First Official Angergeneral top 10 GOAT..

[Y2K]

duncan:

couldnt repeat even with unusual stability and excellent FO work.
with said, unusual stability and excellent FO work, STILL is a part of nba infamy in being a #1 seed to lose to an 8th seed.
has been a regular victim in the playoffs to kobe bryant aka the scourge of s.a.
has not come up big nearly as often as kobe.
kobe is the system as evidence by winning with a hastily rebuilt, lackluster cast.... and REPEATING yet again. all while duncan and company picked up the scraps of the decade.
has deteriorated steadily while kobe has maintained unusually consistent outside of these current injuries.
gets no points for being a nice guy.
is the lesser player on offense while being a peer on defense.
is not nearly as versatile as kobe.
is not the closer kobe has been.

kobe is obviously the better player to those with a brain and not dominated by their feelings.

-Who cares if he never repeated? He's won 4 titles as the lead dog over the course of his career. A claim Kobe can't make
-And Kobe (despite being the system) is part of NBA infamy by blowing a 3-1 series lead (to a Suns team missing arguably their best player in Amare)
-Duncan took out Kobe in '99, '03 and would've taken out Kobe in 2013 had he shown up
-Duncan has not come up as big as Kobe?

Tim Duncan Elimination Game Averages:
21.9 PPG, 12.1 RPG, 3.1 APG, .9 SPG, 2.2 BPG, 2.9 TOPG, 44.7 FG%, 0.0 3P%, 74.3 FT%

Kobe Bryant Elimination Game Averages:
22.3 PPG, 5.6 RPG, 3.7 APG, 1.2 SPG, .6 BPG, 3.0 TOPG, 41.4 FG%, 27.5 3P%, 77.9 FT%

What games are you watching?

-Kobe's "weak cast" were BY FAR the best teams in the league in 2009 and 2010. Funny how you always ignore that.
-Duncan has deteriorated? lolwat? These are his PER36 numbers:

Season Age Tm Lg Pos G GS MP FG FGA FG% 3P 3PA 3P% 2P 2PA 2P% FT FTA FT% ORB DRB TRB AST STL BLK TOV PF PTS
1997-98 21 SAS NBA PF 82 82 3204 7.9 14.5 .549 0.0 0.1 .000 7.9 14.3 .553 3.6 5.4 .662 3.1 7.9 11.0 2.5 0.6 2.3 3.1 2.9 19.4
1998-99 22 SAS NBA PF 50 50 1963 7.7 15.5 .495 0.0 0.1 .143 7.6 15.4 .498 4.5 6.6 .690 2.9 7.6 10.5 2.2 0.8 2.3 2.7 2.7 19.9
1999-00 23 SAS NBA PF 74 74 2875 7.9 16.0 .490 0.0 0.1 .091 7.9 15.9 .494 5.7 7.6 .761 3.3 8.2 11.5 2.9 0.8 2.1 3.0 2.6 21.5
2000-01 24 SAS NBA PF 82 82 3174 8.0 15.9 .499 0.1 0.3 .259 7.9 15.6 .504 4.6 7.5 .618 2.9 8.4 11.3 2.8 0.8 2.2 2.7 2.8 20.6
2001-02 25 SAS NBA PF 82 82 3329 8.3 16.3 .508 0.0 0.1 .100 8.3 16.2 .511 6.1 7.6 .799 2.9 8.4 11.3 3.3 0.7 2.2 2.8 2.3 22.6
2002-03 26 SAS NBA PF 81 81 3181 8.1 15.8 .513 0.1 0.2 .273 8.0 15.5 .517 5.1 7.2 .710 2.9 8.9 11.8 3.6 0.6 2.7 2.8 2.6 21.3
2003-04 27 SAS NBA PF 69 68 2527 8.4 16.8 .501 0.0 0.2 .167 8.4 16.7 .505 5.0 8.4 .599 3.2 9.0 12.2 3.0 0.9 2.6 2.6 2.3 21.9
2004-05 28 SAS NBA PF 66 66 2203 8.4 17.0 .496 0.0 0.1 .333 8.4 16.9 .498 5.0 7.4 .670 3.3 8.7 12.0 2.9 0.7 2.8 2.1 2.4 21.9
2005-06 29 SAS NBA PF 80 80 2784 7.4 15.3 .484 0.0 0.1 .400 7.4 15.3 .485 4.3 6.9 .629 3.0 8.4 11.4 3.3 0.9 2.1 2.6 2.8 19.2
2006-07 30 SAS NBA C 80 80 2726 8.2 14.9 .546 0.0 0.1 .111 8.1 14.8 .550 4.8 7.5 .637 2.8 8.4 11.2 3.6 0.9 2.5 3.0 2.7 21.1
2007-08 31 SAS NBA C 78 78 2651 7.9 16.0 .497 0.0 0.1 .000 7.9 15.9 .498 4.6 6.3 .730 3.2 8.7 12.0 3.0 0.8 2.1 2.4 2.5 20.5
2008-09 32 SAS NBA C 75 75 2524 8.0 15.8 .504 0.0 0.0 .000 8.0 15.8 .505 4.8 6.9 .692 2.9 8.5 11.4 3.8 0.5 1.8 2.4 2.5 20.7
2009-10 33 SAS NBA C 78 77 2438 8.3 16.0 .518 0.0 0.2 .182 8.3 15.8 .522 4.0 5.5 .725 3.3 8.4 11.6 3.6 0.7 1.7 2.1 2.2 20.6
2010-11 34 SAS NBA C 76 76 2156 7.0 14.0 .500 0.0 0.1 .000 7.0 13.9 .502 3.1 4.3 .716 2.8 8.5 11.3 3.4 0.8 2.4 2.0 2.0 17.1
2011-12 35 SAS NBA C 58 58 1634 8.0 16.1 .492 0.0 0.1 .000 8.0 16.1 .495 3.8 5.5 .695 2.4 9.0 11.5 2.9 0.8 1.9 2.1 2.2 19.7
2012-13 36 SAS NBA C 69 69 2078 8.5 16.9 .502 0.0 0.1 .286 8.5 16.8 .504 4.2 5.2 .817 2.1 9.7 11.9 3.2 0.9 3.2 2.5 2.0 21.3
2013-14 37 SAS NBA C 45 45 1319 7.4 15.3 .486 0.0 0.1 .000 7.4 15.2 .488 3.7 5.2 .703 2.7 9.6 12.3 3.5 0.6 2.6 2.5 1.9 18.5
Career NBA 1225 1223 42766 8.0 15.8 .506 0.0 0.1 .178 8.0 15.6 .509 4.6 6.7 .693 3.0 8.5 11.5 3.1 0.8 2.3 2.6 2.5 20.6

He's put up the same production his entire career.

-DOES get points however for being versatile enough to be built into ANY scheme. He's been part of slow-paced defensive grind-it-out teams and has been part of up-tempo offensive juggernauts while still anchoring an elite defense. Looks versatile to me.
-Kobe's a better raw scorer, I'll give him that but Duncan's in his league. On the other hand Duncan is one of the 5 greatest defensive players of all time, Kobe's not even in the conversation for greatest perimeter defender
-Let's leave Skip Bayless/ESPN narratives out of the discussion here. Even if we don't, Duncan is still one of the greatest big game performers in history

Like I said, I see no strong debate in favor of Kobe.

"-Who cares if he never repeated? He's won 4 titles as the lead dog over the course of his career."

people with brains. list for me the franchises that have defended titles and compare that list to those franchises that have not repeated. one is much larger than the other right? what does this tell you?

"-And Kobe (despite being the system) is part of NBA infamy by blowing a 3-1 series lead (to a Suns team missing arguably their best player in Amare)"

infamy? look the word up you dunce. losing as an 7th seed to a 2nd seed is routine. lets see... a team consisting of such luminaries that actually started significant amounts of games in: kwame brown, smush parker, brian cook and chris mihm. even getting into the playoffs in the west with that cast is called overachieving, so losing to the suns with their best player being steve nash, not amare is no real shame. it sucked because they were up on the suns but they should have never been in the series in the first place. even with amare out, one team was better than the other... can you point to which? one had the #2 offense in the league in the suns, going up against a middling 15th ranked defense with a one man offense. by the way... that suns team had the #2 offense in the league WITHOUT amare. he only played three games that year. you can use your usual superficial analysis to compare the teams.... it wont be folly for once, lol. stupid argument witling.

"-Duncan took out Kobe in '99, '03 and would've taken out Kobe in 2013 had he shown up"

are you serious? what kind of idiot would bring this up knowing what their head to head is in the playoffs? how is it you can respond to hav with a logical, halfway decent post but you waste my time and insult my intelligence with this bullshit? stupidity is irritating.

"-Duncan has not come up as big as Kobe?"

no. one is the greatest closer in nba history while the other is not. i know you watched kobe with tears in those eyes, lol.

the rest i didnt bother to read because i'm sure it only gets worse. if i get bored and change my mind i'll post a response to the latter but your arguments fucking suck and i know you can do better... oh wait, no you cant because duncan has ZERO case over the player that has victimized him and the city of sa more than any other player in duncans career.

I will say this:

-Kobe quit against the Suns in game 7 and that was very disrespectful to his team mates, coaching staff, ownership and the fans. BUT being up 3-1 at all was clearly an over achievement.

-Anyone can be a one hit wonder. Takes a lot to win back-to-back.

[Sudanese Sensation]

Michael
Kareem
Bill
Earvin
Wilt
Larry
Shaquille
Tim
Kobe
LeBron

[Robceltsfan]

Why do Laker fans still call Kobe the "greatest closer in history" when everyone knows this is far, far from the truth?

[town bidness]

-Who cares if he never repeated? He's won 4 titles as the lead dog over the course of his career. A claim Kobe can't make
-And Kobe (despite being the system) is part of NBA infamy by blowing a 3-1 series lead (to a Suns team missing arguably their best player in Amare)
-Duncan took out Kobe in '99, '03 and would've taken out Kobe in 2013 had he shown up
-Duncan has not come up as big as Kobe?

Tim Duncan Elimination Game Averages:
21.9 PPG, 12.1 RPG, 3.1 APG, .9 SPG, 2.2 BPG, 2.9 TOPG, 44.7 FG%, 0.0 3P%, 74.3 FT%

Kobe Bryant Elimination Game Averages:
22.3 PPG, 5.6 RPG, 3.7 APG, 1.2 SPG, .6 BPG, 3.0 TOPG, 41.4 FG%, 27.5 3P%, 77.9 FT%

What games are you watching?

-Kobe's "weak cast" were BY FAR the best teams in the league in 2009 and 2010. Funny how you always ignore that.
-Duncan has deteriorated? lolwat? These are his PER36 numbers:

Season Age Tm Lg Pos G GS MP FG FGA FG% 3P 3PA 3P% 2P 2PA 2P% FT FTA FT% ORB DRB TRB AST STL BLK TOV PF PTS
1997-98 21 SAS NBA PF 82 82 3204 7.9 14.5 .549 0.0 0.1 .000 7.9 14.3 .553 3.6 5.4 .662 3.1 7.9 11.0 2.5 0.6 2.3 3.1 2.9 19.4
1998-99 22 SAS NBA PF 50 50 1963 7.7 15.5 .495 0.0 0.1 .143 7.6 15.4 .498 4.5 6.6 .690 2.9 7.6 10.5 2.2 0.8 2.3 2.7 2.7 19.9
1999-00 23 SAS NBA PF 74 74 2875 7.9 16.0 .490 0.0 0.1 .091 7.9 15.9 .494 5.7 7.6 .761 3.3 8.2 11.5 2.9 0.8 2.1 3.0 2.6 21.5
2000-01 24 SAS NBA PF 82 82 3174 8.0 15.9 .499 0.1 0.3 .259 7.9 15.6 .504 4.6 7.5 .618 2.9 8.4 11.3 2.8 0.8 2.2 2.7 2.8 20.6
2001-02 25 SAS NBA PF 82 82 3329 8.3 16.3 .508 0.0 0.1 .100 8.3 16.2 .511 6.1 7.6 .799 2.9 8.4 11.3 3.3 0.7 2.2 2.8 2.3 22.6
2002-03 26 SAS NBA PF 81 81 3181 8.1 15.8 .513 0.1 0.2 .273 8.0 15.5 .517 5.1 7.2 .710 2.9 8.9 11.8 3.6 0.6 2.7 2.8 2.6 21.3
2003-04 27 SAS NBA PF 69 68 2527 8.4 16.8 .501 0.0 0.2 .167 8.4 16.7 .505 5.0 8.4 .599 3.2 9.0 12.2 3.0 0.9 2.6 2.6 2.3 21.9
2004-05 28 SAS NBA PF 66 66 2203 8.4 17.0 .496 0.0 0.1 .333 8.4 16.9 .498 5.0 7.4 .670 3.3 8.7 12.0 2.9 0.7 2.8 2.1 2.4 21.9
2005-06 29 SAS NBA PF 80 80 2784 7.4 15.3 .484 0.0 0.1 .400 7.4 15.3 .485 4.3 6.9 .629 3.0 8.4 11.4 3.3 0.9 2.1 2.6 2.8 19.2
2006-07 30 SAS NBA C 80 80 2726 8.2 14.9 .546 0.0 0.1 .111 8.1 14.8 .550 4.8 7.5 .637 2.8 8.4 11.2 3.6 0.9 2.5 3.0 2.7 21.1
2007-08 31 SAS NBA C 78 78 2651 7.9 16.0 .497 0.0 0.1 .000 7.9 15.9 .498 4.6 6.3 .730 3.2 8.7 12.0 3.0 0.8 2.1 2.4 2.5 20.5
2008-09 32 SAS NBA C 75 75 2524 8.0 15.8 .504 0.0 0.0 .000 8.0 15.8 .505 4.8 6.9 .692 2.9 8.5 11.4 3.8 0.5 1.8 2.4 2.5 20.7
2009-10 33 SAS NBA C 78 77 2438 8.3 16.0 .518 0.0 0.2 .182 8.3 15.8 .522 4.0 5.5 .725 3.3 8.4 11.6 3.6 0.7 1.7 2.1 2.2 20.6
2010-11 34 SAS NBA C 76 76 2156 7.0 14.0 .500 0.0 0.1 .000 7.0 13.9 .502 3.1 4.3 .716 2.8 8.5 11.3 3.4 0.8 2.4 2.0 2.0 17.1
2011-12 35 SAS NBA C 58 58 1634 8.0 16.1 .492 0.0 0.1 .000 8.0 16.1 .495 3.8 5.5 .695 2.4 9.0 11.5 2.9 0.8 1.9 2.1 2.2 19.7
2012-13 36 SAS NBA C 69 69 2078 8.5 16.9 .502 0.0 0.1 .286 8.5 16.8 .504 4.2 5.2 .817 2.1 9.7 11.9 3.2 0.9 3.2 2.5 2.0 21.3
2013-14 37 SAS NBA C 45 45 1319 7.4 15.3 .486 0.0 0.1 .000 7.4 15.2 .488 3.7 5.2 .703 2.7 9.6 12.3 3.5 0.6 2.6 2.5 1.9 18.5
Career NBA 1225 1223 42766 8.0 15.8 .506 0.0 0.1 .178 8.0 15.6 .509 4.6 6.7 .693 3.0 8.5 11.5 3.1 0.8 2.3 2.6 2.5 20.6

He's put up the same production his entire career.

-DOES get points however for being versatile enough to be built into ANY scheme. He's been part of slow-paced defensive grind-it-out teams and has been part of up-tempo offensive juggernauts while still anchoring an elite defense. Looks versatile to me.
-Kobe's a better raw scorer, I'll give him that but Duncan's in his league. On the other hand Duncan is one of the 5 greatest defensive players of all time, Kobe's not even in the conversation for greatest perimeter defender
-Let's leave Skip Bayless/ESPN narratives out of the discussion here. Even if we don't, Duncan is still one of the greatest big game performers in history

Like I said, I see no strong debate in favor of Kobe.

"-Who cares if he never repeated? He's won 4 titles as the lead dog over the course of his career."

people with brains. list for me the franchises that have defended titles and compare that list to those franchises that have not repeated. one is much larger than the other right? what does this tell you?

"-And Kobe (despite being the system) is part of NBA infamy by blowing a 3-1 series lead (to a Suns team missing arguably their best player in Amare)"

infamy? look the word up you dunce. losing as an 7th seed to a 2nd seed is routine. lets see... a team consisting of such luminaries that actually started significant amounts of games in: kwame brown, smush parker, brian cook and chris mihm. even getting into the playoffs in the west with that cast is called overachieving, so losing to the suns with their best player being steve nash, not amare is no real shame. it sucked because they were up on the suns but they should have never been in the series in the first place. even with amare out, one team was better than the other... can you point to which? one had the #2 offense in the league in the suns, going up against a middling 15th ranked defense with a one man offense. by the way... that suns team had the #2 offense in the league WITHOUT amare. he only played three games that year. you can use your usual superficial analysis to compare the teams.... it wont be folly for once, lol. stupid argument witling.

"-Duncan took out Kobe in '99, '03 and would've taken out Kobe in 2013 had he shown up"

are you serious? what kind of idiot would bring this up knowing what their head to head is in the playoffs? how is it you can respond to hav with a logical, halfway decent post but you waste my time and insult my intelligence with this bullshit? stupidity is irritating.

"-Duncan has not come up as big as Kobe?"

no. one is the greatest closer in nba history while the other is not. i know you watched kobe with tears in those eyes, lol.

the rest i didnt bother to read because i'm sure it only gets worse. if i get bored and change my mind i'll post a response to the latter but your arguments fucking suck and i know you can do better... oh wait, no you cant because duncan has ZERO case over the player that has victimized him and the city of sa more than any other player in duncans career.

I will say this:

-Kobe quit against the Suns in game 7 and that was very disrespectful to his team mates, coaching staff, ownership and the fans. BUT being up 3-1 at all was clearly an over achievement.

-Anyone can be a one hit wonder. Takes a lot to win back-to-back.

now to your first point i have had time and rings to mend that wound so i get why he did it but i sure the fuck wouldnt have. he should have just done exactly what he had to but he choose to show his naysayers what he was working with. the playoffs is not the place for that emotional shit. i dont think it was as much about the teammates as it was kobe reacting poorly to the criticisms of know nothings and acting a bit bitch like. i was pretty unhappy but conflicted about that game for a while.

he made up for it plenty, especially with revenge tour '10, so i can now rationalize it a little more.

to your second point, i dont understand what kind of dope tries to downplay title defenses especially when the teams were in the same conference. how does that make any sense to a sound mind?

[town bidness]

Why do Laker fans still call Kobe the "greatest closer in history" when everyone knows this is far, far from the truth?

because it's reality.

just like kareem being the top basketball player ever and your avatar barely hanging on at #10.

[Robceltsfan]

Kobe beat Duncan once in the playoffs without Shaq. He lost to them twice WITH Shaq.

[Robceltsfan]

Why do Laker fans still call Kobe the "greatest closer in history" when everyone knows this is far, far from the truth?

because it's reality.

just like kareem being the top basketball player ever and your avatar barely hanging on at #10.

You're homeristic delusions are hilarious. Troll on.

[town bidness]

Kobe beat Duncan once in the playoffs without Shaq. He lost to them twice WITH Shaq.

and?

what's the actual count regardless of whom kobe is carrying at the moment?

[Robceltsfan]

Kobe beat Duncan once in the playoffs without Shaq. He lost to them twice WITH Shaq.

and?

what's the actual count regardless of whom kobe is carrying at the moment?

3-2 with Shaq

1-0 without Shaq

4-2 overall

[town bidness]

Why do Laker fans still call Kobe the "greatest closer in history" when everyone knows this is far, far from the truth?

because it's reality.

just like kareem being the top basketball player ever and your avatar barely hanging on at #10.

You're homeristic delusions are hilarious. Troll on.

i'm sorry reality has a well established laker bias built on a foundation of empirical evidence, whist buttressed with common sense and simple observation.

how is the truth trolling? lol,

prepare for another twenty years of mediocrity at best. that's not trolling either.

[Ghostown42]

Kobe beat Duncan once in the playoffs without Shaq. He lost to them twice WITH Shaq.

and?

what's the actual count regardless of whom kobe is carrying at the moment?

lol @ the thought of Kobe carrying Shaq.

[town bidness]

Kobe beat Duncan once in the playoffs without Shaq. He lost to them twice WITH Shaq.

and?

what's the actual count regardless of whom kobe is carrying at the moment?

3-2 with Shaq

1-0 without Shaq

4-2 overall

very good.

now outside of duncan... which other player is the lone constant?

[town bidness]

Kobe beat Duncan once in the playoffs without Shaq. He lost to them twice WITH Shaq.

and?

what's the actual count regardless of whom kobe is carrying at the moment?

lol @ the thought of Kobe carrying Shaq.

i wouldnt feign laughter.

kobe carried the lummox, then proved shaq was absolutely unneeded and easily rather replaced with lesser talent. albeit, talent that know his place.. most of the time.

[Robceltsfan]

because it's reality.

just like kareem being the top basketball player ever and your avatar barely hanging on at #10.

You're homeristic delusions are hilarious. Troll on.

i'm sorry reality has a well established laker bias built on a foundation of empirical evidence, whist buttressed with common sense and simple observation.

how is the truth trolling? lol,

prepare for another twenty years of mediocrity at best. that's not trolling either.

Magic needed Kareem to be so successful.......or was it the other way around?

60% of Kobe's legacy is built on Shaq's back.


2 top-5 players on one team at the same time and 2 top-12 players on one team at the same time. Wow, must be really tough to win with that kind of talent.

And people complained that Lebron went to Miami to play with Wade? lol...

You can put Kareem at #1, I don't have TOO big a problem with that. Magic can be as high as 5th if you want. Kobe and Shaq belong under Larry Legend in the 8-12 range somewhere. That's the truth Laker Homer.

[Ali Natural]

This ***** did not type that Kobe is the greatest closer in NBA history with a straight face.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[town bidness]

You're homeristic delusions are hilarious. Troll on.

i'm sorry reality has a well established laker bias built on a foundation of empirical evidence, whist buttressed with common sense and simple observation.

how is the truth trolling? lol,

prepare for another twenty years of mediocrity at best. that's not trolling either.

Magic needed Kareem to be so successful.......or was it the other way around?

60% of Kobe's legacy is built on Shaq's back.


2 top-5 players on one team at the same time and 2 top-12 players on one team at the same time. Wow, must be really tough to win with that kind of talent.

And people complained that Lebron went to Miami to play with Wade? lol...

You can put Kareem at #1, I don't have TOO big a problem with that. Magic can be as high as 5th if you want. Kobe and Shaq belong under Larry Legend in the 8-12 range somewhere. That's the truth Laker Homer.

Magic needed Kareem to be so successful.......or was it the other way around?

terrible question but i'll answer.

it's simple, they needed each other. kareem was the vet that already had a ring and magic was the rookie phenom fresh outta kicking birds ass in college. then magic took over around 86-87 maybe the season before. y2ktors remembers these things way better than i do.

dont be so simple minded. kareem was not the liability on defense and most importantly... in clutch moments like shaq was. in fact, kareem was the polar opposite of shaq in that regard wasnt he? all while not needing to be spoon fed under the basket. so the dynamic is different in several ways. the one correct similarity was that kobe was indeed magic in his dichotomy with shaq, in that he was the main ball handler and assist leader like magic. therein lies the carrying if you didnt sniff it out. i'll assume i dont need to go further into that.

"60% of Kobe's legacy is built on Shaq's back."

tell me you're kidding? it's actually worse, 75% of shaqs legacy was built on kobes' back and 100% of shaqs' accolades came only with kobe leading him. this from a shaq with all this size and athleticism and the center position his alone, couldnt make a defensive first team one damn time, lead the league in rebounds, blocks, etc.

kobe took a 18/9 effete foreigner that couldnt even win a single playoff game to the finals three years straight. shaq got carried by wade (and dubious reffing) still only got one ring to show for it.

by the way.. how much talent has shaq had in his career outside kobe his able shepherd?

2 top-5 players on one team at the same time and 2 top-12 players on one team at the same time. Wow, must be really tough to win with that kind of talent.

And people complained that Lebron went to Miami to play with Wade? lol...

yes it's tough to win in the nba genius. shaq demonstrated that well before kobe became a starter didnt he?

lebron ran to wade like a bitch abandoning the team with the best record two years running... that had been in the finals a couple season prior. the situations are not analogous. what does lebrons sissy ass have to do with anything?

"You can put Kareem at #1, I don't have TOO big a problem with that. Magic can be as high as 5th if you want. Kobe and Shaq belong under Larry Legend in the 8-12 range somewhere. That's the truth Laker Homer."

well kareem is #1 with ease. pick a level of bball, he's the best in them all. you cant have a problem against it because you cant argue against it. you have no choice but to accept it, lol.

larry bird did absolutely nothing special to warrant being anywhere near kobe never mind above. only a knuckle dragging troglodyte, halfwit would even bother trying to make the argument. bird is below hakeem and shaq.... although i tend to feel bird was a better player than shaq but shaq won more. not better than hakeem though. hells no.

any list you could make would be full of sappy sentimentalism and contradictions. easy to pick apart.

[town bidness]

Why do Laker fans still call Kobe the "greatest closer in history" when everyone knows this is far, far from the truth?

There's people who actually think that? How sad and delusional.

it's pretty common knowledge unless one is impervious to rational thought.

who's better and why?

[AlaskaHawks]

Why do Laker fans still call Kobe the "greatest closer in history" when everyone knows this is far, far from the truth?

There's people who actually think that? How sad and delusional.

it's pretty common knowledge unless one is impervious to rational thought.

who's better and why?

Cuz FG% breh.

[town bidness]

There's people who actually think that? How sad and delusional.

it's pretty common knowledge unless one is impervious to rational thought.

who's better and why?

Cuz FG% breh.

silly me, of course. i thought it was going to be per or something.

[Robceltsfan]

i'm sorry reality has a well established laker bias built on a foundation of empirical evidence, whist buttressed with common sense and simple observation.

how is the truth trolling? lol,

prepare for another twenty years of mediocrity at best. that's not trolling either.

Magic needed Kareem to be so successful.......or was it the other way around?

60% of Kobe's legacy is built on Shaq's back.


2 top-5 players on one team at the same time and 2 top-12 players on one team at the same time. Wow, must be really tough to win with that kind of talent.

And people complained that Lebron went to Miami to play with Wade? lol...

You can put Kareem at #1, I don't have TOO big a problem with that. Magic can be as high as 5th if you want. Kobe and Shaq belong under Larry Legend in the 8-12 range somewhere. That's the truth Laker Homer.

Magic needed Kareem to be so successful.......or was it the other way around?

terrible question but i'll answer.

it's simple, they needed each other. kareem was the vet that already had a ring and magic was the rookie phenom fresh outta kicking birds ass in college. then magic took over around 86-87 maybe the season before. y2ktors remembers these things way better than i do.

dont be so simple minded. kareem was not the liability on defense and most importantly... in clutch moments like shaq was. in fact, kareem was the polar opposite of shaq in that regard wasnt he? all while not needing to be spoon fed under the basket. so the dynamic is different in several ways. the one correct similarity was that kobe was indeed magic in his dichotomy with shaq, in that he was the main ball handler and assist leader like magic. therein lies the carrying if you didnt sniff it out. i'll assume i dont need to go further into that.

"60% of Kobe's legacy is built on Shaq's back."

tell me you're kidding? it's actually worse, 75% of shaqs legacy was built on kobes' back and 100% of shaqs' accolades came only with kobe leading him. this from a shaq with all this size and athleticism and the center position his alone, couldnt make a defensive first team one damn time, lead the league in rebounds, blocks, etc.

kobe took a 18/9 effete foreigner that couldnt even win a single playoff game to the finals three years straight. shaq got carried by wade (and dubious reffing) still only got one ring to show for it.

by the way.. how much talent has shaq had in his career outside kobe his able shepherd?

2 top-5 players on one team at the same time and 2 top-12 players on one team at the same time. Wow, must be really tough to win with that kind of talent.

And people complained that Lebron went to Miami to play with Wade? lol...

yes it's tough to win in the nba genius. shaq demonstrated that well before kobe became a starter didnt he?

lebron ran to wade like a bitch abandoning the team with the best record two years running... that had been in the finals a couple season prior. the situations are not analogous. what does lebrons sissy ass have to do with anything?

"You can put Kareem at #1, I don't have TOO big a problem with that. Magic can be as high as 5th if you want. Kobe and Shaq belong under Larry Legend in the 8-12 range somewhere. That's the truth Laker Homer."

well kareem is #1 with ease. pick a level of bball, he's the best in them all. you cant have a problem against it because you cant argue against it. you have no choice but to accept it, lol.

larry bird did absolutely nothing special to warrant being anywhere near kobe never mind above. only a knuckle dragging troglodyte, halfwit would even bother trying to make the argument. bird is below hakeem and shaq.... although i tend to feel bird was a better player than shaq but shaq won more. not better than hakeem though. hells no.

any list you could make would be full of sappy sentimentalism and contradictions. easy to pick apart.

Wow, you did a lot of typing and I feel bad that every single point you made was terrible. Kobe chucked his way to losing with SHAQ, MALONE and PAYTON. He tried to be the carrier of that team and it failed miserably.

Shaq took a team with Nick Anderson as the #3 scoring option to the Finals. Penny Hardaway's career basically ended when Shaq left. Shaq had the Lakers rolling before Kobe was old enough to vote. Sure, Kobe was the final piece to the puzzle, but that's exactly it, he was a piece. Shaq was the alpha. Denying this is silly.

Larry Bird is better than Kobe in every way imaginable. He was a better shooter. He was a better scorer. He was a better passer. He was a better rebounder. He was a vastly smarter basketball player. He was a better teammate. Kobe has no business being mentioned with Larry Bird. No, it isn't close. Kobe is the 3rd or 4th best Laker of all-time behind Kareem and Magic for sure.....and maybe Shaq.

Kareem has an argument to be #1 ahead of MJ, but it's a slim argument. 90% of non-Laker homers would agree.