Nope, the trade talk is very much alive - but it is being kept under wraps.
After talking to Buss, Phil and Magic - kobe still said he wants to be traded.
MOST LIKELY DESTINATION: THE NY KNICKS!
Here's an EPSN chat with Chris Sheridan:
Phil (Chicago): Kobe isn't going anywhere, is he?
Chris Sheridan: (1:10 PM ET ) I disagree. I think he's getting traded, and
I think the Knicks or Bulls are going to get him. There's going to be a colling off period here whether KB24 likes it or not because Jerry Buss is heading off to China on vacation, but I think Kobe is outtathere when it's all said and done.
Jon: Your Kobe destination list is pretty short. Why NY or Chicago? What will either team have to give up to get him? Also, I understand that Chicago has "all the pieces" to make a deal, but they don't need a guard.....
Chris Sheridan: (1:23 PM ET ) Kobe has a no-trade clause, which essentially means he can veto a trade to any destination he does not find desirable. So if he goes in there and officially demands a trade, he can also dictate to them which teams he'd accept a trade to. I don't see him going to any small-market team, and I don't see the Lakers trading him anywhere in the West. So you narrow the list down to major-market teams that are close to being championship contenders, and you get the Bulls and Knicks. (Philly wouldn't be close enough to championship level with what it would take for them _ Iguodala and Andre Miller for starters _ to get Kobe. Maybe Boston could get him for Pierce, but it'd be a huge reach to say that would make the Celtics an elite team in the East. so again, you come back to the Bulls and Knicks, and then it would be a question of which guy is more desperate to to whatever it takes to get him. And that would be Isiah, not John Paxson.
Sean: (Albany NY): what could the Knicks give up to get Kobe?
Chris Sheridan: (1:26 PM ET ) It could be something like Marbury, Frye, Lee and their pick for Kobe and Radmanovic, or if the Lakers didn't want Steph you could substitute Crawford and take Vlade out of the equation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DJ (Englewood): Yeah Isiah may be desperate but isnt Marbury the most untradeable guy in the league? Kobe or no Kobe, if the Lakers have to choose between a worn down Stephon and what Chi's offering, isn't it academic?
Chris Sheridan: (1:31 PM ET ) You don't know what Chicago would be willing to offer. It wpould take three of their core guys to make the Lakers bite, and I'm not including Ben Wallace (not a rebuilding piece) or Kirk Hinrich (base-year compensation) in the list of core guys who might be in any Bulls offer. You you'd basically be talking about a deal that would have Gordon and Tyrus Thomas and/or Deng in it, along with Nocioni (who would have to be sign-and-traded) to even get close to matching salaries. Would there be enogh left on the team to compete for a championship if they had to lump all that together to get Kobe?
I think not, which is another reason why I'd take the Knicks over the Bulls as a likelier destination if and when a Kobe deal goes down.
John (Los Angeles): Chris, I don't why you think New York only has to give up role players in Frye and Lee; and a cap killer in Stephon Marbury for Kobe. While you are saying Chicago has to give up their three of their core young talent. Wouldn't the Lakers be better off with a choice of two from Gordon, Thomas, and Deng than if they took Frye and Lee. And nobody wants Marbury. Your New York trade scenerio doesn't make any sense.
Chris Sheridan: (1:50 PM ET ) If the Knicks had to bid against 28 other teams, the offer would be substandard. But again, if this thing goes forward, they're only going to be bidding against the other teams on Kobe's short list. That'll make a huge difference. And remember, the Knicks have a lot of other young, semi-attractive pieses they could sweeten a deal with (Renaldo Balkman, Nate robinson, Randolph Morris, next year's No. 1 pick).
Pat (D.C.): The Bulls could resign P.J. Brown to a one year deal to make up the cap difference if the Bulls only gave up two core players.
Chris Sheridan: (1:54 PM ET ) If you do a sign-and-trade, it has to be a three-year dea. That's why Nocioni, not P.J., would be the main sign-and-trade piece.
CL: Chris, is there something you're hearing other than what Kobe presented via his various radio interviews that makes you think he's going to be traded or is it a hunch? The last we heard from him, Kobe vehemently stated he wanted to stay with the LAKERS and was hoping they could work something out. Wouldn't it be far more likely that the LAKERS make a move to satisfy him? Moving the best player in the game wouldn't make too much sense and they really don't HAVE to trade him if they don't want to (Kobe wouldn't hold out).
Chris Sheridan: (1:58 PM ET ) The last thing Kobe said publicly and definitively was to Mike Bresnahan of the LA Times, and that was on Wednesday night when he said he still wanted to be traded. Go to his Web site,
www.kb24.com, and read what he wrote that night about "a new road ahead."
Now that's not the only piece of information I'm basing my throries on, because I'm pretty well-sourced. But if you read that entry, and you go back and listen to the tapes of Kobe talking out of both sides of his mouth all over the airwaves, and you factor in stuff I'm hearing about how this breakup has been building a lot stronger and for a lot more time than people realize, you'll start to come over to my side of the table on this one.