It's May 21, 2024, 10:56:13 AM
results say otherwise (and besides, whats he supposd to say?)especially since Kobe always played 2nd horse to Shaq
Quote from: Hack Wilson on February 27, 2008, 12:05:50 PMresults say otherwise (and besides, whats he supposd to say?)especially since Kobe always played 2nd horse to ShaqGotta agree. Phil's thing is he is an expert motivator and knows all the right things to say to get what he wants out of his players. Jordan was clearly the better player, so if he didnt have superior skills, then what is it that made him better? I don't think anybody could honestly say that Jordan was a superior athlete to Bryant. Its tough to measure "will to win" but I'm sure Kobe wants to win every bit as much as Jordan did, so its probably not that. Kobe has better size than Jordan, so that cant be what made Jordan better. So if Kobe has-"better basketball skills than Jordan" (according to Phil)-as good or better athleticism-just as much of a will to win-superior sizethen what made Jordan the better player? (Jordan being the better player is not debatable.)
^^What an unexpected response from Hack Wilson. Since you're the expert on this, what do results say? My results say that you're a major Laker hater. Good job.No Kobe=No rings.No Shaq=No rings.No Jordan=No rings.No Pippen=No rings.Now say something worthwhile.
Okay how is he wrong? Kobe has more range, an unlimited arsenal of moves, and more intensity. Wanna stop Jordan? Force him to take 3s. Keep Kobe out of the paint and he'll knock down long range js from anywhere. All Kobe needs is an MVP and another ring or 2 and this debate will be too close for the haters to feel comfortable. PS: Didn't Tex Winter just say Kobe has better leadership skills than Jordan?
Quote from: Now_I_Know on February 27, 2008, 12:26:43 PM^^What an unexpected response from Hack Wilson. Since you're the expert on this, what do results say? My results say that you're a major Laker hater. Good job.No Kobe=No rings.No Shaq=No rings.No Jordan=No rings.No Pippen=No rings.Now say something worthwhile. michael jordan = 6 rings as the teams best playershaq = 3 rings as his teams best playerkobe = zeroKobe was the best player on the team that lost to Detroit though, he can take satisfaction in that right?
Quote from: Hack Wilson on February 27, 2008, 05:47:10 PMQuote from: Now_I_Know on February 27, 2008, 12:26:43 PM^^What an unexpected response from Hack Wilson. Since you're the expert on this, what do results say? My results say that you're a major Laker hater. Good job.No Kobe=No rings.No Shaq=No rings.No Jordan=No rings.No Pippen=No rings.Now say something worthwhile. michael jordan = 6 rings as the teams best playershaq = 3 rings as his teams best playerkobe = zeroKobe was the best player on the team that lost to Detroit though, he can take satisfaction in that right?Wrong...Kobe was arguably the better player by the time the '01 and '02 run came along.
Nobody knows both players strengths and weaknesses better than Phil.
Quote from: Styles1 on February 27, 2008, 08:57:52 PMNobody knows both players strengths and weaknesses better than Phil.