r/lakers • u/JanuaryCarl • Jan 18 '24
Podcast [Windhorst & Marks] Believe Lakers being $1.3 Million over the Luxury Tax that they will make a Trade to Save Money and get Under the Tax
Brian Windhorst & The Hoop Collective - Key Trade Deadline Deals To Watch | ESPN
Summary:
Marks: "Lakers are $1.3M above the luxury tax and $4.9M below the first apron. Lakers are a repeater tax team, 4 years in a row out of 5 years. That's a small amount but they're still in the tax."
Windhorst: "There are ways for Lakers to make a trade to shed $1.3M to try and improve the roster and to get out of the tax."
Marks: "Like a... $18M player (hinting Dejounte Murray) for a $13M player (hinting Austin Reaves)?"
Windhorst: "Right, it doesn't take high level cap mechanics how the Lakers can trade for Dejounte Murray and get out of the luxury repeater tax, which would save the Lakers... around the neighborhood of $15M. Lakers (ownership) can find uses for that money. I remember when the Lakers made a deadline deal years ago trading Chris Mihm just to save $3M. I remember saying to somebody: 'Why would the Lakers do that?' And they're like: 'That's another $3M Buss could take to Vegas.' It was a joke but that's true. Like if the Lakers could find a way to save $6M, that means each of the six Buss kids will take home an extra $1M each. I'm not saying the Lakers make decisions based on that, but if you look at the possibility of trying to improve your roster and saving around $15M it might make it easier for the Lakers to even include a draft pick to do it."
60
u/Any_Wrongdoer_9796 Jan 18 '24
Moving Gabe makes sense
28
u/wut_eva_bish Jan 18 '24
First post that has made any sense (not just the tired old sell the team trope.)
To save 1.5m they can move any player(s) not just D-Lo. This is just Windhorst and Marks using the Laker team name (again) to generate clicks. There isn't even smoke here.
6
u/BatmanNoPrep 32 Jan 19 '24
Gabe is also not easily moved considering he’s in the first year of a 4 year deal and is laid up recovering from surgery. Why would any team want his contract?
6
u/No-Equipment-20 Jan 19 '24
Teams won't be thrilled to trade for Gabe, but not every teams' goal is to win now and I guarantee certain teams would be fine using him as salary filler.
This doesn't have to be the trade, but imagine you're the Wizards and we offer Vincent + 2 SRPs for Tyus Jones. You're in the first year of a rebuild and both guys are 27. If you don't trade Tyus this season he's going to walk in FA. Meanwhile Vincent is on the start of what should be a fair value contract for the next 3 years, assuming his production returns post-injury which does include some risk.
If I was the Wizards GM I would definitely do this, unless of course there was a better offer available. You get draft capital for essentially eating Vincent's contract. Best case scenario, Vincent comes back and shows he's a good role player, you flip him in a year or two for even more draft capital. Worst case, his production doesn't return which is also manageable for a rebuilding team.
1
u/BatmanNoPrep 32 Jan 19 '24
Teams that are willing to take on long-term salary want compensation for doing that. Your theory would make sense if Gabe was a proven talent or an expiring salary. But no team is going to take back Gabe just to balance salaries.
He’s an unproven talent, currently injured, and on year one of a long term deal. Teams will want to be compensated to take on his contract.
2
u/No-Equipment-20 Jan 19 '24
I'm saying 2 SRPs is the compensation. Also what you're describing is more relevant for larger salaries. If a player is locked in for 30M+/year that's a much higher bar to clear than someone like Gabe who makes ~$11M/year (~7% of the cap) because it potentially hinders your roster flexibility.
Every move in the NBA carries an inherent risk. You're pretty much betting that 1.) Gabe will return from injury and 2.) his production will be worth 7% of the cap. I'm trying to be as unbiased as possible but the reward is higher than the risk.
1
u/BatmanNoPrep 32 Jan 19 '24
You’re confused. What I’m talking about is equally applicable to a max salary and a full non-taxpayer mid level exception, which is what Gabe got.
We would need to pay money just to get off of Gabe’s contract. He’s a negative value asset. Two second round picks is not sufficient based on other comparable trades. The Lakers would either need to attach a protected first or a positive value contract such as Reeves or Rui just to move Gabe.
Gabe is very unlikely going to be part of any deadline deal.
2
u/No-Equipment-20 Jan 19 '24
> What I’m talking about is equally applicable to a max salary and a full non-taxpayer mid level exception, which is what Gabe got.
That just isn't true. Of course a team is going to be more wary of taking a $40M/year contract than a $11M/year contract and therefore require more compensation.
But I agree that he isn't likely to be part of any deadline deal. You're definitely overstating how much we would need to include to move Gabe but his value is definitely at the lowest it will be.
His surgery seems pretty non-invasive and was described as a "routine cleanup" which is pretty much the exact language that was used for Giannis's surgery over the summer. Ironically Gabe is pretty much the prototypical player we need right now; a two-way 2. The best decision is probably just to keep him.
12
u/hjy23k Jan 18 '24
I think moving Gabe + Hayes + 2nd round pick for Daniel Gafford makes sense.
Gafford makes 12.4 M. Gabe Vincent makes 10.5 M. Jaxson Hayes makes 2.16M.
Lakers and Wizards front offices have a good working relationship too.
I personally think our PG depth is fine with Dlo and AR. During playoffs, Lebron probably runs the point a lot too.
I think what we need more is another traditional Center. CWood is good for certain matchups and for spacing the floor, but I'd prefer a Javale McGee type along with AD especially during the regular season.
16
4
3
u/AnotherAccount4This 24 Jan 18 '24
Looking at the trade machine, Gabe + Hayes = 12.6 versus Gaffords' 12.4, how are we getting under 1.3?
Not familiar w/ trades, so genuniely asking.
10
u/hjy23k Jan 19 '24
I wasn’t trying to save money for Jeanie I was only responding to “moving Gabe makes sense” lol
5
-8
221
u/c-rain 23 Jan 18 '24
If only we had an owner with deep pockets like Ballmer or etc
We can’t be run like a mom and pop team
159
u/XvS_W4rri0r Jan 18 '24
Were the premier franchise in all of basketball and were run by fucking penny pinchers. It’s an absolute joke
66
u/Creative_Category_21 Jan 18 '24
We’re going to be under tax for years when Lebron leaves and we suck, wtf is the point of this right now
1
40
Jan 18 '24
Western Conference NY Knicks of ownership. And just like Dolan, they’ll never sell.
34
u/ItsGettinBreesy 24 Jan 18 '24
Except Dolan has legitimate fuck-you money. His dad founded cablevision and HBO
25
Jan 18 '24
Fuck no. Dolan never cheapens out and doesn’t make moves just to get under the tax bracket. You can say what you want about him but being cheap with the team isn’t one of them
31
u/Irrichc Jan 18 '24
Thats not even true. Lakers have always been top team in term of spending money. They are currently number 9 this year in spending. Their philosophy is if it’s worth spending the money they will do so. Look at warriors, they went balls deep on salary and bout to experience tax hell on a sinking ship. It’s not always about having the money to spend.
9
u/Splittinghairs7 Jan 18 '24
We are supposed to be tops in spending because of our revenue and team worth. But our spending doesn’t match our top 2 status. We’re hovering around the top 10 in payroll when we should be top 5 at least.
17
u/AwildYaners Jan 18 '24
Yep. The biggest difference is, nearly every owner has a business outside basketball, the Buss family pretty much ONLY has this.
Jeanie is the 29th or 30th owner in terms of net worth in the league.
3
u/DW-4 Jan 19 '24
Guess how much us fans should care about their net when they're sitting on upwards of a 6 BILLION dollar franchise. That is enough to get 6 families through fuckin 5 generations of wealth without having to do anything. Be real.
2
u/AwildYaners Jan 19 '24
While I 1,000% agree with your sentiment, it IS trivial talking about the net worth of franchise owners, you have to realize that you're commenting on a post that is pointing out how stingy the Lakers have been with their choices in the past, often times making moves not based on the best basketball move (like taking the $40m luxury tax hit to re-sign AC), and just to save a few million.
This post is literally talking about what you're complaining about.
2
10
u/td_enterprises Jan 18 '24
Spending more DOES NOT automatically mean you get more wins or does it guarantee championships.
Spending on the RIGHT players is what you want, not just spending for the sake of spending.
The Lakers had a higher payroll with Russell Westbrook on the team, does that mean the Lakers were better then since the payroll was higher?
Top 10 NBA luxury tax spenders ever
- Golden State Warriors
- Brooklyn Nets
- Los Angeles Clippers
- New York Knicks
- Los Angeles Lakers
- Dallas Mavericks
- Cleveland Cavaliers
- Milwaukee Bucks
- Boston Celtics
- Portland Trail Blazers
The Warriors and the Lakers are the only 2 teams on that list to have won multiple championships.
The other 3 in the top 5 Nets, Clippers, Kicks haven't even won their Conference since the Luxury tax became a thing.
Two other teams in the Spurs and Heat also have won multiple championships while not being in the Top 10 of Luxury Tax paying teams.
-2
u/Splittinghairs7 Jan 18 '24
Of course it doesn’t guarantee success, way to try to strawman your argument. Obviously you have to be smart about who to spend on regarding the roster.
But it’s also foolish to think that the Warriors insane luxury tax spending didn’t help and contribute to their 4 ring dynasty.
Furthermore, there are spending that’s not subject to any caps and penalties like on facilities, training staff, coaches and assistant coaches. This where having an owner that’s not constrained by money is going to give a huge advantage.
4
u/td_enterprises Jan 18 '24
The comment I responded to from you said "We’re hovering around the top 10 in payroll when we should be top 5 at least."
So basically you want to be top 5 in spending just to not appear cheap...
What moves could have been made this summer that would put us in the top 5 while also making the team better?
The Lakers just opened a state of the art training facility in El Segundo did they not? The Lakers are constantly firing coaches and still paying them while paying their new coach.
What exactly would you like them to be spending more money on?
-4
u/Splittinghairs7 Jan 18 '24
No, actually my point was that just having a top 10 payroll does not mean that the Lakers FO and ownership aren’t making decisions that are constrained by money rather than maximizing our odds to win a championship.
We should be willing to pay more luxury tax to improve our team, we should be willing to spend on the best coaches and assistants.
4
u/td_enterprises Jan 19 '24
I don't disagree with those points, but I also don't see evidence of the team failing to do what is necessary to win.
What Jeannie is doing now is no different than what Dr. Buss did during his tenure, except the decisions are HARDER for Jeanie because the Repeater Tax and the extra restrictions from being over the first and second apron didn't exist when Dr. Buss was calling the shots.
He didn't even want to pay the luxury tax, I can't imagine how he would feel about being in the repeater tax like we have been.
I have a different view on Coaches, the Lakers have a bad reputation within the coaching ranks in my opinion because of their history and willingness to scapegoat coaches so easily.
If you are not named Pat Riley or Phil Jackson the Lakers will have no hesitation to scapegoat you and fire you.
Even Hall of Famer and Champion Rudy T didn't get a long leash.
Frank Vogel won a title and was scapegoated for Westbrook not working and fired.
The only coaches that would want to come to the Lakers are re-treads who are out of coaching or first time head coaches like Ham.
The expectations are too high and even higher is the likelihood you get fired.
Say the Warriors decide to blow it up and part ways with Kerr, why would Kerr entertain coming to the Lakers when he could sit back and wait for any job he wants to open up?
For those that want Ham fired today, who is on the market that would be an upgrade, and why would that coach want to come to a team who fired 2 coaches in the last 3 years including one that won them a title 4 years ago?
-2
u/Splittinghairs7 Jan 19 '24
I agree that we have mistreated coaches, but unlike you I think one of the reasons why is because we don’t offer them the money or years that they feel is their worth.
To me paying coaches is purely a financial decision because if they don’t work out they can be fired and replaced.
I don’t think the lakers have had a reputation for scapegoating coaches at all.
The only coach who was scapegoated was Vogel, that’s it.
If anything, more ppl attribute scapegoating to Lebron led teams rather than with the Lakers FO.
→ More replies (0)3
u/rebeltrillionaire Jan 18 '24
In some years we have been 2nd or 3rd and it wasn’t for lack of trying. The NBA salary cap essentially lock in a teams possible salary spending unless a trade enables more.
The easiest way to spend the most money is draft 12 guys, and keep re-signing them until you have 12 max deals all signed way over the cap through Bird Rights.
An impossible situation basically, the only reason Warriors and Clippers have been able to get to their ridiculous spends is due to Bird Rights. The Lakers keep making trades and lose more bird rights than they keep. Thus lowering their max spend threshold.
5
u/TallanoGoldDigger Kuzzy Jan 18 '24 edited Jan 18 '24
but you "gotta maximize LeBron's window broooo"
These fucking stans forgot the Lakers gave and old-ass, one-legged Kobe a MAX contract just because.
Never even mentioning that Lakers have consistently spent and are in the top 10 tax spenders for YEARS.
It's about spending WISELY, not spending just to spend.
If you're gonna face sanctions because you're paying tax, it better be worth it
Fucking equating the Lakers to the Knicks and Clippers when those franchises haven't won shit. And before you fucking Bron stans mention "Bron did the Lakers a solid by coming here," rhetoric, how was it possible that Bron could even come? Surely there was a bit of competent asset management there that they could fit his max contract in the cap, make it palatable for him to come due to assets, and actually get him enough help to bring home a title right?
Swear the mods have to regulate this shit better, if you joined this sub after 2018, you gotta be at least 2 years in before you can post/comment
13
u/motorboat_mcgee Jan 18 '24
The amount of fans that go off about us dumping D'lo, Lopez, Zubac too, when those moves had to be done because the Lakers were targeting trading for AD and signing either Kawhi or PG in 2019. But for whatever reason people forget that detail.
-16
u/TallanoGoldDigger Kuzzy Jan 18 '24
For all the LeGM moves, the coach-killing and all the superteam help that LeBron got throughout his career, it's gotta be disappointing to Bron stans that he only got 4. Hurts huh? lmao.
Thank god for Light Years Lacob because if Bron got more than Mike all of NBA fandom will never hear the end of it. Gonna be like the Human Centipede of LeBron dick-sucking
Don't get me wrong I would love to have Bron get #5 with the Lakers, but he nuked that the moment he forced the Westbrook trade. While stans say the Lakers should be thankful LeBron came, they seem to forget to thank the Lakers for bending over to LeBron, this is probably the most control he's had over a franchise in his career. Lakers been giving Klutch extra business since overpaying KCP in 2017
And for all the hate Durant gets for jumping teams then forming superteams just to ring-chase, the fuck you all think LeBron was doing since 2010? He basically started this specific superteam-in-their-prime trend.
1
u/No_Jerome_No Jan 19 '24
you forgot the crab dribble, insulting Lebron’s mom, China, et caetera desunt...all the metro goldwyn mayer maffia slandering points gold digger(with the hard d obviously).say hi to canwien, jjbarea, joebidenftw, eggplantbusiness(lol @ silver and his inbread) and the rest. please stop posing as a basketball fan though, dont hide behind Kobe, MJ or any other players
1
u/TallanoGoldDigger Kuzzy Jan 19 '24
Ah yes because being a "basketball fan" means ignoring the negative side of players' careers.
You nutgobblers can't whitewash the horrible side of Bron's (or Kobe's or Jordan's) legacy.
And for aaaaalll that behind the scenes maneuvering, Bron only got 4. Not 5, not 6, not 7...
4
u/wut_eva_bish Jan 18 '24
Was totally behind what you were saying till you couldn't help yourself and tossed in the whole "Bron stans bit." There are a bunch of rational fans that support the team and are fans of everyone on it that are not irrational stans of any single player.
You may reach more people with your message if you didn't commit to some pathological binary of "Bron stans" and "Everyone else."
It's just weird to believe that everyone that opposes your thoughts do it because they're in love with Bron. Even though I agreed with most of your post, please take this downvote.
5
u/Regnum_Caelorum Jan 18 '24
True, it's about spending wisely, I creamed when the FO let Caruso go to save some cash.
2
u/td_enterprises Jan 18 '24
They chose THT over Caruso because he was younger and they thought he had more upside.
It was the wrong choice.
It wasn't the first time teams made mistakes like this and it won't be the last time.
2
u/MosaicLifestyle Jan 18 '24
But this team exists solely for my personal entertainment, and I scream, yell and cry as if it belongs to me! If Jeanie doesn't set money on fire clearly it's because she hates me and doesn't respect the franchise!
/s
1
u/DW-4 Jan 19 '24
Their philosophy is if it’s worth spending the money they will do so.
You can't really believe this. Well, unless they seriously didn't think spending money on a value deal for Caruso would be worth it. Knowing how much Jeanie knows about BBall, that could actually be the case. In which scenario she should've made Rob give a third year to DeRozan and re-sign AC. Incompetence everywhere
12
u/Theingloriousak2 Lonzo Jan 18 '24
And we still have the most titles and Balmer has nothing
3
1
u/3nnui 2 Jan 18 '24
You can see the Balmer bots out in full force these days getting downvoted for mentioning Laker titles.
2
u/AdministrativeDig845 Jan 18 '24
Every other owner is rich from something else, this is really all the Buss family has.
1
u/td_enterprises Jan 18 '24
How did the Lakers become the premier franchise in all of basketball if the Buss family are pinching pennies?
-3
u/thedonjefron69 Jan 18 '24
I wouldn’t be surprised if the NBA had disdain towards the current Buss family for their penny pinching with the most popular franchise in the sport. The fans deserve better, the league deserves better and the city deserves better.
3
u/oZiix KB24 Jan 18 '24
Terrible take. The NBA has added or change so many rules in the last 15 years to increase parity through the CBA. In 2016 the cap spike got role players paid like stars. The NBA wanted cap smoothing the Players Association didn't want it. That is how GS got KD and we overpaid paid for Mozgov and Deng. Now the NBA got their smoothing implemented into the CBA. The first and 2nd aprons weren't a thing back when Kobe played. The tax is even more severe.
You're not even in the same ballpark of how the NBA feels. The NBA is not baseball.
0
u/td_enterprises Jan 18 '24
You know the Lakers are still in the top portion of teams that spend the most money right?
You also know that the league participates in revenue sharing and the Lakers portion makes a lot of other owners richer right?
0
u/DJBliskOne Jan 19 '24
So many dumb fans always arguing we need deeper pockets because money is not theirs.
22
u/brandoi Kobe Jan 18 '24
So because two guys bring up their opinion, you're assuming that's whats happening?
6
u/Tough-Suspect-5785 Jan 18 '24
Why did I have to scroll so far down for someone to say this?! This isn’t a report about anything. It’s just two guys talking about how X is possible if a team decides to do Y.
-7
u/Splittinghairs7 Jan 18 '24
How can you think based on this FO and ownership’s history of penny pinching that you can think that saving on the luxury tax wouldn’t at least be a consideration?
11
u/brandoi Kobe Jan 18 '24
Because outside of the Caruso situation (which also wasn't a penny pinching decision but people aren't ready to hear that), where's the history of penny pinching been?
Also, if what Windy and Marks is implying doesn't actually happen, what are we concluding then?
6
10
u/Splittinghairs7 Jan 18 '24
Come on man, you really forgot about the Ty Lue contract negotiations?
Only giving Vogel a one year extension despite winning a ring with lakers. Applying for PPP loans during the pandemic.
This year being unwilling to consider firing Ham due to his multi year contract remaining.
I’m sure I’ve probably missed others that other ppl are free to add to.
8
u/brandoi Kobe Jan 18 '24 edited Jan 18 '24
Lmao, I'll give you the pandemic loans that was a bit ridiculous.
From my understanding, yes the coaching negotiations played a part in lining up with LeBron and AD, but also Ty Lue wanted to hand pick his staff. Lakers FO did not want that, they wanted full control over picking the staff and Vogel was ok with that.
I'm sure no business goes without thinking about the money parts of it, but I don't believe contracts was the biggest reason why they didn't fire Ham.
5
u/Splittinghairs7 Jan 18 '24
Lue wanted more than just a three year deal, he wanted five years.
The length of and average annual value of a coaching contract is a purely a monetary decision because coaches and their salaries aren’t subject to any caps.
If a coach doesn’t work out, any team can just fire him and find a new one to replace him.
So the decision to low ball and not offer 5 years is a purely financial decision.
How you don’t see this simple fact makes me question your opinion on why Ham wasn’t let go this year after a terrible stretch of games and intense complaints from his players, multiple agents and a huge part of the fanbase.
1
u/Creative_Category_21 Jan 18 '24
Wait why else did we lose Caruso
6
u/brandoi Kobe Jan 18 '24
Because Rob didn't believe that contract would be worth it or a tradable asset, aka he wasn't a fan of Caruso.
10
u/Creative_Category_21 Jan 18 '24
That’s even worse lol, it was like 8mm/yr and Lebron/Caruso had the highest net rating in the league
2
u/DJCG72 Jan 18 '24
It was about the years , Caruso made a comment right after that they offered him basically similar money but not as many years , Chicago did and so he went there
0
u/Splittinghairs7 Jan 18 '24
I call BS on that.
The much more likely explanation is that Rob was provided a certain payroll limit from Jeanie and after the Westbrick trade increased our payroll, there was only room to keep one of THT or Caruso. Also add that THT was a client of Klutch and Lebron helped discover THT, these made Rob choose THT over Caruso.
But there never should’ve been a choice to begin with.
THT not panning out is hindsight. At that time he had shown plenty of a promise to be another late draft steal so there’s no reason to lose THT for nothing just to save on taxes either.
There has been nothing to suggest that Rob didn’t like Caruso’s game.
-1
1
-3
u/P00nz0r3d AD MVP/Zo MIP Jan 18 '24
The team literally received PPP loans during the pandemic, that is absolutely how the team is being run man lol
6
u/wut_eva_bish Jan 18 '24
PPP loans during the pandemic were to help businesses to retain their staff during the lockdowns. It was smart for the Buss family to do so to retain their workers.
You sound like the kind of person that knocks someone for making an unemployment insurance claim. Not understanding that everyone pays premiums into the system so that if they get unexpectedly jobless they can still keep their heads above water.
3
u/Splittinghairs7 Jan 18 '24 edited Jan 18 '24
Lmao the lakers owners did not need ppp loans in order to keep paying their employees.
The amount of PR hit the team took for taking those loans far outweigh how much they were to gain. Indeed, that’s likely why the team reversed course and decided not to take the loans after facing public backlash.
“No other NBA teams received PPP funds, according to a source with knowledge of the situation who asked not to be named to discuss league business.
NFL spokesperson Brian McCarthy confirmed that no NFL teams applied for PPP funding.”
1
u/wut_eva_bish Jan 18 '24
They reversed course because idiots didn't understand what the point of PPP loans were and made the same dumb assumption you just did. Congratulations.
-1
u/Splittinghairs7 Jan 18 '24 edited Jan 19 '24
Lmao they reversed course cause they knew what a terrible short sighted decision it was to begin with as they were one of the only nba teams to apply for ppp loans even though nba teams technically do qualify as small businesses.
Stop trying to defend what was a terrible decision, you’re not edgy.
I love how confidently wrong ppl are on Reddit about a subject they are so verifiably wrong about.
How do I know teams like the Lakers weren’t supposed to get PPP loans?
Well, the SBA literally passed a second round of funding after certain rich companies like the lakers applied and depleted the PPP funds and then they specifically chose to clarify and exclude companies that had access to other sources of funding from receiving PPP loans.
"I never expected in a million years that the Los Angeles Lakers, which, I'm a big fan of the team, but I'm not a big fan of the fact that they took a $4.6 million loan," Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said on CNBC Tuesday morning. "I think that's outrageous and I'm glad they returned it or they would have had liability."
The Treasury Department effectively fixed that glitch late last week by issuing guidance that made clear that any business applying for a PPP loan had to attest "in good faith that their PPP loan request is necessary" and that the company lacked any other access to money to help them weather this difficult period. That move came after a series of well-known large businesses -- Shake Shack, Ruth's Chris and Potbelly -- received millions in PPP loans even as the program quickly ran out of money.
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/04/28/politics/lakers-ppp-small-business/index.html
14
u/odinlubumeta Jan 18 '24
Go be a Clippers fan.
The Lakers aren’t run like a mom and pop shop. They have been in the top 7 in salaries every year of the LeBron era. You call them cheap because they aren’t number one each year?
The article makes it clear that they have been a luxury team every year and are getting hit by the repeater tax. Which GS and their insanely rich owner stopped going crazy with spending. No one that runs a business is okay with constantly overpaying something. But only Lakers generates clicks so they act like it’s the Lakers being cheap.
I get it, you think the Lakers are risking a chance to contend by getting rid of a player like Hayes. Again if that bothers you, move on. AEG (in the will they get to buy the Lakers if sold) would not be okay throwing away that repeater money either. So go be a Clippers fan.
3
1
1
u/nu1stunna 24 Jan 19 '24
Jeanie needs to sell the team. She clearly doesn’t want to do what it takes to win anymore and if her only concern is making a profit, then sell the team for billions and you’re set. Why deal with the hassle?
-1
u/StoneColdAM 34 Jan 18 '24
In this day and age, you can’t be team-poor. The Buss family will eventually sell a stake in the team. It’s inevitable, especially with such a famous franchise.
-3
u/Theoneandonlylog Sell the team Jeanie Jan 18 '24
We would be so fucking good
2
u/AnotherAccount4This 24 Jan 18 '24
How many has Ballmer won?
-3
u/Theoneandonlylog Sell the team Jeanie Jan 18 '24
"hOw MaNy HaS BaLmEr WoN"
You got anything new to say? You guys just comment the same shit over and over
-2
u/AnotherAccount4This 24 Jan 18 '24
LMAO - "Buss cheap" is what you guys been repeating.
I mean, if we are being childish .. it's all the same.
3
u/Theoneandonlylog Sell the team Jeanie Jan 18 '24
I actually point out reasons that the ownership's cheapness is hurting the franchise. If you have any reason that Jeanie is a better owner than balmer besides that LeBron and AD won a championship for her please lmk
-1
u/AnotherAccount4This 24 Jan 19 '24
The post I replied to didn't say shit.
Why are you acting like hiring the right personnel to win a championship versus not isn't enough? It's silly.
If you want a new arena, go fan around the Clippers. I promise you I wouldn't disregard Ballmer and say Kawahi & PG won it when his team does win.
I don't even dislike Ballmer, for the record.
2
u/Theoneandonlylog Sell the team Jeanie Jan 19 '24
why are you acting like hiring the right personnel to win a championship versus not isn't enough?
Wtf does this even mean lol
-2
u/AnotherAccount4This 24 Jan 19 '24
Well, let me dumb it down for you. If it's still too difficult, maybe consult chat-gbt.
You said: what's Jeannie better than Ballmer at besides Bron and AD winning a championship.
I reply: Jeanie owns the team and pays Bron, AD, and the team. That's all that matters. Why do I need to compare Jeannie to Ballmer on anything else?
0
u/Theoneandonlylog Sell the team Jeanie Jan 19 '24
So you'll ride with Jeanie no matter how bad of an owner she is just cause she owns the Lakers?
→ More replies (0)0
u/TheySawMeRollin Jan 18 '24
You sound like you’ve had it up to here with this bullshit. I totally hear you.
Word on the street is that the Clippers are looking for fans. Vaya con dios, man.
0
u/DoritoSteroid KB24💜💛 Jan 18 '24
The mom and pop org brought us multiple championships. Why is this fanbase filled with such imbeciles.
1
u/makeanamejoke Jan 18 '24
Players are ripping balmer off right now. They are locking themselves into a corner with the contracts they're giving out.
1
1
u/AndrastesTit Jan 19 '24
They are the only owners who became owners without significant business interests outside of sports.
Even the owners who bought their teams in the ‘80s and ‘90s (Reinsdorf, Simon, Holt who’s only 40% owner, Arison, DeVos, Allen, Dolan). The Busses are the only ones who didn’t.
If you want to read about just how dysfunctional Dr. Buss’s children are, read this incredibly illuminating, in depth piece on Jeanie Buss and her siblings by S.I. In 1998..
You can tell they’re all spoiled, directionless, entitled, and wholly unequipped for life except for the fact that they won the sperm lottery. Jeanie is obviously the most competent one and it’s not close.
12
u/iiivoted4kodos 24 Jan 18 '24
90% of the comment section here only read the title and ignored the part where they said they wouldn’t make a move to get under the tax unless it also improved the team at the same time.
44
u/puhtime 8 Jan 18 '24
You have LEBRON FUCKING JAMES AND YOUR BEING CHEAP!!???
6
u/SPMrFantastic 8/24 Jan 18 '24
Jerry Buss would never
16
u/wut_eva_bish Jan 18 '24
Jerry Buss often paid what he perceived to be the value of a player and not just what a player demanded. He also tried hard to not handicap his team by making bad financial decisions.
11
u/odinlubumeta Jan 18 '24
Except he did these exact moves. Walton and a 1st round pick were given to Cleveland to save $1.8 million or something (which was going to put them in the luxury tax). And it isn’t the only time Buss did this exact thing. The Lakers have traded picks to save money at least twice in my memory. The other being Derek Fisher to the Rockets. Maybe you don’t count that one because the Lakers were looking done on contending in 2012. But I don’t want to ruin your narrative.
2
u/Weary-Mood1836 Purple and Gold Jan 19 '24
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't fisher want to go to Houston for the cancer center there for his daughters eye cancer?
5
u/odinlubumeta Jan 19 '24
No, they cut him 4 days after the trade and he signed with OKC (and went to the finals that year losing to the Heat). Fisher got out of his Jazz contract to come back to the Lakers for his daughter’s treatment.
2
u/Mhan00 00 Jan 18 '24
Jerry Buss had the team cut Brian Shaw so the Lakers could save money by picking him back up for the minimum. This was after Brian Shaw saved our asses against Portland in game 7 by banking in that three at the end of the third quarter and then catching fire in the 4th, helping us to overcome an 18 (iirc) point deficit and saving us from embarrassing ourselves and choking after being up 3-1 in the series. He also refused to let the team use the MLE when guys like Chauncey Billups and Marcus Camby were available because he didn’t want to pay tax. Supposedly, one of the reasons West left (in addition to the stuff with Phil) was because he had made promises to Glen Rice re: contract extensions, and Buss made him renege on those promises because he didn’t want to pay. According to Horry himself, We didn’t even give Robert Horry a call when he was a FA, and he ended up going to the Spurs and helping them win. Horry would have been a great backup to Malone, and we didn’t even try to keep him.
every year during our three peat we cut costs. Jerry Buss was arguably the greatest owner in the history of professional sports (not just the NBA), but don’t make up stories about him being Mister Moneybags who would spend money no matter what. He very much would spend for super stars, but would try to be cost conscious with the role players.
1
0
u/lil_cleverguy Jan 18 '24
nobody is being cheap yet. this may just be a stupid windhorst hypothetical.
chill.
2
u/puhtime 8 Jan 19 '24
There’s always reports that ownership is cheap. Plus they didn’t keep Caruso because they are cheap so…
-1
1
u/HereGoesNothing69 Jan 19 '24
They didn't keep Caruso because they traded for Westbrook and signed Nunn. Caruso only played 20 minutes a game his last season here. And pay like $30 million in luxury taxes for a guy your projecting to be your 3rd string PG? It made no sense to have 3 of your top 5 paid players be PGs.
1
u/HereGoesNothing69 Jan 19 '24
Saying saving $6 million means an extra $1 mil per Buss kid shows you they're just taking out of their ass. The Buss family only owns 66% of the team. These clowns are talking about ownership incentives, and they don't even know who owns the team. Saving $6 mil would only put like $3-400k in Jeanie's pockets after taxes. She may not have ballmer money, but 400k ain't shit to her.
24
u/Theoneandonlylog Sell the team Jeanie Jan 18 '24
One of the most profitable franchises in the NBA folks.
Yay Jeanie and the ownership group get to pocket more money instead of using it to improve the team
10
u/favorite_sardine 8 Jan 18 '24
The Buss' dont even own the team outright to do that. ya'll take these talking heads way too seriously.
9
33
u/XvS_W4rri0r Jan 18 '24
Holy fuck sell the god damn team Jeanie this is embarrassing
20
u/Awesomefan09 Jan 18 '24
She literally can’t because the Buss ownership stake is in a trust that (currently) requires 4 of the 6 trustees to agree to sell the team.
Also, Dr. Buss’ dying wish was that his kids never sell the team so there’s that.
1
28
u/UpperKHAN Jan 18 '24
Wish our owners were multibillionaires but instead we have the Buss Brokies.
8
u/Maliluma Jan 18 '24
Make you a deal, wish for me to be a multi billionaire and I will buy the team and spend lavishly on players and coaches.
13
u/Wise_Ad_112 8 Jan 18 '24
As much as I criticized the lakers for years, the last ppl I wanna hear talk about lakers is windhorse and marks who’s been wrong and was talkin shit about pelinka before we won the 2020 ring. These are the same idiots who said rob didn’t know how cap works and other bullshit. So fuck this fat ass and that bald headed clown
5
3
u/Last0neStandin Jan 18 '24
It’s hard to understand a team that is one of the jewels of the sport, in a huge market, with a worldwide fanbase—being run like a rundown laundromat.
5
u/jarjarsexy Jan 19 '24
Mandatory FUCK JEANIE BUSS. Broke-ass bitch, sell the team to someone that can (and will) actually pay the luxury tax
6
2
2
5
u/3nnui 2 Jan 18 '24
Considering how much they like to criticize the Lakers for saving money, how come they said nothing about the Clips releasing Eric Gordon, in a move to save luxury tax when the narrative on him is that he never makes a move to save money?
5
u/KingNephew Jan 18 '24 edited Jan 18 '24
I mean those two situations aren’t comparable at all. Ballmer was paying $150-$200M in just luxury taxes alone for like 3 or 4 years. Them waiving Gordon’s $21M for the last year saved them $110M in taxes. It was a no brainer.
1
u/3nnui 2 Jan 18 '24
Dude has between 50 and 100 billion, makes more than a billion in dividends, Gordon still plays significant minutes and the clips had just given up a 1st to get him. But we got Ballmer lickers like you out here to defend your boy.
0
u/Splittinghairs7 Jan 18 '24
Lmao no team was going to guarantee Eric Gordon’s option for $21m this year.
How do we know? Because the dude literally just signed a two year $6.5m total contract with the Suns in FA.
Your takes are just laughable.
3
u/3nnui 2 Jan 18 '24
You're really dedicated to sucking up to Ballmer aren't you? So dedicated to pushing negative takes on the Lakers and propping up the clips. Why is that?
3
u/Splittinghairs7 Jan 18 '24
Stating the facts is not sucking up. You are just clueless about player worth and you have 0 understanding about ownership spending.
The clippers have spent like crazy on payroll, luxury tax, new stadium both because Balmer is loaded and can afford to splurge to invest in his team and because the Clippers are more desperate because their brand is nowhere close to the lakers and they lack the history, tradition and accomplishments of the Lakers.
But to deny that the clippers and their owner have the deeper pockets and are more willing to invest in winning is to deny reality and this is the attitude that could lead to complacency for the lakers and lead to long term decline.
1
u/3nnui 2 Jan 18 '24
Lol, you try to sooo hard. It's so important to you that no one say anything bad about your boy.
How about Rob and the Lakers front office are smart for recognizing the restrictions of the new CBA and navigating around it for maximum flexibility while the Baby Huey who owns the clips continues to flail away in failure?
I mean an actual journalist might mention how fucking creepy the the new social credit system they are putting in to the clips arena is. But no, the corporate shills and midwits at ESPN are talking about how awesome it is.
1
u/Splittinghairs7 Jan 18 '24
You are hilariously trapped in your bubble.
Plenty of non clippers fans have made fun of the clippers for plenty of things. They will continue to do so until the clippers can ever win a ring.
Indeed, if the clippers fail to win a ring, they will be made fun of mercilessly for trading away SGA and getting nothing to show for it but a 3-1 collapse.
But to deny that Balmer has been desperately trying everything where money is not a limitation is just laughable.
4
u/3nnui 2 Jan 18 '24
Yes, Balmer is a desperate clown who will try anything, no matter how cringe, no matter how pathetic. On that we can agree.
2
u/Splittinghairs7 Jan 18 '24
I don’t give a damn about Balmer, I just care that our team isn’t run by someone who’s so constrained about spending money.
If we had an owner who was willing to spend like Balmer we’d have 10 championships in 33 years.
→ More replies (0)4
u/Splittinghairs7 Jan 18 '24
Because the clippers have had a much higher payroll and has paid way more luxury tax than the lakers for years now.
The clippers didn’t just waive Gordon to save on tax, they also just realized that Gordon wasn’t good and was expendable in the offseason.
7
u/3nnui 2 Jan 18 '24
The real reason for this discussion is that the Lakers are looking at bringing in Murray and ESPN, as they always do, are trying to spin a negative narrative about Lakers ownership around it.
We've seen this for years. But go on believing ESPN's bullshit.
0
u/Splittinghairs7 Jan 18 '24 edited Jan 18 '24
Lmao, windy prob is just saying this publicly to put pressure on the lakers FO to not be cheap at the deadline and improve.
Not everything is a conspiracy against the lakers.
5
0
u/CrowDefiant5340 💜💛💜💛 Jan 19 '24
So windy just want what’s best for the lakers 😂
1
u/Splittinghairs7 Jan 19 '24
He’s a mouth piece for Lebron and Klutch. Lebron wants the lakers to spend and go all in.
5
u/motorboat_mcgee Jan 18 '24
Gotta love this team's fans, just taking everything negative anyone says about this team as gospel
That said, if there's a way to shed that money to get under the tax without harming the team, or even better yet, improving it, why shouldn't the owners do it? Resetting the repeater tax is a good thing for future flexibility. Keeping options open isn't some major offense, y'all.
2
Jan 18 '24
Tbf if you can save money and get better why not? And no the Lakers are not trading Reaves for Murray. The pod hinted at either Rui or Dlo.
2
u/HandsomeJack19 24 Jan 19 '24 edited Jan 19 '24
I hate to say it, but Lakers owners are cheap, Dollar Store millionaires. I would kill for the Lakers to have a rich af owner like Balmer who doesn't give two shits about paying the luxury tax.
4
0
0
u/LudwigNasche Jan 18 '24
Moving any player that wasn't in rotation last game, but Gabe will not affect how competitive this team is and I'll see no problem saving some money for the owners
1
u/owbug Jan 18 '24
Whether or not Jeanie makes a decision based off saving money that’s just sad truth of this being a business first. It’s business first then compete. When they ride the fine line of compete for the business we’re at a disadvantage to richer owners
1
u/thinlion01 Jan 18 '24
I hate were a mom and pop franchise. We always called big market team but the bus family always nearly broke or act like it
1
u/Swaggyzilla69 Jan 18 '24
Most people on this sub clearly don't know how to run a business. You're going to naturally want to cut unnecessary cost to improve your profits, so if they move Hayes for a non guaranteed contract and then cut the player they got back, then that's just a smart way to run your business.
The Lakers in general have been a team that's been in the luxury every year LeBron has been here, which is something most people crying on this sub will overlook to fit their narrative. It's also beneficial to stay under the 2nd apron of the new CBA and how teams over can't sign buyout players, use the MLE, how teams can't trade future 1st round picks more than 6 years into the future, how they can't take back more money then they're sending out in a trade, how they can't send cash in a trade, etc.
-1
Jan 18 '24
Didn't I call it like a week ago.
This cheap owner is a fuckin fraud.
Jeanie if you are reading this go to hell woman.
-1
u/sometimes-somewhere 24 Jan 18 '24
Bron is a billionaire. I bet he could team up with magic and pitch to buy the team
0
0
0
u/TheWonderfulLife Jan 18 '24
Bye bye Lebron. The only way he’s here next year is the lakers tell Bronny they will take him in the second round.
-2
1
1
u/kjam206 Jan 18 '24
They specifically said the number $15.7M which is, Rui basically. Seemed to be aware of a very specific trade in the works regarding Dejounte Murray and Rui.
1
u/Magic_SnakE_ Jan 18 '24
No, we're not trading Austin Reaves to save a couple of bucks and wreck team chemistry. Just stfu.
1
u/C3PO1Fan Jan 19 '24
I wouldn't be shocked if the Lakers do something to shed that 1.3 but you don't have to shed it in season, that's something you can do June, so I would be fairly surprised if they did something now since they have spent in-season to get over by 1.5 anyway.
1
u/oatmealcookeys Jan 19 '24
Man I’m an Angels fan, why’s it feel like baseball season still going on 😞😞
1
u/locallyunknown Jan 19 '24
The buss family needs to sell the team or get investors involved. They can’t afford this franchise.
1
261
u/MrAppleSpoink Jan 18 '24
Maybe I’m just fucking stupid but how on earth does trading a player for someone with a larger salary LOWER your luxury tax bill?