Thread: Kobe: Hire West or trade me

Originally Posted by Italian Seafood

With the ball in his hands, ok. There's ten guys on the floor and only one has the ball in his hands at any given time. That doesn't mean there's nothing else happening.

And I never said Wallace was their "top player", I said he gave them a presence in the post defensively vs Shaq, which is the point of the conversation. The beauty of that Detroit team is that they were a team, it wasn't "Michael vs Kobe", etc, the kind of **** that is ruining the NBA. It's a team game, everyone has a job to do and on that team they did it beautifully. It doesn't matter who was their "top player" for the marquee, the point is they played as a team and got it done. Depending on how you look at the game, there could be various answers to who the "top player" was.

And there's the problem with building an arguement around vague phrases like "top player" "dominate" or even "championship caliber." Those terms are far too subject to interpretation. One man's dominate player is another man's role player.

Originally Posted by Italian Seafood

Perhaps, but Shaq's presence inside enabled him to be, just as Shaq in his prime made Kobe look like the second coming of Jordan. How's that working out since Shaq left?

Actually it's working out great for Kobe. He can score whenever, with whomever, he wants. Shaq or no Shaq Kobe will score... i.e. 81 point game, 50 point game streak, scoring title. It's the supporting cast that sucks, as everyone knows.

But, maybe Kobe is thinking the only to way get another championship is if he goes to the east...hence his trade demand.

Originally Posted by Madballz15

Actually it's working out great for Kobe. He can score whenever, with whomever, he wants. Shaq or no Shaq Kobe will score... i.e. 81 point game, 50 point game streak, scoring title. It's the supporting cast that sucks, as everyone knows.

I would hardly say it's working out great for him.

Originally Posted by Die Radio Die

And there's the problem with building an arguement around vague phrases like "top player" "dominate" or even "championship caliber." Those terms are far too subject to interpretation. One man's dominate player is another man's role player.

In most cases, yes. That's why I put the words in quotes, because they're not my words. Of course guys like Shaq and Jordan were dominant, but after that you get into huge gray areas.

Originally Posted by jbruin152

I would hardly say it's working out great for him.

Individually yes. Team wise, no. I was just pointing out that Shaq leaving did not effect Kobe's scoring ability. Kobe can dominate if his center was a midget.

Originally Posted by jbruin152

I would hardly say it's working out great for him.

You beat me to it.

Individually it is, but from a team standpoint, have they won a playoff series since Shaq left? Off the top of my head I don't think so. Guess what--the Knicks haven't won a playoff series since Patrick Ewing was traded in 2000. It can't be a coincidence.

Perhaps Kobe's focus is more on having 81 point games and being the star, since he already has his three rings in the bank. But as Laker fans that isn't doing you guys much good in the post season.

Originally Posted by Madballz15

Individually yes. Team wise, no. I was just pointing out that Shaq leaving did not effect Kobe's scoring ability. Kobe can dominate if his center was a midget.

Kobe's scoring ability is irrelevant if he's not winning.

Originally Posted by Italian Seafood

You beat me to it.

Individually it is, but from a team standpoint, have they won a playoff series since Shaq left? Off the top of my head I don't think so. Guess what--the Knicks haven't won a playoff series since Patrick Ewing was traded in 2000. It can't be a coincidence.

Although they did make it to the finals in the lockout season against the Spurs with Ewing a complete non factor.

Originally Posted by ASUcruz

Although they did make it to the finals in the lockout season against the Spurs with Ewing a complete non factor.

He was a huge factor. He did his achilles in Game 2 of the East finals at Indiana, but they never get past Miami with Zo if they don't have Ewing. They swept Atlanta (with Mutumbo) so they might have gotten past them, but Miami with Riley and Alonzo were the #1 seed. Ewing was big in beating them in 2000 as well in 7 games.

Without Ewing the rest of the Indiana series, the Knicks needed LJ's 4-point play at home and a career game from Allan Houston to get by. Then they were lucky to win one game vs Duncan and Robinson without him. He and Camby were a good tandem for those two seasons, I'd at least liked to have seen them matchup with the Spurs.