Where's the Love?
smacdo3347
so high...but what is up with the lack of love for Shaq? Why is everyone
trying so hard to drive him out of town? Here are some facts:
- Even when he is coasting...Shaq is, for the most part, unstoppable one on
one.
- There are not many good big men in the NBA.
- Take a look at who the playoff MVP was during the last three Laker
titles. (Hint - Its Shaq)
- Without Kobe, Shaq could probably still carry those teams to titles.
Without Shaq, the Spurs are multiple title winners.
- Shaq is so unstoppable...coaches completely alter their defensive plans
to try and stop him. How many coaches do that vs. Kobe?
Anyway, whatever...if you guys like Kobe better that's great. Run Shaq out
of town. Trade him. Whichever team he lands on is an instant contender.
And if you think Shaq won't get pissed off and take it as a slight if he
gets traded and Kobe gets kept...well, to paraphrase Bobby Brown...thats
your prerogative. However...if Diesel leaves...you will get a taste of what
it is like to have to guard him.
Not to mention, if Shaq gets traded...wouldn't it be funny if Kobe ends up
doing some jail time? Put all your eggs in one basket though...the rest of
the league thanks you for it.
Miguel M
smacdo3347 wrote:
> Look, I have no idea what kind of smog has settled over LA to make you fans
> so high...but what is up with the lack of love for Shaq? Why is everyone
> trying so hard to drive him out of town? Here are some facts:
>
> - Take a look at who the playoff MVP was during the last three Laker
> titles. (Hint - Its Shaq)
> - Without Kobe, Shaq could probably still carry those teams to titles.
Nope. In each title season, there were several critical games in which
it was Kobe who stepped up and performed while Shaq receded.
Bryant led the Lakers in points, rebounds, assists, and blocked shots
in Game 7 against Portland in 2000. You still think it's a fair
assumption that Shaq could have done it by himself? Of course not.
Without Bryant, they don't even make the Finals. Later, Bryant would
carry them through to a victory in Game 4 against the Pacers, with
O'Neal fouled out in OT.
In 2002, Game 7 versus the Kings, Bryant had 30 points, 10 rebounds, 7
assists, 2 steals. In a game the Lakers had to go to OT to win, I'd say
that's too much to give up, don't you?
Then there was Bryant's dominating run through the 2001 playoffs, which
enabled the Lakers to go 15-1. MAYBE without him they might still
squeak out a championship, but it's pretty hard to say since he
contributed so much.
Ahhh, don't things become much clearer when we look back at the facts?
Shaq did not do any of this on his own. Maybe that's why a guy like
Bryant feels the need to get appreciated at this point in time.
> - Shaq is so unstoppable...coaches completely alter their defensive plans
> to try and stop him. How many coaches do that vs. Kobe?
Larry Brown just did. Don Nelson reportedly has used the Haq-a-Shaq to
keep the ball out of Kobe's hands more than anything.
Well, that's just two pretty significant examples.
> Anyway, whatever...if you guys like Kobe better that's great. Run Shaq out
> of town. Trade him. Whichever team he lands on is an instant contender.
> And if you think Shaq won't get pissed off and take it as a slight if he
> gets traded and Kobe gets kept...well, to paraphrase Bobby Brown...thats
> your prerogative. However...if Diesel leaves...you will get a taste of what
> it is like to have to guard him.
Shaq's running himself out of town.
Dave Zero
> Look, I have no idea what kind of smog has settled over LA to make
> you fans so high...but what is up with the lack of love for Shaq?
> Why is everyone trying so hard to drive him out of town? Here are
> some facts:
I love Shaq. He's my second favorite player in the NBA behind Kobe.
> - Even when he is coasting...Shaq is, for the most part, unstoppable
> one on one.
> - There are not many good big men in the NBA.
> - Take a look at who the playoff MVP was during the last three Laker
> titles. (Hint - Its Shaq)
> - Without Kobe, Shaq could probably still carry those teams to
> titles. Without Shaq, the Spurs are multiple title winners.
> - Shaq is so unstoppable...coaches completely alter their defensive
> plans to try and stop him. How many coaches do that vs. Kobe?
Well, the Pistons sure did (and unfortunately very effectively) after
his buzzer-beater three.
> Anyway, whatever...if you guys like Kobe better that's great. Run
> Shaq out of town. Trade him. Whichever team he lands on is an
> instant contender. And if you think Shaq won't get pissed off and
> take it as a slight if he gets traded and Kobe gets kept...well, to
> paraphrase Bobby Brown...thats your prerogative. However...if Diesel
> leaves...you will get a taste of what it is like to have to guard him.
I'd like to see him stay too. But I want the Shaq of 2000, not the
out-of-shape, often-injured, selfish "I want a raise".
I liked the idea of giving him an incentive based contract - if he gets
his free throws up to 75% he gets $32 M a year. If he doesn't he gets
the league minimum.
> Not to mention, if Shaq gets traded...wouldn't it be funny if Kobe
> ends up doing some jail time? Put all your eggs in one basket
> though...the rest of the league thanks you for it.
"Funny" is not the term I would use to describe it.
--
Dave Zero
"And I don't care about making an ass out of myself because most people
already realize I am one." - Dr. Kary B. Mullis
"I criticize by creation" - Cicero
"I'm not here to make people happy. I prefer to piss people off." - Liam
Gallagher
smacdo3347
"Miguel M" <Poet...@iwon.com> wrote in message
news:10deoc8...@corp.supernews.com...
>
> Nope. In each title season, there were several critical games in which
> it was Kobe who stepped up and performed while Shaq receded.
But who was the *MOST VALUABLE PLAYER* all three years???
<snip three game examples>
Did you ever think that by drawing double and triple teams, Shaq's mere
presence opens up court space for Kobe? Replace Paul Pierce on the Celtics
with Kobe and how do you think Kobe would do? Or is he some sort of super
hero to you?
>
> Then there was Bryant's dominating run through the 2001 playoffs, which
> enabled the Lakers to go 15-1. MAYBE without him they might still
> squeak out a championship, but it's pretty hard to say since he
> contributed so much.
>
> Ahhh, don't things become much clearer when we look back at the facts?
> Shaq did not do any of this on his own. Maybe that's why a guy like
> Bryant feels the need to get appreciated at this point in time.
Yeah, being compared to Jordan probably isn't enough juice, especially in
your mid-20's, right?
Shaq would not do it all on his own...but if you take Kobe off the Lakers
for those title runs...the *team* still wins in all probability. Take Shaq
off and those *teams* don't win. Or at least that is my opinion.
>
>
> > - Shaq is so unstoppable...coaches completely alter their defensive
plans
> > to try and stop him. How many coaches do that vs. Kobe?
>
> Larry Brown just did. Don Nelson reportedly has used the Haq-a-Shaq to
> keep the ball out of Kobe's hands more than anything.
>
> Well, that's just two pretty significant examples.
Here is a list of all the triple teams Kobe Bryant has drawn in his
career....
> Shaq's running himself out of town.
>
You know what? I don't really care what the cause is...just as long as it
happens.
RMJon23
> Not to mention, if Shaq gets traded...wouldn't it be funny if Kobe
> ends up doing some jail time? <
Of all the possible definitions and extensional/semantic senses of the term
"funny," used here, NONE seem appropriate in this "case." Do you mean "deeply
ironic with bleak tragic overtones" funny? I still don't see that as "funny."
Different lanes for different brains, I guess.
Hey smacdo3347: Now it's my turn to ask you, regarding your "funny"
sensibilities: Where's the love?
-rmjon23 de Los Angeles
"Speech is civilization itself...It is silence which isolates." -Thomas Mann
smacdo3347
"RMJon23" <rmj...@aol.comraderie> wrote in message
news:20040621202504...@mb-m20.aol.com...
> smacdo3347 <fa...@nospam.com> wrote:
> > Not to mention, if Shaq gets traded...wouldn't it be funny if Kobe
> > ends up doing some jail time? <
>
> Of all the possible definitions and extensional/semantic senses of the
term
> "funny," used here, NONE seem appropriate in this "case." Do you mean
"deeply
> ironic with bleak tragic overtones" funny? I still don't see that as
"funny."
> Different lanes for different brains, I guess.
>
> Hey smacdo3347: Now it's my turn to ask you, regarding your "funny"
> sensibilities: Where's the love?
>
Sensitive much? I have a T-shirt that says "Bugger a Hugger"...but I don't
really want to ass blast a tree hugger.
The word funny has many possible meanings. If you think that my use meant
literal comedy...that's fine. You can roll yourself up into a great big
sensitive ball and stay that way for as long as you like...
Doesn't mean I don't feel bad for you. And as for the meaning of the word
'bad' in the sense that I used it...I will leave that up to your <ahem>
sensibility...
eichler4
the month anymore. Therefore all his contributions don't mean anything, and
he's now a cancer,.
"smacdo3347" <fa...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:eJHBc.15723$XY6.1...@read2.cgocable.net...
Miguel M
smacdo3347 wrote:
> "Miguel M" <Poet...@iwon.com> wrote in message
> news:10deoc8...@corp.supernews.com...
>
>>Nope. In each title season, there were several critical games in which
>>it was Kobe who stepped up and performed while Shaq receded.
>
>
> But who was the *MOST VALUABLE PLAYER* all three years???
Dude, the MVP is for the FINALES.
SHAQ DOESN'T EVEN REACH THE NBA FINALS WITHOUT KOBE. No Kobe, no
Finals. No Finals, no MVP.
> <snip three game examples>
>
> Did you ever think that by drawing double and triple teams, Shaq's mere
> presence opens up court space for Kobe? Replace Paul Pierce on the Celtics
> with Kobe and how do you think Kobe would do? Or is he some sort of super
> hero to you?
He's far and away better than Paul Pierce. That's what he is. If you
can't see that, then I see I'm talking to a basketball novice.
Why not replace Shaquille O'Neal with a young David Robinson? It's
pointless. Kobe was there. Kobe was the one who led the team to
victory in those elimination games. It's bullshit to assume that
somebody else would have done the same thing, whether it's Paul Pierce
in Kobe's place or David Robinson in Shaq's place.
>>Then there was Bryant's dominating run through the 2001 playoffs, which
>>enabled the Lakers to go 15-1. MAYBE without him they might still
>>squeak out a championship, but it's pretty hard to say since he
>>contributed so much.
>>
>>Ahhh, don't things become much clearer when we look back at the facts?
>> Shaq did not do any of this on his own. Maybe that's why a guy like
>>Bryant feels the need to get appreciated at this point in time.
>
>
> Yeah, being compared to Jordan probably isn't enough juice, especially in
> your mid-20's, right?
>
> Shaq would not do it all on his own...but if you take Kobe off the Lakers
> for those title runs...the *team* still wins in all probability. Take Shaq
> off and those *teams* don't win. Or at least that is my opinion.
Who on those teams was capable of stepping up and doing what Kobe did
in all those huge games. Lemme tell ya, I respect opinions, and you
have a right to have one, but not all opinions are equal, obviously. I
don't even know what you're basing this opinion on? Was Brian Shaw
going to take over that OT against Indiana? Was he going to suddenly be
able to break down his defender and rise up for a jumper each and every
time? Who replaces those performances on the Lakers?
>>>- Shaq is so unstoppable...coaches completely alter their defensive
>
> plans
>
>>>to try and stop him. How many coaches do that vs. Kobe?
>>
>>Larry Brown just did. Don Nelson reportedly has used the Haq-a-Shaq to
>>keep the ball out of Kobe's hands more than anything.
>>
>>Well, that's just two pretty significant examples.
>
>
> Here is a list of all the triple teams Kobe Bryant has drawn in his
> career....
You should watch a bit more basketball, then, before you come in
talking as if you know anything.
nick
> This whole thing is getting disgusting. Apparently Shaq isn't the flavor of
> the month anymore. Therefore all his contributions don't mean anything, and
> he's now a cancer,.
I think anyone one who has seen more than a couple recent Laker games
could at least say that Shaq's salary demands are excessive, sure he
deserves our respect and has come through for the fans on many occasions -
but the amount of $$$ he feels he is due is crippling this team. Should we
be held hostage by a guy who is getting older and looking more lethargic
and injury prone every year?
greelyclinton
All I know is throughout the years the Lakers play .750 with Shaq & no
Kobe & .500 ball with Kobe & no Shaq. People get a clue.
Chainsaw
eichler4 wrote:
> This whole thing is getting disgusting. Apparently Shaq isn't the flavor of
> the month anymore. Therefore all his contributions don't mean anything, and
> he's now a cancer,.
It's pretty sad, isn't it. Puss and Cupcake should be
ashamed.
Miguel M
greelyclinton wrote:
> Miguel M <Poet...@iwon.com> wrote in message news:<10deoc8...@corp.supernews.com>...
>
> All I know is throughout the years the Lakers play .750 with Shaq & no
> Kobe & .500 ball with Kobe & no Shaq. People get a clue.
Please do. If that is all you know, it ain't much.
When Shaq goes out, there goes $30million worth of rebounding and
shotblocking. The Lakers have no backup center because Shaquille O'Neal
is paid the money that his backup - and probably his backup's backup -
would be paid. Hello?
It's a miracle Kobe is even able to keep them above .500 when the team
takes the floor with absolutely no interior defense.
By the way, this season, Kobe w/out Shaq somehow managed .625, while
Shaq w/out Kobe was .600.
greelyclinton
Shaquille is paid $30 million because the Lakers obviously thought it
was a good deal when they signed him to the extension. Without Billy
Hunter agreeing to a salary maximum on player's salaries, it would
have been a whole lot more. Kobe would probably command $200 million
over 7 years now without the cap within the cap. No interior defense
is probably what you are looking at without Shaq around. .625 isn't
going to get you another championship, just a bunch of 2nd round
playoff exits. .750 thru the years probably gets 2 championships in
the 5 years.
Miguel M
greelyclinton wrote:
Hmmmm.... Do I have to draw you a picture? If Shaq is traded, the
Lakers get players in return so...... the Lakers should have players to
provide interior defense.
And, .625 is not far off from the Pistons' regular season record.
So....apparently you were right. That was all you knew.
greelyclinton
Get your facts straight before making smart ass comments. There has
only been 1 team since the 1980-81 season (the 94-95 Rockets at 47-35)
to win a championship with a regular season winning percentage lower
than .625. If history continues, .625 will not win a championship.
Brian Tung
> Dude, the MVP is for the FINALES.
>
> SHAQ DOESN'T EVEN REACH THE NBA FINALS WITHOUT KOBE. No Kobe, no
> Finals. No Finals, no MVP.
On the other hand, Kobe doesn't reach the NBA Finals without Shaq. No
Shaq, no Finals. No Kobe, no Finals. (For that matter, in all
likelihood, no Phil, no Finals, either.) Everybody needed to be on
board for those rings. Somewhere along the way, that was forgotten.
Brian Tung <br...@isi.edu>
The Astronomy Corner at http://astro.isi.edu/
Unofficial C5+ Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/c5plus/
The PleiadAtlas Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/pleiadatlas/
My Own Personal FAQ (SAA) at http://astro.isi.edu/reference/faq.txt
Miguel M
greelyclinton wrote:
Which brings us full circle in the conversation. .625 was without any
interior help, which the Lakers would/should presumably get in return
for O'Neal. In exchange for a top center, the Lakers ought to get a
much-improved frontcourt.