Who was mostly responsible for those 3 les the first go-around? IS it the emergence of Kobe or the foundation that was Shaq? If you say emergence, then explain...why did the MVP's go to the pivot? Also...we all saw what happened when Kobe tried to get that MVP against the Pistons. Shaq shot a high % but never saw the ball the way he did in previous finals.The only reason for this set back for Duncan was the emergence of Kobe. If Kobe had stayed with the team that drafted him, Duncan's career would have been much greater.
Okay, Machine...how many les does Bean have again? 5! How many of those is he seen as the primary reason that his team won? 2. That's it....TWO.Would you rather go 8 for 12 or 4 for 4? I just destroyed his arguement.
8 les > 4 les.
So how you got to 8 is nothing but premature ejaculation. Kobe ain't winning 8. I could see him win a possible 6th but that would be it. You guys make it seem as if he doesn't age, when in fact, because of his type of game, he is feeling the lingering effects of age. How many times have you heard him say, "If I was younger...". Even he knows. Not saying he can't continue to be amazing. He, like Tim, has a foundation of fundamental brilliance. His shines brighter because he plays in LA. But Tim's individual stats and accomplishments stand toe-to-toe with Bean, and in some cases...wins out.
Duncan has 4 les and in every le, his indelible imprint is the reason why they've won. Not just offensively, but defensively as well. There is a reason why Duncan has the most placements on the ALL-NBA D Team. Kobe's played 1 more season than Duncan and doesn't have more placements than Tim.
While you make a compelling argument, many fans and writers will ding a star for leading his team to a Championship loss. It's the time where the nation's undivided attention is on your sport, and as the bona fide leader, your play dictates if you did enough or did not. If LeBron's lack of les is heaped upon his shoulders is okay, the same applies to leaders that have losses in their record.Never understood this criticism. It's better to lose in the first round, second round, or conference finals than losing in the NBA Finals? How does that make sense? Going undefeated when making it to the NBA Finals is impressive, especially when a player has that opportunity to be in the Finals multiple times. But, I don't think it's all that more impressive for player A to have gone 4-0 in the NBA Finals versus player be having gone 5-2 in the NBA Finals. I think getting to the NBA Finals is more impressive than losing earlier in the playoffs.
I completely disagree with using the "undefeated Finals record" in Duncan's favor..I'm pretty sure Tim would have rather made more Finals and lost, than not have made them at all..there are plenty of arguments to use in Duncan's favor against Kobe, but I'm not a fan of this one..
I agree with that sentiment.
Tim Duncan had a greater impact than Kobe Bryant. But I do think Kobe Bryant had more talent than Duncan. As for skill, for each of them, they were among the most skilled players at their position. I think one could make a case that Kobe is the more skilled player but Duncan is one of the most skilled big men ever. And regardless, skill doesn't equal dominance or greatness. Right now, Duncan goes down as the better player in the history books. He's accomplished more individually as a player. I think that's how it will end up too unless Kobe has an incredible finish to his career. As far as who was the better player or more talented player, there's definitely an argument for Kobe over Duncan. But that alone doesn't define greatness.
I do recall Duncan himself calling Kobe the best player on the planet a few years ago, or something to that effect. Kobe critics like to discredit him, but for much of this decade, many if not most NBA players and coaches regarded Kobe as the best player in the league. I think people started thinking LeBron took over, which I myself had thought starting a couple seasons ago. But with LeBron's failure to get that elusive le, I think some of those same people have reneged on that notion.
There are different ways to define greatness. I think a lot of factors are considered, from individual dominance to skill/talent to having that translate into team success. Duncan's resume outshine's Kobe's right now. Kobe's individual talent might have been greater, but that doesn't mean he's been better.
Duncan's overall O and D impact was probably greater than Kobe's, in the grand scheme of things. Which makes it all the more interesting that in almost every playoff series between the two, the impact of Kobe's volume scoring on one end seemed to completely eclipse Duncan's post scoring and defensive anchoring put together.
Who is paying attention and how many people paying attention isn't a very convincing argument, at least to me. Once you're in the playoffs, it's time to show up. Losing in the playoffs before the NBA Finals is not better than losing in the NBA Finals. Period.
Tim has won 4 les in 12 seasons (I won't count the 1999-2000 season when he was injured for those playoffs)
Kobe has won 5 les in 14 seasons (I count 2004-05 where the Lakers missed the playoffs)
That's how I look at it. I don't praise a player going undefeated in the NBA Finals just because he wasn't able to get to the NBA Finals 8 times. And I'm not going to discredit a player for losing in the NBA Finals when it's an accomplishment just getting there.
If a player played 10 seasons in the NBA and went to 10 NBA Finals and went undefeated, then you could use the argument. Not when a player goes 4-for-4 in the NBA Finals but missed out even reaching there 8 times.
Again, it's not better to lose early on in the playoffs than rather to get to the NBA Finals and lose. It seriously doesn't make for a sound argument.
What does that have to do with anything? Who gives a what you think would happen in a bar. We're not in a bar, we're on a message board. I'm not going to entirely base my opinion off of win shares and efficiency obviously, but it's a good indicator of the level of impact Duncan has had compared to Bryant. The fact that he's done it in less games/minutes makes it all the more impressive.
If not this upcoming season, then by the following one what happened to the Spurs after the Gasol "trade" is going to happen to the Lakers after the Heat's heist and when it does, I and many others are going to enjoy shoving it down you arrogant pricks throats to no end.
Shaq was mostly responsible for the finals victories, but when it came time for the Lakers to end Tim Duncan's season and le hopes, it was Kobe who was heading out to pasture with a plastic bag and machete in hand. So his point remains...Duncan has at least 3 ringless fingers that he can personally thank Mr. Bryant for.
Kobe has at least two fingers with rings that he can personally think the officials for. Why you guys always hugging kobe's nuts? He has been the second best player on his team/been helped by the official/blown finals appearance/choked in a game 7 in the finals/has had a ass load of talented role players but barely is able to win. None of that applies to Tim Duncan.
Duncan has choked in a game 7 in the Finals.
If you think that losing by 39 points in the Finals against your most hated rival is ok, then you win
What volume scoring? Bryant didn't eclipse Duncan, brah. It was a dominant Shaq from 00-02 that made things so difficult for Duncan.
Is it worse than getting destroyed by your archrival by as much as 39 points, in the Finals?
Of course its not OK and no true Laker would would tell you it was. But it would have been infinitesimally worse had we not made it to the finals to begin with. Anyone saying it's better to lose prior to the finals than to lose in the finals... has never played compe ive sports... or is a born loser. It's just pure nonsense.If you think that losing by 39 points in the Finals against your most hated rival is ok, then you win
Which is worse is not what I was refuting or even discussing.
I refuted the claim and comment that Duncan has never choked in a game 7 of the Finals like Kobe has.
I don't have any idea how someone who puts up 25 and 11 in Game 7 of the Finals can be considered choking. You might spit on Duncan's offensive output, his shot selection, or anything related to his offense, but defensively, you can't put that in the "choking" category.
I only seek consistency in arguments. My calling Duncan's game 7 in the 2005 NBA Finals a choke is predicated on the contention that Kobe's 23 point, 15 rebound performance in game 7 of this past NBA Finals a choke. If Kobe's is a choke in large part to his extremely poor shooting, reasonable logic could surmise the same for Duncan's 10-for-27 performance in his game 7 alleged "choke," particularly considering that Duncan generally puts up 50% from the field as opposed to Kobe who often has poor shooting numbers. Kobe also played great defense in game 7 and throughout the Finals.
23 points, 15 rebounds (from the guard position) a choke...
But you say 25 points and 11 rebounds is not?
Well, then I question the legitimacy of categorizing Kobe's as a choke.
Interesting how to make the two consistent...
"Damn You're Good"
lol 25% from the field
lol like 10 FT attempts in the 4th
Pure Ownage! But it is exau... soooo nothing new here.
I cannot recall calling Kobe's performance in Game 7 choking, although I have encountered posters here who criticize his woeful 6/24 FG shooting. At the end of the day, both guys won the championship in 2005 and 2010 and that's all that matters.
If you're trying to discredit my arguments because you think I'm claiming Kobe "choked" and performed below expectations in game 7 of the 2010 NBA Finals, then I'm not that guy.
However, I still think that letting his team lose by 39 points in the 2008 NBA Finals is inexcusable.
- Duncan did choke for 2 and a half quarters, it's pretty well-publicized..he was criticized for the entire series for not playing up to his standard, and he was criticized and told he had to step up, even during game 7, where he struggled through the first 2 and a half..
The difference is that Duncan pretty much took over the game when the Spurs made their big run during the end of the 3rd quarter..after the Pistons took a 9-point lead, the Spurs caught up, took the lead, and pretty much never looked back..Duncan went 6-12 and led the way for the entire run during that time(Manu too, obviously)..
He took over when his team needed it, which is the only reason it wasn't labeled a choke job, he stepped up when it mattered..he did struggle for the first 2 and a half quarters though, everybody said this at the time..
- Kobe didn't really do that..he struggled from the beginning until the end of the game..Phil Jackson and Derek Fisher had to ask him to stop shooting and control himself IIRC..he was 1-4 in the 4th, and struggled in the 3rd too..the difference was that Kobe stopped shooting as much as he did in the 1st half, which helped the Lakers, but obviously not something you would expect from your superstar..he never stood out at any point of the game from an offensive standpoint, unlike Duncan, who took over the entire 2nd half of the 3rd to the end of the game, which turned out to be the most important part of that game 7..
- Kobe is known as one of the best scorers of all-time, while Duncan is a very good/great scorer, but never a dominant one, so there's more of an emphasis on scoring with Kobe IMO..it's more surprising to see Kobe struggling to score than it would seeing Duncan struggling to score(especially since Duncan's defensive compe ion was better, too)..while Duncan should have been criticized for his struggles, and he certainly was, his stronger suits have always been other parts of the game..
LOL at a Laker fan needing the help of a Pistons fan to argue for his team
I didn't say you said Kobe choke. But you quoted my post which was responding to Nathan89's inference that Kobe's game 7 was a choke. If you read what I was responding to and realized that, perhaps you wouldn't have gotten into misconstruing the comment in the first place.
As for the 39 point loss, it is what it is. It was embarrassing for Kobe and the Lakers. The only thing they could do is find redemption. Winning the next two NBA les was a good start.
Oh, and I'm not sure how long you've been a Spurs fan, but how about getting swept in the playoffs and in the final two games losing by "39" points and then 29 points even with homecourt advantage? Shrugs, embarrassing things happen sometimes to the best NBA players and the best teams.
http://scores.espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=210525013
http://scores.espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=210527013
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
