Agreed.
So which championship contender is going to spend $50m a year on a probable #3 guy?
It's hard to say.
I agree with @tlance in principal. Where he seems to be ranked among players (at least for regular season performance), does tend to mean a contract in the range of what he just signed.
Having said that, the way he has performed during the playoffs is no longer a secret, nor is it something teams can pass off as the product of the rest of the team not being as good like they could in Indy and OKC. I would think that would lessen his value.
If a team was looking at him as what he is...there is no way in hell he's getting that kind of money because you don't pay that kind of money to a #3. But teams fool themselves into thinking a player is better than he is fairly regularly, so he could still get close to that...especially a team that is paying him as, at least a #2, which is what the Clippers just did (and why I think they're going to regret it).
As for what the Lakers would do. Even if they somehow had the cap space, if they signed him, it would be for less than what they are paying Lebron and AD, even if they had enough to pay him as much.
Minus Lebron or AD. I'd like to think they still wouldn't pay him what the Clippers just did, but am less confident that they wouldn't.