Kobe had one thing that MJ and Lebron didn't have.

That's why you can't have debates with Kobe haters. They keep moving the goal post back when it comes to Kobe

 

No we are clear. Kobe was not the best player on his team during 3 championships. Therefore they count less. And he is not close to jordan.

We do not move the goal post. You have not done anything to disprove the facts i stated in this post.

 

That argument is too simplistic. Shaq was a dominant force. But he was NOT a closer, did NOT have the ball in his hands most of the times in the clutch, Kobe did. Even if Kobe played 2nd fiddle to Shaq (not due to talent), they were BOTH responsible for those rings. Therefore, Kobe's 5 rings are earned. If you want to make hypotheticals, then we can say Lebron's rings don't count because he needed TWO other superstars to get his rings. Had Kobe had 2 superstars in his prime, he'd have 8 rings by now. Hypotheticals don't belong in this conversations unless you want them too

 

That argument is reality. What you keep listing are attempts to change reality. Kobe was not the primary or best player on those teams, period. If you are ring counting for him then those 3 are firmly in the 2nd option category. It's really that simple.

 

No, it's hatred you have for a player that extends outside of the discussion of basketball. Without Kobe, Shaq has NO RINGS with the Lakers. Without Shaq, same result for Kobe. The hatred for Kobe on this site has reached new levels lol

 

So Pippen is 6-0 in the Finals?

 

I have hatred for Kobe because I recognize that he was a 2nd option on 3 of his title teams? Does he hate himself, since he also said he was the 2nd option on those title teams?

Without Pippen, Jordan has no rings with the Bulls. What the hell does that have to do with who was the primary player? No one wins alone. Without Fisher Kobe doesn't win in 2009 and 2010.

 

Depends on who replaces Kobe. If he's replaced with star shooting guards (Iverson, Allen, McGrady, Carter, etc...), then Shaq still wins rings.

Conversely, only Tim Duncan could replace Shaq and still lead the Lakers to a title, but Kobe would still have been considered the 2nd option. Kobe would be the first option if he were teamed with Garnett, but that wouldn't be enough to win a title (depends where Shaq ended up).

 

Kobe was the 2nd option all the way up to winning time. Like I said, it's a little more complex than "Shaq was the 1st option Kobe wasn't". Kobe was the closer and Shaq became the number 2 in the clutch. Pure facts. You're a admitted hater posing like your opinion isn't without bias. My question is how can a opinion from a HATER of someone be taken seriously? I thought this a basketball discussion?????

C'mon bro we've been here before. Shaq & Kobe were the two best players on the team. Shaq dominated the first 3 quarters. Kobe finished the games as the playmaker. The role players benefited. Was Pippen the primary playmaker with Jordan? Nope. Was Fisher the primary scorer with Shaq down the stretch? Nope. As good as Shaq was, he was mostly a liability in the clutch situations due to poor free throw shooting. Without Kobe the Lakers has zero chances of winning a ring. These posts are dripping with hatred right now

 

Kobe could have won rings with Garnett, Dirk, Webber. Shaq was the more dominate player in his prime and when he wanted to be but I'd put my money on Kobe as the alpha winning more rings than Shaq because of attitude and drive

 

Not if they had to play against a team featuring Duncan or Shaq.

 

Yeah, but Wade + Bosh > Gasol + Bynum. Everybody forgets how often Gasol disappeared in the playoffs.

 

He seemed pretty consistent in 2009 and 2010...

 

I think a Laker team with prime KG and prime Kobe could and would beat the Duncan Spurs back then. I do agree that depending on who Shaq had they might not be able to beat his team though.

 

Don't forget that in 2003, Duncan led the Spurs past a Kobe/Shaq Lakers team.

 

His opinion can never be taken seriously

 

Prove your facts. Give us a breakdown of 4th quarter scoring for the two players and whatever you define as "the clutch". Pure facts, right?

Yes, we have been here before. As Kobe admits, he was not the primary option. Yes, Pippen was the primary playmaker for the Bulls. He led them in assists. He had more assists than Kobe. All of his numbers, aside from Kobe, were higher. He also was their primary defender. Without Pippen, Chicago has zero rings. That doesn't mean he was the primary option though.

Why does Kobe say he wasn't the primary option?

 

Better yet, show me where I'm wrong. Provide me some evidence showing exactly what your point is

Pippen the primary playmaker? Huh? So the Bulls spreaded out court, gave Scottie Pippen the ball, and asked HIM to create offense down the stretch of games????????? Really?. History seems to disagree with that and so does Michael Jordan.

I'm not arguing Kobe was mostly the 2nd option. What I'm saying is DOWN THE STRETCH OF GAMES Kobe was the 1st option. Your best player is made to take the last shot or create for others. Kobe was THAT guy. How can the closer for a team that won 3 championships not get credit for those rings? Because he's Kobe, I forgot

 

Absolutely wrong. Ginobili (and sometimes Parker) have closed out games for the Spurs for years. That doesn't change the fact that it was Duncan's team. Drexler (and Maxwell) would close out games for the Rockets, but it was still Olajuwon's team. Starks/Ewing/Knicks, Turkoglu/Howard/Magic, even Lillard/Aldridge/Blazers.

Wings will generally get the ball in crunch time b/c they can quickly create open looks (perimeter jumpers) for themselves, they're better ball handlers (allows for better time management), and they can hit their foul shots.

It has nothing to do with being the best player on the team.

 

Show you where you are wrong? You are the one arguing that Kobe took over in the clutch. Prove YOUR argument. I'm arguing Kobe was not the primary option. My support is Kobe saying he was not the primary option.

Yes, he got the Bulls started in the triangle sets. The exact same thing Kobe did. Kobe dumped to Shaq, and he dumped to Jordan.

Huh? So the Bulls spreaded out court, gave Scottie Pippen the ball, and asked HIM to create offense down the stretch of games????????? Really?. History seems to disagree with that and so does Michael Jordan.

So prove it.