Nitro

In 99-00 Harper was 5 years older than Kobe was in the Finals last year, had played just as many seasons, and simply wasn't as good of a defender as Kobe is when he decides to make that aspect of his game a focus. Harper was a good, smart defender at the end of his career, but there is no way he's keeping arguably the most quickest PG currently in the NBA out of the paint. None. And while Rondo wasn't the same player he is today, his dribble penetration has always caused problems for defenses, even if he isn't scoring or racking up 10+ assists. In the 2008 post-season he had some flashes of brilliance, including some great games against Cleveland, Detroit, and his 16 assists in Game 2 against the Lakers was the difference in that game (and maybe series). Harper wasn't making the kind of impact in the Lakers 1st championship as Rondo was in Boston's. He probably could have kept up with Ray, but Rice and Green aren't keeping up with Pierce and Garnett, and I trust Ray/Posey/T. Allen's defense on a young Kobe considering they did a stellar job on him in that 2008 series. And even if Garnett spends less time focusing on keeping Kobe out of the paint, Kobe did not have the same outside game in 99-00 as the one he eventually developed, and in no circumstance would Kobe be having a feast in the paint against the Celtics. They had too many good individual and help defenders to have that happen. And besides, what I think is a factor is that Kobe was not yet used to being a guy to score in huge volume, which would be necessary against the Celtics. I just don't think young Kobe would be having much success against the Celtics, even if the Celtics throw some doubles at Shaq. It isn't about stopping Shaq...that just ain't happening. However, Perkins is a huge body and very good post defender, so I think he could do a similar job as Big Ben did on Shaq in 2004, when Shaq averaged about 29/14 on over 60% shooting for the series and the Lakers still lost in 5. I just think that even if Shaq went for his 30/15, and Kobe managed to go for 25/5 on 45% shooting ( better numbers than his regular and post-season averages that year, which wouldn't happen against the Celtics), the Celtics would still have matched up too well to have been beaten in a 7-game series. Personally, I think the Celtics' big 3 would have out-performed the Lakers' big 2 because of matchups, and I think the Celtics' defense would have shutdown the Lakers' 3pt shooters, which was their only weapon aside from Shaq/Kobe.

I don't think it's a big deal, they are two strong ego's and Phil knows how Kobe can get...he's dealt with it for a decade now. Phil knows he has to give Kobe some free reign, and Kobe knows Phil is the coach that will give the Lakers the bench chance at more championships.

In my OP I included all seasons from 2000-2010 (aka all seasons that began this decade). But yeah, it doesn't matter, we can do it either way. I actually think the 1999-2000 Lakers would have even more trouble than the next year's group. That 2000 post-season the Lakers were starting an old Ron Harper at PG, an old AC Green at PF, and an old Glen Rice at SF. Harper was still a good defender at that age, but he was on his last legs and would either be expected to defend Rajon Rondo, who would get into the paint at will, or Ray Allen, who would run him ragged off screens. Either way it would be an issue on defense, and on offense Harper simply wasn't producing or playing efficiently at that stage. AC Green was a good defensive player, but against KG he'd be giving up 3 inches and a lot of athleticism. Also, like Harper, he wasn't an offensive factor at that point. I like Glen Rice a whole lot better than Rick Fox offensively, but he still was primarily a 3pt shooter at that point, which would play into the Celtics hand. Defensively, he'd have no shot at stopping Pierce. Lastly, Kobe's game developed significantly from the 1999-2000 to 2000-2001 season, and he became more adept at being able to handle greater offensive responsibility (i.e- volume). Against the Celtics, who would force Kobe into a perimeter-oriented game and would require Kobe to be a bigger part of the offense than he was in the 99-00 regular and post-seasons, I'd prefer the 00-01 version over the 99-00 version.

All fair points, and I certainly can't argue against the 2000-2001 Lakers track record. However, that 2000-2001 Laker team only won 56 games (because of Kobe's injuries). The 1999-2000 Lakers are the ones who won 67 games, but that was also the team that was 1 quarter away from being eliminated by the Blazers, and Kobe was just starting to really hit his stride. The years I included in this topic also didn't include that 1999-2000 Lakers squad. My arguement for the 2007-2008 Boston Celtics largely revolves around how they would have handled the other elite teams of the decade (2000-2002 Lakers, 2002-2003 Spurs, 2003-2004 Pistons, 2008-2010 Lakers and 2009-2010 Celtics being the best teams of the decade IMO). First off, their track record and health was pretty amazing. They won 66 games with a point differential being over 10pts. They held teams to 90PPG on under 42% shooting. Not only was their defense amazing, but they were also killing teams on the glass. One of the things I think that separates them from some of those Laker teams, and also the 2009-2010 Celtics, was their health. No key player played less than 70 games, and everyone was healthy for the entire post-season run. Their balance on offense was tremendous, with 3 guys who were #1 options and averaging 22-25PPG the year before. Not only were they top heavy, but the Big 3's chemistry was near-perfect, with a go-to iso scorer in Pierce, arguably the best 3pt shooter ever in Ray Allen, and a do-everything big man in KG. Outside of those guys, the team had a ton of role players who didn't do too much offensively and also defended extremely well (Posey, Perkins, Rondo, Tony Allen, PJ Brown, Powe, House, etc...). The team did tend to lose concentration and would play down to their opponents at times, but when the pressure was on, this team was intense, gritty and performed extremely well in big-game situations. If they had played the 2000-2001 Lakers, I don't think the Lakers would have matched up very well. Much like in 2004 against the Pistons, Shaq would probably get his numbers, but they would force Kobe into a well-contested, perimeter oriented game and low shooting percentage for the series. The Celtics were very, very good at closing out on and defending 3pt shooters, which was the Lakers only real offensive threats outside of Kobe and Shaq. Defensively, I don't think Rick Fox would have had a ton of success defending Pierce, and KG's versatility would have been a major problem for an old Horace Grant and Horry. The Celtics also had an advantage in the depth department, and ultimately just had more weapons on both sides of the ball.

Who do ya'll think was the best team of the '00's (2000-2001 through 2009-2010)? My pick would be the 2007-2008 Boston Celtics. I'll explain my pick later on...

All that describes Joel Anthony, except Dampier has size, can rebound the ball (especially on the offensive glass), has better hands, and he still has a better offensive and defensive arsenal than Anthony. He needs to be signed, even as just a 1-year rental until the Heat have the MLE and a fresh batch of FA veterans to work with in the off-season. If it was one of those marginal moves where the Heat could probably get by without his services, then I'd say F him because of his attitude. But in this situation, where there is such extreme pressure to win it all this season, a move needs to be made, and the Heat don't have the trade assets to get it done any other way.

Haha, for the most part we agree on the majority of stuff, it's just that not a lot of people will nitpick certain things or enter an all-out debate like I will. But yeah, I would have probably freaked out if someone else made this same topic in regards to T-Mac

I didn't catch the Heat-Hornets game (only game I didn't catch, or at least see the replay of), but as far as the Celtics game goes, it was the first time they ever played together with the full trio and the first meaningful game they played with each other, so I don't put too much stock into it. I thought Bosh has played great PnR defense, he's been very quick on rotations, and he's not making a ton of mistakes. His biggest problem that I've seen with his help defense is when he is rotating on a big man near the basket, and his lanky size isn't making it very tough for big men to finish. Occasionally he has over-rotated, but overall I think he has played effective team defense.

As we all know, Paul Millsap had a career night. 46pts, 9reb, 1ast, 1stl and 1blk. However, he carved a niche for himself in all-time greatness by dropping 11 points in 28 seconds!!, including the game-tying shot to send it to OT. I [expletive]ing turned off the game with about 30 seconds left, and when I found out about what he did I thought about T-Mac's 13 in 35. And remarkebly, it was almost exactly the same, except T-Mac hit a 3pt shot to win the game, and had a 4pt play on one of those 3's (luckily I watched that entire game ). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0A3oqGjbBoM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ceLlz7dOOvY Just thought I'd share...

Again, though, he'll need to learn his role, and that may take some time. He has been a little reluctant the last few seasons to pull the trigger on some shots he needs to take, and on the Heat he won't be asked to do all that much more. His ballhandling, passing and IQ will certainly help, but to expect him to average 4-5 assists when Wade isn't even doing that right now is a little too optimistic. And he'll be more clutch than LeBron, who has hit the most GW shots in the league since 2005 and has statistically been the best clutch player in the league by a good margin for the last 3-4 seasons? No chance. He will be a much better option to hit a GW or game-tying 3 than Eddie House, though.

Well, there is a few reasons why it shouldn't and won't happen... 1) The potential for Bosh (and, for that matter, the entire team) in this offense, and on the boards has not even been close to being realized. As a #1 option he averaged 25PPG on over 50% shooting. He may or may not have been putting up some empty stats on those Raptors team, but the fact of the matter is he is supremely talented. So far this season he has had the hardest time figuring out his role, and for the most part has been relegated to a spotup jumpshooter. I've seen some progress with him working within the offense to get better shots, like tonight where he rolled perfectly off a pick set for LeBron and got an easy layup. As he keeps figuring things out, he will certainly be more efficient from the floor, and will be a dangerous weapon. He probably won't crack 16-17PPG for the season, but just having such a versatile PF that can drop 30+ on any given night is a major advantage. On the boards, he will continue to get better. Since he has been relegated to being a spot-up shooter on offense and is actually playing in a strong defensive system and not simply standing under the basket waiting for rebounds, it will take awhile for him to get comfortable. 2) His help defense has been very good, and against natural PF's he has done a solid job (tonight he got owned). His range on defense has been a major reason this defense has been so suffocating, and his defense will only get better as he develops in a defensive-minded system. Also, until the team gets a true starting Center with size, they are going to struggle against teams with great frontcourts. I think starting and playing Z more minutes will GREATLY help this as he gives the team much needed size, which alone makes up for a decent amount of Bosh's deficiencies in the frontcourt. If they somehow get Dampier, Bosh's defense will start looking a LOT better. 3) Mike Miller, the team's 4th best player, is still out. Until we see the entire roster play 20+ games after they start gelling, making major roster moves, besides filling up glaring holes like at PG and C, is simply premature. 4) The Heat have played 8 games with an entirely revamped cast. They lost to the defending EC champs by like 5pts the 1st game, lost to a 7-0 team in the Hornets by 3pts, and gave up a 20pt lead overall and like a 6pt lead with 30 seconds left to a team expected to make the playoffs in a stacked WC (very possibly could win the NW division). So CHILL.

Wow, after that beautiful fastbreak Ager nails a 50ftr. Hope they keep this game at least a little interesting.

When it comes to games with at least 20pts/10ast, he's had 15 in his career.

Same. If Spoelstra is so uncomfortable with playing Anthony and Z 20+ minutes each, and will go as far as to keep Bosh or Haslem at Center for so many minutes, this team is going to have a LOT of trouble all season. Even though Dampier is a diva, he will only be a one-year rental until the Heat can make an off-season move, and his size/rebounding/defense/efficiency will be a HUGE boost to this team.

Wow, that's got to be the greatest quarter in NBA history. 20-21, with the one miss being a last second heave? That's nuts, and the Nuggets should be epically embarassed...

Honestly, if he would just move Z to starting Center, maybe House to PG (or Wade to PG and Jones to SG until Miller gets back), and stop going 15-20 minutes with Haslem/Bosh at Center, this team would be having a whole lot less issues. Most of the team's issues so far has been with the rotations. Tonight was inexcusable. They had a huge lead in the first half, didn't adjust in the 2nd half, and gave up an ample lead with less than a minute to go. That is on the coach for sure.

WAIT WHAT?!?! I turned off this game because the Heat were up by like 7 with 30 seconds to go...WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED!!!!

What you said had nothing to do with Kobe?... And we are discussing MJ vs. Kobe, so of course I am going to bring Kobe into it. You bring up MJ shooting 49.9% and 47.5% from the field his last 2 post-seasons in the first 3-peat, but if it is not to prop up Kobe, then I see no use of bringing it into the discussion. As for me saying anything bad about MJ, of course I won't when I am defending him against [insert any player in NBA history]. If you wanted to know, my major gripes with MJ are how he would literally break a teammate's spirit when before Phil came along to the point where they would be rendered useless, he would sometimes have too strong a vice grip on the team's play style (similar to Kobe jacking up 30+ shots when he's cold, or LeBron refusing to play off-ball), and sometimes he would just try to force too much instead of letting the game come to him. Also, at the tail-end of his Bulls career, he would sometimes settle a bit too much with his fadeaway off the mid-post instead of taking it to the rim. Other than that, besides maybe his 3pt shooting early in his career, and there's not a whole lot to really harp on the guy about.

No, we were discussing what MJ would have done with Shaq. With Shaq, Kobe played in *8* post-seasons, *3* of them averaging 5APG or more. 3/8 does not equal 1/2. LeBron's post-season in 2009 was AMAZING, and that Orlando series was one of the most dominant I've ever seen from an individual player. Not sure what it has to do with Kobe and MJ, but yes, LeBron so far has been an awesome post-season performer. If he had the help that Kobe and MJ had, even if it was just Gasol, and he won a ring or two, he'd definitely start to be in the discussion for GOAT. And as for the Jordan not shooting over 50% after '91, he shot 49.9% from the field, 39% from 3 in the '92 post-season. The 49.9% from the field would be the best in Kobe's career, and the 39% would be 3rd best in Kobe's career...keep in mind Kobe has played in 13 post-seasons. In '93 he shot 47.5% from the field (would be 3rd best in Kobe's career), and 39% from 3 once again. It just really, really bothers me when people think Kobe has ever been a better basketball player than prime MJ, plain and simple.

I'm sure it would be the same for Kidd, who had a terrible shooting performance in at least half of his career triple doubles

No you weren't, you just gave a smaller sample size. If you include Kobe's early seasons, he averaged 5APG or more in 3 of 7 post-seasons. If you use only after the championship run started, MJ's assist numbers are still vastly superior in the post-season, so the point is moot in this debate. They ran both, and both teams gave ample amounts of iso plays for both Kobe and Jordan, and also PnR oppertunities. To discount a career worth of stats because they weren't in EXACTLY the same offense is ridiculous, and would nullify any player comparisons. Of course he wasn't putting up the same stats in the 2nd 3-peat, he was in his mid-30's. Kobe, because he's always relied so heavily on his outside game, has only dropped off a little bit statistically. However, because his shot selection was so poor for his prime, his peak wasn't as dominant or impressive in any fashion as MJ's was (efficiency a lot moreso than volume). It also didn't help that when Kobe was expected to carry that same load as MJ did before Pippen/when Pippen was young, his defense fell off big-time (even if he got a few undeserved First Team All-Defense selections) while MJ's was arguably the best in the league. And if you want to dissect each's game, I'll go ahead and do that too, but this whole topic was based around stats so I ran with it. When Kobe played out of the triangle he coughed the ball up nearly 4.5x per game, and even if he kept the same 7APG pace he was going at in the beginning of that season, his AST:TO ratio wouldn't have been nearly as impressive when Mike was pretty much a full-time PG averaging 33/8/8 on 53% shooting. Even though we can debate who was the better passer, MJ is the guy you'd trust more with being the primary playmaker since he was always more careful with the ball throughout his career than Kobe. And as I said, regardless of the system and realistic teammates, there is no way Kobe averages over 11 assists in a series unless he is scoring about 10PPG, let alone 30PPG. I wouldn't be surprised if Kobe has never had a 5 game streak, in the regular season or post-season, where he averaged 11APG. MJ did it in the Finals.

Jordan did it 8 of 9 times before his first retirement, 6 of those he was over 6 assists (something Kobe's done only once in 13 tries), 3 of over 7 assists (Kobe's never done that). My point stands.

I meant to say you think Kobe is the better player, period. That's why I included the word individually, but that was my fault. I meant to say, accolades aside, that you think Kobe is the better player. I'm not throwing Kobe under the bus, I just don't think there's enough to say without a doubt he could have averaged 40PPG for a series, let alone 5x in a 5 year period, regardless of teammates or system. And besides the 40PPG, I can say with 100% certainty that Kobe would not have been throwing in 6-8 assists, 6-10 rebounds, 2-3 steals and 1-2 blocks like MJ was in those series'. Put Kobe in any offensive system and that would not change. And I am also 100% sure Kobe would never average 11 assists for a series, let alone with 30+ points. Playoffs are different than regular season. There is a lot more defensive energy, a slower pace, and coaches and players have much more indepth gameplanning. Kobe actually averaged 43PPG against Phoenix in 2005-2006 for the season series on strong efficiency, but in the post-season he did not even crack 30PPG (despite having a 50pt game outburst in Game 6). And in this NBA, individual defenders on the wings have little value against superstars when the team defense is garbage. Raja and Marion could not stay in front of prime Kobe consistently without handchecking, and Amare and Diaw aren't scaring anyone around the paint. If there was ever an oppertunity for Kobe to put up ridiculous scoring numbers in a series, that was the ideal situation. He had the crappy offensive cast, he was in his absolute prime, and he was facing a poor defensive team. Jordan's career post-season average from 3 is only .5% worse than Kobe's. Meanwhile, Jordan shot 5% better from the field, and 2% better from the FT line. Besides the FT part, it's the same situation when I posted those Finals elimination game stats. That's fine, forget the Shaq years...Kobe still hasn't averaged more than 33PPG for a series (MJ's career average) in the 6 years and countless series' since, and only once has he ever had a post-season where he's matched MJ's career post-season shooting percentage. If you want to bring age into it, at 34 years old MJ averaged 37.3PPG/5.3APG/5.8RPG on 57.0% shooting in a series against the Bullets. At age 35, he averaged 36.3PPG on 53.0% shooting against the Nets in a playoff series. That same post-season he averaged 32.0PPG/4.1APG/5.7RPG on 47.0% shooting against the Pacers. And give MJ Shaq, and I PROMISE you he shoots over 45% from the field more than once in 7 post-seasons, which Kobe didn't. I PROMISE you he averages more than 5APG in at least half of those post-seasons, which Kobe did not. I PROMISE you MJ gives you over 2SPG and over 1BPG through those 7 post-seasons, which Kobe did not. Give MJ full PG duties and still the ability to take 20+ shot attempts and his all-around stats would have been very similar to '88-'89 when he averaged 33/8/8/3 on 54% shooting.

That's my point. I said I don't think Kobe is a better player, just possibly more skilled. Using just that factor in the arguement that he is the better player, individually, I think is a flawed arguement.

Just one thing regarding MJ's 11APG average in the Finals...it wasn't like he had such amazing 3pt shooters that series. That post-season Paxson was 2-14 from 3, BJ Armstrong was 3-5, and Pippen was 4-17. The only 2 players to get it going from long distance that post season was Craig Hodges (11-28) and MJ himself (10-26). And MJ was still playing within the confines of the triangle, scored over 28 each of those games, shot over 52% 4 of those 5 games, grabbed over 7 boards in 3 of those games, over 2 steals in 4 of those games, and over 2 blocks in 3 of those games. Young Pippen, Paxson, Armstrong, Grant and Cartwright, in the triangle, isn't the easiest cast to rack up 11APG with, let alone with all the other heavy lifting MJ was doing. I don't think, if you replaced Rondo with Paxson and Pierce with Kobe, that Kobe could even do that with the current Celtics team. That's always going to be the main problem with your arguement. I know you believe Kobe, individually, is the greatest to play the game, but on the basis that he's more skilled I think is a very flawed arguement. Even though Shaq gets criminally underrated in terms of just how skilled he was, there have been a number of big men that have been more skilled than he was. Still, it didn't matter, as he was so physically dominant and was so good at what he did do that it negated all that. With the MJ/Kobe debate that skill difference is a whole lot closer, but MJ was clearly a more physically dominant player, and what he was truly great at was harder to stop and more efficient than Kobe's key strengths. The stats, no matter how you twist them, are strongly in MJ's favor. Then it becomes and arguement of, "Well, if Kobe had this, or Kobe did that..." which provides no tangible proof or reason against a guy who did those things many, many times.