PDA

View Full Version : Who Has Been The Best Since Jordan...



Pages : [1] 2

amos1er
10-26-2014, 07:57 PM
No one can deny that MJ was the GOAT and that no one since has compared. However, out of the players that have come after, who had been the closest and why. This should not be only limited to wing players. This is not about who emulates his style, but rather who has been the most comparable in terms of winning and impact. I will list only the players that are worth comparing in my poll. Discuss...

Cal827
10-26-2014, 08:07 PM
Boy, do I have a good feeling about this thread :D

amos1er
10-26-2014, 08:09 PM
Boy, do I have a good feeling about this thread :D

Should be some fun discussion for sure. :)

IversonIsKrazy
10-26-2014, 08:14 PM
Timmy or Kobe imo.

xxplayerxx23
10-26-2014, 08:14 PM
Lebron

xxplayerxx23
10-26-2014, 08:15 PM
Actually between Duncan or lebron.

More-Than-Most
10-26-2014, 08:19 PM
It should probably go

James



Duncan






Everyone else

Ariza's Better
10-26-2014, 08:20 PM
Oj Mayo

jerellh528
10-26-2014, 08:24 PM
Kobe


Duncan




Everyone else

Jeffy25
10-26-2014, 08:26 PM
Lebron is the only player to even come close to Jordan in PER, WS, WS/48, and a variety of other stats over multiple years.

Shaq had great years, Duncan is a model of consistency, Kobe has been a great 2 guard for years. But Lebron is the only one to compare at this point.

jaydubb
10-26-2014, 08:29 PM
Colby

xxplayerxx23
10-26-2014, 08:30 PM
G
Kobe


Duncan



Everyone else


Kobe fans are hilarious. Lebron is the better player and it isn't that close. Duncan is also better then Kobe, shaq as well lol

Cal827
10-26-2014, 08:38 PM
Kobe or Duncan.


Lebron still has like half his career to go, and once he's done, I will likely put him over both.

More-Than-Most
10-26-2014, 08:43 PM
Kobe or Duncan.


Lebron still has like half his career to go, and once he's done, I will likely put him over both.

It doesnt matter what he has done already is enough to put him above everyone

Iron24th
10-26-2014, 08:44 PM
Penny Hardaway

archdevil84
10-26-2014, 08:51 PM
bron or shaq or wade in his peak years

Sadds The Gr8
10-26-2014, 08:53 PM
James
Duncan
Kobe

amos1er
10-26-2014, 09:02 PM
It doesnt matter what he has done already is enough to put him above everyone

Nope.

xxplayerxx23
10-26-2014, 09:05 PM
Nope.


Easily does. His numbers and awards speak for themselves.

kdspurman
10-26-2014, 09:09 PM
Duncan/Shaq for me and Kobe after. Individual and team success factoring in. The last 6-7 years or so Lebron has started making a strong case obviously so we'll see how things pan out over the next few years.

It's tough to answer this kind of thing though. different players are tasked with doing different things for their teams. especially when you start asking for big and wings.

Mr_Jones
10-26-2014, 09:13 PM
No one can deny that MJ was the GOAT and that no one since has compared. However, out of the players that have come after, who had been the closest and why. This should not be only limited to wing players. This is not about who emulates his style, but rather who has been the most comparable in terms of winning and impact. I will list only the players that are worth comparing in my poll. Discuss...

Yes you could.

More-Than-Most
10-26-2014, 09:18 PM
there have to be alot of Kobe fans on this site. I wish the poll was public

ThuglifeJ
10-26-2014, 09:26 PM
Shaq, Duncan

Jamiecballer
10-26-2014, 09:35 PM
Lebron. Honorable mention Shaq.

AIRMAR72
10-26-2014, 09:41 PM
No one can deny that MJ was the GOAT and that no one since has compared. However, out of the players that have come after, who had been the closest and why. This should not be only limited to wing players. This is not about who emulates his style, but rather who has been the most comparable in terms of winning and impact. I will list only the players that are worth comparing in my poll. Discuss... LeBron James and Tim Duncan if it wasn't for injuries Tracy Mcgrady

HandsOnTheWheel
10-26-2014, 09:43 PM
Lebron, Kobe, Shaq, Wade, Durant.

naps
10-26-2014, 09:44 PM
LeBron James.

Tim Duncan and Shaq are next. This poll has zero credibility if it's not public. Pretty sure a clan lwill make dupes just to win the poll.

jerellh528
10-26-2014, 09:55 PM
Lebron fans are hilarious. I picture them as all 15 year old fanboys with no ideals of the history and respect for the game. But James has swaggg

naps
10-26-2014, 10:09 PM
I know exactly what this thread was created for. But sorry he is not even close to be in the league of LeBrons or Duncans or Shaqs.

beasted86
10-26-2014, 10:15 PM
Its clearly Shaq to me. Nobody has been as dominant a force in their prime. Simply unstoppable.

Not Duncan, not Kobe, not LeBron. Career wise its a coin flip between any of these guys. None clearly separates from the next.

Raps18-19 Champ
10-26-2014, 10:15 PM
As an individual player, this is easy.

c.c.
10-26-2014, 10:18 PM
I guess T-Mac since there isn't no selection for Yao Ming or Steve Francis.

Jeffy25
10-26-2014, 10:22 PM
Lebron fans are hilarious. I picture them as all 15 year old fanboys with no ideals of the history and respect for the game. But James has swaggg

It's funny that I think the same thing about Kobe fans :p

P&GRealist
10-26-2014, 10:27 PM
It doesnt matter what he has done already is enough to put him above everyone

On what basis?

If that's your prime argument, and you're saying Bron is the guy after Jordan, and greatness is measured in championships and W-L, then I don't know how to break it to you, but both Duncan and Kobe along with the dominance, entertainment and league statesmanship status are light years are closer to Jordan in that body of work than LeBron.

Remember, MJ went a perfect 6-0 in the finals. Duncan at 5-1 and Kobe are 5-2 is as close as you can get. And you're going for a guy going 2-3? Hardly Jordan status or close to it.

Let Bron Bron get 1 or 2 titles above .500 and then get back to me.

Kashmir13579
10-26-2014, 10:49 PM
Tmac

koreancabbage
10-26-2014, 11:01 PM
It's funny that I think the same thing about Kobe fans :p

cept they are all 30+ year old men who only watched the game and say, 'oh, missed like 50-60% of his shots but whatever' or 'damn, Kobe, why didn't you make that last shot and win the game' - and totally forget that he did take bad shots over his career when he was triple or doubled team and forgetting that he got his team in a bad position to lose the game only to reminiscence over Kobe game winners (and forgets anything bad about Kobe) and continue to think that the Lakers championships were because of Kobe instead of Shaq.

jerellh528
10-26-2014, 11:19 PM
Lebron fans attack these threads like a wolf pack on a piece of caribou lol

More-Than-Most
10-26-2014, 11:21 PM
On what basis?

If that's your prime argument, and you're saying Bron is the guy after Jordan, and greatness is measured in championships and W-L, then I don't know how to break it to you, but both Duncan and Kobe along with the dominance, entertainment and league statesmanship status are light years are closer to Jordan in that body of work than LeBron.

Remember, MJ went a perfect 6-0 in the finals. Duncan at 5-1 and Kobe are 5-2 is as close as you can get. And you're going for a guy going 2-3? Hardly Jordan status or close to it.

Let Bron Bron get 1 or 2 titles above .500 and then get back to me.

So Robert Horry is the best ever?

Chronz
10-26-2014, 11:57 PM
Shaq for sure.

bucketss
10-26-2014, 11:57 PM
only two people in this discussion IMO

jerellh528
10-26-2014, 11:58 PM
only two people in this discussion IMO

I agree, kobe and Duncan

amos1er
10-27-2014, 12:26 AM
It's funny that I think the same thing about Kobe fans :p

Kobe fans actually are older in age than Lebron fans overall. His argument would be more factual hence forth.

amos1er
10-27-2014, 12:27 AM
So Robert Horry is the best ever?

If I had a nickel for every time I heard this one...

amos1er
10-27-2014, 12:29 AM
I agree, kobe and Duncan

Correct.

amos1er
10-27-2014, 12:31 AM
Lebron fans attack these threads like a wolf pack on a piece of caribou lol

Yes, they are very sensitive these days. Overcompensation is a sign of weakness after all.

Jeffy25
10-27-2014, 12:33 AM
Kobe fans actually are older in age than Lebron fans overall. His argument would be more factual hence forth.

I figure Kobe fans tend to reside in a more specific geographical location rather than having anything to do with age or anything else.

IKnowHoops
10-27-2014, 12:33 AM
there have to be alot of Kobe fans on this site. I wish the poll was public

Why would Amosler want to put his dupe accounts on blast?

amos1er
10-27-2014, 12:34 AM
cept they are all 30+ year old men who only watched the game and say, 'oh, missed like 50-60% of his shots but whatever' or 'damn, Kobe, why didn't you make that last shot and win the game' - and totally forget that he did take bad shots over his career when he was triple or doubled team and forgetting that he got his team in a bad position to lose the game only to reminiscence over Kobe game winners (and forgets anything bad about Kobe) and continue to think that the Lakers championships were because of Kobe instead of Shaq.

At least you admit that basketball fans who tend to feel Kobe is greater than Lebron are more mature in terms of age.

IKnowHoops
10-27-2014, 12:34 AM
LeBron James.

Tim Duncan and Shaq are next. This poll has zero credibility if it's not public. Pretty sure a clan lwill make dupes just to win the poll.

You know this.

amos1er
10-27-2014, 12:41 AM
I figure Kobe fans tend to reside in a more specific geographical location rather than having anything to do with age or anything else.

What about the demographic of a Lebron fan...

- Laker hater jealous of the Lakers success over the years.

- Bandwagon fan of a player that doesn't even follow a team.

- Local team was never that good.

- Young in age and naive in terms of basketball knowledge.

- Loves to drink the company Gatorade.

- High on Sprite

- Can recite every Nike commercial Lebron was ever in.

IKnowHoops
10-27-2014, 12:44 AM
Shaq/Bron

amos1er
10-27-2014, 12:48 AM
Why would Amosler want to put his dupe accounts on blast?

Doesn't matter what this poll says, because we know that this forum is heavily bias towards Lebron. Why don't you google nba player rankings all-time and see what polls with a much larger sample size have already agreed on. I can't post the results of these polls here because it violates the terms of service of this site.

Jeffy25
10-27-2014, 12:49 AM
Let's post some numbers:

Since 96/97

Win Shares:
Jordan career - 214.0 (4th all-time)

1. Duncan - 191.6
2. Dirk - 184.8
3. Garnett - 184.0
4. Kobe - 173.0
5. Lebron - 168.5

WS/48 (min 500 games and didn't play the bulk of their careers while Jordan was playing - Stockton and Malone would make some of these lists)
Jordan career - .250 (tied for first with David Robinson)

1. Paul - .246
2. Lebron - .243
3. Malone - .235
4. Duncan - .211
5. Dirk - .208

PER (min 500 games and didn't play the bulk of their careers while Jordan was playing - Stockton and Malone would make some of these lists)
Jordan career - 27.9 (1st)


1. Lebron - 27.8
2. Shaq - 26.4
3. Paul - 25.6
4. Wade - 25.3
5. Duncan - 24.6

Playoff leaders:

WS
Jordan career - 39.8 (1st)


1. Duncan - 36.3
2. Lebron - 33.8
3. Kobe - 28.3
4. Shaq - 26.3
5. Dirk - 22.6

WS/48 (min 75 games and didn't play bulk of their career when Jordan played)
Jordan career - .255 (1st)


1. Lebron - .242
2. Duncan - .196
3. Dirk - .196
4. Durant - .189
5. Shaq - .188

PER (min 75 games)
Jordan PER - 28.6 (1st)


1. Lebron - 27.7
2. Shaq - 26.2
3. Duncan - 24.6
4. Durant - 24.4
5. Dirk - 24.2


Lebron is the best since Jordan, with Duncan right there. Kobe is just too inefficient to keep up. Paul and Durant could be coming along. And Shaq certainly has an argument, but I think he is falling behind Duncan and Lebron in this time scale sample (I could push it further back, but that's also into Jordan's peak).

You have to be a major Kobe lover and fan to try to push him into this conversation. He has no argument for best since Jordan.

amos1er
10-27-2014, 12:51 AM
Shaq for sure.

Huh... If I had to guess, I would say that you were the one who voted for T-Mac.

Jeffy25
10-27-2014, 12:51 AM
What about the demographic of a Lebron fan...

- Laker hater jealous of the Lakers success over the years.

- Bandwagon fan of a player that doesn't even follow a team.

- Local team was never that good.

- Young in age and naive in terms of basketball knowledge.

- Loves to drink the company Gatorade.

- High on Sprite

- Can recite every Nike commercial Lebron was ever in.

I'm not a Lebron fan by any means. And literally none of these qualify as me.

The numbers just crush Kobe for Lebron. And sometimes, that's all it takes. Is better, hard facts to support the player being better than the other player.

amos1er
10-27-2014, 12:55 AM
Let's post some numbers:

Since 96/97

Win Shares:
Jordan career - 214.0 (4th all-time)

1. Duncan - 191.6
2. Dirk - 184.8
3. Garnett - 184.0
4. Kobe - 173.0
5. Lebron - 168.5

WS/48 (min 500 games and didn't play the bulk of their careers while Jordan was playing - Stockton and Malone would make some of these lists)
Jordan career - .250 (tied for first with David Robinson)

1. Paul - .246
2. Lebron - .243
3. Malone - .235
4. Duncan - .211
5. Dirk - .208

PER (min 500 games and didn't play the bulk of their careers while Jordan was playing - Stockton and Malone would make some of these lists)
Jordan career - 27.9 (1st)


1. Lebron - 27.8
2. Shaq - 26.4
3. Paul - 25.6
4. Wade - 25.3
5. Duncan - 24.6

Playoff leaders:

WS
Jordan career - 39.8 (1st)


1. Duncan - 36.3
2. Lebron - 33.8
3. Kobe - 28.3
4. Shaq - 26.3
5. Dirk - 22.6

WS/48 (min 75 games and didn't play bulk of their career when Jordan played)
Jordan career - .255 (1st)


1. Lebron - .242
2. Duncan - .196
3. Dirk - .196
4. Durant - .189
5. Shaq - .188

PER (min 75 games)
Jordan PER - 28.6 (1st)


1. Lebron - 27.7
2. Shaq - 26.2
3. Duncan - 24.6
4. Durant - 24.4
5. Dirk - 24.2


Lebron is the best since Jordan, with Duncan right there. Kobe is just too inefficient to keep up. Paul and Durant could be coming along. And Shaq certainly has an argument, but I think he is falling behind Duncan and Lebron in this time scale sample (I could push it further back, but that's also into Jordan's peak).

You have to be a major Kobe lover and fan to try to push him into this conversation. He has no argument for best since Jordan.

Ok, lets...

Kobe - 5 rings
Duncan - 5 rings
Shaq - 4 rings
Wade - 3 rings
Lebron - 2 rings
Dirk - 1 ring
Garnett - 1 ring
Iverson - 0 rings
T-Mac - 0 rings
Durant - 0 rings

amos1er
10-27-2014, 12:58 AM
I'm not a Lebron fan by any means. And literally none of these qualify as me.

The numbers just crush Kobe for Lebron. And sometimes, that's all it takes. Is better, hard facts to support the player being better than the other player.

:laugh:

Could've fooled me seeing as you sure invest a good amount of time defending a guy who you are "not a fan of".

Hawkeye15
10-27-2014, 12:59 AM
The best player we have since since Jordan? LeBron James. The best career since Jordan?

If LeBron were to get hit by a truck today, his career would pail to Duncan, Shaq, or Bryant's. But he will have a better career than both when he is done. Individually speaking, LeBron is the best player we have seen since Jordan.

Hawkeye15
10-27-2014, 01:01 AM
Lebron fans are hilarious. I picture them as all 15 year old fanboys with no ideals of the history and respect for the game. But James has swaggg

I am 39, and my opinion is that he is the best individual we have seen since Jordan. And his career, while right now not on Duncan/Kobe/Shaq level (he is 30), will also be better than all of those players when he is done, though that is unwritten currently...

koreancabbage
10-27-2014, 01:02 AM
Lebron fans attack these threads like a wolf pack on a piece of caribou lol

and you ALWAYS agreeing with Amo1ser and vice versa, nothing new here. I swear you are two accounts- one person with the same arguments and trying to back each other up lol

Jeffy25
10-27-2014, 01:02 AM
:laugh:

Could've fooled me seeing as you sure invest a good amount of time defending a guy who you are "not a fan of".

I spend more time putting kobe back into reality, rather than worrying about lifting lebron up

koreancabbage
10-27-2014, 01:03 AM
Ok, lets...

Kobe - 5 rings
Duncan - 5 rings
Shaq - 4 rings
Wade - 3 rings
Lebron - 2 rings
Dirk - 1 ring
Garnett - 1 ring
Iverson - 0 rings
T-Mac - 0 rings
Durant - 0 rings

thats why you're not taken seriously.

Jeffy25
10-27-2014, 01:03 AM
I am 39, and my opinion is that he is the best individual we have seen since Jordan. And his career, while right now not on Duncan/Kobe/Shaq level (he is 30), will also be better than all of those players when he is done, though that is unwritten currently...

Agree completely, and I am 31

Hawkeye15
10-27-2014, 01:04 AM
I figure Kobe fans tend to reside in a more specific geographical location rather than having anything to do with age or anything else.

not true. Kobe fans are freakin everywhere. Anytime I went to a Rockets game when the Lakers were in town, you saw 200 Kobe jersey's on fans ranging from age 10-50.

Jeffy25
10-27-2014, 01:04 AM
Ok, lets...

Kobe - 5 rings
Duncan - 5 rings
Shaq - 4 rings
Wade - 3 rings
Lebron - 2 rings
Dirk - 1 ring
Garnett - 1 ring
Iverson - 0 rings
T-Mac - 0 rings
Durant - 0 rings

Kobe and Shaq each have individual rings?

Team accomplishment, not an individual accomplishment

Hawkeye15
10-27-2014, 01:06 AM
Ok, lets...

Kobe - 5 rings
Duncan - 5 rings
Shaq - 4 rings
Wade - 3 rings
Lebron - 2 rings
Dirk - 1 ring
Garnett - 1 ring
Iverson - 0 rings
T-Mac - 0 rings
Durant - 0 rings

wait, are we measuring tennis players, golfers, or bowlers? Or are we measuring individuals in a team sport?

IKnowHoops
10-27-2014, 01:20 AM
and you ALWAYS agreeing with Amo1ser and vice versa, nothing new here. I swear you are two accounts- one person with the same arguments and trying to back each other up lol

80/20 yes

Crackadalic
10-27-2014, 01:23 AM
So whos going to use the rings argument in this thread.

amos1er
10-27-2014, 01:52 AM
thats why you're not taken seriously.

Then don't respond to my threads.




With all due respect of course.

amos1er
10-27-2014, 01:55 AM
So whos going to use the rings argument in this thread.

How about the stats argument.

tredigs
10-27-2014, 04:08 AM
I see you made a thread off of my comment, I'm honored. Lebron, Duncan or Shaq all have a case as best player for 5+ years of peak play and 10+ years of prime post MJ. The combination of how dominantly they have carried teams, their stats and their accolades are unmatched. If I had to choose one it would be Lebron.

The guy instantly turns whatever team he plays for into a contender, won 4 MVP's in 5 years (another 5 times he has placed top 5), and has advanced stats in the Jordan stratosphere. I do feel that he lacks a mental vigor to his game that would send him into any true GOAT conversation and it has reared itself in some of the most inopportune times, but overall he is simply a one man wrecking crew and has been incredibly consistent for a decade straight now.

qwerty123
10-27-2014, 04:49 AM
timmy for me

sammyvine
10-27-2014, 05:05 AM
Tim Duncan for me

sammyvine
10-27-2014, 05:06 AM
not true. Kobe fans are freakin everywhere. Anytime I went to a Rockets game when the Lakers were in town, you saw 200 Kobe jersey's on fans ranging from age 10-50.

what's wrong with that? just because you hate him doesn't mean everyone else should.

FraziersKnicks
10-27-2014, 06:21 AM
LeBron
Timmy
Shaq
Kobe

FraziersKnicks
10-27-2014, 06:22 AM
I love the fact that the OP made this thread to try and feed his love for Kobe and he's just been trashed in the poll by LeBron :D

jericho
10-27-2014, 09:35 AM
Lebron fans are hilarious. I picture them as all 15 year old fanboys with no ideals of the history and respect for the game. But James has swaggg

Naw dude! You making stuff up now. I'm 29 and i hate Lebron but putting my feelings aside i can still say that Lebron has had the best career since MJ. Its no knock on Duncan, Shaq, Kobe and others. They all have had great careers since MJ its just that Lebron has been that good. But i only put him above them by a bit.

Now one career i wish would have been different would have been Tmac. He was my favorite player since his Toronto days. I always wondered what his career could have been if he had a career injury free. Another one would be Vince if he had that competitive mentality that Kobe has he would have had a totally different career

SanAntonioSpurs23
10-27-2014, 11:35 AM
Duncan

hidalgo
10-27-2014, 11:39 AM
Tim Duncan
Shaquille O'Neal
LeBron James

Durant will likely fill the 4th spot in time

AshyLarry
10-27-2014, 11:55 AM
I voted Lebron, but I can definitely see an argument for Timmy and Shaq. I think Shaq was probably the most dominant player since Wilt, but his injury concerns held him back. Timmy is just Mr. Underrated, but I don't think he peaked nearly as well as Shaq or LBJ.

Lebron is just the only player I've seen like him. He's his own man. I think the true greats (like best ever greats) didn't mimic other players. They played their own game. That's why I think Kobe misses out. Kobe is mini Jordan. Lebron is Lebron. Duncan is Duncan. Shaq is Shaq. Jordan is Jordan. They don't have people you can compare them with because they played the game their own way.

I also just think the championship count argument is silly. Wilt has what 1 or 2 rings? Is anyone going to argue that Bill Russell is better? I'd hope not.

FlashBolt
10-27-2014, 11:57 AM
What about the demographic of a Lebron fan...

- Laker hater jealous of the Lakers success over the years.

- Bandwagon fan of a player that doesn't even follow a team.

- Local team was never that good.

- Young in age and naive in terms of basketball knowledge.

- Loves to drink the company Gatorade.

- High on Sprite

- Can recite every Nike commercial Lebron was ever in.

About 80% of this is completely irrelevant and just continues adding to your list of why you should receive infractions - ultimately adding to your permanent ban.


Doesn't matter what this poll says, because we know that this forum is heavily bias towards Lebron. Why don't you google nba player rankings all-time and see what polls with a much larger sample size have already agreed on. I can't post the results of these polls here because it violates the terms of service of this site.

It's not heavily biased towards LeBron. By your logic, I can argue that Google's search rules are biased against LeBron since you say LeBron isn't in the all time ranking. The fact is, you're the minority in an argument that the majority has destroyed you in. You have no factual evidence and rely on the post in which I quoted below as a response.. That is why your credibility is constantly dropping and why anyone who reads your argument(s) can only feel more entitled to elevate towards LeBron. You just don't have any proof. Anyone - including Hawkeye, has acknowledged that Kobe has the better career. But in terms of who is the best player, that is clearly LeBron James.. Second would be Kevin Durant (more years) for me. These two are playing at a level we have not seen since Jordan and that simply cannot be debated.

Ok, lets...

Kobe - 5 rings
Duncan - 5 rings
Shaq - 4 rings
Wade - 3 rings
Lebron - 2 rings
Dirk - 1 ring
Garnett - 1 ring
Iverson - 0 rings
T-Mac - 0 rings
Durant - 0 rings


On what basis?

If that's your prime argument, and you're saying Bron is the guy after Jordan, and greatness is measured in championships and W-L, then I don't know how to break it to you, but both Duncan and Kobe along with the dominance, entertainment and league statesmanship status are light years are closer to Jordan in that body of work than LeBron.

Remember, MJ went a perfect 6-0 in the finals. Duncan at 5-1 and Kobe are 5-2 is as close as you can get. And you're going for a guy going 2-3? Hardly Jordan status or close to it.

Let Bron Bron get 1 or 2 titles above .500 and then get back to me.

So by your definition, Magic Johnson is a notorious loser? He's 5-9 in the NBA Finals... Wilt Chamberlain is 2-5 in the NBA Finals. Is he a scrub? Yet, he's ranked higher than Kobe/Duncan/Shaq.. Easily.. And there is no way that Duncan/Kobe's dominance+entertainment+league statesmanship (whatever you mean by that) surpasses LeBron. LeBron's impact in the NBA currently is only matched by Michael Jordan in terms of marketability, impact on a team, leadership, and entertainment (why are people getting so upset that he hasn't been in the dunk contest? exactly..) Jordan went 6-0 in the Finals.. with a team that consisted with the likes of Horace Grant, Scottie Pippen, Phil Jackson, Dennis Rodman, and Toni Kukoc.. to name a few. The best team wins 100% of the time.. not the best player. It's why Jordan was a notorious loser before winning a ring and why players like Robert Horry were able to win 8 rings. Some of you forget that Dennis Rodman, Scottie Pippen, and Horace Grant were amazing defenders.. Probably top 15 of their team at any given day. Horace Grant was a top 10 defender for many years. This squad was lethal and it just made Michael Jordan's defense look better than it really did. When an opposing team is pressured by the likes of those guys, it's no wonder Jordan received all the credit. Put him with Chris Bosh, Dwyane Wade (of 2014), and Birdman.. then tell me Jordan beats Spurs..


LeBron James and Tim Duncan if it wasn't for injuries Tracy Mcgrady

Tracy McGrady at his prime wasn't even close to James at his...

Lebron fans are hilarious. I picture them as all 15 year old fanboys with no ideals of the history and respect for the game. But James has swaggg

You have 30-40 year old's who have selected James.. and the fact that none of you Kobe-fanboys have any arguments, it's become clear that you guys just run around despising James but can't realistically find how Kobe is better than James. It's why you guys start avoiding threads in which you were destroyed in an argument. Come up with a reason why Kobe is better than James.. and make sure it is logical. That 5 rings vs 2 rings can easily be disproved via Robert Horry or for that matter, the fact that Kobe wasn't even the Finals MVP 3/5 times. Not to mention Kobe would never had taken any team single handily to the NBA Finals. His years without Shaq/Gasol, he was practically asking for a trade.

Jamiecballer
10-27-2014, 12:00 PM
Kobe fans actually are older in age than Lebron fans overall. His argument would be more factual hence forth.
Not so sure about that one.

FlashBolt
10-27-2014, 12:05 PM
Kobe fans actually are older in age than Lebron fans overall. His argument would be more factual hence forth.

1) How did you come to this conclusion?
2) What does this even prove? Are you telling me that being older means more intellect? I've seen Kobe fans declare Kobe the best player even in 2012... Whatever you're trying to prove with this age argument is completely irrelevant and lacks composition.

Btw.. if you want to cry about LeBron James, let's take out LeBron James from this poll. What do you have? Duncan having more votes than Kobe.. Yet, your attention is on LeBron James. The fact is, you're overrating Kobe's impact. The fact that many believe Duncan>Kobe is another "unbiased" (seeing as how you call everyone who favors LeBron James biased) example of why you just can't understand the evidence presented to you. So please, ignore LeBron James in this thread just for this instance and argue against those Duncan fans.. If you can't, you're just proving to us a perfect illustration of why you hate LeBron James rather than why you don't think LeBron James is the best.

Pierzynski4Prez
10-27-2014, 12:05 PM
The other MJ. Mike James.

AshyLarry
10-27-2014, 12:06 PM
Not so sure about that one.

Honestly I think it's the opposite. Most younger fans don't like Lebron, and way overrate Jordan. Anyone that listens to sports radio knows this.

Jamiecballer
10-27-2014, 12:08 PM
I figure Kobe fans tend to reside in a more specific geographical location rather than having anything to do with age or anything else.
Haha! Well said my friend.

Jamiecballer
10-27-2014, 12:16 PM
What about the demographic of a Lebron fan...

- Laker hater jealous of the Lakers success over the years.

- Bandwagon fan of a player that doesn't even follow a team.

- Local team was never that good.

- Young in age and naive in terms of basketball knowledge.

- Loves to drink the company Gatorade.

- High on Sprite

- Can recite every Nike commercial Lebron was ever in.
Half those things don't exist and are myths created out of insecurity.

The other half would apply to kobe as well. I'll let you figure out which is which.

Jamiecballer
10-27-2014, 12:18 PM
:laugh:

Could've fooled me seeing as you sure invest a good amount of time defending a guy who you are "not a fan of".
I'm not a fan of gravity but I confess if someone tries to convince people it doesn't exist I could see myself being lured into a lengthy debate on principle alone.

AshyLarry
10-27-2014, 12:29 PM
I'm not a fan of gravity but I confess if someone tries to convince people it doesn't exist I could see myself being lured into a lengthy debate on principle alone.

Omg I may be new here, but you're my hero for this post. Love it.

Jamiecballer
10-27-2014, 12:32 PM
Honestly I think it's the opposite. Most younger fans don't like Lebron, and way overrate Jordan. Anyone that listens to sports radio knows this.
I think Jeffy pretty much nailed it with the caveat being Laker fan rather than geography. These guys (for the most part) decided long ago that the only way he could ever be better than Kobe would be if he managed to do an even better impression of MJ than Kobe did. I'm not sure they ever considered there might be better, more impactful ways of playing than being MJ lite.

AshyLarry
10-27-2014, 12:40 PM
I think Jeffy pretty much nailed it with the caveat being Laker fan rather than geography. These guys (for the most part) decided long ago that the only way he could ever be better than Kobe would be if he managed to do an even better impression of MJ than Kobe did. I'm not sure they ever considered there might be better, more impactful ways of playing than being MJ lite.

I agree, but Lakers fans are everywhere. Not just in California. They got to be the most popular NBA team by a mile. That's just a hunch though.

Chronz
10-27-2014, 12:44 PM
Huh... If I had to guess, I would say that you were the one who voted for T-Mac.

Read your thread. The guy admits to voting for him

JordansBulls
10-27-2014, 12:58 PM
Tim Duncan.

Won 5 titles for a franchise that never won anything prior to him arriving with 3 finals mvp's as well.

ewing
10-27-2014, 01:41 PM
yeah, timmy is the right answer.

Jeffy25
10-27-2014, 01:56 PM
I think Jeffy pretty much nailed it with the caveat being Laker fan rather than geography. These guys (for the most part) decided long ago that the only way he could ever be better than Kobe would be if he managed to do an even better impression of MJ than Kobe did. I'm not sure they ever considered there might be better, more impactful ways of playing than being MJ lite.

Lebron plays like Magic. And he's better at Magic's game than Magic was.

Kobe plays like Jordan. And Jordan was better at his game than Kobe was.

Lebron can play like someone else, and still be just as good as Jordan.

Nobody above played like Wilt or Shaq. Shaq and Wilt can be just as valuable as Jordan or Lebron too.

Different styles can create similar values.

Lebron is the best we have seen since Jordan. Duncan has the length, but not the peak. Shaq has the peak, but not the length. Lebron is close in peak, and very well could top the length. Kobe has more length than peak, but he needs another 4-5 years at 2012-2013 level to be in the discussion...and he's not gonna do that.

Kaner
10-27-2014, 02:06 PM
Lebron plays like Magic. And he's better at Magic's game than Magic was.

Kobe plays like Jordan. And Jordan was better at his game than Kobe was.

Lebron can play like someone else, and still be just as good as Jordan.

Nobody above played like Wilt or Shaq. Shaq and Wilt can be just as valuable as Jordan or Lebron too.

Different styles can create similar values.

Lebron is the best we have seen since Jordan. Duncan has the length, but not the peak. Shaq has the peak, but not the length. Lebron is close in peak, and very well could top the length.

Shaq at the exact same point in his career as Lebron's at right now

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/o/onealsh01.html#1993-2003-sum:advanced
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/o/onealsh01.html#1993-2003-sum:per_game

Going off of their first 11 seasons Shaq's stats are better and he had won his 3rd championship already. We don't know how Lebron's going to age, probably better then Shaq did, but at this point in their careers Shaq was at least on par and probably better. So if Lebron doesn't have the peak or the length yet why are you crowning him?

koreancabbage
10-27-2014, 02:32 PM
How about the stats argument.

rings don't measure how good a player is.

IKnowHoops
10-27-2014, 02:34 PM
I really don't understand how people could put Kobe over Shaq. When they played together Shaq was by far the more dominant and superior player and won the finals MVP's every year they won over Kobe. He played at a level in the finals Kobe has never come close to reaching. Shaq was better and more dominant than Kobe ever was. How can Kobe be ahead of him if this is the case? Pure blind love at this point.

koreancabbage
10-27-2014, 02:39 PM
I'm just awaiting Amos1ers view on why people think Duncan is better than Kobe lol. Don't know why he's going pissed off at the people voting for Lebron when Kobe, destined for greatness according to some, is bested by a player in Kobe's own generation. I mean, Kobe can't even win best player in his own generation let alone trying to beat out Lebron, arguable one of the best we have a seen a player play the game of basketball in its entirety.

TheIlladelph16
10-27-2014, 02:49 PM
I'm not a fan of gravity but I confess if someone tries to convince people it doesn't exist I could see myself being lured into a lengthy debate on principle alone.

:clap: Well played sir, well played.

My own answer to this question would be Duncan, Lebron then Kobe. I would personally choose Lebron because he is definitely the best basketball player since Jordan, however Duncan's championships and ridiculous longevity are keeping him slightly ahead of Bron for now. It will eventually be Lebron.

Jeffy25
10-27-2014, 02:57 PM
Shaq at the exact same point in his career as Lebron's at right now

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/o/onealsh01.html#1993-2003-sum:advanced
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/o/onealsh01.html#1993-2003-sum:per_game

Going off of their first 11 seasons Shaq's stats are better and he had won his 3rd championship already. We don't know how Lebron's going to age, probably better then Shaq did, but at this point in their careers Shaq was at least on par and probably better. So if Lebron doesn't have the peak or the length yet why are you crowning him?

Through his age 29 season:

Shaq: 18,634 points, 25,494 mp, 26.6 ppg, 12.3 trb, 2.8 apg, 28.3 PER, 122.3 WS, .230 WS/48

Lebron: 23,170 points, 33,276 mp, 27.5 ppg, 7.2 trb, 6.9 apg, 27.8 PER, 168.5 WS, .243 WS/48

He has him by 46 wins already. Helps that Lebron started earlier and has 8000 more minutes at this age. But it's all about what is accomplished on the court. And lebron only has to play 8000 more minutes to catch Shaq all time in minutes played and 13 more win shares to catch him all-time. Something he might do this next season.

Shaq was very efficient, more efficient than Lebron at this point. Which sort of comes with the position. But Shaq didn't age that well, something you can expect Lebron to do better with his frame.

If Lebron didn't play another minute though, then Shaq would remain ahead of him.

But Lebron should catch Shaq this year in my opinion.

Jamiecballer
10-27-2014, 03:29 PM
Shaq at the exact same point in his career as Lebron's at right now

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/o/onealsh01.html#1993-2003-sum:advanced
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/o/onealsh01.html#1993-2003-sum:per_game

Going off of their first 11 seasons Shaq's stats are better and he had won his 3rd championship already. We don't know how Lebron's going to age, probably better then Shaq did, but at this point in their careers Shaq was at least on par and probably better. So if Lebron doesn't have the peak or the length yet why are you crowning him?

probably because Shaq relied almost exclusively on physical domination. he didn't have the skill that guys like Jordan/Kobe/Lebron have. pretty easy to predict a much better late career barring disaster.

prash
10-27-2014, 03:36 PM
Career: Duncan. How LeBron's team performs this season will go a long way to determining whether he's better than Duncan in the post-MJ era.

Single Season: T-Mac. His performance during the '02 - '03 was one for the ages.

IKnowHoops
10-27-2014, 03:54 PM
Through his age 29 season:

Shaq: 18,634 points, 25,494 mp, 26.6 ppg, 12.3 trb, 2.8 apg, 28.3 PER, 122.3 WS, .230 WS/48

Lebron: 23,170 points, 33,276 mp, 27.5 ppg, 7.2 trb, 6.9 apg, 27.8 PER, 168.5 WS, .243 WS/48

He has him by 46 wins already. Helps that Lebron started earlier and has 8000 more minutes at this age. But it's all about what is accomplished on the court. And lebron only has to play 8000 more minutes to catch Shaq all time in minutes played and 13 more win shares to catch him all-time. Something he might do this next season.

Shaq was very efficient, more efficient than Lebron at this point. Which sort of comes with the position. But Shaq didn't age that well, something you can expect Lebron to do better with his frame.

If Lebron didn't play another minute though, then Shaq would remain ahead of him.

But Lebron should catch Shaq this year in my opinion.

To me this and this alone illustrates why Shaq and Lebron are a two man race on who has been the best since MIKE. You show anyone else's stats up to that point and I bet they pale in comparison to those two. I'm fine with either one. If I was starting a team, I could blindly pick either one. To me these two are in a class by themselves. I love Duncan too, he'd definitely be my 3rd pick. KG and Durant would be tied for my 4th pick. But Shaq and Lebron require so much defensive attention and help that they inevitably make the players around them better, also making there teams better. That attention is what separates them from the rest of the participants.

These two put up there stats with a lot more defensive attention put on them then the rest. If they were to get the one on one attention that these other guys got, there stats would be that much more ridiculous. And in Shaq's case especially, he could of averaged 45+pts a game on single coverage.

Jeffy25
10-27-2014, 03:56 PM
Career: Duncan. How LeBron's team performs this season will go a long way to determining whether he's better than Duncan in the post-MJ era.

Single Season: T-Mac. His performance during the '02 - '03 was one for the ages.

One of only 13 seasons all time where a player had at least a 30.0 PER and 16 WS

Tracy's

Chamberlain had 3 seasons like that
Lebron has had 3 seasons like that
Jordan had 4 seasons like that
Shaq had 1, and the Admiral had 1

DemarDerozan
10-27-2014, 04:29 PM
There should be a psychological research study conducted on Lebron fans...

There have to be dudes on this forum that were rabid Cavs fans, then followed Lebron to Miami only to denounce the Cavs, who are now primed to trash talk miami this year now that Le***** is back in Cleveland.

Any fan with this sort of mental instability probably had some daddy issues growing up.

alexander_37
10-27-2014, 04:35 PM
Lebron
Duncan/Kobe

More-Than-Most
10-27-2014, 05:41 PM
This POLL gives me hope for PSD. I am glad to see James that far ahead and Duncan 2nd.

DemarDerozan
10-27-2014, 05:55 PM
This POLL gives me hope for PSD. I am glad to see James that far ahead and Duncan 2nd.

You should divide LeQueen's votes by three. Or at least two...

For all you classy guys with several accounts. You know who you are.

You had a Cavs-loving account then switched over to white hot heat or some other ******** Miami name... and now you are back where you started. You guys make the Kobephiles look dignified.

Jeffy25
10-27-2014, 06:13 PM
You should divide LeQueen's votes by three. Or at least two...

For all you classy guys with several accounts. You know who you are.

You had a Cavs-loving account then switched over to white hot heat or some other ******** Miami name... and now you are back where you started. You guys make the Kobephiles look dignified.

If you are going to create the allegation.

Let me know who you think has a dupe, and I'll see if they are, and I'll perm ban them.

But don't make the accusation without saying who they are.

mrblisterdundee
10-27-2014, 06:50 PM
Success:
1. Kobe Bryant
2. Tim Duncan
3. Shaquille O'Neal
4. LeBron James

Talent/Dominance:
1. LeBron James
2. Shaquille O'Neal
3. Kobe Bryant
4. Tim Duncan.

IKnowHoops
10-27-2014, 07:04 PM
There should be a psychological research study conducted on Lebron fans...

There have to be dudes on this forum that were rabid Cavs fans, then followed Lebron to Miami only to denounce the Cavs, who are now primed to trash talk miami this year now that Le***** is back in Cleveland.

Any fan with this sort of mental instability probably had some daddy issues growing up.

I'm a Lebron fan, and I wouldn't trash cleveland or miami. I would just cheer fro Bron. I don't think Bron fans trash teams, they just like the player and cheer for him to win, thus cheer for the team he is on, and probably wish the best for the previous team because they built up a love for them while he was there.

Now the far more prevelent situation is to cheer for a player while he is on your team, and then trash him when that player leaves.

Do people who do this also have daddy issues in your opinion?
If Demar Derozen left toronto and went to play with the Cavs and then slaughtered your toronto team, would you cheer for him or trash him?

answer truthfully and reveal your daddy issues.

SeoulBeatz
10-27-2014, 07:14 PM
Kobe.

amos1er
10-27-2014, 07:25 PM
I'm not a fan of gravity but I confess if someone tries to convince people it doesn't exist I could see myself being lured into a lengthy debate on principle alone.

This has now been many lengthy debates.

IKnowHoops
10-27-2014, 07:33 PM
Doesn't matter what this poll says, because we know that this forum is heavily bias towards Lebron. Why don't you google nba player rankings all-time and see what polls with a much larger sample size have already agreed on. I can't post the results of these polls here because it violates the terms of service of this site.

The stats are even more bias towards Lebron. You should direct your confusion to those and gain understanding. People on psd are just informed. Voting for Lebron or Kobe depends on if you decide to embrace or ignore the information.

ChitownSports16
10-27-2014, 07:44 PM
Kobe

amos1er
10-27-2014, 07:50 PM
There should be a psychological research study conducted on Lebron fans...

There have to be dudes on this forum that were rabid Cavs fans, then followed Lebron to Miami only to denounce the Cavs, who are now primed to trash talk miami this year now that Le***** is back in Cleveland.

Any fan with this sort of mental instability probably had some daddy issues growing up.

Lol. They are something aren't they. Best excuse makers I have ever seen. "Rings don't count" "Only stats". They even moved him up in rank this past season even though he lost in the finals with one of the best rosters ever composed. They actually increased his rank for losing... When does that ever happen. If Tiger Woods loses a golf tournament he was favored in, would he then move up in rank past Jack Nicklaus. How can you even have a logical debate with someone who is that fanatical.

amos1er
10-27-2014, 07:51 PM
The stats are even more bias towards Lebron. You should direct your confusion to those and gain understanding. People on psd are just informed. Voting for Lebron or Kobe depends on if you decide to embrace or ignore the information.

Oh, I forgot... PER and WS/48 are the end all be all. Thanks for correcting me.

PhillyFaninLA
10-27-2014, 07:53 PM
no poll is worthwhile that doesn't have other or says out of these choices.

amos1er
10-27-2014, 07:56 PM
Stats don't measure impact people. If Lebron's stats are so great, and stats are such a good indicator of a player who give their team the best possible chance of winning... How come Lebron has come up short so many times when he was the clear favorite. How come out of the top ten players of all-time... Even ones where he has higher PER and WS/48 he has the lowest finals winning percentage (below .500) and with greater rosters than a lot of them have ever even played with and beat out better competition. Can someone please explain that one. How come so many players in NBA history have great PER and WS/48 yet have come up short so many times. Clearly there isn't much of a correlation between advanced stats and on court performance. So stop using the "Stats Excuse" Lebron fans.

amos1er
10-27-2014, 07:57 PM
no poll is worthwhile that doesn't have other or says out of these choices.

Who was I missing...

amos1er
10-27-2014, 08:04 PM
Success:
1. Kobe Bryant
2. Tim Duncan
3. Shaquille O'Neal
4. LeBron James

Talent/Dominance:
1. LeBron James
2. Shaquille O'Neal
3. Kobe Bryant
4. Tim Duncan.

Glad that at least you had the brains and non-bias to break it down into two categories... One objective in "Success" and one subjective in "Talent/Dominance.

jerellh528
10-27-2014, 08:39 PM
People in the nba forum love these early versions of stat formulas such as per. You never go into the smarter nfl forum and hear people saying, "omgz Eli manning has a 78 total qbr he's so much better than Tom brady!" Some nba people today are obsessed with numbers and let that dictate their head for the game.

IKnowHoops
10-27-2014, 09:16 PM
Stats don't measure impact people. If Lebron's stats are so great, and stats are such a good indicator of a player who give their team the best possible chance of winning... How come Lebron has come up short so many times when he was the clear favorite. How come out of the top ten players of all-time... Even ones where he has higher PER and WS/48 he has the lowest finals winning percentage (below .500) and with greater rosters than a lot of them have ever even played with and beat out better competition. Can someone please explain that one. How come so many players in NBA history have great PER and WS/48 yet have come up short so many times. Clearly there isn't much of a correlation between advanced stats and on court performance. So stop using the "Stats Excuse" Lebron fans.

Yeah I will explain it very easily to you.

The stats will show that other players on the team did not play well at all. In fact the stats will show that other players played horribly.

Now when a player wins a ring for example Jordan, or Kobe, or Hakeem, the stats will show that his teammates played very well.

So you see it really is that simple. When a star wins a championship, his teammates played great. When a star player plays great and looses, his teamates had poor stats.

Thats why when Jordan had possibly his best playoff performance against Birds Celtics and lost, we know it wasn't his fault because the stats show his teammates did nothing.

Same with Bron last year, he lost, but he averaged 28/7/4 on 57% from the field, but his teammates did nothing. That is a fact. The stats show us this.

Its not surprising to me that you would ask this question, but I would be surprised if you actually believe what your asking?

IKnowHoops
10-27-2014, 09:21 PM
Also an NBA championship is the #1 team accomplishment.

MVP's are much closer to an individual accomplishment
Stats are much more of an individual accomplishment

Bron kills Kobe in individual accomplishments

With Kobe you have proven he has been on better teams thats it.

tredigs
10-27-2014, 09:36 PM
People in the nba forum love these early versions of stat formulas such as per. You never go into the smarter nfl forum and hear people saying, "omgz Eli manning has a 78 total qbr he's so much better than Tom brady!" Some nba people today are obsessed with numbers and let that dictate their head for the game.
Are there newer more advanced stats you know of that don't have Lebron handily over Kobe through their primes?

I don't think a stat like PER hurts Kobe's case, while I do think it underrates Duncan and his defensive impact. Something many other stats do not fail to recognize.

ILLUSIONIST^248
10-27-2014, 10:16 PM
Timmy or Kobe imo.this next thread

ILLUSIONIST^248
10-27-2014, 10:16 PM
It should probably go

James



Duncan






Everyone else


Lolololol

amos1er
10-27-2014, 10:35 PM
Yeah I will explain it very easily to you.

This should be good.


The stats will show that other players on the team did not play well at all. In fact the stats will show that other players played horribly.

Many people seem to be under the misconception that Lebron was the only one to bring his "A-Game" while it was his teammates who let him down. This breakdown puts that theory to the test and proves why people are totally mislead by flashy paper stats that they really know nothing about...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y02r-Dz5cMw

It appears that Lebron had a great series individually, but under close examination, a few things stood out...

Of the 141 total points Lebron scored in the Finals, 51 of them were scored in blowout situations where the Spurs were up by 15 or more points. During these situations, Lebron averaged a healthy 1.1 points per minute. When the games were closer, he only averaged 0.65 points per minute.

Also, Lebron had just about the same amount of turnovers as he did assists. 20 assists total for the Finals and 19 total turnovers for the finals.

Additionally, Lebron had just about the worst +/- on his team throughout the series... Not just the cramps game.

During the regular season and Eastern Conference playoffs, Lebron was in the 94th and 97th percentile in post up production. In the finals, he only posted up only 11% of the time compared to the 13.9% and 14% he did in the regular season and Eastern Conference playoffs which resulted in him averaging a lowly 1.1 Points Per Post-Up in the finals.

This just goes to show that all the stuff I have been telling you all about over the years is all very true and is agreed upon by people who know how to truly breakdown the game of basketball. Lebron just can't generate enough points against elite teams to be effective. I have told you all time and time again that he pads his stats in both garbage time and against inferior competition and it seems there are other experts who agree with this as well. What good does it do you to be the leader in points, rebounds, and assists when your team is bottom tier in all three. What good does it do you to stuff your Stat Sheet at the expense of your teammates. I'll tell you what good it does you, you get results like you did in this years finals.... The mirage of great individual stats to the layman eye at first glance, while your team receives the worst beat down in finals history.


Now when a player wins a ring for example Jordan, or Kobe, or Hakeem, the stats will show that his teammates played very well.

Really. Can you provide us an example of this. I'm just not buying it. Also, isn't it on the leader of the team to bring out the best in his teammates. Wouldn't someone who couldn't inspire their teammates either through on or off the court be considered a failure alone on that account. Don't you factor in leadership into the equation, or do you simply read box scores and make an assessment solely based on that alone... NM, dumb question.


So you see it really is that simple. When a star wins a championship, his teammates played great. When a star player plays great and looses, his teamates had poor stats.

What about when Lebron played poorly through six of the seven games in the 2013 finals and Ray Allen and Chris Bosh had to bail him out in game six and Wade had to bail him out in game four. Lebron played just mediocre throughout and still won a ring. In 2011, Bosh and Wade played like champions and Lebron choked the whole thing up and cost his team a ring. The team played great and Lebron still lost. Go look at some of Jordan's championships and see who had more help and how much Jordan truly carried his team. Your not going to tell me that out of all Jordan's six rings that his teammates were stellar. Also, once again, having nearly as many assists and turnovers is not considered playing great.


Thats why when Jordan had possibly his best playoff performance against Birds Celtics and lost, we know it wasn't his fault because the stats show his teammates did nothing.

His team was not considered vegas favorites going into that series. A very poor example indeed. The Bulls never had a chance in that series and everyone knew it. Therefore Jordan had a green light to do basically whatever he wanted so that The Bulls could perhaps pull off a miracle. The Heat were the favorites going into the finals. The blame always starts at the top and works it's way down. If you want to credit Lebron for winning, you also must give him the blame when losing.


Same with Bron last year, he lost, but he averaged 28/7/4 on 57% from the field, but his teammates did nothing. That is a fact. The stats show us this.

To the novice eye this might be true... To those who know how to do much more than recite numbers from basketball reference there is much more to it.

Please watch this video again and then we can further debate this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y02r-Dz5cMw


Its not surprising to me that you would ask this question, but I would be surprised if you actually believe what your asking?

What about it is not believable.

amos1er
10-27-2014, 10:38 PM
Shaq is getting mad disrespect here. Dude was way more successful and dominant than Lebron.

The order should be...

1. Kobe
2. Shaq
3. Tim
4. Lebron
5. Dirk

Jeffy25
10-27-2014, 10:51 PM
Shaq is getting mad disrespect here. Dude was way more successful and dominant than Lebron.

The order should be...

1. Kobe
2. Shaq
3. Tim
4. Lebron
5. Dirk

I'll tell you what.

Create one, logical, well thought out, scientific (with statistical individual numerical proof) post about why Shaq, Kobe, and Duncan are all better than Lebron all-time at this point, and I'll concede and give you this one and the next Kobe debate. And I'll say you've got your argument.

If you can't, then you admit that Lebron is greater than Kobe all-time just one time.

The decision of your post being well-thought out and scientific (with numerical, individual statistical proof that isn't just rings) will be based on other posters. Not you or me.


Think you can do this? Just one time? I mean, if you can't, then why even keep posting in all of these threads?



And I would like to see a similar post about why Kobe is greater than Shaq all time as well.

Jeffy25
10-27-2014, 10:55 PM
I'm a Lebron fan, and I wouldn't trash cleveland or miami. I would just cheer fro Bron. I don't think Bron fans trash teams, they just like the player and cheer for him to win, thus cheer for the team he is on, and probably wish the best for the previous team because they built up a love for them while he was there.

Now the far more prevelent situation is to cheer for a player while he is on your team, and then trash him when that player leaves.

Do people who do this also have daddy issues in your opinion?
If Demar Derozen left toronto and went to play with the Cavs and then slaughtered your toronto team, would you cheer for him or trash him?

answer truthfully and reveal your daddy issues.


I'm not a Lebron fan.

I don't have a favorite player or team all-time either.

Statistics are in large part how I rate players (and recollection of memories somewhat).

I am an analytical person. So seeing how Lebron stacks up is why he gets my support so much in debates. I really have no favorites or bias in any of these debates. Stats are simplistic enough to warrant their own support.

We haven't seen a player play to Jordan's caliber except for Shaq for a bit, and Lebron for longer.


Fwiw, a person who trashes a player for leaving their team just sounds like a jealous ex. And there's no time in life for such wasted, useless emotions.

amos1er
10-27-2014, 11:06 PM
I'll tell you what.

Create one, logical, well thought out, scientific (with statistical individual numerical proof) post about why Shaq, Kobe, and Duncan are all better than Lebron all-time at this point, and I'll concede and give you this one and the next Kobe debate. And I'll say you've got your argument.

If you can't, then you admit that Lebron is greater than Kobe all-time just one time.

The decision of your post being well-thought out and scientific (with numerical, individual statistical proof that isn't just rings) will be based on other posters. Not you or me.


Think you can do this? Just one time? I mean, if you can't, then why even keep posting in all of these threads?



And I would like to see a similar post about why Kobe is greater than Shaq all time as well.

You just said it yourself, if it's not a numbers argument, you can't grasp it. Why should I even bother than. If you fail to see why someone like Shaq isn't more dominant than Lebron ever was in his peak, had better longevity, and was more successful in his career, than I really don't even want to waste my time debating you. FYI... Phil Jackson is more about a product he can touch and feel than he is about numbers. Just a little food for thought. Not everything in basketball or any other sport for that matter is 100% quantifiable. Though I will go home in a bit and show you what I can (all in vain I'm sure) so that you can understand my thought process.

BTW... How can you all rank Shaq top five in your poll for all-time, yet vote Lebron ahead of him in this one... It just makes no logical sense and makes you all lose the little credibility you might have had.

Jeffy25
10-27-2014, 11:08 PM
Lol. They are something aren't they. Best excuse makers I have ever seen. "Rings don't count" "Only stats". They even moved him up in rank this past season even though he lost in the finals with one of the best rosters ever composed. They actually increased his rank for losing... When does that ever happen. If Tiger Woods loses a golf tournament he was favored in, would he then move up in rank past Jack Nicklaus. How can you even have a logical debate with someone who is that fanatical.

Can you see a baseball fan saying something as ignorant as that?

Ted Williams and Barry Bonds are probably the two best hitters of all time (along with Ruth)

Neither ever won a ring.


You are damn right rings don't count, because if they do, you better fly Horry and Russell way up all-time, ahead of Kobe.

And should Kobe get credit for being the second best player for three of his rings? Honestly? Should he?


This isn't tennis, or golf, or bowling. This isn't a one-on-one sport. Who you have with you on the court completely affects your ability to compete.

The best team wins rings. The best player doesn't always win rings.

Wouldn't you say Kevin Durant was the best player in the NBA last season? How come he was nowhere close to winning a ring this year?

what is the highest rated player on the Spurs team in active rankings? How many players would you even put in the top 15? Any?

Was Dirk the best player in the NBA in 2011? Or even a top 5 player in the game that year?

If a guy is the best player in the game, and rings should count for all-time ranking, then why doesn't the best player in the game repeatedly win it all?

Ty Fast
10-27-2014, 11:09 PM
Shaq
Kobe
Timmy
Lebron

KD is coming on but not there yet

Jeffy25
10-27-2014, 11:17 PM
You just said it yourself, if it's not a numbers argument, you can't grasp it. Why should I even bother than. If you fail to see why someone like Shaq isn't more dominant than Lebron ever was in his peak, had better longevity, and was more successful in his career, than I really don't even want to waste my time debating you. FYI... Phil Jackson is more about a product he can touch and feel than he is about numbers. Just a little food for thought. Not everything in basketball or any other sport for that matter is 100% quantifiable. Though I will go home in a bit and show you what I can (all in vain I'm sure) so that you can understand my thought process.

BTW... How can you all rank Shaq top five in your poll for all-time, yet vote Lebron ahead of him in this one... It just makes no logical sense and makes you all lose the little credibility you might have had.

So you can't make a logical argument for Kobe over Shaq and Lebron all time, yet you continue to cling to it

BTW... I didn't rank Shaq behind Lebron. I said Lebron is probably going to catch Shaq either this year or next. Lebron is only just now entering his age 30 season. And he's well ahead of where Shaq was at this age. He won't have a problem passing him.

Lebron is going to be passing some major legends with another productive year this year:

Miller, Barkley, Kobe, Robinson, maybe Shaq and Garnett.

If he plays even 80% of his current prime self over the next 3 years, he'll cement himself in the top 5 without an issue.

Lebron has a very real shot for catching Jordan as the best player of all-time, just depends how he ages.



Fun fact:

Kobe's best season, 05-06 he had 28.0 PER and 15.3 WS (and this is his best season by a decent amount)

Lebron has had a 28.0 PER 7 out of 11 seasons and a 15.3 WS 6 out of 11 seasons (15.2 one year)

Jordan had a 28.0 PER 7 out of his 15 seasons and a 15.3 WS 10 out of his 15 seasons

Shaq had a 28.0 PER 8 out of his 18 seasons and a 15.3 WS 2 out of his 15 seasons


So, how is Kobe greater than Shaq? What is your argument specifically?

How is Kobe greater than Lebron? When his best season is weaker than 6 of Lebron's 11 seasons?

Give us an actual argument for why.

jericho
10-27-2014, 11:23 PM
Shaq is getting mad disrespect here. Dude was way more successful and dominant than Lebron.

The order should be...

1. Lebron
2. Duncan
3. Shaquille
4. Kobe
5. Dirk

Here fixed it for you

jericho
10-27-2014, 11:26 PM
I'll tell you what.

Create one, logical, well thought out, scientific (with statistical individual numerical proof) post about why Shaq, Kobe, and Duncan are all better than Lebron all-time at this point, and I'll concede and give you this one and the next Kobe debate. And I'll say you've got your argument.

If you can't, then you admit that Lebron is greater than Kobe all-time just one time.

The decision of your post being well-thought out and scientific (with numerical, individual statistical proof that isn't just rings) will be based on other posters. Not you or me.


Think you can do this? Just one time? I mean, if you can't, then why even keep posting in all of these threads?



And I would like to see a similar post about why Kobe is greater than Shaq all time as well.

You just said it yourself, if it's not a numbers argument, you can't grasp it. Why should I even bother than. If you fail to see why someone like Shaq isn't more dominant than Lebron ever was in his peak, had better longevity, and was more successful in his career, than I really don't even want to waste my time debating you. FYI... Phil Jackson is more about a product he can touch and feel than he is about numbers. Just a little food for thought. Not everything in basketball or any other sport for that matter is 100% quantifiable. Though I will go home in a bit and show you what I can (all in vain I'm sure) so that you can understand my thought process.

BTW... How can you all rank Shaq top five in your poll for all-time, yet vote Lebron ahead of him in this one... It just makes no logical sense and makes you all lose the little credibility you might have had.

I don't see no numbers. Just a bunch of words in an attempt to get out of it since there is no way that any stats that you bring show Kobe having a better career than Lebron. Oh yeah there is only the rings argument.

Jeffy25
10-27-2014, 11:32 PM
Stats don't measure impact people. If Lebron's stats are so great, and stats are such a good indicator of a player who give their team the best possible chance of winning... How come Lebron has come up short so many times when he was the clear favorite. How come out of the top ten players of all-time... Even ones where he has higher PER and WS/48 he has the lowest finals winning percentage (below .500) and with greater rosters than a lot of them have ever even played with and beat out better competition. Can someone please explain that one. How come so many players in NBA history have great PER and WS/48 yet have come up short so many times. Clearly there isn't much of a correlation between advanced stats and on court performance. So stop using the "Stats Excuse" Lebron fans.

Because Lebron hasn't always had the best TEAM.

He teamed up with two greats, but they weren't perfect fits for him like what others have had.

He isn't winning those post-season games by himself. He can't. Nobody can.

Jordan played with insanely fantastic defenses which were perfect for a highly efficient volume shooter. He also had additional options when he got teamed up for others to shoot (Kerr, Pippen, and others were good enough shooters). But mainly, Jordan played with awesome defensive guys and good rebounders.

Kobe won his first three rings with a top 5-10 legend. Lebron nor Jordan ever had that luxury.

Gasol was a good fit for Kobe, much like Bosh is a very good fit for Lebron. Kobe also won those last two rings with guys like Bynum and Odom being extremely effective and good players. That's more talent than Lebron and two stars. That's three stars and a solid regular/borderline all-star.

And why does Finals winning percentage mean anything?


Because if it does, then I hope you lower Magic Johnson in your all-time rankings. And Kobe isn't perfect either.

It's funny that if Lebron simply lost this year in the ECF instead of the Finals, you wouldn't have that argument, does that actually make any sense to you?

sheesh
10-27-2014, 11:35 PM
It's hard to say. I consider Shaq, Duncan, LeBron and Durant. Tim Duncan and LeBron are ultimate team players who benefit the team. The same way Jordan was.

But Durant and Shaq had that aura of they just can't be stopped. They both had insane volume and efficiency.

Jordan wasn't just a scorer, but that's what he did best. There were times last year when I was watching Durant and the basket looked like an ocean. That was for the whole year.

IKnowHoops
10-27-2014, 11:40 PM
amos1er;29186840]This should be good.

This will be better.




Many people seem to be under the misconception that Lebron was the only one to bring his "A-Game" while it was his teammates who let him down. This breakdown puts that theory to the test and proves why people are totally mislead by flashy paper stats that they really know nothing about...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y02r-Dz5cMw

It appears that Lebron had a great series individually, but under close examination, a few things stood out...

Of the 141 total points Lebron scored in the Finals, 51 of them were scored in blowout situations where the Spurs were up by 15 or more points. During these situations, Lebron averaged a healthy 1.1 points per minute. When the games were closer, he only averaged 0.65 points per minute.


.65 points per minute are better than anyones best on the court on either team. He's still outplaying everyone at this clip. Secondly his second best player on his team is giving .3 points per minute. So relative to everyone else, Bron is the best player on the court by far, getting absolutely no help from teammates. Next.


Also, Lebron had just about the same amount of turnovers as he did assists. 20 assists total for the Finals and 19 total turnovers for the finals.

True, his assist to ratio was bad, but an assist is only as good as the guy shooting it. That stat illustrates how poorly his teammates were shooting. Mario Chalmers and Norris Cole each shot 14% from 3pt land. Wade had 18 TO to 13 Asst and averaged 15pts a game on 43% shooting. Bosh averaged 5 rebounds a game. Bron lead the team in pts/rebound/asst/steals. He got absolutely no help. If 3 other guys had played as "bad" as Bron had played they would of won.


Additionally, Lebron had just about the worst +/- on his team throughout the series... Not just the cramps game.


:rolleyes:


During the regular season and Eastern Conference playoffs, Lebron was in the 94th and 97th percentile in post up production. In the finals, he only posted up only 11% of the time compared to the 13.9% and 14% he did in the regular season and Eastern Conference playoffs which resulted in him averaging a lowly 1.1 Points Per Post-Up in the finals.

Niether Mario, Norris, or Wade could initiate any type of offense so he had to bring the ball up. He cannot pass the ball down low to himself. This kind of thing tends to happen when you lead your team in every statistic. You cannot focus on any one thing.


This just goes to show that all the stuff I have been telling you all about over the years is all very true and is agreed upon by people who know how to truly breakdown the game of basketball. Lebron just can't generate enough points against elite teams to be effective. I have told you all time and time again that he pads his stats in both garbage time and against inferior competition and it seems there are other experts who agree with this as well. What good does it do you to be the leader in points, rebounds, and assists when your team is bottom tier in all three. What good does it do you to stuff your Stat Sheet at the expense of your teammates. I'll tell you what good it does you, you get results like you did in this years finals.... The mirage of great individual stats to the layman eye at first glance, while your team receives the worst beat down in finals history.


In Kobe's last finals he had 26 ast and 26 to. Worse than Bron
He score 28.6 pts a game on 40% form the Field. Bron was 28 at 57%
Kobe shot 31% from 3. Bron shot 51% from 3.
Kobe's Big man Gasol gave him 19/12. While Lebron's big man Bosh gave him 14/5.
The Celtics shot 43% from the field. The Spurs shot 53% from the field.
The Lakers shot 42% from the field. The Heat shot 47% from the field.
The Celtics shot 30% from 3pt land. The Spurs shot 46% from 3pt land.
The Lakers shot 28% from 3pt land. The Heat shot 40% from 3pt land.

Just a few things to illustrate how much better in a loss Lebron was than Kobe in a win
...How much better San Antonio was than the Celtics
...How much better Miami was than L.A.
If you picked apart Kobe on the level you are picking apart Lebron, you will find that LEBRON DESTROYS KOBE
And these are with the stats you decided to lay out.
You are just picking out numbers with and showing absolutely no relativity so the numbers mean nothing unless you compare them to another player of equal usage.


Really. Can you provide us an example of this. I'm just not buying it. Also, isn't it on the leader of the team to bring out the best in his teammates. Wouldn't someone who couldn't inspire their teammates either through on or off the court be considered a failure alone on that account. Don't you factor in leadership into the equation, or do you simply read box scores and make an assessment solely based on that alone... NM, dumb question.


I just did.


What about when Lebron played poorly through six of the seven games in the 2013 finals and Ray Allen and Chris Bosh had to bail him out in game six and Wade had to bail him out in game four. Lebron played just mediocre throughout and still won a ring. In 2011, Bosh and Wade played like champions and Lebron choked the whole thing up and cost his team a ring. The team played great and Lebron still lost. Go look at some of Jordan's championships and see who had more help and how much Jordan truly carried his team. Your not going to tell me that out of all Jordan's six rings that his teammates were stellar. Also, once again, having nearly as many assists and turnovers is not considered playing great.

Bron averaged 25/11/7/2.3- lead the team in points/assts/steal/rebs. Noone is bailing him out if he has to lead in 4 categories.

Gasol getting 12 rebounds a game is bailing Kobe out
Kobe going 6/24 with 2 asst and 4TO and getting a win is what you call a bail out.






His team was not considered vegas favorites going into that series. A very poor example indeed. The Bulls never had a chance in that series and everyone knew it. Therefore Jordan had a green light to do basically whatever he wanted so that The Bulls could perhaps pull off a miracle. The Heat were the favorites going into the finals. The blame always starts at the top and works it's way down. If you want to credit Lebron for winning, you also must give him the blame when losing.

Whether your considered favorites or not is a prediction. What players actually produce are called facts. Facts are what matter. And the facts show that Jordan's help, and Lebron's help produced at the same level.




To the novice eye this might be true... To those who know how to do much more than recite numbers from basketball reference there is much more to it.


As I said before, if you break down Kobe's game like this, you will find that Lebron destroys him.


Please watch this video again and then we can further debate this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y02r-Dz5cMw


And this film just pits Bron against himself, but if you compare these numbers against any other player on the court he is still far superior. The breakdown shows stats that are only relative to his own. Put up against any other player on the court and he is the superior player by far.



What about it is not believable.

I guess I gave you to much credit. Won't happen again.

Jeffy25
10-27-2014, 11:44 PM
Many people seem to be under the misconception that Lebron was the only one to bring his "A-Game" while it was his teammates who let him down. This breakdown puts that theory to the test and proves why people are totally mislead by flashy paper stats that they really know nothing about...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y02r-Dz5cMw

It appears that Lebron had a great series individually, but under close examination, a few things stood out...

Of the 141 total points Lebron scored in the Finals, 51 of them were scored in blowout situations where the Spurs were up by 15 or more points. During these situations, Lebron averaged a healthy 1.1 points per minute. When the games were closer, he only averaged 0.65 points per minute.
Kobe Bryant in the 2000 Finals, a year he won a ring that you like to give him credit for:

Scored 15.6 ppg (shooting .367%), 4.6 TRB, 4.2 apg

and played 9 minutes in a game they won, scoring only 2 points.

That same playoff season, he had 14 turnovers in 5 games, with only 18 assists in a series win over the Kings in the easy to fly by first round.

From 2000-2002 with Shaq, when Kobe took 20 shots, the Lakers went (25-10) but when he took under 20 shots, they went (20-2)

But we are going to give Kobe credit for these three rings? If we are going to credit one player for a ring, these are clearly Shaq's rings.

Matter.
10-27-2014, 11:44 PM
Brian scalabrine

Jeffy25
10-27-2014, 11:51 PM
This will be better.





.65 points per minute are better than anyones best on the court on either team. He's still outplaying everyone at this clip. Secondly his second best player on his team is giving .3 points per minute. So relative to everyone else, Bron is the best player on the court by far, getting absolutely no help from teammates. Next.



True, his assist to ratio was bad, but an assist is only as good as the guy shooting it. That stat illustrates how poorly his teammates were shooting. Mario Chalmers and Norris Cole each shot 14% from 3pt land. Wade had 18 TO to 13 Asst and averaged 15pts a game on 43% shooting. Bosh averaged 5 rebounds a game. Bron lead the team in pts/rebound/asst/steals. He got absolutely no help. If 3 other guys had played as "bad" as Bron had played they would of won.



:rolleyes:



Niether Mario, Norris, or Wade could initiate any type of offense so he had to bring the ball up. He cannot pass the ball down low to himself. This kind of thing tends to happen when you lead your team in every statistic. You cannot focus on any one thing.



In Kobe's last finals he had 26 ast and 26 to. Worse than Bron
He score 28.6 pts a game on 40% form the Field. Bron was 28 at 57%
Kobe shot 31% from 3. Bron shot 51% from 3.
Kobe's Big man Gasol gave him 19/12. While Lebron's big man Bosh gave him 14/5.
The Celtics shot 43% from the field. The Spurs shot 53% from the field.
The Lakers shot 42% from the field. The Heat shot 47% from the field.
The Celtics shot 30% from 3pt land. The Spurs shot 46% from 3pt land.
The Lakers shot 28% from 3pt land. The Heat shot 40% from 3pt land.

Just a few things to illustrate how much better in a loss Lebron was than Kobe in a win
...How much better San Antonio was than the Celtics
...How much better Miami was than L.A.
If you picked apart Kobe on the level you are picking apart Lebron, you will find that LEBRON DESTROYS KOBE
And these are with the stats you decided to lay out.
You are just picking out numbers with and showing absolutely no relativity so the numbers mean nothing unless you compare them to another player of equal usage.



I just did.



Bron averaged 25/11/7/2.3- lead the team in points/assts/steal/rebs. Noone is bailing him out if he has to lead in 4 categories.

Gasol getting 12 rebounds a game is bailing Kobe out
Kobe going 6/24 with 2 asst and 4TO and getting a win is what you call a bail out.







Whether your considered favorites or not is a prediction. What players actually produce are called facts. Facts are what matter. And the facts show that Jordan's help, and Lebron's help produced at the same level.





As I said before, if you break down Kobe's game like this, you will find that Lebron destroys him.



And this film just pits Bron against himself, but if you compare these numbers against any other player on the court he is still far superior. The breakdown shows stats that are only relative to his own. Put up against any other player on the court and he is the superior player by far.



I guess I gave you to much credit. Won't happen again.

Fantastic response.

benny01
10-28-2014, 12:02 AM
Shaq is the most dominant player since Jordan. Prior to his journeyman days, everything that happened in the league seemingly had to do with Shaq. Teams were taking absurd gambles and/or paying absurd prices for bigs, because you always had to deal with Shaq. In Shaq's prime you could flop, foul, or play hell denying an entry pass or you were beat. He was too big and too skilled.
Timmy is probably the best basketball player though.
Kobe's the most comparable.

DemarDerozan
10-28-2014, 12:18 AM
Shaq is the most dominant player since Jordan. Prior to his journeyman days, everything that happened in the league seemingly had to do with Shaq. Teams were taking absurd gambles and/or paying absurd prices for bigs, because you always had to deal with Shaq. In Shaq's prime you could flop, foul, or play hell denying an entry pass or you were beat. He was too big and too skilled.
Timmy is probably the best basketball player though.
Kobe's the most comparable.

Thanks for giving an honest account outside the lame Kobe v Lebron argument.

DemarDerozan
10-28-2014, 12:21 AM
Also I'm standing by the Lebron bandwagon fans have daddy issues thing.

Yeah I like DD all right, but if he voluntarily left team his twice to win championships with proven talent I would lose a lot of respect for him. I wouldn't follow the player based upon personal morals.

Leaving the team that drafted you... Nonetheless your hometown team, is sad. Coming back to them after you realize your new team is aging... Well that's just pathetic.
And anyone who follows a pathetic player like this from team to team is a little off themselves.

DemarDerozan
10-28-2014, 12:29 AM
This will be better.





.65 points per minute are better than anyones best on the court on either team. He's still outplaying everyone at this clip. Secondly his second best player on his team is giving .3 points per minute. So relative to everyone else, Bron is the best player on the court by far, getting absolutely no help from teammates. Next.



True, his assist to ratio was bad, but an assist is only as good as the guy shooting it. That stat illustrates how poorly his teammates were shooting. Mario Chalmers and Norris Cole each shot 14% from 3pt land. Wade had 18 TO to 13 Asst and averaged 15pts a game on 43% shooting. Bosh averaged 5 rebounds a game. Bron lead the team in pts/rebound/asst/steals. He got absolutely no help. If 3 other guys had played as "bad" as Bron had played they would of won.



:rolleyes:



Niether Mario, Norris, or Wade could initiate any type of offense so he had to bring the ball up. He cannot pass the ball down low to himself. This kind of thing tends to happen when you lead your team in every statistic. You cannot focus on any one thing.



In Kobe's last finals he had 26 ast and 26 to. Worse than Bron
He score 28.6 pts a game on 40% form the Field. Bron was 28 at 57%
Kobe shot 31% from 3. Bron shot 51% from 3.
Kobe's Big man Gasol gave him 19/12. While Lebron's big man Bosh gave him 14/5.
The Celtics shot 43% from the field. The Spurs shot 53% from the field.
The Lakers shot 42% from the field. The Heat shot 47% from the field.
The Celtics shot 30% from 3pt land. The Spurs shot 46% from 3pt land.
The Lakers shot 28% from 3pt land. The Heat shot 40% from 3pt land.

Just a few things to illustrate how much better in a loss Lebron was than Kobe in a win
...How much better San Antonio was than the Celtics
...How much better Miami was than L.A.
If you picked apart Kobe on the level you are picking apart Lebron, you will find that LEBRON DESTROYS KOBE
And these are with the stats you decided to lay out.
You are just picking out numbers with and showing absolutely no relativity so the numbers mean nothing unless you compare them to another player of equal usage.



I just did.



Bron averaged 25/11/7/2.3- lead the team in points/assts/steal/rebs. Noone is bailing him out if he has to lead in 4 categories.

Gasol getting 12 rebounds a game is bailing Kobe out
Kobe going 6/24 with 2 asst and 4TO and getting a win is what you call a bail out.







Whether your considered favorites or not is a prediction. What players actually produce are called facts. Facts are what matter. And the facts show that Jordan's help, and Lebron's help produced at the same level.





As I said before, if you break down Kobe's game like this, you will find that Lebron destroys him.



And this film just pits Bron against himself, but if you compare these numbers against any other player on the court he is still far superior. The breakdown shows stats that are only relative to his own. Put up against any other player on the court and he is the superior player by far.



I guess I gave you to much credit. Won't happen again.

Obsessed much?

Jeffy25
10-28-2014, 12:32 AM
Obsessed much?

Great, well-thought out response to someone who was just as obsessive and created all the initial points, gets this sort of a response from you?

DemarDerozan
10-28-2014, 12:38 AM
Great, well-thought out response to someone who was just as obsessive and created all the initial points, gets this sort of a response from you?

I didn't bring up any of those points. You're a clown and anyone who feels the need to pull out pointless statistics is a clown.
5-2 beats 2-3 period. Those are all the stats I need. And 6-0 beats both.

Jeffy25
10-28-2014, 12:43 AM
I didn't bring up any of those points. You're a clown and anyone who feels the need to pull out pointless statistics is a clown.
5-3 beats 2-3 period. Those are all the stats I need. And 6-0 beats both.

He responded to amos who brought up all of those points.

I am having a hard time understanding how you are not following this.

But by your logic, Magic sucked. And Manu Ginolbi btw, has the greatest regular season winning percentage, along with great finals records....so....GOAT?

And I guess Russell and Horry are greater than Kobe.


Literally, there is nobody, anywhere, that keeps track of individual players w-l records in the NBA Finals. Because it's a ridiculous thing to track.

It's hilarious. If Lebron could have just lost in the ECF this year, then he would be 2-2, and that would be better in your world.


Do you see how insane that is? How awful that logic is?


Lest we forget this is a ****ing team sport and winning chips has everything to do with being on a great team, and nothing to do with being a great individual player. But hey, I guess Durant wasn't the best player in the game this season, since he didn't win a chip, but instead, it's one of Duncan, Manu, Parker, Leonard or someone on that team.

tredigs
10-28-2014, 01:02 AM
He responded to amos who brought up all of those points.

I am having a hard time understanding how you are not following this.

But by your logic, Magic sucked. And Manu Ginolbi btw, has the greatest regular season winning percentage, along with great finals records....so....GOAT?

And I guess Russell and Horry are greater than Kobe.


Literally, there is nobody, anywhere, that keeps track of individual players w-l records in the NBA Finals. Because it's a ridiculous thing to track.

It's hilarious. If Lebron could have just lost in the ECF this year, then he would be 2-2, and that would be better in your world.


Do you see how insane that is? How awful that logic is?


Lest we forget this is a ****ing team sport and winning chips has everything to do with being on a great team, and nothing to do with being a great individual player. But hey, I guess Durant wasn't the best player in the game this season, since he didn't win a chip, but instead, it's one of Duncan, Manu, Parker, Leonard or someone on that team.

Your arguments do seem to hinge around PER and WS. Two stats where Manu would rank in the top 40 and top 15 all time respectively. So, fair to assume you think he may be top 30 All Time?

IKnowHoops
10-28-2014, 01:05 AM
Also I'm standing by the Lebron bandwagon fans have daddy issues thing.

Yeah I like DD all right, but if he voluntarily left team his twice to win championships with proven talent I would lose a lot of respect for him. I wouldn't follow the player based upon personal morals.

Leaving the team that drafted you... Nonetheless your hometown team, is sad. Coming back to them after you realize your new team is aging... Well that's just pathetic.
And anyone who follows a pathetic player like this from team to team is a little off themselves.

So yes you do have daddy issues. You'll say anything at any moment and contradict yourself with the quickness just to attack Lebron. You have no code. Thats pathetic.

IKnowHoops
10-28-2014, 01:09 AM
Obsessed much?

As I said, no code. Hypocrite. I was answering your boy who went off first, but since it was in favor of Bron, you came at me. Again...pathetic.

IKnowHoops
10-28-2014, 01:16 AM
I didn't bring up any of those points. You're a clown and anyone who feels the need to pull out pointless statistics is a clown.
5-2 beats 2-3 period. Those are all the stats I need. And 6-0 beats both.

So your a clown too? Why are you a clown...because you just said Robert Horry is better than Kobe and Bron.

SMH How do you dudes ignore the many variables that go into winning a ring that have nothing to do with Bron or Kobe. Hard to fathom the knuckle head thinking in the statement "5-2 beats 2-3". Kobe average 15pts on 37% shooting for his first ring. Shaq average 38/17.

Game 1
Shaq 43pts 19reb 67%FG shot 21 for 31
Kobe 14pts 46%FG shot 6 for 13

Game 2
Shaq 40pts 24reb shot 11 to 18
Kobe 2pts shot 1 for 3

Game 3
Shaq 33pts 13reb shot 15 for 24
Kobe did not play

Game 4
Shaq 36pts 21reb shot 13 for 25
Kobe 27pts shot 14 for 27

Game 5
Shaq 35pts 11reb shot 17 for 27
Kobe 8pts shot 4 for 20

Game 6
Shaq 41pts 12reb 19 for 32
Kobe 26pts shot 8 for 27

And these Bron haters got the nerve to say Lebron got carried?!?!
Kobe was a second fiddle by a long shot. How do you guys put Kobe ahead of a dude dominating at this level basically putting up 40 and 15 every night. Meanwhile Kobe is shooting under 30% most of the series and laying eggs on a nightly basis. If Bron could of played with a force of this magnitude...
But yeah 5-2 beats 2-3, keep rolling with that while Kobe scores 2 pts.

Jeffy25
10-28-2014, 01:51 AM
Your arguments do seem to hinge around PER and WS. Two stats where Manu would rank in the top 40 and top 15 all time respectively. So, fair to assume you think he may be top 30 All Time?

Those are easy stats to pull value from.

And I think Manu was a very efficient player, and he excelled in the very specific role he was casted in.

I would say he is more in the top 100 range though. Hell, he is like 86th in Win Shares any way.

tredigs
10-28-2014, 02:35 AM
Those are easy stats to pull value from.

And I think Manu was a very efficient player, and he excelled in the very specific role he was casted in.

I would say he is more in the top 100 range though. Hell, he is like 86th in Win Shares any way.
Right, but he waited until he was 25 to come over to the NBA, that's going to lower his cumulative stats significantly. That would be year 7 for a Lebron.

I'd agree with the top 100 range (actually I'd have him as high as top 75), but by the measures I've seen from you currently in assessing other players I'd say it's tough for you to argue both sides and have him out of the top 30.

Jeffy25
10-28-2014, 02:36 AM
Right, but he waited until he was 25 to come over to the NBA, that's going to lower his cumulative stats significantly. That would be year 7 for a Lebron.

I'd agree with the top 100 range, but by the measures I've seen from you currently in assessing other players I'd say it's tough for you to argue both sides and have him out of the top 30.

Why is it hard to argue him outside of the top 30?

tredigs
10-28-2014, 02:37 AM
Why is it hard to argue him outside of the top 30?

Because of the reliance you stress on PER + WS/48 in assessing other players.

Jeffy25
10-28-2014, 02:38 AM
Because of the reliance you stress on PER + WS/48 in assessing other players.

They aren't the only stats to use.



21,000 minutes, well outside of the top 250

Which is why he is more a top 100 player.

It's one thing to be efficient, it's another to be efficient and have longevity.

tredigs
10-28-2014, 02:41 AM
They aren't the only stats to use.



21,000 minutes, well outside of the top 250

Which is why he is more a top 100 player.

It's one thing to be efficient, it's another to be efficient and have longevity.

I suppose if you're arguing the totality of ones legacy, sure. That's not what I'm getting at though. Can I assume that you would have him in the top 30 range as a prime talent?

Jeffy25
10-28-2014, 02:43 AM
I suppose if you're arguing the totality of ones legacy, sure. But can I assume that you would have him in the top 30 range as a prime talent?

Probably more of a top 50-75 in terms of prime.

That's where PER and WS/48 would place his prime anyway.

tredigs
10-28-2014, 02:46 AM
Here's the long and short of my argument because I'm tired and need to crash soon. Basketball is a SUPREMELY contextually based sports where #'s alone simply cannot tell the story. Especially PER and WS/48. We're itching closer to being able to get a great idea with #'s alone, but they are not indicated in these stats you're using (seemingly as the crux of your arguments).

tredigs
10-28-2014, 02:47 AM
Probably more of a top 50-75 in terms of prime.

That's where PER and WS/48 would place his prime anyway.

PER of 23 and WS/48 of .226 for an 8 year stretch? I doubt you can find 8 years of superior #'s to those from ~70+ NBA players.

Jeffy25
10-28-2014, 02:54 AM
Here's the long and short of my argument because I'm tired and need to crash soon. Basketball is a SUPREMELY contextually based sports where #'s alone simply cannot tell the story. Especially PER and WS/48. We're itching closer to being able to get a great idea with #'s alone, but they are not indicated in these stats you're using (seemingly as the crux of your arguments).

Because basketball is a sport where defense and offense run together and flow together, and you are reliant on team mates for much of your values. The only core things we really know and can track are efficiency numbers and values placed on things like shooting, turnovers, mistakes made etc.

We don't see the values of things like a good screen, a player who is used minimally, but very well (like Manu) or that proper box out that results in a rebound for a team mate, but not yourself.

I know there is a plethora of information that we don't have contained statistically yet (though I'm sure we'll get better at it).

But in the whole of it all, these are good snap-shot measurements which help to better identify value and things like 'best since Jordan' arguments, because they help us to better compare players across eras. It's a ton better than basing things off our memories, our favorites, our biases, or whatever preconceived notions we have already decided.

But I am well aware they have their flaws, and that they miss out on huge aspects of the game. But in terms of what we have today, they are a good start. And the best we have. But they also don't complete the conversations either. They help further the discussion in one of logic and reason, rather than blind homers just spewing whatever crap they feel fits their narrative best.

Jeffy25
10-28-2014, 02:56 AM
PER of 23 and WS/48 of .226 for an 8 year stretch? I doubt you can find 8 years of superior #'s to those from ~70+ NBA players.

And 16,000 minutes.

Might be difficult to find that sort of a stretch repeated very often.

There are at least 40 of them, but 70 is probably a reach.

IKnowHoops
10-28-2014, 03:35 AM
PER of 23 and WS/48 of .226 for an 8 year stretch? I doubt you can find 8 years of superior #'s to those from ~70+ NBA players.

1.Wilt
2.Mike
3.Bron
4.Drob
5.Shaq
6.Wade
7.Tracy
8.Paul
9.Kareem
10.Durant
11.Connie
12.Barkley
13.Wade
14.Malone
15.Mikan
16.Dr. J
17.Baylor
18.KG
19.Pettit
20.Spencer Haywood
21.Kobe
22.Bird
23.Oscar
24.Amare
25.Duncan
26.Magic
27.Love
28.Moses
29.Johnston
30.Gilmore
31.Brand
32.Anthony Davis
33.Yao
34.Bellamy
35.Cousins
36.Dream
37.Iverson
38.Ewing
39.Mcado
40.Mourning
41.Red Robbins
42.Grant Hill
43.Paul Arizan
44.Dolph
45.Dwight Howard
46.John Drew
47.Terrell Brandon
48.Zelmo Beaty
49.Bernad King
50.Tiny Archibauld
51.George Mcginnis
52.Bosh
53.Vince Carter
54.Issel
55.West
56.Bellamy
57.Barry
58.Walton
59.Lanier
60.Sabonis
61.Brook Lopez
62.Cunningham
63.Jimmy Jones
64.Webber
65.Dantley
66.Wilkins
67.Penny Hardaway
68.Alonzo Mourning
69.Carmelo
70.Mcauley

71.Manu

There are 70 players who's best PER year is better than Manu's best. I think you could make a case for him being between the 60-80 range of best NBA players ever. In his prime he was probably the 3rd best SG in the league behind Tmac and Kobe. I know PER is not the end all be all even though it seems like I portray that a lot. But I do think it will show who was the most productive and efficient from season to season. I think PER does a good job with Manu and his place among the best.

YesMcCann
10-28-2014, 03:36 AM
If I get him in his prime 3 years and my object is to win one ring, Shaq no doubt.

If I want my team in the playoffs 8 years in a row, I'll take LeBron.

IKnowHoops
10-28-2014, 03:42 AM
If I get him in his prime 3 years and my object is to win one ring, Shaq no doubt.

If I want my team in the playoffs 8 years in a row, I'll take LeBron.

Agree with this.

YesMcCann
10-28-2014, 03:44 AM
Because basketball is a sport where defense and offense run together and flow together, and you are reliant on team mates for much of your values. The only core things we really know and can track are efficiency numbers and values placed on things like shooting, turnovers, mistakes made etc.

We don't see the values of things like a good screen, a player who is used minimally, but very well (like Manu) or that proper box out that results in a rebound for a team mate, but not yourself.

I know there is a plethora of information that we don't have contained statistically yet (though I'm sure we'll get better at it).

But in the whole of it all, these are good snap-shot measurements which help to better identify value and things like 'best since Jordan' arguments, because they help us to better compare players across eras. It's a ton better than basing things off our memories, our favorites, our biases, or whatever preconceived notions we have already decided.

But I am well aware they have their flaws, and that they miss out on huge aspects of the game. But in terms of what we have today, they are a good start. And the best we have. But they also don't complete the conversations either. They help further the discussion in one of logic and reason, rather than blind homers just spewing whatever crap they feel fits their narrative best.

I really don't think the stats are able to cover enough accurately in this sport. Just doesn't make sense.

IKnowHoops
10-28-2014, 04:10 AM
I really don't think the stats are able to cover enough accurately in this sport. Just doesn't make sense.

No stat can can be 100% right, but take PER. In the top 5 you have
Wilt
Mike
Lebron
Drob
Shaq

You could easily make a case that those five players have had better single seasons than any other players in history.

Now look at Winshares top 5

Kareem
Mike
Wilt
Lebron
Drob

You can easily make a case that those 5 have had better seasons than any other player in history.

Now when you cross reference the two you can get an even better picture. Then you find a few more statistical measures that fare very well with your eye test, and then cross reference them all and I believe you can get a very good picture of who the best players are.

jerellh528
10-28-2014, 04:58 AM
No stat can can be 100% right, but take PER. In the top 5 you have
Wilt
Mike
Lebron
Drob
Shaq

You could easily make a case that those five players have had better single seasons than any other players in history.

Now look at Winshares top 5

Kareem
Mike
Wilt
Lebron
Drob

You can easily make a case that those 5 have had better seasons than any other player in history.

Now when you cross reference the two you can get an even better picture. Then you find a few more statistical measures that fare very well with your eye test, and then cross reference them all and I believe you can get a very good picture of who the best players are.

Ok, now factor in rule changes, teammates, eras, opponents, schedule, minutes, defense, etc and you can easily see where stats can be misleading. There's too many variables in any sport, not just basketball, to just look at a stat and say player a is better than player b because a man named John created a forumla and based on that player a gets a 30 using the forumla and player b gets a 26. Stats are useful if you want to know if a player can put up quantifiable production on the court in a given amount of minutes. That's about as deep as it goes. It's wierd because your favorite player ever besides your man crush Lebron is iverson, and stats hate iverson, yet you constantly try to prove how great he was. Obviously you know there's more to it than just stats but only when it's convincing for your argument.

IKnowHoops
10-28-2014, 06:28 AM
Ok, now factor in rule changes, teammates, eras, opponents, schedule, minutes, defense, etc and you can easily see where stats can be misleading. There's too many variables in any sport, not just basketball, to just look at a stat and say player a is better than player b because a man named John created a forumla and based on that player a gets a 30 using the forumla and player b gets a 26. Stats are useful if you want to know if a player can put up quantifiable production on the court in a given amount of minutes. That's about as deep as it goes. It's wierd because your favorite player ever besides your man crush Lebron is iverson, and stats hate iverson, yet you constantly try to prove how great he was. Obviously you know there's more to it than just stats but only when it's convincing for your argument.

Well if that were true, then it would tell you that I'm not all about stats...but Lebron is my second favorite player ever. My favorite player ever is David Robinson. And he fares well from the stats. The thing is, I thought David and Bron were both in the top 10 players ever before I ever saw PER or Winshares.

Those two stats just confirmed my eye test. Not that they are top 10 players, but that they put up top ten numbers. They had very similar careers too and I don't think thats an accident why I was drawn to both players. They both carried teams on there backs that simply were not good enough to win. They did everything on the court for there teams leading in 4 and 5 different statistical categories. They were both hated on for not being able to win the ring. To me its very obvious when a player doesn't have enough help while simultaneously he's doing more than any player in the league. When that happens and he still gets crapped on for not winning it really pisses me off for some reason.

You got guys like Bird, and Magic who are awesome players, that are surrounded by other awesome players that win because of it. Then you have guys like Lebron, and Drob who out perform and outproduce these guys, but don't have the talent around them, and subsequently can't win a ring and they don't get the respect even though its clear to me, they are more of a force on the court.

Then a guy like Lebron goes and gets a talented team thats not even on par with the Laker talent or the celtic talent and then everyone says he needs a super team to win. But then those same guys slurp Magic and Bird who were born into the super team.

To me there is just no logic behind that.

There is no doubt I love players that wow me. Lebron wowed me. Drob wowed me. Both were doing things that no other players could do. Ive seen david block shots that no one else in the league could go got to. He was so fast and athletic for a man his size. The way he would spin off guys to catch oops was awesome to watch.

Lebron...there just has never been a player like Lebron. His ability is unfair.

So anyway 1.Drob 2.Lebron 3. Tim Hardaway 4. Duncan and then everyone else.

As far as AI goes, yeah I like AI. He's another athletic freak that I feel is underrated. How many guys have put up 31/8 or 33/7. Now the stats have helped me understand how inefficient he was. It doesn't take away from his talent or athletic ability but it does put into perspective where he ranks as a basketball player. At the end of the day, its about how you contribute to winning, and the more shots you miss, the more of a detriment you are to your team.

Now the thing is, he was on a team in philly that had no scorers. No one to take any scoring load off him whatsoever. When he was on Denver at the age of 32 with melo, he shot the ball at a 46% rate for 26pts a game. I truly believe that if Iverson would of had a guy like Shaq or Duncan, he would of been an efficient scorer that could average 30pts a game in the two man game, while also dishing out 10 assists. And like I said, from a skills perspective, I don't think any player in the history of the NBA is more skilled than Allen Iverson.

All that being said, He's not in my top 20. I have Kobe, Tmac, Wade ahead of him. But if he were 6,7" with those skills, and quickness and athletic ability, he would be in my top 5 no doubt, and he probably would of average 40 points a game with over a 46% field goal shot. But I take everything into account. He was 5'11", and that hurts him a lot.

Ive done this before but her are my top 10.

The first 3 are very close and I'd take anyone to start my team and be happy.
1.Mike
2.Bron
3.Shaq
The next two were probably the two most era dominant players in history and can be in any order
4.Wilt
5.Kareem
The next three again are very close and are almost interchangeable as well and can be put in any order.
6. Drob
7. Dream
8. Duncan
And the last two round out my top ten and are also very hard for me to decide who Id rather have.
9.KG
10. Durant
Then after that I would go with these three wings who are pretty interchangeable
11.Tmac
12.Wade
13.Kobe
Then here is where I would put a big group who I think could all be mixed in order
14.Magic/Oscar
15.Bird
16.K.Malone
17.Barkley
18.M.Malone
19.CP3
20.Dirk
21.Dr. J/Baylor
Then my next tier would be
22.Iverson
23.Ewing
24.Pippen
Then my next tier in any order would be
25.Payton
26.Isaiah
27.Stockton
28.Nash

Honorable mentions that I really like who I think could of jumped into this conversation if they would of done something a little different are Amare, Vince,Dominique, Tim Hardaway, Penny Hardaway, Grant Hill. I actually like all these guys better than my bottom 3 guys. I think they had it in them to be better, but either injury or mentality just prevented it from happening.

Of guys playing now I think Blake, and Anthony Davis may have what it takes to get into this list. Maybe Melo but I just don't like his black hole mentality but I like him at a talent.

This list represents the best at there best. Not the best careers. If I'm trying to win a ring, this is the order I want guys in there prime. Dang this got long winded. May have to turn it into a thread. I'll call it "name your top 25-30 players roughly".

Jamiecballer
10-28-2014, 08:08 AM
This has now been many lengthy debates.
The point still stands and you can't have a debate without at least 2 people right?

Jamiecballer
10-28-2014, 08:18 AM
This should be good.



Many people seem to be under the misconception that Lebron was the only one to bring his "A-Game" while it was his teammates who let him down. This breakdown puts that theory to the test and proves why people are totally mislead by flashy paper stats that they really know nothing about...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y02r-Dz5cMw

It appears that Lebron had a great series individually, but under close examination, a few things stood out...

Of the 141 total points Lebron scored in the Finals, 51 of them were scored in blowout situations where the Spurs were up by 15 or more points. During these situations, Lebron averaged a healthy 1.1 points per minute. When the games were closer, he only averaged 0.65 points per minute.

Also, Lebron had just about the same amount of turnovers as he did assists. 20 assists total for the Finals and 19 total turnovers for the finals.

Additionally, Lebron had just about the worst +/- on his team throughout the series... Not just the cramps game.

During the regular season and Eastern Conference playoffs, Lebron was in the 94th and 97th percentile in post up production. In the finals, he only posted up only 11% of the time compared to the 13.9% and 14% he did in the regular season and Eastern Conference playoffs which resulted in him averaging a lowly 1.1 Points Per Post-Up in the finals.

This just goes to show that all the stuff I have been telling you all about over the years is all very true and is agreed upon by people who know how to truly breakdown the game of basketball. Lebron just can't generate enough points against elite teams to be effective. I have told you all time and time again that he pads his stats in both garbage time and against inferior competition and it seems there are other experts who agree with this as well. What good does it do you to be the leader in points, rebounds, and assists when your team is bottom tier in all three. What good does it do you to stuff your Stat Sheet at the expense of your teammates. I'll tell you what good it does you, you get results like you did in this years finals.... The mirage of great individual stats to the layman eye at first glance, while your team receives the worst beat down in finals history.



Really. Can you provide us an example of this. I'm just not buying it. Also, isn't it on the leader of the team to bring out the best in his teammates. Wouldn't someone who couldn't inspire their teammates either through on or off the court be considered a failure alone on that account. Don't you factor in leadership into the equation, or do you simply read box scores and make an assessment solely based on that alone... NM, dumb question.



What about when Lebron played poorly through six of the seven games in the 2013 finals and Ray Allen and Chris Bosh had to bail him out in game six and Wade had to bail him out in game four. Lebron played just mediocre throughout and still won a ring. In 2011, Bosh and Wade played like champions and Lebron choked the whole thing up and cost his team a ring. The team played great and Lebron still lost. Go look at some of Jordan's championships and see who had more help and how much Jordan truly carried his team. Your not going to tell me that out of all Jordan's six rings that his teammates were stellar. Also, once again, having nearly as many assists and turnovers is not considered playing great.



His team was not considered vegas favorites going into that series. A very poor example indeed. The Bulls never had a chance in that series and everyone knew it. Therefore Jordan had a green light to do basically whatever he wanted so that The Bulls could perhaps pull off a miracle. The Heat were the favorites going into the finals. The blame always starts at the top and works it's way down. If you want to credit Lebron for winning, you also must give him the blame when losing.



To the novice eye this might be true... To those who know how to do much more than recite numbers from basketball reference there is much more to it.

Please watch this video again and then we can further debate this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y02r-Dz5cMw



What about it is not believable.
Lebron is unselfish to a fault. When you defer early and your team mates come out cold you find yourself in a hole. So everyone looks to him to pull them back. Sometimes against a great team you just can't do it.

Pretty logical explanation of you ask me.

Slug3
10-28-2014, 09:33 AM
Lebron is unselfish to a fault. When you defer early and your team mates come out cold you find yourself in a hole. So everyone looks to him to pull them back. Sometimes against a great team you just can't do it.

Pretty logical explanation of you ask me.

Miami's first year together with the 3, once the 4th quarter hit in those finals Lebron wanted nothing to do with the ball. He just stood in the corner and pretty much let Wade do all the work. He was I guess still scared or didn't develop into a winner yet. He averaged like 15 points a game those finals. As much as people want to complain he had no help the last finals, the first one he didn't do anything for Miami.

Jeffy25
10-28-2014, 12:40 PM
Miami's first year together with the 3, once the 4th quarter hit in those finals Lebron wanted nothing to do with the ball. He just stood in the corner and pretty much let Wade do all the work. He was I guess still scared or didn't develop into a winner yet. He averaged like 15 points a game those finals. As much as people want to complain he had no help the last finals, the first one he didn't do anything for Miami.

Fwiw,

17.8 ppg, 7.2 trb, 6.8 apg, 1.7 spg, 0.5 bpg, 4.0 turnovers, 13.7 average game score

his usage rate was 22.9%, which is way too low for him.

Wade was def better in those Finals.

But Lebron was clearly better in the next three Finals

IKnowHoops
10-28-2014, 01:08 PM
Miami's first year together with the 3, once the 4th quarter hit in those finals Lebron wanted nothing to do with the ball. He just stood in the corner and pretty much let Wade do all the work. He was I guess still scared or didn't develop into a winner yet. He averaged like 15 points a game those finals. As much as people want to complain he had no help the last finals, the first one he didn't do anything for Miami.

No, I totally agree with you here. It still to me is the most baffling thing I have ever seen in sports history. I still don't know what to make of that. Its times like that where I become a conspiracy theorist. But Im not going to go there. All I can say is I don't give him a pass for this. But I don't compare players by there worst, I go by there best. Whatever Bron was going through during that series, I really never saw that before or again. I still have no idea what he was thinking, but I really don't think he was just scared.

alexander_37
10-28-2014, 01:46 PM
Well if that were true, then it would tell you that I'm not all about stats...but Lebron is my second favorite player ever. My favorite player ever is David Robinson. And he fares well from the stats. The thing is, I thought David and Bron were both in the top 10 players ever before I ever saw PER or Winshares.

Those two stats just confirmed my eye test. Not that they are top 10 players, but that they put up top ten numbers. They had very similar careers too and I don't think thats an accident why I was drawn to both players. They both carried teams on there backs that simply were not good enough to win. They did everything on the court for there teams leading in 4 and 5 different statistical categories. They were both hated on for not being able to win the ring. To me its very obvious when a player doesn't have enough help while simultaneously he's doing more than any player in the league. When that happens and he still gets crapped on for not winning it really pisses me off for some reason.

You got guys like Bird, and Magic who are awesome players, that are surrounded by other awesome players that win because of it. Then you have guys like Lebron, and Drob who out perform and outproduce these guys, but don't have the talent around them, and subsequently can't win a ring and they don't get the respect even though its clear to me, they are more of a force on the court.

Then a guy like Lebron goes and gets a talented team thats not even on par with the Laker talent or the celtic talent and then everyone says he needs a super team to win. But then those same guys slurp Magic and Bird who were born into the super team.

To me there is just no logic behind that.

There is no doubt I love players that wow me. Lebron wowed me. Drob wowed me. Both were doing things that no other players could do. Ive seen david block shots that no one else in the league could go got to. He was so fast and athletic for a man his size. The way he would spin off guys to catch oops was awesome to watch.

Lebron...there just has never been a player like Lebron. His ability is unfair.

So anyway 1.Drob 2.Lebron 3. Tim Hardaway 4. Duncan and then everyone else.

As far as AI goes, yeah I like AI. He's another athletic freak that I feel is underrated. How many guys have put up 31/8 or 33/7. Now the stats have helped me understand how inefficient he was. It doesn't take away from his talent or athletic ability but it does put into perspective where he ranks as a basketball player. At the end of the day, its about how you contribute to winning, and the more shots you miss, the more of a detriment you are to your team.

Now the thing is, he was on a team in philly that had no scorers. No one to take any scoring load off him whatsoever. When he was on Denver at the age of 32 with melo, he shot the ball at a 46% rate for 26pts a game. I truly believe that if Iverson would of had a guy like Shaq or Duncan, he would of been an efficient scorer that could average 30pts a game in the two man game, while also dishing out 10 assists. And like I said, from a skills perspective, I don't think any player in the history of the NBA is more skilled than Allen Iverson.

All that being said, He's not in my top 20. I have Kobe, Tmac, Wade ahead of him. But if he were 6,7" with those skills, and quickness and athletic ability, he would be in my top 5 no doubt, and he probably would of average 40 points a game with over a 46% field goal shot. But I take everything into account. He was 5'11", and that hurts him a lot.

Ive done this before but her are my top 10.

The first 3 are very close and I'd take anyone to start my team and be happy.
1.Mike
2.Bron
3.Shaq
The next two were probably the two most era dominant players in history and can be in any order
4.Wilt
5.Kareem
The next three again are very close and are almost interchangeable as well and can be put in any order.
6. Drob
7. Dream
8. Duncan
And the last two round out my top ten and are also very hard for me to decide who Id rather have.
9.KG
10. Durant
Then after that I would go with these three wings who are pretty interchangeable
11.Tmac
12.Wade
13.Kobe
Then here is where I would put a big group who I think could all be mixed in order
14.Magic/Oscar
15.Bird
16.K.Malone
17.Barkley
18.M.Malone
19.CP3
20.Dirk
21.Dr. J/Baylor
Then my next tier would be
22.Iverson
23.Ewing
24.Pippen
Then my next tier in any order would be
25.Payton
26.Isaiah
27.Stockton
28.Nash

Honorable mentions that I really like who I think could of jumped into this conversation if they would of done something a little different are Amare, Vince,Dominique, Tim Hardaway, Penny Hardaway, Grant Hill. I actually like all these guys better than my bottom 3 guys. I think they had it in them to be better, but either injury or mentality just prevented it from happening.

Of guys playing now I think Blake, and Anthony Davis may have what it takes to get into this list. Maybe Melo but I just don't like his black hole mentality but I like him at a talent.

This list represents the best at there best. Not the best careers. If I'm trying to win a ring, this is the order I want guys in there prime. Dang this got long winded. May have to turn it into a thread. I'll call it "name your top 25-30 players roughly".

It would be physically impossible for Iverson to be that quick at 6'7 his center of gravity would be WAY different.

Slug3
10-28-2014, 01:59 PM
No, I totally agree with you here. It still to me is the most baffling thing I have ever seen in sports history. I still don't know what to make of that. Its times like that where I become a conspiracy theorist. But Im not going to go there. All I can say is I don't give him a pass for this. But I don't compare players by there worst, I go by there best. Whatever Bron was going through during that series, I really never saw that before or again. I still have no idea what he was thinking, but I really don't think he was just scared.

Some people crumble under pressure and some step up. Seemed like at that time Lebron maybe thought if he did nothing he wouldn't crumble and wouldn't get the "cant win big games" label. But doing nothing still got him that. Then I think the next year because of whatever the reasons are, he figured it all out.

Jamiecballer
10-28-2014, 02:39 PM
Miami's first year together with the 3, once the 4th quarter hit in those finals Lebron wanted nothing to do with the ball. He just stood in the corner and pretty much let Wade do all the work. He was I guess still scared or didn't develop into a winner yet. He averaged like 15 points a game those finals. As much as people want to complain he had no help the last finals, the first one he didn't do anything for Miami.

my comment really was in response to Amoser's bit about last years finals

YesMcCann
10-28-2014, 02:54 PM
No stat can can be 100% right, but take PER. In the top 5 you have
Wilt
Mike
Lebron
Drob
Shaq

You could easily make a case that those five players have had better single seasons than any other players in history.

Now look at Winshares top 5

Kareem
Mike
Wilt
Lebron
Drob

You can easily make a case that those 5 have had better seasons than any other player in history.

Now when you cross reference the two you can get an even better picture. Then you find a few more statistical measures that fare very well with your eye test, and then cross reference them all and I believe you can get a very good picture of who the best players are.

Appreciate the post, but my reason isn't buying it. Too many variables left untouched by those stats. It's fun to look at, though.

Heatcheck
10-28-2014, 03:05 PM
Miami's first year together with the 3, once the 4th quarter hit in those finals Lebron wanted nothing to do with the ball. He just stood in the corner and pretty much let Wade do all the work. He was I guess still scared or didn't develop into a winner yet. He averaged like 15 points a game those finals. As much as people want to complain he had no help the last finals, the first one he didn't do anything for Miami.
that's what happens when the other team can dedicate both Shawn Marion and Tyson Chandler to D-ing up one player. not to say he didn't have some crap moments. but its hard to become involved when you have, statistically, the worst PG in Finals history, who cant guard his shadow, and a Center who cant jump over a credit card.

numba1CHANGsta
10-28-2014, 03:11 PM
None of your guy's opinion matters, who's opinion matters is MJ himself and he will tell you straight up that Kobe has been the best overall player since him. LeBron shouldn't even be in this convo, no way he wins anything if he played with the East teams MJ had to play against, the East has been **** since MJ retired, LeBron just breezing by the conference every season. LeBron wouldn't survive in the West, and you all know it.

IKnowHoops
10-28-2014, 03:21 PM
Some people crumble under pressure and some step up. Seemed like at that time Lebron maybe thought if he did nothing he wouldn't crumble and wouldn't get the "cant win big games" label. But doing nothing still got him that. Then I think the next year because of whatever the reasons are, he figured it all out.

You may be right, but my mind tends to go more to the conspiracy side of things. He's had bright lights all his life and he didn't even try during those finals. But you may be right, but nothing would surprise me to what the answer would be.

Jamiecballer
10-28-2014, 03:23 PM
None of your guy's opinion matters, who's opinion matters is MJ himself and he will tell you straight up that Kobe has been the best overall player since him. LeBron shouldn't even be in this convo, no way he wins anything if he played with the East teams MJ had to play against, the East has been **** since MJ retired, LeBron just breezing by the conference every season. LeBron wouldn't survive in the West, and you all know it.

LOL.

MJ is flattered by the imitation that's all that is.

Slug3
10-28-2014, 03:23 PM
that's what happens when the other team can dedicate both Shawn Marion and Tyson Chandler to D-ing up one player. not to say he didn't have some crap moments. but its hard to become involved when you have, statistically, the worst PG in Finals history, who cant guard his shadow, and a Center who cant jump over a credit card.

I am not going to downplay Marions role, but Lebron literally every 4th quarter just stood in the corner and let Wade do everything. Its one thing to be shut down and another thing to not even try.

YesMcCann
10-28-2014, 03:23 PM
None of your guy's opinion matters, who's opinion matters is MJ himself and he will tell you straight up that Kobe has been the best overall player since him. LeBron shouldn't even be in this convo, no way he wins anything if he played with the East teams MJ had to play against, the East has been **** since MJ retired, LeBron just breezing by the conference every season. LeBron wouldn't survive in the West, and you all know it.

First of all, how do you know he'd say that?

Also, to say LeBron hasn't been good enough to be in this conversation is completely absurd, and you make everyone who agrees with you look dumber by saying it.

YesMcCann
10-28-2014, 03:26 PM
The only legitimate knock on LeBron I've ever seen justified was his hilariously awful performance in the finals against the Mavs. But that seemed totally psychological. I can forgive a man for breaking down like that. As he long as he bounces back, which he has thunderously.

L8kers4life
10-28-2014, 03:31 PM
Well if that were true, then it would tell you that I'm not all about stats...but Lebron is my second favorite player ever. My favorite player ever is David Robinson. And he fares well from the stats. The thing is, I thought David and Bron were both in the top 10 players ever before I ever saw PER or Winshares.

Those two stats just confirmed my eye test. Not that they are top 10 players, but that they put up top ten numbers. They had very similar careers too and I don't think thats an accident why I was drawn to both players. They both carried teams on there backs that simply were not good enough to win. They did everything on the court for there teams leading in 4 and 5 different statistical categories. They were both hated on for not being able to win the ring. To me its very obvious when a player doesn't have enough help while simultaneously he's doing more than any player in the league. When that happens and he still gets crapped on for not winning it really pisses me off for some reason.

You got guys like Bird, and Magic who are awesome players, that are surrounded by other awesome players that win because of it. Then you have guys like Lebron, and Drob who out perform and outproduce these guys, but don't have the talent around them, and subsequently can't win a ring and they don't get the respect even though its clear to me, they are more of a force on the court.

Then a guy like Lebron goes and gets a talented team thats not even on par with the Laker talent or the celtic talent and then everyone says he needs a super team to win. But then those same guys slurp Magic and Bird who were born into the super team.

To me there is just no logic behind that.

There is no doubt I love players that wow me. Lebron wowed me. Drob wowed me. Both were doing things that no other players could do. Ive seen david block shots that no one else in the league could go got to. He was so fast and athletic for a man his size. The way he would spin off guys to catch oops was awesome to watch.

Lebron...there just has never been a player like Lebron. His ability is unfair.

So anyway 1.Drob 2.Lebron 3. Tim Hardaway 4. Duncan and then everyone else.

As far as AI goes, yeah I like AI. He's another athletic freak that I feel is underrated. How many guys have put up 31/8 or 33/7. Now the stats have helped me understand how inefficient he was. It doesn't take away from his talent or athletic ability but it does put into perspective where he ranks as a basketball player. At the end of the day, its about how you contribute to winning, and the more shots you miss, the more of a detriment you are to your team.

Now the thing is, he was on a team in philly that had no scorers. No one to take any scoring load off him whatsoever. When he was on Denver at the age of 32 with melo, he shot the ball at a 46% rate for 26pts a game. I truly believe that if Iverson would of had a guy like Shaq or Duncan, he would of been an efficient scorer that could average 30pts a game in the two man game, while also dishing out 10 assists. And like I said, from a skills perspective, I don't think any player in the history of the NBA is more skilled than Allen Iverson.

All that being said, He's not in my top 20. I have Kobe, Tmac, Wade ahead of him. But if he were 6,7" with those skills, and quickness and athletic ability, he would be in my top 5 no doubt, and he probably would of average 40 points a game with over a 46% field goal shot. But I take everything into account. He was 5'11", and that hurts him a lot.

Ive done this before but her are my top 10.

The first 3 are very close and I'd take anyone to start my team and be happy.
1.Mike
2.Bron
3.Shaq
The next two were probably the two most era dominant players in history and can be in any order
4.Wilt
5.Kareem
The next three again are very close and are almost interchangeable as well and can be put in any order.
6. Drob
7. Dream
8. Duncan
And the last two round out my top ten and are also very hard for me to decide who Id rather have.
9.KG
10. Durant
Then after that I would go with these three wings who are pretty interchangeable
11.Tmac
12.Wade
13.Kobe
Then here is where I would put a big group who I think could all be mixed in order
14.Magic/Oscar
15.Bird
16.K.Malone
17.Barkley
18.M.Malone
19.CP3
20.Dirk
21.Dr. J/Baylor
Then my next tier would be
22.Iverson
23.Ewing
24.Pippen
Then my next tier in any order would be
25.Payton
26.Isaiah
27.Stockton
28.Nash

Honorable mentions that I really like who I think could of jumped into this conversation if they would of done something a little different are Amare, Vince,Dominique, Tim Hardaway, Penny Hardaway, Grant Hill. I actually like all these guys better than my bottom 3 guys. I think they had it in them to be better, but either injury or mentality just prevented it from happening.

Of guys playing now I think Blake, and Anthony Davis may have what it takes to get into this list. Maybe Melo but I just don't like his black hole mentality but I like him at a talent.

This list represents the best at there best. Not the best careers. If I'm trying to win a ring, this is the order I want guys in there prime. Dang this got long winded. May have to turn it into a thread. I'll call it "name your top 25-30 players roughly".

I thouht this post was well thought out, but how can anyone take you serious, you ve got Tmac and Wade ahead of Kobe, Magic and Bird, that is insulting. It is also hard to take anything you say serious when you make points such as " Then a guy like Lebron goes and gets a talented team thats not even on par with the Laker talent or the celtic talent and then everyone says he needs a super team to win. But then those same guys slurp Magic and Bird who were born into the super team" this would be a valid point except, the Lakers and Celtics built those teams, Lebron chose the team that would give him the best chance to win a title, went 2-2 in the finals with Miami, and then made up some bull about coming home, when everyone knows he went to Cleveland because he knew they were getting Love and already had Irving.

It's great you have a opinion, but your so biased with anything Lebron it's silly. And the fact you put Mcgrady over Kobe, Magic and Bird, how can anyone possibly take you seriously? Tmac has never been out of the first round, and he has had plenty of talent around him.

Jamiecballer
10-28-2014, 03:45 PM
I thouht this post was well thought out, but how can anyone take you serious, you ve got Tmac and Wade ahead of Kobe, Magic and Bird, that is insulting. It is also hard to take anything you say serious when you make points such as " Then a guy like Lebron goes and gets a talented team thats not even on par with the Laker talent or the celtic talent and then everyone says he needs a super team to win. But then those same guys slurp Magic and Bird who were born into the super team" this would be a valid point except, the Lakers and Celtics built those teams, Lebron chose the team that would give him the best chance to win a title, went 2-2 in the finals with Miami, and then made up some bull about coming home, when everyone knows he went to Cleveland because he knew they were getting Love and already had Irving.

It's great you have a opinion, but your so biased with anything Lebron it's silly. And the fact you put Mcgrady over Kobe, Magic and Bird, how can anyone possibly take you seriously? Tmac has never been out of the first round, and he has had plenty of talent around him.

the guy already said he considers peak to be the most important part of his equation (i think). if that's your criteria then i think his list is a reasonable one for the most part.

although even under that criteria i still think there has to be room higher up for Bird and Magic.

numba1CHANGsta
10-28-2014, 03:51 PM
First of all, how do you know he'd say that?

Also, to say LeBron hasn't been good enough to be in this conversation is completely absurd, and you make everyone who agrees with you look dumber by saying it.

get off his nutz before they burst

Bruno
10-28-2014, 03:57 PM
Kobe and Duncan have had the best NBA careers since Jordans retirement in 1998.

5ass
10-28-2014, 03:58 PM
None of your guy's opinion matters, who's opinion matters is MJ himself and he will tell you straight up that Kobe has been the best overall player since him. LeBron shouldn't even be in this convo, no way he wins anything if he played with the East teams MJ had to play against, the East has been **** since MJ retired, LeBron just breezing by the conference every season. LeBron wouldn't survive in the West, and you all know it.

Ignorant post. You really should stop posting until you get a clue.

ghettosean
10-28-2014, 04:01 PM
Because basketball is a sport where defense and offense run together and flow together, and you are reliant on team mates for much of your values. The only core things we really know and can track are efficiency numbers and values placed on things like shooting, turnovers, mistakes made etc.

We don't see the values of things like a good screen, a player who is used minimally, but very well (like Manu) or that proper box out that results in a rebound for a team mate, but not yourself.

I know there is a plethora of information that we don't have contained statistically yet (though I'm sure we'll get better at it).

But in the whole of it all, these are good snap-shot measurements which help to better identify value and things like 'best since Jordan' arguments, because they help us to better compare players across eras. It's a ton better than basing things off our memories, our favorites, our biases, or whatever preconceived notions we have already decided.

But I am well aware they have their flaws, and that they miss out on huge aspects of the game. But in terms of what we have today, they are a good start. And the best we have. But they also don't complete the conversations either. They help further the discussion in one of logic and reason, rather than blind homers just spewing whatever crap they feel fits their narrative best.

I really hate the bolded statment and it's something that really bothers me among stat geeks... Everyone is so reliant on numbers but they don't tell the entire story. If someone scores more than KAJ and becomes the GOAT scorer ever people will gravitate towards him and say this guy is the greatest of all time but people won't take into account of the rules of that era and if they affected a player getting these stats or to that status. Numbers cannot tell you things like this and it's something that cannot be relied upon completely when comparing players from era to era. I'm really sick of people comparing for example Lebron to Jordan because they were in completely different leagues all together as far as how the game is played today and in all honesty if he played in Jordans era I think his stats and legacy would take a huge hit to what they are today.

I think numbers would be a great comparison if people kept these kind of variables in mind when doing number comparisons from one era to the next unfortunately that doesn't happen and you get more people saying look at his PER and WS compared to this guy from this era. Drives me bat F***ing crazy!!!

numba1CHANGsta
10-28-2014, 04:02 PM
Ignorant post. You really should stop posting until you get a clue.

you mad bro?

Heatcheck
10-28-2014, 04:03 PM
None of your guy's opinion matters, who's opinion matters is MJ himself and he will tell you straight up that Kobe has been the best overall player since him. LeBron shouldn't even be in this convo, no way he wins anything if he played with the East teams MJ had to play against, the East has been **** since MJ retired, LeBron just breezing by the conference every season. LeBron wouldn't survive in the West, and you all know it.

considering his deficient talent evaluating skills, and how well known they are, I doubt you seriously believe that this is the reason kobe is better.

ghettosean
10-28-2014, 04:55 PM
I thouht this post was well thought out, but how can anyone take you serious, you ve got Tmac and Wade ahead of Kobe, Magic and Bird, that is insulting. It is also hard to take anything you say serious when you make points such as " Then a guy like Lebron goes and gets a talented team thats not even on par with the Laker talent or the celtic talent and then everyone says he needs a super team to win. But then those same guys slurp Magic and Bird who were born into the super team" this would be a valid point except, the Lakers and Celtics built those teams, Lebron chose the team that would give him the best chance to win a title, went 2-2 in the finals with Miami, and then made up some bull about coming home, when everyone knows he went to Cleveland because he knew they were getting Love and already had Irving.

It's great you have a opinion, but your so biased with anything Lebron it's silly. And the fact you put Mcgrady over Kobe, Magic and Bird, how can anyone possibly take you seriously? Tmac has never been out of the first round, and he has had plenty of talent around him.


+1

:clap:

ghettosean
10-28-2014, 05:01 PM
the guy already said he considers peak to be the most important part of his equation (i think). if that's your criteria then i think his list is a reasonable one for the most part.

although even under that criteria i still think there has to be room higher up for Bird and Magic.

Agreed on the bolded... Magic practically averaged a triple double in his rookie year and he's 15th on that list... Really 15th.... LOL... SMH!

jericho
10-28-2014, 05:03 PM
None of your guy's opinion matters, who's opinion matters is MJ himself and he will tell you straight up that Kobe has been the best overall player since him. LeBron shouldn't even be in this convo, no way he wins anything if he played with the East teams MJ had to play against, the East has been **** since MJ retired, LeBron just breezing by the conference every season. LeBron wouldn't survive in the West, and you all know it.

Kwame brown says hi.

Jamiecballer
10-28-2014, 05:26 PM
Agreed on the bolded... Magic practically averaged a triple double in his rookie year and he's 15th on that list... Really 15th.... LOL... SMH!
Well let's keep in mind the lack of defense and availability of more rebounds when comparing those numbers against today's players.

amos1er
10-28-2014, 05:39 PM
I really hate the bolded statment and it's something that really bothers me among stat geeks... Everyone is so reliant on numbers but they don't tell the entire story. If someone scores more than KAJ and becomes the GOAT scorer ever people will gravitate towards him and say this guy is the greatest of all time but people won't take into account of the rules of that era and if they affected a player getting these stats or to that status. Numbers cannot tell you things like this and it's something that cannot be relied upon completely when comparing players from era to era. I'm really sick of people comparing for example Lebron to Jordan because they were in completely different leagues all together as far as how the game is played today and in all honesty if he played in Jordans era I think his stats and legacy would take a huge hit to what they are today.

I think numbers would be a great comparison if people kept these kind of variables in mind when doing number comparisons from one era to the next unfortunately that doesn't happen and you get more people saying look at his PER and WS compared to this guy from this era. Drives me bat F***ing crazy!!!

Great post!!! If it was all about numbers, then the best teams would be hiring John Hollinger to be their GM. The free market, much like the vegas odds, would dictate who's opinions would be the most valuable to a team's front office. That isn't happening, so I doubt that the best minds in basketball feel the same way these guys all feel and don't put all that much stock in stats.

amos1er
10-28-2014, 05:42 PM
Agreed on the bolded... Magic practically averaged a triple double in his rookie year and he's 15th on that list... Really 15th.... LOL... SMH!

Ya, David Robinson top five and Kareem and Magic not in the top five. No credibility what so ever. These guys are just too reliant on Hollinger stats and are incapable of formulating any sort of opinions past that. Absolutely ZERO objectivity.

amos1er
10-28-2014, 05:57 PM
Here is the top 30 of all-time according to PER...


1. Michael Jordan* 27.91
2. LeBron James 27.79
3. Shaquille O'Neal 26.43
4. David Robinson* 26.18
5. Wilt Chamberlain* 26.13
6. Chris Paul 25.59
7. Bob Pettit* 25.35
8. Dwyane Wade 25.29
9. Neil Johnston* 24.69
10. Charles Barkley* 24.63
11. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar* 24.58
12. Tim Duncan 24.56
13. Kevin Durant 24.53
14. Magic Johnson* 24.11
15. Karl Malone* 23.90
16. Hakeem Olajuwon* 23.59
17. Julius Erving* 23.58
18. Larry Bird* 23.50
19. Dirk Nowitzki 23.48
20. Kobe Bryant 23.36
21. Oscar Robertson* 23.17
22. Yao Ming 23.02
23. Kevin Garnett 22.92
24. Jerry West* 22.89
25. Elgin Baylor* 22.69
26. Tracy McGrady 22.13
27. Dwight Howard 22.09
28. Amar'e Stoudemire 22.03
29. Moses Malone* 22.00
30. Dolph Schayes* 21.98

Now can we see what a complete joke this stat is people. Kareem out of the top ten. Shaq and Robinson better than Wilt. West not even in the top 20. Bird not even in the top 15... Magic not even in the top ten. I don't know how people really put all that much stock into this system especially considering it doesn't factor in defense, style of play, players around you, competition, the system you play in, and your roll on the team.

amos1er
10-28-2014, 05:58 PM
Championships mean nothing, it's all about PER and WS/48.

FraziersKnicks
10-28-2014, 06:07 PM
Amos1er mad because LeBron is trashing Kobe in the poll :laugh2:

amos1er
10-28-2014, 06:12 PM
Here is WS/48 all-time...


1. Michael Jordan* .2505
2. David Robinson* .2502
3. Wilt Chamberlain* .2480
4. Chris Paul .2464
5. LeBron James .2431
6. Neil Johnston* .2413
7. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar* .2284
8. Magic Johnson* .2249
9. Charles Barkley* .2163
10. Jerry West* .2134
11. Bob Pettit* .2128
12. Tim Duncan .2109
13. Manu Ginobili .2089
14. John Stockton* .2087
15. Dirk Nowitzki .2082
16. Shaquille O'Neal .2081
17. Oscar Robertson* .2069
18. Karl Malone* .2053
19. Kevin Durant .2053
20. Larry Bird* .2032
21. Yao Ming .2001
22. Ed Macauley* .1964
23. Artis Gilmore* .1931
24. Bill Russell* .1927
25. Julius Erving* .1922
26. Dolph Schayes* .1922
27. Dwyane Wade .1921
28. Adrian Dantley* .1887
29. Sidney Moncrief .1873
30. Kevin Garnett .1849
31. Paul Arizin* .1833
32. Sam Jones* .1824
33. Harry Gallatin* .1824
34. Kobe Bryant .1822
35. Dan Issel* .1813

Once again, a complete joke... CP3 top five all-time... David Robinson the 2nd GOAT... Shaq not even top 15 all-time... Kobe not even top 30... Big O not even top 15... Tim Duncan not even top ten... Kareem not even top five... Magic not even top five... Barkley in the top ten... Larry Bird 20th GOAT... Hakeem not even in the top 40.

Once again a faulty ranking system that doesn't even factor in era, defense, style of play, players around you, competition, the system you play in, and your roll on the team. Lebron fans just preach this stuff because it makes "their guy" look good. Never mind all the other inconsistencies.

amos1er
10-28-2014, 06:14 PM
Amos1er mad because LeBron is trashing Kobe in the poll :laugh2:

I'm sure that if we had a way to enforce an 18 or older age limit on the poll he wouldn't be.

amos1er
10-28-2014, 06:19 PM
How come Hollinger never added a margin of error for PER. Was he so confident that his PER ranking system was such an exact science...

amos1er
10-28-2014, 06:23 PM
So you can't make a logical argument for Kobe over Shaq and Lebron all time, yet you continue to cling to it

BTW... I didn't rank Shaq behind Lebron. I said Lebron is probably going to catch Shaq either this year or next. Lebron is only just now entering his age 30 season. And he's well ahead of where Shaq was at this age. He won't have a problem passing him.

Lebron is going to be passing some major legends with another productive year this year:

Miller, Barkley, Kobe, Robinson, maybe Shaq and Garnett.

If he plays even 80% of his current prime self over the next 3 years, he'll cement himself in the top 5 without an issue.

Lebron has a very real shot for catching Jordan as the best player of all-time, just depends how he ages.



Fun fact:

Kobe's best season, 05-06 he had 28.0 PER and 15.3 WS (and this is his best season by a decent amount)

Lebron has had a 28.0 PER 7 out of 11 seasons and a 15.3 WS 6 out of 11 seasons (15.2 one year)

Jordan had a 28.0 PER 7 out of his 15 seasons and a 15.3 WS 10 out of his 15 seasons

Shaq had a 28.0 PER 8 out of his 18 seasons and a 15.3 WS 2 out of his 15 seasons


So, how is Kobe greater than Shaq? What is your argument specifically?

How is Kobe greater than Lebron? When his best season is weaker than 6 of Lebron's 11 seasons?

Give us an actual argument for why.

Since you such a numbers guy... Can you explain this little anomaly to me.

Kobe has had far better playoff runs against far greater competition. I spite you to find me a playoff series where Lebron has performed as good as Kobe has against teams as good as these...

-2001 Western Conference Semifinals versus Kings: 4 gms, 43.3 mpg, 35.0 ppg, 9.0 rpg, 4.3 apg, 1.25 spg, .473 fg%. Lakers win 4-0.
-2001 Western Conference Finals versus Spurs: 4 gms, 42.0 mpg, 33.3 ppg, 7.0 rpg, 7.0 apg, 1.5 spg, .514 fg%. Lakers win 4-0.
-2010 Western Conference Finals versus Suns: 6 gms, 41.7 mpg, 33.7 ppg, 7.2 rpg, 8.3 apg, .521 fg%. Lakers win 4-2.
-2009 Western Conference Finals versus Nuggets: 6 gms, 34.0 ppg, 5.7 rpg, 6.2 apg, 1.5 spg, .481 fg%. Lakers win 4-2.
-2008 Western Conference Semifinals versus Jazz: 6 gms, 41.3 mpg, 33.2 ppg, 7.0 rpg, 7.2 apg, .491 fg%. Lakers win 4-2.
-2008 Western Conference Finals versus Spurs: 5 gms, 40.4 mpg, 29.2 ppg, 5.6 rpg, 3.8 apg, 1.6 spg, .533 fg%. Lakers win 4-1

amos1er
10-28-2014, 06:27 PM
Lebron has a real shot at catching Jordan!!! LMAO!!! So he is going to win 9 more scoring titles, a DPOY, 4 more rings and finals MVP's on a team without two hall of fame running mates in a weak eastern conference like Jordan never had the ease of playing in, 3 steals titles, move up on his statistical rankings you all hold so dear during his declining years. Come on now. Not buying this argument.

amos1er
10-28-2014, 06:31 PM
Can you see a baseball fan saying something as ignorant as that?

Ted Williams and Barry Bonds are probably the two best hitters of all time (along with Ruth)

Neither ever won a ring.


You are damn right rings don't count, because if they do, you better fly Horry and Russell way up all-time, ahead of Kobe.

And should Kobe get credit for being the second best player for three of his rings? Honestly? Should he?


This isn't tennis, or golf, or bowling. This isn't a one-on-one sport. Who you have with you on the court completely affects your ability to compete.

The best team wins rings. The best player doesn't always win rings.

Wouldn't you say Kevin Durant was the best player in the NBA last season? How come he was nowhere close to winning a ring this year?

what is the highest rated player on the Spurs team in active rankings? How many players would you even put in the top 15? Any?

Was Dirk the best player in the NBA in 2011? Or even a top 5 player in the game that year?

If a guy is the best player in the game, and rings should count for all-time ranking, then why doesn't the best player in the game repeatedly win it all?

Baseball is nothing like basketball. Apples and oranges. That is the mistake you are making here. The two are nothing alike in terms of how to rank individual talent.

FraziersKnicks
10-28-2014, 06:35 PM
Take away PER and WS/48 and LeBron still ruins Kobe as a basketball player. You can spend all the time in the world complaining about PER and WS/48 but until you have a sufficient argument that Kobe is the better player there's no point in bothering.

And team success is not an indicator of individual talent before you start with ringzzzzz…

I'm still waiting for your reply to Jeffy...

amos1er
10-28-2014, 06:37 PM
I'll tell you what.

Create one, logical, well thought out, scientific (with statistical individual numerical proof) post about why Shaq, Kobe, and Duncan are all better than Lebron all-time at this point, and I'll concede and give you this one and the next Kobe debate. And I'll say you've got your argument.

If you can't, then you admit that Lebron is greater than Kobe all-time just one time.

The decision of your post being well-thought out and scientific (with numerical, individual statistical proof that isn't just rings) will be based on other posters. Not you or me.


Think you can do this? Just one time? I mean, if you can't, then why even keep posting in all of these threads?



And I would like to see a similar post about why Kobe is greater than Shaq all time as well.

Ok... How about this... What player would you prefer, player A who leads his team in assists, rebounds, and points, but his team is bottom of the league in all three, or a player B who leads his team in assists and points and his team is top of the league in both. Who's stats benefit their team more... Player A or player B...

amos1er
10-28-2014, 06:38 PM
Take away PER and WS/48 and LeBron still ruins Kobe as a basketball player. You can spend all the time in the world complaining about PER and WS/48 but until you have a sufficient argument that Kobe is the better player there's no point in bothering.

And team success is not an indicator of individual talent before you start with ringzzzzz…

I'm still waiting for your reply to Jeffy...

Really, because other than PER, WS/48, and MVP awards, Lebron really has nothing on Kobe.

Jamiecballer
10-28-2014, 06:42 PM
Ya, David Robinson top five and Kareem and Magic not in the top five. No credibility what so ever. These guys are just too reliant on Hollinger stats and are incapable of formulating any sort of opinions past that. Absolutely ZERO objectivity.
At least we look at an abundance of data.

Is your system more sophisticated than simply attributing 90% of a team accomplishment to the teams best player and penalizing any player that plays within a team game?

Because if it is you have fooled us all.

amos1er
10-28-2014, 06:42 PM
wait, are we measuring tennis players, golfers, or bowlers? Or are we measuring individuals in a team sport?

So then your are telling me that the system a "team" runs has no bearing on a players PER and WS/48.

amos1er
10-28-2014, 06:43 PM
At least we look at an abundance of data.

Is your system more sophisticated than simply attributing 90% of a team accomplishment to the teams best player and penalizing any player that plays within a team game?

Because if it is you have fooled us all.

Kobe performed better against much greater competition with far less help.

amos1er
10-28-2014, 06:45 PM
Refute this one if you can...


To put Lebron in the same conversation as Jordan is blasphemous. Jordan never lost in the finals and never needed to form a super team consisting of a top five player and a top fifteen player along with 5 guys who could shoot over 40% from three just to beat some of the weakest competition in NBA history in the east and some mediocre competition in the finals. All with questionable calls the whole way through. You are only as great as your competition and Lebron hasn't really had all that much compared to greats like Jordan and Kobe. Especially considering the super team he constructed when he went ring chasing.

Lebrons advanced stats are more due to the system he runs than him being a great individual player. Nash did the same thing when playing for D'Antoni in a specialized system taylor made to augment his strengths. Nash put up his best statistical seasons when running this unique system, but when playing in a slow down traditional half court offense, he was not nearly the same player statistically. You are all kidding yourselves if you think Lebron could put up the same PER and advanced stats running the triangle with a legit rebounding center. Lebron may lead the Heat in rebounding, but the Heat as a team are last in the league in rebounding. Not impressive at all. Lebron barely made it past the Spurs even with HCA. Lucky for him he was able to coast to HCA throughout the playoffs due to his cakewalk of a regular season schedule in the weak east with by far the best supporting cast in the NBA. Put the Heat in the west and the Spurs in the east and the Spurs would easily have HCA in the finals and would have most likely dispatched the Heat in six games. Kobe performed much better individually and only needed 5 games to defeat a better younger Spurs team in the 2008 WCF with a lesser supporting cast than Lebron had in this years finals. Lets rewind to 2001 and see how Kobe did against San Antonio's twin towers back when Duncan was having one of his best seasons and compare it to Lebron's performance in this years finals against a broken down aged Spurs team. That ought to be good for a laugh.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/...13_finals.html

http://www.basketball-reference.com/..._2008_WCF.html

What do you think about the difference in numbers that Kobe put up against younger better Spurs teams on road to success with weaker supporting casts than Lebron had?

2008 WCF

A prime Kobe with a weaker supporting cast than Lebron's 2013 Heat against a younger tougher Spurs team...

Kobe 29.2 ppg, 5.6 rpg, 3.8 apg, 90.9 FT%, 33.3 3PT%, 53.3 FG%. Most importantly...won the series in 5 games with his second best player in Gasol only contributing 13.2 ppg and his third option Odom only contributing 12.8 ppg.

2013 Finals

A prime Lebron vs. a much older Spurs and weaker Spurs team than Kobe played back in the 2008 WCF...

25.3 ppg, 10.9 rpg, 7.0 apg, 79.5 FT%, 35.3 3PT%, 44.7 FG%. Barely won by the skin of their teeth in 7 games. Lebron received more help all around from his supporting cast as well. His second option Wade contributed 19.6 ppg and his third option Bosh contributed 11.9 ppg. Both shot significantly better from the field as well. Wade 47.6 FG% and Bosh 46.2 FG% compared to Gasol 44.6 FG% and Odom 40.4 FG%. Clearly Lebron's big three are in a whole other universe that what Kobe had to work with.

In addition, his fourth and fifth options in Allen and Chalmers also produced more than Kobe's fourth and fifth options in Farmar and Radmanovic. Both Allen and Chalmers contributed double figure scoring. Allen with 10.6 ppg on 54% from the field and from 3 and Chalmers with 10.6 ppg on 39% from the field, but 40.6% from 3. In 2008 Farmar (Kobe's fourth option) contributed 8.4 ppg on 45.7% from the field and 41.7% from 3. Radmanovic (fifth option) contributed 8.4 ppg on 63.3% from the field, but only 27.3% from 3. Clearly Kobe outperformed Lebron with far less help against a better version of the same team.

And please don't throw in Lebron's empty rebounding and assist numbers because as I said earlier, they are a product of the system he runs and the players he choses to surround himself with. In 2008 Kobe had two guys in Gasol and Odom who both averaged 9.6 rpg in the WCF. Thus there are less rebounds for Kobe to grab, but his team is better off clearly. Lebron may lead the Heat in rebounding, but thats mainly due to the fact that there are no real rebounders on his team and who cares anyways because the Heat are last in the NBA in rebounding. It's not too impressive when you can put up the best rebounding stats on a team that is last in the NBA...talk about not sacrificing personal glory for the good of the team.

As for the assists, Kobe played in the triangle which is not assist friendly at all, but is better for winning games and getting all around passing from the team. Lebron plays a pg on offense which is more designed as a iso drive and kick to his many 3 point snippers. Pretty easy to rack up assists when you have 5 guys on your team who can shoot over 40% from three and the system is designed to boost your stats. A luxury Kobe or MJ never had. Lebron in the triangle would not be able to produce those kind of assist numbers...especially without his 3 point snippers.

There you have it, the proof is in the pudding. Kobe would have won the title that year and had six rings had he been lucky enough to face the Spurs in the finals like Lebron did. Unfortunately, he had to face a far better team in the Celtics. The likes of which Lebron has never faced. Sorry, but it's all about how you do against the top competition, not about how you pad your stats in the regular season against the weaker teams in the weakest conference of all time. Kobe clearly performed better when the stakes were up against the better competition. That is the true measure of greatness.

amos1er
10-28-2014, 06:52 PM
not true. Kobe fans are freakin everywhere. Anytime I went to a Rockets game when the Lakers were in town, you saw 200 Kobe jersey's on fans ranging from age 10-50.

Good point... Also Kobe is the most recognized NBA athlete worldwide as well. Don't know why that guy would try to imply otherwise or that Kobe fans are merely limited to Los Angeles.

amos1er
10-28-2014, 06:56 PM
I see you made a thread off of my comment, I'm honored. Lebron, Duncan or Shaq all have a case as best player for 5+ years of peak play and 10+ years of prime post MJ. The combination of how dominantly they have carried teams, their stats and their accolades are unmatched. If I had to choose one it would be Lebron.

The guy instantly turns whatever team he plays for into a contender, won 4 MVP's in 5 years (another 5 times he has placed top 5), and has advanced stats in the Jordan stratosphere. I do feel that he lacks a mental vigor to his game that would send him into any true GOAT conversation and it has reared itself in some of the most inopportune times, but overall he is simply a one man wrecking crew and has been incredibly consistent for a decade straight now.

I did... I was gonna reply to you in that one and tell you to take the discussion over here actually.

I would disagree that he turns all his teams into contenders. His only two good Cleveland teams that one might consider contenders all were exposed in the playoffs as regular season wonders who benefited greatly from a weak conference schedule the same way that Jason Kidd's and Allen Iverson's teams did. Would you consider those two teams contenders as well...

In terms of career success, I really don't see how Lebron even matches up to Kobe, Shaq, or Duncan. That is mostly what I base my rankings off of.

amos1er
10-28-2014, 06:58 PM
Your arguments do seem to hinge around PER and WS. Two stats where Manu would rank in the top 40 and top 15 all time respectively. So, fair to assume you think he may be top 30 All Time?

Thank you for noticing and yes, they do. I think he is relating basketball to baseball far too much. Good follow up discussion BTW.

sheesh
10-28-2014, 07:18 PM
You can talk about numbers all you want. No arbitrary number can define a players career or dominance. A players ability is entirely subjective.

So in the end all you can do is try to remove your own personal biases as best as you can and make a good call. For me I don't need numbers to tell me that a guy like Kobe wasn't half the player Jordan was. The tape doesn't lie. And I don't need numbers to tell me David Robinson is arguably the GOAT big man. Because IMO he's not.

IKnowHoops
10-28-2014, 07:40 PM
I thouht this post was well thought out, but how can anyone take you serious, you ve got Tmac and Wade ahead of Kobe, Magic and Bird, that is insulting. It is also hard to take anything you say serious when you make points such as " Then a guy like Lebron goes and gets a talented team thats not even on par with the Laker talent or the celtic talent and then everyone says he needs a super team to win. But then those same guys slurp Magic and Bird who were born into the super team" this would be a valid point except, the Lakers and Celtics built those teams, Lebron chose the team that would give him the best chance to win a title, went 2-2 in the finals with Miami, and then made up some bull about coming home, when everyone knows he went to Cleveland because he knew they were getting Love and already had Irving.

It's great you have a opinion, but your so biased with anything Lebron it's silly. And the fact you put Mcgrady over Kobe, Magic and Bird, how can anyone possibly take you seriously? Tmac has never been out of the first round, and he has had plenty of talent around him.

I'm not judging how Lebron or Bird or Magic got there teams. To me it irrelevant. Saying "Lebron needs a super team" is ignorant because so did Magic and Bird. Im not judging how, Im judging what the person is playing with. And Bird and Magic and Kobe played with better, more productive players to get there rings.

As far as TMAC Wade and Kobe. I preface that they are interchangeable for the most part when in peak form. Its a soft rank not a hard rank. As for Magic, Bird under those guys, yes I know I am in the minority when I put guys like Wade and TMac above them, but from a standpoint of Peak, those guys have a case. As far as a career, Tmac has no case. But I am talking about Peak. And Peak Tmac was about as unstoppable as you can get and could guard guys like Kobe and dirk better than anyone alive at that time. Niether Magic or Bird would of had a chance at guarding TMac. And they would of given him trouble too, but if matched up against each other prime for prime, I'd bet TMAC gets the best of both of them.

IKnowHoops
10-28-2014, 07:47 PM
Ya, David Robinson top five and Kareem and Magic not in the top five. No credibility what so ever. These guys are just too reliant on Hollinger stats and are incapable of formulating any sort of opinions past that. Absolutely ZERO objectivity.

hahahahahaha...I see you don't really do research before you post your nonsense. David isn't in my top five and Kareem is in my top five. You have no credibility and zero objectivity because you are spouting off without even reading what I wrote. Get out a hur.

FraziersKnicks
10-28-2014, 08:06 PM
Really, because other than PER, WS/48, and MVP awards, Lebron really has nothing on Kobe.

This is sig worthy :laugh2:

lakersiznumber1
10-28-2014, 08:07 PM
Good point... Also Kobe is the most recognized NBA athlete worldwide as well. Don't know why that guy would try to imply otherwise or that Kobe fans are merely limited to Los Angeles.

this

Jamiecballer
10-28-2014, 08:12 PM
Kobe performed better against much greater competition with far less help.
A) there is zero evidence to support this. In fact, you have to disregard the evidence to hold this claim

B) he had way more help.

IKnowHoops
10-28-2014, 08:14 PM
You can talk about numbers all you want. No arbitrary number can define a players career or dominance. A players ability is entirely subjective.

So in the end all you can do is try to remove your own personal biases as best as you can and make a good call. For me I don't need numbers to tell me that a guy like Kobe wasn't half the player Jordan was. The tape doesn't lie. And I don't need numbers to tell me David Robinson is arguably the GOAT big man. Because IMO he's not.

Drob is my favorite player, and despite his PER and Win Share numbers, I have 3 bigs ahead of him. And two other bigs right there with him. Don't let Amos spout random crap that isn't even true. Despite the bs that Amolser spouts out, I don't have Drob as the Goat Big. I have Shaq as the Goat Big followed by Kareem and Wilt. I don't follow PER and Winshare as the end all be all. I have Duncan and Hakeem right there with Drob. Both of them actually have higher Playoff best PER than Drob so again, PER does prove there dominance as well. Kareem has the highest Winshare48 for a big and I acknowledge that too. Amos is out of his mind, he has no basis for anything he says other than rings.

Jamiecballer
10-28-2014, 08:16 PM
Refute this one if you can...
Whoever wrote that is an idiot. I wouldn't know where to start. Oh wait, yes I do. Help equals PPG from your top three scorers apparently. No need to read further when you see that simplistic crap.

Jeffy25
10-28-2014, 10:15 PM
Kobe performed better against much greater competition with far less help.

2000 Finals?

Jeffy25
10-28-2014, 10:20 PM
Championships mean nothing, it's all about PER and WS/48.

Chips are TEAM accomplishments.

The number of rings a player hasn't has nothing to do with their individual legacy.

This is a team sport. You can't win the ultimate team goal in a team sport by yourself.

Jeffy25
10-28-2014, 10:21 PM
I have to respond to the rest later, heading to bed

Avenged
10-28-2014, 10:26 PM
Lebron. Gonna keep it simple.

But those disregarding Kobe completely, let's get real.

Miltstar
10-28-2014, 10:53 PM
Drob is my favorite player, and despite his PER and Win Share numbers, I have 3 bigs ahead of him. And two other bigs right there with him. Don't let Amos spout random crap that isn't even true. Despite the bs that Amolser spouts out, I don't have Drob as the Goat Big. I have Shaq as the Goat Big followed by Kareem and Wilt. I don't follow PER and Winshare as the end all be all. I have Duncan and Hakeem right there with Drob. Both of them actually have higher Playoff best PER than Drob so again, PER does prove there dominance as well. Kareem has the highest Winshare48 for a big and I acknowledge that too. Amos is out of his mind, he has no basis for anything he says other than rings.

I grew up loving D-Rob too it's hard to beat that smile!

IKnowHoops
10-29-2014, 01:33 AM
Kobe performed better against much greater competition with far less help.

This is what you call taking a dump on what you just said. Read at your own peril Amos. You won't find a worse performance by Lebron, or more help from a player than what Kobe got below. Please stop lying

During the 2000 NBA finals Kobe was carried like a new born infant.
Kobe average 15pts on 37% shooting for his first ring. Shaq average 38/17.

Game 1
Shaq 43pts 19reb 67%FG shot 21 for 31
Kobe 14pts 46%FG shot 6 for 13

Game 2
Shaq 40pts 24reb shot 11 to 18
Kobe 2pts shot 1 for 3

Game 3
Shaq 33pts 13reb shot 15 for 24
Kobe did not play

Game 4
Shaq 36pts 21reb shot 13 for 25
Kobe 27pts shot 14 for 27

Game 5
Shaq 35pts 11reb shot 17 for 27
Kobe 8pts shot 4 for 20

Game 6
Shaq 41pts 12reb 19 for 32
Kobe 26pts shot 8 for 27

And these Bron haters got the nerve to say Lebron got carried?!?!
Kobe was a second fiddle by a long shot. How do you guys put Kobe ahead of a dude dominating at this level basically putting up 40 and 15 every night. Meanwhile Kobe is shooting under 30% most of the series and laying eggs on a nightly basis. If Bron could of played with a force of this magnitude...
But yeah 5-2 beats 2-3, keep rolling with that while Kobe scores 2 pts.

FlashBolt
10-29-2014, 02:00 AM
I am inclined to believe that some duplicate accounts were created. There were never this many users in a thread.. Either they vote and sign off, or they are just duplicates.

YesMcCann
10-29-2014, 02:09 AM
Chips are TEAM accomplishments.

The number of rings a player hasn't has nothing to do with their individual legacy.

This is a team sport. You can't win the ultimate team goal in a team sport by yourself.

Sure, but you can't seriously say that an individual baseball player has as much effect on team accomplishments as in basketball.

Chrisclover
10-29-2014, 02:27 AM
Lebron is the only player to even come close to Jordan in PER, WS, WS/48, and a variety of other stats over multiple years.

Shaq had great years, Duncan is a model of consistency, Kobe has been a great 2 guard for years. But Lebron is the only one to compare at this point.
Agreed. King rules. “built like a truck and runs like a Lamborghini”....thats what I watched on ESPN.

IKnowHoops
10-29-2014, 02:30 AM
Sure, but you can't seriously say that an individual baseball player has as much effect on team accomplishments as in basketball.

Pitchers have more.

Jeffy25
10-29-2014, 12:53 PM
I really hate the bolded statment and it's something that really bothers me among stat geeks...
It really bothers me that someone is classified as a stat geek because they prefer to use statistics to support narratives, rather than just typing random cliches and stories to support why a player is great.

Use information if you have information available to you.


Everyone is so reliant on numbers but they don't tell the entire story.
No one has said they do. But they provide a much better snap shot than whatever our perceptions are.

Unless you have watched every single game for the last 50 year, with an unbiased eye and perfect memory, then you need the data to help you support your claims.


If someone scores more than KAJ and becomes the GOAT scorer ever people will gravitate towards him and say this guy is the greatest of all time but people won't take into account of the rules of that era and if they affected a player getting these stats or to that status.
Why wouldn't someone take into account the era?

Think anyone is ever gonna score 50 a game again? Of course not. The game has changed.

They have era adjusted statistics for a reason.


I'm really sick of people comparing for example Lebron to Jordan because they were in completely different leagues all together as far as how the game is played today and in all honesty if he played in Jordans era I think his stats and legacy would take a huge hit to what they are today.
I would imagine he would be even better.

He would get away with a lot more with his physical play.

Jeffy25
10-29-2014, 12:56 PM
Well let's keep in mind the lack of defense and availability of more rebounds when comparing those numbers against today's players.

And ghettosean just complained about people not adjusting for era.

Jeffy25
10-29-2014, 12:59 PM
Here is the top 30 of all-time according to PER...



Now can we see what a complete joke this stat is people. Kareem out of the top ten. Shaq and Robinson better than Wilt. West not even in the top 20. Bird not even in the top 15... Magic not even in the top ten. I don't know how people really put all that much stock into this system especially considering it doesn't factor in defense, style of play, players around you, competition, the system you play in, and your roll on the team.

you seem to completely ignore and forget that PER is a rate stat.

so a player that plays past their prime, like Kareem, is going to be greatly affected by PER negatively.

PER, in combination with WS (which Kareem is number one all-time in) helps paint a better picture.

Along with WS/48 (makes it back to a rate stat) and a variety of other stats, like TS, RB%, and others will help paint you a better picture.

Nobody is acting like PER is a be-all, end-all stat, so how deceitful of you is to type up that list, and act like people are pretending it's perfect? Nobody is doing that.

If Kareem had retired three years earlier, then he would be 6th all time with a 25.9 PER, and he carried a 27.1 throughout the 70's

Because this is a RATE stat.


























and one other thing to remember, and this is the big part of all of this.

You can't type out a stat, and say the list is a joke because you don't agree with how players are ranked in a stat and see that as an issue with the stat.

that is the definition of misusing statistics.


Stats aren't there to support whatever pre-conceived notions you have about the game. You need to look at this the other way around. When you look at a stat, you should be using the stat to create your opinions on player ranks. Not deciding based on it's player ranks if the stat is worthwhile. It's total ignorance to use math, statistics, science, etc that way.

You complain about people being Lebron-fans and Kobe haters. But you are entering these arguments ***-backwards. A lot of the people picking Lebron are doing so based on a variety of statistics. Not their perceptions of Lebron himself. At least, that's why I am picking him. He has an incredibly strong resume as an elite performer who could catch Jordan all-time in a variety of numbers if he can sustain his level of play for even a little while. He's surpassing Kobe now, etc.





Your quoted post here is a huge problem.

1. You quote it and cite it in a way that nobody is even using it, so why even bother? Nobody is grabbing PER and saying that's an all-time ranking. It's dishonest of you to act like anyone is with this post.

2. It's a rate stat, so it can't be an all-time ranking any way. It has to work in combination.

Just like in baseball. If a hitter is a career .330 hitter, but then he plays 5 years past his prime and lowers his batting average to .323, he isn't going to suddenly lower his all-time ranking. He still produced value in those 5 years. You can't just look at his career batting average and now lower him because it dropped because he continued to play.

3. You can't cite problems with a list simply because you disagree with it's order.

valade16
10-29-2014, 01:06 PM
Chips are TEAM accomplishments.

The number of rings a player hasn't has nothing to do with their individual legacy.

This is a team sport. You can't win the ultimate team goal in a team sport by yourself.

As a generality, they absolutely matter. With his stats, no way would Magic be considered as high as he is without his 5 rings.

That being said, the answer here is obviously LeBron. He has been the best player since Jordan hung em up

Jeffy25
10-29-2014, 01:08 PM
As a generality, they absolutely matter. With his stats, no way would Magic be considered as high as he is without his 5 rings.

That being said, the answer here is obviously LeBron. He has been the best player since Jordan hung em up

And that's absurd.

Magic played with two hall of famers. the number of rings he has shouldn't matter for a moment.

Nor should it matter for Robert Horry, Michael Jordan, Hakeem, Robinson, Lebron, Kobe, etc.

Rings don't matter for an individual's legacy. Because no individual can win a ring by themselves.

FOBolous
10-29-2014, 01:10 PM
Lebron in terms of impact on the league. Durant in terms of efficiency.

Jeffy25
10-29-2014, 01:10 PM
Here is WS/48 all-time...



Once again, a complete joke... CP3 top five all-time... David Robinson the 2nd GOAT... Shaq not even top 15 all-time... Kobe not even top 30... Big O not even top 15... Tim Duncan not even top ten... Kareem not even top five... Magic not even top five... Barkley in the top ten... Larry Bird 20th GOAT... Hakeem not even in the top 40.

Once again a faulty ranking system that doesn't even factor in era, defense, style of play, players around you, competition, the system you play in, and your roll on the team. Lebron fans just preach this stuff because it makes "their guy" look good. Never mind all the other inconsistencies.

Once again, misusing statistics.

You cite a rate stat for an all-time ranking, and then find issues with it based on your preconceived idea of how players should be ranked all-time.

Poor use of this stat, and poor use of your understanding of how it works....AND incorrectly backing into arguments.

Jeffy25
10-29-2014, 01:12 PM
How come Hollinger never added a margin of error for PER. Was he so confident that his PER ranking system was such an exact science...

because he didn't produce it as a perfect science!

My God, it's a stat. He created a stat that measures specific things. That is the output for that stat, nothing else. You don't create a stat and expect people to act like it's infallible and a perfect measure of value. It's a stat that is the result of the measured outcomes. That's it.


You seem to really struggle with statistics, and should probably take a high school level statistics class before bashing these things.

Jeffy25
10-29-2014, 01:21 PM
Since you such a numbers guy... Can you explain this little anomaly to me.

Kobe has had far better playoff runs against far greater competition. I spite you to find me a playoff series where Lebron has performed as good as Kobe has against teams as good as these...

-2001 Western Conference Semifinals versus Kings: 4 gms, 43.3 mpg, 35.0 ppg, 9.0 rpg, 4.3 apg, 1.25 spg, .473 fg%. Lakers win 4-0.
-2001 Western Conference Finals versus Spurs: 4 gms, 42.0 mpg, 33.3 ppg, 7.0 rpg, 7.0 apg, 1.5 spg, .514 fg%. Lakers win 4-0.
-2010 Western Conference Finals versus Suns: 6 gms, 41.7 mpg, 33.7 ppg, 7.2 rpg, 8.3 apg, .521 fg%. Lakers win 4-2.
-2009 Western Conference Finals versus Nuggets: 6 gms, 34.0 ppg, 5.7 rpg, 6.2 apg, 1.5 spg, .481 fg%. Lakers win 4-2.
-2008 Western Conference Semifinals versus Jazz: 6 gms, 41.3 mpg, 33.2 ppg, 7.0 rpg, 7.2 apg, .491 fg%. Lakers win 4-2.
-2008 Western Conference Finals versus Spurs: 5 gms, 40.4 mpg, 29.2 ppg, 5.6 rpg, 3.8 apg, 1.6 spg, .533 fg%. Lakers win 4-1

Seriously?

How irresponsible is this?

You cite some, randomly, cherry picked playoff stats?

What happened in the 2000 first round and the 2000 Finals?


Kobe has had elite performances, and he has had off-the-bench caliber performances.

As a whole:
Kobe has 220 games, 39.3 MPG, 25.6 PPG, 5.1 RBG, 4.7 APG, 1.4 SPG, .448 FG%, 28.3 WS, 22.4 PER
Lebron has 158 games, 42.5 MPG, 28.0 PPG, 8.4 RPG, 6.4 APG, 1.7 SPG, .482 FG%, 33.8 WS, 27.7 PER

Kobe has played 2000 more playoff minutes, but still has 5 less wins produced?

So if Kobe has a handful of elite playoff performances, he must have a ton of really really horrible playoff appearances.


The only thing you are going to respond is that Lebron faced weaker competition, but I don't see evidence of this.

valade16
10-29-2014, 01:22 PM
And that's absurd.

Magic played with two hall of famers. the number of rings he has shouldn't matter for a moment.

Nor should it matter for Robert Horry, Michael Jordan, Hakeem, Robinson, Lebron, Kobe, etc.

Rings don't matter for an individual's legacy. Because no individual can win a ring by themselves.

I think it's absurd to say rings don't matter in the slightest. Obviousy wins are a team accomplishment, but it's a fact a superstar in Basketball affects the game more than a superstar in pretty much any other sport. There's a reason why 3 teams have won 16 of the last 25 titles and it's because they had one of the consensus top 10 players of all-time on their teams...

Also, I think people are smart enough to use context when discussing rings. I.e. Bill Russell's 11 doesn't automatically make him the GOAT nor does Barkleys lack of rings means he's automatically below Dirk.

But to say it doesn't matter at all is absurd. You're telling me Jordan is still the GOAT if he never won a ring? That Karl Malone doesn't move up the ranking if had won a couple rings?

They matter. Malone had his shots, with a team strong enough to compete and win titles for a number of years and couldn't get it done. I think when comparing Hakeem and Malone the fact that Hakeem took his team to the championship twice and Malone couldn't (despite arguably the better team) that should absolutely be a factor.