Jason Whitlock: Kobe's narcissism ruined Lakers

[two3zone]

he won 1 mvp cuz the mid 2000 lakers werent any good. you really think steve nash was a better player than kobe when he won back to back mvps? kobe averaged 35 a game !!! and if not for tim thomas hitting a 3 to force ot in game 5 thaat 06 lakers team with kobe and a bunch of scrubs would have beat nash and his 1 seed suns.

Well if we go by VORP. Never even came in second.

1996-97 Grant Hill, 7.9 (Kobe 0.1)

1997-98 Karl Malone, 6.9 (K0be 1.1)

1998-99 Jason Kidd, 4.1 (50-game season) (Kobe 2.1)

1999-2000 Shaquille O’Neal, 9.3 (Kobe 4.7, 12th)

2000-01 Steve Francis, 7.0 (Kobe 4.4, 20th)

2001-02 Tim Duncan, 8.1 (Kobe 5.0, 12th)

2002-03 Kevin Garnett, 9.0 (Kobe 7.1, 4th)

2003-04 Kevin Garnett, 9.8 (Kobe 4.7, 8th)

2004-05 Kevin Garnett, 9.3 (Kobe 4.5, 16th)

2005-06 LeBron James, 9.5 (Kobe 6.5, 5th)

2006-07 LeBron James, 7.6 (Kobe 5.3, 6th)

2007-08 LeBron James, 10.1 (Kobe 6.0, 3rd)

2008-09 LeBron James, 11.6 (Kobe 4.9, 6th)

2009-10 LeBron James, 10.9 (Kobe 4.0, 13th)

2010-11 LeBron James, 8.2 (Kobe 4.1, 12th)

2011-12 LeBron James, 7.6 (Kobe 2.4)

2012-13 LeBron James, 9.8 (Kobe 5.1, 7th)

2013-14 Kevin Durant, 8.5 (Kobe -0.2)

2014-15 Stephen Curry, 7.9 (Kobe 0.7)

2015-16 Stephen Curry, 9.5 (Kobe -0.3)

 

[CorduroyG]

45 and 10 at spurs west conference finals 2001, but yea that team was all shaq

 

[two3zone]

45 and 10 at spurs west conference finals 2001, but yea that team was all shaq

You going to post the Shaq highlights from that series or season? Just wondering.

 

[OrangeDW]

True but Kobe insisting on thank me for what I have done dollars certainly didn't help them free up $ to land players. Great player but I just never felt he was being his own person. He was always trying to be what he thought MJ was, good, bad and ugly.

They had plenty of money to sign guys, so I don't think Kobe's contract really mattered. Nobody would take their money, because they had absolutely zero young talent on the roster.

 

[CorduroyG]

some people just forget how ridiculously good kobe was

 

[suttree]

It's going to be one looooooooooooong offseason.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

I wouldn't take all those guys over Kobe, but i definately would take Steph. Kobe never was as good as Steph has been the past two years.

Kobe was a better defender. Kobe in the Warriors offense would have her fun. So many open lanes.

 

[jec1521]

some people just forget how ridiculously good kobe was

Forget Kobe, MJ at 40 was ridiculous. Wow.

 

[Knicks411]

he won 1 mvp cuz the mid 2000 lakers werent any good. you really think steve nash was a better player than kobe when he won back to back mvps? kobe averaged 35 a game !!! and if not for tim thomas hitting a 3 to force ot in game 5 thaat 06 lakers team with kobe and a bunch of scrubs would have beat nash and his 1 seed suns.

Nash was one of the worst MVP selections though. You can think Kobe was better than Nash and still not think he should have been the MVP.

That was the year Phoenix lost Stoudamire to injury. The Suns were the two seed. Dallas was the one and lost to Miami with Shaq/Wade in the finals. If anyone had an argument to win the MVP that year it was Dirk.

Lebron went for 31-7-7 that year as well.

 

[Knicks411]

Kobe was a better defender. Kobe in the Warriors offense would have her fun. So many open lanes.

There would be a lot fewer open lanes if he's replacing Steph though. With Steph beside him, sure

 

[Cusefan0307]

Kobe was a better defender. Kobe in the Warriors offense would have her fun. So many open lanes.

I'm not sold on Kobe being that great on defense. He made a lot of all defensive teams based on reputation. Steph had the complete opposite reputation and has made himself a good defender. Stats suggest this is debatable.

Also I know Kobe was more athletic than Steph, but he actually makes a higher percentage of shots at the rim than Kobe did.

 

[Cusefan0307]

Nash was one of the worst MVP selections though. You can think Kobe was better than Nash and still not think he should have been the MVP.



Lebron went for 31-7-7 that year as well.

I didn't think that year was that bad for Nash. He lead the Suns to 54 wins and the two seed in a loaded conference with no Amare. He did average 19 and 11. The year before was worse IMO. That was a weird year for the NBA. It was one of the few times the best team in the NBA didn't win the title.

 

[Knicks411]

I didn't think that year was that bad for Nash. He lead the Suns to 54 wins and the two seed in a loaded conference with no Amare. He did average 19 and 11. The year before was worse IMO. That was a weird year for the NBA. It was one of the few times the best team in the NBA didn't win the title.

Nash was awesome, no doubt. Probably the best offensive point guard of all time. But the defense was pretty shaky, and when you're naming the MVP of the league, that stuff matters. In 06, for instance, you had Kobe going for 35, Lebron was 31-7-7, and Duncan went for 19-11 while anchoring a 63 win team that had the best defense in the league. Among other options.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

I'm not sold on Kobe being that great on defense. He made a lot of all defensive teams based on reputation. Steph had the complete opposite reputation and has made himself a good defender. Stats suggest this is debatable.

Also I know Kobe was more athletic than Steph, but he actually makes a higher percentage of shots at the rim than Kobe did.

Kobe didn't play with the wide open lane. Shak and, to a lesser extent Pau, tended to clog the lane.
Both great players.

 

[MiniCuse]

I just came in here to mention that Whitlock is a moron who only writes hater type crap to try and generate clicks and views for his DOA "journalism" career. Whitlock has never seen a crab climbing for the top without doing his absolute best to drag him back down to the bottom.

 

[strumpfasaurus]

I think everybody here is correct. Kobe was a top 10 player of all time but he really should have retired two years ago. Him staying the past two years and taking all that money really did hurt the lakers and made them hard to be relevant. But he was still one of the greatest players of all time just overstayed his welcome.

 

[Doc5120]

May want to check the numbers.

I suppose you could be right. He just doesn't scream HOF to me, but I've been wrong a few times before!

 

[44cuse]

This thread is amazing.

This thread is actually not amazing. It's in line with the ridiculousness that gets posted on this board amongst smaller amounts of qty. And it's an NBA topic...while that has gotten better in the last 12 mos here, not a lot of NBA knowledge around here.

44cuse

 

[44cuse]

I just came in here to mention that Whitlock is a moron who only writes hater type crap to try and generate clicks and views for his DOA "journalism" career. Whitlock has never seen a crab climbing for the top without doing his absolute best to drag him back down to the bottom.

How did you feel about him when he wrote this: http://www.foxsports.com/college-ba...e-story-irresposible-reporting-by-espn-112111

And that was when there were about two people defending JB or looking at this as ESPN being irresponsible.

44cuse

 

[HastingsCuse]

I must be real old. I have read a 5 page thread about all time great players and all time great Lakers and nobody has mentioned Elgin Baylor. Although I'm too young to remember his earlier years he was the first in the Dr J/ MJ skill set. If modern methods of knee surgery and the 3 point line had been around in the 60s who knows what stats he would have. Kobe scored 60 when no one played defense Elgin Baylor scored 61 in an NBA final game against the Celtics with Bill Russell. Google him! (Yes I know he was recognized in the other Lakers thread. I left off Wilt because he with the Lakers for less than half his career.)
My all time greatest Lakers in order:
Kareem
Magic
Baylor
West
Kobe

 

[OrangeDW]

I think everybody here is correct. Kobe was a top 10 player of all time but he really should have retired two years ago. Him staying the past two years and taking all that money really did hurt the lakers and made them hard to be relevant. But he was still one of the greatest players of all time just overstayed his welcome.

He didn't hurt the Lakers or make it hard for them to be relevant. They were going to be horrible either way, Kobe's presence is the only thing that kept them at all "relevant"(not good, just relevant) and kept butts in the seats.

As I said earlier, the Chris Paul trade being vetoed is what led them to being in this position. With that trade, the Lakers had acquired a superstar who would've given them a chance to win a championship right then(this was 2012, when they were still in the mix and going for it), and who would've been a franchise building block for the future and someone they could rebuild around.

Instead they didn't get him. Gasol as a Laker was basically ruined, from that point forward and they pretty much had to trade him. They desperately went for Nash, mortgaging more of the future for what ended up being a complete flop.

Kobe had zero negative effect on these last 2 years, IMO. Nobody good would take their money anyway(they tried for Carmelo, Lebron, etc.), so they filled out their roster with cheap, short contracts, and basically gave the rest to Kobe, and sucked bad enough to get some high draft picks. Now they've got 3 very promising young players in Randle, Russell, and Clarkson and even Nance looks like he's got some potential. Plus they'll have a high pick this year, as long as it doesn't fall outside the top 5. They're in decent shape going forward, provided a couple of those guys develop into all star type players(I think Russell and Randle both have a pretty good chance of that).

 

[IthacaMatt]

I must be real old. I have read a 5 page thread about all time great players and all time great Lakers and nobody has mentioned Elgin Baylor. Although I'm too young to remember his earlier years he was the first in the Dr J/ MJ skill set. If modern methods of knee surgery and the 3 point line had been around in the 60s who knows what stats he would have. Kobe scored 60 when no one played defense Elgin Baylor scored 61 in an NBA final game against the Celtics with Bill Russell. Google him! (Yes I know he was recognized in the other Lakers thread. I left off Wilt because he with the Lakers for less than half his career.)
My all time greatest Lakers in order:
Kareem
Magic
Baylor
West
Kobe

Oscar Robertson is another great who seldom makes the discussion.

 

[IthacaMatt]

He didn't hurt the Lakers or make it hard for them to be relevant. They were going to be horrible either way, Kobe's presence is the only thing that kept them at all "relevant"(not good, just relevant) and kept butts in the seats.

As I said earlier, the Chris Paul trade being vetoed is what led them to being in this position. With that trade, the Lakers had acquired a superstar who would've given them a chance to win a championship right then(this was 2012, when they were still in the mix and going for it), and who would've been a franchise building block for the future and someone they could rebuild around.

Instead they didn't get him. Gasol as a Laker was basically ruined, from that point forward and they pretty much had to trade him. They desperately went for Nash, mortgaging more of the future for what ended up being a complete flop.

Kobe had zero negative effect on these last 2 years, IMO. Nobody good would take their money anyway(they tried for Carmelo, Lebron, etc.), so they filled out their roster with cheap, short contracts, and basically gave the rest to Kobe, and sucked bad enough to get some high draft picks. Now they've got 3 very promising young players in Randle, Russell, and Clarkson and even Nance looks like he's got some potential. Plus they'll have a high pick this year, as long as it doesn't fall outside the top 5. They're in decent shape going forward, provided a couple of those guys develop into all star type players(I think Russell and Randle both have a pretty good chance of that).

What they should have done is amnesty Kobe's contract after he tore his achilles, cut him and start the rebuild back then. The last 3 years or so have been just marking time until Kobe would "consent" to retire. He acts like he owns the damn franchise.

 

[OrangeDW]

What they should have done is amnesty Kobe's contract after he tore his achilles, cut him and start the rebuild back then. The last 3 years or so have been just marking time until Kobe would "consent" to retire. He acts like he owns the damn franchise.

That's my point though...the rebuild already started a couple years ago. Kobe's presence wasn't in the way, IMO. It didn't prevent them from doing anything they needed to do. They've added Randle, Clarkson, Russell, and Nance in the last 2 drafts and are in good shape as far as cap flexibility goes. If they keep their pick this year(top 5 protected), they'll have a nice young core. Make some smart signings and develop their players(so far, so good in that area) and they'll be on their way.

 

[Knicks411]

Kobe signed the extension after he got hurt; if they wanted to get rid of him prior to that they could have just not extended him.

[QUOTE="OrangeDW, post: 1739369, member: 2458"

Kobe had zero negative effect on these last 2 years, IMO. Nobody good would take their money anyway(they tried for Carmelo, Lebron, etc.), so they filled out their roster with cheap, short contracts, and basically gave the rest to Kobe, and sucked bad enough to get some high draft picks. Now they've got 3 very promising young players in Randle, Russell, and Clarkson and even Nance looks like he's got some potential. Plus they'll have a high pick this year, as long as it doesn't fall outside the top 5. They're in decent shape going forward, provided a couple of those guys develop into all star type players(I think Russell and Randle both have a pretty good chance of that).[/QUOTE]

I agree on Russell, I assume they can keep Clarkson this summer, but I don't think much of Randle. He shot 43% from the field this year, and I don't think his game translates very well to the current NBA landscape.

Their pick is only top 3 protected this year.