Retro POY '07-08 (Voting Complete)

[Sedale Threatt]

I do not have Garnett at #1 as of right now. I didn't think of his as #1 during that season. I do think he was the most valuable player, but a lot of that is circumstance. My understanding is that this is a "best player" project, and he wouldn't be my first pick in that regard.

The biggest issue with Garnett he wasn't really a true #1 scoring option. Now, that doesn't preclude someone from being the game's best, but KG's offense wasn't quite where it was at his peak in Minnesota. He was heavily criticized in Boston at times during the playoffs because of lack of offensive aggressiveness. Obviously, we have to weigh this against his defense.

He was excellent in the Detroit series, peaking in game 5. Pierce was better during the Finals. I think I want my #1 player to be the best player on the floor during the NBA Finals (if he's playing in them) and to be a larger offensive presence. These are my reservations about KG...counter-arguments?

Fair criticisms. The lack of go-to scoring has always been Garnett's biggest shortcoming, in my opinion, even during his peak years in Minnesota.

Personally, I'm not looking at this as necessarily the most valuable player, or best player, but who enjoyed the best season. Garnett still fits that bill, in my opinion -- excellent production, a noticeable impact on his team, individual and team success with a major award and the first championship of his career. The 20/10 in the playoffs sealed it for me.

What really throws a monkey wrench in the works is that two prime candidates, James and Bryant, finished the year on low notes in that they were both pretty horrendous in season-ending losses.

If James is even average against the Celtics, I probably give it to him, but he didn't even show up until the fourth or fifth game of that series. Same thing with Kobe; he was having a great postseason, but four sub-40 shooting games with a ring on the line pretty much sucks.

And regarding Paul -- I don't know why, because he's one of my favorite players in the league, but I just can't see him as the best player that year.

[bastillon]

I do not have Garnett at #1 as of right now. I didn't think of his as #1 during that season. I do think he was the most valuable player, but a lot of that is circumstance. My understanding is that this is a "best player" project, and he wouldn't be my first pick in that regard.

The biggest issue with Garnett he wasn't really a true #1 scoring option. Now, that doesn't preclude someone from being the game's best, but KG's offense wasn't quite where it was at his peak in Minnesota. He was heavily criticized in Boston at times during the playoffs because of lack of offensive aggressiveness. Obviously, we have to weigh this against his defense.

He was excellent in the Detroit series, peaking in game 5. Pierce was better during the Finals. I think I want my #1 player to be the best player on the floor during the NBA Finals (if he's playing in them) and to be a larger offensive presence. These are my reservations about KG...counter-arguments?

I don't see why you would demand more from Garnett than from other players. he was flat out dominant defensively and still brought a lot to the table offensively with his passing, scoring and spacing the floor. his pick and roll with Pierce is what really anchored their offense in all critical situations.

my point about demanding is that Garnett still gave you 20 PPG and great passing offensively which is very good value. LeBron, Kobe and Paul on the other hand never really matched Garnett's offense with their defense... and considering that Boston's winning came from dominating on defense, where it was clearly KG who was mainly responsible for that, I don't think that match his defensive impact with their offense (save for Paul, he was amazing). both LeBron and Kobe had some down moments offensively which pretty much screws their value overall since they can't have significant 2-way impact as smalls.

so as "bad" as KG's offense was, it was still better than other candidates' defense and his defense nicely matches up with their offensive excellence.

as I am now, I could only put Paul ahead of KG, but Garnett's leadership does for me... at least now, after drza's posts.

[mysticbb]

When did I say that the Lakers wouldn't be a contender in the current discussion? I consider any top 4 team in the league a contender depending on who they face and what the circumstances are. I said simply that most didn't expect them to get to the Finals, which is exactly what the consensus amongst Lakers fans late in the season.

What puts Kobe over the edge above the other players is how he performed in the playoffs, simply put. That's where there is a clear separation. NO ONE expected the Lakers to make the Finals that year, not even after we got Gasol, but they got there and gave the Celtics a good run for their money (well, first few games at least) so I like Kobe's overall body of work over CP3's.

That was your statement in your first post. You clearly said that no one expected the Lakers to make the finals. Nearly every expert had them as the best team in the West after that trade occured. Who cares about a bunch of Lakers fans who didn't expect that? Seriously, they went crazy after the trade.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6d9j95Fvo3o
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vBmBF6o2cI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8j9nsqv9m6M

Three times clearly stated that the Lakers became championship contenders.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs2 ... ies=lalbos

Look at this, only one guy picked the Celtics to win the finals. Seriously, saying NO ONE expected the Lakers in the finals is a BIG joke.

Don't act like the Lakers were shoe-ins to meet the Celtics in the Finals. The West was tough that year and the only reason you'd suggest otherwise is to diminish what Kobe did in the playoffs.

They were even expected to WIN the finals, not only to make it.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs2 ... ies=lalsas

6 of 10 expected them to win against the Spurs, Hollinger, who uses scoring margin as the predictor, which is the best tool for that (around 88% of the winner of playoff series are better in scoring margin), have the Lakers winning in 5. EVERYONE with a clue know that the Lakers were title contenders after the trade, the Lakers beat the **** out of every other team, going from +5.8 to +9.1 in scoring margin is HUGE. Those +9.1 is the scoring margin of a 68 wins team, the +5.8 of a 60 wins team. The Lakers went from a top team in the West to the clear cut favourite in the West after that trade. And that has nothing to do with downplaying Bryant's performance in the playoffs. As I said he had really good playoffs until the finals.

He got the contribution from his teammates. In the first game Bryant took a lot of bad shots, turned the ball over a couple of times, the Lakers were +3 in the time he was off the court. In game two he was rather bad until the last 8 minutes or so, he started final to make his shot when the Lakers were down by 20+. Until that point he was what? 6 of 17 from the field with a couple of turnovers? The Lakers came close at the end, but the game was lost before. Game 3, Bryant played great, made his shots, didn't have much help from his colleges on the starting 5, but his bench showed up somehow, Vujacic nailed the 3's, Lakers win. Really good game by Bryant, he gets the credit for this win. In game 4 Bryant played again bad in the 2ndhalf, yes his teammates let him down too, but he was also not a good contributor. On the other side his teammates were the main reason for being up that big after the first half, at the end of the game Bryant was the one who was 6 of 19 from the field for 17 points, 31.6%, his teammates gave him 26-58, yes mainly in the first half, but I can't take the blame from Bryant in that game for the collapse, he was the supposed to be leader, best leader in the game and so on, he didn't do that in that 2nd half. Game 5, win for the Lakers, Bryant has a okish game on offense, good defensive effort, but he also got help from his teammates, big plays by Walton and Odom at the start of the 4th quarter to extend the lead. But Bryant most certainly did nothing out of the ordinary, I would even say a below average game for a someone who is supposed to be the best player in the league.
And we don't need to talk about that pathetic game 6, yes, the rest of the Lakers didn't come to play either, but Bryant was pathetic in that game. Getting blown out by 39 in the finals, that is like the Jazz back in 1998 losing to the Bulls in the same fashion. No leadership whatsover by Bryant.

That was the series against the Celtics, no "wow"-game like James in game 7 against the Celtics or something similar, one of worst performances by a superstar in the finals in average. That thing puts Bryant's overall playoffs performance down, that is for sure. 8 players had a higher WS per 48 value during those playoffs, including LeBron James. On the biggest stage he faltered, against good defense or not, he didn't play any better than James against the Celtics, in fact James at least battled in game 7 for the win, Bryant gave up in game 6.

I don't think posters who blindly follow false accusations are particularly trustworthy either.

False accusation? You were the one who said that NO ONE would have expected the Lakers to make the finals. With emphasize on no one. ;)


Finally I want to say something towards those who have Duncan over Nowitzki:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... i?id=lR07x

Nowitzki beats Duncan out in boxscore metrics.

Nowitzki has also the better +/- numbers (Net+/- and APM), thus the argument Duncan played such great defense to compensate this small gap is not seen in the results. Nowitzki played better than Duncan that season, he was the better player. Don't let the first round exit blind you on that. Howard scored 13 ppg on 39 TS%!, Chris Paul went nuts against Jason Kidd with 25/6/12, the Mavericks were beat by Chris Paul, they didn't lose because of Nowitzki's bad play, the guy had 27/12/4 in that series. In that only win he had he 32/19/6, you can't expect from a player to put that kind of performance up for an entire series in each game, that would be GOAT level. In game 4, in which Nowitzki played below average he managed to have still 22/13/3 with 44.4 fg%, his teammates went 24 of 71 from the field (33.8%) while the defense of the Hornets concentrated purely on Nowitzki (Chandler and West with hard doubles). The Mavericks bricked open shots, that was comical. Byron Scott said before the series that the only players he is worried about are Dirk Nowitzki and Jason Terry, the Hornets whole defensive gameplan was to stop Nowitzki and don't let them have their two-man-game (Terry, Nowitzki). That is a typical example for the Mavericks supporting cast, a support which is very well suited for the regular season, but bad structured for the playoffs with no real constant 2nd option.

Duncan on the other side had the perfect structured team for playoff success. Constant 2nd options in Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili, 22 ppg and 18 ppg on really good efficiency, and a coach who knows what he is doing in Greg Popovich. Perfect situation for a deep playoff run. Duncan, for sure, was a great contributor that season, but overall his impact was lower than 2007. At the end he was outplayed in that series against the Lakers by Kobe Bryant, not that bad at all, because Bryant overall was at least a Top4 player that year. But Duncan himself didn't impress me at all in comparison to Nowitzki. I don't really see the point of putting him above Nowitzki.

[ElGee]

I do not have Garnett at #1 as of right now. I didn't think of his as #1 during that season. I do think he was the most valuable player, but a lot of that is circumstance. My understanding is that this is a "best player" project, and he wouldn't be my first pick in that regard.

The biggest issue with Garnett he wasn't really a true #1 scoring option. Now, that doesn't preclude someone from being the game's best, but KG's offense wasn't quite where it was at his peak in Minnesota. He was heavily criticized in Boston at times during the playoffs because of lack of offensive aggressiveness. Obviously, we have to weigh this against his defense.

He was excellent in the Detroit series, peaking in game 5. Pierce was better during the Finals. I think I want my #1 player to be the best player on the floor during the NBA Finals (if he's playing in them) and to be a larger offensive presence. These are my reservations about KG...counter-arguments?

So you do think Peirce was clearly better than Ray Ray in the Finals ?

Yes. Clearly.

Outside of game 3 (in which the Celtics team shot 35%!), Pierce averaged 25 points (on 14.8 shots), 7 assists and 4 rebounds per game. He played Kobe Bryant about as well as anyone ever has (even blocking his fadeaway a few times). Pierce had 14 pts 3 reb 2 ast on 69% TS% in the second half comeback in G4.

Throwing out Allen's worst game (G5 loss), Allen averaged 21.2 points (12.0 shots), 5.6 rebounds and 2.6 assists. Pierce was bigger in the comeback, on defense and just had a larger offensive presence throughout the series.

[Silver Bullet]

Okay. did anybody see that video I posted. There was nothing Kobe could've done. When he was passing out of triple teams, the lakers outside shooters were just missing wide open looks (except Varejao).
It is unfair to blame Kobe for ending the season on a low note, there is absolutely nothing he could've done.

[Silver Bullet]

I'm gonna repost this, because at no point during that series, did Peirce guard Kobe straight up. I know you people are not gonna watch it, but whatever.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nepmd2ygMK4[/youtube]

[bastillon]

mysticbb, how about Nash vs Nowitzki ?

[mysticbb]

I'm gonna repost this, because at no point during that series, did Peirce guard Kobe straight up. I know you people are not gonna watch it, but whatever.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nepmd2ygMK4[/youtube]

That video is a perfect example for Bryant's bad decision making. Some of those scenes are cut before the turnover occured, because Bryant focussed way too much on getting his own shot going instead of making the right play, pass to the open teammate. The Lakers couldn't establish a flow on offense, because Bryant was too busy taking shots against two or three defenders. And of course, Pierce couldn't guard Bryant alone, I thought Ray Allen did a better job defensively 1on1 against Bryant than Pierce.

[Dr Positivity]

Ok the full list

1. Kevin Garnett - As mentioned a rare case where a player's impact far transcends on court stats and play, albeit he was still likely a top 5 guy in that category. The Celtics were basically the most intense/competitive/locked in defensive team ever. If there was ever a team truly fitting the "they played the right way" label, it was those Cs. Now I think you can credit Pierce and Allen for the work ethic and hungriness, but both had missed the playoffs for a couple years in a row with their old teams and I don't think they brought the fire KG did to that team.

2. Kobe Bryant - Won MVP, made the finals, fit beautifully with Gasol after the trade and the Lakers were in #1 seed position by January even when it was just Kobe and Bynum. A real breakthrough year for him after almost getting dealt the year before. A minor qualm is he coasted through the first 1/4 of the year but it didn't matter much in the end

3. Lebron James - By far the worst Cavs season in the last handful, but he's still a 30/7/7 guy who guarantees you points at the rim and from the 3pt line. In the playoffs he was excellent and almost beat the Celtics by himself

4. Chris Paul - Epic regular season, very good first playoffs considering most youngish teams like that flame out in the 1st round due to an inability on the road. I see one major hole in his game running the Hornets point... his team never got to the FT line. They were 2nd last in the league in FT/FGA and overall FTs made. This was a huge hole in the Hornets offense which otherwise excelled in eFG, TOV, and Orbs and you can argue what separated them from the Lakers. The Hornets got a lot of good 3s but little inside

5. Tim Duncan - Just another all-around great year for Duncan. 19/11/3 as an inside/outside weapon, Spurs still finish top 3 defensively showing his continued legs on that end. In the playoffs he hits the big 3 in Game 1 of the Phx series and drops 40/15 in that game overall and eventually carries his lessening team to the WCF

HM: Deron Williams. The Jazz had statistically one of the best offenses of all time that year. Gotta give credit to the PG running things.

[ElGee]

I do not have Garnett at #1 as of right now. I didn't think of his as #1 during that season. I do think he was the most valuable player, but a lot of that is circumstance. My understanding is that this is a "best player" project, and he wouldn't be my first pick in that regard.

The biggest issue with Garnett he wasn't really a true #1 scoring option. Now, that doesn't preclude someone from being the game's best, but KG's offense wasn't quite where it was at his peak in Minnesota. He was heavily criticized in Boston at times during the playoffs because of lack of offensive aggressiveness. Obviously, we have to weigh this against his defense.

He was excellent in the Detroit series, peaking in game 5. Pierce was better during the Finals. I think I want my #1 player to be the best player on the floor during the NBA Finals (if he's playing in them) and to be a larger offensive presence. These are my reservations about KG...counter-arguments?

I don't see why you would demand more from Garnett than from other players. he was flat out dominant defensively and still brought a lot to the table offensively with his passing, scoring and spacing the floor. his pick and roll with Pierce is what really anchored their offense in all critical situations.

my point about demanding is that Garnett still gave you 20 PPG and great passing offensively which is very good value. LeBron, Kobe and Paul on the other hand never really matched Garnett's offense with their defense... and considering that Boston's winning came from dominating on defense, where it was clearly KG who was mainly responsible for that, I don't think that match his defensive impact with their offense (save for Paul, he was amazing). both LeBron and Kobe had some down moments offensively which pretty much screws their value overall since they can't have significant 2-way impact as smalls.

so as "bad" as KG's offense was, it was still better than other candidates' defense and his defense nicely matches up with their offensive excellence.

as I am now, I could only put Paul ahead of KG, but Garnett's leadership does for me... at least now, after drza's posts.

It's not an issue of demanding more. I've said before that individual offensive impact is more important than defensive impact. I give KG a huge amount of credit -- especially in terms of intangibles -- for anchoring an all-time defense. But again, basketball is an offensive sport. I think it's fair to question how big that impact is versus players who are clearly more reliable offensively. I thought KG exhibited some of the best help defense in the history of the league that year.

In other words, if KG's on-court defense were a little worse, the Celtics still might be the best defensive team in the league (although not historically good). If, say, LeBron James couldn't set up his teammates a few more times per game and his TS% dipped slightly, that Cleveland team would be in trouble.

My reservations are about weighing those concepts with regards to how KG played, especially how it mattered during stretches of the playoffs.

(For instance, Boston's 0-for on the road in the first two rounds had a lot to do with chemistry and Doc not finding a rotation. But was KG's defense suddenly bad? I don't see any statistical or visual evidence of that. Yet they still couldn't beat Atlanta or Cleveland on the road.)

[ElGee]

I'm gonna repost this, because at no point during that series, did Peirce guard Kobe straight up. I know you people are not gonna watch it, but whatever.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nepmd2ygMK4[/youtube]

That video is a perfect example for Bryant's bad decision making. Some of those scenes are cut before the turnover occured, because Bryant focussed way too much on getting his own shot going instead of making the right play, pass to the open teammate. The Lakers couldn't establish a flow on offense, because Bryant was too busy taking shots against two or three defenders. And of course, Pierce couldn't guard Bryant alone, I thought Ray Allen did a better job defensively 1on1 against Bryant than Pierce.

That's incorrect - there were times when Pierce guarded Kobe. Don't misconstrue funneling and help for not guarding someone. It was stated in the 09 thread LeBron didn't guard Hedo. He did at times. Pierce guarded Kobe at times, and he played him incredibly well. His strength and length bother him. The same thing happened during the regular season that year.

And I agree about Bryant's decision making. This is a major issue (perhaps in the tie-breaker sense) for me in years like 2006 with Kobe. His shot selection has made me go gray at times...

[Sedale Threatt]

Sorry, I can't take a video too seriously when it was put together by a guy whose other creations include "Kobe Bryant -- Greatness Personified" and "Kobe Bryant -- Beethoven in Sneakers" while naming his web site, ko8e.com. ("My fascination with Kobe did not begin until...")

Not the most objective source of analysis. Although I did make it to about the eight- or nine-minute mark. Two impressions: That guy is a huge whiner, and damn, the Celtics were an unbelievably good defensive team.

There probably wasn't anything Kobe could have done to avert a loss in that series. That wasn't his fault. But it seems blatant even to me, as a die-hard Laker fan, that that he could have played much, much, much better.

[mysticbb]

mysticbb, how about Nash vs Nowitzki ?

Nash was playing good until the trade, the Suns were most certainly better without Shaquille O'Neal and Nash carrying the offensive load. While Nash's +/- numbers were slightly better than Nowitzki's, I have to take the boxscore numbers into account (from a statistical point of view). Nowitzki beats Nash out in those, especially in the playoffs in which Nash didn't show anything.

Well, having seen Nash and Nowitzki play over the last couple of years a lot, I don't have the impression that 2008 was a particular good year for Nash. I would put him right up there with Duncan for the HM spot, which I did. I don't think that someone else was really close to those three for the 5th spot, you can maybe find an argument for Pierce, but Pierce overall wasn't nearly as good as most people think. Garnett was clearly the better player on the Celtics during the playoffs, and Ray Allen played imho better than Pierce in the finals. Thus the Nowitzki, Nash and Duncan are the only players in my book who would deserve the 5th spot. I made my point for Nowitzki over Duncan. And had never the impression that Nash played better than Nowitzki in the first place.

I'm still reluctant about the 3rd spot for either Paul or Bryant. I have Paul there right now, because he played fantastic in that year, but Bryant clearly lead the Lakers to the finals, and played really good until the finals. I'm most certainly not impressed by Paul's +/- numbers that season while his boxscore numbers are looking great. Well, I probably change it to Bryant on 3rd and Paul on 4th, not quite sure. How long do we have for this?

[Silver Bullet]

I'm gonna repost this, because at no point during that series, did Peirce guard Kobe straight up. I know you people are not gonna watch it, but whatever.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nepmd2ygMK4[/youtube]

That video is a perfect example for Bryant's bad decision making. Some of those scenes are cut before the turnover occured, because Bryant focussed way too much on getting his own shot going instead of making the right play, pass to the open teammate. The Lakers couldn't establish a flow on offense, because Bryant was too busy taking shots against two or three defenders. And of course, Pierce couldn't guard Bryant alone, I thought Ray Allen did a better job defensively 1on1 against Bryant than Pierce.

He'd been passing to his team mates all series long and they kept missing open jumpers -

[mysticbb]

That's incorrect - there were times when Pierce guarded Kobe. Don't misconstrue funneling and help for not guarding someone. It was stated in the 09 thread LeBron didn't guard Hedo. He did at times. Pierce guarded Kobe at times, and he played him incredibly well. His strength and length bother him. The same thing happened during the regular season that year.

Not quite sure, can you point out certain scenes in which he guarded Bryant and done a good job? He was good at staying in front of him, but he always got the help rather quickly. I didn't have the impression that Pierce forced Bryant into the help defender, which would be necessary imho to call his job good. Ray Allen done a better job, at least in my memory.

[mysticbb]

He'd been passing to his team mates all series long and they kept missing open jumpers -

And how was it possible that his teammates had nearly 70 ppg on 55.1 ts% in that series, if they missed all their shots? While Bryant scored 26 on 50 ts%? I can tell you it is impossible to score on an above average scoring efficiency and miss all shots. ;)

[Silver Bullet]

Sorry, I can't take a video too seriously when it was put together by a guy whose other creations include "Kobe Bryant -- Greatness Personified" and "Kobe Bryant -- Beethoven in Sneakers" while naming his web site, ko8e.com. ("My fascination with Kobe did not begin until...")

Not the most objective source of analysis. Although I did make it to about the eight- or nine-minute mark. Two impressions: That guy is a huge whiner, and damn, the Celtics were an unbelievably good defensive team.

There probably wasn't anything Kobe could have done to avert a loss in that series. That wasn't his fault. But it seems blatant even to me, as a die-hard Laker fan, that that he could have played much, much, much better.

Yea, I knew that guy would turn people off, but look at the evidence not the creator. There is nothing biased in that video, because all of it is actual footage.

And here, take a look at the 2nd half from game 1. There wasn't much wrong with ball distribution. That video makes it look worse than it is, because it is totally forced upon Kobe.

But seriously, penalising him for the Final is just sad - They weren't playing defense nearly this well against the Cavs, and yet Lebron has nearly identical numbers. (Partially, they didn't had to, because Peirce is better suited to playing Lebron).

And the defense is just unbelievable - Any current era superstar and Jordan would've had problems if they were played that way.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dIcLMlZuS-I[/youtube]

[ElGee]

Sorry, I can't take a video too seriously when it was put together by a guy whose other creations include "Kobe Bryant -- Greatness Personified" and "Kobe Bryant -- Beethoven in Sneakers" while naming his web site, ko8e.com. ("My fascination with Kobe did not begin until...")

Not the most objective source of analysis. Although I did make it to about the eight- or nine-minute mark. Two impressions: That guy is a huge whiner, and damn, the Celtics were an unbelievably good defensive team.

There probably wasn't anything Kobe could have done to avert a loss in that series. That wasn't his fault. But it seems blatant even to me, as a die-hard Laker fan, that that he could have played much, much, much better.

Watching that video with the sound on is like getting a root canal.

[mysticbb]

But seriously, penalising him for the Final is just sad - They weren't playing defense nearly this well against the Cavs, and yet Lebron has nearly identical numbers. (Partially, they didn't had to, because Peirce is better suited to playing Lebron).

And these kind of statements are those which makes me angry, really. The overall Celtics defense was better suited for playing againt James and they done an incredible job on him. They forced the ball out of his hand or double him hard and forced turnover. James gets the same blame for the first 6 games in that series in my opinion as Bryant gets for the 6 in finals. Now, James gets a slightly edge here due to his awesome game 7 performance. You can't deny the fact that he played great and had not much help whatsover from his teammates.

Overall Bryant gets the edge over James in the playoffs. But James was clearly better during the regular season, even though he played on the less successful team. Garnett played best in my books in the playoffs and was the DPOY, which puts him ahead of Bryant overall, but it wasn't enought to put him ahead of James (even thouh the gap is rather small, wayyy smaller than in 2009 for example between #1 and #2). Chris Paul after that or Kobe Bryant, both are again not that far away from the 2nd spot. Behind those two is a larger gap to Nowitzki, Duncan and Nash.

[Sedale Threatt]

But seriously, penalising him for the Final is just sad.

Why? He played poorly. Those are the breaks. Athletics are beautiful in that it's a pretty bottom-line endeavor. You either win or you lose, perform or fail. In this case, it's pretty clear that he had a terrible series. Yes, it came against a historically good defense; so what? He's not the first player in the history of sports to be presented with a challenge.

LeBron had a crap series; marked him down for it. Kobe had a crap series too, so why should I give him a pass? That's not fair.

And yeah, I think the video is hugely biased, because he's taking a very specific angle in terms of the footage he's using. I don't think it's a stretch to think that someone with an anti-Kobe agenda could come up with a reel of the 78 shots he missed and 23 turnovers he committed in that series and paint a completely different picture.

"Now look at this possession. Kobe is just re-tah-ded with his thought process he-ah. Paul Pe-ahce just locks him down"