Swimming in cash
July 30, 2008 | 1:17
pm
If you've ever wondered whether 111 mil really does offer you the ability to have just about anything, the answer appears to be a pretty resounding "yes." Because that's a serious swimming hole Agent Zero has got going. Multiple fish tanks. Grotto. A "basement" area of sorts that somehow connects to the pool. Probably a few of them inflatable dinosaurs. Quite the setup, to say the least.
Unfortunately, and I hate to mention this after the fact, but when my pool was built, the large stone brought in to serve as a "mountain" cost only $200,000. I'm not sure who Gilbert's "stone guy" is, but he could have gotten a better price than half a million.
I'm just saying.
AK
---Without a doubt, Kobe taking a pay cut is crucial to the ---future of this team. And, the sooner he signs that ---reduced-rate contract the better.
No, no MVPs, no12 time all stars in their primes should ever take pay cuts.
I know the Lakers will be deep in the luxury tax hole if they hand a big contract to Bynum and keep Odom.
But if they do become the NBA champions then who cares about the luxury tax.
Ultimately, the one paying for the luxury tax is Dr. Buss not us fans.
Besides, if the Lakers become the NBA champs again.
Dr. Buss should be able to make the money back he spends in the luxury tax no problem.
The soft NBA cap will only limit our ability to go after restricted and unrestricted free agents.
But then again there is always the sign and trade to get us over that kind of hump.
Posted by: Outsidergua | August 01, 2008 at 12:27 PM
Lakafo
>>>What sense would it make to trade Odom away before
>>>the season even starts, jeopardizing chemistry and the
>>>team's future?
Read my posts about the financial state of the Lakers.
quick summary: starting next season: at least 86 million
for 9 players if they keep all four of Bynum, Gasol, Kobe,
and Odom. Someone either has to sign for a lot less or
someone has to go. Most people agree that if Bynum isn't
willing to take less than the max and Kobe isn't willing to
opt out and take a pay cut and Buss isn't willing to have
the Lakers lose money, then Odom is the odd man out.
Nobody is saying LAMAR MUST BE TRADED NOW!!!!!!!
It's just some thinking ahead and wondering how the Lakers
will deal with the financial situation.
And by the way, if the solution is to trade Lamar, then they
could do the trade just as easily this summer (maybe easier),
and then whatever player they got for him could have
training camp and a full season working in the triangle
before the playoffs.
Look at it this way, if Lamar has a bad or inconsistent season,
then you'll want to trade him but he'll have less trade value
(like Luke and Rad right now). If Lamar has a really good season,
then he'll want more money than the Lakers can reasonably
afford to pay.
Posted by: Long Time Laker Fan | August 01, 2008 at 01:02 PM
Andrew Z,
>>>I like a lot of those trade ideas using Lamar, but at the
>>>end of the day I think the Lakers don't want any salary
>>>in return, they just need him off the books.
If that's the case, then they're playing their hand right, Keep
him around this season and then let him walk away for nothing
next summer. Voila: Salary off the books.
Problem is, if he's gone, you still need to hire someone to
fill his roster spot. So why give up a talented (if inconsistent)
player for nothing, when you could get back one solid (if unspectacular)
player or a couple of promising players still on rookie contracts
back for him. Those players would earn half of what Lamar
earns now.
Posted by: Long Time Laker Fan | August 01, 2008 at 01:12 PM
Paul Pierce needed 2 dudes to help him get his.
Kobe only needed 1 to help him get 3!
Who's the FAKER now?
Class dismissed.
Posted by: utzworld THE BANNER HOLDER
________________________
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
GOOD ONE UTZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: justanothermambafan | August 01, 2008 at 01:15 PM
Outsidergua,
>>>No, no MVPs, no12 time all stars in their primes should
>>>ever take pay cuts.
uh, Kevin Garnett did when he went to the Celtics.
Posted by: Long Time Laker Fan | August 01, 2008 at 01:18 PM
Long Time Laker Fan,
Money will never cure spiritual woes like winning does.
GO LAKERS!
Posted by: Jon K. | August 01, 2008 at 01:43 PM
Jon K.,
I don't like drama. I like Artest despite drama he tends to create. I like the media for giving me something interesting to read and keeping me informed despite the drama they create.
I've played team sports. I played all through high school with a bunch of mentally weak, clique, mediocre players on my soccer team that would avoid passing the ball to players outside of their group. We had a team captain that was more interesting in making jokes and being a jerk than in winning. The guy had brat and ADHD written all over his psych profile.
I understand exactly how personalities can negatively affect a team. We had the skills and physical talent to be a much better team, but the personalities were not managed by the coach properly or at all really and we suffered as a result.
The aftermath of the riot in Detroit clearly ruined the Pacers.
The unwillingness of the Maloofs to commit to Artest after some off-court negativity publicity is what ruined his stint with the Kings, but it was obvious they were going to rebuild around Kevin Martin anyway.
Did Artest ruin Chicago too?
I think the only team he ruined was the Pacers. And that was complicated by his disagreement with the coach's philosophy and the Pacers trying to trade him without telling him, but he found out anyway.
The guy is his own worst enemy and he does get what he deserves. But, equating him to guys like Steve Francis and Stephon Marbury is probably going too far. He's problematic, but he's not on their level. He's not a cancer.
Posted by: Benjamin | August 01, 2008 at 03:52 PM
Benjamin,
>>>>>The guy is his own worst enemy and he does get what he deserves.
>>>>>But, equating him to guys like Steve Francis and Stephon Marbury
>>>>>is probably going too far. He's problematic, but he's not on their level.
>>>>>He's not a cancer.
Excellent post. You’re right that Artest is not a cancer. He is more like a potential nervous breakdown where the patient escapes reality or is it that reality escapes the patient. LOL. Ron’s problems are also primarily off the court and usually more bizarre than cancerous. Ron obviously has a loose screw in there somewhere. I wouldn’t have minded his becoming a Laker but as you noted, I tend to look for anything even slight that gives me a reason to dump on players who might have spurned the Lakers. Such as KG and Ron Ron. Of course, you realize that if we somehow did trade for him, I admit I would have no problem getting behind him.
While I’ve been manic in defending the existing roster on the blog, especially Drew, Pau, and Lamar, I have been pretty relaxed when it came to possible moves by the Lakers. I basically think it would be incredibly stupid not to wait and see what we really have with this team all healthy before making a move such as trading Lamar. Obviously, the Lakers front office agrees. Tempted though they may have been, once again the Lakers have resisted several opportunities to trade Lamar Odom. My hunch is that we may see this as another great move by Mitch, much as his refusal to trade Andrew Bynum has to be viewed in retrospect.
Collateral damage! That’s what the damage to Mitch’s short-lived fame and fortune as an NBA general manager suffered as a result of the Celtics beating the Lakers in the Finals. First. the proverbial they steal the NBA Exec of the Year award from him and give it to Danny Ainge, then they cut the guy’s stint in the bright lights short and blame him for too many soft Euros and white guys. Fortunately, Mitch has always played for the long term and had the patience and intelligence to create a plan, modify it when needed, but basically stick to it. Mitch knows that the plan you elect is often not as critical as how well you execute and implement it.
Do you not see the ironic similarities to the Lakers refusal to trade Lamar Odom for Ron Artest this year to their refusal to trade Andrew Bynum last year? In both cases, the Lakers front office thought they were better off sticking with the player they had, which they valued more than other teams. They were right with Bynum. They may be right about Odom. The smart move is to find out before making a big mistake and trading him. The truth is that every player on the team, including Kobe, is going to benefit hugely by the return and dominant post play of Andrew Bynum. Take what you had last year and then boost it 50% to get an idea of this year. That is monster the domino effect that the Beast will have on the Lakers roster next year.
Tom
Posted by: LakerTom | August 01, 2008 at 09:27 PM