Would any of the people who don't want Malone take Kobe on the Spurs? It's purely hypothetical, but I'd like to know. I rather have Malone than Kobe.
Neither! Kobe and Karl made their beds - let them lie in them! I can't believe Pop said he'd hold spot on the team for Malone. This is like being a high school geek who invites the starting quarterback to his party. The jock says no, but the geek says he'll have a pizza waiting in case he changes his mind.
The Spurs are not geeks, we're two-time NBA Champions! We don't need that jock to make our party a success...
Worked last year, didn't it?
Hits a little close to home?
no to both Karl and Kobe, but for slightly different reasons.
No!
Where did you get that?
Hilarious! Drama Queen? Do you have one with Kobe's head?
You know what I'm beginning to think? I'm beginning to think that the Lakers are hungry for media attention - no matter how adverse.
They're not going to be in the line up for the crown, but they're so used to being the darlings of the media that it doesn't matter what's written about them, just so long as somebody knows they exist.
Bad press; good press! Any press is our kinda press!
Has anybody talked to the all-star cast of fans? Were they there for Kobe, Karl, Shaq, Phil Jackson? Could it be they were there because the Lakers were looking like a team that would control the NBA long enough for them to attach their sorry selves for the exposure?
The Hollywood crowd isn't all that admirable, when you come to think of it. $12 million or more for pretending to be another person (things we did when we were children). I'll bet that everybody on this forum could act for that amount of money.
If it absolutely had to be one or the other, I would pick Malone in a second.
I hate Kobe Bryant more than any other player in the NBA. Shaq is number two. Malone is number three.
For me it has to do what each player has "done" to the Spurs. While both have been one of the main reasons the Spurs were knocked out of the playoffs, they have a significantly different history within the confines of Spurs lore. In terms of gameplay Malone has been one of the dirtiest players I've seen play against the Spurs. IMO Bryant has never been a dirty player and moreso has not been a poor sport toward the Spurs. Taking into account the players on the court and their game only, I would take bryant over malone. Now add to that, Malone's quest to gravytrain a ring and forget about it.
Look, don't blame me if you don't like the fact I'm not opposed to the Spurs signing Malone.
Blame this guy:
Shaq is more honorable persone then most in NBA. If you hate him for doing his job against your team you are an idiot. The reason i don't like malone is the same as i don't like kobe. He never was team player and he never ever would trade his bad stats for team win. Spurs are complete oposite of that and you should consider yourself lucky that they are like that.
If you call honorable stating you have slept with women on national television when in truth you had not.
I'd take Malone over Kobe for sure, and while the Spurs could use Karl, I would still boo his ass relentlessly when he touched the ball.
i think we are all on the same page here. We would rather pick Malone just because kobe is an asshole and everyone hates his arrogant Laker ass.
I would even take Kobe if he offered to sign a contract for 1 dollar in 10 years.
that's right, screw kobe.
I hate Kobe mostly because he's a rival. I didn't want him last year because I liked what we had, but I'd take him in a second over Malone. The only player in the league I've ever hated as much as Malone is Vernon Maxwell.
I'd take Steve Smith back as a starter before Malone.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
