The LeBron James Legacy

[houheffna]

Maybe travesty wasn't the best word

That is all I am saying...the rest of it is semantics. But there was no travesty here...

 

[Kush77]

Diddy1122 wrote:

houheffna wrote:

I don't know about all that dude. Orlando would still give them a good run if they had Pau or not. And what travesty? They were not able to put the best talent around him...Boozer double crossed them and left. They pursued every avenue possible. That was the way the chips fell, Lebron is not some victim here...

I seem to remember them not wanting to give up a certain JJ Hickson in a possible Amare deal that was on the table. How's that looking for them right now? Maybe travesty wasn't the best word but Ferry has not done a good job of putting better talent around him it's that simple.

As for the Boozer double cross, give me a friggin' break. Jim Paxson was a friggin' moron for letting him out of his deal. Boozer is not a back stabber for getting the best deal he could possibly get. Any GM in their right mind would never release a player of Boozer's caliber who would become unrestricted after doing so. That's all on Jim Paxson.

I agree about the Amare thing. I was all for Amare going to Cleveland. That, to me, would have guaranteed James staying. But was it you that was going back and forth with me about Jamison being a better fit? And the whole 20% drop in production? Or was that Stig?

Anyway, Kobe had the Lakers at the top spot in the West before the Gasol trade. Bynum was playing well before his injury. So Kobe was doing something with not much.

I wonder how LA would have done if Memphis didn't donate Gasol to them and they just stood pat? IF Bynum stayed healthy. I think they still could have beat Orlando.

 

[Shakes]

I wonder if Amare doesn't come down to pride, if they got Amare they'd basically have to admit getting Shaq was a mistake. Wouldn't surprise me in the slightest that not getting Amare was all about face saving.

I don't think the Lakers could have done it without Gasol. The Lakers were 35-20 before the Gasol trade I believe. That's 52 win pace, which is a good but not great team.

Orlando would have been tough too, they beat Orlando 4-1 but two games went to OT. With the way Bynum stunk during the series if you take Gasol off the team and it's probably a 4-1 or 4-2 Orlando win (if the Lakers even get there).

 

[Kush77]

Shakes wrote:

I wonder if Amare doesn't come down to pride, if they got Amare they'd basically have to admit getting Shaq was a mistake. Wouldn't surprise me in the slightest that not getting Amare was all about face saving.

I don't think the Lakers could have done it without Gasol. The Lakers were 35-20 before the Gasol trade I believe. That's 52 win pace, which is a good but not great team.

Orlando would have been tough too, they beat Orlando 4-1 but two games went to OT. With the way Bynum stunk during the series if you take Gasol off the team and it's probably a 4-1 or 4-2 Orlando win (if the Lakers even get there).

But Bynum got hurt. That's why getting Gasol was huge.

The Lakers were 35-20 pre-Gasol. But wasn't Bynum out for a while before the Gasol trade? I don't remember exactly. and when he came back, he wasn't the same pre-injury. He was having a breakout season.

 

[mlewinth]

Kush77 wrote:

Diddy1122 wrote:

And Lebron is better than Kobe. I don't even see how it's that much of an argument. What this kid has done thus far has been unbelievable. His playoff numbers are better than anyone the league has ever seen not named Michael Jeffrey Jordan. Granted he hasn't won a title yet but he also didn't have the luxury of playing with a HOF center from the beginning of his career or have arguably the greatest coach of all time calling the plays. Don't get me wrong Kobe will go down as one of the all time greats, but Lebron has the potential to surpass MJ which is something Kobe will never do.

LeBron hasn't won a title yet how can you say he's better than Kobe right now career wise? Starting his carrer with a HOF center is something I would say as well, until Kobe won a title last year as the main man. That can't be a criticism anymore. Kobe did it as a number 1.

As far as all-time greats I rank Kobe ahead of LeBron right now. It's silly to say LeBron ranks ahead of him when he hasn't even won a title and is on the verge of being upset two straight years.

Kush, I normally agree with you, but I don't right here. I think Lebron has been clearly the best player in the leauge for about 3 years (I thought Lebron was MVP the year Kobe did it). Bottom line..Kobe has a much better supporting cast. When the Lakers supporting cast was suspect, Kobe was going out in rounds 1 and 2 (albhiet in the west). Lebron choked this year, but this was really the first year ever that I felt Lebron had a real team around him (especially since the Jamison trade). Lebron makes players around him MUCH MUCH better than Kobe does. Lebron had a shitty game 6 and had 27 pts, 19 rebounds and 10 assists. (Also with 9 turnovers on 38% shooting)...BUT THATS A BAD GAME!!! Lebron fills up a stat sheet like none other and can realistically average a triple double (with 30 pts+ in scoring) at some point in his career. Kobe is definantly more of an assasin than Lebron is, or maybe will ever be. I would rather have Kobe on my team if i'm taking a final shot. But if you ask me, from tip to the final second on the clock, Lebron is BY FAR the best player in the game.

 

[Kush77]

mlewinth wrote:

Kush77 wrote:

Diddy1122 wrote:

And Lebron is better than Kobe. I don't even see how it's that much of an argument. What this kid has done thus far has been unbelievable. His playoff numbers are better than anyone the league has ever seen not named Michael Jeffrey Jordan. Granted he hasn't won a title yet but he also didn't have the luxury of playing with a HOF center from the beginning of his career or have arguably the greatest coach of all time calling the plays. Don't get me wrong Kobe will go down as one of the all time greats, but Lebron has the potential to surpass MJ which is something Kobe will never do.

LeBron hasn't won a title yet how can you say he's better than Kobe right now career wise? Starting his carrer with a HOF center is something I would say as well, until Kobe won a title last year as the main man. That can't be a criticism anymore. Kobe did it as a number 1.

As far as all-time greats I rank Kobe ahead of LeBron right now. It's silly to say LeBron ranks ahead of him when he hasn't even won a title and is on the verge of being upset two straight years.

Kush, I normally agree with you, but I don't right here. I think Lebron has been clearly the best player in the leauge for about 3 years (I thought Lebron was MVP the year Kobe did it). Bottom line..Kobe has a much better supporting cast. When the Lakers supporting cast was suspect, Kobe was going out in rounds 1 and 2 (albhiet in the west). Lebron choked this year, but this was really the first year ever that I felt Lebron had a real team around him (especially since the Jamison trade). Lebron makes players around him MUCH MUCH better than Kobe does. Lebron had a shitty game 6 and had 27 pts, 19 rebounds and 10 assists. (Also with 9 turnovers on 38% shooting)...BUT THATS A BAD GAME!!! Lebron fills up a stat sheet like none other and can realistically average a triple double (with 30 pts+ in scoring) at some point in his career. Kobe is definantly more of an assasin than Lebron is, or maybe will ever be. I would rather have Kobe on my team if i'm taking a final shot. But if you ask me, from tip to the final second on the clock, Lebron is BY FAR the best player in the game.

I don't know Mark.

I still felt Kobe was the best player in the game up until this season. He was the best player in the game in the 07-08 season and proved it in the Olympics.

Am I the only one who stayed up late for the Gold Medal game when Kobe came through and saved the U.S.'s ass? It wasn't LeBron that came up with the clutch 4-point play and the big shots down the stretch, it was Kobe.

Supporting cast, I understand. But LBJ's cast was good enough to win 66 and 61 games. You can' fluke 66 wins. There has to be some talent there.

But thanks for normally agreeing with me Mark. I can always count on you!

 

[Shakes]

Kush77 wrote:

But Bynum got hurt. That's why getting Gasol was huge.

The Lakers were 35-20 pre-Gasol. But wasn't Bynum out for a while before the Gasol trade? I don't remember exactly. and when he came back, he wasn't the same pre-injury. He was having a breakout season.

The Lakers were 18-11 when Bynum got hurt. Then they went 17-9 until they got Gasol, when they suddenly went 22-5 to close the season. Gasol was the difference, having or not having Bynum had little effect on the Lakers. Without Gasol there's no way they win a championship.

 

[Kush77]

Shakes wrote:

Kush77 wrote:

But Bynum got hurt. That's why getting Gasol was huge.

The Lakers were 35-20 pre-Gasol. But wasn't Bynum out for a while before the Gasol trade? I don't remember exactly. and when he came back, he wasn't the same pre-injury. He was having a breakout season.

The Lakers were 18-11 when Bynum got hurt. Then they went 17-9 until they got Gasol, when they suddenly went 22-5 to close the season. Gasol was the difference, having or not having Bynum had little effect on the Lakers. Without Gasol there's no way they win a championship.

To say not having Bynum had little effect is not true. Sure, the Lakers did go 17-9, but what if they had Bynum during that stretch, maybe they go 20-6, 21-5? Bynum was having a breakout season until then.

EDIT: I looked it up and Bynum got hurt when the Lakers were 25-11 in a game vs. Memphis. We might of got 08 and 09 mixed up.

And no the Lakers wouldn't win the title, because I had the Celtics that year and picked the C's over LA with Gasol. I think we're getting 08 mixed up with 09. I wonder if Kobe and Bynum (if he didn't get hurt) could have got the Lakers out of the West still? I think they could have, IF Bynum didn't get hurt. Because when Bynum came back from the injury he wasn't the same.

But may point is about the whole "doing something with nothing question." That year could have been an example of that for Kobe. But getting Gasol at the deadline changed that. Prior to Gasol (during the 17-9 stretch) it was Kobe and who? Odom, Fisher Ariza Walton etc.

 

[Shakes]

Well we have the previous two years when Kobe got bounced in the first round to see how he would have done with no Gasol or Bynum. Although those teams probably had a crappier cast than LeBron had in 07 when he made the finals, so it's not a completely fair comparison. It's not really a knock on Kobe, I don't think even MJ could take a team with Odom and a bunch of below average players far.

 

[Kush77]

Shakes wrote:

Well we have the previous two years when Kobe got bounced in the first round to see how he would have done with no Gasol or Bynum. Although those teams probably had a crappier cast than LeBron had in 07 when he made the finals, so it's not a completely fair comparison. It's not really a knock on Kobe, I don't think even MJ could take a team with Odom and a bunch of below average players far.

Agreed.