Lakers Did Not Want to Take Long-Term Contracts At the Trade Deadline

The Lakers had opportunities to make moves at the deadline, but part of the holdup was their unwillingness to take on long-term contracts from other teams.

The Lakers had every opportunity to improve their team at the deadline. With the number of rumors circulating about their involvement in deals, it was shocking to see that not one move was made. Not even a fringe move to improve what has turned out to be a very weak bench. 

But the opportunities were certainly there. One trade scenario involved the Lakers sending Talen Horton-Tucker and their 2027 first-round pick out in a 3-team trade that would've landed Cam Reddish (and possibly Alec Burks) in Los Angeles.

But that deal did not come to fruition, nor did any other possible deal. But according to LA Times writer Dan Woike, the Lakers did not want to take on long-term contracts in any trade. And that might have been the reason they stood still on February 10th. 

Executives from around the league questioned the approach, noting that even marginal upgrades could’ve mattered around LeBron James and Anthony Davis. But according to NBA insiders, the Lakers made it clear to teams they were mostly unwilling to take on long-term contracts.

Interestingly enough, that doesn't really apply to Reddish or Burks. They can both be extended through the next two seasons, but that doesn't seem to be a long-term contract that the Lakers would want to avoid. 

That leads us to believe that there were other larger deals in play that never even came to light. If the Lakers truly had the opportunity to trade Russell Westbrook, it seems likely that it would've come with a commitment. And maybe that's why he is still with the team right now. 

But regardless of what they wanted to do, the Lakers will look to the buy-out market. And there are already a few REALLY good names they could potentially be looking into.