Would you trade Eric Bledsoe for Luke Kennard?

Yes, but I think he has a poison pill contract, so would be very difficult to pull off.

Big money to another guy who can’t defend. I’d have to say no. I’d rather try to swap Bled for Shroeder. He’s an expiring contract and he’s kind of an a hole and we desperately need an a hole on this team. The lakers might do it if Lebron asks them to. Bledsoe is his boy. Also the fit might be better for LA considering Bled is hitting his threes this year and Schroeder isn’t.

For us, we get a younger guy that can legitimately create his own shot and has a chip on his shoulder. We have a bunch of good guys on the team, but they are mostly soft and that’s a big reason why we can’t buckle down get stops and win tight games.

quote:

---

Bledsoe also is repped by Rich Paul and Klutch.

I'd worry how Schroeder impacts Kira though. He's already made it clear he expects to start, and he's also expecting to get paid, so if you trade for him you're paying him a lot of money.

---

Not a fan of Shroeder. I would pass.

I don't know if my logic is even correct here since you gotta salary match any way but...I just feel like on some level with respect to taking on $10+mil contracts on meh dudes after next season, I'd rather not do so in order to remain flexible on the idea of bringing along a $30mil+ star player hopefully before the 2022 season starts.

I've seen the poison pill thing referred to with Kennard, can someone explain what it is exactly?

His salary amounts look in line, so it's not like the Tyler Johnson poison pill that went from something like $5mil to $19mil, so I wasn't sure what is being referenced there.

I looked at his salary and I don't see a poison pill but obviously could be wrong.

It is a lot of salary to take on for a guy that currently isn't playing well.

When a player signs an extension that goes into affect the following year, his salary value has different value to the incoming and outgoing teams if he's traded before the extension salary begins.
His outgoing value for the Clippers is his current value, which is $5.2M, but his incoming value to the Pelicans would be his average salary he has under contract, so that's $61M over 5 years for an average of $12.2M.
So the Clippers only have to take back in $5.2M, but the Pelicans have to send out $12.2M. The problem with the Clippers is they cannot take back more salary than they send out. If they are taking back Bledsoe's $16.8M, then they have to send out Kennard and Beverly, which is $18.6M, but we still have to send out about $5M to account for Kennards incoming average salary of an additional $7M. so we have to find someone that can absorb salary, which is just the Knicks, or someone with a TPE, which is OKC and Celtics.

Yea the Lakers screwed themselves with the Kyle Kuzma extension for the same reason. He was really their only real means of improving their roster this year.

No.

He's owed alot of money for the next 4 seasons (not counting this season), and he hasn't really shown the ability to stay healthy in his short career.

I would rather keep Bled and use him in the offseason in a deal.

As much as I hate Bledsoe and his overrated defense, no.

Kennard's contract is a negative asset. While Bledsoe hasn't been great its relatively reasonable due to the length. You can live with his production