Could Philadelphia 76ers help Lakers ditch luxury tax?

Re: Could Philadelphia 76ers help Lakers ditch luxury tax?

Postby Snakell Beast on Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:29 pm

live and die in LA wrote: The only upside to this potential deal is it saves the Buss family money...Hill expires at the end of the season anyways, this wouldn't help financially past this season.


Yeah, except that IT WOULD. I am certainly no expert on the finer details of the new CBA (or any era's CBA for that matter) but from what I have read and understood, the repeater tax compounds the regular luxury tax by increasing the amount of fines for any year a team qualifies as a repeat offender. Not only that, but for every 5 million dollars over the luxury tax, repeater tax offenders are charged in increasing tiers/percentages of penalties.

In order to be a repeat offender, I have read, a team has to be over the luxury tax for 3 out of a period of 4 seasons...so if the Lakers don't get under the luxury tax this season ('13-'14), they will have been over the luxury tax for the last 3 seasons ('11-'12, '12-'13, '13-'14), meaning that the first year that the repeater tax kicks in ('14-'15), the Lakers will be repeat offenders...UNLESS they STAY UNDER the luxury tax NEXT SEASON ('14-'15), which means they have to skimp on free agents THE VERY YEAR they have been targeting for free agent spending. As it is, even if they DO get us under the tax this season ('13-'14), they will STILL have to stay under the tax next season ('14-15) so that they don't have to deal with the repeater tax until the '17-'18 season.

If the front office doesn't get us under the tax this season, they will be forced into EITHER blowing up their newly assembled group early (in trades) due to increasing repeater penalties, OR sacrificing their ability to surround the high level free agent additions with decent role players. The TV deal doesn't really alleviate much of this because of #1 the length of the deal (spreading revenue over 25 years) and #2. The revenue sharing burden on the Lakers franchise...which should be (reportedly) at or near (or over) 50 million dollars per season.

Also, the draft picks in this scenario have CAP HOLDs, which means that their CBA determined value counts against the cap EVEN BEFORE we draft anyone, or sign draft picks and free agents. If the front office really wants to reload with free agent acquisitions, then they will want to get rid of ALL cap holds for anyone who isn't going to be signed or re-signed...so that (more flexibility to sign free agents the next off season while also navigating the repeater tax) is another financial gain, aside from raw money savings this season, that the Lakers can make in this scenario.

live and die in LA wrote: Jordan Hill has flaws for sure. He does have an injury history and he doesn't have a great basketball IQ. But what he does bring is undeniable energy, a shot blocking precense, good rebounding, and can occasionally hit the 15 foot jumper. There was times early last year he was a bright spot and I wanted him in the game over Dwight.


Yeah, except he only played 29 games last season...which is actually not THAT far off his career average of roughly 47 (46.75) games per season. The question isn't IF he will get injured at this point, but WHEN. I would rather have Odom and a bunch of D'Antoni guys than that. Also, honestly, Jordan Hill simply doesn't make enough of an impact to matter at this point. We aren't going to go from a team WITH HILL that makes (or comes close to making) the playoffs and then WITHOUT HILL is in the lottery. That is simply NOT the case.

Also, we DON'T have to trade Hill right away. Because of the way the luxury tax works (i.e., if a player is traded away before the end of the season, then none of his salary is taxed) we can play him through the preseason and all the way to the trade deadline, to see if he is healthy and playing well. If we feel he is too vital to a possible playoff run, and thus much needed playoff revenue, then we can choose to keep him...though I wouldn't risk it since it still hampers our reloading plan the next season. If he is hurt, struggling, or simply not making much of a difference, we can trade him in this deal and both teams still get the same benefits and concerned fans are less apprehensive.
The End is nigh. Time for a total Cut and Shuffle. Kobe contract was a mistake...time to avoid making more. The future is here, whether we want it to be or not. An era is over, but for the death rattle, and it's time for the cycle to begin anew. Growth and change are scary and painful, but alas...nothing worth achieving comes easily.
User avatar
Snakell Beast

 
Posts: 2061
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 8:54 pm
Location: Ithaca, NY

Re: Could Philadelphia 76ers help Lakers ditch luxury tax?

Postby charvin on Sun Jul 28, 2013 10:31 pm

There is no upside potential from a financial standpoint. If you wanted to get under the threshold, you would have amnestied Gasol, period. I mean, we signed Kaman using the mini-MLE and he's only $300k cheaper than Hill. If the plan was to save money, then why sign Kaman? Just sign a random scrub C for the vet minimum and be done with it.

We have to understand that it's absolutely alright to go over the tax say, 5 or 10 million. That would still be in line with the amount of taxes that have been paid in the past even if there was a penalty added to it. The Lakers should not worry about the salary cap issue with the same mindset of a small team such as Memphis, it will hamstring them from putting together a decent enough team because they're much too worried to pay taxes. Yes, it's easy for me to say because I'm not the one paying the taxes, but the Lakers should stick to what has worked before, pay the penalty if it means being able to assemble the better team.
charvin

 
Posts: 540
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2012 12:53 pm

Re: Could Philadelphia 76ers help Lakers ditch luxury tax?

Postby Doc Brown on Mon Jul 29, 2013 5:52 am

Snakell Beast wrote:In order to be a repeat offender, I have read, a team has to be over the luxury tax for 3 out of a period of 4 seasons...so if the Lakers don't get under the luxury tax this season ('13-'14), they will have been over the luxury tax for the last 3 seasons ('11-'12, '12-'13, '13-'14), meaning that the first year that the repeater tax kicks in ('14-'15), the Lakers will be repeat offenders...UNLESS they STAY UNDER the luxury tax NEXT SEASON ('14-'15), which means they have to skimp on free agents THE VERY YEAR they have been targeting for free agent spending. As it is, even if they DO get us under the tax this season ('13-'14), they will STILL have to stay under the tax next season ('14-15) so that they don't have to deal with the repeater tax until the '17-'18 season.


They won't be over the tax next year because it isn't possible.

@LarryCoon: Remember, no reason to worry about Lakers paying repeater tax in 2015. They're clearing their roster. Won't be taxpayers in 2014-15.


We are clearing the books, we aren't going to be paying a repeater tax of any high cost. As soon as we use our full MLE we get back, we are hard capped at 75 million. Since we won't have any bird rights players coming back (maybe Hill), we aren't going to have to worry about the repeater tax.

We can't get to that 75 million because we don't have anyone to sign with bird rights to get from point A (maxed out salary cap) to point B (luxury tax level).

*75 million being whatever the luxury tax is at for that year. Just used a random number.

Also, the draft picks in this scenario have CAP HOLDs, which means that their CBA determined value counts against the cap EVEN BEFORE we draft anyone, or sign draft picks and free agents. If the front office really wants to reload with free agent acquisitions, then they will want to get rid of ALL cap holds for anyone who isn't going to be signed or re-signed...so that (more flexibility to sign free agents the next off season while also navigating the repeater tax) is another financial gain, aside from raw money savings this season, that the Lakers can make in this scenario.


Who are we resigning on bird rights that we have large cap holds on? We have to renounce everyone, mainly Pau/Kobe just to be able to bid on one max free agent. They are probably going to renounce these players because there is no way we are paying them what their cap hold would be.

Pau @ 19 million - No
Blake - No
Meeks - No
Kobe @ 30 million - No
Nash - No
Hill - Maybe

Kobe and Pau will be back on way cheaper deals than bird rights would get them. So that leaves Hill.

We can stretch Nash out after this season so his cap hit is only 3 million over 3 years. We aren't going to be paying a large repeater tax because we can't get into that level in the 1st place.

Salary cap ~60 million.....

1.) Renounce all players on roster because we aren't paying them their cap holds
2.) Sign free agents and resign our own players on cheaper deals when we renounce them.
2a.) We don't have bird rights on Farmar/Johnson/Young so it would be just a run for them in free agency again.
3.) All salary cap used up signing players

Full MLE would bring salary cap up to ~65 million (Can use this to sign Farmar/Young if need be)
BAE would bring the salary cap up ~68 million (Can use this to resign Johnson if need be)

We don't have any more cap room or exemptions to sign anybody besides vet. min deals, which IIRC don't impact the cap.

We will avoid the repeater tax just based on we have nothing else to spend to get players.


Yeah, except he only played 29 games last season...which is actually not THAT far off his career average of roughly 47 (46.75) games per season. The question isn't IF he will get injured at this point, but WHEN. I would rather have Odom and a bunch of D'Antoni guys than that. Also, honestly, Jordan Hill simply doesn't make enough of an impact to matter at this point. We aren't going to go from a team WITH HILL that makes (or comes close to making) the playoffs and then WITHOUT HILL is in the lottery. That is simply NOT the case.


Let me present these two scenarios....

A.) We trade Hill for nothing but a TPE and sign Odom. Odom comes and puts up his usual numbers since leaving the Lakers. The season ends and he goes back into the free agent pool or resigns here in his mid-30s and career almost done. Can't sign and trade him because teams aren't giving up squat for him

B.) We keep Hill, as an expiring, he stays relatively healthy puts up the numbers he's been averaging since he's been a Laker or even better he has a very strong season. The season ends and guess what we have another piece to work with in free agency. We can either resign him or sign and trade him to a team. Teams are always in need of a big man. Or if he doesn't work out, we let him hit free agency no harm done.

Option B sounds a lot more beneficial to the Lakers in the long run. Sure they pay a little bit more this year, but moving on we either have a piece for the future, a valuable trade asset or a free agent to be. With Odom it's just the the free agent to be or stop gap one year rental in his mid 30's.
Rule of Thumb at ClubLakers - Never encourage people to check your post history.
User avatar
Doc Brown

 
Posts: 19446
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 10:11 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Could Philadelphia 76ers help Lakers ditch luxury tax?

Postby Snakell Beast on Mon Jul 29, 2013 1:54 pm

charvin wrote: There is no upside potential from a financial standpoint. If you wanted to get under the threshold, you would have amnestied Gasol, period. I mean, we signed Kaman using the mini-MLE and he's only $300k cheaper than Hill. If the plan was to save money, then why sign Kaman? Just sign a random scrub C for the vet minimum and be done with it.


The upside is fielding a competitive team to keep Kobe happy this season while ALSO positioning ourselves to be clear of the repeater tax risk in two years. The Lakers also want to have the ability to re-sign Gasol (as a back-up measure should quality free agents spurn our offers next off-season) or to re-sign Gasol at a reduced rate, that is still much higher than the minimum, should they succeed in picking up a few talented free agents without exceeding the cap.

Doc - The Larry Coon quote only applies if we MAINTAIN a payroll that is under the luxury tax THROUGH the END of the 2014-2015 season. Remember, we have to have a roster for that season, and I find it unlikely that we will stay under the tax level, assuming we still A. Have Kobe, and B. Want to field a contender.

The TAX isn't applied at the beginning of the season, it is applied AFTER THE LAST GAME of a team's season. If, as you advocate, the Lakers keep Hill and Blake and thus are over the Luxury tax after the last game of this season (2013-2014), then, if they are also over the tax threshold after the last game of either of the next two seasons (2014-2015 or 2015-2016), they will pay the repeater tax. So it is not IMPOSSIBLE.

If you want to argue that the Lakers will do everything in their power to AVOID going over the luxury tax next season (which will be easy because they can POTENTIALLY have an almost empty payroll) that's fine...but to say that it is IMPOSSIBLE is inaccurate, and unless they are also under the tax level this year they only avoid the tax increase for one off season and have to worry about it again in the next free agent period (2015-2016) since there is NO WAY that Kobe and Pau are going to come back for WAY CHEAPER...unless, by WAY CHEAPER, you mean Kobe at 15 to 20 million and Pau at 10 to 12 million.

They aren't taking MLE level salaries here. AINT HAPPENING. If we really are going to reload with free agents, the most likely scenario is we lock in Kobe and Pau on 2 or 3 year deals FIRST, eliminating their cap holds with their real salary figure, then over pay for mid level free agents in the next two off seasons (to fill in the starting unit AROUND Kobe and Pau) and populate the rest of the roster with the MMLE and minimum contracts.

Even under this scenario, (the Lakers being under the tax level in 2014-2015) they will STILL be repeat offenders after the next season (2015-2016) if they really want to contend and thus, go over the luxury tax level adding as much talent as they can (most likely by trading our future draft picks unfortunately). The Lakers CAN deliberately avoid the repeater tax, but IMO it will hamstring their desire to build a contender for Kobe in his last few seasons.

So the only way your argument is truly sound is if the Lakers completely move on from Kobe and Pau and rebuild the roster ENTIRELY over the next 2 or 3 free agency and draft periods. I find that HIGHLY unlikely, given that all of the LEGITIMATELY attractive free agents will re-sign with their current teams, many of which will probably extend their current contracts (ala Paul George or John Wall) and we basically mortgaged our drafts for Steve Nash.

As far as the Jordan Hill and Lamar Odom comparison, they aren't mutually exclusive. I am not arguing dumping Hill FOR Odom, I am arguing dumping Hill to alleviate some of the complications of the cap over the next two off seasons. You've already demonstrated a somewhat likely scenario where we stay under the tax next season, making it all the more imperative that we get under it this season, so we can ignore the repeater threat for 3 years and make a SERIOUS run at a title.

PS - If you really think the Lakers are going to renounce their rights to Kobe, you are mistaken. They don't have to renounce his rights to sign him to a reduced salary, but as soon as they do renounce his rights, they can't offer him any more than any other team. So unless they lock him in BEFORE they sign their free agents, they won't have enough to offer him (FULL MLE at most) let alone Pau. And there is no guarantee that, if they DO renounce their rights to Kobe and Pau, that either won't take larger deals from teams on the brink or equivalent deals from contenders.

The ONLY way the Lakers can restock the roster to contend for Kobe's last few seasons is to maintain the ability to offer Kobe more than the market will bear this off season, which means they have to retain his free agent rights and stock the roster around he and Pau with complimentary younger pieces. The only way this doesn't apply is if a genuine opportunity to sign a franchise difference maker comes along, but it doesn't seem likely.
The End is nigh. Time for a total Cut and Shuffle. Kobe contract was a mistake...time to avoid making more. The future is here, whether we want it to be or not. An era is over, but for the death rattle, and it's time for the cycle to begin anew. Growth and change are scary and painful, but alas...nothing worth achieving comes easily.
User avatar
Snakell Beast

 
Posts: 2061
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 8:54 pm
Location: Ithaca, NY

Re: Could Philadelphia 76ers help Lakers ditch luxury tax?

Postby Phil XI on Mon Jul 29, 2013 10:29 pm

If Kobe wants to be the Greatest laker, he'll resign for the veteran minimum. If he doesn't he is 5th for being a greedy prick.
Get 17!!
User avatar
Phil XI

 
Posts: 1680
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 11:23 pm
Location: Thanks Ron for Gm7! You'll always be a Laker Legend!

Re: Could Philadelphia 76ers help Lakers ditch luxury tax?

Postby lakersin4 on Tue Jul 30, 2013 12:46 am

Doc Brown wrote:
Snakell Beast wrote:In order to be a repeat offender, I have read, a team has to be over the luxury tax for 3 out of a period of 4 seasons...so if the Lakers don't get under the luxury tax this season ('13-'14), they will have been over the luxury tax for the last 3 seasons ('11-'12, '12-'13, '13-'14), meaning that the first year that the repeater tax kicks in ('14-'15), the Lakers will be repeat offenders...UNLESS they STAY UNDER the luxury tax NEXT SEASON ('14-'15), which means they have to skimp on free agents THE VERY YEAR they have been targeting for free agent spending. As it is, even if they DO get us under the tax this season ('13-'14), they will STILL have to stay under the tax next season ('14-15) so that they don't have to deal with the repeater tax until the '17-'18 season.


They won't be over the tax next year because it isn't possible.

@LarryCoon: Remember, no reason to worry about Lakers paying repeater tax in 2015. They're clearing their roster. Won't be taxpayers in 2014-15.


We are clearing the books, we aren't going to be paying a repeater tax of any high cost. As soon as we use our full MLE we get back, we are hard capped at 75 million. Since we won't have any bird rights players coming back (maybe Hill), we aren't going to have to worry about the repeater tax.

We can't get to that 75 million because we don't have anyone to sign with bird rights to get from point A (maxed out salary cap) to point B (luxury tax level).

*75 million being whatever the luxury tax is at for that year. Just used a random number.

Also, the draft picks in this scenario have CAP HOLDs, which means that their CBA determined value counts against the cap EVEN BEFORE we draft anyone, or sign draft picks and free agents. If the front office really wants to reload with free agent acquisitions, then they will want to get rid of ALL cap holds for anyone who isn't going to be signed or re-signed...so that (more flexibility to sign free agents the next off season while also navigating the repeater tax) is another financial gain, aside from raw money savings this season, that the Lakers can make in this scenario.


Who are we resigning on bird rights that we have large cap holds on? We have to renounce everyone, mainly Pau/Kobe just to be able to bid on one max free agent. They are probably going to renounce these players because there is no way we are paying them what their cap hold would be.

Pau @ 19 million - No
Blake - No
Meeks - No
Kobe @ 30 million - No
Nash - No
Hill - Maybe

Kobe and Pau will be back on way cheaper deals than bird rights would get them. So that leaves Hill.

We can stretch Nash out after this season so his cap hit is only 3 million over 3 years. We aren't going to be paying a large repeater tax because we can't get into that level in the 1st place.

Salary cap ~60 million.....

1.) Renounce all players on roster because we aren't paying them their cap holds
2.) Sign free agents and resign our own players on cheaper deals when we renounce them.
2a.) We don't have bird rights on Farmar/Johnson/Young so it would be just a run for them in free agency again.
3.) All salary cap used up signing players

Full MLE would bring salary cap up to ~65 million (Can use this to sign Farmar/Young if need be)
BAE would bring the salary cap up ~68 million (Can use this to resign Johnson if need be)

We don't have any more cap room or exemptions to sign anybody besides vet. min deals, which IIRC don't impact the cap.

We will avoid the repeater tax just based on we have nothing else to spend to get players.


Yeah, except he only played 29 games last season...which is actually not THAT far off his career average of roughly 47 (46.75) games per season. The question isn't IF he will get injured at this point, but WHEN. I would rather have Odom and a bunch of D'Antoni guys than that. Also, honestly, Jordan Hill simply doesn't make enough of an impact to matter at this point. We aren't going to go from a team WITH HILL that makes (or comes close to making) the playoffs and then WITHOUT HILL is in the lottery. That is simply NOT the case.


Let me present these two scenarios....

A.) We trade Hill for nothing but a TPE and sign Odom. Odom comes and puts up his usual numbers since leaving the Lakers. The season ends and he goes back into the free agent pool or resigns here in his mid-30s and career almost done. Can't sign and trade him because teams aren't giving up squat for him

B.) We keep Hill, as an expiring, he stays relatively healthy puts up the numbers he's been averaging since he's been a Laker or even better he has a very strong season. The season ends and guess what we have another piece to work with in free agency. We can either resign him or sign and trade him to a team. Teams are always in need of a big man. Or if he doesn't work out, we let him hit free agency no harm done.

Option B sounds a lot more beneficial to the Lakers in the long run. Sure they pay a little bit more this year, but moving on we either have a piece for the future, a valuable trade asset or a free agent to be. With Odom it's just the the free agent to be or stop gap one year rental in his mid 30's.

Lot of good points made in there.. The only way the repeater tax becomes an issue would seemingly be if we trade for a young player on a cheap deal that will need to be re-signed within the 5 year window, which isn't the type of move you make when trying to make 1 last push with Kobe/Pau/Nash.. Or 1 of our unknowns (Kelly, Harris) ends up being a stud that we have to pay to bring back. The odds of the repeater tax becoming a problem for us are too low to justify giving up on a player like Jordan Hill.
lakersin4

 
Posts: 2377
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 8:02 pm

Re: Could Philadelphia 76ers help Lakers ditch luxury tax?

Postby KareemTheGreat33 on Tue Jul 30, 2013 12:59 am

Phil XI wrote:If Kobe wants to be the Greatest laker, he'll resign for the veteran minimum. If he doesn't he is 5th for being a greedy prick.


No. Kobe is the main attraction for this franchise until he retires. Not fair to him to be forced to get lower than 15M per for the rest of his career.
"Allons-y Lakers!"
User avatar
KareemTheGreat33

 
Posts: 7839
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2004 2:52 am
Location: Philippines

Re: Could Philadelphia 76ers help Lakers ditch luxury tax?

Postby Doc Brown on Tue Jul 30, 2013 8:00 am

Snakell Beast wrote:Doc - The Larry Coon quote only applies if we MAINTAIN a payroll that is under the luxury tax THROUGH the END of the 2014-2015 season. Remember, we have to have a roster for that season, and I find it unlikely that we will stay under the tax level, assuming we still A. Have Kobe, and B. Want to field a contender.


Present to me a scenario where we go over the luxury tax line, that doesn't involve Hill getting a fat bird right's contract.

1.) Resign or renounce the rights to Kobe and Pau to eliminate their cap holds. Same applies to any player we still have rights to. We don't have any RFA and we aren't paying the 32 million or 19 million dollar cap hold for Pau or Kobe. Add in the fact that we aren't allowed to sign free agents AND then sign Kobe and Pau with their bird rights, due to their cap holds. We can't go over the tax here.

2.) Use the remaining cap space to sign free agents. We can't spend more than what the cap is at, so we can't go over here.

3.) Use the Full MLE, which hard caps us at whatever the apron will be for that year. Still not close to luxury tax.

4.) Use the BAE, which also hard caps us at whatever the apron will be for that year. Still not close to the luxury tax.

Using the numbers this year.

Salary cap - 58.679
Luxury tax - 71.748
Apron - 75.748

We resign Kobe and maybe Pau (who knows with him) and use the rest of the cap space to sign free agents. Note we don't have to even use the cap space next season if we can't get the players we want. So hitting the tax might not even be an issue. Let's say we use the full cap space allotted....

58.679 + Full MLE (5.15) + BAE (2.016) = 65.845

We don't have anything else to spend and still under the tax by 6 million. That's given we use all the cap space, which wouldn't be smart if we aren't getting top tier players. I'd rather keep the cap space and move onto 2015 with it and go after the better FA class IMO.


The TAX isn't applied at the beginning of the season, it is applied AFTER THE LAST GAME of a team's season. If, as you advocate, the Lakers keep Hill and Blake and thus are over the Luxury tax after the last game of this season (2013-2014), then, if they are also over the tax threshold after the last game of either of the next two seasons (2014-2015 or 2015-2016), they will pay the repeater tax. So it is not IMPOSSIBLE.


I never said we won't be over the tax in 2015-2016. And again please show me a scenario where we go over the tax next season.

I already provided a scenario where we use all the resources we have to acquire players and still 6 million under the luxury tax with numbers from 2013-2014.

If you want to argue that the Lakers will do everything in their power to AVOID going over the luxury tax next season (which will be easy because they can POTENTIALLY have an almost empty payroll) that's fine...but to say that it is IMPOSSIBLE is inaccurate, and unless they are also under the tax level this year they only avoid the tax increase for one off season and have to worry about it again in the next free agent period (2015-2016) since there is NO WAY that Kobe and Pau are going to come back for WAY CHEAPER...unless, by WAY CHEAPER, you mean Kobe at 15 to 20 million and Pau at 10 to 12 million.


Show me the scenario where we go over.

If Pau and Kobe both come back at their cap holds 32 million and 19 million, it doesn't matter. We just have significantly less salary cap and the same options (full MLE and BAE) as before. We can't sign free agents with our cap space AND than sign Kobe and Pau with their bird rights, it's not allowed. No matter what Kobe and Pau come back for, it's still part of that 58.679 salary cap number they will be taking up.

So let's carry the max amount of salary over from the previous season (65.845 million). Use the full MLE, since that is all we will have, since we have all our cap space spent. The number jumps to 70.995. Still under the luxury tax number of 2013-2014. Pay increases on contracts could take us over that tax, but that hit is minimal. And who knows what the tax number will be in that year, so it might not even matter.

Our payroll will look like the Dallas Mavericks this season, who were in the same situation we will be in next year. The only exception being our salary figure will be 5 million less considering they signed Wright as a RFA his cap hold was less than 1 million giving them the freedom to sign him to a bigger deal and over the salary cap figure.

They aren't taking MLE level salaries here. AINT HAPPENING. If we really are going to reload with free agents, the most likely scenario is we lock in Kobe and Pau on 2 or 3 year deals FIRST, eliminating their cap holds with their real salary figure, then over pay for mid level free agents in the next two off seasons (to fill in the starting unit AROUND Kobe and Pau) and populate the rest of the roster with the MMLE and minimum contracts.


I never said they should take MLE level salaries. Why do we have to overpay for mid level free agents? We just got 5 players for 7 million this offseason. If we don't like the players that are available, we don't have to overpay for the ones that are. Just conserve the space and wait until the following season.

We won't have the MMLE, we will have the full MLE because we won't be over the tax line.

Even under this scenario, (the Lakers being under the tax level in 2014-2015) they will STILL be repeat offenders after the next season (2015-2016) if they really want to contend and thus, go over the luxury tax level adding as much talent as they can (most likely by trading our future draft picks unfortunately). The Lakers CAN deliberately avoid the repeater tax, but IMO it will hamstring their desire to build a contender for Kobe in his last few seasons.


We can deliberately avoid the repeater tax and build a contender, it's what the 22 other teams in the league that are under the tax are trying to do.

The only way to really go over the luxury tax is to have a RFA that we have to pay big money to. But even then, if we use the full MLE we are hard capped at 75 million anyway.

I don't get how we are going to go over the luxury tax level adding as much talent as possible, when are options in doing that are very limited. What's going to take us into luxury tax level is pay raises on contracts and using the MLE.

So the only way your argument is truly sound is if the Lakers completely move on from Kobe and Pau and rebuild the roster ENTIRELY over the next 2 or 3 free agency and draft periods. I find that HIGHLY unlikely, given that all of the LEGITIMATELY attractive free agents will re-sign with their current teams, many of which will probably extend their current contracts (ala Paul George or John Wall) and we basically mortgaged our drafts for Steve Nash.


No, that's not true at all. We can still keep Kobe and Pau maybe and still build a contender.

Why are you all about this repeater tax and then say it's highly unlikely we get attractive free agents? If we don't get the big time free agents, we aren't going to overpay for mid-level free agents and we won't have to worry about the tax. Not that it matters because resigning Kobe/Pau + Free agents falls under the 58 million salary cap.

We go over the tax by...

1.) Contract increases ever year for certain players
2.) Signing a RFA to big money
3.) Making a trade to take us over the tax
4.) Using the MLE multiple years to take us over.

But it's all moot, considering we will most definitely use the Full MLE both years. We get hard capped at 4 million over the tax. 4 million x repeater tax is nothing to the Lakers.

As far as the Jordan Hill and Lamar Odom comparison, they aren't mutually exclusive. I am not arguing dumping Hill FOR Odom, I am arguing dumping Hill to alleviate some of the complications of the cap over the next two off seasons. You've already demonstrated a somewhat likely scenario where we stay under the tax next season, making it all the more imperative that we get under it this season, so we can ignore the repeater threat for 3 years and make a SERIOUS run at a title.


You keep preaching about being under the tax at the end of the year. Wouldn't it be smart on the Lakers part to keep Hill, pump up that value of his and trade him for a 1st round pick or nice player going forward at the trade deadline?

If we don't dump Blake this point is moot and the FO has given no indication of doing so or carrying about a tax. They could have easily got under the tax this season.


PS - If you really think the Lakers are going to renounce their rights to Kobe, you are mistaken. They don't have to renounce his rights to sign him to a reduced salary, but as soon as they do renounce his rights, they can't offer him any more than any other team. So unless they lock him in BEFORE they sign their free agents, they won't have enough to offer him (FULL MLE at most) let alone Pau. And there is no guarantee that, if they DO renounce their rights to Kobe and Pau, that either won't take larger deals from teams on the brink or equivalent deals from contenders.


Renounce his rights, resign him to a cheaper deal, whatever you want to call it, they need to get rid of his 32 million dollar cap hold (and Pau's 19) to open up cap space to have the ability to get some free agents.

The ONLY way the Lakers can restock the roster to contend for Kobe's last few seasons is to maintain the ability to offer Kobe more than the market will bear this off season, which means they have to retain his free agent rights and stock the roster around he and Pau with complimentary younger pieces. The only way this doesn't apply is if a genuine opportunity to sign a franchise difference maker comes along, but it doesn't seem likely.


Kobe isn't jumping ship regardless. We give him a 15 million dollar contract and some team offers him 20 million a season, you really think he's going to leave?
Rule of Thumb at ClubLakers - Never encourage people to check your post history.
User avatar
Doc Brown

 
Posts: 19446
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 10:11 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Could Philadelphia 76ers help Lakers ditch luxury tax?

Postby therealdeal on Tue Jul 30, 2013 9:05 am

KareemTheGreat33 wrote:
Phil XI wrote:If Kobe wants to be the Greatest laker, he'll resign for the veteran minimum. If he doesn't he is 5th for being a greedy prick.


No. Kobe is the main attraction for this franchise until he retires. Not fair to him to be forced to get lower than 15M per for the rest of his career.

Well you're both right and you're both wrong I think. :man10:

If he doesn't re-sign for significantly less than he's getting now and it's costs us the chance to get one or two big name FAs this summer, then yes he's greedy and he has sealed his own fate in terms of winning rings. That doesn't mean he doesn't deserve a lot of money as the chief financial draw of the Lakers, but if he truly wants a chance to win rings, he needs to take a bigger pay-cut than 50% of his current pay now.

I am not saying sign for the minimum. I'm saying let the Lakers go get the players they can whether that's Carmelo and/or LeBron, or some other guys, and then let the rest go to Kobe. Whether that's 5 million or 15 million is really dependent on who we bring in, but that SHOULD be Kobe's mentality if he's about winning. He's made enough off of the Busses in the least two years earning an average of about 30 million dollars and destroying our cap space to know that to win he needs to make the sacrifice.

I would propose to Kobe that he sign a one year deal worth whatever we have available. Then next season we can open up the cap space again and hopefully snatch another top tier FA. Especially if we miss out on the LeBron/Melo idea which is entirely possible if not likely.

If we could go into this summer and sign Carmelo Anthony, then fill in the team again with basically what we've got and hopefully a couple minor upgrades (backup PG/SG), then go into next-NEXT summer with Cap space again and get Love or Rondo along with Kobe. I mean that'd be ideal if we strike out on LeBron this summer.
Stu : "Yeah, that's an old fashioned whoopin'."
therealdeal
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 40322
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:03 pm

Re: Could Philadelphia 76ers help Lakers ditch luxury tax?

Postby Snakell Beast on Tue Jul 30, 2013 2:12 pm

Doc Brown wrote: Present to me a scenario where we go over the luxury tax line, that doesn't involve Hill getting a fat bird right's contract.


I don't really want to predict how or why it might be necessary, though I do think we might have to swing trade deadline deals or overpay to get middle pieces, my only point is I want our team to have the most cap flexibility, going forward, as possible. If we are under the Tax level the next two seasons, then we can make a 3 or 4 year run and not even have to THINK about the repeater tax.

That's all. I think you are probably right that we won't (even can't REALISTICALLY) be over the tax line next season, I just think Jordan Hill and Steve Blake aren't worth enough (at this point) to justify risking contending with the repeater tax in the next 3 or 4 seasons.

Doc Brown wrote: I never said they should take MLE level salaries. Why do we have to overpay for mid level free agents? We just got 5 players for 7 million this offseason. If we don't like the players that are available, we don't have to overpay for the ones that are. Just conserve the space and wait until the following season.

We won't have the MMLE, we will have the full MLE because we won't be over the tax line.


The only reason the free agent market was under value expectations this year is because all of the top level teams are cap strapped, the bottom teams are in tank and rebuild mode and the Lakers are not contenders. When the Lakers are competitive, teams intentionally drive the prices up in the market, often going so far as to intentionally over pay for a player they don't really need to keep that player from being the key piece for a Laker run.

Two more things, though. 1. Also look at Dallas for an answer to your question about us having to overpay for lesser players the next two seasons. You have to remember that, though the Lakers franchise has a TON to offer free agents...it is a double-edged sword. Players also know that the pressure is higher, that the fanbase is highly critical and unforgiving of underachievement, and that there is a stigma around the rest of the league to playing for the Lakers.

They also know that they can use their interest with the Lakers to get higher offers from other teams. Knowing that the Lakers have some of the deepest pockets in the league (other than perhaps Dolan, Prokhorov and Cuban) they will attempt to get as much as they can from us and, just like in Dallas...we will be pressured (not only by Kobe's twilight years, but also by fan discontent) to rebuild as quickly as possible.

The front office has been touting the next two free agent periods as the future of the team for years. Expectations will be sky high for who we will get, and the resultant pressure will cause the front office to feel COMPELLED to appease the fans by putting as many decent names together as possible...especially since most of the GENUINELY marquee names will re-sign with their current teams for max money.

I am not psychic, nor do I really know what WILL happen, I just look at Dallas and Houston (other than Dwight) then subtract their draft picks and project that level of free agent success to the Lakers. I mean, the real names we are looking at are Rudy Gay, Larry Sanders et al. Those are the only truly available players, since I don't want Kevin Love any more than I want Greg Oden or Andrew Bogut.

Doc Brown wrote: We can deliberately avoid the repeater tax and build a contender, it's what the 22 other teams in the league that are under the tax are trying to do.


Want to know another thing those 22 "other" teams have in common? DRAFT PICKS. As in WE DON'T ANY VALUABLE ONES...unless you think Derrick Caracter or Devin Ebanks or Darius Johnson-Odom are going to help us rebuild without overpaying for free agents or in trades.

Doc Brown wrote: If we don't get the big time free agents, we aren't going to overpay for mid-level free agents and we won't have to worry about the tax.


So then, if we don't get the LeBrons or Carmelos we are just going to take all our extra cash and go home??? Man, I can just HEAR the pitch fork wielding fans rants if that were to happen. :man10: :man9: Especially since we won't field a contender, and even then our top draft picks are going to other teams (like Phoenix)...so there is no benefit to stinking at that point, not to mention that the drafts in 2 or 3 years might not be as deep or talented.

You wanna see desperation and over paying? Take a look at the Lakers in 2015-2016 if they save their money next off season (in 2014-2015). I'm telling you, the most likely scenario is we give Kobe 20 mil per on a 3 year extension, Pau 12 million on a 3 year deal (option after first or second year) and, when combined with Nash, we won't have a ton of cap space left to spend.

Since we will be "hard capped" as you pointed out, that means we won't be able to build a contender...so we probably wind up overpaying ONE mid-level free agent (probably Rudy Gay) and then pay extra to keep Nick Young, Kaman and Wesley Johnson and add vet minimums and one FULL MLE contract to round out the roster...an MLE that, undoubtedly, we will be forced to over-pay for. Think someone like Mike Miller or Al Harrington.
The End is nigh. Time for a total Cut and Shuffle. Kobe contract was a mistake...time to avoid making more. The future is here, whether we want it to be or not. An era is over, but for the death rattle, and it's time for the cycle to begin anew. Growth and change are scary and painful, but alas...nothing worth achieving comes easily.
User avatar
Snakell Beast

 
Posts: 2061
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 8:54 pm
Location: Ithaca, NY

Previous

Return to Lakers Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests

cron
Advertise Here | Privacy Policy | ©2008 Sculu Sports. Come Strong.