Help my repertoire!

I've recently made a shift in my play as white, and have prepared a simple (and I think brilliant) repertoire.  I've noticed after trying to force a square peg into a round hole that I don't excel at positional chess, or rather I prefer, and feel like I'm better, playing sharp lines.  So I've switched from 1.d4 to 1.e4 and already I feel better.  I must have played a couple thousand games of Queen's Gambit and although I did okay, I've been getting bored - besides there's so much theory to know playing white in those openings such as: Grunfeld, Slav, Dutch, QGD, QGA, KID, Nimzo-Indian etc.  Needless to say perhaps at my level of play that's a little too involved even if at my level I don't NEED to know all the lines.

So I am aiming to know my repertoire completely, without needing to learn so much theory.  I think I have it mostly worked out so here's what I've got so far.

As White:

1.e4

if 1...e5 then I am fairly comfortable here and I know a few lines pretty well despite my inexperience playing them, with Ponziani and Evans Gambit being my favorites.  I feel like if my opponent plays the open game then I will simply just be able to play chess, without too much dependance on my knowledge of theory and lines.

if 1...c5 then I plan to play Smith Morra (2.d4) this seems to me to be the simplest way to play against the Sicilian and I think it pretty much takes the game out of Sicilian and more or less forces black to play white's game.  I could be wrong, I'm not completely booked up on the Smith Morra but then again, at my level who knows the Sicilian lines deeply?

and lastly if 1...d5 then I transpose to Blackmar Diemer by playing 2.d4 again taking the game away from black and more or less forcing black to play white's game.

So that covers the main things I'll run into, sure there are a bajillion things black can play but I feel these 3 main plans are all I need, everything else I can just "play chess" as it were.

As Black:

after 1.e4 I play the Scandinavian 1...d5 which I've been playing for a long long time, I have more knowledge and confidence in this opening than any other and I find that it suits me well, despite the tendency to be closed and rather quiet/positional.  I also have knowledge of Caro-Kann (particularly the Advanced variation) and a tiny bit of French (particularly the Burn variation) since white can transpose the game into these lines.  I like this opening because again, I avoid all the theory after 1.e4 and force white to play black's game here, although as mentioned in my white side of the repertoire I think white's only chance to regain control of the game is to transpose to Blackmar-Diemer, but in that case I should know it pretty well and be rather comfortable.  However, after playing through hundreds of games using Scandinavian as black I have yet to run into the Blackmar once.

Now here's my problem, my repetoire is almost complete and all I need now is something against 1.d4, so what to do?  As I said I don't want to immerse myself into too-much theory, especially since I'd like to keep the same idea throughout my repertoire basically I want to play openings that almost force my opponent into my world.  So here I thought about playing the Budapest, it seemed attractive, it's a gambit with potential for very sharp play while presumably dodging all of white's opening plans.  The only problem is that the Budapest gambit is not sound, and not only that there's no guarantee I can even play it every time.  As of right now the only idea I have is Nimzo-Indian or Nimzo-Bogo perhaps backing this up with KID (kinda what I play right now but I don't REALLY know anything concrete as far as lines and theory, but it seems pretty simple and effective) so that I can play something like e6 and nf6 and can decide which I will play based on what white plays.  But again this seems like it doesn't quite fit into the style of my repertoire, let alone my style of play.

So, any ideas of a reply to 1.d4 that can be of similar effect as the Scandinavian is to 1.e4? That's basically what I'm looking for, some kind of gambit or something leading to sharp play, that is at least somewhat sound?

And also, what's a sharp 1.d4 line to play as white?  I don't want to give up 1.d4 completely, so if I can play it more to my style I will.

Any other constructive comments/suggestions/criticisms pertaining to my repertoire are welcome.

Thanks in advance.

Slav defence against 1.d4 - there are sharp lines, and you're already familiar with the pawn structure.

Against 1...e5, I guess Evans Gambit is fine but you won't get it all the time if Black plays Two Knights or Petroff. I wouldn't really recommend the Ponziani since Black is fine as long as he doesn't fall into some trap.

Against 1...c5, wouldn't recommend SMG cause Black doesn't really need to know much to accept it. Just play a Scheveningan setup, castle, and your good. Or he can even transpose  you into the Alapin which I don't think you want to play. Personally, I recommend the Open Sicilian. You want sharp lines, you get sharp lines. Like you said, your opponents won't know much theory either so just go for it!

You will need something against French/CK. Since you like Sharp, go into the Winawer (be warned: theres tons of theory) or if thats too much play 3.Nd2. Against CK, advance variation or Panov attack.

Ok....now onto playing vs. 1.d4:

The Budapest may seem aggressive at first, but it turns out that if white knows the lines, the game can become unexpectedly boring+ it can't be played against 1.Nf3 or 1.d4 2.Nf3 3.c4--so I don't really recommend it.

Try the KID, Dutch, Benoni, or Benko Gambit.

There are quite a few sharp lines in 1.d4 though. Botvinnik Semi-Slav, Anti Moscow gambit, Marshall Gambit, Bayonet Attack,...

  Right, I want to avoid studying openings as much as possible, and the openings I do know, didn't really require any involved study on my part.  I understand the sentiment that an improving player should focus on tactical and positional play, but at the same time I don't think having an idea of what to play in the opening is bad.  For example when I play Ponziani, I don't know every possible variation and what to play, but I have a general idea of what I'm trying to accomplish and knowing such an opening that can lead to sharp play, wouldn't that in some way help to possibly improve my tactical/positional play and understanding, in a more hands on approach? To be clear, I am not studying any openings per se, and the openings I play, Scandinavian aside, I don't know inside and out but I feel have some idea of what to play in the opening

Lasker's Defense is simple , positional , and very solid.It's a good starting point.Queen's Gambit offers a lot other defenses.Tartakower is also good and positional without much need of theory and Slav can be a good surprise weapon(if you play live or OTB)

There are several tools on Chess.com to help with the tactical elements. What would you recommend to help strengthen the positional elements?

Thanks.