Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="RRyder" data-source="post: 835491" data-attributes="member: 10329">I wont delve into your entire post. It is well thought out but there are things that are being missrepresented.When you reference "losing money isnt a sustainable business practice" you are correct but at the same time failing to remember that the new escalating luxury tax has shown to be an pretty equal deterrent for EVERY team in the league. It's not a situation where big markets have been shown to be more willing to delve into the repeaters tax then small markets. Both big and small markets and even contending teams trade away solid players with 1st round picks attached to them not even to gain cap space but to stay below the taxAs for "to think it's not an advantage doesnt make sense" I guess it's your definition of what a significant advantage would be. Before the new tax rules sure. Teams would stay over the tax for years because they made up the difference through the market. I've stated as such. The new tax however levels that playing field because now even huge markets dont want to pay 20 million for a 5 million dollar playerGS may not be a "small market" but it definitely doesnt fall under the "big market" label and yes it does compete for fans with the Lakers simply due to the Lakers being well.... The Lakers.I wont argue that market size matters. It just doesnt matter much in regards to how much money all these teams can and do spend anymore. Those numbers tend to round out when examining the payrolls of big and small markets alike. Market size matters simply because player choose to play in those markets. The Bucks can offer to pay exactly the same amount of money to Durant, Thompson, Butler, Kawhi or Irving as the Knicks, Lakers, Dallas, Clippers or Bulls but have zero chance of signing any of them because well... Players dont want to live in Milwaukee. In fact theyll probably be resigning Middleton expressly because they can pay him more then all those teams all while going into the luxury tax themselves. That wouldn't be the case if the ability to absorb a big payroll was a huge advantageon a side note i do appreciate the conversation in the dog days of the sports world <img src="/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/smile.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)" data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification

Members online

No members online now.

Total: 40 (members: 0, guests: 40)

Latest posts

First Round Prospect Discussions Specifically
- Latest: gopkrs
- Yesterday at 10:18 PM
Draft Talk
Top 30 Visits 2025
- Latest: DoURant
- Yesterday at 4:47 PM
Draft Talk
I remember this place.
- Latest: milani
- Yesterday at 3:59 PM
The Green Bay Life
The 80th Annual Amish Mafia Draft Contest
- Latest: PikeBadger
- Yesterday at 3:37 PM
Draft Talk
Should the Packers Start Revoking Season Tickets?
- Latest: El Guapo
- Yesterday at 11:19 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum