The Los Angeles Lakers are currently dealing with the aftermath of choosing to trade for Russell Westbrook in the NBA offseason as opposed to going through with a nearly completed trade for Buddy Hield.
So far, Westbrook has provided the Lakers with averages of 18.1 points, 7.7 rebounds, and 7.3 assists while being highly inefficient as a scorer. His output of 0.819 points per possession (PPP) ranks last among the 38 players in the league that has recorded at 1,000 possessions.
With Westbrook being signed to a supermax contract, the Lakers need him to be providing a superstar level of impact. Instead, he’s been a negative too often. Now, the team needs to part with him, and doing so is the top objective they face ahead of a busy offseason.
There has been much discussion about what the Lakers could have done instead of acquiring Russell Westbrook. Los Angeles nearly finalized a deal to acquire Buddy Hield with the Sacramento Kings but LeBron James and Anthony Davis interjected.
LATEST NBA NEWS & TRADE RUMORS: Top Offseason Options For Lakers To Dump Russell Westbrook
Instead of standing firm on his decision, Lakers general manager Rob Pelinka leaned on the desire of his superstar players and decided to pursue a trade for Westbrook instead.
With that being said, let’s dive into three reasons Pelinka should have held firm and went through with the Buddy Hield trade instead of caving in on the Russell Westbrook deal.
