shoeking2101
Banned
- 19,728
- 2,456
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2007
IS KOBE BRYANT...OVERRATED?
- Thread in 'Sports & Training' Thread starter Started by goldenchild9,
- Start date
D
Deleted member 37467
Guest
I do, too, actually.
Time to face the cold,
- 28,054
- 9,169
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2007
Over the past 5 or so pages, we have had the anti-Kobe crowd come up with:
-Imaginary, hypothetical statements such as "if _____ played with Shaq instead of Kobe, the Lakers would have won more titles".........
-Using the "Kobe is not having a good season this year because his shooting percentage is lower than the rest of the Lakers team as a whole" argument.........
and
-Using the "Tim Duncan, Steve Nash and Ray Allen all had better 36 year old seasons than Kobe is having" argument while completely discounting service time.........
All three of these arguments are idiotic and in no way prove a damn thing about Kobe being overrated. Bottom line is, I have no problem when someone presents legit reasons and arguments as to why they feel Kobe is overrated, but these arguments are terrible examples. The anti-Kobe crowd needs to step their debate game up.
-Imaginary, hypothetical statements such as "if _____ played with Shaq instead of Kobe, the Lakers would have won more titles".........
-Using the "Kobe is not having a good season this year because his shooting percentage is lower than the rest of the Lakers team as a whole" argument.........
and
-Using the "Tim Duncan, Steve Nash and Ray Allen all had better 36 year old seasons than Kobe is having" argument while completely discounting service time.........
All three of these arguments are idiotic and in no way prove a damn thing about Kobe being overrated. Bottom line is, I have no problem when someone presents legit reasons and arguments as to why they feel Kobe is overrated, but these arguments are terrible examples. The anti-Kobe crowd needs to step their debate game up.
OBAMA
formerly kill moves
- 2,263
- 1,183
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2014
ima kobe fan but the lakers were winning those 3 rings with or without kobe. shaq was literally unstoppable during that time.
D
Deleted member 37467
Guest
- 3,249
- 199
- Joined
- May 28, 2013
They would've lost to Portland in 2000...No way, man...
May have lost to sac or sa in other series...and when shaq fouls out...who do u go to in the 4th of that indy gm..what about hack a shaq.
Nvm.....spree woulda took the gm over, rt.
May have lost to sac or sa in other series...and when shaq fouls out...who do u go to in the 4th of that indy gm..what about hack a shaq.
Nvm.....spree woulda took the gm over, rt.
I know right? That's why Kobe dropped that 25/11/7/4 line in a game 7 while Shaq was in the huddle telling the team to do it without him because he was locked up by Sabonis, Sheed, and Brian Grant.
No Kobe, no 2000 Championship, Dominant Shaq would have been stopped.
Not to even mention game 4 in Indy after Shaq fouled out.
shoeking2101
Banned
- 19,728
- 2,456
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2007
Or game 4 in 01' against Sacramento, or Game 1 in the WCF against San Antonio, both games on the road.
- 21,973
- 9,843
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2012
D
Deleted member 37467
Guest
Yea, this is how I know a lot of people are just Kobe stans and don't really know what they're talking about.
There were a lot of people who thought Pau should've won Finals MVP in 2010.
2009? Not so much,
There were a lot of people who thought Pau should've won Finals MVP in 2010.
2009? Not so much,
Last edited by a moderator:
- 36,975
- 12,268
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2008
People who are Kobe Haters and did not watch the series. Gasol had 1 game better than Kobe. Maybe 2. Both in the beginning of the series.
Kobe lead the Lakers in scoring, 2nd in RPG, 1st in APG, 1st in Steals
Both teams: Kobe 1st in PPG, 2nd in RPG, 2nd in APG, 1st in Steals, T-5th in BPG
Kobe: 28.6 / 8.0 / 3.9 / 2.1 / 0.7
Pau: 18.6 / 11.6 / 3.7 / 0.7 / 2.6
You do know Pau shot 3 for 12 through 3 quarters of Game 7.
Paul Pierce was 5-15
Ray Allen 3-14
World Peace 7-18
Odom 3-8
The entire Game 7 was a **** show of basketball for both teams.
The Lakers shot 35% without Kobe. Kobe had most points in the game, and most points in the 4th, which was the deciding quarter. Had 15 rebounds which for a guy who averages 5 a game is more impressive than a guy who averages 10 getting 18. Also Gasol shot 7-13 from the line a .538, Kobe 11-15.
Gasol had a game where he shot:
37.5% (Game 7),
42.9% (Game 6), Kobe 47.4% Pau: 17-13-9 Kobe: 26-11-3. They both killed the Celtics. Look at Off Rating & Defensive Rating Kobe was better on both sides of the ball based on advanced statistics
41.7% (Game 5) while he put up 12 & 12 no assists , Kobe had 38 points 5 rebounds 4 assists,
46.2% (Game 4) 21-6-3... Kobe shot 45.5% (54.5% from 3 on 11 3s) 33-6-2
45.5% (Game 3) 13-10-4... Kobe shot a horrible 34.5 29-7-4. But Kobe was a +10 to Pau's 0 +/- Why? 25 of the 32 FGs the Celtics made came within 10 Feet. If not for Kobe & Artest's defense, they go down 2-1
Game 2 Pau Gasol played better than Kobe 25-8-3-1- 6 on 70% Kobe 21-5-6-4 on 40%.
Game 1 Give to Pau as well
The perimeter defense with the exception of Game 2 where Ray Allen couldn't miss from 3 was far better than the Lakers interior defense the other 6 games.
2 other things that go to Kobe's case for it.
1. Gasol's series was not better than Kobe's. Gasol also wasn't the leader of the team. If someone who isn't the leader of the team wins a Finals MVP, you better have the best series on the team (i.e. Kawhi Leonard)
2. Although it is not supposed to, the voters for Finals MVP also take into account the road to the finals, and Kobe was the best player for the Lakers in the playoffs
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 37467
Guest
I know the stats and watched the series,
This wasn't 2009 where there was a clear cut winner.
Like I said before, there were a lot of people who felt Unathletic Anthony Davis should've won it, but it's not like it's a travesty that Kobe did.
This wasn't 2009 where there was a clear cut winner.
Like I said before, there were a lot of people who felt Unathletic Anthony Davis should've won it, but it's not like it's a travesty that Kobe did.
- 36,045
- 12,024
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2012
rather than an empty statement like this would you care to provide at least half an argument to why pau should have been mvp?I know the stats and watched the series,
This wasn't 2009 where there was a clear cut winner.
Like I said before, there were a lot of people who felt Unathletic Anthony Davis should've won it, but it's not like it's a travesty that Kobe did.
- 6,227
- 2,339
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2007
Haaaaa! Came hard with the facts I see lol [emoji]9786[/emoji]️[emoji]128514[/emoji][emoji]128079[/emoji]I know the stats and watched the series,
This wasn't 2009 where there was a clear cut winner.
Like I said before, there were a lot of people who felt Unathletic Anthony Davis should've won it, but it's not like it's a travesty that Kobe did.
D
Deleted member 37467
Guest
What does it matter?
I don't need to "come w/ facts", you guys have your opinion on the situation and I have mine.
I'm not in here trying to sway opinions, just offering mine.
You guy's get so butt hurt over the most trivial nonsense,
I'll take the more efficient player from the floor that adds rim protection over the guy who drops 28 on 40% shooting every single time.
You guys wouldn't, that's fine.
I don't need to "come w/ facts", you guys have your opinion on the situation and I have mine.
I'm not in here trying to sway opinions, just offering mine.
You guy's get so butt hurt over the most trivial nonsense,
I'll take the more efficient player from the floor that adds rim protection over the guy who drops 28 on 40% shooting every single time.
You guys wouldn't, that's fine.
Last edited by a moderator:
- 36,045
- 12,024
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2012
i mean if you just started off with stating that you discredit kobe for no reason at all then you could have saved a lot of guys a lot of typing since they would know you're not worth engaging in conversation with
D
Deleted member 37467
Guest
Bruh, this is a message board where we're all essentially wasting our time.
None of you guys are really worth having conversations with, I just do it to kill time when I'm bored.
Another thing is, I've never discredited Kobe, I just don't think he's as good as some other people.
Now, if you're really bored you can read this article which offers a nice breakdown as to why Pau should've won the Finals MVP.
But I'm sure you'll just discredit it because it doesn't go along w/ your opinion.
That's how these things go, right?
Anyway, here you go:
Congratulations to Los Angeles on winning consecutive titles, but we need to clear up a little matter called the Finals MVP Award. As much as Kobe Bryant seems like an obvious selection because he's the team's most lauded player and he averaged 28.6 points per, he clearly was not the Lakers' best player in the 2010 Finals. That player was Pau Gasol.
The most straight-forward way of looking at this debate is that the series was decided by defense and rebounding. It was a low-scoring, poorly shot affair all around, and the Lakers won the rebounding battle by a landslide in their four wins. Gasol was by far their most impressive rebounder in the series, leading everyone in both the amount he collected and his skill in doing so in the trenches, picking up the tough ones in traffic (not the long caroms that guards usually end up with). On top of that, his strong interior defense set the tone for the Lakers, who rode their defense to the championship; Bryant spent the series playing centerfield far off of Rajon Rondo, certainly not a stopper or defensive game-changer in any capacity.
Statistically, Gasol's input in his Lakers' title defense was significantly more important than that of Bryant. Obviously Kobe's 29 points per look better than Gasol's 19, but it was simply the result of shooting an insane amount of shots at a low percentage. Although the Lakers shot a pitiful 41% over their seven games with Boston, Bryant actually made things worse by shooting 40% (66-163). Not only that, but in a series full of close fourth-quarter battles, Bryant shot an abysmal 31% (11-36) in the games' final periods. Gasol connected on a team-high 48% from the field, hitting 43 of 90 attempts. His efficiency from the field was instrumental in stressing a tight Boston defense.
From a distribution/running-the-O standpoint, Gasol far trumped Kobe in the Finals. The big Spaniard lead the entire Laker squad with a phenomenal 26-13 (2.0) assist-turnover rate. He did a great job passing out of double teams, passing out of the low-post, high-post, perimeter, etc. The only player to accrue more assists on LA was the primary ball handler, Bryant, who handed out one more, 27. Unfortunately for the team, he also turned the ball over 27 times for a terrible 1.0 ratio. It could have been much worse if his teammates didn't hustle to retain possession on numerous Bryant passes that were tipped away by the Celtics into random spaces each game. Offensively, there is no question that Gasol was far more important to the overall success and effectiveness of the Lakers' attack.
Considering the winner of all seven games was also the team that lead each contest in rebounds, this part of their games cannot be overlooked. Gasol was the top rebounder by quite a substantial margin for the series, snagging 11.6 boards per, including an incredible 5.0 offensive each night. With the rest of the Lakers shooting such a low percentage from the field, Gasol's offensive rebounds and the subsequent second-chance points alone were regularly the difference between winning and losing. He surpassed his rebound average in four of the seven games, so there were no single-game totals that pushed his average so high.
Bryant chipped in with an impressive 8.0 rebounds per, including 1.7 offensive, but it should be pointed out he met or exceeded that average only twice. A few outliers skewed his average above a true indication of what he contributed in this category. Not only that, most of Gasol's boards were grabbed in the middle of hard-fought scrums in the paint, whereas Bryant's were usually of the long-bounce-right-to-him variety.
Defensively, Gasol's man-to-man defense is alright, but his ability to energetically block and redirect shots was unparalleled, blocking 18 for the series (2.6 per) and persuading multiple potential shots to not be taken. A big man's defensive presence is always more valuable than a wing's because they have to help clean up the mess opposing guards make when they drive into the paint. That being said, Bryant's defense wasn't responsible for much in the series. He guarded Rajon Rondo, who can't shoot, by hanging out in the lane; Bryant rarely had to hustle or be responsible for containing any tough plays. Rondo still ended up averaging 14 points and 8 assists for the series. Bryant did get credit for 15 steals over the seven games, 8 of which came in two home contests when any deflections caused by his teammates' hustle were given to him if LA's stats keepers determined he gained possession in the end. NBA stats keepers, who work for individual clubs, are allowed a lot of leeway in determining who to give credit for steals, which is why it's one of the most home-oriented statistics for star players.
Pau Gasol was clearly the most impressive player in the 2010 Finals and deserved to win the Bill Russell MVP Award. This is not a slight to Bryant, it's just that Gasol is that good. He is the only other player in the best-big-in-the-league discussion with Dwight Howard. Duncan's slowing speed has taken away a lot of his defense, and Chris Bosh is neither a defender, passer, winner, or much more than a pedestrian shooter inside. On the other hand, the best perimeter player in the league is an argument involving Chris Paul, LeBron James, Dwyane Wade, Deron Williams, Steve Nash, Kevin Durant, maybe Jason Kidd, and Bryant.
Gasol is doing some special things right now that have brought the Lakers out of their three-year .500-ball funk and into a great stretch of Finals runs that includes two titles. It's time he got his due.
None of you guys are really worth having conversations with, I just do it to kill time when I'm bored.
Another thing is, I've never discredited Kobe, I just don't think he's as good as some other people.
Now, if you're really bored you can read this article which offers a nice breakdown as to why Pau should've won the Finals MVP.
But I'm sure you'll just discredit it because it doesn't go along w/ your opinion.
That's how these things go, right?
Anyway, here you go:
Congratulations to Los Angeles on winning consecutive titles, but we need to clear up a little matter called the Finals MVP Award. As much as Kobe Bryant seems like an obvious selection because he's the team's most lauded player and he averaged 28.6 points per, he clearly was not the Lakers' best player in the 2010 Finals. That player was Pau Gasol.
The most straight-forward way of looking at this debate is that the series was decided by defense and rebounding. It was a low-scoring, poorly shot affair all around, and the Lakers won the rebounding battle by a landslide in their four wins. Gasol was by far their most impressive rebounder in the series, leading everyone in both the amount he collected and his skill in doing so in the trenches, picking up the tough ones in traffic (not the long caroms that guards usually end up with). On top of that, his strong interior defense set the tone for the Lakers, who rode their defense to the championship; Bryant spent the series playing centerfield far off of Rajon Rondo, certainly not a stopper or defensive game-changer in any capacity.
Statistically, Gasol's input in his Lakers' title defense was significantly more important than that of Bryant. Obviously Kobe's 29 points per look better than Gasol's 19, but it was simply the result of shooting an insane amount of shots at a low percentage. Although the Lakers shot a pitiful 41% over their seven games with Boston, Bryant actually made things worse by shooting 40% (66-163). Not only that, but in a series full of close fourth-quarter battles, Bryant shot an abysmal 31% (11-36) in the games' final periods. Gasol connected on a team-high 48% from the field, hitting 43 of 90 attempts. His efficiency from the field was instrumental in stressing a tight Boston defense.
From a distribution/running-the-O standpoint, Gasol far trumped Kobe in the Finals. The big Spaniard lead the entire Laker squad with a phenomenal 26-13 (2.0) assist-turnover rate. He did a great job passing out of double teams, passing out of the low-post, high-post, perimeter, etc. The only player to accrue more assists on LA was the primary ball handler, Bryant, who handed out one more, 27. Unfortunately for the team, he also turned the ball over 27 times for a terrible 1.0 ratio. It could have been much worse if his teammates didn't hustle to retain possession on numerous Bryant passes that were tipped away by the Celtics into random spaces each game. Offensively, there is no question that Gasol was far more important to the overall success and effectiveness of the Lakers' attack.
Considering the winner of all seven games was also the team that lead each contest in rebounds, this part of their games cannot be overlooked. Gasol was the top rebounder by quite a substantial margin for the series, snagging 11.6 boards per, including an incredible 5.0 offensive each night. With the rest of the Lakers shooting such a low percentage from the field, Gasol's offensive rebounds and the subsequent second-chance points alone were regularly the difference between winning and losing. He surpassed his rebound average in four of the seven games, so there were no single-game totals that pushed his average so high.
Bryant chipped in with an impressive 8.0 rebounds per, including 1.7 offensive, but it should be pointed out he met or exceeded that average only twice. A few outliers skewed his average above a true indication of what he contributed in this category. Not only that, most of Gasol's boards were grabbed in the middle of hard-fought scrums in the paint, whereas Bryant's were usually of the long-bounce-right-to-him variety.
Defensively, Gasol's man-to-man defense is alright, but his ability to energetically block and redirect shots was unparalleled, blocking 18 for the series (2.6 per) and persuading multiple potential shots to not be taken. A big man's defensive presence is always more valuable than a wing's because they have to help clean up the mess opposing guards make when they drive into the paint. That being said, Bryant's defense wasn't responsible for much in the series. He guarded Rajon Rondo, who can't shoot, by hanging out in the lane; Bryant rarely had to hustle or be responsible for containing any tough plays. Rondo still ended up averaging 14 points and 8 assists for the series. Bryant did get credit for 15 steals over the seven games, 8 of which came in two home contests when any deflections caused by his teammates' hustle were given to him if LA's stats keepers determined he gained possession in the end. NBA stats keepers, who work for individual clubs, are allowed a lot of leeway in determining who to give credit for steals, which is why it's one of the most home-oriented statistics for star players.
Pau Gasol was clearly the most impressive player in the 2010 Finals and deserved to win the Bill Russell MVP Award. This is not a slight to Bryant, it's just that Gasol is that good. He is the only other player in the best-big-in-the-league discussion with Dwight Howard. Duncan's slowing speed has taken away a lot of his defense, and Chris Bosh is neither a defender, passer, winner, or much more than a pedestrian shooter inside. On the other hand, the best perimeter player in the league is an argument involving Chris Paul, LeBron James, Dwyane Wade, Deron Williams, Steve Nash, Kevin Durant, maybe Jason Kidd, and Bryant.
Gasol is doing some special things right now that have brought the Lakers out of their three-year .500-ball funk and into a great stretch of Finals runs that includes two titles. It's time he got his due.
- 36,045
- 12,024
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2012
im not going to discredit that article because i dont agree with it
ill discredit it because the writer doesnt have kobe in his top 50 all time
http://www.behindthebasket.com/btb/2012/9/13/top-50-players-all-time-part-1-50-to-35.html
http://www.behindthebasket.com/btb/2012/9/15/top-50-players-all-time-part-2-34-to-10.html
http://www.behindthebasket.com/btb/2012/9/17/top-50-players-all-time-part-3-9-to-1.html
if these are the kinds of people you choose to base your own basketball opinions on, the by all means go ahead
ill discredit it because the writer doesnt have kobe in his top 50 all time
http://www.behindthebasket.com/btb/2012/9/13/top-50-players-all-time-part-1-50-to-35.html
http://www.behindthebasket.com/btb/2012/9/15/top-50-players-all-time-part-2-34-to-10.html
http://www.behindthebasket.com/btb/2012/9/17/top-50-players-all-time-part-3-9-to-1.html
if these are the kinds of people you choose to base your own basketball opinions on, the by all means go ahead
darthska
Staff member
- 46,102
- 30,293
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2004
There were people. There are people.
- 36,045
- 12,024
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2012
there are also people who believe that kobe should have some of shaq's finals mvps
darthska
Staff member
- 46,102
- 30,293
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2004
Absolutely.
But that has nothing to do w/ correcting the notion that no one considered Pau FMVP.
But that has nothing to do w/ correcting the notion that no one considered Pau FMVP.
D
Deleted member 37467
Guest
Which means what, exactly?
He doesn't have Jordan in his top 3, either.
Doesn't mean that everything dude says is invalid,
- 20,201
- 4,184
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2007
There are people who believe in chupacabra, Bigfoot and the swamp man
There are people who believe in things outside the realm of logic
There are people who believe in things outside the realm of logic
Last edited:
- 36,045
- 12,024
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2012
true, but usually when someone says that its implied that he means "no one with a rational basketball opinion" thinks pau should have been mvp
which is a totally different than saying no one in the world thinks that way
i dont see anything wrong with saying something like "no one in the world still thinks the world is flat" but im sure if you look hard enough you could find some idiot to prove my statement wrong
which is a totally different than saying no one in the world thinks that way
i dont see anything wrong with saying something like "no one in the world still thinks the world is flat" but im sure if you look hard enough you could find some idiot to prove my statement wrong
- 431
- 302
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2013
Not one person?
Lakers' fans suffer from a high degree of denial.
I won't debate 2009, but EVERYONE who watched the 2010 Finals knows that Pau should have won that MVP, ESPECIALLY after Kobe's infamous no-show in game 7.
