|
Lakers only have two players they can trade to fix their skill set holes. Those two players are Butler and Odom. Butler is too valuable to let go for a guy like Curry. He's the Lakers' most valuable trading piece. He's young (24), cheap ($2M per), locked in long term (2007), has some upside, and most importantly is already a good player to begin with. Only Odom can claim all those qualities, with the lone exception being his contract, and that exception is a big one. Odom’s contract severely limits the Lakers' flexibility to trade him for a legit PF/PG, the two positions the Lakers have skill set voids in. With Butler the Lakers are very flexible, they’d be able to package expiring contracts (Divac, Atkins, George, etc.) to a team looking for cap space who’d be willing to part with their budding PG or PF. Doing that with Odom would be extremely difficult, his contract is locked in until 2009 at nearly $10M more per year than Butler’s, whose contract is two years shorter.
Besides, the Lakers would look at Chandler before they'd ever look at Curry. Curry plays the same position as Mihm, and he's not really that much better than Mihm. On top of that, the Lakers would have to worry about paying Curry, while Mihm is locked in until 2007 at $3.5M per.
Chandler can play the 4 just fine and would improve the rebounding/shot blocking/defense tremendously, while also letting Odom slide back to his more natural position (SF). But I very much doubt the Bulls deal Chandler. Or Curry.
|