Gotta Have a Post on Kobe Bryant

Kobe not only demanding a trade, but also apparently demanding that Luol Deng not be part of any deal with Chicago is bordering on the lunatic. There's no way Kobe can manipulate the situation to guarantee that he lines up on a championship team. But the current Bulls frontcourt includes Ben Wallace, Tyrus Thomas, Joakim Noah, Luol Deng, and Andres Nocioni plus some other backup types. That's more guys than the team needs to win games if they can upgrade from Ben Gordon to Kobe Bryant at the two.

Indeed, in a lot of ways a Gordon & Deng for Kobe (plus somehow the salaries need to match) trade would result in the ideal situation for him because the resulting team, while definitely in contention, would also be a squad where it made perfect sense for Kobe to take a ridiculously high proportion of the shots.

Comments

It's looking like it's dead for now, although that could be posturing, so who knows.

Seriously what am I gonna do if my least favorite athlete goes to my favorite sports team? And, yes-- I know Kobe would make us a lot better.

Maybe I'll start liking the Raptors until Kobe retires.

Posted by Freddie | November 2, 2007 11:05 AM

At this point I'm just hoping the Lakers can set themselves up to make a run at LeBron in 2010. Its been a long time since LA had anything resembling cap space.

Posted by mpowell | November 2, 2007 11:14 AM

Even though he almost singlehandedly beat the Rockets on opening night, I'm beyond ready for this long, local/national nightmare to end.

Watching Mr. "no trade clause" attempt to be his own GM is excrutiating.

I'll start watching the NBA again after he's traded.

Posted by SoCalJustice | November 2, 2007 11:14 AM

I don't know why the Lakers would want Gordon. He's small, and, beyond the normal problems associated with such, Jackson doesn't like small guards.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | November 2, 2007 11:22 AM

That's more guys than the team needs to win games if they can upgrade from Ben Gordon to Kobe Bryant at the two.

But Kobe knows that to contend for a championship, a team that trades for a superstar has to keep their best offensive threat in the deal, or else the new team won't contend. Phoenix got Barkley without giving up KJ, Miami got Shaq without giving up Wade, Boston got Garnett without giving up Pierce, etc. Kobe on a Bulls team without Deng wouldn't have enough scoring punch behind him to contend.

Of course, these sorts of trades are very hard to pull off. The thing he should have done was to sign with the Clippers as a free agent in '04, instead of assuming that the Lakers would be able to assemble enough talent around him to contend again.

Posted by Haggai | November 2, 2007 11:23 AM

I don’t know why Paxson is so timid.

I do not see Deng or especially Gordon developing into star type players (like Wade, for example).

The bulls team, as it is right now, will not win a championship in the future. Not a enough star power. I don’t think Paxson realizes this.

Posted by thehvoa | November 2, 2007 11:32 AM

I picked Chicago to go to the Finals this year, but seeing them play Thursday night against the Nets, I remembered that I shouldn't have, unless they get Kobe. Ben Gordon is just an odd player. In the third quarter against the Nets, he heated up to the point he was just unstoppable, just raining threes down. But that was only a short while. In the fourth quarter, with the game on the line, he had his shot blocked by Vince Carter, of all people. I don't think I'd want Gordon on my team - his off-and-on play has just got to be so frustrating. I think the Lakers would be right to hold out for Deng and not make Gordon the main part of the trade.

Posted by Al | November 2, 2007 11:34 AM

I don't know why the Lakers would want Gordon. He's small, and, beyond the normal problems associated with such, Jackson doesn't like small guards.

You're right about that, and I'm sure Petey (a known Bulls-hater) will chime in about how Gordon is useless.

However, as streaky and inconsistent as he is, I have on many occasions seen him catch fire and just absolutely take over games. Obviously, you'd rather have a guy who could do it all the time. But particularly on an offense-challenged squad like the Bulls, a guy who can at times absolutely shoot the lights out is a nice asset to have.

Posted by Freddie | November 2, 2007 11:34 AM

"But Kobe knows that to contend for a championship, a team that trades for a superstar has to keep their best offensive threat in the deal, or else the new team won't contend. Phoenix got Barkley without giving up KJ, Miami got Shaq without giving up Wade, Boston got Garnett without giving up Pierce, etc. Kobe on a Bulls team without Deng wouldn't have enough scoring punch behind him to contend."

Add that Denver got Iverson without giving up Melo.

-----

Kobe is correct to make the Bulls keep Deng. Deng would be his Pippen.

-----

"There's no way Kobe can manipulate the situation to guarantee that he lines up on a championship team."

Sure there is. If he makes life unpleasant enough for the Lakers, they'll have no choice but to ship him exactly where and how he prefers.

If Kobe is willing to take the big PR and be enough of a pain in the ass to the Lakers, he's got all the leverage. That's what that unique no-trade contract is all about.

I'd expect the Lakers to have a very lousy record through November. Losing is one of the best ways for Kobe to force the Lakers' hand.

Posted by Petey | November 2, 2007 11:36 AM

"You're right about that, and I'm sure Petey (a known Bulls-hater) will chime in about how Gordon is useless."

He's not useless. He's a pretty good undersized shooting guard.

But he doesn't have very much trade value.

Posted by Petey | November 2, 2007 11:39 AM

Ben Gordon is just an odd player.

He's Vinnie Johnson without the ugly. And Vinny was a sixth man.

If he makes life unpleasant enough for the Lakers, they'll have no choice but to ship him exactly where and how he prefers.

Opinions differ. Kobe's leverage is more limited than, I think, Kobe realizes.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | November 2, 2007 11:39 AM

The limits on Kobe's leverage seem to be:

(1) He has to wait through this season and the next before he can opt out. If the Lakers refuse to trade him, they can try to count on him softening his demands out of not wanting to (from his perspective) waste two more years of his career with them.

(2) Even if he does wait it out and hit the market again after the '09 season, the landscape of which potentially contending teams would have the cap space available to sign him probably involves some risk on his part. There might be no one out there who could give him enough money *and* be able to contend for the title.

Posted by Haggai | November 2, 2007 11:49 AM

"The limits on Kobe's leverage seem to be"

But if he malingers and refuses to play team basketball, he forces the Lakers' hand.

The key is that he has to be willing to be the bad guy for the press.

It'll be hellish PR for Kobe, but it'll also be hellish PR for the Lakers franchise. If Kobe's willing to push it, he's out of there before Xmas.

Posted by Petey | November 2, 2007 11:54 AM

Following on Haggai: cap space plus money for the extension he's going to want (around 27 mil. per year, apparently). And the Lakers will get cap space to set up for a run at LeBron or Wade, who will cost less, and potentially offer as a teammate a by-then good Bynum.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | November 2, 2007 11:55 AM

But if he malingers and refuses to play team basketball, he forces the Lakers' hand.

That would only be the case if winning mattered to the Lakers, which hasn't been a top priority for several years now.

Posted by SoCalJustice | November 2, 2007 11:59 AM

The key is that he has to be willing to be the bad guy for the press.

Right, and I think he's willing to do that because he's already gotten so much bad press in the last few years from the rape case, being blamed for Shaq leaving, etc. The weird outburst over this summer where he demanded to be traded and then changed his mind about 5 times in the next 10 minutes suggests that he didn't care much about the PR hit he would take for going public with a trade demand.

Posted by Haggai | November 2, 2007 12:00 PM

"Right, and I think he's willing to do that because he's already gotten so much bad press in the last few years from the rape case, being blamed for Shaq leaving, etc."

Yup. Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose.

Posted by Petey | November 2, 2007 12:04 PM

This theory that he can force the Lakers hand is interesting. If they commit to keeping him, can he really afford to start tanking games? At some point its not just a 'PR' hit. It becomes a problem in finding a team that's already a contender willing to make the moves necessary to give him a max contract. He's already got a bad rep. If he drives the Lakers into the basement over the next two years, I think he starts to see real problems along these lines.

On the other hand, if the Lakers are only losing a few more games per year with an angry Kobe than without, why not wait it out to make a run at LeBron or Wade? I think the chance of being a legitimate title contender is worth accepting slightly lower expectations between now and then. The LA market is big enough to continue supporting a so-so Lakers franchise, but too jaded to really get excited unless they're actually a factor in the title hunt. Trading Kobe for 60 cents on the dollar wouldn't really cut it.

Posted by mpowell | November 2, 2007 12:59 PM

What really needs to happen is Jerry Buss waking up and realizing that trading Kobe will be even more disastrous than trading Shaq.

The media loves to blame Kobe for the downfall of the Lakers, but the truth is that Buss refused to give Shaq the extension he wanted, Shaq asked for a trade, and that was that. Not only did Buss trade Shaq, but traded him for 30 cents on the dollar, taking back Brian Grant's ridiculous contract that fucked the Lakers for years.

If Jerry Buss really cared about his team, he would muzzle his son Jim Buss, apologize to Lakers fans everywhere (and Kobe) for lying to them by saying they were trying to win a championship when what they really were doing was chasing Jim Buss' dreams of turning a kid (Andrew Bynum) into the new Shaq.

The problem with the Lakers is that Jerry Buss has ceded control over the franchise to his son Jim, and a series of dumb ass basketball decisions have resulted.

This is why Kobe is pissed. And rightfully so.

Jerry Buss, please, take the keys to the franchise away from your idiot son, trade Bynum and Odom for Jermaine O'Neal, keep Kobe and Phil and the fans happy, and wins some games.

It's sad that Jerry Buss' huge ego has destroyed the Lakers. And it's only by putting his ego to the side and doing what's right that this will get fixed.

Posted by TheCarpetMuncher | November 2, 2007 1:36 PM

Why Matt? Why? Why do you have to have a post on Kobe Bryant? Is Kobe writing a post on you? ........... I didn't think so.

Posted by The Other Brian | November 2, 2007 1:41 PM

Two things:

A) These trade talks have revealed that there is a whole lot of stupid to go around amongst Bulls fans (not talking about any one here, just some of the outlandish overvaluing of certain players, including the intimation that Thabo Sefalosha, Thabo Sefalosha, was untouchable. That said, whoever said that Deng is/will not be a "star type player" knows less about basketball than Dave Berri.

B) Shoals on Kobe. That smarts...

Posted by Pooh | November 2, 2007 2:37 PM

It's funny how widely opinions about Kobe vary. Personally, I think he brings a minimal number of wins to any team he's likely to be on. He just wastes so many possessions in a game and destroys all team chemistry. (Petey, when has Kobe played team ball?) Anyhow, I think the Lakers have no idea how good their position is, because any trade they make will improve them just because they'll be free of Kobe.

Posted by Steve V | November 2, 2007 4:23 PM

I'm hardly a defender, but I have to ask, how does Kobe waste possessions? He shoots a high percentage from 2 and 3, especially considering his volume. Gets to the line lots and makes them, and he doesn't turn the ball over a whole ton considering the amount of possessions he uses. Without doing any research at all, I'm going to guess that Kobe is a quantum leap in terms of efficiency from guys like Gil or AI. I'm guessing Dirk is probably 'more' efficient but in terms of the the really high volume scorers, that's probably about it (Yao and Wade both turn the ball over a ton, and Kobe's 3pt shooting is a plus over them.)

Posted by Pooh | November 2, 2007 4:31 PM

"Petey, when has Kobe played team ball?"

Three rings, dude. Kobe may be an asshole, but he's got elite skills. Put the right roster around him, and he can win rings without the The Big Aristotle.

He's a headcase, but I'd take my chances with him if I were a GM.

"I'm guessing Dirk is probably 'more' efficient but in terms of the the really high volume scorers, that's probably about it"

But as Don Nelson showed, you can take Dirk out of the game if you try hard enough. As a guy with a handle, you can make Kobe work extra hard, but you can't take him out of the game.

Posted by Petey | November 2, 2007 4:41 PM

Without doing any research at all, I'm going to guess that Kobe is a quantum leap in terms of efficiency from guys like Gil or AI.

I'm bored enough to at least look at their TS%. Gil's TS% is actually higher than Kobe's (average over the last 3 years). AI's TS% is a little over 1% lower than Kobe's over that time frame. Kobe's turnovers are slightly lower, but not an awful lot.

Posted by Al | November 2, 2007 4:52 PM

On the other hand, Kobe plays defense and Gil and AI don't.

Posted by Antid Oto | November 2, 2007 5:01 PM

Put the right roster around ANYONE and they'll win a championship. Amazingly, if Kobe was on the Spurs, he would win more championships! Since it's all hypothetical and no one can prove me wrong, I also think that if he was on the Spurs they would NOT be a "better" team -- they'd just be the same league-class team they are now. But "the guy," who carries a team single handedly to the finals? No way. He's just way too selfish. He's all about showing he can go 1-on-4, almost every time down the court. It's the few times he looks to do something else that he actually helps the team. The rest of the roster may not be 55-win caliber, but they can do a lot more than Kobe lets them do. Like I said, opinions about Kobe vary. Lots of LA fans are rabidly supportive of the guy and apparently think the roster wouldn't win 20 games without him. A lot of other folks think he's destroying the team, and in my case, think trading him would be the biggest demonstration of addition-by-subtraction yet seen in professional sports.

Posted by Steve V | November 2, 2007 5:04 PM

How much can Kobe tank and not ruin his trade prospects? At some point, the other GMs in the league are going to say, "well, I'm not giving up half my team for a guy who might decide he doesn't feel like trying anymore."

I love how Petey throws in that "just like the Nuggets didn't give up Carmelo Anthony when they acquired AI, thus establishing themselves as championship contenders."

I suppose if the Mavs, Suns, Spurs and Rockets team planes all collided in midair above New Mexico, the Nuggets would be title contenders.

Posted by too many steves | November 2, 2007 5:11 PM

On the other hand, Kobe plays defense

Not last year, he didn't.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | November 2, 2007 5:13 PM

"I suppose if the Mavs, Suns, Spurs and Rockets team planes all collided in midair above New Mexico, the Nuggets would be title contenders."

If all the health issues surrounding the team are resolved favorably, (which is a big "if" with K-Mart, Nene, Camby, and AI), then they very much are a title contender.

Linas Kleiza, baby. It's Linas Kleiza's world, and we just live in it.

Posted by Petey | November 2, 2007 5:22 PM

Linas Kleiza : Nuggets :: Rajon Rando : Celtics

Posted by Petey | November 2, 2007 5:24 PM

"On the other hand, Kobe plays defense - Not last year, he didn't."

Bill Simmons selected some obscure ESPN Classic playoff games during the pre-season on Wednesday nights, which I TiVoed.

He had on a couple of interesting Bulls games, and it's just fucking amazing how out of this world dominant Jordan is on both sides of the floor.

Mamba can't become Kobe Jordan just by putting up 81.

Posted by Petey | November 2, 2007 5:30 PM

MJ was indeed great defensively, but Pip and Rodman were very good too. It was pretty amazing when they were all on the floor together. Kobe works hard, but he's none of those guys. He's at that comfortable point where his reputation as a defender is worth several calls a game, he's able to play a little looser/sloppier than he did five years ago without collecting any more fouls. It also probably helps with the refs that the NBA's PR machine has decided that he's the best player in the game. Interesting ... if he is the best player, then does that mean my Lakers can get someone like Duncan, or Yao for him?? Please???

Posted by Steve V | November 2, 2007 5:43 PM

Ugh. Every time somebody starts talking how great the Bulls defense was they always talk Rodman as the third part. He was a better than average defender but had real trouble the bigger the opponent to the point where he was better switching on to a small forward rather than a center. His one-on-one post defense was above average only becuase there are a lot of lousy post defenders out there.

The real, unsung third defensive star was Ron Harper. He shut down all those quick, penetrating point guards that used to give the Bulls so much trouble -- Jordan, great as he was, got routinely torched by those kind of guys before Harper came abord.

As far as Kobe goes, I'll let the people who think he can't win because he's selfish continue to buy into the media narritive. Then they can go off and listen to Sean Hannity with complete confidence.

The Nuggets fortunes depend almost completely on thier ability to avoid giving up easy transition buckets. We know they'll put up the points. Their half-court defense is plenty good enough (especially with K-mart throwing his weight around) but they tend to give up easy shots when they turn it over -- yeah, I know every team does but they are terrible at it. Over the course of the season, cutting 6-8 points a game out from those kind of lapses would mean 10-15 wins and all the confidence that would come with a high playoff seed.

Posted by Sigh | November 2, 2007 7:02 PM

Linas Kleiza : Nuggets :: Rajon Rando : Celtics

By which you mean "overrated player who I am sure is going to save my fantasy season?"

Kleiza, not Rondo, as I play in a league with 5 Celtics homers, so Rajon went in round 4. Before, JO, Andre Miller, AK47, Monte Ellis, Lamar Odom, Z, etc...

Posted by Pooh | November 2, 2007 7:03 PM

Re: Rodman's defense, he did have one very special skill which proved rather valuable: Pissing the Mailman off...

Posted by Pooh | November 2, 2007 7:05 PM

Kleiza, not Rondo, as I play in a league with 5 Celtics homers, so Rajon went in round 4. Before, JO, Andre Miller, AK47, Monte Ellis, Lamar Odom, Z, etc...

OMG. I got him in the 9th round. And was thinking of taking Kleiza in the last round, but took Herrmann instead...

In any case, Kleiza will be nothing like Rondo this year. Kleiza is a backup, behind K-Mart & Nene at the 4 and 'Melo at the 3. His playing time is seriously limited. Accordingly, his importance to the team is limited. OTOH, Rondo is the starter with NO serious backup. He's going to be on the court for major minutes and will have an large effect on how the Celtics do.

Posted by Al | November 2, 2007 7:11 PM

"Re: Rodman's defense, he did have one very special skill which proved rather valuable: Pissing the Mailman off..."

Yeah, that did came in rather handy, huh?

Can I join your fantasy league?

Posted by Sigh | November 2, 2007 7:13 PM

"By which you mean "overrated player who I am sure is going to save my fantasy season?"

I think LK is going to see a lot of minutes. The Nuggets weak spot is perimeter defense, and I've seen Kleiza frustrate Kobe.

And with the minutes, he's going to score points from the 3 pt line. So you should be set.

---

Like Rondo, he's a young decent player, and his team needs him to step up if they're going to be a serious contender.

Posted by Petey | November 2, 2007 7:13 PM

OK Sigh, maybe there's some other reason Kobe doesn't add wins to a team besides his obvious selfishness. Maybe it's that he's an asshole and all of his teammates hate him. Either way, he doesn't add wins. The proof being ... the last three years? The fact that the Lakers have the same winning percentage in games Kobe has sat out?

Hey, you can love Kobe as much as you want. Just please, please, persuade the team in your home city to offer its best player to the Lakers for him.

Posted by Steve V | November 2, 2007 7:15 PM

"In any case, Kleiza will be nothing like Rondo this year. Kleiza is a backup, behind K-Mart & Nene at the 4 and 'Melo at the 3. His playing time is seriously limited."

They play him from the 2 to the 4.

Unless J.R. Smith finds Jesus, Kleiza is going to get lots of minutes.

Posted by Petey | November 2, 2007 7:16 PM

Can I join your fantasy league?

You want no part of this league - first year of a super-involved keeper league, and it's turning into a tremendous time suck...

Posted by Pooh | November 2, 2007 7:18 PM

Their half-court defense is plenty good enough (especially with K-mart throwing his weight around)

Well, we'll have to see. K-Mart used to be an elite defender when he was with the Nets, but is he still, after multiple knee surgeries? Color me skeptical.

Meanwhile, 'Melo, AI are not great defenders. (And I have no idea about Diawarra - he's supposed to be good, but I have my doubts.)

Posted by Al | November 2, 2007 7:18 PM

They play him from the 2 to the 4.

Never a good sign when you have a power forward playing shooting guard. At least in Seattle's case, Durant has somewhat quick feet. Kleiza, not so much. Exactly which 2-guards is he supposed to be able to defend?

Posted by Al | November 2, 2007 7:24 PM

Jordan's best years as a defender (or otherwise) were during Jordan I, prior to Harper. And Denver's half-court defense blows.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | November 2, 2007 7:38 PM

(And I have no idea about Diawarra - he's supposed to be good, but I have my doubts.)

Yeah, he's the classic "somewhat athletic bigger wing player who has no game, so he must be here to defend" guy. Ruben Patterson without the need to register, in other words.

Posted by Pooh | November 2, 2007 7:45 PM

OK Sigh, maybe there's some other reason Kobe doesn't add wins to a team besides his obvious selfishness.

Mostly because after him, it's basically an empty bench in an era of Western Conference dominance

The top teams in the West a healthy mix of legit stars and competent role players.

The Lakers are training up Bynum and Lamar Odom is playing bumper cars with his Mercedes.

Trade Kobe for LeBron or D-Wade (or any other similar superstar) on last year's team, and the Lakers would have been no better, and probably worse.

Posted by SoCalJustice | November 2, 2007 7:56 PM

Thank you, matt. You have blogged on the lakers, and bashed Marty Peretz on the same day. You have made me truly happy. Mazel Tov!

Posted by ben dreyfuss | November 2, 2007 8:18 PM

"Gotta Have a Post on Kobe Bryant"

No. You don't.

What did I tell you? Drop the goddamn sports posts!

You never listen to me.

Dude, Transhumans know best!

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | November 2, 2007 11:37 PM

Um... 95-67 Lakers over Suns - in Phoenix - at the end of the 3rd.

Just a little unexpected, but I'll take it.

Wow.

Posted by SoCalJustice | November 3, 2007 12:33 AM

"Yeah, (Diawarra's) the classic "somewhat athletic bigger wing player who has no game, so he must be here to defend" guy. Ruben Patterson without the need to register, in other words."

Patterson actually has a pretty nice (if awfully weird) game on the offensive side of the floor.

Diawarra doesn't have a game on the offensive side of the floor.

Posted by Petey | November 3, 2007 9:33 AM

And for all you Kleiza doubters, Hollinger's got my back.

(I also love that he singled out Louis Williams. Dude's got a fun game. He's a real Baby Iverson.)

Posted by Petey | November 3, 2007 12:34 PM