Lakers record w/o Shaq but w/ Kobe, w/ Kobe b w/o Shaq, w/ Kobe but w/o Odom, etc.

[BEAST Griffin]

http://www.behindthebasket.com/btb/2011/9/1/its-all-about-the-ws-kobe-bryant.html

SAMPLE:

edit: I took out the sample because it seems like some Kobe fans are just going to pout and not read the entire article but make uninformed comments.

:yaohappy:

There is articles like this on other players (before Kobe stans start labeling this article as a Kobe hating attack):

Kevin Garnett
http://www.behindthebasket.com/btb/2011/9/9/its-all-about-the-ws-kevin-garnett.html

Steve Nash
http://www.behindthebasket.com/btb/2011/10/6/its-all-about-the-ws-steve-nash.html

Shaquille O'Neal
http://www.behindthebasket.com/btb/2011/8/25/its-all-about-the-ws-shaquille-oneal.html

Jason Kidd
http://www.behindthebasket.com/btb/2011/8/22/its-all-about-the-ws-jason-kidd.html

Dirk Nowitzki
http://www.behindthebasket.com/btb/2011/8/6/its-all-about-the-ws-dirk-nowitzki.html

[D-Wade316]

:kobe:

[Force]

Everybody should already know this.

The Shaq/Kobe/PJ Lakers had a better record over all their years together when Kobe didn't play than when he did play. As long as Shaq was playing. This was pointed out throughout those seasons as it happened quite a bit. People have short term memory but Kobe used to catch a lot of crap for his style of play..well he still sorta does lol, but it was a totally different story before.

[Xiengqichess]

The basketball history would be better if Kobe never existed at all!

[Punpun]

with Kobe out or getting back into shape as a reserve

Biased article is biased. You do NOT use different categories when wanting to make a valid point. It'd be valid and interesting if that writer sticked to his original plan. I.E when they didn't play.

Frankly pathetic.

[jlauber]

Kobe became an exceptional player by that 99-00 season, and a great player by 01-02, BUT, Shaq was THE man back in that three-peat run. Granted, Kobe was instrumental in the WCF's, but overall, Shaq just plain dominated the league in those years.

I am a big Kobe fan, and he has had a great career, but IMHO, his peak was not on Shaq's peak level. In fact, IMHO, only MJ, Wilt, and Moses had as great peaks. Kareem had some huge seasons, but he never dominated all of his peers, in H2H's, like those four did, in their best seasons.

[stephanieg]

In fact, IMHO, only MJ, Wilt, and Moses had as great peaks. Kareem had some huge seasons, but he never dominated all of his peers, in H2H's, like those four did, in their best seasons.

I'm pretty sure Kareem could've dominated Rik Smits/Dale Davis, Mutombo and Todd MacCulloch. And he wouldn't have had to elbow them in the face either.

[PJR]

Kobrick the most overrated player of all time. He just lucky he was drafted by the Lakers.

[Punpun]

Kobrick the most overrated player of all time. He just lucky he was drafted by the Lakers.

He wasn't.

[I<3NBA]

Kobrick the most overrated player of all time. He just lucky he was drafted by the Lakers.
amen. he would be the poor man's Iverson had his and AI's fate been switched (AI was drafted by Lakers and Kobe went to Philadelphia) I'm sure AI would do as well with Shaq. And Kobe would not even sniff the playoffs with the scrubs AI played with.



and that's the painful truth for kobe stans.

[Rooster]

amen. he would be the poor man's Iverson had his and AI's fate been switched (AI was drafted by Lakers and Kobe went to Philadelphia) I'm sure AI would do as well with Shaq. And Kobe would not even sniff the playoffs with the scrubs AI played with.



and that's the painful truth for kobe stans.

:facepalm Yes Kobe can't sniff the playoff with Smush and Kwame as starters on his team.

[nba_55]

:roll: :applause: :applause: Nice find!
Overrated kobrick getting exposed once again.

[Mr. I'm So Rad]

What exactly is this supposed to prove? Shaq was better than Kobe in Kobe's early years. Big surprise.

But it's pretty hilarious how pathetic the author is. 5-3 w/ Kobe but w/o Shaq but 11-3 w/ Shaq but w/o Kobe is supposed to be a sleight on Kobe? :oldlol:

Oh they go 1-1 when Kobe is in but Shaq isn't. Kobe isn't important :facepalm Rilleh?

[BEAST Griffin]

Biased article is biased. You do NOT use different categories when wanting to make a valid point. It'd be valid and interesting if that writer sticked to his original plan. I.E when they didn't play.

Frankly pathetic.

:facepalm

[BEAST Griffin]

What exactly is this supposed to prove? Shaq was better than Kobe in Kobe's early years. Big surprise.

But it's pretty hilarious how pathetic the author is. 5-3 w/ Kobe but w/o Shaq but 11-3 w/ Shaq but w/o Kobe is supposed to be a sleight on Kobe? :oldlol:

Oh they go 1-1 when Kobe is in but Shaq isn't. Kobe isn't important :facepalm Rilleh?

Supposed to be a slight to Kobe? He just looked at the wins and losses with and without superstars and with and without their important teammates in line ups.

It wasn't done exclusively for Kobe Bryant. Kobe Bryant isn't even the first player in the series.

:facepalm

And don't be dense. I only posted a small piece of the article because of the 10,000 letters limit. Click the link and read the entire thing.

[Mr. I'm So Rad]

Supposed to be a slight to Kobe? He just looked at the wins and losses with and without superstars and with and without their important teammates in line ups.

It wasn't done exclusively for Kobe Bryant. Kobe Bryant isn't even the first player in the series.

:facepalm

And don't be dense. This is only a small piece of the article.

:oldlol: Ok whatever you say bud. You know what you're purpose was.

[bwink23]

Biased article is biased. You do NOT use different categories when wanting to make a valid point. It'd be valid and interesting if that writer sticked to his original plan. I.E when they didn't play.

Frankly pathetic.


Frankly, it's spot on....U MAD??

[Rooster]

Supposed to be a slight to Kobe? He just looked at the wins and losses with and without superstars and with and without their important teammates in line ups.

It wasn't done exclusively for Kobe Bryant. Kobe Bryant isn't even the first player in the series.

:facepalm

And don't be dense. I only posted a small piece of the article because of the 10,000 letters limit. Click the link and read the entire thing.


The Lakers were built around Shaq during Kobe early years. Lakers easily struggled without him because we were left with the shot version of Horace Grant and Samaki Walker rotating on his spot.

[bwink23]

In before the next Kobe stan:

5 RINGS!!!! :rolleyes:

[bwink23]

The Lakers were built around Shaq during Kobe early years. Lakers easily struggled without him because we were left with the shot version of Horace Grant and Samaki Walker rotating on his spot.

Yet the author clearly shows the Lakers had more success when Lamar Odom was on the court as opposed to Kobe...

Get MAD stans, BE MAD!! :lol

[Rooster]

Yet the author clearly shows the Lakers had more success when Lamar Odom was on the court as opposed to Kobe...

Get MAD stans, BE MAD!! :lol


So Lakers would rather have Odom than Kobe. People need to use their common sense sometimes.

[bwink23]

So Lakers would rather have Odom than Kobe. People need to use their common sense sometimes.


And some people need a little dose of reality sometimes.

The article clearly shows, Kobe hardly took a team of scrubs anywhere. Those "scrubs" as Kobetard fans like to put it, clearly were capable of winning without him. And, that really is the point of the article...NOT that the Lakers didn't need Kobe, but that his supporting cast weren't as the writer puts it "carcasses that Kobe carried around on the floor."

In other words, Kobe is not nearly as instrumental as his rabid fan base claims.

[BEAST Griffin]

:oldlol: Ok whatever you say bud. You know what you're purpose was.

:rolleyes:

Obviously my main purpose for posting this article was to demonstrate Kobe Bryant's overrated impact.

But I didn't write the article and I only posted a small sample because of the 10,000 letter limit.

Kobe Bryant's overrated impact is demonstrated in the entire article not just this small sample.

Read the article to get context and don't just dismiss it as a planned slight to Kobe Bryant.

[bwink23]

:rolleyes:

Obviously my main purpose for posting this article was to demonstrate Kobe Bryant's overrated impact.

But I didn't write the article and I only posted a small sample because of the 10,000 letter limit.

Kobe Bryant's overrated impact is demonstrated in the entire article not just this small sample.

Read the entire article to get context and don't just dismiss it as a pre planned slight to Kobe Bryant.



He Mad....Kobe fans only see what they want to see

Funny thing is, to the rest of the world this is nothing new. But the article does give it more context.

[Rooster]

And some people need a little dose of reality sometimes.

The article clearly shows, Kobe hardly took a team of scrubs anywhere. Those "scrubs" as Kobetard fans like to put it, clearly were capable of winning without him. And, that really is the point of the article...NOT that the Lakers didn't need Kobe, but that his supporting cast weren't as the writer puts it "carcasses that Kobe carried around on the floor."

In other words, Kobe is not nearly as instrumental as his rabid fan base claims.


Capable of winning what? regular season games? Kobe took a team of scrubs to the playoffs. If Kobe retire now, the end can easily justify the means. he won a couple of rings as the primary option.

[Rooster]

He Mad....Kobe fans only see what they want to see

Funny thing is, to the rest of the world this is nothing new. But the article does give it more context.


The article proved that Lakers won several games without Kobe. Regular season games as if Lakers hanging the Division Winner on their rafters.

[PickernRoller]

but but.....some random sport writer said Kobe sucks? but but....so true Kobe stans.....so true......you mad, you mad?

Cool brah....cool....OP and gang need to try harder....seriously, harder! :oldlol:Chilling, why can't OP and gang be chilling.......music to my ears.......

http://images2.fanpop.com/image/photos/8900000/relax-relaxing-8925208-1024-768.jpg

[Scholar]

Kobrick the most overrated player of all time. He just lucky he was drafted by the Lakers.

Check the 1996 draft. Kobe was not drafted by the Los Angeles Lakers.

[BEAST Griffin]

Jason Kidd

:bowdown:

[Owl]

Like a certain Fox columnist I think the article is overreaching to say that Kobe isn't very good, possibly in response to a media love in for Kobe going on for a lot of his career.

The columnist claims


he did not make a positive impact on his team
I don't think that is proved by the small samples used especially when we don't know the quality of teams played.

Also given that Shaq was the absolute centrepiece of that Lakers team (rightly so, he was by far their best player) an over .500 team hardly shows that Kobe didn't have a positive impact.

I don't think Kobe's stats matchup up with the popular perception of his legacy and there are those who seem to worship him to extraordinary extents on the internet. However that doesn't warrant being silly in the opposite direction and that is what claiming Kobe isn't/wasn't an impact player does.

If the claims made were more reasonable (say, that Kobe's "in/out" numbers indicate a lack of impact to the extent expected of a top 10 or top 20 all time player, so maybe he isn't one) then the numbers would support the case better.

As it is the arguer comes off looking like a "hater" and undermining their case.

[bwink23]

Like a certain Fox columnist I think the article is overreaching to say that Kobe isn't very good, possibly in response to a media love in for Kobe going on for a lot of his career.

The columnist claims


I don't think that is proved by the small samples used especially when we don't know the quality of teams played.

Also given that Shaq was the absolute centrepiece of that Lakers team (rightly so, he was by far their best player) an over .500 team hardly shows that Kobe didn't have a positive impact.

I don't think Kobe's stats matchup up with the popular perception of his legacy and there are those who seem to worship him to extraordinary extents on the internet. However that doesn't warrant being silly in the opposite direction and that is what claiming Kobe isn't/wasn't an impact player does.

If the claims made were more reasonable (say, that Kobe's "in/out" numbers indicate a lack of impact to the extent expected of a top 10 or top 20 all time player, so maybe he isn't one) then the numbers would support the case better.

As it is the arguer comes off looking like a "hater" and undermining their case.

:lol .....of course he does, anyone who swings from kobe's ball hair like Tarzan is gonna see it as hating....

THE NUMBERS DON'T LIE :coleman:

You can cry about biasness or "hating" all you want...but the facts of the matter are gonna kick you in the nuts every time....:pimp:

[BEAST Griffin]

I've read three other players so far (Duncan, Shaq, Jason Kidd). All with demonstratable significant postitive effects on the Win/Loss column with this method. Kobe is the odd one out so far.

[Heavincent]

This is so stupid :oldlol:

What is the Lakers record on Saturdays when it is raining outside and Kobe is wearing black socks? That's no more pointless than this article.

[bwink23]

This is so stupid :oldlol:

What is the Lakers record on Saturdays when it is raining outside and Kobe is wearing black socks? That's no more pointless than this.


Yeah, i mean....checking the W/L record of every game the Lakers played when Kobe wasn't....HA ! i mean, how stupid!!!



:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[Heavincent]

Yeah, i mean....checking the W/L record of every game the Lakers played when Kobe wasn't....HA ! i mean, how stupid!!!



:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Lakers in the last 16 seasons with Kobe playing: 5 rings.

Just like the article headline says: It's all about the W's, right?

[bwink23]

Lakers in the last 16 seasons with Kobe playing: 5 rings.

Just like the article headline says: It's all about the W's, right?


Robert Horry 7 rings....W's !!! :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[Ne 1]

Robert Horry 7 rings....W's !!! :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Winning can only be a criteria for elite players, players who lead their respective teams with their play and put their team mates into position to excel and Robert Horry, though a exceptional role player, cannot be compared to the all-time greats.

[Heavincent]

Robert Horry 7 rings....W's !!! :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

People still use that shitty argument? :oldlol:

[bwink23]

Winning can only be a criteria for elite players, players who lead their respective teams with their play and put their team mates into position to excel and Robert Horry, though a exceptional role player, cannot be compared to the all-time greats.


Winning is a criteria for a TEAM....the numbers don't lie fool..

"5 Rings" is the kindergarten way of defending Kobe in this instance...It take a TEAM effort to win 5 rings, and this dude showed just how valuable Kobe's team was to Kobe's success.

Kobe never CARRIED anyone, LOL!!!

[Heavincent]

Winning is a criteria for a TEAM....the numbers don't lie fool..

"5 Rings" is the kindergarten way of defending Kobe in this instance...It take a TEAM effort to win 5 rings, and this dude showed just how valuable Kobe's team was to Kobe's success.

Kobe never CARRIED anyone, LOL!!!

I love how Kobe is the only player that isn't allowed to have good teams. Nobody ever complains about Shaq not being able to win a title without a top 2 SG at his side, or Kareem for having Magic, or Bird for having a team loaded with hall of famers. But oh no, Kobe had good teams when he won his 5 rings. WHAT A SCRUB!!!!!

[L8k3r5]

Kobrick the most overrated player of all time. He just lucky he was drafted by the Lakers.
:facepalm You can't even name the right team that originally drafted Kobe. Shows your obvious lack of intelligence about basketball.

[Ne 1]

I love how Kobe is the only player that isn't allowed to have good teams. Nobody ever complains about Shaq not being able to win a title without a top 2 SG at his side, or Kareem for having Magic, or Bird for having a team loaded with hall of famers. But oh no, Kobe had good teams when he won his 5 rings. WHAT A SCRUB!!!!!

Nah man. Kobe was just a marginal role player during Lakers 5 title runs and his championships should all have asterisks next to them.

[PJR]

Fa99ot, Kobrick never once donned a Hornets jersey, So Stfu...

Bottom line is, Kobrick was just lucky his career started with the Lakers.. A franchise with more resources than any other...Period. :pimp:

[Ne 1]

Bottom line is, Kobrick was just lucky his career started with the Lakers


Yup. Everyone else won their rings because they were great players, Kobe was just lucky. lol

troll harder...

[L8k3r5]

Fa99ot, Kobrick never once donned a Hornets jersey, So Stfu...

Bottom line is, Kobrick was just lucky his career started with the Lakers.. A franchise with more resources than any other...Period. :pimp:
:oldlol: I can't even take you seriously with the shitty way you're typing. Looks like you've been in your mom's basement too long there kid.
NEXT...

[PJR]

Never said Kobrick wasn't great, or wasn't a major part on any of the Lakers championships teams...

But y'all stans need to stop putting him on a pedastol, specifically when comparing him to other great players, and using rings as the crutch of your arguments. When he has been fortunate to be in a
Good situation the majority of his career. Fool came into the league the same time the Lakers sign Shaq..Child please...:oldlol:

[FindingTim]

I am a big Kobe fan, and he has had a great career, but IMHO, his peak was not on Shaq's peak level.

dude that is not an opinion-- you'd have to be Kobe's mom to think otherwise.
Peak Shaq was the best player I've ever seen-- yes, better than Michael Jordan. Jordan's playing style was a hell of a lot more sexy, but if I had 1st pick in a pickup game, I'd choose prime Shaq 10/10 times.
I truly believe that If you took this years Charlotte Bobcats and gave them prime Shaq, they could contend for a title.

[Punpun]

Shaq was lucky to have a teamate like Kobe in his team you mean.

[L8k3r5]

Never said Kobrick wasn't great, or wasn't a major part on any of the Lakers championships teams...

But y'all stans need to stop putting him on a pedastol, specifically when comparing him to other great players, and using rings as the crutch of your arguments. When he has been fortunate to be in a
Good situation the majority of his career. Fool came into the league the same time the Lakers sign Shaq..Child please...:oldlol:
Your point? Kobe wouldn't have won w/o Shaq and Shaq wouldn't have won w/o Kobe. Those two needed each other to win those 3 titles. Whoever says otherwise must be on some good shit...

[Force]

It's unreal that people are actually debating the importance of Shaq and Kobe. Shaq was far away the man on the team, it wasn't even close. how young are the people here? did you watch basketball when they were teammates and winning titles? It was all about Shaq, he drew all the attention, put fouls on everybody and killed everything in his way. that fact that people even want to debate this is just mind blowing. prime shaq was like no other, you could have replaced kobe with vince carter and they still would have won at least 1 ring...stackhouse, tmac, ray allen ...prime shaq is beyond anything that is in the league right now, it's not even debatable.

[Punpun]

Oh kiddo Force reciting what he was thaught by his homerist father. They were 1.a and 1.b pick. Try again.

[PJR]

It's unreal that people are actually debating the importance of Shaq and Kobe. Shaq was far away the man on the team, it wasn't even close. how young are the people here? did you watch basketball when they were teammates and winning titles? It was all about Shaq, he drew all the attention, put fouls on everybody and killed everything in his way. that fact that people even want to debate this is just mind blowing. prime shaq was like no other, you could have replaced kobe with vince carter and they still would have won at least 1 ring...stackhouse, tmac, ray allen ...prime shaq is beyond anything that is in the league right now, it's not even debatable.

Lol don't know about Stackhouse, but otherwise I agee...:applause:

[bwink23]

Oh kiddo Force reciting what he was thaught by his homerist father. They were 1.a and 1.b pick. Try again.


Not by what the records indicate when one isn't playing vs. the other.....:D

[FindingTim]

It's unreal that people are actually debating the importance of Shaq and Kobe. Shaq was far away the man on the team, it wasn't even close. how young are the people here? did you watch basketball when they were teammates and winning titles? It was all about Shaq, he drew all the attention, put fouls on everybody and killed everything in his way. that fact that people even want to debate this is just mind blowing. prime shaq was like no other, you could have replaced kobe with vince carter and they still would have won at least 1 ring...stackhouse, tmac, ray allen ...prime shaq is beyond anything that is in the league right now, it's not even debatable.

my thoughts exactly. Kobe was at the right place at the right time. The Lakers would have won titles with any relatively good shooting guard. Shaq required a constant double/triple team, so the Lakers were constantly playing 5on4 or 5on3 basketball. That, my friends, is the Shaq effect.
I'm not even a big fan of the guy, but I can't deny how ridiculously good he was.

[Flamboyant]

I've read three other players so far (Duncan, Shaq, Jason Kidd). All with demonstratable significant postitive effects on the Win/Loss column with this method. Kobe is the odd one out so far.

I don't see why it's such a shock. True PGs, and true big man are supposed to be bigger difference makers. Shaq for example isn't the greatest, but many consider him the most dominant ever. Even Nash was "more important" than Dirk when he was with the Mavs. Still the article is quite biased. I love how they nit-pick, saying the final 4 games of 2010 shouldn't count, but don't do the same for final games of '05 Lakers after they missed the playoff train.

Kobe had the Lakers on #1 before Gasol came in 2008, made the finals after Bynum went down, and his team is still a contender w/out Odom. He even had a positive record without two of them during 08-11, but instead of giving him credit for this record, it's a mere they were "only" 11-10, and "his impact is somewhere around none".

Obviously people can have different opinions. But IMHO: It takes talent to turn bad teams to good ones, and it takes greatness to turn good teams into champions.

[bwink23]

Brick Bryant Is Back!!!!

[BEAST Griffin]

Brick Bryant Is Back!!!!

And we all knew that sooner or later he was going to hit a clutch shot again with the amount of attempts he takes all the time.


All hail Clutchbe..GOD of clutchness...

:bowdown: :bowdown:

[BEAST Griffin]

bump for Kobe fans getting a hard on because Lakers lost today without him

:yaohappy:

[BEAST Griffin]

Interesting how little Kobe Bryant impacts the win loss column compared to other stars.

[The Iron Fist]

Not by what the records indicate when one isn't playing vs. the other.....:D
The records when one isn't playing who the other.

Kobe btb fmvps
Shaq, Wades sidekick. Wade aka Mr 15 wins in a season.

[Roc Nation]

They won 3 titles together.

Shaq- 3 FMVPs
Kobe- 0 FMVPs

nough said

[Jacks3]

Kobe--5 titles
Snaq--4 titles

nuff said.

[Roc Nation]

Kobe--5 titles
Snaq--4 titles

nuff said.
Kobe - 2 FMVPs
Shaq - 3 FMVPs

:kobe:

[General]

Kobe didn't need a top 3 player in the league to win back to back.

[AK47DR91]

So if Kobe was the #1 option, the Lakers would have been barely a .500 ball club? That would have been good enough for them to make the 7th or 8th seed, I guess.

:roll: @ the thought of him not being a second fiddle.

[BEAST Griffin]

So if Kobe was the #1 option, the Lakers would have been barely a .500 ball club? That would have been good enough for them to make the 7th or 8th seed, I guess.

:roll: @ the thought of him not being a second fiddle.

And without him they were still on track for the #1 seed in the West.

:lol

[ProfessorMurder]

No news here, Kobe is overrated.

[Jacks3]

Kobe didn't need a top 3 player in the league to win back to back.
True.

[Jacks3]

2nd-fiddle putting 29+/7+/6+/2 post-seasons. Damn.:biggums:

[Nevaeh]

2nd-fiddle putting 29+/7+/6+/2 post-seasons. Damn.:biggums:

Without drawing a single double team. Damn!! :biggums: