What Will The Lakers Do With Kobe?

[George O'Brien]

1. Kobe Bryant, G, Lakers (PO)
The skinny: Assuming Kobe isn't serving time in Eagle County, Kobe's dilemma is this -- is there enough money out there from a good team to lure him out of L.A.? I can't imagine him playing for the Jazz or Nuggets, based on geography more than the make-up of the team. The Spurs, Suns and, to a lesser extent, the Clippers would be more desirable options. The Spurs would be able to get close, if they give up on everyone else. The Suns would need to dump their two first-round picks or another player to get close to what Kobe will be looking for money-wise. The Clippers could get far enough under the cap to make an offer, but will Kobe come? They would be much better with Kobe in the backcourt, but without a point guard or a center, would they be a championship contender? Sign-and-trades are always possible, but the Lakers are in the driver's seat.

Some of the recent statements by Phil Jackson suggest that the Lakers are getting tired of Kobe's act. He is a great player, but that may not be enough. This suggests that a "sign and trade" may be the only way the Lakers avoid being left high and dry.

On possibility would be a "sign and trade" deal with the Sonics for Ray Allen. Ray is not as good as Kobe, but he may be a better teammate than Kobe. Allen will be on the last year of his contract at $14.6 which is very close to what Kobe will be making under his current contract.

The Celtics might bundle Paul Pierce and Jiri Welsch for Kobe.

About the only deal the Suns could offer that the Lakers might be interested in would be JJ and Shawn for Kobe. I don't like that deal, but Shawn on his own does not meet the Lakers needs.

 

[elindholm]

It's not true that "the Lakers are in the driver's seat." Bryant is the one in the driver's seat; he'd have to cooperate for any sign-and-trade. If he wants to leave (which I still regard as unlikely), it's the Lakers' problem to figure out how to avoid losing him "for nothing."

 

[frdbtr]

Originally posted by George O'Brien
Some of the recent statements by Phil Jackson suggest that the Lakers are getting tired of Kobe's act. He is a great player, but that may not be enough. This suggests that a "sign and trade" may be the only way the Lakers avoid being left high and dry.

sounds like someone that we want on our team.

 

[slinslin]

The Lakers would be dumb to sign and trade Kobe.

They will still have Shaq, Payton and Malone most likely and all of them gone in the same year so they will have enough capspace to get almost any FA and almost all players would put the Lakers on top of their list.

 

[George O'Brien]

Originally posted by slinslin
The Lakers would be dumb to sign and trade Kobe.

They will still have Shaq, Payton and Malone most likely and all of them gone in the same year so they will have enough capspace to get almost any FA and almost all players would put the Lakers on top of their list.

Next season Shaq will make $29.4 million. In 2005-06 Shaq will get $32.4 million.

 

[elindholm]

I think it's important to realize that Phil Jackson is one of the most controlling personalities in all of sports, and Shaquille O'Neal is the NBA's least motivated mega-star. (Seriously, has any dominant player in the history of the league worked less hard than O'Neal?) All of the complaining and unrest being attributed to Bryant (recently) has been second- or third-hand through Jackson or O'Neal.

O'Neal has most of his team against him (witness Payton's recent comments) and has to lash out at someone; that is what he does. And Jackson doesn't like the idea of any player doing better when freed from the shackles of the coach's system; it is too big a blow to his ego. And yet that is exactly what has happened in the past when the Lakers, through injury, have been forced to rely more on Bryant's improvisation -- or what will happen if Bryant leaves.

Bryant's shoulder worries me, his status in the rape trial worries me, and the amount the Suns might give up for the chance of landing him worries me (a little). But his attitude doesn't worry me at all. Not in the slightest. Between Bryant, O'Neal, and Jackson, I'd choose Bryant to build my team around without a second thought.

 

[newfan101]

Originally posted by elindholm
I think it's important to realize that Phil Jackson is one of the most controlling personalities in all of sports, and Shaquille O'Neal is the NBA's least motivated mega-star. (Seriously, has any dominant player in the history of the league worked less hard than O'Neal?) All of the complaining and unrest being attributed to Bryant (recently) has been second- or third-hand through Jackson or O'Neal.

O'Neal has most of his team against him (witness Payton's recent comments) and has to lash out at someone; that is what he does. And Jackson doesn't like the idea of any player doing better when freed from the shackles of the coach's system; it is too big a blow to his ego. And yet that is exactly what has happened in the past when the Lakers, through injury, have been forced to rely more on Bryant's improvisation -- or what will happen if Bryant leaves.

Bryant's shoulder worries me, his status in the rape trial worries me, and the amount the Suns might give up for the chance of landing him worries me (a little). But his attitude doesn't worry me at all. Not in the slightest. Between Bryant, O'Neal, and Jackson, I'd choose Bryant to build my team around without a second thought.

I couldn't agree with you more.

 

[George O'Brien]

Originally posted by newfan101
I couldn't agree with you more.

Jackson's jump shot is not what it once was.

 

[newfan101]

LOL

 

[F-Dog]

Originally posted by elindholm
All of the complaining and unrest being attributed to Bryant (recently) has been second- or third-hand through Jackson or O'Neal.

..except for the comment that was attributed to Payton, right?

Originally posted by elindholm
I'd choose Bryant to build my team around without a second thought.

You don't list 'none of the above' as a choice, though.


Phil Jackson is manipulative (most coaches are controlling), Shaq is lazy, and Kobe needs to be repeatedly convinced of the necessity of putting the team's needs in front of his own. None of those guys is fun to root for IMO, but I guess if you want to cheer for a winner, you have to make sacrifices.


The recent Jax comments seem to lay down the gauntlet for Kobe--if he stays, he'll have to play second fiddle for at least another two years. Jackson implies that his other choices are to go to San Antonio (and Tim Duncan) or sign with a loser and not win championships over that period.

Statements like Jackson's seem to make it more likely that Kobe will leave, but you never know...

 

[frdbtr]

Hmmm, Kobe and Shaq get knocked out of the playoffs for 2 years in a row before Phil Jackson. Phill Jackson gets hired and Kobe and Shaq win the next 3 in a row (before losing last year) and yet Kobe thinks that Phil's system hurts his game. Another point that I can use in saying that Kobe is a selfish player and I don't want him on the team. If a players real goal is to win championships then he/she should want to do anything to win them every year. Leaving a championship team because it "hurts" your game to play within a system isn't a player that I want. By the way, I hate Phil Jackson, I think he is arrogant and gets way too much credit for the championships of the Lakers and Bulls. However, Kobe should be content to continue winning championships in LA rather then be selfishly upset because his game "suffers" because he is not alowed to freelance outside of the system that seems to be working.

Here we go again, time to start getting blasted because most of Y'all disagree with me.

 

[Chaplin]

Of course, you're basing this on a) what the media says, and b) what Phil says.

 

[George O'Brien]

Originally posted by frdbtr
Hmmm, Kobe and Shaq get knocked out of the playoffs for 2 years in a row before Phil Jackson. Phill Jackson gets hired and Kobe and Shaq win the next 3 in a row (before losing last year) and yet Kobe thinks that Phil's system hurts his game. Another point that I can use in saying that Kobe is a selfish player and I don't want him on the team. If a players real goal is to win championships then he/she should want to do anything to win them every year. Leaving a championship team because it "hurts" your game to play within a system isn't a player that I want. By the way, I hate Phil Jackson, I think he is arrogant and gets way too much credit for the championships of the Lakers and Bulls. However, Kobe should be content to continue winning championships in LA rather then be selfishly upset because his game "suffers" because he is not alowed to freelance outside of the system that seems to be working.

Here we go again, time to start getting blasted because most of Y'all disagree with me.

I disagree to a degree, but I think your point is well taken. When the Suns got Barkely, he had a bad rep, but no one ever doubted that he would do whatever it took to win. I'm not 100% convinced that Kobe feels that way and it makes me nervous.

 

[F-Dog]

If Kobe signs with the Suns over the Spurs and Lakers, you'd almost have to say that winning isn't his first priority, wouldn't you?

Not that there's anything wrong with that...

 

[frdbtr]

Originally posted by Chaplin
Of course, you're basing this on a) what the media says, and b) what Phil says.

That is true, but that is all we have to go on right now. I normally don't believe anything that the media says and only half of what I see but in this case it seems that a lot of things being said seem to be repeated over and over and that usually means that "where there is smoke there is fire" My problem is that I don't trust Kobe. I feel that he is a huge risk with huge upside. He could come here and dominate while taking the Suns to a championship(and I will be cheering him the whole way). On the other hand, he could come here and dominate the ball with selfish play and then we would be trying to rebuild again. I don't want to start rebuilding again. I think that this team has some great raw talent right now, lets be patient and see what it can do, if it isn't enough after a couple of years then lets go after that "missing link" free agent. I just don't trust Kobe's attitude.

 

[elindholm]

Hmmm, Kobe and Shaq get knocked out of the playoffs for 2 years in a row before Phil Jackson.

That's because Bryant was about eleven years old. Give him a break.

 

[George O'Brien]

Originally posted by elindholm
Hmmm, Kobe and Shaq get knocked out of the playoffs for 2 years in a row before Phil Jackson.

That's because Bryant was about eleven years old. Give him a break.

Yeh, but a really good 11 year old.

 

[frdbtr]

Originally posted by elindholm
Hmmm, Kobe and Shaq get knocked out of the playoffs for 2 years in a row before Phil Jackson.

That's because Bryant was about eleven years old. Give him a break.

then why was Del Harris Fired and then Jackson given all of the credit for the championship?

But that is beside the point. my point is, Kobe seems to be disatisfied with just winning a championships. He wants to win one while he is "the Man" and this selfishness worries me.

 

[elindholm]

then why was Del Harris Fired and then Jackson given all of the credit for the championship?

Because the media like simple answers. It's very easy to declare Phil Jackson a genius and create story after story about how he has unique skills for motivating stars. However, believe it or not, sometimes the media just say things because they're easy to say, and not because anyone has thought carefully about whether they are true.

Kobe seems to be disatisfied with just winning a championships. He wants to win one while he is "the Man" and this selfishness worries me.

Bryant is already the best second option in the history of the league. Think about that for a moment. There has never been a player so gifted who has been forced to take a back seat to another, larger star. Magic Johnson with the Lakers of the early 80's comes close (behind Abdul-Jabbar), but it wasn't long before Johnson took over that team and Abdul-Jabbar became the second fiddle.

Is Bryant selfish? Sure. All great players are selfish. They all want to be the one who leads the team, takes the important shots, gets the credit. I hope that no one thinks that Jordan or any other great player was any different. The difference was that Jordan was always the best player on his team, so there was no need for him to defer to anyone. And his teammates knew better than to question his aloof, superior attitude.

Why are the Lakers O'Neal's team instead of Bryant's? Because O'Neal is the insecure one. O'Neal is the one that needs prodding to work out during the summer, or, heck, even suit up for games. O'Neal is the one who repeatedly makes public his feuds with the coaching staff and management. O'Neal is the one who whines about a contract extension while not even staying in game shape. O'Neal is the one who is disqualified as a first option in crunch time because he can't make free throws. And O'Neal is the one whose acceptance Jackson had to win immediately if the coach wanted to survive.

Jackson is afraid of O'Neal, but he thinks he can push Bryant around. So he does, but Bryant is getting sick of it. I can't say I blame him. There's nothing more infuriating than to work hard, be ignored for your efforts, and have to sit there while some slacker gets all the credit.

Unless he develops chronic shoulder problems or has to go to jail, Bryant will be a better player once he leaves the Lakers than he has ever been before. I'm quite confident of that.

 

[George O'Brien]

Originally posted by elindholm

Bryant is already the best second option in the history of the league. Think about that for a moment. There has never been a player so gifted who has been forced to take a back seat to another, larger star. Magic Johnson with the Lakers of the early 80's comes close (behind Abdul-Jabbar), but it wasn't long before Johnson took over that team and Abdul-Jabbar became the second fiddle.

I beg to differ. There was a guy named Oscar Robertson who took a back seat to Jabbar and he may have been more dominant than Kobe. If memory serves me, Oscar once AVERAGED a triple doube for a season.

 

[elindholm]

There was a guy named Oscar Robertson who took a back seat to Jabbar and he may have been more dominant than Kobe.

Not by the time he was Abdul-Jabbar's teammate. They didn't hook up until the 1970-71 season, by which point Robertson was in the twilight of his career. 19/6/8 are good numbers, to be sure, but not All-NBA caliber.

If memory serves me, Oscar once AVERAGED a triple doube for a season.

Yes, eight years before Abdul-Jabbar entered the league.

 

[thegrahamcrackr]

Great post Eric, I couldn't agree with you more.

 

[George O'Brien]

I watched some of those playoffs and Oscar did not looke like he was over the hill. He looked like a guy more interested in winning than in his stats.

 

[elindholm]

I watched some of those playoffs and Oscar did not looke like he was over the hill. He looked like a guy more interested in winning than in his stats.

That's changing the subject. If this current Laker team could ever get its act together, you'd see the same behavior from Malone. There are plenty of cases where former all-world players accepted lesser roles even though they were still pretty darn good. I'm not debating that point.

 

[thegrahamcrackr]

I definitely wasn't even alive when O played, but I think the point is he was past his prime.

Was he still good? Of course, but he wasn't at the caliber where you build your team around him anymore.

Similar to Payton now with the Lakers. He is still a damn good player, but he is better used when he doesn't have to be the man anymore.


Kobe Bryant is entering his prime. He is hands down a top 5, most likely even top 3 player in the NBA right now. And he doesn't even have his "own" team. When the 2nd or third best player ni the league is the "second option", it is very understandbale to see why he is upset.