The Show Must Go On: 2013-14 Los Angeles Lakers thread

[Kenny_Powers]

What do you guys think is a reasonable contract for Bledsoe? I'd love him on the Lakers.

 

[Jesus Is Lord]

Man listen, do yall wanna get back on top? Or do yall just want a Kobe show? I want to be on top AND have a Kobe show, now we can't do that anymore. Smh!


Fukk a Carmelo

 

[Recca Gatsby]

I agree Eric Bledsoe would be hella dope on the Lakers.

Suns stubborn though.

 

[IGSaint12]

bledsoe is restricted I think, the suns will match anything the lakers offer.

 

[Long Live The Kane]

Man listen, do yall wanna get back on top? Or do yall just want a Kobe show? I want to be on top AND have a Kobe show, now we can't do that anymore. Smh!


Fukk a Carmelo

What exactly was the plan to achieve this, that changed all of a sudden? Apparently, the best free agent realistically available to the lakers...and the only one that would demand a max contract (melo), wasn't a part of this scenario in your opinion...so that still leaves the lakers 21million or so in cap space this summer to build this team that automatically catapults the lakers back to the top...and the difference between "OMG KOBE'S EXTENSION JUST RUINED EVERYTHING...OUR FUTURE IS DOOMED!!!!" and "a perfectly reasonable contract all things considered " seems to be bout $5mil...I'm just struggling to understand what people thought was gonna happen this summer...who were they signing that makes them insta-contenders that they can't sign anymore?

 

[Mic-Nificent]

Would have been nice if Kobe's contract was for less, but people are overreacting a bit.

 

[Trojan 24]

You wanted the lakers to offer Kobe a contract that started at like $5mil a year (what it would have taken to open space for two max spots)?


Which two players would you want to max out this summer?

Basically...like I said in the other thread, assuming the lakers always planned on resigning kobe, his extension didn't really change too much far as what they could do...they still have room for another max player...and if he signed a deal starting at like 18m-20m instead of what he ended up signing, the difference is 3-5mil of extra space...enough for one sub-mid level exemption caliber player (the jason terry's of the world) or a couple min contract guys...every little bit helps I'm sure, but I'm leaning towards that not being the difference between the lakers contending or not

When I say two max slots, I mean one this summer then one the next. And I said I wished the contract would have been for 2/35-40, which I believe would fit in two players. Honestly there isn't two players I would max, but having the space would give us options.You never know what kinda deals are out there to be had. Now were stuck and are hoping Nash retires to free up some space.

I wanted for the Lakers to contend in Kobe's final years, but I'm not gonna hold it against him.

Little OT, but if Bosh opted out and agreed to a 4/60 type deal would you take him? I kinda think a Kobe-Bosh-Pau team would work, but maybe I'm crazy.

 

[Hersh]

i think bosh and gasol r too redundant..

 

[Jesus Is Lord]

What exactly was the plan to achieve this, that changed all of a sudden? Apparently, the best free agent realistically available to the lakers...and the only one that would demand a max contract (melo), wasn't a part of this scenario in your opinion...so that still leaves the lakers 21million or so in cap space this summer to build this team that automatically catapults the lakers back to the top...and the difference between "OMG KOBE'S EXTENSION JUST RUINED EVERYTHING...OUR FUTURE IS DOOMED!!!!" and "a perfectly reasonable contract all things considered " seems to be bout $5mil...I'm just struggling to understand what people thought was gonna happen this summer...who were they signing that makes them insta-contenders that they can't sign anymore?

The amount of his contract lowers the Lakers options. Less money= less options. I don't think we're doomed so to speak BUT it puts us in a less favorable position to acquire more players.

 

[Jesus Is Lord]

Would have been nice if Kobe's contract was for less, but people are overreacting a bit.

Why would it have been nice if his contract was lower?

 

[Dwight Howard]

the REAL story via WOJ

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nba--k...l---this-wasn-t-a-negotiation--020919237.html

Between his signature on a two-year, $48.5 million contract extension and a cross-country flight to the East Coast on Monday, Kobe Bryant was left befuddled and bemused by those who declared him greedy and uncaring about chasing championships.

"This was easy," Bryant told Yahoo Sports on Monday night. "This wasn't a negotiation. The Lakers made their offer with cap and building a great team in mind while still taking care of me as a player.

"I simply agreed to the offer."

Until the hours before the Lakers' meeting with the Washington Wizards on Tuesday, that's all Bryant would say about the contract extension. He is 35 years old, working his way back from a torn Achilles and the Buss family is still betting Bryant is the best free-agent star available on the market, betting that Bryant can still drive ticket sales and TV ratings and make these Lakers relevant again.

In this basketball universe, that's what a max player does for a big-market franchise. The late Lakers owner, Jerry Buss, was always brutally honest about the value of his superstar players – so much more so than his ownership peers. Once, Buss told Bryant he believed he was worth $60 million to $70 million a year to the Lakers.

With Bryant's deal – which will pay him $23.5 million and $25 million in 2015 and '16, respectively – the Lakers have room to recruit a max player this summer, and only Bryant's contract is still on the books for the summer of 2016.

Make no mistake: There's little chance a max player willing to change teams will be available to the Lakers this summer.LeBron James is never coming to the Lakers, and Carmelo Anthony is unlikely to turn down the $130 million available to him in New York. This might be a summer of signing less-than-superstar players, with next year turning into the Lakers' big play on the market.


In the end, NBA owners created the perfect system to underpay and turn the public against its greatest revenue-producing players. Nowhere else but the NBA do the best players have a limit on the salaries paid to them, and nowhere else but the NBA do the best players have such an impact on winning and TV deals and ticket sales.

The owners wanted this system and, truth be told, superstars would be foolhardy to let the NBA rig everything to make them take even less. Deposed NBPA executive director Billy Hunter gave back everything in collective bargaining over the years, and the stars driving the league are supposed to give back even more? It's the Lakers' job to work within the framework of the CBA now, take their massive revenue, their natural recruiting advantages in L.A., and rebuild this team again.

San Antonio's Tim Duncan did take a three-year, $30 million-plus deal late in his career, but he does play for the San Antonio Spurs. Different market, different revenue streams for Spurs owner Peter ****. When Duncan made the choice to play his entire career in a small market, there were sacrifices he had to make. The Spurs were willing to pay him far more than the deal he accepted in 2012, but management showed him a specific plan to keep the group they had together and how his savings could help them bring on more players within the franchise's financial framework.

The Lakers had a vision for the future, too, and they sold Bryant on its execution with him remaining the highest-paid player in the NBA. That's a superstar's job: Work with the organization, partner in a plan and trust in the track record.

Rest assured, the Lakers are making the leap of faith on what kind of a player Bryant will be upon his return soon, but doctors have convinced them his Achilles is strong again, sturdy, and that Bryant will be Bryant again. The Lakers laid out a plan, made him his offer and Kobe Bryant was exactly right when he told Yahoo Sports on Monday night: "This was easy."

 

[Mic-Nificent]

Why would it have been nice if his contract was lower?

It would have given the team a bit more flexibility.

I'm not of the mindset that the team was going to get two max players. Melo is a possibility and I was saying from the moment it was mentioned that the Lebron stuff was bullshyt made up by some cocksuker reporter.

That extra cap space could of helped the lakers bring in a solid role player or keep one of the guys we already have.

 

[Hater]

We lucky our 3's are falling.

 

[Hater]

Ok Farmarhe bet not start feeling himself tho

 

[Torrential]

interior defense continues to be a problem