David

While I do sort of get that impression, I don't think we've reached the moment of truth in Kobe talks yet. This will continue to drag on.

Who's "Koby"? :wink: I guess he could - he hasn't used up his college eligibility. (double :wink:) Whoops....Koby Bryent? He always wanted to play for Coach K so I thought it would be a perfect place. I think he meant the spelling. Kobe Bryant Thanks dav, I saw that and that's why I spelled the last name wrong too! I figured. I actually typed in that I thought it was on purpose and was just "bait" but then I thought you thought he was just referring to the fact that you were referring to him by first name only (I think there was a mini-rant on that recently, by Meph, I think) and I deleted it. Meh. :)

Who's "Koby"? :wink: I guess he could - he hasn't used up his college eligibility. (double :wink:) Whoops....Koby Bryent? He always wanted to play for Coach K so I thought it would be a perfect place. I think he meant the spelling. Kobe Bryant

The Lakers are dead set on trading Kobe. Everyone from Buss on down to PJ is now convinced that he needs to be moved. They will ultimately give in, IMO.

I know it's Rozner, but... http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=69313

http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=68887 The local beat writers are running with that. All he said was that nothing was happening "for now." In fact, I think the Trib article even left that part out. This is just Pax's way of trying to quell some of the speculation/rumors. I guarantee that talks are ongoing. LA wants to rid themselves of this problem. The entire front office is unanimous in that. Obviously, just like Bernsie said, some real info got out. That's what Pax is peeved about. If it were really fiction, he wouldn't care. How many rumors aren't there out there that are totally false and never get commented on? Something true was leaked and obviously they weren't happy about it. That's why Pax came out and said what he did. I also think it's a little bit of playing hardball with LA through the media. I don't believe for one second that negotiations are dead. He's not just saying it's done for now. He's saying it's done, period. I don't know all about the politics, but that's a direct quote from the guy. I think it's over. And I'm glad Pax is saying this. I'll guarantee our players had it in their minds the whole time this was happening. That's no way to have to play a game, no matter how professional you are supposed to be. And I'm telling you the quote is incomplete. I heard what he said. He said, "for now, at least," at the end of it.

http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=68887 The local beat writers are running with that. All he said was that nothing was happening "for now." In fact, I think the Trib article even left that part out. This is just Pax's way of trying to quell some of the speculation/rumors. I guarantee that talks are ongoing. LA wants to rid themselves of this problem. The entire front office is unanimous in that. Obviously, just like Bernsie said, some real info got out. That's what Pax is peeved about. If it were really fiction, he wouldn't care. How many rumors aren't there out there that are totally false and never get commented on? Something true was leaked and obviously they weren't happy about it. That's why Pax came out and said what he did. I also think it's a little bit of playing hardball with LA through the media. I don't believe for one second that negotiations are dead.

I imagine we'll hear something either once B&B show starts or when Pax addresses the media later today.

He is base year, but that doesn't make it nearly impossible to trade him. We would have to wait until 12/15, though. You might be thinking of the poison pill provision, which definitely does make it harder to trade players.

A guy on RealGM who has some sort of ties/sources in the LA and has scooped a couple of stories in the past before they came out (including the Kobe trade demand) is saying that the Lakers are completely set on getting rid of KB and might even just give in to the Bulls soon. He feels it's 95% that Kobe becomes a Bull.

Here's what I posted at RealGM. Bernstein is saying that the possibilities have never been stronger than at this very moment. Talking about strong-willed people and mercurial personalities. He says that RIGHT NOW there is a deal in front of Kobe Bryant. If he approves it, it will happen. If he doesn't, it won't. There is a deal RIGHT NOW. It's not just Paxson running things. Implying that Reinsdorf wants this badly. The Lakers are SICK of Kobe and want something done. They were amazed and shocked by fans booing Kobe. The deal would NOT involve Luol Deng. Player most likely to go would be Kirk. 3rd team is the Kings. Artest going to Lakers. THIS IS CRAZY!!!

Once again I take too long to reply. Damn this actual work.

I don't see how adding a 3rd team makes the amount the Bulls given up any less. They may be splitting the return between the Lakers and Suns, but they still have to give up what's deemed as "Kobe's value". It could if the 3rd team valued the Bulls offerings more highly than the Lakers do. That's different than what Soul was saying, and even then I think it's unlikely that the difference in perceived value is enough to make much of a difference in what the return is. There's a perception that LA might care about big household names and marketability more so than the actual value they'd be obtaining in the deal. The Bulls players aren't very "sexy." That could be (not saying it is) a factor, for whatever it's worth.

You did see the qualifier he put in, no?

I don't see how adding a 3rd team makes the amount the Bulls given up any less. They may be splitting the return between the Lakers and Suns, but they still have to give up what's deemed as "Kobe's value". It could if the 3rd team valued the Bulls offerings more highly than the Lakers do.

It can still happen after today or tomorrow... We just lose the option of sending PJ or Sweets in a sign-&-trade. We'd also lose roster flexibility since rosters have to be set once the season starts (in terms of either team having more than the max of players, less than the min, etc.). So, in that sense, it becomes quite a bit harder. On the other hand, after Dec 15th, Nocioni (and Smith, for that matter) could be traded.

Paxson never had any intention of gutting this team in a Kobe trade. There's just no way. No reason to. The Bulls aren't in a position of need here. The Lakers are backed against a corner and it will only get worse the longer they wait. As soon as Deng is extended, we'll have little to worry about in terms of him being traded. I don't know why anyone is suggesting or worried about gutting the team. Look at what superstars have netted in return in trades. It's never anywhere near equal value.

I don't see what it could even be. There's no signing of free agents yet, and there doesn't figure to be anything going on regarding the front office or manager/coaching staff of either team. If there's any legitimacy to this, maybe it's got to do with the sale of the team (starting the process or something).

Bucher was on ESPN saying the Bulls had been trying to work in a 3rd team, the Suns (w/Marion) to get the deal done. Apparently, that has fallen through. Steve should be all about helping us out on this one, jeez.

Exactly.

Actually, he's one of the few ESPN guys with a clue.

A trade with Prior and Baldelli as the principals would be interesting. One injury disappointment for another. It'd be great if Prior would sign some sort of incentive-based deal with a team option for 2009, but failing that, I think the Cubs are at a point where they have to look for some sort of face-saving exit strategy. Like someone else said, the situation to avoid is paying the guy for another year to rehab before he goes to pitch someplace else. The Cubs are staring that scenario right in the face right now. Changing your tune? Huh? I think he's confusing me and you. As for me, I'm not changing my tune. I don't even know what my tune is. All I did was counter Lefty's insistence that Prior would be non-tendered with evidence from one of Bruce's articles that he wouldn't be.

Same. Thabo is the only one of those players I mind losing. Hell, I'd die a happy man if I never saw Adrian Griffin suit up for the Bulls again. I was so happy we got rid of him the first time. Anyway, the question is how well that team would do in the regular season with that little depth. They wouldn't be able to sustain a whole lot of injuries, and they'd probably lose a few games because of the bench. In the playoffs, though, that bench matters a whole lot less. That starting lineup would likely take us very deep, possibly/probably into June.

They have $$ and they spend it well. So to put it in conclusion: They scout well. They draft well. And they still have Tom Brady. Last time I checked, that's all you need. Celtics, Patriots, Red Sox....must be good to be living in Boston. Oh, forgot Boston College. God, that's depressing. I hate the entire new-england area. eff them. Of course, we had the bulls...but....since then we've had what? The sox and a failed attempt by the bears? ugh. I thought you hate the Bears? He hates the Sox, too. I guess he just means Chicago.

There's a way to do it without giving up Hinrich or Wallace and without waiting until Dec 15th, but it would involve a pretty good gutting of the bench. It would be Gordon, Thomas/Noah (either one would work), Duhon, Thabo, Khryapa, and Griffin for Kobe. Those two deals would work in terms of salaries. Now, the roster would be pretty gutted. It would look something like.. PG - Hinrich, Curry SG - Bryant, Gardner SF - Deng, Nocioni PF - Thomas/Noah, Smith C - Wallace, Gray It should be noted that (I believe) we can, to some extent, deal with the depth issues in the offseason with the MLE.