RealGM

dj20001 wrote:

KGtabake wrote:Shaq is a consensus top10 player of all time.
For Kobe it's debatable.
I have him in, i know many people don't.
There isn't any serious list that hasn't got Shaq in it though.....

Outside of 1 additional FMVP, I'm not sure how Shaq is for sure in and Kobe is debatable.

Jedi32 wrote:

Sofia wrote:

Handlez wrote:
Pau was 0-12 in the playoffs before Kobe.

Do you realize how significant that is?

He could not even perform at a high enough level for ONE game in three years of playoffs. That is actually unheard of and I'd like to be able to see if it has ever happened before.

I personally have never heard of such a scenario. A top tier player should be good enough to steal at least ONE game in three years of playoffs. Pau couldn't even take over a single game in three years of playoffs.

2004 - lost as 7th seed to Conference winning Spurs, 2nd and 3rd leading scorers on that Memphis team were James Posey and Bonzi Wells

2005 - lost as the 8th seed to the 62 win peak of 7 seconds or less Suns, Mike Miller is 2nd option and Bonzi Wells 10.4ppg is 3rd

2006 - lost as 7th seed to Conference winning Mavs fuelled by peak Dirk. Eddie Jones is the only player that averages double digits in the playoffs with a whopping 10.3ppg

Pau’s scoring went up in each of those 3 playoff series. But let’s be honest, those Griz teams were scrappy but played some of the best teams at top of the very tough west - they never had a chance.

Oh and for what it’s worth, across the 04/05 and 05/06 regular seasons after Shaq left LA, Memphis won 15 more games than the Lakers.

No one said he had to beat those teams. I think the other poster was referring to the fact that he didn't even win one game.

Asianiac_24 wrote:These are the top perimeter player wings he played with in his career and the number of rings he got with them:

Penny Hardaway: 0
Eddie Jones/Van Exel: 0
Kobe Bryant: 3
Dwayne Wade: 1
Steve Nash: 0
LeBron James: 0
Paul Pierce/Ray Allen: 0

Shaq has never played on a bad team for his entire career. Not even once.

Kobe wasted 3 of his prime years on bad teams. Yet Kobe ended up with more rings.

Shut up Shaq

dj20001 wrote:

KGtabake wrote:Shaq is a consensus top10 player of all time.
For Kobe it's debatable.
I have him in, i know many people don't.
There isn't any serious list that hasn't got Shaq in it though.....

Outside of 1 additional FMVP, I'm not sure how Shaq is for sure in and Kobe is debatable.

Calvin Klein wrote:Shaq puts Kobe up there with the best of the best and then basically says he is as good as TMac /Vince

Masigond wrote:

Jedi32 wrote:

Masigond wrote:
More success is quite subjective...

Shaq didn't miss the playoffs for 15 years after his rookie season. Heck, he even reached at least the second round of the playoffs aged 22 to 33.

Kobe couldn't get out of the 1st round of the playoffs for three straight years (and actually missed the playoffs at all in one of those years). In his prime!

Yes, I know. He gets a pass for Smush blah blah blah. But how about "He was not good enough to drag a team that was less than good to great to success"? And how much of the success thereafter is due to Phil Jackson and the arguably best front office who managed to surround him with talent like Gasol, Odom and Artest?

"Shaq, Eddie Jones and Van Exel wasn't enough." Van Exel was only a one-time All-Star and may I remember everyone that he was erratic like hell? He could be the best player on the court in one game and shoot you out of competition in the next one. He could not do anything with the Nuggets, and the Mavs used him in the best way possible: As a sixth man, hoping for a good night of him when nothing else seemed to work.
Furthermore: How about the take that Eddie Jones was not good enough? He was a great defender who shied away from taking on offensive responsibility too much. More of a third option when the Lakers needed a second option. And that is now Shaq's fault that the Lakers pre-2000 were missing some pieces?

Again this repeat BS. Who cares if a player wins two or three straight championships (or reach the finals) or two or three titles with some years apart? This seems just to be a very convenient argument because it's fitting for Kobe (and bringing him near to Jordan whose Bulls won two three-peats). In the end it doesn't mean anything.

It's quite absurd how much of the circumstances around Kobe Bryant are seen through rose-tinted spectacles. He could not win anything without the fitting pieces around him, either. But he's given a pass by many that other players don't get in the same way.

Regarding T-Mac as an example fot that: There is a lot of context missing when just saying that he could not get out of the first round. His Magic teams were flawed when Hill was injured. And when he was with the Rockets his back was already shot, and Yao's injuries added up. With the same ignorance of circumstances one could say that Kobe couldn't even qualify for the playoffs with Odom and Caron Butler at his side.

Just say you don't like kobe, cause your post reads like babble to be honest. The man literally went to two separate three peats with different casts and you're trying to downplay it. Smh

Wrong. I don't dislike Kobe. I hate his stans who do everything to make him look like the GOAT, using the cheapest arguments which don't hold up at all. So who's babbling here? For me it seems to be you when you're just looking at team accomplishments as if Kobe was the only factor for the Lakers to "three-peat twice". Which the Lakers didn't even achieve or is a finals run now as good as a championship? You dare to criticize others for maybe getting a year wrong and are yourself bringing up such sloppy statements?

flytimes11 wrote:Your post has so many contradictions in it. You bring up Odom for kobe but then when you bring up van exel for Shaq you say one time all star to diminish him, while odom made no all stars. Then you say the success is subjective, like he didn't win another championship and make it to more finals than shaq. Shaq has played with more hall of famers than Kobe has, yet has less championships. Then you say "Kobe couldn't get out of the first round 3 straight years" Like that is so awful but then say "It doesn't matter that Kobe made the finals three straight years" Like which is it? You focus on all the negatives of kobe and diminish the positives and then say we are looking through rose tinted spectacles. Do better. Kobe and Steph only two guys in modern times to get multiple rings without the help of a top 75 player. Go ahead and downplay that too.

LakersLegacy wrote:Shaq had the most help in NBA history and ended up with less championships than Bryant

Penny, Nash, Payton
Kobe, Wade
LeBron, Horry, Pierce
Garnett, Amare, Malone
Shaq, Zo, Genetics

dhsilv2 wrote:

dj20001 wrote:

KGtabake wrote:Shaq is a consensus top10 player of all time.
For Kobe it's debatable.
I have him in, i know many people don't.
There isn't any serious list that hasn't got Shaq in it though.....

Outside of 1 additional FMVP, I'm not sure how Shaq is for sure in and Kobe is debatable.

Peak for Peak most see Shaq on a much higher level. Not sure what more needs to be said there. 2000 Shaq is one of the all time greatest seasons/playoff runs ever.

Masigond wrote:

flytimes11 wrote:Your post has so many contradictions in it. You bring up Odom for kobe but then when you bring up van exel for Shaq you say one time all star to diminish him, while odom made no all stars. Then you say the success is subjective, like he didn't win another championship and make it to more finals than shaq. Shaq has played with more hall of famers than Kobe has, yet has less championships. Then you say "Kobe couldn't get out of the first round 3 straight years" Like that is so awful but then say "It doesn't matter that Kobe made the finals three straight years" Like which is it? You focus on all the negatives of kobe and diminish the positives and then say we are looking through rose tinted spectacles. Do better. Kobe and Steph only two guys in modern times to get multiple rings without the help of a top 75 player. Go ahead and downplay that too.

Do you think that Van Exel was a better player than Odom? Just because he was a one-time All-Star? I explained that Van Exel was not the quality player his All-Star nomination makes him look like in the eyes of some very shallow fans. Odom was at least just as good as him. Much better, actually, in my view.

Other than that: I don't care much about rating the quality of teammates by career accolades or lists like top 75. True, Shaq has played with many hall of famers. But which versions of them?
This take for example:

LakersLegacy wrote:Shaq had the most help in NBA history and ended up with less championships than Bryant

Penny, Nash, Payton
Kobe, Wade
LeBron, Horry, Pierce
Garnett, Amare, Malone
Shaq, Zo, Genetics

How good were they when they were playing with Shaq? Malone was literally in his last season of which he missed half, and in the playoffs he averaged 12/9. Zo was after his kidney transplant. Still a useful player but far removed from the All-Star / DPOY version of himself.
Shaq played less than 40 games with Garnett and Pierce when he was 38 years old. Payton had problems to adapt to the TPO (and was already 35 years old...), and even much older when they played together with the Heat. That was not the Sonics version of himself anymore (which had made him a hall of famer).

I know that this list came from another user, but who are the hall of famers you are referring to? Did Shaq really have that much more help than Kobe? Kobe played with both Dwight and Nash, remember. Do we start to count those guys as well, when they were rarely available and not their superstar versions anymore?

Do better yourself.

Calvin Klein wrote:Shaq puts Kobe up there with the best of the best and then basically says he is as good as TMac /Vince

dhsilv2 wrote:

Jedi32 wrote:

Sofia wrote:
2004 - lost as 7th seed to Conference winning Spurs, 2nd and 3rd leading scorers on that Memphis team were James Posey and Bonzi Wells

2005 - lost as the 8th seed to the 62 win peak of 7 seconds or less Suns, Mike Miller is 2nd option and Bonzi Wells 10.4ppg is 3rd

2006 - lost as 7th seed to Conference winning Mavs fuelled by peak Dirk. Eddie Jones is the only player that averages double digits in the playoffs with a whopping 10.3ppg

Pau’s scoring went up in each of those 3 playoff series. But let’s be honest, those Griz teams were scrappy but played some of the best teams at top of the very tough west - they never had a chance.

Oh and for what it’s worth, across the 04/05 and 05/06 regular seasons after Shaq left LA, Memphis won 15 more games than the Lakers.

No one said he had to beat those teams. I think the other poster was referring to the fact that he didn't even win one game.

Kobe was 4-8 over a similar period. Jordan started his playoff career 1-9. I don't think anyone is claiming Gasol is as good as those two. If your team isn't as good and you're a very good player but not a top 20 type player. That's not really much of a knock on you when the gap is as big as described and clearly Gasol didn't exactly have a lot of help.

xinxin wrote:

Revived wrote:

LascelleL wrote:A couple things. This is less about Shaq tearing down Kobe and more giving T-Mac and Vince their flowers because they were not fortunate enough to play with a skilled Big like himself or close to it.

This is how I see it too.

this was also my first impulse. since Shaq has been very profuse with praise about Kobe since they patched things up before Kobe's death..

but somehow, Shaq's ego just cant help it. the statement " " Kobe had room to operate cuz I got 3 people on me.." was clearly meant to downplay Kobe's importance in their 3-peat & 4 finals appearances.. even if true, you just dont say those things.

Calvin Klein wrote:Shaq puts Kobe up there with the best of the best and then basically says he is as good as TMac /Vince

Masigond wrote:

flytimes11 wrote:Your post has so many contradictions in it. You bring up Odom for kobe but then when you bring up van exel for Shaq you say one time all star to diminish him, while odom made no all stars. Then you say the success is subjective, like he didn't win another championship and make it to more finals than shaq. Shaq has played with more hall of famers than Kobe has, yet has less championships. Then you say "Kobe couldn't get out of the first round 3 straight years" Like that is so awful but then say "It doesn't matter that Kobe made the finals three straight years" Like which is it? You focus on all the negatives of kobe and diminish the positives and then say we are looking through rose tinted spectacles. Do better. Kobe and Steph only two guys in modern times to get multiple rings without the help of a top 75 player. Go ahead and downplay that too.

Do you think that Van Exel was a better player than Odom? Just because he was a one-time All-Star? I explained that Van Exel was not the quality player his All-Star nomination makes him look like in the eyes of some very shallow fans. Odom was at least just as good as him. Much better, actually, in my view.

Other than that: I don't care much about rating the quality of teammates by career accolades or lists like top 75. True, Shaq has played with many hall of famers. But which versions of them?
This take for example:

LakersLegacy wrote:Shaq had the most help in NBA history and ended up with less championships than Bryant

Penny, Nash, Payton
Kobe, Wade
LeBron, Horry, Pierce
Garnett, Amare, Malone
Shaq, Zo, Genetics

How good were they when they were playing with Shaq? Malone was literally in his last season of which he missed half, and in the playoffs he averaged 12/9. Zo was after his kidney transplant. Still a useful player but far removed from the All-Star / DPOY version of himself.
Shaq played less than 40 games with Garnett and Pierce when he was 38 years old. Payton had problems to adapt to the TPO (and was already 35 years old...), and even much older when they played together with the Heat. That was not the Sonics version of himself anymore (which had made him a hall of famer).

I know that this list came from another user, but who are the hall of famers you are referring to? Did Shaq really have that much more help than Kobe? Kobe played with both Dwight and Nash, remember. Do we start to count those guys as well, when they were rarely available and not their superstar versions anymore?

Do better yourself.

LascelleL wrote:

Calvin Klein wrote:Shaq puts Kobe up there with the best of the best and then basically says he is as good as TMac /Vince

At their peak? Like from the stretch of 2000 - 2004...without a doubt they were all in the same tier.