I believe the Great Laker Nation has made a huge mistake by allowing Howard to walk and allowing Kobe to basically facilitate his leaving. We all know that Kobe has a huge ego and some could argue deservedly so. He has been a winner and leader of his Laker teams for the majority of his career. I think back to when Kobe and Shaq could no longer coexist. Laker Brass decided it would be better to allow Shaq to leave and retain Kobe. Shaq at the time was without a doubt the most dominant center in the league. Some would say that was a mistake but I believe it was the right decision because Kobe was the younger star and you have to think of the future. With that being said it brings me back to my opening statement. In this recent scenario Howard was the younger star and currently is the best center in the league. I believe Howard would have been the best choice moving forward and the Laker Brass should have backed him instead of Kobe. Are the Lakers mortgaging their future on what has transpired in their recent past by showing loyalty in Kobe? I think so and I believe they will regret it. The whole city of Houston thanks them for their Loyalty and near sightedness. Sometimes you just have to know when to walk away and know when to run.
I think they weren't convinced that he'd ever get back to the player he was. So they weren't going to bend over backwards to accommodate him.
I think it's dumb Dwight wants the Lakers and Kobe to pass the torch. Nobody passes torches around. This isn't the WNBA. You want to be the man? Then you have to be the ****ing man. Take the torch. Hell, I'm convinced that's what Kobe wanted. He's not going to lay down and die, he probably wants a teammate hungry enough step squash Kobe and demand the spotlight. Shaq would. Kobe did. The one thing Dwight couldn't control is the coach, D'antoni just wasn't right. It's like Yao pre-JVG, he wasn't setup to succeed. Aside from Dwight needing to get healthy, dedicate himself and step up to become the man in LA, Houston was the right career choice.
I don't blame the Lakers because Kobe had them by the short-hairs. He has a no-trade clause, a huge contract, and an ego to match. If the Lakers were to back Howard over Kobe, they'd have to unload Kobe. They can't just tell Kobe to defer; they have to get rid of him. But, it'll be hard to get Kobe to waive his no-trade clause, and then doubly hard to find a trade that makes sense given the size of his contract. The most realistic option would be to amnesty him, which is fraught with PR perils, and brings back no assets. So, I think they were in a very weak position once the Kobe/Howard experiment failed. Considering that and considering they are a year away from the expiry of Kobe's contract and a large amount of cap space, should they really abandon a legendary Laker for a somewhat uninspiring Howard, or do they just wait and rely on cap space and a storied franchise reputation to spur a new rebuild? Given the hand they were dealt (they did it to themselves, admittedly), I'm not sure they were wrong.
