Lakers relevant Salary Cap Q&A (Please refer to page 9 for 2023 Cap Plan Forecasts)
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next

 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
vakobe
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 29 Mar 2003
Posts: 1389

PostPosted: Sat Nov 19, 2022 1:20 pm    Post subject:

I didn't want to start a thread just to ask a question, so this seems to be the place to ask it. If Pelicans end up with a better record than the Lakers but both end up as lottery teams, would the Pelicans have to declare that they're taking the Lakers' better odds BEFORE the actual lottery takes place, or would they be allowed to wait and see who gets the higher pick?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 142549
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Sat Nov 19, 2022 1:25 pm    Post subject:

They are allowed to wait and see where them and the Lakers pick.
_________________
If you’ve got a dream, chase it, cause a dream won’t chase you back.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vasashi17+
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 13 Dec 2019
Posts: 4322

PostPosted: Tue Nov 22, 2022 9:25 am    Post subject:

Which cap plan (2022/23 season trade deadline VS 2023/24 offseason) would you go with

Russ / PatB / SkyWalker / Nunn (expiring deals) aggregate to potentially trade for an incoming ~90m in incoming salary aka “cap space” occupied by those incoming deals

VS

Renouncing all our FA bird rights (those dudes mentioned above + TB & TBJr + Gabriel + Schro + JTA) for 26.2m - 36.8m in potential cap space next summer

Projected 2023/24 Offseason Laker Cap Sheet on a 134m Salary Cap
1. Bron 46.9m (ie 35% max based off 134m cap)
2. AD 40.6m
3. Damien (player option) 2.6m
4. MaxC 1.7m
5. 2023 1st pick swap w/NO ~3m (based on pick falling between #20-30)
6. Reaves RFA QO 2.1m (could be 6.3m if he meets “starter criteria”)
*7-12. 6 incomplete roster (IR) charges 6.6m, if we intend to use cap space
= 103.5m - 107.2m in team salary
= 26.2m - 30.5m in cap space (if we renounce all our UFAs)
= 32m in cap space (if Damien opts out & is renounced as an UFA while Reaves does not meet “starter criteria”)
= **35.5m in cap space (if we purge everyone except for Bron & AD)

*Note: we have two 2nd round picks in 2023, but they do not place cap holds like 1st round picks do; if both those players make it to the roster, they likely will both start at 1.1m rookie min deals, which is the same amount as an IR charge. So they are still accounted for in the projections above.

**Note: if the cap trend continues (and it most likely will), the cap will finally come to rest at 136m and if that occurs, Bron’s max extension number will be 47.6m. So in that regard, if we purge everybody except for Bron and AD (ie + 10 IR charges), the most cap space we can offer to a single FA next summer is 36.8m, which is about 11m short of a 35% max player (ie. 47.6m), 4m short of a 30% max player (40.8m) and about 3m more than what a 25% max player could get (ie 34m).

Also something to note: if we go into next summer angling to use room under the salary cap to sign (or trade ie cap space amount + 100k) players to, then we would have to renounce all our FAs to maximize that cap space. However, we can renounce their bird right cap holds and use that space to re-up them to bigger deals than what their bird rights wound have given them. For example, SkyWalker’s 7.8m cap hold means he can earn no more than that if we use his bird rights to have him stay here. However, we can still use whatever cap space we create to resign him to a deal paying him more than what his bird rights would have given him. But whatever cap space we use to ink him to, would lead us to having less of that cap to use towards another FA.

So for example, if we had 30m in cap space, then Walker’s bird caphold will occupy some of that space leaving ~22m to use. We can sign a FA to that amount and keep Walker with his non bird rights to a deal maxed at just under 8m. Or if we want to pay him more, then we renounce his rights and use any portion of the 30m in cap space to re-up him with.

Our UFA cap holds that if not renounced makes us a capped out team:
Russ (full bird) 46.9m
PatB (full bird) 19.5m
Walker IV (non bird) 7.8m
Nunn (early bird) 6.8m
Ryan 2.2m QO (RFA)
TB, TB Jr, JTA, Schro (non bird) 2m each
Gabriel (early bird) 1.9m
_________________
Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
mad55557777
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 29 Jun 2005
Posts: 16896

PostPosted: Tue Nov 22, 2022 10:15 pm    Post subject:

vakobe wrote:
I didn't want to start a thread just to ask a question, so this seems to be the place to ask it. If Pelicans end up with a better record than the Lakers but both end up as lottery teams, would the Pelicans have to declare that they're taking the Lakers' better odds BEFORE the actual lottery takes place, or would they be allowed to wait and see who gets the higher pick?

Of course after.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vasashi17+
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 13 Dec 2019
Posts: 4322

PostPosted: Thu Dec 01, 2022 8:03 am    Post subject:

2022 cap sheet (as of 12/1/22)
1) Russ (Player Option exercised) 47.1m
2) Bron 44.5m
3) AD 38m
4) PatBev 13m
5) Walker IV (full tpMLE) 6.5m
6) Nunn (PO exercised) 5.3m
7) Gabriel (nonguaranteed till 1/10/23) 1.9m
8) Reaves (nonguaranteed till 1/10/23) 1.6m
9) Damian (2yr vet min w/2nd yr PO) 2.3m
10) Brown Jr. (vet min) 1.8m
11) JTA (vet min) 1.8m
12) TBryant (vet min) 1.8m
13) MaxC 1m (rookie min)
14) Schro (vet min) 1.8m
= team salary of 169m (w/Ryan’s waived 410k dead cap hit); 14 roster spots taken up; 1 roster spot open
= tax bill of 41m (18.7m over the tax threshold of 150.3m)
= total team salary + luxury tax of 210m
_________________
Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vasashi17+
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 13 Dec 2019
Posts: 4322

PostPosted: Tue Dec 06, 2022 2:39 pm    Post subject:

Per Stein, possible extension talks towards the Dec 15th CBA opt out voting deadline…

Quote:
Far more crucially: Dec. 15, 2022, is also the deadline in the NBA’s current collective bargaining agreement for both sides — either the league or the players — to give notice that it is opting out of the existing labor deal. The NBA’s current labor pact runs through the 2023-24 season, but an opt-out from either side in the next nine days would sound immediate alarm bells because A) it essentially breaks the contract effective at the end of this season and B) it’s a measure that instantly makes the threat of a lockout tangible.

With the sides nowhere close to a new deal, according to sources briefed on the talks, it would appear that an extension to that deadline will have to be announced very soon for the NBA and the National Basketball Players Association to extend the runway toward hashing out a new labor pact during the 2022-23 season with any semblance of cooperative spirit.

Sources say that the league’s increasingly determined pursuit of an Upper Spending Limit as we revealed in October — its version of a broad Hard Cap without calling it a Hard Cap — remains the No. 1 stumbling block in recent negotiations. There are certainly other issues, such as the ongoing wrangle about the league’s desire to lower the draft-eligible age limit back to 18 and (among numerous related concerns) how that would impact subsequent rookie scale contract lengths, but the USL is clearly Obstacle No. 1. – via Marc Stein @ marcstein.substack.com


_________________
Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vasashi17+
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 13 Dec 2019
Posts: 4322

PostPosted: Fri Dec 09, 2022 1:07 pm    Post subject:

Dec 15th CBA Opt-Out deadline extended

Quote:
Woj: The NBA and National Basketball Players Association have agreed in principle to extend the Dec. 15 deadline that each side has to give notice of plans to opt out of the collective bargaining agreement at the end of the 2022-23 season, sources told ESPN on Friday.

Talks on a new CBA are ongoing, and a formal ratification of an extension -- likely into February -- is expected to come at a virtual board of governors meeting Wednesday, sources said.

The current seven-year CBA expires after the 2023-24 season, but the possibility of either side opting out of the agreement leaves the NBA vulnerable to a work stoppage on July 1, 2023. Pushing back the date to inform the other side of an opt-out allows the league and union to continue to pursue a new, long-term labor agreement.

In talks, the NBA is pursuing the implementation of an upper spending limit, a systemic change that has been met with significant union resistance, sources said.

In the wake of large-market contenders like the Golden State Warriors, Brooklyn Nets and LA Clippers running up massive payrolls and luxury tax penalties, the NBA is proposing a system that would replace the luxury tax with a hard limit that teams could not exceed to pay salaries, sources said.

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/35219446/nba-players-union-agree-extend-opt-deadline-cba-sources-say

_________________
Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vasashi17+
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 13 Dec 2019
Posts: 4322

PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2022 11:24 am    Post subject:

Quote:
The NBA and its players' union have agreed to extend the deadline to give notice of plans to opt out of the collective bargaining agreement to Feb. 8, the sides announced in a joint statement Wednesday.

Prior to Wednesday's agreement, the opt-out deadline had been Thursday. Now it falls one day before this season's trade deadline.

The league and union said in their statement that they are making "ongoing efforts to reach a new agreement." The seven-year CBA would expire after the 2023-24 season, but if either side exercises the opt-out, the agreement would end June 30, putting the NBA at risk of a possible work stoppage.

Sources told ESPN's Adrian Wojnarowski last week that the NBA is pursuing the implementation of an upper spending limit that would replace the luxury tax with a hard limit that teams could not exceed to pay salaries. The league's effort is in response to large-market contenders like the Golden State Warriors, Brooklyn Nets and LA Clippers running up massive payrolls and luxury tax penalties, according to Wojnarowski.


Pushing the deadline vote to a day before the trade deadline could make the transition wire all the more interesting.

If the opt out occurs and 2023 offseason marks the first event of the new CBA, we could see a significant cap spike ( > 136m). A lot of teams angling for max cap space would be interested in expiring deals at the trade deadline and we happen to be sitting on nearly 80m in expiring deals.
_________________
Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Balto
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 25 Jun 2019
Posts: 499

PostPosted: Thu Dec 22, 2022 9:19 am    Post subject:

So Vasash do you believe the best way to get a playoff roster on the books within our cap possibilities for next season is to make trades this season?

Correct me if I'm wrong but it just seems that next off season could be even worse if, like some want to do, "Do nothing keep the picks".

Just seems to me that our only option to build a playoff team for next season MUST take place THIS season with trades because we will only have about $30-$35 million in cap space to try and add a team to AD and Bron. OR we could trade our expiring's of about $80M to build a team with AD and Bron. Yes it will cost us 2 1st round picks but I look at it like this....

$35M in cap space + still having both 1st round picks(That can't really be used because of no outgoing salary available)

VS

$55M extra($35M-$90M) to maximize the roster for AD and Bron.

Am I looking at this all wrong?


Hope that question/comment makes sense Vasash.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vasashi17+
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 13 Dec 2019
Posts: 4322

PostPosted: Thu Dec 22, 2022 12:59 pm    Post subject:

^Balto: it makes sense bro and that is what I was hoping the take away would be. The question is does it make cents (or takes cents away) for Jeanie.

I personally would like load our books up with salary so that we have assets we could trade instead of having to worry about flight risks in free agency, but would Jeanie be down to pay the tax on a roster of more than just “star names”? As of right now, she has shown she is not down for that cause.

The choice is simple: wait to till the offseason to use cap space as an asset or use our expiring contracts now as a means of occupying the cap space they would have left vacant come the offseason.

Pros for waiting till the summer:
-more targets (ie more sellers)
-can add the 2023 1st player rights we get post swap with NO to trade with either the 27/29 or 28/30 draft combo
-can use cap space to keep Walker instead of being limited to just his nonbird rights to max him out at just 7.8m

Cons for waiting till the summer:
-don’t have enough cap space to offer a max deal to most FA targets or not enough to have max deals traded into
-would have to be at the mercy of our FAs and other teams to conduct a S&t to bring in max level deals (ie we can’t trade for 40m Trae even if we wanted to, unless ATL agrees to getting hardcapped via a Russ S&t starting @32m, to which Russ has to agree to facilitate due us as well)

Pros for trading now:
-can trade for salary (using the non min expirings of Russ, Pat, Walker & Nunn) that occupies up to 90m in incoming salary (roughly 3xs the amount we would have compared to free agency this coming summer)
-can reaffirm contention this year instead of wasting yet another year of Bron/AD
-other than opening up the possibility of trading the 2023 1st (post draft) and/or the 2030 1st this coming summer, the same amount of future draft capital that can be traded now is the same amount that can be traded in the summer time: 2 future picks

Cons for trading now:
-using resources to trade for available targets, when better ones may appear later when no available resources remain
-even with a trade, this team ain’t going anywhere this season aka sunk cost fallacy

Like others have before, @Balto you brought up a scenario where we trade with SA and then also acquire a 20m+ TPE to either use now or in the summer time (as a cap strapped team). I believe that scenario is a good compromise for the fan base and ownership.

Why is it important to shed 20m+ (and gain that TPE), cause the Lakers are roughly 20m over the tax line. If we have SA (or Indy as the only cap room having teams) take on our additional salary, then Jeanie is no longer a tax payer this season and can essentially either soft reset the repeater tax status (by paying taxes next year) or go with a full reset on the repeater tax by ducking next year’s taxes as well.
_________________
Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
hydrohead
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 14 Jul 2003
Posts: 3430
Location: Space City

PostPosted: Wed Dec 28, 2022 10:06 am    Post subject:

What y’all think about adding players who have a lower than expected cap hold than expected salary? For instance, the addition of Kuz wouuld allow them to keep bird rights on 150% of his current salary which is 13 mil. Gives you a bit more flexibility to add salary if under the cap. Then you resign to whatever market value is after other signing is in place.
_________________
S.O.S
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vasashi17+
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 13 Dec 2019
Posts: 4322

PostPosted: Wed Dec 28, 2022 4:11 pm    Post subject:

^HH: Imho there are more advantages in being a capped out team, rather than a team with cap space. I rather go into next summer trading for the guys we intend to use our cap space on. That way we’re not limited to just having them renounced to etch out a less than max amount @ 30mish and possibly lose them for nothing.

Kuz’s caphold if he opts out of his player option would be the same as Pat’s ie 19.5m. So trading for him and having his rights sit on our books would turn our near 30mish in cap space into just around 10m (which is less than the ntpMLE). We would then only have the room MLE of about ~6m to turn to afterwards. And that’s if Reaves ain’t meet “starter criteria”, cause if he does, we lose an additional 4m in cap space.

So if it had to come to it and Kuz is indeed a FA target, swap Pat’s deal for his this year and bring in a 20mish player via the same trade or a follow up trade. Then in the summer, we get those guys to reup and if Walker is still willing to come back we can keep him @ 7.8m via his non-bird rights or give him the full 11.6m ntpMLE which would trigger the hard cap, but give Jeanie the built in excuse of having to limit their spending to around 173m in team salary (ie max of about 8m in going beyond the ~165m tax theshold before hitting the apron). So even if we are considered a repeat tax offender, she only has to pay the higher tax rate on being 8m above the tax line at the very most aka ~20m in taxes via the more punitive repeater tax bracket. FYI: we are paying about 40m in taxes this year for being roughly 18.5m above the tax line, where not being a hard capped team doesn’t protect Jeanie from putting a ceiling in her spending.
_________________
Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vasashi17+
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 13 Dec 2019
Posts: 4322

PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2023 10:53 am    Post subject:

With roughly a month remaining before the Feb 9th trade deadline, let’s consider the aspects of trading Pat (along with our other 70m+ in expiring contracts) this season before the trade deadline vs standing pat past the trade deadline.

A couple of key dates to consider: non/partially guaranteed deals become fully guaranteed and full cap hits on the books if they are not waived by 2PM PT on Jan 7th. They have 48hrs to either pass through the waiver wire or get reclaimed by another team, cause Jan 10th aka the “cut-down” date is when all non/partial guaranteed deals go fully guaranteed. It’s safe to assume that our 2 nonguaranteed deals (Austin & Wenyen) will not be waived and remain past that Jan 7th date.

Jan 15th is when BYC players are eligible in getting traded. Klutch klient Zach just might be saved by the bell if he no longer wants to be a bull.

So let’s assume that the numbers for this coming year will reflect a max salary cap of 136m (currently it is at 134m). So that would place the numbers as such:

Quote:
Salary Cap: 136m
Tax threshold: 165m
Hardcap Apron: 173m
35% max: 47.6m
30% max: 40.8m
25% max: 34m
non-taxpayer MLE: 11.6m
taxpayer MLE: 7.2m
room MLE: 5.9m
BAE: 4.5m
vet min (2yr+ seasoned): 2.1m
incomplete roster charge / rookie min: 1.1m


If the Lakers don’t shed nearly 18.5m in salary this season, they will be a tax payer this season and that puts them in danger of being a repeat tax offender next summer. Here are the rates of the more punitive repeater tax bracket compared to a nonrepeat tax offender:

Quote:
Non-repeater Tax / Repeater Tax rates are as follows (total tax amounts for that tier are within parentheses) :

$0 - 4.99m ———> 1.5 (7.5m) / 2.5 (12.5m)
$5m - 9.99m ——> 1.75 (8.75m) / 2.75 (13.75m)
$10m - 14.99m —> 2.5 (12.5m) / 3.5 (17.5m)
$15m - 19.99m —> 3.25 (16.25m) / 4.25 (21.25m)
$20m - 24.99m —> 3.75 (18.75m) / 4.75 (23.75m)
$25m - 29.99m —> 4.25 (21.25m) / 5.25 (26.25m)
$30m - 34.99m —> 4.75 (23.75m) / 5.75 (28.75m)
$35m - 39.99m —> 5.25 (26.25m) / 6.25 (31.25m)
$40m - 44.99m —> 5.75 (28.75m) / 6.75 (33.75m)
$45m - 49.99m —> 6.25 (31.25m) / 7.25 (36.25m)


So hypothetically let’s say Indy trades us Myles for Russ straight up and uses their available cap space to absorb the difference in salary, that would mean the Lakers shed an additional 29m in salary, which would not only give us a TPE for that amount, but it would also take us completely out of the tax for this season, also making us a non repeat tax offender for next season even if we breach the tax line.

Aspects in trading now (2022 trade deadline) vs later (2023 offseason):
Cap potential: We have roughly 80m+ in expiring contracts which can potentially land us 100m in incoming salary. If we allow our expiring deals to come off the books in the offseason to gain cap space, we would only have roughly 30m to bring onto the roster in new incoming salary. Even using that 30m in cap space in a cap absorbing trade means we cannot go more than 100k past the salary cap amount in team salary after the trade is conducted. So essentially if we have 30m in cap space, we can only bring in 30.1m in salary via a trade. We technically would be able to bring in more, but only if our FAs agree to participate in a S&t.

Draft potential: Due to the Stepien rule, we can only trade our ‘27 & ‘29 1st rounders this season. However if we wait till the 2023 offseason (in particular past June 30th), then we have the ability to then trade our 2030 1st, along with our 2028 1st and our 2023 1st post NO swap after the draft. However in order for that 2023 1st’s salary to be aggregated in a trade, we would have to wait 1 month to include that player’s salary in aggregation. However, we can trade that player’s right’s immediately after the draft where his outgoing amount reflects as $0. Also consider that any trade where we can loop in NO, can have it where we ease some of the conditions on our remaining draft picks to them, so that the Stepien rule won’t restrict us from including particular picks (ie like our 2026 1st).

If we do end up standing pat, here are our projected books for the 2023 offseason:

Quote:
Projected 2023/24 Offseason Laker Cap Sheet on a 136m Salary Cap
1. Bron 47.6m
2. AD 40.6m
3. Damien (player option) 2.6m
4. MaxC 1.7m
5. 2023 1st pick swap w/NO ~3m (based on pick falling between #20-30)
6. Reaves RFA QO (“starter criteria”* met) 6.3m
7-12. 4 incomplete roster (IR) charges + 2 2023 2nd rounders 6.6m
= 108.4m in team salary
= 27.6m in cap space (if we renounce all our UFAs)
= 29.1m in cap space (if Damien opts out and is renounced as an UFA)
= 36.8m in cap space (if we purge everyone except for Bron & AD)
*to meet “starter criteria” Austin would have to start in at least 41 regular season games or play at least 2000 minutes in total during the regular season; if he does not meet “starter criteria”, his caphold shrinks to 2.1m and that gives back roughly 4.2m in cap space that can be used towards the numbers above


One other aspect to consider is that if we operate as a capped out team (ie do not renounce our UFAs and/or they do not remove their bird right capholds on our books by signing with another team as a FA), then we can turn to the use of the ntMLE and the BAE instead of just having the rMLE once we exhaust our cap space. If we do use the hard cap triggering ntMLE and/or BAE, ownership essentially caps their team spending and tax spending at 173m aka the apron. So if Jeanie wants to limit her tax bill, she can green light Rob using the ntMLE and the BAE and if we are a repeat tax offender, then our tax bill won’t be larger than 21m. And if we somehow shed salary this year and are a non repeat tax offender, our tax bill would be no larger than 13m by hard capping team salary at 173m and being about 8m above the 165m tax line. If Jeanie wants to use that strategy to minimize the tax hit, the use of the ntMLE, the BAE and/or trading for a S&t’d player is the way.
_________________
Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vasashi17+
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 13 Dec 2019
Posts: 4322

PostPosted: Mon Jan 23, 2023 10:05 am    Post subject:

How Rui trade impacts our projected cap space for 2023 offseason

Quote:
Projected 2023/24 Offseason Laker Cap Sheet on a 136m Salary Cap
1. Bron 47.6m
2. AD 40.6m
3. Rui 18.8m (RFA caphold)
4. Damien (player option) 2.6m
5. MaxC 1.7m
6. 2023 1st pick swap w/NO ~3m (based on pick falling between #20-30)
7. Reaves RFA QO (“starter criteria”* met) 6.3m
8-12. 5 incomplete roster (IR) charges 5.5m
= 126.1m in team salary
= 9.9m in cap space (if we renounce all our UFAs)
= 11.4m in cap space (if Damien opts out and is renounced as an UFA)
= 36.8m in cap space (if we purge everyone except for Bron & AD)
*to meet “starter criteria” Austin would have to start in at least 41 regular season games or play at least 2000 minutes in total during the regular season; if he does not meet “starter criteria”, his caphold shrinks to 2.1m and that gives back roughly 4.2m in cap space that can be used towards the numbers above (ie 14.1m in cap space w/Damien opt in & 15.6m in cap space with Damien player opt out)


Assuming that our own 2023 2nd and/or Chicago’s 2023 2nd are part of the trade with DC, it’s possible that DC could also amend the 2024 & 2028 2nds they sent to us in the Russ trade

Quote:
2024 second round draft pick to Detroit or L.A. Lakers
Detroit will receive the more favorable of Memphis' 2024 2nd round pick and Washington's 2024 2nd round pick and the L.A. Lakers will receive the less favorable of the two (via Memphis to Oklahoma City to Washington; via Brooklyn to Detroit) [Memphis-Oklahoma City, 7/6/2019; Oklahoma City-Washington, 11/19/2020; Brooklyn-Indiana-L.A. Lakers-San Antonio-Washington, 8/6/2021; Brooklyn-Detroit, 9/4/2021]

2028 second round draft pick to Orlando or L.A. Lakers
Orlando will receive the more favorable of the L.A. Lakers' 2028 2nd round pick and Washington's 2028 2nd round pick and the L.A. Lakers will receive the less favorable of the two (via L.A. Lakers) [Brooklyn-Indiana-L.A. Lakers-San Antonio-Washington, 8/6/2021; L.A. Lakers-Orlando, 6/23/2022]

_________________
Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vasashi17+
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 13 Dec 2019
Posts: 4322

PostPosted: Mon Jan 23, 2023 10:23 am    Post subject:

2022 cap sheet (as of 1/23/23)
1) Russ (Player Option exercised) 47.1m
2) Bron 44.5m
3) AD 38m
4) PatBev 13m
5) Walker IV (full tpMLE) 6.5m
6) Rui 6.3m
7) Gabriel (nonguaranteed till 1/10/23) 1.9m
8) Reaves (nonguaranteed till 1/10/23) 1.6m
9) Damian (2yr vet min w/2nd yr PO) 2.3m
10) Brown Jr. (vet min) 1.8m
11) JTA (vet min) 1.8m
12) TBryant (vet min) 1.8m
13) MaxC 1m (rookie min)
14) Schro (vet min) 1.8m
= team salary of 170m (w/Ryan’s waived 410k dead cap hit); 14 roster spots taken up; 1 roster spot open
= tax bill of 44m (19.7m over the tax threshold of 150.3m)
= total team salary + luxury tax of 214m
_________________
Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vasashi17+
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 13 Dec 2019
Posts: 4322

PostPosted: Mon Jan 23, 2023 1:33 pm    Post subject:

Wait…let’s take a second to understand how many 2nds we can still trade with and/or offer in conveyance towards protections that we place on our tradable FRPs

A lot of confusion with the picks & potential to re-up by buying them in latter years:

We had 7 2nds to deal before the Rui trade…now it stands at 4 that we’re allowed to trade during this year and heading into the draft during the offseason.

2023: 1) we have our own (we dealt Chicago’s back to DC)
2024: 2) we have the lesser of Memphis’s or DC’s
2025: 3) we have our own
2026: we don’t have one (part of McGee trade to Cavs)
2027: 4) we have our own
2028: we will either send ours or DC’s to Orlando (part of trade in buying into 2022 2nd round for MaxC), with the lesser of those picks heading (or staying with DC
2029: we dealt our own to DC

Recall we dealt into the 2nd round of the 2019 draft to get THT, but we did so by giving up cash and our 2020 2nd. That summer also had us dealing away our 2022 2nd to dump Moe, Bonga and JJ onto DC. That led to us buying into the 2nd round in the 2022 draft for MaxC, this time surrendering cash as well as our 2028 2nd rounder.

Moving forward, we have 6.4m that we can trade in cash to either help grease a Russ, Pat or Walker trade/buyout with, or to hold onto to buy another 2nd in the 2023 draft.

When 3pm PT on June 30th hits, whatever unused trade cash we had, expires and a new cash purse to trade with gets restocked. Also, we will then have the ability to trade both our 2030 1st & 2nd rounders. We do not have the ability to trade those picks now due to the 7yr Stepien window.

As a result, also be aware that our 2029 1st round pick loses value due to the Stepien rule. This is why teams want that pick in particular to be unprotected since we won’t be able to add protections to it without the ability to have it convey later (ie into 2030 & beyond). By rule, we have to give the particulars on conveyance and since we can’t offer any FRP past 2029 in case that pick doesn’t convey, then we have to turn to 2nd rounders being conveyed. Problem with that is, we no longer have a 2028 and 2029 2nd rounder to offer as conveyance.

This also applies to any protections we could negotiate towards our 2027 1st. We can offer a conveyance of having it still protected for 2028 and if it doesn’t convey that year then it goes unprotected in 2029. However if we turn to the 2nd round for conveyance if our 2027 1st is protected and doesn’t convey, then we can only offer our 2027 2nd as part of that trade package and a 2028 pick swap. It can’t be an outright 2028 1st given up, because that takes our 2029 1st out of being dealt in trade talks. For example, before the Rui trade we could have hypothetically said 2027 is top 5 protected and if it does not convey, our trade partner gets our 2027, ‘28 & ‘29 2nd rounders along with a 2028 1st pick swap instead. But now, the most we can offer in conveyance on that protected 2027 1st is our 2027 2nd and a 2028 1st pick swap. Essentially since we can offer less in conveyance our 2027 1st, if protected, doesn’t hold as much value as it could have had.

So in a nutshell, the Lakers may be looking to at least trade our 2029 1st in the offseason and even our 2027 1st, especially if we are adamant in including protections on it and giving our trading partner better options/assets in conveyance to those protected FRPs.

Hope that clears stuff up.
_________________
Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
gng930
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 10091

PostPosted: Mon Jan 30, 2023 1:56 am    Post subject:

In 36 games, Reavers has started 12 and played just barely over 1,000 minutes. Best case scenario is he gets to play 30 more so it doesn’t seem likely he’ll meet starter criteria.
_________________
Luxury Tax/FA Spreadsheet (Save to your Google Drive to edit)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vasashi17+
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 13 Dec 2019
Posts: 4322

PostPosted: Wed Feb 01, 2023 10:34 am    Post subject:

^G, it sure looks that way…

With 30 games remaining and Reaves most likely still missing a couple of those, dude is going to have to avg 33-35 mins per to get at least 2000 total minutes on the year to unlock starter criteria. I’m starting to doubt that happens as well.

However by trading due Rui and his near 19m caphold, unless they renounce him, it almost signals that the cap plan is kaput…so it wouldn’t even matter if Reaves had a higher caphold this coming summer if we operate as an capped out team.
_________________
Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
gng930
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 10091

PostPosted: Thu Feb 02, 2023 10:27 am    Post subject:

I could still imagine them pre-arranging a Kuzma-ish deal with Rui and then retaining sizable cap space to offer someone 3/60+ or even 4/80+ especially with Klutch clients like GTJ lurking out there. That will get you a 3&D wing.
_________________
Luxury Tax/FA Spreadsheet (Save to your Google Drive to edit)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
governator
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 22988

PostPosted: Thu Feb 02, 2023 10:31 am    Post subject:

vasashi17+ wrote:
^G, it sure looks that way…

With 30 games remaining and Reaves most likely still missing a couple of those, dude is going to have to avg 33-35 mins per to get at least 2000 total minutes on the year to unlock starter criteria. I’m starting to doubt that happens as well.

However by trading due Rui and his near 19m caphold, unless they renounce him, it almost signals that the cap plan is kaput…so it wouldn’t even matter if Reaves had a higher caphold this coming summer if we operate as an capped out team.


would it matter to cap tax next year specifically if FO back load Rui and Reaves' deals?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
gng930
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 10091

PostPosted: Thu Feb 02, 2023 10:36 am    Post subject:

governator wrote:
vasashi17+ wrote:
^G, it sure looks that way…

With 30 games remaining and Reaves most likely still missing a couple of those, dude is going to have to avg 33-35 mins per to get at least 2000 total minutes on the year to unlock starter criteria. I’m starting to doubt that happens as well.

However by trading due Rui and his near 19m caphold, unless they renounce him, it almost signals that the cap plan is kaput…so it wouldn’t even matter if Reaves had a higher caphold this coming summer if we operate as an capped out team.


would it matter to cap tax next year specifically if FO back load Rui and Reaves' deals?


You can limit initial cap/tax impact by backloading deals but there are very rigid rules in place that limit any backloading. The exception is the Arenas provision in Reaves' case but you can't exercise that without another team submitting a massive overpay offer in the first place which probably defeats your purpose altogether.
_________________
Luxury Tax/FA Spreadsheet (Save to your Google Drive to edit)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vasashi17+
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 13 Dec 2019
Posts: 4322

PostPosted: Thu Feb 02, 2023 12:54 pm    Post subject:

^To piggyback in what G said, Reaves & Rui via their bird rights can have a max annual de/escalators of 8%. So backloading the deal can only reflect that type of increase. However we can dedicate up to 15% of a deal to “unlikely” incentives where it isn’t applied to the base salary unless the player comes good on those incentives criteria (ie they become likely).

So for example, let’s say Reaves next deal can give him a total of 10m, then we can dedicate 15% of that deal to unlikely incentives, where it would be considered 8.5m in base salary. Then year 2 of that deal could be up to 10.8m (8% escalator).

Something to note tho, if we play the cap space route and use “unlikely” incentives to reflect a lower base salary, then those “unlikely” incentives are included in calculations to find out how much cap space we can still offer other players. For example if we had 20m in cap space, we would not be able to structured two 10m deals with max “unlikely” incentives (making them 11.5m each in total value that year), since we would need 23m in actual cap space to offer up such deals.

Also the Arenas provision wouldn’t really apply to a team operating with cap space. However if we are playing the capped out route, if a team hands Reaves a bag and we use the the Arenas provision to match, then that’s where his deal truly becomes backloaded via becoming a poison pill contract. For example if another team offers him 15m (4yrs 60m), then we match it via the provision…yr1 would be considered 11.6m, yr2 is 12.2m (5% escalator), yr3 17.7m (poison pill kicks in), yr4 18.5m (max allowed 4.5% increase in Arenas provision’s deals).

As for Rui, we wouldn’t need to use the Arenas provision on him since unlike Reaves, we wound have full bird rights to match his RFA offer sheet.
_________________
Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
lakers4life78
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 09 Apr 2012
Posts: 1841
Location: Southern California

PostPosted: Sun Feb 05, 2023 8:04 am    Post subject:

Could they sign Rui for less than 18.8 mil (cap hold) and open up more space? Lonnie Walker got the mmle. I don’t see how Rui gets a deal starting at 20 mil a year.

No way Reaves reaches starter criteria at this point. So might as well tack that on to cap space.
_________________
17 time World Champions
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vasashi17+
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 13 Dec 2019
Posts: 4322

PostPosted: Sun Feb 05, 2023 10:22 am    Post subject:

^Yep…actually when it comes to player retention, it’s a great strategy to finish lesser deals in order to replace larger capholds with that new contract number instead. If we playing the cap space game and we know we can get Rui to re-up at a tpMLEish amount, then that opens up roughly 11.5m in room (swapping 18.8m caphold with 7.5m in new money).

But still even with that strategy and even having Austin not hit starter criteria, enabling a lesser caphold, we would be limited in the amount we could give FAs this summer.

Looking at the books with this hypothetical towards player retention…

Projected 2023/24 Offseason Laker Cap Sheet on a 136m Salary Cap
1. Bron 47.6m
2. AD 40.6m
3. Rui 7.5m (new deal)
4. Damien (player option) 2.6m
5. MaxC 1.7m
6. 2023 1st pick swap w/NO ~3m (based on pick falling between #20-30)
7. Reaves RFA QO caphold 2.1m
8-12. 5 incomplete roster (IR) charges 5.5m
= 110.6m in team salary
= 25.4m in cap space (if we renounce all our other FAs)
= 26.9m in cap space (if Damien opts out and is renounced)
= 36.8m in cap space (if we purge everyone on our books except for Bron & AD)

So as you can see, if we want to approach Ky with available cap space in the summer, we have to go nuclear with our books and we still can offer him no more than his current expiring deal is paying him (ie 36.9m).
_________________
Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vasashi17+
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 13 Dec 2019
Posts: 4322

PostPosted: Mon Feb 06, 2023 10:07 am    Post subject:

Quote:
As discussions on a new labor agreement continue, the NBA and National Basketball Players Association are expected to extend an early opt-out deadline of Wednesday, allowing the league and union to continue negotiations on a new long-term collective bargaining deal, sources told ESPN on Monday.

As the sides pursue an early labor deal, a significant part of what has allowed discussions to progress has been the NBA's willingness to soften from its original push for an upper spending limit on team payrolls -- a de facto hard cap, sources said.

The NBA's seven-year CBA expires after the 2023-24 season, but Wednesday's deadline -- already extended from Dec. 15 -- pushes back both sides' ability to opt out of the current deal on June 30 and risk the possibility of a lockout.

The NBA's board of governors voted Friday to give the league's labor relations committee the approval to give notice of a June 30 opt-out on a labor deal or extend that opt-out again, sources told ESPN. The league and union's expected decision to extend that date for a second time is rooted in the belief that there's enough common ground in discussions to keep pursuing an early labor deal -- without inviting the uncertainty that would come out of declaring an opt-out.

If the league or union opts out of the current deal effective at the start of free agency on that date, the league's business would shut down. Trades and free agent acquisitions would cease without a new labor agreement. The risk of losing regular-season games would begin in October.

The introduction of the upper spending limit into talks had been rooted in the desire of smaller-market teams to rein in the spending of franchises such as the Golden State Warriors, LA Clippers and Brooklyn Nets, sources said. In the wake of those large-market contenders accumulating outsize payrolls and luxury tax penalties, the NBA had proposed a system that would replace the luxury tax with a hard limit that teams could not exceed to pay salaries, sources said.

The league's upper spending limit proposal had been met with union resistance, to the point that it became clear the upper spending limit had little chance of implementation without the NBA's willingness to endure a lockout and work stoppage, sources said. There's no pathway to get the new union leadership -- president CJ McCollum and executive director Tamika Tremaglio -- to essentially accept a hard salary cap at such early stages of negotiations -- if ever, sources said.

There are broader economic concerns looming for the league that are motivating factors in reaching a new labor deal in the coming weeks and months -- including the potential bankruptcy of the Sinclair/Diamond Sports Regional Sports Networks, which is responsible for broadcasting 16 of the league's teams on local deals. The longer labor talks linger, the more moderate positions among ownership can harden on financial issues and risk deeper difficulties on reaching a new labor deal.

Beyond the NBPA, there was also skepticism among smaller NBA marketplaces, which worry that an upper spending limit would fail to create the competitive parity the league is hoping to achieve, instead causing well-constructed smaller-market teams to have to break up cores of contending talent despite a willingness to enter into the luxury tax, sources said. In the system now, teams can re-sign their own players and add salary in free agency through various exceptions to exceed the salary cap. The NBA's hard cap would've ended luxury tax payments shared with many smaller-market teams, requiring the league to find a new mechanism to supplement revenue sharing, sources said. For now, talks are focusing on keeping those elements of the system and finding other ways to limit the mechanisms high-spending teams use to retain and acquire talent, sources said. The union wants to create more opportunities for middle- and lower-spending teams to sign players too, sources said.

Twenty of the 30 NBA teams are currently below the luxury tax threshold of $150.3 million -- with the other 10 teams projected to pay a league-record $689 million in luxury tax penalties in the 2022-23 season. Among them, 58% of that is shared among the Warriors ($176.5 million), the Clippers ($145 million) and the post Kyrie Irving-Nets ($80 million). Those three teams contributed to 73% of the luxury tax penalties in 2021-22.

Among the other top priorities in collective bargaining talks for the league, sources said:

• Finding mechanisms to incentivize top players participating in more regular-season games, which the league believes is essential competition, and maximizing the league's looming media rights deals.

• Working on a "smoothing" plan to incrementally add in the windfall escalation of revenue in the league's looming media deal, which would avoid a repeat of the cap spike in 2016 that disproportionately rewarded one class of free agents and selected teams.

• To end the "one-and-done" early entry rule and allow 18-year-old high school players back into the NBA draft.

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/35601690/sources-sides-expected-extend-nba-cba-early-opt-date

_________________
Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
Page 9 of 10
Jump to:  

 
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






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB