Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 113 of 113 FirstFirst ... 1363103111112113
Results 1,681 to 1,694 of 1694
  1. #1681
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    LA
    Posts
    45,271
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    Yes, a 1-2 punch in that Shaq was 1 and Kobe was 2.
    Imagine if Duncan had the luxury of being his teams 2ND Best player...... my god, how many rings you think he racks up then?

  2. #1682
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    GMT +2
    Posts
    12,811
    Thing about Kobe vs Lebron in terms of how influential they were on their championship winning teams is not measurable in a scale. It's a series of yes or no questions. Anything else is just hipster, pseudo-basketball discussion that has thrived on this forum and from my understanding throughout "casual basketball talk" in the USA.

    For example, would their teams win the championships if those players were not there?
    Lakers Three-Peat, the answer is no.
    Lakers Double, the answer is no.

    With the Heat it becomes more difficult since a Wade + Bosh team with Ray Allen (think 2013) could have posed a championship contention, but winning it would not be a popular decision. In 2012, the answer is probably no.

    The case with the Heat is that they were indeed overpowered and even if Wade was a top 3 player in 2010 and possibly still a top 10 player by 2012-13 despite his injuries, it was Lebron that made this team 'super'. A team of Wade + Bosh would have just been a very good side.
    The Cavs teams would never reach the NBA Finals without Lebron, but the East was quite weak there.

    Now, reversing the question.
    Would Shaq make it to the NBA Finals 4 times in 5 seasons if he had another teammate instead of Kobe? Would he had achieved that with anyone of: Allen Iverson, Gary Payton, Jason Kidd, Vince Carter, Tracy McGrady, Ray Allen etc if they were teammates from earlier on? It is a massive feat, but the possibility of that is there. No one can take anything away from Kobe's input here, but it took him a lot of time and several slaps (ie 3 airballs vs Jazz) to reach the level that Shaq needed his best teammate to be in order to win a ring. Someone more ready could have perhaps helped Shaq to an earlier ring, or perhaps no. Now that's a discussion to have.

    Now Kobe in 2007-10 without Pau Gasol is another one. But did Kobe really need specifically Pau Gasol or someone of his calibre in general? It's not like Pau GAsol was a top 10 or even top 20 player in the league. His ability to play the game got highlighted because he joined the Lakes with Kobe, Odom and the rest. If Kobe had Kevin Garnett on his team, he probably plays in 4 NBA Finals in a row. If he has Carlos Boozer he may barely make it once instead of 3.
    But Pau Gasol with someone other than Kobe does not make the NBA Finals 3 times in a row. Maybe if he had Wade as a teammate instead he'd make it once or twice. Maybe with Tmac he'd have some chances. But Kobe was the catalyst for Gasol, not the other way around. Gasol was just what the Lakers had to do to make it happen for Kobe. It could have been another name. Even someone like David West was highly rated back then. Now you see Pau Gasol being considered a top 50 or whatever player by some, yet David West who could have equalled his accolades if he played with a ring thirsty Kobe Bryant in the late 2000s would have been in that position. It's not really rocket science guys. Individual talent does not change when your teammates are of a higher quality. It just enables you to showcase that talent at a higher and more prestigious level.

    The same goes with Lebron now.
    His legacy deserves to be hurt because he was the #1 player in the league and joined the team of the #3 best player in the league who had already won a ring 4 years back as a star player of that championship winning team. Not the only star of course, but still a star. Then they also have a top 10-15 player of the league join them.
    Just to give a clue to those that don't grasp the context. It's 2007 and the MVP voting goes: #5 Lebron James, #7 Chris Bosh, #12 Dwyane Wade. In 2010, just before the infamous FA period, the MVP voting was as following: #1 Lebron James, #5 Dwyane Wade, #12 Chris Bosh. Feel free to consider Wade inferior to Kobe, Howard and Durant at that time, it doesn't really mean much. Top 3, top 5. It's still too much.

    When Kobe was teammed up with Shaq, he wasn't really a top 5 player in the league. I don't want to say that the MVP voting proves ****, but even there, he was only in the top 5 once during the Threepeat and when Kobe was rated higher than Shaq, they actually failed to reach the NBA Finals. It was Kobe #3 and Shaq #5 but that was after 3 consecutive championships and people just loved those guys. Of course you will overhype someone who is an important player on a winning team.

    Key component of this discussion. While one player can make all the difference, so does one minor change. Swap JR Smith with Ray Allen and Lebron may have not that 2013 ring. And that's barely the 4th most important player on the entire roster.
    It's a team sport, stop judging players using their teammates' quality as a factor that you will then just completely ignore in the process.


    Now please tell me that if Reggie Miller and Charles Barkley who are both ring-less to this day, teamed up after the Suns lost to the Bulls. Do you really think that they didn't stand a chance? I think they could give the Bulls a run for their money and possibly beat them. And if Charles Barkley had a couple of rings, you probably would be saying that he was the best PF hands down, no questions asked. But the thing that was not in his power is what you are punishing him for in your idea of who is great and who is not.... The same applies with this Kobe vs Lebron discussion or anything else.

    I've been here for far too long now and I've rarely seen anyone really talk about basketball. It's all about "I prefer this guy, so the guy who's name is different sucks" or people who view basketball statistics as some sort of gospel and want to preach and spread the word. Let me just tell you that ex players, coaches and even GMs who hire such people laugh at this. They do use these stuff, but the conclusions they draw are completely irrelevant with what the casual basketball fan thinks their purpose is. And there are of course those who just want to claim that they are witnessing the best era of basketball and that everyone who touches a ball now or wins a ring now has gained immortality and almost everyone before them should be ignored.

    If you want to talk about Kobe vs Lebron, you can do it by comparing their playing styles, their tendencies (here is where you need stats to help your argument), the way the defenses treated them, their personalities and how they behave as teammates, what signs of improvement or regression they showed over the years, ie Lebron didn't know how to post up until he turned 30 or something and Kobe didn't know that he had to pass the ball and defend his man until he was done with puberty.
    If you want to talk about their legacies, talk about their relative peer strength, their team's strength compared to their competition, the effect they had on the league (ie rules changes or other stuff that aren't off the court issues), how their performance was different next to better teammates than with ****** teammates since both experienced both sides. And many other things that can be said.

    Bickering about who has the bigger dick is just naive. It's been 40+ pages now and I don't think many posts really portray the Kobe vs Lebron dilemma. People arguing about Batmans and Robins and all that is just insane. There's 5 players on each team each time. Superstars exist, but it's not like them 2 + 3 shitters > a strong 5 man team. You cannot blame a player if his team is badly constructed or if a rival team is extremely well constructed. There are usually 3-4 teams that can win it all before the Playoffs start. All 3-4 deserve mention. Just because one gets to win doesn't mean that all the rest are crap and their star players aren't worthy of winning a ring and being part of an elite group of all time greats.

  3. #1683
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    16,085
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    The context of my post wasn't given LBJ praise or criticizing him. It was pointing out that AD was somewhat underperforming offensively thus far and so it wasn't appropriate to say that he was playing like himself.

    I'm also not sure what you are talking about, because LBJ started out playing ball dominant basketball (first 5-6 games of the season), which is how he has typically played. I actually didn't even really comment on it too much because that was just the norm. I started commenting on how he's playing team basketball and creating without dominating the ball and doing so within the flow of the offense once he started doing that. It was a notable difference and many others have commented on this as well.
    Lol you still donít get it. It did not start 5 6 games ago it started way way before he got to La. in fact he had the ball less when he played with wade Kyrie, etc who also needed the ball. Playing primary pg now so his assist will go up as a result unless they let someone else handle the ball at times like before. Plus hes making his moves slower now, playing more half court and differing. He has always been mostly the main ball handler that was also relied on to score so don't get me wrong but you get my point.
    Last edited by ldawg; Yesterday at 07:50 PM.

  4. #1684
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    LA
    Posts
    45,271
    Quote Originally Posted by ewing View Post
    I have corrected you on this point at least 5 times on this board. The Bulls lost in the second round to the Knicks. Who lost in the conf finals to the Pacers. I 'll spare us some time because I know that next you are going to say they would have been if it wasn't for the Hubert Davis foul but that isn't true either b/c that was not an elimination game. it was a game 5 in tie series. oh and the game was tied at the time. The Bulls were not in the lead and it would have gone to over time if no foul was called. So they were not in the conf finals and would not have advanced further if not for the Davis/Pippen play. I hope everyone sees just how big a LeBron homer you are. You can't digest facts that contradict your homerism
    Yeah, people tend to overrate that seasons importance to understate MJ's impact, I know I did it for years, it was a massive overachievement from a veteran crew. Tho I do give Pippen a ton of credit for that campaign (except for the Kukoc thing).

    Theres alot of stats that help showcase this that raw/meaningless glances at Win-Loss records to combat the whole "But they ONLY lost 2 more games" rhetoric too.

    That said you got your history twisted too. The Knicks made the Finals that year, if you meant to say the Bulls would have lost to the Pacers that year then IDK, Pippen tormented them defensively.

  5. #1685
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    parts unknown
    Posts
    41,999
    Quote Originally Posted by Chronz View Post
    Yeah, people tend to overrate that seasons importance to understate MJ's impact, I know I did it for years, it was a massive overachievement from a veteran crew. Tho I do give Pippen a ton of credit for that campaign (except for the Kukoc thing).

    Theres alot of stats that help showcase this that raw/meaningless glances at Win-Loss records to combat the whole "But they ONLY lost 2 more games" rhetoric too.

    That said you got your history twisted too. The Knicks made the Finals that year, if you meant to say the Bulls would have lost to the Pacers that year then IDK, Pippen tormented them defensively.
    Yep sorry 95 we lost to the Pacers in EFC. Its just annoying b/c I know I have corrected him on Scottie not making the CF and the Davis foul not keeping them out of the finals more then once. LeBron really is great. Pippen on the other hand has become massively overrated since his retirement b/c of ESPN's LeBron driven narritive.

    That Bulls sqad was a great defensive team. Pete Myers was actually on the Knicks before the Bulls and he was a hell of a defensive player and a big gaurd. the Bulls lost nothing on that end when Micheal left. The were a good vet crew, with a winning culture, and a great defense. They did over achieve a little that year and I agree its way over blown. The next year they were about a 500 team til MJ came back and would of been an earily exit again at best.
    Last edited by ewing; Yesterday at 06:43 PM.
    Rep Power: 0




    Quote Originally Posted by Raps08-09 Champ View Post
    My dick is named 'Ewing'.

  6. #1686
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    LA
    Posts
    45,271
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    Yes, Kobe was the sidekick. Shaq got more accolades and scored more in the regular season and in the playoffs.

    As for your last sentence. Cool, you don't think it's a personal achievement. I give LeBron more credit for his titles than I give Kobe for his first 3 because LeBron was a Batman and Kobe was a Robin.

    Heck, you talk about Pippen not being a superstar, but Pippen has more titles than Kobe! He has 6 to Kobe's 5. Hard to argue Kobe's even better than Pippen at this point.
    I now see why he cant consider Pippen a star even though he was. It goes against his simplistic barometer.


    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    Go ahead and point where exactly I said that LBJ doesn't pass to AD? At no point did I ever, ever say that LBJ doesn't pass to his star teammates. I said he turns them into role players by making it so that they have to take turns on offense (and since he usually dominates the ball) that means whatever they're doing is coming after him and they're usually relegated to watching him when they don't have the ball; the alternative is learn to play together so that they're effective at the same time on any given play. Third, AD has mostly been playing ISO ball most of the season and hasn't gotten too much of his offense within any kind of offensive flow (but I haven't really blamed LBJ for this, as this is something the staff has to figure out). Fourth, and IKH can vouch for me on this, I've been giving LBJ praise left and right after about the 5th or 6th game about how he's playing much more team ball and not dominating the ball as much as he has in the past and how happy I am to see LBJ doing that, which is actually consistent with the stat you cite about passing (which if anything supports my keen eye for the game so thanks for validating that).

    Oh and by the way, you also completely mischaracterized my post because I said that it wasn't really fair to blame LBJ for AD's numbers being down a little because AD is playing hurt, which is kind of not cool of you to do that.
    Ehhhh Brons actually handling the ball more than he ever has, the difference being hes deferring more to others, hence the first time hes leading the league in assists. In the past hes played primarily Point-Forward, usually alongside other ball handling playmakers, now hes legit playing PG almost full time with less playmakers alongside him.

    The last time I saw him play like this was his first stint in Cleveland when Mo WIlliams went down with injury and Bron basically averaged 10 assists IIRC. Rondo's return might cut into that but the Lakers have historically struggled when both share the floor, as they had the worst player pairing of any of his teammates. I'll admit that hes posting up more so some of that added time with the ball is spent in attack positions but Im not sure I would say that makes him less ball dominant. I can see the argument tho, he doesn't endlessly dribble like other ball dominant players but hes definitely got the ball in his hands more often. Pretty sure the time of possession and touches count bare this out but I can check if you dont believe your often memory is letting you down yet again.

    As for Davis, its true his offensive numbers are down from his peak performance but part of that can be a result of his refusal to play his most productive position (C), we'll see how he fares once he plays more with Kuzma out there. The flip side to this is that hes having his most productive defensive season and may very well finally win DPOY, his rebounds are down due to playing alongside better rebounders so that explains at least some of the statistical decline. If he gets his turnovers down, I can see him having a season pretty much on par with the rest of his career (stats wise) but hes doing this on a far better team alongside another great player (great players tend to suppress each others numbers if they're sacrificing, no?).But yeah, when Bron aint out there, AD is back to posting 30 with more inside shots but just like in NOLA, the team struggles to produce.

  7. #1687
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    16,085
    https://youtu.be/ajc8PcXDs70 This debate never dies.

  8. #1688
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    LA
    Posts
    45,271
    Quote Originally Posted by ldawg View Post
    Lol you still donít get it. It did not start 5 6 games ago it started way way before he got to La. in fact he had the ball less when he played with wade Kyrie, etc who also needed the ball. Playing primary pg now so his assist will go up as a result unless they let someone else handle the ball at times like before. Plus hes making his moves slower now, playing more half court and differing. He has always been mostly the main ball handler that was also relied on to score so don't get me wrong but you get my point.
    Well put, I looked up the stats, this is indeed the highest time of possession and touches count that hes ever had in the sportsvue era. Im not sure if this guy really paid attention to Brons game before he got to LA but it should have been obvious just by the assist tallies, those stats usually hint to an increase in ball dominance albeit not always. Lakers even said he would be their PG, that stalker of his (Windhorst) even made note of the change in how hes played (though he did not approve of the game plan thinking it will wind up tiring Bron out).

  9. #1689
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    14,244
    Quote Originally Posted by ewing View Post
    I have corrected you on this point at least 5 times on this board. The Bulls lost in the second round to the Knicks. Who lost in the conf finals to the Pacers. I 'll spare us some time because I know that next you are going to say they would have been if it wasn't for the Hubert Davis foul but that isn't true either b/c that was not an elimination game. it was a game 5 in tie series. oh and the game was tied at the time. The Bulls were not in the lead and it would have gone to over time if no foul was called. So they were not in the conf finals and would not have advanced further if not for the Davis/Pippen play. I hope everyone sees just how big a LeBron homer you are. You can't digest facts that contradict your homerism
    My mistake twerp

  10. #1690
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    14,244
    Quote Originally Posted by ewing View Post
    Yep sorry 95 we lost to the Pacers in EFC. Its just annoying b/c I know I have corrected him on Scottie not making the CF and the Davis foul not keeping them out of the finals more then once. LeBron really is great. Pippen on the other hand has become massively overrated since his retirement b/c of ESPN's LeBron driven narritive.

    That Bulls sqad was a great defensive team. Pete Myers was actually on the Knicks before the Bulls and he was a hell of a defensive player and a big gaurd. the Bulls lost nothing on that end when Micheal left. The were a good vet crew, with a winning culture, and a great defense. They did over achieve a little that year and I agree its way over blown. The next year they were about a 500 team til MJ came back and would of been an earily exit again at best.
    Just as you were mistaken here twerp

  11. #1691
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    parts unknown
    Posts
    41,999

    Kobe vs Lebron: Who is the better player?

    Quote Originally Posted by IKnowHoops View Post
    Just as you were mistaken here twerp
    I wonít say it again in 6 months bc it pumps up Bron


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Last edited by ewing; Yesterday at 11:29 PM.
    Rep Power: 0




    Quote Originally Posted by Raps08-09 Champ View Post
    My dick is named 'Ewing'.

  12. #1692
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,128
    Quote Originally Posted by Chronz View Post
    Nothing silly about the superior indicater of a teams level of play.


    Precisely, which is why nobody looks at raw wins/losses when projecting a teams playoff chances when given data that has proven more predictive. They parse that data even further by focusing on the teams most efficient lineups now too so its definitely evolving.


    You actually get more points than having a higher win total when it comes to playoff probabilities.


    The team wasn't as strong as the year prior but if people followed this idiotic train of thought, people would actually think the 2000 Lakers were stronger than the team that blitzed the playoffs. I prefer methods that have proven more successful at determining a teams level of play.


    There isn't a shred of evidence that even supports this. Unlike Kobe, Duncans teams could not compete at an elite rate without him.


    If Duncan were on a team that could contend without him, he would have no problem either, especially if he won 3 of those as the 2nd best player on his own team.


    Its factual, hence their elite winning% and efficiency differentials when he wasn't playing.


    Yes, extremely limited minutes on top of a history of success without him, and with moments where he held the team back to the point where his own HOF coach wanted to trade him for team players and his own teams Championship DVD pointing out his injury helping the team right the ship AND with him absolutely struggling immediately after losing Shaq whilst watching Shaq have another MVP caliber season and the next year winning a ring. It paints a pretty clear picture given all the data/facts when compared to your utter lack of evidence to support your inane theories.


    False, if they did that it would have completely devalued Kobe, we're merely putting the massive talent support structure he had in place when compared to guy whos teams could never win at such an elite level without them. Facts are, without Shaq the Lakers are likely a lotto team, without Kobe they are still contending and winning at an elite level. This is all rooted in fact/data, you have nothing but conjecture.


    Agreed, Kobe was significantly worse in both regards without Shaq to do the heavy lifting.


    On the flip side, if Kobe were to average 0% shooting he would stop having a large impact because the negatives would far outweigh the positives, you have to inevitably produce to maintain that influence, otherwise you become blown achilles Kobe.


    The most important aspect is always contextualizing those wins, statistics help us, especially when lies like you have spewed come up. Ill take my opinion+data that supports it over your utterlack of evidence any day of the week.


    I've seen Kobe play through injuries before, 2005 was a failure anyway you slice it. His efficiency only returned once he stopped trying to play like Bron/Wade as a do it all offensive player. Its why one of the first things Phil wanted to do was put Kobe back on the wings and pinch post positions instead of trying to always attack at the top of the key. It led to one of Kobes finests seasons.


    I KNOW they provide meaningful data when the alternative is an obviously flawed narrative that goes against ACTUAL EVIDENCE. I know the Lakers could win at an elite level without Kobe because I've seen them without him ALOT over the years and I've seen them without the true anchor. TEAM DATA is actually very significant, if it weren't you would have been able to provide the proof I needed to refute the predictive power of efficiency differentials. The game isn't as random as you wish, you can actually look up to see if what you are saying is true. Sadly, your ignorance to APBR Metrics has led you down the path of a layman.



    Incorrect, if it were then the request would be simple. Its actually because the data is incredibly consistent that you are facing a mountain. Go get your shoes or quit, the choice is yours for sure.


    I highly doubt you could take on the task, nothing you've said thus far has lend any credence to the idea that you would even know how quantify the task at hand. You struggled with the word FAVORED for ****s sake, you didn't know how to look up simple heaves, you've given NOTHING other than lol worthy takes.
    Consistent data doesn't mean it's good data. It's NOT GOOD EVIDENCE if the evidence itself is flawed. I've already explained the issues over and over again. No point of repeating them yet again. You repeat what you say and I repeat the same thing so not really a productive discussion, since you refuse to acknowledge any of the issues I raise and instead resort to dismissing the issue altogether and repeating the same thing lol. It's pretty clear that you have a difficult time with ambiguity and uncertainty, which is why you tend to take an authoritative position. You're a good example of why laypeople shouldn't be allowed near data, because they have no idea how to use or interpret it and draw these conclusions that they think are well grounded, when they're not.
    Last edited by Big Moves03; Today at 12:31 AM.

  13. #1693
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,128
    Quote Originally Posted by Chronz View Post
    Well put, I looked up the stats, this is indeed the highest time of possession and touches count that hes ever had in the sportsvue era. Im not sure if this guy really paid attention to Brons game before he got to LA but it should have been obvious just by the assist tallies, those stats usually hint to an increase in ball dominance albeit not always. Lakers even said he would be their PG, that stalker of his (Windhorst) even made note of the change in how hes played (though he did not approve of the game plan thinking it will wind up tiring Bron out).
    LBJ was dominating the ball early on and then went away from it. Time of possession also includes the time the ball is brought up the floor, which doesn't usually have an impact on the flow of the offense because the ball is being brought up. LBJ was bringing the ball up a lot early on, but that doesn't really factor into dominating the ball. To get a better sense of ball domination, the time the ball is brought up the floor needs to be subtracted to include time with the ball in the half court. Anyone who is watching the games and not a boxscore can tell the difference between how LBJ was playing the first few games and how he's playing now.
    Last edited by Big Moves03; Today at 12:50 AM.

  14. #1694
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,128
    Quote Originally Posted by NYKalltheway View Post
    Thing about Kobe vs Lebron in terms of how influential they were on their championship winning teams is not measurable in a scale. It's a series of yes or no questions. Anything else is just hipster, pseudo-basketball discussion that has thrived on this forum and from my understanding throughout "casual basketball talk" in the USA.

    For example, would their teams win the championships if those players were not there?
    Lakers Three-Peat, the answer is no.
    Lakers Double, the answer is no.

    With the Heat it becomes more difficult since a Wade + Bosh team with Ray Allen (think 2013) could have posed a championship contention, but winning it would not be a popular decision. In 2012, the answer is probably no.

    The case with the Heat is that they were indeed overpowered and even if Wade was a top 3 player in 2010 and possibly still a top 10 player by 2012-13 despite his injuries, it was Lebron that made this team 'super'. A team of Wade + Bosh would have just been a very good side.
    The Cavs teams would never reach the NBA Finals without Lebron, but the East was quite weak there.

    Now, reversing the question.
    Would Shaq make it to the NBA Finals 4 times in 5 seasons if he had another teammate instead of Kobe? Would he had achieved that with anyone of: Allen Iverson, Gary Payton, Jason Kidd, Vince Carter, Tracy McGrady, Ray Allen etc if they were teammates from earlier on? It is a massive feat, but the possibility of that is there. No one can take anything away from Kobe's input here, but it took him a lot of time and several slaps (ie 3 airballs vs Jazz) to reach the level that Shaq needed his best teammate to be in order to win a ring. Someone more ready could have perhaps helped Shaq to an earlier ring, or perhaps no. Now that's a discussion to have.

    Now Kobe in 2007-10 without Pau Gasol is another one. But did Kobe really need specifically Pau Gasol or someone of his calibre in general? It's not like Pau GAsol was a top 10 or even top 20 player in the league. His ability to play the game got highlighted because he joined the Lakes with Kobe, Odom and the rest. If Kobe had Kevin Garnett on his team, he probably plays in 4 NBA Finals in a row. If he has Carlos Boozer he may barely make it once instead of 3.
    But Pau Gasol with someone other than Kobe does not make the NBA Finals 3 times in a row. Maybe if he had Wade as a teammate instead he'd make it once or twice. Maybe with Tmac he'd have some chances. But Kobe was the catalyst for Gasol, not the other way around. Gasol was just what the Lakers had to do to make it happen for Kobe. It could have been another name. Even someone like David West was highly rated back then. Now you see Pau Gasol being considered a top 50 or whatever player by some, yet David West who could have equalled his accolades if he played with a ring thirsty Kobe Bryant in the late 2000s would have been in that position. It's not really rocket science guys. Individual talent does not change when your teammates are of a higher quality. It just enables you to showcase that talent at a higher and more prestigious level.

    The same goes with Lebron now.
    His legacy deserves to be hurt because he was the #1 player in the league and joined the team of the #3 best player in the league who had already won a ring 4 years back as a star player of that championship winning team. Not the only star of course, but still a star. Then they also have a top 10-15 player of the league join them.
    Just to give a clue to those that don't grasp the context. It's 2007 and the MVP voting goes: #5 Lebron James, #7 Chris Bosh, #12 Dwyane Wade. In 2010, just before the infamous FA period, the MVP voting was as following: #1 Lebron James, #5 Dwyane Wade, #12 Chris Bosh. Feel free to consider Wade inferior to Kobe, Howard and Durant at that time, it doesn't really mean much. Top 3, top 5. It's still too much.

    When Kobe was teammed up with Shaq, he wasn't really a top 5 player in the league. I don't want to say that the MVP voting proves ****, but even there, he was only in the top 5 once during the Threepeat and when Kobe was rated higher than Shaq, they actually failed to reach the NBA Finals. It was Kobe #3 and Shaq #5 but that was after 3 consecutive championships and people just loved those guys. Of course you will overhype someone who is an important player on a winning team.

    Key component of this discussion. While one player can make all the difference, so does one minor change. Swap JR Smith with Ray Allen and Lebron may have not that 2013 ring. And that's barely the 4th most important player on the entire roster.
    It's a team sport, stop judging players using their teammates' quality as a factor that you will then just completely ignore in the process.


    Now please tell me that if Reggie Miller and Charles Barkley who are both ring-less to this day, teamed up after the Suns lost to the Bulls. Do you really think that they didn't stand a chance? I think they could give the Bulls a run for their money and possibly beat them. And if Charles Barkley had a couple of rings, you probably would be saying that he was the best PF hands down, no questions asked. But the thing that was not in his power is what you are punishing him for in your idea of who is great and who is not.... The same applies with this Kobe vs Lebron discussion or anything else.

    I've been here for far too long now and I've rarely seen anyone really talk about basketball. It's all about "I prefer this guy, so the guy who's name is different sucks" or people who view basketball statistics as some sort of gospel and want to preach and spread the word. Let me just tell you that ex players, coaches and even GMs who hire such people laugh at this. They do use these stuff, but the conclusions they draw are completely irrelevant with what the casual basketball fan thinks their purpose is. And there are of course those who just want to claim that they are witnessing the best era of basketball and that everyone who touches a ball now or wins a ring now has gained immortality and almost everyone before them should be ignored.

    If you want to talk about Kobe vs Lebron, you can do it by comparing their playing styles, their tendencies (here is where you need stats to help your argument), the way the defenses treated them, their personalities and how they behave as teammates, what signs of improvement or regression they showed over the years, ie Lebron didn't know how to post up until he turned 30 or something and Kobe didn't know that he had to pass the ball and defend his man until he was done with puberty.
    If you want to talk about their legacies, talk about their relative peer strength, their team's strength compared to their competition, the effect they had on the league (ie rules changes or other stuff that aren't off the court issues), how their performance was different next to better teammates than with ****** teammates since both experienced both sides. And many other things that can be said.

    Bickering about who has the bigger dick is just naive. It's been 40+ pages now and I don't think many posts really portray the Kobe vs Lebron dilemma. People arguing about Batmans and Robins and all that is just insane. There's 5 players on each team each time. Superstars exist, but it's not like them 2 + 3 shitters > a strong 5 man team. You cannot blame a player if his team is badly constructed or if a rival team is extremely well constructed. There are usually 3-4 teams that can win it all before the Playoffs start. All 3-4 deserve mention. Just because one gets to win doesn't mean that all the rest are crap and their star players aren't worthy of winning a ring and being part of an elite group of all time greats.
    I don't agree with everything in your post, but I do appreciate the nuance and thought you put into it and you do make many good points.


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •