Shaq makes those around him better.

[Diesel]

Let's take a poll of people who know:

Fox, does Shaq make those around him better... Do you get the open Shot because of Shaq?

Yes.

Horry, does Shaq make those around him better... Do you get the open Shot because of Shaq?

Yes.

Fisher, does Shaq make those around him better... Do you get the open Shot because of Shaq?

Yes.

Shaw, does Shaq make those around him better... Do you get the open Shot because of Shaq?

Yes.

Harper, does Shaq make those around him better... Do you get the open Shot because of Shaq?

Yes.

D. Scott, does Shaq make those around him better... Do you get the open Shot because of Shaq?

Yes.

Nick Anderson, does Shaq make those around him better... Do you get the open Shot because of Shaq?

Yes.

Penny Hardaway, does Shaq make those around him better... Do you get the open Shot because of Shaq?

Yes.

OK, now here's the big question since everybody wants to assume that Kobe is good enough to take any team to the championship on his own.

What's the difference between Kobe and Penny?

Better yet, what happened to Penny, Nick, D.Scott, and all those Guys after Shaq??

Remember people used to think that Penny could carry the Magic and the Suns all by himself too....

[Traceman]

has 3 rings with Shaq and Penny has none! You can say all you want about Kobe but the bottom line is that Shaq played with a LOT of talented players over the years but until Kobe came along, he didn't win any titles either. They need each other. Shaq is DEFINITELY the man on the team but LA won't win jack without Kobe either.

[nbafan]

The knock on Kobe is always that the Lakers are a .500 team without Shaq. This is true, however its misleading to use this stat to evaluate Kobe's ability to carry a team. The Lakers are a team built around Shaq. They are very small up front without him. Other than Kobe and Shaq nobody on the team can create his own shot. They are spot up shooters. If you take Shaq off this team they can't match up defensively with any big team, even a poor one and they don't have enough scorers. As I've said before, you win in the NBA by playing defense and having each player understand and execute on their role. Without Shaq, the roles that Horry, Fox, Fisher, etc. play are not enough to beat playoff NBA teams regularly, even if Kobe goes for 35,8, & 8. When Shaq retires you will see the Lakers build a different team around Kobe. They will add more athletisism, a big defensive minded Center, and at least one more guy who can initiate the offense. I would expect them to run more than they do now. Given a reasonable level of talent and a redesign of the supporting cast, I have no doubt that Kobe could lead a top NBA team.

[Diesel]

Neither of the Laker teams would have beaten MJ's Bulls.

Neither of the Lakers teams would have beaten the Houston team that had Drexler and Hakeem and Ellie on it.

That being the case. Had you place Kobe in Penny's place, there would still have been no rings for Orlando.

It's funny how you transcend time with that lame argument.

Secondly, Penny recieved the same kind of Fanfair that Kobe gets now. Everybody talked about Penny as if he were the franchise.

But what happened when Shaq Left?

[Diesel]

In reply to:

---

The knock on Kobe is always that the Lakers are a .500 team without Shaq. This is true, however its misleading to use this stat to evaluate Kobe's ability to carry a team. The Lakers are a team built around Shaq.

---

The Lakers are not built around Shaq. The Lakers are built around the triangle offense. Kobe gets to play the exact same role that Jordan played in Chicago. The difference is that Kobe is no Jordan. When Shaq is gone, Kobe cannot carry that team anywhere. Jordan didn't have a Shaq at C in Chicago.... And his team won 72 games one yr that's far from the 41-41 record that Kobe would give the Lakers.

In reply to:

---

. I would expect them to run more than they do now. Given a reasonable level of talent and a redesign of the supporting cast, I have no doubt that Kobe could lead a top NBA team.

---

Problem. It's just speculation of what Kobe can do. He needs Shaq like a fish needs water. Secondly, everybody talks about Kobe being the top SG in the game. How would anybody know how good he is until he has faced the pressures that Tmac, Iverson, and Vince Carter face... That pressure is being their teams' main scorer and facing double teams all the time.

[nbafan]

In this case you don't know what you are talking about. Kobe does not play the same role as Jordan did in the triangle. Jordan played the wing position that is played by Rick Fox on the current Lakers. Kobe is asked to assume the Pippen role of initiating the offense with Shaq as the first option (In fact Phil Jackson has said that he has given responsibilty to Kobe that he never gave to Michael). Everything works on an initial attempt to get the ball to Shaq, either at the high or low post depending on the initial action. Kobe is an option off that action. The Bulls used Jordan as the initial option on the Triangle side of the floor. Kobe sometimes plays the Jordan role when Brian Shaw is in the game because he can initiate the offense.

Just because the two teams run the same offense does not mean that they are trying to get the same action as a primary option. The Lakers want to get the ball to Shaq in the post, the Bulls wanted Jordan operating in space on the wing. The Lakers are not trying to get Fox operating in space and the bulls were not trying to get Longley in the post as initial options even though they play the same position as Shaq and Jordan. There is no doubt that the Lakers are built on the offensive end around skills that will keep teams from triple teaming Shaq and on the defensive end around big interchangable players that eliminate other teams ability to create matchup problems through screens.

Phil has also said that both the Bulls and Lakers do things that the other one could not stop and he couldn't give a tremendous advantage to one over the other. Although he did say that Shaq is the single greatest matchup problem in the game, even beyond Michael. If he can't definitively say which was the better team, how can you.

I don't think you can say who would win a game between the two teams. I do think the Bulls have far greater achievements than the Lakers. Until the Lakers win 6 titles and post 60 plus over most of a decade you have to consider the Bulls as a better team.

[nbafan]

You Said:

"Problem. It's just speculation of what Kobe can do. He needs Shaq like a fish needs water. Secondly, everybody talks about Kobe being the top SG in the game. How would anybody know how good he is until he has faced the pressures that Tmac, Iverson, and Vince Carter face... That pressure is being their teams' main scorer and facing double teams all the time. "

Now its clear to me that you don't watch many Laker games and have decided your position regardless of any reality to the contrary. I agree that Kobe plays for a much better team than any of the above. But Kobe is doubled regularly early in the game and is doubled by every team on every important posession late in games. Early in the playoffs last year, when Shaq was barely able to run, Kobe took over at the end of every game with teams sending two and three players at him. Doug Collins has said he is the best perimeter player in the game, the third best player in the game behind Shaq, and that if he and Iverson switched teams Philly would be a better team and Kobe would lead the league in scoring every year.

I think a case can be made that TMac is as good as Kobe. He does everything on the court and is a clutch player, he just plays on a bad team. If McGrady played the system as well as Kobe (Big If) the Lakers would be just as good with TMac.

There is no comparison between Kobe and Iverson/Carter. Carter is a talented highlight reel that disappears at the end of games, doesn't want the big shot and, in my opinion much like Chris Webber, is a second option player - not your leader.

As I went through in my last post, the Lakers outside of Shaq and Kobe are limited role players that require the two main cogs to be successful. They are not built to work with one of them. They are better without Kobe and without Shaq because they are built around Shaq and are not big enough to compete without him, regardless of what Kobe does. If you took out Shaq and replaced him with Pippen and Grant quality players, this Kobe-centric team would be one of the best in the league.

[Diesel]

In reply to:

---

Phil has also said that both the Bulls and Lakers do things that the other one could not stop and he couldn't give a tremendous advantage to one over the other. Although he did say that Shaq is the single greatest matchup problem in the game, even beyond Michael. If he can't definitively say which was the better team, how can you.

---

Because I have seen many good Shaq led teams LOSE. I have seen these same Lakers who have won three championship win Series in DOUBT. and what I mean is that I had doubts of weather they could beat that team had it not been for the refs or injuries. I could never say the same for the championship Bulls teams. The Lakers don't have it. Let me explain.

I can remember when the Bulls would be touring and they were on their way to a city. There was actually a fear that came upon the opposing team because they knew they didn't stand a chance of winning (except the Knicks and Pacers). However, these championship Lakers do not provoke fear for anyone. IN fact, when was the Last time that the Lakers beat the Clipps? Even Lowly Atlanta goes into LA looking for a win.

Do you remember when Jordan and the guys played Seattle in the championships? Shawn Kemp said " well, we probably won't win but we are going to give our best effort". What kind of ____ is that?

Do you remember when Jordan and the guys won 72 games? What teams even thought they had a shot at winning against them?

However, the Lakers have been treated very nicely by injury and very nicely by the refs....

Here's what I see.

Yr one, would the Lakers have beaten the returning Champion Spurs had Duncan and Elliot been healthy? Those same Spurs Swept the Lakers the yr before. Those Same Lakers needed 5 games to beat Sacramento in the first round.

Yr one, would that Laker team have beaten PTL had the ref not disqualified Wallace in THE BIGGEST EGO play I have ever seen??

Yr 2, could the Lakers get past San Antonio so easily had Anderson not gotten Slammed by Juwaun Howard and had his Clavicle Broken?

Actually, I respect the Yr 2 lakers team more than any other... However, why did the refs allow the rape of AI to take place in the finals after Philly won game 1 in LA? I've never seen one of the league's stars frisked the way that Lue was allowed to Frisk Iverson after it was apparent that Kobe, Fisher, and Shaw couldn't stop him. What happens if Lynch and Snow shows up Healthy?

Yr 3, Sac-Town. What happens if Peja Plays? The whole series came down to ONE LUCKY Robert Horry pick the ball up and hit the three play?

Again, the Lakers won those championship... However, there was some doubt in some series.

I never had to doubt the Bulls. Don't get me wrong... After Horace Left, I hated the Bulls, but I still had to respect their work.

[Diesel]

We'll make this yes or no so you can get it.

1. Is Kobe doubled as much as Tmac Yes or No?

2. Is Kobe doubled/tripled as much as Iverson. Yes or No?

3. Is Kobe doubled/tripled as much as Carter... Yes or no?

The bottom line is this. When you had to answer NO to all those, it shows that Kobe has had the easy life compared to the rest of these guys. No one is sitting in a lockerroom with Xs and Os on the board saying... OK, if we stop Kobe we can beat the Lakers. However, they are saying... If we stop Tmac we can beat Orlando or if we stop Iverson we can beat the 76ers, and if we stop Carter, we can beat the Raptors.

No team can afford to set up it's defense around stopping Kobe the way that they set up their defense to stop these other top gaurds.

Therefore, of course Kobe looks really good against competiton. But what happens when Shaq's Gone?

[Traceman]

The Bulls had near misses over the years during their champioship run too. The Jazz and the Pacers gave them every bit as much as the Lakers got from the Kings and the Blazers.

In addition, you might have seen good Shaq teams lose but you haven't seen a good Shaq/Kobe team lose. The last time they didn't win the NBA title, Kobe was only 20 years old. In other words, they have won the title every year that they have played together that Kobe has been old enough to drink! Think about that for a minute. If they had won the title the year before, Kobe couldn't have even had any champagne!

I love all your what ifs. They are truly comical. If a pig had wings it could fly. If Jordan had been called for pushing off before scoring the winning basket against Russell, Stockton and Malone would have a title. If the refs hadn't made the bogus call against Pippen during the playoff series against the Knicks in '94, the Bulls would have went to the Finals without Jordan. If Diesel had a clue, he would realize how STUPID his argument sounds.

[nbafan]

So using your argument, Magic was overrated because he played with Kareem, Kevin McHale doesn't belong in the hall of fame because he played with Bird, West played with Chamberlain so we'll leave him out, and on and on. How much of Kobe's game do you think he has to sublimate because he plays with a hall of famer. I've already said that I believe Kobe and McGrady are comparable players (although I would take Kobe), so I'm not debating that with you. You have made the statement that Kobe has it easy because he plays with Shaq, I suggest that the other guys have it easy because they are playing with no expectations of winning and can hoist shot after shot and are lauded for the statistics they post regardless of the fact they haven't won anything. Kobe's pressure is completely different. The Laker franchise has the expectation that they will compete for a championship every year. Utah raises division title banners, The Lakers only raise NBA Championship banners. It is generally agreed inside the Lakers that Kobe's lowpoint as a member of the team was the game against Golden State where he and Jamison got into a 50+ point shoot out. Would Iverson, TMac, or Carter be universally hammered for such a performance? NO! The expectation is that Kobe must play a role that fits the team, not his individual achievement. None of the other guys have that restriction.

Your comments about the number of times they are doubled are meaningless. How many games do those teams play that don't matter? Is there ever a Laker game that the opponent isn't up and motivated and the arena sold out? Do you honestly think that Kobe's scoring numbers wouldn't go up if he played for a team without Shaq? I am not making the argument that Kobe is better than Michael or that he will be the best player ever. I'm simply saying that he has unbelievable talent, has made tremendous sacrifices in terms of personal achievement for the benefit of the team, is the guy that carries the Lakers in the last 5 minutes of every big game, is still the hardest working Laker, is only 23, and Shaq never won a title without Kobe either.