Shaq: I compete with Duncan, not Kobe

[nicedudewithnicedreams]

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Well, there is clearly a reason why Shaq got those Finals MVPs.

2000 NBA Finals

Shaq- 38 PPG, 17 RPG, 2.5 APG, 2.7 BPG, 61% FG
Kobe-16 PPG, 5 RPG, 4 APG, 1.4 BPG, 36% FG

2001 NBA Finals

Shaq- 33 PPG, 16 RPG, 5 APG, 3.5 BPG, 57% FG
Kobe- 24 PPG, 8 RPG, 6 APG, 1.4 BPG, 41% FG

2002 NBA Finals

Shaq- 37 PPG, 12.25 RPG, 4 APG, 2.75 BPG, 60% FG
Kobe-26 PPG, 5.75 RPG, 5 APG, .75 BPG, 51% FG

Total average stats for 3 championships (15 games)

Shaq=36 PPG, 15.4 RPG, 3.7 APG, 3 BPG, 60% FG
Kobe=20 PPG, 6 RPG, 4.6 APG, 1 BPG, 42% FG

Sidebar, the Lakers could have won if they replaced Kobe with T-Mac in that Nets series right?

i dont think anyones Shaq didnt deserve those MVPs. What im arguing about is people saying Kobe couldnt do it Without Shaq, but pretending like Shaq couldve done it without Kobe.


and i didnt know we could do a replacement in that case If it was Kobe and Tim Duncan Instead of Shaq It would be Game Over

But you can see in the finals averages that Kobe wasn't elevating his game to another level that Shaq did. My point was that T-Mac could have replaced Kobe at least in the Nets series and the Lakers would still be fine. And your suggestion that Kobe and Duncan would have = game over might be true, but best believe that the determining the factor would be how Kobe played. You know what you getting from Duncan and Shaq at that time. The same can't be said for Kobe. Different story now of course with a more mature Kobe. 

 

[nicedudewithnicedreams]

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Well, there is clearly a reason why Shaq got those Finals MVPs.

2000 NBA Finals

Shaq- 38 PPG, 17 RPG, 2.5 APG, 2.7 BPG, 61% FG
Kobe-16 PPG, 5 RPG, 4 APG, 1.4 BPG, 36% FG

2001 NBA Finals

Shaq- 33 PPG, 16 RPG, 5 APG, 3.5 BPG, 57% FG
Kobe- 24 PPG, 8 RPG, 6 APG, 1.4 BPG, 41% FG

2002 NBA Finals

Shaq- 37 PPG, 12.25 RPG, 4 APG, 2.75 BPG, 60% FG
Kobe-26 PPG, 5.75 RPG, 5 APG, .75 BPG, 51% FG

Total average stats for 3 championships (15 games)

Shaq=36 PPG, 15.4 RPG, 3.7 APG, 3 BPG, 60% FG
Kobe=20 PPG, 6 RPG, 4.6 APG, 1 BPG, 42% FG

Sidebar, the Lakers could have won if they replaced Kobe with T-Mac in that Nets series right?

i dont think anyones Shaq didnt deserve those MVPs. What im arguing about is people saying Kobe couldnt do it Without Shaq, but pretending like Shaq couldve done it without Kobe.


and i didnt know we could do a replacement in that case If it was Kobe and Tim Duncan Instead of Shaq It would be Game Over

But you can see in the finals averages that Kobe wasn't elevating his game to another level that Shaq did. My point was that T-Mac could have replaced Kobe at least in the Nets series and the Lakers would still be fine. And your suggestion that Kobe and Duncan would have = game over might be true, but best believe that the determining the factor would be how Kobe played. You know what you getting from Duncan and Shaq at that time. The same can't be said for Kobe. Different story now of course with a more mature Kobe. 

 

[tennhouse2]

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Well, there is clearly a reason why Shaq got those Finals MVPs.

2000 NBA Finals

Shaq- 38 PPG, 17 RPG, 2.5 APG, 2.7 BPG, 61% FG
Kobe-16 PPG, 5 RPG, 4 APG, 1.4 BPG, 36% FG

2001 NBA Finals

Shaq- 33 PPG, 16 RPG, 5 APG, 3.5 BPG, 57% FG
Kobe- 24 PPG, 8 RPG, 6 APG, 1.4 BPG, 41% FG

2002 NBA Finals

Shaq- 37 PPG, 12.25 RPG, 4 APG, 2.75 BPG, 60% FG
Kobe-26 PPG, 5.75 RPG, 5 APG, .75 BPG, 51% FG

Total average stats for 3 championships (15 games)

Shaq=36 PPG, 15.4 RPG, 3.7 APG, 3 BPG, 60% FG
Kobe=20 PPG, 6 RPG, 4.6 APG, 1 BPG, 42% FG

Sidebar, the Lakers could have won if they replaced Kobe with T-Mac in that Nets series right?

i dont think anyones Shaq didnt deserve those MVPs. What im arguing about is people saying Kobe couldnt do it Without Shaq, but pretending like Shaq couldve done it without Kobe.


and i didnt know we could do a replacement in that case If it was Kobe and Tim Duncan Instead of Shaq It would be Game Over

But you can see in the finals averages that Kobe wasn't elevating his game to another level that Shaq did. My point was that T-Mac could have replaced Kobe at least in the Nets series and the Lakers would still be fine. And your suggestion that Kobe and Duncan would have = game over might be true, but best believe that the determining the factor would be how Kobe played. You know what you getting from Duncan and Shaq at that time. The same can't be said for Kobe. Different story now of course with a more mature Kobe. 

Yea but I dont see them making it to The Nets if you replace Kobe with Tracy

 

[tennhouse2]

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Well, there is clearly a reason why Shaq got those Finals MVPs.

2000 NBA Finals

Shaq- 38 PPG, 17 RPG, 2.5 APG, 2.7 BPG, 61% FG
Kobe-16 PPG, 5 RPG, 4 APG, 1.4 BPG, 36% FG

2001 NBA Finals

Shaq- 33 PPG, 16 RPG, 5 APG, 3.5 BPG, 57% FG
Kobe- 24 PPG, 8 RPG, 6 APG, 1.4 BPG, 41% FG

2002 NBA Finals

Shaq- 37 PPG, 12.25 RPG, 4 APG, 2.75 BPG, 60% FG
Kobe-26 PPG, 5.75 RPG, 5 APG, .75 BPG, 51% FG

Total average stats for 3 championships (15 games)

Shaq=36 PPG, 15.4 RPG, 3.7 APG, 3 BPG, 60% FG
Kobe=20 PPG, 6 RPG, 4.6 APG, 1 BPG, 42% FG

Sidebar, the Lakers could have won if they replaced Kobe with T-Mac in that Nets series right?

i dont think anyones Shaq didnt deserve those MVPs. What im arguing about is people saying Kobe couldnt do it Without Shaq, but pretending like Shaq couldve done it without Kobe.


and i didnt know we could do a replacement in that case If it was Kobe and Tim Duncan Instead of Shaq It would be Game Over

But you can see in the finals averages that Kobe wasn't elevating his game to another level that Shaq did. My point was that T-Mac could have replaced Kobe at least in the Nets series and the Lakers would still be fine. And your suggestion that Kobe and Duncan would have = game over might be true, but best believe that the determining the factor would be how Kobe played. You know what you getting from Duncan and Shaq at that time. The same can't be said for Kobe. Different story now of course with a more mature Kobe. 

Yea but I dont see them making it to The Nets if you replace Kobe with Tracy

 

[nicedudewithnicedreams]

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Well, there is clearly a reason why Shaq got those Finals MVPs.

2000 NBA Finals

Shaq- 38 PPG, 17 RPG, 2.5 APG, 2.7 BPG, 61% FG
Kobe-16 PPG, 5 RPG, 4 APG, 1.4 BPG, 36% FG

2001 NBA Finals

Shaq- 33 PPG, 16 RPG, 5 APG, 3.5 BPG, 57% FG
Kobe- 24 PPG, 8 RPG, 6 APG, 1.4 BPG, 41% FG

2002 NBA Finals

Shaq- 37 PPG, 12.25 RPG, 4 APG, 2.75 BPG, 60% FG
Kobe-26 PPG, 5.75 RPG, 5 APG, .75 BPG, 51% FG

Total average stats for 3 championships (15 games)

Shaq=36 PPG, 15.4 RPG, 3.7 APG, 3 BPG, 60% FG
Kobe=20 PPG, 6 RPG, 4.6 APG, 1 BPG, 42% FG

Sidebar, the Lakers could have won if they replaced Kobe with T-Mac in that Nets series right?

i dont think anyones Shaq didnt deserve those MVPs. What im arguing about is people saying Kobe couldnt do it Without Shaq, but pretending like Shaq couldve done it without Kobe.


and i didnt know we could do a replacement in that case If it was Kobe and Tim Duncan Instead of Shaq It would be Game Over

But you can see in the finals averages that Kobe wasn't elevating his game to another level that Shaq did. My point was that T-Mac could have replaced Kobe at least in the Nets series and the Lakers would still be fine. And your suggestion that Kobe and Duncan would have = game over might be true, but best believe that the determining the factor would be how Kobe played. You know what you getting from Duncan and Shaq at that time. The same can't be said for Kobe. Different story now of course with a more mature Kobe. 

Yea but I dont see them making it to The Nets if you replace Kobe with Tracy

I'm a Kings fan so I know personally just how much more scared I was of Shaq than Kobe in 2002. Christie can do a decent job on Kobe and T-Mac, but no one on the Kings could stop Shaq.

 

[nicedudewithnicedreams]

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Well, there is clearly a reason why Shaq got those Finals MVPs.

2000 NBA Finals

Shaq- 38 PPG, 17 RPG, 2.5 APG, 2.7 BPG, 61% FG
Kobe-16 PPG, 5 RPG, 4 APG, 1.4 BPG, 36% FG

2001 NBA Finals

Shaq- 33 PPG, 16 RPG, 5 APG, 3.5 BPG, 57% FG
Kobe- 24 PPG, 8 RPG, 6 APG, 1.4 BPG, 41% FG

2002 NBA Finals

Shaq- 37 PPG, 12.25 RPG, 4 APG, 2.75 BPG, 60% FG
Kobe-26 PPG, 5.75 RPG, 5 APG, .75 BPG, 51% FG

Total average stats for 3 championships (15 games)

Shaq=36 PPG, 15.4 RPG, 3.7 APG, 3 BPG, 60% FG
Kobe=20 PPG, 6 RPG, 4.6 APG, 1 BPG, 42% FG

Sidebar, the Lakers could have won if they replaced Kobe with T-Mac in that Nets series right?

i dont think anyones Shaq didnt deserve those MVPs. What im arguing about is people saying Kobe couldnt do it Without Shaq, but pretending like Shaq couldve done it without Kobe.


and i didnt know we could do a replacement in that case If it was Kobe and Tim Duncan Instead of Shaq It would be Game Over

But you can see in the finals averages that Kobe wasn't elevating his game to another level that Shaq did. My point was that T-Mac could have replaced Kobe at least in the Nets series and the Lakers would still be fine. And your suggestion that Kobe and Duncan would have = game over might be true, but best believe that the determining the factor would be how Kobe played. You know what you getting from Duncan and Shaq at that time. The same can't be said for Kobe. Different story now of course with a more mature Kobe. 

Yea but I dont see them making it to The Nets if you replace Kobe with Tracy

I'm a Kings fan so I know personally just how much more scared I was of Shaq than Kobe in 2002. Christie can do a decent job on Kobe and T-Mac, but no one on the Kings could stop Shaq.

 

[tennhouse2]

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Well, there is clearly a reason why Shaq got those Finals MVPs.

2000 NBA Finals

Shaq- 38 PPG, 17 RPG, 2.5 APG, 2.7 BPG, 61% FG
Kobe-16 PPG, 5 RPG, 4 APG, 1.4 BPG, 36% FG

2001 NBA Finals

Shaq- 33 PPG, 16 RPG, 5 APG, 3.5 BPG, 57% FG
Kobe- 24 PPG, 8 RPG, 6 APG, 1.4 BPG, 41% FG

2002 NBA Finals

Shaq- 37 PPG, 12.25 RPG, 4 APG, 2.75 BPG, 60% FG
Kobe-26 PPG, 5.75 RPG, 5 APG, .75 BPG, 51% FG

Total average stats for 3 championships (15 games)

Shaq=36 PPG, 15.4 RPG, 3.7 APG, 3 BPG, 60% FG
Kobe=20 PPG, 6 RPG, 4.6 APG, 1 BPG, 42% FG

Sidebar, the Lakers could have won if they replaced Kobe with T-Mac in that Nets series right?

i dont think anyones Shaq didnt deserve those MVPs. What im arguing about is people saying Kobe couldnt do it Without Shaq, but pretending like Shaq couldve done it without Kobe.


and i didnt know we could do a replacement in that case If it was Kobe and Tim Duncan Instead of Shaq It would be Game Over

But you can see in the finals averages that Kobe wasn't elevating his game to another level that Shaq did. My point was that T-Mac could have replaced Kobe at least in the Nets series and the Lakers would still be fine. And your suggestion that Kobe and Duncan would have = game over might be true, but best believe that the determining the factor would be how Kobe played. You know what you getting from Duncan and Shaq at that time. The same can't be said for Kobe. Different story now of course with a more mature Kobe. 

Yea but I dont see them making it to The Nets if you replace Kobe with Tracy

I'm a Kings fan so I know personally just how much more scared I was of Shaq than Kobe in 2002. Christie can do a decent job on Kobe and T-Mac, but no one on the Kings could stop Shaq.

were arguing two completely different things not once did i say shaq didnt deserve those MVPs or played better in those series'

 

[tennhouse2]

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Well, there is clearly a reason why Shaq got those Finals MVPs.

2000 NBA Finals

Shaq- 38 PPG, 17 RPG, 2.5 APG, 2.7 BPG, 61% FG
Kobe-16 PPG, 5 RPG, 4 APG, 1.4 BPG, 36% FG

2001 NBA Finals

Shaq- 33 PPG, 16 RPG, 5 APG, 3.5 BPG, 57% FG
Kobe- 24 PPG, 8 RPG, 6 APG, 1.4 BPG, 41% FG

2002 NBA Finals

Shaq- 37 PPG, 12.25 RPG, 4 APG, 2.75 BPG, 60% FG
Kobe-26 PPG, 5.75 RPG, 5 APG, .75 BPG, 51% FG

Total average stats for 3 championships (15 games)

Shaq=36 PPG, 15.4 RPG, 3.7 APG, 3 BPG, 60% FG
Kobe=20 PPG, 6 RPG, 4.6 APG, 1 BPG, 42% FG

Sidebar, the Lakers could have won if they replaced Kobe with T-Mac in that Nets series right?

i dont think anyones Shaq didnt deserve those MVPs. What im arguing about is people saying Kobe couldnt do it Without Shaq, but pretending like Shaq couldve done it without Kobe.


and i didnt know we could do a replacement in that case If it was Kobe and Tim Duncan Instead of Shaq It would be Game Over

But you can see in the finals averages that Kobe wasn't elevating his game to another level that Shaq did. My point was that T-Mac could have replaced Kobe at least in the Nets series and the Lakers would still be fine. And your suggestion that Kobe and Duncan would have = game over might be true, but best believe that the determining the factor would be how Kobe played. You know what you getting from Duncan and Shaq at that time. The same can't be said for Kobe. Different story now of course with a more mature Kobe. 

Yea but I dont see them making it to The Nets if you replace Kobe with Tracy

I'm a Kings fan so I know personally just how much more scared I was of Shaq than Kobe in 2002. Christie can do a decent job on Kobe and T-Mac, but no one on the Kings could stop Shaq.

were arguing two completely different things not once did i say shaq didnt deserve those MVPs or played better in those series'

 

[nicedudewithnicedreams]

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Well, there is clearly a reason why Shaq got those Finals MVPs.

2000 NBA Finals

Shaq- 38 PPG, 17 RPG, 2.5 APG, 2.7 BPG, 61% FG
Kobe-16 PPG, 5 RPG, 4 APG, 1.4 BPG, 36% FG

2001 NBA Finals

Shaq- 33 PPG, 16 RPG, 5 APG, 3.5 BPG, 57% FG
Kobe- 24 PPG, 8 RPG, 6 APG, 1.4 BPG, 41% FG

2002 NBA Finals

Shaq- 37 PPG, 12.25 RPG, 4 APG, 2.75 BPG, 60% FG
Kobe-26 PPG, 5.75 RPG, 5 APG, .75 BPG, 51% FG

Total average stats for 3 championships (15 games)

Shaq=36 PPG, 15.4 RPG, 3.7 APG, 3 BPG, 60% FG
Kobe=20 PPG, 6 RPG, 4.6 APG, 1 BPG, 42% FG

Sidebar, the Lakers could have won if they replaced Kobe with T-Mac in that Nets series right?

i dont think anyones Shaq didnt deserve those MVPs. What im arguing about is people saying Kobe couldnt do it Without Shaq, but pretending like Shaq couldve done it without Kobe.


and i didnt know we could do a replacement in that case If it was Kobe and Tim Duncan Instead of Shaq It would be Game Over

But you can see in the finals averages that Kobe wasn't elevating his game to another level that Shaq did. My point was that T-Mac could have replaced Kobe at least in the Nets series and the Lakers would still be fine. And your suggestion that Kobe and Duncan would have = game over might be true, but best believe that the determining the factor would be how Kobe played. You know what you getting from Duncan and Shaq at that time. The same can't be said for Kobe. Different story now of course with a more mature Kobe. 

Yea but I dont see them making it to The Nets if you replace Kobe with Tracy

I'm a Kings fan so I know personally just how much more scared I was of Shaq than Kobe in 2002. Christie can do a decent job on Kobe and T-Mac, but no one on the Kings could stop Shaq.

were arguing two completely different things not once did i say shaq didnt deserve those MVPs or played better in those series'

What? Don't you understand the part where I said Christie could contain Kobe and T-Mac and let them both do their things, but no one could stop Shaq from exploding on the Kings? The Lakers beat the Kings in their route to the Finals with the Nets because Shaq was Shaq. Kobe did his thing to too, but T-Mac at that time wasn't a wack injured player yet. And you don't need to play defense on Christie or the disappearing Peja so the defensive awareness that Kobe had on T-Mac won't be as important. Then again, T-Mac played defense when he wasn't the man on the team. 

 

[nicedudewithnicedreams]

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Well, there is clearly a reason why Shaq got those Finals MVPs.

2000 NBA Finals

Shaq- 38 PPG, 17 RPG, 2.5 APG, 2.7 BPG, 61% FG
Kobe-16 PPG, 5 RPG, 4 APG, 1.4 BPG, 36% FG

2001 NBA Finals

Shaq- 33 PPG, 16 RPG, 5 APG, 3.5 BPG, 57% FG
Kobe- 24 PPG, 8 RPG, 6 APG, 1.4 BPG, 41% FG

2002 NBA Finals

Shaq- 37 PPG, 12.25 RPG, 4 APG, 2.75 BPG, 60% FG
Kobe-26 PPG, 5.75 RPG, 5 APG, .75 BPG, 51% FG

Total average stats for 3 championships (15 games)

Shaq=36 PPG, 15.4 RPG, 3.7 APG, 3 BPG, 60% FG
Kobe=20 PPG, 6 RPG, 4.6 APG, 1 BPG, 42% FG

Sidebar, the Lakers could have won if they replaced Kobe with T-Mac in that Nets series right?

i dont think anyones Shaq didnt deserve those MVPs. What im arguing about is people saying Kobe couldnt do it Without Shaq, but pretending like Shaq couldve done it without Kobe.


and i didnt know we could do a replacement in that case If it was Kobe and Tim Duncan Instead of Shaq It would be Game Over

But you can see in the finals averages that Kobe wasn't elevating his game to another level that Shaq did. My point was that T-Mac could have replaced Kobe at least in the Nets series and the Lakers would still be fine. And your suggestion that Kobe and Duncan would have = game over might be true, but best believe that the determining the factor would be how Kobe played. You know what you getting from Duncan and Shaq at that time. The same can't be said for Kobe. Different story now of course with a more mature Kobe. 

Yea but I dont see them making it to The Nets if you replace Kobe with Tracy

I'm a Kings fan so I know personally just how much more scared I was of Shaq than Kobe in 2002. Christie can do a decent job on Kobe and T-Mac, but no one on the Kings could stop Shaq.

were arguing two completely different things not once did i say shaq didnt deserve those MVPs or played better in those series'

What? Don't you understand the part where I said Christie could contain Kobe and T-Mac and let them both do their things, but no one could stop Shaq from exploding on the Kings? The Lakers beat the Kings in their route to the Finals with the Nets because Shaq was Shaq. Kobe did his thing to too, but T-Mac at that time wasn't a wack injured player yet. And you don't need to play defense on Christie or the disappearing Peja so the defensive awareness that Kobe had on T-Mac won't be as important. Then again, T-Mac played defense when he wasn't the man on the team. 

 

[in yo nostril]

Originally Posted by 23ska909red02

My opinion? There are 3 or 4 top tier scorers that could be replaced by Kobe back then and our 3-peat would have still been HIGHLY possible. Definitely Iverson or Ray Allen (laughing at that will only prove that you only know the current Jesus, not the beast from the Bucks). I could see it happening with T-Mac back then, or Allan Houston.

But replacing Shaq? There's only 1 other person that we could have replaced Shaq with and still 3-peated; Duncan. That's it, in my opinion. Maybe if we had Kobe and Garnett, but if Shaq were on another team w/ another top tier guard, Kobe and KG would lose to them.

we're talking about a 3 peat here. all those close games, all those important plays that were made. maybe they win 3 with ray allen, maybe they dont even make the finals once in those 3 years.

 

[in yo nostril]

Originally Posted by 23ska909red02

My opinion? There are 3 or 4 top tier scorers that could be replaced by Kobe back then and our 3-peat would have still been HIGHLY possible. Definitely Iverson or Ray Allen (laughing at that will only prove that you only know the current Jesus, not the beast from the Bucks). I could see it happening with T-Mac back then, or Allan Houston.

But replacing Shaq? There's only 1 other person that we could have replaced Shaq with and still 3-peated; Duncan. That's it, in my opinion. Maybe if we had Kobe and Garnett, but if Shaq were on another team w/ another top tier guard, Kobe and KG would lose to them.

we're talking about a 3 peat here. all those close games, all those important plays that were made. maybe they win 3 with ray allen, maybe they dont even make the finals once in those 3 years.

 

[tennhouse2]

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Well, there is clearly a reason why Shaq got those Finals MVPs.

2000 NBA Finals

Shaq- 38 PPG, 17 RPG, 2.5 APG, 2.7 BPG, 61% FG
Kobe-16 PPG, 5 RPG, 4 APG, 1.4 BPG, 36% FG

2001 NBA Finals

Shaq- 33 PPG, 16 RPG, 5 APG, 3.5 BPG, 57% FG
Kobe- 24 PPG, 8 RPG, 6 APG, 1.4 BPG, 41% FG

2002 NBA Finals

Shaq- 37 PPG, 12.25 RPG, 4 APG, 2.75 BPG, 60% FG
Kobe-26 PPG, 5.75 RPG, 5 APG, .75 BPG, 51% FG

Total average stats for 3 championships (15 games)

Shaq=36 PPG, 15.4 RPG, 3.7 APG, 3 BPG, 60% FG
Kobe=20 PPG, 6 RPG, 4.6 APG, 1 BPG, 42% FG

Sidebar, the Lakers could have won if they replaced Kobe with T-Mac in that Nets series right?

i dont think anyones Shaq didnt deserve those MVPs. What im arguing about is people saying Kobe couldnt do it Without Shaq, but pretending like Shaq couldve done it without Kobe.


and i didnt know we could do a replacement in that case If it was Kobe and Tim Duncan Instead of Shaq It would be Game Over

But you can see in the finals averages that Kobe wasn't elevating his game to another level that Shaq did. My point was that T-Mac could have replaced Kobe at least in the Nets series and the Lakers would still be fine. And your suggestion that Kobe and Duncan would have = game over might be true, but best believe that the determining the factor would be how Kobe played. You know what you getting from Duncan and Shaq at that time. The same can't be said for Kobe. Different story now of course with a more mature Kobe. 

Yea but I dont see them making it to The Nets if you replace Kobe with Tracy

I'm a Kings fan so I know personally just how much more scared I was of Shaq than Kobe in 2002. Christie can do a decent job on Kobe and T-Mac, but no one on the Kings could stop Shaq.

were arguing two completely different things not once did i say shaq didnt deserve those MVPs or played better in those series'

What? Don't you understand the part where I said Christie could contain Kobe and T-Mac and let them both do their things, but no one could stop Shaq from exploding on the Kings? The Lakers beat the Kings in their route to the Finals with the Nets because Shaq was Shaq. Kobe did his thing to too, but T-Mac at that time wasn't a wack injured player yet. And you don't need to play defense on Christie or the disappearing Peja so the defensive awareness that Kobe had on T-Mac won't be as important. Then again, T-Mac played defense when he wasn't the man on the team. 

Tmac wasent Wack by anymeans but ur pretending that he was as good as Kobe and you could just swap them out without any decrease in production...yea shaq dominated but this was a very very close series theres no way you u just swap in Tmac for Kobe and still win

 

[tennhouse2]

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Well, there is clearly a reason why Shaq got those Finals MVPs.

2000 NBA Finals

Shaq- 38 PPG, 17 RPG, 2.5 APG, 2.7 BPG, 61% FG
Kobe-16 PPG, 5 RPG, 4 APG, 1.4 BPG, 36% FG

2001 NBA Finals

Shaq- 33 PPG, 16 RPG, 5 APG, 3.5 BPG, 57% FG
Kobe- 24 PPG, 8 RPG, 6 APG, 1.4 BPG, 41% FG

2002 NBA Finals

Shaq- 37 PPG, 12.25 RPG, 4 APG, 2.75 BPG, 60% FG
Kobe-26 PPG, 5.75 RPG, 5 APG, .75 BPG, 51% FG

Total average stats for 3 championships (15 games)

Shaq=36 PPG, 15.4 RPG, 3.7 APG, 3 BPG, 60% FG
Kobe=20 PPG, 6 RPG, 4.6 APG, 1 BPG, 42% FG

Sidebar, the Lakers could have won if they replaced Kobe with T-Mac in that Nets series right?

i dont think anyones Shaq didnt deserve those MVPs. What im arguing about is people saying Kobe couldnt do it Without Shaq, but pretending like Shaq couldve done it without Kobe.


and i didnt know we could do a replacement in that case If it was Kobe and Tim Duncan Instead of Shaq It would be Game Over

But you can see in the finals averages that Kobe wasn't elevating his game to another level that Shaq did. My point was that T-Mac could have replaced Kobe at least in the Nets series and the Lakers would still be fine. And your suggestion that Kobe and Duncan would have = game over might be true, but best believe that the determining the factor would be how Kobe played. You know what you getting from Duncan and Shaq at that time. The same can't be said for Kobe. Different story now of course with a more mature Kobe. 

Yea but I dont see them making it to The Nets if you replace Kobe with Tracy

I'm a Kings fan so I know personally just how much more scared I was of Shaq than Kobe in 2002. Christie can do a decent job on Kobe and T-Mac, but no one on the Kings could stop Shaq.

were arguing two completely different things not once did i say shaq didnt deserve those MVPs or played better in those series'

What? Don't you understand the part where I said Christie could contain Kobe and T-Mac and let them both do their things, but no one could stop Shaq from exploding on the Kings? The Lakers beat the Kings in their route to the Finals with the Nets because Shaq was Shaq. Kobe did his thing to too, but T-Mac at that time wasn't a wack injured player yet. And you don't need to play defense on Christie or the disappearing Peja so the defensive awareness that Kobe had on T-Mac won't be as important. Then again, T-Mac played defense when he wasn't the man on the team. 

Tmac wasent Wack by anymeans but ur pretending that he was as good as Kobe and you could just swap them out without any decrease in production...yea shaq dominated but this was a very very close series theres no way you u just swap in Tmac for Kobe and still win

 

[nicedudewithnicedreams]

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Well, there is clearly a reason why Shaq got those Finals MVPs.

2000 NBA Finals

Shaq- 38 PPG, 17 RPG, 2.5 APG, 2.7 BPG, 61% FG
Kobe-16 PPG, 5 RPG, 4 APG, 1.4 BPG, 36% FG

2001 NBA Finals

Shaq- 33 PPG, 16 RPG, 5 APG, 3.5 BPG, 57% FG
Kobe- 24 PPG, 8 RPG, 6 APG, 1.4 BPG, 41% FG

2002 NBA Finals

Shaq- 37 PPG, 12.25 RPG, 4 APG, 2.75 BPG, 60% FG
Kobe-26 PPG, 5.75 RPG, 5 APG, .75 BPG, 51% FG

Total average stats for 3 championships (15 games)

Shaq=36 PPG, 15.4 RPG, 3.7 APG, 3 BPG, 60% FG
Kobe=20 PPG, 6 RPG, 4.6 APG, 1 BPG, 42% FG

Sidebar, the Lakers could have won if they replaced Kobe with T-Mac in that Nets series right?

i dont think anyones Shaq didnt deserve those MVPs. What im arguing about is people saying Kobe couldnt do it Without Shaq, but pretending like Shaq couldve done it without Kobe.


and i didnt know we could do a replacement in that case If it was Kobe and Tim Duncan Instead of Shaq It would be Game Over

But you can see in the finals averages that Kobe wasn't elevating his game to another level that Shaq did. My point was that T-Mac could have replaced Kobe at least in the Nets series and the Lakers would still be fine. And your suggestion that Kobe and Duncan would have = game over might be true, but best believe that the determining the factor would be how Kobe played. You know what you getting from Duncan and Shaq at that time. The same can't be said for Kobe. Different story now of course with a more mature Kobe. 

Yea but I dont see them making it to The Nets if you replace Kobe with Tracy

I'm a Kings fan so I know personally just how much more scared I was of Shaq than Kobe in 2002. Christie can do a decent job on Kobe and T-Mac, but no one on the Kings could stop Shaq.

were arguing two completely different things not once did i say shaq didnt deserve those MVPs or played better in those series'

What? Don't you understand the part where I said Christie could contain Kobe and T-Mac and let them both do their things, but no one could stop Shaq from exploding on the Kings? The Lakers beat the Kings in their route to the Finals with the Nets because Shaq was Shaq. Kobe did his thing to too, but T-Mac at that time wasn't a wack injured player yet. And you don't need to play defense on Christie or the disappearing Peja so the defensive awareness that Kobe had on T-Mac won't be as important. Then again, T-Mac played defense when he wasn't the man on the team. 

Tmac wasent Wack by anymeans but ur pretending that he was as good as Kobe and you could just swap them out without any decrease in production...yea shaq dominated but this was a very very close series theres no way you u just swap in Tmac for Kobe and still win

I will agree to disagree. Way too easy for you say no no matter what I present in my argument, be it normal stats or advance stats that aren't friends with Kobe. You don't even need to back-up your statements anyways.

 

[nicedudewithnicedreams]

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Well, there is clearly a reason why Shaq got those Finals MVPs.

2000 NBA Finals

Shaq- 38 PPG, 17 RPG, 2.5 APG, 2.7 BPG, 61% FG
Kobe-16 PPG, 5 RPG, 4 APG, 1.4 BPG, 36% FG

2001 NBA Finals

Shaq- 33 PPG, 16 RPG, 5 APG, 3.5 BPG, 57% FG
Kobe- 24 PPG, 8 RPG, 6 APG, 1.4 BPG, 41% FG

2002 NBA Finals

Shaq- 37 PPG, 12.25 RPG, 4 APG, 2.75 BPG, 60% FG
Kobe-26 PPG, 5.75 RPG, 5 APG, .75 BPG, 51% FG

Total average stats for 3 championships (15 games)

Shaq=36 PPG, 15.4 RPG, 3.7 APG, 3 BPG, 60% FG
Kobe=20 PPG, 6 RPG, 4.6 APG, 1 BPG, 42% FG

Sidebar, the Lakers could have won if they replaced Kobe with T-Mac in that Nets series right?

i dont think anyones Shaq didnt deserve those MVPs. What im arguing about is people saying Kobe couldnt do it Without Shaq, but pretending like Shaq couldve done it without Kobe.


and i didnt know we could do a replacement in that case If it was Kobe and Tim Duncan Instead of Shaq It would be Game Over

But you can see in the finals averages that Kobe wasn't elevating his game to another level that Shaq did. My point was that T-Mac could have replaced Kobe at least in the Nets series and the Lakers would still be fine. And your suggestion that Kobe and Duncan would have = game over might be true, but best believe that the determining the factor would be how Kobe played. You know what you getting from Duncan and Shaq at that time. The same can't be said for Kobe. Different story now of course with a more mature Kobe. 

Yea but I dont see them making it to The Nets if you replace Kobe with Tracy

I'm a Kings fan so I know personally just how much more scared I was of Shaq than Kobe in 2002. Christie can do a decent job on Kobe and T-Mac, but no one on the Kings could stop Shaq.

were arguing two completely different things not once did i say shaq didnt deserve those MVPs or played better in those series'

What? Don't you understand the part where I said Christie could contain Kobe and T-Mac and let them both do their things, but no one could stop Shaq from exploding on the Kings? The Lakers beat the Kings in their route to the Finals with the Nets because Shaq was Shaq. Kobe did his thing to too, but T-Mac at that time wasn't a wack injured player yet. And you don't need to play defense on Christie or the disappearing Peja so the defensive awareness that Kobe had on T-Mac won't be as important. Then again, T-Mac played defense when he wasn't the man on the team. 

Tmac wasent Wack by anymeans but ur pretending that he was as good as Kobe and you could just swap them out without any decrease in production...yea shaq dominated but this was a very very close series theres no way you u just swap in Tmac for Kobe and still win

I will agree to disagree. Way too easy for you say no no matter what I present in my argument, be it normal stats or advance stats that aren't friends with Kobe. You don't even need to back-up your statements anyways.

 

[jonnny25]

Shaq in his prime > Kobe in his prime. Kobe just trying to start something because he has 1 more ring.

 

[jonnny25]

Shaq in his prime > Kobe in his prime. Kobe just trying to start something because he has 1 more ring.

 

[noblekane]

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Well, there is clearly a reason why Shaq got those Finals MVPs.

2000 NBA Finals

Shaq- 38 PPG, 17 RPG, 2.5 APG, 2.7 BPG, 61% FG
Kobe-16 PPG, 5 RPG, 4 APG, 1.4 BPG, 36% FG

2001 NBA Finals

Shaq- 33 PPG, 16 RPG, 5 APG, 3.5 BPG, 57% FG
Kobe- 24 PPG, 8 RPG, 6 APG, 1.4 BPG, 41% FG

2002 NBA Finals

Shaq- 37 PPG, 12.25 RPG, 4 APG, 2.75 BPG, 60% FG
Kobe-26 PPG, 5.75 RPG, 5 APG, .75 BPG, 51% FG

Total average stats for 3 championships (15 games)

Shaq=36 PPG, 15.4 RPG, 3.7 APG, 3 BPG, 60% FG
Kobe=20 PPG, 6 RPG, 4.6 APG, 1 BPG, 42% FG

Sidebar, the Lakers could have won if they replaced Kobe with T-Mac in that Nets series right?

we would never know cuz tmac never got out the first round

 that %!$+* was bad luck lol

 

[noblekane]

Originally Posted by nicedudewithnicedreams

Well, there is clearly a reason why Shaq got those Finals MVPs.

2000 NBA Finals

Shaq- 38 PPG, 17 RPG, 2.5 APG, 2.7 BPG, 61% FG
Kobe-16 PPG, 5 RPG, 4 APG, 1.4 BPG, 36% FG

2001 NBA Finals

Shaq- 33 PPG, 16 RPG, 5 APG, 3.5 BPG, 57% FG
Kobe- 24 PPG, 8 RPG, 6 APG, 1.4 BPG, 41% FG

2002 NBA Finals

Shaq- 37 PPG, 12.25 RPG, 4 APG, 2.75 BPG, 60% FG
Kobe-26 PPG, 5.75 RPG, 5 APG, .75 BPG, 51% FG

Total average stats for 3 championships (15 games)

Shaq=36 PPG, 15.4 RPG, 3.7 APG, 3 BPG, 60% FG
Kobe=20 PPG, 6 RPG, 4.6 APG, 1 BPG, 42% FG

Sidebar, the Lakers could have won if they replaced Kobe with T-Mac in that Nets series right?

we would never know cuz tmac never got out the first round

 that %!$+* was bad luck lol

 

[damnitzvin]

THERE IS SO MUCH KOBE-RIDING GOING ON IN THIS THREAD, I'M GETTING NAUSAS.

 

[damnitzvin]

THERE IS SO MUCH KOBE-RIDING GOING ON IN THIS THREAD, I'M GETTING NAUSAS.

 

[doe or die 22]

LMAO. Kobe fans are THEE worst. T-Mac was a better player than Kobe in the early-2000's. Period.

 

[doe or die 22]

LMAO. Kobe fans are THEE worst. T-Mac was a better player than Kobe in the early-2000's. Period.

 

[darthska]

^ Scorer? That argument can fly.

Defender? Prove it.

And I dare you to say that the reason I'm asking you is because I'm another Kobe rider.