Chad Ford: Kobe Destinations

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>On Monday, our ESPN.com panel debated what's going on with Kobe Bryant and the Lakers.</p>

Let's take it a step further today and explore exactly what L.A. could get in return for its superstar.</p>

First, three points:</p>

1. The Lakers aren't giving Bryant away. In other words, they won't take back another team's junk.</p>

They need at least one All-Star-type player, young players with potential, draft picks and expiring contracts. I don't think Jerry Buss is in the mood for a fire sale.</p>

2. Bryant's not going to approve a trade to a team that can't compete for a championship with him on the roster. So if the trade depletes a team, he's not going to approve it. At the same time, I think we shouldn't get too hung up on what we think Bryant wants in terms of market size and other factors. Sure, in a perfect world, he'd love to play in New York. But the Knicks have little of value to give back in return. I think that Bryant is looking for a chance to win a title.</p>

(One side point: I think both Bryant and Buss would prefer that Bryant go to the East. But that's not set in stone if the right deal comes along.)</p>

3. Bryant makes roughly $19.5 million this season, and any team over the cap that does a deal with L.A. has to get within 25 percent and $100,000 of that amount to make it happen.</p>

Given these three points, it won't be easy to trade Bryant. Only a few teams have what it takes to get him.</p>

Who are they? Here are the five teams that have the best shot at landing Bryant, based on the criteria above.</p>

<offer></offer></p>

</p>
<h2 class="subhead">The Favorite</h2>
<div class="phinline"></div>

1. Chicago Bulls
This is no surprise. It's well-known Bryant wants to play in Chicago, and the Bulls have the roster to get a deal done.</p>

After passing on Pau Gasol, losing in the conference semifinals decisively and missing out on Kevin Garnett, you have to believe that the Bulls and GM John Paxson are feeling some pressure.</p>

So who would they give up? From the sound of things, they won't part with Luol Deng (which could turn out to be a deal-breaker).</p>

Without Deng involved, they have two basic packages to offer:</p>

Option 1: Kirk Hinrich, Ben Gordon, Joakim Noah, Viktor Khryapa and Adrian Griffin.
(View the deal in our Trade Machine.)</p>

This deal would work, even though Hinrich is a base-year compensation player.</p>

It would give the Lakers a new backcourt and a player in Noah with the personality and star appeal to thrive in L.A.</p>

But would the Bulls lose too much? Who would play point guard for them? Would a combo of Bryant, Deng and Ben Wallace trump Garnett, Ray Allen and Paul Pierce in the East?</p>

Option 2: Ben Gordon, Joakim Noah, Viktor Khryapa, Adrian Griffin, P.J. Brown (in a sign-and-trade) and two first-round draft picks.</p>

This deal probably would work better for the Bulls. They would have a core that would make them the favorites to win the East.</p>

The question is whether it would be enough for the Lakers. Gordon and Noah are nice pieces, but the draft picks would likely be low first-rounders. Adding Brown (in a deal that would allow the Lakers to release him after Year 1) would give them roughly $14 million in cap relief next summer. But with Gordon looking for a long-term extension, he could make much of those savings go away.</p>

Note: The Bulls could throw in Andres Nocioni to sweeten the deal, but he can't be traded until mid-December per league free agent rules. And of course, players like Chris Duhon and Tyrus Thomas could be used in other versions of the options above.</p>
<hr />
<h2 class="subhead">The Contenders</h2>
<div class="phinline"></div>

1. Washington Wizards
</p>

Could the Wizards get both MJ and Bryant in the same decade?</p>

The Wizards' package: Gilbert Arenas, Nick Young, Darius Songaila and a first-round draft pick.
(View the deal in our Trade Machine.)</p>

The Wizards would immediately become Eastern Conference contenders. And with Arenas expected to opt out of his contract next summer, the Wizards would remove the risk that he bolts for another destination &hellip; while getting Bryant right now.</p>

For the Lakers, Arenas would return home to add some sizzle to the roster, and Young, another local product, is an athletic 2-guard who would eventually take Bryant's spot in the lineup.</p>

Another possibility would be a three-way deal that would send Bryant to the Bulls, Arenas, Young and Noah to the Lakers, and Gordon, Tyrus Thomas, Viktor Khryapa, Griffin and a re-signed Brown to the Wizards.</p>

</p>
<div class="phinline"></div>

2. Phoenix Suns
The Suns flirted all summer with making a blockbuster trade. While Shawn Marion's name dominated the headlines, sources told both Marc Stein and me this summer that the Suns were willing to give up Amare Stoudemire to get Garnett.</p>

So would they be willing to let Stoudemire go to get Bryant? If the answer is yes, can the Lakers really say no to that?</p>

The Suns' package: Stoudemire and Raja Bell.
(View the deal in our Trade Machine.)</p>

The deal would make the Suns the smallest team in the league. But with the trade of Kurt Thomas this summer, they're already heading in that direction. This would make the Suns even more extreme, but still a serious contender.</p>

On the Lakers' side, Stoudemire is probably the best talent that they could get in return for Bryant. Pair him with Andrew Bynum and Lamar Odom, and the Lakers have an outstanding front line. But what would they do in the backcourt?</p>

</p>
<div class="phinline"></div>

3. Atlanta Hawks
The Hawks are the most screwed-up franchise in the business, and they've missed the playoffs eight straight years. So this one's a long shot.</p>

But the Hawks have the pieces to make the Lakers look long and hard at a deal: namely All-Star Joe Johnson and potential All-Star Josh Smith, along with expiring contracts.</p>

The Hawks' package: Joe Johnson, Josh Smith, Lorenzen Wright and Anthony Johnson.
(View the deal in our Trade Machine.)</p>

Now, would Bryant want to go to Atlanta? And would the Hawks have enough talent to win the East with Bryant?</p>

It's questionable. Josh Childress is a very good role player, but is he ready to be Bryant's Scottie Pippen? Al Horford, Marvin Williams and Acie Law IV have potential, sure -- but they would have to meet the high expectations that come with being lottery picks.</p>

Then again, in the East, Bryant could take this team to the Finals. The questions would be if Bryant sees it that way and if the Lakers see this as their best offer.</p>

</p>
<div class="phinline"></div>

4. Memphis Grizzlies
</p>

I know the mention of the Grizzlies -- a team some seem to believe isn't really in the NBA -- may cause you to scratch your head, but hear me out.</p>

First, they have the kind of young, exciting athletes the Lakers would be looking to rebuild around. Second, the Grizzlies would still have a strong enough core to be contenders, even in the West. Finally, Jerry West -- a Bryant confidant -- moved from the Lakers' front office to Memphis, and his dream was always to have Bryant join him. Maybe he would come out of retirement to make it happen.</p>

The Grizzlies' package: Mike Conley Jr., Rudy Gay, Mike Miller and Hakim Warrick.
(View the deal in our Trade Machine.)</p>

This would have to work for the Lakers. They would be set at the 1, 2 and 3 with this deal. Conley and Gay have the potential to be stars. With Miller and Odom providing veteran balance, the further development of Bynum would make the Lakers one of the best teams in the West.</p>

The deal would also be a slam dunk for Memphis. With Pau Gasol and Bryant, the Grizz would have two legit All-Stars. Kyle Lowry and Damon Stoudamire can man the point, and Darko Milicic projects to be better than what Bryant's had in the middle since Shaq left.</p>
<hr />
<h2 class="subhead">The Long Shots</h2>

Pretty much everyone else falls into this category.</p>

We know Bryant would like to go to Dallas, but unless they're willing to put Dirk Nowitzki in a deal, I don't see it happening. And if Dirk is in the deal, what's the point for Bryant?</p>

Some mention the Knicks, but who are they offering? David Lee and &hellip; ?</p>

Listen, Lee is a nice player, but you don't trade him for Bryant straight up. Anyone else the Knicks could throw into the deal would bring the value down, not up. I guess they could claim that Zach Randolph would be an asset for the Lakers, but is L.A. really trading Bryant for Randolph? I don't think so.</p>

The Jazz could use Andrei Kirilenko as bait. But unless Deron Williams is also in the deal, it's tough to see the Lakers biting. And Utah would probably be one destination Bryant would veto regardless of whether he has a chance to win a title there.</p>

There's speculation about Michael Jordan and Bryant finally coming together in Charlotte. But any deal that would work for all parties would probably have to include Raymond Felton, Adam Morrison and Gerald Wallace, and it's not clear that would get it done.</p>

Plus, what would that leave Charlotte with? Bryant, Jason Richardson and Emeka Okafor. And if they're including Wallace in a trade, they have to wait until Dec. 15.</p>

The Pistons could offer Richard Hamilton and Tayshaun Prince for Bryant. I think it would be a great deal for Detroit, but I don't see the Lakers wanting two very good but bland players back for Bryant. I'm also pretty sure he's not ready to do Detroit any favors.</div></p>

This should put to rest the Dallas rumor.</p>

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan)</div><div class='quotemain'></p>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (shapecity)</div><div class='quotemain'></p>

This should put to rest the Dallas rumor.</p>

</div></p>

It is Chad Ford, that doesn't do anything to the Dallas rumor</p>

</p>

</div></p>

Normally I would agree, but the logic makes sense. I don't think Chad Ford did the leg work on any of these scenarios so I'm convinced Kobe is not headed to Dallas.</p>

</p>

 

Bulls' problem is they don't have the contracts to make a satisfactory (for them) deal work. They can make a deal work by offering several players to make up for the CBA 125% rule requirements, but no doubt they would be gutting the team to acquire Kobe. Kobe's no spring chicken, but there would clearly be a 3 or 4 year window of opportunity for the Bulls. Without Kobe, the window seems quite a bit longer, but less immediate.</p>

A deal that may make real sense is Wallace+Deng for Kobe (and filler). Wallace has the cap balast and is still a mighty fine player. Paxson has to get over the idea of keeping Deng at all costs - Kobe is soooo much better and the Bulls still have Nocioni as a more than capable replacement, with Thabo a decent backup. It just fits. It would leave the Bulls with Gray, Smith, Noah, Thomas, and even Nocioni at the bigs' positions, and Kwame as the filler would give the Bulls even more depth at the bigs' position (for a year).</p>

</p>

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (peg182)</div><div class='quotemain'></p>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane)</div><div class='quotemain'></p>

Bulls' problem is they don't have the contracts to make a satisfactory (for them) deal work. They can make a deal work by offering several players to make up for the CBA 125% rule requirements, but no doubt they would be gutting the team to acquire Kobe. Kobe's no spring chicken, but there would clearly be a 3 or 4 year window of opportunity for the Bulls. Without Kobe, the window seems quite a bit longer, but less immediate.</p>

A deal that may make real sense is Wallace+Deng for Kobe (and filler). Wallace has the cap balast and is still a mighty fine player. Paxson has to get over the idea of keeping Deng at all costs - Kobe is soooo much better and the Bulls still have Nocioni as a more than capable replacement, with Thabo a decent backup. It just fits. It would leave the Bulls with Gray, Smith, Noah, Thomas, and even Nocioni at the bigs' positions, and Kwame as the filler would give the Bulls even more depth at the bigs' position (for a year).</p>

</div></p>

Not saying you're wrong or anything, but a more sensible trade to me would include Gordon, and not Deng. But if the Lakers want Deng, whatever...Just my opinion both teams would be better off if it were Gordon instead.</p>

</p>

</div></p>

I think Gordon's the better fit, too, but my point is that Pax can't start trying to get Kobe from the Lakers by taking Deng off the table before anything's discussed. If the Lakers want him over Gordon, it shouldn't be a show stopper.</p>

I can see why the Lakers would want Deng over Gordon. He's a 6'10" guy who's a certain 20 PPG / 8 RPG kind of player this season, barring injury. Gordon is a terrific scorer, but you can't teach height.</p>

</p>

</p>

 

[quote name='peg182']</p>

[quote name='Denny Crane']</p>

[quote name='peg182']</p>

[quote name='Denny Crane']</p>

Bulls' problem is they don't have the contracts to make a satisfactory (for them) deal work. They can make a deal work by offering several players to make up for the CBA 125% rule requirements, but no doubt they would be gutting the team to acquire Kobe. Kobe's no spring chicken, but there would clearly be a 3 or 4 year window of opportunity for the Bulls. Without Kobe, the window seems quite a bit longer, but less immediate.</p>

A deal that may make real sense is Wallace+Deng for Kobe (and filler). Wallace has the cap balast and is still a mighty fine player. Paxson has to get over the idea of keeping Deng at all costs - Kobe is soooo much better and the Bulls still have Nocioni as a more than capable replacement, with Thabo a decent backup. It just fits. It would leave the Bulls with Gray, Smith, Noah, Thomas, and even Nocioni at the bigs' positions, and Kwame as the filler would give the Bulls even more depth at the bigs' position (for a year).</p>

[/QUOTE]</p>

Not saying you're wrong or anything, but a more sensible trade to me would include Gordon, and not Deng. But if the Lakers want Deng, whatever...Just my opinion both teams would be better off if it were Gordon instead.</p>

</p>

[/QUOTE]</p>

I think Gordon's the better fit, too, but my point is that Pax can't start trying to get Kobe from the Lakers by taking Deng off the table before anything's discussed. If the Lakers want him over Gordon, it shouldn't be a show stopper.</p>

I can see why the Lakers would want Deng over Gordon. He's a 6'10" guy who's a certain 20 PPG / 8 RPG kind of player this season, barring injury. Gordon is a terrific scorer, but you can't teach height.</p>

[/QUOTE]</p>

What I'm saying is...the Lakers already have Walton and Odom as starters, who are similar players to Deng...just seems repetitive to me to add Deng to the Lakers. If you add Gordon, on the other hand, you get a SG who would probably make up for the loss of scoring from the loss of Kobe moreso than Deng.</p>

[/QUOTE]</p>

</p>

Deng is very young still and has improved season over season. He's going to be the kind of star that LA needs to replace Kobe with (at best) or a key piece to a much stronger winning team (at worst).</p>

Gordon is my favorite Bull, and I've seen him play almost every game he's played in his career there (thanks to NBALP). He's a probematic player because of his size. If you want him as an SG, he's a tiny one so you have to pair him with ... a guy like Kobe (big guard who can defend and handle the ball). If the Lakers want to play him at PG (where I think he ultimately belongs), they're going to have to live with the growing pains - something I don't think they're ready to do.</p>

</p>