Kobe about to become the second greatest....
Moderator: Moorese
Kobe about to become the second greatest....
....single game scorer in league history.
Laxplayer wrote: Now just imagine if he ever passed and got others involved.
Why in the fuck would he want to do that????!!!!!?????!!!!
With that roster???????!!!!??????????????
Shake yourself.......
“It is usually futile to try to talk facts and analysis to people who are enjoying a sense of moral superiority in their ignorance.”
Laxplayer wrote:I don't know seer.....So my wife sees Luc surpass marcell Dionne the other night, and now she sees Kobe pour in 80+ points.....and I get to go teach tomorrow. What kind of fun is that?
You left yourself wide open on that.....and resisting temptation, I will not rush through that opening.....
“It is usually futile to try to talk facts and analysis to people who are enjoying a sense of moral superiority in their ignorance.”
Re: Kobe about to become the second greatest....
BWHAHAHAHAHAH, yeah, no one-sided team there, eh roof?Roofer wrote:....single game scorer in league history.
Tell me, Sky, do you think the Atlanta Hawks would like Kobe Bryant on their team? How about the Knicks or the Bobcats? Maybe the Bulls?Sky wrote:That's the key baby, that is the key.T REX wrote:TWO ASSISTS!!!!!!!!!!!
I continue to laugh at you and the others who think scoring 81 in a game is a bad thing. If they had lost whatever to 81, then you might have a fighting chance at supporting your logic. The fact is, they won the game, and Kobe shattered the Lakers franchise single game scoring mark in the process. And let's not kid ourselves. Last night could have been the third time in Kobe's career, and second this season, that he scored 80 in a game. His last two 60 point efforts were off of only 3 quarters of work (and oh yeah, they won those games as well).
I'll say it again. The Lakers are as dependant upon Kobe as the Bulls were on MJ. That's only a bad thing if either one goes/went down with an injury. The Bulls had just as much a chance of winning ball games without MJ in the lineup as the Lakers do without Kobe.
Oh, and by the way, Sky, MJ averaged 5.3 assists over his career. Kobe is averaging 4.4 assists/game. Not a huge difference.
Why anyone would want to look at assists for a 2 guard in the first place is beyond me. You want assists, talk to Smush Parker about that.
I will admit this. Last night's game was very Playstation-ish.
Why anyone would want to look at assists for a 2 guard in the first place is beyond me. You want assists, talk to Smush Parker about that.
I will admit this. Last night's game was very Playstation-ish.
You always look at the assists of your superstar. How is he intergrating the rest of the team into the offense. MJ involved everybody. Kobe does not. That is the biggest difference. Mj elevated everyone else's game. Kobe does not.Roofer wrote:Oh, and by the way, Sky, MJ averaged 5.3 assists over his career. Kobe is averaging 4.4 assists/game. Not a huge difference.
Why anyone would want to look at assists for a 2 guard in the first place is beyond me. You want assists, talk to Smush Parker about that.
I will admit this. Last night's game was very Playstation-ish.
Back-to-Back-to-Back National Champions
Florida Gators: Champions in Basketball '06, Football '06, and Basketball '07
Florida Gators: Champions in Basketball '06, Football '06, and Basketball '07
T REX wrote:Mj elevated everyone else's game. Kome does not.
RACK^^^^^^
Roof, you are weak. Just because 7 other guys contributed a combined 41 pts doesn't mean shit. That doesn't make it a team effort or even resemble a cohesive unit. Look at how they flounder when Kome takes the bench, notice how every play has to go through him, and have you see how angry he gets when it doesn't?
Stop comparing him to MJ, cause they aren't even close.
T REX wrote:You always look at the assists of your superstar. How is he intergrating the rest of the team into the offense. MJ involved everybody. Kobe does not. That is the biggest difference. Mj elevated everyone else's game. Kobe does not.Roofer wrote:Oh, and by the way, Sky, MJ averaged 5.3 assists over his career. Kobe is averaging 4.4 assists/game. Not a huge difference.
Why anyone would want to look at assists for a 2 guard in the first place is beyond me. You want assists, talk to Smush Parker about that.
I will admit this. Last night's game was very Playstation-ish.
Ummm, T-REX, I just stated the career assists for both players. MJ involved his teammates on scoring chances about 1 more time per game. Earth shattering stuff, dude.
I recorded Kobe's 81 point performance and watched it again last night. Kobe lost about 3-4 assists on wide open missed shots by his teammates. Anyone who watched that game saw that Kobe gave his teammates numerous chances to "be involved". Once it was apparent they couldn't throw a pebble in the sea, he said "fuck it" and put the team on his back.
Try watching the game closely and then comment it. I'll give you the fact the last 4 or 5 minutes was more circus act than Kobe tryin to pull out a W for the team. You got a problem with that, pin it on PJ. Sam Mitchell pulled his starters essentially waving the white flag, but Zen master left #8 in the game to light up the scoreboard.
Sky,Sky wrote:T REX wrote:Mj elevated everyone else's game. Kome does not.
RACK^^^^^^
Roof, you are weak. Just because 7 other guys contributed a combined 41 pts doesn't mean shit. That doesn't make it a team effort or even resemble a cohesive unit. Look at how they flounder when Kome takes the bench, notice how every play has to go through him, and have you see how angry he gets when it doesn't?
Stop comparing him to MJ, cause they aren't even close.
You're arguing two different points here. The deal is, when people think of MJ and a team dependant on one guy, then it's considered a good thing. When people think of Kobe Bryant and a team dependant one guy, it's Kobe being selfish. Truth is, there is no difference between the Bulls needing to depend on Jordan and the Lakers needing to depend on Kobe. Read my response to T-REX. Kobe tried to get his teammates involved in that game. They couldn't hit shit. It wasn't until early in the 3rd that Kobe decided to put the team on his back and take over single handedly. How that's a bad thing as it relates to Kobe (not the team...it's understood that situation is not good for the Lakers) is still waiting to be explained.
I won't hold my breath.
Hey fucko, get your shit together. Figure out what you are arguing about and then join the conversation.
How can you say this:
How can you say this:
when just a couple days ago you said this:Roofer wrote:Kobe tried to get his teammates involved in that game. They couldn't hit shit. It wasn't until early in the 3rd that Kobe decided to put the team on his back and take over single handedly. How that's a bad thing as it relates to Kobe (not the team...it's understood that situation is not good for the Lakers) is still waiting to be explained.
Idiot! And yeah, 46 of 88 shots is really getting your team involved.Roofer wrote:The Lakers are 21-17 and playing better and better each week. I don't think you can call them "Kobe and a bunch of losers" without expecting some argument.
And no, people don't look at what MJ did as a good thing and what Kome is doing as a bad thing in the terms you describe. MJ was a great player on a good team. Kome is a great yet selfish player on a poor team. But I guarantee you, if MJ ala '90 - '98 was playing on the Lakers, you would see more role players and not a singular unit operating under the facade of a "team." MJ would involve his team and make them better. Kome only makes himself look better.Roofer wrote: Sky,
You're arguing two different points here. The deal is, when people think of MJ and a team dependant on one guy, then it's considered a good thing. When people think of Kobe Bryant and a team dependant one guy, it's Kobe being selfish. Truth is, there is no difference between the Bulls needing to depend on Jordan and the Lakers needing to depend on Kobe. Read my response to T-REX.
I won't hold my breath.
Sky,
Keep movin, bro. Stick and jab, stick and jab.
First, the "Kobe and a bunch of losers" retort. At 21-17 at the time I made the comment, the statement was more a reflection of the term "losers" being associated with a 21-17 team than it was about the players surrounding Kobe. The Lakers problem with their other players is their inconsistency. They each have the potential to put up a decent game, but they don't do it on a night in, night out basis. That's why you see Kobe consistently scoring 35+ a game. He needs to pick up the slack for the other players inabilities. He doesn't do it because he wants to, he does it because he needs to. At 21-17, when the comment was made, you can't call that Kobe and a bunch of losers. You can call that "Kobe and a bunch of less than good players that are relying on #8 to keep them above .500"
Regarding your second attempt.....
You mean to tell me if you substituted Scott Pippen for Lamar Odom, Steve Kerr for Sasha Vuyawhateverthehellhisnameis, Bill Cartwright for Chris Mihm, a young and effective Horace Grant for Kwami Brown, that Jordan would have won 6 rings?? Are you serious? No....you are high, that's what you are. It's been said by others that the players surrounding MJ were notably better than the players surrounding Kobe. Your argument is weak. Again (how many times does it need to be said?), MJ averaged about 5.5 assists a game during his career. Kobe is averaging around 4.5. How in the hell does that equate to MJ getting his players involved more? I mean, yeah, 1 assist a game is more, but the way you and others make it sound, Kobe gets an assist about every 3rd Sunday and MJ woulda dished better than Johnny Stockton if he wasnt scoring so much.
Keep movin, bro. Stick and jab, stick and jab.
First, the "Kobe and a bunch of losers" retort. At 21-17 at the time I made the comment, the statement was more a reflection of the term "losers" being associated with a 21-17 team than it was about the players surrounding Kobe. The Lakers problem with their other players is their inconsistency. They each have the potential to put up a decent game, but they don't do it on a night in, night out basis. That's why you see Kobe consistently scoring 35+ a game. He needs to pick up the slack for the other players inabilities. He doesn't do it because he wants to, he does it because he needs to. At 21-17, when the comment was made, you can't call that Kobe and a bunch of losers. You can call that "Kobe and a bunch of less than good players that are relying on #8 to keep them above .500"
Regarding your second attempt.....
You mean to tell me if you substituted Scott Pippen for Lamar Odom, Steve Kerr for Sasha Vuyawhateverthehellhisnameis, Bill Cartwright for Chris Mihm, a young and effective Horace Grant for Kwami Brown, that Jordan would have won 6 rings?? Are you serious? No....you are high, that's what you are. It's been said by others that the players surrounding MJ were notably better than the players surrounding Kobe. Your argument is weak. Again (how many times does it need to be said?), MJ averaged about 5.5 assists a game during his career. Kobe is averaging around 4.5. How in the hell does that equate to MJ getting his players involved more? I mean, yeah, 1 assist a game is more, but the way you and others make it sound, Kobe gets an assist about every 3rd Sunday and MJ woulda dished better than Johnny Stockton if he wasnt scoring so much.
Yeah, I am sure Kome hates scoring 35+ a night, he hates being the center of attention. That is why he demanded Shaq be traded, right? And dude, you don't make any sense. You say they are not a bunch of losers and then you say they rely on #8 to stay above .500. Such lofty goals.Roofer wrote:Sky,
Keep movin, bro. Stick and jab, stick and jab.
First, the "Kobe and a bunch of losers" retort. At 21-17 at the time I made the comment, the statement was more a reflection of the term "losers" being associated with a 21-17 team than it was about the players surrounding Kobe. The Lakers problem with their other players is their inconsistency. They each have the potential to put up a decent game, but they don't do it on a night in, night out basis. That's why you see Kobe consistently scoring 35+ a game. He needs to pick up the slack for the other players inabilities. He doesn't do it because he wants to, he does it because he needs to. At 21-17, when the comment was made, you can't call that Kobe and a bunch of losers. You can call that "Kobe and a bunch of less than good players that are relying on #8 to keep them above .500"
Regarding your second attempt.....
You mean to tell me if you substituted Scott Pippen for Lamar Odom, Steve Kerr for Sasha Vuyawhateverthehellhisnameis, Bill Cartwright for Chris Mihm, a young and effective Horace Grant for Kwami Brown, that Jordan would have won 6 rings?? Are you serious? No....you are high, that's what you are. It's been said by others that the players surrounding MJ were notably better than the players surrounding Kobe. Your argument is weak. Again (how many times does it need to be said?), MJ averaged about 5.5 assists a game during his career. Kobe is averaging around 4.5. How in the hell does that equate to MJ getting his players involved more? I mean, yeah, 1 assist a game is more, but the way you and others make it sound, Kobe gets an assist about every 3rd Sunday and MJ woulda dished better than Johnny Stockton if he wasnt scoring so much.
And for your breakdown of supporting casts, how many of those players from the old Bulls had you ever heard of prior to being with MJ? None, and how many of those players succeeded after they left the team? None. Oh, well Pippen did great with Portland, didn't he. HA, you are a fucking idiot.
Again, MJ got the best from his teammates--Kome gets the best from himself.
On a side note, are you an LA fan or just a Kome fan?
Uhm yeah, he did kinda lead a team of malcontent scrubs to a couple of conference championships that they otherwise had no business being in.Sky wrote:Oh, well Pippen did great with Portland, didn't he.
Do you people ever actually think before you type this shit out?
I got 99 problems but the 'vid ain't one
Horseshit, everyone expected those teams to do more than just make the playoffs. One year and one year alone they went to the finals. But they had so many players on that team, they should have done a lot better.Dinsdale wrote:Uhm yeah, he did kinda lead a team of malcontent scrubs to a couple of conference championships that they otherwise had no business being in.
Do you people ever actually think before you type this shit out?
1999/00: Despite the occasional bizarre behavior of Rasheed Wallace who set a record for Technical Fouls, and off court legal trouble the Trailblazers continued to play solid basketball as they finished in 2nd place with a solid 59-23 record. In the playoffs the Blazers would get past the Minnesota Timberwolves in 4 games, but before the 2nd round started they would have deal with heartache popular assistant coach Bill Musselman lost a 6-month battle with a rare disease, primary systemic amyloidosis. The Blazers would handle the loss well as they raced out to a 3-0 lead before beating the Utah Jazz in 5 games. In the Western Conference Finals for the second year in a row the Trailblazers appeared to be going down quickly again as they fell behind the Los Angeles Lakers 3 games to 1. However, the Blazers would rally to win the next 2 and force a 7th game in Los Angeles. In Game 7 the Blazers appeared to be on the way to an improbable upset as they led the Lakers 73-58 in the 4th Quarter. However, the Blazers would collapse as the Lakers came back to with the game 89-84 to advance to the NBA Finals where they went on to win the NBA Championship.
2000/01: Coming off their Game 7 collapse the Trailblazers continued to be among the top teams in the NBA as the started March with a 42-18 record. However, the Blazers would stumble down the stretch winning just 8 of their final 22 games as they finished in 4th place with a 50-32 record. The Blazers struggles continued into the playoffs, as they are swept by the Los Angeles Lakers in 3 straight games. Following the season Coach Mike Dunleavy is fired and replaced by Maurice Cheeks.
2001/02: Under new Coach Maurice Cheeks the off court troubles continue to embarrass the franchise as several players are involved in off court incidents that lead to the press calling the team the "Jailblazers." The off court distractions seemed to effect the team early as the Blazers were struggling along with a record of 13-18 early in January. However, the Blazers would turn it around winning 30 of their next 38 games as they made the playoffs for the 20th straight season with a record of 49-33. However, for the second year in a row the Trailblazers would be swept by the Los Angeles Lakers in 3 straight games.
2002/03: The Trailblazers continue to be an embarrassment off the court as Oregon State officials and Owner Paul Allen express displeasure in the continued troubles with Blazers players and the law. All total in 6 years since 1997, 14 different players had been either arrested or citied for 30 different incidents ranging from sexual assault to marijuana possession. However, on the court the Trailblazers continued to play strong basketball finishing in 3rd place with a solid 50-32 record. In the playoffs the Blazers would lose 3 straight to the Dallas Mavericks. However, with the first round being changed to a best of 7 the Blazers were not done. Instead they won 3 straight to force a 7th game. However a late 4th quarter scoring drought would due the Blazers in as the Mavs won Game 7 in Dallas 107-95.
Sky wrote:One year and one year alone they went to the finals.
Fuck, I suppose it's too late to get my money back for those tix against the Lakers...or was it the Spurs that they were lying to me about...I'm not sure, but all I know is that they told me that those were Western Conference Finals games I was watching.Sky wrote:What is this, your fucking troll? Get your stats straight dipshit.
And Pippen was kind of a leading MVP candidate during the years Jordan sat out...but I guess getting those stats straight isn't as important.
I got 99 problems but the 'vid ain't one
You say to-MAY-to, I say to-MAH-to...you say "one and one only," I say "two in a row"...let's call the whole thing off.Sky wrote:1999/00: Despite the occasional bizarre behavior of Rasheed Wallace who set a record for Technical Fouls, and off court legal trouble the Trailblazers continued to play solid basketball as they finished in 2nd place with a solid 59-23 record. In the playoffs the Blazers would get past the Minnesota Timberwolves in 4 games, but before the 2nd round started they would have deal with heartache popular assistant coach Bill Musselman lost a 6-month battle with a rare disease, primary systemic amyloidosis. The Blazers would handle the loss well as they raced out to a 3-0 lead before beating the Utah Jazz in 5 games. In the Western Conference Finals for the second year in a row the Trailblazers appeared to be going down quickly again as they fell behind the Los Angeles Lakers 3 games to 1.
I got 99 problems but the 'vid ain't one
Sky wrote: Yeah, I am sure Kome hates scoring 35+ a night, he hates being the center of attention. That is why he demanded Shaq be traded, right? And dude, you don't make any sense. You say they are not a bunch of losers and then you say they rely on #8 to stay above .500. Such lofty goals.
And for your breakdown of supporting casts, how many of those players from the old Bulls had you ever heard of prior to being with MJ? None, and how many of those players succeeded after they left the team? None. Oh, well Pippen did great with Portland, didn't he. HA, you are a fucking idiot.
Again, MJ got the best from his teammates--Kome gets the best from himself.
On a side note, are you an LA fan or just a Kome fan?
Sky, sky, sky......
Kobe demanded Shaq to be traded? While that rumor got lots of airtime on the local talkshow circuit, I don't think anyone ever came up with the evidence or proof that he demanded Shaq be traded. Did he use his status in the organization to force the Lakers hand at dealing with an underachieving always out of shape 7 footer? More than likely, yes. There's no doubt Kobe would be sportin Clipper blue and red right now if The Lakers didn't offload The Big Malcontent. Do I think the Lakers made the wrong move there? Only in probably not getting equal value in return, but I have and will continue to support the sell of that oversized slacker. Say what you will about Kobe, but the dude takes his trade seriously and his work ethic proves the point. Shaq gave a shit only when he cared enough to do so. Good riddance on the fuck as far as I'm concerned.
I'm guessin math isn't your strong suit, but I'll help you out a little bit. When you win games at a higher clip than you lose games, it's not accurate to call that entity a "loser". If you want to cite the term loser based on social status, ability to hit an open shot, etc., then so be it. As I stated in my last argument, my base for the take was their record, which at 21-17 is/was/will always be a winning record. Goals played no part in the argument.
As for am I a Laker fan or Kobe fan? I bleed purple and gold. I've been a Laker fan all my life. While I was one of the very, very few who supported the Lakers trading for the rights to Kobe Bryant when he was coming out of HS, I'll say that I have questioned his off court behavior ever since "the summer". I have no idea what happened in Colorado that June day, but I do know Kobe put himself in a position to receive the criticism he's gotten. From an on the court standpoint, do I think Kobe shoots too much? At times, yes, but then I see Odom throwin balls away, having major brainfarts down the stretch of the game. I see Kwami Brown become the world's largest disappearing act...I see Devan George not coming close to earning his pay....I see Luke, Cookie, Mihm, and Smush being consistently inconsistent.....I see Andrew Bynum not getting enough minutes....and I say then....."Shoot, Kobe. Shoot". Get some talented guys around him who can put the rock in the hole and I'll start questioning his shot attempts. Until then.....Shoot, Kobe. Shoot.
So what was the point of this paragraph????? You question the validity of my statment and then proceed to discuss all various reasons why it happened. I mean hell, I don't disagree with a thing you said cause it's pretty much what I said.Roofer wrote:Sky, sky, sky......
Kobe demanded Shaq to be traded? While that rumor got lots of airtime on the local talkshow circuit, I don't think anyone ever came up with the evidence or proof that he demanded Shaq be traded. Did he use his status in the organization to force the Lakers hand at dealing with an underachieving always out of shape 7 footer? More than likely, yes. There's no doubt Kobe would be sportin Clipper blue and red right now if The Lakers didn't offload The Big Malcontent. Do I think the Lakers made the wrong move there? Only in probably not getting equal value in return, but I have and will continue to support the sell of that oversized slacker. Say what you will about Kobe, but the dude takes his trade seriously and his work ethic proves the point. Shaq gave a shit only when he cared enough to do so. Good riddance on the fuck as far as I'm concerned.
I'm guessin math isn't your strong suit, but I'll help you out a little bit. When you win games at a higher clip than you lose games, it's not accurate to call that entity a "loser". If you want to cite the term loser based on social status, ability to hit an open shot, etc., then so be it. As I stated in my last argument, my base for the take was their record, which at 21-17 is/was/will always be a winning record. Goals played no part in the argument.
Fucking semantics dude. You say they aren't losers because they are above .500 and I say they are losers because they (as a team) look like complete and utter crap that is scraping by in a sub-par division.
Well good, and glad to hear it. At least this conversation is occuring with a dedicated fan and not some bandwagon hanger on. And personally, if I were in your shoes, I might be saying the same. Except, I think a lot of agression would be focused on JBuss and the lack of talent to accompany kome.As for am I a Laker fan or Kobe fan? I bleed purple and gold. I've been a Laker fan all my life. While I was one of the very, very few who supported the Lakers trading for the rights to Kobe Bryant when he was coming out of HS, I'll say that I have questioned his off court behavior ever since "the summer". I have no idea what happened in Colorado that June day, but I do know Kobe put himself in a position to receive the criticism he's gotten. From an on the court standpoint, do I think Kobe shoots too much? At times, yes, but then I see Odom throwin balls away, having major brainfarts down the stretch of the game. I see Kwami Brown become the world's largest disappearing act...I see Devan George not coming close to earning his pay....I see Luke, Cookie, Mihm, and Smush being consistently inconsistent.....I see Andrew Bynum not getting enough minutes....and I say then....."Shoot, Kobe. Shoot". Get some talented guys around him who can put the rock in the hole and I'll start questioning his shot attempts. Until then.....Shoot, Kobe. Shoot.