Sports

Could Phil, Kobe be Clipped from Lakers?

As long as Sunday’s educated speculation in this space regarding rising free agents Kobe Bryant and Phil Jackson is still alive, let’s advance it a bit.

Say Lakers owner Jerry Buss decides to impeach his Hall of Fame nomination credibility by lowballing the NBA’s record 10-time coaching champ, or, worse, not making a pitch at all.

To what extent would Clippers owner Donald Sterling spread-eagle to persuade the Zen Hen — with Maxamillion Bryant in tow — to switch arena locker rooms?

So much so, Jeanie Buss would refer to him as “Daddy.”

Not that long ago, Bryant seriously considered switching allegiance from L.A. Lore to my Paper Clips. Should his Lakers’ lingering extension negotiation founder, for whatever motivation, Staples Center’s stepchild has a whole lot more real (Chris Kaman, Baron Davis, Eric Gordon, Blake Griffin) and imagined (Minnesota’s unprotected 2012 No. 1 pick) assets going for it today than three summers ago.

Remaining in Los Angeles was a peak priority in 2007. Should the Knicks never show up on Bryant’s radar, it stands to reason the Clippers automatically will become a favored destination.

All it takes to end the above speculation, of course, is for Bryant to autograph a brand new Lakers contract. Well, half of it, anyway. Clearly, Jackson’s future with the team is far more uncertain.

Seemingly, every few years or so, Jerry and Jim Buss again start to believe coaching is overpriced, if not overrated. They see Bryant doing what he pleases most of the time as it is, so why shell out $12 million (former Laker Byron Scott will jump at the job for one-third that amount) a season?

Because Jackson continues to command Bryant’s respect and, when compulsory, accept his direction.

Because, once upon a time, Jackson got through to Bryant — convincing him nobody cares or will remember how many scoring titles or other individual awards he wins. Yet fanatics and casual fans alike know Michael Jordan owns six championship rings and Bill Russell doesn’t have enough fingers for his collection. (I take that back; there are no leftovers. According to Sam Jones, after the 1967-68 season, Russell’s first as player-coach, he felt it would be a good idea to give out watches instead.)

And forever more, Bryant became obsessed with ascending into that elitist association.

So, who needs Jackson anymore? Bryant long ago embraced his teacher’s philosophy and mastered the finer points in creating a legacy. Always exceptionally disciplined and an extreme self-motivator, Bryant never needed to be pushed or prodded toward greatness.

But nobody can push Bryant’s buttons like Jackson.

Not Rudy Tomjanovich, as Jerry and Jim Buss once believed. Not Scott, who has been boys with Bryant since they were teammates.

Nobody!

If Jerry Buss can’t see that, it will be the Lakers’ loss and Sterling’s fortuitous opening to pull off a major coup — because Jackson, by all accounts, is feeling strong and categorically wants to coach next season.

How much would The Donald II pay to sign Jackson? It would take Bernie Madoff at least 20 minutes to loot all of it.

As long as we’re fantasizing, should shanghaiing Bryant prove hopeless, Jackson isn’t a bad recruiting tool to get LeBron James’ attention. Who better to show him how to reach the throne than Big Chief Triangle, who guided Jordan to six crowns and Bryant to four — and counting?

Contrary to a report in the Los Angeles Times, the league office did not send a note to teams notifying them the Cavaliers would not be allowed to sign Zydrunas Ilgauskas once the Wizards buy out his contract and he clears waivers. Something might have been said by a league lawyer during the trade conference call (“We’d better not find out you had a pre-arranged deal”), or maybe not. But, until things are changed, there’s no rule prohibiting a player from rejoining his team once freed.

I’ve lost count. Was the overtime loss to the Thunder the fourth or fifth game Mike D’Antoni has cost the Knicks in less than two seasons by refusing to order his players to take a foul with the verdict on the line?

D’Antoni’s obdurate policy makes no sense whatsoever. Down three, Oklahoma City inbounded with 12 seconds left on the game clock. Kevin Durant stalemated things six ticks later.

What possible reason could there be for not fouling within that elapsed time? The Thunder would have been forced to inbound again (against pressure) and perfectly execute a far less leisurely play.

Yesterday was the 30th anniversary of Lake Placid’s Miracle on Ice.

Three decades later, we’re sticking it to the Russians again — they’re buying the Nets.

peter.vecsey@nypost.com