What to do with Kobe?
Considering the Lakers' ineptitude in recent years, it's amazing that it's taken this long for this to happen. But now it's official. Kobe Bryant has asked to be traded. So if you're the Lakers brass (Mitch Kupchak, Jim Buss, an the drunk-and-jailed Jerry Buss) what do you do? To me, there are only three available options:

A) Trade Kobe
B) Keep him and stay the course
C) Finally give up on the Andrew Bynum experiment and get Kobe some help

Let us first examine option A. What would happen if the Lakers were to trade Kobe Bryant? First of all, it would be years before this scenario could turn out well for the franchise. Kobe, along with Tim Duncan, are the only two pantheon players still in their primes today. Keep in mind, the pantheon is reserved only for those dominant, multi-ringed players that define their generations: Jordan, Magic, Bird, Russell, etc. Is there any way to get even money for Kobe right now? Of course not. He's the best player in the NBA. You would have to get a superstar and an All-Star back in return, and no team both has them and is willing to give them up. The only thing other teams are willing to offer is a package of young emerging stars, draft picks, and maybe one established All-Star.

A Phoenix package of Shawn Marion, Boris Diaw, and picks is enticing. So would be Chicago's Luol Deng, Ben Gordon, and Tyrus Thomas. But would neither would equal Kobe's worth not only to the Lakers, but to the city of Los Angeles. Right now he is the only reason the Lakers sell out and have the nerve to keep ticket prices as high as they are. Los Angelenos don't go to Staples to see Brian Cook's shooting, or for Smush Parker to go 2 for 7. They come for the possibility that Kobe could drop 60 on any given night. No player or package of players the Lakers could get in return can offer that same excitement. Not even close. Even if the team were to improve with a trade, they certainly wouldn't be championship caliber. And only that level of a team would justify spending hundreds of dollars to watch a basketball game.

Option B is for Laker management to keep Kobe, tell him they're doing everything they can to win now, but continue at the pace they were on anyway. This would seem to calm the waters for a little while and buy the Lakers some time, but in the long run it wouldn't work either. It wouldn't take long for Kobe to figure out that nothing is changing. Then you'd have a disgruntled superstar wasting away his prime on a team of scrubs. Kinda like what happened the last couple years, except Kobe would be angry instead of hopeful. This would be a disaster. He would turn on the organization, continually complaining to the media and throwing management under the bus.

Keep in mind, Kobe with Laker fans is a little like a toned down version of Barry Bonds and Giants fans. Outside of San Fransicso, everybody hates Bonds, and outside of LA, everybody hates Kobe. If the Lakers were to keep him and leave him unhappy, his constant jabbing at ownership and complaining of his situation would get old. There are two more full seasons left on his contract before he can opt out. Two more. People would turn on him. They would get tired of hearing it after two whole years, and Kobe's only group of support (the Laker fans) would just want him to go away and end the pain. I would rather see Kobe traded than for this scenario to play out.

The third possibility seems like the most sensible. These days, however, most NBA teams seem to require complete and utter lack of common sense for their management teams. The Lakers need to up and trade Andrew Bynum already. They first drafted Bynum on the recommendation of Jim Buss, and since then he has become Buss' pet project of sorts. Once he started showing flashes of improvement, "Drew" became a coveted and valuable trading chip. But what's the point of having a trading chip if you're not gonna trade it? Buss has been reluctant to let Bynum go, for he sees the kid as a symbol that he'll know what he's doing when he inherits the team in future years. What he fails to realize is the mere fact that we can get value for the guy is validation enough. It was a good pick. Now it's time to let him go.

In the past year or so, the Lakers could have OK'd deals that would have brought Jason Kidd, Carlos Boozer, or Ron Arterst to the team, if they'd only been willing to give up Bynum. Yet, they were unwilling to do so, hoping that Bynum would develop further. Let's be clear about one thing: Andrew Bynum is never going to be great. He might be a quality player, a solid center in the league, and might even make a couple All-Star teams. But he will never be good enough to be a franchise center. The Lakers are stupid for not realizing that already. It is obvious that the team has visions of the future, while Kobe has a desire to maximize his prime potential. They are on two different planes of existence.

If you're the Laker brass, you cannot under any circumstances allow for scenario B. Either give up on Bynum and get Kobe some help, or get something for Kobe and rebuild. It seems unfathomable to me that they would have let it come this far, but here we stand. At least we now know they won't be renewing Phil Jackson's contract.

Brooms on the Freeway

After taking 5 of the last 6 from Cincinnati and St. Louis, the Dodgers were feeling pretty good going into the weekend series with the Angels. So they piled onto the team bus like a bunch of happy kids going off to camp. As they drove down the 5, Derek Lowe raved about Carolyn Hughes in the sack, Olmedo Saenz showed everyone his man-boobs, Grady Little drabbled on like Boomhauer; all was good in the Dodger bus.

But then they got off the bus and apparently forgot to bring their game with them. They were easily swept. In the three games, they managed more errors (6) than runs (4). All three Dodgers starters took the loss. Amazingly, they're still in first place, though only by a game. Now the slumping Brewers (3-7 in their last 10 games) come to town but the Dodgers must face their top three starters (Suppan, Sheets, Capuano). On the bright side, Wilson Betemit has raised his average to .179.

Sly Fined

Sylvester Stallone was ordered to pay over $10,000 in fines this weekend after Austrailian airport officials found 48 vials of HGH in his luggage. It's no secret Stallone was on something. I mean, the guy's pushing 60 and looks buffer than a Spartan. Now everyone just knows what it is he's on. And you wonder why baseball players take this stuff?

Super-Lotto

The NBA Draft Lottery is tomorrow, with Memphis and Boston having the best chances to land Oden or Durant. But let's forget about the basketball aspect of things for a while and look at this:

Does this look like a 19 year old to you? NO! There's no chance Oden is 19. None. I don't care what anyone says. Show me his birth certificate, and I'll say it's a fake. There's just no bloody way that guy is 19. To whatever team gets the #1 pick: Beware. Just you wait. 2 years into his NBA career, Greg Oden will announce his retirement. At the age of 41.

Crazy-Ass Dream of the Night
So I'm going to try to remember my dreams from now on. Just for the hell of it. I'll make an attempt to log them here whenver I do remember. Last night's dream consisted of me and a bunch of my friends singing karaoke on one of those elevator ledges those window washers use to clean skyscrapers. Only there was a giant trampoline beneath us - some 10 stories below. People fell off and bounced right back up onto the ledge. Oh yeah, and we were drunk. People vomitted.

Bonds on Bonds on Roids
Barry Bonds homered again yesterday, putting him at 745. At this pace he'll break Hank Aaron's record sometime in mid-June. A new study came out the other day reporting that 75% of blacks are rooting for Bonds to break the record, but only 25% of whites are doing the same. Of course, this suggests some sort of racism on the part of white people, but that's just not the case.

White people don't dislike Barry Bonds because he's black. White people dislike Barry Bonds because he's a dick. He's indignant towards his teammates and the press, and disrespected the game by juicing up. Race is more of an issue for black people, who have a history of rooting for other blacks to succeed, even though they may recognize all the wrongs (remember OJ?). I think if Bonds were white, the number of his white supporters would stay low, but his black supporters would drop dramatically. White people just aren't being racist here. They hate the player not for his skin color, but for how he's treated people and for what he's done to deface game, as in Pete Rose's case.

Bonds should make the Hall of Fame simply based on his pre-steroids days (8 time All-Star, 3 MVP's, 8 Gold Gloves). But his defecation on the dignity of baseball should not go unnoticed by the public, regardless of what race you are.

Dodger News
After Brad Penny threw his gas by 14 Marlins on Monday, the Dodgers came back yesterday and folded like origami. Jeff Kent and Rafael Furcal both committed errors to help squander a 4-1 lead. Then, in the 9th, Russel Martin allowed a passed ball which moved the winning run into scoring position. Of course, Miguel Cabrera then comes up and singles him in. Typical Dodgers. One day they're great, the next they look like the Bad News Bears.

My Spider Sense Made Me Nauseous
I have to say something about Spider-Man 3, which shattered box office records this weekend by pulling in $150 million, but was thoroughly disappointing.

I will always wonder why the producers decided to go with the two-villain idea. Don't they remember that this is precisely what killed the first Batman series? That and the cartoonification of the movies (Engraved nipples on the Bat-suit? Come on.), which Spider-Man is quickly repeating. Going with two super villains always endangers a comic book film. There just isn't enough time to develop both characters, which is glaringly evident in Spider-Man 3. They make a daft attempt to give the background of Flint Marko. Sandman is just a tool in this film. Nothing more. You never really feel for him at all. They also completely ignore the complexity of Eddie Brock. Venom is supposed to be a vengeful, dark, fear-instilling villain. But sadly, Topher Grace and his sarcastic humor don't fit the bill at all.

And then there's the whole "Dark-Peter-Parker-dancing-around-winking-at-women" thing, which might go down as one of the most ridiculous scenes in the history of film. It seems as if director Sam Raimi ran out of ideas, got a little full of himself and said, "To hell with it. I can do whatever I want. This is Spider-Man!" This all goes back to the cartoonification idea. Superhero movies these days get respect because they take themselves seriously (i.e. Batman Begins). In the first two movies, there was light humor, but nothing as over the top as this scene. With most of the general public still fighting the notion that comic books are for kids, doing something cartoonish like this endangers the franchise. Combined with the sub-par script and mediocre acting, the amazing CG action sequences just can't overcome everything to make the movie good.

Sony has signed the deal to create a 4th, 5th, and 6th movie, but it might be a time for a change. The series could use a little rejuvenation, which means Raimi probably needs to go. Unfortunately, this means Toby Maguire and Kirsten Dunst would also jump ship. This would be fixable, however, as Magire and Jake Gyllenhall are practically the same actor, and they can easily find another actress to play the one dimensional Mary-Jane part. Let's just hope they don't try to cram Mysterio, Scorpion, and Kraven the Hunter into Spider-Man 4.