'No one wants to play with Kobe'

[HurricaneDij39]

Actually, you are the perfect example. Someone puts Kobe in the title of a thread and you are all over it. That was his point, not that people are reading Adrian specifically.

Really??? Is that why I responded to this thread? Are you some sort of psychic mind-reader?

I'm not the one on here posting 50 times a day bragging about my team and/or hating on another. That would be trojan and other Laker fans. The Pacers suck - I know that, and for the most part I mind my own business.

However, the same beaten-to-death complaint about "Kobe drawing so many hater fans" had presented itself in the posts before mine. Therefore, I offered my best insight as to why Kobe is still hated in spite of his team's poor record.

An it is because he's been around so long. Attention hogs draw more haters. It's the same reason LeBron was so hated during his four years in Miami. Kobe has matured - I give him credit. But, he has a history and 19 years is a long time. People like myself and others are thirsting for new material, that is all.

 

[OutlawImmortal]

The whole notion of the Lakers failure to land quality free agents in recent seasons doesn't begin and end with who does and doesn't want to play with Kobe the man or the basketball player. So, in that sense we agree.

The whole point here is that the guy has been with the same franchise for 19 years. Because he's been there so long, the Lakers will always be his team regardless of what comes about. Because of that, free agents are hesitant about signing on a team that has a 36-year-old franchise player who has a limited future.

I'm not saying KD is right or wrong in his comments, but for free agents that spurn the Lakers, it's not necessarily a personal vendetta against Kobe. It's just business, that's all.

Though it would be nice if Laker fans could come up with different reasoning other than "Kobe is great" and "Hollywood is great" as to how their team can attract free agents. Because it hasn't worked for them the last two years.

The Lakers only really tried to go after 2 players last year and as I said before, losing Howard means nothing given his history. Only a couple years removed from a team that included Howard, Pau, Kobe and Nash. A team, by the way, that we didn't get to see very much of at full strength due to Dwight playing through injury, Kobe getting injured and Nash breaking his leg. Huge sample size of failure right?

Lakers fans have no reason to believe the sky is falling.

 

[HurricaneDij39]

The Lakers only really tried to go after 2 players last year and as I said before, losing Howard means nothing given his history. Only a couple years removed from a team that included Howard, Pau, Kobe and Nash. A team, by the way, that we didn't get to see very much of at full strength due to Dwight playing through injury, Kobe getting injured and Nash breaking his leg. Huge sample size of failure right?

Lakers fans have no reason to believe the sky is falling.

Losing Howard means nothing? You can have a personal vendetta against Howard all you want. I for one, don't like how he handled his departure from Orlando.

But, at least get your facts straight. Howard has won wherever he goes. His team is currently 19-5 and 11 and a half game ahead of the Lakers in the standings.

 

[trojanfan12]

The whole notion of the Lakers failure to land quality free agents in recent seasons doesn't begin and end with who does and doesn't want to play with Kobe the man or the basketball player. So, in that sense we agree.

The whole point here is that the guy has been with the same franchise for 19 years. Because he's been there so long, the Lakers will always be his team regardless of what comes about. Because of that, free agents are hesitant about signing on a team that has a 36-year-old franchise player who has a limited future.

I'm not saying KD is right or wrong in his comments, but for free agents that spurn the Lakers, it's not necessarily a personal vendetta against Kobe. It's just business, that's all.

Though it would be nice if Laker fans could come up with different reasoning other than "Kobe is great" and "Hollywood is great" as to how their team can attract free agents. Because it hasn't worked for them the last two years.

I agree with much of this. Here is what you are ignoring though. The Lakers haven't gone after any top level FA's before because they haven't had the cap space. If Dwight had not been traded for, making him their own FA, the Lakers wouldn't even have had the cap space to go after him. So, this past off-season was the first time that they've had the cap space to sign top tier FA's other than their own since probably the 90's.

Last year, there were 2 game changing FA's available, Lebron and 'Melo. Lebron did what everyone always knew he would do, which was either return to Miami or go to Cleveland. It was a little encouraging that Mitch even got to meet with him considering that the vast majority of teams that were interested didn't even get that. 'Melo was always going to take the money to stay a Knick. Again though, it was a little encouraging that the Lakers went from "no chance" to "the biggest threat to the Knicks".

When they didn't get either one, they chose to preserve cap space and flexibility for the future, rather than overpay for a couple of 2nd tier FA's that might make them good enough to challenge for the 8th seed while limiting what they can do in the future. It sucks right now because we're looking at a team that will be lucky (or unlucky lottery wise) to win 30 games. But they will have lots of cap space going forward when more top level FA's will likely be available.

 

[trojanfan12]

Losing Howard means nothing? You can have a personal vendetta against Howard all you want. I for one, don't like how he handled his departure from Orlando.

But, at least get your facts straight. Howard has won wherever he goes. His team is currently 19-5 and 11 and a half game ahead of the Lakers in the standings.

And he has the rings to prove it.



Oh wait............

 

[logic]

Really??? Is that why I responded to this thread? Are you some sort of psychic mind-reader?

I'm not the one on here posting 50 times a day bragging about my team and/or hating on another. That would be trojan and other Laker fans. The Pacers suck - I know that, and for the most part I mind my own business.

That is exactly the point. How do you miss it. You are not posting all the time, but the word Kobe pops up and you feel compelled.

However, the same beaten-to-death complaint about "Kobe drawing so many hater fans" had presented itself in the posts before mine. Therefore, I offered my best insight as to why Kobe is still hated in spite of his team's poor record.

An it is because he's been around so long. Attention hogs draw more haters. It's the same reason LeBron was so hated during his four years in Miami. Kobe has matured - I give him credit. But, he has a history and 19 years is a long time. People like myself and others are thirsting for new material, that is all.

Is Kobe hated because he's been around so long or because he is an attention hog? And who is it that is hating. To me his situation is completely different than LeBron's. LeBron had a national party to dump his girlfriend (Cleveland) for a prettier one (Miami)---never saw Kobe do that.

 

[OutlawImmortal]

Losing Howard means nothing? You can have a personal vendetta against Howard all you want. I for one, don't like how he handled his departure from Orlando.

But, at least get your facts straight. Howard has won wherever he goes. His team is currently 19-5 and 11 and a half game ahead of the Lakers in the standings.

Didn't think I'd have to explain this but obviously Howard is a talented basketball player and having him would help the team, but he changes his mind about things week to week. Losing him is not a negative mark against LA in terms of being a free agent destination.

 

[HurricaneDij39]

As your GM even stated himself - "Landing a superstar free agent never seemed realistic, but we had to try'.

Lakers' Mitch Kupchak never felt Carmelo or LeBron were realistic - CBSSports.com

At this point, the money is the more likely reason a player will sign in L.A. as opposed to the lure of Kobe or Hollywood.

 

[trojanfan12]

As your GM even stated himself - "Landing a superstar free agent never seemed realistic, but we had to try'.

Lakers' Mitch Kupchak never felt Carmelo or LeBron were realistic - CBSSports.com

At this point, the money is the more likely reason player will sign in L.A. as opposed to the lure of Kobe or Hollywood.

Seriously?!? Of course it didn't seem realistic. Lebron and 'Melo were the only 2 available and everyone knew what they were going to do (except you apparently).

Mitch is right, they had to try to show fans that aren't looking to just be satisfied with sucking for a several more years. If they were able to sway one of them to change their mind, great. But they knew it was a longshot.

Btw, way to drag up a 3 month old article that has already been discussed.

 

[bksballer89]

To be fair to Dwight, the Lakers replaced brown with a terrible coach for Howard playing style.

 

[OutlawImmortal]

As your GM even stated himself - "Landing a superstar free agent never seemed realistic, but we had to try'.

Lakers' Mitch Kupchak never felt Carmelo or LeBron were realistic - CBSSports.com

At this point, the money is the more likely reason a player will sign in L.A. as opposed to the lure of Kobe or Hollywood.

And yet they still bothered to hear the Lakers out. Many teams didn't even get that, as Trojan mentioned.

 

[lakersrule]

To be fair to Dwight, the Lakers replaced brown with a terrible coach for Howard playing style.

Dwight would still be in LA if they brought Jackson back again. He pretty much made it clear that he wanted Jackson after they dumped Brown. The narrative would have been much different if that were the case.

I do think it was a big deal that Dwight didn't resigned. That significantly set back the rebuilding/reloading process. He's a very good player.

 

[lakersrule]

The whole notion of the Lakers failure to land quality free agents in recent seasons doesn't begin and end with who does and doesn't want to play with Kobe the man or the basketball player. So, in that sense we agree.

The whole point here is that the guy has been with the same franchise for 19 years. Because he's been there so long, the Lakers will always be his team regardless of what comes about. Because of that, free agents are hesitant about signing on a team that has a 36-year-old franchise player who has a limited future.

I'm not saying KD is right or wrong in his comments, but for free agents that spurn the Lakers, it's not necessarily a personal vendetta against Kobe. It's just business, that's all.

Though it would be nice if Laker fans could come up with different reasoning other than "Kobe is great" and "Hollywood is great" as to how their team can attract free agents. Because it hasn't worked for them the last two years.

It's situational and financial, not not wanting to play with Kobe. Melo was clearly about the money.

 

[OutlawImmortal]

To be fair to Dwight, the Lakers replaced brown with a terrible coach for Howard playing style.

That's fair. That's part of the reason why I think the Lakers waited until after free agency to hire a head coach, so they wouldn't be caught in that situation again. D'Antoni was hired because Nash was supposed to quarterback the offense. At the time, it wasn't a terrible idea. It went completely downhill when Nash got hurt and they were left without a PG who could run the system at a high level.

Mike Brown was a terrible hire though, just doesn't seem to be a guy who commands much respect among his guys at all.

 

[trojanfan12]

That's fair. That's part of the reason why I think the Lakers waited until after free agency to hire a head coach, so they wouldn't be caught in that situation again. D'Antoni was hired because Nash was supposed to quarterback the offense. At the time, it wasn't a terrible idea. It went completely downhill when Nash got hurt and they were left without a PG who could run the system at a high level.

Mike Brown was a terrible hire though, just doesn't seem to be a guy who commands much respect among his guys at all.

Agree with this. Brown's biggest problem, imo, was that he didn't change his offensive system when the Lakers got Dwight and Nash. He and Kobe had discussed the Princeton offense after the Lakers were bounced from the playoffs the prior season. They did it because of deficiency at point guard and the Princeton (like the triangle) doesn't require a lot from the point guard.

However, when the Lakers got Nash and Dwight, he should have scrapped the Princeton and switched to an offense that played to Nash's strengths. That would have ensured better shot distribution, etc. among Kobe, Dwight and Pau. They brought in D'Antoni, but as you point out, once Nash went down, that offense wasn't going to work.

 

[OutlawImmortal]

I do think it was a big deal that Dwight didn't resigned. That significantly set back the rebuilding/reloading process. He's a very good player.

I don't disagree, what I am saying is that you can't look at Dwight's departure and say "no one wants to play for the Lakers", because he's flip-flopped before. In that sense, his departure didn't mean anything.

 

[HurricaneDij39]

And yet they still bothered to hear the Lakers out. Many teams didn't even get that, as Trojan mentioned.

Most teams didn't have the money to make a presentation. They were too busy winning and competing in the present as opposed to depleting their payroll for a "maybe" free agent prize.

 

[HurricaneDij39]

Seriously?!? Of course it didn't seem realistic. Lebron and 'Melo were the only 2 available and everyone knew what they were going to do (except you apparently).

Mitch is right, they had to try to show fans that aren't looking to just be satisfied with sucking for a several more years. If they were able to sway one of them to change their mind, great. But they knew it was a longshot.

Btw, way to drag up a 3 month old article that has already been discussed.

Actually, It's quite the opposite. I called LeBron's return to Cleveland in a blog back in February when all the frontrunners claimed there's no chance in hell he'd leave Miami. I'd post the link the the blog, but I have enough respect for this site not to spam it up.

Point is, you repeatedly claim over and over the Lakers are a top free agent destination, but provide little rationale as to why other than "Kobe is great" and "Hollywood is great".

It's been proven that those factors alone aren't going to be what attracts free agents to L.A. It's the money that will.

 

[OutlawImmortal]

Most teams didn't have the money to make a presentation. They were too busy winning and competing in the present as opposed to depleting their payroll for a "maybe" free agent prize.

Winning what? Only 8 teams have won a championship in the past 30 years.

 

[lakersrule]

Most teams didn't have the money to make a presentation. They were too busy winning and competing in the present as opposed to depleting their payroll for a "maybe" free agent prize.

The Lakers just came off a sustained period of success going to three straight finals. They weren't in the greatest position going into the new CBA. The quick reload/rebuild didn't come with the success hoped for. Let's not act like the Lakers have been depleting payroll for a long period of time for a "maybe" free agent prize.