Graycap23 said:

Dawg, seriously, there isn't an offense in the world designed to create double teams. Double teams happen when either the player being double teamed is good enough to require a double team or when the defense collapses to trap a player and a double team comes from that.

Now, why do you think Kobe was frustrated with the triangle from 2000-2004 but he has absolutely no problem with it now?

MuthaFunka said:

OK, first of all - does "THEE" stand for something, or can you just not spell three-letter words?

Divide and conquer? LOL, sure. That's why Gray said, "Even thoug u are dead wrong.....U are still my boy.". Who's dividing who? For a "journalist", your reading comprehension skills are...suspect.

Face it, my brother - you are wrong. The position you've taken shows you weren't a player. There's no shame in that. Like I said, when you're in a hole, you need to quit digging.


[Edited 4/11/08 14:25pm]

RodeoSchro said:

Tell me I just didn't see a GROWN ASS MAN go to the "typo smack"!?

Again, when YOU decide to answer the question I originally posed to YOU, then I'll treat you like you want to hold a discussion. Until then, keep finding and pointing out people's TYPOS since that seems to be the "sport" you played!

MuthaFunka said:

LMAO, I give you kudos for smacking about everything except the subject at hand!

RodeoSchro said:

[Checks watch. STILL no response]

MuthaFunka said:

namepeace said:

But that's just it - When Shaq did get the rock and he kicked it out, those players weren't making their shots. So it didn't matter how many touches Shaq got if the supporting cast couldn't score from jump.

And as we both certainly agreed earlier - The Pistons great D schemes had a LOT to do with that as well.

And I don't think Kobe took the Shaq option away as much as he had to take up the slack due to the ineffectiveness of the other 3 starters.

MuthaFunka said:

U are mis-reading my post. The triangle is designed 2 get people open 4 good shots/touches.

Graycap23 said:

Ok, bruh, if you say that's what you said and/or meant, then I guess.

MuthaFunka said:

No wonder you are such a Kobe apologist- the 2 of you are like 2 peas in a pod- crassly arrogant with giant egos. Good luck having a happy life living like that.

Moonbeam said:

...And whatever may happen to any of us in this crazy world of ours, just always remember: "Kobe Bryant was detrimental to the game of the great Kwame Brown."

MuthaFunka said:

I never claimed Kwame Brown was great, and I do stand by what I said.

It has become increasingly evident that you are nothing more than an antagonistic troll, so I don't see any need for further discourse with you. That means there's one less person you need to "school" or whatever.

Moonbeam said:

'Beam, all the extraneous stuff aside, Kwame Brown was damaged goods before he ever set foot on the Staples Center floor. MJ and Doug Collins ruined him. Scoop Jackson's column on the issue -- if you can find it -- sums it up well. Kobe was never detrimental to an individual player, but there've been a lot of times where he was detrimental to the team dynamic.

namepeace said:

That's my point of this entire dialog.

Moonbeam said:

And that's been the problem from jump - you stand by something that's completely ridiculous and unfounded, which is why no one here ever co-signed ANY of what you said. Did you ever ask yourself why NO ONE backed you up on that ridiculous claim? - That should have told you something right then, eh?

namepeace said:

Beam, I sincerely hope you're reading that. But I doubt it.

Mutha, since u believe that Jordan did NOT make his teammates better, what is your EXPLANATION for their sub-par performance when they did NOT play along side Jordan? Especially when they played 4 other teams like Longley with the Knicks?

Graycap23 said:

C'mon, dawg. Have you even been reading my posts about that very issue you just raised? I spoke on this already:

I raised the question to YOU that if they got "better" playing with MJ, then why didn't it transfer with them to their next teams they played for? In other words, how come they didn't keep up the same stats/production with their new teams that they did when they played with MJ?

That proves he didn't make them "better" because they would have maintained/took with that "better/improvement" with their next team and they didn't.

This proves that a great player makes the game easier for his teammates and when that great player is no longer around, the game thus becomes HARDER for those same players.

Real simple:

When MJ is there = The game is easier for his teammates because he demands so much attention as well as he puts his teammates in an optimal position to succeed.

When MJ ISN'T there = The game is harder because they no longer have that great player to take the pressure off them/demand more attention/put them in an optimal position to succeed.

Like I said earlier to you: If a coach/intructor/teacher makes you "better", don't you take that "better" with you once you move on from them? Then why wasn't that the case with MJ's teammates that left HIM? See my point?

MuthaFunka said:

It must be a matter of semantics.....your comments PROVE my point.

Graycap23 said:

If your point was: "Great players don't make their teammates better, they make the game EASIER for their teammates to succeed at the game. ONLY that player HIMSELF can make HIMSELF better because that player HIMSELF has to make the shot; the Great Player can't MAKE the shot for that said player" then, yes, your point was proven then.

MuthaFunka said:

EASIER = Better 4 the game of basketball.

Graycap23 said:

But "EASIER" instead of "Making teammates better" - That's the real point.

MuthaFunka said:

Tomatoe.....tamatoe.....

Graycap23 said:

Not really. It's more so "clarification" vs "misconception".

MuthaFunka said:

I will as soon as:

1. Kobe wins his first ever NBA regular season MVP award (it might happen this year).

2. Kobe wins at least one NBA championship ring in his career WITHOUT Shaq.

3. Kobe wins his first olympic gold medal.

MuthaFunka said:

lol....not on my part.

RodeoSchro said:

Just so you know, Hakeem admitted that he learn to improve his fancy footwork on the court by watching MJ!

TonyVanDam said:

I'll have agree. While Kobe is a very talented player, he has won NOTHING without the Diesel.

TonyVanDam said:

And in your opinion, cool. For me, just the 81 points is enough for me to put him in the rarified (yet strongly media-driven) rarified air of MJ.

Now, #2 you need to throw out because MJ NEVER won a title without Pippen, so you can't hold Kobe to a standard that MJ has never lived up to.

Graycap23 said:

Yes - FOR your part.