I agree that the Lakers have been great to Kobe for his time there, and they gave him a great $48.5m contract. I just meant that players often get upset if you trade them without their consent to a team they don't want to go to. This is especially true of a star or franchise player, and with Kobe being probably one of the top-10 NBA players of all time, I think a player like that should be treated in a special way. I do think that when it comes to running an NBA team, some things are more important than winning right now or maximizing draft picks and cap space. You want veterans and potential free agents to know that you'll treat them with respect and take care of them. Jerry Colangelo was EXCELLENT at this.INFORMER wrote:I couldn't disagree more. They would have given him a contract that NO ONE in the league would have even come close to giving him. And in trading him to the Knicks they would be shipping him from one of the worse teams in the league to a team in one of the best markets in the league and that could advance to the second round of the playoffs.Mori Chu wrote:The Lakers won't do that. It would be shameful and a bad way to treat arguably the greatest or second greatest player in franchise history.
Sorry, but that doesn't even come close to treating a player in a "shameful and bad" manner.
I'm just saying that I think that if you're the 2014 Lakers, you have to keep Kobe around until he wants to retire, or physically can't play any more, or asks to leave. I absolutely agree that it isn't cruel or unusual punishment to send him away on a huge contract, but if you have an NBA-history-all-time-great on your team, and he wants to finish his career with you, I think that you should treat that a bit differently than most personnel decisions.