grant. Now, the example that I want to use to kind of, you know, reflect what I'm trying to say, is it pertains the

trade value is Aaron Gordon last year. So for starters, I think Aaron Gordon is a better basketball player than Jeremy Grant. Jeremy Grants a little more skilled, but in the in the sense of what he would look like next to superstars on a contender trying to fill a role. His offensive package that he brings to the table, there's a little bit of a diminishing return they're playing alongside

other superstars, and that's where the defensive gap starts to show. Now, Jeremy Grant is a good perimeter defensive player, we've all seen him do a decent job guarding perimeter superstars. However, Aaron Gordon is a very good perimeter defensive players. So when you're talking about adding a player like that too, you know, a contender, a guy like Eric Aaron Gordon is just a better ceiling raising type of player, you know,

alongside superstars. We haven't really had an opportunity to see that as a result of the Jamal Murray injury, and now he's been slotted in a weird position where they need him to do more and some of his shortcomings are showing. But he's an example of a player like Jeremy Grant this year where there was a desire to add him to a contender to try to raise their ceiling and then go look at what Aaron Gordon went for salary filler basically the half decent young prospect, one

first round pick that was protected. You know, there was a lot of talk about what Aaron Gordon might have gone for. There were a lot of names thrown out. But then when push came to shove, everyone got gun shy, which happens all the time in the NBA. General managers get gun shy and then they don't pull the trigger.

Look at last year with Kyle Lowry. You know, like we all thought the Lakers would absolutely send th HT to Toronto for Kyle Lowry, right, I Mean, it's kind of seemed like a no brainers, but then one pusch came to shove, they hung onto him. Now this year, the Lakers are desperate, and that's why I consider them to be a legitimate threat for some of these scenarios

that I'm laying out in the dream scenarios category. Because the Lakers that th h T Kendrick Nunn and that first package that absolutely is on the table, I have no doubt that they would pull the trigger if they needed to in that case, Whereas some of these teams, yeah, they talked about how they might, but it doesn't really

seem likely. So I'll give you two examples. So for instance, Washington, that was the team that was reported in the uh Bleacher Report article yesterday as the front runner for the team most likely to get Jeremy Grant. But like when you really look at Washington, you've got Bradley Beale pending unrestricted free agent, and they even if they add Jeremy Grant, even if they added Jeremy Grant for nothing, which they would have to send out, you know, assets in the deal.

Even if they got Jeremy Grant for nothing, you're probably still looking at the sixth, third, seventh, best team in the East, maybe fifth if you're being super optimistic. So it's like, what would be the point if you're Washington to cash in a bunch of assets that directly affect your future to become a just a little bit better, mediocre team that loses in the first or second round. And then Bradley Bell finally looks in the mirror and goes, yeah,

I'm sick of losing. I'm out of here. And now you've given up a bunch of assets and now you're basically where the Detroit Pistons are right now, with Jeremy Grant running your offense. So again, Washington might be the favorite, but would you guys be completely shocked if all of a sudden, he you know, the the Wizards backed out at the last second and went never mind, this isn't a good idea. Same thing goes with Chicago. Like Patrick Williams is a much better prospect, much better asset than

Taylor Horton. Tucker is so it's a much more significant ask for Detroit to give him up, excuse me, for Chicago to give him up. So again, you know, if you're Chicago and you're like, man, we're playing really good basketball right now, and Patrick Williams could like, we're not. Like, we're playing really good basketball, but we're probably not going to win the title. I've got Alex Crusoe who's developing offensively.

I've got a Lonzo Ball who's taken a leap. I've got Tamarta Rosen who's an older guy but he looks really, really good. And Zach Levine is still on the way up. Why would I cash in for this season when theoretically in the future, Patrick Williams could fit into that four spot and actually make us a lot better in the next couple of years when we actually have a chance

to try to win the title. And so again, that's where I look at that and I go like, Okay, Chicago might have called Detroit and said, hey, like what about Patrick Williams. But when push comes to shove, are they actually going to do it? I don't know, And especially when you look at their salary situation. We have reporting that says that Jeremy Grant wants a lot of money. He wants a lot of money, and he wants to have the ball in his hands on a team that

already has guys that want to do that. So again, with those two scenarios, those are the two teams that get thrown out, is like really potential trade destinations for Jeremy Grant. I could make a really compelling case for why both of those teams have back out at the last second. So that doesn't mean that Lakers are gonna get Jeremy Grant. What it means is don't help them out. They have a long shot chance to make something like that happen, which is exactly what Zach Low reported on

his podcast a couple of weeks ago. And it was funny because the way he reported it was kind of just through making some sort of logical progression. While he was recording the podcast, He's like, Yeah, the Lakers don't really have much of a chance, and then towards the end, he's like, wait, actually, what if all these teams back out? Okay, wait, yeah, th ht that might be the best package. And that's just the reality. That's just the reality of the way

these trade deadline situations work. The truth is that these players end up going for not much. Now, as far as Jeremy Grant goes, I've seen people talk about the the concept of of of his ball dominance and whether or not that fits with the Lakers. I'm not worried about that at all, because Anthony Davis is not a perimeter initiator and Russell Westbrook is very much not in the long term plans of the Lakers. It's sure, I

sure as hell hope not so. I look at it from the standpoint of like if I was Lebron and the trade was possible, it meaning Detroit was seriously considering the th h T offer, I'd be blown up Jeremy Grant's phone and being like, hey, man, I'm giving you the basketball. I'm also gonna have the basketball. But hey, in the modern NBA, we're taking turns at this thing, and you're gonna get plenty of touches. You're gonna get plenty of opportunity. I'm not I'm not worried about that

side of things at all. Now, there's a whole other money element to it. Like I think if you take on Jeremy Grant and extend him, then you probably have to get rid of Russell Westbrook in the in the summer, so you might have to, you know, to try to figure out a way to make that happen. But I'm not worried about Jeremy Grant's long term fit here. That's not thing that concerns me. Now. The one thing that was pointed out to me in a discussion that I

had with my guy Rouge from Houston. He had mentioned, like, hey, it's a little bit more of a seller's market this year, and that's true. There are more buyers then there are sellers this year, which may not have been the case last year. And maybe that ends up being the thing that drives up the price on Jeremy Grant, especially since he's kind of at the top of this class this trade season. That might be the wrinkle here that turns things into, uh, you know, in the favor of of

of the Lakers being out of the equation. But I would not count the Lakers out. I think he's absolutely a possibility. I think he should be their top target. I think he should be their number one option. And if they could figure that move out, that's when you start to get really excited about some of these small, small ball groups that the Lakers could put out. Any front court going against Lebron, Anthony Davis and Jeremy Grant is going to be at a significant disadvantage even a

team like the Milwaukee Bucks. It's just too much athleticism, it's too much versus to ability, it's too much offense that that that's a really exciting prospect. So the second player that I have under my dream Scenarios list is Harrison Barnes. So Harrison Barnes is less athletic than Jeremy Grant.

I think that's the key difference. I think. I think Harrison Barnes is a little bit more of like a rigid and fundamental basketball player, while Jeremy Grant has a little more of that shiftiness and a little bit more of that, you know, like I would call it like offensive creativity, that just the the ability to have more explosive offensive nights. I think he's I think he is

a little bit better in that regard. That said, Harrison Barnes is not a bad option, and most importantly, at this phase in his career, he doesn't have the same ego issues that Jeremy Grant has in terms of what he wants from his role on a team, and he has a ton of experience in a role player position

alongside superstars, including with Golden State. Now, I know a lot of people are gonna point to, you know, the two thousand sixteen finals and be like, I don't want that guy, but hey, at this point in his career, he's just he's just been through enough of those moments that he's a little bit more you know, comfortable. And most importantly, that kind of thing can happen to anybody.

You're insane if you don't think Jeremy Grant can also have a cold shooting playoffs series, especially with his lack of playoff experience. So I'm not I'm not worried about that at all. Now, the the nice thing with the Harrison Barnes concept is he he might end up being unavailable anyway if the if the Kings end up making this trade for Ben Simmons and Tobias Harris that's been thrown around, although there's some reporting that Daryl Moore is

not interested in what the Kings have to offer. But if if it turns into a situation where the Kings are just trading Harrison Barnes straight up to somebody to try to get some assets because he's in that second position behind Jeremy Grant. That gives the Lakers an opportunity, you know, like if all the big hitters that are actually throwing assets on the table allegedly, if they actually do, then the Lakers would have a better chance at that

second option. And I Harrison Barnes brings a lot of the things that I was talking about with Jeremy Grant in terms of improve the some of the ceiling and some of the lineups that the Lakers can throw out there. The third dream scenario I put together, This one is kind of complicated, and I would say this is probably the least likely of any of the trades that I

put together. Here would be a package built around Russell Westbrook, Taylor Horton, Tucker, Kendrick Nunn, and probably one other minimum contract for Tobias Harris and Ben Simmons. Now it's a long shot for a lot of reasons. Why Because Russell Westbrook's value is at an all time low, So that's certainly the case. Now the only reason the door is cracked is because Tobias Harris is also at an all time low in terms of value. He's on this maximum

contract with the tony years left. It's one of those situations where, even if you looked at it purely from the standpoint of contracts, the Sixers could generate some flexibility by flipping a long term max contract for a shorter term super max contract. Now. Obviously, Tobias Harris, even with his struggles, even with him massively underperforming relative to his contract, I think he's a better basketball player than Russell Westbrook. As I've talked about a lot, I think Westbrook has

entered into his career. He used to make fifteen good plays for every tent bad plays. He's more like seven or eight good plays for every ten back places. And I don't think he's really much of a positive player at this point in his career. So that's probably gonna scare everybody away. Tobias Harris. He's overpaid, he's way over his skis as a player. However, he's a win shoot ball, put the ball on the floor, do some really low

level playmaking, and can guard multiple positions. That automatically makes him an easy plug in in any lineup. I don't have to even think about whether or not Tobias Harris would fit and contribute with the Lakers. He absolutely would, So that kind of ends up being the ring cool there that might make this not work. However, under the circumstances where the Sixers potentially internally could be thinking hard about getting off of Tobias, that's what kind of keeps

his door cracked. Now. The only thing that could swing the door open and make the deal happen, in my opinion, would be Joe l embad So. Over the course of the last half decade, Joel Embiid and Russ have had a lot of really loud battles against each other. They've had a lot of games where the two of them have gone at it, and typically Russ is one, especially

a few years back. So it's possible, just like just like Lebron, James had an elevated sense of value of what Russell Westbrook was that I think he probably regrets now and Beat might have that same situation, and Beat might be sitting on his couch going, man, I'd love to play with Russ. I'd rather have him than some of these younger guards I'm playing with. He's going to be able to run, take and roll with me and get me better shots that he you know open here.

You know, we all know Joel Embiad likes to take threes. That's another kind of angle there that opens up the door to that fit working a little bit better. And most importantly, that team doesn't have playmaking. One of the big reasons why the Lakers kind of don't need what Russ springs to the table is they have better playmaking options. You know, a team, a team like Philly, it's the same problem talking to the same problem I talked about with Boston a lot. They don't have guys that are

good at creating shots for other people. Now, Russ at this phase in his career is bad at a lot of things in my opinion, But there's one thing that he's still good at, and it's the primary source of his good plays. He generates rim pressure, and inherently that rim pressure generates open shots for his teammates, which is something that you know, like we say, it is a very rare skill in the league. It's that playmaking ability, that ability to not just look out for yourself but

rather make plays for your teammates. It's kind of a rare deal in the NBA. He's not great at it, he certainly isn't great at it, like we've talked about, but it's something that he still does well even at this phase in his career. So you can see a situation where maybe Joel Embid talks himself into like, hey, Russ is the man I would love to play with him. Let me go down to Darryl Moore Darryl Moore's office and put some pressure on him and and see if

we can't make this happen. And you know, the other angle there too is what if the market surrounding Ben Simmons just cools in general because all the teams out there don't necessarily want to pay. And then here comes some pressure from Joel Embiid like, hey, I'm sick of playing my ass off here while Ben Simmons sits at home and we have all of our talent and all of our you know, salary tied up in this guy who's not even on the court. Darryl like, stop screwing

around and make this happen. So that would be the like I said, super long shot, but that would be an interesting deal where you could see, just like if a couple of chips fall the right way, or maybe it could potentially happen again long shot, but I wanted to put it on my list. The last one I

had for dream scenarios was Christian Would. So Christian Woods a really into sting player because he brings a lot of perimeter versatility for a big now at this point, even though he's a very good athlete and he has a lot of size, he's not a great defensive player, which I think would scare contenders away from him in

a lot of ways. However, there are going to be teams out there that are going to look at him and be like, man, this would be an interesting young prospect to throw some assets out and see if we can make this happen. Now, if in that scenario, those teams are probably going to be willing to pay more than the Lakers are going to be willing to pay

for a player like Christian Would. But the way I look at it in a long shot scenario is if that market cools and no other deals materialized, it's an interesting option to add size to the Lakers while also maintaining some of that five out identity. I think Christian Wood's ability to shoot the basketball. He's at at thirty seven on four attempts over his last three seasons, which

is pretty good for a big player. He can do a little bit of close out attacking, like he can put the ball on the floor and make some plays. He's definitely not someone you want doing that a lot, but it's something that he can do, and it's an interesting option to add size, add athleticism, fix some of the issues with the Lakers small ball lineups being too small, while also maintaining some of that uh some of that you know, uh five out concept. And then you know,

he also brings some of that upside. The Lakers have a lot tied up in the current generation right let We have a lot tied up in Anthony Davis, we have a lot tied up in Lebron and even with Russ. But Christian Wood gives you a little bit of that. I can have one foot in the moment with a productive player while also potentially having a prospect for the future. Now, Christian Wood could always be a good stats, bad team

guy for the rest of his career. That's certainly possible, but it's also possible that he develops into a decent, productive, you know, big man who can contribute to a championship team. That's all possible. All right, let's move on to the

more likely trade scenarios. The first one that I have on my list is Miles Turner, So I would have put him in the you know, dream scenarios category before the foot injury, because I think you would have had a lot more teams willing to buy for his services, and that lack of desperation that most teams are operating under would probably cause them to pull the plug on any offer they're based on that. Stress fractures. Stress fractures

are weird. I actually had one between my first and second season playing in college, and it's weird because like, I came back in two months, but then I still had pain in my foot for like the first half of the season. It was kind of a problem. I kind of came back too soon. It very easily could have been something that I re injured. Especially with big guys,

that gets even more freaky. It's one of those things where you're you take a couple of weeks off and maybe you start playing again and it just gets worse. Like it's it's one of those things that could scare some people away, which drops his value to the point where I think the Lakers suddenly become a team that could potentially get him. Now it gets tricky because I would want to hold Miles out for at least a month.

So now we're talking about a player that can't play until middle late February, and it becomes one of those things where do you feel like cashing in assets like th HD, like Hendrick Nunn to then have a player come back that can't play for a little while. That is certainly a concern there. The other concern that I have with Miles Turner is just the identity fit piece, because while he does shoot the ball well from the perimeter, he's not like Christian Wood in the sense that he's

not a great close out attacker. So it's hard to imagine him thriving in a five out concept. It would

be more of like a traditional type of concept. And then obviously that would be Frank's dream because then Frank could basically lean all the way back into his you know, traditional pick and roll coverages in his traditional style that you'd love to use in So it's it's it's a dream in that in that respect for Frank, I just worry about it from an identity standpoint, Like we're leaning heavily at this point in the season to try and to learn five out basketball, to try and to learn

small ball, and so why would we do that for another month month and a half and then suddenly late February early March like be like, okay, let's switch it up again. Here comes Miles Turner. We're going giant and we're playing Lebron at the three, eight at the four,

Miles Turner at the five. That's just tough. And with the Lakers team that struggled so much with continuity this year and the ability to take on a style and just stick with it for a while until you get good at it, I think that would be some some form of self sabotage to bring a guy like that in and then to just change up your entire identity and style again in the middle of the season. So

I see both sides there. But he's certainly are a possible option, and I do like the versatility that he brings. It's it's a move that I could talk myself into being a good move, even if it's not my favorite. So the second trade that I have on my more likely list is the trade that our friend cranees Um pointed out in recent weeks going after ken Ridge Williams and Mike Miscala. Now, the nice part about this type

of trade is it's not forfeiting assets. You probably can get that deal done with like Kendrick Nunn in a second round pick, right, So that's exciting in the sense that you have the potential to improve the team while not giving anything up and maintaining those assets potentially for next summer. So that part is exciting. Now, this certainly isn't much of a ceiling raising trade. I don't really

see Mike Noscala's value much at all. One of the things that Crane just pointed out is that his shooting in l a was a huge outlier, and I tend to agree with that. Something to keep in mind, like bad basketball teams have a hard time generating quality shots, and that team when Microscolo was playing, as a result of all the injuries, just wasn't very good. So he wasn't getting high quality shots. And and every team plays hard against the Lakers, so it wasn't like they were

getting poor effort out of their opponents. It was just a tough That whole season was just tough. So I'm willing to give him a pass in that regard. But the more exciting thing to me would be Kendridge Williams. So the Lakers have had a lack of forwards. That's been an issue all year long. Ken Ridge Williams is not a very good basketball player, but he's another player

that kind of fits into that Stanley Johnson archetype. I would say he's significantly less athletic and a little bit smaller, but he is still a good athlete and he shoots the ball better. So it's kind of like a variation of Stanley Johnson that's a little bit better of a spot up threat, but doesn't bring all of the same things that Stanley brings to the table. But it's another

big forward to have off the bench. That buys you some depth, that buys you some versatility on the wing, gives you more options in those small ball lineups to have switchy wings on the perimeter that can hold their own offensively. So again, that's a that's a fringe move. Like, let's say all these other deals don't materialize, but you're still looking to improve the team somehow. Well, Hey, like

Kendrick Nunn hasn't even played a minute for us. What if we could flip him into end of the bench shooter that we can use on some nights and some matchups, and another forward that could certainly be on the fringe of our rotation as a big guy that can play big wing, that can play in our small ball lineup. So I thought that one was interesting. Um, the last one that I have on my more likely list is

Eric Gordon. So this is the one that drives Lakers fans crazy because they think that he's not good anymore, and rightfully so, they have their eyes on bigger targets, right like we all are looking at the Jeremy Grants and the Harrison Barnes types Like I get that, but Eric Gordon is a very possible outcome. It's a it's a trade that the Lakers absolutely can be in the

hunt for, and it's a decent fallback option. Now I look at Eric Gordon, it's kind of like a massive upgrade on the th HD position in the current uh Like in the current timeline. Now, if I'm describing th h t s potential outcomes, like what kind of player he could become one day, I think it kind of ranges from an Eric Gordon all the way up to like a Drew holiday, meaning like his ceiling, like the kind of player he could become if everything goes right,

is like a Drew Holiday. But it's extremely realistic to think that th HT by the time he's in his late twenties early thirties could be an Eric Gordon type. You know, a guy who brings, who's a little bit undersized on the wing, but is built like a truck, has you know, a super low center of gravity that makes him very difficult to move off of his spot. He was very good defensively, and I, as I've said on the show many times, I think th HD projects

to eventually be a good shooter, even if he isn't yet. Now. Eric Gordon immediately coming out of college, immediately coming out of Indiana was already a good shooter. So it's not like their timelines are the same or anything like that. But I look at Eric Gordon as like a similar concept of like, hey, what if we could take th HT but make him a veteran. You know, That's kind of the way I look at it. Now, with his size,

it would be an issue. Eric Gordon would become an issue if Frank continued to stay too small at the guard position, Like if Frank's plan is to play Russ Avery Bradley and uh and Eric Gordon and yeah, I'm with you, guys, that's a stupid idea. But it's also a stupid idea to do the same thing with Moleague

Monk there, which is something he's been doing anyway. So the way I look at it is like in the future where Anthony Davis is back and Frank finally leans on using some of these small forwards the way he talked about in the preseason, Allah aresa in the starting lineup. As long as we look at it from that perspective,

his size is actually beneficial. If I look at it as like Eric Gordon as the fifth guy in a lineup that includes Lebron, Anthony Davis, Russell Westbrook Day, Trevor Ariza or an Austin Reeves or Stanley Johnson and those lineups, I think Eric Gordon's size it's fine. He's got a ton of playoff experience, he said, a ton of big playoffs shots. He has a ton of of He has a long resume of causing problems for people as a perimeter defender in the playoffs, including what he's done to

Donovan Mitchell. He can chase over the top of screens the way that Frank wants him to in our scheme. Again, I understand some of the pessimism there because there are

better options available. But if the Lakers ended up falling back on Eric Gordon, I think it's one of those deals where we could be looking in a playoff series, you know, in April, and and looking at a lineup on the floor, watching the Lakers go on a run in a big moment, and being like, man, Eric Gordon's making some plays out there, you know, I I tend to think that that he would still be a good option. So the last concept that I wanted to look at

is this veteran minimum swap type of concept. Now it's hard to really gauge what these deals would look like because it's hard to gauge what types of veteran veteran minimum players are available. But I'll give you one example of the type of deal I'm looking I'm talking about. This is a deal that I think Laker fans would hate, but I think would be more you know, beneficial to what our identity, what our identity would be moving down

the line. So Malik Monk Malik Monk has been unbelievable offensively as of late, although he's coming off of a short stretch here where he hasn't shot the ball as well. You know, Malik Monk, when he was in that group against the Jazz, when we had Lebron and Austin Reaves and Stanley Johnson and th Ht on the floor, he was okay defensively. Why because the entire unit was bought in. They were switching everything so he didn't have to fight

over the top of screens or anything like that. And just because of the aggri defensive talent surrounding him, he was functional as a two guard in that lineup right. But for the most part, over the course of the last couple of months, coinciding with his offensive explosion, he's been our worst defensive player, like really, really, really really bad, something I've been talking about a lot on the pod lately.

So as good as Milik Monk is and I think his value, I think he's played himself into a situation where his value uh massively exceeds what his contract number is. That said, it's also you know, I'm of the opinion that if the Lakers, you know, were to flip him for a similar type of player on a minimum contract that better fits what their identity is as a switching

team that needs to defend well. Even though it would be hard for Laker fans to accept because of how good Malik Monk has been playing offensively, it could make the team better. So the one example I wanted to give is a trade with the Oklahoma City Thunder for lu dorw Out. You might think that's absolutely crazy, and both teams might be not at all interested, but I wanted to use it as just an example of the

type of trade I'm talking about. Lou Dort. I don't think he's necessarily even as good of a basketball player as Malik Monk, probably not close. But on a Laker team that, when fully healthy, doesn't need Malik Monk's offense

as much. On a fully healthy Laker team that's gonna lean heavily on Lebron James and big moments, on Anthony Davis and big moments, you know on, in that scenario where Malik Monk is going to be more relegated to spot up shooting, or Malik Monk is going to be more dependent on defensively, it's possible that in that scenario, a player of Lou Dort's archetype actually makes the Lakers better.

I know it's hard to imagine, but if you think forward, because he's he's kind of like a high volume three point shot guy that doesn't shoot especially well, kind of like that Kyle Kuzma type of archetype in the sense that he's sets him up, but they tend to not go in. However, really aggressive three point shooters, even when they don't shoot well, tend to have a certain amount of gravity, just because it's what shows up in the

scouting report. That was the thing with Kuzma. Like Kuzman didn't shoot the ball amazingly well when he was with the Lakers, but teams guarded him out there because they knew he would shoot it and on any given night he could get hot and make six out of eight and it could swing a game. And Lue Dort's kind of that same type of player in terms of a spot up threat. But he is amazing defensively. He is a flat out weapon to have against some of the

bigger wings in the league. He's an amazing option to have in those scenarios, and adding him to the roster in place of someone like Malik Monk, even though it might hurt you in the regular season short term right now with Anthony Davis out because they're leaning so heavily on the leak Monk. I could see in a playoffs scenario down the line, when the team is fully healthy, I could see a player like lu Door kind of

being just a better fit. And if you're Oklahoma City and you're building for the future, and you're like, wait, wait, wait, we might get Malik Monk, this kid who's been playing so well. Maybe we can develop him more as a as a physical specimen, put some muscle on him. Maybe he becomes a better defensive player, and he becomes a good that court partner for say Gil just Alexander, Like,

I could see Oklahoma City talking themselves into that as well. Now, even if it's not Dort, even if it's not Monk. These are the kinds of deals I'm talking about trying to flip. I talked about this concept with a rush trade flipping junk for junk, Like this is a player that on our team is junk, and on your team you have a player that you guys kind of us junk. But maybe if we swap them because our identities are different,

they'll flip they'll fit better into our concept. So I use the Monk Dort deal as just like an idea of what I'm talking about. But essentially, what I'm asking is the Lakers to consider flipping betteran minimum pieces that haven't worked for us, for veteriment, veteran minimum pieces that haven't worked elsewhere that might fit better with our identity in the direction we're trying to go as a team. So that's kind of the way I look at it. I like I said from the beginning, I wouldn't hold

the Lakers. I wouldn't count the Lakers out in any trade scenario where the salaries match, just because of the fact that you never know how much GMS are willing to pay, and also you guys don't know how much GM's value players. I know, it's kind of one of those deals where you know, th HD has become the butt of a joke because he played so poorly for a stretch this season, But guys, th HD is is

still a prospect that carries value around the league. In his last six games, he's averaging thirteen points on six shooting, while also having a great deal of defensive impact. He had a huge couple of huge defensive moments against Donovan Mitchell in that game against the Jazz. He still flashes a lot of that potential. It's not unreasonable to think that just because Twitter doesn't think th HD is good, that the GM of such and such NBA team thinks

he's good. They there are absolutely going to be gms in the league that think highly of THHD, or more highly of him than the rest of Twitter does. So I hope people acknowledge that reality when they're talking about this kind of stuff, because it certainly is a factor. All Right, that's all I had for today, guys. This is gonna be on dash Radio tomorrow morning. Actually, tonight's postgame show will be on dash Radio tomorrow morning. I'll

find some other time to air this one. This will be in our podcast feed here in about half an hour. As always, we appreciate you guys support. We broke our daily record for downloads again after that Jazz game. I appreciate you guys hanging with us because this team has been so frustrating for so long and you can actually see just an interest and not even just with you guys, with me, like man when we were when we all

had COD, when the whole team had COVID. I was having a hard time being enthusiastic about watching some of those games when it's like a fake basketball team in the middle of the season. So I get it, I do. But hopefully this Jazz game is the start of a far more interesting and successful Lakers run, and hopefully we can all have some some fun covering it together. But thank you guys as always for your support, and we will see you tonight right after the final buzzer against Indiana