NBA Legacy Thread, Update Resumes

[CP1708]

Originally Posted by gangsta207therevolution

CP one of these days we got to do like a 2 hour u stream
Maybe by weekly?

Huh?  What's a u stream?  And why bi weekly? 

Kev hates Ray Allen?  What on Earth for?  Man I ain't tryna put Korver in no big 3. 

  Like a big 2.1 or some @#$% 

  

 

[CP1708]

Originally Posted by gangsta207therevolution

CP one of these days we got to do like a 2 hour u stream
Maybe by weekly?

Huh?  What's a u stream?  And why bi weekly? 

Kev hates Ray Allen?  What on Earth for?  Man I ain't tryna put Korver in no big 3. 

  Like a big 2.1 or some @#$% 

  

 

[darthska]

gangsta207therevolution:

---

Ska your blinded by your Kobe hate right now.

gangsta207therevolution:

---

I know Ska has a thing about Kobe, but he is straight up hating on him.
I love when people say BS like this.

What did I say that was hateful?

"No, I mean, you're basically saying..."

EFF 'BASICALLY'! What. Did I say. That was hating?

"Well, by saying that Kobe sucks..." Stop it. Is that gonna be your response? Because... I never said that.

How about "You're saying Kobe's a scrub"? You gonna bring that to the table? Because I never said that, either. 

So what exactly did I say that was hating?

There are a lot of cases where a fan thinks that a certain someone pisses excellence and brunches w/ Jesus regularly, and the feelings of that fan get hurt when they find out someone refuses to agree that this certain someone is the product of Greek gods. This isn't one of those cases, is it? 

CP:

---

Everyone can relax, Ska is a certified Laker fan, he has every single right in the world to talk on Kobe, he's seen as many of Kobe's games as anyone around, it's not hate or whatever when it's your own dang team guys. 

  Let the guy breathe.  We have plenty of people in here that will be pro Kobe, let someone else speak freely "against" Kobe.  That's the point of discussing resumes and of course, Legacies. 

He's not hating, he's giving a different view of Kobe as a Laker fan.  Let him speak without freaking.  Arguing a point is fine, chill with all the "hater" crap.
My dude. 

 

[darthska]

gangsta207therevolution:

---

Ska your blinded by your Kobe hate right now.

gangsta207therevolution:

---

I know Ska has a thing about Kobe, but he is straight up hating on him.
I love when people say BS like this.

What did I say that was hateful?

"No, I mean, you're basically saying..."

EFF 'BASICALLY'! What. Did I say. That was hating?

"Well, by saying that Kobe sucks..." Stop it. Is that gonna be your response? Because... I never said that.

How about "You're saying Kobe's a scrub"? You gonna bring that to the table? Because I never said that, either. 

So what exactly did I say that was hating?

There are a lot of cases where a fan thinks that a certain someone pisses excellence and brunches w/ Jesus regularly, and the feelings of that fan get hurt when they find out someone refuses to agree that this certain someone is the product of Greek gods. This isn't one of those cases, is it? 

CP:

---

Everyone can relax, Ska is a certified Laker fan, he has every single right in the world to talk on Kobe, he's seen as many of Kobe's games as anyone around, it's not hate or whatever when it's your own dang team guys. 

  Let the guy breathe.  We have plenty of people in here that will be pro Kobe, let someone else speak freely "against" Kobe.  That's the point of discussing resumes and of course, Legacies. 

He's not hating, he's giving a different view of Kobe as a Laker fan.  Let him speak without freaking.  Arguing a point is fine, chill with all the "hater" crap.
My dude. 

 

[pmatic]

I still think Kidd's inability to shoot off the dribble and from the mid-range hurt him more in his prime than the three ball. Hell, whenever he shoots off the dribble now I cringe.

 

[pmatic]

I still think Kidd's inability to shoot off the dribble and from the mid-range hurt him more in his prime than the three ball. Hell, whenever he shoots off the dribble now I cringe.

 

[university of nike]

Originally Posted by CP1708

Originally Posted by gangsta207therevolution

CP one of these days we got to do like a 2 hour u stream
Maybe by weekly?

Huh?  What's a u stream?  

 

[university of nike]

Originally Posted by CP1708

Originally Posted by gangsta207therevolution

CP one of these days we got to do like a 2 hour u stream
Maybe by weekly?

Huh?  What's a u stream?  

 

[CP1708]

Originally Posted by PMatic

I still think Kidd's inability to shoot off the dribble and from the mid-range hurt him more in his prime than the three ball. Hell, whenever he shoots off the dribble now I cringe.

Agreed.  That's what I think of in terms of Kidd can't shoot.  Set shot 3 pointers?  Sure, he's good money. But 18 feet, 15 feet, pull ups, off the dribble, fadeaways, turnarounds, any of that, he's a 0% percent shooter I think. 

  That to me is where Nash is an elite shooter, and Kidd just can't.  Another thing that Payton while not great, was decent shooting from all over the floor. 

  

 

[CP1708]

Originally Posted by PMatic

I still think Kidd's inability to shoot off the dribble and from the mid-range hurt him more in his prime than the three ball. Hell, whenever he shoots off the dribble now I cringe.

Agreed.  That's what I think of in terms of Kidd can't shoot.  Set shot 3 pointers?  Sure, he's good money. But 18 feet, 15 feet, pull ups, off the dribble, fadeaways, turnarounds, any of that, he's a 0% percent shooter I think. 

  That to me is where Nash is an elite shooter, and Kidd just can't.  Another thing that Payton while not great, was decent shooting from all over the floor. 

  

 

[darthska]

But to me, that's like knocking Shaq for not having the passing ability of Yao, or slighting Mailman for poor 3-pt shooting.

Not only do I not care about having a prolific scorer at the 1, but I actually would rather not have one.

Actually, Iverson and Nash are mentioned as two of the best scoring PGs ever. And... well... you can finish my thought without me typing it, CP.

 

[darthska]

But to me, that's like knocking Shaq for not having the passing ability of Yao, or slighting Mailman for poor 3-pt shooting.

Not only do I not care about having a prolific scorer at the 1, but I actually would rather not have one.

Actually, Iverson and Nash are mentioned as two of the best scoring PGs ever. And... well... you can finish my thought without me typing it, CP.

 

[gangsta207therevolution]

Originally Posted by CP1708


Everyone can relax, Ska is a certified Laker fan, he has every single right in the world to talk on Kobe, he's seen as many of Kobe's games as anyone around, it's not hate or whatever when it's your own dang team guys. 

  Let the guy breathe.  We have plenty of people in here that will be pro Kobe, let someone else speak freely "against" Kobe.  That's the point of discussing resumes and of course, Legacies. 

He's not hating, he's giving a different view of Kobe as a Laker fan.  Let him speak without freaking.  Arguing a point is fine, chill with all the "hater" crap. 

No doubt, and I know the opinions of SKA....
I think something about it is setting me off today....
SKA you right I filled in the specifics, but Kobe is still a better player w/o a ring cause Mac isnt winning with Shaq at that 3peat time, Iverson and Shaq legit might not win one Vince aint Kobe, and Houston and Allen are too close to being one dimentional. The whole Kobe having no rings along with Mac Vince, Iverson is an argument we have every year on NT. And it always comes out the same
they were close, but only Mac, and Iverson had a legit season or series of seasons where they were better than Kobe, and that if Kobe were in Toronto, Philly or Orlando they might be better than they were.
You just admited as much.
Now you put Kobe and Mac in the east on Toronto circa 2001 against anyone and they take the Eastern cake.
Kobe in Philly in 2001 they take the Eastern cake
Kobe in Boston in 2003 they take the Eastern cake
And now your woundering if Kobe doesnt steal one of those titles.
Look simply put all of those guys change the team's on floor dynamic.
 Maybe Tmac, Iverson and Pierce are best equiped to make the argument physically, skill wise and emotionally, but openly trying to rewrite history does not work.
I gave Duncan and Kobe 9 titles, and when you think about it its not that far fetched. 

 

[gangsta207therevolution]

Originally Posted by CP1708


Everyone can relax, Ska is a certified Laker fan, he has every single right in the world to talk on Kobe, he's seen as many of Kobe's games as anyone around, it's not hate or whatever when it's your own dang team guys. 

  Let the guy breathe.  We have plenty of people in here that will be pro Kobe, let someone else speak freely "against" Kobe.  That's the point of discussing resumes and of course, Legacies. 

He's not hating, he's giving a different view of Kobe as a Laker fan.  Let him speak without freaking.  Arguing a point is fine, chill with all the "hater" crap. 

No doubt, and I know the opinions of SKA....
I think something about it is setting me off today....
SKA you right I filled in the specifics, but Kobe is still a better player w/o a ring cause Mac isnt winning with Shaq at that 3peat time, Iverson and Shaq legit might not win one Vince aint Kobe, and Houston and Allen are too close to being one dimentional. The whole Kobe having no rings along with Mac Vince, Iverson is an argument we have every year on NT. And it always comes out the same
they were close, but only Mac, and Iverson had a legit season or series of seasons where they were better than Kobe, and that if Kobe were in Toronto, Philly or Orlando they might be better than they were.
You just admited as much.
Now you put Kobe and Mac in the east on Toronto circa 2001 against anyone and they take the Eastern cake.
Kobe in Philly in 2001 they take the Eastern cake
Kobe in Boston in 2003 they take the Eastern cake
And now your woundering if Kobe doesnt steal one of those titles.
Look simply put all of those guys change the team's on floor dynamic.
 Maybe Tmac, Iverson and Pierce are best equiped to make the argument physically, skill wise and emotionally, but openly trying to rewrite history does not work.
I gave Duncan and Kobe 9 titles, and when you think about it its not that far fetched. 

 

[japanair21]

Kidd is still very terrible shooting the ball if he's not set. If he's set, he's almost golden, but most of his shots aren't. If it goes in when he's not set, it's a lucky shot.

 

[CP1708]

23ska909red02 wrote:

---

But to me, that's like knocking Shaq for not having the passing ability of Yao, or slighting Mailman for poor 3-pt shooting.

Not only do I not care about having a prolific scorer at the 1, but I actually would rather not have one.

Actually, Iverson and Nash are mentioned as two of the best scoring PGs ever. And... well... you can finish my thought without me typing it, CP.
I don't mean it to sound such a knock on Kidd, I just mean in terms of what he can do.  I wouldn't ask him to get me 20 a night, but just the ability to hit those type shots could and would open up shots for his teammates that much more.  For all I bag on Nash, one angle I do not is his shooting.  It's part of why he has so many lanes to his teammates, he can stop and shoot from pretty much anywhere off the dribble.  If Kidd could, and at his size 

  he woulda been damn near unguardable. 


I like Kidd, I don't mean to sound negative because he isn't a great shooter, just pointing out a flaw in his game thru my way of seeing it is all. 



  

 

[CP1708]

23ska909red02 wrote:

---

But to me, that's like knocking Shaq for not having the passing ability of Yao, or slighting Mailman for poor 3-pt shooting.

Not only do I not care about having a prolific scorer at the 1, but I actually would rather not have one.

Actually, Iverson and Nash are mentioned as two of the best scoring PGs ever. And... well... you can finish my thought without me typing it, CP.
I don't mean it to sound such a knock on Kidd, I just mean in terms of what he can do.  I wouldn't ask him to get me 20 a night, but just the ability to hit those type shots could and would open up shots for his teammates that much more.  For all I bag on Nash, one angle I do not is his shooting.  It's part of why he has so many lanes to his teammates, he can stop and shoot from pretty much anywhere off the dribble.  If Kidd could, and at his size 

  he woulda been damn near unguardable. 


I like Kidd, I don't mean to sound negative because he isn't a great shooter, just pointing out a flaw in his game thru my way of seeing it is all. 



  

 

[japanair21]

Kidd is still very terrible shooting the ball if he's not set. If he's set, he's almost golden, but most of his shots aren't. If it goes in when he's not set, it's a lucky shot.

 

[CP1708]

gangsta207therevolution wrote:

I gave Duncan and Kobe 9 titles, and when you think about it its not that far fetched. 
Yeah it is.  

That's a TON of extra games played, and nobody can just go thru that year after year without wearing down at some point.  3-4 years tops before people start breakin down for a year or two.  

I gave Shaq and Kobe a possible 6-7 off of what could have been, with it mind that they would have broken down big time after a spell.  It's not the same as the 60's, no more 7 game postseason years where you win a title, winning a title now is about 20-23 games.  HUGE difference. 

  

 

[CP1708]

gangsta207therevolution wrote:

I gave Duncan and Kobe 9 titles, and when you think about it its not that far fetched. 
Yeah it is.  

That's a TON of extra games played, and nobody can just go thru that year after year without wearing down at some point.  3-4 years tops before people start breakin down for a year or two.  

I gave Shaq and Kobe a possible 6-7 off of what could have been, with it mind that they would have broken down big time after a spell.  It's not the same as the 60's, no more 7 game postseason years where you win a title, winning a title now is about 20-23 games.  HUGE difference. 

  

 

[jbone2308]

Kobe will never be placed right in history because every little detail will be broke down to take away from where he stands.

I wish some of ya'll would just say it instead of using silly reasons like it would be 'easier' to replace Kobe and win. How do we know?

I hope we are breaking down everyones career standings like this because if so I think we will find some interesting things.

 

[jbone2308]

Kobe will never be placed right in history because every little detail will be broke down to take away from where he stands.

I wish some of ya'll would just say it instead of using silly reasons like it would be 'easier' to replace Kobe and win. How do we know?

I hope we are breaking down everyones career standings like this because if so I think we will find some interesting things.

 

[darthska]

gangsta207therevolution:

---

openly trying to rewrite history does not work.
Nope. And that's why I seldom enter these "If you switched this guy..." discussions.

gangsta207therevolution:

---

I gave Duncan and Kobe 9 titles, and when you think about it its not that far fetched.
Now THAT... we can agree on. And I've said why before, so I'll say it again.

Obviously, Shaq and Kobe worked; 4 Finals, 3 titles. You HAVE to call that a success.

But the way it ended was obviously over egos; they both had egos too large for the success to continue, so they parted ways. Alright, with all that being said, I think Duncan is more philosophical and 'team-oriented' than Shaq, so I think a Kobe/Duncan feud would have ended with Kobe and Duncan still on the same team after Duncan figured out how to make it work with both of them getting what they wanted.

 

[darthska]

gangsta207therevolution:

---

openly trying to rewrite history does not work.
Nope. And that's why I seldom enter these "If you switched this guy..." discussions.

gangsta207therevolution:

---

I gave Duncan and Kobe 9 titles, and when you think about it its not that far fetched.
Now THAT... we can agree on. And I've said why before, so I'll say it again.

Obviously, Shaq and Kobe worked; 4 Finals, 3 titles. You HAVE to call that a success.

But the way it ended was obviously over egos; they both had egos too large for the success to continue, so they parted ways. Alright, with all that being said, I think Duncan is more philosophical and 'team-oriented' than Shaq, so I think a Kobe/Duncan feud would have ended with Kobe and Duncan still on the same team after Duncan figured out how to make it work with both of them getting what they wanted.

 

[gangsta207therevolution]

Originally Posted by 23ska909red02

gangsta207therevolution:

---

Ska your blinded by your Kobe hate right now.

gangsta207therevolution:

---

I know Ska has a thing about Kobe, but he is straight up hating on him.
I love when people say BS like this.

What did I say that was hateful?

"No, I mean, you're basically saying..."

EFF 'BASICALLY'! What. Did I say. That was hating?

"Well, by saying that Kobe sucks..." Stop it. Is that gonna be your response? Because... I never said that.

How about "You're saying Kobe's a scrub"? You gonna bring that to the table? Because I never said that, either. 

So what exactly did I say that was hating?

There are a lot of cases where a fan thinks that a certain someone pisses excellence and brunches w/ Jesus regularly, and the feelings of that fan get hurt when they find out someone refuses to agree that this certain someone is the product of Greek gods. This isn't one of those cases, is it? 

CP:

---

Everyone can relax, Ska is a certified Laker fan, he has every single right in the world to talk on Kobe, he's seen as many of Kobe's games as anyone around, it's not hate or whatever when it's your own dang team guys. 

  Let the guy breathe.  We have plenty of people in here that will be pro Kobe, let someone else speak freely "against" Kobe.  That's the point of discussing resumes and of course, Legacies. 

He's not hating, he's giving a different view of Kobe as a Laker fan.  Let him speak without freaking.  Arguing a point is fine, chill with all the "hater" crap.
My dude. 

You know full well that isnt the case. But at the very minimum you have been between Deuce King, and CP the whole time.
Im closer to CP personally in how I feel about Kobe as I said in my previous post before reading this one.
Guys like Tmac, Pierce and if he could be tamed Iverson have the best combination of skill and mental strength.
But I would argue you that Shaq needed Kobe's challenges? That almost eliminates Tmac.
 They needed Kobe's size and ability to defend 3 positions. That eliminates Iverson
And they needed his Ball Handling as Phil would play Ron Harper and Brian Shaw before Fisher.
There would have been ways, but if Kobe is in the same cities as Mac was in 2001, Iverson in 2001 and Pierce in 2001 or even if the Lakers decided they wanted Vince, The Bucks took Kobe for Ray Allen. It is my opinion that all of those teams are in the finals against Shaq.
Philly as constructed that year, maybe with a pass first pg are the best bet to at bare minimum win more games in the finals against Shaq and the "all star SG"  Mac and Kobe, or Vince and Kobe still are giving the Lakers fits.
The problem I thought about and I have with your statement about the "all star SG" replacing Kobe is that your forgeting Newtons 3rd Law of Physics. If im crazy and it doesnt apply tell me.
Thats why I said the Kidd Marion trade was the best situation, and that doesnt involve an "all star SG" unless its Eddie Jones.