Kobe Watch

[slinslin]

Yes, Lakers lost tonight to a rival who played without Webber and Miller.

I guess that improves the chance of Kobe leaving by 0.1%.

Lakers aren't winning the title!

35/11/6/1 for Kobe tonight but on 28 shots.


Since the ASG, 34ppg 7.3rpg 7.6apg 2.3spg 0.83bpg 55%FG

35/11/6/1 only game he shot under 50% 12-28
35/7/10/3 14-26
40/7/5/3 15-25
28/5/7/3/2 10-18
35/6/8/2/1 11-16
31/8/10/2 13-23

I guess I would settle for Kobe only!

 

[George O'Brien]

Is there any word on when or if Malone is expected back?

I never felt the Lakers had a strong enough bench to carry them if there were injuries. They have actually played better than I expected this season, but bench strength is very important. If Malone is not healthy by the playoffs, the Lakers could get picked off. If Malone is healthy, I would not bet against them.

 

[scotsman13]

still the question remains can kobe work with a team? if he cant work with amare then show him to the door. without a big man this team isnt going anywhere if it had AI, kobe and Tmac.

 

[George O'Brien]

Originally posted by scotsman13
still the question remains can kobe work with a team? if he cant work with amare then show him to the door. without a big man this team isnt going anywhere if it had AI, kobe and Tmac.

We heard you the first time.

This problem may be somewhat overstated. Shaq offers an unusual situation - a big scorer who hits 57% of his shots. Coaching logic is that you keep doing something until the opponent figures out a way to stop it - and getting the ball to Shaq almost every play works even if it is a bit boring. Kobe has always had very good assist statistics, so he does pass the ball (he's no Antoine Walker).

I have never said I did not think Kobe would be very nice. My concern has always been to give up on White and give away draft picks with only a minimal chance of actually getting Kobe.

 

[elindholm]

I have never said I did not think Kobe would be very nice. My concern has always been to give up on White

Revisionist history.

You wrote repeatedly that signing Bryant to a max deal was a dangerous financial risk, tying up too much money in one player and making it basically impossible to improve the team further. Why have you backed away from that stance?

 

[George O'Brien]

Originally posted by elindholm
I have never said I did not think Kobe would be very nice. My concern has always been to give up on White

Revisionist history.

You wrote repeatedly that signing Bryant to a max deal was a dangerous financial risk, tying up too much money in one player and making it basically impossible to improve the team further. Why have you backed away from that stance?

Some of it had to do with the starting salary. If the Suns started Kobe at $15 million, it would tie up a lot of cap. I said it was marginally feasible if he only started at $13 and much more reasonable if the Suns could do it without dumping White.

I realize that my posts get pretty long when I run through variations and options. If anything, I have been looking for a way that Kobe could be signed that did not cause too much damage.

This doesn't mean that I am wildly enthusiastic about giving anyone a max contract considering the Suns history with Penny and Googs. But I will admit I am less concerned about giving Kobe a max than Dampier or Camby due to their history of injuries.

In any case, my concern has been more focused on doing things that might hurt the team if there is no real chance of signing Kobe. White contributes and giving him away unless there is an assurance seems likely to creat cap space that would not be used. That is different than saying that I would not want a selfish, adulderous ball hog with an excessive contract. That was someone else.

 

[DieHardFromMO]

Originally posted by slinslin
Yes, Lakers lost tonight to a rival who played without Webber and Miller.

The Lakers lost on their own homecourt to the Kings without the services of Bobby Jackson also, the best non-starting guard in the NBA.

 

[slinslin]

Here is one big reason Kobe should sign with the Suns..

The roster should be able to win about 50+ games with Kobe and a few additions.

Kobe will get a lot of credit for the huge turnaround and will be the frontrunner for MVP by far especially since he is playing in the West and already has a big name.

He simply needs to do something new to put his name big into the mix instead of being in Shaq's shadow.

Maybe it is a risk for Kobe to sign with the Suns but there is a lot to gain for him.

 

[scotsman13]

Originally posted by slinslin
The roster should be able to win about 50+ games with Kobe and a few additions.

slin, just a simple question with what money are we going to be able to add anyone beside kobe? we may get some team to take eisley or white but we are not going to be able to get rid of both. and then the team is still facing the same problem that they have this year and that is they are still the youngest team in the nba and will still make mistakes that will add up and cost them the game. lets look at it this way, we make a deal with the bobcats that if they take eisley we will give them jj and clevelands draftpick (yea on this we have gotten our backsides ripped). that would make our roster for next year something like this
starting
amare
jake
marion
kobe
barbosa

bench
zarko
milos
lampe
white
casey
first round pick

but at this point just to get kobe we are over the cap and can only sign players for the mle if we want to pay double (tax) for them and vet. minuims. so where do you think we are going to find anyone that will make a differance long term?

 

[Joe Mama]

The chance that the Phoenix Suns will trade JJ and Cleveland's draft pick to the bobcats just so they will take Howard Eiseley is somewhere between zero and zilch. They MIGHT be willing to unload their top draft pick if they have a very good feeling about Kobe Bryant. They would not trade JJ to make room for him unless they were 100% sure he would be signing in Phoenix this summer. Since the expansion draft is well before free agency starts don't count on that.

Joe Mama

 

[elindholm]

scotsman13:

Several things are wrong with your post.

1. No way are the Suns going to give up Joe Johnson just to be free of Eisley's contract.

2. If the Suns sign Bryant for all of their cap space, they can't use the MLE. (Thanks to slinslin for this correction earlier when I made the same error.)

3. You don't pay luxury tax on players over the cap, you pay it on players over the luxury tax limit, which is much higher.

If the Suns sign Bryant and it costs them White, they will have a significant problem at center. They'll have to hope to get by for a year with Voskuhl, minimum-salary pickups, possibly their lottery pick, and small lineups.

If the Suns sign Bryant and it costs them Eisley and their pick, they'll have to hope that Voskuhl and White can be a fairly effective center tandem.

Either way, they'll have access to the MLE in summer 2005 and will be able to make modest improvements with that.

Another possibility is to trade someone for a center, for example Marion for Ilgauskas (although most of this board does not like that trade).

 

[slinslin]

I don't know why everyone is complaining about losing Jahidi White.

I mean it is not like we couldn't sign a much better center for the same money if we get rid off White and Eisley.

Mmm would I rather have White or Dampier? mmmmm

 

[elindholm]

I mean it is not like we couldn't sign a much better center for the same money if we get rid off White and Eisley.

I agree that White is nothing to get excited about, but who are the better options at roughly MLE money? I don't think Camby (your usual top choice) is realistic; someone will give him more. I like Foyle, but most of this board doesn't.

Mmm would I rather have White or Dampier?

If Dampier opts out, his new deal will start at at least $7 million per season. I think you can pretty much count on that.

And finally, I don't think any of your plans for getting rid of both White and Eisley are viable.

 

[scotsman13]

Originally posted by slinslin
Mmm would I rather have White or Dampier? mmmmm

lets see a player that has shown that he can guard shaq and rebound very well (9th over all per 48 min) and block shots and makes 7 million.

or

a player that is the #1 per 48 mins in rebounds and is 4 years older and then white and has a major issue with injurys over his time in the nba. also is making 8 million and there is no promise that he will take less or that we can get him.

personally i think that we are going to be taking to many chances this summer already. i like white as a player and amare seems to do better when he is on the court then jake.

 

[sunsfn]

Originally posted by elindholm
I like Foyle, but most of this board doesn't.

I like Foyle, and would not be upset if the suns would sign him this offseason. That is if they get rid of White.

At this point I do not think they should get rid of White until they have a sure thing with signing someone better or make a trade for someone.

I hope they do not give up a draft pick to get rid of white, I think that would be a waste of a pick.

 

[slinslin]

Wow, White has now proven he can guard Shaq? That's awesome.

Mmm 6'11 , long arms, 11.6/11.6 or 6'9 Jahidi White? mmmm

Dampier already mentioned the possibility of playing for the MLE as far as I know. At most he will get 6M$ starting I predict.

 

[Chaplin]

Originally posted by slinslin
Wow, White has now proven he can guard Shaq? That's awesome.

Mmm 6'11 , long arms, 11.6/11.6 or 6'9 Jahidi White? mmmm

Dampier already mentioned the possibility of playing for the MLE as far as I know. At most he will get 6M$ starting I predict.

If that's what he's projected to get, he won't opt out.

 

[fordronken]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=stein_marc&id=1746036

By Marc Stein
ESPN.com


The schedule isn't the friendliest on this hard-luck Friday. Broadcasting arrangements made way back in the summer have served up Raptors at Celtics, followed by Suns at Sonics.

Seems like a fine time, then, to go in a completely different direction and delve into a completely hypothetical situation.

Completely.

Let's say a marquee free agent signs a big contract with an NBA team this summer. It could be the team he currently plays for, or a team in the same city.

A team that plays in the same building, even.

Then that player is incarcerated.

It's one of the most-asked questions we get here at Stein Line HQ: What are the salary-cap implications for the team in question if it ever signed a superstar free agent who is subsequently jailed?

So we've consulted with salary-cap experts to address these implications. Answers to some good questions follow:

1. If a player with a guaranteed contract is incarcerated, is a team stuck with that contract on its payroll?

No. If a player is incarcerated, he can't perform under the terms of the contract. Based on Section 16(a) of the NBA's uniform player contract, a player who shall "at any time fail, refuse or neglect to render his services hereunder or in any other manner" breaches his contract. The team is thus allowed to void the contract if it chooses, removing the contract fully from the books.

So ...

In the case of our hypothetical example, if a free agent is signed this summer and then sent to prison, his team can void the contract as if the money was never spent. Which diffuses the risk factor for teams pursuing a hypothetical free agent with a perilous legal cloud over his head. If the team involved wants to break all ties, all it's really risking is the PR hit.

2. What if a team signs a player who is then jailed, but the team doesn't want to cut ties with the player? Can the team keep his rights?

The most likely course, in this case, is that the team suspends the player while he's unable to perform. And all such suspensions, according to league rules, are without pay. When the player is free to return to the NBA, it would then be the commissioner's decision whether the player would be cleared for reinstatement. Of course, in the interim, the contract of a suspended player continues to count against the salary cap and would carry luxury-tax consequences in a tax year. A team facing such circumstances would undoubtedly consider the length of the sentence when deciding whether it's a worthy investment to sacrifice financial flexibility -- and perhaps pay substantial penalties -- for keeping the rights to someone who can't play.

3. But what if said team, out of the goodness of its heart, wants to keep paying the player while he's in jail?

It's theoretically possible, but the team would have to keep the player on the active roster of 12 to do so, which would be risky on multiple fronts. On top of that, it's highly unlikely that commissioner David Stern would allow such a move, given the severity of the offense. So a suspension without pay is the best a team can do, if it's hoping to stay on the good side of a player who won't be around for a while.

All of the above, of course, is hypothetical. I predict that the court system in Colorado isn't going to force us to use any of this new knowledge this summer.

 

[JCSunsfan]

That is quite interesting.

It means that clearing money to sign Kobe is much less risky than the present circumstances appear.

If there is no prison sentence (aquittal or probation)--its a win.

If there is a short prison sentence (suspension for a year)--its a cap hit but the rights are retained and no money out of pocket.

If there is a long prison sentence--cut the player with no contract obligations or cap problems.

 

[George O'Brien]

Originally posted by JCSunsfan
That is quite interesting.

It means that clearing money to sign Kobe is much less risky than the present circumstances appear.

If there is no prison sentence (aquittal or probation)--its a win.

If there is a short prison sentence (suspension for a year)--its a cap hit but the rights are retained and no money out of pocket.

If there is a long prison sentence--cut the player with no contract obligations or cap problems.

The only cost relates to what it takes to clear the cap space in the first place AND the PR cost of signing a felon.

 

[zett]

I believe the penalty for rape in Colorado is life. no small jail sentence will be handed down.

 

[thegrahamcrackr]

Originally posted by zett
I believe the penalty for rape in Colorado is life. no small jail sentence will be handed down.

It is 20 years to life I believe. With life long probation as well.

 

[slinslin]

He isn't going to jail.

Maybe it doesn't even go to trial. The defense brings up the point that the supposed victim had sex with another man 15 hours after the incident.

Mmm so a woman who was just raped goes out the next day and has sex with someone else?

That seems a litttttle fishy.

 

[Joe Mama]

Originally posted by slinslin
He isn't going to jail.

Maybe it doesn't even go to trial. The defense brings up the point that the supposed victim had sex with another man 15 hours after the incident.

Mmm so a woman who was just raped goes out the next day and has sex with someone else?

That seems a litttttle fishy.

I don't think he will be convicted either. However if you take everything a defense attorney says at face value you are mighty gullible.

Joe Mama