do you guys still consider kobe to be "Good"?
Goto page 1, 2, 3 ... 24, 25, 26  Next
 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
BigBallerBrand
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 23 Dec 2008
Posts: 5785
Location: LA

PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 11:28 am    Post subject: do you guys still consider kobe to be "Good"?

serious question so serious answers only please. do you guys think he is still a "Good" player? like is he someone you still want on your team to win (ignoring his salary, past accomplishments as a laker) a ring. or would you guys prefer he doesn't take shots away from other players on your team? (let's ignore his salary here)
_________________
Billions Billions Billions
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 11:29 am    Post subject:

Define "good."
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Megaton
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 18 Feb 2015
Posts: 25624

PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 11:31 am    Post subject:

Kobe Bryant is a good basketball player.
_________________
Darvin Scam: https://media.tenor.com/images/3c15249955860a4b16b59e8ae035fb75/tenor.gif
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
BigBallerBrand
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 23 Dec 2008
Posts: 5785
Location: LA

PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 11:31 am    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
Define "good."


i put "good" in quotations precisely due to the fact that it is subjective. that is also the reason why i am asking the very question.
_________________
Billions Billions Billions
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 11:32 am    Post subject:

I would phrase it as,

"if he wasn't a Laker all-time great, HOFer, and we just had the Kobe from last season, would you want him as a primary player on your team today?"
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
BigBallerBrand
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 23 Dec 2008
Posts: 5785
Location: LA

PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 11:34 am    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
I would phrase it as,

"if he wasn't a Laker all-time great, HOFer, and we just had the Kobe from last season, would you want him as a primary player on your team today?"


that's not really what i want to know, and that is not what i am asking. all i want to know is, do you guys still think he is a "good" player? like if you name the top players in the world, is kobe still on your list?
_________________
Billions Billions Billions
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 11:35 am    Post subject:

15 wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
I would phrase it as,

"if he wasn't a Laker all-time great, HOFer, and we just had the Kobe from last season, would you want him as a primary player on your team today?"


that's not really what i want to know, and that is not what i am asking. all i want to know is, do you guys still think he is a "good" player? like if you name the top players in the world, is kobe still on your list?


Right now? No. 1 on 1 exhibition, sure, but not if you're trying to win a NBA championship.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
dmorans1
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 11 Sep 2012
Posts: 11669

PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 11:44 am    Post subject:

15 wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
I would phrase it as,

"if he wasn't a Laker all-time great, HOFer, and we just had the Kobe from last season, would you want him as a primary player on your team today?"


that's not really what i want to know, and that is not what i am asking. all i want to know is, do you guys still think he is a "good" player? like if you name the top players in the world, is kobe still on your list?


Wait, so only the top players in the world are "good" for you? Damn you're a tough guy to impress I guess.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
deal
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 17 Aug 2008
Posts: 14900
Location: Earth

PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 11:45 am    Post subject:

"good" responses..
_________________
Lakers need to build a freaking team !
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 11:45 am    Post subject:

Without defining (in a meaningful way) "good," this post is not going anywhere.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
wolfpaclaker
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 29 May 2002
Posts: 58318

PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 11:48 am    Post subject:

He's definitely a good player. Based on last year, he was a good player, taking too many shots. If he tones down his shot taking and plays more team ball, he'll be an asset to the team. He needs to be kept playing 30 mpg, and needs to be told to move the ball more often.

There is no question in my mind Kobe is still a top 30 player when healthy. The only problem is I think Kobe still plays like he's the best player in the league.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 11:51 am    Post subject:

wolfpaclaker wrote:
He's definitely a good player. Based on last year, he was a good player, taking too many shots. If he tones down his shot taking and plays more team ball, he'll be an asset to the team. He needs to be kept playing 30 mpg, and needs to be told to move the ball more often.

There is no question in my mind Kobe is still a top 30 player when healthy. The only problem is I think Kobe still plays like he's the best player in the league.


Health and role-mindset are the two reasons why it's hard for me to say that he's still "good" (as I define that as whether you want him as one of your top players, in an opportunity cost sense). Of course you could throw him as a player on the Warriors, but for me to test whether he's "good" is to ask whether you'd replace Curry with Kobe. If Kobe was still a top 5 guy, that wouldn't be much of a question.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
PROPHET
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 05 Jul 2001
Posts: 4356
Location: Oxnard, CA - The Nard

PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 11:57 am    Post subject:

Kobe can be a good player still but he needs to change his game from volume scorer to more of a role player to not be detrimental to a team. His defense is atrocious right now at his age and he is a volume scorer who is not efficient, those are just the facts.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
dmorans1
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 11 Sep 2012
Posts: 11669

PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 12:01 pm    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
wolfpaclaker wrote:
He's definitely a good player. Based on last year, he was a good player, taking too many shots. If he tones down his shot taking and plays more team ball, he'll be an asset to the team. He needs to be kept playing 30 mpg, and needs to be told to move the ball more often.

There is no question in my mind Kobe is still a top 30 player when healthy. The only problem is I think Kobe still plays like he's the best player in the league.


Health and role-mindset are the two reasons why it's hard for me to say that he's still "good" (as I define that as whether you want him as one of your top players, in an opportunity cost sense). Of course you could throw him as a player on the Warriors, but for me to test whether he's "good" is to ask whether you'd replace Curry with Kobe. If Kobe was still a top 5 guy, that wouldn't be much of a question.


Great definition of a "good" player yinoma. Kobe is not a good player. Chris Paul is not a good player. Melo isn't. Griffin isn't. Kyrie isn't. I can go on and on listing all the players I wouldn't replace Curry with. What a dumb definition of "good".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
kikanga
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 29152
Location: La La Land

PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 12:02 pm    Post subject:

When healthy, he's a top 5 SG in the league.
The Only guys I'd take over him are Harden, Klay, and Jimmy Butler (I don't consider Paul George a SG).
When healthy, I think Kobe is the same range as Derozan, Bradley Beal, and Wade overall.
_________________
"Every hurt is a lesson, and every lesson makes you better”
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 12:03 pm    Post subject:

dmorans1 wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
wolfpaclaker wrote:
He's definitely a good player. Based on last year, he was a good player, taking too many shots. If he tones down his shot taking and plays more team ball, he'll be an asset to the team. He needs to be kept playing 30 mpg, and needs to be told to move the ball more often.

There is no question in my mind Kobe is still a top 30 player when healthy. The only problem is I think Kobe still plays like he's the best player in the league.


Health and role-mindset are the two reasons why it's hard for me to say that he's still "good" (as I define that as whether you want him as one of your top players, in an opportunity cost sense). Of course you could throw him as a player on the Warriors, but for me to test whether he's "good" is to ask whether you'd replace Curry with Kobe. If Kobe was still a top 5 guy, that wouldn't be much of a question.


Great definition of a "good" player yinoma. Kobe is not a good player. Chris Paul is not a good player. Melo isn't. Griffin isn't. Kyrie isn't. I can go on and on listing all the players I wouldn't replace Curry with. What a dumb definition of "good".


Not my fault that the original poster didn't include a definition of "good."

That can encompass anything. Cut it down with the insults. My definition of "good" may be different than yours, which is the basis of my problem with this post, and yours too.

As I said, it's a test. For me the test is to replace a team's best player and say would you replace current Kobe with that guy. Curry/GSW was an example.

So what's your definition of "good" then?
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
dmorans1
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 11 Sep 2012
Posts: 11669

PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 12:10 pm    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
dmorans1 wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
wolfpaclaker wrote:
He's definitely a good player. Based on last year, he was a good player, taking too many shots. If he tones down his shot taking and plays more team ball, he'll be an asset to the team. He needs to be kept playing 30 mpg, and needs to be told to move the ball more often.

There is no question in my mind Kobe is still a top 30 player when healthy. The only problem is I think Kobe still plays like he's the best player in the league.


Health and role-mindset are the two reasons why it's hard for me to say that he's still "good" (as I define that as whether you want him as one of your top players, in an opportunity cost sense). Of course you could throw him as a player on the Warriors, but for me to test whether he's "good" is to ask whether you'd replace Curry with Kobe. If Kobe was still a top 5 guy, that wouldn't be much of a question.


Great definition of a "good" player yinoma. Kobe is not a good player. Chris Paul is not a good player. Melo isn't. Griffin isn't. Kyrie isn't. I can go on and on listing all the players I wouldn't replace Curry with. What a dumb definition of "good".


Not my fault that the original poster didn't include a definition of "good."

That can encompass anything. Cut it down with the insults. My definition of "good" may be different than yours, which is the basis of my problem with this post, and yours too.

As I said, it's a test. For me the test is to replace a team's best player and say would you replace current Kobe with that guy. Curry/GSW was an example.

So what's your definition of "good" then?


My definition isn't in question. Would you consider any player in the League a great player? Just truly a ridiculous statement by you. You go around in public saying anyone less talented than Curry is not a good player? So basically the Spurs suck, Houston sucks, Clippers suck, etc. Truly ridiculous.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 12:11 pm    Post subject:

dmorans1 wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
dmorans1 wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
wolfpaclaker wrote:
He's definitely a good player. Based on last year, he was a good player, taking too many shots. If he tones down his shot taking and plays more team ball, he'll be an asset to the team. He needs to be kept playing 30 mpg, and needs to be told to move the ball more often.

There is no question in my mind Kobe is still a top 30 player when healthy. The only problem is I think Kobe still plays like he's the best player in the league.


Health and role-mindset are the two reasons why it's hard for me to say that he's still "good" (as I define that as whether you want him as one of your top players, in an opportunity cost sense). Of course you could throw him as a player on the Warriors, but for me to test whether he's "good" is to ask whether you'd replace Curry with Kobe. If Kobe was still a top 5 guy, that wouldn't be much of a question.


Great definition of a "good" player yinoma. Kobe is not a good player. Chris Paul is not a good player. Melo isn't. Griffin isn't. Kyrie isn't. I can go on and on listing all the players I wouldn't replace Curry with. What a dumb definition of "good".


Not my fault that the original poster didn't include a definition of "good."

That can encompass anything. Cut it down with the insults. My definition of "good" may be different than yours, which is the basis of my problem with this post, and yours too.

As I said, it's a test. For me the test is to replace a team's best player and say would you replace current Kobe with that guy. Curry/GSW was an example.

So what's your definition of "good" then?


My definition isn't in question. Would you consider any player in the League a great player? Just truly a ridiculous statement by you. You go around in public saying anyone less talented than Curry is not a good player? So basically the Spurs suck, Houston sucks, Clippers suck, etc. Truly ridiculous.


Again, "my" test is one thing, and my question is, what's yours?

What's ridiculous is your comment on my subjective definition, when the OP makes no effort to define good.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
slavavov
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 03 Oct 2003
Posts: 8288
Location: Santa Monica

PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 12:13 pm    Post subject:

If we're going just by last season, there's no way we can consider Kobe a "good" player when he shot well under 40%.
_________________
Lakers 49ers Chargers Dodgers
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
dmorans1
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 11 Sep 2012
Posts: 11669

PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 12:17 pm    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
dmorans1 wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
dmorans1 wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
wolfpaclaker wrote:
He's definitely a good player. Based on last year, he was a good player, taking too many shots. If he tones down his shot taking and plays more team ball, he'll be an asset to the team. He needs to be kept playing 30 mpg, and needs to be told to move the ball more often.

There is no question in my mind Kobe is still a top 30 player when healthy. The only problem is I think Kobe still plays like he's the best player in the league.


Health and role-mindset are the two reasons why it's hard for me to say that he's still "good" (as I define that as whether you want him as one of your top players, in an opportunity cost sense). Of course you could throw him as a player on the Warriors, but for me to test whether he's "good" is to ask whether you'd replace Curry with Kobe. If Kobe was still a top 5 guy, that wouldn't be much of a question.


Great definition of a "good" player yinoma. Kobe is not a good player. Chris Paul is not a good player. Melo isn't. Griffin isn't. Kyrie isn't. I can go on and on listing all the players I wouldn't replace Curry with. What a dumb definition of "good".


Not my fault that the original poster didn't include a definition of "good."

That can encompass anything. Cut it down with the insults. My definition of "good" may be different than yours, which is the basis of my problem with this post, and yours too.

As I said, it's a test. For me the test is to replace a team's best player and say would you replace current Kobe with that guy. Curry/GSW was an example.

So what's your definition of "good" then?


My definition isn't in question. Would you consider any player in the League a great player? Just truly a ridiculous statement by you. You go around in public saying anyone less talented than Curry is not a good player? So basically the Spurs suck, Houston sucks, Clippers suck, etc. Truly ridiculous.


Again, "my" test is one thing, and my question is, what's yours?

What's ridiculous is your comment on my subjective definition, when the OP makes no effort to define good.


You're subjective definition is ridiculous, I can't believe you don't realize that.

I would consider most players who contribute positively to team succes a good player. I would consider guys like Barnes and Iggy good players, guys who you would not. The Finals MVP, you wouldn't consider him a good player. Beyond ridiculous.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
BigBallerBrand
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 23 Dec 2008
Posts: 5785
Location: LA

PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 12:17 pm    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
dmorans1 wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
dmorans1 wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
wolfpaclaker wrote:
He's definitely a good player. Based on last year, he was a good player, taking too many shots. If he tones down his shot taking and plays more team ball, he'll be an asset to the team. He needs to be kept playing 30 mpg, and needs to be told to move the ball more often.

There is no question in my mind Kobe is still a top 30 player when healthy. The only problem is I think Kobe still plays like he's the best player in the league.


Health and role-mindset are the two reasons why it's hard for me to say that he's still "good" (as I define that as whether you want him as one of your top players, in an opportunity cost sense). Of course you could throw him as a player on the Warriors, but for me to test whether he's "good" is to ask whether you'd replace Curry with Kobe. If Kobe was still a top 5 guy, that wouldn't be much of a question.


Great definition of a "good" player yinoma. Kobe is not a good player. Chris Paul is not a good player. Melo isn't. Griffin isn't. Kyrie isn't. I can go on and on listing all the players I wouldn't replace Curry with. What a dumb definition of "good".


Not my fault that the original poster didn't include a definition of "good."

That can encompass anything. Cut it down with the insults. My definition of "good" may be different than yours, which is the basis of my problem with this post, and yours too.

As I said, it's a test. For me the test is to replace a team's best player and say would you replace current Kobe with that guy. Curry/GSW was an example.

So what's your definition of "good" then?


My definition isn't in question. Would you consider any player in the League a great player? Just truly a ridiculous statement by you. You go around in public saying anyone less talented than Curry is not a good player? So basically the Spurs suck, Houston sucks, Clippers suck, etc. Truly ridiculous.


Again, "my" test is one thing, and my question is, what's yours?

What's ridiculous is your comment on my subjective definition, when the OP makes no effort to define good.


the word "good" is inherently subjective, and it depends on your frame of reference. i thought i made that clear above. so what i am asking is, "from what frame of reference are you considering kobe to be good or not?" are you comparing his performance last year to 10 years ago, or comparing his current performance to performance of his peer group as of today? etc.
_________________
Billions Billions Billions
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 12:19 pm    Post subject:

dmorans1 wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
dmorans1 wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
dmorans1 wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
wolfpaclaker wrote:
He's definitely a good player. Based on last year, he was a good player, taking too many shots. If he tones down his shot taking and plays more team ball, he'll be an asset to the team. He needs to be kept playing 30 mpg, and needs to be told to move the ball more often.

There is no question in my mind Kobe is still a top 30 player when healthy. The only problem is I think Kobe still plays like he's the best player in the league.


Health and role-mindset are the two reasons why it's hard for me to say that he's still "good" (as I define that as whether you want him as one of your top players, in an opportunity cost sense). Of course you could throw him as a player on the Warriors, but for me to test whether he's "good" is to ask whether you'd replace Curry with Kobe. If Kobe was still a top 5 guy, that wouldn't be much of a question.


Great definition of a "good" player yinoma. Kobe is not a good player. Chris Paul is not a good player. Melo isn't. Griffin isn't. Kyrie isn't. I can go on and on listing all the players I wouldn't replace Curry with. What a dumb definition of "good".


Not my fault that the original poster didn't include a definition of "good."

That can encompass anything. Cut it down with the insults. My definition of "good" may be different than yours, which is the basis of my problem with this post, and yours too.

As I said, it's a test. For me the test is to replace a team's best player and say would you replace current Kobe with that guy. Curry/GSW was an example.

So what's your definition of "good" then?


My definition isn't in question. Would you consider any player in the League a great player? Just truly a ridiculous statement by you. You go around in public saying anyone less talented than Curry is not a good player? So basically the Spurs suck, Houston sucks, Clippers suck, etc. Truly ridiculous.


Again, "my" test is one thing, and my question is, what's yours?

What's ridiculous is your comment on my subjective definition, when the OP makes no effort to define good.


You're subjective definition is ridiculous, I can't believe you don't realize that.

I would consider most players who contribute positively to team succes a good player. I would consider guys like Barnes and Iggy good players, guys who you would not. The Finals MVP, you wouldn't consider him a good player. Beyond ridiculous.


And that's fine. I have no problem with you defining "good" the way you want it. You could include Sacre to be "good" for all I care. You can literally make any argument for a player being "good."

If I want to define it as "would you replace your top player with said player" then why do you have a problem with it?

I don't understand it. Good luck.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Voices
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 07 Jul 2006
Posts: 8287
Location: Oxnard, Ca.

PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 12:21 pm    Post subject:

Kobe is still great..... for how many mins?????
_________________
.....
.....
ALTHOUGH HE STANDS 6 FEET 2 INCHES, JIM BUSS ATTENDED JOCKEY SCHOOL WHEN HE WAS 20.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 12:21 pm    Post subject:

Simply put, what I think is "truly ridiculous" is that my subjective criteria (which the OP just said was what he wanted) is "truly ridiculous."

State your criteria and move on.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
dmorans1
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 11 Sep 2012
Posts: 11669

PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 12:22 pm    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
dmorans1 wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
dmorans1 wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
dmorans1 wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
wolfpaclaker wrote:
He's definitely a good player. Based on last year, he was a good player, taking too many shots. If he tones down his shot taking and plays more team ball, he'll be an asset to the team. He needs to be kept playing 30 mpg, and needs to be told to move the ball more often.

There is no question in my mind Kobe is still a top 30 player when healthy. The only problem is I think Kobe still plays like he's the best player in the league.


Health and role-mindset are the two reasons why it's hard for me to say that he's still "good" (as I define that as whether you want him as one of your top players, in an opportunity cost sense). Of course you could throw him as a player on the Warriors, but for me to test whether he's "good" is to ask whether you'd replace Curry with Kobe. If Kobe was still a top 5 guy, that wouldn't be much of a question.


Great definition of a "good" player yinoma. Kobe is not a good player. Chris Paul is not a good player. Melo isn't. Griffin isn't. Kyrie isn't. I can go on and on listing all the players I wouldn't replace Curry with. What a dumb definition of "good".


Not my fault that the original poster didn't include a definition of "good."

That can encompass anything. Cut it down with the insults. My definition of "good" may be different than yours, which is the basis of my problem with this post, and yours too.

As I said, it's a test. For me the test is to replace a team's best player and say would you replace current Kobe with that guy. Curry/GSW was an example.

So what's your definition of "good" then?


My definition isn't in question. Would you consider any player in the League a great player? Just truly a ridiculous statement by you. You go around in public saying anyone less talented than Curry is not a good player? So basically the Spurs suck, Houston sucks, Clippers suck, etc. Truly ridiculous.


Again, "my" test is one thing, and my question is, what's yours?

What's ridiculous is your comment on my subjective definition, when the OP makes no effort to define good.


You're subjective definition is ridiculous, I can't believe you don't realize that.

I would consider most players who contribute positively to team succes a good player. I would consider guys like Barnes and Iggy good players, guys who you would not. The Finals MVP, you wouldn't consider him a good player. Beyond ridiculous.


And that's fine. I have no problem with you defining "good" the way you want it.

If I want to define it as "would you replace your top player with said player" then why do you have a problem with it?

I don't understand it. Good luck.


Cause it's so extreme. Makes no sense. Basically everyone sucks/mediocre except the top 5 guys. Thought of you as one of the best posters but this is absurd.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3 ... 24, 25, 26  Next
Page 1 of 26
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB