aznzen

1. not a shaq fan
2. hows that an insane idea when practically almost all fans from both fan base as well as sports analysts are viewing the possibility and its realistic value are legitimate?


c'mon throw me some better and logical reasoning than that

Basel57

I am a LAKER fan, and I think trading Kobe makes no sense. That's my opinion on it.

I've been a Lakers fan before Kobe was there, and I'll be a Lakers fan long after he's gone. But trading him right now, while he is still the best player in the league, would not be very smart to me. Even if we did get a package of Deng, Gordon, etc. I don't see that elevating the Lakers much higher than where they are at right now.

__________________

Bleeding purple & gold...

DaRizzle

First of all the Celtics can go to hell and got what they deserved in the draft. Second of all Shaq was screaming "Show me the money!" to Dr. Buss in the pre-season...you don't do that, and 3rd, another player we got in the Shaq trade was Kobe, because he would have been gone if Shaq wasn't. Have fun with your 5th pick. HA HA HA HA HA

Basel57

No need to get on him because he's a Celtics fan. That has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

__________________

Bleeding purple & gold...

aznzen

you didnt really give out any reasoning as to why a new set of roster combined with some of the current lakers is not as better.


im waiting/

Basel57

My main reasoning behind it is that if Phil stays coach, and a trade like that goes through, it takes a while to learn the Triangle System. Kobe has it perfected right now. Bringing in other players in a trade for Kobe will probably make things tough for the Lakers.

And I just don't think Deng/Gordon etc. have the leadership ability to make the Lakers go far with a lineup that would also include Odom, Walton, Radmanovic, etc. Sure, Kobe might not yet be the leader that we've all wanted, but he's still a great leader in my opinion.

I just don't see a trade involving Kobe working out for the Lakers in the next few years.

__________________

Bleeding purple & gold...

aznzen

very conveninet for you to put samaki and derek into the line up when you know horace grant, rob horry and ron harper were better options to disprove your point.

how about the previous 3 years where they won three straight titles?
malone nor payton was not a laker, so i dont see that as avalid excuse.

playing the history and roster game, only shows and proves that malone or payton was not much of a difference maker.
a prime kobe and a declining shaq still has a better chance of competing rather than a prime kobe and lamar odom.

aznzen

lol

thats one of the weakest excuse by current laker fans. "triangle takes a while to be perfected"


FYI: the triangle does not need to be perfected in order for a team to be successful. im a chicago bulls fan, trust me i know how Phil jackson took over a disgrunteld and beaten bulls in the 90's and only after ONE Training Camp, the bulls immediately won the title that year.

coincidentally, majority of they key players with the lakers only had ONE training camp with jackson and his staff to learn the system before winning 3 consecutive titles


so you see, that excuse doesnt do well in this debate.


also how can you bring leadership in this debate, true every team needs one but id rather have a team full of capable and talented individuals running the team rather than a team with a "leader" and a bunch of role players.


nowadays, a team with no legitimate superstar can with a title, the pistons are a living proof that a group of skilled individuals can win.

Eternal

Your sitting there arguing with us, a team that your imagining in your head, that the Lakers will be better with Ben Gordon, Deng, etc. (which they very well may be) acting like the Lakers will get both of those guys, or something along the lines of Ben Gordon or Deng with Hinrich. I'm thinking realistic deals here, and there is no way the Bulls are going to give up two of the three big names on their name (Deng, Gordon, and Hinrich), IMO.

The Lakers will be getting the bad end of the deal with whatever team they trade with, as they are the ones who will need to find a team to trade with.

FYI the Bulls didn't win a championship their first year with Phil Jackson. It was the year after, so it wasn't immediately...

Eternal

Never said they would be worse, I was making a generalization, on you calling people homers if they don't agree with you...

aznzen

your sitting there arguing denying the undeniable truth that its proven that kobe and his current roster cannot bring the lakers past mediocrity,so its simply not just an imagination in your case but rather a refusal to admit facts presented to you by history.


you dont think chicago will not give up a 6th man player like gordon and a player like luol deng for the best player in the league? i dont know what logical thinking you have but any gm in this world would do such trade immediately.


miami gave up 2 of their three biggest names when shaq was traded, houston did the same when they acquired mcgrady, so dont act as if its such a strange transaction in this day and age.

.
I type too fast for my own good sometimes, i meant jackson spent a whole season before giving them a run for a trophy.


its still by far not a "long time" like most of you guys are claiming.

Eternal

I'm definitely not arguing that the Lakers can get past being an average to mediocre team, without changes. They don't need to involve trading Kobe though.

DaRizzle

Uh...what?!?!?!?!? Are you gonna defend communism and Satan next? He is a C E L T I C S fan!!! Last time I checked they are the Lakers all time mortal enemy! Stomp them while they are down!