2000 WCF:
Shaq 26/12/4/2 on 54% shooting
Kobe 20/6/5/2 on 44% shooting
2001 WCF:
Shaq 27/13/3/1 on 54% shooting
Kobe 33/7/7/1 on 51% shooting
2002 WCF:
Shaq 30/14/2/2 on 53% shooting
Kobe 27/6/4/1 on 42% shooting. In Game 7, Kobe didn't make a single field goal in the 4th quarter OR overtime, and Shaq scored 6 in overtime to put the Lakers ahead for good.
Obviously Shaq dominated the Finals even more than the WCF. So Kobe had ONE WCF and ZERO NBA Finals where he played better than Shaq, and it gets turned into a whole narrative by Kobe stans. Being the star in 1 out of 6 series sure is impressive.
And the "wack Eastern Conference Center" that Shaq dominated in 2001 was Defensive Player of the Year Dikembe Mutombo, who averaged 14 points, 14 rebounds, and 3 blocks per game in the playoffs. Kobe, meanwhile, was guarded by the legendary Aaron McKie.
Don't really know what the argument is and don't have a side, but Kobe's post Shaq WCF performances in his actual prime:
'08 Vs Spurs: 29.2ppg, 5.6rpg, 3.8apg; 2.4tov, 58.5% TS (53.3% FG, 90.2% FT, 33.3% 3PT, 2.2 FTA, 4.8 3PA)
'09 Vs Nuggets: 34.0ppg, 5.8rpg, 5.8apg; 2.2tov; 62.7% TS (48.1% FG, 93.2% FT, 31.0%, 12.0 FTA, 5.3 3PA)
'10 Vs Suns: 33.7ppg, 7.2rpg, 8.3apg, 2.5tov; 63.7% TS (52.1 FG%, 88.1% FT, 43.2% 3PT, 7.0 FTA, 7.3 3PA)
He was a killer. The defenses he faced were generally strong too
2/5 in the finals says otherwise.
the east has just been really weak since MJ left in 98. the only years i can remember the east being DECENT was the run from 2008-2010. you had Bron's Cavs, the big 3 celtics, and Dwight's Magic playing good basketball. 3 legit finals contenders. other than for that stretch, i don't think there were ever 3 contenders in the east that could compete with the west.
I think he played well enough to win the title last year. Can't really hold the performances of his supporting cast against him. Don't think it matters if there's three contenders in a conference. Not like MJ had to deal with that year in & year out, his best competition was generally in the conference finals or finals and that's kinda the benefit of having the number one seed. You usually don't have to play the best teams until the end. The year before they knocked off the Spurs I'd consider that to be very impressive and pretty indicative of the fact that they'd be able to beat any team in the league in any conference. The Pacers still won 56 games and held the best defense in the league. Pretty sure thats a steep task for any team, to go against a top D and an offensive star in George who has the ability to greatly change the flow of a game. Year before they dethroned a rising OKC team that just got finished gentleman sweeping the Spurs, I think they'd have beaten them too. The C's had them down 3-2 in the conference finals but wound up losing because LBJ went god mode and dropped 45 which could've been 55 if he decided to keep shooting. Thats not weak competition but rather a dominant player taking the outcome of a series into his own hands. Don't forget that they had to overcome a Chris Bosh injury to pull out the Pacers series in the 2nd round. Indy had the opportunity to beat them. Year before sure, LBJ doesn't play well in the Finals and they get beat by the Mavs. But that Chicago team was extremely formidable. Best defense in the game, MVP, top rebounding team, great coach. That is some good competition and definitely could've competed with any team in that Western Conference. Year before he loses to the big three Celtics, year before the Dwight led Magic who were great, year before loses to the best defensive team of this era in the championship C"s who would also give Kobe work in the Finals and then the year before he bests the Detroit Pistons but loses to the championship Spurs. I am seeing some good competition here.
y'all getting creative wit it now
How is LeBron, D-Wade and CBosh and Ray Allen off the bench considered underdogs against anybody? Thats 4 future HoFers .
