View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
LAKERMIKE2 Star Player
Joined: 26 Oct 2005 Posts: 2076 Location: Jack's Crib
|
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2023 9:17 am Post subject: When does the salary issue stop? |
|
|
Since the Championship & trading or allowing guys to sign elsewhere it seem like all we are doing is signing league minimum salary players minus the MLE, LBJ, AD & after the Russ trade. I heard Trevor from Laker Nation say we will continue to have to sign league minimum players? So even with Russ leaving we can’t use his money for next season, why not?
According to Trevor we will continually have to sign like 8 minimum players?
How in the world can we or anyone build or keep a team & not start every year with new players. I & all of us want to see Bryant, Reaves & maybe a few more remain for 2-3 seasons.
I’m assuming we can only regain cap money or ability to sign a.k.a. 5 players averaging 10-15 million a year unless LBJ or AD go away?
So WHEN or what YEAR can we get back to having a roster like the Chip roster or better without relying on rookies? 🤔 _________________ My Laker squad.
Mr. Clutch, Nixon, Eddie, Nick, Magic, Kareem,
Silk, Cooper, AC, Worthy, Horry, Shaq, Kobe.
HC: Riley |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Megaton Retired Number
Joined: 18 Feb 2015 Posts: 25624
|
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2023 9:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
When the team stops throwing away draft picks nonchalantly.
One of the most valuable things about draft picks nowadays is you have them for cheap at 4-5 years minimum. And you don’t have to worry about cap space with draft picks, because no matter how over the cap you are, you will always have a draft pick to fill a roster spot. That’s how you continue to build continuity and build a roster where you don’t have to go through an overhaul every year.
Lakers this year have a first round and 2nd round pick. That’s two cheap players to build up the roster with, while maintaining the main core the Lakers have. You trade those away nonsensically, you force yourself into a hole of players you can’t even count fully on one hand, while not having the salary to properly fill the roster. _________________ Darvin Scam: https://media.tenor.com/images/3c15249955860a4b16b59e8ae035fb75/tenor.gif |
|
Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001 Posts: 144432 Location: The Gold Coast
|
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2023 9:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Russ’ contract put the team over the luxury tax limit and the only way to stay over would be to trade him for longer term contracts. If we let Russ’ contract expire we can’t take in salary above the tax limit. If we keep Reaves’ cap hit and the FRP cap hit we will have about $27 mil to fill out the rest of the roster along with whichever exceptions we use. There won’t be a lot of salary to bring in role players as long as we have Lebron and AD. _________________ RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
LAKERMIKE2 Star Player
Joined: 26 Oct 2005 Posts: 2076 Location: Jack's Crib
|
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2023 9:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
Megaton wrote: | When the team stops throwing away draft picks nonchalantly.
One of the most valuable things about draft picks nowadays is you have them for cheap at 4-5 years minimum. And you don’t have to worry about cap space with draft picks, because no matter how over the cap you are, you will always have a draft pick to fill a roster spot. That’s how you continue to build continuity and build a roster where you don’t have to go through an overhaul every year.
Lakers this year have a first round and 2nd round pick. That’s two cheap players to build up the roster with, while maintaining the main core the Lakers have. You trade those away nonsensically, you force yourself into a hole of players you can’t even count fully on one hand, while not having the salary to properly fill the roster. |
Yes, I figured that & totally agree, so I guess we blame the front office geniuses. Rob is not a good GM, these Monks, Walkers, Bryant’s are coming here to get paid by other teams not because Rob is magical. I guess every year we gotta hope there are players who want to build up their worth & it basically hurts us. That & MOST of ALL, other teams want 3 times more from us than others & Rob still gives in yet alone with picks! 😡 _________________ My Laker squad.
Mr. Clutch, Nixon, Eddie, Nick, Magic, Kareem,
Silk, Cooper, AC, Worthy, Horry, Shaq, Kobe.
HC: Riley |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005 Posts: 31763
|
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2023 9:41 am Post subject: Re: When does the salary issue stop? |
|
|
LAKERMIKE2 wrote: | So even with Russ leaving we can’t use his money for next season, why not? |
It doesn't work quite that way. If you go to V+'s stickied thread, he explains the various cap space scenarios. If the Westbrook contract expires, we will have cap space available, but not the full amount of Westbrook's contract. _________________ Internet Argument Resolved |
|
Back to top |
|
|
vasashi17+ Star Player
Joined: 13 Dec 2019 Posts: 5610
|
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2023 9:46 am Post subject: Re: When does the salary issue stop? |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter wrote: | LAKERMIKE2 wrote: | So even with Russ leaving we can’t use his money for next season, why not? |
It doesn't work quite that way. If you go to V+'s stickied thread, he explains the various cap space scenarios. If the Westbrook contract expires, we will have cap space available, but not the full amount of Westbrook's contract. |
Thx my guy for the redirects.
But if y’all pressed for time, here’s the TL;dr…
#MarginalizingTheMargins & unbelievably not realizing you’re doing it. Now our most valued nonKlutch assets are soon to be free agents and picks 5-7 years away.
This is not a Laker tax. We here for a reason and part of it is ducking the luxury tax. _________________ Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
lakersfever714 Franchise Player
Joined: 05 Jan 2016 Posts: 11600
|
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2023 9:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
We paid AD the max every season but he's only played one full (shortened) season for us. There's your problem. _________________ LeGoat! LeMazing! LeGend! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Omar Little Moderator
Joined: 02 May 2005 Posts: 90299 Location: Formerly Known As 24
|
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2023 9:50 am Post subject: Re: When does the salary issue stop? |
|
|
vasashi17+ wrote: | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | LAKERMIKE2 wrote: | So even with Russ leaving we can’t use his money for next season, why not? |
It doesn't work quite that way. If you go to V+'s stickied thread, he explains the various cap space scenarios. If the Westbrook contract expires, we will have cap space available, but not the full amount of Westbrook's contract. |
Thx my guy for the redirects.
But if y’all pressed for time, here’s the TL;dr…
#MarginalizingTheMargins & unbelievably not realizing you’re doing it. Now our most valued nonKlutch assets are soon to be free agents and picks 5-7 years away.
This is not a Laker tax. We here for a reason and part of it is ducking the luxury tax. |
I don’t think it’s a tax issue. I think it’s a badly mismanaged roster and now they don’t think they can get enough with what assets they have left to get over the top, and spending those assets means in a couple years they are a lotto team without the lotto picks. So they are paralyzed and their new thinking is how to go get another third star and reboot the same mess. _________________ “We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Omar Little Moderator
Joined: 02 May 2005 Posts: 90299 Location: Formerly Known As 24
|
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2023 9:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
LAKERMIKE2 wrote: | Megaton wrote: | When the team stops throwing away draft picks nonchalantly.
One of the most valuable things about draft picks nowadays is you have them for cheap at 4-5 years minimum. And you don’t have to worry about cap space with draft picks, because no matter how over the cap you are, you will always have a draft pick to fill a roster spot. That’s how you continue to build continuity and build a roster where you don’t have to go through an overhaul every year.
Lakers this year have a first round and 2nd round pick. That’s two cheap players to build up the roster with, while maintaining the main core the Lakers have. You trade those away nonsensically, you force yourself into a hole of players you can’t even count fully on one hand, while not having the salary to properly fill the roster. |
Yes, I figured that & totally agree, so I guess we blame the front office geniuses. Rob is not a good GM, these Monks, Walkers, Bryant’s are coming here to get paid by other teams not because Rob is magical. I guess every year we gotta hope there are players who want to build up their worth & it basically hurts us. That & MOST of ALL, other teams want 3 times more from us than others & Rob still gives in yet alone with picks! 😡 |
The single year MLE is a really dumb move because you can’t keep a guy if he hits. Similar to the one year minimum. Of course the two year is dumb too because you have an extra year of non performance risk but still no ability to keep the guy after two if he hits.
One year MLE and minimums are useful at times for contending deep teams, but not so much fir thin teams that have traded their picks and depth for names. _________________ “We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dont_be_a_wuss Franchise Player
Joined: 29 Mar 2012 Posts: 21415
|
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2023 9:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Omar Little wrote: | LAKERMIKE2 wrote: | Megaton wrote: | When the team stops throwing away draft picks nonchalantly.
One of the most valuable things about draft picks nowadays is you have them for cheap at 4-5 years minimum. And you don’t have to worry about cap space with draft picks, because no matter how over the cap you are, you will always have a draft pick to fill a roster spot. That’s how you continue to build continuity and build a roster where you don’t have to go through an overhaul every year.
Lakers this year have a first round and 2nd round pick. That’s two cheap players to build up the roster with, while maintaining the main core the Lakers have. You trade those away nonsensically, you force yourself into a hole of players you can’t even count fully on one hand, while not having the salary to properly fill the roster. |
Yes, I figured that & totally agree, so I guess we blame the front office geniuses. Rob is not a good GM, these Monks, Walkers, Bryant’s are coming here to get paid by other teams not because Rob is magical. I guess every year we gotta hope there are players who want to build up their worth & it basically hurts us. That & MOST of ALL, other teams want 3 times more from us than others & Rob still gives in yet alone with picks! 😡 |
The single year MLE is a really dumb move because you can’t keep a guy if he hits. Similar to the one year minimum. Of course the two year is dumb too because you have an extra year of non performance risk but still no ability to keep the guy after two if he hits.
One year MLE and minimums are useful at times for contending deep teams, but not so much fir thin teams that have traded their picks and depth for names. |
If you really think about it, it’s extremely dumb because losing a player after he hits isn’t the risk of the 1-year deals. It is the GOAL of the one year deal. The front office wants these players to perform as well as possible which causes th to leave. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
vasashi17+ Star Player
Joined: 13 Dec 2019 Posts: 5610
|
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2023 10:01 am Post subject: Re: When does the salary issue stop? |
|
|
Omar Little wrote: | vasashi17+ wrote: | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | LAKERMIKE2 wrote: | So even with Russ leaving we can’t use his money for next season, why not? |
It doesn't work quite that way. If you go to V+'s stickied thread, he explains the various cap space scenarios. If the Westbrook contract expires, we will have cap space available, but not the full amount of Westbrook's contract. |
Thx my guy for the redirects.
But if y’all pressed for time, here’s the TL;dr…
#MarginalizingTheMargins & unbelievably not realizing you’re doing it. Now our most valued nonKlutch assets are soon to be free agents and picks 5-7 years away.
This is not a Laker tax. We here for a reason and part of it is ducking the luxury tax. |
I don’t think it’s a tax issue. I think it’s a badly mismanaged roster and now they don’t think they can get enough with what assets they have left to get over the top, and spending those assets means in a couple years they are a lotto team without the lotto picks. So they are paralyzed and their new thinking is how to go get another third star and reboot the same mess. |
Sometimes I try to be witty without providing clear context.
I totally agree with you, but imho part of the reason for mismanagement is by ducking a heavier luxury tax bill. They could have traded for Russ AND kept all our FAs…but they didn’t want to spend additionally for the luxury of fielding a deeper roster. _________________ Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Omar Little Moderator
Joined: 02 May 2005 Posts: 90299 Location: Formerly Known As 24
|
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2023 10:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
It’s not the goal. It’s just the inability to commit to the risk and loss of “flexibility”, so they do a favor for a Klutch guy more often than not and “keep their powder dry”. Because they simply don’t value the pieces outside the stars _________________ “We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel |
|
Back to top |
|
|
LAKERMIKE2 Star Player
Joined: 26 Oct 2005 Posts: 2076 Location: Jack's Crib
|
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2023 10:02 am Post subject: Re: When does the salary issue stop? |
|
|
Omar Little wrote: | vasashi17+ wrote: | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | LAKERMIKE2 wrote: | So even with Russ leaving we can’t use his money for next season, why not? |
It doesn't work quite that way. If you go to V+'s stickied thread, he explains the various cap space scenarios. If the Westbrook contract expires, we will have cap space available, but not the full amount of Westbrook's contract. |
Thx my guy for the redirects.
But if y’all pressed for time, here’s the TL;dr…
#MarginalizingTheMargins & unbelievably not realizing you’re doing it. Now our most valued nonKlutch assets are soon to be free agents and picks 5-7 years away.
This is not a Laker tax. We here for a reason and part of it is ducking the luxury tax. |
I don’t think it’s a tax issue. I think it’s a badly mismanaged roster and now they don’t think they can get enough with what assets they have left to get over the top, and spending those assets means in a couple years they are a lotto team without the lotto picks. So they are paralyzed and their new thinking is how to go get another third star and reboot the same mess. |
👍 Absolutely! Gotta have that mixture of own drafted players & 2 big YOUNGER free agents (not past prime or past 30), if we can ever get there again? _________________ My Laker squad.
Mr. Clutch, Nixon, Eddie, Nick, Magic, Kareem,
Silk, Cooper, AC, Worthy, Horry, Shaq, Kobe.
HC: Riley |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Omar Little Moderator
Joined: 02 May 2005 Posts: 90299 Location: Formerly Known As 24
|
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2023 10:13 am Post subject: Re: When does the salary issue stop? |
|
|
vasashi17+ wrote: | Omar Little wrote: | vasashi17+ wrote: | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | LAKERMIKE2 wrote: | So even with Russ leaving we can’t use his money for next season, why not? |
It doesn't work quite that way. If you go to V+'s stickied thread, he explains the various cap space scenarios. If the Westbrook contract expires, we will have cap space available, but not the full amount of Westbrook's contract. |
Thx my guy for the redirects.
But if y’all pressed for time, here’s the TL;dr…
#MarginalizingTheMargins & unbelievably not realizing you’re doing it. Now our most valued nonKlutch assets are soon to be free agents and picks 5-7 years away.
This is not a Laker tax. We here for a reason and part of it is ducking the luxury tax. |
I don’t think it’s a tax issue. I think it’s a badly mismanaged roster and now they don’t think they can get enough with what assets they have left to get over the top, and spending those assets means in a couple years they are a lotto team without the lotto picks. So they are paralyzed and their new thinking is how to go get another third star and reboot the same mess. |
Sometimes I try to be witty without providing clear context.
I totally agree with you, but imho part of the reason for mismanagement is by ducking a heavier luxury tax bill. They could have traded for Russ AND kept all our FAs…but they didn’t want to spend additionally for the luxury of fielding a deeper roster. |
I don’t think that true. I think they didn’t value some guys, but more importantly, as they’ve gone forward, they’ve been hedging Westbrook. Meaning they want cap space next year. They went deeper in the tax giving that MLE to walker, just like they did with Nunn the previous year _________________ “We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Laker's Fan Franchise Player
Joined: 27 Jun 2002 Posts: 12813
|
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2023 10:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Omar Little wrote: | It’s not the goal. It’s just the inability to commit to the risk and loss of “flexibility”, so they do a favor for a Klutch guy more often than not and “keep their powder dry”. Because they simply don’t value the pieces outside the stars |
It's counterintuitive, but under the NBA CBA flexibility is greater with middling salaries for productive players than cap space. That gives you tradable salary to build and adjust your roster while Free Agency requires overpaying (or paying forward looking rates if you prefer). I think the minds in the Laker Front Office understand that. It's actually a clean balance sheet that they're after, for a number of reasons. Adding marketable stars is a value proposition b/c the max salary limits their earning and you can boost the bottom line with their presence. So raising the expense base for them is approved.
If one wants to see how a roster is managed when money is not a limiting factor, just look at the Clippers. They run things almost polar opposite than the Lakers. It's fair to say they've come up snake eyes ( ), but that doesn't validate the Laker approach. _________________ Austin Reaves keeps his game tight, like Kobe Bryant on game night. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
vasashi17+ Star Player
Joined: 13 Dec 2019 Posts: 5610
|
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2023 10:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Omar: I guess that’s where we disagree then.
It seems like they value them at a certain price point.
We’ve seen our previous retreads, from not keeping Rondo, AvBrad & Dwight to welcoming them back at the vet mins. This year it was with Schro.
According to Rob, they made a competitive offer to AC. ACcording to Caruso, the Lakers were so-so in retaining his services.
Had they kept him @ the Bull’s price point of 8m, then he would have added nearly 30m to the tax bill. We had the means to do it via his full bird rights, but chose not to. Kieff was an early bird player who could have gotten a pay bump in the 10m range. Wes was only a nonbird player, but seeing how he was previously coming off BAE money, he could have gotten about 4.5m in a re-up. Instead that money went to Nunn. And we all know what happened to Schro, but again you can give him what Boston ended up giving him (MLE amount) and we would still have the MLE remaining to use on Nunn, since we had Schro’s full bird rights.
Bottomline, we could have traded for Russ, kept all our FAs, still use the MLE on Nunn and still give Reaves the rookie min. With all our FAs making more than minimum deals, you could later flip them for assets that you valued more or could stomach footing a larger tax bill for…but instead we went the 8-10 vet min route. That’s what I mean by ducking a heavier luxury tax bill.
Part of the mismanagement of our roster was not retaining players on salaries that make them trade fodder for for midseason trades. As a result, last year’s trade deadline came and went with us standing pat and not dealing THT.
Only to then deal him for Pat this year. Why? Cause we can stand Pat’s expiring contract while THT’s player option would have potentially leaked onto our books next season and we can’t have that! 2023 cap space is king!
But then we have reports that the Lakers are interested in Bog’s 20m deal next year (just not at the price of an unprotected FRP). But why rid ourselves of THT’s deal then Bog’s deal leaks into 2023 cap space too…I guess it’s worth “repeating”…the luxury tax.
And we’ll keep flushing our non-star assets/salary fodder in order to avoid paying a heftier tax bill. After all, they call it a luxury tax for a reason. How much you willing to spend on luxury items? _________________ Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mad55557777 Franchise Player
Joined: 29 Jun 2005 Posts: 22801
|
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2023 11:18 am Post subject: Re: When does the salary issue stop? |
|
|
LAKERMIKE2 wrote: | Since the Championship & trading or allowing guys to sign elsewhere it seem like all we are doing is signing league minimum salary players minus the MLE, LBJ, AD & after the Russ trade. I heard Trevor from Laker Nation say we will continue to have to sign league minimum players? So even with Russ leaving we can’t use his money for next season, why not?
According to Trevor we will continually have to sign like 8 minimum players?
How in the world can we or anyone build or keep a team & not start every year with new players. I & all of us want to see Bryant, Reaves & maybe a few more remain for 2-3 seasons.
I’m assuming we can only regain cap money or ability to sign a.k.a. 5 players averaging 10-15 million a year unless LBJ or AD go away?
So WHEN or what YEAR can we get back to having a roster like the Chip roster or better without relying on rookies? 🤔 |
As soon as our owner willing to spent on high luxury tax or when we draft our own super star. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
activeverb Retired Number
Joined: 17 Jun 2006 Posts: 37470
|
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2023 11:41 am Post subject: Re: When does the salary issue stop? |
|
|
LAKERMIKE2 wrote: | Since the Championship & trading or allowing guys to sign elsewhere it seem like all we are doing is signing league minimum salary players minus the MLE, LBJ, AD & after the Russ trade. I heard Trevor from Laker Nation say we will continue to have to sign league minimum players? So even with Russ leaving we can’t use his money for next season, why not?
According to Trevor we will continually have to sign like 8 minimum players?
How in the world can we or anyone build or keep a team & not start every year with new players. I & all of us want to see Bryant, Reaves & maybe a few more remain for 2-3 seasons.
I’m assuming we can only regain cap money or ability to sign a.k.a. 5 players averaging 10-15 million a year unless LBJ or AD go away?
So WHEN or what YEAR can we get back to having a roster like the Chip roster or better without relying on rookies? 🤔 |
Others have provided the basic nuts and bolts answers.
The Lakers have chosen to go down paths which increasingly limit our options and flexibility. Some of that has been to save money. Some of that was a gamble on how certain players perform.
We are now facing the consequences of those choices. Those decisions can't be unwound quickly, and we can't change course easily.
The Lakers face new choices about gambling on the present, which would have more consequences in the future.
We will have to pay the piper eventually. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Halflife Franchise Player
Joined: 15 Aug 2015 Posts: 16656
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
LAKERMIKE2 Star Player
Joined: 26 Oct 2005 Posts: 2076 Location: Jack's Crib
|
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2023 12:21 pm Post subject: Re: When does the salary issue stop? |
|
|
mad55557777 wrote: | LAKERMIKE2 wrote: | Since the Championship & trading or allowing guys to sign elsewhere it seem like all we are doing is signing league minimum salary players minus the MLE, LBJ, AD & after the Russ trade. I heard Trevor from Laker Nation say we will continue to have to sign league minimum players? So even with Russ leaving we can’t use his money for next season, why not?
According to Trevor we will continually have to sign like 8 minimum players?
How in the world can we or anyone build or keep a team & not start every year with new players. I & all of us want to see Bryant, Reaves & maybe a few more remain for 2-3 seasons.
I’m assuming we can only regain cap money or ability to sign a.k.a. 5 players averaging 10-15 million a year unless LBJ or AD go away?
So WHEN or what YEAR can we get back to having a roster like the Chip roster or better without relying on rookies? 🤔 |
As soon as our owner willing to spent on high luxury tax or when we draft our own super star. |
activeverb wrote: | LAKERMIKE2 wrote: | Since the Championship & trading or allowing guys to sign elsewhere it seem like all we are doing is signing league minimum salary players minus the MLE, LBJ, AD & after the Russ trade. I heard Trevor from Laker Nation say we will continue to have to sign league minimum players? So even with Russ leaving we can’t use his money for next season, why not?
According to Trevor we will continually have to sign like 8 minimum players?
How in the world can we or anyone build or keep a team & not start every year with new players. I & all of us want to see Bryant, Reaves & maybe a few more remain for 2-3 seasons.
I’m assuming we can only regain cap money or ability to sign a.k.a. 5 players averaging 10-15 million a year unless LBJ or AD go away?
So WHEN or what YEAR can we get back to having a roster like the Chip roster or better without relying on rookies? 🤔 |
Others have provided the basic nuts and bolts answers.
The Lakers have chosen to go down paths which increasingly limit our options and flexibility. Some of that has been to save money. Some of that was a gamble on how certain players perform.
We are now facing the consequences of those choices. Those decisions can't be unwound quickly, and we can't change course easily.
The Lakers face new choices about gambling on the present, which would have more consequences in the future.
We will have to pay the piper eventually. |
Indeed & agreed, as much as I want Russ gone because I think he’ll blow it if we make playoffs. If we can unload him or get Bodan for guys who aren’t gonna be here next year & keep 1st rd picks & give up combo of Walker ( hate to lose his athleticism) Pat & Nunn (who has disappointed) I’d say go for it. But if we stay the course & Ham plays T.B. lots of minutes & Nunn stays consistent, Wayne gets minutes & most importantly Ham doesn’t wear out LBJ & AD playing them no more than 34 minutes per game than I believe we have a chance if the offense continues to SHARE the ball & HUSTLE & ENERGY on defense! All this RELIES on the health of TEAM!
I just don’t wanna see 7-8 NEW guys on the team next two years but seems like we’re headed that way with F.O. being so incapable of decision making! Too many cook line chefs in the kitchen & one is dumb enough to give up 3 times more than other teams would because we’re the Lakers & everyone wants to rip us off, just say NO, Rob! _________________ My Laker squad.
Mr. Clutch, Nixon, Eddie, Nick, Magic, Kareem,
Silk, Cooper, AC, Worthy, Horry, Shaq, Kobe.
HC: Riley |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Omar Little Moderator
Joined: 02 May 2005 Posts: 90299 Location: Formerly Known As 24
|
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2023 12:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
vasashi17+ wrote: | Omar: I guess that’s where we disagree then.
It seems like they value them at a certain price point.
We’ve seen our previous retreads, from not keeping Rondo, AvBrad & Dwight to welcoming them back at the vet mins. This year it was with Schro.
According to Rob, they made a competitive offer to AC. ACcording to Caruso, the Lakers were so-so in retaining his services.
Had they kept him @ the Bull’s price point of 8m, then he would have added nearly 30m to the tax bill. We had the means to do it via his full bird rights, but chose not to. Kieff was an early bird player who could have gotten a pay bump in the 10m range. Wes was only a nonbird player, but seeing how he was previously coming off BAE money, he could have gotten about 4.5m in a re-up. Instead that money went to Nunn. And we all know what happened to Schro, but again you can give him what Boston ended up giving him (MLE amount) and we would still have the MLE remaining to use on Nunn, since we had Schro’s full bird rights.
Bottomline, we could have traded for Russ, kept all our FAs, still use the MLE on Nunn and still give Reaves the rookie min. With all our FAs making more than minimum deals, you could later flip them for assets that you valued more or could stomach footing a larger tax bill for…but instead we went the 8-10 vet min route. That’s what I mean by ducking a heavier luxury tax bill.
Part of the mismanagement of our roster was not retaining players on salaries that make them trade fodder for for midseason trades. As a result, last year’s trade deadline came and went with us standing pat and not dealing THT.
Only to then deal him for Pat this year. Why? Cause we can stand Pat’s expiring contract while THT’s player option would have potentially leaked onto our books next season and we can’t have that! 2023 cap space is king!
But then we have reports that the Lakers are interested in Bog’s 20m deal next year (just not at the price of an unprotected FRP). But why rid ourselves of THT’s deal then Bog’s deal leaks into 2023 cap space too…I guess it’s worth “repeating”…the luxury tax.
And we’ll keep flushing our non-star assets/salary fodder in order to avoid paying a heftier tax bill. After all, they call it a luxury tax for a reason. How much you willing to spend on luxury items? |
My point was that they don't respect or value non star assets, not so much because of tax (they will pay tax for star players), but because they don't value continuity and the relative trade and on court value of those guys. They just think they can go sign whatever, rely on a couple of draft picks, and the stars will carry them. Remember, Westbrook is about 11 million more expensive than Caruso, KCP, and Kuzma (more than that really since you need to fill two more roster spots). Trez doesn't count because his contract already expired but he's making 2.7 this year if you wanted to keep him too (I wouldn't). So it's not a tax issue so much as a what level of player they will deign to pay.
As another poster put it, beyond my argument that those players are more valuable both in what they provide and continuity, they are also far better trade assets than Westbrook, who literally no one else wanted and who no one will take without us paying them AND taking on bad contracts. But here the Lakers are paying tax and not having all those assets. _________________ “We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel |
|
Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001 Posts: 144432 Location: The Gold Coast
|
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2023 12:45 pm Post subject: Re: When does the salary issue stop? |
|
|
mad55557777 wrote: | LAKERMIKE2 wrote: | Since the Championship & trading or allowing guys to sign elsewhere it seem like all we are doing is signing league minimum salary players minus the MLE, LBJ, AD & after the Russ trade. I heard Trevor from Laker Nation say we will continue to have to sign league minimum players? So even with Russ leaving we can’t use his money for next season, why not?
According to Trevor we will continually have to sign like 8 minimum players?
How in the world can we or anyone build or keep a team & not start every year with new players. I & all of us want to see Bryant, Reaves & maybe a few more remain for 2-3 seasons.
I’m assuming we can only regain cap money or ability to sign a.k.a. 5 players averaging 10-15 million a year unless LBJ or AD go away?
So WHEN or what YEAR can we get back to having a roster like the Chip roster or better without relying on rookies? 🤔 |
As soon as our owner willing to spent on high luxury tax or when we draft our own super star. |
They have been paying the luxury tax, just not wisely. _________________ RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Treble Clef Franchise Player
Joined: 20 Nov 2012 Posts: 23745
|
Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2023 6:09 pm Post subject: Re: When does the salary issue stop? |
|
|
LAKERMIKE2 wrote: | Since the Championship & trading or allowing guys to sign elsewhere it seem like all we are doing is signing league minimum salary players minus the MLE, LBJ, AD & after the Russ trade. I heard Trevor from Laker Nation say we will continue to have to sign league minimum players? So even with Russ leaving we can’t use his money for next season, why not?
According to Trevor we will continually have to sign like 8 minimum players?
How in the world can we or anyone build or keep a team & not start every year with new players. I & all of us want to see Bryant, Reaves & maybe a few more remain for 2-3 seasons.
I’m assuming we can only regain cap money or ability to sign a.k.a. 5 players averaging 10-15 million a year unless LBJ or AD go away?
So WHEN or what YEAR can we get back to having a roster like the Chip roster or better without relying on rookies? 🤔 |
The link earlier in the thread explains it well. It’s hard to maximize the salary cap rules in free agency. The rules allow you to go way above the cap to retain your own players but they are much more prohibitive toward a team just going out and trying to sign the best players available no matter how much it costs.
If they are able to flip a contract like Westbrook for someone they want long term, they can get around the cap that way. Or if any of their young players demand a big contract, they can go above the cap to keep them. But they’ll be limited in free agency as long as they have AD and LeBron. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
defense Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jan 2010 Posts: 39324
|
Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2023 3:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
Starting point is 3 guys making around 40 million but none of them producing to justify that salary is where I would start.
Big fish first then look at the small fries. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005 Posts: 31763
|
Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2023 4:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
vasashi17+ wrote: | According to Rob, they made a competitive offer to AC. ACcording to Caruso, the Lakers were so-so in retaining his services. |
According to Caruso's camp, the Lakers were actually trying to convince him to take less money because of all of the luxury tax that they would need to pay. When I read that, I just shook my head. Can you imagine someone offering you 50 cents on the dollar for your car because of high gas prices? _________________ Internet Argument Resolved |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|