Reply With Quote
I am sorry you are a numbers re . Good luck in getting the right number of nickels and dimes when you are giving change back to the customer at the cashier.
I did. You didn't give a straight answer. You said you didn't care. But you did, that's why you are still here.
I am sorry you are a numbers re . Good luck in getting the right number of nickels and dimes when you are giving change back to the customer at the cashier.
Which means you didn't answer the question.
You don't need to, somebody smarter than us already did the calculations.
And you don't have to know which players are overrated to enjoy the game. You can just go chant "defense" with the rest of the crowd and think you have a hand in helping the team win.
Stick to facts, Amb when you get passionate your hate, bias and agenda show. Why do you care so much about Pau's legacy? LOL
Tough to say, we have seen plenty of extremely talented teams not win because they don't have good coaches. Coaches bring structure and direction to a team (well, good ones), and without Phil, Kobe and Shaq would have imploded way before 2004.
I did, read the first three lines you just don't like my answer ..rings baby
Those were the facts.
I hate it when players don't get their due (see my stance on Dirk, a one time major adversary to the Spurs)
I also hate it when players get way more than their due.
2010 it is then, but then you didn't care.
And that is absolutely the wrong answer.
Kobe was at his absolute prime from early to mid 00s.
Kobe is selfish and shoots too much, we know. Had either Shaq (04) or Pau (08) received more touches, the final outcomes of the series would be the same. The Pistons and Celtics were hungrier. They were not going to be denied.
Thing that kills me you call him a superstar and a leader, but sans Kobe ...Pau (again a great player) had a penchant for coming up small in big games going back to his national team play, Phil and to a lessor extent Kobe was the best thing that happened to him. Also media did not make Phil poke Pau in his chest or shrink from Celts physical play. That happened you excuse that cuz u love Pau but skewer Kobe cuz you don't even a stat nerd is biased which further proves my case, thanks!
Your ego is Kobeesque so cuz u say its so my answer is wrong?
God complex much?
Dirk was in his prime in 2005 I still take 2011 Dirk
Kg was in his prime in 2004 I still take 2008 KG ...so what? No ring you get MVP for regular season greatness rings stamp your legacy
why are we still arguing kobe versus duncan using the rings argument?
kobe: 2 rings as the 1st option (not disputing that), 3 rings as the second option
duncan: 4 rings as the 1st option
take away the 2 rings as the 1st option from both those guys and it's kobe's 3 as the beta versus duncan's 2 as the alpha.
i've yet to run into any dumbass who would tell me that pippen's 6 as a beta > olajuwon's 2 as an alpha. so why are we using the rings argument to take kobe over duncan?
I can't prove either way, and Pau in 08 was a tossup, but if Shaq got more touches in 04, the Lakers had a very good chance.
This. Celts had hca and a long winstreak they maintained through the tougher West (on a road trip).
Pistons were the perfect storm like the 2011 Mavs with Dirk shooting like Larry Bird. Pistons had Chauncey who was uber clutch that year and living off that rep since
Those assaults against my intelligence were just so devastating.
So Amb please address Pau and his poor play in the playoffs and internationally prior to Lakers?
Again I'm not knocking Pau helped us win 2 but superstar and leader?
I don't love Pau, I don't hate Kobe. I just think they were unfairly criticised. And by leader, I meant to say Pau was the leader in WS, not the leader leader of the team. However, he was the reason the Lakers were successful, there is no question about it. Does he shrink under pressure? Sure! But so what? He did lead the Lakers to two les.
As for the superstar moniker, he led the Lakers to b2b, not sure what else you would have called him.
See below.
We all know 06 Kobe was a better player than 10 Kobe, you know it, and I know it. We all know that 05 Dirk > 11 Dirk. We all know 04 Garnett > 08 Garneet.
And yet you said you will take the lesser version in each and every case not because they were better players, but because they had better teammates and coaches. Put 04 Garnett on the 08 Celtics team, and they would have been better. Put 06 Kobe on the 10 team, the Lakers would have been better. Put 05 Dirk on the 11 Mavs, and they would have been better, and yet you would willingly take the lesser player not because of a players' ability, but because of other factors such as coaching, teammates, system, and opposition.
Thus, this is the wrong answer.
It's like you are willing to take a Honda Civic over a Bugatti because Dale Earnhardt drove that Civic, while an idiot 6 year old drove the Bugatti.
In all honesty, I believe they had a good chance to possibly extend the series, not win it. The only chance the Lakers had to win that year was if Malone was anywhere near 100%. Malone played hobbled, the Pistons smelled blood.
the Celts barely got by the Hawks and the Cavs (only got by the Hawks because Garnett was not suspended, which was BS to begin with).
amb with the no mercy for human life goods
Then please stop posting to further exhibit them.
Please cite specific examples.
And while you are at it, please address Kobe's poor play during 05 to 07, his 6-24, and a list of other horrible playoff games.
Don't worry bro, I know my place now. I know this is basketball stuff is 2deep4me
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions