Saturday, November 3, 2007

Getting Kobe Would Require More Than The Bulls Have To Offer

The Kobe Bryant-to-the-Bulls saga, which seems finally over with John Paxson's declarations Thursday, is like an NBA/media version of the Big Lie, a World War II propaganda technique.
It has often been stated that if you tell a lie often enough, make it big and keep repeating it, people eventually will believe it.
Bryant stated last May he wanted to be traded, and to the Bulls. It would be a dereliction of duty for Bulls General Manager Paxson not to explore the possibility, but the talks never got beyond the exploratory stage.
With the onset of the season and owner Jerry Buss saying he'd consider a deal, Bryant and his people -- most everyone in L.A. has "people" -- apparently began to panic. They were contacting teams and suggesting trades and dropping hints to reporters about impending deals, all to create an atmosphere of imminence.
Media members both embraced and enhanced these hints, to the point that there were breathless newspaper, Internet and broadcast reports of an impending trade almost daily for the last week.
Paxson put an end to that Thursday. "There's not a deal that ever was on the verge of being done, ever close to being done or is going to be done right now," he said.
So there.
That seemed apparent from the beginning, though not nearly as good a story, which makes this a media indictment, which is hardly a rarity anymore. The Lakers and Bulls were sitting there knowing they weren't close to doing anything, and reading or hearing daily that they were on the verge of something to change the NBA.
"I can't tell you how many calls and e-mails and text messages I got from people I really like and respect in the business saying, 'I heard this, I heard this,' " Paxson said. "It really was mind boggling to me."
It's fun to talk about combinations and potential implications. I'm as guilty as anybody when it comes to that, though in my self-proclaimed role as shadow GM to 30 teams I am careful to suggest what teams should do, not what they are about to do.
The Bulls had to look at this seriously. After all, how often do you get a chance to grab the best player in the NBA, or at least best talent?
And it's not like the Bulls believe they have a team filled with untouchables. I think they know they aren't quite there yet.
The problem, in part, is the Bulls don't have players quite good enough.
Paxson's plan has been a good one: to acquire players and one day perhaps turn some of them into a star player via a trade, assuming the Bulls could not land a true star player in the draft. The problem is no Bulls player has been an All-Star yet, and the likelihood is none becomes an All-Star this season.Luol Deng has a chance, but the competition at forward is tougher now in the East. Start with LeBron James, Kevin Garnett and Chris Bosh. Then there's at least a half-dozen others, including Jermaine O'Neal, Rashard Lewis, Zach Randolph and Antawn Jamison.
And, by the way, what's with Deng and Ben Gordon turning down $10-million-a-year extensions? Players always say they learn the NBA really is a business. Well, business is risk and reward. Both players believe they are worth more. Fine. That's how the system works. But they'll be restricted free agents after next season, and there's little doubt the Bulls will match any offer. Knowing that, few teams go after restricted free agents with big money anymore. Plus a team has to be under the salary cap to make an offer, and only the likes of Charlotte, the Clippers, Seattle, Minnesota and Philadelphia may be under the cap in upcoming seasons. Do they really want to start over on bad teams?
And it's not like Gordon and Deng are franchise-type players a team would spend all its money on. Not with players like James and Dwyane Wade coming up for contracts in a few years and this summer's free-agent class likely to include Allen Iverson, Gilbert Arenas and Jermaine O'Neal.
Is it worth risking injury or illness for a year or two -- and still hardly guaranteed bigger deals -- instead of taking $50 million? That sounds like bad business. But everyone should pursue what he believes is his worth.If Deng really didn't want to be traded, though, he should have signed. Getting an extension puts a player in a restricted salary class of so-called "poison pill" and then "base year." Both categories make trades exceedingly difficult. It now will remain simpler for the Bulls to trade Deng or Gordon.
But you're going to trade Bryant for one or two good players?
And then how good is the team left to play with Bryant?
All of that has been discussed ad infinitum, though there were other factors perhaps more critical to a deal.
Bryant has a no-trade clause in his contract he didn't want to drop. Any team that acquired him would ask him to drop it and give them flexibility so they're not in the position the Lakers are now in with Bryant able to dictate a deal.
He also has an opt-out after next season he doesn't want to drop. So you could trade for him and then he could still could leave as a free agent after next season. He wants an extension averaging about $27 million a year, which would make him the second-highest-paid player in NBA history behind only Michael Jordan.
And he doesn't want to drop the 15% trade kicker that any acquiring team would also have to pay beyond his current contract, which averages $22.1 million. All this before he would have played a game for his new team.
Still, the Bulls listened.
Why not? There doesn't appear to be a franchise more in flux than the Lakers, with owner Jerry Buss serving a league suspension for drunk driving. Magic Johnson, still a Lakers vice president, expressed it eloquently on Tuesday's TNT Lakers broadcast: There are too many voices with Phil Jackson, Jim Buss and General Manager Mitch Kupchak all in the process.
It was a plea for a return of Jerry West, now out as Memphis general manager, to run the franchise.
It's the obvious move for the Lakers because Bryant holds West in the highest regard. West also would likely do what the Lakers should be doing: getting someone else to play with Bryant, such as Jermaine O'Neal or Pau Gasol, who's always a week or two away from disliking Memphis.
When you have the best player, you try to add players to complement him. Not trade him.
Yes, the Lakers are frustrated and angry with Bryant, which is an issue that hangs over other teams. After all, if the Lakers could trade Shaquille O'Neal to accommodate Bryant and give him the best contract in the league only to have him do this to them, what could he do to us if he gets upset?
And when they traded O'Neal, they did not get the other team's best player, Dwyane Wade. Maybe they'd be stupid again.
So the Bulls listened.
After all, desperate people do desperate things. Maybe they'd take Ben Wallace, Joakim Noah, Viktor Khryapa and Chris Duhon and draft picks.Suggestions came to the Bulls regularly.
Maybe get Ron Artest to make it a three-way deal? The Bulls acknowledged talking to the Kings, who said they weren't interested.
Bryant sent in demands regarding whom he'd play with or not. The Lakers and his representatives tossed around possibilities. Sometimes the Bulls would call the Lakers and ask if it were true. The Lakers would laugh at the suggestions.
Other teams called as well. The Lakers talked of getting rid of big-salaried mistakes, like Vladimir Radmanovic. It was the kind of "what if" stuff that general managers throw around all the time. But it began to overwhelm the Bulls and spiral out of control ... and reality. There didn't seem to be one combination that came close to making sense to both sides and to Bryant.
This Bulls team, if not perfect, is considered by most experts to be a contender to get out of the East this season. Why not see if it can?
My guess is Bryant will still be there next summer when Paxson truly knows if this team is good enough. If it's not, and with Bryant then just one year from an opt-out, it might be more possible to make a deal, and make more sense for both sides to pursue one.

by Sam Smith
Chicago Tribune

No comments: