View Single Post
Old 10-12-2006, 12:59 PM   #189
Five-ofan
Guru
 
Five-ofan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 10,016
Five-ofan has a reputation beyond reputeFive-ofan has a reputation beyond reputeFive-ofan has a reputation beyond reputeFive-ofan has a reputation beyond reputeFive-ofan has a reputation beyond reputeFive-ofan has a reputation beyond reputeFive-ofan has a reputation beyond reputeFive-ofan has a reputation beyond reputeFive-ofan has a reputation beyond reputeFive-ofan has a reputation beyond reputeFive-ofan has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by creditXpert2003
And they dont need to defend/defame my posts as well. It is too lopsided. When this happens it becomes obvious their intentions. Do you agree on that?

Since, you bring up the 80's, go back to the 70's as well. In each decade the game of the NBA has changed. The players, the teams and the rules.

70's was about the centers, 80's about Showtime and having many go to guys on each team. The 90's started the thrend to where Sidekicks became the main way to win. Having 2 Superstars like Utah never got them by. As we look at the 90's we see the what you all call the Batman/Robin dominant the titles, even 1999 with Robinson and Duncan. Early 2000 was Shaq/Kobe. Early on Shaq was the Superstar, and Kobe was the rising star. Then I would say they had a title with both as a Superstar, then fell off as times went back to Batman/Robin or complete team ball like the Pistons. SA has ruled the 2000's, and their style is Batman/Robin with Duncan as "Batman" and Ginobili and Parker as "Robin".

Now, the Heat just won with Batman(Wade) and Robin(Shaq). I feel the Mavs defensive gameplan should have stayed designed to stop Batman, because Robin was not going to beat u, especially if you put him on the free throw line..
Umm, im fairly certain without actually looking it up(this has zito potential for me to be completely wrong because i didnt look that up either) I cant think of a team that won in the 70s without a second superstar either.

In general the batman and robin idea i agree with. However, Batman and robin refers to Batman and robin both being superstars generally and btw, hte lakers have more rings in the 2000s than the spurs do just fyi. Jordan and Pippen was batman and robin and both were superstars. What you seem to be thinking about would be something like Batman and Alfred or Batman and commisioner Gordon. If you truly feel that either shaq or kobe of the lakers wasnt a superstar then im just done because you are too ignorant to be reasoned with.

Shaqs last season of the threepeat, 27.2 ppg, 10.7 rpg, 3.0 apg, 2.0 bpg and 58% shooting. Thats pretty darn superstarish.
Five-ofan is offline