LSL Round Table: Are the Lakers Better Off Without Kobe Bryant?
By Eric Yee
Before starting, this article must be prefaced with the following statements:
Kobe “Bean” Bryant is a legend. He will be a first ballot Hall of Famer in years to come, he is the second best shooting guard ever and when it is all said and done, he could go down as one of the Top 10 players of all time.
With this in mind, all of Bryant’s past accomplishments have little, if any, bearing on the outcome of current games. The only thing that matters is how he plays on the court.
With Bryant once again facing an injury, the controversial question now arises, are the Lakers better off without Kobe Bryant?
Co-Editor, Eric D Yee
Though some still believe that maintaining Bryant’s health should be the Lakers’ primary goal this season, in actuality, prepping their young stars for life without Bryant is much more appropriate.
It is a well known fact that players have a habit of ball watching when playing alongside “The Black Mamba,” and this year is no exception. The one difference Los Angeles currently faces is that this ball watching is detrimental to the growth of their young stars.
In the preseason game against the Golden State Warriors, fans were given a brief glimpse at what the future could possibly look like for LA: a young, explosive lineup made up of D’Angelo Russell, Jordan Clarkson, Anthony Brown, and Julius Randle, all anchored by veteran big man Roy Hibbert.
More from Lake Show Life
- Darvin Ham adds to Max Christie hype train after Lakers preseason opener
- Is LeBron James playing tonight? Latest Lakers vs Warriors update
- Can Darvin Ham put all of the Lakers puzzle pieces together?
- Lakers news: Darvin Ham knows his fifth starter, LeBron James and Rui Hachimura, Jalen Hood-Schifino praise
- Michael Malone’s painfully ironic comment has Lakers fans heated
The truth of the matter is, their win against the Warriors was arguably their best game of the preseason. The ball moved well, and hardly stuck, though Randle is becoming notorious for attempting to take advantage of his individual matchup.
While their success was obviously not all due to Bryant’s absence, it did allow for more spacing for the starters.
This leads to the conclusion that, in order to be helpful, Bryant must adapt to this team, rather than the team adapting to him, something he has little familiarity with over the course of his 20 year career.
Despite his injuries, when healthy, Bryant is still a top shooting guard in the league. That said, Los Angeles would greatly benefit this season by reducing Bryant’s role.
Co-Editor, Paul Bressler
The idea that Bryant is somehow holding the Lakers back is way out of bounds. What exactly is he holding the team back from? A championship? The Playoffs? Wins?
The franchise hasn’t been in contention for a championship since the 2011-12 lockout shortened season. Is that on Bryant? It’s amazing how quickly critics forget Bryant was the one that carried a team that consisted of Dwight Howard and Steve Nash to the 2013 NBA Playoffs.
An Achilles tear ultimately sealed the team’s fate and cut short Bryant’s heroics.
Critics also act like the organization would’ve been better off the last two years if the team shifted their focus away from Bryant, but the Lakers haven’t been within striking distance of a playoff berth during that span.
His departure wouldn’t have changed that, because the quality of the players surrounding Bryant has been suspect at best. Freeing up money for free agents becomes irrelevant when the team doesn’t have the pieces to lure them in.
Carmelo Anthony, LaMarcus Aldridge and Howard all passed on the Lakers for other teams. It’s not like Bryant’s contract prevented the front office from making an offer, but he was the only thing the team had going for them.
Staff Writer, Justin Haines
If Bryant can accept the current state of his body, the Lakers should absolutely try to bring him back next year. While Bryant at $25 million might be bad for the Lakers right now, he’s still a proven scorer.
If he is truly committed to winning another ring, the Lakers should bring him back at the veterans minimum and use him as the second or third option in a modern NBA offense, with him being the go to scorer with a game on the line.
But all of this is a big if. Bryant likely won’t be willing to change and will still have to be ‘the guy’; if so, the Lakers are better off without him.
Staff Writer, Shereen Rayan
The Lakers are better off without Kobe Bryant as a starter; though not better off without him at all. Bryant should play a role like Derek Fisher played for the Oklahoma City Thunder. His role should be more like a seasoned player who provides leadership off the bench and gets into a game for clutch plays or when the team needs some experience on the court.
More from Lakers News
- Darvin Ham adds to Max Christie hype train after Lakers preseason opener
- Is LeBron James playing tonight? Latest Lakers vs Warriors update
- Can Darvin Ham put all of the Lakers puzzle pieces together?
- Lakers news: Darvin Ham knows his fifth starter, LeBron James and Rui Hachimura, Jalen Hood-Schifino praise
- Michael Malone’s painfully ironic comment has Lakers fans heated
It won’t be worth $25 million, but it will help with team chemistry and consistency.
The Lakers need the least amount of distractions possible this season. We are not even in the regular season yet, and Kobe is already out with an injury similar to the one that ended Steve Nash‘s career.
Having to plan a strategy for a game not knowing Bryant’s status is a huge distraction for the coaching staff. It’s even more of a distraction for the players who won’t know what position they will play from game to game.
Do we really want to spend this season asking the same questions fans have been asking and trying to answer for the last 2-3 years? No, probably not.
Staff Writer, Hannah Kulik
It depends on what the goal is for the season.
If the aim is to win as many games as possible then having Kobe Bryant on the court will result in a few more wins. If, as it should be, the goal is to give the younger players as much experience as possible in order to expedite their progress, and possibly show next summer’s free agents that the Lakers are a good destination, then Bryant doesn’t fit in.
Bryant may not handle the ball as much as before but he still shoots whenever he has the ball, so not much has changed. With that in mind, the situation may take care of itself, in that Bryant is already injured and this may be a sign of how the season will eventually play out.
Bryant’s injury status was disruptive last season, and it will be again, but it is what the front office signed up for when they gave Bryant his current contract. In the end, as long as Bryant is around and can play, he will, so the trick is how to put him in the lineup while encouraging the younger players to stand up and be equal participants.
Do you think the Lakers are better off without Kobe Bryant? Should Kobe adjust his role to benefit the team? Let us know in the comments below.
Next: Three Things Lakers Fans Would Love to See This Season