Phil Jackson: "Quite often I could feel Kobe's hatred.

[chips93]

[QUOTE=DJ Leon Smith]No it wasn't. If in 2004 - when Shaq was still clearly the best first option for the Lakers - Kobe was able to bite his tongue and win a fourth ring, let's say Shaq sticks around and from 2006-> the Lakers would have CLEARLY been Kobe's team.

Now let's say Shaq hangs around as a semi-star/super-role player for a while, the Lakers keep winning, then Shaq retires and frees up a ton of cap room to sign a marquee free agent, maybe a superstar who doesn't like being an alpha and wants to play next to a high-octane shooting guard who can take some of the pressure off him down the stretch. Someone like LeBron James. Kobe then wins from 2001-2015 (playing with LeBron means he plays less minutes and doesn't suffer near-career ending injuries), cementing himself as the GOAT and retiring with the most rings won by a player in NBA history.

That would be the best thing that ever happened. But instead Kobe decided to shoot his team out of a ring then play with Smush Parker for a couple of years before crippling himself on a lottery team. Oh well

[rmt]

Lets say the two really do stick together past 2004, as shaq declines, do you really think he happily hands over control of the team to kobe?

Id bet the whole thing would blow up in a big power struggle betwen the two. It was inevitable, shaq wouldn't accept being second banana, just like kobe couldnt accept it any longer after 2004.

Shaq didn't seem to have a problem being second banana to Wade. But I guess it's easier going to a different team with its own franchise player than turning over the reigns to a "kid" that used to be beneath you.

I thought that Parker didn't do a good job handing the reigns over to Leonard last year. Maybe it was Pop's fault - but I think Leonard should have been the focus of the offense instead of this incessant dribbling of Parker trying to get to the rim.