PDA

View Full Version : Should Luke retire?



lakersfan01
07-17-2010, 09:27 PM
Please dude, i respect you, but retire, collect your insurance, and be an assistant head coach with brian shaw.

show34
07-17-2010, 09:47 PM
Luke to young for retirement he needs to remain a laker like kobe will he sttill will try to play injured give him some props

Hellcrooner
07-17-2010, 09:53 PM
what for?

If he retires his salary iwill still count against our cap.

Id rather have 10 good games from him each season if im going to have to pay for him either way.

ViperK8B
07-17-2010, 09:59 PM
if he retires it drops off. reason behind the celtics pushing for sheed to do the same.

also sad to say even if he did retire we would still be over the cap ( not 100% sure ) so it wouldnt make much of a diff, so might as well keep him and squeeze everything we can outta him now.

rjvacad
07-17-2010, 10:05 PM
Heartless!!!

Phabulous
07-17-2010, 10:14 PM
The man needs a full season, he does more than you think. He is an intelligent ball player & handler. He just got back surgery and coaches are tendering his min. Look plays D and passes the ball. He took a hard fall in the playoffs against OKC. He played in the Celtics series HARD with whatever minutes he got, Luke is the one who is probably telling LO to do something when he's out there. I rather have Luke than a new guy just warming the bench with a jersey on. Luke has been devoted to the franchise. Just let him be.

lakersfan01
07-17-2010, 10:15 PM
i wish he would just work on his shot so when he is healthy enough to play, he can knock down the shot when people sag off of him expecting him to miss. from what i understand if he retired because he was too injured to play, insurance would pay the remainder of contract and lakers would be off the hook for his contract that has 3 years at 5 million per year left. since we are over the cap, he costs another 5 million in luxary tax. so luke costs us 10 million lol. lakers really overpaid for him and signed him 6 years ouch. i think mitch has learned from that. only way to learn i suppose. maybe luke can get healthy and prove his doubters wrong. would be cool but i don't see it happening. probably hurts our negotiating too. i can just here the negotiating at the table, well luke gets paid 5 million a year, so you saying im not as good as luke? haha

lakersfan01
07-17-2010, 10:17 PM
i do remember his finger getting dislocated, and he got it set back in and continued to play. definetly a tough guy. like i said i respect him. and i was afraid for him when he fell like that. it probably set him back in his rehab.

FakeBlackMamba
07-18-2010, 01:05 AM
The dude is going to make over 5 million sitting on the bench next year. Nobody in their correct state of mind would retire....

LUKE PLEASE PLEASE RETIRE!

Hellcrooner
07-18-2010, 01:29 AM
The dude is going to make over 5 million sitting on the bench next year. Nobody in their correct state of mind would retire....

LUKE PLEASE PLEASE RETIRE!

what part of even if he retires the team has to pay him and he coutns against our cap did you not understand?

Arepas y postobon!!!!

Anilyzer
07-18-2010, 01:40 AM
Yeah... Luke was a pretty marginal player even in the best of times. Even playing at his best, we just felt good that he was able to play at a fairly high level, but he was never really doing anything that many other players in the league could do if they were on the Lakers. I guess we signed him for decent $$ because he had some marketability and was part of the triangle and all that... but yeah, ESPECIALLY now that he is injured, and ESPECIALLY because we need to be at 100% strength to 3Peat, Luke should retire. Take one for the team, man. Retire. He is popular, and go right on TV as an announcer and all that. But for the Lakers, the stakes have never been higher. This is all about Phil Jackson as GOAT, Kobe as GOAT, Lakers as GOAT... SOOOOO much is riding on next season. AND we've got to handle the Celtics, Bulls, Heat, Spurs, Thunder and Orlando next year. As cool as Luke is, we just have ZERO space for someone who is not going to play next year.

Actually, it's worse than that. Not only does he take up a roster spot and not play (a spot we could sign a rookie or vet-min free agent for) but he also has status on the team -- so when he IS healthy, he expects to be in the rotation ahead of the other SFs we might have on the roster. This screws with the rotation, because not only are we going between our "first team" and our "bench crew", but we also always have to find minutes for Luke. This will tend to freeze out new, fresh, talented players like EBanks, because Phil gives minutes during the regular season to Luke, and then if he is out in the playoffs, Ebanks doesn't play then either because he hasn't played all season. The coach likes him, so he tends to get minutes during the season, even if they are kind of "priviledge" minutes (the precious minutes on the court with Kobe at Staples on national TV and all that) -- but if he's not gonna be there for the whole year 100%, then he should just retire and let those minutes go to young players who are trying to develop into the rotation.

FakeBlackMamba
07-18-2010, 12:16 PM
what part of even if he retires the team has to pay him and he coutns against our cap did you not understand?

Arepas y postobon!!!!

What part of no it doesnt dont you understand???????? when a player retires, the salary comes off the books and he DOES NOT CONTINUE TO GET PAID!

lakers4sho
07-18-2010, 12:44 PM
What part of no it doesnt dont you understand???????? when a player retires, the salary comes off the books and he DOES NOT CONTINUE TO GET PAID!


There is one exception whereby a player can continue to receive his salary, but the salary is not included in the team's team salary. This is when a player is forced to retire for medical reasons and a league-appointed physician confirms that he is medically unfit to continue playing. There is a waiting period of one year following the injury or illness before a team can apply for this salary cap relief. If the waiting period expires mid-season (on any date prior to the last day of the regular season), then the player's entire salary for that season is removed from the team's team salary.

Luke played during last year's playoffs, so I [ or the league ] wouldn't think he's "medically unfit to continue playing".

gr824
07-18-2010, 01:44 PM
if he retires it drops off. reason behind the celtics pushing for sheed to do the same.

also sad to say even if he did retire we would still be over the cap ( not 100% sure ) so it wouldnt make much of a diff, so might as well keep him and squeeze everything we can outta him now.


i wish he would just work on his shot so when he is healthy enough to play, he can knock down the shot when people sag off of him expecting him to miss. from what i understand if he retired because he was too injured to play, insurance would pay the remainder of contract and lakers would be off the hook for his contract that has 3 years at 5 million per year left. since we are over the cap, he costs another 5 million in luxary tax. so luke costs us 10 million lol. lakers really overpaid for him and signed him 6 years ouch. i think mitch has learned from that. only way to learn i suppose. maybe luke can get healthy and prove his doubters wrong. would be cool but i don't see it happening. probably hurts our negotiating too. i can just here the negotiating at the table, well luke gets paid 5 million a year, so you saying im not as good as luke? haha


what part of even if he retires the team has to pay him and he coutns against our cap did you not understand?

Arepas y postobon!!!!


What part of no it doesnt dont you understand???????? when a player retires, the salary comes off the books and he DOES NOT CONTINUE TO GET PAID!

Wow, you guys, so much confusion and contention over poor Luke Walton and his $$$s. I am gonna try to clear up some fallacies and half-truths here [ good luck to me :rolleyes: ]:

First off, Walton has a guaranteed contract which is scheduled to pay him $16.74 million over the next three seasons. Assuming the Lakers pay him his money -- either in salary or via some sort of accelerated or decelerated buyout agreement -- that payout will count against the Cap and will be subject to LT assessment. If the team should waive Luke, that would get a roster spot back for their use with another player, but it does nothing to affect the salary guarantee nor the Cap/LT realities ...

Now, Walton could voluntarily retire. If he does so, then it becomes the Lakers' prerogative to either pay him or to not pay the salary he is 'owed'. If they decide to honor the contract, then nothing changes in terms of the Cap/LT; if they refuse to pay him, then his salary comes off the books and the Cap/LT. This seems to be what you guys are advocating that Walton do, regardless of whether he gets paid or not, which to me seems unrealistic: Walton is not going to walk away from nearly $17 million; I would worry about his mental health if he were to do so [ Rasheed Wallace's situation is being compared to Walton's and, though similar on the surface, I just do not see the parallel when I look closer: Wallace is almost six years older than Luke and, in his career, Rasheed has earned nearly 10 times the $$$s Walton has; Walton needs the next three years worth of pay or else he is sacrificing about half of his total career earning power. ] ...

Many of you guys are saying that Luke has insurance and that it will pay his salary if he retires; I do not think things are that simply. If Walton "just retires" [ like Wallace ], to get his salary off the Laker Cap/LT ledger, then any insurance Walton may have will not merely kick in in response to the retirement, because it covers him only if he is disabled, not if he retires "voluntarily". On the other hand, if he is disabled and quits because of it, his salary still counts against the Cap and is subject to LT, even if the Lakers are reimbursed by Walton's insurance for the salary payout. In the latter eventuality, after a year or more, the Lakers can petition the league to have Walton certified as disabled and maybe the NBA office will grant the 'request' and take Walton's salary off the Cap retroactively and remove it from the LT tally, but it is far from automatic that the league will do so ...

In terms of the insurance, it is rare for a player of Luke's stature to have such insurance, since, evidently, it is quite costly. If, indeed, he does have it, more power to him, because it may be needed to pay his salary down the line if he is permanently disabled. But even if insurance "pays", the league will count the payments as team salary and charge the Lakers accordingly, both vis-a-vis the Cap and the LT. As I mentioned, the Lakers may have recourse to soften that harsh reality somewhat, both in the form of the "petition" I mentioned above and via seeking a disabled player exception to utilize Walton's roster spot and to gain some Cap leeway to fund that action [ the DPE would be an exception worth no more than half Walton's salary to be used to sign one player ] ... This whole process is not simple nor is it a slamdunk either though ...

I hope this post does a bit to clear up the battles taking place in this thread as to the options available to both Walton and the Lakers. There may be some long-range solutions for them both, depending on Luke's ongoing treatment and his eventual prognosis. But the fact remains that Walton quitting as a result of this injury is no quick fix for the Lakers' current Cap/LT predicament and to presume otherwise is to blithely ignore the complications that exist in the modern NBA ...

gr824
07-18-2010, 02:00 PM
The man needs a full season, he does more than you think. He is an intelligent ball player & handler. He just got back surgery and coaches are tendering his min. Look plays D and passes the ball. He took a hard fall in the playoffs against OKC. He played in the Celtics series HARD with whatever minutes he got, Luke is the one who is probably telling LO to do something when he's out there. I rather have Luke than a new guy just warming the bench with a jersey on. Luke has been devoted to the franchise. Just let him be.

Walton has opted for therapy on his back, instead of surgery. I do not believe he has gone under the knife yet for his back 'problem' and, if the therapy 'works', he may never go the surgery route ...

show34
07-18-2010, 02:24 PM
Luke if you out here dont listen to this man you are a warrior and just play like you aint even injured your dad did it so can you big dawg keep it pushin

ldawg
07-18-2010, 11:54 PM
Who is Worst Luke or Devin George?

kid24
07-19-2010, 03:21 AM
yes

Enemey
07-19-2010, 03:38 AM
He might as well retire because he aint getting no P/T

The Raven
07-20-2010, 01:00 PM
Retire already Walton. At this point, you are nothing but a detriment to the tea, anyway so please go away

Laker Legend42
07-20-2010, 02:19 PM
Luke if you out here dont listen to this man you are a warrior and just play like you aint even injured your dad did it so can you big dawg keep it pushinLuke is anything but a warrior. This dude comes out for shoot around and gets hurt. This back issue will be the end all for his playing career but I don't think surgrey is the way to go. I've yet to see anyone have their back cut on and be better for it. Larry Johnson never dunked again after he had back surgrey. That doesn't apply to Luke but can you imagine a slower Luke?

djlamer
07-20-2010, 08:06 PM
but hes so basketball smart. phil loves him. alot of laker ladies love him for some reason....if he just stopped gettin injured.....

New Power House
07-20-2010, 08:23 PM
but hes so basketball smart. phil loves him. alot of laker ladies love him for some reason....if he just stopped gettin injured.....

He is a basketball smart?:rolleyes: He is a business smart! Three more years making ,what?6 mill each without playing and getting rings? Cupcake's biggest mistake for the last 5 years! I just hope he gets to fix it soon!:facepalm:

Laker Legend42
07-21-2010, 07:18 PM
but hes so basketball smart. phil loves him. alot of laker ladies love him for some reason....if he just stopped gettin injured.....

he's the exact opposite of Gerald Green. Luke is smart with no athleticisim and Green is all athleticism and dumb as a rock.

lakersfan01
07-21-2010, 07:49 PM
I'm tired of the Luke is so smart and has has a high basketball IQ talk. He has one of the highest turnover per minute ratios on the Lakers roster every time i check! And that's being generous, because everytime I remember checking, he had thge worst turnover per minute ratio. He is so pathetically unathletic, and is a pathetic shooter. I'm pretty sick of Luke. But I think just like when Kwame was booed by Laker fans before he got traded for Gasol, it was the gross amount of money he was making compared to what a lousy player he was. Luke is in the same underachieving top 10 human pathetic highlight reel boat. He is a rediculous 6 year contract making over 5 million per year. For god's sake, Ron Artest makes 6 million a year!!! I wasn't high on him even when the Lakers resigned him to one of the most terrible contracts in Laker signing history.

Jewelz0376
07-21-2010, 07:50 PM
I wish he would..he's a bum..I can do what Luke does

lakersfan01
07-21-2010, 07:53 PM
The only person that love him are his mom dad brothers, and his friend Richard Jefferson that he half owns a party house with in San Diego. Whats an nba player gotta go in halfs with to buy a house? They were roommates back in college at arizona too.

lakers4sho
07-21-2010, 08:03 PM
can you imagine a slower Luke?

:speechless:

lakersfan01
07-21-2010, 08:08 PM
Devin George is much better than Puke! He at least was a big contributor and hit key 3 point shots in championship runs in the playoff.