PDA

View Full Version : Kobe or Garnett, Build a Team Around?



dwade3ai3
07-02-2007, 12:49 PM
Seem like their are a ton of trade rumors surronding these two players, who would you build your team around?

lakerboy
07-02-2007, 12:57 PM
What happened the last time a team was built around these players...

1. Kobe - 3 championship rings, finals, semi-finals appearance.. Ok Shaq carried the team whatever but Kobe still played a major major part of it.

2. KG - Passed the first round only once, reached a team in the western conference finals,... and eliminated by Kobe and the Lakers :)

Do you even have to ask?

xanderyear
07-02-2007, 12:58 PM
I'd build around KG. He's more team oriented where as Kobe demands a high number of shots. The chemistry would probably end up being better with KG at the center.

dwade3ai3
07-02-2007, 01:08 PM
What happened the last time a team was built around these players...

1. Kobe - 3 championship rings, finals, semi-finals appearance.. Ok Shaq carried the team whatever but Kobe still played a major major part of it.

2. KG - Passed the first round only once, reached a team in the western conference finals,... and eliminated by Kobe and the Lakers :)

Do you even have to ask?

Kobe has a team built around him now. And hasn't gotten out of the first round.

KG had a team built around him and got to the WCF and won MVP. He led his team to 50+ wins on numerous of occasions. Kobe has only led his team to 45 wins max.

kingkobe
07-02-2007, 01:29 PM
Kobe has a team built around him now. And hasn't gotten out of the first round.

KG had a team built around him and got to the WCF and won MVP. He led his team to 50+ wins on numerous of occasions. Kobe has only led his team to 45 wins max.

lol

ImmortalD24
07-02-2007, 01:34 PM
Hahaha...

JordansBulls
07-02-2007, 08:09 PM
Seem like their are a ton of trade rumors surronding these two players, who would you build your team around?

It's always easier to build around a big man, unless it is MJ or Magic. Those are the only two exceptions of superstar players for choosing to build around guards and they showed why time and time again in the playoffs leading their teams to titles.

Redbull
07-03-2007, 02:00 AM
Very close but ill take Kobe.

rorrito
07-03-2007, 03:19 AM
Kevin Garnett
:up:

LEGENDS
07-03-2007, 11:28 AM
Easily Kobe. Kobe can take a WNBA team to the playoffs every year. Garnett can't.

Aftermath
07-03-2007, 01:04 PM
I'd build around KG. He's more team oriented where as Kobe demands a high number of shots. The chemistry would probably end up being better with KG at the center.

I would rather build a team around someone like Garnett who uses his team to win games then someone who may get 81 points but have no assists and lose the game. So I would go with Garnett.

m26555
07-03-2007, 04:47 PM
Garnett..easily.

JordansBulls
07-06-2007, 11:14 AM
Easily Kobe. Kobe can take a WNBA team to the playoffs every year. Garnett can't.

You say this each time and it is not true. What WNBA team?

Did you know that Garnett led a team with Troy Hudson and Wally Szcerbiak as his best players to 50 wins on a few occasions?

lakershowtime
07-07-2007, 04:44 PM
Kg its easier to build a team with a big man. All he would need is good role players.

lakersrock
07-07-2007, 04:48 PM
Who can take a crappy roster to the playoffs and who can't? Last time I checked, the TWolves haven't done **** and the Lakers have at least been in the playoffs.

beau_boy04
07-09-2007, 06:13 PM
Seem like their are a ton of trade rumors surronding these two players, who would you build your team around?

I think you better choose a competent GM as well because it doesn't who you have in y our roster as long as your Gm's are Mitch and McHale

dwade3ai3
07-10-2007, 01:38 PM
Who can take a crappy roster to the playoffs and who can't? Last time I checked, the TWolves haven't done **** and the Lakers have at least been in the playoffs.

I'm sure had Garnett had Odom and Butler he would have won 55+ games. Kobe couldn't even win 35 games nor get into the playoffs with them. Also give Garnett Phil Jackson as his coach and his team would win 47-50 games.

LA SeV
07-10-2007, 05:58 PM
I'm sure had Garnett had Odom and Butler he would have won 55+ games. Kobe couldn't even win 35 games nor get into the playoffs with them. Also give Garnett Phil Jackson as his coach and his team would win 47-50 games.

Kobe is the best player in the league, one of the greatest scorers of all time, and one of the better all-around perimeter players basketball has ever known.

Kobe had a team around with just as little talent as KG and still makes them viable darkhorses in the Western conference.

Kobe will win u a title if u surround him with enough talent. Hes proven that already. Nobody has a bigger impact on a game like KObe.

JayW_1023
07-10-2007, 07:00 PM
If both players switched brains...they'd be the perfect players at their position.

If KG ever has that killer instinct Kobe possesses, he'd dominate and win more games. If Kobe had KG's unselfishness and leadership...he'd win more games and dominate as well...but would have to sacrifice his scoring average.

LA SeV
07-10-2007, 07:25 PM
If both players switched brains...they'd be the perfect players at their position.

If KG ever has that killer instinct Kobe possesses, he'd dominate and win more games. If Kobe had KG's unselfishness and leadership...he'd win more games and dominate as well...but would have to sacrifice his scoring average.

What part of KG's games gives u the idea that he is a better leader than Kobe? Im so sick of people trashing Kobe's leadership skills. The man lead a team of nobodies into the playoffs in the West 2 years in a row.

And Kobe's selfishness is the ONLY reason why the Lakers are still a valid team in the NBA. And, even without KG's "unselfishness and leadership," Kobe is still dominating the league like we havent seen since MJ.

JayW_1023
07-10-2007, 07:57 PM
And Kobe's selfishness is the ONLY reason why the Lakers are still a valid team in the NBA.

That's a deep paradox, man. But not really in the positive sense. It really explains when the Lakers were actually winning games when he wasn't playing selfishly early last year.

Garnett isn't the perfect leader either, but I think he does a good job because he understands he can't win by himself...and he tries to get his teammates involved early. He just doesn't have the instincts to take over games like Kobe and that is sometimes exactly what is necessairy to win games.

On the other hand, Kobe doesn't trust his teammates like Garnett does, and the lack of talent is no excuse. Winning basketball games requires playing off each other. With KG he plays off his teammates and vice versa because he gives them confidence. With Kobe, it usually only goes one way...scoring the ball and only give up the ball whenever the defense crowds him. He doesn't play within the offensive sets. He is so caught up in scoring the basketballs that his teammates have no idea what to expect when their superstar goes on to freestyle. It disrupts the rhythm of the offense.

You need to recognise the difference between individual class and true leadership. That is something you won't find in the statistics.

Kobe is amazing when he is on and KG really lacks that mentality, and I recognise that winning basketball games sometimes required the leader to step up. But that isn't synonymous to being a great leader. You can't be a leader when your teammates become spectators.

JordansBulls
07-10-2007, 11:23 PM
If both players switched brains...they'd be the perfect players at their position.

If KG ever has that killer instinct Kobe possesses, he'd dominate and win more games. If Kobe had KG's unselfishness and leadership...he'd win more games and dominate as well...but would have to sacrifice his scoring average.

That's too funny

:laugh2:

LA SeV
07-11-2007, 02:55 AM
That's a deep paradox, man. But not really in the positive sense. It really explains when the Lakers were actually winning games when he wasn't playing selfishly early last year.

Garnett isn't the perfect leader either, but I think he does a good job because he understands he can't win by himself...and he tries to get his teammates involved early. He just doesn't have the instincts to take over games like Kobe and that is sometimes exactly what is necessairy to win games.

On the other hand, Kobe doesn't trust his teammates like Garnett does, and the lack of talent is no excuse. Winning basketball games requires playing off each other. With KG he plays off his teammates and vice versa because he gives them confidence. With Kobe, it usually only goes one way...scoring the ball and only give up the ball whenever the defense crowds him. He doesn't play within the offensive sets. He is so caught up in scoring the basketballs that his teammates have no idea what to expect when their superstar goes on to freestyle. It disrupts the rhythm of the offense.

You need to recognise the difference between individual class and true leadership. That is something you won't find in the statistics.

Kobe is amazing when he is on and KG really lacks that mentality, and I recognise that winning basketball games sometimes required the leader to step up. But that isn't synonymous to being a great leader. You can't be a leader when your teammates become spectators.

Kobe has won more games and led his team to the playoffs by being necessarily selfish in spans during the season than KG has by being a "team" player. And yes, lack of talent IS an excuse.

When Kobe was playing the facilitator role early on the season last year, the Lakers were winning cuz theyre starting 5 was together. As soon as the injuries went down, the Lakers couldnt win with Kobe being the facilitator. Kobe had to put his team on his back, and carry them into the playoffs.

KG doesnt do that, maybe becasue hes not as selfish as Kobe, as you like to say. Selfishness is necessary sometimes if u want to win.

JayW_1023
07-11-2007, 04:58 AM
Everyone in this league can play...otherwise they wouldn't be in this league. Good teammates don't come overnight. Look at Tony Parker...he was still a rookie and made bad decisions with the rock all the time. But Duncan never gave up on him to flourish...even when all the talk of trading Jason Kidd to San Antonio surfaced. The attention Duncan demanded on defense gave Parker the opportunity to grow into an All-star.

Kobe demands huge attention from defenses as well. Are you telling me Farmar, Walton and Bynum have reached their peak? They are young players with significant upside. But if Kobe only trusts himself to win games, they will never get the confidence to become a better supporting cast.

JordansBulls
07-11-2007, 08:31 AM
Everyone in this league can play...otherwise they wouldn't be in this league. Good teammates don't come overnight. Look at Tony Parker...he was still a rookie and made bad decisions with the rock all the time. But Duncan never gave up on him to flourish...even when all the talk of trading Jason Kidd to San Antonio surfaced. The attention Duncan demanded on defense gave Parker the opportunity to grow into an All-star.

Kobe demands huge attention from defenses as well. Are you telling me Farmar, Walton and Bynum have reached their peak? They are young players with significant upside. But if Kobe only trusts himself to win games, they will never get the confidence to become a better supporting cast.

Perfect post!! That is the same way that Pippen and Grant and others on the Bulls became great. None of those players were stars until their 3rd year or so in the league. It takes time to flourish, even Kobe himself took 3 years to become a great player. Some players come in great, some take time to become great.

LA SeV
07-11-2007, 06:51 PM
u guys are rediculous. Parker was gonna become a phenomenal player regardless if he played with Duncan or not. Same goes with Pip and Grant. Pip and Grant would have still been amazing players had they never played with MJ.

SOme players have it and some dont. And for one to become a champ, the people around him need to step up.

Once again, if u have an open shot as a result of the double team your captain gets, its your job to knock it down, not your camptain's. Its on YOU,not anyone else.

JayW_1023
07-12-2007, 07:10 PM
u guys are rediculous. Parker was gonna become a phenomenal player regardless if he played with Duncan or not. Same goes with Pip and Grant. Pip and Grant would have still been amazing players had they never played with MJ.

SOme players have it and some dont. And for one to become a champ, the people around him need to step up.

Once again, if u have an open shot as a result of the double team your captain gets, its your job to knock it down, not your camptain's. Its on YOU,not anyone else.

No one was talking about Tony Parker becoming a star before he was drafted. Same with Pippen. What about all those scrubs Jordan made look great like Longley, Buechler, Burrell, Wennington, Simpkins, Randy Brown. Those guys were valuable role players alongside Jordan...on any other team they were DNPCD's.

LA SeV
07-12-2007, 07:40 PM
No one was talking about Tony Parker becoming a star before he was drafted. Same with Pippen. What about all those scrubs Jordan made look great like Longley, Buechler, Burrell, Wennington, Simpkins, Randy Brown. Those guys were valuable role players alongside Jordan...on any other team they were DNPCD's.

Damn dude!! Give credit where credit is due. Just cuz nobody talked about a certain player becoming a star doesnt mean he was "carried" by his superstars.

Parker would still be one of the best PGs in the game even if he never played with Duncan.

Im so sick of this whole argument than Superstars miraculously make their role players more talented.

Just stop it. If youre a great player in the NBA, you are one becasue you have the ability and talent to be, not because youre superrstar put more talent into you.

JayW_1023
07-12-2007, 07:48 PM
It also depends on the situation. If Parker were to be drafted on a dysfunctional Knicks team where players ***** about playing time, do you really think he'll have more opportunity than when he plays on a team where everyone is on the same page and is happy with their role. Do the math.

Talent is not enough...if that were the case guys like Shawn Kemp, Darius Miles, Tim Thomas or Isiah Rider would've been franchise guys. They had the talent. They just blew it because they have an oafish mindset and believe their talent alone what enough to cruise them to stardom.

Being a franchise player is not about having the biggest stats...you need to understand how your skills can help your team win the best. It takes dedication and knowing your teammates. You can't win titles on your own.

LA SeV
07-12-2007, 08:00 PM
It also depends on the situation. If Parker were to be drafted on a dysfunctional Knicks team where players ***** about playing time, do you really think he'll have more opportunity than when he plays on a team where everyone is on the same page and is happy with their role. Do the math.

Talent is not enough...if that were the case guys like Shawn Kemp, Darius Miles, Tim Thomas or Isiah Rider would've been franchise guys. They had the talent. They just blew it because they have an oafish mindset and believe their talent alone what enough to cruise them to stardom.

Being a franchise player is not about having the biggest stats...you need to understand how your skills can help your team win the best. It takes dedication and knowing your teammates. You can't win titles on your own.

Listen dude...heres what im saying. Players like Parker and Pip are loke Horry. They will be great no matter where they played or who they played under.

They have too much talent to be mediocre players. Yes, Duncan makes the game easier on his teamates, just as much as Kobe, LBJ, Nash, Yao, Dirk, and Wade do, but its still comes down to talent. If a playe doesnt have talent, theyre not gonna be great players, no matter who they play with. On the contrary, if a player has great great talent, they will shine no matter where they play.

Oefarmy2005
07-13-2007, 01:26 PM
Either way, the voting shows. Kobe is the best player in the NBA but too selfish. KG is a stud for building a team around, but mchale is a ****** for not being able to do so.

Tom81
07-17-2007, 09:39 AM
KG no doubt

JordansBulls
07-25-2007, 03:04 PM
KG no doubt

I wouldn't say it is no doubt.

ReD~aLeRt
07-26-2007, 12:03 AM
I would rather build a team around someone like Garnett who uses his team to win games then someone who may get 81 points but have no assists and lose the game. So I would go with Garnett.

Wow..they lost and he had no assist? Learn something new everyday....

dwade3ai3
07-26-2007, 01:44 PM
Either way, the voting shows. Kobe is a top 5 player in the NBA but too selfish. KG is a stud for building a team around, but mchale is a ****** for not being able to do so.

fixed

JordansBulls
07-28-2007, 03:01 PM
fixed

:eyebrow:

ju1ce06
07-30-2007, 12:16 PM
KG any day hes such a versatile big man

JordansBulls
08-04-2007, 04:28 PM
KG any day hes such a versatile big man

The Bulls would take KG because he would fill the need on the team more since they need a big man down low. They are stacked at SG/SF.

LakersRule24
08-04-2007, 04:36 PM
Either way, the voting shows. Kobe is a top 10 player of all time but too selfish. KG is a stud for building a team around, but mchale is a ****** for not being able to do so.

fixed
fixed

fhatmanz
08-06-2007, 02:55 PM
I would rather build a team around someone like Garnett who uses his team to win games then someone who may get 81 points but have no assists and lose the game. So I would go with Garnett.

too bad they won that game and had also had 2 assists...

kbj28
08-07-2007, 06:26 PM
Easily KG. You can't win the big games without the big men.

dwade3ai3
08-08-2007, 12:39 PM
Easily KG. You can't win the big games without the big men.

Both are overrated, but KG is much better at least he has a MVP.

senseiking
08-09-2007, 08:35 PM
Garnett is much better than Kobe.

CELTICS4LYFE
08-09-2007, 09:38 PM
Both are overrated, but KG is much better at least he has a MVP.

how r they over ratted???? we r talkin about 2 of the best of our day!!! kg has an mvp and kobe has 81!!!

CELTICS4LYFE
08-09-2007, 09:39 PM
but yes to build a team around id take kg cuz great big men r harder to come by

dwade3ai3
08-17-2007, 10:39 AM
how r they over ratted???? we r talkin about 2 of the best of our day!!! kg has an mvp and kobe has 81!!!

:laugh2:

And KG made it out of the 1st round once in 11 years as the go to guy and Kobe never has made it out of the 1st round as the go to guy even with the greatest coach ever.

Robbw241
08-17-2007, 12:27 PM
Kg

CELTICS4LYFE
08-19-2007, 03:45 PM
:laugh2:

And KG made it out of the 1st round once in 11 years as the go to guy and Kobe never has made it out of the 1st round as the go to guy even with the greatest coach ever.

ok that doesnt mean they r overrated, how far u think dwade would make it wit out shaq???

CardinalRed4eva
08-20-2007, 06:56 PM
Garnett ONLY because he is easy to build around, and Kobe isnt, but Kobe is much better...

Rockets&Browns
08-20-2007, 07:22 PM
Well this one is soooo easy! Neither! Has anyone noticed that their GM's tried to build teams around these two and have failed drastically. They are franchise players, but right now isn't Andre Iguodala in Philly. They need much more than just pieces to fit to win anything. They need another dominant guy. From what I've seen in the playoffs this year, I'd say Lebron is more equipped to build a team around!

dwade3ai3
08-27-2007, 01:52 PM
Garnett ONLY because he is easy to build around, and Kobe isnt, but Kobe is much better...

It's easier to build around Garnett and Garnett is much better. He actually led a team out of the 1st round as the main guy remember?

kgceltics
09-12-2007, 10:58 AM
Garnett. The only player that could be considered as good is Duncan.

kgceltics
09-20-2007, 03:36 PM
It's easier to build around Garnett and Garnett is much better. He actually led a team out of the 1st round as the main guy remember?

I didn't even see this before. this is one of the best post in this thread.

:clap::clap::clap:

dwade3ai3
09-20-2007, 07:31 PM
Everyone knows KG is much better than Kobe. This is no contest in my book. Anyone with an MVP in the season or Finals is greater than Kobe. Kobe should be compared to Tmac.

kgceltics
09-21-2007, 05:23 PM
Everyone knows KG is much better than Kobe. This is no contest in my book. Anyone with an MVP in the season or Finals is greater than Kobe. Kobe should be compared to Tmac.

I don't think anyone is better than Kobe just because of a MVP, but KG is significantly better than Kobe. You are correct on the 2nd part, add in Pierce, Vince Carter, Carmelo, Lebron and Wade and they are all on the same tier. KG and Duncan are on a tier of their own.

frankgore21
09-22-2007, 12:28 AM
garnett because he is so unselfish and it's just easier 2 build around a big, but kobe is still better. :cool:

dwade3ai3
09-22-2007, 01:28 PM
garnett because he is so unselfish and it's just easier 2 build around a big

Great Point. Garnett is just better plain and simple.

HouRealCoach
09-25-2007, 02:01 AM
Garnett has the size along with everything else

kgceltics
09-25-2007, 12:53 PM
garnett because he is so unselfish and it's just easier 2 build around a big, but kobe is still better. :cool:

KG is better than Kobe.

The tiers in the league go as follows:

Tier 1
Duncan, KG

Tier 2
Kobe, Pierce, Wade, Lebron, Tmac, Kidd, Dirk

Tier 3
Vince, Carmelo, Arenas, Ray Allen, Steve Nash, Amare, Boozer, Iverson

Tier 4
Odom, Marion, Ak47, Parker, Shaq, Howard, Bosh, D Howard, Gasol

thesparky33
09-25-2007, 01:57 PM
KG is better than Kobe.

The tiers in the league go as follows:

Tier 1
Duncan, KG

Tier 2
Kobe, Pierce, Wade, Lebron, Tmac, Kidd, Dirk

Tier 3
Vince, Carmelo, Arenas, Ray Allen, Steve Nash, Amare, Boozer, Iverson

Tier 4
Odom, Marion, Ak47, Parker, Shaq, Howard, Bosh, D Howard, Gasol

how did you come up with those "tiers"? and what do they mean? how do you move up or down in a "tier"?

GregOden#1
09-25-2007, 07:15 PM
This is a dumb thread, Mike James is way better to build your team around.

kgceltics
10-03-2007, 03:32 PM
The choice between these players is situation.

I'd prefer KG, because it's easier to build around him.

Kobe has proven that he can carry a squad to the first round in the West, which has value, but Garnett did the same thing with worse teams for a eight consecutive years, so it's not like he's unproven in this capacity either.

The only way you can decide and have it be something other than a subjective, preferential judgement is to base it on what resources you can acquire or already have.

KG's crappy Wolves have generally won 50+ while Kobe's crappy Lakers have won ~ 45 games.... a marginal difference but the only measurable one, IMO. Also, KG's dealt with Flip Saunders, Dwayne Casey and Randy Whittman, while Kobe has largely enjoyed the coaching of Phil Jackson.

thesparky33
10-03-2007, 03:42 PM
Also, KG's dealt with Flip Saunders, Dwayne Casey and Randy Whittman, while Kobe has largely enjoyed the coaching of Phil Jackson.

A little off-topic, but what's wrong with Flip Saunders? He is one of the best coaches in the league, IMO. I see that a lot of people dont like him, but his teams have always been successful. Only 1 season in his entire time as a head coach has he not made the playoffs.

kgceltics
10-03-2007, 04:32 PM
A little off-topic, but what's wrong with Flip Saunders? He is one of the best coaches in the league, IMO. I see that a lot of people dont like him, but his teams have always been successful. Only 1 season in his entire time as a head coach has he not made the playoffs.

Because in my mind he is one of the worst coaches in the league. He is not a good coach.

dwade3ai3
10-13-2007, 04:16 PM
The choice between these players is situation.

I'd prefer KG, because it's easier to build around him.

Kobe has proven that he can carry a squad to the first round in the West, which has value, but Garnett did the same thing with worse teams for a eight consecutive years, so it's not like he's unproven in this capacity either.

The only way you can decide and have it be something other than a subjective, preferential judgement is to base it on what resources you can acquire or already have.

KG's crappy Wolves have generally won 50+ while Kobe's crappy Lakers have won ~ 45 games.... a marginal difference but the only measurable one, IMO. Also, KG's dealt with Flip Saunders, Dwayne Casey and Randy Whittman, while Kobe has largely enjoyed the coaching of Phil Jackson.

Everyone knows KG is better than Kobe except kobe homers.

kgceltics
10-15-2007, 10:02 AM
Everyone knows KG is better than Kobe except kobe homers.

:dance:

:cheers:

2nd_COMING
10-15-2007, 03:38 PM
i say that u 2 (kgceltics and dwade3ai3) meet up and discuss your kobe hating together because nobody wants to hear your garbage

kgceltics
11-07-2007, 01:26 PM
i say that u 2 (kgceltics and dwade3ai3) meet up and discuss your kobe hating together because nobody wants to hear your garbage

:confused::confused:

LakersHistory
04-07-2008, 10:02 AM
Kobe has a team built around him now. And hasn't gotten out of the first round.

KG had a team built around him and got to the WCF and won MVP. He led his team to 50+ wins on numerous of occasions. Kobe has only led his team to 45 wins max.

:laugh:

:crazy:

papelbon58
04-07-2008, 12:40 PM
What happened the last time a team was built around these players...

1. Kobe - 3 championship rings, finals, semi-finals appearance.. Ok Shaq carried the team whatever but Kobe still played a major major part of it.

2. KG - Passed the first round only once, reached a team in the western conference finals,... and eliminated by Kobe and the Lakers :)

Do you even have to ask?

i agree id prob take kobe, but its VERY close. and the 3 rings part, all of those rings came with shaq. who has garnett had before this year thats even remotely close to shaq?

LakersHistory
04-07-2008, 04:41 PM
i agree id prob take kobe, but its VERY close. and the 3 rings part, all of those rings came with shaq. who has garnett had before this year thats even remotely close to shaq?

Why do people insist that Kobe had nothing to do with the titles?

papelbon58
04-07-2008, 05:40 PM
Why do people insist that Kobe had nothing to do with the titles?

when did i say that? obviously he did. hes the best player in the league right now. but shaq is a hof. and garnett has never had any one close to a hof play with him. thats all i was saying

jdillion
04-08-2008, 03:07 PM
until kobe wins without another superstar or even another all star on his team therez no argument here. Bc kg got his team pass the first round with sam cassell( a very clutch by not an all star player) and a washed up sprewell

LakersHistory
04-08-2008, 04:43 PM
until kobe wins without another superstar or even another all star on his team therez no argument here. Bc kg got his team pass the first round with sam cassell( a very clutch by not an all star player) and a washed up sprewell

Garnett had Sprewell who was better than a prime Pippen.

papelbon58
04-08-2008, 05:22 PM
Garnett had Sprewell who was better than a prime Pippen.

ummmm....no?

MassoDio
04-10-2008, 07:00 PM
Garnett had Sprewell who was better than a prime Pippen.

:laugh2: Talking to ssomeone who thinks this is like :bang: It's pointless, stupid, and it makes your head hurt.

JordansBulls
04-11-2008, 12:52 AM
Garnett had Sprewell who was better than a prime Pippen.

:speechless:

Genuinetrooper
06-24-2008, 07:29 PM
Garnett easily

sanfranfan1210
06-24-2008, 08:42 PM
Kg

Beno7500
06-24-2008, 09:57 PM
Obviously KG. it worked for him, it didnt work for Kobe. Tell me if i am wrong, just go look at who won the finals.

#1Mavericksfan
06-24-2008, 10:24 PM
Garnett

_Sn1P3r_
06-25-2008, 11:31 AM
Kg

GasolandKobe
04-01-2009, 11:09 PM
Garnett.

Kobe didn't do anything until he got a dominant big man in Gasol.

JordansBulls
04-02-2009, 08:04 AM
Garnett.

Kobe didn't do anything until he got a dominant big man in Gasol.

Talking about an old topic.

GspLAL
04-02-2009, 06:16 PM
I would rather build a team around someone like Garnett who uses his team to win games then someone who may get 81 points but have no assists and lose the game. So I would go with Garnett.

Such an ignorant post, go look at Lakers roster in those couple years that he went off and scored all the points he can, it's called having to CARRY a team.

Lakersfan2483
04-02-2009, 06:23 PM
Garnett.

Kobe didn't do anything until he got a dominant big man in Gasol.

Stop with the ridiculous comments, every great player needs talent to win games. Kobe carried a bunch of D-league guys to the playoffs before he got decent help. Also, before Bynum got hurt last year (and the Gasol trade), LA was in first place in the most competitive Western Conference in yrs..... No player is going to win a title or make it far in the playoffs unless they have talent around them.

Lakersfan2483
04-02-2009, 06:26 PM
Obviously KG. it worked for him, it didnt work for Kobe. Tell me if i am wrong, just go look at who won the finals.

So, the fact that Paul Pierce and Ray Allen were on the team didn't have anything to do with him winning a title (All 3 guys are hall of famers). The lakers were without their starting center in the finals, let's see what happens this year.

Sportfan
04-02-2009, 11:21 PM
KG. He's more of a team player than Kobe.
Massive bump

JordansBulls
04-03-2009, 12:10 AM
So, the fact that Paul Pierce and Ray Allen were on the team didn't have anything to do with him winning a title (All 3 guys are hall of famers). The lakers were without their starting center in the finals, let's see what happens this year.

Gasol was the starting center. They got Gasol because your other guy went down. If Bynum doesn't go down your owner already mentioned you guys wouldn't have gone after Gasol.

Lakersfan2483
04-03-2009, 04:54 PM
Gasol was the starting center. They got Gasol because your other guy went down. If Bynum doesn't go down your owner already mentioned you guys wouldn't have gone after Gasol.

I am well aware of that JB, trust me. I was just pointing out that Kobe had LA in contention prior to Bynum's injury (1st place in the Western Conference last year) and of course we made the move because of Dru's injury. I am very happy we were able to get Gasol.

JordansBulls
04-04-2009, 05:56 PM
I am well aware of that JB, trust me. I was just pointing out that Kobe had LA in contention prior to Bynum's injury (1st place in the Western Conference last year) and of course we made the move because of Dru's injury. I am very happy we were able to get Gasol.

I see what you are saying here.;)

superkegger
04-05-2009, 12:53 AM
I take it GasolandKobe actually turned out to be dwade3ai3?

GregOden#1
04-05-2009, 01:43 AM
And LakersHistory is BostonCeltics.