-
08-22-2012, 10:27 AM
#121
Laker Nation
-
08-22-2012, 10:31 AM
#122
Serious playground baller
Re: Things Kobe-haters say
"kobe is not the goat"
-
08-22-2012, 11:18 AM
#123
Local High School Star
Re: Things Kobe-haters say
Originally Posted by gtfomyface
"kobe is not the goat"
He is for his generation
-
08-22-2012, 12:05 PM
#124
Curry: 0x Finals MVP
Re: Things Kobe-haters say
Originally Posted by DirtySanchez
He is for his generation
The 2006 season?
-
08-22-2012, 12:08 PM
#125
Laker Nation
Re: Things Kobe-haters say
Originally Posted by SilkkTheShocker
The 2006 season?
2000's decade.
-
08-22-2012, 01:00 PM
#126
Re: Things Kobe-haters say
If Kobe makes the finals he'll once again be carried by 2 time mvp steve nash and the greatest defensive player of his generation Dwight Howard. If they lose it will all be due to Kome's chucking and overratedness!!!
-
08-22-2012, 01:09 PM
#127
Made that high school varsity squad
Re: Things Kobe-haters say
Originally Posted by KG215
This...this statement right here. Why do Kobe stans latch onto it like it actually proves something? Why? They put nothing into context, blatantly ignore every single circumstance Shaq was in from his rookie season through the 1998-1999 season, and think that him not winning a championship until Kobe became a starter and/or emerged proves something about Kobe's greatness.
I can live with all the other stuff but, this argument or whatever, no, just....no.
You can have a seat with the other haters too sir. I've read plenty of you're posts and it's clear that you are one of them kobe haters that this thread is about.
It does prove something. Fact of the matter is, if shaq was so dominant, if shaq was most dominant ever, if he basically 3 peated by himself, then why couldn't he do it until kobe came along? Better yet, why did he need Kobe to be a starter to win something? Since mr dominant, was so dominant lol, why didn't he win an MVP until Kobe was a starter? You haters like to blatantly ignore everything Kobe did during the 3 peat, so why should we blatantly ignore that Shaq didn't win a Finals game or MVP until Kobe became a starter?
Go head hater, respond. In the meantime have a seat with the rest of them.
-
08-22-2012, 01:20 PM
#128
7-time NBA All-Star
Re: Things Kobe-haters say
Originally Posted by swag2011
You can have a seat with the other haters too sir. I've read plenty of you're posts and it's clear that you are one of them kobe haters that this thread is about.
It does prove something. Fact of the matter is, if shaq was so dominant, if shaq was most dominant ever, if he basically 3 peated by himself, then why couldn't he do it until kobe came along? Better yet, why did he need Kobe to be a starter to win something? Since mr dominant, was so dominant lol, why didn't he win an MVP until Kobe was a starter? You haters like to blatantly ignore everything Kobe did during the 3 peat, so why should we blatantly ignore that Shaq didn't win a Finals game or MVP until Kobe became a starter?
Go head hater, respond. In the meantime have a seat with the rest of them.
I've argued this point countless other times in other threads, so I'm not going to do it again. And if you've read my other posts, you would know I'm not a Kobe "hater." I've never said Shaq "carried" Kobe during the 3-peat. I know Kobe was an integral part of those teams, and odds are Shaq never wins a title without Kobe.
My problem and "hate" is for the Kobe stans who latch on to things like "Shaq couldn't win without Kobe" as gospel without putting anything into context; like how his time in Orlando coincided with Michael Jordan's reign over the league and Hakeem Olajuwon at his peak. Shaq was very good before he joined the Lakers and Kobe emerged but he didn't win all because Kobe became a starter and was so good. While his stats in Orlando and LA were similar, he wasn't the same player his first 5-6 years in the league. It wasn't until he joined the Lakers did he become a more disciplined and dedicated defender, and developed a more refined post game; and about that same time another top 10 player all-time emerged and it created a dominant team.
-
08-22-2012, 02:15 PM
#129
Laker Nation
Re: Things Kobe-haters say
Originally Posted by KG215
I've argued this point countless other times in other threads, so I'm not going to do it again. And if you've read my other posts, you would know I'm not a Kobe "hater." I've never said Shaq "carried" Kobe during the 3-peat. I know Kobe was an integral part of those teams, and odds are Shaq never wins a title without Kobe.
My problem and "hate" is for the Kobe stans who latch on to things like "Shaq couldn't win without Kobe" as gospel without putting anything into context; like how his time in Orlando coincided with Michael Jordan's reign over the league and Hakeem Olajuwon at his peak. Shaq was very good before he joined the Lakers and Kobe emerged but he didn't win all because Kobe became a starter and was so good. While his stats in Orlando and LA were similar, he wasn't the same player his first 5-6 years in the league. It wasn't until he joined the Lakers did he become a more disciplined and dedicated defender, and developed a more refined post game; and about that same time another top 10 player all-time emerged and it created a dominant team.
great post.
But I think the only reason why anyone even says the bolded is because others always say "Kobe could never win without Shaq" or "Shaq carried Kobe", etc. You know you've seen things like that. It's just more of a counter argument against haters, imo, than an actual statement just in the blues.
-
08-22-2012, 03:07 PM
#130
How does my Dirk taste
Re: Things Kobe-haters say
-
08-22-2012, 04:41 PM
#131
7-time NBA All-Star
Re: Things Kobe-haters say
Originally Posted by riseagainst
great post.
But I think the only reason why anyone even says the bolded is because others always say "Kobe could never win without Shaq" or "Shaq carried Kobe", etc. You know you've seen things like that. It's just more of a counter argument against haters, imo, than an actual statement just in the blues.
Right. I'll never say Kobe could've won without Shaq or Shaq could've won without Kobe from 2000-2004. They both needed each other. I don't know if 2000-2002 Shaq could've won a championship if that version was playing for the Magic from 1992-1996, either. Not because he didn't have Kobe, but because the Bulls/Jordan and Hakeem/Rockets were that good at the time.
But Kobe stans want to discredit a young and still developing Shaq for not winning without Kobe in a time when Jordan was keeping plenty of other HOFers from winning a ring.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|