Would Kobe make more than 48 million on the market?

[crazyeights]

Tried to stay away from this thread...then I got sucked in. Then I tried to read as much as I could...but ****, so many long, repetitive posts, had to skim.

I get the sides of this argument. I agree that I am disappointed that both Kobe didn't suggest he should take less money and that it doesn't appear we attempted to negotiate.

We can argue the merits of these things until we're all blue in the face, and I'll get around to making my point:

This is all a little revisionist. IF Kobe had come back, fully healthy, worked out the kinks and got himself into real playing shape, maybe started getting that swagger back toward the 2nd half of the season...maybe by Feb/March/April he would have started averaging 15/17/21ppg...then would we still be having this same discussion?

Has anyone even made the point that when they offered the extension, Mitch and Jimmy had no way of knowing he was going to have another season ending injury (technically he could have played at the end of the season, but we were in tank mode, so it was moot.)

I think that is the real problem here. But hey, that's life. It's the same thing that screwed us with the Nash trade and MDA hire. Had we known Nash would never be healthy again, we wouldn't have hired MDA--not in a million years. The problem is we've rushed that decision, but at the time the Lakers were a Titantic and Dr. Buss was dying. You really couldn't ask them to look into their crystal balls, ride Bickerstaff for a month and see how Nash's broken leg would have worked with his pre-existing back/nerve damage.

Maybe we're a "there are no accidents" crowd here. And, yeah, maybe when we signed Nash and that little voice in the back of our head thought-- "but, aren't we lacking youth...and isn't Nash 94 years old?" But hey we pulled of Dwight and everybody just drank to Kool-Aid.

So, if you are expecting people from the planet Earth to look back in July of 2014 and say would Kobe receive a contract like the one he extended 6 months ago, before his disappointing 6 games he returned in--before a second horrible injury? Then no. He wouldn't, by any organization wanting to win.

Maybe. If by a team trying to make money.

I think the bottom line is everyone is sort of right. Kilroy believes he would have been paid. He's right, hell if I owned a team, I'd bet on him. I grew up an Angels fan and that's what I watched them do year after year...Mo Vaughn...ugh...crappy teams pay washed up players all the time.

ST is right: if we were trying to win, then it's an unfortunate contract to have on the books.

However, I think it's a little revisionist. Maybe Mitch and Jimmy were drinking the K-A...maybe they made the same mistake twice (doubling down on senior citizens [Nash then Kobe]). What I do know is Dr. Buss supposedly wrote some plan where the Buss kids are following to the letter...supposedly. I do believe in his old age Dr. Buss got a little sentimental and wanted Kobe to retire here with a nice fat check. And I believe business wise it's great and basketball wise it was a risk, but calculated. Much more than it's been given credit for.

Looking at it from two years ago or even 6 months, it was absurd to think LeBron was really going to leave the Heat. Meaning we'd still have to wait for KD, Westbrook, someone like that to come out to LA if we wanted our best chance at winning. Yes, I'd love for us to slowly piece together a winning team, all around, but you only need a twice in NBA history type personality in Duncan to facilitate that.

So we did as Dr. Buss always did. He played the odds. We need stars to make this work. So, he paid Kobe. Kobe's broken knee **** up the near-term, but we're still setup for 2016.

One thing that they also calculated -- and you know this because it's been the story the entire time -- was the effect of the contract on other players. IMO, the Lakers looked at the Heat and said, how can we firebomb these guys. The new CBA has made it very difficult to piece together a team like that again. The Lakers obviously were losers in the new CBA...so they did something interesting:

They didn't bow down to it and negotiate with Kobe. Instead they persisted, saying "No, we're still gonna pay our guy." This isn't just some huge glaring blindspot that anyone with half a brain can see a thousand miles away--look at what the NBPA is suggesting, begging its stars to do:

Take MAX money. Period. The Lakers are playing the long game, and so long as the CBA is this stilted, they don't have the same advantages as they used to. So, in a time when they are "cash-poor" on talent, the Lakers are seemingly making other teams pay. It's not a mistake that LeBron James is asking for MAX money this time around. The Heat are in a tight spot. Yes, Wade opted out, but IMO Kobe's contract had a direct impact on these things going forward.

Look at the way recently Barkley discussed how he'll never look at how the Big Three got together as exactly on the level. They circumnavigated a sort of honor code, and also hamstrung the player's case with the owners. They fell right into their hands, and IMO it's why the Heat are now turning to guys like Marvin Williams to patch their **** together--Marvin freaking Williams! If I'm a player, I don't just hate the Heat because they're winning, I hate them, because they sold me out. Instead of taking MAX contracts and making the money they deserved, they took less, spoiled the sanctity of the league and destroyed their cause in the last CBA. They've completely changed the discussion. Now everyone believes they should take less money. As a bit of PR, it's awful how the players have lost the fans.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/ESPNSteinLine/status/484874468544630786[/tweet]
[tweet]https://twitter.com/ESPNSteinLine/status/484874570654969857[/tweet]
[tweet]https://twitter.com/ESPNSteinLine/status/484875316276768768[/tweet]


In case guys haven't noticed, there's a battle going on. And it has zero to do about Kobe Bryant deserving the contract. This is about the future of the league.

[TyCobb]

Excellent post, Crazy.

[Sedale Threatt]

...

Some very, very good points.

But it isn't just the Heat. You've also got guys like Tim Duncan and Dirk Nowitzki who have voluntarily taken less than they deserve in the twilight of their career, despite both playing at extremely high levels and who mean every bit to their franchise as Kobe does to his, in order to increase their chances of remaining competitive.

Even if Kobe might be a better box office draw or whatever...so what? People keep trying to draw a distinction between them when there is none. Value is value, and sacrifice is sacrifice.

Like this nonsense that however much we overpaid Kobe doesn't mean anything to our on-court viability. Assuming Duncan could easily be still commanding $20 million, and I don't think that's a big assumption, that extra cash he forwent just about covers the salaries of Patty Mills and Boris Diaw moving forward, two players without whom the Spurs have zero chance of defending their title.

It's a tough spot, and I get that. As much as I believe a salary cap is absolutely essential to the health of the league, I also hate the NBA's financial structure. Owners get too much of the pie, role players are overpaid -- i.e., Matt Bonner made $4 million last season -- and star players don't get enough. You could probably never adequately pay guys like Bryant and James for what they've meant to the NBA. I would much, much rather that money going into the pockets of the guys who entertain us on a nightly basis than some of the scumbag owners like Donald Sterling, I can promise you that.

I read somewhere that Michael Jordan, between merchandise and TV exposure, has generated something like $6 billion since he came into the NBA, while he's made "only" about $1 billion. That's a pretty crappy split. So I totally, totally get how lame it sounds to be expecting the great players, the most valuable assets in this game, to take less money when almost none of us would do the same if we were presented with that expectations in our own lives. (Although, most of us aren't cashing seven figure checks every month.)

But this debate has been going on long before the recent CBA, which only exacerbates the issue. Kevin Garnett was under intense criticism for much of his career for demanding the absolute largest contract he could get, during which Minnesota was usually mired in mediocrity.

Ultimately, I believe the onus is on management to do their jobs as their great players are doing theirs. Minnesota and Cleveland failed to build around their stars, while the Lakers and Spurs consistently did so. That's their fault. At the same time, when you've got a player like KG, as great as he was, taking up something like half the salary cap at the time, that can't help but tie one hand behind your back.

It's a hard, hard, hard balance to strike between competitive balance and financial equity, and we've got some incredibly smart and talented people on both sides of the table who haven't been able to find it yet.

Another lockout was almost guaranteed as soon as they signed the last CBA, and this time the players are preparing so they don't have to capitulate when the months drag on and the bills start piling up. As you note, that doesn't have anything to do with what Kobe Bryant is making. It has everything to do with the fact that NBA business has been absolutely booming, and franchise values soaring, since the players gave up seven percent of BRI. Bryant's deal might serve as some sort of rallying cry, but nobody needed that to open their eyes. That was apparent almost immediately after they put pen to paper.

So, ultimately, I hope none of my posts have come across as antagonistic towards Bryant himself. If there were no constraints, I couldn't care less what he makes. He probably deserves twice what he's made, at least. But when that salary impacts our on-court competitiveness, topped off by people grasping at straws to try to spin this into a wise course of action on our part, that's what bothers me.

[Sedale Threatt]

Also, this notion that Buss mapped out a plan back to the mountain top on his death bed...wow. I'm just going to have to wait and see about that one. If fans in general are prone to wishful and magical thinking in regards to their favorite teams, that just about takes the cake.

[crazyeights]

All evidence has shown that Dr. Buss did leave a plan in place and from interviews I've seen with the Buss children, Kobe's extension was one of them.

And look, I'm not disagreeing with you, but I think it's much easier to be disappointed with Kobe's albatross extension after he was injured again.

IMO, in life, that's when things really screw you, when you have 2 or 3 unforeseen events occur in succession. Kobe's achilles, Dwight left, they needed to do a gesture to hold over the fans, and then they re-signed Kobe early.

It was a statement of good faith. We believe in Kobe to return to greatness. Hell, the last time we saw the man, he was stringing together a most epic swan song.



We could argue many things about this. There were a lot of mistakes made. And regardless of the timing, I wanted Kobe to take less, I believed he would. However if you meant to tell me that in that moment, that the Lakers, on their heels, if we were them we could have:

1) Risked a full fan mutiny and not secured Kobe to be a Laker for life.
2) Known that a few weeks later he'd be injured for the rest of the season

Then, I'd say you're a warlock, or if nothing else, a braver man than I.

Thus, I say it's easy to look back at it and say "Man, they won't sacrifice to win?!" But IMO, that's hindsight vision right there. If Kobe came back and somehow was who he was that final stretch with Dwight and Co, then this deal wouldn't be all that far off. Yes, they could have nickel and dimed him for 20, 18, maybe 15...but they obviously chose to do something different.

From all the evidence we've seen this was a coherent choice by the Laker organization. Instead of pointing at the extension over and over, perhaps we should accept what's been done, and look deeper at the whys.

After all, we're not Mitch, and although he's surely not infallible, I'd like to think weighing the information that he knew at the time, he made the best decision he could.

The awful thing about life is this: everyone has their reasons.

-Renoir

I believe there is a greater strategy at play, and I don't believe it's some desperate stretch, by a conspiratorial mind...I think it's logical and rational. They are trying to show that the Lakers are still above the fray when it comes to the new CBA. That they won't look at 5 championships Kobe Bryant was instrumental in bringing to this great franchise and the 4 billion dollar TV deal over 20 years (with up to 5 for 25) he ushered in...that they would in turn beg him to play for 5M less.

Instead, he'll be the highest paid player in the league as he retires.

If we can't grasp the value of that to an actual free agent, and the message it sends the entire league about the fabric of this franchise, then that's fine. Like I said, it's not that we can't argue the merits of the strategy, it's just that it's not gonna change it one bit.

I'd prefer to consider the whys and move forward.

[Sedale Threatt]

All evidence has shown that Dr. Buss did leave a plan in place and from interviews I've seen with the Buss children, Kobe's extension was one of them.

I don't necessarily dispute that it happened. I just find the whole notion that Buss devised a map back to the promised land on his death bed that his children are now faithfully following to be amusing at best, disturbing at worst. It certainly doesn't fill me with any sense of confidence. I give Jerry West about 10 times more credit for making the Lakers what they were and are.

And look, I'm not disagreeing with you, but I think it's much easier to be disappointed with Kobe's albatross extension after he was injured again.

A fair point. Although I think an Achilles tendon tear suffered in the mid 30s by a player with his mileage is more than enough reason for caution. I was every bit as disappointed/puzzled when the extension was first announced as I am now.

1) Risked a full fan mutiny and not secured Kobe to be a Laker for life.

I don't doubt that this was absolutely a huge part of their thinking, if not the single biggest reason. But if you end up running your franchise based on the whims of the mob, I don't see how that's all that conducive to any sort of success. As I noted early, see Knicks, New York.

From all the evidence we've seen this was a coherent choice by the Laker organization. Instead of pointing at the extension over and over, perhaps we should accept what's been done, and look deeper at the whys.

I don't think that's the case at all. Indeed, I'd argue, as I've been arguing throughout this thread, that the evidence -- again: age, injury (we'll just leave it as singular as even the first one was significant enough) and mileage -- points to the exact opposite, that it was a huge and unnecessary risk.

We had his Bird rights. We had the emotional and historical ties. We had the massive profits to fund his salary. We had every possible advantage had he hit on the open market. If we accept the notion that whatever we overpaid him by doesn't mean anything, what's another couple of million more on top of that had some Russian tin oligarch swooped in to lure Kobe away to Moscow.

I believe there is a greater strategy at play, and I don't believe it's some desperate stretch, by a conspiratorial mind...I think it's logical and rational. They are trying to show that the Lakers are still above the fray when it comes to the new CBA. That they won't look at 5 championships Kobe Bryant was instrumental in bringing to this great franchise and the 4 billion dollar TV deal over 20 years (with up to 5 for 25) he ushered in...that they would in turn beg him to play for 5M less.

Instead, he'll be the highest paid player in the league as he retires.

If we can't grasp the value of that to an actual free agent, and the message it sends the entire league about the fabric of this franchise, then that's fine.

This is all well and good, but it's so much pissing into the wind when it comes down to the iron-clad, intractable rules of the salary cap. Nobody is above that fray.

Unless you're able to draft well and groom a good crop of young players, a la Oklahoma City, or happen to luck out like Miami did a few years back, you can't just spend your way around it. We don't even know if the Lakers, with their seemingly limitless wealth, would be willing to pay the repeater tax or some of the other punishments that are said to be devastating under the new CBA. We do know that they won't be any different than Milwaukee or Orlando or any other team when it comes to fleshing out a roster around Bryant and possibly Anthony with table scraps with what remains of their cap space.

As for sending a message to the rest of the league, I've seen this reasoning rolled out over and over and over again, and it never fails to confuse.

Since when has the Lakers' fabric ever been in doubt?

Our history speaks for itself. We shouldn't need futile gestures to underscore that.

[madmaxmedia]

Maybe some team might offer a contract somewhere close to the vicinity of 2 years for $48M, but it certainly wouldn't be a good team with any sort of realistic championship aspirations. And I doubt it would be a team Kobe would seriously consider going to.

What I mainly disagree with was how the contract was 'negotiated', rather than the final contract numbers.

My understanding of the contract was that the Lakers basically came right out with the 2/$48M offer, and Kobe said yes. Given Kobe's stature, his age, the franchise's AND his desire to win another ring, I would have liked it to have been a more collaborative effort. If it turned out Kobe flat-out said, "I'm not signing for less than $20M (or $24M or whatever), then yes maybe they end up with the same deal. And they then do that deal for all the reasons people have offered in defense of it. But at least they tried to work something out (as many other franchises and teams have done.)

I guess the silver lining is that it's only for 2 years? Hey, it could have been 3 for $72M...

[crazyeights]

That's just my point! It's about the next CBA. Not the current one. In my first post, I stated we're essentially not going to win (unless we luck out) until we can sign Durant-type talent in 2016.

Thus it's about trying to torpedo the current super teams by having the union pressure stars to not take less, because the Lakers will always outspend their opponents if they have the chance to win. Whereas teams like OKC and Miami do everything they can to stay below the line.

Buss had been preparing his exit strategy for about a decade, so for you to make the point that it was on his deathbed, then I guess it's for your own amusement.

Also, IDK where you've been, but people--even Laker fans--are actively doubting the Lakers fabric ever since Buss died--and they won't cease until we win again.

ST, I love ya, buddy, but accept the reality. Nobody here is saying they're happy we signed him for so much, but what are you really arguing for here? That we should just pack it up? That we're totally ****?

We were **** already if that's how you want to look at it.

You bring up the strategy of rebuilding/grooming young players--we had already traded all of our picks. When we re-signed Kobe, we had no assets! You're coming at this as if the Nash gamble didn't happen. That Dwight didn't leave. That we didn't know Kobe was about to break his knee.

And fine you can say: well we still shouldn't have paid Kobe so much, that this is precisely your point, why pay Kobe MAX money?

Say we had Kobe give up 10 million. Who else do we need? We have enough to get Melo for the MAX. We can possibly work out a way for Pau to take less, while stretching Nash, and get get Kobe/Melo/Pau/Randle....

Last year our bench when healthy was good enough to be on a contending team: it was our top-tier players we were missing. If we can address that at the minimum, then why do you think we suddenly need another $5M to sign Matt Boner?

The Lakers were dealt a **** hand. They have a player they couldn't let go away, for every possible reason (fans, money, winning), who they thought would be healthy, but in a smaller role, they had a huge FA they just traded for walk away, they mortgaged their future on building a contender (trading for Nash) to give Kobe one last shot.

I bet if instead of trading for Nash, if we had just put our thumbs up our asses and Kobe had nothing to play for, then fans would be furious for Mitch and Jimmy for not "giving Kobe a chance."

Hell, he probably wouldn't have been injured since we'd be in a totally different universe and so when he's still playing at a nice level, and comes to be a free agent, and the Lakers low-ball him, then he leaves, people would scratch their head and wonder--what happened? Why didn't we try?

Well guess what? The brass did try, and they gambled wrong.

If trying to nab Melo doesn't work, then we do what we can and let Kobe retire with some dignity. Then have a go at the next round when he's up.

It's only two years. Two years that will likely be dominated by LeBron, Durant, and San Antonio.

[b shaw20]

Those were fun teams. But that was not done on purpose. When our 80's team was met with Magics announcement and Worthy retiring, etc.. it was all we could do. They were trying to back then what they are trying to now. Get stars. But back then we could flip a George Lynch for some cap relief and move a guy like Vlade without blinking an eye to get what we needed. Jerry and Jerry were always looking to go after that Melo/Lebron. They would still right now if they could.

I think Jerry would have been wise enough to not get ourselves locked into such a bad deal with Bryant, or trying to land a guy of Anthony's age at a point where a superstar almost certainly isn't going to do much for us. Given what it's going to do to our cap, I'll be somewhat stunned of we even reach the conference finals at any point during his tenure. But we shall see...

Ask the Angels... (Pujols)

[TyCobb]

Angels also got a fat TV deal out of it.

[Sedale Threatt]

xxx

Appreciate your responses Crazy. I've bloviated enough so I don't have much else to add. (Shocking, I know.) We shall see how it rolls.

[dockingsched]

I had a dream that Kobe told the lakers during his extension talks that he planned on playing for 4 more years and would settle for a Duncan/dirk 10 mil like annual salary. The parties then hashed out a planned to pay him the lions share of tha money the 1st two years then kobe would sign for the minimum the last two yrs opening up cap for the 2016 FA class

[stunnar0b]

Keep dreamin

[jigga_man]

Duncan was settling for 21 million dollars and taking up 1/3 of the Spurs capspace when he was 36 years old.

[tlifeset]

The truth is that the best way to be a finals contender is to nail a draft pick. The Heat way is NEARLY impossible. The Thunder nailed Durant (lucked out)... The Spurs nailed Kawahi... Hopefully the Lakers nailed Randle. When you have a player on your squad for a long time, you get continuity. The Spurs are obviously the extreme of this. If you can get production from a guy making $3M a year (or less) then it doesn't really matter if you're paying your 35 year old star $24M.

You know what, I'm happy that Kobe didn't take the pay cut. It's sends a better message to the league for the Lakers. Stars get paid in LA. You don't have to make compromises. And, maybe even more important, it's going to taste that much sweeter when him and Melo win a championship making the max together than some stupid collusion to make a dream team. MJ was making $30M a year when he last won ... in a league that wasn't nearly as popular. There's a reason why Lebron wants the max - he's earned the max. There is a psychological effect to being paid the best... it's proof that you are the best. Kobe will earn this contract... keep doubting him... keep questioning his league status... keep crying about the lack of sacrifices. He will bleed for that 6ht ring, he's going to win it his way... not some fantasy idea from fans as to how it should be. Call me crazy... but I like that. And it wouldn't really matter much to Kobe if I didn't.