KB24.com: Kobe vs Jordan

[lebomb]

So you are wrong.







...................look at what I added above.........Im not wrong. :lmao

[Allanon]

Yeah, Kobe will catch up. :(

Are you saying it's impossible for Kobe to surpass Jordan?

[lebomb]

You make Jordan out to be able to walk on water but then you expect him to be just "anyone".

Huh? :rolleyes

I said he wasnt in his prime at 35yrs old.......Im sticking to that.

Lets see if Kobe is in his prime at 35 as you say. I say they both at 28-30yrs old are their prime.

[Allanon]

...................look at what I added above.........Im not wrong. :lmao

What are you talking about? Wrong about what?

You only quoted a small portion of what I wrote.

[Allanon]

I said he wasnt in his prime at 35yrs old.......Im sticking to that.

Lets see if Kobe is in his prime at 35 as you say. I say they both at 28-30yrs old are their prime.

That's your OPINION. You like dumb athletic players over smart less athletic players, what can I say.

[lebomb]

What are you talking about? Wrong about what?

You only quoted a small portion of what I wrote.

Im taking about NBA records held. There is a small gap between Jordan and Kobe. :king

Later man....Im out. Ive stated my case.

[Allanon]

Im taking about NBA records held. There is a small gap between Jordan and Kobe. :king

Later man....Im out. Ive stated my case.

You again are comparing end-of career Jordan to current Kobe. Anybody can sse the silliness in that :king

Are you saying Kobe can never surpass Jordan?

[lebomb]

Are you saying Kobe can never surpass Jordan?

Yes, that is exactly what Im saying. Its not going to happen. I personally think Kobe needs to be more concerned about Lebron starting to be compared to Jordan.......he may end up with more rings than Kobe. He has a good 6yrs of age advantage as well.

Have a good one.......I will let other slam you on this issue. :lmao

[Allanon]

Yes, that is exactly what Im saying. Its not going to happen. I personally think Kobe needs to be more concerned about Lebron starting to be compared to Jordan.......he may end up with more rings than Kobe. He has a good 6yrs of age advantage as well.

Have a good one.......I will let other slam you on this issue. :lmao

Ah, now you're another prophet, you know the future.

Hey prophet, who will win the championship the next 5 years? :rollin

[dbreiden83080]

You said, if Duncan had 2 rings and David Robinson had 2 rings. You didn't say anthing about MVPs, etc. Duncan's career would not have been been so great compared to DRob's if both had ended up with 2 rings. So you are wrong.


Duncan's legacy is more set in stone because of the 4 rings he has won but at 2 rings a piece, he still would be light-years ahead of D-Rob because of everything that went along with those rings. When D-Rob retired in 2003 Duncan was seen as the better player

[dbreiden83080]

Are you saying it's impossible for Kobe to surpass Jordan?

Unless he has another 6 rings in him yes

[Allanon]

Unless he has another 6 rings in him yes

It would take 9 rings for Kobe to surpass Jordan? Wow. I disagree, but that is your opinion and fine by me. At least you leave the door open as a posibility, unlike the prophet above.

[Allanon]

Duncan's legacy is more set in stone because of the 4 rings he has won but at 2 rings a piece, he still would be light-years ahead of D-Rob because of everything that went along with those rings. When D-Rob retired in 2003 Duncan was seen as the better player

Duncan being the better player than DRob would have been debateable at 2 rings a piece. Whereas now, with 4 rings, it's a joke.

[dbreiden83080]

Duncan being the better player than DRob would have been debateable at 2 rings a piece. Whereas now, with 4 rings, it's a joke.

How is it debateable at 2 rings a piece when Duncan was the man on both those teams? Was it debateable that Pippen was there with Jordan after 2 rings? D-Rob accomplished a ton individually but his huge knock was not being able to get his team to a title and by 2003 Duncan had been League MVP and finals MVP twice.

[Allanon]

How is it debateable at 2 rings a piece when Duncan was the man on both those teams? Was it debateable that Pippen was there with Jordan after 2 rings? D-Rob accomplished a ton individually but his huge knock was not being able to get his team to a title and by 2003 Duncan had been League MVP and finals MVP twice.

It is debateable because DRob had a stellar career and an MVP of his own. The only thing Duncan had more than DRob were 2 Finals MVPs. In place of the 2 Finals MVPs, DRob had a DPOY, Rebounding title, Scoring title, etc, etc. All of those Duncan still doesn't have.

Duncan with only 2 rings means he won 2 with DRob, only later on did we find that he could do it on his own. That was what "Twin Towers" was all about, the domination by both, not just the 1 Tower but the Twin Towers.

2 ring Duncan vs 2 ring DRob would have been debateable in my opinion.

[dbreiden83080]

Duncan with only 2 rings means he won 2 with DRob, only later on did we find that he could do it on his own. That was what "Twin Towers" was all about, the domination by both, not just the 1 Tower but the Twin Towers.


Jesus, did you even watch in 2003? D-Rob played about 10 min a game while Timmy put up triple doubles and outplayed Shaq in the playoffs. Domination by both, what the holy hell are you talking about??

[Allanon]

Jesus, did you even watch in 2003? D-Rob played about 10 min a game while Timmy put up triple doubles and outplayed Shaq in the playoffs. Domination by both, what the holy hell are you talking about??

Jesus, are you even a Spur fan? DRob played 10 minutes? You think Duncan was just carrying the Spurs on his own? Of course, DRob was just a wall flower on the court instead of a defensive stopper right? DRob didn't score as much as Duncan but he was still a defensive force.

DRob was almost retired but he was still quite a bad-ass in the finals.

In his final game, DRob had 17 freakin' rebounds.

DRob earned and deserved every bit of his ring, he wasn't just the baggage you make him out to be.

Where did you get that DRob only played 10 minutes a game in the 2003 finals, are you crazy?

[dbreiden83080]

Jesus, are you even a Spur fan? DRob played 10 minutes? You think Duncan was just carrying the Spurs on his own? Of course, DRob was just a wall flower on the court instead of a defensive stopper right? DRob didn't score as much as Duncan but he was still a defensive force.

1999 D-Rob was still damn good, not in his prime but very capable by 2003, he had multiple injuries and more limited playing time. His biggest contributions were his leadership and defense. Leadership Duncan still had yet to fully command but by the end of 2003 was handling. They won the title in 2003 with D-Rob completely at the end and Tony and Manu young, raw and at times out of control. 99 you have a case about D-Rob, by 2003 you have none, he was a shell of his dominant self at that point. Would have been like Kobe playing with Shaq 2 years from where he is right now.

DRob was almost retired but he was still quite a bad-ass in the finals

You mean the finals Duncan obliterated the Nets and had statistcially one of the best of all time, that finals?



"Where did you get that D-Rob only played 10 minutes a game in the 2003 finals, are you crazy"


Someone is not familiar wiith sarcasm and while we are off topic, you are still not any closer to convincing anyone that Kobe can compare with Jordan because of who he played with. Pippen is a very good player, not a legend. Shaq is a legend whom Kobe played with in his prime. You have no logical way of dismissing this fact to make Kobe look better. 3 more rings won't cut it, he needs more because of who was the main reason he got the first 3. Without Shaq he has ZERO and would have just lost to Pierce. Think about how pathetic that would be.

[Allanon]

Someone is not familiar wiith sarcasm

Nice save :oops



and while we are off topic, you are still not any closer to convincing anyone that Kobe can compare with Jordan because of who he played with.

I never said Kobe can compare with Jordan, I've said the exact opposite, read the posts.



Pippen is a very good player, not a legend. Shaq is a legend whom Kobe played with in his prime. You have no logical way of dismissing this fact to make Kobe look better. 3 more rings won't cut it, he needs more because of who was the main reason he got the first 3. Without Shaq he has ZERO and would have just lost to Pierce. Think about how pathetic that would be.

Without Pippen (a TOP50 all-time player), Jordan, would have had ZERO rings and would have and did lose to Detroit 3 years in a row. Thank about how pathetic that would be.

[ambchang]

Without the College Awards, there is no sizeable lead on Kobe. Kobe still had 3 rings to Jordan's 2.

You seem to put a lot of weight into rings, with no regards for DPoY, ROY, All-NBA 1st teams, All-D 1st teams, MVPs, Finals MVPs, etc ...

Pippen got 6 rings and Duncan's got 4, is Pippen more accomplished than Duncan?


Kobe would not need drastic improvement, what he needs to do is start winning. Exactly the same as Jordan did at this age. I don't say he will, but he can possibly do it. I don't this it's logical for you to say it is impossible for him to do it.

Him winning would certainly help, but is it reasonable to say that Kobe can win 6 more Finals MVP starting at the age of 29? Not impossible, just not that likely. It would be difficult for him to get 4.


Yes, Pippen's rings are just as much of an accomplishment as Jordan's were.

Then I really have nothing to say. Sam Jones is more accomplished than Jordan, the guy got 8 rings! Doesn't matter that Russell and Cousy were the driving force.


When did I ever say this?

Otis Thorpe got one ring, Malone got zero. Thorpe is more accomplish than Malone. This is consistent with your previous logic of how Kobe's 3 rings is a better accomplishment of 2 rings, or how Pippen's 6 rings is the same accomplishments as Jordan's 6.

Parker has the chance to be better than Jordan because he got 3 rings to Jordan's zero at the same age of 26. Parker is more accomplished.

[ambchang]

Don't try to be stupid. Kobe has 6-8 years left to get Rings and Finals MVPs unless you think Kobe's career is over?

You expect Kobe to win Final MVPs at age 36 to 38?

[dbreiden83080]

Without Pippen (a TOP50 all-time player), Jordan, would have had ZERO rings and would have and did lose to Detroit 3 years in a row. Thank about how pathetic that would be.

Do you honestly feel Pippen is one of the 50 best players to ever play in the NBA or are you throwing that out there because he got included as part of that dumb-ass list like a decade ago? You know how many guys are more deserving to be there than him in the last decade alone?

Right off the Bat here are the top 24 all time scoring leaders


1. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
2. Karl Malone
3. Michael Jordan
4. Wilt Chamberlain
5. Moses Malone
6. Elvin Hayes
7. Hakeem Olajuwon
8. Oscar Robertson
9. Dominique Wilkins
10. John Havlicek
11. Shaquille O'Neal
12. Alex English
13. Reggie Miller
14. Jerry West
15. Patrick Ewing
16. Charles Barkley
17. Robert Parish
18. Adrian Dantley
19. Elgin Baylor
20. Allen Iverson
21. Clyde Drexler
22. Gary Payton
23. Larry Bird
24. Kobe Bryant

All these players are superior to Pippen, you don't think i can find 26 more?

Off the Bat Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, Dwayne Wade, Lebron James, Amare Stoudamire, Dirk Nowitzki, Steve Nash (2 league MVPS, probably does it for him), Dwight Howard (He will be) Tracy Mcgrady, Yao Ming, and that is just getting started.

[ambchang]

Don't try to be stupid. Kobe has 6-8 years left to get Rings and Finals MVPs unless you think Kobe's career is over?


I wouldn't be too sure of that.

Jordan lost to the Pistons 3 years in a row with a very good team.

Please check the rosters again, and tell me with a straight face that it was a very good team.

It really isn't that hard to look up. Please do your own work.

[dbreiden83080]

Pippen got 6 rings and Duncan's got 4, is Pippen more accomplished than Duncan?

The argument has no base because he needs to keep Kobe's 3 rings in play with Jordan's so when/if (big ass IF), Kobe hits 6 rings he can put him up there with him. You can't make it that simple, by just ignoring the circumstances surrounding the titles won and the contributions of the all time players.

[Reggie Miller]

The real issue to me is who, if anyone, can ever match Oscar Robertson. When people start legitimately comparing a modern guard to the Big O, wake me up...

[dbreiden83080]

The real issue to me is who, if anyone, can ever match Oscar Robertson. When people start legitimately comparing a modern guard to the Big O, wake me up...

LOL, where did that come from?

[Allanon]

You expect Kobe to win Final MVPs at age 36 to 38?

It is possible.

[Allanon]

You seem to put a lot of weight into rings, with no regards for DPoY, ROY, All-NBA 1st teams, All-D 1st teams, MVPs, Finals MVPs, etc ...

Pippen got 6 rings and Duncan's got 4, is Pippen more accomplished than Duncan?

Pippen has 0 MVPs. Find an MVP with 6 rings and we can compare them to Duncan.



Him winning would certainly help, but is it reasonable to say that Kobe can win 6 more Finals MVP starting at the age of 29? Not impossible, just not that likely. It would be difficult for him to get 4.

I don't think he's going to catch Jordan in the Finals MVP but he can surpass him in rings and that would make up for it.



Then I really have nothing to say. Sam Jones is more accomplished than Jordan, the guy got 8 rings! Doesn't matter that Russell and Cousy were the driving force.

How many MVPs does Sam Jones have?



Otis Thorpe got one ring, Malone got zero. Thorpe is more accomplish than Malone. This is consistent with your previous logic of how Kobe's 3 rings is a better accomplishment of 2 rings, or how Pippen's 6 rings is the same accomplishments as Jordan's 6.

How many MVPs does Otis Thorpe have?



Parker has the chance to be better than Jordan because he got 3 rings to Jordan's zero at the same age of 26. Parker is more accomplished.

How many MVPs does Parker have? This has been discussed already. Kobe already has 1 MVP, when Parker gets 1 MVP, he can join the discussion.

[dirk4mvp]

Have any of you read the comments on the actual blog?


I've made this argument several times and there is always that one jordan fan who says "kobe will never be better than jordan." I'm not trying to undermine jordan's game, i have respect for what he did to the game, but jordan should not go down as the best player to ever pick up a basketball. Yes he has accomplished more, but Kobe has a much better all around game than jordan ever did. The one factor that I especially think sets Kobe ahead of jordan is their drive to be the best. When jordan played he wanted to be the best in the league. His drive was being better than those around him but that didnt mean he had the game he could have achieved, with kobe his drive is having a PERFECT game. Ya kobe wants to be better than those around him and of course he wants to be the best, but he feels that he needs to have a perfect game. He wants to be the best at every aspect of the game. This is what pushes him ahead of jordan, Kobe is obsessed with being perfect and wont stop until he achieves the absolute best.

Using competitive drive as an arguing point as to whether a player is better than Michael Jordan is some of the oddest shit I've ever read in my life.

[Allanon]

Do you honestly feel Pippen is one of the 50 best players to ever play in the NBA or are you throwing that out there because he got included as part of that dumb-ass list like a decade ago? You know how many guys are more deserving to be there than him in the last decade alone?

Right off the Bat here are the top 24 all time scoring leaders


1. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
2. Karl Malone
3. Michael Jordan
4. Wilt Chamberlain
5. Moses Malone
6. Elvin Hayes
7. Hakeem Olajuwon
8. Oscar Robertson
9. Dominique Wilkins
10. John Havlicek
11. Shaquille O'Neal
12. Alex English
13. Reggie Miller
14. Jerry West
15. Patrick Ewing
16. Charles Barkley
17. Robert Parish
18. Adrian Dantley
19. Elgin Baylor
20. Allen Iverson
21. Clyde Drexler
22. Gary Payton
23. Larry Bird
24. Kobe Bryant

All these players are superior to Pippen, you don't think i can find 26 more?

Off the Bat Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, Dwayne Wade, Lebron James, Amare Stoudamire, Dirk Nowitzki, Steve Nash (2 league MVPS, probably does it for him), Dwight Howard (He will be) Tracy Mcgrady, Yao Ming, and that is just getting started.

Yes, I think Pippen is a Top50 player, even today.

[Obstructed_View]

If Kobe wins three more rings he might be as great as Scottie Pippen.

[Allanon]

If Kobe wins three more rings he might be as great as Scottie Pippen.

First off, Pippen never got even 1 MVP.

But let's go with that a minute and say you're right. If Kobe gets 6 lets put him with Pippen. What if Kobe gets 7 rings? Or 8 Rings?

[dbreiden83080]

Yes, I think Pippen is a Top50 player, even today.

Who in there is he ahead of? if any? That is 34 names, total I can give you 16 more with my eyes closed. And even if i couldn't, Shaq is on most people top 10, no comparison.

[Allanon]

Who in there is he ahead of? if any? That is 34 names, total I can give you 16 more with my eyes closed. And even if i couldn't, Shaq is on most people top 10, no comparison.

Off your list

Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, Dwayne Wade, Lebron James, Amare Stoudamire, Dirk Nowitzki, Steve Nash (2 league MVPS, probably does it for him), Dwight Howard (He will be) Tracy Mcgrady, Yao Ming,

I would definitely put Pippen ahead of Tracy McGrady, Yao Ming, Amare, DWade.

[Allanon]

It's dinner time for me. Post away, I'll answer when I get back.

[dbreiden83080]

Off your list

Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, Dwayne Wade, Lebron James, Amare Stoudamire, Dirk Nowitzki, Steve Nash (2 league MVPS, probably does it for him), Dwight Howard (He will be) Tracy Mcgrady, Yao Ming,

I would definitely put Pippen ahead of Tracy McGrady, Yao Ming, Amare, DWade.

Wade is already ahead of him, he carried a team to a title with Shaq not what he once was. When did Kobe do that, oh yeah that's right, he had a shot, the Pistons bitch-slapped him.

Mcgrady based on talent and stats alone is ahead of Pippen.

Ming same thing

[Reggie Miller]

LOL, where did that come from?

1. Kobe v. MJ is about as fresh and interesting as a debate on the origins of Balkanization.

2. MJ is treated as the end-all, be-all by too many young people. I can name five more valuable players I have seen play in my own lifetime: The Big O, Wilt The Stilt, Dr. J, Iceman, and Russell.

Oscar Robertson = The best small man ever. Statistically, no one can touch him. Robertson carried entire teams for most of his career, from high school to the NBA. The Kings (formerly Royals) and possibly the Bucks would not exist today if not for Robertson. This is part of my definition of value: Robertson saved the very existence of at least one franchise.

Wilt Chamberlain = I'm not going to waste bandwidth on defending Chamberlain as a selection for one of the five most valuable players in the history of pro basketball. Without Chamberlain, the NBA may not have returned to his native Philadelphia after the relocation of the Warriors until the expansion of the early 1980s...

Julius Erving = Dr. J was a better player in his prime than Michael Jordan, from a pure skills standpoint (as was Robertson). You can question this all you want, but you won't find anyone who actually saw his prime in the ABA question this very seriously. I accept that the skill level of the opposition may not have been as high, but Erving's seasons with the Squires and Nets were probably the most dominant perforamnces in pro ball, ever. Without Dr. J, the ABA would have been driven out of business, and the merger would not have happened.

George Gervin = As a kid growing up in southern Indiana, my basketball world centered on I.U. and the Pacers, the most dominant team for the history of the ABA. There were two ABA teams that you wanted to see play the Pacers, because they were also "NBA quality." If Dr. J or the Iceman beat you, you went home disappointed, but you knew you had just watched one hell of a game. David Robinson and Tim Duncan would have played somewhere else than San Antonio if not for the Iceman. Like my other examples, Gervin's value was saving a franchise.

Bill Russell = I can't really argue that Russell kept the Celtics in Boston, but it may very well be the case. Russell was THE core player on eleven championship teams. Russell also coached two of those teams. Now THAT'S value.

[Obstructed_View]

First off, Pippen never got even 1 MVP.

But let's go with that a minute and say you're right. If Kobe gets 6 lets put him with Pippen. What if Kobe gets 7 rings? Or 8 Rings?

If Kobe gets 7 rings then he's better than Pippen. Face it: Nothing he's done so far in his career is close to Jordan. Truth be told, Kobe's not even in the top three Lakers of all time. He's a great basketball player, no question, but he doesn't deserve to have this many pages of a message board thread dedicated to such a ridiculous discussion. I only post in it because it's the offseason and there's nothing else to do, but it's frankly such an easy argument to win it's like clubbing baby seals in here.

[Reggie Miller]

If Kobe gets 7 rings then he's better than Pippen. Face it: Nothing he's done so far in his career is close to Jordan. Truth be told, Kobe's not even in the top three Lakers of all time. He's a great basketball player, no question, but he doesn't deserve to have this many pages of a message board thread dedicated to such a ridiculous discussion. I only post in it because it's the offseason and there's nothing else to do, but it's frankly such an easy argument to win it's like clubbing baby seals in here.

Ignoring the "pure talent" question, which is largely unanswerable (different positions, different eras, etc.), Bryant isn't even in the discussion when it comes to the most important players in the history of pro basketball. At this point, Bryant is more likely to be remembered as the complimentary player on three Shaq teams and "that guy who scored 81 points in a game" than for anything else.

[dbreiden83080]

At this point, Bryant is more likely to be remembered as the complimentary player on three Shaq teams and "that guy who scored 81 points in a game" than for anything else.

Hey someone else who sees where Kobe is at right now. See what happens when you take that Laker cap off and open up those eyes just a little Allanon . :toast

[dbreiden83080]

I only post in it because it's the offseason and there's nothing else to do, but it's frankly such an easy argument to win it's like clubbing baby seals in here.

:lmao

[Allanon]

If Kobe gets 7 rings then he's better than Pippen.

And may be as good as or better than Jordan.



Face it: Nothing he's done so far in his career is close to Jordan. Truth be told, Kobe's not even in the top three Lakers of all time. He's a great basketball player, no question

I agree. But he has many years left to define his legacy.



but he doesn't deserve to have this many pages of a message board thread dedicated to such a ridiculous discussion. I only post in it because it's the offseason and there's nothing else to do, but it's frankly such an easy argument to win it's like clubbing baby seals in here.

There's no "winning" this argument. You have won nothing. Nobody knows what Kobe may do. And if you know what Kobe's going to do the rest of his career, I may have to ask you for the next lotto numbers.

[Allanon]

Ignoring the "pure talent" question, which is largely unanswerable (different positions, different eras, etc.), Bryant isn't even in the discussion when it comes to the most important players in the history of pro basketball. At this point, Bryant is more likely to be remembered as the complimentary player on three Shaq teams and "that guy who scored 81 points in a game" than for anything else.

That is true today. But who knows what he will accomplish in the next few years of his career?

[Allanon]

Wade is already ahead of him, he carried a team to a title with Shaq not what he once was.



When did Kobe do that, oh yeah that's right, he had a shot, the Pistons bitch-slapped him.

Celtics, but I know what you mean. Kobe has several years to bitch slap the Celtics. My guess is it will start this year.



Mcgrady based on talent and stats alone is ahead of Pippen.

Ming same thing

I'd take Pippen over any of those guys any day (assuming they've accomplished all they will accomplish).

[dirk4mvp]

I'd take Pippen over any of those guys any day (assuming they've accomplished all they will accomplish).

What? Isn't that going against everything you've been saying about what Kobe has yet to accomplish?

Why don't we just assume Kobe has accomplished all he will?

[Allanon]

What? Isn't that going against everything you've been saying about what Kobe has yet to accomplish?

Why don't we just assume Kobe has accomplished all he will?


It's a hypothetical question and a hypothetical answer and I definitely could be wrong about TMAC, Wade, Yao, etc. Just like today, if we assumed Kobe's done, I'd take Jordan.

Of course we know all of these guys are still ongoing.

[Reggie Miller]

That is true today. But who knows what he will accomplish in the next few years of his career?

I'll give you this much: He deserves to be in these kind of "what if" and other hot stove arguments.

On the other hand, consider this. Reggie Miller is definitely going to make the Basketball HOF. Bryant probably will also.

As the years go by, I am realizing that Kobe is environmentally retarded. Seriously, he grew up overeseas as the child of a pro athlete. No wonder he acts the fool.

[Obstructed_View]

Nobody knows what Kobe may do.
And the clubbing continues, only this time I can sit back and watch as you do it to yourself. At this point, Wade looks more like Jordan than Kobe does.

[LA24]

At this point, Wade looks more like Jordan than Kobe does.

You want to compare a guy who left a game in a wheelchair to Kobe Bryant ? :dizzy

Perhaps you were impressed by his performance at the olympics ?:lol

Wade isn't on Kobe's level. He doesn't have Kobe's mental toughness, clutchness/killer instinct, nor is his game as complete as Kobe's (and never will be). Kobe's nba resume blows Wade's away (http://www.kb24.com/bio). I can just stop right here. It's silly, really.

[Reggie Miller]

You want to compare a guy who left a game in a wheelchair to Kobe Bryant ? :dizzy

Perhaps you were impressed by his performance at the olympics ?:lol

Wade isn't on Kobe's level. He doesn't have Kobe's mental toughness, clutchness/killer instinct, nor is his game as complete as Kobe's (and never will be). Kobe's nba resume blows Wade's away (http://www.kb24.com/bio). I can just stop right here. It's silly, really.

Straw man.

Compare Bryant to Robertson.

[LA24]

Wade is already ahead of him, he carried a team to a title with Shaq not what he once was.


Context, context please. How did Wade get that championship ? Oh yeah, by getting the undeserved Jordan treatment by the refs that year and the Mavs choking a 2-0 lead.
The only time Wade was really battle tested was during that ONE series against the Pistons. He still haven't proven his mettle. I call that a fortunate title run being in the weak ass east and all. Bring his ass over to the west, and see if he could do what Kobe did...carry a crap ass team every single night throughout the year and be one game from knocking out a 2nd seeded team in the playoffs.

I can understand if we're talking about Lebron here. But Wade ? It's so illogical that I must conclude that it's just bitterness and haterism for "Spurs Killer" Kobe. It has to be for that reason alone.

Btw, I don't think rings alone should determine a players greatness.
Horry has more rings than Kobe, but does that mean he's a greater player ?
Does that mean he's closer to Jordan than Kobe is ?
Like I said, context please.

[Obstructed_View]

You want to compare a guy who left a game in a wheelchair to Kobe Bryant ? :dizzy
No, I want to compare a guy who was the best player on the planet in the '06 NBA finals to Michael Jordan; try and keep up. Kobe's never been that in the playoffs, let alone in the Finals.


Perhaps you were impressed by his performance at the olympics ?:lol You mean this year's olympics, where he was better than Kobe Bryant? Well, yeah.


Wade isn't on Kobe's level. He doesn't have Kobe's mental toughness, clutchness/killer instinct, nor is his game as complete as Kobe's (and never will be). Kobe's nba resume blows Wade's away (http://www.kb24.com/bio). I can just stop right here. It's silly, really.
Kobe's NBA resume has way more individual accolades than Wade's does, but unfortunately basketball is a team sport, and Allanon is talking about what someone could become. As far as mental toughness and clutchness (?) go, I'll take Wade. He's done more to carry a team in big games than Kobe has and he's four years younger. If comparing him to Jordan is crazy, then imagine what comparing Kobe to Jordan is.

[LA24]

Bryant isn't even in the discussion when it comes to the most important players in the history of pro basketball. At this point, Bryant is more likely to be remembered as the complimentary player on three Shaq teams and "that guy who scored 81 points in a game" than for anything else.

Hyperbole + Haterism = loss of credibility.

Kobe is a definetly top 50 in Nba history. Therefore, he is important to it's history.

[LA24]

No, I want to compare a guy who was the best player on the planet in the '06 NBA finals to Michael Jordan; try and keep up. Kobe's never been that in the playoffs, let alone in the Finals.

Best player "IN" that moment of time during "THAT" series ? I'll give you that. But he definetly wasn't the best player in the world during that time.


You mean this year's olympics, where he was better than Kobe Bryant? Well, yeah.

And during the championship game when it MATTERED....who stepped up when NO ONE else could ? Well, yeah.



As far as mental toughness and clutchness (?) go, I'll take Wade. He's done more to carry a team in big games than Kobe has and he's four years younger. .

I disagree. Oh wells.

[LA24]

As the years go by, I am realizing that Kobe is environmentally retarded. Seriously, he grew up overeseas as the child of a pro athlete. No wonder he acts the fool.

What the hell does that have to do with anything ? And you don't even personally know the guy.

Proof of haterism here.

Sorry, because of that, you lose credibility when talking about Kobe Bryant now.

[Allanon]

And the clubbing continues, only this time I can sit back and watch as you do it to yourself. At this point, Wade looks more like Jordan than Kobe does.

Uhmm, you clubbed yourself on that one. Wade = 1 ring, Kobe 3 rings. Considering this year, I like Kobe's chances to be 4 rings to Wade's 1.

Nobody knows what Kobe's going to do / or Wade. Come back to me when you become a prophet.

[DPG21920]

Allanon, is it possible that aliens will come down from outer space and have a 3 way with Kobe?

[Obstructed_View]

Uhmm, you clubbed yourself on that one. Wade = 1 ring, Kobe 3 rings.
Wade's four years younger than Kobe, so nothing Kobe did counts because I can make up whatever outlandish shit I'd like because Wade's career hasn't been written yet.

[TheMadHatter]

Are you guys seriously trying to argue that Wade is a better player than Kobe?

I can completely understand the Lebron debate, but Wade is undeserving at this point in time. Wade is a great player and I love watching him play, but he isn't on Kobe's level. There is only one active player who is on Kobe's level right now, and that is Lebron.

[TheMadHatter]

Wade's four years younger than Kobe, so nothing Kobe did counts because I can make up whatever outlandish shit I'd like because Wade's career hasn't been written yet.

We're not having this debate. Wade is not better than Kobe nor is he equal to Kobe. This is simply not up to debate, sorry.

I understand your bitterness for Kobe because he has killed your Spurs so many times in the playoffs, but it clearly is clouding your judgment.

[Allanon]

Allanon, is it possible that aliens will come down from outer space and have a 3 way with Kobe?

DPG, nah, they'll probably come and visit you instead.

[Allanon]

Wade's four years younger than Kobe, so nothing Kobe did counts

What Wade does in the future won't change anything that Kobe has done.



because I can make up whatever outlandish shit I'd like because Wade's career hasn't been written yet.

Yes, you can. It doesn't make you right or prophetic.

[KidCongo]

Kobe has maybe 1/3 of Jordans achievements.

[dbreiden83080]

Btw, I don't think rings alone should determine a players greatness.
Horry has more rings than Kobe, but does that mean he's a greater player ?
Does that mean he's closer to Jordan than Kobe is ?
Like I said, context please.

Welcome to the debate. I have been arguing it is not just about rings and you have to look at the specific circumstances for 15 pages now. Try reading more than one post :rolleyes

[DPG21920]

DPG, nah, they'll probably come and visit you instead.

So you are saying it is impossible that aliens will come and visit Kobe and have a 3 way?

[Allanon]

So you are saying it is impossible that aliens will come and visit Kobe and have a 3 way?

Oh, no. I just think it's more probable they'll visit you for some kinky 3-way action, but that's just my opinion.

[DPG21920]

Oh, no. I just think it's more probable they'll visit you for some kinky 3-way action, but that's just my opinion.

Well I don't agree, but you are certainly entitled to your opinion. Either way, even when I am wrong, I am right in this case. I am glad to see that you are not a prophet like some of these other posters.

[Allanon]

I am glad to see that you are not a prophet like some of these other posters.

Why thankyou, that's very kind of you to say.

[ambchang]

Pippen has 0 MVPs. Find an MVP with 6 rings and we can compare them to Duncan.

Since why is one MVP important now? Why aren't DPoY, Finals MVPs important? Because Kobe got one MVP and doesn't have the others?


I don't think he's going to catch Jordan in the Finals MVP but he can surpass him in rings and that would make up for it.

Coming from a guy who couldn't stop about people stating their opinions as facts ....

Why would Kobe catching up with # of rings be able to make up for Final MVPs? Because you defined them?


How many MVPs does Sam Jones have?

Why is this important?


How many MVPs does Otis Thorpe have?

Why is this important?


How many MVPs does Parker have? This has been discussed already. Kobe already has 1 MVP, when Parker gets 1 MVP, he can join the discussion.

Why? Might as well state exactly your criteria. From what I read, one MVP gets you in the conversation, then rings, regardless of your role, finalizes it.

So is Garnett more accomplished than Malone and Barkley?

[ambchang]

nV3AAH4_UV4

Marquise Walker could be better than Jordan, Bird, Magic, Chamberlain and Russell combined. He is more accomplished than any one of them at 8 years old, and no one can be sure that he is not going to win 1 MVPs and 54 titles, but zero Finals MVP. I expect him to average 94 ppg in the NBA, with 52 rpg, 16 blks, 21 steals and 36 assists, while average zero turnovers and fouls, shooting 100% from the field and ft line. He is going to break every single record in existence, and play for 54 years (winning a title for every single year he will be in the league).

Why not? It's possible.

[Allanon]

Since why is one MVP important now? Why aren't DPoY, Finals MVPs important? Because Kobe got one MVP and doesn't have the others?

MVP proves that you are the best of the best over the course of a season.

A Finals MVP means you were great in 4 games.




Coming from a guy who couldn't stop about people stating their opinions as facts ....

Why would Kobe catching up with # of rings be able to make up for Final MVPs? Because you defined them?

I did not say catching up with the #'s of rings. I said SURPASS. If Kobe has 7-8 rings, he would have more than Jordan. So what else could you bring up to level the playing field other than start going into awards?




Why is this important?
Because it shows you were the best. If Jordan never got 1 MVP, he would not be GOAT. If Kobe never got 1 MVP, we would never have this conversation.



Why is this important?
Because it shows you were the best. If Jordan never got 1 MVP, he would not be GOAT. If Kobe never got 1 MVP, we would never have this conversation.



Why? Might as well state exactly your criteria. From what I read, one MVP gets you in the conversation, then rings, regardless of your role, finalizes it.

So is Garnett more accomplished than Malone and Barkley?

I don't know if KG is more accomplished than Malone and Barkley I haven't thought about it but it's certainly debateable.

[Allanon]

nV3AAH4_UV4

Marquise Walker could be better than Jordan, Bird, Magic, Chamberlain and Russell combined. He is more accomplished than any one of them at 8 years old, and no one can be sure that he is not going to win 1 MVPs and 54 titles, but zero Finals MVP. I expect him to average 94 ppg in the NBA, with 52 rpg, 16 blks, 21 steals and 36 assists, while average zero turnovers and fouls, shooting 100% from the field and ft line. He is going to break every single record in existence, and play for 54 years (winning a title for every single year he will be in the league).

Why not? It's possible.

Definitely he could be a great player, that kid's got some great handles.

I saw some special video on him I think on ESPN, I hope he makes it to the NBA.

[Obstructed_View]

Are you guys seriously trying to argue that Wade is a better player than Kobe?
You are finally starting to get what it's like when you guys try to argue that Kobe is even close to Jordan. Put that feeling in a bottle and take a sniff of it every time you feel the urge to bring this moronic discussion up again.

[DPG21920]

You are finally starting to get what it's like when you guys try to argue that Kobe is even close to Jordan. Put that feeling in a bottle and take a sniff of it every time you feel the urge to bring this moronic discussion up again.

Allanon is not arguing that Kobe is better than Jordan. He is saying that it is possible he can be better by the time he is done. He is arguing that it is possible for Kobe to catch and surpass Jordan's individual and team achievements and awards by the time his career is over.

What I want to know is, does he think it is PROBABLE? If so, please list your reasoning, complete with factual evidence to support this belief in probability.

[Allanon]

What I want to know is, does he think it is PROBABLE? If so, please list your reasoning, complete with factual evidence to support this belief in probability.

I am 50/50 on this one as to whether Kobe will match or surpass Jordan as GOAT.

For facts, I use the fact that Kobe at 30 is at virtually the same point as Jordan at age 30. A couple of championships down, an MVP in the pocket and a championship caliber team. Both had lost their selfish tags at this point and were all about winning and leading their respective teams.

After this year, I think we will have a much better feel for this, the timing on this question is 1 season too early.

What Kobe does starting this year will determine whether or not he has the goods to become GOAT or mentioned with him.

[DPG21920]

I am 50/50 on this one as to whether Kobe will match or surpass Jordan as GOAT.

For facts, I use the fact that Kobe at 30 is at virtually the same point as Jordan at age 30. A couple of championships down, an MVP in the pocket and a championship caliber team. Both had lost their selfish tags at this point and were all about winning and leading their respective teams.

After this year, I think we will have a much better feel for this, the timing on this question is 1 season too early.

What Kobe does starting this year will determine whether or not he has the goods to become GOAT or mentioned with him.

But the "fact" you use was already demonstrated to be absurd considering Jordan's accomplishments while he was 30 vs. Kobe (what he would have to do this year)

[Allanon]

But the "fact" you use was already demonstrated to be absurd considering Jordan's accomplishments while he was 30 vs. Kobe (what he would have to do this year)

Sorry if I don't include college achievements into the equation. It's neither right nor wrong, but I don't consider what a player does in college as part of his "career". Especially since Kobe never had the benefit of going to college to win awards.

[Obstructed_View]

Sorry if I don't include college achievements into the equation. It's neither right nor wrong, but I don't consider what a player does in college as part of his "career".
You don't seem to consider any of the mountain of evidence that Jordan is an all-time player, and Kobe is a taller version of Allen Iverson.

[DPG21920]

I presume that you include "the day he turned 30" for some reason, but by the end of the season in which he turned 30, Jordan had won an NCAA title, been the Naismith and Wooden player of the year in college, had won two regular season MVPs, led the league in scoring seven years in a row, had won three NBA titles and three Finals MVPs, became the second person in NBA history to score 3000 points in a season (also became the first person in NBA history to get 200 steals and 100 blocks in that same season, yet wasn't awarded the MVP), set the record for most points in a playoff game...

If you'd like to cut off "by the day he turned 30" he had done all those things with the exception of the last title and one of the finals MVP awards.

The only things Kobe Bryant has done by the age of 30 that Jordan never did is score 81 points against Toronto, tank a playoff game to spite his team and get outplayed and lose in the finals.

By your weak attempts to compare, someone could make a case that Tony Parker is as close to Jordan as Kobe is.


Sorry if I don't include college achievements into the equation. It's neither right nor wrong, but I don't consider what a player does in college as part of his "career". Especially since Kobe never had the benefit of going to college to win awards.

Even if you take out the college part, he still has done quite a bit more than Kobe.

[Allanon]

You don't seem to consider any of the mountain of evidence that Jordan is an all-time player, and Kobe is a taller version of Allen Iverson.

Jordan's mountain of evidence didn't complete until he was retired.

At age 30, Jordan was a shorter Kobe.

[Allanon]

Even if you take out the college part, he still has done quite a bit more than Kobe.

Unfortunately not true in my opinion. Jordan 2 rings, Kobe 3 rings.

They both got lots of scoring titles, defensive things. Jordan had more of some, Kobe had more of others. But those are individual things, winning is what's important.

What is it that the Spur fans say, it's an 82 game pre-season ... or something like that.

[DPG21920]

Unfortunately not true in my opinion. Jordan 2 rings, Kobe 3 rings.

They both got lots of scoring titles, defensive things. Jordan had more of some, Kobe had more of others. But those are individual things, winning is what's important.

What is it that the Spur fans say, it's an 82 game pre-season ... or something like that.

I thought Jordan had 3 rings before he was 31 with 3 finals MVP's?

[DPG21920]

How many scoring titles does Kobe have? How many in a row? How many years had Kobe played in the nba for his 3 rings versus Jordan?

[Allanon]

I thought Jordan had 3 rings before he was 31 with 3 finals MVP's?

Kobe might have 4 rings and 1 more MVP and 1 Finals MVP before he's 31 but that's in the future. That's why I say this year is a turning point.

edit: oops, counted wrong and corrected.

[DPG21920]

Kobe might have 4 rings and 1 more MVP and 1 Finals MVP before he's 31 but that's in the future. That's why I say this year is a turning point.

He would only tie Jordan's regular season MVP's then, correct? I thought Jordan had 2 before he was 31?

[Allanon]

He would only tie Jordan's regular season MVP's then, correct? I thought Jordan had 2 before he was 31?

Yes, he would be behind Jordan in MVPs and FInals MVPs, but he would still be ahead in # of rings.

[Obstructed_View]

I thought Jordan had 3 rings before he was 31 with 3 finals MVP's?

He did. Allanon keeps going back to Jordan's birthday being before the playoffs and cutting it off there, as though it means something. People who say Kobe's comparable to Jordan aren't old enough to remember watching Jordan play.

I'm the guy who wrote an article about how overrated Jordan was, and he's still an order of magnitude better than Kobe.

[Allanon]

He did. Allanon keeps going back to Jordan's birthday being before the playoffs and cutting it off there, as though it means something. People who say Kobe's comparable to Jordan aren't old enough to remember watching Jordan play.

I'm the guy who wrote an article about how overrated Jordan was, and he's still an order of magnitude better than Kobe.

Jordan was born during the season, Kobe was born during the offseason. So if you count by age, anything Jordan does at a certain age, Kobe gets a full season to match it.

[Obstructed_View]

Kobe might have 4 rings and 1 more MVP and 1 Finals MVP before he's 31 but that's in the future. That's why I say this year is a turning point.

edit: oops, counted wrong and corrected.

Jordan had three of each. Kobe has zero finals MVPs. Can't make those up. Kobe had a team stocked with first ballot hall of famers and couldn't win a ring with them.

[Obstructed_View]

Jordan was born during the season, Kobe was born during the offseason. So if you count by age, anything Jordan does at a certain age, Kobe gets a full season to match it.
Kobe can't match it in two seasons. Jordan's undefeated in the finals. Kobe can't match that without a time machine.

[Allanon]

Jordan had three of each. Kobe has zero finals MVPs. Can't make those up. Kobe had a team stocked with first ballot hall of famers and couldn't win a ring with them.

As nice as a Finals MVP is, I believe a ring is more important than those awards. I'm sure Barkley and Malone would have traded in all their awards for 1 ring.

Jordan had the Finals MVP, Kobe has 1 more ring.

[Obstructed_View]

As nice as a Finals MVP is, I believe a ring is more important than those awards. I'm sure Barkley and Malone would have traded in all their awards for 1 ring.

Jordan had the Finals MVP, Kobe has 1 more ring.

Kobe doesn't have one more ring, Kobe has two more trips to the finals. Kobe had won his three rings by age 24, and hasn't really done shit since. Parker has the same number of rings, so Parker's closer to Kobe than Kobe is to Jordan.

[Allanon]

Kobe doesn't have one more ring, Kobe has two more trips to the finals. Kobe had won his three rings by age 24, and hasn't really done shit since. Parker has the same number of rings, so Parker's closer to Kobe than Kobe is to Jordan.

Parker has no MVP. Find any player with 3 rings + 1 MVP under the age of 30 and we can start some comparisons with Jordan at age 30.

And no matter what you say can't change the fact that Kobe had 3 at the same age Jordan had 2.

[dbreiden83080]

And no matter what you say can't change the fact that Kobe had 3 at the same age Jordan had 2.

Nor can you change the fact that Kobe played with a top 10 player of all time, he's won nothing since that player left and Jordan played with a guy who it's very debateable if he is even in the top 50.

[Allanon]

Nor can you change the fact that Kobe played with a top 10 player of all time, he's won nothing since that player left and Jordan played with a guy who it's very debateable if he is even in the top 50.

Pippen IS in the Top50 list, that isn't debateable.

I do agree Kobe's won nothing since Shaq left but Kobe's team has been pretty crappy until this last year.

If Kobe still had Luke, Smush and Kwame as starters, then I'd say Kobe has no chance. But with a young team that can contend into the next 5 years, I see no reason why Kobe shouldn't get a chance.

[DPG21920]

Pippen IS in the Top50 list, that isn't debateable.

I do agree Kobe's won nothing since Shaq left but Kobe's team has been pretty crappy until this last year.

If Kobe still had Luke, Smush and Kwame as starters, then I'd say Kobe has no chance. But with a young team that can contend into the next 5 years, I see no reason why Kobe shouldn't get a chance.

Do you think Kobe could of taken that crappy Laker team to the finals in the east?

[Allanon]

Do you think Kobe could of taken that crappy Laker team to the finals in the east?

Possibly in the East but no way in the West. Depends on the matchups they got along the way.

And there's no way he would have gotten past the Spurs in the Finals.

[DPG21920]

Lebron definitely did it.

[dbreiden83080]

Pippen IS in the Top50 list, that isn't debateable

Your right about that, but let me ask you this?? What is that list worth when players like Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, Dirk Nowitski, Steve Nash and one day Lebron James and Dwayne Wade, just to name a few are nowhere near it??

Translation, it's not worth the paper it's printed on

[Allanon]

Lebron definitely did it.

LeBron's team was nowhere near as crappy as the Luke, Smush, KwameLakers. Cavs were not and still aren't a good offensive team. But on defense, the Cavs were pretty good. Big Z was pretty good and still one of the better centers. Larry Hughes was decent. Drew Gooden, not bad and Eric Snow was a good defender.

I can't really say much positive for Luke, Smush and Kwame. Kobe & Odom were the only worthwhile guys.

[Allanon]

Your right about that, but let me ask you this?? What is that list worth when players like Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, Dirk Nowitski, Steve Nash and one day Lebron James and Dwayne Wade, just to name a few are nowhere near it??

Translation, it's not worth the paper it's printed on

These guys will get their chance in the next list. Until then, Pippen's on it and I have to say I think he does deserve to be on it. I don't think Pippen got enough credit from fans for his role in the 6 championships.

[DPG21920]

I hear excuses.

[Allanon]

I hear excuses.

You should have your ears checked.

[dbreiden83080]

These guys will get their chance in the next list. Until then, Pippen's on it and I have to say I think he does deserve to be on it. I don't think Pippen got enough credit from fans for his role in the 6 championships.

What if there is no next list? That is really the point i am making here. Is Pippen right now today, a clear cut top 50 player of all time?? I really don't feel he is. At the very least it is a good debate. Times change, there are players that made that list that don't belong there anymore, which is why it was a silly idea to begin with.

If you want to say Pippen back then was deserving okay fine we agree but still today, ehhhh i am not so sure. Like i said it is a good debate. What's not debateable is Shaq is likely top 10 on everyone's list.

[DPG21920]

Lebron James Kobe Bryant
Larry Hughes Smush Parker
Zydrunas Ilgauskas Lamar Odom
Drew Gooden Luke Walton
Sasha Pavlovic Maurice Evans
Donyell Marshall Andrew Bynum
Anderson Varejao Brian Cook
Damon Jones Ronnie Turiaf
Eric Snow Vladimir Radmonovic
Daniel Gibson Kwame Brown
David Wesley Jordan Farmar
Shannon Brown Sasha Vujacic
Ira Newble Shammond Williams
Scott Pollard Aaron McKie
Dwayne Jones

Those are the two rosters from the same year

[DPG21920]

LeBron's team was nowhere near as crappy as the Luke, Smush, KwameLakers. Cavs were not and still aren't a good offensive team. But on defense, the Cavs were pretty good. Big Z was pretty good and still one of the better centers. Larry Hughes was decent. Drew Gooden, not bad and Eric Snow was a good defender.

I can't really say much positive for Luke, Smush and Kwame. Kobe & Odom were the only worthwhile guys.

I thought you were a facts guy. This is all opinion. In my opinion Kobe's team was just as good as Lebron's. The only fact remains that Lebron got to the finals with a comparable team.

[Allanon]

Lebron James Kobe Bryant
Larry Hughes Smush Parker
Zydrunas Ilgauskas Lamar Odom
Drew Gooden Luke Walton
Sasha Pavlovic Maurice Evans
Donyell Marshall Andrew Bynum
Anderson Varejao Brian Cook
Damon Jones Ronnie Turiaf
Eric Snow Vladimir Radmonovic
Daniel Gibson Kwame Brown
David Wesley Jordan Farmar
Shannon Brown Sasha Vujacic
Ira Newble Shammond Williams
Scott Pollard Aaron McKie
Dwayne Jones

Those are the two rosters from the same year


I thought you were a facts guy. This is all opinion. In my opinion Kobe's team was just as good as Lebron's. The only fact remains that Lebron got to the finals with a comparable team.

I was asked for my opinion, so I gave it.

As for comparing the teams, just looking at the Starters:
Eric Snow >>> Smush Parker
David Wesley? <<<<< Kobe
LeBron >>>>>> Luke
Donyell Marshall <<<< Odom
Big Z >>>>>>> Kwame

Off the bench, Farmar, Sasha, Ronny were all trash back then.

[DPG21920]

Just looking at the Starters:
Eric Snow >>> Smush Parker
David Wesley? <<<<< Kobe
LeBron >>>>>> Luke
Donyell Marshall <<<< Odom
Big Z >>>>>>> Kwame

point is that they are not that different with regards to talent. Lets look at it this way: who is better Kobe or Lebron?

[Allanon]

point is that they are not that different with regards to talent. Lets look at it this way: who is better Kobe or Lebron?

The teams were ALOT different in talent in my opinion. The Lakers were a d-league team outside of Kobe & Odom.

I think Kobe is still better than LeBron.

[dbreiden83080]

I was asked for my opinion, so I gave it.

As for comparing the teams, just looking at the Starters:
Eric Snow >>> Smush Parker
David Wesley? <<<<< Kobe
LeBron >>>>>> Luke
Donyell Marshall <<<< Odom
Big Z >>>>>>> Kwame

Off the bench, Farmar, Sasha, Ronny were all trash back then.

Did Smush play that year? Because Snow was on the bench for the finals.

[Allanon]

Did Smush play that year? Because Snow was on the bench for the finals.

Yes, Smush was the starting point guard. I don't know who the Cavs backup point guard was during the Finals but I'm sure he was better than Smush. Hell, practically all the NBA point guards are better than Smush.

[DPG21920]

The teams were ALOT different in talent in my opinion. The Lakers were a d-league team outside of Kobe & Odom.

I think Kobe is still better than LeBron.

Ok, so who is better Odom or Big Z?

[Allanon]

Ok, so who is better Odom or Big Z?

Back then, Big Z was better than Odom. I believe that was the year Odom's kid passed away and it showed in his play.

[DPG21920]

Back then, Big Z was better than Odom. I believe that was the year Odom's kid passed away and it showed in his play.

Really, you are being honest. I think that in no point in time was Big Z better than Odom.

[Allanon]

Dinner time, I'll check back in a couple of hours and respond then.

[Obstructed_View]

Parker has no MVP. Find any player with 3 rings + 1 MVP under the age of 30 and we can start some comparisons with Jordan at age 30.
Parker has a finals MVP. One more than Kobe has, to be exact. As nice as a regular season MVP award is, I think the finals MVP is more important than the regular season MVP. Parker also has four years to get a regular season MVP, which like I said, is a hell of a lot more likely than it is for Kobe to win three or more championships.


And no matter what you say can't change the fact that Kobe had 3 at the same age Jordan had 2.

All of your hair splitting can't change the fact that Jordan had three at the age Kobe is now and had never lost in the finals.

[Obstructed_View]

Ok, so who is better Odom or Big Z?

Big Z post foot surgery <<<<< Odom.

[dbreiden83080]

As nice as a regular season MVP award is, I think the finals MVP is more important than the regular season MVP.

No come on. Think about the 2003 Spurs. Duncan had a brillaint year and earned that season MVP. So what if someone else had gotten finals MVP that year on the Spurs, his reg season MVP still means more. Lets be fair that is an 82 game honor.

[Obstructed_View]

No come on. Think about the 2003 Spurs. Duncan had a brillaint year and earned that season MVP. So what if someone else had gotten finals MVP that year on the Spurs, his reg season MVP still means more. Lets be fair that is an 82 game honor.

Actually, I was just paraphrasing when he said that Jordan's two finals MVP awards by the nanosecond he turned 30 can't compare to a Kobe's three rings he won on Shaq's back, but then says that a Parker who won three rings and a finals MVP four years earlier than Kobe did can't compare because he doesn't have an MVP. :lol

[TheMadHatter]

Actually, I was just paraphrasing when he said that Jordan's two finals MVP awards by the nanosecond he turned 30 can't compare to a Kobe's three rings he won on Shaq's back, but then says that a Parker who won three rings and a finals MVP four years earlier than Kobe did can't compare because he doesn't have an MVP. :lol

To say that Kobe won ring's on Shaq's back is a horrible representation of the truth.

Kobe was just as much responsible for those 3 rings as Shaq. As a Spurs fan you of all people should know this.

It's obvious you have a bias and hatred towards Bryant. It shows clearly in your posts.

[KidCongo]

That year the Cavs started PG Larry Hughes SG Sasha Pavlovic SF LeBron James (4th year) PF Drew Gooden C Big Z

Off bench were Boobie (R), AV, Donyell, DJ or Snow

[Allanon]

Parker has a finals MVP. One more than Kobe has, to be exact. As nice as a regular season MVP award is, I think the finals MVP is more important than the regular season MVP. Parker also has four years to get a regular season MVP, which like I said, is a hell of a lot more likely than it is for Kobe to win three or more championships.

Finals MVP means you were great for 4-7 games. Regular Season MVP means you were great for a whole season, much harder to do.



All of your hair splitting can't change the fact that Jordan had three at the age Kobe is now and had never lost in the finals.

Nope, Jordan had 2. If you count 3, that goes beyond June of this year which is in the future. Weak.

[Allanon]

Actually, I was just paraphrasing when he said that Jordan's two finals MVP awards by the nanosecond he turned 30 can't compare to a Kobe's three rings he won on Shaq's back.

Shaq didn't hit the game winning shots for the most part due to Hack-a-Shaq. Shaq was a liability in the 4th quarter. Not to say Shaq didn't do a great job, but the Lakers would not won as much without Kobe's clutch performances. As a result, Shaq sat out quite a few of the last minutes of close 4th quarters.

As recent as a couple of months ago, Popovich showed that Shaq was a liability in the 4th quarter due to hack-a-Shaq, you should know that.



but then says that a Parker who won three rings and a finals MVP four years earlier than Kobe did can't compare because he doesn't have an MVP. :lol

Finals MVP is 4-7 games of greatness. MVP is for a full season which is much more difficult.

[DPG21920]

If it is "much" more difficult, than why does Kobe have an MVP and not a finals MVP?

[KidCongo]

If it is "much" more difficult, than why does Kobe have an MVP and not a finals MVP?

Robin when he wins finals. Batman when he loses finals.

[Allanon]

That year the Cavs started PG Larry Hughes SG Sasha Pavlovic SF LeBron James (4th year) PF Drew Gooden C Big Z

Off bench were Boobie (R), AV, Donyell, DJ or Snow

This team was significantly better than the Lakers of that same year. LeBron has had a good team for a few years now and he plays in the East.

For the Lakers:

Starters: Smush, Kobe, Luke, Odom, Kwame

Off the bench: Farmar, Sasha, Radmanovic, Turiaf (they sucked back then, they did not get significantly better until last year)

[Allanon]

If it is "much" more difficult, than why does Kobe have an MVP and not a finals MVP?

Do you actually think a Finals MVP ranks higher than a regular season MVP?

As Behold the King said, he lost last year. If he had won, then he would have gotten his Finals MVP too.

[KidCongo]

This team was significantly better than the Lakers of that same year. LeBron has had a good team for a few years now and he plays in the East.

For the Lakers:

Starters: Smush, Kobe, Luke, Odom, Kwame

Off the bench: Farmar, Sasha, Radmanovic, Turiaf (they sucked back then, they did not get significantly better until last year)

How is the Cavs team significantly better?

For those 4 months after the All Star break, this team worked. Before that it was all LeBron with people chipping in less than they did in the 4 month stretch. However, i doubt Kobe's lineup would beat the Pistons in 07.

[Allanon]

How is the Cavs team significantly better?

For those 4 months after the All Star break, this team worked. Before that it was all LeBron with people chipping in less than they did in the 4 month stretch. However, i doubt Kobe's lineup would beat the Pistons in 07.

Because the Cavs are an excellent defensive team with a decent bench.

Let's rate the guys from that year:

Pavlovic >>>>>> Smush Parker
Larry Hughes <<<< Kobe
LeBron >>>>>>>> Luke Walton
Drew Gooden << Odom
Big Z >>>>>>>>> Kwame Brown

Bench:
Anderson Verajao >>>> Ronny Turiaf
Boobie Gibson >>> Sasha Vujacic
Donyell Marshall >> Brian Cook
Damon Jones >>> Farmar

The Cavs were better than the Lakers by a wide margin.

[dirk4mvp]

Kobe couldn't have done what LeBron did if they switched placed then.

[dbreiden83080]

To say that Kobe won ring's on Shaq's back is a horrible representation of the truth.

Kobe was just as much responsible for those 3 rings as Shaq. As a Spurs fan you of all people should know this.

It's obvious you have a bias and hatred towards Bryant. It shows clearly in your posts.

It's not that Kobe flat out won them on Shaq's back but the comparisons are being made to Jordan and his titles with Pippen. That is a ridiculous comparison given that Scottie is a borderline at best top 50 player (Personally i don't think he is anymore) and Shaq is regarded as one of the 5 best centers and probably top 10 player all time in the NBA. Shaq put up legeandary post-season numbers and finals numbers. 2 of Pippen maybe equal Shaq.

[Reggie Miller]

It's not that Kobe flat out won them on Shaq's back but the comparisons are being made to Jordan and his titles with Pippen. That is a ridiculous comparison given that Scottie is a borderline at best top 50 player (Personally i don't think he is anymore) and Shaq is regarded as one of the 5 best centers and probably top 10 player all time in the NBA. Shaq put up legeandary post-season numbers and finals numbers. 2 of Pippen maybe equal Shaq.

I agree, but we've gotten pretty far afeild from Kobe v. MJ.

Anyways...

You can't go by what people ought to do, or probably will do, in the future. In 1996, it looked like Reggie Miller had a chance of being every bit the equal of Jordan by the end of their careers. How'd that work out?

Fact: If Kobe Bryant dies tomorrow, there is a very good chance he doesn't even make the HOF on the first ballot.

To the earlier poster who claimed I lack credibility, learn your history and read a book or two before opening your trap. Bryant is not in the discussion for one of the most important players in the history of pro basketball. No rational, educated person could think otherwise. The men I listed have saved entire franchises and/or their pro league from extinction. If you think Bryant is on that level, then you are an idiot, plain and simple.

[RsxPiimp]

Kobe couldn't have done what LeBron did if they switched placed then.

dirk couldnt have done what wade did if they switched placed then

[dirk4mvp]

dirk couldnt have done what wade did if they switched placed then


you following me is getting creepy.

[Obstructed_View]

Nope, Jordan had 2. If you count 3, that goes beyond June of this year which is in the future. Weak.

Sorry to inform you, but it's October. Kobe hasn't gotten any more rings, he just got outplayed in another Finals.

[RsxPiimp]

you following me is getting creepy.

u take insults very well:toast

[dirk4mvp]

u take insults very well:toast


how was that an insult?

[RsxPiimp]

how was that an insult?

i wasnt talkn about that one dawg :lol

[Allanon]

Sorry to inform you, but it's October. Kobe hasn't gotten any more rings, he just got outplayed in another Finals.

Yup, it's October, and Kobe still has a full season at age 30 left to go.

[Obstructed_View]

Yup, it's October, and Kobe still has a full season at age 30 left to go.

Okay, we'll spot him a full year. If he can win another MVP, five more scoring titles, three finals MVPs and a rookie of the year then we'll talk. :lol

[Allanon]

If he can win another MVP, five more scoring titles, three finals MVPs and a rookie of the year then we'll talk. :lol

Let me know when Jordan scores 81.

[Obstructed_View]

Let me know when Jordan scores 81.

Well, he never scored 71 either, so Robinson >= Jordan. :lol

I can respect your tenacity, but you don't even believe this crap, do you?

[Allanon]

Well, he never scored 71 either, so Robinson >= Jordan. :lol

I can respect your tenacity, but you don't even believe this crap, do you?

1 ring extra makes up for all those individual awards. I think it was Barkley or Malone that said they'd trade in all their awards for just 1 ring.

[dirk4mvp]

Let me know when Jordan scores 81.


:lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao


You're not serious, are you?

[mystargtr34]

Let me know when Jordan scores 81.

You contradict yourself so much its ridiculous. First you say a regular season MVP > Finals MVP because its over a full 82 game season instead of 4-7 games.

And then you say "Let me know when Kobe scores 81". Jordan won about 10 scoring titles which are over an 82 game season. But when Kobe has a one game accomplishment its greater than Jordans 82 game accomplishment.

[mystargtr34]

1 ring extra makes up for all those individual awards. I think it was Barkley or Malone that said they'd trade in all their awards for just 1 ring.

When will you learn you have to put it in context, do you think Malone and Barkley would give up all their individual accomplishments and their legacy, and trade it all for being a rotation guy on 1 championship team? Hell no.

[Reggie Miller]

Most people lack perspective.

Let's assume Kobe is the best player in the NBA right now. There was a brief, shiny moment that Darryl Dawkins was the best player in the NBA. Years later, people still remember Chocloate Thunder breaking backboards.

Dawkins isn't considered in the same light as Jordan. (No one would seriously suggest otherwise.) At this point, Bryant is probably closer to Jordan than Dawkins, but lots of great players become footnotes in history.

There is no way in Hell that any reasonable person will take Bryant v. Jordan comparisons seriously until he has six rings or more. The knock on Jordan was winning at any cost. The knock on Bryant is that he has to win HIS way. Is that legitimate? Probably not, but that is the "rap sheet" for those players in the public mind.

Whether or not this is fair and/or whether or not Bryant was a "better" player from a pure skills standpoint are not at issue. We can't really decide those questions, only postulate.

[m33p0]

1 ring extra makes up for all those individual awards. I think it was Barkley or Malone that said they'd trade in all their awards for just 1 ring.
that comment has something to do with the fact that they've never won 1 gaddamn ring.

[Reggie Miller]

that comment has something to do with the fact that they've never won 1 gaddamn ring.

As I said, "most people lack perspective."

[Allanon]

You contradict yourself so much its ridiculous. First you say a regular season MVP > Finals MVP because its over a full 82 game season instead of 4-7 games.

And then you say "Let me know when Kobe scores 81". Jordan won about 10 scoring titles which are over an 82 game season. But when Kobe has a one game accomplishment its greater than Jordans 82 game accomplishment.

It's not a contradiction or a comparison. Both players did many special feats. Jordan's scoring titles are special, Kobe's 81 was special.

But when Jordan has scoring titles without rings, it's an achievement. When Kobe scores, he's "a taller Allen Iverson".

It's quite a double-standard, really.

[Allanon]

that comment has something to do with the fact that they've never won 1 gaddamn ring.

They said it, not I.

Do you believe that individual awards are greater than rings?

[Allanon]

Most people lack perspective.

Let's assume Kobe is the best player in the NBA right now. There was a brief, shiny moment that Darryl Dawkins was the best player in the NBA. Years later, people still remember Chocloate Thunder breaking backboards.

Dawkins isn't considered in the same light as Jordan. (No one would seriously suggest otherwise.) At this point, Bryant is probably closer to Jordan than Dawkins, but lots of great players become footnotes in history.

There is no way in Hell that any reasonable person will take Bryant v. Jordan comparisons seriously until he has six rings or more. The knock on Jordan was winning at any cost. The knock on Bryant is that he has to win HIS way. Is that legitimate? Probably not, but that is the "rap sheet" for those players in the public mind.

Whether or not this is fair and/or whether or not Bryant was a "better" player from a pure skills standpoint are not at issue. We can't really decide those questions, only postulate.

Agreed, that's what I've been saying all along.

It's all postulation, we're just gonna have to sit and wait but some would rather be prophets. :D

[dbreiden83080]

Let me know when Jordan scores 81.

LOL, Dude in this era of no touching star players until they are basically at the hoop MJ would have scored 120 if he wanted too. He bombed the Celtics in the playoffs for 63 once. Yeah the Bird Celtics i mean...

[Reggie Miller]

Agreed, that's what I've been saying all along.

It's all postulation, we're just gonna have to sit and wait but some would rather be prophets. :D

I'll give you this much. You at least present real arguments without resorting to crap-flinging.

:toast

[Allanon]

LOL, Dude in this era of no touching star players until they are basically at the hoop MJ would have scored 120 if he wanted too. He bombed the Celtics in the playoffs for 63 once. Yeah the Bird Celtics i mean...

No touching versus no-Zone. That will always be debated as to which is easier to operate in.

[Allanon]

I'll give you this much. You at least present real arguments without resorting to crap-flinging.

:toast

:toast You have some good arguments in other threads I've read.

[Mr.Bottomtooth]

x_dv-oPZTno

[Allanon]

x_dv-oPZTno

That video makes me wet.

[Mr.Bottomtooth]

:lol

[Obstructed_View]

No touching versus no-Zone. That will always be debated as to which is easier to operate in.

What does a zone do that the Jordan Rules didn't? Before zones were legal, you could still double and triple team a guy as soon as he had the ball.

[Obstructed_View]

I'll give you this much. You at least present real arguments without resorting to crap-flinging.

:toast

I agree. It's actually nice to have a silly debate without getting too far into name calling or just trading insults. I'm sure if a Mavericks player were involved in this conversation the word faggot would have been thrown around about a hundred times by now. :)

[dirk4mvp]

I agree. It's actually nice to have a silly debate without getting too far into name calling or just trading insults. I'm sure if a Mavericks player were involved in this conversation the word faggot would have been thrown around about a hundred times by now. :)


I'm inclined to start a Diop vs. Russell thread to test this theory out...

[Obstructed_View]

I'm inclined to start a Diop vs. Russell thread to test this theory out...

:lmao

[m33p0]

They said it, not I.

Do you believe that individual awards are greater than rings?
no but it serves as a witness to how much a player did in obtaining said rings... how much a player means to the success of his team. this is one way to differentiate the horrys from the duncans.

[Allanon]

What does a zone do that the Jordan Rules didn't? Before zones were legal, you could still double and triple team a guy as soon as he had the ball.

Yes, but you couldn't pack the lanes like you can do now. It's not just me with this argument, coaches, analysts always debate this.

[Allanon]

no but it serves as a witness to how much a player did in obtaining said rings... how much a player means to the success of his team. this is one way to differentiate the horrys from the duncans.

It's great to be a scoring leader but I think it's more important to win. Duncan and Allen Iverson are the prime examples of this. I think the MVP is a more valuable award.

[Allanon]

I agree. It's actually nice to have a silly debate without getting too far into name calling or just trading insults. I'm sure if a Mavericks player were involved in this conversation the word faggot would have been thrown around about a hundred times by now. :)

It is a silly debate, but it's pre-season, I suggest if this thread is still going by opening night, it ends there until summer, when one of us will probably bump it depending on the outcome :D

[Obstructed_View]

Yes, but you couldn't pack the lanes like you can do now. It's not just me with this argument, coaches, analysts always debate this.

Well, to be honest, I hear people say it a lot, but nobody really debates it. I've never seen a convincing case made to support the assertion that many just repeat. I'm also not sure how packing the lane was going to stop Jordan. He had as much range as anyone in the NBA, even today, plus he added a turnaround jumper at some point that nobody could defend. I really think the hand checking rules would have made him impossible to guard, zone or no.

[Obstructed_View]

It is a silly debate, but it's pre-season, I suggest if this thread is still going by opening night, it ends there until summer, when one of us will probably bump it depending on the outcome :D

Yeah, that's probably right. There just isn't enough to get excited about right now otherwise.

[ambchang]

MVP proves that you are the best of the best over the course of a season.

A Finals MVP means you were great in 4 games.

So why are rings such an important accomplishment when comparing players? They just prove that you are part of a great team, especially when you are obviously not the lead man on your team.

And having ONE ring is just the same as say ... having 5. So Jordan was voted as the best player over 5 seasons, and Kobe only one (then led his team to a historical collapse in the finals), and that has no bearing at all.


I did not say catching up with the #'s of rings. I said SURPASS. If Kobe has 7-8 rings, he would have more than Jordan. So what else could you bring up to level the playing field other than start going into awards?

So? Like you said, it just proves that he belongs to great teams, what is the significance?



Because it shows you were the best. If Jordan never got 1 MVP, he would not be GOAT. If Kobe never got 1 MVP, we would never have this conversation.

So having 1 MVP is enough? Dirk has 1 MVP? He wasn't fortunate enough to have played with SHaq in his career, why should he be penalized for not whining his way out of his team like Kobe did to CHarlotte?



I don't know if KG is more accomplished than Malone and Barkley I haven't thought about it but it's certainly debateable.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao

[Allanon]

So why are rings such an important accomplishment when comparing players? They just prove that you are part of a great team, especially when you are obviously not the lead man on your team.

Jordan would not be GOAT without his 6 rings.



And having ONE ring is just the same as say ... having 5. So Jordan was voted as the best player over 5 seasons, and Kobe only one (then led his team to a historical collapse in the finals), and that has no bearing at all.

Jordan had the benefit of finishing his career, Kobe still has not so it's not logical to compare Jordan's full body of work to Kobe's.



So? Like you said, it just proves that he belongs to great teams

I never said that.



So having 1 MVP is enough? Dirk has 1 MVP? He wasn't fortunate enough to have played with SHaq in his career, why should he be penalized for not whining his way out of his team like Kobe did to CHarlotte?

Dirk's 1 MVP is a good start for gettting into the conversation, now he just needs to get 3 more rings before age 30 and we can start talking about Dirk vs Jordan.



HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. :lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao

[ambchang]

Jordan would not be GOAT without his 6 rings.

Jordan would not be GOAT without leading his team to 6 rings. Of course, on top of that, there were those ridiculous stats, great performances in the clutch, not quitting on his team, leading the league in scoring 10 times, winning DPoY, All-NBA 1st teams, All-NBA 1st D teams, excelling in every aspect of the game, leading the league in steals.


Jordan had the benefit of finishing his career, Kobe still has not so it's not logical to compare Jordan's full body of work to Kobe's.

You expect Kobe to win 4 more MVPs when he had only 1 at the age of 29, after 12 years in the league? While this is not impossible, it is improbable and still means that Kobe is not comparable to Jordan at this stage of their respective careers.

Again, do your own work, let me know the stats and accomplishments (both team and individual) of the two players.


I never said that.

Oh yes, winning Finals MVP was only showing that a player was great in 4 games, those teams just magically appear in the finals because the player who won Finals MVP sucked in the other 12 (or 11, or 8, depending on era).


Dirk's 1 MVP is a good start for gettting into the conversation, now he just needs to get 3 more rings before age 30 and we can start talking about Dirk vs Jordan.

Why penalize Dirk for him being on a crappy team?


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. :lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao

Glad you agree that comparing Garnett to Barkley and Malone is laughter inducing.

[ambchang]

Come to think of it, you never addressed the issue of the 3pt shooting between the two, where Jordan shot less because of the era in which he lived in, nor did you address the point where Jordan scored more points in an era of low scoring than Kobe in an era of high scoring. (Not to mention that it was YOU who said the 90's score significantly less points than the 00's)

[Allanon]

Come to think of it, you never addressed the issue of the 3pt shooting between the two, where Jordan shot less because of the era in which he lived in

I did address this, I said Jordan was not as skilled in shooting 3s as Kobe, he was more comfortable in the mid-range. Jordan did not have as much range as Kobe. Jordan's range was about 18 foot, Kobe's range is about 25 feet.



nor did you address the point where Jordan scored more points in an era of low scoring than Kobe in an era of high scoring.

As far as I know, this was never brought up.



(Not to mention that it was YOU who said the 90's score significantly less points than the 00's)

I did say that scoring was less in the 90's as opposed to the scoring in the 00's. The league has transitioned to a more up tempo game.

[Allanon]

Jordan would not be GOAT without leading his team to 6 rings. Of course, on top of that, there were those ridiculous stats, great performances in the clutch, not quitting on his team, leading the league in scoring 10 times, winning DPoY, All-NBA 1st teams, All-NBA 1st D teams, excelling in every aspect of the game, leading the league in steals.

Yes, all of the individual honors helps his GOAT status, the rings are at the top of the list. Kobe probably will not match up in awards but in rings, he might.



You expect Kobe to win 4 more MVPs when he had only 1 at the age of 29, after 12 years in the league? While this is not impossible, it is improbable and still means that Kobe is not comparable to Jordan at this stage of their respective careers.

Again, do your own work, let me know the stats and accomplishments (both team and individual) of the two players.


At the same age, Jordan had 2 MVPs, 1 more than Kobe. However, Kobe has 3 rings compared to Jordan's 2 at the time. I believe that's pretty close.



Oh yes, winning Finals MVP was only showing that a player was great in 4 games, those teams just magically appear in the finals because the player who won Finals MVP sucked in the other 12 (or 11, or 8, depending on era).


Who knows who was great in the other 12, it varies depending on series. The Finals MVP is performance based solely on the Finals.



Why penalize Dirk for him being on a crappy team?

You yourself said Kobe hasn't won anything since Shaq left. Look at Kobe's crappy team which was 100x crappier than Dirk's. You penalized Kobe easily but for your argument, you want to give Dirk a free pass.



Glad you agree that comparing Garnett to Barkley and Malone is laughter inducing.

Nope, I didn't agree, just felt like laughing arbitrarily like you. I think by the time KG is done, he'll be mentioned along with Barkley and Malone right behind Duncan. If you think about it, Duncan is already the best power forward of all time and he's compared with Duncan all the time. If KG's compared to the best, why couldn't he compare with the other runner-ups?

[ShoogarBear]

There was a brief, shiny moment that Darryl Dawkins was the best player in the NBA.


Say what? When was this? Dawkins never came remotely close to making an All-Star or All-NBA team.

[ambchang]

I did address this, I said Jordan was not as skilled in shooting 3s as Kobe, he was more comfortable in the mid-range. Jordan did not have as much range as Kobe. Jordan's range was about 18 foot, Kobe's range is about 25 feet.

http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2840757&postcount=158

No you didn't, you first brought up a made-up fact that all-time leaders in 3 pt shooting “made their mark during Jordan’s era”, and when I refuted with the fact that they actually most made their mark during Kobe’s era, it was never addressed.

http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2840857&postcount=159

Besides, your “skill” argument was shattered when it was shown that Jordan’s 3pt% during his prime was practically the same as Kobe’s (Jordan’s being slightly better), the only thing was that Kobe shot more, which was since shown that it was due to different eras, when 3pters are used much more as a weapon as in the past.



As far as I know, this was never brought up.

I did say that scoring was less in the 90's as opposed to the scoring in the 00's. The league has transitioned to a more up tempo game.

Of course you never said “Kobe scored less in an era of increased scoring than Jordan did in an era of low scoring, therefore Kobe is just as skilled as Jordan.”, but you said:


Yes 3 point shooting has increased dramatically but scoring in general has increased dramatically since the 90s.

http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2840936&postcount=160


To which I responded:

So Kobe can’t even score more than Jordan even though Kobe was scoring in an era that has dramatically more scoring than Jordan’s? How would this help your case with Kobe having the same impact as Jordan?

http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2842185&postcount=202

So Jordan scored more than Kobe (fact) in an era where there was less scoring than Kobe’s era, and yet Kobe was just as skilled as Jordan in all aspects, and more so in 3pt shooting? (Not to mention the fact that increased 3pt attempts should allow Kobe to inflate his scoring even more). How do you figure?

[ambchang]

Yes, all of the individual honors helps his GOAT status, the rings are at the top of the list

Why would the rings be at the top of the rings? If Kobe got one more ring than Jordan, why would it make him more accomplished than Jordan despite the fact that he has worse stats, less MVPs, less Finals MVP, less DPoY, less RoY, less 1st team all-nba, less 1st team all-d, less scoring titles, less steals titles?

Oh yes, it was because Kobe had Shaq instead of Pippen, helping him win 3 rings, that’s why.

So when comparing Jordan to Kobe, the #s of rings are important; but we don’t talk about total rings, we talk about # of rings at their respective age, not at the respective points in their careers. But when we talk about other players, it is important to have MVPs, but the # of MVPs doesn’t matter, it only matters that a player has one.

In other words, a player has to have exactly the same accomplishments as Kobe to be considered the most accomplished player in the NBA at the age of 29.


Kobe probably will not match up in awards but in rings, he might.

For all I care, Kirk Hinrich might find his inner potential and start to win 8 straight MVPs. It’s not probale that he will match Jordan’s accomplishments, but he might.

And you are talking 3 MORE rings, you know how many FRANCHISES in NBA history has 3 or more rings? Celtics, Lakers, Bulls, Spurs and Pistons. That is it.


At the same age, Jordan had 2 MVPs, 1 more than Kobe. However, Kobe has 3 rings compared to Jordan's 2 at the time. I believe that's pretty close.

I also believe that Shaq was the driving force behind “Kobe’s” 3 rings. Writing Kobe’s 3 rings down as the same level of accomplishment as any of Jordan’s rings is absolutely illogical. But then again, you felt that the 6 Bulls ring reflects the same level of accomplishment for Pippen as for Jordan.


Who knows who was great in the other 12, it varies depending on series. The Finals MVP is performance based solely on the Finals.

Anybody who watched those games did. And those who watched the 6 Bulls run knows that Jordan was the leader, while those who watched the Lakers 3-peat knew that Shaq was the leader. That was why Shaq won an MVP during those 3-peat, and Kobe didn’t.


You yourself said Kobe hasn't won anything since Shaq left. Look at Kobe's crappy team which was 100x crappier than Dirk's. You penalized Kobe easily but for your argument, you want to give Dirk a free pass.

So you think I said Dirk should be compared to Jordan? You think I have been using the # of rings to gauge a player’s greatness? Note the Garnett to Barkley and Malone comparisons?

Rings have ALWAYS been a team accomplishment. Some players need more support than others, and that makes them less great. I would never say Andrew Toney, James Worthy and Chauncey Billups are just as great as Wilt Chamberlain because they all have 1 MVP, or the 3 are greater than David Robinson because Robinson never won a ring.

A player is judged as how great he is based on his whole body of work, not by how closely they match the accomplishments of Kobe Bryant.


Nope, I didn't agree, just felt like laughing arbitrarily like you. I think by the time KG is done, he'll be mentioned along with Barkley and Malone right behind Duncan. If you think about it, Duncan is already the best power forward of all time and he's compared with Duncan all the time. If KG's compared to the best, why couldn't he compare with the other runner-ups?

KG was compared to Duncan? Why would that happen? Duncan’s got 4 rings, KG’s only got one at a later age than Duncan got his? Both have MVPs. With your arbitrary and moving standards, KG shouldn’t be compared to Duncan.

[Allanon]

http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2840757&postcount=158

No you didn't, you first brought up a made-up fact that all-time leaders in 3 pt shooting “made their mark during Jordan’s era”, and when I refuted with the fact that they actually most made their mark during Kobe’s era, it was never addressed.

http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2840857&postcount=159

What are you talking about? it's right here, read it yourself. Even Obstructed View responded to it saying I should have my Laker fandom removed:
"Jordan just didn't have the skill."
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2840936&postcount=160



Besides, your “skill” argument was shattered when it was shown that Jordan’s 3pt% during his prime was practically the same as Kobe’s (Jordan’s being slightly better), the only thing was that Kobe shot more, which was since shown that it was due to different eras, when 3pters are used much more as a weapon as in the past.

Nope, Jordan didn't improve his 3 point shooter until later on in his career. At Kobe's age, Jordan was a 30% 3 point shooter, he got better in the later years. Kobe right now is a 34% 3 point shooter on the upward swing as well. It's quite obvious that Kobe has a superior 3pt shot and even sustains a higher percentage even though he shot a ton more.

Jordan didn't shoot 3's because he was shooting a bad percentage at Kobe's age. A 30% 3 point shooter is pretty bad. Kobe shoots 3's because he can, Jordan didn't because of his bad percentage.

Have a look at his 3 point shooting #'s in his first 4 years:
Jordan %'s: 17%, 17%, 18%, 13%



Of course you never said “Kobe scored less in an era of increased scoring than Jordan did in an era of low scoring, therefore Kobe is just as skilled as Jordan.”


Then don't put words into my mouth.



So Jordan scored more than Kobe (fact) in an era where there was less scoring than Kobe’s era, and yet Kobe was just as skilled as Jordan in all aspects, and more so in 3pt shooting? (Not to mention the fact that increased 3pt attempts should allow Kobe to inflate his scoring even more). How do you figure?

This is actually quite simple to explain, there are tons of reasons.

Jordan was a physical freak of that era...he was much bigger than shooting guards of that era (fact). Whereas Kobe's now the average size or under-sized for a shooting guard.
He set the standard on how to guard a talented shooting guard.
The NBA was "watered down" during Jordan's time. While Kobe plays in an elite West.
Look at the draft from 1988 to 1995 (Jordan's era). It's quite pathetic with only a few notables. Kobe's had to contend with the Greatest PF, Greatest SF, Greatest Center.
Coaches were not able to use the zone to guard Jordan while the NBA uses the Box and 1 on Kobe, Kobe gets the box and everybody else gets the one.
Kobe plays in the toughest conference of all time (50+ wins to make the playoffs)


There's a ton more if you want.

[Allanon]

Why would the rings be at the top of the rings? If Kobe got one more ring than Jordan, why would it make him more accomplished than Jordan despite the fact that he has worse stats, less MVPs, less Finals MVP, less DPoY, less RoY, less 1st team all-nba, less 1st team all-d, less scoring titles, less steals titles?

Kobe has done 81, gotten scoring titles and an MVP, All NBA's

BUT...read the posts from your fellow Spur fans and yourself. One even posted "Kobe hasn't done SHIT since Shaq". So an MVP and scoring titles mean nothing or do they? Why are you trying to use the same argument for and against? It doesn't work that way, that's called a "double-standard"

Winning is everything.



Oh yes, it was because Kobe had Shaq instead of Pippen, helping him win 3 rings, that’s why.

Oh yes, it's because Jordan had Pippen, a top50 Player, Rodman, the best rebounder ever and Steve Kerr, the best 3 point shooter ever (arguably with Bird).



So when comparing Jordan to Kobe, the #s of rings are important; but we don’t talk about total rings, we talk about # of rings at their respective age, not at the respective points in their careers. But when we talk about other players, it is important to have MVPs, but the # of MVPs doesn’t matter, it only matters that a player has one.

Sure, the # of MVPs matters, I was just making it easy for you to come up with one but you haven't. At least 1 MVP, at least 3 rings...at the age of 30. Come up with just 1 in the NBA's 50+ year history and then they can join the Kobe / Jordan talk.



For all I care, Kirk Hinrich might find his inner potential and start to win 8 straight MVPs. It’s not probale that he will match Jordan’s accomplishments, but he might.

Sure he can, he'd have to start this year since he's 27.



And you are talking 3 MORE rings, you know how many FRANCHISES in NBA history has 3 or more rings? Celtics, Lakers, Bulls, Spurs and Pistons. That is it.

Kobe plays for the Lakers...the same team that has been to the Finals 50%+ of all NBA finals ever played.



I also believe that Shaq was the driving force behind “Kobe’s” 3 rings. Writing Kobe’s 3 rings down as the same level of accomplishment as any of Jordan’s rings is absolutely illogical. But then again, you felt that the 6 Bulls ring reflects the same level of accomplishment for Pippen as for Jordan.

Anybody who watched those games did. And those who watched the 6 Bulls run knows that Jordan was the leader, while those who watched the Lakers 3-peat knew that Shaq was the leader. That was why Shaq won an MVP during those 3-peat, and Kobe didn’t.


I don't think you actually watched the Lakers. Kobe was THE MAN for the Lakers during 4th quarters for the last decade. Shaq was on the bench alot during the Final minutes of the 4th quarter because of the Hack-A-Shaq liability. You couldn't give him the ball on game-winners because he couldn't make his free throws.

As much as Kobe needed Shaq in 3 quarters, Shaq needed Kobe during the 4th.

You saw that last year with Pop's famous "cowardly move", you should know nothing's changed.



So you think I said Dirk should be compared to Jordan? You think I have been using the # of rings to gauge a player’s greatness? Note the Garnett to Barkley and Malone comparisons?

Yup, Garnett will be on the same level as Barkley and Malone, 1 notch below Duncan, after it's all said and done.



Rings have ALWAYS been a team accomplishment.

I thought you said Jordan won the rings by himself, he didn't need any help...I don't recall did you say that?



Some players need more support than others, and that makes them less great. I would never say Andrew Toney, James Worthy and Chauncey Billups are just as great as Wilt Chamberlain because they all have 1 MVP, or the 3 are greater than David Robinson because Robinson never won a ring.

A player is judged as how great he is based on his whole body of work, not by how closely they match the accomplishments of Kobe Bryant.

Is that opinion I hear? You're free to have your opinions, but it doesn't make my opinion wrong.



KG was compared to Duncan? Why would that happen? Duncan’s got 4 rings, KG’s only got one at a later age than Duncan got his? Both have MVPs. With your arbitrary and moving standards, KG shouldn’t be compared to Duncan.

Don't take my word for it.

Read what your own Spur fans posted, yesterday they're comparing the two right there:

Garnett's D on Duncan
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=107933

[ambchang]

What are you talking about? it's right here, read it yourself. Even Obstructed View responded to it saying I should have my Laker fandom removed:
"Jordan just didn't have the skill."
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2840936&postcount=160

Your response was proven false. Those 3 pt shooters shot and made most of their 3 pointers from 96 onwards, meaning that those were done at the end of Jordan’s era, and the beginning of Kobe’s.

Kobe wasn’t more skilled than Jordan in 3pt shooting, they shot the same % during their primes.


Nope, Jordan didn't improve his 3 point shooter until later on in his career. At Kobe's age, Jordan was a 30% 3 point shooter, he got better in the later years. Kobe right now is a 34% 3 point shooter on the upward swing as well. It's quite obvious that Kobe has a superior 3pt shot and even sustains a higher percentage even though he shot a ton more.

Jordan didn't shoot 3's because he was shooting a bad percentage at Kobe's age. A 30% 3 point shooter is pretty bad. Kobe shoots 3's because he can, Jordan didn't because of his bad percentage.

Have a look at his 3 point shooting #'s in his first 4 years:
Jordan %'s: 17%, 17%, 18%, 13%

Stop coming up with fake “facts”. Jordan shot 35% from the 3 when he was 29 y.o. He shot a low percentage from 3 his 1st four seasons because the 3 was a specialty shot in those days. It has been proven time and time again.

And a 30% 3 pt shooter is not “pretty bad”, especially when you are actually a 32.7% 3 pt shooter.

Kobe shot 26.7% in his 3rd season, and 25% in his 6th, did he suddenly become “less skilled” in those years?


Then don't put words into my mouth.

This is actually quite simple to explain, there are tons of reasons.

Jordan was a physical freak of that era...he was much bigger than shooting guards of that era (fact). Whereas Kobe's now the average size or under-sized for a shooting guard.
He set the standard on how to guard a talented shooting guard.

http://www.nba.com/news/survey_2007.html
The average player is shorter now than they were 20 years ago, and weigh about 6 lbs more.


The NBA was "watered down" during Jordan's time. While Kobe plays in an elite West.

Are you nuts?

The league has watered down the talent level through expansion, and brought in extra help from overseas, the effect pretty much cancelled each other out.

Cite specific examples. Cite the talent in All-Star teams.


Look at the draft from 1988 to 1995 (Jordan's era). It's quite pathetic with only a few notables. Kobe's had to contend with the Greatest PF, Greatest SF, Greatest Center.

Why just the draft 1988 to 1995? Why not include Hakeem, Malone, Robinson, Barkley, Magic, Bird, Thomas, Drexler, Stockton? Shaq was pathetic? Mourning? Webber? Grant Hill? Larry Johnson? Danny Manning?

I am sure Kwame Brown and Michael Olowokandi, along with Kenyon Martin are shining examples of what #1 draft picks could be.


Coaches were not able to use the zone to guard Jordan while the NBA uses the Box and 1 on Kobe, Kobe gets the box and everybody else gets the one.

Jordan had the Jordan rules, he had hand checks, flagrant fouls on him. Kobe didn’t have to contend with any of that.


Kobe plays in the toughest conference of all time (50+ wins to make the playoffs)


That happened ONE year of his career, and you make it sound like it happens all the time.
The 8th seed in the West won the following amount of games in the listed years:
2007: 42
2006: 44
2005: 45
2004: 43
2003: 44
2002: 45

The 8th seed in the East won the following amount of games in the listed years:
1998: 43
1997: 44
1996: 42
1993: 41
1992: 40
1991: 39
1990: 42
1989: 42

Wow! Huge difference!
Besides, what does the parity of the league have anything to do with how many points Jordan vs. Kobe scores?


There's a ton more if you want.

Please provide


Kobe has done 81, gotten scoring titles and an MVP, All NBA's

81 points vs. Raptors is such an important accomplishment? Jordan scored 63 vs. the Celtics in the playoffs, he average 40 points in the finals vs. Barkley and Suns. These are notable accomplishments.

And you were talking about how insignificant the Finals MVP is because it only represent 4 games of the year, yet now you are talking about 1 pointless regular season game?

Jordan’s got 10 scoring titles, Kobe got 2. Jordan won 5 MVPs, Kobe got 1. You see the difference?


BUT...read the posts from your fellow Spur fans and yourself. One even posted "Kobe hasn't done SHIT since Shaq". So an MVP and scoring titles mean nothing or do they? Why are you trying to use the same argument for and against? It doesn't work that way, that's called a "double-standard"

I am now lumped with other fans? Please distinguish between who you are arguing with. Just because me and my “fellow Spur fans” support the same team doesn’t mean that we think alike.

Double standard doesn’t mean two different people having two different arguments. That is actually normal. An example of double standard would be having a linear progression in importance for rings, while having a Boolean function for MVPs and scoring titles.


Winning is everything.



Oh yes, it's because Jordan had Pippen, a top50 Player, Rodman, the best rebounder ever and Steve Kerr, the best 3 point shooter ever (arguably with Bird).

You are putting in Steve Kerr? Are you serious? Steve Kerr?
Since you are so fond of 3pt shooting “skills” and having selective years of a player’s career (such as the 1st 4 years) instead of viewing it as a whole, Steve Kerr actually shot 23.1% during the 92-93 season. If 30% quantifies as terrible, I don’t know what that quantifies as. He shot a close to terrible 31.3% in 98-99 too. Oh my GOSH! Besides, Jordan won 3 straight without Kerr.

Rodman was an offensive liability. And Jordan won 3 straight with Horace Grant instead of Rodman.

While at the same time, Kobe needed a top 15 player of all-time Shaq, one of the best coaches of all-time in Phil Jackson. 3 pt shooting extraordinaire Derek Fisher, one of the clutchest player in the history of the league Robert Horry, and defensive swing man Ron Harper to win the ring.

But why are we even talking about teammates? It doesn’t matter does it, a ring is a ring, winning is everything. Horry is better than Paul Pierce, he has 7x the rings, and neither won the MVP. Same could be said that Horry > Kevin McHale, Horry has 7, McHale only has 3, neither has an MVP.


Sure, the # of MVPs matters, I was just making it easy for you to come up with one but you haven't. At least 1 MVP, at least 3 rings...at the age of 30. Come up with just 1 in the NBA's 50+ year history and then they can join the Kobe / Jordan talk.

Why? Why those cut offs? Oh, because it’s exactly what Kobe has, ic….

I define the greatest player of all time to have at least 7 rings, and has the most 3 pters in the NBA finals. That would be Robert Horry! Find me another player who has the same accomplishments.


Sure he can, he'd have to start this year since he's 27.

Just that it’s not likely.


Kobe plays for the Lakers...the same team that has been to the Finals 50%+ of all NBA finals ever played.

So? If they have the exact same team (including management) in Memphis, would it make the probability of them winning a ring less? What does playing on a franchise that has won more than 3 rings in its history have any relevance on their probability to win a ring in the near future?


I don't think you actually watched the Lakers. Kobe was THE MAN for the Lakers during 4th quarters for the last decade. Shaq was on the bench alot during the Final minutes of the 4th quarter because of the Hack-A-Shaq liability. You couldn't give him the ball on game-winners because he couldn't make his free throws.

Explains why Shaq won the MVP and Finals MVPs while Kobe didn’t. It’s nice that Kobe can shoot FTs during the last 2 minutes of a tight game, cool, but Shaq helps make sure that most of those aren’t even tight games. Horry shot clutch shots, does that make him the man on his teams?

Besides, I remember Shaq being on the floor during 0.4, during Horry’s dagger to the Kings, during the huge run against Portland.


As much as Kobe needed Shaq in 3 quarters, Shaq needed Kobe during the 4th.

Find me the numbers to back up your claim instead of just throwing out random unconfirmed “facts”.


You saw that last year with Pop's famous "cowardly move", you should know nothing's changed.

The Lakers were in their 3-peat last year? Have you been in a coma for the last 6 years?


Yup, Garnett will be on the same level as Barkley and Malone, 1 notch below Duncan, after it's all said and done.

By your be-all-and-end-all scorecard, no doubt.


I thought you said Jordan won the rings by himself, he didn't need any help...I don't recall did you say that?

Quote me. If you can’t, look it up first before you type this out. It’s in the same thread, it’s not that hard. You have a habit of spewing up incorrect “facts” with nothing to back up.


Is that opinion I hear? You're free to have your opinions, but it doesn't make my opinion wrong.
Count the number of “I thinks”/”I thoughts” in your own post.



Don't take my word for it.

Read what your own Spur fans posted, yesterday they're comparing the two right there:

Garnett's D on Duncan
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=107933

You are comparing Kobe with Jordan as well. Doesn’t make them equal.

Besides, these quotes really show that Garnett and Duncan are comparable:


The Celtics were the best defensive team in basketball last year, so I'd imagine everyone's field goal percentage went down when they played Boston. Go back to when he was in Minnesota and Duncan was tearing him up.

Garnett is a soft post defender. The fact he won DPOY averaging 9 rebounds and about a block a game is a fucking joke.


Duncan is a post player. Garnett is more a mid-range wing forward.

If they stuck KG on Duncan consistently, Timmy would post him up every single time without a problem. KG doesn't have the body to stay in front of Timmy. That's why he only sees spot defensive minutes against him.

No one in this league can guard Duncan when he's healthy without fouling him every other trip down the court.


KG is Duncan's bitch


this might by the worst analysis I've EVER heard..

I guess you CAN call that a comparison, using whatever wacky criteria you came up on the spot.

[dbreiden83080]

^^

LOL yeah KG and Duncan is not really a comparison more of a mocking of KG

[Allanon]

^^

LOL yeah KG and Duncan is not really a comparison more of a mocking of KG

Nope, it looks pretty serious to me if you read the thread by Spur fans.

Head to head matchups, stats, etc, that looks like a pretty good comparison going on there. Of course, there are homers that won't give KG any kind of credit.

[lefty]

Someone please close this thread.

Kobe should be happy to suck Jordan's dick.

Especially after tasting Shaq's ass.

[diego]

I still dont understand why people are comparing kobe to jordan.

as far as 3-peats go,
its jordan= shaq
pippen = kobe,

with the overall ranking going

jordan > shaq > kobe > pippen. That barely gets kobe into the top 10 discussion, and nowhere near the number 1 spot. Could he be there in 10 years? Could Mccain win this election? Can the grizzlies win a ship in the next 5 years? all of this is possible, but improbable. People just dont like players that quit on their team and rat out their teammates, no matter how many points they scored in a regular season game against an expansion team no one cares about.

[Allanon]

Your response was proven false. Those 3 pt shooters shot and made most of their 3 pointers from 96 onwards, meaning that those were done at the end of Jordan’s era, and the beginning of Kobe’s.


Nope, there was less scoring back then. Not only were 3 point shots down, regular 2 point field goals were down too.



Kobe wasn’t more skilled than Jordan in 3pt shooting, they shot the same % during their primes.

At age 30, Kobe has a 34% 3pt shooting percent. Jordan at age 30 had a 30% field go shooting percentage. 34%>30%, and that is a vast margin when you compare what a difference in points it made.

Jordan didn't shoot 3's because he was shooting a bad percentage at Kobe's age. A 30% 3 point shooter is pretty bad. Kobe shoots 3's because he can, Jordan didn't because of his bad percentage.

Have a look at his 3 point shooting #'s in his first 4 years:
Jordan %'s: 17%, 17%, 18%, 13%



Stop coming up with fake “facts”. Jordan shot 35% from the 3 when he was 29 y.o. He shot a low percentage from 3 his 1st four seasons because the 3 was a specialty shot in those days. It has been proven time and time again.

Today, Kobe is 30. Jordan's 3pt% average at age 30 was 30%. Kobe's average at age 30 is 34%. 30% is quite poor compared to 3



And a 30% 3 pt shooter is not “pretty bad”, especially when you are actually a 32.7% 3 pt shooter.

Are there ANY good 3 point shooters at 30%? Stop making up excuses for Jordan's poor 3 point shooting.



Kobe shot 26.7% in his 3rd season, and 25% in his 6th, did he suddenly become “less skilled” in those years?

You take the good and the bad when it comes to averages. Look at Jordan's 17% in his early years. The fact of the matter is, even though Kobe took a TON more shots than Jordan, his shooting percentage on 3s is MUCH higher than Jordan's at the same age.


http://www.nba.com/news/survey_2007.html
The average player is shorter now than they were 20 years ago, and weigh about 6 lbs more.[/quote]

Nope, that is OVERALL average height, not just at the shooting guard position. Centers were bigger back then than they are now. Jordan played against much smaller shooting guards.



Are you nuts?

Are you?



The league has watered down the talent level through expansion, and brought in extra help from overseas, the effect pretty much cancelled each other out.

Cite specific examples. Cite the talent in All-Star teams.

You forget, 95 was an expansion year for the Grizzlies.
Extra top tier talented players from overseas: Manu, Dirk, Yao

Looking at the drafts in Jordan's years, who do we have going to the Top 50 list? By the mid 90's Jordan had no competition.

Shaq in 92 but he's also in Kobe's era. Off the top of my head, in Kobe's era we have AI, Duncan, LeBron, KG, and I'm sure there are plenty more I forgot.



Why just the draft 1988 to 1995? Why not include Hakeem, Malone, Robinson, Barkley, Magic, Bird, Thomas, Drexler, Stockton?
Those were the years when Jordan started to "get it and start winning".



Shaq was pathetic? Mourning? Webber? Grant Hill? Larry Johnson? Danny Manning?

Only Shaq on that list. Kobe has to deal with AI, Duncan, LeBron, KG



I am sure Kwame Brown and Michael Olowokandi, along with Kenyon Martin are shining examples of what #1 draft picks could be.

Yup, just like Pervis Ellison, Derrick Coleman, Glenn Robinson, Joe Smith.




Jordan had the Jordan rules, he had hand checks, flagrant fouls on him. Kobe didn’t have to contend with any of that.

And Jordan didn't have the zone to bust him up.



That happened ONE year of his career, and you make it sound like it happens all the time.

Wow! Huge difference!


Yes, thankyou it is. The West has been much more difficult than the east for almost a decade now.



Besides, what does the parity of the league have anything to do with how many points Jordan vs. Kobe scores?

It's easier to score against lesser competition.



81 points vs. Raptors is such an important accomplishment? Jordan scored 63 vs. the Celtics in the playoffs, he average 40 points in the finals vs. Barkley and Suns. These are notable accomplishments.

Yup, as good as Jordan was, he could never hit 81.



And you were talking about how insignificant the Finals MVP is because it only represent 4 games of the year, yet now you are talking about 1 pointless regular season game?

Everybody will always remember 100 and 81 until they get surpassed. I can't even remember the Finals MVP from 2006.



Jordan’s got 10 scoring titles, Kobe got 2. Jordan won 5 MVPs, Kobe got 1. You see the difference?

Yes, I see the difference, past tense versus present tense (ie. pitting 1 players lifetime achievement vs another player who's not done with his career).



I am now lumped with other fans? Please distinguish between who you are arguing with. Just because me and my “fellow Spur fans” support the same team doesn’t mean that we think alike.

So you never said "Kobe hasn't done anything since Shaq"?



Double standard doesn’t mean two different people having two different arguments. That is actually normal. An example of double standard would be having a linear progression in importance for rings, while having a Boolean function for MVPs and scoring titles.

Nope, "double standard" means holding Kobe to 1 standard and giving Jordan a free pass on the same standard.



You are putting in Steve Kerr? Are you serious? Steve Kerr?

Yup, Steve Kerr was a bad-ass 3 point shooter, even the Spurs thought so and brought him in.



Since you are so fond of 3pt shooting “skills” and having selective years of a player’s career (such as the 1st 4 years) instead of viewing it as a whole, Steve Kerr actually shot 23.1% during the 92-93 season. If 30% quantifies as terrible, I don’t know what that quantifies as. He shot a close to terrible 31.3% in 98-99 too. Oh my GOSH!

By age 30,
Kerr 46% 3 pointers
Kobe 34% 3 pointers
Jordan 30% 3 pointers

Oh my GOSH!



Besides, Jordan won 3 straight without Kerr.

Jordan won 3 straight with Kerr.



Rodman was an offensive liability. And Jordan won 3 straight with Horace Grant instead of Rodman.

Rodman was a rebounding beast and the most athletic player Phil ever coached. And Jordan won 3 straight with Rodman instead of Horace Grant.



While at the same time, Kobe needed a top 15 player of all-time Shaq, one of the best coaches of all-time in Phil Jackson. 3 pt shooting extraordinaire Derek Fisher, one of the clutchest player in the history of the league Robert Horry, and defensive swing man Ron Harper to win the ring.

I'll give you Shaq over Luc Longley.
Fisher < Kerr
Horry < Rodman
Harper < Pippen.



But why are we even talking about teammates? It doesn’t matter does it, a ring is a ring, winning is everything. Horry is better than Paul Pierce, he has 7x the rings, and neither won the MVP. Same could be said that Horry > Kevin McHale, Horry has 7, McHale only has 3, neither has an MVP.

We're not talking about the non-MVPs, we're talking about MVPs. What's wrong? Couldn't find another player <30 with 3 rings and at least 1 MVP to compare with Jordan?



Why? Why those cut offs? Oh, because it’s exactly what Kobe has, ic….

Sorry, last time I checked, Kobe's 30 years old, I can't change that and we are talking about Kobe vs Jordan.



I define the greatest player of all time to have at least 7 rings, and has the most 3 pters in the NBA finals. That would be Robert Horry! Find me another player who has the same accomplishments.

Hey, whatever rocks your boat, you have your opinion. I'm not gonna dispute it as right or wrong.



So? If they have the exact same team (including management) in Memphis, would it make the probability of them winning a ring less? What does playing on a franchise that has won more than 3 rings in its history have any relevance on their probability to win a ring in the near future?

Probability is the same but the odds are good that the Lakers are going to win in the future. Even Vegas agrees, have a look at their odds.



Explains why Shaq won the MVP and Finals MVPs while Kobe didn’t. It’s nice that Kobe can shoot FTs during the last 2 minutes of a tight game, cool, but Shaq helps make sure that most of those aren’t even tight games. Horry shot clutch shots, does that make him the man on his teams?

Shaq carries the team for 3 quarters, Kobe carries it for 1. That's always been the case. Shaq would not have won without Kobe's 4 quarter heroics. Kobe would not have won without Shaq's 3 quarter performances. Shaq was the more dominant player but his major kryptonite was 4th quarters.



Besides, I remember Shaq being on the floor during 0.4, during Horry’s dagger to the Kings, during the huge run against Portland.

Do you ever remember Shaq getting the ball in those instances? Nope. The rules say you can't foul Shaq in the last 2 minutes unless he has the ball. That's why the Lakers didn't give him the ball.



Find me the numbers to back up your claim instead of just throwing out random unconfirmed “facts”.

I'll do better than that, I'll SHOW you. Now you go find me some clutch Shaq Game winners :D

[youtube]J2yzNQWFYko[/quote]



The Lakers were in their 3-peat last year? Have you been in a coma for the last 6 years?

I distinctly remember Pop doing Hack-a-Shaq since Shaq's the same 4th quarter liability as he's always been. But, maybe I remember last year's Spurs vs Suns series wrong.



By your be-all-and-end-all scorecard, no doubt.

Or your end of career vs current career. Either one would be just as good.



Quote me. If you can’t, look it up first before you type this out. It’s in the same thread, it’s not that hard. You have a habit of spewing up incorrect “facts” with nothing to back up.

Oh no, you never said that. I was just having you confirm it in a round about way since you wouldn't admit it straight out. Jordan didn't win those titles by himself, he needed Pippen. Thankyou.



Count the number of “I thinks”/”I thoughts” in your own post.


Yup, unlike you, I don't think I know it all. It's my opinion so I say I think as opposed to your absolutes.



You are comparing Kobe with Jordan as well. Doesn’t make them equal.

Kobe and Jordan are not equal, I've said that before.



Besides, these quotes really show that Garnett and Duncan are comparable:

I guess you CAN call that a comparison, using whatever wacky criteria you came up on the spot.

There's no cure for homerism. If you look through the same post, you see some more valid analysis from less biased Spur fans.

[The Franchise]

Why was this stupid ass thread even started. Their is no comparison other than for kids who were to young to see Jordan play or fools who are just to stubborn to except reality. Fact: Jordan was better. Any argument against this is just blind stupidity. There is no middle ground.

[Allanon]

Just to set the record straight for late visitors to this thread:

I'm not arguing that Kobe is better than Jordan.

Jordan's the GOAT.

[Obstructed_View]

What are you talking about? it's right here, read it yourself. Even Obstructed View responded to it saying I should have my Laker fandom removed:
"Jordan just didn't have the skill."

Actually, I made a mistake. I thought Jordan broke the record for three pointers in a finals game against the Lakers. He did it against the Blazers. I retract my "laker fandom" statement with an apology, but my belief that you are a retard for saying Jordan didn't have three point skill when he damn near set the record for threes in the NBA finals in a half is still intact. :)

[Reggie Miller]

Say what? When was this? Dawkins never came remotely close to making an All-Star or All-NBA team.

You caught me in hyperbole. The point was he'll be remembered for breaking backboards, which really doesn't have much to do with basketball skill one way or the other.

[ambchang]

Nope, there was less scoring back then. Not only were 3 point shots down, regular 2 point field goals were down too.

Year PPG/Team 3PA/Team
91 106.3 7.1
92 105.3 7.6
96 99.5 16.0
01 94.8 13.7
04 93.4 14.9
08 99.9 18.1

So not only did 3pters increased by 250%, scoring DECREASED from Jordan’s era, showing, irrefutably, that 3pters are a larger part of today’s offense. But of course, most people who actually watched the game back in the early 90s didn’t need numbers to back it up.

Any other bullshit you want to spew?


At age 30, Kobe has a 34% 3pt shooting percent. Jordan at age 30 had a 30% field go shooting percentage. 34%>30%, and that is a vast margin when you compare what a difference in points it made.

So you are OK with saying that Kobe is a terrible scorer compared to Jordan at age 30? Kobe averages 25.0 ppg at age 30, Jordan averaged 33.3 ppg. 33.3 > 25.0, and infact, 29% better, and that is a vast margin.

BTW, Kobe averages 3.7 3pt a game, if he shot 30% instead of 34% from 3, he will score a WHOPPING 0.44 points less a game.

Jordan averaged 1.7 3pter a game, and if he shot 34% instead of 30% from 3, he will score an amazing 0.20 points a game. That really is a “vast margin” when I compared the differences, huh?



Jordan didn't shoot 3's because he was shooting a bad percentage at Kobe's age. A 30% 3 point shooter is pretty bad. Kobe shoots 3's because he can, Jordan didn't because of his bad percentage.

Have a look at his 3 point shooting #'s in his first 4 years:
Jordan %'s: 17%, 17%, 18%, 13%



Today, Kobe is 30. Jordan's 3pt% average at age 30 was 30%. Kobe's average at age 30 is 34%. 30% is quite poor compared to 3



Are there ANY good 3 point shooters at 30%? Stop making up excuses for Jordan's poor 3 point shooting.

LOL, so you are expecting Kobe to improve his 3 pt shooting when his career goes on, despite:
- At age 29, he already has 12 years in the league, compared to 9 for Jordan
- 3 pters experienced a huge increase in importance to all the teams during Jordan’s career.

OK, fine, remember this when you compare scoring averages, rebounding, assists, steals, blks and FG% between the two.


You take the good and the bad when it comes to averages. Look at Jordan's 17% in his early years. The fact of the matter is, even though Kobe took a TON more shots than Jordan, his shooting percentage on 3s is MUCH higher than Jordan's at the same age.

He shot more, so? Shot selection. Jordan wasn’t a good 3pt shooter when he entered the league, and he took less shots, he became a proficient 3 pt shooter later on in his career. Is there a problem?


Nope, that is OVERALL average height, not just at the shooting guard position. Centers were bigger back then than they are now. Jordan played against much smaller shooting guards.

Find the stats to back up your claim, don’t throw out vague generalizations.



Are you?

You forget, 95 was an expansion year for the Grizzlies.
Extra top tier talented players from overseas: Manu, Dirk, Yao

Why do you care? Jordan was older than 30, the magical cut off line of comparison you used, by 95. What is the big deal about something that happened after Jordan hit 30?

A really, 3 extra top-tier player in a league that has 30 teams compared to 24/27 teams? Oh, that makes about 1 all-star per team, sounds like a slightly watered-down league to me.


Looking at the drafts in Jordan's years, who do we have going to the Top 50 list? By the mid 90's Jordan had no competition.

Shaq in 92 but he's also in Kobe's era. Off the top of my head, in Kobe's era we have AI, Duncan, LeBron, KG, and I'm sure there are plenty more I forgot.

Wait, so if Shaq was drafted during Jordan’s career where he “get it and start winning”, it matters that he was in Kobe’s era, he should be counted as part of Kobe’s competition, but we can ignore Barkley, Malone, Bird, Magic, McHale, Stockton, Drexler, Mullin, Ewing, Hakeem and Robinson, because they were drafted prior to Jordan “getting it”.

So we should only count the players that were drafted between 01 and 03, those were the only years Kobe got rings. Do we have a top-50 player there? No. Why would you count Garnett? He was drafted in 95, why AI and Duncan, they were drafted in 96 and 97, before Kobe “got it”.


Those were the years when Jordan started to "get it and start winning".


Only Shaq on that list. Kobe has to deal with AI, Duncan, LeBron, KG

Oops, none of the players were in the Kobe “got it” years outside of Lebron. And we know that since Lebron was drafted, Kobe didn’t win squat. We should just ignore them.

On the other hand, Shaq, a top 50 player was drafted in 92, Iverson in 96, Duncan in 97, all are years when Jordan won rings in. And Garnett was drafted in 95, between the two 3-peats


Yup, just like Pervis Ellison, Derrick Coleman, Glenn Robinson, Joe Smith.

You had no idea how good Derrick Coleman was, do you? He was a headcase, but an extremely talented headcase.

Ellison was a legit 18/9/2 man if his career wasn’t derailed by injuries, you just don’t know that because you never saw him play.

Glenn Robinson was a 20ppg scorer, and Joe Smith was an 18/8 guy, MUCH better than Olowakandi or Brown ever was. Besides, Joe Smith was drafted the same year as Garnett, why would Smith be grouped together in Jordan’s group, and Garnett in Kobe’s?

Inconsistent much?



And Jordan didn't have the zone to bust him up.

What did you say earlier?


You take the good and the bad when it comes to averages.

Stop making excuses for Kobe’s lesser scoring averages. He was simply less skilled in scoring up to the age of 30.


Yes, thankyou it is. The West has been much more difficult than the east for almost a decade now.

Jordan was playing in the east the last decade?


It's easier to score against lesser competition.

Jordan only played against the East back in the day, and Kobe only in the West?


Yup, as good as Jordan was, he could never hit 81.

That helps explain why Kobe scored 81! He was playing against a team in the East, the Raptors, and that was lesser competition, proven by their record going up against the West. I don’t know how the East teams of Jordan’s era would do up against the West teams in Kobe’s era, they never played each other.


Everybody will always remember 100 and 81 until they get surpassed. I can't even remember the Finals MVP from 2006.

I can. I can remember the top 2 performers in NBA finals, no problem. In fact, I can remember the last 30 Finals MVPs, I can’t remember the top 30 scoring performances.


Yes, I see the difference, past tense versus present tense (ie. pitting 1 players lifetime achievement vs another player who's not done with his career).

And we have also shown that Jordan’s accomplishments were better than Kobe’s at age 30.


So you never said "Kobe hasn't done anything since Shaq"?

Did I?


Nope, "double standard" means holding Kobe to 1 standard and giving Jordan a free pass on the same standard.

Such as having one standard for 3p%, while another for scoring? Gotcha.


Yup, Steve Kerr was a bad-ass 3 point shooter, even the Spurs thought so and brought him in.

And played him a whopping 10 mpg! Oh my goodness, Steve Kerr is more accomplished than Lebron James, he won 4 rings AND shot better from the field, and neither won the MVP.


By age 30,
Kerr 46% 3 pointers
Kobe 34% 3 pointers
Jordan 30% 3 pointers

Oh my GOSH!

Kobe wasn’t even as good as Kerr? Oh my GOSH!


Jordan won 3 straight with Kerr.

Kobe won 3 straight with Fisher. Fisher is just as good as Kerr.


Rodman was a rebounding beast and the most athletic player Phil ever coached. And Jordan won 3 straight with Rodman instead of Horace Grant.

So you mean Grant and Rodman are supplementary players who Jordan doesn’t need to win rings? Thanks.


I'll give you Shaq over Luc Longley.
Fisher < Kerr
Horry < Rodman
Harper < Pippen.


Of course Pippen>Harper, but Kobe > Pippen.

And what does this prove anyways?

Kerr > Fisher? How so? Fisher was a better defender, better ball handler, scored more, drives better.

Horry shred Rodman to pieces in the 95 playoffs as a rookie.



We're not talking about the non-MVPs, we're talking about MVPs. What's wrong? Couldn't find another player <30 with 3 rings and at least 1 MVP to compare with Jordan?
What’s wrong? Couldn’t find another player with 7 rings and at least 40 3 pters to compare to Horry?



Sorry, last time I checked, Kobe's 30 years old, I can't change that and we are talking about Kobe vs Jordan.

And Jordan was better than Kobe in every single category, other than 3pta.


Hey, whatever rocks your boat, you have your opinion. I'm not gonna dispute it as right or wrong.

You have your opinion, and I am going to say that it is wrong.


Probability is the same but the odds are good that the Lakers are going to win in the future. Even Vegas agrees, have a look at their odds.

Vegas have odds for the next 6 to 8 years? Please send me the link.


Shaq carries the team for 3 quarters, Kobe carries it for 1. That's always been the case. Shaq would not have won without Kobe's 4 quarter heroics. Kobe would not have won without Shaq's 3 quarter performances. Shaq was the more dominant player but his major kryptonite was 4th quarters.

Really? Show me Shaq’s 4th quarter stats, prove it.


Do you ever remember Shaq getting the ball in those instances? Nope. The rules say you can't foul Shaq in the last 2 minutes unless he has the ball. That's why the Lakers didn't give him the ball.

I do remember him flushing an alley-oop dunk to put out the Blazers. Seemed like your man Kobe gave him the ball.


I'll do better than that, I'll SHOW you. Now you go find me some clutch Shaq Game winners :D

J2yzNQWFYko

phM-QS6o8qc

Oops.


I distinctly remember Pop doing Hack-a-Shaq since Shaq's the same 4th quarter liability as he's always been. But, maybe I remember last year's Spurs vs Suns series wrong.

You remembered a lot of stuff wrong, so this is no surprise.




Or your end of career vs current career. Either one would be just as good.


Oh no, you never said that. I was just having you confirm it in a round about way since you wouldn't admit it straight out. Jordan didn't win those titles by himself, he needed Pippen. Thankyou.

Sure, what’s wrong? He needed Pippen’s help, just like Shaq needed Kobe’s help.


Yup, unlike you, I don't think I know it all. It's my opinion so I say I think as opposed to your absolutes.

What did I say wrong?


Kobe and Jordan are not equal, I've said that before.

He was just as skilled / more skilled. Gotcha.


There's no cure for homerism. If you look through the same post, you see some more valid analysis from less biased Spur fans.

Those that agree with you are “valid analysis”, those that don’t are being homers.

I am sure you are not a Kobe homer, your analysis was “valid”.

[diego]

allanon, can you even make a good argument for kobe being the best LAKER of all time?

and if you are going to answer that it's unfair because kobe hasnt finished his career, just say it outright that he hasnt accomplished enough to say if he's the best laker ever instead of going on and on about all the ifs and buts that would have to occur for someone to consider him the best laker ever.

[Allanon]

allanon, can you even make a good argument for kobe being the best LAKER of all time?

and if you are going to answer that it's unfair because kobe hasnt finished his career, just say it outright that he hasnt accomplished enough to say if he's the best laker ever instead of going on and on about all the ifs and buts that would have to occur for someone to consider him the best laker ever.

Oh no, I have no problem with it, I said it before.

Right now, Kobe is not the greatest Laker ever. I'd put Magic and Shaq ahead of him right now.

[Allanon]

Year PPG/Team 3PA/Team
91 106.3 7.1
92 105.3 7.6
96 99.5 16.0
01 94.8 13.7
04 93.4 14.9
08 99.9 18.1

So not only did 3pters increased by 250%, scoring DECREASED from Jordan’s era, showing, irrefutably, that 3pters are a larger part of today’s offense. But of course, most people who actually watched the game back in the early 90s didn’t need numbers to back it up.

Any other bullshit you want to spew?[/quote]

Where did you get these #'s or did you make them up? Why are you missing years 93-95? 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007? Hiding some of your bullshit behind your made up "facts"?



So you are OK with saying that Kobe is a terrible scorer compared to Jordan at age 30? Kobe averages 25.0 ppg at age 30, Jordan averaged 33.3 ppg. 33.3 > 25.0, and infact, 29% better, and that is a vast margin.

Ah but you fail to mention, also at age 30, Kobe has 21,619 points...Jordan had 16,596. Nice try.



BTW, Kobe averages 3.7 3pt a game, if he shot 30% instead of 34% from 3, he will score a WHOPPING 0.44 points less a game.

Jordan averaged 1.7 3pter a game, and if he shot 34% instead of 30% from 3, he will score an amazing 0.20 points a game. That really is a “vast margin” when I compared the differences, huh? [/quote]

Yup, it is a VAST margin in games especially with games on the line. 30% is a poor 3 point shooter no matter how you try to bend the numbers your way. Hello Kobe's better shooting percentage game him like an extra 400 points (without calculator)



LOL, so you are expecting Kobe to improve his 3 pt shooting when his career goes on, despite:
- At age 29, he already has 12 years in the league, compared to 9 for Jordan
- 3 pters experienced a huge increase in importance to all the teams during Jordan’s career.

OK, fine, remember this when you compare scoring averages, rebounding, assists, steals, blks and FG% between the two.

Kobe doesn't need to improve his 3 point shooting, he's already ahead of Jordan in 3pt %.



He shot more, so? Shot selection. Jordan wasn’t a good 3pt shooter when he entered the league, and he took less shots, he became a proficient 3 pt shooter later on in his career. Is there a problem?

No problem, thanks for agreeing that Jordan wasn't as good a 3 point shooter as Kobe at age 30.



Find the stats to back up your claim, don’t throw out vague generalizations.
Your stat was a vague generalization.



Why do you care? Jordan was older than 30, the magical cut off line of comparison you used, by 95. What is the big deal about something that happened after Jordan hit 30?

Because this is a question about Jordan's overall career, read the question yourself.



A really, 3 extra top-tier player in a league that has 30 teams compared to 24/27 teams? Oh, that makes about 1 all-star per team, sounds like a slightly watered-down league to me.

Hahah, nice try at diminishing their achievements. "Top Tier", hahah, you're talking about 3 All Time Greats at the same time Kobe wanted to be an All Time Great.



Wait, so if Shaq was drafted during Jordan’s career where he “get it and start winning”, it matters that he was in Kobe’s era, he should be counted as part of Kobe’s competition, but we can ignore Barkley, Malone, Bird, Magic, McHale, Stockton, Drexler, Mullin, Ewing, Hakeem and Robinson, because they were drafted prior to Jordan “getting it”.

Sure you can include those guys outside of Bird and Magic. Sorry but I take LeBron, Duncan, Shaq over any of those guys.



So we should only count the players that were drafted between 01 and 03, those were the only years Kobe got rings. Do we have a top-50 player there? No. Why would you count Garnett? He was drafted in 95, why AI and Duncan, they were drafted in 96 and 97, before Kobe “got it”.

For the simple fact that Kobe is still in his career and has "got it" right now and has those guys to deal with this year.



Oops, none of the players were in the Kobe “got it” years outside of Lebron. And we know that since Lebron was drafted, Kobe didn’t win squat. We should just ignore them.

You're talking about Kobe's "got it" years in the past. Kobe's career is not over.... Oopsie.



On the other hand, Shaq, a top 50 player was drafted in 92, Iverson in 96, Duncan in 97, all are years when Jordan won rings in. And Garnett was drafted in 95, between the two 3-peats

Yup, all drafted at the tail end of Jordans' career so he never had to compete against them except for Shaq. Jordan was lucky to come in the watered down early 90's.



You had no idea how good Derrick Coleman was, do you? He was a headcase, but an extremely talented headcase.

You have no idea how talented Ron Artest is do you? He's a headcase but an extremely talented headcase. :yawn.



Ellison was a legit 18/9/2 man if his career wasn’t derailed by injuries, you just don’t know that because you never saw him play.

if his career didn't get derailed. But it DID get derailed and he's a footnote and a bust.



Glenn Robinson was a 20ppg scorer, and Joe Smith was an 18/8 guy, MUCH better than Olowakandi or Brown ever was. Besides, Joe Smith was drafted the same year as Garnett, why would Smith be grouped together in Jordan’s group, and Garnett in Kobe’s?

Hmm, Glenn Robinson vs LeBron. I take LeBron. Hmm, Joe Smith vs Tim Duncan, I take Tim Duncan.



Inconsistent much?

Not as much as your double-standards. heheh.



What did you say earlier?

I dunno, why don't you go read it?



Stop making excuses for Kobe’s lesser scoring averages. He was simply less skilled in scoring up to the age of 30.

Stop giving His Airness a free pass.



Jordan was playing in the east the last decade?

Nope, Kobe's been playing in the best conference for a decade now.



Jordan only played against the East back in the day, and Kobe only in the West?

Seeding is within the conference. More games are played within the conference. Playoffs are within the conference until the Finals. You don't think playing in a harder conference makes much of a difference? :)



That helps explain why Kobe scored 81! He was playing against a team in the East, the Raptors, and that was lesser competition, proven by their record going up against the West. I don’t know how the East teams of Jordan’s era would do up against the West teams in Kobe’s era, they never played each other.

Sure, and Jordan played in the East and still couldn't get 81 against those East teams.




I can. I can remember the top 2 performers in NBA finals, no problem. In fact, I can remember the last 30 Finals MVPs, I can’t remember the top 30 scoring performances.

Yup, and you will remember 81 and 100 until/if they get surpassed.



And we have also shown that Jordan’s accomplishments were better than Kobe’s at age 30.

Kobe 3 rings, Jordan 2 rings.



Did I?

I don't know, did you?



Such as having one standard for 3p%, while another for scoring? Gotcha.

Yes, you outta stop doing that, it hurts your case.



And played him a whopping 10 mpg! Oh my goodness, Steve Kerr is more accomplished than Lebron James, he won 4 rings AND shot better from the field, and neither won the MVP.

Hell yeah, Steve Kerr's a ton more accomplished than LeBron.



Kobe wasn’t even as good as Kerr? Oh my GOSH!

Unfortunately no, Kerr was a much better 3 point shooter.




Kobe won 3 straight with Fisher. Fisher is just as good as Kerr.

Unfortunately, Fisher was never the best at anything, unlike Kerr who holds the all time 3 pt % record.



So you mean Grant and Rodman are supplementary players who Jordan doesn’t need to win rings? Thanks.

Yes, Jordan needed Pippen.



Of course Pippen>Harper, but Kobe > Pippen.

Of course.



And what does this prove anyways?

That Jordan's team was better than Kobe's team up until last year.



What’s wrong? Couldn’t find another player with 7 rings and at least 40 3 pters to compare to Horry?

No MVPs.



And Jordan was better than Kobe in every single category, other than 3pta.

Oh and that little thing called a Ring too :)



You have your opinion, and I am going to say that it is wrong.

:sleep



Vegas have odds for the next 6 to 8 years? Please send me the link.

Nope, they have odds for this year and the Lakers are by far the favorites. I can get that link for you if you like.



Really? Show me Shaq’s 4th quarter stats, prove it.

Hahah, in denial of Hack-a-Shaq? Hint, it's named after Shaq.



I do remember him flushing an alley-oop dunk to put out the Blazers. Seemed like your man Kobe gave him the ball.

1 memory? Great, I gave you a video with tons and you have 1 memory of Shaq? Hahah.

phM-QS6o8qc

Oops.[/quote]

Wow, that blank screen is really exciting.



You remembered a lot of stuff wrong, so this is no surprise.

Hahah, really where? Links, quotes, proof?



Sure, what’s wrong? He needed Pippen’s help, just like Shaq needed Kobe’s help.

Yup.



What did I say wrong?

You just said my opinion was wrong. That in itself is wrong.



He was just as skilled / more skilled. Gotcha.

Again, weak attempts at trying to put words in my mouth.



Those that agree with you are “valid analysis”, those that don’t are being homers.

I am sure you are not a Kobe homer, your analysis was “valid”.

Nope, those with opinions only are homers. Those who actually put up a valid argument or stats, in either direction, are valid.

I'm sure you're not a Kobe hater, your Analysis was "valid".

[Obstructed_View]

Oh no, I have no problem with it, I said it before.

Right now, Kobe is not the greatest Laker ever. I'd put Magic and Shaq ahead of him right now.

So Kareem, Zeke, and Baylor go without saying then, right? They're all above Shaq as Lakers.

[Allanon]

So Kareem, Zeke, and Baylor go without saying then, right? They're all above Shaq as Lakers.

Ah, yes, I forgot those guys as well although I didn't get to watch their games (some Kareem but missed most of his career) so can't say first hand.

[ambchang]

Where did you get these #'s or did you make them up? Why are you missing years 93-95? 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007? Hiding some of your bullshit behind your made up "facts"?

What? You don’t know where you got simple numbers like team ppt and 3PA? You don’t know of the concept of random sampling? I am not going to list out all 20 years for comparisons, if you want to, go ahead.

Look it up yourself on the web, it’s not really that hard to find.


Ah but you fail to mention, also at age 30, Kobe has 21,619 points...Jordan had 16,596. Nice try.

Oh yes, we ignore the fact that Kobe Bryant played way more games because he started at 18 instead of 23 like Jordan. Let us reward Kobe for living in an era where drafting high school players are common, instead of actual skills and ability.

At the age of 20, Andrew Bynum has more points than Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Wilt Chamberlain, Bill Russell and Hakeem Olajuwon put together when they were 20. According to you, Bynum should be compared to those greats.

Besides, you yourself said:

You take the good and the bad when it comes to averages.


Jordan averaged 1.7 3pter a game, and if he shot 34% instead of 30% from 3, he will score an amazing 0.20 points a game. That really is a “vast margin” when I compared the differences, huh?

Yup, it is a VAST margin in games especially with games on the line. 30% is a poor 3 point shooter no matter how you try to bend the numbers your way. Hello Kobe's better shooting percentage game him like an extra 400 points (without calculator)[/quote]

Do you know the margin difference of those teams are? 0.2 points and 0.4 points is miniscule no matter how you cut it.

And yes, 400 points over a 12 year career is extremely small.


Kobe doesn't need to improve his 3 point shooting, he's already ahead of Jordan in 3pt %.

So how does Kobe Bryant’s game work, they can improve if they are not to Jordan’s level, but they can’t get worse when they are ahead of Jordan? Kobe could become a terrible 3pt shooter in the last few years of his career, dragging his average to an awful 30% using your logic. It cuts both ways.


No problem, thanks for agreeing that Jordan wasn't as good a 3 point shooter as Kobe at age 30.

And thanks for showing that Kobe wasn’t as good a 3 point shooter as Kerr was at age 30. Really means something.


Your stat was a vague generalization.

Then show your stats. Where are they?



Because this is a question about Jordan's overall career, read the question yourself.

But you only compare Jordan’s achievement up to age 30, why would you take other considerations now?


Hahah, nice try at diminishing their achievements. "Top Tier", hahah, you're talking about 3 All Time Greats at the same time Kobe wanted to be an All Time Great.

Manu is an all-time great? Yao is an all-time great? Maybe you should back it up with their accomplishments up to 30 years old. I fail to see how they are all-time greats.

And Jordan didn’t have any all-time greats in his era?



Sure you can include those guys outside of Bird and Magic. Sorry but I take LeBron, Duncan, Shaq over any of those guys.

Why outside of Bird an Magic? Jordan competed against them directly in the playoffs.

And Shaq was drafted in 92, right in the smack of Jordan’s dominance? Why is he all of a sudden a Kobe-era guy now? Duncan was drafted before Kobe got it and while Jordan was still winning rings. You came up with the standard of draft dates.

And you would take LeBron over Hakeem? Great!


For the simple fact that Kobe is still in his career and has "got it" right now and has those guys to deal with this year.

What has Kobe “gotten”? Refusing to shoot in a playoff game, folding faster than superman on laundry day in the finals. Oh yeah, he really “got it”.


You're talking about Kobe's "got it" years in the past. Kobe's career is not over.... Oopsie.

Kobe’s got it years has yet to come. He went into a nasty feud with Shaq (both responsible) and broke up a team in the middle of their dominance, he was recorded bad-mouthing Andrew Bynum in a video, he refused to shoot to show his coach who’s the boss, he led a team to a 40-point loss in an elimination game in the finals. The only thing he ever “got” was Shaq as his teammate.


Yup, all drafted at the tail end of Jordans' career so he never had to compete against them except for Shaq. Jordan was lucky to come in the watered down early 90's.

You mentioned something about the Grizzlies expanding in 95, wasn’t that the “tail-end” of Jordan’s career? And guess what? The league was even MORE watered-down, the Bobcats joined the Grizz and the Raptors in the league!


You have no idea how talented Ron Artest is do you? He's a headcase but an extremely talented headcase. :yawn.

Yes he was, and the Pacers were one a contender. What’s the problem?


if his career didn't get derailed. But it DID get derailed and he's a footnote and a bust.

Players get injured every year, Yao?


Hmm, Glenn Robinson vs LeBron. I take LeBron. Hmm, Joe Smith vs Tim Duncan, I take Tim Duncan.

Not as much as your double-standards. heheh.

Such as taking the worse and compare them to the best, right? How about LeBron vs. Shaq, much more even now is it? And Duncan was drafted BEFORE Kobe got it (both drafted around the same time), so a better comparison would be Duncan vs. Hakeem (with Hakeem being drafted the same year as Jordan). The comparisons are closer now, huh?


I dunno, why don't you go read it?

You don’t know what you said yourself? Even though it was quoted right underneath? You are dumber than I thought!

I will quote it for you again.


You take the good and the bad when it comes to averages.


Stop giving His Airness a free pass.
Such as how? Could you explain why Kobe scored less than Jordan? Or are you going into your excuses?




Nope, Kobe's been playing in the best conference for a decade now.

Wow, really, he played in the best conference for a decade now? That sounds really impressive, especially when there is a grand total of TWO conferences in the NBA.

Oh wait, so what? How does that factor into Jordan vs. Kobe comparisons?


Seeding is within the conference. More games are played within the conference. Playoffs are within the conference until the Finals. You don't think playing in a harder conference makes much of a difference? :)

But you were using regular season stats.

And MORE games doesn’t mean exclusive, does it?


Sure, and Jordan played in the East and still couldn't get 81 against those East teams.

Jordan played against that Raptors team? What year was it that Kobe scored 81 again? I don’t remember.



Yup, and you will remember 81 and 100 until/if they get surpassed.

I would remember them even after they were surpassed, just like I remember the final MVPs.


Kobe 3 rings, Jordan 2 rings.

So, Pippen got more rings than Jordan at the same age. So Kobe is comparable to Jordan, but not to Pippen?

Besides, Jordan won his 3rd ring at age 30 and 4 months and, Kobe will be 30 and 4 months by December. Given the fact that rings are not won until June, Kobe will have the same number of rings as Jordan at the same age of 30 years and 4 months.


I don't know, did you?

You don’t know about something you are trying to make a point on? You don’t even know whether I made a point or not, and you are saying I did and tried to argue with me? Do your own work, dig up your own arguments, and stop wasting my time.




How so? Please explain. You DID use one standard for 3p%, and another for scoring when comparing the two players.


memory? Great, I gave you a video with tons and you have 1 memory of Shaq? Hahah.


phM-QS6o8qc

Oops.

Wow, that blank screen is really exciting.

Wow, you have a video! This is really amazing! It proves for a fact that things that never happened on a video never existed.

I will try the youtube again.

[youtube]phM-QS6o8qc[/quote]

And while you are preaching, pull us some stats, rather than saying random things like Jordan played against smaller SGs than Kobe did, or how the 00’s are so much more scoring heavy than the late 80’s, early 90’s.


Hahah, really where? Links, quotes, proof?

Such as how the early 90’s were low scoring, while the 00’s were so much more high scoring.


Yup.

You just said my opinion was wrong. That in itself is wrong.

Opinions COULD be wrong, especially when there are facts to refute them. Such as the scoring differential stated earlier.


Again, weak attempts at trying to put words in my mouth.

Then what were you trying to say?



Nope, those with opinions only are homers. Those who actually put up a valid argument or stats, in either direction, are valid.

I'm sure you're not a Kobe hater, your Analysis was "valid".

Hey, I put up the stats in this thread, you didn’t. I guess that makes my arguments valid, and you are just a homer.

And FYI, I like Kobe more than Jordan. I hated Jordan as a player, but I am not blind enough to say that Kobe is comparable to Jordan.

[Obstructed_View]

Ah, yes, I forgot those guys as well although I didn't get to watch their games (some Kareem but missed most of his career) so can't say first hand.

I'm surprised that you saw any of Kareem's career, since you obviously missed all of Jordan's.

[m33p0]

why compare kobe to mj when lebron is all set to supplant duncan(eat that, muthafuckers!) as the best?

[Obstructed_View]

why compare kobe to mj when lebron is all set to supplant duncan(eat that, muthafuckers!) as the best?

That's a similar argument to Kobe vs. Jordan, actually. Well done.

[Allanon]

What? You don’t know where you got simple numbers like team ppt and 3PA? You don’t know of the concept of random sampling? I am not going to list out all 20 years for comparisons, if you want to, go ahead.

Look it up yourself on the web, it’s not really that hard to find.


Ho hum. Made up numbers unless you can cite the source.



Oh yes, we ignore the fact that Kobe Bryant played way more games because he started at 18 instead of 23 like Jordan. Let us reward Kobe for living in an era where drafting high school players are common, instead of actual skills and ability.

Trying to make up more excuses for Jordan? When you count Kobe's career, it's going to be his entire career. Kobe's going to surpass Jordan in career points in the next 5 years or so.



At the age of 20, Andrew Bynum has more points than Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Wilt Chamberlain, Bill Russell and Hakeem Olajuwon put together when they were 20. According to you, Bynum should be compared to those greats.

At age 20, yes.



Do you know the margin difference of those teams are? 0.2 points and 0.4 points is miniscule no matter how you cut it.

Yes, 2% and 4% like not much. But it depends on where that extra points come in at. Let's say in a 1 point game, that extra 1 point is huge.



And yes, 400 points over a 12 year career is extremely small.

It may be small to you, but in game situations, those 400 points may be crucial.



So how does Kobe Bryant’s game work, they can improve if they are not to Jordan’s level, but they can’t get worse when they are ahead of Jordan? Kobe could become a terrible 3pt shooter in the last few years of his career, dragging his average to an awful 30% using your logic. It cuts both ways.

Of course, Kobe could become a poor ass 3 point shooter. That's why I said at age 30. Anything more is speculation.



And thanks for showing that Kobe wasn’t as good a 3 point shooter as Kerr was at age 30. Really means something.

Yup, Kerr was the #1 3 point shooter in accuracy, he was also Jordan's helper.



Then show your stats. Where are they?

Why would I need to show stats for your vague generalization?



But you only compare Jordan’s achievement up to age 30, why would you take other considerations now?

Because this accounts for Jordan's competition as opposed to Kobe's competition.



Manu is an all-time great? Yao is an all-time great? Maybe you should back it up with their accomplishments up to 30 years old. I fail to see how they are all-time greats.

I dunno where you got yao, Manu from. LeBron, Duncan, Shaq.



And Jordan didn’t have any all-time greats in his era?

None like Duncan, Shaq & LeBron.



Why outside of Bird an Magic? Jordan competed against them directly in the playoffs.

When they were at the tail end of their careers.



And Shaq was drafted in 92, right in the smack of Jordan’s dominance? Why is he all of a sudden a Kobe-era guy now? Duncan was drafted before Kobe got it and while Jordan was still winning rings. You came up with the standard of draft dates.

Because he was a rookie in 92. Shaq didn't become a great player until 97.



And you would take LeBron over Hakeem? Great!

Hell Yeah.



What has Kobe “gotten”? Refusing to shoot in a playoff game, folding faster than superman on laundry day in the finals. Oh yeah, he really “got it”.

Open your eyes to the world outside the Spurs, there are other teams. Kobe last year "got it", even though he didn't win.



Kobe’s got it years has yet to come. He went into a nasty feud with Shaq (both responsible) and broke up a team in the middle of their dominance, he was recorded bad-mouthing Andrew Bynum in a video, he refused to shoot to show his coach who’s the boss, he led a team to a 40-point loss in an elimination game in the finals. The only thing he ever “got” was Shaq as his teammate.

Nope, he won the MVP last year. He didn't get a ring (and thus lost ground on Jordan last year). But he finally got what it means to be a leader and a teammate.



You mentioned something about the Grizzlies expanding in 95, wasn’t that the “tail-end” of Jordan’s career? And guess what? The league was even MORE watered-down, the Bobcats joined the Grizz and the Raptors in the league!

Yes, we know about the expansions. You had only mentioned the recent expansions but did not mention the Jordan era expansions with your coloring.



Yes he was, and the Pacers were one a contender. What’s the problem?

Yup, just like your #1 pick Derrick Coleman, a talented headcase.



Players get injured every year, Yao?

:lol :lol Hahah comparing a guy who played only HALF his NBA games to Yao?



Such as taking the worse and compare them to the best, right? How about LeBron vs. Shaq, much more even now is it? And Duncan was drafted BEFORE Kobe got it (both drafted around the same time), so a better comparison would be Duncan vs. Hakeem (with Hakeem being drafted the same year as Jordan). The comparisons are closer now, huh?



Yup, Kobe goes up against LeBron and Duncan all the time. In fact, he'll probably be fighting with the Greatest Power Forward of all time in the Playoffs again this year.

[quote]
You don’t know what you said yourself? Even though it was quoted right underneath? You are dumber than I thought!

Nope, I don't answer your stupid vague answers.



Wow, really, he played in the best conference for a decade now? That sounds really impressive, especially when there is a grand total of TWO conferences in the NBA.

Hahah, you're more delusional than I thought if you don't think that playing in the West is quite a bit harder than the East.



Oh wait, so what? How does that factor into Jordan vs. Kobe comparisons?

Competition in the West vs Watered down NBA.



But you were using regular season stats.

And MORE games doesn’t mean exclusive, does it?

That's 1/3 more games played within your conference. And if you happen to be in the West, like Kobe, you can see how much more difficult it is.

You're stupider than I thought if you think playing in the West is not much more difficult than the East.



Jordan played against that Raptors team? What year was it that Kobe scored 81 again? I don’t remember.

There were plenty of Eastern teams for Jordan to pick on and score 81. He didn't, again, stop making excuses for MJ, he doesn't need it.



I would remember them even after they were surpassed, just like I remember the final MVPs.

Uhmm, sure you would :)



So, Pippen got more rings than Jordan at the same age. So Kobe is comparable to Jordan, but not to Pippen?

How many MVPs did Pippen get?



Besides, Jordan won his 3rd ring at age 30 and 4 months and, Kobe will be 30 and 4 months by December. Given the fact that rings are not won until June, Kobe will have the same number of rings as Jordan at the same age of 30 years and 4 months.

Yes, and if Kobe has a ring in June, he'll have 4 rings at age 30 and 10 months. Jordan at 30 and 10 months had 3. :D



You don’t know about something you are trying to make a point on? You don’t even know whether I made a point or not, and you are saying I did and tried to argue with me? Do your own work, dig up your own arguments, and stop wasting my time.

I ain't going to waste my time responding to "What did you say earlier?". If you're going to make a point, make it. Don't be coy.



How so? Please explain. You DID use one standard for 3p%, and another for scoring when comparing the two players.

Where did I use 1 standard for 3p% and a different one for scoring?



I rest my case.

Excellent. You can have your wrong opinion and I can have my wrong opinion.



Kobe can compare to Jordan, but he doesn’t hold a candle to Kerr, gotcha.

Yup, Kobe can't compare to Kerr's 3 pointers, that boy was bad. But Kobe was a greater 3 point shooter than Jordan.



So? Artis Gilmore is the all-time leader in FG%, Karl Malone never was the best at anything in the league, does that mean Gilmore is better than Malone?

Calvin Murphy hold the best ft% record, Dwayne Wade never led the league in anything, is Murphy better than Wade?

Who are these guys? We're talking about Kobe and MJ, please stay on subject.



Yeah, because Jordan was better than Kobe. And what was so great about Kobe’s team last year? How they got totally embarrassed in the finals? Fortunately, this is one game like the 81 point game, every one will remember it until there was an even more embarrassing loss in the finals.

Or until Kobe gets the 4th ring and they hold a big parade and cool ceremonies.



Why are MVPs boolean functions? And why should you set the rules in accomplishments. I prefer my way, Horry is the greatest player of all-time.

Sure, you can say Horry is the best player in the world. Doesn't make you right.



You mean how both of them will have 3 rings when they are 30 years old and 4 months, but one of them didn’t have one of the greatest players to lean on?

Or how Kobe may have 4 rings at 30 years and 10 months and Jordan will have 3 rings at 30 years and 10 months. Pippen is in the Top 50 list of Greatest Players ever so I agree.



But you were making the case that Kobe’s Lakers can be contenders for the next 6 to 8 years.

[quote]
Because it rhymes, it was developed for Wilt Chamberlain, look it up.

Yah, they should have called it Hack a Wilt :)



Wow, you have a video! This is really amazing! It proves for a fact that things that never happened on a video never existed.

Good save.



I will try the youtube again.

[youtube]phM-QS6o8qc

And while you are preaching, pull us some stats, rather than saying random things like Jordan played against smaller SGs than Kobe did, or how the 00’s are so much more scoring heavy than the late 80’s, early 90’s.

Impressive, 1 game winner video in 17 years in the league, uh great? That SURE does prove Shaq's a 4th quarter clutcher and Hack a Shaq didn't happen :D



Opinions COULD be wrong, especially when there are facts to refute them. Such as the scoring differential stated earlier.

Sure, if there were facts that actually proved them wrong which you have failed at repeatedly.



Then what were you trying to say?

Kobe and Jordan are not equal, I've said that before.



Hey, I put up the stats in this thread, you didn’t. I guess that makes my arguments valid, and you are just a homer.

Ah, how about this stat? Kobe 3 rings, Jordan 2.



And FYI, I like Kobe more than Jordan. I hated Jordan as a player, but I am not blind enough to say that Kobe is comparable to Jordan.

Uhm, sure you do. :wink

30 year old Kobe is comparable to 30 year old Jordan, but Jordan is still GOAT today and by a wide margin.

[ShoogarBear]

You caught me in hyperbole. The point was he'll be remembered for breaking backboards, which really doesn't have much to do with basketball skill one way or the other.

Ah, gotcha.

Actually, this one was better anyway:

"Send it in Jerome!"

eTn_9k-GBzQ

[Allanon]

I'm surprised that you saw any of Kareem's career, since you obviously missed all of Jordan's.

Hahah, no. I give Jordan his props and he was obviously a great player. And no, I don't think Kobe's close to MJ now.

My whole point is let's not count out Kobe just yet.

[Obstructed_View]

Hahah, no. I give Jordan his props and he was obviously a great player. And no, I don't think Kobe's close to MJ now.

My whole point is let's not count out Kobe just yet.

Fair enough, but Kobe's going to have to develop something he's never had in order to become Jordanesque. Put Manu's heart in Kobe's body for the next several years and he might have a chance.

[ambchang]

Ho hum. Made up numbers unless you can cite the source.

If I were as weak as not being able to easily find numbers like ppg and 3pa for teams in the last 20 years, I won’t be going around acting like a smart ass on the internet arguing basketball.

Look up basketball-reference.com, or do you need me to tell you exactly where to look?

You are just embarrassing yourself.


Trying to make up more excuses for Jordan? When you count Kobe's career, it's going to be his entire career. Kobe's going to surpass Jordan in career points in the next 5 years or so.

What are you talking about? You are the one who likes to quote averages. Now the averages are not important anymore, it’s total points. Well what do you know? Mark Jackson is a better passer than Magic, the Big-O, Jason Kidd, Isiah Thomas, Gary Payton, Steve Nash and Bob Cousy, because he got more total assists in his career. Idiot.


At age 20, yes.

Continue your funneled, narrow-minded view of the world. There are other factors in judging a player’s potential than how many points he scored by 20.


Yes, 2% and 4% like not much. But it depends on where that extra points come in at. Let's say in a 1 point game, that extra 1 point is huge.

1 point? Where is that one point? Oh you mean that 0.2 or 0.4 points! So on average, that one point could make a difference in a 1 point game every 5 games or every 2.5 games.

But that is assuming they all take 3-pointers in that situation, which is just plain stupid when you are down by one. You drive to a lane for the deuce. So to be more specific, Kobe Bryant could make 1 more 3 pointer for every 25 taken, so in other words, that extra 4 % could make a difference when the Lakers are down 2 (depending if Jackson wants a tie or a win) or 3 points once every 25 times. Given there were 82 games in the season, why don’t you look up the Lakers, and see how many games were decided by 2 or 3 points last season, with Kobe Bryant shooting a 3?

Oh I forgot, you CAN’T look up anything on the web, because that would be like a monumental task for you. Try nba.com, sports.espn.go.com/nba, or basketball-reference.com, they all give great information.


It may be small to you, but in game situations, those 400 points may be crucial.

Example, which one?


Of course, Kobe could become a poor ass 3 point shooter. That's why I said at age 30. Anything more is speculation.

Oh, so by age 30, despite Kobe Bryant having worse stats and accomplishments than Jordan despite playing 3 more seasons in the league, we are to assume that it is probable that Kobe would end up being a greater player than Jordan.


Yup, Kerr was the #1 3 point shooter in accuracy, he was also Jordan's helper.

So? Any correlation that the league with the #1 3 point shooting leads to more wins? Want to look that up to prove your own point?


Why would I need to show stats for your vague generalization?

YOU said Jordan played against smaller SG than Kobe, I didn’t. If YOU want to prove YOUR own point, YOU look up the stats. If YOU can’t back it up with anything, YOU are generalizing.

I came up with average height and weight and players for the last 20 years, YOU did nothing except threw out irresponsible vague generalizations. (Nice attempt to copy what I wrote and throw it back at me, even though it makes no sense when applied to me, but we all know that not being able to look up anything on the net doesn’t stop you from spewing “points” that you can’t back up).


Because this accounts for Jordan's competition as opposed to Kobe's competition.

So because the West was stronger than the East in Kobe’s era, we know that the East in Jordan’s era is weaker than today’s West? What kind of logic is that?

With your logic.

If Kobe’s West = 6, and Kobe’s East = 4, and Jordan’s West = 3 and East = 10, your logic shows that Kobe’s West > Jordan’s East, which shows 6 > 10, which is incorrect. Your “logic” is hardly logical.

BTW, the East was so weak last year, an 8th seed took the Celtics to 7, while the West champs lost in 6 to the Celtics. Great point backing you up.


I dunno where you got yao, Manu from. LeBron, Duncan, Shaq.

Go look it up yourself, now that I have empowered you with a website, you can cease to be ignorant. Of course, I am thinking that you willing choose to be.


None like Duncan, Shaq & LeBron.

You mean Duncan and Shaq being in Jordan’s era, right?

Magic and Bird wasn’t as great as LeBron? That is news to me. Hakeem wasn’t as great as Lebron? That is news to me too.


When they were at the tail end of their careers.

LOL! Bird won 3 straight MVPs and a ring, while Magic won 3 MVPs and 3 titles while Jordan was in the league! Jordan competed against Magic in the finals the year Magic finished #2 in MVP voting! Do you know anything?


Because he was a rookie in 92. Shaq didn't become a great player until 97.

Where did that come from? Shaq led the Magic to the finals in 95, his team beat Jordan’s in the same year. He average 29.7 points in his second season. Shaq didn’t become a great player after he joined the Lakers, homer.


Hell Yeah.

That’s it, you know nothing about basketball, because you would take a player who has less accomplishments than Kerr over Hakeem.


Open your eyes to the world outside the Spurs, there are other teams. Kobe last year "got it", even though he didn't win.

LOL, judging from your idiotic responses and general ineptitude to basketball knowledge, you should open your eyes outside to Kobe, to which you don’t even know too much about.

Kobe “got it” last year by showing ZERO leadership abilities when the pressure was on.


Nope, he won the MVP last year. He didn't get a ring (and thus lost ground on Jordan last year). But he finally got what it means to be a leader and a teammate.

This is about as vague as it gets. He won the MVP and didn’t get the ring, which means he was a leader? Did Dirk Nowitzki got it in 06, then lost it the following year?


Yes, we know about the expansions. You had only mentioned the recent expansions but did not mention the Jordan era expansions with your coloring.

With my colouring? What does that even mean? So why does the recent expansions not further water down the league? After all, YOU defined watering down the league as having expansion teams.



Yup, just like your #1 pick Derrick Coleman, a talented headcase.

So Coleman is talented now? So why did you bring him up when you talked about players comparable to Olowakandi and Kwame Brown? You think the later two are talented?


:lol :lol Hahah comparing a guy who played only HALF his NBA games to Yao?

By 27, Yao played 404 games, at the same age, Ellison played 327 games. HALF you say?


Yup, Kobe goes up against LeBron and Duncan all the time. In fact, he'll probably be fighting with the Greatest Power Forward of all time in the Playoffs again this year.

Jordan went up against Hakeem, Magic, Bird, Malone, Barkley, McHale, Drexler all the time. Did you watch the games?


Nope, I don't answer your stupid vague answers.

First you don’t know, how you don’t answer? Which one was it?

And why do you have to answer answers? Why is quoting you directly a vague answer? Oh, I got it, you are saying that you give vague answers. I will try not quoting you.

So I will state this again. YOU refused to accept explanations for Jordan’s lower 3p%, calling those excuses and giving Jordan a free pass, and yet YOU gave a list of half a dozen “reasons” for Kobe’s lower ppg average. Care to explain why this inconsistency?


Hahah, you're more delusional than I thought if you don't think that playing in the West is quite a bit harder than the East.

Quote me.


Competition in the West vs Watered down NBA.

You mean how Kobe’s era has 30 teams vs. Jordan’s era, where they have 24, and then 27 teams? Why are you comparing Kobe to Kobe? I know in you are in love with him, but take off your pink Kobe jersey and open your eyes, there are more NBA players than Kobe.


That's 1/3 more games played within your conference. And if you happen to be in the West, like Kobe, you can see how much more difficult it is.

Unfortunately, I don’t play in the NBA like you do, so I don’t know how much more difficult it is to score points.


You're stupider than I thought if you think playing in the West is not much more difficult than the East.

Like how the West champs lost to the East champs? Great example!
And Kobe didn’t agree with you.
Last year, against MUCH tougher competition in the west, he had:
29.3 points (on 47 FG%, 36 3p%, and 82 FT%, 5.3 asts, 6.8 rebs, 0.46 blks, and 1.9 steals.
While vs. the weak weak east, he had:
26.7 points (on 43%, 36% , 88%), 5.6 assts, 5.5 rebs, 0.5 bls, and 1.7 stls.

Oh yes, the source; check out Nba.com, player profile.



There were plenty of Eastern teams for Jordan to pick on and score 81. He didn't, again, stop making excuses for MJ, he doesn't need it.

Wow! All Eastern teams are created the same? Fantastic! I didn’t know that Jordan had to play against the same Raptors team that Kobe had to play against.

Also, nice to know that your view of a basketball player’s motivation is how many points he can score in one game, rather than scoring to help his team win.


Uhmm, sure you would :)



How many MVPs did Pippen get?

Zero, so? How many did Kobe get? How many did Jordan get at the same age? The difference is the same to me.


Yes, and if Kobe has a ring in June, he'll have 4 rings at age 30 and 10 months. Jordan at 30 and 10 months had 3. :D

If? What if? Has it happened yet? Why are we counting things that hasn’t happened yet? If Kobe Bryant retired tomorrow, or had a career ending injury. Just as likely.


I ain't going to waste my time responding to "What did you say earlier?". If you're going to make a point, make it. Don't be coy.

I made it, it was quoted right underneath. If you can’t read it (or refused to read it because you can’t answer), it is your problem.


Where did I use 1 standard for 3p% and a different one for scoring?

One you use averages, the other you used total.


Excellent. You can have your wrong opinion and I can have my wrong opinion.

What is wrong with mine?


Yup, Kobe can't compare to Kerr's 3 pointers, that boy was bad. But Kobe was a greater 3 point shooter than Jordan.

Well duh! Sure showed how much greater Kerr was than Kobe and Jordan, doesn’t it?

Oh wait, you need points written straight out to you because you are admittedly not too bright, how about this? Being good in 3pt shooting has little to do with how great a player is.


Who are these guys? We're talking about Kobe and MJ, please stay on subject.

This is on the subject because they pertain to your illogical responses. If you don’t even know Artis Gilmore and Calvin Murphy, you really shouldn’t state anything on the web.

And talking about staying on the subject, why did you bring in Kerr and Rodman?

[QUOTE=Allanon;2855050]Or until Kobe gets the 4th ring and they hold a big parade and cool ceremonies.

Has that happened? Heard of don’t count your chickens before they hatch? Or do you need a reference on this?


Sure, you can say Horry is the best player in the world. Doesn't make you right.

You mean opinions could be wrong? Really? Or do you mean opinions can be not right?


Or how Kobe may have 4 rings at 30 years and 10 months and Jordan will have 3 rings at 30 years and 10 months. Pippen is in the Top 50 list of Greatest Players ever so I agree.

May have? May have?


Yah, they should have called it Hack a Wilt

Look it up on the web, look for the history of Hack-a-Shaq. Just because an animal is called a sea horse doesn’t mean that it’s a horse.


Impressive, 1 game winner video in 17 years in the league, uh great? That SURE does prove Shaq's a 4th quarter clutcher and Hack a Shaq didn't happen :D

Quote me where I said it didn’t happen. But it shows your assertion that Kobe carried the team every time to be false. Shaq got the ball in the low post in the final seconds. Hack a Shaq sends a 50% FT to the line, who has the same yield as a 50% FG shooter, and that is mighty high.


Sure, if there were facts that actually proved them wrong which you have failed at repeatedly.

Quote me. Don’t just say “you are wrong”, state what I said wrong. Like I have stated how you incorrectly stated scoring differentials between Jordan’s and Kobe’s era, or how you stated incorrectly about the 3P shooting, or how you think Kobe scored more vs. the East than he did vs. the West.


Kobe and Jordan are not equal, I've said that before.



Ah, how about this stat? Kobe 3 rings, Jordan 2.

You mean Kobe 3, Jordan 3? 30 years old and 4 months, both have 3 rings.


Uhm, sure you do. :wink

30 year old Kobe is comparable to 30 year old Jordan, but Jordan is still GOAT today and by a wide margin.

Well duh!

And I repeat:

Pull us some stats, rather than saying random things like Jordan played against smaller SGs than Kobe did, or how the 00’s are so much more scoring heavy than the late 80’s, early 90’s.

[Allanon]

If I were as weak as not being able to easily find numbers like ppg and 3pa for teams in the last 20 years, I won’t be going around acting like a smart ass on the internet arguing basketball.

Look up basketball-reference.com, or do you need me to tell you exactly where to look?

You are just embarrassing yourself.

Made up "stats" are the most embarrASSing of all.



What are you talking about? You are the one who likes to quote averages. Now the averages are not important anymore, it’s total points. Well what do you know? Mark Jackson is a better passer than Magic, the Big-O, Jason Kidd, Isiah Thomas, Gary Payton, Steve Nash and Bob Cousy, because he got more total assists in his career. Idiot.

When did I say BETTER? Learn to read, Idiot:

"Kobe's going to surpass Jordan in career points in the next 5 years or so."



Continue your funneled, narrow-minded view of the world. There are other factors in judging a player’s potential than how many points he scored by 20.

You brought up the idiocy at age 20, I was helping you out.



1 point? Where is that one point? Oh you mean that 0.2 or 0.4 points! So on average, that one point could make a difference in a 1 point game every 5 games or every 2.5 games.

But that is assuming they all take 3-pointers in that situation, which is just plain stupid when you are down by one. You drive to a lane for the deuce. So to be more specific, Kobe Bryant could make 1 more 3 pointer for every 25 taken, so in other words, that extra 4 % could make a difference when the Lakers are down 2 (depending if Jackson wants a tie or a win) or 3 points once every 25 times. Given there were 82 games in the season, why don’t you look up the Lakers, and see how many games were decided by 2 or 3 points last season, with Kobe Bryant shooting a 3?

Why does it have to be at the end of a game? 3 points is 3 points. If you're up by 1 point at the end of a game, it could have been a 3 point shot during the game.

Don't act stupid, that extra 1 point is crucial in some games.



Oh I forgot, you CAN’T look up anything on the web, because that would be like a monumental task for you.

Getting angry now? :D



Example, which one?

Which one? You kidding me? Alright, I found one that shows that vital "3 pointer" and it even matches the sound of your posts as a bonus :)

GBKLjgZOMCg




Oh, so by age 30, despite Kobe Bryant having worse stats and accomplishments than Jordan despite playing 3 more seasons in the league, we are to assume that it is probable that Kobe would end up being a greater player than Jordan.

Again, please READ my friend, when did I EVER say it was probable that Kobe would surpass Jordan? But you can continue ASSuming if you like.



So? Any correlation that the league with the #1 3 point shooting leads to more wins? Want to look that up to prove your own point?

No, you need to check your history. JORDAN won the rings with the help of Kerr, it wasn't the other way around.



YOU said Jordan played against smaller SG than Kobe, I didn’t. If YOU want to prove YOUR own point, YOU look up the stats. If YOU can’t back it up with anything, YOU are generalizing.

Sure, I'm generalizing, just like you. You didn't disprove my statement either so it's just opinion right now.



I came up with average height and weight and players for the last 20 years, YOU did nothing except threw out irresponsible vague generalizations. (Nice attempt to copy what I wrote and throw it back at me, even though it makes no sense when applied to me, but we all know that not being able to look up anything on the net doesn’t stop you from spewing “points” that you can’t back up).

Quoting wrong stats, even if you're quoting them, is still wrong. Average height of NBA players has nothing to do with the height of Shooting Guards.



So because the West was stronger than the East in Kobe’s era, we know that the East in Jordan’s era is weaker than today’s West? What kind of logic is that?

Yup, my point is the West is strong in this era, and the East was weak, if you disagree, prove it, otherwise you have no point.



With your logic.

If Kobe’s West = 6, and Kobe’s East = 4, and Jordan’s West = 3 and East = 10, your logic shows that Kobe’s West > Jordan’s East, which shows 6 > 10, which is incorrect. Your “logic” is hardly logical.

What? Where are you making up these numbers from this time "6, 4, 3, 10"? I never said no "6,4,3,10", quote me where.

Explain your "logic"



BTW, the East was so weak last year, an 8th seed took the Celtics to 7, while the West champs lost in 6 to the Celtics. Great point backing you up.

BTW, you talking about that Hawks team with a whopping 37 wins last year? Hahahahahahah.



Go look it up yourself, now that I have empowered you with a website, you can cease to be ignorant. Of course, I am thinking that you willing choose to be.

Blah, blah, blah.



You mean Duncan and Shaq being in Jordan’s era, right?

Nope, Duncan and Shaq being in Kobe's era.



Magic and Bird wasn’t as great as LeBron? That is news to me. Hakeem wasn’t as great as Lebron? That is news to me too.

Sorry, by the 90's Magic and Bird were no longer as good as LeBron. And yup, I take LeBron over Hakeem. Lot's of things are news to you it seems.



LOL! Bird won 3 straight MVPs and a ring, while Magic won 3 MVPs and 3 titles while Jordan was in the league! Jordan competed against Magic in the finals the year Magic finished #2 in MVP voting! Do you know anything?

The 80's were Bird and Magic. The 90's were Jordan's era. How many rings did Magic or Bird win in the 90s? How OLD were they in the 90s? Do you know anything?




Again, open your eyes up beyond stats, you sound like Hollinger. Shaq's rings with Orlando: 0 . Shaq's rings with the Lakers: 3. Big difference, Hollinger.

[quote]
That’s it, you know nothing about basketball, because you would take a player who has less accomplishments than Kerr over Hakeem.

And you obviously know nothing about basketball as well :)



LOL, judging from your idiotic responses and general ineptitude to basketball knowledge, you should open your eyes outside to Kobe, to which you don’t even know too much about.

LOL, judging from your idiotic responses and general ineptitude to basketball knowledge, you should open your eyes outside to Jordan, to which you don’t even know too much about.



Kobe “got it” last year by showing ZERO leadership abilities when the pressure was on.

NOPE, Kobe lost because he was not good enough. His team was not good enough. It had nothing to do with leadership.



This is about as vague as it gets. He won the MVP and didn’t get the ring, which means he was a leader? Did Dirk Nowitzki got it in 06, then lost it the following year?

Yup, you can lose and still be a leader.



With my colouring? What does that even mean? So why does the recent expansions not further water down the league? After all, YOU defined watering down the league as having expansion teams.

Colouring as in rose-tinted :)



So Coleman is talented now? So why did you bring him up when you talked about players comparable to Olowakandi and Kwame Brown? You think the later two are talented?

Nope, Jordan Era #1 pick Coleman was a waste of time just like the Kandi Man #1 pick in the Kobe era.



By 27, Yao played 404 games, at the same age, Ellison played 327 games. HALF you say?

Hello? Yao's played 80% of his games compared to Ellison's 66%.



Jordan went up against Hakeem, Magic, Bird, Malone, Barkley, McHale, Drexler all the time. Did you watch the games?

Tail end of Magic, McHale and Bird's career.

Malone, Barkley, Drexler, sure. If I we had a 3 on 3, I'd take LeBron, Shaq and Duncan or your 3 and we'd whup you.



First you don’t know, how you don’t answer? Which one was it?

I dunno, if you actually READ it you would know.



And why do you have to answer answers? Why is quoting you directly a vague answer? Oh, I got it, you are saying that you give vague answers. I will try not quoting you.

Oh just like to answer ansers, vague or not.



So I will state this again. YOU refused to accept explanations for Jordan’s lower 3p%, calling those excuses and giving Jordan a free pass, and yet YOU gave a list of half a dozen “reasons” for Kobe’s lower ppg average. Care to explain why this inconsistency?

Hey, if you're gonna try to give Jordan a free pass, I'm gonna copy you and give Kobe a free pass too :)



Quote me.


Just checking. So do you think that playing in the West is significantly harder than the East?



You mean how Kobe’s era has 30 teams vs. Jordan’s era, where they have 24, and then 27 teams? Why are you comparing Kobe to Kobe? I know in you are in love with him, but take off your pink Kobe jersey and open your eyes, there are more NBA players than Kobe.

Yup, they both went through the expansion, so your original point to compare the two by bringing up the expansion is useless.

Sorry, I know you think Jordan was your daddy but take off your daddy's jersey and open your eyes.



Unfortunately, I don’t play in the NBA like you do, so I don’t know how much more difficult it is to score points.

Oh, it's hard.



Like how the West champs lost to the East champs? Great example!
And Kobe didn’t agree with you.
Last year, against MUCH tougher competition in the west, he had:
29.3 points (on 47 FG%, 36 3p%, and 82 FT%, 5.3 asts, 6.8 rebs, 0.46 blks, and 1.9 steals.
While vs. the weak weak east, he had:
26.7 points (on 43%, 36% , 88%), 5.6 assts, 5.5 rebs, 0.5 bls, and 1.7 stls.

Are you saying the East is stronger than the West? If not, what ARE you saying?



Wow! All Eastern teams are created the same? Fantastic! I didn’t know that Jordan had to play against the same Raptors team that Kobe had to play against.

Wow! There were plenty of sucky teams during Jordan's era too.



Also, nice to know that your view of a basketball player’s motivation is how many points he can score in one game, rather than scoring to help his team win.

You were the one that brought up scoring titles, not I, genius.



Zero, so? How many did Kobe get? How many did Jordan get at the same age? The difference is the same to me.

Thankyou. Pippen can join the conversation when he gets an MVP with his rings.



If? What if? Has it happened yet? Why are we counting things that hasn’t happened yet? If Kobe Bryant retired tomorrow, or had a career ending injury. Just as likely.

You were the idiot that jumped into the future, not I. If you can magically jump into the future, why can't I?
"Besides, Jordan won his 3rd ring at age 30 and 4 months and, Kobe will be 30 and 4 months by December. Given the fact that rings are not won until June, Kobe will have the same number of rings as Jordan at the same age of 30 years and 4 months."



One you use averages, the other you used total.

Quotes, links, proof?



What is wrong with mine?

Oh I saw you say my opinion was wrong, so I figured yours must be wrong too since you can't prove it.



Well duh! Sure showed how much greater Kerr was than Kobe and Jordan, doesn’t it?

Yup, it sure must have been great for Kobe to have Kerr on his team....oh wait.



Oh wait, you need points written straight out to you because you are admittedly not too bright, how about this?

Admittedly, oh no. Maybe you have admitted to not being too bright, but I haven't.



Being good in 3pt shooting has little to do with how great a player is.
Great job, you get a star, but I don't agree with your OPINION.


Who are these guys? We're talking about Kobe and MJ, please stay on subject.

This is on the subject because they pertain to your illogical responses. If you don’t even know Artis Gilmore and Calvin Murphy, you really shouldn’t state anything on the web.

Sorry, I'm here to stay whether you think I should or shouldn't. We're talking about Kobe and Jordan and you're bringing up guys who have nothing to do with either one of them because you're out of your , uhm, "facts".



And talking about staying on the subject, why did you bring in Kerr and Rodman?

Uhm, perhaps because they were on Jordan's team?



Has that happened? Heard of don’t count your chickens before they hatch? Or do you need a reference on this?

Heard of "Never say Never". Do you need a reference on this?



You mean opinions could be wrong? Really? Or do you mean opinions can be not right?

I dunno, either way, it would only be my opinion :)



May have? May have?

You have a writing impediment, why do you stutter? Look, if you can go into the future I can too. Stop trying to do this double-standard stuff, it's embarrassing.



Look it up on the web, look for the history of Hack-a-Shaq.

Ok, so you're saying Hack-a-Shaq is named after Wilt. Nice logic my friend.



Just because an animal is called a sea horse doesn’t mean that it’s a horse.

No, it's not a horse, you said it yourself, it's a "sea horse". Hahahahah, the great debater aren't you?



Quote me where I said it didn’t happen. But it shows your assertion that Kobe carried the team every time to be false. Shaq got the ball in the low post in the final seconds.

I'm glad you now agree upon Kobe's greatness in the 4th and Shaq's liability.



Hack a Shaq sends a 50% FT to the line, who has the same yield as a 50% FG shooter, and that is mighty high.

Yeah, that 50% is so high that Pop used it repeatedly last year. Read your own Spurs threads, some of the REAL Spur fans thought it was great to Hack-a-Shaq to stop them from scoring.



Quote me. Don’t just say “you are wrong”, state what I said wrong. Like I have stated how you incorrectly stated scoring differentials between Jordan’s and Kobe’s era, or how you stated incorrectly about the 3P shooting, or how you think Kobe scored more vs. the East than he did vs. the West.

You are wrong because you THINK i incorrectly stated the scoring differrentials. You have no proof but say I am wrong. That IS wrong.



You mean Kobe 3, Jordan 3? 30 years old and 4 months, both have 3 rings.

Yes, if you want to go into the Future instead of sticking into the present. Again one of your double standards. You can go into the future but I can't. Great debater you are my friend.




Well duh!

[quote]
And I repeat:

Pull us some stats, rather than saying random things like Jordan played against smaller SGs than Kobe did, or how the 00’s are so much more scoring heavy than the late 80’s, early 90’s.

Sure, here's a stat for you.

Kobe 3 rings at age 30, Jordan 2 rings at age 30 (with no time travelling into the future)

[ambchang]

Made up "stats" are the most embarrASSing of all.

Bwhahahah! So I summarized it for you, and it was not enough, I gave you the website, and it is still not enough? I originally thought that you were just ignorant of NBA history, and how the game changed over the last 20 years, now I am just thinking that you like to lie your way out of things.

I will put the links for the stats for you, in MUCH more detail so that even you can read them. You don’t even have to find them in the site, and it would be great for someone who is as lazy as you are.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2008.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2007.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2006.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2005.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2004.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2003.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2002.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2001.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2000.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1999.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1999.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1999.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1998.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1997.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1996.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1995.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1994.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1993.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1992.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1991.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1990.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1989.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1988.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1987.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1986.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1985.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1984.html

Do you need more help in clicking these links?


When did I say BETTER? Learn to read, Idiot:


Of course, it also said:


Kobe would not need drastic improvement, what he needs to do is start winning. Exactly the same as Jordan did at this age.

Oh yeah, you didn’t say that Kobe was better, my apologies, you implied that he was at least the same as Jordan in abilities and skills, and he need only to win more rings to surpass Jordan.

Then there is this gem:

At age 30, I would say they're dead even and if forced to pick 1, I would take Kobe.

You decide to take Kobe why? Because he is worse?


"Kobe's going to surpass Jordan in career points in the next 5 years or so."

Practice what you preach, you kept going on and on about people should be prophets and predict the future. What are you doing right here again? You are predicting Kobe will pass Jordan in points in 5 years! As you always like to say, it is possible Kobe retires tomorrow. It’s possible.


You brought up the idiocy at age 20, I was helping you out.

Thank you for agreeing that it’s idiocy, comparing Kobe to Jordan with their age rather than years in the NBA is in fact idiocy.


Why does it have to be at the end of a game? 3 points is 3 points. If you're up by 1 point at the end of a game, it could have been a 3 point shot during the game.

Sure, then tell me how many games the Lakers won/loss within 3 points last year, and how many 3-point shots Kobe took in those games. He could only make a slight difference in 1 out of 25 of those shots.


Don't act stupid, that extra 1 point is crucial in some games.

When did I say it wasn’t? Just tell me now likely it is. Let me know the following:
In games where the Lakers were in a one point win/loss, Kobe’s 3pt % would mean a difference if Kobe shot 8 or more 3pters (expected value of 1).
In games where the Lakers were in a two point win/loss, Kobe’s 3pt % would mean a difference if Kobe shot 17 or more 3pters (expected value of 2).
In games where the Lakers were in a three point win/loss, Kobe’s 3pt % would mean a difference if Kobe shot 25 or more 3pters (expected value of 3).

I wonder how many games that happened like that last year.


Getting angry now? :D
? Well, can you look up anything on the web? You didn’t show that you have any ability to do so far. But like you said, it’s possible.



Which one? You kidding me? Alright, I found one that shows that vital "3 pointer" and it even matches the sound of your posts as a bonus :)

GBKLjgZOMCg

What is the purpose of the video? What are you trying to argue?


Again, please READ my friend, when did I EVER say it was probable that Kobe would surpass Jordan? But you can continue ASSuming if you like.

So it is not probable Kobe will catch Jordan, but you kept saying that Kobe is comparable to Jordan because he has 3 rings* at the same age when Jordan “only” had 2.

* Courtesy of Shaq.


No, you need to check your history. JORDAN won the rings with the help of Kerr, it wasn't the other way around.

Jordan WON the rings without Kerr as well. What is your point? Jordan also won the rings with the help of Bill Cartwright and Will Perdue. So?


Sure, I'm generalizing, just like you. You didn't disprove my statement either so it's just opinion right now.

Stating something as factual as saying Jordan played against smaller SG is not an opinion, it is either true or untrue. You stated this as a fact to back up your claims of why Kobe scored less than Jordan despite similar skills, you prove it. You can’t, then don’t cite it.

I cited the fact that players are smaller now than they were 20 years ago, that is a specific fact, it is not an opinion nor was it generalized. You stated that the players are smaller on average despite bigger SGs because centers are smaller now. Prove it.


Quoting wrong stats, even if you're quoting them, is still wrong. Average height of NBA players has nothing to do with the height of Shooting Guards.

The stats were right, and it came straight from an NBA site. You can argue that it does not represent what you are looking for, but it does have strong correlations. If you want to go more specific than this, you do your work. You are lazy and refused to do your own research, even though I have put in the specific website you can find the information.

You also had the inability to distinguish between opinions and facts. You can’t have an opinion and say that SGs are larger now than they were 20 years ago when there is a clear guideline of whether the statement is right or wrong. Stating Jordan scored 38.2 ppg in 88-89 is not an opinion, it is an incorrectly stated fact because there are clear statistics to back this up.


Yup, my point is the West is strong in this era, and the East was weak, if you disagree, prove it, otherwise you have no point.

You asserted a statement, it is your onus to prove your own point. I have shown that you have done nothing but compared apples and oranges. The logic is not only flawed, it can’t even be categorized as logic. Kobe played in a strong West, therefore Jordan played in a weak East?


What? Where are you making up these numbers from this time "6, 4, 3, 10"? I never said no "6,4,3,10", quote me where.

Explain your "logic"[/quote]

It is an example to prove your illogical “opinions”.

You are basically saying that A > B, therefore A > D (with A representing Kobe’s West, B, Kobe’s East, and D Jordan’s East), with no direct comparisons between A and D.


BTW, you talking about that Hawks team with a whopping 37 wins last year? Hahahahahahah.

The same team that took the team that beat the Western Conference Champs in 6 games to 7 games, yes.


Blah, blah, blah.

Very logical arguments, considering it came from you. This is actually a step up from your other points. BTW, this is an opinion.


Nope, Duncan and Shaq being in Kobe's era.

How so? Why? They both played against Jordan and Kobe.


Sorry, by the 90's Magic and Bird were no longer as good as LeBron. And yup, I take LeBron over Hakeem. Lot's of things are news to you it seems.

Jordan played from 84 on, he didn’t just play in the 90s.
I am not surprised that you would take LeBron over Hakeem, especially when you like to contradict yourself by saying that you would take Kobe over Jordan, despite saying Jordan > Kobe at this point.


The 80's were Bird and Magic. The 90's were Jordan's era. How many rings did Magic or Bird win in the 90s? How OLD were they in the 90s? Do you know anything?

Well duh! Still didn’t change the fact that Jordan played against both players, and had epic battles in the playoffs against both.

At least I know who Calvin Murphy and Artis Gilmore are.


Again, open your eyes up beyond stats, you sound like Hollinger. Shaq's rings with Orlando: 0 . Shaq's rings with the Lakers: 3. Big difference, Hollinger.

Rings is not a stat? How do you quantify Shaq being good? How about … having a better coach, a better team around him? A player could still be great without rings. Karl Malone was a great player, so was Barkley, so was Stockton, so was Nique.

[quote=allanon]And you obviously know nothing about basketball as well :)

… because.


LOL, judging from your idiotic responses and general ineptitude to basketball knowledge, you should open your eyes outside to Jordan, to which you don’t even know too much about.

Is this an opinion?


NOPE, Kobe lost because he was not good enough. His team was not good enough. It had nothing to do with leadership.

He was not good enough as in what context? Would lacking leadership be one of them?


Yup, you can lose and still be a leader.

Of course! There are many great leaders on the losing front. Just that quitting on your team, or refusing to shoot to send a message is not exhibiting the qualities of a good leader.


Colouring as in rose-tinted :)

How so? And you still haven’t explained why the league is less watered-down now than it was in the 80’s and 90’s, where there were less teams.
[quote=allanon]Nope, Jordan Era #1 pick Coleman was a waste of time just like the Kandi Man #1 pick in the Kobe era.

Coleman led the Nets to the playoffs for 3 years in a row. The Nets couldn’t make the playoffs prior. He made the all-star team once, won RoY and was on the All-NBA 3rd team twice. How was that a waste of time?


Hello? Yao's played 80% of his games compared to Ellison's 66%.

Why are you going into percentages and averages now? Shouldn’t you go into totals? And which universe is 66% half of 80%?


Tail end of Magic, McHale and Bird's career.

A tail end in which Bird and Magic won 3 MVPs, in which McHale averaged 26+ ppg. Yes, that tail end.


Malone, Barkley, Drexler, sure. If I we had a 3 on 3, I'd take LeBron, Shaq and Duncan or your 3 and we'd whup you.

Is this an opinion? And why is Shaq and Duncan on Kobe’s side? You have previously defined draft years. Shaq should, without a doubt, go into Jordan’s era by your own definition. Duncan could be either given that he was drafted when both players were playing. Hakeem, Robinson, Ewing, Stockton says hello.


I dunno, if you actually READ it you would know.

So if you read it you would know, and you don’t know. So you don’t even read what you write?



Oh just like to answer ansers, vague or not.

So you just like to answer answers? Maybe this explains your rationale so far, you just have no point.


Hey, if you're gonna try to give Jordan a free pass, I'm gonna copy you and give Kobe a free pass too :)

So you can just throw your excuses of why Kobe can’t score as much as Jordan out the window.


Just checking. So do you think that playing in the West is significantly harder than the East?

How would I know? I never played in the league. And I would imagine this is different for different players, given their particular style and such. Kobe on the other hand, showed through his statistics that he does play better against teams in the West.


Yup, they both went through the expansion, so your original point to compare the two by bringing up the expansion is useless.

You brought up expansion by saying Jordan played in a watered-down league. Try to keep up with your own arguments.


Sorry, I know you think Jordan was your daddy but take off your daddy's jersey and open your eyes.

Getting angry?


Oh, it's hard.

So you played in the NBA? Nice!


Are you saying the East is stronger than the West? If not, what ARE you saying?

What I AM saying is that Kobe doesn’t agree with you that it is tougher to score on the West than it is on the East. In fact, he proved the opposite.



Wow! There were plenty of sucky teams during Jordan's era too.
So? Are they the same as the Raptors? Was Jordan in a situation were he had to score 81 points to beat a lowly East team?



You were the one that brought up scoring titles, not I, genius.
Scoring in one game = scoring title? How do you figure?



Thankyou. Pippen can join the conversation when he gets an MVP with his rings.

I disagree, it is my opinion. I believe Pippen is already better than Kobe can ever become, and this is my opinion.

BTW, based on your IQ, this is sarcasm.


You were the idiot that jumped into the future, not I. If you can magically jump into the future, why can't I?
"Besides, Jordan won his 3rd ring at age 30 and 4 months and, Kobe will be 30 and 4 months by December. Given the fact that rings are not won until June, Kobe will have the same number of rings as Jordan at the same age of 30 years and 4 months."

So you are saying that Kobe can win a 4 ring by the time he is 30 years and 4 months old, despite the fact that Kobe will be 30 years and 4 months old December 2008, and it is impossible to win a 4th ring at that time?

You really showed how smart you are. You have zero abilities to come to conclusions even with rules clearly written out.



Quotes, links, proof?

Are you trying to deny that you used averages for 3 point shooting, then used totals for scoring?

How about http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2853887&postcount=445
It’s only a couple of posts above. Read your own post.


Oh I saw you say my opinion was wrong, so I figured yours must be wrong too since you can't prove it.

What have I not proven?


Yup, it sure must have been great for Kobe to have Kerr on his team....oh wait.

What does this have to do with the argument that Kerr is a great teammate to have?



Admittedly, oh no. Maybe you have admitted to not being too bright, but I haven't.

Great job, you get a star, but I don't agree with your OPINION.

The top 10 players in career 3pt %.
Jason Kapono
Steve Kerr
Hubert Davis
Drazen Petrovic
Steve Nash
Tim Legler
Anthony Parker
BJ Armstrong
Wesley Person
Ben Gordon.

How many great players do you see in there? Now ask yourself, if only a maximum of 2 out of 10 career 3pt shooting leaders can be considered great, is 3 pt shooting % a strong indicator of how good a 3 pt shooter is?

Also, players like Shaq and Duncan have horrible 3 pt shooting, and yet you have labeled them great. How does this work?


Sorry, I'm here to stay whether you think I should or shouldn't. We're talking about Kobe and Jordan and you're bringing up guys who have nothing to do with either one of them because you're out of your , uhm, "facts".

Those players are used to show your own contradictions.


Uhm, perhaps because they were on Jordan's team?

And I brought in Gilmore and Murphy because they showed that shooting % has little to do with greatness.


Heard of "Never say Never". Do you need a reference on this?

Of course! I said Never when I said Never say Never, a contradiction on its own. Which based on your self-contradictory “arguments”, is a perfect motto for you.


I dunno, either way, it would only be my opinion :)

Try to look up the difference between facts, opinions, and projections. You have poor understanding of any of them.


You have a writing impediment, why do you stutter? Look, if you can go into the future I can too. Stop trying to do this double-standard stuff, it's embarrassing.

I went in the “future” after you did. I stated what Jordan has already accomplished, and stated what Kobe already has accomplished. You went into the future and say that they are comparable because of future possible events.


Ok, so you're saying Hack-a-Shaq is named after Wilt. Nice logic my friend.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hack-a-Shaq

Your lack of knowledge of NBA history never cease to amaze me.




No, it's not a horse, you said it yourself, it's a "sea horse". Hahahahah, the great debater aren't you?

Just because Hack a Shaq has the word Shaq on it doesn’t mean that it was developed specifically for Shaq. And thanks for agreeing with me that a sea horse is a sea horse and not a horse using the same logic I used.


I'm glad you now agree upon Kobe's greatness in the 4th and Shaq's liability.

How was saying “Shaq got the ball in the low post in the final seconds.” Agreeing with Shaq being a liability?



Yeah, that 50% is so high that Pop used it repeatedly last year. Read your own Spurs threads, some of the REAL Spur fans thought it was great to Hack-a-Shaq to stop them from scoring.

To disrupt the flow. I thought it was a great tactic, it messed with the Suns offense and stopped them from a free flow, forced D’antoni to yank Shaq. It doesn’t make Shaq a liability in the 4th quarter, because it was done in the 2nd.


You are wrong because you THINK i incorrectly stated the scoring differrentials. You have no proof but say I am wrong. That IS wrong.

You specifically said that scoring increased in Kobe’s era vs. Jordan’s era, it was PROVEN wrong. Check the links above.


Yes, if you want to go into the Future instead of sticking into the present. Again one of your double standards. You can go into the future but I can't. Great debater you are my friend.

But you already did, you specifically said that Kobe COULD be greater than Jordan. Could pertains to the future.


Sure, here's a stat for you.

Kobe 3 rings at age 30, Jordan 2 rings at age 30 (with no time travelling into the future)

Jordan already won 6 rings. Kobe won 3 rings* after 12 NBA seasons, Jordan have 5 have 12 NBA seasons.

[Allanon]

Bwhahahah! So I summarized it for you, and it was not enough, I gave you the website, and it is still not enough? I originally thought that you were just ignorant of NBA history, and how the game changed over the last 20 years, now I am just thinking that you like to lie your way out of things.

I will put the links for the stats for you, in MUCH more detail so that even you can read them. You don’t even have to find them in the site, and it would be great for someone who is as lazy as you are.

Why, thank you.



http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2008.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2007.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2006.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2005.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2004.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2003.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2002.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2001.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2000.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1999.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1999.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1999.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1998.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1997.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1996.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1995.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1994.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1993.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1992.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1991.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1990.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1989.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1988.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1987.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1986.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1985.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1984.html


Looking at your links, there are two points for and against your argument:

1) More points were indeed scored in the 90's
2) The 90's had watered down teams.

I'll concede the more points in the 90's as the average points scored per team is much higher than the 00's.

At the same time, it also shows that it was much easier to score in that same period of time, thus proving my point of why Kobe scores less in a lower scoring period.

91 47 % FG average
92 47 %
93 47 %
94 47 %
95 47 %
96 46 %
97 46 %
98 45 %

Average FG% across 8 years: 46.5%

01 44 %
02 45 %
03 44 %
04 43 %
05 45 %
06 45 %
07 46 %
08 46 %

Average FG% across 8 years: 44.75%

So, in an era where it was easier to score on the watered down league, Jordan had a significantly worse 3 point shooting percent than Kobe.



Do you need more help in clicking these links?

No, but thank you for asking.



Oh yeah, you didn’t say that Kobe was better, my apologies, you implied that he was at least the same as Jordan in abilities and skills, and he need only to win more rings to surpass Jordan.

You imply, means you assume and you know what they say about ASSuming.



You decide to take Kobe why? Because he is worse?

Nope, because Kobe had 1 more ring than Jordan at the same age.



Practice what you preach, you kept going on and on about people should be prophets and predict the future. What are you doing right here again? You are predicting Kobe will pass Jordan in points in 5 years! As you always like to say, it is possible Kobe retires tomorrow. It’s possible.

I just wanted to say Kobe will surpass Jordan in points to see if you'd argue with that.



Thank you for agreeing that it’s idiocy, comparing Kobe to Jordan with their age rather than years in the NBA is in fact idiocy.

Nope, not agreeing that it's idiocy. Why should we go by years in the NBA when Jordan had the benefit of college? Jordan was able to hit the NBA running so he had better stats from the get go while Kobe was a rookie on the bench.



Sure, then tell me how many games the Lakers won/loss within 3 points last year, and how many 3-point shots Kobe took in those games. He could only make a slight difference in 1 out of 25 of those shots.

Why could he only make a slight difference in 1 out of 25 of those shots? How do you know it wasn't the cumulative effort of his 3's that won the game? Is that you Hollinger?



When did I say it wasn’t? Just tell me now likely it is. Let me know the following:
In games where the Lakers were in a one point win/loss, Kobe’s 3pt % would mean a difference if Kobe shot 8 or more 3pters (expected value of 1).
In games where the Lakers were in a two point win/loss, Kobe’s 3pt % would mean a difference if Kobe shot 17 or more 3pters (expected value of 2).
In games where the Lakers were in a three point win/loss, Kobe’s 3pt % would mean a difference if Kobe shot 25 or more 3pters (expected value of 3).

I wonder how many games that happened like that last year.

Sorry Hollinger, you're trying to take a yearly % and break it down into a game by game analysis. It doesn't work that way, you should know that.



What is the purpose of the video? What are you trying to argue?

You asked me for proof of Kobe winning games in the 4th quarter. I showed you a several minute video.

Then I asked you for a video of Shaq's heroics in the 4th and you show me 1 play.

Thank you for illustrating with your silence that Shaq needed Kobe to win those games.



So it is not probable Kobe will catch Jordan, but you kept saying that Kobe is comparable to Jordan because he has 3 rings at the same age when Jordan “only” had 2*.

Nope, it's not probable that Kobe will catch Jordan, I never said that.

* courtesy of Pippen


Jordan WON the rings without Kerr as well. What is your point? Jordan also won the rings with the help of Bill Cartwright and Will Perdue. So?

You had said "Jordan won 3 rings WITHOUT Kerr". I was just helping your 1 sided memory.

"Stating something as factual as saying Jordan played against smaller SG is not an opinion, it is either true or untrue. You stated this as a fact to back up your claims of why Kobe scored less than Jordan despite similar skills, you prove it. You can’t, then don’t cite it."

Yes, it is EITHER true or untrue. So until proven otherwise, by your numbers, it's still unproven opinion. You can't prove me wrong.



I cited the fact that players are smaller now than they were 20 years ago, that is a specific fact, it is not an opinion nor was it generalized. You stated that the players are smaller on average despite bigger SGs because centers are smaller now. Prove it."

Sorry, smaller players now IN GENERAL has no bearing on the size of SHOOTING GUARDS. There's nothing to prove or disprove. I stated that Shooting guards were smaller then. You have NOTHING to prove they weren't.



The stats were right, and it came straight from an NBA site. You can argue that it does not represent what you are looking for, but it does have strong correlations. If you want to go more specific than this, you do your work. You are lazy and refused to do your own research, even though I have put in the specific website you can find the information.

AVERAGE NBA PLAYER SIZE does not tell you anything about the size of Shooting Guards. Let's not try to make up any stats, shall we?



You also had the inability to distinguish between opinions and facts. You can’t have an opinion and say that SGs are larger now than they were 20 years ago when there is a clear guideline of whether the statement is right or wrong. Stating Jordan scored 38.2 ppg in 88-89 is not an opinion, it is an incorrectly stated fact because there are clear statistics to back this up.

Shooting guards were smaller back then is an opinion.

It's an opinion until proven right or wrong. You have done neither.



You asserted a statement, it is your onus to prove your own point. I have shown that you have done nothing but compared apples and oranges. The logic is not only flawed, it can’t even be categorized as logic. Kobe played in a strong West, therefore Jordan played in a weak East?

Thank you for not disagreeing. I knew I was right.





It is an example to prove your illogical “opinions”.

You are basically saying that A > B, therefore A > D (with A representing Kobe’s West, B, Kobe’s East, and D Jordan’s East), with no direct comparisons between A and D.

Ah, so you made more stuff up, yah, I thought so.



The same team that took the team that beat the Western Conference Champs in 6 games to 7 games, yes.

Yup, I thought it was those same 37 win Hawks.



Very logical arguments, considering it came from you. This is actually a step up from your other points. BTW, this is an opinion.

Why thank you. Yes, they are my opinions, just like yours.



How so? Why? They both played against Jordan and Kobe.

If they played during Jordan's "era" they would be mentioned with Jordan. Jordan's rings came before Duncan even joined the NBA. Shaq was not Shaq until a few years after he joined the Lakers.



Jordan played from 84 on, he didn’t just play in the 90s.
I am not surprised that you would take LeBron over Hakeem, especially when you like to contradict yourself by saying that you would take Kobe over Jordan, despite saying Jordan > Kobe at this point.

The 80's were the Celtics and the Lakers. Jordan was busy with the Pistons and just a bigger version of Allen Iverson at the time.



I am not surprised that you would take LeBron over Hakeem, especially when you like to contradict yourself by saying that you would take Kobe over Jordan, despite saying Jordan > Kobe at this point.

Wrong, READ it again. I said I would take 30 year old Kobe over 30 year old Jordan if we disregarded EVERYTHING else (accomplishments, team, future, etc). I didn't contradict myself, you just read what you wanted to read in your mind.



Well duh! Still didn’t change the fact that Jordan played against both players, and had epic battles in the playoffs against both.

Sorry, Jordan's epic battles were losing to the Pistons 3 years in a row.



At least I know who Calvin Murphy and Artis Gilmore are.

You get another star...yippee. But it has nothing to do with Kobe and Jordan.



Rings is not a stat? How do you quantify Shaq being good? How about … having a better coach, a better team around him? A player could still be great without rings. Karl Malone was a great player, so was Barkley, so was Stockton, so was Nique.

Ah yes, there are great players without Rings. But the Greater players are the ones with Rings. And Duncan and Shaq have 4 of 'em so he's far greater than Malone, Barkley, Stockton and Nique.



… because.

.... because I said so. Just like you said so.



Is this an opinion?

Yup. Do you disagree?



He was not good enough as in what context? Would lacking leadership be one of them?

Nope, not leadership. Kobe's a great leader nowadays. He lacked toughness, his team lacked toughness.



Of course! There are many great leaders on the losing front. Just that quitting on your team, or refusing to shoot to send a message is not exhibiting the qualities of a good leader.

Yes, Kobe used to be a dick. Now he's a great leader.


How so? And you still haven’t explained why the league is less watered-down now than it was in the 80’s and 90’s, where there were less teams.

Look at the 90's and how many wins got you into the Playoffs.

35 wins for the Celtics, 38 for the Heat, 43 for the Lakers, 39 for the Lakers, 39 for the Kings, 36 for the Clippers.



Coleman led the Nets to the playoffs for 3 years in a row. The Nets couldn’t make the playoffs prior. He made the all-star team once, won RoY and was on the All-NBA 3rd team twice. How was that a waste of time?

Let's see. Jordan gets to go up against the likes of Coleman at #1 draft pick and Kobe goes up against the likes of LeBron at #1 draft pick. Hmmm....that's a hard one.



Why are you going into percentages and averages now? Shouldn’t you go into totals? And which universe is 66% half of 80%?

Nope, I said percentages and YOU jumped into totals.



A tail end in which Bird and Magic won 3 MVPs, in which McHale averaged 26+ ppg. Yes, that tail end.

Yup, Kobe got Jordan at the tail end of his career too in which Jordan won 2 rings and 2 MVPs. I don't count that stupid stuff, sorry.



Is this an opinion? And why is Shaq and Duncan on Kobe’s side? You have previously defined draft years. Shaq should, without a doubt, go into Jordan’s era by your own definition. Duncan could be either given that he was drafted when both players were playing. Hakeem, Robinson, Ewing, Stockton says hello.

Shaq yes, he's in both eras as he is Kobe's competition as well as Jordan's. Duncan was never Jordan's real competition.



So if you read it you would know, and you don’t know. So you don’t even read what you write?

Nope, I'm not going to read it again if you have not even read it once.



So you just like to answer answers? Maybe this explains your rationale so far, you just have no point.

Nope, I'm just answering your answer answer. There's no real answer to silliness.



So you can just throw your excuses of why Kobe can’t score as much as Jordan out the window.

Sure, if you can throw out your excuses for Jordan's poor 3 point shooting.



How would I know? I never played in the league. And I would imagine this is different for different players, given their particular style and such. Kobe on the other hand, showed through his statistics that he does play better against teams in the West.

Ah, playing dumb again. You're about the only NBA "fan" that I know that "doesn't know" if the West is harder than the East.



You brought up expansion by saying Jordan played in a watered-down league. Try to keep up with your own arguments.

Nope, look at your own posts, YOU brought up the expansion, not I.



So you played in the NBA? Nice!

Woohoo!



What I AM saying is that Kobe doesn’t agree with you that it is tougher to score on the West than it is on the East. In fact, he proved the opposite.

That is why you bring up Kobe's 81 points..."against the Raptors". Gotcha.



So? Are they the same as the Raptors? Was Jordan in a situation were he had to score 81 points to beat a lowly East team?

81 points is 81 points. Jordan never scored 81 so let's try not to take stuff away from Kobe's accomplishments.



Scoring in one game = scoring title? How do you figure?

Nope, but it's a great accomplishment.



I disagree, it is my opinion. I believe Pippen is already better than Kobe can ever become, and this is my opinion.

Sure, you're entitled to your own opinion.



BTW, based on your IQ, this is sarcasm.

Getting angry? :)



So you are saying that Kobe can win a 4 ring by the time he is 30 years and 4 months old, despite the fact that Kobe will be 30 years and 4 months old December 2008, and it is impossible to win a 4th ring at that time?

You really showed how smart you are. You have zero abilities to come to conclusions even with rules clearly written out.

Sorry, you're jumping into the future....this is October, not December. If you can jump into the future, then so can I. Talk about today or talk in the future but don't do your double-standards.



How about http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2853887&postcount=445
It’s only a couple of posts above. Read your own post.

Are you trying to deny that you used averages for 3 point shooting, then used totals for scoring?

Sure, are you trying to deny that you didn't use mixed percentages and totals?



What have I not proven?

You have not proven me wrong.



What does this have to do with the argument that Kerr is a great teammate to have?

Because you said Jordan won 3 without Kerr. I said he won 3 WITH Kerr. Just helping you from hiding the truth.



The top 10 players in career 3pt %.
Jason Kapono
Steve Kerr
Hubert Davis
Drazen Petrovic
Steve Nash
Tim Legler
Anthony Parker
BJ Armstrong
Wesley Person
Ben Gordon.

How many great players do you see in there? Now ask yourself, if only a maximum of 2 out of 10 career 3pt shooting leaders can be considered great, is 3 pt shooting % a strong indicator of how good a 3 pt shooter is?

Yes, every one of those guys on that list are great 3 point shooters.



Also, players like Shaq and Duncan have horrible 3 pt shooting, and yet you have labeled them great. How does this work?

I never said Shaq or Duncan were better 3 point shooters than Kobe at Age 30. I said Kobe was a better 3 point shooter than Jordan. Making up more ridiculous stuff my friend?



Those players are used to show your own contradictions.

Off topic thread, you can post them there.



And I brought in Gilmore and Murphy because they showed that shooting % has little to do with greatness.

Off topic thread, you can post them there.



Of course! I said Never when I said Never say Never, a contradiction on its own. Which based on your self-contradictory “arguments”, is a perfect motto for you.

Yawn. Try to come up with some more arguments, not just more insults when you lose a point.



Try to look up the difference between facts, opinions, and projections. You have poor understanding of any of them.

Is that an opinion? :D



I went in the “future” after you did. I stated what Jordan has already accomplished, and stated what Kobe already has accomplished. You went into the future and say that they are comparable because of future possible events.

Yes, because you were trying to make up an extra ring for His Airness.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hack-a-Shaq

Your lack of knowledge of NBA history never cease to amaze me.

Yup, and that's why they call it "Hack-a-Shaq", because it's named after Wilt. Your lack of logic never ceases to amaze me. :D



Just because Hack a Shaq has the word Shaq on it doesn’t mean that it was developed specifically for Shaq.

Yes, and that's why it's called Hack-a-Shaq, because it's not named after Shaq. Great logic, A+



And thanks for agreeing with me that a sea horse is a sea horse and not a horse using the same logic I used.

You said a sea horse wasn't a horse. Of course it's not. A sea horse is a sea horse. What's your point?



How was saying “Shaq got the ball in the low post in the final seconds.” Agreeing with Shaq being a liability?

Because you have 1 example of this. I say he's a liability and ask you to show me some videos. You came up with 1 video with 1 play while I came up with a several minute video with dozens of plays with Kobe finishing the 4th.

Shaq needed Kobe in the 4th quarters to win.



To disrupt the flow. I thought it was a great tactic, it messed with the Suns offense and stopped them from a free flow, forced D’antoni to yank Shaq. It doesn’t make Shaq a liability in the 4th quarter, because it was done in the 2nd.

Let's see, you don't think Shaq's a 4th quarter liability. You don't think Kobe finished up the games for Shaq. You don't think Hack-a-Shaq was named after Shaq. That's good stuff :)



You specifically said that scoring increased in Kobe’s era vs. Jordan’s era, it was PROVEN wrong. Check the links above.

That was wrong. But at the same time, it proved my point that the NBA was watered down in the 90s. +1 for you, +1 for me. Thankyou.



But you already did, you specifically said that Kobe COULD be greater than Jordan. Could pertains to the future.

I also said Kobe may not even be greater than Jordan. I'm not committed either way so I'm neither right or wrong in saying Kobe may be greater than Jordan and then again, he might not .



Jordan already won 6 rings. Kobe won 3 rings* after 12 NBA seasons, Jordan have 5 have 12 NBA seasons.

Let's make up some more excuses for His Airness shall we? It doesn't change the fact that at the same age, Kobe had 3 rings, Jordan had 2.

[ambchang]

Looking at your links, there are two points for and against your argument:

2 points for and 2 against makes 4 points. You have three points below, I will try to make out what you are trying to say.


1) More points were indeed scored in the 90's
So you ARE finally admitting that teams were scoring more in Jordan’s era, with less 3 pters?


2) The 90's had watered down teams.

How so? Where did that come from?


I'll concede the more points in the 90's as the average points scored per team is much higher than the 00's.

At the same time, it also shows that it was much easier to score in that same period of time, thus proving my point of why Kobe scores less in a lower scoring period.

91 47 % FG average
92 47 %
93 47 %
94 47 %
95 47 %
96 46 %
97 46 %
98 45 %

Average FG% across 8 years: 46.5%

01 44 %
02 45 %
03 44 %
04 43 %
05 45 %
06 45 %
07 46 %
08 46 %

Average FG% across 8 years: 44.75%

So, in an era where it was easier to score on the watered down league, Jordan had a significantly worse 3 point shooting percent than Kobe.

How did you jump from FG% to 3 pt %? Jordan scored much better in FG% in an era of slightly higher FG%, what is wrong with that?
He also shot much less 3 pters and shot at a lower % when 3 pters were not used as much as a weapon as it is now. Sounds about consistent.

You imply, means you assume and you know what they say about ASSuming.

You implying doesn’t mean me assuming, it means me interpreting. Look up the dictionary.


Nope, because Kobe had 1 more ring than Jordan at the same age.

So is Kobe better at the same age than Jordan? Is Kobe the same as Jordan at the same age? You take individual players based on team success, and when one was the leader winning rings, while the other is an obvious second wheel? Please explain your rationale in more details, if there is one.

I just wanted to say Kobe will surpass Jordan in points to see if you'd argue with that.

So you are saying that you are trolling? Is that what you are saying?

You are saying that you don’t mean what you typed? I am having trouble understanding your constant flip-flopping.

Complete this sentence for me:

It is (acceptable/unacceptable) to factor in future accomplishments when evaluating players.


Nope, not agreeing that it's idiocy. Why should we go by years in the NBA when Jordan had the benefit of college? Jordan was able to hit the NBA running so he had better stats from the get go while Kobe was a rookie on the bench.

Why are you coming up with excuses for Kobe? Why should Kobe Bryant have the benefit of having the accomplishments (points scored namely) included for entering the league early, while not getting penalized for scoring less efficiently?


Why could he only make a slight difference in 1 out of 25 of those shots? How do you know it wasn't the cumulative effort of his 3's that won the game? Is that you Hollinger?

But I did! See below:


When did I say it wasn’t? Just tell me now likely it is. Let me know the following:
In games where the Lakers were in a one point win/loss, Kobe’s 3pt % would mean a difference if Kobe shot 8 or more 3pters (expected value of 1).
In games where the Lakers were in a two point win/loss, Kobe’s 3pt % would mean a difference if Kobe shot 17 or more 3pters (expected value of 2).
In games where the Lakers were in a three point win/loss, Kobe’s 3pt % would mean a difference if Kobe shot 25 or more 3pters (expected value of 3).

I wonder how many games that happened like that last year.


Sorry Hollinger, you're trying to take a yearly % and break it down into a game by game analysis. It doesn't work that way, you should know that.

How should it work then? You claim that it happens enough for it to be significant, I say it doesn’t. The stats stand on my side. What do you have to back up your claim?
And no, it is not taking yearly and try to break it into a game by game situation, try to understand how it works. I am saying the probability of this happening. Out of a 4% in 3pt%, Kobe would make a difference in those situations, that’s it.
BTW, Hollinger’s mathematical “models” are so flawed that anyone who refers to him as some sort of statistician have little to no understanding of stats and basketball.

You asked me for proof of Kobe winning games in the 4th quarter. I showed you a several minute video.

Then I asked you for a video of Shaq's heroics in the 4th and you show me 1 play.

Thank you for illustrating with your silence that Shaq needed Kobe to win those games.

I showed you a video of Shaq scoring in the low blocks and flushing down an alley-oop in a close Game 7 vs. Portland after you claimed Shaq was a liability in the 4th. He wasn’t, and the video proved it.
If you want more proof: http://82games.com/comm3.htm
In 02-03 season, at the peak of Shaq-Kobe dominance, Kobe was #2 in points scored in the clutch, O’Neal was #3. O’Neal was #1 in effective FG% in the clutch, and #3 in points/possession while surprisingly, Kobe wasn’t even in the top 30. O’Neal was #1 in foul drawn, but that is expected given hack-a-shaq.
And I never asked you for proof of Kobe winning games in the 4th, I have seen it. In fact, I can recall it off the top of my head. I don’t need links to prove it, because I watch actual games.

Nope, it's not probable that Kobe will catch Jordan, I never said that.

It is not probable Kobe will catch Jordan, and yet you are saying people are whacked in saying that Kobe will not catch Jordan. Why is it wrong to say something that is not probable to happen not to happen? It sounds very consistent.


* courtesy of Pippen

I thought it was Kerr! But then again, equating Pippen’s contributions to Shaq’s contribution is the best of all.


You had said "Jordan won 3 rings WITHOUT Kerr". I was just helping your 1 sided memory.

What is one-sided? You can’t even keep up with your own flip-flopping arguments. You insisted that Jordan won those 3 rings with the help of Kerr, but Jordan also won 3 rings WITHOUT Kerr, showing that Kerr is all but a complimentary player (most people with common sense would be able to note his 10 mpg as proof).


Yes, it is EITHER true or untrue. So until proven otherwise, by your numbers, it's still unproven opinion. You can't prove me wrong.

Sorry, smaller players now IN GENERAL has no bearing on the size of SHOOTING GUARDS. There's nothing to prove or disprove. I stated that Shooting guards were smaller then. You have NOTHING to prove they weren't.

AVERAGE NBA PLAYER SIZE does not tell you anything about the size of Shooting Guards. Let's not try to make up any stats, shall we?

Let me repeat, YOU made the assertion that Jordan played against smaller SG, and the onus is on YOU to proof it.
If you want to go by your asinine logic, I will say Kobe Bryant won those 3 rings because he bribed the referees and David Stern, so none of them count. It is now YOUR onus to prove otherwise. See how it works?
You can’t just through out empty statements and treat them like facts. You have to prove them, and you have done NOTHING in this thread to do so. You can’t come up with anything and expect me to do the work to disprove you, and then expect me to come up with the work to prove my own work as well (see the 3pt shooting and average scoring part, I made the arguments, and I am happy to prove it. I just find it incredulous that you are as lazy as to not click on the first links I have provided an continuously question my integrity, then offered no apologies whatsoever and decided to say nothing to admit your own ignorance when direct links were provided).
Let me tell you how to do this:
Take random samples of years, say 1988, 1993, 1996, 2000, 2003, go to basketball-reference.com, look at all the SGs and note down their height, then do an average. If you are too lazy to do it, then don’t treat it as a fact.

Shooting guards were smaller back then is an opinion.

It's an opinion until proven right or wrong. You have done neither.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/opinion

Check the definition. Stating NBA guards were smaller in the early 90s is not an opinion. An opinion is a judgment call that was asserted under the circumstances of insufficient information. Information could be revealed in the future validating or invalidating said opinion, but the fact is SG sizes are readily available statistics. YOU look it up.



You asserted a statement, it is your onus to prove your own point. I have shown that you have done nothing but compared apples and oranges. The logic is not only flawed, it can’t even be categorized as logic. Kobe played in a strong West, therefore Jordan played in a weak East?


Thank you for not disagreeing. I knew I was right.

Not disagreeing = you are right? Your inability to grasp on any kind of logic, lack of general knowledge on the NBA, and ignorance on the definition of facts, assertions and opinions have forced you to randomly invent points to pad up your own self-esteem.

Ah, so you made more stuff up, yah, I thought so.

You also fail to understand the usage of examples. It was to illustrate your flawed logic.
And what have I made up? What have you done to explain your logic?
You specifically said Kobe’s West > Kobe’s East, Jordan played in the East (different era), therefore Kobe played in a tougher conference than Jordan. This makes absolutely no sense, and I have illustrated it fully, what was “made up”?

Yup, I thought it was those same 37 win Hawks.

By your own logic, the Hawks only won 37 games because the East was extremely tough. A team as good as the Hawks, which took the champions that knocked off the Western champs in 6 games to 7 games, had trouble winning 40 games.


Why thank you. Yes, they are my opinions, just like yours.

Blah blah blah is indeed a great opinion considering the source. It is in fact the only opinion that you came up with in this thread that doesn’t contain flawed logic.


If they played during Jordan's "era" they would be mentioned with Jordan. Jordan's rings came before Duncan even joined the NBA. Shaq was not Shaq until a few years after he joined the Lakers.

Do you know anything? Duncan was drafted in 97. Jordan won his last ring in 98!
Shaq has been Shaq throughout. His legacy was more shining because he won those rings, and he won those rings because of a better team, not because he was significantly better.

The 80's were the Celtics and the Lakers. Jordan was busy with the Pistons and just a bigger version of Allen Iverson at the time.

Jordan played and lost to Bird. He scored 63 points vs. Bird and the Celtics. Please read up on NBA history. You have no grasp of a subject you are trying to argue.
I hope that you are not going to say that it is your opinion that Jordan didn’t play against Bird in the playoffs, refused to click on links and then call those lies.

Wrong, READ it again. I said I would take 30 year old Kobe over 30 year old Jordan if we disregarded EVERYTHING else (accomplishments, team, future, etc). I didn't contradict myself, you just read what you wanted to read in your mind.

No you didn’t, you never said anything in that post, or even alluding to anything in that post, that we should disregard everything else. And now that you said disregarding EVERYTHING other than rings, you would choose Pippen over Kobe because Pippen won more rings than Kobe by 30, wouldn’t you?

Sorry, Jordan's epic battles were losing to the Pistons 3 years in a row.

Losing is not a battle? Losing means that Jordan didn’t play in their era? Let me refresh your pitiful memory. YOU stated that Jordan scored more than Kobe because of weaker competition, then cited draft picks from a randomly chosen 88 to 93 era as proof. But of course, Jordan DID play against strong competition, and the Celtics, Lakers and Pistons were proof.

At least I know who Calvin Murphy and Artis Gilmore are.

Then why did you ask who are they?


You get another star...yippee. But it has nothing to do with Kobe and Jordan.

Of course it has everything to do with Kobe and Jordan, to which you cited Jordan needed “great” players like Kerr to win championships (since shown that Jordan won without him), citing Kerr is the single-season record holder for one statistical category (3-pt shooting) in NBA history as proof. I have since taken Calvin Murphy and Artis Gilmore (both better players than Kerr) as proof that your logic is flawed.

Ah yes, there are great players without Rings. But the Greater players are the ones with Rings. And Duncan and Shaq have 4 of 'em so he's far greater than Malone, Barkley, Stockton and Nique.

But it doesn’t mean that having a ring = a greater player. Bob McAdoo won a ring and an MVP, doesn’t make him greater than Barkley, or Malone, or Nique.

.... because I said so. Just like you said so.
Since when have I stated something and not backed it up? State them, and I will happily answer them?


Yup. Do you disagree?

Nope, not leadership. Kobe's a great leader nowadays. He lacked toughness, his team lacked toughness.

So lacking toughness would lead to him losing in the Finals. What is the evidence that Kobe has improved his toughness to a required level that he could win 4 more rings before his career ends? If there is none, why would you state that as a probability? Are you just counting on blind faith?

Yes, Kobe used to be a dick. Now he's a great leader.

Evidenced by what? What has he done that would categorize him as a great leader?

Look at the 90's and how many wins got you into the Playoffs.

35 wins for the Celtics, 38 for the Heat, 43 for the Lakers, 39 for the Lakers, 39 for the Kings, 36 for the Clippers.

Having great teams up top could also contribute to lower ranking teams with low win totals. It only shows a large disparity in the league, not teams that aren’t any good.
And you just quoted the Hawks winning 37 games and they got to the playoffs, it is still happening now.


Let's see. Jordan gets to go up against the likes of Coleman at #1 draft pick and Kobe goes up against the likes of LeBron at #1 draft pick. Hmmm....that's a hard one.

Or Jordan goes up against Magic and Kareem, Bird, Barkley, Hakeem, Stockton and Malone, and Nique, while Kobe goes up against Lebron, Duncan, and a beaten down Shaq. Sounds much fairer now does it?


Nope, I said percentages and YOU jumped into totals.

YOU used totals for points at a certain cut off age, and therefore I used totals for games played at a cut off age. I used methodologies that was consistent with yours. If you want to go with averages, sure, but I still fail to see how 66% is half of 80%, and I would love to see how Kobe’s average scoring at 30 compares to Jordan’s average at 30.


Yup, Kobe got Jordan at the tail end of his career too in which Jordan won 2 rings and 2 MVPs. I don't count that stupid stuff, sorry.

Yeah, Kobe played in Jordan’s era, you heard me arguing otherwise?

Shaq yes, he's in both eras as he is Kobe's competition as well as Jordan's. Duncan was never Jordan's real competition.

But YOU were the one who used year drafted as any indication. Shaq was Kobe’s “competition” after 2004, in which he was entering his 12th or 13th NBA season, same as Jordan when Duncan played against him.

Nope, I'm not going to read it again if you have not even read it once.

You are not going to read what you wrote yourself? How is that possible? Although it does explain the crap you have been spewing all along.


Nope, I'm just answering your answer answer. There's no real answer to silliness.

Cool, you are resorting to mindless banter, not that this is any worse than your “opinions” earlier on.


Sure, if you can throw out your excuses for Jordan's poor 3 point shooting.

Sure, Jordan shot worse than Kobe on 3 pt %, I never argued otherwise. Kobe scored less, have less rebounds, assists, FG%, FT%, wins, more fouls, less blocks, less steals, less awards. And yet you are saying that Kobe could be better than Jordan.


Ah, playing dumb again. You're about the only NBA "fan" that I know that "doesn't know" if the West is harder than the East.

I never played in the league, I really don’t know. I am surprised you know. But I will repeat this for the 3rd time, Kobe scored more, at a higher %, when he played against the East than the West, and that is a fact. It directly contradicts to your assertion.

Nope, look at your own posts, YOU brought up the expansion, not I.

Why do you have to lie?
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2852079&postcount=430

You cited the watered-down league as why Jordan scored more than Kobe, saying that expansion is the proof. I then said that, using your logic, there was further expansion in Kobe’s era because there was another expansion.


Woohoo!

81 points is 81 points. Jordan never scored 81 so let's try not to take stuff away from Kobe's accomplishments.

How is that going to factor into Kobe’s greatness? If you want to use how many points Kobe scored in one game as any sort of indicator that Kobe could be greater than Jordan, go ahead. That is your own, faulty definition.

Nope, but it's a great accomplishment.

So why did you say that I brought up scoring titles when I said saying Kobe scoring 81 points is an insignificant accomplishment? You are continuously putting your own foot in your mouth, with no plan or reason as to what and why you are arguing.

Sure, you're entitled to your own opinion.
And that is precisely the problem. Incorrect opinions should be dismissed. Pippen is not greater than Kobe, and to state that is an obvious reflection on your incorrect take. It is not OK to hind behind the cloak of opinion and take no responsibility of what was said.


Sorry, you're jumping into the future....this is October, not December. If you can jump into the future, then so can I. Talk about today or talk in the future but don't do your double-standards.

And yet you are free to say that Kobe will pass Jordan in scoring in the next 5 years. Just to make it clear, YOU brought this up long before I stated the 3 rings by 30 years and 4 months argument.

BTW, Kobe NOT winning a ring by Dec 2008 is a certainty, it WILL happen. It is impossible to say that he will. Kobe surpassing Jordan in scoring in the next 5 years is not, it is NOT a certainty.


Sure, are you trying to deny that you didn't use mixed percentages and totals?

You mean this?
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2840687#post2840687

You have not proven me wrong.

You mean other than the fact that scoring decreased since Jordan’s era? You mean other than the fact that players are shorter now than they were 20 years ago? You mean other than the fact that 3 pt shooting is a bigger part of today’s offense?

Because you said Jordan won 3 without Kerr. I said he won 3 WITH Kerr. Just helping you from hiding the truth.

Hiding from what truth? You said Jordan had Kerr to help him win championships, which is a fact, what I am arguing is that Kerr is a bit player that shouldn’t even go into the conversation, proven by the fact that Jordan won 3 without him. When did I ever say that Jordan never won 3 without Kerr? Get back down to earth, and follow the thread.


Yes, every one of those guys on that list are great 3 point shooters.
So how does this relate to Kobe having the potential to be better than Jordan?

I never said Shaq or Duncan were better 3 point shooters than Kobe at Age 30. I said Kobe was a better 3 point shooter than Jordan. Making up more ridiculous stuff my friend?
Again, how does this relate to Jordan vs. Kobe? Yeah, Kobe shot a higher %, so?

Off topic thread, you can post them there.

Those players were used to show your own contradictions within this thread.


Off topic thread, you can post them there.
Those players were used to show your own contradictions within this thread.

Yawn. Try to come up with some more arguments, not just more insults when you lose a point.
Lose what point?

Is that an opinion?

It is an observation.




Yes, because you were trying to make up an extra ring for His Airness.
Jordan DID win 3 rings by 30 years and 4 months, how is that making up an extra ring?


Yup, and that's why they call it "Hack-a-Shaq", because it's named after Wilt. Your lack of logic never ceases to amaze me.
When did I say it was named after Wilt? You said that Shaq was a liability in the 4th and hack-a-shaq strategy was derived to do exactly that. I said the strategy was invented back I the Wilt days. Shaq merely was the most famous representative of this strategy.
You just seem to make things up as you go.



Yes, and that's why it's called Hack-a-Shaq, because it's not named after Shaq. Great logic, A+

Did I say it wasn’t named after Shaq? I said “Because it rhymes, it was developed for Wilt Chamberlain, look it up.”


You said a sea horse wasn't a horse. Of course it's not. A sea horse is a sea horse. What's your point?

That Hack a Shaq is named after Shaq, but not because of him.

Because you have 1 example of this. I say he's a liability and ask you to show me some videos. You came up with 1 video with 1 play while I came up with a several minute video with dozens of plays with Kobe finishing the 4th.

Only having 1 video means agreeing with you Shaq is not clutch. Find me videos of Jerry West’s clutch shots. He was named Mr. Clutch, but I fail to find more than 1 video.
And look up those stats.


Shaq needed Kobe in the 4th quarters to win.

I like to think Kobe needed Shaq’s presence to disrupt the defense.

Let's see, you don't think Shaq's a 4th quarter liability. You don't think Kobe finished up the games for Shaq. You don't think Hack-a-Shaq was named after Shaq. That's good stuff

Check out the stats above.

That was wrong. But at the same time, it proved my point that the NBA was watered down in the 90s. +1 for you, +1 for me. Thankyou.

How was scoring level an indication of the league watering down? I can argue the league is so bad now, they struggle to score. How is that a point for you?
Points were even higher in the early 80’s, was the 80’s more watered down?
How do you indicate the league watering down? You first use the number of teams, that didn’t work since Kobe’s era has even more teams, you then used scoring, which also didn’t work because there was more scoring in the 80’s, and you have said the 90’s were watered down than the 80’s. What is it? Have a single point a stick to it. Don’t contradict yourself constantly, using the same argument to sometimes argue for, and something against your own arguments.

I also said Kobe may not even be greater than Jordan. I'm not committed either way so I'm neither right or wrong in saying Kobe may be greater than Jordan and then again, he might not .

But that is STILL going into the future. Why are you predicting? Why are you saying Kobe will score more than Jordan in 5 years?

Jordan already won 6 rings. Kobe won 3 rings* after 12 NBA seasons, Jordan have 5 have 12 NBA seasons.

Let's make up some more excuses for His Airness shall we? It doesn't change the fact that at the same age, Kobe had 3 rings, Jordan had 2.

It doesn’t change the fact that Jordan have 5 rings after 12 years in the league, and Kobe “only” 3.

[Allanon]

So you ARE finally admitting that teams were scoring more in Jordan’s era, with less 3 pters?

Yes, teams were scoring more in Jordan's era.



How so? Where did that come from?

Look at how many wins it required to make the Playoffs.



How did you jump from FG% to 3 pt %? Jordan scored much better in FG% in an era of slightly higher FG%, what is wrong with that?
He also shot much less 3 pters and shot at a lower % when 3 pters were not used as much as a weapon as it is now. Sounds about consistent.

I made a statement on the ease of scoring during Jordan's era which you provided the links for. It was easier to score in Jordan's era.



You implying doesn’t mean me assuming, it means me interpreting. Look up the dictionary.

In your case, yes it does mean you are ASSuming because I never said it.



So is Kobe better at the same age than Jordan? Is Kobe the same as Jordan at the same age? You take individual players based on team success, and when one was the leader winning rings, while the other is an obvious second wheel? Please explain your rationale in more details, if there is one.

3 rings to 2 rings. I've already proven that Shaq needed to have Kobe win 4th quarters. That is not "2nd wheel". You've tried, but failed to disprove that.



So you are saying that you are trolling? Is that what you are saying?

Oh no, you like to hide, so I try to coax answers out of you.



You are saying that you don’t mean what you typed? I am having trouble understanding your constant flip-flopping.

I DO mean what I said. I don't flip-flop like you.

Read it again, if you like, I said:

Kobe will surpass Jordan in points. Complete this sentence for me:

Kobe will/will not surpass Jordan in points.



Complete this sentence for me:

It is (acceptable/unacceptable) to factor in future accomplishments when evaluating players.

I am not evaluating Kobe and was not using it in an argument. I was stating my opionion.



Why are you coming up with excuses for Kobe? Why should Kobe Bryant have the benefit of having the accomplishments (points scored namely) included for entering the league early, while not getting penalized for scoring less efficiently?

He gets both actually. He gets penalized for his inefficiency in his rookie years and he also gets the benefit of it. It's there in his stats, look it up.



But I did! See below:

Learn some English, that makes no sense:

I Said: "Why could he only make a slight difference in 1 out of 25 of those shots? How do you know it wasn't the cumulative effort of his 3's that won the game? Is that you Hollinger?"

But you did what?



How should it work then? You claim that it happens enough for it to be significant, I say it doesn’t. The stats stand on my side. What do you have to back up your claim?
And no, it is not taking yearly and try to break it into a game by game situation, try to understand how it works. I am saying the probability of this happening. Out of a 4% in 3pt%, Kobe would make a difference in those situations, that’s it.
BTW, Hollinger’s mathematical “models” are so flawed that anyone who refers to him as some sort of statistician have little to no understanding of stats and basketball.

Again, Hollinger, you're trying to apply a mathematical equation to a single game situation. Doesn't work that way.

Are you saying that the 1 extra point from 3 pointers doesn't make that much difference?



I showed you a video of Shaq scoring in the low blocks and flushing down an alley-oop in a close Game 7 vs. Portland after you claimed Shaq was a liability in the 4th. He wasn’t, and the video proved it.
If you want more proof: http://82games.com/comm3.htm
In 02-03 season, at the peak of Shaq-Kobe dominance, Kobe was #2 in points scored in the clutch, O’Neal was #3.

You obviously pretend to know more than you do. Shaq-Kobe dominance was not at it's peak in 2003, Shaq-Kobe was heavily into the decline by 2003. Your own Spurs beat them in the 2nd round, look it up.

You have 1 video of Shaq flushing down an alley oop in the 4th quarter in his 17 years in the NBA. You don't have anymore? I did a 10 second search on Youtube and there are litterally hundreds of Kobe's clutch performances.

You said Kobe was the "2nd wheel to Shaq", how come he is #2 and Shaq is #3 in your own list?



O’Neal was #1 in effective FG% in the clutch, and #3 in points/possession while surprisingly, Kobe wasn’t even in the top 30. O’Neal was #1 in foul drawn, but that is expected given hack-a-shaq.

Your fantasy about Shaq not being a 4th quarter liability is stupid. Even your own team's coach exposes that liability. You have 1 video out of 16 years of Shaq's "Mr. Clutch" career...Gotcha. :)

BTW, Shaq-Kobe did not win a ring in 2003, so this doesn't help your case in stating that Kobe was "2nd wheel" to Shaq in the ring getting. Nice try but a FAIL as usual.

SHAQ should be thanking KOBE for winning those close games.



And I never asked you for proof of Kobe winning games in the 4th, I have seen it. In fact, I can recall it off the top of my head. I don’t need links to prove it, because I watch actual games.

You obviously don't watch actual games because you said 2003 was the peak of the Shaq-Kobe era. That was the DECLINING year.

Your own coach of the Spurs does hack-a-Shaq because he's a liability. You should start by opening your eys to some Spurs games.



It is not probable Kobe will catch Jordan, and yet you are saying people are whacked in saying that Kobe will not catch Jordan. Why is it wrong to say something that is not probable to happen not to happen? It sounds very consistent.

Because one is absolute, one is not. When you say "CANNOT" that means 100%, probable still has a chance. Is that so hard to understand?



I thought it was Kerr! But then again, equating Pippen’s contributions to Shaq’s contribution is the best of all.

Shaq couldn't win games by himself without Kobe, the video showed that. The video even shows Shaq sitting on the bench. Your "Mr. Clutch" Shaq sitting on the bench watching Kobe's heroics win the game. :D



What is one-sided? You can’t even keep up with your own flip-flopping arguments. You insisted that Jordan won those 3 rings with the help of Kerr, but Jordan also won 3 rings WITHOUT Kerr, showing that Kerr is all but a complimentary player (most people with common sense would be able to note his 10 mpg as proof).

Yes, you like to state only 1 side of things, I'm getting to know your sneaky thinking the more we talk. You like to say only the positive side to help your arguments. "Jordan won 3 rings without Kerr".



Let me repeat, YOU made the assertion that Jordan played against smaller SG, and the onus is on YOU to proof it.

Nope, the ONUS is on YOU to prove it IF YOU DISAGREE. If you have NO PROOF, just let it go.

Obviously you feel like you're some basketball guru but have no proof. Nice.



If you want to go by your asinine logic, I will say Kobe Bryant won those 3 rings because he bribed the referees and David Stern, so none of them count. It is now YOUR onus to prove otherwise. See how it works?

Yah, I see how it works. You have some stupid logic, but it's all yours baby.



You can’t just through out empty statements and treat them like facts. You have to prove them, and you have done NOTHING in this thread to do so. You can’t come up with anything and expect me to do the work to disprove you, and then expect me to come up with the work to prove my own work as well (see the 3pt shooting and average scoring part, I made the arguments, and I am happy to prove it.

You have proved that there was more scoring in the 90s in a watered down league. Yay!



I just find it incredulous that you are as lazy as to not click on the first links I have provided an continuously question my integrity, then offered no apologies whatsoever and decided to say nothing to admit your own ignorance when direct links were provided).

It's not hard to question your rose-colored integrity. You keep arguing the Kobe 3 rings to Jordan's 2 rings with some kind of crazy future jumping logic without conceding the fact.

Or that Shaq's some kind of great 4th quarter performer.

Or that "Hack - a - Shaq" was named after Wilt.

You are by far one of the rudest posters I've met here on ST who can't have a debate without throwing out insult.

You started the insults, don't wonder why you're not getting any respect. I have no problem with insults, keep 'em cummin' but make no mistake, your ignorance, rudeness, and bias deserves no respect or apologies.



Let me tell you how to do this:
Take random samples of years, say 1988, 1993, 1996, 2000, 2003, go to basketball-reference.com, look at all the SGs and note down their height, then do an average. If you are too lazy to do it, then don’t treat it as a fact.

I ain't going to do your work for you. If you want to disagree, come up with your own "facts".


http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/opinion

Check the definition. Stating NBA guards were smaller in the early 90s is not an opinion. An opinion is a judgment call that was asserted under the circumstances of insufficient information. Information could be revealed in the future validating or invalidating said opinion, but the fact is SG sizes are readily available statistics. YOU look it up.[/quote]

Yup, I looked it up. It's an opinion.

Shooting Guards were smaller in the early 90s.
"a personal view, attitude, or appraisal. "

Look it up, it's right there in your link.



Not disagreeing = you are right? Your inability to grasp on any kind of logic, lack of general knowledge on the NBA, and ignorance on the definition of facts, assertions and opinions have forced you to randomly invent points to pad up your own self-esteem.

As usual, you dodged the question yet again. I asked you outright if it was harder to play in the West or the East.

"Oh I don't know, I'm not a player".

And now you hide behind the issue by throwing out more insults, niec :lol



You also fail to understand the usage of examples. It was to illustrate your flawed logic.
And what have I made up? What have you done to explain your logic?
You specifically said Kobe’s West > Kobe’s East, Jordan played in the East (different era), therefore Kobe played in a tougher conference than Jordan. This makes absolutely no sense, and I have illustrated it fully, what was “made up”?

Hahah, you like to make up stuff, yo ueven make up stuff about not making up stuff.

"With your logic.

If Kobe’s West = 6, and Kobe’s East = 4, and Jordan’s West = 3 and East = 10, your logic shows that Kobe’s West > Jordan’s East, which shows 6 > 10, which is incorrect. Your “logic” is hardly logical."

Sure, let's just pull up some #'s out of our ass and say that's "Allanon's logic" :)



By your own logic, the Hawks only won 37 games because the East was extremely tough. A team as good as the Hawks, which took the champions that knocked off the Western champs in 6 games to 7 games, had trouble winning 40 games.

Nope, that's your own crazy Hollinger logic that only looks at numbers to win games instead of looking at matchups.



Blah blah blah is indeed a great opinion considering the source. It is in fact the only opinion that you came up with in this thread that doesn’t contain flawed logic.

Great logic! Hahah, more insults, getting angry?



Do you know anything? Duncan was drafted in 97. Jordan won his last ring in 98!
Shaq has been Shaq throughout. His legacy was more shining because he won those rings, and he won those rings because of a better team, not because he was significantly better.

Do you know ANYTHING? Duncan was a rookie in 97. Even your "great Jordan" couldn't start contending for a ring until 5 seasons.

Ditto for Shaq.



Jordan played and lost to Bird. He scored 63 points vs. Bird and the Celtics. Please read up on NBA history. You have no grasp of a subject you are trying to argue.
I hope that you are not going to say that it is your opinion that Jordan didn’t play against Bird in the playoffs, refused to click on links and then call those lies.

Of course Jordan lost to Bird, that was the Magic-Bird era, not the Jordan era. He got swept twice by the Celtics. But that is all understandable, it's much like the Kobe early years.

And after he lost to Bird, he got his ass beat by the Pistons 3 years in a row. They called them the "Detroit Bad Boys". Look it up.

It took Jordan several years to become a conteder. By the time he was a contender, Magic/Bird were shells of their former selves.



No you didn’t, you never said anything in that post, or even alluding to anything in that post, that we should disregard everything else. And now that you said disregarding EVERYTHING other than rings, you would choose Pippen over Kobe because Pippen won more rings than Kobe by 30, wouldn’t you?

Please learn to read:

" Originally Posted by DPG21920 View Post

DPG21920: Who was the better basketball player at age 30, do not talk about systems or teams or anything. "

Allanon: At age 30, I would say they're dead even and if forced to pick 1, I would take Kobe.
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2841288&postcount=191



Losing is not a battle? Losing means that Jordan didn’t play in their era? Let me refresh your pitiful memory. YOU stated that Jordan scored more than Kobe because of weaker competition, then cited draft picks from a randomly chosen 88 to 93 era as proof. But of course, Jordan DID play against strong competition, and the Celtics, Lakers and Pistons were proof.

Nope, Jordan was not ready to contend in those years. Jut like Kobe wasn't, LeBron isn't, etc. Hell, Kobe battled David Robinson, doesn't mean he was part of DRob's era.

Jordan's "era" is considered the 90's.



Then why did you ask who are they?

Because they have no relevance to Kobe and Jordan.



Of course it has everything to do with Kobe and Jordan, to which you cited Jordan needed “great” players like Kerr to win championships (since shown that Jordan won without him), citing Kerr is the single-season record holder for one statistical category (3-pt shooting) in NBA history as proof. I have since taken Calvin Murphy and Artis Gilmore (both better players than Kerr) as proof that your logic is flawed.

Nope, I said Jordan needed Pippen to win. Where did I ever cite "Jordan needed 'great' players like Kerr to win championships'". Prove it? Links? Quotes?

Stop making stuff up and saying that I said it.



But it doesn’t mean that having a ring = a greater player. Bob McAdoo won a ring and an MVP, doesn’t make him greater than Barkley, or Malone, or Nique.

Why can't you read? I said 3 rings and 1 MVP. 1 MVP and 1 ring does not equal 3 rings and 1 MVP. If "Bob McAdoo" had 3 rings and 1 MVP, he'd be greater than Barkley.



Since when have I stated something and not backed it up? State them, and I will happily answer them?

Alright, since you're being so open:

Was Shaq a liability in the 4th quarter?
Did Shaq often sit on the bench watching Kobe win the game.
Did Kobe have 3 rings to Jordan's 2 when they turned 30?

Yes or No, is it possible that Kobe may become GOAT?



So lacking toughness would lead to him losing in the Finals. What is the evidence that Kobe has improved his toughness to a required level that he could win 4 more rings before his career ends? If there is none, why would you state that as a probability? Are you just counting on blind faith?

There is no evidence that Kobe has improved his toughness, and I never stated that he had improved his toughness.

Clarify your this statement, which probablility are you referring to? The probablility of what?

"If there is none, why would you state that as a probability?"



Evidenced by what? What has he done that would categorize him as a great leader?

Again Hollinger, there are just some things that can't be explained by numbers.

There is no evidence of leadership other than what you perceive.

Jordan was a great team leader. I have no evidence of this but I know.



Having great teams up top could also contribute to lower ranking teams with low win totals. It only shows a large disparity in the league, not teams that aren’t any good.

Nope, if you have great Top teams, there are more wins, it's the cellar dwellers that suffer from the top teams. No matter how great a Top team is, they're only going to play 2-4 games against you.



And you just quoted the Hawks winning 37 games and they got to the playoffs, it is still happening now.

Come on, you're good with averages, look at the average # of wins needed in Jordan's watered down era.

"35 wins for the Celtics, 38 for the Heat, 43 for the Lakers, 39 for the Lakers, 39 for the Kings, 36 for the Clippers."



Or Jordan goes up against Magic and Kareem, Bird, Barkley, Hakeem, Stockton and Malone, and Nique, while Kobe goes up against Lebron, Duncan, and a beaten down Shaq. Sounds much fairer now does it?

If you want to pull up such ridiculousness, Kobe goes up against:

Jordan
Pippen
Hakeem
Barkley
Stockton
Malone
LeBron
Shaq
Duncan
DRob
Ewing
Drexler


Sounds much less fair now doesn't it?



YOU used totals for points at a certain cut off age, and therefore I used totals for games played at a cut off age. I used methodologies that was consistent with yours. If you want to go with averages, sure, but I still fail to see how 66% is half of 80%, and I would love to see how Kobe’s average scoring at 30 compares to Jordan’s average at 30.

Thank you for admitting that you like to jump around and again trying to do it by asking for average when I stated that Kobe scored a ton more points than Jordan at the same age.



Yeah, Kobe played in Jordan’s era, you heard me arguing otherwise?

OK, I added some more players that Kobe played in my list above. Thanks.



But YOU were the one who used year drafted as any indication. Shaq was Kobe’s “competition” after 2004, in which he was entering his 12th or 13th NBA season, same as Jordan when Duncan played against him.

Sure, given your "logic" I've expanded Kobe's list of "players he played against" for you.



You are not going to read what you wrote yourself? How is that possible? Although it does explain the crap you have been spewing all along.

More anger. :)



Cool, you are resorting to mindless banter, not that this is any worse than your “opinions” earlier on.[/qote]

More anger. :)

[quote]
Sure, Jordan shot worse than Kobe on 3 pt %, I never argued otherwise. Kobe scored less, have less rebounds, assists, FG%, FT%, wins, more fouls, less blocks, less steals, less awards. And yet you are saying that Kobe could be better than Jordan.

Nope, you just tried to make excuses and diminish Kobe's achievement even though I unquestionably gave Jordan the rest.

Yes, Kobe could be better than Jordan. It may happen, it may never happen but it's certainly a possibility.



I never played in the league, I really don’t know. I am surprised you know. But I will repeat this for the 3rd time, Kobe scored more, at a higher %, when he played against the East than the West, and that is a fact. It directly contradicts to your assertion.

How does that contradict my assertion?



Why do you have to lie?
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2852079&postcount=430

You cited the watered-down league as why Jordan scored more than Kobe, saying that expansion is the proof. I then said that, using your logic, there was further expansion in Kobe’s era because there was another expansion.

Are you blind or you can't read?

WHERE in that post is the word EXPANSION?

Copy and paste a screenshot because I sure as hell don't see it and even was a good boy and did a word search :)



How is that going to factor into Kobe’s greatness? If you want to use how many points Kobe scored in one game as any sort of indicator that Kobe could be greater than Jordan, go ahead. That is your own, faulty definition.

Ah yes, my faulty definition vs your faulty definition. I can live with that.



So why did you say that I brought up scoring titles when I said saying Kobe scoring 81 points is an insignificant accomplishment? You are continuously putting your own foot in your mouth, with no plan or reason as to what and why you are arguing.

Sorry, I was putting my foot in your mouth :) I said Kobe's 81 points was a significant achievement. That's what I wanted to say, you can't regulate or censor what I want to say just because it doesn't meet YOUR "plan or reason"



And that is precisely the problem. Incorrect opinions should be dismissed. Pippen is not greater than Kobe, and to state that is an obvious reflection on your incorrect take. It is not OK to hind behind the cloak of opinion and take no responsibility of what was said.

Is there any way to prove that Pippen is not greater than Kobe? If so, prove it. Otherwise, it's just opinion.



And yet you are free to say that Kobe will pass Jordan in scoring in the next 5 years. Just to make it clear, YOU brought this up long before I stated the 3 rings by 30 years and 4 months argument.

Again, I'm free to say it, if you disagree, then disagree. If you don't disagree, let it go. Simple as that.



BTW, Kobe NOT winning a ring by Dec 2008 is a certainty, it WILL happen. It is impossible to say that he will. Kobe surpassing Jordan in scoring in the next 5 years is not, it is NOT a certainty.

December 2008 is in the future. It is not today so yes, you are jumping into the future whether a certainty or not. Wait until December and you will be saying it in the present or does his Airness need a time traveller for his case?



You mean this?
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2840687#post2840687

Great, at least we're in agreement.



You mean other than the fact that scoring decreased since Jordan’s era? You mean other than the fact that players are shorter now than they were 20 years ago? You mean other than the fact that 3 pt shooting is a bigger part of today’s offense?

You mean other than the fact that FG% was higher in Jordan's watered down era?



Hiding from what truth? You said Jordan had Kerr to help him win championships, which is a fact, what I am arguing is that Kerr is a bit player that shouldn’t even go into the conversation, proven by the fact that Jordan won 3 without him. When did I ever say that Jordan never won 3 without Kerr? Get back down to earth, and follow the thread.

I'm used to your one sided "facts", carry on.



So how does this relate to Kobe having the potential to be better than Jordan?

Kobe has 3 rings, Jordan had 2 at his age.



Again, how does this relate to Jordan vs. Kobe? Yeah, Kobe shot a higher %, so?

So it's an area where he's better than Jordan.



Those players were used to show your own contradictions within this thread.

You showed nothing other than going off topic.



Those players were used to show your own contradictions within this thread.

Lose what point?

You showed nothing other than going off topic.



It is an observation.

Great.



Jordan DID win 3 rings by 30 years and 4 months, how is that making up an extra ring?

Because Kobe is not 30 years and 4 months? Does the Great Jordan need a couple extra months in time to give him the advantage over Kobe?



You said that Shaq was a liability in the 4th and hack-a-shaq strategy was derived to do exactly that.

WHERE DID I EVER SAY THIS? You are making stuff up again? I never said this, show me, quotes, links?



I said the strategy was invented back I the Wilt days. Shaq merely was the most famous representative of this strategy.


Who cares about when it was invented, I never argued that point. It's called "Hack-a-Shaq". None of your bluster or changing the subject changes the fact that Shaq was a massive 4th quarter liability.



You just seem to make things up as you go.

Funny, I thought that about you.



Did I say it wasn’t named after Shaq? I said “Because it rhymes, it was developed for Wilt Chamberlain, look it up.”

Who cares about when it was invented, I never argued that point. It's called "Hack-a-Shaq". None of your bluster or changing the subject changes the fact that Shaq was a massive 4th quarter liability.



That Hack a Shaq is named after Shaq, but not because of him.

Great. Who cares? This ain't Jeopardy or Trivial pursuit.

It's called "Hack-a-Shaq". None of your bluster or changing the subject changes the fact that Shaq was a massive 4th quarter liability.



Only having 1 video means agreeing with you Shaq is not clutch. Find me videos of Jerry West’s clutch shots. He was named Mr. Clutch, but I fail to find more than 1 video.
And look up those stats.

Again, you can't prove your point so you're jumping to other players. You like to argue but then jump into different tangents.

This is about Shaq, come up with some Shaq videos or even Stats that proves he was clutch in winning those titles. Bring up some stats that show he wasn't on the bench while Kobe did the scoring?

I showed you plenty of Kobe vids, you have 1 Shaq vid, we know about Hack-a-Shaq, we've seen Pop do it numerous times and yet you live in some fantasy world of Shaq not being a liability in the 4th. :downspin:



I like to think Kobe needed Shaq’s presence to disrupt the defense.

I like to think they needed each other.



How was scoring level an indication of the league watering down? I can argue the league is so bad now, they struggle to score. How is that a point for you?

Hahah, you can argue all you want but that doesn't change the fact that a reasonable person can see that it was much easier to score back in Jordan's watered down era.



Points were even higher in the early 80’s, was the 80’s more watered down?
How do you indicate the league watering down?

Yes, it was even more watered down in the 80's. You had the Lakers and Celtics and that was it. Classic case of the haves vs the have nots.



You first use the number of teams, that didn’t work since Kobe’s era has even more teams

I never used the number of teams, stop making stuff up. Quotes, links?



, you then used scoring, which also didn’t work because there was more scoring in the 80’s

Nope, I said there is LESS scoring in the 00's.



and you have said the 90’s were watered down than the 80’s.

I have never said this, you need to check your head.



What is it? Have a single point a stick to it. Don’t contradict yourself constantly, using the same argument to sometimes argue for, and something against your own arguments.

hahah, you obviously have no clue as to what I've said and haven't said. Quote me from ANY Of the 4 points above, I've never said ANY of them. Hahahah, that was pure entertainment. Good one! :toast



But that is STILL going into the future. Why are you predicting? Why are you saying Kobe will score more than Jordan in 5 years?

Cuz I felt like it. Disagree if you wish. Argue if you wish. But I can say anything I want, it's up to you if you wish to disagree, that's your choice but don't try to censor me.



It doesn’t change the fact that Jordan have 5 rings after 12 years in the league, and Kobe “only” 3.

Yup, absolutely true, you can spin it however you like.

It's also true that Kobe has 3 rings as opposed to Jordan's 2 when he turned 30.

[ambchang]

Yes, teams were scoring more in Jordan's era.

Look at how many wins it required to make the Playoffs.

Less wins in making a playoffs does not make teams weaker in general in different years, and especially different eras. It only speaks of higher disparity between teams. Throughout different years, the competition is different from one another, and you can only speak of them relative to each other by looking strictly at win totals.


I made a statement on the ease of scoring during Jordan's era which you provided the links for. It was easier to score in Jordan's era.

No you didn’t, you were on the case of 3 pt shooting throughout this entire conversation around scoring in different eras. I said Kobe was a better 3 pt shooter because teams are using 3 pt shooting as a bigger weapon than during Jordan’s era, you countered by saying that Kobe simply shot and made more 3 pters because teams are scoring more, which is a retarded assertion in the first place because comparing 2008 to 1991, teams in 2008 shoots 153% more 3 pters than teams in 1991, and unless teams in 2008 scores 153% more (that is, if teams in 1991 scores 100ppg, teams in 2008 would have to score 253ppg), or anything around that general area, it would made your assumption moot. Anyone who managed to fact check would not have thrown out these ridiculous assertions, but of course, you never do.

On the other hand, Kobe scores at an 83% rate of Jordan, and yet teams in 2008 scores at 94.0% of the teams in 1991, and there remains a significant difference of 10% that has to be addressed.


In your case, yes it does mean you are ASSuming because I never said it.

You have said things that has directly implied Kobe is better than Jordan at the age of 30 BECAUSE you said you would take Kobe over Jordan. I fail to understand how anyone would ever say that they would take Kobe over Jordan because Kobe was worse.


3 rings to 2 rings. I've already proven that Shaq needed to have Kobe win 4th quarters. That is not "2nd wheel". You've tried, but failed to disprove that.

How have you “proven” anything? You showed some video clips for pete’s sake. It proves that Kobe made clutch shots, it does not prove Shaq needed Kobe to win. In fact, the clutch factor calculation showed that not only was Shaq not a liability in the 4th in the 2002-03 season, he was in fact, an asset and a huge asset at that.

Besides, players making clutch shots COULD be second wheels, Robert Horry is a classic example of that.

Second, Kobe won 3 rings with Shaq, and he won 3 with 12 tries. Jordan won 5 in 12 tries.

Finally, you never answered why you would take Kobe over Jordan despite you said that Jordan is better in other spots. You contradict yourself frequently.


Oh no, you like to hide, so I try to coax answers out of you.

How is answering answers coaxing answers out of me? What were you trying to coax? Where was I hiding? Would you mind being more specific?


I DO mean what I said. I don't flip-flop like you.

Read it again, if you like, I said:

Kobe will surpass Jordan in points. Complete this sentence for me:

Kobe will/will not surpass Jordan in points.

I don’t know, like you said, I am not a prophet, and I don’t want to peek into the future. He COULD surpass Jordan in points, but I don’t know if he would.

So did you mean what you wrote when you said people should not look into the future?

And on what subject have I flip-flopped? Care to quote me?


I am not evaluating Kobe and was not using it in an argument. I was stating my opionion.

It does not matter whether you are stating an opinion or not. You said people should not predict the future to say that Kobe will never be as great as Jordan, and then you said Kobe will surpass Jordan in 5 years. The only difference in the two is that your prediction is much more precise, with timelines and absolute measurements, while the 1st assertion is subjective to some degree. If anything YOUR assertion was much more specific and “prophet-like”


He gets both actually. He gets penalized for his inefficiency in his rookie years and he also gets the benefit of it. It's there in his stats, look it up.

I did look up stats, constantly. You were the one who despise using stats.


Learn some English, that makes no sense:

I admit “But I did! See below: “ is poor grammar, but I never realized I am going into grammar school, nor did I realize that you do not have the mental capacity to understand that sentence.


I Said: "Why could he only make a slight difference in 1 out of 25 of those shots? How do you know it wasn't the cumulative effort of his 3's that won the game? Is that you Hollinger?"

But you did what?

Do you know how statistics work? He COULD make a difference in 1 or 2 games, but the probability of that is low because of the way his shots were distributed. Learn how to use stats before you make wild assertions.


Again, Hollinger, you're trying to apply a mathematical equation to a single game situation. Doesn't work that way.

I applied it to a whole season of 82 games, with the likelihood of it making any difference in individual games because results do not carry over from game to game.


Are you saying that the 1 extra point from 3 pointers doesn't make that much difference?

You either make or miss a three pointer, you have 3 points, not one. Throughout the season, the 4% difference in the two players translates to 0.4 pts if we uses Kobe’s 3PAs, and 0.2 pts if we uses Jordan’s 3PAs. But if you want to go over the course of the game, we have to take into account 2 pters and FTs as well instead of looking at 3 pters in a vacuum.


You obviously pretend to know more than you do. Shaq-Kobe dominance was not at it's peak in 2003, Shaq-Kobe was heavily into the decline by 2003. Your own Spurs beat them in the 2nd round, look it up.

My mistake, I had it mixed up with the 01-02 season. But the point still stands, Shaq was NOT a liability in the 4th like you claimed.


You have 1 video of Shaq flushing down an alley oop in the 4th quarter in his 17 years in the NBA. You don't have anymore? I did a 10 second search on Youtube and there are litterally hundreds of Kobe's clutch performances.

Why do I have to show videos when the stats readily prove it? Other than the alley oop, there was videos showing Shaq catching and finishing in the low blocks in the very same video, look it up yourself.


You said Kobe was the "2nd wheel to Shaq", how come he is #2 and Shaq is #3 in your own list?

LOL, Ginobili had a higher clutch factor than Duncan last year, but Duncan was clearly the main man, while Ginobili was the 2nd wheel. The offense was designed around Duncan, just like the offense was designed around O’Neal when he was a Laker. Fact that Shaq was #3 in the clutch factor shows that he was NOT a liability in the 4th quarter as you have claimed.


Your fantasy about Shaq not being a 4th quarter liability is stupid. Even your own team's coach exposes that liability. You have 1 video out of 16 years of Shaq's "Mr. Clutch" career...Gotcha. :)

You just used Shaq being #3 in the league in performance in the clutch, and you are trying to disprove it because I didn’t take the time to search videos? So are you trying to dismiss the study?


BTW, Shaq-Kobe did not win a ring in 2003, so this doesn't help your case in stating that Kobe was "2nd wheel" to Shaq in the ring getting. Nice try but a FAIL as usual.

As usual? Interesting, what are the fails you have witnessed?
The video you have shown showed Kurt Rambis as the head coach, did the Lakers win the championship with Rambis as the headcoach? It then showed a clear foul by Kobe on Sabonis? Was that a shot? It then showed Kobe’s shot against the Kings and one against Charlotte? Were those shots that allow the Lakers to win the championship?

I found a huge lot of videos of Horry making clutch shots, was he the lead man, or even the 2nd, or even 3rd wheel on those teams?

Shaq won 1 MVP and 3 finals MVP in those years, Kobe didn’t. Maybe that showed that Shaq was the main man?


SHAQ should be thanking KOBE for winning those close games.

He should also thank Horry too! What do we know, Horry was the main guy, because he made more clutch shots.


You obviously don't watch actual games because you said 2003 was the peak of the Shaq-Kobe era. That was the DECLINING year.

Wow! I got the years mixed up, ladeedada!


Your own coach of the Spurs does hack-a-Shaq because he's a liability. You should start by opening your eys to some Spurs games.

In 2008, sure. Shaq could no longer provide what he had on defense in 2008 as he did in 00 to 02. How does that relate to Shaq being a liability in 2000 to 2002?


Because one is absolute, one is not. When you say "CANNOT" that means 100%, probable still has a chance. Is that so hard to understand?

And you said Kobe CAN be greater than Jordan, one is the negative of the other. How can one be absolute and the other not?

I would imagine saying something like Kobe WILL score more than Jordan in 5 years is absolute.


Shaq couldn't win games by himself without Kobe, the video showed that. The video even shows Shaq sitting on the bench. Your "Mr. Clutch" Shaq sitting on the bench watching Kobe's heroics win the game. :D

Mr. Clutch was talking about Jerry West, read will you?

Horry for president! Horry was the man on all the teams he was at. It turned out Kobe and Shaq both owe it all to Horry! Because Horry made clutch shots!


Yes, you like to state only 1 side of things, I'm getting to know your sneaky thinking the more we talk. You like to say only the positive side to help your arguments. "Jordan won 3 rings without Kerr".

What is sneaky? YOU stated Jordan won titles with the help of Kerr first, I countered by saying Jordan won 3 rings without Kerr. YOU had one sided arguments. It’s on this very same page, just a few posts above, READ WHAT YOU WROTE, you weasel.


Nope, the ONUS is on YOU to prove it IF YOU DISAGREE. If you have NO PROOF, just let it go.

I state that Kobe bribed officials so that he could make 4th quarter clutch shots and titles, therefore, his 3 rings should be discarded If you disagree, you have to disprove it, otherwise, it stays as a fact. That is using your logic.

I have shown that Jordan played in an era of athletes who were taller, but lighter, you have yet to show anything.


Obviously you feel like you're some basketball guru but have no proof. Nice.



Yah, I see how it works. You have some stupid logic, but it's all yours baby.

The proof is that NBA athletes were taller in 1988 than they were in 2008. If you want to be more granular, do your own work.



You have proved that there was more scoring in the 90s in a watered down league. Yay!

Why was it watered down? When specifically was it watered down?


It's not hard to question your rose-colored integrity. You keep arguing the Kobe 3 rings to Jordan's 2 rings with some kind of crazy future jumping logic without conceding the fact.

Where have I ever said that?


Or that Shaq's some kind of great 4th quarter performer.

He was, the numbers proved it.


Or that "Hack - a - Shaq" was named after Wilt.

Where did I say that? Quote me.


You are by far one of the rudest posters I've met here on ST who can't have a debate without throwing out insult.

You haven’t been on this forum for too long. I am not above labeling an idiot an idiot.


You started the insults, don't wonder why you're not getting any respect. I have no problem with insults, keep 'em cummin' but make no mistake, your ignorance, rudeness, and bias deserves no respect or apologies.

I will have many sleepless nights without your respect. You continuously said that I threw out fake facts when I provided you with links. That is the definition of laziness and ignorance. You have done no work in this thread to prove your assertion, and threw out assertion after assertion with nothing to back them up, while putting all the onus on me to show the work. Why would your assertion be assumed correct until proven wrong, while my research be assumed fake even when links were shown?


I ain't going to do your work for you. If you want to disagree, come up with your own "facts".

I did, I have shown players were smaller in 2008. You disagree that this shows that this has a strong relation with SG size, you look things up.

Yup, I looked it up. It's an opinion.

Shooting Guards were smaller in the early 90s.
"a personal view, attitude, or appraisal. "

Look it up, it's right there in your link.
[/quote]

SG were smaller in the early 90s is not a personal view, attitude or appraisal, it is a stated fact. There are clear statistics to prove or disprove it, you are just too lazy to state anything.

Is saying Shaq is smaller than Spud Webb an opinion? If it isn’t, then why would having a larger group of people with the same readily available stats be one?


As usual, you dodged the question yet again. I asked you outright if it was harder to play in the West or the East.

"Oh I don't know, I'm not a player".

And now you hide behind the issue by throwing out more insults, niec :lol

I really personally don’t know. How am I supposed to know? Different players would have different preferences based on style and pace of game. If I were to play in the East and the West, I would imagine it would be equally difficult for me, because I wouldn’t be able to compete with either group of athletes. However, I did state that with Kobe’s statistics showed that he scored more efficiently and at the higher rate in the West than in the East.


Hahah, you like to make up stuff, yo ueven make up stuff about not making up stuff.

"With your logic.

If Kobe’s West = 6, and Kobe’s East = 4, and Jordan’s West = 3 and East = 10, your logic shows that Kobe’s West > Jordan’s East, which shows 6 > 10, which is incorrect. Your “logic” is hardly logical."

Sure, let's just pull up some #'s out of our ass and say that's "Allanon's logic" :)

It is called illustration. If you cannot understand that, it’s just another illustration of your subpar IQ.


Nope, that's your own crazy Hollinger logic that only looks at numbers to win games instead of looking at matchups.

It is using numbers as examples of absolutes. YOU stated East vs. West as hard absolute comparisons, which I used numbers to illustrate your fault logic


Great logic! Hahah, more insults, getting angry?

I would say that this more frustration, like trying to explain simple logic to a deer.


Do you know ANYTHING? Duncan was a rookie in 97. Even your "great Jordan" couldn't start contending for a ring until 5 seasons.

Duncan was a rookie in 97-98, and he won a ring the next year. What’s the problem? He still competed with Jordan in the same era. But I didn’t come up with these standards, you did, you used draft years. Then Jordan played two more years in Washington, with little success (relatively)


Ditto for Shaq.

Shaq was in his 6th year when Jordan won his last title. Then he went to the Lakers. Kobe didn’t even start competing with Shaq until 04-05.


Of course Jordan lost to Bird, that was the Magic-Bird era, not the Jordan era. He got swept twice by the Celtics. But that is all understandable, it's much like the Kobe early years.

Sure, so they competed, directly, head to head. Why was Bird not direct competition?


And after he lost to Bird, he got his ass beat by the Pistons 3 years in a row. They called them the "Detroit Bad Boys". Look it up.

Yeah, so they competed, what is wrong with that? Jordan competed against Bird, Thomas and Magic, just like Kobe competed against Lebron and Duncan. What is the problem? You stated that Jordan’s competition should be defined by the drafted players from 88 to 93, which is a curious definition to exclude David Robinson. And yet Kobe’s competition should include Shaq (who was drafted 4 years before Kobe entered the league, and only competed head to head with Kobe after his 12th year), Duncan (who was drafted 2 years after Kobe), and Lebron.


It took Jordan several years to become a conteder. By the time he was a contender, Magic/Bird were shells of their former selves.

Jordan won his first NBA title playing against Magic, the year which Magic finished #2 in MVP voting.


Please learn to read:

" Originally Posted by DPG21920 View Post

DPG21920: Who was the better basketball player at age 30, do not talk about systems or teams or anything. "

Allanon: At age 30, I would say they're dead even and if forced to pick 1, I would take Kobe.
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2841288&postcount=191

So you would take Kobe over Jordan at age 30 because ……
And you also said:

Wrong, READ it again. I said I would take 30 year old Kobe over 30 year old Jordan if we disregarded EVERYTHING else (accomplishments, team, future, etc). I didn't contradict myself, you just read what you wanted to read in your mind.

http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2860508&postcount=459

So if we disregard everything else, would you pick Pippen over Kobe at age 30 because Pippen got more rings?



Nope, Jordan was not ready to contend in those years. Jut like Kobe wasn't, LeBron isn't, etc. Hell, Kobe battled David Robinson, doesn't mean he was part of DRob's era.

So if Lebron is not ready to contend, why would you include him in the conversation when comparing competition?

And I would include Robinson as part of Kobe’s competition, just that it was a hobbled Robinson.

However, if Kobe played against Robinson directly in the playoffs while Robinson won DPoY, MVPs, and all-nba first teams, yeah, I would say Kobe had great competition, just like Jordan had great competition when he played directly against a Bird who won 3 MVPs and a title, and a Magic who won 3 titles and 3 MVPs.


Jordan's "era" is considered the 90's.

Doesn’t mean that he didn’t have some great competition in the 80s as well, in which he played 6 years.


Because they have no relevance to Kobe and Jordan.

Because they do, as an example of your faulty logic.


Nope, I said Jordan needed Pippen to win. Where did I ever cite "Jordan needed 'great' players like Kerr to win championships'". Prove it? Links? Quotes?

Stop making stuff up and saying that I said it.[/quote]

Here:
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2852194&postcount=431

Oh yes, it's because Jordan had Pippen, a top50 Player, Rodman, the best rebounder ever and Steve Kerr, the best 3 point shooter ever (arguably with Bird).
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2853887&postcount=445

Hell yeah, Steve Kerr's a ton more accomplished than LeBron.

Unfortunately no, Kerr was a much better 3 point shooter.

Unfortunately, Fisher was never the best at anything, unlike Kerr who holds the all time 3 pt % record.
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2855050&postcount=452

Yup, Kobe can't compare to Kerr's 3 pointers, that boy was bad. But Kobe was a greater 3 point shooter than Jordan.

Yup, Kerr was the #1 3 point shooter in accuracy, he was also Jordan's helper.
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2853887&postcount=447

No, you need to check your history. JORDAN won the rings with the help of Kerr, it wasn't the other way around.


Why can't you read? I said 3 rings and 1 MVP. 1 MVP and 1 ring does not equal 3 rings and 1 MVP. If "Bob McAdoo" had 3 rings and 1 MVP, he'd be greater than Barkley.

Barkley had 1 MVP and zero rings. Why does a player have to have exactly/at least 3 rings to elevate above the rest?


Alright, since you're being so open:

Was Shaq a liability in the 4th quarter?

No, not during 2000-2002, the numbers proved it.


Did Shaq often sit on the bench watching Kobe win the game.

No, the numbers proved that as well.


Did Kobe have 3 rings to Jordan's 2 when they turned 30?

Of course, just that it has no relevance.


Yes or No, is it possible that Kobe may become GOAT?

Not from my point of view, because he lags Jordan significantly after 12 seasons in the league.


There is no evidence that Kobe has improved his toughness, and I never stated that he had improved his toughness.

Clarify your this statement, which probablility are you referring to? The probablility of what?

"If there is none, why would you state that as a probability?"

Since we have been talking about the probability of Kobe winning 4 more rings before his career ended, I would imagine anyone with the attention span of a mouse would know that we are talking about that very same subject, but since it was you, I was talking about the probability of Kobe winning 4 more rings before the end of his career with no evidence of his improved toughness.


Again Hollinger, there are just some things that can't be explained by numbers.

Such as how many points were scored in the late 80s, or how teams shoot 3 pters in different eras, or the height and weight of SGs. Numbers certainly couldn’t explain those in your world.


There is no evidence of leadership other than what you perceive.

And I perceive those of Kobe’s to be bad, because leaders don’t thrown teammates and GMs under the bus.


Jordan was a great team leader. I have no evidence of this but I know.

Because Jordan led his team to 6 titles. He wouldn’t have been perceived as one if he didn’t.


Nope, if you have great Top teams, there are more wins, it's the cellar dwellers that suffer from the top teams. No matter how great a Top team is, they're only going to play 2-4 games against you.

And with 3 great teams at the top, that would translate to 6 to 12 losses for the middle tier teams, that is a huge difference, like a difference between a 38 win team and a 50 win team.


Come on, you're good with averages, look at the average # of wins needed in Jordan's watered down era.

How was Jordan’s era watered down?


"35 wins for the Celtics, 38 for the Heat, 43 for the Lakers, 39 for the Lakers, 39 for the Kings, 36 for the Clippers."

So?


If you want to pull up such ridiculousness, Kobe goes up against:

Jordan
Pippen
Hakeem
Barkley
Stockton
Malone
LeBron
Shaq
Duncan
DRob
Ewing
Drexler


Sounds much less fair now doesn't it?

Sounds about the same as Jordan’s competition, only that includes a broken down Hakeem, Barkley, Ewing and Drexler.


Thank you for admitting that you like to jump around and again trying to do it by asking for average when I stated that Kobe scored a ton more points than Jordan at the same age.

Because he had 3 more seasons?


OK, I added some more players that Kobe played in my list above. Thanks.

You sure did, so?




Sure, given your "logic" I've expanded Kobe's list of "players he played against" for you.

Great! Remind me, did I ever say that Kobe’s competition was weaker than Jordan’s? I recalled me saying that the two equaled out. Which is now shown to be the case.



More anger. :)

[quote]
Cool, you are resorting to mindless banter, not that this is any worse than your “opinions” earlier on.[/qote]

More anger. :)

You not being able to say anything = me being angry. Sure. And even if I was, so? Take your own advice stay on the topic, and let me know what answering answers mean.


Nope, you just tried to make excuses and diminish Kobe's achievement even though I unquestionably gave Jordan the rest.

And you saying Jordan scored more because he was in a watered down league is unquestionably giving Jordan his due?


Yes, Kobe could be better than Jordan. It may happen, it may never happen but it's certainly a possibility.

Why are you trying to foretell the future?


How does that contradict my assertion?

Kobe scored more against the West than the East, with higher efficiency, which was directly contradicting your assertion that it is easier to score against tougher competition (The west)


Are you blind or you can't read?

WHERE in that post is the word EXPANSION?

Copy and paste a screenshot because I sure as hell don't see it and even was a good boy and did a word search :)

Here: http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2852456&postcount=437

You forget, 95 was an expansion year for the Grizzlies.
Extra top tier talented players from overseas: Manu, Dirk, Yao
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2855050&postcount=452

Yes, we know about the expansions. You had only mentioned the recent expansions but did not mention the Jordan era expansions with your coloring.

Ah yes, my faulty definition vs your faulty definition. I can live with that.

What was my faulty definition?


Sorry, I was putting my foot in your mouth :) I said Kobe's 81 points was a significant achievement. That's what I wanted to say, you can't regulate or censor what I want to say just because it doesn't meet YOUR "plan or reason"

So you knowingly mentioned something totally out of the blue when asked about scoring titles?


Is there any way to prove that Pippen is not greater than Kobe? If so, prove it. Otherwise, it's just opinion.

Kobe has more MVPs, better stats.


Again, I'm free to say it, if you disagree, then disagree. If you don't disagree, let it go. Simple as that.

I am free to disagree with you. If you don’t like it, you are free to refute. But I would prefer some reason behind your constant barrage of opinions.


December 2008 is in the future. It is not today so yes, you are jumping into the future whether a certainty or not. Wait until December and you will be saying it in the present or does his Airness need a time traveller for his case?

But that is not a prediction, that is deriving an answer based on current rules.
Hey, at least I just showed that you can’t do something as simple as deriving a certainty.


Great, at least we're in agreement.

Me quoting a whole bunch of stats that didn’t mix %s and totals after you said I mixed %s and totals is agreeing?


You mean other than the fact that FG% was higher in Jordan's watered down era?

Have I ever argued that Jordan had a lower FG%?
How was Jordan’s era watered down?

And you still haven’t answered, how were the following not proving you wrong:

“You mean other than the fact that scoring decreased since Jordan’s era? You mean other than the fact that players are shorter now than they were 20 years ago? You mean other than the fact that 3 pt shooting is a bigger part of today’s offense?”


I'm used to your one sided "facts", carry on.

Was Kerr not a bit player? Did Jordan not win 3 titles without Kerr? YOU were the one who stated Jordan won with the help of Kerr and Rodman, not mentioning the fact that Jordan won 3 rings without either. You have presented 1-sided facts by your definition.


Kobe has 3 rings, Jordan had 2 at his age.

Pippen have more rings than Kobe at the same age.


So it's an area where he's better than Jordan.

Still does not show that Kobe could be greater than Jordan. Kerr has an area better than Kobe at the same age, is Kerr better than Kobe?


You showed nothing other than going off topic.



You showed nothing other than going off topic.



Great.

Showing your own contradiction within this thread is not going off topic, unless what you stated was off topic to begin with.


Because Kobe is not 30 years and 4 months? Does the Great Jordan need a couple extra months in time to give him the advantage over Kobe?

Idiocy at it’s purest form, penalizing Jordan for having his birthday in the middle of the season. FYI, Kobe is already 30, Jordan has 3 rings by 30, the same as Kobe.


WHERE DID I EVER SAY THIS? You are making stuff up again? I never said this, show me, quotes, links?

Here: http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2848446&postcount=374


Shaq didn't hit the game winning shots for the most part due to Hack-a-Shaq. Shaq was a liability in the 4th quarter. Not to say Shaq didn't do a great job, but the Lakers would not won as much without Kobe's clutch performances. As a result, Shaq sat out quite a few of the last minutes of close 4th quarters




Who cares about when it was invented, I never argued that point. It's called "Hack-a-Shaq". None of your bluster or changing the subject changes the fact that Shaq was a massive 4th quarter liability.

Despite the fact that statistics shows that Shaq was one of the most productive players in the clutch during his prime.


Funny, I thought that about you.



Who cares about when it was invented, I never argued that point. It's called "Hack-a-Shaq". None of your bluster or changing the subject changes the fact that Shaq was a massive 4th quarter liability.

Despite the fact that statistics shows that Shaq was one of the most productive players in the clutch during his prime.



Great. Who cares? This ain't Jeopardy or Trivial pursuit.

It's called "Hack-a-Shaq". None of your bluster or changing the subject changes the fact that Shaq was a massive 4th quarter liability.

Despite the fact that statistics shows that Shaq was one of the most productive players in the clutch during his prime.


Again, you can't prove your point so you're jumping to other players. You like to argue but then jump into different tangents.

It shows that clutch players may not have videos of clutch Directly addressing your stance of having no videos of Shaq in the clutch means Shaq didn’t deliver in the clutch.


This is about Shaq, come up with some Shaq videos or even Stats that proves he was clutch in winning those titles. Bring up some stats that show he wasn't on the bench while Kobe did the scoring?

Stats were shown.


I showed you plenty of Kobe vids, you have 1 Shaq vid, we know about Hack-a-Shaq, we've seen Pop do it numerous times and yet you live in some fantasy world of Shaq not being a liability in the 4th. :downspin:

The stats have already shown the tale, but if you so insist:

b8Mn7889K5E



I like to think they needed each other.

With one being the clear #1, while the other a clear #2.


Hahah, you can argue all you want but that doesn't change the fact that a reasonable person can see that it was much easier to score back in Jordan's watered down era.

Except you, who first argued that scoring was less back in the day than it was now, and then flip-flopped.

Besides, top-10 scoring averages was as high now as ever.


Yes, it was even more watered down in the 80's. You had the Lakers and Celtics and that was it. Classic case of the haves vs the have nots.

You are speaking of disparity in the league with significant differences in top and bottom level competition. There is no question that was the case in the 80s before salary cap had its full effect on the league. But that does not speak to the league being watered-down.

The definition of watered-down is dilution of talent through increasing # of teams, it has NOTHING to do with disparity.

And btw, the 6ers, Pistons, Mavs, and Rockets were very good teams at one point or another in the 80s.


I never used the number of teams, stop making stuff up. Quotes, links?

You said watered down. Something is watered down through dilution. The only way this could happen is the increase of teams and decrease of talent. And since we have shown that the talent remains relatively constant, the only option is the increase of teams.


Nope, I said there is LESS scoring in the 00's.

Could you please stop lying?
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2852456&postcount=437

Nope, there was less scoring back then. Not only were 3 point shots down, regular 2 point field goals were down too.

You explicitly said that 3 pters and 2 pters were down in Jordan’s era compared to Kobe’s era.


I have never said this, you need to check your head.

Just like you claimed you have never said all the things you actually said.


hahah, you obviously have no clue as to what I've said and haven't said. Quote me from ANY Of the 4 points above, I've never said ANY of them. Hahahah, that was pure entertainment. Good one! :toast

Except that you did.


Cuz I felt like it. Disagree if you wish. Argue if you wish. But I can say anything I want, it's up to you if you wish to disagree, that's your choice but don't try to censor me.

Have I tried to put you in prison? Have you been killed? Do you know what censorship means?

I question your predictions to the future, just like you have questioned those of others. Other people like to say what they said, why are you trying to censor them?


Yup, absolutely true, you can spin it however you like.

It's also true that Kobe has 3 rings as opposed to Jordan's 2 when he turned 30.

Kobe has 3 rings in 12 tries, Jordan has 5 rings in 12 tries. No spinning required.

[dickface]

^that was a good little bit of ownage right there :tu

[Allanon]

Less wins in making a playoffs does not make teams weaker in general in different years, and especially different eras. It only speaks of higher disparity between teams. Throughout different years, the competition is different from one another, and you can only speak of them relative to each other by looking strictly at win totals.

Says your opinion. Even though it takes fewer wins to make the Playoffs, you're saying the teams are just as tough. Great logic.

I guess the 50 win Western teams from last year were just a bunch of pussies.



No you didn’t, you were on the case of 3 pt shooting throughout this entire conversation around scoring in different eras. I said Kobe was a better 3 pt shooter

You never said Kobe was a better 3 point shooter, where did you say Kobe as a 3 point shooter, Mr Liar? Quote/links?



You have said things that has directly implied Kobe is better than Jordan at the age of 30 BECAUSE you said you would take Kobe over Jordan. I fail to understand how anyone would ever say that they would take Kobe over Jordan because Kobe was worse.

You are reading more into it than I say, it's ASSuming.



How have you “proven” anything? You showed some video clips for pete’s sake. It proves that Kobe made clutch shots, it does not prove Shaq needed Kobe to win. In fact, the clutch factor calculation showed that not only was Shaq not a liability in the 4th in the 2002-03 season, he was in fact, an asset and a huge asset at that.

Yes, how many rings did Shaq's clutchness win him in 2003?



Besides, players making clutch shots COULD be second wheels, Robert Horry is a classic example of that.

Yes, clutch shots but not clutch QUARTERS. Kobe was the man during 4th quarters then and he is now.



Second, Kobe won 3 rings with Shaq, and he won 3 with 12 tries. Jordan won 5 in 12 tries.

Yes, and Kobe's 30 with 3 rings and Jordan's 30th birthday came with 2 rings and a bad-ass Scottie Pippen.



Finally, you never answered why you would take Kobe over Jordan despite you said that Jordan is better in other spots. You contradict yourself frequently.

I answered that question way back in the original post, look it up yourself and don't blame for your lack of reading skills.



How is answering answers coaxing answers out of me? What were you trying to coax? Where was I hiding? Would you mind being more specific?

Let's see, down below if you're hiding. Oh yeah, you're still hiding, I'll have to coax a few more answers from you :)



I DO mean what I said. I don't flip-flop like you.

Read it again, if you like, I said:

Kobe will surpass Jordan in points. Complete this sentence for me:

Kobe will/will not surpass Jordan in points.

I don’t know, like you said, I am not a prophet, and I don’t want to peek into the future. He COULD surpass Jordan in points, but I don’t know if he would.

So did you mean what you wrote when you said people should not look into the future?

And on what subject have I flip-flopped? Care to quote me?

I gave you an example of your flip-flopping right above, about the East and the West, read it.



It does not matter whether you are stating an opinion or not. You said people should not predict the future to say that Kobe will never be as great as Jordan, and then you said Kobe will surpass Jordan in 5 years. The only difference in the two is that your prediction is much more precise, with timelines and absolute measurements, while the 1st assertion is subjective to some degree. If anything YOUR assertion was much more specific and “prophet-like”

Like I said, what I say is my own business, not yours. If you wish to disagree then say so. But I can say whatever I want. You can choose to ignore it if you wish or come up with an argument. And you have done neither.



I did look up stats, constantly. You were the one who despise using stats.

Yet, looking at the stats in front of you, you still tried to penalize Kobe while giving Jordan a free pass. Nice!



I admit “But I did! See below: “ is poor grammar, but I never realized I am going into grammar school, nor did I realize that you do not have the mental capacity to understand that sentence.

Uh, what were you saying? It makes no sense. You did what?
Only a mental midget as yourself could understand that.



Do you know how statistics work? He COULD make a difference in 1 or 2 games, but the probability of that is low because of the way his shots were distributed. Learn how to use stats before you make wild assertions.

Yes, you are trying to take average statistics and apply it to single games. That's just stupid, anybody who ever took statistics knows it doesn't work that way.



I applied it to a whole season of 82 games, with the likelihood of it making any difference in individual games because results do not carry over from game to game.

Nope, you applied it to a single game, read it again yourself Hollinger.



You either make or miss a three pointer, you have 3 points, not one. Throughout the season, the 4% difference in the two players translates to 0.4 pts if we uses Kobe’s 3PAs, and 0.2 pts if we uses Jordan’s 3PAs. But if you want to go over the course of the game, we have to take into account 2 pters and FTs as well instead of looking at 3 pters in a vacuum.

Yes, Hollinger. Unfortunately, you can't score .4 pts in a game. That's why you can't apply averages to a single game.



My mistake, I had it mixed up with the 01-02 season. But the point still stands, Shaq was NOT a liability in the 4th like you claimed.

Then you have absolutely NO PROOF. You said Kobe/Shaq were peak in 2003 and showed 2003 stats. They LOST in 2003. Your stats did NOT include the 01-o2 season. Nice try.



Why do I have to show videos when the stats readily prove it? Other than the alley oop, there was videos showing Shaq catching and finishing in the low blocks in the very same video, look it up yourself.

Sure Shaq can catch and finish at the rim, what time was it when he made them? In all of Shaq's 16 years of clutchness, you have 1 video of him with a game winner. Great job proving your logic, A+!

Where are your stats that readily prove it? Your stats were from "Kobe/Shaq's" dominant year, 2003. Yes, so dominant the Spurs won that year.



LOL, Ginobili had a higher clutch factor than Duncan last year, but Duncan was clearly the main man, while Ginobili was the 2nd wheel. The offense was designed around Duncan, just like the offense was designed around O’Neal when he was a Laker. Fact that Shaq was #3 in the clutch factor shows that he was NOT a liability in the 4th quarter as you have claimed.

It was YOUR list, not mine. And your own Spurs won in 2003 despite your claims of "Kobe/Shaq's peak" :lol



You just used Shaq being #3 in the league in performance in the clutch, and you are trying to disprove it because I didn’t take the time to search videos? So are you trying to dismiss the study?

It was YOUR list, not mine. And your own Spurs won in 2003 despite your claims of "Kobe/Shaq's peak" :lol

You just used Ginobili as an example of being higher than Duncan. You're contradicting yourself. This list is just stupid "LOL, Ginobili had a higher clutch factor than Duncan last year"



As usual? Interesting, what are the fails you have witnessed?
The video you have shown showed Kurt Rambis as the head coach, did the Lakers win the championship with Rambis as the headcoach? It then showed a clear foul by Kobe on Sabonis? Was that a shot? It then showed Kobe’s shot against the Kings and one against Charlotte? Were those shots that allow the Lakers to win the championship?

Yes, without those shots, the Lakers never would have gotten the rings. Another FAIL.



I found a huge lot of videos of Horry making clutch shots, was he the lead man, or even the 2nd, or even 3rd wheel on those teams?

No but he was much more clutch than Shaq. Why are you looking for Horry instead of Shaq? How come you can only come up with 1 game winner in Shaq's "Mr. Clutch" O'Neals 16 year history ? :lol



He should also thank Horry too! What do we know, Horry was the main guy, because he made more clutch shots.

This does not change the fact that Kobe made more clutch shots and that Kobe won games while Shaq watched.



Wow! I got the years mixed up, ladeedada!

Yup, useless.



In 2008, sure. Shaq could no longer provide what he had on defense in 2008 as he did in 00 to 02. How does that relate to Shaq being a liability in 2000 to 2002?

Hack-a-Shaq was used in 2000, 2002.



And you said Kobe CAN be greater than Jordan, one is the negative of the other. How can one be absolute and the other not?

I said Kobe can possibly be better than Jordan which is either he will or he won't. There's no wrong answer when you leave the door open to possibility.



I would imagine saying something like Kobe WILL score more than Jordan in 5 years is absolute.

Yup, it is.



Mr. Clutch was talking about Jerry West, read will you?

According to you, Shaq was "Mr. Clutch".



Horry for president! Horry was the man on all the teams he was at. It turned out Kobe and Shaq both owe it all to Horry! Because Horry made clutch shots!

Sure, if you wish, but I think your logic is stupid. Kobe was a 4th quarter performaer, Horry made some clutch shots. Shaq was a liability.



What is sneaky? YOU stated Jordan won titles with the help of Kerr first, I countered by saying Jordan won 3 rings without Kerr. YOU had one sided arguments. It’s on this very same page, just a few posts above, READ WHAT YOU WROTE, you weasel.

Nope, go back further, YOU said it first, you obviously can't read.



I state that Kobe bribed officials so that he could make 4th quarter clutch shots and titles, therefore, his 3 rings should be discarded If you disagree, you have to disprove it, otherwise, it stays as a fact. That is using your logic.

Sure, great.



I have shown that Jordan played in an era of athletes who were taller, but lighter, you have yet to show anything.

Sure, but Jordan still played against smaller shooting guards.



The proof is that NBA athletes were taller in 1988 than they were in 2008. If you want to be more granular, do your own work.

Your "facts" have nothing to do with whether or not Shooting Guards were bigger or smaller. Another fail.



Why was it watered down? When specifically was it watered down?

"35 wins for the Celtics to make the Playoffs, 38 for the Heat, 43 for the Lakers, 39 for the Lakers, 39 for the Kings, 36 for the Clippers."



Where have I ever said that?

Exactly my point, you'll never concede any facts even when they're in front of you. When have you EVER stated that Kobe has 3 rings to Jordan's 2 without diminishing the accomplishment?



He was, the numbers proved it.

And exactly what numbers proved that? Your 2003 list in which the Spurs won the championships or that Ginobili is more crunch than Duncan? Those numbers "proved" it? There's such thing as stupid statistics and you like to read them. Hahahhahah.



Where did I say that? Quote me.

If you didn't say it, then what are you trying to say?



You haven’t been on this forum for too long. I am not above labeling an idiot an idiot.

Whatever, dick. You started out with the rudeness, don't ask for respect.



I will have many sleepless nights without your respect.

Hahah, obviously you did because you asked why you weren't getting any apologies. Aww, sand in your vagina hurting again?



I did, I have shown players were smaller in 2008. You disagree that this shows that this has a strong relation with SG size, you look things up.

Smaller players does not show that Shooting Guards were smaller. You have prove nothing.





Shooting Guards were smaller in the early 90s.
"a personal view, attitude, or appraisal. "

Personal appraisal, view.



On the other hand, Kobe scores at an 83% rate of Jordan, and yet teams in 2008 scores at 94.0% of the teams in 1991, and there remains a significant difference of 10% that has to be addressed.

Yes, Kobe has more points than Jordan at age 30.



SG were smaller in the early 90s is not a personal view, attitude or appraisal, it is a stated fact. There are clear statistics to prove or disprove it, you are just too lazy to state anything.

You are too stupid to disprove it. Fail.



Is saying Shaq is smaller than Spud Webb an opinion? If it isn’t, then why would having a larger group of people with the same readily available stats be one?

It is an opinion until proving one way or another.



I really personally don’t know. How am I supposed to know? Different players would have different preferences based on style and pace of game. If I were to play in the East and the West, I would imagine it would be equally difficult for me, because I wouldn’t be able to compete with either group of athletes. However, I did state that with Kobe’s statistics showed that he scored more efficiently and at the higher rate in the West than in the East.

Make up your mind, why do you keep flip-flopping? Do you even know what you are saying? You said this:
"Kobe scored more, at a higher %, when he played against the East than the West, and that is a fact. "




It is called illustration. If you cannot understand that, it’s just another illustration of your subpar IQ.

Or an excellent example of making things up that is "my logic" or what "I said". Stick with your own words and silly logic, don't try to make it sound like it came from me.



It is using numbers as examples of absolutes. YOU stated East vs. West as hard absolute comparisons, which I used numbers to illustrate your fault logic
Or an excellent example of making things up that is "my logic" or what "I said". Stick with your own words and silly logic, don't try to make it sound like it came from me.



I would say that this more frustration, like trying to explain simple logic to a deer.

Your logic is flawed but your insults are entertaining :)



Duncan was a rookie in 97-98, and he won a ring the next year. What’s the problem? He still competed with Jordan in the same era. But I didn’t come up with these standards, you did, you used draft years. Then Jordan played two more years in Washington, with little success (relatively)

Let's see, was Jordan in the league when "rookie" Duncan won his ring?



Sure, so they competed, directly, head to head. Why was Bird not direct competition?

Yup, you sound desperate to find competition for Jordan in the 80s.



Yeah, so they competed, what is wrong with that? Jordan competed against Bird, Thomas and Magic, just like Kobe competed against Lebron and Duncan. What is the problem? You stated that Jordan’s competition should be defined by the drafted players from 88 to 93, which is a curious definition to exclude David Robinson. And yet Kobe’s competition should include Shaq (who was drafted 4 years before Kobe entered the league, and only competed head to head with Kobe after his 12th year), Duncan (who was drafted 2 years after Kobe), and Lebron.

Then obviously, Kobe had much more competition. Look at Kobe's list versus Jordans. Kobe even had to compete with the Great Michael Jordan.



Jordan won his first NBA title playing against Magic, the year which Magic finished #2 in MVP voting.

It was also the same year, 1991, that Magic retired. It's like Kobe winning a championship over Jordan's Wizards.



So you would take Kobe over Jordan at age 30 because ……

Yup I'd take Kobe over Jordan at age 30.




And you also said:

http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2860508&postcount=459

I said alot of stuff in that post, which are you talking about?



So if we disregard everything else, would you pick Pippen over Kobe at age 30 because Pippen got more rings?

Nope.



So if Lebron is not ready to contend, why would you include him in the conversation when comparing competition?

What are you talking about? Lebron played your very own Spurs in the Finals in 2007. Look it up.



However, if Kobe played against Robinson directly in the playoffs while Robinson won DPoY, MVPs, and all-nba first teams, yeah, I would say Kobe had great competition, just like Jordan had great competition when he played directly against a Bird who won 3 MVPs and a title, and a Magic who won 3 titles and 3 MVPs.

Stop making excuses, you keep trying to expand the number of "great players" Jordan competed with to get his rings.



Doesn’t mean that he didn’t have some great competition in the 80s as well, in which he played 6 years.

Yup, Jordan was just another bigger version of Allen Iverson back then. He was not ready to win championships.



Because they do, as an example of your faulty logic.

You call it faulty logic, I say your logic is illogical. Same thing.



Stop making stuff up and saying that I said it.

Here:
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2852194&postcount=431

http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2853887&postcount=445

http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2855050&postcount=452

http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2853887&postcount=447


Hahahahah. WHERE, did I say Jordan NEEDED Kerr? I said Jordan NEEDED Pippen. It's nowhere in all those links you posted. FAIL!

Can you read?



Barkley had 1 MVP and zero rings. Why does a player have to have exactly/at least 3 rings to elevate above the rest?

Because Kobe has 3 rings. And Jordan has 6 so Kobe's the closest player, Barkley's nowhere near.



No, not during 2000-2002, the numbers proved it.

The numbers didn't prove Jack. Your numbers are from 2003 (read it, it says so across the top) which was according to you "The Peak of Shaq/Kobe". In fact your own Spurs won in 2003, the Lakers were on the decline.

Your own "numbers" have Ginobili as a better clutch player than Duncan hahahahah.

And on top of it all, you have only 1 video of Shaq's game winners in his 16 years. Great job Mr. Clutch.



No, the numbers proved that as well.
Obviously you can't comprehend stats, just like to parrot them back. Let me help you. Kobe/Shaq did not win any rings in 2003, they were NOT at their peak. Spurs won in 2003, I can find you numbers for that if you wish.



Of course, just that it has no relevance.

Yet, you always seem to bring up irrelevant players, nice.



Not from my point of view, because he lags Jordan significantly after 12 seasons in the league.

Sure you can have your point of view. My point of view is he has 3 rings to Jordan's 2.



Since we have been talking about the probability of Kobe winning 4 more rings before his career ended, I would imagine anyone with the attention span of a mouse would know that we are talking about that very same subject, but since it was you, I was talking about the probability of Kobe winning 4 more rings before the end of his career with no evidence of his improved toughness.

Sorry, not gonna timejump with you on this one. I don't know if Kobe will win 4 more or his probability to do so. You can be the prophet on this for all I care.



Such as how many points were scored in the late 80s, or how teams shoot 3 pters in different eras, or the height and weight of SGs. Numbers certainly couldn’t explain those in your world.

Obviously, numbers like 3 vs Jordan's 2 doesn't compute in your little calculator head either.



And I perceive those of Kobe’s to be bad, because leaders don’t thrown teammates and GMs under the bus.

Yes, he was a dick before but he's been a model citizen since then and the Laker's have turned it around. Jordan was a ballhog early in his career and a dick to his teammates as well.



Because Jordan led his team to 6 titles. He wouldn’t have been perceived as one if he didn’t.[q/uote]

Ah, jumping into the future. We don't know what Kobe's final outcome will be.



And with 3 great teams at the top, that would translate to 6 to 12 losses for the middle tier teams, that is a huge difference, like a difference between a 38 win team and a 50 win team.

Yup, there were 3 great teams at the top, and the rest were watered down. Thanks for proving my point.



How was Jordan’s era watered down?
And with 3 great teams at the top, that would translate to 6 to 12 losses for the middle tier teams, that is a huge difference



So?

So?



Sounds about the same as Jordan’s competition, only that includes a broken down Hakeem, Barkley, Ewing and Drexler

Yup Kobe had a much better list than Jordan did, including Jordan himself.



Because he had 3 more seasons?

Yup, 2 of those seasons on the bench while Jordan was getting experience in college so he could enter the NBA ready to go. Again, your one-sidedness tries to penalize Kobe.



You sure did, so?

So?



Great! Remind me, did I ever say that Kobe’s competition was weaker than Jordan’s? I recalled me saying that the two equaled out. Which is now shown to be the case.

Nope, Jordan had a watered down era to deal with. Superstars in their decline. That was why the 90's were not Magic's era or Bird's era, they were retired.



You not being able to say anything = me being angry. Sure. And even if I was, so? Take your own advice stay on the topic, and let me know what answering answers mean.

Hahah, you're cute when you're angry.



And you saying Jordan scored more because he was in a watered down league is unquestionably giving Jordan his due?

Yes, it's giving him his due. His numbers surpass Kobe. But that is the fault in comparing to players of different eras.



Why are you trying to foretell the future?

How is that foretelling the future? More of your idiotic logic?



Kobe scored more against the West than the East, with higher efficiency, which was directly contradicting your assertion that it is easier to score against tougher competition (The west)

What was my faulty definition?

You said: "Kobe scored more, at a higher %, when he played against the East than the West"

Ah, ok, that is your assertion? Never mind then. The East is obviously easier than the West as I have stated before.



So you knowingly mentioned something totally out of the blue when asked about scoring titles?

Yup.



Kobe has more MVPs, better stats.

Great.




I am free to disagree with you. If you don’t like it, you are free to refute. But I would prefer some reason behind your constant barrage of opinions.

I feel like we're getting to know each other better and better.



But that is not a prediction, that is deriving an answer based on current rules.
Hey, at least I just showed that you can’t do something as simple as deriving a certainty.

You haven't showed jack.



Me quoting a whole bunch of stats that didn’t mix %s and totals after you said I mixed %s and totals is agreeing?

But you did mix %s and totals, do you deny it?



Have I ever argued that Jordan had a lower FG%?
How was Jordan’s era watered down?

Look at the number of wins it takes to make the Playoffs during Jordan's watered down era. You said it yourself, you have 3 top teams. Kobe's playing in an era with a ton of top teams.



And you still haven’t answered, how were the following not proving you wrong:

“You mean other than the fact that scoring decreased since Jordan’s era? You mean other than the fact that players are shorter now than they were 20 years ago? You mean other than the fact that 3 pt shooting is a bigger part of today’s offense?”


FG% was way up during Jordan's era in general. It wasn't just Jordan.

Even though there are more 3 pointers shot today, it doesn't change the fact that Jordan had a crappy 3 point shooting percentage which was my point.



Was Kerr not a bit player? Did Jordan not win 3 titles without Kerr? YOU were the one who stated Jordan won with the help of Kerr and Rodman, not mentioning the fact that Jordan won 3 rings without either. You have presented 1-sided facts by your definition.

I was just following YOUR lead in telling half-sides of the story.



Pippen have more rings than Kobe at the same age.

Yes, but no MVPs. Shame on him.



Still does not show that Kobe could be greater than Jordan. Kerr has an area better than Kobe at the same age, is Kerr better than Kobe?

Once Kerr un-retires and gets an MVP, he can join the Kobe/Jordan conversation.



Showing your own contradiction within this thread is not going off topic, unless what you stated was off topic to begin with.

Nope, that is off-topic, hell, we might as well start bringing in the NFL, Obama and the elections if you'd like to continue going off-topic to make your case.



Idiocy at it’s purest form, penalizing Jordan for having his birthday in the middle of the season. FYI, Kobe is already 30, Jordan has 3 rings by 30, the same as Kobe.

Hey, why penalize Kobe for being born in the off-season? Jordan's so great you have to spot him 4 more months extra into the future? :)

FYI, if Kobe wins a ring this year, he will have 4 rings at 30 as opposed to Jordan's 3. Two can play at that game.



Here: http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2848446&postcount=374

:lol I am seriously wondering if you can read. Where did I say "You said that ... hack-a-shaq strategy was derived to do exactly that."

I never once brought into question of the origina of "Hack-A-Shaq". Learn to read or go make up some better quotes.



Despite the fact that statistics shows that Shaq was one of the most productive players in the clutch during his prime.

The numbers didn't prove Jack. Your numbers are from 2003 (read it, it says so across the top) which was according to you "The Peak of Shaq/Kobe". In fact your own Spurs won in 2003, the Lakers were on the decline.

Your own "numbers" have Ginobili as a better clutch player than Duncan hahahahah.

And on top of it all, you have only 1 video of Shaq's game winners in his 16 years. Great job Mr. Clutch.



Despite the fact that statistics shows that Shaq was one of the most productive players in the clutch during his prime.

The numbers didn't prove Jack. Your numbers are from 2003 (read it, it says so across the top) which was according to you "The Peak of Shaq/Kobe". In fact your own Spurs won in 2003, the Lakers were on the decline.

Your own "numbers" have Ginobili as a better clutch player than Duncan hahahahah.

And on top of it all, you have only 1 video of Shaq's game winners in his 16 years. Great job Mr. Clutch.



It shows that clutch players may not have videos of clutch Directly addressing your stance of having no videos of Shaq in the clutch means Shaq didn’t deliver in the clutch.

The numbers didn't prove Jack. Your numbers are from 2003 (read it, it says so across the top) which was according to you "The Peak of Shaq/Kobe". In fact your own Spurs won in 2003, the Lakers were on the decline.

Your own "numbers" have Ginobili as a better clutch player than Duncan hahahahah.

And on top of it all, you have only 1 video of Shaq's game winners in his 16 years. Great job Mr. Clutch.




Stats were shown.
The numbers didn't prove Jack. Your numbers are from 2003 (read it, it says so across the top) which was according to you "The Peak of Shaq/Kobe". In fact your own Spurs won in 2003, the Lakers were on the decline.

Your own "numbers" have Ginobili as a better clutch player than Duncan hahahahah.

And on top of it all, you have only 1 video of Shaq's game winners in his 16 years. Great job Mr. Clutch.



The stats have already shown the tale, but if you so insist:

b8Mn7889K5E

Ah great, 1 video of the great Mr. Clutch Shaq.

I give you 8 minutes of Kobe clutch and can show you a ton more. Enjoy!
r-5MXgEcL74



With one being the clear #1, while the other a clear #2.

Which one was #1 and which one was #2? Which one sat on the bench in the 4th quarter?



Except you, who first argued that scoring was less back in the day than it was now, and then flip-flopped.

Nope, just admitting when I was wrong. Something you have no grasp of.



You are speaking of disparity in the league with significant differences in top and bottom level competition. There is no question that was the case in the 80s before salary cap had its full effect on the league. But that does not speak to the league being watered-down.

How is that NOT watered down? You have a couple of teams at the top wherease now, there are a grip of top teams. This is a much tougher league to play in now.



The definition of watered-down is dilution of talent through increasing # of teams, it has NOTHING to do with disparity.

So you are saying increasing # of teams has nothing and dissemination of talent has nothing to do with disparity?



And btw, the 6ers, Pistons, Mavs, and Rockets were very good teams at one point or another in the 80s.

Good for them. How many championships did they win in the 80s?



You said watered down. Something is watered down through dilution. The only way this could happen is the increase of teams and decrease of talent. And since we have shown that the talent remains relatively constant, the only option is the increase of teams.

Hey, you brought it up, not I. Learn your lesson and don't say I say things when I didn't. The dillution of talent can occur through expansion OR lack of talent.



Could you please stop lying?

Could you please learn to read?

"Originally Posted by Allanon

1) More points were indeed scored in the 90's"



Just like you claimed you have never said all the things you actually said.

You need to check your eyes. All of your "quotes" of me were wrong...every single one. FAIL.



Have I tried to put you in prison? Have you killed? Do you know what censorship means?

Nope, trying to tell me what I CAN and CANNOT say is out of your jurisdiction sir. I'll say whatever I want to say and whenever I want to say it. You might think you're right but you're wrong if you think you can tell me what not to say.



I question your predictions to the future, just like you have questioned those of others. Other people like to say what they said, why are you trying to censor them?

Oh no, you can jump into the future if you like, I'll just jump into the future with you to even things up.



Kobe has 3 rings in 12 tries, Jordan has 5 rings in 12 tries. No spinning required.

Kobe has 3 rings, Jordan had 2 at the same age. No spinning required.

[dickface]

^and that's some pretty good failure.

[Allanon]

^and that's some pretty good failure.

^^ Hahah, whatever "dickface" :)

[ambchang]

You have stated that Kobe led the Lakers in the 4th quarter while Shaq was a liability witnessed by his clutch shots. That has been proven false with statistics. While Kobe was #2 in clutch performance and Shaq was #3, this speaks highly of both players and does not indicate which one is the de facto go-to guy in the clutch. In fact, even IF Kobe was clutch and Shaq WAS a liability, so what? Ginobili was clutch, but he still wasn't the leader on the Spurs.


Says your opinion. Even though it takes fewer wins to make the Playoffs, you're saying the teams are just as tough. Great logic.

Your logic is faulty because you are comparing Kobe's West to Kobe's East, and this does not include anything from Jordan's East. Again, A>B != A>D, it has no relevance. I will admit that the disparity was larger in Jordan's East, and the proof is in the records, but you will be comparing apples and oranges by jumping to conclusions.

Even though you are piss poor in interpreting illustrations, I will have to draw one to talk down to the level of your abilities. In an exaggerated scenario. There are two leagues, one with a bunch of high school kids, and one in the professional leagues, having the same number of teams and same playoff seeding.

In the professional leagues, the disparity is low, thus it requires a 50% winning percentage to get into the playoffs. In the high school league, the disparity is high, with top teams dominating bad teams, and creating a top heavy standings. For the playoffs, a high school team needs 60% winning percentage to get into the playoffs. Are the teams in the high school league better than those in the professional leagues? In fact, we are seeing this in NCAA vs. NBA, or actual high school leagues vs. NBA.

I am not saying Kobe's West is as bad as a high school league, what I am saying is that the records to two entirely different leagues cannot be compared to each other to draw any conclusions of the quality of teams.


I guess the 50 win Western teams from last year were just a bunch of pussies.
The Lakers (a 57-win team), beat the Nuggets (a 50-win team) in 4 games. New Orleans beat the Mavs in 5, the Spurs beat the Suns in 5, the only semi-competitive 1st round series in the West was the Jazz over the Rockets.
It is another indication that regular season win totals does not speak to the quality of the teams.
In fact, I can make the argument that the West was terrible last year because the top seed only won 57 games. In comparison, the top team in Jordan’s East won 67 games in 1992. The argument cuts both ways.

You never said Kobe was a better 3 point shooter, where did you say Kobe as a 3 point shooter, Mr Liar? Quote/links?
Could you PLEASE do your own searches? It is getting tiresome. You are illogical and lazy. I at first thought you are just lazy and don’t do the required work, now I am believing that you are faking it to drag this conversation as long as possible.
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2840687&postcount=157

Kobe was better than Jordan in 3PA and 3PM by almost 90%.

It’s as obvious as it could be, Kobe was better than Jordan in 3PA and 3PM, what else do you need?

You are reading more into it than I say, it's ASSuming.

So answer this, you are willing to take Kobe over Jordan at age 30 because Kobe is better/worse than Jordan.
If you answer better, then you have contradicted yourself when you said Jordan is better than Kobe, if you said worse, it just shows that you are illogical. Pick one.

Yes, how many rings did Shaq's clutchness win him in 2003?

And I saw how Kobe’s clutchness won him a ring in 2003 as well. Funny only clutch players can win rings, I guess Kobe was only clutch in 3 years of his career.

Yes, clutch shots but not clutch QUARTERS. Kobe was the man during 4th quarters then and he is now.

Your argument all along that Kobe is the man because he is clutch is that Kobe has a ton of videos. So do you have any Kobe performance throughout the whole 4th quarter? If not, Kobe is not clutch in the whole 4th by your own definition.
Besides, I am not arguing Kobe is not clutch, I am arguing Shaq is not a liability, he was the 3rd clutchest player based on statistics in 02-03. That is hardly a liability.

Yes, and Kobe's 30 with 3 rings and Jordan's 30th birthday came with 2 rings and a bad-ass Scottie Pippen.

I am sure you would take Pippen over Shaq. Afterall, you would pick Kobe over Jordan.
Duncan got two MVPs and 4 rings by the time he was 30, but I wouldn’t pick him over Jordan. I wouldn’t even pick him over Jabbar, or Magic. So what if Kobe won 3 rings on his 30th birthday? So? He had a birthday that fell on a summer instead of the middle of an NBA season, that is why you picked him over Jordan? This is about as retarded as it could sound.

I answered that question way back in the original post, look it up yourself and don't blame for your lack of reading skills.

Because he won 1 more ring at the age of 30? What kind of idiotic response is that? It makes no logical sense. Robert Horry won two rings by the time he was 24. Would you take him over Jordan?
Oh wait, you had to throw in a random 1 MVP as the qualifier. Because you have to find illogical cut-off points that speak directly to Kobe’s accomplishments.

Let's see, down below if you're hiding. Oh yeah, you're still hiding, I'll have to coax a few more answers from you
I DO mean what I said. I don't flip-flop like you.

Read it again, if you like, I said:

Kobe will surpass Jordan in points. Complete this sentence for me:

Kobe will/will not surpass Jordan in points.

I don’t know, like you said, I am not a prophet, and I don’t want to peek into the future. He COULD surpass Jordan in points, but I don’t know if he would.

Do you even know what flip-flop means? I am surprised you don’t since you have it so often in this thread along. If I said Kobe could surpass Jordan in points, then said he can’t, that is flip flopping. If I said the league had higher lower scoring in the 90s, then later on said Jordan scored more in the 90s because somebody else pointed out to me that the 90’s had higher scoring, that would be flip flopping. If I said Jordan was better than Kobe, and then decide to pick Kobe over Jordan, that would be flip-flopping.

Saying I don’t know to questions I don’t know is not flip-flopping, it’s not knowing.


I gave you an example of your flip-flopping right above, about the East and the West, read it.

What about the East and the West? I don’t agree with you is not flip-flopping. I have been constantly saying that the Jordan’s East and Kobe’s West could not be compared based on regular season records alone. You can go into specifics and draw subjective arguments around quality of play and your own observations, though.

Like I said, what I say is my own business, not yours. If you wish to disagree then say so. But I can say whatever I want. You can choose to ignore it if you wish or come up with an argument. And you have done neither.

Then why are you in a forum? I have disagreed and said so profoundly throughout this conversation. I am disagreeing with your application of rules where you question other people’s methods in “predicting” the future.
Your whole premise throughout this thread is that people shouldn’t count Kobe out because he hasn’t finished his career, discounting methods that potentially goes into the future (however unlikely it is), and yet you say that Kobe could be greater than Jordan because he has more rings than Jordan at the same age, and project that this is possible that he would end up with more rings because of that. You also noted that Kobe WILL score more points than Jordan in 5 years. You are not applying your own logic and arguments to those who disagree with you. That is what flip-flopping is.

Yet, looking at the stats in front of you, you still tried to penalize Kobe while giving Jordan a free pass. Nice!

What free pass? I am still struggling to understand what kind of free pass you are talking about. Jordan was better than Kobe in every single statistical category by comparing their 9 prime years except 3PA and 3PM.


Uh, what were you saying? It makes no sense. You did what?
Only a mental midget as yourself could understand that.

You yourself said “Learn some English, that makes no sense:” right after I said “But I did! See below:”. You comprehension ability is worse than I thought.

Nope, you applied it to a single game, read it again yourself Hollinger.

I applied it to a whole season of 82 games. You have the inability to understand how statistics work. 3pters, and points scored per game specifically, are not cumulative, so 4% difference in 3 pters can only have an impact in close games where Kobe shot a significant number of 3 pters. Averaging out to a full season with a normal distribution, a 4% difference in 3 pters have little to no impact on the games. Do you finally understand?

Are you a math major? Have you ever taken statistics? Do you know how 3 pters work?


Yes, Hollinger. Unfortunately, you can't score .4 pts in a game. That's why you can't apply averages to a single game.

Which is why I said over the course of a season, he COULD make a difference, but that chance is small. If you do not understand, just say you do not understand. You understanding statistics doesn’t make you stupid, and it is perfectly fine that you don’t understand it. I won’t hold your lack of knowledge towards statistics against you, you have given me enough ammo with your stacks of idiotic, illogical responses.


Then you have absolutely NO PROOF. You said Kobe/Shaq were peak in 2003 and showed 2003 stats. They LOST in 2003. Your stats did NOT include the 01-o2 season. Nice try.

Why do they have to show 02 stats in particular? Shaq and Kobe duo had similar output from 01 to 03, and Shaq had similar shooting %s. What does them losing in 03 have to do with Shaq being not clutch? Your stance was that Shaq was a liability in the 4th because of his awful FT%. His 03 FT numbers were as bad as ever, and yet it was shown that he was clutch. What is not proven?

Sure Shaq can catch and finish at the rim, what time was it when he made them? In all of Shaq's 16 years of clutchness, you have 1 video of him with a game winner. Great job proving your logic, A+!

Where are your stats that readily prove it? Your stats were from "Kobe/Shaq's" dominant year, 2003. Yes, so dominant the Spurs won that year.

You sure are putting a lot of weight at me saying 03 was the peak of Shaq and Kobe’s dominance. However, your pea-sized brain just let the main point fly over your head like so many other points. The point is, Shaq was clutch, and the number proved it.
You also stated that Kobe carried Shaq in the 4th quarters, and yet you showed him shooting last second shots. By your definition, you haven’t proven that Kobe carried Shaq in the 4th quarter because at least some of those shots were not in championship winning years (the first one comes to mind), and that they didn’t show the rest of the 4th quarter.

It was YOUR list, not mine. And your own Spurs won in 2003 despite your claims of "Kobe/Shaq's peak"

It was not my list, it was a study done by some statistics geek. If you disagree with the study, feel free to argue, although I question whether you have the ability to understand the study at all.

Finally, yeah, I made a mistake in saying that it was the peak of Shaq/Kobe dominance, so? Does it change the fact that Shaq was clutch? But if I was you, I would say that it was an opinion, and that dominance does not need to end in titles, but I am not a weasel like you.


You just used Ginobili as an example of being higher than Duncan. You're contradicting yourself. This list is just stupid "LOL, Ginobili had a higher clutch factor than Duncan last year"

Are you retarded? I said exactly what I meant. Ginobili had a higher clutch factor than Duncan last year, and yet Duncan is the man, showing that even though Kobe was #2 and O’neal was #3 in clutch factor, it does not mean that Kobe is the man. Do you get it? I have seen donkeys that are smarter than you.

Yes, without those shots, the Lakers never would have gotten the rings. Another FAIL.

How so? When were those shots taken? How would a shot taken with Kurt Rambis behing the head coach allow the Lakers to win a championship? Care to explain?


No but he was much more clutch than Shaq. Why are you looking for Horry instead of Shaq? How come you can only come up with 1 game winner in Shaq's "Mr. Clutch" O'Neals 16 year history ?

Of course, there were two shots just in that one video, and then another in another video, but you just won’t bother watching it. The argument isn’t that Shaq is the clutchest player ever, it was that Shaq wasn’t a liability in the 4th. You asserted that Shaq was a liability, and it has been proven to be wrong, and sadly, the only thing you can come up with the counter is that I got the years mixed up, which has nothing to do with the point anyways.


This does not change the fact that Kobe made more clutch shots and that Kobe won games while Shaq watched.

So? Kobe shot an air ball against Utah in the playoffs when he was young. How does a bunch of videos show Kobe was the main guy on those Laker teams?

Yup, useless.

Not as useless as you who claimed teams scored more in Kobe’s era, then when your ignorance was shown, use the direct opposite to explain Kobe’s lower scoring average.


Hack-a-Shaq was used in 2000, 2002.
Just those two years? Not in 01? Not in 03? If it was used in 03, how did Shaq became one of the clutchest players in the league that year?

I said Kobe can possibly be better than Jordan which is either he will or he won't. There's no wrong answer when you leave the door open to possibility.
But Kobe WILL score more than Jordan, so that is an absolute, right? And why would you take Kobe at 30 over Jordan at 30? Because Kobe at 30 is already greater than Jordan at 30?
While I was searching some of your old quotes, I found these gems:
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2835946&postcount=12
“Kobe won't get as many MVPs as Jordan did. But I think he has a chance at beating him in rings.” – Why are you predicting the future? Why are you saying Kobe WON’T get as many MVPs as Jordan? How would you know?

http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2836122&postcount=19
“For Kobe haters, the ultimate nightmare would be if he got 3-4 more rings because he would probably take his place next to his Airness.” – So back to the basics, Kobe would NOT be next to Jordan even if he won 3 to 4 more rings. He had worse stats, lost twice in the finals in embarrassing fashion, failed to make the playoffs, have worse stats, have less Finals MVPs, and generally less accomplishments.

Yup, it is.

So why are you trying to predict the future? Is there a possibility that Kobe will not score more than Jordan in 5 years?


According to you, Shaq was "Mr. Clutch".
Where have I said that? I disagreed with your premise that Shaq was a liability in the 4th and needed Kobe to carry him through. It has been proven with numbers and videos.



Sure, if you wish, but I think your logic is stupid. Kobe was a 4th quarter performaer, Horry made some clutch shots. Shaq was a liability.

But why? You didn’t have Kobe 4th quarters in videos do you? You only showed clutch shots? Why would those Horry clutch shot videos not translate into Horry going nuts in the 4th? In fact, he did go nuts in the 05 finals 4th quarter and overtime.
Why was Shaq a liability? He had great numbers in the final minutes of a close game, he played great!


Nope, go back further, YOU said it first, you obviously can't read.
Quote me.
You first mentioned Kerr in post 431.
“Oh yes, it's because Jordan had Pippen, a top50 Player, Rodman, the best rebounder ever and Steve Kerr, the best 3 point shooter ever (arguably with Bird).”
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2852194&postcount=431

I first mentioned Kerr in post 432, directly quoting YOU.
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2852375&postcount=432
“You are putting in Steve Kerr? Are you serious? Steve Kerr?”

If you want to lie, at least lie on something that is not easily searchable.


Sure, great.

Now that you agreed Kobe’s 3 rings should be dismissed, there is nothing more that Kobe is better than Jordan. Thank you.


Sure, but Jordan still played against smaller shooting guards.

And I continue to ask you to back up your assertions.

Your "facts" have nothing to do with whether or not Shooting Guards were bigger or smaller. Another fail.
It does. Players were smaller in general, and Jordan played against all of them. Jordan didn’t play exclusively against SGs, and neither did Kobe.


"35 wins for the Celtics to make the Playoffs, 38 for the Heat, 43 for the Lakers, 39 for the Lakers, 39 for the Kings, 36 for the Clippers."

What does this have to do with the league being watered-down? It shows that teams with lower than .500 records can make the playoffs, how is that watered-down? Watered-down speak specifically to the dilution of talent in the league, team records show NOTHING with regards to talent level.

Exactly my point, you'll never concede any facts even when they're in front of you. When have you EVER stated that Kobe has 3 rings to Jordan's 2 without diminishing the accomplishment?

Kobe DID win the 3 rings because of Shaq. Nobody with a right mind would argue that. Shaq won 1 MVP and 3 Finals MVP in those years, he was the centre of offense on those Lakers team. That is not diminishing his accomplishments, that is stating facts. Saying Shaq was a liability in the 4th an required Kobe to carry him through is diminishing someone’s accomplishments, saying Jordan scored more because he played against smaller SG is diminishing his accomplishments.


And exactly what numbers proved that? Your 2003 list in which the Spurs won the championships or that Ginobili is more crunch than Duncan? Those numbers "proved" it? There's such thing as stupid statistics and you like to read them. Hahahhahah.

Ginobili WAS more clutch than Duncan, that is a fact. Kobe WAS more clutch than Shaq in 2003, that was a fact. We all know it, nobody would argue that. The numbers also showed that Shaq was NOT a liability in the 4th quarter.

If you didn't say it, then what are you trying to say?

I am supposed to have meant something that I haven’t said? What are you trying to say is the better question.

Whatever, dick. You started out with the rudeness, don't ask for respect.

Oh mommy, he started it first. Grab a pacifier and suck on it, kid.


Hahah, obviously you did because you asked why you weren't getting any apologies. Aww, sand in your vagina hurting again?


Smaller players does not show that Shooting Guards were smaller. You have prove nothing.
It showed players were smaller in general now than ever. Besides, Jordan didn’t play against SG, he played against other players as well.




Personal appraisal, view.

SGs are smaller back then is not a personal view nor a personal appraisal. There are cold hard facts to back them up. You just refuse to do your own work.


Yes, Kobe has more points than Jordan at age 30.

Because he played 3 more seasons than Jordan? So? He scored more points because he played more games. How does that show that Kobe is a better scorer than Jordan?


You are too stupid to disprove it. Fail.

You are not even making sense at this point. You just keep throwing out incorrect statements after incorrect statements with nothing to back up. You constantly flip-flop on your own points, you brought nothing of any quality to this thread, you have no understanding of terms you try to argue, and you straight out lie to drag on a conversation.

I will say this once more, if you want to prove Kobe played against bigger SGs, prove it. And even if you do, so? Doesn’t make Kobe’s scoring more difficult.

It is an opinion until proving one way or another.

LOL, saying Shaq is smaller than Spud Webb is idiocy, it is not an opinion.


Make up your mind, why do you keep flip-flopping? Do you even know what you are saying? You said this:
"Kobe scored more, at a higher %, when he played against the East than the West, and that is a fact. "

My mistake, I had a typo, I meant to say that Kobe scored more, at a higher %, when he played against the West than the East, and that is a fact. But then anyone with the IQ of a snail would know that I had a typo, because I had been consistently saying Kobe scored more against the West than the East, and I preceded this statement with “And for the 3rd time”. However, I am talking to you, so I am not surprised you didn’t get it.

Or an excellent example of making things up that is "my logic" or what "I said". Stick with your own words and silly logic, don't try to make it sound like it came from me.

When did I even start to make it sound like it came from you? It is a simple logic with illustrations, but you have failed to understand anything.


Your logic is flawed but your insults are entertaining

What is flawed about my logic? It irrevocably showed that your original train of thought was faulty.


Let's see, was Jordan in the league when "rookie" Duncan won his ring?

I am not sure how to answer this. On one hand, Jordan was playing when Duncan was a rookie, on the other hand, Duncan won a ring in his 2nd season. What are you trying to say? That Jordan competed directly with Duncan, and they won championships one after the other?

Yup, you sound desperate to find competition for Jordan in the 80s.

Why was it desperate? Bird competed against Jordan head to head, what is the problem with that?

Then obviously, Kobe had much more competition. Look at Kobe's list versus Jordans. Kobe even had to compete with the Great Michael Jordan.

Kobe never competed against Bird, Magic, Jabbar, Moses Malone, Dr. J, McHale. How was Kobe’s list much better?


It was also the same year, 1991, that Magic retired. It's like Kobe winning a championship over Jordan's Wizards.

Jordan finished #2 in MVP voting with the Wizards? Jordan made the finals with the Wizards? When did that happen?


Yup I'd take Kobe over Jordan at age 30.

Why?


And you also said:

http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost...&postcount=459


Wrong, READ it again. I said I would take 30 year old Kobe over 30 year old Jordan if we disregarded EVERYTHING else (accomplishments, team, future, etc). I didn't contradict myself, you just read what you wanted to read in your mind.
I said alot of stuff in that post, which are you talking about?

You really are retarded, the quote was right underneath, and I have to quote it again.


Nope.

Why not? You said you would take Kobe over Jordan by disregarding everything other than the rings, why would you not take Pippen over Kobe disregarding everything but rings?

So if Lebron is not ready to contend, why would you include him in the conversation when comparing competition?

What are you talking about? Lebron played your very own Spurs in the Finals in 2007. Look it up.

I didn’t define Lebron not ready to contend, you did:
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2862327&postcount=461

Nope, Jordan was not ready to contend in those years. Jut like Kobe wasn't, LeBron isn't, etc”
In case you weren’t able to read more than 3 lines in one reading, I have quoted what you said above, like I have done all the other times.

Stop making excuses, you keep trying to expand the number of "great players" Jordan competed with to get his rings.

What expanded? Bird has been in the conversation from the get go.

Yup, Jordan was just another bigger version of Allen Iverson back then. He was not ready to win championships.

So, still doesn’t change the fact that he had great competition in the 80s. What are you trying to say?


You call it faulty logic, I say your logic is illogical. Same thing.
Why was my logic faulty? Care to come up with examples?


Stop making stuff up and saying that I said it.

Here:
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost...&postcount=431

http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost...&postcount=445

http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost...&postcount=452

http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost...&postcount=447

Hahahahah. WHERE, did I say Jordan NEEDED Kerr? I said Jordan NEEDED Pippen. It's nowhere in all those links you posted. FAIL!

Can you read?
“Oh yes, it's because Jordan had Pippen, a top50 Player, Rodman, the best rebounder ever and Steve Kerr, the best 3 point shooter ever (arguably with Bird).”

Oh yeah, Jordan won BECAUSE of Kerr, that is MORE than needing Kerr. I am terribly sorry that I have understated the impact of Kerr in your eyes.

Because Kobe has 3 rings. And Jordan has 6 so Kobe's the closest player, Barkley's nowhere near.
Duncan has 4, is Duncan > Kobe?


The numbers didn't prove Jack. Your numbers are from 2003 (read it, it says so across the top) which was according to you "The Peak of Shaq/Kobe". In fact your own Spurs won in 2003, the Lakers were on the decline.

And yet they made the finals the next year.


Your own "numbers" have Ginobili as a better clutch player than Duncan hahahahah.

Of course he is. Anybody who watch the Spurs knows that Ginobili is a better clutch player than Duncan, what is wrong with that?


And on top of it all, you have only 1 video of Shaq's game winners in his 16 years. Great job Mr. Clutch.

You have zero videos of Kobe carrying the Lakers in the 4th quarter. Judging by your definition, you lied.


Obviously you can't comprehend stats, just like to parrot them back. Let me help you. Kobe/Shaq did not win any rings in 2003, they were NOT at their peak. Spurs won in 2003, I can find you numbers for that if you wish.

What does it matter that the Lakers didn’t win the championship in 03. It proves that Shaq was NOT a liability in the 4th, and that was the whole point of the argument.


Yet, you always seem to bring up irrelevant players, nice.

Sure you can have your point of view. My point of view is he has 3 rings to Jordan's 2.

Duncan have 4 rings and 2 MVPs, 3 Finals MVPs by 30, is he better than Jordan? Would you pick Duncan at 30 over Jordan at 30?

Sorry, not gonna timejump with you on this one. I don't know if Kobe will win 4 more or his probability to do so. You can be the prophet on this for all I care.
But you ARE able to tell that Kobe will score more than Jordan in 5 years.


Obviously, numbers like 3 vs Jordan's 2 doesn't compute in your little calculator head either.

Jordan have 6 rings, he didn’t have 2. I don’t put qualifiers around rings to make my favourite player more accomplished than he really is.

Yes, he was a dick before but he's been a model citizen since then and the Laker's have turned it around. Jordan was a ballhog early in his career and a dick to his teammates as well.

Jordan was terrible to his teammates even after he started winning rings, but he led them to titles. Kobe never did.

Ah, jumping into the future. We don't know what Kobe's final outcome will be.

How is saying Jordan not being perceived as a leader if he never won 6 rings jumping into the future? I deal with things that has already happened. Jordan already won 6 rings, Kobe won 3.

Yup, there were 3 great teams at the top, and the rest were watered down. Thanks for proving my point.

Have 3 great teams up top does not equal not having good teams underneath. You have no ability to understand any kind of scenarios.

Yup Kobe had a much better list than Jordan did, including Jordan himself.
How did you jump to that conclusion?

Yup, 2 of those seasons on the bench while Jordan was getting experience in college so he could enter the NBA ready to go. Again, your one-sidedness tries to penalize Kobe.

I stated my original analysis by removing the first 4 or 5 years of Kobe’s career to compare statistics. You insisted on added those years in with the comparisons with point totals and 3 titles by 30 years old. Choose one standard, do you want to use totals or averages?

Nope, Jordan had a watered down era to deal with. Superstars in their decline. That was why the 90's were not Magic's era or Bird's era, they were retired.

I will state this again, BIRD AND MAGIC WON MVPs AND TITLES WHILE JORDAN WAS PLAYING!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hahah, you're cute when you're angry.

Yes, it's giving him his due. His numbers surpass Kobe. But that is the fault in comparing to players of different eras.

Saying Jordan scored more than Kobe in a watered-down league is giving Kobe his due, got it.


How is that foretelling the future? More of your idiotic logic?

That was definitely trying to foretell the future. You are prediciting the future based on events that has never happened yet.


You said: "Kobe scored more, at a higher %, when he played against the East than the West"

That was a typo, and only someone as stupid as you would not understand it given my constant stance that Kobe scored more vs. the West than the East.


Ah, ok, that is your assertion? Never mind then. The East is obviously easier than the West as I have stated before.

Keep grabbing on straws, things like a typo. Kobe scored more vs. the West than the East, and the numbers have consistently proved that.


Yup.

Can’t fault me for not catching on to your sudden change of course in conversations.

Great.
I feel like we're getting to know each other better and better.

You haven't showed jack.

Like Kobe and Jordan both have 3 rings when they are 30?


But you did mix %s and totals, do you deny it?
Where?

How was Jordan’s era watered down?

You don’t even know what watered-down means. You have meant less talented, and that is certainly debatable, but it was not watered-down because there was no dilution of talent.


Look at the number of wins it takes to make the Playoffs during Jordan's watered down era. You said it yourself, you have 3 top teams. Kobe's playing in an era with a ton of top teams.

It speaks of disparity, not quality.


FG% was way up during Jordan's era in general. It wasn't just Jordan.

By how much?


Even though there are more 3 pointers shot today, it doesn't change the fact that Jordan had a crappy 3 point shooting percentage which was my point.

He had a 32.7% shooting percentage, how the hell was that crappy?


I was just following YOUR lead in telling half-sides of the story.
Once again, you brought up Kerr in the conversation, I have no idea how you would be following my lead. Again, you said Jordan won BECAUSE of Kerr.


Yes, but no MVPs. Shame on him.
Why does it matter? Pippen is better by your own definition.


Once Kerr un-retires and gets an MVP, he can join the Kobe/Jordan conversation.

It’s entirely possible in your world. Don’t count Kerr and Pippen out.


Nope, that is off-topic, hell, we might as well start bringing in the NFL, Obama and the elections if you'd like to continue going off-topic to make your case.
If it shows your own contradictions, it is staying on topic.


Hey, why penalize Kobe for being born in the off-season? Jordan's so great you have to spot him 4 more months extra into the future?

That’s why both won 3 rings when they were 30.


FYI, if Kobe wins a ring this year, he will have 4 rings at 30 as opposed to Jordan's 3. Two can play at that game.

Why are you trying to foretell the future?


Here: http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost...&postcount=374

I am seriously wondering if you can read. Where did I say "You said that ... hack-a-shaq strategy was derived to do exactly that."
You said Shaq was a liability in the 4th because of the hack a shaq, which means that teams used the strategy specifically to stop shaq. That has been proven to be untrue, because Shaq was a top 3 performer in the clutch.


I never once brought into question of the origina of "Hack-A-Shaq". Learn to read or go make up some better quotes.

The numbers didn't prove Jack. Your numbers are from 2003 (read it, it says so across the top) which was according to you "The Peak of Shaq/Kobe". In fact your own Spurs won in 2003, the Lakers were on the decline.

Your own "numbers" have Ginobili as a better clutch player than Duncan hahahahah.

And on top of it all, you have only 1 video of Shaq's game winners in his 16 years. Great job Mr. Clutch.
Already addressed.



The stats have already shown the tale, but if you so insist:



Ah great, 1 video of the great Mr. Clutch Shaq.

I give you 8 minutes of Kobe clutch and can show you a ton more. Enjoy!

Where are the videos of Kobe carrying the Lakers in the 4th? I don’t see those. Do you want Horry making clutch shots? Does that prove Horry carried his teams in the 4th?



Which one was #1 and which one was #2? Which one sat on the bench in the 4th quarter?

Shaq sat on the bench in all the 4th quarters? What do you mean? Why was he able to finish off the Blazers when he was sitting on the bench?


Nope, just admitting when I was wrong. Something you have no grasp of.
So you WERE wrong on the scoring part. Now that you have finally admitted to it. Jordan still had a sizeable advantage on Kobe even when their scoring averages were normalized against team scoring averages.


How is that NOT watered down? You have a couple of teams at the top wherease now, there are a grip of top teams. This is a much tougher league to play in now.

That is called disparity. Watered down is dilution of talent. It has NOTHING to do with disparity.

So you are saying increasing # of teams has nothing and dissemination of talent has nothing to do with disparity?

Increasing # of teams does dilute talent, and thus a watered-down league. And through that definition, Kobe played in a watered-down league. However, Kobe era also brought in foreign talent, which increased the talent pool, thus offset the dilution. In other words, the talent in Jordan’s era and Kobe’s era is comparable.


Good for them. How many championships did they win in the 80s?
I am sure you can check that out yourself.

Hey, you brought it up, not I. Learn your lesson and don't say I say things when I didn't. The dillution of talent can occur through expansion OR lack of talent.

Since when did Jordan’s era lack talent?


Could you please learn to read?

"Originally Posted by Allanon

1) More points were indeed scored in the 90's"

This was what I was referring to:
“Nope, there was less scoring back then. Not only were 3 point shots down, regular 2 point field goals were down too.”





You need to check your eyes. All of your "quotes" of me were wrong...every single one. FAIL.
I cut and pasted them, care to be more specific?


Nope, trying to tell me what I CAN and CANNOT say is out of your jurisdiction sir. I'll say whatever I want to say and whenever I want to say it. You might think you're right but you're wrong if you think you can tell me what not to say.
Why are you trying to tell me that I can’t tell you what to say? Why are you trying to suppress me man? I was merely using your own standards on you. I was merely saying that you can’t go on and predict the future, like you said people can’t be

Oh no, you can jump into the future if you like, I'll just jump into the future with you to even things up.
Kobe has 3 rings, Jordan had 2 at the same age. No spinning required.

Horry has 2 rings by the time he was 25, Jordan has zero. No spinning required.

I also noticed you dropped the expansion bit from the water-down arguments area. Why is that? Is it because you mentioned expansion afterall?

[Allanon]

You have stated that Kobe led the Lakers in the 4th quarter while Shaq was a liability witnessed by his clutch shots.

Wrong again. I said Shaq would not have won rings without Kobe taking over in the 4th. Your stats are from 2003

"If you want more proof: http://82games.com/comm3.htm
In 02-03 season, at the peak of Shaq-Kobe dominance, Kobe was #2 in points scored in the clutch, O’Neal was #3. "

Spurs in 2003, Baby!



That has been proven false with statistics.

Again, these are made up "statistics". Your statistics are from 2003, a year in which Kobe and Shaq did not win rings AND Manu was more "clutch" than Duncan.

Let's post your laughable Statistics just to see who the "Clutch" NBA players were that year, hahahah. Ray Allen, Jalen Rose, Starbury, Paul Pierce and Mr Clutch Nowitzki ahead of Duncan with Earl "Iceman" Boykins rounding out the list of top "Clutch" NBA players? Hahahah, great stats Hollinger.


McGrady
Bryant
O'Neal
Billups
Allen
Rose
Marbury
Pierce
Nowitzki
Duncan
Iverson
Francis
Arenas
Houston
Webber
Garnett
Jordan
Allen
Malone
Mashburn
Boykins




Your logic is faulty because you are comparing Kobe's West to Kobe's East, and this does not include anything from Jordan's East. Again, A>B != A>D, it has no relevance. I will admit that the disparity was larger in Jordan's East, and the proof is in the records, but you will be comparing apples and oranges by jumping to conclusions.

Hey, you compare Jordan's scoring to Kobe's scoring in this era. Why can't I do the same and compare Jordan's watered down league to today's 50 win West Playoff teams? Apples to Oranges is all you get when comparing two players from two eras. You've been obliging so far, let's not wuss out now.



Even though you are piss poor in interpreting illustrations, I will have to draw one to talk down to the level of your abilities. In an exaggerated scenario. There are two leagues, one with a bunch of high school kids, and one in the professional leagues, having the same number of teams and same playoff seeding.

Nope, you're just piss poor at coming up with arguments so you have to make up shit about what "I'm thinking". You can add "Mind-Reader" to your resume as well now :)



In the professional leagues, the disparity is low, thus it requires a 50% winning percentage to get into the playoffs. In the high school league, the disparity is high, with top teams dominating bad teams, and creating a top heavy standings. For the playoffs, a high school team needs 60% winning percentage to get into the playoffs. Are the teams in the high school league better than those in the professional leagues? In fact, we are seeing this in NCAA vs. NBA, or actual high school leagues vs. NBA.

Why are you comparing the NBA to the NCAA? What does the NCAA have anything to do with the NBA except provide it with draft prospects?

Fact remains that it takes 50 wins to make the Western Playoffs now and it it was much less in Jordan's watered down era.



I am not saying Kobe's West is as bad as a high school league, what I am saying is that the records to two entirely different leagues cannot be compared to each other to draw any conclusions of the quality of teams.

Two entirely different leagues? I'm talking about the NBA. You are happy to quote stats with Jordan being better than Kobe's (in "different leagues"). Then when it doesn't suit your argument you say "the records to two entirely different leagues cannot be compared to each other to draw any conclusions".

Hahah, talk about Mr. Flip Flop!



The Lakers (a 57-win team), beat the Nuggets (a 50-win team) in 4 games. New Orleans beat the Mavs in 5, the Spurs beat the Suns in 5, the only semi-competitive 1st round series in the West was the Jazz over the Rockets.
It is another indication that regular season win totals does not speak to the quality of the teams.

Yes, that has been consistent throughout the NBA. 1st seeds are usually better than 8 seeds. No surprise there.

Now look at your second rounds and ALL ACROSS THE BOARD it was hot and heavy. There's your quality there.



In fact, I can make the argument that the West was terrible last year because the top seed only won 57 games. In comparison, the top team in Jordan’s East won 67 games in 1992. The argument cuts both ways.

Nope, that only shows how easy it was to win. The dominant team had 67 wins to make the playoffs. While even the crappy 30 something win teams still made the playoffs.



Could you PLEASE do your own searches? It is getting tiresome. You are illogical and lazy. I at first thought you are just lazy and don’t do the required work, now I am believing that you are faking it to drag this conversation as long as possible.
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2840687&postcount=157

It’s as obvious as it could be, Kobe was better than Jordan in 3PA and 3PM, what else do you need?

Can you even read? 3PA (Attempts) and 3PM (Made). How does that equate to "Kobe is a better 3 point shooter"? You never said it, stop flip-flopping.

You said it yourself that they're equal in your same quote"
"it seems like both are about equal during their prime years, and Jordan improved his 3P% dramatically as his career progresses, and had the highest 3P% in the years where he made most of his attempts (something about shot selection).

It comes as no surprise that Kobe made more 3pters as this is an era when 3pt shooting has matured into a serious weapon, while in the 80's, and even the early 90's, the shot was nothing more than a gimmick and an option for a team to come back in a high-risk/high-reward maner.[/quote]

WHERE have you stated that Kobe was a better 3 point shooter than Jordan? You're saying they were equal in their prime and that "it's no surprise" that Kobe shot more and made more. That does not say he's "better".



So answer this, you are willing to take Kobe over Jordan at age 30 because Kobe is better/worse than Jordan.
If you answer better, then you have contradicted yourself when you said Jordan is better than Kobe, if you said worse, it just shows that you are illogical. Pick one.

I'm going to take a page from your book of Dodging and "answer" this one:

"Uh I don't know, I'm not an NBA owner so I can't answer that".



And I saw how Kobe’s clutchness won him a ring in 2003 as well. Funny only clutch players can win rings, I guess Kobe was only clutch in 3 years of his career.

Look at your laughable list with Dirk Nowitzki more clutch than Duncan and you can throw those "statistics" into the trash Hollinger.



Your argument all along that Kobe is the man because he is clutch is that Kobe has a ton of videos. So do you have any Kobe performance throughout the whole 4th quarter? If not, Kobe is not clutch in the whole 4th by your own definition.
Besides, I am not arguing Kobe is not clutch, I am arguing Shaq is not a liability, he was the 3rd clutchest player based on statistics in 02-03. That is hardly a liability.

Sorry, don't avoid the subject. We've seen tons of Kobe footage as oppposed to "Mr Clutch" Shaq's 1 "game-winner". Nice try my friend.




I am sure you would take Pippen over Shaq. Afterall, you would pick Kobe over Jordan.

Who I pick is my business and none of yours, please stop trying to make picks for me, you have your own problems :)



Duncan got two MVPs and 4 rings by the time he was 30, but I wouldn’t pick him over Jordan. I wouldn’t even pick him over Jabbar, or Magic. So what if Kobe won 3 rings on his 30th birthday? So? He had a birthday that fell on a summer instead of the middle of an NBA season, that is why you picked him over Jordan? This is about as retarded as it could sound.

I'd pick Duncan over Jordan, Magic and Kareem at age 30 and not knowing what either would become. The only thing retarded is your sense of entitlement to the only right opinion in the world.



Because he won 1 more ring at the age of 30? What kind of idiotic response is that? It makes no logical sense. Robert Horry won two rings by the time he was 24. Would you take him over Jordan?

Wake me up when Horry gets an MVP.



Oh wait, you had to throw in a random 1 MVP as the qualifier. Because you have to find illogical cut-off points that speak directly to Kobe’s accomplishments.

We are directly speaking to Kobe and MJ's accomplishments are we not? What's so hard about finding another player like Kobe (in the NBA's 50 years) that you have to diminish his achievements to find a match?



Do you even know what flip-flop means?

Yup, Mr. Flip-Flop says Hi up above.



Saying I don’t know to questions I don’t know is not flip-flopping, it’s not knowing

It's avoiding the question, I took a page from your book when I "answered" you above. I felt dirty but liberated at the same time :)



What about the East and the West? I don’t agree with you is not flip-flopping. I have been constantly saying that the Jordan’s East and Kobe’s West could not be compared based on regular season records alone. You can go into specifics and draw subjective arguments around quality of play and your own observations, though.

I said nothing about disagreeing with me, you disagreed with yourself.

Tell me, was Kobe's performance better against the East or the West? Answer either way and I'll quote you your two opinion "flip flop". Just answer it.



Then why are you in a forum? I have disagreed and said so profoundly throughout this conversation. I am disagreeing with your application of rules where you question other people’s methods in “predicting” the future.
Your whole premise throughout this thread is that people shouldn’t count Kobe out because he hasn’t finished his career, discounting methods that potentially goes into the future (however unlikely it is), and yet you say that Kobe could be greater than Jordan because he has more rings than Jordan at the same age, and project that this is possible that he would end up with more rings because of that. You also noted that Kobe WILL score more points than Jordan in 5 years. You are not applying your own logic and arguments to those who disagree with you. That is what flip-flopping is.

Hey, you're free to flip flop all you want, I'll point it out to you when you do. You obviously flip-flopped ion the Kobe's East/West performance.



What free pass? I am still struggling to understand what kind of free pass you are talking about. Jordan was better than Kobe in every single statistical category by comparing their 9 prime years except 3PA and 3PM.

You don't understand because you refuse too, it's in front of your face.



You yourself said “Learn some English, that makes no sense:” right after I said “But I did! See below:”. You comprehension ability is worse than I thought.

"But I did! See below" makes no sense. And while you're trying to point out my comprehension ability, it's not "You comprehension", it's "Your comprehension".



I applied it to a whole season of 82 games.

Liar:


Jordan averaged 1.7 3pter a game, and if he shot 34% instead of 30% from 3, he will score an amazing 0.20 points a game. That really is a “vast margin” when I compared the differences, huh?

Right there, applied it to "a game". Statistics don't work like that Hollinger.


Are you a math major? Have you ever taken statistics? Do you know how 3 pters work?

Are you a math major? Have you ever taken statistics? Do you know how 3 pters work?



If you do not understand, just say you do not understand. You understanding statistics doesn’t make you stupid, and it is perfectly fine that you don’t understand it. I won’t hold your lack of knowledge towards statistics against you, you have given me enough ammo with your stacks of idiotic, illogical responses.

Oh dont hold back, keep 'em insults coming to cover up your lack of statistical knowledge.



Why do they have to show 02 stats in particular? Shaq and Kobe duo had similar output from 01 to 03, and Shaq had similar shooting %s. What does them losing in 03 have to do with Shaq being not clutch? Your stance was that Shaq was a liability in the 4th because of his awful FT%. His 03 FT numbers were as bad as ever, and yet it was shown that he was clutch. What is not proven?

I said Shaq needed Kobe to win his RINGS. Lakers did not win any rings in 2003, despite your saying Kobe/Shaq were at their Peak in 2003 even though your own Spurs won in 2003. Please learn to read and not throw out irrelevant stats. BTW, your junk "stats" say Dirk is more clutch than Duncan, nice!



You sure are putting a lot of weight at me saying 03 was the peak of Shaq and Kobe’s dominance. However, your pea-sized brain just let the main point fly over your head like so many other points. The point is, Shaq was clutch, and the number proved it.

Hahah, more insults when you're wrong instead of admitting you're wrong. Your "proof" also said Earl Boykins was a top NBA clutch performer and Dirk Nowitzki was more "clutch" than Duncan. Hahahah.

Even Diehard Mav fans would say you're crazy.

A parrot can read and repeat stats, but it takes a brain to comprehend them.



You also stated that Kobe carried Shaq in the 4th quarters, and yet you showed him shooting last second shots. By your definition, you haven’t proven that Kobe carried Shaq in the 4th quarter because at least some of those shots were not in championship winning years (the first one comes to mind), and that they didn’t show the rest of the 4th quarter.

Ho hum, yeah, thanks providing your 1 video of "Mr Clutch" Shaq in 16 years of playing.



although I question whether you have the ability to understand the study at all.

Getting angry? Hahah.



Finally, yeah, I made a mistake in saying that it was the peak of Shaq/Kobe dominance, so? Does it change the fact that Shaq was clutch? But if I was you, I would say that it was an opinion, and that dominance does not need to end in titles, but I am not a weasel like you.

It has no relevance to our discussion. I said Shaq needed Kobe to win his Rings. True to form, you quote something irrelevant.



Are you retarded? I said exactly what I meant. Ginobili had a higher clutch factor than Duncan last year, and yet Duncan is the man, showing that even though Kobe was #2 and O’neal was #3 in clutch factor, it does not mean that Kobe is the man. Do you get it? I have seen donkeys that are smarter than you.

Sure, I'll play your silly game. Let's see who your fellow Spur fans think is more clutch: Manu, Timmy or Dirk
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=108899



How so? When were those shots taken? How would a shot taken with Kurt Rambis behing the head coach allow the Lakers to win a championship? Care to explain?

Hmm, was that the only thing you can pick out of that long ass video? If yes, I can live with that 1 error in the championship run as opposed to your "Shaq's Greatest Clutch Shots" video :D



Of course, there were two shots just in that one video, and then another in another video, but you just won’t bother watching it. The argument isn’t that Shaq is the clutchest player ever, it was that Shaq wasn’t a liability in the 4th. You asserted that Shaq was a liability, and it has been proven to be wrong, and sadly, the only thing you can come up with the counter is that I got the years mixed up, which has nothing to do with the point anyways.

Only you say Shaq is NOT a liability in the 4th quarter. But you're free to have your delusional opinions.



So? Kobe shot an air ball against Utah in the playoffs when he was young. How does a bunch of videos show Kobe was the main guy on those Laker teams?

Yup, it sure does show Kobe was young when he joined the league. Those videos show KOBE with the game winners, not Shaq. I never said Kobe was the main guy, I said Shaq needed Kobe to win games in the 4th quarter. When did I EVER say Kobe was "The Main Man". Again, you're making shit up.
Quotes, links?



Not as useless as you who claimed teams scored more in Kobe’s era, then when your ignorance was shown, use the direct opposite to explain Kobe’s lower scoring average.

Hey I can admit when I'm wrong, unlike you who is "infallible". But in my own correction, I found out I was wrong in a different area. But as usual, you won't concede that either. Not surprised.



Just those two years? Not in 01? Not in 03? If it was used in 03, how did Shaq became one of the clutchest players in the league that year?

With silly statistics? Dirk is NOT more clutch than Duncan. Shaq is NOT more clutch than Duncan. But your list says he is.



But Kobe WILL score more than Jordan, so that is an absolute, right? And why would you take Kobe at 30 over Jordan at 30? Because Kobe at 30 is already greater than Jordan at 30?

Nope, I said it was a matter of preference.



While I was searching some of your old quotes, I found these gems:
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2835946&postcount=12
“Kobe won't get as many MVPs as Jordan did. But I think he has a chance at beating him in rings.” – Why are you predicting the future? Why are you saying Kobe WON’T get as many MVPs as Jordan? How would you know?

Was I saying it to you? Why can't I say it? This was said to a different poster and we were openly talking about the future.

Trying to censor me again? :)



http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2836122&postcount=19
“For Kobe haters, the ultimate nightmare would be if he got 3-4 more rings because he would probably take his place next to his Airness.” – So back to the basics, Kobe would NOT be next to Jordan even if he won 3 to 4 more rings. He had worse stats, lost twice in the finals in embarrassing fashion, failed to make the playoffs, have worse stats, have less Finals MVPs, and generally less accomplishments.

Hahah, you are so deperate you have to go to my conversations with other people? Hey that's your opinion, enjoy it. :D



So why are you trying to predict the future? Is there a possibility that Kobe will not score more than Jordan in 5 years?

Sure, I try to predict stuff all the time, I just don't try to use it as proof for or against as you have. Those were not conversations between you and i, our talks are much more entertaining :toast



Where have I said that? I disagreed with your premise that Shaq was a liability in the 4th and needed Kobe to carry him through. It has been proven with numbers and videos.

Yawn, Kobe did not win a ring with Shaq in 2003, they were not in their Peak, your "proof" in 2003 is irrelevant to my statement of "Shaq needed Kobe to win rings".



But why? You didn’t have Kobe 4th quarters in videos do you? You only showed clutch shots?

Yes, Kobe shot the game winners for Shaq. Shaq needed Kobe to win those games.



Why would those Horry clutch shot videos not translate into Horry going nuts in the 4th? In fact, he did go nuts in the 05 finals 4th quarter and overtime.

When Horry comes up with an MVP, we can talk Horry.



Why was Shaq a liability? He had great numbers in the final minutes of a close game, he played great!

Hack-a-Shaq. Shaq's still the same liability he was 10 years ago.



You first mentioned Kerr in post 431.
“Oh yes, it's because Jordan had Pippen, a top50 Player, Rodman, the best rebounder ever and Steve Kerr, the best 3 point shooter ever (arguably with Bird).”
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2852194&postcount=431

I first mentioned Kerr in post 432, directly quoting YOU.
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2852375&postcount=432
“You are putting in Steve Kerr? Are you serious? Steve Kerr?”

If you want to lie, at least lie on something that is not easily searchable.

No lieing again, you can't read. You said I said "Jordan NEEDED" Kerr. I said Jordan HAD Kerr. I never said Jordan NEEDED Kerr. I did say Jordan NEEDED Pippen, you can quote me on that.

So get your quotes right and stop making shit up.



Now that you agreed Kobe’s 3 rings should be dismissed, there is nothing more that Kobe is better than Jordan. Thank you.

Nope, I don't agree. Kobe's 3 rings are a part of his legacy. As were Jordan's 2 rings at that age.



And I continue to ask you to back up your assertions.

Hey if you want to disagree, then disagree. I don't have to prove my opinions. You have done nothing to prove my opinions wrong.



It does.

Really? Then what was the average size (feet/inches) of Shooting Guards? If you can answer that, then it does. Otherwise, it's more of your garbage stats.



What does this have to do with the league being watered-down? It shows that teams with lower than .500 records can make the playoffs, how is that watered-down? Watered-down speak specifically to the dilution of talent in the league, team records show NOTHING with regards to talent level.

Because there's no challenge.



Kobe DID win the 3 rings because of Shaq. Nobody with a right mind would argue that.

Shaq DID win 3 rings because of Kobe. Nobody with a right mind would argue that.



Ginobili WAS more clutch than Duncan, that is a fact. Kobe WAS more clutch than Shaq in 2003, that was a fact. We all know it, nobody would argue that. The numbers also showed that Shaq was NOT a liability in the 4th quarter.

Ho hum. You said "Shaq and Kobe were at their peak in 2003". In 2003, the Spurs won not Shaq, so you're obviously quite wrong.

And then you compound the idiocy by putting up a list that has Dirk Nowitzki as being more "Clutch" than Tim Duncan. Dirk is known for ANYTHING But being clutch.



Oh mommy, he started it first. Grab a pacifier and suck on it, kid.

Getting angry? :lol



It showed players were smaller in general now than ever. Besides, Jordan didn’t play against SG, he played against other players as well.

Really? Then what was the average size (feet/inches) of Shooting Guards? If you can answer that, then it does. Otherwise, it's more of your garbage stats.



SGs are smaller back then is not a personal view nor a personal appraisal. There are cold hard facts to back them up. You just refuse to do your own work.

Hey, it's my own personal view and appraisal, exactly what it says in your Webster's dictionary link you posted. Look it up.



Because he played 3 more seasons than Jordan? So? He scored more points because he played more games. How does that show that Kobe is a better scorer than Jordan?

Because he has done more scoring at the same age.



You are not even making sense at this point. You just keep throwing out incorrect statements after incorrect statements with nothing to back up. You constantly flip-flop on your own points, you brought nothing of any quality to this thread, you have no understanding of terms you try to argue, and you straight out lie to drag on a conversation.

Hahah, you lie, you quote me and even those quotes are wrong. You say I said things I never have. But it's all good, I won't hold it against you, let's continue.



I will say this once more, if you want to prove Kobe played against bigger SGs, prove it. And even if you do, so? Doesn’t make Kobe’s scoring more difficult.

No proof needed, it was my personal view and appraisal as per your "Webster's Dictionary" link. You have done nothing to prove me wrong.



LOL, saying Shaq is smaller than Spud Webb is idiocy, it is not an opinion.

I won't argue your idiocy LOL!



My mistake, I had a typo, I meant to say that Kobe scored more, at a higher %, when he played against the West than the East, and that is a fact. But then anyone with the IQ of a snail would know that I had a typo, because I had been consistently saying Kobe scored more against the West than the East, and I preceded this statement with “And for the 3rd time”. However, I am talking to you, so I am not surprised you didn’t get it.

Sure, when I prove your "flip-flopping" which you say you DON'T do, you say it's a "typo". Not surprised, nice save.



When did I even start to make it sound like it came from you? It is a simple logic with illustrations, but you have failed to understand anything.

You prefaced it "With YOUR logic". Don't try to back out and lie now. That was never my logic, you made that shit up and tried to pin it on me.



What is flawed about my logic? It irrevocably showed that your original train of thought was faulty.

Hahah, more insults while the infallible "Ambchang" is always right even though proven wrong several times, but oh no, it's a "typo". Hahahah.



I am not sure how to answer this.

Finally, some truth out of you.



Why was it desperate? Bird competed against Jordan head to head, what is the problem with that?

By the time Jordan was ready to take on Bird for a championship, Bird was a shell of Larry Legend.



Kobe never competed against Bird, Magic, Jabbar, Moses Malone, Dr. J, McHale. How was Kobe’s list much better?

Kobe had to compete against 1) The top shooting Guard of all time 2) The Greatest Power Foward of All time 3) And possibly the greatest Small Forward of All Time.



Jordan finished #2 in MVP voting with the Wizards? Jordan made the finals with the Wizards? When did that happen?

Jordan played against Kobe.



Why?

Why not?



You really are retarded, the quote was right underneath, and I have to quote it again.

Getting angry?



Why not? You said you would take Kobe over Jordan by disregarding everything other than the rings, why would you not take Pippen over Kobe disregarding everything but rings?

Sure if we are disregarding "EVERYTHING but RINGS", I'd take Pippen over Kobe. Hell, give me Robert Horry in this "Everything but RINGS" conversation of yours. :)



What expanded? Bird has been in the conversation from the get go.

Nope, our original conversation had only the 90's draft years. You expanded it by going into the 80's. Read your own words, you added the 80's after you lost the original argument.



So, still doesn’t change the fact that he had great competition in the 80s. What are you trying to say?

I'm trying to say you need to add more things to Jordan's resume to make him sound more impressive. Sad that you have to stoop to that level.



Why was my logic faulty? Care to come up with examples?

You said "Shaq and Kobe were in their peak in 2003". I said "Shaq Needed Kobe to Win Rings". Your logic came up with a list in 2003, year in which the Lakers did NOT win a RING and in their decline rather than their "Peak".

That's your own faulty logic, not mines.



“Oh yes, it's because Jordan had Pippen, a top50 Player, Rodman, the best rebounder ever and Steve Kerr, the best 3 point shooter ever (arguably with Bird).”

Oh yeah, Jordan won BECAUSE of Kerr, that is MORE than needing Kerr. I am terribly sorry that I have understated the impact of Kerr in your eyes.

Can you read? Stop trying to change my quotes, is that the only kind of logic you have, to change quotes? I never said "Jordan won BECAUSE of Kerr",

I said "Oh yes, it's because Jordan had Pippen, a top50 Player, Rodman, the best rebounder ever and Steve Kerr, the best 3 point shooter ever (arguably with Bird)."




Duncan has 4, is Duncan > Kobe?

Hands Down YES at this point.



And yet they made the finals the next year.
And yet, they didn't win a ring. I said "Shaq needed Kobe to win rings". Neither happened in 2003 or 2004. More of your "logic"?



Of course he is. Anybody who watch the Spurs knows that Ginobili is a better clutch player than Duncan, what is wrong with that?

Perhaps Manu is, but Dirk too (it's on your list)



You have zero videos of Kobe carrying the Lakers in the 4th quarter. Judging by your definition, you lied.

I have plenty of videos of Kobe winning games, you have 1 video of Shaq winning a game.



What does it matter that the Lakers didn’t win the championship in 03. It proves that Shaq was NOT a liability in the 4th, and that was the whole point of the argument.

I said "Shaq needed Kobe to win Rings". Lakers did not win any rings in 2003, your Spurs did, look it up.



Duncan have 4 rings and 2 MVPs, 3 Finals MVPs by 30, is he better than Jordan? Would you pick Duncan at 30 over Jordan at 30?

Hell Yeah!



But you ARE able to tell that Kobe will score more than Jordan in 5 years.

Yup, I said so, feel free to disagree if you like or ignore it if you wish.



Jordan have 6 rings, he didn’t have 2. I don’t put qualifiers around rings to make my favourite player more accomplished than he really is.

Sure, let's compare end of career Jordan to Kobe at age 30, really fair. Unlike you I am fair and I'll take them at the same age.



Jordan was terrible to his teammates even after he started winning rings, but he led them to titles. Kobe never did.

Yet.



How is saying Jordan not being perceived as a leader if he never won 6 rings jumping into the future? I deal with things that has already happened. Jordan already won 6 rings, Kobe won 3.

Yup, Kobe has several more years in the FUTURE before we figure out how many he will have.



Have 3 great teams up top does not equal not having good teams underneath. You have no ability to understand any kind of scenarios.

Yes, that is why around 30 wins sometimes got you into the Playoffs in Jordan's era, gotcha.



How did you jump to that conclusion?

I just did.



I stated my original analysis by removing the first 4 or 5 years of Kobe’s career to compare statistics. You insisted on added those years in with the comparisons with point totals and 3 titles by 30 years old. Choose one standard, do you want to use totals or averages?

Why remove any years? Just take them at the same age which I did.



I will state this again, BIRD AND MAGIC WON MVPs AND TITLES WHILE JORDAN WAS PLAYING!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yes, Jordan was an oversized Allen Iverson back then. So?



Saying Jordan scored more than Kobe in a watered-down league is giving Kobe his due, got it.

You're welcome.



That was definitely trying to foretell the future. You are prediciting the future based on events that has never happened yet.

Feel free to disagree, I encourage it, but don't try to stop me from saying it.



That was a typo, and only someone as stupid as you would not understand it given my constant stance that Kobe scored more vs. the West than the East.

So when you're proven wrong, more insults and a "typo", gotcha, my frined :)



Keep grabbing on straws, things like a typo. Kobe scored more vs. the West than the East, and the numbers have consistently proved that.]

So when you're proven wrong, it's a "typo", great logic!



Can’t fault me for not catching on to your sudden change of course in conversations.

So when you're proven wrong, it's my fault, gotcha!



Like Kobe and Jordan both have 3 rings when they are 30?

Or like Kobe might have 4 rings to Jordan's 3 when they are 30?



You don’t even know what watered-down means. You have meant less talented, and that is certainly debatable, but it was not watered-down because there was no dilution of talent.

So you're saying that dilution cannot happen due to lack of talent. Look at your own definition of "watered down" before you answer this.



It speaks of disparity, not quality.

So lack of talent does not speak of quality, gotcha.



By how much?

Enough.



He had a 32.7% shooting percentage, how the hell was that crappy?

32.7% at what age? 30?



Once again, you brought up Kerr in the conversation, I have no idea how you would be following my lead. Again, you said Jordan won BECAUSE of Kerr.[q/uote]

Nope, I never said "Jordan NEEDED Kerr", I addressed your twisting of my quotes above, nice try buddy.

[quote]
Why does it matter? Pippen is better by your own definition.

Pippen has no MVP, talk to me when he gets one.



It’s entirely possible in your world. Don’t count Kerr and Pippen out.

I live in an MVP only world, Kerr and Pippen can stay out.



If it shows your own contradictions, it is staying on topic.

Nope. It shows that you like to go off topic.



That’s why both won 3 rings when they were 30.

That's why Kobe might have 4 rings when he's 30 compared to Jordan's 3.



Why are you trying to foretell the future?

It's not December yet, you're going into the future then so can I.



You said Shaq was a liability in the 4th because of the hack a shaq, which means that teams used the strategy specifically to stop shaq. That has been proven to be untrue, because Shaq was a top 3 performer in the clutch.

I said "Shaq needed Kobe to win RINGS". Shaq and Kobe never won rings in the 2003. Already addressed.



Where are the videos of Kobe carrying the Lakers in the 4th? I don’t see those. Do you want Horry making clutch shots? Does that prove Horry carried his teams in the 4th?

Kobe made Game-winners. Horry can join the conversation when he gets an MVP.



Shaq sat on the bench in all the 4th quarters? What do you mean? Why was he able to finish off the Blazers when he was sitting on the bench?

1 video, great, where are the other videos in Mr. Clutch's 16 year career. Weak.



So you WERE wrong on the scoring part. Now that you have finally admitted to it. Jordan still had a sizeable advantage on Kobe even when their scoring averages were normalized against team scoring averages.

Yes I was wrong about the scoring and admitted it. But your stats also showed that it was easier to score in Jordan's watered down era.



That is called disparity. Watered down is dilution of talent. It has NOTHING to do with disparity.

So disparity cannot be a result of dilution of talent?



Increasing # of teams does dilute talent, and thus a watered-down league. And through that definition, Kobe played in a watered-down league. However, Kobe era also brought in foreign talent, which increased the talent pool, thus offset the dilution. In other words, the talent in Jordan’s era and Kobe’s era is comparable.

Yup, the foreign talent has indeed increased the competitiveness in Kobe's era.



I am sure you can check that out yourself.

Thank you for not disagreeing.



Since when did Jordan’s era lack talent?

You said it yourself, there were only 3 top teams. Kobe's era has around 10 top teams regularly.



This was what I was referring to:
“Nope, there was less scoring back then. Not only were 3 point shots down, regular 2 point field goals were down too.”

Yes, I admitted that was wrong. Too bad you can't admit when you're wrong.



I cut and pasted them, care to be more specific?

Yes, they're ALL of your quotes were wrong that you posted.



Why are you trying to tell me that I can’t tell you what to say? Why are you trying to suppress me man? I was merely using your own standards on you. I was merely saying that you can’t go on and predict the future, like you said people can’t be

Nope, you can't tell me what I can't say or can say. I say what I want.



Horry has 2 rings by the time he was 25, Jordan has zero. No spinning required.

I believe Jordan had an MVP at 25. Let me know when Horry gets an MVP.



I also noticed you dropped the expansion bit from the water-down arguments area. Why is that? Is it because you mentioned expansion afterall?

Nope, I didn't start with the expansion bit, you did. You're free to try to disprove me on that.

[kobe_bryant]

that a boy allanon

[ambchang]

Wrong again. I said Shaq would not have won rings without Kobe taking over in the 4th. Your stats are from 2003

You said Shaq was a liability in the 4th and that Kobe carried that team during which time. You have provided no evidence of either.
Shaq was NOT a liability in the 4th, and it has been shown.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/45022-first-and-second-team-all-clutch-an-nba-analysis

In the 2001 finals:
Shaq played 52 minutes in Game 1
In game 2, he made the “Biggest Play of the game” according to Larry Brown (http://www.nba.com/finals2001/recap_phi_lal_010608.html?nav=SiteFragment)
“Biggest play of the game was when he (Shaq) kicked it out to Fisher," Philadelphia coach Larry Brown said. "He's a tremendous passer. He made some unbelievable plays."
In game 3, O’Neal got into foul trouble.
In game 4, O’Neal scored 34 points in 42 minutes
In game 5, O’Neal scored 29 points on 45 minutes.

Do those look like he was a liability? Does a liability in the 4th make the biggest play of the game with 2 minutes left in the game?


Spurs in 2003, Baby!

So far in the thread, you found me with one typo and one mixup in the years, and you sure are riding those high. Too bad you ignore to address the fact that:
1) You based your whole argument on not being a prophet and tell future events, while you do it continuously.
2) You first used less scoring in the 90’s as your base of argument as to why Kobe shot better, then you used more scoring the 90s as your base of argument as to why Jordan scored more.
3) You said the league was watered-down, and yet showed nothing to back that up.
4) You said Jordan played against smaller SGs, yet had nothing to back that up.
5) You can’t understand the difference between an opinion, a fact and an assertion.
6) You can’t understand the difference between clutch and lead man of the team.
7) Using totals in scoring and titles to compare Kobe and Jordan, while putting qualifiers around averages.
8) You said you would pick Kobe over Jordan at age 30, while saying that Jordan was better than Kobe is.

And these are just off the top of my head.


Again, these are made up "statistics". Your statistics are from 2003, a year in which Kobe and Shaq did not win rings AND Manu was more "clutch" than Duncan.

Of course Manu is more clutch than Duncan. It’s pretty well known. You didn’t know?


Let's post your laughable Statistics just to see who the "Clutch" NBA players were that year, hahahah. Ray Allen, Jalen Rose, Starbury, Paul Pierce and Mr Clutch Nowitzki ahead of Duncan with Earl "Iceman" Boykins rounding out the list of top "Clutch" NBA players? Hahahah, great stats Hollinger.


McGrady
Bryant
O'Neal
Billups
Allen
Rose
Marbury
Pierce
Nowitzki
Duncan
Iverson
Francis
Arenas
Houston
Webber
Garnett
Jordan
Allen
Malone
Mashburn
Boykins


What is wrong with this list? Do you have other ways to disprove this other than your “fake” statistics routine? Do you have any real statistics that doesn’t just have “because I said so" as a backup?


Hey, you compare Jordan's scoring to Kobe's scoring in this era. Why can't I do the same and compare Jordan's watered down league to today's 50 win West Playoff teams? Apples to Oranges is all you get when comparing two players from two eras. You've been obliging so far, let's not wuss out now.

But of course I normalized the scoring based on average scoring vs. individual scoring in their respective eras. My comparison is A:B compared to C:D. Your comparison is A>B therefore A>D. One uses ratios, the other used nothing. But I am glad you finally got it through your thick skull that you ARE indeed comparing Apples and Oranges.


Nope, you're just piss poor at coming up with arguments so you have to make up shit about what "I'm thinking". You can add "Mind-Reader" to your resume as well now :)
Just because you never think doesn’t mean that I can’t. And yes, you have demonstrated that you have no grasp of illustrations at all.


Why are you comparing the NBA to the NCAA? What does the NCAA have anything to do with the NBA except provide it with draft prospects?

Another demonstration of your piss poor ability to draw conclusions. So why are you comparing the 90s to the 00s? What the records in the 00’s have to do with the quality of teams in the 90s?


Fact remains that it takes 50 wins to make the Western Playoffs now and it it was much less in Jordan's watered down era.

Fact remains that it takes 67 wins to secure the best record in the East in the 90s, and that it was much less in Kobe’s era.

And pray tell, why is it watered down? You have nothing but your own words.


Two entirely different leagues? I'm talking about the NBA. You are happy to quote stats with Jordan being better than Kobe's (in "different leagues"). Then when it doesn't suit your argument you say "the records to two entirely different leagues cannot be compared to each other to draw any conclusions".

These are two entirely different leagues, just like the 90s were different than the 80s, the 80s from the 70s and the 70s from the 60s.


Hahah, talk about Mr. Flip Flop!

What have I flip-flopped on?


Yes, that has been consistent throughout the NBA. 1st seeds are usually better than 8 seeds. No surprise there.

But it does show a huge difference in quality of teams despite such a narrow band of difference in wins.


Now look at your second rounds and ALL ACROSS THE BOARD it was hot and heavy. There's your quality there.

That was the same in the 90s as well. Both Eastern conference series went 7 games.


Nope, that only shows how easy it was to win. The dominant team had 67 wins to make the playoffs. While even the crappy 30 something win teams still made the playoffs.

It shows disparity. I am not sure if you really are that stupid, or you are pretending to be just so that you can make this argument as long and pointless as possible.


Can you even read? 3PA (Attempts) and 3PM (Made). How does that equate to "Kobe is a better 3 point shooter"? You never said it, stop flip-flopping.

3PA and 3PM are not part of 3 point shooting? Which universe do you come from?


You said it yourself that they're equal in your same quote"
"it seems like both are about equal during their prime years, and Jordan improved his 3P% dramatically as his career progresses, and had the highest 3P% in the years where he made most of his attempts (something about shot selection).

It comes as no surprise that Kobe made more 3pters as this is an era when 3pt shooting has matured into a serious weapon, while in the 80's, and even the early 90's, the shot was nothing more than a gimmick and an option for a team to come back in a high-risk/high-reward maner.

WHERE have you stated that Kobe was a better 3 point shooter than Jordan? You're saying they were equal in their prime and that "it's no surprise" that Kobe shot more and made more. That does not say he's "better".

They were equal in their prime, but Kobe shot more, how is that not saying Kobe is a better 3 point shooter than Jordan was. And yes, it was no surprise for anyone who actually watched the game to know that the 00’s used the 3 point shot way more than the early 90s.

And of course, I also said this you weasel:
“I was shocked by the results, especially those around 3P%”.


I'm going to take a page from your book of Dodging and "answer" this one:

"Uh I don't know, I'm not an NBA owner so I can't answer that".

But you ALREADY said you would pick Kobe over Jordan, you ALREADY played the role of an NBA owner. So why did you do that even though you said Jordan was better than Kobe is?


Look at your laughable list with Dirk Nowitzki more clutch than Duncan and you can throw those "statistics" into the trash Hollinger.
What is wrong with that? Nowitzki scored more in the clutch than Duncan did. The stats showed that, and it is tough to argue.



Sorry, don't avoid the subject. We've seen tons of Kobe footage as oppposed to "Mr Clutch" Shaq's 1 "game-winner". Nice try my friend.

So can you come up with videos that showed Kobe carried the Lakers in the clutch? If you can’t, you are just blowing hot air by your own definition. And now, there were already 3 shots of Shaq scoring in the clutch. But who cares? We are talking about Shaq being a liability in the 4th quarter, not Shaq making last second game winning shots. Shaq finished #3 in clutch factor in 2002-03, and he played heavy minutes with great results in the 01 finals, coupled by the biggest play in the game in game 2. He was hardly a liability.



Who I pick is my business and none of yours, please stop trying to make picks for me, you have your own problems :)

Of course it is your own business, have you heard me arguing otherwise? You chose Kobe over Jordan afterall, I won’t be surprised by any idiotic decisions by you.


I'd pick Duncan over Jordan, Magic and Kareem at age 30 and not knowing what either would become. The only thing retarded is your sense of entitlement to the only right opinion in the world.

I apologize for not taking retarded opinions from you. But I have trouble accepting decisions that are totally illogical.


Wake me up when Horry gets an MVP.

It is possible he will get on a team this year and win one, he has the potential, don’t count him out!


We are directly speaking to Kobe and MJ's accomplishments are we not? What's so hard about finding another player like Kobe (in the NBA's 50 years) that you have to diminish his achievements to find a match?

Duncan?


Yup, Mr. Flip-Flop says Hi up above.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/flip-flop
Flip-flop means “A reversal, as of a stand or position”


It's avoiding the question, I took a page from your book when I "answered" you above. I felt dirty but liberated at the same time :)

Flip flop does not mean avoiding the question. Look it up. In fact, I DID answer your question, I SAID Kobe scored more efficiently and at a higher % against the West than the East. I simply do not know how I would do, but I did say that if forced to answer, I would imagine it is equally hard for me to score because I probably can’t score in either scenario because of lack of basketball abilities against professional athletes.

You on the other hand, avoid to face a contradiction you have put up yourself. You say you would pick Kobe over Jordan at age 30, and yet said Jordan was better than Kobe is at different spots.


I said nothing about disagreeing with me, you disagreed with yourself.

Tell me, was Kobe's performance better against the East or the West? Answer either way and I'll quote you your two opinion "flip flop". Just answer it.

I said it was a typo, do you have anything more than semantics? Kobe scored better against the West than the East, and anyone with an ounce of brain would read the whole sentence and come to that conclusion. Of course, I am talking to you.


Hey, you're free to flip flop all you want, I'll point it out to you when you do. You obviously flip-flopped ion the Kobe's East/West performance.

Bwahahaha, said the person who can’t tell a typo. You really are that ignorant and stupid.



You don't understand because you refuse too, it's in front of your face.

What is right in front of my face? That Jordan beats Kobe in every single statistical category except 3 pt shooting? How is that giving Jordan a free pass?



"But I did! See below" makes no sense. And while you're trying to point out my comprehension ability, it's not "You comprehension", it's "Your comprehension".

Oh my Gosh! I have a typo! Do you want to dig up your own typos in this thread? But of course, it’s the oldest page in the book, when you can’t argue with logic, look for semantics and typos, because those irrefutably show that the opposition’s stance is incorrect.




Liar:
Right there, applied it to "a game". Statistics don't work like that Hollinger.


And of course you fail to read the whole thread:
“And yes, 400 points over a 12 year career is extremely small.”
“But that is assuming they all take 3-pointers in that situation, which is just plain stupid when you are down by one. You drive to a lane for the deuce. So to be more specific, Kobe Bryant could make 1 more 3 pointer for every 25 taken, so in other words, that extra 4 % could make a difference when the Lakers are down 2 (depending if Jackson wants a tie or a win) or 3 points once every 25 times. Given there were 82 games in the season, why don’t you look up the Lakers, and see how many games were decided by 2 or 3 points last season, with Kobe Bryant shooting a 3?”
“When did I say it wasn’t? Just tell me now likely it is. Let me know the following:
In games where the Lakers were in a one point win/loss, Kobe’s 3pt % would mean a difference if Kobe shot 8 or more 3pters (expected value of 1).
In games where the Lakers were in a two point win/loss, Kobe’s 3pt % would mean a difference if Kobe shot 17 or more 3pters (expected value of 2).
In games where the Lakers were in a three point win/loss, Kobe’s 3pt % would mean a difference if Kobe shot 25 or more 3pters (expected value of 3).

I wonder how many games that happened like that last year.”

You weasel.


Are you a math major? Have you ever taken statistics? Do you know how 3 pters work?

Yes, yes and yes.


Oh dont hold back, keep 'em insults coming to cover up your lack of statistical knowledge.


I said Shaq needed Kobe to win his RINGS. Lakers did not win any rings in 2003, despite your saying Kobe/Shaq were at their Peak in 2003 even though your own Spurs won in 2003. Please learn to read and not throw out irrelevant stats. BTW, your junk "stats" say Dirk is more clutch than Duncan, nice!

So does the stats in 2000, 2001 and 2002 finals work for you? What about 3 Finals MVPs?
And you also said Shaq was a liability in the 4th. You never said Shaq was a liability in the 4th in titles years and required Kobe to bail him out. I have shown that Shaq wasn’t.

Keep picking up semantics, because that is all you got.




Hahah, more insults when you're wrong instead of admitting you're wrong. Your "proof" also said Earl Boykins was a top NBA clutch performer and Dirk Nowitzki was more "clutch" than Duncan. Hahahah.

What is wrong with that? Earl Boykins and Nowitzki DID perform better in the clutch in the 02-03 regular season. Is there a problem?


Even Diehard Mav fans would say you're crazy.

Nowitzki got the ball in crunch time when he was with the Mavs, it really isn’t that much of a surprised to anyone who watched the game. In fact, the same Nowitzki shredded the Spurs in the 06 playoffs time and again during crunch time.


A parrot can read and repeat stats, but it takes a brain to comprehend them.

You can do neither.


Ho hum, yeah, thanks providing your 1 video of "Mr Clutch" Shaq in 16 years of playing.

What is the significance of Shaq clutch shot videos?


Getting angry? Hahah.


It has no relevance to our discussion. I said Shaq needed Kobe to win his Rings. True to form, you quote something irrelevant.

Shaq won a ring with Dwayne Wade.


Sure, I'll play your silly game. Let's see who your fellow Spur fans think is more clutch: Manu, Timmy or Dirk
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=108899
Ginobili got more votes than Duncan! What a surprise!



Hmm, was that the only thing you can pick out of that long ass video? If yes, I can live with that 1 error in the championship run as opposed to your "Shaq's Greatest Clutch Shots" video :D

But how does that show Shaq is a liability in the 4th?




Only you say Shaq is NOT a liability in the 4th quarter. But you're free to have your delusional opinions.

He wasn’t, the stats showed it, his minutes played showed it.


Yup, it sure does show Kobe was young when he joined the league. Those videos show KOBE with the game winners, not Shaq. I never said Kobe was the main guy, I said Shaq needed Kobe to win games in the 4th quarter. When did I EVER say Kobe was "The Main Man". Again, you're making shit up.
Quotes, links?

You said Kobe carried the Lakers in the 4th. Main guys carry the team.


Hey I can admit when I'm wrong, unlike you who is "infallible". But in my own correction, I found out I was wrong in a different area. But as usual, you won't concede that either. Not surprised.

I said I had a typo and I said I mixed up the years, in fact, those are two of things that you have been harping on the last 2 posts. You can’t read?


With silly statistics? Dirk is NOT more clutch than Duncan. Shaq is NOT more clutch than Duncan. But your list says he is.

And what is wrong with that? If you are so damned sure, show me clutch shots by Duncan on video.


Nope, I said it was a matter of preference.

Where did you say that?



Was I saying it to you? Why can't I say it? This was said to a different poster and we were openly talking about the future.

You do realize this is an open thread, right? On the other hand, you said it in a post that was a direct response to me:
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2855050&postcount=452
“Kobe's going to surpass Jordan in career points in the next 5 years or so.”
Just keep weaseling.


Trying to censor me again? :)

Where did I say you are censored?


Hahah, you are so deperate you have to go to my conversations with other people? Hey that's your opinion, enjoy it. :D

So you said it, right? What does it matter that you were talking to other people? It is an open thread. Everyone can read it. Why are you questioning my rights to read an open thread? Why are you trying to suppress me? What have I ever done to you?



Sure, I try to predict stuff all the time, I just don't try to use it as proof for or against as you have. Those were not conversations between you and i, our talks are much more entertaining :toast

And? Those are talks in a public forum, addressing the same subject in the same thread. If you are so ashamed of your own post, send it through private message.


Yawn, Kobe did not win a ring with Shaq in 2003, they were not in their Peak, your "proof" in 2003 is irrelevant to my statement of "Shaq needed Kobe to win rings".

Addressed ad nauseum. It was a mix up in year, the point that Shaq was NOT a liability in the 4th still stays.



Yes, Kobe shot the game winners for Shaq. Shaq needed Kobe to win those games.

Are those games in championship years? I am sure the first one wasn’t. Kurt Rambis never won a championship as a head coach.


When Horry comes up with an MVP, we can talk Horry.
Why, I want to talk Horry now! Why are you trying to censor me?



Hack-a-Shaq. Shaq's still the same liability he was 10 years ago.

But Shaq was a great asset in crunch time 5 years ago.


No lieing again, you can't read. You said I said "Jordan NEEDED" Kerr. I said Jordan HAD Kerr. I never said Jordan NEEDED Kerr. I did say Jordan NEEDED Pippen, you can quote me on that.

You said Jordan won “because Jordan had Pippen, a top50 Player, Rodman, the best rebounder ever and Steve Kerr”


So get your quotes right and stop making shit up.
I didn’t




Nope, I don't agree. Kobe's 3 rings are a part of his legacy. As were Jordan's 2 rings at that age.

I don’t agree with your stance, you have to prove otherwise based on your definition.


Hey if you want to disagree, then disagree. I don't have to prove my opinions. You have done nothing to prove my opinions wrong.

Check, remind me that whatever you said is just made up stuff. You just like to express your opinions with nothing to back up. When they were wrong, they were still just an opinion and there is nothing anybody can do about it. Gotcha.


Really? Then what was the average size (feet/inches) of Shooting Guards? If you can answer that, then it does. Otherwise, it's more of your garbage stats.

I will say the average height is 6’4 ¾” in 1992, and 6’4 ½” in 2008. Prove me wrong.


Because there's no challenge.

But that is not dilution of talent, it’s just that the Bulls were that much better than anybody else.


Shaq DID win 3 rings because of Kobe. Nobody with a right mind would argue that.

You mean Shaq win 3 rings with the help of Kobe, right? Shaq winning 3 rings because of Kobe means that Shaq would not have won those rings otherwise.



Ho hum. You said "Shaq and Kobe were at their peak in 2003". In 2003, the Spurs won not Shaq, so you're obviously quite wrong.

And I already said I got the years mixed up, but it still stays that Shaq was NOT a liability like you claimed.


And then you compound the idiocy by putting up a list that has Dirk Nowitzki as being more "Clutch" than Tim Duncan. Dirk is known for ANYTHING But being clutch.

No he wasn’t. He performed very well vs. the Spurs in 06. The stats of 02-03 showed that he performed great in crunch time.




Getting angry? :lol


Really? Then what was the average size (feet/inches) of Shooting Guards? If you can answer that, then it does. Otherwise, it's more of your garbage stats.

See above.


Hey, it's my own personal view and appraisal, exactly what it says in your Webster's dictionary link you posted. Look it up.

It isn’t anymore.


Because he has done more scoring at the same age.

At a lower average over a huge range of games? Why did you say Kerr is a better 3 pt shooter than Kobe Bryant when Kerr only had 410 3PM at age 30, while Kobe had 1008? By your definition, Kobe should be more than twice the 3P shooter Kerr is.


Hahah, you lie, you quote me and even those quotes are wrong. You say I said things I never have. But it's all good, I won't hold it against you, let's continue.

I quoted them and you said what you said. You just continue to deny them.



No proof needed, it was my personal view and appraisal as per your "Webster's Dictionary" link. You have done nothing to prove me wrong.

As with all your other points. In other words, you have no points.


I won't argue your idiocy LOL!



Sure, when I prove your "flip-flopping" which you say you DON'T do, you say it's a "typo". Not surprised, nice save.

LOL, mixing up West and East was a typo. I have consistently said that Kobe scored more and at a higher efficiency against the West than the East to prove that players had a difficult time scoring against better competition (defined by better records by you) was incorrect. It is a shame that your below average IQ can’t pick that up, and that your only come back was a typo.



You prefaced it "With YOUR logic". Don't try to back out and lie now. That was never my logic, you made that shit up and tried to pin it on me.

I was applying your logic to what I was going to say. I never said you said it.


Hahah, more insults while the infallible "Ambchang" is always right even though proven wrong several times, but oh no, it's a "typo". Hahahah.

LOL, mixing up East and West was indeed a typo. Try reading the whole thread.



Finally, some truth out of you.

By the time Jordan was ready to take on Bird for a championship, Bird was a shell of Larry Legend.

But they still competed directly against each other, right?


Kobe had to compete against 1) The top shooting Guard of all time 2) The Greatest Power Foward of All time 3) And possibly the greatest Small Forward of All Time.

Jordan had to compete against the four of the greatest center of all time(Kareem, Hakeem, Robinson and Shaq), the greatest power forward of all time (Duncan), the 2nd greatest PF of all time (Malone), the 3 greatest point guards of all time (Magic, Stockton and Thomas), and the greatest small forward of all time (Bird).


Jordan played against Kobe.

He sure did, so?


Why not?

Getting angry?

I need not be angry to note that you are retarded. It’s very apparent and I can note that under any emotions.


Sure if we are disregarding "EVERYTHING but RINGS", I'd take Pippen over Kobe. Hell, give me Robert Horry in this "Everything but RINGS" conversation of yours. :)

No wonder you chose Kobe over Jordan. Thanks for letting me finally understand your idiotic stance. It is really hard for me to shut off my brain and think like you.


Nope, our original conversation had only the 90's draft years. You expanded it by going into the 80's. Read your own words, you added the 80's after you lost the original argument.

That was your original definition, I never agreed to it and said it made no sense. But then you curiously added in Shaq as Kobe’s competition. Jordan competed head to head in some classic battles with people drafted outside of the 90s.

What original argument have I lost? This is just getting hilarious. You are just randomly saying that I lost arguments.



I'm trying to say you need to add more things to Jordan's resume to make him sound more impressive. Sad that you have to stoop to that level.

What have I added that didn’t exist? How about removing Jordan’s accomplishments like putting qualifiers around age? Sad that you have to stoop to that level.


You said "Shaq and Kobe were in their peak in 2003". I said "Shaq Needed Kobe to Win Rings". Your logic came up with a list in 2003, year in which the Lakers did NOT win a RING and in their decline rather than their "Peak”.

That's your own faulty logic, not mines.

That was a response to you saying Shaq was a liability in the 4th quarter, which was proven to be false. And 03 was not their decline, they made the finals the next year, with Kobe leading them to an embarrassing loss to the massive underdogs.


Can you read? Stop trying to change my quotes, is that the only kind of logic you have, to change quotes? I never said "Jordan won BECAUSE of Kerr",

I said "Oh yes, it's because Jordan had Pippen, a top50 Player, Rodman, the best rebounder ever and Steve Kerr, the best 3 point shooter ever (arguably with Bird)."

You said Jordan won because he had Pippen, Rodman and Kerr, it’s right in your quote!





Hands Down YES at this point.

Great to know.


And yet, they didn't win a ring. I said "Shaq needed Kobe to win rings". Neither happened in 2003 or 2004. More of your "logic"?

I never disagreed, what I disagreed was when you said Shaq was a liability in the 4th and required Kobe to carry him. That was not the case, and has been shown.



Perhaps Manu is, but Dirk too (it's on your list)

Dirk did quite well in the clutch in 02-03.



I have plenty of videos of Kobe winning games, you have 1 video of Shaq winning a game.

So?



I said "Shaq needed Kobe to win Rings". Lakers did not win any rings in 2003, your Spurs did, look it up.

So Kobe didn’t step up in 03? What a shame!



Hell Yeah!

Yup, I said so, feel free to disagree if you like or ignore it if you wish.

But why are you trying to tell the future, when your original point was that people shouldn’t do that? Why do you violate your own definitions and rules?


Sure, let's compare end of career Jordan to Kobe at age 30, really fair. Unlike you I am fair and I'll take them at the same age.

And I like to look at the whole career instead. Jordan DID play on. Kobe COULD play on.




Yet.

I am not trying to predict the future like you did, nor am I trying to predict the future like you asked people not to.



Yup, Kobe has several more years in the FUTURE before we figure out how many he will have.

Yes, that is why around 30 wins sometimes got you into the Playoffs in Jordan's era, gotcha.[/quote]

Just like 37 wins got the Hawks in during Kobe’s era.


I just did.

The question was how, not when.



Why remove any years? Just take them at the same age which I did.

I will compare the 1st 12 years in the league then. Why compare ages when one played significantly less years than the other?


Yes, Jordan was an oversized Allen Iverson back then. So?

So he still competed with some top-notch competition. Just like I won’t take off Kobe’s competition from 04 to 07 because he was an “oversized” Allen Iverson”.


You're welcome.

About what? About acknowledging your own contracdiction?



Feel free to disagree, I encourage it, but don't try to stop me from saying it.

How have I tried to stop you from saying anything? I never knew that you are so weak psychologically.


So when you're proven wrong, more insults and a "typo", gotcha, my frined :)

I feel sorry for you, I really do. Keep grabbing onto semantics, you have nothing else.
And no, I won’t stoop to your level and go on and on about how you spelt “friend” incorrectly.



So when you're proven wrong, it's a "typo", great logic!

Read the original quote. I have consistently said that Kobe scored more vs. the West vs. the East. In fact, that was my sole point. The stats showed it. Too bad you have to grab onto that like it was some sort of saving grace.


So when you're proven wrong, it's my fault, gotcha!

When have I be proven wrong? You mean the typo? Yeah, it was my fault that I typed wrong and didn’t double check, but it takes someone as mentally handicapped as you to not see it as a typo.



Or like Kobe might have 4 rings to Jordan's 3 when they are 30?

Might? Why are you looking into the future again?


So you're saying that dilution cannot happen due to lack of talent. Look at your own definition of "watered down" before you answer this.

And the 80s didn’t have lack of talent, nor did the 90s.


So lack of talent does not speak of quality, gotcha.

Wide margins in records speak of disparity, not quality. We have been talking about that through out.


Enough.

32.7% at what age? 30?

Throughout his career.



Nope, I never said "Jordan NEEDED Kerr", I addressed your twisting of my quotes above, nice try buddy.

But you DID bring up Kerr, didn’t you? Your original quote said Jordan won because he had Pippen, Rodman and Kerr. If you meant otherwise, say what you originally meant.




Pippen has no MVP, talk to me when he gets one.
I like to talk about Pippen, why are you trying to censor me?



I live in an MVP only world, Kerr and Pippen can stay out.
I don’t.


Nope. It shows that you like to go off topic.
I disagree, it is my opinion.



That's why Kobe might have 4 rings when he's 30 compared to Jordan's 3.

Stop jumping into the future.



It's not December yet, you're going into the future then so can I.

Jordan had 3 rings at 30, Kobe has 3 rings at 30.




I said "Shaq needed Kobe to win RINGS". Shaq and Kobe never won rings in the 2003. Already addressed.

You also said Shaq was a liability in the 4th.



Kobe made Game-winners. Horry can join the conversation when he gets an MVP.

Horry made game-winners as well. I like to put in Horry in the conversation, why can’t I? You are free to go all over the place whenever you feel like, why are you trying censor me?



1 video, great, where are the other videos in Mr. Clutch's 16 year career. Weak.

What do those videos show? Why should I care? How does not having videos show that a player is a liability in the 4th? Since when did Jerry West play 16 years in the league?



Yes I was wrong about the scoring and admitted it. But your stats also showed that it was easier to score in Jordan's watered down era.

But Jordan still scored at a higher rate than Kobe did even when the eras were normalized. Jordan scored 10% better in fact.



So disparity cannot be a result of dilution of talent?
It could be, of course.




Yup, the foreign talent has indeed increased the competitiveness in Kobe's era.

The increase in teams negated that too.




Thank you for not disagreeing.


You said it yourself, there were only 3 top teams. Kobe's era has around 10 top teams regularly.

In 2008, I counted the Lakers, Celtics, and the Spurs. Where are the other 7?



Yes, I admitted that was wrong. Too bad you can't admit when you're wrong.

Too bad you can’t read.



Yes, they're ALL of your quotes were wrong that you posted.

I don’t really get what you are trying to say here. Could you please just post what you think I quoted you wrong on?



Nope, you can't tell me what I can't say or can say. I say what I want.

So why did you try to suppress people and stop them from “going into the future”?



I believe Jordan had an MVP at 25. Let me know when Horry gets an MVP.

He could get one in the future.





Nope, I didn't start with the expansion bit, you did. You're free to try to disprove me on that.

You started with watering down league, and I brought up expansion. You then brought up the Grizzlies as evidence to Jordan’s league being watered down.

[Allanon]

You said Shaq was a liability in the 4th and that Kobe carried that team during which time. You have provided no evidence of either.
Shaq was NOT a liability in the 4th, and it has been shown.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/45022-first-and-second-team-all-clutch-an-nba-analysis

BleacherReport. Woo hoo!!!

[quote]
In the 2001 finals:
Shaq played 52 minutes in Game 1
In game 2, he made the “Biggest Play of the game” according to Larry Brown (http://www.nba.com/finals2001/recap_phi_lal_010608.html?nav=SiteFragment)
“Biggest play of the game was when he (Shaq) kicked it out to Fisher," Philadelphia coach Larry Brown said. "He's a tremendous passer. He made some unbelievable plays."
In game 3, O’Neal got into foul trouble.
In game 4, O’Neal scored 34 points in 42 minutes
In game 5, O’Neal scored 29 points on 45 minutes.

Do those look like he was a liability? Does a liability in the 4th make the biggest play of the game with 2 minutes left in the game?

Sure, you can be a liability and make the biggest play of the game. Noticed Shaq PASSED the ball, he couldn't go for a shot because he'd get fouled and get put on the line.

Also excerpt from a Mavs game, Shaq went 6-14 from the line...that IS a liability:

" O'Neal was fouled seven times in a span of 3:36 on Sunday night starting with 7:02 remaining and the Lakers in command. A couple came in the backcourt away from the ball, but none was flagrant.

O'Neal went 6-of-14 from the line in that span, giving him 10-of-23 in the game and 20-of-51 this season. He left the game with 3:16 to play and the Lakers up 99-88.

"It's a shame he has to deal with that, going to the free throw line 23, 25 times a game," Fisher said. "There should be a limit on how many times they can foul a player."

Nelson smiled when asked about his strategy.



So far in the thread, you found me with one typo and one mixup in the years, and you sure are riding those high. Too bad you ignore to address the fact that:

"typo" harhar and "a mixup". But you weren't wrong right? They were just typos and mixups! Hahahah, nice save.



1) You based your whole argument on not being a prophet and tell future events, while you do it continuously.
When you time travel, I get to time travel.



2) You cited Kerr first, and then claimed you didn’t
I didn't bring up the 3 rings, YOU did.



Where did I say you are censored?

Just keeping you honest.


So you said it, right? What does it matter that you were talking to other people? It is an open thread. Everyone can read it. Why are you questioning my rights to read an open thread? Why are you trying to suppress me? What have I ever done to you?

Hahah, you are so deperate you have to go to my conversations with other people? Hey that's your opinion, enjoy it.



And? Those are talks in a public forum, addressing the same subject in the same thread. If you are so ashamed of your own post, send it through private message.

Nothing wrong with my predictions, I say them all the time. So? What's your point?



Addressed ad nauseum. It was a mix up in year, the point that Shaq was NOT a liability in the 4th still stays.

Alrighty then, when you're wrong and proven wrong, it was a "mixup", gotcha.



Are those games in championship years? I am sure the first one wasn’t. Kurt Rambis never won a championship as a head coach.

Yes they were.



Why, I want to talk Horry now! Why are you trying to censor me?

You can talk about Horry all you like but he's not comparable to Jordan and Kobe because he has no MVP.



But Shaq was a great asset in crunch time 5 years ago.

Says you.



You said Jordan won “because Jordan had Pippen, a top50 Player, Rodman, the best rebounder ever and Steve Kerr”

So? What's your point? I never said "Jordan NEEDED Kerr" as you wrongfully quoted.



I didn’t
So? What's your point? I never said "Jordan NEEDED Kerr" as you wrongfully quoted. I've shown you the passages and you still say you "didn't". Is this another TYPO or MIXUP? HAHAHAHHAAH.



I don’t agree with your stance, you have to prove otherwise based on your definition.

There's nothing to prove, Kobe had 3 rings as opposed to Jordan's 2. That's a fact.



Check, remind me that whatever you said is just made up stuff. You just like to express your opinions with nothing to back up. When they were wrong, they were still just an opinion and there is nothing anybody can do about it. Gotcha.

That's fine, if you don't agree, then disagree. Otherwise, let it go, nobody's forcing you to answer.



I will say the average height is 6’4 ¾” in 1992, and 6’4 ½” in 2008. Prove me wrong.

Great, we have two opinions now. You have proven NOTHING.



But that is not dilution of talent, it’s just that the Bulls were that much better than anybody else.

More opinion.



You mean Shaq win 3 rings with the help of Kobe, right? Shaq winning 3 rings because of Kobe means that Shaq would not have won those rings otherwise.
You mean Kobe win 3 rings with the help of Shaq, right? Kobe winning 3 rings because of Shaq means that Kobe would not have won those rings otherwise.



And I already said I got the years mixed up, but it still stays that Shaq was NOT a liability like you claimed.

Ah so when you're wrong, you claim it's a "mixup", gotcha.



No he wasn’t. He performed very well vs. the Spurs in 06. The stats of 02-03 showed that he performed great in crunch time.

Thank god your fellow Spur fans aren't as stupid as you:
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=108899



It isn’t anymore.

Says you.



At a lower average over a huge range of games? Why did you say Kerr is a better 3 pt shooter than Kobe Bryant when Kerr only had 410 3PM at age 30, while Kobe had 1008? By your definition, Kobe should be more than twice the 3P shooter Kerr is.

Again, trying to put words into my mouth. I never said this. You know what they say about ASSuming.



I quoted them and you said what you said. You just continue to deny them.

ALL the QUOTES in your list were wrong, stop making up BS just because you lost.



As with all your other points. In other words, you have no points.

As with all your other points. In other words, you have no points.



I won't argue your idiocy LOL!
I won't argue your idiocy LOL!



LOL, mixing up West and East was a typo. I have consistently said that Kobe scored more and at a higher efficiency against the West than the East to prove that players had a difficult time scoring against better competition (defined by better records by you) was incorrect. It is a shame that your below average IQ can’t pick that up, and that your only come back was a typo.

Ah yes, when you're wrong it's not because you're wrong, it's because:

1) Typo
2) Mixup
3) Semantics

Gotcha!



I was applying your logic to what I was going to say. I never said you said it.

Good, apply your logic to yourself, don't try to peddle that BS as mines.



LOL, mixing up East and West was indeed a typo. Try reading the whole thread.

Ah yes, when you're wrong it's not because you're wrong, it's because:

1) Typo
2) Mixup
3) Semantics

Gotcha!



But they still competed directly against each other, right?

Yup, so? Kobe competed against Michael Jordan himself.



Kobe had to compete against 1) The top shooting Guard of all time 2) The Greatest Power Foward of All time 3) And possibly the greatest Small Forward of All Time.

Jordan had to compete against the four of the greatest center of all time(Kareem, Hakeem, Robinson and Shaq), the greatest power forward of all time (Duncan), the 2nd greatest PF of all time (Malone), the 3 greatest point guards of all time (Magic, Stockton and Thomas), and the greatest small forward of all time (Bird).

Yup, Kobe had harder competition than Jordan's watered down era.



He sure did, so?

Kobe's competition was > Jordan's.



I need not be angry to note that you are retarded. It’s very apparent and I can note that under any emotions.

Hahahah, good stuff. Getting angry?



No wonder you chose Kobe over Jordan. Thanks for letting me finally understand your idiotic stance. It is really hard for me to shut off my brain and think like you.

You asked the IDIOT question, I answered in the same IDIOT MANNER. You said regardless of EVERYTHING but Rings. If we're just counting rings, Horry's one of the greatest, I choose him.

Read your own idiotic question, of course you're gonna get an idiotic answer :D



That was your original definition, I never agreed to it and said it made no sense. But then you curiously added in Shaq as Kobe’s competition. Jordan competed head to head in some classic battles with people drafted outside of the 90s.

Yup, thus "original" versus add on. You added it on.



What original argument have I lost? This is just getting hilarious. You are just randomly saying that I lost arguments.

All of it. You've proven nothing. Hahah, hilarious, nah, entertaining, yes!



What have I added that didn’t exist? How about removing Jordan’s accomplishments like putting qualifiers around age? Sad that you have to stoop to that level.

Hey, Kobe was born in the Off-season, why penalize him for that? If he gets a ring in June, it will be 4 and he will be 30.

But right now, he has 3 compared to Jordan's 2 at the same age.



That was a response to you saying Shaq was a liability in the 4th quarter, which was proven to be false. And 03 was not their decline, they made the finals the next year, with Kobe leading them to an embarrassing loss to the massive underdogs.

Regardless of what you say, the Kobe-Shaq duo did not win a ring again after 2002. If that is not decline, I have no idea what is. Make up all the stuff you want.



You said Jordan won because he had Pippen, Rodman and Kerr, it’s right in your quote!

Stop your BS, you're wrong as usual. Where did I say "Jordan NEEDED Kerr" as in your original quote of me?" Point it out?



Great to know.

So? What's your point?



I never disagreed, what I disagreed was when you said Shaq was a liability in the 4th and required Kobe to carry him. That was not the case, and has been shown.

You haven't shown anything. All you've shown are some stupid stats in a year when Kobe and Shaq won nothing. Fail.



So?

Great, at least you have agreed you have no proof.



So Kobe didn’t step up in 03? What a shame!

So Shaq didn’t step up in 03? What a shame!



But why are you trying to tell the future, when your original point was that people shouldn’t do that? Why do you violate your own definitions and rules?

Hey, if you're going to do it, so will I, my friend. :)



And I like to look at the whole career instead. Jordan DID play on. Kobe COULD play on.

Sure you could. So? What's your point?



I am not trying to predict the future like you did, nor am I trying to predict the future like you asked people not to.

You already closed off the door for Kobe getting a 4th ring at age 30. That's predicting the future.



3) You first used less scoring in the 90’s as your base of argument as to why Kobe shot better, then you used more scoring the 90s as your base of argument as to why Jordan scored more.

Yup, I was wrong on the scoring but right on it being easier to score. Thankyou.



4) You talked about expansion, but you said you didn’t.
YOU talked about expansion, but you said you didn’t, nice try.



5) You said the league was watered-down, and yet showed nothing to back that up.

I showed you, you just can't admit it when you're wrong. Look at FG% and look at how many wins it took to get into the Playoffs in Jordan's era. The stats are there in front of your face, you choose to ignore it.



6) You said Jordan played against smaller SGs, yet had nothing to back that up.
You have nothing to disprove it.



7) You can’t understand the difference between an opinion, a fact and an assertion.

Is that your OPINION? hahahahah



8) You can’t understand the difference between clutch and lead man of the team.

Is that your OPINION? hahahahah



9) Using totals in scoring and titles to compare Kobe and Jordan, while putting qualifiers around averages.

Yes, you did a wonderful job of mixing the two together.



10) You said you would pick Kobe over Jordan at age 30, while saying that Jordan was better than Kobe is.

Stop making shit up, I never said that.



And a few other contradictions I can’t recall off the top of my head.

That's because they're all made up in yoru head.



Of course Manu is more clutch than Duncan. It’s pretty well known. You didn’t know?

How about Dirk on your list being more clutch than Duncan? And Earl Boykins in the Top list of the NBA clutch? Ridiculous.

A parrot can quote stats, it needs a mind to comprehend them.



What is wrong with this list? Do you have other ways to disprove this other than your “fake” statistics routine? Do you have any real statistics that doesn’t even “because I said so?”

How about Dirk on your list being more clutch than Duncan? And Earl Boykins in the Top list of the NBA clutch? Ridiculous.

A parrot can quote stats, it needs a mind to comprehend them.



But of course I normalized the scoring based on average scoring vs. individual scoring in their respective eras. My comparison is A:B compared to C:D. Your comparison is A>B therefore A>D. One uses ratios, the other used nothing. But I am glad you finally got it through your thick skull that you ARE indeed comparing Apples and Oranges.

Your skull is thick and you make up shit to say that it's me saying it? I knew that already :)



Just because you never think doesn’t mean that I can’t. And yes, you have demonstrated that you have no grasp of illustrations at all.

Yes, you excel at making up shit for other people to make your arguments sound good. I never said any of that, illustrate your own thoughts, don't do it for others.



Another demonstration of your piss poor ability to draw conclusions. So why are you comparing the 90s to the 00s? What the records in the 00’s have to do with the quality of teams in the 90s?

Another demonstration of your double standards using the comparisons in one example and then saying you "can't" in a another.



Fact remains that it takes 67 wins to secure the best record in the East in the 90s, and that it was much less in Kobe’s era.

Yes, Jordan's era sure was watered down wasn't it? :)



And pray tell, why is it watered down? You have nothing but your own words.

No, I have your words out of your big mouth, you said there were
"3 top teams". There are at least 8 top teams in Kobe's era.



These are two entirely different leagues, just like the 90s were different than the 80s, the 80s from the 70s and the 70s from the 60s.

Of course it's convenient for you to compare Jordan and Kobe then when you're shown wrong, "two entirely different leagues". How convenient as usual for you.



What have I flip-flopped on?

You need to see it again? Ok, answer me this:

Was it easier for Kobe to score on the East or the West? Answer the question and I'll show you your flip-flop statement.



But it does show a huge difference in quality of teams despite such a narrow band of difference in wins.

Yes, Jordan's era was watered down, we know that.



It shows disparity. I am not sure if you really are that stupid, or you are pretending to be just so that you can make this argument as long and pointless as possible.

It shows being watered down. So disparity is not watered down? If you have 3 top teams and a butch of shitty teams, that's not a "watered" down league?

I am not sure if you really are that stupid, or you are pretending to be just so that you can make this argument as long and pointless as possible.



3PA and 3PM are not part of 3 point shooting? Which universe do you come from?

It is a part but it is not the same thing. You just pointed out that he shot more and made more. And then you go onto say you weren't surprised Kobe shot more and made more.

Stop being a lieing flip-flop. You never said Kobe was a better 3 point shooter. Stop with your BS.



They were equal in their prime, but Kobe shot more, how is that not saying Kobe is a better 3 point shooter than Jordan was. And yes, it was no surprise for anyone who actually watched the game to know that the 00’s used the 3 point shot way more than the early 90s.

Where do you say "Kobe was a better 3 point shooter"? You never said it, stop your BS.



And of course, I also said this you weasel:
“I was shocked by the results, especially those around 3P%”.

Where do you say "Kobe was a better 3 point shooter"? You never said it, stop your BS.



But you ALREADY said you would pick Kobe over Jordan, you ALREADY played the role of an NBA owner. So why did you do that even though you said Jordan was better than Kobe is?

I'm just answering with your kind of BS answer since you're not man enough to admit when you're wrong. "Oh, I don't know I don't play in the NBA". Hahahah.



What is wrong with that? Nowitzki scored more in the clutch than Duncan did. The stats showed that, and it is tough to argue.

Thank god your fellow Spur fans aren't stupid as you:
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=108899



So can you come up with videos that showed Kobe carried the Lakers in the clutch? If you can’t, you are just blowing hot air by your own definition. And now, there were already 3 shots of Shaq scoring in the clutch. But who cares? We are talking about Shaq being a liability in the 4th quarter, not Shaq making last second game winning shots. Shaq finished #3 in clutch factor in 2002-03, and he played heavy minutes with great results in the 01 finals, coupled by the biggest play in the game in game 2. He was hardly a liability.

Hey I came up with a ton of clutch wins by Kobe. You came up with a couple for your Mr. Clutch "Shaq".



Of course it is your own business, have you heard me arguing otherwise? You chose Kobe over Jordan afterall, I won’t be surprised by any idiotic decisions by you.

Getting angry?



I apologize for not taking retarded opinions from you. But I have trouble accepting decisions that are totally illogical.

Getting angry?



It is possible he will get on a team this year and win one, he has the potential, don’t count him out!

Sure, let me know when he does.



Duncan?
Duncan?



http://www.thefreedictionary.com/flip-flop
Flip-flop means “A reversal, as of a stand or position”

Flip flop does not mean avoiding the question. Look it up. In fact, I DID answer your question, I SAID Kobe scored more efficiently and at a higher % against the West than the East.

Exactly, and this is where you flip-flopped. You said:

1) Kobe scored easier against the West
then you flip-flopped
2) Kobe scored easier against the East

Do you need me to quote you?



I simply do not know how I would do, but I did say that if forced to answer, I would imagine it is equally hard for me to score because I probably can’t score in either scenario because of lack of basketball abilities against professional athletes.

Yes, thanks for avoiding the question.



You on the other hand, avoid to face a contradiction you have put up yourself. You say you would pick Kobe over Jordan at age 30, and yet said Jordan was better than Kobe is at different spots.

I did answer the question your style. "I don't know, I'm not an NBA owner". What's wrong, can't take the same kind of weasel answer you give others? Har har. :)



I said it was a typo, do you have anything more than semantics? Kobe scored better against the West than the East, and anyone with an ounce of brain would read the whole sentence and come to that conclusion. Of course, I am talking to you.

Of course, when you're wrong it's a "typo", gotcha buddy.



Bwahahaha, said the person who can’t tell a typo. You really are that ignorant and stupid.

Of course, when you're wrong it's a "typo", gotcha buddy.



What is right in front of my face? That Jordan beats Kobe in every single statistical category except 3 pt shooting? How is that giving Jordan a free pass?

Yup, that's right in your face and you still can't say Kobe was a better 3 point shooter, hahah, weak. And Kobe has 3 rings to Jordan's 2.



Oh my Gosh! I have a typo! Do you want to dig up your own typos in this thread? But of course, it’s the oldest page in the book, when you can’t argue with logic, look for semantics and typos, because those irrefutably show that the opposition’s stance is incorrect.

Of course, when you're wrong it's a "typo", gotcha buddy.



And of course you fail to read the whole thread:
“And yes, 400 points over a 12 year career is extremely small.”
“But that is assuming they all take 3-pointers in that situation, which is just plain stupid when you are down by one. You drive to a lane for the deuce. So to be more specific, Kobe Bryant could make 1 more 3 pointer for every 25 taken, so in other words, that extra 4 % could make a difference when the Lakers are down 2 (depending if Jackson wants a tie or a win) or 3 points once every 25 times. Given there were 82 games in the season, why don’t you look up the Lakers, and see how many games were decided by 2 or 3 points last season, with Kobe Bryant shooting a 3?”
“When did I say it wasn’t? Just tell me now likely it is. Let me know the following:
In games where the Lakers were in a one point win/loss, Kobe’s 3pt % would mean a difference if Kobe shot 8 or more 3pters (expected value of 1).
In games where the Lakers were in a two point win/loss, Kobe’s 3pt % would mean a difference if Kobe shot 17 or more 3pters (expected value of 2).
In games where the Lakers were in a three point win/loss, Kobe’s 3pt % would mean a difference if Kobe shot 25 or more 3pters (expected value of 3).

I wonder how many games that happened like that last year.”

Yup, and still you pointed out .20 IN A GAME which is stupid, you should know better than that Hollinger.


Are you a math major? Have you ever taken statistics? Do you know how 3 pters work?[/quote

Yes, yes and yes.



So does the stats in 2000, 2001 and 2002 finals work for you? What about 3 Finals MVPs?
And you also said Shaq was a liability in the 4th. You never said Shaq was a liability in the 4th in titles years and required Kobe to bail him out. I have shown that Shaq wasn’t.

I said Shaq need Kobe to win Rings, you have not proven otherwise. Your stats are from the wrong years.



Keep picking up semantics, because that is all you got.

Of course, when you're wrong it's not wrong, it's "semantics", gotcha buddy.

[quote]
What is wrong with that? Earl Boykins and Nowitzki DID perform better in the clutch in the 02-03 regular season. Is there a problem?[q/uote]

Thankfully, your fellow Spur fans aren't as stupid as you.
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=108899

[quote]
Nowitzki got the ball in crunch time when he was with the Mavs, it really isn’t that much of a surprised to anyone who watched the game. In fact, the same Nowitzki shredded the Spurs in the 06 playoffs time and again during crunch time.

Thankfully, your fellow Spur fans aren't as stupid as you.
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=108899



You can do neither.

Good, you have no proof, Shooting Guards were smaller in Jordan's error.



What is the significance of Shaq clutch shot videos?

It might show him winning a game instead of Kobe perhaps?



Shaq won a ring with Dwayne Wade.

Yes he did, he also needed Kobe to win his other 3.


Sure, I'll play your silly game. Let's see who your fellow Spur fans think is more clutch: Manu, Timmy or Dirk
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=108899
Ginobili got more votes than Duncan! What a surprise!

And Duncan got more than Nowitzki. Thank god your fellow Spur fans aren't as stupid as you.

[quote]
But how does that show Shaq is a liability in the 4th?

Hack-a-Shaq.



He wasn’t, the stats showed it, his minutes played showed it.

Alot of players can be on the court, that's the difference between being effective or not. Shaq was just on the court. Kobe took and made the game-winners.



You said Kobe carried the Lakers in the 4th. Main guys carry the team.

Yes, Kobe sure was awesome wasn't he?



I said I had a typo and I said I mixed up the years, in fact, those are two of things that you have been harping on the last 2 posts. You can’t read?

Yes, when you're wrong, it's not because you're wrong, it's a "typo" or a "mixup", gotcha.



And what is wrong with that? If you are so damned sure, show me clutch shots by Duncan on video.

Thank god your fellow Spur fans aren't as stupido as you.
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=108899



Where did you say that?
Are you saying I didn't say that?



You do realize this is an open thread, right? On the other hand, you said it in a post that was a direct response to me:
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2855050&postcount=452
“Kobe's going to surpass Jordan in career points in the next 5 years or so.”
Just keep weaseling.

What are you talking about? I said Kobe's going to surpass Jordan in points, either agree or disagree or let it go. How's that weaseling?



Just like 37 wins got the Hawks in during Kobe’s era.

37 > 35



The question was how, not when.

So?



I will compare the 1st 12 years in the league then. Why compare ages when one played significantly less years than the other?

Again you are penalizing Kobe for playing early but giving Jordan the benefits of college.



So he still competed with some top-notch competition. Just like I won’t take off Kobe’s competition from 04 to 07 because he was an “oversized” Allen Iverson”.

Going on your expanded list theory, Kobe's played alot more harder tougher players than Jordan. And going by my competitive years list, Kobe's played against more of the top players. Either way, you're wrong.



About what? About acknowledging your own contracdiction?

About what? About acknowledging your own contracdiction?



How have I tried to stop you from saying anything? I never knew that you are so weak psychologically.

You told me I can't say it. That's your problem. I like you and all but that sure as hell didn't stop me. Sorry, you can't tell me what to say or do :D



I feel sorry for you, I really do. Keep grabbing onto semantics, you have nothing else.
And no, I won’t stoop to your level and go on and on about how you spelt “friend” incorrectly.

Yes, when you're wrong, you feel "sorry for me" and it's "semantics" or a "typo" or a "mixup", gotcha.



Read the original quote. I have consistently said that Kobe scored more vs. the West vs. the East. In fact, that was my sole point. The stats showed it. Too bad you have to grab onto that like it was some sort of saving grace.

Nope you said Kobe scored more against the East when you flip-flopped, do you need me to quote it for you?



When have I be proven wrong? You mean the typo? Yeah, it was my fault that I typed wrong and didn’t double check, but it takes someone as mentally handicapped as you to not see it as a typo.

Yes, when you're wrong, you feel "sorry for me" and it's "semantics" or a "typo" or a "mixup", gotcha.



Might? Why are you looking into the future again?

I can look into the future when you look into the future. No sneaking in double-standards you weasel.



And the 80s didn’t have lack of talent, nor did the 90s.

Neither did the 90s and the 2000s. Kobe got to play against more.



Wide margins in records speak of disparity, not quality. We have been talking about that through out.

So disparity has nothing to do with quality?



Throughout his career.

Great, His Airness gets to pit his career #'s against Kobe's at age 30, great logic!



But you DID bring up Kerr, didn’t you? Your original quote said Jordan won because he had Pippen, Rodman and Kerr. If you meant otherwise, say what you originally meant.

Hahah, you little weasel. Where in there does it say "Jordan NEEDED Kerr"?

You like to twist my quotes and take parts out of it so it sounds like what you want to hear. Hear's what I said, stop lieing:

""Oh yes, it's because Jordan had Pippen, a top50 Player, Rodman, the best rebounder ever and Steve Kerr, the best 3 point shooter ever (arguably with Bird).""



I like to talk about Pippen, why are you trying to censor me?

Sure, keep on talking about Pippen if you like. But that won't make him win an MVP.



I don’t.

That's too bad because Kobe got an MVP, it's really pretty.



I disagree, it is my opinion.

Great.



Stop jumping into the future.

If you jump into the future, so will I.



Jordan had 3 rings at 30, Kobe has 3 rings at 30.

Yes, and Kobe may have 4 rings at age 30 and Jordan would have 3.



You also said Shaq was a liability in the 4th.

Hack-a-Shaq



Horry made game-winners as well. I like to put in Horry in the conversation, why can’t I? You are free to go all over the place whenever you feel like, why are you trying censor me?

Sure, if you want to go off topic.

Horry isn't in the conversation with Jordan and Kobe cuz he's got no MVPs.



What do those videos show? Why should I care? How does not having videos show that a player is a liability in the 4th? Since when did Jerry West play 16 years in the league?

Great that you have no argument then. Shaq needed Kobe to win his Rings.



But Jordan still scored at a higher rate than Kobe did even when the eras were normalized. Jordan scored 10% better in fact.

Sure he did, in a watered down league with a higher average FG% than Kobe's era.



It could be, of course.

Then there you have it. Thanks for agreeing.



The increase in teams negated that too.

Nope, Jordan had his expansion too.



In 2008, I counted the Lakers, Celtics, and the Spurs. Where are the other 7?

Pistons, Suns, Hornets, Jazz, Rockets, Cavaliers, Mavs



Too bad you can’t read.

Getting angry? :D



I don’t really get what you are trying to say here. Could you please just post what you think I quoted you wrong on?

None of your quotes you listed in response to that were right. NONE, zippo, FAIL, try again, etc.



So why did you try to suppress people and stop them from “going into the future”?

Sure you can, but as you go, so will I.



He could get one in the future.
Let me know when he does.



You started with watering down league, and I brought up expansion. You then brought up the Grizzlies as evidence to Jordan’s league being watered down.

Yes, I said watered down, YOU SAID expansion. Thankyou.

[Obstructed_View]

Tony Parker's now one step closer to Jordan than Kobe is.

[Allanon]

Tony Parker's now one step closer to Jordan than Kobe is.

Unfortunately, Tony took one step back last night, no pun intended.

[dbreiden83080]

LOL, I can't believe this thread is still going...

[RsxPiimp]

this is too tiring for me but ill give allanon his props. boy had too much time and energy to defend the undefendable.

[BullsDynasty]

Holy Rage Batman!!!!!!

[dbreiden83080]

[quote]


Exactly, and this is where you flip-flopped. You said:

1) Kobe scored easier against the West
then you flip-flopped
2) Kobe scored easier against the East

Do you need me to quote you?



Yes, thanks for avoiding the question.



I did answer the question your style. "I don't know, I'm not an NBA owner". What's wrong, can't take the same kind of weasel answer you give others? Har har. :)



Of course, when you're wrong it's a "typo", gotcha buddy.



Of course, when you're wrong it's a "typo", gotcha buddy.



Yup, that's right in your face and you still can't say Kobe was a better 3 point shooter, hahah, weak. And Kobe has 3 rings to Jordan's 2.



Of course, when you're wrong it's a "typo", gotcha buddy.



Yup, and still you pointed out .20 IN A GAME which is stupid, you should know better than that Hollinger.

[QUOTE=Ambchang;2875968]Are you a math major? Have you ever taken statistics? Do you know how 3 pters work?[/quote

Yes, yes and yes.



I said Shaq need Kobe to win Rings, you have not proven otherwise. Your stats are from the wrong years.



Of course, when you're wrong it's not wrong, it's "semantics", gotcha buddy.

[quote]
What is wrong with that? Earl Boykins and Nowitzki DID perform better in the clutch in the 02-03 regular season. Is there a problem?[q/uote]

Thankfully, your fellow Spur fans aren't as stupid as you.
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=108899



Thankfully, your fellow Spur fans aren't as stupid as you.
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=108899



Good, you have no proof, Shooting Guards were smaller in Jordan's error.



It might show him winning a game instead of Kobe perhaps?



Yes he did, he also needed Kobe to win his other 3.

[QUOTE=Allanon;2875968]Sure, I'll play your silly game. Let's see who your fellow Spur fans think is more clutch: Manu, Timmy or Dirk
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=108899
Ginobili got more votes than Duncan! What a surprise!

And Duncan got more than Nowitzki. Thank god your fellow Spur fans aren't as stupid as you.



Hack-a-Shaq.



Alot of players can be on the court, that's the difference between being effective or not. Shaq was just on the court. Kobe took and made the game-winners.



Yes, Kobe sure was awesome wasn't he?



Yes, when you're wrong, it's not because you're wrong, it's a "typo" or a "mixup", gotcha.



Thank god your fellow Spur fans aren't as stupido as you.
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=108899


Are you saying I didn't say that?



What are you talking about? I said Kobe's going to surpass Jordan in points, either agree or disagree or let it go. How's that weaseling?



37 > 35



So?



Again you are penalizing Kobe for playing early but giving Jordan the benefits of college.



Going on your expanded list theory, Kobe's played alot more harder tougher players than Jordan. And going by my competitive years list, Kobe's played against more of the top players. Either way, you're wrong.



About what? About acknowledging your own contracdiction?



You told me I can't say it. That's your problem. I like you and all but that sure as hell didn't stop me. Sorry, you can't tell me what to say or do :D



Yes, when you're wrong, you feel "sorry for me" and it's "semantics" or a "typo" or a "mixup", gotcha.



Nope you said Kobe scored more against the East when you flip-flopped, do you need me to quote it for you?



Yes, when you're wrong, you feel "sorry for me" and it's "semantics" or a "typo" or a "mixup", gotcha.



I can look into the future when you look into the future. No sneaking in double-standards you weasel.



Neither did the 90s and the 2000s. Kobe got to play against more.



So disparity has nothing to do with quality?



Great, His Airness gets to pit his career #'s against Kobe's at age 30, great logic!



Hahah, you little weasel. Where in there does it say "Jordan NEEDED Kerr"?

You like to twist my quotes and take parts out of it so it sounds like what you want to hear. Hear's what I said, stop lieing:

""Oh yes, it's because Jordan had Pippen, a top50 Player, Rodman, the best rebounder ever and Steve Kerr, the best 3 point shooter ever (arguably with Bird).""



Sure, keep on talking about Pippen if you like. But that won't make him win an MVP.



That's too bad because Kobe got an MVP, it's really pretty.



Great.



If you jump into the future, so will I.



Yes, and Kobe may have 4 rings at age 30 and Jordan would have 3.



Hack-a-Shaq



Sure, if you want to go off topic.

Horry isn't in the conversation with Jordan and Kobe cuz he's got no MVPs.



Great that you have no argument then. Shaq needed Kobe to win his Rings.



Sure he did, in a watered down league with a higher average FG% than Kobe's era.



Then there you have it. Thanks for agreeing.



Nope, Jordan had his expansion too.



Pistons, Suns, Hornets, Jazz, Rockets, Cavaliers, Mavs



Getting angry? :D



None of your quotes you listed in response to that were right. NONE, zippo, FAIL, try again, etc.



Sure you can, but as you go, so will I.


Let me know when he does.



Yes, I said watered down, YOU SAID expansion. Thankyou.

Holy Fucking Shit, this has to be the longest ass reply i have ever seen, can we call this a draw folks and go out for a beer or something??

[Allanon]

Hahahah, yeah, I know, it's a little bit on the crazy side.

I have plenty of time at my job so its either this or actually working... this is more enjoyable.

[lefty]

Someone close this dumb thread

Jordan >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kobe

[Allanon]

Jordan >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kobe

I agree.

[lefty]

I agree.

:toast

[m33p0]

good. can we close this thread now?

[Kobe™]

Jordan>>Kobe
No question about it.

Can Kobe put some challenge to the argument when his career is over?


Sure.

[ambchang]

I don't think Allanon was trying to argue that Kobe > Jordan, he is just saying that Kobe could be better than Jordan in the future despite no evidence to show that he could. His only rationale is that Kobe got one more ring than Jordan at age 30 (through taking advantage of the fact that Kobe had a birthday August, while Jordan has his Feb), and disregarding the fact that Jordan played a much larger roles in those 2 rings than Kobe did in his three, as well as dismissing the fact that Kobe had a head start by coming into the league at age 18.

However, he is willing to take Kobe over Jordan at age 30.

He also showed little knowledge of NBA history over the last 20 years, trying to deny that Jordan shot less 3pters and at a lower % than Kobe did early in their careers because 3pters are simply used more extensively in this era.

[Allanon]

I don't think Allanon was trying to argue that Kobe > Jordan, he is just saying that Kobe could be better than Jordan in the future despite no evidence to show that he could. His only rationale is that Kobe got one more ring than Jordan at age 30 (through taking advantage of the fact that Kobe had a birthday August, while Jordan has his Feb), and disregarding the fact that Jordan played a much larger roles in those 2 rings than Kobe did in his three, as well as dismissing the fact that Kobe had a head start by coming into the league at age 18.

Yup, I sincerely believe that Kobe has a shot at surpassing Jordan. He may surpass him, he may not. Either way I'm right.



However, he is willing to take Kobe over Jordan at age 30.

Yup. There isn't anything Jordan could do at age 30 that Kobe can't do at age 30. The only difference was in the teams they had. Jordan had better teams at age 27, 28. Kobe now has a team that can compare with Jordan's Bulls at 30. At the same age, Kobe has 3 rings to Jordan's 2.



He also showed little knowledge of NBA history over the last 20 years, trying to deny that Jordan shot less 3pters and at a lower % than Kobe did early in their careers because 3pters are simply used more extensively in this era.

Yup, I was right. Jordan wasn't as good a 3 point shooter as Kobe at the same age.

[xtremesteven33]

I think it is kinda unfair to say that Jordan is like GOD and Kobe is still fighting to get there. I think in terms of talent, they are on the same level. In terms of accomplishments, Kobe has a LONG way to go.

Jordan single handedly dominated this league. Not only was it his talent that made him so great it was his baskeball intelligence that made him so great. The only player i see playing now that i would say is like the same mindset of Jordan (and this might suprise some of you) would be Chris Paul. I HATE THIS GUY on the court. he is a feirce competitor. He takes cheap shots and does anything to win. But i can see a feirce tiger in that guy when he plays.

[xtremesteven33]

When i see Chris Paul play. I see a whole lotta Jordan in that guy. not so much in terms of talent. but in the way he plays.

[TheMACHINE]

When i see Chris Paul play. I see a whole lotta Jordan in that guy. not so much in terms of talent. but in the way he plays.


yah cuz jordan plays point guard, has alot of assists and does layups alot.

[xtremesteven33]

yah cuz jordan plays point guard, has alot of assists and does layups alot.



did u not read my other post. I know Jordan wasnt a PG dude.

I am simply saying that Chris Paul has that JORDANESQUE playing mentality/ability that Jordan has and nobody else has right now. He KNOWS hes the best, He ACTS like hes the best and he DOMINATES the game like no one else right now.

[Allanon]

yah cuz jordan plays point guard, has alot of assists and does layups alot.

No disrespect to you Laker brotha, but I can see where ExtremeSteven is coming from.

That little fucker is fiery, he hates to lose and he is clutch. Without CP3, the Hornets would be lottery bound...hell, even worse than the Bobcats. The Hornets sucked very recently...that was until CP3 was drafted and he turned them around. Gotta give him his props.

As much as guys get paid in the NBA, most players lack those qualities. Alot of players have talent but that drive is what separates the winners from the losers.

Joakim Noah, surprisingly has all that but not the talent.
T-Mac has all the talent but none of the above.
Sheed is fiery and talented but his desire is questionable

Kobe, CP3, Jordan have the skill and more importantly, the Desire to win.

[xtremesteven33]

yea man,

no disrespect to Kobe but i honestly think Chris Paul is more like the mind of Jordan than Kobe is.

let me put it like this. Chris Paul has the mindset of Jordan but plays like Magic but looks like Isaiah

[Allanon]

yea man,

no disrespect to Kobe but i honestly think Chris Paul is more like the mind of Jordan than Kobe is.

let me put it like this. Chris Paul has the mindset of Jordan but plays like Magic but looks like Isaiah

Chris Paul's biggest problem is his size. If he was Kobe or LeBron sized, he would be an All Time Great.

Which brings me to LeBron, he has not shown the work ethic of Kobe/CP3. Kobe's worked on all aspects of his game. CP3 came into the NBA with a poor shooting touch. He's quickly becoming a pretty good shooter.

LeBron has improved but he has not worked on his mid-range shot and free-throws enough.

[xtremesteven33]

If Lebron was a good shooter he would no doubt surpass Jordan. No doubt

[ambchang]

Yup, I sincerely believe that Kobe has a shot at surpassing Jordan. He may surpass him, he may not. Either way I'm right.

Either way you are right? How does that work? You don't even have a stance, how could you be right?


Yup. There isn't anything Jordan could do at age 30 that Kobe can't do at age 30. The only difference was in the teams they had. Jordan had better teams at age 27, 28. Kobe now has a team that can compare with Jordan's Bulls at 30. At the same age, Kobe has 3 rings to Jordan's 2.

Jordan was a better scorer, had better defense, was a better leader, better marketer, better passer, better rebounder.

Funny how you mentioned teams. Jordan never had anyone as good as Shaq playing alongside him, and Kobe had Shaq from the get go all the way to 2004. He had less talented teams in 05 to 07, but compares to Jordan's teams for his first few years. Overall, Kobe got better teams than Jordan did.


Yup, I was right. Jordan wasn't as good a 3 point shooter as Kobe at the same age.

So?

[Allanon]

Either way you are right? How does that work? You don't even have a stance, how could you be right?

Because I say Kobe may or may not surpass Jordan.

If Kobe surpasses Jordan, I'm right.
If Kobe doesn't surpass Jordan, I'm right.



Jordan was a better scoring, better defense, better leader, better marketer, better passer, better rebounder.

Different times, different coaching, different teams, etc. There's nothing Jordan could do that Kobe couldn't do except Win. Kobe's got a few years to improve in that department.

The marketting aspect is also a huge thing. Jordan made the NBA a nationwide phenomenom. With Kobe's popularity increasing world-wide, Kobe may be the reason the NBA becomes a global giant. One more Olympic gig and Kobe will probably secure his place as a global icon...that's probably why Kobe's so excited to be in London/Europe in 2012, he already cornered the Asian market, he needs the European one now.



Funny how you mentioned teams. Jordan never had anyone as good as Shaq playing alongside him, and Kobe had Shaq from the get go all the way to 2004. He had less talented teams in 05 to 07, but compares to Jordan's teams for his first few years. Overall, Kobe got better teams than Jordan did.

True, Jordan didn't have Shaq. Kobe paid the price the last 3 years without Shaq. Now the playing field is even. Kobe doesn't have Shaq and he doesn't have a Pippen level player but he has a deeper team.



So?

His Airness doesn't have Kobe beat in ALL categories, most but not ALL.

[TheMACHINE]

did u not read my other post. I know Jordan wasnt a PG dude.

I am simply saying that Chris Paul has that JORDANESQUE playing mentality/ability that Jordan has and nobody else has right now. He KNOWS hes the best, He ACTS like hes the best and he DOMINATES the game like no one else right now.


and im simply saying that your a dumbass if you dont think Kobe "KNOWS hes the best, ACTS like the best and DOMINATES the game".

[TheMACHINE]

No disrespect to you Laker brotha, but I can see where ExtremeSteven is coming from.



Yah, you can...but to say that CP3 is the only one currenlty in the NBA already goes against your points in this thread.

[John Kerry]

Because I say Kobe may or may not surpass Jordan.

If Kobe surpasses Jordan, I'm right.
If Kobe doesn't surpass Jordan, I'm right.

I'm John Kerry, and I approve this message. Waffling on topics and never taking a stance led me to my almost-victory against the most hated President in US history!

Keep the waffling up!

[Allanon]

Yah, you can...but to say that CP3 is the only one currenlty in the NBA already goes against your points in this thread.

Oh, no. I don't agree at all that CP3 is the only one. Obviously, Kobe too, but that doesn't need to be said cuz I've already said it like a million times in this thread :D

[TheMACHINE]

Oh, no. I don't agree at all that CP3 is the only one. Obviously, Kobe too, but that doesn't need to be said cuz I've already said it like a million times in this thread :D

but sadly Extremesteven thinks he is the only one. :rolleyes

[Allanon]

I'm John Kerry, and I approve this message. Waffling on topics and never taking a stance led me to my almost-victory against the most hated President in US history!

Keep the waffling up!

How's that waffling?

I'm not going to say Kobe's going to surpass Jordan, that's crazy. But it's also crazy to say Kobe ISN'T going to surpass Jordan with 5+ years left in his career.

So the best stance right now is to wait for Kobe to finish his career before you decide to vote one way or another.