Respects to Lebron for last night but that was a typical kobe game against the spurs

[rule1223]

Lebron Last night

35/10/2/64%/4TO


2008 WCF

game 1 - 27/5/9/52%/1TO

game 2 - 22/5/5/59%/3TO

game 3 - 30/5/1/56%/4TO

game 4 - 28/10/1/48%/2TO

game 5 - 39/3/3/53%/2TO

Series average - 29/6/4/53%/~2TO

Keep in mind that that was an exceptional game for Lebron and that this was typical kobe

[navy]

35/10 on 64% is better than every game there.....

[tmacattack33]

Let's look at what Lebron did vs OKC in the playoffs compared to what Kobe does against them :roll:

Or Boston.

Or the Pistons.

Orlando is a wash.




You lose, I win. Too easy.

[SilkkTheShocker]

It wasn't a typical NBA Finals game for Kobe.

[rule1223]

Let's look at what Lebron did vs OKC in the playoffs compared to what Kobe did against them :roll:

Or Boston.

Or the mid 2000's Detroit Pistons.


You lose, I win. Too easy.
i dont know why youre laughing, only legitimate claim you have is lebron against OKC, if im wrong i will admit it but please dont use a past their prime detroit team who dominated a weak east to compare to the championship calibre pistons kobe faced, as well do not use a boston team that held lebron to 11/35 in his last 2 cav games which basically end his legacy

[Rose'sACL]

i dont know why youre laughing, only legitimate claim you have is lebron against OKC, if im wrong i will admit it but please dont use a past their prime detroit team who dominated a weak east to compare to the championship calibre pistons kobe faced, as well do not use a boston team that held lebron to 11/35 in his last 2 cav games which basically end his legacy
not that 11/35 can be your typical kobe game.

[tmacattack33]

i dont know why youre laughing, only legitimate claim you have is lebron against OKC, if im wrong i will admit it but please dont use a past their prime detroit team who dominated a weak east to compare to the championship calibre pistons kobe faced, as well do not use a boston team that held lebron to 11/35 in his last 2 cav games to basically end his legacy

...you used the 2008 Spurs and compared them to the 2013 and 2014 Spurs.


Fact is they've had 5 common playoff opponents, and Lebron has played better against 3 of them and the other is a wash.

Talk about a thread backfire if there ever was one :roll:



Anyway, this was just too easy and that's why I mentioned it real quickly without even thinking much about it...while i sit here at work bored. I haven't posted in a kobe vs lebron thread in a while. That debate is pretty much over. Lebron has moved on to being debated in comparisons vs Larry Bird and MJ now.

[AintNoSunshine]

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

22-5-5 same as 35-10, OK:oldlol:

Lebron's game tonight would be close to Kobe's game of his life in the PO, OP

[rule1223]

...you used the 2008 Spurs and compared them to the 2013 and 2014 Spurs.


Fact is they've had 5 common playoff opponents, and Lebron has played better against 3 of them and the other is a wash.

Talk about a thread backfire if there ever was one :roll:



Anyway, this was just too easy and that's why I mentioned it real quickly without even thinking much about it...while i sit here at work bored. I haven't posted in a kobe vs lebron thread in a while. That debate is pretty much over. Lebron has moved on to being debated in comparisons vs Larry Bird and MJ now.
didnt think much but had to edit both ur posts? kobe has been compared to mj since he was in his rookie year, let the bron vs durant comparisons to pass before saying that hes moved on

[rule1223]

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

22-5-5 same as 35-10, OK:oldlol:

Lebron's game tonight would be close to Kobe's game of his life in the PO, OP
ur comparing kobes worst game against lebrons best. I was ssaying that the game last night is a typical kobe game against the spurs which means lebron had a great game. Kobe has lebrons game last night, no one bats an eyelash except saying kobe continues his tear

[tmacattack33]

kobe has been compared to mj since he was in his rookie year, let the bron vs durant comparisons to pass before saying that hes moved on

:roll:

Too much hilarity in this post.

[greymatter]

Only one of those statlines even comes close to resembling Lebron's and it was 7 pts less on 16% lower efficiency.

"Typical" Kobe is clearly inferior? Not news.

What does it say that "exceptional" Kobe is getting his ~28-30 points on 50+% shooting while "exceptional" Lebron is getting his on 60+% shooting?

[Rubio2Gasol]

Spurs are a mediocre defensive team these days. He was also guarded by Boris Diaw most of the time.

[CelticBaller]

What's lebron's rape charges percentage?

[Rubio2Gasol]

What's lebron's rape charges percentage?

1/2 - 50%

Raped by Dirk
Raped Durant

[rule1223]

Only one of those statlines even comes close to resembling Lebron's and it was 7 pts less on 16% lower efficiency.

"Typical" Kobe is clearly inferior? Not news.

What does it say that "exceptional" Kobe is getting his ~28-30 points on 50+% shooting while "exceptional" Lebron is getting his on 60+% shooting?
kobe exceptional is stringing off a week of 50+ point games or averaging 40ppg in a month, lebron exceptional is a high shooting percentage

[funnystuff]

People are still making Lebron vs Kobe comparisons??

We shouldn't disrespect Lebron like that.

[DuMa]

Kobe who?

[AintNoSunshine]

ur comparing kobes worst game against lebrons best. I was ssaying that the game last night is a typical kobe game against the spurs which means lebron had a great game. Kobe has lebrons game last night, no one bats an eyelash except saying kobe continues his tear


ur listing those games and claiming they are comparable. Lebron has scored 35, 37, 25(left early), 35 in the past 4 games.

[AintNoSunshine]

kobe exceptional is stringing off a week of 50+ point games or averaging 40ppg in a month, lebron exceptional is a high shooting percentage


Kobe exceptional is always in the regular season, whatever string of whatever, 81, everything memorable about him happened in the regular season.

[rule1223]

Kobe exceptional is always in the regular season, whatever string of whatever, 81, everything memorable about him happened in the regular season.
lebron has 4 regular season MVPs and 2 collusion championships, if anyones a regular season player its lebron

[Rocketswin2013]

Kobe exceptional is always in the regular season, whatever string of whatever, 81, everything memorable about him happened in the regular season.
/Thread



The comparisons must stop. This is not 2010 anymore. LeBron is just better than Kobe.

[AintNoSunshine]

lebron has 4 regular season MVPs and 2 collusion championships, if anyones a regular season player its lebron


:lol Looks like somebody's a little mad but has no real counter

[greymatter]

kobe exceptional is stringing off a week of 50+ point games or averaging 40ppg in a month, lebron exceptional is a high shooting percentage

The fact of the matter is that Lebron could easily get 40ppg if he wanted to and on higher efficiency than Kobe. He's more content making 70 shots on 96 attempts over a 6 game stretch than averaging 40+ppg for any stretch. Prime Kobe could never sniff anything close to a sustained stretch of high efficiency scoring if his and every life on the planet depended on it.

No matter which way you try moving those goalposts, Kobe is/was and forever shall be an inferior player to Lebron.

[Magic 32]

No opposing player has ever scored 50 points against the Spurs in a playoff game. And since Gregg Popovich took over as head coach in 1996 the Spurs have allowed an opponent to score 40 on them in the playoffs only seven times. The Spurs won four of the seven games.

Kobe Bryant has hung both 40 points and an L on the Spurs twice in the playoffs; scoring 45 in a Los Angeles Lakers victory on May 19, 2001, and 42 on May 11, 2004.

- J.A. Adande

http://s22.postimg.org/42jbn0m5t/456.png

[Magic 32]

The fact of the matter is that Lebron could easily get 40ppg if he wanted to and on higher efficiency than Kobe. He's more content making 70 shots on 96 attempts over a 6 game stretch than averaging 40+ppg for any stretch.

Is that why Lebron only has 4 finals games against the Spurs shooting over 44% ?

[rule1223]

:lol Looks like somebody's a little mad but has no real counter
it is what it is, when kobe was "gifted" gasol people were outraged, imagine if he got wade and bosh. The thing is before he came to the heat, he had a constant number 1 seed in the playoffs from the regular season and would be upset in the playoffs every year, what more do u need to constitute a regular season player?

[aj1987]

http://s22.postimg.org/42jbn0m5t/456.png
If you're playing with a top 5 GOAT during his PEAK, the defense tends to concentrate more on that dude.

[Magic 32]

If you're playing with a top 5 GOAT during his PEAK, the defense tends to concentrate more on that dude.

Can you point out an example?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0HtbJFEzJM

[VIntageNOvel]

If you're playing with a top 5 GOAT during his PEAK, the defense tends to concentrate more on that dude.


TOP 3 SG all time + one of the Top Clutches Player All Time + Bosh > Top 5 Center

btw lebron getting single coverage all game, so your point is invalid

[r15mohd]

it is what it is, when kobe was "gifted" gasol people were outraged, imagine if he got wade and bosh. The thing is before he came to the heat, he had a constant number 1 seed in the playoffs from the regular season and would be upset in the playoffs every year, what more do u need to constitute a regular season player?


Lebron took scrubs to 60+ win seasons and to the ECF and Finals

When Kobe had scrubs, he was a no-show for the playoffs or a 1st round knock -out...see the difference?!? :rolleyes:

[Magic 32]

Lebron took scrubs to 60+ win seasons and to the ECF and Finals

When Kobe had scrubs, he was a no-show for the playoffs or a 1st round knock -out...see the difference?!? :rolleyes:

I can see the difference.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/061129

http://brocouncil.com/images/stories/Articles/2013/04april/nba-debate-eastern-conference-weak.jpg

[aj1987]

TOP 3 SG all time + one of the Top Clutches Player All Time + Bosh > Top 5 Center

btw lebron getting single coverage all game, so your point is invalid
:facepalm

Wade's prime was 2 years ago and his peak was 5 years ago. Not to mention he was injured last season. Bosh played like a bitch last season and the same way till Game 3 of the ECF. Still can't defend a 38 year old Timmy.

Shaq was in his prime and those years were arguably his PEAK years.


I can see the difference.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/061129

So, Kobetards only use what Simmons says when it benefits them? I thought you guys considered him an idiot.

[Ne 1]

If you're playing with a top 5 GOAT during his PEAK, the defense tends to concentrate more on that dude.

Kobe was the primary facilitator/play maker and the closer on those teams. People like to say Shaq made the game easier for Kobe because he was getting double teamed. I find this hilarious people try to use this to discredit Kobe's production because Kobe would also draw plenty of double teams and he made the game easier for Shaq. How many times have we seen highlights from that era of Kobe penetrating into the paint, drawing a second defender and then dropping the ball into Shaqs hands for an open power slam?

It's ridiculous how detractors bring this up as if Kobe was just getting spoon feed open shots. The fact is that teams weren't playing off of Kobe to double Shaq, the double teams came from the other positions more often than not. As I pointed out, Kobe directly created for Shaq more with his penetration. Kobe's points didn't come easily, and he provided more than just scoring. Kobe was the best SG/swingman in the league... do you honestly think defensive schemes weren't being drawn up to focus on the best perimeter scorer/player in the game back then? You don't think teams were worrying about him? Seriously, trolling aside, do people really think that teams doubled off of Kobe Bryant off all players? :oldlol: Maybe if they got a rotation wrong and tried to help one pass away. Even in 2000, teams would much rather double off of guys like Ron Harper and AC Green.

[greymatter]

Is that why Lebron only has 4 finals games against the Spurs shooting over 44% ?

Maybe if you tried actually comprehending what was written, you'd understand that you're talking apples when the subject was oranges. Keep trying. Maybe if you throw a few million more darts, one of them might actually hit its target.

[Magic 32]

So, Kobetards only use what Simmons says when it benefits them? I thought you guys considered him an idiot.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see how awful the east has been since 2007.

[aj1987]

Kobe was the primary facilitator/play maker and the closer on those teams. People like to say Shaq made the game easier for Kobe because he was getting double teamed. I find this hilarious people try to use this to discredit Kobe's production because Kobe would also draw plenty of double teams and he made the game easier for Shaq. How many times have we seen highlights from that era of Kobe penetrating into the paint, drawing a second defender and then dropping the ball into Shaqs hands for an open power slam?

It's ridiculous how detractors bring this up as if Kobe was just getting spoon feed open shots. The fact is that teams weren't playing off of Kobe to double Shaq, the double teams came from the other positions more often than not. As I pointed out, Kobe directly created for Shaq more with his penetration. Kobe's points didn't come easily, and he provided more than just scoring. Kobe was the best SG/swingman in the league... do you honestly think defensive schemes weren't being drawn up to focus on the best perimeter scorer/player in the game back then? You don't think teams were worrying about him? Seriously, trolling aside, do people really think that teams doubled off of Kobe Bryant off all players? :oldlol: Maybe if they got a rotation wrong and tried to help one pass away. Even in 2000, teams would much rather double off of guys like Ron Harper and AC Green.
When did I discredit it? He had a tremendous series and was a beast. I've said this numerous times.

I've been over this a billion times and don't want to get into it again. If you honestly believe that having Shaq didn't help Kobe be MORE dominant, you're just a homer.

[r15mohd]

:facepalm

Wade's prime was 2 years ago and his peak was 5 years ago. Not to mention he was injured last season. Bosh played like a bitch last season and the same way till Game 3 of the ECF. Still can't defend a 38 year old Timmy.

Shaq was in his prime and those years were arguably his PEAK years.


So, Kobetards only use what Simmons says when it benefits them? I thought you guys considered him an idiot.


they move with the wind :rolleyes:

[Magic 32]

Maybe if you tried actually comprehending what was written, you'd understand that you're talking apples when the subject was oranges. Keep trying. Maybe if you throw a few million more darts, one of them might actually hit its target.

Oh I'm sorry.

You were talking about what Lebron "could" do if he wanted to.

[Magic 32]

they move with the wind :rolleyes:

http://img.ffffound.com/static-data/assets/6/93a112d07d362b2a5ef5a04f1c1a61c968f21c56_m.png

[Ne 1]

Lebron took scrubs to 60+ win seasons and to the ECF and Finals


This is a gross exaggeration.


If you honestly believe that having Shaq didn't help Kobe be MORE dominant, you're just a homer.

Yet he was even more dominant during the post Shaq years? Can't explain that.

[Ne 1]

Shaq was in his prime and those years were arguably his PEAK years.


The thing is that the 3-peat Lakers weren't a typical championship team. They relied heavily on their two best players. Those team were not very talented outside of Kobe and Shaq, they had below average role players starting at each position outside of their center and shooting guard, and they had a weak bench. No depth at all. Yet they weren't just a championship caliber team, but they were a dynasty. In fact, out of all the dynasties in NBA history those Lakers were clearly the least talented.

Just look at how LA's "3rd options" (Fisher/Fox?) stack up to other title teams. Even in 2000, the Lakers were called "two deep" as opposed to the Blazers who were called "too deep" in the WCF. If you ranked the top 50 players those years, I guarantee there wouldn't be a 3rd Laker in the list and I don't think anyone can make an argument that there were 3 Lakers that were top 50. In fact, I think it's obvious that the other 3 starters on those teams, while solid role players, were below average compared to the other starters at their position.

Kobe and Shaq were the only Laker players anywhere near All-Star level, and one the only 2 Lakers in 2001 and 2002 who were offensive threats at all. The only thing the 3-peat Lakers ever had close to a 3rd offensive threat was a washed up Glen Rice who wasn't playing like one in the playoffs, with many of the negatives on and off the court outweighing the one positive of his one-dimensional game; which was fading.

[JZ600]

i love and miss watching kobe play, but are u fkin serious right now:facepalm :facepalm :facepalm :facepalm :facepalm

[Ne 1]

Just look at how LA's "3rd options" (Fisher/Fox?) stack up to other title teams. Even in 2000, the Lakers were called "two deep" as opposed to the Blazers who were called "too deep" in the WCF. If you ranked the top 50 players those years, I guarantee there wouldn't be a 3rd Laker in the list and I don't think anyone can make an argument that there were 3 Lakers that were top 50. In fact, I think it's obvious that the other 3 starters on those teams, while solid role players, were below average compared to the other starters at their position.

Kobe and Shaq were the only Laker players anywhere near All-Star level, and one the only 2 Lakers in 2001 and 2002 who were offensive threats at all. The only thing the 3-peat Lakers ever had close to a 3rd offensive threat was a washed up Glen Rice who wasn't playing like one in the playoffs, with many of the negatives on and off the court outweighing the one positive of his one-dimensional game; which was fading.

Adding on to this; Phil Jackson on the 2000 Lakers:


We were far from being the most talented team in the league. Indiana, Portland, Phoenix, Sacramento, and New York were all ball clubs whose top eight or nine players had more talent than we had in our regular rotation.

This is why Shaq and Kobe both deserve a huge amount of credit for those 3 rings. Even in 2000 when Kobe wasn't as good as he was in 2001/2002 and the gap between him and Shaq was much larger. The closest thing they ever had to a 3rd offensive threat/scoring option (Glen Rice) averaged 12 ppg on 41% shooting in the playoffs and was getting benched late in games for standing around when he didn't have the ball and was getting lit up on defense. This left plenty of room for Kobe to play his game and produce like a 1st option himself with Derek Fisher or Rick Fox as the closest thing the team had to a 3rd option in 2001 and 2002. Neither were scoring options. Of course the offense went through Shaq first, but Kobe didn't have to take a backseat like Wade has the last 3 seasons because there was no Chris Bosh, much less a Ray Allen, and because Kobe was improving, not declining like Wade.

[SOD 21]

Adding on to this; Phil Jackson on the 2000 Lakers:



This is why Shaq and Kobe both deserve a huge amount of credit for those 3 rings. Even in 2000 when Kobe wasn't as good as he was in 2001/2002 and the gap between him and Shaq was much larger. The closest thing they ever had to a 3rd offensive threat/scoring option (Glen Rice) averaged 12 ppg on 41% shooting in the playoffs and was getting benched late in games for standing around when he didn't have the ball and was getting lit up on defense. This left plenty of room for Kobe to play his game and produce like a 1st option himself with Derek Fisher or Rick Fox as the closest thing the team had to a 3rd option in 2001 and 2002. Neither were scoring options. Of course the offense went through Shaq first, but Kobe didn't have to take a backseat like Wade has the last 3 seasons because there was no Chris Bosh, much less a Ray Allen, and because Kobe was improving, not declining like Wade.

First off, excellent posts on your part.

One thing I would like to discuss further is the importance of Kobe Bryant in the 2000 championship run, even when he wasn't quite the superstar that he became later.

Here are just a few highlights from that playoff run that illustrate his importance to the Los Angeles Lakers winning the championship that year:

1) On the road in the first round against Sacramento when Shaq's bruising style frequently led to foul trouble on the road, Kobe Bryant averaged 33 points, five rebounds and four assists on the road in this series as a 21-year-old.

2) Kobe Bryant hits game-winning shot over Jason Kidd in the second round on isolation play in Game 2. Phil Jackson decides not to run the offense through Shaquille O'Neal late with him being such a liability at the free-throw line. This gives the Los Angeles Lakers a commanding 2–0 lead in the series.

3) In game three of the Western Conference finals in Portland with the Blazers having an opportunity to tie the game, Kobe Bryant blocks the shot by Portland center Arvydas Sabonis to clinch the game. This block ensures a 2–1 lead for Los Angeles Lakers heading into Game Four in Portland.

4) Kobe Bryant goes on to lead the Lakers in scoring, rebounds, assists, steals and blocks in the game that clinches the series in the Western Conference finals. In the most important game of the season, it was a 21-year-old Kobe Bryant that led the Lakers in every major statistical category to leave them to the finals.

5) When limited in the NBA finals after an intentional attempt by Jalen Rose to injure him, which resulted in a severe ankle sprain and limited him in the finals, Kobe Bryant carries the Lakers late in Game Four to seal the victory after Shaq fouls of the game.

These are just five examples from that 2000 championship run and Kobe Bryant wasn't even at the height of his powers that were critical to the Los Angeles Lakers winning the championship that year. Yes, no question that Shaquille O'Neal was the most dominant player in the league, but that doesn't negate the importance of Kobe Bryant on those teams.

Many people like to discount that 2000 championship and Kobe Bryant's importance, but just look at those important plays that he made in that run.

[greymatter]

Oh I'm sorry.

You were talking about what Lebron "could" do if he wanted to.

Not my fault you're too slow of mind to understand that the discussion was a comparison of greatest regular season stretches: running off a bunch of 40-50 pt games vs going 70/96 over 6 games.

And Lebron "could" easily get 40 against the Spurs if he wanted to, but he'd be hurting his team's chances of winning.

[Replay32]

With the exception of 2003, kobe owns the Spurs.

[Ne 1]

First off, excellent posts on your part.

One thing I would like to discuss further is the importance of Kobe Bryant in the 2000 championship run, even when he wasn't quite the superstar that he became later.

Here are just a few highlights from that playoff run that illustrate his importance to the Los Angeles Lakers winning the championship that year:

1) On the road in the first round against Sacramento when Shaq's bruising style frequently led to foul trouble on the road, Kobe Bryant averaged 33 points, five rebounds and four assists on the road in this series as a 21-year-old.

2) Kobe Bryant hits game-winning shot over Jason Kidd in the second round on isolation play in Game 2. Phil Jackson decides not to run the offense through Shaquille O'Neal late with him being such a liability at the free-throw line. This gives the Los Angeles Lakers a commanding 2–0 lead in the series.

3) In game three of the Western Conference finals in Portland with the Blazers having an opportunity to tie the game, Kobe Bryant blocks the shot by Portland center Arvydas Sabonis to clinch the game. This block ensures a 2–1 lead for Los Angeles Lakers heading into Game Four in Portland.

4) Kobe Bryant goes on to lead the Lakers in scoring, rebounds, assists, steals and blocks in the game that clinches the series in the Western Conference finals. In the most important game of the season, it was a 21-year-old Kobe Bryant that led the Lakers in every major statistical category to leave them to the finals.

5) When limited in the NBA finals after an intentional attempt by Jalen Rose to injure him, which resulted in a severe ankle sprain and limited him in the finals, Kobe Bryant carries the Lakers late in Game Four to seal the victory after Shaq fouls of the game.

These are just five examples from that 2000 championship run and Kobe Bryant wasn't even at the height of his powers that were critical to the Los Angeles Lakers winning the championship that year. Yes, no question that Shaquille O'Neal was the most dominant player in the league, but that doesn't negate the importance of Kobe Bryant on those teams.

Many people like to discount that 2000 championship and Kobe Bryant's importance, but just look at those important plays that he made in that run.
Great post. Yeah, even though statistically he wasn't truly elite yet, he still stepped up in some huge moments and that was probably his peak defensive year, which is why I don't feel like he was as replaceable as some people like to believe. And this is why you can't just judge rings as "best player" and "second best player" without context. Kobe's production and level of play was on par with or better than some rings won as the "best player on the team" Even in 2000 he was still a top 10 player (and in 2001/2002 a top 2-3 player in the league, so why should it even matter if he was playing with someone who was slightly better at the time?) Just judge rings on a case by case basis, what matters is the strength of the team as a whole. This faux "rings as the best player on the team" catagoery would mean something if the "best player" was able to win without the "second best player" but as we've seen throughout the history of the NBA, it can't be done aside from a few cases (Barry, Olajuwon, Duncan, Dirk) The fact of the matter is that if he didn't perform at a high level the Lakers wouldn't have won those rings, so I could care less if he was the "best player" and let's be honest, would any guard/perimiter player in the history of the league be the "first option" or "best player" on a team with peak/prime Shaq? I don't think so, so why put a qualifier on his rings because he played with Shaq? Nobody does that with Magic/Kareem. Magic is considered to be a 5x champion even though he was clearly the best player for 2 of his rings and what's funny is that Kobe was actually closer to Shaq in 2001/2002 than Magic was to Kareem in 1980, yet all 5 of Magic'a rings "count" but only 2 of Kobe's "count?" :oldlol: