Why argue over this it's all said and done and he's not a Laker anymore. People need to get over it. _________________ Maybe you think it's completely innocent. Maybe you don't. But there's no denying that what the rule book says means a lot less than what the NBA wants at any given moment. -Tim Donaghy
Why argue over this it's all said and done and he's not a Laker anymore. People need to get over it.
because the same group of people here saying Dwight can't carry Kobe's jock are also wishing he's still here. they just can't let it go. imagine if we still have Dwight, Kobe or not, mostly likely we gonna sign either Melo or Bosh this summer.
Dwight was gone from the Lakers before he ever left Orlando. I tried telling you guys.
Don't buy it. He wouldn't have sat down with the Lakers to hear their pitch then. It served no purpose.
Mehhhh, your reasoning is hodgepodge.
You never sat down with a girl and told her you liked her and maybe there was a chance you could work it out when you knew it was over? Well maybe you haven't, but just try to imagine it like that.
Why would I sit down with a girl and tell her I like her, when I don't like her, and don't want to have anything to do with her?
That makes no sense. Why would ANYONE ever do that?
Dwight listened to the Lakers for the same reason that Melo did, or that LeBron listened to the Heat. You listen to hear what they have to say, and if it does nothing to sway your decision, at least the decision is made with more information than had you not gone to the meeting. This is not uncommon at all.
Totally agree. That's why I don't agree with the premise that he was gone before he even arrived.
There was still a chance. I heard at one point it was a 50/50 decision and he went with Houston.
Maybe people feel better about it saying oh well we never had a chance to begin with, I just don't think that was really the case in reality.
You just don't get it bud.
Dwight knew he was leaving. All the reports from the lakers camp said he wouldn't even look at anyone in the eye in that room when they had the meeting.
When you play for the Lakers and they put up billboards asking you to stay, you grant their request in having one meeting to present you their pitch. This is called common sense.
Again. If he knew he was leaving, he wouldn't have gone to the meeting in the first place. Just because Billy Bob didn't do the same thing to his bae doesn't matter.
I'm in line with what JMK said. He was already leaning towards leaving (which is what I thought also even before that season ended), but maybe something will come up that might change his mind. Can't know unless you try kind of thing.
But I get it. It makes it easier to think, bahhhh we had no chance anyway. But we did. A small one. And we lost. And I'm not that upset about it either. But I don't need to trick myself in to thinking he was gone before he even left Orlando either. (Which was the original point I wasn't in agreement with).
Joined: 14 Apr 2001 Posts: 144432 Location: The Gold Coast
Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2014 2:37 pm Post subject:
ringfinger wrote:
venturalakersfan wrote:
Dwight was gone from the Lakers before he ever left Orlando. I tried telling you guys.
Don't buy it. He wouldn't have sat down with the Lakers to hear their pitch then. It served no purpose.
PR, and Dwight was in need of some positive PR at the time. And according to those who were there, Dwight was there physically but not mentally. _________________ RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023.
Dwight was gone from the Lakers before he ever left Orlando. I tried telling you guys.
Don't buy it. He wouldn't have sat down with the Lakers to hear their pitch then. It served no purpose.
PR, and Dwight was in need of some positive PR at the time.
I doubt that. Is that documented or just your theory?
Doesn't make sense to me. Plus, he got almost no positive PR out of it. If anything, it was negative PR because it substantiates his reputation for being indecisive.
I thought he was leaving $9.3M in guaranteed dollars on the table.
I'm not talking about non-guaranteed dollars because you can't leave those on or off the table. He could win the lottery too but I'm not counting that either.
I won't bother looking up all the #'s again because DH's simply isn't worth it...but a shotgun estimate answer is something like this (#'s not exact, but illustrate the point).
DH could sign for 88/4 years in Hou or 118/5 years in LAL
22 mil per year in Hou and 23.6 in LAL - or 1.6m difference per year (rules of the CBA give him raises each year, so it's not exactly like that, but close enough for an example)
Cali tax rate of 13% of 23.6m is 3.07m
meaning his takehome in LAL after state taxes was only 20.5m, while his takehome in Hou with no state taxes was $22m. This doesn't account for Fed Taxes or anything else, but that's not important to this discussion.
Remember, he's got an opt out coming up in 2016, which just so happens to be when the Cap is expected to skyrocket due to the new tv contract. He'll resign with someone for a lot more then, since the Max K level is expected to go way up.
In reality, DH probably takes home more in HOU then he does in LAL (not counting endorsements) - but if he did leave any money on the table, it was minimal. _________________ LBJ + AD = More rings
Never argue with a fool - listeners can't tell you apart
Wilt's unstoppable fadeaway: www.youtube.com/watch?v=8O9MgNfcGJA
NPZ's Magic Johnson mix: www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8Qbo0WqvOI
Dwight was gone from the Lakers before he ever left Orlando. I tried telling you guys.
Don't buy it. He wouldn't have sat down with the Lakers to hear their pitch then. It served no purpose.
PR, and Dwight was in need of some positive PR at the time. And according to those who were there, Dwight was there physically but not mentally.
When the Lakers went with Pringles, he left.
Again, all this is a result of the Lakers putting personal feelings before business.
You can see it with Jennie and her constant need to get in-front of a camera when someone says anything negative about the Lakers. _________________ 2008-2010 Finals. 28.9 PTS 6.1 REB 5.4 AST 2.1 STLs
I thought he was leaving $9.3M in guaranteed dollars on the table.
I'm not talking about non-guaranteed dollars because you can't leave those on or off the table. He could win the lottery too but I'm not counting that either.
I won't bother looking up all the #'s again because DH's simply isn't worth it...but a shotgun estimate answer is something like this (#'s not exact, but illustrate the point).
DH could sign for 88/4 years in Hou or 118/5 years in LAL
22 mil per year in Hou and 23.6 in LAL - or 1.6m difference per year (rules of the CBA give him raises each year, so it's not exactly like that, but close enough for an example)
Cali tax rate of 13% of 23.6m is 3.07m
meaning his takehome in LAL after state taxes was only 20.5m, while his takehome in Hou with no state taxes was $22m. This doesn't account for Fed Taxes or anything else, but that's not important to this discussion.
Remember, he's got an opt out coming up in 2016, which just so happens to be when the Cap is expected to skyrocket due to the new tv contract. He'll resign with someone for a lot more then, since the Max K level is expected to go way up.
In reality, DH probably takes home more in HOU then he does in LAL (not counting endorsements) - but if he did leave any money on the table, it was minimal.
I looked it up. It WAS $9.3M in guaranteed money. Which is close to your paper napkin calculation (thanks for that by the way) of a net $1.5M over 5 years difference ($7.5M by your numbers).
That's a lot of money.
Quote:
By going to Houston, Howard will leave $9.3 million on the table in net guaranteed dollars, because he could have received a five-year deal and more money from the Lakers, rather than the four-year maximum deal he will get by signing with another team. This assumes that Howard will be a resident of Texas instead of California, since Texas has no state income taxes, while California has the highest state income taxes in the country.
I thought he was leaving $9.3M in guaranteed dollars on the table.
I'm not talking about non-guaranteed dollars because you can't leave those on or off the table. He could win the lottery too but I'm not counting that either.
I won't bother looking up all the #'s again because DH's simply isn't worth it...but a shotgun estimate answer is something like this (#'s not exact, but illustrate the point).
DH could sign for 88/4 years in Hou or 118/5 years in LAL
22 mil per year in Hou and 23.6 in LAL - or 1.6m difference per year (rules of the CBA give him raises each year, so it's not exactly like that, but close enough for an example)
Cali tax rate of 13% of 23.6m is 3.07m
meaning his takehome in LAL after state taxes was only 20.5m, while his takehome in Hou with no state taxes was $22m. This doesn't account for Fed Taxes or anything else, but that's not important to this discussion.
Remember, he's got an opt out coming up in 2016, which just so happens to be when the Cap is expected to skyrocket due to the new tv contract. He'll resign with someone for a lot more then, since the Max K level is expected to go way up.
In reality, DH probably takes home more in HOU then he does in LAL (not counting endorsements) - but if he did leave any money on the table, it was minimal.
I looked it up. It WAS $9.3M in guaranteed money. Which is close to your paper napkin calculation (thanks for that by the way) of a net $1.5M over 5 years difference ($7.5M by your numbers).
That's a lot of money.
Quote:
By going to Houston, Howard will leave $9.3 million on the table in net guaranteed dollars, because he could have received a five-year deal and more money from the Lakers, rather than the four-year maximum deal he will get by signing with another team. This assumes that Howard will be a resident of Texas instead of California, since Texas has no state income taxes, while California has the highest state income taxes in the country.
This is because pro athletes pay taxes based on where the games are played, not based on the location of their team. California players don't pay California taxes on all of their earnings, while Texas and Florida players pay taxes based on games in states that have state and local income taxes. It's not as simple as some people assume. California players do pay more in taxes than Texas players.
I thought he was leaving $9.3M in guaranteed dollars on the table.
I'm not talking about non-guaranteed dollars because you can't leave those on or off the table. He could win the lottery too but I'm not counting that either.
I won't bother looking up all the #'s again because DH's simply isn't worth it...but a shotgun estimate answer is something like this (#'s not exact, but illustrate the point).
DH could sign for 88/4 years in Hou or 118/5 years in LAL
22 mil per year in Hou and 23.6 in LAL - or 1.6m difference per year (rules of the CBA give him raises each year, so it's not exactly like that, but close enough for an example)
Cali tax rate of 13% of 23.6m is 3.07m
meaning his takehome in LAL after state taxes was only 20.5m, while his takehome in Hou with no state taxes was $22m. This doesn't account for Fed Taxes or anything else, but that's not important to this discussion.
Remember, he's got an opt out coming up in 2016, which just so happens to be when the Cap is expected to skyrocket due to the new tv contract. He'll resign with someone for a lot more then, since the Max K level is expected to go way up.
In reality, DH probably takes home more in HOU then he does in LAL (not counting endorsements) - but if he did leave any money on the table, it was minimal.
I looked it up. It WAS $9.3M in guaranteed money.
Quote:
By going to Houston, Howard will leave $9.3 million on the table in net guaranteed dollars, because he could have received a five-year deal and more money from the Lakers, rather than the four-year maximum deal he will get by signing with another team. This assumes that Howard will be a resident of Texas instead of California, since Texas has no state income taxes, while California has the highest state income taxes in the country.
I read the article, and it looks like you misread it and that the part you are quoting is ONLY IF you add in the 5th year.
a paragraph later in that article states exactly what I was illustrating
"Comparing just the first four years of what the Lakers could pay Howard with what the Rockets likely will pay him, Howard will net $2.6 million more after taxes in Houston if he becomes a Texas resident." _________________ LBJ + AD = More rings
Never argue with a fool - listeners can't tell you apart
Wilt's unstoppable fadeaway: www.youtube.com/watch?v=8O9MgNfcGJA
NPZ's Magic Johnson mix: www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8Qbo0WqvOI
Again. If he knew he was leaving, he wouldn't have gone to the meeting in the first place. Just because Billy Bob didn't do the same thing to his bae doesn't matter.
I'm in line with what JMK said. He was already leaning towards leaving (which is what I thought also even before that season ended), but maybe something will come up that might change his mind. Can't know unless you try kind of thing.
But I get it. It makes it easier to think, bahhhh we had no chance anyway. But we did. A small one. And we lost. And I'm not that upset about it either. But I don't need to trick myself in to thinking he was gone before he even left Orlando either. (Which was the original point I wasn't in agreement with).
Keep in mind that the situation was fluid. Dwight may have been open to staying at the beginning of the year onlt to realize that his differences with MDA was a deterent as was the difficult season of injuries. When they played well down the stretch to make it into the playoffs he very well may have seen the potential of the team and system, perhaps even the possibility of going deep into the Playoffs, only to have that vision dashed by Kobe's Achilles. After that injury it was very unlikely that Dwight would return, though his advisors had already agreed that they would meet formally after the season. It's easy to surmise that he would or would not have re-signed, and at various points of the season, either could have been accurate. I think it is also fair to say that there was an ebb and flow to the Lakers' opinion of Howard. By the time the pitch was made it seemed clear that the Lakers would not cater to Dwight's wishes of being in the post and having input to the players and coaching decisions, and Howard was unwilling to commit to their vision of having him play in the P+R and dedicate himself like never before.
Neither side wanted the other unless their own terms were met. In absence of that it seems reasonable for Dwight to take his talents to H-town and the Lakers focus on the long road of rebuilding.
Last edited by JerryMagicKobe on Wed Oct 29, 2014 2:55 pm; edited 1 time in total
I thought he was leaving $9.3M in guaranteed dollars on the table.
I'm not talking about non-guaranteed dollars because you can't leave those on or off the table. He could win the lottery too but I'm not counting that either.
I won't bother looking up all the #'s again because DH's simply isn't worth it...but a shotgun estimate answer is something like this (#'s not exact, but illustrate the point).
DH could sign for 88/4 years in Hou or 118/5 years in LAL
22 mil per year in Hou and 23.6 in LAL - or 1.6m difference per year (rules of the CBA give him raises each year, so it's not exactly like that, but close enough for an example)
Cali tax rate of 13% of 23.6m is 3.07m
meaning his takehome in LAL after state taxes was only 20.5m, while his takehome in Hou with no state taxes was $22m. This doesn't account for Fed Taxes or anything else, but that's not important to this discussion.
Remember, he's got an opt out coming up in 2016, which just so happens to be when the Cap is expected to skyrocket due to the new tv contract. He'll resign with someone for a lot more then, since the Max K level is expected to go way up.
In reality, DH probably takes home more in HOU then he does in LAL (not counting endorsements) - but if he did leave any money on the table, it was minimal.
I looked it up. It WAS $9.3M in guaranteed money. Which is close to your paper napkin calculation (thanks for that by the way) of a net $1.5M over 5 years difference ($7.5M by your numbers).
That's a lot of money.
Quote:
By going to Houston, Howard will leave $9.3 million on the table in net guaranteed dollars, because he could have received a five-year deal and more money from the Lakers, rather than the four-year maximum deal he will get by signing with another team. This assumes that Howard will be a resident of Texas instead of California, since Texas has no state income taxes, while California has the highest state income taxes in the country.
This is because pro athletes pay taxes based on where the games are played, not based on the location of their team. California players don't pay California taxes on all of their earnings, while Texas and Florida players pay taxes based on games in states that have state and local income taxes. It's not as simple as some people assume. California players do pay more in taxes than Texas players.
That makes sense. So that's probably the difference there in the $7.5M and $9.3M then?
This is because pro athletes pay taxes based on where the games are played, not based on the location of their team. California players don't pay California taxes on all of their earnings, while Texas and Florida players pay taxes based on games in states that have state and local income taxes. It's not as simple as some people assume. California players do pay more in taxes than Texas players.
That makes sense. So that's probably the difference there in the $7.5M and $9.3M then?
Actually, AH got that a little wrong too
SOME states (not all) will charge income taxes for out of state players for all games played in their state (ie: Cali, NJ, NY, etc)
DH lives in HOU which has no state income taxes, but when he plays in LA, GSW, etc he gets charged by CALI for 13% of his 1 game salary rate.
but, when he plays in FL (or any state that doesn't tax out of state athletes or has no state income tax) he pays nothing in state taxes.
Kobe on the other hand pays 13% for every single one of his games, regardless of where he plays since he's a Cali resident. If Kobe played a game in TX where there is no state income tax, Cali still charges him 13%. If he plays in Portland, where the state charges 9.5% max tax then the way that works is Kobe pays 9.5% to OR, and Cali gives him a deduction for that and only charges him 3.5% - so it still adds up to 13%
(BTW: I have absolutely no idea if OR charges out of state athletes for games played in the state of Oregon...I was just making an example) _________________ LBJ + AD = More rings
Never argue with a fool - listeners can't tell you apart
Wilt's unstoppable fadeaway: www.youtube.com/watch?v=8O9MgNfcGJA
NPZ's Magic Johnson mix: www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8Qbo0WqvOI
Why argue over this it's all said and done and he's not a Laker anymore. People need to get over it.
because the same group of people here saying Dwight can't carry Kobe's jock are also wishing he's still here. they just can't let it go. imagine if we still have Dwight, Kobe or not, mostly likely we gonna sign either Melo or Bosh this summer.
You just killed a forest of bananas with that completely wrong statement. _________________ “It took many years of vomiting up all the filth I’d been taught about myself, and half-believed, before I was able to walk on the earth as though I had a right to be here.”
― James Baldwin, Collected Essays
Dwight was gone from the Lakers before he ever left Orlando. I tried telling you guys.
If Dwight didn't have a choice of his destination, he would've gone to Houston in the first place. Houston had the best package for Orlando at the time, including a guaranteed lottery pick. He wanted to be a Laker but Orlando wanted nothing to do with Bynum. It was purely genius how Mitch pulled off that trade.
IIRC LA Times reported D12 was willing to sign an extension after the trade. Kobe was quoted that Lakers would be his team after he retired in a couple of years. Then everything changed after Kobe's welcoming phone call to Dwight.
Dwight's agent came out said his client will not sign an extension and will wait for the summer.
Kobe changed his story.
The writing was on the wall how deeply they hated each other when, after Dwight was ejected the last game vs Spurs, Kobe walked out b/c he didn't want to be in the same locker room as Dwight.....
I don't have espn insider but i saw there's a new article called "Worse gunner: Kobe or Russ" (westbrook, i'm assuming). lol the shots keep coming.
That's not really a shot. Kobe IS a gunner. He's one of the best gunners too.
This may be debatable but i'd say gunner is a deragatory term when related to basketball. Pretty sure it's not a complementary piece (could be wrong).
Derogatory? It just means you're a high volume shooter. You know, like a gunner. I mean, I'm not sure how anyone could argue that Kobe is a low volume shooter. LMAO.
Who said that? Gunner means chucker which is definitely derogatory. Meaning takes a lot of shots including bad ones instead of finding open teammates. LMAO
And? Kobe does that. So how is that a "shot" at Kobe?
Kobe IS a chucker. He's just a darn good one.
When someone calls someone something derogatory, that is called a taking a "shot" at them. It's like calling a musician a "hack". Gunner is an insult in the basketball world. _________________ Championships since NBA/ABA merger in '76: Lakers 10 - Celtics 5 - Clippers 0 --- Phil Jackson 10 - Doc Rivers 1
Joined: 09 Jul 2010 Posts: 7844 Location: Orange County
Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2014 7:05 pm Post subject:
First dantoni wants to shoot 40 3s a game. Now Bscott wants less than 10? Dumbass coaches. Can we play within the flow of the game instead of dictating how we play before the game even starts?
Oops wrong thread. _________________ Don't let perfect be the enemy of good
Abbott ate crow for breakfast this morning. No headline that reads "Lakers lose because Kobe scored 31."
BSPN = No credibility as usual. And after Melo and PG both laughed at the report...writing is on the wall little bald Henry Absolt, you officially have zero cred when it comes to what you say about Kobe. And now the fans of Henry Abbett will revolt, but you can't deny the truth.
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