| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
iml84myd8s
Starting Rotation
Joined: 06 Aug 2005
Posts: 598
|
 Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2006 8:56 am Post subject: ESPN Game Note: Lakers vs Clippers (Lakers under salary cap) |
|
|
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/recap?gameId=260224012
| Quote: | | The Lakers' passing on last-minute trades before Thursday's deadline means they will not pay the luxury tax this season. They are about $3 million under the threshold of $61.7 million. |
Why is this a game note? Is ESPN making a point that the Lakers are content with this team so they could avoid luxury tax or is it a back handed shot at the Laker for not making a trade?
Odd. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Tony Montana
Star Player
Joined: 18 Apr 2005
Posts: 2962
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2006 8:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Both. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wolfpaclaker
Retired Number
Joined: 29 May 2002
Posts: 58333
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2006 9:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
I don't think this season was the objective of staying under the limit - rather next season.
Because if we dealt George and still took on a more (by about 25%) than we send out - we would be taking on 7.5+ million for next season plus yearly increments on that amount.
Even if we made a trade, we would have been under that amount - this season. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
drew4lakers
Star Player
Joined: 03 Jun 2002
Posts: 3417
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2006 12:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but being under the luxury tax threshold doesn't mean we're under the cap does it?
I thought this means we're somewhere in between.
_________________
BORN REBLE |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dirka dirka
Franchise Player
Joined: 09 Jul 2005
Posts: 14655
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2006 12:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
we arent anywhere close to being under the salary cap, your title is misleading....only reason we are under the luxury tax is because of the amnesty clause and brian grant...his money still counts against our salary cap.
_________________
| jbjb wrote: | | Echoes from the half empty glass. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hydro21
Star Player
Joined: 20 May 2005
Posts: 2392
Location: NYC
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2006 1:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| dirka dirka wrote: | | we arent anywhere close to being under the salary cap, your title is misleading....only reason we are under the luxury tax is because of the amnesty clause and brian grant...his money still counts against our salary cap. |
for how long? what year should we be under the cap? 2007? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
drew4lakers
Star Player
Joined: 03 Jun 2002
Posts: 3417
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2006 2:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Hydro21 wrote: | | dirka dirka wrote: | | we arent anywhere close to being under the salary cap, your title is misleading....only reason we are under the luxury tax is because of the amnesty clause and brian grant...his money still counts against our salary cap. |
for how long? what year should we be under the cap? 2007? |
I believe we wil be under the salary cap in 2007 at earliest. If in fact, as is commonly believed, Kwame's third year option has already been picked up -- we will not be under the cap enough for a max player.
When i wrote my earlier post, I actually had forgotten the artificial "cap space' created by waiving brian grant. That is a major factor in considering where our actual salary cap numbers are until 2007. I hadn't completely forgotten it (some things are just too painful to think about too often) .
I just am not capologist enough to know how the numbers work out. apparently they didn't do too good a job of it on the telecast either.
_________________
BORN REBLE |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HateitorLoveit
Starting Rotation
Joined: 15 Jul 2005
Posts: 171
Location: Long Beach, CA
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2006 5:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| sweet |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JIFISH
Star Player
Joined: 12 Apr 2001
Posts: 9315
Location: Los Angeles, CA
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2006 7:37 pm Post subject: Re: ESPN Game Note: Lakers vs Clippers (Lakers under salary cap) |
|
|
| iml84myd8s wrote: | http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/recap?gameId=260224012
| Quote: | | The Lakers' passing on last-minute trades before Thursday's deadline means they will not pay the luxury tax this season. They are about $3 million under the threshold of $61.7 million. |
Why is this a game note? Is ESPN making a point that the Lakers are content with this team so they could avoid luxury tax or is it a back handed shot at the Laker for not making a trade?
Odd. |
How, exactly would trading players of more or less equal salary (as the trade rules require) put the Lakers over the luxury tax threshold? You can't trade a player making 3 million for a player making 6, right?
_________________
I would rather have questions I cannot answer than answers I cannot question - Richard Feynman |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sodapoppenski
Star Player
Joined: 24 Apr 2005
Posts: 7364
Location: Washington, DC
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2006 7:44 pm Post subject: Re: ESPN Game Note: Lakers vs Clippers (Lakers under salary cap) |
|
|
| JIFISH wrote: | | iml84myd8s wrote: | http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/recap?gameId=260224012
| Quote: | | The Lakers' passing on last-minute trades before Thursday's deadline means they will not pay the luxury tax this season. They are about $3 million under the threshold of $61.7 million. |
Why is this a game note? Is ESPN making a point that the Lakers are content with this team so they could avoid luxury tax or is it a back handed shot at the Laker for not making a trade?
Odd. |
How, exactly would trading players of more or less equal salary (as the trade rules require) put the Lakers over the luxury tax threshold? You can't trade a player making 3 million for a player making 6, right? |
For the team (or both teams if it applies) who is over the cap, the incoming
salaries cannot be more than 125% of the outgoing salaries.
In other words, had we packaged say LO ($11.5m or so) and another
player with say a $3m contract like Slava.
Our outgoing would be $14.5m, so we could take in roughly the same
$14.5m plus an additional $3.6m.
So yes, we could have gone over the lux tax that way.
But it would have had to be a big deal and the numbers would have to
almost purposefully been geared towards us taking in the most possible
under those guidelines.
Basically, the likelihood of that happening is small enough that ESPN
bringing this up as it's only note on the team, is IMO, a backhanded
compliment or simply a subtle stab. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr. Laker
Franchise Player
Joined: 12 Apr 2002
Posts: 17096
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2006 8:55 pm Post subject: Re: ESPN Game Note: Lakers vs Clippers (Lakers under salary cap) |
|
|
| JIFISH wrote: |
How, exactly would trading players of more or less equal salary (as the trade rules require) put the Lakers over the luxury tax threshold? You can't trade a player making 3 million for a player making 6, right? |
Don't forget that guys get raises.
Kobe, Odom, Kwame, Mihm, Cook, Wafer, et. al., get a combined 6 Million dollars in raises next year. Add whoever we'd get for Devean (at 5 million) and it becomes a 16 million dollar tax bill.
_________________
On Lakersground, a concern troll is someone who is a fan of another team, but pretends to be a Lakers fan with "concerns". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JIFISH
Star Player
Joined: 12 Apr 2001
Posts: 9315
Location: Los Angeles, CA
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2006 9:38 pm Post subject: Re: ESPN Game Note: Lakers vs Clippers (Lakers under salary cap) |
|
|
| Dr. Laker wrote: | | JIFISH wrote: |
How, exactly would trading players of more or less equal salary (as the trade rules require) put the Lakers over the luxury tax threshold? You can't trade a player making 3 million for a player making 6, right? |
Don't forget that guys get raises.
Kobe, Odom, Kwame, Mihm, Cook, Wafer, et. al., get a combined 6 Million dollars in raises next year. Add whoever we'd get for Devean (at 5 million) and it becomes a 16 million dollar tax bill. |
Sure. Everyone gets raises (except me, of course), but basketball players don't get raises during the season they are traded, so what's that got to do with us being 3 million under the luxury tax threshold?
_________________
I would rather have questions I cannot answer than answers I cannot question - Richard Feynman |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sage_10
Star Player
Joined: 24 Dec 2005
Posts: 6668
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2006 10:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Even though we're 3 mil under the lux. tax we are still over the Salary cap right? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
