2016 Cavs vs 2001 Lakers

[Showtime2001]

nice catch in the slip of logic.

aj says shaq will foul out by halftime.
aj says kobe will get locked down by a statistically inferior defense
aj says Lakers should win

so.. i guess aj thinks Derek fisher is goin for 30 ppg? ..


there's no debating with him.. you can hash out perfectly logical arguments that he will just shitpost all over, claiming the opposite of whatever you said in a child like defiant manner.. but w/o any backing to it.. hence shitposts. And when you put them all together you just get a giant mound of turds haha.

Thats why you dont argue with retards.

[aj1987]

That doesn't equate with your earlier sentiments. If you agree that the Lakers would beat Cleveland, how would they do this if Shaq fouls out at halftime and Kobe is stifled by Lebron/JR/Iman?

Because before you brought up TODAY'S rules:

Depends on the rules. Is it today or is Shaq allowed elbow everyone.

If the refs let things go, Shaq drops 35/10 easily. TT is just too small and post injury Mozgov isn't a great rim protector anymore.

Nobody on the Lakers can shut down Bron/Kyrie but love would be useless.
Kobe would be horrible as per usual in the Finals.

Despite LeBeast Lakers in 7, Shaq is the MDE for a reason.

I saw that.

Let's say it's today's rules.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/sho...57&postcount=4

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/sho...61&postcount=5

I was basing my posts off of what sportsjames23 said. '01 rules. You were the one who brought up todays rules. Right here, in this post:

- And again, if we're playing [COLOR="Red"]today's rules[/COLOR] Kobe is going to get to the rim. You keep throwing this out as if Kobe has never played against the caliber of defender like Smith and Shumpert. They don't present anything insurmountable. Lebron on Kobe is interesting but again, only in limited situations. Lebron can roam and be a terror defensively when his opposing number doesn't provide the offensive challenge that Kobe would

One of the reasons why I specified today's rules in my post when I replied:

By todays rules, it'd basically be Kobe vs the Cavs. Shaq would foul out by halftime.

I mentioned the rules specifically because you changed the criteria from the OP.

Here's my ORIGINAL post from the beginning of this thread:

Shaq would murder the Cavs. 40/20 and the series would be over in 5, unless LeBron/Kyrie go absolutely bonkers.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/sho...7&postcount=12

Kobe's made more 3's than Wade taken for his career. What are we debating here, again?

That 33% does not equate to 30%. 33% is a decent point shooter. You wouldn't call a 30% 3pt shooter that.

nice catch in the slip of logic.

aj says shaq will foul out by halftime.
aj says kobe will get locked down by a statistically inferior defense
aj says Lakers should win

Kid, you might want to actually read the entire thread, if you want to butt into a conversation I'm having with another poster.

so.. i guess aj thinks Derek fisher is goin for 30 ppg? ..

there's no debating with him.. you can hash out perfectly logical arguments that he will just shitpost all over, claiming the opposite of whatever you said in a child like defiant manner.. but w/o any backing to it.. hence shitposts. And when you put them all together you just get a giant mound of turds haha.

The [COLOR="black"]f[/COLOR]uck are you talking about? I literally backup each and everyone of my claims with FACTS and STATS. You're the dude who uses hyperbole and your hatred for LeBron to cloud your judgment and make retarded posts.

You guy absolutely wrecked and you're in denial. Come back when you can actually refute any of the STATS and FACTS I posted. Until then, stick with your "but but but OKC's length will beat the Cavs" posts.


A wild lapbitch shows up.

[inclinerator]

shaq would be less effective cuz of the rule change still good enough for a lakers win probably unless every cavs player goes off which could happen

kevin love would go off for sure

[Dragonyeuw]

Because before you brought up TODAY'S rules:





http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/sho...57&postcount=4

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/sho...61&postcount=5

I was basing my posts off of what sportsjames23 said. '01 rules. You were the one who brought up todays rules. Right here, in this post:



One of the reasons why I specified today's rules in my post when I replied:



I mentioned the rules specifically because you changed the criteria from the OP.

Here's my ORIGINAL post from the beginning of this thread:



http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/sho...7&postcount=12

When you initially agreed with me about the Lakers winning, I don't recall you specifying which rules you were basing that on, at least during our line of discussion, but no matter. Things sometimes get lost in translation. So let's put this in context, for clarity:

Today's rules: Shaq fouls out, Kobe is smothered by Bron/Iman/Smith, Cavs win

2001 rules: Shaq goes HAM, Kobe goes (less?) HAM but fares better than he would in 2016, Lakers win

Is that an accurate summary of your argument?

[aj1987]

Today's rules: Shaq fouls out, Kobe is smothered by Bron/Iman/Smith, Cavs win

Let me be extra clear. IF the refs call all his elbows and other stuff they let him get away with in '01, he certainly will be in foul trouble the entire series, diminishing his effect.

Kobe is historically not a great Finals performer. LeBron's defense was brilliant this postseason. The trio of LeBron/Shump/JR are better than the wing defenders that the Sixers had to neutralize Kobe.

I know that I said the Cavs would win (well, I implied it), but Shaq is my favorite player and I wouldn't bet against him. Still, I'll stick with what I said. Cavs in 6/7.

2001 rules: Shaq goes HAM, Kobe goes (less?) HAM but fares better than he would in 2016, Lakers win

Even with the '01 rules, I think Kobe would struggle against the Cavs. Just imagine LeBron being extra physical with the '01 rules on the defensive end. Still, Lakers in 5. Shaq would steamroll them.

Is that an accurate summary of your argument?

Pretty much. All these are hypotheticals. I wouldn't necessarily say that you're wrong, because that's your opinion and this is mine.

[Dragonyeuw]

Pretty much. All these are hypotheticals. I wouldn't necessarily say that you're wrong, because that's your opinion and this is mine.

Fair enough for me