OFFICIAL GENERAL FREE AGENCY/TRADE THREAD (Shams: Lakers to sign Sekou Doumbouya)
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 7002, 7003, 7004 ... 7049, 7050, 7051  Next

 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Inspector Gadget
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 18 Apr 2016
Posts: 36123

PostPosted: Fri Sep 17, 2021 12:34 pm    Post subject:

What’s the difference between Eric Gordon and Wayne Ellington? I know Gordon is a more talented scorer but it seems like both play the same style.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Outspoken
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 11 Feb 2015
Posts: 4384

PostPosted: Fri Sep 17, 2021 12:40 pm    Post subject:

Inspector Gadget wrote:
What’s the difference between Eric Gordon and Wayne Ellington? I know Gordon is a more talented scorer but it seems like both play the same style.


1 can create off the dribble in Eric Gordon, and the other is more of a catch and shoot in Wayne Ellington.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Inspector Gadget
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 18 Apr 2016
Posts: 36123

PostPosted: Fri Sep 17, 2021 12:43 pm    Post subject:

Outspoken wrote:
Inspector Gadget wrote:
What’s the difference between Eric Gordon and Wayne Ellington? I know Gordon is a more talented scorer but it seems like both play the same style.


1 can create off the dribble in Eric Gordon, and the other is more of a catch and shoot in Wayne Ellington.


Thanks, Gordon is definitely the better player but the injury issues + the contract makes him a undesirable trade target.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 32155

PostPosted: Fri Sep 17, 2021 12:49 pm    Post subject:

Inspector Gadget wrote:
Outspoken wrote:
Inspector Gadget wrote:
What’s the difference between Eric Gordon and Wayne Ellington? I know Gordon is a more talented scorer but it seems like both play the same style.


1 can create off the dribble in Eric Gordon, and the other is more of a catch and shoot in Wayne Ellington.


Thanks, Gordon is definitely the better player but the injury issues + the contract makes him a undesirable trade target, Ellington is much more durable.


Even with all his injury issues, Gordon is more explosive and has a more varied offensive game. As Outspoken said, Ellington pretty much is a catch-and-shoot 3-point specialist.

Neither is a good defender, but Gordon is probably a little better.

Gordon is more expensive and overpaid. Ellington is a vet minimum guy because he's not that talented other than shooting. Gordon loses a lot of games to injuries; Ellington loses games because lack of talent keeps him on the bench a lot.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Inspector Gadget
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 18 Apr 2016
Posts: 36123

PostPosted: Fri Sep 17, 2021 12:51 pm    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
Inspector Gadget wrote:
Outspoken wrote:
Inspector Gadget wrote:
What’s the difference between Eric Gordon and Wayne Ellington? I know Gordon is a more talented scorer but it seems like both play the same style.


1 can create off the dribble in Eric Gordon, and the other is more of a catch and shoot in Wayne Ellington.


Thanks, Gordon is definitely the better player but the injury issues + the contract makes him a undesirable trade target, Ellington is much more durable.


Even with all his injury issues, Gordon is more explosive and has a more varied offensive game. As Outspoken said, Ellington pretty much is a catch-and-shoot 3-point specialist.

Neither is a good defender, but Gordon is probably a little better.

Gordon is more expensive and overpaid. Ellington is a vet minimum guy because he's not that talented other than shooting. Gordon loses a lot of games to injuries; Ellington loses games because lack of talent keeps him on the bench a lot.


If it wasn’t for Gordon’s contract I would have had interest in him, maybe if he proves he can stay on the floor he can end up being a trade target during the season.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Chick's Magic Johnson
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 25 Mar 2016
Posts: 625

PostPosted: Fri Sep 17, 2021 12:52 pm    Post subject:

jodeke wrote:
activeverb wrote:

Quote:
I don't think any owner is going to spend every penny they can conceivably spend to increase their chance of winning by a small amount, just as players aren't going to give up money to increase their chance of winning.


That's not true. Harden took less money to play in Brooklyn with Durant and Kyrie. The Heat ran out of money to keep Haslem on the team, the big three of Wade, LeBron and Bosh stepped up to take a pay cut.


I agree, I think you can find plenty of examples of players chasing winning over $$$. You can find the opposite as well, to be sure, but either way this is pure whataboutism in response. The issue I'm talking about is different.

The Lakers did what they did and, as many have pointed out, the team being cheap at times (relatively speaking), especially with role players, is nothing new. It's just confusing to me to see fans of the team rally around billionaires to support them saving a buck and letting decent players walk.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
gng930
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 9169

PostPosted: Fri Sep 17, 2021 12:58 pm    Post subject:

vasashi17+ wrote:
gng930 wrote:


Would most people pay $40 million to insure $200+ million? Probably not and I wouldn't even consider AC the most reassuring insurance policy though you could argue that my analogy might not be spot on altogether. And while we will never know if Gasol ever had an intent to come back to accurately critique that decision, I do find it disingenuous to bunch the McKinnie and Rondo transactions together. Nobody could foresee that Rondo was going to get bought out when that decision was made on McKinnie. I think they made that move thinking they could get more on the market with less.


Disingenuous? McK was waived on August 4th...Rondo was linked to us at the end of August. The point was McK at 1.9m was waived and replaced by a vet min cap hit of 1.7m...it could have been Rondo, DJ, Melo, Monk, whoever...that was a 850k savings in salary+tax. And we here still sitting on a 13 man roster with McK still orbiting within the FAbyss. It’s not like we cut him lose to do him a solid in finding a new home that was already lined up.

Fact remains, he could have remained here till Jan. 10th when his contract would be fully guaranteed. The inconvenient truth is that the days of service he gives us during the regular season before we waive him has a prorated tax applied to it.

All these (non)moves had one objective: save ownership money. Thinking otherwise is disingenuous.


Your choice of wording definitely implied that McK and Rondo's transactions were intentionally linked but he said/she said... I get that ultimately you have to replace his above-minimum salary with a minimum salary which sets up a de facto link but that's not the same.

Yes it happened to save ownership money but to paint it as a pure cost-cutting measure is presumptive. Obviously the market has been cold on McK but it's entirely possible that he asked to be waived so that he could even field the market, if not for more guaranteed money then at least more playing time opportunity. I understand the argument to maximize your assets but there's also something to be said about maintaining good relationships. I can count a least a few times that agents went out of their way to compliment the FO for their "class" instead of keeping their clients in limbo. And for that same reason I can't necessarily fully judge the way things played out with Gasol. Ainge was notorious for hoarding assets and burning bridges; I'd rather they not take that approach.
_________________
Luxury Tax/FA Spreadsheet (Save to your Google Drive to edit)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jodeke
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 57747
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is consider a great way to learn.

PostPosted: Fri Sep 17, 2021 1:24 pm    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
jodeke wrote:
activeverb wrote:

Quote:
I don't think any owner is going to spend every penny they can conceivably spend to increase their chance of winning by a small amount, just as players aren't going to give up money to increase their chance of winning.


That's not true. Harden took less money to play in Brooklyn with Durant and Kyrie. The Heat ran out of money to keep Haslem on the team, the big three of Wade, LeBron and Bosh stepped up to take a pay cut.


Oh, sure, there are occasions now and then when players give up some money for a better chance of winning. But it's fairly rare, and it's even rarer for them to give up a significant amount of money.

In the case of Harden, he didn't actually give up money. He moved to a team in a different state with a higher tax system. Exactly how much that cost him is a complex calculation, since NBA players pay taxes in the different cities in which they play, and then things like property tax factor in as well.

If you are going to play the income tax game, you could also argue Bosh and Lebron didn't really lose money going to Miami (and might have made some) because that state has no state income tax.

All that said, by a large, it is fairly rare for an NBA player to take significantly less money in salary to improve his team's chances of winning. Of course, nothing is an absolute, and it is easy to find a few exceptions to the general rule, for both players and owners.

You're giving me reason this, reason that. Not talking about how much, taxes, all I said was "That's not true." About Harden LINK
Quote:
After weeks of pouting, minimal effort on the court, and blaming seemingly everyone but himself, Harden was traded from the Houston Rockets to the Brooklyn Nets in a blockbuster deal Wednesday. Harden will reunite with ex-Thunder teammate Kevin Durant in New York for what should be his best chance to win an NBA title yet. It might seem like a perfect situation for Harden, who’s wanted out of Houston for months, but the move will actually cost him $13 million.

_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.

America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.


Last edited by jodeke on Fri Sep 17, 2021 1:45 pm; edited 3 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jodeke
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 57747
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is consider a great way to learn.

PostPosted: Fri Sep 17, 2021 1:31 pm    Post subject:

Chick's Magic Johnson wrote:
jodeke wrote:
activeverb wrote:

Quote:
I don't think any owner is going to spend every penny they can conceivably spend to increase their chance of winning by a small amount, just as players aren't going to give up money to increase their chance of winning.


That's not true. Harden took less money to play in Brooklyn with Durant and Kyrie. The Heat ran out of money to keep Haslem on the team, the big three of Wade, LeBron and Bosh stepped up to take a pay cut.


I agree, I think you can find plenty of examples of players chasing winning over $$$. You can find the opposite as well, to be sure, but either way this is pure whataboutism in response. The issue I'm talking about is different.

The Lakers did what they did and, as many have pointed out, the team being cheap at times (relatively speaking), especially with role players, is nothing new. It's just confusing to me to see fans of the team rally around billionaires to support them saving a buck and letting decent players walk.


I'm not talking about owners, I'm talking about players. I vaguely remember Mark Cuban losing money to win, not sure, vaguely remember.
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.

America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DLaker
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 14 Jul 2005
Posts: 1337

PostPosted: Fri Sep 17, 2021 2:10 pm    Post subject:

This team have come a long way

End of 2015 4th worse team
- Clarkson, Randle (Star Kobe)
End of 2016 2nd worse team
- Clarkson, Randle, Dlo, Nance
End of 2017 3rd worse team
- Clarkson, Randle, Dlo, Nance, BI, Zu [Moz/Deng]
End of 2018 10th worse team
- Randle, BI, Zu, Zo, Kuz, Hart, Bryant, Caruso [Deng]
End of 2019 11th worse team
- BI, Zu, Zo, Kuz, Hart, Caruso, Mo, Svi, Bonga (Star LBJ) [Deng Waive]
End of 2020 NBA Champ
- Kuz, Caruso, THT (Star LBJ and AD) [Deng Waive]
End of 2021 tied 7th best team
- Kuz, Caruso, THT (Star LBJ and AD) [Deng Waive]

Current season 2021-2022
- THT, Nunn, Monk (Star LBJ, AD, RW) [Deng Waive]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Inspector Gadget
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 18 Apr 2016
Posts: 36123

PostPosted: Fri Sep 17, 2021 2:26 pm    Post subject:

DLaker wrote:
This team have come a long way

End of 2015 4th worse team
- Clarkson, Randle (Star Kobe)
End of 2016 2nd worse team
- Clarkson, Randle, Dlo, Nance
End of 2017 3rd worse team
- Clarkson, Randle, Dlo, Nance, BI, Zu [Moz/Deng]
End of 2018 10th worse team
- Randle, BI, Zu, Zo, Kuz, Hart, Bryant, Caruso [Deng]
End of 2019 11th worse team
- BI, Zu, Zo, Kuz, Hart, Caruso, Mo, Svi, Bonga (Star LBJ) [Deng Waive]
End of 2020 NBA Champ
- Kuz, Caruso, THT (Star LBJ and AD) [Deng Waive]
End of 2021 tied 7th best team
- Kuz, Caruso, THT (Star LBJ and AD) [Deng Waive]

Current season 2021-2022
- THT, Nunn, Monk (Star LBJ, AD, RW) [Deng Waive]


I still remember the line up during the Lakers dark years in which we had Sacre/Ryan Kelly and a few other scrubs starting in a game.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
joeblow
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 24 Nov 2008
Posts: 2146

PostPosted: Fri Sep 17, 2021 3:19 pm    Post subject:

DLaker wrote:
This team have come a long way

End of 2015 4th worse team
- Clarkson, Randle (Star Kobe)
End of 2016 2nd worse team
- Clarkson, Randle, Dlo, Nance
End of 2017 3rd worse team
- Clarkson, Randle, Dlo, Nance, BI, Zu [Moz/Deng]
End of 2018 10th worse team
- Randle, BI, Zu, Zo, Kuz, Hart, Bryant, Caruso [Deng]
End of 2019 11th worse team
- BI, Zu, Zo, Kuz, Hart, Caruso, Mo, Svi, Bonga (Star LBJ) [Deng Waive]
End of 2020 NBA Champ
- Kuz, Caruso, THT (Star LBJ and AD) [Deng Waive]
End of 2021 tied 7th best team
- Kuz, Caruso, THT (Star LBJ and AD) [Deng Waive]

Current season 2021-2022
- THT, Nunn, Monk (Star LBJ, AD, RW) [Deng Waive]

Dang.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 32155

PostPosted: Fri Sep 17, 2021 3:53 pm    Post subject:

Inspector Gadget wrote:
activeverb wrote:
Inspector Gadget wrote:
Outspoken wrote:
Inspector Gadget wrote:
What’s the difference between Eric Gordon and Wayne Ellington? I know Gordon is a more talented scorer but it seems like both play the same style.


1 can create off the dribble in Eric Gordon, and the other is more of a catch and shoot in Wayne Ellington.


Thanks, Gordon is definitely the better player but the injury issues + the contract makes him a undesirable trade target, Ellington is much more durable.


Even with all his injury issues, Gordon is more explosive and has a more varied offensive game. As Outspoken said, Ellington pretty much is a catch-and-shoot 3-point specialist.

Neither is a good defender, but Gordon is probably a little better.

Gordon is more expensive and overpaid. Ellington is a vet minimum guy because he's not that talented other than shooting. Gordon loses a lot of games to injuries; Ellington loses games because lack of talent keeps him on the bench a lot.


If it wasn’t for Gordon’s contract I would have had interest in him, maybe if he proves he can stay on the floor he can end up being a trade target during the season.


I don't see that happening. I think the only we could balance salaries is THT and Nunn.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 32155

PostPosted: Fri Sep 17, 2021 3:55 pm    Post subject:

jodeke wrote:
activeverb wrote:
jodeke wrote:
activeverb wrote:

Quote:
I don't think any owner is going to spend every penny they can conceivably spend to increase their chance of winning by a small amount, just as players aren't going to give up money to increase their chance of winning.


That's not true. Harden took less money to play in Brooklyn with Durant and Kyrie. The Heat ran out of money to keep Haslem on the team, the big three of Wade, LeBron and Bosh stepped up to take a pay cut.


Oh, sure, there are occasions now and then when players give up some money for a better chance of winning. But it's fairly rare, and it's even rarer for them to give up a significant amount of money.

In the case of Harden, he didn't actually give up money. He moved to a team in a different state with a higher tax system. Exactly how much that cost him is a complex calculation, since NBA players pay taxes in the different cities in which they play, and then things like property tax factor in as well.

If you are going to play the income tax game, you could also argue Bosh and Lebron didn't really lose money going to Miami (and might have made some) because that state has no state income tax.

All that said, by a large, it is fairly rare for an NBA player to take significantly less money in salary to improve his team's chances of winning. Of course, nothing is an absolute, and it is easy to find a few exceptions to the general rule, for both players and owners.

You're giving me reason this, reason that. Not talking about how much, taxes, all I said was "That's not true." About Harden LINK
Quote:
After weeks of pouting, minimal effort on the court, and blaming seemingly everyone but himself, Harden was traded from the Houston Rockets to the Brooklyn Nets in a blockbuster deal Wednesday. Harden will reunite with ex-Thunder teammate Kevin Durant in New York for what should be his best chance to win an NBA title yet. It might seem like a perfect situation for Harden, who’s wanted out of Houston for months, but the move will actually cost him $13 million.


Did you even read the article you're linking to? It's saying exactly what I did about income taxes.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Car54
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 10 Aug 2005
Posts: 13317

PostPosted: Fri Sep 17, 2021 7:56 pm    Post subject:

Inspector Gadget wrote:
What’s the difference between Eric Gordon and Wayne Ellington? I know Gordon is a more talented scorer but it seems like both play the same style.


Not even close to the same player. Gordon is better and plays defense.
_________________
Coach Vogel, Kidd, Hollins
Max slot : Kawhi
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vasashi17+
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 13 Dec 2019
Posts: 2239

PostPosted: Sat Sep 18, 2021 5:10 am    Post subject:

J.C. Smith wrote:
vasashi17+ wrote:
I’m happy with #17, but I think it’s disingenuous to think the unique COVID climate has no impact an a rather unusual season and postseason.


You could say the same about last year (short off season, way too many injuries) or any number of other years (strike years, expansion years). The reality is that pre-Covid the Lakers and Bucks were the best teams in the league and the Lakers had found their groove with a string of big wins before the shut down.


True...which is why both need to compete this postseason and prove their recent runs weren’t a fluke and/or heavily attributed to the unique situations COVID presented them with. Real talk, we would be saying this about any non-Laker title team as well. Especially for us and the way we are constructed around LeBron, it’s title or bust.

Dr. Laker wrote:
JUST-MING wrote:
vasashi17+ wrote:

I’m happy with #17, but I think it’s disingenuous to think the unique COVID climate has no impact an a rather unusual season and postseason. That being said, I like our chances this year and proving #17 wasn’t a fluke. Still, I would love to be in this position, while looking at cap sheet thinking, yep management did everything they could to get #18 and we got a number of assets to fall back on in case emergency strikes or we need to shuffle up the deck.


We already have #18


Just went back through that thread. Man, the trolls back then were much more tolerable than our current ones.


Just went back through this quote and someone needs to tell dude to stop trolling the fan base. We aiming to raise #19. #GreatestStoryEverTrolld

Quote:
We have an insatiable desire and passion to bring banner No. 18 here and we’re excited about the work we’re gonna commence tomorrow to get that done for our fans and for the organization.


Speaking of trolling, wouldn’t it be something if long time veteran members kept that same energy in producing quality discussion inducing posts rather than troll hunt? LG would be better for it. Ah well, not all stories have a happy ending.

gng930 wrote:
vasashi17+ wrote:
gng930 wrote:


Would most people pay $40 million to insure $200+ million? Probably not and I wouldn't even consider AC the most reassuring insurance policy though you could argue that my analogy might not be spot on altogether. And while we will never know if Gasol ever had an intent to come back to accurately critique that decision, I do find it disingenuous to bunch the McKinnie and Rondo transactions together. Nobody could foresee that Rondo was going to get bought out when that decision was made on McKinnie. I think they made that move thinking they could get more on the market with less.


Disingenuous? McK was waived on August 4th...Rondo was linked to us at the end of August. The point was McK at 1.9m was waived and replaced by a vet min cap hit of 1.7m...it could have been Rondo, DJ, Melo, Monk, whoever...that was a 850k savings in salary+tax. And we here still sitting on a 13 man roster with McK still orbiting within the FAbyss. It’s not like we cut him lose to do him a solid in finding a new home that was already lined up.

Fact remains, he could have remained here till Jan. 10th when his contract would be fully guaranteed. The inconvenient truth is that the days of service he gives us during the regular season before we waive him has a prorated tax applied to it.

All these (non)moves had one objective: save ownership money. Thinking otherwise is disingenuous.


Your choice of wording definitely implied that McK and Rondo's transactions were intentionally linked but he said/she said... I get that ultimately you have to replace his above-minimum salary with a minimum salary which sets up a de facto link but that's not the same.

Yes it happened to save ownership money but to paint it as a pure cost-cutting measure is presumptive. Obviously the market has been cold on McK but it's entirely possible that he asked to be waived so that he could even field the market, if not for more guaranteed money then at least more playing time opportunity. I understand the argument to maximize your assets but there's also something to be said about maintaining good relationships. I can count a least a few times that agents went out of their way to compliment the FO for their "class" instead of keeping their clients in limbo. And for that same reason I can't necessarily fully judge the way things played out with Gasol. Ainge was notorious for hoarding assets and burning bridges; I'd rather they not take that approach.


Alright, let me word it like this: the decision with AC, management saved roughly 40m in salary + tax on top of the 9m they already saved with the decisions made toward not using the full mMLE along with dumping Gasol/McK. Net they saved was around 50m in salary+tax. I guess they couldn’t stomach that price tag even though they had an insatiable desire to raise banner #18...or is it #19??? Anyways, AC was for more palatabull for Chicago.

As for good relationships, they have a funny way of communicating that. They told Dudz they were going younger...I guess they did with Rondo & DJ, but I guess like me, they could have worded it better. They sure made Nina look bad in having AD trot out for no reason in Game 6. Communication between Vogs and our FO has also been suspect: see bringing in Marc/Trez at a premium only to have them collect DNPs during the season. But aside from the coaching/med staff, there were miscommunications with Dwight last offseason, that continued with AC this offseason. And although I don’t have much sympathy for these next couple dudes, I’m sure Schro/Drummond feel a certain way towards the Lakers. So I’m not so sure how much “class” is involved with all these starting gig promises/DNPs that we’re going around last season, but I’m sure you would agree that it was less than ideal.

Lastly, I couldn’t agree with you more CMJ
_________________
Are other members mocking your trade proposals?
Are you not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules?
Don’t be that guy/gal! Please CLICK HERE to get familiar!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Dr. Laker
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Apr 2002
Posts: 15060

PostPosted: Sat Sep 18, 2021 8:00 am    Post subject:

jodeke wrote:
activeverb wrote:

Quote:
I don't think any owner is going to spend every penny they can conceivably spend to increase their chance of winning by a small amount, just as players aren't going to give up money to increase their chance of winning.


That's not true. Harden took less money to play in Brooklyn with Durant and Kyrie. The Heat ran out of money to keep Haslem on the team, the big three of Wade, LeBron and Bosh stepped up to take a pay cut.


There's an order of magnitude difference between a "haircut" and a "paycut." LBJ and Bosh taking $110 million each instead of $116 million each is a "haircut." Much like AD waiving a part of his trade kicker to help the Lakers out.

Owners do it, too, in the short term. I recall the Marlins in baseball going "all in" in 1997 by adding a bunch of salaries. They won the WS in 7, then immediately dumped their highest salary guys and finished in last place in 1998. Ditto Cuban - in his early years as Mavs owner, he spent lavishly, but he hasn't paid the luxury tax since their 2011 Championship. https://www.spotrac.com/nba/cba/tax/

Even Ballmer is concerned about money - they traded team icon PatBev and saved $30 million in luxury taxes.

Th only guy I remember taking a ridiculous pay cut while in his prime was Rick Fox. He turned down a 3 year/$15 million contract to sign with the Lakers in 1997 for 3 year/$3 million deal - but he was motivated to jump start his acting career.
_________________
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
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
AD23
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 15 Jul 2019
Posts: 2016

PostPosted: Sat Sep 18, 2021 8:18 am    Post subject:

Dr. Laker wrote:
jodeke wrote:
activeverb wrote:

Quote:
I don't think any owner is going to spend every penny they can conceivably spend to increase their chance of winning by a small amount, just as players aren't going to give up money to increase their chance of winning.


That's not true. Harden took less money to play in Brooklyn with Durant and Kyrie. The Heat ran out of money to keep Haslem on the team, the big three of Wade, LeBron and Bosh stepped up to take a pay cut.


There's an order of magnitude difference between a "haircut" and a "paycut." LBJ and Bosh taking $110 million each instead of $116 million each is a "haircut." Much like AD waiving a part of his trade kicker to help the Lakers out.

Owners do it, too, in the short term. I recall the Marlins in baseball going "all in" in 1997 by adding a bunch of salaries. They won the WS in 7, then immediately dumped their highest salary guys and finished in last place in 1998. Ditto Cuban - in his early years as Mavs owner, he spent lavishly, but he hasn't paid the luxury tax since their 2011 Championship. https://www.spotrac.com/nba/cba/tax/

Even Ballmer is concerned about money - they traded team icon PatBev and saved $30 million in luxury taxes.

Th only guy I remember taking a ridiculous pay cut while in his prime was Rick Fox. He turned down a 3 year/$15 million contract to sign with the Lakers in 1997 for 3 year/$3 million deal - but he was motivated to jump start his acting career.


It was actually a 1 yr deal for $1M followed by another 1 yr deal where Fox trusted the Lakers to "keep their promise". He went on to sign a 6 yr $25M deal in 1999.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 32155

PostPosted: Sat Sep 18, 2021 9:40 am    Post subject:

Dr. Laker wrote:

Th only guy I remember taking a ridiculous pay cut while in his prime was Rick Fox. He turned down a 3 year/$15 million contract to sign with the Lakers in 1997 for 3 year/$3 million deal - but he was motivated to jump start his acting career.


That's true.

Typically, you see guys who give up money in buyouts or at the end of their careers to chase rings. Like most things, there are often multiple motivations at work. These guys are usually in situations where they are not playing, they hate the city they are in, and they want to feel valued again.

Fox is a perfect example of the multiple motivations. He wanted to go from a crappy Celtics team to a good Lakers team, but he also wanted to develop an acting career.

I know some posters have brought up how players have moved to teams where they pay more state income tax, but I am not sure how many players even consider or even realize stuff like that when they are making trade demands. A lot of NBA players are not exactly deep thinking financial geniuses. Their agents might not bring it up since it doesn't affect the agent's cut.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 25484

PostPosted: Sat Sep 18, 2021 12:00 pm    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
I know some posters have brought up how players have moved to teams where they pay more state income tax, but I am not sure how many players even consider or even realize stuff like that when they are making trade demands. A lot of NBA players are not exactly deep thinking financial geniuses. Their agents might not bring it up since it doesn't affect the agent's cut.


Two comments on this:

1. I expect that players know all about this, because the teams from the states with low income taxes have an incentive to tell them all about it.

2. But I suspect that this is just background noise to most players. It's just a part of the cost of living in different places. Everyone knows that it costs a lot more to live in NYC or San Francisco than San Antonio or Orlando. It isn't just state and local taxes. It's pretty much everything. So, for example, I doubt that Harden perceived his move to Brooklyn as a pay cut. He was just moving to NYC, and it was going to cost more to live there. If cost of living was really essential to players, then the Lakers and Clippers would have trouble attracting players.
_________________
Internet Argument Resolved
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
RG73
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 14 Jul 2001
Posts: 11389

PostPosted: Sat Sep 18, 2021 12:26 pm    Post subject:

vasashi17+ wrote:

True...which is why both need to compete this postseason and prove their recent runs weren’t a fluke and/or heavily attributed to the unique situations COVID presented them with. Real talk, we would be saying this about any non-Laker title team as well. Especially for us and the way we are constructed around LeBron, it’s title or bust


They already won, it's history. Whether they win again or not is irrelevant to the fact that they won that season. Winning again isn't proof it wasn't a fluke, it proves they were the best team under the current set of circumstances.

I fail to understand this obsession about a championship team having to subsequently prove they're actually a championship team. The Larry O'Brien trophy says it all.

And regardless of what happened two seasons ago, the team would need to contend for a championship. That would be expected with the talent they have. Besides, is it going to be a fluke going through a Kawhi-less West? What if Giannis and Durant go down with season ending injuries? Will it still be a fluke if they win it all?

You can literally go through every single NBA season and find some reason to discount that the eventual champion didn't go through every single possible competitor or obstacle and had a great deal of luck on their side. How many champions resulted from various last second shots? How come those teams aren't considered flukes? If you replayed various last second heroic shots over and over again you might get a variety of outcomes. So through all the multiverses there are scenarios were the Lakers did and didn't win in the bubble and where other past champions failed. Play that game all you want. But the universe we all live in, the Lakers won fair and square and were the best team under the circumstances that all the teams faced.

Moving forward, we all expect the team will try their best to be the last team standing again--another early round bow out will be a disappointment. Again, that would be the case regardless of what happened in the past.

I would also note that given that the composition of the two teams is substantially different, even if the previous championship was a fluke, how is the performance of a different roster an indication of how good the other team was? I mean sure, you have Lebron, AD, Dwight and Rondo back, but otherwise it's a new team. The performance of the two teams is largely unrelated based on roster composition, not to mention say coaching staff changes. Then there's rule changes to consider---for example, not rewarding offensive players for throwing themselves into a defender. So if the game is literally called differently, we can effectively say the two teams with different rosters are also playing under a different set of rules. Next, the composition of the competition is also different than what it was a couple of seasons ago. So since this team cannot face the same teams as before, we can't possibly know if their performance was a fluke. Lastly, Lebron is two years older. So even where you have the same player, they're not the same player as they were.

So you basically want to conduct an experiment that isn't possible to verify a hypothesis that isn't falsifiable. The banner is going to hang from Staples regardless of how flukey you think it is and the players are going to keep their rings because THEY WON. It's really that simple. Like were they not supposed to win that season in order to satisfy your desire to see them win in a sort of normal season (and recall last season wasn't even a normal NBA season with the shortened off season, fewer games, covid protocols, etc.)? I expect the new normal for the NBA moving forward is for there to not be a normal anymore and every season is going to be a bit weird until this covid thing has finally blown over.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 32155

PostPosted: Sat Sep 18, 2021 12:34 pm    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
activeverb wrote:
I know some posters have brought up how players have moved to teams where they pay more state income tax, but I am not sure how many players even consider or even realize stuff like that when they are making trade demands. A lot of NBA players are not exactly deep thinking financial geniuses. Their agents might not bring it up since it doesn't affect the agent's cut.


Two comments on this:

1. I expect that players know all about this, because the teams from the states with low income taxes have an incentive to tell them all about it.

2. But I suspect that this is just background noise to most players. It's just a part of the cost of living in different places. Everyone knows that it costs a lot more to live in NYC or San Francisco than San Antonio or Orlando. It isn't just state and local taxes. It's pretty much everything. So, for example, I doubt that Harden perceived his move to Brooklyn as a pay cut. He was just moving to NYC, and it was going to cost more to live there. If cost of living was really essential to players, then the Lakers and Clippers would have trouble attracting players.


That's a reasonable way to put it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jodeke
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 57747
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is consider a great way to learn.

PostPosted: Sat Sep 18, 2021 12:55 pm    Post subject:

Dr. Laker wrote:
jodeke wrote:
activeverb wrote:

Quote:
I don't think any owner is going to spend every penny they can conceivably spend to increase their chance of winning by a small amount, just as players aren't going to give up money to increase their chance of winning.


That's not true. Harden took less money to play in Brooklyn with Durant and Kyrie. The Heat ran out of money to keep Haslem on the team, the big three of Wade, LeBron and Bosh stepped up to take a pay cut.


There's an order of magnitude difference between a "haircut" and a "paycut." LBJ and Bosh taking $110 million each instead of $116 million each is a "haircut." Much like AD waiving a part of his trade kicker to help the Lakers out.

Owners do it, too, in the short term. I recall the Marlins in baseball going "all in" in 1997 by adding a bunch of salaries. They won the WS in 7, then immediately dumped their highest salary guys and finished in last place in 1998. Ditto Cuban - in his early years as Mavs owner, he spent lavishly, but he hasn't paid the luxury tax since their 2011 Championship. https://www.spotrac.com/nba/cba/tax/

Even Ballmer is concerned about money - they traded team icon PatBev and saved $30 million in luxury taxes.

Th only guy I remember taking a ridiculous pay cut while in his prime was Rick Fox. He turned down a 3 year/$15 million contract to sign with the Lakers in 1997 for 3 year/$3 million deal - but he was motivated to jump start his acting career.


Again you're talking about degree. All I said and will stick with
Quote:
just as players aren't going to give up money to increase their chance of winning.
is not true. Not how much but players will give up money to win a ring.
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.

America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.


Last edited by jodeke on Sat Sep 18, 2021 2:02 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
AD23
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 15 Jul 2019
Posts: 2016

PostPosted: Sat Sep 18, 2021 1:50 pm    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
Dr. Laker wrote:

Th only guy I remember taking a ridiculous pay cut while in his prime was Rick Fox. He turned down a 3 year/$15 million contract to sign with the Lakers in 1997 for 3 year/$3 million deal - but he was motivated to jump start his acting career.


That's true.

Typically, you see guys who give up money in buyouts or at the end of their careers to chase rings. Like most things, there are often multiple motivations at work. These guys are usually in situations where they are not playing, they hate the city they are in, and they want to feel valued again.

Fox is a perfect example of the multiple motivations. He wanted to go from a crappy Celtics team to a good Lakers team, but he also wanted to develop an acting career.

I know some posters have brought up how players have moved to teams where they pay more state income tax, but I am not sure how many players even consider or even realize stuff like that when they are making trade demands. A lot of NBA players are not exactly deep thinking financial geniuses. Their agents might not bring it up since it doesn't affect the agent's cut.


Not really. I love how this story became Fox leaving the Celtics for less money to become a movie star.

The Celtics actually offered him a big contract. Then pulled it lol. I think this was when Rick Pitino took over.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 32155

PostPosted: Sat Sep 18, 2021 1:54 pm    Post subject:

AD23 wrote:
activeverb wrote:
Dr. Laker wrote:

Th only guy I remember taking a ridiculous pay cut while in his prime was Rick Fox. He turned down a 3 year/$15 million contract to sign with the Lakers in 1997 for 3 year/$3 million deal - but he was motivated to jump start his acting career.


That's true.

Typically, you see guys who give up money in buyouts or at the end of their careers to chase rings. Like most things, there are often multiple motivations at work. These guys are usually in situations where they are not playing, they hate the city they are in, and they want to feel valued again.

Fox is a perfect example of the multiple motivations. He wanted to go from a crappy Celtics team to a good Lakers team, but he also wanted to develop an acting career.

I know some posters have brought up how players have moved to teams where they pay more state income tax, but I am not sure how many players even consider or even realize stuff like that when they are making trade demands. A lot of NBA players are not exactly deep thinking financial geniuses. Their agents might not bring it up since it doesn't affect the agent's cut.


Not really. I love how this story became Fox leaving the Celtics for less money to become a movie star.

The Celtics actually offered him a big contract. Then pulled it lol. I think this was when Rick Pitino took over.


You're right about the Celtics. They offered him a contract and then withdrew (the reasons are complicated).

At that point, Fox became a free agent. That's the point when he turned down larger offers from other teams, in part to develop an acting career in LA.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 7002, 7003, 7004 ... 7049, 7050, 7051  Next
Page 7003 of 7051
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






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


Powered by phpBB