Kobe vs Shaq vs Duncan [Archive] - Message Board Basketball Forum

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 03:29 AM

Which one is the best all time, Rank them in order
1.?
2.?
3.?

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
kobe vs duncan in playoffs

spurs vs lakers in playoffs (points from each game)

2001 wcf

kobe - 45, 28, 36, 24

duncan- 28, 40, 9, 15

LAL 4-0

2002 2nd round

kobe - 20, 26, 31, 28, 26

duncan - 26, 27, 28, 30, 34

LAL 4-1

2003 2nd round

kobe - 32.1 ppg

duncan- 24.7 ppg

SAS 4-2

2004 2nd round

kobe - 31, 15, 22, 42, 22, 26

duncan - 30, 24, 10, 19, 21, 20

LAL 4-2

2008 WCF

kobe - 27, 22, 30, 28, 39

duncan - 30, 12, 22, 29, 19

LAL 4-1

playoff series wins against each other

kobe - 4

duncan - 1

2001 http://www.nba.com/playoffs2001/finals/west/?nav=SiteFragment
2002 http://www.nba.com/playoffs2002/west_round2_02.html
2003 http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs2003/series?series=lalsas
2004 http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs2004/series?series=lalsas
2008 http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs2008/series?series=saslal

IMO
1. shaq
2. kobe
3. duncan

2 best seasons statistically

duncan
01-02 - 25.5 ppg, 12.7 rpg, 3.7 apg, 2.5 bpg
02-03 - 23.3 ppg, 12.9 rpg, 3.9 apg, 2.9 bpg

shaq
93-94 - 29.3 ppg, 13.2 rpg, 2.4 apg, 2.9 bpg
99-00 - 29.7 ppg, 13.6 rpg, 3.8 apg, 3.0 bpg

kobe
05-06 - 35.4 ppg, 5.3 rpg, 4.5 apg, 1.8 spg
06-07 - 31.6 ppg, 4.7 rpg, 5.4 apg, 1.4 spg

Norcaliblunt

03-12-2011, 03:33 AM

Which one is the best all time, Rank them in order
1.?
2.?
3.?

Shaq
Duncan
Kobe

ginobli2311

03-12-2011, 03:34 AM

1. duncan
2. shaq

3. kobe

ThaSwagg3r

03-12-2011, 03:34 AM

1. duncan
2. shaq

3. kobe
You are only kidding yourself if you think Duncan and Shaq have a big gap over Kobe.

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 03:38 AM

1. duncan
2. shaq

3. kobe

wow why do you thinks so?

Ne 1

03-12-2011, 03:42 AM

1. Shaq
2. Kobe
3. Duncan

8BeastlyXOIAD

03-12-2011, 03:42 AM

1.Shaq

2.Kobe
3.Duncan

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 03:45 AM

1.Shaq

2.Kobe
3.Duncan

you do know kobe has won 2 in a row without shaq, and could 3peat
what has shaq done without kobe (jump around to other contenders to try to win a ring)

Jacks3

03-12-2011, 04:03 AM

Shaq

Kobe
Duncan

rmt

03-12-2011, 04:12 AM

1. Duncan
2. Shaq
3. Kobe

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 04:14 AM

1. Duncan
2. Shaq
3. Kobe

Duncan?? better than shaq and kobe?

Round Mound

03-12-2011, 04:14 AM

Shaq
Duncan
Kobe

bdreason

03-12-2011, 04:15 AM

Shaq
Duncan
Kobe

bdreason

03-12-2011, 04:18 AM

what has shaq done without kobe

Well, let's see. In his 1st year after leaving the Lakers Shaq almost won another MVP. The 2nd year after leaving the Lakers Shaq won another Championship.

And let's not forget Shaq had carried a bunch of no-names to the NBA Finals before Kobe was even in the NBA.

Stuckey

03-12-2011, 04:18 AM

peak:

shaq
duncan

kobe

career:

duncan
kobe
shaq

prodnus

03-12-2011, 04:25 AM

Shaqktus
Duncan
Kobe

Ne 1

03-12-2011, 04:32 AM

Well, let's see. In his 1st year after leaving the Lakers Shaq almost won another MVP. The 2nd year after leaving the Lakers Shaq won another Championship.

And let's not forget Shaq had carried a bunch of no-names to the NBA Finals before Kobe was even in the NBA.

Also not to mention he was named as one of the 50 greatest players in NBA history before ever playing with Bryant.

Penny, Anderson, Grant and Scott weren't no-names though.

Big#50

03-12-2011, 04:37 AM

Shaq and Kobe together were beat by Tim Duncan.
Duncan all day over Shaq and Kobe.
Kobe is a guard who takes a lot of shots. He needs a great big man to win.
Shaq was a force that always needed a great wing to help him win.

Harison

03-12-2011, 04:39 AM

Shaq
Duncan
Kobe
+1

rmt

03-12-2011, 04:42 AM

Duncan?? better than shaq and kobe?

Better than Kobe - very close to Shaq. Shaq is a freak of nature and could have been GOAT if he had the work ethic of Kobe or TD. He should have kept himself in shape and worked hard (especially on the defensive end) instead of these movies, rap music and feuding with Kobe.

Duncan did more with less (team mates, owner, small market team, coach, size, athleticism) than Shaq.

Force

03-12-2011, 04:42 AM

you do know kobe has won 2 in a row without shaq, and could 3peat
what has shaq done without kobe (jump around to other contenders to try to win a ring)

Shaq took an expansion team to the finals...that will never be done again. What exactly did Kobe do after Shaq and before Gasol? see I can play that game too.

You must be young, take a look at the 3 finals MVPs Shaq won in LA. Since Jordan's retirement, Shaq is the most dominating player to ever play in the NBA to this point. It's not that close.

It's hard to compare Kobe to a player like Duncan but the only thing that is for sure is that Shaq was overall the most dominating of all 3.

roffie

03-12-2011, 04:52 AM

here comes all the kobe fans, they gonna be maaaaad. :roll:

and,

shaq
duncan
kobe

King24

03-12-2011, 04:57 AM

1. Kobe
2. Shaq
3. Duncan

twintowers

03-12-2011, 04:58 AM

you do know kobe has won 2 in a row without shaq, and could 3peat
what has shaq done without kobe (jump around to other contenders to try to win a ring)

Kobe didn't do nothing until Gasol came in,and Shaq won second season without Kobe.....

SkyR#1fanCapCou

03-12-2011, 05:03 AM

I'll wait until their entire careers are done.

Ne 1

03-12-2011, 05:03 AM

Kobe didn't do nothing until Gasol came in,and Shaq won second season without Kobe.....

What did Gasol do before playing with Kobe? If I'm not mistaken he didn't even win a single playoff game before coming to the Lakers.

Shaq won without Kobe, but had Wade.

Bottom line is nobody wins without help.

LEFT4DEAD

03-12-2011, 05:09 AM

Duncan
Shaq
Kobe

ginobli2311

03-12-2011, 05:11 AM

What did Gasol do before playing with Kobe? If I'm not mistaken He didn't even win a single playoff game before coming to the Lakers.

Shaq won without Kobe, but had Wade.

Bottom line is nobody wins without help.

when did you become so rational?

well said.

twintowers

03-12-2011, 05:12 AM

Shaqktus
Duncan
Kobe

Absolutely agree all the laker fans forget easily tha couple of years after Shaq was gone 2005 season ended 34-48 and missed playoffs...In the following season, they won 26 of their first 39 games, but lost 27 of their last 43

Ne 1

03-12-2011, 05:17 AM

Shaq took an expansion team to the finals...that will never be done again. What exactly did Kobe do after Shaq and before Gasol? see I can play that game too.

You must be young, take a look at the 3 finals MVPs Shaq won in LA. Since Jordan's retirement, Shaq is the most dominating player to ever play in the NBA to this point. It's not that close.

It's hard to compare Kobe to a player like Duncan but the only thing that is for sure is that Shaq was overall the most dominating of all 3.

In terms of prime and dominance, I think only Wilt and maybe Kareem have a case against Shaq.

Longevity and consistency, Kobe and Duncan get the nod but Shaq has a far superior peak then both. So it's a murky question of pure, outright dominance vs longevity.

blablabla

03-12-2011, 05:22 AM

Shaq
Duncan
Kobe

simply because the impact of a great big man > the impact of a great wing

ginobli2311

03-12-2011, 05:25 AM

In terms of prime and dominance, I think only Wilt and maybe Kareem have a case against Shaq.

Longevity and consistency, Kobe and Duncan get the nod but Shaq has a far superior peak then both. So it's a murky question of pure, outright dominance vs longevity.

in terms of careers, i think its very close for all of them.

as players though, I think Duncan and Shaq are a tier higher than Kobe.

They could just dominate the game to a higher degree. The reason I have Shaq behind Duncan is mainly because Duncan was so great defensively. Also, Duncan is the only player in the last 31 years to win more than 1 titles without an all nba teammate. Hakeem did it once and Jordan did it once.

Duncan did it for all 4 of his titles. Legendary stuff.

So in terms of level of play and impact....I have Duncan slightly ahead of Shaq with their being a gap...and then Kobe. Its not an enormous gap, but there is one.

Xiengqichess

03-12-2011, 05:27 AM

These make Kobe close to all time greatest. Shaq and Duncan are so far behind.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMYFuaIdy80
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKzpyRKdcJ8&feature=related
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kobe_Bryant:banana:

King24

03-12-2011, 05:30 AM

Great Wings> Great Bigs

Bigs can't take-over games in the fourth like wings. They're nowhere the play-makers, nor the scorers. You have a truly great wing and you'll be set for an elite offense (top 6-7). Even with garbage around them. See: 07 & 06 Kobe. 03 T-Mac etc. At that point, all you need is a top 10 defense, which is easily attainable as long as you have a competent coach with a good scheme and players willing to put in effort. You don't even need a particularly good anchor. Just a decent one.

See: 2010 Heat, 2011 Mavs, Those old Bulls teams with Scott Skilles, etc

King24

03-12-2011, 05:32 AM

lol @ Duncan being on a completely different tier than Bryant.

Someone needs to watch the 2001, 2002, 2008 series between them where KOBE completely outplayed him. :pimp:

alenleomessi

03-12-2011, 05:41 AM

1. Shaq
2. Duncan
3. Kobe

:confusedshrug:

Force

03-12-2011, 06:08 AM

What did Gasol do before playing with Kobe? If I'm not mistaken he didn't even win a single playoff game before coming to the Lakers.

Shaq won without Kobe, but had Wade.

Bottom line is nobody wins without help.

Gasol won 50 games and made the playoffs year after year before Kobe. Kobe after Shaq and before Gasol didn't do quite as well as Gasol with the Grizz actually.

Also, Shaq was already one of the greatest centers of ALL TIME before Kobe Bryant wasn't even in the NBA.

Mark Madsen

03-12-2011, 06:13 AM

lmao @ anyone putting duncan over shaq

shaq
duncan
kobe

not that hard .. kobe def moves ahead of duncan if LA wins another one this season

Ne 1

03-12-2011, 06:35 AM

in terms of careers, i think its very close for all of them.

as players though, I think Duncan and Shaq are a tier higher than Kobe.

They could just dominate the game to a higher degree. The reason I have Shaq behind Duncan is mainly because Duncan was so great defensively. Also, Duncan is the only player in the last 31 years to win more than 1 titles without an all nba teammate. Hakeem did it once and Jordan did it once.

Duncan did it for all 4 of his titles. Legendary stuff.

So in terms of level of play and impact....I have Duncan slightly ahead of Shaq with their being a gap...and then Kobe. Its not an enormous gap, but there is one.

Career wise they are all defiantly close. IMO if Kobe wins another ring this year, I think he's defiantly better though career wise.

Duncan has the edge over Shaq defensively, but I think Shaq's presence and intimidation alone was key for his teams on the defensive end of the ball. At his peak he was 2nd in DPOY voting. Duncan's prime years were longer than Shaq's, but still I think Shaq was way more dominant during his peak/prime. He's as close to an unanimous MVP as there has ever been. I honestly used to feel bad for other teams opposing centers during Shaq's prime, that's how great he was.

olddangerfield

03-12-2011, 06:52 AM

Obviously it's

Kobe
Duncan
Shaq

anyone who thinks otherwise is retarded (cough ginobli)

PaPaK

03-12-2011, 07:00 AM

Shaq was more dominant than both but career wise they are all pretty close, probably Kobe by the end of their careers

Ne 1

03-12-2011, 07:00 AM

Gasol won 50 games and made the playoffs year after year before Kobe. Kobe after Shaq and before Gasol didn't do quite as well as Gasol with the Grizz actually.

Also, Shaq was already one of the greatest centers of ALL TIME before Kobe Bryant wasn't even in the NBA.

Do you know how ridiculous you sound? :facepalm

Don't get me wrong, O'Neal and Gasol are great players, but they didn't win anything until they were paired with Bryant. (In O'Neal's defense he has won a championship and been to 2 NBA Finals and 4 Conference Finals without Kobe, but my point still stands).

Shaq was already one of the greatest players ever before playing with Kobe (was selected to the NBA's 50th anniversary team), but he didn't win that prestigious championship ring until he had Kobe.

Even after Shaq left and before Gasol came to LA, Kobe led a team with Smush Parker, Kwame Brown, Lamar Odom, Chris Mihm and Luke Walton/Maurice Evans as the Lakers core to consecutive playoff appearances and even nearly knocked off a heavily favored Suns team in '06. Also led the Lakers to the # 1 seed in the West before Gasol was traded to the Lakers in '08.

ginobli2311

03-12-2011, 07:14 AM

Do you know how ridiculous you sound? :facepalm

Don't get me wrong, O'Neal and Gasol are great players, but they didn't win anything until they were paired with Bryant. (In O'Neal's defense he has won a championship and been to 2 NBA Finals and 4 Conference Finals without Kobe, but my point still stands).

Shaq was already one of the greatest players ever before playing with Kobe (was selected to the NBA's 50th anniversary team), but he didn't win that prestigious championship ring until he had Kobe.

Even after Shaq left and before Gasol came to LA, Kobe led a team with Smush Parker, Kwame Brown, Lamar Odom, Chris Mihm and Luke Walton/Maurice Evans as the Lakers core to consecutive playoff appearances and even nearly knocked off a heavily favored Suns team in '06. Also led the Lakers to the # 1 seed in the West before Gasol was traded to the Lakers in '08.

True.

Its also a big reason why I had Duncan over Shaq. Duncan was able to win titles without that legit all time great by his side. Shaq couldn't. He lost with penny and a good/deep orlando team. He needed two of the 5 best shooting guards of all time to win.

I don't weight titles extremely heavily, but what Duncan did is something that no player since 1980 has come close to. All 4 titles without an all-nba teammate. Its unreal. To compare, Kobe has only been out of the first round once without an all-nba teammate.

Ne 1

03-12-2011, 07:33 AM

True.

Its also a big reason why I had Duncan over Shaq. Duncan was able to win titles without that legit all time great by his side. Shaq couldn't. He lost with penny and a good/deep orlando team. He needed two of the 5 best shooting guards of all time to win.

I don't weight titles extremely heavily, but what Duncan did is something that no player since 1980 has come close to. All 4 titles without an all-nba teammate. Its unreal. To compare, Kobe has only been out of the first round once without an all-nba teammate.

Shaq may have had superior running mates with Kobe and Wade, but Duncan had deeper and more well rounded teams IMO.

ballerz

03-12-2011, 07:33 AM

kobe
duncan
shaq

ginobli2311

03-12-2011, 07:42 AM

Shaq may have had superior running mates with Kobe and Wade, but Duncan had deeper and more well rounded teams IMO.

depends on the years.

guys like fisher/horry/fox/harper/shaw.....those dudes stepped up and flat out won playoff series for the lakers.

duncan had quality help as well, but if it was easy to win without an all-nba teammate, it would have happened more than just 2 other times outside duncan in the last 31 years.

SinJackal

03-12-2011, 09:30 AM

Shaq
Duncan

Kobe

NoGunzJustSkillz

03-12-2011, 10:21 AM

primes
shaq
td
kobe

overall & longevity
kobe
duncan
shaq

Bigsmoke

03-12-2011, 11:00 AM

Shaq
Duncan
Kobe

Andrei89

03-12-2011, 11:21 AM

Everyone who does not put Shaq at n1 is creeezy!!

Eat Like A Bosh

03-12-2011, 12:02 PM

Do you know how ridiculous you sound? :facepalm

Don't get me wrong, O'Neal and Gasol are great players, but they didn't win anything until they were paired with Bryant. (In O'Neal's defense he has won a championship and been to 2 NBA Finals and 4 Conference Finals without Kobe, but my point still stands).

Shaq was already one of the greatest players ever before playing with Kobe (was selected to the NBA's 50th anniversary team), but he didn't win that prestigious championship ring until he had Kobe.

Even after Shaq left and before Gasol came to LA, Kobe led a team with Smush Parker, Kwame Brown, Lamar Odom, Chris Mihm and Luke Walton/Maurice Evans as the Lakers core to consecutive playoff appearances and even nearly knocked off a heavily favored Suns team in '06. Also led the Lakers to the # 1 seed in the West before Gasol was traded to the Lakers in '08.
:applause:
I think right now all 3 players could rank anywhere between 1/2/3, since everyone has different opinions. Like if what you favor more, peak (Shaq), longevity (Kobe), consistency (Duncan), or Achievements (Kobe), etc. There isn't a clear cut #1 between those 3.
Even if you, say put Duncan at #1 among them, it's still very debatable. Same goes for Kobe and Shaq.
We'll wait for this season to play out. If Kobe wins #6, then we'll see a clear cut #1.

'Toine=MVP

03-12-2011, 12:25 PM

Shaq

Duncan
Kobe

IGOTGAME

03-12-2011, 12:30 PM

True.

Its also a big reason why I had Duncan over Shaq. Duncan was able to win titles without that legit all time great by his side. Shaq couldn't. He lost with penny and a good/deep orlando team. He needed two of the 5 best shooting guards of all time to win.

I don't weight titles extremely heavily, but what Duncan did is something that no player since 1980 has come close to. All 4 titles without an all-nba teammate. Its unreal. To compare, Kobe has only been out of the first round once without an all-nba teammate.

there is a difference between "couldn't" and "didn't"...

Xiengqichess

03-12-2011, 12:36 PM

You have to look at who CONTRIBUTE to basketball more : Kobe, Shaq or Duncan?
I just cant imagine if there were no Kobe for the last 12 years.
Some of you just think of what they did in one or two particular year then rank them all time, it is just wrong.
Look at their whole career, look at the impact they did to the game.
That's why a lot of people ( ex-players, media) rank Kobe in top 5 all time.
Haters are just stupid.

CJ Mustard

03-12-2011, 12:57 PM

1. Shaq - Up there with Wilt and Jordan as one of the most dominant players to ever live.

2. Duncan - GOAT Power Forward, 4 championships, 3 Finals MVP's, 2 MVP's over the course of 10 years.

3. Kobe - Never the undisputed best player in the league. Won 3 titles with one of the most dominant forces in NBA history, and the other 2 with one of the most stacked rosters in NBA history.

stickfigure87

03-12-2011, 01:06 PM

peak?

1. shaq.
2. duncan
3. kobe

longevity?

1. kobe
2. duncan
3. shaq

shaq in the first three-peat was simply unguardable. there was an entire concept developed to slowing him down and stopping the lakers. what duncan did over the last decade is impressive, though. winning four titles w/o a dominant second option, and that 2003 season when he was on a mission to deny the lakers from four-peating.

kobe has simply never sustained a very high peak. his entire career has been compared to other great players: t-mac, vince, lebron, he has never been the clear cut best player in the league, except maybe that 05-06 season. being able to out last all his competitors is a great achievement, however.

tpols

03-12-2011, 01:37 PM

It all comes down to how you rank players.

These are the two ways I look at how 'good' a player was:

Impact in their Primes- very important; shows how well they played at their absolute best.

Length of their prime/dominance- also very important; how long a player remains dominant is just as important as how much they dominated especially when we're talking about the best to ever play since their impacts are all relatively close.. you're going to want a guy on your team that can go for a very long time.

Then as far as careers.. accomplishments, accolades and the role they had on their teams getting rings are just as important as how 'good' of a player they were. Winning is the ultimate goal in this sport and it is what all the best players have always strived for.. so naturally when you're looking at a player's resume, what they have specifically accomplished is very important in determining who left the best legacy.. the best footprint on the game as individual basketball players.

Using this outline, I have it:

Shaq
Kobe
Duncan

Shaq was a more dominant force in his prime than duncan. He also remained dominant for a long ten year stretch garnering MVP votes until his 11th or 12th season. So shaq was more dominant than duncan and he was dominant for longer, and he won just as much.. so I think he's easily above duncan as a player in terms of how good he was and what he accomplished.

Kobe wasn't as impactful in his prime as duncan because a perimeter player really can't provide the kind of defense a big man can no matter how good they are at defending on the perimeter. Kobe obviously was a much more potent scoring and playmaking threat in his prime, but that doesn't overshadow the fact that duncan was better defensively by a larger margin. Kobe, however, has stayed a top the league as a top 3 player for a very long time and thus has had a longer prime then duncan though so that almost evens out who was the 'better' player since time at the top is just as important because it leads to more meaningful winning.. the goal of the game. As far as career accolades, duncan has 4 rings to kobe's 5. His first two rings were more impressive than any of kobe's. But kobe's last two rings are more impressive than duncan's last two rings where manu and parker proved that they could step up and be just as important as duncan. The very fact that the spurs are still dominant today with duncan having a much, much smaller impact shows you just how important tony, manu, the spur's depth, and the spur's coaching were to their success. And kobe's role on the first three peat with shaq was so instrumental to that dynasty. In terms of winning they have both done it a lot and at the highest level. As far as how 'good' they were, longevity and dominance, they are neck and neck with both having the advantage in one of the categories. In terms of accomplishments they are pretty much neck and neck too. It really comes down to preference at this point but kobe's career, since his longevity appears to keep going, will probably pan out to be better than duncan's since duncan has declined to a point where he isn't really going to individually dominate anymore.

creepingdeath

03-12-2011, 01:51 PM

Shaq
Duncan

Kobe

Ne 1

03-12-2011, 01:55 PM

He lost with penny and a good/deep orlando team.

Also, I don't really hold much against Shaq for not winning in Orlando.

He was drafted to a 21 win expansion team, didn't have a contending cast around him until '95 and then he did reach the Finals. He held his own against prime Hakeem at 22 years old and was hardly the reason they lost that series. The next season he reached the Eastern Conference Finals, but lost to the 72-10 champion Bulls. Losing to the team with the best record in NBA history isn't anything to be ashamed of.

ProfessorMurder

03-12-2011, 01:57 PM

Killbot

03-12-2011, 01:59 PM

1. duncan
2. shaq

3. kobe

Gap needs to be bigger. #1 and #2 are arguable.

STATUTORY

03-12-2011, 02:01 PM

3. Kobe - Never the undisputed best player in the league. Won 3 titles with one of the most dominant forces in NBA history, and the other 2 with one of the most stacked rosters in NBA history.

so Pau gasol and lamar odom is one of the most stacked roster in nba history?:facepalm

you even watch the nba?

Ne 1

03-12-2011, 02:02 PM

Kobe - Never the undisputed best player in the league. Won 3 titles with one of the most dominant forces in NBA history, and the other 2 with one of the most stacked rosters in NBA history.

:oldlol: @ this agenda.

Most stacked roster in NBA history?

The talent he's played with in the playoffs hasn't even been that impressive, especially last year. Lakers had three below average starters in the playoffs. Fisher is poor. Artest was a huge liability after the first round. Bynum was struggling with injury and had limited mobility (averaged 7/6 after the first round last year, and 6/4 on below 50% in the '09 playoffs). If he had a healthy Bynum, a prime Artest, a great bench, I'd accept the "stacked" argument but that's not what he's won with in the last two years. His playoff roster just hasn't been that special, especially in comparison to past championship teams.

Players putting up 30/6/6 on 57 TS% in three consecutive playoff runs don't grow on trees (and definitely aren't getting carried due to a "stacked" roster - or they wouldn't be averaging 30 in the first place). Only Jordan, Shaq and Hakeem I'd say have had better three year runs in the playoffs over that.

few questions about kobe's 'ridiculously stacked team'......

how many hall of famers do the lakers have?

how many dominant defensive players do the lakers have?

how many dominant rebounders do the lakers have?

how many other wing players had their starting center average 6/4 and 8/6 during championship runs?

how many hall of famers did other top 10 players play with during their championship runs?

how many championship teams of other top 10 players would sasha vujacic get consistent playing time?

Also why is is held against Kobe for playing with Shaq? Nobody diminishes Magic for playing with Kareem.

Shaq was huge during the 3-peat, but so was Kobe.

CJ Mustard

03-12-2011, 02:11 PM

so Pau gasol and lamar odom is one of the most stacked roster in nba history?:facepalm

you even watch the nba?Yes because Pau Gasol and Lamar Odom (two very good players) are the only other players on the team. :rolleyes:

DonCorleone

03-12-2011, 02:14 PM

1. Shaquille Rashuan O'neal

2. Timothy Theodore Duncan

3. Kobe Bean Bryant

STATUTORY

03-12-2011, 02:18 PM

Yes because Pau Gasol and Lamar Odom (two very good players) are the only other players on the team. :rolleyes:

I only named them because they are the only two above average players on the last two Lakers championship run other than Kobe. Surely you weren't talking about Derek Fisher when you said most stacked team of all time :oldlol:

Kobe and Hakeem are only two players to lead their teams to two straight NBA championship without another bonafide HOF on their team.

most stacked team of all time. you kill me bro :roll: :roll:

Ne 1

03-12-2011, 02:18 PM

Yes because Pau Gasol and Lamar Odom (two very good players) are the only other players on the team. :rolleyes:

Think his point is that outside of Kobe, Gasol and Odom have been the Lakers 2 best players during the Lakers title runs.

Ne 1

03-12-2011, 02:21 PM

I only named them because they are the only two above average players on the last two Lakers championship run other than Kobe. Surely you weren't talking about Derek Fisher when you said most stacked team of all time :oldlol:

Kobe and Hakeem are only two players to lead their teams to two straight NBA championship without another bonafide HOF on their team.

most stacked team of all time. you kill me bro :roll: :roll:

I think Pau will make it to the hall of fame, but off of the strength of his international and NBA career combined.

After all, it's the basketball hall of fame, not the NBA hall of fame.

CJ Mustard

03-12-2011, 02:25 PM

Think his point is that outside of Kobe, Gasol and Odom have been the Lakers 2 best players during the Lakers title runs.How the f*ck does that change the fact that they were one of the most stacked teams in NBA history?

CJ Mustard

03-12-2011, 02:25 PM

STATUTORY

03-12-2011, 02:27 PM

How the f*ck does that change the fact that they were one of the most stacked teams in NBA history?

clearly you are dumb. Wasn't even most stacked team in the league that season but one of the most stacked team in nba history.

:rolleyes:

MJ Pippen Rodman

Kareem, magic worthy

KG Ray Paul Pierce

Manu Parker Tim Duncan

Bird Parish Mchale

Russell and 10 HOFers

Dumars, Isiah and Lambeer

basically all multiple ring winning teams have had more talent than the lakers last two seasons.

CJ Mustard

03-12-2011, 02:32 PM

:roll: @ "Laker fans" downplaying the entire team to make Kobe look better.

The Lakers had one of the best all around teams from top to bottom from 2009-now. They have the best front lines in the league on both ends of the floor, good wing defenders, good shooting, a deep bench, an amazing coach, clutch role players, veteran leadership, and a top 5 player to top it all off.

CJ Mustard

03-12-2011, 02:33 PM

clearly you are dumb. Wasn't even most stacked team in the league that season but one of the most stacked team in nba history.

:rolleyes:

MJ Pippen Rodman

Kareem, magic worthy

KG Ray Paul Pierce

Manu Parker Tim Duncan

Bird Parish Mchale

Russell and 10 HOFers

Dumars, Isiah and Lambeer

basically all multiple ring winning teams have had more talent than the lakers last two seasons. Because 3 players makes up an entire team, right. :rolleyes:

From top to bottom, the Lakers had a better roster than all the bolded teams.

ProfessorMurder

03-12-2011, 02:33 PM

Laker19

03-12-2011, 02:36 PM

How the f*ck does that change the fact that they were one of the most stacked teams in NBA history?

Its stacked for the NBA today, the bench isn't anything to brag about in any of the last 3 years but if you want to compare it to the most stacked teams in NBA History

60's Celtics
Lakers had Wilt, West, and Baylor (I think past his prime though)
Celtics of the 80's
Lakers of the 80's
Pistons in the Late 80's
Bulls in the 90's
Jazz in the late 90's
Lakers threepeat, although one of the years the bench sucked

Im sure there are lots more teams that have been stacked but im not a basketball historian.

Ne 1

03-12-2011, 02:40 PM

The talent he's played with in the playoffs hasn't even been that impressive, especially last year. Lakers had three below average starters in the playoffs. Fisher is poor. Artest was a huge liability after the first round. Bynum was struggling with injury and had limited mobility (averaged 7/6 after the first round last year, and 6/4 on below 50% in the '09 playoffs). If he had a healthy Bynum, a prime Artest, a great bench, I'd accept the "stacked" argument but that's not what he's won with in the last two years. His playoff roster just hasn't been that special, especially in comparison to past championship teams.

Players putting up 30/6/6 on 57 TS% in three consecutive playoff runs don't grow on trees (and definitely aren't getting carried due to a "stacked" roster - or they wouldn't be averaging 30 in the first place). Only Jordan, Shaq and Hakeem I'd say have had better three year runs in the playoffs over that.

few questions about kobe's 'ridiculously stacked team'......

how many hall of famers do the lakers have?

how many dominant defensive players do the lakers have?

how many dominant rebounders do the lakers have?

how many other wing players had their starting center average 6/4 and 8/6 during championship runs?

how many hall of famers did other top 10 players play with during their championship runs?

how many championship teams of other top 10 players would sasha vujacic get consistent playing time?

:confusedshrug:

CJ Mustard

03-12-2011, 02:43 PM

:confusedshrug:Am I supposed to waste my time answering those questions? I already explained why the Lakers had one of the most stacked rosters ever and my post is yet to be disputed.

jlauber

03-12-2011, 02:43 PM

I have them very close actually.

Shaq at #6, Duncan at #7, and Kobe at #8. And, if either Duncan or Kobe manage to win another title, they will move up to the top of those three.

IMHO, Shaq, in his prime, was right there with Wilt and MJ as the three most dominating individuals to ever play the game (and Kareem slightly behind all three.) And only Wilt, at his absolute peak, was better. Both Shaq and Chamberlain were simply unguardable at their very best. Everyone knows about Shaq's "three-peat" of which I rank his play in those Finals as the three best in NBA history. However, his competition was never close to what Chamberlain had to face in his post-season career. My god, Chamberlain was HEAVILY outscoring, outrebounding, and outshooting the great Bill Russell in virtually all of their EIGHT H2H post-season series. And, in their 142 H2H games, Wilt not only outplayed Russell in the vast majority of them, he CRUSHED him in some one-third of them.

Duncan, on the other hand, was among the greatest TEAM players in NBA history. He, along with Russell and Magic, ELEVATED the play of their surrounding casts. Don't get me wrong. MJ, Kareem, Shaq, and Wilt made their team's better, just by being so dominant. But, IMHO, they didn't raise the level of play with their teammates. At least not to the extent that Russell, Magic, and Duncan did. Chamberlain COULD do it, however, as he proved in '67, '68, '72, and '73, (especially in '67), when he proved he could lead the league in assists, and anchor team's defensively. But, overall, Chamberlain's teammates generally played no better with, or without him. The same could be said for MJ, Kareem, and Shaq.

Kobe's PEAK individual play slightly lags behind Duncan's, and considerably behind Shaq's, but his career play is now very close to both. He has been among the greatest offensive players in NBA history. And for those that rip his shooting in his Finals, if you subtract his first couple of seasons, he has averaged about 30 ppg in his post-season CAREER. And, furthermore, of the play of Duncan, Shaq, and Kobe, in their H2H post-seasone careers (Duncan with SA, and Kobe and Shaq in their LA careers...of which Kobe has played much longer than Shaq), it was KOBE who was the best player of the three.

Once again, however, the three are very close. IMO, if Duncan wins a title this year, he will vault to #6. However, if Kobe leads his team to a ring, then he will jump to #6. Another ring on top of that, for either, could vault them to as high as #3 in my rankings (just behind Russell and MJ.)

Ne 1

03-12-2011, 02:53 PM

Am I supposed to waste my time answering those questions? I already explained why the Lakers had one of the most stacked rosters ever and my post is yet to be disputed.

The points I quoted debunk what you said. Also you never answered my question, why should Kobe be discredited for winning with Shaq, but Magic is never discredited for winning with Kareem?

There is a huge double standard for counting rings on here.

Also, if the current Lakers were one of the most stacked teams in NBA history, like you suggest, then why is it necessary for Kobe to put up 30/6/6, 30/5/5 and 29/6/6 during the last 3 playoff runs? The Lakers team outside of Kobe and Gasol are average.

Make no mistake Kobe and Gasol are a great duo, but besides them the Lakers aren't "stacked" by any stretch.

Javat_90

03-12-2011, 03:01 PM

CJ Mustard

03-12-2011, 03:02 PM

The points I quoted debunk what you said. Also you never answered my question, why should Kobe be discredited for winning with Shaq, but Magic is never discredited for winning with Kareem?

There is a huge double standard for counting rings on here.

I would say the same thing if this thread was comparing Magic and Kareem. I've always had Kareem ranked solidly ahead of Magic.

Also, if the current Lakers were one of the most stacked teams in NBA history, like you suggest, then why is it necessary for Kobe to put up 30/6/6, 30/5/5 and 29/6/6 during the last 3 playoff runs? The Lakers team outside of Kobe and Gasol are average. Those are great numbers, but come on now, don't act like he willed them to the championship. I've seen much better numbers from players who had to do more for their teams in the Playoffs (ex. Jordan, Shaq, KG, Duncan).

jlauber

03-12-2011, 03:03 PM

Why the holy f*ck do you have to name Wilt Chamberlain in every single post you make?

And yet you read them anyway...

Walduś

03-12-2011, 03:13 PM

1. shaq
2. kobe

3. duncan

catch24

03-12-2011, 03:17 PM

Other than the BIG 5 (Kobe, Pau, Bynum, Gasol, and Artest), the Lakers are far from stacked. In fact, their bench is pretty weak.

During their peaks:

1.) Shaq

2.) Duncan
3.) Kobe

ZenMaster

03-12-2011, 03:19 PM

Shaq
Duncan
Kobe

Big#50

03-12-2011, 03:19 PM

Kobe never won a series without a great big man. He has two now. Shot his team out of a ring. Quit on. His team in another series. Quit in the finals as well. Has he ever shot over 46 percent? He is a guy who needs to take 30 shots to make his presence felt. He doesn't impact the game in any other way. He doesn't make other players better. He actually makes them worse. The Lakers are the most stacked team in the nba for the last three seasons. He has had his chance to surpass many greats, but has come up short. We already saw a prime Kobe. Whatever he does and has done for the last two seasons has been because of the great team he plays in.

Not saying Tim and Shaq are perfect players. But Tim is up there with Bird, Russell, Magic as players who make his teammates better. Shaq caused entire front lines to be in foul trouble. Now that's impact.

STATUTORY

03-12-2011, 03:20 PM

Other than the BIG 5 (Kobe, Pau, Bynum, Gasol, and Artest), the Lakers are far from stacked. In fact, their bench is pretty weak.

During their peaks:

1.) Shaq

2.) Duncan
3.) Kobe

and let's not forget Bynum was largely absent last two playoff runs.

And for the original point my ranking is

1)shaq
2)duncan
3)kobe

in term of peak

and

1)duncan
2)Kobe
3)shaq

if I start a franchise picking any of those guys from their rookie year onward

catch24

03-12-2011, 03:34 PM

and let's not forget Bynum was largely absent last two playoff runs.

Yeah, but he was instrumental in the Finals for his blocking/contesting shots & rebounding.

Oh, and I meant to put Odom on the list (had Gasol listed twice).

And for the original point my ranking is

1)duncan
2)Kobe
3)shaq

if I start a franchise picking any of those guys from their rookie year onward

Why do both Duncan and Kobe rank ahead of Shaq for you?

For me, Shaq's peak play was better than both, has 4 MVPs (including Final MVPs), is ahead of both in all-time scoring, was more dominant than both for more seasons... The guy was just a flat out more impactful player.

Ne 1

03-12-2011, 03:40 PM

Other than the BIG 5 (Kobe, Pau, Bynum, Gasol, and Artest), the Lakers are far from stacked. In fact, their bench is pretty weak.

During their peaks:

1.) Shaq

2.) Duncan
3.) Kobe

I could see the stacked argument if Artest was still in his prime and if Bynum was healthy more often and didn't miss all the time he does due to injury.

Either way imo outside of Kobe and Gasol, I really wouldn't say the Lakers are really stacked. Also like you mentioned during the last 3 playoff runs their bench rotation has consisted of:

Radmanovic/Walton/Farmar/Turiaf
Bynum/Brown/Farmar/Walton/Vujacic
Bynum/Brown/Farmar/Vujacic/Walton

NoName22

03-12-2011, 03:40 PM

Kobe
Duncan
Shaq

STATUTORY

03-12-2011, 03:42 PM

Yeah, but he was instrumental in the Finals for his blocking/contesting shots & rebounding.

Oh, and I meant to put Odom on the list (had Gasol listed twice).

And for the original point my ranking is

Why do both Duncan and Kobe rank ahead of Shaq for you?

For me, Shaq's peak play was better than both, has 4 MVPs (including Final MVPs), is ahead of both in all-time scoring, was more dominant than both for more seasons... The guy was just a flat out more impactful player.

I honestly think it's easier to build around Duncan than Shaq. The first two championship run by Duncan is the most incredible sustained performance from an individual player that I can remember. He anchored the defense, great at pnr defense, and was a consistent force on the boards and offense.

With shaq, I think there's a reason no team has had shaq for more than 7 years. In that sense I selecting shaq would have less longevity than picking duncan or kobe.

That's why i had separate ranking for peak performance (shaq was most dominant) and starting a franchise with.

catch24

03-12-2011, 03:51 PM

I could see the stacked argument if Artest was still in his prime and if Bynum was healthy more often and didn't miss all the time he does due to injury.

I don't necessarily think people believe Bynum is this "crazy" allstar-like player. It's just when he's healthy, the Lakers are that much better of a frontline and their interior defense/rebounding becomes significantly better. Sort of like Artest, except out in the perimeter (during the playoffs is where he'll make his mark; i.e. - last year shutting down Pierce).

Odom has been 'allstar-like', but again, similar to Bynum, it's just he makes the Lakers THAT much better with his play making, length, and extra scoring.

All in all, as I said, outside of the 5, they're pretty weak actually. Not sure why people think otherwise :confusedshrug:

catch24

03-12-2011, 03:52 PM

I honestly think it's easier to build around Duncan than Shaq. The first two championship run by Duncan is the most incredible sustained performance from an individual player that I can remember. He anchored the defense, great at pnr defense, and was a consistent force on the boards and offense.

With shaq, I think there's a reason no team has had shaq for more than 7 years. In that sense I selecting shaq would have less longevity than picking duncan or kobe.

That's why i had separate ranking for peak performance (shaq was most dominant) and starting a franchise with.

Good post and I see where you're coming from (especially the bold). Out of the three, he was probably the best 2-way player.

Ne 1

03-12-2011, 03:52 PM

Why do both Duncan and Kobe rank ahead of Shaq for you?

For me, Shaq's peak play was better than both, has 4 MVPs (including Final MVPs), is ahead of both in all-time scoring, was more dominant than both for more seasons... The guy was just a flat out more impactful player.

I really guess it depends what someone values more. Duncan and Kobe probably have the edge as far as longevity and consistency, but Shaq had a superior peak/prime and was more dominant. He's as close to an unanimous MVP as there has ever been and only Wilt and maybe Kareem or Jordan even come close to matching how good he was during his peak.

Anaximandro1

03-12-2011, 04:07 PM

1.Duncan

2.Shaq

3.Kobe

Shaq is a force of nature,and the most talented player since Wilt;Kobe is the most skilled bball player since Jordan;Tim Duncan is the best player of the post-Jordan era.Duncan can take over playoffs games at either end of the floor.In addition to being a great individual talent,Tim is the consummate team player:he involves his teammates,he makes them better,only cares about winning and he's coachable.Tim is not a prima donna,therefore the Spurs always have an amazing team chemistry.You know,the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

In short: Spurs are only the second club to reach the 50-win mark 12 seasons in row,and Duncan is the first player ever to lead 4 championship teams in scoring, rebounding and blocked shots during the regular season and playoffs.

If it's white and in a bottle,it must be milk.

ShaqAttack3234

03-12-2011, 04:08 PM

Lakers threepeat, although one of the years the bench sucked

:oldlol: at this team being listed. Those teams were Shaq and Kobe and then no 3rd option. They had role players around them who hit some big shots and did some little things, but weren't big impact players on a nightly basis, and typically, the 3 players around Shaq and Kobe were below average at their position.

The 3peat Lakers weren't stacked, they just had a great duo and a few key role players for each run.

Big#50

03-12-2011, 04:14 PM

:oldlol: at this team being listed. Those teams were Shaq and Kobe and then no 3rd option. They had role players around them who hit some big shots and did some little things, but weren't big impact players on a nightly basis, and typically, the 3 players around Shaq and Kobe were below average at their position.

The 3peat Lakers weren't stacked, they just had a great duo and a few key role players for each run.
You don't really need a third option with Shaq and Kobe on your team.

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 04:15 PM

[QUOTE=twintowers]Absolutely agree all the laker fans forget easily tha couple of years after Shaq was gone 2005 season ended 34-48 and missed playoffs...In the following season, they won 26 of their first 39 games, but lost 27 of their last 43

Big#50

03-12-2011, 04:18 PM

kobe played only 66 games in 2004-05 season, so thats why they missed the playoffs

plus kobe has a chance to finish with the most points in nba history and most playoff points in nba history

duncan always had good teams with manu and parker, kobe had nobody from 2004-05 to 2007
Duncan would have had those same Lakers teams in contention. He is that good. There is just so such a sg can do. A great big man will always make the team better.

Ne 1

03-12-2011, 04:19 PM

I don't necessarily think people believe Bynum is this "crazy" allstar-like player. It's just when he's healthy, the Lakers are that much better of a frontline and their interior defense/rebounding becomes significantly better. Sort of like Artest, except out in the perimeter (during the playoffs is where he'll make his mark; i.e. - last year shutting down Pierce).

Odom has been 'allstar-like', but again, similar to Bynum, it's just he makes the Lakers THAT much better with his play making, length, and extra scoring.

All in all, as I said, outside of the 5, they're pretty weak actually. Not sure why people think otherwise :confusedshrug:

Yeah, that's why Bynum has been so great for us. He's a physical presence, gives us defense, interior toughness and can push around other teams bigs.

Artest is solid, but he's defiantly not as good as he once was and is often a liability on offense. I honestly believe that we were better suited with Ariza.

Even with their weak bench, I honestly wouldn't have any problem agreeing that the Lakers are stacked if Bynum wasn't out so much because of injuries and if Artest was in his prime.

Besides Wade and LeBron, I don't think there's a better duo in the league than Kobe and Gasol, but outside of them I just don't see the Lakers being "immensely stacked" like some people say.

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 04:20 PM

3. Kobe - Never the undisputed best player in the league. Won 3 titles with one of the most dominant forces in NBA history, and the other 2 with one of the most stacked rosters in NBA history.

:facepalm

do you remeber that when michael jordan retired the first time in 1993, the bulls won 55 games and got to the ECF without jordan

the showtime lakers
80s celtics
90s bulls
were more stacked teams

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 04:22 PM

Duncan would have had those same Lakers teams in contention. He is that good. There is just so such a sg can do. A great big man will always make the team better.

swap kobe to the spurs they will be in contention,...kobe manu parker

shaq>kobe>duncan....kobes not done yet tho

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 04:26 PM

primes
shaq
td
kobe

overall & longevity
kobe
duncan
shaq

kobe: 81, 62 in 3, 61 at msg, 4 straight 50+ games, 9 consecutive 40+ games, averaged 35.4 ppg in 05-06
kobe has the 2nd most 60 point games
3rd most 40 point games
50 point game in the playoffs

kobe just didnt have a good team in his peak prime like shaq and duncan, imaging if he had someone like a parker or manu or dwade in 06

kobes prime was atleast better than duncans

Big#50

03-12-2011, 04:28 PM

swap kobe to the spurs they will be in contention,...kobe manu parker

shaq>kobe>duncan....kobes not done yet tho
No. LoL there is only one ball. Parker would average five points next to Kobe. Manu about seven. They would have no defende. Don't be silly. Dont be a blind fanboy.

Big#50

03-12-2011, 04:30 PM

kobe: 81, 62 in 3, 61 at msg, 4 straight 50+ games, 9 consecutive 40+ games, averaged 35.4 ppg in 05-06
kobe has the 2nd most 60 point games
3rd most 40 point games
50 point game in the playoffs

kobe just didnt have a good team in his peak prime like shaq and duncan, imaging if he had someone like a parker or manu or dwade in 06

kobes prime was atleast better than duncans
Kobe is an awesome scorer when given the green light to chuck. Any other reason you feel he is better than Duncan?

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 04:32 PM

No. LoL there is only one ball. Parker would average five points next to Kobe. Manu about seven. They would have no defende. Don't be silly. Dont be a blind fanboy.

kobe in his peak prime 05-07, if he had a supporting cast, he woulda won a ring
shaq in his prime had a young kobe, result 3 rings
duncan in his prime had manu, parker, result 3 rings, 1 with robinson

kobe had smush parker, kwayme brown, chris mihm, ect in part of his prime
the first year he got someone good he got to the finals, then 2 rings, now maybe more

Big#50

03-12-2011, 04:34 PM

kobe in his peak prime 05-07, if he had a supporting cast, he woulda won a ring
shaq in his prime had a young kobe, result 3 rings
duncan in his prime had manu, parker, result 3 rings, 1 with robinson

kobe had smush parker, kwayme brown, chris mihm, ect in part of his prime
the first year he got someone good he got to the finals, then 2 rings, now maybe more
See 2003 NBA season.

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 04:36 PM

Kobe is an awesome scorer when given the green light to chuck. Any other reason you feel he is better than Duncan?

duncan can rebound, any 7 footer can rebound, shaq rebounded more than duncan and scored more points
and about defense kobe is a great defender, same with duncan, i just think that kobes scoring puts him over duncan

and the "green light to chuck" wow, mj took more shots then kobe, so is he just a chucker

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 04:46 PM

See 2003 NBA season.

2 best seasons

duncan
01-02 - 25.5 ppg, 12.7 rpg, 3.7 apg, 2.5 bpg
02-03 - 23.3 ppg, 12.9 rpg, 3.9 apg, 2.9 bpg

shaq
93-94 - 29.3 ppg, 13.2 rpg, 2.4 apg, 2.9 bpg
99-00 - 29.7 ppg, 13.6 rpg, 3.8 apg, 3.0 bpg

kobe
05-06 - 35.4 ppg, 5.3 rpg, 4.5 apg, 1.8 spg
06-07 - 31.6 ppg, 4.7 rpg, 5.4 apg, 1.4 spg

shaq>duncan

but its hard comparing a pf to a sg, but kobes numbers look more impressive than duncans IMO

Big#50

03-12-2011, 04:46 PM

duncan can rebound, any 7 footer can rebound, shaq rebounded more than duncan and scored more points
and about defense kobe is a great defender, same with duncan, i just think that kobes scoring puts him over duncan

and the "green light to chuck" wow, mj took more shots then kobe, so is he just a chucker
This thread is not about MJ. I think Duncan's D, passing, teamwork, all around game puts him over Kobe.

ShaqAttack3234

03-12-2011, 04:47 PM

You don't really need a third option with Shaq and Kobe on your team.

They definitely would've benefitted from Glen Rice playing like one in the 2000 playoffs instead of 12/4/2, 41 FG% with bad defense while being a bad fit in the system. Especially since 2000 Kobe was a legit all-star player, but not the elite superstar he was during the 2001 and 2002 seasons. And the 2002 team definitely could've used a 3rd option. It's not like the 2000 and 2002 teams just coasted to championships. The 2000 Lakers were taken to the maximum 5 games in the first round, Portland had a 15 point lead in the 4th quarter of game 7 and Indiana led late in game 6 of the finals. And it took the Lakers 7 games and overtime to beat the 2002 Kings.

And regardless of whether they "needed" a 3rd option, a team without one certainly can't be listed among the most stacked teams ever. Phil Jackson said that the 2000 Lakers had less talent in terms of their top 8-9 guys than the Blazers, Suns, Knicks, Kings or Pacers did that year.

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 05:14 PM

mrpuente

03-12-2011, 05:24 PM

:oldlol:

how can you compare three players against each other, when two of them played on the same team?

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 05:28 PM

:oldlol:

how can you compare three players against each other, when two of them played on the same team?

look at them as when they were the best player on their team
shaq - 3 finals mvps, 3 rings
kobe - 2 finals mvps, 2 rings
plus stats and other accomplishments

jlauber

03-12-2011, 05:32 PM

spurs vs lakers in playoffs (points from each game)

2001 wcf

kobe - 45, 28, 36, 24

duncan- 28, 40, 9, 15

LAL 4-0

2002 2nd round

kobe - 20, 26, 31, 28, 26

duncan - 26, 27, 28, 30, 34

LAL 4-1

2003 2nd round

kobe - 32.1 ppg

duncan- 24.7 ppg

SAS 4-2

2004 2nd round

kobe - 31, 15, 22, 42, 22, 26

duncan - 30, 24, 10, 19, 21, 20

LAL 4-2

2008 WCF

kobe - 27, 22, 30, 28, 39

duncan - 30, 12, 22, 29, 19

LAL 4-1

playoff series wins against each other

kobe - 4

duncan - 1

2001 http://www.nba.com/playoffs2001/fina...v=SiteFragment
2002 http://www.nba.com/playoffs2002/west_round2_02.html
2003 http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playof...?series=lalsas
2004 http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playof...?series=lalsas
2008 http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playof...?series=saslal

Good post. I mentioned that in my previous, post, although I did not detail like it you did. When Kobe and Shaq faced Duncan and the Spurs, or when Kobe faced Duncan alone, it was Kobe who was the best player on the floor.

That does not mean that I believe that Kobe was greater than either, but it does put Kobe in a better light when some have suggested that he was well behind those two in terms of greatness.

SCdac

03-12-2011, 05:41 PM

ShaqAttack3234

03-12-2011, 05:42 PM

Good post. I mentioned that in my previous, post, although I did not detail like it you did. When Kobe and Shaq faced Duncan and the Spurs, or when Kobe faced Duncan alone, it was Kobe who was the best player on the floor.

That does not mean that I believe that Kobe was greater than either, but it does put Kobe in a better light when some have suggested that he was well behind those two in terms of greatness.

Depends on the year, Kobe played better than Shaq or Duncan in the '01 and '02 series, Duncan and Shaq both played better than Kobe in the '03 series(with Duncan obviously being the best out of the 3) and in '04, they were all pretty close, though I'd say Shaq was the best player in that series. '08 was obviously Kobe.

Big#50

03-12-2011, 05:44 PM

spurs vs lakers in playoffs (points from each game)

2001 wcf

kobe - 45, 28, 36, 24

duncan- 28, 40, 9, 15

LAL 4-0

2002 2nd round

kobe - 20, 26, 31, 28, 26

duncan - 26, 27, 28, 30, 34

LAL 4-1

2003 2nd round

kobe - 32.1 ppg

duncan- 24.7 ppg

SAS 4-2

2004 2nd round

kobe - 31, 15, 22, 42, 22, 26

duncan - 30, 24, 10, 19, 21, 20

LAL 4-2

2008 WCF

kobe - 27, 22, 30, 28, 39

duncan - 30, 12, 22, 29, 19

LAL 4-1

playoff series wins against each other

kobe - 4

duncan - 1

2001 http://www.nba.com/playoffs2001/fina...v=SiteFragment
2002 http://www.nba.com/playoffs2002/west_round2_02.html
2003 http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playof...?series=lalsas
2004 http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playof...?series=lalsas
2008 http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playof...?series=saslal
2001 and 02 Spurs had no chance. Tim did everything he could in 02. In 01 he didnt even bother teying in game three and four. They were way over matched. Kobe would have lost if they played the Spurs of 05, 06, 07, so whats your point? Lakers had better teams those seasons they did beat the Spurs.
Kobe is a great ****ing player. But he is a sg. Why don't you get it through your head. It is a big man's game. Kobe has won rings with the best front line in basketball. He has won with the most dominant big in the paint. Do you think it is a coincidence?

ginobli2311

03-12-2011, 05:46 PM

Good post. I mentioned that in my previous, post, although I did not detail like it you did. When Kobe and Shaq faced Duncan and the Spurs, or when Kobe faced Duncan alone, it was Kobe who was the best player on the floor.

That does not mean that I believe that Kobe was greater than either, but it does put Kobe in a better light when some have suggested that he was well behind those two in terms of greatness.

I'm not sure how much weight I'm willing to put into the head to head play for Duncan and Kobe.

For starters, they don't play the same position. Its not like wade and kobe going at it in a playoff series or something.

2nd, Kobe having Shaq by his side to alleviate a good amount of focus and pressure is something that just can't be discounted. Manu and Parker really didn't emerge as those types of guys until the 05 seasons. Neither of them were that guy in 03 for example.

jlauber

03-12-2011, 05:47 PM

Depends on the year, Kobe played better than Shaq or Duncan in the '01 and '02 series, Duncan and Shaq both played better than Kobe in the '03 series and in '04, they were all pretty close, though I'd say Shaq was the best player in that series. '08 was obviously Kobe.

No argument here. I just think that those that tend to diminish Kobe in these rankings, need to at least acknowledge that he has had his share of "wins" in their H2H battles. Once again, I don't rank Kobe over either, but he has certainly not been WAY behind either of them. And, IF he can lead LA to another title, and assuming that Duncan does not get another ring as a key contributor, and I would suggest that a case could be made that Kobe's career would then be even greater than either, as well.

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 05:49 PM

Look at Duncan in the 2002 playoffs - he scored more and more points in every game of that series (26, 27, 28, 30, 34). What more did he have to do?... It's a team game, and pointing out head-to-head stats of players that didn't even guard each other (let alone the fact Shaq was ON some of those teams) is overly simplistic. Take Shaq or Pau off Kobe's teams, and I'll take a Duncan lead team over it ANY day of the week.

pau, pau is second banana to kobe

take manu, parker, and even d.robinson (1999 year) off the spurs, what will they win?

duncan always had a good supporting cast, kobe most of the time but not in his peak prime 2005-06 to 2006-07

plus look at all the series kobe was better in 4/5 of them, duncan only 1

Round Mound

03-12-2011, 05:50 PM

ShaqAttack3234

03-12-2011, 05:50 PM

No argument here. I just think that those that tend to diminish Kobe in these rankings, need to at least acknowledge that he has had his share of "wins" in their H2H battles. Once again, I don't rank Kobe over either, but he has certainly not been WAY behind either of them. And, IF he can lead LA to another title, and assuming that Duncan does not get another ring as a key contributor, and I would suggest that a case could be made that Kobe's career would then be even greater than either, as well.

Well, here's where I differ from you when ranking players. I don't like to just add up rings/MVPs ect., I take how good they were in their prime/peak heavily into consideration, which is why I won't rank either over Shaq or Hakeem, who I think both tend to get underrated on a lot of these all-time lists, particularly Hakeem who I see outside a good amount of top 10 lists.

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 05:53 PM

:applause: Indeed...although Prime Barkley would destroy Duncan

your man barkley said kobes number 6 all time ahead of shaq and duncan

Javat_90

03-12-2011, 05:53 PM

:applause: Indeed...although Prime Barkley would destroy Duncan

No troll, he wouldnt.

ginobli2311

03-12-2011, 05:54 PM

Well, here's where I differ from you when ranking players. I don't like to just add up rings/MVPs ect., I take how good they were in their prime/peak heavily into consideration, which is why I won't rank either over Shaq or Hakeem, who I think both tend to get underrated on a lot of these all-time lists, particularly Hakeem who I see outside a good amount of top 10 lists.

Yea. I think this is the best way of ranking players. Focusing more on simply how good they were.

We just differ on how good we actually thought Duncan was, but overall I totally agree with your criteria...etc.

jlauber

03-12-2011, 05:55 PM

Well, here's where I differ from you when ranking players. I don't like to just add up rings/MVPs ect., I take how good they were in their prime/peak heavily into consideration, which is why I won't rank either over Shaq or Hakeem, who I think both tend to get underrated on a lot of these all-time lists, particularly Hakeem who I see outside a good amount of top 10 lists.

Well, no player dominated his peers like Chamberlain did in his prime, including his post-seasons, in which he was heavily outscoring, outrebounding, outshooting, and even outpassing his peers H2H.

pauk

03-12-2011, 05:55 PM

1. shaq
2. duncan
3. kobe

thats how it always was
thats how it still is
nothing to debate here

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 05:55 PM

Depends on the year, Kobe played better than Shaq or Duncan in the '01 and '02 series, Duncan and Shaq both played better than Kobe in the '03 series(with Duncan obviously being the best out of the 3) and in '04, they were all pretty close, though I'd say Shaq was the best player in that series. '08 was obviously Kobe.

duncan had a better series than kobe in 2002 but thats it, kobe had a better series than duncan in 2001, 03, 04, 08,..look at the numbers

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 05:56 PM

1. shaq
2. duncan
3. kobe

thats how it still is
thats how it always was
nothing to debate here

reread my first post, the playoff numbers head to head

kaiiu

03-12-2011, 05:56 PM

Shaq
Duncan
Kobe
Edit: ^ my bad

ShaqAttack3234

03-12-2011, 05:57 PM

Yea. I think this is the best way of ranking players. Focusing more on simply how good they were.

We just differ on how good we actually thought Duncan was, but overall I totally agree with your criteria...etc.

Yeah, my rankings aren't all based on prime/peak, but that factors enough into them that players primes/peaks at least had to be very close for me to rank the inferior player(at their prime/peak) over the other, and will have to make up for the difference in prime/peak with superior longevity and team success.

I'd probably rank Duncan around top 6 or 7 all time.

Well, no player dominated his peers like Chamberlain did in his prime, including his post-seasons, in which he was heavily outscoring, outrebounding, outshooting, and even outpassing his peers H2H.

What the hell does Wilt have to do with this?

duncan had a better series than kobe in 2002 but thats it, kobe had a better series than duncan in 2001, 03, 04, 08,..look at the numbers

You have your years mixed up. Kobe was the best player in the 2002 Lakers/Spurs series regardless of numbers, but Duncan played much better than him in the 2003 series.

pauk

03-12-2011, 05:58 PM

reread my first post, the playoff numbers head to head

playoffs shmeloffs
1. shaq
2. duncan
3. kobe

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 05:58 PM

lol @ Duncan being on a completely different tier than Bryant.

Someone needs to watch the 2001, 2002, 2008 series between them where KOBE completely outplayed him. :pimp:

plus 2004

ginobli2311

03-12-2011, 06:01 PM

Yeah, my rankings aren't all based on prime/peak, but that factors enough into them that players primes/peaks at least had to be very close for me to rank the inferior player(at their prime/peak) over the other, and will have to make up for the difference in prime/peak with superior longevity and team success.

I'd probably rank Duncan around top 6 or 7 all time.

What the hell does Wilt have to do with this?

You have your years mixed up. Kobe was the best player in the 2002 Lakers/Spurs series regardless of numbers, but Duncan played much better than him in the 2003 series.

You mind listing your top ten? I'm curious....I know you have Bird really high.

jlauber

03-12-2011, 06:02 PM

Yeah, my rankings aren't all based on prime/peak, but that factors enough into them that players primes/peaks at least had to be very close for me to rank the inferior player(at their prime/peak) over the other, and will have to make up for the difference in prime/peak with superior longevity and team success.

I'd probably rank Duncan around top 6 or 7 all time.

What the hell does Wilt have to do with this?

You have your years mixed up. Kobe was the best player in the 2002 Lakers/Spurs series regardless of numbers, but Duncan played much better than him in the 2003 series.

What the hell does Hakeem have to do with this, then, as well?

ShaqAttack3234

03-12-2011, 06:05 PM

What the hell does Hakeem have to do with this, then, as well?

He's an example of his prime being too good to rank some players over him because of accomplishments such as Kobe and Duncan, who IMO, just weren't as good as Hakeem.

You brought up Wilt because it's obvious that my all time ranking for Wilt offends you so much that you want to try to debate it again.

Fatal9

03-12-2011, 06:06 PM

duncan had a better series than kobe in 2002 but thats it, kobe had a better series than duncan in 2001, 03, 04, 08,..look at the numbers
LOL. Did you watch the series at all? The big story was San Antonio's epic fourth quarter collapses (led by Duncan who was getting shut down by Shaq iirc) and Kobe's clutch play. Spurs should have won the series if they could keep it together but they would go dry offensively (Duncan not being able to take over as a scorer). In game 3, Kobe went 5/5 in the fourth and put the Spurs away. In game 4, he made the game winning shot and outscored the Spurs by himself in the fourth quarter. In game 5, Kobe had a big second half (20+ pts iirc) and assisted on Horry's game winning three. LA won all three games and SA went into all those games with a lead in the fourth. LA shouldn't have won that series at all. And Shaq was struggling offensively late in games because he wasn't 100% so Kobe HAD to play well to win those games.

That series (and playoff run) really cemented Kobe's clutch status in the league. Kobe's destroyed Duncan's teams head to head, nothing Timmy's defensive impact can do when Kobe is raining shots over his teams.

BTW, if Kobe's team blew a series like that with another opposing superstar taking over games at the same time, we'd never hear the end of it.

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 06:08 PM

LOL. Did you watch the series at all? The big story was San Antonio's epic fourth quarter collapses (led by Duncan who was getting shut down by Shaq iirc) and Kobe's clutch play. Spurs should have won the series if they could keep it together. In game 3, Kobe went 5/5 in the fourth and put the Spurs away. In game 4, he made the game winning shot and outscored the Spurs by himself in the fourth quarter. In game 5, Kobe had a big second half (20+ pts iirc) and assisted on Horry's game winning three. LA won all three games and SA went into all those games with a lead in the fourth. LA shouldn't have won that series at all. And Shaq was struggling offensively late in games because he wasn't 100% so Kobe HAD to play well to win those games.

That series (and playoff run) really cemented Kobe's clutch status in the league. Kobe's destroyed Duncan's teams head to head, nothing Timmy's defensive impact can do when Kobe is raining shots over his teams.

oh i think i meant 2003
yeah, kobe>duncan, idk how people can say otherwise

CJ Mustard

03-12-2011, 06:08 PM

tpols

03-12-2011, 06:10 PM

Thread should've ended right here.
From the beginning of this years season..

Even with Boozer they don't scare anybody. They are in no way, shape or form, contenders. They'll be on the same level as the Knicks, and Bucks.

That is all.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=190123
Why would anyone take your opinion seriously?:roll:

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 06:10 PM

Thread should've ended right here.

did u even read my first post?
kobe owned duncan in the playoffs except one year

SCdac

03-12-2011, 06:13 PM

pau, pau is second banana to kobe

take manu, parker, and even d.robinson (1999 year) off the spurs, what will they win?

duncan always had a good supporting cast, kobe most of the time but not in his peak prime 2005-06 to 2006-07

Dude, in 1999 Duncan was a second-year player and straight up owned the Knicks in the Finals and earned the Finals MVP without a shred of doubt... How many Finals MVP's did Kobe get playing with Shaq again?

look at the scoring in the 99 Finals:

game 1: Duncan 33 , Robinson 13
game 2: Duncan 25 , Robinson 16
game 3: Duncan 20 , Robinson 25 (spurs lost)
game 4: Duncan 28 , Robinson 14
game 5: Duncan 31 , Robinson 15

Duncan scored a third of the Spurs Finals points!

Take 4 players off the 1999 Spurs and replace them with even worse players?? obviously that's going to hurt...

Consider this, Manu, Parker, and an old David Robinson, particularly in 2003, were no where near the player Pau Gasol was and is now. We're talking about a late first rounder, a deep second rounder, and somebody in his last season before retiring. Parker was a second year player with a crap jump shot, Manu was a rookie who was inconsistent, and Robinson was a 37 year old role player at center at most.

CJ Mustard

03-12-2011, 06:18 PM

From the beginning of this years season..

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=190123
Why would anyone take your opinion seriously?:roll: I ended up being 2/3.

- They are not contenders, they're pretenders (you can argue this all you want, you'll see the truth in the Playoffs)

- They are on the same level as the Knicks (you could argue the Knicks are better, they've beaten them twice already without Melo)

- Nobody on this entire ****ing forum thought the Bucks would turn out like this. If it wasn't for all the injuries we suffered, who knows how good we could have been.

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 06:18 PM

Dude, in 1999 Duncan was a second-year player and straight up owned the Knicks in the Finals and earned the Finals MVP without a shred of doubt... How many Finals MVP's did Kobe get playing with Shaq again?

look at the scoring in the 99 Finals:

game 1: Duncan 33 , Robinson 13
game 2: Duncan 25 , Robinson 16
game 3: Duncan 20 , Robinson 25 (spurs lost)
game 4: Duncan 28 , Robinson 14
game 5: Duncan 31 , Robinson 15

Duncan scored a third of the Spurs Finals points!

Take 4 players off the 1999 Spurs and replace them with even worse players?? obviously that's going to hurt...

Consider this, Manu, Parker, and an old David Robinson, particularly in 2003, were no where near the player Pau Gasol was and is now. We're talking about a late first rounder, a deep second rounder, and somebody in his last season before retiring. Parker was a second year player with a crap jump shot, Manu was a rookie who was inconsistent, and Robinson was a 37 year old role player at center at most.

lol look at the playoff head to head numbers i posted, kobe outscored a prime duncan in 3/4 series, when kobe was younger
kobe owns duncan in the playoffs
plus kobe was 21,22,23 during the 3peat with shaq, shaq was 28,29,30 (prime), but kobe did play better in some series tho

6_funk

03-12-2011, 06:19 PM

Which player would i want to have at his peak:
1) Shaq
2) Duncan
3) Kobe

Whose career achievements would i want:
1) Kobe
2) Duncan
3) Shaq

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 06:21 PM

Dude, in 1999 Duncan was a second-year player and straight up owned the Knicks in the Finals and earned the Finals MVP without a shred of doubt... How many Finals MVP's did Kobe get playing with Shaq again?

look at the scoring in the 99 Finals:

game 1: Duncan 33 , Robinson 13
game 2: Duncan 25 , Robinson 16
game 3: Duncan 20 , Robinson 25 (spurs lost)
game 4: Duncan 28 , Robinson 14
game 5: Duncan 31 , Robinson 15

Duncan scored a third of the Spurs Finals points!

Take 4 players off the 1999 Spurs and replace them with even worse players?? obviously that's going to hurt...

Consider this, Manu, Parker, and an old David Robinson, particularly in 2003, were no where near the player Pau Gasol was and is now. We're talking about a late first rounder, a deep second rounder, and somebody in his last season before retiring. Parker was a second year player with a crap jump shot, Manu was a rookie who was inconsistent, and Robinson was a 37 year old role player at center at most.

what about manu and parker in 2005 and 2007, they were good players, parker won finals mvp in 07

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 06:24 PM

Which player would i want to have at his peak:
1) Shaq
2) Duncan
3) Kobe

Whose career achievements would i want:
1) Kobe
2) Duncan
3) Shaq

kobe in his peak went insane scoring, he just didnt have a supporting cast

2 best seasons statistically

duncan
01-02 - 25.5 ppg, 12.7 rpg, 3.7 apg, 2.5 bpg
02-03 - 23.3 ppg, 12.9 rpg, 3.9 apg, 2.9 bpg

shaq
93-94 - 29.3 ppg, 13.2 rpg, 2.4 apg, 2.9 bpg
99-00 - 29.7 ppg, 13.6 rpg, 3.8 apg, 3.0 bpg

kobe
05-06 - 35.4 ppg, 5.3 rpg, 4.5 apg, 1.8 spg
06-07 - 31.6 ppg, 4.7 rpg, 5.4 apg, 1.4 spg

too me the best peaks was
1.shaq
2.kobe
3.duncan

CJ Mustard

03-12-2011, 06:25 PM

did u even read my first post?
kobe owned duncan in the playoffs except one yearIrrelevant.

jlauber

03-12-2011, 06:25 PM

what about manu and parker in 2005 and 2007, they were good players, parker won finals mvp in 07

The '07 Finals was just another example of Duncan's greatness. The Spurs easily won that series, and TD didn't have to put up huge games for them to win the Finals.

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 06:33 PM

The '07 Finals was just another example of Duncan's greatness. The Spurs easily won that series, and TD didn't have to put up huge games for them to win the Finals.

you can say the same about kobe in the 3peat with shaq, but no it was all shaq, kobe made all the clutch plays,
remember this (go to 2:15) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7Lp5aQq4zI
and this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JkvpnmAk2xU
this too http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpArN4LbTI0&feature=related

ShaqAttack3234

03-12-2011, 06:34 PM

you can say the same about kobe in the 3peat with shaq, but no it was all shaq, kobe made all the clutch plays,
remember this (go to 2:15) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7Lp5aQq4zI

All of the clutch plays? Kobe was clutch, but Shaq averaged 11.5 ppg in the 4th quarters of the 2000 finals, I hate this revisionist history that portrays Shaq as some guy who stood around doing nothing late in games.

6_funk

03-12-2011, 06:36 PM

kobe in his peak went insane scoring, he just didnt have a supporting cast

2 best seasons statistically

duncan
01-02 - 25.5 ppg, 12.7 rpg, 3.7 apg, 2.5 bpg
02-03 - 23.3 ppg, 12.9 rpg, 3.9 apg, 2.9 bpg

shaq
93-94 - 29.3 ppg, 13.2 rpg, 2.4 apg, 2.9 bpg
99-00 - 29.7 ppg, 13.6 rpg, 3.8 apg, 3.0 bpg

kobe
05-06 - 35.4 ppg, 5.3 rpg, 4.5 apg, 1.8 spg
06-07 - 31.6 ppg, 4.7 rpg, 5.4 apg, 1.4 spg

too me the best peaks was
1.shaq
2.kobe
3.duncan

Kobe in his prime was never the anchor of a great defense. Duncan was.
This was the major factor why I'd take Duncan's peak over Kobe's. In a pound for pound sense, i think Kobe's the most talented of the 3. But in reality, great big men affect the game moreso than great swingmen.

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 06:39 PM

All of the clutch plays? Kobe was clutch, but Shaq averaged 11.5 ppg in the 4th quarters of the 2000 finals, I hate this revisionist history that portrays Shaq as some guy who stood around doing nothing late in games.

shaq dominated in the finals, but in the other series, kobe played better in some of them, but in the finals shaq was a beast

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 06:40 PM

Kobe in his prime was never the anchor of a great defense. Duncan was.
This was the major factor why I'd take Duncan's peak over Kobe's. In a pound for pound sense, i think Kobe's the most talented of the 3. But in reality, great big men affect the game moreso than great swingmen.

so MJ isnt goat?

ShaqAttack3234

03-12-2011, 06:45 PM

shaq dominated in the finals, but in the other series, kobe played better in some of them, but in the finals shaq was a beast

Here's how I'd break it down.

2000- Shaq was the MVP of every series.

2001
1st round- Shaq
2nd round- Shaq(though you could give them co-MVPs for that series and I wouldn't complain)
WCF- Kobe
Finals- Shaq

2002
1st round- Shaq
2nd round- Kobe
WCF- Shaq
Finals- Shaq

Kobe was definitely at the level where he could be the best player on the floor in any given series, but in general, Shaq was the best player and MVP of those teams. I do think that Kobe was a top 3 player in the entire league in 2001 and 2002, though.

6_funk

03-12-2011, 06:47 PM

so MJ isnt goat?

MJ isn't the goat.

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 06:53 PM

MJ isn't the goat.

then who do you think it is?

IMO its MJ

az00m

03-12-2011, 07:22 PM

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 07:31 PM

both shaq and duncan are better.

Shaq was the go to guy for 15 years in the nba. He put up monster numbers in the playoffs and didnt choke like kobe. Same with duncan, he stepped up his game a lot in the playoffs unlike kobe.

Shaq
Duncan
Kobe

read my first post!!!!!!, look at the numbers, kobe outplayed duncan in head to head meetings in the playoffs, look at the numbers man

Stuckey

03-12-2011, 07:35 PM

Knoe Itawl

03-12-2011, 08:21 PM

Shaq
Duncan

Kobe

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 08:26 PM

crazy how ppl are putting kobe at #1

he has more championships but no way is he even close to as good as duncan and shaq were

give kobe his own team and he'll repeat what he did in 06'07, even pau gasol got 50 wins

put shaq on an expansion team, and he goes to the finals

put duncan on a mediocre team, he wins championships, duncan even beat kobe/shaq combo, which is insane, then beat the team that beat the kobe/shaq combo two years later

:facepalm
how far did MJ go without pippen?
you do know that shaq had kobe for those first 3 rings, then dwade for his 4th
so without kobe he has 1 ring
your making it seem like duncan has nobody on his teams, he had david robinson back then and manu ginobli and tony parker
parker won finals mvp in 07
and why mention gasol, he is the second option, nobody can win on their own, even mj had pippen, rodman, and a good defense

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 08:27 PM

these kobe haters are so dumb, how bad do you think kobe is? NOT EVEN IN THE TOP 20 OR SO, I BET YALL PROBALLY THINK THAT

jlauber

03-12-2011, 08:34 PM

these kobe haters are so dumb, how bad do you think kobe is? NOT EVEN IN THE TOP 20 OR SO, I BET YALL PROBALLY THINK THAT

I just can't see ten players with better resumes, all-time, than Kobe. In fact, I even rank him above Hakeem and Bird at #8, although I could live with either above him. When you combine his rings, his Finals MVP's, his MVP, his scoring title (which, IMHO, was the best scoring season, in terms of pure scoring, by a player not named Chamberlain), and his other accolades, there are just not too many players that can top him.

So, anytime someone bashes Kobe about being a top-10 player, ask them to provide the players who have had better careers.

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 08:38 PM

MJs first 3 years he got knocked out of the playoffs
the next year the bulls drafted pippen and they got past it out 1st round
It took him 7 years to win a title, around when pippen got into his prime

so if you haters gonna say, look what he did without shaq and gasol, he got knocked out of the first round, it was because he didnt have a supporting cast

smush parker - not even in the league
kwame brown - justs sucks badly
chris mihm - is he even in the league?
luke walton
ronny turiaf
ect

took pheonix to 7 games, in that series he had a game winning shot and a 50 point game

tim duncan and shaq never had a crappy team like kobe had for 3 seasons

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 08:40 PM

jlauber

03-12-2011, 08:49 PM

these haters just hate kobe so bad that some even think clyde drexler was better (i live in oregon, and some think that)

anyways haters gonna hate

Here again, in almost every category, Kobe has been the better player. Offensively, there is/was a grand-canyon sized chasm between them. And Kobe was a FAR greater post-season player, as well. As for accolades, Clyde occasionally cracked the top-10 in MVP balloting, with a HIGH of 5th. It is pure nonsense to suggest that Drexler was close to the player that Kobe has been.

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 08:53 PM

Here again, in almost every category, Kobe has been the better player. Offensively, there is/was a grand-canyon sized chasm between them. And Kobe was a FAR greater post-season player, as well. As for accolades, Clyde occasionally cracked the top-10 in MVP balloting, with a HIGH of 5th. It is pure nonsense to suggest that Drexler was close to the player that Kobe has been.

no matter what kobe does, in haters mind he will still suck and always suck, its no point in having a legit argument with them, its not worth the time

ginobli2311

03-12-2011, 08:58 PM

I just can't see ten players with better resumes, all-time, than Kobe. In fact, I even rank him above Hakeem and Bird at #8, although I could live with either above him. When you combine his rings, his Finals MVP's, his MVP, his scoring title (which, IMHO, was the best scoring season, in terms of pure scoring, by a player not named Chamberlain), and his other accolades, there are just not too many players that can top him.

So, anytime someone bashes Kobe about being a top-10 player, ask them to provide the players who have had better careers.

i have kobe as my tenth best player ever...albeit a little reluctantly.

but what everyone needs to understand is that some people use different criteria. i respect jlabuer's opinions greatly, but he ranks careers.

my rankings are more about a players level of play than just resume.

as far as ranking careers....kobe is top 8 without a doubt.

as far as ranking players.....I could see Kobe in the 8-15 range in terms of level of play and impact.

so before we label people "haters"....just ask them their criteria.

ginobli2311

03-12-2011, 08:58 PM

no matter what kobe does, in haters mind he will still suck and always suck, its no point in having a legit argument with them, its not worth the time

i've never heard anyone say kobe sucks and never seen anyone list kobe worse than 17th all time since my time on here.
:confusedshrug:

jlauber

03-12-2011, 09:00 PM

i have kobe as my tenth best player ever...albeit a little reluctantly.

but what everyone needs to understand is that some people use different criteria. i respect jlabuer's opinions greatly, but he ranks careers.

my rankings are more about a players level of play than just resume.

as far as ranking careers....kobe is top 8 without a doubt.

as far as ranking players.....I could see Kobe in the 8-15 range in terms of level of play and impact.

so before we label people "haters"....just ask them their criteria.

My respect for your opinions is mutual, my friend, even if we occasionally disagree. I said it a long time ago,...there have been very few posters here that are on your level.

Stuckey

03-12-2011, 09:02 PM

i rate players by their prime impact

and there's at least 10 players i would rather have over kobe if i were to build a team starting from scratch

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 09:04 PM

i rate players by their prime impact

and there's at least 10 players i would rather have over kobe if i were to build a team starting from scratch

sure:rolleyes:

jlauber

03-12-2011, 09:04 PM

i've never heard anyone say kobe sucks and never seen anyone list kobe worse than 17th all time since my time on here.
:confusedshrug:

I'm a huge Kobe fan, but the problem here is that he is usually very over-rated, or very under-rated. Very few posters rank him properly. He has no case for a top-5, and could easily be at #10. However, there are not 16 players that have had better careers.

jlauber

03-12-2011, 09:08 PM

i rate players by their prime impact

and there's at least 10 players i would rather have over kobe if i were to build a team starting from scratch

Prime impact being what? Being capable of easily scoring 40+ points in a game, and easily scoring 30+ in the playoffs? Of being able to take over games in the 4th quarter? Of being capable of getting 15 rebounds and playing exceptional defense in a game seven, in which his shooting was off? For all of his critics, there have been very few players who have had a bigger impact in their careers.

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 09:10 PM

i've never heard anyone say kobe sucks and never seen anyone list kobe worse than 17th all time since my time on here.
:confusedshrug:

lol you dont live in oregon (blazer fans), probally boston fans think the same, on thursday the miami heat crowd was chanting "kobe sucks", same in the boston game a while ago

there are not 10 players better than him

ginobli2311

03-12-2011, 09:17 PM

I'm a huge Kobe fan, but the problem here is that he is usually very over-rated, or very under-rated. Very few posters rank him properly. He has no case for a top-5, and could easily be at #10. However, there are not 16 players that have had better careers.

I agree. But again....you there is that word again.....careers.

I would imagine anyone not having kobe in the top 8 that is a sane and logical person would be ranking these guys much more on level of play than their career accomplishments.

Its very difficult to have conversations with people about this subject because everyone is so entrenched in their views.

Its obviously too early to compare them overall, but what makes Kobe better than Wade.

Through their first 7.5 years respectively, I think Wade has been the better player. Wade's numbers are better in the regular season and playoffs. Wade has done something in 1 finals appearance Kobe never did....etc.

What makes Kobe better than Wade as a player? Not much. Same with Lebron.

So it gets into a really tough spot. How much do we value team accomplishments and circumstances? Would we rank KG over Kobe if he had 3 titles and 2 finals MVPs (something that is more than realistic given better situations for KG's first 10 years)?

Do we overlook Kobe's inept play in the finals throughout his career?

How much are these players a product of circumstances?

All very difficult questions and for some reason, Kobe always seems to be the most controversial.

And I think the reason why is because his level of play just hasn't quite been up to the legendary standards of guys like magic and bird and duncan and wilt.....etc.

But that is just my opinion. I have biases like anyone. I'm a huge efficiency and high IQ guy. I value things differently than others.

jlauber

03-12-2011, 09:24 PM

I agree. But again....you there is that word again.....careers.

I would imagine anyone not having kobe in the top 8 that is a sane and logical person would be ranking these guys much more on level of play than their career accomplishments.

Its very difficult to have conversations with people about this subject because everyone is so entrenched in their views.

Its obviously too early to compare them overall, but what makes Kobe better than Wade.

Through their first 7.5 years respectively, I think Wade has been the better player. Wade's numbers are better in the regular season and playoffs. Wade has done something in 1 finals appearance Kobe never did....etc.

What makes Kobe better than Wade as a player? Not much. Same with Lebron.

So it gets into a really tough spot. How much do we value team accomplishments and circumstances? Would we rank KG over Kobe if he had 3 titles and 2 finals MVPs (something that is more than realistic given better situations for KG's first 10 years)?

Do we overlook Kobe's inept play in the finals throughout his career?

How much are these players a product of circumstances?

All very difficult questions and for some reason, Kobe always seems to be the most controversial.

And I think the reason why is because his level of play just hasn't quite been up to the legendary standards of guys like magic and bird and duncan and wilt.....etc.

But that is just my opinion. I have biases like anyone. I'm a huge efficiency and high IQ guy. I value things differently than others.

Good points. I do probably value TEAM accomplishments more than some other's here, though. And before someone jumps down my throat about Wilt...I always connect he and Russell together. Russell was the game's greatest "winner", and yet, Chamberlain was a total of NINE points away from having a 5-3 edge in rings in H2H post-season play. And, of course, Wilt also outplayed Russell in the vast majority of their H2H games, as well.

And, if you took Duncan's TEAM accomplishments away, and his numbers, while certainly amongst the best ever, would drop him further down than many other "great" players.

But, I agree...we all have our opinions. All I ask from anyone is some kind of consistency in their's...as well as using some common sense. No rational poster is going to claim Drexler as a better player than Kobe, even without Kobe's rings.

ginobli2311

03-12-2011, 09:33 PM

Good points. I do probably value TEAM accomplishments more than some other's here, though. And before someone jumps down my throat about Wilt...I always connect he and Russell together. Russell was the game's greatest "winner", and yet, Chamberlain was a total of NINE points away from having a 5-3 edge in rings in H2H post-season play. And, of course, Wilt also outplayed Russell in the vast majority of their H2H games, as well.

And, if you took Duncan's TEAM accomplishments away, and his numbers, while certainly amongst the best ever, would drop him further down than many other "great" players.

But, I agree...we all have our opinions. All I ask from anyone is some kind of consistency in their's...as well as using some common sense. No rational poster is going to claim Drexler as a better player than Kobe, even without Kobe's rings.

Right. Which goes to your point about people making wild statements.

I do disagree a little about Duncan....and this is part of my bias. His impact on both ends is simply nothing like I've seen before out of any player other than Hakeem and Jordan. He could absolutely dominate on both ends and on the glass. I value Duncan's defense hugely and its the main reason why I have him so high.

If you stripped Duncan of 2 of his titles, yea, it would probably impact a little where i rank him, but not a ton. I do value titles, but if Duncan had played just as well as he did and lost....meh....hard to really fault him.

Dirk in 09 against the nuggets is a perfect example of this:

Games:
1.28 points 10 boards 4 assists 2 steals 1 block 55% shooting 80%ft....mavs lost by 14

2. 35 points 9 boards 4 assists 55% shooting 92%ft......mavs lost by 12

3. 33 points 16 boards 2 assists 2 blocks 47% shooting 87% ft......mavs lost by 1 on melo buzzer beater

4. 44 points 13 rebounds 3 assists 2 steals 1 block 56% shooting 94% ft....mavs won by 2

5. 32 points 10 boards 7 assists 1 block 53% shooting 100% ft.....mavs lost by 14

That series was not even 2 years ago. Do people remember Dirk playing amazingly well? No, ask anyone about Dirk and the first thing they will say is that he chokes in the playoffs and can't get out of the first round. Yet he dominated the Spurs two years ago and then did the above against a very good nuggets team.

Should we fault Dirk for his team clearly not being good enough to win? The Mavs got blown out in 3 of the losses.....I mean, at some point we have to use our brains and realize these games are not played with the same circumstances for each player.

Just gets annoying after a while. We ignore how players play just because they win or lose. I find that notion extremely limited and flawed.

King24

03-12-2011, 09:38 PM

lol @ the Lakers bring stacked in 09 or 2010

2010: Worst starting PG in the league. Worst offensive starting SF in the league. Horrible bench. No shooting at all (24th in 3PT%). Center putting up 7/5. Yeah, real "stacked".

2009: Again, worst starting PG in league and a horrible bench. Bynum putting 6/4(:oldlol: ) Kobe essentially won that championship with Gasol, who wasn't even top 10 in the league, and Odom/Ariza--a couple of role-players. What has Ariza done since leaving Kobe anyway? Nothing.

Even when they made the Finals in 2008 they were out-rebounded in every game. :oldlol:

Kobe=#1

jlauber

03-12-2011, 09:42 PM

[/B]

Right. Which goes to your point about people making wild statements.

I do disagree a little about Duncan....and this is part of my bias. His impact on both ends is simply nothing like I've seen before out of any player other than Hakeem and Jordan. He could absolutely dominate on both ends and on the glass. I value Duncan's defense hugely and its the main reason why I have him so high.

If you stripped Duncan of 2 of his titles, yea, it would probably impact a little where i rank him, but not a ton. I do value titles, but if Duncan had played just as well as he did and lost....meh....hard to really fault him.

Dirk in 09 against the nuggets is a perfect example of this:

Games:
1.28 points 10 boards 4 assists 2 steals 1 block 55% shooting 80%ft....mavs lost by 14

2. 35 points 9 boards 4 assists 55% shooting 92%ft......mavs lost by 12

3. 33 points 16 boards 2 assists 2 blocks 47% shooting 87% ft......mavs lost by 1 on melo buzzer beater

4. 44 points 13 rebounds 3 assists 2 steals 1 block 56% shooting 94% ft....mavs won by 2

5. 32 points 10 boards 7 assists 1 block 53% shooting 100% ft.....mavs lost by 14

That series was not even 2 years ago. Do people remember Dirk playing amazingly well? No, ask anyone about Dirk and the first thing they will say is that he chokes in the playoffs and can't get out of the first round. Yet he dominated the Spurs two years ago and then did the above against a very good defensive team.

Should we fault Dirk for his team clearly not being good enough to win? The Mavs got blown out in 3 of the losses.....I mean, at some point we have to use our brains and realize these games are not played with the same circumstances for each player.

Just gets annoying after a while. We ignore how players play just because they win or lose. I find that notion extremely limited and flawed.

No doubt about it. Just take a look at Garnett's career. He played brilliantly on 30 win teams, and played brilliantly on 66 win championship teams. Basketball is still a TEAM game. And you said it best in another thread...the best players do not start with a level playing field. Some, like Russell, were blessed with as many as SEVEN HOF teammates. Other's like Wilt, carried crappy rosters to within an eyelash of beating Russell's Celtics. And I would rank Duncan's four rings over Kobe's five, too. Oscar had the misfortune to not only be saddled with poor rosters for most of his career, he also had to play in the era of the Celtic Dynasty, Wilt, and the West-Baylor combo.

TEAM success is just ONE area which validates a great player's career.

rodman91

03-12-2011, 10:14 PM

Player comparision :
Shaq >>Duncan>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Kobe

Achievements comparision:
Duncan>>>Shaq>Kobe

Current comparision:
Kobe>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Duncan>>>>Shaq

Anaximandro1

03-12-2011, 10:17 PM

And, if you took Duncan's TEAM accomplishments away, and his numbers, while certainly amongst the best ever, would drop him further down than many other "great" players.

Duncan has joined Olajuwon,Abdul-Jabbar and Shaq as the only players in NBA history to record at least 20,000 points, 10,000 rebounds, 2,000 blocks and 3,000 assists in a career (Wilt should be up there with them)

We all know that Duncan always saves his best work for the spring.Look at these playoff numbers:

NBA Playoff Leaders for Points

1. Michael Jordan 5987

2. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar 5762

3. Shaquille O'Neal 5248 (214 GM)

4. Kobe Bryant 5052

5. Karl Malone 4761

6. Jerry West 4457

7. Tim Duncan 3914 (170 GM)

NBA Playoff Leaders for Total Rebounds

1. Bill Russell 4104

2. Wilt Chamberlain* 3913

3. Shaquille O'Neal 2508 (214 GM)

4. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar 2481

5. Tim Duncan 2114 (170 GM)

NBA Career Playoff Leaders for Blocks

1. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar 476

2. Hakeem Olajuwon 472

3. Shaquille O'Neal 459 (214 GM)

4. Tim Duncan 438 (170 GM)

Duncan put up huge numbers consistently during the playoffs against the Lakers,Suns,Mavs ...

1999

Western Conference Semifinals / Spurs 4-0 over Lakers

Duncan averaged 29 pts,10.8 rbs,3.3 as.,2 blk

Finals/ Spurs 4-1 over Knicks

Duncan averaged 27.4 pts,14.1 rbs,2.4 as.,2.2 blk

2001

Western Conference Semifinals / Spurs 4-1 Over Mavs

Duncan averaged 26.8 pts,17.4 rb,3.6 as,2 blk

2002

Western Conference Semifinals / Lakers 4-1 over Spurs

LA was the better team but Duncan averaged 29 pts,17.2 rb,4.6 as,3.2 blk

2003

Western Conference Semifinals / Spurs 4-2 over Lakers

Duncan averaged 28 pts,11.8 rb,4.8 as,1.3 blk

Western Conference Finals / Spurs 4-2 over Mavs

Duncan averaged 28 pts,16.7 rb,5.8 as,3 blk

Finals / Spurs 4-2 over Nets

Duncan averaged 24.2 pts,17.0 rb,5.3 as,5.3 blk

2005

Western Conference Semifinals / Spurs 4-2 over Sonics

Duncan averaged 25.2 pts,10.3 rb,2.5 as,2.5 blk

Western Conference Finals / Spurs 4-1 over Suns

Duncan averaged 27.4 pts,13.8 rb,3.2 as,1.8 blk

2006

Western Conference Finals / Mavs 4-3 over Spurs

Duncan averaged 32.2 pts,11.7 rb,3.7 as,2.6 blk

2007

Western Conference Semifinals / Spurs 4-2 over Suns

Duncan averaged 26.8 pts,13.7 rb,1.1 as,4.1 blk

2008

Western Conference First Round / Spurs 4-1 over Suns

Duncan averaged 24.8 pts,13.8 rb,2.6 as,2.4 blk

Western Conference Finals / Lakers 4-1 over Spurs

Duncan averaged 22.4 pts,17.4 rb,2 blk

Colby Brian

03-12-2011, 11:12 PM

SCdac

03-13-2011, 12:44 AM

NBA Playoff Leaders for Points

1. Michael Jordan 5987

2. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar 5762

3. Shaquille O'Neal 5248 (214 GM)

4. Kobe Bryant 5052

5. Karl Malone 4761

6. Jerry West 4457

7. Tim Duncan 3914 (170 GM)

Kobe could end up number 1 in the next 3 years

yeah, and to get that #, he's taken more 3-point attempts in the playoffs than anyone not named Reggie Miller, and more FGA's than anyone but Jordan and Kareem themselves. The guy is a gunner and has chucked up bad shots in plenty of games, because he played with one of the most dominant players ever. He ranks #193 in career playoff FG%, while Shaq the main guy for LA during the 3-peat is top-5 all time. Point being, it helps to play with a big man who consistently scores more than half the time he shoots the ball, somebody who draws doubles and triple teams, which can be said about Duncan as well (for years people right here on ISH were saying how "Parker and Manu are the product of TD", suddenly now they're portrayed as some kind of perennial top-5 players since they stepped foot on the floor).

ginobli2311

03-13-2011, 12:46 AM

yeah, and to get that #, he's taken more 3-point attempts in the playoffs than anyone not named Reggie Miller, and more FGA's than anyone but Jordan and Kareem themselves. The guy is a gunner and has chucked up bad shots in plenty of games, because he played with one of the most dominant players ever. He ranks #193 in career playoff FG%, while Shaq the main guy for LA during the 3-peat is top-5 all time. Point being, it helps to play with a big man who consistently scores more than half the time he shoots the ball, somebody who draws doubles and triple teams, which can be said about Duncan as well (for years people right here on ISH were saying how "Parker and Manu are the product of TD", suddenly now they're portrayed as some kind of perennial top-5 players since they stepped foot on the floor).

44.8% shooting for kobe's career in the playoffs
41.2% shooting for kboe's career in the finals

volume and circumstances are the reasons he's scored so many points in the playoffs.

rmt

03-13-2011, 12:48 AM

Reading through this thread I find it amusing that most posters have Duncan in the middle. Those (the majority) have Shaq, TD and Kobe. The Kobe fans have Kobe, TD, Shaq. Almost nobody has it Shaq, Kobe, TD or Kobe, Shaq, TD.

I guess because Shaq and Kobe were on the same team, it kinda dilutes each if one lists them above TD. Or it's peak (Shaq, TD, Kobe) or it's accomplishments (although I don't see how one can say that as of now, Kobe's accomplishments > TD's).

Great Wings> Great Bigs

Bigs can't take-over games in the fourth like wings. They're nowhere the play-makers, nor the scorers. You have a truly great wing and you'll be set for an elite offense (top 6-7). Even with garbage around them. See: 07 & 06 Kobe. 03 T-Mac etc. At that point, all you need is a top 10 defense, which is easily attainable as long as you have a competent coach with a good scheme and players willing to put in effort. You don't even need a particularly good anchor. Just a decent one.

See: 2010 Heat, 2011 Mavs, Those old Bulls teams with Scott Skilles, etc

I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who agrees with you that great wings > great bigs. Look at most people's top 10 GOAT lists, they are littered with big men. There was a thread late last year asking who would you start a franchise with. The vast majority picked great big men (KAJ, Wilt, Shaq, Russell, TD, Hakeem) even surprisingly above MJ. I'd hazard a guess that some would pick DRob, Moses Malone, even KG to start a franchise over Kobe.

Look at the great defensive teams anchored by defensive big men - Spurs (TD and DRob), Pistons (Wallacex2), etc. What exactly have the 06 and 07 Kobe teams, 03 T-Mac team, 2010 Heat and 2011 Mavs won? Nothing.

Colby Brian

03-13-2011, 03:04 AM

44.8% shooting for kobe's career in the playoffs
41.2% shooting for kboe's career in the finals

volume and circumstances are the reasons he's scored so many points in the playoffs.

and his 2 rings without shaq are because of his great teammates and not his greatness right?

ginobli2311

03-13-2011, 03:21 AM

and his 2 rings without shaq are because of his great teammates and not his greatness right?

nah. kobe is a great player. just a bit over-rated in general. kobe was the best player on the lakers title teams over the last few years. he deserves more credit than any other player for that.

he's just not on the level of duncan or shaq imo in terms of impact or level of play.

just how i feel.

Colby Brian

03-13-2011, 03:24 AM

nah. kobe is a great player. just a bit over-rated in general. kobe was the best player on the lakers title teams over the last few years. he deserves more credit than any other player for that.

he's just not on the level of duncan or shaq imo in terms of impact or level of play.

just how i feel.

what if kobe ends up with the mosts points of all time, plus most points in playoffs, and another finals mvp,....would he be above shaq or duncan?
i already have him above duncan, just not above shaq tho

ginobli2311

03-13-2011, 03:30 AM

what if kobe ends up with the mosts points of all time, plus most points in playoffs, and another finals mvp,....would he be above shaq or duncan?
i already have him above duncan, just not above shaq tho

you are ranking careers. its different. kobe's career has already been better than shaq and duncan's imo.

but using context and looking at which player was better at playing the game and impacting it.

really not much kobe can do to pass duncan or shaq imo. duncan was just so good on both ends. he provided all time great interior defense and rebounding and was a great offensive post player that required a double or he'd shred you.

kobe just never impacted the game to that extent imo. its why duncan has won his titles with considerably less help than kobe. i just don't see kobe ever winning a title with the kind of teams that duncan had.

i factor in everything when i rank players....i do account for titles and accolades, but i heavily weight the circumstances in which players won or lost and how they played while winning and losing.

and then the last question i ask:

"if i had to pick one of these guys to build a team around for that players best 10 years.....which player would i choose"?

and the answer to that question for me is very difficult between duncan and shaq.....but there is no way in hell i'm taking kobe over either of them. and so when i look at everything...and then factor in my answer to the above question.

it becomes an easy answer for me overall.