# The difference:Kobe vs. MJ



## Priest (Jun 24, 2003)

Whats the difference between these two? and I dont mean the rape case or jordans 6 rings to kobe's 3 or stats..I mean skill wise? To me Kobe has a better handle then jordanand everything else is just similar. They both have that same hunger and drive to be the best so whats so diffeent about these two?


----------



## BallBiologist (Mar 29, 2003)

Jordan didn't have the most dominating center (aka Shaq) to make it easy for him...


----------



## HEATLUNATIC (May 27, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>courtside</b>!
> Jordan didn't have the most dominating center (aka Shaq) to make it easy for him...


U can say that again!!!


----------



## OG (Aug 12, 2003)

Jordan had so much control over his body, look at how graceful he was. 
The biggest thing that stands out to me is he was so incredibly intelligent on the court - his court vision and decision making. Kobe is yet to get to that level.


----------



## JT (Mar 1, 2004)

The difference between Kobe & Jordan? Kobe hits clutch shots in the regular season, Jordan does it in both regular and playoff games. And also, Kobe is a student of Jordan. The student shall never overtake the master.


----------



## De_dauntless (Oct 2, 2003)

I have always felt that Kobe has patterned himself to MJ and made his game similar. However, the big difference is the passion for the game. MJ always give it his all there was never no compromise. Kobe on the other hand lapse on defense and let dressing room problems affect him give eg lakers vs kings, 1 shot in the entire 1/2 half.


----------



## jokeaward (May 22, 2003)

How 'bout 32.5-8-8, .538, 234 STL? And that wasn't even a season he won one of his 5 MVPs.


----------



## Lynx (Mar 6, 2004)

No one can reach the heights of greatness as MJ did in his career.



> Originally posted by <b>jtx</b>!
> The difference between Kobe & Jordan? Kobe hits clutch shots in the regular season, Jordan does it in both regular and playoff games. And also, Kobe is a student of Jordan. The student shall never overtake the master.


Couldn't have said it better.


----------



## Idunkonyou (Feb 23, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>courtside</b>!
> Jordan didn't have the most dominating center (aka Shaq) to make it easy for him...


I agree. :yes:


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>courtside</b>!
> Jordan didn't have the most dominating center (aka Shaq) to make it easy for him...


He did have two future HOF's, who also happened to be two of the best defensive players of all-time.


----------



## JT (Mar 1, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Wilt_The_Stilt</b>!
> 
> He did have two future HOF's, who also happened to be two of the best defensive players of all-time.


You could say that for Bill Russell too, but Russell was the leader of his team just like Jordan was unquestionably the heart and soul. In Kobe's case its not so simple.


----------



## BallBiologist (Mar 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Wilt_The_Stilt</b>!
> 
> 
> He did have two future HOF's, who also happened to be two of the best defensive players of all-time.


Haha..

Shaq>Pippen


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>courtside</b>!
> Shaq>Pippen


I agree. But having Pippen, Rodman, and Kukoc made Jordan's job a lot easier.


----------



## Sánchez AF (Aug 10, 2003)

Jordan is the best he make all his teammates better he van win champioships by himself and Kobe has Shaq

*~Fr¥~*


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

Physically, Jordan had HUGE hands. Kobe has relatively small hands. His hands allowed MJ to do anything he wanted on the court. Kobe sometimes struggles to finish properly or handle the ball in heavy traffic. 

Mentally, MJ was light years ahead of Bryant. Kobe has been in the league for nearly a decade and he still acts like a rookie with his decision making from time to time. MJ was a much more cerebral player in his 10th year in the league. He eventually embraced the triangle, something that Kobe should do as well.


----------



## Spriggan (Mar 23, 2004)

before this year, who did kobe have besides shaq? at all?

MJ had several talented players surrounding him during their championship years. someone already mentioned them.

now, i don't think kobe > MJ or anything, it just bothers me when people bring up shaq when discussing kobe's TALENT. shaq has NOTHING to do with kobe's raw talent, so shut up about it already.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

You want to know what the difference is? When was the last time Kobe had a absolutely DOMINATING playoff game. I mean you can look and see Kobe had 30, but it wasnt a dominating 30... Theres a total difference... Its hard to explain but i know you guys know what im talking about... Like for instance, Duncan had 37 points in Game 6 when they beat the Lakers... And it was a DOMINATING 37 points, it almost look like he scored every single point... Then you look at the game this season against the Kings. Kobe has 35, but he wasnt a dominating force in the game... I think we all get the point now... Then look at ALL the dominating playoff games MJ had... THATS where you draw the line... And yeah, MJ had Pippen, but Kobe had Shaq... And Shaq is WAYYYYYYYYYYY better than Pippen, PLUS Pippen didnt open lanes like Shaq does for Kobe... Shaq draws double teams, opens driving lanes, gets Kobe layups... Thats the difference


----------



## John (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>SacKings384</b>!
> You want to know what the difference is? When was the last time Kobe had a absolutely DOMINATING playoff game. I mean you can look and see Kobe had 30, but it wasnt a dominating 30... Theres a total difference... Its hard to explain but i know you guys know what im talking about... Like for instance, Duncan had 37 points in Game 6 when they beat the Lakers... And it was a DOMINATING 37 points, it almost look like he scored every single point... Then you look at the game this season against the Kings. Kobe has 35, but he wasnt a dominating force in the game... I think we all get the point now... Then look at ALL the dominating playoff games MJ had... THATS where you draw the line... And yeah, MJ had Pippen, but Kobe had Shaq... And Shaq is WAYYYYYYYYYYY better than Pippen, PLUS Pippen didnt open lanes like Shaq does for Kobe... Shaq draws double teams, opens driving lanes, gets Kobe layups... Thats the difference


I think I know what you are saying. The lesser time you demand the ball but to score the same amount of points somtimes make you look less dominant.

But for Kobe case, I know what you are saying. There are some part of his points are coming from "score within the flow" especially for the first 3 quarters. But on the other hand, Duncan was their only offense. The plays starts with him and ends with him.


----------



## Ice Nine (Apr 3, 2004)

The difference is almost entirely mental. Jordan 1.0 played the most aggressive defense I have yet witnessed for the entire 48 minutes. Jordan wouldn't tolerate any BS from himself or his team. When responding to insults Jordan would use his play to embarass the person who gave insult, not himself.


----------



## Luiz_Rodrigo (Dec 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>spriggan9</b>!
> before this year, who did kobe have besides shaq? at all?
> 
> MJ had several talented players surrounding him during their championship years. someone already mentioned them.
> ...


I agree with you... Shaq is a legend and of the best centers ever, but even if Kobe played with another big guy, he´d still be a top 5 player in the league.

MJ was better than Kobe... even when Detroit and Boston had better teams than MJ´s, he did amazing things against those guys, like 63 points at Boston.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

Think of it this way... If you were to label Kobe as good as Michael Jordan. Youd be labeling Kobe the greatest basketball player of all time. In fact, the greatest athlete of all time... Kobe is NOT either of those...


----------



## Jordan23 (Apr 12, 2004)

One thing I have noticed is that MJ in the playoffs or regular season leaves everything on the floor.

Something I have noticed Kobe and his Lakers team not do before. For example in my opinion last year against the Spurs in the Playoffs. It seemed like the last 8 minutes of the 4th quarter Kobe and the Lakers just kind of gave up on the game.

Thats something You never saw Michael Jordan do. Michael Jordan put a 100% out in every game regardless if he won or lost or how many points they were down by. Especially in the playoffs. Also Michael Jordan is the all time leader in points in the playoffs in the history of the NBA. That right there says something about his dominance as a player. And he leads everyone with points in the playoffs by a wide margin.


----------



## bender (Jul 15, 2002)

I compare them at the same age, both at 25.

Michael, when he was younger, was a lot quicker than Kobe is now. I don't think there ever was a quicker player than the young MJ. Nowadays Iverson, but back then? Nobody. Jordan was such a great scorer because of that, he blew by his defender easily. Kobe is not nearly as quick, but he's more skilled than Jordan was. He already has this turnaround-jumpshot Jordan didn't have until he was in his thirties. Kobe's shot also has more range, Jordan couldn't shoot threes at all during the 80s. Overall Kobe's more versatile on offense than Jordan was at the same age. On defense, Kobe doesn't gamble as much as Jordan did in his early years. Both are great clutch performers, I think equal. Both are ball hogs, sometimes taking shots with 3 or 4 guys hanging on them. But Jordan learned how to involve his teammates, I think Kobe will learn that as well.

Overall, I think they are on the same level (at the same age).


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>SacKings384</b>!
> Think of it this way... If you were to label Kobe as good as Michael Jordan. Youd be labeling Kobe the greatest basketball player of all time. In fact, the greatest athlete of all time... Kobe is NOT either of those...


I don't think Kobe Bryant is at Jordan's level, but I don't think this is a fair way to argue it.

It's circular: *if* Kobe were that good, that would mean he's way better than he is, and he can't be way better than he is, so he can't be that good.

"That good," of course, being "as good as Jordan."

The debate should be, is Bryant (or McGrady, if he ever gets a chance to win titles) as good as Jordan, comparing basketball ability. If he is, then, yes, that means he *is* potentially the best player ever. Saying Kobe is obviously not the best player ever, thus he can't be as good as Jordan is arguing it backwards and isn't fair.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> 
> 
> I don't think Kobe Bryant is at Jordan's level, but I don't think this is a fair way to argue it.
> ...


I dont see why not. If Kobes AS good as MJ, then Kobe should be the best or second best NBA player of all time. Its like arguing Jack Nicklaus (if thats how you spell his name) vs. Tiger Woods. You can compare them because Tiger is one of top 5 of all time golfers. Kobes not even top 10 of all time. So how can he be on the same level as the best of all time?


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>SacKings384</b>!
> 
> 
> I dont see why not. If Kobes AS good as MJ, then Kobe should be the best or second best NBA player of all time.


If Kobe is AS good as Jordan, then Kobe *is* one of the few best players ever.

You're acting like these are two separate issues, and the answer to one provides evidence for the other. They're essentially the same question, phrased differently.

As an example, it's like saying, "So-and-so can't be guilty of the murder, because if he *were* guilty of murder, then he'd be a bad person. But So-and-so *isn't* a bad person, so he can't be guilty."

One will decide the other. They aren't two separate questions, where deciding, in your opinion, that he's not a bad person is further evidence that he didn't do it.

If you see what I mean.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Pinball</b>!
> Physically, Jordan had HUGE hands. Kobe has relatively small hands. His hands allowed MJ to do anything he wanted on the court. Kobe sometimes struggles to finish properly or handle the ball in heavy traffic.
> 
> Mentally, MJ was light years ahead of Bryant. Kobe has been in the league for nearly a decade and he still acts like a rookie with his decision making from time to time. MJ was a much more cerebral player in his 10th year in the league. He eventually embraced the triangle, something that Kobe should do as well.


I agree. These are the main differences. Jordan had a perfect balance of how to attack the game at the right time. He had perfect timing. Thats the mental part of it, then the point about the hands is also correct.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>SacKings384</b>!
> 
> 
> I dont see why not. If Kobes AS good as MJ, then Kobe should be the best or second best NBA player of all time. Its like arguing Jack Nicklaus (if thats how you spell his name) vs. Tiger Woods. You can compare them because Tiger is one of top 5 of all time golfers. Kobes not even top 10 of all time. So how can he be on the same level as the best of all time?


he's 25. how do you expect him to be top 10 of all-time?


----------



## 7thwatch (Jul 18, 2002)

*Jordan at 25:*

35 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 5.9 asp, 3.16 stp, 1.6 bpg, .535 fg%


*Kobe at 25:*

24 pgg, 5.5 rpg, 5.1 apg, 1.72 spg, .43 bpg, .438 fg%

or, even when he was 24, a much better year for him:

30ppg, 6.9 rpg, 5.9 apg, 2.21 spg, .82 bpg, .451 fg%


Not even close. What sets Jordan apart even farther IMO is that he is also one of the greatest defenders of all time. Defensive player of the year in 1988 and a perrenial 1st team all league defense selection. And he is either 2nd or 3rd on the all time list in steals. Kobe is a very good defender (when he chooses to be) but he's far behind Jordan defensively. 

This is no knock on Kobe. He is a great player and a future hall of famer, but as of right now, he doesn't stack up against Jordan.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

Kobe will be 26 going into next season. Jordan as a 26 year old averaged 33 points on 54% FG, 8 rebounds, 8 assists and 3 steals. That was Jordans best season statistically IMO, but definitely not his most impressive season. His most impressive seasons went beyond the stats, even though he always put up nice numbers.


----------



## HallOfFamer (May 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>7thwatch</b>!
> *Jordan at 25:*
> 
> 35 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 5.9 asp, 3.16 stp, 1.6 bpg, .535 fg%
> ...


I agree, in no way, shape or form will Kobe ever be as good as Jordan. He will be one of the greats, but not the greatest.

But when comparing their statistics at 25, I think its unfair to judge Kobe considering the position he is in this year. He has to share the ball with 4 other HOFers. Remember, MJ was always the #1 option on his team and Kobe only has been once, and that was last year due to Shaqs inability to get back in shape. His numbers at last year, were very comparable to Jordans. Kobe had 30,7,6 at 24. Those are great numbers. I hope for Kobes sake he matures mentally the way Jordan did, he could definitely be up there as one of the all time greats if he does.

But in all honesty, if a team were built around Kobe to compliment him perfectly, what kind of numbers do you think he would be able to put up?


----------



## Pumpkin_Escobar (Jun 8, 2003)

Everybody is seriously under-rating Pippen...Pippen was a top 5 player during the 90's...He helped Mold Jordan and vice-verse...How good would Kobe be if he has somebody Of that defensive caliber to go at during practice...Rick Fox just doesn't cut it...Personally I would take Pippen over Shaq...Not now of course, but in there primes...


----------



## Hov (Aug 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Pumpkin_Escobar</b>!
> Everybody is seriously under-rating Pippen...Pippen was a top 5 player during the 90's...He helped Mold Jordan and vice-verse...How good would Kobe be if he has somebody Of that defensive caliber to go at during practice...Rick Fox just doesn't cut it...Personally I would take Pippen over Shaq...Not now of course, but in there primes...


Pippen was a great player. If I remember correctly, I think Pippen lead the Bulls to the ECF along with a 50+ win season after Jordan's first retirement.

But to say you'd take PIPPEN OVER SHAQ IS :laugh: 
Shaq in his prime=Arguably top 5 of ALL TIME.


----------



## ScottVdub (Jul 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Hov</b>!
> 
> Pippen was a great player. If I remember correctly, I think Pippen lead the Bulls to the ECF along with a 50+ win season after Jordan's first retirement.
> 
> ...


it was game 7 of the eastern conference semi finals and i guess there was a terrible call that caused the bulls to lose that game. new york beat indiana in the conference finals and later lost to houston in the finals. pip had a great year that year and i wish i could have seen him have more opportunities to lead a team in his prime. but having him alongside jordan worked out well.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Jordan was more physically gifted than Kobe is now. Though, I'd say the difference isn't that huge right now. Then again, I'm comparing a prime Jordan to a Kobe who is just entering his prime. We'll see how much better Kobe gets in the next 2 years. 

That said, what really makes Jordan significantly better than Kobe has nothing to do with stats and everything to do with each of their psychological makeups. Jordan was, quite simply, a much smarter player and a player who could dominate a game better than Kobe has proven in his career. 

Oh, and there should be something said about the zone and how Jordan never had to face it. But alas, the zone has killed a lot of fun in the NBA and there's nothing we can do about it.


----------



## bender (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>7thwatch</b>!
> *Jordan at 25:*
> 
> 35 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 5.9 asp, 3.16 stp, 1.6 bpg, .535 fg%
> ...


Don't compare stats if they're from different eras. When Mike averaged 35+ points, the league team average of points was way above 110. Today it's about 90, or even lower. If the 25-yr old Mike would play today, he wouldn't score 35+ points _and_ average 5+ assists.
However, I think both Mike and Kobe can score at will. Remember Kobe's 40-point streak last year.


----------



## Tersk (Apr 9, 2004)

Jordan made basketball as what is, 99% of people would call him one of he greatest ever and better than Kobe. I remember when he averaged 30-8-8.. Kobe cant get 30-6-7..however if Kobe went to. say phoenix, he'd more than likely lead the league in scoring and would be the no.1 option. Jordan was a fantastic defender.. greatest of the era..maybe. However Kobe can sometimes be one, all-defensive 2nd team. where jordan was a front runner for the award quite a few times if my memory serves me right.
What made Jordan the best was how he got so many people to watch the game, after he retired ratings went down as he was the most explosive and best player of the time. Today, not only is there Kobe but there are lots more exciting players - BDavis, Tmac, Vince. People have trouble deciding between Kobe and Tmac and Shaw for 3rd, 4th and 5th spot of great players today. When Jordan was around.. people were argueing whos number 2 coz there was no doubt ppl would call Jordan no.1. If u asked everyone who was the best player back in Jordans day, theyd say Jordan but today theyd say KG or TD. Jordan wzs a better shooter, defensive player, rebounder n passer


----------



## osman (Jul 29, 2003)

Everything has already been said, just to add Jordan made his team-mates alot better. And was also a great motivator and leader.


----------



## bender (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>theo4002</b>!
> When Jordan was around.. people were argueing whos number 2 coz there was no doubt ppl would call Jordan no.1. If u asked everyone who was the best player back in Jordans day, theyd say Jordan but today theyd say KG or TD. Jordan wzs a better shooter, defensive player, rebounder n passer


That's bull****. Until 1992 Jordan wasn't the main man in the League. There were Magic and Bird, on the same level, if not higher. Even after Jordan's first threepeat people would argue Magic Johnson was the better player because he had 5 titles while Jordan had 3.


----------



## Tersk (Apr 9, 2004)

what i meant was if u look back at that time, u would say hoos no. 2.. coz jordan was no.1


----------



## bender (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>theo4002</b>!
> what i meant was if u look back at that time, u would say hoos no. 2.. coz jordan was no.1


What tells you that Kobe won't be "the clear number 1" of this decade if you look back in 15 yrs?

Man, this discussion is sick. :uhoh:


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>EHL</b>!
> That said, what really makes Jordan significantly better than Kobe has nothing to do with stats and everything to do with each of their psychological makeups. Jordan was, quite simply, a much smarter player and a player who could dominate a game better than Kobe has proven in his career.


Jordan was so much smarter than Kobe. It amazes me how dumb Kobe can be sometimes. He's a bright guy but an incredibly inane player at times. A guy with his talent and athletic ability should be able to take better shots than he does. He seems to have transformed himself from an intelligent, heady player into a dramatic "crowdpleaser". His shot selection has actually gotten worse the past two years and you see it in his fg%. In the past, I could point to Kobe and say that he was different from the rest of the wings in the NBA but not anymore. Honestly, I think he likes it that way. I don't think he was ever comfortable with that "heady" image that people associated with his game. It was a testament to his work ethic and his intelligence but it seems like he took it as an affront to his talent. I think he's much more comfortable playing the flashy, showboating role that made him popular when he entered the league. He was fun to watch but he didn't always play smart basketball. That's exactly the way he is right now. He's fun to watch but he doesn't usually make quality decisions on the court. Jordan was a stubborn player at 25 but he was a much more mature player in his eighth season in the league than Kobe is. I wish people would stop making excuses for Kobe by saying that he's still young. It would be one thing if he was always this way but he really matured between 1999-2001 when the Lakers were winning championships. He was arguably the best or second best player in the league during this time period. He embraced Shaq and embraced the triangle. That tells me that he's capable of playing team basketball. However, he's so damn stubborn that he doesn't want to do that anymore. It's either his way or the highway. Quite frankly, I'm sick of this ****. Shaq's immaturity has bothered me for years but I'm really starting to grow weary of Kobe's adolescent behavior as well. Honestly, if he continues to play this way, then he's better off on another team. I hope for his sake that he changes his tune this Summer.


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>bender</b>!
> I compare them at the same age, both at 25.
> 
> Michael, when he was younger, was a lot quicker than Kobe is now. I don't think there ever was a quicker player than the young MJ. Nowadays Iverson, but back then? Nobody. Jordan was such a great scorer because of that, he blew by his defender easily. Kobe is not nearly as quick, but he's more skilled than Jordan was. He already has this turnaround-jumpshot Jordan didn't have until he was in his thirties. Kobe's shot also has more range, Jordan couldn't shoot threes at all during the 80s. Overall Kobe's more versatile on offense than Jordan was at the same age. On defense, Kobe doesn't gamble as much as Jordan did in his early years. Both are great clutch performers, I think equal. Both are ball hogs, sometimes taking shots with 3 or 4 guys hanging on them. But Jordan learned how to involve his teammates, I think Kobe will learn that as well.
> ...


best post i've seen in this thread so far, also one of the few even grappling with the question at hand, comparing the skill level of the two.

kobe is already a "dominant" player akin to a veteran jordan. he really can do it all. will he put it all together and rise above the rest to win another ring this year? it will be interesting to watch; you don't see kobe choke all that often.

kobe is so young but he's already having to deal with injuries that never seemed to bother jordan. he's also compensating quite nicely, playing through pain like a pro. considering all his troubles, kobe's game has stood up fairly well and you know he's going to keep on winning for many more years.


----------



## De_dauntless (Oct 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>bender</b>!
> 
> Don't compare stats if they're from different eras. When Mike averaged 35+ points, the league team average of points was way above 110. Today it's about 90, or even lower. If the 25-yr old Mike would play today, he wouldn't score 35+ points _and_ average 5+ assists.
> However, I think both Mike and Kobe can score at will. Remember Kobe's 40-point streak last year.


You are so wrong MJ with his last comeback averaging 21 pts a game and 4 assist and you want to tell me you he cant average 35 pts and 5 assist. I think you have lost it


----------



## Focus (Feb 13, 2004)

I never buy into those "Kobe is as good as MJ when they're all 25...bahbah" Player in NBA shouldn't be measure by ago(how about 40yr old MJ vs 40yr old Kobe 15yrs from now? And guess who is better.) It should be measure by what they have done in their 5th-10th yrs of NBA career and how they affect the game. If ago is all your game than King James should be the BEST PLAYER EVER walk on earth.

Back on topic, Kobe and MJ shouldn't be on the same senstence. Kobe may have the skill on MJ but Kobe don't have the "will to win" or "killer mind" the MJ have. MJ will never want Kobe on his team.


----------



## bender (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>De_dauntless</b>!
> You are so wrong MJ with his last comeback averaging 21 pts a game and 4 assist and you want to tell me you he cant average 35 pts and 5 assist. I think you have lost it


Honestly I don't see any connection between a 21/4 season of MJ as a 40 yr old and a possible 35+/5+ season as 25 yr old in today's game. Please help me out. :uhoh:


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Focus</b>!
> Back on topic, Kobe and MJ shouldn't be on the same senstence. Kobe may have the skill on MJ but Kobe don't have the "will to win" or "killer mind" the MJ have. MJ will never want Kobe on his team.


This, I disagree with. Kobe is incredibly competitive and has a burning desire to win. The only problem is that he wants to do it on his terms. He wants the six rings that MJ and Pippen collected but he doesn't want to be the Scottie Pippen in the relationship, ignoring the fact that Scottie was a terrific player in his own right. He's very stubborn and sometimes it comes back to bite the Lakers. I appluaded him for getting away from that selfish attitude a few years ago. He seemed to embrace Shaq as the leader of the team and picked his spots to dominate the game. He played excellent team ball and seemed to care about the team more than he does now. However, all that seemed to change last year when he made 2002-2003 _his _ season. From the beginning you got the impression that he was going to do things on his terms. He had a great year and I applaud him for that but I thought he played very selfishly throughout the season. He forced shots, ignored wide open teammates, and played risky defense. I think that attitude has carried over into this season. He still does many of the same things that he did last year. Kobe has reverted back to the player he was before Phil Jackson's arrival. MJ became a better teammate with each passing year in PJ's system. Kobe peaked rapidly and has gotten worse with each passing year. I hope he makes a serious commitment to becoming a better teammate and player next season, wherever he is.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

i'd question how mj would handle playing kobe's role in la. he'd be watching the team revolve around shaq, a player who doesn't work nearly as hard as him, and he'd be playing with players who don't have his intensity. i think mj might have a bit of a problem fitting within the system in la as well.

he'd probably respond differently, but i don't think he'd love to be doing what kobe is doing.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

Theres i few things i have with the Kobe MJ comparison. One, Kobe is not nearly as smart, I watched alot of MJ's games, and he was a very smart player... He didnt force alot of things, if they were double teaming him hed pass... Kobe forces ALOT of shots... I MEAN ALOT. MJ never got lost in the game (partially due to the fact that he was the main man on the Bulls and Kobe isnt on the Lakers) sometimes i see Kobe and if u didnt know what he looked like you wouldnt even know hes playing some games. Kobe has never been an MVP in the finals or in the regular season. How can he be the best or one of the best when hes not even the best on his own team. How can you consider Kobe leading his team to a championship when hes never gotten an MVP for the finals. Yes i agree that Shaq may get the nod for finals MVP because the East has no big man and Shaq just tears up the East... Then you gotta think, and this is what split MJ apart. MJ had the ability, almost every playoff game, to DOMINATE the game... Kobe hasnt shown that yet... Let Kobe finish his career, then well talk...


----------



## De_dauntless (Oct 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>bender</b>!
> 
> Honestly I don't see any connection between a 21/4 season of MJ as a 40 yr old and a possible 35+/5+ season as 25 yr old in today's game. Please help me out. :uhoh:



If an 40 year old guy that had lost basically his athelism could average 21 pts and 4 assist. Can you imagine what he would do in his prime with this present day competition come on dude wake up and smell the coffee.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kflo</b>!
> i'd question how mj would handle playing kobe's role in la. he'd be watching the team revolve around shaq, a player who doesn't work nearly as hard as him, and he'd be playing with players who don't have his intensity. i think mj might have a bit of a problem fitting within the system in la as well.
> 
> he'd probably respond differently, but i don't think he'd love to be doing what kobe is doing.


He'd probably react the same way. After all, MJ was an incredibly selfish and stubborn player, especially as a youngster. It's a good thing that they drafted (traded) for Pippen because there's no way Jordan was playing the subservient role that Pippen played. It's just not in his nature. I think he'd quarrel with Shaq just as much as Kobe does. He didn't initially like the triangle as the go-to-guy. Imagine how he'd react to it as a complimentary player? 

My beef with Kobe in all of this is that he's _reverted back_ to the player that he was when he first came into the league. That is, a selfish, flashy, showboating, volume shooter. He actually made progress between 99-02. He played an excellent all-round game and seemed so much more effective on the court. He picked his moments to break the offense and create opportunities for himself but he played smart, unselfish basketball for much of the game. Now, it seems like he's always breaking the offense and looking to score. His stats mask how selfishly he plays at times but anyone who watches all of the games can see that Kobe has regressed as a player this season. I just want to know what happened after 02'. He was making so much progress as a player and then he just snapped and reverted back to what he was before.


----------



## De_dauntless (Oct 2, 2003)

We all know that Shaq is the man on the Lakers but if MJ was on that team can we say for certain that Shaq would still be the man. I think not.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>De_dauntless</b>!
> We all know that Shaq is the man on the Lakers but if MJ was on that team can we say for certain that Shaq would still be the man. I think not.


It depends which MJ you are talking about. Obviously, it's easy for us to say that MJ would be the man on the Lakers now because we know how well he turned out. However, if MJ was Kobe's age when Phil Jackson came to town with his triangle offense, I'd almost surely bet that he'd build the team around Shaq. After all, Shaq is 7-1 350 and shoots 60% from the field. MJ was regarded as a selfish, gaudy, stat padder at 25. Some people around the league were convinced that he'd never win a championship playing the way that he did. That label of being a selfish player did not disappear until he won a ring.


----------



## John (Jun 9, 2002)

Ron Harper.


----------



## Kmasonbx (Apr 7, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>De_dauntless</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> If an 40 year old guy that had lost basically his athelism could average 21 pts and 4 assist. Can you imagine what he would do in his prime with this present day competition come on dude wake up and smell the coffee.


Actually your point holds no weight, at 39 Karl Malone averaged 20.6 points, 7.8 rebounds and a career high 4.7 assists per game. He never averaged 35 points, and he played through the same era Jordan did. Clearly in the 80s and early 90s the NBA game was much more uptempo so if he couldn't average 35 during the uptempo days in his prime why would he be able to nowadays? Don't just say because he did this at a certain age, if he was younger he would've put up the same #s he did in a totally different era. 

As for the debate, Kobe is more skilled than MJ at the same stage, and that is the original question. Kobe is a better shooter and I think he is more craft than Jordan was at the same age. But MJ had a little something extra, like somebody said he was extremely quick, and he gave it his all at the defensive end, and Jordan was probably a little more athletic than Kobe. 

I think it's ridiculous to say that at the same stage Kobe isn't better than Jordan because MJ is considered the greatest, well Jordan wasn't considered the greatest at 25. At 25 Jordan was dealing with the same issues that Kobe is dealing with. If Jordan had came into the league with Kareem or Moses Malone then you would've seen a different Jordan. For the first 4 or 5 years of his career people would've been saying all that stuff about how the big man makes it easier for him, so he would be doing the same thing Kobe does to show everybody it's not the big man. MJ wanted to be the man as bad as Kobe wants to be the man, but the difference is, when Mike was drafted he was the man from day 1. Another thing is Kobe is dealing with playing with a big man who is past his prime, and everybody can see that, but the offense is still run through him and that obviously frustrates Kobe. 

Also for people saying that Shaq makes things easy for Kobe how about the fact that Pippen ensured MJ could never be double teamed on the perimeter? Did you see how the Kings defended Kobe, they were sending 2 and 3 people at him everytime he touched the ball. That simply couldn't happen with Mike because of Pippen, another player on the perimeter who could do a lot of the same things as Mike. 

For you guys who think Kobe shouldn't be the main option, after his 35 point game against Houston they said that was the 20th time he scored 30 this season and the Lakers won 17 of those games. So they are obviously at their best when Kobe is at his best. 

Will Kobe pass Jordan as the GOAT, probably not, because I think it's going to be so hard to pass MJ because of all the little things. I think the only person in the NBA right now who has any chance of 1 day passing Mike is LeBron. If Kobe leaves LA this year, and he gets on a team that is constructed around him they will do very very well. I think a great fit for him would be the Clippers, because they have another solid wing well actually 2, with Maggette and Richardson and a PF who doesn't demand the ball and rebounds and blocks shots. All they are missing is a PG and they could get one in the draft


----------



## bender (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>De_dauntless</b>!
> 
> If an 40 year old guy that had lost basically his athelism could average 21 pts and 4 assist. Can you imagine what he would do in his prime with this present day competition come on dude wake up and smell the coffee.


Well, Karl Malone had 20/8 last season, as a 40 year old. He'd have 35/14 if he were 25 again today, right? 

Is it really that hard to understand? Teams took more shots in the 80s. The game was different. A great player, even a Michael Jordan, wouldn't get as many shots today as he had 15-20 yrs ago. MJ had a lower scoring average in the early nineties, _although_ he was a better player. Because the game had changed. In 87-88, when MJ had 35 ppg, nine players had more than 25 points. Today there's one. 
Did you get it?



> Originally posted by <b>SacKings384</b>!
> 
> Theres i few things i have with the Kobe MJ comparison. One, Kobe is not nearly as smart, I watched alot of MJ's games, and he was a very smart player... He didnt force alot of things, if they were double teaming him hed pass...


Wrong. When MJ was young, he forced everything. Most times he could, because he was literally unstopable. But in the playoffs, especially vs. the Pistons, he lost games. The Pistons knew Jordan would do it all by himself, and they focused their defense only on him. That's how they beat him many times.


----------



## De_dauntless (Oct 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmasonbx</b>!
> 
> 
> Actually your point holds no weight, at 39 Karl Malone averaged 20.6 points, 7.8 rebounds and a career high 4.7 assists per game. He never averaged 35 points, and he played through the same era Jordan did. Clearly in the 80s and early 90s the NBA game was much more uptempo so if he couldn't average 35 during the uptempo days in his prime why would he be able to nowadays? Don't just say because he did this at a certain age, if he was younger he would've put up the same #s he did in a totally different era.
> ...



I dont think you are getting it dude I am talking about MJ not Karl Malone. what I am saying if MJ can average 20 pts and 4 assist when he was 40 in the 21st century. When he was younger at age 25 he would be still capable of putting up 35pts and 5 assista a night with the present crop of players. Which he did back in late 80's and 90's.


----------



## De_dauntless (Oct 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>bender</b>!
> 
> Well, Karl Malone had 20/8 last season, as a 40 year old. He'd have 35/14 if he were 25 again today, right?
> 
> ...



Your logic is so wrong dude. The reason why MJ average 30 and more pts is because he took it to the hole on a regular basic back in the late 80's and early 90's. When he didn't score he got to the line where is was an over 80% free thrower. Later in the 90's michael became a more of a mid range jump shooter and didn't get to the line more regularly and that is why his average became lower.


----------



## John (Jun 9, 2002)

somtimes, the lack of athletcisim forces players to score in othe ways. Those other ways require some skills to do it.


----------



## De_dauntless (Oct 2, 2003)

Yo xmasonbx u said that

"Also for people saying that Shaq makes things easy for Kobe how about the fact that Pippen ensured MJ could never be double teamed on the perimeter? Did you see how the Kings defended Kobe, they were sending 2 and 3 people at him everytime he touched the ball. That simply couldn't happen with Mike because of Pippen, another player on the perimeter who could do a lot of the same things as Mike."


Dude i dont you have ever seen the bulls plat detroit when the pistons where the 'bad boys'. No only did MJ have 2 or 3 players on him, the whole team guard MJ so much you know about basketball.


----------



## Kmasonbx (Apr 7, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>De_dauntless</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> I dont think you are getting it dude I am talking about MJ not Karl Malone. what I am saying if MJ can average 20 pts and 4 assist when he was 40 in the 21st century. When he was younger at age 25 he would be still capable of putting up 35pts and 5 assista a night with the present crop of players. Which he did back in late 80's and 90's.


I don't think your getting the point, you can't say in one players case it doesn't matter what he did and when you talk about the other player say based on the same #s as the other player he would put up 35 a game when the other player never did in his career. 

Here is the real reason why MJ at 25 wouldn't get 35 a game in the present day NBA. At 25 Jordan really only had range out to 18-20 feet, by today's standards he would still be very athletic and quick but his lack of range would prevent him from putting up the offensive #s he did back then. Look at T-Mac he has a lot of the same offensive qualities as Jordan and he is a pretty good 3 point shooter but the most he's averaged is 32. I think Jordan's average would hover around the 30ppg mark, still obviously a great scorer but he wouldn't be as dominant a scorer as he was in his actual prime.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Pinball</b>!
> 
> 
> He'd probably react the same way. After all, MJ was an incredibly selfish and stubborn player, especially as a youngster. It's a good thing that they drafted (traded) for Pippen because there's no way Jordan was playing the subservient role that Pippen played. It's just not in his nature. I think he'd quarrel with Shaq just as much as Kobe does. He didn't initially like the triangle as the go-to-guy. Imagine how he'd react to it as a complimentary player?
> ...


----------



## Kmasonbx (Apr 7, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>De_dauntless</b>!
> Yo xmasonbx u said that
> 
> "Also for people saying that Shaq makes things easy for Kobe how about the fact that Pippen ensured MJ could never be double teamed on the perimeter? Did you see how the Kings defended Kobe, they were sending 2 and 3 people at him everytime he touched the ball. That simply couldn't happen with Mike because of Pippen, another player on the perimeter who could do a lot of the same things as Mike."
> ...


When the Bulls were battling the Pistons, Pippen wasn't a superstar yet. Pippen didn't really get people attention until the Lakers series, when he made life hell for Magic. Your trying to compare Scottie in his 3rd and 4th year to Shaq in his prime? Come on be real. The Bulls started beating everybody when Scottie proved at times he could be just as dominant as MJ, but obviously not on a consistent basis. Did the Lakers ever double team him? Or anybody they played in Finals, or how about even the Knicks? They just couldn't you double off of Mike your leaving Scottie open or a lights out shooter. The Bulls that couldn't beat the Pistons was a much different team then the 1 that won 6 straight titles.


----------



## De_dauntless (Oct 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmasonbx</b>!
> 
> 
> I don't think your getting the point, you can't say in one players case it doesn't matter what he did and when you talk about the other player say based on the same #s as the other player he would put up 35 a game when the other player never did in his career.
> ...




Tmac is not all of that the guy shoots way too many threes for my liking with is a low precentage shot. Mj mid range was deadly and he took it to the hole and got to the line as i said before. Therefore, MJ could still average 30 or more pts in the league today.


----------



## De_dauntless (Oct 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmasonbx</b>!
> 
> 
> When the Bulls were battling the Pistons, Pippen wasn't a superstar yet. Pippen didn't really get people attention until the Lakers series, when he made life hell for Magic. Your trying to compare Scottie in his 3rd and 4th year to Shaq in his prime? Come on be real. The Bulls started beating everybody when Scottie proved at times he could be just as dominant as MJ, but obviously not on a consistent basis. Did the Lakers ever double team him? Or anybody they played in Finals, or how about even the Knicks? They just couldn't you double off of Mike your leaving Scottie open or a lights out shooter. The Bulls that couldn't beat the Pistons was a much different team then the 1 that won 6 straight titles.


Yo dawg you are totally wrong again i will take you to the last game that won the bulls the 1st series. Why did you think Paxton was so wide open all the time. They double MJ and he step through their defense and kicked it out to paxton. Who couldn't miss.


----------



## Kmasonbx (Apr 7, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>De_dauntless</b>!
> 
> 
> Yo dawg you are totally wrong again i will take you to the last game that won the bulls the 1st series. Why did you think Paxton was so wide open all the time. They double MJ and he step through their defense and kicked it out to paxton. Who couldn't miss.


Are you serious? Who doesn't get double teamed when they penetrate? That's not even double teamming thats called collapsing on the ball. It happens to Chauncey Billups the same way it happens to T-Mac or Kobe. 

Did you see that Sacramento game when Kobe was doubled at the 3 point line almost every time he touched the ball? That's being double teammed, and MJ didn't face that.


----------



## De_dauntless (Oct 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmasonbx</b>!
> 
> 
> Are you serious? Who doesn't get double teamed when they penetrate? That's not even double teamming thats called collapsing on the ball. It happens to Chauncey Billups the same way it happens to T-Mac or Kobe.
> ...



LOl man you are so right I am not sure how you can step through a collapsing defense. But hey the man was MJ. So if you say that Mj step through a collapsing defense he did. I am not going to discuss that anymore. But what i will say that MJ would still average 30 or more points if he still played today when he was MJ in the late 80's and early 90's.


----------



## Kmasonbx (Apr 7, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>De_dauntless</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> LOl man you are so right I am not sure how you can step through a collapsing defense. But hey the man was MJ. So if you say that Mj step through a collapsing defense he did. I am not going to discuss that anymore. But what i will say that MJ would still average 30 or more points if he still played today when he was MJ in the late 80's and early 90's.


I never said he wouldn't average 30, I said he would average around right around the 30 point mark, but he wouldn't average 35 and 37 like he did when he was young.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

tmac scored 32 ppg last year. i don't think it's a stretch to thnk jordan could score more than that. he wouldn't have the same numbers across the board though. his fg% would be lower than it was. 

it depends on the team. jordan was regarded in a higher standing overall when his numbers were a bit lower than when he was putting up 35-37 ppg. 

the game is different. teams have less overall offensive firepower (generally). the stars are generally expected to carry a larger portion of the load. i guess you could call that a residual of the jordan era. 

jordan was the best (at least for his era). his circumstances helped create the player he became and how he's regarded. kobe's circumstances have upside, but they have downside, at least in comparison to mj. mj created this distinction of "the man". it's not enough to win, and it's not enough to dominate. mj, with help from pippen and his crew, had the perfect pecking order in place. and jordan establishing himself on bad teams that got better and were built completely around him (and coaches fired who didn't always see eye-to-eye) enabled him to completely control the scene. 

players who have the misfortune of sharing the spotlight, or developing in someone elses shadow, have no chance against the legend of mj. that won't mean they can't be as good, but the standard mj set is tough to match, even if it doesn't make that much sense. mj could have been even more successful if drafted into a different situation, but we'd likely view him less favorably. 

lebron at least has a chance, because he's got himself a (bad / mediocre) team, and he's got a few year head-start on mj.


----------



## compsciguy78 (Dec 16, 2002)

The difference is Kobe has yet to finish his career. If Kobe gets 10 rings, who would be better?


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>De_dauntless</b>!
> 
> Yo dawg you are totally wrong again i will take you to the last game that won the bulls the 1st series. Why did you think Paxton was so wide open all the time. They double MJ and he step through their defense and kicked it out to paxton. Who couldn't miss.


That's a bad example. That wasn't the Suns doubling Jordan because he was Jordan...that was a defense collapsing on a player who attacked the hoop. Even today, if Michael Finley attacks the hoop, he'll pull defenders down to try and stop him from scoring. Rotation defense was coming into vogue.

But the Michael Finley example does nothing to prove that Finley is constantly doubled or tripled.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>De_dauntless</b>!
> 
> LOl man you are so right I am not sure how you can step through a collapsing defense. But hey the man was MJ. So if you say that Mj step through a collapsing defense he did.


"Step through"? I don't know what you mean. He passed the ball (to Horace Grant) because he was stopped from getting a good shot. He passed to another player on the interior, further sucking the defense inwards, and then Grant threw it out to an open Paxson.

That's textbook team, passing offense beating a scrambling, rotating defense. It has nothing to do with showing that Jordan was being doubled all the time.


----------



## De_dauntless (Oct 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> 
> 
> "Step through"? I don't know what you mean. He passed the ball (to Horace Grant) because he was stopped from getting a good shot. He passed to another player on the interior, further sucking the defense inwards, and then Grant threw it out to an open Paxson.
> ...



who talking about the suns series son. We were discussing the Lakers series.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>De_dauntless</b>!
> 
> who talking about the suns series son. We were discussing the Lakers series.


Ah, sorry. I misread your post.

It was still due to penetration, unlike the Pistons who double-teamed even before he drove, but now at least I know what you meant by "stepped through."


----------



## O2K (Nov 19, 2002)

basically the playoffs- i cant remember a complete series which kobe has dominated, where as jordan dominated the complete playoffs.......

if im wrong correct me


----------



## bender (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>O2K</b>!
> basically the playoffs- i cant remember a complete series which kobe has dominated, where as jordan dominated the complete playoffs.......
> 
> if im wrong correct me


Well, actually Jordan had won only 1 playoff series when he was 25. Bryant has three rings.


----------



## Kmasonbx (Apr 7, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>bender</b>!
> 
> Well, actually Jordan had won only 1 playoff series when he was 25. Bryant has three rings.


Thats the thing that everybody is doing, they are comparing the totallity of Jordan's career against Kobe at age 25. Let's compare at the same stage not Jordan entire career against half of Kobe's.


----------



## O2K (Nov 19, 2002)

but one must remember that kobe does have shaq and at 25 jordan practicly(sp?) had no one


----------



## Spriggan (Mar 23, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>O2K</b>!
> but one must remember that kobe does have shaq and at 25 jordan practicly(sp?) had no one


you could use that same argument to make the claim that kobe would average gaudier numbers without shaq.


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmasonbx</b>!
> 
> 
> I don't think your getting the point, you can't say in one players case it doesn't matter what he did and when you talk about the other player say based on the same #s as the other player he would put up 35 a game when the other player never did in his career.
> ...



so then why do we hold players like bird, johnson, robertson and players like that in such reverance?

technically we could make claims that back in the 60's and 70's a guy like KG would be averaging a triple double... 35ppg 20reb and 10 ast.

the game has changed alot over time... and remember... even a 40 year old mike still put up 20ppg.

and im quite sure if mike was in the game now as a 25 year old... he would have more adapted his game, and done so as his own man.


----------



## JNice (Jul 13, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>O2K</b>!
> basically the playoffs- i cant remember a complete series which kobe has dominated, where as jordan dominated the complete playoffs.......
> 
> if im wrong correct me


Kobe really hasnt had to dominate entire series like Jordan did. Kobe has the luxury of cruising through many 1-3 qtrs while Shaq dominates, then expending his energy to dominate fourth quarters. Some games Kobe has been able to cruise through the entire game, but Jordan wasnt able to do that very often.

I think there are 2 or 3 players that have Jordan-like talents right now. I'd say Kobe, Tmac, and Lebron ... but I dont think the Kobe-MJ comparisons will be valid until we see what Kobe can accomplish without Shaq.


----------



## Kmasonbx (Apr 7, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Tragedy</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm not really sure of your point. I don't think you can determine a players greatness by saying if he played in a certain era with his game he has now or then what would he do. If KG played in the 60s n 70s with his exact game he has now, he would be absolutely unstoppable but he wouldn't have the game he has now if he played back then.

Jordan is a different player, he set the standards for what the prototype wing should be. Jordan wouldn't have to change his game at all to be succesful right now, but with the slower pace of games and thus less shot attempts I couldn't see a prime Jordan averaging 35 points a game, and 32 for his career like he did before his initial retirement.


----------



## bender (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Tragedy</b>!
> technically we could make claims that back in the 60's and 70's a guy like KG would be averaging a triple double... 35ppg 20reb and 10 ast.


Possible. Maybe he wouldn't have 10 apg, but 35/20 is realistic.


----------



## O2K (Nov 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>JNice</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> I think there are 2 or 3 players that have Jordan-like talents right now. I'd say Kobe, Tmac, and Lebron ... but I dont think the Kobe-MJ comparisons will be valid until we see what Kobe can accomplish without Shaq.


i totally agree to your comment, we really cant see what kobe can do until he leads a team by himself.... to kobes chagrin everyone(including myself) have to factor in shaq, we'll just have to wait a while to see the true comparison


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmasonbx</b>!
> 
> Jordan is a different player, he set the standards for what the prototype wing should be. Jordan wouldn't have to change his game at all to be succesful right now, but with the slower pace of games and thus less shot attempts I couldn't see a prime Jordan averaging 35 points a game, and 32 for his career like he did before his initial retirement.



but the way i see it, as well as many other posters on this board... Jordan wasn't just a player, and that was what set him apart from other scorers in his time, and even in this time.

i will give you benefit of the doubt, because there were far more 30ppg, 29ppg, and 28 ppg players back in the 80's. But plenty of those guys were just scorers.

Jordan completely influenced the game, he went from being a scorer, to being a dominant player. 

you really cannot use the fact that kobe has 3 rings at 25 in his favor, because when it comes down to it Shaq was the dominant force behind all three of those rings.

Technically Kobe played a different version of the role Pippen played to Jordan...

Its widely considered that Jordan kept many people from winning their ring. Patrick Ewing, Charles Barkley, Gary Payton, Karl Malone and John Stockton, and even Clyde Drexler (who snuck a ring on the strength of Hakeem and the fact Jordan had just returned).

I know people are comparing the whole of Jordans career to Kobe at 25, but the way i see it people are doing the same to Shaq right now, but in reverse. Its almost like people have forgotten exactly what Shaq is. Cuz even a young, immature, 23 year old unfocused Shaq took the magic to the finals. Even though they lost, i cant really knock their effort, considering he was facing Hakeem in his prime, years before Shaq was to even see his own.

I still wont understand how people can compare the two.. especially when one has a 7'2 350-370 lb safety blanket.

For our sake more than his, I hope Kobe decides to build his own dynasty somewhere else.

But for arguements sake, I do believe Kobe would be one of those top players should he have been playing in the 80's leading into the 90's... But with no Jordan to mold his game into, he would be lost amongst the Drexlers, Wilkins, and Dantley's.


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)




----------



## Shanghai Kid (Mar 7, 2003)

I'm watching the difference between Kobe and MJ right now.

Kobe is choking in the clutch AND he's letting Mobley rape him.


----------



## Shanghai Kid (Mar 7, 2003)

Correction- Kobe is God.


----------



## JNice (Jul 13, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Shanghai Kid</b>!
> Correction- Kobe is God.


 

Kobe was very un-clutch and clutch all in the same game. Although, the Rockets really made some bonehead plays. I was thinking when I saw Jim Jackson dribble against Kobe that "uh-oh, here comes a turnover" ...


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Shanghai Kid</b>!
> Correction- Kobe is God.


One good play doesn't make or break a player. I've never understood how a player can be considered "clutch" if he misses 15 straight shots and hits one down the stretch. You can't just ignore the 15 misses and look at the one he makes. Conversely, I've never understood how a player can make play after play in the fourth quarter and not be considered clutch if he misses one basket at the end of a game. Don't all of the baskets preceeding the miss count? Without all of those makes that player's team would not be in a position to win the game. Kobe is a clutch player because he usually makes plays in the fourth quarter, period. I'd also consider a handful of players in the league clutch, regardless of how they do on the last shot of a game. You have to look at the complete picture. Regardless, it's clear that Kobe is not as good in crunch time this year as he has been in the past. I think he'll be better next season if he's able to put all of his legal troubles behind him (IOW, he's found to be not guilty).


----------



## Flaming Homer (Jan 27, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>bender</b>!
> ...
> Is it really that hard to understand? Teams took more shots in the 80s. The game was different. A great player, even a Michael Jordan, wouldn't get as many shots today as he had 15-20 yrs ago. MJ had a lower scoring average in the early nineties, _although_ he was a better player. Because the game had changed. In 87-88, when MJ had 35 ppg, nine players had more than 25 points. Today there's one.
> Did you get it?
> ...


Jordan took _1998_ shots back in '87/88 season and averaged 35 points.
Kobe took 2002/2003 _1924_ shots with an avaerage of 30 points, McGrady shot last year _1813_ FGA in 75 games. Iverson attempted _1940_ shots last year, I don't see the big difference there. 
Why should Jordan take lesser shots nowadays? The big difference is the FG%, and this is the result of cleverness, in my opinion. Jordan had no that range like Kobe has today, but his midrange-jumper was much more consistant. Jordan played more through his strengths, and I would call that 'cleverness'. That's the major difference, in my opinion.


----------



## hellrazor08 (Feb 20, 2003)

if kiki vandewahe is averaging 27 ppg in '87 i would think more people would agree that it was easier for individuals to score in that era and that jordans 37 ppg is a compared to individual scoring in this era is a bit unfair. and again how come jordan in his prime had a lower fg% and scoring average than he did in his early to mid 20s? again youd think people would realize that this might be attributed to scoring being much easier during the mid 80s when mj played.


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

what about players in todays game who score 18-20 ppg...

are you insinuating that they would be doing 25ppg if they played years ago?

what about guys who averaged astronomical stats... would u discount those as well because they didnt play in today's game?

you can also make an arguement that the league wasnt so watered down back then as it is now. the overall talent of the league was much higher... 


i guess you could look at scoring as being relative to currency.

5cents in 1930 is probably the equivalent of 35 cents today (im just making an example)

but then again, it was only last year that we had two players to average more than 30ppg.

kobe did so in a system that had shaq.
tmac averaged 32 being the primary scorer.

so if jordan were to play today, with the same bulls team (for arguement's sake) of the first three peat (for age reasons), you're telling me he wouldnt average at least 32ppg? nor 35? or better yet... would the bulls team of the first three peat beat the lakers? how about the bulls team of the second three peat?


----------



## bender (Jul 15, 2002)

Who would've thought? Another one from Germany. 



> Originally posted by <b>Flaming Homer</b>!
> Jordan took _1998_ shots back in '87/88 season and averaged 35 points.
> Kobe took 2002/2003 _1924_ shots with an avaerage of 30 points, McGrady shot last year _1813_ FGA in 75 games. Iverson attempted _1940_ shots last year, I don't see the big difference there.
> Why should Jordan take lesser shots nowadays? The big difference is the FG%, and this is the result of cleverness, in my opinion. Jordan had no that range like Kobe has today, but his midrange-jumper was much more consistant. Jordan played more through his strengths, and I would call that 'cleverness'. That's the major difference, in my opinion.


Jordan took more than 1998. When you shoot or drive and get the foul that lead to freethrows, the shot attempt doesn't count. Mike shot about 11 freethrows _per game_ that season. How many extra shots are that to his 1998 total?
But actually the fg% is another factor. Mike wouldn't have the same percentage today, because today driving is not that easy anymore, especially since there's the zone (ask AI). There's no way MJ would have .500+ FG% today.


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Priest</b>!
> Whats the difference between these two? and I dont mean the rape case or jordans 6 rings to kobe's 3 or stats..I mean skill wise? To me Kobe has a better handle then jordanand everything else is just similar. They both have that same hunger and drive to be the best so whats so diffeent about these two?


Their games are very similiar. They both are great all around players, but I would say Jordan was just that much better in every aspect of the game. They both have that killer sense for winning. Both are champions..... I guess the only thing that really sets them apart is Jordan's done it all, and Kobe's is trying to follow the path of greatness.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

jordan took it to the hole relentlessly when he was younger. kobe settles for jumpers and bad shots too much. part of it i believe is the system he plays in doesn't encourage it. part is just desire / determination to do it. part is too much confidence in outside shot. part is era. part is ability to beat man with first step. jordan was more explosive overall. kobe has a more mature game at this point, but that's not necessarily a positive.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kflo</b>!
> jordan took it to the hole relentlessly when he was younger. kobe settles for jumpers and bad shots too much. part of it i believe is the system he plays in doesn't encourage it. part is just desire / determination to do it. part is too much confidence in outside shot. part is era. part is ability to beat man with first step. jordan was more explosive overall. kobe has a more mature game at this point, but that's not necessarily a positive.


At 25, Jordan was a more explosive athlete than any of today's wings. However, that still doesn't preclude guys like Kobe from driving. Hell, Paul Pierce attacks the basket relentlessly and he's not nearly the ballhandler or the athlete that Kobe is. I think that Kobe has become far too reliant on his jumper. A few years ago that was alright but his jumper is not as reliable as it used to be. I think Shaq's presence takes away driving opportunities for him as well. Shaq is always drawing 2-3 defenders and that usually clogs the paint. If he were playing with a guy like Divac, he'd probably be able to attack the basket more freely. However, Shaq's presence does give Kobe more one-on-one matchups. He'd draw more double teams without him.


----------



## hellrazor08 (Feb 20, 2003)

again players like drexler, olajuwon, ewing, barkley, nique all had their best statistical year around the mid 80s and all were around their early to mid 20s. as they came into their prime during the early 90s, their ppg or fg% usually stayed the same or decreased. even kareem who was almost 40 had one of his best fg% during the mid 80s. so look it didnt just apply to mj but to many of the top players in the league. the 80s was a great offensive statisticl period for individuals and comparing statsof players from that era would be inflated to individual stats of this era.


----------



## bballlife (Oct 5, 2003)

Nice thread. Lots of good points being made, and lots of horrible/incorrect points being made.

Let me give you guys the ultimate break down on MJ vs Kobe.
MJ @ 25 years compared to Kobe now. 

MJ
Advantage #1- Very large hands, crucial and very important function that allowed him to do many different things, allowed him to hold on to the ball in heavy traffic. Allowed him to finish absurd 3 point plays. 
Kobe has small hands, and its really strange because most guys his size have big hands, Lebron has huge hands like MJ for example. As Pinball noted earlier, this has caused him some trouble, get stripped in traffic, losing the ball, missing dunks, these things happen when your hands are not huge like MJ's

Advantage #2- MJ was more athletic plain and simple. Faster, quicker, more explosive, higher jumper, etc. Kobe is very athletic also, but does not have the natural gifts MJ had, Richardson is the only player in the league that sometimes reminds me of MJ's athletic ability.

Advantage #3
Jordan had his own show from day 1, Kobe has had to share/take a back seat on the Lakers, not to mention the fact that he has never had everyone’s respect on the team. MJ did with the bulls and he was the man, if Horace Grant was lagging behind in practice, MJ would drill him, he would ride his teammates, he demanded their respect and demanded they work as hard as he did. The best way to sum this up is, Jordan was a killer, Kobe wants to be or pretends to be a killer. When he has his own show and power, then we will see.

Advantage #4- Both are great defenders but because of MJ's superior athletic ability, it allowed him to take over games defensively, Kobe can't do that. 

Kobe's advantages include- better long range shooter, better 3 point shooter, more skilled across the board offensively, better with the left hand. Kobe also has a better handle than MJ did. Kobe also has the best work ethic I have ever heard of with NBA players. 


Close on most other aspects of the game.

Both extremely smart, super competitive basketball players, both destined for greatness before they played 1 game in the NBA. 



I strongly believe that when its all said and done, MJ and Kobe will be the top 2 players in NBA history. In what order? That depends on Kobe. He's got at least another 10 seasons.


----------



## magic_bryant (Jan 11, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>bballlife</b>!
> Nice thread. Lots of good points being made, and lots of horrible/incorrect points being made.
> 
> Let me give you guys the ultimate break down on MJ vs Kobe.
> ...


Everything he or she said. 

But to add on to what he said, I think the MAIN advantage MJ has over Kobe is that simply put, MJ came FIRST. I truely can not see the differences other than the things mentioned above. BUt overall, they REALLY equal out. MJ's team was designed to make HIM a better overall player and designed to HIGHLIGHT his talents. Whereas Kobe's team is designed in a way that actually DISCOURAGES Kobe's talents, yet he still finds a way to make his mark on a game most of the time. Also, when Kobe has tried ot demand intensity from his teammates they took it as Kobe thinking he were better than they were or he was arrogant. (Last year Samaki and Fisher questioning Kobe in the first 12 games of the season) 

I honestly think that Kobe may very well be in the Top 10 of All-Time at THIS point. Which leads to the question of whether Kobe is AS good as MJ was. To say that he IS, is laughable because he's only been this good for a few years and we don't know how he's going to turn out. We KNOW how MJ's legacy turned out. 

It's funny, everything people hate Kobe for, I remember arguing with my Grandma about MJ. Cockiness, arrogance, BALL-HOG, STAT PADDER. These are the EXACT SAME THINGS MJ was hated for that Kobe is being labelled NOW. Kobe proves a point by only shooting ONCE in the first half vs Sacramento and it's considered EXTREMELY selfish even though it's done to show the best way to win is through him (Kobe). I remember watching a PLAYOFF game in 1988 I think it was. A few people on the Bulls had mentioned MJ hogging the ball. So he went out and shot 8 TIMES!!! ONLY 8!!! Kobe at least shot 13 times in the Sacramento game. 

It appears to me that Kobe is going to pretty much follow the SAME path as MJ, whether by design or not, which I think it's just by coincedence. If Kobe DOES follow the same path and go onto become the FOCAL POINT of an offense and continues to win a few titles, the ONE advantage may very well be that Kobe got his first 3 titles at an EARLY age. You never know, 10 years from now, A LOT OF PEOPLE could very well look at the Lakers and say, depending on what Kobe has done since, "Man, the Lakers only won because of Kobe's brilliance and WINNING attitude. I mean, Shaq didn't win without Kobe and Kobe DID win without Shaq!!!" 

So Kobe has a HELL OF A SHOT at being the BEST EVER!!! In my HONEST opinion without any BIAS, the fact that Kobe has pretty much the same MENTAL competitiveness and basically equal MJ's talents, he WILL be either the GREATEST or teh SECOND GREAT behind MJ. It just depends on how Kobe's situation (team, players, focal point, leader) turns out.


----------



## Spriggan (Mar 23, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Pinball</b>!
> 
> 
> One good play doesn't make or break a player. I've never understood how a player can be considered "clutch" if he misses 15 straight shots and hits one down the stretch. You can't just ignore the 15 misses and look at the one he makes. Conversely, I've never understood how a player can make play after play in the fourth quarter and not be considered clutch if he misses one basket at the end of a game. Don't all of the baskets preceeding the miss count? Without all of those makes that player's team would not be in a position to win the game. Kobe is a clutch player because he usually makes plays in the fourth quarter, period. I'd also consider a handful of players in the league clutch, regardless of how they do on the last shot of a game. You have to look at the complete picture. Regardless, it's clear that Kobe is not as good in crunch time this year as he has been in the past. I think he'll be better next season if he's able to put all of his legal troubles behind him (IOW, he's found to be not guilty).


i don't really think "clutch" really exists. at least, not in the way most people envision it. clutch to me is simply not choking in the waning moments of a game. kobe and MJ are considered clutch, yet both have missed their fair share of game-tying/winning field goals.

however, they've probably hit more game-winners then missed, and people only remember the game winners.

then again, when you have someone who's already labeled "clutch" hitting two of the most improbable 3 point field goals i (or anyone else, i'm sure) have ever seen to send the game into OT and then win it, it's a bit difficult not to believe in some type of clutch. not to mention reggie's barrage of points in like 10 seconds against the bulls...... and MJ's ability to hit what seems like EVERY important shot he's ever taken. i'm talkin playoffs and finals. doesn't get any more clutch than that.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>spriggan9</b>!
> i don't really think "clutch" really exists. at least, not in the way most people envision it. clutch to me is simply not choking in the waning moments of a game. kobe and MJ are considered clutch, yet both have missed their fair share of game-tying/winning field goals.
> 
> however, they've probably hit more game-winners then missed, and people only remember the game winners.
> ...


I think clutch is a myth. Kobe missed a load of shots before making that big play at the end against the Rockets. If he had hit any one of those shots, it would have been considered clutch and likely would have decided the game right there since it was so close. It was just a matter of a great player making a play, it was just a matter of time before it happened. 

Clutch to me is not being afraid to shoot at the end and being confident, not losing a step or disappearing. The rest depends on your skills. I dont care if Shaq was the most clutch player ever, hes not going to hit a jumpshot to win a game (without a whole lot of luck of course). Jordan didnt disappear down the stretch of games, he was confident, and on top of that he was the best player in the game by far. He was bound to make big plays since he made big plays during the course of the whole game since hes the best, so that didnt change at the end of games.


----------



## Vinsanity (May 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>courtside</b>!
> 
> 
> Haha..
> ...


Shaq>Rodman, Pippen, Kokuc........


----------



## Vinsanity (May 28, 2002)

MJ = GOAT
Kobe = Overrated........wayyyyy overrated


----------



## 33 (Nov 18, 2002)

What has Kobe done for you to warrent him as a top 2 in NBA history? How can you compare him to MJ? Yeah he has 3 titles, the same amount as Jud Buchler. Kobe is no where near MJ. MJ has 10 consecutive scoring titles, Kobe has none. MJ has at tleast 3 MVPs, Kobe has none. MJ was a defensive player of the year, Kobe has never been that. MJ has 6 Finals MVPs, Kobe has none. MJ has led the league in steals, Kobe has yet to do that. I'm not saying Kobe is sorry b/c even though I don't like him, he is one of the leagues best players. He is in no way, shape, or form comparable to MJ. I'll take that back. When it comes to game-winning shots, Kobe is the closest thing to MJ, but that's the only comparable attribute to MJ.


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>33</b>!
> What has Kobe done for you to warrent him as a top 2 in NBA history? How can you compare him to MJ? Yeah he has 3 titles, the same amount as Jud Buchler. Kobe is no where near MJ. MJ has 10 consecutive scoring titles, Kobe has none. MJ has at tleast 3 MVPs, Kobe has none. MJ was a defensive player of the year, Kobe has never been that. MJ has 6 Finals MVPs, Kobe has none. MJ has led the league in steals, Kobe has yet to do that. I'm not saying Kobe is sorry b/c even though I don't like him, he is one of the leagues best players. He is in no way, shape, or form comparable to MJ. I'll take that back. When it comes to game-winning shots, Kobe is the closest thing to MJ, but that's the only comparable attribute to MJ.


All this true, except for there being no reason to compare him to MJ. We've seen so many players be compared to MJ over the years: Penny, Grant, Minor, Kobe, etc.... 
Kobe's the one guy that is continually compared to Mike and it's not for no reason. The reason aren't any of the aforementioned, of course because he's yet to do those things, but the fire and the passion that they both possess is there connection. It's shows in big games. They are both winners, which is also a result of playing with that kind of fire. Like Doc Rivers said last weekend, since MJ left the game, Kobe has been the one guy to provided that kind of excitement to the league. He is the best player in the league at that since MJ. While I understand most fans don't like it(not to mention Kobe doesn't like it), I don't see this comparision going away. It's the same way they did Mike when he came into the league by constantly comparing him to Dr. J. Mike had to live with it, and so does Kobe. I'm sure everyones question is will he(Kobe) continue to live up to the expectations of the media hype? He's done a great job so far, let's see how he does from here forward.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>33</b>!
> What has Kobe done for you to warrent him as a top 2 in NBA history? How can you compare him to MJ? Yeah he has 3 titles, the same amount as Jud Buchler. Kobe is no where near MJ. MJ has 10 consecutive scoring titles, Kobe has none. MJ has at tleast 3 MVPs, Kobe has none. MJ was a defensive player of the year, Kobe has never been that. MJ has 6 Finals MVPs, Kobe has none. MJ has led the league in steals, Kobe has yet to do that. I'm not saying Kobe is sorry b/c even though I don't like him, he is one of the leagues best players. He is in no way, shape, or form comparable to MJ. I'll take that back. When it comes to game-winning shots, Kobe is the closest thing to MJ, but that's the only comparable attribute to MJ.



the problem with this type of analysis is that mj likely wouldn't have had most of his individual accomplishments had he been drafted onto a team with shaq. he would have been the same player, he just wouldn't have done the same things.

when it's all said and done, we can look back at career accomplishments and jordan has alot on his resume. but at this point of kobe's career, it's not really fair to say he didn't do this or that. you can say he doesn't shoot a high enough %, or he doesn't apply himself defensively all the time, or that he's not as consistent. kobe gets points for what he's been a part of and helped his team accomplish. he gets points for his ability to rise to the occassion. he gets some demerits as well. but not winning finals mvp, when his teammates going for 35 & 15 isn't a demerit for him. if jordan was playing with shaq against nj, he'd be riding shaq as well. and he'd be destroying the competition before they got there.


----------



## 33 (Nov 18, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kflo</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I think you are making excuses. When Magic got drafted to a team with a dominate center it didn't stop what he does on the floor. If Kobe was like MJ, his stats would be comparable...point blank. Kobe is clutch, and that is the only thing that is caparable to MJ. You talk all that mess about him playing with Shaq, but on the defensive end MJ is way better than Kobe. Until Kobe achieves some type of individual award, he is not comparable to MJ.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>33</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> I think you are making excuses. When Magic got drafted to a team with a dominate center it didn't stop what he does on the floor. If Kobe was like MJ, his stats would be comparable...point blank. Kobe is clutch, and that is the only thing that is caparable to MJ. You talk all that mess about him playing with Shaq, but on the defensive end MJ is way better than Kobe. Until Kobe achieves some type of individual award, he is not comparable to MJ.


magic statistically didn't reach his peak until la consciously made a decision to make him their go-to guy, when kareem was no longer capable of handling the load, in '87. magic was already in the league 7 years at that point. he handn't won any league mvp's at that point. after that point, he proved what most knew, that he was capable of shouldering more of the load if needed.


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>33</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> I think you are making excuses. When Magic got drafted to a team with a dominate center it didn't stop what he does on the floor. If Kobe was like MJ, his stats would be comparable...point blank. Kobe is clutch, and that is the only thing that is caparable to MJ. You talk all that mess about him playing with Shaq, but on the defensive end MJ is way better than Kobe. Until Kobe achieves some type of individual award, he is not comparable to MJ.


Once Kobe gets' those individual awards, it still wont matter because you find a new season to discredit him. For example, Kobe may not be half the defender Mike was, but at the age of 25 Kobe has just as many if not more all defensive team awards. That doesn't seem to count for much amongst those who do not like Kobe.

As far as Magic, theres a big difference between being the type of player Kobe/MJ are and the player Magic was. Magic's game is like Kidd to an instant. If he played with Shaq, he'd be doing alot of the same thing. He's an assist man. MJ and Kobe are not that type of player but would be forced to had they played with Shaq. You have to give the ball to the big guy, because no one can guard him. Forget the fact that no oone can guard MJ or Kobe.... the big man is closest to the basket and it's the easiest way to produce scoring. MJ would have suffered playing along side a big man of Shaq's ability.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

At this point, Kobe and Tmacs career are both on track to be better than Jordans was if you base it on what they achieved at the same age. However, Jordans very best work wasnt done until later in his career as far as becoming the best ever. He was in the same shoes as Tmac as a youngster, but he stepped up his game in the 90s. Whether or not Kobe and Tmac do that remains to be seen. 

So basically, its not what Kobe and Tmac have done up until this point that will put them on Jordans level, its what they accomplish in the future. I just dont think they'll have the same ability, intelligence and mental toughness as Jordan did. 

They'll be fine players though.


----------



## Ryoga (Aug 31, 2002)

In his early years Magic was the second star to Alcindor just as much Kobe has been to Shaq. The only reason he won the Finals MVP was the injury to his MVP center for the sixth game.


----------



## 33 (Nov 18, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kflo</b>!
> 
> 
> magic statistically didn't reach his peak until la consciously made a decision to make him their go-to guy, when kareem was no longer capable of handling the load, in '87. magic was already in the league 7 years at that point. he handn't won any league mvp's at that point. after that point, he proved what most knew, that he was capable of shouldering more of the load if needed.


Well, LA has not made that decision in Kobe's favor,so until then he can't be compared to MJ. He will never be like MJ


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>John The Cool Kid</b>!
> At this point, Kobe and Tmacs career are both on track to be better than Jordans was if you base it on what they achieved at the same age.


How has Tmac accomplished more than Jordan at the age of 25?

When Mike was 25:
1 MVP
1st team all NBA twice
1 DPOY
1 all NBA defensive team award
lead the NBA in steals
2 time scoring champ(averaging 35ppg, 37ppg)
And he got out of the first round after beating the Cleveland Cavaliers.

How can Tmac compare to that?


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>33</b>!
> 
> 
> Well, LA has not made that decision in Kobe's favor,so until then he can't be compared to MJ. He will never be like MJ


Why protest the fact that he can be compared to MJ? He obviously can, because he always has been. MJ hadn't accomplished nearly what DR. J had when they started comparing them, so how is this any different?


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>IV</b>!
> How has Tmac accomplished more than Jordan at the age of 25?
> 
> When Mike was 25:
> ...


Well, Tmac has the scoring awards and Kobe has about half of those defensive awards. Neither have an MVP or DPOY or led the NBA in steals. I guess they arent as close as I thought.


----------



## bballlife (Oct 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>IV</b>!
> 
> 
> How has Tmac accomplished more than Jordan at the age of 25?
> ...



You beat me to it IV, but don't forget the biggie. 63 points against the Celtics in the playoffs, an NBA record.
He also had the Bulls in the playoffs every year. 

Tmac has accomplished jack squat compared to MJ at the same age, or Kobe for that matter.


----------



## Spriggan (Mar 23, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>IV</b>!
> 
> 
> How has Tmac accomplished more than Jordan at the age of 25?
> ...


if grant hill was healthy, i wouldn't have put it past t-mac to achieve a lot of those accomplishments.


----------



## bballlife (Oct 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>33</b>!
> What has Kobe done for you to warrent him as a top 2 in NBA history? How can you compare him to MJ? Yeah he has 3 titles, the same amount as Jud Buchler. Kobe is no where near MJ. MJ has 10 consecutive scoring titles, Kobe has none. MJ has at tleast 3 MVPs, Kobe has none. MJ was a defensive player of the year, Kobe has never been that. MJ has 6 Finals MVPs, Kobe has none. MJ has led the league in steals, Kobe has yet to do that. I'm not saying Kobe is sorry b/c even though I don't like him, he is one of the leagues best players. He is in no way, shape, or form comparable to MJ. I'll take that back. When it comes to game-winning shots, Kobe is the closest thing to MJ, but that's the only comparable attribute to MJ.



You and John the kid need to really watch some more basketball, because you have no clue what you are talking about. Have you ever watched Kobe?? Once or twice? Only on sportscenter? 

If you can't see the resemblence between MJ and Kobe you are blind. MJ was the best clutch player in the league, Kobe is now. Both show the great desire to win, both have similar moves on the court, scoring ability, I could go on and on, but I don't see the point.

Pinball- I don't understand why you don't understand how hard it is to be a clutch player. Look at how many consistent clutch players there are in this league, 4-5? If that. With the game on the line, it is much, much easier to make a mistake or crap your pants then to remain collected and try and make the play. 

IE I have seen Iverson dribble the ball out of bounds, slip and fall down on his own dribble at least 5-6 times with seconds left going for the win. 

It aint easy being clutch.


----------



## Priest (Jun 24, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>spriggan9</b>!
> 
> 
> if grant hill was healthy, i wouldn't have put it past t-mac to achieve a lot of those accomplishments.


:boohoo:


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>bballlife</b>!
> You and John the kid need to really watch some more basketball, because you have no clue what you are talking about. Have you ever watched Kobe?? Once or twice? Only on sportscenter?


This doesnt mean much coming from someone who thinks Kobe will be the 1st or 2nd best player of all time. I've seen Kobe play, I live in southern california and get the local networks. Hes a top 5 player in this league right now, and he may never be undoubtedly the best player in the league, and will be fortunate if he wins any more than 2 MVPs. Thats top 25 of all time material.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>John The Cool Kid</b>!
> 
> 
> This doesnt mean much coming from someone who thinks Kobe will be the 1st or 2nd best player of all time. I've seen Kobe play, I live in southern california and get the local networks. Hes a top 5 player in this league right now, and he may never be undoubtedly the best player in the league, and will be fortunate if he wins any more than 2 MVPs. Thats top 25 of all time material.


west never won an mvp, and he was never the best player in the league. hakeem won 1 mvp, and had a 2 year stretch as the best player. oscar won 1 mvp, 1 title as 2nd best player on team, never consensus best player. baylor, karl malone, etc...

not that kobe will be top 10 or even top 20, but i'm not sure exactly what the standard for that is. he's on a pretty decent track for a pretty high spot.


----------



## Spriggan (Mar 23, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Priest</b>!
> 
> :boohoo:


do you doubt that? isn't it logical to assume that if a great player gets another great player by his side, that will in turn make him a better player and improve the team drastically?

it's only common sense.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>kflo</b>!
> west never won an mvp, and he was never the best player in the league. hakeem won 1 mvp, and had a 2 year stretch as the best player. oscar won 1 mvp, 1 title as 2nd best player on team, never consensus best player. baylor, karl malone, etc...
> 
> not that kobe will be top 10 or even top 20, but i'm not sure exactly what the standard for that is. he's on a pretty decent track for a pretty high spot.


Well, obviously a lot more goes into it. Hakeems forte was defense even though he was an excellent offensive player, and probably would have won more MVPs had the greatest player of all time not been in there at the same time. I dont see how Kobe would make the top 5 (let alone 2) when guys who are debatably only top 10 like Duncan and KG are obviously better players right now.


----------



## Priest (Jun 24, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>spriggan9</b>!
> 
> 
> do you doubt that? isn't it logical to assume that if a great player gets another great player by his side, that will in turn make him a better player and improve the team drastically?
> ...


yeah you are correct i just dislike when people assume things


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>John The Cool Kid</b>!
> 
> 
> Well, obviously a lot more goes into it. Hakeems forte was defense even though he was an excellent offensive player, and probably would have won more MVPs had the greatest player of all time not been in there at the same time. I dont see how Kobe would make the top 5 (let alone 2) when guys who are debatably only top 10 like Duncan and KG are obviously better players right now.


hakeem came in 2nd in the voting once, losing to barkley in '93. jordan didn't keep him from winning any mvps.

maybe duncan and garnett are obviously better at this moment. they weren't both obviously better last year (at least for alot of the year), or the year before, or the year before. things change quickly. a dominant postseason (not happening so far), and kobe could be right back in the ballgame.

but you're right, it will be extremely difficult to crack the top 10 for anyone, and they'll need to do some special things.


----------



## bballlife (Oct 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>John The Cool Kid</b>!
> 
> 
> This doesnt mean much coming from someone who thinks Kobe will be the 1st or 2nd best player of all time. I've seen Kobe play, I live in southern california and get the local networks. Hes a top 5 player in this league right now, and he may never be undoubtedly the best player in the league, and will be fortunate if he wins any more than 2 MVPs. Thats top 25 of all time material.



Just cool your horses, when its all said and done, Kobe will have plenty of MVP awards. Then you will have to find something else. 

You're off stating that Kobe is top 5 right now. 
In the last week I have heard Doug Collins, Doc Rivers, and Tony Kornheiser all say he is the best player in the league and Doc said he has been the greatest player since Jordan. He is having a rough series against the Rockets but he will bounce back. 

Skill level= off the charts
Desire to win = GREAT
Add those two together=great success.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>kflo</b>!
> but you're right, it will be extremely difficult to crack the top 10 for anyone, and they'll need to do some special things.


I agree. I also like your statement about things change quickly, that can also apply to McGrady. Hes not thought of too highly right now, but obviously thats because of his team success. He could demand a trade this summer and blow up on a better team. Kobes future is unsure right now as well, so who knows really. 

Personally, I think Kobe would have to do a whole lot to be a top 2 player in the next three years unless KG or Duncan decline drastically. I think they do more things on the court and dominate games in more ways. Thats me though, I'm a front court supremesist (sp?).


----------



## Priest (Jun 24, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>John The Cool Kid</b>!*I'm a front court supremesist (sp?). *


and the truth comes out:reporter:


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>jtx</b>!
> The difference between Kobe & Jordan? Kobe hits clutch shots in the regular season, Jordan does it in both regular and playoff games.


What the? How old are you? Let me test you: do you know what happened in the following games from the 2000 playoffs?

Game 2 Lakers vs Phoenix
Game 4 Lakers vs Pacers

?????


----------



## bballlife (Oct 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Jamel Irief</b>!
> 
> 
> What the? How old are you? Let me test you: do you know what happened in the following games from the 2000 playoffs?
> ...



What about game 7 Lakers/Blazers in 2000 Western Conference finals? I recall a clutch Kobe bringing them back from a 13 point hole in the 4th to win the game. 

Then in the Finals against the Pacers, he had some huge clutch performances. 

He was only 20.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>John The Cool Kid</b>!
> Personally, I think Kobe would have to do a whole lot to be a top 2 player in the next three years unless KG or Duncan decline drastically. I think they do more things on the court and dominate games in more ways. Thats me though, I'm a front court supremesist (sp?).


I think Duncan is more of an obstacle than Garnett. Just a year ago most people had Kobe and KG on the same level. Before that, many people considered Kobe to be better than him. KG has only emerged as a top two player in most people's minds in the last year or so, as Shaq has declined and Kobe has regressed. I don't think it's all that difficult to picture possibly surpassing KG again. As good as KG is as a player, he's not really a dominant offensive player. He's probably the best all-round defender in the league but it's the offensive contributions that win games for you down the stretch. As good as he is, he sometimes has trouble scoring in big spots and has to be "bailed out" by teammates. That is one thing that Kobe has always had over him. He's a top notch scorer that can put the ball in the basket throughout the course of a game. KG has had a much better year but I expect Kobe to bounce back next season and have another year like 03'. KG may be big but he doesn't always play like a big man. That works to his advantage many times but it can also work against him.


----------



## Priest (Jun 24, 2003)

the only big men that came through in the clutch imo were da dream and kareem


----------



## bballlife (Oct 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Pinball</b>!
> 
> 
> I think Duncan is more of an obstacle than Garnett. Just a year ago most people had Kobe and KG on the same level. Before that, many people considered Kobe to be better than him. KG has only emerged as a top two player in most people's minds in the last year or so, as Shaq has declined and Kobe has regressed. I don't think it's all that difficult to picture possibly surpassing KG again. As good as KG is as a player, he's not really a dominant offensive player. He's probably the best all-round defender in the league but it's the offensive contributions that win games for you down the stretch. As good as he is, he sometimes has trouble scoring in big spots and has to be "bailed out" by teammates. That is one thing that Kobe has always had over him. He's a top notch scorer that can put the ball in the basket throughout the course of a game. KG has had a much better year but I expect Kobe to bounce back next season and have another year like 03'. KG may be big but he doesn't always play like a big man. That works to his advantage many times but it can also work against him.




I agree with most of your post. But I think Kobe has been better than KG and Duncan for the last 4 seasons. Last 3 for sure, this year has been off and on. I would still take him over Duncan or KG any day of the week. 

KG has his scoring problems down the stretch and is not very clutch but I still put him above Duncan.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Pinball</b>!
> 
> 
> I think Duncan is more of an obstacle than Garnett. Just a year ago most people had Kobe and KG on the same level. Before that, many people considered Kobe to be better than him. KG has only emerged as a top two player in most people's minds in the last year or so, as Shaq has declined and Kobe has regressed.


I think KG has emerged due to his starting to win more. If he continues to win at a fairly decent clip (a contender each year), I don't think Bryant will have a very good chance of passing him or Duncan.

The only player who might have a chance, if he really lives up to billing, is James.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Pinball</b>!
> I think Duncan is more of an obstacle than Garnett. Just a year ago most people had Kobe and KG on the same level. Before that, many people considered Kobe to be better than him. KG has only emerged as a top two player in most people's minds in the last year or so, as Shaq has declined and Kobe has regressed. I don't think it's all that difficult to picture possibly surpassing KG again. As good as KG is as a player, he's not really a dominant offensive player. He's probably the best all-round defender in the league but it's the offensive contributions that win games for you down the stretch. As good as he is, he sometimes has trouble scoring in big spots and has to be "bailed out" by teammates. That is one thing that Kobe has always had over him. He's a top notch scorer that can put the ball in the basket throughout the course of a game. KG has had a much better year but I expect Kobe to bounce back next season and have another year like 03'. KG may be big but he doesn't always play like a big man. That works to his advantage many times but it can also work against him.


I agree, and for all those reasons I still think Duncan is the best player in the league and theres a seperation between him and KG. 

I think it would take an amazing, almost perfect season for Kobe to match the kind of season Garnett put up this year. I just think Garnett is more of an impact player. Kobe will probably put up 28 ppg, Garnett probably 24 on a better shooting percentage. They put up about the same assist numbers, and where it gets lobsided is the rebounding, where Garnett grabs anywhere from 7-9 more per game and is the overall better defender. 

Put it this way, if you put a prime Kobe with no distractions on the Twolves in place of KG, and had a PF the calibur of Sprewell to make up for the position switch in the franchise players, I dont think they win nearly as many games. Probably 5-10 less IMO. 

Thats just my opinion though. It would be the same for Tmac or any guard. I'm a huge believer that frontcourt players (PF/C) naturally have more impact on games.


----------



## JT (Mar 1, 2004)

This whole topic is ludacris, just ludacris I say. If Jordan had Shaq at his side, he'd still be winning titles, even RIGHT NOW at 41! And to me, it doesn't matter if Kobe/T-Mac match Jordan accomplishment for accomplishment because in the end, they aren't him. 

He singlehandedly revolutionized the game, from getting shoe deals (which everybody does now) to bringing in baggy shorts to the game. If Kobe retired right now and went to play baseball, would anybody hire him? Probably not. Will he be starring in any animated movies barring a crime special? No. That's how notorious Jordan was. The consummate professional.

I'm not taking away from Kobe, he's an incredible player with excellent control, but still there will never be another Jordan, just like there will never be another Magic. But I do agree, Kobe will be probably the closest thing _to_ him when its all said and done.


----------



## 33 (Nov 18, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>IV</b>!
> 
> 
> Why protest the fact that he can be compared to MJ? He obviously can, because he always has been. MJ hadn't accomplished nearly what DR. J had when they started comparing them, so how is this any different?




MJ was compared to Dr. J b/c of the way they play above the rim. MJ and Erving have totally different floor games. anybody who is touted to be a great player will unfairly be compared to the greatest, no matter what sport it is. To me, age is not relevant. I go by years played in the league. Like Kobe was the fastest to 10,000 points, but how many years did it take for him to reach that point compared to the person he past. That's what I look at. Now, you say MJ did all those accomplishments by the age of 25, but how many years in the league was under his belt before he accomplished those things and compare them to the next player.


----------



## Showtime84' (Oct 8, 2002)

For the people that think Kobe is anywhere close to Jordan take a look at Jordan's playoffs stats from 1988 to 1993:

35ppg 51%FG 7rbs 6asts 35%3PFG

Now think about this for a minute. This was probably the strongest competitive period in NBA history, specially for the East. In that 6 year time span MJ had to battle:

The Bad Boy Pistons- 22 games
Barkleys' Sixers and Suns- 17 games
Ewings' Knicks-22 games
The Cavs-20 games
Magic's Lakers-5 games
Drexlers' Blazers-6 games

That's 114 games against prime time teams in a 6 year period!!!!

Not to mention the fact that he was the UNDESPUTED leader of the Bulls and focus of the opposing teams entire deffensive schemes back in a time were hand checking and all out flagrant fouls were allowed and you begin to understand the pressure the guy was under.

Remember, for those first 3 years, 88' to 90', before Pippen and Grant had developed the Bulls success fell squarely on the shoulders of Michael wich makes it even more amazing that he led the Bulls to the cusp of the Finals in both 1989 and 90' giving the champion Bad Boys EVERYTHING they could handle in the ECF's.

This is where the real difference comes in.


----------



## 33 (Nov 18, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>jtx</b>!
> But I do agree, Kobe will be probably the closest thing _to_ him when its all said and done.



I think the closest thing to MJ came before him, and his name was Wilt. Those two dominated thier era.


----------



## JT (Mar 1, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>33</b>!
> 
> I think the closest thing to MJ came before him, and his name was Wilt. Those two dominated thier era.


I meant as in guard play.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>jtx</b>!
> This whole topic is ludacris, just ludacris I say. If Jordan had Shaq at his side, he'd still be winning titles, even RIGHT NOW at 41! And to me, it doesn't matter if Kobe/T-Mac match Jordan accomplishment for accomplishment because in the end, they aren't him.
> 
> He singlehandedly revolutionized the game, from getting shoe deals (which everybody does now) to bringing in baggy shorts to the game. If Kobe retired right now and went to play baseball, would anybody hire him? Probably not. Will he be starring in any animated movies barring a crime special? No. That's how notorious Jordan was. The consummate professional.
> ...



i could care less about what these guys do outside basketball, from shoe deals to movies to fashion trends. these guys are basketball players, and that's really the standard by which i'll choose to judge them.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>33</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


so when kobe was an 18 year old in the nba, it's irrelevant that mj was a role-player in college (albeit a good one), it's really mj's rookie year 3 years later that we should be comparing to?


----------



## JT (Mar 1, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>kflo</b>!
> 
> i could care less about what these guys do outside basketball, from shoe deals to movies to fashion trends. these guys are basketball players, and that's really the standard by which i'll choose to judge them.


MJ's dominance of the game enabled him to do virtually whatever he wanted outside of it. Kobe is not that dominant, you catch the drift or are you lagging?


----------



## bballlife (Oct 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>jtx</b>!
> 
> 
> MJ's dominance of the game enabled him to do virtually whatever he wanted outside of it. Kobe is not that dominant, you catch the drift or are you lagging?



No, more like MJ's charisma, smile and personality allowed him to gain popularity and endorsements off the court. The great athlete part is a given. 

And Kobe was doing very well with endorsements until he got in trouble.


----------



## bballlife (Oct 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Showtime84'</b>!
> For the people that think Kobe is anywhere close to Jordan take a look at Jordan's playoffs stats from 1988 to 1993:
> 
> 35ppg 51%FG 7rbs 6asts 35%3PFG
> ...


Kobe has faced plenty of great competition in the playoffs. Just think about facing a very deep Blazers team nearly every year, the best Spurs and Kings teams of all time. He has faced great compo and put up very good stats as well.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>jtx</b>!
> 
> 
> MJ's dominance of the game enabled him to do virtually whatever he wanted outside of it. Kobe is not that dominant, you catch the drift or are you lagging?


no it wasn't his dominance alone. it was his athleticism, his flair, his timing (importantly), his marketing, his personality. he was a marketing superstar well before he was the unquestioned king of basketball.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>kflo</b>!
> no it wasn't his dominance alone. it was his athleticism, his flair, his timing (importantly), his marketing, his personality. he was a marketing superstar well before he was the unquestioned king of basketball.


Honestly, aside from all the sidestepping the question with different scenarios, where do you think Kobe measures up to Jordan? Personally, I think that Kobe is a poor mans Michael Jordan. He gets the comparisons because he modeled his whole game and basketball persona after MJ. Theres nothing wrong with that (from a basketball standpoint) but if he were to have a very different style of play but still be the *same calibur* player, he would never get those comparisons. Dont get me wrong either, Kobe is a fantastic player and is easily a top 5 player when healthy (mentally and physically), but a top 5 current player is much different than a top 2 all time player. 

As far as style of play, Kobe is the closest thing to Jordan in the league. 

As far as dominance, Tim Duncan is the closest thing to Jordan in the league. 

Theres a huge difference.


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>33</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> I think the closest thing to MJ came before him, and his name was Wilt. Those two dominated thier era.


I thought the Celtics dominated Wilt's era of basketball?


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>John The Cool Kid</b>!
> 
> 
> Honestly, aside from all the sidestepping the question with different scenarios, where do you think Kobe measures up to Jordan? Personally, I think that Kobe is a poor mans Michael Jordan. He gets the comparisons because he modeled his whole game and basketball persona after MJ. Theres nothing wrong with that (from a basketball standpoint) but if he were to have a very different style of play but still be the *same calibur* player, he would never get those comparisons. Dont get me wrong either, Kobe is a fantastic player and is easily a top 5 player when healthy (mentally and physically), but a top 5 current player is much different than a top 2 all time player.
> ...


he's, imo, the dominant perimeter player in the league, who thrives under pressure, plays above the rim, has a well rounded game - he's bound to get comparisons to those who played before him. 

i agree that he's a poor man's jordan at ths point. jordan was ahead of him in just about every area, as of now. a few years ago, you could say kobe was on par at the same age, i don't think that holds anymore. i don't think he's reached his peak yet, and we'll see. i think he'll end up no worse than the 3rd best ever at the position (at least unless tmac or lebron pass him). i don't think he'll approach mj, but i don't think it's completely impossible.


----------



## bballlife (Oct 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>John The Cool Kid</b>!
> 
> 
> Honestly, aside from all the sidestepping the question with different scenarios, where do you think Kobe measures up to Jordan? Personally, I think that Kobe is a poor mans Michael Jordan. He gets the comparisons because he modeled his whole game and basketball persona after MJ. Theres nothing wrong with that (from a basketball standpoint) but if he were to have a very different style of play but still be the *same calibur* player, he would never get those comparisons. Dont get me wrong either, Kobe is a fantastic player and is easily a top 5 player when healthy (mentally and physically), but a top 5 current player is much different than a top 2 all time player.
> ...


No.

Kobe is no poor mans Jordan in any way. Look at my comparison, Kobe is more skilled across the board on the offensive end. This includes a better handle, better 3 point shooter, better left hand. 
MJ gets him in a few categories but Kobe holds up very well against the greatest ever. 

When healthy Kobe is the #1 player on the planet, trust me. 

Tim Duncan has decent weaknesses, ie ft shooting, passing out of double teams. Kobe has none.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>kflo</b>!
> he's, imo, the dominant perimeter player in the league, who thrives under pressure, plays above the rim, has a well rounded game - he's bound to get comparisons to those who played before him.
> 
> i agree that he's a poor man's jordan at ths point. jordan was ahead of him in just about every area, as of now. a few years ago, you could say kobe was on par at the same age, i don't think that holds anymore. i don't think he's reached his peak yet, and we'll see. i think he'll end up no worse than the 3rd best ever at the position (at least unless tmac or lebron pass him). i don't think he'll approach mj, but i don't think it's completely impossible.


I can agree with all of that 100%. Thats how I see it also, although I'm not that familiar with the history of great 2-guards other than Jordan (and other 80-90s guys like Drexler and Wilkins) so I dont know how Kobe stacks up against West and so on. I'll take your word for it.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>bballlife</b>!
> 
> 
> No.
> ...


Physically, Kobe is a poor man's Jordan. As you said, his hands are much smaller and he's not as explosive as Jordan was at the same age. Kobe is a great athlete but Jordan was better. Skill wise, they are very close. Jordan was a more accurate shooter but Kobe has more range. Kobe is a better ball handler but Jordan was the better dribbler. Both were great passers. Both were great defenders, although Jordan was better. Overall, their skills are very similar. I might even agree that Kobe is a bit more skilled than Jordan at the same age but Jordan had better physical attributes and that made him the better player.


----------



## John (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Pinball</b>!
> 
> 
> Physically, Kobe is a poor man's Jordan. As you said, his hands are much smaller and he's not as explosive as Jordan was at the same age. Kobe is a great athlete but Jordan was better. Skill wise, they are very close. Jordan was a more accurate shooter but Kobe has more range. Kobe is a better ball handler but Jordan was the better dribbler. Both were great passers. Both were great defenders, although Jordan was better. Overall, their skills are very similar. I might even agree that Kobe is a bit more skilled than Jordan at the same age but Jordan had better physical attributes and that made him the better player.


What is the difference between being a better ball handler and a better dribbler? I am not challenging, is it just me? I cant define the difference between the two.

And you made a great point at the end. Sometimes, Jordan was better physically so he didnt have to score his points in a more "skilled" way.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>John</b>!
> What is the difference between being a better ball handler and a better dribbler? I am not challenging, is it just me? I cant define the difference between the two.


I see a slight difference between handling and dribbling. To me, ball handling is a player's overall skills with the ball in his hands. Dribbling is more about how well a player controls the ball. I think that Kobe is an excellent ball handler but he dribbles the ball to high. That works against most players but when he goes into heavy traffic, he has a tendency to get the ball stripped. Jordan used to keep his dribble very low and that allowed him to have excellent control of the ball. His large hands also allowed him to control the ball better.


----------



## Spriggan (Mar 23, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Pinball</b>!
> 
> 
> I see a slight difference between handling and dribbling. To me, ball handling is a player's overall skills with the ball in his hands. Dribbling is more about how well a player controls the ball. I think that Kobe is an excellent ball handler but he dribbles the ball to high. That works against most players but when he goes into heavy traffic, he has a tendency to get the ball stripped. Jordan used to keep his dribble very low and that allowed him to have excellent control of the ball. His large hands also allowed him to control the ball better.


that's a great observation.


----------



## bballlife (Oct 5, 2003)

They go together.

Handle refers to how well you move with the ball. How well you control it. 

The better the handle, the easier for the player to move in any direction with the ball and not lose it. 

Dribbling refers to specific dribble moves, IE between the legs, around the back. 

Look at Steve Nash, he combines both extremely well, excellent handle, great dribbler. 

Players with great handles are often said to have the ball "attached" to their hand.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Sorry, but if you're differentiating between dribbling and handling, you obviously need to pick up a ball and shoot hoops. 

If you have handles, then you can dribble. They are synonyms, in this context. 

You can have bad handles, it just equals bad dribbling.


----------



## CaliCool (Nov 5, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>bballlife</b>!
> Tim Duncan has decent weaknesses, ie ft shooting, passing out of double teams. Kobe has none.


Excuse me. Tim Duncan is weak at passing out of double teams? Can you check his assists numbers, <b>in the playoffs?</b>


----------



## TheRifleman (May 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>33</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> I think the closest thing to MJ came before him, and his name was Wilt. Those two dominated thier era.


EXCEPT that Wilt was domina<b>ted </b>in the playoffs and Mike was not!

Wilt has many regular season records, but not that many for the playoffs. There is a distinction between the 2, as the PO's are against TOUGHER competition.


----------



## Sánchez AF (Aug 10, 2003)

Theresnot deifference because you cant compare both MJ. is just the best is in another level Kobe is good player but he's not even half of player of what MJ was.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>bballlife</b>!
> 
> When healthy Kobe is the #1 player on the planet, trust me.
> 
> Tim Duncan has decent weaknesses, ie ft shooting, passing out of double teams. Kobe has none.


Is Kobe not healthy right now, or is there something else prohibiting him from shooting 40% from the floor, or leading his team to victories? I can guarantee Tim Duncan or Kevin Garnett could win with the supporting cast Kobe has now.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

again, fg% isn't nearly as important as ppfga. kobe's ppfga is 1.16, which, for a full season, would have ranked him 17th in the league last year.

la has played 3 games, and they've lost to 2 teams that are currently undefeated. lets not judge them, or kobe, on these 3 games.


----------



## O2K (Nov 19, 2002)

the difference is that for every jordan thread there is about 5.6 kobe threads


----------



## Sánchez AF (Aug 10, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>hobojoe</b>!
> 
> 
> Is Kobe not healthy right now, or is there something else prohibiting him from shooting 40% from the floor, or leading his team to victories? I can guarantee Tim Duncan or Kevin Garnett could win with the supporting cast Kobe has now.


:yes:


----------

