Leaderboard

Hmm... I didn't even say Kobe's name in my post, but since you threw the hook and worm out there... 1) Bryant had 17 game-winners when he was with Shaq. Just in case you didn't realize, game-winners are hit in the fourth quarter or overtime of games. 2) I'm guessing you don't know anything about Bryant or his fourth-quarter performances, playoffs or regular season, so I'll just let you do the research on that. You could also look up how many 50-point games Shaq had as Kobe's teammate, also...if you're curious, of course. Hint: he had two, Bryant had five, one of Shaq's being in 1998, when Kobe was barely getting minutes. "Daddy Shaq" was also pulled from a few games every season when things were close in the fourth, because he was the worst free throw shooter in the NBA (next to Ben Wallace, at least). Or, he was fouling out of games or sitting in foul trouble...fouled out of six games in 2001. 3) O'Neal had two 40-point games in the 2000-01 season. He had three in 2002-03. None in 2003-04. Sure didn't look like he dominated the team the way Jordan did Chicago, or LeBron did the Cavaliers. Looks like he may have had a lot of help from Kobe, to the tune of... 1999-2000: 22.5 PPG, 6.3 RPG, 4.9 APG 2000-2001: 28.5 PPG, 5.9 RPG, 5.0 APG 2001-2002: 25.2 PPG, 5.5 RPG, 5.5 APG 2002-2003: 30.0 PPG, 6.9 RPG, 5.9 APG 2003-2004: 24.0 PPG, 5.5 RPG, 5.1 APG (Shaq averaged under 22 PPG that season) Care to give me a second option that has put up those numbers? Just one Robin, all I'm looking for... After 2000, Shaq never averaged more shots per game than Kobe as teammates in LA. Two rings and three Finals appearances were the result of that. Can you give me a second option on a championship team that has taken 20+ shots per game, and the most on that championship team? Just curious. 4) Bryant was the best defensive player on the Lakers, hands down, during the dynasty. No need to debate it, but you can also ask those handing out the defensive awards: five for Bryant as Shaq's teammate, three for O'Neal as Kobe's. Five for Kobe without O'Neal...and zero for Shaq without Kobe. Did you know Bryant led the team in assists every championship season? That's facilitating the triangle offense AND taking the most shots per game, averaging anywhere from 25-30 points each contest, defending the best perimeter players on the court as well. Mind-boggling, huh? 5) Kobe was also doing work in the playoffs. 1999-2000: 21.1 PPG, 4.5 RPG, 4.4 APG 2000-2001: 29.4 PPG, 7.3 RPG, 6.1 APG 2001-2002: 26.6 PPG, 5.8 RPG, 4.6 APG 2002-2003: 32.1 PPG, 5.1 RPG, 5.2 APG 2003-2004: 24.5 PPG, 4.7 RPG, 5.5 APG --------- Did you see the Lakers/Kings and Lakers/Spurs games in the post-season? I'm not so sure you did, since Bryant has needed "Daddy Shaq" to bail him out in fourth quarters. Were you around to see Kobe's nine-consecutive 40's? Shaq was there for a few of them, but I think it was Kobe carrying the load. http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200302060NYK.html http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200302110LAL.html http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200302120DEN.html http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200302140LAL.html http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200302160LAL.html http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200302180LAL.html http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200302190UTA.html http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200302210LAL.html http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200302230LAL.html Just making sure you knew about them. In that stretch, there were also 13 consecutive 35+ point games, 16 consecutive 30's. LA went 13-3 in that stretch of 16, which included ALL of the games mentioned above. That was with Bryant carrying the load and bailing LA out in the fourth quarters, something you said he didn't do. Haha...look, don't bring up Kobe and Shaq. That above is not even a piece of what I have to offer in return for your foolish comments. ---------- As far as Kobe and Jordan are concerned, Jordan is the greatest player to ever play the game. Never said he wasn't. Kobe may be the most complete. Give me one weakness of Kobe's, offense or defense, that stands out...you know, like LeBron's post game, or Shaq's free throws. Neither Kobe or Jordan have a weakness in their games...so "most complete" is debatable. Kobe had Shaq, right? Jordan had Pippen (arguably the greatest perimeter defender of all-time) and in the second three-peat, he ADDED Rodman (arguably the greatest defender of all-time). Both had Phil Jackson. Jordan had a plethora of shooters, which included Kerr, Paxson, Armstrong (all-star), Kukoc and Harper. Horace Grant was no scrub...an all-star the following season after Jordan's first retirement. For his six rings, Jordan played with four all-star players: Pippen, Rodman, Grant and Armstrong (won't count the guys like Cartwright, who was an all-star in 1980). MJ didn't have Shaq, but he had more than enough to make up for it. LA was more of a superstar duo, while Chicago was the ultimate team, packed with shooters and defensive specialists. LeBron and Iverson reached the Finals with shooters and defensive-minded teammates. I think you're underestimating what damage a real team can do, which means you're underrating what Kobe has done in his career, and/or overrating what Jordan has done.

I'm forcing myself not to dive back into Kobe and Shaq. Back to Jordan and the zone...he did face them, no doubt. Not to the extent Bryant has, obviously, because the league didn't allow it all of the time (and I'm talking Boston vs. Bryant as an example, Phoenix's zone this season is another, and plenty of other teams who have went to it). But I will say this much: I have never seen a single player doubled and triple-teamed as much as Kobe, other than Shaq. That includes Michael. I've seen five Memphis players all collapse to stop Kobe at the rim, when the other four LA players are at least 10 feet away from the drive. I've seen players doubling Bryant off the ball and 23 feet away from the rim, something I've actually never seen done against any other player since I've been watching the game. If I recall correctly, it was the Nets who triple-teamed Bryant on an inbounds play, last second attempt to win the game, before the ball was even thrown in. Jordan has been tagged with Payton, Dumars, and other significant perimeter defenders. He's dropped buckets on Ewing, Eaton, Hakeem, Mourning and Malone. Bryant has tackled Bowen, Battier, Bell, Wallace, Prince, Duncan, Howard, Garnett...but I think the most notable would be the actual teams. The 2008 Celtics were one of the greatest defensive teams of all-time. Same can be said for the 2004 Pistons, 2004 Spurs, 2004 Wolves, 2001 Sixers, and another 2-3 teams during the 2004 season (Pacers and Nets are two, I believe...don't feel like looking that up though). For Jordan's sake, the 1993, 1994 and 1997 Knicks were monsters on the defensive end. The 1998 Spurs held opponents to .411 shooting, second of all-time since Jordan's rookie season (2004 Spurs top everyone, at .409 FG). But, of the top 20 oppFG% teams since Jordan's rookie season, only five of them are pre-1999, after Jordan's retirement. I'm sure the defensive rating numbers are similar, even though they are strongly influenced by offensive pace. And...the offensive pace was much different as well. Jordan averaged 37 PPG when his Bulls were averaging at least seven more shots per game than Bryant's 2006 Lakers. It wasn't rare to see teams scoring 130 points against each other when Jordan was dropping his bombs. Portland was averaging 118 PPG that season, while the Suns were leading the league at 108 PPG in 2006, followed by the Sonics at under 103. Twelve teams averaged 110+ PPG in 1986. There's always an argument against Jordan's production, just as there is for Wilt.

It is Lil Keke - Southside, the version on youtube isn't the version in the video http://www.rhapsody.com/player?type=undefined&id=tra.27267953&remote=undefined&page=undefined&pageregion=undefined&guid=undefined&from=undefined&__pcode= +1 for being the man?

Confidence selects... http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/09/01/sports/afcnorth.190.jpg Willis McGahee

I think some people get offended and think that if you say Jordan could beat a double team better than Bryant, you're saying that it's because he can jump twice as high or whatever. While Jordan was definitely better at jumping from farther and got more hangtime (which both happen when you are quicker of foot), he doesn't jump substantially higher than any of those guys. The difference between the best of the best is usually not that great... Jordan, Pippen, Erving, James, Bryant, McGrady, Carter... they all get up about the same. I said usually... There is one thing that makes Jordan so dramatically different and special. That helped him beat double teams like no other... His footspeed... Never has a high-flying swingman been even remotely as quick as Jordan... he literally had the first step and the foot speed of a very quick 6'1" point guard. If you gave Kobe Bryant John Stockton's first step, he'd be doing what Jordan did in Chuck Daley's words... "embarrassing the league." Kobe has definitely made the league a place that he has continued success in. Since Jordan, other than Shaq, I don't think anyone, including Duncan, has "embarrassed" the league. Jordan could take ridiculous angles... against the Pistons he looks closed off on many double teams, but he JUST BARELY gets the angle on a Piston defender and the next thing you know he's laying it in with someone hitting him in the back. And that is the play that separates him from Kobe, who would JUST BARELY be closed off, forcing him back to the perimeter and into a jumper. The next thing that separates Jordan from Kobe is something that a lot of high flyers have... ridiculous pound for pound strength. Erving and Pippen both had that ability to get hit and not be fazed by it. Carter, Bryant, McGrady? Not so much. Now that is not as glaring a difference. Kobe is strong and he does have forceful power... but he's an 8.5 whereas Jordan would be a 10. Magic once said "see Michael... has the strength of a big man.... that's what makes it so hard to face him." It is also hilarious that people think defenses are better now. There were fouls committed on Jordan that weren't even flagrants in 1989 that would warrant 15 game suspensions now. Just how good could Jordan have been if clotheslining was a 15 game suspension? The Pistons broke Scottie Pippen's nose and I believe nobody was suspended. If they were it was nothing big. Jordan was going off during the Knicks despite dirty moves like Greg Anthony throwing him to the ground. And no, defensively, the 06 Suns aren't anything like the 92 Knicks. Back in Jordan's prime the game was played differently, defense was actually allowed to be played and the defensive player was given as much freedom as the offensive player. Nowadays the rules are so much in favor for the offensive player that it doesn't make any sense and the reason for this is because of the overall lack of sound fundamentals by todays players. Could you imagine some of these so called great players of today having to play in an era where they could be hand checked and bumped without a foul being called? The offensive player complains so much in todays game it's ridiculous...I don't think they could survive playing in an era where there was rough play allowed.

Cleveland is a diehard sports town. Obviously not a NY, BOS, or LA... but they have really passionate fans. And they have so many depressing sports moments summed up as one-liners. Seriously... I mean they just lost LeBron and they're going to an Indians game. How they reacted was probably over the top, but it's Cleveland... and they are passionate. I really wouldn't have expected any less.

http://lakers.topbuzz.com/a-499.html Even though the dialogue is clearly cleaned up and probably far-fetched, the overall story is pretty fascinating. It isn't the best written piece ever, but it's just a fan article chronicling events that took place in the 2 books he referenced. Just thought ya'll would enjoy the read.

That's not a playoff team. That's a team tanking for the #1 pick.

Keeping the theme, here's is T-Mac's 62pt game... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnWZ1T7Gk4s That defense by Laetner at the 18 second mark is about as bad as you will ever see. Seriously, wtf is THAT? And at 2:08 is arguably the sickest pullup 3 ever.

As RD said and as the video shows with the floating zone, those rules weren't heavily enforced. And I really don't know how you can say defenses today are so much better when the '90's were the best defensive era in NBA history (not to mention the slowest paced which hurts stats). The video clearly shows just how physical the defenses could get, including a quote that says, "You couldn't guard MJ without putting your hands on him." If you take a look at his series' against the Bad Boy Pistons, where they threw a make-shift zone with one of the best perimeter defenders of all-time (Joe Dumars) hand-checking Jordan and playing physical, as well as Rodman and other hip-checking Jordan on every cut, and he STILL had unbelievable statistical series'...I mean, I don't know what to say if you discount what Jordan did against those types of defenses because of some belief that athletes today are SO much more advanced. Take a look at the video and the type of defense those Knicks and Pistons played against Jordan. They were relentless. Yeah, because Jordan's 37PPG season or 32/8/8 season or MVP/DPOY awards in the '80's was against inferior competition...right. You do know the '80's had the most stacked teams in NBA history, right? That was before expansion and the league started to get a little diluted in the '90's. The level of competition was the highest in league history during the '80's. And it's not like he was playing against a bunch of unathletic, unconditioned boys. You're drastically underrated the athletes the '80's and '90's had (not just the top guys like MJ and Nique, but the overall average player). Smarter... Really? Just because they have access to so much information doesn't mean many players take advantage of it. Generally speaking players today are less intelligent today than back in the '80's and '90's because there is far less emphasis on actual refined skill as opposed to athleticism when the players are in middle and high school (even in college to a degree). If you look at players back in the '80's and '90's, they were a lot more fundementally sound and were much better at understanding basic concepts of the game that many players today fail to grasp. This makes a HUGE difference to the quality of play as athleticism only gets you so far (see- Amare and his defense). As for being more well-trained, I agree...however, it's not like we're comparing today's NBA to 1950's or 1960's basketball. The '80's and '90's each had their fair share of freak athletes, and really the level of athleticism and conditioning wasn't much different than nowadays.

Finals MVP's are really, really nitpicking, man. Same with the FTA and FG%. There was hardly anyone that could contain Shaq because there were really only two or three solid centers in the NBA around that time...and when you start talking about the Finals? Only Mutombo was worthy of mention, but he was rail thin and really had no help up front (I wouldn't consider Hill much help, at all). Shaq was an excellent passer, yes, but Bryant demanded doubles as well, and he was able to find shooters. How many dishes have you seen with Kobe penetrating? I've seen so many dishes to O'Neal, it's ridiculous. The duo was no Batman and Robin...it was Superman and, umm...the Silver Surfer. And the fascinating thing about it, in my opinion, was that Bryant hadn't really reached his absolute prime. LA didn't win it all in 2003 because Tim Duncan absolutely dominated Shaq, and Popovich denied post every chance he got. Bryant was a bit selfish and didn't want to pass it to anyone else not named O'Neal (I mean, who else is going to score when the third highest scorer is hitting at 10 PPG), and the Spurs proved to be the better team. In fact, the Spurs almost did what the Pistons were able to do, but it took more of a fight, and more from a superstar (Duncan). Lakers fans have a lot of respect for Pop after that series (at least I do, and I know a few others who share the same feelings). The biggest flaw (and really the only flaw) in LA's triangle was that their primary scorer (who became Kobe) was also the facilitator. That didn't happen in Chicago. That was the difference, and it opened up a hole in Winter's triangle offense, one that he experienced when he was back at K-State (I can't remember the year or team, but he did talk about this once before). San Antonio found the flaw. Detroit found it. The 2008 Celtics found it. I just have no idea why the Magic and the recent Celtics squad didn't play Los Angeles the same way. Artest and Fisher wouldn't have enough firepower to win a seven-game series. And finally, Erving's 21/7/4 performance is fine. I actually don't mind saying Kobe was Robin in 1999-00. But I can't say he was for the next two rings, and he sure wasn't when he led LA to the Finals in 2004, and I'm a firm believer that, if Karl Malone was not injured, the Lakers would've had that one extra 15-20 a game, and rebounder and decent defender (because he wasn't the Malone of the mid-90's) that could put Brown's Pistons to sleep in six games. At the end of the day, I think a lot of teams realized that stopping Bryant was the key to stopping the Lakers. There weren't enough big men in the NBA to stop Shaq down low, one-on-one (Ewing, Hakeem, Eaton, Howard, Russell, none of those guys were playing or able to during the dynasty), so shutting down the facilitator and primary option was, well, the primary option. Granted it was a waste of time for mostly everyone, including some contenders, there were teams like the Spurs who had the goods to do that AND make Shaq work down low. Duncan had his way with O'Neal in 2003. Ben Wallace crashed the glass and was a monster on defense in 2004. Had those two centers found Shaq in the NBA Finals, would that have changed O'Neal's numbers? I'd say most definitely, yes, compared to Rik Smits (who was done after that Finals series), Todd MacCulloch (really?) and Dikembe Mutombo, who was 35 years old and 245 pounds.

No, there is no solid evidence in the movie that says Leo is crazy in the end. It's completely up to personal interpretation go watch it, it's an amazing movie.

Haha RD that was ownage. But I'm bored so I'm gonna nit-pick a few things... Oh c'mon you know that's not the right way to look at it. Shaq led the league each of the championship seasons in both FG% and FTA. He led the league in scoring the first championship, and took home MVP. Top 4 in blocks the first 2 championship seasons, top 3 in RPG both of those seasons. He was #1 in PER each of the championship seasons. Finals MVP each championship. Aside from the stats, no one demanded as much defensive attention in modern day NBA history as Shaq did those seasons. He was so efficient, so dominant both as a scorer and rebounder, and his passing out of those post is one of the reasons that offense ran so smoothly. Well, are we talking just championship teams? If so, I'd say Dr. J came close when the Sixers won the championship and Moses Malone was MVP. Erving averaged 21.4PPG/6.8RPG/3.8APG/1.6SPG/1.8BPG and shot 51.7% from the field. Actually a very good comparison to the '99-'00 stat wise as Malone gave relatively similar production to Shaq. Gail Goodwrich on the '71-'72 Lakers. Took 20.7 FGA to West's 20.0. Don't know if you're trying to prove that Kobe/Shaq was Batman A and Batman B as opposed to Batman and Robin, but Shaq's playoff numbers during the championship years were off the charts- 1999-2000: 30.7PPG, 15.4RPG, 3.1APG, 56.6% FG, 2.4BPG 2000-2001: 30.4PPG, 15.4RPG, 3.2APG, 55.5% FG, 2.4BPG (including the Finals destruction of DPOY Mutombo) 2001-2002: 28.5PPG, 12.6RPG, 2.8APG, 52.9% FG, 2.5BPG Shaq was CLEARLY "the man" on those Laker teams. His level of dominance in that 3-peat has not really been matched in the last 20-30 years by anyone not named MJ. The Lakers didn't win the championship that season, did they? And isn't it ironic that the first post-season Kobe outscored Shaq, they were knocked out of the playoffs? Keep in mind against the Spurs that post-season Kobe shot nearly 13% worse from the field than Shaq (43% to 56%), and averaged the same amount of assists with 1 more TO.

That's cause you're a LOSER ECN.

The reason Jordan is considered so much greater than Kobe is because Jordan redefined the way the game is played. Top players these days model their game off of Jordan, and Kobe has admitted he did too. While there is no logical way to say who the better player is since we can't compare eras, it is known by all that Kobe learned from Jordan.

haha, it takes me like a month to deilver 55 posts.