What will Bronsexuals do if AD wins Finals MVP?

[8Ball]

What will Bronsexuals do if the Lakers win the championship and AD is named Finals MVP?

They'll have to do a whole lot of goalpost shifting, flip-flopping and mental gymnastics after all the sh*t talking about Kobe's first 3 rings with Shaq and about Curry only having 1 Finals MVP for his 4 rings.

Not to mention... Jordan dickriders will forever bring up the fact that MJ was Finals MVP for ALL SIX of his championships...

Lmfao this zombie also had a sleepless night and this is all the trash you can muster?

Weak.

[tpols]

You brought up Pau...and I was simply reminding you of that thing called competition that happens to matter.

Prime KG...yes, I think they would lose, but anything is possible....as I said.

If you think prime peak Kobe is losing with prime KG you're dumber than I thought. KG damn near took scrubs to the Finals... him and Kobe would be one of the sickest duos ever. You just don't appreciate (or know) basketball at that point.

[red1]

dmavs completely right once again.


great to have you back for the playoffs tpols. GOAT james STILL doing his thing.

[ArbitraryWater]

If you think prime peak Kobe is losing with prime KG you're dumber than I thought. KG damn near took scrubs to the Finals... him and Kobe would be one of the sickest duos ever. You just don't appreciate (or know) bsketball at that point.

youre not applying any nuance.

it woud absoutely be questionabe if 2002 kobe and 2002 kg win a chip.

they definitey dont in 2002. consider how much room for error they had against the kings, and then switch shaq for kg and ask yoursef if kg coud fill the gap of that room for error.

[AlternativeAcc.]

Kobes 2nd leading scorer in 2016 was Jordan Clarkson. He obviously wasn't as good as lebron longevity wise or at those respective ages... but the comparison is just a joke given their huge gap in help.

You're right, rhe comparison is a joke because the gap between them is so incredibly massive.

He literally doubled Kobes ppg on far greater efficiency while being the main playmaker too. Kobe was literally the worst player in the league and LeBron still one of the best.

I know it hurts.

[DMAVS41]

If you think prime peak Kobe is losing with prime KG you're dumber than I thought. KG damn near took scrubs to the Finals... him and Kobe would be one of the sickest duos ever. You just don't appreciate basketball at that point.

Dude...go through the years....

00 - Drawing dead...not good enough
01 - Probably win given how weak competition was, but depends on what team Shaq is on and nothing is certain
02 - I'd favor a loss...KG wasn't as good as Shaq and the 02 Kings were elite
03 - Loss
04 - Loss...not sure how the hell KG is making Kobe play better against the Pistons

One title likely...maybe 2, but I doubt 2.

[tpols]

"Probably win" Nice bro. There you go. Coming back to reality. But even then you still had an excuse.

The problem you've always had in your hypotheticals is you directly transpose performances in one context to another when the circumstances could dictate totally different results. 2004 is probably the perfect example. That was the height of the Shaq Kobe fued and the Pistons used it to their advantage confirmed by Chauncey Billups interviews. Does a fued exist between Garnett and Kobe? Almost certainly not. And 2004 KG was an absolute animal. With the right chemistry of course they could have won it.

Let's say kobe and garnett lose in 2002 and 2000... Does that mean they aren't as tired and burnt out as Kobe and Shaq were coming off a 3peat and have a much better shot in 2003? Again... you extrapolate direct results from competing circumstances that would dictate a different outcome.

It's like arguing with a lower level intelligence here. You need to research the butterfly effect and realize how even a small change in situation can produce wildly different results across the board. But switching up from KG to Shaq isn't even a small change. It's a huge one with a wide variety of implications.

[DMAVS41]

"Probably win" Nice bro. There you go. Coming back to reality. But even then you still had an excuse.

The problem you've always had in your hypotheticals is you directly transpose performances in one context to another when the circumstances could dictate totally different results. 2004 is probably the perfect example. That was the height of the Shaq Kobe fued and the Pistons used it to their advantage confirmed by Chauncey Billups interviews. Does a fued exist between Garnett and Kobe? Almost certainly not. And 2004 KG was an absolute animal. With the right chemistry of course they could have won it. Let's say they lose in 2002... Does that mean they aren't as tired and burnt out as Kobe and Shaq were coming off a 3peat? Again... you extrapolate direct results from competing circumstances that would dictate a different outcome. I

It's like arguing with a lower level intelligence here. You need to research the butterfly effect and realize how even a small change in situation can produce wildly different results across the board. But switching up from KG to Shaq isn't even a small change. It's a huge one with a wide variety of implications.

You can only go off of how players played...you can't start arguing that Kobe is all of a sudden just start to play better because you think so. You know what? He could also play worse.

So, sorry if you don't like it...but Kobe simply did not play well enough to win a title with a player like KG in 00, 02, 03, and 04. His 00 finals isn't close to good enough, his inefficiency in the 02 Kings series would have cost them, he couldn't beat the Spurs in 03 with Shaq doing 25/14/4, and we all know about his dreadful 04 finals in which we was awful.

That is what happened...that is how he played...and he managed to win 3 rings in the time because, yes, he was a great player...but he was a great player that had ****ing peak Shaq on his team...rather than having to play against him.

Again, sorry if you don't like how Kobe performed...but it is what is is.

And, again, if you applied the same charitable thinking to all players, I really wouldn't have much of a problem with you...but you don't do that at all...because if you did...you'd have to focus on actual level of play and impact. And you won't do that because then you have to realize that 3 rings sounds a lot better than describing Kobe's actual impact in his first 8 years of his career.

What makes it even more sad is that the Lebron vs Kobe stuff is over. You've lost the debate...and you are still clinging to hoping that Lebron doesn't win while going on 40 years old while still being one of the best players in the league...already preparing yourself to diminish what an insane accomplishment it would be to play his role on a title winning team this late in his career on a good, but hardly all-time loaded team.

You probably go to bed each night worrying what life might be like in a month...which is just so sad because it is already your worst case scenario...everyone already ranks Lebron higher...it isn't even close for most.

[elementally morale]

tbh from an outsiders perspective, it just looks like you applying mental gymnastics.

The thing tpols doesn't seem to get even after all these years, I think, is the obvious fact that something or somebody doesn't have to be the best for you to like it or him/her the most. Favorite movies, books, music, your friends, children, close family... and yes, athletes. You may like someone the most even if he is not the best or not top 5, 10, whatever. You liking him needs no validation. The best one for you is the best one for you, period.

As for me, when Kobe died I was in shock for 2-3 days and cried a lot. And I was like 45-46 at the time. I asked myself several times why him dying had the effect on me it did. I finally realized that he was the 1st player whose career I've seen in its entirety. So when Kobe died, a big piece of me died, too. (Jordan said the same thing about hiim and it is a real though surreal experience.) I guess 'my youth' ended in those few days after his death (as I was 23 when Kobe came into the league.)

At any rate: ranking people across eras is not my cup of tea. However, I'm absoutely sure I've seen 5 basketball players 'live' who were better players than Kobe. Still, Kobe was my favorite. Why? Cause I liked his flaws, too. He was a prick lots of the time... and it entertained me. At other times he was just being great. Post NBA was good, too.

[1987_Lakers]

The thing tpols doesn't seem to get even after all these years, I think, it the obvious fact that something or somebody doesn't have to be the best for you to like it or him/here the most. Favorite movies, books, musis, your friends, children, close family... and yes, athletes. You may like someone the most even if he is not the best or not top 5, 10, whatever. You liking him needs no validation.

As for me, when Kobe died I was in shock for 2-3 days and cried a lot. And I was like 45-46 at the time. I asked myself several times why him dying had the effect on me it did. I finally realized that he was the 1st player whose career I've seen in its entirety. So when Kobe died, a big piece of me died, too. (Jordan said the same thing about hiim and it is a real though surreal experience.) I guess 'my youth' ended in those few days after his death (as I was 23 when Kobe came into the league.)

At any rate: ranking people across eras is not my cup of tea. However, I'm absoutely sure I've seen 5 basketball players 'live' who were better players than Kobe. Still, Kobe was my favorite. Why? Cause I liked his flaws, too. He was a prick lots of the time... and it entertained me. At other times he was just being great. Post NBA was good, too.

Meanwhile, we had that psycho Kobe fan Kenny saying he was happy Kobe died because it would mean a boost in legacy.

[tpols]

You can only go off of how players played..

No you can't when the situations are totally different.

You can't just transpose a players averages or performances from one situation DIRECTLY to a totally different situation. Everything from their chemistry, win total, seeding, matchups, and more would be different.

I honestly can't believe you're this daft. It's amazing.

[DMAVS41]

No you can't when the situations are totally different.

You can't just transpose a players averages or performances from one situation DIRECTLY to a totally different situation. Everything from their chemistry, win total, seeding, matchups, and more would be different.

I honestly can't believe you're this daft. It's amazing.

No, that is what you have to do because we have no idea if said player is going to play worse or better you ****ing mental midget.

One could easily argue that without Shaq...Kobe sees even more defensive attention and because he was so selfish at times...takes even more bad shots and plays worse. You follow?

I can't believe you fail to grasp this. It's unreal...

The Kobe stan logic is the most unreal thing I've ever witnessed...they want him to lose Shaq for a worse player...and they argue not only that Kobe wins just as much...but that he's going to play better with worse help.

Neat idea...tell us more.

[tpols]

No, that is what you have to do because we have no idea if said player is going to play worse or better you ****ing mental midget.

One could easily argue that without Shaq...Kobe sees even more defensive attention and because he was so selfish at times...takes even more bad shots and plays worse. You follow?

I can't believe you fail to grasp this. It's unreal...

The Kobe stan logic is the most unreal thing I've ever witnessed...they want him to lose Shaq for a worse player...and they argue not only that Kobe wins just as much...but that he's going to play better with worse help.

Neat idea...tell us more.

Kobe saw max defensive attention after Shaq left and lit the league up.

What are you talking about?

That's an argument that's long gone. You gotta come with something stronger than that. I can't believe you even tried pulling that argument.

[DMAVS41]

Kobe saw max defensive attention after Shaq left and lit the league up.

What are you talking about?

That's an argument that's long gone. You gotta come with something stronger than that. I can't believe you even tried pulling that argument.

He missed the playoffs in 05. Lost in the first round in 06 and 07...lost in 08. He won 2 titles with the best superstar help in the league at the time in 09/10.

There was also a rules change in 05 that made offense much easier...again, you should know these things.

Again, arguing that Kobe would play better than he did while getting worse help is not logical. That is why you go off of what guys did as the baseline....you don't just start assuming that Kobe is going to start shooting 60% TS against the Kings instead of 49%....

And this is the Kobe stan method. Ignore actual performance and then argue some absurd hypothetical about him playing better in worse conditions...then accuse others of simply noting how lucky he was to have 8 years with Shaq to start his career got get 3 titles.

Regardless...you think he'd play better...I think he'd play worse. Know how to settle it? How about just going off how the ****ing guy actually played...I know it is a crazy idea...but we could actually just use what happened. I know it is tough for you...but try to think for a minute...we could just actually go off what happened in reality.

****ing clown.

[tpols]

Superstar help in 2009 and 2010? If Pau and Odom were superstars what does that make 2004 KG?

Oh wait... wasn't just that... rule changes too!



How many excuses do you have bro?