Anthony Davis, Gasol, Noah (You are going to be picky about 0.9 points)?, Howard, Hibbert, Duncan. Then if you take away the 1.5+ blocks, the list gets much much larger. Even if it's 1.2 blocks per game or higher.
I would do the same. They may have lost Kobe for good. There is even talk from the fanbase that they should amnesty Kobe. Adding two wings like Matthews and Batum would be a good thing for them.
I don't think the Lakers want players back. Maybe they'd take Matthews as a short-term Kobe replacement. But I don't think you can do TPE and a player in the same deal.
Yes you can. You cannot use a TE in combination of obtaining a player with that TE. Portland isn't using a TE. They are giving Lakers the TE because the deal is lopsided.
Howard is making something like $20 mil a year. Matthews and Batum are making around 16 million I think (combined). The Blazers would have to find a way to fill the last four million, but at least this way the Lakers get younger and they get something rather than nothing for Howard. The whole thing is completely hypothetical because I'm not convinced that D12 would come here, but it's fun to speculate.
http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q83 In some cases, teams have up to one year to acquire the replacement player(s) to complete a trade. These trades are considered non-simultaneous. In a non-simultaneous trade, a team can acquire only up to 100% plus $100,000 of the outgoing salary (as opposed to a higher amount in a simultaneous trade). A trade in which salaries are aggregated (see question number 82) cannot be non-simultaneous.
it's not combining a TPE with a player, it's using cap space with a player, which creates a TPE for LA.
Freeland and Leonard would equal that. and we woul dstill have our cap space....right? While it wouldn't be ideal, we would be the talk of the league if we dealt for Howard and were able to sign Josh Smith Lillard Barton Smith Aldridge Howard
Plus don't forget the draft pick we'd have coming in, but that sure is a lot to trade for a guy that LA is going to lose anyway.