Are all laker fans this ignorant

[adrew35]

"KG and Ray have been Celtics for only 3 years.... Pierce has had nowhere near the presence or impact on the Celtics that Kobe has had on the Lakers or LA... exit stage left with that nonsense"

He said Lakers losing Kobe when he retires won't be the same as Celtics losing the big 3.

wow

[PosImpos]

Well, no, Pierce hasn't been able to carry teams the same way Kobe has at times, because he's simply not as good as Kobe.

That said, without Shaq and then Pau the Lakers would not have won any championships in the last decade.  Kobe has carried his team farther into the playoffs by himself than Paul ever really did, but he's never won a championship by himself.  When Kobe retires, the Lakers might still be relevant if they still have Pau and Bynum.  Without Paul and the rest of the Big 3, the Celtics will be dog meat.

All of this is to say that I kind of get what the person is saying, but I think he's way overstating it and giving Kobe far too much credit and Paul too little.  That's not at all surprising given it's a Lakers fan talking.  Many Lakers (Kobe) fans seriously think he's potentially as good as MJ.  In other words, they are delusional.

[manbehindtheman]

"KG and Ray have been Celtics for only 3 years.... Pierce has had nowhere near the presence or impact on the Celtics that Kobe has had on the Lakers or LA... exit stage left with that nonsense"

He said Lakers losing Kobe when he retires won't be the same as Celtics losing the big 3.

wow

I think kobe is as important to the lakers as the big 3 are to the celtics.  the celtics have others that can fill in to some extent, the lakers have nobody that can fill kobe's shoes.  i don't see the insult in all of this though.

[PosImpos]

"KG and Ray have been Celtics for only 3 years.... Pierce has had nowhere near the presence or impact on the Celtics that Kobe has had on the Lakers or LA... exit stage left with that nonsense"

He said Lakers losing Kobe when he retires won't be the same as Celtics losing the big 3.

wow

I think kobe is as important to the lakers as the big 3 are to the celtics.  the celtics have others that can fill in to some extent, the lakers have nobody that can fill kobe's shoes.  i don't see the insult in all of this though.

This ignores the fact that the Lakers have their own "Big 3" though.  In fact, like the Celtics, they have a "Big 4."  The Lakers can't win if they are missing members of their Big 3 / Big 4, just as the Celtics cannot win without members of theirs.

Pau Gasol was the true Finals MVP last season.  No way do the Lakers even make the Finals, let alone win the title, if he missed any significant stretch of time.

[wdleehi]

Well, no, Pierce hasn't been able to carry teams the same way Kobe has at times, because he's simply not as good as Kobe.

That said, without Shaq and then Pau the Lakers would not have won any championships in the last decade.  Kobe has carried his team farther into the playoffs by himself than Paul ever really did, but he's never won a championship by himself.  When Kobe retires, the Lakers might still be relevant if they still have Pau and Bynum.  Without Paul and the rest of the Big 3, the Celtics will be dog meat.

All of this is to say that I kind of get what the person is saying, but I think he's way overstating it and giving Kobe far too much credit and Paul too little.  That's not at all surprising given it's a Lakers fan talking.  Many Lakers (Kobe) fans seriously think he's potentially as good as MJ.  In other words, they are delusional.

What has Kobe carried? 


Outside of having a top big man (Shaq and then Gasol), Kobe's teams did nothing more then Pierce's team (the pre-KG teams). 

[Fafnir]

Well, no, Pierce hasn't been able to carry teams the same way Kobe has at times, because he's simply not as good as Kobe.

That said, without Shaq and then Pau the Lakers would not have won any championships in the last decade.  Kobe has carried his team farther into the playoffs by himself than Paul ever really did, but he's never won a championship by himself.  When Kobe retires, the Lakers might still be relevant if they still have Pau and Bynum.  Without Paul and the rest of the Big 3, the Celtics will be dog meat.

All of this is to say that I kind of get what the person is saying, but I think he's way overstating it and giving Kobe far too much credit and Paul too little.  That's not at all surprising given it's a Lakers fan talking.  Many Lakers (Kobe) fans seriously think he's potentially as good as MJ.  In other words, they are delusional.

What has Kobe carried? 


Outside of having a top big man (Shaq and then Gasol), Kobe's teams did nothing more then Pierce's team (the pre-KG teams). 

And Odom is a better player than most realize as well

[fairweatherfan]

With KG and Ray I agree - they're well-liked and respected, but they aren't career Celtics.  The attachment isn't going to be the same as LA's attachment to Kobe.

But Pierce is a different story.  We've seen him develop, we've seen huge ups and downs, and he's been in green all the way.  He's a major part of the fabric of Celtics history, just as Kobe is a major part of Lakers franchise history.  Both will leave a huge hole to fill when they retire.

[OsirusCeltics]

Well, no, Pierce hasn't been able to carry teams the same way Kobe has at times, because he's simply not as good as Kobe.

That said, without Shaq and then Pau the Lakers would not have won any championships in the last decade.  Kobe has carried his team farther into the playoffs by himself than Paul ever really did, but he's never won a championship by himself.  When Kobe retires, the Lakers might still be relevant if they still have Pau and Bynum.  Without Paul and the rest of the Big 3, the Celtics will be dog meat.

All of this is to say that I kind of get what the person is saying, but I think he's way overstating it and giving Kobe far too much credit and Paul too little.  That's not at all surprising given it's a Lakers fan talking.  Many Lakers (Kobe) fans seriously think he's potentially as good as MJ.  In other words, they are delusional.

What has Kobe carried?  


Outside of having a top big man (Shaq and then Gasol), Kobe's teams did nothing more then Pierce's team (the pre-KG teams).  

Exactly, as soon as Shaq left he missed the playoffs the next season and never made it past the first round with the reasonable players on his team. He was outperformed in all of his Finals appearances by Shaq and Gasol. 2009 I'll give him some credit for

And I don't know where this "Kobe is better than Pierce" premise came from. The only thing Pierce lacks is amount of ESPN/NBA TV highlights

[Chris]

Without context, its tough to say, but I don't think its that outlandish.

I honestly feel a little uncomfortable with the idea of KG and Ray going down in history as true Celtics, the same way I feel uncomfortable with thinking of Wilt as a Laker, or Barkley as a Sun.  I love what they did, but where it was only a fraction of their career, I just don't think I look at it the same way as if they were there for most of their career.

With Pierce, obviously, he is a career Celtic, but (again, need to see the context of the comment), I can see an argument where Kobe is more integrated into Lakers history than Pierce is in Boston.

For one thing, there are the championships.  For Kobe to span two great championship runs is certainly impressive.

But, for Pierce, I think people seem to forget how much he had fallen off the radar in Boston before the Big 3 got here.  He not only became close to irrelevant in the Boston sports scene for about half the decade, he became the symbol for futility for a while.  There was a huge contingent calling for him to be traded, and with bandagegate against the Pacers being the height of it, he was just not looked on very highly among Boston sports fans.

Of course, he completely redeemed himself when the Big 3 showed up, but I am not sure I would put him in the Boston Sports pantheon, the way Kobe probably belongs in the pantheon in LA.

[RebusRankin]

Well, no, Pierce hasn't been able to carry teams the same way Kobe has at times, because he's simply not as good as Kobe.

That said, without Shaq and then Pau the Lakers would not have won any championships in the last decade.  Kobe has carried his team farther into the playoffs by himself than Paul ever really did, but he's never won a championship by himself.  When Kobe retires, the Lakers might still be relevant if they still have Pau and Bynum.  Without Paul and the rest of the Big 3, the Celtics will be dog meat.

All of this is to say that I kind of get what the person is saying, but I think he's way overstating it and giving Kobe far too much credit and Paul too little.  That's not at all surprising given it's a Lakers fan talking.  Many Lakers (Kobe) fans seriously think he's potentially as good as MJ.  In other words, they are delusional.

Paul made the CF as the main player. Kobe never won a play-off series by putting a team on his back.

[GreenFaith1819]

Well, no, Pierce hasn't been able to carry teams the same way Kobe has at times, because he's simply not as good as Kobe.

That said, without Shaq and then Pau the Lakers would not have won any championships in the last decade.  Kobe has carried his team farther into the playoffs by himself than Paul ever really did, but he's never won a championship by himself.  When Kobe retires, the Lakers might still be relevant if they still have Pau and Bynum.  Without Paul and the rest of the Big 3, the Celtics will be dog meat.

All of this is to say that I kind of get what the person is saying, but I think he's way overstating it and giving Kobe far too much credit and Paul too little.  That's not at all surprising given it's a Lakers fan talking.  Many Lakers (Kobe) fans seriously think he's potentially as good as MJ.  In other words, they are delusional.

Paul made the CF as the main player. Kobe never won a play-off series by putting a team on his back.

Great Point Rebus - you mean back in I think 02-03, correct?

[ManUp]

I think Kobe is overrated and Pierce is underrated, but Kobe is a better than Pierce. Add in all the championships he's helped bring to LA and yeah its totally different. Kobe is LA royalty. Imo, he's not the impact player he's made out to be, but some people think he's Jordan pt.2. Already he's won a regular season MVP and finals MVP off hype alone.

[manbehindtheman]

I think Kobe is overrated and Pierce is underrated, but Kobe is a better than Pierce. Add in all the championships he's helped bring to LA and yeah its totally different. Kobe is LA royalty. Imo, he's not the impact player he's made out to be, but some people think he's Jordan pt.2. Already he's won a regular season MVP and finals MVP off hype alone.

i don't get pleasure in saying this but the fact is that Kobe is right up their with the all time best, if he puts in a few more years and racks up another championship or 2 he will possibly be widely considered the best all-time.  I think this year is his best chance at a championship.  I think the fall off in ability has already begun with him and unless he catches a sudden second wind, he will be surpassed by the younger talent in the league.   

[Assassin70]

Well, no, Pierce hasn't been able to carry teams the same way Kobe has at times, because he's simply not as good as Kobe.

That said, without Shaq and then Pau the Lakers would not have won any championships in the last decade.  Kobe has carried his team farther into the playoffs by himself than Paul ever really did, but he's never won a championship by himself.  When Kobe retires, the Lakers might still be relevant if they still have Pau and Bynum.  Without Paul and the rest of the Big 3, the Celtics will be dog meat.

All of this is to say that I kind of get what the person is saying, but I think he's way overstating it and giving Kobe far too much credit and Paul too little.  That's not at all surprising given it's a Lakers fan talking.  Many Lakers (Kobe) fans seriously think he's potentially as good as MJ.  In other words, they are delusional.

Paul made the CF as the main player. Kobe never won a play-off series by putting a team on his back.

You beat me to it TP.

[18isGREATERthan72]

Without context, its tough to say, but I don't think its that outlandish.

I honestly feel a little uncomfortable with the idea of KG and Ray going down in history as true Celtics, the same way I feel uncomfortable with thinking of Wilt as a Laker, or Barkley as a Sun.  I love what they did, but where it was only a fraction of their career, I just don't think I look at it the same way as if they were there for most of their career.

With Pierce, obviously, he is a career Celtic, but (again, need to see the context of the comment), I can see an argument where Kobe is more integrated into Lakers history than Pierce is in Boston.

For one thing, there are the championships.  For Kobe to span two great championship runs is certainly impressive.

But, for Pierce, I think people seem to forget how much he had fallen off the radar in Boston before the Big 3 got here.  He not only became close to irrelevant in the Boston sports scene for about half the decade, he became the symbol for futility for a while.  There was a huge contingent calling for him to be traded, and with bandagegate against the Pacers being the height of it, he was just not looked on very highly among Boston sports fans.

Of course, he completely redeemed himself when the Big 3 showed up, but I am not sure I would put him in the Boston Sports pantheon, the way Kobe probably belongs in the pantheon in LA.

If I remember correctly, there was a large portion of LA fans that weren't too happy with Kobe post Shaq, and wanted him to be traded too.  Revisionist history shows that LA always wanted Kobe, and that he was the more important player than Shaq was, but when it was all happening, and LA wasn't doing much, and the Heat won a championship?  I don't think fans in LA were feeling that way.