West Coast Connection Forum
Lifestyle => Sports & Entertainment => Topic started by: OG Hack Wilson on March 14, 2011, 08:49:56 PM
-
Phil Jackson has been there, he has played golf with Michael Jordan. He has had dinners with Kobe Bryant. He has coached them both. He has won championships with both. His perspective on comparing the greatest player of his generation (if not all time) and his heir apparent may have the most insight.
And he wants us to stop comparing the two.
Really, we need to stop comparing anyone to Jordan, he told T.J. Simers of the Los Angeles Times.
“Kobe has patterned himself after Michael, and there are a lot of identical things there, but it’s one thing to hope to be like him, it’s another thing to be like him….
“I’m with [ESPN's] Bill Simmons on this,” he says. “We have to take Michael Jordan out of the equation. Stop comparing anyone to Michael Jordan. It’s just not fair. He was remarkable. Kobe’s in his own sphere.
“He doesn’t shoot the same percentage [.455] as Michael [.497]. He has the same characteristics as Michael, but he’s not the same player. It takes nothing away from him — he’s a great player in his own right.”
-
LOL. Can't wait for NIK to make a thread how "Phil Jackson is overrated & is on drugs" lol.
-
LOL. Can't wait for NIK to make a thread how "Phil Jackson is overrated & is on drugs" lol.
it's probably partly true if u think weeds a drug - but the drugs have not caused him to think wrong :)
if u gave Don Nelson the 90's bulls roster he ATLEAST wins 4 titles
-
LOL. Can't wait for NIK to make a thread how "Phil Jackson is overrated & is on drugs" lol.
it's probably partly true if u think weeds a drug - but the drugs have not caused him to think wrong :)
if u gave Don Nelson the 90's bulls roster he ATLEAST wins 4 titles
If you gave Stevie Wonder the 90's Bulls roster & the three-peat Lakers team he would be on pace for at six rings lol.
-
LOL. Can't wait for NIK to make a thread how "Phil Jackson is overrated & is on drugs" lol.
it's probably partly true if u think weeds a drug - but the drugs have not caused him to think wrong :)
if u gave Don Nelson the 90's bulls roster he ATLEAST wins 4 titles
If you gave Stevie Wonder the 90's Bulls roster & the three-peat Lakers team he would be on pace for at six rings lol.
nah dude those early 2000s Kings teams wouldve stumped STevie :D
-
^Na, I never said the refs would be different; just the Lakers coach. ;)
-
Phil Jackson has been there, he has played golf with Michael Jordan. He has had dinners with Kobe Bryant. He has coached them both. He has won championships with both. His perspective on comparing the greatest player of his generation (if not all time) and his heir apparent may have the most insight.
And he wants us to stop comparing the two.
Really, we need to stop comparing anyone to Jordan, he told T.J. Simers of the Los Angeles Times.
“Kobe has patterned himself after Michael, and there are a lot of identical things there, but it’s one thing to hope to be like him, it’s another thing to be like him….
“I’m with [ESPN's] Bill Simmons on this,” he says. “We have to take Michael Jordan out of the equation. Stop comparing anyone to Michael Jordan. It’s just not fair. He was remarkable. Kobe’s in his own sphere.
“He doesn’t shoot the same percentage [.455] as Michael [.497]. He has the same characteristics as Michael, but he’s not the same player. It takes nothing away from him — he’s a great player in his own right.”
That's interesting that Jordan shot at a higher percentage. I think Kobe is a better pure shooter than Jordan and everyone knows that. Kobe is much more deadly from long range, and you very rarely saw Jordan shoot any of those long distance three's Kobe takes that are often well-beyond the three point arc.
But whatever Jordan didn't have on Kobe in the way of shooting touch, he made up for in physical and mental control. Jordan seemed to have more strength and body control than Kobe. So Jordan was able to get good looks at the basket easier than Kobe Bryant. Jordan also was able to mentally control a basketball game in a way nobody else can. From beginning to the end you always felt Jordan had a firm grip on everything that went down on the basketball court.
Also, as a icon of the sport Jordan was more articulate than Kobe, but that's a separate subject.
-
Phil Jackson has been there, he has played golf with Michael Jordan. He has had dinners with Kobe Bryant. He has coached them both. He has won championships with both. His perspective on comparing the greatest player of his generation (if not all time) and his heir apparent may have the most insight.
And he wants us to stop comparing the two.
Really, we need to stop comparing anyone to Jordan, he told T.J. Simers of the Los Angeles Times.
“Kobe has patterned himself after Michael, and there are a lot of identical things there, but it’s one thing to hope to be like him, it’s another thing to be like him….
“I’m with [ESPN's] Bill Simmons on this,” he says. “We have to take Michael Jordan out of the equation. Stop comparing anyone to Michael Jordan. It’s just not fair. He was remarkable. Kobe’s in his own sphere.
“He doesn’t shoot the same percentage [.455] as Michael [.497]. He has the same characteristics as Michael, but he’s not the same player. It takes nothing away from him — he’s a great player in his own right.”
That's interesting that Jordan shot at a higher percentage. I think Kobe is a better pure shooter than Jordan and everyone knows that. Kobe is much more deadly from long range, and you very rarely saw Jordan shoot any of those long distance three's Kobe takes that are often well-beyond the three point arc.
But whatever Jordan didn't have on Kobe in the way of shooting touch, he made up for in physical and mental control. Jordan seemed to have more strength and body control than Kobe. So Jordan was able to get good looks at the basket easier than Kobe Bryant. Jordan also was able to mentally control a basketball game in a way nobody else can. From beginning to the end you always felt Jordan had a firm grip on everything that went down on the basketball court.
Also, as a icon of the sport Jordan was more articulate than Kobe, but that's a separate subject.
I think Kobe tends to settle for outside jumpers more than Jordan would too. A lot of times outside, and very contested jumpers. Also, as Jordan aged he developed a "go-to" move that he perfected. Kobe does have a solid arsenal...but doesnt really have that ONE move that is just unstoppable (like Jordans fade-away, Kareems Sky Hook, Hakeems Dream Shake, etc). He has a lot of different moves to get off a shot, but not that ONE move, that he can rely on every trip down the floor if he wanted. One more thing too, Jordan drew a LOT of fouls driving to the hoop. When you get fouled on a shot, it only counts as a shot attempt IF you make the basket. If you dont, it doesnt count as a shot attempt. That could have helped Jordans FG% also.
-
First, Kobe's outside shooting is overly applauded. Its not like he shoots a GREAT percentage from three, but it is better than MJ.
Second, PJ, who has coached both for many years, clearly has a good idea who is better, and he says it here (as he has before), although in a politically correct way.
Frankly, I think Phil is trying to help Kobe; its almost unfair that he is compared to MJ when Jordan is clearly that much better. 3 more championships will not make Kobe better, and Jackson knows this.
The ONLY thing Kobe has on MJ is 3 pt shooting, and even then he isn't a GREAT 3 point shooter. So I've always wondered why this is even debated. Kobe fan propaganda has fuelled this i suspect.
Still, Kobe is the CLOSEST one, which is an incredible feat in itself, and should be good enough for Kobe stans/fans
-
And don't none of you Kobe stans tell me this is some Phil Jackson motivation type shit
-
Second, PJ, who has coached both for many years, clearly has a good idea who is better, and he says it here (as he has before), although in a politically correct way.
Where's the link?
-
Still, Kobe is the CLOSEST one, which is an incredible feat in itself, and should be good enough for Kobe stans/fans
Kobe is the closest thing to MJ, but not the closest thing to the greatest player of all time. People always use MJ as the measuring stick. Unfortunately, the only players who will ever get compared to him are perimeter players. The league likes to build up perimeter guys rather than bigmen. Which is why the debate over who is the best player in the world, is always limited to perimeter guys. Kobe might be the closest thing to MJ because of his style of play, but up until this last championship, it was difficult to find many experts who had him ranked in the top 10 all time.
-
First, Kobe's outside shooting is overly applauded. Its not like he shoots a GREAT percentage from three, but it is better than MJ.
Second, PJ, who has coached both for many years, clearly has a good idea who is better, and he says it here (as he has before), although in a politically correct way.
Frankly, I think Phil is trying to help Kobe; its almost unfair that he is compared to MJ when Jordan is clearly that much better. 3 more championships will not make Kobe better, and Jackson knows this.
The ONLY thing Kobe has on MJ is 3 pt shooting, and even then he isn't a GREAT 3 point shooter. So I've always wondered why this is even debated. Kobe fan propaganda has fuelled this i suspect.
Still, Kobe is the CLOSEST one, which is an incredible feat in itself, and should be good enough for Kobe stans/fans
Yeah it really is annoying how some people act as if Kobe was as good as Ray Allen from the 3 point line... when the fact is that even LeBron has been BETTER last season. And LeBron is far from a "great" 3 pt shooter. He was BETTER than Kobe last season - fact.
-
Still, Kobe is the CLOSEST one, which is an incredible feat in itself, and should be good enough for Kobe stans/fans
Kobe is the closest thing to MJ, but not the closest thing to the greatest player of all time. People always use MJ as the measuring stick. Unfortunately, the only players who will ever get compared to him are perimeter players. The league likes to build up perimeter guys rather than bigmen. Which is why the debate over who is the best player in the world, is always limited to perimeter guys. Kobe might be the closest thing to MJ because of his style of play, but up until this last championship, it was difficult to find many experts who had him ranked in the top 10 all time.
the best players ever (at this very moment)
Bill Russell (11 rings, 5 MVP's....and he had to do it over Wilt. nobody touching this guy)
Michael Jordan
Larry Bird
Oscar Charleston
Wilt Chamberlain
Magic Johnson
Kareem Abdoul Jabbar
Shaq
Hakeem
Dr. J
Kevin Garnett
Tim Duncan
Karl Malone
Jerry West
John Stockton (I'll put him over Kobe because of all the games he had 13+ assists which equals Kobe's scoring average)
Kobe
Lebron
Barkley
Ewing
McHale
-
Still, Kobe is the CLOSEST one, which is an incredible feat in itself, and should be good enough for Kobe stans/fans
Kobe is the closest thing to MJ, but not the closest thing to the greatest player of all time. People always use MJ as the measuring stick. Unfortunately, the only players who will ever get compared to him are perimeter players. The league likes to build up perimeter guys rather than bigmen. Which is why the debate over who is the best player in the world, is always limited to perimeter guys. Kobe might be the closest thing to MJ because of his style of play, but up until this last championship, it was difficult to find many experts who had him ranked in the top 10 all time.
the best players ever (at this very moment)
Bill Russell (11 rings, 5 MVP's....and he had to do it over Wilt. nobody touching this guy)
Michael Jordan
Larry Bird
Oscar Charleston
Wilt Chamberlain
Magic Johnson
Kareem Abdoul Jabbar
Shaq
Hakeem
Dr. J
Kevin Garnett
Tim Duncan
Karl Malone
Jerry West
John Stockton (I'll put him over Kobe because of all the games he had 13+ assists which equals Kobe's scoring average)
Kobe
Lebron
Barkley
Ewing
McHale
lol
When you show so much Celtic bias, it makes your whole list look like bullshit man. For one, no one consideres Jordan #2 lol. Also, Bird and Magic are typically only one spot away from eachother. I have seen far more lists that have Magic ahead of Bird though. But it could be argued either way. Garnett above Duncan is absolutely fuckin amazing lol. I have never seen that. Duncan is widely considered the greatest PF of all time, ahead of Malone and Barkley. Those two are typically ranked ahead of Garnett. So you having Garnett so high is ridiculous. Mchale was good, but belongs NOwhere near this list. Neither does Ewing. Robinson was a far better player than Ewing, but I would be fine with someone leaving him off this list too. LeBron might get here eventually, but right now...no.
My post wasnt to take a shot at Kobe. Just to show how misleading it is to say "Kobe is the closest thing to MJ". I would say that now, Kobe could be considered top 10 all time. Where in the top ten, im not sure. Definitely not top 5...but somewhere between 6 and 10. Clearly the best players from this generation have been Shaq, Duncan, and Kobe. All three should be top ten I think, and all three between 6 and 10. Lebron could get up there when its all said and done, but he would be considered the generation after Shaq, Duncan, and Kobe.
-
Oscar Charleston
Dude managed a hell of a team to almost 100 wins and batted over .350 the same year, but what the fuck is he doing on a top 5 NBA list?
-
Oscar Charleston
Dude managed a hell of a team to almost 100 wins and batted over .350 the same year, but what the fuck is he doing on a top 5 NBA list?
lmao
you know i mean Robertson
but i cant wait for baseball
-
and we all know KEvin Garnett is better than Tim Duncan
-
First, Kobe's outside shooting is overly applauded. Its not like he shoots a GREAT percentage from three, but it is better than MJ.
Second, PJ, who has coached both for many years, clearly has a good idea who is better, and he says it here (as he has before), although in a politically correct way.
Frankly, I think Phil is trying to help Kobe; its almost unfair that he is compared to MJ when Jordan is clearly that much better. 3 more championships will not make Kobe better, and Jackson knows this.
The ONLY thing Kobe has on MJ is 3 pt shooting, and even then he isn't a GREAT 3 point shooter. So I've always wondered why this is even debated. Kobe fan propaganda has fuelled this i suspect.
Still, Kobe is the CLOSEST one, which is an incredible feat in itself, and should be good enough for Kobe stans/fans
this ::)
-
Still, Kobe is the CLOSEST one, which is an incredible feat in itself, and should be good enough for Kobe stans/fans
Kobe is the closest thing to MJ, but not the closest thing to the greatest player of all time. People always use MJ as the measuring stick. Unfortunately, the only players who will ever get compared to him are perimeter players. The league likes to build up perimeter guys rather than bigmen. Which is why the debate over who is the best player in the world, is always limited to perimeter guys. Kobe might be the closest thing to MJ because of his style of play, but up until this last championship, it was difficult to find many experts who had him ranked in the top 10 all time.
the best players ever (at this very moment)
Bill Russell (11 rings, 5 MVP's....and he had to do it over Wilt. nobody touching this guy)
Michael Jordan
Larry Bird
Oscar Charleston
Wilt Chamberlain
Magic Johnson
Kareem Abdoul Jabbar
Shaq
Hakeem
Dr. J
Kevin Garnett
Tim Duncan
Karl Malone
Jerry West
John Stockton (I'll put him over Kobe because of all the games he had 13+ assists which equals Kobe's scoring average)
Kobe
Lebron
Barkley
Ewing
McHale
When you show so much Celtic bias, it makes your whole list look like bullshit man. For one, no one consideres Jordan #2 lol. Also, Bird and Magic are typically only one spot away from eachother.
I do it my way
how about I replace Mchale with Havlicek? deal? maybe Bob Cousy? or Paul Pierce? :D
meanwhile back to KG I've been saying KG > Duncan for awhile now....part of it is the fact KG is the most intense, vocal leader in the league. I started watching the NBA right around the time both KG and Duncan got into it and Duncan got the much better situation. Not that duncan isn't an all time great himself.
-
oh and by the way, how the hell can you argue AGAINST Russell? he dominated Wilt, won 11 rings and 5 MVPs. and he obviously wasn't on some Robert Horry shit with those 11 rings (just incase someone wanted to make that lame arguement)
-
oh and by the way, how the hell can you argue AGAINST Russell? he dominated Wilt, won 11 rings and 5 MVPs. and he obviously wasn't on some Robert Horry shit with those 11 rings (just incase someone wanted to make that lame arguement)
Not that I disagree with you about Russel, but the argument is the era he did it in. Had Russell started playing in the mid 80s and had to face Larry, Magic, The Pistons, the Knicks, the Suns, and The Jazz how many rings would he have lead his team to? No way is it 11. The question is whether it's more than 6.
-
so you'll downplay him facing Wilt, Jerry West or Oscar's teams?
-
lol at kobe being rated and thought of so low.
hes "considered by you guys" that hes the closest to MJ yet KG is ahead of him (KG is my Fav PF so there is no bias even though hes a celtic now)
years ago people say he wont be considered beating MJ unless he got more rings, now you guys say that doesnt even matter. lol this is fucking ridiculous, what does kobe need to get the same number or more of scoring championships?
i mean whats the line? even if he were, u guys would still be pointing at something else. its retarded, what if jordon played with the zone? what about the lack of young superstars in jordans era?
this is retarded. u guys pick at kobes stats inch for inch, while u guys blatantly name other players without doing the same.
-
Kobe had Shaq for 3 years
then he got the NBA to let the Lakers rape memphis and won 2 more rings
if KG doesn't get hurt in 08-09 the Celtics would've been going for a threepeat last year
Tim Duncan won 4 rings as the star of his team each year
Karl Malone was just as good a scorer as Kobe in his prime if not better and also was better due to his amazing reboiunding ability
-
who gives a fuck, phil says something new every day. he has also gone on record to say that kobe is a greater scorer and better with the ball than jordan. kobe is currently doing it with much less than jordan ever had. he's playin with gasol as a second fiddle, while jordan had pippen for all his title runs. give kobe a sidekick like pippen and lakers win the last 6 titles LOL. also, like infinite mentioned, kobe's shooting percentage is only lower because he has more range. so in essence, this is a plus for kobe. the more range a player has, the lower his percentage is. mj had no three-ball, so he barely shot from outside, while kobe is a great pure shooter. naturally, players who make their living in or around the paint have a higher percentage. amir johnson and deandre jordan dont have a higher shooting percentage than kevin garnett and tim duncan because they're better, they have a higher percentage because they have less range, therefore attempt shots within a limited range. same could be said for the kobe/jordan argument. and kobe doesn't have a go-to move? psssh...turnaround fadeway from the corner, how many times have we seen kobe close games with that shot? come on, now, if thats not a go-to move, i dunno what is.
another argument people never mention is the difference in competition from wing players...jordan went through so many mediocre wings. jazz, bulls? come on...his greatest rival at shooting guard was clyde drexler lol. athleticism was not the same back then as it is nowadays. today, the league is dominated by perimeter players, whereas back in the day, there were no lebron's, wade's, melo's, durant's, etc, it was clyde drexler, michael jordan, hersey hawkins, and bryon russell..feel it?
-
Jordan > Kobe
get over it jew
-
so you'll downplay him facing Wilt, Jerry West or Oscar's teams?
I think the Celtics with out Russel beat the shit out of Lakers with out East and/or Wilt. This was a very stacked team. Not that Jordan's Bulls wasn't of course.
Let me just for the record say a few things I believe before this turns into a debate;
Russel was the most important person on any team in NBA history.
They would have won at least 9 rings with Larry instead of Russel, and 15 straight rings with Larry and Russel.
Larry would have had more rings than Magic is Kareem was never a Laker.
the NBA was more competitive in the 80s than it was in the 60s.
The 80s Bulls would have won a bunch in the 60s, but only if Russel's Celts didn't exist.
I don't think The 60s Celts could have had their way with the 80s Lakers like they did in the 60s
and only the 86 Celtics could have beaten the 60s Celtics. But Russel on the 80s Celtics couldn't beat Larry on the 60s Celtics.
and Larry did indeed walk on water once. I saw it.
-
Jordan > Kobe
get over it jew
kobe's career is not done, cracker...stfu and stop fingerbanging yourself.
-
who gives a fuck, phil says something new every day. he has also gone on record to say that kobe is a greater scorer and better with the ball than jordan. kobe is currently doing it with much less than jordan ever had. he's playin with gasol as a second fiddle, while jordan had pippen for all his title runs. give kobe a sidekick like pippen and lakers win the last 6 titles LOL. also, like infinite mentioned, kobe's shooting percentage is only lower because he has more range. so in essence, this is a plus for kobe. the more range a player has, the lower his percentage is. mj had no three-ball, so he barely shot from outside, while kobe is a great pure shooter. naturally, players who make their living in or around the paint have a higher percentage. amir johnson and deandre jordan dont have a higher shooting percentage than kevin garnett and tim duncan because they're better, they have a higher percentage because they have less range, therefore attempt shots within a limited range. same could be said for the kobe/jordan argument. and kobe doesn't have a go-to move? psssh...turnaround fadeway from the corner, how many times have we seen kobe close games with that shot? come on, now, if thats not a go-to move, i dunno what is.
another argument people never mention is the difference in competition from wing players...jordan went through so many mediocre wings. jazz, bulls? come on...his greatest rival at shooting guard was clyde drexler lol. athleticism was not the same back than as it is nowadays. today, the league is dominated by perimeter players, whereas back in the day, there were no lebron's, wade's, melo's, durant's, etc, it was clyde drexler, michael jordan, hersey hawkins, and bryon russell..feel it?
It took you 3 days to come up with this? :(
two things in MJ's era- handchecks. HUGE post players who were physical.
Your shit is getting pathetic NIK.
HOwever, also pathetic is someone in this thread rating Garnett ahead of Kobe
-
Futhermore, even if Kobe plays 5 more years, how exactly does he become a BETTER player than MJ? Cuz longevity doesn't = better. If its rings, its Russell. More rings than MJ would not make Kobe best ever.
-
who gives a fuck, phil says something new every day. he has also gone on record to say that kobe is a greater scorer and better with the ball than jordan. kobe is currently doing it with much less than jordan ever had. he's playin with gasol as a second fiddle, while jordan had pippen for all his title runs. give kobe a sidekick like pippen and lakers win the last 6 titles LOL. also, like infinite mentioned, kobe's shooting percentage is only lower because he has more range. so in essence, this is a plus for kobe. the more range a player has, the lower his percentage is. mj had no three-ball, so he barely shot from outside, while kobe is a great pure shooter. naturally, players who make their living in or around the paint have a higher percentage. amir johnson and deandre jordan dont have a higher shooting percentage than kevin garnett and tim duncan because they're better, they have a higher percentage because they have less range, therefore attempt shots within a limited range. same could be said for the kobe/jordan argument. and kobe doesn't have a go-to move? psssh...turnaround fadeway from the corner, how many times have we seen kobe close games with that shot? come on, now, if thats not a go-to move, i dunno what is.
another argument people never mention is the difference in competition from wing players...jordan went through so many mediocre wings. jazz, bulls? come on...his greatest rival at shooting guard was clyde drexler lol. athleticism was not the same back than as it is nowadays. today, the league is dominated by perimeter players, whereas back in the day, there were no lebron's, wade's, melo's, durant's, etc, it was clyde drexler, michael jordan, hersey hawkins, and bryon russell..feel it?
It took you 3 days to come up with this? :(
two things in MJ's era- handchecks. HUGE post players who were physical.
Your shit is getting pathetic NIK.
HOwever, also pathetic is someone in this thread rating Garnett ahead of Kobe
one thing in kobe's era...zone defense. jordan played most of his ball against one defender. in todays game, they send a 2nd and even 3rd defender at kobe when he gets hot. zone rules changed the way superstars are double and triple teamed on the perimeter. jordan was playing amongst little scrubs who guarded him one-on-one most of the time...LOL. and i don't post here every day, dipshit, so no, it didn't take me three days, i responded as soon as i saw the thread. and stop making arguments against yourself, there were better bigs back in those days, true, but better PERIMETER players nowadays. now, basketball is a perimeter oriented game, whereas back in jordan's era, bigs runned the game, jordan was head-and-shoulders above the league as far as perimeter players went...honestly, the only pathetic thing is you coming in here with arguments that lack substance and try refuting my points with no basis whatsoever. step up your debating skills and argue my points without resorting to baseless claims.
-
Futhermore, even if Kobe plays 5 more years, how exactly does he become a BETTER player than MJ? Cuz longevity doesn't = better. If its rings, its Russell. More rings than MJ would not make Kobe best ever.
LOL..when Kobe was in his physical prime, all the jordan nut huggers argued that kobe was as good as jordan as far as ability, but that he didn't have what it takes to lead his team. now that he's leading his teams to all these titles, the tune has changed...honestly, stfu, YOUR shit is getting pathetic.
-
In one of these videos, phil is quoted saying that kobe is better than jordan in terms of skill, and that the biggest advantage jordan had on kobe were the size of his hands...enjoy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anoqbgOZrEg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IxYZAgKRtM8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtGJSiMqpWk
-
Futhermore, even if Kobe plays 5 more years, how exactly does he become a BETTER player than MJ? Cuz longevity doesn't = better. If its rings, its Russell. More rings than MJ would not make Kobe best ever.
LOL..when Kobe was in his physical prime, all the jordan nut huggers argued that kobe was as good as jordan as far as ability, but that he didn't have what it takes to lead his team. now that he's leading his teams to all these titles, the tune has changed...honestly, stfu, YOUR shit is getting pathetic.
Lol Kobe plays on a stacked team, his teams did nothing after shaq left and before gasol came. You just can't admit it because your a Kobe nut hugger
-
Futhermore, even if Kobe plays 5 more years, how exactly does he become a BETTER player than MJ? Cuz longevity doesn't = better. If its rings, its Russell. More rings than MJ would not make Kobe best ever.
LOL..when Kobe was in his physical prime, all the jordan nut huggers argued that kobe was as good as jordan as far as ability, but that he didn't have what it takes to lead his team. now that he's leading his teams to all these titles, the tune has changed...honestly, stfu, YOUR shit is getting pathetic.
Lol Kobe plays on a stacked team, his teams did nothing after shaq left and before gasol came. You just can't admit it because your a Kobe nut hugger
dude...you dont even watch basketball. you just come in here and use basketball as a way to ride my nuts. seriously, you are one of the most pathetic beings i have ever encountered, internet or reality.
and about who kobe plays with, like i said, kobe has won titles with a much lesser 2nd fiddle in Gasol, whereas MJ had Pippen for ALL SIX OF HIS TITLES, who was arguably the 2nd best player in the league behind MJ. now lets see you try spinnin that shit into somehow riding my nuts, faggot.
-
You can practically feel the angry tears hitting the keyboard everytime you come in here like captain simp to defend your idol. Seriously, your love of him is creepy and pathetic. No wonder you still live with your parents with Kobe sheets on your bed
-
You're arguments are always so predictable and stale.
Ignore mentions of how good the lakers team is, downplay all the talent.
When Kobe is compared to another player, claim the other team is full of superstars.
If a call is missed make sure to mention it everytime while ignoring the ones going the other way
Call everyone nut huggers
Have roccy and infinite come in the thread to back you up
-
^i never once said nuthugger, idiot...in fact, that's what you called me a couple posts up lmao.
i'm done with this faggot, back to teecee, since at least you're debating from the heart and not the hormones.
this is what you said 2 years ago
But at least LBJ showed up in the elimination game, instead of allowing his team to get beat by 30 or whatever. Kobe, like that one game 7 against the SUns, merely gave up...............which is why HE IS NOT JORDAN. Is he as talented as Jordan? DEFINITELY----------but fact is, Jordan never went out in finals game like that.
Kobe still has ALOT to do to get on Jordan's level as far as acoomplishments go, and isn't that what sports is all about? Not potential or ability, but RESULTS.
So some players are overhyped, yet you saying Kobe is better than Jordan is not overhyping Kobe? Again, abiout results, lets look at Kobe once he has LEAD his team to a title and has a few playoff MVP's. He will never ever touch Jordan stat wise (assists, boards, steals, blocks....Jordan was too good overall) on a career basis so really, its all about palyoff results and it looks as though Kobe is on the cusp of making his mark as a leader in the playoffs. Of course, it looked that way last year as well and we didn't exactly see a Jordan-worthy performance in the finals did we?
LOL....so now that Kobe has a chance to surpass Jordan in RINGS, he is no longer "DEFINITELY" as talented (as you said in the past)? GET OUT OF HERE. thread over, you killed your own arguments, considerin your opinion from 2 years ago did a complete 180. don't ever call anyone's opinion pathetic right after contradicting yourself that bad.
-
You call someone a nuthugger in every 5 posts or so
-
Did that nigga forget that Kobe played with Shaq? Someone who some consider to be a better player on the all-time list than Kobe? ??? :laugh:
-
Did that jew forget that Kobe played with Shaq? Someone who some consider to be a better player on the all-time list than Kobe? ??? :laugh:
yep
NIK was calling Shaq the best center of all time at one point....now NIK tries to downplay Shaq as if he ws just along for the ride with Kobe
-
Futhermore, even if Kobe plays 5 more years, how exactly does he become a BETTER player than MJ? Cuz longevity doesn't = better. If its rings, its Russell. More rings than MJ would not make Kobe best ever.
LOL..when Kobe was in his physical prime, all the jordan nut huggers argued that kobe was as good as jordan as far as ability, but that he didn't have what it takes to lead his team. now that he's leading his teams to all these titles, the tune has changed...honestly, stfu, YOUR shit is getting pathetic.
Lol Kobe plays on a stacked team, his teams did nothing after shaq left and before gasol came. You just can't admit it because your a Kobe nut hugger
-
So Kobe gets penalized for being part of the greatest 1-2 punch in history? lame argument, dicklickers.
-
So Kobe gets penalized from being part of the greatest 1-2 punch in history? lame argument, dicklickers.
No but the question lies in how effective that first punch either was or needed to be. Shaq in those years was a mid 80s Mike Tyson uppercut right on the chin. The first punch, the one that sets up the uppercut doesn't have to be dynamite left hook, which Kobe was. A solid left jab will be enough for the other fighter to respect it to leave some opening for the more forceful punch.
The Lakers really lost a step for a couple years when Kobe was trusted into the leader position. He has since more than made up for any criticism, but in the couple years after Shaq left it made me wonder how vital he really was to the 3-peat team. When Gretzky left the Oilers we saw that the punch that set up the hay-maker was a hay maker in itself with Messier, and we saw it right away. When Pippen took over for MJ they were still a hip skip and a jump away from another ring (I'm not sure that even with Jordan they would have won it all that year). When Shaq left they fell to under 500 with Kobe at the helm.
Like I said, Kobe has more than become everything you said he always was, I'm just not so sure he always was. Whether or not Kobe is is as good as Jordan or Magix now is one thing, but I think that 3-peat team is at least a 4peat team with Magic, Larry, or MJ teamed up with Shaq. And you can add current Kobe to that list.
-
So Kobe gets penalized from being part of the greatest 1-2 punch in history? lame argument, dicklickers.
No but the question lies in how effective that first punch either was or needed to be. Shaq in those years was a mid 80s Mike Tyson uppercut right on the chin. The first punch, the one that sets up the uppercut doesn't have to be dynamite left hook, which Kobe was. A solid left jab will be enough for the other fighter to respect it to leave some opening for the more forceful punch.
The Lakers really lost a step for a couple years when Kobe was trusted into the leader position. He has since more than made up for any criticism, but in the couple years after Shaq left it made me wonder how vital he really was to the 3-peat team. When Gretzky left the Oilers we saw that the punch that set up the hay-maker was a hay maker in itself with Messier, and we saw it right away. When Pippen took over for MJ they were still a hip skip and a jump away from another ring (I'm not sure that even with Jordan they would have won it all that year). When Shaq left they fell to under 500 with Kobe at the helm.
Like I said, Kobe has more than become everything you said he always was, I'm just not so sure he always was. Whether or not Kobe is is as good as Jordan or Magix now is one thing, but I think that 3-peat team is at least a 4peat team with Magic, Larry, or MJ teamed up with Shaq. And you can add current Kobe to that list.
LOL...when the lakers lost shaq, they lost the whole team, shaq was not the only one who left. new system, new coach, new players, new team. the lakers were basically an expansion team rebuilding around kobe. when jordan left the bulls, the team was still left in tact- same system, same coach, same players, same everything, minus jordan...if anything, that simple fact should be an argument against jordan in this kobe-jordan debate. bulls were still a 55 win team who made it to the eastern conference semi-finals, without jordan. if kobe was not on the lakers these last few years, no way they are a 50 win team, let alone a playoff team. as for you acting like threepeating is some simply walk in the park, psssh, yeaa right. do u know how hard it is to threepeat? lakers barely won some of those series's during the threepeat era, we almost got knocked off by the blazers and the kings along the way, it is not something that just any duo out there coulda pulled off...and during that run, who was the one closing out games for the lakers during crunch time, carrying the lakers with huge clutch plays in those 4th quarters with shaq on the bench? none other than kobe..plus, kobe and shaq were statistically neck-and-neck in those threepeat years, so for u to sit there and act like anyone out there coulda replaced him and they still woulda threepeated and/or won more titles is pretty insane. don't forget that shaq himself proclaimed kobe "the best player in the world" during those glory years.. if the lakers woulda remained in tact when shaq left, things woulda played out a lot different. instead, we got rudy-t (who left midway through the season) and an expansion team with kobe on it. definitely not fair to judge kobe based on those dark rebuilding years.
-
Yeah the lakers magically made it by the kings based on skill and teamwork. LMAO
-
So Kobe gets penalized from being part of the greatest 1-2 punch in history? lame argument, dicklickers.
No but the question lies in how effective that first punch either was or needed to be. Shaq in those years was a mid 80s Mike Tyson uppercut right on the chin. The first punch, the one that sets up the uppercut doesn't have to be dynamite left hook, which Kobe was. A solid left jab will be enough for the other fighter to respect it to leave some opening for the more forceful punch.
The Lakers really lost a step for a couple years when Kobe was trusted into the leader position. He has since more than made up for any criticism, but in the couple years after Shaq left it made me wonder how vital he really was to the 3-peat team. When Gretzky left the Oilers we saw that the punch that set up the hay-maker was a hay maker in itself with Messier, and we saw it right away. When Pippen took over for MJ they were still a hip skip and a jump away from another ring (I'm not sure that even with Jordan they would have won it all that year). When Shaq left they fell to under 500 with Kobe at the helm.
Like I said, Kobe has more than become everything you said he always was, I'm just not so sure he always was. Whether or not Kobe is is as good as Jordan or Magix now is one thing, but I think that 3-peat team is at least a 4peat team with Magic, Larry, or MJ teamed up with Shaq. And you can add current Kobe to that list.
LOL...when the lakers lost shaq, they lost the whole team, shaq was not the only one who left. new system, new coach, new players, new team. the lakers were basically an expansion team rebuilding around kobe. when jordan left the bulls, the team was still left in tact- same system, same coach, same players, same everything, minus jordan...if anything, that simple fact should be an argument against jordan in this kobe-jordan debate. bulls were still a 55 win team who made it to the eastern conference semi-finals, without jordan. if kobe was not on the lakers these last few years, no way they are a 50 win team, let alone a playoff team. as for you acting like threepeating is some simply walk in the park, psssh, yeaa right. do u know how hard it is to threepeat? lakers barely won some of those series's during the threepeat era, we almost got knocked off by the blazers and the kings along the way, it is not something that just any duo out there coulda pulled off...and during that run, who was the one closing out games for the lakers during crunch time, carrying the lakers with huge clutch plays in those 4th quarters with shaq on the bench? none other than kobe..plus, kobe and shaq were statistically neck-and-neck in those threepeat years, so for u to sit there and act like anyone out there coulda replaced him and they still woulda threepeated and/or won more titles is pretty insane. don't forget that shaq himself proclaimed kobe "the best player in the world" during those glory years.. if the lakers woulda remained in tact when shaq left, things woulda played out a lot different. instead, we got rudy-t (who left midway through the season) and an expansion team with kobe on it. definitely not fair to judge kobe based on those dark rebuilding years.
I never said anyone could have been put in their for the 3-peat, I simply questioned how strong the first punch needed to be, and that Magic, Larry, or MJ would have lead to more than just 3 rings with Shaq. I also think the dark re-building Lakers would have gone farther faster with those 3 guys at the helm than they did with Kobe.
I'm also acknowledging that the current Kobe could have done all of what I said those 3 greats could have done. Laugh all you want, that's how I feel.
-
So Kobe gets penalized for being part of the greatest 1-2 punch in history? lame argument, dicklickers.
Thats life. If Lebron wins a title alongside Wade, it wouldnt be viewed as great as it would if he did in Cleveland. Winning three titles as the #2 guy on the team will always be a part of Kobe's legacy, especially considering the fact that they sucked when Shaq left. Like it or not, thats just how it is. Like I said, he IS an all time great. But the bottom line is, he DOES have 2 titles as THE man for his team. He has 3 titles as the sidekick.
-
So Kobe gets penalized from being part of the greatest 1-2 punch in history? lame argument, dicklickers.
No but the question lies in how effective that first punch either was or needed to be. Shaq in those years was a mid 80s Mike Tyson uppercut right on the chin. The first punch, the one that sets up the uppercut doesn't have to be dynamite left hook, which Kobe was. A solid left jab will be enough for the other fighter to respect it to leave some opening for the more forceful punch.
The Lakers really lost a step for a couple years when Kobe was trusted into the leader position. He has since more than made up for any criticism, but in the couple years after Shaq left it made me wonder how vital he really was to the 3-peat team. When Gretzky left the Oilers we saw that the punch that set up the hay-maker was a hay maker in itself with Messier, and we saw it right away. When Pippen took over for MJ they were still a hip skip and a jump away from another ring (I'm not sure that even with Jordan they would have won it all that year). When Shaq left they fell to under 500 with Kobe at the helm.
Like I said, Kobe has more than become everything you said he always was, I'm just not so sure he always was. Whether or not Kobe is is as good as Jordan or Magix now is one thing, but I think that 3-peat team is at least a 4peat team with Magic, Larry, or MJ teamed up with Shaq. And you can add current Kobe to that list.
LOL...when the lakers lost shaq, they lost the whole team, shaq was not the only one who left. new system, new coach, new players, new team. the lakers were basically an expansion team rebuilding around kobe. when jordan left the bulls, the team was still left in tact- same system, same coach, same players, same everything, minus jordan...if anything, that simple fact should be an argument against jordan in this kobe-jordan debate. bulls were still a 55 win team who made it to the eastern conference semi-finals, without jordan. if kobe was not on the lakers these last few years, no way they are a 50 win team, let alone a playoff team. as for you acting like threepeating is some simply walk in the park, psssh, yeaa right. do u know how hard it is to threepeat? lakers barely won some of those series's during the threepeat era, we almost got knocked off by the blazers and the kings along the way, it is not something that just any duo out there coulda pulled off...and during that run, who was the one closing out games for the lakers during crunch time, carrying the lakers with huge clutch plays in those 4th quarters with shaq on the bench? none other than kobe..plus, kobe and shaq were statistically neck-and-neck in those threepeat years, so for u to sit there and act like anyone out there coulda replaced him and they still woulda threepeated and/or won more titles is pretty insane. don't forget that shaq himself proclaimed kobe "the best player in the world" during those glory years.. if the lakers woulda remained in tact when shaq left, things woulda played out a lot different. instead, we got rudy-t (who left midway through the season) and an expansion team with kobe on it. definitely not fair to judge kobe based on those dark rebuilding years.
I never said anyone could have been put in their for the 3-peat, I simply questioned how strong the first punch needed to be, and that Magic, Larry, or MJ would have lead to more than just 3 rings with Shaq. I also think the dark re-building Lakers would have gone farther faster with those 3 guys at the helm than they did with Kobe.
I'm also acknowledging that the current Kobe could have done all of what I said those 3 greats could have done. Laugh all you want, that's how I feel.
kobe was 20-22 in those 3peat years....there's no way magic, jordan, or bird would have done any better at that age. at that age, jordan, magic, and bird were still in college. what kobe was doing at that age was unheard of. in fact, one can go ahead and say that if shaq were replaced by kareem, hakeem, or wilt, kobe woulda won more titles during those years. argument can go either way, but it doesn't help to sit here and wonder "what if"...trust me, if you followed the lakers during those years, you would know just how special kobe's talent was, even in his younger days, and how vital that talent was to any success the lakers had.
-
So Kobe gets penalized for being part of the greatest 1-2 punch in history? lame argument, dicklickers.
Thats life. If Lebron wins a title alongside Wade, it wouldnt be viewed as great as it would if he did in Cleveland. Winning three titles as the #2 guy on the team will always be a part of Kobe's legacy, especially considering the fact that they sucked when Shaq left. Like it or not, thats just how it is. Like I said, he IS an all time great. But the bottom line is, he DOES have 2 titles as THE man for his team. He has 3 titles as the sidekick.
sidekicks don't average around 30 points...it was not a sidekick situation, it was a 1-2 punch, and it was the greatest 1-2 punch in history...discrediting kobe's titles because he played with shaq would be like discrediting magic's titles because he played with kareem. not happenin'.
-
So Kobe gets penalized for being part of the greatest 1-2 punch in history? lame argument, dicklickers.
Thats life. If Lebron wins a title alongside Wade, it wouldnt be viewed as great as it would if he did in Cleveland. Winning three titles as the #2 guy on the team will always be a part of Kobe's legacy, especially considering the fact that they sucked when Shaq left. Like it or not, thats just how it is. Like I said, he IS an all time great. But the bottom line is, he DOES have 2 titles as THE man for his team. He has 3 titles as the sidekick.
sidekicks don't average around 30 points...it was not a sidekick situation, it was a 1-2 punch, and it was the greatest 1-2 punch in history...discrediting kobe's titles because he played with shaq would be like discrediting magic's titles because he played with kareem. not happenin'.
Then why does the rest of the world see him as the #2 guy on those teams with Shaq? lol. The rest of the world doesnt see Magic as the #2 guy on his titles with Kareem. They DO with Kobe. Maybe the entire world is wrong, outside of Kobe fans.
-
So Kobe gets penalized for being part of the greatest 1-2 punch in history? lame argument, dicklickers.
Thats life. If Lebron wins a title alongside Wade, it wouldnt be viewed as great as it would if he did in Cleveland. Winning three titles as the #2 guy on the team will always be a part of Kobe's legacy, especially considering the fact that they sucked when Shaq left. Like it or not, thats just how it is. Like I said, he IS an all time great. But the bottom line is, he DOES have 2 titles as THE man for his team. He has 3 titles as the sidekick.
sidekicks don't average around 30 points...it was not a sidekick situation, it was a 1-2 punch, and it was the greatest 1-2 punch in history...discrediting kobe's titles because he played with shaq would be like discrediting magic's titles because he played with kareem. not happenin'.
Then why does the rest of the world see him as the #2 guy on those teams with Shaq? lol. The rest of the world doesnt see Magic as the #2 guy on his titles with Kareem. They DO with Kobe. Maybe the entire world is wrong, outside of Kobe fans.
maybe that's because the offense ran through shaq, as a triangle offense traditionally should.....okay, lets flip it around. are you gunna discredit karreem's 5 titles because he got them with magic? most people saw magic as the first option on that team, but that doesn't mean kareem wasn't just as vital. in fact, kareem is considered by most the greatest center of all time...try twistin that one up LOL.
-
There are lot of interesting things to discuss in B-Ball besides MJ , Kobe , Shaq , Lebron , the Lakers and the Heat ... trust me :-X
-
kobe was 20-22 in those 3peat years....there's no way magic, jordan, or bird would have done any better at that age. at that age, jordan, magic, and bird were still in college. what kobe was doing at that age was unheard of. in fact, one can go ahead and say that if shaq were replaced by kareem, hakeem, or wilt, kobe woulda won more titles during those years. argument can go either way, but it doesn't help to sit here and wonder "what if"...trust me, if you followed the lakers during those years, you would know just how special kobe's talent was, even in his younger days, and how vital that talent was to any success the lakers had.
I don't think more titles but maybe just as many, but those 3 Centers would have been the leaders on that team.
And what Larry did in that last year of college and that first year on the Celtics Kobe wasn't able to do until very recently. Fuck numbers, I could get in that all day with my QB debates, this is about being able to carry guys that wouldn't even know what playoffs were if anyone else was on that team. Not Jordan, not Magic, not fucking Ben Hur, could have taken that 79/80 Celtics to the playoffs in their rookie years. I wonder if they could have even done it in their prime. Had Larry started with Kareem, and Magic with a bunch of scrubs (no McHale or Parrish yet) there may not have even been much a rivalry.
I'll debate Magic vs Larry as players, but not as leaders. And that first year Celtic team needed a better leader than player.
-
So Kobe gets penalized for being part of the greatest 1-2 punch in history? lame argument, dicklickers.
Thats life. If Lebron wins a title alongside Wade, it wouldnt be viewed as great as it would if he did in Cleveland. Winning three titles as the #2 guy on the team will always be a part of Kobe's legacy, especially considering the fact that they sucked when Shaq left. Like it or not, thats just how it is. Like I said, he IS an all time great. But the bottom line is, he DOES have 2 titles as THE man for his team. He has 3 titles as the sidekick.
sidekicks don't average around 30 points...it was not a sidekick situation, it was a 1-2 punch, and it was the greatest 1-2 punch in history...discrediting kobe's titles because he played with shaq would be like discrediting magic's titles because he played with kareem. not happenin'.
Then why does the rest of the world see him as the #2 guy on those teams with Shaq? lol. The rest of the world doesnt see Magic as the #2 guy on his titles with Kareem. They DO with Kobe. Maybe the entire world is wrong, outside of Kobe fans.
maybe that's because the offense ran through shaq, as a triangle offense traditionally should.....okay, lets flip it around. are you gunna discredit karreem's 5 titles because he got them with magic? most people saw magic as the first option on that team, but that doesn't mean kareem wasn't just as vital. in fact, kareem is considered by most the greatest center of all time...try twistin that one up LOL.
I wouldnt discredit Kareems titles with Magic, because like most people...I dont see one of the two as being more of a focal point of those teams. There is a bit of a difference when you are looking at a PG anyways. Look at Stockton and Malone. The two arent in competition as to who the focal point is. With Shaq and Kobe, they were both score first guys. Their jobs, offensively, were to put the ball in the basket. Kobe was feeding off of Shaq though. And it has nothing to do with the triangle. That would have been the case in any offense. Shaq gets the ball first, tries to create..if he is doubled (which he was most of the time back then) he kicks it out to an open shooter, a slashing Kobe, etc.
If it makes you feel any better, Robinson is one of the greatest Centers ever. But a title withOUT Duncan would have meant more to his legacy than a title WITH Duncan. True any title is better than none at all. But not all titles are weighed evenly.
-
So Kobe gets penalized for being part of the greatest 1-2 punch in history? lame argument, dicklickers.
Thats life. If Lebron wins a title alongside Wade, it wouldnt be viewed as great as it would if he did in Cleveland. Winning three titles as the #2 guy on the team will always be a part of Kobe's legacy, especially considering the fact that they sucked when Shaq left. Like it or not, thats just how it is. Like I said, he IS an all time great. But the bottom line is, he DOES have 2 titles as THE man for his team. He has 3 titles as the sidekick.
This
-
So Kobe gets penalized for being part of the greatest 1-2 punch in history? lame argument, dicklickers.
Thats life. If Lebron wins a title alongside Wade, it wouldnt be viewed as great as it would if he did in Cleveland. Winning three titles as the #2 guy on the team will always be a part of Kobe's legacy, especially considering the fact that they sucked when Shaq left. Like it or not, thats just how it is. Like I said, he IS an all time great. But the bottom line is, he DOES have 2 titles as THE man for his team. He has 3 titles as the sidekick.
With that being said, Kobe is a great player, the best the game has today and will go off as one of the all time greats BUT like Phil said - HE IS NOT MJ AND NEVER WILL BE. He's unique in his own way but comparing him and everyone else to Jordan is just unfair. If you look at what Michael did on and off the basketball court - it's just ridiculous to compare anyone to him and no matter what Kobe will do in the few more years he's got left, he will always be number 2 behind Mike.. and it's a great accomplish in it's own way - he's the closest one we've seen.
BUT Michael fuckin' Jeffrey Jordan is the G.O.A.T. - point blank.
-
There are two things than make MJ better than Kobe : shooting efficiency and MJ first three finals are out of this world , Kobe production in the finals has been average ... but this topic didn't really to be discussed for the 14445855544 times
-
kobe was 20-22 in those 3peat years....there's no way magic, jordan, or bird would have done any better at that age. at that age, jordan, magic, and bird were still in college. what kobe was doing at that age was unheard of. in fact, one can go ahead and say that if shaq were replaced by kareem, hakeem, or wilt, kobe woulda won more titles during those years. argument can go either way, but it doesn't help to sit here and wonder "what if"...trust me, if you followed the lakers during those years, you would know just how special kobe's talent was, even in his younger days, and how vital that talent was to any success the lakers had.
I don't think more titles but maybe just as many, but those 3 Centers would have been the leaders on that team.
And what Larry did in that last year of college and that first year on the Celtics Kobe wasn't able to do until very recently. Fuck numbers, I could get in that all day with my QB debates, this is about being able to carry guys that wouldn't even know what playoffs were if anyone else was on that team. Not Jordan, not Magic, not fucking Ben Hur, could have taken that 79/80 Celtics to the playoffs in their rookie years. I wonder if they could have even done it in their prime. Had Larry started with Kareem, and Magic with a bunch of scrubs (no McHale or Parrish yet) there may not have even been much a rivalry.
I'll debate Magic vs Larry as players, but not as leaders. And that first year Celtic team needed a better leader than player.
LMAO...I don't think you realize that Magic, as a rookie, won the title without Kareem. when Kareem went down with an injury, Magic started the title game for the Lakers at CENTER, as a muthafuckin rookie...i'm sorry, but nothing Larry Legend did in his rookie year could rival that, no matter how hard u sit there and try pushing "Larry>Magic"...Magic was an amazing player, as was Bird, but Magic was able to do things Larry could only dream of.
still, neither Magic nor Bird were able to threepeate...Kobe is on the verge of doing it for a second time, with a lesser supporting cast.
-
So Kobe gets penalized for being part of the greatest 1-2 punch in history? lame argument, dicklickers.
Thats life. If Lebron wins a title alongside Wade, it wouldnt be viewed as great as it would if he did in Cleveland. Winning three titles as the #2 guy on the team will always be a part of Kobe's legacy, especially considering the fact that they sucked when Shaq left. Like it or not, thats just how it is. Like I said, he IS an all time great. But the bottom line is, he DOES have 2 titles as THE man for his team. He has 3 titles as the sidekick.
sidekicks don't average around 30 points...it was not a sidekick situation, it was a 1-2 punch, and it was the greatest 1-2 punch in history...discrediting kobe's titles because he played with shaq would be like discrediting magic's titles because he played with kareem. not happenin'.
Then why does the rest of the world see him as the #2 guy on those teams with Shaq? lol. The rest of the world doesnt see Magic as the #2 guy on his titles with Kareem. They DO with Kobe. Maybe the entire world is wrong, outside of Kobe fans.
maybe that's because the offense ran through shaq, as a triangle offense traditionally should.....okay, lets flip it around. are you gunna discredit karreem's 5 titles because he got them with magic? most people saw magic as the first option on that team, but that doesn't mean kareem wasn't just as vital. in fact, kareem is considered by most the greatest center of all time...try twistin that one up LOL.
I wouldnt discredit Kareems titles with Magic, because like most people...I dont see one of the two as being more of a focal point of those teams. There is a bit of a difference when you are looking at a PG anyways. Look at Stockton and Malone. The two arent in competition as to who the focal point is. With Shaq and Kobe, they were both score first guys. Their jobs, offensively, were to put the ball in the basket. Kobe was feeding off of Shaq though. And it has nothing to do with the triangle. That would have been the case in any offense. Shaq gets the ball first, tries to create..if he is doubled (which he was most of the time back then) he kicks it out to an open shooter, a slashing Kobe, etc.
If it makes you feel any better, Robinson is one of the greatest Centers ever. But a title withOUT Duncan would have meant more to his legacy than a title WITH Duncan. True any title is better than none at all. But not all titles are weighed evenly.
sorry to burst your kobe bashin bubble, blood, but magic been considered the focal point of them laker teams, even moreso than shaq of the threepeat era. in the magic days, it was always magic and the lakers. magic was the one with his picture on the cover and what not. in the threepeat era, it was always kobe AND shaq or shaq AND kobe, never shaq and the lakers. and they were always both publicized TOGETHER, if not, kobe maybe even a little more. point is, if u discredit kobe's titles, u gotta discredit kareems, because he was part of a 1-2 punch, a dynamic duo- NOT a sidekick.
as for shaq creating double teams, don't act like it didn't go both ways. kobe would drive and spoon-feed shaq wide open dunks left and right, if u even watched the lakers in those years. as for d-robinson, that is no comparison...d-robinson was already well out of his prime when he won his title, while kobe was entering his prime when he started winning. awful analogy.
-
So Kobe gets penalized for being part of the greatest 1-2 punch in history? lame argument, dicklickers.
Thats life. If Lebron wins a title alongside Wade, it wouldnt be viewed as great as it would if he did in Cleveland. Winning three titles as the #2 guy on the team will always be a part of Kobe's legacy, especially considering the fact that they sucked when Shaq left. Like it or not, thats just how it is. Like I said, he IS an all time great. But the bottom line is, he DOES have 2 titles as THE man for his team. He has 3 titles as the sidekick.
With that being said, Kobe is a great player, the best the game has today and will go off as one of the all time greats BUT like Phil said - HE IS NOT MJ AND NEVER WILL BE. He's unique in his own way but comparing him and everyone else to Jordan is just unfair. If you look at what Michael did on and off the basketball court - it's just ridiculous to compare anyone to him and no matter what Kobe will do in the few more years he's got left, he will always be number 2 behind Mike.. and it's a great accomplish in it's own way - he's the closest one we've seen.
BUT Michael fuckin' Jeffrey Jordan is the G.O.A.T. - point blank.
i dunno if u watched the videos i posted, but if u did, phil clearly said kobe is more talented than jordan...the perception of the general public is exactly what u said, but that is what nike, the media, and the nba has embedded in everyones brain growing up in the take-off of the marketting era. from a basketball standpoint, kobe has accomplished feats just as amazing as jordan, and even outdid him in certain aspects...so yes, the comparison is still very much there, my dude.
-
There are two things than make MJ better than Kobe : shooting efficiency and MJ first three finals are out of this world , Kobe production in the finals has been average ... but this topic didn't really to be discussed for the 14445855544 times
what about jordan's failed years in the playoffs? LOL. there were years when he wasn't even good enough to make it to the finals, so that is not a fair assessment. jordan never played in a finals series with a soft and inexperienced pau gasol getting punked as a second option, but rather had the best perimeter defender in the league and one of the 50 greatest players of all time playing with him in all 6 of those finals. as for the efficiency, once again, jordan was not capable of shooting the ball from long distances, as he wasn't good from outside, so most of his shots would come from in or around the paint. kobe has more range, thus naturally he shoots a lower percentage. no way jordan would be as efficient as he was in todays perimeter oriented game...not with the way teams are able to double and triple team nowadays, no way. in my opinion, kobe drafted to the bulls in 84 insteada jordan woulda won 8 straight titles (considering his competitive drive and love for basketball is much too strong to retire for baseball).
-
LOL. You're reaching with that "lesser of a cast" shit.
Shaq didn't have a complimentary big man. Gasol & Bynum together is as effective, if not more than Shaq in his prime.
Odom arguably could have been the 3rd best player on that three-peat team if he was on it then & Artest is a lovely fit.
Not to mention, you're much deeper off the bench.
Enough excuses, son.
-
So Kobe gets penalized for being part of the greatest 1-2 punch in history? lame argument, dicklickers.
Thats life. If Lebron wins a title alongside Wade, it wouldnt be viewed as great as it would if he did in Cleveland. Winning three titles as the #2 guy on the team will always be a part of Kobe's legacy, especially considering the fact that they sucked when Shaq left. Like it or not, thats just how it is. Like I said, he IS an all time great. But the bottom line is, he DOES have 2 titles as THE man for his team. He has 3 titles as the sidekick.
With that being said, Kobe is a great player, the best the game has today and will go off as one of the all time greats BUT like Phil said - HE IS NOT MJ AND NEVER WILL BE. He's unique in his own way but comparing him and everyone else to Jordan is just unfair. If you look at what Michael did on and off the basketball court - it's just ridiculous to compare anyone to him and no matter what Kobe will do in the few more years he's got left, he will always be number 2 behind Mike.. and it's a great accomplish in it's own way - he's the closest one we've seen.
BUT Michael fuckin' Jeffrey Jordan is the G.O.A.T. - point blank.
Kobe wont be considered #2 behind Jordan. I doubt Kobe is going to pass up Bill Russell, etc on the all time list lol. Again, Kobe is compared to Jordan because of his style of play...not necessarily the content of it. There have been times since Jordan left where the best player in the league was a bigman, but they are never compared to Jordan because they are bigs. So Kobe might end his career as the #2 SG behind Jordan, but not the #2 player.
-
So Kobe gets penalized for being part of the greatest 1-2 punch in history? lame argument, dicklickers.
Thats life. If Lebron wins a title alongside Wade, it wouldnt be viewed as great as it would if he did in Cleveland. Winning three titles as the #2 guy on the team will always be a part of Kobe's legacy, especially considering the fact that they sucked when Shaq left. Like it or not, thats just how it is. Like I said, he IS an all time great. But the bottom line is, he DOES have 2 titles as THE man for his team. He has 3 titles as the sidekick.
sidekicks don't average around 30 points...it was not a sidekick situation, it was a 1-2 punch, and it was the greatest 1-2 punch in history...discrediting kobe's titles because he played with shaq would be like discrediting magic's titles because he played with kareem. not happenin'.
Then why does the rest of the world see him as the #2 guy on those teams with Shaq? lol. The rest of the world doesnt see Magic as the #2 guy on his titles with Kareem. They DO with Kobe. Maybe the entire world is wrong, outside of Kobe fans.
maybe that's because the offense ran through shaq, as a triangle offense traditionally should.....okay, lets flip it around. are you gunna discredit karreem's 5 titles because he got them with magic? most people saw magic as the first option on that team, but that doesn't mean kareem wasn't just as vital. in fact, kareem is considered by most the greatest center of all time...try twistin that one up LOL.
I wouldnt discredit Kareems titles with Magic, because like most people...I dont see one of the two as being more of a focal point of those teams. There is a bit of a difference when you are looking at a PG anyways. Look at Stockton and Malone. The two arent in competition as to who the focal point is. With Shaq and Kobe, they were both score first guys. Their jobs, offensively, were to put the ball in the basket. Kobe was feeding off of Shaq though. And it has nothing to do with the triangle. That would have been the case in any offense. Shaq gets the ball first, tries to create..if he is doubled (which he was most of the time back then) he kicks it out to an open shooter, a slashing Kobe, etc.
If it makes you feel any better, Robinson is one of the greatest Centers ever. But a title withOUT Duncan would have meant more to his legacy than a title WITH Duncan. True any title is better than none at all. But not all titles are weighed evenly.
sorry to burst your kobe bashin bubble, blood, but magic been considered the focal point of them laker teams, even moreso than shaq of the threepeat era. in the magic days, it was always magic and the lakers. magic was the one with his picture on the cover and what not. in the threepeat era, it was always kobe AND shaq or shaq AND kobe, never shaq and the lakers. and they were always both publicized TOGETHER, if not, kobe maybe even a little more. point is, if u discredit kobe's titles, u gotta discredit kareems, because he was part of a 1-2 punch, a dynamic duo- NOT a sidekick.
as for shaq creating double teams, don't act like it didn't go both ways. kobe would drive and spoon-feed shaq wide open dunks left and right, if u even watched the lakers in those years. as for d-robinson, that is no comparison...d-robinson was already well out of his prime when he won his title, while kobe was entering his prime when he started winning. awful analogy.
Magic wasnt the only focal point of those teams, Kareem was aswell. He was just the STAR of those teams. There is a difference. Magic was Showtime, he was Hollywood...etc. Im talking about ON the court. And the Robinson comparison is only in that, winning a title as THE man...is different than winning a title like Kobe did his first three. You would discredit any title won by Lebron with the Heat, because he is playing with Wade. Well Kobe wasnt even in his prime yet when the Shaq Lakers started winning titles. Shaq was. Those were Shaqs teams...and Kobe was there to help. These teams now, these are Kobe's teams. So the last two titles I give him full credit for as being THE man on these teams. His first three matter, but not as much. Period. You can argue all you want, but face it...youre just wrong. I know you think you never are. But everyone else always does, so its all good.
-
So Kobe gets penalized for being part of the greatest 1-2 punch in history? lame argument, dicklickers.
Thats life. If Lebron wins a title alongside Wade, it wouldnt be viewed as great as it would if he did in Cleveland. Winning three titles as the #2 guy on the team will always be a part of Kobe's legacy, especially considering the fact that they sucked when Shaq left. Like it or not, thats just how it is. Like I said, he IS an all time great. But the bottom line is, he DOES have 2 titles as THE man for his team. He has 3 titles as the sidekick.
sidekicks don't average around 30 points...it was not a sidekick situation, it was a 1-2 punch, and it was the greatest 1-2 punch in history...discrediting kobe's titles because he played with shaq would be like discrediting magic's titles because he played with kareem. not happenin'.
Then why does the rest of the world see him as the #2 guy on those teams with Shaq? lol. The rest of the world doesnt see Magic as the #2 guy on his titles with Kareem. They DO with Kobe. Maybe the entire world is wrong, outside of Kobe fans.
maybe that's because the offense ran through shaq, as a triangle offense traditionally should.....okay, lets flip it around. are you gunna discredit karreem's 5 titles because he got them with magic? most people saw magic as the first option on that team, but that doesn't mean kareem wasn't just as vital. in fact, kareem is considered by most the greatest center of all time...try twistin that one up LOL.
I wouldnt discredit Kareems titles with Magic, because like most people...I dont see one of the two as being more of a focal point of those teams. There is a bit of a difference when you are looking at a PG anyways. Look at Stockton and Malone. The two arent in competition as to who the focal point is. With Shaq and Kobe, they were both score first guys. Their jobs, offensively, were to put the ball in the basket. Kobe was feeding off of Shaq though. And it has nothing to do with the triangle. That would have been the case in any offense. Shaq gets the ball first, tries to create..if he is doubled (which he was most of the time back then) he kicks it out to an open shooter, a slashing Kobe, etc.
If it makes you feel any better, Robinson is one of the greatest Centers ever. But a title withOUT Duncan would have meant more to his legacy than a title WITH Duncan. True any title is better than none at all. But not all titles are weighed evenly.
sorry to burst your kobe bashin bubble, blood, but magic been considered the focal point of them laker teams, even moreso than shaq of the threepeat era. in the magic days, it was always magic and the lakers. magic was the one with his picture on the cover and what not. in the threepeat era, it was always kobe AND shaq or shaq AND kobe, never shaq and the lakers. and they were always both publicized TOGETHER, if not, kobe maybe even a little more. point is, if u discredit kobe's titles, u gotta discredit kareems, because he was part of a 1-2 punch, a dynamic duo- NOT a sidekick.
as for shaq creating double teams, don't act like it didn't go both ways. kobe would drive and spoon-feed shaq wide open dunks left and right, if u even watched the lakers in those years. as for d-robinson, that is no comparison...d-robinson was already well out of his prime when he won his title, while kobe was entering his prime when he started winning. awful analogy.
Magic wasnt the only focal point of those teams, Kareem was aswell. He was just the STAR of those teams. There is a difference. Magic was Showtime, he was Hollywood...etc. Im talking about ON the court. And the Robinson comparison is only in that, winning a title as THE man...is different than winning a title like Kobe did his first three. You would discredit any title won by Lebron with the Heat, because he is playing with Wade. Well Kobe wasnt even in his prime yet when the Shaq Lakers started winning titles. Shaq was. Those were Shaqs teams...and Kobe was there to help. These teams now, these are Kobe's teams. So the last two titles I give him full credit for as being THE man on these teams. His first three matter, but not as much. Period. You can argue all you want, but face it...youre just wrong. I know you think you never are. But everyone else always does, so its all good.
sorry, but in my opinion, and many others who followed the lakers closely during the threepeat era, shaq and kobe were just as much 50-50 as magic and kareem. why would shaq consider himself and kobe the greatest DUO in history if it were otherwise...if u didnt watch the games where kobe clearly led the team, just look at numbers in comparison to shaq's...they are neck and neck, and kobe was talented enough to average 35+ a game in those days.
-
LOL. You're reaching with that "lesser of a cast" shit.
Shaq didn't have a complimentary big man. Gasol & Bynum together is as effective, if not more than Shaq in his prime.
Odom arguably could have been the 3rd best player on that three-peat team if he was on it then & Artest is a lovely fit.
Not to mention, you're much deeper off the bench.
Enough excuses, son.
come on, idiot, kobe is clearly playing with less of a cast than jordan did, and it's not even up for debate. the bulls minus jordan were a 55 win team. pippen was considered by many the 2nd best player in the league for some time while he played with jordan. you gotta be a total dumbshit to compare kobe's current cast to that of jordan's.
-
LOL. You're reaching with that "lesser of a cast" shit.
Shaq didn't have a complimentary big man. Gasol & Bynum together is as effective, if not more than Shaq in his prime.
Odom arguably could have been the 3rd best player on that three-peat team if he was on it then & Artest is a lovely fit.
Not to mention, you're much deeper off the bench.
Enough excuses, son.
come on, idiot, kobe is clearly playing with less of a cast than jordan did, and it's not even up for debate. the bulls minus jordan were a 55 win team. pippen was considered by many the 2nd best player in the league for some time while he played with jordan. you gotta be a total dumbshit to compare kobe's current cast to that of jordan's.
No, no, no. A few posts up you compared "Kobe's current cast" to his cast with Shaq. I'm talking about that.
-
kobe was 20-22 in those 3peat years....there's no way magic, jordan, or bird would have done any better at that age. at that age, jordan, magic, and bird were still in college. what kobe was doing at that age was unheard of. in fact, one can go ahead and say that if shaq were replaced by kareem, hakeem, or wilt, kobe woulda won more titles during those years. argument can go either way, but it doesn't help to sit here and wonder "what if"...trust me, if you followed the lakers during those years, you would know just how special kobe's talent was, even in his younger days, and how vital that talent was to any success the lakers had.
I don't think more titles but maybe just as many, but those 3 Centers would have been the leaders on that team.
And what Larry did in that last year of college and that first year on the Celtics Kobe wasn't able to do until very recently. Fuck numbers, I could get in that all day with my QB debates, this is about being able to carry guys that wouldn't even know what playoffs were if anyone else was on that team. Not Jordan, not Magic, not fucking Ben Hur, could have taken that 79/80 Celtics to the playoffs in their rookie years. I wonder if they could have even done it in their prime. Had Larry started with Kareem, and Magic with a bunch of scrubs (no McHale or Parrish yet) there may not have even been much a rivalry.
I'll debate Magic vs Larry as players, but not as leaders. And that first year Celtic team needed a better leader than player.
LMAO...I don't think you realize that Magic, as a rookie, won the title without Kareem. when Kareem went down with an injury, Magic started the title game for the Lakers at CENTER, as a muthafuckin rookie...i'm sorry, but nothing Larry Legend did in his rookie year could rival that, no matter how hard u sit there and try pushing "Larry>Magic"...Magic was an amazing player, as was Bird, but Magic was able to do things Larry could only dream of.
still, neither Magic nor Bird were able to threepeate...Kobe is on the verge of doing it for a second time, with a lesser supporting cast.
Yeah but they were still up 3-2 in the finals with Kareem. Being greater in his rookie season in one game doesn't make it a better season. And still even with out Kareem the Lakers were way better than the Celtics (with out Larry). It's very simple, the 80 Lakers with out Magic still make the playoffs, the 79/80 Celtics do not, with out Larry.
-
LOL. You're reaching with that "lesser of a cast" shit.
Shaq didn't have a complimentary big man. Gasol & Bynum together is as effective, if not more than Shaq in his prime.
Odom arguably could have been the 3rd best player on that three-peat team if he was on it then & Artest is a lovely fit.
Not to mention, you're much deeper off the bench.
Enough excuses, son.
come on, idiot, kobe is clearly playing with less of a cast than jordan did, and it's not even up for debate. the bulls minus jordan were a 55 win team. pippen was considered by many the 2nd best player in the league for some time while he played with jordan. you gotta be a total dumbshit to compare kobe's current cast to that of jordan's.
No, no, no. A few posts up you compared "Kobe's current cast" to his cast with Shaq. I'm talking about that.
no...no, i didn't...and even if, the laker threepeat team is one of the greatest teams ever assembled in sports, so not many teams can compare to them, regardless.
-
kobe was 20-22 in those 3peat years....there's no way magic, jordan, or bird would have done any better at that age. at that age, jordan, magic, and bird were still in college. what kobe was doing at that age was unheard of. in fact, one can go ahead and say that if shaq were replaced by kareem, hakeem, or wilt, kobe woulda won more titles during those years. argument can go either way, but it doesn't help to sit here and wonder "what if"...trust me, if you followed the lakers during those years, you would know just how special kobe's talent was, even in his younger days, and how vital that talent was to any success the lakers had.
I don't think more titles but maybe just as many, but those 3 Centers would have been the leaders on that team.
And what Larry did in that last year of college and that first year on the Celtics Kobe wasn't able to do until very recently. Fuck numbers, I could get in that all day with my QB debates, this is about being able to carry guys that wouldn't even know what playoffs were if anyone else was on that team. Not Jordan, not Magic, not fucking Ben Hur, could have taken that 79/80 Celtics to the playoffs in their rookie years. I wonder if they could have even done it in their prime. Had Larry started with Kareem, and Magic with a bunch of scrubs (no McHale or Parrish yet) there may not have even been much a rivalry.
I'll debate Magic vs Larry as players, but not as leaders. And that first year Celtic team needed a better leader than player.
LMAO...I don't think you realize that Magic, as a rookie, won the title without Kareem. when Kareem went down with an injury, Magic started the title game for the Lakers at CENTER, as a muthafuckin rookie...i'm sorry, but nothing Larry Legend did in his rookie year could rival that, no matter how hard u sit there and try pushing "Larry>Magic"...Magic was an amazing player, as was Bird, but Magic was able to do things Larry could only dream of.
still, neither Magic nor Bird were able to threepeate...Kobe is on the verge of doing it for a second time, with a lesser supporting cast.
Yeah but they were still up 3-2 in the finals with Kareem. Being greater in his rookie season in one game doesn't make it a better season. And still even with out Kareem the Lakers were way better than the Celtics (with out Larry). It's very simple, the 80 Lakers with out Magic still make the playoffs, the 79/80 Celtics do not, with out Larry.
you act like making the playoffs is some amazing feat LOL. brandon jennings led his team to the playoffs as a rookie last year...if larry won a title as a rookie, different story, but as it is, he definitely didn't do anything in his rookie season that puts him above magic.
-
kobe was 20-22 in those 3peat years....there's no way magic, jordan, or bird would have done any better at that age. at that age, jordan, magic, and bird were still in college. what kobe was doing at that age was unheard of. in fact, one can go ahead and say that if shaq were replaced by kareem, hakeem, or wilt, kobe woulda won more titles during those years. argument can go either way, but it doesn't help to sit here and wonder "what if"...trust me, if you followed the lakers during those years, you would know just how special kobe's talent was, even in his younger days, and how vital that talent was to any success the lakers had.
I don't think more titles but maybe just as many, but those 3 Centers would have been the leaders on that team.
And what Larry did in that last year of college and that first year on the Celtics Kobe wasn't able to do until very recently. Fuck numbers, I could get in that all day with my QB debates, this is about being able to carry guys that wouldn't even know what playoffs were if anyone else was on that team. Not Jordan, not Magic, not fucking Ben Hur, could have taken that 79/80 Celtics to the playoffs in their rookie years. I wonder if they could have even done it in their prime. Had Larry started with Kareem, and Magic with a bunch of scrubs (no McHale or Parrish yet) there may not have even been much a rivalry.
I'll debate Magic vs Larry as players, but not as leaders. And that first year Celtic team needed a better leader than player.
LMAO...I don't think you realize that Magic, as a rookie, won the title without Kareem. when Kareem went down with an injury, Magic started the title game for the Lakers at CENTER, as a muthafuckin rookie...i'm sorry, but nothing Larry Legend did in his rookie year could rival that, no matter how hard u sit there and try pushing "Larry>Magic"...Magic was an amazing player, as was Bird, but Magic was able to do things Larry could only dream of.
still, neither Magic nor Bird were able to threepeate...Kobe is on the verge of doing it for a second time, with a lesser supporting cast.
Yeah but they were still up 3-2 in the finals with Kareem. Being greater in his rookie season in one game doesn't make it a better season. And still even with out Kareem the Lakers were way better than the Celtics (with out Larry). It's very simple, the 80 Lakers with out Magic still make the playoffs, the 79/80 Celtics do not, with out Larry.
you act like making the playoffs is some amazing feat LOL. brandon jennings led his team to the playoffs as a rookie last year...if larry won a title as a rookie, different story, but as it is, he definitely didn't do anything in his rookie season that puts him above magic.
If Larry as a rookie was the only rookie in league history that could have taken that 79/80 squad, to not only the playoffs, but the conference finals then yeah it is some amazing feat. But that's all speculation.
What isn't isn't speculation is winning the rookie of the year award. And who was the MVP that year again? Oh, yeah the guy Magic got to play with all year. It's very simple, if Kareem had been on Boston in 79/80 instead of LA, Larry would have started out his career with a ring. If you think anything else I will not respond to any of your posts ever again. I promise.
-
NIK, you dug up old posts to call me out or win or whatever the fuck; if I had time I'd do the same but its all good.
My point was that because Kobe will NEVER EVER be able to compete with MJ stats wise (except for games and seasons played), the only way he has a chance in hell of being as good as MJ is with playoff success. And yes, he has 5 rings, so good on Kobe. Even now, with two MVP's in playoffs (to MJ's six), its not really that logical to put Kobe up with MJ. Kobe is top 10 all time definitely, and second best shooting guard ever.
Kobe is not Michael as he has more flaws in his game (decision making/bball sense being the biggest) but he is fucking good.
-
kobe was 20-22 in those 3peat years....there's no way magic, jordan, or bird would have done any better at that age. at that age, jordan, magic, and bird were still in college. what kobe was doing at that age was unheard of. in fact, one can go ahead and say that if shaq were replaced by kareem, hakeem, or wilt, kobe woulda won more titles during those years. argument can go either way, but it doesn't help to sit here and wonder "what if"...trust me, if you followed the lakers during those years, you would know just how special kobe's talent was, even in his younger days, and how vital that talent was to any success the lakers had.
I don't think more titles but maybe just as many, but those 3 Centers would have been the leaders on that team.
And what Larry did in that last year of college and that first year on the Celtics Kobe wasn't able to do until very recently. Fuck numbers, I could get in that all day with my QB debates, this is about being able to carry guys that wouldn't even know what playoffs were if anyone else was on that team. Not Jordan, not Magic, not fucking Ben Hur, could have taken that 79/80 Celtics to the playoffs in their rookie years. I wonder if they could have even done it in their prime. Had Larry started with Kareem, and Magic with a bunch of scrubs (no McHale or Parrish yet) there may not have even been much a rivalry.
I'll debate Magic vs Larry as players, but not as leaders. And that first year Celtic team needed a better leader than player.
LMAO...I don't think you realize that Magic, as a rookie, won the title without Kareem. when Kareem went down with an injury, Magic started the title game for the Lakers at CENTER, as a muthafuckin rookie...i'm sorry, but nothing Larry Legend did in his rookie year could rival that, no matter how hard u sit there and try pushing "Larry>Magic"...Magic was an amazing player, as was Bird, but Magic was able to do things Larry could only dream of.
still, neither Magic nor Bird were able to threepeate...Kobe is on the verge of doing it for a second time, with a lesser supporting cast.
Yeah but they were still up 3-2 in the finals with Kareem. Being greater in his rookie season in one game doesn't make it a better season. And still even with out Kareem the Lakers were way better than the Celtics (with out Larry). It's very simple, the 80 Lakers with out Magic still make the playoffs, the 79/80 Celtics do not, with out Larry.
you act like making the playoffs is some amazing feat LOL. brandon jennings led his team to the playoffs as a rookie last year...if larry won a title as a rookie, different story, but as it is, he definitely didn't do anything in his rookie season that puts him above magic.
If Larry as a rookie was the only rookie in league history that could have taken that 79/80 squad, to not only the playoffs, but the conference finals then yeah it is some amazing feat. But that's all speculation.
What isn't isn't speculation is winning the rookie of the year award. And who was the MVP that year again? Oh, yeah the guy Magic got to play with all year. It's very simple, if Kareem had been on Boston in 79/80 instead of LA, Larry would have started out his career with a ring. If you think anything else I will not respond to any of your posts ever again. I promise.
LOL..who cares. lets disclude that first title year.. when Bird got his cast, it was still Magic who came out on top with 4 titles to Larry's 3 (even with a career shortened due to aids). Magic was simply the better overall player. not to say that Bird wasn't up there, cuz he was, but my preference would most definitely be Magic over Bird.
-
NIK, you dug up old posts to call me out or win or whatever the fuck; if I had time I'd do the same but its all good.
My point was that because Kobe will NEVER EVER be able to compete with MJ stats wise (except for games and seasons played), the only way he has a chance in hell of being as good as MJ is with playoff success. And yes, he has 5 rings, so good on Kobe. Even now, with two MVP's in playoffs (to MJ's six), its not really that logical to put Kobe up with MJ. Kobe is top 10 all time definitely, and second best shooting guard ever.
Kobe is not Michael as he has more flaws in his game (decision making/bball sense being the biggest) but he is fucking good.
point is, you already admitted that Kobe was as talented as MJ and claimed that he just neeeded the hardware to surpass him in stature...that was back when kobe had 3 titles. now that kobe has 5 going on 6, the tune has changed. if kobe wins 7 titles, he not only surapassed the talent and ability of MJ, but will have surpassed him in hardware as well. kobe will never match mj stastically, because they were placed in two completely different scenerios. mj was handed a franchise from day 1, while kobe had to work his way to the top (of the greatest franchise in this sport)...so yea, statistics will not tell the story as far as talent and ability in this case...titles should. lets see how it ends.
-
So Kobe gets penalized for being part of the greatest 1-2 punch in history? lame argument, dicklickers.
the Big O and Kareem > Magic + Kareem > rapist and Shaq
and exactly how has Kobe surpassed what MJ did? MJ has the better stats by a mile, MJ was 6-0 in the NBA finals AS THE LEADER OF HIS TEAM EACH YEAR and MJ also won 5 mvp's.
Kobe? 1 mvp LMAO
Kobe never had a team win 70 games either
-
So if mj W's handed a franchise from day 1, thus making his stats less impressive, wouldn't that then make kobes first three titles less impressive as well?
NIK, you dug up old posts to call me out or win or whatever the fuck; if I had time I'd do the same but its all good.
My point was that because Kobe will NEVER EVER be able to compete with MJ stats wise (except for games and seasons played), the only way he has a chance in hell of being as good as MJ is with playoff success. And yes, he has 5 rings, so good on Kobe. Even now, with two MVP's in playoffs (to MJ's six), its not really that logical to put Kobe up with MJ. Kobe is top 10 all time definitely, and second best shooting guard ever.
Kobe is not Michael as he has more flaws in his game (decision making/bball sense being the biggest) but he is fucking good.
point is, you already admitted that Kobe was as talented as MJ and claimed that he just neeeded the hardware to surpass him in stature...that was back when kobe had 3 titles. now that kobe has 5 going on 6, the tune has changed. if kobe wins 7 titles, he not only surapassed the talent and ability of MJ, but will have surpassed him in hardware as well. kobe will never match mj stastically, because they were placed in two completely different scenerios. mj was handed a franchise from day 1, while kobe had to work his way to the top (of the greatest franchise in this sport)...so yea, statistics will not tell the story as far as talent and ability in this case...titles should. lets see how it ends.
-
LOL..who cares. lets disclude that first title year.. when Bird got his cast, it was still Magic who came out on top with 4 titles to Larry's 3 (even with a career shortened due to aids). Magic was simply the better overall player. not to say that Bird wasn't up there, cuz he was, but my preference would most definitely be Magic over Bird.
As long as you agree that Kareem on those 79/80 Celtics means that Larry gets a ring in year 1 then I've got no problems.
of course if Larry wins that year then it would give him 4 titles as well (and who knows how many more with Kareem instead of Parrish), mentioning the aids isn't any different than Larry's 88 injury or even deteriorating legs before it happened.
For the record I could flip a coin over who I'd rather start, Larry or Magic, and not be bothered by either choice. For me it's 1 and 1a greatest of all time between those two players. And if either stay healthy for the 90s the first Bulls 3-peat doesn't happen.
-
LOL..who cares. lets disclude that first title year.. when Bird got his cast, it was still Magic who came out on top with 4 titles to Larry's 3 (even with a career shortened due to aids). Magic was simply the better overall player. not to say that Bird wasn't up there, cuz he was, but my preference would most definitely be Magic over Bird.
As long as you agree that Kareem on those 79/80 Celtics means that Larry gets a ring in year 1 then I've got no problems.
of course if Larry wins that year then it would give him 4 titles as well (and who knows how many more with Kareem instead of Parrish), mentioning the aids isn't any different than Larry's 88 injury or even deteriorating legs before it happened.
For the record I could flip a coin over who I'd rather start, Larry or Magic, and not be bothered by either choice. For me it's 1 and 1a greatest of all time between those two players. And if either stay healthy for the 90s the first Bulls 3-peat doesn't happen.
no beef with that at all...i agree to a certain extent, i just think magic was the better of the two, thats all.
-
So if mj W's handed a franchise from day 1, thus making his stats less impressive, wouldn't that then make kobes first three titles less impressive as well?
NIK, you dug up old posts to call me out or win or whatever the fuck; if I had time I'd do the same but its all good.
My point was that because Kobe will NEVER EVER be able to compete with MJ stats wise (except for games and seasons played), the only way he has a chance in hell of being as good as MJ is with playoff success. And yes, he has 5 rings, so good on Kobe. Even now, with two MVP's in playoffs (to MJ's six), its not really that logical to put Kobe up with MJ. Kobe is top 10 all time definitely, and second best shooting guard ever.
Kobe is not Michael as he has more flaws in his game (decision making/bball sense being the biggest) but he is fucking good.
point is, you already admitted that Kobe was as talented as MJ and claimed that he just neeeded the hardware to surpass him in stature...that was back when kobe had 3 titles. now that kobe has 5 going on 6, the tune has changed. if kobe wins 7 titles, he not only surapassed the talent and ability of MJ, but will have surpassed him in hardware as well. kobe will never match mj stastically, because they were placed in two completely different scenerios. mj was handed a franchise from day 1, while kobe had to work his way to the top (of the greatest franchise in this sport)...so yea, statistics will not tell the story as far as talent and ability in this case...titles should. lets see how it ends.
being a focal point of a threepeat team before being legally able to drink is nothing but impressive.
-
LOL at the guy who put KG over KOBE as the all time greatest...DUDE ARE U FUCKIN KIDDING ME