# Would you trade for Kobe?



## Nephets (Jul 15, 2004)

This was talked about in NBA general, but let's see what diehard Spurs fans think of it.

Honestly, I'd trade Manu/Parker for Kobe Bryant. I know, I love Manu and Parker like you guys, but if the chance ever comes for Kobe and Duncan on the same team, that would be EXCELLENT.

With Manu gone, we'd need an SG... Kobe is the best SG in the game (IMO), and if Parker gets traded, remember we have Udrih still, who is coming along very, very well as a rookie, who was a draft steal.

I doubt this would ever happen, but if the chance arouse, I am all for it. I'd pain me to see Manu and Parker on the Lakers, but if it's for one of the NBA's finest stars, it'll be worth it. Just remember that Manu is older than Kobe, and that Parker, while young and very talented, has times of inconsistancy, while Udrih has been remarkably solid for a rookie, and Kobe, like Duncan is hardly ever inconsistant.

Solid on the offense side and defensive side, Kobe would honestly be a good addition to our franchise. It'd also make the franchise more popular with Kobe on the team, remember that.

If this ever happened, tell me how this starting lineup sounds:

Udrih
Bryant
Bowen
Duncan
Rasho

Remember, this is if we'd have all of our other subs, so, take that team and give them all the subs we currently have. How would we do? Better or worse?

Would you do this trade?


----------



## ljt (May 24, 2003)

Kobe didnt want to play wtih Shaq,he wants play with Tim?


----------



## DaBobZ (Sep 22, 2003)

I'd take at least 10 payers before Kobe.
Players that can fit the Spurs system opposed to a system that has to fit Kobe's game.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

Hmmm.....very interesting. Kobe has almost unmatched talent, but he carries around lots and lots of baggage. Personally, I would rather stick with Manu and Parker as opposed to Kobe Bryant. Udrih/Wilks at the PG position would immediately drop the Spurs to having one of the worst PG rotations in the league, and even if Barry stepped over as the backup PG, things still aren't good. Depth is what the Spurs are all about, and even though Kobe has talent oozing out of the ***, I wouldn't take him in a 2-for-1 with guys as good as Manu and Parker.


----------



## TheRoc5 (Mar 1, 2005)

no way the future best pg in the nba and yet is so young plus an alstar that does so much on the court and off the court not to mention.


----------



## DaBobZ (Sep 22, 2003)

doh


----------



## FreeMason Jr. (Jul 12, 2004)

Like I said on the NBA General thread, I would never trade to future allstars for a has-been. I think Manu can be just as good as Kobe in a couple years, atleast close to him, and Tony is going to be one of the premiere PG's in the league in just a year or two while Kobe's prime is slipping away from him. If the Spurs wanted a title now the trade would be the ebst thing possible, but for the future of the spurs HELL NO!

BTW didn't we almost make this trade during the post-season?


----------



## texan (Jul 10, 2003)

Guys, as much as I love Parker and Ginobili, we are talking about Kobe Bryant here. He is the premier SG in the league, would be even better with another superstar to take pressure off him, and is only 26 years old. He still could become better. IMO, he isn't in his prime yet. He would work better as a teammate of Duncan's, rather than Shaq's, both because Duncan has no problem with taking the back seat scoring wise, and has less of an ego. A Kobe-Duncan tandem would be practically unstoppable. 

I know Parker and Gino are great players, but we have guys to fill their spots. Udrih is fully capable of being a starting PG in the league, and is maybe even a better fit for our system than Parker. He is a better 3 point shooter, and a better passer. He would fill a role very nicely. We also have Barry, and Brown as our back-up guards, and a PG-laden draft this year. We could possibly pick-up a talented PG with our first round pick. We still have Bowen and could sign a FA to fill the back-up SF role. We have a great talent level, and depth, even if Parker and Gino depart. 

Lastly, as good as Parker and Gino are at times, they lack in consistency, and IMO are not going to improve much more. Contrary to popular belief, I don't think Parker will be the best PG in the league. He is too limited in his shot ability and his passing skills. He should be a Top 5 PG, however, he is in the bottom tier of those 5 PG's, not the elite, superstar class. Ginobili is already 26 or 27 years old, and won't be improving much more. He's a good all around player, borderline all star, but nothing untouchable if we were to attain Kobe Bryant.

I know most of ya'll will bash me for supporting trading for Kobe, but I just think that we would be a better team with him. IMO, a Duncan-Kobe tandem is much better than a Yao-McGrady tandem, and a bit better than a Shaq-Kobe tandem. Add in the fact that we have the talent level, and the potential depth to compensate for the loss of Parker and Gino in this 2-for-1 trade and I think its an easy decision.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

The thing about a Kobe Bryant trade is that nothing is guaranteed. We could do this trade and who knows how the team would turn out. With Parker and Ginobili, we are a proven championship level team, no questions asked. 


And texan, we are talking about Kobe Bryant here. The guy is an ego-maniac, and he carries luggage. If he doesn't want to pass the ball, he's not going to pass the ball. He's an injury risk. He's a great player, but he's not so good that he'd be more valuable than Manu/Parker IMO. My point of view is being conservative. Don't fix it if it ain't broken. Since there is no guarantee Kobe would propel this team to another level, I'd stick with what we got.


----------



## TheRoc5 (Mar 1, 2005)

our team is like checks and balance system lol
duncan 
parker
manu

u cant b missing one part for the government to work or its like a puzzle

with out duncan u cant win or with out parker and or manu its hard to or u cant win. no doubt duncan is the major peice but we rely need both manu and parker to fill in what r teams needs r. our team is built great like mybe the best in the nba. so if we get kobe we have to start all over and we rely cant have the same sporting cast wich means take a yr or 2 to geta tiltle and duncan is like what 30. so we can still win a few(3) more championships with this team anyway so why mess up the chemistry. just duncan dont get hurt.
this might be the dumbest post ever but if u can get some of it,it makes sense... i think lol


----------



## texan (Jul 10, 2003)

If, hypothetically(this off-season), we acquired Kobe, we would have time to answer all the questions at other positions. We have plenty of depth to cover the void Manu and Parker leave, and we still could be a championship contender. Kobe + Duncan, along with our supporting cast, is an instant championship level team, and one of our most consistent teams ever.

You can say all the negative things about Kobe; however, a shot at getting Kobe is not something I would pass up. Yeah, he does have an ego, but he also has the game to back it up. What our team lacked last postseason was someone who wanted the ball in the clutch, and could, on a nightly basis, perform in the clutch. Kobe brings us that. He brings us an athletic guard that is capable of playing 1st Team type defense(and he has been playing much better D this year). He brings us our most consistent outside scoring threat since the Ice Man. As much as I love Parker and Gino, they don't produce as consistenly as one would hope. Kobe is a superstar that would keep us at the Championship level. He also in not really an injury liability more than Parker or Manu are. He did have a bit of the injury bug, but his career has been relatively injury free. Also, he will pass the ball as long as we are winning, which IMO wouldn't be a problem.

I look at this, and think that the riskier approach is perhaps the better approach. If Kobe is in top form(and still getting better), he could propel us to a "dynastic" level if we surround him and TD with the right pieces(which we pretty much already have). There is a small risk the chemistry might be bad, but I think TD and Kobe would get along fine. TD has no problem taking the back seat scoring wise, and media wise. Kobe wouldn't clash with TD like he did with Shaq, and all would be well in Spur land.


----------



## XxMia_9xX (Oct 5, 2002)

dang that's hard! as much as i hate kobe, i gotta admit, he's like really good! i wouldn't mind seeing him as a spur at all... now to trade him for parker and manu? i just don't know. i'm not sure if i would ever want to see parker wearing a lakers jersey, that would be horrible! now that's just me being a spurs fan and hating the lakers... but what's better for the spurs? i think i would trade them. the spur would be awesome if duncan and kobe are together. that's like the two best player in the NBA playing together...


----------



## mr_french_basketball (Jul 3, 2003)

texan said:


> ...Lastly, as good as Parker and Gino are at times, they lack in consistency, and IMO are not going to improve much more...


You base your affirmations on impressions texan, and IMO both still have room to improve (even Manu).

The reallity is that Tony's and Manu's consistency is the reason that led us to our all-time best record, maintaining a very high level of play all season (before late injuries).

My consistency ranking can't be wrong : It's based on mathematical formulas. And based on those ratings, Manu has been as much consistent as Duncan this season(!!!), and Tony is our third best consistent player...

Most people think Beno is more consistent than Parker because he plays a reassuring old fashioned basketball. But the numbers are clear, and it's not even close (6.90 against 5.53)...

If you want to blame some players about their consistency, talk about Barry(5.21), Bowen(5.06) or Brown(5.05), who have been terrible in that aspect this season.

Moreover, when you say Tony is not a good passer, here again I think it's a wrong impression. You have to consider Spurs system relies little on PG play making, and Tony's still ranks #17 in the NBA in Assists Per 48 Minutes at 8.6.

You seem to underestimate Manu as well. Manu and Bryant are very close in efficiency/48 mn (28.29 against 27.88) and Manu's talent and energy is just unique.

Sorry texan, I have nothing against you, but those things have to be said!

*To conclude : I would never trade Tony and Manu for a ego-maniac Bryant.*


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

mr_french_basketball said:


> You base your affirmations on impressions texan, and IMO both still have room to improve (even Manu).
> 
> The reallity is that Tony's and Manu's consistency is the reason that led us to our all-time best record, maintaining a very high level of play all season (before late injuries).
> 
> ...


 Good post. I tend to agree with you mr french, but I want to make sure that texan doesn't feel like we're teaming up on him. 


For comparison's sake, let's look at what T-Mac was traded for. Steve Francis, Mobley, Cato, and that was with Juwan Howard being included. One borderline All-Star in Francis for one of the game's best players. Let's look at the Shaq trade: Shaq for Odom, Butler, and Grant. Again, one borderline All-Star (If even that) in Odom and two role players. Hey, Kobe is Kobe, but I'm not sure why he'd be worth two borderline All-Stars when Shaq and T-Mac both weren't equal to that. It's more of getting equal value in return than me just hating Kobe Bryant. Parker and Manu are + players for their position, meaning they are better than the mediocre starters at the position. Trade them away and then we get Beno and Kobe. Beno has impressed at times, but I'm not going to say he'd be better than a mediocre starter at this point. So, did we really upgrade? Personally, I'd rather have the big responsiblities put on two more than capable guys than one (Kobe). Like I said, I'd prefer depth over stars, so trading away Manu and Parker straight up wouldn't be in my favor.


----------



## DaBobZ (Sep 22, 2003)

Wow this thread as gone pretty high since last time I checked it !
Good job guys and great discussion.

I agree with Mr French ball about the consistency thing, I'll just add that it's much more tougher to get in the rythm from the bench and of course it's hard to get a 7+ off the bench, especially playing 15 minutes or less.


----------



## texan (Jul 10, 2003)

I think that our hate for Kobe Bryant has overshadowed and biased us somewhat on this trade. It took me a long while to conclude that I would actually trade Parker and Ginobili for Kobe. Some may still disagree, but if you really look at the trade from a nonbiased view, you will see that, in fact, this trade is not a bad one, or an overly uneven one.

Yeah, Kobe does have an ego, but to call him an ego-maniac, is going a bit too far. The simple fact is that his personality and Shaqs clashed, and it was just as much Shaq's fault as it was Kobe's. Kobe, when teamed with a big man that can take double and triple teams away from him, is a 30/7/7 player on 45% or better shooting, along with 1st Team All-Defense qualities. He can score 40 on any night and IMO, outside of Dirk, is the most fearsome scoring threat in the league.

I won't argue that Parker and Manu have become much more consistent. However denying that Parker is still somewhat inconsistent is absurd. The past week we have seen him show up one quarter only to disappear the next. Another example of his still inconsistent play is his month by month 3pt shooting %. In December and February, he shot a very good over 40%; however, in November, January and March he has shot under 20%, and near 10% in Nov. and March. His free throw consistency is also an area he needs much improvement on. I'm not saying this will last his entire career, but I also wouldn't bank on him improving those numbers enough to be the premiere player at his position, something Kobe Bryant is.

Barry has been amazingly inconsistent, and had I know he would play like this, I would not have advised signing him. However, Bowen is not an offensive player. He does bring his defense every night, and that is the aspect in which he is one of the most consistent players in the league, and it fits his role. It is harder to produce when you get the amount of minutes Brown does, and you are not allowed to get in sync.

I'm not saying that with Parker and Manu we aren't a championship caliber team. They are great players and I love them. I hope they never leave the Spurs. On the contrary, acquiring Kobe Bryant for the two, although risky, would perhaps propel us to dynastic level. I would rather have one superstar than two borderline all-stars. We don't know whether Parker or Ginobili will improve any more. We do know that Kobe is the best(or one of the best) SG in the league, with a very good work ethic and the will to win. I feel we have the pieces to cover up the loss of a 2 for 1 trade, and be an even stronger team, with Kobe.


----------



## Kneejoh (Dec 21, 2004)

texan said:


> I think that our hate for Kobe Bryant has overshadowed and biased us somewhat on this trade. It took me a long while to conclude that I would actually trade Parker and Ginobili for Kobe. Some may still disagree, but if you really look at the trade from a nonbiased view, you will see that, in fact, this trade is not a bad one, or an overly uneven one.
> 
> Yeah, Kobe does have an ego, but to call him an ego-maniac, is going a bit too far. The simple fact is that his personality and Shaqs clashed, and it was just as much Shaq's fault as it was Kobe's. Kobe, when teamed with a big man that can take double and triple teams away from him, is a 30/7/7 player on 45% or better shooting, along with 1st Team All-Defense qualities. He can score 40 on any night and IMO, outside of Dirk, is the most fearsome scoring threat in the league.
> 
> ...


Yeah it is very amazing that some fans' hatred for Kobe has blinded them from seeing what Kobe can do for the Spurs. 

People say he brings a lot of baggage but his talents and experience outweigh his ego.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

texan said:


> I think that our hate for Kobe Bryant has overshadowed and biased us somewhat on this trade. It took me a long while to conclude that I would actually trade Parker and Ginobili for Kobe. Some may still disagree, but if you really look at the trade from a nonbiased view, you will see that, in fact, this trade is not a bad one, or an overly uneven one.
> 
> Yeah, Kobe does have an ego, but to call him an ego-maniac, is going a bit too far. The simple fact is that his personality and Shaqs clashed, and it was just as much Shaq's fault as it was Kobe's. Kobe, when teamed with a big man that can take double and triple teams away from him, is a 30/7/7 player on 45% or better shooting, along with 1st Team All-Defense qualities. He can score 40 on any night and IMO, outside of Dirk, is the most fearsome scoring threat in the league.
> 
> ...






The bias isn't "hatred" of Kobe. Since there are several of us arguing for keeping Manu and Parker, you probably weren't just addressing me, but I can say that I'm looking at it from a non-biased point of view. Kobe Bryant has insane talent. No one doubts that. However, it's not that I wouldn't want Kobe as much as it is how good Manu and Parker are. I don't give a damn what people say, inconsistent or not, these two guys are good players. I personally feel they are being undervalued packaged together. I don't set the "value" either, it's the GM's that set the "value" of these players. texan, thug_immortal, why didn't you guys answer to the point I made about what Shaq and T-Mac were traded for? Didn't see it? Let me repeat it:



Shaq for Butler, Odom, and Grant. Sure, Shaq is old, his contract is huge, yada yada yada, he can singlehandedly make a team a championship contender, yet all the Lakers got in return was one borderline All-Star in Odom, if even that. 



T-Mac and Juwan Howard for Steve Francis, Cuttino Mobley, and Kelvin Cato. Take a 2nd look at this trade. T-Mac *and* Howard for yet again one borderline All-Star.




So, why do we give up two borderline All-Stars for Kobe when in the examples above a top-notch talent comes at a better cost? 





Hey, you guys might assume people are under rating Kobe because of all the crap he's been through, but not in my case. I see a guy with all the talent in the world, but why take a risk when you already have a championship squad? It's assumed Kobe on the team instead of Parker/Manu would make the team better, but there's substantial proof that the Spurs are title contenders with what we have. No assumptions, that's a fact. Again, it all has to do with being conservative. I'm not taking an unneccessary risk when I can win a championship with what I got.


----------



## texan (Jul 10, 2003)

Koko, I fully understand where you are coming from, and when I first saw this thread, I felt the exact same way as you. I felt that why would you tamper with a championship caliber team, especially by giving up two possible all-star quality players. I obviously have changed my opinion, partially because I feel we have the talent to fill the void holes left by Manu and Parker, and also b/c I feel Kobe brings something to this team that we have been lacking for a long time. That is a premiere outside threat with a killer instinct and someone who can score in the clutch. Yes, Manu can do that every once in a while, but he also is prone to mess-ups like the one against the Grizz where he got the ball stripped from him. We don't have someone we can count on, from the outside, when the game is on the line. Kobe is as dominant a guard there is in this league, and a player like him teamed with Duncan would produce many championships. I know that there is a risk in getting him b/c of chemistry, but I would be willing to take that risk, in order to reap the rewards.

To answer your question about the Shaq and Tmac trades, the Lakers and Magic got the raw end of their deals, b/c they were pretty much forced to trade their superstars. Tmac wanted out of Orlando, and management made it known that they no longer wanted Shaq. If Kobe somehow clashed with management and he demanded a trade, we could get by with not trading both those players for him, however, at his current value, two borderline all-stars seems about fair.

This trade will most likely never happen, and I'd probably become more skeptical about it if the rumors were actually true, but as of right now, a Manu+ Parker for Kobe swap sounds like a good trade to me. 

Just for discussion, say the trade was Kobe Bryant and Caron Butler for Manu, Parker and a 1st Rounder. Would yall do it? Why or Why not?


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

texan said:


> Koko, I fully understand where you are coming from, and when I first saw this thread, I felt the exact same way as you. I felt that why would you tamper with a championship caliber team, especially by giving up two possible all-star quality players. I obviously have changed my opinion, partially because I feel we have the talent to fill the void holes left by Manu and Parker, and also b/c I feel Kobe brings something to this team that we have been lacking for a long time. That is a premiere outside threat with a killer instinct and someone who can score in the clutch. Yes, Manu can do that every once in a while, but he also is prone to mess-ups like the one against the Grizz where he got the ball stripped from him. We don't have someone we can count on, from the outside, when the game is on the line. Kobe is as dominant a guard there is in this league, and a player like him teamed with Duncan would produce many championships. I know that there is a risk in getting him b/c of chemistry, but I would be willing to take that risk, in order to reap the rewards.
> 
> To answer your question about the Shaq and Tmac trades, the Lakers and Magic got the raw end of their deals, b/c they were pretty much forced to trade their superstars. Tmac wanted out of Orlando, and management made it known that they no longer wanted Shaq. If Kobe somehow clashed with management and he demanded a trade, we could get by with not trading both those players for him, however, at his current value, two borderline all-stars seems about fair.
> 
> ...






Great post. It's good to see we can have intelligent debate without anyone flying off the handle. I completely see where you are coming from as well, because I've said time and time again that he's insanely talented. I'm just a conservative type of person all around, and my opinion on this topic shows that.



As for the trade you proposed, well, that's interesting, but going with my first impressin I'd probably hold off on that as well. If Caron Butler had improved from his rookie season instead of digressing, I'd be all over this. As good as it would be to have a replacement for Bowen lined up already, but if the trade doesn't make me automatically reply with a "Yes" I'll hold off.


----------



## Matiz (Jun 5, 2003)

simple: no.
why- a bit extreme opinion that most people won't agree with, but I don't like those players straight out of HS... actually I hate the way they are playing. There is one thing missing in their game: teamplay, they're all great stat padders and more or less are considered as superstars in their teams... 
San Antonio is playing a tottaly different type of basketball and just imho they wouldn't fit the system that Spurs management created mostly through nba draft, and I can't imagine a ballhog like Kobe in a team oriented game played at Spurs.


----------



## Nikos (Jun 5, 2002)

No I wouldn't. The title would mean less if Kobe Bryant came here.

I rather the team win with the nucleus they have now. All these years going against Kobe, him being the enermy, getting him would make it too easy. Less enjoyable of a title.


----------

