Durant on Kobe "He's probably the best ever. You can't say that he's lost a step"

[ShaqAttack3234]

Right, so the defensive player of the year in 2001 was over the hill? Top 5 in blocks, an all-star and the leader in rebounding.... And it's funny to act like Shaq wasn't facing as many if not more double teams than anyone in history which makes the individual defender irrelevant. In 2000, Shaq was guarded by Dale Davis who was a good defensive player who averaged a double double and made the all-star team that season.

[cotdt]

As Durant talked to his teammates on the bus ride over to Staples Center, he told them there were two kinds of Kobe Bryant they were going to encounter Tuesday and both could be equally deadly in a do-or-die game as Game 5 was being billed.

"You never know what Kobe is going to do," Durant said. "He can turn it on and off so easily. You got to be ready for him to hit 10 in a row. A guy like that can get hot at any time. [In Game 4] I thought he was going to [go off], but he kind of deferred to his teammates and tried to get everybody involved. It's better when he tries to get everyone involved, that's Kobe Bryant. Once he gets 12 or 13 points in the first quarter that's the Black Mamba. We want him to be Kobe Bryant not Black Mamba. Our toughest job is stopping the Black Mamba."

[Allstar24]

I've defended Kobe throughout the season, but he's had nagging injuries the last 3 seasons, he didn't play particularly well starting in January, he's in his 14th season, he now has arthritis in his shooting hand and he's had one of his worst playoff series vs OKC. He has the most talented cast in the league so it will hurt his legacy if they dissapoint in the playoffs. Kobe's horrendous 2004 finals performance, subpar 2008 finals performance and insignificant 2000 finals performance won't help either compared to Shaq who has 3 of the greatest finals series of all time.

It also won't help that Kobe was Shaq's second option on those teams, hell I've heard Kobe and Phil say this multiple times. Missing the playoffs in his prime also doesn't help neither does failing to make it out of the first round those years(not that he had a cast you should expect to).

According to you, Kobe was "declining" back in 08...he won his first MVP that year. He was supposed to be declining in 09 and he won his first finals MVP. He was horrendous in the 04 finals but he also prevented the Lakers from getting swept. He was insignificant in the 2000 finals? He was the closer for the Lakers when Shaq got fouled out in game 4 of the finals. And if you want to pretend that Kobe didn't have a historic season in 06 and 07, that he didn't lead his team to the finals in 08, win the title and finals MVP in 09 and only point out the downside of his career, I'm going to assume you're not very objective. For the record, you brought up the Kobe vs Shaq thing in this thread.

[Younggrease]

Right, so the defensive player of the year in 2001 was over the hill? Top 5 in blocks, an all-star and the leader in rebounding.... And it's funny to act like Shaq wasn't facing as many if not more double teams than anyone in history which makes the individual defender irrelevant. In 2000, Shaq was guarded by Dale Davis who was a good defensive player who averaged a double double and made the all-star team that season.

Why do those Finals series count more than the other series...Indiana had no chance at a beating the Lakers, The Sixers also had no chance at beating the Lakers, the Nets had no chance at beating the Lakers.

Its not like the competition was raised, by the time the Finals came along the title was already decided. Sorry but these arent the series that attest to Shaq's greatness.

The series were he was meaured were against the Kings and the Spurs. The teams who actually had a chance at beating the prime Lakers.

[Kblaze8855]

It was almost 1989 when Durant was born. He only really remembers the primes of 2 players who are above Kobe all time and he was 10-11 when one of them peaked. And plenty of people are putting Kobe above Duncan(not that they should).

He was 3 when Bird and Magic were gone. Jordan peaked when he was like 2. He grew up on Kobe like most of the people here. Its not a shocking opinion from someone his age.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Why do those Finals series count more than the other series...Indiana had no chance at a beating the Lakers, The Sixers also had no chance at beating the Lakers, the Nets had no chance at beating the Lakers.

Its not like the competition was raised, by the time the Finals came along the title was already decided. Sorry but these arent the series that attest to Shaq's greatness.

The series were he was meaured were against the Kings and the Spurs. The teams who actually had a chance at beating the prime Lakers.

And Shaq crushed the Kings. The Spurs never had a chance vs the Lakers in 2001 and 2002.

In 2001, the Spurs were missing their 2nd leading scorer and only perimeter threat, Derek Anderson. An old David Robinson was the second option. The Lakers beat the Spurs by an average of over 22 points per game. The Sixers were easily the toughest team the Lakers faced in the playoffs, Shaq faced the DPOY and the finals are the biggest stage, period.

In 2002, The Spurs second option was an even older David Robinson who was injured and barely played in the playoffs. Tony Parker was a rookie and Manu Ginobili wasn't on the team yet. It's true that the Nets weren't much of a threat, but 36/12/4/3 on 60% shooting in the finals is pretty amazing regardless. And Shaq put up 30/14 vs Sacramento including a 41/17 game to extend the series to 6 and a 35/13/4 game 7.

As far as the Pacers in 2000? Indiana definitely had a chance. The Lakers weren't a proven championship team yet. In game 1, the Lakers pulled away in an 83-77 game thanks to a 13-2 run led by Shaq. As we saw in 2000, there was no guarantee the Lakers would pull out the game 1 win. If Shaq had an average game instead of a 43/19/4/3 game on 68% shooting then they almost surely would have lost that game because Kobe was the second best player with 14 points on 13 shots, and I believe he only had 1 field goal after the 3rd quarter. In game 2, Kobe left after 9 minutes and outside of Shaq and Kobe the Lakers weren't great during the 3peat. As it is, this ended in a 111-104 win, certainly not a blowout. If Shaq again didn't have a monster game(40/24/4/3) then the Pacers could have easily won this. The Lakers lost game 3 and if not for Kobe's overtime heroics and Shaq's 36/21 game in game 4, the Lakers easily could have lost that one. The Pacers blew them out in game 5 and game 6 ended in a 116-111 victory, so again, another very close game. Shaq also had 41/12/4. The Pacers if anything were more experienced and they lost 3 very winnable games, and in reality 4 winnable games.

I mean looking at the series, Shaq pretty much carried them to the win. Kobe only had a good game 4 and basically only played in 2 games, Rice was trash throughout the playoffs, AC Green was done by that point and while Harper was valuable, he was nothing more than a role player.

[ShaqAttack3234]

According to you, Kobe was "declining" back in 08...he won his first MVP that year. He was supposed to be declining in 09 and he won his first finals MVP. He was horrendous in the 04 finals but he also prevented the Lakers from getting swept. He was insignificant in the 2000 finals? He was the closer for the Lakers when Shaq got fouled out in game 4 of the finals. And if you want to pretend that Kobe didn't have a historic season in 06 and 07, that he didn't lead his team to the finals in 08, win the title and finals MVP in 09 and only point out the downside of his career, I'm going to assume you're not very objective. For the record, you brought up the Kobe vs Shaq thing in this thread.

First of all, I consider 2008 to be Kobe's best all around year, but on the other points? They wouldn't have been in a position to get swept had Kobe's shot selection been so horrendous and his ego been so huge at that point. Yeah, he had the big game 4, but other than that? He missed almost 2 games and averaged 16/4/4 on 37% shooting and like 19 shots per game. He had one good game in the series. Hell, he didn't even defend one of Indiana's 2 best perimeter players most of the time. They put him on Mark Jackson.

[dbugz]

Durant is trying to jinx Kobe.

Seriously, these thunder's players needs to stfu and let this series end first before saying anything awesome about their opponent. It's like saying, we're fcked up and we will going to lose this series because Kobe is so damn good.

[Younggrease]

And Shaq crushed the Kings. The Spurs never had a chance vs the Lakers in 2001 and 2002.

In 2001, the Spurs were missing their 2nd leading scorer and only perimeter threat, Derek Anderson. An old David Robinson was the second option. The Lakers beat the Spurs by an average of over 22 points per game. The Sixers were easily the toughest team the Lakers faced in the playoffs, Shaq faced the DPOY and the finals are the biggest stage, period.

In 2002, The Spurs second option was an even older David Robinson who was injured and barely played in the playoffs. Tony Parker was a rookie and Manu Ginobili wasn't on the team yet. It's true that the Nets weren't much of a threat, but 36/12/4/3 on 60% shooting in the finals is pretty amazing regardless. And Shaq put up 30/14 vs Sacramento including a 41/17 game to extend the series to 6 and a 35/13/4 game 7.

As far as the Pacers in 2000? Indiana definitely had a chance. The Lakers weren't a proven championship team yet. In game 1, the Lakers pulled away in an 83-77 game thanks to a 13-2 run led by Shaq. As we saw in 2000, there was no guarantee the Lakers would pull out the game 1 win. If Shaq had an average game instead of a 43/19/4/3 game on 68% shooting then they almost surely would have lost that game because Kobe was the second best player with 14 points on 13 shots, and I believe he only had 1 field goal after the 3rd quarter. In game 2, Kobe left after 9 minutes and outside of Shaq and Kobe the Lakers weren't great during the 3peat. As it is, this ended in a 111-104 win, certainly not a blowout. If Shaq again didn't have a monster game(40/24/4/3) then the Pacers could have easily won this. The Lakers lost game 3 and if not for Kobe's overtime heroics and Shaq's 36/21 game in game 4, the Lakers easily could have lost that one. The Pacers blew them out in game 5 and game 6 ended in a 116-111 victory, so again, another very close game. Shaq also had 41/12/4. The Pacers if anything were more experienced and they lost 3 very winnable games, and in reality 4 winnable games.

I mean looking at the series, Shaq pretty much carried them to the win. Kobe only had a good game 4 and basically only played in 2 games, Rice was trash throughout the playoffs, AC Green was done by that point and while Harper was valuable, he was nothing more than a role player.

why is it "amazing" if its in the Finals, even though the team is severely overmatched.

Its kinda what I expected of Shaq. I think the world of Shaq but a performance against Aaron Williams and Todd McCulluh isnt why I think he is great.

[MakeHistory78]

Kobe's not the best ever, Durant probably didn't mean for it to come out like that...but Kobe will go down as a greater player than Shaq when it's all said and done. Shaq's been irrelevant since 2006.

Kobe is nowhere to Shaq...Shaq at his prime was a beast and he had one of the three most dominant primes ever IMO with MJ and Wilt...

So Kobe is perhaps the second greatest Shooting guard ever but is nowhere to consider as the GOAT.He isn't even close.Shaq at least has a GOAT candidate prime.

Durant is 22 years old and his favorite player was Vince Carter...Are you kidding?He don't know anything about the History of the game.
Durant is an idiot if he thinks Kobe is the GOAT.
Kobe isn't even the best player in the league.LeBron James is by far the best in the game the last two years.Kobe isn't even close....

[ShaqAttack3234]

why is it "amazing" if its in the Finals, even though the team is severely overmatched.

Its kinda what I expected of Shaq. I think the world of Shaq but a performance against Aaron Williams and Todd McCulluh isnt why I think he is great.

Because in the history of the NBA, how many players have put up comparable numbers in the finals? And that wasn't the only time a team was severely overmatched. The Nets were a very good defensive team. Hell, I consider Kobe's 2001 series vs the Spurs amazing too. It doesn't make it an unimpressive series because the Spurs were overmatched that year or because the Spurs didn't have any perimeter defenders who you'd think would stand a chance(iirc, they had guys like Terry Porter and Steve Smith on their last legs). Bruce Bowen didn't join the team until the following season, but I still consider that one of the better series of the decade and Kobe's personal best.

[dawsey6]

Durant is trying to jinx Kobe.

Seriously, these thunder's players needs to stfu and let this series end first before saying anything awesome about their opponent. It's like saying, we're fcked up and we will going to lose this series because Kobe is so damn good.

Someone giving credit where they believe credit is due has nothing to do with how competitive they are. You never heard Michael talking about any of their opponent like they weren't great. Kobe doesn't do that either, and Lebron certainly doesn't. They all give credit where they feel credit is due when they talk to the press, but they still go out and play the game.

[NBASTATMAN]

Kobe's not the best ever, Durant probably didn't mean for it to come out like that...but Kobe will go down as a greater player than Shaq when it's all said and done. Shaq's been irrelevant since 2006.

Shaq's prime was better than KObe's but I would rate kobe a better player when HE finishes his playing days.. At this point I have to argue for Kobe over Shaq.. Like him or not Kobe comes to play at all times.. Shaq hasn't..

[NBASTATMAN]

As Durant talked to his teammates on the bus ride over to Staples Center, he told them there were two kinds of Kobe Bryant they were going to encounter Tuesday and both could be equally deadly in a do-or-die game as Game 5 was being billed.

"You never know what Kobe is going to do," Durant said. "He can turn it on and off so easily. You got to be ready for him to hit 10 in a row. A guy like that can get hot at any time. [In Game 4] I thought he was going to [go off], but he kind of deferred to his teammates and tried to get everybody involved. It's better when he tries to get everyone involved, that's Kobe Bryant. Once he gets 12 or 13 points in the first quarter that's the Black Mamba. We want him to be Kobe Bryant not Black Mamba. Our toughest job is stopping the Black Mamba."

I think KEVin is playing mind games... Kevin surely remembers the other night when he shut Kobe aka the greatest of all times down... I think DuraNT is just complimenting the hell out of Kobe but I am sure he wants to embarass him like he did the other night.. Smart

[Younggrease]

Because in the history of the NBA, how many players have put up comparable numbers in the finals? And that wasn't the only time a team was severely overmatched. The Nets were a very good defensive team. Hell, I consider Kobe's 2001 series vs the Spurs amazing too. It doesn't make it an unimpressive series because the Spurs were overmatched that year or because the Spurs didn't have any perimeter defenders who you'd think would stand a chance(iirc, they had guys like Terry Porter and Steve Smith on their last legs). Bruce Bowen didn't join the team until the following season, but I still consider that one of the better series of the decade and Kobe's personal best.

I dont understand why the putting the discussion in the box of the finals. IMO the discussion should be in comparison to every other series that is played and then you should factor un strength of team whatever. The Nets were garbarge and the games were never in doubt, it was a joke and not even worth watching. It was a foregone conclusin.