View Single Post
Old 10-30-2012, 08:30 AM   #315
Decent college freshman
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,572
Default Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone

Robinson's ability to shoot 3s as a 6'10" power forward as well as his defense made him valuable. Corliss Williamson wasn't a big man, he was playing small forward and a very nice scorer to have as a complementary player.
robinson was trash, he had no ability to shoot 3s as was obvious by his three point percent under league average. he was much more closer to average the previous year, but in '03 he dropped off in almost every facet of the game. williamson was much closer to a big man than a small man, played in the post, and defended big guys. all he could manage was just over 4 rebounds per game and shot a paultry 45% from the field.
Yao played well, though he struggled with foul trouble. Gooden played well, but still didn't have the impact Yao did. Aside from Yao producing much more offensively, you also had to put a lot more effort into defending him than Gooden, and he was much more of a presence and made a much bigger impact defensively.
yao was trash. yao was the reason the rockets lost in the first round. mcgrady stepped up, yao did not. he could only manage to put up 12 shots per game, averaged under 8 rebounds, and turned the ball over as many times as he blocked shots, and ofcourse there was the foul trouble as you have mentioned. houston was just as effective with mutombo on the court than they were with yao. gooden on the other hand was a pleasant surprise. he improved in every facet of the game. put up 14 points, 12.7 rebounds, and only put up only 1.7 turnovers per contest as a rookie. including coming up huge in the elimination game 7 with 20 points and 17 rebounds.
What a joke. Howard made a group of poor defenders a top 3 defensive team, averaged 14 rpg and still put up 23 ppg on 59%. He had no peers defensively, and had developed a very nice skill set and become comfortable with his back to the basket to complement his athleticism.
how far did all these meaningless stats get his orlando magic? how did he perform in the playoffs?
I said nothing about stats. I said PLAY at a comparable level, of course, that means stats to you, but the game is much more than that to me.
ahh ofcourse it does, yet all you mention is numbers when comparing players
You're correct that both Duncan and Kobe were better in 2002 than their 2000 selves, but the gap for Kobe was much bigger. Duncan in 2000 was as good as he was in almost any other year. Kobe wasn't even in the same tier as him yet.
actually the difference between kobe is very minimal, however the difference in duncan was huge. duncan in '00 was worse than he was in any year of his prime.
As for 2006 Shaq vs 2000 Kobe, your claim that Kobe made a bigger impact is laughable, especially since we conveniently have solid sample sizes that strongly suggest otherwise. The 2000 Lakers went 12-4 without Kobe, and 12-3 when Shaq played in those games. The 2006 Heat went just 10-13 without Shaq, and 10-11 when Wade played in those games.
this filth again too many factors can come into play when dealing with "sample sizes" of an 82 game regular season.
Not that the backup excuse would make up for such a massive disparity in the first place, but even that helps Shaq's argument. The Heat had that poor record despite having an excellent backup in Alonzo Mourning who was still one of the best defensive players in the game and averaged 12/9 on 58% with 4 bpg as a starter. The Lakers only had Derek Fisher to fill in as a starting guard, and this was before Fisher was even a good shooter. Fisher shot under 35% for the entire 2000 season.
again, too many factors. the '00 lakers had peak shaq, a much better option to fall back on than '06 dwyane wade.
2006 Shaq was a much more savvy and team-oriented player. He was also still probably the biggest mismatch in the game and received far more defensive attention than Kobe. We saw what happened when even a great frontcourt like the Pistons guarded him 1 on 1, he averaged 22/11 with 2.3 bpg on 66%, which may have influenced the Mavs to make him the focus of their defense until game 5. For the season, he still put up 20/9/2/2 on 60% in just 31 mpg.
he looked like he was making up the numbers in the finals, i felt embarassed for him watching the trash he put up in that series, it was cringe-worthy. bryant on the other hand came up huge when it mattered most. in a tough 3-2 series victory over the kings he put up 28/4/4/1/1 including outscoring peak o'neal in 3 out of the 5 games in the first round. putting up 20/5/6/2/2 against the trail blazers in the conference finals including a game 7 in which he was the best player. and against the pacers in the finals, well we all know how that series went if not i recommend you watching pivitol game 4 in indianapolis.
Shep is offline   Reply With Quote