Reply With Quote
so, steve nash is better than both shaq and kobe?
why does steve nash have 2
and shaq and kobe each have 1?
so, steve nash is better than both shaq and kobe?
for those who think gasol was the "man" in 2010
game 5 of the 2010 finals
kobe - 38 points, 5 rebounds, 5 assists
gasol - 12 points, 12 rebounds, 4 assists
game 6 of 2010 WCF
kobe - 37 points, 4 rebounds, 6 assists
gasol - 9 points, 4 rebounds, 7 assists
game 4 of the 2010 WCF
kobe - 38 points, 7 rebounds, 10 assists
gasol - 15 points, 5 rebounds, 3 assists
2010 playoffs
kobe - 29/6/6
gasol - 20/11/4
2010 finals
kobe - 29/8/4
gasol - 19/12/4
if he had 5 rings. seems like you see kobe to be better than duncan because of 1 more ring.
lol wheres game 7 stats
GOD. We aren't arguing Steve Nash. He has no rings. We're arguing two of the top 3 players of the post-MJ era, who's impact is so close, that every detail counts. Don't give me the 'Horry/7 rings argument=GOAT' argument. That's weak .
well thats not the only thing, stats, and just watching the game, but its close tho, duncan was a great player, but i feel kobe is slightly better
but, trust me if duncan had 5 rings and kobe had 4, you guys would be saying the same thing too
Nah, I doubt anyone here goes to a Lakers forum and talks about Kobe.
horry wasnt even a 3rd option on any of those championships lol
what about shaq then, you think duncan is better than shaq too, get out of here
as far as i know, this is the NBA forum
and what else is there to talk about right now, you guys are talking about him as much as me right now
Kobe's rings don't carry the same weight as Duncan's because he was not the leader of 3 of the 5.
so duncan is better than kareem too?
kareem was the leader of 2, maybe 3 (but in '80 magic won gm 6 without him and had 42 points) so its probally 2
and i have kareem as the #2 greatest
the lakers team was shaq and kobe, it wasnt just shaq
kobe in 2001 playoffs
29/7/6
the only playoff run that duncans has thats as good as that was his 03 one
Kobe had 23 points and 15 rebounds on horrible FG% (6/24)
Gasol had 19 points and 18 rebounds on bad shooting (6/16)
kobe had 10 4th quarter points, gasol 9
Like I said to the Nash comment you made... we aren't talking about anyone other than Kobe/Duncan. With Kareem, you have tons of other variables, and I agree with having Kareem at #2.
Duncan
1999 Playoffs
23/12/3
2003 Playoffs
25/15/5
2005 Playoffs
24/12/3
2007 Playoffs
22/12/3
Kobe
2000 Playoffs
21/5/4
2001 Playoffs
29/7/6
2002 Playoffs
27/6/5
2009 Playoffs
30/5/6
2010 Playoff
29/6/6
kobe 2000 run was pretty weak
but the rest of kobe runs are arguably better than 3/4 of duncans
you mean the playoff run where he single handedly knocked out shaq & kobe, mavs, & the nets for the championship. kobes 01 performance is def just as great as td in 03
knocking off shaq and kobe after they have been to 3 straight finals and won all 3 of them isnt that great of an accomplishmentyou mean the playoff run where he single handedly knocked out shaq & kobe, mavs, & the nets for the championship. kobes 01 performance is def just as great as td in 03
03 td was betteryou mean the playoff run where he single handedly knocked out shaq & kobe, mavs, & the nets for the championship. kobes 01 performance is def just as great as td in 03
doing it with a rookie manu, d robinson playing limited minutes in his final season, & with tony parker that was lucky enough to play because speedy claxton wasnt able to take the starting spot due to injury. sounds great to me but def not as great as kobes 1st round exits as the only star on his team.
Look, when you have players at Kobe's and Duncan's calibur, stats don't mean as much. Duncan's offensive role for the Spurs' offense wasn't focused on scoring as much as Kobe's for the Lakers' was.
Arguing two great players, you look at all variables. Stats are a part of it, but run with impact and role. Duncan always made the entire team better, and that has always been a flaw for Kobe.
kobe makes his team better, how does he not?
its dumb to say that duncans rings hold more value than kobes, cause it doesnt
He does, but don't act like he's as efficient as Duncan. He makes his team better just on raw talent and drawing the defensive attention. Up until 05-06ish, everything ran through Duncan. Kobe has never been known for his passing ability and leadership. Don't act like Kobe is some great leader.
How is it dumb? How many rings does Kobe have without a second all-star option? How many rings does Kobe have without a third all-star option?
passing ability?
duncan better than Kobe?
kobes is the much better playmaker and passer
leader, good enough
and about rings, kobe has 2 rings without a top 50 player of alltime
and thats still a dumb argument
so i guess duncans better than jordan with that ring argument your using, jordans always had pippen....
kobes 01, 02, 09, 10 playoff runs are better than duncans 99, 05, 07 runs
again, duncans rings are not more valuable than kobes
Shaq never won without a good guard either and the 2003 spurs, while not being a good team, weren't really trash like the Laker squads were. Spurs still had some competence in that year.
As an individual talent, I just see Kobe is better. It's not a knock on Duncan, but he's an anchor player; Duncan does the same things on a consistent basis which is why I look at him as a better team asset. Kobe has spurts of scoring a lot, passing a lot, rebounding a lot or being a defensive presence. He's not the same game by game and the team has to adjust to him, so he's not a great leader.
I think being interchangeable with Shaq or Hakeem is an overestimation of Duncan, though. My take, I personally don't like Kobe or Duncan that much.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions