- 17,715
- 7,991
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2005
Last I checked Kobe has more rings than Shaq, so clearly he didn't need Shaq to win a title
During that timeframe YES Kobe did need Shaq.
Shaq was a ridiculous, dominant force for the LA Lakers at the start of this century. Shaq would open up the whole floor for everybody, allowing Kobe to operate as he did. Teams went into each game/series with the intent of finding a way to slow Shaq as much as possible, which wasn't very possible really. He was a beast. Kobe would get doubled a time or two thru the course of a game, mostly when Shaq was out, or a bad defender somehow found his way defending Kobe, but Shaq would get doubled as he was taking off his warmups before opening tip. He would even see a few triple teams, just for the heck of it.
I want all you Laker/Kobe fans to keep reading this statement up above and let it soak into your memory so that you never forget it. Once that happens maybe you dudes will have a better perspective of who and what Kobe really was during his first 3 championships.
They were clearly a 1A, 1B situation, with Kobe maybe being the best 1B we're seen play, but he WAS 1B. There is zero doubt, there is no downplaying of what Shaq did as a Laker.
In the end, Kobe may go on to have a "better" career then Shaq in terms of final number of titles and what not, career numbers, etc etc etc, but at no point should we as Laker fans try to make Shaq look like anything less then THEE driving force behind our first 3-peat. He deserves that credit, and always shall.
Exactly, this is what I've been telling you dudes for the longest on here. Like I said before, in a team setting, everybody can't be Batman, somebody's got to be Robin, which is was Kobe's role early on in his career.
