Kobe Was Ridiculous

Mull

Pro
Joined
May 24, 2022
Messages
427
Reputation
70
Daps
1,452
I consider myself a student of the game I’m not going to act like I saw Mike play live so with my own two eyes Bean was the greatest I ever seen lace em up. Flaws and all Kobe was the best I saw do, combination of sheer will and force combined with a a ridiculous skill set #Mamba
 

LurkGod

Rookie
Joined
Mar 11, 2022
Messages
116
Reputation
10
Daps
459
Reppin
Harlem
I wouldn't call Kobe a role player in 2000. You wouldn't call Klay, Middleton etc role players and Kobe was better than they were. He was a borderline top 12 player that year.

Bro was second team all NBA with the other guard spot going to A.I. but I guess they were just two role players according to some :skip:
 

Killer Instinct

To live in hearts we leave behind is to never die.
Supporter
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
32,633
Reputation
11,481
Daps
150,162
Reppin
LWO
Kobe was a mere "roleplayer" in the three peat championship run. In '98 & '99, Kobe was an "all star" -- a key piece -- that was culpable for Shaq & the Lakers being swept. Y'all are gon' to learn about wasting the precious moments of limited time you have on this earth arguing with insipid dikkheads. :pachaha:
 

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
47,758
Reputation
18,328
Daps
190,300
Reppin
the ether
While “role player” Kobe was putting up 25-11-7 in the comeback win what was bus driver Shaq doing? Dropping 18-9-5 on 5/9 shooting :shaq2:


Because after giving up an average of 30-13-4 on 11-19 shooting to Shaq the first five games (as opposed to 17-4-6 on 5-13 shooting to Kobe), Blazers switched up the defense in Games 6/7 and did everything possible to deny the entry pass, bring the quick double, play as physical as possible and see what the refs would do, etc. Often they fouled him before the shot attempt, forcing LA to restart the possession. That in turn opened up a lot more attempts for Kobe, who was not the focus of their defense in any way whatsoever.

The strategy worked VERY well for Portland for 7 quarters. Even with Kobe's increased scoring output for those two games, Portland won Game 6 by 10 and was up 13 going into the fourth quarter of Game 7. But we all know what happened in the 4th quarter. Behind a constant parade of trips to the line, both Sabonis and Pippen fouling out, and a ton of bricked open jumpers by Portland, Lakers made a 31-13 comeback in the 4th. Kobe was 3-7 from the field and 3-6 from the line in that quarter for 9 points, the rest of LA was 6-8 from the field and 7-12 from the line for 22 points including 9 from Shaq himself on far fewer attempts. Framing Game 7 as some amazing Kobe carry job was out of line with reality.

It was closer to the same strategy employed by Spurs in 2001-04 and Pistons in 2004 - let Kobe shoot them out of the game - and it almost worked. To deny that, you have to explain while Portland outscored LA by 23 over the first 7 quarters despite Kobe scoring nearly 50 in that time, but then Kobe's 9 points on relatively poor shooting in that 4th somehow turned the game around.

In the Finals, he was back to exactly how he had played in Games 1-5 of the WCF, even before he got hurt in Game 1 and the first half of Game 2. Shaq was simply the focus of the team and that's what carried them to victories.



Kobe was a mere "roleplayer" in the three peat championship run. In '98 & '99, Kobe was an "all star" -- a key piece -- that was culpable for Shaq & the Lakers being swept. Y'all are gon' to learn about wasting the precious moments of limited time you have on this earth arguing with insipid dikkheads. :pachaha:

Kobe was a key piece in 1998, 1999, and 2000. #3 scorer in 1998, #2 scorer in 1999 and 2000, but far behind Shaq's contribution. He should get exactly as much credit or blame as he deserves for how well he played each year.

Only Kobestans tried to create this dichotomy where Kobe gets full credit for every ring but Shaq gets full blame for coming up short before that. I'm perfectly fine with partial credit every season.
 
Last edited:

LurkGod

Rookie
Joined
Mar 11, 2022
Messages
116
Reputation
10
Daps
459
Reppin
Harlem
Because after giving up an average of 30-13-4 on 11-19 shooting to Shaq the first five games (as opposed to 17-4-6 on 5-13 shooting to Kobe), Blazers switched up the defense in Games 6/7 and did everything possible to deny the entry pass, bring the quick double, play as physical as possible and see what the refs would do, etc. That in turn opened up a lot of room for Kobe, who was not the focus of their defense in any way whatsoever.

The strategy worked VERY well for Portland for 7 quarters. Even with Kobe's increased scoring output for those two games, Portland won Game 6 by 10 and was up 13 going into the fourth quarter of Game 7. But we all know what happened in the 4th quarter. Behind a constant parade of trips to the line, both Sabonis and Pippen fouling out, and a ton of bricked open jumpers by Portland, Lakers made a 31-13 comeback in the 4th. Kobe was 3-7 from the field and 3-6 from the line in that quarter for 9 points, the rest of LA was 6-8 from the field and 7-12 from the line for 22 points including 9 from Shaq himself on far fewer attempts. Framing Game 7 as some amazing Kobe carry job was out of line with reality.

So somehow the guy who led the team in scoring, rebounding, assists and blocks gets less credit for the win than the guy who made a grand total of 5 shots? Is this real life :skip:

I should’ve known after you called a 2nd team all NBA guy just a “role player” but you’ve been trolling this entire time, haven’t you? :pachaha:

Good one, you got me :ehh:
 

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
47,758
Reputation
18,328
Daps
190,300
Reppin
the ether
So somehow the guy who led the team in scoring, rebounding, assists and blocks gets less credit for the win than the guy who made a grand total of 5 shots? Is this real life :skip:

How the fukk did you just reduce the entire postseason to the stats of a single 3rd round game? :dead:

Kobe made 5 or fewer field goals in MOST of the Lakers' games the last two rounds, and was inferior in other stats as well. In game 7 he only scored more because he took over twice as many shots, and that strategy was working for Portland until the 4th when Shaq scored just as much as Kobe did.

Shaq was the entire focus of both Portland and Indiana, and everything that happened was predicated on stopping him. Everyone at the time knew that. Kobe being some sort of co-equal star was revisionist history that didn't take off until the 2001 playoffs and wasn't accurate then either.

Which we've seen ourselves with LWO. Did you not see the thread that Kobestan just made shytting on Shaq and Pau and blaming them entirely for the sweeps? He straight up said it was Shaq's fault the Lakers got swept in 1998 even though Shaq played great and Kobe was M.I.A.



I should’ve known after you called a 2nd team all NBA guy just a “role player” but you’ve been trolling this entire time, haven’t you? :pachaha:

Regular season is not the Finals.
 
Last edited:

LurkGod

Rookie
Joined
Mar 11, 2022
Messages
116
Reputation
10
Daps
459
Reppin
Harlem
How the fukk did you just reduce the entire postseason to the stats of a single 3rd round game? :dead:

Kobe made 5 or fewer field goals in MOST of the Lakers' games the last two rounds, and was inferior in other stats as well. In game 7 he only scored more because he took over twice as many shots, and that strategy was working for Portland until the 4th when Shaq scored just as much as Kobe did.






Regular season is not the Finals.

So winning a popularity fan vote makes Kobe an “all star” during the sweep in 98 but being all nba during the three peat makes him a role player. Gotcha :dead:
 

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
47,758
Reputation
18,328
Daps
190,300
Reppin
the ether
So winning a popularity fan vote makes Kobe an “all star” during the sweep in 98 but being all nba during the three peat makes him a role player. Gotcha :dead:

And you claimed I was the one trolling? You just made three different false claims on me.

1. Being voted all-star didn't "make" Kobe anything. I merely pointed out he was an important player on the team, I never said he was a star. He was the #3 scorer that year, are you denying he was important or not?

2. I didn't say shyt about Kobe being a role player for the entire three peat, I said the 2000 Finals.

3. I didn't say being all-nba "makes" anyone anything, it's all about what their role is and how they perform when it matters.



Do you agree with the Kobestan take that Shaq was solely responsible for the 1998 and 1999 sweeps? Cause that's what started the whole debate, and if you're still giving a pass on that then you really look disingenuous.



Why not just agree to the obvious compromise I stated earlier? When the Lakers lose, Kobe should get blamed corresponding to how poorly he played. When the Lakers win, Kobe should get credit corresponding to how well he played. There's no magic line between "role player" and "star" anyway, and thus all-or-nothing blame game is useless outside of fuelling stan wars.
 
Last edited:

LurkGod

Rookie
Joined
Mar 11, 2022
Messages
116
Reputation
10
Daps
459
Reppin
Harlem
Do you agree with the Kobestan take that Shaq was solely responsible for the 1998 and 1999 sweeps? Cause that's what started the whole debate, and if you're still giving a pass on that then you really look disingenuous.

I don’t think the Lakers and more specifically, Kobe were ready yet. He was fresh out of high school and wasn’t ready to co-anchor a championship run. :yeshrug:

Shaq was always great but the Lakers weren’t winning shyt until Kobe took that next step, they needed each other that’s what being a duo is. The beauty of that Lakers team was they had TWO players better than most teams best player, thus a three peat. It wasn’t Shaq just carrying Kobe along for the ride :martin:

Shaq being a better player than Kobe during the first championship doesn’t make him a damn “role player” is all I’m saying lol.
 

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
47,758
Reputation
18,328
Daps
190,300
Reppin
the ether
Kobe regressed from 1998 to the three peat years :troll:

Absolutely bizarre to me that Kobestans continuously troll their own threads. From the initial deflection to LeBron all the way to this, why even act like you don't want to have stan wars if all you do is troll like stans?



I don’t think the Lakers and more specifically, Kobe were ready yet. He was fresh out of high school and wasn’t ready to co-anchor a championship run. :yeshrug:

No one asked him to "co-anchor" the team in 98, 99, or 00. Lakers had 3 other all-stars in 1998 and two other recent elite #1s in 99 and 00. We're only discussing what he did with the role he had.



Shaq was always great but the Lakers weren’t winning shyt until Kobe took that next step, they needed each other that’s what being a duo is. The beauty of that Lakers team was they had TWO players better than most teams best player, thus a three peat. It wasn’t Shaq just carrying Kobe along for the ride :martin:

Kobe never needed to be better than the other team's best player in 2000. He just needed to do his role, and they still won.




Shaq being a better player than Kobe during the first championship doesn’t make him a damn “role player” is all I’m saying lol.

That's fair, "role player" is a meaningless subjective term so it was silly for me to use it anyway.

Like I said in the compromise, just give players credit for their contribution, good and bad. All-or-nothing is weird and useless.

Even being on this deflection is silly. We're only here because Kobestans have been making multiple entire threads blaming Shaq and Bron for every time they got swept and saying Kobe gets a pass. Why do those threads even exist, seriously, other than to fuel stan wars?
 
Top