A Rookie 1984 Michael Jordan or a Current Kobe Bryant?

[juju151111]

Even Washington Wizards' MJ? :confusedshrug:

As an objective Jordan watcher, I'd say his best years were between 1990 - 1998.
I would say 87-93prime years.

[Brunch@Five]

Why not ask about a rookie Kobe vs. prime Michael? :)

That isn't even close. Didn't you see Kobe take it to MJ as a rookie? Imagine him going up against an MJ that has 5 less years experience.

[chopchop20]

I would say 87-93prime years.

He didn't develop the consistent outside shot and fadeaway until the 90's

[juju151111]

He didn't develop the consistent outside shot and fadeaway until the 90's
MJ in the 80s had a great mid range gm.What are u talking about?He always had a 18 ft or in gm.

[Silverbullit]

That isn't even close. Didn't you see Kobe take it to MJ as a rookie? Imagine him going up against an MJ that has 5 less years experience.

I only want to show how ridiculous those comparisons are :D

[Samurai Swoosh]

As much as I like Kobe, I still think a rookie MJ would be smart enough considering his college experience under Smith and his experience in the Olympics with Knight to be almost as basketball intelligent as prime Kobe. And his physical abilities were so amazing, that they might outweigh Kobe's years of honed skill. MJ would get to the bucket at will.

[bokes15]

I refuse to read the original post. Who would take rookie Jordan over prime Kobe???

[Loki]

Even Washington Wizards' MJ? :confusedshrug:


Of course not Wizards Jordan. You know what I meant. :oldlol:

As for the common misconceptions and myths about Jordan's jumper, well, when Sports Illustrated in 1991 calls him "the best shooter in the league from 21 feet and in," then that didn't happen overnight. He didn't wake up in '91 and have a jumper. Here's how the progression of his jumper went in terms of range:

Rookie year: consistent from 17-18 feet and in
'87/'88: Consistent from 19-20 feet and in
'89/'90: Consistent from 21 feet and in plus range (38% on threes in '90)
'91-onward: 22 feet and in.

And when I say "consistent" I don't mean like Lebron or Wade, I mean much more than them. No way could SA play off even a 23 year old Jordan the way they did Lebron last year in the Finals not not get lit up for 40+ consistently. Jordan could hit those shots very consistently. All anyone has to do is go watch some old games and not swallow the common misconceptions about his game.

[eliteballer]

Of course not Wizards Jordan. You know what I meant. :oldlol:

As for the common misconceptions and myths about Jordan's jumper, well, when Sports Illustrated in 1991 calls him "the best shooter in the league from 21 feet and in," then that didn't happen overnight. He didn't wake up in '91 and have a jumper. Here's how the progression of his jumper went in terms of range:

Rookie year: consistent from 17-18 feet and in
'87/'88: Consistent from 19-20 feet and in
'89/'90: Consistent from 21 feet and in plus range (38% on threes in '90)
'91-onward: 22 feet and in.

And when I say "consistent" I don't mean like Lebron or Wade, I mean much more than them. No way could SA play off even a 23 year old Jordan the way they did Lebron last year in the Finals not not get lit up for 40+ consistently. Jordan could hit those shots very consistently. All anyone has to do is go watch some old games and not swallow the common misconceptions about his game.

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL now LOCO is trying to convince us that he can track the distance on MJ's progression on his jumpshot down to A FOOT EVERY YEAR:roll: Almost as bad as him telling an inch difference in height with his naked eye:oldlol:

[Loki]

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL now LOCO is trying to convince us that he can track the distance on MJ's progression on his jumpshot down to A FOOT EVERY YEAR:roll: Almost as bad as him telling an inch difference in height with his naked eye:oldlol:

When you have 300 games on tape, you can spot trends. :pimp: :violin:

[eliteballer]

Get the F outta here, your ridiculous assertions have gone too far. Tracking a foot difference in jumpshot distance with the naked eye year by year, absurd and dilusional as it gets:oldlol:

[Dizzay]

When you have 300 games on tape, you can spot trends. :pimp: :violin:
:roll:

[Poseidon]

When you have 300 games on tape, you can spot trends. :pimp: :violin:

You shouldn't be bragging about something like this. Ever heard of a "woman" or a "social life?" :rolleyes:

[Loki]

Get the F outta here, your ridiculous assertions have gone too far. Tracking a foot difference in jumpshot distance with the naked eye year by year, absurd and dilusional as it gets:oldlol:

It's called an estimate, and was meant to illustrate the progression of his jumper. Deal. :pimp:

[VCMVP1551]

being easily the best player on his team, his number of touches and the time the ball was in his hand would increase dramatically, and there is no doubt he would've scored atleast 2 more field goals per game

Yeah, that's not where my argument is. My argument is that he'd have to work harder to score as the first option without Shaq and so while he'd score more because of the extra FGA but he'd be less efficient. And that's why while I could see him scoring more I couldn't see 2000 Kobe averaging over 24-25 ppg.


so what? coaches always tell scorers to keep shooting, even if they are having an off night, you'd rather kobe went 8-27 than 3-10, especially in a close game. atleast he was still being aggressive, he went to the line 9 times and made 8, while recording 4 assists and only 1 turnover so offensively he made a huge contribution regardless of shooting percentages

Yeah 8-27 is better than 3-10 but neither is good. 8-27 is a bad night and I bet Kobe would admit that.


he was due to have a bad game? :lol i'm sure coach scott skiles would've sat back after being eliminated and thought to himself "well, he played good throughout games 1-4, so i expected him to play like a chump in game 5" :roll:

Even with the bad game his numbers were still far above his season averages.


that three year regular season record means nothing. if portland pushed la to 7 games with both shaq and kobe there is no way in hell they are losing to them without kobe. kobe even outplayed shaq in 3 or 4 games that series :oldlol:

But without Kobe who knows if Glen Rice steps up in the games that Shaq is struggling or how much Horry, Fisher, Fox ect. step up.

One of the reasons the Lakers won without Kobe in 2000 was because Rice stepped up too. Look up Rice's numbers without Kobe in 2000, they were better than his season numbers. Glen Rice was a great fit next to Shaq.


yes, its the story of shaq's career - when the going gets tough bolt to another team with an up and coming superstar

Can't argue with the results.


yeh they won 17 more games - that will happen when you give away a guy who isn't even top 11 at his position and another guy who barely averages 9 points per game for a top 3 player. wade also had alot more of the ball due to not having odom around anymore and had significant increases in fga, fta, and turnovers.

Odom had a great season with Miami. He averaged 17 ppg, 10 rpg, 4 apg, 1 spg and 1 bpg while playing multiple positions, running the offense at times and causing matchup problems.


i'm not saying i can remember individual games, but i do remember doing it..it was like a family tradition :D

Ok well when do you first remember watching individual games?

[brandonislegend]

I refuse to read the original post. Who would take rookie Jordan over prime Kobe???

i agree

this thread is a joke. of course PRIME kobe you got to be kidding.

people are just to far up MJ's *** to accept the fact kobe is closing the gap between the two, not saying he will ever catch up.

[Shep]

Yeah, that's not where my argument is. My argument is that he'd have to work harder to score as the first option without Shaq and so while he'd score more because of the extra FGA but he'd be less efficient. And that's why while I could see him scoring more I couldn't see 2000 Kobe averaging over 24-25 ppg.
yes he'd be less efficient but only 1-2 more ppg? :roll: he'd average atleast 28 ppg.

Yeah 8-27 is better than 3-10 but neither is good. 8-27 is a bad night and I bet Kobe would admit that.
its a bad shooting night, overall he had a fantastic game and he still had the second best game out of everyone on the court

Even with the bad game his numbers were still far above his season averages.
numbers don't mean **** if you can't win a game, and if you don't show up in the most important game of the season you really aren't worth much

But without Kobe who knows if Glen Rice steps up in the games that Shaq is struggling or how much Horry, Fisher, Fox ect. step up.

One of the reasons the Lakers won without Kobe in 2000 was because Rice stepped up too. Look up Rice's numbers without Kobe in 2000, they were better than his season numbers. Glen Rice was a great fit next to Shaq.
:oldlol: you're talking about replacing a superstar with a bunch of role players. glen rice in kobe bryants place? :roll: c'mon now. kobe created offense through penetration, the lakers had nobody on that team who could consistantly do that. kobe was one of the best perimiter defenders in the league, the lakers had nobody else close to that level.

Can't argue with the results.
going through the tough times with your team is part of growing up as a basketball player, shaq never wanted to grow up.

Odom had a great season with Miami. He averaged 17 ppg, 10 rpg, 4 apg, 1 spg and 1 bpg while playing multiple positions, running the offense at times and causing matchup problems.
he had an ok season, but like i said he was nowhere near the top power forwards in the game where as shaq was still top 3 overall

Ok well when do you first remember watching individual games?
probably the pistons/lakers finals

[VCMVP1551]

yes he'd be less efficient but only 1-2 more ppg? :roll: he'd average atleast 28 ppg.

:roll: 28 ppg? Not even close.


its a bad shooting night, overall he had a fantastic game and he still had the second best game out of everyone on the court

A horrendous shooting night, he didn't have a good game but Shaq dominated so it didn't matter.


numbers don't mean **** if you can't win a game, and if you don't show up in the most important game of the season you really aren't worth much

Once again Penny didn't have Shaq that season who was playing at a higher level than anyone ever not named Michael Jordan that season


:oldlol: you're talking about replacing a superstar with a bunch of role players. glen rice in kobe bryants place? :roll: c'mon now. kobe created offense through penetration, the lakers had nobody on that team who could consistantly do that. kobe was one of the best perimiter defenders in the league, the lakers had nobody else close to that level.

Shaq was so dominant that he may have been better not having to share the ball with another star and I think that with the double teams he draws you'd see a huge rise in everyone elses production if Kobe wasn't there.

Without Kobe 2000-2002(not including a game he left after 15 minutes)
25-6 record
31.7 ppg, 12.7 rpg, 3.8 apg, 2.9 bpg, 59.5 FG%


he had an ok season, but like i said he was nowhere near the top power forwards in the game where as shaq was still top 3 overall

Yeah I know but my point was that they lost quite a bit of talent but still improved 17 games with Shaq.


probably the pistons/lakers finals

That's reasonable since you would have been like 4-5 years old. I remember the Bulls vs Knicks ECF and the Bulls vs Suns Finals clearly in 1993 clearly at 6 years old so that's not uncommon.

[Shep]

28 ppg? Not even close.
yeh you're probably right, it'd be closer to 30

A horrendous shooting night, he didn't have a good game but Shaq dominated so it didn't matter.
there was only 5 points in it at the end of the night so obviously shaq still needed help from his teammates even if he does go off for 40, kobe stepped up big with his 26

Once again Penny didn't have Shaq that season who was playing at a higher level than anyone ever not named Michael Jordan that season
i'm not talking about the season, i'm talking about game 5 - the most important game of the year for his team, and he goes misssing

Shaq was so dominant that he may have been better not having to share the ball with another star and I think that with the double teams he draws you'd see a huge rise in everyone elses production if Kobe wasn't there.
with nobody to create offense and the only play being to throw the ball to shaq the lakers don't succeed. kobe handled all the late game situations aswell - you need a game winning shot? give kobe the ball. without kobe? give shaq the ball, he gets fouled, misses both free throws, lakers lose.

Without Kobe 2000-2002(not including a game he left after 15 minutes)
25-6 record
31.7 ppg, 12.7 rpg, 3.8 apg, 2.9 bpg, 59.5 FG%
:roll: this **** again? 8 wins a year? that'll get you a #1 pick for sure

Yeah I know but my point was that they lost quite a bit of talent but still improved 17 games with Shaq.
:hammerhead: you lose a top 12 power forward, you pick up a top 3 player. what will you do next year? win more or lose more? :confusedshrug:

[VCMVP1551]

yeh you're probably right, it'd be closer to 30

:roll:

Care to back that up? Kobe as the first option would have to face far more double teams and had a tougher time scoring. The extra 2 FGA wouldn't make up for it that much. 24-25 ppg and 5-6 apg on 45% shooting is realistic.


there was only 5 points in it at the end of the night so obviously shaq still needed help from his teammates even if he does go off for 40, kobe stepped up big with his 26

No he didn't step up big. When you take 27 shots you should score more than 26 points. He nearly wasted Shaq's dominant performance. He missed 19 shots.


i'm not talking about the season, i'm talking about game 5 - the most important game of the year for his team, and he goes misssing

He didn't have Shaq in game 5 either.


with nobody to create offense and the only play being to throw the ball to shaq the lakers don't succeed. kobe handled all the late game situations aswell - you need a game winning shot? give kobe the ball. without kobe? give shaq the ball, he gets fouled, misses both free throws, lakers lose.

That wasn't the case of those 31 games prove it.


:roll: this **** again? 8 wins a year? that'll get you a #1 pick for sure

You don't seem to get it, 31 games is enough games to show that team could win without Kobe.


:hammerhead: you lose a top 12 power forward, you pick up a top 3 player. what will you do next year? win more or lose more? :confusedshrug:

Of course the improvement was expected but that shows how valuable Shaq was.

For example people use the Suns improvement in that same season as a reason why he was the MVP but that is horrible logic.

Phoenix improved 33 games but they didn't have to give up all star level talent to get Steve Nash, Amare had missed 27 games the previous season and he also was entering his 3rd season so he still had room for a lot of improvement. So when you factor in their leading scorer playing 25 more games and Phoenix giving up nothing to get Nash then their 33 game improvement is less impressive for Nash than Miami's improvement is for Shaq.

[Shep]

Care to back that up? Kobe as the first option would have to face far more double teams and had a tougher time scoring. The extra 2 FGA wouldn't make up for it that much. 24-25 ppg and 5-6 apg on 45% shooting is realistic.
extra 2 fga? where did you get this from? shaq shoots the ball about 20 times per game, so take this out and kobe would shoot the ball atleast 5-7 times more, and even with a slight drop in % this would mean he averages 27-28ppg. in games where shaq was absent in 2000 kobe averaged 30ppg, 9rpg, and 6apg against tough defensive teams san antonio and seattle.

No he didn't step up big. When you take 27 shots you should score more than 26 points. He nearly wasted Shaq's dominant performance. He missed 19 shots.
he stepped up in terms of being aggressive, getting to the free throw line, being active defensively, rebounding the basketball, and getting his teammates involved.

He didn't have Shaq in game 5 either.
so he didn't have to share the ball with a man who wanted 20 shots per game and played with jason kidd instead. he should've been alot better statistically for this reason.

That wasn't the case of those 31 games prove it.
regular season games. lakers went 5-3 without shaq in '01. this proves the lakers would've won 51 games without shaq that year, only 5 less games than what they won over the course of that season, and shaq is only slightly better than greg foster :bowdown:

Of course the improvement was expected but that shows how valuable Shaq was.
its called logic. trading a top 3 player for a top 12 power forward..one of the most lopsided trades in nba history..there's a reason why the lakers lost 22 less games with odom and butler in shaq's place you know

For example people use the Suns improvement in that same season as a reason why he was the MVP but that is horrible logic.

Phoenix improved 33 games but they didn't have to give up all star level talent to get Steve Nash, Amare had missed 27 games the previous season and he also was entering his 3rd season so he still had room for a lot of improvement. So when you factor in their leading scorer playing 25 more games and Phoenix giving up nothing to get Nash then their 33 game improvement is less impressive for Nash than Miami's improvement is for Shaq.
nash wasn't top 7 most valuable that year and is tied for second spot in nba history when talking about the worst mvp decisions ever.

[VCMVP1551]

extra 2 fga? where did you get this from? shaq shoots the ball about 20 times per game, so take this out and kobe would shoot the ball atleast 5-7 times more

Kobe was already shooting 18 shots per game so if you think a coach would let a 21 year old who had never even averaged 20 ppg in a season shoot 23-25 shots per game then you're crazy.


in games where shaq was absent in 2000 kobe averaged 30ppg, 9rpg, and 6apg against tough defensive teams san antonio and seattle.

That's 2 games. You'd need atleast 10 games as an example to prove a point.


he stepped up in terms of being aggressive

He was just chucking


getting to the free throw line

9 FTA isn't that good when you consider he took 27 Field Goals


getting his teammates involved.

Only 4 assists.


so he didn't have to share the ball with a man who wanted 20 shots per game and played with jason kidd instead. he should've been alot better statistically for this reason.

No because Penny was a natural point guard so he would have been more comfortable not playing with someone who played the same position as him.


regular season games. lakers went 5-3 without shaq in '01. this proves the lakers would've won 51 games without shaq that year, only 5 less games than what they won over the course of that season, and shaq is only slightly better than greg foster :bowdown:

:roll: 8 games is not the same as 31! :oldlol:


its called logic. trading a top 3 player for a top 12 power forward..one of the most lopsided trades in nba history..there's a reason why the lakers lost 22 less games with odom and butler in shaq's place you know

Yeah I know but that proves how good Shaq was even at 33, a top 3 player.


nash wasn't top 7 most valuable that year and is tied for second spot in nba history when talking about the worst mvp decisions ever.

I agree he was undeserving but what are your other choices for worst MVP decisions. I assume Bill Walton has to be up there.

[highwhey]

Kwame Brown. :rolleyes:

[Shep]

Kobe was already shooting 18 shots per game so if you think a coach would let a 21 year old who had never even averaged 20 ppg in a season shoot 23-25 shots per game then you're crazy.
who else was going to make up for the 21 shot gap o'neal had? ac green? glen rice could not create his own shot, neither could ron harper, or derek fisher. bryant would be getting the nod.

That's 2 games. You'd need atleast 10 games as an example to prove a point.
:roll: why? because thats all you got?

He was just chucking
all those shots were in the offense

9 FTA isn't that good when you consider he took 27 Field Goals
its a relatively good number for that number of fga, besides, any more than that and it starts to get boring :D

Only 4 assists.
third best in the game

No because Penny was a natural point guard so he would have been more comfortable not playing with someone who played the same position as him.
penny was not a natural point guard, if you watched him you'd know this. the magic moved him to shooting guard in the '97 playoffs against miami and he responded with 31ppg.. he was much more of a shooting guard than a point guard, even in orlando they had natural point guards come in off the bench so penny could move to the 2

8 games is not the same as 31!
31 is not the same as 246

Yeah I know but that proves how good Shaq was even at 33, a top 3 player.
no, i'm talking about shaq's last year in LA when he was 31, and still a top 3 player.

I agree he was undeserving but what are your other choices for worst MVP decisions. I assume Bill Walton has to be up there.
worst ever is nash over duncan and 10 other players in '06
second worst is unseld over chamberlain and 7 other players in '69
third worst is nash over marion and 7 other players in '05
fourth worst is malone over bird and 5 other players in '82
fifth worst is iverson over o'neal and 4 other players in '01
sixth worst is pettit over johnston and 3 other players in '56

walton was third most deserving out of all players in '78, so that would be next along with 6 other times the third most deserving player has won the actual award.

[VCMVP1551]

who else was going to make up for the 21 shot gap o'neal had? ac green? glen rice could not create his own shot, neither could ron harper, or derek fisher. bryant would be getting the nod.

23-25 shots isn't realistic for a 21 year old who had never averaged 20 ppg before. Think about it.


:roll: why? because thats all you got?

No actually I pointed to Shaq's 12-3 record w/o Kobe in 2000. 15>>>>>>2


all those shots were in the offense

:roll:


its a relatively good number for that number of fga, besides, any more than that and it starts to get boring :D

Yeah it does start to get boring but still a 3/1 FGA to FTA ratio isn't that good. It's not bad but not what you'd call good.


third best in the game

And?


penny was not a natural point guard, if you watched him you'd know this. the magic moved him to shooting guard in the '97 playoffs against miami and he responded with 31ppg.. he was much more of a shooting guard than a point guard, even in orlando they had natural point guards come in off the bench so penny could move to the 2

I did watch Penny and he was a PG. It makes no difference that he's 6'6" or that he was also proficient at SG. He was better as the primary ball handler/facilitator


no, i'm talking about shaq's last year in LA when he was 31, and still a top 3 player.

Shaq was 32 that year.


worst ever is nash over duncan and 10 other players in '06
second worst is unseld over chamberlain and 7 other players in '69
third worst is nash over marion and 7 other players in '05
fourth worst is malone over bird and 5 other players in '82
fifth worst is iverson over o'neal and 4 other players in '01
sixth worst is pettit over johnston and 3 other players in '56

Glad to see you included 2001, that still pisses me off that Shaq was robbed. Now as a result Steve Nash has twice as many MVP's as Shaq. :hammerhead:


walton was third most deserving out of all players in '78, so that would be next along with 6 other times the third most deserving player has won the actual award.

The biggest problem I had with Walton's choice was that he missed 24 games.

[Da_Realist]

The 2008 NBA Finals is certainly showing the gap may not be as wide as some thought. Kobe does not know how to manage a game. He's a spectacular scorer and that's pretty much it.

Are you sure Rookie MJ would be this badly outplayed? Even if he was, at least MJ would play some defense. Even at that age, he had enough pride not to let PP consistently outplay him. And he would at least take it to the rack and consistently put pressure on that Celtics defense. He may or may not shoot a high percentage as a rookie, but he would shoot no lower than the 42% Kobe is shooting right now.

Kobe's a 12 year vet and has played in 25 NBA Finals games and yet he just cannot manage a game.

[Shep]

23-25 shots isn't realistic for a 21 year old who had never averaged 20 ppg before. Think about it.
:sleeping . you think about this. only year later kobe averaged 22fga per game and averaged 28.5ppg WITH SHAQ STILL ON THE ROSTER. now take the same shaq out of this team a year earlier and ask yourself the same question. kobe would be shooting atleast this amount of shots in 2000 with no shaq.

No actually I pointed to Shaq's 12-3 record w/o Kobe in 2000. 15>>>>>>2
15 games is what 2 games is = not 82 games. if you want to use small sample sizes of regular season basketball then i can use 2 game as an example

Yeah it does start to get boring but still a 3/1 FGA to FTA ratio isn't that good. It's not bad but not what you'd call good.
i'd definately call it good.

And?
third best, meaning only 2 players recorded more assists, which means kobe is good.

I did watch Penny and he was a PG. It makes no difference that he's 6'6" or that he was also proficient at SG. He was better as the primary ball handler/facilitator
penny never averaged over 7apg when he was a point guard, which is not good, especially when you're averaging close to 40mpg, this proves that he wasn't the natural playmaker point guards were, and that he looked for his shot more than point guards usually do. he was a natural scorer, and he had the all round game that resembled that of a shooting guard more than a point guard. keep arguing against this point and i'll accept that you have not watched any games with penny hardaway involved, or simply can't remember how the man played.

Shaq was 32 that year.
no, he was 31

Glad to see you included 2001, that still pisses me off that Shaq was robbed. Now as a result Steve Nash has twice as many MVP's as Shaq.
nash also has twice as many mvp's as david robinson :oldlol:

The biggest problem I had with Walton's choice was that he missed 24 games.
george gervin and bob mcadoo both deserved it more than walton

[VCMVP1551]

:sleeping . you think about this. only year later kobe averaged 22fga per game and averaged 28.5ppg WITH SHAQ STILL ON THE ROSTER. now take the same shaq out of this team a year earlier and ask yourself the same question. kobe would be shooting atleast this amount of shots in 2000 with no shaq.

First of all Kobe improved a lot of the summer after the first championship.

Second of all Kobe was often playing out of the offense that season hence the teams inconsistent start.

When Kobe was playing within the offense in the second half, he averaged 25.3 ppg.


15 games is what 2 games is = not 82 games. if you want to use small sample sizes of regular season basketball then i can use 2 game as an example

2 is not large enough, period.


third best, meaning only 2 players recorded more assists, which means kobe is good.

Who cares about third best. Who was his competition besides Mark Jackson? Jalen Rose?


penny never averaged over 7apg when he was a point guard, which is not good, especially when you're averaging close to 40mpg, this proves that he wasn't the natural playmaker point guards were, and that he looked for his shot more than point guards usually do.

:roll:

Penny averaged 7.2 apg with 20.9 ppg in under 38 mpg during his sophomore season and 21.7/7.1 in under 37 mpg the next season.



no, he was 31

Shaq was born in March, 1972 so in the 2003-2004 season he turned 32.


nash also has twice as many mvp's as david robinson :oldlol:

Yeah another travesty plus twice as many as KG, Hakeem and Kobe.


george gervin and bob mcadoo both deserved it more than walton

Right but Gervin was the clear choice since he won 9 more games than McAdoo and won the scoring title.

[Shep]

First of all Kobe improved a lot of the summer after the first championship.

Second of all Kobe was often playing out of the offense that season hence the teams inconsistent start.

When Kobe was playing within the offense in the second half, he averaged 25.3 ppg.
kobe didn't improve much in 2001, he was only slightly better than the 2000 version.
the team didn't start inconsistent, they kept at a steady 2 win, 1 loss pace throughout the season
the only reason why kobe's scoring decreased over the second half of the season was because he had injuries, and had to constantly take games off.

2 is not large enough, period.
then 15 isn't

Who cares about third best. Who was his competition besides Mark Jackson? Jalen Rose?
apparently ron harper

Penny averaged 7.2 apg with 20.9 ppg in under 38 mpg during his sophomore season and 21.7/7.1 in under 37 mpg the next season.
when i said he never averaged more than 7 i meant it as in he never averaged 8 assists per game, which is the minimum if you want to be seen as an elite point guard

Shaq was born in March, 1972 so in the 2003-2004 season he turned 32.
yeh, but at the start he was 31. he also played the majority of the season as a 31 year old.

Yeah another travesty plus twice as many as KG, Hakeem and Kobe.
twice as many as oscar robertson, bob cousy, julius erving

Right but Gervin was the clear choice since he won 9 more games than McAdoo and won the scoring title.
he also played all 82 games

[VCMVP1551]

kobe didn't improve much in 2001, he was only slightly better than the 2000 version.
the team didn't start inconsistent, they kept at a steady 2 win, 1 loss pace throughout the season

Compare that to the 11-3 record without Kobe and the record they had post all-star break. Or compare that to their 67-15 record the year before.


the only reason why kobe's scoring decreased over the second half of the season was because he had injuries, and had to constantly take games off.

No he was playing better team ball like he did in 2000. Kobe while playing team basketball in 2001 was a 25.3 ppg scorer but in 2000 he was a 22.5 ppg scorer while playing team basketball.


then 15 isn't

15 is a large enough stretch to get an idea of what a team can do.


apparently ron harper

Exactly


when i said he never averaged more than 7 i meant it as in he never averaged 8 assists per game, which is the minimum if you want to be seen as an elite point guard

Never heard of this minimum, you must have made it up.


yeh, but at the start he was 31. he also played the majority of the season as a 31 year old.

Pointless argument. I consider him 32 that season and you say 31, doesn't make a big difference either way.


twice as many as oscar robertson, bob cousy, julius erving

2 more than Jason Kidd, Isiah Thomas and John Stockton combined who were superior players to Nash aswell.


he also played all 82 games

And he shot 54% from the field/84% from the line, superior to McAdoo who shot 52% from the field and 73% from the line.

[crisoner]

how Come You People Don't Understand There Is A Kobe Topic For This???????????????????????

[Voulnet]

how Come You People Don't Understand There Is A Kobe Topic For This???????????????????????
The Kobe topic is not enough.
Jeff HAS to create a Kobe forum, for God's sake, the Celtics won and people bash Kobe instead of congratulating the champions. Haters are obsessive fools...

[Shep]

Compare that to the 11-3 record without Kobe and the record they had post all-star break. Or compare that to their 67-15 record the year before.
the lakers lost more in 2001 for 3 reasons: shaq wasn't as good as he was a year before, shaq missed more games than the year before, and glen rice and his 16ppg were no longer there

No he was playing better team ball like he did in 2000. Kobe while playing team basketball in 2001 was a 25.3 ppg scorer but in 2000 he was a 22.5 ppg scorer while playing team basketball.
no. kobe had an injury interrupted second half of the regular season and only got back into a groove once the playoffs started, in which he averaged 29.4ppg, 7.3rpg, and 6.1apg including 35ppg in the sweep of the kings and 33.5ppg against the spurs.

15 is a large enough stretch to get an idea of what a team can do.
15 isn't even a quarter of a regular season so no, it can't be used in this instance

Exactly
:confusedshrug:

Never heard of this minimum, you must have made it up.
if a point guard is not averaging atleast 8apg in 36+mpg then he is not a natural point guard and he is more suited to playing the two - where he can concentrate on his natural scoring abilities.

Pointless argument. I consider him 32 that season and you say 31, doesn't make a big difference either way.
don't bring it up then

2 more than Jason Kidd, Isiah Thomas and John Stockton combined who were superior players to Nash aswell.
2 more than scottie pippen, patrick ewing, elvin hayes, gary payton, and elgin baylor

And he shot 54% from the field/84% from the line, superior to McAdoo who shot 52% from the field and 73% from the line.
all in over 5 less minutes per game, making it an even more impressive stat line

[VCMVP1551]

the lakers lost more in 2001 for 3 reasons: shaq wasn't as good as he was a year before, shaq missed more games than the year before, and glen rice and his 16ppg were no longer there

You forgot the last reason. Kobe played selfish basketball at the start of the year. Shaq called him out on it.


no. kobe had an injury interrupted second half of the regular season and only got back into a groove once the playoffs started, in which he averaged 29.4ppg, 7.3rpg, and 6.1apg including 35ppg in the sweep of the kings and 33.5ppg against the spurs.

The playoffs are irrelevant because the team played at a higher level than they were capable of in the regular season anyway so those numbers are meaningless.

The team had a 15-1 record(.938 winning %) against the elite teams in the league and Shaq averaged 30.4 ppg, 15.4 rpg, 3.4 apg and 2.4 bpg.


15 isn't even a quarter of a regular season so no, it can't be used in this instance

Yes it can because it proved the team could play at a very high well for an extended period of time without Kobe. Shaq also kept that up the next few years without Kobe with a 25-6 record combined.


if a point guard is not averaging atleast 8apg in 36+mpg then he is not a natural point guard and he is more suited to playing the two - where he can concentrate on his natural scoring abilities.

You just made that up


2 more than scottie pippen, patrick ewing, elvin hayes, gary payton, and elgin baylor

2 more than Nate Thurmond, John Havlicek aswell. The list goes on.

It's just a disgrace to the history of professional basketball and makes the award look like a joke.


all in over 5 less minutes per game, making it an even more impressive stat line

Seems like a pretty clear MVP to me, I can't see how the voters got it wrong. How anyone can be awarded MVP while missing 24 games is beyond me.

[Knoe Itawl]

Gimme rookie Jordan!

[AAP Remix]

The great MJ? Lol...anyone who says Kome Cryant, I guarantee that person is not older than 25.

Any rational person would take rookie LeBron James over Kome Cryant.

[Kblaze8855]

Little documentary on rookie Jordan. Not great quality but somewhat rare:

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=Y1ZOBGBM

Might also be on youtube but I dont know.

[kuzdeen]

like Kobe but i have to go with rookie Jordan.

[Da_Realist]

Little documentary on rookie Jordan. Not great quality but somewhat rare:

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=Y1ZOBGBM

Might also be on youtube but I dont know.

The quality of the vid was pretty bad but the content was very interesting. Thanks for posting.

[Shep]

You forgot the last reason. Kobe played selfish basketball at the start of the year. Shaq called him out on it.
shaq was just mad that his play was subpar and he needed a scapegoat.

The playoffs are irrelevant because the team played at a higher level than they were capable of in the regular season anyway so those numbers are meaningless.

The team had a 15-1 record(.938 winning %) against the elite teams in the league and Shaq averaged 30.4 ppg, 15.4 rpg, 3.4 apg and 2.4 bpg.
the team played at a higher level because of the elevated play of kobe bryant and shaquille o'neal. and the playoffs aren't irrelevant because it proves that kobe can score what he did and the team can still be (very) successful: 35ppg in a sweep, 34ppg in a sweep.

Yes it can because it proved the team could play at a very high well for an extended period of time without Kobe. Shaq also kept that up the next few years without Kobe with a 25-6 record combined.
its regular season games. shaq led the lakers well without kobe for 10 games in 2001, but they may or may not have played teams who had winning records, and under what circumstances were those teams that they played when kobe was out? it is regular season ball, a 82 game season is alot different to 10 games, and the playoffs is a whole nother ball game.

You just made that up
is gilbert arenas a natural point guard?

2 more than Nate Thurmond, John Havlicek aswell. The list goes on.
clyde drexler, jason kidd, chris webber, robert parish, rick barry.

It's just a disgrace to the history of professional basketball and makes the award look like a joke.
the award has been given to the right person only 60% of the time :roll:

Seems like a pretty clear MVP to me, I can't see how the voters got it wrong. How anyone can be awarded MVP while missing 24 games is beyond me.
it is also clear to me that george gervin deserved the award. however, if walton played a handful more games he would've been the deserved mvp that year. he was easily the better player individually when comparing walton and gervin, and his team also had the best record in the nba. the fact that he missed so much time was, unfortunately for him, his ultimate downfall (in the fact that he didn't deserve the award).

[VCMVP1551]

shaq was just mad that his play was subpar and he needed a scapegoat.

As a center he can't get as many shots as he needs if a perimeter player is chucking.


the team played at a higher level because of the elevated play of kobe bryant and shaquille o'neal. and the playoffs aren't irrelevant because it proves that kobe can score what he did and the team can still be (very) successful: 35ppg in a sweep, 34ppg in a sweep.

However the team was still at it's best when Shaq was the first option like in the playoffs.


its regular season games. shaq led the lakers well without kobe for 10 games in 2001, but they may or may not have played teams who had winning records, and under what circumstances were those teams that they played when kobe was out? it is regular season ball, a 82 game season is alot different to 10 games, and the playoffs is a whole nother ball game.

That's true but I'm just pointing out that from what we have to go by the team played well without Kobe. Later on I'll go back and see how good the teams were the Lakers beat without Kobe.


is gilbert arenas a natural point guard?

Nope but he has a different mindset than Penny.

In 2006 and 2007 Gilbert took 21 shots per game while penny never even took 16 shots per game.


clyde drexler, jason kidd, chris webber, robert parish, rick barry.

The fact that we could go on and on shows how pathetic the voters for the award can be. Steve Nash? :oldlol: He played with 2 all-stars and 2 teammates who combined for about 45 ppg and he always got lit up on defense.


the award has been given to the right person only 60% of the time :roll:

2001 was among the worst choices. O'Neal played more games than Iverson, had better all around stats, won as many games in a much tougher conference. The West that year was similar to this year. People also forget Iverson had great teammates too, he had the 6th man of the year, the DPOY, a handful of great defenders and rebounders.


it is also clear to me that george gervin deserved the award. however, if walton played a handful more games he would've been the deserved mvp that year. he was easily the better player individually when comparing walton and gervin, and his team also had the best record in the nba. the fact that he missed so much time was, unfortunately for him, his ultimate downfall (in the fact that he didn't deserve the award).

I agree, if Walton played atleast around 70 games then he would have deserved the award but he didn't even play 60.

[D-Rose]

kobe, because of experience,leadership,and his game is more refined in this day and age.

[72-10]

Rookie Jordan led his team in scoring, rebounding, assists and steals, and was second in blocked shots.

Rookie MJ ftw

[lilojmayo]

jordan couldnt hit the backside of the barn in his early years but he was just so superior athletic like LBJ is now but Jordan is just a better scorer nobody could keep him out the lane thats why he averaged 37.1pts a game one season shooting 55%

to help a team win MJ

[Loki]

jordan couldnt hit the backside of the barn in his early years but he was just so superior athletic like LBJ is now but Jordan is just a better scorer nobody could keep him out the lane thats why he averaged 37.1pts a game one season shooting 55%

to help a team win MJ

Jordan had a better shot in his rookie year from 18 feet and in than Lebron has today. ALso, he didn't shoot 55% the year he averaged 37.1 ppg, he shot 48.2% that year. He shot 53.5% the year he averaged 35.0 ppg, however. His highest FG% was 53.9% (1991) and he also shot 53.8% in 1989.

[72-10]

actually he shot 53.9% in 1991 and 53.8% in 1989, I believe.

[VCMVP1551]

Jordan had a better shot in his rookie year from 18 feet and in than Lebron has today. ALso, he didn't shoot 55% the year he averaged 37.1 ppg, he shot 48.2% that year. He shot 53.5% the year he averaged 35.0 ppg, however. His highest FG% was 53.8% (1991).

Damn those numbers are just sick especially 37 ppg or 35 ppg on 54% shooting.

[Loki]

actually he shot 53.9% in 1991 and 53.8% in 1989, I believe.

You're right, I just checked. 53.8% in 1989 and 53.9% in 1991. 1990 was the "down" year for him at 52.6%. :oldlol: I'll edit my post.

[Shep]

As a center he can't get as many shots as he needs if a perimeter player is chucking.
he was getting the same attempts. are you going to blame kobe for his 5 less fg% and 37%FT? :roll:

However the team was still at it's best when Shaq was the first option like in the playoffs.
yes, but those same playoff series' proved that kobe's increased points didn't stop the lakers from being successful

Nope but he has a different mindset than Penny.

In 2006 and 2007 Gilbert took 21 shots per game while penny never even took 16 shots per game.
quit looking at the stat pages and watch their games. both are point guards with a scorers mentality. guys like baron davis, allen iverson, and steve francis are all in the same boat.

The fact that we could go on and on shows how pathetic the voters for the award can be. Steve Nash? He played with 2 all-stars and 2 teammates who combined for about 45 ppg and he always got lit up on defense.
:oldlol: tell me about it. he played with 2 of the top 3 most valuable players in the entire league in '05

2001 was among the worst choices. O'Neal played more games than Iverson, had better all around stats, won as many games in a much tougher conference. The West that year was similar to this year. People also forget Iverson had great teammates too, he had the 6th man of the year, the DPOY, a handful of great defenders and rebounders.
shaq, duncan, webber, and garnett all deserved it more than iverson.

[VCMVP1551]

he was getting the same attempts. are you going to blame kobe for his 5 less fg% and 37%FT? :roll:

He wasn't getting the same attempts because he got more FTA as well once Kobe started playing more team basketball.


yes, but those same playoff series' proved that kobe's increased points didn't stop the lakers from being successful

Yeah, as long as Shaq was still the teams leading scorer.


quit looking at the stat pages and watch their games. both are point guards with a scorers mentality. guys like baron davis, allen iverson, and steve francis are all in the same boat.

Guys like Iverson and Arenas are much different than the rest. Arenas and Iverson seem like undersized 2 guards or combo guards. In fact Iverson did play shooting guard for a while under Larry Brown. The best comparison of those guys to Penny is Francis.


:oldlol: tell me about it. he played with 2 of the top 3 most valuable players in the entire league in '05

Shaq didn't get traded to Phoenix for 3 more years. :D Stoudemire and Marion weren't in the top 5 as far as I'm concerned. Marion had a much better case in 2006. Stoudemire however should be a good candidate for MVP next season if Phoenix remains a 50 plus win team.



shaq, duncan, webber, and garnett all deserved it more than iverson.

Yeah I agree. I'd go in that order for MVP that season except for possibly Iverson over KG.

[Shep]

He wasn't getting the same attempts because he got more FTA as well once Kobe started playing more team basketball.
last 4 months of the season (when shaq finally woke up and started playing well) = 19.4fgapg, first 2 months (when shaq was moping): 19fgapg. he was getting the same attempts.

Yeah, as long as Shaq was still the teams leading scorer.
wrong. kobe was the leading scorer in the sweep of sacramento, and outscored shaq by over 6ppg in the sweep of san antonio.

Guys like Iverson and Arenas are much different than the rest. Arenas and Iverson seem like undersized 2 guards or combo guards. In fact Iverson did play shooting guard for a while under Larry Brown. The best comparison of those guys to Penny is Francis.
penny was a combo guard. and i'm not saying he played like iverson or arenas, i'm saying he had a scorers mentality while being his teams point guard - just like those players, but to a lesser extent

Shaq didn't get traded to Phoenix for 3 more years
:lol

Stoudemire and Marion weren't in the top 5 as far as I'm concerned.
:lol

Marion had a much better case in 2006. Stoudemire however should be a good candidate for MVP next season if Phoenix remains a 50 plus win team.
marion was also top 3 most valuabe in '06, and stoudemire might need to develop other parts of his game besides scoring if he wants to become a league mvp in the future.

[VCMVP1551]

last 4 months of the season (when shaq finally woke up and started playing well) = 19.4fgapg, first 2 months (when shaq was moping): 19fgapg. he was getting the same attempts.

Kobe averaged a ridiculous 23.2 FGA per game prior to the all-star break. That's too much for the second option.


wrong. kobe was the leading scorer in the sweep of sacramento, and outscored shaq by over 6ppg in the sweep of san antonio.

That isn't a full season, I'm talking about for the season. For the regular season, for the playoffs and the finals Shaq was the leading scorer and that's when the team is at it's best. That forces teams to double and triple Shaq which frees up space for Kobe to finish at the basket or get open shots like in those 2 series you mentioned.



penny was a combo guard. and i'm not saying he played like iverson or arenas, i'm saying he had a scorers mentality while being his teams point guard - just like those players, but to a lesser extent

Fair enough, although to me he always seemed like a point guard more than anything.


marion was also top 3 most valuabe in '06

I hope you at least have Wade ahead of Marion that year.

27 ppg, 6 rpg, 7 apg, 50% from the field as easily the best player on a 52 win team. Wade also made many clutch shots down the stretch.

Lebron also had a great season with 31, 7 and 7 on a 50 win team with scrubs for teammates.

Kobe also had a superhuman season with 35 ppg and he led a team with not much talent to the playoffs but it's hard to win MVP with just 45 wins.

Billups was also a strong candidate for MVP with 18.5 ppg, 8.6 apg, great perimeter shooting, great defense and clutch plays on a 64 win team.


and stoudemire might need to develop other parts of his game besides scoring if he wants to become a league mvp in the future.

Stoudemire's passing is improving and now he is back at his natural position. His rebounding has always been pretty good as well at 9.1 rebounds per game and once Shaq retires or gets injured you could see that easily go over 10 per game. He is also a good shot blocker who has all the tools to be a good defender and maybe now with a new coach that'll happen.

They might not give it to him because of how much talent is on his team and the fact that Steve Nash gets overrated but it's possible. What other 25 ppg scorers shoot 59% from the field and 81% from the line?

Kobe, Chris Paul, KG and Duncan should be somewhere among the candidates but I don't think Lebron will win enough games to get serious consideration and KG, Duncan and Kobe have all won it before not to mention they all have deep supporting casts. So the MVP race will be wide open.

[Shep]

Kobe averaged a ridiculous 23.2 FGA per game prior to the all-star break. That's too much for the second option.
someone had to score, shaq wasn't, kobe had to step up.

That isn't a full season, I'm talking about for the season.
:oldlol: but i mentioned it was in the playoffs and you replied to it knowing this.

For the regular season, for the playoffs and the finals Shaq was the leading scorer and that's when the team is at it's best. That forces teams to double and triple Shaq which frees up space for Kobe to finish at the basket or get open shots like in those 2 series you mentioned.
wait, so the lakers are at their best when shaq is the leading scorer, which forces teams to double and triple shaq - which is what they did in those two series? kobe was the leading scorer in those two series :roll: wtf are you talking about? the lakers were (out of all the regular season and the playoffs) most impressive in the spurs series - when they swept the team with the best record in the nba, and kobe was the most valuable player of that series with averages of 33.3ppg, 7rpg, and 7apg on 51%FG

I hope you at least have Wade ahead of Marion that year.

27 ppg, 6 rpg, 7 apg, 50% from the field as easily the best player on a 52 win team. Wade also made many clutch shots down the stretch.
nope, wade was 7th most valuable

Lebron also had a great season with 31, 7 and 7 on a 50 win team with scrubs for teammates.
yes, lebron was 1 of 2 players more valuable than marion that year

Kobe also had a superhuman season with 35 ppg and he led a team with not much talent to the playoffs but it's hard to win MVP with just 45 wins.
kobe was 9th

Billups was also a strong candidate for MVP with 18.5 ppg, 8.6 apg, great perimeter shooting, great defense and clutch plays on a 64 win team.

fifth

Stoudemire's passing is improving and now he is back at his natural position. His rebounding has always been pretty good as well at 9.1 rebounds per game and once Shaq retires or gets injured you could see that easily go over 10 per game. He is also a good shot blocker who has all the tools to be a good defender and maybe now with a new coach that'll happen.
only time will tell. i'll definately be watching him closely this upcoming season. right now with the team they got i don't feel as if they can be successful enough for amare to contend for the mvp going by how they performed last season after the trade for shaq.

They might not give it to him because of how much talent is on his team and the fact that Steve Nash gets overrated but it's possible. What other 25 ppg scorers shoot 59% from the field and 81% from the line?
the team isn't really that talented any more with shawn marion gone. nash is still a top 5 point guard, but he struggled the most out of everyone after the shaq trade, and they will need to learn how to play together and maximize everyone's talents if they want to be successful.

Kobe, Chris Paul, KG and Duncan should be somewhere among the candidates but I don't think Lebron will win enough games to get serious consideration and KG, Duncan and Kobe have all won it before not to mention they all have deep supporting casts. So the MVP race will be wide open.
chris paul should've "won" the mvp this season, considering he deserved it, and as a 22 year old he'll only get better so if he stays injury free he'll definately deserve the award again. he's my pick. duncan finished outside the top 5 for the first time in his career in '08 (besides '05 when he missed 16 games), and i feel as though he will never be in serious consideration again.

[fiddy]

What kind of retarded question is that?

Kobe>MJ.

[VCMVP1551]

someone had to score, shaq wasn't, kobe had to step up.

Shaq was averaging about 27 ppg despite Kobe's chucking.

The team also was much better in the second half when Shaq was getting his usual shots. Shaq averaged 30.8 ppg after the all-star break and the team went 25-10 while Kobe averaged 25.3 ppg and missed 14 of those games. The team was 11-3 in the 14 games Bryant missed.


:oldlol: but i mentioned it was in the playoffs and you replied to it knowing this.

For an extended time like a regular season or even a playoff run Shaq had to be the leading scorer because the team was built around him and Kobe wasn't yet at the level where you could build a title team around him.


wait, so the lakers are at their best when shaq is the leading scorer, which forces teams to double and triple shaq - which is what they did in those two series? kobe was the leading scorer in those two series :roll: wtf are you talking about?

Use some common sense. Shaq had been the leading scorer for the regular season, the first round and outscored Kobe by 5.5 ppg after the all-star break. That forced Sacramento and the Spurs to worry about Shaq more heading into the series and focus their defense on him. If you don't think Shaq was the main focus of San Antonio and Sacramento going in then you didn't watch those series. The attention Shaq draws opens things up for Kobe and Kobe took full advantage in those series playing at maybe the highest level of his career.


the lakers were (out of all the regular season and the playoffs) most impressive in the spurs series - when they swept the team with the best record in the nba, and kobe was the most valuable player of that series with averages of 33.3ppg, 7rpg, and 7apg on 51%FG

I explained that in the post above.


nope, wade was 7th most valuable

:roll: Explain who was more valuable.


yes, lebron was 1 of 2 players more valuable than marion that year

OK well in your opinion who was the other guy more valuable? I'm guessing Dirk Nowitzki.


only time will tell. i'll definately be watching him closely this upcoming season. right now with the team they got i don't feel as if they can be successful enough for amare to contend for the mvp going by how they performed last season after the trade for shaq.

I don't know. They went 18-11 after the Shaq trade agains a really tough Western Conference and that was with them having to adjust to Shaq in the lineup.

The Suns will be interesting because they really depend on 2 things and those are how much Nash declines and if Shaq shows up motivated and in shape. If Nash can play at a similar level to what he's been playing and Shaq is around 320-330 pounds then they should be an elite team.

If Shaq shows up at 360 plus pounds and Nash continues to decline a lot then I doubt they even win 50 but we'll see what happens.


the team isn't really that talented any more with shawn marion gone. nash is still a top 5 point guard, but he struggled the most out of everyone after the shaq trade, and they will need to learn how to play together and maximize everyone's talents if they want to be successful.

Yeah but Nash still has great court vision, he can still shoot and he's an excellent passer so he could be a top 5 PG again. Grant Hill and Raja Bell are great role players as well if Hill is healthy. Shaq still put up about 13 and 11 on 61% shooting after the trade so if he's healthy and in shape he can help a lot.


chris paul should've "won" the mvp this season, considering he deserved it, and as a 22 year old he'll only get better so if he stays injury free he'll definately deserve the award again. he's my pick. duncan finished outside the top 5 for the first time in his career in '08 (besides '05 when he missed 16 games), and i feel as though he will never be in serious consideration again.

Paul seems like the favorite now but I expect KG, Kobe and Amare to all be in the race(if the Suns win of course). I wouldn't be surprised if Dwight Howard is a candidate either. He is young and improving and the as it is the Magic won 50 games. If he can take the next step and Orlando improves then expect him to get a lot of votes.

[Scott Pippen]

What kind of retarded question is that?

Kobe>MJ.

yes current kobe is > rookie MJ.:applause: otherwise kobe is not > jordan

[RoseCity07]

Easy, Michael Jordan.

[Loki]

when they swept the team with the best record in the nba, and kobe was the most valuable player of that series with averages of 33.3ppg, 7rpg, and 7apg on 51%FG

Shaq averaged 28/12/3 blk/54% FG that series while occupying both Duncan and Robinson (and others) so Kobe had free lanes to the basket all series against single coverage. How was Kobe the MVP of that series again? At the very least it's debatable.

[Shep]

Shaq was averaging about 27 ppg despite Kobe's chucking.
shaq averaged a pathetic 24ppg in november, and 26ppg in december, so while shaq played unmotivated ball and shot sub 40% from the free throw line kobe had to step up and do the bulk of the scoring with 28ppg on 46%fg, 41%3p, and 89%ft in november and 32ppg on 49%fg, 32%3p, and 85%ft in december.

The team also was much better in the second half when Shaq was getting his usual shots. Shaq averaged 30.8 ppg after the all-star break and the team went 25-10 while Kobe averaged 25.3 ppg and missed 14 of those games. The team was 11-3 in the 14 games Bryant missed.
shaq was getting the same shots he did pre all-star break. the only thing that changed his ppg post all-star break was his improved free throw percent, which improved by 20%. the 11 wins came against teams who ended the season with an average of 40 wins.

For an extended time like a regular season or even a playoff run Shaq had to be the leading scorer because the team was built around him and Kobe wasn't yet at the level where you could build a title team around him.
pathetic. you mentioned that shaq had to be the leading scorer at all times, i proceeded to destroy this logic with two playoff series being an example, and now you're rambling on about how that isn't long enough. get the **** out.

Use some common sense. Shaq had been the leading scorer for the regular season, the first round and outscored Kobe by 5.5 ppg after the all-star break. That forced Sacramento and the Spurs to worry about Shaq more heading into the series and focus their defense on him. If you don't think Shaq was the main focus of San Antonio and Sacramento going in then you didn't watch those series. The attention Shaq draws opens things up for Kobe and Kobe took full advantage in those series playing at maybe the highest level of his career.
first of all this has got nothing to do with the quote you used. second of all who cares if shaq was the main focus? shaq was the main focus of every team he had faced, and it didn't stop him from dominating. the fact remains that kobe outplayed shaq in the lakers most impressive playoff series in the three peat.

I explained that in the post above.
destroyed.

Explain who was more valuable.
tim duncan - leads the spurs to 63 wins, probably is the best defender in the nba, puts up 18.6ppg, 11rpg, 3.2apg, .9spg, and 2bpg, while only missing 2 games
lebron james - leads the cavs to 50 wins, averages 31.4ppg, 7rpg, 6.6apg, 1.6spg, and .8bpg, while only missing 3 games
shawn marion - leads the suns to 54 wins, is one of the elite defenders in the nba, averages 21.8ppg, 11.8rpg, 1.8apg, 2spg, and 1.7bpg, while only missing 1 game
dirk nowitzki - leads the mavs to 60 wins, averages 26.6ppg, 9rpg, 2.8apg, .7spg, and 1bpg, while only missing 1 game
chauncey billups - leads the pistons to the best record in the nba (64 wins), averages 18.5ppg, 3.1rpg, 8.6apg, .9spg, and .1bpg, while only missing 1 game
ben wallace - as important to detroits chances of winning as billups, defensive player of the year, averages 7.3ppg, 11.3rpg, 1.9apg, 1.8spg, and 2.2bpg, while playing all 82 games

OK well in your opinion who was the other guy more valuable? I'm guessing Dirk Nowitzki.
tim duncan

Shaq averaged 28/12/3 blk/54% FG that series while occupying both Duncan and Robinson (and others) so Kobe had free lanes to the basket all series against single coverage. How was Kobe the MVP of that series again? At the very least it's debatable.
yeh its debatable, you can debate and lose if you want, i don't care. give me 33/7/7 on 51% over shaqs line any day. kobe was guarded by bruce bowen, one of the best and most physical defenders in the game, all series and its alot easier for shaq to dominate against good defenders than it is for a perimiter guy like kobe because shaq has unmatched size so it isn't like they can stop him backing them down, just look at what he did to the defensive player of the year in 2001 in the finals.

[Loki]

yeh its debatable, you can debate and lose if you want, i don't care. give me 33/7/7 on 51% over shaqs line any day. kobe was guarded by bruce bowen, one of the best and most physical defenders in the game

Actually, Bowen wasn't on the Spurs that year -- get your facts straight. Kobe was guarded by 92 year old Terry Porter and Antonio Daniels in that series since Derek Anderson, their starting SG, was injured. And again, it is debatable whether 33/7/7/51% > 28/13/3 blk/54%, especially considering that Shaq did his thing against 2-3 defenders while Kobe was single covered -- how do you think Kobe was able to waltz down the lane the whole series? Because Duncan and Robinson -- two HOF defensive big men who were tag-teaming Shaq that series while Kobe was busy trying to break down the fossilized Terry Porter -- refused to come off Shaq to help on Kobe's penetration for fear of a dump-off or offensive rebound by Shaq.

[VCMVP1551]

shaq averaged a pathetic 24ppg in november, and 26ppg in december, so while shaq played unmotivated ball and shot sub 40% from the free throw line kobe had to step up and do the bulk of the scoring with 28ppg on 46%fg, 41%3p, and 89%ft in november and 32ppg on 49%fg, 32%3p, and 85%ft in december.

Shaq would have averaged more if Kobe hadn't been chucking. Shaq even called Kobe out on that. Don't you remember that?


shaq was getting the same shots he did pre all-star break. the only thing that changed his ppg post all-star break was his improved free throw percent, which improved by 20%.

More FTA as well.


the 11 wins came against teams who ended the season with an average of 40 wins.

And? You face plenty of bad teams in a season anyway. A win is a win and 11-3 is a damn good stretch.


pathetic. you mentioned that shaq had to be the leading scorer at all times, i proceeded to destroy this logic with two playoff series being an example, and now you're rambling on about how that isn't long enough. get the **** out.

8 games....game f*cking games? :roll: Yeah that sure is long enough. Kobe was the leading scorer in those series because the teams had to worry so much about Shaq as mentioned. Of course Kobe scoring in those series then made the Sixers a little more hesitant to focus so much on Shaq(hence Shaq's 34 ppg in the Finals).


first of all this has got nothing to do with the quote you used. second of all who cares if shaq was the main focus? shaq was the main focus of every team he had faced, and it didn't stop him from dominating. the fact remains that kobe outplayed shaq in the lakers most impressive playoff series in the three peat.

Shaq was easily as valuable. He was matched up with both Duncan and Robinson who were both elite defenders. Shaq destroyed both of them, Kobe wasn't matched up with anyone near that level. Who was he matched up with an old washed up Terry Porter?


tim duncan - leads the spurs to 63 wins, probably is the best defender in the nba, puts up 18.6ppg, 11rpg, 3.2apg, .9spg, and 2bpg, while only missing 2 games

Yeah but he had Tony Parker who put up 18.9 ppg, 5.8 apg on 54.8 FG%, Ginobili who averaged 15.1 ppg and 3.6 apg, Finley averaged double digits off the bench and Bowen was probably the best perimeter defender.

Duncan was robbed of DPOY not MVP.


lebron james - leads the cavs to 50 wins, averages 31.4ppg, 7rpg, 6.6apg, 1.6spg, and .8bpg, while only missing 3 games

Fair enough choice.


shawn marion - leads the suns to 54 wins, is one of the elite defenders in the nba, averages 21.8ppg, 11.8rpg, 1.8apg, 2spg, and 1.7bpg, while only missing 1 game

No he wasn't.


dirk nowitzki - leads the mavs to 60 wins, averages 26.6ppg, 9rpg, 2.8apg, .7spg, and 1bpg, while only missing 1 game

Dirk has a good case, I won't argue that.


chauncey billups - leads the pistons to the best record in the nba (64 wins), averages 18.5ppg, 3.1rpg, 8.6apg, .9spg, and .1bpg, while only missing 1 game

Chauncey had a great case too.


ben wallace - as important to detroits chances of winning as billups, defensive player of the year, averages 7.3ppg, 11.3rpg, 1.9apg, 1.8spg, and 2.2bpg, while playing all 82 games

:roll: Did you seriously just say that 2006 Ben Wallace was more valuable than 2006 Dwyane Wade?

The Pistons also had Prince, Wallace and McDyess. They were a far deeper team than Miami. Still had Shaq who had a very good season but Shaq missed 23 games and Wade didn't have a supporting cast like Billups or Wallace did.


tim duncan

Duncan didn't even lead his own team in scoring, he shot 48.4% which is poor for his position and he had a better supporting cast than Wade. I know he played injured but still he wasn't better than Wade that year.


kobe was guarded by bruce bowen, one of the best and most physical defenders in the game, all series

:roll: Bowen was with Miami in 2001, he didn't join the Spurs until the following season.


and its alot easier for shaq to dominate against good defenders than it is for a perimiter guy like kobe because shaq has unmatched size so it isn't like they can stop him backing them down, just look at what he did to the defensive player of the year in 2001 in the finals.

Who cares what looks more impressive to you? What matters is what's more effective.

[DCL]

i remember seeing this thread a couple months ago, but i ignored it and i have not clicked on it at all until now.

but i have still not read one single post and i refuse to get into the same old bullsht that never ends.

anyway, i have a feeling this thread might still be on the first page a couple months from now.

[Shep]

Shaq would have averaged more if Kobe hadn't been chucking. Shaq even called Kobe out on that.
how would shaq have averaged more? i've already outlined the fact that he got the same shots he did when he was averaging 30ppg and the only reason shaq didn't average more points is because of his awful free throw percent.. shaq only called kobe out because he starting to emerge as the lakers best player and was jealous. if shaq showed up at the start of the season motivated they wouldn't have had a problem

More FTA as well.
yes. a whole 1 more fta per game too :rolleyes:

And? You face plenty of bad teams in a season anyway. A win is a win and 11-3 is a damn good stretch.
yes, you face plenty of bad teams during the season - which is why a kobe less lakers would have no hope of replicating that record in the playoffs

8 games....game f*cking games?
the most important 8 games in the lakers season? :roll: the 8 games when the lakers were at their most dominant? :roll:

Yeah that sure is long enough.
shut the **** up with your "no that isn't long enough" bull****. you said shaq needed to be the leading scorer. 2 whole playoff series say otherwise.

Kobe was the leading scorer in those series because the teams had to worry so much about Shaq as mentioned. Of course Kobe scoring in those series then made the Sixers a little more hesitant to focus so much on Shaq(hence Shaq's 34 ppg in the Finals).
they focused on shaq, and they minimized his impact. kobe on the other hand dominated, and was the best player in atleast 1 of the 2 series. if a team focused on a dude who averaged 40 points and 20 rebounds during the season and he averages 5 points during a playoff series would you still call him the mvp of the series? didn't think so.

Shaq was easily as valuable. He was matched up with both Duncan and Robinson who were both elite defenders. Shaq destroyed both of them
shaq averaged 27ppg - down from his season average of 29ppg. how you came to the conclusion that he destroyed them is anyone's guess.

Kobe wasn't matched up with anyone near that level. Who was he matched up with an old washed up Terry Porter?
who cares who was matched up on kobe? michael jordan was matched up with jeff hornacek in the '97 and '98 finals, does this mean whatever he did meant nothing?

Yeah but he had Tony Parker who put up 18.9 ppg, 5.8 apg on 54.8 FG%, Ginobili who averaged 15.1 ppg and 3.6 apg, Finley averaged double digits off the bench and Bowen was probably the best perimeter defender.
wade had shaquille o'neal - better than any of duncan's teammates. finley was trash, the spurs only had three servicable players - duncan, parker, ginobili. meanwhile the heat go 6 deep, wade misses 7 games, and duncan is easily the better defender.

Duncan was robbed of DPOY not MVP.
both

No he wasn't.
yes he was

Did you seriously just say that 2006 Ben Wallace was more valuable than 2006 Dwyane Wade?
i'm pretty sure i just said ben wallace was more valuable than dwyane wade in 2006

The Pistons also had Prince, Wallace and McDyess. They were a far deeper team than Miami. Still had Shaq who had a very good season but Shaq missed 23 games and Wade didn't have a supporting cast like Billups or Wallace did.
wallace and billups took votes away from each other, rasheed wallace was also top 10 because they all were leading contributers to the best record in the nba. the pistons didn't have 1 superstar, instead they had 3 stars and they finished fifth, sixth, and tenth in the most valuable player standings.

Bowen was with Miami in 2001, he didn't join the Spurs until the following season.
lucky for him :roll:

Who cares what looks more impressive to you? What matters is what's more effective.
its common sense. perimiter domination is much harder than inside domination. who cares what looks more impressive to me? the only person that matters in this conversation - me.

Actually, Bowen wasn't on the Spurs that year -- get your facts straight. Kobe was guarded by 92 year old Terry Porter and Antonio Daniels in that series since Derek Anderson, their starting SG, was injured.
DA played the last two games - get your facts straight. and is it kobe's fault he didn't have the worlds best defender on him? you can't discredit him for that. the fact was that san antonio were a great defensive team, and kobe got his 33/7/7 against them.

And again, it is debatable whether 33/7/7/51% > 28/13/3 blk/54%
where did you get this **** about shaq averaging 28/13/3? he averaged 27/13/1 - get your facts straight.

especially considering that Shaq did his thing against 2-3 defenders while Kobe was single covered -- how do you think Kobe was able to waltz down the lane the whole series? Because Duncan and Robinson -- two HOF defensive big men who were tag-teaming Shaq that series while Kobe was busy trying to break down the fossilized Terry Porter -- refused to come off Shaq to help on Kobe's penetration for fear of a dump-off or offensive rebound by Shaq.
i see words, but all i hear is this: :cry: . there's a reason why in this series shaq himself said "kobe is the best player in the world" - something i don't agree with, but for this series alone kobe was clearly the best player.

[VCMVP1551]

how would shaq have averaged more? i've already outlined the fact that he got the same shots he did when he was averaging 30ppg and the only reason shaq didn't average more points is because of his awful free throw percent.. shaq only called kobe out because he starting to emerge as the lakers best player and was jealous. if shaq showed up at the start of the season motivated they wouldn't have had a problem

Look at this. The first 4 games of the season O'Neal averaged 34 ppg on 22.8 FGA. For the rest of November(11 games) he averaged 17 shots. In December he still got just 19.4 shots, in January he still got just 19.2 shots but averaged 31 ppg. He was started to dominate just prior to the all-star break.

For a guy who won the Finals MVP, the scoring title, regular season MVP and was the leading scorer in the playoffs that's not a lot of shots per game. Especially considering that he got 21 shots the previous season and seemed to dominate whenever he was given shots.

He started off the season hot but Kobe started chucking and he didn't get many shots for the rest of November.


yes, you face plenty of bad teams during the season - which is why a kobe less lakers would have no hope of replicating that record in the playoffs

You said those teams won an average of 40 games? :oldlol: Well at the end of the season every team has faced teams with an average of 42 wins. :roll:


the most important 8 games in the lakers season? :roll: the 8 games when the lakers were at their most dominant? :roll:

Shaq averaged 43.5 ppg on over 60% shooting in the first 2 games foring the Kings and Spurs to give even more attention to stopping Shaq. After getting 29 FGA those first 2 games he only got 19 the next 6 games and that was because he was almost always doubled and tripled.


shut the **** up with your "no that isn't long enough" bull****. you said shaq needed to be the leading scorer. 2 whole playoff series say otherwise.

Here's an example of what I'm talking about.

The first 2 games of the Kings series Shaq destroyed them with back to back 40 point games on an average of 29 shots per game.

The next 2 games he averaged 14.5 FGA because the Kings tried everything to stop him. That opened things up for Kobe.


they focused on shaq, and they minimized his impact.

They spend all of that energy and still allow 27 and 13 and you call that minimizing? :oldlol:


kobe on the other hand dominated, and was the best player in atleast 1 of the 2 series. if a team focused on a dude who averaged 40 points and 20 rebounds during the season and he averages 5 points during a playoff series would you still call him the mvp of the series? didn't think so.

Shaq didn't drop from 40 and 20 to 5 points. He was at 29 and 13 during the regular season and averaged 27 and 13 in that series.

He also averaged 33.3 ppg vs the Kings with 17.3 rpg and shot 59.8%. All of that is well up from his season averages.

I'd say they were equally valuable in the Spurs series but in the Kings series Shaq was easily MVP.


shaq averaged 27ppg - down from his season average of 29ppg. how you came to the conclusion that he destroyed them is anyone's guess.

He averaged 27 but also 13 rpg which matched his season and average and that was while being guarded by two of the best big men defenders in the league. So yes getting around his season average while being doubled by both those guys is destroying them.


who cares who was matched up on kobe? michael jordan was matched up with jeff hornacek in the '97 and '98 finals, does this mean whatever he did meant nothing?

No but when you have Shaq matched up with 2 of the leagues best defenders it obviously makes it more impressive that he was able to play well. We can both agree that Duncan and Robinson are/were great defenders right?


wade had shaquille o'neal - better than any of duncan's teammates.

Yeah but Shaq missed 23 games.


finley was trash

10 ppg and great shooting off the bench is trash? :confusedshrug:


, the spurs only had three servicable players - duncan, parker, ginobili.

What about Bruce Bowen who you just said was one of the best defenders as well as the fact that he's a good 3 point shooter from the corner.


meanwhile the heat go 6 deep, wade misses 7 games, and duncan is easily the better defender.

The heat had Wade and Shaq but Payton was garbage at that point, Mourning missed 17 games, Posey missed 15 games, their 3rd leading scorer Jason Williams missed 23 games.


both

Duncan was too far below his standards on offense that year. 48% for a low post player is poor and he didn't make up for it from the line(63%). He also scored below 19 ppg.

Duncan's two MVP's in 2002 and 2003 were deserved and you could make a case for him deserving MVP in 1999 as well but that's it.


i'm pretty sure i just said ben wallace was more valuable than dwyane wade in 2006

:roll: Thanks for that quote, it's pretty damn funny.


wallace and billups took votes away from each other, rasheed wallace was also top 10 because they all were leading contributers to the best record in the nba. the pistons didn't have 1 superstar, instead they had 3 stars and they finished fifth, sixth, and tenth in the most valuable player standings.

Fair enough but Billups was pretty close to having a superstar type impact with his near 19 and 9 average as well as clutch shots, defense and perimeter shooting.


its common sense. perimiter domination is much harder than inside domination. who cares what looks more impressive to me? the only person that matters in this conversation - me.

It matters what's more effective, not more impressive.

[Loki]

who cares who was matched up on kobe? michael jordan was matched up with jeff hornacek in the '97 and '98 finals, does this mean whatever he did meant nothing?

Jordan saw first option defensive pressure, Kobe didn't. That's the point when discussing his performance vs. Shaq's in that series, since Shaq was the one seeing first option pressure.

[crisoner]

A.D.K.T.







Another Dumb Kobe Topic

[Shep]

Look at this. The first 4 games of the season O'Neal averaged 34 ppg on 22.8 FGA. For the rest of November(11 games) he averaged 17 shots. In December he still got just 19.4 shots, in January he still got just 19.2 shots but averaged 31 ppg. He was started to dominate just prior to the all-star break.
- shaq shot less in wins than he what did in losses
- after those first four games shaq shot 42%, 39%, and 43% in his next three games
- if he averaged 31ppg in january on 19 shots there was no reason why he couldn't have averaged 31ppg on 19 shots in december

For a guy who won the Finals MVP, the scoring title, regular season MVP and was the leading scorer in the playoffs that's not a lot of shots per game. Especially considering that he got 21 shots the previous season and seemed to dominate whenever he was given shots.
big men aren't usually volume shooters. you won't find too many centers shooting the ball more than 20 times per contest.

He started off the season hot but Kobe started chucking and he didn't get many shots for the rest of November.
thats because he was playing like junk for the month of november. in 7 of the 14 november games he shot under 50% and in 8 of the 15 games he shot 40% or under from the free throw line. no wonder he didn't get his usual shots.

You said those teams won an average of 40 games? Well at the end of the season every team has faced teams with an average of 42 wins.
half of 82 = 41 :roll: , and 40 wins means they were less than average :roll:

Shaq averaged 43.5 ppg on over 60% shooting in the first 2 games foring the Kings and Spurs to give even more attention to stopping Shaq. After getting 29 FGA those first 2 games he only got 19 the next 6 games and that was because he was almost always doubled and tripled.
so he was kept under his usual production :sleeping

They spend all of that energy and still allow 27 and 13 and you call that minimizing?
was it under his usual playoff production?

Shaq didn't drop from 40 and 20 to 5 points. He was at 29 and 13 during the regular season and averaged 27 and 13 in that series.
you didn't answer the question

He also averaged 33.3 ppg vs the Kings with 17.3 rpg and shot 59.8%. All of that is well up from his season averages.

I'd say they were equally valuable in the Spurs series but in the Kings series Shaq was easily MVP.
the were closer to being equally as valuabe in the blazers series, in the spurs series kobe was "the best player in the world" - shaq

He averaged 27 but also 13 rpg which matched his season and average and that was while being guarded by two of the best big men defenders in the league. So yes getting around his season average while being doubled by both those guys is destroying them.
getting less that normal production is destroying them? :roll: .

No but when you have Shaq matched up with 2 of the leagues best defenders it obviously makes it more impressive that he was able to play well. We can both agree that Duncan and Robinson are/were great defenders right?
i'm talking about kobe, and his defender. are you looking at jordan and saying that hornacek guarded him so whatever he does means nothing?

Yeah but Shaq missed 23 games.
but shaq drew double teams blah blah opened up things for wade blah blah good defense blah blah :lol

10 ppg and great shooting off the bench is trash?
10 points in 27 minutes? what the hell else does he do?

What about Bruce Bowen who you just said was one of the best defenders as well as the fact that he's a good 3 point shooter from the corner.
i'm talking about all round players. yes bowen was a good perimiter defender but when talking about players overall game he was trash.

The heat had Wade and Shaq but Payton was garbage at that point, Mourning missed 17 games, Posey missed 15 games, their 3rd leading scorer Jason Williams missed 23 games.
yeh they had injuries, but jason williams was a very good player, zo was one of the best bench players in the nba, haslem missed only 1 game and gave you 9/8 every night, walker didn't miss a game and played very well off the bench

Duncan was too far below his standards on offense that year. 48% for a low post player is poor and he didn't make up for it from the line(63%). He also scored below 19 ppg.
it doesn't matter what his standards are, it is what you are compared to the rest of the league, and what duncan provided for his team was more valuable than what anyone else provided for their team

Duncan's two MVP's in 2002 and 2003 were deserved and you could make a case for him deserving MVP in 1999 as well but that's it.
yes he deserved it in 1999 also

Thanks for that quote, it's pretty damn funny.
:confusedshrug:

Fair enough but Billups was pretty close to having a superstar type impact with his near 19 and 9 average as well as clutch shots, defense and perimeter shooting.
yes, billups was very close to being a superstar

It matters what's more effective, not more impressive.
but you have to take into consideration the position they play. there have been a number of dominant centers throughout history, there haven't been many players who have been able to dominate at the 2 position.

[VCMVP1551]

- shaq shot less in wins than he what did in losses

Because that counts blowouts where he played less minutes. He played 39.0 mpg in wins but 40.7 mpg in losses.

So Shaq shot more per minute in wins. You give him 40.7 mpg in those wins and he would have had 20.0 FGA.

So that point is destroyed.


- after those first four games shaq shot 42%, 39%, and 43% in his next three games

Becuase he wasn't getting enough shots to get in a rythym.


- if he averaged 31ppg in january on 19 shots there was no reason why he couldn't have averaged 31ppg on 19 shots in december

big men aren't usually volume shooters. you won't find too many centers shooting the ball more than 20 times per contest.

Shaq wasn't just any center. He was the best player in the league and the reigning scoring champion.


thats because he was playing like junk for the month of november. in 7 of the 14 november games he shot under 50% and in 8 of the 15 games he shot 40% or under from the free throw line. no wonder he didn't get his usual shots.

Playing like junk? :roll: He was still among the leading scorers in the league.


half of 82 = 41 :roll: , and 40 wins means they were less than average :roll:

By 1 game. :oldlol:


was it under his usual playoff production?

Yes but barely and it took extra attention to do it. That extra attention was what made it possible for Kobe go off.


you didn't answer the question

The question was irrelevant.


the were closer to being equally as valuabe in the blazers series, in the spurs series kobe was "the best player in the world" - shaq

Shaq has also said his favorite toilet paper is his hand, that Yao Ming is 8 feet tall and that Kevin Garnett plays no defense.


getting less that normal production is destroying them? :roll: .

Considering the attention he drew, yes.


i'm talking about kobe, and his defender. are you looking at jordan and saying that hornacek guarded him so whatever he does means nothing?

No but he didn't have the best player as his teammate much less the best player in the league being guarded by 2 of the best defenders in the league.


but shaq drew double teams blah blah opened up things for wade blah blah good defense blah blah :lol

Not in the 23 games he missed.


10 points in 27 minutes? what the hell else does he do?

He did what he was suppose to do. Shoot and score, what the hell do you think they signed Finley for?


i'm talking about all round players. yes bowen was a good perimiter defender but when talking about players overall game he was trash.

He did what he was supposed to do. Players who excel at their role and know their role are very valuable.


yeh they had injuries, but jason williams was a very good player, zo was one of the best bench players in the nba, haslem missed only 1 game and gave you 9/8 every night, walker didn't miss a game and played very well off the bench

2006 Walker and 2006 Jason Williams were good role players but nothing more. Just like a lot of the San Antonio players.


it doesn't matter what his standards are, it is what you are compared to the rest of the league, and what duncan provided for his team was more valuable than what anyone else provided for their team

And his offense wasn't good enough to be MVP.


yes he deserved it in 1999 also

You could make a great case for him but I'd go with Alonzo Mourning.


but you have to take into consideration the position they play. there have been a number of dominant centers throughout history, there haven't been many players who have been able to dominate at the 2 position.

Yes and that's impressive but what matters is what's more effective. Everything else is trivial.

[Shep]

Because that counts blowouts where he played less minutes. He played 39.0 mpg in wins but 40.7 mpg in losses.

So Shaq shot more per minute in wins. You give him 40.7 mpg in those wins and he would have had 20.0 FGA.

So that point is destroyed.
lol@you using my word again. my point remains - you said shaq needed alot of shots for the lakers to win, and he happened to shoot less when they won. if shaq shooting more was a major factor in the lakers winning he'd shoot atleast 2 or 3 more fga per game in wins than what he did in losses.

Becuase he wasn't getting enough shots to get in a rythym.
:oldlol: worthless excuses. 19 shots wasn't enough shots to get into a rythem? shaq also had games where he had low fga and still made shots, including a 9-14 game, a 9-12 game, a 8-13 game, and many more.

Shaq wasn't just any center. He was the best player in the league and the reigning scoring champion.
you missed the point

Playing like junk? He was still among the leading scorers in the league.
i'm talking about compared to the benchmark he set the previous year

By 1 game.
still less :oldlol: , and you can't do a simple math problem, so now you can't do math, and you can't do english..what year did you drop out of grade school again? :oldlol:

Yes but barely and it took extra attention to do it. That extra attention was what made it possible for Kobe go off.
shaq had the same attention throughout his time with the lakers, kobe seized the moment and carried the lakers into the finals

The question was irrelevant.
only because you had no answer

Shaq has also said his favorite toilet paper is his hand, that Yao Ming is 8 feet tall and that Kevin Garnett plays no defense.
shaq makes jokes. what he said about kobe was no joke.

Considering the attention he drew, yes.
:oldlol:

No but he didn't have the best player as his teammate much less the best player in the league being guarded by 2 of the best defenders in the league.
this had nothing to do with what i just said

Not in the 23 games he missed.
59 games is better than 0 games

He did what he was suppose to do. Shoot and score, what the hell do you think they signed Finley for?
just because they signed him for that doesn't mean he's a good player. 10 points in 27 minutes for a scorer is a pathetic number, especially when you don't do anything else.

He did what he was supposed to do. Players who excel at their role and know their role are very valuable.
not as valuable as well rounded stars

2006 Walker and 2006 Jason Williams were good role players but nothing more. Just like a lot of the San Antonio players.
walker was miami's third best player in the finals, williams was their fourth best player - role players yes, but easily better than the role players of the spurs.

And his offense wasn't good enough to be MVP.
yes, because you need to be in the top scorers in the league to hold any value to your team :rolleyes: . pathetic.

You could make a great case for him but I'd go with Alonzo Mourning.
zo wasn't even top 3

Yes and that's impressive but what matters is what's more effective. Everything else is trivial.
kobe was more effective in the san antonio series

[lilojmayo]

Shaq at his prime was a hell of a lot better than Kobe all Kobe did in his prime was shoot everytime and his team went absolutely no where Shaq always had a winning team

I would Take MJ in college over Kobe i would take OJ Mayo over Kobe also

In 1984-1987 nobody could stay in front of jordan jordan got to the lane whenever he wanted Jordan always shot the ball over 50% jus think if jordan had a big man who he could have worked with in those years like Kobe was giving with Shaq

[Loki]

kobe was more effective in the san antonio series

No, he wasn't. Calculate the EFF and I'm pretty sure Shaq comes out on top (33/7/7/51% vs. 27/12/3 blk/54%), to say nothing of the fact that Shaq occupied SA's entire interior defense (including 2 of the best defensive bigs of all time) while Kobe was left on an island with Porter and Daniels.

[VCMVP1551]

lol@you using my word again. my point remains - you said shaq needed alot of shots for the lakers to win, and he happened to shoot less when they won. if shaq shooting more was a major factor in the lakers winning he'd shoot atleast 2 or 3 more fga per game in wins than what he did in losses.

Your word? :oldlol:

Shaq was getting more shots for the time he was out on the floor. The team was much better in those games and a a result they had more blowout wins.


:oldlol: worthless excuses. 19 shots wasn't enough shots to get into a rythem? shaq also had games where he had low fga and still made shots, including a 9-14 game, a 9-12 game, a 8-13 game, and many more.

The word is rythym first of all. Second of all in the games after those first 4 games(22.8 FGA he wasn't averaging 19 shots per game. He was averaging 15.3 shots.


you missed the point

That's because you didn't make one.


i'm talking about compared to the benchmark he set the previous year

Well then everyone in the league has played like garbage since.


still less :oldlol: , and you can't do a simple math problem, so now you can't do math, and you can't do english..what year did you drop out of grade school again? :oldlol:

Coming from a guy who can't spell hockey or rythym.


shaq had the same attention throughout his time with the lakers, kobe seized the moment and carried the lakers into the finals

For Shaq to have the focus of 2 of the top 5 big men defenders in the league and still put up 27 and 13 is far more impressive than what Kobe did. Kobe had single coverage against some poor, old defenders.


only because you had no answer

If that were the case then everyone question I've asked you would be irrelevant.


shaq makes jokes. what he said about kobe was no joke.

It was an exaggeration. Shaq speaks without thinking all the time. If you had followed Shaq's career for 15 years like me then you'd know this.


this had nothing to do with what i just said

Yes it did.


59 games is better than 0 games

Yeah I know and Shaq made a huge contribution to that team but Duncan's all-star teammates missed a combined 19 games while Wade's star teammate missed 23 games.


just because they signed him for that doesn't mean he's a good player. 10 points in 27 minutes for a scorer is a pathetic number, especially when you don't do anything else.

That's not a pathetic number. That's excellent production off the bench. Every team needs shooters.


not as valuable as well rounded stars

Wade only had 1 of those and you could argue that Shaq wasn't even a star anymore at that point.


walker was miami's third best player in the finals, williams was their fourth best player - role players yes, but easily better than the role players of the spurs.

Walker and Williams weren't better than Bowen.


yes, because you need to be in the top scorers in the league to hold any value to your team :rolleyes: . pathetic.

I never said among the top scorers, I said just quite a bit better than his 18.6 ppg on his pathetic shooting %.


zo wasn't even top 3

:roll: So 20 and 11 with 4 blocks as the leagues best defender on a number 1 seed isn't among the 3 most valuable players? GTFO :oldlol:


kobe was more effective in the san antonio series

No he wasn't because Shaq dominated against 2 agreat defenders and allowed Kobe to go off against some bad defenders.

[Shep]

Your word?
yes :oldlol:

Shaq was getting more shots for the time he was out on the floor. The team was much better in those games and a a result they had more blowout wins.
the difference is not substantial enough to make an argument out of

The word is rythym first of all. Second of all in the games after those first 4 games(22.8 FGA he wasn't averaging 19 shots per game. He was averaging 15.3 shots.
he was shooting bricks when he did shoot, so there was no point in shooting any more and wasting a possession

That's because you didn't make one.
more like because you couldn't come up with a counter point you instead dismiss it as me not having a point :roll:

Well then everyone in the league has played like garbage since.
pathetic. you are expected to show up to the best of your capabilities each and every night, other players were expected to play to their best and they did, shaq was expected to and he didn't.

Coming from a guy who can't spell hockey or rythym.
coming from a guy who can't spell elliott

For Shaq to have the focus of 2 of the top 5 big men defenders in the league and still put up 27 and 13 is far more impressive than what Kobe did. Kobe had single coverage against some poor, old defenders.
its easier to double a guy who plays 5ft away from the hoop than a perimiter oriented player, and kobe's 33/7/7 is much more impressive than o'neal's 27/13, including a 45 point game 1 in san antonio that set the tone for the series.

If that were the case then everyone question I've asked you would be irrelevant.
i've not only answered your questions, but destroyed them

It was an exaggeration. Shaq speaks without thinking all the time. If you had followed Shaq's career for 15 years like me then you'd know this.
yes, it was an exaggeration, but he said it at a time when kobe was the best player in the world for a period of four games. i also don't just follow shaq's career, but everyone's.

Yes it did.
thats funny, considering it didn't

Yeah I know and Shaq made a huge contribution to that team but Duncan's all-star teammates missed a combined 19 games while Wade's star teammate missed 23 games.
miami had alonzo mourning to fill the void of the missing o'neal and he averaged 12 points, 9 rebounds, and 4 blocks as a starter

That's not a pathetic number. That's excellent production off the bench. Every team needs shooters.
:oldlol: examples of excellent production off the bench in '06 is alonzo mourning, speedy claxton, and mike miller. if you want to be a scorer who does nothing but score, excellent production is more like 12 points in 20 minutes, minimum.

Walker and Williams weren't better than Bowen.
:lol

I never said among the top scorers, I said just quite a bit better than his 18.6 ppg on his pathetic shooting %.
quite a bit better than 18.6ppg is among the best scorers in the game, and 48% shooting is only 2.9% worse than what it was when he was at his peak.

So 20 and 11 with 4 blocks as the leagues best defender on a number 1 seed isn't among the 3 most valuable players?
:lol the leagues best defender? :roll: ever heard of a guy called david robinson? not to mention tim duncan and dikembe mutombo were both probably better also. duncan (clearly), malone, and robinson were all more valuable.

No he wasn't because Shaq dominated against 2 agreat defenders and allowed Kobe to go off against some bad defenders.
kobe controlled games with his overall play - playing defense, setting the tone, getting teammates involved, initiating offense, driving lanes, grabbing rebounds, dominant scoring. easily more effective.

[Loki]

LOL So Kobe didn't have better numbers (they're about equal), didn't see nearly as much defensive attention, and didn't do it to two of the best defenders in history like Shaq did, yet his series was "easily more effective"? Give me some of whatever you're smoking. :oldlol:

[VCMVP1551]

LOL So Kobe didn't have better numbers (they're about equal), didn't see nearly as much defensive attention, and didn't do it to two of the best defenders in history like Shaq did, yet his series was "easily more effective"? Give me some of whatever you're smoking. :oldlol:

As funny as it sounds that's not surprising coming from Shep.

Shep has said the following things.


Shawn Marion is better than Tim Duncan

Marcus Camby is the best center in the league

David Robinson is better than Shaq or Hakeem Olajuwon

David Robinson was better than michael jordan every year from 1990-1996 except for 1993

[Killer_Instinct]

I think Kobe would be appalled to know people are obssessed with him to this extent. Creepy ****.

[One of Shemps Kids]

I agree, Shep is a dumbass (and a huge one at that), but this is just getting to be too much.

[Scott Pippen]

Shep:roll::roll::roll: