What do the lakers need to be the dominant team in Los Angeles again?

[trojanfan12]

2 years.

Sound about right. 3 at most.

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

Sound about right. 3 at most.

3 years for the West!

 

[Black Adam]

3 years for the West!

yep. i think it's funny how fans who hate the Lakers talk about the Clippers like they were always the dominant team here, though...

 

[Jims_Doors]

It's just the difference in how things are done now and how they used to be done. Players like Magic, Bird and MJ wouldn't have tried to do what Lebron, D-Wade and Bosh did because back then, it just wasn't done that way. That's why they and fans who grew up watching them don't like what the Heat's Big 3 did.

While I don't like it, it seems that what the Lebron, D-Wade and Bosh did may simply be the next logical step in free agency. Players have been using free agency to play for teams of their choice for years. It's a pretty safe bet that there were conversations about some of those moves between players looking to play together. The main difference is that the Heat threw it in everyone's face.

They weren't able to do it even if they wanted to.

Magic signed a 25yr contract in 1981, he wasn't going anywhere unless traded.
Bird signed a 7yr contract extension in 1983, he wasn't going to be traded and there was no such thing as Unrestricted Free Agency until the summer of 1988.
MJ signed an 8yr deal in 1988 for more money any other team could of offered him. He chose the money.

It's nothing more than just speculation to say "they wouldn't have"....especially Magic considering what he said about his draft and staying in school.

 

[Jims_Doors]

Exactly. The Lakers intend to be under the cap next season to avoid the repeater tax. However, as Kupchak also seems to indicate, they'll pay it under the right circumstances.

Example: If Lebron were to say he'll sign with the Lakers, it's a pretty safe bet that they would bite the bullet and pay the tax. The revenue generated from additional jersey sales and the interest in Kobe and Lebron playing together for Kobe's final 2 season's would likely be astronomical.

So why keep bringing up the TV deal? If they didn't care about the money spent on players, then they wouldn't be concerned or make sure to avoid being over the cap and paying a high repeater tax.

That's all I'm implying. There is concern on their part.

 

[thunderc]

Anyone that doesn't think this new cap structure has their attention is fooling themselves.

 

[trojanfan12]

So why keep bringing up the TV deal? If they didn't care about the money spent on players, then they wouldn't be concerned or make sure to avoid being over the cap and paying a high repeater tax.

That's all I'm implying. There is concern on their part.

Because the TV deal is the reason that they can absorb a greater luxury tax hit than any other team in the league. Is it really that difficult to figure out?

Of course there is concern on their part. There has always been concern on their part. Even when the luxury tax was less painful, there was concern. No one has said otherwise.

What some of you don't seem to understand is that it's not as if the Lakers WANT to pay the luxury tax, it's that they have always been willing to pay the tax for a contending team.

When it comes to paying the tax, the Lakers will approach it the same way that they always have. They will look at each scenario individually and make a determination on whether or not paying the tax would be worth it and make a decision.

Example: if the Lakers were to have to pay the repeater tax to land Lebron in the upcoming FA period, they will pay the tax because they would be contenders pretty much immediately.

However, if it looks as if they are going to have essentially the same team next year as they have now, then they will want to avoid the tax.