# Kobe... Triple Double..... Again?



## JaK (Aug 13, 2002)

Lakers and Cav's and it's late in the 4th...

Kobe is one more assist away from his 3rd TD, this year... He's playin' out of head this year...


----------



## Devestata (May 29, 2002)

My goodness...let us know what happens. Kobe is proving us that he is out to win 4 straight with Shaq again.


----------



## <<<D>>> (Jul 15, 2002)

Close but not quite - 15 Pts-13 Rebs-9 Assist
Lakers struggled all night. Bigg Z was impressive
T-Mac is flirting with one right now in the 4th qtr I think he has 40-7-7 soo far


----------



## Chops (May 30, 2002)

*The Good:*
13 rebounds, 9 assists, 1-1 3pt shooting

*The Bad:*
5-13 FG, 15 points

*The Ugly:*
Cavs- *89*
Lakers-*70*


----------



## Devestata (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>KC</b>!
> *The Good:*
> 13 rebounds, 9 assists, 1-1 3pt shooting
> 
> ...


:laugh: What the?? The Cavs were victorious over the Lakers folks! Bad shooting night for Kobe also...


----------



## Chops (May 30, 2002)

In related news...

Tracy McGrady had 41 points, 8 rebounds, and 7 assists. He is now king of the world.


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

The Lakers only got 31 points in the second half. Worst performance in franchise history for the Lakers. They scored a franchise low 70 points! They were in the game until the fourth quarter. They were only down by 7 going into the fourth, but then they only scored 10 points in the final quarter. 10!

Kobe only took 13 shots!? That's ludicrous! PJ told him to not make it a one-on-one contest with Ricky Davis, but come on!

He has to take more than 25 shots when no one else is scoring.

This was just an awful effort from LA.


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>KC</b>!
> In related news...
> 
> Tracy McGrady had 41 points, 8 rebounds, and 7 assists. He is now king of the world.


Yep, and the Kings lost too


----------



## Chops (May 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Damian Necronamous</b>!
> 
> 
> Yep, and the Kings lost too



I doubt they will recover.


----------



## hogey11 (Aug 30, 2002)

i'm not gonna say anything until shaq comes back. When shaq comes back, i'll make my decision as to what kinda respect he deserves. he's definately showing his versatility, and he is showing he can pass out of triple teams really well (which explains the influx of assists). But losing to the Cavs is bad.... not nuggets bad... but bad enough. 

The kobe bashers will be back. trust me on this. just wait.....


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>KC</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> I doubt they will recover.


I agree


----------



## Tom (Jul 15, 2002)

*i was wrong 81 points in two nights*

TMAC is better than Kobe
:gbanana:


----------



## TheRifleman (May 20, 2002)

As so many posters say, stats count when you get the win - otherwise it means nothing. Winning is everything - right? I don't think so; at least , imho when someone tries so hard and their teammates don't help you enough to make the stat line translate into the victory, then how can anybody say anything derogatory about somebody with another near triple double, & who also obviously knows how to play this game?


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

*Re: i was wrong 81 points in two nights*



> Originally posted by <b>Tom</b>!
> TMAC is better than Kobe
> :gbanana:


God spare me...here we damn go again!


----------



## Chops (May 30, 2002)

*Re: Re: i was wrong 81 points in two nights*



> Originally posted by <b>Damian Necronamous</b>!
> 
> 
> God spare me...here we damn go again!


Yea, I get sick of these haters.


----------



## Devestata (May 29, 2002)

*Re: i was wrong 81 points in two nights*



> Originally posted by <b>Tom</b>!
> TMAC is better than Kobe
> :gbanana:


What? How can you say this?


----------



## Chops (May 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TheRifleman</b>!
> As so many posters say, stats count when you get the win - otherwise it means nothing. Winning is everything - right? I don't think so; at least , imho when someone tries so hard and their teammates don't help you enough to make the stat line translate into the victory, then how can anybody say anything derogatory about somebody with another near triple double, & who also obviously knows how to play this game?


Well, he only scored 15 points on 5-13 shooting. That doesn't seem like it was just a case of his teammates not helping enough. It seems like someone played good defense and he shot poorly.


----------



## Devestata (May 29, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: i was wrong 81 points in two nights*



> Originally posted by <b>KC</b>!
> 
> 
> Yea, I get sick of these haters.


Just wondering KC who do you think is getting hated on? Seriously...you think there are still TMac haters?


----------



## TheRifleman (May 20, 2002)

*Re: i was wrong 81 points in two nights*



> Originally posted by <b>Tom</b>!
> TMAC is better than Kobe
> :gbanana:


Actually, TMac had 47 and then 41, which is 88, not 81 points. 

Now do a couple games tell anybody that either Kobe or TMac is better than the other? That would be ludicrous. That will be decided when each has ended their careers.

It's a good thing they're both friends off the court & that they each respect one another! (Too bad many fans don't learn from them and learn how to respect and admire both players!)


----------



## Chops (May 30, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: i was wrong 81 points in two nights*



> Originally posted by <b>Devestata</b>!
> 
> 
> Just wondering KC who do you think is getting hated on? Seriously...you think there are still TMac haters?


No, Kobe doesn't get the respect he deserves. Too many haters out there...


----------



## Devestata (May 29, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: i was wrong 81 points in two nights*



> Originally posted by <b>KC</b>!
> 
> 
> No, Kobe doesn't get the respect he deserves. Too many haters out there...


Oh...I see. Um...I think...you are being a bit sarcastic but I think I'll leave it alone now.


----------



## Tom (Jul 15, 2002)

*Relax!*

i was kidding.  you guys are too easy.


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: i was wrong 81 points in two nights*



> Originally posted by <b>Devestata</b>!
> 
> 
> Oh...I see. Um...I think...you are being a bit sarcastic but I think I'll leave it alone now.


No offense (KC), but he is always sarcastic...it's hard to tell when he's serious or not.


----------



## Devestata (May 29, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: i was wrong 81 points in two nights*



> Originally posted by <b>Damian Necronamous</b>!
> 
> 
> No offense (KC), but he is always sarcastic...it's hard to tell when he's serious or not.


Well...he is serious when it comes to the Kings and his 9ers in football...he just likes to joke around a lot about Kobe.


----------



## Chops (May 30, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: i was wrong 81 points in two nights*



> Originally posted by <b>Devestata</b>!
> 
> 
> Well...he is serious when it comes to the Kings and his 9ers in football...he just likes to joke around a lot about Kobe.


My favorite team by far is the Bulls. With the Kings a *distant* second.


----------



## Devestata (May 29, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: i was wrong 81 points in two nights*



> Originally posted by <b>KC</b>!
> 
> 
> My favorite team by far is the Bulls. With the Kings a *distant* second.


Oh sorry KC... I knew that. I can never forget a fellow Bulls fan. Even though they are 2-2 we are running again. Sorry about being off topic folks.


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: i was wrong 81 points in two nights*



> Originally posted by <b>KC</b>!
> With the Kings a *distant* second.


You learn something new everyday.


----------



## <<<D>>> (Jul 15, 2002)

*Re: i was wrong 81 points in two nights*



> Originally posted by <b>Tom</b>!
> 81 points in two nights TMAC is better than Kobe
> :gbanana:



So this is how these 2 players are being judged now??
Few games into the season, impressive stats, one fails to win or put up big numbers and he's better than the other. If you want to look at totals and in YOUR own perspective, let's bring in the ultimate.
Kobe - 3 Rings
TMac - ZERO

and that's a big advantage soo far in their young careers.


----------



## Devestata (May 29, 2002)

*Re: Relax!*



> Originally posted by <b>Tom</b>!
> i was kidding.  you guys are too easy.


Tom, you sure tricked me.  :laugh:


----------



## Chops (May 30, 2002)

*Re: Re: i was wrong 81 points in two nights*



> Originally posted by <b><<<D>>></b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Kobe= 1 Shaq
T-Mac= 0 Shaq

That is another huge advantage for Kobe.


----------



## TheRifleman (May 20, 2002)

*Re: Re: i was wrong 81 points in two nights*



> Originally posted by <b><<<D>>></b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I think the Magic are winning more this year(4/1), in spite of pat garrity being their starting Power Forward. 

As I said earlier, TMac & Kobe are friends off the court and have high respect for one another - too bad so many fans cannot like AND respect both players.


----------



## Chops (May 30, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: i was wrong 81 points in two nights*



> Originally posted by <b>TheRifleman</b>!
> 
> 
> I think the Magic are winning more this year(4/1), in spite of pat garrity being their starting Power Forward.
> ...


Good point TRM. However, I'm not sure if T-Mac likes Kobe. When asked about Kobe, didn't T-mac say something like, "Yeah, he's OK."


----------



## Devestata (May 29, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: i was wrong 81 points in two nights*



> Originally posted by <b>KC</b>!
> 
> 
> Good point TRM. However, I'm not sure if T-Mac likes Kobe. When asked about Kobe, didn't T-mac say something like, "Yeah, he's OK."


Darn, those egos.


----------



## Chops (May 30, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: i was wrong 81 points in two nights*



> Originally posted by <b>Devestata</b>!
> 
> 
> Darn, those egos.


Of course I don't know the context in which the question was asked. He could have been joking.


----------



## TheRifleman (May 20, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: i was wrong 81 points in two nights*



> Originally posted by <b>KC</b>!
> 
> 
> Good point TRM. However, I'm not sure if T-Mac likes Kobe. When asked about Kobe, didn't T-mac say something like, "Yeah, he's OK."


That could be, but I didn't see that interview. I did see a couple interviews on the sunshine network which told about how they call one another long distance, discussing things and how each of them have encouraged one another because of the media glaring into their lives so much.


----------



## Chops (May 30, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: i was wrong 81 points in two nights*



> Originally posted by <b>TheRifleman</b>!
> 
> 
> That could be, but I didn't see that interview. I did see a couple interviews on the sunshine network which told about how they call one another long distance, discussing things and how each of them have encouraged one another because of the media glaring into their lives so much.


You are probably right and T-Mac was probably just joking around.


----------



## Devestata (May 29, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: i was wrong 81 points in two nights*



> Originally posted by <b>KC</b>!
> 
> 
> Of course I don't know the context in which the question was asked. He could have been joking.


Hmm...that's probably something we will never know for sure.


----------



## <<<D>>> (Jul 15, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: i was wrong 81 points in two nights*



> Originally posted by <b>TheRifleman</b>!
> 
> 
> I think the Magic are winning more this year(4/1), in spite of pat garrity being their starting Power Forward.
> ...


I know about their relationship ON and OFF the court and theirs no doubt in my mind, the Magic will be better this season. I've always respected Mac and what he brings as an athlete. My reply to the poster was....is this how you judge these 2 young stars?? If so....look further


----------



## <<<D>>> (Jul 15, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: i was wrong 81 points in two nights*



> Originally posted by <b>KC</b>!
> 
> 
> Kobe= 1 Shaq


I knew this was going to get brought up


----------



## Wiggum (Jul 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>KC</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> I doubt they will recover.


Next time you use sarcasm like that, be sure to insert the appropriate "  " or else people might take you seriously.


----------



## Chops (May 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Wiggum</b>!
> 
> 
> Next time you use sarcasm like that, be sure to insert the appropriate "  " or else people might take you seriously.


Gotcha!


----------



## JNice (Jul 13, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: i was wrong 81 points in two nights*



> Originally posted by <b><<<D>>></b>!
> 
> 
> I knew this was going to get brought up


Of course it would be brought up, it is a very important point.

Tmac may not have any rings, but there is no way Kobe would have any without Shaq.

A comparison of which is the better player doesnt really have much to do with rings anyways. Rings are a team accomplishment.

Right now, both guys are tearing the league up.. clearly the best two players in the world.

As for my opinion, I go with Tmac.


----------



## c_dog (Sep 15, 2002)

*Re: Re: i was wrong 81 points in two nights*



> Originally posted by <b><<<D>>></b>!
> Kobe - 3 Rings
> TMac - ZERO


Fisher - 3 Rings
Kidd - ZERO

Are you saying Fisher is better than Kidd?


----------



## the mail man (Oct 31, 2002)

kobe only toook 15 shoots! face it ppl he only cares about geting a triple double, he was wide open often times but just passed it off, you cant do that when your trying to lead a team.


----------



## The OUTLAW (Jun 13, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>the mail man</b>!
> kobe only toook 15 shoots! face it ppl he only cares about geting a triple double, he was wide open often times but just passed it off, you cant do that when your trying to lead a team.


He took 13 shots and I still don't recall all of these times he was wide open and trying to get assists. It appeared as though he would drive and dish out for the wide open jumper and the Lakers were just not converting.


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>the mail man</b>!
> kobe only toook 15 shoots! face it ppl he only cares about geting a triple double, he was wide open often times but just passed it off, you cant do that when your trying to lead a team.


if Kobe takes as many shots as Tmac and scores 40, he's a ball hog!

if he shoots to little, he only cares about triple doubles!

if he has an off night, he sucks!

if he shoots 12-18 and post a triple double, he got lucky!

if he does it again the following night, there's no comment!

*Just face it, whether you're for or against Kobe, he's a great player anything you say he can't do he will. Because he's got that will to overcome adversity! That's the major difference between Kobe & Tmac. Kobe has stepped up when it counts most, Tracy hasn't*


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>The OUTLAW</b>!
> 
> 
> He took 13 shots and I still don't recall all of these times he was wide open and trying to get assists. It appeared as though he would drive and dish out for the wide open jumper and the Lakers were just not converting.


Speak the truth!


----------



## The OUTLAW (Jun 13, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>IV</b>!
> 
> 
> Speak the truth!


I thought I was


----------



## <<<D>>> (Jul 15, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: i was wrong 81 points in two nights*



> Originally posted by <b>c_dog</b>!
> 
> 
> Fisher - 3 Rings
> ...




Wow....very smart!!!
from equal comparisons of Mac & Kobe......to this??
Of course we know who's better from your analogy.
Do you want to try it again??


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>The OUTLAW</b>!
> 
> 
> I thought I was


you were, I agree with you!

so many people hate kobe. its nice to see you support him and you're a fan of the opposing team.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: i was wrong 81 points in two nights*



> Originally posted by <b>c_dog</b>!
> 
> 
> Fisher - 3 Rings
> ...


So we're comparing Fisher and Kobe now? Fisher is a role player while Kobe is a superstar with or without Shaq. Role vs. superstar, role player vs. superstar, role player vs. superstar. 

*:naughty: Pinball, try to keep the discussion basketball related.*- KC


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>the mail man</b>!
> kobe only toook 15 shoots! face it ppl he only cares about geting a triple double, he was wide open often times but just passed it off, you cant do that when your trying to lead a team.


Oh my the sheer hypocrisy of this statement! You bash Kobe for being selfish and yet you support a player whose reputed selfishness is legendary? Wow! If you don't like Kobe just say so, but don't devise some BS excuse for why you don't "respect" him.


----------



## c_dog (Sep 15, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: i was wrong 81 points in two nights*



> Originally posted by <b><<<D>>></b>!
> 
> Wow....very smart!!!
> from equal comparisons of Mac & Kobe......to this??
> ...


Hey, you started it. You compared T-Mac and Kobe using rings(you said kobe=3ring, t-mac=zero), so I'm just saying rings don't mean everything. Fisher has more rings than Kidd, but we both know that Kidd is better.



> Originally posted by <b>Pinball</b>!
> So we're comparing Fisher and Kobe now?


Huh? o_0 Since when? That would be silly.

I was just proving to <<D>> that rings don't everything. That's all. I wasn't comparing anybody to anybody. XD


----------



## <<<D>>> (Jul 15, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: i was wrong 81 points in two nights*



> Originally posted by <b>c_dog</b>!
> 
> 
> Hey, you started it. You compared T-Mac and Kobe using rings(you said kobe=3ring, t-mac=zero), so I'm just saying rings don't mean everything. Fisher has more rings than Kidd, but we both know that Kidd is better.
> ...


OK C-dog.....Rings don't mean everything???


----------

