NBA: NBA Win Share Leader of the last 19 champions

[mindcrime]

The problem with your scenario is when was Pau ever the focus of anyone's defensive strategy?
Was PAu ever constantly doubled on the LAkers the way Dirk, Shaq, Kobe or Duncan are?

PArt of the reason why Pop an others was pissed we got Pau was we got a top 10 player to play our #2 role, when Kobe was already a top 3 player. That was teh issue. When was PAu ever even a top 5 player in the NBA? 10? Yes. Top 5. Nope.

This honestly puts an end to the Pau > Kobe 'debate'. Defensive strategies are constructed to limit the best player of a team. In very rare instances (where you have two 'best' players) such as the 2000 - 2002 Lakers, teams weren't able to limit either. That was because both Kobe and Shaq were dominant in their particular roles.

[ambchang]

I Agree to a point, just saying that I would of voted for Duncan in 2007 for Finals MVP, in 2005 I could see it going either way. I LOVED how Manu played in 2005,
by far his best season imho ...and Iw as in SA at that time to see it up close.

07 was most definitely Parker. Duncan for sure was the leader of the team, nobody will dispute that, but Parker won the FINALS MVP fair and square, key word being Finals. Duncan was going up against very good defenders in Varaejo, with help from Ilgaukas, not to mention an entire Cavs defense crowding him, while Parker was most defended by Boobie Gibson or Mo Williams, with none of the defensive pressure.

As for 05, Ginobili was great in wins, but he was horrible in the losses, and yes, losses count as well.

[ambchang]

Of course that was a factor ...never said it was not. Liek you said Shaq role decreased through the 3peat but especially teh first two years Kobe benefitted of course so did Shaq ...Kobe is better than any team-mate Duncan had

From a skills stand point, yes. As a teammate stand point, no. None of Duncan's teammates ever ran him out of town, and especially not during his peak. In fact, Robinson flew back from Hawaii to convince Duncan to stay.

[Thread]

The problem with your scenario is when was Pau ever the focus of anyone's defensive strategy?
Was PAu ever constantly doubled on the LAkers

They (Perkins '08/Dirk/Chandler '11) just put a foot in his ass & he started crying to everybody.

Howard in ''09 wouldn't think of doing something like that & Perkins in '10 was mercifully shinin' pine.

[ambchang]

This honestly puts an end to the Pau > Kobe 'debate'. Defensive strategies are constructed to limit the best player of a team. In very rare instances (where you have two 'best' players) such as the 2000 - 2002 Lakers, teams weren't able to limit either. That was because both Kobe and Shaq were dominant in their particular roles.

The RS WS numbers begs to differ. People say that the 09 and 10 Lakers were Kobe driven, but they were not, they were frontline driven, with Pau being the centerpiece of it. The frontline of Pau and Odom created an absolute nightmare problem for the opposition, and nobody could stop it. Kobe, on the other hand, could be, he had a string of horrible games during important parts of the playoffs, but the frontline of Pau + Odom provided them consistently great looks close to the basket, defense and rebounding.

[ambchang]

One more thing KK81, tell me, was 06 Kobe better, or was 10 Kobe better.

[Killakobe81]

This honestly puts an end to the Pau > Kobe 'debate'. Defensive strategies are constructed to limit the best player of a team. In very rare instances (where you have two 'best' players) such as the 2000 - 2002 Lakers, teams weren't able to limit either. That was because both Kobe and Shaq were dominant in their particular roles.

Yep. Dont listen to Amb, he is trying to build this case to help another (Duncan vs. Kobe) Just like Kobe fanbois discredit Shaq/Pau to elevate Kobe. Neither needs to be done. Bird had McHale, DJ and PArish no one tries discredit his 3 or Magic's 5. If you are a key piece not a key role player like Horry rings matter in a legacy debate. Horry has his rings but you can only argue he was a top 3 player on maybe only the the first Rox championship ...

Kobe gets some love on TNT and Amb goes to work. Not much to see here mindcrime Im just bored but gotta get back 2 work soon ...most of this is just trolling by Spur fan but Amb I think really believes Pau was the leader of the Lakers #WINSHARES!!!

[AaronY]

What the are win shares anyway? Like how they are even calculated

[Killakobe81]

One more thing KK81, tell me, was 06 Kobe better, or was 10 Kobe better.

Depends on what you mean? Im a rings guy so my gut tells me 10. I dont care if he did more to help his team in 2006 (sure you will tell me) but they did not win ... so it matters in the overall scheme ...but big picture ... it's just highlights and numbers. Thing is, I dont even throw around traditional numbers. For eample, Kobe had a triple double the other night, big deal. But if you watched the game, his impact was bigger than that. What was his winshares for the Dallas game for argument sakes?

[whitemamba]

KK81 going ham

[Killakobe81]

One more thing Amb, I enjoy our back and forth but hate that you sometimes get me to do what I accuse you of ... downgrading Shaq or Pau. I am a Kobe apologist but not a fanboi ... I know Shaq and Pau and ESPECIALLY Phil played a huge role in Kobe's success. I will freely admit without Phil (even with Shaq) my guess is ... Kobe gets two rings max. Not sure even with the talent/support on the 5 le teams they can even win 3 without Phil, I thought he was blessed and lucky (but also a good coach) before he joined Lakers, but seeing him up close ...he is a master ... tbh only Pop and Riles are in his class tbh.

[Clipper Nation]

It's amazing, the lengths that Lakerfan will go to in order to diminish the frontcourt they had in '08, '09 and '10.... the Celtics were really the only team who ever had an answer for it, and even then, they got owned in 2010.... meanwhile, Kirby was being his same old shot-chucking self, the one who was missing the playoffs or getting bounced in the first round in the years between Shaq and Pau....

[Thread]

Kirby was being his same old shot-chucking self

Save the shovel to Artest.

tee, hee.

[mindcrime]

One more thing Amb, I enjoy our back and forth but hate that you sometimes get me to do what I accuse you of ... downgrading Shaq or Pau. I am a Kobe apologist but not a fanboi ... I know Shaq and Pau and ESPECIALLY Phil played a huge role in Kobe's success. I will freely admit without Phil (even with Shaq) my guess is ... Kobe gets two rings max. Not sure even with the talent/support on the 5 le teams they can even win 3 without Phil, I thought he was blessed and lucky (but also a good coach) before he joined Lakers, but seeing him up close ...he is a master ... tbh only Pop and Riles are in his class tbh.

The only time the man ever lost a finals series was when his team was truly outmatched.

2004 - Nobody was denying the Pistons that year.
2008 - Pierce played out of his mind, KG was KG, and the rest of the team stepped up when it counted most.

[ambchang]

What the are win shares anyway? Like how they are even calculated

http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/ws.html

[ambchang]

Depends on what you mean? Im a rings guy so my gut tells me 10. I dont care if he did more to help his team in 2006 (sure you will tell me) but they did not win ... so it matters in the overall scheme ...but big picture ... it's just highlights and numbers. Thing is, I dont even throw around traditional numbers. For eample, Kobe had a triple double the other night, big deal. But if you watched the game, his impact was bigger than that. What was his winshares for the Dallas game for argument sakes?

In other words, you are avoiding the question, because the obvious answer is 06 Kobe > 10 Kobe. But it flew in the face of your les theory.

[ambchang]

KK81 going ham

How so? He has shown that my statistical methods have been consistent for 19 straight years (probably more so if I go back further). The only argument that I have heard so far is "I saw it with my eyes".

[Killakobe81]

In other words, you are avoiding the question, because the obvious answer is 06 Kobe > 10 Kobe. But it flew in the face of your les theory.

Read what I said again ...

[AaronY]

Lol @ advanced stats nerds...good luck in your quest to make following sports about as much fun as doing your taxes

[ambchang]

One more thing Amb, I enjoy our back and forth but hate that you sometimes get me to do what I accuse you of ... downgrading Shaq or Pau. I am a Kobe apologist but not a fanboi ... I know Shaq and Pau and ESPECIALLY Phil played a huge role in Kobe's success. I will freely admit without Phil (even with Shaq) my guess is ... Kobe gets two rings max. Not sure even with the talent/support on the 5 le teams they can even win 3 without Phil, I thought he was blessed and lucky (but also a good coach) before he joined Lakers, but seeing him up close ...he is a master ... tbh only Pop and Riles are in his class tbh.

Without Shaq, Pau and Phil, Kobe gets 0 rings, both of us knows it, and therein lies the problem of using rings, namely, they are extremely teammate dependent.

No Shaq, Kobe gets 2
No Pau, Kobe gets 3
No Phil, Kobe gets 0

This isn't even a point to argue.

And based on your logic, if Kobe didn't have Shaq, he would have been a worse player than he really is, even though he has the same game, the same career, same points, same assists, same rebounds, same everything except having one of the most dominant big man in the game as his teammate? That doesn't make ANY sense at all. None.

And that brings us to looking at WS, which is how a player helps his team wins, which is, both of us agree, is ultimately the most important role of any player.

[Killakobe81]

Amb was so quick with his reply he missed that I said 2010 regular season and first 6 games of playoffs 2006 was fine work but no ring amb, in the end that is what matters.

[AaronY]

brb gettin my Texas Instruments equipment so I can follow this basketball game..

[ambchang]

The only time the man ever lost a finals series was when his team was truly outmatched.

2004 - Nobody was denying the Pistons that year.
2008 - Pierce played out of his mind, KG was KG, and the rest of the team stepped up when it counted most.

Untrue. If you actually watched both of those series, you would have seen how Kobe made it his mission to shoot the ball every time he's got. Shaq was absolutely destroying the Pistons frontline, and yet Kobe kept shooting these fade away bull long range jumpers. So what did the media change the story to? They said Shaq was old and over the hill (even though Shaq finished #2 in MVP voting the very next season in Miami).

In 08, Kobe kept his chucking , and ignored Pau in the low post. Gasol had 62 total FG in the entire series despite shooting 53%, while Kobe had 131 despite shooting 131 (that's more than double). The media made up this story about Gasol wilting under pressure, took sound bites out of context, and used one or two plays at the end of the game to justify Gasol as soft, blaming the entire blame on him.

[AaronY]

Seriously, that page he linked, man...wtf was that, apparently I need a tutor to follow basketball now

[Killakobe81]

Without Shaq, Pau and Phil, Kobe gets 0 rings, both of us knows it, and therein lies the problem of using rings, namely, they are extremely teammate dependent.

No Shaq, Kobe gets 2
No Pau, Kobe gets 3
No Phil, Kobe gets 0

This isn't even a point to argue.

I think shaq/Kobe were talented enough to win eventually sans Phil ...but no way they 3 peat
The back2back Lakers were good but without PJ they lose to Celts and Rox those years


And based on your logic, if Kobe didn't have Shaq, he would have been a worse player than he really is, even though he has the same game, the same career, same points, same assists, same rebounds, same everything except having one of the most dominant big man in the game as his teammate? That doesn't make ANY sense at all. None.

And that brings us to looking at WS, which is how a player helps his team wins, which is, both of us agree, is ultimately the most important role of any player.