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

[markjay]

I remember saying that Kobe wouldn't play second fiddle to any of the top FA's and some of y'all[Lakers fans] thought he'd take a backseat to LeBron if LeBron had wanted to joined him. Kobe's an egomaniac. He's great at what he does for a living, but he's not a guy that players would want to hang around with off the court like they would with, LeBron, Wade, Durant, etc.

He wants the spotlight. He cares about shooting 30+ times if he's having an off shooting night. He's just really grumpy. No current superstar in his right mind would want to play second fiddle to a shot Kobe Bryant. He's so one dimensional at this point and has been for years since after 2010. He's still a box office draw and he got paid, but if the Lakers FO ever thought they had a chance of landing a big name FA while Kobe's still under contract, then they're more delusional than i thought they were.

This is completely absurd. In 2012-2013 (i.e., his most recent real season), among all NBA shooting guards, he was first in points per game, tied for second in assists per game, and second in rebounds per game. How in world is that one-dimensional??

[markjay]

Ok, I've posted quotes directly from Ramon Sessions in the previous thread but I'll do so again:



NBC Sports

Abbott says Sessions left because of Kobe, so that's dismissed.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/Yg_Trece/status/524297654570713088[/tweet]

Abbott: No player wants to play with Kobe. Paul George goes out of his way to throw his support behind him. Chris Paul threatens to sue the league over botched trade.

Pau Gasol



Marca

Aboott: Kobe never batted for Pau and Pau suffered because of Kobe. Debunked again.

If you pull the strings slightly his whole premise and questionable sources falls off. Now tell me why I shouldn't question his credibility once again.

Great stuff slava. I wrote this earlier but to add to the list. Until this year weve been over the cap. For all those years, players willingly took less than what they were worth on the market. I.e. artest barging into kobes shower, jamison for the min, kaman for the min, pau reupping with the lakers, odom depression after leaving, cp3 thinking of suing the nba, list goes on.....the only person who truly hated kobe was smush freaking parker. I betcha thats abbots source. Haha

Good point, I missed Artest & Odom who took steep pay cuts to play with the lakers.

Nick Young too

[The_Ghost_of_JB]

Very interesting read. I always wondering why the Lakers offered Kobe such a large contact and this article sheds some light on it. It does not put Kobe in the best light but that way I look at it is most great players that want to win can be jerks. Kobe seems like one, Jordan was one and no doubt Larry Bird was one.

It seems the Lakers are going to struggle until Kobe retires or moves on in a couple of years, However, when the day comes and Kobe is not a laker FA will sign there and the lakers will continue to make lopside trades.

[almatic]

Great stuff slava. I wrote this earlier but to add to the list. Until this year weve been over the cap. For all those years, players willingly took less than what they were worth on the market. I.e. artest barging into kobes shower, jamison for the min, kaman for the min, pau reupping with the lakers, odom depression after leaving, cp3 thinking of suing the nba, list goes on.....the only person who truly hated kobe was smush freaking parker. I betcha thats abbots source. Haha

Good point, I missed Artest & Odom who took steep pay cuts to play with the lakers.

Nick Young too

Nick Young barely took a paycut (if that, he probably makes more money now off public appearances) considering he became pretty much an overnight MTV celebrity "Swaggy P" after becoming a Laker & dating Iggy Azalea.

[The Rebel]

So the Lakers did a piss poor job of rebuilding by signing Steve Nash and Howard walking despite trading for him and him wanting no part of being in LA, and they need someone to blame for their incompetence.

Kobe insults ESPN for being the idiots they are, and they are looking to slame Kobe.

yet Kobe is the problem in all of this?

[Heat3]

what is with the current espn campaign to bash kobe? where is it coming from? its like they got a directive from somewhere to push out this current spin.

[Doctor MJ]

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've read this a number of times, and i don't understand it.

If it's a PR battle or rep thing, why not offer him a 2 yr / 30m deal?

That's still 15m annually, which is a massive deal. Hell, i'd say a 2 yr / 24m deal is still very solid considering the market.

I know he brings a tonne of money in through corporates and everyone wants to go and see Kobe play, but that first offer i noted is still a very good one.

If he knocks that back citing that it's enough and goes elsewhere, who is the bad guy, Buss or Bryant?

Who is paying Bryant 15m on the open market, anyway?

I am yet to be convinced that this is a sound reasoning.

Not saying I would have done what Buss did, it's more like: How damaging of a decision was this really?

If there's no hope of getting free agents or building a team around Kobe any way, then all that's lost is a bit more money, and still the Lakers are making a profit off Kobe then, just less of one.

[Yoshun]

Kobe must have ticked someone off at ESPN. Really though, these kinds of articles make ESPN lose worse than they make Kobe look.

[digitaldropoff]

So the Lakers did a piss poor job of rebuilding by signing Steve Nash and Howard walking despite trading for him and him wanting no part of being in LA, and they need someone to blame for their incompetence.

Kobe insults ESPN for being the idiots they are, and they are looking to slame Kobe.

yet Kobe is the problem in all of this?

Kobe is part of the problem....you can be an alpha male, leader, all of that while still trying to work with different personalities. Everyday people work with morons and all sorts of characters, and the majority of people find a way to work with eachother to get a job done.

[digitaldropoff]

Kobe must have ticked someone off at ESPN. Really though, these kinds of articles make ESPN lose worse than they make Kobe look.

This feud does nothing for ESPN.....and it puts a ton of pressure on Kobe. Not only does Kobe have to stay healthy the entire season, he's going to have to rip it up on top of it to prove he's "worthy" of a high player rating that absolutely means nothing. If he doesn't....ESPN looks right, and Kobe looks like a guy who can't cut it anymore. Kobe wants this...but the ball is literally in his court.

[TheDoors24]

Kobe must have ticked someone off at ESPN. Really though, these kinds of articles make ESPN lose worse than they make Kobe look.

No kidding man.

Henry has a history of writing a bunch of Kobe hate articles and on the radio interviews pretty much said he thought Kobe was overrated and horrible. Then Kobe calls ESPN idiots (which I agree) and this article all of a sudden pops up.

mmmmmmm.

[Yuri Vaultin]

ESPN are looking like piss poor excuses for journalists with a pinch of douchebagginess.

If I'm a Laker fan I love this stuff though - Kobe is the one player that doesn't need more motivation, but by all means please anger him so he can go Black Mamba all over the league one more time.

[Yoshun]

Kobe must have ticked someone off at ESPN. Really though, these kinds of articles make ESPN lose worse than they make Kobe look.

This feud does nothing for ESPN.....and it puts a ton of pressure on Kobe. Not only does Kobe have to stay healthy the entire season, he's going to have to rip it up on top of it to prove he's "worthy" of a high player rating that absolutely means nothing. If he doesn't....ESPN looks right, and Kobe looks like a guy who can't cut it anymore. Kobe wants this...but the ball is literally in his court.

I don't really think Kobe is pressured at all, that's one of the things that's made Kobe so good. He often laughs stuff like this off. If anything, this will motivate him to play better. If I were a Laker fan, I'd welcome all of this Kobe bashing with open arms.

I was speaking more about how it makes ESPN look to the public and basketball circles. Look at this thread for example, even people who are often critical of Kobe are making statements like, "Wow, what's ESPN's problem?" Don't get me wrong, it's not going to effect their ratings or sales. It's not like people are going to stop watching ESPN because they're writing stuff about Kobe. It just makes them look almost like they're kicking a man while he's down. Here's a guy who is a basketball legend (in this era anyway), who has won 5 titles with one of the biggest franchises in sports and who is coming off of a major injury that he rehabbed really hard to come back from. Usually, ESPN would make a big deal out of this as some kind of come back story. This just makes them look bitter.

[SA37]

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've read this a number of times, and i don't understand it.

If it's a PR battle or rep thing, why not offer him a 2 yr / 30m deal?

That's still 15m annually, which is a massive deal. Hell, i'd say a 2 yr / 24m deal is still very solid considering the market.

I know he brings a tonne of money in through corporates and everyone wants to go and see Kobe play, but that first offer i noted is still a very good one.

If he knocks that back citing that it's enough and goes elsewhere, who is the bad guy, Buss or Bryant?

Who is paying Bryant 15m on the open market, anyway?

I am yet to be convinced that this is a sound reasoning.

I think the article alludes to the fact the Lakers wanted the contract negotiations/extension to go smoothly and quickly and to avoid a management (Jim Buss) vs Kobe situation at all costs.

I forget how much Kobe made last year, but around $25-$27 million, I think. You offer him $12-$15 million per season (justified or not) and the Lakers would have been in the exact situation they were looking to avoid. You have to imagine whatever money Kobe guarantees the Lakers by playing for them is worth $48 million for two seasons L.A. was going to be irrelevant anyway.

The next shot to find a star is in 2016 and Kobe will be 38. The Lakers and Kobe are basically squeezing the last drop of money out of one another.

[JesusHCoxMd]

Kobe is the one that generates Lakers most of jersey sales and is the face of the franchise. Even not playing he makes more money for his team than 95% of league players. So that tells alot. Yes, he hasn't contributed much in the W columns lately, but he still will be able to produce and mentor younger players.
Don't put a "done" label on him yet.

[Imon]

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've read this a number of times, and i don't understand it.

If it's a PR battle or rep thing, why not offer him a 2 yr / 30m deal?

That's still 15m annually, which is a massive deal. Hell, i'd say a 2 yr / 24m deal is still very solid considering the market.

I know he brings a tonne of money in through corporates and everyone wants to go and see Kobe play, but that first offer i noted is still a very good one.

If he knocks that back citing that it's enough and goes elsewhere, who is the bad guy, Buss or Bryant?

Who is paying Bryant 15m on the open market, anyway?

I am yet to be convinced that this is a sound reasoning.

Basically what I said in the other Kobe thread.
The salary cap is an issue that looms over this whole discussion but every time it's brought up Lakers fans cry about the injustice of a cap.

I don't think anyone is arguing that Kobe isn't the key to putting butts in seats and selling merchandise. The issue is what would the casual Lakers fans rather watch - a lottery team with Kobe making $24 million/year or a possible playoff team with Kobe making $14-16 million a year with 2nd tier FAs like Isaiah Thomas or Lance Stephenson?
I'm not saying the Lakers will be contenders - almost certainly not without another star in his prime but at least they'll be competitive in games rather than being blown out like they were last year by the Clippers.

Lance signed a three year deal at $9 mil/year with the third year being a team option. If the Lakers wanted to dump salary then they could choose not to exercise the third year making his contract and Kobe's come off in the same year.
Lance was going to leave Indiana if not just to spite them. He was available for pickup - someone just had to make an offer.

So what is it?
Did the front office make a stupid decision by offering Kobe the 2-year $48 mil?
What if they had initially offered him less? Then the narrative would have been that the front office was disrespecting Kobe by offering him non-star level money. I think in either scenario the front office would have been subject to criticism.

[LLcoleJ]

So in summary. The first year the Lakers actually have cap-space. Bosh and Carmelo choose to take more cap-space form their current teams as opposed to taking less to come play with bitter Kobe. ( Also, they only had cap-space for 1 of them)

Copy pasting your response more than once doesn't mean your right.
Do it once more, or 50 more times, or a 100 more times - you're still wrong.

What part is wrong....of the Lakers having cap space for the first time this season or the 2 FA's that took nearly 30 million each more stayed with their team?

[theforumblue]

And yet Phil Jackson returned to coach him again.

Fair enough Phil did trash some people in that book on the Lakers and did return to coach them. However, Kobe was still a top player in the league at that point and I think Phil meant when Kobe was near the end such as he is now.

he was ready to come back yet again when the whole mike d'antoni mess happened.

[Hornet Mania]

Kobe Bryant is the only reason the Lakers will be relevant and profitable this season, bottom line. Any article that fails to mention this fact is either negligent or willfully ignorant of the facts.

I guess, theoretically, Kobe could hold the team back from a personnel standpoint, if circumstances were different. He does clearly want to be the alpha male, and he is pretty clearly either declining or will be at that point very soon. Ideally it would be best for Kobe to take a backseat and let young talent carry the banner forward...except they don't have any. Moreover, none was available this year in free agency. So it's sort of pointless to say "Kobe can't be moved, he's not good for the team" when no "good" option has been passed up in his favor.

What move, realistically, did LA pass up to keep Kobe Bryant? Did the Lakers really want to outbid Dallas/Houston for Parsons? Or offer Bosh/Hayward the max? If they did, nothing was stopping them. Lebron wasn't signing there, and Love was clearly approached about going to Cleveland, so that's a big negative on both those possibilities. Melo considered LA, but there's no reason to think he passed it up because of Kobe. It's not like his Knicks teammates are any better, and by all accounts Melo and Kobe get along pretty well. Melo chose Phil, a bigger contract and New York City, Kobe had zero impact on that decision.

Kobe has made a lot of enemies through the years, obviously, and he's an easy guy to hate. Now he's weakened, aged, and likely never to be even close to what he once was as a player. If you want to throw hate at Kobe Bryant by all means analyze his play, surely there will be a lot to dissect and criticize there. But don't act like Kobe is the primary reason the 2014-2015 Lakers are going to be a bad team, or somehow preventing them from adding talent, because that is simply untrue.

[StocktonShorts]

Kobe Bryant is the only reason the Lakers will be relevant and profitable this season, bottom line. Any article that fails to mention this fact is either negligent or willfully ignorant of the facts.

Anyone who has read the article would realize it discusses this point in detail, spending at least three paragraphs on it.