[ctt1wbw]

Not that anyone here cares except maybe for ca$h, but who are we pulling for? I hope the Lakers lose because I'm frakkin tired of hearing about Kobe. I think he thinks he's a One Man Team. I hope they lose.

[ghporter]

I'm with you. And not just because the Lakers beat the Spurs. The Lakers are Kobe Bryant plus an unnamed supporting cast. Of course a lot of other NBA teams aren't much better, like the Suns, whichis Shaq plus the similarly unnamed supporting cast. Not that I'm pulling for the Magic, but I am pulling against the Lakers.

[voodoo]

Lakers for the win! They've been my team since 1986. Besides they have Pau Gasol and he's as good as he's ugly.

If the Lakers are just Bryant and «supporting cast» then Magic is just the supporting cast. However seeing how much of a team player Bryant is, I can't accept the «one man team» criticism. It could have applied before, but he's clearly matured a lot since he started.

After all he was what, sixteen or seventeen when he started in the NBA?

[ctt1wbw]

No, I think he played in Italy for while and bypassed the NCAA.

[Kerrigan]

I've always thought that playing in Europe would be a pretty exciting way to start a career. Although college is still cooler.

[ctt1wbw]

Yeah, but the women in Italy are hot, too. But nothing like college, though.

[angelmb]

The mention of Italy has nuked the topic, the only Lakers fan as of writing -voodoo- doesn't like anything Italy related :-P

[ctt1wbw]

Why? Italy is a wonderful country. Been there numerous times.

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by angelmb 

The mention of Italy has nuked the topic, the only Lakers fan as of writing -voodoo- doesn't like anything Italy related :-P

I take it you're not a Lakers fan (or not into NBA or basketball), but damn Spain has on of the best centers I've seen in Pau Gasol. Always an enjoyment to watch him play.

I look forward to watching the game later tonight (in half an hour or so)

As for Italians, well I've met two of them who I like pretty well. I can say one or two good things about Italians if I'm feeling charitable.. Big fan of Andea Bocelli and Eros Ramazzotti. I applauded when Zidane head-butted Materazzi though

Even so, according to Kobe Bryant's profile on NBA he's always played in the US, never in Italy - though according to Wikipedia he did live there as a kid.

Anyways, go Lakers!!

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by ctt1wbw 

Why? Italy is a wonderful country. Been there numerous times.

Yeah it's not so much the country itself, rather the inhabitants of said country.. they're a bit like Sweden of southern Europe.

Oh there I go again insulting entire nations

Those offended can just send hate mail to the usual address.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Kobe started in the NBA when he was 18 of course.

Although he still well deserves the one-man team criticism in my opinion. I think Kobe makes the craziest, hardest shots of any player ever in the NBA. Why? Because he takes those kind of shots, consistently, on a per-game basis; catch-and-shoot turnaround fadeaways over two guys, stepbacks right in someone's face well outside the line, etc. etc.

Jordan had nothing on Kobe when it comes to the insanely difficult shots. Of course, I'd like to think that 23 didn't have to attempt those shots because he could get them in "better" ways, but there you go.

greg

[selowitch]

Kobe has great talent, no question. I don't think he makes his teammates better the way Magic, Bird, and Jordan did, but he is nevertheless an extraordinary player. Not sure how I feel about that alleged rape case in Colorado involving him. He does speak fluent Italian, which is pretty cool. Not sure I would like Kobe the man if I met him. But anyway, the man has some serious skills.

Oh, and @ghporter, you are mistaken if you think the Suns are Shaq's team at this stage in his career. In truth, the best player on that squad is either Amaré Stoudemire or Steve Nash. The Suns (and GM Steve Kerr and owner Bob Sarver) have made some interesting and possibly disastrous moves in recent years. They probably couldn't avoid losing Joe Johnson, but it was a shame. But to then lose Raja Bell and Shawn Marion essentially destroyed Suns basketball as we knew it -- high-speed, fast-breaking, dynamic offense. Shaq was a great, Hall-of-Fame player, but at this point in his career he needs a lot of help to make the playoffs and advance. I think that Steve Nash has to be on the downside of a great career, and Amaré is very good. In the NBA, they say you need at least two star players to be a contender. The Suns have three, and yet the combination of Shaq/Nash/Amaré seems to be somewhat lesser than the sum of their parts at this point.

[voodoo]

Wow exciting game! Nasty hit on Gasol in the end, but fortunately he held the ring tightly enough so he didn't fall backwards.

Fisher was definitely the man of the game.

[angelmb]

Originally Posted by voodoo 

I take it you're not a Lakers fan (or not into NBA or basketball), but damn Spain has on of the best centers I've seen in Pau Gasol. Always an enjoyment to watch him play.

Quite the opposite, I have played basketball for 15 years, I am spaniard and I am a Celtics fan.

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by angelmb 

Quite the opposite, I have played basketball for 15 years, I am spaniard and I am a Celtics fan.

Oh no!!! A celtics fan!!! </faints>

hehe

Although some of my best friends are Celtics fans they are the bitter rivals of the Lakers. Well ok not so bitter, but sort of rivals.

Been so many finals games, Lakers vs. Celtics in the past. At least all the way back to Larry Bird vs. Magic Johnson. Good times.

Watched the finals last year and was hoping for a rematch. Unfortunately Celtics just had to lose against Magic (comeon!!) and the possibility for a dramatic rematch between the Lakers and Celtics was destroyed.

Orlando is mildly threatening yes, but I would have preferred a more even match between Celtics and the Lakers.. maybe next year?

[abbaZaba]

Originally Posted by ghporter 

I'm with you. And not just because the Lakers beat the Spurs. The Lakers are Kobe Bryant plus an unnamed supporting cast.

whoa. very wrong. they have a rising young star in Bynum plus they have Derek Fisher who is a staple in Finals games and they have Lamar Odom. Not to mention Bill Walton's son is on the team and quite a fundamentally sound player. AND Pau Gasol, who was "...the major factor in turning around a storied NBA franchise..." and received a silver medal at the '08 Olympics.

Originally Posted by ghporter 

Of course a lot of other NBA teams aren't much better, like the Suns, whichis Shaq plus the similarly unnamed supporting cast.

wrong again. Shaq joining the Suns is an afterthought. If you are suggesting Steve Nash is part of the "unnamed supporting cast" I suggest you stop talking basketball. Grant Hill and Amar'e Stoudemire are also part of that "unnamed supporting cast"....


but I still agree with you on being against the Lakers. I dislike Kobe. The Magic completely blew up in overtime last night. that was sad to watch; they had that game. If only Jameer Nelson hadn't guarded DEREK FISHER (see above) so loosely they would have won it in regulation.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Originally Posted by abbaZaba 

whoa. very wrong. they have a rising young star in Bynum

Really? Bynum? You'd call him a "rising young star"?

I mean, he's shown the odd flash now and again. But I can't say as I've seen anything that would indicate "star."

greg

[abbaZaba]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

Really? Bynum? You'd call him a "rising young star"?

I mean, he's shown the odd flash now and again. But I can't say as I've seen anything that would indicate "star."

greg

I wouldn't indicate he has reached "star" status which is why I appended the "rising". He's got plenty of room to falter, yet he has been doing pretty well in the Finals so far. he was a non-factor in some games leading up to now but all-in-all I would say that "rising young star" fits him at this moment.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Originally Posted by abbaZaba 

I wouldn't indicate he has reached "star" status which is why I appended the "rising". He's got plenty of room to falter, yet he has been doing pretty well in the Finals so far. he was a non-factor in some games leading up to now but all-in-all I would say that "rising young star" fits him at this moment.

Naw man. He hasn't played terribly well in the Finals in my opinion. He's shooting what, probably around 30% in the finals (as a C), averaging maybe 4 rebounds and probably 6 points a game? Sure, he's playing decent D on the big D and getting backup minutes, but his numbers aren't "rising star"-esque; they're more "very, very backup C"-esque.

Of course he had his problems with the injury this season and whatnot, so it's not like I'm counting him out or anything. He's had a lot of hype for his size and athleticism and flashes of promise, but to be honest, considering the players he's been paired up with (could Kobe ever not be every C's dream SG?), and considering the injuries he's already had at this point in his career, and considering that he seems to play like a less-athletic version of Howard (i.e. relying far too much on athleticism rather than fundamentals), and considering the reported feuds he's been having with Phil... I am very, very skeptical that he should be tagged for potential star status down the road.

Of course I might be wrong. But I just don't see much to justify an eventual "star."

greg

[abbaZaba]

alright, I'm not going to argue about the star-ness of Bynum. my point was that Kobe is not surrounded by an "unnamed supporting cast". I tossed Bynum in there because he was a big name coming out of high school and he has put up some good numbers in the regular season, but like you said, he's been injury prone.

[boy8cookie]

Originally Posted by abbaZaba 

... The Magic completely blew up in overtime last night. that was sad to watch; they had that game. If only Jameer Nelson hadn't guarded DEREK FISHER (see above) so loosely they would have won it in regulation.

You can't blame Jameer Nelson, you really can't. Look back to the previous possession, if Dwight Howard had made either of the two free-throws it would've been a 4 point game, and Fisher's 3 wouldn't have mattered. In missing those 2 free-throws, Dwight lost the game for the Magic.

[abbaZaba]

Originally Posted by boy8cookie 

You can't blame Jameer Nelson, you really can't. Look back to the previous possession, if Dwight Howard had made either of the two free-throws it would've been a 4 point game, and Fisher's 3 wouldn't have mattered. In missing those 2 free-throws, Dwight lost the game for the Magic.

I cannot tell you how it irks me so that these superstars cannot make free throws. I was literally yelling at the TV when Howard missed those free throws. I mean, come on, you are in the NBA Finals. make your damn free throws, or at least one of them!

[selowitch]

I think one of the defining (and maddening) characteristics of the Lakers is they know right when to stick the dagger in, exactly at the moment when hopes are rising. They are masters of the psychology of winning, and they just seem to make the right shots and the right time. They have earned the championship this year, even though they are hardly my favorite team.

[voodoo]

Congratulations Lakers!! NBA champions 2009!!

Pau Gasol had a solid game, Kobe Bryant showed how to be a team player, Phil Jackson has his 10th victory and can now put a NBA champion ring on all his fingers.

Well deserved victory tonight.

[ctt1wbw]

What if he wins next year, too?

[ShortcutToMoncton]

I hope not. Gotta give Kobe respect though; he killed it in the playoffs. Did anyone else notice on that baseline drive-and-dunk that he came close to missing it?? Three-years-ago Kobe would've hammered that down. Happens to everyone, but I guess we've seen Kobe be such a high-flier for so long that it seems weird to see him resort more and more to his ground game. (Plus, I'm on the east coast now and don't get to watch many Lakers games any more.)

The Pau Gasol trade just rots me still, however. If there ever was a behind-the-scenes-dirty GM move in recent NBA history, that one should legitimately be at the top of the heap.

greg

[voodoo]

Nice sour grapes guys. How the hell can you even think this was Kobe Bryant winning? It was the Lakers and let me then be the first to tell you this: it's a team effort to win the NBA.

Kobe Bryant would not have won on his own. Nor would he have won with another team. I know it's hard to explain to those who think the Lakers are one man, but call me an optimist.

The Lakers would not be champeons without Bryant, true - however nor would they be champions without Gasol, Ariza, Fisher and Odom to name a few. Take any one of them out and the Lakers wouldn't be champions. Not to mention Jackson.

This whining about the Lakers is worse than listening to Charles Barkley. Sheesh. The Lakers team was simply a whole level better than the Magic.

[Sealobo]

Kobe is definitely the most hated champion in recent basketball history. There must be a reason. Maybe it's his overly active elbows? lol~

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Originally Posted by voodoo 

Kobe Bryant would not have won on his own. Nor would he have won with another team.

...

The Lakers would not be champeons without Bryant, true - however nor would they be champions without Gasol, Ariza, Fisher and Odom to name a few. Take any one of them out and the Lakers wouldn't be champions. Not to mention Jackson.

Dude, this is just weird stuff. It doesn't make any sense.

Sure, they'd be a different team without any of these players, but to say they would not have won is nonsense. How can you estimate that sort of thing? Pro-sport GMs try to match stars and role players for a living and consistently fail at it. Hey, substitute Hedo Turkoglu or Rashard Lewis for Lamar Odom and you'd have a totally different Lakers team at the PF/SF position, but IMO it'd be a good shot that they still win the title this year. What about if Eddie House was playing instead of Derek Fisher?

Similarly, put Kobe in the SG spot for Orlando, and you probably have the makings of a title contendor. And so on, and so forth. This could go on forever. You can say "their team was perfect to win," but you can't say "but if changed, their team would not have won." It just doesn't work that way.

Originally Posted by voodoo

Kobe Bryant showed how to be a team player

This series:
10-23 FGA, 2-5 from three, perfect 8-8 FT, 30 points, win.
11-31 FGA, 2-6 from three, perfect 8-8 FT, 32 points, win.
11-25 FGA, 4-9 from three, 5-10 FT, 31 points, loss.
10-22 FGA, 1-4 from three, 8-10 FT, 29 points, win.
16-34 FGA, 0-1 from three, 8-8 FT, 40 points, win.

Note the huge FGA numbers and his mediocre FG percentage. He had pretty great assist numbers throughout the finals, but I can't believe anyone who actually watched this series would argue that on the whole, Kobe wasn't as "do it myself" as he's ever been. I'm sorry, but he made a lot of horrendous, horrendous me-vs-Orlando plays this series. A lot.

And yet, they still won. I'm sorry, but I can't decide whether it's because Orlando played so badly, because the rest of the Lakers played so well, or because Kobe/Lakers just made "the big shots" when they absolutely needed to throughout the series. I don't know.

I just can't really comprehend anyone saying that this series is an example of "Kobe Bryant becoming a team player." I just can't. I see nothing to indicate anything other than that he was the same Kobe we've always seen, except that the rest of his team somehow compensated for it and helped him out.

greg

[ghporter]

Any word on an MVP for the series? That will be interesting-if it's Kobe, what does that say about the Lakers? If it isn't, does that validate that the Lakers are becoming a real "team play" team?

[Sealobo]

Kobe is the Finals MVP, for the first time.

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

Dude, this is just weird stuff. It doesn't make any sense.

I just can't really comprehend anyone saying that this series is an example of "Kobe Bryant becoming a team player." I just can't. I see nothing to indicate anything other than that he was the same Kobe we've always seen, except that the rest of his team somehow compensated for it and helped him out.

greg

What doesn't make sense is all this Kobe Bryant hatred nor does it make sense to think he was the one who won the championship. It's a team sport and no single player wins anything, though it may be said that having Kobe Bryant on the team sure made winning easier.

He's the captain of the team and the main strategist on the field. Obviously he matters, but he's not the team.

If you can't see that he's matured into a fine team player, then you just can't. The fact that the Lakers won decisively with good team play and without everything depending on Kobe Bryant scoring a lot proves how good a team player he is.

Plenty of assists, lay ups and good strategy and team spirit by Bryant just says you're wrong. You don't have to realize you're wrong to be wrong though - and I'm not here to convince you of anything.

Kobe Bryant has become one of the best NBA players ever, certainly in the top ten, and that's only because he's a team player. Those who can't play well in a team never amount to anything and certainly don't lead their team to win the NBA championship title.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Originally Posted by voodoo 

What doesn't make sense is all this Kobe Bryant hatred nor does it make sense to think he was the one who won the championship. It's a team sport and no single player wins anything, though it may be said that having Kobe Bryant on the team sure made winning easier.

He's the captain of the team and the main strategist on the field. Obviously he matters, but he's not the team.

You're somehow equating my statements about Kobe "not being a different player" with "he's a one-man team." The two are not synonymous. Iverson on his great Philly run might qualify as a "one-man team" but even that is debatable.

In fact, I'm saying that the rest of the team was better.

If you can't see that he's matured into a fine team player, then you just can't. The fact that the Lakers won decisively with good team play and without everything depending on Kobe Bryant scoring a lot proves how good a team player he is.

1. He averaged around 27 shots a game, 43% shooting, low-30s ppg in the final series. Is that what constitutes "without Kobe scoring a lot" to you?!?

2. Furthermore, saying "they won decisively" belies the fact that Orlando had several games almost in the bag, and completely choked - via missed free throws and terrible coaching decisions. Conversely, the Lakers hit massive shots when they needed them (of course Fisher is a hero, but Kobe and Gasol and Ariza had great moments as well). Orlando missed "key shots" in games two and four, and the Lakers stuck the dagger in. I think games one and five obscure the fact that it really was a closer series than it looked.

(And that doesn't even get into why Stan would suddenly drop Alston and Lee in favour of Nelson and Reddick during the Finals. I mean, I guess there's arguments either way, but in my opinion in was a "don't mess with a good thing" situation for Orlando coming into the series.)

Plenty of assists, lay ups and good strategy and team spirit by Bryant just says you're wrong. You don't have to realize you're wrong to be wrong though - and I'm not here to convince you of anything.

Kobe Bryant has become one of the best NBA players ever, certainly in the top ten, and that's only because he's a team player. Those who can't play well in a team never amount to anything and certainly don't lead their team to win the NBA championship title.

What you're doing is repeating your argument - that Kobe is a "team player" - but not telling me why. (I'm sorry, but "plenty of assists and lay ups" is a dubious yardstick at best.)

Furthermore, what you're also not doing is showing me why my argument is wrong. I watched every game of the series - not every minute, because there was a lot of switching-between-the-hockey-game for a couple nights, but I got the vast majority of it - and I repeat: Kobe really didn't play much different than he always has. He didn't magically become a "team player" this series. He took a ton of ridiculous, contested jumpers (many of which he made) and made a ton of horrendous, one-on-everyone plays (some of which he made). In fact a lot of his points came on tremendously difficult individual plays - e.g. swing the ball to Bryant, hold, swing through, hold, jab step, and then stick a mid-to-late-clock long jumper right in the face of his defender.

Now, can Kobe makes those kinds of plays? Yeah, of course. That's how he gets a lot of his points - on absolutely ridiculously brilliant individual efforts. But are those "team player" plays? NO. They aren't. They simply aren't.

I repeat: did you watch the Finals? If so, then please tell me how Kobe's play during the Finals was any different than his play during past years. I simply can't see how it was any different. His teammates just hit their shots this time, that's all - from Gasol to Fisher to Ariza and on down the list.

On that note, I'd personally love to see a thorough statistical breakdown of assist parameters for Kobe. For example, if you could measure things like "passes made in which the passee bricked the shot" or "total passes to someone in a scoring position" or stuff like that, I suspect his passing numbers really wouldn't be that much different. I'd be interested in knowing
a) whether Pau Gasol's high-percentage scoring rate ups Kobe's assist numbers compared to their former "low-post players", and
b) whether players that he passed to made their shots at a higher rate than previous years.

Of course, I doubt this sort of information exists. But again, I'll repeat: I didn't see much of a change in Kobe's play from previous years. I think it was just better play from his supporting cast.

greg

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by Sealobo 

Kobe is the Finals MVP, for the first time.

OK. And there we see how the Lakers roll. Too bad; the whole "Kobe is a team player" thing doesn't seem to hold water, at least for me.

[abbaZaba]

Originally Posted by ctt1wbw 

What if he wins next year, too?

not if Shaq goes to the Cavs ooooooo

[boy8cookie]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

*snip*

Gasol / Bryant pick-n-roll

[Sealobo]

MVP:



nobody questions his ability. but this guy has attitude issue.

[voodoo]

After seeing Howard jumping on the back of Gasol in game 4 after Gasol dunked right at the end of the game, which could have ended really badly for Gasol sure wasn't pretty either.

There's plenty of dirty tricks and nasty loss of temprament in the NBA.

Bryant sure is no angel, but then he's not exactly competing against angels either.

As I said before I adored Zidane's head-butt, so I do approve of a certainl level of dirty tricks when applicable

Let's all get outraged!!

[sek929]

Originally Posted by voodoo 

As I said before I adored Zidane's head-butt

That can't be because he head-butted an Italian, right?

[ShortcutToMoncton]

So I check Bill Simmons for the first time in a while today, and right on cue:

Kobe '09: Change We Can Believe In?

Originally Posted by Bill

Thanks to Ariza, the '09 Lakers finally made sense: Their best five was Kobe, Gasol, Ariza, Odom and Fisher (well past his prime, but still occasionally effective). Not only did the '08 Lakers lack a "best five," they didn't catch any breaks. The '09 Lakers caught a few breaks. They stayed healthy when other teams didn't. Every time their opponents screwed up in crunch time and gave them a second life, they took advantage. They never collapsed like they did in Game 4 of the 2008 Finals. They deserved to win.

If you're playing the "Shut up, Kobe was better this spring!" card, your only real evidence is two signature Kick-Butt Kobe Finals Games (Games 1 and 5). But if you're selling the "Kobe finally gets it" angle, then why was he gunning for 40 points at the tail end of a Game 1 blowout when he had already taken 30-plus shots? In Game 2, why did he go one-on-four for the winning basket (and miss) and ignore three wide-open teammates? Why did everyone so willingly gloss over the fact that, from the second quarter of Game 3 through overtime of Game 4, he missed 31 of 46 shots and kept shooting, anyway? Or that, near the tail end of Game 5, Kobe was so desperate to drain the clinching dagger that he clanged two 27-footers and allowed Orlando to climb within 12? Or that he didn't have a single clutch moment in the Finals other than his sweet dish to Gasol during their frantic Game 4 comeback?

In my opinion, nothing fundamentally changed: Kobe still wants to dominate and he still wants to win, and sometimes, you can't do both.

Goddamn, I'm good sometimes.

greg

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Originally Posted by Bill

Did Kobe do a better job of conforming this spring, or did the Lakers do a better job of surrounding him with efficient players who complemented him? Think about what he had in the 2004 Finals: Gary Payton sullenly standing in the corner, Karl Malone limping around, an out-of-shape Shaq who wasn't totally invested anymore, the immortal Devean George and Slava Medvedenko, a washed-up Rick Fox ... I mean, come on. Those guys battled constantly, with the battles centering around the same thing: Kobe wanted to spread his wings, everyone else wanted him to conform. They weren't invested in his individual success. They were threatened by it.

Not the 2009 Lakers. Take Gasol, who shot 62 percent from the field in the last two rounds. You know how many shots he attempted in those 11 games? 120. You know how many big guys would have been happy with a situation in which their coach said, "I know you score six out of every 10 times we get you the ball, but you're going to have to live with 11 shots a game because we can't win a title unless Kobe's happy?" Not many. Shaq didn't like the arrangement and got shipped out of town. Gasol came from NBA Hell (Memphis), and he was willing to sacrifice to make the Lakers better. He's a big reason they won. He crashed the boards, killed himself on defense and reinvented himself as a complementary sidekick of the highest order.

Did you hear about Gasol's sacrifice during the playoffs? Not really. Just like you didn't hear about Odom's willingness to give up minutes and touches during a contract year (a rarity in the NBA these days), or Ariza's red-hot shooting and the irony of Orlando giving him away last season. We always heard about Kobe sacrificing, but really, the key to the 2009 title was that he finally found three talented sidekicks willing to sacrifice for him. Big difference.

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

So I check Bill Simmons for the first time in a while today, and right on cue:

Kobe '09: Change We Can Believe In?



Goddamn, I'm good sometimes.

greg

Ahahaha!!!

Yes, Simmons sure is a bitter Celtics fan. You know I take great stock in their opinions.

He, like you, can't stop whining about Bryant - and that's on par for your average Kobe Bryant hater - however I watched the Lakers games and what he's writing about didn't happen except in his mind.

Maybe it's an 'merrycan thing, but team sports are never won by a single player. Whenever Bryant scored more than average, he's «hogging» up the ball. Yeah right.

Not letting his team play. Oh and Fisher is «well past his prime». Etc etc. Just a load of apologetic bullcrap from a bitter Celtics fan. -- and to add insult to injury I hear Simmons is a Patriots fan in the NFL.

Ahahahhaha!!!! Lakers won!

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Heh.

But it did happen. It was right there on TV. To me it's remarkable that we both saw exactly the same thing.

You just keep saying "he's a team player" over and over again, even when statistics and specific examples are thrown at you to prove otherwise.

Again: has Kobe Bryant always been a team player? That's the question I'm asking you. Because he's not really playing any different now than he ever was.

You seem awful sensitive to any criticism of Kobe, too. What's wrong? Why do you have to label anyone who points out what's clearly staring you in the face a "hater"? These are completely valid criticisms, backed up by detailed statistics and in-game examples. Furthermore, Simmons' article clearly states that Kobe is one of the greatest players of all time, and goes on at length about how incredible his accomplishments have been over the past two years.

The point is: Kobe is not a "team player," and never has been throughout his career. He's probably the greatest individual playmaker in the history of the game, but the team has to fit him in order to be successful, not the other way around. The Lakers won this year because everyone else on the team was better, not because Kobe did anything different. Where's your argument against that, besides "nuh uh"?

And why do you feel the need to crow so much over the Lakers - compensating for your Red Wings fiasco?

greg

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

Heh.

But it did happen. It was right there on TV. To me it's remarkable that we both saw exactly the same thing.

You just keep saying "he's a team player" over and over again, even when statistics and specific examples are thrown at you to prove otherwise.

Again: has Kobe Bryant always been a team player? That's the question I'm asking you. Because he's not really playing any different now than he ever was.

You seem awful sensitive to any criticism of Kobe, too. What's wrong? Why do you have to label anyone who points out what's clearly staring you in the face a "hater"? These are completely valid criticisms, backed up by detailed statistics and in-game examples. Furthermore, Simmons' article clearly states that Kobe is one of the greatest players of all time, and goes on at length about how incredible his accomplishments have been over the past two years.

The point is: Kobe is not a "team player," and never has been throughout his career. He's probably the greatest individual playmaker in the history of the game, but the team has to fit him in order to be successful, not the other way around. The Lakers won this year because everyone else on the team was better, not because Kobe did anything different. Where's your argument against that, besides "nuh uh"?

And why do you feel the need to crow so much over the Lakers - compensating for your Red Wings fiasco?

greg

As a player Kobe Bryant hasn't changed that much, except he's gotten better and he's a better team player. He was the captain of the team that won the NBA championship.

Statistics can «show» whatever you like, I just watched the games. There I saw a team player in Kobe Bryant. He's become many levels better than last year, let alone since he started.

Had he been dominating the team, somehow taking away chances from other players, I'd have been displeased. Instead he created chances, passed, layed up and distracted the opponents and led his team (as the team's captain) to win.

Simple as that.

What I don't get is that the only people obsessing over Kobe are fans of other teams, not the Lakers fans. Lakers fans are simply pleased with him and his development. Even Phil Jackson is pleased with Kobe Bryant now and he was very displeased with him not a few years ago. That itself only supports my point that he has developed and matured as one of the best current NBA players to becoming one of the best NBA players ever.

... but yeah what is the «Red Wings fiasco»? I've probably participated in a lot of fiascos through my days, but that rings no bells.

Oh you're talking about the team! Ah you see I am not my team. I just root for them because they are the best team in the NBA and play consistently entertaining basketball.

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by voodoo 

As a player Kobe Bryant hasn't changed that much, except he's gotten better and he's a better team player. He was the captain of the team that won the NBA championship.

Statistics can «show» whatever you like, I just watched the games. There I saw a team player in Kobe Bryant. He's become many levels better than last year, let alone since he started.

Had he been dominating the team, somehow taking away chances from other players, I'd have been displeased. Instead he created chances, passed, layed up and distracted the opponents and led his team (as the team's captain) to win.

Simple as that.

What I don't get is that the only people obsessing over Kobe are fans of other teams, not the Lakers fans. Lakers fans are simply pleased with him and his development. Even Phil Jackson is pleased with Kobe Bryant now and he was very displeased with him not a few years ago. That itself only supports my point that he has developed and matured as one of the best current NBA players to becoming one of the best NBA players ever.

... but yeah what is the «Red Wings fiasco»? I've probably participated in a lot of fiascos through my days, but that rings no bells.

Oh you're talking about the team! Ah you see I am not my team. I just root for them because they are the best team in the NBA and play consistently entertaining basketball.

I have posted that "Kobe is still a one-man team" above, but I want to emphasize that this is really about the large number of NBA teams with what might be called "very strong leading player" makeups. I did this in particular to contrast such teams with the Spurs because they have consistently been a "strongly led" but not "very strong leading player" team. Kobe is a wonder on the court, and there is no disputing that he can make the ball behave the way he wants it to. It's great to see highlight clips of him making exceptional shots.

And I'm also confused about some "fiasco" involving the Red Wings. They got to the Cup finals (again) and played very hard against a very, very good team that they beat by not too much last time. I don't see any "fiasco" there, just the two best teams in the NHL being the two best teams in the NHL for a couple years in a row-with some GREAT hockey games to show for it.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Originally Posted by voodoo 

Maybe it's an 'merrycan thing, but team sports are never won by a single player. Whenever Bryant scored more than average, he's «hogging» up the ball. Yeah right.

Oh, and through your repeated assertions of "team game" you keep ignoring the fact that basketball is more heavily dependent on one-on-one players than any other major team sport. Furthermore, Kobe play SG, which is the most create-your-own-shot position in the league.

It's the "Jordan effect."

Had he been dominating the team, somehow taking away chances from other players, I'd have been displeased. Instead he created chances, passed, layed up and distracted the opponents and led his team (as the team's captain) to win.

He averaged 27 shots a game and shot low-40s percentages. There has already been a list of specific examples of when and how Kobe repeatedly took away chances from other players. You continue to ignore it by saying "nuh uh." Fair enough I suppose.

What I don't get is that the only people obsessing over Kobe are fans of other teams, not the Lakers fans. Lakers fans are simply pleased with him and his development. Even Phil Jackson is pleased with Kobe Bryant now and he was very displeased with him not a few years ago. That itself only supports my point that he has developed and matured as one of the best current NBA players to becoming one of the best NBA players ever.

Maybe that's because people who aren't fans can actually analyze the team objectively? These are the people who are pointing out that Orlando imploded in the Finals, whereas you prefer to crow that the Lakers "won decisively."

See, I'm not a Lakers fan, or a Celtics fan, or a Cavs fan, etc. etc. I'm a Raptors fan. Therefore, I can be completely objective when it comes to talking about the NBA playoffs.

Red Wings fiasco

My bad. Got you confused with Villalobos.

(Although "fiasco" means the Wings being one of the only teams in SCF history to lose 2-0 and 3-2 leads. )