Comparisons can still be made about how the Los Angeles Lakers allowed two of the best centers of their era to leave the franchise. While the similarities are easy to see, the differences are even more apparent.
Both Howard and O'Neal had issues with Kobe Bryant. Both men weren't content with Bryant's tendency to dominate the ball.
The difference here is that O'Neal was still the alpha male on the team. Even with Bryant's ball-dominating ways being an issue, there was no doubt that the Lakers went as far as O'Neal took them during their three-peat.
On the other hand, Howard was clearly the second option on offense. In fact, under head coach Mike D'Antoni's system, Howard's production may not have even been a focus of the team's attack.
With Howard having a hard time fitting into a template that was tailored toward shooters and the pick-and-roll, it was clear that his role on the offensive end of the floor was nowhere near as important as O'Neal's was.
The significance of this is that O'Neal was ousted from the Lakers despite being their most important offensive cog.
The Lakers wanted O'Neal gone despite his vital role in order to rebuild around Kobe Bean Bryant.
Howard was wooed and courted by the Lakers to return as the cornerstone and future of the franchise. The situations are different because O'Neal was no longer welcome in L.A.'s future, while Howard was integral to the rebuilding process.
In fact, Bryant's presence as a detriment to Howard's potential re-signing was much less significant than his presence in O'Neal's eventual departure to Miami.
Although Bryant and Howard did have their g...
Article Source: Bleacher Report - Los Angeles Lakers
