# OT: Kobe Not Budging From Trade Demands



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

> Kobe Bryant met with Los Angeles Lakers owner Jerry Buss in Barcelona, Spain and reiterated his demand to be traded, according to Los Angeles-area media reports citing unnamed sources.
> 
> 
> The Press-Enterprise of Riverside, Calif. cited two unnamed league sources, who said Buss was shocked by Bryant's continued demand for a trade, and left the meeting uncertain if he would comply with the disgruntled All-Star's wishes.
> ...


http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2906373
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2906373


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*wait kitty there's more*

http://www.pe.com/sports/basketball/breakout/stories/PE_Sports_Local_D_lakers_16.3dccb4a.html



> Bryant is the only NBA player with a no-trade clause in his contract. He had said he would waive that clause. *But he could make a trade more difficult because he has a three-team wish list, the sources said. Two of the teams are the Chicago Bulls and New York Knicks. *
> One report had the Lakers hoping to acquire Bulls center Ben Wallace, Ben Gordon, Luol Deng and Chicago's No. 1 draft pick (9) for Bryant.
> 
> But the sources said every team, including the Bulls, knows the Lakers will try to "gut" a team in order to get as much value as possible for Bryant.
> ...


let the sweepstakes begin...but i do wonder who the 3rd team is .

as it is now i am going to have to give the knicks a serious edge on the bulls because if the bulls ever agreed to that deal (which they wouldn't) Kobe would veto it anyway. the knicks have more assets they could give away and still be more or less a strong team with Kobe on it...something i'm not so sure of with the bulls.


----------



## ChosenFEW (Jun 23, 2005)

3rd team is probably in the west....

while this gets me somewhat excited. I do realize that if he were to come to the east the bulls have a lot more attractive pieces to offer then we do.


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

I swear to you guys if we can land Kobe, I'll take back all the bad things I've ever said about Isiah. :bsmile:


----------



## EwingStarksOakley94 (May 13, 2003)

I can't see how the Knicks could offer a more attractive package than Chicago.

Grinch, if you could explain please do. I'm not picking an argument at all, I just really don't see how we could beat their best offer, especially since they have a lottery pick to throw in.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

What would you guys offer? Marbury, Frye, Balkman, Robinson, future pick for Kobe, Vlad?

Lakers get young talent, a known name and get rid of Vlad's contract. I don't think we are going to want to take on long contracts like Crawford and QRich. Marbury is not a good contract but he is a known name and is only for 2 more years, same time Odom's deal would be up (if they didn't deal him as well)

You guys would be left with:

Curry
Lee
Vlad
Kobe
Francis

Or you could slide Kobe to the 3 and start Crawford or put Qrich in over Vlad, etc.

I think a deal with the Bulls would probably give Kobe a better chance at a ring and make the Lakers happier.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

EwingStarksOakley94 said:


> I can't see how the Knicks could offer a more attractive package than Chicago.
> 
> Grinch, if you could explain please do. I'm not picking an argument at all, I just really don't see how we could beat their best offer, especially since they have a lottery pick to throw in.


because kobe might not like whats left of the bulls when the lakers accept the offer...he has a no trade clause

for instance the bulls are weak on the interior , do you think Kobe would accept the trade if they sent ben wallace ?

i doubt he would consent if they sent Luol either

kirk is almost impossible to make a deal with because he has a posion pill contract right now.

i dont doubt the bulls can send better players , what i do doubt is whats left when they do, the best deal i can think of for them is S&T of PJ and Nocioni , duhon , #9 and gordon , i think the knicks can equal that with frye collins , Qrich , francis r. morris and the #23 and if Zeke got desperate he could probably afford to put in Lee, I dont think the bulls could afford to add anything else without seriously killing any remnants of their depth.


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

EwingStarksOakley94 said:


> I can't see how the Knicks could offer a more attractive package than Chicago.
> 
> Grinch, if you could explain please do. I'm not picking an argument at all, I just really don't see how we could beat their best offer, especially since they have a lottery pick to throw in.


They couldnt offer a better package, but in offering their package, the Knicks won't be giving up the whole team.

Now it takes less to win in the East, and maybe Kobe may take that into consideration, but I don't think he wants to go to a team where he'll end up like the current lakers.

With the Knicks, the Atlantic is far weaker as a whole than the Central Division, which means he'd have the 4th seed at least (the Celts, Sixers, and Nets wouldn't compare), compared to the Central, where he'd be in direct competition with the Conference leader from last season, and the Finals runner up. 

With a gutted Bulls team, he'd have to fight harder for higher seeding. Sure they could get anywhere from 1-4, but with the Knicks he could have a better opportunity to lock down home court, as the worst they could do (if they win the division) is 4th.

I think.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

Kobe's contract cannot exceed the maximum with the addition of the trade kicker, so I don't think the trade kicker applies.


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

ChosenFEW said:


> 3rd team is probably in the west....
> 
> while this gets me somewhat excited. I do realize that if he were to come to the east the bulls have a lot more attractive pieces to offer then we do.


 
For some reason I think the 3rd team is Dallas. Cuban is crazy enough to ship Dirk's behind out of town, after his horrid performance this season. With that said, imagine if we can actually pull this kind of deal? Do you realize how many bandwagon fans would all of a sudden be Knick fans? The Kobesexuals would be in full effect..acting like they were Knick fans since the Clarence Weatherspoon days. :biggrin:


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

Da Grinch said:


> because kobe might not like whats left of the bulls when the lakers accept the offer...he has a no trade clause
> 
> for instance the bulls are weak on the interior , do you think Kobe would accept the trade if they sent ben wallace ?
> 
> ...


I'm going to disagree, IMO we have really nothing to offer the Lakers. This is what I think will be the only way #24 will wear a orange and blue uni. Kobe has to come out and tell Buss that he wants to go to no other team _but _NY. He has to convince the Laker brass to do a deal, and that's the only way it will get done. Otherwise, I just don't feel we have adequate chips to get a deal done, without the voice of the Black Mamba backing us up. So Knick fans, send Kobe an e-mail because Isiah can't, that is called tampering...:biggrin: and tell him that you want him to come here and put NY back on the map!


----------



## EwingStarksOakley94 (May 13, 2003)

USSKittyHawk said:


> I'm going to disagree, IMO we have really nothing to offer the Lakers. This is what I think will be the only way #24 will wear a orange and blue uni. Kobe has to come out and tell Buss that he wants to go to no other team _but _NY. He has to convince the Laker brass to do a deal, and that's the only way it will get done. Otherwise, I just don't feel we have adequate chips to get a deal done, without the voice of the Black Mamba backing us up. So Knick fans, send Kobe an e-mail because Isiah can't, that is called tampering...:biggrin: and tell him that you want him to come here and put NY back on the map!


actually he couldn't be number #24 on the Knicks, it's retired (Bill Bradley) :biggrin:


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

EwingStarksOakley94 said:


> actually he couldn't be number #24 on the Knicks, it's retired (Bill Bradley) :biggrin:


Awww shoot, you damn right. Sorry Senator Bradley. :redface: How about #8? We never had anyone of significance wearing that number. Right? :devil2:


----------



## Truknicksfan (Mar 25, 2005)

I have to agree with Kitty on this one. The only way I see us getting Kobe is if he says he wants to go to NY.


----------



## da1nonly (May 8, 2006)

Kobe has the final decision. And I;m almost positive that he, or anybody, would love to play in New York


----------



## knickstorm (Jun 22, 2003)

he'll go where he can win, i dont know why everyone says the buls have to be gutted, so you trade, Wallace, Deng and Gordon.......the bulls would still have a solid core of kobe, hinrich, Ty Thomas, Sefolosha and the 9th pick for this year.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

To me, if Kobe gets traded at the deadline the Knicks are in a much better position. 

Then Francis will be an expiring contract the following season, Lee or Frye could be included, Crawford thrown in as well and a future pick. Again the Lakers are not going to get a great deal for him, same with Allen Iverson, same with Shaq, same with Abdul Jabbar.

Superstars get traded for garbage in this league.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

One more thing here that could work in the Knicks favor. Paxson has been afraid to trade any of his "core" players away. Guy is gunshy and overprotective of them. Let's hope he feels he can win with this group period and says no thanks on Kobe. Once that happens, the Knicks would be the frontrunners because they ain't dealing him to Phoenix, especially when a guy like Marion expires in two years and would leave for greener pastures. 

I still think if Kobe is traded, it will be to the New York Knicks.


----------



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

HKF said:


> One more thing here that could work in the Knicks favor. Paxson has been afraid to trade any of his "core" players away. Guy is gunshy and overprotective of them. Let's hope he feels he can win with this group period and says no thanks on Kobe. Once that happens, the Knicks would be the frontrunners because they ain't dealing him to Phoenix, especially when a guy like Marion expires in two years and would leave for greener pastures.
> 
> I still think if Kobe is traded, it will be to the New York Knicks.


This is very true about Pax and him being protective on the core. Or so it seems. 

I highly doubt the Lakers would entertain trading a player like Kobe within their division too. Oh, and Marion could also opt out as soon as next yr.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Dissonance19 said:


> This is very true about Pax and him being protective on the core. Or so it seems.
> 
> I highly doubt the Lakers would enteratin trading a player like Kobe within their division too. Oh, and Marion could also opt out as soon as next yr.


Totally forgot that could happen. I actually think he will opt out because a few teams will be under the cap as well and he could get a 4 year to make up for it. Although, thinking about it, it's hard to opt out of 16.3 million bucks.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

What if the deal was something like Marbury, Lee, Frye, draft pick(s) for Kobe and Brian Cook? How good would the Knicks be?


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

USSKittyHawk said:


> For some reason I think the 3rd team is Dallas. Cuban is crazy enough to ship Dirk's behind out of town, after his horrid performance this season. With that said, imagine if we can actually pull this kind of deal? Do you realize how many bandwagon fans would all of a sudden be Knick fans? The Kobesexuals would be in full effect..acting like they were Knick fans since the Clarence Weatherspoon days. :biggrin:


I'd trade Dirk straight up for KG. Salary wise it works and is benefitial to both teams. The Wolves have serious issues concerning their ability to build a legitimate team. Dirk is 4 years younger than KG and has much more time available to build a contender than KG. Dirk is also locked into a contract for about 3 more years which also gives the Wolves leverage in keeping a star without fear of him using some clause to get out of it like KG has. 

The Mavs make the moves for obvious reasons. They need a better player as their franchise player that won't disappear for games. Although KG has been a bad closer historically, the Mavs have guys around him like Stackhouse and Terry that thrive in finishing out games. Ideally speaking, the trade works for both teams.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

knickstorm said:


> he'll go where he can win, i dont know why everyone says the buls have to be gutted, so you trade, Wallace, Deng and Gordon.......the bulls would still have a solid core of kobe, hinrich, Ty Thomas, Sefolosha and the 9th pick for this year.


Your essentially talking about Kirk Hinrich, an unproven and unskilled young pup with Tyrus Thomas, a bench player that hasn't proven much more than any of our bench guys and the 9th pick in what many call a two man draft, with no offensive or defensive big men down low. Remind me what about that team is attractive.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

Wilt_The_Stilt said:


> What if the deal was something like Marbury, Lee, Frye, draft pick(s) for Kobe and Brian Cook? How good would the Knicks be?


I'm one of the few that apparently believe that as long as we keep Kobe and Curry that we're ahead of the pack regardless of what we give up. Remember, we are in the Eastern Conference and we are talking about the best player in the league and one of the tops of all-time. Role players are not as much a concern when you've got your two stars around them, even though the right mix is crucial.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*I can't stand*

that people are content to build to win the East. I hate that we have settled for that. I want to win the whole enchilada, and Kobe and Curry ain't doin it. A younger Kobe and a a younger Shaq couldn't do it against weaker teams than are out there now. A complete team is needed and that is why anyone serious about giving fans there money's worth will NOT gut the team to get a guy with a limited shelf life as a superstar. Even though IT would never do it, Curry is the one player that may have enough juice to limit the amount of additional assets required to get kobe. We could live without his unbalanced game, but we need guys like Lee, Balkman, Collins, Frye, etc. to give Kobe help and keep the future bright.


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

*Re: I can't stand*



alphaorange said:


> that people are content to build to win the East. I hate that we have settled for that. I want to win the whole enchilada, and Kobe and Curry ain't doin it. A younger Kobe and a a younger Shaq couldn't do it against weaker teams than are out there now. A complete team is needed and that is why anyone serious about giving fans there money's worth will NOT gut the team to get a guy with a limited shelf life as a superstar. Even though IT would never do it, Curry is the one player that may have enough juice to limit the amount of additional assets required to get kobe. We could live without his unbalanced game, but we need guys like Lee, Balkman, Collins, Frye, etc. to give Kobe help and keep the future bright.


I disagree about getting rid of Curry, but you and Kiyman basically have the same thoughts on including him on a possible deal. I'm leaning toward keeping him, because I think he improved this year, but needs to work on his defense, passing and rebounding, I want to give him another shot because if he works on his game in the offseason he can be a huge asset. The fact he requires a double team on many occasion gives me the thoughts of the Shaq and Kobe duo. Give me a reason why Curry should go instead of Frye, Crawford and company? Don't you want to give Curry at least one more season with us?


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Like I said*

Its not because of Curry's flaws. Its because he has more value to the other trade partner. I would rather have Kobe and a very complete supporting cast than Kobe plus an incomplete Curry (who may or may not improve the other aspects) and a bunch of guys that are not very good...plus mortgage our future again. Kobe and Shaq did not win it all their last year together and Shaq was far more dominant than Curry will ever be. You need to have a very good supporting cast, and that is a truth. Trading Frye, Lee, Balkman, and whoever else is in the deal du jour is not going to leave us with enough threaten with a title. I could give two craps about winning the East as a goal.


----------



## EwingStarksOakley94 (May 13, 2003)

*Re: Like I said*



alphaorange said:


> Its not because of Curry's flaws. Its because he has more value to the other trade partner. I would rather have Kobe and a very complete supporting cast than Kobe plus an incomplete Curry (who may or may not improve the other aspects) and a bunch of guys that are not very good...plus mortgage our future again. Kobe and Shaq did not win it all their last year together and Shaq was far more dominant than Curry will ever be. You need to have a very good supporting cast, and that is a truth. Trading Frye, Lee, Balkman, and whoever else is in the deal du jour is not going to leave us with enough threaten with a title. I could give two craps about winning the East as a goal.


I can agree with that. I don't think there's anyone who would place more value on Curry than Kobe. I mean, we're talking about the best player in the league. You gotta give up something to get something.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: I can't stand*



alphaorange said:


> that people are content to build to win the East. I hate that we have settled for that. I want to win the whole enchilada


The last time I checked, 98.2% of all NBA champions won a Conference/Division Finals Series (the lone exception being the NBA's first year when there was a three division format). Unless a team can win the east, it can't win a title.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*I expect more form you*

Although what you said is true, building a team to win the current Eastern conference is like training a horse to come in second in the Kentucky Derby. It means nothing until you're in the winners circle. Second place is for losers. Either you win a title or you don't. Lots of cliche's but no matter how you say it, it means the same. May as well say that we are building to be the Atlantic champ because you can't win it all without being the Atlantic top dog. Of course, it isn't the case but the idea is the same. Suppose thye Cavs were built to win the East (which they are). Suppose, also, that they are limited in how much they can improve through drafts and transactions (which they are, although not as much as the Knicks would be if they gutted for Kobe). Does anyone really believe that team is going to win a title over the Western teams anytime soon? LJ may get a little better along with Gibson, but Z is on the way down, Hughes is never going to be better, and Gooden is what he is. I don't see them getting over the hump unless the Western team fall apart.

Bottom line is that you build a team to win a title. If you are good enough to win a title, you are certainly good enough to win your conference. You need to be good enough for both.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

*Re: I can't stand*



alphaorange said:


> that people are content to build to win the East. I hate that we have settled for that. I want to win the whole enchilada, and Kobe and Curry ain't doin it. A younger Kobe and a a younger Shaq couldn't do it against weaker teams than are out there now. A complete team is needed and that is why anyone serious about giving fans there money's worth will NOT gut the team to get a guy with a limited shelf life as a superstar. Even though IT would never do it, Curry is the one player that may have enough juice to limit the amount of additional assets required to get kobe. We could live without his unbalanced game, but we need guys like Lee, Balkman, Collins, Frye, etc. to give Kobe help and keep the future bright.


Have you been watching Kobe play recently? There is no comparison between he and his "young self." The man his taken his game to a whole other level and has plenty of game left in his 29 year old body. Although we'd have to give up some assets to get him, it would be worth the gamble (if you can even call it that). The Knicks as presently constructed have been mentioned several times as needing a guy that could step up and be a major player for us alongside Curry. Why are you shying away from that now that we have the opportunity? Like I said, Shaq and Wade almost made the Finals in their first year starting current bench caliber players like Eddie Jones, Rasual Butler and Udonis Haslem. We'd be just fine with the best player in the game right now. He did just get the Lakers into the playoffs with practically nothing and still is young enough to have us add some key role players.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

*Re: Like I said*



alphaorange said:


> Its not because of Curry's flaws. Its because he has more value to the other trade partner. I would rather have Kobe and a very complete supporting cast than Kobe plus an incomplete Curry (who may or may not improve the other aspects) and a bunch of guys that are not very good...plus mortgage our future again. Kobe and Shaq did not win it all their last year together and Shaq was far more dominant than Curry will ever be. You need to have a very good supporting cast, and that is a truth. Trading Frye, Lee, Balkman, and whoever else is in the deal du jour is not going to leave us with enough threaten with a title. I could give two craps about winning the East as a goal.


Curry might not be where Shaq was during the final year of the Kobe-Shaq duo but at the same time, Kobe has improve immensely since then. It all balances itself in the end. Look at the Heat and the amount they accomplished with the little they had to play with. With Kobe and Curry, you'd need just a few role players here and there because we wouldn't be trading away every asset we have.

P.S., and the last time I checked, Kobe turned a much less talented and flawed player in Smush Parker into a starter. Parker was so mediocre he almost had to rent jersey's in the NBA to just be on the team, let alone play minutes. Now, he's actually a FA signing candidate for teams.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Whatever you say....*

Talk to me when ANY of what you so fervently preach comes to pass. The Knicks would not have nearly enough to beat the Spurs. Duncan would eat Curry's lunch and the rest of them would pinch Kobe just like they did LJ and there wouldn't be enough left to pick up the slack. You're also forgetting that Eddie is just a bad defender...as is JC.....as is Nate. Tell me who's left on the team after the trade and who the back ups are. Then lets talk about "holes", as in lack of depth. Where you and I disagree is primarily in two places.

1) You think much more of Curry and his positive impact than I do.

2) You believe a team can win a title with a great guy, a good guy, and just about anybody else.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

*Re: Whatever you say....*



alphaorange said:


> Talk to me when ANY of what you so fervently preach comes to pass. The Knicks would not have nearly enough to beat the Spurs. Duncan would eat Curry's lunch and the rest of them would pinch Kobe just like they did LJ and there wouldn't be enough left to pick up the slack. You're also forgetting that Eddie is just a bad defender...as is JC.....as is Nate. Tell me who's left on the team after the trade and who the back ups are. Then lets talk about "holes", as in lack of depth. Where you and I disagree is primarily in two places.
> 
> 1) You think much more of Curry and his positive impact than I do.
> 
> 2) You believe a team can win a title with a great guy, a good guy, and just about anybody else.


LOL, whatever. It appears as though as long as someone has an opinion that differs from your own, no matter how much the reasoning and fact, your always right. There really is no point in bothering with you.

I will say that all you need to do is refer back to my previous posts to answer your questions. Hopefully when that happens, you'll find some time to answer my own.


----------

