Watch the NBA|Lakers guard game

Today is a special game related to the Lakers guard.

1. The Raptors double guard that the Lakers want to watch: VanVleet and Trent Jr

Trent Jr.'s announcement of an 18.8 million player option was somewhat surprising. Isn't Trent Jr. confident about getting a salary above that in the free market? Maybe it's a possibility, after all, he's not in the lead on any track. If you're looking for a defender who can play the main attack, you certainly won't consider him. If you're looking for a versatile puzzle, you'll give priority to Bruce Brown. If you're looking for a fierce defender, consider Dillon. If you're looking for a small body size 3D, DiVincenzo is cheaper. Considering the uncertain future of the Raptors, there is really no next home in the market, and the home team does not take over, which is a bit embarrassing.

But there are many teams with space under the cap this year, and there is also a clear demand for the shooter-type No. 2 position, and the probability of Trent Jr. not finding the next home after jumping out is not high. Continuing to play for another year and leaving the suspense until next summer may not be safe for a player in his position.

One possibility is that after the player option is executed, there will be an extension or extension of the contract waiting for him. Moreover, he can also be put into a trade, and the 18.8 million contract can be matched by many teams.

It's hard not to think of the Lakers first.

In theory, the Lakers are capable of taking Trent Jr. from free agency, but the Lakers will have additional losses when they become a team under the cap, and unless there are really worthy stars, they should not do so. If you can trade for Trent Jr. at a small cost, it will be more cost-effective than becoming a team under the cap. Trent Jr. has been a good shooter in recent years, shooting 40.7 percent from three-point range in the past three seasons and a certain ability to shoot from mid-range with the ball. He is relatively reliable defensively, and Beasley, who is not playing in the playoffs, is no small improvement.

But rather than Trent Jr., the Lakers may prefer to consider VanVleet first.

VanVleet jumped out of his 22.8 million player option. When he first signed his contract, I would have worried that he was at a premium because VanVleet's exploitable potential was exhausted, his highly dependent style of play that relied heavily on shooting efficiency could result in a disastrous season if he fluctuated. The reality is that VanVleet's stability is better than expected, and he is fully worthy of the value of the first three years of this four-year, $85 million contract.

So, then what?

VanVleet is pursuing a contract extension with a starting salary of more than 30 million, and we assume that the market gives him a starting salary of 30 million rather than a large 30 million. The 23-24 season salary cap came to 136 million, and 30 million starting salary accounted for 22% of the salary cap, while VanVliet's salary in 20-21 (the starting salary of the previous contract) accounted for 19.5% of the salary cap at the time. His salary increase is not as exaggerated as the absolute value seems.

Of course, you can still say that he is not worth the price. VanVleet's most recent playoff game was in 2022, which can be described as unscored and unpreventable, and his retirement due to injury is the key to the Raptors' ability to turn the 76ers over two games. But VanVleet was plagued by injuries at the time, he had Finals highlights, was a reliable no-ball player in a large sample, had qualified No. 1 offensive ability, and had good defensive toughness and positional flexibility. Compared to Russell, he is clearly more compatible with the Lakers.

Compared to Harden, VanVleet's biggest advantage is that it will be at least 5 million cheaper. If we were to pick a backcourt headliner, I'd be willing to pay an extra $5 million for Harden — assuming the extra $5 million is really enough — but if we're just looking for the team's third or even fourth point and hoping he can take on some defensive tasks, then VanVleet has his own unique features. Most importantly, a cheaper $5 million will make it easier for the Lakers to make a signing and matching, and there is a chance that it will not affect the extension of Hachimura.

However, choosing VanVleet will inevitably make the Lakers unable to use the full middle class, and it is impossible to have both VanVleet and Russell - although there is no need for this.

2. The Lakers' own two guards: Reeves and Russell

The Lakers' handling strategy for Reeves is simpler:

Brainless matching market quotes will do.

The Arenas clause has limited Reeves' starting salary next season, and the Lakers have no reason to give up a Reeves who received a full middle-class salary in the 23-24 season, and considering the Lakers' relatively relaxed salary environment after two seasons, even if the next home offers a contract structure that skyrocketed in the 25-26 season, the Lakers have nothing to worry about. Since Reeves' contract extension will inevitably trigger the BYC clause, it is technically difficult for him to balance in the deal, and unless the next non-Reeves does not want it, the Lakers have no reason to put Reeves in the trade when there are multiple contracts that can be cooperated.

The main operational focus of the Lakers is Russell.

Russell has never proven that he can produce solid primary performance in the playoffs, and his true shooting percentage of 51.6 percent this year is even his new playoff high. He is also not a qualified defender and cannot take on any difficult defensive tasks. The first thing the Lakers can think of, of course, is to see Russell as a trade chip that can be used for signing. Most teams in the market will not actively take an interest in Russell, but in some special cases, this opportunity exists:

First, if other teams have players to leave, if they have to go to Los Angeles, in order to avoid losing assets in vain, they are willing to make a signing with the Lakers and get compensation, which allows Russell to once again play the role of the general equivalent of the league - for example, the aforementioned VanVleet;

Second, feelings — will the Nets accept Russell's return? Russell + No. 17 pick as the main body, to exchange Finney Smith and Royce O'Neal, didn't the Lakers take off? The idea is good, but the Nets will have to deal with the hard salary cap conundrum as a result, and with the No. 21 and No. 22 picks in hand, it's a question mark about how interested the Nets are in the No. 17 pick. Since the pickings can only happen after the free market opens, the draft is behind and the Nets can't merge the three first-round picks into an upward trade. But if Russell accepts a contract that is much lower than expected and the Nets don't catch Lillard, they wouldn't think about it.

It's also possible that Russell, as a free agent, runs straight away and doesn't give the Lakers any chance. For example, the Spurs or Rockets, after all their options to upgrade the point guard failed, directly dumped Russell a windfall - this is unlikely.

If the Lakers don't find the right option to sign Russell, they'll need to make the following trade-offs:

Renewing Russell would leave the Lakers unable to use their full mid-range. Of course, if the Lakers can really press Russell's starting salary to 20 million or even below, the situation will be different, and holding a contract of this size, with this year's rookie, can become a bargaining chip for future trades;

The meaning of the full middle class is that you can go to the market to find a forward line and an internal reinforcement. Although the free-market full-mid-level forwards and interior linemen are very limited this year, if you have such a special case, as a qualified championship goal, you should still routinely do the following two things:

Quote by Grant Williams. While the Pacers would easily make an offer above the full mid-range, and Gwee's psychological expectation would be higher than that, what if?

Quote Bruce Brown. There is nothing to say, weakening the opponent is to strengthen yourself.

In addition, if Pony is pre-cooled in the market, a full mid-class pick him up can also be tried. However, this possibility is almost zero, after all, adding a little price to keep for yourself, brushing the data and then shooting, this is the Wizards' favorite deal.

3. The Lakers' Ultimate Dream: LaVine and DeRozan

What is LaVerne's market price?

Bill next door bought a cabbage price, the two are close in strength, and they both have a touching career period of attendance. Other conditions are compared as follows:

Bill 29.9, LaVine 28.2;

Beal's salary for the 23-24 season is 46.7 million, LaVine is 40.1 million, both have contract expiration in the summer of 2027, both have player options;

Both have a 15 percent trade margin, but Bill also has veto power, and LaVine does not.

LaVin's contract will be better than Bill's, and the asking price will naturally be higher. But the Bulls will encounter a ruined situation after a "nuclear war", and how many teams will be able to come up with a lucrative chip to pursue LaVine after all the teams that have won the current stud? Most of the draft picks have already gone to several rebuilding teams that won't be interested in LaVine.

If the Heat succeed in stealing Lillard, the Bulls are expected to have the Kings and Knicks next, who have both demand and chips. Boss Cai is another hidden strength buyer in the market, after all, Simmons + Harris earn everything in exchange. After that, there are a few old brothers who are intentional every day and have cleaner pockets than their faces.

Although the chips are not as good as those in front of them, the Lakers are not without a chance to ask for LaVine. But the price of obtaining LaVine is more daunting than the pursuit of difficulty. The Lakers need to at least regularize the contracts of Bamba and Beasley, give Russell a contract, and then have the basic conditions to equalize LaVine. After that, the Lakers' salary will go straight to the second hard salary cap, and in the 24-25 season, just Thick Eyebrows, James, LaVine, Reeves, Hachimura, 5 people may have to take 165 million salaries.

From another point of view, it is not an idea to accumulate a core lineup before the new version of the collective agreement is gradually implemented, and not to strengthen it all the way to the end. You should also like the ball-free compatibility of the Lakers' core five, which is better than all the discussions that appear in this article when it comes to providing off-ball firepower.

But since DeRozan is also available, would he be the more suitable candidate?

DeRozan is a stronger attacker, and his presence will take the opposing Lakers' counterposition pressure to the next level, and the Lakers have proven that their overall ball intelligence and mid-range ability can tolerate the three-point disadvantage in a multi-ball lineup.

None of this is important – DeRozan only needs 28.6 million next season, and in theory, Russell+17 has a chance to equalize. It is difficult to predict the specific chips, and DeRozan will be very sought-after. Pursuing him is obviously a short-term operation, you may not be willing to use him to the long-term first round, in this case, the chips that the Lakers can take out are No. 17 rookie + Russell + several rounds, and this level of chips, there are many teams that can be taken out. If the trade happens on the trade deadline and DeRozan desperately wants to go to the Lakers, the hope will be even greater.

So, what about Owen?

Let's put it this way:

All the advantages mentioned above on the field, Irving can basically provide;

But all the operational difficulties mentioned earlier, Owen also exists. Irving's departure from the Nets is not unrelated to money, it is unrealistic to expect him to take a significant salary cut, and it takes a lot of effort to sign him, which adds great salary pressure to the future of the Lakers, and he is not young enough, and looking for him is also seeking short-term results.

Irving may be the perfect answer for the Lakers at a competitive basketball level, but at the level of basketball operations (and non-basketball factors), he is undoubtedly the worst answer.