Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 114 of 201 FirstFirst ... 1464104112113114115116124164 ... LastLast
Results 1,696 to 1,710 of 3005
  1. #1696
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    16,983
    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.
    Nothing personal but your doing somewhat the exact same thing as most of us. Its just opinions and ones personal side of the matter. I said that from the beginning and was not the one degrading Lebron. I agree with some of what you said however. Thats my take they were both good players in their own way and can win with either. Its a team sport and none where in the exact same situation. Thats why winning rings is not a measurement, suggesting a player legacy is hurt because he moved, teammates ranking are old school way of thinking. In terms of ones ability can be measured not teams success its a difference.
    Last edited by ldawg; 11-21-2019 at 09:49 AM.

  2. #1697
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    GMT +2
    Posts
    12,899
    When I talk about his legacy, I mean that he opted to find the easiest route to the championship. It was a time where everyone judged Lebron based on his lack of rings if you remember. "What if he never wins?" and all that silly questions. That got to him. And it was a sign of mental weakness.

    Winning the championship is all about a struggle and if you want the easy route, you deserve to have it known. It's not like he cheated or anything, but that's something everyone could have done in the past if they wanted to simply win a ring. But winning isn't everything...

  3. #1698
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,888
    Quote Originally Posted by ldawg View Post
    Are you trying to say the newly constructed team improved so they got more fluid? i thought your thing is lebron turn stars to role players and you cant win like that him dominating the ball. Even if that faults statement was true its still not true since he has 3 rings and have a very good record of winning games even if he dominated the ball standing on top of the key not in flow. You even suggest he only won because it was the East yet Lakers are in the West and doing it out his prime. In your circle of context it started 5 6 days ago.

    Do you think NO would be in the playoffs and not Lakers had Lebron went and not Ingram, Hart and Ball? that same you cant win like that guy was winning with Lakers non playoff roaster and was playoff bound had he not gotten hurt. Even some of you praised Lonzo not Lebron saying the team was better without him. The same guy now that hes not playing team got better. I even point out Ingram/Randle was better than any other combo with Lonzo the year before Lebron arrival.
    First, the East is no longer bad. They've been respectable since last year. Second, LBJ in the past has turned stars into role players, but I've been giving him credit for playing more team ball of late (meaning that what he is doing right now is less likely to turn AD into a role player). It's not as though a player cannot change. Simply because he's done that in the past doesn't mean he will continue to do that now. If he does, this team won't go very far. If he keeps playing like he has the last few games they have a chance to make a deep run. Also note that "my circle" are basically people who watch every laker game. Most of the people on this forum likely do not and base their opinions on boxscores and numbers, which is a big no-no.

  4. #1699
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,888
    Quote Originally Posted by NYKalltheway View Post
    When I talk about his legacy, I mean that he opted to find the easiest route to the championship. It was a time where everyone judged Lebron based on his lack of rings if you remember. "What if he never wins?" and all that silly questions. That got to him. And it was a sign of mental weakness.

    Winning the championship is all about a struggle and if you want the easy route, you deserve to have it known. It's not like he cheated or anything, but that's something everyone could have done in the past if they wanted to simply win a ring. But winning isn't everything...
    Yep

  5. #1700
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    GMT +2
    Posts
    12,899
    As for these two players. Both deserve a place in the NBA's Pantheon and I hate ranking players but since everyone does it I sort of play along at times.

    I do not see in Lebron James the competitive spirit that I saw in past legends. Or even compared to Kobe. For me that is crucial if you want to be compared with everyone, ever. And I also am not a great fan of players who rely mostly on athleticism and not on basketball fundamentals, so for me while Lebron is probably the greatest player in the 2010s, he's not one of the biggest names in NBA history.

  6. #1701
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    16,983
    Quote Originally Posted by NYKalltheway View Post
    When I talk about his legacy, I mean that he opted to find the easiest route to the championship. It was a time where everyone judged Lebron based on his lack of rings if you remember. "What if he never wins?" and all that silly questions. That got to him. And it was a sign of mental weakness.

    Winning the championship is all about a struggle and if you want the easy route, you deserve to have it known. It's not like he cheated or anything, but that's something everyone could have done in the past if they wanted to simply win a ring. But winning isn't everything...
    I know i am like that on the matter. I dont respect Durant joining the champs after they spanked him. His own teammates Green did not either. I am sure he want 1 outside GSW for himself as well. I can see how some put Lebron in that boat but i dont its different. Players do get tired of being on bad teams and being in bad situations. Ex look at NO no one goes to the games, if your Davis not winning and no fans why stay? In Lebrons, AD, case it was just time to move on. Kawhi left a winning team twice to live and play where he wants even taking less money. Shaq left his winning team in Orlando. Players move for a number of reasons. Why you think players try to refuse some teams as the #1 pick? Those days are gone.
    Last edited by ldawg; 11-21-2019 at 11:10 AM.

  7. #1702
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    16,983
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    First, the East is no longer bad. They've been respectable since last year. Second, LBJ in the past has turned stars into role players, but I've been giving him credit for playing more team ball of late (meaning that what he is doing right now is less likely to turn AD into a role player). It's not as though a player cannot change. Simply because he's done that in the past doesn't mean he will continue to do that now. If he does, this team won't go very far. If he keeps playing like he has the last few games they have a chance to make a deep run. Also note that "my circle" are basically people who watch every laker game. Most of the people on this forum likely do not and base their opinions on boxscores and numbers, which is a big no-no.
    Dude is the west bad now? you said he only won because he was in the east. Hes out his prime now doing it in the west. Had he played in the west back then him and his team would have adjusted to what was needed. So playing in east or west is irrelevant. And no he dont turn star into role players. Do you want to know the reason Glen rice hated being a Laker? Shaq and Kobe was taking all the shots. Why you keep harping on that wen the game is played with one ball and players have to sacrifice. And again he was the best player on his team and the team revolved around him. Is that not why Kobe wanted Shaq out of town?
    Last edited by ldawg; 11-21-2019 at 10:57 AM.

  8. #1703
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,888
    Quote Originally Posted by ldawg View Post
    Dude is the west bad now? you said he only won because he was in the east. Hes out his prime now doing it in the west. Had he played in the west back then him and his team would have adjusted to what was needed. So playing in east or west is irrelevant. And no he dont turn star into role players. Do you want to know the reason Glen rice hatted being a Laker? Shaq and Kobe was taking all the shots. Why you keep harping on that wen the game is played with one ball and players have to sacrifice.
    The west isn't bad now, but neither is the east. I also didn't say that he won because he was in the east, I said he made the finals 8 straight times because he was in the east. No way would that have happened were he in the west. It absolutely matters if you play in a much weaker conference. You just don't seem to understand why, but I've already explained it and mostly everyone understood it.

  9. #1704
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    16,983
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    The west isn't bad now, but neither is the east. I also didn't say that he won because he was in the east, I said he made the finals 8 straight times because he was in the east. No way would that have happened were he in the west. It absolutely matters if you play in a much weaker conference. You just don't seem to understand why, but I've already explained it and mostly everyone understood it.
    So why is the east west a thing? How do you know, Curry just went 4 times but now injured, Kobe 4 so why are you thinking it was impossible? ok 6 times make you feel more a ease?

  10. #1705
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,888
    Quote Originally Posted by ldawg View Post
    So why is the east west a thing? How do you know, Curry just went 4 times but now injured, Kobe 4 so why are you thinking it was impossible? ok 6 times make you feel more a ease?
    Because the east was horrible, that's why. It's not like one conference was better than the other by a moderate amount. The east was absolutely horrible. Kobe also didn't go to the finals 4 times in a row, he went 3 times twice. LBJ's teams were usually destroyed in the finals in mostly uncompetitive series, which shows that his teams didn't belong there most of the time. The finals was usually the WCF. Im not sure why anyone would even debate this. It's widely recognized how horrible the East has been for almost 20 years. It wasn't until last season that the east was respectable again.

  11. #1706
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    16,983
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    Because the east was horrible, that's why. It's not like one conference was better than the other by a moderate amount. The east was absolutely horrible. Kobe also didn't go to the finals 4 times in a row, he went 3 times twice. LBJ's teams were usually destroyed in the finals in mostly uncompetitive series, which shows that his teams didn't belong there most of the time. The finals was usually the WCF. Im not sure why anyone would even debate this. It's widely recognized how horrible the East has been for almost 20 years. It wasn't until last season that the east was respectable again.
    Kobe is not as good as i thought.

  12. #1707
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    16,983
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    Because the east was horrible, that's why. It's not like one conference was better than the other by a moderate amount. The east was absolutely horrible. Kobe also didn't go to the finals 4 times in a row, he went 3 times twice. LBJ's teams were usually destroyed in the finals in mostly uncompetitive series, which shows that his teams didn't belong there most of the time. The finals was usually the WCF. Im not sure why anyone would even debate this. It's widely recognized how horrible the East has been for almost 20 years. It wasn't until last season that the east was respectable again.
    Yes like the possibility of last year Lakers being a playoff team. that impact speaks volume. Remember i am not the one measuring by rings how many times in finals, etc.
    Last edited by ldawg; 11-21-2019 at 11:28 AM.

  13. #1708
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,888
    Quote Originally Posted by ldawg View Post
    Yes like the possibility of last year Lakers being a playoff team. that impact speaks volume. Remember i am not the one measuring by rings how many times in finals, etc.
    You've sure mentioned him making the finals many times as if though it were some great accomplishment

  14. #1709
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    16,983
    Quote Originally Posted by NYKalltheway View Post
    As for these two players. Both deserve a place in the NBA's Pantheon and I hate ranking players but since everyone does it I sort of play along at times.

    I do not see in Lebron James the competitive spirit that I saw in past legends. Or even compared to Kobe. For me that is crucial if you want to be compared with everyone, ever. And I also am not a great fan of players who rely mostly on athleticism and not on basketball fundamentals, so for me while Lebron is probably the greatest player in the 2010s, he's not one of the biggest names in NBA history.
    see and this is where kobe drives that everyone loves come into play along with free throw shooting. Its all what one prefer and value most at the end on the day. That will be their guy. Older will prefer Kobe because he reminds them of their Micheal Jordan and he got that it. The new generation prefer Lebron as players try to be more all around playing position less ball as say Dallas Luka. But it still have data that keep track and tools that measure players ability. If i blindfold you remove teams accomplishments and give you the data you will pick the exact same player every time.
    Last edited by ldawg; 11-21-2019 at 11:55 AM.

  15. #1710
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    31,164
    Quote Originally Posted by NYKalltheway View Post
    When I talk about his legacy, I mean that he opted to find the easiest route to the championship. It was a time where everyone judged Lebron based on his lack of rings if you remember. "What if he never wins?" and all that silly questions. That got to him. And it was a sign of mental weakness.

    Winning the championship is all about a struggle and if you want the easy route, you deserve to have it known. It's not like he cheated or anything, but that's something everyone could have done in the past if they wanted to simply win a ring. But winning isn't everything...
    You said this:

    You cannot blame a player if his team is badly constructed or if a rival team is extremely well constructed.


    So you can't blame LeBron if his team is badly constructed, but apparently you do blame him for leaving the badly constructed team.

    It's also interesting that you say that winning a ring doesn't really matter and then criticize LeBron's skill based on his OP team that won a ring. Shouldn't you be judging LeBron's ability on his ability, and whether he won a ring with a stacked team should have absolutely no bearing on the conversation because as you said, it doesn't matter to your ability?

Posting Permissions

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