RealGM

so what do you guys think if mgmt. came to Luke and says here's your money now GFTO , would he still count against the cap if he retires? I know he'll still get his money, least he could do for team considering he has 2 rings and didn't contribute squat but eating up a fat $5mill/yr for the next 3yrs, his back is probably going to get worse, I dont even know how its possible when he plays a whopping 5mins a game (lil exaggeration)

He still counts for salary cap and luxury tax if he retires. It doesn't do anything to help the lakers, only gives them another roster spot to fill with the vet minimum

10scott10 wrote:He still counts for salary cap and luxury tax if he retires. It doesn't do anything to help the lakers, only gives them another roster spot to fill with the vet minimum

so how did Por. get their medical exemption for Miles before he came back to mem and F that up?

His contract will be a valuable trade asset, especially for those looking to shed salary when it expires in 38 years.

Seriously, WTF were we thinking?

LApwnd wrote:

10scott10 wrote:He still counts for salary cap and luxury tax if he retires. It doesn't do anything to help the lakers, only gives them another roster spot to fill with the vet minimum

so how did Por. get their medical exemption for Miles before he came back to mem and F that up?

Miles knees were shredded and a Dr. proclaimed him unable to continue. Portland gambled on the fact, that Miles would go away quietly and not play again.

Luke has had some back issues, but nothing I would say career ending. So that is not really option. Unless Luke really doesn't want to play again, which I doubt.

He can be useful to this team if he stays healthy.

semi-sentient wrote:His contract will be a valuable trade asset, especially for those looking to shed salary when it expires in 38 years.

Seriously, WTF were we thinking?

Yeah, his contract length is the real WTF.

this is what its come to . . . wishful thinking and hoping . . . thats when you know we got the raw end of the deal with this kids contract.

Luke looked more like a coach when he was on the IR with the clip board. He might have a future there. I do not see anyone trading for him till his deal is in the last year. His contract might cost the Lakers Lamar. He might be the first to go.

He's got negative value and if Phil retires he could be a liability even when healthy for us.

J-far, you may be right, but some of that negativity would be curbed if Shaw takes over for Jackson and we continue with the triangle.

I think Luke runs our offense well and does a nice job of coming in and executing the offense when things seem to be going a little "helter skelter." He also does a nice job of feeding the post and trying to get our inside game going.

Luke is limited, but he does bring some qualities that can help the Lakers if properly used by the coach.

doesn't Minie need people with triangle experience? do it Kurt!

what the hell were they thinking about with the length of that contract. Were they really fearing losing luke, therefore set him up for life killing out future plans of nabbing a legit PG?

so in Rasheed case, if he retires does his remaining 2yr 10mill stay on Bos book?

salmahayek wrote:J-far, you may be right, but some of that negativity would be curbed if Shaw takes over for Jackson and we continue with the triangle.

I think Luke runs our offense well and does a nice job of coming in and executing the offense when things seem to be going a little "helter skelter." He also does a nice job of feeding the post and trying to get our inside game going.

Luke is limited, but he does bring some qualities that can help the Lakers if properly used by the coach.

He was good when he shot the 3 well and that was the main reason he got that contract from Mitch. Since then he's neither had the continuity nor a consistency to his game. I'm just scared that he might be a big reason we might consider trading Odom's salary this summer.

I hope not.

j-far wrote:

salmahayek wrote:J-far, you may be right, but some of that negativity would be curbed if Shaw takes over for Jackson and we continue with the triangle.

I think Luke runs our offense well and does a nice job of coming in and executing the offense when things seem to be going a little "helter skelter." He also does a nice job of feeding the post and trying to get our inside game going.

Luke is limited, but he does bring some qualities that can help the Lakers if properly used by the coach.

He was good when he shot the 3 well and that was the main reason he got that contract from Mitch. Since then he's neither had the continuity nor a consistency to his game. I'm just scared that he might be a big reason we might consider trading Odom's salary this summer.

I hope not.

IF that were a reason even just a slight, I hope the whole team black balls this BOZO and he never sees PT again.

the (Please Use More Appropriate Word) cant hit a wide open 10 foot jump shot

If, and when, Shaw goes to Cleveland, Luke should take a 4.5 mil buyout spread over the 3 yrs of his contract ((ie 1.5 mil cap hit per year, way better than his current 5+ mil hit), and take Shaw's coaching spot at whatever the assistants make (500k?).

He'd still be getting 2 mil per yr but would save LA in cap space + tax significantly.

10-11 was 5.26 would be reduced to 1.5 cap hit
11-12 was 5.68 would be reduced to 1.5 cap hit
12-13 was 6.10 would be reduced to 1.5 cap hit

saving the Lakers 25 mil (12.5 salary and 12.5 tax, since they are in tax land the next 3 yrs already).

Yeah, as others have said, Luke retiring doesn't help the Lakers in any way financially.

Plus, why would he ever agree to retire? He get's payed millions to sit courtside at Lakers games

Phil XI wrote:
He can be useful to this team if he stays healthy.

you are an optimist...............................or the no sleep at night is already getting to you

Yeah, now that I look at it, the Grizz had to still pay 13.4 mil to Jaric (only saving 1.3 mil in the buyout). No way Walton takes 4.5 mil when he's owed 15 mil. I am again in fantasyland.