On the Luxury Tax Implications of Odom for Artest and K-9

by Carl on Jul 18, 2008 2:39 PM PDT Comment 24 comments

Scott Howard-Cooper (can I just call him Scoop for short?) wrote a well-researched article about how much it will cost the Lakers to take on Kenny Thomas with Ron Artest. The jist of the article is that the Lakers would take an enormous luxury tax hit by including Kenny Thomas Thomas in the deal for Lamar Odom. Scoop notes that substituting Qunicy Douby and Shelden Williams for K9 would save the Lakers $25 million over the next two seasons.

(This is a FanPost from a member of the Sactown Royalty community. The views expressed come from the member, and not Sactown Royalty staff.)

0 recs | Comment 24 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Hadn't seen this analysis

This is why they pay Scoop the big bucks. I haven’t seen the tax implications of the Lakers taking on K9 discussed anywhere. I don’t see any way the Lakers take on Kenny Thomas with the tax numbers Scoop mentions in his article.

I don’t think the Kings believe they have anything with either Shelden Williams or Qunicy Douby, so they might as well pull the trigger on that deal, or substitute Mikki Moore if they’d rather keep young guys that will probably never play.

by Carl on Jul 18, 2008 2:45 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I think the tax implications have been discussed only in terms of a possible K-9 acquisition preventing a possible match of Turiaf’s offer.

I don’t like the deal Scoop suggests. Artest and Mikki I can deal with, but parting with Artest and two cheap prospects - as marginal as they may seem - for Odom is a no-go without Farmar included.

by Ziller on Jul 18, 2008 3:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree

Keep the youngens.

I wonder why Scoop is figuring all this out for the Lakers. Sounds like he is doing the Lakers work for them. Is Scoop trying to warn them?

He can shoot, and he looks great in a suit. Hey, everybody - It's REGGIE TIME!

by dalt99 on Jul 18, 2008 3:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Including Moore with Artest makes the most sense (if they won’t take K9), especially if Odom is going to start at the 4 and Salmons at the 3. More playing time for Jason Thompson.

by Vromanite on Jul 18, 2008 3:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Doesn't make much sense to me

So all the Kings would get in this deal is “getting rid of Artest” and renting Odom for a year? And they give away Williams and Douby to do it? Williams might not have much value, but I’d think Douby certainly does with his potential and his relatively cheap contract. If anything, I see Douby being included in an Artest deal to sweeten the pot for the other team, giving them reason to eat KT (or Reef’s) contract. This probably wouldn’t happen with a team like the Lakers that are so deep in the Luxury tax, but I’m sure there’s plenty of other teams out there that want Artest on their roster bad enough to give us a deal that is good for us beyond simply getting rid of Ron’s headaches.

by AnotherStupidSN on Jul 18, 2008 3:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Both guys have talent

I actually think both of Shelden and Qunicy have talent, but I don’t think either of them will realize that talent on the Kings. My reasoning is that if the Kings have decided these guys aren’t going to cut it, part ways and give them a chance somewhere else. Plus, I really, really want to be rid of Artest.

by Carl on Jul 18, 2008 4:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

other thread...

i had proposed a roundly rejected 3-way in light of scoop’s column involving Cleveland: goes like this – LA gets artest, williams, douby; Sac gets Farmar, Varejao, and Sczerbiak (all one-year deals); Cleveland gets Odom and K-9. In my view it improves Scoop’s deal for us by getting rid of K9 and getting potential assets in Farmar and Varejao. Plus, i suspect Wally might have some trade deadline value for a contending team looking for a rentable shooter… maybe you guys like it better?

by longtimelistenerfirsttimecaller on Jul 18, 2008 3:39 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

This looks great for us and the Lakers

But which GM holds a gun to Cleveland’s head to make them do this?

by AnotherStupidSN on Jul 18, 2008 3:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

The thing SCoop doesn't point out

is that with Artest/K9 we ease our Tax situation, but in his proposed trade, we’d have to pay Tax. We’re currently only about 1mil or so under the tax.

Odom(14.1mil) – Artest/Thomas(16mil) = 1.9mil Savings

Odom(14.1mil) – Artest/Williams/Douby(12.2mil) = 1.9mil increase.

Which would put us in the neighborhood of 1 million over the tax which would cost the team 5 million or so in penalties/lost bonuses.

I can’t believe SCoop didn’t realize this, and if he did, why didn’t he point it out. I could understand if he were a Lakers columnist, but not as a Bee writer.

Artest/Moore(13.2mil) is not much better, putting us right on the threshold or maybe a bit over.

Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott

by Kfan in Korea on Jul 18, 2008 4:10 PM PDT reply actions 2 recs

glad somebody posted this

Mikki Moore in the skills challenge! - LPA

by iashwash on Jul 18, 2008 4:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Excellent point

by Carl on Jul 18, 2008 4:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Great point!

And I say NFW to this deal. If Artest is the possible missing piece for the Lakers then they can damn sure pay for that piece.

No Douby, no Williams in this deal. Hell, no Mikki either!

I would take the LA trade to be rid of Artest and K9’s (no offense, K9!) contract. But Shelden and Q are both still very young and possibly very talented players. I wouldn’t want to trade them until next off-season at the earliest. And no way do I want to give the Lakers more possible talent to torture us with for a long long time. Take Artest and Thomas or get away from us. I think I’d prefer to suffer another season with Artest antics and lose him for nothing next year than give the Lakers Artest, Q, and Shelden in a trade for Odom.

My gut feeling is probably irrational, but I hate this trade. If LA thinks Arest is their missing piece, they can pay out of their asses for the luxury of signing him and buying their chance at a championship with him.

Sending Q and Shelden, or Mikki, with Artest is a fire sale.

Have I mentioned yet how much I hate this trade?

Your Sacramento Kings: Another day, another drama.

by KK on Jul 18, 2008 9:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's not irrational

I think it’s an entirely pointless as the Kings get virtually nothing out of the deal. I still say Cleveland will be the front runner of the deal.

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on

by pookeyguru on Jul 18, 2008 9:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I just thought of something else.

The Lakers tax burden that Scoop talks about is already existing. The Artest/K9 deal would only add 1.9 million to their cap number this year. That’s 3.8 million in extra tax, above the amount they are already paying. Next year it would mean more tax, but only if they let Odom walk for nothing. Strangely presented argument by Scott.

Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott

by Kfan in Korea on Jul 18, 2008 9:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

That's what I mean KFan

It’s like he’s a Lakers fan, and he’s acting entitled. (I’ve always thought that, but that’s me. Then again I don’t think he’s a genius either.)

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on

by pookeyguru on Jul 18, 2008 9:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

$17.55 million next season

The thing is, if they hold on to Odom, then it might be worth the tax next year. With Kenny Thomas, they’re paying $17.55 million for nothing.

by Carl on Jul 18, 2008 9:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, but the way he worded the article

is sounded like Thomas would cost an extra 35 mil. His wording is technically correct, but the implication is that it would be extra. And next year is next year, a lot can change between now and then. Maybe they cut salary somewhere else, or they move K9’s then expiring deal to Memphis for Marc Gasol.

If the Lakers think Artest could help them win a title, then 3.8 million extra to get that done is not unreasonable.

Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott

by Kfan in Korea on Jul 18, 2008 10:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

WTF happened?

Last part should’ve said something like:

If the Lakers think Artest could help them win a title, then 3.8 million is not a lot to spend.

Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott

by Kfan in Korea on Jul 18, 2008 10:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

They add Ariza if no one matches his qualifying

Works for everyone

"Being loquacious and being right aren't necessarily always the same."
GP, the man, the myth, the legend, puts the smackdown on Reggie

by SavageBeast on Jul 18, 2008 4:26 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Odom's salary

..is 14.5 mil per year and he has one more season.

If we trade for him and he decides to re-sign for about 8-10 millions I would be extremely happy to have him in Sacto. If he wants another 14 mil per year contract, we better keep Ron and the (hopeless? :( ) youngsters and we’ll see what happens next summer.

by ZenBaller on Jul 18, 2008 5:20 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

The allure of this deal for me

is ridding ourselves of K9(woof!). It just doesn’t appeal to me otherwise.

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on Jul 18, 2008 5:50 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

The Lakers are tax concious. Let them be. That’s not the Kings problem.

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on

by pookeyguru on Jul 18, 2008 8:40 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs