Odom: Clips are deeper than championship Lakers

[SpecialQue]

http://espn.go.com/blog/los-angeles/clippers/post/_/id/2589/odom-clips-are-deeper-than-championship-lakers


Los Angeles Clippers forward Lamar Odom says he thinks the current Clippers are the deepest team he has ever been on, and yes, that includes the Los Angeles Lakers teams he was on that went to three straight NBA Finals and won back-to-back titles.

"No," Odom said Friday when asked if he has ever been on a team as deep as this season's Clippers. "I've been on good teams. I've been on a team that went to the Finals three years in a row. You have to be pretty good to get to the Finals. But championships aren't won by just talking about a team and looking at a roster. We've all seen good rosters before and teams that we think should win, but this team is built to compete against the best teams in the NBA. If we were to play a seven-game series right now against the best teams in the NBA, I would expect us to compete."


:lebronamazed:




































:kobe:

[b1imtf]

Rest of the people: :facepalm

[kNIOKAS]

http://i1214.photobucket.com/albums/cc489/niokulis/kobe-hilariously-confused-reaction-gif_zpsd8750576.gif

[TheMarkMadsen]

The only thing deep about this team is Lamar Odom's gut


Honestly though those Laker championship teams had a HORRIBLE bench outside of odom so I don't see how this is supposed to mean anything?

[kennethgriffin]

they are deaper than either championship laker team from 2009 or 2010

kobe had 1 other allstar and his 3rd best player ( odom ) never made an allstar team

bynum was f*** all in the playoffs ( 6ppg and 8ppg? )


so yea kobe won with less help than people think


but the thing about it is... not only are the clippers deaper. today there is 5-6 teams that are deaper than those laker teams because it takes allot more stars to win these days because of the heat douche bag colluding idiots ruining the league


so it doesnt automatically mean this clipper team will win a title.


and ontop of all that... deaper doesnt always mean better... hense ( lakers beating the celtics in 2010 )

[All Net]

08 team bench was good but the two titles the depth was very poor outside of Lamar...

[SpecialQue]

Honestly though those Laker championship teams had a HORRIBLE bench outside of odom so I don't see how this is supposed to mean anything?

Yeah, this is one of those little things that people who hate the Lakers tend to ignore when discussing the championships. There are several teams right now that are deeper than the championship Laker teams.

[ZeN]

Yeah.. That's not saying much.. Those Lakers teams had good team chemistry and maximized the efforts of who they had.. But depth was lacking.. Fisher, Farmar, Sasha, weak Bynum, Joe smith, etc.. Not a worthy thing to boast about..lol

[daily]

After Odom's disappearing act last year does anyone really care what he thinks.

[CoolBreeze0840]

Yes the Clippers are deep but the Lakers have the better starting 5 and come playoff time the Lakers will probably only run a 9 or 10 man rotation with the starters and the sixth man getting more minutes than in the regular season so being deep doesn't matter if the second unit will be facing the starters. Lamar should know that.

[KeyNote]

the clippers have bledsoe and crawford which is nice backcourt depth off the bench...but you lose evans and martin and now you're banking on fat odom to return to form and grant hill to stay healthy and not show his age...clippers depth is being overrated

[SourPatchKids]

That's horrid.

[Raider007]

Khloe is making him kooky


http://img.perezhilton.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/kardashians-komment-on-khloe-pregnancy-rumors__oPt.jpg

[longtime lurker]

This doesn't sound good for haters that say Kobe only won because he had the most stacked teams in the league.

[BlackVVaves]

He's right.

The Lakers team that won in 2009 and 2010 was anemic in depth quality.

Certainly a testament to how futile bench depth really is in the larger scheme of things in terms of championship achievement, and also a very telling tale of how much the top talent of the Lakers those years (Kobe, Gasol, Odom on a good day) truly carried those teams. Three Finals appearances in a row, in the mightily tough Western Conference, is a revered feat only a small handful of teams in the NBA's entire history can boast.

[Indian guy]

Basketball, especially playoff basketball, is all about how good your core 2-3 players are. Depth doesn't win you championships. Superstars and stars do, and Lakers have more of those than anybody else in the league.

[BlueandGold]

To be fair the 2008-2010 Finals Laker teams had terrible benches, especially considering how Bynum was out 50% of the time and injured/partially injured 75% of the time.

[EnoughSaid]

Lmao the rotation come Playoff time is going to be 7-8 players. Odom might not even get more than 10-15 minutes. :roll:

[KG215]

they are deaper than either championship laker team from 2009 or 2010

kobe had 1 other allstar and his 3rd best player ( odom ) never made an allstar team

bynum was f*** all in the playoffs ( 6ppg and 8ppg? )


so yea kobe won with less help than people think


but the thing about it is... not only are the clippers deaper. today there is 5-6 teams that are deaper than those laker teams because it takes allot more stars to win these days because of the heat douche bag colluding idiots ruining the league


so it doesnt automatically mean this clipper team will win a title.


and ontop of all that... deaper doesnt always mean better... hense ( lakers beating the celtics in 2010 )

How many times are you going to try and play the "Kobe didn't have much help in 2009 and 2010" card? Relative to the rest of the league, those Lakers teams were either the best or second best team in the league and the favorites in the West both years. Yes, in large it was due to them having Kobe, but what other contenders other than the Celtics had three or four All-Stars?

Cleveland - LeBron James, and I guess Mo Williams counts?
Orlando - Dwight Howard and I guess Jameer Nelson counts?
Spurs - Past his prime Tim Duncan and Tony Parker

That was it, and I'm not even sure the Spurs counted as legit contenders in '09 and '10. They might no belong in that group. But compared to the other legit contenders in '09 and '10, Kobe's on All-Star teammate was much better than LeBron's one All-Star teammate and Dwight Howard's one All-Star teammate. Mo Williams and Jameer Nelson weere All-stars because they were good players that one season on a team with one of the best records in the league. Pau Gasol was a multiple time Al-Star and an established star.

Obviously the Celtics had their four All-Stars but Ray Allen was an All-Star one of those years as an injury replacement and wasn't really having an All-Star worthy season. And in 2009 they were removed from the contender discussion as soon as it was announced Garnett would miss the playoffs.

Then you look at the "pseudo-contenders" (Denver, Phoenix, Atlanta, Portland, Dallas) and all of them only had one or two All-Stars. You can keep playing the "Kobe only had one All-Star teammate in '09 and '10" card all you want and I'll keep calling you on it.

[kennethgriffin]

How many times are you going to try and play the "Kobe didn't much help in 2009 and 2010" card? Relative to the rest of the league, those Lakers teams were either the best or second best team in the league and the favorites in the West both years. Yes, in large part it was due to them having Kobe, but what other contenders other than the Celtics had three or four All-Stars?

Cleveland - LeBron James, and I guess Mo Williams counts?
Orlando - Dwight Howard and I guess Jameer Nelson counts?
Spurs - Past his prime Tim Duncan and Tony Parker

That was it, and I'm not even sure the Spurs counted as legit contenders in '09 and '10. They might no belong in that group. But compared to the other legit contenders in '09 and '10, Kobe's on All-Star teammate was much better than LeBron's one All-Star teammate and Dwight Howard's one All-Star teammate. Mo Williams and Jameer Nelson weere All-stars because they were good players that one season on a team with one of the best records in the league. Pau Gasol was a multiple time Al-Star and an established star.

Obviously the Celtics had their four All-Stars but Ray Allen was an All-Star one of those years as an injury replacement and wasn't really having an All-Star worthy season. And in 2009 they were removed from the contender discussion as soon as it was announced Garnett would miss the playoffs.

Then you look at the "pseudo-contenders" (Denver, Phoenix, Atlanta, Portland, Dallas) and all of them only had one or two All-Stars. You can keep playing the "Kobe only had one All-Star teammate in '09 and '10" card all you want and I'll keep calling you on it.



why wouldn't i? he didn't have that much help in comparison to other championship teams throughout history


gasol? a few allstar games off the bench. 0-12 playoff record as lead dog. a couple of third team all nba's ( only way he makes hall of fame is because of some silver medals and a gold in a meaningless euro competition )

not exactly your typical championship 2nd leading man. most are usually sure shot hall of famers and make a ton of all nba teams/allstar games .



Bynum? barely even played. 6ppg in 2009 and 8ppg in 2010. he sat most of the 2nd half every game in the playoffs


fisher? worst starting PG in the nba. no defense and hes lucky kobe took care of the play making responsibilities or his career would have ended a long time ago

odom? never even ONCE made the allstar team. never even ONCE was an all nba player. never even ONCE averaged over 20ppg.


ariza? his career ended the minute he left LA. kobe got him a huge contract and now hes getting bounced around the league. average player at best


artest? worst outside shooter in the nba. absolute liability on offense ever since he got to LA. mainly known for defense and he was already old by the time he got there.



after that... who are we lookin at? sasha? walton? farmar? probably the worst championship bench in nba history




kobe won without another hall of famer. TWICE... only guy to ever do it multiple times


gasol shouldnt make the hall. but even if he does. its still not a deap team compared to other teams that won titles

[Chrono90]

Clippers is a good team but they haven't done a damm thing. Please take action then talk. The Clippers are talking so much before they even do anything. :facepalm

[BlackVVaves]

KG215, I agree with everything you said...with one caveat.

In relation to other NBA champions, the 2009 and 2010 Lakers were pretty bare. The majority of the champions of the 80s, 90s, and some of the new millennium like the 2005 Spurs, 2008 Celtics, and now 2012 Heat, had a larger scale of dependency from their overall roster.

[BlackVVaves]

Lmao someone just negged me from this thread :roll:

[KG215]

why wouldn't i? he didn't have that much help in comparison to other championship teams throughout history
As is the case with almost all of your Kobe arguments, that's true on the surface but, as usual. you fail to put anything into perspective in order to make Kobe look more impressive.

First, winning those two rings as the lead-dog was impressive as it is anytime a player wins multiple rings as the lead-dog. Those two championships are what makes him a top 7-10 player all-time and not a top 15-25 player.

However, winning two rings with "only one other All-Star" does not make them anymore impressive than a lot of other all-time greats winning a championship or two as the best player when you put Kobe's '09 and '10 championships into context. I've already told you why.

The other contenders in '09 and '10 didn't have more "All-Stars" or anymore top-end help than Kobe. In fact, the one-two punch of Kobe and Gasol was quite a bit better than the 1-2 punch of LeBron-Mo, Howard-Jameer, Carmelo-Bilups, etc.

Come playoff time, if you have the two best or two of the three best players in a series, a very good third option like Odom, and other solid role players (comparatively speaking) that know their roles, you're going to succeed. Find me a playoff series in 2009 and 2010 the Lakers weren't the favorites. MAYBE the 2010 Finals?



gasol? a few allstar games off the bench. 0-12 playoff record as lead dog. a couple of third team all nba's ( only way he makes hall of fame is because of some silver medals and a gold in a meaningless euro competition )
Gasol wasn't ever going to succeed as a #1 option in terms of leading teams to deep playoff runs. He was traded to the Lakers and more than flourished as Kobe's second banana. Among the other contenders those years, he as the best second option by a pretty decent margin.

If you want to keep diminishing his role and say he shouldn't be a HOFer, and the only reason he will be one is due to his play in the Olympics and Euroleague, I can't help you. He isn't a first ballot HOFer by any stretch of the imagination but, if/when he makes it, it will be because of a combination o what he accomplished on an international stage AND playing an integral role on two NBA championship teams.


not exactly your typical championship 2nd leading man. most are usually sure shot hall of famers and make a ton of all nba teams/allstar games.
And again, what other contenders had "sure shot hall of famers" as their second best player in '09 and '10?


odom? never even ONCE made the allstar team. never even ONCE was an all nba player. never even ONCE averaged over 20ppg.
What does that have to do with the player he was in 2009 and 2010 in his role? What other contenders in '09 and '10 had a better third option other than the Celtics? Odom fit that team and that system almost perfectly.


ariza? his career ended the minute he left LA. kobe got him a huge contract and now hes getting bounced around the league. average player at best
And what does any of that have to do with how he played in 2009? In the playoffs he averaged 11-4-2-2, shot 50% from the floor, and 48% from three. Not bad production for the #4 option on a team. Was he not better than Pietrus and Rafer Alston in the 2010 Finals?



kobe won without another hall of famer. TWICE... only guy to ever do it multiple times
And who else was going to win with another HOFer in '09 and '10 other than the Celtics? And the Celtics don't even really count in '09. What teams in the West did Kobe and the Lakers have to go through with multiple HOFers?

[KG215]

KG215, I agree with everything you said...with one caveat.

In relation to other NBA champions, the 2009 and 2010 Lakers were pretty bare. The majority of the champions of the 80s, 90s, and some of the new millennium like the 2005 Spurs, 2008 Celtics, and now 2012 Heat, had a larger scale of dependency from their overall roster.

I agree and, if you put those Lakers teams up against the teams you mentioned, there's a very good chance they don't win a championship. Griff and other Kobe stans like to make it seem like Kobe overcame some insurmountable odds to win it all in '09 and '10 when they were the favorites in every playoff series aside from MAYBE the 2010 Finals. And if they weren't the favorites against Boston in '10, they might've been very slight underdogs.

The Celtics in '10 were a very good team but, for a team that was already considered old and past their prime in 2008, they were even older and further past their prime in 2010, and Garnett still wasn't the same player he was in 2008.

It's Griff's inability and/or refusal to not put anything into context that annoys me. This particular argument isn't much different than saying "Shaq didn't/couldn't win a championship" until he had Kobe. Which, on the surface, is factually correct if you don't put anything into context.

[talkingconch]

and that's all they'll do, compete

[kennethgriffin]

I agree and, if you put those Lakers teams up against the teams you mentioned, there's a very good chance they don't win a championship. Griff and other Kobe stans like to make it seem like Kobe overcame some insurmountable odds to win it all in '09 and '10. The Celtics in '10 were a very good team but, for a team that was already considered old and past their prime in 2008, they were even older and further past their prime in 2010, and Garnett still wasn't the same player he was in 2008.

It's Griff's inability and/or refusal to not put anything into context that annoys me. This particular argument isn't much different than saying "Shaq didn't/couldn't win a championship" until he had Kobe. Which, on the surface, is factually correct if you don't put anything into context.


its not kobes fault lebron choked two 60+ win teams away



and as for the 2010 celtics... they were deaper or as deap as any stacked legendary championship team in history AND KOBE STILL BEAT THEM while averaging 30/7/5 in the finals



and kobe had to eliminate the jazz with OKUR, BOOZER, KIRILENKO, MILLSAP and DERON


then kobe had to eliminate the the rockets with BATTIER, YAO, SCOLA, and ARTEST IN HIS PRIME

then kobe had to eliminate the nuggets with CARMELO, BILLUPS, MARTIN, and SMITH

then kobe had to eliminate the magic with GORTAT, HOWARD, LEWIS, NELSON, and TURKOGLU





and in 2010


kobe had to eliminate the OKC thunder with DURANT, GREEN, IBAKA, WESTBROOK and HARDEN


then kobe had to eliminate the jazz with OKUR, BOOZER, KIRILENKO, MILLSAP and DERON

then kobe had to eliminate the suns with BARBOSA, DRAGIC, FRYE, HILL, LOPEZ, NASH, RICHARDSON and STOUDEMIRE

then kobe had to eliminate celtics with RAY, TONY, DAVIS, GARNETT, HOUSE, PIERCE, NATE, RONDO, and RASHEED




sorry kgFu*ckhead .... whether you like it or not ... KOBE beat allot of deap teams. you're just in denial cause your pu*ssy is so fragile it breaks every time kobes name is mentioned. get a grip on reality bro

[Jacks3]

why wouldn't i? he didn't have that much help in comparison to other championship teams throughout history


gasol? a few allstar games off the bench. 0-12 playoff record as lead dog. a couple of third team all nba's ( only way he makes hall of fame is because of some silver medals and a gold in a meaningless euro competition )

not exactly your typical championship 2nd leading man. most are usually sure shot hall of famers and make a ton of all nba teams/allstar games .



Bynum? barely even played. 6ppg in 2009 and 8ppg in 2010. he sat most of the 2nd half every game in the playoffs


fisher? worst starting PG in the nba. no defense and hes lucky kobe took care of the play making responsibilities or his career would have ended a long time ago

odom? never even ONCE made the allstar team. never even ONCE was an all nba player. never even ONCE averaged over 20ppg.


ariza? his career ended the minute he left LA. kobe got him a huge contract and now hes getting bounced around the league. average player at best


artest? worst outside shooter in the nba. absolute liability on offense ever since he got to LA. mainly known for defense and he was already old by the time he got there.



after that... who are we lookin at? sasha? walton? farmar? probably the worst championship bench in nba history




kobe won without another hall of famer. TWICE... only guy to ever do it multiple times


gasol shouldnt make the hall. but even if he does. its still not a deap team compared to other teams that won titles
Very true.

Those teams won because Kobe had one of the greatest playoff stretches in history.

From 08-10 he averaged 30/6/6/2/57% TS with 43 30+ point games and 7 40+ point games and multiple legendary series. :bowdown:

[BlackVVaves]

its not kobes fault lebron choked two 60+ win teams away



and as for the 2010 celtics... they were deaper or as deap as any stacked legendary championship team in history AND KOBE STILL BEAT THEM while averaging 30/7/5 in the finals



and kobe had to eliminate the jazz with OKUR, BOOZER, KIRILENKO, MILLSAP and DERON


then kobe had to eliminate the the rockets with BATTIER, YAO, SCOLA, and ARTEST IN HIS PRIME

then kobe had to eliminate the nuggets with CARMELO, BILLUPS, MARTIN, and SMITH

then kobe had to eliminate the magic with GORTAT, HOWARD, LEWIS, NELSON, and TURKOGLU





and in 2010


kobe had to eliminate the OKC thunder with DURANT, GREEN, IBAKA, WESTBROOK and HARDEN


then kobe had to eliminate the jazz with OKUR, BOOZER, KIRILENKO, MILLSAP and DERON

then kobe had to eliminate the suns with BARBOSA, DRAGIC, FRYE, HILL, LOPEZ, NASH, RICHARDSON and STOUDEMIRE

then kobe had to eliminate celtics with RAY, TONY, DAVIS, GARNETT, HOUSE, PIERCE, NATE, RONDO, and RASHEED




sorry kgFu*ckhead .... whether you like it or not ... KOBE beat allot of deap teams. you're just in denial cause your pu*ssy is so fragile it breaks every time kobes name is mentioned. get a grip on reality bro

Chill out dude.

[BlackVVaves]

I agree and, if you put those Lakers teams up against the teams you mentioned, there's a very good chance they don't win a championship. Griff and other Kobe stans like to make it seem like Kobe overcame some insurmountable odds to win it all in '09 and '10 when they were the favorites in every playoff series aside from MAYBE the 2010 Finals. And if they weren't the favorites against Boston in '10, they might've been very slight underdogs.

The Celtics in '10 were a very good team but, for a team that was already considered old and past their prime in 2008, they were even older and further past their prime in 2010, and Garnett still wasn't the same player he was in 2008.

It's Griff's inability and/or refusal to not put anything into context that annoys me. This particular argument isn't much different than saying "Shaq didn't/couldn't win a championship" until he had Kobe. Which, on the surface, is factually correct if you don't put anything into context.

Yea I agree with you. Griffey and his stanhood logic certainly takes facts and warps them for his own Kobe-riden agenda.

Like everything in this world, you must always observe the context surrounding a situation, to effectively adhere to the truth. In this case, it's not to take away anything from Kobe, as he was brilliant overall in those years, but to prevent the misconception that stans would like perpetuate, which is that Kobe had ZERO help and is a god among men.

[kennethgriffin]

Yea I agree with you. Griffey and his stanhood logic certainly takes facts and warps them for his own Kobe-riden agenda.

Like everything in this world, you must always observe the context surrounding a situation, to effectively adhere to the truth. In this case, it's not to take away anything from Kobe, as he was brilliant overall in those years, but to prevent the misconception that stans would like perpetuate, which is that Kobe had ZERO help and is a god among men.


who said kobe had zero help? but you did get one thing right..he is a god among men


i just said kobe had one of the 4 or 5 worst supporting casts in championship history.. then listed all the teams LA beat and every single one seemingly had more total past+current allstars playing at a high level

all he needed was a good 2nd option ( not great ) but good

and an average PG, SF and C with a crap bench other than a solid never been allstar 6th man in odom

[d.bball.guy]

He's too fat that he occupies 2 roster spots.

[KG215]

who said kobe had zero help? but you did get one thing right..he is a god among men


i just said kobe had one of the 4 or 5 worst supporting casts in championship history.. then listed all the teams LA beat and every single one seemingly had more total past+current allstars playing at a high level

all he needed was a good 2nd option ( not great ) but good

and an average PG, SF and C with a crap bench other than a solid never been allstar 6th man in odom


I'd go through those teams you listed and their players one by one and pick apart another one of your flawed arguments, but it's not worth my time. You'll find something else and, like BlackVVaves says, you'll warp information to make it look like factual inarguable information in order to prop Kobe up.

I like how in 2009 Artest was in his prime then, all of a sudden, in 2010 he was the worst 3P shooter in the NBA and a borderline scrub. If you can't see how ignorant 99.9% of your arguments are, then you need help or just need to take a vacation from message boards.

[SpecialQue]

I'm getting tired of people downplaying Gasol in those championship runs. If those back to back titles were due primarily to Kobe, then the following second-round knock outs also land squarely on Kobe's shoulders.

Kobe's the best player on the team, not a single person's denying that. However, there's absolutely no reason to downplay the undeniable importance of Gasol on those teams.

[UtahJazzFan88]

He's probably right, Clippers ARE deeper, but the Lakers have a better starting 5 by far.

[BlackVVaves]

I'm getting tired of people downplaying Gasol in those championship runs. If those back to back titles were due primarily to Kobe, then the following second-round knock outs also land squarely on Kobe's shoulders.

Kobe's the best player on the team, not a single person's denying that. However, there's absolutely no reason to downplay the undeniable importance of Gasol on those teams.

Hence the difference between a somewhat objective Lakers fan, and a spawn of Kobe stanhood.

[Clippersfan86]

He's probably right, Clippers ARE deeper, but the Lakers have a better starting 5 by far.

By far is a very strong statement. I'd say Clippers still have a top 5 starting 5 in the NBA.... and if Lakers are first the gap isn't big. Let's see how the two teams mesh and Clippers young players develop before making black and white claims. The same way I think that the Clippers depth advantage is being overstated here, I think the Lakers starting 5 advantage is being overstated.

[KG215]

I'm getting tired of people downplaying Gasol in those championship runs. If those back to back titles were due primarily to Kobe, then the following second-round knock outs also land squarely on Kobe's shoulders.

Kobe's the best player on the team, not a single person's denying that. However, there's absolutely no reason to downplay the undeniable importance of Gasol on those teams.

Thank you. And that's the difference between the Lakers and the other contenders or pseudo-contenders in '09 and '10. Kobe was the best or second best player in the league (I know some would argue he might've been 3rd after LeBron and Wade in '09) and Gasol was a top 10-12 player. Kobe's "only one other All-Star teammate" was a top 10-12 player while the only other All-Star for the other contenders weren't even top 25 players probably. Not sure where you'd rank Mo Williams, Chauncey Billups, Jameer Nelson, Hedo Turkoglu, etc.

How about this. After the Lakers traded for Gasol, they went 15-4 including a 10 game win streak and 11-1 start in the first 12 games. Then Gasol misses nine games and the Lakers go 5-4. He comes back for the final nine games of the season, and they go 7-2. Overall, with Gasol, the Lakers went 22-6, and 5-4 without Gasol to finish the regular season.

I'm not saying Kobe wasn't the best player on the team. He clearly was. But Griff and other Kobe stans (not Lakers fans) trying to downplay Gasol's significance is getting as old as people trying to say Gasol was the best player on those championships teams.

[kennethgriffin]

Hence the difference between a somewhat objective Lakers fan, and a spawn of Kobe stanhood.


2012 - is pau better than wade or bosh? no
2011 - is pau better than terry? yes
2008 - is pau better than KG or allen? no
2007 - is pau better than duncan or parker or ginobili ? no
2006 - is pau better than shaq ? no
2005 - is pau better than parker or ginobili? no
2004 - is pau better than wallace? arguable
2003 - is pau better than parker? a young parker.. probably
2002 - is pau better than kobe? no
2001 - is pau better than kobe? no
2000 - is pau better than kobe? no
1999 - is pau better than robinson? no
1998 - is pau better than pippen or rodman? no
1997 - is pau better than pippen or rodman? no
1996 - is pau better than pippen or rodman? no
1995 - is pau better than drexler? no
1994 - is pau better than maxwell? yes
1993 - is pau better than pippen? no
1992 - is pau better than pippen? no
1991 - is pau better than pippen? no
1990 - is pau better than isaih or dumars? no
1989 - is pau better than isaih or dumars? no
1988 - is pau better than kareem or worthy? no
1987 - is pau better than kareem or worthy? no
1986 - is pau better than mchale or parish? no
1985 - is pau better than kareem or worthy? no
1984 - is pau better than mchale or parish? no
1983 - is pau better than erving? no
1982 - is pau better than wilkes or magic? no
1981 - is pau better than parish or maxwell? no
1980 - is pau better than wilkes or magic? no



i can go on and on and on till the beginning of the nba.. 99% of the time there was a better 2nd best player than pau on a championship team

wilt to west/goodrich

russell to cousy, havlicek and more

its never ending

[KG215]

2012 - is pau better than wade or bosh? no
2011 - is pau better than terry? yes
2008 - is pau better than KG or allen? no
2007 - is pau better than duncan or parker or ginobili ? no
2006 - is pau better than shaq ? no
2005 - is pau better than parker or ginobili? no
2004 - is pau better than wallace? arguable
2003 - is pau better than parker? a young parker.. probably
2002 - is pau better than kobe? no
2001 - is pau better than kobe? no
2000 - is pau better than kobe? no
1999 - is pau better than robinson? no
1998 - is pau better than pippen or rodman? no
1997 - is pau better than pippen or rodman? no
1996 - is pau better than pippen or rodman? no
1995 - is pau better than drexler? no
1994 - is pau better than maxwell? yes
1993 - is pau better than pippen? no
1992 - is pau better than pippen? no
1991 - is pau better than pippen? no
1990 - is pau better than isaih or dumars? no
1989 - is pau better than isaih or dumars? no
1988 - is pau better than kareem or worthy? no
1987 - is pau better than kareem or worthy? no
1986 - is pau better than mchale or parish? no
1985 - is pau better than kareem or worthy? no
1984 - is pau better than mchale or parish? no
1983 - is pau better than erving? no
1982 - is pau better than wilkes or magic? no
1981 - is pau better than parish or maxwell? no
1980 - is pau better than wilkes or magic? no



i can go on and on and on till the beginning of the nba.. 99% of the time there was a better 2nd best player than pau on a championship team

wilt to west/goodrich

russell to cousy, havlicek and more

its never ending

You're still completely ignoring the fact that Pau was the best #2 option in '09 and '10. How many of those teams you listed did the 2009 and 2010 Lakers have to beat to win a championship? Stop comparing Kobe's championship teams in '09 and '10 to other championship teams to make it seem like he went through a more difficult path than they did to win it all.

Instead, look at the 2009 and 2010 seasons on their own. Entering the playoffs, what team in the West was considered better than the Lakers. Other than the Cavs, what team in the East was considered as good or better than the Lakers? Same thing in 2010. What team in the West was considered better? And, once again, only the Cavs were probably considered bigger favorites in the entire league but, the 1-2 punch of Kobe and Gasol was >>>>> than LeBron and Mo Williams.

[Heavincent]

I agree and, if you put those Lakers teams up against the teams you mentioned, there's a very good chance they don't win a championship. Griff and other Kobe stans like to make it seem like Kobe overcame some insurmountable odds to win it all in '09 and '10 when they were the favorites in every playoff series aside from MAYBE the 2010 Finals. And if they weren't the favorites against Boston in '10, they might've been very slight underdogs.

The Celtics in '10 were a very good team but, for a team that was already considered old and past their prime in 2008, they were even older and further past their prime in 2010, and Garnett still wasn't the same player he was in 2008.

It's Griff's inability and/or refusal to not put anything into context that annoys me. This particular argument isn't much different than saying "Shaq didn't/couldn't win a championship" until he had Kobe. Which, on the surface, is factually correct if you don't put anything into context.

But Kobe was the reason as to why they were always the favorites.

[KG215]

But Kobe was the reason as to why they were always the favorites.

No, the combination of Kobe and Gasol was the reason. Kobe was the biggest reason but not the only reason. What happens if you switch Gasol and Mo Williams in '09 and '10? Or Gasol and Jameer Nelson? What about Gasol and Billups or Gasol and Parker? Are the Lakers still as big of or even the favorites?

Look, I'm not trying to downplay Kobe's significance. Look at some of the series he had (especially in 2009) and you're looking at a level of play from a SG only bettered by Michael Jordan in my opinion.

[#1SportsFan86]

I'm getting tired of people downplaying Gasol in those championship runs. If those back to back titles were due primarily to Kobe, then the following second-round knock outs also land squarely on Kobe's shoulders.

Kobe's the best player on the team, not a single person's denying that. However, there's absolutely no reason to downplay the undeniable importance of Gasol on those teams.

:applause:

[BlackVVaves]

No, the combination of Kobe and Gasol was the reason. Kobe was the biggest reason but not the only reason. What happens if you switch Gasol and Mo Williams in '09 and '10? Or Gasol and Jameer Nelson? What about Gasol and Billups or Gasol and Parker? Are the Lakers still as big of or even the favorites?

Look, I'm not trying to downplay Kobe's significance. Look at some of the series he had (especially in 2009) and you're looking at a level of play from a SG only bettered by Michael Jordan in my opinion.

This, this, and this.

[LAClipsFan33]

F*ck Lamar Odom

[Dictator]

When did Lebron-Mo or Dwight-Jameer ever win a ring together?

[Jacks3]

Pau before Bryant:

1 All-Star team
0 MVP votes
0 All-NBA teams
Not even considered a top 20 player
Swept in PS three straight years
Lead team to lottery multiple times

:durantunimpressed:

[KG215]

And predictably so, Griff's legion of fellow Kobe stan's come to his aid with more flawless stan-like logic.

[SpecialQue]

Pau before Bryant:

1 All-Star team
0 MVP votes
0 All-NBA teams
Not even considered a top 20 player
Swept in PS three straight years
Lead team to lottery multiple times

:durantunimpressed:

Bryant after Shaq and before Gasol:

Missed the playoffs.
Knocked out in first round.
Knocked out in first round.

But hey...81 points!!!!!!

I love Kobe, but can we please cut the shit here? No, Pau wouldn't have won shit without Kobe, but let's stop pretending that Kobe was leading his team to anything better than playoff fodder before Gasol came along.

Jesus Christ, am I only one of a handful of Laker fans here who still respects what Gasol brought and continues to bring to this team?

[Jacks3]

It's perfectly sound logic. Pau before Bryant was nothing more than a borderline all-star. That's the truth. There was nothing "stacked" about the 08-10 teams.

Deal with it.

[KG215]

Bryant after Shaq and before Gasol:

Missed the playoffs.
Knocked out in first round.
Knocked out in first round.

But hey...81 points!!!!!!

I love Kobe, but can we please cut the shit here? No, Pau wouldn't have won shit without Kobe, but let's stop pretending that Kobe was leading his team to anything better than playoff fodder before Gasol came along.

Jesus Christ, am I only one of a handful of Laker fans here who still respects what Gasol brought and continues to bring to this team?

Well, to be fair, you're not arguing with true Laker fans. You're arguing with Kobe fanboys pretending to be Laker fans.

[red1]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to KG215 again.


Odom is right. Kobe, gasol> cp3, griffin. After that it's all clippers.

LA's main weakness was their shitty bench, and one of their main strengths (coaching) isn't included when measuring the depth of a roster.

[Jacks3]

Kobe before Pau---best player in the world.

Pau before Bryant---borderline all-star.

not comparable.

[daily]

Jesus Christ, am I only one of a handful of Laker fans here who still respects what Gasol brought and continues to bring to this team?

No, real Laker fans know what Gasol brought to the Lakers.

Kobe fans are not worth arguing with, they'd knock down anyone not named Kobe, by and large most Kobe fans are idiots, There's some Laker fans that need Gasol as a scapegoat because they can't admit the team as a unit fell short last year, these are usually the same people that whined and cried about Fisher until he was gone then they picked on Gasol.

Most real Lakers fans that know the team, it's history and everyone on the squads place in Laker history love and appreciate Gasol.

[Jacks3]

Well, to be fair, you're not arguing with true Laker fans. You're arguing with Kobe fanboys pretending to be Laker fans.
Pointing out facts is being a fanboy? Wow.

[Jacks3]

Jesus Christ, am I only one of a handful of Laker fans here who still respects what Gasol brought and continues to bring to this team?
I respect Pau. Its just annoying how the Kobe detractors overrate the shit out of him for their obvious agenda. He was nowhere near as good or as valuable as Bryant from 08-10.

that's just the truth.

[Jacks3]

Kobe fans are not worth arguing with, they'd knock down anyone not named Kobe, by and large most Kobe fans are idiots,
Because generalizing a entire fanbase is so smart. Dumass. :lol

[KG215]

When did Lebron-Mo or Dwight-Jameer ever win a ring together?

Not even close to the point, but thanks for letting me know you either have the reading comprehension of a 5th grader or just completely ignored my posts.

In 2009, the "contenders" were the Lakers, Cavs, Magic, and who else? Maybe the Spurs? Sorta kinda but not really. The Celtics would've been if Garnett wasn't hurt but they were eliminated from that group after it was announced he would miss the playoffs.

I forgot Rashard Lewis made the All-Star team in 2009, so technically the Magic had three All-Stars; but was Rashard Lewis really that much better or impactful to Orlando's playoff run than Odom? Anyway, Howard's other "All-Star" in 2009 was Jameer Nelson and Rashard Lewis. I shouldn't have to explain to you the gap between Jameer Nelson and Pau Gasol in terms of talent/ability and impact.

The only other All-Star for the Cavs was Mo Williams who was an injury replacement for Jameer Nelson. And, again, I shouldn't have to explain the gap between Gasol an Mo Williams in terms of ability/talent and impact.

If Griff is going to keep saying "Kobe won championships with only one other All-Star and no other HOFers in 2009 and 2010" then I'm going to keep pointing out that the other contenders only had "one other All-Star and no other HOFers." And hell, Pau Gasol will come 1,000x closer to sniffing the HOF than Jameer Nelson, Rashard Lewis, and Mo Williams. He should get into the HOF eventually to be honest.

[KG215]

Pointing out facts is being a fanboy? Wow.

No, it's the way you're presenting the facts.

1. I'm not trying to say Gasol was as valuable or more valuable than Kobe in 2009 or 2010. I've never argued that and I've never been one of those idiots that says "Gasol carried Kobe in the playoffs."

2. How you're presenting that "fact" is no different than Griff or someone else saying "Fact: Shaq didn't win a championship until he got Kobe" in trying to prove Kobe is better than Shaq.

3. What Gasol accomplished before being traded to the Lakers doesn't and shouldn't detract from the player he was in LA in 2009 and 2010. He was never suited to be a #1 option on a team intending to make deep playoff runs year after year. He was very well suited to be a #2 option, though, and he showed that. He flourished in that role and helped turn the Lakers into a championship caliber team.

It's not a coincidence that the Lakers in 2006 and 2007 were 1st round playoff fodder and turned into legit championship contenders in 2008. Before they traded for Gasol in 2008, did you or anyone else honestly think they'd do any better than the 1st or 2nd round in the playoffs?

[longtime lurker]

Bryant after Shaq and before Gasol:

Missed the playoffs.
Knocked out in first round.
Knocked out in first round.

But hey...81 points!!!!!!

I love Kobe, but can we please cut the shit here? No, Pau wouldn't have won shit without Kobe, but let's stop pretending that Kobe was leading his team to anything better than playoff fodder before Gasol came along.

Jesus Christ, am I only one of a handful of Laker fans here who still respects what Gasol brought and continues to bring to this team?

Every Lakers fan respects what Pau brought to the team. The problem is the haters that want to claim that Gasol single handidly led the team to titles in an effort to detract from Kobe. Every fan knows no Pau no title, but lets not make things bigger than it is.

[Jacks3]

Well, they were the #1 seed with one of the hardest schedules in the league in 2008 before the trade so....They could have very easily been at least in the WCF that year assuming Bynum stays healthy.

As for 2006 and 2007, of course they weren't winning anything with a supporting cast of Odom/Walton/Luke/Mihm/Cook/Smush Parker in the West.

They massively overachieved during those seasons anyway. 2006 they won 46 games and had the 7th best SRS in the league. And were a rebound away from the 2nd-round and potentially a WCF berth.

2007 they were 27-13 and well on their to 50+ wins before injuries completely decimated their season.

So it's not as simple as Pau being the difference between the 1st round and Championship like u seem to be implying.

But I agree with your general point. He certainly played well in 2009 and 2010. Now even the Kobe haters would stop overrating the crap out of him...we'd have no problem.

[KG215]

Every Lakers fan respects what Pau brought to the team. The problem is the haters that want to claim that Gasol single handidly led the team to titles in an effort to detract from Kobe. Every fan knows no Pau no title, but lets not make things bigger than it is.
Who in this thread is doing that? Who's saying Gasol single-handedly led the Lakers to those championships?

[DatAsh]

It's perfectly sound logic. Pau before Bryant was nothing more than a borderline all-star. That's the truth. There was nothing "stacked" about the 08-10 teams.

Deal with it.

From the outside looking in, it appears that your missing his point. I think he agrees that they are indeed some of the least stacked teams to ever win a championship, he's just pointing out the fact that they didn't really have to go through the same caliber of teams that other more "stacked" championship teams had to go through.

Do you really see the 09' 10' Lakers winning anything in the 80s or 90s? I don't.

[kennethgriffin]

jesus christ ENOUGH already

who the hell ever said kobe didnt need pau?

who the hell ever said anyone can win on their own!?

pau was an allstar rightfully so. he was great. the lakers needed him.





all i ever said was pau is the 4th or 5th to last rated 2nd option in championship history. and kobe won possibly 2 titles without another hall of fame player next to him


what about that makes it look like he wasnt good? give kobe a solid 2nd option that averages 17-18ppg and he will win a title with him

thats it.... thats all


what about THIS makes me a hater or making sh*t up?

he was ranked like 94th best player all time by SLAMs top 500 or something... thats not exactly greatness.


YES kobe needed PAU



does that take away from the fact that kobe needed less help than your average finals mvp?

the ONLY guys who can even argue to having a lower rated 2nd option are

- Hakeem once
- dirk once
- barry once
- walton once


thats it

[DatAsh]

all i ever said was pau is the 4th or 5th to last rated 2nd option in championship history. and kobe won possibly 2 titles without another hall of fame player next to him


Not that I disagree with you here, but that's an enormous difference.

[Jacks3]

From the outside looking in, it appears that your missing his point. \
\
No, not really. I understand his point perfectly.

It still doesn't change the fact that there was nothing "stacked" about those Laker teams, even relative to league average.

In 2008 the Nuggets, Jazz, and Spurs had similar amount of talent. The Celtics were far more stacked.

In 2009 the Jazz, Nuggets, and Magic had similar teams in terms of talent.

2010 Celtics were MORE talented. 2010 Suns were nearly equal.

The Lakers won those series because they had a top 2 player in the world putting up one of the greatest playoff stretches in history, not because they were "stacked". He had a very solid supporting cast and that's it.

[Dictator]

Not even close to the point, but thanks for letting me know you either have the reading comprehension of a 5th grader or just completely ignored my posts.

In 2009, the "contenders" were the Lakers, Cavs, Magic, and who else? Maybe the Spurs? Sorta kinda but not really. The Celtics would've been if Garnett wasn't hurt but they were eliminated from that group after it was announced he would miss the playoffs.

I forgot Rashard Lewis made the All-Star team in 2009, so technically the Magic had three All-Stars; but was Rashard Lewis really that much better or impactful to Orlando's playoff run than Odom? Anyway, Howard's other "All-Star" in 2009 was Jameer Nelson and Rashard Lewis. I shouldn't have to explain to you the gap between Jameer Nelson and Pau Gasol in terms of talent/ability and impact.

The only other All-Star for the Cavs was Mo Williams who was an injury replacement for Jameer Nelson. And, again, I shouldn't have to explain the gap between Gasol an Mo Williams in terms of ability/talent and impact.

If Griff is going to keep saying "Kobe won championships with only one other All-Star and no other HOFers in 2009 and 2010" then I'm going to keep pointing out that the other contenders only had "one other All-Star and no other HOFers." And hell, Pau Gasol will come 1,000x closer to sniffing the HOF than Jameer Nelson, Rashard Lewis, and Mo Williams. He should get into the HOF eventually to be honest.


You're still wrong. If you're talking about championships teams why bring up teams that never won a championship? Hence the term "championship" team.
And YES Pau was great but why act like Kobe played with MJ?

Calm down. The NBA neither affects your life nor mine so just chill.

[KG215]

jesus christ ENOUGH already

who the hell ever said kobe didnt need pau?

who the hell ever said anyone can win on their own!?

pau was an allstar rightfully so. he was great. the lakers needed him.





all i ever said was pau is the 4th or 5th to last rated 2nd option in championship history. and kobe won possibly 2 titles without another hall of fame player next to him


what about that makes it look like he wasnt good? give kobe a solid 2nd option that averages 17-18ppg and he will win a title with him

thats it.... thats all


what about THIS makes me a hater or making sh*t up?

he was ranked like 94th best player all time by SLAMs top 500 or something... thats not exactly greatness.


YES kobe needed PAU



does that take away from the fact that kobe needed less help than your average finals mvp?

the ONLY guys who can even argue to having a lower rated 2nd option are

- Hakeem once
- dirk once
- barry once
- walton once


thats it

It's because, as usual, you are doing this to prop Kobe up. You're trying to compare his teams to other championship teams to make it sound lke "kobe winning with only one other All-Star" makes his championship run in those specific seasons more impressive than what all but a handful of other #1 options did to win a championship.

You try to keep your base arguments simple and pass them off as indisputable fact. Then, when someone takes your main argument, breaks it down, and puts into context (as any reasonable fan should when arguing something) you start backtracking and/or running in circles

This particular argument isn't any different than your "Kobe>>>>>>>Shaq and it's not even close" thread with "Shaq didn't win a championship until he got Kobe" as your main argument.

Is context something you don't understand, or is it just something you choose to ignore because it makes pushing your Kobe agenda easier?

[Jacks3]

Hilarious how you're always so willing to call out Kobe fans, but won't do the same when a Kobe haters says something ridiculous...like calling Pau the best player on the 2010 Lakers or whatever. Real unbiased. :oldlol:

[KG215]

You're still wrong. If you're talking about championships teams why bring up teams that never won a championship? Hence the term "championship" team.
And YES Pau was great but why act like Kobe played with MJ?

Calm down. The NBA neither affects your life nor mine so just chill.

Because I'm trying to put Kobe's main competition and/or the other main competitors in 2009 and 2010 in perspective. If I'm going to argue that Kobe's teams in 2009 and 2010 were the biggest or second biggest favorites in 2009 and 2010 then it only helps my argument to bring up the other main championship contenders those seasons. It's not irrelevant information.

[longtime lurker]

Who in this thread is doing that? Who's saying Gasol single-handedly led the Lakers to those championships?

Oh it's been said more than enough on this site. Just give it some time and it will be said. So I don't understand your beef then? Objectively if you look at the Lakers from 08-10 they really aren't that stacked when you consider Andrew Bynum was rarely healthy. Pau was great but this team wasn't head and shoulders above their competition.

[KG215]

Hilarious how you're always so willing to call out Kobe fans, but won't do the same when a Kobe haters says something ridiculous...like calling Pau the best player on the 2010 Lakers or whatever. Real unbiased. :oldlol:

How do you know? I think I've personally ran across someone saying that about Gasol maybe 2 or 3 times the last month or two and other people had already called him on the stupidity of saying that. But, just for you, next time I see someone say "Gasol was the best player for the Lakers in 2009 and 2010" I'll call them out on their stupidity.

I have nothing against Kobe as a player. But these type statements by the Kobe stans that have infested ISH are far too common. For every "Gasol carried Kobe in '09 and '10" post there's 50 of these type posts by Kobe fans. And, 9 times out of 10, the people that say Gasol carried Kobe are some of the more obvious LeBron stans.

[KG215]

Oh it's been said more than enough on this site. Just give it some time and it will be said. So I don't understand your beef then? Objectively if you look at the Lakers from 08-10 they really aren't that stacked when you consider Andrew Bynum was rarely healthy. Pau was great but this team wasn't head and shoulders above their competition.

I agree, they weren't really head and shoulders above the competition, but even some of the most stacked championship teams in history weren't "head and shoulders" above their competition that year. That's why you need to look at their competition in those particular seasons instead of comparing how "stacked" a championship team in 20009 was compared to a championship team from 1996 or 1973.

[Jacks3]

. For every "Gasol carried Kobe in '09 and '10" post there's 50 of these type posts by Kobe fans. .
this is just so wrong. just simply not true... but whatever...

[RazorBaLade]

dont sau kobe only needs 2nd option who does 17 ppg tho. dont forget the boards and the fg. pau isnt just 17ppg

[KG215]

this is just so wrong. just simply not true... but whatever...

Ok, a 50 to 1 ratio was hyperbolic and over the top. 10 or 20 to 1 is more realistic.

[G-train]

So to summarise, it doent matter if they are 15 deep cos they dont have Kobe.
:banana:

[kennethgriffin]

It's because, as usual, you are doing this to prop Kobe up. You're trying to compare his teams to other championship teams to make it sound lke "kobe winning with only one other All-Star" makes his championship run in those specific seasons more impressive than what all but a handful of other #1 options did to win a championship.

You try to keep your base arguments simple and pass them off as indisputable fact. Then, when someone takes your main argument, breaks it down, and puts into context (as any reasonable fan should when arguing something) you start backtracking and/or running in circles

This particular argument isn't any different than your "Kobe>>>>>>>Shaq and it's not even close" thread with "Shaq didn't win a championship until he got Kobe" as your main argument.

Is context something you don't understand, or is it just something you choose to ignore because it makes pushing your Kobe agenda easier?


how does that make it false? it just means i'm using facts to show kobe didnt need a legendary side kick compared to most finals mvps throughout history


accept the truth. quit thinking just because something favors kobe that it must be false

[KG215]

how does that make it false? it just means i'm using facts to show kobe didnt need a legendary side kick compared to most finals mvps throughout history


accept the truth. quit thinking just because something favors kobe that it must be false

What you're saying on the surface isn't false but when you actually do a little bit of digging, you see the other main championship contenders in 2009 and 2010 didn't have a "legendary" sidekick for their best player either.

You're trying to make it sound like Kobe wouldn't have ever needed a "legendary" sidekick in any era to win a championship as his team's best player. It comes off as if you want people to believe that the 2008-2010 version of Kobe could've won a championship in any given year with Pau Gasol (or someone of equal skill and talent) as his sidekick.

And if you're not, and if I'm misunderstanding your posts, I apologize.

[Fiasco]

Scrodom was just telling the truth. Why is this such a big deal?

[qrich]

Well, of course they are. This Clipper bench is top 5 in the league but would probably be the best during those runs. Just the way the league has changed over the past few years.

[TheBigVeto]

LOL for anybody who believes this.
Odom is Lakers' agent. His mission is to infiltrate the Clippers and then destroy them from the inside.
He was successful in Dallas. He's gonna do it again.

[BlackVVaves]

Spurs and Nuggets were the deepest teams last year in the league. Guess what happened?

The Lakers and Thunder, whom only ran a 6-8 true rotation, beat those respective teams, because, as is usually the case in the post-season, their top 3 or 4 players were just more talented than the opposition's top 3 or 4 players.

Ultimately, it's likely the Clippers will have a very good season, where that depth is truly utilized. However, it's also likely they will only go as far as CP3, Griffin, and I guess Billups or Crawford (lol) will take them in the playoffs, in relation to the Kobe/Dwight/Nash, Durant/Westbrook/Harden, Parker/Ginobli/Duncan tandems of the West.

Depth is a great luxury to have, and certainly can be very useful if needs and problems arise in the playoffs. Ask the Miami Heat last year and Dallas Mavericks the year prior. However, I think depth shows it's usefulness more in the actual Finals than any other series; Dirk pretty much single handedly carried the Mavs through the playoffs into the Finals - as did Bron pretty much last year, and Kobe in 2009. Once you reach the Finals, you can use all the help you can get, but you have to actually reach the Finals in my opinion to truly gauge the benefit of a 10-12 deep roster.

[KG215]

Spurs and Nuggets were the deepest teams last year in the league. Guess what happened?

The Lakers and Thunder, whom only ran a 6-8 true rotation, beat those respective teams, because, as is usually the case in the post-season, their top 3 or 4 players were just more talented than the opposition's top 3 or 4 players.

Ultimately, it's likely the Clippers will have a very good season, where that depth is truly utilized. However, it's also likely they will only go as far as CP3, Griffin, and I guess Billups or Crawford (lol) will take them in the playoffs, in relation to the Kobe/Dwight/Nash, Durant/Westbrook/Harden, Parker/Ginobli/Duncan tandems of the West.

Depth is a great luxury to have, and certainly can be very useful if needs and problems arise in the playoffs. Ask the Miami Heat last year and Dallas Mavericks the year prior. However, I think depth shows it's usefulness more in the actual Finals than any other series; Dirk pretty much single handedly carried the Mavs through the playoffs into the Finals - as did Bron pretty much last year, and Kobe in 2009. Once you reach the Finals, you can use all the help you can get, but you have to actually reach the Finals in my opinion to truly gauge the benefit of a 10-12 deep roster.

The Pacers were another "deepest team in the league" last year too and you see where that got them. In the end, even without Bosh, it proved that LeBron and Wade simultaneously going off (after the Heat fell behind) was too much for the Pacers and all of their depth to overcome.

I'm not sure depth even means that much in the Finals, although I see where you're coming from. In this year's Finals the Heat did have guys like Battier, Chalmers, Miller, and Cole step-up at different times, but it wasn't necessarily because of their depth. Those guys were part of the usual 8-man rotation. They all just kinda stepped-up and played better as a group than they did in the earlier rounds. On the flipside, OKC's "other" players played worse in the Finals than they did in the other rounds.

Once you get to the playoffs star power usually takes over. You take one of the top 3-5 players in the league and give him another top 10-15 player, and maybe a third borderline All-Star caliber player, that has the potential to get you a long way if they're all healthy.

There's a reason at all levels of basketball (NBA, college, high school) you see tightened rotations in the postseason. A deep bench and the "luxury" of being able to play 10-11 guys a game can go a long way in the regular season in keeping players fresh and winning a lot of games, but you want your best players playing as much as possible in the most meaningful games, because their impact over the course of a game is greater. At that point in the season, when every win is crucial, you want to take 3-5 minutes away from your 9th and 10th best player so your 1st and 2nd best player can get those 6-10 extra minutes on the floor.

I do think the Clippers will prove to be a top 3-5 team in the West this year but that depth won't mean as much if they have to play someone like the Lakers or Thunder in the playoffs if CP3 and Griffin don't outplay Durant/Westbrook/Harden or Kobe/Howard/Nash/Gasol.

[COnDEMnED]

By far is a very strong statement. I'd say Clippers still have a top 5 starting 5 in the NBA.... and if Lakers are first the gap isn't big. Let's see how the two teams mesh and Clippers young players develop before making black and white claims. The same way I think that the Clippers depth advantage is being overstated here, I think the Lakers starting 5 advantage is being overstated.

In the past months have you not, yourself, used the "great clipper depth" as a tool to boost your team in comparison against the Lakers and other teams?
More than once if my memory serves correct. Would that not make you a non credible flip flop biased liar?

[CTulc]

Odom'a going deep into his 5th quarter-pound burger.

[TOUCH MY BODY]

Odom has gained quite a bit of weight as of late. Guess that's natural when your wife looks like a walking meatball :pimp:

[Clippersfan86]

In the past months have you not, yourself, used the "great clipper depth" as a tool to boost your team in comparison against the Lakers and other teams?
More than once if my memory serves correct. Would that not make you a non credible flip flop biased liar?

I'm not denying the Clippers have better depth than the Lakers and it's an advantage. I'm merely stating the same way it's not a HUGE advantage.... the Lakers don't have a HUGE advantage in the starting 5 like people are talking about.

[Lakers_Kobe_Fan]

I'm not denying the Clippers have better depth than the Lakers and it's an advantage. I'm merely stating the same way it's not a HUGE advantage.... the Lakers don't have a HUGE advantage in the starting 5 like people are talking about.

:biggums: :kobe: :yaohappy:

[coin24]

I'm not denying the Clippers have better depth than the Lakers and it's an advantage. I'm merely stating the same way it's not a HUGE advantage.... the Lakers don't have a HUGE advantage in the starting 5 like people are talking about.


WOW:facepalm :facepalm :facepalm

Usually you're not AS bad of a homer anymore... But damn, you just went full retard:facepalm :facepalm

[senelcoolidge]

90 posts for a Clippers thread and nearly every other Clippers thread has a decent amount of post. The Clippers are doing something right. The threatened haters are in full swing. This is going to be a fun season. Everyone expects the league to have the fix for the lakers and heat..don't be shocked if it doesn't happen.

[LakersReign]

90 posts for a Clippers thread and nearly every other Clippers thread has a decent amount of post. The Clippers are doing something right. The threatened haters are in full swing. This is going to be a fun season. Everyone expects the league to have the fix for the lakers and heat..don't be shocked if it doesn't happen.

Y'all said exactly the same thing last year. Excuse me while I........:sleeping

[#1SportsFan86]

90 posts for a Clippers thread and nearly every other Clippers thread has a decent amount of post. The Clippers are doing something right. The threatened haters are in full swing. This is going to be a fun season. Everyone expects the league to have the fix for the lakers and heat..don't be shocked if it doesn't happen.

Lebron or Kobe is gonna be in the Finals this season...the NBA is not gonna have a finals without either one of them in it.

[OmniStrife]

Not deep, THICK.

http://i.imgur.com/w3EJg.png

[BlackVVaves]

I'm not denying the Clippers have better depth than the Lakers and it's an advantage. I'm merely stating the same way it's not a HUGE advantage.... the Lakers don't have a HUGE advantage in the starting 5 like people are talking about.

Hmm. Though I follow your train of thought depicting the measureably short gap between the Lakers' starting 5 and other legit or fairly legit title contenders (I allowed this expansion to include the likes of the Clippers, Grizzlies, and whatever team will end up the third place fodder out in the East behind the Heat and Celtics), the object....and once again context...of the true pretenses of the team are escaping you, as they do with many individuals whom look at basketball as a names, paper, and stats sport (not saying you're one of those people, just that you share a common characteristic in sometimes forgetting); if healthy and properly integrated, there is no more versatile and potentially offensively dynamic while simultaneously proficient defensive team than the Lakers 5-some, except the exceptionally elite Miami Heat. While the Heat will dominate with speed and athleticism, the Lakers will look to strike methodically through strength and execution.

Will it actually happen? That depends on if the LakeShow can develop the type of on-court chemistry that transcends into flawlessly smooth operation, remain healthy, and play to each other's strengths. And even then, the Thunder and Heat will still lay in wait, with just as much potent production on at least one side, if not both sides of the ball. But, in terms of potential, in which ALL teams are being gauged on right now, since we haven't seen a lick of play from any team yet, the Lakers (again, based on potential and potential execution) hold a pretty decent gap from the other contending teams, not named Miami.

Unfortunately for LA, even with that accessible prowess, OKC still serves as a potentially bad match-up, even though the Lakers themselves match up good with the Heat, who conversely match up good against OKC. Like it's been stated already, if I had to take a formative guess I'd say Miami > OKC, but OKC > LAL, but LAL > Miami. It'll be interesting come April, May, and June to see which of these three had the bigger positive impact: execution, match-ups,
or talent.

[Thechosen1]

refs wont let the lakers lose even if they are supposed to, stop looking at basketball as a game and look at it as a business and you will understand how point less it is as a fan to root for any other team besides the heat thunder or lakers

[senelcoolidge]

refs wont let the lakers lose even if they are supposed to, stop looking at basketball as a game and look at it as a business and you will understand how point less it is as a fan to root for any other team besides the heat thunder or lakers

Well if that is the case than there no point in watching any NBA games. Championships are meaningless. If everything is in the fix, it's worthless. Nothing to brag about or be excited about it. It's garbage.

[D.J.]

The Clippers might be deeper with a better bench, but they also don't have 4 All-Stars in their starting 5 along with a former DPOY.

[Thechosen1]

Well if that is the case than there no point in watching any NBA games. Championships are meaningless. If everything is in the fix, it's worthless. Nothing to brag about or be excited about it. It's garbage.




there really isnt

[clipps]

The Clippers might be deeper with a better bench, but they also don't have 4 All-Stars in their starting 5 along with a former DPOY.

Kinda like the 2011 finals. The Heat had the star power but the Mavs were deeper and more balanced. I wonder what kind of excuses will be made when the Lakers get knocked out of the playoffs again.

[Levity]

Kinda like the 2011 finals. The Heat had the star power but the Mavs were deeper and more balanced. I wonder what kind of excuses will be made when the Lakers get knocked out of the playoffs again.

This current laker team has a better bench than the heat had in 2011 as well as a more cohesive starting 5. So that analogy is a bit wasted.

[HorryIsMyMVP]

My only problem with the Clippers is that they are all bitch made flopping pieces of worthless shit.

[RazorBaLade]

refs wont let the lakers lose even if they are supposed to, stop looking at basketball as a game and look at it as a business and you will understand how point less it is as a fan to root for any other team besides the heat thunder or lakers

so why do the lakers lose more than half the time

[Clippersfan86]

The Clippers might be deeper with a better bench, but they also don't have 4 All-Stars in their starting 5 along with a former DPOY.

Neither do the Lakers. Nash hasn't been an all star for what 2 or 3 seasons? Gasol wasn't an all star last year due to better PF's in the west. Lakers have two current all stars, just like the Clippers. Same as it was last year. Not saying Lakers aren't more top heavy or the best starting 5 on paper because they are. Don't twist facts though.

[IGOTGAME]

Neither do the Lakers. Nash hasn't been an all star for what 2 or 3 seasons? Gasol wasn't an all star last year due to better PF's in the west. Lakers have two current all stars, just like the Clippers. Same as it was last year. Not saying Lakers aren't more top heavy or the best starting 5 on paper because they are. Don't twist facts though.

I agree with this. Lets not pretend the Lakers have 4 all stars. They do not.

[wakencdukest]

Kinda like the 2011 finals. The Heat had the star power but the Mavs were deeper and more balanced. I wonder what kind of excuses will be made when the Lakers get knocked out of the playoffs again.


No excuses will be made. There was no excuses last year. The Lakers played like shit, and got beat. I can see a lot of excuses being made if the Lakers win though, and it will be any thing from the refs to Stern favoring the Lakers. That shit happens every year.

[LakersReign]

No excuses will be made. There was no excuses last year. The Lakers played like shit, and got beat. I can see a lot of excuses being made if the Lakers win though, and it will be any thing from the refs to Stern favoring the Lakers. That shit happens every year.

This.

Some of them already started crying, immediately after the Howard trade. Real Laker fans have heard it all before, so we already know the routine:rolleyes:

[Zedja]

Neither do the Lakers. Nash hasn't been an all star for what 2 or 3 seasons? Gasol wasn't an all star last year due to better PF's in the west. Lakers have two current all stars, just like the Clippers. Same as it was last year. Not saying Lakers aren't more top heavy or the best starting 5 on paper because they are. Don't twist facts though.
Inb4NashKobeGasolHowardstartinASG

[SpecialQue]

Inb4NashKobeGasolHowardstartinASG

:lebronamazed: :lebronamazed: :lebronamazed: :lebronamazed: :lebronamazed: