Real Deal

It's sort of easy to step on your argument, though. Players that were focused on both offense and defense were wearing themselves down on both sides of the ball. Today, defensive-minded players are usually spot-up shooters (Bowen, Battier, Bell, Artest are good examples) and they take pride in putting 100% effort on defense, 35-40 minutes every game, less fatigued going into the fourth. But there are still excellent defenders that actually score 25-30, also. Kobe, Wade, LeBron, Paul and Howard are all sitting on defensive team awards. And then you still have the teams that hold their opponents to the lowest FG% in the history of the league, and a lot of them are in this era, little or nothing to do with pace. Keep in mind: tough play and great defense don't necessarily go hand-in-hand. Nobody got away with dropping Rambis on his back, just like Ariza didn't get away with dropping Fernandez. Players weren't thrown out of the game for a hard, nasty foul...but they were still called for the foul. Steve Nash could go clip a player from behind, drop them on their backs during elevation, and whether or not he gets tossed for that, it doesn't mean he's playing better defense. He's just being more physical (and stupid). Basically, what I think is that defensive schemes in the 90's were more set on stopping the team. Today, they are geared towards stopping the superstar, because more than ever, the league is now more superstar-heavy than it ever was (if that makes sense). That's why teams seek guys like Sefolosha, Afflalo, Batum, Pietrus, and Matthews...guys that probably wouldn't be starting ten years ago because James Harden, JR Smith and others are actually better offensive players. And because the league is centered around stopping the superstar, one would have to think things are a bit more difficult for Bryant and Durant.

Doesn't Sam Amico write for NBA.com now?

Walton probably isn't playing this upcoming season. Ratliff (or Caracter), Odom, Barnes, West and Blake.

Breaking someone's nose and clotheslining someone isn't playing defense. Just because they weren't handing out suspensions for clotheslines doesn't mean they weren't calling them as fouls. The 2006 Suns were never a good defensive team...they were average, in the middle of the league. But the 2008 Celtics were a better defensive team than the 1992 Knicks, and so were the 2004 Spurs. I'm not sure what the point is...

Nash would be my pick. Depending on the magnitude of the game, I will select Kobe over Ray (Bryant gets the nod in a Finals game, but I'd take Ray in the regular season).

Carlos Arroyo or Mario Chalmers will start at the point, unless both absolutely suck in camp and pre-season play. Wade has expressed his desire to stay at the two plenty of times, and there's a reason why Miami brought in Arroyo while keeping Chalmers.

Allowing zone defense would decrease scoring. The league basically gave teams an extra way of playing defense, and teams that were once average to pathetic defensively could basically "cheat" on the defensive end. You saw this with Phoenix, against us, this post-season.

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.

1) Need a link for every article posted. 2) Post a few blocks of the text only, no full articles. We can get into trouble for not posting links, or posting full articles. ------- As for the Pacers having to find a point, they might as well look into Calderon. Jack needs to be the starter in Toronto, and I'm sure the Raptors would have no problem with dealing Jose to the Pacers.

I'm going to give myself a warning for going off-topic.

Well, here's something to chew on... The Magic didn't win the championship that season, did they? We can talk about what Shaq did in Orlando all you want, but that doesn't seem relevant to the discussion. I can tell you what Bryant did against the Raptors in 2006, tell you about his four-consecutive 50's, his 35 PPG average in a season, etc...but what's the point? Shaq wasn't there for that. Shaq scored and rebounded the ball. Bryant scored and did everything else on the floor. O'Neal was contesting shots, but also fouling, showing late help on rotations, and getting absolutely murdered in pick and roll situations ever since the first championship season. Bryant's selfish play wasn't what killed the Lakers after the three-peat. It was teams figuring out who to stop. Shaq couldn't even log 70 games in any of his last three seasons in Los Angeles, because he was overweight and decided to have surgeries after his summer fun was over with. Madsen and Medvedenko were starting a handful of games, Samaki Walker started 63 games that third championship season, and with Shaq in and out of the lineup, things got ugly. Bryant had to play 15 games with Samaki Walker starting at center in 2002-03, and Fisher, Horry, and Fox starting as well. Once Shaq started putting on the weight, he found himself injured, and needed a second superstar to help carry the load. He came to LA in 1996, and Bryant was nowhere near that help. 1996-1997: 51 games 1997-1998: 60 games 1998-1999: 49 games That's the count for how many games Shaq played his first three seasons in Los Angeles (yes, I know about the lockout in 1999, I'm sure he would've missed plenty had there been 82 games to play). You mentioned what he did against Robinson and Duncan. Did you see the series in 1999? He couldn't stop Duncan from scoring the ball because Tim was too intelligent, and the Spurs kept the ball out of Shaq's hands, fouled him when he got to the rim, and forced him into bad hooks. They also held him to under 23 points in three of the four games on their way to the sweep, and Duncan matched everything Shaq had in the fourth and final game. The previous season, it was Malone that controlled the glass, boxing Shaq out and keeping him at eight or less boards in three of the four games they played in Utah's sweep of the Lakers. Speaking of Duncan, how about Shaq's performance in 2002? The Spurs took him completely out of his game...wouldn't allow him room to score, contested every shot, and the Lakers still took the series 4-1. GM1: 23 PTS (9-22, .409 FG) GM2: 19 PTS (7-16, .438 FG) GM3: 22 PTS (10-20, .500 FG) GM4: 22 PTS (9-18, .500 FG) GM5: 21 PTS (7-18, .389 FG) Shaq was not unstoppable.

Sure thing.

They have made really good decisions to put a team in Miami, not just a trio. They added shooters and a bit of defense, and it can definitely work now.

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.

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.

The Bulls signed McGrady?

If he would accept the bench role, McGrady would fit in well with the Lakers. He's always been a candidate for the triangle offense, in my opinion, even in his prime. As much as I dislike him and don't want him back, Shaq would be best in LA, backing up Bynum. Iverson wouldn't fit in LA, though...definitely not a triangle player. If he's not ring-chasing, I think he should go to Charlotte and play under Larry Brown one last time. He'll start over Augustin and Livingston, more than likely. Otherwise, he should head out to Miami and see if they'll pay him the minimum.

So many stats. Just look at the big picture: defense and scoring. Miami's three dropkicks New York's in both. Amare is the worst defender of the six players we're discussing, and Carmelo is as bad as Bosh. James and Wade are both better defenders than Paul. The Heat trio would also rip apart the Knicks trio on the glass. Scoring? There's nobody on the Knicks that can stop LeBron or Wade from putting up 40. I can't stand the Heat and I hope they lose 82 games, but I can't say they will, and I can't say the Knicks' potential "big three" will be better.

By the way, that's one reason why Jordan excelled with the 90's Bulls. He always had shooters, and they always knocked down the shots when MJ wasn't able to get his (and we all know how rare that was, but they did step up at certain times during every game). It's no wonder he was throwing so many assists, too...teams were scared to death of Michael, no matter what coach/player wants to deny it.

The key to using a zone defense back in those days was that you were required to commit to the double. If you were showing double, you had to commit to it and leave your man open. You weren't allowed to sit a player in the middle of the island, stick guys in random spots on the floor to show that potential double, and not actually execute it. The referees were really loose on those rules...don't know why, really. I thought it was ridiculous to begin with, though...no need to tell a team how to play defense, especially on a professional level.

Williams (Dele) didn't play for the Clippers at the same time those others did. Dele was on the Bulls in 1996-1997 (he won a ring).

I keep forgetting you guys have the TPE.

Well, $4 million and a one-year deal is great for Washington. Pretty damn cheap if he is fully healthy. I don't see any reason to be upset over that, at all.

I believe the picture was taken in Vegas.

Self-inflicted? So how did the van return?