Agree with the conclusion, disagree with all of the reasons provided. In fact, it's a horribly written article that misunderstands... everything.
1) It's true that some stars don't like to play with Kobe. But Kobe's not the problem. He wants to win and he's stated in the past that he wants to see the Lakers in a good place competitively when he's done. He won't take the vet's min, but he'll take a significant pay cut. Also, the writer's supposed evidence that people don't want to play with Kobe is just hearsay. I do think it's true some people (plays in Houston, I think) don't want to play with Kobe but I don't think it's as big a factor as the writer says it is. Melo loves Kobe and I think there are at least some other stars (Kevin Love maybe) who would love to be a Laker. Despite all the crap he gets, Pau still wants to be a Laker. Shaq never wanted to leave LA even if he hated Kobe, he just wanted to get paid and Dr. Buss said no.
2) As somebody mentioned earlier, the guy completely misrepresents the situation with Ramon. Sessions HAD to leave because the Lakers chose Nash over him. Plus, he wanted more money which the Lakers weren't willing to give him. Sessions had nothing but good things to say about the Lakers and Kobe. I have absolutely no idea how the writer came to the conclusion that Sessions didn't want to play here. He must have an active imagination.
3) And then again the writer goes off into vivid imagination land when he talks about Nash. Steve was talking about adapting his game to Kobe's in that quote. He was just stating the obvious that the two of them as ball-dominant guards would have to adjust to playing with each other. Besides, if Nash was not that "joyous" about playing with Kobe, why the hell did he voluntarily decide to come to the Lakers in the first place? If Kobe's mere existence is enough to deter stars from coming to LA, wouldn't Nash have chosen to go to New York, or Toronto, or somewhere else?
4) The new CBA's impact is overrated. The Lakers may not necessarily have the ability to outspend everyone in raw numbers per se, but smart spending by clearing cap and keeping away from toxic contracts and a general willingness to spend cap money will always give the Lakers an advantage. I mean, there's a reason why teams that spend tens of millions of dollars on Hedo Turkoglu, Gilbert Arenas, and Rashard Lewis don't win championships. The Lakers have always had good front offices and that hasn't changed (probably). As long as they spend their money wisely, they'll always be able to acquire big names because other teams are bound by the same rules and not everyone will have the same amount to spend at once. Even then, there's no certainty that small market teams can shell out the money freely to land big names even if the CBA levels the ability of teams to spend. Sure, a small market team may want to win, but who's to say the owner will be willing to unload twenty mil to get a guy and go way over the cap? The Lakers will still be doing that years from now.
Like I said, I agree that the Lakers are headed in a bad direction, but the reasons this guy gives for saying that are a joke. This article is garbage, like my sig.