Reply With Quote
Forward vs Guard
Forward vs Guard
Flash over Substance is not a valid statement and disingenuous at best. If you're comparing Timmy vs Vince Carter then the statement might make sense. Kobe was flashy but by his productivity alone has proven to be more substantive than Duncan. The numbers speak for themselves. Duncan shoots a career 5% better only because dunks as a big man are higher percentage shots. The numbers I posted are proof that Kobe has more substance over Duncan. To say by default its always wise to choose a big man is false reasoning. If I'm not mistaken Sam Bowie was picked over MJ.
I know you want to try and seem fair to Duncan but fact is Kobe lived to torture Duncan and the Spurs during those years if he wasn't there Duncan might have eight rings and Shaq would be irrelevant today.
Kool can you bring up the stats for Kobe,Shaq, Reggie Miller, and Jalen Rose for the 2000 finals.
Bowie picked over Jordan, and Oden chosen over Durant only proves my statement, big men are valued more. That doesn't make it right every time. For every reason you can say MJ i> Wilt you can say Wilt > MJ. That's because they play different positions.
Of course Kobe's 4-2 record over Duncan will add fuel to his fire, but then again Russell only lost once to Wilt, but Chamberlain still dominated him, he just didn't have the supporting cast. If I recall Duncan dominated in 1999 and 2003, but Kobe killed the Spurs in 2001, 2002, 2004, and 2008. his best performance was 2001, but in 2002, Kobe closed them out in the fourth quarter in all 4 wins. Who got double teamed with 0.4 remaining in game 5, 2004? It wasn't Fisher.
I don't think the Spurs would have had 8 rings if no Kobe and/or Shaq, one more at most.
2000: No, Duncan injured.
2001: Yes, Spurs would have killed Sixers
2002: No, Kings would have beat them
2004: No, T-Wolves had HCA and Pistons would have beaten them, they weren't the same team in 2005.
2008: Celtics would have prevailed.
It's possible the Spurs don't get their 2 les in 2005 and 2007 if Shaq stayed. That's a whole new debate, but Lakers dominance over the Spurs last decade suggests the Lakers have a great chance to win one more le themselves. I say if it happens, it does in 2005, revenge over Detroit.
Conversely, the Spurs may have cost the Lakers a 2003 le. Do the Lakers beat the Mavs, a third straight series w/o HCA? If so, the 2003 le is a cakewalk versus the Nets.
Bottom line, is, the argument is still an argument, but as I alluded earlier, it's one that Kobe will win in future debates when both are retired. 5 les over an 11 year span is better than 4 in 9. Magic had 5 les in 9 years, Bird had 3 in 6. Magic > Bird, most believe. It doesn't matter that Kobe is considered second banana to Shaq, and later won two with Gasol, or that Duncan had Robinson, Parker, and Ginobili. Those arguments talk about teammates, not players. You gave the stats, those will speak.
Allow me:
Kool can you bring up the stats for Kobe,Shaq, Reggie Miller, and Jalen Rose for the 2000 finals.
Shaq: 38 / 16.7 / 2 / 2.7
Miller: 24.3 / 2.7 / 3.7 / .3
Rose: 23 / 4.5 / 3 / .3
And as for Kobe Bryant, who is more on par with Austin Croshere:
Bryant: 15.6 / 4.2 / 4.5 / 1.5 on 36.7%
Kobe's stats in 2000 finals are misleading. He only played in 5 games and in game 2, he played 9 minutes and had two points. He left the game with a sprained ankle. He returned in game 4 and closed it out in OT when Shaq fouled out. Of course Shaq dominated the finals stats, who was there to guard him? Feed Shaq Feed Shaq! That makes a finals win. Go check the real finals, the WCF in 2000-2002. Shaq had his troubles there, and Kobe was the difference maker.Allow me:
Shaq: 38 / 16.7 / 2 / 2.7
Miller: 24.3 / 2.7 / 3.7 / .3
Rose: 23 / 4.5 / 3 / .3
And as for Kobe Bryant, who is more on par with Austin Croshere:
Bryant: 15.6 / 4.2 / 4.5 / 1.5 on 36.7%
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
The stats are adjusted for 5 games
Shaq: 38 / 16.7 / 2 / 2.7
36.7% player being the difference maker.
The stats are adjusted for 5 games
Shaq: 38 / 16.7 / 2 / 2.7
Last edited by Daddy_Of_All_Trolls; 06-26-2011 at 02:46 PM.
Looks to me Kobe wasn't passing the ball.
Speaking of game 7, Kobe once shot a whopping 6-24 in a finals game 7.
Oh 2002 WCF is the one they cheated for the Lakers and they still barely won the series. Is that what you are talking about?
7 assists isn't passing the ball? 11 rebounds in full compe ion with Shaq and the Blazers defense isn't dominant? Who won the game where Kobe shot 6-24? How many rebounds did he get? Don't tell me Shaq couldn't score against the Blazers, he was 14-25 in game 1.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/...005200LAL.html
Point is, when it all came down to do or die in game 7 vs, Portland, Shaq was 2nd banana to Kobe and it kills your arguments about Kobe needing Shaq to win. Shaq needed Kobe just as much!
You can't prove it's cheating. Barely winning and winning are still winning. Spurs barely won game 5 in 2005 finals. What's your point? Kobe did very well in the 2002 WCF, and Shaq needed him.
Yeah and he was 5-9 in game 7. Maybe they should have passed the ball to him more.
Clearly not because of Kobe.
Everybody knows that PPG, Assts and rbds of 5 playoffs series is the best way to determine a player's worth. Who cares about blocks, steals, field goal percentage, efficiency, defense and the thousands of other games played by those players?
One more thing to factor in (though morons on here, look at it as a negative) is the fact that Kobe has not only 1 more ring but 3 MORE Finals appearances.
The reason this is important, they both played in the same era in the same confrence and Kobe made it to the Finals two other times and lost with both Shaq and pau as team-mates.
Kobe is no Mj, but his career compares favorably with Magic.
Magic won in: 1980. 1982, 1985 and the repeat of 87-88.
He also LOST in in the Finals in 1983,1984, 1989 and 91
Magic won 5 out of 9 ... Kobe 5 of 7
I would take either over 4 of 4 anyday.
In Magic's first 12 years he made the Finals 9 times. That gives him the edge not only over Bird but Kobe and Duncan. Heck, a strong case can be made for Magic being the greatest winner since Russell other than MJ and even that can be argued.
Kobe's 5 of 9 in his career so far, puts him above Duncan (slightly) just below Magic and a few more notches behind MJ. And dont bring up Horry here. Kobe has rings, MVPS of all flavors, stats and head to head all in his favor over Duncan, not just rings.
On Duncan's side, he has advanced stats, his better Finals numbers and the fact though he had some great teams, he never played with anayone as good Shaq. As good as david was he is not as good as Shaq was ESPECIALLY the 2000 version.
Again for me, it is very close. Unlike BR and others, I have no issues with duncan as the greatet PF or even best big man of his era ...just a shade ahead of Shaq.
But best overall player, post MJ? That is Kobe.
BTW I Thought Lebron had a shot of taking that le but last year's Finals made me realize he aint ready yet.
Look at the stats, except for game 1, Kobe was close to Shaq. They did pass the ball to Shaq, he just couldn't get it going, go watch the replay.
Yeah and he was 5-9 in game 7. Maybe they should have passed the ball to him more.
Clearly not because of Kobe.
Just because Kobe went 6-12 at free throws and Shaq went 8-12 doesn't make Kobe any less clutch that game. You completely ignore Kobe's lead in assists and rebounds. The rebound lead really has to sting.
I can't believe how naive you are. If you want to believe Kobe isn't all that great, fine. I don't have him in my top 10 all time and he's far from my favorite Lakers player. I like Jerry West myself. However, you have bought into all the arguments against Kobe and use selective memory to pick stats that make your case. The fact is, there are less publicized stats where Kobe comes out just fine, and now that you have seen them, you still ignore them. Kobe deserves a lot of criticism for things he's done, like throwing Shaq or teammates under the bus, but being second banana and not leading the Lakers to 3 les is stupid. Players don't win les, teams do. No one devalues either Kareem or Magic for their 5 rings together, and no one takes away from Bird that he needed McHale and Parish. Kobe has 5 rings, and his team has 5.
Don't be foolish, you are helping Koolaid make his case because I am showing here what you guys don't want to hear. Probably you didn't even know it, you just bought into the hype against Kobe.
nice fair and balanced post...but I've given Duncan credit many times even while facing the wrath of my brother Lakaluva who is a staunch Duncan hater.
Duncan is lucky Shaq was lazy because if Shaq came to play like Kobe did the only le the Spurs would have is that * 1999 le.
Rings count is a good argument to determine if a team is better than another, is re ed to use that argument to compare players though, specially when the player you're advocating for wasn't the best player in his own team for most of those rings.
thanks.nice fair and balanced post...
Duncan is lucky Shaq was lazy because if Shaq came to play like Kobe did the only le the Spurs would have is that * 1999 le.
Another point no one seems to want to bring up is a comparison of Shaq's 3 Lakers finals wins to 3 of Tim's finals wins. No one could guard Shaq in those finals 2000-02. Same is true in 1999, 2003, and 2007, no one coud guard Tim either. All weak teams, probably weaker than what the Lakers faced. Yet in 2007, TP got the finals MVP. Does this raise the stock of both Shaq and Tim higher than it should? Possibly, that's why examination of the defacto NBA finals, the WCF needs to be looked at in 1999-2003, and apparantly 2007 as well. Kobe's two finals losses were to two of the greatest defensive teams of all time, the 2004 Pistons and the 2008 Celtics. I can't remember when the Spurs lost to a great defensive team, or even played one outside of 2005. Aside from the Spurs defensive juggernauts, there hasn't really been a long sustained defensive team outside of the Pistons of 2003-2008.
Anyway, it all comes down to how hard it is to compare players of different positions. But the harder people try to take Kobe down, the sillier the arguments become. I mean, if you criticize LeBron for fading in the 4th quarter of the finals, you have to applaud Kobe for his 2002 4th quarters against the Spurs. I have already shown who won the critical game 7 of the 2000 WCF, it was Kobe with the game MVP. A 2001 WCF player MVP goes to Kobe as well. 2002 is a debate, Shaq or Kobe.
Hopefully, your thread le is prophetic, the debate should stop. Opinions will vary, but the facts, as I have shown, aren't exactly what people thought they were.
One more thing....Go back and watch Game 1 in 2001 WCF between the Spurs and Lakers... Kobe scored 15 baskets in the paint, the paint that Duncan was supposed to be protecting. During 7 of those he scored directly over or around Duncan himself (including back to back posters in the 3rd quarter.) That's not even keeping track of all the times he went into the paint and got free throws or found an open man. When Duncan and Kobe went up against each other, Kobe went directly at Duncan in the painted area and regularly came out successful. I could understand if Kobe was just killing them with jumpers but the majority of his damage came right in the area that Duncan was in charge of. I don't think that can be overlooked.
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.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
