RUI HACHIMURA to the Lakers
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 19, 20, 21 ... 31, 32, 33  Next

 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
mad55557777
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 29 Jun 2005
Posts: 16950

PostPosted: Tue Jan 24, 2023 11:50 am    Post subject:

^so we got a bad contract in Russ, and not trying at all to improve afterwards? in the process of trying to improve, we might have to take on bad contracts, and that shouldn't worry Jeanie because she will only be paying it for 1-2 seasons at the most, and we can start rebuilding afterwards which means no more luxury tax.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
troy
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 30 Jan 2013
Posts: 4266

PostPosted: Tue Jan 24, 2023 11:52 am    Post subject:

Did someone mention this dude has mental health problems? Oh sh**...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
lakersfan32
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 2389

PostPosted: Tue Jan 24, 2023 11:52 am    Post subject:

ocho wrote:
Rui will wear #28, putting to rest the rumors that we will retire Alfonso McKinnie’s jersey.


we can use that guy right now, lol
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Pidge
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 11 Oct 2012
Posts: 405

PostPosted: Tue Jan 24, 2023 11:56 am    Post subject:

JustaObserver wrote:
Pidge wrote:
People are genuinely complaining here? Saying that those picks are in the 30s?!

How terminally pessimistic are you to think that about second rounders 5/6 years out?



The whole leauge for the past couple of years have valued those 2nd ROUND PICKS...smh.

Some of you will be on here on draft night complaining why the lakers couldnt just buy a 2nd round pick to get someone who dropped and then complain AGAIN when they do well in summer leauge or in regular season...geez!


They have value, but nowhere near as much as a starter/lottery talent with bird rights.

Assuming they'll be early 2nd rounders is a ridiculous mindset. The plan is to get better, so they won't be. I'm glad that we are not waiting for the second round of the 2029 NBA Draft to try and do so...
_________________
"I got Wheaties!"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
J.C. Smith
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 12339

PostPosted: Tue Jan 24, 2023 11:57 am    Post subject:

BILBJH wrote:
The only way AD is going stay healthy is if you teach him to play without his athleticism.


I think they could likely help mitigate his issues with load balancing, and keeping a more watchful eye on his nagging injuries. If you look at this injury or the achilles issue a couple of years ago, those seem like situations where they narrowly avoided a more serious injury.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 29785

PostPosted: Tue Jan 24, 2023 12:01 pm    Post subject:

mad55557777 wrote:
^so we got a bad contract in Russ, and not trying at all to improve afterwards? in the process of trying to improve, we might have to take on bad contracts, and that shouldn't worry Jeanie because she will only be paying it for 1-2 seasons at the most, and we can start rebuilding afterwards which means no more luxury tax.


The repeater tax is the problem.
_________________
Internet Argument Resolved
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
mad55557777
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 29 Jun 2005
Posts: 16950

PostPosted: Tue Jan 24, 2023 12:05 pm    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
mad55557777 wrote:
^so we got a bad contract in Russ, and not trying at all to improve afterwards? in the process of trying to improve, we might have to take on bad contracts, and that shouldn't worry Jeanie because she will only be paying it for 1-2 seasons at the most, and we can start rebuilding afterwards which means no more luxury tax.


The repeater tax is the problem.

for 1-2 years? yes, but won't be an issue after that. obviously i know Jeanie won't do it, but just don't tell me how she is willing to spend.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
BILBJH
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 23 Jul 2020
Posts: 3614

PostPosted: Tue Jan 24, 2023 12:09 pm    Post subject:

J.C. Smith wrote:
BILBJH wrote:
The only way AD is going stay healthy is if you teach him to play without his athleticism.


I think they could likely help mitigate his issues with load balancing, and keeping a more watchful eye on his nagging injuries. If you look at this injury or the achilles issue a couple of years ago, those seem like situations where they narrowly avoided a more serious injury.


What's interesting is that Ingram isn't athletic and he gets hurt all the time.

The difference is that Ingram has more basketball skills while AD relies on his unique physical abilities.

So if AD could learn more skills and play close to the ground then I could see him being healthier... but then a lot of what makes him AD would be gone.

But I honestly thought he was on his downside and then he had that burst of greatness before he got hurt... so you never know.

Can someone who relies on his length and leaping ability to score and block shots do well without jumping so much and aggravating his foot?

I don't know.

I get my trade proposal was absurd in many ways, but in many ways it isn't. Only AD and his doctors know what he's capable of in the future.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
BILBJH
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 23 Jul 2020
Posts: 3614

PostPosted: Tue Jan 24, 2023 12:11 pm    Post subject:

troy wrote:
Did someone mention this dude has mental health problems? Oh sh**...


A lot of players have mental health issues just like a lot have concussions in football.

Only difference is that they treat them now.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
sonic the laker
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 06 Oct 2013
Posts: 1780

PostPosted: Tue Jan 24, 2023 12:13 pm    Post subject:

mad55557777 wrote:
^so we got a bad contract in Russ, and not trying at all to improve afterwards? in the process of trying to improve, we might have to take on bad contracts, and that shouldn't worry Jeanie because she will only be paying it for 1-2 seasons at the most, and we can start rebuilding afterwards which means no more luxury tax.


Putting this all in context, in regards to willingness to taking on bad contracts, I think we are talking about the repeater tax, now. I briefly took a look at how the repeater tax works, and my layman understanding of it is, any team that is operating over the luxury tax threshold, in 3 years out of the last 4, it triggers the repeater tax penalty. If I'm not mistaken, the Lakers have been in the luxury tax in the past two years. If they do so again the next year as well, that would put them in the repeater tax. Unless the Lakers are title contending team, I don't think the Lakers are looking to be penalized just for a middling team. This could possibly explain their reluctance to have the payroll balloon beyond a certain point. Just speculation on my part.
_________________
ZOOM!!!!!!!!!!!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
anth2000
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 16 Apr 2001
Posts: 10385
Location: Pasadena, CA

PostPosted: Tue Jan 24, 2023 12:15 pm    Post subject:

BILBJH wrote:
troy wrote:
Did someone mention this dude has mental health problems? Oh sh**...


A lot of players have mental health issues just like a lot have concussions in football.

Only difference is that they treat them now.


I am not concerned. I am sure his DC experience hasn't been great, plus COVID really screwed with folks....I know people still trying to get back into society after being a hermit for the past 2+ years. Scary.

I read was that players like Kyrie Irving, Metta World Peace, Royce White, DeMar DeRozan, Blake Griffin, Justise Winslow, Kelly Oubre, Jay Williams, Markelle Fultz, Paul Pierce, Keyon Dooling and Kevin Love have all taken time off for mental health.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
mad55557777
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 29 Jun 2005
Posts: 16950

PostPosted: Tue Jan 24, 2023 12:27 pm    Post subject:

sonic the laker wrote:
mad55557777 wrote:
^so we got a bad contract in Russ, and not trying at all to improve afterwards? in the process of trying to improve, we might have to take on bad contracts, and that shouldn't worry Jeanie because she will only be paying it for 1-2 seasons at the most, and we can start rebuilding afterwards which means no more luxury tax.


Putting this all in context, in regards to willingness to taking on bad contracts, I think we are talking about the repeater tax, now. I briefly took a look at how the repeater tax works, and my layman understanding of it is, any team that is operating over the luxury tax threshold, in 3 years out of the last 4, it triggers the repeater tax penalty. If I'm not mistaken, the Lakers have been in the luxury tax in the past two years. If they do so again the next year as well, that would put them in the repeater tax. Unless the Lakers are title contending team, I don't think the Lakers are looking to be penalized just for a middling team. This could possibly explain their reluctance to have the payroll balloon beyond a certain point. Just speculation on my part.

repeater tax is still just money, using last year as example, we paid about 40 mil in luxury tax, and if we apply the repeater tax to the calculation, our bill goes up 20 mil. would 20 mil break the Lakers? the warriors are on hook for 262 mil in luxury taxes next season alone, ok Warriors/nets/clippers are different animals, but we've been outspent by the Bucks last year, and likely this year, and will be next year unless they just give up some of their role players.
ok, someone is going to tell me it is not my money, and i understand that, but just don't tell me our owner is willing to spend.
if ownership worry about not being good enough, smart thing to do will be trade Lebron and AD and start rebuild, but if they don't want to trade them, then help them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 29785

PostPosted: Tue Jan 24, 2023 12:30 pm    Post subject:

mad55557777 wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
mad55557777 wrote:
^so we got a bad contract in Russ, and not trying at all to improve afterwards? in the process of trying to improve, we might have to take on bad contracts, and that shouldn't worry Jeanie because she will only be paying it for 1-2 seasons at the most, and we can start rebuilding afterwards which means no more luxury tax.


The repeater tax is the problem.

for 1-2 years? yes, but won't be an issue after that. obviously i know Jeanie won't do it, but just don't tell me how she is willing to spend.


This is why the NBA wants to change the system in the next CBA. Because a few owners are willing to spend crazy amounts of money, the other owners look cheap if they don't match the spending. There is a lot of irony in this. About 10 years ago, we had a lockout because the owners wanted to turn a profit on their teams. They blamed the BRI split with the players for causing them to lose money. Now that they got past that fight, it's the newer owners who are causing the problems.

I understand your perspective. I really do. However, there is a material difference between saying that Jeanie is unwilling to pay $100M+ in luxury tax and saying that she is unwilling to spend.
_________________
Internet Argument Resolved
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
mad55557777
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 29 Jun 2005
Posts: 16950

PostPosted: Tue Jan 24, 2023 12:36 pm    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
mad55557777 wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
mad55557777 wrote:
^so we got a bad contract in Russ, and not trying at all to improve afterwards? in the process of trying to improve, we might have to take on bad contracts, and that shouldn't worry Jeanie because she will only be paying it for 1-2 seasons at the most, and we can start rebuilding afterwards which means no more luxury tax.


The repeater tax is the problem.

for 1-2 years? yes, but won't be an issue after that. obviously i know Jeanie won't do it, but just don't tell me how she is willing to spend.


This is why the NBA wants to change the system in the next CBA. Because a few owners are willing to spend crazy amounts of money, the other owners look cheap if they don't match the spending. There is a lot of irony in this. About 10 years ago, we had a lockout because the owners wanted to turn a profit on their teams. They blamed the BRI split with the players for causing them to lose money. Now that they got past that fight, it's the newer owners who are causing the problems.

I understand your perspective. I really do. However, there is a material difference between saying that Jeanie is unwilling to pay $100M+ in luxury tax and saying that she is unwilling to spend.

i think they might look into change the system, but i doubt the players will agree to it. Jeanie is willing to spend compare to other small market teams for sure, but we are competing against the big boys with a handicapped roster and making it better might involve more spending, it is like spend half a million trying to build an one million dream house.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
sonic the laker
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 06 Oct 2013
Posts: 1780

PostPosted: Tue Jan 24, 2023 12:44 pm    Post subject:

mad55557777 wrote:
sonic the laker wrote:
mad55557777 wrote:
^so we got a bad contract in Russ, and not trying at all to improve afterwards? in the process of trying to improve, we might have to take on bad contracts, and that shouldn't worry Jeanie because she will only be paying it for 1-2 seasons at the most, and we can start rebuilding afterwards which means no more luxury tax.


Putting this all in context, in regards to willingness to taking on bad contracts, I think we are talking about the repeater tax, now. I briefly took a look at how the repeater tax works, and my layman understanding of it is, any team that is operating over the luxury tax threshold, in 3 years out of the last 4, it triggers the repeater tax penalty. If I'm not mistaken, the Lakers have been in the luxury tax in the past two years. If they do so again the next year as well, that would put them in the repeater tax. Unless the Lakers are title contending team, I don't think the Lakers are looking to be penalized just for a middling team. This could possibly explain their reluctance to have the payroll balloon beyond a certain point. Just speculation on my part.

repeater tax is still just money, using last year as example, we paid about 40 mil in luxury tax, and if we apply the repeater tax to the calculation, our bill goes up 20 mil. would 20 mil break the Lakers? the warriors are on hook for 262 mil in luxury taxes next season alone, ok Warriors/nets/clippers are different animals, but we've been outspent by the Bucks last year, and likely this year, and will be next year unless they just give up some of their role players.
ok, someone is going to tell me it is not my money, and i understand that, but just don't tell me our owner is willing to spend.
if ownership worry about not being good enough, smart thing to do will be trade Lebron and AD and start rebuild, but if they don't want to trade them, then help them.


I hear what you're saying, but we have to keep it in context. Those teams you mentioned (Warriors, Nets, Clippers, Bucks) are all title contending teams (Clippers are borderline, due to Kawhi/PG's health). So, it would explain the owners willing to pay to keep those teams firmly in contention. The Lakers, at present, are a borderline play-in team. Last season was just as bad, record wise, but worse looking in terms of roster construction. Who's going to spend money on that?

But, this is a Rui Hachimura thread, and we went into the weeds, into a discussion that's probably best suited for another thread. So, apologies for sidetracking the thread. And, thanks for the discussion, mad.
_________________
ZOOM!!!!!!!!!!!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 29785

PostPosted: Tue Jan 24, 2023 12:45 pm    Post subject:

mad55557777 wrote:
repeater tax is still just money, using last year as example, we paid about 40 mil in luxury tax, and if we apply the repeater tax to the calculation, our bill goes up 20 mil. would 20 mil break the Lakers?


The luxury tax is progressive. Jeanie hit the brakes last year. Suppose we had re-signed Caruso for $10M (to use a round number). That's about another $40M in luxury tax. For a repeater, that's about another $50M in luxury tax.

Someone like V+ can, and probably has, run the numbers with more precision than this. But once you get to the point of being $20M over the threshold, the repeater tax starts at 4.75:1 and goes up from there. And you're already on the hook for about $65M just for getting to $20M.
_________________
Internet Argument Resolved
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 29785

PostPosted: Tue Jan 24, 2023 12:49 pm    Post subject:

mad55557777 wrote:
i think they might look into change the system, but i doubt the players will agree to it. Jeanie is willing to spend compare to other small market teams for sure, but we are competing against the big boys with a handicapped roster and making it better might involve more spending, it is like spend half a million trying to build an one million dream house.


Here's the catch: The players don't get any of the luxury tax money. Unlike baseball, the players' take is based on a percentage of BRI. The players will resist changes like this because they like seeing owners spend lots of money, but they don't necessarily have as much of an incentive as you might think.
_________________
Internet Argument Resolved
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
scottpot29
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 05 Mar 2006
Posts: 2538
Location: OC

PostPosted: Tue Jan 24, 2023 12:54 pm    Post subject:

We got RYU! SHORYUKEN!

On a side note....I always thought he was saying "ALLL YOU CAN!" during that uppercut when it first came out.
_________________
Wow. Luke has gone full (bleep) on us. - DB
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
mad55557777
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 29 Jun 2005
Posts: 16950

PostPosted: Tue Jan 24, 2023 12:56 pm    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
mad55557777 wrote:
repeater tax is still just money, using last year as example, we paid about 40 mil in luxury tax, and if we apply the repeater tax to the calculation, our bill goes up 20 mil. would 20 mil break the Lakers?


The luxury tax is progressive. Jeanie hit the brakes last year. Suppose we had re-signed Caruso for $10M (to use a round number). That's about another $40M in luxury tax. For a repeater, that's about another $50M in luxury tax.

Someone like V+ can, and probably has, run the numbers with more precision than this. But once you get to the point of being $20M over the threshold, the repeater tax starts at 4.75:1 and goes up from there. And you're already on the hook for about $65M just for getting to $20M.

i was just trying to say the repeater tax is just extra 20 mil if we used last year as example. repeater tax is just a more punishing version of luxury tax. for spending over 20 mil, you pay $4.75 compare to $3.75 per dollar. also more for levels below 20 mil. it's not like we have to pay $4.75 on top of $3.75. can the lakers afford it? yes. will they? highly unlikely.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 29785

PostPosted: Tue Jan 24, 2023 1:04 pm    Post subject:

mad55557777 wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
mad55557777 wrote:
repeater tax is still just money, using last year as example, we paid about 40 mil in luxury tax, and if we apply the repeater tax to the calculation, our bill goes up 20 mil. would 20 mil break the Lakers?


The luxury tax is progressive. Jeanie hit the brakes last year. Suppose we had re-signed Caruso for $10M (to use a round number). That's about another $40M in luxury tax. For a repeater, that's about another $50M in luxury tax.

Someone like V+ can, and probably has, run the numbers with more precision than this. But once you get to the point of being $20M over the threshold, the repeater tax starts at 4.75:1 and goes up from there. And you're already on the hook for about $65M just for getting to $20M.

i was just trying to say the repeater tax is just extra 20 mil if we used last year as example. repeater tax is just a more punishing version of luxury tax. for spending over 20 mil, you pay $4.75 compare to $3.75 per dollar. also more for levels below 20 mil. it's not like we have to pay $4.75 on top of $3.75. can the lakers afford it? yes. will they? highly unlikely.


As Sonic said, we're off topic. I'll just say that what the Lakers can afford, when we start to get to these sorts of numbers, is not so clear. We would need detailed financial information that accounts for revenue sharing and all of the other stuff. This gets into a lot of other issues, including the fact that Buss family members expect their checks. Let's just leave it for another day and another thread.
_________________
Internet Argument Resolved
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
mad55557777
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 29 Jun 2005
Posts: 16950

PostPosted: Tue Jan 24, 2023 1:07 pm    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
mad55557777 wrote:
i think they might look into change the system, but i doubt the players will agree to it. Jeanie is willing to spend compare to other small market teams for sure, but we are competing against the big boys with a handicapped roster and making it better might involve more spending, it is like spend half a million trying to build an one million dream house.


Here's the catch: The players don't get any of the luxury tax money. Unlike baseball, the players' take is based on a percentage of BRI. The players will resist changes like this because they like seeing owners spend lots of money, but they don't necessarily have as much of an incentive as you might think.

from the player's perspective, let's use the warriors as example, say a hard cap is implemented, they have to get rid of some players, like Wiggins/DG or Klay, and let's say they can get the same salary in a team like the thunder, that takes away the ability of the Thunder to pay another player the same money(maybe a lessor player), so the lessor player would need to take less money or go to other teams who is willing to pay him the same money, as these slots trickle down, there will be less pie for players below, so players will get less money compare to current system.
the players probably don't even want a salary cap let alone luxury tax. the bigger the payroll the more money they get and more players get money.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
mad55557777
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 29 Jun 2005
Posts: 16950

PostPosted: Tue Jan 24, 2023 1:09 pm    Post subject:

sonic the laker wrote:
mad55557777 wrote:
sonic the laker wrote:
mad55557777 wrote:
^so we got a bad contract in Russ, and not trying at all to improve afterwards? in the process of trying to improve, we might have to take on bad contracts, and that shouldn't worry Jeanie because she will only be paying it for 1-2 seasons at the most, and we can start rebuilding afterwards which means no more luxury tax.


Putting this all in context, in regards to willingness to taking on bad contracts, I think we are talking about the repeater tax, now. I briefly took a look at how the repeater tax works, and my layman understanding of it is, any team that is operating over the luxury tax threshold, in 3 years out of the last 4, it triggers the repeater tax penalty. If I'm not mistaken, the Lakers have been in the luxury tax in the past two years. If they do so again the next year as well, that would put them in the repeater tax. Unless the Lakers are title contending team, I don't think the Lakers are looking to be penalized just for a middling team. This could possibly explain their reluctance to have the payroll balloon beyond a certain point. Just speculation on my part.

repeater tax is still just money, using last year as example, we paid about 40 mil in luxury tax, and if we apply the repeater tax to the calculation, our bill goes up 20 mil. would 20 mil break the Lakers? the warriors are on hook for 262 mil in luxury taxes next season alone, ok Warriors/nets/clippers are different animals, but we've been outspent by the Bucks last year, and likely this year, and will be next year unless they just give up some of their role players.
ok, someone is going to tell me it is not my money, and i understand that, but just don't tell me our owner is willing to spend.
if ownership worry about not being good enough, smart thing to do will be trade Lebron and AD and start rebuild, but if they don't want to trade them, then help them.


I hear what you're saying, but we have to keep it in context. Those teams you mentioned (Warriors, Nets, Clippers, Bucks) are all title contending teams (Clippers are borderline, due to Kawhi/PG's health). So, it would explain the owners willing to pay to keep those teams firmly in contention. The Lakers, at present, are a borderline play-in team. Last season was just as bad, record wise, but worse looking in terms of roster construction. Who's going to spend money on that?

But, this is a Rui Hachimura thread, and we went into the weeds, into a discussion that's probably best suited for another thread. So, apologies for sidetracking the thread. And, thanks for the discussion, mad.

simple question would be "would Jeanie spend the same amount of money in their shoes?"
thanks for the discussion, Sonic.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 29785

PostPosted: Tue Jan 24, 2023 1:31 pm    Post subject:

mad55557777 wrote:
from the player's perspective, let's use the warriors as example, say a hard cap is implemented, they have to get rid of some players, like Wiggins/DG or Klay, and let's say they can get the same salary in a team like the thunder, that takes away the ability of the Thunder to pay another player the same money(maybe a lessor player), so the lessor player would need to take less money or go to other teams who is willing to pay him the same money, as these slots trickle down, there will be less pie for players below, so players will get less money compare to current system.
the players probably don't even want a salary cap let alone luxury tax. the bigger the payroll the more money they get and more players get money.


It may have an effect on individual players for sure. It has no effect on the players as a whole because of the escrow system. We're getting far afield, so I'll just link Larry's explanation of the escrow system:

http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q16

There could be a theoretical case in which the escrow is not enough. Except for the Covid years (discussed in Larry's Q17), this hasn't happened.
_________________
Internet Argument Resolved
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
sonic the laker
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 06 Oct 2013
Posts: 1780

PostPosted: Tue Jan 24, 2023 1:53 pm    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
mad55557777 wrote:
from the player's perspective, let's use the warriors as example, say a hard cap is implemented, they have to get rid of some players, like Wiggins/DG or Klay, and let's say they can get the same salary in a team like the thunder, that takes away the ability of the Thunder to pay another player the same money(maybe a lessor player), so the lessor player would need to take less money or go to other teams who is willing to pay him the same money, as these slots trickle down, there will be less pie for players below, so players will get less money compare to current system.
the players probably don't even want a salary cap let alone luxury tax. the bigger the payroll the more money they get and more players get money.


It may have an effect on individual players for sure. It has no effect on the players as a whole because of the escrow system. We're getting far afield, so I'll just link Larry's explanation of the escrow system:

http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q16

There could be a theoretical case in which the escrow is not enough. Except for the Covid years (discussed in Larry's Q17), this hasn't happened.


Great read. Really good stuff. Thanks.
_________________
ZOOM!!!!!!!!!!!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Polarbear
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 03 Nov 2003
Posts: 3378

PostPosted: Tue Jan 24, 2023 2:03 pm    Post subject:

LakerSD wrote:
2019 wrote:
Lakerz113 wrote:
dont_be_a_wuss wrote:
He makes a little over $1M more than Nunn and we are in the $3.25/$1 luxury tax bracket, so Jeannie is paying $4.25M more with this trade. Maybe Jeannie is actually willing to spend.


She’s gonna make that back in jersey sales lol.

https://twitter.com/cjtoledano/status/1617581465897959424?s=46&t=rnll6GToYoI932-Ec_Fktw


This is 100% a factor in agreeing to this deal. They'll have $1,000,000 in jersey sales profit by all star break.


See this is the problem for Jeanie. You can’t even have this be a thought in modern pro sports ownership.


Oh, give me a break. This is a byproduct of what is going on here with this new addition.
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 ... 19, 20, 21 ... 31, 32, 33  Next
Page 20 of 33
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