Kobe being held down individually by Shaq is way overblown

[Rocker09]

Turning the table, wouldn't you agree that Shaq's legacy (whatever that means) wouldn't be the same without Kobe either? I thought so.

This actually makes sense....Yes, kobe wouldn't have won 3 rings w/o shaq but the same applies to shaq....The same also applies to Phil Jackson...The lakers 3 peat is the result of having these 3 in one team...

[plowking]

This actually makes sense....Yes, kobe wouldn't have won 3 rings w/o shaq but the same applies to shaq....The same also applies to Phil Jackson...The lakers 3 peat is the result of having these 3 in one team...

No, pair Shaq with any all star wing those first 2 championships and he wins.

[Rocker09]

No, pair Shaq with any all star wing those first 2 championships and he wins.

That's hypothetical and cannot be proven.....Whether people like it or not, Kobe is a big reason for that 3 peat.....Remove any of those 3 key pieces(shaq, kobe, and Phil) and the lakers MIGHT NOT have won anything....

[jmill]

Kobe without playing with Shaq may ahve had a few extra ppg, but you wouldn't have seen him shooting around 47% like he was during the 3peat and you wouldn't have seen him playing deep into the playoffs and winning championships. In reality his legacy would be worse without the 3 extra rings. Kobe would never trade those 3 rings for 3 extra ppg for is career.

Um, Kobe has been a better shooter since Shaq left. You're ignoring the fact that Kobe increased his volume with regards to 3PA's since Shaq left. Due to him becoming more proficient in that area and likely due to getting older and not being able to rely on his explosiveness as much. His TS% (true shooting percentage) is the metric that should be looked at, not just his FG%.

And his TS% has been higher every single year since Shaq left LA.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Um, Kobe has been a better shooter since Shaq left. You're ignoring the fact that Kobe increased his volume with regards to 3PA's since Shaq left. Due to him becoming more proficient in that area and likely due to getting older and not being able to rely on his explosiveness as much. His TS% (true shooting percentage) is the metric that should be looked at, not just his FG%.

And his TS% has been higher every single year since Shaq left LA.

What's your point? We know what he did after Shaq left, I'm talking about what Shaq era Kobe would have done without Shaq. He would not shoot 47% during those years so while his scoring would increase, his shooting percentages would not. And of course without Shaq, those Laker teams might not even make the playoffs.

[dynasty1978]

I didn't say he wasn't held down individually AT ALL, just that its been overexaggerated greatly as evident to the fact that he's had seasons with Shaq that were equal or better then some of his seasons without Shaq, and even better then one where his team wasn't talented like it has been for the past 2 years. Many people assume he would be a 30 ppg career scorer and won many more MVPs, but like I said this is far-fetched. People even say Kobe's legacy would've been better off had he not played with Shaq at all, which is really crazy IMO.

Those people saying Kobe's legacy would've been better w/out Shaq IMO are typically obsessed with individual stats and resume builders (i.e., scoring titles). The only benefit to this is added ammo for kobe vs. player x arguments on ISH

A small price to pay for the stats that matter, championships. In the end, the major criticism of Bryant as a player centered on his ability to lead, get the best out of his teammates, and ultimately win. I'll gladly take the finished product that I'm seeing now over a stat stuffing machine.

[lefthook00]

You guys are acting like Kobe would be the same player if Shaq wasn't there. He would have developed much faster. He has the drive and work ethic for it. I think he would have about 2 rings by now, somewhere between 2004-present.

[triangleoffense]

No, Shaq would have won if he had any other of the 4 or 5 top SG's at the time.

well he had penny and went 0-4 in the finals. Some say that penny would have been a hall of famer if not for the injuries. Shaq played with the top3 SGs of the generation and two of the top5 coaches of all time. And now who is he playing with? Arguebly the best player of the next generation.

[plowking]

well he had penny and went 0-4 in the finals. Some say that penny would have been a hall of famer if not for the injuries. Shaq played with the top3 SGs of the generation and two of the top5 coaches of all time. And now who is he playing with? Arguebly the best player of the next generation.

Shaq was a hell of a lot better at the Lakers than at Orlando. Furthermore, the supporting cast excluding Penny/Kobe was better at the Lakers.

[jmill]

What's your point? We know what he did after Shaq left, I'm talking about what Shaq era Kobe would have done without Shaq. He would not shoot 47% during those years so while his scoring would increase, his shooting percentages would not. And of course without Shaq, those Laker teams might not even make the playoffs.

Huh?

- You say he wouldn't have shot x% without Shaq
- Without Shaq, he's done just that.

My point is he's already done what you said he wouldn't without Shaq. Also, the way you worded it implied Kobe was a better shooter when he played with Shaq, which he wasn't.

All you're doing then is speculating off what you think would have happened, while I'm using stats that show he's done exactly what you're saying he wouldn't have.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Huh?

- You say he wouldn't have shot x% without Shaq
- Without Shaq, he's done just that.

My point is he's already done what you said he wouldn't without Shaq. Also, the way you worded it implied Kobe was a better shooter when he played with Shaq, which he wasn't.

All you're doing then is speculating off what you think would have happened, while I'm using stats that show he's done exactly what you're saying he wouldn't have.

You pointed out yourself that Kobe's become a better shooter over the years. 3peat Kobe's shooting percentages would have dropped if he was forced to play without Shaq.

In fact in the 3peat and 2003, Kobe shot 43% in the games that Shaq missed and the Lakers were 18-22.

I wasn't talking about what Kobe did after Shaq left I was talking about what the younger version of Kobe would have done without Shaq. Yes, he would have scored more points as Kobe fans love to point out, but his shooting percentages would have dropped and the Lakers would have struggled to be a .500 team.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Furthermore, the supporting cast excluding Penny/Kobe was better at the Lakers.

That couldn't be farther from the truth. Shaq had a prime Horace Grant on the Magic who was far better than any Laker not named Shaq or Kobe on the 3peat, Brian Shaw was better than he was on the Lakers and Nick Anderson and Dennis Scott were also more productive than the Lakers role players.

The 3peat Laker teams really weren't that good outside of Shaq and Kobe.

[plowking]

What is it with Kobe fans using TS%? FG% is there for a reason, its the best stat.

[guy]

You guys are acting like Kobe would be the same player if Shaq wasn't there. He would have developed much faster. He has the drive and work ethic for it. I think he would have about 2 rings by now, somewhere between 2004-present.

Why do you say that? Every SG/SF besides Kobe in the league since Jordan retired in 98 have all had teams built around them that weren't nearly as good as the teams built around Shaq and Duncan. Not sure why we should assume Kobe would be different. I'm not saying he couldn't have won, but there is no reason to say he would've.

And like I said, its just speculation IMO to say he would've developed faster. Yes, he would've been more used to carrying his teams on offense more. But what about that valuable playoff and big game experience that he probably wouldn't have had if he didn't play on those great teams? What about his ability to play with great players in the first place, which like many have said, is harder to learn? For example, I'm sure playing with Shaq all those years has helped him play with his current cast of Gasol/Bynum/Odom much better.

[guy]

This actually makes sense....Yes, kobe wouldn't have won 3 rings w/o shaq but the same applies to shaq....The same also applies to Phil Jackson...The lakers 3 peat is the result of having these 3 in one team...

The difference is Kobe was clearly more replaceable then Shaq and didn't have as much impact on that team. If you remove one guy from any team, it could change everything so much. People like to point out that without Kobe on the 2000 team, they don't get past the Blazers. You can say the same thing about Brian Shaw who hit like 2 3s during the comeback. You can say the same thing about Robert Horry in 2002 who hit the buzzer beater against the Kings. That doesn't mean Horry and Shaw were just as important to that team as Kobe was, just like Kobe wasn't as important to that team as Shaq was.