Reply With Quote
Big man dependent, imo.
Gee, let's see... Maybe because Bryant is an overrated gunner who only wins when he has a dominant big man in the paint?
Big man dependent, imo.
IMO in that event Duncan would won it the third time, with Garnett close second. Duncan had very good stats too, so the primary criteria would have been what team had much better record. 5 additional wins should have been enough.
Shaq made everyone better. He was guarded by 2-3 players, he used to pass the ball where players like Kobe, Fisher or Horry were wide open on the perimeter.
Right now it's not just Gasol. There are Odom and Bynum. Typically the Lakers bigs score more efficiently than Kobe, win every rebounding battle for additional possessions and prevent other teams from taking high percentage shots. Plus there is Artest too since last season, a very big SF.
What did you expect ? 10 MPVS? The guy is a sidekick, big man dependent. He should be pretty happy about the one he got. He didn't even deserve that IMO.
I smell skunk.
To be honest this is really unfair to Kobe Bean. This is like asking to explain Manu's 0 MVPs, or Scottie's, or Mo Williams'. Its really hard to be MVP of the league when youve only been the best player on your own team 3-4 years in your 14 yr career.
But, a 5-time NBA World Champion.
The bigger question is why Shaq only has 1 mvp
....& only 4 NBA World Championships.
Most of which, were not done as the MVP of his team. Much less the league.
Still & all Bryant has 5 NBA World Championships, whilst Daddy and your guy Duncan have but 4.
Let us proceed...
And you still have none.
Oh, contrare', I've got 16 NBA World Championships.
Take a picture of your rings and post 'em. And make sure to frame them with a piece of paper that reads Culburn from Spurstalk or something like that.
LOL weak era? With Shaq, duncan, KG, Dirk and now Lebron as 3 of the all-time greats he was competing with MVP's for? This may be the stupidest thread of the many of the summer. Kobe may or may not be an all-time top 10 player ....but if he isnt, it's not due to lack of compe ion or MVP's. hakeem has only 1 and he is one of the greatest centers in NBA history ditto for shaq. And big men can impact the game in so many more ways that an SG. Plus the MVP means crap ...many think Lebron won't win MVP (look at the GM poll) even though he is the most dominant player.if he never wins another MVP award does that change that fact? Kobe wont win it even though he is the best player from a skill stand-point. Doesnt matter we all really know who the best players are regardless of MVP's ...but nice try.
In general Kobe had very strong teams, and when he scored 50 on everyone he had a JV team to work with.
...Shaq and Duncan. Dirk and KG are good but all time greats.
Have you looked at the NBA all time greats that can found in the 90's?
great question
LMAO@ this gif...
Dirk may be the best international player in NBA history ...
KG was the first great HS to NBA talent of his era. He blazed the path for Kobe, Lebron etc. KG Put up great numbers was great defender and was the MVP (deserving) when he won it. I am not saying that Dirk or KG are the equals of duncan shaq or Kobe, but you asked the question and i answered.
The only other legit claim to MVP Kobe had, was one of Nash's. I agree the award is flawed, and the criteria, inconsistent, but the winners (including Nash) have been worthy candidates even if debatable.
BTW The 90's was great because many of the greats MJ, malone etc STARTED in the mid 80's which was a FAR better decade. Historically Mostr of the 90's greats started in the mid to late 80's ...
Why the would you use logic in Spurstalk?
I'll answer this troll thread seriously...
-Kobe earlier in his career had the problem of playing with probably the most dominant player in this era of NBA basketball. It would have been tough enough had Shaq been on a different team to challenge him for MVPs (despite Shaq only getting 1), but because Kobe played on the same team, his ability to shine individually was even tougher playing next to Shaq.
-Additionally early on in his career, going back to the mid 1990s, Kobe was stuck in an era of Jordan (won an MVP in 1998), Shaq as already mentioned, and Duncan. Three guys that should go down as top 10 players of all time in the history of the league. I think it would be similar to what Oscar Robertson had to deal with in the early 1960s when not only did he put up a triple-double season, but his first five seasons were all pretty close to triple-double seasons while averaging right around 30 PPG. Ridiculous. Except that was a time where both Bill Russell and Wilt Chamberlain were winning League MVPs. Oscar might be lucky to have won 1. Early in his career, Kobe faced a similar hill to climb.
-The MVP has become a team accomplishment award. I believe Kareem back in the early or mid 1970s was the last MVP from a team that wasn't a top 2 or top 3 team in a conference. The award often goes to the player with the most individual season on one of the top 4-5 teams in the league, what probably are considered teams with legitimate chances to contend for a championship that year. Statistically, Kobe put up the most impressive individual season in 2005-06 with his scoring but the Lakers were the 7th seed in the Western Conference.
-And it's been seen in recent years that the MVP award also seems to be a product of an agenda where you could argue not just one but both of Steve Nash's MVP trophies could be argued were generously awarded to him. And for Shaq to only have 1 MVP while Nash has 2 is pretty hard to understand. That's a different debate that's already been discussed at length.
At the end of the day, Kobe probably only deserved 1 MVP and probably deserved it, and arguably not even the season he won it. But to me, that doesn't mean a player with only 1 MVP isn't a top 10 player. Do Karl Malone's 2 MVPs and Steve Nash's 2 MVPs mean those two are top 10 players in the history of the NBA? Does Moses Malone's 3 MVPs mean he's better than Tim Duncan with 2 MVPs or Shaq with 1 MVP? And Kobe isn't the only great who might be a top 10 or top 15 player with only 1 League MVP. Both Hakeem and as mentioned Shaq only have 1. Both are widely considered top 10 players or on the cusp of being top 10 players.
I realize this thread was just trolling trying to bait butt hurt Laker fans. But I figured I'd answer it seriously anyway.
Please.
Yer just as much a troll as the next asshole, Jammie.
The OP thinks your ruining his fun.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
