Kobe Was Ridiculous

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
51,330
Reputation
19,666
Daps
203,882
Reppin
the ether
the thread is about Kobe. someone brought up lebron and this nikka posted a photo of jordan :laugh:

nikka the Sentry of stanning


OP brought up Jordan too, dumbass. And four people brought up Bron before I did. A Kobestan brought him up first, for literally zero reason, and he blatantly lied.

As I've pointed out many times before, I never start these stan wars, I just respond to them. If you don't want a stan war, then why not point the finger at the ones starting them?
 

Sunalmighty

Superstar
Joined
Mar 1, 2013
Messages
7,954
Reputation
1,705
Daps
19,149
Reppin
Oakland, Ca
OP brought up Jordan too, dumbass. And four people brought up Bron before I did. A Kobestan brought him up first, for literally zero reason, and he blatantly lied.

As I've pointed out many times before, I never start these stan wars, I just respond to them. If you don't want a stan war, then why not point the finger at the ones starting the
:laugh: chill god, i'm fukking with you
 

LurkGod

Rookie
Joined
Mar 11, 2022
Messages
116
Reputation
10
Daps
459
Reppin
Harlem
Kobestans constantly say he Kobe has 5 rings and deserves just as much credit as Shaq does. They count all those rings just as much as if he had been leading the team. They say his 5 rings are superior to other players who have 3 or 4 rings, even if those other players were the team leader and Finals MVP for more of theirs. That's what it means to give him FULL CREDIT for the rings.

That's why I say all-or-nothing ring counting is dumb. Kobe's contribution in 2000 (and the other years, but most obviously 2000) was clearly not nearly as important as Shaq's contribution. Yeah he went off some games, just like Wiggins went off some games last year, or Middleton the year before that. Yes, he played a big part in some wins, just like any good role player does. But he wasn't the main reason they won, not even close, and talking like his 78 total points in the 2000 Finals were just as meaningful as another player who put up more than that in 2 games alone is a joke.

You have to see the lack of logic for "all or nothing" ring counting. You full well know that Klay, Middleton, AD, Siakim, Kyrie, Wade, Terry, Pau, etc. don't get the same credit for their rings that Steph, Giannis, LeBron, Kawhi, Duncan, Dirk, and Kobe got. It's obvious that if you have to "ring count" at all, only the best player is going to receive the full credit. But suddenly when Kobe isn't the best player, you want the rules to change for him alone.

:childplease:

Kobe wasn’t no damn role player. Just a couple posts back you brought up him being an all star (which was only because he was popular, not because he was that caliber of player yet) in 98 to share blame in a sweep but now, two years later he’s just a “good role player?”

Kobe was one of the only reasons they were even in the damn finals because he cooked the Blazers in game 7, that’s not role player shyt. His Finals numbers that year were skewed because Jalen Rose intentionally injured his damn ankle but even still he closed the pivotal game out when Shaq fouled out.

Saying Kobe was a role player during the three peat is crazy talk :martin:
 

Stick Up Kid

Veteran
WOAT
Joined
Aug 29, 2012
Messages
30,501
Reputation
-14,392
Daps
148,504
Reppin
Newark NJ
OP brought up Jordan too, dumbass. And four people brought up Bron before I did. A Kobestan brought him up first, for literally zero reason, and he blatantly lied.

As I've pointed out many times before, I never start these stan wars, I just respond to them. If you don't want a stan war, then why not point the finger at the ones starting them?

I never brought up Jordan
 

Black Mamba

Superstar
Joined
Mar 11, 2022
Messages
17,572
Reputation
2,820
Daps
50,929
Kobestans constantly say he Kobe has 5 rings and deserves just as much credit as Shaq does. They count all those rings just as much as if he had been leading the team. They say his 5 rings are superior to other players who have 3 or 4 rings, even if those other players were the team leader and Finals MVP for more of theirs. That's what it means to give him FULL CREDIT for the rings.

That's why I say all-or-nothing ring counting is dumb. Kobe's contribution in 2000 (and the other years, but most obviously 2000) was clearly not nearly as important as Shaq's contribution. Yeah he went off some games, just like Wiggins went off some games last year, or Middleton the year before that. Yes, he played a big part in some wins, just like any good role player does. But he wasn't the main reason they won, not even close, and talking like his 78 total points in the 2000 Finals were just as meaningful as another player who put up more than that in 2 games alone is a joke.

You have to see the lack of logic for "all or nothing" ring counting. You full well know that Klay, Middleton, AD, Siakim, Kyrie, Wade, Terry, Pau, etc. don't get the same credit for their rings that Steph, Giannis, LeBron, Kawhi, Duncan, Dirk, and Kobe got. It's obvious that if you have to "ring count" at all, only the best player is going to receive the full credit. But suddenly when Kobe isn't the best player, you want the rules to change for him alone.


:mjtf:
Oh man when Bron retires we finna put you tarred in feathers and other shyt then in a cannon to launch your ass off this Lakeshow :pacspit:
 

LexDiamonds

Superstar
Joined
May 26, 2012
Messages
3,669
Reputation
935
Daps
15,158
Reppin
Toronto
:childplease:

Kobe wasn’t no damn role player. Just a couple posts back you brought up him being an all star (which was only because he was popular, not because he was that caliber of player yet) in 98 to share blame in a sweep but now, two years later he’s just a “good role player?”

Kobe was one of the only reasons they were even in the damn finals because he cooked the Blazers in game 7, that’s not role player shyt. His Finals numbers that year were skewed because Jalen Rose intentionally injured his damn ankle but even still he closed the pivotal game out when Shaq fouled out.

Saying Kobe was a role player during the three peat is crazy talk :martin:
2000 NBA finals

Shaq - 38ppg, 16.7 rebounds, 2.7 blks on 61.1 fg%

Kobe - 15.6ppg, 4.6 rebounds, 4.2 assists on 36.7 fg% and 20% from three

Shaq averaged more rebounds than Kobe averaged points :picard:
 

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
51,330
Reputation
19,666
Daps
203,882
Reppin
the ether
:childplease:

Kobe wasn’t no damn role player. Just a couple posts back you brought up him being an all star (which was only because he was popular, not because he was that caliber of player yet) in 98 to share blame in a sweep but now, two years later he’s just a “good role player?”

Kobe was one of the only reasons they were even in the damn finals because he cooked the Blazers in game 7, that’s not role player shyt. His Finals numbers that year were skewed because Jalen Rose intentionally injured his damn ankle but even still he closed the pivotal game out when Shaq fouled out.

Saying Kobe was a role player during the three peat is crazy talk :martin:


Doesn't matter what he did beforehand, in the 2000 Finals he was a role player. Averaged 15-4-4, come on now.

The fact that you make a big deal about Game 7 of the WCF (25 points on 9-19 shooting) just makes your point worse. Yes, a role player can have 25 in a big game. Didn't Gabe Vincent just light up the Celtics for 29 in Game 2 while Caleb Martin pulled up for 25? Didn't Derrick White leda all scorers in Game 5 with 24 while Marcus Smart was second with 23?

Earlier in the WCF, Kobe scored just 13 points on 4-9 shooting in Game 1 and 12 points on 2-9 shooting in Game 2. He had 18 points on 5-15 shooting in Game 4, 17 points on 4-13 shooting in Game 5. That's MOST of the games in the WCF where he put up role player numbers, not star numbers, and he wasn't even injured yet. Then Game 1 of the Finals, still before the injury, he puts up just 14 points on 6-13 shooting.

So in 5 of the last 8 games before the injury, he put up weak ass efforts on offense and it didn't even matter because the Lakers won most of those games anyway. Then after he got injured he only reached double figures twice in the last five games, and in one of those he had to shoot 8-27 to do it.

Sorry if that's nowhere near the same planet that Shaq was on.
 

kdslittlebro

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Jun 14, 2018
Messages
22,351
Reputation
2,880
Daps
74,236
A thread about a deceased legend and his best clutch moments turned into this

:francis:

kobe-leave-early-kobe-embarass.gif
Weirdo nikkas can’t walk and chew bubble gum at the same time. It’s not that difficult to give props to more than one player, but mf’s stay with that zero-sum mindset. Any props for one player means you gotta balance it out by hating on another
 

LurkGod

Rookie
Joined
Mar 11, 2022
Messages
116
Reputation
10
Daps
459
Reppin
Harlem
Doesn't matter what he did beforehand, in the 2000 Finals he was a role player. Averaged 15-4-4, come on now.

The fact that you make a big deal about Game 7 of the WCF (25 points on 9-19 shooting) just makes your point worse. Yes, a role player can have 25 in a big game. Didn't Gabe Vincent just light up the Celtics for 29 in Game 2 while Caleb Martin pulled up for 25? Didn't Derrick White leda all scorers in Game 5 with 24 while Marcus Smart was second with 23?

Earlier in the WCF, Kobe scored just 13 points on 4-9 shooting in Game 1 and 12 points on 2-9 shooting in Game 2. He had 18 points on 5-15 shooting in Game 4, 17 points on 4-13 shooting in Game 5. That's MOST of the games in the WCF where he put up role player numbers, not star numbers, and he wasn't even injured yet. Then Game 1 of the Finals, still before the injury, he puts up just 14 points on 6-13 shooting.

So in 5 of the last 8 games before the injury, he put up weak ass efforts on offense and it didn't even matter because the Lakers won most of those games anyway. Then after he got injured he only reached double figures twice in the last five games, and in one of those he had to shoot 8-27 to do it.

Sorry if that's nowhere near the same planet that Shaq was on.

Oh so when they got swept he was an all star and when they won the chip he was a “role player”.

My bad I thought we were having a serious discussion :unimpressed:
 

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
51,330
Reputation
19,666
Daps
203,882
Reppin
the ether
:mjtf:
Oh man when Bron retires we finna put you tarred in feathers and other shyt then in a cannon to launch your ass off this Lakeshow :pacspit:


But zero heat for the guy who shyt on Bron way worse, right at the beginning of the thread, with zero context or motivation. It's okay for a "Laker" fan to derail a Kobe thread just to randomly make up lies about Lebron for no reason, but for a Lebron fan to respond to those lies, that's too much.

Y'all keep proving you're Kobe fans, not Laker fans.




Weirdo nikkas can’t walk and chew bubble gum at the same time. It’s not that difficult to give props to more than one player, but mf’s stay with that zero-sum mindset. Any props for one player means you gotta balance it out by hating on another


How many people aren't reading the thread to see that a KOBE FAN shyt on Bron first before any Bron fans had even entered the thread? :heh:

If no one had posted Bron hate, I wouldn't have posted in the thread at all.
 

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
51,330
Reputation
19,666
Daps
203,882
Reppin
the ether
Oh so when they got swept he was an all star and when they won the chip he was a “role player”.

My bad I thought we were having a serious discussion :unimpressed:

I've been under no illusions that any of you are trying to have a serious discussion. :mjlol:

I pointed out that Kobe was an all-star and the team's 2nd/3rd option in those years to counter the posters who were claiming that Kobe was irrelevant and losing to the Jazz was all on Shaq alone. Of course he was still a role player, but he was an important enough role player that if he plays like shyt, he deserves some of the blame. ANYONE who plays poorly deserves blame if their poor play hurt the team.

FWIW, Eddie Jones and Nick van Exel were role players too, despite also making the all-star team. And both of them deserve blame for losing too, especially van Exel.

I think players should get the amount of blame corresponding to how much they hurt the team, and the amount of credit corresponding to how much they help the team. I think all-or-nothing is stupid (especially when it's not even correlated to how well they play), and I think ring-counting is stupid. I've always been consistent on that.
 

A Pimp Named Slickback

Superstar
Supporter
Joined
Apr 22, 2018
Messages
9,570
Reputation
5,070
Daps
43,187
Reppin
Woodcrest
Weirdo nikkas can’t walk and chew bubble gum at the same time. It’s not that difficult to give props to more than one player, but mf’s stay with that zero-sum mindset. Any props for one player means you gotta balance it out by hating on another
That one fukking nerd was like

"Actually statistics prove that Kobe was, in fact, not the most clutch athlete ever! No need to lie about him!
:skip: "

Who raised these men?
:what:
 

LurkGod

Rookie
Joined
Mar 11, 2022
Messages
116
Reputation
10
Daps
459
Reppin
Harlem
I've been under no illusions that any of you are trying to have a serious discussion. :mjlol:

I pointed out that Kobe was an all-star and the team's 2nd/3rd option in those years to counter the posters who were claiming that Kobe was irrelevant and losing to the Jazz was all on Shaq alone. Of course he was still a role player, but he was an important enough role player that if he plays like shyt, he deserves some of the blame. ANYONE who plays poorly deserves blame if their poor play hurt the team.

FWIW, Eddie Jones and Nick van Exel were role players too, despite also making the all-star team. And both of them deserve blame for losing too, especially van Exel.

I think players should get the amount of blame corresponding to how much they hurt the team, and the amount of credit corresponding to how much they help the team. I think all-or-nothing is stupid (especially when it's not even correlated to how well they play), and I think ring-counting is stupid. I've always been consistent on that.

You compared Kobe having 25 points 11 rebounds and 7 assists in a game 7 comeback win to some damn Gabe Vincent. You’re just as disingenuous as anybody else :unimpressed:
 
Top