<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/4SyNbF9awiE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> Bynum facing triple and quadruple teams. Jesus. How on earth can Kobe not shoot 50% with this?
You haven't been watching Laker games i guess. Bynum gets doubled/tripled WITH Kobe on the court. You take him out, he gets tripled/quadrupled team.
How on earth did this guy shoot BELOW 40% on the court the previous 3 games Kobe missed? vs PHX 10 for 27 vs NOR 7 for 17 vs SAS 7 for 20 Last night should've been a blowout, they forced fed him the ball he kept turning the ball over (4 times) or he was lazy and didn't catch the pass properly. 22 turnovers last night, most of them coming while force feeding him in the post
Bynum and Gasol both taking 20 shots a game without Kobe in there Bynum shooting 42% from the field, Gasol shooting 46%. Well below their averages when the D focuses on them
Fact, Kobe's much more efficient when Bynum is out. Bynum is much less efficient when Kobe is out. You can be delusional but you can't change the fact.
And they are 3-1. LOL so much fail. And what's Ron Artest doing since KB24 is out? LOL again so much fail. Fact: They are 2-2 when Bynum doesn't play. If you add the 2 losses to us when he was ejected with PLENTY of time (and a lead), they are 2-4. Fact: They are 3-1 without Kobe this year, beating the best team in the West on the road by 20+. And the most hated perimeter player on the Lakers became instantly better with Kobe out. Coincidence, I think not.
Artest steps up for ONCE after stinking for the last 2 years. If anything he owes these type of games to Kobe and the Lakers.
Tmac so whats your point they're a better regular season team without Kobe? So be it LOL it doesn't accomplish jack in the bigger scheme of things as far as playoffs are concerned. The Lakers are 3-1 this season without Kobe (and 61-37 overall w/o him since 1996) however they're just 26-27 without him since 2003-04
Why would you bring up 03-04 when Bynum is finally a star this year? The record doesn't mean anything in the grand scheme of things b/c Kobe isn't out for the year. But what it does say is this team is not dependent on Kobe at all. Hopefully Kobe sees this and stop jacking up shots. This team just beat the Spurs by 20 and Bynum just obliterated the Spurs frontline by himself. This is a championship contender if Kobe is willing to alter his game. Wait until next year, you'll see the Lakers will be 70% Bynum on offense anyways. Goodbug always nitpicks on stats and said the final results matter only (when talking about kobe - for instance game 7 of the finals). Now he's dissing Bynum and Gasol stats when they're WINNING. It's laughable to me.
LOL, so you are talking about 4 games. One worst loss to a lottery team. 2 last minute wins on one lottery team and one low seed team. And a win to the Spurs that don't seem to be interested and just sit the game out previous night? Not to mention it takes Artest to hit 5 out 5 3pt to win one of those games. It's good he had such performance. But if you think he can consistently get that with Kobe out, you are truly delusional.
You know what is hillarious is you guys arguing whether they are better with or without Kobe yet most of you deny they are a top threat to come out of the West! What you have to realize is that with or without Kobe, they are a very good team because they have two of the most highly skilled longest bigs in the league.
LOL, so after you got beat by numbers, you come out with such crap? Are you saying Bynum shooting 42% is going to carry Lakers to promising land? Or Bynum shooting 42% is the reason Artest and Barnes step up? Check the title, I didn't start this nonsense thread. You are holding 4 games win/loss as your last straw, while disregarding 10 times more samples since 2004. This is a very pathetic attempt.
No it's still OKC. I just don't see Kobe passing up shots in the playoffs. There is no way Bynum and Gasol getting 15+ shots consistently in the playoffs. And b/c they most likely wont', they won't get to the Finals.
If he gets 30 rebounds when he shoots 42%, then sure. But when he shot 50% like last night, not a lot of offensive rebounds to get right? Wins regardless. And again, you're bringing up sample size? Didn't you use a small sample size of Kobe shooting > 50% without bynum to prove he's better w/o Bynum. Pick an argument and stick with it PLEASE.
But Bynum got 30 boards that game. I thought grabbing a ton of boards when you shoot like garbage = good game according to you? At least that's what you keep saying whenever someone mentions Kobe shooting 25% in G7 of the 2010 Finals. Consistency....
That's ONE game. Yes, it's fine if he can get 30 board every game. But he isn't, he shot 42% in 4 games and got 30 board for one. And Kobe's OK to shoot 25% when Allen and PP combined for 27% for one game, I don't expect Allen and PP to shoot 27% every game. That's the point.
What small samples? Kobe has been shooting around 45% for a few years before Lakers set up plays for Bynum this year. That's not a small sample in any sense. At the end of the day, Kobe still has 5 to 0 of LeChoke and TMac combined. He can kill Lakers and that's still the case. Your trolling doesn't change the fact. You MAD?
Nobody should doubt Bynum's status as an elite player and star in this league now. There's a reason Kupchak believes he's untouchable. Meanwhile people here think Chandler Parson's is untouchable...Smh.
