Trojan 24
Veteran
We really need to stop comparing Icons to a guy who's playing in a city that doesn't care if he left tomorrow 
Kobe Was Ridiculous
- Thread starter Stick Up Kid
- Start date
2001 VS PORTLAND-
SHAQ: 27-15-3
KOBE: 25-4-8
2001 VS SACRAMENTO-
SHAQ: 33-17-2
KOBE: 35-9-4
2001 VS SAN ANTONIO-
SHAQ: 27-13-3
KOBE: 33-7-7
2002 VS PORTLAND-
SHAQ: 26-11-4
KOBE: 26-6-5
2002 VS SAN ANTONIO-
SHAQ: 21-12-3
KOBE: 26-5-5
2002 VS SACRAMENTO-
SHAQ: 30-14-2
KOBE: 27-6-4
CLEARLY NOT SIDEKICK NUMBERS, AND WHEN U TAKE INTO ACCOUNT DEFENSE, KOBE WAS OBVIOUSLY THE BETTER PLAYER VS THE CONTENDING TEAMS THOSE YEARS…. BUT U CONSCIOUSLY CHOSE TO AVOID POSTING ALL THESE NUMBERS, BECAUSE U KNOW U CAN DISINGENUOUSLY MISLEAD BY NITPICKING NUMBERS TO MAKE KOBE LOOK WORSE
YOUR SCHTICK HAS BEEN EXPOSED LONG AGO.. I SUGGEST U FALL BACK BECAUSE AT THIS POINT U JUST CONTINUE MAKIN YOURSELF LOOK
WORSE N WORSE BY THE POST
VVVV
CLEARLY THOSE ARE BRON>KOBE POSTERS… EVEN IF THEYRE NOT BRON GROUPIES
SORRY, UNLIKE U, I DONT HAVE HARD COPY DATA FOLDERS ON EACH POSTER, SO ITS HARD FOR ME TO REMEMBER WHO IS AND WHO ISNT A LEBRON FANATIC
BUT BECAUSE OF CATS LIKE U, WHEN SOMEONE POSTS KOBE SLANDER WE AUTOMATICALLY ASSUME ITS A BRON GROUPIE
Every player who dislikes Kobe is pretty much a "Bron >Kobe poster" by default. So should we call every Bron hater an MJ stan now too?
You lied and called them Bron groupies when they clearly aren't. And you used that to justify Kobestans randomly shytting on Bron when no one had mentioned him at all.
You're just affirming what I already said. Y'all are so fukking insecure about LeBron that if anyone shyts on Kobe, you immediately lash out at Bron even if he's not involved.
But now that you realize you were wrong, let's go back to the original claim. You said I was "being fake" and "disingenuous bron slurping nonsense" just because I said that Kobestans brought Bron into the conversation first, and Bron stans only replied. Now that you realize I was right, will that change your assessment?
Of course not.
Every player who dislikes Kobe is pretty much a "Bron >Kobe poster" by default. So should we call every Bron hater an MJ stan now too?
You lied and called them Bron groupies when they clearly aren't. And you used that to justify Kobestans randomly shytting on Bron when no one had mentioned him at all.
You're just affirming what I already said. Y'all are so fukking insecure about LeBron that if anyone shyts on Kobe, you immediately lash out at Bron even if he's not involved.
But now that you realize you were wrong, let's go back to the original claim. You said I was "being fake" and "disingenuous bron slurping nonsense" just because I said that Kobestans brought Bron into the conversation first, and Bron stans only replied. Now that you realize I was right, will that change your assessment?
Of course not.
LEARN HOW TO DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN LYING AND MAKING ASSUMPTIONS WEIRDO
LIKE I SAID, YOU CANNOT BLAME A KOBE FAN FOR THINKING KOBE SLANDER IS ROOTED IN BRON GROUPIEISM.. BLAME YASELF FOR THAT
AND YES, U WERE BEIN DISINGENUOUS.. BECAUSE U TRIED TO ACT LIKE BRON WAS RANDOMLY BROUGHT UP WHEN CLEARLY THE POSTER WHO BROUGHT HIM UP THOUGHT HE RESPONDING TO A BRON GROUPIE SLANDERING KOBE WHICH 99% OF THE TIME IS THE CASE
You didn't list the contending teams though, you listed some random teams and left off most of the main contenders.
The 2000 Blazers, 2000 Pacers, 2001 Sixers, and 2002 Kings were the clearest contenders during the threepeat, plus the 2002 Nets deserve a mention by being in the Finals where anything can happen. And Shaq was the better player in ALL five of those series. It ain't even fukking close.
You only listed 1 of those, a series in which Kobe was clearly outplayed, then you added a bunch of series against teams that weren't contenders at all.
lol, Shaq was far more important on defense than Kobe was. He was the rim protector averaging 2.5 blocks/game every one of those postseasons, he had better defensive advanced stats every year, and he actually controlled his assignment in the big matches as well as keeping a decent lid on drives. He had 16 blocks in the Indiana Finals, 17 blocks in the Philly Finals, and 17 blocks in the Kings WCF. It's not surprise that the Blazers, Pacers, Sixers, and Kings only made series competitive by launching a ton of jump shots.
Kobe, meanwhile, couldn't stop Steve Smith or Reggie Miller or Jalen Rose or Allen Iverson or Mike Bibby. Who was the best offensive wing he shut down or even seriously limited during that 2000-2002 run? He had flashes but he wasn't consistently good on that end, by 2001 he wasn't even deserving those all-defensive selections. Remember what Phil Jackson had to say?
“Kobe’s defense, to be accurate, has faltered in recent years, despite his presence on the league’s all-defensive team. The voters have been seduced by his remarkable athleticism and spectacular steals, but he hasn’t played sound, fundamental defense. Mesmerized by the ball, he’s gambled too frequently, putting us out of position, forcing rotations that leave a man wide open, and doesn’t keep his feet on the ground.”
I chose to avoid posting meaningless 1st-round series and easy sweeps full of blowouts? Of course I did.
You were the one who tried to claim this was about "contending series", then you posted a bunch of numbers against shytty teams that had no chance at the title.
Shaq had better regular season #'s every year. Shaq had better postseason #'s every year. Shaq had better Finals #'s every year. Shaq had better advanced stats every year. Shaq had more MVP votes every year. Shaq had a UNANIMOUS Finals MVP vote every year. Claiming Kobe was better in any of those years is an impossible argument by any metric.
And the final point is, y'all are the ones who tried to make this "rings" and claim the title is the only thing that matters. If that's all that matters, then the Finals are it. Claiming the "real Finals" shyt is silly anyways, because no one thought the 2004 Pistons or 2011 Mavs were the worthy contender, yet we all saw what happened. If the ring is all that matters, then how you perform when the ring is on the line should be what matters the most. And Shaq clearly the dominant player in all three of those situations AND in the "real Finals" like 2000 WCF and 2002 WCF too.
Kobe 2000-2002, as a whole, had a similar impact in Finals as Pippen in 1991-1993. I proved that easily and you're still avoiding it.
You didn't list the contending teams though, you listed some random teams and left off most of the main contenders.
The 2000 Blazers, 2000 Pacers, 2001 Sixers, and 2002 Kings were the clearest contenders during the threepeat, plus the 2002 Nets deserve a mention by being in the Finals where anything can happen. And Shaq was the better player in ALL five of those series. It ain't even fukking close.
You only listed 1 of those, a series in which Kobe was clearly outplayed, then you added a bunch of series against teams that weren't contenders at all.
lol, Shaq was far more important on defense than Kobe was. He was the rim protector averaging 2.5 blocks/game every one of those postseasons, he had better defensive advanced stats every year, and he actually controlled his assignment in the big matches as well as keeping a decent lid on drives. He had 16 blocks in the Indiana Finals, 17 blocks in the Philly Finals, and 17 blocks in the Kings WCF. It's not surprise that the Blazers, Pacers, Sixers, and Kings only made series competitive by launching a ton of jump shots.
Kobe, meanwhile, couldn't stop Steve Smith or Reggie Miller or Jalen Rose or Allen Iverson or Mike Bibby. Who was the best offensive wing he shut down or even seriously limited during that 2000-2002 run? He had flashes but he wasn't consistently good on that end, by 2001 he wasn't even deserving those all-defensive selections. Remember what Phil Jackson had to say?
“Kobe’s defense, to be accurate, has faltered in recent years, despite his presence on the league’s all-defensive team. The voters have been seduced by his remarkable athleticism and spectacular steals, but he hasn’t played sound, fundamental defense. Mesmerized by the ball, he’s gambled too frequently, putting us out of position, forcing rotations that leave a man wide open, and doesn’t keep his feet on the ground.”
I chose to avoid posting meaningless 1st-round series and easy sweeps full of blowouts? Of course I did.
You were the one who tried to claim this was about "contending series", then you posted a bunch of numbers against shytty teams that had no chance at the title.
Shaq had better regular season #'s every year. Shaq had better postseason #'s every year. Shaq had better Finals #'s every year. Shaq had better advanced stats every year. Shaq had more MVP votes every year. Shaq had a UNANIMOUS Finals MVP vote every year. Claiming Kobe was better in any of those years is an impossible argument by any metric.
And the final point is, y'all are the ones who tried to make this "rings" and claim the title is the only thing that matters. If that's all that matters, then the Finals are it. Claiming the "real Finals" shyt is silly anyways, because no one thought the 2004 Pistons or 2011 Mavs were the worthy contender, yet we all saw what happened. If the ring is all that matters, then how you perform when the ring is on the line should be what matters the most. And Shaq clearly the dominant player in all three of those situations AND in the "real Finals" like 2000 WCF and 2002 WCF too.
Kobe 2000-2002, as a whole, had a similar impact in Finals as Pippen in 1991-1993. I proved that easily and you're still avoiding it.
LOOK BRUH I AINT FALLIN FOR YOUR BS
OTHER RETARDS MIGHT, BUT THE REAL ONES WILL SEE RIGHT THROUGH IT
I DIDNT POST 2000 BECAUSE KOBE DIDNT OVERTAKE SHAQ UNTIL 2001
I POSTED EVERY SERIES FROM 2001 AND 2002 WESTERN CONFERENCE PLAYOFFS AKA THE REAL COMPETITION, WHICH SHOWS KOBE TO BE EQUAL TO OR BETTER THAN SHAQ.. AND DEFINITELY NO SIDEKICK
BUT CONTINUE TRYNA SPIN THINGS IN YOUR FAVOR.. IF THAT MAKES U FEEL SECURE IN YOUR NONSENSE, HAVE AT IT……..
god shamgod
Veteran
No he wasn’t
he was a shot away from being up 3-2 which guarantees nothing.the pacers were up 3-2 in the ‘94 ecf with game 6 at home & lost the seriesthe bulls won 55 games with pippen ,grant & Armstrong being all stars. Back then having 3 all stars was a luxury along with rookie Toni Kukoc hitting 3-4 gw shots.kukoc was 2nd team all rookie. It’s crazy how pippen gets all the credit for a deep overachieving regular season team that was good but ultimately only won ONE playoff series without Jordan & that was vs a cavs team the bulls eliminated the last 4 times they matched up. That ‘94 bulls team overrated af
lol at how MJ beating the Cavs is a big narrative for him, but Pippen beating the Cavs with no MJ shouldn't count as anything special.
Bulls replaced Jordan with a damn near useless Italy-league SG, and STILL were a ECSF team on the cusp of a ECF and possibly Finals appearance.
Lakers traded Shaq for three Miami starters including Odom who had been their 1A/1B option in an ECSF run, and won just 34 games.
Of course, you can make other excuses for why Kobe came up so short that year. (Excuses y'all never make for Bron.) But claiming that Kobe in the first run did anything qualitatively better than Pippen in the first run just doesn't fly. Pippen's Finals stats were just as good if not better, his success without his #1 was clearly better, and he was doing MORE than Kobe that doesn't show up on the stat sheet.
I don't even have to argue that Pippen was better than Kobe during those Finals. I'm just arguing that they were in the same ballpark. And that argument is easy to make.
Last edited:
SymbolicOne09
All Star
Shaq went to the finals in dwades 2nd or 3rd year in the league penny too... hard to really tell what would of happened but shaq was the x factor
mvp_status
Superstar
That's all that had to be said, but everybody wants to fight
whats funny is Kobe/Bron stans in here be trying to act like the other side is obsessed/crazy
from where I'm standing all these nikkas need therapy
This is ignorance at an amazing level.
2001 Spurs were a hopeless squad with zero help for Duncan once Anderson went out. They lost in a sweep by a combined 90 points. None of the games was within 10 in the last 40 seconds.
Sixers were a well-coached fighting team that won Game 1, had great chances to win Games 2 and 3, and only lost by a combined 33 points.
Anyone who claims that joke of a WCF (Games 3 and 4 decided by 30-40 points) was the "real Finals", while trying to say that damn near even Finals doesn't count, is up to their ears in bullshyt.
And you seriously posted rounds 1 and 2 as well, which were even worse comp, while claiming the Finals doesn't count.
2001 Spurs were throwing out career benchwarmer Antonio Daniels as their #2 option. They started completely washed 38yo Terry Porter at point guard and half-washed 35yo David Robinson at center. They lost Derek Anderson to injury and Sean Elliott to bad kidneys, they didn't have Parker or Manu yet or even Stephen Jackson. They were NOT a contender, it was a Tim Duncan one-man show.
Spurs lost in a sweep by a combined 90 points. Only ONE of the games was within 14, when Duncan put up a monster 40-15-3 with 4 blocks, nearly outscoring Shaq and Kobe combined, and still had to hit a three-pointer at the buzzer to cut the final margin from 10 to 7.
Meanwhile, the Sixers actually had a 1-0 lead on Lakers. NONE of their games was decided by more than 14 points, in fact, until Game 4 they were all decided by single digits. They won Game 1, missed two free throws with 3 minutes left in Game 2 that would have cut the lead to 3 (followed by turnover on a possession that could have then tied it), and were within 1 with 30 seconds left in Game 3. Overall they were outscored by a total margin of 33 points. Unlike the Spurs' one-man show, they had Dikembe and Iverson both playing at an elite level, two All-NBA guys to the Spurs's one.
Spurs lost in a sweep by a combined 90 points. Only ONE of the games was within 14, when Duncan put up a monster 40-15-3 with 4 blocks, nearly outscoring Shaq and Kobe combined, and still had to hit a three-pointer at the buzzer to cut the final margin from 10 to 7.
Meanwhile, the Sixers actually had a 1-0 lead on Lakers. NONE of their games was decided by more than 14 points, in fact, until Game 4 they were all decided by single digits. They won Game 1, missed two free throws with 3 minutes left in Game 2 that would have cut the lead to 3 (followed by turnover on a possession that could have then tied it), and were within 1 with 30 seconds left in Game 3. Overall they were outscored by a total margin of 33 points. Unlike the Spurs' one-man show, they had Dikembe and Iverson both playing at an elite level, two All-NBA guys to the Spurs's one.
We really need to stop comparing Icons to a guy who's playing in a city that doesn't care if he left tomorrow
Bron getting his # retired in 10% of the NBA's stadiums. Y'all Laker fans gonna be staring at his jersey every home game and multiple road games on the annual.
Might be four stadiums once he leaves LA and wins multiple Manu/Walton titles in his twilight years with Pop and Wemby.
GreatestLaker
#FirePelinka
Straight facts.whats funny is Kobe/Bron stans in here be trying to act like the other side is obsessed/crazy
from where I'm standing all these nikkas need therapy