Kobe's 2001-2002 season

[ShaqAttack3234]

What are your thoughts on Kobe's '01-'02 season overall? It seems that when it comes to Kobe, everyone mentions 2001 and 2003 for the Shaq era.

Regular Season- 25.2 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 5.5 apg, 2.8 TO, 1.5 spg, 46.9 FG%, 54.4 TS%
Playoffs- 26.6 ppg, 5.8 rpg, 4.6 apg, 1.4 spg, 2.8 TO, 43.4 FG%, 51.1 TS%

It was a notable season for Kobe in that he made his first all-nba first team, he won another championship, finished 5th in MVP voting which marked his first top 5 finish and he made the all-defensive second team. He also had that 56 in 3 quarters game vs Memphis, the first of his many legendary scoring games.

Despite an inconsistent playoff run(poor vs Portland, but they swept them anyway, streaky vs Sacramento), he was huge in 4th quarters throughout the playoffs and had 2 great series vs elite defenses. The first being the WCSF vs the Spurs where he was clearly the best player in the series and the finals, where he had one of the best series ever by a non-finals MVP.

It seems like this season is forgotten despite it being one of Kobe's most mature seasons I've seen in terms of team play and clutch play. Maybe it's because his regular season was very good, but forgettable by his standards(only one 40+ point game and a 7-8 record without Shaq), and maybe his playoff moments are forgotten due to how hard of an act his 2001 run was to follow. And his superior numbers in 2001 and 2003 as well as the scoring streaks and highlights in '03 make this kind of his forgotten season.

Where would you rank this among Kobe's superstar seasons('01-present)?

[Bring-Your-Js]

Probably the best Finals performance of his career, which is funny because he had several overall playoff runs more impressive statistically (01, 03, 08-10). I can see why people would choose 2009 (because its the best of his 3 appearances post-Shaq) but 27/7/6 on 51.4%FG is a wholly excellent Finals.

[Jacks3]

Pretty meh season for his standards. I think he was so determined to not cause the sort of chemistry problems the Lakers had in the beginning of 2001 that he hurt his game. In fact, that was the year Phil was asking him to look for his shot more, especially in the 1-2 quarters of games. His playoff numbers vs Sacremento is also depressed by the fact that he played with major food poisoning in the middle games of that series.

Best super-star seasons:
1. 2006
2. 2007
3. 2008
4. 2001
5. 2003
6. 2009
7. 2010
8. 2002
9. 2004
9. 2005

[ShaqAttack3234]

Probably the best Finals performance of his career, which is funny because he had several overall playoff runs more impressive statistically (01, 03, 08-10). I can see why people would choose 2009 (because its the best of his 3 appearances post-Shaq) but 27/7/6 on 51.4%FG is a wholly excellent Finals.

He may have gotten more credit for that series if it was closer, but I think because nobody gave the Nets much of a chance, and even though the games were close for the most part, the Nets never seemed like a serious threat to the Lakers, that makes it the most forgettable finals in recent years. That, and the fact that with him not winning Finals MVP and Shaq putting up such huge numbers, most of what people remember about the series is Shaq.


Pretty meh season for his standards. I think he was so determined to not cause the sort of chemistry problems the Lakers had in the beginning of 2001 that he hurt his game. In fact, that was the year Phil was asking him to look for his shot more, especially in the 1-2 quarters of games. His playoff numbers vs Sacremento is also depressed by the fact that he played with major food poisoning in the middle games of that series.

Best super-star seasons:
1. 2006
2. 2007
3. 2008
4. 2001
5. 2003
6. 2009
7. 2010
8. 2002
9. 2004
9. 2005

Can't disagree too much with your rankings, except I'd move 2008 up to 1 or 2. You could argue that 2009 could be ranked a little higher as well due to him leading a team to 65 wins, winning a title as the man and having an all-time great playoff run. But your rankings look pretty accurate.

And your theory about Kobe's different approach may be true. That's a season where I don't remember any real Shaq/Kobe problems.

[Jacks3]

Probably the best Finals performance of his career, which is funny because he had several overall playoff runs more impressive statistically (01, 03, 08-10). I can see why people would choose 2009 (because its the best of his 3 appearances post-Shaq) but 27/7/6 on 51.4%FG is a wholly excellent Finals.
His 2001, 2009, 2010 Finals were all arguably more impressive...

People are putting to much focus on FG%.

[ShaqAttack3234]

His 2001, 2009, 2010 Finals were all arguably more impressive...

People are putting to much focus on FG%.

2001? Nah. Good series, but he was better in 2002, put up better numbers, was more consistent and better in the 4th quarter, iirc. 2010? Kind of hard to compare considering he was the man on that team and facing a better team than the Nets.

[Disaprine]

why do people say 2001-2002 was his best finals performance? because he shot above 50%? :facepalm

anyways to answer the op question, i would say is his 5th best season imo.

1. 2005-2006
2. 2006-2007
3. 2007-2008
4. 2002-2003
5. 2001-2002

[ThaSwagg3r]

Kobe's top 5 seasons....

1. 08-09
2. 07-08
3. 05-06
4. 02-03
5. 01-02

His 08-09 season was probably the best mainly because he won the championship as the leader and "the guy" for the first time. He was very dominant in the playoffs and he also had very dominant regular season with a nice win record as well. 65 wins, iirc.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Kobe's top 5 seasons....

1. 08-09
2. 07-08
3. 05-06
4. 02-03
5. 01-02

His 08-09 season was probably the best mainly because he won the championship as the leader and "the guy" for the first time. He was very dominant in the playoffs and he also had very dominant regular season with a nice win record as well. 65 wins, iirc.

No 2006-2007?

And to me, he was clearly better in 2008 than 2009, the difference being that his cast stepped up more and he didn't face Boston.

[kaiiu]

05-06
08-09
02-03
07-08
06-07

where my fav. seasons by him

[ImmortalD24]

1. 2006-07
2. 2005-06

[Heavincent]

08-09 was his best season. His team dominated all year and he was the main man. And he performed very well in the finals.

01-02 was pretty decent though.

[ThaSwagg3r]

No 2006-2007?

And to me, he was clearly better in 2008 than 2009, the difference being that his cast stepped up more and he didn't face Boston.
No 06-07, sure he had a hot scoring streak but did he do much outside of that? To me, there is a lot more to the game than scoring, that is why 07-08 and 08-09 are so high up in my list. And I wouldn't say he won because he avoided Boston, I would just say he won because his teammates were healthy. Ariza and Bynum were hurt in the 08 playoffs. Well Ariza was out until the WCF, but I don't think they played him, and Bynum was totally out.

There is a difference between his best scoring season and his best season.

[ShaqAttack3234]

No 06-07, sure he had a hot scoring streak but did he do much outside of that? To me, there is a lot more to the game than scoring, that is why 07-08 and 08-09 are so high up in my list. And I wouldn't say he won because he avoided Boston, I would just say he won because his teammates were healthy. Ariza and Bynum were hurt in the 08 playoffs. Well Ariza was out until the WCF, but I don't think they played him, and Bynum was totally out.

There is a difference between his best scoring season and his best season.

I thought it was a combination of factors, one being that the 2008 Celtics were better than the 2009 Magic, the other being health. Ariza hit some big shots for the Lakers, and while Bynum wasn't very good in the 2009 playoffs, he gave them more size and the difference between Gasol in 2008 and 2009 was night and day.

[kizut1659]

What are your thoughts on Kobe's '01-'02 season overall? It seems that when it comes to Kobe, everyone mentions 2001 and 2003 for the Shaq era.

Regular Season- 25.2 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 5.5 apg, 2.8 TO, 1.5 spg, 46.9 FG%, 54.4 TS%
Playoffs- 26.6 ppg, 5.8 rpg, 4.6 apg, 1.4 spg, 2.8 TO, 43.4 FG%, 51.1 TS%

It was a notable season for Kobe in that he made his first all-nba first team, he won another championship, finished 5th in MVP voting which marked his first top 5 finish and he made the all-defensive second team. He also had that 56 in 3 quarters game vs Memphis, the first of his many legendary scoring games.

Despite an inconsistent playoff run(poor vs Portland, but they swept them anyway, streaky vs Sacramento), he was huge in 4th quarters throughout the playoffs and had 2 great series vs elite defenses. The first being the WCSF vs the Spurs where he was clearly the best player in the series and the finals, where he had one of the best series ever by a non-finals MVP.

It seems like this season is forgotten despite it being one of Kobe's most mature seasons I've seen in terms of team play and clutch play. Maybe it's because his regular season was very good, but forgettable by his standards(only one 40+ point game and a 7-8 record without Shaq), and maybe his playoff moments are forgotten due to how hard of an act his 2001 run was to follow. And his superior numbers in 2001 and 2003 as well as the scoring streaks and highlights in '03 make this kind of his forgotten season.

Where would you rank this among Kobe's superstar seasons('01-present)?

For me that season was a dissapointment. Every season before that Kobe made a huge leap. During the 2000-2001 season and especially playoffs, while Kobe was still not as good as Jordan, it was feasible and actually seemed likely that Kobe will reach that level soon since he was still only 22. In 2001-2002 season though, Kobe plateaued and indeed, in my opinion, played overally worse in the playoffs than the season before (even though he did have better finals). This set the pattern for the rest of Kobe's career - a superstar and always one of the best players in the league year in and year out but never reaching Jordan' s level.

[ThaSwagg3r]

I thought it was a combination of factors, one being that the 2008 Celtics were better than the 2009 Magic, the other being health. Ariza hit some big shots for the Lakers, and while Bynum wasn't very good in the 2009 playoffs, he gave them more size and the difference between Gasol in 2008 and 2009 was night and day.
Sure, but I am not sure how that shows how Kobe in 08 was better than Kobe in 09. It kind of reminds me of Jordan in 89-90 vs. Jordan in 90-91.

Kobe didn't do anything better in 07-08 compared to 08-09. Averaged the same amount of points in the playoffs with 2% less (48% vs. 46%), which isn't a big deal to me anyways. If it is a big deal to you then I will also let you know that Kobe shot a 1% higher in the regular season in 08-09 compared to 07-08 (47% vs. 46%). He averaged a rebound more in 08, but I am guessing that has to do with the injury of Bynum if anything.

He was pretty much the same in 07-08 and he was in 08-09 except he won the championship in 08-09 instead of coming up short.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Sure, but I am not sure how that shows how Kobe in 08 was better than Kobe in 09. It kind of reminds me of Jordan in 89-90 vs. Jordan in 90-91.

Kobe didn't do anything better in 07-08 compared to 08-09. Averaged the same amount of points in the playoffs with 2% less (48% vs. 46%), which isn't a big deal to me anyways. He averaged a rebound more in 08, but I am guessing that has to do with the injury of Bynum if anything.

He was pretty much the same in 07-08 and he was in 08-09 except he won the championship in 08-09 instead of coming up short.

He played better defense in 2008, was more athletic, attacked the basket more and that was his peak as a playmaker, imo.

[eliteballer]

Kobe got married before this season I believe and it was noted at the time how he was more content to pull back a little on the court as he was happy off of it. Still, he had that 56 in 3 quarters game that year, although that was because it was needed since Shaq was out that game.

[kizut1659]

He played better defense in 2008, was more athletic, attacked the basket more and that was his peak as a playmaker, imo.

Yeab but his finals performance was pretty horrible.

[chazzy]

Yeab but his finals performance was pretty horrible.
Against a much better defensive team with worse teammates though.

[Samurai Swoosh]

What are your thoughts on Kobe's '01-'02 season overall? It seems that when it comes to Kobe, everyone mentions 2001 and 2003 for the Shaq era.

Regular Season- 25.2 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 5.5 apg, 2.8 TO, 1.5 spg, 46.9 FG%, 54.4 TS%
Playoffs- 26.6 ppg, 5.8 rpg, 4.6 apg, 1.4 spg, 2.8 TO, 43.4 FG%, 51.1 TS%

It was a notable season for Kobe in that he made his first all-nba first team, he won another championship, finished 5th in MVP voting which marked his first top 5 finish and he made the all-defensive second team. He also had that 56 in 3 quarters game vs Memphis, the first of his many legendary scoring games.

Despite an inconsistent playoff run(poor vs Portland, but they swept them anyway, streaky vs Sacramento), he was huge in 4th quarters throughout the playoffs and had 2 great series vs elite defenses. The first being the WCSF vs the Spurs where he was clearly the best player in the series and the finals, where he had one of the best series ever by a non-finals MVP.

It seems like this season is forgotten despite it being one of Kobe's most mature seasons I've seen in terms of team play and clutch play. Maybe it's because his regular season was very good, but forgettable by his standards(only one 40+ point game and a 7-8 record without Shaq), and maybe his playoff moments are forgotten due to how hard of an act his 2001 run was to follow. And his superior numbers in 2001 and 2003 as well as the scoring streaks and highlights in '03 make this kind of his forgotten season.

Where would you rank this among Kobe's superstar seasons('01-present)?
I honestly don't get why for the Lakers chapionship runs, whenever Shaq "was out" ... (which was virtually always, cause his fat lazy ass never stayed in shape, something you refuse to critique your boy on considering the Lakers shouldn't have had to "play w/o Shaq" for such extended periods of time in the regular season as they ALWAYS did) ... YOU always give like a back handed compliment to Kobe about the Lakers record when Shaq was out of service.

Those Lakers teams weren't very talented outside of Shaq / Kobe ... you take either one of those guys out and they are going to suffer some loses. More specifically taking Shaq out because the team was built primarily around him, and you remove him and you have a significant drop off in defense and rebounding. Their back up centers were TERRIBLE, obviously because they didn't need to be real good because the team was BUILT around Shaq.

So please, stop using the well when Shaq was out in (2002, 2003) Kobe only had the team at a 9-8 record (or whatever example) you love to use as a sort of means to prop up Shaq and down grade Kobe. Even from 2001 on if the Lakers were built semi talentedly outside of Shaq / Kobe, Kobe could have took those teams to good records. You love using this argument specifically for the 2002 - 2003 season ... where it was obvious Kobe was the best player on the Lakers. And IMO was a very strong MVP candidate. Regardless of their record w/o Shaq. He had NO help outside of Shaq. Luckily, Kobe wasn't the fat lazy injury prone player Shaq was so we can't use the argument on the other foot of how well Shaq would've done without Kobe for extended stretches during the season.

:facepalm

[Samurai Swoosh]

2001? Nah. Good series, but he was better in 2002, put up better numbers, was more consistent and better in the 4th quarter, iirc. 2010? Kind of hard to compare considering he was the man on that team and facing a better team than the Nets.
Not true ... apart from one atrocious game against the Sixers, he had a REALLY good Finals. He didn't go out looking to simply score, he had a great all around game. And after game 1, he gave Iverson problems on the defensive end of the floor. You also have to take into account that Sixer defense was WAY better than the Nets. That Nets team is one of the worst NBA Finals teams of all-time. Right there with the 2007 Cavs, 2003 Nets, etc

[Samurai Swoosh]

1. 2006-07
2. 2005-06
Just out of curiosity ... why 2007 over 2006? His role on the team was the exact same in both seasons, and he was better at it in 2006. Plus he took the Suns 7 games, instead of 5 or 6 (whatever it was) ...

[BlackJoker23]

Not true ... apart from one atrocious game against the Sixers, he had a REALLY good Finals. He didn't go out looking to simply score, he had a great all around game. And after game 1, he gave Iverson problems on the defensive end of the floor. You also have to take into account that Sixer defense was WAY better than the Nets. That Nets team is one of the worst NBA Finals teams of all-time. Right there with the 2007 Cavs, 2003 Nets, etc
quit spreading lies. kobe only guarded iverson in the first half of game 1. fisher and lue guarded him the rest of the way.

[BlackJoker23]

Those Lakers teams weren't very talented outside of Shaq / Kobe ... you take either one of those guys out and they are going to suffer some loses.

25-7 when shaq played and kobe didn't during the first 3-peat.

[Samurai Swoosh]

quit spreading lies. kobe only guarded iverson in the first half of game 1. fisher and lue guarded him the rest of the way.
Why be such a douche, I'm sorry my memory wasn't as sharp for this series. I've only been watching NBA basketball since 1990. So sometimes my mind slips on the small details. I do know Kobe held him to a 1 - 5 start shooting in Game 1, then they switched up and I want to say Iverson went 6 - 8 (hit 1 or 2 shots on Kobe) when they switched to Fisher and Lue on him.

Kobe guarded him a lot in game 2, and held him to 23 points. That was the game where Iverson got frusterated at Bryant and they got into having words.

[Samurai Swoosh]

25-7 when shaq played and kobe didn't during the first 3-peat.
Clearly you didn't read the rest of my post, or understand it like a dumb ass nigg ...

Those teams were built around Shaq. If he left obviously it would be more impactful than if Bryant left for extended periods.

Without Shaq their back up center was Slava Mavdenko and people like that.

If it was someone even servicable at center Kobe would've been able to better keep them afloat.

But you have a hatred for Bryant, so obviously it obscures your vision. So why are you even in this thread?

[ShaqAttack3234]

I honestly don't get why for the Lakers chapionship runs, whenever Shaq "was out" ... (which was virtually always, cause his fat lazy ass never stayed in shape, something you refuse to critique your boy on considering the Lakers shouldn't have had to "play w/o Shaq" for such extended periods of time in the regular season as they ALWAYS did) ... YOU always give like a back handed compliment to Kobe about the Lakers record when Shaq was out of service.

Those Lakers teams weren't very talented outside of Shaq / Kobe ... you take either one of those guys out and they are going to suffer some loses. More specifically taking Shaq out because the team was built primarily around him, and you remove him and you have a significant drop off in defense and rebounding. Their back up centers were TERRIBLE, obviously because they didn't need to be real good because the team was BUILT around Shaq.

So please, stop using the well when Shaq was out in (2002, 2003) Kobe only had the team at a 9-8 record (or whatever example) you love to use as a sort of means to prop up Shaq and down grade Kobe. Even from 2001 on if the Lakers were built semi talentedly outside of Shaq / Kobe, Kobe could have took those teams to good records. You love using this argument specifically for the 2002 - 2003 season ... where it was obvious Kobe was the best player on the Lakers. And IMO was a very strong MVP candidate. Regardless of their record w/o Shaq. He had NO help outside of Shaq. Luckily, Kobe wasn't the fat lazy injury prone player Shaq was so we can't use the argument on the other foot of how well Shaq would've done without Kobe for extended stretches during the season.

:facepalm

:oldlol: at this. I gave a review of his whole season, with a lot more praise than criticism, but included everything, both negatives and positives.

Yes, Shaq wasn't in the best shape in 2002, but when you're a 7 footer in general, there's a good chance you'll be injury prone, particularly when you play such a physical style, much less a guy who even when he's in shape is easily over 300 pounds. And 15 games missed in a regular season isn't that much, particularly when 3 were due to suspension.

And if you really want to question how Shaq could fare with Kobe out for an extended stretch, they were 11-3 with him out in 2001 and 12-3 with him out in 2000.......

Do you really want to turn this into a Shaq vs Kobe thread? Oh and :roll: at Kobe being clearly better in 2003. That type of shit shows what a Kobe stan you can be, well that and you arguing he was better than Duncan that year. :facepalm

[Samurai Swoosh]

Yes, Shaq wasn't in the best shape in 2002, but when you're a 7 footer in general, there's a good chance you'll be injury prone, particularly when you play such a physical style, much less a guy who even when he's in shape is easily over 300 pounds. And 15 games missed in a regular season isn't that much, particularly when 3 were due to suspension.
So that excuses him being out of shape, lazy, putting off surgeries to miss regular season time, etc.?


And if you really want to question how Shaq could fare with Kobe out for an extended stretch, they were 11-3 with him out in 2001 and 12-3 with him out in 2000.......
And you do realize why that is correct? Way to not address the rest of the post. They were built around Shaq. The back ups were terrible. Obviously they would fare worse without Shaq than they would with out Kobe. Significant drop off in defense and rebounding, no?


Do you really want to turn this into a Shaq vs Kobe thread?
And you're not clearly all over Shaq's d1ck?

:oldlol:

The career underachiever.

Who wouldn't have won d1ck if he didn't play with 2 of the top 3 SG's of ALL - TIME ?!?!

The man who went H.A.M. for one season in his entire career (1999 - 2000)

Shaq for all he achieved was a massive waste of one of the physical wonders of the world.

Because he was soft, massively egotistical, and straight out lazy. He should've won every year in the league if he had a brain transplant and had the motivational fire of the Birds, Jordans, Bryants, Magics of the world.

[Eat Like A Bosh]

From a pure statistical standpoint, people would point out his 2003 season as his best overall complete season in terms of stats.
Kobe put up 30-7-6 on 46.7% shooting, as well as nabbing 2.2 steals a game.

But I think his most memorable season, 2006, even though they got knocked out in the first round, Kobe was a beast scorer back then. He looked unstoppable.

[ShaqAttack3234]

So that excuses him being out of shape, lazy, putting off surgeries to miss regular season time, etc.?

I've never defended him putting off that surgery, I've criticized him for it many times. Funny how I'll never once hear you criticize Kobe for chucking and going out of the offense, refusing to accept the role at times that his legendary coach thought was best, and history proved was best.


And you do realize why that is correct? Way to not address the rest of the post. They were built around Shaq. The back ups were terrible. Obviously they would fare worse without Shaq than they would with out Kobe. Significant drop off in defense and rebounding, no?

Now maybe you'll realize how valuable he was because he was leading the team in scoring, drawing the most double teams and as you alluded to, the team relied on him so much for defense and rebounding.

Who exactly did they have to back up Kobe? You just said that the team didn't have talent outside of Shaq/Kobe.

You clearly have no idea how to separate skills(which will always favor a perimeter player) over who was a more effective player. Hence your ridiculous assertion that Iverson was better than Shaq even including the playoffs in 2001, and Kobe being better than Duncan in 2003.


And you're not clearly all over Shaq's d1ck?

:oldlol:

The career underachiever.

Who wouldn't have won d1ck if he didn't play with 2 of the top 3 SG's of ALL - TIME ?!?!

The man who went H.A.M. for one season in his entire career (1999 - 2000)

Shaq for all he achieved was a massive waste of one of the physical wonders of the world.

Because he was soft, massively egotistical, and straight out lazy. He should've won every year in the league if he had a brain transplant and had the motivational fire of the Birds, Jordans, Bryants, Magics of the world.

Actually, I'm reasonable when it comes to Shaq. For example, I don't claim he was better than players he clearly wasn't such as Duncan in 2003 or 1999, and have argued with people who said he was better than Duncan in '99, another season I'm critical of Shaq for.

But you get like a schoolgirl when you talk about Kobe's "killer instinct" and his scoring streaks.

LOL at Shaq being soft. That is literally the dumbest thing I've ever heard on these boards.

As far as Shaq not winning anything if he hadn't played with two top 3 shooting guards of all time....first of all, you know damn well that Kobe wasn't near that level yet in 2000, more importantly, you also acknowledge that the Lakers were pretty much a 2 man team, so how should playing with 1 great player on those 2001 and 2002 teams discredit him vs other players who won with a player not as good as Kobe, but more talent(and in some cases much more talent) around them overall?

And Wade is not a top 3 shooting guard of all time, plus it's funny that you act like Shaq didn't do shit to earn that ring yet that team went just 10-11 without Shaq even when Wade was playing. And don't try to angle that into me saying Shaq was better that year because he wasn't, but you severely undervalue how much Shaq meant to that team.

[Bring-Your-Js]

LMAO @ Comparing Bryant to Shaq.

For all of Shaq's flaws, he was infinitely more dominant/efficient/impactful than Bryant.

LMAO @ Shaq putting 27/11/63% on the 04 Pistons, taking whatever the **** he wanted, while the ****ing perimeter superstar shotjacked them totally out of the series.

[Samurai Swoosh]

I've never defended him putting off that surgery, I've criticized him for it many times. Funny how I'll never once hear you criticize Kobe for chucking and going out of the offense, refusing to accept the role at times that his legendary coach thought was best, and history proved was best.
Actually I just addressed it the other day, IE his selfish play in the 2004 Finals, that was destructive to the team. A Finals they absolutely should have won.


Now maybe you'll realize how valuable he was because he was leading the team in scoring, drawing the most double teams and as you alluded to, the team relied on him so much for defense and rebounding.
Where did I say he wasn't valuable?

I'm just tired of your ridiculous back handed compliments of records with or without Shaq. Because when you include the context, it doesn't make any sense. Of course anyteam would be worse without one of their top two best players.


Who exactly did they have to back up Kobe? You just said that the team didn't have talent outside of Shaq/Kobe.
But the team was built with the low post threat in mind as the main option, offensively and defensively.

Shaq's back ups were significanly worse than Devean George, Kareem Rush, Ron Harper, Derek Fisher, etc.

Those guys are servicable pros as role players. Shaq's replacements were GOD AWFUL.

How can you even question this?


You clearly have no idea how to separate skills(which will always favor a perimeter player)
Not unless you're Kareem, Hakeem, David Robinson, Patrick Ewing, Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, Chris Webber, Sabonis etc

So yea we will go ahead and pretend those players don't exist for the sake of your argument for your boy.

Who really did dominate because of his overwhelming size more than anything. Which you refuse to just conceed. He was born a freak of nature. That's it.

But yea, I don't know how to seperate skill from production.

:rolleyes:


Hence your ridiculous assertion that Iverson was better than Shaq even including the playoffs in 2001, and Kobe being better than Duncan in 2003.
Hence your d1ck sucking agenda to your wet dreams about "big men" ...

In context, Iverson is EASILY the 2001 MVP.

Dude didn't play with another top five player. A player who makes signicant impact on defense and offense.

Iverson was a one man wrecking crew. For as dominant as Shaq was ... you had another dominating piece standing right next to him.

Shaq was not MVP in 2001, and obviously I'm in the majority on that one. Seeing as Iverson and the Big Lazy have the same number of MVP trophies.


Actually, I'm reasonable when it comes to Shaq.
You're really not ...

You claimed Shaq > Wade both in 2005 and the 2005 playoffs ... and I'm even sure you thought so as well for the 2006 regular season.

When it was clear as day, yes Shaq may have been the vocal leader ... but Wade was absolutely the best player on the floor.


But you get like a schoolgirl when you talk about Kobe's "killer instinct" and his scoring streaks.
Yes, I think its far more fascinating for someone to be an overachiever. I think its far more compelling for someone to maximize and exceed what god gave them. I find it far more interesting and admirable that a player who wasn't born as a pure freak of nature did more than someone who was born as King Kong in human form.

Yes, Kobe's scoring streaks are amazing. Much more amazing that a 6'6 SG scored 81 pts, 62 pts in 3, 56 pts in 3, 52 pts in 3, 65 pts, 60 pts, 61 pts. And the Big Slacker aka the Human King Kong aka the Big Dirty Cop managed to drop 60 ... ONE TIME ... on the worst team in the league, on Michael Olawakandi.

:oldlol:


LOL at Shaq being soft. That is literally the dumbest thing I've ever heard on these boards.
He is soft. You take away that size and what is he? A mental midget. A slacker. A bum ... lazy as all get out. No internal drive. Guy couldn't even learn to shoot free throws. Guy never averaged OVER 30 ppg as a 7'2 550 lbs man in a league where there was NO ONE physically to defend him. In a league where there WAS NO elite centers anymore. That's beyond pathetic. The most "dominant force" ever couldn't average over 30 ppg one time, let alone for the duration of his career? He should be flat out embarassed.


And Wade is not a top 3 shooting guard of all time
Uhhh, yea he is. And he's for sure to go down as #3, too. Who is better than Wade?

Drexler? West?

No. And he's already accomplished more, and still has at least 3 or 4 years left as an elite player.



plus it's funny that you act like Shaq didn't do shit to earn that ring yet that team went just 10-11 without Shaq.
Like I said any team will struggle when you take away one of their top two players.

Wade won an NBA championship without Shaquille O'Neal.

Who was busy being shut down by Erika Dampier.

:oldlol:

Finals MVP and best playoff performer for the Heat on CONSECUTIVE years matches and exceeds your stupid little quip about the Heat going 10 - 11 during the regular season w/o Shaq.

If Wade doesn't go down in 2005 v.s. the Pistons, fairly certain they go to the Finals. He was DOMINATING that series. And what did Shaq do to pick up the slack when Wade was injured to get them over the hump?

Nothing. Or not near enough for the "MDE" ...

Fukk outta here ...

MLE

Most Lazy Ever

[Juges8932]

My favorite version of Kobe was 2008.

He just seemed to have a great balance on the court.

He matured a lot coming into the season and it showed. He became a good leader and knew how to motivate his guys. His play was a lot of fun to watch. He knew when to attack, when to facilitate, and when he needed to put the team on his back.

He had a great feel for the game. Often, he would have < 5 FGA in the first half and 6-8 assists. He would still be aggressive, penetrating the D and getting in the lane, opening up the floor for the shooters on the wing or the pass to Pau right by the basket for the easy two. Then, once he got the team going, he would look for his shot in the second half and be more assertive from a scoring standpoint.

That sole reason is why I think he was the best version and my favorite version. For those that want to bring up the Finals and them not winning: it certainly wasn't due to a lack of his effort. Simply the team that showed up for him in '09 and '10 was a lot more hardened, seasoned, and ready for the moment. In '08 they looked scared and got punked (particularly Pau, who was night and day different in the following two years).

He has not been as good at balancing out his style of play (facilitator, scorer, etc) as he was back then. He still does it, of course, just not with the consistency that he displayed in '08. There seems to be a lot more poor chucking nights and fewer of the great all-around games. But that's the dual-edged sword that is Kobe Bryant. When he is hot and hitting from everywhere, you love it; but when those same shots are clanking and they just keep going up, you hate it and it is enraging to watch, lol.

If I had to rank the seasons:

08
06
07
09
03
10
01
02
04
05

Had a hard time to debate between placement of '07 and '09 & '03 and '10. Many people will probably have '06 as his best season and as an individual scorer, that is true. I would just take the overall package of '08 for a player to lead my team to the title.

However, to be honest, 02 is really the season where my memory is not as good. '05 and '04 were not good (by his standards) for obvious reasons and were certainly his two worst (IMO). '04 he really was trying to be the man and it probably cost the Lakers a title (or at least a close series). '05 was him trying to prove that he could do everything by himself.

Like ShaqAttack said, I probably don't recall the specifics of '02, of all his star seasons, because that is the one that is not brought up very often, while 01 and 03 are brought up frequently and so I get a chance to review the season and his play in them a lot. '04 and '05 are brought up a lot and not easy to forget for obvious reasons as well.

As far as the 'chucker' title he has been tagged with between the Shaq and Gasol eras, it is stupid. It wasn't like he was averaging less assists and watching him play, it wasn't like he refused to pass entirely. Only difference is, instead of passing and setting up to Shaq or Gasol, he was passing to Kwame Brown or Smush Paker :facepalm I'm not saying that Kobe can't get in chucker mode, because lord knows he can (particularly if he was just on a hot streak and went cold. He will just keep on chucking, lol. This goes back to how enraging it can be to watch him), but I feel it gets overblown a lot as far as defining him as a player overall. In '04, there was certainly some unnecessary chucking being done, when he was trying to prove himself as the man. He also had trust issues with those teammates (post-Shaq, pre-Gasol) and you really can't blame him for that. I wouldn't have trusted them in crucial game situations to get the job done either. That has certainly changed since he got Gasol and the return of Fisher. There have been a number of game-winning shots that have not been shot by him (most of those being shot by Fisher).

[ThaSwagg3r]

He played better defense in 2008, was more athletic, attacked the basket more and that was his peak as a playmaker, imo.
I don't think any of that is true except that he attacked the basket more. And I am not sure how you decline as a playmaker, but he did a great job playmaking in 2009 too. He didn't really play better defense, because he still had the ability in 2009, I guess he was more willing on that end but that was because he wasn't playing next to Trevor Ariza in 2008 (i.e. no defensive specialist). More athletic? Not sure if that is true either, he was still very athletic in 2009, maybe he was slightly more athletic, but nothing significant.

I really have no problem with someone saying Kobe in 2008 was better than Kobe in 2009. I just don't see the difference. Kobe could have easily won the MVP in 2009 if LeBron didn't improve so much.

[ShaqAttack3234]

I'm just tired of your ridiculous back handed compliments of records with or without Shaq. Because when you include the context, it doesn't make any sense. Of course anyteam would be worse without one of their top two best players.

They're not back handed compliments, but worth noting because Kobe by that point was good enough that he couldn't really be compared to other second options, so how well he was able to lead a team at that point is important, imo, particularly vs later versions of Kobe.


But the team was built with the low post threat in mind as the main option, offensively and defensively.

So wait....the team was built around Shaq, yet you argue that Shaq was the man on those teams? :oldlol:


Shaq's back ups were significanly worse than Devean George, Kareem Rush, Ron Harper, Derek Fisher, etc.

Those guys are servicable pros as role players. Shaq's replacements were GOD AWFUL.

How can you even question this?

Harper was a starter. George wasn't even remotely a factor before 2002 so irrelevant to when Kobe missed extended stretches(2000 and 2001) and Rush wasn't on the team yet, Fisher shot under 35% for the entire 2000 season, and he was the guy who stepped into the starting lineup in 2000.



Not unless you're Kareem, Hakeem, David Robinson, Patrick Ewing, Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, Chris Webber, Sabonis etc

So yea we will go ahead and pretend those players don't exist for the sake of your argument for your boy.

Who really did dominate because of his overwhelming size more than anything. Which you refuse to just conceed. He was born a freak of nature. That's it.

But yea, I don't know how to seperate skill from production.

:rolleyes:

Yet you'd look stupid arguing any of those guys except Kareem, Hakeem and Duncan were as good as Shaq. And Kareem is the only one I'd say was better with Hakeem being right there peak vs peak.



Hence your d1ck sucking agenda to your wet dreams about "big men" ...

I don't have an agenda, no matter how hard you try to make it seem like I have one.

First, it's me diminishing Kobe, despite me arguing with you that Kobe was a better player than Iverson and top 3 in 2001, when you'll only go as far as calling him top 5. Oh, and then, it's me being an Iverson hater just because I'm logical and don't think he was as good as prime Shaq, despite me defending him against those who call him a cancer because he wasn't going outside the gameplan in his prime, but I call it like I see it and don't think his skillset was ideal for building a winning team around.


In context, Iverson is EASILY the 2001 MVP.

Dude didn't play with another top five player. A player who makes signicant impact on defense and offense.

Iverson was a one man wrecking crew. For as dominant as Shaq was ... you had another dominating piece standing right next to him.

Shaq was not MVP in 2001, and obviously I'm in the majority on that one. Seeing as Iverson and the Big Lazy have the same number of MVP trophies.

Right, a one man wrecking crew when his team starts the eason 12-2 with him averaging just 22/5/5/38 FG% in those games, yet he didn't have any help. :facepalm


You're really not ...

You claimed Shaq > Wade both in 2005 and the 2005 playoffs ... and I'm even sure you thought so as well for the 2006 regular season

No, I said 2005 regular season, not the playoffs. Which I still maintain, and many others agree, and if you're going to cite MVP voting for Shaq vs Iverson, then it's pretty convenient that you ignore it here when Shaq easily finished above Wade in 2005 MVP voting.


Yes, I think its far more fascinating for someone to be an overachiever. I think its far more compelling for someone to maximize and exceed what god gave them. I find it far more interesting and admirable that a player who wasn't born as a pure freak of nature did more than someone who was born as King Kong in human form.

Yes, Kobe's scoring streaks are amazing. Much more amazing that a 6'6 SG scored 81 pts, 62 pts in 3, 56 pts in 3, 52 pts in 3, 65 pts, 60 pts, 61 pts. And the Big Slacker aka the Human King Kong aka the Big Dirty Cop managed to drop 60 ... ONE TIME ... on the worst team in the league, on Michael Olawakandi.

:oldlol:

I find Kobe's scoring streaks very entertaining as well, but you act like it's equal to sex and get even more ridiculous when you talk about Jordan. If either of us is a stan, it's you.


He is soft. You take away that size and what is he? A mental midget. A slacker. A bum ... lazy as all get out. No internal drive. Guy couldn't even learn to shoot free throws. Guy never averaged OVER 30 ppg as a 7'2 550 lbs man in a league where there was NO ONE physically to defend him. In a league where there WAS NO elite centers anymore. That's beyond pathetic. The most "dominant force" ever couldn't average over 30 ppg one time, let alone for the duration of his career? He should be flat out embarassed.

The lack of intelligence in this post is incredible. Right, the guy who played more physically than anyone in league history is soft, He took more of a pounding than anyone else, and still kept playing his game, dishing out plenty of physicality and trying to tear down the basket. There's literally no way to call him soft. It's not like you can call him a choker either.

How many people were averaging 30 during Shaq's prime? The few who were took quite a few more shots. Shaq is one of only 3 players in the shot clock era to win a scoring title and championship in the same year(I think Mikan did it before shot clock era, if not then my mistake). He won 2 scoring titles, was leading in 1994 as well, though Robinson went for the scoring title on the last day while Shaq couldn't have cared less. He was top 2 or 3 in scoring pretty much every year from 1994-2002. If you're going to criticize Shaq for something, scoring definitely shouldn't be it. He could have been a better defender throughout his career, but scoring? Hell, he probably could have scored more, but would it have helped the team? He wasn't in a situation like late 80's Jordan or Kobe circa 2006 where scoring any more would have been necessary. Look at what guys score on championship teams or championship contenders.


Uhhh, yea he is. And he's for sure to go down as #3, too. Who is better than Wade?

Drexler? West?

No. And he's already accomplished more, and still has at least 3 or 4 years left as an elite player.



Like I said any team will struggle when you take away one of their top two players.

Wade won an NBA championship without Shaquille O'Neal.

Who was busy being shut down by Erika Dampier.

:oldlol:

Finals MVP and best playoff performer for the Heat on CONSECUTIVE years matches and exceeds your stupid little quip about the Heat going 10 - 11 during the regular season w/o Shaq.

If Wade doesn't go down in 2005 v.s. the Pistons, fairly certain they go to the Finals. He was DOMINATING that series. And what did Shaq do to pick up the slack when Wade was injured to get them over the hump?

Nothing. Or not near enough for the "MDE" ...

Fukk outta here ...

MLE

Most Lazy Ever

West>Wade.

West won a title too in case you forgot, and also could have won another in 1969 when he was so good that he won finals MVP on a losing team and certainly would have won had Baylor or Wilt showed up.

[bl2k8]

The next season(his best season) is when he turned into the Kobe all know today

[Jacks3]

2001? Nah. Good series, but he was better in 2002, put up better numbers, was more consistent and better in the 4th quarter, iirc. 2010? Kind of hard to compare considering he was the man on that team and facing a better team than the Nets.
His last 4 games of the 2001 series were just as good as 02, he played better defense, and he did against better competition. His 02 Finals are overrated just because his FG%.

[Samurai Swoosh]

His last 4 games of the 2001 series were just as good as 02, he played better defense, and he did against better competition. His 02 Finals are overrated just because his FG%.
Pretty much, exactly.

[Jacks3]

LMAO @ Comparing Bryant to Shaq.

For all of Shaq's flaws, he was infinitely more dominant/efficient/impactful than Bryant.

LMAO @ Shaq putting 27/11/63% on the 04 Pistons, taking whatever the **** he wanted, while the ****ing perimeter superstar shotjacked them totally out of the series.
lol @ this garbage. Shaq isn't "infinitely" more dominant, nor did Kobe shot-jack them out in 2004. The rest of the Lakers shot 34% outside of Kobe/Shaq that series. I like how you fail to mention to that. :oldlol:

[Samurai Swoosh]

West>Wade.

West won a title too in case you forgot, and also could have won another in 1969 when he was so good that he won finals MVP on a losing team and certainly would have won had Baylor or Wilt showed up.
But the point was he didn't ...

Wade won as the best player on his team. And he had a LEGIT case for MVP in 2009. Wade's also the VASTLY superior defender. Like there isn't even an argument.

To act like their resumes aren't comprable shows your agenda with the Big Lazy.

At worst he's what? ... the 4th best SG all-time?

So Shaq NEEDED 2 of the top 5 all-time at their position, and two of the best clutch / closer players of all-time to get his four rings.

Kobe got two rings with his next best player being Pau Gasol.

Who isn't even a top five player in today's league, let alone top ten or five at his position all time.

Hard work beats talent, when talent doesn't work hard.

Shaq's an underachieving, lazy, ring chasing, immature, insecure fat ass.

[ShaqAttack3234]

But the point was he didn't ...

Wade won as the best player on his team. And he had a LEGIT case for MVP in 2009. Wade's also the VASTLY superior defender. Like there isn't even an argument.

To act like their resumes aren't comprable shows your agenda with the Big Lazy.

No, Wade did not have a case for MVP in 2009 over Lebron who led that Cav team to 66 wins, definitely not when Wade won only 43 games.

And no, Wade shouldn't be ranked over West yet. He's in just his 8th season and has had several seasons where injuries played a major factor. In several years, if he remains elite, then I'll be open to this discussion.

At worst he's what? ... the 4th best SG all-time?

So Shaq NEEDED 2 of the top 5 all-time at their position, and two of the best clutch / closer players of all-time to get his four rings.


Kobe got two rings with his next best player being Pau Gasol.

And the the rest of his roster was definitely more talented than the 3peat Lakers, and Shaq scoring pretty close to what his 2nd and 3rd options Kobe and Rice did combined, those titles shouldn't be question, he was putting up historic numbers. I've said many times that Kobe deserves more credit than just about any other 2nd option for the 2001 and 2002 titles due to the Lakers lack of a 3rd option, but that also means that Shaq shouldn't get any less credit than other first options. Look at his numbers, look at all of the defensive attention he received. He didn't have it easy, he dominated to get those rings, just like the other greats. He wasn't coasting by only having to put up 20/10 and receiving single coverage during the 3peat.

The team was just built differently, they relied on 2 players more while teams such as the '05/'07 Spurs, '04 Pistons, '08 Celtics ect. had a more balanced attack. .


Hard work beats talent, when talent doesn't work hard.

Shaq's an underachieving, lazy, ring chasing, immature, insecure fat ass.

Very few had anywhere near the talent that Shaq did anyway so it doesn't really matter in the end. He's still hands down among the very best to ever play the game.

[Jacks3]

why do people say 2001-2002 was his best finals performance? because he shot above 50%? :facepalm

anyways to answer the op question, i would say is his 5th best season imo.

1. 2005-2006
2. 2006-2007
3. 2007-2008
4. 2002-2003
5. 2001-2002
where is 08-09. easily better than 01-02.

[Heilige]

But the point was he didn't ...

Wade won as the best player on his team. And he had a LEGIT case for MVP in 2009. Wade's also the VASTLY superior defender. Like there isn't even an argument.

To act like their resumes aren't comprable shows your agenda with the Big Lazy.

At worst he's what? ... the 4th best SG all-time?

So Shaq NEEDED 2 of the top 5 all-time at their position, and two of the best clutch / closer players of all-time to get his four rings.

Kobe got two rings with his next best player being Pau Gasol.

Who isn't even a top five player in today's league, let alone top ten or five at his position all time.

Hard work beats talent, when talent doesn't work hard.

Shaq's an underachieving, lazy, ring chasing, immature, insecure fat ass.


Who do you think is a better player between a prime Kobe and prime Shaq?

[catch24]

Who do you think is a better player between a prime Kobe and prime Shaq?

Why do you feel the need to ask this?

[Samurai Swoosh]

Who do you think is a better player between a prime Kobe and prime Shaq?
The popular answer is Shaq.

Because he was the most "dominant" ... what he dominated, I don't know exactly.

It wasn't MVPs

It wasn't Scoring Titles

It wasn't Championships

Also of the school of thought it's inherently easier to win with a dominant big man. So I can certainly see why people would pick Shaq.

He's needed two of the five best ever at their position just to finally get it done. And two of the absolute best late game players to ever grace the court.

He was emerging in his prime with a VERY talented Laker cast that couldn't get it done (Van Excel, Eddie Jones, Elden Campbell)

But honestly, I'd take Kobe. I also admitedly am not a goo goo gaga Shaq fan. I like the intangibles mentality, and drive Kobe brings me. He's not even difficult to build around. LA gave him a good number 2 option. Certainly not a dominant player ... but good enough to be a solid number 2 option and Kobe took the Lakers to three straight NBA Finals. Winning two of them. It's impressive.

His team's weren't insanely talented outside of Bryant. Gasol was an all-star, Lamar Odom shows potential every now and then ... he's a very good 6th man. But it isn't packed with all-stars like the Heat, Celtics, or even Hawks, etc.

Hell, it's not insane to think that you can't make the argument Kobe > Shaq. And don't let anyone else tell you different.

I mean at the end of the day, the two most important accomplishments are MVPs and Rings. Kobe has 5 rings, Shaq has 4 rings ... both have 1x MVP ... both are two time scoring champs.

[Ne 1]

lol @ this garbage. Shaq isn't "infinitely" more dominant, nor did Kobe shot-jack them out in 2004. The rest of the Lakers shot 34% outside of Kobe/Shaq that series. I like how you fail to mention to that. :oldlol:

Exactly. Don't get me wrong Kobe played horrendous that series but not only that, Tex Winter criticized Shaq's play in that series for being lazy on defense and the glass, and for not establishing position in the paint.....don't get it twisted, Kobe played terribly, but it's not like Shaq was playing up to par either... And I think Shaq only had the one great game that series.

During the '04 series Shaq wasn't getting in position to get the ball. (when he did he was able to score though). But even if you look at the game where Kobe wasn't looking to score, Shaq still couldn't get off. That's why Phil made the comment about wasting Shaq's great game cause he knew Shaq couldn't bring that level of energy every game. Karl Malone was out hurt. Gary Payton was a bad fit and even criticized the triangle offense that year. And the Lakers really had no one else to take those shots so of course it was left to Kobe to gun, it wasn't him just forcing up bad shots.

The Lakers own coaches came out saying how Shaq wasn't working for position and wasn't working to get the ball. You can make the judgment on if that was just Shaq pouting because he wasn't getting the ball enough or you can credit Detroit's legendary defense. Shaq had some good offensive games but was slow defensively coming off the pick and Rip Hamilton and Chauncy Billups got to the rim at will. People need to stop remaking their own history by looking up some box scores. Anyone can do that.

[Heavincent]

The popular answer is Shaq.

Because he was the most "dominant" ... what he dominated, I don't know exactly.

It wasn't MVPs

It wasn't Scoring Titles

It wasn't Championships

Also of the school of thought it's inherently easier to win with a dominant big man. So I can certainly see why people would pick Shaq.

He's needed two of the five best ever at their position just to finally get it done. And two of the absolute best late game players to ever grace the court.

He was emerging in his prime with a VERY talented Laker cast that couldn't get it done (Van Excel, Eddie Jones, Elden Campbell)

But honestly, I'd take Kobe. I also admitedly am not a goo goo gaga Shaq fan. I like the intangibles mentality, and drive Kobe brings me. He's not even difficult to build around. LA gave him a good number 2 option. Certainly not a dominant player ... but good enough to be a solid number 2 option and Kobe took the Lakers to three straight NBA Finals. Winning two of them. It's impressive.

His team's weren't insanely talented outside of Bryant. Gasol was an all-star, Lamar Odom shows potential every now and then ... he's a very good 6th man. But it isn't packed with all-stars like the Heat, Celtics, or even Hawks, etc.

Hell, it's not insane to think that you can't make the argument Kobe > Shaq. And don't let anyone else tell you different.

I mean at the end of the day, the two most important accomplishments are MVPs and Rings. Kobe has 5 rings, Shaq has 4 rings ... both have 1x MVP ... both are two time scoring champs.

:applause:

[Heilige]

The popular answer is Shaq.

Because he was the most "dominant" ... what he dominated, I don't know exactly.

It wasn't MVPs

It wasn't Scoring Titles

It wasn't Championships

Also of the school of thought it's inherently easier to win with a dominant big man. So I can certainly see why people would pick Shaq.

He's needed two of the five best ever at their position just to finally get it done. And two of the absolute best late game players to ever grace the court.

He was emerging in his prime with a VERY talented Laker cast that couldn't get it done (Van Excel, Eddie Jones, Elden Campbell)

But honestly, I'd take Kobe. I also admitedly am not a goo goo gaga Shaq fan. I like the intangibles mentality, and drive Kobe brings me. He's not even difficult to build around. LA gave him a good number 2 option. Certainly not a dominant player ... but good enough to be a solid number 2 option and Kobe took the Lakers to three straight NBA Finals. Winning two of them. It's impressive.

His team's weren't insanely talented outside of Bryant. Gasol was an all-star, Lamar Odom shows potential every now and then ... he's a very good 6th man. But it isn't packed with all-stars like the Heat, Celtics, or even Hawks, etc.

Hell, it's not insane to think that you can't make the argument Kobe > Shaq. And don't let anyone else tell you different.

I mean at the end of the day, the two most important accomplishments are MVPs and Rings. Kobe has 5 rings, Shaq has 4 rings ... both have 1x MVP ... both are two time scoring champs.

:applause:


Do you think if Shaq worked as hard as Kobe, there would have been no problems or would Kobe still have wanted to be the man/supreme alpha male on the team?

[Jacks3]

Seriously. It's not a coincidence that the biggest blow-out for Detroit that series came in the game where Bryant only took 13 shots. They literally had nobody who could create anything on the perimeter and nobody who could shoot. At times they were running a lineup of Kobe, Kareem Rush, Slava Medvedenko, Devean George, and Derek Fisher. With Malone, Grant, and Rick Fox injured, and Payton totally ineffective, this was a worse team top to bottom than Kobe's 2006 squad outside of Shaq. I've considered posting this a few times. But its more fun to imagine Kobe dribbling downcourt with devil horns sticking out of his head, cackling like a mad scientist as he shoots while Shaq is wide open under the rim, on both knees, hands clasped together begging for the ball. We tried to forcefeed him plenty. It was almost as good for a turnover as it was a field goal. The game Kobe had the least shot attempts, 13, Shaq still only shot 14 times. If Bryant's chucking was the only thing preventing Shaq from getting the rock and putting it in the hole, you'd think he'd have shot 25+ times with Kobe easing up. But thats not how basketball works.

It is how good the Pistons D was though. "You want to get the ball inside? Good luck." They weren't holding teams to <80ppg because they didn't know how to handle post players. Actually getting the basketball in the paint was a bitch, be you perimeter player or bigman.

The guards outside of Kobe shot 30% for the series. The small forwards (Walton and George) shot 40%. Nobody was making shots from the perimeter when Kobe fed them, and the Pistons made it difficult to feed Shaq inside the way they would have liked to. Kobe is Kobe, and he thinks he can make anything no matter what. Do the math.

[BlackJoker23]

Seriously. It's not a coincidence that the biggest blow-out for Detroit that series came in the game where Bryant only took 13 shots. They literally had nobody who could create anything on the perimeter and nobody who could shoot. At times they were running a lineup of Kobe, Kareem Rush, Slava Medvedenko, Devean George, and Derek Fisher. With Malone, Grant, and Rick Fox injured, and Payton totally ineffective, this was a worse team top to bottom than Kobe's 2006 squad outside of Shaq. I've considered posting this a few times. But its more fun to imagine Kobe dribbling downcourt with devil horns sticking out of his head, cackling like a mad scientist as he shoots while Shaq is wide open under the rim, on both knees, hands clasped together begging for the ball. We tried to forcefeed him plenty. It was almost as good for a turnover as it was a field goal. The game Kobe had the least shot attempts, 13, Shaq still only shot 14 times. If Bryant's chucking was the only thing preventing Shaq from getting the rock and putting it in the hole, you'd think he'd have shot 25+ times with Kobe easing up. But thats not how basketball works.

It is how good the Pistons D was though. "You want to get the ball inside? Good luck." They weren't holding teams to <80ppg because they didn't know how to handle post players. Actually getting the basketball in the paint was a bitch, be you perimeter player or bigman.

The guards outside of Kobe shot 30% for the series. The small forwards (Walton and George) shot 40%. Nobody was making shots from the perimeter when Kobe fed them, and the Pistons made it difficult to feed Shaq inside the way they would have liked to. Kobe is Kobe, and he thinks he can make anything no matter what. Do the math.
bro if you wanna copy picc's post at least give credit.

[Heilige]

bro if you wanna copy picc's post at least give credit.


What site did he copy it from? Do you have a link to it?

[Samurai Swoosh]

bro if you wanna copy picc's post at least give credit.
How do you know who "picc84" is ?

You just registered here last year ...

By the way where is that dude ... he was a really good poster.

[Samurai Swoosh]

Do you think if Shaq worked as hard as Kobe, there would have been no problems or would Kobe still have wanted to be the man/supreme alpha male on the team?
Shaq ... work hard? Don't make me laugh, bro.

:oldlol:

I don't know as much immaturity as there was on Kobe's part (he had an excuse, he was 22, 23, 24, etc) ... Shaq was equally immature, and extremely insecure. And he was already a grown ass man in his late 20's / early 30's.

Shaq's immaturities and ego play just as much into the equation as anyones.

Anyone who says otherwise probably hates Kobe Bryant.

[catch24]

bro if you wanna copy picc's post at least give credit.

SMH. :oldlol:

[Jacks3]

bro if you wanna copy picc's post at least give credit.
i forget dawf:violin:

[Jacks3]

SMH. :oldlol:
Doesn't make it any less true though. Stop the hate. :pimp:

Myth exposed. :pimp:

[Samurai Swoosh]

SMH. :oldlol:
You don't find it equally pathetic that "BlackJoker23" ... gimmick / troll account

Memorized someone's post?

Not to mention it's a poster who stopped posting here for at least the past 2 or 3 years. So in essence "BlackJoker23" is a former banned poster errr what?

[catch24]

You don't find it equally pathetic that "BlackJoker23" ... gimmick / troll account

Memorized someone's post?

Not to mention it's a poster who stopped posting here for at least the past 2 or 3 years. So in essence "BlackJoker23" is a former banned poster errr what?

Who is he?

I haven't seen enough of his posts to know whether he is a troll or not.

[BlackJoker23]

What site did he copy it from? Do you have a link to it?
its from re@lgm from a lebron/kobe finals performance thread. i dont know if i can post a direct link.

[BlackJoker23]

You don't find it equally pathetic that "BlackJoker23" ... gimmick / troll account

Memorized someone's post?

Not to mention it's a poster who stopped posting here for at least the past 2 or 3 years. So in essence "BlackJoker23" is a former banned poster errr what?
lmao @ this clown accusing me of being a gimmick. i didnt memorize that post btw. and i dont who picc is besides that he posts on re@lgm. he wrote the same thing jacks c&p a few days ago.

[Samurai Swoosh]

I haven't seen enough of his posts to know whether he is a troll or not.
I don't know, but he talks with a lot of familarity and he only registered this past December.

You do the math ...

And he's always trollin it up in anti Kobe agenda threads.

He's pathetic ...

Where did picc84 go though? You remember him? He was a great poster.

[Samurai Swoosh]

lmao @ this clown accusing me of being a gimmick. i didnt memorize that post btw. and i dont who picc is besides that he posts on re@lgm. he wrote the same thing jacks c&p a few days ago.
Hmmm, picc84 is a former poster of ISH. Really good, too. He wasn't some anti-Kobe troll like ... oh I don't know, some nigg with the username BlackJoker23.

:oldlol:

[catch24]

I don't know, but he talks with a lot of familarity and he only registered this past December.

You do the math ...

And he's always trollin it up in anti Kobe agenda threads.

He's pathetic ...

Where did picc84 go though? You remember him? He was a great poster.

I have no idea who picc84 is either. By the looks of the post Jacks3 copy and pasted, he does seem like a solid poster though.

[Samurai Swoosh]

I have no idea who picc84 is either. By the looks of the post Jacks3 copy and pasted, he does seem like a solid poster though.
Jacks3 or BlackJoker23?

Cause if its the latter, absolutely not.

[catch24]

Jacks3 or BlackJoker23?

Cause if its the latter, absolutely not.

lol

I meant picc84, the poster you were reffering to and who's post (http://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1118423&p=28289221#wrap) Jacks3 copied and pasted.

[Samurai Swoosh]

I meant picc84, the poster you were reffering to and who's post (http://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1118423&p=28289221#wrap) Jacks3 copied and pasted.
That's old school picc!!! Tell him to get his a$$ back here. Boards are getting younger, and dumber by the second.

[magnax1]

Kobe's best seasons probably rank something like
1-06
2-07 (same as 06 when he recovered from his surgery 100%)
3-08/09
5-01
03 and 05 are probably right up there with 01 too, but not quite there.

[Samurai Swoosh]

Kobe's best seasons probably rank something like
1-06
2-07 (same as 06 when he recovered from his surgery 100%)
3-08/09
5-01
03 and 05 are probably right up there with 01 too, but not quite there.
2001 > 2003?

Really? 2005 even being mentioned? Huh?

[Heilige]

Kobe's best seasons probably rank something like
1-06
2-07 (same as 06 when he recovered from his surgery 100%)
3-08/09
5-01
03 and 05 are probably right up there with 01 too, but not quite there.


why do you think Kobe's 2002-2003 season is not better than his 2000-2001 season? And Kobe's 2004-2005 season is not equal to the 2003 season at all.

[BlackJoker23]

:oldlol: @ samurai trying to troll hard.

Jacks3 or BlackJoker23?

Cause if its the latter, absolutely not.
http://uploadpic.org/storage/2011/SF54lcHCoeY9TFkQ9YFEZ5sg.gif

[magnax1]

2001 > 2003?

Really? 2005 even being mentioned? Huh?
In the playoffs in 01 he was a beast, and while he wasn't injured in 05 he was very good to. 03 he might've been statistically better, but never played like it in the playoffs.

[Samurai Swoosh]

http://uploadpic.org/storage/2011/SF54lcHCoeY9TFkQ9YFEZ5sg.gif
Dude look like you ...

Nice.

:pimp:

[KenneBell]

Kobe's best seasons probably rank something like
1-06
2-07 (same as 06 when he recovered from his surgery 100%)
3-08/09
5-01
03 and 05 are probably right up there with 01 too, but not quite there.
I kind of like 08 as my favorite. That would have been a nasty year had the Lakers not bytched up in the Finals.

[Samurai Swoosh]

That would have been a nasty year had the Lakers not bytched up in the Finals.
Subliminal @ Gasol

[KenneBell]

Subliminal @ Gasol
Subliminals at everyone. :oldlol:

They were probably ahead of schedule getting into the Finals after being together for only 40 games or so anyway. But still...that one hurt way more than this years sweep. Everyone was kind of apathetic after losing to the Mavs.

It really is a shame that Kobe didn't get a true championship-caliber team until after his prime. He would've easily had 30+/6+/6+ runs with a good team from 05-07.

[BlueandGold]

09-10 for pretty special for me, which shows how great of a career he's had. 6 true game-winners (buzzer beaters or incredibly close) in one season is very hard to match. His game refined more, there were many times where he would have 30 through quarters 1-3 and look to pass or have 8 points through 3 quarters and erupt for 20 points in the 4th. He simply knew the right moments to take over games. All of this was of course topped off by the Lakers finally beating the Celtics in a game 7, led by Kobe Bryant.

[Heilige]

Subliminals at everyone. :oldlol:

They were probably ahead of schedule getting into the Finals after being together for only 40 games or so anyway. But still...that one hurt way more than this years sweep. Everyone was kind of apathetic after losing to the Mavs.

It really is a shame that Kobe didn't get a true championship-caliber team until after his prime. He would've easily had 30+/6+/6+ runs with a good team from 05-07.

why do you feel Kobe's prime only lasted two years?

[Bring-Your-Js]

why do you feel Kobe's prime only lasted two years?

Probably his PPG drop off. Its really pretty simple as taking fewer FGA per game once they added a legit second option.

[Jacks3]

Probably his PPG drop off. Its really pretty simple as taking fewer FGA per game once they added a legit second option.
No, it's because Kobe in 09/2010 was no longer capable of doing the things he did in his prime. 4 straight 45+ point games, 4 straight 50+ games, 81 pts, 62 in 3 Q, 35+ PPG for a entire season, 10 50+ games in a season, etc.

And it wasn't just a matter of his FGA dropping off. :facepalm

[Heilige]

No, it's because Kobe in 09/2010 was no longer capable of doing the things he did in his prime. 4 straight 45+ point games, 4 straight 50+ games, 81 pts, 62 in 3 Q, 35+ PPG for a entire season, 10 50+ games in a season, etc.

And it wasn't just a matter of his FGA dropping off. :facepalm

Do you think Kobe in his 2002-2003 and 2007-2008 seasons could have done the above?

[Jacks3]

Yeah, but not from 09 on. It's clear he lost a step then.

[Bring-Your-Js]

No, it's because Kobe in 09/2010 was no longer capable of doing the things he did in his prime. 4 straight 45+ point games, 4 straight 50+ games, 81 pts, 62 in 3 Q, 35+ PPG for a entire season, 10 50+ games in a season, etc.

And it wasn't just a matter of his FGA dropping off. :facepalm

Like hell dude. Kobe 05-07 did all of those feats because nobody else on that team was worth a shit as a reliable scoring option. He demanded his trade after the 2007 playoffs. The next season Bynum finally began playing up to his capability (before going down for the season of course) and they made the trade for Gasol (Boom, instant reliable No. 2 from then on). Hell, Kobe dropped 61 in the Garden simply because he felt like putting on a show in 2009. When Gasol didn't play at the beginning of 09/10, he was dropping 40-point games left and right. Then the ankle sprain happened, combined with finger injuries he'd already been dealing with. To top it all off, he got his knee scoped for the third time last offseason.

[Samurai Swoosh]

Like hell dude. Kobe 05-07 did all of those feats because nobody else on that team was worth a shit as a reliable scoring option. He demanded his trade after the 2007 playoffs. The next season Bynum finally began playing up to his capability (before going down for the season of course) and they made the trade for Gasol (Boom, instant reliable No. 2 from then on). Hell, Kobe dropped 61 in the Garden simply because he felt like putting on a show in 2009. When Gasol didn't play at the beginning of 09/10, he was dropping 40-point games left and right. Then the ankle sprain happened, combined with finger injuries he'd already been dealing with. To top it all off, he got his knee scoped for the third time last offseason.
Solid points.

[Jacks3]

Like hell dude. Kobe 05-07 did all of those feats because nobody else on that team was worth a shit as a reliable scoring option. He demanded his trade after the 2007 playoffs. The next season Bynum finally began playing up to his capability (before going down for the season of course) and they made the trade for Gasol (Boom, instant reliable No. 2 from then on). Hell, Kobe dropped 61 in the Garden simply because he felt like putting on a show in 2009. When Gasol didn't play at the beginning of 09/10, he was dropping 40-point games left and right. Then the ankle sprain happened, combined with finger injuries he'd already been dealing with. To top it all off, he got his knee scoped for the third time last offseason.
No, it's because in 05-08 he was quicker, faster, had more stamina, and got a ton more elevation on his jumper. Watch a Kobe game from 05-08. Then watch one from 09/10 on.

The #1 you'll notice is that defenders in the 05-08 period consistently play off him, give him several feet of space because of his quick first-step. Now watch from 09 on. Guys crowd him because they know he's going for the jumper and he doesn't have the explosion to make them pay anymore (for crowding him/playing close to him).

And I never said he still couldn't drop 40 anymore, he's still a great scorer even past his prime, but you're kidding yourself in you think 2010 Kobe could average 35 PPG, or drop 50+ points in 4 straight games, or drop 40+ in 9 straight games.

[Mr. I'm So Rad]

certainly would have won had Baylor or Wilt showed up.

inb4 jlauber

[LA_Showtime]

Kobe's best seasons probably rank something like
1-06
2-07 (same as 06 when he recovered from his surgery 100%)
3-08/09
5-01
03 and 05 are probably right up there with 01 too, but not quite there.

05...? Really? That was an off year. He was still very good, but he was way too bulky.

[Bring-Your-Js]

No, it's because in 05-08 he was quicker, faster, had more stamina, and got a ton more elevation on his jumper. Watch a Kobe game from 05-08. Then watch one from 09/10 on.

The #1 you'll notice is that defenders in the 05-08 period consistently play off him, give him several feet of space because of his quick first-step. Now watch from 09 on. Guys crowd him because they know he's going for the jumper and he doesn't have the explosion to make them pay anymore (for crowding him/playing close to him).

And I never said he still couldn't drop 40 anymore, he's still a great scorer even past his prime, but you're kidding yourself in you think 2010 Kobe could average 35 PPG, or drop 50+ points in 4 straight games, or drop 40+ in 9 straight games.

You ARE right. Although I still believe he couldve had one of his best seasons in 09/10 barring that ankle injury. And he continued playing on it, basically Killing his efficiency numbers (I recall nearly 49% into January) and by the playoffs he got no lift at all on his J's by the fourth quarter.

Drained his knee near the end of the OKC series and just Destroyed Utah and especially Phoenix almost single handedly (Gasol had almost zero impact in the PHX road games, true of Boston series on the road as well.

The unfortunate thing for Kobe the individual is that he didn't begin to get a team built AROUND HIM until his 9th season in the NBA. Probably left countless unbelievable games and streaks on the table. Those three titles in 2000-2002? Well its obvious he doesnt need somebody dropping 35/16 in order to win.

[Samurai Swoosh]

05...? Really? That was an off year. He was still very good, but he was way too bulky.
Way too bulky, and was injured way too much.

Anytime Kobe tries to add bulk, he sustains injuries.

His body just isn't meant to carry weight. Both in 2003 and 2005 he gained weight only to have it give him injuries.

[LA_Showtime]

Way too bulky, and was injured way too much.

Anytime Kobe tries to add bulk, he sustains injuries.

His body just isn't meant to carry weight. Both in 2003 and 2005 he gained weight only to have it give him injuries.

What's amazing to think about is Kobe's spent the majority of his career with nagging injuries that would cause 95% of the other players in the NBA major problems. Looking at his games played it appears he's not injury prone, when in fact he's had very few seasons without major injuries. I wonder if that's a product of his work ethic, and his body simply telling him to rest?

[Samurai Swoosh]

I wonder if that's a product of his work ethic, and his body simply telling him to rest?
I don't know, but it makes the 6'6 "Iverson" theory kind of legit.

Kobe is obviously tough ... sometimes I do think he slightly exaggerates his injuries to the public.

But he's had unfortunately a lot of major injuries and nagging injuries through out his career.

In 2005 alone he had a knee injury, a shoulder injury, and plantar fascitis (for any like me who have had it, can attest, the most annoying injury in the world) ... you can't really even treat plantar fascitis ... you have to just flat rest it.

That's where the next level echelon seperates the supremely gifted athletes who can take the abuse and rigors of 82 games + playoffs and still be ok. The durable players. The freaks ... the MJs, David Robinson, the LeBrons of the world etc.

[LA_Showtime]

Kobe is definitely prone to exaggeration. The game two years ago where he pretended like he was going to faint is the perfect example. He also gets the flu at least 5 times a year. With that said, his warrior mentality is invaluable and other players have admitted it motivates them to try and play all 82 games.

[Samurai Swoosh]

Kobe is definitely prone to exaggeration. The game two years ago where he pretended like he was going to faint is the perfect example. He also gets the flu at least 5 times a year. With that said, his warrior mentality is invaluable and other players have admitted it motivates them to try and play all 82 games.
The game against the Nuggets, right?

:oldlol: @ the flu comment. Dead on the money with that one, bro

People will flame me for this (you know I like and respect Kobe) ... but ever since he came into the league he's always been having mini-"flu games" ala Jordan. Or games where we get the emphasis on how hurt he is before he performs and Kobe will try and prove everyone wrong. haha

My friend and I were just talking about this the other day. It seems ever since Jordan and the flu game, and the mythical way MJ always seemed to play better on days he was sick ... Kobe tries to replicate that for his own copy and pasted "legacy" ... it's just not near as genuine and epic.

Thats why I don't get it with him. Clearly he's smart as hell as a person AND as a player. Too smart for his own good. But he's got to realize for people who have followed the game and know the history ... can't they see through his antics? We've all seen this before. Stop trying to copy, and do you and create your own legacy. The way he always says Jordan wasn't his favorite player (said Magic) ... yet we all know otherwise.

Says he doesn't want to be compared to MJ, but literally and creepily apes him every chance he gets.

I know he isn't that dumb that not only does he realize he's copying Jordan ... but we all do as well.

[ShaqAttack3234]

So the consensus is that it's a pretty average season by Kobe's standards?

I agree, but I'd still rank him as a top 3 player that year, anyone else agree?

When you look at every other player besides Shaq and Duncan, Kobe still seems better that season.

For example, Garnett carried his team to 50 wins in the West, but was swept in the first round and didn't step up like he could've.

Kidd led the Nets to the finals, but that was one of the worst eastern conferences ever, probably rivaled only by 2007 in the last decade or so. And he was a more limited player, imo, though he did step up and play great in the playoffs and showed clutch ability and leadership.

T-Mac did a great job carrying a crappy team and had a more impressive regular season/statistical season, but despite good numbers vs New Orleans(and he was playing with a back injury or knee injury, iirc), he didn't come through in the clutch when he needed to in that New Orleans series.

Webber almost led the Kings to a championship, and played pretty well in the playoffs, but I also don't remember him coming through in a lot of big moments, his free throw shooting dropped off dramatically in the playoffs to the point where he was shooting them worse than Shaq, iirc and he missed 28 games during the regular season.

What separated Kobe from those guys, imo, was his clutch play in the playoffs and in particular being the clear best player in the Spurs series.

[Jacks3]

You ARE right. Although I still believe he couldve had one of his best seasons in 09/10 barring that ankle injury. And he continued playing on it, basically Killing his efficiency numbers (I recall nearly 49% into January) and by the playoffs he got no lift at all on his J's by the fourth quarter.

Drained his knee near the end of the OKC series and just Destroyed Utah and especially Phoenix almost single handedly (Gasol had almost zero impact in the PHX road games, true of Boston series on the road as well.

The unfortunate thing for Kobe the individual is that he didn't begin to get a team built AROUND HIM until his 9th season in the NBA. Probably left countless unbelievable games and streaks on the table. Those three titles in 2000-2002? Well its obvious he doesnt need somebody dropping 35/16 in order to win.
Yeah, I would have loved to see what he could have done, what kind of numbers he could have put up, if he had his own team from the beginning of his prime.

[Bring-Your-Js]

Yeah, I would have loved to see what he could have done, what kind of numbers he could have put up, if he had his own team from the beginning of his prime.

probably be a career 28-30 ppg scorer.

[heyhey]

Yeah, I would have loved to see what he could have done, what kind of numbers he could have put up, if he had his own team from the beginning of his prime.

me too I would liked to have seen him in a free flowing ball dominant system for a few years just to put up some of those PER numbers that modern nba analysis seem to go by.



That's where the next level echelon seperates the supremely gifted athletes who can take the abuse and rigors of 82 games + playoffs and still be ok. The durable players. The freaks ... the MJs, David Robinson, the LeBrons of the world etc.

I don't know about putting Lebron up there yet. He's only 26 and he's shown he CANNOT play with injuries at all. take games off for the littlest things. I wouldn't categorize him as durable till we see him in late 20s and early 30s

[Heilige]

My friend and I were just talking about this the other day. It seems ever since Jordan and the flu game, and the mythical way MJ always seemed to play better on days he was sick ... Kobe tries to replicate that for his own copy and pasted "legacy" ... it's just not near as genuine and epic.


Agreed. This article touches on what you talk about it.

http://larrybrownsports.com/basketball/kobe-bryant-and-the-duality-of-basketball/58271

[Jacks3]

Oh please. :facepalm

[magnax1]

Subliminals at everyone. :oldlol:

They were probably ahead of schedule getting into the Finals after being together for only 40 games or so anyway. But still...that one hurt way more than this years sweep. Everyone was kind of apathetic after losing to the Mavs.

It really is a shame that Kobe didn't get a true championship-caliber team until after his prime. He would've easily had 30+/6+/6+ runs with a good team from 05-07.
Actually, I think he would've done better then 30-6-6 considering that's basically what he averaged in his 08-10 playoff runs.

[CJ Mustard]

Kobe was amazing in 2007-2008. He led that team to the 1st seed in the West even before they got Gasol. That was the year where he was very clearly the best player in the game, nobody else had much of an argument.

[Samurai Swoosh]

probably be a career 28-30 ppg scorer.
I'm willing to further than that ... depending on how soo his team was playing championship caliber ball.

Imagine Kobe switching places with Iverson ...

Kobe's putting up better more amazing numbers on the regular.

The only season we got to see Kobe go all out scoring was 2006 and 2007. Towards the end of his prime.

Imagine him from 2001 - 2009 (the first year he won a ring on his own as a leader so its fair to say)

That would be 8 season of ELECTRIC scoring. He just wouldn't have got near the defensive praise he got earlier in his career, cause I don't think Kobe can sustain playing elite level defense while being a 30 + ppg scorer.

Only person who can do that is Jordan it seems.

[Jacks3]

He played great D in 2001/2003/2008 while putting up 29 PPG, 30 PPG, and 28 PPG...

[zay_24]

02 Kobe is better than any player in the league right now besides kobe





































BEAN!

[Samurai Swoosh]

He played great D in 2001/2003/2008 while putting up 29 PPG, 30 PPG, and 28 PPG...
Fair enough, but it wasn't Jordan level defense.

He also slacked defensively when he averaged 35 ppg and 32 ppg.

I'm assuming if we switch his spot with Iverson, the guy is at least averaging 32 - 35 ppg on a yearly basis.

I don't think he would continue to always play that caliber defense with such a load defensively.

2001 and 2003 he had the big man back there allowing him to gamble. A lot.

2008, he had much more help offensively.

You don't think it's a fair assessment given his history in the league to say if he had a team of his own as lone offensive gun slinger, Maverick style ... that his defense wouldn't suffer in the face of all that scoring?

I'm being too critical?

[Rysio]

02 Kobe is better than any player in the league right now besides kobe

correct.

[Jacks3]

Fair enough, but it wasn't Jordan level defense.

He also slacked defensively when he averaged 35 ppg and 32 ppg.

I'm assuming if we switch his spot with Iverson, the guy is at least averaging 32 - 35 ppg on a yearly basis.

I don't think he would continue to always play that caliber defense with such a load defensively.

2001 and 2003 he had the big man back there allowing him to gamble. A lot.

2008, he had much more help offensively.

You don't think it's a fair assessment given his history in the league to say if he had a team of his own as lone offensive gun slinger, Maverick style ... that his defense wouldn't suffer in the face of all that scoring?

I'm being too critical?
No, he'd definitely see a drop-off in his D, though I have no doubt he'll still be among the best at his position.

[Disaprine]

where is 08-09. easily better than 01-02.
forgot about 08-09, that season was his 3rd best imo.

[ArbitraryWater]

Great thread, with some great posters and posts.. ShaqAttack = Bawz.

But damn, its like Swish came in here to get rid off some RL anger.. immediately stirring shit up out of nowhere due to falling to the Kobe stan disease.

[riseagainst]

miss ShaqAttack.

[NZStreetBaller]

What are your thoughts on Kobe's '01-'02 season overall? It seems that when it comes to Kobe, everyone mentions 2001 and 2003 for the Shaq era.

Regular Season- 25.2 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 5.5 apg, 2.8 TO, 1.5 spg, 46.9 FG%, 54.4 TS%
Playoffs- 26.6 ppg, 5.8 rpg, 4.6 apg, 1.4 spg, 2.8 TO, 43.4 FG%, 51.1 TS%

It was a notable season for Kobe in that he made his first all-nba first team, he won another championship, finished 5th in MVP voting which marked his first top 5 finish and he made the all-defensive second team. He also had that 56 in 3 quarters game vs Memphis, the first of his many legendary scoring games.

Despite an inconsistent playoff run(poor vs Portland, but they swept them anyway, streaky vs Sacramento), he was huge in 4th quarters throughout the playoffs and had 2 great series vs elite defenses. The first being the WCSF vs the Spurs where he was clearly the best player in the series and the finals, where he had one of the best series ever by a non-finals MVP.

It seems like this season is forgotten despite it being one of Kobe's most mature seasons I've seen in terms of team play and clutch play. Maybe it's because his regular season was very good, but forgettable by his standards(only one 40+ point game and a 7-8 record without Shaq), and maybe his playoff moments are forgotten due to how hard of an act his 2001 run was to follow. And his superior numbers in 2001 and 2003 as well as the scoring streaks and highlights in '03 make this kind of his forgotten season.

Where would you rank this among Kobe's superstar seasons('01-present)?

these numbers are good for the star of any team in history but to put up those numbers with the MVP and dominant big man shaq is just ridiculous........ was D wades numbers this good with lebron. was pippens with jordan?

[tamaraw08]

Still remember how KObe dominated the heavily favored Spurs right in thier own crib.
Rightfully so, Pops team was very confident, winning 58 reg season games with prime Duncan, DRob, Derek Anderson, Porter, Avery, Daniels etc etc.
What made Kobe great was that his teammates really struggled esp game 1 when the Spurs took charge early. Kobe eventually dominated the game. 45 pts, 10 rebs esp the 2nd half. Dunking over Duncan and DRob, offensive reb and a put back etc.
For that series alone, Kobe averaged 33.3 pts, 7 assists and 7 rebs.

[ArbitraryWater]

Still remember how KObe dominated the heavily favored Spurs right in thier own crib.
Rightfully so, Pops team was very confident, winning 58 reg season games with prime Duncan, DRob, Derek Anderson, Porter, Avery, Daniels etc etc.
What made Kobe great was that his teammates really struggled esp game 1 when the Spurs took charge early. Kobe eventually dominated the game. 45 pts, 10 rebs esp the 2nd half. Dunking over Duncan and DRob, offensive reb and a put back etc.
For that series alone, Kobe averaged 33.3 pts, 7 assists and 7 rebs.

2001

[T_L_P]

Still remember how KObe dominated the heavily favored Spurs right in thier own crib.
Rightfully so, Pops team was very confident, winning 58 reg season games with prime Duncan, DRob, Derek Anderson, Porter, Avery, Daniels etc etc.
What made Kobe great was that his teammates really struggled esp game 1 when the Spurs took charge early. Kobe eventually dominated the game. 45 pts, 10 rebs esp the 2nd half. Dunking over Duncan and DRob, offensive reb and a put back etc.
For that series alone, Kobe averaged 33.3 pts, 7 assists and 7 rebs.

:biggums:

I remember almost every commentator before the series (especially when Derek got hurt) saying the Spurs had an uphill battle.

Kobe destroyed us, but stop it. Also, you just mentioned TOSB Porter (who I loved), TOSB Avery, and scrub Daniels. That alone says it all.

[MastaKilla]

This was the second year in a row where Kobe led the playoffs in 4th quarter scoring.

[MastaKilla]

:biggums:

I remember almost every commentator before the series (especially when Derek got hurt) saying the Spurs had an uphill battle.

Kobe destroyed us, but stop it. Also, you just mentioned TOSB Porter (who I loved), TOSB Avery, and scrub Daniels. That alone says it all.

you don't remember shit :roll: :roll:

commentators were talking about how the Lakers had a tough opponent against a team built around "the best big man duo in NBA history"

they didn't even note Anderson's injury during the pre game..

skip to 45 seconds or so

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iiSsHGoQm7M

[ArbitraryWater]

Shouldn't have bumped, now we have trolls like MastaKilla ruining decent threads.

[T_L_P]

you don't remember shit :roll: :roll:

commentators were talking about how the Lakers had a tough opponent against a team built around "the best big man duo in NBA history"

they didn't even note Anderson's injury during the pre game..

skip to 45 seconds or so

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iiSsHGoQm7M

:rolleyes: Yeah, because the broadcasting station is really gonna let an analyst flatten the drama.

I have a Marc Stein ESPN article where he says the Spurs will lose without a healthy Anderson. I'll find it and link it in a min. There are some others out there which I will post too.

Since you addressed one point which you think is a lie, can you please address the other? Go find someone saying the Spurs are the overwhelming favourites in the series, in light of the fact that Anderson was down.

EDIT: here's the Stein article. Will find the others now.

http://a.espncdn.com/nba/playoffs2001/2001/0509/1193812.html

[MastaKilla]

Shouldn't have bumped, now we have trolls like MastaKilla ruining decent threads.

oh look, the everlast bag of ISH

[MastaKilla]

:rolleyes: Yeah, because the broadcasting station is really gonna let an analyst flatten the drama.

I have a Marc Stein ESPN article where he says the Spurs will lose without a healthy Anderson. I'll find it and link it in a min. There are some others out there which I will post too.

Since you addressed one point which you think is a lie, can you please address the other? Go find someone saying the Spurs are the overwhelming favourites in the series, in light of the fact that Anderson was down.

EDIT: here's the Stein article. Will find the others now.

http://a.espncdn.com/nba/playoffs2001/2001/0509/1193812.html

I never said any of this, why are you making shit up?

[ArbitraryWater]

which account just got recently banned?

Im guessing this "MastaKilla" dude is anaheimlakers since he may have received a perma?

[ArbitraryWater]

I never said any of this, why are you making shit up?

Dumbass, you just disagreed with him saying the Spurs had an uphill battle..

[MastaKilla]

Dumbass, you just disagreed with him saying the Spurs had an uphill battle..

i disagreed with his assertion that the commentators were saying the Spurs were going to have an uphill battle without Anderson.. the video i posted is two commentators talking before the game and they don't even mention anderson being out. If he was such an important piece of the team they would have obviously talked about that..

and disagreeing that the spurs had an uphill battle doesn't mean i think they were overwhelming favorites like TLP is saying.. :wtf: :roll:

[mehyaM24]

which account just got recently banned?

Im guessing this "MastaKilla" dude is anaheimlakers since he may have received a perma?
mastakilla is markmadsen. he said so himself.

but anyway - do people SERIOUSLY think derek anderson was going to make a difference in that series? instead, the lakers would have won in 5, maybe 6. that's it.

get a grip people.

[feyki]

09
01/08
10
06/07/03
02

[Mr Feeny]

09
01/08
10
06/07/03
02

2008?:wtf: when he choked a 3-1 finals lead against the Lakers' most bitter opponents which including the biggest collapse in nba finals history (24 points) on home court has he shot like a blind man?
And which included the biggest destruction in any closeout finals game in history? 39 points in a game in which he went 7/22 to close the season and was outplayed by a kid Rondo?:biggums:

Oh my daymmm.

[Young X]

A thread as simple as this could never happen now because either a bunch of dickriders would come in to sidetrack it and push an agenda or there wouldn't be enough posts/interest.

There was always trolling but the forum officially went to shit after 2013. Most of the 2014 and on posters are just idiots.

[NBAGOAT]

A thread as simple as this could never happen now because either a bunch of dickriders would come in to sidetrack it and push an agenda or there wouldn't be enough posts/interest.

There was always trolling but the forum officially went to shit after 2013. Most of the 2014 and on posters are just idiots.

read through the thread. The Swoosh vs ShaqAttack debate got pretty stupid however because of Swoosh. Swoosh also claimed later he take prime Kobe over prime Shaq. This is the perfect example of when people take intangibles way too far. What's even worse is how many guys agreed with him

[ArbitraryWater]

read through the thread. The Swoosh vs ShaqAttack debate got pretty stupid however because of Swoosh. Swoosh also claimed later he take prime Kobe over prime Shaq. This is the perfect example of when people take intangibles way too far. What's even worse is how many guys agreed with him

Swoosh is a pretty big moron when it comes to guys he overly likes or dislikes...

btw, MastaKilla is MarkMadsen, lol. Who is now probably the 34-32 footwork guy.

[Mr Feeny]

Swoosh is a pretty big moron when it comes to guys he overly likes or dislikes...

btw, MastaKilla is MarkMadsen, lol. Who is now probably the 34-32 footwork guy.I'm convinced all of them are about 2 guys. 2 Kobe stans with 29 alts:oldlol:

[Young X]

read through the thread. The Swoosh vs ShaqAttack debate got pretty stupid however because of Swoosh. Swoosh also claimed later he take prime Kobe over prime Shaq. This is the perfect example of when people take intangibles way too far. What's even worse is how many guys agreed with himIt's still much better discussion than there is now.

If this thread happened now, a bunch of clowns would've turned this into a Kobe vs. Lebron thread. And we would've heard the same dumb ass arguments over and over again.

The last thread I remember being interested in was that "best player" thread by Gifted Mind. Because there were only mature posters involved. I think you posted in it too.

[stalkerforlife]

He's the 2nd GOAT for a reason.

[NBAGOAT]

It's still much better discussion than there is now.

If this thread happened now, a bunch of clowns would've turned this into a Kobe vs. Lebron thread. And we would've heard the same dumb ass arguments over and over again.

The last thread I remember being interested in was that "best player" thread by Gifted Mind. Because there were only mature posters involved. I think you posted in it too.

well ofc, you want good player discussion read realGM's player comparsion thread. Yep I remember that thread and posted a little but unfortunately the main thing that stuck out from that thread was GM and DMAVS getting pretty nasty(even if the discussion was pretty good)

[SamuraiSWISH]

Probably the best Finals performance of his career, which is funny because he had several overall playoff runs more impressive statistically (01, 03, 08-10). I can see why people would choose 2009 (because its the best of his 3 appearances post-Shaq) but 27/7/6 on 51.4%FG is a wholly excellent Finals.
Kobe's 2009 Finals is clearly his best. Then 2002.

[SwayDizzle]

2008?:wtf: when he choked a 3-1 finals lead against the Lakers' most bitter opponents which including the biggest collapse in nba finals history (24 points) on home court has he shot like a blind man?
And which included the biggest destruction in any closeout finals game in history? 39 points in a game in which he went 7/22 to close the season and was outplayed by a kid Rondo?:biggums:

Oh my daymmm.
feeny. take a chill pill.

the 01-02 season was phenomenal, just like all of kobe's other championship runs. there's a reason the man is ranked top 5 all time with 5 sublime finals wins and 7 finals performances.

the man is truly a legend. :bowdown: :bowdown:

[NBAGOAT]

feeny. take a chill pill.

the 01-02 season was phenomenal, just like all of kobe's other championship runs. there's a reason the man is ranked top 5 all time with 5 sublime finals wins and 7 finals performances.

the man is truly a legend. :bowdown: :bowdown:

when did Kobe fans start giving credit for just playing in the Finals :lol. You guys were some of the biggest 2/6 2/7 etc guys on this board.

[AintNoSunshine]

Yep he peaked in 2002

[ArbitraryWater]

Yep he peaked in 2002

:wtf: