Has Kobe Changed?

I say yes and maybe. He clearly has transformed his game to one where he does not have to score all the points and knows how to win playing that way. The true test will be if he can do it deep in the post-season when the pressure is much greater. He has proven himself to quit on his team in the past (disappearing when up 3-1 against the Suns 2 years ago comes to mind) - if he gets through the post-season and gets his ring, I will acknowledge that he has truly changed.

By his interviews and the players around him, i'd say yes. I've been a Lakers fan since the early 80s and the way Kobes teammates talk about him this year brings back comparisons to the way teammates talked about Magic. The fact that all his teammates stats have gone up. Players like Walton and Sasha are playing their best ball since being on the Lakers. I'd say Kobe has something to do with that. So, I'm happy he's finally getting his due.

He certainly has more confidence in his teammates, which is why he's sharing the ball. I don't know that he'd be playing any differently if they played at the same level they did last year or the year before. Isn't it a chicken and the egg scenario? Did his supporting cast improve and that's why he's sharing the ball or did they improve because he's sharing the ball? I think it's probably the former, but Kobe finally sharing the ball can only help his team improve.

It also doesn't hurt to have Pau Gasol on the team.

YES, he trusts his teamates now. his says the team clicks from 1-12. the lakers now have others who can score Gasol, Bynum, and the bench has developed quite well. Kwame Brown (worst hand in the NBA) and Smush Parker were not cuttin it

Well said. I agree.

I think its a little bit of both - a little changing and a lot of PR advice. You can't doubt his talent, though. Or the fact that after bashing his team and creating a shit-storm of controversy demanding (and then not demanding) a trade just this past off-season, he has come around to realize he can get the scoring titles, but not the rings, on his own. The truth of it is, I think if he doesn't win a ring without Shaq people will always, somewhere deep down inside, believe it was Shaq and not Kobe who created that piece of history.

The "never won a title without Shaq" stuff is interesting. People seem to forget that all of Shaq's titles were with either Kobe, or D-Wade when he was healthy. How come no one ever questions his ability to win one on his own? I don't think this should be a knock on Kobe. No NBA player is good enough on their own to win a title. They all have sidekicks, or great supporting casts...

Was referring to the all the hoopla surrounding Shaq leaving LA - and it possibly being Kobe's doing (although we have learned that may not actually be the case). I'm talking in terms of vindication for Kobe.

Got it--good point

Cool. I do absolutely agree, Rofman, about it taking a great supporting cast (makes me kind of question what the heck is going on down there in Houston, though). Let's throw chemistry in there too. I also wanted to add that I think Kobe has a bit of a chip on his shoulder stemming from all the ring/Shaq-talk. I have to believe he is just chomping at the bit to win one with "his guys".

Kobe was the sidekick for those 3 years and has never until now been able to be the leading man. The Lakers with Shaq would have won all of those rings with several possible players that were close to Kobe's quality at the time - but there was nobody who could have taken Shaq's place on those teams. This year, Kobe seems to have made himself into that indispensable type of player - but we will still see.

I agree that Kobe's a much better player now than when he was during the title years, but there is no way you can say that the Lakers would've won those titles without Kobe. It's like saying the Celts would've won without Parish or Ainge, or the Lakers would've won without Worthy, or that Jordan would've won without Pippen, etc etc etc. None of those things ever happened, so you can't say with any certainty that they would have. The fact remains that Shaq's only titles have happened with great supporting casts or great sidekicks. Not taking anything away from Shaq, but even he wasn't dominant enough to win a title on his own...

The Celtics would have easily won without Danny Ainge - I can name at least 20 players at that time who could have subbed for him and the Celtics would have won just as many games. Robert Parrish was a HoF center playing at the prime of his career at a level far higher than Kobe played at during the Shaq years. In the 80s, you needed 3 guys like that to win titles.

The Lakers won because Shaq was unguardable for those seasons - there were at least 10 swingmen in the 2nd-3rd tier of NBA stars who could have won with the Lakers in Kobe's place.

You can speculate all you want, but the fact remains that Shaq has never won a title without an all-star #2. Look at Kobe's stats during the championship years: http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/stats?playerId=110. No matter how much you hate him, no matter how unlikeable he was during the early years of his career, there is no denying that even then, he was far above average and was absolutely critical to the Lakers winning those titles. Shaq could not have won a single one without him. You could've replaced any of the other players on those teams and they still would've won, but not Kobe. No way.

Stats have never been a reliable indicator of Kobe's value to a winning team (the correlation was violated this very season) - from the MVP files:

1. Shaq was voted Finals MVP each of the 3 seasons the Lakers won with him (and Kobe). This was not the case in Miami where DWade won finals MVP - no analogy to DWade since he was recognized to have been the deciding factor in that series, as Shaq was in the 3 series they won with the Lakers.

2. Lakers Ring #1: Shaq was voted league MVP and finals MVP. Kobe finished 12th in MVP voting that year. Shaq won all but 1 first place vote, and 9 other players were deemed more valuable during the regular season than Kobe - more analysis will show that the best #2s tend to finish far higher in MVP voting.

3. Lakers Ring #2: Shaq finishes #3 (to AI and Tim Duncan) and Kobe finishes #9 in the MVP voting. #9 is still pretty replacable but he is clearly improving. Shaq is named Finals MVP after making Dikembe Mutombo look like a child.

4. Lakers Ring #3: Shaq finishes #3 again and Kobe finishes #5. It took 3 years and 2 rings but perhaps this was the year that Kobe was a big factor - he sure was in his own mind. If I give him any credit as a HoF type #2, this is the year I do so.

Good topic.

You can have the last word. I'm tired. I just posted another interesting topic that you'll like chiming in on...

No, Kobe never was a "ballhog" in the first place. Watch the old Laker games. His teammates WANTED Kobe to have the ball. He was never a prick like the media portrays him to be. He's an intense competitor who wants to win and refuses to let his team lose. His intensity on the court, especially at the end of games is unmatched, only KG comes close to the focus he has. Kobe's been my MVP the last 3 years with this year coming close between him and CP3. Kobe has single-handedly took the Lakers to the playoffs the last few years and is now being a team player because now he actually has a TEAM to play with.