I can't remember the last "great" that never relinquished control, not even at the very end, dragging an entire franchise down with him. That was his decision, how you don't penalize him for it? Even when MJ or Hakeem were in their last legs, they went to other teams to milk the brand name for a few more years.
I don't have Paul in the top 20 for those reasons. All time great, but in like the 3rd or 4th tier with the George Gervins and such.
Still don't like the total win shares stat. I'd still take Paul over Cheeks and Parker in a heartbeat. His flaws could be minimized under better coaching. Byron, Monty Williams, Vinny Del Negro and Doc Rivers aren't exactly the cream of the crop.
He was dog in 2007 and 2011.
He was the only guy the Spurs had to guard in 2007. It's like ing at Duncan for the Spurs getting wrecked in the 01 WCF when they were starting Terry Porter, Antonio Daniels, and Danny Ferry.
In 03 Duncan was a one man show and managed just fine. Lebron way underperformed in that series, he looked scared, and was a shadow of himself compared to what he was against Detroit one series earlier. So please tell me how Detroit was unable to lock down one guy with no support but we were? Its because Lebron played like dog
I stopped reading at Karl Malone
as I said before, by the time he retires, he'll be considered barely a top 20 player and in 5 years time, maybe not even a top 30. There is just too much flaws in his game and in his career to be seriously considered.
wtf are you smoking
You can't really compare a SF with a C (or oversized PF). A SF can carry an offense, but not a defense. Conversely, a 7 footer can carry both. To illustrate this, only 3 guys have won a le with a team full of role players: Olajuwon, Duncan, and Dirk.
Okay but does that explain why Lebron had an MVP caliber performance in the ECF against an elite defensive team but then shriveled into a pussy when he played the Spurs in the finals...?
Where did I say rings don't matter?Why the would rings not matter?
Were the 2007 Pistons really an elite defensive team? Ben Wallace had left for the Bulls, and the Pistons had replaced him with a 33 year old Chris Webber who would retire the following season.
If anything, their stats could've been beefed up by playing in an extremely weak eastern conference.
Detroit was the #6 defensive team in the league that season and the Spurs were #3 and they gave up 2.5 more points than us per 100 possessions. So yeah, they were pretty elite.
According to DRtg, Spurs were #2 at 99.9, Cavs were #4 at 101.3, and Detroit was #7 with 104.2.
Maybe that helps answer your question as to why the Spurs beat the Cavs and the Cavs beat the Pistons.
Okay that wasnt what I was wondering, I used per 100, not Drating. But regardless, why was Lebron all world in the ECF and then dog in the Finals, its because he choked.
Drating is points allowed per 100 possessions.
Look how the Spurs and Pistons were constructed. Who was anchoring their interior defense? The Spurs had Duncan. The Pistons had.....Chris Webber? Antonio McDyess? Rasheed Wallace? Were any of them considered good defenders?
Lebron beat the Pistons b/c he could bully his way to the basket, and no one could stop him in the paint. He couldn't do that against the Spurs.
Can you really say Lebron choked when nobody expected the Cavs to win?
Game 1: 4-16 14 points 6TO
Game 2: 9-21 25 points 6TO
Game 3: 9-23 25 points 5TO
Game 4: 10-30 24 points 6TO
Those numbers are ing abhorrent
Sure he has flaws but ...
Raven that is such a apropos handle tbh ...
Yeah that was one of the dumbest posts i have ever read lolSure he has flaws but ...
Raven that is such a apropos handle tbh ...
Yep, he ran into a defense that could neutralize his greatest strength, and he had no one on his team who could step up.
Out of curiosity, how would you describe the following stats:
Game 1: 10-22, 30 pts, 4 TO.
Game 2: 10-29, 29 pts, 1 TO.
Game 3: 9-19, 26 pts, 2 TO.
Game 4: 6-24, 23 pts, 4 TO.
Your life story:
Game 1, good performance
Game 2,
Game 3, great
Game 4,
Not much dumber than talking rings like they are so heavily weighted, then throwing out qualifiers to make your point like "alpha rings"
I agree there is some commons sense needed and rings are important, but the "count them rings" arguments are outdated and a huge reason why Kobe fans are struggling to see things for what they are (like most evolving sports writers see things now with the proliferation of stats in analysis).
Once you get to the point where you've reached (and won) multiple finals, its stops being important. Obviously, having only 2 FMVP out of 7 trips (5 total wins) shows you a certain thing. It's not to knock Kobe, but there are so many variables in the playoffs and yes, regular season is a HUGE part of ranking players.
People always love to throw out "clutch" because of a big playoff game or series, but the truth is that regular seasons matter and are more statistically relevant. Playoffs grab the glory (and rightfully so because the objective for the team is to win a le), but weighting playoffs so much heavier and doing ring smack? It really is the lowest form of debating sports now.
You have to look beyond the stereotypes (Kobe clutch shooting, etc..). You have to look beyond rings (is a guy really considered better because he played in the biggest advantaged market in the league vs CLE + supporting casts like Shaq, Pau, etc..).
Game 4? that looks like Kobe's Game 7 ...
So a 10-22, 30 pts, 4 TO game is a good performance. But a 9-21, 25, 6 TO game is ing abhorrent?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
