I'm surprised that the Lakers caved to that extent. Odom wouldn't take $36M/4 yrs., but took this. I thought they'd meet in the middle ($38M). $2M doesn't seem like much compared to these amounts, but that's still money that could be used elsewhere.
This makes me wonder what the Lakers' next move is. The starters are great, but the bench outside of Odom still seems weak to me. Then again, outside of Manu, the Spurs don't have much proven production off the bench.
Edit: Crunching the numbers:
Year 1 $8,639,309, year 2 $9,546,436, year 3 $10,453,563, year 4 $11,360,692.
Lakers' team salary for 2009-2010 is now $93,253,041 for 14 players. The cost of keeping a championship team together. By comparison...
Spurs: $79M, 14 players
Cavs: $80M, 13 players (assuming the Heat don't match on Moon)
Magic: $80M, 12 players (including Barnes)
Celtics: $79M, 12 players
It takes massive spending to keep up at the top of today's NBA. I suppose Holt (et al) realized this. The Spurs' total salaries last year were around $68M.

Reply With Quote


