PhillyArena Forums
PhillyArena Community => NBA Discussion => Topic started by: WayOutWest on December 10, 2008, 01:39:50 AM
-
The Kings really worked the Lakers 2nite. I wonder if that means Theus's job is safe for the time being. Everyone is talking about Theus being on the chopping block, I wonder if this gives him more time to do something with his INJURED team.
-
Well.....at least that kills the talk of the Lakers going 79-2.
Does Kobe always get whinny when he gets frustrated late in games? He trashed the refs every time he went into the lane last night.
-
and early, and middle, and middle late, and....
-
And how is that different from almost every star in the NBA - Tim Duncan, big whiner, allen iverosn, big whiner, whining is part of the game...
-
Well.....at least that kills the talk of the Lakers going 79-2.
Does Kobe always get whinny when he gets frustrated late in games? He trashed the refs every time he went into the lane last night.
Kobe whines a lot, but so does every player in the league. The problem I have with Kobe in that situation is that he feels he needs to assert himself after percieved bad or no call. When he asserts himself he usually gets his way BUT it's at the expense of team offense and offensive flow. He has got a lot better about it though, he's more willing to get a team mate a good shot when he draws a lot of defenders. In the past when he felt he needed to get a make up call he would take it 1 on 5 regardless of whether a team mate was wide open or not. Now he'll find a team mate now and then but for the most part he'll try and score no matter what after a whinning incident.
Right now the Lakers don't have a strong non-whinner, in the past the Lakers had guys like AC Green or James Worthy that did not whine on a regular basis, right now they have a Hall of Fame group of whinners in Kobe/Gasol/Sasha. Odom for the most part is pretty drama free compared to the rest of the Lakers. There are not too many non-whinners in the league right now, back in the day Bird was a big time non-whinner, which was still not enough to offset the uber-whinner McHale, DRob I think was a non-whinner, Joe Dumars. I'm trying to think of a non-whinner in the league right now......Prince? Kidd? Hmmm...tough one....
-
My problem is Andre Iguodala whining all the time, cause really Andre, you aren't getting that call anyway if it even exists and you have enough problems - though in his defense he did learn from the 'master' of the whine - Mr Allen Iverson
-
And how is that different from almost every star in the NBA - Tim Duncan, big whiner, allen iverosn, big whiner, whining is part of the game...
True....but does it really accomplish anything?
Brad Miller and Beno Udruh do it consistently too and at times while the game has moved on to the other end of the court and is still active. Seems like a total waste of time and hardly ever convinces a ref to suddenly blow his whistle, while it tends to distract the refs from watching what else is happening at the time, and often THAT is where a foul is occurring.
I noticed Kobe doing it last night while he was trying to make his shot, sometimes. And usually with minimum or no contact worth complaining about.
Strange "game within a game" action.
This game was fun to watch as a King's fan because it showcased where the Kings want the team to go. Having a truckload of youngsters on a squad can be daunting at times, but at least guys like Hawes, Brown, and Greene show us what type of players we can expect them to be once they get past their 'youth' stage. Thompson has already done enough to showcase his case.
-
True....but does it really accomplish anything?
I believe it can yes - I believe it can make certain refs pay more attention if the 'whine' is made properly and politely - and i think yes most players do it way too much but it's just reality now - and most players ARE fouled on every shot pretty much - but if refs called every foul games would go forever and half of each squad would foul out (if fouls were called as written)
-
Well.....at least that kills the talk of the Lakers going 79-2.
Does Kobe always get whinny when he gets frustrated late in games? He trashed the refs every time he went into the lane last night.
Kobe whines a lot, but so does every player in the league. The problem I have with Kobe in that situation is that he feels he needs to assert himself after percieved bad or no call. When he asserts himself he usually gets his way BUT it's at the expense of team offense and offensive flow. He has got a lot better about it though, he's more willing to get a team mate a good shot when he draws a lot of defenders. In the past when he felt he needed to get a make up call he would take it 1 on 5 regardless of whether a team mate was wide open or not. Now he'll find a team mate now and then but for the most part he'll try and score no matter what after a whinning incident.
Right now the Lakers don't have a strong non-whinner, in the past the Lakers had guys like AC Green or James Worthy that did not whine on a regular basis, right now they have a Hall of Fame group of whinners in Kobe/Gasol/Sasha. Odom for the most part is pretty drama free compared to the rest of the Lakers. There are not too many non-whinners in the league right now, back in the day Bird was a big time non-whinner, which was still not enough to offset the uber-whinner McHale, DRob I think was a non-whinner, Joe Dumars. I'm trying to think of a non-whinner in the league right now......Prince? Kidd? Hmmm...tough one....
LeBron seems to not let so-called non-fouls interupt his game or his work with his teammates. At least from the limited times I have seen him play a full game. Mainly he never stops to discuss it, like Beno Udruh did about three weeks ago as his man ran past him and on for a lay-up. We pay these guys for this?
-
True....but does it really accomplish anything?
I believe it can yes - I believe it can make certain refs pay more attention if the 'whine' is made properly and politely - and i think yes most players do it way too much but it's just reality now - and most players ARE fouled on every shot pretty much - but if refs called every foul games would go forever and half of each squad would foul out (if fouls were called as written)
And I wonder if it sometimes works against players. A consistent whiner could be targeted by a fed up ref just as easily.
-
Interesting how in todays paper there was an article about how the cavs were talkinga bout that very same thing at half time of last nights game - letting the technicals get in the way - and how lebron has 3 T's in the last week...
so maybe he whines a bit more?
Also - it's easier to not whine when you're winning by such large margins and can sit the fourth quarter.
The celtics are getting a rep for trash talking thuggery so far this season and KG seems to continue to pick on smaller guys at point as is his rep
-
True....but does it really accomplish anything?
I believe it can yes - I believe it can make certain refs pay more attention if the 'whine' is made properly and politely - and i think yes most players do it way too much but it's just reality now - and most players ARE fouled on every shot pretty much - but if refs called every foul games would go forever and half of each squad would foul out (if fouls were called as written)
And I wonder if it sometimes works against players. A consistent whiner could be targeted by a fed up ref just as easily.
It probably does - but Allen Iverson was probably the lead whiner while he was in Philadlephia (in the league) and averaged one of the highest, possibly highest, FT attempts per game as well...
-
True....but does it really accomplish anything?
I believe it can yes - I believe it can make certain refs pay more attention if the 'whine' is made properly and politely - and i think yes most players do it way too much but it's just reality now - and most players ARE fouled on every shot pretty much - but if refs called every foul games would go forever and half of each squad would foul out (if fouls were called as written)
And I wonder if it sometimes works against players. A consistent whiner could be targeted by a fed up ref just as easily.
It probably does - but Allen Iverson was probably the lead whiner while he was in Philadlephia (in the league) and averaged one of the highest, possibly highest, FT attempts per game as well...
That had more to do with Iverson holding the ball on offense 99.9 percent of the time.
-
Probably also helped that he's not much taller than the mayor of munchkin land - and pretty darn skinny too - but i think the whining helped - cold be wrong - probably no real way to quantify it though
Certain refs seems to have grudges (Steve Javie)
-
I agree on the whining front esp. with Kobe and Sasha, but don't forget Bynum. He seems to be whining after every perceived non-call, which is a disturbing trend for a young guy.
I get why Kobe does it and I almost think he has to in order to raise attention from the refs. I don't like it, but I understand it. Magic did it, Bird did it, Jordan perfected it. Leaders on teams, who are also typically their teams leading scorers, often take it upon themselves to complain to the refs if they feel their missing calls. I'd like to say they shouldn't do this, but it usually works, so I can't blame them for doing it. How many times have we all witnessed when Kobe, or Jordan, or Iverson complains about a no call and they get a make-up call next time down the court? Happens all the freaking time. JoMal raises a good point in that this can backfire, and Javie is the perfect example, but more often then not it seems to work.
I can't take anything away from Sac as they flat outplayed the Lakers last night. That said, this was one of those games that I could tell right away the Lakers were going to lose. The most disturbing thing to me wasn't the Lakers lack of defense. Unfortunately, I'm used to that now. What drove me nuts was their absolute refusal to run the offense. This is actually the second game in a row of this trend, Milwaukee was just too horrible to capitalize on it. They didn't run the triangle at all last night and it's everyone's fault, but Kobe, as the leader was the worst offender. It's almost like he fell in to the "Salmons can't guard me, I'll show them" trap. He just continually forced up bad shot after bad shot and it never allowed the Lakers to establish a rhythm in their triangle offense. And how does the coaching staff not address this at every possible moment within the game. Call a timeout and address it, yell at them from the sideline, put in a fresh set of 5 guys who will run the triangle. I don't get it.
-
What drove me nuts was their absolute refusal to run the offense.
That was by design. Even the commentators BEFORE the game started said the Kings were going to run every time and get a quick shot so the Lakers could not set up the defense. The Kings hoped to get the Lakers into a run and gun game because that was the ONLY way they could beat the Lakers.
It worked, props to Kings. A+
Lakers coaching staff and players get an F-.
-
Um you are all wrong, the reason they lost is I was unable to watch the game in Arizona!
This is my reality-adding-nothing-to-the-thread post for the day.
-
Um you are all wrong, the reason they lost is I was unable to watch the game in Arizona!
This is my reality-adding-nothing-to-the-thread post for the day.
Just need to add a picture of some gay dude wearing a Lakers jersey sitting in the desert watching a broken tv...
-
Just need to add a picture of some gay dude wearing a Lakers jersey sitting in the desert watching a broken tv...
That actually sounds kind of interesting - if only i had some photoshop time :)
-
Um you are all wrong, the reason they lost is I was unable to watch the game in Arizona!
This is my reality-adding-nothing-to-the-thread post for the day.
Just need to add a picture of some gay dude wearing a Lakers jersey sitting in the desert watching a broken tv...
Lakermania does that every game from his trailer park out in Hemet, with his JB, (no ice).
The Kings are not, shall we say, stalwarts of defense, which is really where the Lakers fell apart, by not taking advantage. But I think putting Hawes into the game as a starter is giving the Kings the beginning of something they have lacked for, oh, twenty years or so - a front line that thwarts shots in the lane. At least that is the plan. Execution up to now has not been all that noticable until this game. Strange that Hawes is something of a shot blocker - he did not have that rep in college, nor as a rebounder, for that matter. The Kings' trainer got him working out in the off-season and he looks and acts like he can play for over ten minute stretches now, where last season he was puffing as soon as he pulled off his sweats.
The Kings also shot the ball particularly well last night. This really helps if you, you know, want to win a game or two during the season. The Kings are spotty at best shooting the ball and if one starts missing, his teammates usually try to keep him company.
Also, I thought for a coach on the hot seat, Theus coached very well in this game by removing players who failed to play and work the ball in the offense and keeping the better guys out on the court.
-
Obviously I didn't see the game but I don't understand what happened to the Lakers focus on defense. The entire road trip they've played poorly on that end. I thought they left their defense in LA but it wasn't there when they got home.
Oh and as far as Bynum crying....it's not just to the refs, it's everywhere. If he doesn't get enough touches, if he's not in during the final minutes (he took a shot at the team and PJ for getting benched against Indiana because he had 0 offensive rebounds), and of course when he gets tapped. I am actually a bit worried about this to be honest.
-
What drove me nuts was their absolute refusal to run the offense.
That was by design. Even the commentators BEFORE the game started said the Kings were going to run every time and get a quick shot so the Lakers could not set up the defense. The Kings hoped to get the Lakers into a run and gun game because that was the ONLY way they could beat the Lakers.
It worked, props to Kings. A+
Lakers coaching staff and players get an F-.
Yeah, I get that, and the Kings did a good job of dictating the tempo. Still, even if a team is forcing a run and gun, when the Lakers are on the offensive end of the court, they can run their offense. They weren't passing the ball around and trying to get opportunities out of the triangle. Whether it was Kobe, or Fish, or Scrotum, they just dribbled and took bad shots off the dribble.
-
Details, details... >:(
The Lakers are a top three NBA team this year and a little road bump in SacTown really just gives the locals up here a feelgood moment during a drag of a rebuilding year, while the Lakers are more worried about how old the Spurs are getting, if the Suns are serious, if the Nuggets can maintain anything close to their current level of play and on a side note, whether LeBron has surpassed the Kobster in overall talent yet.
Just to get the ball rolling out on the court on that last one, yeah, he has :P ;D
-
The lakers defense has been questionable for a while now - even questioned by PhilJackson - and BYnum was mouthing off about being pulled last week - the lakers are good - but these are cracks in the foundation that if not fixed will collapse the house in on itself
-
The lakers defense has been questionable for a while now - even questioned by PhilJackson - and BYnum was mouthing off about being pulled last week - the lakers are good - but these are cracks in the foundation that if not fixed will collapse the house in on itself
LOL! Bill Walton just called them the Fakers!!! He's says what I mentioned a few days ago, the Lakers are playing fake hustle D. There is no toughness on the Lakers right now, as the great Bill Walton said, there is no physical or mental toughness on the Lakers D right now and I agree.
-
I don't like Bill Walton
-
The lakers defense has been questionable for a while now - even questioned by PhilJackson - and BYnum was mouthing off about being pulled last week - the lakers are good - but these are cracks in the foundation that if not fixed will collapse the house in on itself
LOL! Bill Walton just called them the Fakers!!! He's says what I mentioned a few days ago, the Lakers are playing fake hustle D. There is no toughness on the Lakers right now, as the great Bill Walton said, there is no physical or mental toughness on the Lakers D right now and I agree.
Honestly I blame Bynum for that. Reason being is was the guy saying all off season he sat on the bench during the finals upset because of the lack of an intimidating shot blocker. I haven't seen him focus in on shot blocking in 4-5-6 games. Looks like he is falling into Shaq mode where he only cares about defense when he scores. Annoying.
The Lakers def need more tough players (Rick Fox comes to mind) but I don't want to see Phil Jackson try to turn Ariza into one of his goons like he did Rick Fox and Dennis Rodman.
-
Looks like he is falling into Shaq mode where he only cares about defense when he scores. Annoying.
My concern is that the ENTIRE Lakers team lets their offense key their defense, it's supposed to be the other way around. It looks kind of scary.
-
Looks like he is falling into Shaq mode where he only cares about defense when he scores. Annoying.
My concern is that the ENTIRE Lakers team lets their offense key their defense, it's supposed to be the other way around. It looks kind of scary.
When your anchor looks to be going that route and your PG is starting to look his age there is not going to be much defense. For those who don't watch the Lakers each game one of the better defenders in the last 2 weeks has been Vlad Radman, seriously. Just think about that for a second and get where the Laker faithful are coming from.
-
Not exactly a convincing win, at home, against a short handed suns team (only 9 available players but they run a short rotation usually don't they?)...are laker fans becoming concerned that this defensive softness is not temporary but systemic to the lakers?
-
Not exactly a convincing win, at home, against a short handed suns team (only 9 available players but they run a short rotation usually don't they?)...are laker fans becoming concerned that this defensive softness is not temporary but systemic to the lakers?
Hi jemagee, my name is 2003, it is nice to meet you :D
As soon as Lebron wins a championship we can talk about him surpassing Kobe. Until then I think he needs a few more years under his belt to surpass him. I do see him doing that if he continues on this pace, he just is not there yet. Being a main part of 3 championship runs needs to amount to something more than scoring a lot of points or running off 10 wins in a row. I know it was bait JoMal but I think it was worth addressing in a somewhat serious way.
-
Not exactly a convincing win, at home, against a short handed suns team (only 9 available players but they run a short rotation usually don't they?)...are laker fans becoming concerned that this defensive softness is not temporary but systemic to the lakers?
Hi jemagee, my name is 2003, it is nice to meet you :D
As soon as Lebron wins a championship we can talk about him surpassing Kobe. Until then I think he needs a few more years under his belt to surpass him. I do see him doing that if he continues on this pace, he just is not there yet. Being a main part of 3 championship runs needs to amount to something more than scoring a lot of points or running off 10 wins in a row. I know it was bait JoMal but I think it was worth addressing in a somewhat serious way.
Is LeBron playing defense this year?
-
Not exactly a convincing win, at home, against a short handed suns team (only 9 available players but they run a short rotation usually don't they?)...are laker fans becoming concerned that this defensive softness is not temporary but systemic to the lakers?
Hi jemagee, my name is 2003, it is nice to meet you :D
As soon as Lebron wins a championship we can talk about him surpassing Kobe. Until then I think he needs a few more years under his belt to surpass him. I do see him doing that if he continues on this pace, he just is not there yet. Being a main part of 3 championship runs needs to amount to something more than scoring a lot of points or running off 10 wins in a row. I know it was bait JoMal but I think it was worth addressing in a somewhat serious way.
I know it is morning in Texas and the coffee is still doing it's magic but this looks like a Reality answer. Totally off point to the question. What does 2003 and LeBron have to do with a question about the Lakers "soft" defense?
-
Not exactly a convincing win, at home, against a short handed suns team (only 9 available players but they run a short rotation usually don't they?)...are laker fans becoming concerned that this defensive softness is not temporary but systemic to the lakers?
Hi jemagee, my name is 2003, it is nice to meet you :D
As soon as Lebron wins a championship we can talk about him surpassing Kobe. Until then I think he needs a few more years under his belt to surpass him. I do see him doing that if he continues on this pace, he just is not there yet. Being a main part of 3 championship runs needs to amount to something more than scoring a lot of points or running off 10 wins in a row. I know it was bait JoMal but I think it was worth addressing in a somewhat serious way.
Is LeBron playing defense this year?
A lot more than Kobe fans would like to give him credit for.
-
Not exactly a convincing win, at home, against a short handed suns team (only 9 available players but they run a short rotation usually don't they?)...are laker fans becoming concerned that this defensive softness is not temporary but systemic to the lakers?
Hi jemagee, my name is 2003, it is nice to meet you :D
As soon as Lebron wins a championship we can talk about him surpassing Kobe. Until then I think he needs a few more years under his belt to surpass him. I do see him doing that if he continues on this pace, he just is not there yet. Being a main part of 3 championship runs needs to amount to something more than scoring a lot of points or running off 10 wins in a row. I know it was bait JoMal but I think it was worth addressing in a somewhat serious way.
I know it is morning in Texas and the coffee is still doing it's magic but this looks like a Reality answer. Totally off point to the question. What does 2003 and LeBron have to do with a question about the Lakers "soft" defense?
What I got from the wk's response was the current Lakers look like the 2003 Lakers. They look like they are "backing" into the season and possibly the playoffs.
Someone brought the LeBron is better than Kobe reference somewhere. IMO LeBron is possibly the best offensive back court player ever, better than MJ and Kobe and will probably surpass Magic before it's all said and done. But like the Magic vs MJ battles of "long ago" MJ was better overall because of his defense, same goes with LeBron vs Kobe.
-
What I got from the wk's response was the current Lakers look like the 2003 Lakers. They look like they are "backing" into the season and possibly the playoffs.
Ok. As long as the 2010 championship ends up in the same place as tthe 2003 one then I have no problems. ;D
Someone brought the LeBron is better than Kobe reference somewhere. IMO LeBron is possibly the best offensive back court player ever, better than MJ and Kobe and will probably surpass Magic before it's all said and done. But like the Magic vs MJ battles of "long ago" MJ was better overall because of his defense, same goes with LeBron vs Kobe.
JoMal did that and even said it was in jest. jemagee went no where near that topic so IMO it comes off as quite a bit defensive about your team/star. (not that I haven't gone there before) ;)
-
Ok. As long as the 2010 championship ends up in the same place as tthe 2003 one then I have no problems. ;D
Wow, you've already conceeded the 2009 title? You're a bigger fan of the Lakers than I thought....either that or you've jumped on to the Cavs/Boston bandwagon..... :P
JoMal did that and even said it was in jest. jemagee went no where near that topic so IMO it comes off as quite a bit defensive about your team/star. (not that I haven't gone there before) ;)
You have to understand that wk and I are like Lakers/Kobe Marines...firsts ones in; last ones out...big brutes and no brains.....wait....I meant "The few, the proud"....yea...that's more like it....
-
Not exactly a convincing win, at home, against a short handed suns team (only 9 available players but they run a short rotation usually don't they?)...are laker fans becoming concerned that this defensive softness is not temporary but systemic to the lakers?
Hi jemagee, my name is 2003, it is nice to meet you :D
As soon as Lebron wins a championship we can talk about him surpassing Kobe. Until then I think he needs a few more years under his belt to surpass him. I do see him doing that if he continues on this pace, he just is not there yet. Being a main part of 3 championship runs needs to amount to something more than scoring a lot of points or running off 10 wins in a row. I know it was bait JoMal but I think it was worth addressing in a somewhat serious way.
I know it is morning in Texas and the coffee is still doing it's magic but this looks like a Reality answer. Totally off point to the question. What does 2003 and LeBron have to do with a question about the Lakers "soft" defense?
Lurker normally when two thoughts are seperate from each other you add spacing. Which is what I did. The 2003 comment was in regards to the Lakers defense. It has been spotty for years now. We've gone from seeing flashes of brilliant defense and a whole lot of lack luster efforts. We've almost become use to the fact that words 'Lakers' and 'defense' don't go together for long periods of time. Even in our earlier championship runs of this decade this was discussed. So when Jemagee asked if we are worried that this team is unable to play defense I responded by saying 'hi my name is 2003' because we've already come to terms with it. We actually thought at the start of this season it would change but they did what they have always done, play uninspired defense for long stretches of time. See Lurker this is part of the reason sometimes it comes off as I am a Spurs fan. They play the type of defense I wish the Lakers would play so I enjoy following the team when I can. The Lakers don't play consistent defense for 48 minutes for 80+ games.
I also think Lebron is getting a little bit more credit for doing everything when he is not the only person contributing. This team has improved and so has its players. A number of these guys have improved their games since the last time they went to the finals and adding guys like Mo Williams seems to help a great deal.
Again, I think if Lebron continues on this pace he will pass Kobe in talent but to say that right now because he is on a 10 game winning streak? Like I said, I think being a key part of 3 NBA titles holds a lot more weight than what Lebron has done thus far. That's not a knock on Lebron. He just hasn't been in the league as long so he hasn't had his chances.
-
wk, based on their respective squads during their formative years, LeBron is more like MJ then like Kobe, because during the Lakers' championship run, Kobe was overshadowed by Shaq. THIS Laker squad, where he is THE GUY, is more of a comparison - and gee, he has not won a championship yet on his own either. MJ took, I believe, six years to win a championship and only after he got help, so LeBron getting help is no arguement one way or the other. Same with Kobe's current team.
So it is very fair to judge them on what they have accomplished so far - on their own. Of late, it just seems like LeBron is playing with children on the court. No one in the League matches up with his combination of size, strength, and speed. not to mention his basketball skills. While they both can defer to teammates more this year, it is clear from my perspective that LeBron can turn on that deferment at will, while Kobe sometimes needs to just back off from shooting his team out of games, which he did in SacTown to a degree and almost did again against the Suns. LeBron gets many fourth quarters off because of his stellar work in the first three, and his supporting cast appreciates the challenge of maintaining late leads, while Kobe usually has to stay on the court to either get the lead back or maintain slim leads.
Sounds like one of these guys has a bit of a defensive problem that the other one doesn't. WOW asked how LeBron was doing on defense? If you are blowing away teams in the fourth so your star player can sit it out, I would say that can not be just due to your offense.
-
Um - so - no ones worried about the lakers defense?
-
Um - so - no ones worried about the lakers defense?
I am!
The frustrating thing is that they've shown the ability to play team defense. Not just in 12 minute spurts like last season, but this season they actually came out of the gate playing very solid D the first 7 or 8 games and it's just kind of faded since then. That to me shows a lack of focus and mental toughness, which is something the Celtics have clearly shown all of last season and obviously continuing through this season.
Whoever made the comment earlier in the thread (WOW, I think) that the Lakers let their offense dictate their defense rather than the other way around, which is how it should be, hit the nail square on the head.
The season is still young and hopefully they can sharpen their defensive focus as it goes on. I hate to say this, but recently I've kind of wanted them to get their butts kicked to knock them off their high horse. I think they're all guilty of reading their own press clippings and believing the hype and forgetting that it takes more than just showing up to win night in and night out.
-
Um - so - no ones worried about the lakers defense?
NO! Because the God-like Kobe will walk on the heads of the little people who populate the other teams in the NBA and lead through his overwhelming offensive skills the chosen few to the promised land of bling-bling.
-
wk, based on their respective squads during their formative years, LeBron is more like MJ then like Kobe, because during the Lakers' championship run, Kobe was overshadowed by Shaq. THIS Laker squad, where he is THE GUY, is more of a comparison - and gee, he has not won a championship yet on his own either. MJ took, I believe, six years to win a championship and only after he got help, so LeBron getting help is no arguement one way or the other. Same with Kobe's current team.
The difference is MJ did win. Lebron has yet to do it. So while he is in the same situation he hasn't won anything. He hasn't had help so I am not saying his entire career is tarnished, he will get his chance to win. I am def not holding it against him but I also am not ignoring what Kobe did. While you are right he was over shadowed by Shaq let's not pretend like he was not the #1 option in many playoff games and was a MAJOR contributor. Let's not reduce him to Rick Fox status or Glen Rice status. He won a large number of playoff games. In fact Shaq and Kobe kind of switched off. Kobe was the man on the road and Shaq was the man at home. Do you remember when the Lakers went 16-1 in the playoffs? That year Kobe has torching teams on the road, Shaq at home. Lebron has not won a title or been on a championship team in any capacity. Kobe was a MAJOR contributor to three. So regardless if Shaq was there or not there is a clear difference between the two. You can't ignore that just because another player was there. You wouldn't do that to Paul Pierce but you would do it to Kobe. Obviously there is a HUGE bias towards him on your side but let's try for once for you to ignore that.
I don't see how dominating a league for 3 years as the #2 guy (and during the regular season and playoffs sometimes #1) is ignored as if it doesn't mean much. A 10 game winning streak means more than that? Come on.
So it is very fair to judge them on what they have accomplished so far - on their own.
No, that is not fair at all. You can't ignore what Kobe did on the championship team just because Shaq was there. What about the Indian Pacers finals in game 6 when Shaq was gone on the bench and he won the game? Shaq wasn't there to win the game. Kobe did it. Is that acceptable based on your criteria? Shaq didn't do everything for Kobe and Kobe made Shaq's life easier. He benefitted from Kobe as well. Why is it that you talk like Shaq only helped Kobe and not vice versa? I think after Shaq parted and Kobe continued to do what he did with out him proved that it wasn't just Shaq who made Kobe. If that was the case he would tank majorily. He has not. Shaq did not win every single game for the Lakers contrary to how you want to re-write history. Any person who watches the Lakers often will back up everything I am saying.
And even if we wanted to run with this funny idea....Both Kobe and Lebron have got to the finals and lost. How has Lebron surpassed him? Because he had less to work with? He also played lesser teams. The team that SPANKED the Cavs the year before is the same team that lost to the Lakers in 5. While the Lakers had more talent (obviously) my point is they went through 3 50+ win teams to get to the finals.
Of late, it just seems like LeBron is playing with children on the court. No one in the League matches up with his combination of size, strength, and speed.
Kobe has been doing this for 4 years Jomal. Maybe your memory is slipping up here. He has clearly been toying with teams for YEARS now. There is no one in the league that has matched up with him in combination of drive, basketball iq, speed, clutch, and scoring ability. Lebron is getting up there now. Kobe has been there for a while now. You may not think this but everyone else in the league has said the same thing. Including Lebron James himself.
LeBron gets many fourth quarters off because of his stellar work in the first three, and his supporting cast appreciates the challenge of maintaining late leads, while Kobe usually has to stay on the court to either get the lead back or maintain slim leads.
This is an example of why I make my 'crystal ball' comments to you. You clearly don't watch Laker games. This proves that. Kobe is playing 10 less minutes a game because......???? The Lakers have been blowing out teams up until the last 4. They have a +12 winning point margin. There have been 8-9 games where he played less than 2 minutes in the 4th quarter.
Sounds like one of these guys has a bit of a defensive problem that the other one doesn't. WOW asked how LeBron was doing on defense? If you are blowing away teams in the fourth so your star player can sit it out, I would say that can not be just due to your offense.
Really? I think the PHX Suns of years past disagree with you.
-
Um - so - no ones worried about the lakers defense?
I am!
The frustrating thing is that they've shown the ability to play team defense. Not just in 12 minute spurts like last season, but this season they actually came out of the gate playing very solid D the first 7 or 8 games and it's just kind of faded since then. That to me shows a lack of focus and mental toughness, which is something the Celtics have clearly shown all of last season and obviously continuing through this season.
Whoever made the comment earlier in the thread (WOW, I think) that the Lakers let their offense dictate their defense rather than the other way around, which is how it should be, hit the nail square on the head.
The season is still young and hopefully they can sharpen their defensive focus as it goes on. I hate to say this, but recently I've kind of wanted them to get their butts kicked to knock them off their high horse. I think they're all guilty of reading their own press clippings and believing the hype and forgetting that it takes more than just showing up to win night in and night out.
I will accept an *X-Mass* present of Lakers vs Celtics ticket(s) on Dec 25th...... ;)
-
Btw....I am concerned about the defense as well. It is the reason we didn't hoist the trophy last year. Just saying that we've come to terms with the fact this team struggles (and has forever) on the defensive end.
-
The difference is MJ did win. Lebron has yet to do it. So while he is in the same situation he hasn't won anything. He hasn't had help so I am not saying his entire career is tarnished, he will get his chance to win. I am def not holding it against him but I also am not ignoring what Kobe did. While you are right he was over shadowed by Shaq let's not pretend like he was not the #1 option in many playoff games and was a MAJOR contributor. Let's not reduce him to Rick Fox status or Glen Rice status. He won a large number of playoff games. In fact Shaq and Kobe kind of switched off. Kobe was the man on the road and Shaq was the man at home. Do you remember when the Lakers went 16-1 in the playoffs? That year Kobe has torching teams on the road, Shaq at home. Lebron has not won a title or been on a championship team in any capacity. Kobe was a MAJOR contributor to three. So regardless if Shaq was there or not there is a clear difference between the two. You can't ignore that just because another player was there. You wouldn't do that to Paul Pierce but you would do it to Kobe. Obviously there is a HUGE bias towards him on your side but let's try for once for you to ignore that.
I don't see how dominating a league for 3 years as the #2 guy (and during the regular season and playoffs sometimes #1) is ignored as if it doesn't mean much. A 10 game winning streak means more than that? Come on.
MJ won only after six years of futility and without any help up to then, which pretty much covers LeBron's career up to now as well, as he has just entered his sixth season. If Jordan or LeBron had a Shaq-type player in his prime as a teammate, it would have been a similar situation that could be compared. But because Kobe had Shaq, I guess you just can not comprehend how easy a skilled player like Kobe could make that work for himself. Maybe you can by just observing how many championships Kobe has won on his own since Shaq was traded.
Are you counting?
Sure Kobe was given the chance to win games. He still is, but he has yet to actually win a championship without that fallback guy taking triple coverage down low to free him up consistently. I don't know, but maybe you should consider that before crowning Kobe as the best individual player currently playing. And my point, by the way, is not how Kobe has played the last four years or so, when he was the best player in the League, but that LeBron, THIS SEASON, has played better and looks to have passed him up in overall skill. Including defense, where he blocks more shots and gets more steals. More assists too. Kobe's teammates can't catch his passes either?
Championships are nice as a fallback in defense of a player's abilities, as they can tend to inflate a player's abilities or reveal them for what they are even more. They clearly revealed MJ's, but Kobe has that Shaq thing hanging over him that just makes you think - If LeBron had Shaq as a teammate, how would he have done as far as championships up to now? All we can do is look at how each is doing on their own, for the most part. The Lakers are skilled in keeping the talent level very high around Kobe. The Cavs are still working on that. In the mean time, LeBron seems to be doing a better overall job this season, even though both teams are way above average. I still maintain his abilities are looking better overall then Kobe's are.
No, that is not fair at all. You can't ignore what Kobe did on the championship team just because Shaq was there. What about the Indian Pacers finals in game 6 when Shaq was gone on the bench and he won the game? Shaq wasn't there to win the game. Kobe did it. Is that acceptable based on your criteria? Shaq didn't do everything for Kobe and Kobe made Shaq's life easier. He benefitted from Kobe as well. Why is it that you talk like Shaq only helped Kobe and not vice versa? I think after Shaq parted and Kobe continued to do what he did with out him proved that it wasn't just Shaq who made Kobe. If that was the case he would tank majorily. He has not. Shaq did not win every single game for the Lakers contrary to how you want to re-write history. Any person who watches the Lakers often will back up everything I am saying.
This really is not that relevant to my arguement, wk. Kobe had his moments in the playoffs with Shaq, to be sure. But I still maintain he was ONLY in those championship games in the first place because of a certain teammate he had. Take Shaq out of those Laker teams and it stretches the imagination to think the Lakers would have been as successful. They may have still won a championship, but not three.
Kobe has been doing this for 4 years Jomal. Maybe your memory is slipping up here. He has clearly been toying with teams for YEARS now. There is no one in the league that has matched up with him in combination of drive, basketball iq, speed, clutch, and scoring ability. Lebron is getting up there now. Kobe has been there for a while now. You may not think this but everyone else in the league has said the same thing. Including Lebron James himself.
Let me make it simpler for you. Kobe WAS the best player in the League the prior four seasons. I completely agree with you. From my observations of BOTH players this year, the Best Player In The League banner has passed over to LeBron. Based on that fact you pointed out that neither has won a championship yet, then clearly Paul Pierce is better then either, right? Forgetting for the moment the contributions of Garnett and Allen in making last year possible, of course.
This is an example of why I make my 'crystal ball' comments to you. You clearly don't watch Laker games. This proves that. Kobe is playing 10 less minutes a game because......???? The Lakers have been blowing out teams up until the last 4. They have a +12 winning point margin. There have been 8-9 games where he played less than 2 minutes in the 4th quarter.
You are right on this one. They both have benefitted from blowouts to take some fourth quarters off. Lately, though, LeBron is getting to rest more frequently, though as we know, that will change when the Cavs play better teams.
Really? I think the PHX Suns of years past disagree with you.
Up until they played the defensive teams in the playoffs, that is. Is that what you meant?
-
I'll respond back JoMal. Just wanted to say I read over the post but I can't give a detailed response until this weekend.
-
IMO LeBron is ahead of both MJ and Kobe. Bron-Bron single handedly took a mediocer team to the NBA finals. I don't know how much of it was the decling play of the Pistons and how much of it was LeBron but all I know is he got further than MJ and Kobe did WITHOUT a decent supporting cast.
On OFFENSE, LeBron does look like a man amoung boys but his game is not complete like MJ and Kobe IMO.
-
MO LeBron is ahead of both MJ and Kobe. Bron-Bron single handedly took a mediocer team to the NBA finals.
2001 Allen Iverson says "I'm in the discussion too" then.
-
MO LeBron is ahead of both MJ and Kobe. Bron-Bron single handedly took a mediocer team to the NBA finals.
2001 Allen Iverson says "I'm in the discussion too" then.
Are you referring to the team the year AI was the MVP of the league and ALL he to to work with was the Defensive Player of the Year, The Sixth Man of the Year AND the Coach of the Year?
That team?
STFU!
-
Oh right - you can tell how good a team was by the awards that were given out that weren't really deserved?
-
MJ won only after six years of futility and without any help up to then, which pretty much covers LeBron's career up to now as well, as he has just entered his sixth season. If Jordan or LeBron had a Shaq-type player in his prime as a teammate, it would have been a similar situation that could be compared. But because Kobe had Shaq, I guess you just can not comprehend how easy a skilled player like Kobe could make that work for himself. Maybe you can by just observing how many championships Kobe has won on his own since Shaq was traded.
Are you counting?
I do not agree. If Shaq had a polished offensive player like T-Mac, Ray Allen, D-Wade...ooops.... the results would have been the same. A young MJ or LeBron would not have cut it IMO. They were more effective scorers than Kobe early on but not as versatile. Shaq needs a slasher BUT he also needs outside shooter who can spread the floor as well and IMO LeBron and MJ were not capable early in their careers to do what Kobe did, heck Kobe was not capable of doing what he did when he was younger. Kobe failed miserably, most notably against the Jazz, and worked on his game and by the time PJ arrived Kobe was a 90% complete offensive player, he was still lacking a post up game.
How many titles did Shaq win without Kobe? How many titles did Shaq win without Wade? Shaq has proven he can NOT win a title without a polished wing player. Before Kobe, Shaq won ZERO, the year Wade was hurt Shaq won ZERO. This has been addressed before, why bring it up again? Bored? You replace Shaq with TD on Lakers squad with Kobe and they title 5 (FIVE) years in a row IMO.
Sure Kobe was given the chance to win games. He still is, but he has yet to actually win a championship without that fallback guy taking triple coverage down low to free him up consistently. I don't know, but maybe you should consider that before crowning Kobe as the best individual player currently playing. And my point, by the way, is not how Kobe has played the last four years or so, when he was the best player in the League, but that LeBron, THIS SEASON, has played better and looks to have passed him up in overall skill. Including defense, where he blocks more shots and gets more steals. More assists too. Kobe's teammates can't catch his passes either?
Again, see Shaq accomplishments comments above.
Championships are nice as a fallback in defense of a player's abilities, as they can tend to inflate a player's abilities or reveal them for what they are even more. They clearly revealed MJ's, but Kobe has that Shaq thing hanging over him that just makes you think - If LeBron had Shaq as a teammate, how would he have done as far as championships up to now? All we can do is look at how each is doing on their own, for the most part. The Lakers are skilled in keeping the talent level very high around Kobe. The Cavs are still working on that. In the mean time, LeBron seems to be doing a better overall job this season, even though both teams are way above average. I still maintain his abilities are looking better overall then Kobe's are.
I agree Kobe needs to prove he can do it without Shaq but only a below average fan doesn't see the flip side of the coin, actually 3 sides of the coin. Shaq/LeBron/Wade = Titles, Shaq w/o a polished wing = No titles, and last but not least Kobe/TD = Titles (5Peat IMO).
This really is not that relevant to my arguement, wk. Kobe had his moments in the playoffs with Shaq, to be sure. But I still maintain he was ONLY in those championship games in the first place because of a certain teammate he had. Take Shaq out of those Laker teams and it stretches the imagination to think the Lakers would have been as successful. They may have still won a championship, but not three.
Take Kobe/Wade out of the equation and Shaq would continue to do what he did up until he joined the Lakers, NOTHING. Same difference. I can only imagine how many titles a dedicated TD would have won on the Lakers with an extrodinarily dedicated Kobe.......I think Bill Russells over inflated record would have been in jeapordy. Kobe/TD might have won enough rings for all their fingers and a few toes.
Let me make it simpler for you. Kobe WAS the best player in the League the prior four seasons. I completely agree with you. From my observations of BOTH players this year, the Best Player In The League banner has passed over to LeBron. Based on that fact you pointed out that neither has won a championship yet, then clearly Paul Pierce is better then either, right? Forgetting for the moment the contributions of Garnett and Allen in making last year possible, of course.
I think LeBron needs a consistent mid-range game and a consistent defensive game to make that statement a no-brainer but right now that point can be debated either way. For now I'll stick with the Kobe camp until proven otherwise, but I can see LeBron being better as a realistic point of view THIS year and not just Kobe-Hate or Bron-Love as in years past.
-
Oh right - you can tell how good a team was by the awards that were given out that weren't really deserved?
What did Bron have to work with? Nothing close to what AI had. AI did NOT do anything remotely close to what LeBron did, it's too silly to discuss AGAIN on this board.
-
On OFFENSE, LeBron does look like a man amoung boys but his game is not complete like MJ and Kobe IMO.
This I would like for you to explain in a bit more detail.
Where, exactly, has LeBron lagged compared to Kobe? This season, that is, where I think LeBron has started to surpass Bryant.
MPG? LJ gets 35.0 and KB gets 34.0
PPG? LJ stands at 28.8: KB at 24.5
RPG? LJ: 6.8; KB: 5.3
APG? LJ: 6.3 KB: 4.3
Blocks? LJ: 1.1 KB: 0.5
Steals? LJ: 2.0 KB: 1.5
3PT %? LJ: 28.1 KB: 27.7
FG %? LJ: 48.9 KB: 45.8
AH HA!!!!!! Shots per game: KB: 19.2 and LJ: 19.0. That and FT %: KB: 87.6 and LJ: 79.7, but LJ goes to the line more; 9 per game compared to KB's 6.9, so he gets one point more from freebies per game.
Okay, you win. Clearly Kobe is superior to LeBron in that he takes 0.2 more shots per game and shoots a better percentage for his free throws. If only Kobe did not have what is considered the best bench in the NBA to cloud the perception of his greatness to we mere masses.
-
On OFFENSE, LeBron does look like a man amoung boys but his game is not complete like MJ and Kobe IMO.
This I would like for you to explain in a bit more detail.
Where, exactly, has LeBron lagged compared to Kobe? This season, that is, where I think LeBron has started to surpass Bryant.
MPG? LJ gets 35.0 and KB gets 34.0
PPG? LJ stands at 28.8: KB at 24.5
RPG? LJ: 6.8; KB: 5.3
APG? LJ: 6.3 KB: 4.3
Blocks? LJ: 1.1 KB: 0.5
Steals? LJ: 2.0 KB: 1.5
3PT %? LJ: 28.1 KB: 27.7
FG %? LJ: 48.9 KB: 45.8
AH HA!!!!!! Shots per game: KB: 19.2 and LJ: 19.0. That and FT %: KB: 87.6 and LJ: 79.7, but LJ goes to the line more; 9 per game compared to KB's 6.9, so he gets one point more from freebies per game.
Okay, you win. Clearly Kobe is superior to LeBron in that he takes 0.2 more shots per game and shoots a better percentage for his free throws. If only Kobe did not have what is considered the best bench in the NBA to cloud the perception of his greatness to we mere masses.
I don't know if you are joking or not JoMal but I already addressed what I meant by "complete" aka "versatile". I used the Kareem vs Walton example. Kareem has proven to have been the better scorer but he was not as complete as Walton. Bill had more moves, better range and just overall more skills YET Kareem was more effective because of one unstoppable offensive weapon. Wooden was asked about the best player he ever coached and he said Kareem was more effective but Walton was better. Same goes here, Kobe is more versatile offensive player but LeBron just seems to score at will by taking it to the rack when ever he seems to feel like it. LeBron doesn't need all those moves and range that Kobe has because he scores when he wants to so why take a circuse shot when a layup at the rim will do.
-
I do not agree. If Shaq had a polished offensive player like T-Mac, Ray Allen, D-Wade...ooops.... the results would have been the same. A young MJ or LeBron would not have cut it IMO. They were more effective scorers than Kobe early on but not as versatile. Shaq needs a slasher BUT he also needs outside shooter who can spread the floor as well and IMO LeBron and MJ were not capable early in their careers to do what Kobe did, heck Kobe was not capable of doing what he did when he was younger. Kobe failed miserably, most notably against the Jazz, and worked on his game and by the time PJ arrived Kobe was a 90% complete offensive player, he was still lacking a post up game.
How many titles did Shaq win without Kobe? How many titles did Shaq win without Wade? Shaq has proven he can NOT win a title without a polished wing player. Before Kobe, Shaq won ZERO, the year Wade was hurt Shaq won ZERO. This has been addressed before, why bring it up again? Bored? You replace Shaq with TD on Lakers squad with Kobe and they title 5 (FIVE) years in a row IMO.
Perhaps you can provide examples of ANY NBA team that won a championship without at least two dominant players somewhere on their rosters. Shaq and Kobe together made championships (okay, Jackson helped), but the Spurs had Duncan, Ginobili, Parker, and Bowen - all of whom were if not the best at what they did, close to it. I totally agree with you that Shaq requires a talented wing man to make championships.
My question to you is, who doesn't?
Only MJ really pulled championships out of his hat with talented but hardly superstar support (that Jackson connection, however, sticks in my craw)
I agree Kobe needs to prove he can do it without Shaq but only a below average fan doesn't see the flip side of the coin, actually 3 sides of the coin. Shaq/LeBron/Wade = Titles, Shaq w/o a polished wing = No titles, and last but not least Kobe/TD = Titles (5Peat IMO).
What, pray tell, is it that I am failing to see? That Kobe needed Shaq as much as Shaq needed Kobe. You are right, that dead horse is getting whiplash.
Take Kobe/Wade out of the equation and Shaq would continue to do what he did up until he joined the Lakers, NOTHING. Same difference. I can only imagine how many titles a dedicated TD would have won on the Lakers with an extrodinarily dedicated Kobe.......I think Bill Russells over inflated record would have been in jeapordy. Kobe/TD might have won enough rings for all their fingers and a few toes.
Ideal teammate matchups are fun to speculate, but only the recent Celtic teams have actually accomplished a Perfect Storm/Bermuda Triangle trifecta of talent.
I think LeBron needs a consistent mid-range game and a consistent defensive game to make that statement a no-brainer but right now that point can be debated either way. For now I'll stick with the Kobe camp until proven otherwise, but I can see LeBron being better as a realistic point of view THIS year and not just Kobe-Hate or Bron-Love as in years past.
That Kobe-Hate thing is soooo last < ten> year<s>. I am all for the realistic point of view that is all about THIS year. The Bron-Love is coming, though. Now, I am leaning more to pitying Kobe and his over-sized ego. :'( :'(
-
I don't know if you are joking or not JoMal but I already addressed what I meant by "complete" aka "versatile". I used the Kareem vs Walton example. Kareem has proven to have been the better scorer but he was not as complete as Walton. Bill had more moves, better range and just overall more skills YET Kareem was more effective because of one unstoppable offensive weapon. Wooden was asked about the best player he ever coached and he said Kareem was more effective but Walton was better. Same goes here, Kobe is more versatile offensive player but LeBron just seems to score at will by taking it to the rack when ever he seems to feel like it. LeBron doesn't need all those moves and range that Kobe has because he scores when he wants to so why take a circuse shot when a layup at the rim will do.
I NEVER joke, make unnecessary whoopie, take the Lords name in vain, nor mock the opinions of others.
.
.
.
.
.
.
<excuse me a minute, I suddenly have to dodge several lightening strikes that are hitting my cubicle.>
.
.
.
.
.
.
............but LeBron just seems to score at will by taking it to the rack when ever he seems to feel like it. LeBron doesn't need all those moves and range that Kobe has because he scores when he wants to so why take a circuse shot when a layup at the rim will do.
ummmmmmm.............that was thoughtful of you to explain how Kobe is.......um......still fending off LeBron, there.
-
I will accept an *X-Mass* present of Lakers vs Celtics ticket(s) on Dec 25th...... ;)
Haha! Good one. I can't believe I'm doing this but I'm actually highly considering selling them on eBay. I never do that, but I was looking at what tickets were trading for in my section and it's over 2x the face value ... tough to resist.
-
I will accept an *X-Mass* present of Lakers vs Celtics ticket(s) on Dec 25th...... ;)
Haha! Good one. I can't believe I'm doing this but I'm actually highly considering selling them on eBay. I never do that, but I was looking at what tickets were trading for in my section and it's over 2x the face value ... tough to resist.
How much would that be?
-
MJ won only after six years of futility and without any help up to then, which pretty much covers LeBron's career up to now as well, as he has just entered his sixth season. If Jordan or LeBron had a Shaq-type player in his prime as a teammate, it would have been a similar situation that could be compared. But because Kobe had Shaq, I guess you just can not comprehend how easy a skilled player like Kobe could make that work for himself. Maybe you can by just observing how many championships Kobe has won on his own since Shaq was traded.
Ok but you are already awarding Lebron titles he has not got yet. You assume if he had help he would have already won and that is a 'crystal ball' comment. The Celtics are pretty good right now. Having another player with him does not give him the trophy automatically. Us Laker fans thought that with Pau Gasol, we learned the hard way. Nothing is 'for sure' in this league so I don't think you are on with this one.
How many has Shaq won with out a dominating player on the perimeter? 0 W.O.W has already gone over this so I won't repeat it. With out Kobe the Lakers do not win those championships. With out Shaq they don't win them. They needed BOTH players and BOTH players deserve credit. If you really want to start breaking down regular season contributions and playoff contributions you will see it's a lot more even than people who don't watch the Lakers day in and day say. Shaq's skills dropped from that first year and a half. Yet the Lakers continued to win. So it's easy to see Kobe benefitted from Shaq and that Shaq benefitted with Kobe. That was a great and dominating team thanks in part to Kobe Bryant.
Are you counting?
Yes 0. The same amount Shaq has won with out a player who completely can dominate a game from the perimeter. He won 0 in Orlando with out a player of that caliber and he won 0 in LA with a player of that caliber. He is going to win 0 in PHX. Again, proping up Shaq because you dislike Kobe a great deal really doesn't work.
Maybe you haven't really paid attention to the last two playoff runs leading up to a title for Shaq he was carried by those same two dominating players we've been refering to.
Sure Kobe was given the chance to win games. He still is, but he has yet to actually win a championship without that fallback guy taking triple coverage down low to free him up consistently.
Just to throw this out there because you don't watch Laker games often....there have been many games where Shaq was not in the game due to foul trouble (so no QUADRUPLE TEAM cuz if we are going to exaggerate this happened often lets go all the way) that were won by Kobe. Not all teams double teamed Shaq every single game. The Spurs rarely doubled Shaq. The Wolves did not double Shaq for parts of the series in the WCF. By the time the 2nd and 3rd championships rolled around teams were not doubling him as much because of the improvement of Kobe Bryant. Let's not re-write history that was only a handful of years ago. It is still fresh in the minds of people who's minds are fresh ;)
I don't know, but maybe you should consider that before crowning Kobe as the best individual player currently playing. And my point, by the way, is not how Kobe has played the last four years or so, when he was the best player in the League, but that LeBron, THIS SEASON, has played better and looks to have passed him up in overall skill. Including defense, where he blocks more shots and gets more steals. More assists too. Kobe's teammates can't catch his passes either?
Maybe you should consider other things as well. Take some of your own advice. It looks like I've actually agreed with some of your points and did say I felt Lebron James would surpass Kobe eventually. You dislike the guy so much you are not considering anything else.
Sorry JoMaL but if you were trying your hardest to not give Kobe his props for what he has done for years now why makes you act like its crazy for someone not to just hand it to Lebron James after 20 games? Yes he is doing well. No one can deny that. That title has best individual player in my mind spans a longer distance than just one fifth of a season.
As for catching passes, Kobe does not run his offense. Lebron James does. If you take a look at Pau Gasol's assists at the end of games you will see where some of them are going. Or Lamar or some of the other better passers on this team. With Pau Gasol's passing ability and Kobe trusting his teammates more he has a lesser role in the offense. He doesn't have to create nearly as much. They don't have to rely on him to create. And this is why I see Lebron starting to move in the direction of eventually passing Kobe because of his court vision. He is a much better passer than Kobe and I think that's what seperates them when it is all said and done. Lebron is not a better scorer than Kobe Bryant. There is a whole lot more stats than just the current PPG that proves that. Kobe Bryant, when he gets hot, is still the deadliest scorer in this league. I honestly feel that is not debatable.
As you know this is not hockey so you do not get an assist if you make the right pass to a player who makes the right pass. The Lakers offense currently does not run where Kobe just drives and kicks over and over.
Championships are nice as a fallback in defense of a player's abilities, as they can tend to inflate a player's abilities or reveal them for what they are even more. They clearly revealed MJ's, but Kobe has that Shaq thing hanging over him that just makes you think - If LeBron had Shaq as a teammate, how would he have done as far as championships up to now? All we can do is look at how each is doing on their own, for the most part. The Lakers are skilled in keeping the talent level very high around Kobe. The Cavs are still working on that. In the mean time, LeBron seems to be doing a better overall job this season, even though both teams are way above average. I still maintain his abilities are looking better overall then Kobe's are.
Championships are the whole point teams play the regular season and the playoffs. Stop trying to diminish the highest achievement in this league to try to add to your argument.
On top of winning a championship winning 3 in a row is a very tough thing to do. Only 3 teams have been able to do that. 3 of the best teams in history. Going 16-1 is a record that has not been broken yet. It was more than just being a championship team once, it was being the #2 (and sometimes #1) key player in one of the greatest teams of all time. Your bitterness is shinning like the California sun here as usual. You don't want to admit any of this or want to ignore it. This however is FACT. That Laker squad was one of the best teams of all time. With out Kobe that team wouldn't have been great. I think that is also a fact. Again, ditto for Shaq but clearly they benefitted from each other. If the Celtics repeat this year are you going to down play what Kevin Garnett does because he had Paul Pierce? Probably not.
This really is not that relevant to my arguement, wk. Kobe had his moments in the playoffs with Shaq, to be sure. But I still maintain he was ONLY in those championship games in the first place because of a certain teammate he had. Take Shaq out of those Laker teams and it stretches the imagination to think the Lakers would have been as successful. They may have still won a championship, but not three.
Moments are small spots in time. He had 3 entire years of getting things done in the playoffs. The Lakers wouldn't have been as good as they were with out Kobe Bryant.
I would like to re-visit a famous play to prove my point. What kicked off the Lakers 3-peat was a come back in Portland. The Lakers were getting their butts kicked and made a push on the back of Shaq and Kobe. The nail in the coffin or the breaking point was Kobe juking out 2 players to throw a lob to Shaq for a slam. Now think about that for a second.......
Let me make it simpler for you. Kobe WAS the best player in the League the prior four seasons. I completely agree with you. From my observations of BOTH players this year, the Best Player In The League banner has passed over to LeBron. Based on that fact you pointed out that neither has won a championship yet, then clearly Paul Pierce is better then either, right? Forgetting for the moment the contributions of Garnett and Allen in making last year possible, of course.
Again so reluctant to give him props prior, so quick to give them to another. This season is not over. If you want to say he looks better than Kobe does in the first 20 games, I will agree. Completely being better than Kobe, not yet.
You are right on this one. They both have benefitted from blowouts to take some fourth quarters off. Lately, though, LeBron is getting to rest more frequently, though as we know, that will change when the Cavs play better teams.
Or not, to be fair. They look really good and better than the Lakers. You might see Kobe's numbers go up and Lebron's go down which is why I don't really agree with you posting the stats and only going off 20 games. If the Cavs continue to play well, he rests. If the Lakers continue to play poor like they have then Kobe is going to get more minutes and his stats will go up.
Up until they played the defensive teams in the playoffs, that is. Is that what you meant?
They did blow out those defensive teams at times....but we can't really compare regular season defense and playoff defense.
-
The knicks have put 40+ up on the kings - in sacramento
in the first quarter
-
Ok but you are already awarding Lebron titles he has not got yet.
um......no.
I am not awarding titles to Kobe AND LeBron equally that they have not yet earned...on their own merits. Please pay attention.
You assume if he had help he would have already won and that is a 'crystal ball' comment. The Celtics are pretty good right now. Having another player with him does not give him the trophy automatically. Us Laker fans thought that with Pau Gasol, we learned the hard way. Nothing is 'for sure' in this league so I don't think you are on with this one.
Again, I am more making the rather easier assumption that Kobe benefitted from HAVING that other player to help him win championships and that LeBron would be a pretty good complementary player to a dominant center as well and possibly would have had the same success Kobe enjoyed, if their situations had been reversed. You are making this more sinister and complicated then you should.
Also, and I am just throwing this one out there, until Jackson showed up, neither Kobe nor Shaq won as teammates.
How many has Shaq won with out a dominating player on the perimeter?
How many teams have won ANYTHING without a dominating player on the perimeter? What does that have to do with this? Except for the Jordan/Chicago years, which is probably why MJ is still and always will be put above Kobe in NBA lore, just about every championship team ever had a dominant center or forward as well. Especially recently, when big, mobile centers or quick forwards who dictate what happens in the lane are harder to find. Cleveland's current front line is good, but not great. Kobe and Gasol together would be considered superior. Once again, LeBron is doing more with less around him, and doing it with apparent ease.
W.O.W has already gone over this so I won't repeat it. Without Kobe the Lakers do not win those championships. With out Shaq they don't win them. They needed BOTH players and BOTH players deserve credit. If you really want to start breaking down regular season contributions and playoff contributions you will see it's a lot more even than people who don't watch the Lakers day in and day say. Shaq's skills dropped from that first year and a half. Yet the Lakers continued to win. So it's easy to see Kobe benefitted from Shaq and that Shaq benefitted with Kobe. That was a great and dominating team thanks in part to Kobe Bryant.
Yes, you are right. In other words, LeBron should rightfully be compared to Michael Jordon instead of Kobe, depending on whether James can win a championship without a complementary big player, while Kobe is behind them both, since he clearly cannot win or even compete for a championship unless he gets that dominant front line player to take the pressure off. I see your point completely now.
Just to throw this out there because you don't watch Laker games often....there have been many games where Shaq was not in the game due to foul trouble (so no QUADRUPLE TEAM cuz if we are going to exaggerate this happened often lets go all the way) that were won by Kobe. Not all teams double teamed Shaq every single game. The Spurs rarely doubled Shaq. The Wolves did not double Shaq for parts of the series in the WCF. By the time the 2nd and 3rd championships rolled around teams were not doubling him as much because of the improvement of Kobe Bryant. Let's not re-write history that was only a handful of years ago. It is still fresh in the minds of people who's minds are fresh ;)
So you are saying that because Shaq had lost it by the time the Lakers played the Pistons that last year, Kobe could not win consistently without him, but before that year, Kobe could win with Shaq? Did Kobe start losing it as well? Gee, wk, that is an interesting thought.
Maybe you should consider other things as well. Take some of your own advice. It looks like I've actually agreed with some of your points and did say I felt Lebron James would surpass Kobe eventually. You dislike the guy so much you are not considering anything else.
Sorry JoMaL but if you were trying your hardest to not give Kobe his props for what he has done for years now why makes you act like its crazy for someone not to just hand it to Lebron James after 20 games? Yes he is doing well. No one can deny that. That title has best individual player in my mind spans a longer distance than just one fifth of a season.
And I think I am agreeing with some of the points that you have made, and certainly have been thinking about the other points. As for hating Kobe, I don't hate him any more then you or some other Laker fans do, from the looks of things.
But Kobe's place in the overall NBA historical talent pool has been secured long before LeBron came along. He just is not "THE GUY" now as he once was because LeBron has passed him. That is not all that bad for Kobe, wk and it IS inevitable. I am just saying it looks like it has happened already, while you are saying it is still has not, but basing your arguement on the number of championships Kobe won, the last being, what, four years ago, hardly makes Kobe the best player in the NBA TODAY.
As for catching passes, Kobe does not run his offense. Lebron James does.
This makes Kobe the better player how?
If you take a look at Pau Gasol's assists at the end of games you will see where some of them are going. Or Lamar or some of the other better passers on this team. With Pau Gasol's passing ability and Kobe trusting his teammates more he has a lesser role in the offense. He doesn't have to create nearly as much. They don't have to rely on him to create.
Why is it that part of your arguement for Kobe is always predicated on Kobe suddenly working to get his teammates more involved, while I never need to resort to that with LeBron, because he seemlessly does that already????
Why is that????
Yeah, about Gasol's assists taking them away from Kobe, on the Cavs, they do it the old fashioned way. Their point guard Mo Williams dishes out 4.3 assists per game, which would make that more then Gasol's 3.5 per game. Wonder how many assists LeBron would have it he also did not have other teammates taking them away from him? ::)
You watch the Lakers play, westkoast. A lot. You have made that point very clear and that I do not. You also make it abundantly clear from your observations that YOU don't watch much of any of the other teams in the NBA all that much either, unless they happen to be playing the Lakers. DUH!!! It might be of great insight, therefore, if I could point out that most NBA teams consist of five players on the court at all times - same as the Lakers. And often, but not always obvious to Laker fans who have grown up NBA-wise just watching games in which Kobe has played, these other teams allow other players around their "star" attraction to hold the ball, dribble the ball, and - pay attention now - PASS the ball to others so they can make shots.
Lebron is not a better scorer than Kobe Bryant. There is a whole lot more stats than just the current PPG that proves that. Kobe Bryant, when he gets hot, is still the deadliest scorer in this league. I honestly feel that is not debatable.
How is it not debatable? They both take the exact number of shots per game this season - 19.0, yet LeBron hits 48.8 percent of his while Kobe hits 45.3. Careerwise, Kobe lags LeBron in shooting percentage 45.3 to 46.8 and LeBron shot MORE attempts per game prior to this season. Along with more rebounds and more assists during their careers, there can be only one reason for you to think Kobe is better then LeBron.
Kobe plays for the Lakers.
BAM!!!...... AND ONE......
Championships are the whole point teams play the regular season and the playoffs. Stop trying to diminish the highest achievement in this league to try to add to your argument.
Okay, when Kobe wins one on his own, I will allow that he is at least a good player.
Moments are small spots in time. He had 3 entire years of getting things done in the playoffs. The Lakers wouldn't have been as good as they were with out Kobe Bryant.
I would like to re-visit a famous play to prove my point. What kicked off the Lakers 3-peat was a come back in Portland. The Lakers were getting their butts kicked and made a push on the back of Shaq and Kobe. The nail in the coffin or the breaking point was Kobe juking out 2 players to throw a lob to Shaq for a slam. Now think about that for a second.......
Okay........still thinking........
Ah....got it. You are making a reference back to when Kobe was a good player and had a dominant player helping him win big games and before LeBron came into the League and outshown him. Got it!!!!!! Good point, westkoast, it does make my arguement look stronger.
Again so reluctant to give him props prior, so quick to give them to another. This season is not over. If you want to say he looks better than Kobe does in the first 20 games, I will agree. Completely being better than Kobe, not yet.
It seems I have not been all that reluctant to give Kobe his prior year props. Far from it. He is just so last year anymore, as you clearly agree. That is what "Passing Him By" as the best player in the NBA today means, wk. Today, not when Portland was the biggest challenge to a Laker championship.
-
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
I was prepared to rip you apart again, like I did in my other detailed response to one of your posts, but you eff'd up the usage of the quote feature so bad that I'm not sure I can respond.
That is a very effective technique to counter my superior b-ball knowledge JoMal...touch'e
-
Perhaps you can provide examples of ANY NBA team that won a championship without at least two dominant players somewhere on their rosters. Shaq and Kobe together made championships (okay, Jackson helped), but the Spurs had Duncan, Ginobili, Parker, and Bowen - all of whom were if not the best at what they did, close to it. I totally agree with you that Shaq requires a talented wing man to make championships.
I missed this one......
The Pistons teams of the 80's and 00's won titles without two dominant players, in fact both those teams won with out ONE SINGLE dominant player. Isiah was the closets thing to a dominant player but he didn't dominate durring their runs except for game 6 in the 88 finals, which they lost.
The first Houston title only had ONE dominant player, I think the 2nd team was the same but you could make the argument about Dexler but I would not buy that one.
The Trailblazers title team only had one dominant player.
MJ had Pippen/Grant and Pippen/Rodman, that's more than any of those squads had and IMO Pippen was better than anything Kobe had to work with. Same argument goes for MJ, he could not have won those titles without Pippen, no chance. He may or may not have won titles with a dominant/solid center but I doubt they beat the Lakers for their first title because Magic would have torn the Bulls apart if they did not have Pippen. The Lakers could have dealt with a tough center vs Pippen IMO.
Not to mention MJ won his titles in the most watered down league since the NBA/ABA days.
-
I missed this one......
Really.....?? That was the only one you missed??
The Pistons teams of the 80's and 00's won titles without two dominant players, in fact both those teams won with out ONE SINGLE dominant player. Isiah was the closets thing to a dominant player but he didn't dominate durring their runs except for game 6 in the 88 finals, which they lost.
The first Houston title only had ONE dominant player, I think the 2nd team was the same but you could make the argument about Dexler but I would not buy that one.
The Trailblazers title team only had one dominant player.
MJ had Pippen/Grant and Pippen/Rodman, that's more than any of those squads had and IMO Pippen was better than anything Kobe had to work with. Same argument goes for MJ, he could not have won those titles without Pippen, no chance. He may or may not have won titles with a dominant/solid center but I doubt they beat the Lakers for their first title because Magic would have torn the Bulls apart if they did not have Pippen. The Lakers could have dealt with a tough center vs Pippen IMO.
Not to mention MJ won his titles in the most watered down league since the NBA/ABA days.
I disagree about those Piston teams. They had some superior guys on defense that put them on top of players on other teams. And Dumars and Isiah would both be HOF'ers would they not? Wasn't Dennis Rodman and Grant Hill (pre-ankle disaster) on those teams?
The Houston teams had that dominant player being a center, as did that Portland team, and the Blazers also had Maurice Lucas on their championship team that surely helped Walton out a bit.
Other then the Kings, you could say the Lakers won their recent championships while the League was certainly watered down as well, especially the Eastern Conference.
-
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
I was prepared to rip you apart again, like I did in my other detailed response to one of your posts, but you eff'd up the usage of the quote feature so bad that I'm not sure I can respond.
That is a very effective technique to counter my superior b-ball knowledge JoMal...touch'e
Yeah.....that is a little trick I learned from Reality that seems to always bait you into resounding flummoxing.
-
How much would that be?
Face is $147 ea. x 2 = $294. They seem to be trading in the $700-$800 range for two in comparable section.
-
Thus why i can never get good tickets when the sixers come to town
-
I disagree about those Piston teams. They had some superior guys on defense that put them on top of players on other teams. And Dumars and Isiah would both be HOF'ers would they not? Wasn't Dennis Rodman and Grant Hill (pre-ankle disaster) on those teams?
1st title had Zeke/Dumars/Aguire/Mahorn/Lambier with Vinny/Salley/Rodman/Edwards comming off the bench. 2nd title had Rodman, I think, moving into the starting line-up because Mahorn ended up in Philly. That year Philly OWNED the Pistons, Barkley and Mahorn expecially destroyed the Pistons. I was pissed that the up and comming wussy Bulls took out the Sixers and ruined an EC finals for the ages.
None of those players were "dominant", zeke came the closest.
The Houston teams had that dominant player being a center, as did that Portland team, and the Blazers also had Maurice Lucas on their championship team that surely helped Walton out a bit.
You asked for teams that won without at LEAST two dominant players Lurker...err...JoMal. You got your answer. FYI Lucas was not dominant unless you classify cheap shots and borderline dirty play as "dominant"
Other then the Kings, you could say the Lakers won their recent championships while the League was certainly watered down as well, especially the Eastern Conference.
I totally disagree, it's not even close. The WC at the time was the best in all NBA history when the Lakers made their run(s). You had the 8th seed in the WC winning at least 50 games. That was the toughest competition in NBA history and the toughest I can remember since the 80's. You had the Spurs/Blazers/Kings/Wolves in their primes and the Lakers destoyed them. Only the recent WC compares but I agree that the EC was the weakest ever but the Lakers had to get through the WC in order the meet the soft bunny from the EC. Only the EC of the 80's could even be compared to the WC of the 00's.
-
1st title had Zeke/Dumars/Aguire/Mahorn/Lambier with Vinny/Salley/Rodman/Edwards comming off the bench. 2nd title had Rodman, I think, moving into the starting line-up because Mahorn ended up in Philly. That year Philly OWNED the Pistons, Barkley and Mahorn expecially destroyed the Pistons. I was pissed that the up and comming wussy Bulls took out the Sixers and ruined an EC finals for the ages.
None of those players were "dominant", zeke came the closest.
For that era, they certainly would be superior. Few teams could field a lineup as deep as the Pistons. And Dumas was woefully underrated during his time back then, but his defensive at the perimeter was better then anyone else's, which would make him the dominant player at his position during playoff runs.
The Houston teams had that dominant player being a center, as did that Portland team, and the Blazers also had Maurice Lucas on their championship team that surely helped Walton out a bit.
You asked for teams that won without at LEAST two dominant players Lurker...err...JoMal. You got your answer. FYI Lucas was not dominant unless you classify cheap shots and borderline dirty play as "dominant"
Actually, back then that WOULD make him a dominant player during his era. It certainly worked well for those Piston teams as well. They beat the crap out of their competition.
Other then the Kings, you could say the Lakers won their recent championships while the League was certainly watered down as well, especially the Eastern Conference.
I totally disagree, it's not even close. The WC at the time was the best in all NBA history when the Lakers made their run(s). You had the 8th seed in the WC winning at least 50 games. That was the toughest competition in NBA history and the toughest I can remember since the 80's. You had the Spurs/Blazers/Kings/Wolves in their primes and the Lakers destoyed them. Only the recent WC compares but I agree that the EC was the weakest ever but the Lakers had to get through the WC in order the meet the soft bunny from the EC. Only the EC of the 80's could even be compared to the WC of the 00's.
The 80's and the Laker/Celtic rivalry was better - and at a time when both conferences had a top team worthy of the name. Neither the Spurs nor the Lakers of more recent times had it over the Lakers or the Celtics of the eighties. As you say - it's not even close.
And do not forget the 2002 championship was very "tainted", so the Lakers did not dominate through those western conference series all the time.
Those WC teams blew through the Eastern Conference annually, pumping up their records. It made those times completely impossible to read for overall competition because all the talent was in the west.
-
First off, I'll take the time to fix your "quote" errors, I know you are trying to destroy me with that tactic.....your best strategy yet!
For that era, they certainly would be superior. Few teams could field a lineup as deep as the Pistons.
You can NOT call ANY of those players dominant. They may have been "deeper" but there was not one single "dominant" player on those teams Lurker. Deeper does not equal players dominant. Their team could dominate but they did it because, as you pointed out, they were deeper and complimented each other very well.
You had guys like Magic, MJ, Bird, Hakeem, Ewing, Nique, Barkley, Moses, Dr J, ect...durring the 80's, not one single guy on the Pistons could dominate the way those guys did, some on both ends of the court. Zeke came the closest offensively but overall he could not dominate games like those guys could.
And Dumas was woefully underrated during his time back then, but his defensive at the perimeter was better then anyone else's, which would make him the dominant player at his position during playoff runs.
Actually, back then that WOULD make him a dominant player during his era. It certainly worked well for those Piston teams as well. They beat the crap out of their competition.
FYI, Dumars was a title winning Piston, Dumas was a coke head Sun. :P
I agree that Dumars was very under-rated but there were guys like Cooper that IMO were as good, if not better, a defender but I would not even think of calling them "dominant".
The 80's and the Laker/Celtic rivalry was better - and at a time when both conferences had a top team worthy of the name. Neither the Spurs nor the Lakers of more recent times had it over the Lakers or the Celtics of the eighties. As you say - it's not even close.
No argument there but that is not the point of this portion of the discussion. Back in the 80's the EC was tough from 1 to 6 and they had to battle it out through the toughest competition I can remember and the Lakers had one maybe two teams that were tough in the WC. That has flipped and when the Lakers made their run the WC was, IMO, just as tough as some of those 80's EC teams, the point being the Lakers had to actually beat those great teams and more of them so while the league overall may have been watered down, I highly disagree with that point, the Lakers had to face the toughest competition and more of it than any team in history. As great as those Sixers/Pistons/Bucks/Hawks/Bulls teams where in the 80's, they didn't all peak at the same time so IMO the Lakers faced tougher competition than the Celtics/Pistons/Sixers/Bulls had to face durring their runs in the 80's and early 90's.
And do not forget the 2002 championship was very "tainted", so the Lakers did not dominate through those western conference series all the time.
The 2002 was the toughest run they had and it had as much to do with the drop off of the Lakers as it did with the competition. I agree that it's possible that the WC finals were tinted based on some comments made by that one ref but it's not a proven fact. A proven fact was the records those WC teams posted that made it in to the WC playoffs, those records were the best EVER.
Those WC teams blew through the Eastern Conference annually, pumping up their records. It made those times completely impossible to read for overall competition because all the talent was in the west.
You are totally missing the point, either by accident or on purpose. The point is the competition in the WC was the best EVER, and that is the conference the Lakers had to go through. The Lakers had to beat 3 50+ win teams to win the WC. That run through the WC was the toughest ever, the 80's being the only possible exception. Even though the Finals was a walk in the park for the team comming from the WC, just getting there was harder than most, if not all, runs any team ever had to go through from any conference in any area. Now if the Lakers came from the EC and won all those title I would agree that the Lakers path to the titles was easy, but the road to the finals was the toughest ever and the Lakers were the kings of the hill at the end.
-
First off, I'll take the time to fix your "quote" errors, I know you are trying to destroy me with that tactic.....your best strategy yet!
Really wish I knew how I was doing it.
FYI, Dumars was a title winning Piston, Dumas was a coke head Sun. :P
I agree that Dumars was very under-rated but there were guys like Cooper that IMO were as good, if not better, a defender but I would not even think of calling them "dominant".
Oh.....I forgot that Cooper is in the HOF just as Duma(r)s is. Of course he must have been his equal, then.
But since you must be referring to the ONLY Cooper currently in the HOF, "Tarzan" Cooper of the old Philadelphia teams and the New York Renaissance of the 1920's and 30's, I was wondering what HE had to do with comparisons to Joe Duma(r)s???
No argument there but that is not the point of this portion of the discussion. Back in the 80's the EC was tough from 1 to 6 and they had to battle it out through the toughest competition I can remember and the Lakers had one maybe two teams that were tough in the WC. That has flipped and when the Lakers made their run the WC was, IMO, just as tough as some of those 80's EC teams, the point being the Lakers had to actually beat those great teams and more of them so while the league overall may have been watered down, I highly disagree with that point, the Lakers had to face the toughest competition and more of it than any team in history. As great as those Sixers/Pistons/Bucks/Hawks/Bulls teams where in the 80's, they didn't all peak at the same time so IMO the Lakers faced tougher competition than the Celtics/Pistons/Sixers/Bulls had to face durring their runs in the 80's and early 90's.
This is why arguements that try to compare teams of different eras always bog down.
The 2002 was the toughest run they had and it had as much to do with the drop off of the Lakers as it did with the competition. I agree that it's possible that the WC finals were tinted based on some comments made by that one ref but it's not a proven fact. A proven fact was the records those WC teams posted that made it in to the WC playoffs, those records were the best EVER.
How many games did the Lakers lose in that playoff year? Four?? Three of which were against just one team, I believe? Yeah, that was a really tough year of WC competition and that 4-0 sweep of the EC winners, the Nets, was just creepy it was so tough.
You are totally missing the point, either by accident or on purpose. The point is the competition in the WC was the best EVER, and that is the conference the Lakers had to go through. The Lakers had to beat 3 50+ win teams to win the WC. That run through the WC was the toughest ever, the 80's being the only possible exception. Even though the Finals was a walk in the park for the team comming from the WC, just getting there was harder than most, if not all, runs any team ever had to go through from any conference in any area. Now if the Lakers came from the EC and won all those title I would agree that the Lakers path to the titles was easy, but the road to the finals was the toughest ever and the Lakers were the kings of the hill at the end.
I certainly miss the accident on purpose, but otherwise......
It was good, but not easy to gauge because of the difference in talent between the conferences. I WOULD agree that discrepancy had to be the biggest ever in the NBA, but because it was, judging the competition the Lakers endured in the WC is really much harder to do. The top teams 1-7 all were in the west, but that did not mean they were all close to being as good as the Lakers once the playoffs started. If any of those teams were in the East, the records would have had to have been a lot different.
It did mean the NBA championship was always being decided in the WC finals, though.
-
westkoast: Kobe has been doing this for 4 years Jomal. Maybe your memory is slipping up here. He has clearly been toying with teams for YEARS now. There is no one in the league that has matched up with him in combination of drive, basketball iq, speed, clutch, and scoring ability. Lebron is getting up there now. Kobe has been there for a while now. You may not think this but everyone else in the league has said the same thing. Including Lebron James himself.
Bold quote is Jomal: Let me make it simpler for you. Kobe WAS the best player in the League the prior four seasons. I completely agree with you. ....From my observations of BOTH players this year, the Best Player In The League banner has passed over to LeBron. Based on that fact you pointed out that neither has won a championship yet, then clearly Paul Pierce is better then either, right? Forgetting for the moment the contributions of Garnett and Allen in making last year possible, of course.
Jomal you are doing a fine job on this thread with the two Lakerees. Beyond that, how on earth do you place Kobme above Timmy Duncar for all and any of 2003-7?
-
Jomal you are doing a fine job on this thread with the two Lakerees. Beyond that, how on earth do you place Kobme above Timmy Duncar for all and any of 2003-7?
The discussion is sooooooooooooooooooo over your boxscore head it's not even funny....oh wait...it is funny...
Reality strikes again...
(http://samuelpablo.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/epic_fail.jpg)
-
Jomal,
Maybe you are waiting to extract a few free dinner n drinks off of WoW before posting about Kobme vs Timmy Dunkar.
After that could you explain how he is better then DWade? Oh those 2004 and 2006 finals results. Then about last night.....That Heat-Lakers game. :D
-
Jomal,
Maybe you are waiting to extract a few free dinner n drinks off of WoW before posting about Kobme vs Timmy Dunkar.
After that could you explain how he is better then DWade? Oh those 2004 and 2006 finals results. Then about last night.....That Heat-Lakers game. :D
(http://samuelpablo.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/epic_fail.jpg)
-
Another close one halfway through the 3rd against a team they should pummel
-
Another close one halfway through the 3rd against a team they should pummel
The Lakers are STRICTLY relying on their offense to win games. I can understand the Lakers not having the speed to stay in front of the penetration but at some point you have to make an adjustment. The penetration is destroying the Lakers. When the defense collapses the Lakers are not rotating back out to the shooters and EVERYONE is getting wide open looks. Rondo and the Celtics are going to murder the Lakers on XMas.
-
Not for nothing - but someone cut Vujacic hair please...
-
SO what was the line on tonights lakers game?
-
SO what was the line on tonights lakers game?
Lakers by 8.
Ah my little cash cows.....
-
Interesting, the line I saw was lakers by 12 and the over under was 206
I wonder - do you know WHY I was asking what the line was?
-
Another close one halfway through the 3rd against a team they should pummel
The Lakers are STRICTLY relying on their offense to win games. I can understand the Lakers not having the speed to stay in front of the penetration but at some point you have to make an adjustment. The penetration is destroying the Lakers. When the defense collapses the Lakers are not rotating back out to the shooters and EVERYONE is getting wide open looks. Rondo and the Celtics are going to murder the Lakers on XMas.
Yup, that is why I made sure I started him in fantasy on X-mas :D
You guys do know the last few games I did not watch they lost. I watched last nights game and they won. I'll try to do a better job as a Laker fan now that travel has slowed down for the next 2 weeks.
-
Interesting, the line I saw was lakers by 12 and the over under was 206
I wonder - do you know WHY I was asking what the line was?
Were you talking about the line at The Gap in West Hollywood? So you, WoWkoast and other Lakers could do some more pre XMass shopping?
There are many betting lines. Altho you refer to the Vegas one, correct?
Props to Kobe for leading the Lakers over the Grizzleys.
-
But you still don't know why i asked do you?
-
But you still don't know why i asked do you?
I do not. Could it be that the previous 5 straight games, the Flamers did not cover the line?
-
But you still don't know why i asked do you?
I do not. Could it be that the previous 5 straight games, the Flamers did not cover the line?
Nope - it could not
-
Farmar out for 2 months to rehab torn meniscus surgery?
-
Farmar out for 2 months to rehab torn meniscus surgery?
Si senior, which really puts us in a tough spot because he runs the offense very well for that second unit.
-
Phil Jackson was talking up Sasha "I need a haircut" Vujacic (sp?) the past couple days - you don't believe in Sasha?
-
Farmar out for 2 months to rehab torn meniscus surgery?
Si senior, which really puts us in a tough spot because he runs the offense very well for that second unit.
The Laker announcers were harping on Farmar's injury I couldn't help but think "isn't this the deepest bench in the league...". All of a sudden Jordan is the key to the Lakers 2nd unit? The problem is the Lakers deep bench does NOT have the PG position covered very well. Every spot is at least 3 deep except the PG. Lakers are going to have to go "old skool" triangle now and play big at the PG with Kobe/Sasha/Ariza playing the PG spot in name only. If Harper can play the point in the triangle then so should the previously named trio plus Odom in a pinch.
IMO Farmar makes some of the stupidest defensive plays for the Lakers but no doubt he's vital to the 2nd unit.