CELTICS CONTINUE TO DEBUNK MYTH OF "COACH" JACKSON

In article <EFR5k.158221$TT4.129096@attbi_s22>,
Skeptic <bcs002b.RemoveThis@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> Wake me when Ray Allen is the entire focus of the Lakers' defense.
>
>I never said he was was - straw man argument.


Someone did, because the title of this thread is "Kobe vs Allen". It's
stupid to compare Kobe to Allen when Kobe is the focus of the Celtics
defense and Allen is the third point of focus for the Lakers defense.
You should compare Kobe to Garnett, who is the focus of the Lakers defense
and who is shooting 40% as a result.


>As for Allen, this is exactly why he would have been a bad fit in Boston.
>He would have detracted from the other players and made the Celtics less of
>a team and more of a Kobe show. Kobe shows don't and won't win
>championships. Teams do.


I know you are just now getting back into the NBA after a 20 year hiatus, but
the Lakers and Kobe won a few titles while you were cheering for the Red Sox.
I know you think Shaq won those titles, but Shaq was ringless until Kobe
matured into a true All-Star. Shaq's claim to fame was getting swept out
of the playoffs every year.


>You'll be able to see that for yourself tonight. If Kobe were truly a team
>player, he'd be able to get Odom and Gasol to the point where they were
>considered offensive threats enough to not be able to just focus on one guy.



Both Gasol (.527) and Odom (.558) are shooting over 50%. They are the only
players in The Finals on either team averaging over 6 points per game that are
doing so.


Dimitri
 >> Stay informed about: CELTICS CONTINUE TO DEBUNK MYTH OF "COACH" JACKSON 

On Jun 17, 6:40�am, "Skeptic" <bcs0....RemoveThis@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "MMM" <madmanmoo....RemoveThis@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> news:57af818a-6ad4-4b4b-a2a8-62e37e00e684@w8g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
> On Jun 16, 8:19?pm, "Skeptic" <bcs0....RemoveThis@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "MMM" <madmanmoo....RemoveThis@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:9d307cec-a92f-4bd1-817f-99d1ee0b8091@y21g2000hsf.googlegroups.com....
> > On Jun 16, 1:24?pm, "Skeptic" <bcs0....RemoveThis@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > "MMM" <madmanmoo....RemoveThis@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> > >news:14f6ceea-609a-44b4-8bb6-123c0fd27557@79g2000hsk.googlegroups.com....
> > > On Jun 16, 6:18?am, "Skeptic" <bcs0....RemoveThis@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > "Dennis" <boz....RemoveThis@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > > >news:91a70500-36ea-4efe-a0e6-92b09067bbff@t54g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> > > > On Jun 15, 3:11 pm, "Skeptic" <bcs0....RemoveThis@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > Kobe is no better Iverson.-
>
> > > > hahahahahahahahahahaha... hilarious... and you wonder why
> > > > no one takes you serious...
>
> > > > **************************************************************
> > > > REPLY:
>
> > > > How's this for taking me serious - pre finals a I said Boston would
> > > > games
> > > > 1
> > > > and 2, lose game 3, win game 4, lose game, win game 6.
>
> > > > I've provided a rationale for a fair comparison to Kobe. ?If you
> > > > disagree,
> > > > give some reasons. ?Cause they seem awfully similar to me ... in stats
> > > > and
> > > > in success as the team's leader.
>
> > > The 76ers' all-time record with Iverson in the lineup was barely
> > > above .500 (355-342), and in the 2006-2007 season, the 76ers posted a
> > > better win-loss record without Iverson in the lineup than with him.
>
> > > Kobe Bryant: 8-time All-Defensive Selection:
> > > First Team: 2000, 2003, 2004, 2006, 2007, 2008
> > > Second Team: 2001, 2002
>
> > > *****************************************************************
>
> > > So that's your argument... that Kobe has more hype surrounding him than
> > > Iverson does? ?Wow.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Excuse me but how can you possibly compare the two unless you consider
> > the facts. Fact is, Kobe is a great defender and Iverson is not. If
> > you discount the all-defensive selections for Kobe then go ahead and
> > discount the mvp award for Iverson..afterall, it's just a popularity
> > award anyways. So..what's left..? Ah yes, nerd stats...and rings..and
> > scoreboard.
>
> > ***************************************************************
>
> > Kobe is a good not great defender. ?Kobe can guard more players because of
> > his size.
>
> ..and quickness. I'll concede good but definately better than the
> average 2 guard.
>
> > Iverson is also a good defender. ?He plays the passing lanes well.
>
> Iverson plays passing lanes because he likes to steal the ball, which
> he is very good at. He also gambles and gets burned more times than he
> makes steals..that doesn't make him a good defender at all.
>
> > I'll happily discount Iverson's MVP. ?You should know that when he got
> > that
> > award, I promptly labeled (in the C's NG) as the least valuable player to
> > ever win an MVP and it was really a demonstration as to what useless such
> > selections were (MVP, all defensive teams, etc.).
>
> We agree Iverson was unworthy of his mvp..we disagree that all awards
> and selections have no qualifying requirements and the players who
> receive these selections and honors are always unworthy. You do not
> get selected 8 times to the all-defensive team by NOT being above
> average if not the best in your position.
>
> > You should try watching games that don't involve Kobe someday.
>
> You should try to watch a few games that does involve Kobe. I'm
> certain you would be enlightened.
> �?
>
> >Iverson is an amazing scorer.
>
> Agreed..scorer only though.?
>
> >Kobe is also.
>
> Kobe is most dominate offensive force in the NBA today. This is not
> just my opinion, ask any player, coach, or owner in the NBA what they
> think. ?
>
> >Both play good D.
>
> No. AI plays marginal D. Kobe is an 8 time all-defensive team
> defender. �?
>
> >Neither has ever been able to lead their team to a championship.
>
> Same ole dribble Laker fans hear from Kobe bashers. Kobe shared
> equally in his championships, this is a TEAM game we are speaking of
> and anyone who watched more than one half of Laker basketball would
> know Kobe AND Shaq were leaders as well was Fox and Fish. You assume
> that Shaq lead the Lakers and totally carried them on his
> back..obviously, you're a Kobe basher. You discount Kobe's work ethic
> and give Shaq credit for being overweight and unwilling to actually
> push himself until he got to the playoffs. How do you think the Lakers
> made it to the playoffs in the first place? Riding Shaq's coat tails?
> And just an after thought..should Pippen strip himself of his rings
> because really he just played with MJ and Jordan was totally
> responsible for all their championships? Ridiculous. One more...on the
> C's this season..who's your leader? Pierce? KG? Can't have more than
> one so choose well. �?
>
> >Stats are similar.
>
> Not all of them..just the ones you choose to use. You missed my little
> number thing about Iverson so i'll re-post it for ya...
>
> The 76ers' all-time record with Iverson in the lineup was barely
> above .500 (355-342), and in the 2006-2007 season, the 76ers posted a
> better win-loss record without Iverson in the lineup than with him. ?
>
> >Rings go to Kobe thanks to Shaq - but the good fortune to play with Shaq
> >rather than
> > Dalembert or Ratliff doesn't make Kobe better than Iverson - it makes him
> > more fortunate.
>
> Yadda yadda...see above.
>
> > Kobe is a tall version of Iverson. ?If that bothers you, think of Iverson
> > as
> > a short version of Kobe.- Hide quoted text -
>
> I see Kobe as about equal height but more consistant and definately
> more explosive and just all around better player than Paul Pierce.
> Right now that's all that matters.
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> **************************************************************
> Reply:
>
> 1. �You continue to selectively discount certain awards. �Iverson winning
> the MVP is not something worth arguing, but Kobe getting selected tall
> defensive teams is? �You can't have it both ways. �I'm in the camp that such
> selections are devoid of any meaningful value in evaluating players. �If you
> want to cite them, go ahead, but they're popularity contests only loosely
> based on ability. �A continuation on that line of reasoning means you
> concede the case that Kobe = Tall AI
>
I concede nothing. I discount no certain awards..I was merely agreeing
with you that AI didn't deserve his MVP which is one less thing you
can compare with Kobe.

> 2. �Pippen deserves his rings. �All of them. �Just like Kobe does. �Pippen
> was, imo, MORE instrument to Chicago's success than Kobe was to LA's. �I
> think you'll disagree, but many would agree. �Pippen was a very unique type
> of player with his length, flexibility to play multiple positions, and he
> actually WAS a great defender. �I think replacing him during the Bulls Era
> would have been very very hard. �Kobe's role was a scorer. �Someone to take
> the burden off Shaq. �Someone who could shoot and open up the interior.
> That's the sort of role that is easily filled by Ray Allen, Reggie, Pierce,
> Hamilton, Ginobili, Finley, and host of other players. �Pippen without
> Jordan didn't win any rings but got close. �Kobe without Shaq hasn't won any
> rings but got close.
>
Pippen's greatest contribution to the Bulls championships was his
defense. He was a remarkable defender especially considering he always
had the tough assignments. I'm an honest person and concede it would
be ridiculous to put Kobe into Pippens defensive class..but I will say
Kobe is not too far behind. Kobe also gets the tough assignments and
more often than not does his job well. This plays to my point that a
player can not be judged merely on his offensive talents. AI has never
been compared to anyone with defensive skills..until now. I take from
this that you like Pippen..hate Kobe.

> 3. �You talk again about their teams' success. �Absolutely ridiculous
> reasoning. �Iverson (and again, I'm no fan because of his ball hoggedness)
> played for some really poor teams. �He never had a period of time with the
> game's most dominant center. �He never really playd with a center.. �I think
> the best guard he ever played next was Snow, who would struggle to not be
> cut on most NBA teams. �Kobe would have done no better with those teams.
> Just like those of us in Boston don't fault Pierce for the C's futility last
> year. �Good player on a bad team.
>
First you discount awards and selections, now you discount teams'
success. You are correct in one thing..this is absolutely ridiculous
reasoning. But just for the sake of beating my head against another
wall, I believe Kobe DOES do better with a couple of the teams AI has
played with in place of him. My belief is that Kobe would have created
better scoring opprotunities for his team mates, like he has always
done here, and of course his defense far surpasses that of AI. Kobe is
a better talent all-around than AI. Sorry, but i'm not the only one
who feels that way.

> 4. �Stats you say are for nerds. �Ok. �That doesn't leave you with much as
> evidenced by the above 3 points.
>
I waiting for a solid point to rebutt. You say Iverson's career won/
loss record doesn't matter but what you think does matter is that he
nor Kobe has lead their individual teams to a championship. You can't
have it both ways..you can repeatedly ignore my points of contention,
that's fine, but stop dancing for a second and put some thought into
this.

> Why don't you just say "because I said so"; that's about what you're left
> with.- Hide quoted text -
>
Ok, because I said so and everyone who knows anything about basketball
and is not a Kobe-Basher agrees with me.
> - Show quoted text -
 >> Stay informed about: CELTICS CONTINUE TO DEBUNK MYTH OF "COACH" JACKSON 

Skeptic wrote:
> "D. Gerasimatos" <dim.TakeThisOut@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU> wrote in message
> news:g38la0$tf2$1@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU...
>>
>>
>> Pierce on Kobe:
>>
>>
>> "He's the whole focus for us," Pierce said. "He's a guy who can beat
>> you all by himself, so the whole game plan is (based) on stopping him
>> and making other guys beat us. It's just unfortunate that we let the
>> other guys beat us."
>>
>> Wake me when Ray Allen is the entire focus of the Lakers' defense.
>
> I never said he was was - straw man argument. You could easily argue that
> playing against the Sixer team that went to the Finals, the focus of the
> defenses was to stop AI. So more proof that AI and Kobe are very similar.
>
> As for Allen, this is exactly why he would have been a bad fit in Boston.
> He would have detracted from the other players and made the Celtics less of
> a team and more of a Kobe show. Kobe shows don't and won't win
> championships. Teams do.
>
> You'll be able to see that for yourself tonight. If Kobe were truly a team
> player, he'd be able to get Odom and Gasol to the point where they were
> considered offensive threats enough to not be able to just focus on one guy.
> That sort of ball hoggedness is LA's undoing. The only player in the
> history of basketball that has been able to do that and win was MJ. But as
> Kobe continues to prove, he is nowhere near as talented as MJ.

after series, print and eat... :-)
 >> Stay informed about: CELTICS CONTINUE TO DEBUNK MYTH OF "COACH" JACKSON 

"D. Gerasimatos" <dim DeleteThis @soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU> wrote in message
news:g390m3$9cr$1@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU...
> In article <EFR5k.158221$TT4.129096@attbi_s22>,
> Skeptic <bcs002b DeleteThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Wake me when Ray Allen is the entire focus of the Lakers' defense.
>>
>>I never said he was was - straw man argument.
>
>
> Someone did, because the title of this thread is "Kobe vs Allen". It's

All I said was that the Celtics would not have been a better team this year
with Kobe instead of Allen. That goes well beyond which player is better
individually.

> stupid to compare Kobe to Allen when Kobe is the focus of the Celtics
> defense and Allen is the third point of focus for the Lakers defense.
> You should compare Kobe to Garnett, who is the focus of the Lakers defense
> and who is shooting 40% as a result.

See above. My comparison for Kobe is AI.

>>As for Allen, this is exactly why he would have been a bad fit in Boston.
>>He would have detracted from the other players and made the Celtics less
>>of
>>a team and more of a Kobe show. Kobe shows don't and won't win
>>championships. Teams do.
>
>
> I know you are just now getting back into the NBA after a 20 year hiatus,
> but
> the Lakers and Kobe won a few titles while you were cheering for the Red
> Sox.

Shaq won with Kobe as a helpful SG. He could have easily been replaced by
many others. Shaq was the key.

> I know you think Shaq won those titles, but Shaq was ringless until Kobe
> matured into a true All-Star. Shaq's claim to fame was getting swept out
> of the playoffs every year.

LOL... oh my. Shaq moved on to Miami after Kobe banished him from LA.
There he took another team that without him had no chance of winning a title
and did so. Had he been younger and healthier, Miami would have been the
team dominating the East. D-Wade played Kobe's role there. Shaq won those
rings, plain and simple. Kobe helped, but no moreso than any above average
SG or SF would have.

>>You'll be able to see that for yourself tonight. If Kobe were truly a
>>team
>>player, he'd be able to get Odom and Gasol to the point where they were
>>considered offensive threats enough to not be able to just focus on one
>>guy.
>
> Both Gasol (.527) and Odom (.558) are shooting over 50%. They are the only
> players in The Finals on either team averaging over 6 points per game that
> are
> doing so.

I'm sure that had a point but must have stopped short of making it. Again,
if Kobe were a complete player, he would take players like Gasol and Odom
and make them into real offensive threats so that teams would not be able to
spend so much attention stopping Kobe. It's funny you mention Odom has a
high FG%.... he gets most of his points opportunistically with rebounds or
rolling on pick and rolls from Kobe double teams. It's not that he is a
great scorer. His teammate just draws a lot of attention.
 >> Stay informed about: CELTICS CONTINUE TO DEBUNK MYTH OF "COACH" JACKSON 

"D. Gerasimatos" <dim.DeleteThis@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU> wrote in message
news:g3910c$9n0$1@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU...
> In article <e3G5k.211852$yE1.161728@attbi_s21>,
> Skeptic <bcs002b.DeleteThis@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
> [snip!]
>>
>>Kobe is a tall version of Iverson. If that bothers you, think of Iverson
>>as
>>a short version of Kobe.
>
>
> And both of them are better than Paul Pierce.

And Pierce is better than Gasol. Your point?
 >> Stay informed about: CELTICS CONTINUE TO DEBUNK MYTH OF "COACH" JACKSON 

In article <N7V5k.212842$yE1.65379@attbi_s21>,
Skeptic <bcs002b DeleteThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
>"D. Gerasimatos" <dim DeleteThis @soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU> wrote in message
>news:g3910c$9n0$1@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU...
>> In article <e3G5k.211852$yE1.161728@attbi_s21>,
>> Skeptic <bcs002b DeleteThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>> [snip!]
>>>
>>>Kobe is a tall version of Iverson. If that bothers you, think of Iverson
>>>as
>>>a short version of Kobe.
>>
>>
>> And both of them are better than Paul Pierce.
>
>And Pierce is better than Gasol. Your point?



So in your world:


Kobe = Iverson > Pierce > Gasol


I just wanted to hear you say Kobe was the best player on the court.
Thanks for acknowledging that.


Dimitri
 >> Stay informed about: CELTICS CONTINUE TO DEBUNK MYTH OF "COACH" JACKSON 

"D. Gerasimatos" <dim RemoveThis @soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU> wrote in message
news:g394k3$dib$1@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU...
> In article <9tWdnUgSjYKck8XVnZ2dnUVZ_r3inZ2d RemoveThis @supernews.com>,
> Bryant Durrell <durrell RemoveThis @innocence.com> wrote:
>>In article <g39193$a04$1@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>,
>>D. Gerasimatos <dim RemoveThis @soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU> wrote:
>>>>IOW, defensively, any thought of not giving Ray
>>>>equal attention is foolish.
>>>
>>>Equal to Paul Pierce and Garnett? He's hardly deserving.
>>
>>Game Four called. It has a couple of layups it wants to show you.
>
>
> It's easy to make layups when no one's paying attention to you in favor of
> your
> more high-profile team members.

It's EASY to give a guy an uncontested layup driven to the basket from about
15-20 feet away? A guy who is a known prolific shooter and scoring guard?
That's EASY to do??

Well, I guess for your team it is. That's why they're all done in a few
hours.
 >> Stay informed about: CELTICS CONTINUE TO DEBUNK MYTH OF "COACH" JACKSON 

"Skeptic" <bcs002b.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:M6V5k.158459$TT4.117574@attbi_s22:

> I'm sure that had a point but must have stopped short of making it.
> Again, if Kobe were a complete player, he would take players like
> Gasol and Odom and make them into real offensive threats so that teams
> would not be able to spend so much attention stopping Kobe. It's
> funny you mention Odom has a high FG%.... he gets most of his points
> opportunistically with rebounds or rolling on pick and rolls from Kobe
> double teams. It's not that he is a great scorer. His teammate just
> draws a lot of attention.

So you are saying that because of Kobe, Odom becomes a better player
because he gets better looks when Kobe is double-teamed. That
contradicts your litmus test that Kobe does not make Odom more of an
offensive threat. SCottie Pippen's two best seasons PPG-wise were while
MJ was playing baseball. Those were also his last two seasons shooting
over 48%. They were also 2 of the three highest FTA seasons he had. So,
did MJ make Pippen more of an offensive threat? Your logic, such as it
is, is circular and self-defeating.

--
Are you Evolved?
 >> Stay informed about: CELTICS CONTINUE TO DEBUNK MYTH OF "COACH" JACKSON 

"theBZA" <dewey3kNOSPAM RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9AC0A87DEEE49dewey3kNOSPAMgmailco@130.133.1.4...
> "Skeptic" <bcs002b RemoveThis @yahoo.com> wrote in
> news:M6V5k.158459$TT4.117574@attbi_s22:
>
>> I'm sure that had a point but must have stopped short of making it.
>> Again, if Kobe were a complete player, he would take players like
>> Gasol and Odom and make them into real offensive threats so that teams
>> would not be able to spend so much attention stopping Kobe. It's
>> funny you mention Odom has a high FG%.... he gets most of his points
>> opportunistically with rebounds or rolling on pick and rolls from Kobe
>> double teams. It's not that he is a great scorer. His teammate just
>> draws a lot of attention.
>
> So you are saying that because of Kobe, Odom becomes a better player
> because he gets better looks when Kobe is double-teamed.

No. Nice try at placing words inappropriately, though.

Kobe does no make Odom a better player. He provides him with some easy
scoring opportunities. That's not the same. A good team player helps his
players at more times than just when he has 2 or 3 defenders on him. Kobe
is selfish. Plain and simple. Odom and Gasol are greatly limited by Kobe
because he is a ballhog. It's a strain watching LA get them involved while
Kobe is on the floor. The Celtics are the exact opposite. Except for those
times that Pierce goes into "give me the damn ball mode", which can be good
and bad, the team functions, well, like a team. If you need that explained
further, I'll leave you alone.

> That
> contradicts your litmus test that Kobe does not make Odom more of an
> offensive threat.

Any halfwit can set a screen, roll, catch a pass, and make a wide open
layup. It doesn't make him an "offensive threat". It makes Kobe an
offensive threat. Odom could one day become an offensive threat by actually
being involved in an offense that functions like a team offense.

> SCottie Pippen's two best seasons PPG-wise were while
> MJ was playing baseball. Those were also his last two seasons shooting
> over 48%. They were also 2 of the three highest FTA seasons he had. So,
> did MJ make Pippen more of an offensive threat? Your logic, such as it
> is, is circular and self-defeating.

Oh, you're misunderstanding me if you think that. I think MJ was absolutely
the biggest ballhog ever in the game. Worse even than AI or Kobe. BUT, the
overwhelming difference is this: MJ succeeded by being a ballhog. He was
so much better than any of his contemporaries that he really did become
unstopable. He passed when he needed to and made all sorts of other plays,
but he was The Ballhog. Pippen was always a transition scoring threat. But
in a halfcourt game, I'd be more concerned about where a guy like Paxson was
spotting up than Scottie.
 >> Stay informed about: CELTICS CONTINUE TO DEBUNK MYTH OF "COACH" JACKSON 

"Skeptic" <bcs002b.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:8oV5k.158482$TT4.115698@attbi_s22:

>
> "theBZA" <dewey3kNOSPAM.TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns9AC0A87DEEE49dewey3kNOSPAMgmailco@130.133.1.4...
>> "Skeptic" <bcs002b.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote in
>> news:M6V5k.158459$TT4.117574@attbi_s22:
>>
>>> I'm sure that had a point but must have stopped short of making it.
>>> Again, if Kobe were a complete player, he would take players like
>>> Gasol and Odom and make them into real offensive threats so that
>>> teams would not be able to spend so much attention stopping Kobe.
>>> It's funny you mention Odom has a high FG%.... he gets most of his
>>> points opportunistically with rebounds or rolling on pick and rolls
>>> from Kobe double teams. It's not that he is a great scorer. His
>>> teammate just draws a lot of attention.
>>
>> So you are saying that because of Kobe, Odom becomes a better player
>> because he gets better looks when Kobe is double-teamed.
>
> No. Nice try at placing words inappropriately, though.
>
> Kobe does no make Odom a better player. He provides him with some
> easy scoring opportunities. That's not the same. A good team player
> helps his players at more times than just when he has 2 or 3 defenders
> on him. Kobe is selfish. Plain and simple. Odom and Gasol are
> greatly limited by Kobe because he is a ballhog. It's a strain
> watching LA get them involved while Kobe is on the floor. The Celtics
> are the exact opposite. Except for those times that Pierce goes into
> "give me the damn ball mode", which can be good and bad, the team
> functions, well, like a team. If you need that explained further,
> I'll leave you alone.
>
This is just gibberish. Odom just had the best year of his career but
somehow it was inspite of playing with Kobe? Gasol was at 51% FGs with
memphis and shot 59% with the Lakers but I'm sure that somehow it isn't
because of Kobe. You are an irrational Kobe-hater. That's fine. You also
have no actual argument which is why you resort to veiled insults.


--
Are you Evolved?
 >> Stay informed about: CELTICS CONTINUE TO DEBUNK MYTH OF "COACH" JACKSON 

theBZA wrote:
> "Skeptic" <bcs002b.DeleteThis@yahoo.com> wrote in
> news:8oV5k.158482$TT4.115698@attbi_s22:
>
>>
>> "theBZA" <dewey3kNOSPAM.DeleteThis@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:Xns9AC0A87DEEE49dewey3kNOSPAMgmailco@130.133.1.4...
>>> "Skeptic" <bcs002b.DeleteThis@yahoo.com> wrote in
>>> news:M6V5k.158459$TT4.117574@attbi_s22:
>>>
>>>> I'm sure that had a point but must have stopped short of making it.
>>>> Again, if Kobe were a complete player, he would take players like
>>>> Gasol and Odom and make them into real offensive threats so that
>>>> teams would not be able to spend so much attention stopping Kobe.
>>>> It's funny you mention Odom has a high FG%.... he gets most of his
>>>> points opportunistically with rebounds or rolling on pick and rolls
>>>> from Kobe double teams. It's not that he is a great scorer. His
>>>> teammate just draws a lot of attention.
>>>
>>> So you are saying that because of Kobe, Odom becomes a better player
>>> because he gets better looks when Kobe is double-teamed.
>>
>> No. Nice try at placing words inappropriately, though.
>>
>> Kobe does no make Odom a better player. He provides him with some
>> easy scoring opportunities. That's not the same. A good team player
>> helps his players at more times than just when he has 2 or 3 defenders
>> on him. Kobe is selfish. Plain and simple. Odom and Gasol are
>> greatly limited by Kobe because he is a ballhog. It's a strain
>> watching LA get them involved while Kobe is on the floor. The Celtics
>> are the exact opposite. Except for those times that Pierce goes into
>> "give me the damn ball mode", which can be good and bad, the team
>> functions, well, like a team. If you need that explained further,
>> I'll leave you alone.
>>
> This is just gibberish. Odom just had the best year of his career but
> somehow it was inspite of playing with Kobe? Gasol was at 51% FGs with
> memphis and shot 59% with the Lakers but I'm sure that somehow it isn't
> because of Kobe. You are an irrational Kobe-hater. That's fine. You also
> have no actual argument which is why you resort to veiled insults.

funniest thing about skeptic is when you go at with insults he withers
away like a lil beeeeeeeeeyotch... :-)
 >> Stay informed about: CELTICS CONTINUE TO DEBUNK MYTH OF "COACH" JACKSON 

On Jun 17, 8:05�pm, "Skeptic" <bcs0....DeleteThis@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Lakers should have stayed at home.
>
> Spared them the embarrassment.

Setting aside differences..congrats on a great season. This has been a
remarkable year for the Celts and they deserve everything they have
worked so hard to gain. Well done.
 >> Stay informed about: CELTICS CONTINUE TO DEBUNK MYTH OF "COACH" JACKSON 

"Dennis" <bozak1 DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote in message
news:91a70500-36ea-4efe-a0e6-92b09067bbff@t54g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> hahahahahahahahahahaha... hilarious... and you wonder why
> no one takes you serious...

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAH!!! Lakers best player is a GREEDY BALL HOGGING FAGGOT
BEING OUTPLAYED BY PAUL PIERCE!!!! REMEMBER HIM, SHAQ CALLED HIM THE
"TRUTH" MEANING KOBE IS A FAKE ASSED BITCH!!!!

SHAQ KNEW WHO WAS BETTER!!!
 >> Stay informed about: CELTICS CONTINUE TO DEBUNK MYTH OF "COACH" JACKSON