Jamaican Man backup
New member
...agitated over a debate? " You can say that Kobe needed Shaq and Pau, but neither of them won without Kobe and none of those three plus Jordan and Pippen have won without Phil. "
Error there. Shaq won a title and made the finals twice without Kobe.
To comment on your second paragraph, you either didn't see Nash play until he played with the Suns or refuse to admit the Nash with the Mavs isn't the same player as the Nash with the Suns. Nash peaked in 2005 when he played with the Suns and I watched his entire career, he was not the same player as when he played with the Mavs. Plus you're trying to make it seem like Dirk had a extra stacked team and just sucked. His teams were good. But you keep ignoring my point about a team being built around a players skillset. Like I said, Kobe played with Shaq and Pau and that was his only bit of playoff success because they compliment his outside game. Dirk is a player that lures bigmen away from the hoop right? Therefore he would need slashers that drive and take advantage of that along with an inside bigman. His centers were Bradley, Diop, Dampier. Nobody in the NBA history has won a title with centers like that, so stop expecting Dirk to do the same. What is the point of luring bigs away from the hoop so teammates can drive if you surround him with shooters? Finley was great but a SHOOTER first. and Nash wasn't in his prime with Dirk.
And I never said rings didn't mean anything. But a quick point of what I'm trying to say. Rings don't make a player better than the other because there were times when Kobe failed in clutch moments like game 7 going for 6-24 and had a true second option to back him up. Also when he put up 20ppg on 35%fg in the 2000 finals and Shaq put up 38ppg to bail him out. If Dirk failed he had to depend on Terry, who isn't a true second option.
Condescending responses don't mean a thing either. I noticed you run around here barely giving basketball insight and doing more correcting of grammar, condescending answers, and answers to make yourself seem better than the next person. How about a reasonable debate without getting upset?
This question
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AqgCO68lQzNqA5JMMBX20lX4DH1G;_ylv=3?qid=20110214212545AAVqjaI
Wow, you can't handle a debate without those weasily little condescending answers as if you're some God. If you can't handle a debate, you shouldn't have started one. And you shouldn't be here. This is called and forum and this is not "spam" just because you disagree. I NEVER said championships don't mean anything. If you debate someone at least read what they put. Keep being close minded, I could care less.
Lakers 3 peat give me a break with that nonsense.
@ Lora: You can also go back to cheating for best answer and then acting like you're above someone when you waste your time on this forum point gaming for meaningless points while others use it to debate like a normal person..
Error there. Shaq won a title and made the finals twice without Kobe.
To comment on your second paragraph, you either didn't see Nash play until he played with the Suns or refuse to admit the Nash with the Mavs isn't the same player as the Nash with the Suns. Nash peaked in 2005 when he played with the Suns and I watched his entire career, he was not the same player as when he played with the Mavs. Plus you're trying to make it seem like Dirk had a extra stacked team and just sucked. His teams were good. But you keep ignoring my point about a team being built around a players skillset. Like I said, Kobe played with Shaq and Pau and that was his only bit of playoff success because they compliment his outside game. Dirk is a player that lures bigmen away from the hoop right? Therefore he would need slashers that drive and take advantage of that along with an inside bigman. His centers were Bradley, Diop, Dampier. Nobody in the NBA history has won a title with centers like that, so stop expecting Dirk to do the same. What is the point of luring bigs away from the hoop so teammates can drive if you surround him with shooters? Finley was great but a SHOOTER first. and Nash wasn't in his prime with Dirk.
And I never said rings didn't mean anything. But a quick point of what I'm trying to say. Rings don't make a player better than the other because there were times when Kobe failed in clutch moments like game 7 going for 6-24 and had a true second option to back him up. Also when he put up 20ppg on 35%fg in the 2000 finals and Shaq put up 38ppg to bail him out. If Dirk failed he had to depend on Terry, who isn't a true second option.
Condescending responses don't mean a thing either. I noticed you run around here barely giving basketball insight and doing more correcting of grammar, condescending answers, and answers to make yourself seem better than the next person. How about a reasonable debate without getting upset?
This question
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AqgCO68lQzNqA5JMMBX20lX4DH1G;_ylv=3?qid=20110214212545AAVqjaI
Wow, you can't handle a debate without those weasily little condescending answers as if you're some God. If you can't handle a debate, you shouldn't have started one. And you shouldn't be here. This is called and forum and this is not "spam" just because you disagree. I NEVER said championships don't mean anything. If you debate someone at least read what they put. Keep being close minded, I could care less.
Lakers 3 peat give me a break with that nonsense.
@ Lora: You can also go back to cheating for best answer and then acting like you're above someone when you waste your time on this forum point gaming for meaningless points while others use it to debate like a normal person..