When will people critically analyze Kobe Bryant's playoff performances?

[D-Dogg]

In case Gee is wondering, I have him on ignore. I assume 90 percent of his posts are about me...the other 10 percent about the Lakers or his new favorite team the Celtics. I click every now and then to confirm my feelings...last one turned out to be correct.

I post this Gee, so you don't look silly talking to yourself, and so that you can stop obsessing about me and why I'm not responding to you. Your obsession with me is borderline creepy, and I really don't need to get into meaningless back and forth about Arizona, the Lakers, doughbags, your newfound Celtic love blah blah blah. So chat at me all you want, but don't be surprised that you aren't getting a rise out of me. I realized it was unhealthy to talk to a spinning brick wall, so I used ignore for the first time ever. And it's glorious.

 

[nowagimp]

a) huh? You do realize that Wennington and Longley never played against Charles in that series as they weren't on that team, right? As to your other point bringing up Charles, again, I'm REALLY put off by this part of your argument. You say that Barkley was a terrible defender so yes, MJ could go inside against him... as proof of what? That against a team with big men, MJ couldn't destroy them as well. Again, he destroyed the Pistons who were huge, the Knicks who brutalized him and were big, the Magic with Shaq and Horace and Zo who is one of the best defensive C of all time.



huh? So if the Jazz had an All-Star Team they could beat the Bulls? I guess that's what you're saying, because apparently having a very good SG a deep bench and probably the 2nd best PGs and PF of all time denigrates what the Jazz were able to accomplish.

1) I am not talking about one series, its about an era, the jordan era, narrowing it down to one series is your synthesis to prove your points. The bulls played the middle with stiffs, you have no counterpoint at all to that statement as its true. And calling the pistons big, well only salley was even a decent shotblocker. Laimbeer(lame, terrible on D, 4" hops), mahorn, NOT a shotblocker just a banger, sure jordan could shoot over them, Dr J would have had a "dunk a thon" against those guys, stiffs. Almost no one ranks the bad boys as a historically powerful team, it was just a sign of a declining league that they won 2x. The bad boys were a perimeter offensive team and a bunch of bangers.

2) the barkley thing was supposed to point out that MJ COULD score inside against a team without interior defense, and charles at the PF with no real center was ALWAYS on that kind of team. MJ's bulls would have problems with teams that could score inside and defend there also, like the celtics and lakers of the 80's. Its hard to score outside while your opponent goes inside, the percentages dont favor the outside team.

2) the jazz were characteristic of the unbalanced teams of that era. Malone had NO inside game at all, and they always played an eaton or tag stiff at center, an easy guy to double off of. The Jazz were the perfect matchup for the bulls, no one to challenge the bulls weak interior D. take malone away and add a low post threat and yes the jazz could have matched up better against the bulls.

The bulls had 2 top 50 all time players in jordan and pippen in their prime, and for part of the era, an all star PF in grant in his prime, then rodman another all star near his prime. What did Hakeem have? A used up drexler who was no longer all star caliber, and some good but not great role players, including cassel(never even close to an all star) in his first 2 years. What did David robinson have? Well he did get TD eventually, and won, but his support was weak as well. Dr J beat a young MJ as did magic and bird, but I dont hold that against MJ, he was still developing and they were in their primes(Dr. J was well past his prime). Dr. J never had MJ's supporting cast of all stars, never even had a good PF(or even a rebounder) until he was 34 years old when moses arrived. Its a team game and its important to note the supporting casts. MJ almost always played with two other all stars on thsoe winning bulls teams, and plenty of good role players on a deep bench. Most of the eras superstars, robinson, olajuwon, ewing, ZO, malone werent so lucky. those jordan bulls never faced a team like the showtime lakers or celtics, teams that had dominant inside AND outside offense. I cant imagine cartwright or longeley guarding kareem or mchale, ughhh! If they double down low bird, ainge or scott, cooper are wide open for the outside shot. We just disagree, I dont think any one player can make one team the greatest, the supporitng cast is critical, and whyile the bulls were deep, they used poor interior defenders, making them susceptible to balanced teams with strong inside games.

 

[nowagimp]

Magic had a hell of a lot more talent than Jordan. He wouldn't have needed to be outright better than him. There would have been strength in numbers. 87 Lakers v. 92 Bulls would have been beyond epic IMO. Those are probably the two best teams to play in the modern era.

By '87 kareem was almost used up 39 years old and magic had lost some of his quickness. I dont even consider that the best laker team as the inside outside balance wasnt there with kareem being old. I kind of like the '84 team when Kareem was still dominant as the top scorer on the team, scoring 22ppg at 60% FGs. Three guys on that team shot better than 56% FG's and scott was at 54%, McAdoo at 52%. The 87 team had magic as top scorer, indicating the lack of offensive options for him compared with the '84 team.

 

[Cheesebeef]

MJ almost always played with two other all stars on thsoe winning bulls teams, and plenty of good role players on a deep bench. Most of the eras superstars, robinson, olajuwon, ewing, ZO, malone werent so lucky. those jordan bulls never faced a team like the showtime lakers or celtics, teams that had dominant inside AND outside offense. I cant imagine cartwright or longeley guarding kareem or mchale, ughhh! If they double down low bird, ainge or scott, cooper are wide open for the outside shot. We just disagree, I dont think any one player can make one team the greatest, the supporitng cast is critical, and whyile the bulls were deep, they used poor interior defenders, making them susceptible to balanced teams with strong inside games.

MJ always played with two other all-stars on those Bulls winning teams? Who was the perennial All-Star besides Pippen? Horace Grant who never made an All-Star game while playing weith Jordan and only got to one during his entire career? Or a washed up Rodman who never madxe an All-star game while playing with (and only made two during his entire career, both which were at least 4 years prior to coming to the Bulls. Now, both of those guys were good players (although the idea that Rodman was "close to his prime" is a pretty big exagerration IMO considering he was 36 years old when he joined the bulls and never came close to his prime numbers of 18, 17 or 16 rebounds per game), but neither were EVER All-stars while playing with MJ and only had 3 All-Star appearances between the two of them.

You also keep mentioning that Wennington and the rest of the stiffs would have gotten killed by those guys, but a) Wennington really didn't get all that much run on those teams and the biggest inside threats were pretty much always neutralized or at least bodied by Horace (who guarded Barkley) or Rodman (who frustrated and shut down Shaq and Zo).

You also say the Bulls never played a balanced team... uh, what were the Phoenix Suns if not a completely balanced team? It had KJ who could shoot the mid range jumper and attack the rack, Majerle and Ainge who could bomb from three, Dumas who could slash and Barkley who was one of the best low-post players of all time. What were the Orlando Magic who had Penny who could attack, dish, with a slew of three-point shooters with Anderson, D Scott, and had Shaq and Horace Grant down low? Tht team wasn't balanced either? You do remember them beating us, without HC advantage, right? You do remember them kicking the ever living snot out of the Magic 4-0, right? Or what about beating the snot out of the Heat in the ECF 4-1 when they won 61 games and had Zo and PJ Brown on the inside with Tim Hardaway who was first team All-NBA, Jammal Mashburn as a solid role player and Vashon Leonard who shot threes at a 41% clip?

What more balance do you want? You want All-Star teams... well guess what? That's not how the NBA goes.

 

[Cheesebeef]

if you remember, was vilified in the press, by teamates, and by fans as being a self absorbed, selfish, ballhogging stat monger. It wasn't until he got good players around him and he learned to trust in them that they started winning.

Good players like Charles Oakley and Dave "The Dad" Corzine as his best two players, who Jordan led to 50 wins and a first round series playoff victory in 1987 as Scottie Pippen and Horace Grant were rookies averaging 8 points a piece each. Or good players like the next year when Jordan took the Bulls to the Conference Finals in 1987 with Pippen still nowhere near being depended upon in only his second season and Bill Carwright being the third best player on the team. In those playoffs, he pretty much singlehandedly took a 6 seed and beat the #2 and #3 seeds without Homecourt. Jordan might not have won the whole enchilada by then, but he was winning and winning against all odds rather than missing the playoffs entirely or getting his ass handed to him in the first round at the same age and with the same limitations as far as personel as Kobe was.

So no, it may sound familiar when you distort what happened back then and compare it to now, but anyone who used to watch Jordan put those awful teams on his shoulders AND win in the playoffs knows the above not to be the case.

 

[cobbler]

Good players like Charles Oakley and Dave "The Dad" Corzine as his best two players, who Jordan led to 50 wins and a first round series playoff victory in 1987 as Scottie Pippen and Horace Grant were rookies averaging 8 points a piece each. Or good players like the next year when Jordan took the Bulls to the Conference Finals in 1987 with Pippen still nowhere near being depended upon in only his second season and Bill Carwright being the third best player on the team. In those playoffs, he pretty much singlehandedly took a 6 seed and beat the #2 and #3 seeds without Homecourt. Jordan might not have won the whole enchilada by then, but he was winning and winning against all odds rather than missing the playoffs entirely or getting his ass handed to him in the first round at the same age and with the same limitations as far as personel as Kobe was.

So no, it may sound familiar when you distort what happened back then and compare it to now, but anyone who used to watch Jordan put those awful teams on his shoulders AND win in the playoffs knows the above not to be the case.

Seems a tad excessive to me as i remember it took a tim thomas last second 3 for the heavily favored (7 seed against 2) suns to gain a game 7 at home with home court advantage. This with a Kwame and Smush in the starting lineup. I would take Carwright on his worst day over Kwame anytime. Harper or Smush? No contest. Scottie or Horace even in their early years continually showed improvement as opposed to odom who has never ever been consistent or reliable in the clutch. Again, its so hard to compare different eras, but to imply that Jordans cast was much weaker than Kobe's over the last 3 years is just not accurate IMO.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Seems a tad excessive to me as i remember it took a tim thomas last second 3 for the heavily favored (7 seed against 2) suns to gain a game 7 at home with home court advantage.

A tad excessive, one year the Suns destroyed the Lakers in a 5 game series in which two of the game were complete and utter blowout and as far as "heavily favored 2-7 matchup", someone's remembering that series with some rosey glasses. The Suns had limped their way towards to the playoffs by the end of the 2006 season, having already lost 2 of their front line starters and they were running on fumes. playing .500 ball in the last month and half. A lot of of the media was actually predicting them to LOSE to LA as the Lakers caught fire at the end of the year, going something like 12-3 in their last 15. Regardless, none of the above really matters because even though the Lakers were handed Game 4 and 3-1 lead on a silver platter, they STILL lost, even losing a game on their homecourt to eliminate the Suns where they were down ANOTHER starter (Bell due to suspension).

This with a Kwame and Smush in the starting lineup. I would take Carwright on his worst day over Kwame anytime. Harper or Smush? No contest. Scottie or Horace even in their early years continually showed improvement as opposed to odom who has never ever been consistent or reliable in the clutch.

huh? Is this the same Scottie Pippen who got "migraine headaches" in Game 7 against the Pistons and failed to show up, and this after he was laready established as one of the best players in the game having come into his own by his third year? Or the one Scottie Pippen who was so clutch during that incredible run in 89 when the six seed Bulls went to the Conference Finals he averaged a whopping 13 ppg? The Odom you see right now was VASTLY superior to ANYTHING Jordan had on either of the 88-89 teams where he DID win WITHOUT good talent. You want to show me who on the Bulls put up Odom's type of "inconsistency" in the playoffs (19, 11 and 5 and 19, 13 and 2 while shooting 48%) with Jordan when he was winning with unbelievably dubious talent in 88-89?

Again, its so hard to compare different eras, but to imply that Jordans cast was much weaker than Kobe's over the last 3 years is just not accurate IMO.

here's the bottom line - I think they BOTH of had pretty weak casts. The difference is Jordan was able to singlehandedly take those weak casts to unimagineable heights, whereas Kobe took his nowhere and was involved in some pretty embarassing ass-kicking and collapses. Then, when Jordan got talent he started winning and never stopped, dominating in the Finals, as opposed to Kobe getting a lot of talent and laying an egg in his first Finals as the leader (and pretty much every Finals before that as evidenced by his 41% shooting and rash of turnovers).

 

[Cheesebeef]

Seems a tad excessive to me as i remember it took a tim thomas last second 3 for the heavily favored (7 seed against 2) suns to gain a game 7 at home with home court advantage.

A tad excessive? Last year the Suns destroyed the Lakers in a 5 game series in which two of the game were complete and utter blowout and as far as "heavily favored 2-7 matchup", someone's remembering that series with some rosey glasses. The Suns had limped their way towards to the playoffs by the end of the 2006 season, having already lost 2 of their front line starters and they were running on fumes. playing .500 ball in the last month and half. A lot of of the media was actually predicting them to LOSE to LA as the Lakers caught fire at the end of the year, going something like 12-3 in their last 15. Regardless, none of the above really matters because even though the Lakers were handed Game 4 and 3-1 lead on a silver platter, they STILL lost, even losing a game on their homecourt to eliminate the Suns where they were down ANOTHER starter (Bell due to suspension). The fact that a completely healthy Laker team couldn't beat that Suns team, even with a huge lead in the series is an indictment on Kobe (along with his quitting on the team in Game 7) more than anything else. So yeah, when the Suns beat you 8 of twelve times and 7 of those games we were down 2 starters, yeah, I'd call it a pretty ugly two year playoff stretch, not to mention missing the playoffs entirely three years ago.

And they year they didn't even make the playoffs is even crazier for me, considring Kobe had Odom and Caron Butler and that team was STILL pathetic. Now before you go out and bring up that Odom missed the last 17 games, does that excuse any team with those three guys on it from being a .500 basketball team (which they were) before they unconscionably lost 19 of 21 to end the season once Odom went down. Kobe and Caron could summons enough good play to lift that team to more than 2 wins out of 21?

This with a Kwame and Smush in the starting lineup. I would take Carwright on his worst day over Kwame anytime. Harper or Smush? No contest. Scottie or Horace even in their early years continually showed improvement as opposed to odom who has never ever been consistent or reliable in the clutch.

huh? Is this the same Scottie Pippen who got "migraine headaches" in Game 7 against the Pistons and failed to show up, and this after he was already established as one of the best players in the game having come into his own by his third year? Or the one Scottie Pippen who was so clutch during that incredible run in 89 when the six seed Bulls went to the Conference Finals he averaged a whopping 13 ppg? Or even the Pippen who refused to go into a playoff game because he didn't get the last shot? Pippen was NEVER clutch. Out of every Finals game he ever played, the only in memory that Ican remember as clutch was when he poured in 32 on the Lakers in the closeout game after the Lakes were banged up and the series was basically already over. Pippen... reliable in the clutch... that was a good one. That aside, the "clutch Pippen" wouldn't come close to maturing into that player until his third year and the Odom you see right now was VASTLY superior to ANYTHING Jordan had on either of the 88-89 teams where he DID win WITHOUT good talent. You want to show me who on the Bulls put up Odom's type of "inconsistency" in the playoffs (19, 11 and 5 and 19, 13 and 2 while shooting 48%) with Jordan when he was winning with unbelievably dubious talent in 88-89?

Again, its so hard to compare different eras, but to imply that Jordans cast was much weaker than Kobe's over the last 3 years is just not accurate IMO.

here's the bottom line - I think they BOTH of had pretty weak casts. The difference is Jordan was able to singlehandedly take those weak casts to unimagineable heights, whereas Kobe took his nowhere and was involved in some pretty embarassing ass-kicking and collapses. Then, when Jordan got even just a smidgen of talent he started winning and never stopped, dominating in the Finals, as opposed to Kobe getting a solid amount of talent and laying another egg in the Finals, his first as the leader.

 

[cobbler]

here's the bottom line - I think they BOTH of had pretty weak casts. The difference is Jordan was able to singlehandedly take those weak casts to unimagineable heights, whereas Kobe took his nowhere and was involved in some pretty embarassing ass-kicking and collapses. Then, when Jordan got even just a smidgen of talent he started winning and never stopped, dominating in the Finals, as opposed to Kobe getting a solid amount of talent and laying another egg in the Finals, his first as the leader.

Agreed, they both had pretty weak casts. I also believe there is more parity in the league now as opposed to the 90's.

Silly me. I didn't realize the series was over. I thought you had to win 4 to end it so I'll reserve judgement on this years series until it is actually over.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Agreed, they both had pretty weak casts. I also believe there is more parity in the league now as opposed to the 90's.

you believe there is more parity? Meaning what?

Silly me. I didn't realize the series was over.

neither did I. Does it change the fact that Kobe's laid an egg so far? Did I ever say he's got no chance to come back? Believe me, if he engineers a comeback win, it'll elevate him to legend status in my eyes, but that has been far from the case in this series at this point, so I can only speak to what I've seen so far, no?

I notice you didn't touch any of my other responses to a lot of your comments (like Pippen being clutch, the Suns being down a plethora of starters, Jordan winning without talent as opposed to Kobe doing nothing without talent, etc. etc.). I won't prod you anymore on those topics. I'll just say the silence is deafening.

 

[cobbler]

you believe there is more parity? Meaning what?

neither did I. Does it change the fact that Kobe's laid an egg so far? Did I ever say he's got no chance to come back? Believe me, if he engineers a comeback win, it'll elevate him to legend status in my eyes, but that has been far from the case in this series at this point, so I can only speak to what I've seen so far, no?

I notice you didn't touch any of my other responses to a lot of your comments (like Pippen being clutch, the Suns being down a plethora of starters, Jordan winning without talent as opposed to Kobe doing nothing without talent, etc. etc.). I won't prod you anymore on those topics. I'll just say the silence is deafening.

Parity meaning there are a larger number of teams that could contend for the title. ie. 8 50 win teams in the west this year. When you commented on Kobe laying an egg in the finals it seemed to me as you had formed your opinion without regard to what is left. When you qualified it on this post as "so far" then i am fine with that though i would not call it an egg. His numbers are not horrific but no doubt he has some room for improvement. If most players had his numbers they would be estatic. He is judged to a higher level. I liked Rivers comments yesterday on how absurd it is that Kobe is vilified so often. Again, I'll wait to the end of the series to form my opinion.

I really didn't go into the Pippen clutchness issue because I just think is silly when comparing it to my comment about Odom. Clearly, if anyone has a choice of Pippen vs Odom, most would say Pippen is more clutch and a infinetly better than Lamar. Yes, the headache game was absurd but a one time issue.

As neither Kobe or Jordan made the finals with thier less than stellar casts I don't see that as an issue either. Maybe Jordan went further in the playoffs? But again, how can you compare? Certainly the West in the last several years has been very competitive. Again, to reiterate my beliefs from above, i feel the league has had tougher and more equal competition in the last several years as opposed to the 90's.

As for the Suns being without Amare in 2006 and whoever else, I simply say... Kwame, Smush, and Walton as starters. I'd take your 2nd string.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Parity meaning there are a larger number of teams that could contend for the title. ie. 8 50 win teams in the west this year.

So, you thought the Mavs, Rockets, Suns, Jazz and Denver all had teams that could contend for the title? Why? Because they won 50 games or more? Come on man. And even if the above was true (which I will and have steadfastly stated wasn't the case IMO even if the media wanted it to be... go back and look at the Best West Playoffs ever thread if you want), parity means a LOWER LEVEL of play which gives everyone a chance. There wasn't one dominant team this year. Even the Big 3 in the west were all SEVERELY flawed. The Lakers play pretty poor defense, the Hornets were extremely inexperienced and shallow and the Spurs were ancient.

You know why there's parity? You say that as if it's something that works in Kobe's favor in this discussion. It's because these teams in general aren't as good as they used to be. The talent pool has been stretched much thinner than it was in the 80's and much of the 90's because of expansion, HS players coming and general fundamentals being down across the board. If anything, parity only further strengthens what Jordan was able to accomplish with trash surrounding him from 88-9.

When you commented on Kobe laying an egg in the finals it seemed to me as you had formed your opinion without regard to what is left. When you qualified it on this post as "so far" then i am fine with that though i would not call it an egg. His numbers are not horrific but no doubt he has some room for improvement. If most players had his numbers they would be estatic. He is judged to a higher level.

you mean held to the standard of a superstar? Shocking considering... he's a superstar. Funny how that works, huh? When you play at that level, your play has NOTHING TO DO WITH with anyone else's standards but those set yourself. When you fall short of them, you're going to get criticized.

I liked Rivers comments yesterday on how absurd it is that Kobe is vilified so often. Again, I'll wait to the end of the series to form my opinion.

again, I believe this to be a) Rivers trying to kill Kobe with kindness and b) an outright fabrication. Kobe has played below par in this series and STILL anyone can talk about is how the Laker reserves are letting him down. Do you think Dirk Nowitzki could get away with and 2-7 and 4 point performance headed into the final quarter of a must-win game without being unmercifully crucified for that performance. Kobe's getting off easy at this point. Do you know how disgusting a player of his stature and talent has played in his last two Finals? The numbers are appalling... for anyone, much less a player who's got MVP qualities.

I really didn't go into the Pippen clutchness issue because I just think is silly when comparing it to my comment about Odom. Clearly, if anyone has a choice of Pippen vs Odom, most would say Pippen is more clutch and a infinetly better than Lamar.

ah, the old "let's completely change the argument because, well, I have none, love those. You know as well as I do that the entire Pippen/Lamar discussion revolved around your dubious claim that Jordan never won until he got good talent around him, then I showed how Michael started winning before he got good talent around versus Kobe by comparing numbers of their respective "good players". So again, are would take a first and second year Pippen over Lamar the previosu two playoff years? You really think the Pippen averaging 10 ppg or a 2nd year Pippen averaging 13 ppg in the playoffs and not being able to play big minutes was a better supporter than Odom who averaged 19, 11 and 5 and 19, 13 and 2? If you do, well,I don't know what to tell you.

The silly thing here isn't the argument, It's you distorting it (or just not being able to read it correctly) because you'd rather not admit you're wrong.

Yes, the headache game was absurd but a one time issue.

man, again, either memory fails you or you just can't admit the truth. Remember Game 6 against the Suns when the Bulls score 9 points in the first 11:55 of the fourth quarter... you know how many of thsoe Pippen had? Zero. You know how many any other Bull had until the last four seconds? Zero. Jordan scored every point because Pippen was a legendary choke artist. You want to tell me what Pippen did against the Knicks in '94 or ignore the point I made about him refusing to go back in the game because the final shot wasn't drawn up for him? Or how about his 2 point performance in Game 6 of 1998 Finals? A one time issue? Those are just a couple instances off the top of my head where I can remember Pippen being nowhere to be found in the biggest moments. Pippen always played great D, but he almost ALWAYS shrunk on offense when the pressure got big and was one of the main reasons Jordan had to score so many damn points in the Finals.

As neither Kobe or Jordan made the finals with thier less than stellar casts I don't see that as an issue either. Maybe Jordan went further in the playoffs?

how is this even a maybe? And went further? Kobe went NOWHERE.

But again, how can you compare? Certainly the West in the last several years has been very competitive.

it has? There have been three "great" teams since Kobe took over and two of them were tissue paper soft (the Suns and Mavs). After them, the West for the time Kobe was in the same position ot do more with less was pathetic. The LA Clippers? The Sonics? Those were teams that mad eit to the second round. The 2006 Suns? Are you kidding me? The West hasn't been loaded since these days of the Kings, Lakers, Spurs and Mavs were all in their heyday, which was about two years.

Again, to reiterate my beliefs from above, i feel the league has had tougher and more equal competition in the last several years as opposed to the 90's.

ah, so I see you CAN compare eras when it benefits your argument, but when it doesn't you don't think comparisons are apt. Well, you've made the argument that the league has been better this decade than last and I'll retort by asking you this: deeper teams previous to to expansion, very few high schoolers and early college kids which meant better fundamentals, legendary superstars, actual competition in both conferences (multiple 60 games winners in each, hotly contested Finals) in the 90's made for a weaker league than a diluted league due to expansion, a slew of players not ready for the NBA, scoring and shooting percentages plummetting and the absolute patheticness of an entire conference for the better part of this decade East and no competition in the Finals whatsoever somehow has made the league tougher this decade? The first four years of this decade, no one believed any team in the East had a shot in hell of winning the Finals and pretty much only thought two teams (Lakers/Blazers in 2000, Lakers/Spurs twice - with pretty weak Spurs teams and Laker and Kings once) had any shot. How is that more equal competiton? 2004 was a very competitive year with the Lakers, Spurs, Kings, T-Wolves being true contenders in the West and the Pistons being the eventual champs in the East. 2005? The soft-as-hell Suns were the number 1 team in the league and no one thought they had a shot. That year came down to 3 teams - Pistons, Spurs and Miami. 2006 was a joke with an awful Suns team being the fourth big contender and getting to the Conference Finals down multiple starters, not to mention the year ended up with arguably the worst NBA Champion of the modern era (the Heat) and last year was just as much of a joke as were the first four years of the decade where the Spurs, Mavs and Suns (two of them hugely flawed teams) had the only shot, with another waltz in the Finals to come. This year has been competitive and the first sign of the actual parity you speak of. I mean, do you realize that the Eastern Conference has only had Homecourt Advatange in one year this decade? THAT'S balance? Out of the first 8 years of this decade there have been 2 years where there was any semblance of compeition and balance. Or do you believe that people have been turning away in droves from the NBA because of the increased competition and the better chances for more teams to win titles? Why would that drive ratings to less than half of what they were throughout the 90's? Should people want to watch better basketball and games where they're teams have a chance to win?

The only thing harder and tougher about basketball in this decade hasn't been the competition, it's been the strain on the eyes from watching it.

 

[carrrnuttt]

From another forum:

3 words as to why the Lakers will never ever win a championship with Kobe Bryant at the helm.

Decision making process.

It was evident tonight when the Celtics made their run, what does Bryant proceed to do during the 3rd quarter?

Launch ill-advised jumpers.

Here’s Brian K’s (LA TIMES Blog) take:

“Kobe came out in the third looking to get himself going. More iso, more one-on-one, more jumpshooting. All of that equals less ball movement. ”

Usually when the spotlight is shining, the real stars step up and seize the moment. Let’s take a look back at Bryant’s stats in Finals history.

Remember, this is the Finals. Doesn’t get any bigger than this, correct?

Here we go:

***Against Indiana 1999-2000

15.6 PPG and 36% FG (While Shaq avg. 38 PPG, 16.6 RBDS, and 61% FG).

Wow. Talk about stepping up Kobe.

Revisionist like to imagine as Kobe being “clutch”. Once again, the actual numbers tell a whole different story.

***Against Philly 2000-2001

24.6 PPG and 41.5% FG. Once again. Look at the staggering high shooting percentage. Coming through again.

Remember, this will have been the 2nd Finals series that he has shot poorly in.

***Against New Jersey 2001-2002

26.8 PPG and 51.4% FG. Finally. For once, Bryant lives up to expectations in the Finals.

It’s strange how some like to romp and cheer when Bryant has a performance like 30 PPG and 50% FG.

Isn’t it expected from the “best player in the game”?

Or are they cheering because those type of performances are atypical, hence since it’s not expected, they are pleasantly surprised?

Puzzling.

***Against Detroit 2003-2004

22.6 PPG and 37% FG. Obviously Bryant had “choking” issues on and off the court that year.

***Against Boston 2007-2008

After tonight’s catastrophe, FG% is probably hovering around 40%.

As clearly demonstrated, Kobe has only performed in 1 out of 5 Finals series.

Is that acceptable for someone that anointed by quick to the draw Kobe zealots that proclaim him as the best ever simply because of his scoring prowess?

Though amazing as singular feats (string of 50+ pts, string of 40+ pts, 62 pts in 3 quarters, 81 pts, etc.), what have those done for the bottom line, anyway?

The bottom line is to win a championship, is it not? That’s what all athletes should strive for. Go back and look at those stats again. Bryant’s done practically nothing in the Finals 4 out of 5 series. That’s a HUGE sample size already.

24 games total.

When can the fans see one of those performances worthy of MVP chants? If he’s in a slump, when will it end? 2015 when he retires? Most fans would be all for Kobe being anointed as the best ever. But as clearly shown, he’s far far far from it. One has to do it on the biggest stage for it to matter. Who cares if he wins 5 more scoring titles, 3 more MVP’s.

Bryant’s play in the Finals (career-wise) as been a huge letdown. His play has cemented and tarnished what little veracity to begin with regarding his clutchness (biggest choke up in the Finals, can’t “take over” on the Finals stage), basketball mind (look at all those low FG% - poor shot selection - low basketball IQ), and leadership (team on its heels, he cowers and launches jumpers).

Stats don’t lie.

Bryant is an absolute choke job when comes to the Finals. All those All-star MVP’s, scoring titles, All-defense teams, MVP’s, means absolutely zilch when it doesn’t come into play during the Finals.

And as for fans holding out hope that Bryant will lead the charge in the revival, don’t hold your breath.

Using history to serve as a reminder, most of know that it ain’t gonna happen.

 

[Gee!]

In case Gee is wondering, I have him on ignore. I assume 90 percent of his posts are about me...the other 10 percent about the Lakers or his new favorite team the Celtics. I click every now and then to confirm my feelings...last one turned out to be correct.

I post this Gee, so you don't look silly talking to yourself, and so that you can stop obsessing about me and why I'm not responding to you. Your obsession with me is borderline creepy, and I really don't need to get into meaningless back and forth about Arizona, the Lakers, doughbags, your newfound Celtic love blah blah blah. So chat at me all you want, but don't be surprised that you aren't getting a rise out of me. I realized it was unhealthy to talk to a spinning brick wall, so I used ignore for the first time ever. And it's glorious.

lol.. first Ive checked in all day to asfn and i see this.. but thanks donald for the heads up... you prolly cant read this though.. some one quote me so donald can hear my appreciation..

 

[Cheesebeef]

lol.. first Ive checked in all day to asfn and i see this.. but thanks donald for the heads up... you prolly cant read this though.. some one quote me so donald can hear my appreciation..

here ya go Gee.

I love Gee and Donald. Damn boys, in the immortal words of Rodney King: Can't we all just... get along?

 

[carrrnuttt]

How many times will the Kobe fans have to keep making excuses as to why he disappeared in a crucial game, or big series until they say enough is enough? Seriously? I mean, the excuses popping up in all the major Lakers forums are just laughable at this point. Detroit in '04 anyone? Round 1, Game 7 vs the Amareless Suns in '05, anyone? Yeah, defensive juggernauts, those '05 Suns were.

 

[Irish]

How many times will the Kobe fans have to keep making excuses as to why he disappeared in a crucial game, or big series until they say enough is enough? Seriously? I mean, the excuses popping up in all the major Lakers forums are just laughable at this point. Detroit in '04 anyone? Round 1, Game 7 vs the Amareless Suns in '05, anyone? Yeah, defensive juggernauts, those '05 Suns were.

They'll have to start blaming PJ.

 

[msdundee]

Looks like they'll start right about now: http://www.sportsline.com/nba/story/10869304

 

[carrrnuttt]

Someone in LA gets it: MVP? More like MIA

And that's from one of the biggest LA homers I have ever seen.

 

[D-Dogg]

Someone in LA gets it: MVP? More like MIA

And that's from one of the biggest LA homers I have ever seen.

LOL!!

Bill Plaschke? Big LA homer? Dude is a laker hater FFS. FINALLY he has written pro-LA articles in the playoffs, but the dude hates on the Lakers, and Kobe particularly, every day.

Hilarious you think he's a Laker homer. Laker fans wouldn't piss on him if he were on fire in the desert.

 

[Covert Rain]

Looks like they'll start right about now: http://www.sportsline.com/nba/story/10869304

Someone in LA gets it: MVP? More like MIA

And that's from one of the biggest LA homers I have ever seen.

They make great points in both articles. This is 2 years in a row that a regular season MVP has disappeared in the finals. His performance was not as bad as Dirk's but not far off. At least Kobe showed flashes in this series. That's alot more then I can say about Dirk.

Still disappointing though. I give alot of credit to the Celtics defense. They played Kobe very well. The Celtics banked on that fact that PG, LO or any of those other guys couldn't get it done if they keyed on Kobe. Then when Kobe disappeared they started playing him 1 on 1 and it was over. Lakers need another legit star to have any hope of getting a title while Boston is on top. Every team in the West is going to tinker and improve. It should be a fun year again next year.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

I personally think PJ needs just as much, if not more criticism than KB.

 

[sunsallday]

Kobe was too over hyped for his own good. Once a player is compared to Jordan, it is bound to cause trouble. Michael Jordan and the others greats such as people like Magic or Elgin Baylor or Bird were on a level that is god like. They practiced every single minute of their life perfecting the way they play basketball as practice makes perfect.

People also forget MJ scored on teams at will that had much more physical defense than today's soft game. MJ would sometimes get tripled or even quadrople teamed. Another factor is MJ's will to win was twice that of any player. As a very wise man once said, ''never underestimate the heart of a champion.'' My Suns learned that after Tim Duncan hit that heart killing three.

Kobe is Kobe. MJ is MJ.

 

[cobbler]

Let the Kobe bashing begin! Just can't let it go can you guys?

There are many reasons the Celts won. I agree with Dream that PJ deserves much more of the fault than anyone, followed closely by the fact the bench, who were strong all year, simply didn't show up. Gasol and Odom played a total of maybe 5 quarters with any intensity as well. Much has to be credited to the Boston D for all this. Kobe played decent. Not MJ supernova level but good enough to win had his supporting cast delivered. They simply did not and PJ was completely out coached.

I attribute the Celts bench outplaying the the Lakers bench to experience over youth. A lot of us thought their youth would enable them to outrun and tire the celts bench and it just didn't happen.

The Celts deserve credit for bringing it. The Lakers did not. Other than the blowout 6th and 10 point 1st game all others were within 6 points.

It's time to give the Kobe bashing a rest and just appreciate what he brings to the floor rather than put him under a microscope for every little aspect of his life.

Were these numbers for the finals really that bad?

Mins 38
FG% .432
3p% .393
Reb 4.5
assists 6.3
steals 1.2
blocks .3
turnover 3.6
fouls 4.0
points 21.8

Honestly, Are those numbers so awfully bad that everyone has to bash the guy? Everybody who hates Kobe keeps saying their is no comparison to MJ. So I ask a simple question. Why don't you stop camparing them? Let Kobe be Kobe. He's not done yet.

 

[abomb]

Let the Kobe bashing begin! Just can't let it go can you guys?

There are many reasons the Celts won. I agree with Dream that PJ deserves much more of the fault that anyone followed closely by the fact the bench, who were strong all year, simply didn't show up. Gasol and Odom played a total of maybe 5 quarters with any intensity as well. Much has to be credited to the Boston D for all this. Kobe played decent. Not MJ supernova level but good enough to win had his supporting cast delivered. They simply did not and PJ was completely out coached.

I attribute the Celts bench outplaying the the Lakers bench to experience over youth. A lot of us thought their youth would enable them to outrun and tire the celts bench and it just didn't happen.

The Celts deserve credit for bringing it. The Lakers did not. Other than the blowout 6th and 10 point 1st game all others were within 6 points.

It's time to give the Kobe bashing a rest and just appreciate what he brings to the floor rather than put him under a microscope for every little aspect of his life.

Were these numbers for the finals really that bad?

Mins 38
FG% .432
3p% .393
Reb 4.5
assists 6.3
steals 1.2
blocks .3
turnover 3.6
fouls 4.0
points 21.8

Honestly, Are those numbers so awfully bad that everyone has to bash the guy? Everybody who hates Kobe keeps saying their is no comparison to MJ. So I ask a simple question. Why don't you stop camparing them? Let Kobe be Kobe. He's not done yet.

Good post.

The only problem with the numbers is that they weren't KB numbers and didnt result in a title. KB has set the bar extemely high.