Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Fair or Foul for Phil Jackson to call out Kobe??


Dpantherman

Recommended Posts

We all saw how the lakers did without a hall of fame coach and without 4-5 all stars. In the early 90s, with the 4-5 all stars but no HOF coach, they could not get out of the west. Then after trading Shaq they couldn't beat the Suns.

Kobe will be in the HoF but he's not a player I'll ever respect and the Lakers are not an organization to model your franchise after, not unless Michael Jordan has a friend who runs another team and will give us their all nba player for practically nothing.

NBA has a close community and teams like the Celtics and Lakers will be handed lopsided trades repeatedly. They have less respect from me than teams like the Yankees that just spend their way to success.

Now teams like the Thunder, Nuggets and Jazz, those teams are everything that's right about the NBA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We all saw how the lakers did without a hall of fame coach and without 4-5 all stars. In the early 90s, with the 4-5 all stars but no HOF coach, they could not get out of the west. Then after trading Shaq they couldn't beat the Suns.

Kobe will be in the HoF but he's not a player I'll ever respect and the Lakers are not an organization to model your franchise after, not unless Michael Jordan has a friend who runs another team and will give us their all nba player for practically nothing.

NBA has a close community and teams like the Celtics and Lakers will be handed lopsided trades repeatedly. They have less respect from me than teams like the Yankees that just spend their way to success.

Now teams like the Thunder, Nuggets and Jazz, those teams are everything that's right about the NBA.

Do you have any fuging clue what the Lakers roster looked like in the early 90's?

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/LAL/1994.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Someone with a high basketball IQ would distribute to his teammates more often, and exploit defenses by passing out of the double teams instead of just chucking the ball up every time it hits his hands.

Maybe he does have a high basketball IQ, but he doesn't show it.

Black Mamba? More like Chuck Chucker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So now you're pooting on Van Exel, Divac, Worthy, Bowie, Campbell, Lynch, Rambis?

You sure don't know much about the history of your favorite team.

Still looking for those 4-5 all stars on that '94 team.

Maybe you can point them out here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_NBA_All-Star_Game

Oh, all you haters look the same.

Kobe had a higher Basketball IQ than to play in your sh!thole arena and for your sh!tohole owner. But not to worry, he's in the NBA Finals most years so you can check him out there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I'd rather not have Burns and draft good edge rushers. He wasn't worth the contract he got for a dude that could only rush the passer and frankly did a terrible job of it for us because whenever he did beat his blocker, he would whiff on the QB. Congrats to him for actually being able to wrap up the QB this year - it's the first time he has consistently been able to do it. The amount of teams that ran right at him while he was with us shows that teams realized he was an undersized edge and could get pushed backwards several yards on run plays. Having Dexter Lawrence next to you helps mask that problem
    • I mean, some of y'all keep on saying that, but the fact is is that he is the only Giant feasting. Burns is just better than many of us thought, myself included. Sometimes it just takes guys time to get to the top of their game, that's why I'm going to give our rookies a lot of grace. It might be a couple of years before they hit their stride (though it didn't take Burns that long). But I have been disappointed. Moreover, I suspect that they all might benefit by migrating to  a 4-3 base.  But Burns is what he is. It was ultimately bad timing IMO. After Scott Fitterer failed to take the two firsts, things were destined to go downhill. I think we should've kept Clowney for another year or so more than Burns, but it's all been fûcked up anyway, so nobody was probably going to make that much of a difference.
×
×
  • Create New...