Replace Kobe with Current KD on the 3peat team

[hahaitme]

We all know someone humble like Durant would assume 2nd position to the god that is Shaq and not break up the team like some other snitch who took it for granted.

How many titles? 6 peat? :cheers:

The 90's bulls are lucky Shaq and Durant weren't born a bit earlier, they probably wouldn't have even won a single chip.

[NumberSix]

None. KD is a choker.

[JellyBean]

KD is a great talent but who knows what could have happened if we replace the great Kobe with the rising talent that is KD. Anything is possible.

[Ne 1]

Shaq with Penny = 0 rings Shaq with Eddie Jones/Nick Van Exel = 0 rings Shaq with Wade = 1 ring Shaq with Nash/Amar'e = 0 rings Shaq with LeBron = 0 rings. :oldlol: at thinking you could just put anyone in Kobe's place and the Lakers still 3-peat.

[Andrei89]

Shaq with Penny = 0 rings Shaq with Eddie Jones/Nick Van Exel = 0 rings Shaq with Wade = 1 ring Shaq with Nash/Amar'e = 0 rings Shaq with LeBron = 0 rings. :oldlol: at thinking you could just put anyone in Kobe's place and the Lakers still 3-peat.

In none of those situation was Shaq at his absolute peak. During the Lakers three peat Shaq was the most dominant player ever.

God some of you posters are horrible. Shaq with Nash and Amare? Really? :roll:

[Warfan]

Shaq with Penny = 0 rings Shaq with Eddie Jones/Nick Van Exel = 0 rings Shaq with Wade = 1 ring Shaq with Nash/Amar'e = 0 rings Shaq with LeBron = 0 rings. :oldlol: at thinking you could just put anyone in Kobe's place and the Lakers still 3-peat.

http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20120626025228/halo/images/1/15/Dw_what.gif

you retarded bruh?

[HoopsFanNumero1]

Shaq with Penny = 0 rings Shaq with Eddie Jones/Nick Van Exel = 0 rings Shaq with Wade = 1 ring Shaq with Nash/Amar'e = 0 rings Shaq with LeBron = 0 rings. :oldlol: at thinking you could just put anyone in Kobe's place and the Lakers still 3-peat.

These Kobetards are complete scum the way they're always trying to discredit Shaq. No matter how hard you try, Kobe will always be considered a sidekick for those three championships.

[Jlamb47]

None. KD is a choker.


Lol Lebron holds the biggest choke in history of NBA and u dawgin KD? insecure

[Akrazotile]

These Kobetards are complete scum the way they're always trying to discredit Shaq. No matter how hard you try, Kobe will always be considered a sidekick for those three championships.

And the second two

[Jlamb47]

And the second two

so why his sidekick numbers identical to lebrons fmvp numbers?
kobe in 01 put up numbers just like lebron?? yal insecure

[Ne 1]

In none of those situation was Shaq at his absolute peak. During the Lakers three peat Shaq was the most dominant player ever.

God some of you posters are horrible. Shaq with Nash and Amare? Really? :roll:
It wasn't until Kobe became a starter and developed into one of the leagues premier players did Shaq finally win those elusive rings and was able to be called "the most dominant player ever." He helped motivate Shaq and helped him become a better player is when Shaq reached his full potential, much like he did with Gasol. Kobe's pick and rolls also caused the big men to go back. Kobe slashing through the defense broke teams down so they were unable to get back to Shaq. If they couldn't get back, its a problem. Kobe creates for Shaq directly with his penetration and nobody got the ball to Shaq better than Kobe did. Kobe's clutch ability and ability to consistently take over in 4th quarters also helped Shaq tremendously.

[Jlamb47]

These Kobetards are complete scum the way they're always trying to discredit Shaq. No matter how hard you try, Kobe will always be considered a sidekick for those three championships.

shaq and kobe were 1a and 1b

arguably the 2 best player in the league at the time. Look up kobe numbers
your just a Bran fan thats all

[tmacattack33]

Shaq with Penny = 0 rings Shaq with Eddie Jones/Nick Van Exel = 0 rings Shaq with Wade = 1 ring Shaq with Nash/Amar'e = 0 rings Shaq with LeBron = 0 rings. :oldlol: at thinking you could just put anyone in Kobe's place and the Lakers still 3-peat.

Shaq and Penny only had two chances before Penny got hurt. In one, they got to the Finals (and beat the MJ Bulls...MJ's only playoff loss in the entire decade) and Shaq was outplayed by Hakeem. In the other, they lost to the MJ Bulls.

[Ne 1]

These Kobetards are complete scum the way they're always trying to discredit Shaq. No matter how hard you try, Kobe will always be considered a sidekick for those three championships. I'm not discrediting Shaq. But saying Kobe was a "side-kick" for his first 3 rings and that they don't count is bullshit. It was far more of a two-headed monster in L.A. than just Shaq and his little Robin aka Kobe Bryant like Kobe detractors like to believe. Yeah, the consensus during those years was that Shaq was the best player in the NBA, but if you try using that to discredit Kobe then you also have to remember that the consensus was that Kobe was the second best player in the league starting around the 2001 playoffs. The gap was much larger in 2000, but Kobe was still a top 10 player in the league and the best shooting guard in the league. Kobe's performances and level of play during the 2001 and 2002 playoffs was better than some championship team's first option which is why you can't just judge rings as "first option rings" or "second option rings" without context. I'm sorry but labeling Kobe's rings in 2001 and 2002 as "not the best player on his team" doesn't do his level of play justice and is diminishing what he actually was.

[ArbitraryWater]

I'm not discrediting Shaq. But saying Kobe was a "side-kick" for his first 3 rings and that they don't count is bullshit. It was far more of a two-headed monster in L.A. than just Shaq and his little Robin aka Kobe Bryant like Kobe detractors like to believe. Yeah, the consensus during those years was that Shaq was the best player in the NBA, but if you try using that to discredit Kobe then you also have to remember that the consensus was that Kobe was the second best player in the league starting around the 2001 playoffs. The gap was much larger in 2000, but Kobe was still a top 10 player in the league and the best shooting guard in the league. Kobe's performances and level of play during the 2001 and 2002 playoffs was better than some championship team's first option which is why you can't just judge rings as "first option rings" or "second option rings" without context. I'm sorry but labeling Kobe's rings in 2001 and 2002 as "not the best player on his team" doesn't do his level of play justice and is diminishing what he actually was.

2002 definitely wasn't your production of a championship winning leader..

Pretty hard to lead a team to a title while shooting 43%.

[SilkkTheShocker]

Kobe was a sidekick. His stans needs really need to let it go.

[riseagainst]

they winning 2 tops. Replace Kobe with lebron and they win 1.

[BoutPractice]

To make the comparison work, you need to use the same ages. Durant joined the league at 19, Kobe Bryant was 19 in 1998. Here's the factual background if you want it:

1997-1998 season

Kobe at 19:
15, 3 and 2.5 on 55 TS%, 18 PER.

replaced with Durant at 19:
20, 4.5 and 2.5 on 52 TS%, 16 PER.


1998-1999 season

Kobe at 20:
20, 5 and 4 on 55 TS%, 19 PER.

Durant at 20:
25, 6.5 and 3 on 58 TS% 21 PER.

1999-2000 season

Kobe at 21:
22.5, 6.5 and 5 on 55 TS%, 22 PER. All-Defensive First team. 12th in MVP voting.

Durant at 21:
30, 7.5 and 3 on 60 TS%, 26 PER. 2nd in MVP voting. Net plus minus: +7.1. Already showing he can lead a team in the playoffs, competing with alpha 2010 Kobe.

2000-2001

Kobe at 22:
28.5, 6 and 5 on 55 TS%, 24.5 PER. 9th in MVP voting. All-Defensive Second team. Net plus minus: +6.5.

Durant at 22:
28, 7 and 3 on 59 TS%, 23.5 PER. 5th in MVP voting. Net plus minus: +4. Able to lead a team to the Western Conference finals.

2001-2002

Kobe at 23:
25, 5.5 and 5.5 on 54.5 TS%, 23 PER. 5th in MVP voting. All-Defensive Second team. Net plus minus: +7.

Durant at 23:
28, 8 and 3.5 on 61 TS%, 26 PER. 2nd in MVP voting. Net plus minus: +7. Able to lead a team to the Western Finals. Improving on defense.

2002-2003

Kobe at 24:
30, 7 and 6 on 55 TS%, 26 PER. 3rd in MVP voting. All-Defensive first team. Net plus minus: +4.

Durant at 24:
28, 8 and 4.5 on 65 TS%, 28 PER. 2nd in MVP voting. Net plus minus: +11.5. Leads his team to the second round but fails to advance due to his second option getting injured.Becoming a well-rounded player and good defender.

2003-2004

Kobe at 25:
24, 5.5 and 5 on 55 TS%, 24 PER. Net plus minus: +6. 5th in MVP voting. All-Defensive First team.

Durant at 25:
32, 7.5 and 5.5 on 64 TS%, 30 PER. Wins MVP. Net plus minus: +8.


Certainly an intriguing comparison.

My take:

Shaq-Durant led Lakers win anywhere from 2 to 5 championships, most likely scenario being around 3 (the same as Kobe-Shaq) and 4 (they win 2004 as well, having 2014 Durant, 2004 Shaq, Malone and Payton).

[DMAVS41]

They for sure win in 00 and 01.

99, 02, 03, and 04 are all possibilities...but hardly locks.

I bet they win 2 to 4 titles from 99 through 04.

[f0und]

theyd win more than 3. getting all those open looks with all the attention on shaq, kobe still only managed to shoot a mediocre pct. imagine if kd, a much better shooter, got all those open looks. he'd be putting up better numbers than he has now. and he's got those numbers while being the #1 option.

[T_L_P]

KD's an egomaniac bro. Not that he has to be humble, but he's really not.

Anyway, they win in '00 and '01. Maybe '04 too.

[f0und]

KD's an egomaniac bro. Not that he has to be humble, but he's really not.

Anyway, they win in '00 and '01. Maybe '04 too.

KD may be an egomaniac, but its nothing compared to kobe. its not even in the same universe.

[DMAVS41]

To make the comparison work, you need to use the same ages. Durant joined the league at 19, Kobe Bryant was 19 in 1998. Here's the factual background if you want it:

1997-1998 season

Kobe at 19:
15, 3 and 2.5 on 55 TS%, 18 PER.

replaced with Durant at 19:
20, 4.5 and 2.5 on 52 TS%, 16 PER.


1998-1999 season

Kobe at 20:
20, 5 and 4 on 55 TS%, 19 PER.

Durant at 20:
25, 6.5 and 3 on 58 TS% 21 PER.

1999-2000 season

Kobe at 21:
22.5, 6.5 and 5 on 55 TS%, 22 PER. All-Defensive First team. 12th in MVP voting.

Durant at 21:
30, 7.5 and 3 on 60 TS%, 26 PER. 2nd in MVP voting. Net plus minus: +7.1. Already showing he can lead a team in the playoffs, competing with alpha 2010 Kobe.

2000-2001

Kobe at 22:
28.5, 6 and 5 on 55 TS%, 24.5 PER. 9th in MVP voting. All-Defensive Second team. Net plus minus: +6.5.

Durant at 22:
28, 7 and 3 on 59 TS%, 23.5 PER. 5th in MVP voting. Net plus minus: +4. Able to lead a team to the Western Conference finals.

2001-2002

Kobe at 23:
25, 5.5 and 5.5 on 54.5 TS%, 23 PER. 5th in MVP voting. All-Defensive Second team. Net plus minus: +7.

Durant at 23:
28, 8 and 3.5 on 61 TS%, 26 PER. 2nd in MVP voting. Net plus minus: +7. Able to lead a team to the Western Finals. Improving on defense.

2002-2003

Kobe at 24:
30, 7 and 6 on 55 TS%, 26 PER. 3rd in MVP voting. All-Defensive first team. Net plus minus: +4.

Durant at 24:
28, 8 and 4.5 on 65 TS%, 28 PER. 2nd in MVP voting. Net plus minus: +11.5. Leads his team to the second round but fails to advance due to his second option getting injured.Becoming a well-rounded player and good defender.

2003-2004

Kobe at 25:
24, 5.5 and 5 on 55 TS%, 24 PER. Net plus minus: +6. 5th in MVP voting. All-Defensive First team.

Durant at 25:
32, 7.5 and 5.5 on 64 TS%, 30 PER. Wins MVP. Net plus minus: +8.


Certainly an intriguing comparison.

My take:

Shaq-Durant led Lakers win anywhere from 2 to 5 championships, most likely scenario being around 3 (the same as Kobe-Shaq) and 4 (they win 2004 as well, having 2014 Durant, 2004 Shaq, Malone and Payton).

I know Kobe came in a year earlier (that you didn't include)...but damn..KD has been so much better than Kobe over the first 7 years of their careers.

Here are the numbers;

22/5/4 55% TS for Kobe in regular season

22/5/4 53% TS for Kobe in playoffs


27/7/4 60% TS for Durant in regular season

29/8/4 59% TS for Durant in playoffs

So...yea...you put Durant in place of Kobe for their first 8 years (assuming Durant stays at this level next year) of their respective careers...and I see no reason why Durant doesn't win 3 or 4 titles in a hypothetical as he was just considerably better than Kobe in many of the years.

[TheMarkMadsen]

2002 definitely wasn't your production of a championship winning leader..

Pretty hard to lead a team to a title while shooting 43%.

Dirk shot 41% in the finals and you made a thread about it being the goat finals by a player

Dumbass

[Ne 1]

2002 definitely wasn't your production of a championship winning leader..

Pretty hard to lead a team to a title while shooting 43%.
No true Scotsmen.