1. +++++++++ WELCOME Guest, TO LAKERSBALL's SECRET THEME +++++++++

2026-27 Team Developments: Trades / Free Agents / News / Rumors / Ideas

Discussion in 'Lakers Discussion' started by TIME, Jun 14, 2026.

  1. ldawg

    ldawg - Rookie -

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2026
    Messages:
    768
    Likes Received:
    436
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Offline
    yep once you pay that much to one player it make it hard to build out the team. Then if you win its also hard to keep the players. Also if that player gets injured your toast. So for me that much money to one player now hurts if that the way they are going to do it. That why i totally understood Dallas issue with Luka.

    My belief is some of the middle class teams were always good. Thing is nba favored the big market teams. So i think that was more the nba wanting to feature certain teams in the playoffs and get a little help. example Xmas games and opening night they go for those teams. Playoffs were no different.

    I dont think the NBA is trying to protect owners i think this is the nba including the owners trying to slow down the amount of money the avg player makes. Pretty much trying to reverse what they agreed on in the last bargain agreement.
     
    Last edited: Aug 15, 2026 at 6:26 PM
    abeer3 likes this.
  2. svtzr

    svtzr - Lakers All Star -

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2016
    Messages:
    5,280
    Likes Received:
    15,739
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Offline
    If they just let teams have a salary cap and then just a free for all in terms of contract sizes, I believe we would see different kinds of team makeups. At 210m, one team maybe pay 3 guys 60m each and then 30m on vet minimums to fill the rest out of the roster out. Another team may decide to pay Wemby 100m and then fill the rest of the team out at 100m. And the last may decide to give a good scorer 40m and then spread 150m between 8 guys and have the bench as vet mins.

    It would make things more interesting to see which philosophies can win.
     
    abeer3 likes this.
  3. abeer3

    abeer3 - Lakers Legend -

    Top Poster Of Month

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2014
    Messages:
    34,955
    Likes Received:
    96,221
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Offline
    exactly. but owners won't go for it because they're too tempted to brad beal it. all the maxes, including mle, tpmle, bae, artificially set markets. they ironically fear the real free market. but it would better for fans and the game. everybody gets the same allotment. within that, allocate as you will.

    this would require other changes that i also endorse (player options on rookie scale contracts, etc.).
     
  4. ldawg

    ldawg - Rookie -

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2026
    Messages:
    768
    Likes Received:
    436
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Offline
    the next bargain agreement we could see another lock out. The stars should not have anything to fight about as they get a significant amount of the pie.
     
    Kobeluka99 and abeer3 like this.
  5. abeer3

    abeer3 - Lakers Legend -

    Top Poster Of Month

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2014
    Messages:
    34,955
    Likes Received:
    96,221
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Offline
    Franchise valuations are up, and the aprons are depressing total payroll, so I’m not sure owners would want a lockout.

    I think this years’s FA cycle could have middle class nba players rankled, though. Lots of squeeze downward for those guys recently.
     
  6. ldawg

    ldawg - Rookie -

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2026
    Messages:
    768
    Likes Received:
    436
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Offline
    Its good for owners. Its the players that may not like the pressure of having to take pay cuts.
     

Share This Page