Could Philadelphia 76ers help Lakers ditch luxury tax?

Could Philadelphia 76ers help Lakers ditch luxury tax?

Postby emplay on Tue Jul 23, 2013 11:10 am

Hey all,

Here’s some interesting math – Sixers are under the payroll minimum by about the amount the Lakers are over the tax:

Could Philadelphia 76ers help Lakers ditch luxury tax?
http://www.latimes.com/sports/lakersnow ... 7854.story

Philadelphia 76ers Below Minimum Salary
http://www.hoopsworld.com/philadelphia- ... mum-salary

Also,

Marcus Landry a fan of Mike D'Antoni's system, hopes to be a Laker
http://www.latimes.com/sports/lakersnow ... 3247.story

Lakers' week in review
http://www.latimes.com/sports/lakersnow ... 5465.story

Thanks!

Eric
Check me at at www.HOOPSWORLD.com and on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/EricPincus
emplay
Clublakers Analyst
 
Posts: 3945
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 5:50 pm

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

Postby revgen on Tue Jul 23, 2013 11:27 am

I'm sure Philly would love to help LA after all the help we gave them last season.

Kidding aside, I personally believe that Philly is looking to rebuild, which means they are looking to put together a team that won't do very well, so they rack up draft picks. I doubt they care if they are below minimum salary.
"Every time he’s hurt, he always plays, he always comes through."

- Metta World Peace on teammate Kobe Bryant
revgen
HDTV/Multimedia Guru
 
Posts: 21735
Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 10:53 pm
Location: Southern California

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

Postby Weezy on Tue Jul 23, 2013 12:02 pm

So we get rid of Blake and Hill, leaving us with 9 players, then sign Hudson and Odom, assume we sign Kelly, and go into the season with the minimum 12 players? We go in with a rookie backup PF that is injured and hasn't played a game, backing up an aging and not in great shape Odom, an aging and seemingly injury prone starting C in Pau, an injury prone backup C in Kaman, all to save some luxury tax? Ok, sure, if our goal is to tank. We lose one or two of those PF's or C, we are screwed, it's not even known if Kelly can hang in the NBA yet, let alone be a starter for the Lakers. No thanks to trading Hill, and no thanks to trading Blake without a replacement for him lined up like Sasha. I don't think the Lakers need to avoid the luxury tax that bad, I continue to go back to the billions Time Warner is paying them, don't get cheap on us or them.
User avatar
Weezy
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 50881
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 11:14 am
Location: Anaheim, CA

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

Postby Alleyhoops on Tue Jul 23, 2013 12:25 pm

If they went that route, I would seriously consider not putting any additional mileage on Bryant. A year isn't a terribly long amount of time. Have Kobe take his time, steadily train and work on complete mending and strengthening. Why put another hundred hours of floor time on his body when a title is out of the question anyway. I suppose the same could be said for this coming season as it stands, but intentionally getting rid of your competitive assets for financial reasons seals that deal for me. Just hibernate for a season.
Image
User avatar
Alleyhoops

 
Posts: 4297
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 6:08 pm
Location: Culver City California

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

Postby lakerfan2 on Tue Jul 23, 2013 12:53 pm

Our frontline is thin as it is, and there's no guarantee Odom will sign here.

I would happily send Blake and Meeks and give CDR or another PG/SG a chance.
#OURHOUSE
User avatar
lakerfan2

 
Posts: 9920
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 5:23 pm

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

Postby LTLakerFan on Tue Jul 23, 2013 1:32 pm

Alleyhoops wrote:If they went that route, I would seriously consider not putting any additional mileage on Bryant. A year isn't a terribly long amount of time. Have Kobe take his time, steadily train and work on complete mending and strengthening. Why put another hundred hours of floor time on his body when a title is out of the question anyway. I suppose the same could be said for this coming season as it stands, but intentionally getting rid of your competitive assets for financial reasons seals that deal for me. Just hibernate for a season.


What could say tank more? Give up draft choices that we need just so a team takes a couple of what currently are valuable players for us based on performances last year. If they do that, for me, there goes a big chunk of the "fun quotient" for this season. Bet the primo seat holders would be thrilled as well as Time Warner. :bang:
LTLakerFan

 
Posts: 6485
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 10:44 pm
Location: SoCal

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

Postby live and die in LA on Tue Jul 23, 2013 1:42 pm

Send out Hill to save a few million? I thought the Lakers said they weren't tanking. I would have no interest at all in sending out Hill for nothing, his hustle may be one of the things that keeps me watching next year. Energy off the bench is tremendously important.

As far as Blake, I wouldn't send him out to save money either. I picture Farmar as the backup at point but lets face it, Nash could get hurt at any time. Not to mention Blake is a better option at shooting guard than Meeks IMO. I trust his shooting more (42% from deep last season) and he can create for others, evident by a good assist to turnover ratio. The only downfall would be his size on defense, but in reality Meeks isn't any taller he just has more bulk. To Blake's credit he is a pesky defender and we would be at a disadvantage with Meeks anyways.
User avatar
live and die in LA

 
Posts: 4842
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2004 6:23 pm

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

Postby Savory Griddles on Tue Jul 23, 2013 1:59 pm

Other than the numbers making up a near perfect match, this deal makes no basketball sense for either team.
User avatar
Savory Griddles

 
Posts: 9048
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 10:56 am
Location: AV,CA

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

Postby lakersin4 on Tue Jul 23, 2013 3:50 pm

Really hope this isn't the route we go, but I guess it all depends on Kobe's recovery & the other guys staying healthy.. If we have another injury riddled season & Kobe still isn't 100% by the deadline, I wouldn't be against dumping Hill & Blake.. I think we're going to have a tough time bringing everyone back next season anyway if we get a max FA or 2.. Say we get Melo starting at 19.1M, stretch Nash so he's only on the books for 3M next season.. You still have to go out & get a starting PF/C, hopefully a bargain bin guy like Larry Sanders.. I have a feeling that if Nash is still around, we'll desperately need a PG who can take over the bulk of the minutes from him too. Then we have to try to convince Kobe, Pau, & Hill to split what's left. If we can go out & get Melo, Larry Sanders, good backup PG, & bring Kobe & Pau back, I think I'd rather try to convince Dirk to take the MLE than use it to bring back Hill.. Hopefully Kobe/Melo/Pau/Sanders/Nash is enough to convince him this is the place to ringchase.. He'd be perfect next to a guy like Sanders. I think we might have enough alternatives with all that cap space for it to be worth letting Hill go now, so that 3 years into adding role players to that core, we aren't unable to sign anyone because it would make us repeaters.
lakersin4

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

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

Postby Doc Brown on Tue Jul 23, 2013 5:33 pm

^^^^ Does every thread have to turn into a post like that with you?

The topic is dumping Blake and Hill THIS season. Not some unrealistic view of next season and beyond.
Rule of Thumb at ClubLakers - Never encourage people to check your post history.
User avatar
Doc Brown

 
Posts: 19457
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 10:11 am
Location: Ohio

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

Postby lakersin4 on Wed Jul 24, 2013 9:38 am

Doc Brown wrote:^^^^ Does every thread have to turn into a post like that with you?

The topic is dumping Blake and Hill THIS season. Not some unrealistic view of next season and beyond.

Image
lakersin4

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

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

Postby lakerfan2 on Wed Jul 24, 2013 10:08 am

He may be Larry Sanders' agent. :man10:
#OURHOUSE
User avatar
lakerfan2

 
Posts: 9920
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 5:23 pm

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

Postby khmrP on Wed Jul 24, 2013 10:39 am

outside of kaman, who is injury prone our backup bigs are rather pittiful, why get rid of Hill? Even if Odom comes on, still need Jordan, who knows what kind of mental state Odom is in not to mention his weight issues.
User avatar
khmrP

 
Posts: 10448
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 10:45 pm

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

Postby OX1947 on Wed Jul 24, 2013 10:45 am

If the Lakers wanted to tank, they would have amnestied Gasol. I believe the Lakers need one more front line guy and they will keep Hill. Need his hustle off the bench if the Lakers get LO.
OX1947

 
Posts: 1879
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 12:48 am

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

Postby Snakell Beast on Wed Jul 24, 2013 2:59 pm

Honestly, Hill is a good player (10 and 10 guy in 25+ minutes) but he has no jump shot, has clumsy lateral movement and is injury prone. I don't mind dumping him at this point, especially if it helps us maneuver under the repeater tax for when we reload next off season. Honestly, as long as we agree with Lamar BEFORE we do this, I would pull the trigger.

I have seen enough of Lester Hudson to trust him to the #3 point guard and combo 2 (Blake's role) behind Nash and Farmar. We can just sign Shawne Williams and Marcus Landry (or Elias Harris) to replace Hill. We're not going to have ANY defense or rebounding this season anyway, so we might as well double down on rebuilding starting next season, as well as double down on giving Antoni the perfect defense-free jump shooting roster he craves.

High paced, young and athletic small ball (with a sprinkling of older guys in Odom, Gasol, Kaman, Kobe and Nash) sounds honestly exciting. Even if we didn't make the playoffs...who cares. We would be fun to watch. The repeater tax is a SCARY thing, so if we have the opportunity to get out of its way moving toward our reload phase, then I think we should do it. I watched the summer league team, and honestly Harris, Hudson and Landry are all capable of playing in D'Antoni's offense...especially alongside Kobe, Pau, Nash, Kaman, Young, Wes Johnson, Odom (hopefully) and Farmar...really would like that team.

I am fine either way. If we stand pat (and just add camp invites) I am cool. If Odom comes in and then we stand pat (with camp invites) I am cool. If we swing this deal, I am cool too. This season is probably going to be fun and frustrating.
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 Wed Jul 24, 2013 6:29 pm

lakerfan2 wrote:He may be Larry Sanders' agent. :man10:

:bow:
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 puffyusaf#2 on Wed Jul 24, 2013 7:51 pm

lakersin4 wrote:
Doc Brown wrote:^^^^ Does every thread have to turn into a post like that with you?

The topic is dumping Blake and Hill THIS season. Not some unrealistic view of next season and beyond.

Image

suspecting someone is going to get a warning........
For what it's worth, the Lakers also clinched the Pacific Division, an achievement Bryant dismissed by saying "We don't hang divisions." No, only the big NBA championship banners are considered wall-worthy for the Lakers.
User avatar
puffyusaf#2

 
Posts: 30702
Joined: Sun Apr 02, 2006 3:15 pm
Location: Chasing the dream to an Oscar

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

Postby 432J on Wed Jul 24, 2013 11:23 pm

why would any team help the lakers in any way?
:man10:

it's funny how sometimes people on here assume teams will make ridiculous trades that are 100% in the lakers favour, pau trade aside. i'm sure helping the lakers are the last thing teams want to do, especially considering the success the lakers have had in their history
Image
User avatar
432J

 
Posts: 4794
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Sherbrooke, Quebec

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

Postby Snakell Beast on Thu Jul 25, 2013 7:56 am

432J wrote:why would any team help the lakers in any way?
:man10:

it's funny how sometimes people on here assume teams will make ridiculous trades that are 100% in the lakers favour, pau trade aside. i'm sure helping the lakers are the last thing teams want to do, especially considering the success the lakers have had in their history


Well, actually, in this case the Sixers incentive was (as EMPLAY wrote it) that we would be sending them cash and draft picks...plus, by accepting Hill and Blake (aside from getting two solid veterans at need positions on expiring contracts who could contribute immediately if needed) they would wind up avoiding being fined for having too small a payroll (yes, there is a MINIMUM salary cap as well as a maximum) and having extra draft picks moving forward.

IMHO, as long as the Lakers replaced Hill and Blake with competent reserve players and didn't give up too much in the way of draft picks, then it would be great because we would eliminate the repeater tax potential post reload in a few years. This honestly would be a win-win.
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 revgen on Thu Jul 25, 2013 8:11 am

^If Philly's objective is to have a young developing team (AKA a losing team) that could possibly pick up a high lottery pick and grab Wiggins in the draft, then they don't have any reason to pick up vets like Blake and Hill. If they wanted to avoid the minimum salary problem, they could have just kept Holiday instead of sending him to New Orleans. They will happily pay a fine to grab a lottery pick, which is partly why the whole "minimum salary" rule was originally put into place. To the Philly FO, it's the cost of doing business.
"Every time he’s hurt, he always plays, he always comes through."

- Metta World Peace on teammate Kobe Bryant
revgen
HDTV/Multimedia Guru
 
Posts: 21735
Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 10:53 pm
Location: Southern California

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

Postby Snakell Beast on Thu Jul 25, 2013 12:14 pm

revgen wrote:^If Philly's objective is to have a young developing team (AKA a losing team) that could possibly pick up a high lottery pick and grab Wiggins in the draft, then they don't have any reason to pick up vets like Blake and Hill. If they wanted to avoid the minimum salary problem, they could have just kept Holiday instead of sending him to New Orleans. They will happily pay a fine to grab a lottery pick, which is partly why the whole "minimum salary" rule was originally put into place. To the Philly FO, it's the cost of doing business.


The problem with that reasoning is that 11 million is more than 7.5, especially since it was for the next 4 seasons, so the Jrue Holiday comparison isn't applicable for a totally rebuilding team. Then you consider the following:

A. In the scenario emplay put forward, we are sending them part of the salary money back, meaning they pay 4.5 million in salary instead of 7.5 million in fines (so they are spending less than they would just sticking with the fines) which may not seem like a lot, but on a team with no talent (and thus no ticket sales) 3 million can make a huge difference on the company books.

B. We would be sending them a few draft selections...which translates really well to a "developing a young team from scratch" philosophy...especially in the deep drafts that are approaching. The Lakers have made it clear they will continue to reload versus rebuild.

C. Neither player will impact the team anywhere near enough to weaken their tanking...and that's if they even play, which is completely up to the Sixers anyway. If either player threatened, in any way, their ability to totally stink...just cut them mid season, keeping the salary on the books for the rest of the year while giving the players the option to sign with contenders.

D. Philly could, in the event that neither player ruined their suckiness and required release, choose to retain free agent rights to both players if market value provided the opportunity to sign and trade next season to acquire more picks. If not, just renounce rights (and subsequent cap holds) and PRESTO! 2 extra draft picks and 3 million dollars saved.

Their incentive is very clearly superior to simply paying the fine, ESPECIALLY if they intend to restock with young draft talent. Our incentive (for losing future picks and cash in the deal) is a much smaller tax bill this year (aggregate savings much larger than the 3 or so million we would be sending to Philly), and avoiding repeater tax penalties, should we choose to go over the cap in the free agent market in the next two off-seasons. Total win-win for both sides IMHO.
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 KB24 on Sun Jul 28, 2013 2:12 am

Odom in the starting lineup? Unless you have spent a significant portion of your last 3 years under a huge rock, you should have gotten the memo that Odom SUCKS.

Dumping Hill makes absolutely no sense unless the Lakers officially want to tank for good.
Image

"It is not how big you are, it is how big you play"
"Basketball doesn't build character. It reveals it"
"Be strong in body, clean in mind, lofty in ideals"
User avatar
KB24
Site Admin
 
Posts: 55536
Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2004 10:56 pm
Location: In Heaven

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

Postby Rooscooter on Sun Jul 28, 2013 11:14 am

KB24 wrote:Dumping Hill makes absolutely no sense unless the Lakers officially want to tank for good.


Image
"If the past sits in judgment on the present, the future will be lost." Winston Churchill

“The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present - and is gravely to be regarded." Dwight Eisenhower

"Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it" Thomas Sowell
User avatar
Rooscooter

 
Posts: 23048
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 4:25 pm
Location: Chandler AZ and Andalué

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

Postby Snakell Beast on Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:24 pm

I don't think dumping a career 15mpg player who gets injured every year, and whose career averages are 5 points, 4 boards and half a block, is going to cause the Lakers to go from a potential playoff team to the lottery. I know some would argue that he wasn't getting enough playing time for his career averages to be representative of what he can give us, but it is important to remember that injuries have been the main reason he hasn't gotten enough playing time to showcase his ability...as well as a bad attitude in NY and Houston. Just my two cents.

FYI, I really like Jordan Hill's POTENTIAL, but at some point (as Kareem said) that potential has a shelf life. If not for the injury history I would say he is worth taking a chance on as our main PF, but honestly I just can't trust that he will give us more than 30-50 games in a given year (and that at about 15-20mpg) so since he doesn't fit the team's coach or system, we should trade him for as much value as we can get...which, in this case, is trimming our payroll and fines this season and getting out of future repeater tax penalties.

We can wait until the trade deadline to do the deal with Philly if we absolutely feel Hill is too valuable, but IMHO he is just another in a long line of promising young F/C players with durability issues and a lack of refined skills. He's decent, but at 3.5million + tax penalties and in a system that doesn't utilize his abilities and playing for a coach who doesn't get along with him, he is just too costly at this point.

I was ALL FOR having Hill when we traded for him at the deadline, but that was when we were running Mike Brown's big oriented, slow down style and Hill was going to be our #3 big behind Bynum and Gasol. I also approved of him backing up Howard and Gasol, but as our starting PF, especially with unproven guys like Elias Harris, Ryan Kelly, Marcus Landry or Shawne Williams behind him, I DO NOT approve...especially if he is costing us significant tax penalties AND is affecting our ability to stock up on free agents moving forward.
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 live and die in LA on Sun Jul 28, 2013 6:47 pm

Snakell Beast wrote:I don't think dumping a career 15mpg player who gets injured every year, and whose career averages are 5 points, 4 boards and half a block, is going to cause the Lakers to go from a potential playoff team to the lottery. I know some would argue that he wasn't getting enough playing time for his career averages to be representative of what he can give us, but it is important to remember that injuries have been the main reason he hasn't gotten enough playing time to showcase his ability...as well as a bad attitude in NY and Houston. Just my two cents.

FYI, I really like Jordan Hill's POTENTIAL, but at some point (as Kareem said) that potential has a shelf life. If not for the injury history I would say he is worth taking a chance on as our main PF, but honestly I just can't trust that he will give us more than 30-50 games in a given year (and that at about 15-20mpg) so since he doesn't fit the team's coach or system, we should trade him for as much value as we can get...which, in this case, is trimming our payroll and fines this season and getting out of future repeater tax penalties.

We can wait until the trade deadline to do the deal with Philly if we absolutely feel Hill is too valuable, but IMHO he is just another in a long line of promising young F/C players with durability issues and a lack of refined skills. He's decent, but at 3.5million + tax penalties and in a system that doesn't utilize his abilities and playing for a coach who doesn't get along with him, he is just too costly at this point.

I was ALL FOR having Hill when we traded for him at the deadline, but that was when we were running Mike Brown's big oriented, slow down style and Hill was going to be our #3 big behind Bynum and Gasol. I also approved of him backing up Howard and Gasol, but as our starting PF, especially with unproven guys like Elias Harris, Ryan Kelly, Marcus Landry or Shawne Williams behind him, I DO NOT approve...especially if he is costing us significant tax penalties AND is affecting our ability to stock up on free agents moving forward.


The only upside to this potential deal is it saves the Buss family money. That is it. As a fan I'm not concerned about their money, I'm pretty sure they will be fine. There is that Time Warner cable deal and this is the 2nd most valuable franchise in the NBA (1 billion). Remember that Hill expires at the end of the season anyways, this wouldn't help financially past this season.

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.

The deal is this: The Lakers say they are definitely not tanking and I will take them at their word. If they wanted to tank they would have dumped Gasol instead of World Peace. Dumping Hill to save a few million is stupid considering what they are trying to do. I seriously doubt it would happen.
User avatar
live and die in LA

 
Posts: 4842
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2004 6:23 pm

Next

Return to Lakers Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 16 guests

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