First Official Angergeneral top 10 GOAT..

[AlaskaHawks]

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.

LMFAO. I didn't even read past you including Malone and Payton.

[Robceltsfan]

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.

LMFAO. I didn't even read past you including Malone and Payton.

Kobe shot 38% in that Finals and still chucked 22.6 FGA's per game. In the 4 losses that series he shot 33.7%. He tried to be the alpha with Shaq and it failed. Meahwhile Shaq averaged 27/11 on 63% shooting.......but he simply couldn't keep the ball out of Kobe's hands enough.

[lettherebehouse]

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.

God damn that's some heavy hitting son, solid work here. There's nothing but pure carnage left in the wake, I'll fetch you a mop masta.

[town bidness]

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.

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.


"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."

yes, pretending my points are terrible might seem like a sound rebuttal in your mind but it isnt. not to anyone with two brain cells to rub together at least... it's merely bluster son.

you cant be this stupid. do i have to point out the obvious in my typical sardonic manner for you to know how stupid this is or do you a fully functioning brain? tell me you are not a donkey.

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

no shit. it's simple, kareem is #1 and no one else is in contention, especially not that pippen rider. kareem is the god of all basketball. you can be wrong right along with that fictitious 90%.

"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."

yes, shaq got swept out of the finals with a very good magic squad. what is pointing out nick as a #3 supposed to be? a counter point of failure just like shaqs' first finals appearance. are we now pretending the magic were not a good team when they were winning like idiots do with lebron and the cavs?

wait a min...... let's really think back...... shaq was swept out of the playoffs the year before the first finals trip, then swept out by old man hakeem and the rockets. then shaq was swept out the following year in the ecf by the bulls. then shaq went on to get damn near swept out by fucking utah with a rookie kobe on the bench and a pretty decent line up.... to only be swept out of the playoffs by utah the following year in the first round. then shaq lead the lakers to a sweep to sa the very next year.

are you noticing a pattern yet?

shaq loses with good teams and without the #1 and #4 all time shooting guards he has nothing to show for his many years in the league but SWEEPS APLENTY, lol. why are you wasting your time?

"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."

yes larry was better at not being a greater scorer despite lax defensive focus along with a run and gun style of play and extra possessions in the league during that time.

better passer? bird lead 2 of 3 championship teams in assists. kobe lead all five of his championship teams in assist as the main ball handler. what did bird do to have such a distinction?

wow... you mean to tell me a forward has more rebounds that a sg playing out of position his entire career? please tell me more. jesus.. lol.

how does one quantify who the smarter player is? is it by ones play or by some bball aptitude test? vastly smarter eh?

if by play then bird is the lesser by having done what? that's right, much, much less. you can pretend bird is better all you want but even bird would laugh at that. you get credit for your career... not the wishes of halfwit fans.

a morons argument, lol.

kobe is the top laker to date with kareem being the top player ever. had kareem spent his entire career in la the it would be different. just by bringing up shaq you make yourself appear to be dumber than you actually are.... i hope.

fuck you suck, lol.

[town bidness]

oh well it's lunch time. i'll look for you and witling later bob.

[Robceltsfan]

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.

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.


"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."

yes, pretending my points are terrible might seem like a sound rebuttal in your mind but it isnt. not to anyone with two brain cells to rub together at least... it's merely bluster son.

you cant be this stupid. do i have to point out the obvious in my typical sardonic manner for you to know how stupid this is or do you a fully functioning brain? tell me you are not a donkey.

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

no shit. it's simple, kareem is #1 and no one else is in contention, especially not that pippen rider. kareem is the god of all basketball. you can be wrong right along with that fictitious 90%.

"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."

yes, shaq got swept out of the finals with a very good magic squad. what is pointing out nick as a #3 supposed to be? a counter point of failure just like shaqs' first finals appearance. are we now pretending the magic were not a good team when they were winning like idiots do with lebron and the cavs?

wait a min...... let's really think back...... shaq was swept out of the playoffs the year before the first finals trip, then swept out by old man hakeem and the rockets. then shaq was swept out the following year in the ecf by the bulls. then shaq went on to get damn near swept out by fucking utah with a rookie kobe on the bench and a pretty decent line up.... to only be swept out of the playoffs by utah the following year in the first round. then shaq lead the lakers to a sweep to sa the very next year.

are you noticing a pattern yet?

shaq loses with good teams and without the #1 and #4 all time shooting guards he has nothing to show for his many years in the league but SWEEPS APLENTY, lol. why are you wasting your time?

"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."

yes larry was better at not being a greater scorer despite lax defensive focus along with a run and gun style of play and extra possessions in the league during that time.

better passer? bird lead 2 of 3 championship teams in assists. kobe lead all five of his championship teams in assist as the main ball handler. what did bird do to have such a distinction?

wow... you mean to tell me a forward has more rebounds that a sg playing out of position his entire career? please tell me more. jesus.. lol.

how does one quantify who the smarter player is? is it by ones play or by some bball aptitude test? vastly smarter eh?

if by play then bird is the lesser by having done what? that's right, much, much less. you can pretend bird is better all you want but even bird would laugh at that. you get credit for your career... not the wishes of halfwit fans.

a morons argument, lol.

kobe is the top laker to date with kareem being the top player ever. had kareem spent his entire career in la the it would be different. just by bringing up shaq you make yourself appear to be dumber than you actually are.... i hope.

fuck you suck, lol.

Lax defense? When did the no-handchecking rule come into effect? Isn't that what people complain about with today's players, how much easier it is to score with the lax defensive rules?

And extra possessions in the league huh? Yeah, I agree with that. Despite that fact Bird has still averaged less shot attempts per game in his career than Kobe has. Bird could have averaged plenty more points if he wanted to chuck the ball 9 out of 10 games, but he was too busy getting his teammates involved. Bird has a usage percentage FIVE POINTS lower than Kobe during his career and Bird still has stats that stack up to and in some cases surpass Kobe. Kobe has always been ball-dominant and that's why he's lead the Lakers in assists so often (despite never averaging more than 6.0 in any season). There's no need for a PG when Kobe brings the ball up and plays ISO basketball. zzzzz

So while you make a rebuttal of "you mean to tell me a forward has more rebounds that a sg playing out of position his entire career?" to illustrate how ho-hum that fact is, I'd ask you why a SF (that was not the primary ball handler) was able to rack up a higher assist rate than Kobe over his career? And no, the pace of play argument does not fly because the difference in pace isn't large enough to push Kobe's stat higher than Bird's here.

Bird shot from 2 at a higher percentage. Bird shot from 3 at a higher percentage. Bird shot FTs at a higher percentage. Bird was a better rebounder. Bird was a better passer. Bird was a less-athletic-but-more-gifted scorer than Kobe is. And Bird was a more clutch player than Kobe. That one will be tough for you to swallow, but the truth usually is.

Hope you enjoyed lunch.

[Ali Natural]

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.

You typed a lot of bullshit. Lol @ Kobe carrying Shaq to all his accolades. That was Kobe who put up 41 and 12 in game 6 of the 2000 finals? Could have sworn it was the big bald *****.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Deez]

Idiots would think Kobe carried Shaq, that's a fricken laughing joke.

[town bidness]

Lax defense? When did the no-handchecking rule come into effect? Isn't that what people complain about with today's players, how much easier it is to score with the lax defensive rules?

And extra possessions in the league huh? Yeah, I agree with that. Despite that fact Bird has still averaged less shot attempts per game in his career than Kobe has. Bird could have averaged plenty more points if he wanted to chuck the ball 9 out of 10 games, but he was too busy getting his teammates involved. Bird has a usage percentage FIVE POINTS lower than Kobe during his career and Bird still has stats that stack up to and in some cases surpass Kobe. Kobe has always been ball-dominant and that's why he's lead the Lakers in assists so often (despite never averaging more than 6.0 in any season). There's no need for a PG when Kobe brings the ball up and plays ISO basketball. zzzzz

So while you make a rebuttal of "you mean to tell me a forward has more rebounds that a sg playing out of position his entire career?" to illustrate how ho-hum that fact is, I'd ask you why a SF (that was not the primary ball handler) was able to rack up a higher assist rate than Kobe over his career? And no, the pace of play argument does not fly because the difference in pace isn't large enough to push Kobe's stat higher than Bird's here.

Bird shot from 2 at a higher percentage. Bird shot from 3 at a higher percentage. Bird shot FTs at a higher percentage. Bird was a better rebounder. Bird was a better passer. Bird was a less-athletic-but-more-gifted scorer than Kobe is. And Bird was a more clutch player than Kobe. That one will be tough for you to swallow, but the truth usually is.

Hope you enjoyed lunch.[/quote]

"Lax defense? When did the no-handchecking rule come into effect?"

yes the 80s was a decade of lax defensive focus. didnt you watch during the era? hand check is for lazy or physical defenders but hand checking does not make for sound defense. it's a crutch.

"And extra possessions in the league huh? Yeah, I agree with that"

you have no choice, its a fact.

"Despite that fact Bird has still averaged less shot attempts per game in his career than Kobe has. Bird could have averaged plenty more points if he wanted to chuck the ball 9 out of 10 games, but he was too busy getting his teammates involved."

yes he averaged less shots but that's birds problem? whether he could averaged more points or not makes no difference because the point is he didnt. you get no credit for what you could have done. if he wanted to shoot more he could have and probably would have won less. bird was a great player but i'm sorry he's not better than kobe because you wish it to be so. again kobe was busy getting his teammates involved.. by leading five championship teams in assists. MORE THAN BIRD.

that's kobe getting more teammates involved for almost double the rings with vastly different rosters. repeating with both incarnations of the lakers. how many times did bird repeat again? ol' zeke managed to.

"Bird has a usage percentage..." "Kobe has always been ball-dominant and that's why he's lead the Lakers in assists so often (despite never averaging more than 6.0 in any season)."

you're actually getting worse than witling. just stop. yes kobe was ball dominant and he has almost double the rings to show for said ball dominance. what is the problem? lol. what does averaging more than 6 apg bring one? what did it do for john stockton or mark jackson? weakness.

"So while you make a rebuttal of "you mean to tell me a forward has more rebounds that a sg playing out of position his entire career?" to illustrate how ho-hum that fact is, I'd ask you why a SF (that was not the primary ball handler) was able to rack up a higher assist rate than Kobe over his career? And no, the pace of play argument does not fly because the difference in pace isn't large enough to push Kobe's stat higher than Bird's here."

again, what difference does it make that a forward that played in an era with more possessions and a faster pace has more rebounds than a GUARD... that mainly played point? why does this seem like a compelling point to you? it's grasping for straws.

"Bird shot from 2 at a higher percentage. Bird shot from 3 at a higher percentage. Bird shot FTs at a higher percentage. Bird was a better rebounder. Bird was a better passer. Bird was a less-athletic-but-more-gifted scorer than Kobe is. And Bird was a more clutch player than Kobe. That one will be tough for you to swallow, but the truth usually is."

yes, he shot better from two. he should, he's a forward that also shot less. yes bird shot a higher 3pt%.. of course it's easy to maintain that precious percentage when you shoot half as many threes' in your career when compared to a shooter like kobe. it's a 4% difference on top of that.. i wouldnt have even brought that up since it points to kobe being a better 3pt shooter anyways. much like in the case with jordan.. kobe has almost made as many threes as bird attempted.

bird was a less athletic, less gifted scorer that was pretty slick and was not a pussy like lebron at least. kobe was better than bird at scoring in every facet and we havent mentioned the defensive side of the ball where bird AGAIN has no argument against kobe.

how is bird more clutch than kobe? no one has more game winners and no one has won in more ways than kobe in the modern game. especially bird who is under the dream all time. too bad bird didnt play world class defense.

lunch was alright but cold by the time i got back to it.

[town bidness]

Idiots would think Kobe carried Shaq, that's a fricken laughing joke.

yes, shaqs' fat ass was carried just like your bald headed god jordan.

[town bidness]

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.

God damn that's some heavy hitting son, solid work here. There's nothing but pure carnage left in the wake, I'll fetch you a mop masta.

revisionists make it easy bruh. you know how it is.

[Y2K]

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.

You are 100% correct, sir. It was 1986-87, as Magic won MVP and FMVP that season. Kareem, being the unselfish winner that he is, decided to reduce his role as Magic took it upon himself, as a great leader does, to become more of an integral part of the offense.

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?

I was waiting on you to mention LeBron's androgenic alopecia. 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."

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.

[l3bron]

Duncan shot 42% in 2005 45% in 2007.... and he's a big man.

Except Duncan's calling card has never been his scoring, it's been his dominant impact on the defensive end of the court through elite defense and rebounding. Kobe's calling card is his offense.

Big difference. You've just been nitpicking at Duncan's resume, he's better than Kobe. There's no question about it.

Every great has had a bad shooting performance in a playoff series is my point. Only Singling Kobe out is wrong.

And let us not pretend as if Kobe was not ever a great defender. He was very much. Notice I said WAS.

I didn't single out one or two series with Kobe's FG%. I called out 7 SERIES. Huge difference bub.

[l3bron]

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.

This is almost as bad as your pathetic showing in your KG/Dirk thread (one of the many thrashing I've handed to you over the years.)

These are the backbones to your argument:
-The Spurs never repeated and some ESPN narrative BS
-The Lakers have a 4-3 playoff record against the Spurs (three of those series wins coming with Shaq as the leader of the Lakers)
-And the fact that Kobe is the greatest closer in NBA history because...you say so (you avoid all statistics here because they don't paint Kobe in a positive light)
http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_ ... hink-again" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Horrible post bidness, you'd think I'd be used to your rabid fanboy-ism by now but it gets worse every time your lips salivate at the thought of Kobe.

[l3bron]

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


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

bidness isn't the sharpest tool in the shed. It's best just to either humor him or ignore him.

[Y2K]

Except Duncan's calling card has never been his scoring, it's been his dominant impact on the defensive end of the court through elite defense and rebounding. Kobe's calling card is his offense.

Big difference. You've just been nitpicking at Duncan's resume, he's better than Kobe. There's no question about it.

Every great has had a bad shooting performance in a playoff series is my point. Only Singling Kobe out is wrong.

And let us not pretend as if Kobe was not ever a great defender. He was very much. Notice I said WAS.

I didn't single out one or two series with Kobe's FG%. I called out 7 SERIES. Huge difference bub.

He's definitely had some stinkers for sure fg% wise. But I didn't recall it being that bad damn near every time. Lol

[Y2K]

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


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

bidness isn't the sharpest tool in the shed. It's best just to either humor him or ignore him.

I find him pretty reasonable, even in disagreement.

[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.

This is almost as bad as your pathetic showing in your KG/Dirk thread (one of the many thrashing I've handed to you over the years.)

These are the backbones to your argument:
-The Spurs never repeated and some ESPN narrative BS
-The Lakers have a 4-3 playoff record against the Spurs (three of those series wins coming with Shaq as the leader of the Lakers)
-And the fact that Kobe is the greatest closer in NBA history because...you say so (you avoid all statistics here because they don't paint Kobe in a positive light)
http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_ ... hink-again" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Horrible post bidness, you'd think I'd be used to your rabid fanboy-ism by now but it gets worse every time your lips salivate at the thought of Kobe.

yes they've never repeated. even lebron could eventually, props to him for that. very few have but duncan never has. tough shit, it's a demerit just like getting that 8th seed whooping he got.
it's 4-2 and shaq was a lead scorer, not a leader.
i'm not clicking on the link because the author is probably a dope if you are enthralled by the article. make your own arguments you bum.

i actually gave detail, line by line refutation and substance..... this is what you give in return? fluff? for shame. witling.

oh by the way kg is better all time than dirk because kg was a great scorer AND defender.

dirk is a great scorer and choker with a ring.

that is all.

[town bidness]

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


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

bidness isn't the sharpest tool in the shed. It's best just to either humor him or ignore him.

lol, stop playing.

[town bidness]

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


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

bidness isn't the sharpest tool in the shed. It's best just to either humor him or ignore him.

I find him pretty reasonable, even in disagreement.

some people just dont like strongly opinionated folks. it intimidates them.

hell we disagree on plenty but it's just personal preference, lol.