thank you for making my point most of all, thank you making it so easy for me to make you look less than knowledgeable.
Just because, you are 3rd scorer doesn't make you role player, by that logic James Worthy, Robert Parish, Charles Barkley (Houston), Tony Parker (or Manu Ginobili) and other players are role players. I would say their value is a little bit more than a common role player.
You still are ignoring my question even though I have asked around 3 times. Why did the Bulls go from 1 win (Pip & Grant rookie yr), to 2 wins (2nd yr) to 3 wins and a Game 7 (3rd yr) against Detroit? How do you explain them getting better and giving the Pistons their biggest challenge in their two title years..all before Jackson? They were on their way to breaking through against Detroit...Phil or not. Especially since Detroir was aging.... Where is your reasoning besides just blurting out "Phil got them over the hump"? So why didn't LA win in 2003 when all those role players (especially Horry and Fox) starting missing shots? Why have we been searching for good role players for years now? Did you really just say Robert Horry was interchangeable? Take your own advice. Harper played more than one year for LA and he was their defensive PG. Rice won his ring in year 1 with LA, not year 3. The season before PJ got there was Bryant's first as a starter. He made the 3rd all NBA team...and again, he couldn't even drink that season. The next season he made the 2nd team and the all D team. In other words, he got a lot better. Rice only played half that season. Horry missed 12 games himself. The starting PF's were Travis Knight, J.R. Reid and a washed up Rodman. Rice only missed 2 games the following season. Shaw came and added stability at the point. And even if you want to say all those dudes are easily replacable...the fact remains Phil had a top 5/7 player in Kobe and Harris didn't. You don't seem to be able to comprehend young players making huge strides in their games.
I'm sorry but pinning their growth on PJ is absurd. Kobe worked on his skill set on his own without any PJ interference. In the summer of 2000, Kobe spent the whole summer working on every facet of his game and came back the next season playing like the best player in the world. Similarly Pippen worked on his skill set. They were both young players and improved because of the hours they put in. PJ is not the GOAT of coaching. What he is the best Psychologist the basketball world has ever seen. His ability to manage the biggest egos in the NBA into winners, making them part of a cohesive team unit is unmatched. However there are several coaches i'd take over him when it comes to the X and O's.
Sorry didn't read the posts in this thread but all my friends that are Laker fans say that Pau is an overrated POS. I don't know about that...
Lakers are the most complete team in the NBa. They utilize their talent with the Trianly offense(which Houston would be great at with great passers in Yao, -tmac, brent barry) which brings the best out of players like Vujaic and Fisher. And the attention Bryant gets gives everyone room to work, with Paul Gasol as a inside passer and Bynum adding on defense. This team is just flat out scary with the system they are running
I watch a lot of Lakers games (almost all). So I have a pretty large sample data to analyze. As a team the Lakers do not have any major weaknesses. Their only slight weakness is that they are soft, as it has been pointed out by the general public. By soft I mean that they tend to shy away from contact. Another minor weakness is that they complain to the refs a lot, which is not really a skill based weakness, more of a irritating issue. But their individual players have some pretty glaring weaknesses, as I will list them below. Player, Glaring Weakness for their position Radmonovich, Can't pass Fisher, None Kobe, Can't take a charge Bynum, None Gasol, None Now that I think of it, their starting line up doesn't have too many weaknesses. It's hard to come up with more that what I did above. But once again as a team, no weaknesses.
Simply put, Kobe cannot force an offensive foul/charge. He tries to stand outside the semi circle but always looks to be moving to try to get right in front of the offensive player. Some players just aren't good at taking charges, and Kobe is one of them.
They do have a major weakness: They are to perfect and to apprehended to win it all. They have a huge pressure.
I don't want to argue with you whether Phil is overrated or not. But that team plays like they are well coached on both ends. At the same time, The Rockets sometimes play like a team with players somebody just randomly picked up from different NBA teams.
Its okay to throw praise at a single digit scoring role player for getting a team over the hump. But not a coach?
simply put, some people just don't know what they r talking about, making things up as they go along. and u r one of them !
ignorance is bliss, icehouse actually believes that role players like Horry, Fox, Harper, Rice, Grant are more valuable than game-changers like Kobe and Shaq
Radmanovich, Can't pass, not very aggressive, and is a sub-par defender. Fisher, Struggles against fast and quick pgs, especially ones who can beat him off the dribble. Kobe, I am tempted to say none, but I think probably taking wild contested long range shots and not passing the ball. Since, I don't think he really has to take charges as often, as you might think. Bynum, hard to say, I would say he's just a nice complimentary player, nothing more. Gasol, defense, aggressiveness, defense, aggressiveness, and more defense. If a player really wants to score against Gasol, they usually can do it. Don't get me wrong, they're a good team, but let's not compare them to the 90s Bulls or even 2000s Lakers.
Actually they are the strength. They spread the floor to get open shots from Gasol and Bynum down low. If the Lakers have a weakness it is Kobe and his shot selection. It will come back to bite them.
