- Jan 20, 2006
- 17,900
- 793
We sold out when we started Eddie Robinson. Of course we're going to sell out now, we're always tops in attendance... Which is why Jerry & co are in no hurry to make any drastic moves.
Official NBA 2012-2013 Season Thread
- Thread in 'Sports & Training' Thread starter Started by Spectacular23,
- Start date
- Status
We sold out when we started Eddie Robinson. Of course we're going to sell out now, we're always tops in attendance... Which is why Jerry & co are in no hurry to make any drastic moves.
lawdog1
Supporter
- Sep 14, 2000
- 60,150
- 72,627
I think the Rockets other than Harden are better than people are giving them credit for. Lin, after a slow start, has been solid. Asik is space eater and a good defensive center. Parsons is much improved, etc. They do have some talent on that team. If it was just Harden and a bunch of bums, they wouldn't be seventh in the West. Plus, from what I've seen, the Rockets have been pretty competitive in the games Harden hasn't played. They killed the Clippers without him once. I'm not saying Harden doesn't deserve MVP consideration, I'm just saying that I don't think the Rockets would be awful without him. They wouldn't be a playoff team in the West though, that's for sure.
- Jan 30, 2007
- 23,381
- 6,002
Harden for MVP... lol
antidope
Supporter
- Jan 2, 2012
- 63,506
- 68,012
Didnt say he should win, just that he should end up higher on the list than where hes going to actually land.
- May 19, 2010
- 4,750
- 1,407
But by this standard the Knicks would still be a playoff team and Melo leading the league in scoring really means nothing. Because without Melo, the Knicks wouldn't make the playoffs, possibly get a low seed in the East at best only because they only have two go to scorers as it is.
Last edited:
- Nov 26, 2004
- 3,240
- 83
The Brandon Knight disrespect this year is OC. Somebody needs to make a compilation of it all
- May 12, 2002
- 16,448
- 2,155
- Jul 31, 2008
- 12,209
- 277
"I honestly think the Lakers would do fine without Kobe."
Define fine.
Define fine.
- Aug 7, 2012
- 2,731
- 2,257
srs?
plz explain
I don't think it's that difficult to understand, if the award was always given to the best player in the league then Derrick Rose would not have an MVP. There's no way you can say he was the best player in 2010-2011 or any year for that matter.
- Jun 17, 2006
- 44,214
- 2,544
- Aug 2, 2006
- 34,129
- 29,467
'I know right.
So Dirk was the best player in the world in 07-08?
You mean 06-07 when he won the MVP.
yes he was the best player.
- Sep 18, 2003
- 61,853
- 134,028
The disrespect of Steve Nash and his MVPs on here
ohmygosher
Banned
- Jul 18, 2012
- 8,072
- 2,447
This.
antidope
Supporter
- Jan 2, 2012
- 63,506
- 68,012
Theyd have a better record than what they currently have, dead serious( I like Kobe and have 0 issues with him whatsoever)
Last edited:
- Dec 17, 2005
- 23,933
- 5,933
Damn bro, I honestly valued your opinions.
I still do but its hard to take much serious if you honestly believe the Lakers would have a better record right now without Kobe.
Seems like a Skip Bayless typa thing to say...basic shock value.
Didn't take you as that typa poster.
But aight man, if thats really your opinion then so be it.
- May 19, 2010
- 4,750
- 1,407
^Yeah cause their almost a lottery team with him. If you take this same season injures included without Kobe. :x they might get 30 wins.
Last edited:
antidope
Supporter
- Jan 2, 2012
- 63,506
- 68,012
It isnt a knock on Kobe by any means. If we're talking about the Lakers with Mike D'Antoni as the coach, I think them minus Kobe would be better if not at least comparable. He would be able to impliment his offense to a higher degree without Kobe there because he demands a large amount touches and shots. Obviously Kobe has won them games alone this season and should get credit for it, but I think that with Kobe gone, they'd get to feed Howard more, and open up more opportunities for shooters amongst a few other things.
Maybe better record was a reach, in fact I wanna withdraw that. Big Js right, you cant base an argument on hypotheticals it leads to nothing. Delete all my recent Posts SKA/Animalthug/Meth
Maybe better record was a reach, in fact I wanna withdraw that. Big Js right, you cant base an argument on hypotheticals it leads to nothing. Delete all my recent Posts SKA/Animalthug/Meth
Last edited:
- Mar 30, 2010
- 8,485
- 1,318
Agreed. You also have to look at their offensive system. With or without Harden, they play at a breakneck pace that a lot of teams wouldn't be able to keep up with.
- Mar 8, 2010
- 21,800
- 3,553
- Dec 17, 2005
- 23,933
- 5,933
I know youre an objective guy.
I know you post genuine beliefs.
But i just dont think you're dissecting that situation enough and really thinking about what the team would be like without Kobe.
I dont wanna make TOO long of a post about it, but i'll post a few bullet points of things to consider when claiming their record would be better without Kobe:
-Dwight would get the load of touches, but without the proper facilitating he isn't capable of constantly creating his own shots throughout a game.
-Dwight cant make free throws, he's not your go-to guy in the 4th quarter...unless you wanna see a bunch of bricked FT's which will ruin the flow of their game.
-Nash was injured for pretty much half the season, and the other half hes been the same shooter hes always been...but even SLOWER than usual on defense especially transition D.
-Pau was pretty much injured half the season.
-Jordan Hill is out
-Steve Blake was out for 25 games or so.
So for a majority of the season your starting line-up would be:
PG- STEVE BLAKE/DARIUS MORRIS
SG- JODIE MEEKS
SF- METTA WORLD PEACE
PF- EARL CLARK
C - DWIGHT HOWARD.
Now just take a long, hard look at that....82 games, of THAT.
You think MDA's system will flourish better with just THEM and not with Kobe?
You think that after 82 games, with a MAJORITY of them having that starting line-up...the Los Angeles Lakers would have more than 42 wins? You think they would have 50 wins with Jodie Meeks as the go-to guard?
I just want you to let that sink in a little, sleep on it, then come back later and let me know if you still stand by your comment.
If you do, alright...we'll drop it and move on.
But think about it man, you really think Dwight with a bad back half the season and a lack of post-moves to begin with, plus bad free throw shooting, was going to carry that squad to 45-50 wins?
That's all im sayin.
Last edited:
- Dec 8, 2004
- 2,453
- 403
This is the NBA Thread, there is a thread dedicated to discrediting Kobe its called the Kobe Overrated Thread, please use it!
- Jul 3, 2012
- 12,744
- 2,371
It's always something with Kobe damnnnnn boy can't do right. Man I give up talking about this
- Sep 25, 2004
- 8,931
- 3,513
you really think the lakers would have a better record WITHOUT kobe?
dantoni could implement a better offense without kobe? he would be able to do this without an offseason and training camp?
not playing with kobe wont improve dwights willingness and ability to play the pick and roll with nash
not playing with kobe wont keep pau gasol, steve nash, steve blake, and jordan hill off the injury list for long periods of time.
you're gonna have jodie meeks out there as your starting SG? or are you going to run a steve nash and steve blake backcourt with duhon/morris and meeks backing them up?
and thats just the offensive side of things.
not playing with kobe wont improve the team's defense either, which is the biggest fault of this team.
kobe has his faults, but to say the lakers would have a better record without kobe? no. i don't think so.
edit: LTB beat me to it
dantoni could implement a better offense without kobe? he would be able to do this without an offseason and training camp?
not playing with kobe wont improve dwights willingness and ability to play the pick and roll with nash
not playing with kobe wont keep pau gasol, steve nash, steve blake, and jordan hill off the injury list for long periods of time.
you're gonna have jodie meeks out there as your starting SG? or are you going to run a steve nash and steve blake backcourt with duhon/morris and meeks backing them up?
and thats just the offensive side of things.
not playing with kobe wont improve the team's defense either, which is the biggest fault of this team.
kobe has his faults, but to say the lakers would have a better record without kobe? no. i don't think so.
edit: LTB beat me to it
Last edited:
- May 9, 2005
- 10,219
- 1,671
That's ridiculous. And it's not because it's Kobe Bryant. It's because the rest of the team has been lackadasical, disinterested, or injured at one point or another.
Take Kobe off the team - the one guy who has played at a high level through it all - and then you've got a team where Dwight Howard was injured and/or not eem caring for a good stretch, Pau Gasol camped out at the three + injured + BENCHED, Steve Nash injured on and off, D'Antoni shuffling everyone's roles to the point where they don't know what to do. That team would still be under .500 at least.
The Lakers season has been a mess and Kobe's play is a huge reason why they might almost survive it.
Take Kobe off the team - the one guy who has played at a high level through it all - and then you've got a team where Dwight Howard was injured and/or not eem caring for a good stretch, Pau Gasol camped out at the three + injured + BENCHED, Steve Nash injured on and off, D'Antoni shuffling everyone's roles to the point where they don't know what to do. That team would still be under .500 at least.
The Lakers season has been a mess and Kobe's play is a huge reason why they might almost survive it.
Last edited:
- May 9, 2005
- 10,219
- 1,671
double
Last edited:
- Status
