Kobe's 2001-2002 season

[ThaSwagg3r]

I thought it was a combination of factors, one being that the 2008 Celtics were better than the 2009 Magic, the other being health. Ariza hit some big shots for the Lakers, and while Bynum wasn't very good in the 2009 playoffs, he gave them more size and the difference between Gasol in 2008 and 2009 was night and day.

Sure, but I am not sure how that shows how Kobe in 08 was better than Kobe in 09. It kind of reminds me of Jordan in 89-90 vs. Jordan in 90-91.

Kobe didn't do anything better in 07-08 compared to 08-09. Averaged the same amount of points in the playoffs with 2% less (48% vs. 46%), which isn't a big deal to me anyways. If it is a big deal to you then I will also let you know that Kobe shot a 1% higher in the regular season in 08-09 compared to 07-08 (47% vs. 46%). He averaged a rebound more in 08, but I am guessing that has to do with the injury of Bynum if anything.

He was pretty much the same in 07-08 and he was in 08-09 except he won the championship in 08-09 instead of coming up short.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Sure, but I am not sure how that shows how Kobe in 08 was better than Kobe in 09. It kind of reminds me of Jordan in 89-90 vs. Jordan in 90-91.

Kobe didn't do anything better in 07-08 compared to 08-09. Averaged the same amount of points in the playoffs with 2% less (48% vs. 46%), which isn't a big deal to me anyways. He averaged a rebound more in 08, but I am guessing that has to do with the injury of Bynum if anything.

He was pretty much the same in 07-08 and he was in 08-09 except he won the championship in 08-09 instead of coming up short.

He played better defense in 2008, was more athletic, attacked the basket more and that was his peak as a playmaker, imo.

[eliteballer]

Kobe got married before this season I believe and it was noted at the time how he was more content to pull back a little on the court as he was happy off of it. Still, he had that 56 in 3 quarters game that year, although that was because it was needed since Shaq was out that game.

[kizut1659]

He played better defense in 2008, was more athletic, attacked the basket more and that was his peak as a playmaker, imo.

Yeab but his finals performance was pretty horrible.

[chazzy]

Yeab but his finals performance was pretty horrible.

Against a much better defensive team with worse teammates though.

[Samurai Swoosh]

What are your thoughts on Kobe's '01-'02 season overall? It seems that when it comes to Kobe, everyone mentions 2001 and 2003 for the Shaq era.

Regular Season- 25.2 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 5.5 apg, 2.8 TO, 1.5 spg, 46.9 FG%, 54.4 TS%
Playoffs- 26.6 ppg, 5.8 rpg, 4.6 apg, 1.4 spg, 2.8 TO, 43.4 FG%, 51.1 TS%

It was a notable season for Kobe in that he made his first all-nba first team, he won another championship, finished 5th in MVP voting which marked his first top 5 finish and he made the all-defensive second team. He also had that 56 in 3 quarters game vs Memphis, the first of his many legendary scoring games.

Despite an inconsistent playoff run(poor vs Portland, but they swept them anyway, streaky vs Sacramento), he was huge in 4th quarters throughout the playoffs and had 2 great series vs elite defenses. The first being the WCSF vs the Spurs where he was clearly the best player in the series and the finals, where he had one of the best series ever by a non-finals MVP.

It seems like this season is forgotten despite it being one of Kobe's most mature seasons I've seen in terms of team play and clutch play. Maybe it's because his regular season was very good, but forgettable by his standards(only one 40+ point game and a 7-8 record without Shaq), and maybe his playoff moments are forgotten due to how hard of an act his 2001 run was to follow. And his superior numbers in 2001 and 2003 as well as the scoring streaks and highlights in '03 make this kind of his forgotten season.

Where would you rank this among Kobe's superstar seasons('01-present)?

I honestly don't get why for the Lakers chapionship runs, whenever Shaq "was out" ... (which was virtually always, cause his fat lazy ass never stayed in shape, something you refuse to critique your boy on considering the Lakers shouldn't have had to "play w/o Shaq" for such extended periods of time in the regular season as they ALWAYS did) ... YOU always give like a back handed compliment to Kobe about the Lakers record when Shaq was out of service.

Those Lakers teams weren't very talented outside of Shaq / Kobe ... you take either one of those guys out and they are going to suffer some loses. More specifically taking Shaq out because the team was built primarily around him, and you remove him and you have a significant drop off in defense and rebounding. Their back up centers were TERRIBLE, obviously because they didn't need to be real good because the team was BUILT around Shaq.

So please, stop using the well when Shaq was out in (2002, 2003) Kobe only had the team at a 9-8 record (or whatever example) you love to use as a sort of means to prop up Shaq and down grade Kobe. Even from 2001 on if the Lakers were built semi talentedly outside of Shaq / Kobe, Kobe could have took those teams to good records. You love using this argument specifically for the 2002 - 2003 season ... where it was obvious Kobe was the best player on the Lakers. And IMO was a very strong MVP candidate. Regardless of their record w/o Shaq. He had NO help outside of Shaq. Luckily, Kobe wasn't the fat lazy injury prone player Shaq was so we can't use the argument on the other foot of how well Shaq would've done without Kobe for extended stretches during the season.

[Samurai Swoosh]

2001? Nah. Good series, but he was better in 2002, put up better numbers, was more consistent and better in the 4th quarter, iirc. 2010? Kind of hard to compare considering he was the man on that team and facing a better team than the Nets.

Not true ... apart from one atrocious game against the Sixers, he had a REALLY good Finals. He didn't go out looking to simply score, he had a great all around game. And after game 1, he gave Iverson problems on the defensive end of the floor. You also have to take into account that Sixer defense was WAY better than the Nets. That Nets team is one of the worst NBA Finals teams of all-time. Right there with the 2007 Cavs, 2003 Nets, etc

[Samurai Swoosh]

1. 2006-07
2. 2005-06

Just out of curiosity ... why 2007 over 2006? His role on the team was the exact same in both seasons, and he was better at it in 2006. Plus he took the Suns 7 games, instead of 5 or 6 (whatever it was) ...

[BlackJoker23]

Not true ... apart from one atrocious game against the Sixers, he had a REALLY good Finals. He didn't go out looking to simply score, he had a great all around game. And after game 1, he gave Iverson problems on the defensive end of the floor. You also have to take into account that Sixer defense was WAY better than the Nets. That Nets team is one of the worst NBA Finals teams of all-time. Right there with the 2007 Cavs, 2003 Nets, etc

quit spreading lies. kobe only guarded iverson in the first half of game 1. fisher and lue guarded him the rest of the way.

[BlackJoker23]

Those Lakers teams weren't very talented outside of Shaq / Kobe ... you take either one of those guys out and they are going to suffer some loses.

25-7 when shaq played and kobe didn't during the first 3-peat.

[Samurai Swoosh]

quit spreading lies. kobe only guarded iverson in the first half of game 1. fisher and lue guarded him the rest of the way.

Why be such a douche, I'm sorry my memory wasn't as sharp for this series. I've only been watching NBA basketball since 1990. So sometimes my mind slips on the small details. I do know Kobe held him to a 1 - 5 start shooting in Game 1, then they switched up and I want to say Iverson went 6 - 8 (hit 1 or 2 shots on Kobe) when they switched to Fisher and Lue on him.

Kobe guarded him a lot in game 2, and held him to 23 points. That was the game where Iverson got frusterated at Bryant and they got into having words.

[Samurai Swoosh]

25-7 when shaq played and kobe didn't during the first 3-peat.

Clearly you didn't read the rest of my post, or understand it like a dumb ass nigg ...

Those teams were built around Shaq. If he left obviously it would be more impactful than if Bryant left for extended periods.

Without Shaq their back up center was Slava Mavdenko and people like that.

If it was someone even servicable at center Kobe would've been able to better keep them afloat.

But you have a hatred for Bryant, so obviously it obscures your vision. So why are you even in this thread?

[ShaqAttack3234]

I honestly don't get why for the Lakers chapionship runs, whenever Shaq "was out" ... (which was virtually always, cause his fat lazy ass never stayed in shape, something you refuse to critique your boy on considering the Lakers shouldn't have had to "play w/o Shaq" for such extended periods of time in the regular season as they ALWAYS did) ... YOU always give like a back handed compliment to Kobe about the Lakers record when Shaq was out of service.

Those Lakers teams weren't very talented outside of Shaq / Kobe ... you take either one of those guys out and they are going to suffer some loses. More specifically taking Shaq out because the team was built primarily around him, and you remove him and you have a significant drop off in defense and rebounding. Their back up centers were TERRIBLE, obviously because they didn't need to be real good because the team was BUILT around Shaq.

So please, stop using the well when Shaq was out in (2002, 2003) Kobe only had the team at a 9-8 record (or whatever example) you love to use as a sort of means to prop up Shaq and down grade Kobe. Even from 2001 on if the Lakers were built semi talentedly outside of Shaq / Kobe, Kobe could have took those teams to good records. You love using this argument specifically for the 2002 - 2003 season ... where it was obvious Kobe was the best player on the Lakers. And IMO was a very strong MVP candidate. Regardless of their record w/o Shaq. He had NO help outside of Shaq. Luckily, Kobe wasn't the fat lazy injury prone player Shaq was so we can't use the argument on the other foot of how well Shaq would've done without Kobe for extended stretches during the season.

at this. I gave a review of his whole season, with a lot more praise than criticism, but included everything, both negatives and positives.

Yes, Shaq wasn't in the best shape in 2002, but when you're a 7 footer in general, there's a good chance you'll be injury prone, particularly when you play such a physical style, much less a guy who even when he's in shape is easily over 300 pounds. And 15 games missed in a regular season isn't that much, particularly when 3 were due to suspension.

And if you really want to question how Shaq could fare with Kobe out for an extended stretch, they were 11-3 with him out in 2001 and 12-3 with him out in 2000.......

Do you really want to turn this into a Shaq vs Kobe thread? Oh and at Kobe being clearly better in 2003. That type of shit shows what a Kobe stan you can be, well that and you arguing he was better than Duncan that year.

[Samurai Swoosh]

Yes, Shaq wasn't in the best shape in 2002, but when you're a 7 footer in general, there's a good chance you'll be injury prone, particularly when you play such a physical style, much less a guy who even when he's in shape is easily over 300 pounds. And 15 games missed in a regular season isn't that much, particularly when 3 were due to suspension.

So that excuses him being out of shape, lazy, putting off surgeries to miss regular season time, etc.?

And if you really want to question how Shaq could fare with Kobe out for an extended stretch, they were 11-3 with him out in 2001 and 12-3 with him out in 2000.......

And you do realize why that is correct? Way to not address the rest of the post. They were built around Shaq. The back ups were terrible. Obviously they would fare worse without Shaq than they would with out Kobe. Significant drop off in defense and rebounding, no?

Do you really want to turn this into a Shaq vs Kobe thread?

And you're not clearly all over Shaq's d1ck?



The career underachiever.

Who wouldn't have won d1ck if he didn't play with 2 of the top 3 SG's of ALL - TIME ?!?!

The man who went H.A.M. for one season in his entire career (1999 - 2000)

Shaq for all he achieved was a massive waste of one of the physical wonders of the world.

Because he was soft, massively egotistical, and straight out lazy. He should've won every year in the league if he had a brain transplant and had the motivational fire of the Birds, Jordans, Bryants, Magics of the world.

[Eat Like A Bosh]

From a pure statistical standpoint, people would point out his 2003 season as his best overall complete season in terms of stats.
Kobe put up 30-7-6 on 46.7% shooting, as well as nabbing 2.2 steals a game.

But I think his most memorable season, 2006, even though they got knocked out in the first round, Kobe was a beast scorer back then. He looked unstoppable.