Tmac: 'Replace me with Kobe and I'm with Shaq, I don't win a championship?'

[QUOTE=RRR3;15017571]T-Mac was a year younger than Kobe. At the same age as Kobe in 2000, T-Mac was putting up ~27/8/5, they wouldn't have needed a game 7 with 21 year old T-Mac.[/QUOTE]
No that was 2001 you dipshit. In 2000 he was toronto and wanted his own team, now he's crying. Why didn't he stick it out with Vince? Like Kobe did in LA? And no he was never as skilled as Kobe honestly and like the other poster mentioned, Defense.

Think he could average those 27/8/5 with Vince? Kobe did with Shaq and everyone knew he was being held back offensively.

Kobe & Shaq will be remembered as the most dominant duo for a long long time and for obvious reasons, those are the facts. Then you have Kobe's career as whole.

Gilbert nodding his head like the bron nut huging kluch slave he is, ugh.

Didn't Tmac play with Yuo Ming? He was better than Pau Gasol.

[QUOTE=97 bulls;15017663]Didn't :oldlol:Tmac play with Yuo Ming? He was better than Pau Gasol.[/QUOTE]

Uh Yao ming was made of walking paper mache during that time and Tmac was made of popsicle sticks himself. He was great when he played but when did they actually play? I went to maybe 7 rockets games when we had both. I saw Tmac once, Yao once and the supporting cast the other 5 games lol. I'll never forget the one time I got to watch Yao the thing rhat immediately struck me a few minutes into the game was how painful just getting up the floor looked for him.

[QUOTE=LAL;15017545]We know Tmac was impressive for 3 years.

But what if Kobe, Kawhi or KD for example played 23 healthy years with superteams like Lebron? 3 + 1 bubble ring?[/QUOTE]

I dunno what's more impressive your inability to get over Lebron or the way you post under other accounts like we dont know who you are you angry midget.

Replace Kobe with rookie TMac in 1997, I don't think they'd win anything. Shaq didn't win with a better player (Penny) in Orlando. I don't think TMac had the drive or the fire to push the boundaries like Kobe did. I don't think TMac would have stepped on any toes to get a win like Kobe did and that's because I don't think TMac wanted to win as much as Kobe did. I don't think TMac worked as hard as Kobe did. He certainly didn't play defense the way Kobe did. And as talented as TMac was offensively, I don't think his game fit quite as well in the Triangle as Kobe's did.

Replace Kobe with TMac in 1997 (which is where it should start, not at the mountaintop like TMac wants us to do), they would have kept getting swept by the Jazz and then the Spurs and maybe beaten by the Blazers and Kings too. Shaq was also a force in 1997 and 1998. But until Shaq had a guy that lifted the competitive spirit of the team and was willing to take on the pressure of big games, he was going to keep getting swept. Kobe's fire burned. Maybe too hot at times but that's better than nothing.

I think TMac should have won a playoff series before asking us to give him the benefit of the doubt here.

Young T-Mac would also have Phil Jackson as his coach and not whoever was in Orlando (was it Doc Rivers?)

I think people take issue with TMac saying he's never had an opportunity to win in his prime, which absolves him of blame. They also take exception with Tmac ignoring intangibles and defense. Kobe had over 10 all-defensive teams in his career (his best defensive seasons were with Shaq). Tmac? 0.

Of course Mcgrady COULD win a ring with Shaq, just like Allen Iverson, Vince Carter and a few other players back then COULD. I doubt he 3-peats with Shaq though. And definitely wouldn't bet on him winning with Pau Gasol.

I remember back in 2006/7 ish, in Kobe's crap Lakers years, there was definitely A LOT of discussion of Kobe vs T-Mac and then Lebron up and coming but no one really considering him in the run yet.

My criticism of T-Mac is he pioneered the hyper-ball dominant playstyle. Walk the ball up slowly so you don't have the full shot clock, then iso or shoot a 3, no one touching the ball. Gilbert Arenas was even worse, but didn't have the same skill.

I'd say T-Mac had that same Kobe ability to hit bad shots consistently, but he did shoot a lot of bad shots.

In any case, T-Mac is probably his generation Dominique Wilkins. Everyone who watched T-Mac knows how great he was, but he's all but forgotten in the talks and NBA lore.

Does he win one with Shaq? Probably, I think a lot of guards win one. Does he 3-peat with Shaq? Not so sure about that.

The one I'd have liked to see was Grant Hill without injuries with Shaq. We talk about if Tim Duncan came to Orlando, but if Hill with no injuries play with Shaq, it's going to be crazy.

[QUOTE=Tavr;15017744]I think people take issue with TMac saying he's never had an opportunity to win in his prime, which absolves him of blame. They also take exception with Tmac ignoring intangibles and defense. Kobe had over 10 all-defensive teams in his career (his best defensive seasons were with Shaq). Tmac? 0.

Of course Mcgrady COULD win a ring with Shaq, just like Allen Iverson, Vince Carter and a few other players back then COULD. I doubt he 3-peats with Shaq though. And definitely wouldn't bet on him winning with Pau Gasol.[/QUOTE]
The post right above, I mentioned Phil Jackson. He's very important in Shaq and Kobe's development that doesn't get enough attention.

That plays a factor. How does Kobe do if he comes up in Charlotte instead of LA.

[QUOTE=sdot_thadon;15017678]I dunno what's more impressive your inability to get over Lebron or the way you post under other accounts like we dont know who you are you angry midget.[/QUOTE]

Never in my life did i create multiple accounts, that's mostly a lebum stan thing, it's funny to see on social media where you guys pretend to be fans of other random teams to bring him up for no ****ing reason in discussions and to defend his legacy all day long.

I know it's crazy to you i don't post a lot.

[QUOTE=L.Kizzle;15017756]The post right above, I mentioned Phil Jackson. He's very important in Shaq and Kobe's development that doesn't get enough attention.

That plays a factor. How does Kobe do if he comes up in Charlotte instead of LA.[/QUOTE]
Yes Phil is important and Kobe would've sucked and never won if he was the number option on another team starting from 97. Great argument.

[QUOTE=Da_Realist;15017699]Replace Kobe with rookie TMac in 1997, I don't think they'd win anything. Shaq didn't win with a better player (Penny) in Orlando. I don't think TMac had the drive or the fire to push the boundaries like Kobe did. I don't think TMac would have stepped on any toes to get a win like Kobe did and that's because I don't think TMac wanted to win as much as Kobe did. I don't think TMac worked as hard as Kobe did. He certainly didn't play defense the way Kobe did. And as talented as TMac was offensively, I don't think his game fit quite as well in the Triangle as Kobe's did.

Replace Kobe with TMac in 1997 (which is where it should start, not at the mountaintop like TMac wants us to do), they would have kept getting swept by the Jazz and then the Spurs and maybe beaten by the Blazers and Kings too. Shaq was also a force in 1997 and 1998. But until Shaq had a guy that lifted the competitive spirit of the team and was willing to take on the pressure of big games, he was going to keep getting swept. Kobe's fire burned. Maybe too hot at times but that's better than nothing.

I think TMac should have won a playoff series before asking us to give him the benefit of the doubt here.[/QUOTE]

Good post. There are some things assumed (not from you specifically, just in general) around how this hypothetical scenario would play out. I will touch on a few of your points:

- You said Shaq didn't win with a better player in Penny( Orlando), but 1) while Orlando Shaq was dominant he was unquestionably a better player by 2000,at least a more cerebral one, so eventually Tmac would have had access to the best version of Shaq( and I would say 2003-2005 Tmac was better than Penny ever was until his body failed). I would also argue that the Shaq/Penny duo never maxed out because they happened to run into a historically great Bulls team in 96( if they managed to get past Chicago that year, I'd have taken them over Seattle. Shaq would have feasted and neutralized Kemp and Penny/Anderson/Scott are more than a match for Payton/Hawkins/Detlef, the rosters otherwise didn't feature any major edges one way or another). Shaq then leaves and Penny's last great year is 97. They 'should' have been the next dynasty after the Bulls reign ended, but neither here nor there at this point.

- Are the same roster moves happening if Tmac is on the squad? Eddie Jones was moved for Glen Rice to open up the SG spot for Kobe. I wonder if there's a scenario where Tmac starts at the 3 and Jones is kept at the 2. What does that mean for how things shook out? Well Rice provided floor spacing but I would have preferred Jones overall floor game in this scenario. He and Tmac form an interesting offense/defense duo where Tmac is able to take off the gas a little on offense and be a better defender( which as stated previously, he was a good defender in Toronto, and he and Jones would be able to switch defensively depending on matchups). They would be dynamic on the break and then you have Shaq anchoring everything in the halfcourt. No idea if that ever comes to fruition but the whole conversation is a hypothetical.

- How does TMac adjust to the triangle? What is his relationship with Shaq likely to be( TMac went to Orlando originally to play 2nd fiddle to Grant Hill, so he obviously wouldn't have any issue doing so for Shaq). How much does Phil improve his approach to the game( Phil is on record as saying Kobe was uncoachable at one point, something I don't think I've ever heard applied to TMac)? As great as Shaq/Kobe was at their best, their battle for control of the team from 2001 probably cost them 2 titles. What 'should' have happened is Shaq gradually hand over control of the team to Kobe in 2004, the former exiting his peak as the latter enters his, and revitalize the supporting cast with quality pieces to keep them in contention. Since these are all assumptions, maybe TMac's back holds just a wee bit longer since he's not carrying the weight of an offense? The Lakers are still contending for titles from 2000 through, I don't know, 2005? 2006? I have a hard thinking at least one of those years LA doesn't pull through.



Otherwise, basically everything you're saying about Kobe and Tmac, asides from health, was the difference in that Kobe just had much greater competitive fire. health and there are circumstances where he rose to the occasion that I simply can't just slide Tmac into and say he does as well, like game 7 vs the Blazers in 2000 and 2001 WCFs vs the Spurs off the top of my head. But then you'd have to also play the game that THOSE exact scenarios play out the same way, and we know that a move of this magnitude is going to play out differently in terms of the 'pebble in the lake' ripple effect. Generally you are right that Tmac's inability to get out of the first round( if I recall he had three 3-1 leads in his playoffs career and lost the series ALL three times), makes it hard for him to just say '[I]sure, you put me in Kobe's spot and I'm doing the same shit[/I]'. No, he wouldn't just off the intangibles. I do think he manages one ring though, which of course doesn't equate to what Kobe managed. And it would probably come down to those intangible differences you outline. But even with a single ring, based on the 'rings culture' argument it doesn't do much for his personal legacy. Despite not having any team success, under Shaq his numbers would have been capped and he'd have been seen as a 'Robin' just as Kobe was. I'm not sure winning a title changes much of how people would see him in a vacuum as far as career rankings and whatnot, except he wouldn't have the '2nd round virgin' tag.

People really think McGrady is winning zero titles with peak Shaq? Y'all are tripping :lol

[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents;15017815]People really think McGrady is winning zero titles with peak Shaq? Y'all are tripping :lol[/QUOTE]

Correct. Kobe > McGrady as an overall basketball player. [I]Maybe[/I] they get one, but not threepeat.

[QUOTE=Meticode;15017816]Correct. Kobe > McGrady as an overall basketball player. [I]Maybe[/I] they get one, but not threepeat.[/QUOTE]
In the early 2000's? He really, really wasn't. The idea 3peat Kobe was discernably better than Orlando McGrady is just patently false, it's rewriting history.

I'm sure in 10 years they'll be making this claim about Kobe & Wade too.