Kobe Bryant - scathing article

[ivanvamp]

Here:  http://espn.go.com/espn/feature/story/_/id/11717596/is-kobe-bryant-reason-los-angeles-lakers-downfall
 
Absolutely scathing article.  Here's one tiny snippet:
 
"It's horrendous. It's evil. It's a hard drug to quit when you're winning," says a front office executive from a rival team who knows everyone involved well. "Kobe has cost the Lakers dearly in human capital. Kobe has hurt a lot of people. In some cases jeopardized careers."

 

[jon abbey]

Thanks for linking this, I looked for it online after reading it in the print magazine, but it looks like they just put it online today. 

Maybe the best piece ever written for this usually worthless mag (I get it free with an Insider subscription). 

 

[Tony C]

Yep, great article, nothing to add to it though perhaps more could be said about what an inefficient player Kobe is.
 
I'd love to hear what Laker mouthpieces like Ramona Shelburne -- who defended down the line the idiotic signing of Kobe -- would say about it.
 
I guess the one thing I'd disagree with is that they signed him because they had money to burn since no one would sign with him on board. But if they don't re-sign him -- or offer him only a below market deal (which he would have rejected much more likely than not) -- then the message would have been sent that the Lakers were back open for business.

 

[ivanvamp]

Kobe is, and always has been, an incredible talent. 
 
But holy cow I wouldn't want to play with him, if I was in the NBA.  Not. At. All.

 

[The Social Chair]

Article is kind of bullshit.
 
-The two key players they cite as being offended by Kobe's personality are Dwight Howard and Andrew Bynum. I mean ...come on.
 
- The article never mentions the main reason the Lakers rebuild didn't work out - David Stern killing the Chris Paul trade.
 
- They also cite Lebron and Melo not signing as evidence of Kobe killing the franchise, but Lebron was never going to sign with LA and Melo only choose the Knicks because they offered more money. 
 
- NBA superstars are the most underpaid in sports. Kobe is being overpaid now but he was probably underpaid for 10 years. 

 

[DukeSox]

"jeopardized careers"?  
 
What does that even mean?

 

[HomeRunBaker]

Article is kind of bullshit.
 
-The two key players they cite as being offended by Kobe's personality are Dwight Howard and Andrew Bynum. I mean ...come on.
 
- The article never mentions the main reason the Lakers rebuild didn't work out - David Stern killing the Chris Paul trade.
 
- They also cite Lebron and Melo not signing as evidence of Kobe killing the franchise, but Lebron was never going to sign with LA and Melo only choose the Knicks because they offered more money. 
 
- NBA superstars are the most underpaid in sports. Kobe is being overpaid now but he was probably underpaid for 10 years. 

Yeah Henry showed to have a serious agenda on this piece. I read the entire piece looking to see all the careers he jeopardized......if I paid to read this I'd demand a refund for false advertising.

Agreed on Kobe having been underpaid much of his career.

 

[ivanvamp]

Article is kind of bullshit.
 
-The two key players they cite as being offended by Kobe's personality are Dwight Howard and Andrew Bynum. I mean ...come on.
 
- The article never mentions the main reason the Lakers rebuild didn't work out - David Stern killing the Chris Paul trade.
 
- They also cite Lebron and Melo not signing as evidence of Kobe killing the franchise, but Lebron was never going to sign with LA and Melo only choose the Knicks because they offered more money. 
 
- NBA superstars are the most underpaid in sports. Kobe is being overpaid now but he was probably underpaid for 10 years. 

 
Why did Stern kill the Chris Paul deal anyway?  I totally can't remember the rationale.

 

[Omar's Wacky Neighbor]

So, Kobe would make A-Rod move to third......?

 

[SoxJox]

So, Kobe would make A-Rod move to third......?

No.  Kobe would make A-Rod go back to Texas.

 

[mikeford]

 
Why did Stern kill the Chris Paul deal anyway?  I totally can't remember the rationale.

"basketball reasons"

 

[Cellar-Door]

Article is kind of bullshit.
 
-The two key players they cite as being offended by Kobe's personality are Dwight Howard and Andrew Bynum. I mean ...come on.
 
- The article never mentions the main reason the Lakers rebuild didn't work out - David Stern killing the Chris Paul trade.
 
- They also cite Lebron and Melo not signing as evidence of Kobe killing the franchise, but Lebron was never going to sign with LA and Melo only choose the Knicks because they offered more money. 
 
- NBA superstars are the most underpaid in sports. Kobe is being overpaid now but he was probably underpaid for 10 years. 

 
Well and Shaq, that's 3 of the what 4? Stars he's played with  and the 4th is Pau who he doesn't have a great relationship with.
I think the article is going overboard some, but the idea that nobody wants to play with Kobe isn't surprising. Unless they are overpaying why would any max guy want to play second fiddle to a guy who dominates the ball, doesn't run offense, and on top of it is a huge asshole?

 

[Tony C]

 
...Unless they are overpaying why would any max guy want to play second fiddle to a guy who dominates the ball, doesn't run offense, and on top of it is a huge asshole?

 
Right. I don't quite get the argument that this article is off-base, though it definitely had an agenda. Not mentioning the Chris Paul thing stuck out to me, too. But the rest is pretty much obvious: no one in their right mind wants to play with Kobe, and those that do either get run-off (Shaq) or run off on their own (Howard). This has doomed what was the marquee franchise of the NBA to being in long-term purgatory.
 
What part of that is wrong? Does anyone seriously argue a big time free agent is going to pull a Lebron-Wade-Bosh or Lebron-Love deal to play with Kobe?

 

[Grin&MartyBarret]

The Paul George stuff is bullshit, as well. George signed a max rookie extension. The alternative was accepting a qualifying offer, playing a year, and then signing in LA. He was never actually a free agent, nor did he even get within a year of being a free agent.

That said, I buy the Dwight Howard bit. Easy to blame it on Howard, but the guy turned down 30 million in guaranteed money for a reason, and I doubt it was because of Mike D'Antoni. The Lakers would've fired him in a heartbeat had that been the reason.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

 
Right. I don't quite get the argument that this article is off-base, though it definitely had an agenda. Not mentioning the Chris Paul thing stuck out to me, too. But the rest is pretty much obvious: no one in their right mind wants to play with Kobe, and those that do either get run-off (Shaq) or run off on their own (Howard). This has doomed what was the marquee franchise of the NBA to being in long-term purgatory.
 
What part of that is wrong? Does anyone seriously argue a big time free agent is going to pull a Lebron-Wade-Bosh or Lebron-Love deal to play with Kobe?

No there was nothing necessarily incorrect it was just so blatantly one-sided I felt like I was reading one of my rightist friends Facebook posts complete with a right-wing.com link.

 

[nighthob]

Why did Stern kill the Chris Paul deal anyway?  I totally can't remember the rationale.

Because the proposed trade forced the other 27 owners of the Hornets to pay out $60 million so that LA and Houston could improve.

 

[moly99]

I'd love to hear what Laker mouthpieces like Ramona Shelburne -- who defended down the line the idiotic signing of Kobe -- would say about it.
 
I guess the one thing I'd disagree with is that they signed him because they had money to burn since no one would sign with him on board. But if they don't re-sign him -- or offer him only a below market deal (which he would have rejected much more likely than not) -- then the message would have been sent that the Lakers were back open for business.

 
They couldn't do that because non-basketball factors do matter. There would literally be rioting by Lakers fans if they let him go after playing hardball in negotiations with him.
 
I also think it will be good for the team in the long run as it lets them tank without looking like they are tanking. They can let Kobe take 20 hero ball shots per game and land a top 5 pick while the cult of Kobe continues to buy tickets.

 

[jose melendez]

My recollection was that Kobe has basically framed it with Howard that if they won it was because of Kobe and if they lost it was because of Howard.
 
The fact that folks like Bird say they'd most like to play with Kobe out of anyone in the NBA earns him some credit in my eyes, but I'll be damned if I can't remember a star who was more petulant.

 

[CreightonGubanich]

I'm sure that Kobe Bryant is extremely tough to play with, but he's tough in the same way Jordan was. You heard these same things about Jordan all the time. Of course, Jordan was better than Kobe, and he managed to find the perfect sidekick, so he largely gets deified for being a competitor instead of trashed for being selfish. 
 
Honestly, I find it pretty tough to fault Kobe for deciding that Dwight Howard needed his rear kicked more than he needed it kissed.  
 
Edit: Thought this SI article was a little more balanced:
 
http://www.si.com/longform/kobe/
 

 
 
He sees his role on the Lakers in the final third of his career as, in essence, a------ in chief. “You can’t afford to placate people,” he explains, his voice rising. “You can’t afford to do that. You’re a leader. You’re not here to be a social butterfly. You’re here to get them to the promised land. A lot of people shy away from that because a lot of people want to be liked by every­body. I want to be liked too. But I know that years from now they’ll appreciate how I pushed them to get us to that end result.”

 

 

[crystalline]

There's a difference between people who act like a******* and motivate others, and people who are just a*******.

Those motivation tactics need to _work_, otherwise Kobe fails as a leader.

And in the NBA it mostly needs to work with only one other person. That was Pippen in Jordan's case. Kobe just needed to keep _one_ person happy- Shaq or Pau or Howard or Bynum.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

Those motivation tactics need to _work_, otherwise Kobe fails as a leader.

Well he did win 5 Championships. I'd argue they worked fairly well from a results based view.

 

[LeftyTG]

There's a difference between people who act like a******* and motivate others, and people who are just a*******.

Those motivation tactics need to _work_, otherwise Kobe fails as a leader.

And in the NBA it mostly needs to work with only one other person. That was Pippen in Jordan's case. Kobe just needed to keep _one_ person happy- Shaq or Pau or Howard or Bynum.

exactly.
 

I'm sure that Kobe Bryant is extremely tough to play with, but he's tough in the same way Jordan was. You heard these same things about Jordan all the time. Of course, Jordan was better than Kobe, and he managed to find the perfect sidekick, so he largely gets deified for being a competitor instead of trashed for being selfish. 
 
Honestly, I find it pretty tough to fault Kobe for deciding that Dwight Howard needed his rear kicked more than he needed it kissed.  
 
Edit: Thought this SI article was a little more balanced:
 
http://www.si.com/longform/kobe/
 
 

if the article is to be believe, and that Kobe showed up to the Howard pitch meeting dressed in hoop shorts, a t-shirt, and gold chain, and that he lectured Howard on developing a thick skin - then where does that fit in?  Would Jordan have shown up and acted like that?  Clearly the Laker front office wanted Howard - was Kobe exercising leadership there?
 

Well he did win 5 Championships. I'd argue they worked fairly well from a results based view.

How much of those 5 championships do you attribute to Kobe's "motivation tactics"?

 

[The Social Chair]

I'm sure that Kobe Bryant is extremely tough to play with, but he's tough in the same way Jordan was. You heard these same things about Jordan all the time. Of course, Jordan was better than Kobe, and he managed to find the perfect sidekick, so he largely gets deified for being a competitor instead of trashed for being selfish. 
 
 
 
 

 
 Jordan on the Wizards had less skill than Kobe now, dominated the ball as much, and treated his teammates worse. 

 

[nighthob]

Yeah, Howard doesn't like the pressure of winning. It's no coincidence that guys like Garnett used to openly mock him. Also, Kobe dragged Pau Gasol to two titles with all of Gashole's whining and whimpering.

 

[nighthob]

How much of those 5 championships do you attribute to Kobe's "motivation tactics"?

Unless you think that Pau Gasol is the kind of player that's put teams on his back for his career I'd say they worked pretty well in 2009 & 2010.

 

[nighthob]

Gasol is 0 for his postseason career without Bryant. I mean literally as Gashole led teams had a 0-12 playoff record before he lucked into the Lakers situation.

 

[nighthob]

That guys like Bryant and Bosh were actually able to lead teams to playoff wins and Gasol literally never had? Gashole was only known for getting his houdini on prior to landing in LA. And it's not like he was a defensive heavyweight, either.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

exactly.
 
if the article is to be believe, and that Kobe showed up to the Howard pitch meeting dressed in hoop shorts, a t-shirt, and gold chain, and that he lectured Howard on developing a thick skin - then where does that fit in?  Would Jordan have shown up and acted like that?  Clearly the Laker front office wanted Howard - was Kobe exercising leadership there?
 
How much of those 5 championships do you attribute to Kobe's "motivation tactics"?

I'd say quite a bit. He won his final one with the lineup of a lunatic in Artest, a soft Euro in Gasol, a crackhead Lamar Odom, a lazy Andrew Bynum and a rotation with Shannon Brown/Jordan Farmar as key pieces. Sure Derek Fisher helped stabilize that group but this was clearly Kobe's team.

Good god winning with that crew, especially with the letsown potential of having just won the year prior, is more impressive than any championship that Michael ever won. I'd say Kobe's leadership skills were pretty effective in getting the most out of those clowns.

 

[CreightonGubanich]

 
if the article is to be believe, and that Kobe showed up to the Howard pitch meeting dressed in hoop shorts, a t-shirt, and gold chain, and that he lectured Howard on developing a thick skin - then where does that fit in?  Would Jordan have shown up and acted like that?  Clearly the Laker front office wanted Howard - was Kobe exercising leadership there?
 
 

 
I think Jordan absolutely would have acted like that. You can disagree with the thought process if you want, but I have no doubt this was calculated on Kobe's part, not just indifference. The message was pretty clear - if you really want to win basketball games, let's get to work. If you're more concerned about everyone bending over backward to make you the center of attention, maybe you should go play somewhere else. Remember, Dwight had already been in LA for a year, he knew the deal at this point.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

 
I think Jordan absolutely would have acted like that. You can disagree with the thought process if you want, but I have no doubt this was calculated on Kobe's part, not just indifference. The message was pretty clear - if you really want to win basketball games, let's get to work. If you're more concerned about everyone bending over backward to make you the center of attention, maybe you should go play somewhere else. Remember, Dwight had already been in LA for a year, he knew the deal at this point.

No doubt. We've heard the stories of how awful Jordan treated his teammates like Muggsy Bogues, Rodney McCray, Kerr, Kwame, etc. Some responded in the ways some of Kobe's teammates did and then others didn't. Their leadership styles were very similar and it led to 11 combined titles.

 

[Cellar-Door]

 
 Jordan on the Wizards had less skill than Kobe now, dominated the ball as much, and treated his teammates worse. 

And it was incredibly detrimental to the franchise which is the point.

 

[nighthob]

Mighty generous of you to group Bosh with Kobe. 3-8 playoff record in a garbage conference. Really impressive. Gasol clearly had his playoff issues but he went up against the 2004 Spurs, 2005 Suns, and 2006 Mavs. All of those teams were very good.

And Gasol wasn't. The 2005 Suns were not exactly a defensive juggernaut and Gasol still got his Houdini on.

 

[mandro ramtinez]

Mighty generous of you to group Bosh with Kobe. 3-8 playoff record in a garbage conference. Really impressive. Gasol clearly had his playoff issues but he went up against the 2004 Spurs, 2005 Suns, and 2006 Mavs. All of those teams were very good.

Not apples to apples, but Kobe took the 06 Suns to 7 games in the first round almost by himself.  Amare was out that year so maybe Gasol would have given that Suns team a run too, but they did make the WCF.

 

[ElUno20]

The idiots out here on espn la radio are losing their mind that someone would dare criticize the great kobe bryant

 

[NatetheGreat]

Kobe taking a ridiculously huge contract does hamstring the Lakers, but I'm not sure he can really be "blamed" for that. I guess you can argue he should have opted to take less money for the good of the team, but I honestly don't think he owed them that. He did what the overwhelming majority of players would do, and took the best deal he could get. If someone is to blame there, it is the Buss/Kupchak brain trust for offering him a deal everyone knew made no sense at the time.
 
Kobe being a gigantic asshole, on the other hand, probably has hurt them...on the other hand, its not like Shaq was on great terms with most of his former teammates, and Dwight isn't really known for great team chemistry either. I think both of them share some of the responsibility for those teams falling apart as well. Shaq in particular was massive (in more ways than one) diva with probably the worst work ethic of any NBA superstar ever--during those Lakers years he'd regularly show up to camp 30+ lbs overweight, having spent the offseason eating, running his mouth, and doing stupid media stuff, then he'd play himself into shape over the course of the season so he could steamroll a weak crop of centers over the playoffs, all while talking himself up and taking as much credit as possible for the team's success. Kobe, being a workaholic Jordan wannabe, may have dealt with this especially badly, but I honestly think Shaq would get on most NBA superstar's nerves if they had to share the spotlight with him. As for Andrew Bynum, his bad attitude was proved beyond a shadow of a doubt to have everything to do with Bynum, and nothing to do with whatever poor team happened to sign him.

 

[Tony C]

I agree, Kobe is/was a great player. But that has nothing to do with what I was disagreeing with.

 
Exactly. I'm not sure why people are bringing in his entire career. He's not Jordan, but anyone would be an idiot not to say that Kobe has been great and a key player on championship teams, with both Shaq and then Gasol. It's not the point of this article or, really, anyone to deny that. Zero relevance.
 
 

 
They couldn't do that because non-basketball factors do matter. There would literally be rioting by Lakers fans if they let him go after playing hardball in negotiations with him.
 
I also think it will be good for the team in the long run as it lets them tank without looking like they are tanking. They can let Kobe take 20 hero ball shots per game and land a top 5 pick while the cult of Kobe continues to buy tickets.

 
I could agree with that if they didn't pick up the amnestied Boozer, for example, and made a run at other good players albeit it didn't work out. I"m not sure how much to trust that article on the economic incentive for the Buss' to have the Lakers win, but I don't really see them tanking. It's actually doubly interesting in that the Lakers only keep their first rounder if they are bottom 5 in the draft, otherwise it goes to the Suns due to the Nash trade. Kobe is nothing if not insanely competitive and while the Lakers aren't going to be good, I suspect he'll will them into a slot in the lottery that, odds are, won't land them in the bottom 5.
 

The idiots out here on espn la radio are losing their mind that someone would dare criticize the great kobe bryant

 
I'd really love to be listening!
 

Kobe taking a ridiculously huge contract does hamstring the Lakers, but I'm not sure he can really be "blamed" for that. I guess you can argue he should have opted to take less money for the good of the team, but I honestly don't think he owed them that. He did what the overwhelming majority of players would do, and took the best deal he could get. If someone is to blame there, it is the Buss/Kupchak brain trust for offering him a deal everyone knew made no sense at the time.....

 
Well, plenty of other players take deals that aren't at the absolute max in order to enable others to sign. Lebron in Miami, Duncan in SA being most notable -- hell, even Carmelo Anthony gave a tiny discount to the Knicks (emphasis on tiny --$2.5 million, if memory serves). It's absolutely Kobe's right to take every penny the Lakers will give him -- he deserves it more than the Buss family feeding at the Laker trough/his trough. But given the realities of the salary cap, it is at odds with his proclaiming he's all about winning.

 

[Cellar-Door]

"He wants to win," says a source close to Lakers decision makers. "But only as long as he's the reason we're winning, as long as the performance is not affecting his numbers.
 
That is such of succinct summation of everything I've ever thought about Kobe.
 
Jordan was an enormous asshole, but he was also a great teammate, tons of guys who played with him talk about how he was difficult, but in the end great to play with, He drove guys to be better, and he was remarkably unselfish for such a big star. Giving Paxson and Kerr the ball on huge game winning possessions is an example.
 
Kobe isn't that guy. He wants his teammates to be good so he can look good. If he's struggling he's still not giving up the big shot to the open man, and I can't remember a former teammate ever saying they liked playing with Kobe once they were gone from the Lakers.

 

[Auger34]

I completely agree with you CellarDoor. There is some major revisionist history going on here saying that Kobe "dragged" Gasol and Bynum to a title in 2010. It's easy to forget now but Bynum was a stud then and had his emotions in check (maybe in part because of Kobe) and Gasol has always been one of the most talented post players in the NBA. He is not an "alpha" or #1 guy but is about as good of a 2nd banana as you can get.

Why would Abbot want to write a biased article to hurt Kobe? It does seem like some of the sources involved are Dwight and Bynum but he also has quotes from other agents, front office executives, even some executives from within the Lakers. (The Steve Nash bits were especially telling since Nash is generally regarded as one of the best teammates around).
Abbot is a good, respected writer who is a straight shooter and doesn't engage in smear campaigns or anything of the like. I just don't think he set out to write a bias article against Kobe

 

[HomeRunBaker]

I completely agree with you CellarDoor. There is some major revisionist history going on here saying that Kobe "dragged" Gasol and Bynum to a title in 2010. It's easy to forget now but Bynum was a stud then and had his emotions in check (maybe in part because of Kobe) and Gasol has always been one of the most talented post players in the NBA. He is not an "alpha" or #1 guy but is about as good of a 2nd banana as you can get.

Why would Abbot want to write a biased article to hurt Kobe? It does seem like some of the sources involved are Dwight and Bynum but he also has quotes from other agents, front office executives, even some executives from within the Lakers. (The Steve Nash bits were especially telling since Nash is generally regarded as one of the best teammates around).
Abbot is a good, respected writer who is a straight shooter and doesn't engage in smear campaigns or anything of the like. I just don't think he set out to write a bias article against Kobe

It wasn't only Gasol......Kobe's supporting cast was a severely flawed crew each of whom fell off the NBA radar once they left LA. Bynum was far from a stud.....he was coming off seasons where he missed 54 and 30 games while putting up 12/9 in the games he did play then after he left Kobe quit playing altogether. Well, at least he quit playing basketball anyway.......

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wX5ZzVz9qDs

 

[moly99]

I could agree with that if they didn't pick up the amnestied Boozer, for example, and made a run at other good players albeit it didn't work out. I"m not sure how much to trust that article on the economic incentive for the Buss' to have the Lakers win, but I don't really see them tanking. It's actually doubly interesting in that the Lakers only keep their first rounder if they are bottom 5 in the draft, otherwise it goes to the Suns due to the Nash trade. Kobe is nothing if not insanely competitive and while the Lakers aren't going to be good, I suspect he'll will them into a slot in the lottery that, odds are, won't land them in the bottom 5.

 
Boozer is exactly the kind of player you want if you are tanking. They are a team full of guys who are poor on defense and jack up terrible mid range shots. If they start him, he can reliably provide 5 for 13 games for them and give up a ton at the other end of the court.
 

Gasol is 0 for his postseason career without Bryant. I mean literally as Gashole led teams had a 0-12 playoff record before he lucked into the Lakers situation.

 
The other side of this coin is that Pau managed to lead a truly atrocious Memphis team to the playoffs for three straight years (in the West!) after having no season with a record better than 28-54 before he arrived.
 
The "Gasoft" stuff is just silly. He was a really, really good player in his prime.

 

[Blacken]

#LakerGate cares not about your facts, duders. All that matters is that guy with the future-eating contract and the total wreck he's leaving behind him as he exits.

 

[jose melendez]

Gasol was the decisive player in that 2010 series.  His failure to win anything with a dogshit Memphis team doesn't tell you much.
 
Also, can we stop with the Jordan references.  Jordan was the best player on all of his championship teams by a country mile.  Kobe absolutely wasn't on two of them, and probably on three of them

 

[Tony C]

This is true.
 
Even though I definitely agree with the thrust of the Abbott article, I thought Jeannie Buss' response this morning on ESPN  was great:
 

 

Lakers' team president Jeanie Buss responded strongly to an article that said players don't come to Los Angeles because they don't want to play with Kobe Bryant.

"Any free agent that would be afraid to play with Kobe Bryant is probably a loser, and I'm glad they wouldn't come to the team," Buss said in an interview on Thursday. "I have no doubt that Kobe will make people regret ever saying [those comments]."
 

 
She delivered it in an appropriately dismissive tone. Excellent PR move. It's a shame for the Lakers that her dimwitted party boy brother seems to have more power in terms of basketball decisions. In an alternate universe Jeannie has power. Hires Phil. Phil knows how to work with Howard and Kobe. Lakers keep Howard and stay competitive. Still with plenty of empty pieces, but still with the general aura of an elite franchise with the structure in place to win in the near term.

 

[Van Everyman]

I'm not so sure about that. It looks pretty dim-witted to me.

Gasol was the decisive player in that 2010 series.  His failure to win anything with a dogshit Memphis team doesn't tell you much.

This. For all his "euro-softness" in 2008, Gasol played a very solid D in 2010. If he doesn't grow into that role, the C's almost certainly have banner #18 hanging in the rafters now.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

I'm not so sure about that. It looks pretty dim-witted to me.


This. For all his "euro-softness" in 2008, Gasol played a very solid D in 2010. If he doesn't grow into that role, the C's almost certainly have banner #18 hanging in the rafters now.

In Gasol's 3-4 year peak window he did grow into this role. I'd argue that we still hang #18 if not for needing Big Baby and Sheed's corpse to keep a pair of 7-footers off the offensive glass in an elimination game where they are bringing it. Perkins knee cost us 18 more than anything else.

 

[Auger34]

I'm not so sure about that. It looks pretty dim-witted to me.


This. For all his "euro-softness" in 2008, Gasol played a very solid D in 2010. If he doesn't grow into that role, the C's almost certainly have banner #18 hanging in the rafters now.

Absolutely. My reason for thinking that the C's win that series (and apparently the Celtics players themselves thought this) was that Gasol was soft and could be intimidated/outrebounded by Garnett and Perkins. That didn't end up happening and he was the key player for helping them win that title.
HRB, I think you might be engaging in a bit of revisionist history about that 2010 team. Now Bynum is the guy who is known to be the guy who shot the ball wherever he caught it in a Cavs practice/the guy who came to basketball games looking like an out of work pimp to sit on the sidelines when injured. But that 2010 season he was a very, very good player. He was one of the top 5 centers in the NBA that year. I mean don't you think in 2010 the Lakers had one of if not the best PF/C combos in the NBA? The notion that Kobe dragged a group of ragtag scrubs to a championship is absurd.

It sort of astounds me this is even a discussion. I don't think Kobe is an evil sorcerer purposely trying to ruin the Lakers or something but you've got to have your head buried pretty far in the sand if you don't think that he is an egomaniacal dick/tough teammate and person to get along with. I mean look at his comments about Julius Randle earlier this month. You've got to be an idiot to mess up this opportunity? What opportunity is that exactly Kobe? The opportunity to play with an aging superstar who everyone knows has regressed? Or is it the opportunity to play with the coach who believes shooting 3's ruins basketball teams and is generally regarded as a bad head coach?

 

[HomeRunBaker]

Absolutely. My reason for thinking that the C's win that series (and apparently the Celtics players themselves thought this) was that Gasol was soft and could be intimidated/outrebounded by Garnett and Perkins. That didn't end up happening and he was the key player for helping them win that title.
HRB, I think you might be engaging in a bit of revisionist history about that 2010 team. Now Bynum is the guy who is known to be the guy who shot the ball wherever he caught it in a Cavs practice/the guy who came to basketball games looking like an out of work pimp to sit on the sidelines when injured. But that 2010 season he was a very, very good player. He was one of the top 5 centers in the NBA that year. I mean don't you think in 2010 the Lakers had one of if not the best PF/C combos in the NBA? The notion that Kobe dragged a group of ragtag scrubs to a championship is absurd.

It sort of astounds me this is even a discussion. I don't think Kobe is an evil sorcerer purposely trying to ruin the Lakers or something but you've got to have your head buried pretty far in the sand if you don't think that he is an egomaniacal dick/tough teammate and person to get along with. I mean look at his comments about Julius Randle earlier this month. You've got to be an idiot to mess up this opportunity? What opportunity is that exactly Kobe? The opportunity to play with an aging superstar who everyone knows has regressed? Or is it the opportunity to play with the coach who believes shooting 3's ruins basketball teams and is generally regarded as a bad head coach?

It's not revolutionist history at all. Both Bynum and Gasol's are/were supremely skilled players who grew under Kobe and best years were with Kobe pushing them which is the case with nearly everyone who has come through LA while Kobe was there. He's a jackass who gets the most out of his teammates.

 

[ElUno20]

I disagree. I thought Jeanie came off as a delusional moron this morning and made me believe that its an even bigger clusterfuck behind the scenes in laker land.

Does buss have other kids?

 

[nighthob]

Absolutely. My reason for thinking that the C's win that series (and apparently the Celtics players themselves thought this) was that Gasol was soft and could be intimidated/outrebounded by Garnett and Perkins. That didn't end up happening and he was the key player for helping them win that title.

Except that that's exactly what was happening until Fat Andy Bynum jumped on Kendrick Perkins back and rode him into the ground blowing up his knee in the process. To be brutally frank, that was pretty much the extent of his contribution to the Laker cause. After Boston was forced to play The Baconator 35+ minutes Gasol and Odom were able to play volleyball. But until game six Boston was firmly in control on the defensive end.

 

[Cellar-Door]

This is true.
 
Even though I definitely agree with the thrust of the Abbott article, I thought Jeannie Buss' response this morning on ESPN  was great:
 

 
 
She delivered it in an appropriately dismissive tone. Excellent PR move. It's a shame for the Lakers that her dimwitted party boy brother seems to have more power in terms of basketball decisions. In an alternate universe Jeannie has power. Hires Phil. Phil knows how to work with Howard and Kobe. Lakers keep Howard and stay competitive. Still with plenty of empty pieces, but still with the general aura of an elite franchise with the structure in place to win in the near term.

Phil wasn't keeping Howard around. Coaching isn't why Howard left, he left because of Kobe on and off the court. Phil wasn't changing Kobe. Jeannie wasn't going to kick Kobe to the curb either, all her wealth is dependent on the team she couldn't afford a rebuild any more than Jim.