Reply With Quote
Somewhere between John Crotty and Ryan Gomes on the all-time list, tbh.
Somewhere between John Crotty and Ryan Gomes on the all-time list, tbh.
Westbrook won over a lot of the haters. Dude went straight up alpha (and might have destroyed CP3's career in the process) in the playoffs.
I agree. duncan is now higher. Kobe is higher than Bird. Kobe did/does chuck to much. Yes prime vince or AI could have won with Shaq (Dwade for example) but none of them would have won three or the two with Pau especially ... Right now most games he is playing a hideous style of ball his chucking getting worse as his team-mates and his game has got weaker. (last couple games excluded).Thank you, finally someone here says it. Anytime I hear someone scoff at Kobe being top 10, I ask them what their list is, I have no problem with Duncan being ranked higher, in fact I rank him higher myself.
But when they start listing guys like Jerry West or even Larry Bird as number 5 but Kobe at 15, it makes me wonder if they are basing it on facts and accomplishments or emotions.
Yeah, Kobe was a ball hog, yes Kobe was a chucker. However, in a Phil Jackson system+a great big he produces championships. I guarantee you 95% of the league couldnt accomplish that.
Yes, Allen Iverson/McGrady/Carter would have won a ring with Shaq in those teams, but not 3 rings, not a threepeat, and none of those guys could win 1 ring with Gasol.
But I understand the hate, I hate Westbrook the way you guys hate Kobe.
But the trollin about he is not better than Bonner is funny to me ... doesnt even make me mad or troll me but is just funny ...
But you can tell it was a slow NBA nighton Monday ...like 6 new Kobe threads came up and only 33% were from Kool
How in the world is Kobe > Bird.
But when they start listing guys like Jerry West or even Larry Bird as number 5 but Kobe at 15, it makes me wonder if they are basing it on facts and accomplishments or emotions.
Yeah, Kobe was a ball hog, yes Kobe was a chucker. However, in a Phil Jackson system+a great big he produces championships. I guarantee you 95% of the league couldnt accomplish that.
Yes, Allen Iverson/McGrady/Carter would have won a ring with Shaq in those teams, but not 3 rings, not a threepeat, and none of those guys could win 1 ring with Gasol.
But I understand the hate, I hate Westbrook the way you guys hate Kobe.
Bird was a three time MVP, and primary nemesis to Magic, he was the clear alpha on one of the best team in NBA history, he was an unparalleled passer, shooter, and compe or, and one of the best clutch players of all time.
Unless you want to say Kobe > Magic, there is just no case that Kobe > Bird, because Magic = Bird, and that would just be incredibly stupid.
Besides, Duncan was < Bird and Kobe last year, how in the world would a ring at an advanced age when he was no longer even close to prime ring winning days put him over the top? It makes no sense. The ONLY reasonable answer is that Duncan > Kobe and Bird all along.
But I am having trouble putting Duncan over Bird. To me, Duncan, Magic, and Bird are in the same tier. Kobe is two strungs below, belonging to the Dirk, Garnett group, after the Shaq, Hakeem, Moses group.
5-3. That's how we started & we're gonna continue in that manner, all the way to the end.
since when Kobe > Bird ?
what the ...
Not going down this path ...except yes Duncan is better than Bird and Kobe. Magic is better than Bird too. A case can be made for Kobe over Magic but I am taking Magic. And I had Duncan over bird BEFORE last year for the record.
It's funny you favor bigs based on your groupings but duncan doesnt get the nod over Bird?
I have pretty much given up on strict rankings, and is looking more in strata. But even that is difficult because a case could be made to have Magic and Bird in the same group as Jabbar and Jordan, but there is also a case against it.
The only counter to Bird is longevity, but having a 13-year career, where he was dominant for 5 or 6 years and 3 or 4 years where he was clearly the best player in the league is a resume that is equaled or surpassed by a very small number of players.
Duncan can't claim that (overlap with Shaq), and Magic can't claim that (overlap with Jordan). The only reason they were in the same strata as Bird was because of Bird's back.
Bird's peak was as high as Shaq (but it was longer than Shaq's), Lebron (with better results), and Jordan (Jordan had better results and longer). There isn't another player who can claim as high a peak outside of those mentioned, or older timers (Wilt, Russell, Jabbar, maybe Oscar).
I'll just bet you are.
If we go by peaks than Hakeem can be moved up ... I think duncan's resume of sustained brilliance even if he dipped a bit after 2007 he came back strong these past two seasons that absolutely matters and so does the back to back finals. Duncan made an all NBA team (I think he did he certainly deserved it) long after Bird's career would have been done due to back injury. Duncan has been to finals 6 times winning 5. Bird has the MVP edge but that award is bull more so in Tim's era than Bird's... but still. Also I dont get how duncan doesnt have an edge on Shaq. bird was brilliant in his prime and was every bit as good or better than Magic during it. But rings and full career matters so Magic duncan and even Kobe are ahead of Bird tbh ...
Career length is only reason Kobe is in the Magic convo tbh .. if he doesnt get the last two it's not even close.
Oh and Shaq is greater than Bird too but I think that is a bit closer argument because the last 3 or 4 shaq years were crappy.
I disagree. Shaq is overrated. I can't call a player great that runs from the moment. He has the stats but he's no killer.
If you go by career length, then players like Hondo or Malone would be high on the list, and yet they aren't.
Kobe and Hakeem had dips in their careers during their primes that cannot be ignored.
Duncan and Shaq is still a tough one for me. It depends on the time of the day you ask me, I would side with Duncan 80% of the time, but then the other 20% of the time, I am reminded of how ridiculously dominant Shaq was for a few years.
Bird was basketball Jesus for a good stretch, and was Jordan before Jordan in terms of dominance. People just forgot how ridiculously good he was during his prime. They saw him during his injured days, looked up the stats of those years vs. his prime years, and thought his prime was just a little bit better because of those stats, but it wasn't. Bird was much much better during his prime than during his injury years, despite the somewhat comparable stats (a few points, rebounds and assists off). Bird was Dominant with a capital D.
It's like Shaq's early Orlando years vs. his Laker years, the stats are similar, but Shaq was that much better as a Laker as he was a Magic.
When did Shaq run from any moments?
He saw the sinking ship that was the Shaq/Kobe Lakers and left, promptly winning a le in '06.
I dont really care about yours or even my rankings tbh, so I will just say this no I did not just say "length" because Malone did not ring. Stilla great player but rings matter always have, always will. Never saw Hondo so cant speak one way or the other. I realize West, NBaylor, Hondo russell etc were great players but I dont judge guys i never saw play in their prime and tbh I missed most of Kareem's. But I give him the benefit of the doubt because I saw him skyhook Walton, Moses etc. to death (though Moses kicked his ass in '83). Kareem was still having key final Performances late in his career. to say that Duncan's le in 2014 in which he was no longer dominant but still a crucial contributor doesnt help elevate him over Bird or even shaq/kobe is crazy. at Shaq's best of course he was "more dominant" (like the case you made for Bird) that doesnt mean he was the better overall player or had the better career. Magic had a better career than Bird just less dominant and same applies to Duncan/Shaq. If Lebron dies today he was more dominant than Kobe, Duncan and bird ...even Magic but career wise I'm taking Kobe/Duncan/Magic.
We just have different criteria. Very different.
Lebron's dominance was amazing, but he had all these pockets of failure in there. 2011 vs. Mavs was a huge black mark, and his OK finals in 2013 didn't help matters. He was really truly dominant end to end in 2012. I am actually more impressed by his first Cavs stint by carrying that poo poo platter of a team by himself deep in the playoffs every year.
Walton and Moses were both very underrated, Walton had a great peak, but that was way too short. It's a shame injuries shortened his career, he would have been undoubtedly a top 10 player of all time, and possibly top 5 if he played another 5 or 6 years at his prime, but that Blazers curse is just too much to overcome.
As for Duncan's 2014 le, again, it's not really that huge of a finals performance. His 2013 finals performance was perhaps greater. And no, neither of them elevated Duncan over Kobe/Shaq, he was already above them before those two finals appearances.
As for Bird, I am not sure if it's your Boston hate, but I have a very tough time putting him out of the top 5 of all time. He was incredible.
Kirby is closer 15 than he is to 10. I just don't see how a player who has been so poor at making teammates around him better can be placed in the Top 10. He's probably a Top 5 individual talent but that ain't all that it's about. His style is a losing style anywhere other than LA. Can you imagine building a small market team around his chucking? His whole career would've looked like this year.
Stay upstairs with your BS. How was Kobe's style when he ripped through your team during the early 2000's? Or his style when he went back to back again and 3 straight finals. Like I said, stay upstairs with your "takes"
Kirby is closer 15 than he is to 10. I just don't see how a player who has been so poor at making teammates around him better can be placed in the Top 10. He's probably a Top 5 individual talent but that ain't all that it's about. His style is a losing style anywhere other than LA. Can you imagine building a small market team around his chucking? His whole career would've looked like this year.
Is Kobe good at making teammates better? Has his style yielded any success when it is the main driving force behind a team? The Lakers team ripped through the league all those years, it wasn't all Kobe. I bet he doesnt rip through all those years if you put him in Cleveland or Toronto.
The best stat we have to try and quantify that is RAPM, which wisely adjusts for a variety of variables outside a player's control (ex. which players he's on the floor with, pace, etc), and in fact, yes, Kobe does make his teammates better since they are usually worse off when he's out of the game.
That said, Kobe's RAPM does lack behind many other greats of his era. Oddly, Kobe has finished in the top 10 in regular season RAPM only twice in his career. A player like Tim Duncan has finished in the top 5 twelve times over his career and topped the list 3 times.
http://stats-for-the-nba.appspot.com/
I have some theories why Kobe lacks behind almost all the other top all stars of his era in RAPM, despite his impressive per game stats, and I think the first culprit is ball dominance. When a single player dominates the ball, the other players get out of rhythm offensively and their defense drops off. The second culprit is Kobe's shot selection. He loves 18-20 foot jumpers to a pathological degree. A miss from a long 2 is about the worst miss in basketball and ignites a fast break more effectively than other misses. I think this is a reason why Kobe has been a net negative defensively for over 10 seasons now.
Kobe does make his teammates better, but there is some truth to the idea that his individual brilliance as a scorer doesn't translate to optimal success for the team.
ANOTHER triple double::: 12pts, 13asts, 10TOs
GOAT
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
