|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
oaktown_dimond
Star Player
Joined: 16 Nov 2007
Posts: 1376
|
 Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2021 11:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
i wonder if it was literally between AC or monk/nunn... the lakers decided the latter was a better ROI.
| vasashi17+ wrote: | | activeverb wrote: | | vasashi17+ wrote: | And I’m a bit shocked folks aren’t acknowledging the “if healthy” discussion of yesteryear.
Russ will shield Bron. Love it and couldn’t ask for anything more being in the mostly powerless situation we were in.
But we’ve seen some fluky stuff and god forbid, one if our trio go down for a lengthy portion. Heading into the deadline, we could potentially see names where if we brought them in, it could salvage the ever shrinking Bron tithe window. You turn to the roster and you’re forced now to send out THT as any meaningful salary.
Instead of letting AC walk, it’s yet another dude that has been impactful in his play, can still be meaningful salary/asset in a deal and more importantly adds that much more depth for our trio. Russ is going to cover Bron more, but I’m sure we still want to cover Russ as well.
Dude was an above average player on a below average deal. UnbelievaBull asset and we’re asses for letting it go.
At about 8.5m, we let this guy go and I’m sorry, it was a terribull non-move. I know its not my money...but it is my opinion nonetheless.
This is our window...utilize every asset you got till it’s closed. |
As you admit, that's easy for you to say, because it's not your money.
But let's have a reality check:
Signing Caruso, with salary and taxes, would have cost another $30 million this year alone.
Basically, that requires Jeanie to go to her relatives and say, "If each of you give up $3 million this year that you could have put in your own pocket, we can sign Caruso."
That's a hard sell, and I'm not sure if I would do it in her position. If I were a member of the Buss Family Trust, I probably wouldn't want to pull $3 million out of my pocket to give the team a slightly better chance to win. The cost-benefit analysis wouldn't have justified that for me. I would have said, "Let Caruso go, and I'll keep the money. We're spending enough."
Jeanie has to look at this from a real-world perspective, with all the economic and political issues involved. Fans, like you and me, have the luxury of taking a fantasy basketball perspective where we can pretend the political and economic stuff doesn't matter. |
What type of business does the family own?
Of that entertainment brand, who do the masses see as a fan favorite?
30m is a smart investment for a fan driven brand and if you consider that each vet min is nearly an 8m investment to a tax team, you could easily remove 1-2 vet min guys (ie like Ariza and Ellington) and have that much more to offer for AC without getting hit with a stricter tax rate. You can go into the season rostered at 13 with 2 2-way players.
It was a poor decision and I have yet to hear a valid enough retort to sway my opinion on it. Dude would have earned PT to close out games with next to Russ in the backcourt off of his tenacious defense alone. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
deal
Franchise Player
Joined: 17 Aug 2008
Posts: 14979
Location: Earth
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2021 12:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| venturalakersfan wrote: | | 32 wrote: | I think the pandemic has hit the Lakers financially. This article from Forbes came out in March of last year.
The Coronavirus Pandemic Could Cost NBA Nearly $690 Million In Ticket Revenue
| Quote: | | Unsurprisingly, it’s the Los Angeles Lakers, who could lose approximately $82.1 million for their ten remaining regular-season games, with an average ticket cost being around $432. |
|
And didn't they play most, if not all, of last season without fans? More lost revenue. Just as I wouldn't begrudge a player for moving on for more money, I won't begrudge ownership of saving every dollar they can. It is a business after all. |
It's a business decision. IF income does not come in you cut cost (fat Vs muscle). Running a franchise in that sense is like any other business.
_________________
Lakers need to build a freaking team ! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakerDYnasty72
Star Player
Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Posts: 4602
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2021 2:42 pm Post subject: Re: $42.3M Projected tax bill largest in Lakers history |
|
|
Largest tax bill in team history? But isn't everything else "largest" in a sense? The value of the franchise is at an all time high. The price of tickets...crazy for many. The money the owners of the team(s) are pocketing is serious.
The tax bill is simply a reflection of, and corresponding to, today's price of doing business in the NBA. Jeanie knows this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
activeverb
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2021 2:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| vasashi17+ wrote: |
What type of business does the family own?
Of that entertainment brand, who do the masses see as a fan favorite?
30m is a smart investment for a fan driven brand and if you consider that each vet min is nearly an 8m investment to a tax team, you could easily remove 1-2 vet min guys (ie like Ariza and Ellington) and have that much more to offer for AC without getting hit with a stricter tax rate. You can go into the season rostered at 13 with 2 2-way players.
It was a poor decision and I have yet to hear a valid enough retort to sway my opinion on it. Dude would have earned PT to close out games with next to Russ in the backcourt off of his tenacious defense alone. |
The “fan favorite” thing doesn’t matter. Caruso doesn't sell tickets; his absence won’t have any meaningful impact on the team’s revenue, the team’s value, or fans’ opinions about the team. Plenty of “fan favorite” players have come and gone over the year. Some other player will replace him as a fan favorite.
The 13-person roster thing is irrelevant as well. If the Lakers chose, they could still have a 13-man roster and save the money, So that decision isn't inherently connected to the decision on whether resigning Caruso was worthwhile.
The only question is how much resigning Caruso would have bumped up our chances of winning a ring. You might say it would have increased our chances by 2% or 5% or whatever arbitrary number you put on it.
Is that worth $40 million a year in salary and tax? The answer probably depends a great deal on whether you are the one actually paying the bill.
Ultimately, every business has to draw a line on spending somewhere. The Lakers drew the line at Caruso. I can see why that upsets some fans, but I can also see why the team did it from a dollars-and-cents standpoint. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
32
Retired Number
Joined: 04 Nov 2009
Posts: 73164
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2021 2:45 pm Post subject: Re: $42.3M Projected tax bill largest in Lakers history |
|
|
| LakerDYnasty72 wrote: |
Largest tax bill in team history? But isn't everything else "largest" in a sense? The value of the franchise is at an all time high. The price of tickets...crazy for many. The money the owners of the team(s) are pocketing is serious.
The tax bill is simply a reflection of, and corresponding to, today's price of doing business in the NBA. Jeanie knows this. |
It's the most they ever paid and some people are complaining they should spend more. Fans are going to be fans. It's not their money.
_________________
Nobody in the NBA can touch the Laker brand, which, like the uniform color, is pure gold. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BandwagonLBJhopper
Star Player
Joined: 07 Feb 2020
Posts: 3609
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2021 2:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I just think it’s funny how the FO leaked the Caruso news ahead of FA because they knew he was a fan favorite and people would be salty about the penny pinching.
But hard to (bleep) when Rob recovered like he did bringing in guys like Monk and Nunn on value contracts. Job well done overall. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
activeverb
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2021 2:56 pm Post subject: Re: $42.3M Projected tax bill largest in Lakers history |
|
|
| LakerDYnasty72 wrote: |
Largest tax bill in team history? But isn't everything else "largest" in a sense? The value of the franchise is at an all time high. The price of tickets...crazy for many. The money the owners of the team(s) are pocketing is serious.
The tax bill is simply a reflection of, and corresponding to, today's price of doing business in the NBA. Jeanie knows this. |
The team's value would have been at an all-time high even if the Lakers paid no luxury tax at all, so I'm not sure I'd call the luxury tax an intrinsic cost of doing business.
A team's value or revenues don't impact the luxury tax.
Basically, it's a cost-benefit calculation. Does spending the money boost your chances of winning enough to justify spending the money? There really isn't a one-size-fits-all answer to that, and most teams will attempt to avoid the tax rather than seeing it as an inevitability. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr. Laker
Franchise Player
Joined: 12 Apr 2002
Posts: 17205
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2021 3:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| activeverb wrote: | | twisted wrote: | Frankly, 42M is not that much considering Lakers is the biggest international brand in the NBA.
Compare that with what GS and Joe Tsai are paying. The Nets will have to shell out at least 90M, and if their sign and trade for Dinwiddie pushes through, it could potentially add 60M in Taxes alone this year, on top of the additional 20M in salary. |
The big difference is the Nets and Warriors have a billionaire in charge who can make unilateral decisions.
The Nets owner is worth $13.7 billion, and he's investing to build the team's brand.
At this point, additional winning might not change the Lakers brand value to any significantly degree.
So Jeanie has to deal with the politics of how much money her relatives are willing to sacrifice today for a potential payoff in the future. My guess is that consideration -- as well as discussions with key family members -- are integral to every dollar the Lakers spend. Jeanie knows she has to cultivate and keep her relatives' allegiance to stay in power.
The Warriors and Nets don't have to worry about those politics. |
Jeanie makes those decisions herself. IIRC, the partner's share is included in the budget. One of the reasons Jonny & Jimmy tried the coup was that they didn't like the way she wielded her authority.
_________________
On Lakersground, a concern troll is someone who is a fan of another team, but pretends to be a Lakers fan with "concerns".
Last edited by Dr. Laker on Thu Aug 05, 2021 3:17 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr. Laker
Franchise Player
Joined: 12 Apr 2002
Posts: 17205
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2021 3:16 pm Post subject: Re: $42.3M Projected tax bill largest in Lakers history |
|
|
| activeverb wrote: | | LakerDYnasty72 wrote: |
Largest tax bill in team history? But isn't everything else "largest" in a sense? The value of the franchise is at an all time high. The price of tickets...crazy for many. The money the owners of the team(s) are pocketing is serious.
The tax bill is simply a reflection of, and corresponding to, today's price of doing business in the NBA. Jeanie knows this. |
The team's value would have been at an all-time high even if the Lakers paid no luxury tax at all, so I'm not sure I'd call the luxury tax an intrinsic cost of doing business.
A team's value or revenues don't impact the luxury tax.
Basically, it's a cost-benefit calculation. Does spending the money boost your chances of winning enough to justify spending the money? There really isn't a one-size-fits-all answer to that, and most teams will attempt to avoid the tax rather than seeing it as an inevitability. |
Also factor in the Lakers and Knicks (by rule) CANNOT ever receive revenue sharing. If they have a bad year or two, the cannot draw a revenue sharing check - they can only pay into it.
Meanwhile, something like 20-24 teams ALWAYS draw at least $20 million in revenue sharing.
IIRC, the Spurs won a championship AND got a revenue sharing check in the same season.
_________________
On Lakersground, a concern troll is someone who is a fan of another team, but pretends to be a Lakers fan with "concerns". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Laker's Fan
Franchise Player
Joined: 27 Jun 2002
Posts: 12949
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2021 3:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
At the next CBA negotiations, if any of the markets with less well funded ownership groups want to complain about "big market" teams, I hope they point their fingers at the likes of the Nets, Warriors and Clippers instead of clamoring that the Lakers are the source of the issue.
_________________
Austin Reaves keeps his game tight, like Kobe Bryant on game night. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
activeverb
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2021 3:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dr. Laker wrote: | | This isn't true. Jeanie makes those decisions herself. |
I think it's extremely naive to think she doesn't take the concerns of her relatives into consideration. She's already won one power struggle because of the support she cultivated among her relatives.
| Dr. Laker wrote: | | IIRC, the partner's share is included in the budget. |
If the Lakers signed Caruso and paid $30 million in tax, the partners would have had $30 million few dollars. That could mean the Lakers working capital would have been $30 million or it could mean they might have had to reduce the owner share. Either way, the owners have $30 million less. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vasashi17+
Star Player
Joined: 13 Dec 2019
Posts: 5766
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2021 3:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| activeverb wrote: | | vasashi17+ wrote: |
What type of business does the family own?
Of that entertainment brand, who do the masses see as a fan favorite?
30m is a smart investment for a fan driven brand and if you consider that each vet min is nearly an 8m investment to a tax team, you could easily remove 1-2 vet min guys (ie like Ariza and Ellington) and have that much more to offer for AC without getting hit with a stricter tax rate. You can go into the season rostered at 13 with 2 2-way players.
It was a poor decision and I have yet to hear a valid enough retort to sway my opinion on it. Dude would have earned PT to close out games with next to Russ in the backcourt off of his tenacious defense alone. |
The “fan favorite” thing doesn’t matter. Caruso doesn't sell tickets; his absence won’t have any meaningful impact on the team’s revenue, the team’s value, or fans’ opinions about the team. Plenty of “fan favorite” players have come and gone over the year. Some other player will replace him as a fan favorite.
The 13-person roster thing is irrelevant as well. If the Lakers chose, they could still have a 13-man roster and save the money, So that decision isn't inherently connected to the decision on whether resigning Caruso was worthwhile.
The only question is how much resigning Caruso would have bumped up our chances of winning a ring. You might say it would have increased our chances by 2% or 5% or whatever arbitrary number you put on it.
Is that worth $40 million a year in salary and tax? The answer probably depends a great deal on whether you are the one actually paying the bill.
Ultimately, every business has to draw a line on spending somewhere. The Lakers drew the line at Caruso. I can see why that upsets some fans, but I can also see why the team did it from a dollars-and-cents standpoint. |
They wanted to trade for Russ and that made a lot of cents...but they did so wanting to also avoid a tax...well that’s noncents.
If you’re trading for Russ so that when he hits your books you’re paying 126m for 3 players and a corpse...you chose to make that decision knowing you have to field a team of at least 13 by opening night. The tax line was a mere 10m away and you still had to add 10 more bodies. You chose to put yourselves in that position and knowing how the optics would look, allowed a key player from a title team to walk for nothing.
And they say they’re all about titles? They didn’t spend for #18, they spent for 3 aka star power. And yes that will upset some fans. They have me in my feelings where I’m in the right mind to throw my (bleep) swear jar at them, so I can knock some cents into them.
(Bleep) (Bleep) (Bleep) (Bleep) (Bleep) (Bleep) (Bleep) (Bleep) (Bleep)
Don’t mind me, I’m just trying to #MakeCents of all this bull(bleep).
_________________
Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE!
Last edited by vasashi17+ on Thu Aug 05, 2021 3:39 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
activeverb
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2021 3:31 pm Post subject: Re: $42.3M Projected tax bill largest in Lakers history |
|
|
| Dr. Laker wrote: | | activeverb wrote: | | LakerDYnasty72 wrote: |
Largest tax bill in team history? But isn't everything else "largest" in a sense? The value of the franchise is at an all time high. The price of tickets...crazy for many. The money the owners of the team(s) are pocketing is serious.
The tax bill is simply a reflection of, and corresponding to, today's price of doing business in the NBA. Jeanie knows this. |
The team's value would have been at an all-time high even if the Lakers paid no luxury tax at all, so I'm not sure I'd call the luxury tax an intrinsic cost of doing business.
A team's value or revenues don't impact the luxury tax.
Basically, it's a cost-benefit calculation. Does spending the money boost your chances of winning enough to justify spending the money? There really isn't a one-size-fits-all answer to that, and most teams will attempt to avoid the tax rather than seeing it as an inevitability. |
Also factor in the Lakers and Knicks (by rule) CANNOT ever receive revenue sharing. If they have a bad year or two, the cannot draw a revenue sharing check - they can only pay into it.
Meanwhile, something like 20-24 teams ALWAYS draw at least $20 million in revenue sharing.
IIRC, the Spurs won a championship AND got a revenue sharing check in the same season. |
The Lakers and Knicks make significantly more revenue than other teams, so we share revenue. That's just the system the NBA operates under. Even with the sharing, we still make more revenue and profits than other teams, so I don't know that that affects our willingness to pay the luxury tax.
By definition if you are sharing revenue, you are making more than others. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
32
Retired Number
Joined: 04 Nov 2009
Posts: 73164
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2021 3:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Shelburne says the Lakers would go up to $7M a year for Caruso. So he had a chance to stay. Anyways Caruso is replaceble. The Lakers don't need him to win a championship this year.
_________________
Nobody in the NBA can touch the Laker brand, which, like the uniform color, is pure gold. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr. Laker
Franchise Player
Joined: 12 Apr 2002
Posts: 17205
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2021 3:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| activeverb wrote: | | Dr. Laker wrote: | | This isn't true. Jeanie makes those decisions herself. |
I think it's extremely naive to think she doesn't take the concerns of her relatives into consideration. She's already won one power struggle because of the support she cultivated among her relatives.
| Dr. Laker wrote: | | IIRC, the partner's share is included in the budget. |
If the Lakers signed Caruso and paid $30 million in tax, the partners would have had $30 million few dollars. That could mean the Lakers working capital would have been $30 million or it could mean they might have had to reduce the owner share. Either way, the owners have $30 million less. |
On $400 million revenue, the Lakers get $150 million net revenue (profit), the Lakers rarely do an equity distribution (which was one of Jonny & Jimmy's complaints). Jeanie banks that, pays down some mortgages and keeps a hefty reserve. The money the owners get (Busses, Soon-Shiong, Dodger dudes), come out of their $250 million in expenses (I'm not sure how much, but the number $60 million sticks in my mind).
So this year, with taxes, etc., there's a $100 million increase in expenses and a $40 million decrease in revenue (COVID still lingers), so net revenue is $10 million.
The number that is budgeted for the owners (dividend) isn't coming out of that $10 million, it's already on the expense side. Moreover, if the revenue shortfall is bigger (call it $100 million), and the net profit is now a deficit of $50 million, it still doesn't affect the owner's draw. Why?
Because the Lakers maintain a large cash reserve.
The Lakers don't - can't - live "paycheck to paycheck," and have one of the savviest financial teams in Joe McCormack & Tim Harris in pro sports.
_________________
On Lakersground, a concern troll is someone who is a fan of another team, but pretends to be a Lakers fan with "concerns". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakerMindLA
Star Player
Joined: 26 Dec 2008
Posts: 5344
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2021 3:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| dcarter4kobe wrote: | And it's not fair to say "Caruso would have cost the Lakers 40M".
You can play that game with anybody on the payroll, most notably Luol Deng |
The $40m tax hit isn't even factual because Caruso was taking a salary of $8.6m and we still had to sign a player for $1.7m. That min contract is costing the Lakers $6.5m.
There are also other ways to drop the tax bill so Caruso isn't creating that tax hit. Gasol being turned into a min contract would save the Lakers nearly $5m dollars. The Lakers can sign a rookier for the final roster spot and save $5m
If the Lakers did the over two moves, the Caruso is only costing the Lakers an additional $17m. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakerSD
Franchise Player
Joined: 10 Nov 2016
Posts: 23972
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2021 4:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| If/when the Dodgers owners get majority ownership of the Lakers, the league will be in big, big trouble. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakerDYnasty72
Star Player
Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Posts: 4602
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2021 4:32 pm Post subject: Re: $42.3M Projected tax bill largest in Lakers history |
|
|
| activeverb wrote: | | LakerDYnasty72 wrote: |
Largest tax bill in team history? But isn't everything else "largest" in a sense? The value of the franchise is at an all time high. The price of tickets...crazy for many. The money the owners of the team(s) are pocketing is serious.
The tax bill is simply a reflection of, and corresponding to, today's price of doing business in the NBA. Jeanie knows this. |
The team's value would have been at an all-time high even if the Lakers paid no luxury tax at all, so I'm not sure I'd call the luxury tax an intrinsic cost of doing business.
A team's value or revenues don't impact the luxury tax.
Basically, it's a cost-benefit calculation. Does spending the money boost your chances of winning enough to justify spending the money? There really isn't a one-size-fits-all answer to that, and most teams will attempt to avoid the tax rather than seeing it as an inevitability. |
I'm sure it's implied but I didn't use the term "intrinsic". You injected it. She does not, nor does any other owner, have to pay the luxury tax if they stay within certain salary limitations. So it's not "intrinsic".
"The cost of doing business" was my statement. Paying escalating salaries, but not necessarily a luxury tax, is the cost of doing business, it's intrinsic. That was my point. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheeLakeshow
Star Player
Joined: 08 Dec 2011
Posts: 1457
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2021 5:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| activeverb wrote: | | vasashi17+ wrote: | And I’m a bit shocked folks aren’t acknowledging the “if healthy” discussion of yesteryear.
Russ will shield Bron. Love it and couldn’t ask for anything more being in the mostly powerless situation we were in.
But we’ve seen some fluky stuff and god forbid, one if our trio go down for a lengthy portion. Heading into the deadline, we could potentially see names where if we brought them in, it could salvage the ever shrinking Bron tithe window. You turn to the roster and you’re forced now to send out THT as any meaningful salary.
Instead of letting AC walk, it’s yet another dude that has been impactful in his play, can still be meaningful salary/asset in a deal and more importantly adds that much more depth for our trio. Russ is going to cover Bron more, but I’m sure we still want to cover Russ as well.
Dude was an above average player on a below average deal. UnbelievaBull asset and we’re asses for letting it go.
At about 8.5m, we let this guy go and I’m sorry, it was a terribull non-move. I know its not my money...but it is my opinion nonetheless.
This is our window...utilize every asset you got till it’s closed. |
As you admit, that's easy for you to say, because it's not your money.
But let's have a reality check:
Signing Caruso, with salary and taxes, would have cost another $30 million this year alone.
Basically, that requires Jeanie to go to her relatives and say, "If each of you give up $3 million this year that you could have put in your own pocket, we can sign Caruso."
That's a hard sell, and I'm not sure if I would do it in her position. If I were a member of the Buss Family Trust, I probably wouldn't want to pull $3 million out of my pocket to give the team a slightly better chance to win. The cost-benefit analysis wouldn't have justified that for me. I would have said, "Let Caruso go, and I'll keep the money. We're spending enough."
Jeanie has to look at this from a real-world perspective, with all the economic and political issues involved. Fans, like you and me, have the luxury of taking a fantasy basketball perspective where we can pretend the political and economic stuff doesn't matter. |
This is also under the presumption that Caruso makes us better. While I loved what he did for our title run he wasn't a needed commodity this year and even less so at the money needed to retain his services. He earned his pay raise and I wish him nothing but the best, I am just glad its not us shelling the dough out.
_________________
*Paging Mike "Doo Doo" Brown to the front desk*
Thee Jason in LA |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144688
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2021 5:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LakerSD wrote: | | If/when the Dodgers owners get majority ownership of the Lakers, the league will be in big, big trouble. |
I might not see that day, the Buss boys are pretty young.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vasashi17+
Star Player
Joined: 13 Dec 2019
Posts: 5766
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2021 8:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TheeLakeshow wrote: | | activeverb wrote: | | vasashi17+ wrote: | And I’m a bit shocked folks aren’t acknowledging the “if healthy” discussion of yesteryear.
Russ will shield Bron. Love it and couldn’t ask for anything more being in the mostly powerless situation we were in.
But we’ve seen some fluky stuff and god forbid, one if our trio go down for a lengthy portion. Heading into the deadline, we could potentially see names where if we brought them in, it could salvage the ever shrinking Bron tithe window. You turn to the roster and you’re forced now to send out THT as any meaningful salary.
Instead of letting AC walk, it’s yet another dude that has been impactful in his play, can still be meaningful salary/asset in a deal and more importantly adds that much more depth for our trio. Russ is going to cover Bron more, but I’m sure we still want to cover Russ as well.
Dude was an above average player on a below average deal. UnbelievaBull asset and we’re asses for letting it go.
At about 8.5m, we let this guy go and I’m sorry, it was a terribull non-move. I know its not my money...but it is my opinion nonetheless.
This is our window...utilize every asset you got till it’s closed. |
As you admit, that's easy for you to say, because it's not your money.
But let's have a reality check:
Signing Caruso, with salary and taxes, would have cost another $30 million this year alone.
Basically, that requires Jeanie to go to her relatives and say, "If each of you give up $3 million this year that you could have put in your own pocket, we can sign Caruso."
That's a hard sell, and I'm not sure if I would do it in her position. If I were a member of the Buss Family Trust, I probably wouldn't want to pull $3 million out of my pocket to give the team a slightly better chance to win. The cost-benefit analysis wouldn't have justified that for me. I would have said, "Let Caruso go, and I'll keep the money. We're spending enough."
Jeanie has to look at this from a real-world perspective, with all the economic and political issues involved. Fans, like you and me, have the luxury of taking a fantasy basketball perspective where we can pretend the political and economic stuff doesn't matter. |
This is also under the presumption that Caruso makes us better. While I loved what he did for our title run he wasn't a needed commodity this year and even less so at the money needed to retain his services. He earned his pay raise and I wish him nothing but the best, I am just glad its not us shelling the dough out. |
See this right here...
| Quote: | Memphis is trading guard Grayson Allen to Milwaukee for Sam Merrill and two future second-round picks, sources tell ESPN.
that they are willing to make a financial commitment with this roster.
Luxury tax penalty will increase from $36M to $44M with this trade.
Milwaukee is right at $200M in salary and luxury tax.
|
...is annoying as (bleep) to me. Small market team wins a title and should be content coming down with fatcatitis. Instead, they add coin to their books and willingly pay more in taxes than we presently are (35m). Uh, we’re the big market team that wants to win #18 at no cost, right?
I got you AC...I won’t let them forget 
_________________
Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE!
Last edited by vasashi17+ on Fri Aug 06, 2021 8:57 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hype
Star Player
Joined: 19 Nov 2007
Posts: 4394
Location: Lake Nacimiento
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2021 8:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I mean the Lakers also just signed a guy thats still living on potential to a 3 year 10 million a year contract after they turned down paying for Caruso.. They offered Caruso 7 mill which I think personally is more then fair for what he gives and instead he turned it down for a bit more money on a non contender and thats fine but I see nothing that shows the Lakers are being overly cheap for it?
We're pretty loaded at guard with several guys that can very easily end up being better then Caruso at a fraction of the cost and not dealing a long term contract to a guy who's routinely banged up. Mind boggling to me it's this big of a deal to any Laker fans. I hated seeing him go but he chose a bit more money over returning here so it's time to move on and wish him good luck.. He's def. not the difference maker for us and has had back2back mediocre to bad Playoff runs if we really look at his overall game. We got some new guys to root for, let Caruso fade into mediocrity now on the Bulls. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vasashi17+
Star Player
Joined: 13 Dec 2019
Posts: 5766
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2021 9:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
How many true assets did we have on the squad? Draft capital is shut till 2027. Due to the deferment option we surrendered (for god knows why) prohibited us from trading away our own future 1sts in multiple years.
Young assets on team friendly deals: Kuz (maybe?), THT...even the young guys we just signed have either 1yr deals (Monk & 1&doneNunn via player option) or 2yr deals (THT has a 3rd yr PO as well)
Yeah that pretty much sums it up on assets we look to trade (Bron/AD obviously are off limits).
So that makes our FAs that much more important in retaining or utilizing as a trade chip.
Out of those key FAs, it’s really Schro, THT and AC that had real value. Drummond, Kieff and Wes were fringe assets at the best.
So it appears like we will lose Schro for nothing. We lost AC and it appears also for nothing, since we haven’t seen a report officially stating he was S&t’d to Chicago (so no TPE, even as insignificant a 4.3m TPE is).
You wondering how many offers THT got? Did we have to match any offer. So once again it appears we bid against ourselves and decided, let’s just pay the Klutch tax since they been so nice at hooking us up (without a Trez opt-in, the Russ trade becomes infinitely more difficult to achieve especially since we probably had no interest in pleading to Schro to help facilitate a S&t into the aggregate salary of Kuz/Kcp...not to mention, Kcp and his seemed to like LA and so they didn’t cause a stink on the way out...but he could have).
Not a difference maker?! Now that’s mind boggling. Dude was the best teammate of Bron based on advanced metrics.
It’s mind boggling how much some of you guys wanna deflect. If you’re going to bring in 3 stars in max salaries, expect to not only go all in on competing right the duck now, but also to pay the toll to the bball gods.
_________________
Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr. Laker
Franchise Player
Joined: 12 Apr 2002
Posts: 17205
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2021 9:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| vasashi17+ wrote: | How many true assets did we have on the squad? Draft capital is shut till 2027. Due to the deferment option we surrendered (for god knows why) prohibited us from trading away our own future 1sts in multiple years.
Young assets on team friendly deals: Kuz (maybe?), THT...even the young guys we just signed have either 1yr deals (Monk & 1&doneNunn via player option) or 2yr deals (THT has a 3rd yr PO as well)
Yeah that pretty much sums it up on assets we look to trade (Bron/AD obviously are off limits).
So that makes our FAs that much more important in retaining or utilizing as a trade chip.
Out of those key FAs, it’s really Schro, THT and AC that had real value. Drummond, Kieff and Wes were fringe assets at the best.
So it appears like we will lose Schro for nothing. We lost AC and it appears also for nothing, since we haven’t seen a report officially stating he was S&t’d to Chicago (so no TPE, even as insignificant a 4.3m TPE is).
You wondering how many offers THT got? Did we have to match any offer. So once again it appears we bid against ourselves and decided, let’s just pay the Klutch tax since they been so nice at hooking us up (without a Trez opt-in, the Russ trade becomes infinitely more difficult to achieve especially since we probably had no interest in pleading to Schro to help facilitate a S&t into the aggregate salary of Kuz/Kcp...not to mention, Kcp and his seemed to like LA and so they didn’t cause a stink on the way out...but he could have).
Not a difference maker?! Now that’s mind boggling. Dude was the best teammate of Bron based on advanced metrics.
It’s mind boggling how much some of you guys wanna deflect. If you’re going to bring in 3 stars in max salaries, expect to not only go all in on competing right the duck now, but also to pay the toll to the bball gods. |
This is a franchise that three-peated while being clowned by Mark Cuban as "The Merry Men of Minimum." Dr. Buss refused to exceed the salary cap . . . and won 8 rings in the salary cap era (10 total).
If I can win spending $100 million less than my competition, am I cheap - or am I just better than them?
Don't hate the player, hate the game . . .
_________________
On Lakersground, a concern troll is someone who is a fan of another team, but pretends to be a Lakers fan with "concerns". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vasashi17+
Star Player
Joined: 13 Dec 2019
Posts: 5766
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2021 10:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You mean the generational takent of Kobe and a once in a lifetime genetic marvel that was Shaq...yeah I ain’t hating those players.
A 3peat that some classify as rings still left on the table while Kob’s body got bodied, while Shaq’s Achilles migrated to his pinky toe. Yeah, that’s the game I would hate to play.
Russ has carried most his teams for years. We know AD plays defense and dudes that play defense have the battle scars to prove it. Bron has been an iron man and then he got to LA and started looking like the pine man. How long will those 3 hold it together? Shaq/Kobe were in their primes and still in their 20s.
Pay the MFing toll to the bball gods. We’ve seen how relentless that guy could be. Pay for even more depth and even more in your assets pool, so that if we need anything else to prolong our trio and their associated title run, we can pull those assets together and get em even more of a guarantee in ringS.
That’s have the game should be played. Playing it any other way is where you’re hating the player (and their associated health/well being).
_________________
Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
