Why L.A. Should Amnesty Kobe, Keep Howard

Views:      
 
 
-

Why L.A. Should Amnesty Kobe, Keep Howard

February 17, 2013 4:50 pm

Before you start shouting "5 Rings!" at me, please just hear me out. 

Kobe Bryant and Dwight Howard don't seem to mesh well, something has to give, likely this summer.      

I'd pull the amnesty trigger on Kobe's 2013-14 salary of $30.4M during this offseason, and here's why:    

(1) Bigs are a commodity, volume shooters are a dime a dozen.

(2) Just about any NBA guard or forward could average 27 points if you gave them 21 shots a night.  No need to pay $30M for it under this CBA.

(3) Dwight Howard is leading the league in rebounding, 5th in blocks, and 4th in FG% all on a bad back and shoulder.  He's putting up better numbers this season than Bynum's best season ever, and many of you would give Bynum a pass for sitting out three-quarters of the season while Howard chose to play through it.  Howard's contract next season will be worth about $20M.

(4) We need to re-sign Earl Clark during the offseason, because he helps us get younger and more athletic.  That $10M difference between Howard and Kobe would help do that plus sign another quality free agent.    

(5) We don't need Kobe as much as we need team basketball.  Look at the Lakers record from the first 42 games when Kobe shot 20-30 times a night and compare that to the last 12 games when Kobe suddenly started shooting less and passing more.  For those keeping score it's 17-25 versus 8-4. 

(6) Howard will attract more, better free agents.  Kobe dissuades quality free agents from coming to the Lakers (only reason Howard came was because Kobe promised him he was on his way out).  Don't believe me?  Answer this: If you were a NBA baller free agent, who would you rather play with, the guy who takes 20-30 shots a night or the guy who leads the league in rebounding injured?

(7) The Lakers franchise was built on its ability to acquire and retain the best big men in the game.  That's Howard right now.  If you think it's Brook Lopez or Tyson Chandler, I'd urge you to look at the stats top-5 leaderboard (Chandler appears once for FG%, Lopez not at all) and to look beyond the immediate season and be more realistic.

(8) This is a business.  Dedicated fans like myself demand winning basketball.  More importantly, casual fans don't tune in when you're losing.   

HUGE CAVEAT: If Kobe can sustain his team play of late and stop bashing Howard and everyone else on the team in the media (not good leadership attributes by any measure), then it is possible for Kobe and Howard to co-exist.  But Kobe needs to do some public and private damage control to get Howard back in the fold.  Otherwise the rest of the season is a waste and see 1-8 above.

PREEMPTIVE ARGUMENT:  Howard will re-sign with the Lakers, because (a) The Lakers won't trade him before the deadline, so he's going to have to publicly request a trade, which Howard does not have the public goodwill to do after already doing that in Orlando, we all know he cares deeply about his public image, and there's an unspoken rule in the NBA that you only get to whine once like that; (b) The Lakers own Howard's Bird Rights and will likely use the new CBA as an excuse to tell Howard privately they can't do a sign-and-trade this summer; therefore (c) Howard's only options this summer will be either (1) sign a longer, more lucrative deal with L.A. where he knows the franchise is committed to building a championship team every season, or (2) sign for $30M less with a franchise that isn't as committed to winning every year.  Considering his recent back issues, the safe money is on Howard taking the longer, more lucrative deal.  Then again, he could roll the dice but I don't think his advisors would let him make that $30M mistake.    





Big Red Slugs
SinceJan 23, 2013
-

Why L.A. Should Amnesty Kobe, Keep Howard

February 17, 2013 7:00 pm

Before you start shouting "5 Rings!" at me, please just hear me out.  Kobe Bryant and Dwight Howard don't seem to mesh well, something has to give, likely this summer.
First of all, the Lakers aren't amnestying Kobe - it just isn't happening - so you may as well just perish that thought.  That said, and more to the point, I really think the jury is out on this whole "Kobe and Dwight don't seem to mesh well" argument.

The fact of the matter is that the Dwight Howard that we've seen in a Lakers uniform this season is simply not the Dwight Howard that we've all bargained for, and by "we" I include Kobe Bryant.  This has been a wholly abberant season, nothing more, nothing less...no judgements can be drawn from it.

I'm convinced that not only will the Dwight Howard be signing with the Lakers this summer, but we're going to see a much different #12 next season because he'll have both the injuries and this unsettling business of playing in a contract year behind him.  Once Howard regains his explosiveness and can play freely without the constraints of the uncertainty of pending free agency, I think you're going to see Howard and Kobe meshing just fine.

I'm more concerned about what becomes of Pau Gasol next season - asssuming Mike D'Antoni is sticking around - than I am about either Dwight or Kobe.  Bryant's got one more season after this one on his current deal and then his monstrous salary - that he earns every penny of - comes off the books, along with every other contract not named Howard and Nash...and that's when you'll see this Lakers team truly in a position to reload for the future.

There will be no amnestying of Kobe Bean Bryant, sorry to disappoint you.
jefe101
SinceFeb 22, 2008
-

Why L.A. Should Amnesty Kobe, Keep Howard

February 17, 2013 7:42 pm

First of all, the Lakers aren't amnestying Kobe - it just isn't happening - so you may as well just perish that thought. . . .

There will be no amnestying of Kobe Bean Bryant, sorry to disappoint you.
Way to dismiss 8 rational, logical points with a childish "Because I said so."

Anyone care to addess my post intelligently?  

In 2013/2014, Kobe Bryant will be paid $30.5 million to play basketball. That's 34% more than any other player in the league. Purely from a basketball standpoint, you know who is worth $30.5 million dollars in today's financial reality? Nobody. 

Here's some reading material from others who actually thought it through:

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/po
st/_/id/31449/when-kobes-contract-b
ecomes-a-burden

http://www.nbadraft.net/forum/trueh
oop-amnesty-kobe

http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2012/5/
24/3038350/la-lakers-future-trades-
kobe-bryant-pau-gasol-dwight-howard


http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nba-b
all-dont-lie/lakers-improve-kobe-br
yant-making-30-million-234747272.ht
ml

http://www.silverscreenandroll.com/
2012/5/30/3052847/the-reasons-not-t
o-amnesty-kobe-bryant-are-not-baske
tball-reasons



Big Red Slugs
SinceJan 23, 2013
-

Why L.A. Should Amnesty Kobe, Keep Howard

February 17, 2013 8:18 pm

Red, I'm not saying Kobe's contract isn't onerous, all I'm saying is that if you think the Lakers FO would have the temerity to amnesty Kobe Bryant, then you simply don't know the Lakers. It's not happening.
jefe101
SinceFeb 22, 2008
-

Why L.A. Should Amnesty Kobe, Keep Howard

February 17, 2013 8:34 pm

I appreciate the comprehensiveness and clarity of your post BRS.  It obviously took time and effort to prepare.  Unfortunately you'll probably have to file for witness protection treatment now..

The only circumstance where I would consider amnestying Kobe is if a player such as LeBron or CP3 were available and doing so would put LA far enough under the cap to sign either one.  Assuming CP3 for example expressed an interest publicly in joining D12 as a Laker (an extreme hypothetical obviously), I would consider amnestying Kobe IF LA had already shed enough salary to actually sign him (an obvious point). However, this is no small feat.

Howards cap hold is about $20.5M (105% of this years salary).  Pair that with Nash's $9.3M and that's already $30M dedicated just to two players.  Now add Gasol's $19.2M and that already takes you completely out of max offer range.  LA would have to effectively dump Pau for literally almost zero financial return to a team significantly under the cap (no team has a trade exception that big), attach either Blake or Artest in that deal, amnesty the one who isn't involved in the deal and decline Meeks' option just to enter the max offer range.  And they'd still have Hill's $3.5M, Clark's $2.35M cap hold, $1.5 guaranteed for Duhon and minimum roster charges in between $3-4 million.  Thus, if LA can do all of the above, which is borderline impossible, they could have about $19M to throw at the Maestro.  This is all incredibly far-fetched (and that's kind of the point), but would be the one scenario I'd entertain amnestying Kobe.  Saving money to accomodate Clark as well can be accomplished in other more justifiable ways, such as amnestying MWP.

I would not amnesty Kobe to save $30+ million in luxury taxes and not have the ability to spend on a superstar.  It just doesn't make basketball sense.  Kobe is still a top 7 player in the league.  $30M is a cap killer for sure, but unless you can bring in another superstar you can't amnesty him. 

Reading between the lines of your post it seems you believe Dwight will re-sign (that was explicit) but at the same time would amnesty Kobe to ensure he stays (less explicit).  I would not amnesty Kobe just to appease Dwight.  If Dwight wants to go to Houston (his only logical alternative) to avoid playing with Kobe (highly doubtful), I would not amnesty Kobe to prevent it.  I don't see this as an either or scenario though.  Both can be on this team next year, and in 2014 LA can move on with Dwight at the helm with Kobe likely retiring..

It's an interesting subject to discuss, but being entirely realistic not a subject that will even cross the minds of Lakers brass. IMO it would literally have to take CP3 saying publicly he'd 100% sign w/ LA to even get management to somewhat entertain the idea.. It's a tough sell to your fanbase amnestying Kobe with no superstar replacement.  Even though Kobe fans would likely storm the keep and kill everyone regardless..





 
Quick Is Deadly
SinceJan 15, 2009
-

Why L.A. Should Amnesty Kobe, Keep Howard

February 17, 2013 8:38 pm

Interesting perspective and post, BLR. But I don't think that we will ever see Kobe play in another uniform. There might be a slight window when his contract ends. But I still see Kobe retiring in a Laker uniform. I think he's the type of guy who cares about his legacy. And I believe that he will love to say he retired playing with one team: our beloved Lakers. And I think ownership will respond in kind, valuing what he has meant to this team.

However, I am much more inclined to accept your caveat as proposed. I think the jury is still out on how well Kobe and Howard can mesh. We never have seen an injury-free Dwight Howard. That said, I don't like hearing constant reports that they can't play together; Kobe talking about him in the media; or frankly Dwight's attitude; I really didn't like him smiling after that last blow out, making allusions that he may want to play for another team, and saying how he is not happy here. In addition, I'm also apt to believe that, as Jefe said, this has been an aberrant year filled with injuries and coaching changes more than anything.

Also, let's say we sign Dwight long-term. He still is looking at surgery at the end of the year for a torn labrum. An injury that will likely sideline him for 6 months. Matt Kemp had that surgery, and his estimated recovery time was around 6 months. So, we would likely not see Dwight , if ever healthy, till at least January 2014. It's basically going to come down to a gamble on whether Dwight can recover and return to his former self when he was with Orlando. Do we use 20 million towards Dwight, or do we turn to other players to help us. That's another thing to consider. I must admit that I'm leaning toward cutting our losses and going into another direction all together.  I proposed a Kevin Love for Dwight Howard deal about a month and a half ago, and I stand by it. This has been such a mess that I'm thinking the whole Dwight experiment isn't gonna work out. But as Jefe said, it's a wait and see at this point. Let's see what happens after the All Star Game.

Lastly, one thing that has come from all this drama and injury filled year is the importance of Pau Gasol and how much he means to this team. We were starting to look good before Pau's torn fascia. Btw, he was still playing injured. And the team play was considerably better with Pau at center, without Howard, than Howard at center without Gasol. Gasol wouldn't be smiling after that last Clipper loss. I can't wait to see Pau come back with his push and jump returning. I'm convinced that we'll see the Pau Gasol who helped us win 2 Championships, once again. The guy has played through injuries, has said all along that he wants to remain a Laker, and has done whatever the team has asked of him. I hope managment finally sees this, too. I'd much rather see Pau stay and D'Antoni go if it comes down to a decision being made. Or, as I've said before, perhaps a lightning bolt will strike D'Antoni's head, and he will come to the realization that Howard and Pau can co-exist together. You just have to know how to use them. I'd love for both Howard and Pau to stay with the team. But right now, if it came down to a decision between Pau and Dwight, I'd take the Spaniard and see what we can get in the off season without having Howard's hugh contract and questional back as a burden. We'll see.

DodgerAngle
SinceJul 8, 2009
-

Why L.A. Should Amnesty Kobe, Keep Howard

February 17, 2013 10:16 pm

Well, I certainly knew this wasn't going to be a popular post.  

Sorry for reacting the way I did, Jefe, it just gets under my skin when people so easily dismiss something I truly believe in, even if I am ultimately wrong.  For me, debate is the ultimate sign of respect you can show another human being.   

Probably no one in the world is going to agree with me, but this is still exactly what I would do if it were it up to me.  

I can't justify paying anyone $30M when this team is playing as terrible as it is these days, and my inclination is to construct the best defensive team possible that plays together on the offensive end of the court as well.  That's all I'm trying to do.  

And, yes, admittedly I do see "Kobe Bean Bryant" as the antithesis to a defensive, team-oriented approach.  I won't apologize for that.      
  
Big Red Slugs
SinceJan 23, 2013
-

Why L.A. Should Amnesty Kobe, Keep Howard

February 17, 2013 10:37 pm

Howards cap hold is about $20.5M (105% of this years salary).  Pair that with Nash's $9.3M and that's already $30M dedicated just to two players.  Now add Gasol's $19.2M and that already takes you completely out of max offer range.  LA would have to effectively dump Pau for literally almost zero financial return to a team significantly under the cap (no team has a trade exception that big), attach either Blake or Artest in that deal, amnesty the one who isn't involved in the deal and decline Meeks' option just to enter the max offer range.  And they'd still have Hill's $3.5M, Clark's $2.35M cap hold, $1.5 guaranteed for Duhon and minimum roster charges in between $3-4 million.  Thus, if LA can do all of the above, which is borderline impossible, they could have about $19M to throw at the Maestro.  This is all incredibly far-fetched (and that's kind of the point), but would be the one scenario I'd entertain amnestying Kobe.  Saving money to accomodate Clark as well can be accomplished in other more justifiable ways, such as amnestying MWP.
They teach you this stuff at Marquette?  Man, I got robbed in my Sports Law course.  

Reading between the lines of your post it seems you believe Dwight will re-sign (that was explicit) but at the same time would amnesty Kobe to ensure he stays (less explicit).
Yeah, sort of.  See my caveat.  I'm cool with the "nice" Kobe, and judging by Howard's comments this season, he is too.  I just don't see Kobe sustaining it, to the detriment of my favorite team.    

It's an interesting subject to discuss, but being entirely realistic not a subject that will even cross the minds of Lakers brass.  
Really, you don't think the idea of using the amnesty on Kobe's $30M has crossed their minds?  I dsagree, for all the reasons I already stated.  

It's a tough sell to your fanbase amnestying Kobe with no superstar replacement.  Even though Kobe fans would likely storm the keep and kill everyone regardless..
Winning fixes everything.  Also, keep in mind we're talking about the franchise that ignored two games of an arena literally chanting for Phil Jackson.  

 
Big Red Slugs
SinceJan 23, 2013
-

Why L.A. Should Amnesty Kobe, Keep Howard

February 17, 2013 10:59 pm

Also, let's say we sign Dwight long-term. He still is looking at surgery at the end of the year for a torn labrum. An injury that will likely sideline him for 6 months. Matt Kemp had that surgery, and his estimated recovery time was around 6 months. So, we would likely not see Dwight , if ever healthy, till at least January 2014.
I don't get the impression Howard has seriously considered having the surgery.  Odom had it, tore the tendon, had the surgery again, tore it again, something like three times and gave up.  A lot of athletes forgo the whole surgery because it isn't all that effective nor necessary to play, plus the 6 months you mentioned.    

Lastly, one thing that has come from all this drama and injury filled year is the importance of Pau Gasoland how much he means to this team. We were starting to look good before Pau's torn fascia. Btw, he was still playing injured. And the team play was considerably better with Pau at center, without Howard, than Howard at center without Gasol.
I agree wholeheartedly, DA!  I wouldn't expect Pau to always outplay Howard though, obviously.  We just need a better coach, like you said.

Which makes me wonder (since I'm bent on retaining Dwight Howard):  Is Howard's main beef with D'Antoni or Kobe?  His dad's comments made it seem like both but more directed at D'Antoni.  I can't image D'Antoni being able to outlive both Pau and Howard with the Lakers.  If he does, everything I've said moot, as I will seriously renounce every allegiance I've ever felt toward to the Lakers.   

 

Big Red Slugs
SinceJan 23, 2013
-

Why L.A. Should Amnesty Kobe, Keep Howard

February 17, 2013 11:16 pm

Red, speaking of your allegiance to the Lakers, I suppose the premise of your thread authoring post that irked me the most was the manner in which you seem so casually quick to simply write Kobe off...basically dismissing him as a really expensive, ultimately expendable, volume shooter. Surely, as a long time fan, you can appreciate not only everything that Kobe has contributed towards the Lakers championship legacy, but also the extend to which Kobe remains a superstar in this league, a top 10 player in his own right, the team's most marketable player, and STILL the face of the franchise.
jefe101
SinceFeb 22, 2008
-

Why L.A. Should Amnesty Kobe, Keep Howard

February 17, 2013 11:23 pm

Red, speaking of your allegiance to the Lakers, I suppose the premise of your thread authoring post that irked me the most was the manner in which you seem so casually quick to simply write Kobe off...basically dismissing him as a really expensive, ultimately expendable, volume shooter. Surely, as a long time fan, you can appreciate not only everything that Kobe has contributed towards the Lakers championship legacy, but also the extend to which Kobe remains a superstar in this league, a top 10 player in his own right, the team's most marketable player, and STILL the face of the franchise.
Absolutely.  Thing is, presently (as has been since the '80s when my dad started explaining the game to me) my allegiance is to the Lakers, as was his.  What most people nowadays don't get is that I could not care any less whether Kobe Bryant gets his, so long as my team wins.  Too often I see Kobe get his and my team loses.  I see the pattern, because I've been taught how the game is supposed to be played.  

If you can't see it, I should be the one questioning your allegiance to the Lakers.    
Big Red Slugs
SinceJan 23, 2013
-

Why L.A. Should Amnesty Kobe, Keep Howard

February 17, 2013 11:35 pm

"get his"??? Red, all Kobe wants to do is win...and not just games, but championships - that's his primary directive...that's it, that's all there is to his DNA. If you can't see that, then...
jefe101
SinceFeb 22, 2008
-

Why L.A. Should Amnesty Kobe, Keep Howard

February 17, 2013 11:38 pm

Maybe you missed #5:

(5) We don't need Kobe as much as we need team basketball.  Look at the Lakers record from the first 42 games when Kobe shot 20-30 times a night and compare that to the last 12 games when Kobe suddenly started shooting less and passing more.  For those keeping score it's 17-25 versus 8-4.  
Big Red Slugs
SinceJan 23, 2013
-

Why L.A. Should Amnesty Kobe, Keep Howard

February 17, 2013 11:50 pm

Is Howard's main beef with D'Antoni or Kobe?  His dad's comments made it seem like both but more directed at D'Antoni.  I can't image D'Antoni being able to outlive both Pau and Howard with the Lakers.
BRS, I think the Kobe/Howard beef is more media hyperbole that fans react to more than the athletes.  But they have to get listeners and viewers, so I guess it works.  Fans buy the out of context comments.

Also, with the amnesty of Kobe, you have to realize, the Lakers would still have to pay Kobe the 30 million.  Even if another team picks him up, they still have to pay the balance.   As Q pointed out, even if the Lakers had the slim chance of pulling off the amnesty and opening cap room is difficult.  But lets assume the Lakers were to amnesty Kobe.

You know who would probably be the best max player of LIKELY free agents next season then?  This assuming that Dwight Howard is staying with the Lakers.  And I don't see Chris Paul really leaving. Who would it be?  Kobe Bryant.  And I am sure there are teams that would sign him to a one year max deal.  Houston?  But if Kobe decided he just wanted to pick the team, because Kobe play just to win, he might play somewhere for less or decide to play two more years, take very little salary next season, and max his last.

Thing is, Lakers would most likely not get under the salary cap, lose a player of Kobe's talent and not replace it and still have to pay money to him that just doesn't count towards the cap..
Davwy
SinceJul 10, 2008
-

Why L.A. Should Amnesty Kobe, Keep Howard

February 18, 2013 12:04 am

Yeah, Davwy, I can't disagree with anything you said.  

I also don't accept losing like this.  Certainly my caveat is the best solution.  

Based on your response and others, I'll concede that amnesty is not viable.  

But I still say more people need to take off the Kobe glasses.  Maybe I expect too much from other fans because I grew up playing ball every single day for at least 4 hours, sometimes 10 hours on the weekends with two brothers who are 6'7'', and I'm only 6'2'' so I learned real quick how the game is supposed to be played. I had to, otherwise my butt wasn't on the court.  Besides, I liked winning.     
Big Red Slugs
SinceJan 23, 2013
-

Why L.A. Should Amnesty Kobe, Keep Howard

February 18, 2013 1:40 am

Well thought out and educated post I must say....but I'm on the side of disagreeing. Watching Kobe this season, I've thought that this is the most that I've EVER seen him try to find any possible way to win. The guy is still a top 5-10 player, and I'm not willing to see him walk out of the door for nothing(atleast not for a mega star in return). Here's what we should be hoping for(imo)....if Kobe doesn't want to retire when we get all that cap space, THEN we're going to need him to take significantly less than that 30 mil. if we want to go free agent shopping. Another thing, not to be all sentimental, but it is HUGE to me that Kobe retires a Laker. Love him or hate him, he's one of the greatest Lakers to ever do it, and I wanna see him go out a Laker. As for this year,Kobe/Dwight aside, something that's going a tad unnoticed and something that I'm worried about is Steve Nash on OFFENSE. He's hesistant on offense and he hasn't shown the Derek Fisher willingness to look Kobe off and do his own thing when the time calls for it. When they start running the play when Steve Nash throws it to Kobe in the post on 1 side and the other 4 players go to the other side, I start facepalming IMMEDIATELY. When Kobe tries to pass the ball, he has to pass through 4 defenders likely resulting in a turnover which results in him getting all the blame for the turnover.
koldazice
SinceJul 2, 2007
-

Why L.A. Should Amnesty Kobe, Keep Howard

February 18, 2013 4:35 am

I just want to say that two years ago I worte a post about amnestying Kobe... I can't look that far back on my queue, but it happened. Mine was more emotional than statistical like my sworn enemy's creative post.

I don't want to amnesty Kobe... even if it meant we struggled a little and didn't win titles. We've had many, many years of great competitive basketball and I have no doubt we'll have plenty more in the future. If we have to suck it up a few seasons, I can live with it.


Sometimes the best way to succeed is to fail a little... makes you more hungry. 
dpwtv
SinceOct 28, 2006
-

Why L.A. Should Amnesty Kobe, Keep Howard

February 18, 2013 8:23 am

Great post, B.R.S.!  And sensible, intelligent replies by all.  Not much left to say on the matter, except to say that I do not believe the Lakers will amnesty Kobe.  

I would like to pose some additional food for thought related to Dwight re-signing with us.  It has to do with CALIFORNIA TAX LAW, and Dwight paying "his fair share".  The question is......would Dwight actually be keeping more money in signing a max contract with us, or in signing a 4 year, $80 million deal in Houston (as an example)?  We've seen Tiger's advice to Phil......"move to Florida".  

I just have to wonder if we are all making more out of being able to give Dwight the max contract terms than we should be.  In terms of actual take home $$$$$$, we may in fact be offering him a contract that would be less valuable than what other teams would be willing to offer.  I have no doubt Dwight has a very capable tax attorney, who has advised him on this matter.  However, I believe we, as fans may be overlooking this aspect of his next contract.  

I could be way off in even bringing up this topic, as other California sports teams (see Dodgers and Angels) have offered huge contracts that have been accepted by players such as Greinke, Pujols, Hamilton, etc...., but I am curious as to this particular aspect.

My Caviat:  I do not know anything about the California Tax Laws, except to say that I know its State Tax is higher than most (if not all) other States.  Additionally, I don't know if Dwight is actually a resident of California at this point.....but if he signed a 5-year deal, I would imagine he would become one......     
SCLakerFan
SinceMar 13, 2008
-

Why L.A. Should Amnesty Kobe, Keep Howard

February 18, 2013 11:17 am

I just have to wonder if we are all making more out of being able to give Dwight the max contract terms than we should be.  In terms of actual take home $$$$$$, we may in fact be offering him a contract that would be less valuable than what other teams would be willing to offer.  I have no doubt Dwight has a very capable tax attorney, who has advised him on this matter.  However, I believe we, as fans may be overlooking this aspect of his next contract.
 
You're right.  CA actually has a new 13.3% tax rate on millionaires, so that has to be a consideration, because it's my understanding it's even higher than NY now.  However, NBA players pay the "jock tax" in like 20 different states regardless of residency, based on games played in a particular state.  

It's a complicated mess, and like you said I'm sure Dwight is getting the best tax advice possible.  Has to be a consideration, great point.

At the same time, you have to think about other things like: Is his Adidas and other deals going to be as lucrative going forward in Houston as it would be in Los Angeles?  Probably not.  How about the opportunity to get more involved in acting or whatever it is he apparently wants to do?  Probably can't hobnob quiet the same in Houston as L.A. on a daily basis.  Besides, he has a home in L.A. and seems to like it here on a personal level.  Who wouldn't?  

Also, I've actually worked in Texas a bit before and although the absence of state income tax made filing at the end of the year much easier, most Texans will tell you that the financial difference is easily offset by local property and other taxes.  Texas isn't just some promised land, they've got bills too.
Big Red Slugs
SinceJan 23, 2013
-

Why L.A. Should Amnesty Kobe, Keep Howard

February 18, 2013 12:12 pm

Thanks for making that more clear for me, BRS.  Like I said in my post, I have no idea how the whole tax situation works at this point in time -- particularly in California.  No doubt California is the "land of opportunity" in terms of endorsements and/or acting possibilities, and I would never suggest he would have the same opportunities in Texas.  New York....possibly.  And, as a proud California native myself, I would never suggest anyone move from California to Texas per se -- I just thought the tax implications may have been something that was being overlooked as it relates to re-signing Dwight.  
SCLakerFan
SinceMar 13, 2008