L.A. Lakers: Who Goes First for Dwight Howard, Pau Gasol or Andrew Bynum?

In order for the Los Angeles Lakers to remain a relevant NBA franchise in the future, general manager Mitch Kupchak and owner Jerry Buss must deal with some difficult issues in the coming months.

The Lakers chose to largely abstain from the free-agent feeding frenzy of this past summer, but most observers expect them to make a huge splash when it comes to the coveted free-agent class of 2012.

Chris Paul, Deron Williams and Dwight Howard are some of the biggest names on the 2012 market, and there's a good chance that the Lakers will pursue at least one of those players.

Most fans would prefer if Kupchak and Buss concentrated their collective energy on chasing Howard, but if a deal is possible, what would the Lakers have to lose in order to obtain him?

If the Orlando Magic are unable to reach a long-term agreement with Howard, then their best course would be to seek a trade before his current contract expires and the Magic lose him for nothing.

There would likely be numerous suitors for Howard's services, but few other teams could potentially offer the Magic a package that would include either All-Star forward Pau Gasol or center Andrew Bynum as its centerpiece.

Both Gasol and Bynum have been previously described as untouchable players when it comes to tinkering with the Lakers roster, but if the opportunity to acquire Howard arises, either player is probably as good as gone.

But which one?

Most of the speculation concerning a deal for Howard has centered on Bynum, and if not for his injury-prone nature, Bynum would be much more attractive to Orlando general manager Otis Smith.

Bynum is a talented young center in his own right, and his low-post game is already more developed than Howard's at this point, but he can never escape the threat of imminent injury that hangs over his head.

If circumstances dictated that Orlando deal Howard, then a healthy Bynum would be a no-brainer, but if the chance does present itself, the Magic would probably want more players as insurance than the Lakers would be willing to provide for agreeing to accept Bynum.

But maybe not for Gasol.

Sure, the Lakers would probably have to part with a couple of players, like Matt Barnes and Shannon Brown, to make the deal work, but those are reasonable terms, and the Magic would be receiving as close to trade value as they could possibly get with Gasol.

Gasol is a legitimate top-15 NBA player and still young enough to serve as the center of a rebuilding process that would accompany Howard's departure.

The Lakers would be reluctant to part with Gasol since he has meant so much to the team over the past three seasons, but there are some questions as to whether he still fits in the larger picture.

The Lakers have made an effort to get physically and mentally tougher since their loss to the Boston Celtics in the 2008 NBA Finals, and acquiring Ron Artest and Matt Barnes was a step in that direction.

Bynum also helped his case by finding the fortitude to play through injury during the 2010 postseason and with his strong performances this year despite being injured yet again.

Those players fit the tough, old-school defensive mold that the Lakers are searching for, but Gasol's passive tendencies stick out like a sore thumb.

Gasol usually faces more physical abuse than any other Laker. That's because other teams have designated Gasol as the Lakers' physical weak link, and more times than not Gasol has validated it.

Gasol's weak performances are one of the reasons Los Angeles is struggling mightily in its first-round playoff series with New Orleans this year, and not even Gasol's vast array of skills can mask the issue.

Eventually the Lakers will have to make a decision on their future, and if Howard is involved, then the only untouchable player on the Lakers roster will be Kobe Bryant.

The Lakers will not have to part with both Gasol and Bynum to acquire Howard if he becomes available, but do you trust Bynum's injury-filled past or Gasol's ability when it comes to moving on in the future?