Lakers: How underrated is James Worthy

[Fabbs]

lol at his " great ing spin move "

He used to hug his defender with one arm and got away with it

this.
just part of the marketing hype.

The Rockets kicked the Fakers asses in '86 so Sternfish suspends Lewie Lloyd and Mitc Wiggins for 1987.
'87 had to be the most pussified West Conference run in history.
In turn leading to a lucky le over the injury ravaged Celts.

[Thread]

this.
just part of the marketing hype.

The Rockets kicked the Fakers asses in '86 so Sternfish suspends Lewie Lloyd and Mitc Wiggins for 1987.
'87 had to be the most pussified West Conference run in history.
In turn leading to a lucky le over the injury ravaged Celts.

Lloyd was a load. A consciousless brute. He was having none of Magic's skin & grin BS. I was glad to see him disappear like a fart in the wind.

Christ-a-mighty, that er.

[Killakobe81]

We just rank things differently, I look at the performance over a long period of time (career, season, playoff run), and not in games, because if you look into games, you can see lots of variation, and you tend to favour the peaks (80 Finals Game 6), and ignore the valleys (82). 87 was absolutely phenomenal, but Bird was equally dominant in the 86 playoff run. That 80s game was magical, especially given the cir stances of KAJ being out, but Jordan puts up some very underrated games vs. Phoenix, Barkley's 56 point outburt, Duncan's near quad-dub, Shaq's total dominance of Mutombo in 01, Lebron's 48 vs. Pistons are all up there (yes, Barkley's game, even though he lost the series, was phenomenal). Again, ranking players based on one game is a slippery slope, and I will not go down that route. Yes, Magic is no doubt phenomenal, and he is my favourite non-Spur player of all time, and I would rank him one of the top 3 (with Jordan and KAJ), with varying positioning based on the day, but Bird's peak was higher.

As for your refusal to rank players based strictly on stats, fair enough, but keep in mind that impact to the game of basketball was important as well. Sure Russell wasn't a huge stats guy and was surrounded by 7 other HoFers, but it was him who made most of those HoFers due to the championships, he changed the way the game was played, and was instrumental in changing the peach basket game into the modern game.

I wouldn't say Bird's peak was not close to Magic's, I am saying it was just a little, but clearly better.

As for Kobe, you ranked him in your list.

I said Finals and though Kobe and LeBron have some great Finals showings along with some stinkers their best work came before June. That is no knock on either just being honest.

[Thread]

In turn leading to a lucky le over the injury ravaged Celts.

I remember 'em linmpin' around on "sprained ankles." Jabbar pulled 'em aside: "Don't believe it, not for a second. It's a ploy. Go for the throat. Now. Go, NOW!"
& Jabbar was correct. He'd been rinsed before. It was propogated by CBS in association with NYC. Though Stern by then had stepped away from the con and was letting them settle it twixt the coasts.

[Killakobe81]

this.
just part of the marketing hype.

The Rockets kicked the Fakers asses in '86 so Sternfish suspends Lewie Lloyd and Mitc Wiggins for 1987.
'87 had to be the most pussified West Conference run in history.
In turn leading to a lucky le over the injury ravaged Celts.

Lol in 2007 GSW and LeBron and his Cavs did all the heavy lifting if you want to head down this slippery slope.

[ambchang]

I was no MJ or Bird fan but yet I respect their games. Stats are just tools used to support peopled preconceived notions. We are humans and are ALL biased. Sure, it sounds great in theory but stats are used to support biast you cling to them when they support your case (Duncan over Kobe) but use intangibles and things you see or feel to edge Duncan over Shaq. Since few folks Only go by stats which would be stupid ...just like eye test only or rings alone ... Would be foolish.all are factors imho but rings and my eyes are what I trust most. Rings are the ultimate goal and should be weighted appropriately. When I watch a gameI know enough to not just watch the ball or get swayed by idiot commentators. Box score analysis alone is extremely dangerous a fair criticism of Kobe is he get garbage points. But sometimes the game requires it others it is misguided if you don't watch said game how do you know if he is being a compeitor or a selfish prick? Or both?

Stats tell the story, and if they are close (Shaq vs. Duncan), the eye tests tell the rest.

Rings are a HORRIBLE way of weighing players tbh, rings are the ultimate goal, but it should be how much an individual contributes to the rings. And that is where stats come in, where WS, defensive rating, offensive ratings and such allows people to see how valuable a player is.

[ambchang]

I said Finals and though Kobe and LeBron have some great Finals showings along with some stinkers their best work came before June. That is no knock on either just being honest.

Can't recall any great Kobe Finals games, tbh.

[Thread]

Can't recall any great Kobe Finals games, tbh.

Those 2 suicide drives into the front of the rim in Game 7, '10 came in handy.

You get your jollies from a stat line. Knock yerself out.

I get mine from:::

Kobe: 5

the tired old bag Duncan: 4

[Killakobe81]

Can't recall any great Kobe Finals games, tbh.

How about his OT performance when Shaq fouled out in Game 5 (IIRC) Not sure it was transcendant numbers wise ... but the timing and the place of it was spectacular. But like I said many of his best were in the playoffs.

[lefty]

Well, undersized Mark Jackson was guarding him

I dont know what Bird was thinking TBH

MJ dropped 50+ games in the playoffs vs the likes of Dumars and Starks

[Killakobe81]

Stats tell the story, and if they are close (Shaq vs. Duncan), the eye tests tell the rest.

Rings are a HORRIBLE way of weighing players tbh, rings are the ultimate goal, but it should be how much an individual contributes to the rings. And that is where stats come in, where WS, defensive rating, offensive ratings and such allows people to see how valuable a player is.

I think it is vital and important we agree to disagree ...

[spurraider21]

LOL ^ Funny thing is I could care less overall how Kobe is percieved if we could win another le without him ...

But you Spur fans have made me care about Kobe's legacy ....when I still think Magic is greater than Kobe ... I remember the Magic vs. Bird debates I had as a kid ...that is the only thing that compares ... because MJ ended all debates when he got "6" funny how time changes. Bulls fans loved to throw around 6>5 or 3 ... but now that is a "team accomplishment". GTFO ... teams are led by great players and in my book if you are a real leader (not a locker room one) on teh court your rings count ...PERIOD.

I think MJ pretty much sealed it by #4 tbh. The fact that he proved he can pretty much win a le whenever he felt like it put him on another level altogehter. #5 sorta padded it and 6 with the game winner was just over kill

I mean, he 3peated with 3 finals MVP, a prime-Shaq-like stretch. As good as any 3 year stretch you could imagine. He retires for a year, comes back in the tail end the next year and wasn't in perfect game shape (as evidenced by his uncharacteristic 41% from the field). The next year got back into shape and crushed the league on route to a record of 72-10 and another le. at that point, I think MJ was GOAT already. by this point of his career, he really had no rival besides boredom

[Thread]

Rings are a HORRIBLE way of weighing players tbh

Yeah, I know. It was the same horse- when we finally broke thru in Boston in '85. They wanted to change the rules, change the way home. Uh, uh. Now that Kobe leads the tired old bag Duncan 5-4 you want to change the rules, the way home. Uh, uh. We started together and that's the way we're going to go/together.

And that's just the way it's gonna be, Amb.

[Killakobe81]

Yeah, I know. It was the same horse- when we finally broke thru in Boston in '85. They wanted to change the rules, change the way home. Uh, uh. Now that Kobe leads the tired old bag Duncan 5-4 you want to change the rules, the way home. Uh, uh. We started together and that's the way we're going to go/together.

And that's just the way it's gonna be, Amb.

Tell em, Cully a couple nerds with toomuch time on his hands is not gonna change the rules of this here game ...

It's all in the game, yo ...

[Blake]

Rings are a HORRIBLE way of weighing players tbh,

lolwut

[ambchang]

How about his OT performance when Shaq fouled out in Game 5 (IIRC) Not sure it was transcendant numbers wise ... but the timing and the place of it was spectacular. But like I said many of his best were in the playoffs.

Not sure if those were in the same league as the ones I mentioned or the Magic game. Sure he put up some good games, but like you said, probably no transcendent games.

[ambchang]

Yeah, I know. It was the same horse- when we finally broke thru in Boston in '85. They wanted to change the rules, change the way home. Uh, uh. Now that Kobe leads the tired old bag Duncan 5-4 you want to change the rules, the way home. Uh, uh. We started together and that's the way we're going to go/together.

And that's just the way it's gonna be, Amb.

I never subscribed to more les = better, it's part of the oversimplified black and white culture that breeds ignorance and errors. I am not surprised you like to wallow in it though (I am assuming you are the real Giuseppe, even though, seriously, I am having strong doubts).

Tell em, Cully a couple nerds with toomuch time on his hands is not gonna change the rules of this here game ...

It's all in the game, yo ...

Cully agreeing you is not a good thing, you know that, right?

[ambchang]

lolwut

If you like to say that ignoring teammates, compe ion, make up of team, system, coaching, and many other cir stances is the right way to do things, be my guest.

[Killakobe81]

Stats tell the story, and if they are close (Shaq vs. Duncan), the eye tests tell the rest.

Rings are a HORRIBLE way of weighing ROLE players tbh, rings are the ultimate goal, but it should be how much an individual contributes to the rings. And that is where stats come in, where WS, defensive rating, offensive ratings and such allows people to see how valuable a player is.

Fixed it for ya ...

[Blake]

If you like to say that ignoring teammates, compe ion, make up of team, system, coaching, and many other cir stances is the right way to do things, be my guest.

I don't like to say any of that. I also don't know why including rings with all that is HORRIBLE.

[ambchang]

Fixed it for ya ...

Why? They are all players, they all are part of an equation to team success, just that some of them played a bigger role doesn't mean that they should be held to a different standard.

If player A is 90% responsible for a championship.
Player B is 51% responsible for a championship.

Both players won 1 championship, and have similar stats.

Your logic is that these two players are equal.

Better yet, player A had a major role in all 4 of his championships, including being irreplaceable and named MVP in 3 of them (arguably irreplaceable in 4).
Player B played a major role in 3 championships, including being irreplaceable and named MVP in 2 of them, but won 5 in total.

You are saying B > A.

[ambchang]

I don't like to say any of that. I also don't know why including rings with all that is HORRIBLE.

Here is a tip for you, read the whole sentence.

Stats tell the story, and if they are close (Shaq vs. Duncan), the eye tests tell the rest.

Rings are a HORRIBLE way of weighing players tbh, rings are the ultimate goal, but it should be how much an individual contributes to the rings. And that is where stats come in, where WS, defensive rating, offensive ratings and such allows people to see how valuable a player is.