2699473, they could.... but "should" is a more appropriate question.|
Posted by Cold Truth, Mon Jun-17-19 09:18 AM
>Lakers don't care about the luxury tax. The league allows
>you to go over the cap to sign your own players/fill out the
>roster (Vet mins/exceptions).
Yes, but this goes back to the issue with the picks, and Rob apparently getting got for the money that would have gone toward that max slot.
We resign all these guys. Cool.
You be be ok with us riding out with a top heavy roster with poorly fitting parts surrounding said heavies... which makes sense, given that you're not a Lakers fan.
Objectively, there's a major problem with that scenario:
W sign all those players. At that point, we have no tradable assets. We have a big ol bag of dildos, with no picks to grease them with.
So if we have needs to fill, that scenario leaves us with precious little wiggle room to do that.
That's before discussing the poor fit of many of them.
so going inti the tax, particularly in multiple years, is problematic. not because we cant afford to pay it, but because it severely limits our ability to tweak things as needed.
it's not just a case of rich people having problems too. it's just reality, and long term success and health of this team is poorly served by going deep into the tax for the likes of Born Ready.
it's easy to just say "hey you got brawn and AD!", and say fuck it with the rest, but that's not how an elite franchise should operate.
>One mo' max
That one mo max isn't there, because Rob didn't make this deal contingent upon the date needed to keep that max slot.
this could change, but that's where things stand for now.
^^^^a huge mixed bag. At a glance, I'd keep Bullock, Rondo, Caruso. The rest depend on price tags and what else we got.
>Maybe replace a few with ring chasing vets but this team would
>be very competitive and likely the 2020 favorites.
this doesn't mean we need to just say fuck it, and not take a disciplined approach to building around AD and Brawn.