harveycmd

At age 22 during the 2001 playoffs, Kobe Bryant was considered by many to be a top-3 player and arguably the best in the world, averaging 29.4 points, 7.3 rebounds, and 6.1 assists

Nonsense. Federal legislation or supreme court decicsion.

At age 22 during the 2000-01 season, Kobe Bryant was arguably the best player in the world,

Luka can't stay healthy with the other guys. He sucks.

An all-time Los Angeles Lakers team—featuring Magic Johnson, Kobe Bryant, LeBron James, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, and Shaquille O'Neal—would likely be favored against an "All-NBA" team due to unmatched size, depth, and superstar talent.

Ain't no conflict. Swain needs to go.

Gerry Ain't no combo guard talk. Best point guard ever ever because he passed better than anyone ever.

Nothing for few hours. AI search. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar is generally regarded as the greatest center in NBA history due to his unmatched longevity, six championships, six MVPs, and unstoppable skyhook shot. Magic Johnson is widely considered the greatest point guard of all time due to his unique 6'9" size,5 championships, 3 MVPs, and unmatched playmaking in the "Showtime" Lakers era

I'll add that this year in college basketball is like the Celtics of the 1980s. Great size and skill in the front court is winning out. Even so, that didn't ultimately beat the combo of Magic and Kareem and the overall athleticism of the Lakers in the 1980s. Goobers who think "it's different now" need to study up some. It's a cycle with limits.

Winter's Triangle went back to the 1960s. Triangle worked for Phil because Pippen could play point on offense and Shaq and Kobe couldn't be defended one-on-one. Of course MJ couldn't either. You don't need a particular system; you need players. I'm sure Gerry would agree. That said, there are skills that the game itself rewards. Of course, this can be manipulated by rules. There's a limit to the amount of manipulation you can implement without doing damage to the game. The NBA crossed that line after the Lakers destroyed everyone in 2001. The NBA owners decided they didn't like the idea of 22 year old Kobe and Shaq dominating the league one-one-one. So they changed the rules. It took a while, but now we're seeing they screwed up. College basketball was at the mercy of the NBA until they started paying players. That's not the case now. We now have real basketball in college. That why interest in college is increasing and interest in the NBA is decreasing. PG is not a fungible position. A great PG is not a necessity if you have another great perimeter and post player, but having a great PG is better than having a combo guard and "stretch" 4. History proves this.

I don't disagree with anything you say, Gerry, but it doesn't change the fundamentals. Five years ago it was literally nuts to think you needed multiple big men to win a natty in CBB. What's going on now? NIL and the change in money have brought big men back big time. A less than similar change can make PGs much more important because the fundamentals of basketball don't simply change because of fads. NBA doesn't matter in the least. They've sucked ever since they changed the rules to keep Shaq and Kobe from winning 10 titles. Losing viewership and attendance by the day they suck so bad now. Those idiots have screwed up so bad they are going to have to change multiple rules just to keep real players on the floor. Back to PGs: Having a PG that can score doesn't equal a "combo" guard. All the greatest PGs could score. Not all combo guards can pass well enough to win a game if they don't score much. That's the difference.

I want be clear. You don't spend the money on another 3. You spend it on the high level 4 and 1 that you need. I don't agree with Gerry that you can just forget the 1 and go combo. A few examples of outliers doesn't change the fundamentals of the game. Time doesn't change it either. The law of gravity doesn't change with time. There are plenty of true point guards tall enough to defend more than one position, and that's all you're worried about with this combo nonsense.

They must assume he's not coming back and allocate the money to another high level player. If he does come back, they can try to raise the money, but you can't hold the money for a low chance opportunity. I'd say it's 80/20 he'll stay in the draft. He's being consistently mocked in the low to mid 20s pick range now, and he'll likely outperform many of the guys being mocked ahead of him (Haugh, Mullins, etc.) during the workout process.

It's called negotiating.

Disappointing. Not ready to play.

Not to toot my horn, but I was right about moving Borba to third and Becerra to short.

I don't know what to make of it. Texas is the only WCBB team I watch. We go through stretches during which we turn it over like crazy and can't shoot. Pretty sure UConn doesn't have those lapses. Don't know about UCLA. If you win, you can get the respect.

I've said before and I'll say it again. Jokic and Doncic would not have started for an NBA team twenty-five years ago. Without rules to protect the slow Euro boys offensively, they'd get exposed really quick.

We need the video of an aggie fan injuring their own LF by throwing back a homerun ball and hitting him in the back of the head.

Certainly much better than SGA or no defense Doncic.

Sark said he had a "championship roster" last spring. Probably did, but it didn't come together soon enough for whatever reasons. If they take it to Ohio State in week two, we know we have the goods.

Experience at each position matters.

Becerra to short, Borba to third, platoon first.

Kobe Bryant is often cited as the only player with a winning playoff record against Tim Duncan, having achieved an 18–12 record in postseason games against him. Throughout their careers, the two legends met in six different playoff series between 1999 and 2008, with Bryant's Los Angeles Lakers winning four of those matchups and Duncan's San Antonio Spurs winning two.