In 2010, LeBron James chose not to sign a maximum contract when joining the Miami Heat. Instead, he accepted a slightly lower salary to help the team assemble the strongest possible roster around him. This move contributed to two championship wins. However, the Heat also capitalized on James`s financial sacrifice in ways that reportedly caused him frustration. For instance, they used the amnesty clause to waive key role player Mike Miller primarily to save money on luxury tax penalties. By the time James became a free agent again in 2014, he made it clear from the outset that he would no longer offer discounts and would only consider signing for the maximum allowable salary.
This approach remained consistent from 2014 through 2024. He earned every bit of his salary, and the general belief was that as long as he continued to perform at that level, he would keep receiving his highest possible pay. However, with the Los Angeles Lakers facing significant spending limitations, reports indicated James offered a potential concession: he was willing to take a considerable pay cut, estimated at around $15 million, to help the team pursue specific approved free agents using either the mid-level exception or a sign-and-trade agreement.
His agent, Rich Paul, conveyed James`s priority at the time: “He is prioritizing a roster improvement,” Paul told ESPN. “He`s been adamant about exuding all efforts to improve the roster.”
The Lakers attempted to acquire Klay Thompson but ultimately lost out to the Dallas Mavericks. Consequently, James withdrew his original, larger pay cut offer. He still agreed to a smaller concession to help the Lakers avoid the punitive second apron, but his re-signing deal was for $104 million over two years. Given the player option on the second year, there was likely some hope he might reconsider a pay cut under favorable future circumstances.
As of now, however, a significant pay cut seems improbable. Current reports suggest James is expected to exercise his player option for the final year of his contract, valued at $52.6 million. While the exact reasons for this apparent shift in priority regarding roster improvement are unclear at this juncture, the result is a more challenging path for the Lakers to upgrade their team this offseason.
Assuming James and Dorian Finney-Smith opt into their respective player options for next season, the Lakers would enter the offseason approximately $4 million below the first-apron threshold and around $16 million shy of the second apron. Ideally, the Lakers would prefer to stay below the first apron. Doing so would grant them access to the taxpayer mid-level exception of about $5.7 million for free agency, rather than the larger $14.1 million full mid-level exception. It would also enable the use of the bi-annual exception, worth roughly $5.1 million, for another free agent signing, and provide the flexibility to acquire players through sign-and-trade deals. During the season, teams below the first apron can sign any player waived on the buyout market. Teams exceeding the first apron face limitations, only able to sign bought-out players whose previous salaries were below the non-taxpayer mid-level exception. Overall, avoiding the apron offers substantial financial and strategic flexibility. While the Lakers have other methods to create cap space, such as trading salaries, the simplest approach by far would be a sacrifice on James`s part.
Let`s establish this upfront: LeBron James absolutely still deserves a maximum salary. He was just named to the Second-Team All-NBA squad, which speaks volumes. According to Bleacher Report`s Andy Bailey and his “Huge Nerd Index” (HNI), which averages a player`s ranking across eight widely used catch-all metrics, James, even at age 40, tied for 16th place, coincidentally with former teammate Anthony Davis. While there`s a natural concern about age-related decline for any high-usage player nearing 40, James has historically defied expectations. He might play worse next season, but it`s highly unlikely he`ll decline so significantly that he wouldn`t warrant a max salary, especially considering players like Paul George and Bradley Beal receive one. Based on his most recent performance, LeBron was still playing at a max-level caliber.
And even if his performance were to dip slightly, does it truly matter in this context? He has negotiated a salary for the 2025-26 season that is effectively a max-level figure through his player option. He is fully within his contractual rights to simply take that money. We rarely question other players for prioritizing their earnings. The fact that James is a billionaire shouldn`t change this perspective; this is his profession, and he is exceptionally good at it. Why shouldn`t he be fairly compensated?
Rich Paul provided the rationale a year ago: James is driven by the desire to win. He himself has stated he is “chasing a ghost,” referring to Michael Jordan`s six championships compared to his four. The argument isn`t that James *should* take less money from a moral standpoint; it`s that his choice not to take a pay cut conflicts with his publicly stated goal of pursuing that elusive sixth championship. At this juncture, it becomes a matter of setting priorities. James can choose to maximize his income, or he can choose to maximize his probability of winning a fifth NBA title. He cannot simultaneously achieve both goals. While it`s theoretically possible for the Lakers to win a championship with James earning his option salary, these two objectives are fundamentally opposed. The more James earns, the more difficult it becomes for the Lakers to build a championship-caliber team around him due to salary cap restrictions.
Even with Luka Dončić now on the team, building a championship contender is going to be an uphill struggle. The Minnesota Timberwolves eliminated the Lakers in just five games in the first round of the recent playoffs. The Timberwolves themselves were then comfortably beaten by the Oklahoma City Thunder in five games two rounds later. That Thunder team, one of the league`s youngest, least expensive, and asset-richest squads, is expected to be even better next season. Given the reality that James`s performance could potentially decline, the current gap appears significant, at least for the time being. This doesn`t mean the gap is insurmountable, but closing it will likely require the Lakers to utilize every available team-building strategy.
As a minimum requirement, the Lakers desperately need two reliable centers. JJ Redick implicitly highlighted Jaxson Hayes` inadequacy as a playoff-level backup big man during the Minnesota series by essentially abandoning his use. They also need a guard with defensive capabilities, as Finney-Smith is better suited to guarding wings, and the Western Conference is replete with smaller, quicker scorers that the Lakers currently lack the personnel to effectively contain. Adding a spare ball-handler would also be beneficial, not necessarily for a massive role, but to alleviate regular-season workload and serve as an option in the playoffs.
The Lakers likely have only one major trade asset they can realistically deploy. They can thank the rescinded Mark Williams trade for this flexibility. Their 2031 first-round draft pick, along with swap rights in 2026, 2030, and 2032, are available. Gabe Vincent and Maxi Kleber represent easily movable expiring salaries. Jarred Vanderbilt is also a movable contract from a salary-matching perspective, although his long-term deal and injury history might deter potential suitors. If the Lakers wanted to be more aggressive, Rui Hachimura could potentially interest certain teams as an asset in his own right, and his $18 million expiring salary is quite movable.
However, unless Austin Reaves is included in trade discussions (and by all accounts, he would only be part of a package for a genuine star), these assets likely won`t be sufficient to address all of the Lakers` roster needs. Free agency will be a crucial component of their offseason strategy, and as discussed, the financial resources available to the Lakers are directly impacted by whether James takes a pay cut.
While James holds leverage through his player option, the Lakers also possess agency through their offseason decisions. They are not obligated to go “all-in” solely on winning the 2026 championship. Now that they have the 26-year-old Dončić — assuming they are confident he will sign an extension this offseason — they must also consider the team`s long-term future.
Consider that 2031 first-round pick. Currently, it might be enough to trade for a solid center. But next summer, their 2033 first-round pick will become available for trading. If they retain the 2031 pick, they could potentially offer two first-rounders for a more significant player next summer. Dončić is young enough to wait a year for a championship push; James may not be.
There`s also the question of James`s role with the team beyond 2026. Currently, the Lakers are positioned to potentially have maximum salary cap space that summer. The likely goal would be to use this space to acquire players who will form the long-term core of a Dončić-centric roster. Where James fits into that future is uncertain. For example, if they wanted to pursue a max-level free agent like Jaren Jackson Jr., retaining James at anywhere near his current salary would be impossible under cap rules. If James wishes to secure a substantial salary with the Lakers for the 2026-27 season, his player option becomes a bargaining chip. In exchange for sacrificing salary this year, he could potentially negotiate another player option or a guaranteed contract for the following year.
If the Lakers are fully committed to preserving that potential cap space for 2026, it will affect not only James`s decision but also the types of players they can add around him this summer. If the Lakers limit themselves to acquiring players on expiring contracts, the pool of potentially helpful role players shrinks considerably. James likely doesn`t care much about what the Lakers might do with cap space in 2026; he wants to win now.
But the Lakers are compelled to consider a longer time horizon. Their worst-case scenario is going all-in on the present, failing to win a title, and then being left without the resources to effectively improve the team around Dončić once James eventually departs. This situation provides the Lakers with a degree of leverage. They can credibly approach James and argue that if he wants them to commit fully to winning this upcoming season, he needs to do his part to maximize their ability to build the best possible roster.
The relationship between NBA teams and their star players is inherently a partnership. While the relationship between James and the Lakers has been largely mutually beneficial, there have certainly been periods of tension. The Lakers have gone out of their way to support several other clients represented by Paul`s agency, Klutch Sports. They notably traded for Russell Westbrook, reportedly at James`s urging. Yet, they were also slow to trade Westbrook, even when James himself reportedly hinted at the necessity of such a move. They allowed fan-favorite Alex Caruso to leave solely to save money, a type of decision James has publicly criticized in the past. There are valid points of contention on both sides of this dynamic.
This history doesn`t necessarily indicate a fundamental breakdown in trust, but it acknowledges that trust regarding financial sacrifices is not always a given. James didn`t blindly accept a pay cut last year; he set specific conditions that the Lakers failed to meet. His experience in Miami demonstrated the potential downsides when he grants his organization too much latitude. If he is ever to leave money on the table again, he will want assurance that the sacrifice will be genuinely worthwhile and utilized effectively.
James is not required to make a decision regarding his player option until June 29th. This timeline allows him to assess the state of the Lakers` roster after early offseason moves. Although no recent reporting supports this theory, it is conceivable that James might be waiting to see what kind of offseason the Lakers are having before making any financial decisions. Recall that the reporting about his willingness to take a smaller salary last summer emerged after the Lakers successfully drafted his son, Bronny James. Perhaps he remains open to a pay cut, provided the Lakers commit to using that money to pursue specific players he approves of. An obvious candidate might be his close friend Chris Paul, but other potential additions could also influence his decision. In this scenario, the responsibility would fall on the Lakers. If they want James`s financial assistance, they must demonstrate that they are capable of effectively using those resources to help him achieve his goal.
However, the notion that he would even consider a pay cut this year remains largely speculative at this point. The reporting thus far has been consistent: James is not expected to make a significant financial sacrifice this upcoming season. That is absolutely his right to decide, but such a decision would undeniably have consequences for the Lakers` roster construction. James is clearly aware of this; it`s why he made the offer last summer. It`s also why he genuinely left money on the table in 2010 and, in 2013, spoke positively about the benefits of doing so in an interview with ESPN`s Brian Windhorst. “Financially, I`ll sacrifice for the team,” he said then. “It shows for some of the top guys, it isn`t all about money. That`s the genuine side of this, it`s about winning. I understand that.”
And if the Lakers aspire to win at the absolute highest level, it likely means James will need to earn a little less than his maximum potential salary. This reality has nothing to do with his value as a player, nor is it an ethical argument that any player should be obligated to sacrifice earnings for their team. It is simply the practical consequence of the current situation. The Lakers, in their present state, have a considerable distance to cover before they can be considered credible contenders for the 2026 championship. Achieving that goal will require substantial roster improvements, and the most straightforward path to making those significant upgrades involves James making a substantial financial sacrifice. He might be understandably hesitant to do so, having witnessed previous teams potentially misuse similar sacrifices. However, if he is focused on maximizing his chances of securing one more NBA title, a personal pay cut remains the most impactful tool available at his disposal to facilitate that outcome.
Jasper Hawthorne