Russell Westbrook and D'Angelo Russell (Photo : Getty Images)
The Russell Westbrook trade rumors have exploded as more buzz has emerged from Las Vegas that the Boston Celtics are closing in on Russell Westbrook.
The big question for the LA Lakers is whether or not they should be involved in this frenzy. While the rumor is attached to the Celtics, teams can make counter offers, including the Lakers.
With D'Angelo Russell gaining buzz in Summer League, pundits speculate that it could now be easier to sell him as the centerpiece of a trade for the OKC Thunder.
It was previously reported that the Lakers are confident they could sign Westbrook as a free agent in 2017, so a trade that would decimate their young core is no longer necessary, but Matt Moore of CBS Sports has disputed that. Here are his points.
"Whoever trades for him likely keeps him," Moore argued. "Yes, it's true, if you trade for him you don't get his Bird rights and therefore you don't have the financial advantage. But players aren't going to want to leave twice in a year."
The Lakers would be the first team to refute this. The team traded for Dwight Howard in 2012 and ended up losing him in free agency the year after. Westbrook may not be as fickle-minded as Dwight Howard but he's not Tim Duncan either.
"Plus, it's much easier to sell Westbrook on the perks of living in L.A. and being a part of the Lakers when he's already there than it is to sell him on it as a free agent," Moore countered. As a corollary, Moore cited that the Lakers missed out on Carmelo Anthony, LaMarcus Aldridge and Kevin Durant because they haven't seen the difference of living in LA.
But one person who knows how to be a famous personality in LA is Russell Westbrook. He had a taste of that when he went to UCLA with Kevin Love. Also, the Lakers are not known at this time for their "basketball culture." In fact, they're trying to re-establish that with Luke Walton.
Westbrook would have an idea of how Walton coaches-he was the main assistant on their bitter rivals, the Golden State Warriors, and also was an interim head coach early last season. Also, Westbrook would probably want to join a stronger Lakers team than to lose assets like Russell and Ingram for him.
There are still many executives who believe that the Lakers are still the primary destination for Westbrook and trading him to Boston does not change that.
The main point is that trading Westbrook is a necessity for the Oklahoma City Thunder, not for Westbrook himself. There is no incentive for Westbrook to sign an extension or even make any type of commitment to a team that trades for him. Nothing at all.
For the Lakers, let him be someone else's flight risk-especially to their arch rivals, the Boston Celtics. There is no assurance for the Lakers that Westbrook will stay if they trade for him, and if not even the OKC Thunder, his team for his entire career could convince him to an extension, neither could the Celtics or any other team.
It would be a bad idea for the Lakers to trade off major building blocks like D'Angelo Russell or Brandon Ingram for Westbrook.
