Its Amazing How Overrated the 08 Celtics Get

[SilkkTheShocker]

I also see them in all-time list but they were far from world beaters in the playoffs.

Hawks- Got taken to 7 games by a sub .500 Atlanta team.
Cavs- Got taken to 7 games by a Cleveland team thats 2nd best player was Delonte West. Took a PJ Brown jumphot to survive.
Pistons- Beat a past prime Pistons team.
Lakers- Played an LA team without Bynum or healthy Ariza. Still took 6 games and rigged officiating in Boston to win.


Does anyone really think this team has a shot in hell of beating the 01 Lakers, 96 Bulls, etc.?

[Teanett]

Does anyone really think this team has a shot in hell of beating the 01 Lakers, 96 Bulls, etc.?

no chance.
there's a reason they only won once.
they were never as good as their reputation.

[red1]

no chance.
there's a reason they only won once.
they were never as good as their reputation.
kg's knee

[plUto or bUst]

kg's knee

Seriously, they were KG's knee injury and a bad 4th quarter away from being a dynasty.

[Teanett]

kg's knee
basically.
the "big 3" united 3 years past kg's and ray allen's prime.

[SpecialQue]

So this is a new thing that people are doing here?

[Nick Young]

Same as the early pistons. They won one flukey title because Karl Malone was injured. The east was so shit that they got the best record for a few years after, but they were never legit contenders.


08 Boston wins one flukey title when Ariza and Bynum were injured and now are on all time great lists, wtf:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

Don't forget the Powe-Whistle game, Leon Powe is suddenly given 16 freethrows on the same day he has a heartwarming halftime piece about him being homeless.

Don't forget the bittch Paul Pierce getting dragged away on a wheelchair then coming back 5 minutes later miraculously cured:facepalm

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Played down to their competition really. Only team in recent memory that could literally flick an on/off switch. They were THAT good (primarily on the defensive end).

[SilkkTheShocker]

kg's knee


Not buying the Celtics beating LA in 09 with KG. They really just weren't as amazing as people make them out to be. They also had a knack for blowing 3-2 series leads. Rivers is a good coach that gets the most out of his team. But the guy would be sitting between Bill Simmons and Magic Johnson on ESPN right now if it weren't for KG.

[red1]

Not buying the Celtics beating LA in 09 with KG. They really just weren't as amazing as people make them out to be. They also had a knack for blowing 3-2 series leads. Rivers is a good coach that gets the most out of his team. But the guy would be sitting between Bill Simmons and Magic Johnson on ESPN right now if it weren't for KG.
:no: It wasn't just 09, even in 2010 he wasn't fully recovered from his knee issues.

[SilkkTheShocker]

Seriously, they were KG's knee injury and a bad 4th quarter away from being a dynasty.

Meh, more excuses. Its no guarantee at all that 09 Celtics win the title with KG. The Perkins excuse is also weak. Perkins blows and isn't even all that good of a rebounder. The Celtics flat-out got outplayed in that 4th quater.

[STATUTORY]

RG is on point with this one

ppl always pretend that the celts were some dynasty team or something

they were just good defensive team that had a serendipitous run.

Defensive teams rarely repeat becuase their success is all based on effort and it's easy for effort to die down once they get their ring.

Celts are an easy out for any team in the playoffs, they living on reputation

[red1]

:facepalm

[SilkkTheShocker]

:no: It wasn't just 09, even in 2010 he wasn't fully recovered from his knee issues.


Neither was Bynum in 09 or 2010. And Kobe had a broken finger.

[Rooster]

Same as the early pistons. They won one flukey title because Karl Malone was injured. The east was so shit that they got the best record for a few years after, but they were never legit contenders.


08 Boston wins one flukey title when Ariza and Bynum were injured and now are on all time great lists, wtf:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

Don't forget the Powe-Whistle game, Leon Powe is suddenly given 16 freethrows on the same day he has a heartwarming halftime piece about him being homeless.

Don't forget the bittch Paul Pierce getting dragged away on a wheelchair then coming back 5 minutes later miraculously cured:facepalm

Paul Pierce in a wheelchair was like a movie. Drama Queen really pulled a great stunt in there. I can't believe someone from Inglewood can flail like a bitch and cry like a baby and came back as on OG. Stranger than fiction indeed.

[SilkkTheShocker]

Played down to their competition really. Only team in recent memory that could literally flick an on/off switch. They were THAT good (primarily on the defensive end).


You can make the same case for the Lakers playing down to the competition. And im obviously far from a Laker fan, but they probably 3-peat with Bynum and Ariza. People forget they had Vlad Radmonovic guarding Pierce for christ's sake.

[STATUTORY]

Paul Pierce in a wheelchair was like a movie. Drama Queen really pulled a great stunt in there. I can't believe someone from Inglewood can flail like a bitch and cry like a baby and came back as on OG. Stranger than fiction indeed.
http://cdn3.sbnation.com/imported_assets/625523/boston-celtics-paul-pierce-6080583_medium.jpg

[Nick Young]

Meh, more excuses. Its no guarantee at all that 09 Celtics win the title with KG. The Perkins excuse is also weak. Perkins blows and isn't even all that good of a rebounder. The Celtics flat-out got outplayed in that 4th quater.
Perkins out was a blessing in disguise. Rasheed played amazing that game, playing better D than Perk has ever played in his life while providing 3s+low post scoring. If Rasheed had played more in the series they possibly could have won another title.

[SilkkTheShocker]

Perkins out was a blessing in disguise. Rasheed played amazing that game, playing better D than Perk has ever played in his life while providing 3s+low post scoring. If Rasheed had played more in the series they possibly could have won another title.

This. The Perkins excuse is extremely weak. Sheed was beasting on defense all playoffs. He put a clinic on how to defend Howard in the ECF. For some reason people think if you don't score, you are all of a sudden a beast at defense :facepalm Perkins made his rep looking like a goon and having a few nice games defending Dwight. Thats really it. Aside from that, the guy brings nothing to the table at all. His defense gets talked about because he played next to one of the best defensive players ever. People didn't even know who the hell he was before the Big 3 formed.

[scm5]

Seriously, they were KG's knee injury and a bad 4th quarter away from being a dynasty.

That's like saying the Lakers in 08', were a healthy Bynum and Ariza from three-peating.

Or the Lakers in 08' were a game of keeping the starters in for an extended period of time in a "blowout" from three-peating.

The 09' and 10' Lakers are never regarded as "dominant" or a "dynasty" despite being to the Finals 3 years in a row and winning 2/3. We were a flawed team with an injury prone Center, a terribly inconsistent bench, and a reputation to allow opposing PG's to have career highs against.

It's ridiculous to regard the 08' Celtics as an all-time team when they struggled with bad teams, much like the Lakers did with Houston (without Yao).

All-Time Teams are the ones listed above. The Dynasty Bulls, the Dynasty Lakers, The Showtime Lakers, Bill Russell's Celtics, etc...

The 08' Celtics never showed the kind of dominance these teams were capable of.

[Bigsmoke]

i just think its ironic that Celtics fans always brag about taking the Heat to 7 games last year but never mention the fact that they took the Hawk to 7 games in their title run.


for the record, the Celtics were going to beat the Lakers with or without Bynum and Ariza.

-Ariza wasn't going to stop Pierce and Pierce already prove that he could torch Ariza with ease earlier that season
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200712300LAL.html
-Bynum would be a shot blocker but can be a blackhole and his post game wasnt as good as it is now. Perkins and KG can both lock him down back then.
-Gasol still soft
-Celtics were just more hungry and more physical and Bynum wouldnt have encurage the Lakers to do none of that.

[Whoah10115]

That Celtics team would have beaten the 01 Lakers.

[Derka]

Silkk can't sleep at night if he's not doing something to hate on the greatest franchise in NBA history.

KG's knee and four points away from a three-peat being carried by three guys past their primes. Please, tell me more about how overrated they were.

Its a shame that window has passed now, but c'est la vie.

[SilkkTheShocker]

That Celtics team would have beaten the 01 Lakers.


Yea, no.

Shaq would have wiped his ass with that frontcourt.

[Nick Young]

Silkk can't sleep at night if he's not doing something to hate on the greatest franchise in NBA history.

KG's knee and four points away from a three-peat being carried by three guys past their primes. Please, tell me more about how overrated they were.

Its a shame that window has passed now, but c'est la vie.
:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

Kobe played injured in 08. 09. 10. In 08 he had two broken fingers on his shooting hand.

Lakers are two Kobe fingers away from a threepeat vs the Celtics.

See what I did thur?:hammerhead: :hammerhead:

If KG is healthy in your hypothetical magic lala situation, then Ariza, Bynum and Kobe would be healthy too. If that's the case, Boston would be killed even with healthy KG.

[SilkkTheShocker]

Silkk can't sleep at night if he's not doing something to hate on the greatest franchise in NBA history.

KG's knee and four points away from a three-peat being carried by three guys past their primes. Please, tell me more about how overrated they were.

Its a shame that window has passed now, but c'est la vie.


Lakers are definitely the greatest NBA franchse. The Celtics did most of their damage when there was like 8 teams in the league. And please stop with all the hypothetical BS. They weren't close to a 3 peat at all.

[STATUTORY]

Silkk can't sleep at night if he's not doing something to hate on the greatest franchise in NBA history.

KG's knee and four points away from a three-peat being carried by three guys past their primes. Please, tell me more about how overrated they were.

Its a shame that window has passed now, but c'est la vie.

:roll: :roll: :roll: :facepalm

Boston patties are so delusional. the celtics had 2 good decades in their history and they are suppose to be greatest franchise in NBA history

[SpecialQue]

Lakers are definitely the greatest NBA franchse. The Celtics did most of their damage when there was like 8 teams in the league. And please stop with all the hypothetical BS. They weren't close to a 3 peat at all.

I'm all for talking shit about the Celtics, but this argument really needs to die NOW. Do people here really not understand how a talent pool works? You really think that fewer teams, with tougher competition just to get in, means that somehow the league is weaker? How does that even work when these same people think that too many teams means that the league is "watered down"?

So what is it? Too few teams means that the competition is weak, or too many teams means that the competition is weak? You can't have it both ways.

[Ne 1]

the greatest franchise in NBA history.


The Lakers.

[Legends66NBA7]

I'd lean towards the Lakers also as the greatest NBA franchise, but it's pretty close.

Boston clearly does have the greatest dynasty, though.

[albas89]

I also see them in all-time list but they were far from world beaters in the playoffs.

Hawks- Got taken to 7 games by a sub .500 Atlanta team.
Cavs- Got taken to 7 games by a Cleveland team thats 2nd best player was Delonte West. Took a PJ Brown jumphot to survive.
Pistons- Beat a past prime Pistons team.
Lakers- Played an LA team without Bynum or healthy Ariza. Still took 6 games and rigged officiating in Boston to win.


Does anyone really think this team has a shot in hell of beating the 01 Lakers, 96 Bulls, etc.?
The moment I read that, I stopped reading. When you get beaten by 40 in a closeout Finals game, there are no excuses, end of story. And if you're gonna call a Celtics-Lakers Finals matchup "rigged", then it must be the 2010 Finals. Whoever's not a Lakers' fan/ LeBron dickrider knows what I'm talking about...

I'm pretty sure with a healthy KG the Celtics were gonna 3peat, but other teams have always had injuries as well, it's part of the game so I'm gonna leave it at that.

The 08 Celtics were NOT overrated and I think that became pretty obvious next year when they started the season with 27-2 (NBA record). If anything, we're underrating this team cause we never saw their full potential after 1 year of bonding together and a championship.

[Derka]

:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

Kobe played injured in 08. 09. 10. In 08 he had two broken fingers on his shooting hand.

Lakers are two Kobe fingers away from a threepeat vs the Celtics.

See what I did thur?:hammerhead: :hammerhead:

If KG is healthy in your hypothetical magic lala situation, then Ariza, Bynum and Kobe would be healthy too. If that's the case, Boston would be killed even with healthy KG.

Kobe scored the shit out of the ball with those two broken fingers so...you know...lol @ you. That injury was nothing.

If KG's healthy in 2009 and the Lakers are fully healthy, the Lakers still don't beat the Celtics. In 2010 when this actually happened and the Celtics officially got old, they lost a game that was still winnable.

[fpliii]

silkk - I don't think they'd have much of a chance versus those two teams in particular (bad matchups), but they are IMO one of the top 10 teams in league history. That being said, the first two rounds of their playoff run were very underwhelming.

[Derka]

Lakers are definitely the greatest NBA franchse. The Celtics did most of their damage when there was like 8 teams in the league. And please stop with all the hypothetical BS. They weren't close to a 3 peat at all.

They were...ridiculously close to a three-peat. But keep hating, broski.

[scm5]

That Celtics team would have beaten the 01 Lakers.

Oh really?

Do you not remember how utterly dominant the 01' Lakers were?

They had one of the toughest roads to the Finals. The Blazers, Kings, and then Spurs. Swept all of them. They hit the Sixers, got cocky, lost a game, and then swept the Sixers.

There was no stopping either Shaq or Kobe that season.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/LAL/2001.html

Shaq: 30/15/3 with 2.4bpg on.555% FG%
Kobe: 29/7/6 with 1.6spg on .469 FG%

Portland's Drtg: 101.8
Sac's Drtg: 99.6
Spurs Drtg: 98.0
Sixers Drtg: 98.9

08' Boston Drtg: 98.9

Similarly good defensive teams, all swept by the Lakers. This is a post-season where Kobe and Shaq were both equally good, Kobe actually averaging more Win Shares in the playoffs than Shaq.

There is no way.

[Derka]

The Lakers.

An incredibly close #2.

[STATUTORY]

An incredibly close #2.
listen masshole, take your homer glasses off

lakers have won rings in EVERY decade. your team was irrelevant for long stretches of time.

vast majority of your championships came in an antiquated era. lakers are the premiere franchise both domestically and internationally. outside of new england, Celtics aren't even a draw.

[Legends66NBA7]

lakers have won rings in EVERY decade. your team was irrelevant for long stretches of time.

Neither the Lakers or Celtics won titles in the 90's.

Lakers didn't win a title in the 60's either.

[Rooster]

Kobe scored the shit out of the ball with those two broken fingers so...you know...lol @ you. That injury was nothing.

If KG's healthy in 2009 and the Lakers are fully healthy, the Lakers still don't beat the Celtics. In 2010 when this actually happened and the Celtics officially got old, they lost a game that was still winnable.

If Bynum was as healthy prior to that injury, Boston would have no change. That was like the explosive version of Bynum. Having said that we would probably never gotten Gasol either. But I prefer that healthy Bynum on that Celtics matchup.

[Ne 1]

the celtics had 2 good decades in their history and they are suppose to be greatest franchise in NBA history

The reason Boston fans claim the Celtics are the greatest franchisee in NBA history is only because they have the most championships in league history, which is only 1 more title than the Lakers have. You have to consider though that a large bulk of their championships came during the 60s. Since that era, they have won a total of 6 championships, while the Lakers have won 11.

Sure the Celtics dominated the raw, early, pioneering/developing stages of the NBA in the 50s/60s, I will give them that. However since then it has clearly been advantage Lakers. The Lakers are the premiere franchise in all of professional sports when it comes to success in the modern era. The Celtics were the the laughing stock of the NBA for a long time and just 6 years ago Celtic fans were chanting MVP! during a game in Boston for Kobe. Looking at before and after the modern era it's funny to think that before the start of the 80s you couldn't even have this argument. The Celtics were up 13-6 at the time. Now it's 17-16.

[scm5]

They were...ridiculously close to a three-peat. But keep hating, broski.

The Lakers were even more ridiculously close to a three-peat considering, you know... we went to 3 Finals in a row and actually repeated, a prerequisite to three-peating.

No one, not even the most ridiculous Laker fans, consider the 08-10' Lakers a dynasty or one of the most dominant teams in NBA history. No one says, "we were a healthy Bynum and Ariza away from being one of the most dominant teams in NBA history.".

We know that those championship teams were flawed teams that grinded it out. Bynum is an injury prone player. Pau was considered soft and didn't exactly strike fear into players hearts. Our PG defense, headed by Fisher, allowed career nights by opposing PG's nightly.

The Celtics were even further away from three-peating than the Lakers. On their best year, they were taken to 7 by two teams that had worse defensive ratings than their offensive ratings.

Hawks:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/ATL/2008.html

Cavs:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/CLE/2008.html

The 08' Celtics were far from dominant and far from three-peating. It's not even hate. It's truth.

[Nick Young]

Kobe scored the shit out of the ball with those two broken fingers so...you know...lol @ you. That injury was nothing.

If KG's healthy in 2009 and the Lakers are fully healthy, the Lakers still don't beat the Celtics. In 2010 when this actually happened and the Celtics officially got old, they lost a game that was still winnable.
Every other player in the league would sit out with 2 broken fingers on their shooting hand. It's a legit injury, Kobe's production was hampered, you can't deny it.

If you get to make Celtic injury excuses and proclaim dynasties, so does every other team in the league.

Lakers are healthy Bynum and healthy Kobe away from 4 titles in a row, according to your logic


IN 2010 Bynum was injured, needing fluid in his knee drained after every two games. If Bynum is at full health in 2010 it is a sweep, Perkins could only contain Bynum because he was hobbling on one knee, in the regular season that year Healthy Bynum was dominating KG+Perkins doubles.

[STATUTORY]

Neither the Lakers or Celtics won titles in the 90's.

Lakers didn't win a title in the 60's either.
69-70s season

99-00's season

[red1]

An incredibly close #2.
1. lakers
2. celtics






3. spurs
4. bulls

[hitmanyr2k]

Oh really?

Do you not remember how utterly dominant the 01' Lakers were?

They had one of the toughest roads to the Finals. The Blazers, Kings, and then Spurs. Swept all of them. They hit the Sixers, got cocky, lost a game, and then swept the Sixers.

There was no stopping either Shaq or Kobe that season.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/LAL/2001.html

Shaq: 30/15/3 with 2.4bpg on.555% FG%
Kobe: 29/7/6 with 1.6spg on .469 FG%

Portland's Drtg: 101.8
Sac's Drtg: 99.6
Spurs Drtg: 98.0
Sixers Drtg: 98.9

08' Boston Drtg: 98.9

Similarly good defensive teams, all swept by the Lakers. This is a post-season where Kobe and Shaq were both equally good, Kobe actually averaging more Win Shares in the playoffs than Shaq.

There is no way.


The Lakers never faced a quality East opponent in the Finals during their 3peat. It was one of the all-time weakest eras of the NBA. And when they did face a quality opponent in the Finals they got their asses busted. Who's to say a team like the '08 Celtics (who were far better than any other East opponent LA faced back then) wouldn't beat that '01 Lakers team in the Finals? It's not like LA was blowing out the Sixers in every game of the Finals.

[Glide2keva]

Teams Lakers beat in the Kobe era = great competition.

Teams Kobe lost to = overrated or some other excuse for Kobe.

[scm5]

An incredibly close #2.

No.

How do you argue against the Lakers aside from having more championships overall?

The Lakers have been relevant for almost the entire history of the NBA. The Celtics got the vast majority of championships through the Bill Russell Celtics, in a league of 9 teams.

Think about that, they competed with 9 teams for the championship back then, TOTAL. Not in their conference, not in the playoffs. TOTAL. That is the era in which they won 11 of their 17 championships. From one single team. In a league of 9 teams.

.....

The Lakers' distribution of championships is a result of Greatness throughout the history of the NBA. In nearly every era, the Lakers are relevant.

[SpecialQue]

The Lakers never faced a quality East opponent in the Finals during their 3peat. It was one of the all-time weakest eras of the NBA. And when they did face a quality opponent in the Finals they got their asses busted. Who's to say a team like the '08 Celtics (who were far better than any other East opponent LA faced back then) wouldn't beat that '01 Lakers team in the Finals? It's not like LA was blowing out the Sixers in every game of the Finals.

The best teams in the NBA during the threepeat were in the West.

The Lakers kicked those team's asses.

Your argument fails.

[Legends66NBA7]

69-70s season

99-00's season

Even if I were to use that angle, Lakers still didn't win 69-70. They lost to the Knicks.

[Ne 1]

I'd lean towards the Lakers also as the greatest NBA franchise, but it's pretty close.

Boston clearly does have the greatest dynasty, though.

Well if you want to include a time that nobody remembers, than the Celtics are more storied. But during my lifetime it isn't even close. I just don't know how people can brag about championships from the 1950s/1960s. Was anybody here alive to remember when the Celtics were beating the Syracuse Nationals, Philadelphia Warriors, Cincinnati Royals, and St. Louis Hawks?

Isn't bragging about championships won half a century ago the same thing Boston fans complain about when it comes to Yankees fans? All I know is that in all my years on this planet, the Celtics sucked for almost a third of them.

Between 1993 and 2001 the Celtics made the playoffs ONCE. That's 7 out of 8 seasons where they couldn't even finish in the top 8 of the Eastern Conference .

Between 1993 and 2007 the Celtics missed the playoffs 9 out of 14 times.

The Lakers have missed the playoffs only twice since 1976.

The Celtics went 20 years without a single championship from 1987-2007.

Since 1980 the Lakers have made it to the Finals 16 times and won 10 of them.

If you wanna go back to ancient NBA history the Celtics are more decorated. But if we're talking recent history then it's not even close.

[scm5]

The Lakers never faced a quality East opponent in the Finals during their 3peat. It was one of the all-time weakest eras of the NBA. And when they did face a quality opponent in the Finals they got their asses busted. Who's to say a team like the '08 Celtics (who were far better than any other East opponent LA faced back then) wouldn't beat that '01 Lakers team in the Finals? It's not like LA was blowing out the Sixers in every game of the Finals.

Wow, really?

Back then, people pretty much assumed that whoever came out of the West would win in the Finals. It's like if you take the Heat out of the East this season. New York miiiiiight be dangerous, but we're still unsure if they're going to be this dominant into the postseason. The West though? Tough competition all throughout the playoffs.

In fact, I would argue that the Lakers championships were amongst the most impressive in terms of quality of opponents throughout the playoffs. The West was incredible back then.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

The Lakers never faced a quality East opponent in the Finals during their 3peat. It was one of the all-time weakest eras of the NBA. And when they did face a quality opponent in the Finals they got their asses busted. Who's to say a team like the '08 Celtics (who were far better than any other East opponent LA faced back then) wouldn't beat that '01 Lakers team in the Finals? It's not like LA was blowing out the Sixers in every game of the Finals.

That and Kobe is known for his horrible play against quality DEFENSES. You get physical w/ him and he wilts. I could see Boston letting Shaq get his (guy was just unstoppable) and shutting down everyone else.

Ray and KG run amok out on the perimeter / high post.

[SilkkTheShocker]

Teams Lakers beat in the Kobe era = great competition.

Teams Kobe lost to = overrated or some other excuse for Kobe.

No one is really sticking up for Kobe. The point is that the 08 Celtics were overrated. I cringe everytime someone puts them in an all-time team list. I don't even think they beat the 05 or 07 Spurs. Let alone the 01 Lakers. Its also annoying to hear that excuse over missing a scrub like Perkins when LA was missing Bynum and Ariza (two better players than Perkins) in 2008. Boston won one title in 3 seasons, but they were "close to 3 peating" according to them :oldlol:

[hitmanyr2k]

The best teams in the NBA during the threepeat were in the West.

The Lakers kicked those team's asses.

Your argument fails.

Best teams in the west my ass. The Blazers in '01 were hardly the same team from '00. They made stupid acquisitions and messed up their team chemistry and their players were already old to begin with. The '01 Spurs were old and injured. Juwan Howard took out Derek Anderson in Round 2 so there went their only legit 2nd option. They had an old geriatric point guard in Terry Porter, a midget 6'2 SG in Antonio Daniels starting, and a SF playing through kidney disease :oldlol: . And don't get me started on their bench lol. Duncan was a one man show just like Iverson. And after the west playoffs the Finals (which should be the hardest round of all) was a freakin cakewalk. Weak ass era.

[SilkkTheShocker]

The Lakers never faced a quality East opponent in the Finals during their 3peat. It was one of the all-time weakest eras of the NBA. And when they did face a quality opponent in the Finals they got their asses busted. Who's to say a team like the '08 Celtics (who were far better than any other East opponent LA faced back then) wouldn't beat that '01 Lakers team in the Finals? It's not like LA was blowing out the Sixers in every game of the Finals.


So are we going to forget the fact the 01 Lakers demolished the Blazers, Kings, and Spurs on the way to the title? But its ok for Boston to play the sub .500 Hawks, Lebron and Delonte West, past-prime Detroit, or an injured Laker team, right?

[hitmanyr2k]

So are we going to forget the fact the 01 Lakers demolished the Blazers, Kings, and Spurs on the way to the title? But its ok for Boston to play the sub .500 Hawks, Lebron and Delonte West, past-prime Detroit, or an injured Laker team, right?

You're late. See my post above :oldlol:

[Nick Young]

That and Kobe is known for his horrible play against quality DEFENSES. You get physical w/ him and he wilts. I could see Boston letting Shaq get his (guy was just unstoppable) and shutting down everyone else.

Ray and KG run amok out on the perimeter / high post.
I see this 08 Boston team getting swept like the Jason Kidd Nets.:roll: :roll: :roll:

[MJ23forever]

I kinda want to agree with Ne 1 because he's basically right since I believe it's a whole lot tougher and harder to win in the modern era (if you consider the 80's the start of the modern era) than it would in the pioneering/developing stages of a league.

But then you have to realized that 8 of the 11 titles Boston won in the 50's/60's was against the Lakers. :lol

It's kinda like the Yao (Prime Yao) vs Dwight argument. Dwight is better against the league but Yao was better against Dwight. In this case, the Lakers are better against the league while the Celtics are better against the Lakers.









Originally Posted by Ne 1
The Lakers are the premiere franchise in all of professional sports when it comes to success in the modern era.

You can't argue with this statement though. 10 titles since the 80's, not even the Yankees can claim that.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

I see this 08 Boston team getting swept

That's because you don't know basketball. Good luck stopping KG/Pierce/Allen AND Rondo. Boston just has more depth - and I'm not talking about their bench.

[scm5]

That and Kobe is known for his horrible play against QUALITY defenses. You get physical w/ him and he wilts. I could see Boston letting Shaq get his (guy was just unstoppable) and shutting down everyone else.

All in all Kobe would have a tough series while KG and Allen run amok out on the perimeter / high post.

What?

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/POR/2001.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAC/2001.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAS/2001.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/PHI/2001.html

Those were their opponents in the 01' run. For the lazy:

Portland's Drtg: 101.8 ranked 9th overall
Sac's Drtg: 99.6 ranked 7th overall
Spurs Drtg: 98.0 ranked 1st overall
Sixers Drtg: 98.9 ranked 5th overall

08' Boston Drtg: 98.9 ranked 1st overall

Kobe's averages in the postseason:
29.4ppg, 7.3rpg, 6.1apg, 1.6spg, .8bpg, 3.2TO/gm, .469FG%, .555TS%, 25.0PER, 3.8WS, .260WS/gm

Sorry, but no. Kobe did not fold against good defenses.

[Legends66NBA7]

The Lakers have been relevant for almost the entire history of the NBA. The Celtics got the vast majority of championships through the Bill Russell Celtics, in a league of 9 teams.

Think about that, they competed with 9 teams for the championship back then, TOTAL. Not in their conference, not in the playoffs. TOTAL. That is the era in which they won 11 of their 17 championships. From one single team. In a league of 9 teams.

While I do agree the Lakers have won titles much more in recent history and in tougher eras... regarding teams Bill Russell led Celtics faced:

56-57 to 60-61: 8 teams
61-62 to 65-66: 9 teams
66-67: 10 teams
67-68: 12 teams
67-69: 14 teams

Just saying, Russell's Celtics still won titles even with 3 or 5 more teams in the league.


Well if you want to include a time that nobody remembers, than the Celtics are more storied. But during my lifetime it isn't even close. I just don't know how people can brag about championships from the 1950s/1960s. Was anybody here alive to remember when the Celtics were beating the Syracuse Nationals, Philadelphia Warriors, Cincinnati Royals, and St. Louis Hawks?

Isn't bragging about championships won half a century ago the same thing Boston fans complain about when it comes to Yankees fans? All I know is that in all my years on this planet, the Celtics sucked for almost a third of them.

Between 1993 and 2001 the Celtics made the playoffs ONCE. That's 7 out of 8 seasons where they couldn't even finish in the top 8 of the Eastern Conference .

Between 1993 and 2007 the Celtics missed the playoffs 9 out of 14 times.

The Lakers have missed the playoffs only twice since 1976.

The Celtics went 20 years without a single championship from 1987-2007.

Since 1980 the Lakers have made it to the Finals 16 times and won 10 of them.

If you wanna go back to ancient NBA history the Celtics are more decorated. But if we're talking recent history then it's not even close.

I'm on the Lakers > Celtics camp as the #1 team (it's close) in the NBA, but it's not because of what I'm selecting. I look at the whole picture.

I value consistency the most and (like you mentioned) getting to the playoffs, Finals apperances, championship, value of the franchise, the players that have played for the respective team, fan support, etc... that is what it comes down to for me. This is a franchise were talking about.

Which is why I ultimately choose the Lakers.

[Nick Young]

That's because you don't know basketball. Good luck stopping KG/Pierce/Allen AND Rondo. :oldlol:
Do you watch basketball? In 08 Rondo got shut down and benched by Doc because Kobe just sagged off him 15 feet. Rondo got benched in favor of Eddie House, who could actually he open shots.

Rondo SUCKED in 08, stop rewriting history.


ALSO, Shaq already destroyed KG IN HIS PRIME MVP YEAR. Old KG would be no problem for him.

Allen was matched against old Kobe in 08. If you actually watched basketball, you'd also know that old athletic young Kobe used to shit on young Ray Ray on both ends of the floor.

Pierce is great, but not good enough to overcome prime Shaq who would have gotten KG into foul trouble every single game.

[SilkkTheShocker]

You're late. See my post above :oldlol:

Meh, just more excuses. The 01 Lakers were basically a two man wrecking crew of Shaq/Kobe and Fisher with some big shots. Out of all the top teams of all time, the 01 Lakers were by far the least stacked. The Celtics had 3 hall of famers and a nice bench and they got taken to the limit by a young Hawks team and a Cleveland team that was severely lacking talent. After Lebron, the next best 4-5 players were all Celtics :oldlol: They were a good team, but they weren't an all-time great team like some try to say. The revisionist history with the 08 Celtics is amazing.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

What?

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/POR/2001.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAC/2001.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAS/2001.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/PHI/2001.html

Those were their opponents in the 01' run. For the lazy:

Portland's Drtg: 101.8 ranked 9th overall
Sac's Drtg: 99.6 ranked 7th overall
Spurs Drtg: 98.0 ranked 1st overall
Sixers Drtg: 98.9 ranked 5th overall

08' Boston Drtg: 98.9 ranked 1st overall

Kobe's averages in the postseason:
29.4ppg, 7.3rpg, 6.1apg, 1.6spg, .8bpg, 3.2TO/gm, .469FG%, .555TS%, 25.0PER, 3.8WS, .260WS/gm

Sorry, but no. Kobe did not fold against good defenses.

What were those teams ranked, defensively, in the playoffs? And like Hitman mentioned most of them were old, injury riddled and depleted by the playoffs.

And no, Kobe does "wilt" against good defenses. See: Boston in '08, Detroit in '04, and Sixers in '01 (look at his numbers prior to the '08 and '01 finals for a bigger sample size).

Sorry Kobe fans, but the evidence points to him being less THAN ordinary vs. QUALITY defenses. :oldlol:

[scm5]

That's because you don't know basketball. Good luck stopping KG/Pierce/Allen AND Rondo. Boston just has more depth - and I'm not talking about their bench.

01 Shaq would punish KG/Perk. Not only would they be tired trying to keep him out of the paint, they might be in foul trouble doing so and not nearly as effective as they could be.

01 Kobe would demolish Ray Allen defensively and blow by him at will. 01' was one of Kobe's best years in terms of defense. He was everywhere on the court and had seemingly limitless energy.

01 Rick Fox/Ron Harper would have been able to give Pierce a very hard time. Pierce being the most dangerous Celtic player, and Fox and Harper not having huge roles on offense would help a ton.

08' Rondo was whatevers. He wasn't the player he is today and wouldn't have done anything against Fisher, who was actually a good defensive player back then. Harper might have actually given Rondo a TON of trouble considering Kobe was able to guard Rondo without much trouble. Harper was a very good defensive player, even at that age.

I would say that the 01' Lakers match up pretty favorably against the 08' Celtics.

[Nick Young]

What were those teams ranked, defensively, in the playoffs? And like Hitman mentioned most of them were old, injury riddled and depleted by the playoffs.

And no, Kobe does "wilt" against good defenses. See: Boston in '08, Detroit in '04, and Sixers in '01 (look at his numbers prior to the '08 and '01 finals for a bigger sample size).

Sorry Kobe fans, but the evidence points to him being less THAN ordinary vs. QUALITY defenses. :oldlol:
Kobe da wilter: 5 rings
Ray Allen, KG, Paul Pierce, the clutch legends-1 ring each:roll: :roll:

Choking Kobe has 2 more rings than those three HOFers combined. Guess he is nothing but an overrated choking, chucking scrub.

[Celtic_Pride]

Lakers- Played an LA team without Bynum or healthy Ariza. Still took 6 games and rigged officiating in Boston to win.


When they played the Lakers during that regular season with healthy Bynum and Ariza, they still shitted on them so bad albeit those two games happened before Stern gifted them Gasol!

You know how the "scrub" Perkins played against healthy Bynum in one of those games?

Perkins 21 points, 10 rebounds on 8-10 shooting with Bynum guarding him
Bynum 4 points on 2-7 shooting with Perk guarding him

:oldlol:

So much for this fool being a difference factor.

Bynum is nothing but a glorified role player on the Lakers since they acquired Pau Gasol. Phil would never play him more than 30 mpg in regular season and 25 mpg in playoffs during those 3 Final runs. Odom always played more minutes than him. Though Bynum would start, it was always Gasol and Odom finishing the game as they are extremely versatile.

Kobe's injury excuse in the finals? He shot 9-21 and 6-25 in those 2 Boston games before the injury. Basically even if Kobe is completely healthy, he had no chance with Posey, Tony Allen and Pierce on him all game. He cannot handle them!

However you see it, healthy 2008-10 Celtics is a better team than healthy 2008-10 Lakers.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Do you watch basketball? In 08 Rondo got shut down and benched by Doc because Kobe just sagged off him 15 feet. Rondo got benched in favor of Eddie House, who could actually he open shots.

Rondo SUCKED in 08, stop rewriting history.


ALSO, Shaq already destroyed KG IN HIS PRIME MVP YEAR. Old KG would be no problem for him.

Allen was matched against old Kobe in 08. If you actually watched basketball, you'd also know that old athletic young Kobe used to shit on young Ray Ray on both ends of the floor.

Pierce is great, but not good enough to overcome prime Shaq who would have gotten KG into foul trouble every single game.

Uh oh, someone doesnt understand the concept of TEAM ball. :oldlol: So, 10/5 on 49% shooting w/ good defense sucks now? And don't single out players, I'm talking about stopping them ALL. Outside of Kobe and Shaq, the '01 Lakers simply don't have enough firepower to matchup.

Boston, howerver, did have enough perimeter defenders - Posey, Pierce and Tony Allen - to shut Kobe down (who, like I've already pointed out, dreads elite defenses). It would basically be a one man (Shaq) show.

[Nick Young]

When they played the Lakers during that regular season with healthy Bynum and Ariza, they still shitted on them so bad albeit those two games happened before Stern gifted them Gasol!

You know how the "scrub" Perkins played against healthy Bynum in one of those games?

Perkins 21 points, 10 rebounds on 8-10 shooting with Bynum guarding him
Bynum 4 points on 2-7 shooting with Perk guarding him

:oldlol:

So much for this fool being a difference factor.

Bynum is nothing but a glorified role player on the Lakers since they acquired Pau Gasol. Phil would never play him more than 30 mpg in regular season and 25 mpg in playoffs during those 3 Final runs. Odom always played more minutes than him. Though Bynum would start, it was always Gasol and Odom finishing the game as they are extremely versatile.

Kobe's injury excuse in the finals? He shot 9-21 and 6-25 in those 2 Boston games before the injury. Basically even if Kobe is completely healthy, he had no chance with Posey, Tony Allen and Pierce on him all game. He cannot handle them!

However you see it, healthy 2008-10 Celtics is a better team than healthy 2008-10 Lakers.
Kobe had two broken fingers.

Give Paul Pierce two broken fingers and he wouldnt even have played the entire series considering he needed to be wheelchaired off the court after stubbing his toe on the ground.

If Kobe is healthy and Ariza is healthy 08 Celtics don't even win a single ring:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: Deal with it.


How do you explain the Powe-whistle game? Roleplaying scrub leon powe is suddenly gifted 14 freethrows on the same day ABC has a little half time fluff piece about him being the ultimate underdog. Coincidence, amirite?:facepalm

[BlackWhiteGreen]

You're missing a few things.

A - they won in their first season together (something Kobe and Shaq, Pippen and Jordan, LeBron and Wade could not do).
B - the supporting cast was a very raw Rondo, Eddie House (no longer in the league), James Posey (has barely been mentioned since that season, as far as I'm aware no longer in the league), PJ Brown (came out of retirement) and Kendrick "my own fans hate me so much they call me Scrubkins" Perkins. It was also Rondo and Perkins' first playoffs.

Also: how anyone can argue that the Lakers are the greatest franchise in history when they have fewer championships than the Celtics AND a losing record (31-43) in the Finals against the Celtics? It took NINE attempts before a Lakers team could beat the Celtics in a series, and they've lost 9 out of 12 series against the Celtics. But sure, the Lakers are a better franchise. :rolleyes:

I don't know who it was but someone on the first page mentioned this: fewer players in the league make it a tougher league. If there were 8 teams today, you'd have at least 1 all star starter on every team, and 3 all stars total per team (on average). There would be no such thing as "superteams" because EVERYONE would be a superteam.

[SilkkTheShocker]

When talking about all-time great teams, who are the 08 Celtics better than?

[Ne 1]

That and Kobe is known for his horrible play against quality DEFENSES

Funny because as a #1 option, in his prime Kobe played the following top 10 defensive teams:

Nuggets '08 - torched
Spurs '08 - torched
Celtics '08 - mediocre series (who also embarrassed the other great perimeter player in LeBron, defensive efficiency wise, only the '93 Knicks compare) (And how did Jordan fair against them? '93 Knicks series:
32/6/7 on 40% (PPG and FG% hlped by one game too. Shot 0/7 in the fourth quarter when his team was trying to eliminate the Knicks in game 6. Shot 3/18 when team was about to go down 0-3)

Jazz '09 - very respectable series
Rockets '09 - respectable series
Nuggets '09 - torched
Magic '09 - respectable series


Even past his prime:
Jazz '10- torched
Celtics '10- respectable series

Only really struggled against one top 10 defensive team as "the man" in his prime, and that team was easily a top 5 defensive team of all time.

[BlackWhiteGreen]

When talking about all-time great teams, who are the 08 Celtics better than?

Name some and I'll give you an answer. For starters, no they weren't better than the 86 Celtics, 01 Lakers, or 97 Bulls.

[SilkkTheShocker]

Are the 05 and 07 Spurs considered all-time great teams? Becuase they would beat Boston imo. Every Bulls championship team in the 90s beats them. Each Laker 3 peat team beats Boston. Wow, there must be a ton of "all-time great" teams!!!!!

[Nick Young]

You're missing a few things.

A - they won in their first season together (something Kobe and Shaq, Pippen and Jordan, LeBron and Wade could not do).
B - the supporting cast was a very raw Rondo, Eddie House (no longer in the league), James Posey (has barely been mentioned since that season, as far as I'm aware no longer in the league), PJ Brown (came out of retirement) and Kendrick "my own fans hate me so much they call me Scrubkins" Perkins. It was also Rondo and Perkins' first playoffs.

Also: how anyone can argue that the Lakers are the greatest franchise in history when they have fewer championships than the Celtics AND a losing record (31-43) in the Finals against the Celtics? It took NINE attempts before a Lakers team could beat the Celtics in a series, and they've lost 9 out of 12 series against the Celtics. But sure, the Lakers are a better franchise. :rolleyes:

I don't know who it was but someone on the first page mentioned this: fewer players in the league make it a tougher league. If there were 8 teams today, you'd have at least 1 all star starter on every team, and 3 all stars total per team (on average). There would be no such thing as "superteams" because EVERYONE would be a superteam.
So many weak excuses:roll: :roll: :roll:

Rookie Perkins+old KG would have got destroyed by Shaq for 35/20 every game. Stop rewriting history. Not only did shaq destroy prime MVP KG, but Shaq destroyed DPOTY Dikembe Mutumbo in the finals as well.

It doesnt matter if Celtic roleplayers were better than Laker roleplayers, because defenses had to collapse on Shaq just to survive and stay competitive, the roleplayers would always get wideopen shots most of the time anyways.

01 Lakers would sweep the 08 celtics, maybe 4-1 if Celtics get a lucky Powe-whistle game.

If prime KG gets shitted on by shaq, old KG would have been no resistance at all. Perkins would have started crying if he had to guard prime Shaq:roll:

[scm5]

What were those teams ranked, defensively, in the playoffs? And like Hitman mentioned most of them were old, injury riddled and depleted by the playoffs.

And no, Kobe does "wilt" against good defenses. See: Boston in '08, Detroit in '04, and Sixers in '01 (look at his numbers prior to the '08 and '01 finals for a bigger sample size).

Sorry Kobe fans, but the evidence points to him being less THAN ordinary vs. QUALITY defenses. :oldlol:

08' Celtics did a good job on 08' Kobe. 26/5/5 on 41% shooting, but that's not exactly folding.

04' Detroit, Kobe was chasing around Rip Hamilton all game and had to deal with the rape trial. Kobe actually struggled throughout the entire playoffs that season. His averages for the playoffs weren't far off from his averages against Detroit. It's not like Detroit just shut him down...

01' Sixers, Kobe put up 25/8/6 on 42% shooting. Again, not exactly folding. Kobe actually only had one really bad game, the first game, in which they lost. Then Kobe came back and tore them a new asshole, putting up 31/8/6, 32/6/3, 19/10/9, and 26/12/6.

[tpols]

08' Celtics did a good job on 08' Kobe. 26/5/5 on 41% shooting, but that's not exactly folding.

04' Detroit, Kobe was chasing around Rip Hamilton all game and had to deal with the rape trial. Kobe actually struggled throughout the entire playoffs that season. His averages for the playoffs weren't far off from his averages against Detroit. It's not like Detroit just shut him down...

01' Sixers, Kobe put up 25/8/6 on 42% shooting. Again, not exactly folding. Kobe actually only had one really bad game, the first game, in which they lost. Then Kobe came back and tore them a new asshole, putting up 31/8/6, 32/6/3, 19/10/9, and 26/12/6.
And what about the number 1 ranked Orlando Magic, the spurs year in and year out, the Ron artest rockets, the sixth ranked kings, etc. Kuniva_dAMiGhTy needs to take the Lakers tampon he has up his ass out. Dudes been straight trollllin:lol

[Nick Young]

08' Celtics did a good job on 08' Kobe. 26/5/5 on 41% shooting, but that's not exactly folding.

04' Detroit, Kobe was chasing around Rip Hamilton all game and had to deal with the rape trial. Kobe actually struggled throughout the entire playoffs that season. His averages for the playoffs weren't far off from his averages against Detroit. It's not like Detroit just shut him down...

01' Sixers, Kobe put up 25/8/6 on 42% shooting. Again, not exactly folding. Kobe actually only had one really bad game, the first game, in which they lost. Then Kobe came back and tore them a new asshole, putting up 31/8/6, 32/6/3, 19/10/9, and 26/12/6.
In 08 Kobe had two broken fingers on his shooting hand, don't forget.

Stop rewriting history people, stop trying to write off two broken fingers on your shooting hand as 'no big deal'.

[Ne 1]

I kinda want to agree with Ne 1 because he's basically right since I believe it's a whole lot tougher and harder to win in the modern era (if you consider the 80's the start of the modern era) than it would in the pioneering/developing stages of a league.

But then you have to realized that 8 of the 11 titles Boston won in the 50's/60's was against the Lakers. :lol


No doubt. The Celtics dominated the 50s/60s, but ever since then the Lakers have been by far a better franchise and the premier franchisee out of all the major sports leagues. Like I said, isn't bragging about championships won half a century ago the same thing Boston fans complain about when it comes to Yankees fans?

How am I going to speak about what happened in the NBA during the 1950s/1960s when the league had 8 teams made up of guys who were ex-military personnel, and guys like Dolph Schayes and Bob Ferry at center. These were times when players just smoked cigarettes at halftime. When today they discuss what game strategies are working and what is not, make adjustments on offense and defense, review their game plans, match-ups etc.

[Ne 1]

08' Celtics did a good job on 08' Kobe. 26/5/5 on 41% shooting, but that's not exactly folding.


Compared to the rest of the playoffs in 2008, yes, Kobe played subpar basketball.

Celtics had the better and tougher team. It's ludicrous to expect ANY player to go off on a team like that. Don't forget what they did to LeBron either.

Kobe did put up respectable stats (26/5/5) vs the best defensive team in the league. The Celtics could swarm Kobe because nobody made them pay. Sure, Gasol's FG% looks impressive, but he wasn't assertive at all and you can't expect Odom to give much more than 13/9 anyway. The Lakers as a team choked in game 4. But the reality was that the Celtics were just better. By no means did Kobe step up, but choking or even folding isn't a real accurate description either. Biggest reason why they lost? No one was making shots which led to Celtics playing even more aggressively on Kobe. Fisher, Walton, Vujacic and Radmanovic shot 56/145 (38.6%).

[BlackWhiteGreen]

So many weak excuses:roll: :roll: :roll:

Rookie Perkins+old KG would have got destroyed by Shaq for 35/20 every game. Stop rewriting history. Not only did shaq destroy prime MVP KG, but Shaq destroyed DPOTY Dikembe Mutumbo in the finals as well.

It doesnt matter if Celtic roleplayers were better than Laker roleplayers, because defenses had to collapse on Shaq just to survive and stay competitive, the roleplayers would always get wideopen shots most of the time anyways.

01 Lakers would sweep the 08 celtics, maybe 4-1 if Celtics get a lucky Powe-whistle game.

If prime KG gets shitted on by shaq, old KG would have been no resistance at all. Perkins would have started crying if he had to guard prime Shaq:roll:

As I've since posted, the 01 Lakers would have beaten the 08 Celtics (although it's closer than a sweep, obviously). I was referring to the supposed overrating of the Celtics. Difficult for you to read, I know...

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

08' Celtics did a good job on 08' Kobe. 26/5/5 on 41% shooting, but that's not exactly folding.

04' Detroit, Kobe was chasing around Rip Hamilton all game and had to deal with the rape trial. Kobe actually struggled throughout the entire playoffs that season. His averages for the playoffs weren't far off from his averages against Detroit. It's not like Detroit just shut him down...

01' Sixers, Kobe put up 25/8/6 on 42% shooting. Again, not exactly folding. Kobe actually only had one really bad game, the first game, in which they lost. Then Kobe came back and tore them a new asshole, putting up 31/8/6, 32/6/3, 19/10/9, and 26/12/6.

Nothing to write home about, especially by "Kobe standards".

Again, what was he averaging before the series vs. Philly? Before Boston? It's not a coincidence that his shooting percentages dip AFTER facing elite defenses...in the finals.


And what about the number 1 ranked Orlando Magic, the spurs year in and year out, the Ron artest rockets, the sixth ranked kings, etc. Kuniva_dAMiGhTy needs to take the Lakers tampon he has up his ass out. Dudes been straight trollllin:lol

Yeah, you're definitely upset. Lol. How am I trolling btw?

[Rooster]

That and Kobe is known for his horrible play against quality DEFENSES. You get physical w/ him and he wilts. I could see Boston letting Shaq get his (guy was just unstoppable) and shutting down everyone else.

Ray and KG run amok out on the perimeter / high post.

Kobe played well against those quality DEFENSE from the Spurs. Bruce Bowen got physical with him and he still torched them.

[tpols]

-35/9/4 against the kings in 01 99Drtg 7th in the league

-33/7/7 against a great defensive team ranked number one in the 01 spurs

-29/6/4 against the defending champion and third ranked defense 08 spurs

-33/7/7 against the jazz in 09 with prime kirilenko on him top ten overall defense

-32/7/6 against number one ranked magic defense

Yup..

[BlackWhiteGreen]

No doubt. The Celtics dominated the 50s/60s, but ever since then the Lakers have been by far a better franchise and the premier franchisee out of all the major sports leagues. Like I said, isn't bragging about championships won half a century ago the same thing Boston fans complain about when it comes to Yankees fans?

How am I going to speak about what happened in the NBA during the 1950s/1960s when the league had 8 teams made up of guys who were ex-military personnel, and guys like Dolph Schayes and Bob Ferry at center. These were times when players just smoked cigarettes at halftime. When today they discuss what game strategies are working and what is not, make adjustments on offense and defense, review their game plans, match-ups etc.

Dolph Schayes, 12 time all star and Hall-of-Famer? That Dolph Schayes? The one ranked #38 all time in this forum, above Kevin McHale, Robert Parish, and Bob McAdoo?

[tpols]

Kobe played well against those quality DEFENSE from the Spurs. Bruce Bowen got physical with him and he still torched them.
He's trolling dude.. Kobe's had more great series by his standards against great defensive teams than he's had bad ones. Go and look up his top five-ten playoff series of all time.. Most of them came against top five ranked defenses. He's been torching the top ranked extremely physical spurs defenses for a decade.

[scm5]

Nothing to write home about, especially by "Kobe standards".

Again, what was he averaging before the series vs. Philly? Before Boston? It's not a coincidence that his shooting percentages dip AFTER facing elite defenses...in the finals.


True, 42% isn't up to Kobe's standards but that same post season, Kobe torched the Spurs who were ranked #1 in defense.

Also, the 42% was including a horrible first game of the series which the Lakers lost. As I mentioned, Kobe came back and put up really good numbers on much better shooting in the games that followed. The stats were skewed by one 7/22 shooting game in which he scored only 15 pts.

[Rooster]

He's trolling dude.. Kobe's had more great series by his standards against great defensive teams than he's had bad ones. Go and look up his top five-ten playoff series of all time.. Most of them came against top five ranked defenses. He's been torching the top ranked extremely physical spurs defenses for a decade.

Most of these haters remember the bad ones to fit their agenda.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

-35/9/4 against the kings in 01 99Drtg 7th in the league

-33/7/7 against a great defensive team ranked number one in the 01 spurs (another old, injury-riddled team by the playoffs; ie., Derek Anderson)

-29/6/4 against the defending champion and third ranked defense 08 spurs

-33/7/7 against the jazz in 09 with prime kirilenko on him top ten overall defense

-32/7/6 against number one ranked magic defense on 42% shooting

Yup..

Obviously he's had some great games and series' vs. elite defenses; it's just not consistent enough.

[tpols]

Obviously he's had some great games and series' vs. elite defenses; it's just not consistent enough.
Lol.. Obviously. Thought he always struggled. Kobe has more great series against great defensive teams than he has bad ones. We can tally them up and it isn't even close.

And lol at your excuses. Kobe had mangled fingers on his shooting hand in both Boston series and was injured to begin the philly series. Goes both ways dude.

[eliteballer]

They're better than any team Miami's had..

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Lol.. Obviously. Thought he always struggled. Kobe has more great series against great defensive teams than he has bad ones. We can tally them up and it isn't even close.

And lol at your excuses. Kobe had mangled fingers on his shooting hand in both Boston series and was injured to begin and philly series. Goes both ways dude.

Historically, Kobe doesn't fair well against elite defenses (I'm talking cream of the crop, top 3-5 level-d here). That's a fact.

http://i1111.photobucket.com/albums/h467/Catrean/wade-kobe-lebron-playoff-breakdown-by-defense1.jpg

As far as the bold goes ... I'd love to see that. In fact, I'll even wait to see that "proof". :applause:

[Ne 1]

And no, Kobe does "wilt" against good defenses.

How did Jordan do when he faced the #1 defense in the NBA Finals? Or at any time in the 90s?

'93 Knicks Eastern Conference Finals:
32.1/6/7 on 40% (ppg and fg% helped by one game too. Shot 0/7 in the fourth quarter when team was trying to eliminate Knicks in game 6. Shot 3/18 when team was about to go down 0-3)

'96 Sonics Finals:
27/5/4 on 41%

'97 Heat Eastern Conference Finals:
30/8/3 on 39%

He did have an excellent series against the '92 Knicks though. Although they weren't rated the best defense in the league that year, even though they probably were.

Could you imagine what his Finals statistics would be if he went up against the #1 defense each time? The Sonics series, the only #1 team he'd ever face in the Finals, turned into a statistical disaster for him.

Just something to consider when folks bring in the Finals statlines of other players to dismiss them. What's the reason for this post? Just to remind people (mainly kunvia) that Jordan, who many consider to be the greatest player ever was human, just like Kobe. Also keep these in mind when someone tries to tell you Jordan would destroy the '04 Pistons and '08 Celtics (who statistically are better than any team Jordan ever faced in the playoffs).

[tpols]

Historically, Kobe doesn't fair well against elite defenses (I'm talking cream of the crop, top 3-5 level-d here). That's a fact.

http://i1111.photobucket.com/albums/h467/Catrean/wade-kobe-lebron-playoff-breakdown-by-defense1.jpg

As far as the bold goes ... I'd love to see that. In fact, I'll even wait to see that "proof". :applause:
I got you man... Give me a sec.

[KG215]

You know how the "scrub" Perkins played against healthy Bynum in one of those games?

Perkins 21 points, 10 rebounds on 8-10 shooting with Bynum guarding him
Bynum 4 points on 2-7 shooting with Perk guarding him

The f***? That's like 3 or 4 games worth of stats for Perkins these days. This just makes me hate him even more.

[SilkkTheShocker]

They're better than any team Miami's had..

Who is talking about Miami? Try to keep up with the rest of us.

[tpols]

Kobe against TOP THREE Defenses cream of the 'crop'.

-33/7/7, 51FG NO. 1 ranked spurs defense(01) (above his playoff averages that year)

-29/6/4, 53FG NO. 3 ranked spurs defense(08) (above his playoff averages that year)

-32/7/6, 42FG NO. 1 ranked magic defense (above his playoff averages that year.. more points assists and rebounds trumps slightly less fg)

-27/5/6, 51FG NO. 1 ranked nets defense (above his playoff averages that year)

-26/6/6, 46FG NO. 2 ranked spurs defense(02) (right at his playoff averages that year)

Versus..

-26/5/5, 41FG NO. 1 ranked Celtics defense (below his playoff averages that year)

-24/4/4, 37FG NO. 1 ranked pistons defense (below below his playoff averages that year)

The sixers don't fall into the top three and neither do the Celtics of 2010. If you want to add them then ill have to add the kings and a few other teams that had similar out of range relative defensive ratings.

Either way kobe has had considerably more good series against elite defensive teams in his career than he has bad. Also take note that most of his best performances against physical teams occurred in the physical hand checking era.

[Kevin_Garnett_5]

:oldlol: Doesn't this guy make the same threads over and over again (keep an eye out for his next Dirk > KG thread in a few weeks)?

We get it, you don't like the Celtics & you think KG is overrated. You can move on to discussing something else any time now.

[TMT]

Keep in mind they were the only "super team" at the time. There wasn't exactly great competition either. The Lakers were soft, Lebron was still stuck not getting the Cavs over the hump, the Spurs were full of injuries and had officials going for a Lakers finals appearance. The Celtics at the time were by far the best defensive team. I don't think they are overrated at all, I just think there weren't as many top dog teams at the time.

[Blue&Orange]

It doesnt matter if Celtic roleplayers were better than Laker roleplayers, because defenses had to collapse on Shaq just to survive and stay competitive, the roleplayers would always get wideopen shots most of the time anyways.

you mean Kobe, right? Kobe in fact did a great job riding Shaq and putting great stats with all the space he gave him.

[SilkkTheShocker]

Keep in mind they were the only "super team" at the time. There wasn't exactly great competition either. The Lakers were soft, Lebron was still stuck not getting the Cavs over the hump, the Spurs were full of injuries and had officials going for a Lakers finals appearance. The Celtics at the time were by far the best defensive team. I don't think they are overrated at all, I just think there weren't as many top dog teams at the time.

I like how you make it sound like it was all on LeBron for not getting Cleveland over the hump but then make a ton of excuses for the spurs. Your agenda against LeBron is hilarious

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Kobe against TOP THREE Defenses cream of the 'crop'.

-33/7/7, 51FG NO. 1 ranked spurs defense(01) (above his playoff averages that year)

-29/6/4, 53FG NO. 3 ranked spurs defense(08) (above his playoff averages that year)

-32/7/6, 42FG NO. 1 ranked magic defense (above his playoff averages that year.. more points assists and rebounds trumps slightly less fg)

-27/5/6, 51FG NO. 1 ranked nets defense (above his playoff averages that year)

-26/6/6, 46FG NO. 2 ranked spurs defense(02) (right at his playoff averages that year)

Versus..

-26/5/5, 42FG NO. 1 ranked Celtics defense (below his playoff averages that year)


The sixers don't fall into the top three and neither do the Celtics of 2010. If you want to add them then ill have to add the kings and a few other teams that had similar out of range relative defensive ratings.

Either way kobe has had considerably more good series against elite defensive teams in his career than he has bad. Notice that he has three above average series for his standards against the top ranked defenses in the entire league than he has bad ones. Also take note that most of his best performances against physical teams occurred in the physical hand checking era.

That's only 5 playoff series' dude. lol

I'll give you the bold - the rest? I already went over (plus I posted a HUGE sample size that includes regular season games); you call it "excuses", I say context.

We'll have to agree to disagree.

[tpols]

That's only 5 playoff series' dude. lol

I'll give you the bold - the rest? I already went over (plus I posted a HUGE sample size that includes regular season games); you call it "excuses", I say context.

We'll have to agree to disagree.
What? I just gave hard concrete evidence based on defensive ratings that kobe does not 'wilt' against great defenses. If you average his stats across all seven of the playoff series he has played the good and the bad in his career you get..

27/6/6 on 47 percent shooting.

He has three series where he shot over 50 percent against top ranked defenses and somehow they make him wilt. You're a joke dude. There's no agree to disagree. Everyone cn see you're wrong in this comparison.

[ThaRegul8r]

No.

How do you argue against the Lakers aside from having more championships overall?

The Lakers have been relevant for almost the entire history of the NBA. The Celtics got the vast majority of championships through the Bill Russell Celtics, in a league of 9 teams.

Think about that, they competed with 9 teams for the championship back then, TOTAL. Not in their conference, not in the playoffs. TOTAL. That is the era in which they won 11 of their 17 championships. From one single team. In a league of 9 teams.

.....

The Lakers' distribution of championships is a result of Greatness throughout the history of the NBA. In nearly every era, the Lakers are relevant.

If one wants to make a case, one can argue that the Lakers were more consistently successful, while the Celtics' greatness is concentrated primarily in one era, and point out that it took over 20 years for the Celtics to become relevant again since the '80s, but it's uneccessary to resort to tearing down a team's past accomplishments in order to prop your team. It sounds like a political campaign.

For the life of me, I don't understand why people don't build up the positives of whomever they're talking about instead of trying to tear someone else down. Greatness should speak for itself, and if someone (or some team) is truly great, is should be easy then to point out that greatness. Smear campaigns smack of insecurity, since they apparently don't have enough positive things to talk about regardind whoever it is they're advocating for.

[Legends66NBA7]

If one wants to make a case, one can argue that the Lakers were more consistently successful, while the Celtics' greatness is concentrated primarily in one era, and point out that it took over 20 years for the Celtics to become relevant again since the '80s, but it's uneccessary to resort to tearing down a team's past accomplishments in order to prop your team. It sounds like a political campaign.

For the life of me, I don't understand why people don't build up the positives of whomever they're talking about instead of trying to tear someone else down. Greatness should speak for itself, and if someone (or some team) is truly great, is should be easy then to point out that greatness. Smear campaigns smack of insecurity, since they apparently don't have enough positive things to talk about regardind whoever it is they're advocating for.

Good post.

In basic terms to keep in talks of a franchise:

Boston has the greater dynasty, Finals advantage vs the Lakers, and overall ring count VS Lakers have playoff consistency, overall better players that have played for them, and a much more valuable franchise.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

What? I just gave hard concrete evidence based on defensive ratings that kobe does not 'wilt' against great defenses. If you average his stats across all seven of the playoff series he has played the good and the bad in his career you get.[

27/6/6 on 47 percent shooting.

He has three series where he shot over 50 percent against top ranked defenses and somehow they make him wilt. You're a joke dude. There's no agree to disagree. Everyone cn see you're wrong in this comparison.

:confusedshrug:

I posted an entire statistical chart (includes Wade + Bron) vs. top rated defenses and you give me 5 single-series'? WTF? That's your "concrete evidence"? :oldlol:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

I mean honestly, I could post single series too. :confusedshrug:

Check out Kobe's numbers, in the playoffs, against teams w/ a 103 DRtg or less.

2000 Pacers
2001 Sixers
2002 Kings
2003 Spurs
2004 Rockets
2004 Wolves
2004 Pistons

Hey Kobe fans, at least it's more than 5 series'. LOL...

[Deuce Bigalow]

Team that had the better season - advancing further into the playoffs and/or better record

'47-'48: Celtics (Lakers did not exist)
'49-'55: Lakers
'56-'69: Celtics
'70-'73: Lakers
'74-'76: Celtics
'77-'80: Lakers
'81: Celtics
'82: Lakers
'83: Lakers
'84: Celtics
'85: Lakers
'86: Celtics
'87-'91: Lakers
'92: Celtics
'93-'04: Lakers
'05: Celtics
'06-'07: Lakers
'08: Celtics
'09-'10: Lakers
'11-12: Celtics


Advantage: Lakers 39-25

Lakers are GOAT

[tpols]

:confusedshrug:

I posted an entire statistical chart (includes Wade + Bron) vs. top rated defenses and you give me 5 single-series'? WTF? That's your "concrete evidence"? :oldlol:
I gave you the only seven series kobe has faced a top 3 defense in the playoffs.. The best criteria for a truly elite defense. In five of those seven series he had above average numbers for his standards.

Now you wanna move the measuring stick to the teams with 103 and less dtrg. LOL. All those top three teams I listed had d ratings in the 90s.

Take your L like a man dude.:lol

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

I gave you the only seven series kobe has faced a top 3 defense in the playoffs.. The best criteria for a truly elite defense. In five of those seven series he had above average numbers for his standards.

Now you wanna move the measuring stick to the teams with 103 and less dtrg. LOL

Take your L like a man dude.:lol

Hey, the chart I posted measured it by 103. :confusedshrug:

I'm all for using DRtg as long as it's within the decade. Just sayin'

[tpols]

Hey, the chart I posted measured it by 103. :confusedshrug:

I'm all for using DRtg as long as it's within the decade. Just sayin'
It doesn't matter. 103 is no longer truly elite. All those teams you just listed for 103 and under are top 8-10 defenses in the league. In the playoffs especially in the west where 8 very good teams make it, almost all of the participants have defenses ranked inside the top 10 especially those that make it to the later rounds. Good teams have good defenses and good offenses.

Truly elite defenses however? Those are the ones that take the top one or two or three spot in the entire league.

You're moving the goal posts to teams outside of what everyone would consider elite defensive teams. You sound like Yao Ming foot using d ratings to discredit mj when everything is relative to the single seasons the defenses were in.

You're wrong dude.. Kobe doesn't wilt against tough defenses in the playoffs. He has actually excelled in the majority of them.

You're like a Dirk hater, probably what I used to be, hating on him for choking because of one or two series when in reality he has pulled through the majority of the time but it wasn't as blown up or talked about as much as the failures were.

Stop hating dude.. You're wrong here flat out.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Kobe against TOP THREE Defenses cream of the 'crop'.

-33/7/7, 51FG NO. 1 ranked spurs defense(01) (above his playoff averages that year)

-29/6/4, 53FG NO. 3 ranked spurs defense(08) (above his playoff averages that year)

-32/7/6, 42FG NO. 1 ranked magic defense (above his playoff averages that year.. more points assists and rebounds trumps slightly less fg)

-27/5/6, 51FG NO. 1 ranked nets defense (above his playoff averages that year)

-26/6/6, 46FG NO. 2 ranked spurs defense(02) (right at his playoff averages that year)

Versus..

-26/5/5, 41FG NO. 1 ranked Celtics defense (below his playoff averages that year)

-24/4/4, 37FG NO. 1 ranked pistons defense (below below his playoff averages that year)

The sixers don't fall into the top three and neither do the Celtics of 2010. If you want to add them then ill have to add the kings and a few other teams that had similar out of range relative defensive ratings.

Either way kobe has had considerably more good series against elite defensive teams in his career than he has bad. Also take note that most of his best performances against physical teams occurred in the physical hand checking era.
Another Jordan fan proposed myth shot to the ground.

Also the 01 Kings were not a top 3 defense that season, but had a defensive rating below 100, at 99.6.
Kobe averaged 35-9-4 on 47FG/59TS

Kobe faced top 9 defenses in every series in the 2001 Playoffs
He averaged 29-7-6 on 46FG/56TS

Kobe also faced top 10 defenses in every series in the 2009 Playoffs
He averaged 30-5-6 on 46FG/56TS

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

It doesn't matter. 103 is no longer truly elite. All those teams you just listed for 103 and under are top 8-10 defenses in the league.

:oldlol:

103 was the standard just a few seasons ago. Kobe has played more games THEN than he has NOW anyway. This chart doesn't even include Kobe's series' vs. Dallas and OKC (who also avg'd around a 103 DRtg).

Essentially, the Sixers were rated #3 because Atlanta wasn't a playoff team. Same w/ the 2000 Pacers (Bulls and Cavs weren't playoff teams).

Cavs missed the playoffs in 2002 making the Kings a top 5 rated defense in the playoffs.

2003 Spurs (http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAS/2003.html) were a top 3 rated defense; 2004 Rockets (http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/HOU/2004.html) were a top 5 rated defense; 2004 Wolves (http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2004.html) were practically a top 5 defense -- and of course the Pistons were the top rated defensive team in the league.

How exactly are these teams rated #8-10? LOL


Good teams have good defenses and good offenses.

No one is debating that.

Fact is, top 10 defensive-rated ball clubs are NOT elite. They're good. Solid even. Just not ELITE.


You're moving the goal posts to teams outside of what everyone would consider elite defensive teams. You sound like Yao Ming foot using d ratings to discredit mj when everything is relative to the single seasons the defenses were in.

:facepalm

I'm posting facts. Feel free to correct me anytime.



You're wrong dude.. Kobe doesn't wilt against tough defenses in the playoffs. He has actually excelled in the majority of them.

You're like a Dirk hater, probably what I used to be, hating on him for choking

Stop hating dude.. You're wrong here flat out.

Quit changing the subject.

How am I wrong? I've posted data and evidence that backs up what I say. In fact, after you posted your single series', I posted mine, just more. :oldlol:

[BlackWhiteGreen]

Good post.

In basic terms to keep in talks of a franchise:

Boston has the greater dynasty, Finals advantage vs the Lakers, and overall ring count VS Lakers have playoff consistency, overall better players that have played for them, and a much more valuable franchise.

What does this mean?

As in, in terms of money?

[tpols]

How come you didn't include the kings who had sub 100 ratings or the wolves the previous year in 03 when Kobe did great against them?

You move the goal posts.. And then you don't even include all of the teams under the new measurements.. Only the ones that fit your agenda. :oldlol:

I gave data on the top 3 Defenses and kobe did well above his average in the majority of them. You have been changing the criteria and excluding information outside of your range.. I have not. Your done dude. :oldlol:

[tpols]

:oldlol:

103 was the standard just a few seasons ago.
Just a few seasons ago and then you quote defensive teams from TEN years ago where the league was totally different and there was a whole set of different defensive rules. Your credibility is shot bro. You're all over the place.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

How come you didn't include the kings who had sub 100 ratings or the wolves the previous year in 03 when Kobe did great against them?

You move the goal posts.. And then you don't even include all of the teams under the new measurements.. Only the ones that fit your agenda. :oldlol:

I gave data on the top 3 Defenses and kobe did well above his average in the majority of them. You have been changing the criteria and excluding information outside of your range.. I have not. Your done dude. :oldlol:

Uh, I did include the Kings. They were a top 5 defense in the postseason via defensive-rating.

LOL at "new measurements" and "moving goal posts". Really? This is getting pathetic. So none of those teams I listed are top 5 level defenses? Basketball-reference is lying now? :oldlol:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Just a few seasons ago and then you quote defensive teams from TEN years ago

How is this relevant? Kobe has always played below his standards against elite defenses. THAT is the point. :confusedshrug:

[tpols]

Uh, I did include the Kings. They were a top 5 defense in the postseason via defensive-rating.

LOL at "new measurements" and "moving goal posts". Really? This is getting pathetic. So none of those teams I listed are top 5 level defenses? Basketball-reference is lying now? :oldlol:
You've been taking out the teams that didn't make the playoffs to artificially bump teams up in their relative drating. The wolves weren't top five.. The sixers weren't top three.. The kings weren't top five.. Bball reference isn't lying. YOU are lying. You're moving the goal posts all over the fvcking place using d rating where it helps you and subbing in defensive rank whee it doesn't.

I gave numbers for the concrete top 3 Defenses in the league while you haven't given numbers for anything. Kobe actually did good against hose kings teams and those wolves teams in a bunch of series and they haven't been posted because I didn't think it was fair to include his stats against teams that weren't even truly elite defensively when compared to the top three list I compiled before. Keep shuffling bro. :oldlol:

[tpols]

How is this relevant? Kobe has always played below his standards against elite defenses. THAT is the point. :confusedshrug:
What? You're using a 103 d rating standard from a few seasons ago to compare d ratings that occurred over a decade ago. It makes no sense. 103 wasn't as elite back then when Kobe faced a bunch of teams posting d ratings in the 90 s.

[tpols]

Another Jordan fan proposed myth shot to the ground.

Also the 01 Kings were not a top 3 defense that season, but had a defensive rating below 100, at 99.6.
Kobe averaged 35-9-4 on 47FG/59TS

Kobe faced top 9 defenses in every series in the 2001 Playoffs
He averaged 29-7-6 on 46FG/56TS

Kobe also faced top 10 defenses in every series in the 2009 Playoffs
He averaged 30-5-6 on 46FG/56TS
Ether. :lol i don't think much more needs to be stated with both these lists combined.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

You've been taking out the teams that didn't make the playoffs to artificially bump teams up in their relative drawing. The wolves weren't top five.. The sixers weren't top three.. The kings weren't top five.. Bball reference isn't lying. YOU are lying. You're moving the goal posts all over the fvcking place using d rating where it helps you and subbing in defensive rank whee it doesn't.


I gave numbers for the concrete top 3 Defenses in the league while you haven't given numbers for anything.

Not at all. Again, the Sixers were top 5 (top 3 if we exclude non-playoff teams). Kings and Wolves are both at #6.

Once more, I began this thread saying defenses in the top 3-5 range. How are those teams not elite defensively?

And...how are they rated #8-10? Remember, YOU said that. :oldlol:

I gave you a chart that had a 5 year sample size of games, and you completely ignored it. You'd rather post red herrings debating semantics. LOL.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

What? You're using a 103 d rating standard from a few seasons ago to compare d ratings that occurred over a decade ago. It makes no sense. 103 wasn't as elite back then when Kobe faced a bunch of teams posting d ratings in the 90 s.

What is the problem? :confusedshrug:

I'm using a chart that lists stats from '05-10. I also posted other years previously (those teams, on average, are about top 5 defensively) as an example to show people Kobe is, and will always be, mediocre vs. ELITE defenses.

[Mach_3]

For those talking about the 08 C's getting taken to 7 games by the Hawks, it was clear as day that they never took the Hawks seriously as a threat during that series or the reg season even. As evidenced by the fact that they got DESTROYED in that game 7 by the Celtics when they finally said "alright lets end this"

And the Lakers had a train ran on them in 08 with a 40 pt beatdown in the last game. KG doesn't go down with a knee injury late in 09 (IMO up to this point in the season the Celtics were actually BETTER than they were in 08) they at the very least repeat with a chance at a 3rd title in 2010

[tpols]

What is the problem? :confusedshrug:

I'm using a chart that lists stats from '05-10. I also posted other years previously (those teams, on average, are about top 5 defensively) as an example to show people Kobe is, and will always be, mediocre vs. ELITE defenses.
Against the only top three ELITE defenses kobe ever faced in the playoffs where it matters..


-33/7/7, 51FG NO. 1 ranked spurs defense(01) (above his playoff averages that year)

-29/6/4, 53FG NO. 3 ranked spurs defense(08) (above his playoff averages that year)

-32/7/6, 42FG NO. 1 ranked magic defense (above his playoff averages that year.. more points assists and rebounds trumps slightly less fg)

-27/5/6, 51FG NO. 1 ranked nets defense (above his playoff averages that year)

-26/6/6, 46FG NO. 2 ranked spurs defense(02) (right at his playoff averages that year)

Versus..

-26/5/5, 42FG NO. 1 ranked Celtics defense (below his playoff averages that year)

-24/4/4, 37 FG NO. 1 1 ranked pistons defense (below his playoff averages that year)

You post a chart from the regular season.. I use playoffs. I guess kobe gets up for better competition. just facts bruh:cheers:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Against the only top three ELITE defenses kobe ever faced in the playoffs where it matters..


-33/7/7, 51FG NO. 1 ranked spurs defense(01) (above his playoff averages that year)

-29/6/4, 53FG NO. 3 ranked spurs defense(08) (above his playoff averages that year)

-32/7/6, 42FG NO. 1 ranked magic defense (above his playoff averages that year.. more points assists and rebounds trumps slightly less fg)

-27/5/6, 51FG NO. 1 ranked nets defense (above his playoff averages that year)

-26/6/6, 46FG NO. 2 ranked spurs defense(02) (right at his playoff averages that year)

Versus..

-26/5/5, 42FG NO. 1 ranked Celtics defense (below his playoff averages that year)

-24/4/4, 37 FG NO. 1 1 ranked pistons defense (below his playoff averages that year)

You post a chart from the regular season.. I use playoffs. I guess kobe gets up for better competition. just facts bruh:cheers:

Don't hold your breath. The chart I posted includes postseason play. :oldlol:

[tpols]

Don't hold your breath. The chart I posted includes postseason play. :oldlol:
And your chart excludes all play prior to 05 which is where kobe saw 4 out of 7 of the top three defenses he ever played in the playoffs. Keep trying. :oldlol:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

And your chart excludes all play prior to 05 which is where kobe saw 4 out of 7 of the top three defenses he ever played in the playoffs. Keep trying. :oldlol:

"Top 3"? Look who's moving "goal posts" now. Ouch! LOL!

I also listed 7 teams (to your 5) that Kobe went against in playoff series; they were all top 5 level defenses prior to '05. Of course, Kobe was practically awful in all of them. Nothing new there. :oldlol:

[TheBigVeto]

I also see them in all-time list but they were far from world beaters in the playoffs.

Hawks- Got taken to 7 games by a sub .500 Atlanta team.
Cavs- Got taken to 7 games by a Cleveland team thats 2nd best player was Delonte West. Took a PJ Brown jumphot to survive.
Pistons- Beat a past prime Pistons team.
Lakers- Played an LA team without Bynum or healthy Ariza. Still took 6 games and rigged officiating in Boston to win.


Does anyone really think this team has a shot in hell of beating the 01 Lakers, 96 Bulls, etc.?

Yes of course.
They are rated properly.

[tpols]

"Top 3"? Look who's moving "goal posts" now.
l:
It's always been top three. I listed it at the top every time and every team I listed was either ranked one two or three for their respective season. LOL. catch up my dude.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

It's always been top three. I listed it at the top every time. LOL. catch up my dude.

I've been saying top 3-5 though. Naturally, it's a bigger sample size.

Better edit your post. lol. Heck, I'll even let you keep Kobe's series vs. Orlando in there (you know, where he shot 42%?). :D

[Legends66NBA7]

What does this mean?

As in, in terms of money?

Yeah, Forbes has the Lakers ranked #1 last year.

I mean, it might not mean that much in basketball terms... but in talking about a franchise with their playoff success, it does mean a lot IMO.

[tpols]

I've been saying top 3-5 though. Naturally, it's a bigger sample size.

Better edit your post. lol. Heck, I'll even let you keep Kobe's series vs. Orlando (you know, where he shot 42%?). :D
Post kobes playoff stats for all top five.. You already have my list for top three defenses. Add it for five. And no cheating aka including teams that are ranked 6/7 whatever.

My sample size for the best of the best includes 30-40 games.. Plenty for a random sample size as 30 is the typical benchmark in statistics.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Post kobes playoff stats for all top five.. You already have my list for top three defenses. Add it for five. And no cheating aka including teams that are ranked 6/7 whatever.

My sample size for the best of the best includes 30-40 games.. Plenty for a random sample size as 30 is the typical benchmark in statistics.

I asked YOU to show me Kobe's averages vs. top 3-5 level defenses, and you only gave me 5 series' vs. top 3 rated defenses....

Matter of fact, I already posted Kobe's numbers from his prime. They were less than stellar.

[tpols]

I asked YOU to show me Kobe's averages vs. top 3-5 level defenses, and you only gave me 5 series' vs. top 3 rated defenses....

Matter of fact, I already posted Kobe's numbers from his prime. They were less than stellar.
I gave you seven series and 35+games. would you like me to post the list again? :oldlol: keep lying dude..

And sure I'll post his averages against the teams that ranked 4 and 5 defensively and add it to the list that includes ones, twos, and threes. Kobe already has five out of seven as above average so he'll have to have really really poor results to have his bad series eclipse his good ones like you lied about.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

I gave you seven series and 35+games. would you like me to post the list again? :oldlol: keep lying dude..

And sure I'll post his averages against the teams that ranked 4 and 5 defensively and add it to the list that includes ones, twos, and threes. Kobe already has five out of seven as above average so he'll have to have really really poor results to have his bad series eclipse his good ones like you lied about.

I'm not lying. You only posted those 5 series (not including the Celtics and Pistons ones I already listed).

So again: I'll wait for you to show me a list of series, w/ links, of Kobe facing top 3-5 rated defenses. Remember, I already posted PRIME Kobe's stats from '05-10. :oldlol:

[tpols]

I'm not lying. You only posted those 5 series (not including the Celtics and Pistons ones I already listed).

So again: I'll wait for you to show me a list of series, w/ links, of Kobe facing top 3-5 rated defenses. Remember, I already posted PRIME Kobe's stats from '05-10. :oldlol:
I posted the only seven series he faced top three defenses in.. The good ones and the bad ones. And there happen to be more than twice as many good or great series as there were bad. You're already on a bad track dude. Better think of something else after I post the top five.

[Blue&Orange]

Another Jordan fan proposed myth shot to the ground.

Also the 01 Kings were not a top 3 defense that season, but had a defensive rating below 100, at 99.6.
Kobe averaged 35-9-4 on 47FG/59TS

Kobe faced top 9 defenses in every series in the 2001 Playoffs
He averaged 29-7-6 on 46FG/56TS

Kobe also faced top 10 defenses in every series in the 2009 Playoffs
He averaged 30-5-6 on 46FG/56TS


I just looked up Defensive Ratings from 1988 to today. What a ****ing joke this is. The 89 Pistons came in ranked 225th.
The 92 Bulls? 211th
The 97 Bulls? 205th

The highest ranked Jordan/Pippen Bulls team was the old ass 97-98 team where Pippen missed half the season -- at 38th. :no:

The 03 Sacramento Kings? 27th!!! :lol

The 04 New Jersey NETS -- 10th! :bowdown: :applause:

The 94 Knicks are 14th, but the team that BEAT them are ranked 65th!

Get this. The 03 Nuggets, who won all of 17 games is ranked 63rd. That's right. 17-65 and they are ranked SIXTY-THIRD best defense since 1988! Higher than any of the 90's champions except for the old, injured 98 Bulls that barely held it together. What a f*cking joke. :roll:

And this dude keeps shoving this stat up everyone's ass like it means something. :oldlol:
Yep a team that won 17 games were a better defensive team than the bad boys.

Another myth shot down :facepalm

[tpols]

Yep a team that won 17 games were a better defensive team than the bad boys.

Another myth shot down :facepalm
That's why you can't use dratings across eras. Gotta use their relative ranking since times change.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

I posted the only seven series he faced top three defenses in.. The good ones and the bad ones. And there happen to be more than twice as many good or great series as there were bad. You're already on a bad track dude. Better think of something else after I post the top five.

I asked for top 3-5, though. Not just "top 3".

Thanks again :cheers:

[KG215]

All that really does, which I think any level-headed objective person has said numerous times on here, is tell us that it's silly to compare DRtg across different eras and different decades.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

I posted the only seven series he faced top three defenses in.. The good ones and the bad ones. And there happen to be more than twice as many good or great series as there were bad. You're already on a bad track dude. Better think of something else after I post the top five.

Oh, and again, not including the bad series, you only post 5 of them. 23 games mate. Good luck w/ the research. :applause:

[Deuce Bigalow]

Yep a team that won 17 games were a better defensive team than the bad boys.

Another myth shot down :facepalm
It's relatively to its own era /logic
:facepalm

[Deuce Bigalow]

I'm not lying. You only posted those 5 series (not including the Celtics and Pistons ones I already listed).

So again: I'll wait for you to show me a list of series, w/ links, of Kobe facing top 3-5 rated defenses. Remember, I already posted PRIME Kobe's stats from '05-10. :oldlol:
01-03 was part of Kobe's prime. You can't remove that.
33-7-7 on 51FG/57TS VS No.1 defense in 01 WCF
27-6-5 on 51FG/62TS VS No.1 defense in 02 Finals

He's had some average series vs top defenses and some great ones. Don't try to rewrite history.

[Legends66NBA7]

All that really does, which I think any level-headed objective person has said numerous times on here, is tell us that it's silly to compare DRtg across different eras and different decades.

Would the same rules apply for comparing ORtg and offensive numbers ?

[JohnnySic]

The '08 Celtics are not one of the truly elite all-time teams like the '86 Celtics, '96 Bulls, etc, but they are still on the best teams of the past decade along withthe '04 Pistons and '03 and '05 Spurs.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Hey, tpols, I did your homework for you.

So from '96-'04, against top 5 rated defenses, here's what Kobe averaged:

21.6ppg - 5.4reb - 5ast on .446% shooting -- and yes, this includes the '01 Spurs, '01 Nets, '02 Spurs, and '04 Pistons.

It does NOT include his series vs. the '08 Spurs, '09 Magic, '08 Celts or '10 Celts. Once again, though, I already posted his numbers from 2005-10.


01-03 was part of Kobe's prime. You can't remove that.
33-7-7 on 51FG/57TS VS No.1 defense in 01 WCF
27-6-5 on 51FG/62TS VS No.1 defense in 02 Finals

He's had some average series vs top defenses and some great ones. Don't try to rewrite history.

'03 had "different" defensive rules. Your fellow Kobe stan wants to use "context" and not compare across era's; this despite Kobe playing the entire millennium lol.

[Legends66NBA7]

The '08 Celtics are not one of the truly elite all-time teams like the '86 Celtics, '96 Bulls, etc, but they are still on the best teams of the past decade along withthe '04 Pistons and '03 and '05 Spurs.

I would leave the 2003 Spurs out. They weren't that great.

[hitmanyr2k]

The '08 Celtics are not one of the truly elite all-time teams like the '86 Celtics, '96 Bulls, etc, but they are still on the best teams of the past decade along withthe '04 Pistons and '03 and '05 Spurs.

The '03 Spurs weren't great at all. Anytime your PF leads the team in every major statistical category including assists you know your team has holes. Parker was still in development as a 2nd year player and couldn't be counted on in big moments. Ginobili was a wreckless rookie. Stephen Jackson was a turnover machine and none of those guys were consistent. Duncan was the only constant. The '03 Spurs got the same benefit of a weakass era the Lakers got in '00 thru '02. If the '03 Spurs had faced the Pistons of '04 or '05 they probably get rocked.

Now the '05 Spurs I agree with. They were truly a great team that would give any team of any era trouble. Their youngsters Parker and Ginobili had grown to all-star status, Bowen was in his defensive prime, had veteran 3 point shooters in Horry and Barry to stretch the floor and of course Duncan was still dominant and he had another 7 footer alongside him in Nazr Mohammed to make their interior defense damn good. And they completed a full playoff run against tough west opponents and unlike the 3peat Lakers they faced a very good East opponent in the defending champion Pistons with tough defense and prevailed.

[tpols]

Kobe against TOP FIVE defenses throughout the playoffs

-33/7/7, 51FG NO. 1 ranked spurs defense(01) (above his playoff averages that year)

-29/6/4, 53FG NO. 3 ranked spurs defense(08) (above his playoff averages that year)

-32/7/6, 42FG NO. 1 ranked magic defense (above his playoff averages that year.. more points assists and rebounds trumps slightly less fg)

-27/5/6, 51FG NO. 1 ranked nets defense (above his playoff averages that year)

-26/6/6, 46FG NO. 2 ranked spurs defense(02) (above his playoff averages that year)

32/5/4, 44FG NO. 3 ranked spurs defense(03) (right at playoff averages)

27/6/4, 46FG NO. 4 ranked rockets defense(09) (right at playoff averages)

-30/6/5, 41FG NO. 5 ranked Celtics defense (slightly below playoff averages that year)

-26/5/5, 42FG NO. 1 ranked Celtics defense (below his playoff averages that year)

-25/6/6, 38FG NO. 5 ranked rockets defense (below his playoff averages)

-23/4/3, 38FG NO. 1 ranked pistons defense (below his playoff averages that year)

-25/6/8, 42FG NO. 5 ranked sixers defense (below his playoff averages)

So kobe has five good series, two average ones, and five bad ones by his his own standards against top five defensive teams. If you average all of these playoff numbers from kobes prime in 2001 til now you get...

28/6/5 on 45 FG:oldlol:

Kobe's EXACT playoff averages from his prime..

[AngelEyes]

The 08' Celtics are rated just fine.

[tpols]

...

Already did it bro.. From kobes prime in 01 til now he averaged 28/6/5 on 45 percent against top five defensive teams in the playoffs. :cheers:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Kobe against TOP FIVE defenses throughout the playoffs

-33/7/7, 51FG NO. 1 ranked spurs defense(01) (above his playoff averages that year)

-29/6/4, 53FG NO. 3 ranked spurs defense(08) (above his playoff averages that year)

-32/7/6, 42FG NO. 1 ranked magic defense (above his playoff averages that year.. more points assists and rebounds trumps slightly less fg)

-27/5/6, 51FG NO. 1 ranked nets defense (above his playoff averages that year)

-26/6/6, 46FG NO. 2 ranked spurs defense(02) (above his playoff averages that year)

32/5/4, 44FG NO. 3 ranked spurs defense(03) (right at playoff averages)

27/6/4, 46FG NO. 4 ranked rockets defense(09) (right at playoff averages)

-30/6/5, 41FG NO. 5 ranked Celtics defense (slightly below playoff averages that year)

-26/5/5, 42FG NO. 1 ranked Celtics defense (below his playoff averages that year)

-25/6/6, 38FG NO. 5 ranked rockets defense (below his playoff averages)

-23/4/3, 38FG NO. 1 ranked pistons defense (below his playoff averages that year)

-25/6/8, 42FG NO. 5 ranked sixers defense (below his playoff averages)

So kobe has five good series, two average ones, and five bad ones by his his own standards against top five defensive teams. If you average all of these playoff numbers from kobes prime in 2001 til now you get...

28/6/5 on 45 FG:oldlol:

Kobe's EXACT playoff averages from his prime..

:confusedshrug:

Where are his series vs. the '99 Spurs (top rated defense), '00 Blazers (top 5 rated defense), '00 Suns (top 5 rated defense), and '04 Spurs (top rated defense) ...

Better go edit that post, tpols!! :oldlol:

[tpols]

:confusedshrug:

Where are his series vs. the '99 Spurs (top rated defense), '00 Blazers (top 5 rated defense), '00 Suns (top 5 rated defense), '04 Spurs (top rated defense), and '09 Rockets (top 5 rated defense) ...

Better go edit that post, tpols. :oldlol:
I did 09 rockets. Throw your glasses on son its in orange. :oldlol: He exploded to open that series and did fine based on his typical playoff performances. Don't know why you would include that lol

Why are you including series out of kobes prime? Obviously that will skew the numbers namely ppg apg and rpg and not fg since you showed he shot 45 percent regardless in this time span. Keep twisting facts. :oldlol:

[tpols]

Kunny you might as well admit it bro.. You've been dead wrong. The numbers don't lie. :confusedshrug:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

I did 09 rockets. Throw your glasses on son its in orange. :oldlol:

Why are you including series out of kobes prime? Obviously that will skew the numbers namely ppg apg and rpg and not fg since you showed he shot 45 percent regardless in this time span. Keep twisting facts. :oldlol:

So you're gonna act like you didn't post this? :confusedshrug:


TEN years ago where the league was totally different and there was a whole set of different defensive rules.

...But I'm the one moving the "goal posts" :roll:

[tpols]

So you're gonna act like you didn't post this? :confusedshrug:



...But I'm the one moving the "goal posts" :roll:
Lol And it's over. Fishing back multiple pages when you've been proven wrong.. Thought you'd take it like a man but you still a biitch. Peace. :cheers:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

And it's over. Fishing back when you've been proven wrong.. Thought you'd take it like a man but you still a biitch. Peace. :cheers:

Uh oh! :oldlol: No answer for that one, huh tpols? Lets be honest, you're better off avoiding it.

:applause:

[rmt]

Don't know why Kobe fans think that they can just forget about Kobe's early years. It's just like that MJ/Kobe thread - guess Kobe's the only player who gets a pass for his early years.

[Shepseskaf]

The '08 Celtics closed out a championship series in as dominating a fashion as anyone could want. Without health issues and dumb moves by Ainge, that team could have three-peated.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Don't know why Kobe fans think that they can just forget about Kobe's early years. It's just like that MJ/Kobe thread - guess Kobe's the only player who gets a pass for his early years.

Not sure why they would either. :oldlol:

Dude was an allstar caliber player from '99-00 (would have been an AS in '99 had it not been for a lockout).

Here are his REAL numbers vs. top 5 rated defenses ('99-'10):
28pts - 6.7reb - 4.4ast on .409% shooting

Not terrible, I'll admit, but still subpar for a player of his stature. Can't say I'm surprised by the AWFUL shooting, though. Kobe really stinks up the joint against ELITE defenses.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Not sure why they would either. :oldlol:

Dude was an allstar caliber player from '99-00 (would have been an AS in '99 had it not been for a lockout).

Here are his REAL numbers vs. top 5 rated defenses ('99-'10):
28pts - 6.7reb - 4.4ast on .409% shooting

Not terrible, I'll admit, but still subpar for a player of his stature. Can't say I'm surprised by the AWFUL shooting, though. Kobe really stinks up the joint against ELITE defenses.

So from '96-'04, against top 5 rated defenses, here's what Kobe averaged:

21.6ppg - 5.4reb - 5ast on .446% shooting -- and yes, this includes the '01 Spurs, '01 Nets, '02 Spurs, and '04 Pistons.


05-10 vs Top 5 rated defenses in the Playoffs

08 WCF vs Spurs (No.3 defense)
08 Finals vs Celtics (No.1 defense)
09 WCSF vs Rockets (No.4 defense)
09 Finals vs Magic (No.1 defense)
10 Finals vs Celtics (No.5 defense)

29.2 ppg - 5.6 rpg - 3.8 apg on .533%FG
25.7 ppg - 4.7 rpg - 5.0 apg on .405%FG
27.4 ppg - 5.0 rpg - 3.7 apg on .453%FG
32.4 ppg - 5.6 rpg - 7.4 apg on .430%FG
28.6 ppg - 8.0 rpg - 3.9 apg on .405%FG

Average
28.5 ppg - 5.8 rpg - 4.6 apg on .442%FG (314/710)

The numbers you put up don't make sense. How could his FG% be .409 from 99-10 when his FG% vs the top 5 defenses in 97-04 was .446 and in 05-10 was .442?

[Deuce Bigalow]

Kobe VS Top 5 ranked defenses in the Playoffs from '99-'10

99 WCSF vs Spurs (No.1 defense)
00 WCSF vs Suns (No.3 defense)
00 WCF vs Blazers (No.5 defense)
01 WCF vs Spurs (No.1 defense)
01 Finals vs 76ers (No.5 defense)
02 WCSF vs Spurs (No.2 defense)
02 Finals vs Nets (No.1 defense)
03 WCSF vs Spurs (No.3 defense)
04 WCQF vs Rockets (No.5 defense)
04 WCSF vs Spurs (No.1 defense)
04 Finals vs Pistons (No.2 defense)
08 WCF vs Spurs (No.3 defense)
08 Finals vs Celtics (No.1 defense)
09 WCSF vs Rockets (No.4 defense)
09 Finals vs Magic (No.1 defense)
10 Finals vs Celtics (No.5 defense)

21.3 ppg - 6.5 rpg - 3.5 apg on .447%FG
21.0 ppg - 3.8 rpg - 3.4 apg on .452%FG
20.4 ppg - 4.9 rpg - 5.9 apg on .439%FG
33.3 ppg - 7.0 rpg - 7.0 apg on .514%FG
24.6 ppg - 7.8 rpg - 5.8 apg on .415%FG
26.2 ppg - 5.4 rpg - 4.8 apg on .455%FG
26.8 ppg - 5.8 rpg - 5.3 apg on .514%FG
32.3 ppg - 5.0 rpg - 3.7 apg on .434%FG
24.4 ppg - 5.6 rpg - 6.2 apg on .386%FG
26.3 ppg - 6.3 rpg - 5.8 apg on .462%FG
22.6 ppg - 2.8 rpg - 4.4 apg on .381%FG
29.2 ppg - 5.6 rpg - 3.8 apg on .533%FG
25.7 ppg - 4.7 rpg - 5.0 apg on .405%FG
27.4 ppg - 5.0 rpg - 3.7 apg on .453%FG
32.4 ppg - 5.6 rpg - 7.4 apg on .430%FG
28.6 ppg - 8.0 rpg - 3.9 apg on .405%FG

Average from '99-'10
26.4 ppg - 5.6 rpg - 4.9 apg on .443%FG

Average from '01-'10
27.6 ppg - 5.7 rpg - 5.0 apg on .447%FG

Average from '05-'10
28.5 ppg - 5.8 rpg - 4.6 apg on .442%FG

[Deuce Bigalow]

Already did it bro.. From kobes prime in 01 til now he averaged 28/6/5 on 45 percent against top five defensive teams in the playoffs. :cheers:
Yep, you were right. :cheers:

[tpols]

Kobe VS Top 5 ranked defenses in the Playoffs from '99-'10

99 WCSF vs Spurs (No.1 defense)
00 WCSF vs Suns (No.3 defense)
00 WCF vs Blazers (No.5 defense)
01 WCF vs Spurs (No.1 defense)
01 Finals vs 76ers (No.5 defense)
02 WCSF vs Spurs (No.2 defense)
02 Finals vs Nets (No.1 defense)
03 WCSF vs Spurs (No.3 defense)
04 WCQF vs Rockets (No.5 defense)
04 WCSF vs Spurs (No.1 defense)
04 Finals vs Pistons (No.2 defense)
08 WCF vs Spurs (No.3 defense)
08 Finals vs Celtics (No.1 defense)
09 WCSF vs Rockets (No.4 defense)
09 Finals vs Magic (No.1 defense)
10 Finals vs Celtics (No.5 defense)

21.3 ppg - 6.5 rpg - 3.5 apg on .447%FG
21.0 ppg - 3.8 rpg - 3.4 apg on .452%FG
20.4 ppg - 4.9 rpg - 5.9 apg on .439%FG
33.3 ppg - 7.0 rpg - 7.0 apg on .514%FG
24.6 ppg - 7.8 rpg - 5.8 apg on .415%FG
26.2 ppg - 5.4 rpg - 4.8 apg on .455%FG
26.8 ppg - 5.8 rpg - 5.3 apg on .514%FG
32.3 ppg - 5.0 rpg - 3.7 apg on .434%FG
24.4 ppg - 5.6 rpg - 6.2 apg on .386%FG
26.3 ppg - 6.3 rpg - 5.8 apg on .462%FG
22.6 ppg - 2.8 rpg - 4.4 apg on .381%FG
29.2 ppg - 5.6 rpg - 3.8 apg on .533%FG
25.7 ppg - 4.7 rpg - 5.0 apg on .405%FG
27.4 ppg - 5.0 rpg - 3.7 apg on .453%FG
32.4 ppg - 5.6 rpg - 7.4 apg on .430%FG
28.6 ppg - 8.0 rpg - 3.9 apg on .405%FG

Average from '99-'10
26.4 ppg - 5.6 rpg - 4.9 apg on .443%FG

Average from '01-'10
27.6 ppg - 5.7 rpg - 5.0 apg on .447%FG

Average from '05-'10
28.5 ppg - 5.8 rpg - 4.6 apg on .442%FG
Wow and he was lying.. What an little ******:facepalm

[Deuce Bigalow]

Wow and he was lying.. What an little ******:facepalm
:oldlol:

[Money 23]

Played down to their competition really. Only team in recent memory that could literally flick an on/off switch. They were THAT good (primarily on the defensive end).
Correct answer.

One of the top five teams I've ever seen in my almost 2 decades of watching NBA ball from '90 - 2k13

They played down to the comp, I'd even argue as a team they were the best post MJ Bulls team. Better even than the 2001 Lakers.

Celtics were scarier in 2009, pre KG's injury. Shame what happened to that squad. With a healthy KG, I think they could've won 3 straight. 2k11 would've been the first year I don't see them winning w/ a healthy KG.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Kobe VS Top 5 ranked defenses in the Playoffs from '99-'10

99 WCSF vs Spurs (No.1 defense)
00 WCSF vs Suns (No.3 defense)
00 WCF vs Blazers (No.5 defense)
01 WCF vs Spurs (No.1 defense)
01 Finals vs 76ers (No.5 defense)
02 WCSF vs Spurs (No.2 defense)
02 Finals vs Nets (No.1 defense)
03 WCSF vs Spurs (No.3 defense)
04 WCQF vs Rockets (No.5 defense)
04 WCSF vs Spurs (No.1 defense)
04 Finals vs Pistons (No.2 defense)
08 WCF vs Spurs (No.3 defense)
08 Finals vs Celtics (No.1 defense)
09 WCSF vs Rockets (No.4 defense)
09 Finals vs Magic (No.1 defense)
10 Finals vs Celtics (No.5 defense)

21.3 ppg - 6.5 rpg - 3.5 apg on .447%FG
21.0 ppg - 3.8 rpg - 3.4 apg on .452%FG
20.4 ppg - 4.9 rpg - 5.9 apg on .439%FG
33.3 ppg - 7.0 rpg - 7.0 apg on .514%FG
24.6 ppg - 7.8 rpg - 5.8 apg on .415%FG
26.2 ppg - 5.4 rpg - 4.8 apg on .455%FG
26.8 ppg - 5.8 rpg - 5.3 apg on .514%FG
32.3 ppg - 5.0 rpg - 3.7 apg on .434%FG
24.4 ppg - 5.6 rpg - 6.2 apg on .386%FG
26.3 ppg - 6.3 rpg - 5.8 apg on .462%FG
22.6 ppg - 2.8 rpg - 4.4 apg on .381%FG
29.2 ppg - 5.6 rpg - 3.8 apg on .533%FG
25.7 ppg - 4.7 rpg - 5.0 apg on .405%FG
27.4 ppg - 5.0 rpg - 3.7 apg on .453%FG
32.4 ppg - 5.6 rpg - 7.4 apg on .430%FG
28.6 ppg - 8.0 rpg - 3.9 apg on .405%FG

Average from '99-'10
26.4 ppg - 5.6 rpg - 4.9 apg on .443%FG

Average from '01-'10
27.6 ppg - 5.7 rpg - 5.0 apg on .447%FG

Average from '05-'10
28.5 ppg - 5.8 rpg - 4.6 apg on .442%FG

Didn't see this response. You're right - and I apologize for the errors. My original point still stands, however. Against ELITE defenses, Kobe has more BAD shooting series than good (i.e. the bold)

[Deuce Bigalow]

Didn't see this response. You're right - and I apologize for the errors. My original point still stands, however. Against ELITE defenses, Kobe has more BAD shooting series than good (i.e. the bold)
His career FG% drops by 1 and his TS% drops by 2. Nothing unusual. It's better defense so that is normal.

Mind posting Jordan's? I remember his FG being .400 and .415 vs No.1 defenses of 93 Knicks and 96 Sonics.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

His career FG% drops by 1 and his TS% drops by 2. Nothing unusual. It's better defense so that is normal.

The difference between one shot (or % point) is significant over the course of a season ... or in this case, multiple playoff runs.


Mind posting Jordan's? I remember his FG being .400 and .415 vs No.1 defenses of 93 Knicks and 96 Sonics.

Go ahead. Post his numbers vs. top 5 rated defenses; they're definitely better than Kobe's. :oldlol:

[Deuce Bigalow]

The difference between one shot (or % point) is significant over the course of a season ... or in this case, multiple playoff runs.



Go ahead. Post his numbers vs. top 5 rated defenses; they're definitely better than Kobe's. :oldlol:
It's normal for your %s to drop. I bet Jordan's dropped too. Post em.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Post em.

You brought him up. Knock yourself out. :oldlol:

[Whoah10115]

Correct answer.

One of the top five teams I've ever seen in my almost 2 decades of watching NBA ball from '90 - 2k13

They played down to the comp, I'd even argue as a team they were the best post MJ Bulls team. Better even than the 2001 Lakers.

Celtics were scarier in 2009, pre KG's injury. Shame what happened to that squad. With a healthy KG, I think they could've won 3 straight. 2k11 would've been the first year I don't see them winning w/ a healthy KG.



Correct here. The best team I've seen since the Jordan Bulls.

[Deuce Bigalow]

You brought him up. Knock yourself out. :oldlol:
Just post his FG%, not anything else.

93 ECF: 62/155
96 Finals: 51/123

I gave you 2 series, post the rest.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Just post his FG%, not anything else.

93 ECF: 62/155
96 Finals: 51/123

I gave you 2 series, post the rest.

If it's just his FG%, then I'll post it. Give me a few minutes here.

*remember, we're talking about his numbers vs. top rated defenses -- don't change your criteria like tpols did. :oldlol:

[Deuce Bigalow]

If it's just his FG%, then I'll post it. Give me a few minutes here.

*remember, we're talking about his numbers vs. top rated defenses -- don't change your criteria like tpols did. :oldlol:
Tpols never changed anything. He got it right. It was you who posted the wrong numbers.

[Derka]

Correct answer.

One of the top five teams I've ever seen in my almost 2 decades of watching NBA ball from '90 - 2k13

They played down to the comp, I'd even argue as a team they were the best post MJ Bulls team. Better even than the 2001 Lakers.

Celtics were scarier in 2009, pre KG's injury. Shame what happened to that squad. With a healthy KG, I think they could've won 3 straight. 2k11 would've been the first year I don't see them winning w/ a healthy KG.

Just feel like quoting this because I'm called a dumb blind homer for saying this exact same thing.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Tpols never changed anything. He got it right. It was you who posted the wrong numbers.

He tried to change the criteria, though. Guy didn't want to add Kobe's "early years". That's probably why I ****ed up the stats. :oldlol:

Here are Jordan's numbers btw:

vs. '85 Bucks (#1 rated defense)-- .433%
vs. '86 Celts (#1 rated defense) -- .493%
vs. '88 Cavs (#5 rated defense) -- .559%
vs. '88 Pistons (#2 rated defense) -- .491
vs. '89 Cavs (#2 rated defense) -- .518%
vs. '89 Pistons (#3 rated defense) -- .460%

vs. '90 Pistons (#2 rated defense) -- .469%
vs. '91 Pistons (#3 rated defense) -- .535%
vs. '91 Lakers (#5 rated defense) -- .558%
vs. '92 Knicks (#2 rated defense) -- .477%
vs. '92 Blazers (#3 rated defense) -- .526%
vs. '93 Knicks (#1 rated defense) -- .400%

vs. '96 Knicks (#3 rated defense) -- .442%
vs. '96 Sonics (#1 rated defense) -- .415%
vs. '97 Hawks (#3 rated defense) -- .454%
vs. '97 Heat (#1 rated defense) -- .387%
vs. '98 Pacers (#5 rated defense) -- .467%

Still looks more efficient than Kobe. :confusedshrug:

[Deuce Bigalow]

He tried to change the criteria, though. Guy didn't want to add Kobe's "early years". That's probably why I ****ed up the stats. :oldlol:

Here are Jordan's numbers btw:

vs. '85 Bucks (#1 rated defense)-- .433%
vs. '86 Celts (#1 rated defense) -- .493%
vs. '88 Cavs (#5 rated defense) -- .559%
vs. '88 Pistons (#2 rated defense) -- .491
vs. '89 Cavs (#2 rated defense) -- .518%
vs. '89 Pistons (#3 rated defense) -- .460%

vs. '90 Pistons (#2 rated defense) -- .469%
vs. '91 Pistons (#3 rated defense) -- .535%
vs. '91 Lakers (#5 rated defense) -- .558%
vs. '92 Knicks (#2 rated defense) -- .477%
vs. '92 Blazers (#3 rated defense) -- .526%
vs. '93 Knicks (#1 rated defense) -- .400%

vs. '96 Knicks (#3 rated defense) -- .442%
vs. '96 Sonics (#1 rated defense) -- .415%
vs. '97 Hawks (#3 rated defense) -- .454%
vs. '97 Heat (#1 rated defense) -- .387%
vs. '98 Pacers (#5 rated defense) -- .467%

Still looks more efficient than Kobe. :confusedshrug:
What's the average %?

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

What's the average %?

Around ~48%. Efficient and pretty damn close to his playoff average. :cheers:

[Deuce Bigalow]

Around ~48%. Efficient and pretty damn close to his playoff average. :cheers:
You need to get total fg/fga, no ~
I doubt that its 48

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

You need to get total fg/fga, no ~
I doubt that its 48

You asked me for a percentage.

The exact percentage without rounding is .475% -- feel free to double check it.

[chazzy]

You asked me for a percentage.

The exact percentage without rounding is .475% -- feel free to double check it.
Did you avg each FG% number, or add up the total FGA/FGM from each game? It could be better or worse if you did that

[Deuce Bigalow]

You asked me for a percentage.

The exact percentage without rounding is .475% -- feel free to double check it.
Alright. His career playoff average is .487. So his FG% drops 1.2%. So what's the deal? Both players FG% dropped by only ~1%.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Alright. His career playoff average is .487. So his FG% drops 1.2%. So what's the deal? Both players FG% dropped by only ~1%.
:confusedshrug:

Jordan is actually efficient, though. Be a good boy and post his overall numbers for me. A future rep will be given. :D

[Deuce Bigalow]

Here are Jordan's numbers btw In the 90s

vs. '90 Pistons (#2 rated defense) -- .469%
vs. '91 Pistons (#3 rated defense) -- .535%
vs. '91 Lakers (#5 rated defense) -- .558%
vs. '92 Knicks (#2 rated defense) -- .477%
vs. '92 Blazers (#3 rated defense) -- .526%
vs. '93 Knicks (#1 rated defense) -- .400%

vs. '96 Knicks (#3 rated defense) -- .442%
vs. '96 Sonics (#1 rated defense) -- .415%
vs. '97 Hawks (#3 rated defense) -- .454%
vs. '97 Heat (#1 rated defense) -- .387%
vs. '98 Pacers (#5 rated defense) -- .467%

I had to cut the 80s out. A defense giving up 100 ppg on 45% is not a great defense in today's league.

This years Lakers are giving up 100 ppg on 45% right now so don't try to say I'm cherrypickin lol. What is that percentage?

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

I had to cut the 80s out. A defense giving up 100 ppg on 45% is not a great defense in today's league.

This years Lakers are giving up 100 ppg on 45% right now so don't try to say I'm cherrypickin lol. What is that percentage?

You're changing your criteria like that clown, tpols. I've already discussed this bullshit ad nauseum. Stay on topic or admit defeat. :oldlol:

[Champ]

:roll: :roll: :roll: :facepalm

Boston patties are so delusional. the celtics had 2 good decades in their history and they are suppose to be greatest franchise in NBA history

Which two decades are you referring to out of the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, and 00s?

[tpols]

Alright. His career playoff average is .487. So his FG% drops 1.2%. So what's the deal? Both players FG% dropped by only ~1%.
Wait.. Jordan and kobe have the same exact drop off against top defenses.. What a surprise? :oldlol: I guess Jordan 'wilts' against elite defenses too.

[Deuce Bigalow]

You're changing your criteria like that clown, tpols. I've already discussed this bullshit ad nauseum. Stay on topic or admit defeat. :oldlol:
Both FG% dropped 1% for their careers. That we all know now.

[tpols]

I had to cut the 80s out. A defense giving up 100 ppg on 45% is not a great defense in today's league.

This years Lakers are giving up 100 ppg on 45% right now so don't try to say I'm cherrypickin lol. What is that percentage?
Nah dude.. Don't take out those 80s pistons defenses. That's unfair. Just leave it as it is. Jordan and kobe both see the same drop off.. There's no relative difference. Kuniva_dAMiGhTy tried to say kobe shot 41 percent and lied. Kobe in fact does not wilt against tough defenses at all.. His main point has been completely debunked.

[Deuce Bigalow]

:confusedshrug:

Jordan is actually efficient, though. Be a good boy and post his overall numbers for me. A future rep will be given. :D
I'll check his ppg and will get his TS%

What was his total FGA?

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Both FG% dropped 1% for their careers. That we all know now.

Or that Jordan shot efficiently? Considerably more than your boi, at least.

None of this means Kobe sucks or anything. He's the GOAT volume scorer. :applause:

[BlueandGold]

Same as the early pistons. They won one flukey title because Karl Malone was injured. The east was so shit that they got the best record for a few years after, but they were never legit contenders.


08 Boston wins one flukey title when Ariza and Bynum were injured and now are on all time great lists, wtf:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

Don't forget the Powe-Whistle game, Leon Powe is suddenly given 16 freethrows on the same day he has a heartwarming halftime piece about him being homeless.

Don't forget the bittch Paul Pierce getting dragged away on a wheelchair then coming back 5 minutes later miraculously cured:facepalm

That was probably one of the most WTF sports moments I've ever had. I still remember essentially every moment of that game because of how close the Lakers got to winning that one and you can only imagine the alternative history if that were to happen.

I know it's a stretch but I see some sort of connection to that Paul Pierce acting stunt in the Finals and also the increase in the amount of flops and fake injuries afterwards.. it seriously went against everything that goes in the name of sports/sportsmanship.. you don't just fake an injury like that and get carted off in a wheelchair. Even if he went off on his own accord yet was hobbling and then came back it wouldn't have been nearly an issue as his extremely dramatic hand over his face/wincing in pain/wheelchair moment.

lol pau pierce IS a little bitch i actually agree with this person for once.. know why cause only a bitch would pull a stunt like that

and yes to answer the OP: 08 Celtics extremely overrated.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Or that Jordan shot efficiently? Considerably more than your boi, at least.

None of this means Kobe sucks or anything. He's the GOAT volume scorer. :applause:
Kobe's points per shot is 0.03 less than Jordan's, so how is he a "volume" scorer?

[Deuce Bigalow]

Kuniva, Jordan shot 3 FG% higher, but Kobe takes a lot more 3s so the difference in efficiency is not big, so if Kobe wasn't efficient then Jordan wasn't either, although I think both did good.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Kobe stans crack me up. Kobe's early years don't count. HE SUCKED!!! 80s defense doesnt count. TOO MANY short white guys!!! :oldlol:


Nah dude.. Don't take out those 80s pistons defenses. That's unfair. Just leave it as it is. Jordan and kobe both see the same drop off.. There's no relative difference. Kuniva_dAMiGhTy tried to say kobe shot 41 percent and lied. Kobe in fact does not wilt against tough defenses at all.. His main point has been completely debunked.

Kobe has more BAD (inefficient) series than he does good (efficient) ones. Didn't you say the opposite?


Kobe has more great series against great defensive teams than he has bad ones. We can tally them up and it isn't even close.

Oh, that's right. You did! :roll:

[chazzy]

Kobe has more BAD (inefficient) series than he does good (efficient) ones. Didn't you say the opposite?



Oh, that's right. You did! :roll:
Now we have to define what constitutes bad and what's good. Sub 43% shooting? What if he has great overall numbers like he did in the 09 finals (32/7.4)

[tpols]

Kobe VS Top 5 ranked defenses in the Playoffs from '99-'10

99 WCSF vs Spurs (No.1 defense)
00 WCSF vs Suns (No.3 defense)
00 WCF vs Blazers (No.5 defense)
01 WCF vs Spurs (No.1 defense)
01 Finals vs 76ers (No.5 defense)
02 WCSF vs Spurs (No.2 defense)
02 Finals vs Nets (No.1 defense)
03 WCSF vs Spurs (No.3 defense)
04 WCQF vs Rockets (No.5 defense)
04 WCSF vs Spurs (No.1 defense)
04 Finals vs Pistons (No.2 defense)
08 WCF vs Spurs (No.3 defense)
08 Finals vs Celtics (No.1 defense)
09 WCSF vs Rockets (No.4 defense)
09 Finals vs Magic (No.1 defense)
10 Finals vs Celtics (No.5 defense)

21.3 ppg - 6.5 rpg - 3.5 apg on .447%FG
21.0 ppg - 3.8 rpg - 3.4 apg on .452%FG
20.4 ppg - 4.9 rpg - 5.9 apg on .439%FG
33.3 ppg - 7.0 rpg - 7.0 apg on .514%FG
24.6 ppg - 7.8 rpg - 5.8 apg on .415%FG
26.2 ppg - 5.4 rpg - 4.8 apg on .455%FG
26.8 ppg - 5.8 rpg - 5.3 apg on .514%FG
32.3 ppg - 5.0 rpg - 3.7 apg on .434%FG
24.4 ppg - 5.6 rpg - 6.2 apg on .386%FG
26.3 ppg - 6.3 rpg - 5.8 apg on .462%FG
22.6 ppg - 2.8 rpg - 4.4 apg on .381%FG
29.2 ppg - 5.6 rpg - 3.8 apg on .533%FG
25.7 ppg - 4.7 rpg - 5.0 apg on .405%FG
27.4 ppg - 5.0 rpg - 3.7 apg on .453%FG
32.4 ppg - 5.6 rpg - 7.4 apg on .430%FG
28.6 ppg - 8.0 rpg - 3.9 apg on .405%FG

Average from '99-'10
26.4 ppg - 5.6 rpg - 4.9 apg on .443%FG

Average from '01-'10
27.6 ppg - 5.7 rpg - 5.0 apg on .447%FG

Average from '05-'10
28.5 ppg - 5.8 rpg - 4.6 apg on .442%FG
He does.. Kun 9 to 7.

And what's funny is when you highlighted this list with the bad performances in bold.. It was 8-8. :oldlol:

You're wrong even by your standards.

[tpols]

A 1 percent decline in FG.. :oldlol:

[KOBE143]

08 Celtics was one of the best defensive team of all time on par with the 04 Piston.. Look at the playoff record of the 04 piston.. They also struggle going to finals, same goes to Celtics.. Even tho the Celtics were great back then, they still find a way to cheat and rigged the finals to steal the championship from the Lakers.. Lakers should've been the champs that year..

[tpols]

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=8121012&postcount=168

You have it at 8-8 homeboy.. And that's discounting his 32/7/6 09 Finals.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=8121012&postcount=168

You have it at 8-8 homeboy.. And that's discounting his 32/7/6 09 Finals.

Just because I didn't bold ALL of them doesn't mean I think they're "good". Look at the series' he had in 1999 and 2000. By his standards, they're average and below. :oldlol:

[tpols]

Just because I didn't bold ALL of them doesn't mean I think they're "good". Look at the series' he had in 1999 and 2000. By his standards, they're average and below. :oldlol:
Not compared to what he put up in those years.. Kobe wasn't a 30/5/5 player 2000 and below.

And again 1 percent less FG. Boy did kobe struggle against those tough defenses. Imagine if he faced weaker defenses? He might have averaged one more point per game. :eek:

:oldlol:

[MiseryCityTexas]

that 08 celtics team woulda had a shit load of championships if all three players would have played for the celtics when they were in their mid to late 20s. instead, they wasted all their prime years on mediorce play-off teams, and teams that didn't qualify for the play-offs.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Not compared to what he put up in those years.. Kobe wasn't a 30/5/5 player 2000 and below.

And again 1 percent less FG. Boy did kobe struggle against those tough defenses. Imagine if he faced weaker defenses? He might have averaged one more point per game. :eek:

:oldlol:

What was he in 2004? You know ... against the Pistons? :oldlol:

Compared to how Shaq played, I just don't consider those series' "good". Don't know what to tell you :confusedshrug:

The chart I posted lists PRIME Kobe's shooting %'s VS. ELITE defenses. He struggled.

[tpols]

What was he in 2004? You know ... against the Pistons? :oldlol:

Compared to how Shaq played, I just don't consider those series' "good". Don't know what to tell you :confusedshrug.
Who considered his 2004 pistons series good? Both you and I have that as his worst. What are you even talking about? Fact is kobe put up the same numbers against tough defenses in the Playoffs that he did against other defenses.. Minus one percent. He didn't 'wilt' against them. That was such a joke.

I'm glad you learned something today. :cheers:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Who considered his 2004 pistons series good? Both you and I have that as his worst. What are you even talking about? Fact is kobe put up the same numbers against tough defenses in the Playoffs that he did against other defenses.. Minus one percent. He didn't 'wilt' against them. That was such a joke.

I'm glad you learned something today. :cheers:

How? You do realize his career numbers reflect both his good and bad games, right? :oldlol:

eg:
http://i1111.photobucket.com/albums/h467/Catrean/wade-kobe-lebron-playoff-breakdown-by-defense1.jpg

Look at the HUGE discrepancy vs. ELITE and Good / Bad defenses.

[tpols]

How? You do realize his career numbers reflect both his good and bad games, right? :oldlol:]
Uh.. Let me try to explain it to you.

Kobe has good and bad games against shitty defenses.

Kobe has good and bad games against great defenses.

When you average the good and the bad from his games against shitty defenses they come out with ONE percent more FG than the averages of his good and bad games against great defenses.. Everything else being the same.

It's very simple.

And this is about where it matters.. The PLAYOFFS.

[Deuce Bigalow]

The chart I posted lists PRIME Kobe's shooting %'s VS. ELITE defenses. He struggled.
The 2005-2010 years vs the top 5 defenses he averaged 28.5 ppg - 5.8 rpg - 4.6 apg on .442%FG

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Uh.. Let me try to explain it to you.

Kobe has good and bad games against shitty defenses.

Kobe has good and bad games against great defenses.

:confusedshrug:

His stats (see above) don't bear out. What you're saying simply doesn't reflect in the numbers.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

The 2005-2010 years vs the top 5 defenses he averaged 28.5 ppg - 5.8 rpg - 4.6 apg on .442%FG

... And what did he average against bad defenses?

[tpols]

:confusedshrug:

His stats (see above) don't bear out. What you're saying simply doesn't reflect in the numbers.
What? Are you changing this argument to what he did in the regular season for 40 % of his career instead of what he did in the playoffs for 100 % of his career? :oldlol:

One percent FGG..

Damn.. That nikka really was hurt in. Cmon kobe. Gotta get that last percentage point to please the almighty Kunnn

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

What? Are you changing this argument to what he did in the regular season for 40 % of his career instead of what he did in the playoffs for 100 % of his career? :oldlol:

:biggums:

What I posted includes postseason play. How many times have I said that already? LOL ...

[tpols]

... And what did he average against bad defenses?
Bottom line kobe struggled as much against tough defenses as MJ did.. They both went hard at the Ds and put up numbers that they typically averaged anyway.. Minus one percent FG of course.

Going against a tougher defense and putting up the same as your averages against less challenging defenses means you went even harder than normal.

There's no way you can spin this.. Unless of course you wanna admit MJ struggled against tough Ds too. :oldlol:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Bottom line kobe struggled as much against tough defenses as MJ did.. They both went hard at the Ds and put up numbers that they typically averaged anyway.. Minus one percent FG of course.

Going against a tougher defense and putting up the same as your averages against less challenging defenses means you went even harder than normal.

There's no way you can spin this.. Unless of course you wanna admit MJ struggled against tough Ds too. :oldlol:

Uhh, my point has ALWAYS been that he struggles against ELITE defenses (which means he's GREAT against the average and below average defenses).

What exactly am I "spinning"?

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

How does one explain the numbers in the chart I posted? Are they made up? Kobe's shooting %'s just "magically" fall off vs. ELITE defenses :confusedshrug:

[tpols]

Uhh, my point has ALWAYS been that he struggles against ELITE defenses (which means he's GREAT against the average and below average defenses).

What exactly am I "spinning"?
What? Kobe averages the same numbers against great defenses as he does overall minus one percent FG. him and MJ are literally identical in this regard.. They both average the same stats minus the one percent FG. There's no way you can say kobe struggles without saying MJ struggles as well. They have identical relative differences.

[tpols]

How does one explain the numbers in the chart I posted? Are they made up? Kobe's shooting %'s just "magically" fall off vs. ELITE defenses :confusedshrug:
Those numbers include regular season games in addition to the playoffs for only half of kobes prime..they EXCLUDE all of his great series against the spurs and Nets earlier in kobes prime. You choose to leave out the portion of his prime where he was most effective against the great defenses we are arguing about. Are you really this dense dude?

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

What? Kobe averages the same numbers against great defenses as he does overall minus one percent FG. him and MJ are literally identical in this regard..

Jordan averages a higher % though. Nearly four percentage points HIGHER. Pretty big difference there.

[tpols]

Jordan averages a higher % though. Nearly four percentage points HIGHER. Pretty big difference there.
But Jordan shoots FIVE percent better than kobe overall.. It's all relative dude.

If Jordan normally shoots 50-51 percent in the playoffs and shoots 47.5 percent against tough Ds that means he had a harder time against them. Same thing for kobe when he goes from 45-46 to 44.

By your definition of efficiency.. Kobe is NEVER efficient. Even against average Ds he shoots well below 50 percent.

You're making zero sense dude..

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Those numbers include regular season games in addition to the playoffs for only half of kobes prime..they EXCLUDE all of his great series against the spurs and Nets earlier in kobes prime. You choose to leave out the portion of his prime where he was most effective against the great defenses we are arguing about. Are you really this dense dude?

Why are you making excuses? Everyone knows Kobe's best years are around 2005-10. It's not even close.

BTW, the numbers I posted aren't from the regular season. I know I had originally said that they were, but the dude's blog ACTUALLY says they're from the postseason. That's my bad.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

But Jordan shoots FIVE percent better than kobe overall.. It's all relative dude.

If Jordan normally shoots 50-51 percent in the playoffs and shoots 47.5 percent against tough Ds that means he had a harder time against them. Same thing for kobe when he goes from 45-46 to 44.

By your definition of efficiency.. Kobe is NEVER efficient. Even against average Ds he shoots well below 50 percent.

You're making zero sense dude..

You're right. I don't consider Kobe efficient. He's a career 44% scorer in the postseason. 45% in the regular season. He's the GREATEST volume scorer ever.

[tpols]

Why are you making excuses? Everyone knows Kobe's best years are around 2005-10. It's not even close.
Making excuses? I'm including all the stats.. Kobe was a 30/5/5 caliber player for four years before what your chart includes.

Money23 will tell you he thinks 2003 kobe is one of the best kobes ever. I can't believe you're telling ME I'm making excuses because I'm using the entirety of kobes prime while you only use half of it. What a joke. :oldlol:

[chazzy]

You're right. I don't consider Kobe efficient. He's a career 44% scorer in the postseason. 45% in the regular season. He's the GREATEST volume scorer ever.
Better than Jordan and Wilt, what a compliment :applause:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Making excuses? I'm including all the stats.. Kobe was a 30/5/5 caliber player for four years before what your chart includes.

Money23 will tell you he thinks 2003 kobe is one of the best kobes ever. I can't believe you're telling ME I'm making excuses because I'm using the entirety of kobes prime while you only use half of it. What a joke. :oldlol:

I'm not saying you should ignore them. I'm addressing the numbers I just posted. Do they not drop off (substantially) vs. ELITE defenses?

[tpols]

I'm not saying you should ignore them. I'm addressing the numbers I just posted. Do they not drop off (substantially) vs. ELITE defenses?
Why would I respect that when I have the data for all of his years instead of just the five you chose?

Kobe had better numbers against elite Ds in 00,01 and 02 than he did in 09 and 10 from an FG perspective. And you are excluding them thus sskewing the results for the total body of work.

So you ask do they drop off for that time period? Yes. And they go up in the other time period you excluded to bring the average to a whopping one percent FG off his overall averages. That is just the truth.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Why would I respect that when I have the data for all of his years instead of just the five you chose?

Because they're from his BEST years. One or two seasons before he hit his peak/prime vs. BULK of his prime. Wow, that's what you're arguing here? :oldlol:


Kobe had better numbers against elite Ds in 00,01 and 02 than he did in 09

That's because you had the most dominant player ever. Pretty obvious there.


one percent FG off his overall averages. That is just the truth.

I've already said that I don't think he's efficient. Kobe's 44% shooting vs. ELITE defenses isn't impressive. Not when you compare him to other all-time greats, at least.

[tpols]

Because they're from his BEST years. One or two seasons before he hit his peak vs. BULK of his prime. Wow, that's what you're arguing here? .
It's not the bulk of his prime. :oldlol: You're leaving out four years out of nine and saying it's the bulk. This is all very simple. There's a one percent FG difference off his total averages against elite defenses.



I've already said that I don't think he's efficient. Kobe's 44% shooting vs. ELITE defenses isn't impressive. Not when you compare him to other all-time greats, at least.
And you would also say kobes 45 percent career overall average is not impressive. Thus implying no drop off.. Other than one percent FG.

Now I know why all those people were camping outside Wallstreet. That one percent. :eek:

[tpols]

Are you seriously debating 2001-2004 Kobe vs. 2005-2010? Really? :oldlol:

It's not. Not when you compare him to other all-time (great) scorers ... or the amount of shots he takes for that matter.
I'm not debating the two against each other. I'm using BOTH. I'm using the full sample of playoff games. You're using half. Whose right here? :oldlol:

[chazzy]

Yeah I don't get why you would leave out elite years with great performances just because Shaq was there.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

I'm not debating the two against each other. I'm using BOTH. I'm using the full sample of playoff games. You're using half. Whose right here? :oldlol:

I'm using his BEST years. You're bitching about two or three years w/ PEAK Shaq. :oldlol:

[tpols]

Btw Kun weren't you biitching at me for not using 2000 and 1999 in our original comparison? Now you want to exclude the full sample? Really?

Talk about a hypocrite. :oldlol:

[tpols]

I'm using his BEST years. You're bitching about two or three years w/ PEAK Shaq. :oldlol:
Four years dumb ass.. Lol and now we're throwing up the Shaq excuse. You're on a roll homie. Keep it up. :cheers:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Btw Kun weren't you biitching at me for not using 2000 and 1999 in our original comparison?

Yeah, YOU didn't want to include them. Remember? :oldlol:

Lets discuss his numbers from his BEST (overall) years ... against ELITE defenses. :applause:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Four years dumb ass.. Lol and now we're throwing up the Shaq excuse. You're on a roll homie. Keep it up. :cheers:

Playing w/ the most dominant player of the 20th century is an excuse? Oh, Kobe fans!! :oldlol:

[chazzy]

You claimed Kobe wilts against elite defenses, got proven wrong by full playoff numbers over a 10 year span, and now you want to dismiss half the sample because of Shaq? Should we eliminate Magic's early numbers alongside Kareem from future discussion now?

BTW, that chart is only a 3 year sample because Kobe didn't play an elite defense in 05-07

[tpols]

Yeah, YOU didn't want to include them. Remember? :oldlol:

Lets discuss his numbers from his BEST (overall) years ... against ELITE defenses. :applause:
And they ended up being included. Kobe never dropped fire on those spurs teams now. LOL

Crank this through your speakers dawg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSj4_8MR2lI&feature=youtube_gdata_player

[tpols]

You claimed Kobe wilts against elite defenses, got proven wrong by full playoff numbers over a 10 year span, and now you want to dismiss half the sample because of Shaq? Should we eliminate Magic's early numbers alongside Kareem from future discussion now?

BTW, that chart is only a 3 year sample because Kobe didn't play an elite defense in 05-07
Wow so that charts only 08-10.. This kids pathetic man. :(

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

You claimed Kobe wilts against elite defenses, got proven wrong by full playoff numbers over a 10 year span, and now you want to dismiss half the sample because of Shaq? Should we eliminate Magic's early numbers alongside Kareem from future discussion now?

BTW, that chart is only a 3 year sample because Kobe didn't play an elite defense in 05-07

:confusedshrug:

He shoots 44% against ELITE defenses. He has more average to bad series' than he does good series'. Nearly EVERY ELITE defense Kobe has faced in the finals, he's struggled shooting the ball (see: '01 Sixers, '04 Pistons, '08 and '10 Celts, '09 Magic). Should I go on?

[chazzy]

:confusedshrug:

He shoots 44% against ELITE defenses. He has more average to bad series' than he does good series'. Nearly EVERY ELITE defense Kobe has faced in the finals, he's struggled shooting the ball (see: '01 Sixers, '04 Pistons, '08 and '10 Celts, '09 Magic). Should I go on?
He shoots 44.8% overall in the playoffs, so he plays right around the same on average. Wilting would be if there were a huge and consistent drop off. He's had both good and bad series which balance out.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

You claimed Kobe wilts against elite defenses, got proven wrong by full playoff numbers over a 10 year span, and now you want to dismiss half the sample because of Shaq? Should we eliminate Magic's early numbers alongside Kareem from future discussion now?

BTW, that chart is only a 3 year sample because Kobe didn't play an elite defense in 05-07

Not necessarily. Look at the Good / Solid / Elite discrepancy. Kobe doin' work ... vs. crappy defenses. :oldlol:

[chazzy]

Not necessarily. Look at the Good / Solid / Elite discrepancy. Kobe doin' work ... vs. crappy defenses. :oldlol:
True, I meant elite defenses though.

[tpols]

Kun:oldlol:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

True, I meant elite defenses though.

53%TS vs. 60%TS

Hmmm, that's a tough choice ...

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Kun:oldlol:

http://pixti.me/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/oh-hai.jpg

[chazzy]

53%TS vs. 60%TS

Hmmm, that's a tough choice ...
?

I was saying the elite defense sample is only 08-10. 09 and 10 were the tail end of his prime.. so your chart doesn't actually include much of his peak play really. I don't see why it should hold more value over a 10 year sample.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

?

I was saying the elite defense sample is only 08-10. 09 and 10 were the tail end of his prime.. so your chart doesn't actually include much of his peak play really. I don't see why it should hold more value over a 10 year sample.

Whatever. I've already said that I don't think shooting 44% is efficient. What are we debating exactly? :confusedshrug:

[tpols]

Kun?? Kun?? Cmon Kun.. CMON KUN!!


:oldlol: This totally wasn't worth it Haha.

[chazzy]

Whatever. I've already said that I don't think shooting 44% is efficient. What are we debating exactly? :confusedshrug:
Whether or not Kobe wilts against elite defenses.. and the overall numbers show that he stays around the same. Not much more to say really.. :lol