Brian Windhorst Suggests It's Not A Complete Guarantee That Luka Doncic Signs An Extension To Stay With The Lakers

Icon Sportswire. Getty Images.

One of the more common talking points that you heard as a result of the massive Luka Doncic trade was the fact that the Lakers had just locked in their LeBorn replacement and the next future superstar of that franchise for the next 10+ years. That's not exactly a "hot take" considering that's pretty much how things have played out with the Lakers all throughout NBA history whenever they've made a big time trade/signing like this. 

And while I admit that what I'm about to say next could very well just be my anti-Lakers bias showing through, but as I was watching all the games last night and listening to people talk about this trade and the future of the Lakers, I couldn't help but wonder about a certain aspect of this trade that I still find confusing/interesting. 

I feel as though usually when you hear of a trade of this magnitude, part of that equation is the player giving his agent/that team a nod that if they were to trade for him, he'll immediately sign an extension if he's eligible (Luka is). But when you go through the details of this trade, all the reporting makes it very clear that Luka or his agent had no idea it was in the works. That means it's not crazy to think that Luka did not inform the Lakers that he would immediately sign an extension.  As a reminder, this is his current deal

(sidenote: it's very weird seeing the Lakers logo in that graphic. Sorry Mavs fans)

As we know, now that Luka has been traded, he is no longer allowed to sign that massive $350M supermax. Before this trade, that was the easiest lock of all time. Nobody, and I mean nobody passes up supermax money and nobody waits to sign it once they become eligible for it. If the Mavs wanted to offer it this summer, Luka was going to sign it.

But now with that deal off the table, what's the rush? Given all the money he's now lost out on, is it crazy to think Luka might wait to extend so he can get in on some of that new TV deal money as the cap continues to go up? Is it crazy to think there's a world in which he's become radicalized after this whole thing and is now going to do whatever is in his best interest moving forward, which means turning down that player option and hitting the open market so he can decide where he plays? 

I know, it sounds like cope from a guy who hates the Lakers with a passion. I get that. But at the same time…….

Advertisement

Alright, you know the drill!

It's actually not as crazy a scenario as one might think. To me, that's what makes this whole thing so exciting. The Mavs may have made the dumbest trade in NBA history, but the Lakers are also taking a leap of faith that Luka will decide to stay long term. What if the team struggles? What if he doesn't love how things look in a post-LeBron world? What if again, he wants to wait and sign for the most money possible now that the supermax is out and that only comes by waiting for the cap to go up? 

It may be unlikely, but it is something that should be talked about. Maybe Luka only signs a short-team extension so he can re-up once he hits 10 years of service and is eligible for 35% of the cap. He only needs 3 more years for that, so why lock yourself into a 5 year extension? My guess is whatever he signs the last year will be a player option (just like his current deal), so a 3+1 or a 2+1 doesn't seem out of the question if he does end up signing something this summer. But I could also see a world in which he wants to now take his talents to the market and get the highest price/best situation possible. For a guy who just had control over his career ripped away, maybe he'll want that back.

That is a very different scenario than blindly locking in Luka as the next Lakers superstar for the next 10+ years. It may very well end up that way, but the financials matter. What happens from here on out in terms of team success and roster building matters. 

Logic tells you that few if any superstars would turn down max money and the option of living in LA while being the successor to LeBron for a historic franchise. But then again, what about this trade/scenario has been logical? You could also say logic tells you that teams never bail on a 25 year old MVP candidate but here we are.

I can't really remember a trade of this magnitude where both sides were taking such massive risks. While the Lakers may have paid 60 cents on the dollar, AD and that 2029 pick were still two of their bigger trade chips, so losing those and then only getting 1.5 years of Lukla would be a bit of a disaster should he not extend and instead choose to hit the market. The Mavs of course put the entire future of their franchise on the table with this move, hitching their wagon to a 32 year old center. Remember, Kyrie has a player option for next season, are we sure he now stays long term?

As Windy said, time will tell. Nobody can know anything for certain at this juncture, which makes it all so fun. How it shakes out is basically anyone's guess at this point.