The Lakers had previously been comfortable with a two-year deal at about 10 million per year. That structure would have been just under the non-taxpayer mid-level exception and presented a low-risk, team-friendly option for Los Angeles. However, that offer did not gain traction, and Kuminga’s team reportedly pushed for a higher annual average, closer to 20 million per season. While the exact figure didn’t have to be 20 million, it was described as leaning toward the higher end of the spectrum rather than the lower, two-year proposal.
This price point helps explain why the negotiations between the Lakers and Kuminga have stalled despite mutual interest. Earlier in the offseason, the Lakers explored creating roughly 10 million dollars in salary-cap space to sign Kuminga outright to a two-year contract totaling around 20 million dollars. Kuminga declined that framework, seeking greater long-term security and a higher average annual salary.
Since then, the Lakers have moved forward with other roster moves, including re-signing Austin Reaves and adding Quentin Grimes, Sandro Mamukelashvili, Kevon Looney, and Ziaire Williams. While these acquisitions filled the team’s 15-man roster, they effectively eliminated any straightforward path to signing Kuminga outright, pushing the plan toward a sign-and-trade arrangement with another team, such as the Atlanta Hawks, if a deal is to be completed.
A significant complication with a sign-and-trade is the league’s collective bargaining rules. Players acquired via sign-and-trade must sign contracts containing at least three guaranteed seasons before any option years, which means the Lakers’ preferred two-year structure could not be the basis of a Kuminga deal. Some analysts suggested a structure with a three-year contract, perhaps around 45 million total (roughly 15 million per year), which would land in the middle of what both sides might want. Yet reaching a three-year agreement requires the Hawks’ buy-in to facilitate the trade, and Atlanta’s participation is not guaranteed.
Even if a compromise on the contract length and value is reached, the Hawks must also agree to the deal’s mechanics, including the participation in a sign-and-trade. The Lakers’ remaining draft capital is limited after previous moves, with assets such as a 2032 first-round pick swap and several second-round picks still on the table. The most plausible salary-matching players in potential packages—Jarred Vanderbilt and Dalton Knecht—have not drawn substantial interest league-wide, making it harder to assemble a package that satisfies the Hawks’ criteria and the league’s salary-matching requirements.
Public reports over the summer indicated that discussions had centered on Vanderbilt and the 2032 first-round pick swap as a foundation for a Kuminga package, though other insiders noted that Atlanta had not shown a strong appetite for taking back Vanderbilt in a Kuminga trade. Knecht’s value has become more uncertain due to a variable performance season and previous trade outcomes. Without a third team’s involvement or additional draft compensation, constructing a package attractive enough for Atlanta remains a major hurdle.
Throughout these developments, the Lakers have not altered their evaluation of Kuminga. The team remains interested in him as a potential starting forward, even as it navigates the complexities of funding, structure, and opponent willingness to engage in a sign-and-trade. The central takeaway from the latest reporting is clear: Kuminga’s asking price has moved higher than the Lakers initially planned, and the path to a deal now requires alignment on price, contract length, and the willingness of Atlanta to facilitate the trade within the constraints of the league’s rules and the Lakers’ limited draft capital.
If a middle ground can be found—a three-year deal around mid-teens per year, paired with a sign-and-trade that satisfies the Hawks and complies with league rules—the door to landing Kuminga could reopen. Until then, Los Angeles will continue to weigh its options, balancing the desire to upgrade at forward with the practical realities of cap space, asset availability, and the complexities of coordinating a multi-party trade. The pursuit remains active, even as the path forward becomes increasingly intricate.
