Jim Alexander: It is the middle point of the baseball season, the All-Star Game is Tuesday in Atlanta (as well as the amateur draft the day before, at which the chances are good we may see multiple picks from Corona High School), and yet … why are we talking basketball??
But I do wonder if the NBA, in its attempt to emulate the NFL as an all-year talking point, has miscalculated. Pro football has skillfully extended its calendar to almost a 365-day conversation piece: The Super Bowl leads into the combine, which leads into the draft, which leads into OTAs and minicamps and the release of the schedule, which leads into spending the month of June talking about training camps that start in July.
Maybe Adam Silver needs to take this a little more seriously. The NBA Finals end, the draft is later that week, free agency is the week after that – actually the real news is on July 1, and then team announcements of those deals six days after the fact – and boom, most of the conversation that drives interest is done three weeks in.
We have Summer League, which might or might not become known as Bronny James’ season, but by late July all is quiet. The schedule’s out in August, but we already know the Lakers and Clippers have been placed in the same group for the NBA Cup – or is it the Emirates’ NBA Cup? I’ve lost track. Whether you like that schedule gimmick or not, and I would be in the “not” category, at least it’s a “news” development.
So, Mirjam, before we begin dissecting what the Lakers and Clippers did in the last week or so, what would your suggestion be for getting the NBA into top-of-mind status in August and early September?
Mirjam Swanson: Oh man. As a recovering NBA beat writer, I hate this idea. Haha.
Give us our August and September without having to worry about putting our phones down for five minutes for fear of missing breaking NBA news. Plus, how can we, as an audience, miss the NBA if it’s never gone? Like, most of the country does have seasons, and personally I think we should embrace it.
Also, this the WNBA’s time to shine! Let Caitlin and Angel and Phee have the floor; they’re putting on a good show.
And I’d argue football is a different animal, or you might say, the NBA isn’t the same beast. Americans have a different appetite for football – and maybe, to your point, that’s because we’re used to being fed football news 12 months a year.
But I wouldn’t trust the NBA to give us offseason fodder worth our attention. I mean, we’ve seen the mess they’ve made of the All-Star Game and that weekend, right? And I don’t know, I still haven’t managed to get myself to feel strongly, or even mildly, about the In-Season Tournament.
So I don’t think we need anything scheduled, per se, especially because around here, the Lakers are always going to be top of mind anyway.
And, speaking of … so, Jim, what have you made of the Lakers’ offseason so far?
Jim: Taking in the comments from Deandre Ayton the other day, my first thought is, “Hmm, maybe he gets it after all.” And it seems that (a) his skills fit the rim protector/lob threat vision in the Lakers’ lineup, and (b) after a situation in Portland that didn’t seem conducive to his development, being on the same floor with LeBron James and Luka Doncic daily will give Ayton the best opportunity to be his best – if he takes advantage of it. Words are meaningless once the ball goes up.
Re-signing Jaxson Hayes to be the backup probably isn’t a bad call. There were times, after the Anthony Davis trade, that Hayes looked like a better-than-adequate NBA center. Problem is, with this franchise better-than-adequate isn’t nearly enough.
Now, is Jake LaRavia better than a better-than-adequate replacement for Dorian Finney-Smith? Jury’s out there. I thought DFS was a near-perfect addition to their system when he came over from Brooklyn, just from the standpoint of doing a lot of little things that contribute to winning. Then again, it’s hard to tell until you see a guy in a particular team’s system and alongside its personnel. LaRavia’s 3-point shooting ability seems to be a plus, and if he can be a true 3-and-D player this was money well spent.
These aren’t sexy acquisitions. But they fit the Lakers’ budget, as in “how do we upgrade and stay out of the second apron?”
Mirjam: I think the Lakers are in better shape than a lot of people think they are – including their own hard-to-please fans, whose sky-high expectations are part of what make the Lakers the Lakers, of course.
But whatever happened with the Finney-Smith negotiations, it worked out well for the Lakers. They essentially traded him – a good, aging player – for an up-and-coming 23-year-old 3-and-D guy with something to prove yet AND that much-needed good center – better, my friends, than should-be backups Brook Lopez and Clint Capella – with something to prove and lots of upside, if things go right.
The jury you mentioned is mixed, it seems, on Ayton, who is just 26. There was the Athletic piece that detailed all the ways he irritated people in Portland – anonymously sourced; the NBA is nothing if not petty and, more and more, teams love to throw shade as players are walking away.
But there were also accounts from reporters like Sean Highkin, who’s on the ground, covering the team every day, about how admirably Ayton actually carried himself in Portland. One of several tweets defending the big man: “One thing I really respected about him this past season was how visibly/vocally he supported and helped out (fellow big man Donovan) Clingan. He could have felt a certain way about them drafting someone at his position in the top 10 but he embraced him right away and always hyped him up to us.”
And anyone who blames him for the Trail Blazers’ woes isn’t understanding what the Blazers are doing up there.
I’m not saying he’s a perfect player, but, personally, I’m going to give the guy the benefit of the doubt because the misgivings seem a bit much.
And – avert your eyes, Clippers fans – I witnessed the Valley-Oop live in Phoenix. That was an amazing play and an electric moment and I can imagine those sorts of things for him playing with Luka in purple and gold.
Jim: And as for the Clippers’ moves, they’re sounding as if John Collins is the last piece of the puzzle. I’m not sure that’s accurate – the ultimate success of this team depends on (a) Kawhi Leonard’s health and (b) James Harden’s ability to push aside the ghosts of past playoff failures. But Collins does give them a true power forward and may be a better fit, as much as I hate to see Norman Powell go.
There’s this with the Collins situation, too: According to Sports Illustrated’s Karl Rasmussen, reporting on a suggestion made by ESPN’s Tim MacMahon on a podcast hosted by fellow ESPN hoops reporter Brian Windhorst, Collins was “too damn productive” in Utah and, allegedly, hindered the Jazz’ tanking strategy.
Isn’t it amazing? One ESPN guy talks to another on a podcast and a Sports Illustrated guy reports it, and it doesn’t matter how flimsy the report might be, it’s the first thing you see when you Google “John Collins.” A reminder, then, to be careful who and what you believe. Just imagine when the AI bots start disseminating NBA “news” … if they haven’t already.
The other big move by the Clippers: bringing Brook Lopez back to SoCal as a backup for Ivica Zubac. Not a championship-securing move, but I’m OK with it, having someone who can relieve Zubac’s burden.
Mirjam: The Collins piece is a big one for the Clippers. As Lawrence Frank, the team’s president of basketball operations said this week, they’ve been trying to get him on the roster for years. Years!
But I don’t know that it’s so much even reporting as common sense to think that the hard-tanking Jazz didn’t have much use for productive players. I mean, they did get fined $100,000 last season for violating the NBA’s player participation policy for failing to make their standout power forward Lauri Markkanen available in games, even though he was healthy.
But I don’t think Collins is the last piece of the Clippers’ puzzle. For their sake, I’d hope not. Because, if the reporting on the NBA’s never-totally-dormant rumor mill is to be believed, they’ve got their sights squarely on Bradley Beal once – if? – he’s bought out in Phoenix.
We’re assuming so, because they traded away Powell and now there’s a massive void in terms of ball-handling and scoring, a hole that Beal sure would fit snugly.
So we wait to see when (if?) he’s really going to give back a brain-numbing $13 million – and his no-trade clause, by the way – in the process of accepting a buyout of the remaining two years and $110.8 million in the deal he had with the Suns.
What do the Clippers have to offer him after that? As our Janis Carr wrote this week: “They have the $5.3 non-taxpayer mid-level exception available and are expected to target a backup point guard, with reports indicating they are interested in pursuing both Bradley Beal if/when he is bought out by the Phoenix Suns and perhaps reuniting with Chris Paul, who has said the upcoming season will be his last.”
It feels, from all the reporting, that the buyout and Beal’s eventual destination are foregone conclusions, and I suppose he’ll expect to land in a better situation in L.A. that resets his value going forward – not unlike Ayton hopes to do with the Lakers. But, man, I am having trouble wrapping my mind around the fact that a player would forfeit not just $1 or 2 million, but as much as $13 million.
Good for the Clippers, when (if?) it works out. They’re not winning a title this year – as the league is getting younger, they’re getting older… but believe they have big dreams for 2027. Still, we ought to applaud their dedication to putting quality teams on the court every single season. Next season won’t be any different.
Jim: I find it intriguing – fascinating, actually – that a player doesn’t work out in one organization, but another will take a shot figuring it has the key to unlock whatever remaining performance is in there. I’m curious how much of those decisions are actual assessments of the player, his situation and his potential usefulness – as opposed to organizational arrogance, as in, “We can straighten him out.”
I’ve got to think that – in all sports, not just this one – there are so many analysts and so much number-crunching in front offices that there are plenty of ways to make a rational assessment, especially with so much money involved. But I’m sure there are organizations where the people in charge let that arrogance get in the way, and I suspect more often than not they’re the ones at the bottom of the standings.
Which brings us to that other sport. There are now exactly three weeks to baseball’s trade deadline.
Forget the current Dodgers’ losing streak. Lots of fans seem to be heading for the ledge, but slumps happen during a 162-game season, and the defending champs are in the middle of a bad one. More significantly, though, while the Dodgers are 56-38 and have the second best record in baseball even after this bad stretch, they’re 20-22 against teams over .500, including these last six straight losses to the Astros and Brewers. That, plus the lengthy injured list – 11 pitchers alone at this moment – has people yelling “Do something!”
But if you’re Andrew Friedman and Brandon Gomes, do you go all in at the deadline or do you take the chance that those guys who are supposed to be part of the master plan – Blake Snell, Blake Treinen, Michael Kopech, etc. – will be ready for the stretch run?
Mirjam: I don’t think it’s a hot take to suggest that the Dodgers will be fine. Just fine.
Because, No. 1, they’re so loaded that anytime they activate one of their own players from that well-populated injured list, it’s like making a major acquisition.
And No. 2, for me, it’s a matter of trust. We know the Dodgers’ front office knows what it’s doing, so if there’s a move to be made, it’s going to be a smart one, and with a team as talented as this one, it doesn’t need to be an all-in blockbuster, either.
Because, thinking about your point above, about teams thinking they can get something out of players that other organizations could? Has there been another team as good at doing that as the Dodgers? Probably not many, if any.
Didn’t Max Muncy just about think he was done when the A’s released him back in 2017? He’s done all right as a Dodger.
Chris Taylor had a similar story, coming from the Mariners, I recall. And Evan Phillips, who they claimed off waivers after it didn’t work out for him in Philadelphia. Alex Vesia had an 18.69 earned-run average with the Marlins in 2020 before the Dodgers fished him out of the so-called scrap heap. And on and on … I think the organization can absolutely matter. The infrastructure, the coaching, the philosophies – though, sometimes, it’s a matter of perception. Back to the Suns’ Beal, for a bit: He’s a real good player; he’s just not a five-year, $250 million god-tier player.
But, yes, in the Dodgers’ current case: I say the defending World Series champions, with that second-best record in all of the baseball, they should definitely stick with the master plan.
Jim: I’ve often wondered, not being a devotee of picking fantasy teams myself, what the lure is. Why do people invest so much time in playing general manager? Maybe it’s because there’s comparatively little risk in putting together a fantasy team, no salary caps or luxury tax thresholds, and no real world consequences – beyond being laughed at by your acquaintances – in screwing up a pick or signing the wrong guy at the wrong time. At the highest levels, enough bad decisions or risky ones that blow up in your face can cost your job. (Ask Washington Nationals GM Mike Rizzo, after he and manager Davey Martinez both got fired the last few days, victims of a rebuild that hasn’t been fruitful.)
Which brings me to one last question/observation: If you’re the Angels, with a promising young core of players and sitting just three games out of a wild-card spot, is it too soon in those players’ development to go all-in at the deadline? The risk there: They don’t seem to have a lot of bargaining chips in a farm system that still seems to lag in player development, especially given that a number of the guys now playing key roles have been rushed through (or past) the minors to the major-league roster.
And also consider: The last time the Angels went all-in at the trade deadline, two years ago, they wound up going into a slump that took them out of the wild-card race, they wound up waiving some of those players they’d acquired to try to get under the luxury tax threshold, and their very best player wound up taking his talents up the 5 to Chavez Ravine.
Lots to think about.
Mirjam: Indeed. And so I’ll say: If I was the Angels, I wouldn’t sell this year either.
No, because what they’re selling to their fans is that they’ve got youth worth developing – which they do. I wouldn’t give any of those young (and affordable) dudes up.
Not to mention that they’re three games out of a wild-card spot right now. That’s not a layup, of course, for an Angels team that hasn’t made the playoffs since 2014 … but it’s not out of the ballpark of possibility. And I think they owe it to their loyal and long-suffering fans to give it a shot if there’s any shot at playing playoff baseball.
Related Articles
Sparks go quietly in loud loss to first-place Lynx Horse racing notes: Summer heats up as Saratoga opens star-studded season Former Olympic wrestler and MMA star Ben Askren recovering from double lung transplant Swanson: Jim Abbott’s legacy explored in ESPN documentary Pro beach volleyball is back, but inside Intuit Dome Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( The Audible: On the Lakers’ and Clippers’ moves and baseball’s trade deadline )
Also on site :