Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 304 of 509 FirstFirst ... 204254294302303304305306314354404 ... LastLast
Results 4,546 to 4,560 of 7627
  1. #4546
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    487
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    I just went back and looked at the first 3 pages and According to the comments the count was 17-0 LeBron over Kobe before the first guy came in saying Kobe. That guy was BigMoves, who is still arguing.

    So this thread being this long isnít indicative of any sort of even split on the subject, itís a reflection of the dedication both sides have to their position.

    If weíre going by the numbers, using PSD, it is overwhelmingly decided that LeBron is superior to Kobe, with a few notable holdouts (yourself, BigMoves, NYKalltheway, etc.)
    This site is clearly not representative of the anecdotal evidence I have personally seen on the internet. Please don't use ESPN or Bleacher Report as your next examples lol.

    I pretty much conceded this site is pretty much pro LeBron already. It's pretty obvious. What is your definition of an overwhelming majority? Like 80%? I would be curious to see a poll results on here. I'd be willing to bet it's not an overwhelming majority. Hopefully there would be more than 20 votes too lol.

    I remember this poll back in 2016 that Kobe pretty much dominated when the country voted and not the ESPN media members. https://lakeshowlife.com/2016/09/08/...dan-espn-poll/

    Here is another link. https://www.espn.com/sportsnation/st...es-kobe-bryant This was even after his 2016 Cleveland title.

  2. #4547
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    GMT +2
    Posts
    13,851
    And as for your inability to comprehend a basic principle, that if Lebron was as great, all he'd need would be an Al Jefferson or Eric Gordon. Or just Chris Bosh.

    When Kobe got Pau Gasol he didn't get the best PF in the league. He got someone who barely sneaked the top 10.
    You had Duncan, Garnett, Amare, Nowitzki and even Boozer ahead and guys like Elton Brand, David West and remarkably LeBron's future teammate Antwan Jamison at the same level.

    But somehow Kobe got mad help with Gasol, but Lebron what? Needed Duncan or Garnett otherwise it'd be unfair to compare?
    Give me a break.

    All this points out to is that Lebron did not trust he could pull it off a la Kobe, he needed to find an easy way out and he failed miserably with just 2/4 unconvincing wins. And then got swept during his prime.

  3. #4548
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    37,894
    Quote Originally Posted by NYKalltheway View Post
    Who is ranked in the top 10 from the 90s by the mainstream media? Don't tell me players with a couple of seasons there. There's Shaq only and he barely competed in the 90s. Hakeem just got tossed out of the top 10 from ESPN.
    Please tell me the 90s players in the top 10 or even 15.

    The guys who competed against the best and took his teams to 6 games in the Finals apparently weren't as good as someone who cannot even win every year against inferior competition when he's the consensus #1 for a decade. Isn't that ironic?
    Shaq barely competed in the 90s when his rookie year was in 1992? Okay.

    What is your point anyways? If you use ESPN's ranking of top 10 players, there is representation from the 60s onward and its pretty diverse. You have Bird and Magic from the 80s, Shaq and Michael from the 90s, Wilt and Russell from the 60s, and Kobe/Duncan from the 00s.

    Wilt's most dominant days were in a league where maybe one guy in the whole league could guard him and that was Bill Russell. Guard is a relative term btw. Wilt still averaged 29 points and 29 boards a game against Russell. Look, your bias is against Lebron is obvious. You can put Lebron wherever you want to but you're not clued into anything we aren't. The numbers, career accolades, etc support Lebron being among the top players ever. Its hard to take your opinion seriously when your assessment of Lebron's basketball skills are solely that he is "fast and strong".

  4. #4549
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    GMT +2
    Posts
    13,851
    He barely COMPETED, not barely played.
    He was competing for a championship for 2 seasons with Orlando (95, 96) and maybe 2 seasons in LA (98, 99).

  5. #4550
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    37,894
    Quote Originally Posted by NYKalltheway View Post
    He barely COMPETED, not barely played.
    He was competing for a championship for 2 seasons with Orlando (95, 96) and maybe 2 seasons in LA (98, 99).
    So half of the years he had played in his career to that point? That's barely competed? Just admit you were wrong there and move on.

  6. #4551
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    GMT +2
    Posts
    13,851
    Quote Originally Posted by metswon69 View Post
    So half of the years he had played in his career to that point? That's barely competed? Just admit you were wrong there and move on.
    Doesn't matter if it was half his career. Half of Duncan's career he already had a ring in 99, doesn't make him a 90s selection.

    Shaq is the closest thing to a 90s player we have in consensus mainstream media top 10s yet everyone will tell you he is more of a 00s player.

  7. #4552
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    37,894
    Quote Originally Posted by NYKalltheway View Post
    Doesn't matter if it was half his career. Half of Duncan's career he already had a ring in 99, doesn't make him a 90s selection.
    No one said Duncan was a 90s selection though. You were the one who said that Shaq barely competed in the 90s and that's not true. Again the eras are pretty diversely represented among those top 10 players.

  8. #4553
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    113,474
    Quote Originally Posted by metswon69 View Post
    So half of the years he had played in his career to that point? That's barely competed? Just admit you were wrong there and move on.
    he wont... he wont ever... its why i find it hilarious at this point. He doesnt have a clue and is only OMG I HATE LEBRON mode.

  9. #4554
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    GMT +2
    Posts
    13,851
    Quote Originally Posted by metswon69 View Post
    No one said Duncan was a 90s selection though. You were the one who said that Shaq barely competed in the 90s and that's not true. Again the eras are pretty diversely represented among those top 10 players.
    Look, just like Jordan was great in the 80s, so was Shaq in the 90s. But it's not the decade you will associate him with. Shaq made the finals once and got swept, just like Lebron in the 00s. You wouldn't consider associating Lebron in the 00s if it wasn't for the 09 MVP. Even now, it's hard not to say that his name is closely tied with the 10s and not so much the 00s where Shaq, Duncan and Kobe are more automatic choices.

    Why is this so hard to grasp? You do it all the time but now that I've written it is somehow false?

  10. #4555
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    37,894
    Quote Originally Posted by NYKalltheway View Post
    Doesn't matter if it was half his career. Half of Duncan's career he already had a ring in 99, doesn't make him a 90s selection.

    Shaq is the closest thing to a 90s player we have in consensus mainstream media top 10s yet everyone will tell you he is more of a 00s player.
    I grew up on 90s basketball. Great era but you didn't have a ton of transcendent talent. You had great players but there were great players in the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, too that didn't compare to the Wilts, Kareems, Magics, Birds, of those respective decades.

    Its hard for talent to transcend when the decade is dominated by one player. If Jordan doesn't retire to play baseball, there's a pretty good chance those Bulls teams win 8 titles in a row and Hakeem has no rings.
    Last edited by metswon69; 05-22-2020 at 04:37 AM.

  11. #4556
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    37,894
    Quote Originally Posted by NYKalltheway View Post
    Look, just like Jordan was great in the 80s, so was Shaq in the 90s. But it's not the decade you will associate him with. Shaq made the finals once and got swept, just like Lebron in the 00s. You wouldn't consider associating Lebron in the 00s if it wasn't for the 09 MVP. Even now, it's hard not to say that his name is closely tied with the 10s and not so much the 00s where Shaq, Duncan and Kobe are more automatic choices.

    Why is this so hard to grasp? You do it all the time but now that I've written it is somehow false?
    Again, you said Shaq barely competed then went on to say he only "barely competed" by being the best player (on 4 different teams) in the 90s that could have won a title. I know its hard to keep your posts straight with twisted logic like that. Either way, you were wrong.

    I'm aware Lebron had all of his championship success in the 2010s. Associating him with that decade doesn't change the diversity of the list. Recency bias doesn't really apply when the only player in that top 10 who really represented this decade is Lebron. Its not like we're talking about Lebron, Durant, Curry.
    Last edited by metswon69; 05-22-2020 at 04:49 AM.

  12. #4557
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    487
    Pierce has a great top four All-Time and the exact same guys I have.

    1. Jordan
    2. Kareem
    3. Russell
    4. Magic

    Only difference is that I don't have Kobe in my top five lol. I have Bird instead.

    5. Bird
    6. Duncan
    7. Shaq
    8. Kobe
    9. LeBron
    10. Wilt

    Though, as Jalen Rose said, it gets real dicey from 6-10. Very debatable. I do think Duncan is a tier ahead of those guys mainly due to winning and team impact. Which I value heavily. Duncan also had very good accolades.

  13. #4558
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    GMT +2
    Posts
    13,851
    Quote Originally Posted by metswon69 View Post
    Again, you said Shaq barely competed then went on to say he only "barely competed" by being the best player (on 4 different teams) in the 90s that could have won a title. I know its hard to keep your posts straight with twisted logic like that. Either way, you were wrong.

    I'm aware Lebron had all of his championship success in the 2010s. Associating him with that decade doesn't change the diversity of the list. Recency bias doesn't really apply when the only player in that top 10 who really represented this decade is Lebron. Its not like we're talking about Lebron, Durant, Curry.
    What 4 different teams?

    I said he barely competed in the 90s. The 90s is 10 years long and the decade doesn't give a rat's *** if a player was drafted in 1992 or 1995 or 1999. And Shaq has what? 1 Finals appearance (sweep, damn you Nick Anderson?) an ECF and a WCF? Doesn't seem like a lot in 10 years of the 90s.

    Shaq is a legend because he was a beast in the early to mid 2000s. The 90s part is obviously part of his legacy and adds to it, but subtract the 90s from him and you still have a top 10 candidate. He's a 2000s legend that was also great for spells in the 90s.

    The thing is, I don't care if Hakeem has a ring or not. For me he's a top 10 player whether he has 0 or 2 or 5.
    The only thing that rings does is solidify a claim for GOAT. Jordan is got exactly because he held guys like Barkley, Drexler, Payton, Karl Malone ringless and would have also kept Hakeem ringless. And kept Magic ringless in the 90s, too.
    That's what makes Michael Jordan the undisputed GOAT for many, not the notion that he has 6 out of 6 Finals wins, that's the simplified version that simpletons use in favor of Mike or against others. It's irrelevant as a pure number. It's the why. Which is also why Russell isn't viewed as the GOAT with his impressive record.

    This is why context matters. And obviously skill level, talent, conditions, surrounding environment and other factors are in place.
    Last edited by NYKalltheway; 05-22-2020 at 05:03 AM.

  14. #4559
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    37,894
    Quote Originally Posted by Romeo Naes View Post
    Pierce has a great top four All-Time and the exact same guys I have.

    1. Jordan
    2. Kareem
    3. Russell
    4. Magic

    Only difference is that I don't have Kobe in my top five lol. I have Bird instead.

    5. Bird
    6. Duncan
    7. Shaq
    8. Kobe
    9. LeBron
    10. Wilt

    Though, as Jalen Rose said, it gets real dicey from 6-10. Very debatable. I do think Duncan is a tier ahead of those guys mainly due to winning and team impact. Which I value heavily. Duncan also had very good accolades.
    I can't understand Bill Russell at 3. I don't even see him as a top 10 player. He wasn't even the best center of that era imo. Wilt was clearly the more talented and dominant player.

    I understand Russell was the best defensive player of that time period and that he has 11 rings but the league had hardly any parity. He played in an era with no free agency, he had maybe the best coach of all time, his offense was mediocre at best, etc.
    Last edited by metswon69; 05-22-2020 at 05:19 AM.

  15. #4560
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    37,894
    Quote Originally Posted by NYKalltheway View Post
    What 4 different teams?

    I said he barely competed in the 90s. The 90s is 10 years long and the decade doesn't give a rat's *** if a player was drafted in 1992 or 1995 or 1999. And Shaq has what? 1 Finals appearance (sweep, damn you Nick Anderson?) an ECF and a WCF? Doesn't seem like a lot in 10 years of the 90s.

    Shaq is a legend because he was a beast in the early to mid 2000s. The 90s part is obviously part of his legacy and adds to it, but subtract the 90s from him and you still have a top 10 candidate. He's a 2000s legend that was also great for spells in the 90s.

    The thing is, I don't care if Hakeem has a ring or not. For me he's a top 10 player whether he has 0 or 2 or 5.
    The only thing that rings does is solidify a claim for GOAT. Jordan is got exactly because he held guys like Barkley, Drexler, Payton, Karl Malone ringless and would have also kept Hakeem ringless. And kept Magic ringless in the 90s, too.
    That's what makes Michael Jordan the undisputed GOAT for many, not the notion that he has 6 out of 6 Finals wins, that's the simplified version that simpletons use in favor of Mike or against others. It's irrelevant as a pure number. It's the why. Which is also why Russell isn't viewed as the GOAT with his impressive record.

    This is why context matters. And obviously skill level, talent, conditions, surrounding environment and other factors are in place.
    Of course it does. If you're going to say he competed for a title in half the years he played to that point in his career (which you did), that's not "barely competed". Don't backtrack now. He played 8 years in the 90s. That's a significant portion of the decade. You don't get to dismiss that. It's not like we are quantifying his work for a decade based on 2 or 3 seasons.

    You don't have a top 10 candidate if you subtract the 90s. Shaq stopped being a dominant player by the time he was 30 (which was the 2002-2003 season). His first 10 years in the league (much of which were in the 90s) was where most of his greatness lies.

    I'm not arguing how amazing Jordan was. I hate that "GOAT" label **** but he's definitely the best player in NBA history. That doesn't mean the 90s was littered with transcendent talent. Its a lot like other decades. 1 or 2 dominant players with the rest of the guys a tier below.

    That's where Lebron is now. He's that guy and I'm sorry no matter how much you dislike Lebron or diminish his talents, the overwhelming majority of people would say Lebron is at least a top 5 player in NBA history.
    Last edited by metswon69; 05-22-2020 at 05:27 AM.

Posting Permissions

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