# Kobe Trade Fallout



## koberules24 (Nov 12, 2006)

5 things will happen if the Lakers trade Kobe Bryant.

1. They'll get stuck with crap players (see Chicago Bulls roster) with onerous contract extensions and subsequently suck for 15-20 years....AT LEAST

2. Phil's Gone. He won't even sign the extension with an unhappy Kobe. Rest assured he won't have any interest in staying with no Kobe and NO SUPERSTARS.

3. Derek Fisher will either ask to be traded or let out of his contract.....again. As he said earlier this week when asked about a Kobe trade he admitted that Bryant was the main reason he came here. L.A. isn't the only city with great medical care for his daughter either (Miami also has excellent eye treatment for his daughter).

4. Luke Walton will eventually become disgruntled as well asking out to a team with a great point guard system like Phoenix. Walton signed a VERY below value deal (look at what Kapono got) at a ridiculous six years to stay with the Lakers and more specifically PLAY WITH KOBE. If the Lakers make a deal they'll be stuck with either a Luol Deng or Ben Gordon who will push Walton to the bench where he'll struggle for minutes in a new non-triangle coaching system.

5. Lakers ticket sales will likely fall below the league average of 85% not only due to Bryant and O'Neal's departures but because of their ridiculous prices ($2300 a piece for courtside and 150 or more for anything decent). They're already at a Laker low 93% just with Kobe's trade rumors and his unlikelihood of being dealt. I also seriously doubt Jerry Buss would be willing to slice ticket prices either.

_I suppose all of that is hell of a lot simpler than say simply attempting to upgrade the current roster but god forbid we may actually have to give up something (Odom/Bynum) in return._


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

They'll lose millions and the Kobe fans will move out. Real Laker fans will still watch, in disgust, as the team implodes. Trading Kobe should be a last resort. Unfortunately this FO has lost their balls since West left. When Magic asked for Westhead's removal in 81 or he was gone, he got it the next day. West (and Sharman) knew what to do. This FO doesn't have the first clue. 

If you want to win, put better big men around Kobe. We know he's capable of winning plenty of titles with a good big man. Anything is better than this squad.


----------



## leidout (Jul 13, 2005)

Laker fans will probably come back when they realize the team will be much improved. 

Having one guy who jacks up 40 shots at 35% traded for a couple of quality players who understand the team concept will do wonders for the Lakers.

Bynum & Odom are pretty good players when they aren't being hindered by a primadonna.


----------



## seifer0406 (Jun 8, 2003)

I don't think your opinion is entirely objective as you are clearly a Kobe fan and wants him to stay. With that in mind I don't think you have the best interest of the Laker team in mind.



> 1. They'll get stuck with crap players (see Chicago Bulls roster) with onerous contract extensions and subsequently suck for 15-20 years....AT LEAST


If a team suck for 15-20 years, there are 2 possibilities. The Tampa Bay Devil Ray syndrome where the team only spends chump change on its roster, or incredibly bad luck in its front office. Now the Lakers are obviously not possibility #1. If they are #2, whether or not you trade Kobe will have nothing to do with it as it's a front office problem. Basically, if you have a good GM your team will eventually be winning. If you don't, either lose until you find one or just keep losing. Either way, it has nothing to do with Kobe.



> 2. Phil's Gone. He won't even sign the extension with an unhappy Kobe. Rest assured he won't have any interest in staying with no Kobe and NO SUPERSTARS.


Theres no point of having Phil here for the rebuilding years. The guy is still young enough and is a puppet to the boss's daughter. When the Lakers rise again, I am sure he will be available to coach the Lakers then.



> 3. Derek Fisher will either ask to be traded or let out of his contract.....again. As he said earlier this week when asked about a Kobe trade he admitted that Bryant was the main reason he came here. L.A. isn't the only city with great medical care for his daughter either (Miami also has excellent eye treatment for his daughter).


First of all, it's Derek Fisher. Secondly.....actually, that's it.



> 4. Luke Walton will eventually become disgruntled as well asking out to a team with a great point guard system like Phoenix. Walton signed a VERY below value deal (look at what Kapono got) at a ridiculous six years to stay with the Lakers and more specifically PLAY WITH KOBE. If the Lakers make a deal they'll be stuck with either a Luol Deng or Ben Gordon who will push Walton to the bench where he'll struggle for minutes in a new non-triangle coaching system.


See above. I like Luke Walton and thinks that he is one of the best passing SFs that nobody knows of in the league. But if you are worried about hurting Luke Walton's feelings, I have to say you are worrying too much. He is a role player and should not have much say in the team's direction.



> 5. Lakers ticket sales will likely fall below the league average of 85% not only due to Bryant and O'Neal's departures but because of their ridiculous prices ($2300 a piece for courtside and 150 or more for anything decent). They're already at a Laker low 93% just with Kobe's trade rumors and his unlikelihood of being dealt. I also seriously doubt Jerry Buss would be willing to slice ticket prices either.


The way I see it it comes down to this. Will the Lakers be a better team if they trade Kobe, get young pieces in return. Or, will they be a better team if they let this play out, sell a couple years of tickets, let Kobe walk, and rebuild with the cap space that they have available because of his departure. This is a key decision because at the end of the day if they have a winning team on the floor, they will sell tickets. If they keep Kobe and he walks 2 years down the road and they have a horrendous time rebuilding the team, they will just suffer even more financially. The worst case scenario is if Kobe makes a raucous and either sits out games or gets benched by Phil Jackson because doing something like what VC did back in Toronto. That case, Lakers would lose ticket sales and run the risk of losing Kobe in 2 years.

If the Lakers are capable of improving their team around Kobe and try to win a championship then obviously that's the best for everyone. But one has to be realistic and think about what to do if it's impossible to accomplish that.


----------



## leidout (Jul 13, 2005)

EHL said:


> If you want to win, put better big men around Kobe. We know he's capable of winning plenty of titles with a good big man. Anything is better than this squad.


"good big man"??? :lol: Shaq could've played with 4 dead bodies & won those titles.

Shaq + Kobe/Wade/T-mac/Pierce/Iverson/Allen/Davis/Ginobili/Billups/Kidd/Nash/etc would've won 3 championships without question. Kobe hasn't proven he can do anything in the playoffs without MDP.


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

koberules24 said:


> 5 things will happen if the Lakers trade Kobe Bryant.
> 
> 1. They'll get stuck with crap players (see Chicago Bulls roster) with onerous contract extensions and subsequently suck for 15-20 years....AT LEAST


See chicago bulls roster? Last time I checked, they're a better team than the current Lakers.



> 2. Phil's Gone. He won't even sign the extension with an unhappy Kobe. Rest assured he won't have any interest in staying with no Kobe and NO SUPERSTARS.


Great, Phil won't resign with an unhappy Kobe, Kobe DOES NOT WANT TO STAY. Get it through your head, its not as if management wants to trade him and Kobe is begging to stay. They want to trade him because he is begging to leave.



> 3. Derek Fisher will either ask to be traded or let out of his contract.....again. As he said earlier this week when asked about a Kobe trade he admitted that Bryant was the main reason he came here. L.A. isn't the only city with great medical care for his daughter either (Miami also has excellent eye treatment for his daughter).


UCLA is actually the 8th best cancer treatment center in the US. There is nothing in Miami that compares with the top hospitals in the nation. Second, if Kobe is traded, the team is going to build for the future, and I doubt an aging point guard like Derek Fisher is in the team's long term plans.



> 4. Luke Walton will eventually become disgruntled as well asking out to a team with a great point guard system like Phoenix. Walton signed a VERY below value deal (look at what Kapono got) at a ridiculous six years to stay with the Lakers and more specifically PLAY WITH KOBE. If the Lakers make a deal they'll be stuck with either a Luol Deng or Ben Gordon who will push Walton to the bench where he'll struggle for minutes in a new non-triangle coaching system.


You do not know that Walton signed specifically to play with Kobe. I'm pretty sure the length of the contract has more to do with him resigning. Not many teams are willing to give bench players like Walton long term deals. Ben Gordon is 6'3, cannot rebound, or defend (not like Walton can either), and will not force Walton anywhere. Luol Deng is a far superior player to, and if you would rather Walton start over him, you are more foolish than I originally thought. Walton is a bench caliber player, who will go to the bench when Lamar Odom returns from injury because Phil already said that Turiaf is likely to start.



> 5. Lakers ticket sales will likely fall below the league average of 85% not only due to Bryant and O'Neal's departures but because of their ridiculous prices ($2300 a piece for courtside and 150 or more for anything decent). They're already at a Laker low 93% just with Kobe's trade rumors and his unlikelihood of being dealt. I also seriously doubt Jerry Buss would be willing to slice ticket prices either.


_I suppose all of that is hell of a lot simpler than say simply attempting to upgrade the current roster but god forbid we may actually have to give up something (Odom/Bynum) in return._[/QUOTE]

Please explain how the roster is to be upgraded, the team has no real viable pieces. Trading for JO while losing both Odom AND Bynum is a step sideways and does not make the team a contender. That being said, Kobe demanding a trade also limits the flexibility of the front office. Maybe you haven't noticed, but teams desperate for trades generally get low-balled pretty badly.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

leidout said:


> Laker fans will probably come back when they realize the team will be much improved.
> 
> Having one guy who jacks up 40 shots at 35% traded for a couple of quality players who understand the team concept will do wonders for the Lakers.
> 
> Bynum & Odom are pretty good players when they aren't being hindered by a primadonna.


Primadonna???You are too kind....

The guy cant defer to Shaq,and then he goes to the other extreme and rips a 20 y.o Bynum.....

Kobe makes his bed,and now refuses to lay in it....


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

EHL said:


> They'll lose millions and the Kobe fans will move out. Real Laker fans will still watch, in disgust, as the team implodes. Trading Kobe should be a last resort. Unfortunately this FO has lost their balls since West left. When Magic asked for Westhead's removal in 81 or he was gone, he got it the next day. West (and Sharman) knew what to do. This FO doesn't have the first clue.
> 
> *If you want to win, put better big men around Kobe. We know he's capable of winning plenty of titles with a good big man. Anything is better than this squad*.


We have no idea if Kobe is capable of winning plenty with a good big man..We know he won with the most dominant big man in the game..That is vastly different than "good"....

Are you suggesting moving Bynum and Odom,cause that is all you have....

If you dance with the devil,you are going to get burned....

Assuming one believes Bynum is the real deal and Phil can coach without megastars,why not trade Kobe for Gordon,Thomas,Noah and Wallace?? Even though Walace is on the decline,it gives Bynum time to develop


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

I didn't know Nostradamus posts at BBF.com.


----------



## The One (Jul 10, 2005)

While his posts of his are emotional and very subjective, I think you guys have been too hard on Koberules24. I say this because this is a guy who supports what he believes in to the point of dellusion the same way you guys support what you guys believe in to the point where it's dellusional. The only difference is that Koberules24 supports Kobe while you guys support the Lakers. It's one thing to disagree with eachother, it's another to say that one's belief is better than the other as if this is religion. This is basketball, this is entertainment and should be treated as such during a discussion.


----------



## Bartholomew Hunt (Mar 4, 2003)

Basel57 said:


> I didn't know Nostradamus posts at BBF.com.


I do, and have for a long time.


----------



## DaRizzle (May 22, 2007)

The One said:


> While his posts of his are emotional and very subjective, I think you guys have been too hard on Koberules24. I say this because this is a guy who supports what he believes in to the point of dellusion the same way you guys support what you guys believe in to the point where it's dellusional. The only difference is that Koberules24 supports Kobe while you guys support the Lakers. It's one thing to disagree with eachother, it's another to say that one's belief is better than the other as if this is religion. This is basketball, this is entertainment and should be treated as such during a discussion.


Sorry, but no...I don't go out of my way to shoot him down on his comments. I'll be the first to agree with him if I do. I couldn't stand "WilttheStilt's" opinions for a while but that calmed down(because his comments did:biggrin: )

P.S. Of course it has to be the right deal, and some of the trade rumors that I have heard I would have been down for(not Artest & Wallace), I am announcing that I am on the side to TRADE KOBE.

<font color="purple">No personal attacks.</font>


----------



## koberules24 (Nov 12, 2006)

Thanks for the complement Basel it really means a lot. And thanks for everybody who responded by answering like a bunch of 12 year olds. At least that Drewbs guy made a reasonable argument....jesus.
Very inventive posting DaRizzle: simply repeat what I've already said to you as an insult.....very creative.:clap2:


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

koberules24 said:


> 5 things will happen if the Lakers trade Kobe Bryant.
> 
> 1. They'll get stuck with crap players (see Chicago Bulls roster) with onerous contract extensions and subsequently suck for 15-20 years....AT LEAST
> 
> ...



I completely agree with points 1, 2 & 5. On point 3, thank god. Maybe he will ask for his contract to be rescinded, I don't want to be stuck with Fisher in any situation. For 4, we should have let Walton walk and signed Pietrus. Walton is not the type of player EVER to demand a trade IMO, not that I want to keep him or anything.


----------



## Bartholomew Hunt (Mar 4, 2003)

Number one, cut out the personal attacks. I realize that when times are tough for your team, it is easy to snap at each other. This is the Lakers Forum, not the Lakers Front Office. We do make fools out of ourselves. If somebody pisses you off with a comment, do not respond with attacks. A mod will take care of it. If you feel that we are not doing an adequate job of that, send one of us a Private Message. Meanwhile, turn this discussion around the right way or it will be closed.


----------



## DaRizzle (May 22, 2007)

koberules24 said:


> LOL. Seriously I speak common sense....I BACK IT UP.
> 
> <font color="purple">Cleaned it up for you.</font>


Lakers will suck for 15-20 years?!? common sense?!? When has that ever happened? Lets see....never. Since Dr. Buss bought the team 11 years is the biggest drought the Lakers have ever had without winning a championship. They have only had three losing seasons in that entire time. Take your BS of 15-20 years before they compete and shove it.

I DON'T want Phil there if this trade goes down. He doesn't want to be, nor is he a coach that can adapt/teach new players.

Luke Walton is a so cal native, and has the opportunity to play with his home town team. His family is set for life besides him. I would totally take a slight pay cut to play with my hometown team that has a history of winning championships with and without a certain Mr. Bryant. I bet you if Luke had his way he would be a Laker for life regardless if diva Kobe is there.

Fisher is a complete professional and a short term solution so I don't even know why you are mentioning him.

Go to KB24.com


----------



## DaRizzle (May 22, 2007)

i see you there...c'mon with something outlandish and witty with a pinch of trash talking


----------



## GPS (Mar 28, 2003)

truth said:


> We have no idea if Kobe is capable of winning plenty with a good big man..We know he won with the most dominant big man in the game..That is vastly different than "good"....


We have no idea if Shaq is capable of winning plenty with a good PG/SG... We know he won with top 5 players next to him... That is vastly different than "good"....


----------



## leidout (Jul 13, 2005)

GPS said:


> We have no idea if Shaq is capable of winning plenty with a good PG/SG... We know he won with top 5 players next to him... That is vastly different than "good"....



When did Shaq win a title with a top 5 player?

Kobe & Dwayne may be top 5 players NOW, but when Shaq won titles, he was playing with top 10 NBA players at best.


----------



## afobisme (Apr 29, 2006)

leidout said:


> When did Shaq win a title with a top 5 player?
> 
> Kobe & Dwayne may be top 5 players NOW, but when Shaq won titles, he was playing with top 10 NBA players at best.


kobe was easily a top 5 player in 02-03.. 01-02 as well.

dwyane is a top 5 player now, arguably at least.


----------



## farzadkavari (Oct 13, 2004)

LOL at (Miami also has excellent eye treatment for his daughter).


----------



## farzadkavari (Oct 13, 2004)

What people don't realize is that kobe is one of the hardest player in the league to be traded with his contract and the type of talent he can bring to the team. It will almost be impossbile to get the same value back and alot of teams do not want to give away their best player for a someone like Kobe that causes so much drame. Just like Steven Smith mentioned Kobe has one of the best contracts in all of sports and not any team would wanna take on a HUGE contract like Kobe's. Bottom line is that I would not be suprise if Lakers are force to keep him for the whole year and then try making a trade next summer.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

A lot of chicken little sky is falling stuff here. We all know this situation will be a disaster unless the Lakers win ten in a row and everyone forgets all of this and goes back on focusing on winning. But some of these scenarios aren't happening. Luke Walton signed specifically to play with Kobe? Speculation at best. Luke grew up in SoCal, loves the city, loves playing for Phil, loves the team and being a Laker. Plus nobody was going to give him a bigger contract than we did as we can offer the 6th year. Playing with Kobe probably wasn't even in his top 5 reasons. And Fisher? Main reason he came here was for the eye treatment.



EHL said:


> They'll lose millions and the Kobe fans will move out. Real Laker fans will still watch, in disgust, as the team implodes. Trading Kobe should be a last resort. Unfortunately this FO has lost their balls since West left. When Magic asked for Westhead's removal in 81 or he was gone, he got it the next day. West (and Sharman) knew what to do. This FO doesn't have the first clue.
> 
> If you want to win, put better big men around Kobe. We know he's capable of winning plenty of titles with a good big man. Anything is better than this squad.


It's easy to be armchair GM and be critical. But you were all for the Kwame for Caron deal.

Think Caron wouldn't help us get a great big man now?


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

GPS said:


> We have no idea if Shaq is capable of winning plenty with a good PG/SG... We know he won with top 5 players next to him... That is vastly different than "good"....


Are we talking about Shaq now?? 

A poster made the point that Kobe can win it all with a "good" big man..That is unproven and mere speculation as the only time Kobe has won it all was with the most dominant force in the league....

The truth of the matter is if Kobe and the Lakers were in the East,we wouldnt be having this conversation.


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

I think the most likely scenraio of a Kobe trade is being mediocre to average to bad for 20 years or more. It happens, Hall of Fame talent doesn't come around that often. We may find a Van Excel level player but the Kobe's and Shaq's not likely. 

Kobe is an alltime great as is Shaq. 

You trade them both within 5 years and you don't recover from that easily. 

It took the Lakers what 9 years to recover from Magic's early retiremnet.And thats because Jerry West worked his magic finding Kobe and luring Shaq. 

Celtics been down for 20 years since the last time they seriously contended.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

jazzy1 said:


> I think the most likely scenraio of a Kobe trade is being mediocre to average to bad for 20 years or more. It happens, Hall of Fame talent doesn't come around that often. We may find a Van Excel level player but the Kobe's and Shaq's not likely.
> 
> Kobe is an alltime great as is Shaq.
> 
> ...


I think all of us know how hard it is to win. Kobe doesn't though. He never realized how good he had it with Shaq.

20 years is unlikely though. This is the greatest franchise in the NBA. How long did it take to rebound after losing Mikan and Pollard? West and Baylor? Magic and Kareem?


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Kobe is a prima dona 

If he stays the Lakers will either over pay for him to remain in LA and never win another championship because they wont be able to add another superstar to play with him, or lose him for nothing to free agency. You guys won't suck for that long because you are LA. Players like the sun and beaches. Some of you might think this next part is blasphemy, but I think you could get other superstar players to come there if Kobe weren't there. 

Get youself under the cap and start luring players to LA with your nice weather and big market assets.


----------



## Cris (Jun 18, 2003)

Bartholomew Hunt said:


> I do, and have for a long time.


Man, you are freaking ugly.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

Fisher wouldn't ask for a trade. It's not about playing with Kobe. He signed with the Warriors, remember? 

Walton signed here because no one else would have given him the contract we did.

But we should have done the JO trade.


----------



## GPS (Mar 28, 2003)

truth said:


> Are we talking about Shaq now??
> 
> A poster made the point that Kobe can win it all with a "good" big man..That is unproven and mere speculation as the only time Kobe has won it all was with the most dominant force in the league....


Well, it's just that you took your time to object EHL's post but not leidout's post, so I take it you agree with him. A poster made a point that Shaq could win it all with any half good wing player. That is unproven and mere speculation as the only time Shaq has won it all was with a top 5 player next to him.



leidout said:


> When did Shaq win a title with a top 5 player?
> 
> Kobe & Dwayne may be top 5 players NOW, but when Shaq won titles, he was playing with top 10 NBA players at best.


Kobe was easily a top 5 player during the 3peat, and not only was D-Wade a top 5 player but he was much much better than Shaq at that point in time. He was the damn finals mvp, Shaq barely even played in those playoffs. And even if that were the case my point is the same. Shaq had a lot more help without Kobe than Kobe had without Shaq.


----------



## LoyalBull (Jun 12, 2002)

I see a lot of comparisons but simply put... this isn't your father's leauge.

Unfortuantely, the CBA has changed 2 times since West was able to make the Shaq deal happen.

There are realities and hinderences that don't allow for a comparison of 'then' and 'now'.

The Bulls are just recovering nearly a decade later from losing all its players at once.

They "could" have recovered quickly (with 2 full boats) and with Duncan and Tmac as their targets.

When the CBA changed... Orlando could afford Hill AND Tmac (because of the max salary format).


Brand with Artest, Miller and Tmac (and the #4 Fizer and #7 Crawford) that Krause wanted to deal for Oneal.

The vision?

Miller
Brand
Artest
Tmac
Crawford

Not bad... right?

With one quick change in the midst of "the plan"... it all crumbled.

And thats what you risk for if you "play for later".

saying "we were this" doesn't account for anything.

Nor does "we will be this".

What matters is "what is".

And "what is" is Kobe.

Not recognizing that (and trading POSSIBLE will bes for nows) is the issue.

Its still fixable.


----------



## elcap15 (Aug 8, 2006)

LoyalBull said:


> With one quick change in the midst of "the plan"... it all crumbled.
> 
> And thats what you risk for if you "play for later".
> 
> ...



Thats beautiful. You should be a professional poet.

I totally agree with you.

I believe "rebuilding" is something that GM's created becuase they cant put together good teams. You are either winning now, or you arent.

Name me one team that won championships by waiting and gathering young talent. It doesnt happen. You either have the pieces to win, or you dont.


----------



## Bartholomew Hunt (Mar 4, 2003)

elcap15 said:


> Thats beautiful. You should be a professional poet.
> 
> I totally agree with you.
> 
> ...


Exactly. Stocking a **** load of young talent just doesn't work. They don't develop properly with so few veterans, they become frustrated near contract time and play for themselves. They lack the cohesion. The GM ends up blowing up the team and repeating the same mistake over again.


----------



## DANNY (Aug 9, 2005)

Bartholomew Hunt said:


> Exactly. *Stocking a **** load of young talent just doesn't work. They don't develop properly with so few veterans, they become frustrated near contract time and play for themselves*. They lack the cohesion. The GM ends up blowing up the team and repeating the same mistake over again.


good point. i like it


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> I think all of us know how hard it is to win. Kobe doesn't though. He never realized how good he had it with Shaq.
> 
> 20 years is unlikely though. This is the greatest franchise in the NBA. How long did it take to rebound after losing Mikan and Pollard? West and Baylor? Magic and Kareem?


We had superior management and some good luck. 

We went from 72 till 80 before we won then 88 to 2000. 

We were fortunate that Magic was an alltime great, we got lucky to get Kobe at 13 and he's an alltime great, great manuvering by West brought us kareem and Shaq. 

Good management and good fortune. 

If it takes the celtics 20 years it could easily take us that long to return if Kobe's traded. 

Reality is Kobe doesn't really need all that much help but the front office won't pull the trigger on a project in Bynum. 

If you put Artest with LO and Kobe here or JO with Kobe and LO and we're instant contenders and I think a possible champion. 

Kobe didn't underestimate how hard it was to win he did however underestimate how much fun it was playing with Shaq and how much easier it was having that veteran team around him. 

He has no warriors with him now.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

We're in a no-win situation here. If we trade Kobe, I don't trust Mitch to a) get equal or even comparable value for him b) stock a talented roster around the pieces he acquired and c) convince Buss to open up his wallet and sign premier free agents. If we don't trade Kobe, I don't trust Mitch to upgrade the talent level around Kobe. He never really made the Lakers better after West left and we've had adequate talent at best around Kobe since Shaq left. Even when we did have talent (Kobe, Odom, and Caron on one team), we seemed to be too top heavy at certain positions. I just don't know what is going on upstairs. It seems Buss and Co. are content winning 45-48 games per year and using Kobe to draw sellout crowds to the stadium. He's making money and he's not putting it back into the franchise. The current formula obviously isn't working. It's going to be the same story every year. We play erratically, win 45 games, make the playoffs as a #7 seed, and get knocked out in the first round. As much as I hate the Yankees, sometimes I wish Buss ran his franchise like Steinbrenner. We're without question the second most storied franchise in the sport and yet it's run like a mom and pop shop.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

I am in no way playing hindsight analyst,but the moment the Lakers rolled the dice on Shaq for Caron and Odom,and then doubled down by trading Butler for Kwame,the Lakers fate was sealed....



> Name me one team that won championships by waiting and gathering young talent. It doesnt happen. You either have the pieces to win, or you dont.


Had Kwame proven to be half as good as MJ thought he was when he selected him number 1,the Lakers would be the exception to that rule.With Kwame playing up to his perceived talent,a developing Bynum,Odom at the 3, along with Kobe,the Lakers would have been a serious threat in the West...


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

truth said:


> I am in no way playing hindsight analyst,but the moment the Lakers rolled the dice on Shaq for Caron and Odom,and then doubled down by trading Butler for Kwame,the Lakers fate was sealed....
> 
> 
> 
> Had Kwame proven to be half as good as MJ thought he was when he selected him number 1,the Lakers would be the exception to that rule.With Kwame playing up to his perceived talent,a developing Bynum,Odom at the 3, along with Kobe,the Lakers would have been a serious threat in the West...


Yet another guy who said Caron for Kwame was a good move for the Lakers changing his tune.


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

truth said:


> I am in no way playing hindsight analyst,but the moment the Lakers rolled the dice on Shaq for Caron and Odom,and then doubled down by trading Butler for Kwame,the Lakers fate was sealed....
> 
> 
> 
> Had Kwame proven to be half as good as MJ thought he was when he selected him number 1,the Lakers would be the exception to that rule.With Kwame playing up to his perceived talent,a developing Bynum,Odom at the 3, along with Kobe,the Lakers would have been a serious threat in the West...


Had Kwame proven to be half as good as MJ thought he was, then he might have never been traded to begin with. Even a horrible Kwame at times shows signs of brilliance (rarely), so him being half as good as people thought would be GREAT for him, no?


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Jamel Irief said:


> A lot of chicken little sky is falling stuff here. We all know this situation will be a disaster unless the Lakers win ten in a row and everyone forgets all of this and goes back on focusing on winning. But some of these scenarios aren't happening. Luke Walton signed specifically to play with Kobe? Speculation at best. Luke grew up in SoCal, loves the city, loves playing for Phil, loves the team and being a Laker. Plus nobody was going to give him a bigger contract than we did as we can offer the 6th year. Playing with Kobe probably wasn't even in his top 5 reasons. And Fisher? Main reason he came here was for the eye treatment.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Armchair GM'ing also would have gotten me Barbosa instead of Cook in 03, Anderson Varejo two years ago and Boozer the year before. Wouldn't have even considered Kwame in the first place had I gotten any of those wishes over the last few years. Not arm-chair GM'ing, just reality. Reality that shows the Lakers' FO hasn't gotten much done without West.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

leidout said:


> "good big man"??? :lol: Shaq could've played with 4 dead bodies & won those titles.
> 
> Shaq + Kobe/Wade/T-mac/Pierce/Iverson/Allen/Davis/Ginobili/Billups/Kidd/Nash/etc would've won 3 championships without question. Kobe hasn't proven he can do anything in the playoffs without MDP.


And Shaq hasn't wont jack without Kobe or Wade. Your point is moot until their respective situations are comparable. Not that anyone here is under the impression you're being intellectually honest. 



truth said:


> We have no idea if Kobe is capable of winning plenty with a good big man..We know he won with the most dominant big man in the game..That is vastly different than "good"....


He's proven he can win with a very good supporting cast. Not difficult to understand either way. 



> Are you suggesting moving Bynum and Odom,cause that is all you have....
> 
> If you dance with the devil,you are going to get burned....
> 
> Assuming one believes Bynum is the real deal and Phil can coach without megastars,why not trade Kobe for Gordon,Thomas,Noah and Wallace?? Even though Walace is on the decline,it gives Bynum time to develop


Time for Bynum to develop into what? The next Vlade Divac? Won't make a bit of difference in the West.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Jamel Irief said:


> Yet another guy who said Caron for Kwame was a good move for the Lakers changing his tune.


How is this any different than you calling Sasha Vujacic the next Jeff McInnis? (who was solid before going cancer on the Cavs). 

Don't act like your ish don't stank, _everybody_ makes poor predictions.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> Yet another guy who said Caron for Kwame was a good move for the Lakers changing his tune.


Jamal,As far as I can remember I was in favor of the Kwame trade as I felt if anyone could motivate him it would be Phil,and I always beleived the roster would be much more balanced with an "effective" Kwame and Odom as opposed to Butler and Odom...

I am clearly wrong,but I still think it was the right move to make,and I am still a believer that if Kobe can take a deep breath and work with Bynum,that will prove to be the "wise" decision...


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

EHL said:


> Time for Bynum to develop into what? The next Vlade Divac? Won't make a bit of difference in the West.


Why are you(and Kobe) so down on Bynum??

The kid is just 20 years old and you can see he is still developing physically..Giving up on him now would be the single biggest mistake the organisation could make....

All will be fine,but a little patience is in order


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

truth said:


> Jamal,As far as I can remember I was in favor of the Kwame trade as I felt if anyone could motivate him it would be Phil,and I always beleived the roster would be much more balanced with an "effective" Kwame and Odom as opposed to Butler and Odom...
> 
> I am clearly wrong,but I still think it was the right move to make,and I am still a believer that if Kobe can take a deep breath and work with Bynum,that will prove to be the "wise" decision...


Then why are you blaming the front office when they are making moves you thought was good?



> How is this any different than you calling Sasha Vujacic the next Jeff McInnis? (who was solid before going cancer on the Cavs).
> 
> Don't act like your ish don't stank, everybody makes poor predictions.


McInnis was a cancer on the Clippers (not really, but he shot way too much and they let him walk) and Blazers to. And I never said Sasha was the "next" McInnis I said he could be a Jeff McInnis type player... and he is. Tall, shoots well, shoots first, does nothing else. 

Saying someone is the next Jeff McInnis is like saying someone is the next Reggie Evans.


----------



## Bulldozer (Jul 11, 2006)

Question I want to bring up for L.A. fans. Why not trade for Artest? Is it because of a inter-state market/conflict, that maybe a Sacramento team doesn't want to help L.A. in any way? What do you think he'd require in return?

Fisher
Bryant
Artest
Odom
Bynum

Not bad at all...


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Bulldozer said:



> Question I want to bring up for L.A. fans. Why not trade for Artest? Is it because of a inter-state market/conflict, that maybe a Sacramento team doesn't want to help L.A. in any way? What do you think he'd require in return?
> 
> Fisher
> Bryant
> ...


I would do it of course. Who knows, if Sacramento starts stinking bad enough we might be able to get him for Kwame.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

truth said:


> Why are you(and Kobe) so down on Bynum??
> 
> The kid is just 20 years old and you can see he is still developing physically..Giving up on him now would be the single biggest mistake the organisation could make....
> 
> All will be fine,but a little patience is in order


He hasn't _proven_ anything beyond that he's big and tall. Yes, he's 20, which just means that he's 20. 



Jamel Irief said:


> Then why are you blaming the front office when they are making moves you thought was good?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You compared him to McInnis cause he's tall? OK. And McInnis isn't known as much of a dead-eye, he was a good creator and athletic. Nothing like Vujacic.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Bulldozer said:


> Question I want to bring up for L.A. fans. Why not trade for Artest? Is it because of a inter-state market/conflict, that maybe a Sacramento team doesn't want to help L.A. in any way? What do you think he'd require in return?
> 
> Fisher
> Bryant
> ...


Who do the Lakers trade away? Kwame? If that's the case of course you do that.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

EHL said:


> He hasn't _proven_ anything beyond that he's big and tall. Yes, he's 20, which just means that he's 20.
> 
> 
> 
> You compared him to McInnis cause he's tall? OK. And McInnis isn't known as much of a dead-eye, he was a good creator and athletic. Nothing like Vujacic.


McInnis isn't a good long range shooter, but the mid-range jumper is his only weapon. I wouldn't say he's athletic at all for a guard. His lack of athleticism and 6'4" frame is why he dribbles with his back to the basket.

What's the point anyways? All I was saying is that people want to be overly critical of the front office. A lot of the moves they made people were in favor of at the time.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> Then why are you blaming the front office when they are making moves you thought was good?


Post Shaq trade,I was 100% in agreement with the moves the Lakers front office made,and never blamed the front office.I liked the Kwame gamble(admit being wrong),and I loved the Bynum pick.

IMHO,trading Bynum for vets would be a disastorous move..


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Jamel Irief said:


> McInnis isn't a good long range shooter, but the mid-range jumper is his only weapon. I wouldn't say he's athletic at all for a guard. His lack of athleticism and 6'4" frame is why he dribbles with his back to the basket.
> 
> What's the point anyways? All I was saying is that people want to be overly critical of the front office. A lot of the moves they made people were in favor of at the time.


All sorts of different Laker fans were for all sorts of different moves, you could find a fan that agreed or disagreed with every move. But if you're going to point out just the agreements with the FO that turned out wrong (Caron for Kwame), to be fair you should point about the disagreements with the FO that turned out right (Barbosa instead of Cook).


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

Jemel, in no short orders, the things I blame the FO on:

In no short order, the moves I have been against since West left:

1) Not pushing for Wade over Butler. You can look back at my posts around the trade time, I thought the front office was idiotic for imposing a deadline, if they pushed, I think we could have gotten Wade.

2)Skipping over Barbosa. Everyone on this board knows I thought Barbosa was great for us before the draft because I really liked his speed (mostly because Fisher a slow lug and constantly got burned during our title runs). I don't think any recent move, pissed me off more than is, and such an obvious one at that.

3)Skipping over Varejao. Again, if you look at posts, I supported getting Varejao pre-draft and again Mitch or whoever ran front office didn't get him.

4)Cutting Brian Grant, who could have been used as trade bait in his final contract year. To see valuable his expiring would have been, simply look at the trades that occured the year we cut him.

5)The team ignoring a blatent weakness at the PG spot, this weakness was throughout our championship years and way after that (up until the farmer and critt drafts)

This ignores non-moves that pissed me off, including not getting Terry (the hawks demands were very reasonable). Other non-moves, not pushing harder for Boozer when he was injured and had a horrible relationship with jazz management, not pushing harder for Baron Davis.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

I'm married to a Brazilian... hence the #4 and #8 players in my signature. I would of loved Barbosa and Varejao... also wanted Splitter over Crittention.


----------



## Eternal (Sep 7, 2005)

truth said:


> Post Shaq trade,I was 100% in agreement with the moves the Lakers front office made,and never blamed the front office.I liked the Kwame gamble(admit being wrong),and I loved the Bynum pick.
> 
> IMHO,trading Bynum for vets would be a disastorous move..


I'm starting to agree more and more that trading Bynum could be a bad move for vets, if he played anything like he did against the Suns.

I need to see more of what he showed there though against a better defensive team, and for a consistant amount of time.


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

If Bynum is at least a servicable player on offense and can hold his own defensively and on the boards, then having a 2 headed monster at center between him and Kwame is not too shabby and the two should combine for decent numbers just about every night. If I were the Lakers I'd much rather have that and have a good rebounding 3 with Odom then take on Jermaine O'Neal for both Odom and Bynum.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Drewbs said:


> If I were the Lakers I'd much rather have that and have a good rebounding 3 with Odom then take on Jermaine O'Neal for both Odom and Bynum.


Whats amazing to me is that the Lakers are in a quazi rebuild mode,and if Kobe can exhibit a modocum of patience,they will have a very good team.

One thing is very clear is that great players with HUGE egos more often than not make ****ty GM's,(forget Jerry West,think MJ),and Kobe is too close too the fire to think rationally...not his forte under normal circumstances...

Kobe should lead this team and light a major fire under Bynums butt..If he can do that,there is no reason the Lakers cant go deep into the playoffs


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

Bulldozer said:


> Question I want to bring up for L.A. fans. Why not trade for Artest? Is it because of a inter-state market/conflict, that maybe a Sacramento team doesn't want to help L.A. in any way? What do you think he'd require in return?
> 
> Fisher
> Bryant
> ...


I would love to get Artest. I thought going in to the season that he was the best chance to win now and keep our young talent at the same time.


----------



## DaRizzle (May 22, 2007)

Wilt_The_Stilt said:


> I would love to get Artest. I thought going in to the season that he was the best chance to win now and keep our young talent at the same time.


True...but it's Ron Artest...he can't handle himself in cow town let alone LA. Big risk, big reward


----------

