Kobe in media day: "it's my team"

[upside24]

It his team. He is the leader although no longer the best on the team. He is still the alpha. I do hope he reduces his part on the team to get some balance. I want Kobe to lead me, not Dwight.

[Legends66NBA7]

Shaq dominated from 2000 - 2005 / 2006 ish

5 title runs, 3 rings, 1 MVP

Duncan dominated from 2000 - 2008
3 title runs, 3 rings, 1 MVP

Kobe dominated from 2001 - 2009
5 title runs, 4 rings, 1 MVP

Just a correction, Duncan had 2 MVP's... Only player to win back to back MVP's from 2000-2009.

[BlackVVaves]

Well, looked it up myself:



So it's not even been close yet to either definition. I just thought it was different in terms of sport.

Given yours and the definition look up... let's just say 25 years, for the hell of it. I'd rather stick to decades though.

Yea, 25-30 years is typically the measuring stick in sociology. For NBA purposes, it's usually considered a smaller scale. I'd say, for instance, that the generation that Lebron is considered in begins with Amare's draft class, and ends with Bogut's draft class.

It's truly all subjective, but it makes sense when you sit and look at it. When we look at Durant's "generation," we automatically think of players like D-Rose, Aldridge, Bargnani, Westbrook, John Wall, Blake Griffin. And, just like Lebron's generation class, those players all fall within a 3-4 year window where they were drafted.

Idk, that's my perception at least.

[daily]

Yea, 25-30 years is typically the measuring stick in sociology. For NBA purposes, it's usually considered a smaller scale. I'd say, for instance, that the generation that Lebron is considered in begins with Amare's draft class, and ends with Bogut's draft class.

It's truly all subjective, but it makes sense when you sit and look at it. When we look at Durant's "generation," we automatically think of players like D-Rose, Aldridge, Bargnani, Westbrook, John Wall, Blake Griffin. And, just like Lebron's generation class, those players all fall within a 3-4 year window where they were drafted.

Idk, that's my perception at least.

Good perception

[BlackVVaves]

Just a correction, Duncan had 2 MVP's... Only player to win back to back MVP's from 2000-2009.

In your opinion, does that extra MVP that Duncan carries above Kobe warrant him being regarded as having the better individual career? The same question for the extra FMVP he has over Kobe.

Also, in your mind, who do you think had the better career and will be/ is ultimately acclaimed higher on your All-Time list: Shaq or Duncan?

[KG215]

Yea, 25-30 years is typically the measuring stick in sociology. For NBA purposes, it's usually considered a smaller scale. I'd say, for instance, that the generation that Lebron is considered in begins with Amare's draft class, and ends with Bogut's draft class.

It's truly all subjective, but it makes sense when you sit and look at it. When we look at Durant's "generation," we automatically think of players like D-Rose, Aldridge, Bargnani, Westbrook, John Wall, Blake Griffin. And, just like Lebron's generation class, those players all fall within a 3-4 year window where they were drafted.

Idk, that's my perception at least.

And even then, you've got guys from the 2001-2005ish draft classes whose peak and prime overlaps a good deal with players from the 2006-2010ish draft classes. When I think of generations, I don't really think of LeBron and Kobe being in the same generation although Kobe's best years were arguably from 2008-2010 when LeBron was in his prime and maybe even peaking depending on how the next 3-4 years play out.

There's some overlap between guys like Kobe, Duncan, Shaq, KG, and Dirk and LeBron, Wade, Howard, Durant, and CP3. It's hard to distinguish between distinct definable generations. In that regard, I've always sort of been under the perception that an NBA generation is a decade, more-or-less. But I don't know if you can simplify it down to just specific decades like 50s, 60s, 70s etc. Was Jordan part of the Bird/Magic generation or was he part of the 90s generation? Isn't there some overlap there, too? Same with Shaq and the 90s/00s.

I think NBA/sports generations are highly subjective and there's not one correct answer as to what separates one generation from the next.

[Jacks3]

[QUOTE]

[AlphaWolf24]

PLEASE ...

Lots of dumb casual fans vote on those type of things. And we all know the sizable Laker fan community in Cali, chalk full of soccer playing, grass mowing, low ryder driving basketball fans (if you get my drift) who would obviously be as biased as China voting in Yao Ming, or Jeremy Lin into this year's all-star game.

Obviously Kobe is among the best of the decade, but among knowledgable people, it isn't that cut and dry in his favor. But for Shaq and Duncan to be left out of the conversation shows your ridiculous fan boy bias, and bias logic.

No one in this decade dominated the way Shaq did in the early 2000's. Duncan was amazing, and very consistent ... carrying his franchise for virtually the entire decade (Kobe can't even make that claim) cause Kobe didn't become lead dog on the Lakers until 2005, and the decade ends after the 2009 season.

Shaq dominated from 2000 - 2005 / 2006 ish

5 title runs, 3 rings, 1 MVP

Duncan dominated from 2000 - 2008
3 title runs, 3 rings, 1 MVP

Kobe dominated from 2001 - 2009
5 title runs, 4 rings, 1 MVP

It's not like he dominated enough to be named the CLEAR cut individual talent of the decade, along with resume / team success.

Only one singular athlete of a decade did that ... and that was MJ.

6 title runs, 6 rings, 4x MVPs

And he sat out two seasons of his prime / peak

You're talking gaga once again, with your Laker dildo planted firmly in cheek. Shame on you as a basketball head for leaving both Shaq and Duncan out the equation.

- here we go again....

- Casual fans make up the majority of the fan base....us "hardcore fans" who use "lead dog" criteria's and advanced math to figure out Kobe shot 52% TS compared to 54% doesn't mean anything.

example: 1% of the fanbase ( us "smart hardycorey fans baseketball elitits) say Kobe isn't the best player of the decade...but 99% of the rest of world thinks he is...

that doesn't mean he isn't...in fact the NBA itself uses acclamation as judging thier players...by acclamation __________ players get judged ( majority opinion)


- By 2001 Kobe dominated at the same level as Shaq did....especially considering Kobe's role...( facilitate early and Dominate the 4th quarters and crunchtime)..but why do we have to regergitate all this stupid criteria that hardly anyone uses????

- Do people discredit Larry Bird for not winning Finals MVP?....do they suggest Cedric Maxwell was the lead Dog because he won Finals MVP instead?...what about Magic?...was Worthy the lead dog when he won Finals MVP?...Kareem?

- Casual fans don't discredit Michael Jordan when his team nearly won a title without him....his "lead dog" staus replaced by a CBA player...and still the Bull's dominated...in fact outta the 15 seasons as "Lead Dog"..MJ had 5 losing seasons and was swept in the first round 3 times as "Lead dog"...so many ways to spin the stupid criteria.

- Kobe Dominated the early 2000's with Epic Playoff runs and winning 3 Titles....in the middle of the decade he was clearly the best overall player and put scoring runs up not seen since Wilt Chamberlain..

- Kobe Dominated the end of the Decade goindg to 3 straight NBA Finals...and putting up Epic Playoff/championship Runs just as he did with Shaq...in fact he never quit to play Baseball for a year....he never retired...he dominated more then any player of his generation...

- by acclamation clearly the answer was Kobe.

[Legends66NBA7]

In your opinion, does that extra MVP that Duncan carries above Kobe warrant him being regarded as having the better individual career? The same question for the extra FMVP he has over Kobe.

Well I definitely think those two awards are the highest valued individual awards. Taking into account that Tim Duncan won back to back MVP's definitely shows that he was playing at a high level for his team and great consistency. Also, won the most MVP's in one decades, which is again notable.

Individually, one should consider that very highly. I also consider something else: playoff matchups. While Duncan and Kobe rarely faced off against each other, Kobe has outplayed him in more playoff series. Again, that should noted.

Now, does that make Kobe better than Duncan when he outplayed him in those certain playoff series ? Depends on the context used for those years.

Also, in your mind, who do you think had the better career and will be/ is ultimately acclaimed higher on your All-Time list: Shaq or Duncan?

Very tough question, but I'll say Shaq. IMO, his peak of 00-02... I think that would probably the greatest players we've ever seen, maybe even over 90-93 Jordan. And even though Duncan was amazing as well and even played well against Shaq, I think the 3 peat, better longevity, and peak play puts Shaq over Duncan, even with Duncan's great defensive accolades and outstanding winning consistency.

Playoff matchups, Duncan has the edge to me there.

Duncan, legacy wise, should be considered better because he was the best player for all 4 titles he brought to a small market team in San Antonio. And when you bring that first title to a team that never had any, that just means much more to me for a legacy. I think what hurts Shaq, legacy wise, is that after 2006, he really started moving around teams and was injury prone.

So all-time wise, I go with Shaq, but ultimately I do think Duncan more than has a case over him... plus, who knows what another title would mean, IF he plays at a high level.

I think both have a case over Magic and Bird too.

[NuggetsFan]

I think you bring up a good point. Maybe Dwight is finally learning that he does need to go through the process, and learn more before taking the lead position.


I dont know where exactly he felt he was going to go and be "the man" anyway.

Is this a joke? Dwight has to go through the process and learn more before coming into the "lead position"? Dude took a team to the finals already. Came close to winning MVP's. Played big in the playoffs. Entire f*cking league has to go through the "process" I guess, as well as aton of retired vets.

Dwight is the best player on the team. Kobe fans just need to deal with it. L.A fans who are Laker fans FIRST probably know that. Who will be the leader, I have no idea. Whoever the media shoves down our throat, we don't see behind closed doors. Guy's like Fisher are probably as much of a leader as any All-Star in the entire league.

That's not to say Kobe isn't important or won't get his and still shine big. He's Kobe Bryant. L.A can be his team all he wants because really what the f*ck does that mean? This isn't tennis, it's the NBA. 12 man rosters, 5 starters. It's a team game, a Dwight Howard is the best individual on that team. Which in the grand scheme of things should mean very little to L.A fans if you win a championship...

[TheeBeast]

17 years, one of the longest lasting commitments any player has made to an NBA team. 5 championships, 7 finals. This is Kobe's team until he retires

[LakersReign]

PLEASE ...

Lots of dumb casual fans vote on those type of things. And we all know the sizable Laker fan community in Cali, chalk full of soccer playing, grass mowing, low ryder driving basketball fans (if you get my drift) who would obviously be as biased as China voting in Yao Ming, or Jeremy Lin into this year's all-star game.

Obviously Kobe is among the best of the decade, but among knowledgable people, it isn't that cut and dry in his favor. But for Shaq and Duncan to be left out of the conversation shows your ridiculous fan boy bias, and bias logic.

No one in this decade dominated the way Shaq did in the early 2000's. Duncan was amazing, and very consistent ... carrying his franchise for virtually the entire decade (Kobe can't even make that claim) cause Kobe didn't become lead dog on the Lakers until 2005, and the decade ends after the 2009 season.

Shaq dominated from 2000 - 2005 / 2006 ish

5 title runs, 3 rings, 1 MVP

Duncan dominated from 2000 - 2008
3 title runs, 3 rings, 1 MVP

Kobe dominated from 2001 - 2009
5 title runs, 4 rings, 1 MVP

It's not like he dominated enough to be named the CLEAR cut individual talent of the decade, along with resume / team success.

Only one singular athlete of a decade did that ... and that was MJ.

6 title runs, 6 rings, 4x MVPs

And he sat out two seasons of his prime / peak

You're talking gaga once again, with your Laker dildo planted firmly in cheek. Shame on you as a basketball head for leaving both Shaq and Duncan out the equation.

Why is it such a hard concept for you people to grasp that not ALL Laker fans live in LA? This is the second post of yours I've read that has that ludicrous idea in it. On what planet? So...according to your logic then, ALL Spurs fans MUST live in San Antonio....ALL Knicks fans MUST live in New York...etc? You love to call Laker fans dumb and all that, while posting ret**ded sh*t like that? Nice

[Fudge]

is it really that hard to believe?

dwights more valuable position wise. but better? no

more efficient? yes

more tallented? more determined? a better leader? more clutch? no, no, no and no


he couldnt handle being a leader just like pau... they go to kobe and win

kobe averages the near 30ppg lines... wins the finals mvps... and is the more popular more worshipped more loved more hated player for it... its natural to be jealous and predict kobes downfall every year before it happens. its just part of being a sap


and most people are saps. not many can handle the truth.


kobe is jack nickolson..

yall are a bunch of tom cruise's






YOU WANT ANSWERS?














YOU WANT THE TRUTH?!









YOU CANT HANDLE THE TRUTH!!!!!!!!

You're corny as hell.

[KG215]

You're corny as hell.

Not so much corny as he's a biased awful trolling poster who just needs to go away.

[G-Funk]

He's right. It's HIS team to lead to a championship or HIS team to set up for failure. Plus its Kobe we're talking about, guy's as confident as it gets but Kobe will know what's needed come playoff time.