Originally Posted by
duguxiaojing
(Why does it matter if they own his rights or not if he didn't play for them? If he didn't play how is he supposed to contribute which is the whole basis of the argument.)
Sorry. Quote botton isn't working.
It wasn't an argument against bird. The wiki article mentioned it because they said they had his rights earlier and the statement was used to explain that Bird had nothing to do with their failure.
(No they did not revamp their roster because their main core remained the same. Dave Cowens, Maxwell, and Tiny Archibald were all there. Seriously, who cares if they added Gerald Henderson who gave them 6 points, 1 rebound, 1 assist per game or a 10th or 11th man on the bench?)
They obviously had some chemistry and other issues the two seasons before. If not why else would they swap half their team twice? Again, like I stated before I am not arguing that Bird was not a huge factor, but stating that he made a 30 game team to an elite team without any other contributing factors is ridiculous. Basketball is a team game and one player can only do so much.
(They lost their number 1 guy but they also added Caron Butler and Lamar Odom. Yea, Shaq was obviously better than those guys combined, but that wasn't the point. Put Duncan on that team and he'd at least carry them to the plyaoffs.)
No. I don't think so. Not after they lost or traded 3 starters (malone,shaq and payton) and 2 guys in (fox, fisher) who had been a core part of the team from the start. Not after they forced out a coach who had so much influence. Not after their replacement HOF coach quite half way through the season because of health issues. And especially not if Duncan missed nearly 20 games and they needed a 46 game winning season to get into the playoffs. Caron was a good support player at best during that time..he did not become and allstar calibre player until 2 or 3 years later with the wiz. Adding two 15 ppg support players with Duncan the first year they are together does not equate to a playoff team.
(Honestly man, those numbers are not close not to mention they are misleading, because you didn't include their field goal percentage. Yea, the scoring maybe somewhat close but Kobe takes about twice as manay shots. I'm pretty sure Kobe's FG% decreased in the playoffs especially in the finals where he has had some awful games. Shaq on the other hand played his best ball on the biggest stage. Those 3 finals MVP were no fluke.)
Shaq has one of the highest FG% in nba history and owns the record for most seasons as the FG% leader (tied with wilt) and consecutive leader per year. Kobe is a career 45% guy...obviously shaq would have the better FG%. ....That does not change the fact that Kobe contributed nearly as much offensively. Shaq averaged only what 0.5 to 2 points more in the last two seasons? You can't explain the whole thing off by throwing up their FG%. While Kobe at times did play outside of the offense, there were many times where they needed Kobe to take over, as dumping the ball down to shaq and having shaq kick it out when doubled is pretty predictable.
(Man, Shaq was clearly the first option on all those Lakers team. I don't know how you argue otherwise. Their game plan was pretty simple, dump the ball into Shaq and let him dunk on someone or let him get triple team then kick it out to a shooter. Kobe was the primary second option. )
Again, it's not as simple as you make it out. If all the Lakers had to do was dump it into shaq for a 60% chance of making a bucket every play, you don't think that a coach of Jackson's talent would have done so? Shaq had troubles against teams with a big body centre and either a strong help defender and or quick long arm wings who could come in to double and then recover after the kick out. That's why the Lakers had a more diffcult time against the trailblazers, spurs and kings then any team they played in the finals (pacers, 76ers, nets).
The first season aside (I already coincided that shaq was the definite first option the firs season) there were series where Kobe was needed take over the offense and either setup shaq or take over the reigns as the primary option. Outside of Kobe the Lakers did not have another player who could consistently create their own shot. (Fox, Horry, Fish, George) That's why they were always searching for that new third option (rice, richmond, rider) which never really worked out. This is reflected in their ppg averages which is near identical and should not be ignored.
The Shaq and Kobe combo was different from nearly every other championchip winnning combo in nba history in that both players were so close to one another skill wise. It was not like the bulls (Jordan >pippen, kukok), lakers (Magic> worthy, Kareem) or celtics (bird>>Mchale, Parish) case where one superstar was clearly the best player and first option on the team.
Furthermore, I will bring up the point again about Kobe being the primary option when the game was close or tied. Shaq's freethrow problems pretty much elimiated him as a viable option. Honestly, how many times have you seen shaq score the game winning bucket after a set play (stealing an inbounds pass and duncking dont count). I can remember exactly one vs utah back in 96 or 97, where he threw a jump hook over ostretags out stretched arms.
Kobe on the other hand was pretty much guranteed to ball to either setup or take the game winners. Coupled with what Kobe did for the teams defensively for the team, I would defenitly say that Kobe contributed nearly as much to those titles as shaq...certainly more than what you would call a "coat tailer rider."
whooaa...honestly it's been fun but i'm tired out lol..and to be honest I doubt that we will change each other's opinion if we went on another 20 pages..here just to restate:
kobe has what? (sorry again you cant take these 4 rings away from him especially if you condiser what he contributed)
4 rings
1 Mvp
1 finals mvp
(7-8 all nba first team =2-3 second or third teams combined)
( 7-8 all nba defensive team)
2? scoring titles
and he is 30 atm..(soon 2 be 31! =P)
He is arguably the most unstoppable scorer in nba history+ one of the best lock down defenders in nba history when he wants to be.
I think you could at least make a debate that he is top 10 calibre. I still disagree with your statements that kobe is not even close to goat, should not be on anyones list and that their are 10 guys who are unquestionably better than kobe.
The fact that we have been debating for this long + their are 3-4 other guys who do not agree with you in the last few pages is proof enough that its debatable.....Brian Shaw = non debatable top 10, Jason Kidd = still not debatable
Isain Thomas = getting closer but not quite there.....Kobe Bryant = definatley debatable and already on alot of people's list.