So, Kobe is still the best player in the game?

[Pero]

kobe ain't winning without the size la has. Rings are something only hakeem in his prime gets without another allstar.

Duncan says hi.

[RsxPiimp]

That's why I said "probably" in the previous post. Pierce was more efficient at scoring points.

Would the Lakers have been better off if Kobe passed the rock more? It's arguable, I think. His teammates weren't doing great, but that doesn't mean that Kobe should just try to "get his". If they had better ball rotation they may have freed up players for better shots.

I never thought it was the ball rotation or the execution for that matter. No one in LA was hitting jack anyway in that series. Plain and simple. Celtics were the better team. They ranked # 1 in defensive efficiency ang KG rightfully earned the DPOY award that year for a reason. Additionally, the Lakers were full of finesse players with no size. Gasol and Odom is simply not going to stop Kendrick Perkins, Kevin Garnett and not even Leon Powe. And im not even going to start with the guards.

[LnGrrrR]

I never thought it was the ball rotation or the execution for that matter. No one in LA was hitting jack anyway in that series. Plain and simple. Celtics were the better team. They ranked # 1 in defensive efficiency ang KG rightfully earned the DPOY award that year for a reason. Additionally, the Lakers were full of finesse players with no size. Gasol and Odom is simply not going to stop Kendrick Perkins, Kevin Garnett and not even Leon Powe. And im not even going to start with the guards.

That's cool, and I don't have a problem with people thinking Kobe needed to take over. I just wanted to point out that PP WAS more efficient, scoring only 3 pts less on 6 less shots per game. You said you wanted stats that could argue in favor of Pierce; I gave them to you.

[boston.balla]

Duncan says hi.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/HOU/1994.html

Take a good look at that roster. That's the second most appalling roster (not counting the dominant superstar) that reached the nba finals. First is ofc cavs 2007.

Duncan had robinon, raw but talented manu + good balanced roster, manu&tony+roster.

[Pero]

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/HOU/1994.html

Take a good look at that roster. That's the second most appalling roster (not counting the dominant superstar) that reached the nba finals. First is ofc cavs 2007.

Duncan had robinon, raw but talented manu + good balanced roster, manu&tony+roster.

Robinson was half tetraplegic by that time.
Anyway you didn't say anything about worst team or something like that. You said "without another all-star". And there sure as were no all-stars on that Spurs team.

[JamStone]

Are you really going to use that statement between Pierce and Kobe? That was specifically for Lebron's non effort showing in game 5.

Your quote. That's all I'm saying.

I saw the games. All 6 of them. Every minute. Thats why I have a problem with your statement, without proving other than "Well, he did" excuse.


Pierce was a no show on Games 5 and 6. Kobe shot the ball slightly better. He scored more. Pierce racked higher assist numbers, but with LA's defense who would'nt.

Paul Pierce scored 38 points in game 5 and seemed like the only Celtic who wasn't content with just stealing one of the middle three games in LA, while most of the rest of the Celtics played like it was a get-away game, happy to close the Finals at Boston.

Seems you choose to ignore how Pierce did outplay Kobe in games 1 and 2 (edit), and you go straight at game 4 and game 6 because that's your only conceivably decent argument. Don't worry, I'll get to games 4 and 6.

I will shortly address game 6 after your following quote.

Again, tell us how Pierce outplayed Kobe other than going by "I said so" at ude. That wont cut it.

I think you'll even concede that Pierce outplayed Kobe in games 1 and 2.

Pierce had a horrible shooting/scoring performance in game 3, which actually makes it pretty impressive that his stats were still comparable with Kobe's and he still shot better from the field for the series.

Now you attacked Pierce's performances in games 4 and 6. You also stated that you watched each minute of all the games. I find it hard to believe.

Game 4: Remember, this was the game of the Lakers' monumental collapse. They led in the first half by 24 points. They led at halftime by 18 points. The game started to turn around late in the second quarter. In the second half, the game had a 24 point turnaround. In that crucial second half that pretty much decided the game, here are Pierce's stats and Kobe's stats:

Pierce: 14 points on 4-for-7 shooting and 5 assists
Kobe: 14 points on 6-for-14 shooting and 4 assists

Similar points and assists, but look at scoring efficiency and consider that Kobe's team was up 18 points at half while Pierce's team was trying to climb back into the game. Given the cir stances of that second half, Pierce outplayed Kobe even though if you look at the game stats you might not think that way. Kobe shot 6-for-19 for the entire game by the way.

Game 6: This was a blowout win for the Celtics so it's hard to evaluate game stats when it's like that. But I will say this. After one quarter, it was a 4 point game. At halftime, the Celtics led 58-35 and never looked back. The second quarter basically determined the outcome of that game and essentially won the Celtics their 2008 le. Here are the stats for Kobe and Pierce in that second quarter:

Kobe: 3 points (all on technical free throws), 0-for-4 from the field, 0 assists, 2 turnovers
Pierce: 8 points and 6 assists

After that second quarter, the Celtics never looked back. And Kobe laid and egg as he watched his team fall 20 points on the road in an elimination game.

You're clearly misrepresenting Paul Pierce's defense to that of the whole Celtics team who shut Kobe's offensive game plan all along. Pierces defense on Kobe was not evident. Boston's perfect execution however was.

Pierce didn't guard Kobe the entire series and his teammates definitely helped. But there were a couple of crucial possessions (in I forget but one of the first two games, maybe both) where Pierce's defense really helped win the game. I'd have to go back and look at what I vaguely remember.

[jacobdrj]

Of players still not eliminated from the 2010 le, yes he is the best. But D-Wade is the 2010 MVP...

[picc84]

I think back at the time of the 2008 NBA Finals, Kobe was a better player than Paul Pierce. And after the NBA Finals, I still thought Kobe was the better player. However, for the actual NBA Finals, I think Paul Pierce outplayed Kobe and was the better player for that Finals series.

What were the reasons? Probably several. At the time, the talent might have been about even for the two teams, but Pierce had the better, more cohesive "team" around him. Kobe didn't fully trust his teammates and Gasol and Odom played like vaginas. Not every game, but Kobe had his moments in those Finals where he did go into Kobe mode. And I do think in the back of his mind, he was still concerned with winning that elusive Finals MVP and played for glory more than playing to make sure the Lakers actually won the le. That approach was partly to blame. But I would also say that the Celtics as a whole just played better than the Lakers as a hole.

You can add, amend, and delete those reasons as you wish. I don't really care either way what the reasons were, but Paul Pierce for that NBA Finals was a better player and outplayed Kobe.

In short, these are the reasons Pierce outplayed Kobe in the finals.

1. The Celtics defense was lightyears ahead of the Lakers, ranking as one of the greatest team defenses in NBA history.

2. Pierce had far less offensive responsibility than Kobe did, which coupled with the difference between the defenses made his offense much, much easier to come by energy and opportunity wise.

Kobe was the primary ballhandler, playmaker, and scorer for the Lakers. He had to do everything for that team. Allen and Rondo both helped handle ballhandling and playmaking duties for Boston. Because of the versatility of the Celtics offense, the Lakers couldn't focus on stopping one player like Boston could. We had to worry about Allen, Garnett, Rondo, AND Pierce, who each took over games in the finals. The Celtics only had one player they worried about - Kobe.

Pierce had more spot up shooting opportunities in that series than Kobe did the whole playoffs. Kobe NEVER had an easy shot because of both the defense and how the offense relied on him to do everything.

Pierce had a ty game 6 and the Celtics still blew us out - if Kobe had that kind of game the Lakers were finished. There was no equal talent on those teams, Boston had a 10 game lead on us and 3 HOF players along with a young stud point guard, and a bench that completely annihilated our's throughout the series. They were the better and more talented team through and through.

3. The primary defender on Kobe was Allen and Posey. Pierce for most stretches guarded Radman, while Kobe was on Rondo. Both conserving energy right? Difference being Pierce didnt have to guard Radman, who just stood around waiting for a kickout, while Kobe still had to chase Rondo around while he had the ball, even if he was playing off him. Kobe actually DID have to play defense on Rondo.

So its no wonder Pierce had the energy to guard Kobe at the end of those games, he had tons more energy both from having less offensive responsibility and less defensive responsibility. Along with having the rest of the alltime Boston defense backing him up.

4. Kobe did take Pierce at the end of a few games, only Garnett would come to set one of his famous "screens" and Pierce would be gone and to the rim. Why? Because LA's interior and help defense was complete compared to Boston's. Kobe gets a screen at the top of the key and Garnett/Perkins/Posey/Brown are all over him and he's forcing a pass to Fisher or Odom, both of whom the bed.

Yes, Pierce outplayed Kobe in the series. But there are numerous reasons why outside of "Pierce was the better player". Their team defense was astronomically better, and their offense was much less reliant on one player, not to mention the conveniently illegal defense they got away with all year.

Put Kobe on the Celtics and Pierce on the Lakers, and Boston sweeps LA by an average of 20 with Pierce putting up 2010 Iverson numbers.

[HarlemHeat37]

Put Lebron on the Lakers and they probably go 16 wins and 1-2 losses TBH..

[JamStone]

In short, these are the reasons Pierce outplayed Kobe in the finals.

1. The Celtics defense was lightyears ahead of the Lakers, ranking as one of the greatest team defenses in NBA history.

2. Pierce had far less offensive responsibility than Kobe did, which coupled with the difference between the defenses made his offense much, much easier to come by energy and opportunity wise.

Kobe was the primary ballhandler, playmaker, and scorer for the Lakers. He had to do everything for that team. Allen and Rondo both helped handle ballhandling and playmaking duties for Boston. Because of the versatility of the Celtics offense, the Lakers couldn't focus on stopping one player like Boston could. We had to worry about Allen, Garnett, Rondo, AND Pierce, who each took over games in the finals. The Celtics only had one player they worried about - Kobe.

Pierce had more spot up shooting opportunities in that series than Kobe did the whole playoffs. Kobe NEVER had an easy shot because of both the defense and how the offense relied on him to do everything.

Pierce had a ty game 6 and the Celtics still blew us out - if Kobe had that kind of game the Lakers were finished. There was no equal talent on those teams, Boston had a 10 game lead on us and 3 HOF players along with a young stud point guard, and a bench that completely annihilated our's throughout the series. They were the better and more talented team through and through.

3. The primary defender on Kobe was Allen and Posey. Pierce for most stretches guarded Radman, while Kobe was on Rondo. Both conserving energy right? Difference being Pierce didnt have to guard Radman, who just stood around waiting for a kickout, while Kobe still had to chase Rondo around while he had the ball, even if he was playing off him. Kobe actually DID have to play defense on Rondo.

So its no wonder Pierce had the energy to guard Kobe at the end of those games, he had tons more energy both from having less offensive responsibility and less defensive responsibility. Along with having the rest of the alltime Boston defense backing him up.

4. Kobe did take Pierce at the end of a few games, only Garnett would come to set one of his famous "screens" and Pierce would be gone and to the rim. Why? Because LA's interior and help defense was complete compared to Boston's. Kobe gets a screen at the top of the key and Garnett/Perkins/Posey/Brown are all over him and he's forcing a pass to Fisher or Odom, both of whom the bed.

Yes, Pierce outplayed Kobe in the series. But there are numerous reasons why outside of "Pierce was the better player". Their team defense was astronomically better, and their offense was much less reliant on one player, not to mention the conveniently illegal defense they got away with all year.

Put Kobe on the Celtics and Pierce on the Lakers, and Boston sweeps LA by an average of 20 with Pierce putting up 2010 Iverson numbers.

I might mildly disagree with some of your points, but for the most part I don't disagree with them.

But as I already said, I didn't get into the reasons why nor does that really change what I said. Paul Pierce outplayed Kobe Bryant in the 2008 NBA Finals. You can justify it with whatever reasoning and/or logic you want. Pierce still outplayed Kobe in that series.

[TheMACHINE]

Put Lebron on the Lakers and they probably go 16 wins and 1-2 losses TBH..

Derek Fisher
Shanon Brown
Lebron James
Pau Gasol
Andrew Bynum

vs

Mo Williams
Kobe Bryant
Antawn Jamison
Anderson Varejao
Shaquille O'Neal

[TD 21]

Bryant never was the best player in the game. This is myth, nothing more than media created propaganda, because he plays in a big market, sells tons of shoes and jerseys, has a game and personality that resemble Jordan and scores a million points.

The truth of the matter is, post Jordan, it went: O'Neal-Duncan-James. This notion that "James passed Bryant in '08" is ridiculous. Did people just start following the league or did they have no idea what they were watching and were brainwashed by the media's obsession with players of their ilk?

From 02-08, the general consensus was that Duncan was the best player in the game. Yet somehow that all changed with the Gasol trade and the Lakers sudden rise. People act like that never happened now.

[Allanon]

3-peat years

81 points, only surpassed by Wilt

Ring again in 2009 and chance for a repeat in 2010

Rings and statistical dominance...the only constant here is Kobe Bean Bryant

[HarlemHeat37]

Kobe doesn't have statistical dominance outside of "points scored", and he only has 1 ring as a main guy..only 1 MVP as well..it doesn't exactly scream dominance..

The only constant with Kobe is that he has a cult following with his fans that talk the same , and the media that talks the same , playing with perception..Al-Quobe, the terrorist organization..

[Allanon]

Majority vs minority.

I'm sure there are some that believe Jordan, Bird, Magic, Wilt were over-rated.

Everybody has the right to an opinion on either side...I'm cool with that.

[picc84]

I might mildly disagree with some of your points, but for the most part I don't disagree with them.

But as I already said, I didn't get into the reasons why nor does that really change what I said. Paul Pierce outplayed Kobe Bryant in the 2008 NBA Finals. You can justify it with whatever reasoning and/or logic you want. Pierce still outplayed Kobe in that series.

There is a difference. Kobe was still the best player in that series, even as Pierce was outplaying him because he was guarded by Vlad Radmanovic and getting easy offense because of his HOF teammates.

[mogrovejo]

Pierce defended Kobe for the entire 2nd half in the pivotal 4th game, for example. Kobe was just playing centerfield off Rondo or just guarding Eddie House. It was pathetic. Pierce still outplayed him.

The Lakers were an offensive juggernaut mostly due to their ability to pass the ball and play as a team. It's almost hilarious to read what their fans say now compared to what they were saying before the series.

[mogrovejo]

There is a difference. Kobe was still the best player in that series, even as Pierce was outplaying him because he was guarded by Vlad Radmanovic and getting easy offense because of his HOF teammates.

A difference for what?

LeBron is easily outplaying Pierce in this series, even though Pierce has far better teammates and is the best player in the league - that's the differences I can think off.

[TD 21]

But that wasn't even the majority opinion until after the fact (Gasol trade, Lakers subsequent rise). Then and only then did people act like Bryant had been the best player in the game for years. But during those years, very few people referred to him as that. The general consensus was Duncan. It was said, written and ranked that way virtually everywhere. It wasn't said as much as it is today with these two pukes, but it was known by most.

[picc84]

A difference for what?

LeBron is easily outplaying Pierce in this series, even though Pierce has far better teammates and is the best player in the league - that's the differences I can think off.

Pierce is a worse player now than he was in 2008.

Would you say Rondo is outplaying Lebron so far? I would. Despite Lebron still being a far and away superior player. , you could even argue Ray Allen is outplaying him. Why? Because of his team makeup.

[picc84]

Pierce defended Kobe for the entire 2nd half in the pivotal 4th game, for example. Kobe was just playing centerfield off Rondo or just guarding Eddie House. It was pathetic. Pierce still outplayed him.

The Lakers were an offensive juggernaut mostly due to their ability to pass the ball and play as a team. It's almost hilarious to read what their fans say now compared to what they were saying before the series.

Its hilarious to read Boston fans trying to act like Pierce outplaying Kobe wasn't a direct result of their respective team makeups.

[JamStone]

There is a difference. Kobe was still the best player in that series, even as Pierce was outplaying him because he was guarded by Vlad Radmanovic and getting easy offense because of his HOF teammates.

I simply disagree with that contention.

In crunch time of several of those games, the Lakers tried different defenders on Pierce, including Kobe and Odom. That didn't work very well either. And Pierce took on the challenge in several of those close games late in the game to defend Kobe.

For that Finals, in my opinion, Pierce outplayed Kobe and was the better player, for that Finals series only. I still thought Kobe was the better player in general, just not for the Finals.

[cobbler]

Do you respect Kobe? Kobe put a much more radical disappearance act in the 2008 Finals. At least LeBron still defended, rebounded and created shots for his teammates.

Disappearance act? Really? The entire Cetic defense was predicated on stopping Kobe and yet he put up almost identical numbers to Pierce who ended up being the MVP.

[picc84]

I simply disagree with that contention.

In crunch time of several of those games, the Lakers tried different defenders on Pierce, including Kobe and Odom. That didn't work very well either. And Pierce took on the challenge in several of those close games late in the game to defend Kobe.

For that Finals, in my opinion, Pierce outplayed Kobe and was the better player, for that Finals series only. I still thought Kobe was the better player in general, just not for the Finals.

Switch the two players on the respective teams.

What happens?

The fact he put up similar numbers to Pierce, actually better numbers purely statistically, despite the radical difference between the Lakers defense and the Celtics speaks volumes to who was purely the better basketball player, IMO.

[mogrovejo]

Disappearance act? Really? The entire Cetic defense was predicated on stopping Kobe and yet he put up almost identical numbers to Pierce who ended up being the MVP.

The entire Celtics defense is predicated on stopping LeBron and yet he's putting way better numbers than Pierce while also shutting him down defensively. He doesn't have a Gasol next to him and he's putting up a much bigger fight and hasn't lost the series.

What's so hard to understand about this?