Printable View
[QUOTE=Shep]
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?[/quote]
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.
[CENTER][COLOR="Purple"][FONT="Arial Black"][SIZE="7"]A.D.K.T.[/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR]
Another Dumb Kobe Topic[/CENTER]
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
- 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
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
big men aren't usually volume shooters. you won't find too many centers shooting the ball more than 20 times per contest.
[QUOTE]He started off the season hot but Kobe started chucking and he didn't get many shots for the rest of November.[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
half of 82 = 41 :roll: , and 40 wins means they were less than average :roll:
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
so he was kept under his usual production :sleeping
[QUOTE]They spend all of that energy and still allow 27 and 13 and you call that minimizing?[/QUOTE]
was it under his usual playoff production?
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
you didn't answer the question
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
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
[QUOTE]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. [/QUOTE]
getting less that normal production is destroying them? :roll: .
[QUOTE]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?[/QUOTE]
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?
[QUOTE]Yeah but Shaq missed 23 games.[/QUOTE]
but shaq drew double teams blah blah opened up things for wade blah blah good defense blah blah :lol
[QUOTE]10 ppg and great shooting off the bench is trash?[/QUOTE]
10 points in 27 minutes? what the hell else does he do?
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
i'm talking about all round players. yes bowen was a good perimiter defender but when talking about players overall game he was trash.
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
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
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
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
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
yes he deserved it in 1999 also
[QUOTE]Thanks for that quote, it's pretty damn funny.[/QUOTE]
:confusedshrug:
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
yes, billups was very close to being a superstar
[QUOTE]It matters what's more effective, not more impressive.[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE=Shep]- shaq shot less in wins than he what did in losses[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE] - after those first four games shaq shot 42%, 39%, and 43% in his next three games[/QUOTE]
Becuase he wasn't getting enough shots to get in a rythym.
[QUOTE] - 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.[/QUOTE]
Shaq wasn't just any center. He was the best player in the league and the reigning scoring champion.
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
Playing like junk? :roll: He was still among the leading scorers in the league.
[QUOTE]half of 82 = 41 :roll: , and 40 wins means they were less than average :roll: [/QUOTE]
By 1 game. :oldlol:
[QUOTE]was it under his usual playoff production?[/QUOTE]
Yes but barely and it took extra attention to do it. That extra attention was what made it possible for Kobe go off.
[QUOTE]you didn't answer the question[/QUOTE]
The question was irrelevant.
[QUOTE]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[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]getting less that normal production is destroying them? :roll: .[/QUOTE]
Considering the attention he drew, yes.
[QUOTE]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?[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]but shaq drew double teams blah blah opened up things for wade blah blah good defense blah blah :lol [/QUOTE]
Not in the 23 games he missed.
[QUOTE]10 points in 27 minutes? what the hell else does he do?[/QUOTE]
He did what he was suppose to do. Shoot and score, what the hell do you think they signed Finley for?
[QUOTE]i'm talking about all round players. yes bowen was a good perimiter defender but when talking about players overall game he was trash.[/QUOTE]
He did what he was supposed to do. Players who excel at their role and know their role are very valuable.
[QUOTE]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[/QUOTE]
2006 Walker and 2006 Jason Williams were good role players but nothing more. Just like a lot of the San Antonio players.
[QUOTE]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[/QUOTE]
And his offense wasn't good enough to be MVP.
[QUOTE]yes he deserved it in 1999 also[/QUOTE]
You could make a great case for him but I'd go with Alonzo Mourning.
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
Yes and that's impressive but what matters is what's more effective. Everything else is trivial.
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]Becuase he wasn't getting enough shots to get in a rythym.[/QUOTE]
: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.
[QUOTE]Shaq wasn't just any center. He was the best player in the league and the reigning scoring champion.[/QUOTE]
you missed the point
[QUOTE]Playing like junk? He was still among the leading scorers in the league.[/QUOTE]
i'm talking about compared to the benchmark he set the previous year
[QUOTE]By 1 game.[/QUOTE]
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:
[QUOTE]Yes but barely and it took extra attention to do it. That extra attention was what made it possible for Kobe go off.[/QUOTE]
shaq had the same attention throughout his time with the lakers, kobe seized the moment and carried the lakers into the finals
[QUOTE]The question was irrelevant.[/QUOTE]
only because you had no answer
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
shaq makes jokes. what he said about kobe was no joke.
[QUOTE]Considering the attention he drew, yes.[/QUOTE]
:oldlol:
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
this had nothing to do with what i just said
[QUOTE]Not in the 23 games he missed.[/QUOTE]
59 games is better than 0 games
[QUOTE]He did what he was suppose to do. Shoot and score, what the hell do you think they signed Finley for?[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]He did what he was supposed to do. Players who excel at their role and know their role are very valuable.[/QUOTE]
not as valuable as well rounded stars
[QUOTE]2006 Walker and 2006 Jason Williams were good role players but nothing more. Just like a lot of the San Antonio players.[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]And his offense wasn't good enough to be MVP.[/QUOTE]
yes, because you need to be in the top scorers in the league to hold any value to your team :rolleyes: . pathetic.
[QUOTE]You could make a great case for him but I'd go with Alonzo Mourning.[/QUOTE]
zo wasn't even top 3
[QUOTE]Yes and that's impressive but what matters is what's more effective. Everything else is trivial.[/QUOTE]
kobe was more effective in the san antonio series
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
[QUOTE=Shep]
kobe was more effective in the san antonio series[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE=Shep]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.[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]: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.[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]you missed the point[/QUOTE]
That's because you didn't make one.
[QUOTE]i'm talking about compared to the benchmark he set the previous year[/QUOTE]
Well then everyone in the league has played like garbage since.
[QUOTE]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: [/QUOTE]
Coming from a guy who can't spell hockey or rythym.
[QUOTE]shaq had the same attention throughout his time with the lakers, kobe seized the moment and carried the lakers into the finals[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]only because you had no answer[/QUOTE]
If that were the case then everyone question I've asked you would be irrelevant.
[QUOTE]shaq makes jokes. what he said about kobe was no joke.[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]this had nothing to do with what i just said[/QUOTE]
Yes it did.
[QUOTE]59 games is better than 0 games[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
That's not a pathetic number. That's excellent production off the bench. Every team needs shooters.
[QUOTE]not as valuable as well rounded stars[/QUOTE]
Wade only had 1 of those and you could argue that Shaq wasn't even a star anymore at that point.
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
Walker and Williams weren't better than Bowen.
[QUOTE]yes, because you need to be in the top scorers in the league to hold any value to your team :rolleyes: . pathetic.[/QUOTE]
I never said among the top scorers, I said just quite a bit better than his 18.6 ppg on his pathetic shooting %.
[QUOTE]zo wasn't even top 3[/QUOTE]
: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:
[QUOTE]kobe was more effective in the san antonio series[/QUOTE]
No he wasn't because Shaq dominated against 2 agreat defenders and allowed Kobe to go off against some bad defenders.
[QUOTE]Your word?[/QUOTE]
yes :oldlol:
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
the difference is not substantial enough to make an argument out of
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
he was shooting bricks when he did shoot, so there was no point in shooting any more and wasting a possession
[QUOTE]That's because you didn't make one.[/QUOTE]
more like because you couldn't come up with a counter point you instead dismiss it as me not having a point :roll:
[QUOTE]Well then everyone in the league has played like garbage since.[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]Coming from a guy who can't spell hockey or rythym.[/QUOTE]
coming from a guy who can't spell elliott
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]If that were the case then everyone question I've asked you would be irrelevant.[/QUOTE]
i've not only answered your questions, but destroyed them
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]Yes it did.[/QUOTE]
thats funny, considering it didn't
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
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
[QUOTE]That's not a pathetic number. That's excellent production off the bench. Every team needs shooters.[/QUOTE]
: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.
[QUOTE]Walker and Williams weren't better than Bowen.[/QUOTE]
:lol
[QUOTE]I never said among the top scorers, I said just quite a bit better than his 18.6 ppg on his pathetic shooting %.[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]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? [/QUOTE]
: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.
[QUOTE]No he wasn't because Shaq dominated against 2 agreat defenders and allowed Kobe to go off against some bad defenders.[/QUOTE]
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.
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:
[QUOTE=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:[/QUOTE]
As funny as it sounds that's not surprising coming from Shep.
Shep has said the following things.
[QUOTE]Shawn Marion is better than Tim Duncan[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Marcus Camby is the best center in the league[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]David Robinson is better than Shaq or Hakeem Olajuwon[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]David Robinson was better than michael jordan every year from 1990-1996 except for 1993[/QUOTE]
I think Kobe would be appalled to know people are obssessed with him to this extent. Creepy ****.
I agree, Shep is a dumbass (and a huge one at that), but this is just getting to be too much.
Shep:roll::roll::roll: