Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 380 of 497 FirstFirst ... 280330370378379380381382390430480 ... LastLast
Results 5,686 to 5,700 of 7454
  1. #5686
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    113,277
    Quote Originally Posted by McAllen Tx View Post
    Still waiting for a single reply from the pro LBJ posters. Some were quick to jump in when I said if Kobe started off his career in Cleveland he would've averaged 32 PPG. Piled up stats. They said he would've demanded a trade right away.

    Flip the script and if LBJ were to have played with Shaq and they won a couple of championships, was LBJ not gonna get the credit for them?
    lebron came out of the gate better so he wouldnt have gotten nearly as carried but yes... we would not have thought lebron was the top guy for the titles... nobody is saying kobe didnt earn them.. we wouldnt be saying omg lebron has 5 rings... the ring against the warriors wasnt the ring itself but the comeback against a far superior team. Nobody that actually understands the sport and the statistics actually cares about the stupid ring argument.... Stockton never won a ring yet he is still one of the goat pgs.... CP3 never won a ring yet he is still one of the goat PGs... Kobe won a ring against the celtics where he was the 3rd best player on his team for a game 7.... lebron beat the warriors and had a far superior series against a much better team... yet i bet you think these 2 rings are equal correct?


    I have a question... Durant has 2 rings because he joined the most stacked team ever do you think those titles count for his legacy and how much do they count in your eyes? If he had stayed with the warriors and they won 4 or 5 rings would he be better then kobe in your eyes?

  2. #5687
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    113,277
    Quote Originally Posted by NYKalltheway View Post
    Kyrie was 3 years in the league already, twice an all star and actually the All star game MVP a few months before Lebron joined him. USA Basketball also named him Athlete of the Year (Lebron won this in 2012 only). It doesn't mean much, but it's something.

    And it definitely means that he wasn't "basically a rookie player".
    and yet he is still overrated to this day... interesting.

  3. #5688
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    9,879
    Quote Originally Posted by More-Than-Most View Post
    lebron came out of the gate better so he wouldnt have gotten nearly as carried but yes... we would not have thought lebron was the top guy for the titles... nobody is saying kobe didnt earn them.. we wouldnt be saying omg lebron has 5 rings... the ring against the warriors wasnt the ring itself but the comeback against a far superior team. Nobody that actually understands the sport and the statistics actually cares about the stupid ring argument.... Stockton never won a ring yet he is still one of the goat pgs.... CP3 never won a ring yet he is still one of the goat PGs... Kobe won a ring against the celtics where he was the 3rd best player on his team for a game 7.... lebron beat the warriors and had a far superior series against a much better team... yet i bet you think these 2 rings are equal correct?


    I have a question... Durant has 2 rings because he joined the most stacked team ever do you think those titles count for his legacy and how much do they count in your eyes? If he had stayed with the warriors and they won 4 or 5 rings would he be better then kobe in your eyes?
    Such a silly post. Kobe was not the 3rd best player in that Game 7. He had a poor shooting night, along with almost every other perimeter star player on either team and he also happened to pull down 15 boards and hit a huge 3 in that game. All of those other opportunities Kobe's teammates had was because of Kobe. The defense committed to holding him down and it opened things up for everyone else. That's what you really fail to grasp. Kobe can go 6-24 and still have a far greater impact than a normal star player who goes 8-14.

    As to the KD question, they don't carry that much weight for his legacy because the team was already an elite team without him. The lakers couldn't get out of the west before Kobe became a star (and I think only made the WCF once on a team that had 2 additional all-star caliber players outside of shaq; this was in Kobe's rookie season). Huge difference there.
    Last edited by Big Moves03; 05-28-2020 at 05:16 PM.

  4. #5689
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    27,713
    LeBron


    Kristaps Porzingis
    Stronger than most 15 year old girls.

  5. #5690
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    113,277
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    Such a silly post. Kobe was not the 3rd best player in that Game 7. He had a poor shooting night, along with almost every other perimeter star player on either team and he also happened to pull down 15 boards and hit a huge 3 in that game. All of those other opportunities Kobe's teammates had was because of Kobe. The defense committed to holding him down and it opened things up for everyone else. That's what you really fail to grasp. Kobe can go 6-24 and still have a far greater impact than a normal star player who goes 8-14.

    As to the KD question, they don't carry that much weight for his legacy because the team was already an elite team without him. The lakers couldn't get out of the west before Kobe became a star (and I think only made the WCF once on a team that had 2 additional all-star caliber players outside of shaq; this was in Kobe's rookie season). Huge difference there.
    i knew you would respond with this and again its hypocritical ******** because its the exact opposite of your shaq/kobe argument when kobe was the metta of that game 7 to shaq in your original opinion... like i said you dont have a clue and use anything that you feel fits your argument nomatter the situation or the statistical evidence.... its adorable and you continue to look so bad its actually hard to take serious.

  6. #5691
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    15,877
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    Shaq in Orlando was also much quicker and faster than Shaq with Kobe (and that shaq was also in much better shape). Wade was a in a much different role in 06 than with LBJ so not really clear that he was better pre LBJ since Wade's play with LBJ was directly impacted by LBJ's style of play. We don't really know how Wade would've played if LBJ wasn't there or if LBJ wasn't as ball dominant. Wade was still putting up elite numbers for 2-3 years into his stint with LBJ, especially for playing alongside such a ball dominant player. Now I know the numbers don't tell the whole story, but from the eye test, he definitely looked like himself for at least the first 2 years and a good chunk of the 3rd.
    The thing is, volume doesnít show effectiveness. With all eyes on Bron, if he was still as good as he was during his days with Shaq, heíd of at least been equally efficient with a drop in volume. But he wasnít, he was on a clear downturn in efficiency. LA Shaq still put up his best numbers and he was still well beyond Kobe. D Wade was clearly not on Brons level.

  7. #5692
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    15,877
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    I mean if you extend it to an extreme. Most elite superstars are able to eventually get teammates that are good enough to make them the team a contender and that's where we can make the assessment about wining. Sure, if Kobe and LBJ played on absolutely horrible, horrible teams their entire careers, then it would be a different type of assessment but that didn't happen for either of them
    Yes but unless they play with the exact same teams against the exact same competition then we canít look at rings. The extra variables are so much higher than comparing statistics that you are so much against. There is zero logic in looking at rings based on the same logic you use when you disregard stats.

  8. #5693
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    15,877
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    It's not about shutting the ball, it's about how often LBJ has the ball in his hands and is dominating the offense. Just from a fit perspective, LBJ and Shaq are not a great fit. Shaq would likely clog the paint some and make it harder for LBJ to get to the rim and Shaq can't spread the floor. Bosh was actually an excellent fit for playing with LBJ because he could spread the floor and take the defense away from the rim and was a very good catch and shoot option from the mid range. LBJ would be most effective with someone like Bosh or dirk as a big man or maybe AD or KG or even Duncan because they had far greater ability to spread the floor than Shaq. With Shaq, there's really no reason to guard him beyond 10 feet from the basket.
    No it is also about shooting the ball. If one guy shoots as often as possible and another guy wants to get his teamates good shots, then the guy who shoots as much as possible will have inflated scoring stats. Kobe would rather score 60 and lose than score 15 and win as he showed in the loss against Detroit. When a player has that mindset he absolutely will have inflated scoring stats.

  9. #5694
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    15,877
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    Bro, the difference in their efficiency amounts to 1.12 shots per game that kobe misses more than LBJ. This is completely ignoring that Kobe played 7 years in an era where it was much harder to score than now and that his last 90 or so games of his career he was a shell of the player he used to be. Ignoring all of that and not adjusting differences in fg% (which is absolutely necessary to make an efficiency comparison), once we factor in the differences in ft%, we're looking at about half a shot more per game that Kobe misses than LBJ (again this is ignoring any adjustments that have to be made to account for differences in the rules during those first 7 years of Kobe's career and the last 90 games or so of Kobe's career being played after the achilles injury or the likely larger lower percentage shots that kobe was forced to take late in the clock, as LBJ seems to avoid taking these when possible). The efficiency argument is mostly trivial if not entirely negligible (not even clear it would favor LBJ once these other factors are accounted for, but either way any differences would likely be mostly meaningless).
    If one guy shoots 51% and another guy shoots 45% thatís a 102 to 90 Ball game. Now figure in the shots Bron doesnít take and gives it up for an easy 3 where as the shot Kobe did take is a miss, itís closer to 107 to 90 ball game. Thatís the difference between the two on the same team bro.

  10. #5695
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    15,877
    Quote Originally Posted by ldawg View Post
    Kyrie was a young player trending upwards playing with Lebron and did not stunt his growth. Kyie was able to be himself. Kyrie was basically a rookie player.
    Exactly, Kyrie, who was the only player Bron ever played with who was entering his prime, didnít fall off at all and actually played better with Bron. He dropped his career high while playing with Bron who also dropped around a 30 point triple double in the same game.

  11. #5696
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    9,879
    Quote Originally Posted by IKnowHoops View Post
    If one guy shoots 51% and another guy shoots 45% thatís a 102 to 90 Ball game. Now figure in the shots Bron doesnít take and gives it up for an easy 3 where as the shot Kobe did take is a miss, itís closer to 107 to 90 ball game. Thatís the difference between the two on the same team bro.
    Yes, if two guys take all of their teams shots that's what will happen. Since that's not what occurs, it amounts to about a half shot difference per game (once we factor in ft%) and this completely ignores that we're not accounting for the differences in fg% based on the years they were playing so it ultimately amounts to a meaningless difference. However, if we factor in how much LBJ has the ball and likely has a greater proportion of passes than Kobe, this suggests that LBJ's assists are inflated (i.e., the true difference in their assists is likely far lower once we factor in that LBJ is engaging in more playing making and passing).
    Last edited by Big Moves03; 05-28-2020 at 08:30 PM.

  12. #5697
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    9,879
    Quote Originally Posted by More-Than-Most View Post
    i knew you would respond with this and again its hypocritical ******** because its the exact opposite of your shaq/kobe argument when kobe was the metta of that game 7 to shaq in your original opinion... like i said you dont have a clue and use anything that you feel fits your argument nomatter the situation or the statistical evidence.... its adorable and you continue to look so bad its actually hard to take serious.
    It's adorable that you can't make a coherent post and that basically all of your posts are condescending nonsense. I don't even have any idea what you're trying to say in this post. Maybe try to string together a coherent thought next time you respond.
    Last edited by Big Moves03; 05-28-2020 at 08:25 PM.

  13. #5698
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    9,879
    Quote Originally Posted by IKnowHoops View Post
    Yes but unless they play with the exact same teams against the exact same competition then we canít look at rings. The extra variables are so much higher than comparing statistics that you are so much against. There is zero logic in looking at rings based on the same logic you use when you disregard stats.
    No, I disregard stats because I don't they don't capture what I think is actually meaningful for assessing players.

  14. #5699
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    9,879
    Quote Originally Posted by IKnowHoops View Post
    No it is also about shooting the ball. If one guy shoots as often as possible and another guy wants to get his teamates good shots, then the guy who shoots as much as possible will have inflated scoring stats. Kobe would rather score 60 and lose than score 15 and win as he showed in the loss against Detroit. When a player has that mindset he absolutely will have inflated scoring stats.
    Except that throughout their careers, they average the same amount of shots (LBJ shoots slightly more actually). LBJ will also have inflated assists and scoring because the entire offense is LBJ having the ball, whereas that was never the case for Kobe. Sure, he would break from the offense, but that pales in comparison to someone who the entire offense is having them handle the ball. Kobe also was the ultimate winner so it's silly to say that he would rather score 60 and lose by 15. If that were the case, he could've gone to a team like the cavs after shaq left and averaged 40 a game for the next 7 years or so and been on a mediocre team. Kobe was willing to do whatever it took to win. He played alongside shaq, who constantly took cheap shots at him and threw him under the bus repeatedly with the media, he played with a coach who did the same and then wrote a book about him (and Kobe still allowed him to return to the team) all while sacrificing his maximum output in the process. Kobe was about winning first and foremost.
    Last edited by Big Moves03; 05-28-2020 at 08:36 PM.

  15. #5700
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    9,879
    Quote Originally Posted by IKnowHoops View Post
    The thing is, volume doesnít show effectiveness. With all eyes on Bron, if he was still as good as he was during his days with Shaq, heíd of at least been equally efficient with a drop in volume. But he wasnít, he was on a clear downturn in efficiency. LA Shaq still put up his best numbers and he was still well beyond Kobe. D Wade was clearly not on Brons level.
    Well we both know what I'm going to say about the efficiency argument lol

Posting Permissions

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