What’s next for Lakers, Nets after D’Angelo Russell-Dorian Finney-Smith trade?

Trading role players rarely has the seismic impact fans might want. We’ve seen that play out recently with the Golden State Warriors’ acquisition of Dennis Schröder, and we should expect similar from the Los Angeles Lakers nabbing Dorian Finney-Smith from the Brooklyn Nets.

Trading D’Angelo Russell for Finney-Smith isn’t going to shift the balance of power in the NBA. That doesn’t mean it doesn’t matter. The Lakers likely plugged one hole by creating another, but they hope they also got a better-fitting player in the process. The bigger question is how it leaves their chessboard for something more dramatic.

Before we dive deeper, let’s review the particulars: The Lakers traded Russell and Maxwell Lewis, along with second-round picks in 2027, 2030 and 2031, to the Nets for Finney-Smith and Shake Milton. The pick in 2027 only conveys to Brooklyn if it doesn’t go to Utah, which would happen if L.A.’s first-round pick that year lands in the top four. Finally, the Lakers created a trade exception for $3,768,140, which is good through next Dec. 29; it’s likely of limited value, but hey, you never know.

Milton is a replacement-level (at best) shoot-first guard whose minimum-contract money is non-guaranteed after this season. The key to the deal for L.A. is Finney-Smith, a fairly credible stretch four or even a small-ball center, whose gritty defense offsets limited shot creation. While he’s on the back nine now at age 31 and is unlikely to replicate the 43.5 percent from 3 he shot in Brooklyn this season (his career mark of 35.9 percent is a more reliable predictor), he also represents a massive upgrade on the flotsam L.A. had coming off the bench at the forward spots.

Some of the nerdiest advanced metrics actually had Russell rated slightly better than Finney-Smith, but in terms of their value to this season’s Lakers, I’d be inclined to state the opposite. For starters, L.A. had so many other matadors on the defensive end that adding Russell to the mix on top of it made several lineups untenable. Secondarily, Russell hadn’t been nearly as effective offensively this season as he was in 2023-24, and the play the Lakers got from Max Christie and Dalton Knecht gave enough of a floor that Russell wasn’t as irreplaceable as he was a year ago.

That said … the Lakers guards weren’t good before, and now they’re really not good. Russell was found wanting as a starter, but Christie and Knecht aren’t starting-caliber players either and lack Russell’s shot-creation juice.

Lineup-wise, starting Finney-Smith pushes everyone down a position in ways that seem problematic for the defense, leaving LeBron James checking small forwards and Austin Reaves on point guards. Yikes. It seems Finney-Smith might be better off as a sixth man, sponging up most or all of the formerly horrific backup minutes in the frontcourt. Maybe L.A. can start him but sub early and quickly rotate, so both Finney-Smith and James play the bulk of their minutes at power forward.

Bigger picture, that’s where the next dominoes come in. The Lakers had a negative point differential on the season before making this trade, even with James and Anthony Davis healthy all season; normally a team with their scoring margin would be 13-18. So, no, this trade isn’t going to suddenly vault them into contenders. It’s a marginal upgrade that comes at an acceptable cost, keeping the powder dry in the three first-rounders they could potentially trade in a more impactful blockbuster. (One nerdy note: Despite trading their 2031 second-round pick, the Lakers could potentially protect a 2031 first-rounder in a deal. The alternative would just be worse for the receiving team if the pick doesn’t convey; it would either be cash or bubkes, because it can no longer be a second-rounder.)

At least Finney-Smith, with his 0.1 BPM, gives the Lakers a third player with a BPM above zero! That underscores the crux of the issue in L.A.: the lack of a true third star behind James and Davis. (Not to mention the lack of anyone worthy of being the fourth and fifth starters.)

Thus, the question: How does L.A. fix what still ails it? This deal removes the largest expiring contract the Lakers could use in any future trade. Anything they do now would have to rely on aggregating multiple contracts that go beyond this season and, most likely, would carry negative value to receiving teams: Gabe Vincent, Rui Hachimura and Jarred Vanderbilt.

Those three and Jalen Hood-Schifino’s expiring $3.9 million deal can combine to make $43.6 million in outbound salary and could take back roughly the same amount while keeping L.A. under the collective bargaining agreement’s second apron (remember, the Lakers would have to backfill empty roster spots in a four-for-one or three-for-one trade). That amount is enough to match the salaries of most of the star players they’d be considering. Zach LaVine, for instance, makes $43 million; Anfernee Simons makes $25.9 million; LaMelo Ball (sure, let’s go there) makes $35.1 million; and De’Aaron Fox (what the heck, let’s go there, too) makes $34.5 million.

While you get into some complicated roster dynamics when you try doing four-for-one or five-for-one deals in-season, I’ll note the Lakers can muster other small expiring salaries at the drop of a hat (Christian Wood, $3.0 million; Jaxson Hayes, $2.5 million; Cam Reddish, $2.5 million), none of whom will be missed much.

GO DEEPER

Why Lakers have long coveted Dorian Finney-Smith and how he can immediately help

Any swap is likely to be more costly since such a limited portion would be expiring money. The only new barriers are that Finney-Smith and Milton can’t be aggregated in a deal. I’ll also note Reaves’ contact also could be added to a deal; his is the only one that would have positive value for a receiving team.

Finally, I know it’s not really the Lakers’ thing to look beyond this season, but Finney-Smith’s contract offers some interesting possibilities this summer. He has a $15.4 million player option for 2025-26 that is probably a slight overpay, and it could complicate the Lakers’ dance with the first apron. However, the player option also offers a way to land the plane more gently on Finney-Smith’s 30s, by opting out, re-signing at a lower number for more years and creating more wiggle room below the apron.

But that’s next summer’s problem. For now, the Lakers have made a mild upgrade that prompts the question of whether they will make another deal that upgrades the roster enough to truly matter. As Spotrac’s Keith Smith noted, this was their first trade in nearly two years!

As for Brooklyn, we have a few important notes. The headline is that the Nets created $15 million more in salary-cap room for next summer, raising their expected trove to roughly $65 million, depending on your opinion on some small contract guarantees and where their first-round pick lands.

But for you, fellow nerds, we can go much deeper. First, don’t sleep on Russell being traded again before the deadline, given that he has an expiring contract and could be a plus addition for a team needing to exchange dead money for a bench scorer. Don’t get your hopes up, Nets fans, but squirreling away another second-round pick out of this isn’t out of the question.

The other reason the Nets might want to move Russell is that they may have inadvertently made their team better in the short term.

While Finney-Smith is a good role player, the Nets had been rolling with zero real point guards since trading Schröder. If you understand their motivations this year, the results had been impressive: The Nets only cleared 101 points once in their past six games and managed to lose at home to Utah. Russell is just good enough to be dangerous in this circumstance, playing a high-usage role in games that don’t really matter and providing a competent offensive floor while heating up enough to win one game in three. He’s already done this once in Brooklyn.

The other thing to remember is that Russell is unlikely to be a factor in the buyout market if he isn’t traded. His salary being more than the nontaxpayer midlevel exception means that most of the league’s elite teams are unable to sign him by virtue of being over the first apron. It’s possible to find potential homes for him if you squint (Houston?), but only a handful of certain playoff teams can even legally sign him.

GO DEEPER

Trade grades: Dorian Finney-Smith a far better fit for Lakers than D’Angelo Russell

The Nets are technically $175,006 over the luxury tax line right now, but that likely will change within the next 10 days or so before the cut date for contract guarantees on Jan. 7. By waiving either Jalen Wilson or Keon Johnson before that date, the Nets would get themselves back under by roughly $1 million. Johnson, who has a PER of 6.8 and a career shooting percentage of 36.8 percent, would seem the more likely candidate, but Wilson hasn’t exactly set the league aflame this year either.

That tax consideration is why the Milton-for-Lewis part of this trade happened, saving the Nets nearly $1 million on their cap sheet. The Nets will say all the right things about Lewis being an intriguing, athletic prospect and maybe give him a few chances, but he’s not even a good G League player right now. His contract for 2025-26 guarantees on June 29; I suspect either he won’t be a Net on June 30, or they’ll drag out the guarantee date to give him another look in summer league before moving on. There’s a $100,000 guarantee the Nets will have to eat as a cap charge, but that’s chump change.

Finally, let’s talk about Brooklyn’s road not taken. There was a rumored deal, first reported by NBA reporter Marc Stein, that had the Memphis Grizzlies sending a protected first-round pick along with Jon Konchar and Luke Kennard to the Nets for Finney-Smith and possibly getting a second-rounder in return.

My spies tell me this was an absolutely legit offer, and thus represents an interesting, if low-level, sliding doors moment for Brooklyn. Would you rather have a 2025 first-rounder from the Grizzlies — trending toward being 25th or so — and give up a future second, or would you rather have the three seconds from the Lakers? Is Konchar a value contract at $6.1 million each of the next two years or a cap-clogging deal-breaker? Can you get anything more for Kennard than you could for Russell? Does a fifth first-round pick in 2025 carry the same value when you already have four others?

This is the type of deep-in-the-weeds stuff front offices spend a lot of time in conference rooms batting back and forth as trade deadlines get closer. I suspect the crux of the non-deal was the second-rounder going back to Memphis. If it were Brooklyn’s own in 2025, it might only have been a 12-pick jump in the draft or so.

Whatever it was, it’s apparent the Nets liked the bet against L.A.’s future enough that they ended up valuing the three seconds more than the first-for-a-second, but this wasn’t a slam dunk.

San Antonio’s Keldon Johnson battles for a loose ball with Jazz rookies Isaiah Collier and Cody Williams. (Scott Wachter / Imagn Images)

Rookies of the Week: Cody Williams and Isaiah Collier, Utah Jazz

(This section won’t necessarily profile the best rookie of the week. Just the one I’ve been watching.)

I don’t want to be cruel, but we need to talk about what’s happening in Utah.

The Jazz’s two first-round picks, Cody Williams (selected 10th) and Isaiah Collier (29th), have received plenty of run in the early part of the season, and that may eventually pay huge benefits down the road on a rebuilding team. Both only recently turned 20, and as players, both are a young 20, with many rough edges to sand down before you get to the good stuff. I had both players rated in the top 20 of my draft board, and they may yet someday justify my optimism.

That said … yiiiiikes.

Among all 332 NBA players with at least 200 minutes played this season, Williams and Collier are Nos. 331 and 332 in PER and Nos. 331 and 332 in BPM.

Collier ranks last in PER at 1.3, while Williams is at a lofty 3.2. In terms of BPM, Collier is at a breathtaking minus-11.0, while Williams is at minus-7.3. No player has ever played more than 500 minutes in a season with a PER below 3.0, but the Jazz are threatening to put two entries on the list.

Both players, I’ll note, flash occasional bursts of potential. Collier is a brutish guard who has had some Earl Campbell-esque bully-ball drives to the cup and can move his feet on defense. Williams is a long athlete who can handle the ball and glides up and down the court in transition. Each has shown more flashes of quality in their G League assignments than at the pro level, albeit with some of the same weaknesses cropping up.

For Williams, the key issue is his utter toothlessness as an offensive player. He can’t quickly get into a shot from the perimeter and has no pull-up game off the perimeter at all. Add in limited wiggle in tight half-court spaces and a lack of strength for finishing near the rim, and you get a lot of possessions that look like the clip below.

Williams is shooting 20.5 percent from 3 and 40.0 percent from 2 and averaging a meager 8.0 points per 100 possessions. If he can’t score from anywhere, it’s tough to build a platform from which he can develop.

For Collier, the issue is his phenomenal propensity to turn the ball over. We’re getting into unprecedented territory actually, with Collier averaging more than two turnovers for every made basket. Read that sentence again slowly; it’s true. His 36.1 percent turnover rate would be the highest by a non-center in 40 years if he keeps it up.

Collier’s turnovers generally come in two varieties, which I call “Where you goin’?” and “Where you throwin’?”

The first variety are perhaps the run-of-the-mill bad decisions you might see from any rookie, especially one predisposed to putting his head down and going to the basket. Like, could you please not dribble right into people?

The “Where you throwin’?” batch, however, might be a little trickier, because I’m not sure how you fix this. Collier, quite simply, might be the most inaccurate passer I’ve ever seen. This was an issue at USC, too, but it seems to have only magnified at the pro level. It’s like watching Mitchell Trubisky play point guard.

This is a pretty good read to flip a left-handed pass to a cutting Svi Mykhailiuk while the defense is sleeping. Too bad it missed by five feet.

Collier has an eye-popping 28 bad-pass turnovers in his 368 minutes, according to Basketball-Reference.com, and several of them share this commonality. Even some of his assists look this way, entailing either a tough catch or a narrowly missed pick-six before the ensuing bucket.

As for the Collier-Williams tandem, let’s close with the punch line. Despite their massive struggles, they’ve been getting plenty of burn lately, and it likely would be raising more eyebrows in a more prominent market.

Most notably, there was the fourth quarter of Thursday’s barnburner in Portland. In an award-worthy display of “understanding the assignment,” Jazz coach Will Hardy played Collier the entire fourth quarter and Williams the final six minutes as a nine-point Utah lead very, very unfortunately turned into a two-point loss. Collier committed all four of Utah’s turnovers in the quarter, while Williams’ only contribution was the clip above.

Saturday’s aw-shucks three-point loss to the Philadelphia 76ers wasn’t quite as brazen, with Williams playing six fourth-quarter minutes and Collier two, but the duo still combined for six points and seven turnovers in their 43 gift-wrapped minutes.

I’m really interested in seeing how this plays out. Do they get any better? Do they keep playing if they continue to be this awful? Are the fans in Utah pretty much OK with this? What about the other players?

I don’t want to be mean, but I have to point out what’s happening. Thus far, Collier and Williams have been the two worst players in the league by a pretty significant margin. In concert, their tank-commander potential for the final 52 games is off the charts.

Sign up to get The Bounce, the essential NBA newsletter from Zach Harper and The Athletic staff, delivered free to your inbox.

(Top photo of D’Angelo Russell: Sean M. Haffey / Getty Images)