Lakers Trade Rumors: LA Makes Right Call in Waving off Michael Beasley Deal
No potential move at this trade deadline has made less sense than the one that would have brought Michael Beasley to the Lakers. I have yet to hear one explanation for that move that makes any sense for LA's perspective.
Fortunately, that trade is off of the table, at least according to Brett David Roberts of Yahoo! Sports.
"Citing the luxury tax that would accompany the addition of Michael Beasley, the Los Angeles Lakers have decided against adding the small forward to their team.
The Minnesota Timberwolves were said to be asking for an upgrade in first-round picks, eying this year's loaded draft as a possible opportunity for snagging a premier player at a discount in the middle round.
"
TOP NEWS
Report: Lakers' New Uni Sponsor Deal Worth $30M+
Lakers Linked to Thybulle 🔗
Tom Brady Slaps Logan Paul On Video
At this point, my only question is why did this take so long to happen? Beasley isn't even close to being worth a first-round pick for the Lakers, or any team. That is the case any year, but certainly applies when we're talking about a deep draft.
If Beasley played point guard, we could talk. But at this point, the Lakers shouldn't be making any deals that don't bring in a man to quarterback the offense from the point. The only possible exception would be if the player being brought in is a genuine star.
But that need doesn't supersede the need for a point guard. The Lakers' point guard should be deadly, as the focus of defenses is on Kobe Bryant and the paint duo of Andrew Bynum and Pau Gasol. With all of the defensive attention there, they need a point guard that will knock down the open shots.
Beasley isn't that player. He isn't even that kind of player from the small forward position. The production you get from Beasley isn't anywhere near good enough to forsake bringing in a point guard.
Ultimately, the Lakers have three needs. They need a point guard, they need to get younger and they need to add depth. If a potential trade doesn't fill at least two of those needs, then the Lakers have no business going through with it.
Beasley would only make them younger, although even that comes with an asterisk as it would apparently cost a draft pick.
When you consider his lack of star power and less than ideal past, this is a move that the Lakers should have passed on a long time ago. If the best they can do is Beasley and he would cost a first-round pick, then the Lakers are better off staying put and re-tooling in the offseason.
