Henry Abbot: Lakers FO can't wait for Kobe to retire

[kingkirk]

Not sure if you're read the article or not, but Jim Buss isn't portrayed in a very favorable light. But I don't think you can talk about the Lakers without mentioning Kobe. There's way too much smoke to categorically deny that there's no chance of a fire.

What fire, though?

I mean, from a free agency perspective, Kobe's contract is killing the Lakers, but what free agent is joining LA when they know Bryant has 2 years left in the game and they have a terrible roster?

They have also been through a bunch of coaches, all of whom we're obviously going to fail.

My view is that the smoke that is pointed towards Bryant, that could easily be rerouted to the ownership.

Bryant's hand's aren't clean, but he is an easy whipping boy given the contract he signed.

[kingkirk]

Jim Buss is a problem, but so is Kobe. Jim is crippling the team with his poor decisions and letting his ego get in the way of how the team should be running and he isn't open-minded about anyone else's ideas, but his own. Kobe is crippling the Lakers because he doesn't plan on taking a backseat to anyone even at his age and other players have big egos too, they don't have or want to put up with all that drama when they have the option to play somewhere else and play with players who will take backseats to them.

Who should Kobe be taking a step backwards for?

An aging Gasol or an immature Howard?

Who now? Nick Young? Carlos Boozer?

[Sixerscan]

The Lakers are in this weird spot where it seems pretty dumb to pay a guy $24 million so you can win 37 games instead of 27 games, but it also seems pretty dumb to tank a season from the jump when your pick is only top 5 protected. Rough situation. Oh well, they're the Lakers, a hall of famer will fall into their lap in the next 4 years and everything will be hunky dory.

[HotRocks34]

ESPN writes and anti Kobe article after he calls them idiots?

Hmm.

I think the article was actually out before that, in ESPN The Magazine.

[MistyMountain20]

Wait, who should we believe in regards to Paul George; Henry Abbott and his anonymous sources or Paul George? That's a tough one, I mean I can see where Paul George may have an advantage; he is after all Paul George and I believe he has sources into his own brain. But with Abbott, Abbott is such clever investigative journalist, he can find the real truth and thoughts of a person, even when they seem unreachable, where most people couldn't see them, as if they were lodged deeply up his own ass. That takes talent friends.

[Ugly0598]

Meh. Who cares, they're the Lakers and everyone knows they can get great players when they want. Unless they got LeBron I don't think it would have mattered who they got this offseason. I don't think Kobe and Melo would have worked together much anyway. I guess they could have got a star to pair with Kobe and then when Kobe retires they get a star to replace Kobe, but I don't mind seeing what Kobe can do as the main guy, even at 36.

[Wonderllama]

Maybe he was wrong about Paul George as it relates to his free agency and the Lakers, but what makes the rest of the article incorrect?

[HotRocks34]

This is the approximate timeline, I think, for the current "ESPN vs Kobe" matter.


ESPN The Magazine article out ==================> Oct 15 or so
ESPN ranks Kobe #40 ==========================> Oct 16
Kobe calls ESPN "idiots" first time ===============> Oct 16
Word spreads on internet about article ===========> Oct 18
Kobe calls ESPN "idiots" second time =============> Oct 19
Article appears on ESPN.com front page ==========> Oct 20

[Run DLC]

Jim Buss is a problem, but so is Kobe. Jim is crippling the team with his poor decisions and letting his ego get in the way of how the team should be running and he isn't open-minded about anyone else's ideas, but his own. Kobe is crippling the Lakers because he doesn't plan on taking a backseat to anyone even at his age and other players have big egos too, they don't have or want to put up with all that drama when they have the option to play somewhere else and play with players who will take backseats to them.

Who should Kobe be taking a step backwards for?

An aging Gasol or an immature Howard?

Who now? Nick Young? Carlos Boozer?

Like it or not, Howard has more values than Kobe does at this point. He probably wouldn't be able to put asses in seats like Kobe does, but he was a guy that the Lakers could've built around. He had no reason to waste his prime years playing with a grumpy, stubborn, aging superstar who refuses to accept he's no longer a top 5 player. Howard is weak, but I'm sure he'd have no problems playing next to an unselfish mega superstar like, LeBron.

[Slava]

ESPN writes and anti Kobe article after he calls them idiots?

Hmm.

I'm guessing that article has been in the works for quite some time. It certainly predates Kobe's predictable, annual, public outrage at losing the battle with Father Time.

That article is likely Abbott's magnum opus conceived since the days he spent eating ramen noodles and jerking off to Macy's catalogues in his dorm room.

[John Long]

Love is the only one Laker fans thought might've been a possibility but he couldn't pass up the opportunity to play with Lebron while both in their primes. Can't blame him.

I'm still struggling to find a single free agent that Kobe has costed the Lakers. I mean there's a whole article on it so it must be true. But who are these free agents? I keep asking but can't seem to get a reply. Just a bunch of haters kicking dirt on a legend's grave for no real reason.

Love wasn't a free agent, he got traded to Cleveland.

[kingkirk]

Like it or not, Howard has more values than Kobe does at this point. He probably wouldn't be able to put asses in seats like Kobe does, but he was a guy that the Lakers could've built around. He had no reason to waste his prime years playing with a grumpy, stubborn, aging superstar who refuses to accept he's no longer a top 5 player. Howard is weak, but I'm sure he'd have no problems playing next to an unselfish mega superstar like, LeBron.

Dwight was with the Lakers in 2012-13, a season where he was carrying a few injuries.

That same season, Kobe has a renaissance of sorts, posting the following numbers:

Code: Select all

PPG 27.3
RPG 5.6
APG 6.0
FG% 46.3
TS% 57.0
PER 23.0

He was damn incredible that year. Why should he be taking a backwards step for Dwight Howard and his immaturity after posting huge numbers and balling hard as a 34 year old?

Fair enough if Kobe was playing crap and chucking up shots during Dwight’s tenure as a Laker, but I’d argue that Bryant’s 2012-13 season was one of his better ones in his career.

[HotRocks34]

Above timeline is now complete

[StocktonShorts]

Jim Buss is a problem, but so is Kobe. Jim is crippling the team with his poor decisions and letting his ego get in the way of how the team should be running and he isn't open-minded about anyone else's ideas, but his own. Kobe is crippling the Lakers because he doesn't plan on taking a backseat to anyone even at his age and other players have big egos too, they don't have or want to put up with all that drama when they have the option to play somewhere else and play with players who will take backseats to them.

Who should Kobe be taking a step backwards for?

I can't think of a better way to exemplify the problem in Lakerland than to highlight this question. It's like no one can envision a scenario where Kobe isn't the alpha dog. So that's what the Lakers are stuck with until he retires: a team where no player can be better than Kobe. And as his skill set declines, so does the team's ceiling.

[Doctor MJ]

Jimmy is waiting for him to leave.”

I think Lakers fans are waiting for Jimmy to leave lol. He's terrible.

Jumping in like 12 pages in but this is an often stated given that is no given. Look within the past few years the Lakers have acquired Chris Paul and Dwight Howard. Obviously neither one worked out, but any front office that has done this should at the very least be given the opportunity to take another stab at things before anyone starts seriously complaining.

The obvious rebuttal is: Okay, any time now Jim! But these opportunities don't grow on trees, and forgetting all blame on Kobe's front, it's always awkward to have a guy who has so defined your franchise age past being able to build around him, and there's no clear cut best way to play it.

From what I see, Buss and the front office felt like they just couldn't take the combined corporate and PR hit for breaking free from Kobe at this time now without the next clear superstar lined up. Again that was supposed to Paul, and that was supposed to be Howard. If they had either of those guys now and Kobe hadn't been able to fit in with them, he's be gone. But if the choice was Kobe or nothing, they felt they had to go with Kobe. One can debate about whether it was the right move or not, but the logic behind it isn't strange by any means.

I also think the article makes a very good point: This isn't a "we're going to have to keep Kobe around as long as possible no matter the cost" situation. Rather, it's a "one more contract for our hero" type thing. It's due diligence which will make it so that no one can seriously argue that Buss was disloyal to Kobe no matter how the end happens from this point, and it's being paid in a time frame where I think the Lakers clearly concluded they couldn't expect to get any superstar any way.

[John Long]

Which free agents are you referring to?

The free agents that stick out and are talked about most often are the big names like Dwight, Melo, Lebron, or Bosh but what about the second tier FA?
Guys like Isaiah and Lance Stephenson?
You don't have to have two stars to be a competitive team. To be a title contender, yes, but not a team that makes the playoffs. Denver won 50+ games two seasons ago with a bunch of solid players.

So why didn't the Lakers go for second-tier FAs like Bledsoe?
If you want ratings get a competitive team that could potentially squeeze into the playoffs instead of a lottery team. Just structure their contracts so they end when Kobe's ends.

Because their FO is still stuck in the past and only go after big names because they think that is how you build a team. Lakers have been looking for a big name to sell tickets they thought Howard would be their guy but that didn't work out. Going after Melo and Lebron was a waste of time, everybody knew it except for Mitch and Jim Buss

[wallsfamily]

The response to the article is really the Lakers problem. In 2010, the Lakers was everything you wanted but they made some dumb moves and overeacted to the one year wonder Mavericks who beat Kobe, Duncan and Lebron in same year. The one thing that hurt the Lakers was the same thing that hurt them earlier with Shaq. They never addressed the issues of the backup for their star. They also didn't get younger. In addition the drafting was horrible. Think about it the 80's Lakers got Mike Mghee a starter in 85, AC Green starter in 87 and 88. Vlade Divac, Elden Campbell all became starters in spite of being late picks. West never traded picks to get aging players to fit with the superstars. The minute Nash wanted to meet about ball sharing was the day the Lakers needed to go for another player. instead of stargazing picture if the Lakers make this trade for Bynum with Philly, get Iguodala, Vujacek, and Harkless + resign Sessions. No super-duper stars but a lineup of Gasol, Jordan Hill, Iguodala, Kobe and Sessions. with Vujacek, Clark, Blake and Artest off the bench. Kobe would not have had to guard the best perimeter player as well as the point guards. Team is younger with role players and Iggy's offense with shooters and rebounders would be off the chain. Espn put too much blame on Kobe but the fact that a team with 30 mill under the cap's best free agent signing is Carlos Boozer is ridiculous.

[John Long]

Jim Buss is a problem, but so is Kobe. Jim is crippling the team with his poor decisions and letting his ego get in the way of how the team should be running and he isn't open-minded about anyone else's ideas, but his own. Kobe is crippling the Lakers because he doesn't plan on taking a backseat to anyone even at his age and other players have big egos too, they don't have or want to put up with all that drama when they have the option to play somewhere else and play with players who will take backseats to them.

Who should Kobe be taking a step backwards for?

I can't think of a better way to exemplify the problem in Lakerland than to highlight this question. It's like no one can envision a scenario where Kobe isn't the alpha dog. So that's what the Lakers are stuck with until he retires: a team where no player can be better than Kobe. And as his skill set declines, so does the team's ceiling.

Thats a straw man argument because I believe if there is a player that is better than Bryant and will bring wins to the team Kobe is more than willing to step back and allow the young star to shine. But the lakers don't have anyone that fits that category.

[Wreckus13]

Above timeline is now complete

I wonder what the next step is in all of this. Does Kobe take a shot back at them? Does it all just go away? Could be very interesting because it seems ESPN is engaging with Kobe by putting this article on the front page.

[RichieW]

The ratings part is interesting. Sure, they would get less now, but if it makes them better in the long run then they would get that ratings money back.

Funnily enough I suspect they will be effectively tanking with Kobe, which is almost a win-win. They get ratings and gate receipts, and will still likely keep their draft pick. Giving away their 2017 pick in the Howard trade too, that's the one that will really hurt.