— The U.S. Open tees off on Thursday at the famed Bethpage Black in New York. I played the intimidating "Black" course in 2006, shooting a lopsided 112. I have few distinct memories from the course itself, but I'll never forget the beauty of the dream-like fairways and the absurdly thick rough.
— The Los Angeles Lakers polished off the Orlando Magic in the NBA Finals tonight. This undoubtably boosts the already remarkable stocks of Kobe Bryant and Phil Jackson. Kobe proved he COULD do it without Shaq, and Phil proved he COULD do it with only one great player. Here's a question for some NBA heads; if Scottie Pippen never suits up for the Bulls, how many titles does Jordan earn?
— The Washington Nationals selection of San Diego State flamethrower Stephen Strasburg could go down as an all-time bust. No way his arm lasts more than 150 starts. Mark my words.
This sounds outlandish now, but Strasburg is best suited for the bullpen. Give that guy the lead in the ninth inning and it's a win 99 percent of the time. Plus, his dynamite arm would never get over-worked.
— Is anybody else willing to give Trevor Ariza the NBA Finals MVP? I know Derek Fisher drained those two big threes in Game 4, but Ariza's defense and energy pushed the Lakers over the top. Don't forget Ariza's 13 clutch points in the third quarter of Game 4.
The above topic reminds me; why does the MVP of a championship series always go to the obvious choice? Sounds like a stupid argument, doesn't it? Hear me out, though.
What's the point of a series MVP? Everybody knows Kobe is the MVP of the Lakers. We don't need a trophy to figure that out. That's why you give it to the guy that exceeded expectations.
Kobe averaged more than 30 points per game in the Finals, and that's exactly what we expected. Why not give the Finals MVP to Ariza? Did anyone expect Ariza to have the type of impact on the series as he displayed?
5 comments:
As for the question concerning NBA titles, Pippen and Jordan: That question is irrelevant. It can be flipped so many ways. Does Jordan win w/o Pip? Does Phil win w/o MJ? Does Shaq win w/o Kobe and Wade? Does Kobe win w/o Gasol (Who could very well be on his way to a HoF career)? Does Olajuwon win w/o Drexler? Does Bird win w/o McHale? Does Magic win w/o Kareem? It goes on and on. Again, I think the question is irrelevant. Every championship team has a few great players who were either great players who won a championship, or are considered great BECAUSE they won a championship (Although Adam Morrison will not fall into this category).
What I look at is this: Kobe has been to the Finals seven times, winning four. Jordan made six Finals, winning all six. And six Finals MVP's. That, along with the greatest player ever question, is something that is not debatable.
KOBE BRYANT's finals stats are exactly the same as last years blowout by the Celtics. You say that KOBE won it without another star. You are insane! Look at they depth of the Lakers this year. Gasol and Odom played out of their minds. MJ is THE GREATEST to every play and don't even try to hypothosis what would of happened without Pippen...
I would never consider Odom or Gasol a star. They are products of the system. Gasol is perfect for the triangle offense because of his passing skills. Odom is ideal as well because of his ability to play point-forward and can play the interior.
Gasol was never a dominant big man during his days in Memphis (he never had the talent around, though) and Odom didn't start playing hard until the 2008 playoffs when Kobe lit a fire under him.
Just because the Lakers are full of depth doesn't mean they are loaded with "stars."
You can't build a team around Gasol or Odom and expect to compete for a championship every year.
Odom and Gasol are exactly the type of players essential to a championship team. Take one of them out of the equation and the championship is lost. So, again, Kobe does not win without Gasol or Odom. Or Ariza or Fisher for that matter. Remember he was a missed layup away from being A goat, and is most certainly not THE G.O.A.T.
Also, I have to address this: Gasol not being dominant in Memphis. Come on. You can't avaerage 19 points, 9 boards, and 5 assists and not be dominant. Just because he was on a shitty team doesn't mean he wasn't a stud.
Gasol was a good player in Memphis. In Los Angeles, he's become a great player now that he's in the perfect offensive system, a championship nucleus surrounds him and a ridiculous scoring threat keeps most teams from doubling him. Sure, he got his numbers for the Grizz. But when your squad get squashed by 15 every night, who cares? There's always one guy on a bad team who puts up respectable numbers.
Post a Comment