NKYSportsFreak

There was the George Mikan way! There was the Bill Russell way! There was the Magic Johnson way! There was the Larry Bird way! There was the Jordan way! And just like those are all history, there WAS the Kobe way! Kobe will NOT change who he is. And Kobe will go down as one of the greatest to ever play. But, those days of greatness are history as the Celtics greatness is history. Kobe should not change, and I like it that way. Because as long as Kobe is in LA, LA will be no better than first round fodder in the playoffs!

As I said, he scored 18-20 for a HORRIBLE team. Somebody had to score, and I guess it was the guy on his 4th team in 3 years. Must of been a LOT of teams pounding down his door.....

Umm, Nick Young has never averaged 20 a game, he is a career 12 ppg game. Yes, he will get his 17 with the Lakers, but somebody has to score...... LOL, as I have said to you many times, LA is the most attractive city in the NBA, yet they could not lure a true superstar there. As for the roster being as bad as it is, well, same demoninator, Kobe - no one wanted to come there except 50 yo PG's who still want a check! Look forward to 2018 and pray the Kobe hangs up his Nike's or moves on.....

Look, you are not about to convince me, and I won't convince you. But the FACT is, LA is the most attractive market in the NBA for a Superstar, Agreed? Yet the Lakers could have afforded at least one Superstar, maybe two - Agreed? Yet no Superstar came - Fact? My list was by no means a list of who the Lakers should have went after, but it would be shocking that LA could not get something better than what they got. They got Nick Young, a guy on his fourth team in three years, yep, that sounds like a steal! No, I take that back, it sounds like desparation!

That's laughable to pin this on Jim Bus. Players want two things, MONEY and the BALL. Jim Bus had all that money, so it was not Jim Bus. I guess it must have been the Ball. Players don't care who the owner is, if that was the case, then Nick Young would not have came!

Yes, you beat me to it. The Bengals could not resign Michael Johnson,so there is no way they sign Suh. Not a good move at all. The Bengals MUST get younger in the Defensive Backfield, and the only way they can do that is with draft picks. Granted, their last two DB's have yet to work out, but I'd rather take my chances there than bringing in Suh for this year.

Craig is slated to play Bond 24 and Bond 25. That would most likely be it. I have tried to think of quality English actors to take over when he is done. I can't come up with good options, any thoughts? Will Christian Bale be too old? I think I could buy Sam Worthington. Hugh Jackman, Clive Owen?

Took my allowance and bought Apple and Microsoft, and then would have retired and played golf starting at 30.....

The charecter that Timothy Dalton played almost ended it for me. I have always been a big fan, but the Dalton years were bad. Since Sean and Roger stepped away, the most enjoyable Bond for me has been Craig.

Yeah, Morgan or Frank would have made a great John Coffey in The Green Mile. Probably would have won AA too!

^ I have heard no talk of it, but the Giants now must be called a Dynasty.

I made it to the 6th inning, then I was done.

^ Everyone else already added Denzel, that would just be following the crowd....

Eddie Murphy, Fred Williamson, Michael Clarke Duncan, Ving Rhames

So major Free Agents didn't jump at the chance to play in LA because Jerry Bus passed away a 1 1/2 years ago? We are talking about LA! We are talking about one of the most glamorous cities in the World, where every professional athlete wants to go. So if there was no Kobe Bryant, does anyone think that Carmello would not have jumped at a chance to move his wife to LA? It was meant to be that Lebron was going to Cleveland, but you don't think LA would have been a consideration? He had zero interest in LA, he even considered Houston before LA! Lowery would not have been more attracted to LA than TORONTO for Gawds sake????? This is not hatred towards Kobe. I honestly don't care about Kobe, but to not see what is blatantly in front of you is pure blindness.

So out of all the NBA free agents, all they could get was Nick Young? You mean the Lakers were not better fits for guys lilke Spencer Hawes, Kamen, Ben Gordon, Isiah Thomas, Danny Granger, DJ Augustin, Chandler Parsons. Why would Paul Pierce not some to LA and play the 3? You can't tell me that Lance Stephenson would not have been a fit. Ed Davis was a better fit than Michael Beasley? C'mon, the Lakers had money to target EVERY free agent available. They are terrible, and they are terrible because no worthy veteran had any interest in going to play with Kobe. The proof is in the fact that every single Free Agent could have came, the the BEST was Nick Young, who is more famous because of his girlfriend than his Basketball.

Well, that's exactly the question - WHO was coming. So, the Lakers have ALL that money and they decided - no, we WONT GO AFTER ANYONE! So, with all that money, you tell me, WHO DID THEY GET??? They got NO ONE! And you can't say there were not better free agents out there that was better then what they got. You mean to tell me that guys like Shawn Marion would take less money to go to Cleveland than to go to LA? As Cris Carter would say

Well, who came???

You mean, the team that has 5 wins only one of which is against a team with a winning record? You mean that team????

Take angst with the article and how it was written, but facts are facts. NO ONE was interested in LA and NO ONE will be until Kobe is gone! Kobe stills wants to be Kobe, he will do everything in his power to prove he has lost nothing, meaning "Give me the damn Ball". But to me, that is not the biggest factor. Kobe is old school, which is what makes him so great to the purists. BUT - today's players are NOT old school. I won't say that most are as soft as D-Howard when Kobe challenged him, but DH is closer to today's players than what Kobe's mental attitude it. There is no player that will go to LA and take the challenges that Kobe will present to them. The NBA is closer to a love-fest and an attitude tough as nails game that most of us grew up with. Kobe is the detriment to LA landing any major free-agents!

So, what will keep your interest? With all the talk of no one watching, it sounds like most of us will be watching. At what stage do you give up and switch the channel? I'm not a fan of the Giants, actually, I don't care about them one way or the other. So the intrigue of them being there for the 3rd time in the last five years means nothing to me. I have enjoyed watching the Royals, but I think I have remained interested because of the streak and how they win games. Well, if Bumgarner does what he has done in game one in his last two game 1 WS starts, 0 runs in 15 innings, and the Royals lose, then I am done as well. The mystique of the "Magical Mystery Tour" will be over, and I probably will be too.

Hunh??? They even have to play? I thought their only game is on April 6. Starting line-ups have been announced for both teams UK C - Johnson PF - Lyles SF - Poythress SG - Booker PG - Harrison versus UK C - Towns PF - Cauley-Stein SF - Booker SG - Harrison PG - Ulis It will probably end in a tie, with two national championship trophies being presented.

7. Cardinals 5. Saints 3. Seahawks 2. Steelers 1. Bengals TB. Cardinals

I can't say I am ready to bail, but I do agree that the story telling is beginning to waver. I guess with the start of tonight's show, and the previews for next week, we are now moving from the "reality" based characters and plots to the cartoon brand of "UN-reality". I'll stick it out through the first season, but there needs to be clarity of the direction before I move with it after that.

I'll go with Bob Lilly. First player ever drafted by the Cowboys, and the foundation of the Doomsday D. After that, maybe the greatest Guard to ever play the game, Larry Allen.