The Final Debate - and Please Don't Bring This Up Again

[Koolaid_Man]

Ghazi get the out of here...this is grown man talk you dip ...you know nothing about this...lol

[DAF86]

Who was the best Lakers player during the 5 Showtime 1980's championships, Kareem, or Magic? Don't forget, Worthy won a finals MVP himself in there.

You can't take a player down for not being the best player on his team. you just can't. No one devalues Kareem's or Magic's 5 rings because they had each other. Note, Magic won 1980 finals MVP because of what he did in game 6, but Kareem was hurt and sat out that game yet beasted that series.

I don't know who the best player was back in the '80s 'cause I didn't have the chnce to watch that team play, but I did see the 2000s Lakers and Shaq was clearly the best player of that team. Of course you can't take a player down for not beign the best player on his team but you can't say that player is better than another for winning more rings either, specially when in more than half of those rings he wasn't the best player on his own team.

[Koolaid_Man]

Here is the 2nd half of that game:

[Daddy_Of_All_Trolls]

I don't know who the best player was back in the '80s 'cause I didn't have the chnce to watch that team play, but I did see the 2000s Lakers and Shaq was clearly the best player of that team. Of course you can't take a player down for not beign the best player on his team but you can't say that player is better than another for winning more rings either, specially when in more than half of those rings he wasn't the best player on his own team.

Ok, then you have proved my point. You gave no argument for who was the better player, and none whatsoever whether their rings should be devalued because one was better than another. That was an honor that rotated. Kareem was the best player in 1985, and probably 1980. Magic was in 1982 and 1987. However, a debate can be made for either player who was better and in what years. It was between Magic and Worthy by 1987, Kareem had declined. Neither was the best player on the team more than half the time, Worthy messes that up in 1988. In 1984, Magic gave the Celtics the series. Magic and Kareem won the same number of rings together, Kareem got one more in 1971. Shaq was the better player in 2000-02, but not by as much as you believe, go back and read my posts for what Kobe did in the WCF's 2000-02, and read what has been said by a few about Kobe's and Duncan's performances in the 6 series in which they met. Essentially, it puts Shaq and Kobe closer to Kareem and Magic than you expected. I believe Tim is the better player between him and Kobe, but eventually I am going to change my mind. The main reason is I believe Kobe still has a good year or two left in him. Let's see what he can do. Tim's legacy is secure, but unfortunately for him, it's the Lakers franchise he's up against, not Kobe Bryant. The Mamba will be more remembered because of a great career on a storied franchise.

[Lincoln]

dat kobe tin all over old ass spurs

[Koolaid_Man]

dat kobe tin all over old ass spurs

for those Spur fans that can watch those vids I posted it's going to make them sick...that was insane against the Spurs in the paint and on the wings...In his prime he couldn't be guarded...that 2nd vid I posted is just ing raw if I've ever seen it...

Sorry Spur fan but Kool won't let you re-write history...I witnessed that and even though my is past his prime he's still the face of the league almost 10 yrs later...

[DAF86]

Ok, then you have proved my point. You gave no argument for who was the better player, and none whatsoever whether their rings should be devalued because one was better than another. That was an honor that rotated. Kareem was the best player in 1985, and probably 1980. Magic was in 1982 and 1987. However, a debate can be made for either player who was better and in what years. It was between Magic and Worthy by 1987, Kareem had declined. Neither was the best player on the team more than half the time, Worthy messes that up in 1988. In 1984, Magic gave the Celtics the series. Magic and Kareem won the same number of rings together, Kareem got one more in 1971. Shaq was the better player in 2000-02, but not by as much as you believe, go back and read my posts for what Kobe did in the WCF's 2000-02, and read what has been said by a few about Kobe's and Duncan's performances in the 6 series in which they met. Essentially, it puts Shaq and Kobe closer to Kareem and Magic than you expected. I believe Tim is the better player between him and Kobe, but eventually I am going to change my mind. The main reason is I believe Kobe still has a good year or two left in him. Let's see what he can do. Tim's legacy is secure, but unfortunately for him, it's the Lakers franchise he's up against, not Kobe Bryant. The Mamba will be more remembered because of a great career on a storied franchise.

I never said the rings should be devalued, I said that they shouldn't be the factor to determine if a player is better than another. And about the other stuff, if Magic and Kareem shared the "best player on the team" distinction back in the 80s fine, all I know is that Shaq was clearly the best player in the 00/02 Lakers, swap Kobe for any other star SG and the Lakers still win those championships, swap O'neal for another center and they wouldn't.

[Koolaid_Man]

I never said the rings should be devalued, I said that they shouldn't be the factor to determine if a player is better than another. And about the other stuff, if Magic and Kareem shared the "best player on the team" distinction back in the 80s fine, all I know is that Shaq was clearly the best player in the 00/02 Lakers, swap Kobe for any other star SG and the Lakers still win those championships, swap O'neal for another center and they wouldn't.

So Kobe and Duncan wouldn't have won ....

dude look at the vids I just posted...T-Mac, A.I, nor Vince was playing at Kobe's level back then and in particular at that time...at least not on both sides of the ball...

[DAF86]

So Kobe and Duncan wouldn't have won ....

Going against a T-Mac/Shaq for example, no they wouldn't. Prime Shaq is the most dominant player I've ever seen.

[DMC]

So you cherry pick a video and say he always played that dominant? If so, why doesn't he have 8 rings and why did he do jack without Shaq or Pau?

Pippen was not the most dominant player in the game when he and MJ played together. He never won a ring without MJ. Shaq had been to the Finals before Kobe, won 3 with him and then proceeded to win another before Kobe did. If you contend it was Wade, why couldn't Wade with Lebron get over Dallas?

Face it, Kobe was a decent shooter, had moments of unbelievable success which happens to decent shooters who become high volume chuckers. He's got the ability to attack the rim and does so with reckless abandon, and he's in the top 20 to ever play the game.

However, let's not get all sucky about him. He's a second wheel and has been since the beginning. It doesn't matter if he gets more press, more money from sponsors... on the court he's a second wheel and not even a good one now. He's bone on bone and done. Dallas ed him so hard in his brown puckered starfish that he's taken a whole summer to recover. He's finished. He will never be thought of as the best to ever play his position. Tim Duncan will.

[Koolaid_Man]

So you cherry pick a video and say he always played that dominant? If so, why doesn't he have 8 rings and why did he do jack without Shaq or Pau?

Pippen was not the most dominant player in the game when he and MJ played together. He never won a ring without MJ. Shaq had been to the Finals before Kobe, won 3 with him and then proceeded to win another before Kobe did. If you contend it was Wade, why couldn't Wade with Lebron get over Dallas?

Face it, Kobe was a decent shooter, had moments of unbelievable success which happens to decent shooters who become high volume chuckers. He's got the ability to attack the rim and does so with reckless abandon, and he's in the top 20 to ever play the game.

However, let's not get all sucky about him. He's a second wheel and has been since the beginning. It doesn't matter if he gets more press, more money from sponsors... on the court he's a second wheel and not even a good one now. He's bone on bone and done. Dallas ed him so hard in his brown puckered starfish that he's taken a whole summer to recover. He's finished. He will never be thought of as the best to ever play his position. Tim Duncan will.

Less emotion are more facts please...

my suggestion Cherry Pick A vid.... your constant drivel is intoxicating and invites me to you some more....BOHICA BOHICA

[Koolaid_Man]

Going against a T-Mac/Shaq for example, no they wouldn't. Prime Shaq is the most dominant player I've ever seen.

all we have are the facts and those vids...hundreds of them...Kobe owns the SpursPERIOD...

[LkrFan]

Game 7, 2000 WCF Lakers vs. Portland. The defacto NBA finals. This is the game the Lakers trailed 75-60 in the 4th quarter. Why down so much? Shaq wasn't doing well. Kobe came through.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/...006040LAL.html

Kobe 47 minutes, 9-19 FG, 25 points, 7 assists, 11 rebounds
Shaq 47 minutes, 5-9 FG, 18 points, 5 assists, 9 rebounds

Great post(s) man. This one many Kobe haters like to ignore. Of course Shaq dominated when he played against weak front lines (which was 95% of the time). But that other 5%? You see stats like the above. Kobe has been consistent in his dominance. So much so that the Spurs went out and signed Bruce Lee Bowen. They didn't make such moves to deal with Shaq.

Kobe has consistently been great throughout his 15-year career. The head to head stats v. TD only tell part of the story. Even with the mileage he has endured, he is still arguably on top of his game. The same cannot be said for TD, as 13/8 last year illustrates.

For me, Kobe is clearly better and has had the better career than TD. Most Spur fans on ST won't admit it.

[LkrFan]

By the way, great thread Kool. Most will just troll it instead of giving a legit debate. Why? It's all they can do.

[djohn2oo8]

Great post(s) man. This one many Kobe haters like to ignore. Of course Shaq dominated when he played against weak front lines (which was 95% of the time). But that other 5%? You see stats like the above. Kobe has been consistent in his dominance. So much so that the Spurs went out and signed Bruce Lee Bowen. They didn't make such moves to deal with Shaq.

Kobe has consistently been great throughout his 15-year career. The head to head stats v. TD only tell part of the story. Even with the mileage he has endured, he is still arguably on top of his game. The same cannot be said for TD, as 13/8 last year illustrates.

For me, Kobe is clearly better and has had the better career than TD. Most Spur fans on ST won't admit it.

The re edness is strong with you.

[DAF86]

Without Shaq in his team Kobe wouldn't have had the chance of playing that game. As much as you like to pointout single games and spin things around Shaq was the best player in the league back then and by a distance.

[Koolaid_Man]

By the way, great thread Kool. Most will just troll it instead of giving a legit debate. Why? It's all they can do.

when I'm posting facts with numbers and finding lost youtube tapes and what in the can they say...except troll...these bas s don't want to get into a fact check with me...they'll lose everytime...

Part of me feels like I'm wrong for doing this (bringing the truth) to Spur fan but then another part of me says em...I listen to the em part of me...they deserve it...Kobe ted all over them at least most of the time...

[djohn2oo8]

I think the sad part about this is Kool is a 60 something year old man child with a crush on a man half his age

[Daddy_Of_All_Trolls]

I never said the rings should be devalued, I said that they shouldn't be the factor to determine if a player is better than another. And about the other stuff, if Magic and Kareem shared the "best player on the team" distinction back in the 80s fine, all I know is that Shaq was clearly the best player in the 00/02 Lakers, swap Kobe for any other star SG and the Lakers still win those championships, swap O'neal for another center and they wouldn't.

Ok, rings are be devalued if you say they shouldn't be a factor in determining who is better. Some people want to place Kobe top 10 all time because of his 5 rings. I don't count rings in determining who is greater either, that's why.

I don't buy swapping Kobe out for another all star SG means the Lakers win 3 les, you simply can't forget what he did in the western playoffs. I am not certain any all star SG could have been as clutch as Kobe in so many series. Koolaid posted from the 2001 WCF. Spurs win that game if Kobe doesn't penetrate, period. Put another SG in there, Spurs still win, they had Duncan and Robinson in the paint for crying out loud, but Kobe broke that defense down and scored. Who else could get by both #21 and #50? 2000 WCF Lakers were ready to choke that series away and Kobe stepped up in game 7. Not certain if the Lakers get by the Kings in 2002 with another SG.

Now, on the other hand, I do believe it's possible the Lakers still win les in 2000-2002 with a different center, at least a defensive one. All they had to do was get to the finals. They had offensive diversity in 2000 and 2001, less so by 2002. Anyway, this is all speculation and that is for the most part worthless. If the dog hadn't have stopped to , he would have caught the fox. Facts say Kobe had Shaq, and Shaq had Kobe. Together they won 3 les and nothing can change it, and each stepped up for the most part to do their job, when needed.

[Koolaid_Man]

Without Shaq in his team Kobe wouldn't have had the chance of playing that game. As much as you like to pointout single games and spin things around Shaq was the best player in the league back then and by a distance.

there's a huge difference between best player and dominant...I happen to think during that time Shaq was the most dominant big man but Duncan was actually better (skill wise) then Shaq......there's no doubt that Kobe and Shaq benefited each other...Kobe's game helped open up the inside and Shaq's inside presence helped to open up the perimeter.

[Koolaid_Man]

I think the sad part about this is Kool is a 60 something year old man child with a crush on a man half his age

not even close...come again...my dreams of playing in the league were derailed....now largely unfulfilled...so I live vicariously through my team...my Ace...

[DAF86]

there's a huge difference between best player and dominant...I happen to think during that time Shaq was the most dominant big man but Duncan was actually better (skill wise) then Shaq......there's no doubt that Kobe and Shaq benefited each other...Kobe's game helped open up the inside and Shaq's inside presence helped to open up the perimeter.

skills, if I'm building a team from scratch give me O'neal anyday of the week.

[djohn2oo8]

not even close...come again...my dreams of playing in the league were derailed....now largely unfulfilled...so I live vicariously through my team...my Ace...

6-26-2011, 4:56 pm : Koolaid_Man admits he's pathetic

[dunkman]

'99 must be counted. It was the first match between Duncan vs. Shaq and Kobe. Duncan dominated, setting up the things forever who's the best player of that generation.

In '00 the Lakers avoided the Spurs because Duncan got injured before the playoffs. It would have been contested series. The Lakers got solid refs help against the Blazers in Q4 of game 7.

For '01 the Spurs had DA injured, he was the second Spurs scorer and the third best player. DA and Daniels from the bench would have pressured Kobe to play some defense and it would be more difficult for Kobe to shot over DA as he did over Daniels.

In '02 the Lakers were slightly better, the Spurs were still rebuilding, but Duncan was the MVP that season and much better than Kobe.

Kobe was important sometimes, but most elite teams had a capable wing defender, the Spurs were a bit late to add such player (Bowen). For the teams that had a good wing defensive player, Kobe wasn't any problem. It was all about the refs and Shaq.

Shaq commanded not only double, but triple teams. Only two teams had a good answer for him: D-Rob with Duncan help defense, Sabonis with other Portland bigs and Divac who would put Shaq in foul problems. In those years, it was easy for Kobe to play, and he was also supported by clutch players like Horry and Fisher that couldn't be left open. The teams that emerged from the east were good defending the perimeter, but they didn't had answers for Shaq, Kobe alone would never got that les for the Lakers even reaching the finals.

For '03 everyone else gave up, except the Spurs. And Duncan was very dominant in that series, he couldn't be stopped by Shaq and Horry, on the other hand Kobe suffered with Bowen.

In '04 the Spurs were inferior in talent. The Lakers added Malone $1M and Payton for $5M, both instrumental in winning the series, that has nothing to do with Kobe being better than Duncan. The Spurs had to pay market value for their players and when didn't like in the case of S-Jax the players signed for another team.

In '05 Kobe's lead Lakers missed the playoffs, that has to be counted against him.

In '06 and '07 the Kobe was out in first round, and lucky not to play the Spurs.

For '08 the Lakers the Lakers added Gasol shipping very long term projects and bad players with expiring contracts. For a 7 footer franchise player? When the Spurs wanted to add some talent for the the '08-'09 season, the best option was a player with max contract owed $30M over two seasons, that isn't a bigman nor even an all-star.

From '08 to '10 the Lakers had success because of Gasol, Odom and Bynum, and other quality players. Kobe was important, but he wasn't the main reason the Lakers were successful, the Lakers won critical playoffs games even when Kobe sucked. Gasol was very important for the Lakers too. When Gasol played at serviceable level only, the Lakers suffered with shorthanded Hornets and got swept by the Mavs (the only team the Mavs swept in their championship run).

Kobe can't take full credit for 5 championships and 7 finals, he had awful lot of help. Kobe was able to shot inefficiently and the Lakers would still win.

Kobe is a great player that had a great career, but his impact in the game wasn't the same as Duncan.

Also, it's a fact, the NBA rigged the '02 WCF. How can one pretend to say Kobe has 5 championships?

[dunkman]

'99 must be counted. It was the first match between Duncan vs. Shaq and Kobe. Duncan dominated, setting up the things forever who's the best player of that generation.

In '00 the Lakers avoided the Spurs because Duncan got injured before the playoffs. It would have been contested series. The Lakers got solid refs help against the Blazers in Q4 of game 7.

For '01 the Spurs had DA injured, he was the second Spurs scorer and the third best player. DA and Daniels from the bench would have pressured Kobe to play some defense and it would be more difficult for Kobe to shot over DA as he did over Daniels.

In '02 the Lakers were slightly better, the Spurs were still rebuilding, but Duncan was the MVP that season and much better than Kobe.

Kobe was important sometimes, but most elite teams had a capable wing defender, the Spurs were a bit late to add such player (Bowen). For the teams that had a good wing defensive player, Kobe wasn't any problem. It was all about the refs and Shaq.

Shaq commanded not only double, but triple teams. Only two teams had a good answer for him: D-Rob with Duncan help defense, Sabonis with other Portland bigs and Divac who would put Shaq in foul problems. In those years, it was easy for Kobe to play, and he was also supported by clutch players like Horry and Fisher that couldn't be left open. The teams that emerged from the east were good defending the perimeter, but they didn't had answers for Shaq, Kobe alone would never got that les for the Lakers even reaching the finals.

For '03 everyone else gave up, except the Spurs. And Duncan was very dominant in that series, he couldn't be stopped by Shaq and Horry, on the other hand Kobe suffered with Bowen.

In '04 the Spurs were inferior in talent. The Lakers added Malone $1M and Payton for $5M, both instrumental in winning the series, that has nothing to do with Kobe being better than Duncan. The Spurs had to pay market value for their players and when didn't like in the case of S-Jax the players signed for another team.

In '05 Kobe's lead Lakers missed the playoffs, that has to be counted against him.

In '06 and '07 the Kobe was out in first round, and lucky not to play the Spurs.

For '08 the Lakers the Lakers added Gasol shipping very long term projects and bad players with expiring contracts. For a 7 footer franchise player? When the Spurs wanted to add some talent for the the '08-'09 season, the best option was a player with max contract owed $30M over two seasons, that isn't a bigman nor even an all-star.

From '08 to '10 the Lakers had success because of Gasol, Odom and Bynum, and other quality players. Kobe was important, but he wasn't the main reason the Lakers were successful, the Lakers won critical playoffs games even when Kobe sucked. Gasol was very important for the Lakers too. When Gasol played at serviceable level only, the Lakers suffered with shorthanded Hornets and got swept by the Mavs (the only team the Mavs swept in their championship run).

Kobe can't take full credit for 5 championships and 7 finals, he had awful lot of help. Kobe was able to shot inefficiently and the Lakers would still win.

Kobe is a great player that had a great career, but his impact in the game wasn't the same as Duncan.

Also, it's a fact, the NBA rigged the '02 WCF. How can one pretend to say Kobe has 5 championships?