Kobe Bryant vs Hakeem Olajuwon

[the ambush]

Reggie's Pacers were legit. They were the gatekeepers of the East(in an era when the east was good).

The Pacers were a little better than the Trail Blazers during the same time period yet not by much. That is still 5 legit, good teams every year in the west without even counting the Blazers. I was not disputing the east having good teams, the west consistently had better playoff series though. I do not see how anyone could argue this.

 

[gspieler]

Theres a reason they are considered one of if not the best 1-2 punch in NBA history. At worst... 1a and 1b? Lol. Not at worst, as accurate.

Kobe 5

Shaq 4

I'm not going to argue against them being 1a and 1b. I'm simply stating Shaq was slightly more responsible for the championships imo.

 

[hasar]

Kobe is not top 10 material. Internet era kids think he's cool.

 

[berimBOWLoh]

Imagine you could put Kobes work ethic in Shaqs body.


He would have been GOAT. Thats how good that dude was. He just literally used the regular season to get in shape and did bare min work required. Physically he was unstoppable when in shape and motivated. Problem is he was motivated to party, eat like crap, not take shit seriously most of his career.


Shaq respects the F outta Hakeem. Saw an interview where he said he knew he was serious business when he fully elbowed him in the chest and Hakeem just turned to him and smiled saying "nice one!!" and proceeded to school him after. He realized Hakeem wasnt scared one bit. Truth is almost everybody was scared of Shaq, dude would dunk you thru the rim with the ball if you arent careful lol

 

[gspieler]

The Pacers were a little better than the Trail Blazers during the same time period yet not by much. That is still 5 legit, good teams every year in the west without even counting the Blazers. I was not disputing the east having good teams, the west consistently had better playoff series though. I do not see how anyone could argue this.

I miss the days when there was some semblance of balancing the talent in the league. Yes, the Bulls probably fir the definition of "superteam", but in any given year(particularly when MJ wasnt there), it felt like there were 6-8 legit teams, that came about organically, that you couldnt sleep on.

 

[Possum Jenkins]

Kobe beat some good teams as well. The Duncan/Pop Spurs, the Nash/Stoudamire Suns, Durant/Westbrook/Harden Thunder, The Iverson/Carmelo Nuggets, and the Big 3 Celtics. The Rockets, Jazz, and Magic weren't great teams but were solid.

Then you can look at the teams he beat with Shaq: Blazers, Kings, Spurs, Timberwolves.

From all of those, the only ones that can hang with Hakeem's list are the Duncan/Pop Spurs, the Kings, and the Big 3 Celtics

 

[TheComebackKid]

From all of those, the only ones that can hang with Hakeem's list are the Duncan/Pop Spurs, the Kings, and the Big 3 Celtics

The Twin Tower Spurs(2x champs), Jail Blazers, and Suns as well.

 

[gspieler]

The Twin Tower Spurs(2x champs), Jail Blazers, and Suns as well.

Could be wrong, but pretty sure The Admiral was only there for one title, that happened in '99.

 

[Lord Commander Palis]

I'm not going to argue against them being 1a and 1b. I'm simply stating Shaq was slightly more responsible for the championships imo.

Again, im not arguing that, im arguing crunch time, with who defers too. It's literally the most important time in basketball.

 

[gspieler]

Again, im not arguing that, im arguing crunch time, with who defers too. It's literally the most important time in basketball.

I understood the question to be which of the two was more vital their success. I argue Shaq, in spite of Kobe being better in the final minutes.

 

[Lord Commander Palis]

I understood the question to be which of the two was more vital their success. I argue Shaq, in spite of Kobe being better in the final minutes.

Without a great closer Shaq never wins a title. History shows. I guess you could say without a big Kobe never wins however Kobe was the unequivocal #1 in the Kobe/Pau 1-2 and it's not a diss to Pau.

I'm merely opening everyone's eyes that downplay Kobe with Shaq which is what has occurred in this thread. It's a bit of haterism mixed in with ignorance.

However there is a reason why Shaq says Kobe is better and is also the greatest Laker of all time despite the animosity.

 

[WhiskeyPunch]

The Dream.

 

[gspieler]

Without a great closer Shaq never wins a title. History shows. I guess you could say without a big Kobe never wins however Kobe was the unequivocal #1 in the Kobe/Pau 1-2 and it's not a diss to Pau.

I'm merely opening everyone's eyes that downplay Kobe with Shaq which is what has occurred in this thread. It's a bit of haterism mixed in with ignorance.

However there is a reason why Shaq says Kobe is better and is also the greatest Laker of all time despite the animosity.

"Without a great closer..." implies that anyone ever got there on their own. Every champion has had either (1) another legit star plus good role players, or (2) multiple higher-level guys on top of a star with good role players. Jordan never got there without Pippen. Magic never got there without KAJ. Lebron never got there without another MVP on his team.

Singling Shaq out in this regard isn't fair IMO. The closest guys you'll find to carrying a team to a title are Hakeem and Dirk, and even they had decent supporting casts.

Also, what Shaq has to say about Kobe should be taken with a grain of salt, animosity and all. Shaq never played with Magic, or KAJ. He did, however, have a front seat to the first half of Kobe's career.

 

[Lord Commander Palis]

"Without a great closer..." implies that anyone ever got there on their own. Every champion has had either (1) another legit star plus good role players, or (2) multiple higher-level guys on top of a star with good role players. Jordan never got there without Pippen. Magic never got there without KAJ. Lebron never got there without another MVP on his team.

Singling Shaq out in this regard isn't fair IMO. The closest guys you'll find to carrying a team to a title are Hakeem and Dirk, and even they had decent supporting casts.

Also, what Shaq has to say about Kobe should be taken with a grain of salt, animosity and all. Shaq never played with Magic, or KAJ. He did, however, have a front seat to the first half of Kobe's career.

Ummm no... Without Kobe or D Wade Shaq never got a ring, fact. Thats what i mean by that, I'm not talking about others, im talking about Shaq.

A grain of salt because of what? Your expression of words is incomplete.

 

[gspieler]

Ummm no... Without Kobe or D Wade Shaq never got a ring, fact. Thats what i mean by that, I'm not talking about others, im talking about Shaq.

A grain of salt because of what? Your expression of words is incomplete.

What applies to Shaq applies to every other ATG a with a ring. Kobe has zero rings without Shaq and Gasol.

As for the "grain of salt", I took it as a given the implication was that because he played with him, his comments on him are inherently biased.

 

[Lord Commander Palis]

What applies to Shaq applies to every other ATG a with a ring. Kobe has zero rings without Shaq and Gasol.

As for the "grain of salt", I took it as a given the implication was that because he played with him, his comments on him are inherently biased.

We're going in circles here. You and others downplayed Kobes greatness and I countered it. Fact of the matter is that Kobe has 5 and Hakeem doesn't come close.

How many other SGs at the time of Kobe/Shaqs era could replace Kobe to 3peat with Shaq?

Here is also a good read that sums up what I've been saying here for years. It's good stuff for shutting up haters and new bball fans

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/198374-kobe-and-shaq-they-needed-each-other-the-numbers-dont-lie

O’Neal was the team scoring leader in nine playoff games, eight times scoring 30 or more points and Kobe led the team in ten playoff games, six times scoring 30 or more points.

The point of this statistical analysis is to prove how foolish it is to claim Kobe was carried by Shaq to his three rings.

Why is it that no one questions the validity of the rings won by other stars that played with stars (Bob Cousy, Sam Jones, John Havlicek, Jerry West, Wilt, Julius Erving, James Worthy, Kareem, Magic, Bird, McHale, Isiah, Joe Dumars, Dennis Rodman, David Robinson, Tim Duncan, Tony Parker, Manu Ginobili, Kevin Garnett, Ray Allen, Paul Pierce), but with Kobe, he is judged on a completely different and unfair level.

No one wins a title alone and I have never heard a star getting his rings devalued because he played with another great player except in the case of Kobe.

Ball don't lie, numbers don't lie.

/Thread

 

[TheComebackKid]

Again, im not arguing that, im arguing crunch time, with who defers too. It's literally the most important time in basketball.

 

[gspieler]

We're going in circles here. You and others downplayed Kobes greatness and I countered it. Fact of the matter is that Kobe has 5 and Hakeem doesn't come close.

How many other SGs at the time of Kobe/Shaqs era could replace Kobe to 3peat with Shaq?

Here is also a good read that sums up what I've been saying here for years. It's good stuff for shutting up haters and new bball fans

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/198374-kobe-and-shaq-they-needed-each-other-the-numbers-dont-lie



Ball don't lie, numbers don't lie.

/Thread

Threepeating is a once-in-a-generation type of thing. There no names, in the history basketball, you could replace Kobe with and garuntee a threepeat. But there are a list of names from that era you could replace Kobe with, and likely win multiple rings. Those names include:
Kidd
VC
AI
T-Mac
Payton
Etc

And who's claiming Shaq carried Kobe? Just because Shaq was a slightly more important element to the team does not equate a claim Kobe was carried.

Also, are we actually getting back to the rings argument? It's obviously not a good way to compare guys like Kobe and Hakeem, who have completely different contexts to their careers.

 

[TheComebackKid]

This is how the ATG's titles breakdown:

Kareem: 5 partnerships, 1 sole proprietorship

Russell: 11 corporations(majority stakeholder)

Wilt: 1 sole proprietorship, 1 partnership

West: 1 partnership

Erving: 1 partnership

Malone: 1 partnership

Magic: 5 partnerships

Bird: 3 sole proprietorships

Jordan: 6 Sole proprietorships

Hakeem: 2 Sole proprietorships

Shaq: 4 partnerships

Duncan: 2 sole proprietorships, 3 corporations(2 maj. stakeholder, 1 min. stakeholder)

Kobe: 2 Sole proprietorships, 3 partnerships

Dirk: 1 sole proprietorship

DWade: 1 partnership, 2 corporations(min. stakeholder)

Lebron: 2 corporations(maj. stakeholder), 1 sole proprietorship

Curry: 1 sole proprietorship, 1 partnership

Durant: 1 partnership

 

[TheComebackKid]

Threepeating is a once-in-a-generation type of thing. There no names, in the history basketball, you could replace Kobe with and garuntee a threepeat. But there are a list of names from that era you could replace Kobe with, and likely win multiple rings. Those names include:
Kidd
VC
AI
T-Mac
Payton
Etc

And who's claiming Shaq carried Kobe? Just because Shaq was a slightly more important element to the team does not equate a claim Kobe was carried.

Also, are we actually getting back to the rings argument? It's obviously not a good way to compare guys like Kobe and Hakeem, who have completely different contexts to their careers.

You said that Kobe's 3 rings with Shaq are equivalent to Hakeem making it to the second round lol. You were trying to devalue Kobe's rings.