Would you rather have Kobe Bryant for 5 years or Paul Pierce for 10 years?

Would you rather have Kobe Bryant for 5 years or Paul Pierce for 10 years?

Give me 5 years of Kobe easily.

Kobe

Kobe for 5.

I guess the difficult thing here is to know if it is 5 years of Kobe in general or 5 prime years of Kobe.

Kobe with 5 even though his "prime years" are behind him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GroundAttack25

Kobe with 5 even though his "prime years" are behind him.

---

Not talking about now talking about building a team.

Kobe in general is basically prime Kobe regardless.. so Kobe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JordansBulls

I guess the difficult thing here is to know if it is 5 years of Kobe in general or 5 prime years of Kobe.

---

Does that same principle not apply for Pierce as well?

an out of prime Kobe is still a top 3 player in the league. So I'll take Kobe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raidaz4Life

Does that same principle not apply for Pierce as well?

---

Yep. The only difference is that with Pierce he came in more nba ready. So let's say you are getting them as rookies then it probably is better to get 10 years of Pierce over 5 years of Kobe. But if you are getting them close to primes than it is better to get 5 years of Kobe over 10 years of Pierce.

Colby.