Are the Cavs serious right now?????....Lebron and Kobe stans galore

[laker4lifeman]

Originally Posted by 703FlipFiend

Cats have been putting their hearts into these final papers the past two pages. Too much foolishness to read.

Yep 

 

[MVP]

Xta is writing alot about NOTHING...

Ifs, ifs, ifs, if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle.

The facts are that Kobe and LeBron did not enter into the league in the same situations. Kobe sat on the bench for a year and a half before getting any real minutes, LeBron was handed then entire franchise and given free-reign to do whatever the hell he wanted to do. Could Bron have won with Shaq, probably but there's no earthly way that you can say for damn sure that he would have, why? Because it DIDN'T happen. It's all conjecture. Kobe and Shaq were good compliments to each other because they were a true inside/outside combo, the likes that we've rarely seen. Could early Lebron have been that same yin to Shaq's yang when he lives in the paint just as Shaq did? Maybe, but it's not guaranteed he would.

Kobe was "given" his own team in 2004 and in 4 years led them to the Finals and won 2 games. Bron was given his own team in 2003 and led them to the Finals in 2007 and got swept. Supporting casts or not that's about the closest comparison to be made between them. Otherwise all this banter is just pie in the sky and has no founded basis.

All I know is that the excuses in that Mr. James has been granted over the years prior to his Decision are out of the window. He has to win and win NOW. No more he doesn't have a supporting cast and doesn't have any help. He has two other top 15 players in the league with him. If he doesn't get it done THIS year, Wade won't be killed, Bosh won't be killed, the firestorm will be all on LeBron James.

 

[MVP]

Xta is writing alot about NOTHING...

Ifs, ifs, ifs, if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle.

The facts are that Kobe and LeBron did not enter into the league in the same situations. Kobe sat on the bench for a year and a half before getting any real minutes, LeBron was handed then entire franchise and given free-reign to do whatever the hell he wanted to do. Could Bron have won with Shaq, probably but there's no earthly way that you can say for damn sure that he would have, why? Because it DIDN'T happen. It's all conjecture. Kobe and Shaq were good compliments to each other because they were a true inside/outside combo, the likes that we've rarely seen. Could early Lebron have been that same yin to Shaq's yang when he lives in the paint just as Shaq did? Maybe, but it's not guaranteed he would.

Kobe was "given" his own team in 2004 and in 4 years led them to the Finals and won 2 games. Bron was given his own team in 2003 and led them to the Finals in 2007 and got swept. Supporting casts or not that's about the closest comparison to be made between them. Otherwise all this banter is just pie in the sky and has no founded basis.

All I know is that the excuses in that Mr. James has been granted over the years prior to his Decision are out of the window. He has to win and win NOW. No more he doesn't have a supporting cast and doesn't have any help. He has two other top 15 players in the league with him. If he doesn't get it done THIS year, Wade won't be killed, Bosh won't be killed, the firestorm will be all on LeBron James.

 

[lukethejediknight]

"Otherwise all this banter is just pie in the sky and has no founded basis."

You're absolutely right.

But to play devil's advocate, doesn't this flipside of this argument also hold true? We don't know how LeBron would do with Shaq and a supporting cast like Kobe's, we ABSOLUTELY know Kobe wins no titles without one. As a matter of fact, we also know that within the grand context of the team, he is simply the engine of a car that needs ALL the other parts to work.


Unless of course, Kobe is really Superman in disguise and can play one-on-five but you get what I mean.

 

[lukethejediknight]

"Otherwise all this banter is just pie in the sky and has no founded basis."

You're absolutely right.

But to play devil's advocate, doesn't this flipside of this argument also hold true? We don't know how LeBron would do with Shaq and a supporting cast like Kobe's, we ABSOLUTELY know Kobe wins no titles without one. As a matter of fact, we also know that within the grand context of the team, he is simply the engine of a car that needs ALL the other parts to work.


Unless of course, Kobe is really Superman in disguise and can play one-on-five but you get what I mean.

 

[Mark Antony]

In a thread about the 2011 Cavs? naw i'm good.

 

[Mark Antony]

In a thread about the 2011 Cavs? naw i'm good.

 

[acidicality]

And no, the text on the sign isn't photoshopped. The whole forum is full of you. Your team is the Kobe Bryants. Oh, I am so sorry that I blamed the other players on the Cavs for the Cavs not winning the championships. Clearly I was wrong with the way they're dominating the league. It would've made much more sense to blame LeBron, like you and your fellow Kobe stans. It was clearly his fault that they lost against the Magic with his pathetic 38, 8 and 8 averages throughout that series and the buzzer beating 3. He didn't do sufficiently with the "best supporting cast in the league". And I used Smush and Kwame as an example because of YOU Kobe homers, and how you constantly mention that Kobe had such a horrible team around him in the post-Shaq, pre-Gasol days. If he was able to lead these bums to the best record in the league, he wouldn't have had problems doing it with anyone... He would survive with Kwame and Smush. He would dominate with Lamar Odom and Caron Butler. Yeah, Kobe's ego was so tiny. His ego and reluctance to accept that he was a #2 to Shaq and failed attempt to be #1 is the main reason the Lakers lost the 2004 finals against the Pistons, which led to Shaq leaving. And LeBron has a huge ego, yet he somehow comes to a team to be a Robin and Pippen. Which one is it? And talk about hypocrisy. You Kobe homers blame EVERYONE but Kobe. Gasol grabs 20 rebounds and he's the scapegoat. It's still his fault if the Lakers lose. And not only is it his fault, but it's his fault because he's soft. 20 REBOUNDS... SOFT!

And here's proof that you all are just a bunch of Kobe huggers and not Lakers fans:

I claim that Pau Gasol was the real MVP of the 2010 NBA Finals. But every time I mention this I get battalions of salty Kobe homer soldiers like the one pictured above gang up on me. Yet this is not an anti-Lakers statement in any way. It may be a pro-Pau Gasol and (in your opinion) an anti-Kobe Bryant statement, but it's certainly not an anti-Lakers statement, since in the both players play for the Lakers. I'm simply choosing one LAKERS player over another. Yet because it's not Kobe, you get upset. You constantly customize to make The ridiculous statement in this thread that LeBron only won a gold medal because of Kobe illustrates the most extreme example of your customization:

Kobe plays like doo-doo on a stick throughout the entire 2008 Olympics, but then hits a couple of big shots in the gold medal game and it's because of him LeBron has the gold medal. It's all about that final game. But Kobe shoots 6-24 in game 7 of the finals and gets bailed out, yet suddenly game 7 isn't all that important. It's all about "the whole series", (where Gasol put up better numbers over 7 games as well, not to mention had a much better game 7).. Or it's about the ONE thing that Kobe did well in game 7: rebound. Never in your decade long period of Kobe homerism have you and your fellow stanboys EVER pointed out rebounding as a reason as to why Kobe is so great.. It was always about him being clutch, scoring when it mattered. But oh no, not this time: He rebuilds the World Trade Center with the bricks he lays throughout game 7, so you can't exactly use that to homerize.. "He didn't shoot well, so let's see: What did Kobe do well... AHA! Rebound. That's what we'll use.." All the while LeBron gave up despite him grabbing 19 rebounds against the Celtics.

The NBA markets its players as individuals, but it's still clearly a team game when it comes to who wins the championships, and having a great big man is practically a prerequisite to contention.

 

[acidicality]

And no, the text on the sign isn't photoshopped. The whole forum is full of you. Your team is the Kobe Bryants. Oh, I am so sorry that I blamed the other players on the Cavs for the Cavs not winning the championships. Clearly I was wrong with the way they're dominating the league. It would've made much more sense to blame LeBron, like you and your fellow Kobe stans. It was clearly his fault that they lost against the Magic with his pathetic 38, 8 and 8 averages throughout that series and the buzzer beating 3. He didn't do sufficiently with the "best supporting cast in the league". And I used Smush and Kwame as an example because of YOU Kobe homers, and how you constantly mention that Kobe had such a horrible team around him in the post-Shaq, pre-Gasol days. If he was able to lead these bums to the best record in the league, he wouldn't have had problems doing it with anyone... He would survive with Kwame and Smush. He would dominate with Lamar Odom and Caron Butler. Yeah, Kobe's ego was so tiny. His ego and reluctance to accept that he was a #2 to Shaq and failed attempt to be #1 is the main reason the Lakers lost the 2004 finals against the Pistons, which led to Shaq leaving. And LeBron has a huge ego, yet he somehow comes to a team to be a Robin and Pippen. Which one is it? And talk about hypocrisy. You Kobe homers blame EVERYONE but Kobe. Gasol grabs 20 rebounds and he's the scapegoat. It's still his fault if the Lakers lose. And not only is it his fault, but it's his fault because he's soft. 20 REBOUNDS... SOFT!

And here's proof that you all are just a bunch of Kobe huggers and not Lakers fans:

I claim that Pau Gasol was the real MVP of the 2010 NBA Finals. But every time I mention this I get battalions of salty Kobe homer soldiers like the one pictured above gang up on me. Yet this is not an anti-Lakers statement in any way. It may be a pro-Pau Gasol and (in your opinion) an anti-Kobe Bryant statement, but it's certainly not an anti-Lakers statement, since in the both players play for the Lakers. I'm simply choosing one LAKERS player over another. Yet because it's not Kobe, you get upset. You constantly customize to make The ridiculous statement in this thread that LeBron only won a gold medal because of Kobe illustrates the most extreme example of your customization:

Kobe plays like doo-doo on a stick throughout the entire 2008 Olympics, but then hits a couple of big shots in the gold medal game and it's because of him LeBron has the gold medal. It's all about that final game. But Kobe shoots 6-24 in game 7 of the finals and gets bailed out, yet suddenly game 7 isn't all that important. It's all about "the whole series", (where Gasol put up better numbers over 7 games as well, not to mention had a much better game 7).. Or it's about the ONE thing that Kobe did well in game 7: rebound. Never in your decade long period of Kobe homerism have you and your fellow stanboys EVER pointed out rebounding as a reason as to why Kobe is so great.. It was always about him being clutch, scoring when it mattered. But oh no, not this time: He rebuilds the World Trade Center with the bricks he lays throughout game 7, so you can't exactly use that to homerize.. "He didn't shoot well, so let's see: What did Kobe do well... AHA! Rebound. That's what we'll use.." All the while LeBron gave up despite him grabbing 19 rebounds against the Celtics.

The NBA markets its players as individuals, but it's still clearly a team game when it comes to who wins the championships, and having a great big man is practically a prerequisite to contention.

 

[luigitheking]

Dudes spending more time typing @$%% in here than I do on my homework. 

 

[luigitheking]

Dudes spending more time typing @$%% in here than I do on my homework. 

 

[mrdieselfuel09]

 

[mrdieselfuel09]

 

[lukethejediknight]

"The NBA markets its players as individuals, but it's still clearly a team game when it comes to who wins the championships, and having a great big man is practically a prerequisite to contention. "

Smartest post in this whole thread.

 

[lukethejediknight]

"The NBA markets its players as individuals, but it's still clearly a team game when it comes to who wins the championships, and having a great big man is practically a prerequisite to contention. "

Smartest post in this whole thread.

 

[MVP]

Originally Posted by LuketheJediKnight

"Otherwise all this banter is just pie in the sky and has no founded basis."

You're absolutely right.

But to play devil's advocate, doesn't this flipside of this argument also hold true? We don't know how LeBron would do with Shaq and a supporting cast like Kobe's, we ABSOLUTELY know Kobe wins no titles without one. As a matter of fact, we also know that within the grand context of the team, he is simply the engine of a car that needs ALL the other parts to work.


Unless of course, Kobe is really Superman in disguise and can play one-on-five but you get what I mean.

Who gives a flying you know what? I live in REALITY not FANTASY

First it was he wouldn't win a title without Shaq, he did.

Then some people want to heap the majority of the credit to Pau who won all of ZERO playoff games before joining LA. 

Has Kobe just been some nice role player and had no significant impact on getting his 5 rings? I mean have the Lakers won back to back titles IN SPITE OF HIM?

People always talk about what Kobe's supporting cast has done for him. But have those same guys not gotten better, more recognition, etc. when coming to play with him? Nobody was mentioning Pau as one of or the top big men in the league before he came to LA, now all of a sudden he's the most skilled big man in the game today. What changed? The stats are mostly similar, but he was brought into something that he'd never been part of before, a winning environment. And that changes the perception of a whole lot of things. Kobe does a lot of things that irk people, doesn't make the best decisions all the time, and isn't the perfect player, but one thing that can't be questioned is his will to win. It may even be misguided at times where he figures he'll just be better off trying to do that on his own, but still it's there. You can't sit here and say that hasn't had an effect on his teammates. It took him a while but he's developed into a pretty effective leader.

LeBron may have not had a supporting cast that has been on par with Kobe's in the past but he does now, so like I said all the excuses he's had are over with. And before you say besides Wade and Bosh, who does he have, I won't even start to mention all the clowns on here hyping up the acquisitions of Mike Miller, Eddie House, etc. before this season started. I already have seen the tide turn with some of those same cats b/c basically this entire season it's been the Big 3 and a bunch of bums out there for the Heat.

 

[MVP]

Originally Posted by LuketheJediKnight

"Otherwise all this banter is just pie in the sky and has no founded basis."

You're absolutely right.

But to play devil's advocate, doesn't this flipside of this argument also hold true? We don't know how LeBron would do with Shaq and a supporting cast like Kobe's, we ABSOLUTELY know Kobe wins no titles without one. As a matter of fact, we also know that within the grand context of the team, he is simply the engine of a car that needs ALL the other parts to work.


Unless of course, Kobe is really Superman in disguise and can play one-on-five but you get what I mean.

Who gives a flying you know what? I live in REALITY not FANTASY

First it was he wouldn't win a title without Shaq, he did.

Then some people want to heap the majority of the credit to Pau who won all of ZERO playoff games before joining LA. 

Has Kobe just been some nice role player and had no significant impact on getting his 5 rings? I mean have the Lakers won back to back titles IN SPITE OF HIM?

People always talk about what Kobe's supporting cast has done for him. But have those same guys not gotten better, more recognition, etc. when coming to play with him? Nobody was mentioning Pau as one of or the top big men in the league before he came to LA, now all of a sudden he's the most skilled big man in the game today. What changed? The stats are mostly similar, but he was brought into something that he'd never been part of before, a winning environment. And that changes the perception of a whole lot of things. Kobe does a lot of things that irk people, doesn't make the best decisions all the time, and isn't the perfect player, but one thing that can't be questioned is his will to win. It may even be misguided at times where he figures he'll just be better off trying to do that on his own, but still it's there. You can't sit here and say that hasn't had an effect on his teammates. It took him a while but he's developed into a pretty effective leader.

LeBron may have not had a supporting cast that has been on par with Kobe's in the past but he does now, so like I said all the excuses he's had are over with. And before you say besides Wade and Bosh, who does he have, I won't even start to mention all the clowns on here hyping up the acquisitions of Mike Miller, Eddie House, etc. before this season started. I already have seen the tide turn with some of those same cats b/c basically this entire season it's been the Big 3 and a bunch of bums out there for the Heat.

 

[lukethejediknight]

"You can't sit here and say that hasn't had an effect on his teammates."

You can easily make the same argument vice-versa.

Why so angry though? It's not even like I was saying the dude isn't important in helping the Lakers win, but I simply stated the fact that he wins nothing without a supporting cast. Same is true for any other player. Doesn't that fact in of itself make the rings argument pretty silly? After all, when you say "Kobe's five rings to LeBron's no rings" you're not actually comparing the players Kobe and LeBron at all strictly speaking, but the Lakers and Cavs as an entire TEAM. And they're not trotting the exact same players and coaches out there.

 

[lukethejediknight]

"You can't sit here and say that hasn't had an effect on his teammates."

You can easily make the same argument vice-versa.

Why so angry though? It's not even like I was saying the dude isn't important in helping the Lakers win, but I simply stated the fact that he wins nothing without a supporting cast. Same is true for any other player. Doesn't that fact in of itself make the rings argument pretty silly? After all, when you say "Kobe's five rings to LeBron's no rings" you're not actually comparing the players Kobe and LeBron at all strictly speaking, but the Lakers and Cavs as an entire TEAM. And they're not trotting the exact same players and coaches out there.

 

[MVP]

Of course having better players around you is going to give you a better opportunity to win, but there have been many teams with seemingly a great roster that haven't been able to put it together to produce a champion, a lot of other intangibles go into that process.

I wonder if or when Bron wins a title will the same arguments be made against him, "well he didn't win until/without he got Wade and Bosh"

Basketball is a team sport, but out of all the other sports one transcendent talent can have the most impact.

Why is the rings argument silly, isn't there a reason that Duncan is put over Chuck and Malone as the greatest PF of all time. What about Magic over Stockton? Or Hakeem over Ewing They all were great Hall of Fame talents at their positions, but the glaring difference is that the former have rings and the latter don't. It does matter, when talking about players of equivalent and supreme talent. Nobody in their right mind is going to say Slava Medvadenko > Bron even with his ring, but for more comparative players it most definitely plays a factor; to dismiss it is just ludicrous.

I'm far from mad, it's just that the same gahbage it said year after year and it just gets old and I have nothing better to do tonight.

 

[MVP]

Of course having better players around you is going to give you a better opportunity to win, but there have been many teams with seemingly a great roster that haven't been able to put it together to produce a champion, a lot of other intangibles go into that process.

I wonder if or when Bron wins a title will the same arguments be made against him, "well he didn't win until/without he got Wade and Bosh"

Basketball is a team sport, but out of all the other sports one transcendent talent can have the most impact.

Why is the rings argument silly, isn't there a reason that Duncan is put over Chuck and Malone as the greatest PF of all time. What about Magic over Stockton? Or Hakeem over Ewing They all were great Hall of Fame talents at their positions, but the glaring difference is that the former have rings and the latter don't. It does matter, when talking about players of equivalent and supreme talent. Nobody in their right mind is going to say Slava Medvadenko > Bron even with his ring, but for more comparative players it most definitely plays a factor; to dismiss it is just ludicrous.

I'm far from mad, it's just that the same gahbage it said year after year and it just gets old and I have nothing better to do tonight.

 

[lukethejediknight]

"Basketball is a team sport, but out of all the other sports one transcendent talent can have the most impact."

This is correct, but do NOT confuse this with thinking that the individual becomes more important to winning than the team. He isn't. He can help his team's chances by himself more than other sports, but it's still a team sport first.

"It does matter, when talking about players of equivalent and supreme talent."

But is the talent they play WITH (not to mention the coaches and the staff that puts the team together) also of "equivalent and supreme talent"? Because if you answer yes, then Kobe has alot to explain for for the 2003 to 2008 seasons, especially that 2006 season with Smush Parker. Right?

 

[lukethejediknight]

"Basketball is a team sport, but out of all the other sports one transcendent talent can have the most impact."

This is correct, but do NOT confuse this with thinking that the individual becomes more important to winning than the team. He isn't. He can help his team's chances by himself more than other sports, but it's still a team sport first.

"It does matter, when talking about players of equivalent and supreme talent."

But is the talent they play WITH (not to mention the coaches and the staff that puts the team together) also of "equivalent and supreme talent"? Because if you answer yes, then Kobe has alot to explain for for the 2003 to 2008 seasons, especially that 2006 season with Smush Parker. Right?

 

[MVP]

Of course it does. But since you do say it is a TEAM sport, did Bron's cast have anything to do with the Cavs getting 60+ win seasons or was it all him? Cause they have fell completely off the map without him.

Point I'm making is Bron has a level playing field now, let's see if he can have similar success that Kobe has had with his great casts over the years. If he doesn't, then he will be blamed, no one else.

 

[MVP]

Of course it does. But since you do say it is a TEAM sport, did Bron's cast have anything to do with the Cavs getting 60+ win seasons or was it all him? Cause they have fell completely off the map without him.

Point I'm making is Bron has a level playing field now, let's see if he can have similar success that Kobe has had with his great casts over the years. If he doesn't, then he will be blamed, no one else.