# Kobe is the constant



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

1998- Michael Jordan retires
1999, 2000- Kobe vs Vince Carter
2001- Kobe vs Iverson
2002, 2003, 2004- Kobe vs Tmac
2005- Kobe vs LeBron
2006- Kobe vs LeBron, Kobe vs Wade

So are these other guys going to stick around in these debates you crazy kids love to have? Or are they going to fall off as well?


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

In 2004-05, McGrady was better than Kobe, and he had one of the greatest all-around playoff performances by a perimeter player since Jordan.

That said, Bryant has both been great and durable, which has allowed him to be the most constant. Over the next five years, if McGrady recovers from his 2005-06 injury, Bryant, McGrady, Wade and James are all likely to be "constants" and James and Wade will be around longer than Bryant and McGrady.

It's unlikely any wing will dominate the era like Jordan did. The era is too talent-rich in perimeter players.


----------



## ralaw (Feb 24, 2005)

Kobe Bryant has always had the expectation of greatness around him and now that he's achieved this level he is the fair standard for SG's in today's game. However, he doesn't have the mystique of Jordan, but who does? I know it, you know it, he knows it, he's opponents know it, and his haters know it. 

James and Wade came into the league at a great time, because it has been when Kobe's image was taking it's biggest hit for several reasons and people basically moved on. However, if Kobe had the clean image it might be a different story.


----------



## ChiBron (Jun 24, 2002)

A large part of that is him playing for a team like LA which made sure he was constantly in the spotlight. Say 5 years ago he was on a .500 team putting up 27/6/5 while T-Mac/Vince/Wade or some other great perimeter player was playing alongside Shaq and going deep in the playoffs every year. Would all star SGs still be compared to Kobe first? Definitely not. Statistically he was putting up the same numbers VC, T-mac, AI, PP etc were but his biggest advantage lied in LA making deep playoff runs every season while those guys usually couldn't get past the 1st round. It's all abt the W in the end. 

Of the current crop of perimeter superstars nothing is stopping Wade/LeBron barring injury. Great players part of great/good teams. So they will be the constants or maybe even the standard given their performance last season.

btw, 2005 definitely wasn't Kobe vs. LeBron. Kobe hardly generated any talk abt his OWN self that year given his and LA's mediocre play.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

What's the point here? Kobe's been around for awhile, yes...but..what are you saying here? I'm not being sarcastic, I want to know what your point is.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

_Dre_ said:


> What's the point here? Kobe's been around for awhile, yes...but..what are you saying here? I'm not being sarcastic, I want to know what your point is.


I guess the point is that us NBA geeks (a johnism) are always putting up Who's better threads. And when it comes to the best wing players around for some time now, Kobe is the one being compared to. That's why he is "the constant".


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

PauloCatarino said:


> I guess the point is that us NBA geeks (a johnism) are always putting up Who's better threads. And when it comes to the best wing players around for some time now, Kobe is the one being compared to. That's why he is "the constant".


 Yes, he's constantly doing well but that doesn't mean he's constantly/always/ever the best.


----------



## ralaw (Feb 24, 2005)

_Dre_ said:


> Yes, he's constantly doing well but that doesn't mean he's constantly/always/ever the best.


....yet, he's still the standard. Hence all of the comparisons.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

ralaw said:


> ....yet, he's still the standard. Hence all of the comparisons.


 I suppose.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

_Dre_ said:


> Yes, he's constantly doing well but that doesn't mean he's constantly/always/ever the best.


If he hasn't been the best, you surely must agree is has been a top-2 wing player. And that's the reasoning for the comparisons.

When Kobe dropped 81, there was a thread in this Board about the best player in the league. Kobe won it hands down. A couple of months later, Lebron won it. Go figure.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

As of about two years ago..he has been the best, but that doesn't mean all those other times he was the best. 

I'd take VC, AI, and T-mac (his best 30+ppg year) over Kobe in those comparisions.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

_Dre_ said:


> As of about two years ago..he has been the best, but that doesn't mean all those other times he was the best.
> 
> I'd take VC, AI, and T-mac (his best 30+ppg year) over Kobe in those comparisions.


Sure you would. What's new?


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

You would take Vince Carter huh? Why?


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

SPMJ said:


> A large part of that is him playing for a team like LA which made sure he was constantly in the spotlight. Say 5 years ago he was on a .500 team putting up 27/6/5 while T-Mac/Vince/Wade or some other great perimeter player was playing alongside Shaq and going deep in the playoffs every year. Would all star SGs still be compared to Kobe first? Definitely not. Statistically he was putting up the same numbers VC, T-mac, AI, PP etc were but his biggest advantage lied in LA making deep playoff runs every season while those guys usually couldn't get past the 1st round. It's all abt the W in the end.
> 
> Of the current crop of perimeter superstars nothing is stopping Wade/LeBron barring injury. Great players part of great/good teams. So they will be the constants or maybe even the standard given their performance last season.
> 
> btw, 2005 definitely wasn't Kobe vs. LeBron. Kobe hardly generated any talk abt his OWN self that year given his and LA's mediocre play.


Man, you and me and others have been arguing this insanity for years time to turn the page. 

Kobe had one of the great season's EVER and didn't have Shaq, best season in 20 years by a scorer yet you contend Kobe would have been just like any other of those guys instead of the standard bearer, I guess last season dispelled this notion 81 points, 62 in 3 quarters, clutch shots. 

Kobe ended all those prior debates on HIS ABILITY. 

He had a injury filled season with coaching problems and the transition away from Shaq in 05

Kobe contributed heavily to those deep runs. He had a 27ppg scorer on his team and still was outscoring each one of those guys except for AI.

Tmac a standard guy,please he played on the worst team in the league with 19 wins, what great player through istory has played on the league's worst team. 

AI a gunner who shot notoriously low fg % and high to's plus never allowing another teammate to flourish. 

PP and VC were never even close to as good while Kobe was making all defensve teams to boot something those guys were never doing. 

Anyway Its like saying Wade is over hyped because of his teams success. Wade, Melo and Bron will be in the conversation IF they get better and keep improving judging by the Worlds they have work to do as Dirk said if Kobe plays its a wrap the US wins gold easy. 

Kobe's an alltime great player no matter how hard the NBA's marketing team wants to annoit the league in the hands of Wade, Melo, and Bron, give it time Kobe will do what he did wit the others, he'll end the discussion. I guess in 5 years OJ mayo will get his shot at Kobe. 

As MJ said Kobe is the best player in the league NOW.


----------



## essaywhuman (Aug 10, 2005)

SPMJ said:


> btw, 2005 definitely wasn't Kobe vs. LeBron. Kobe hardly generated any talk abt his OWN self that year given his and LA's mediocre play.


Are you talking about 04-05 or 05-06?
Because Kobe and the Lakers were terrible in 04-05. Such a disappointing year as a Laker fan.


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

Ive been saying this for a while. Kobe's new nick name

"The Standard" :biggrin:


----------



## Pain5155 (May 28, 2006)

t-mac hasnt done anything, call me when he gets outta the first round.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

PauloCatarino said:


> Sure you would. What's new?


Leave me alone. You "debated" me in one thread, and you know "what's new with me." 



> You would take Vince Carter huh? Why?


Back then, yes. Now, no. Of course not.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

Yeah, Kobe has been holding down the perimeter scene for years just like Duncan and Shaquille have been holding down the paint for the same years (post-Jordan era). Some elite players who were considered threats have come and gone, but those three (Kobe, Duncan, Shaquille) have been the constant and the standards of the post-Jordan era. All elite players get compared to them.


----------



## magic_bryant (Jan 11, 2004)

Sir Patchwork said:


> Yeah, Kobe has been holding down the perimeter scene for years just like Duncan and Shaquille have been holding down the paint for the same years (post-Jordan era). Some elite players who were considered threats have come and gone, but those three (Kobe, Duncan, Shaquille) have been the constant and the standards of the post-Jordan era. All elite players get compared to them.


Exactly. 

I'm sure there were quite a few people who would take Drexler or Nique over Jordan back in their heyday. But Jordan was always in the argument. Magic and Bird were the winners, but Jordan was still in the argument. 

Kobe's been that guy. As Tony Kornheiser likes to say, "Kobe Bryant has been the best all-court player for the last 5 years or so, we just never realized it."

Regardless of who was the best swingman in the league in any given year, Kobe was the comparison. Just to give a little taste of how true that is, notice any other players of the last 5-7 years that get really compared to MJ on a consistent basis? Not really, save for maybe Bron. Why? Because Kobe is the standard at which one has to reach before you can be compared to MJ. Kobe's ONLY comparison is to whether or not he's reached MJ, yet.


----------



## beamer05 (Feb 24, 2006)

SPMJ said:


> A large part of that is him playing for a team like LA which made sure he was constantly in the spotlight. Say 5 years ago he was on a .500 team putting up 27/6/5 while T-Mac/Vince/Wade or some other great perimeter player was playing alongside Shaq and going deep in the playoffs every year. Would all star SGs still be compared to Kobe first? Definitely not. Statistically he was putting up the same numbers VC, T-mac, AI, PP etc were but his biggest advantage lied in LA making deep playoff runs every season while those guys usually couldn't get past the 1st round. It's all abt the W in the end.
> 
> Of the current crop of perimeter superstars nothing is stopping Wade/LeBron barring injury. Great players part of great/good teams. So they will be the constants or maybe even the standard given their performance last season.
> 
> btw, 2005 definitely wasn't Kobe vs. LeBron. *Kobe hardly generated any talk abt his OWN self that year given his and LA's mediocre play*.


Kobe avg. 27,6,6 for that season as the Lakers were 34-48. 

Lebron in 04-05, avg 27,7,6 as the Cavs were 42-40.

Tmac in 04-05 avg. 26,6,6 as the Rockets were 51-31. [28,6,5 in his last year w/the Magic as they only won 19 games if I remember correctly.] 

I guess what I don't get is why people think Kobe had a mediocre year in 2004-05. His averages were right there with Lebron's and Tmac's. His team obviously didn't fare as well as the other two teams, but the Cavs didn't make the playoffs and the Rockets lost in the first round. He played a few less games because of injury, but still performed fairly well despite everything else going on- rudy t. coaching/having to quit, some "interesting" role players, drama about shaq being 'forced out' pj's book, etc. So, exactly how was this season mediocre in any way except that the Lakers had a bad record? Sure, it's all about W's but there are some extenuating circumstances regarding that as well. IMO.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

And if you know how to use the Internet, you'd have discovered that Kobe Bryant was the single most talked about player of anyone in the NBA during the 2004-2005 season. That's with regards to articles written about him over the Internet, but if you look through the papers (big or small) or go through the TV coverage on him again you'd see the same pattern. People can't get enough of the guy, especially the people that don't even like him. Funny, but mostly sad.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

Not sure what the point of the thread is. Kobe is the constant sure. But he's the constant loser.

In the early part of his career, AI was definitely better. By the time Kobe was coming into prominence, AI was on the way down for a myriad of reasons. Also as a sidebar, it was VC vs. AI more than it was Kobe. But whatever. Anyways. Then it became T-Mac and Kobe--and that arguement had no decider. Now Kobe is coming into his prime, and he's not definitively out of the arguement with Wade and Lebron.

This season I believe has been the closest Kobe has come to being the definitive best player. But Lebron finished with more MVP votes, his team went farther into the playoffs, and Wade won a championship, and got Finals MVP(something Kobe doesn't have).


----------



## beamer05 (Feb 24, 2006)

futuristxen said:


> Not sure what the point of the thread is. Kobe is the constant sure. *But he's the constant loser.*
> In the early part of his career, AI was definitely better. By the time Kobe was coming into prominence, AI was on the way down for a myriad of reasons. Also as a sidebar, it was VC vs. AI more than it was Kobe. But whatever. Anyways. Then it became T-Mac and Kobe--and that arguement had no decider. Now Kobe is coming into his prime, and he's not definitively out of the arguement with Wade and Lebron.
> 
> This season I believe has been the closest Kobe has come to being the definitive best player. But Lebron finished with more MVP votes, his team went farther into the playoffs, and Wade won a championship, and got Finals MVP(something Kobe doesn't have).



So it's possible to be the constant loser, while having won 3 championships? And only playing on one losing team in 10 NBA seasons? That makes total sense.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

beamer05 said:


> So it's possible to be the constant loser, while having won 3 championships? And only playing on one losing team in 10 NBA seasons? That makes total sense.


Loser of the individual matchups. *No need to attack another poster.*


----------



## Brandname (May 24, 2006)

beamer05 said:


> So it's possible to be the constant loser, while having won 3 championships? And only playing on one losing team in 10 NBA seasons? That makes total sense.


I'm pretty sure he meant the "loser" in terms of head-to-head player comparisons, which is what this thread was originally about. Not "loser" in terms of NBA wins/losses.


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

good points futurixten. i'd like too agree that kobe in the pre-lebron/wade era wasn't better than t-mac individually, nor AI (especially AI). ppl know kobe is a scorer, and that's all he does. but AI is a better scorer than kobe is. and now in the lebron/wade era...i would say kobe is the 3rd best wing player...4th best if t-mac is healthy. kobe was on a shaq-led team during the three-peat...now he just finished his 10th season, and he still can't lead a team. the young gunz wade and lebron have been leading their team since their first year...while putting up better stats. it's mostly laker fans who make up the comparison threads...no one else cares...that's why he is the constant (loser BTW as futurixten said). nowadays most basketball fans make wade vs lebron threads when comparing wing players.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

HKF said:


> You would take Vince Carter huh? Why?


Because without the injuries, Vince could arguably be a better player right now or right on par with Kobe, and without the injuries he isnt that far off really.

But back to the topic at hand, Kobe one has been blessed with the fact that he rarely has suffered any injuries during his career and two unlike all those other guys compared with him, he had the luxury to play with the most dominant big man of our time.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

HB said:


> Because without the injuries, Vince could arguably be a better player right now or right on par with Kobe, and without the injuries he isnt that far off really.
> 
> But back to the topic at hand, Kobe one has been blessed with the fact that he rarely has suffered any injuries during his career and two unlike all those other guys compared with him, he had the luxury to play with the most dominant big man of our time.


 Don't attach that to me , I was talking about back then. I'm not taking anyone over Kobe right now besides maybe Lebron.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

HB said:


> Because without the injuries, Vince could arguably be a better player right now or right on par with Kobe, and without the injuries he isnt that far off really.
> 
> But back to the topic at hand, Kobe one has been blessed with the fact that he rarely has suffered any injuries during his career and two unlike all those other guys compared with him, he had the luxury to play with the most dominant big man of our time.


Well *Not appropriate*. However, we live in a world where if's don't really matter. He also works harder than Vince Carter.


----------



## Kobester888 (Jul 8, 2005)

Vince was dope back then but he was not better than Kobe. I'll admit I am a Kobe bias but Vince never really showed me that he has a heart of a champion. I would rather have the old AI than the old Vince if i had to trade for one of them back then for Kobe.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Sure, Kobe's been the constant. He hasn't consistently been the best perimeter player (though he has at times), but he's been the discussion standard for a few reasons:

-Played for a top team
-Played in one of the largest national markets
-Due to various controversy and perceived attitude, has as many people who dislike him as love him...and both groups invoke his name constantly, either to announce he's fallen below someone or to announce he's the best in basketball

And, of course, he's great. But if he were the same player and had played for the Sonics his whole career, I don't think he'd be the "constant" in perimeter player comparisons.


----------



## beamer05 (Feb 24, 2006)

futuristxen said:


> Loser of the individual matchups.



So in these individual match-ups that Kobe was the supposed loser does anyone take into account his teams win/losses? At all? So you would rather VC get 35-5-5 and the loss, while Kobe got something like 30-4-4 and the win? Makes total sense. At least for me, I try to factor in winning a little bit in these 'individual' match-ups. There was also the little thing of having Shaq to play with, but that probably didn't diminish his stats any did it?


----------



## ralaw (Feb 24, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> Sure, Kobe's been the constant. He hasn't consistently been the best perimeter player (though he has at times), but he's been the discussion standard for a few reasons:
> 
> -Played for a top team
> -Played in one of the largest national markets
> ...


Are you arguing the perception of Kobe versus the reality of Kobe? 
Are you attempting to say his legacy would be closer to McGrady's had he went to the Hornets?

I agree to an extent, but this argument really has to do with opinion. Had he went to the Hornets, he may not have any championships, and since we judge our elite players by championships won, he may not be considered the clear best, but he still would have been the standard IMHO simply due to his overall ability. However, it's hard to discuss these types of arguments because of the amount of assumption and opinion involved. 

If I say, "he was the one player compared to Jordan who had health, consistency and ability", you would argue, "If he didn't have Shaq, he wouldn't have health and consistency due to him being forced to carry the load his entire career like McGrady!" If I say, "Unlike (fill in the blank), he has proven himself on the biggest stage time and time again you would argue, "Who got him to the biggest stage time and time again?" This type of argument could go on for days and never end, so I'm not going to teke the bait.


----------



## ralaw (Feb 24, 2005)

futuristxen said:


> Loser of the individual matchups.


Since people like to use the "Shaq factor" against Kobe to dismiss his abilities and accomplishments, I'll use it for him here. Kobe's individual stats where suppressed due to Shaq's presence.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

ralaw said:


> Are you arguing the perception of Kobe versus the reality of Kobe?


Partly. Who the "standard" is for discussion board comparisons is is all about perception. The reality is that McGrady has been just as good as Bryant up to last season (when injury derailed McGrady), but the perception is different for many due to which teams the two have played for.



> I agree to an extent, but this argument really has to do with opinion. Had he went to the Hornets, he may not have any championships, and since we judge our elite players by championships won, he may not be considered the clear best, but he still would have been the standard IMHO simply due to his overall ability.


Why? McGrady has displayed as much overall ability but is not, evidently, viewed as the standard. The reason is because Kobe has been involved with championship teams and his performances have been under national spotlights that McGrady's haven't.

But yes, this entire thread is all about opinion.

Jordan established himself as the standard due to overall ability, because he was clearly and significantly better than anyone else. No perimeter player since him has done that. But LeBron James could very well do that.


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

futuristxen said:


> Not sure what the point of the thread is. Kobe is the constant sure. But he's the constant loser.
> 
> In the early part of his career, AI was definitely better. By the time Kobe was coming into prominence, AI was on the way down for a myriad of reasons. Also as a sidebar, it was VC vs. AI more than it was Kobe. But whatever. Anyways. Then it became T-Mac and Kobe--and that arguement had no decider. Now Kobe is coming into his prime, and he's not definitively out of the arguement with Wade and Lebron.
> 
> This season I believe has been the closest Kobe has come to being the definitive best player. But Lebron finished with more MVP votes, his team went farther into the playoffs, and Wade won a championship, and got Finals MVP(something Kobe doesn't have).



This is delusional. 

VC versus AI in that ONE playoff series, how could Kobe have affected it when he was in the Western Conference, Perception even then was Kobe was the next MJ that goes back to the 98 allstar game they weren't saying AI was the next anything. And when VC hit the scene he was the next MJ until the battle was he or Kobe and Kobe settled that with stellar play clutch shots and toughness remember the whole Mommas boy thing with Oakley, 

No decider between Kobe and TMac are You serious. 

Tmac played on the worst team record wise in the league what great player through NBA history EVER played on the worst TEAM .

Plus Head to head teamwise Kobe wins, stats wise Kobe wins head to head what else do you want. 

I thougt so, 

And Kobe had the best season of a scorer in 20 years Tmac never did that so yeah Kobe ended it. 

Like I said prior, Kobe had a 27ppg scorer on his team and was still getting just as good a numbers as the other guys and still found time to make all defense, 

VC, AI and Tmac never did that. 

Now its time for Kobe to lay down the 03 guys who are probably the 1st legit standard challengers. 

Bron got more votes because the media hates Kobe now , so who cares thats a beauty contest now for MVP becoming irrelevant now with nash going back to back. 

melo not even in the conversation

Wade too soon to tell.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

I remember folks used to say "Kobe is great but Tmac is 10 times better", that's when Tmac was back in Orlando playing great basketball. Kobe wasn't better, he just benefited from the success of playing with Shaq who was in his prime.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

For those easily trying to dismiss the fact that Kobe played with Shaq, in arguably his prime. Lets flip the script, although a hypothetical one. Would AI, Tmac, Vince, even Ray and PP have had as much success playing with the big man as Kobe did. And if so, would they have as much acclaim as Mr Kobe


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

HB said:


> For those easily trying to dismiss the fact that Kobe played with Shaq, in arguably his prime. Lets flip the script, although a hypothetical one. Would AI, Tmac, Vince, even Ray and PP have had as much success playing with the big man as Kobe did. And if so, would they have as much acclaim as Mr Kobe


 That's the reason I take mostly all those other guards in those comparisions. The one year Kobe was the easily the best SG in the league was that year before they got Payton and Malone, and Kobe had that 8/9 game 40 point streak and kept the Lakers afloat while Shaq was out.


----------



## ralaw (Feb 24, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> Partly. Who the "standard" is for discussion board comparisons is is all about perception. The reality is that McGrady has been just as good as Bryant up to last season (when injury derailed McGrady), but the perception is different for many due to which teams the two have played for.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


IMHO, what seperates Kobe from McGrady is determination, heart and work ethic. In my opinion, this is why he still would have been the standard had he went to the Hornets. Kobe is one of a few players in league history who not only has the ability and conditioning, but also the determination and work ethic to want to destroy his opponent. Add to that his marketability coming out of highschool; he would have still been the standard. Kobe has always displayed a killer instinct that McGrady and Carter have only shown in spots at best. My perception of McGrady and Vince Carter are guys who had the most ability in the league; however, due to a mixture of their character issues and injuries couldn't be and had no desire to be the best.

Yes, LeBron could surpass Kobe and dare I say approach "his greatness", but he will have to win atleast 5 championships, while being a statistical juggernaut to accomplish the seemingly impossible task of surpassing the greatness that is Michael Jordan.


----------



## Lynx (Mar 6, 2004)

_Dre_ said:


> That's the reason I take mostly all those other guards in those comparisions. The one year Kobe was the easily the best SG in the league was that year before they got Payton and Malone, and Kobe had that 8/9 game 40 point streak and kept the Lakers afloat while Shaq was out.


That's when Shaq got out of shape, hit his declined. The season was 2002-03.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Lynx said:


> That's when Shaq got out of shape, hit his declined. The season was 2002-03.


 Exactly, when Shaq became more of the dependent.


----------



## DaBruins (Jul 30, 2003)

Air Fly said:


> I remember folks used to say "Kobe is great but Tmac is 10 times better", that's when Tmac was back in Orlando playing great basketball. Kobe wasn't better, he just benefited from the success of playing with Shaq who was in his prime.


**Edit* No one has surpassed Kobe.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

Minstrel said:


> The reality is that McGrady has been just as good as Bryant up to last season





Minstrel said:


> But yes, this entire thread is all about opinion.


just saying...


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

ralaw said:


> IMHO, what seperates Kobe from McGrady is determination, heart and work ethic.


What matters is production on the court. Either you're wrong, or that difference doesn't make any difference to on-court play or McGrady _could_ be even better than Kobe (instead of just his equal) if he had Kobe's "determination, heart and ethic" (as vague, opinon-based and pretty much impossible to judge without knowing the people involved as that is).

As far as on-court performance, the two have been virtual equals until last season. That's what matters.

IMO, "heart," "clutch," "determination," "force of will," "desire" are all the unprovable characteristics people invoke when they are emotionally invested in one player being better than another but can't show real differences in on-court performance. You may actually believe it, but I think it's because you _want_ Kobe to be better, so you see the intangibles that you want to see (despite not knowing anything about what McGrady thinks, desires or how much he works out).

Kobe wanted Shaq gone, so that he could be the "main guy," even though that obviously made the team worse. McGrady wanted to join a team with another star/superstar, jeopardizing his status as the leading light, in order to win more. What does that say about "desire to win" or "desire to be the best?" Don't you think you're being a bit selective in your evaluation of these things?


----------



## ralaw (Feb 24, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> What matters is production on the court. Either you're wrong, or that difference doesn't make any difference to on-court play or McGrady _could_ be even better than Kobe (instead of just his equal) if he had Kobe's "determination, heart and ethic" (as vague, opinon-based and pretty much impossible to judge without knowing the people involved as that is).
> 
> As far as on-court performance, the two have been virtual equals until last season. That's what matters.
> 
> ...


Not really, as I already stated, your opinion is based on your reality as well as mine. I am fully aware of your support of McGrady from your post history, so I will take that in to mind. For me "heart," "clutch," "determination," "force of will," "desire" are all traits that become evident in situations across time. These types of characteristics are displayed time and time again and thus become proven. When McGrady was in Orlando, he was quoted as saying, he never wanted to be the man (leader), and would rather be just another guy on the team. McGrady is a whinner and always has been his entire career. McGrady has a history of wanting to be a leader when things are going well and wanting no part of it when things are going bad.

This has nothing to do with stats. Its the traits that seperate the great players. Stats are great, but are a limited indication of a players value to a franchise as a whole. 

Trust me, the only people I'm emotionally attached to is my wife and family, you accusing me of being emotionally attached to an athlete is comical at best. Me having an opinion about McGrady or Carter is simply from my observation of both players over time. The funny part of your argument is that I actually am a fan of McGrady and Carter and always have been their entire careers, so me looking for a reason to bring them down would be counterproductive. However, I'm not one to let my liking for someone to get in the way of reality. It seems to me you are using this argument of accusing me of being emotionally attached to Kobe in order to divert the attention off of McGrady's apathetic nature, to which you know exist.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

Wow this thread is hilarious. Within the space of less than 50 posts, we have a mixture of Kobe haters agreeing with one another, a continuation of the TMac v Kobe debate and Vince fans going "Don't overlook Vince, don't overlook Vince"

Priceless


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

cpawfan said:


> Wow this thread is hilarious. Within the space of less than 50 posts, we have a mixture of Kobe haters agreeing with one another, a continuation of the TMac v Kobe debate and Vince fans going "Don't overlook Vince, don't overlook Vince"
> 
> Priceless


You do notice that at the beginning of the thread, those two guys were mentioned as being compared to Kobe once.

By the way, whats your contribution to this whole thing


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

To hell with all the stats! Lets just look at it like this. Kobe AI Tmac Vince Lebron and Wade are excellent scorers. All of them are about equal at that. but lets bring up the other spectrum. Kobe is the only one that is also known for his tenacious DEFENSE as well which is why hes is at the top of the Wing player mountain..


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

CubanLaker said:


> To hell with all the stats! Lets just look at it like this. Kobe AI Tmac Vince Lebron and Wade are excellent scorers. All of them are about equal at that. but lets bring up the other spectrum. Kobe is the only one that *is* also known for his tenacious DEFENSE as well which is why hes is at the top of the Wing player mountain..


You mean was


----------



## reHEATed (Jun 29, 2003)

CubanLaker said:


> To hell with all the stats! Lets just look at it like this. Kobe AI Tmac Vince Lebron and Wade are excellent scorers. All of them are about equal at that. but lets bring up the other spectrum. Kobe is the only one that is also known for his tenacious DEFENSE as well which is why hes is at the top of the Wing player mountain..


there is more to offense then scoring


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

wadeshaqeddie said:


> there is more to offense then scoring


 Like how you score for one, passing, unselfishness, movement without the ball, people just like to say scoring and just be done with offense. And for some reason they like to think passing is uninimportant to anyone but a PG.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

HB said:


> You do notice that at the beginning of the thread, those two guys were mentioned as being compared to Kobe once.
> 
> By the way, whats your contribution to this whole thing


I guess my commenting on the different agendas present in this thread went over your head. And yes, I'm very aware of which players were mentioned in the first post.

My only hope is that this thread doesn't die as it is hilarious


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

HB said:


> You mean was


Which is still better than "*never* were" which can be said for all the other candidates.

Lets not forget his 1st team all defenses last year.


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

wadeshaqeddie said:


> there is more to offense then scoring


Kobe excels at all aspects of offense while playing in one of the most difficult structured offenses if not the MOST difficult one. . You can go ahead and bring up him avg 5 assist, which by the way is still excellent for a sg, but that also takes into account the quality of his teammates which should not be taken into account when analyzing individual stars.


----------



## alex (Jan 7, 2003)

CubanLaker said:


> To hell with all the stats! Lets just look at it like this. Kobe AI Tmac Vince Lebron and Wade are excellent scorers. All of them are about equal at that. but lets bring up the other spectrum. Kobe is the only one that is also known for his tenacious DEFENSE as well which is why hes is at the top of the Wing player mountain..



Ya know, Bryant plays great defense when he choses to, but this rings true for just about every elite wing. . . in 04-05 he didn't really chose to all that much, last year (in the 2-3 games of his that I saw), however, he played better, but it wasn't really "tenacious". Of course, when he sets his mind to it, he is indeed darn good (like his yearly Mike Redd D. . .).


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

alex said:


> Ya know, Bryant plays great defense when he choses to, but this rings true for just about every elite wing. . . in 04-05 he didn't really chose to all that much, but last year (in the 2-3 games of his that I saw) he played better, but it wasn't really "tenacious". Of course, when he sets his mind to it, he is indeed darn good (like his yearly Mike Redd D. . .).


I agree it wasnt as tenacious at it has been in the past, and imo it was because he has sooo much to worry about when it comes to the offense that he needs to conserve his energy for that. but that still better than the other candidates.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

kflo said:


> just saying...


You act like there's a contradiction there. You're above semantic games, kflo.  I was obviously making a distinction between on-court realities versus perceptions. It's my opinion that the reality is that the two have been dead even on the court, regardless of perceptions.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

ralaw said:


> Not really, as I already stated, your opinion is based on your reality as well as mine. I am fully aware of your support of McGrady from your post history, so I will take that in to mind. For me "heart," "clutch," "determination," "force of will," "desire" are all traits that become evident in situations across time.


Yes, in seeing what you want to see. I notice you didn't respond to my example of Kobe Bryant acting in his own statistical and fame interests over team success interests while McGrady did the opposite. If you ignore the data that contradicts your pre-conceived theory, I'm not surprised that you find Kobe to have a large edge there.


----------



## O2K (Nov 19, 2002)

CubanLaker said:


> Which is still better than "*never* were" which can be said for all the other candidates.
> 
> Lets not forget his 1st team all defenses last year.



The last time kobe was 1st all defense i believe was with shaq



and actually tmac was once known for his defense as well...

unless kobe gets help he will not be known for his defense, its rare to see a perimeter player able to dominate both ends of the floor on a consistant basis....


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

O2K said:


> The last time kobe was 1st all defense i believe was with shaq
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No Kobe tied with Jason Kidd last year. Both were put on the 1st team all defense.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

O2K said:


> and actually tmac was once known for his defense as well...


Never. Ever.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

_Dre_ said:


> Never. Ever.


Actually believe it or not, their first few seasons in the league Tmac and Carter were pretty good defenders.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

HB said:


> Actually believe it or not, their first few seasons in the league Tmac and Carter were pretty good defenders.


 Yeah, but he said T-Mac was *known* for his defense. When you think T-Mac, you don't think defense. Kobe's a good defender, TD's a good defender, but neither is known for defense. At the most, TD's known for being a balanced player. Not for defense.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

_Dre_ said:


> Yeah, but he said T-Mac was *known* for his defense. When you think T-Mac, you don't think defense. Kobe's a good defender, TD's a good defender, but neither is known for defense. At the most, TD's known for being a balanced player. Not for defense.


I'll give Tmac a pass because he has for most of the time been responsible for a lot of his team's offense. We all saw what happened to Kobe's 'defense' once he had the team to himself.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

HB said:


> I'll give Tmac a pass because he has for most of the time been responsible for a lot of his team's offense. We all saw what happened to Kobe's 'defense' once he had the team to himself.


 True. They're both great players, but he was trying to make T-Mac out to be "known" for defense, which wasn't the case.


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

Minstrel said:


> What matters is production on the court. Either you're wrong, or that difference doesn't make any difference to on-court play or McGrady _could_ be even better than Kobe (instead of just his equal) if he had Kobe's "determination, heart and ethic" (as vague, opinon-based and pretty much impossible to judge without knowing the people involved as that is).
> 
> As far as on-court performance, the two have been virtual equals until last season. That's what matters.
> 
> ...



Tmac played on the worst team in the league one year won 19 games what great player has EVER played on a team that bad name the great player please. 

Where did Kobe say he wanted Shaq gone, where, once again listening to the media hype, Shaq wanted gone thats the fact he wanted out because he wasn't gonna get paid.

Another thing when you are losing as often as Tmac was and his rep as a player was in tatters. He made the choice to LEAVE a situation instead of stick it out and rebuild with what in essence was dwight Howard and Jameer Nelson. he wanted a ready made team to take the Heat off so he wouldn't be expected to be the man anymore. 

Thats not a whole lotta heart. 

When TNT had its experts list the NEXT TEN as in the 50 greatest then never mentioned TMac's name why not because of one bad season because he didn't have that great a rep and he wasn't as good a player there was an expert panel that selected . If they had been equals he would have been thought of as well. 

Nevermind the fact that he wasn't all defense. 

In Kobe's 2nd full season alone he had the best season a scorer has had in 29 years , scored the 2nd most points in league history in a single game and might have done it TWICE had he played the 4th quarter against the NBA finalist Dallas. 

did Tmac do those things .


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

jazzy1 said:


> Tmac played on the worst team in the league one year won 19 games what great player has EVER played on a team that bad name the great player please.
> 
> Where did Kobe say he wanted Shaq gone, where, once again listening to the media hype, Shaq wanted gone thats the fact he wanted out because he wasn't gonna get paid.
> 
> ...


From Phil's last book:

"Would Shaquille returning influence your decision to stay?"

Kobe: "Yes. I'm tired of being a sidekick."


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Kobe's the most polarizing figure ever in basketball. 

This was simply an unarguable statement and it stretched 4 pages.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

_Dre_ said:


> Kobe's the most polarizing figure ever in basketball.
> 
> This was simply an unarguable statement and it stretched 4 pages.


I'm on page 2. 50 posts per page rules!


----------



## O2K (Nov 19, 2002)

_Dre_ said:


> Yeah, but he said T-Mac was *known* for his defense. When you think T-Mac, you don't think defense. Kobe's a good defender, TD's a good defender, but neither is known for defense. At the most, TD's known for being a balanced player. Not for defense.



actually in Toronto Tmac was known as for his defense, his offense was a work in progress, it was his defense that got his name going


----------



## SeaNet (Nov 18, 2004)

As the ultimate gunner, Kobe is always going to inspire great loyalty amongst his many minions, esp. those that can't distinguish between what makes someone talented and what makes someone a great NBA basketball player.


----------



## KDOS (Nov 29, 2005)

SeaNet said:


> As the ultimate gunner, Kobe is always going to inspire great loyalty amongst his many minions, esp. those that can't distinguish between what makes someone talented and what makes someone a great NBA basketball player.


I agree with this logic, any player that is given a full license to shoot(disregarding all the other aspects of the game and/or achievements) should inspire great loyalty to their fans.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

O2K said:


> actually in Toronto Tmac was known as for his defense, his offense was a work in progress, it was his defense that got his name going


That's not known then. Casual fans didn't know Mcgrady back then.


----------



## SeaNet (Nov 18, 2004)

_Dre_ said:


> That's not known then. Casual fans didn't know Mcgrady back then.


Before TMac dedicated himself solely to the offensive arts, he was actually most often compared to Scottie Pippen. People thought he'd develop into a multi-talented distributor and defender, not a 25 foot jump shooter.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

SeaNet said:


> Before TMac dedicated himself solely to the offensive arts, he was actually most often compared to Scottie Pippen. People thought he'd develop into a multi-talented distributor and defender, not a 25 foot jump shooter.


Ok, even still, he was not known on the level he is known on now, which is what (I thought) O2K was saying in the first place.

And furthermore, that's not Mac being known as a defender in the same way he's known as a scorer now. Pippen was not known as a defender solely. He was known as a balanced, versatile player. Not Scottie Pippen the defender. 

Bruce Bowen, however, is a guy who's known for defense. There's a difference for me.


----------



## KDOS (Nov 29, 2005)

O2K said:


> actually in Toronto Tmac was known as for his defense, his offense was a work in progress, it was his defense that got his name going


I think thats an overstatement, TMAC was known for being Vince's sidekick, his defense was not efficiently or statiscally impressive to overwhelm his offensive ability at the first place. He made more noise defensively when Toronto played NY in the playoffs and eventually gained more recognition afterwards particularly due to the role he performed very well along with Vince Carter disappearance in that series.


----------



## bballlife (Oct 5, 2003)

HB said:


> Actually believe it or not, their first few seasons in the league Tmac and Carter were pretty good defenders.



Actually, no. Carter has never been a good defender. Might be the first time I have ever heard somebody state that. Mcgrady on the other hand has had stretches as a good defender. Most of the success he had on D early on was as a help side shot blocker. Peaked in his 3rd season, then saw a drop off once he hit Orlando and picked up the scoring. Solid or average help/man defender most of his career.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

jazzy1 said:


> Tmac played on the worst team in the league one year won 19 games what great player has EVER played on a team that bad name the great player please.


Very few great players have ever been surrounded by a supporting cast that bad, if any.

By PER, Orlando had McGrady, two mediocre players in Juwan Howard and Drew Gooden, and then a bunch of barely replacement-level scrubs. That's a pretty historically bad supporting cast.

I realize that you want to conflate team success and individual success, because team success is pretty much the only differentiator between the two, but individual players cannot create winning teams if their supporting cast is awful.

As far as defense, I've watched a ton of games for both Kobe and McGrady. I think the All-Defense awards won by Bryant are misleading. His defense looked better than it was when he played with Shaquille O'Neal (as did the defense of all the Lakers' perimeter players, like Rick Fox and Derek Fisher). They could all afford to play their man much tighter than normal because they didn't have to worry as much about their man beating them off the dribble with Shaq in the middle to alter shots.

Both McGrady and Kobe are good defenders, but not great defenders except in bursts. Bryant was often able to provide those bursts when Shaq was on the team because he had someone to help him carry the offensive load. McGrady had to carry the offensive load entirely on his own, causing his offense to suffer.

Since Shaq has left LA, Bryant's defense has been ordinary and sometimes poor. McGrady's defense has been consistently good to very good since he landed in Houston. Bryant may continue to win awards for defense on reputation, but his defense is not among the best in the league.


----------



## bballlife (Oct 5, 2003)

_Dre_ said:


> Yeah, but he said T-Mac was *known* for his defense. When you think T-Mac, you don't think defense. Kobe's a good defender, TD's a good defender, but neither is known for defense. At the most, TD's known for being a balanced player. Not for defense.


? Duncan has been called the best interior defender in the league for quite some time. He is the definition of a defensive anchor.


----------



## bballlife (Oct 5, 2003)

Jamel Irief said:


> From Phil's last book:
> 
> "Would Shaquille returning influence your decision to stay?"
> 
> Kobe: "Yes. I'm tired of being a sidekick."



And then doesnt he go on to say that Kobe just wanted to be equals with Shaq? But Shaq would never allow it?


----------



## KDOS (Nov 29, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> McGrady's defense has been consistently good to very good since he landed in Houston.


He should. For the very same reason when Kobe had much help pre Dynasty break-up in L.A.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

bballlife said:


> ? Duncan has been called the best interior defender in the league for quite some time. He is the definition of a defensive anchor.


 I know this. 

Read the post up a few posts where I mention Pippen. The same applies to Duncan. 



> And furthermore, that's not Mac being known as a defender in the same way he's known as a scorer now. Pippen was not known as a defender solely. He was known as a balanced, versatile player. Not Scottie Pippen the defender.
> 
> Bruce Bowen, however, is a guy who's known for defense. There's a difference for me.


Here, I helped you. How did you quote that last post without coming past the last one where I reiterated what I was trying to say?

And furthermore that "is TD an offensive or defensive player" should further reinforce my point.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

KOBEDUNKEDONSHAQ said:


> He should. For the very same reason when Kobe had much help pre Dynasty break-up in L.A.


Agreed. McGrady is reaping benefits from playing with Yao without doubt.


----------



## bballlife (Oct 5, 2003)

Minstrel said:


> I think the All-Defense awards won by Bryant are misleading. His defense looked better than it was when he played with Shaquille O'Neal (as did the defense of all the Lakers' perimeter players, like Rick Fox and Derek Fisher). They could all afford to play their man much tighter than normal because they didn't have to worry as much about their man beating them off the dribble with Shaq in the middle to alter shots.


The Laker perimeter players did funnel their opponents to Shaq at times, and could afford to play tighter because of the great presence inside, but how much does that factor into whether or not Kobe gets recognition as a great defender? 

When coaches vote for this award, they probably look at the players individual defensive statistics, they might check the team's defensive stats as well, but what does it all come down to? Probably what the coach saw the player do, in terms of defensive ability, throughout the season. That is most likely the biggest factor. 

Ya, good for Kobe, he had Shaq guarding his back, that is why those Laker teams got the stops they needed at critical points. That is what helped them to win those championships. Now, the Lakers have Kwame Brown in the middle, and Kobe was selected 1st team defense again. Reputation? Didnt come close in 04/05. Great defensive play? Enough to catch the eye of several coaches? Probably.

Kobe 6 selections now. Mcgrady- none. At some point, you are going to have to smell what you are shoveling.


----------



## reHEATed (Jun 29, 2003)

CubanLaker said:


> Kobe excels at all aspects of offense while playing in one of the most difficult structured offenses if not the MOST difficult one. . You can go ahead and bring up him avg 5 assist, which by the way is still excellent for a sg, but that also takes into account the quality of his teammates which should not be taken into account when analyzing individual stars.


Kobe is a great passer for his position

but, Lebron and Wade are better passers and ball handlers. Both have legitimately started at the pg position for long periods of time (Wade his entire rookie season).....thats not even bringing up the assist numbers. 

Kobe is a better scorer. Better defensive player. But I rate Lebron and Wade on the same level as him offensively due to the things they are better at (ball handling and passing and getting high percentage shots). 

Kobe is still one up on the defense, no complaints. Wade is an above average defender though, and Lebron has all the skills to be a grat defender- and is still 21/22 years old. He has time.


----------



## ralaw (Feb 24, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> Yes, in seeing what you want to see. I notice you didn't respond to my example of Kobe Bryant acting in his own statistical and fame interests over team success interests while McGrady did the opposite. If you ignore the data that contradicts your pre-conceived theory, I'm not surprised that you find Kobe to have a large edge there.


Me not addressing it wasnt intentional; however, since you want an answer, I'll give you my opinion on it. I believe Kobe due to his "heart," "determination," "force of will," "desire" all coupled with people's opinion about him being Shaq's sidekick are what lead him to make the decisions he made. A player like Kobe desires to be the man on a winning team and to expect otherwise from him is being foolish. Please excuse Kobe for wanting another challenge. 



Minstrel said:


> Kobe wanted Shaq gone, so that he could be the "main guy," even though that obviously made the team worse. McGrady wanted to join a team with another star/superstar, jeopardizing his status as the leading light, in order to win more. What does that say about "desire to win" or "desire to be the best?" Don't you think you're being a bit selective in your evaluation of these things?


You are correct it made the team worse in the short term, however, you are ignoring the role Shaq played in the seperation and how his and Kobe's personalities were clashing; therefore, the team had to be blown up regardless. According to his ultimate plan, Jerry Buss made the wise decision in trading Shaq. The team had already accomplished what it was going to accomplish. If you believe Kobe is wrong for wanting to lead a team to a success, that is on you, but I see no problem with this coming from an elite player like Kobe. McGrady is the type of player that would want to team with a another player after having played his entire career virtually by himself; however, this doesn't make him a better teammate than Kobe Bryant, nor does it make him any less selfish.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

bballlife said:


> The Laker perimeter players did funnel their opponents to Shaq at times, and could afford to play tighter because of the great presence inside, but how much does that factor into whether or not Kobe gets recognition as a great defender?


A lot. Observationally, Kobe looks far better when he can play tight and go for steals. He can contest many more jumpers and accumulate more steal statistics.



> When coaches vote for this award, they probably look at the players individual defensive statistics, they might check the team's defensive stats as well, but what does it all come down to? Probably what the coach saw the player do, in terms of defensive ability, throughout the season. That is most likely the biggest factor.


And they see Kobe maybe 2-4 times a season. Hardly enough to form a complete and unimpeachable judgement of defense, especially when they have other things on their minds, like trying to win the game. In those few glimpses, a player who's contesting more shots and generating more turnovers is likely to come across much more favourably.



> Now, the Lakers have Kwame Brown in the middle, and Kobe was selected 1st team defense again. Reputation?


Yup. Thanks to all his awards when Shaq was on the same time, Kobe automatically ends up in the "usual suspects to consider." Award inertia occurs in all professional sports, even if the player doesn't win every single year.



> Kobe 6 selections now. Mcgrady- none. At some point, you are going to have to smell what you are shoveling.


What it comes down to is that I don't trust or use that award, whether it's convenient to what I'm arguing or not. Pippen is my favourite player of all-time, but I never use All-Defense awards to argue his case, even though he has (I think) the most selections ever.

Obviously you, as an extreme Kobe partisan, are going to consider my opinion BS if it doesn't go Kobe's way. And, whether you want to believe it or not, both Kobe and McGrady are among my favourite players to watch and follow and I've watched as many games as possible from both. I trust my own judgements on defense over an award that I think is hollow and as subject to fallacious perceptions as the MVP award.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

wadeshaqeddie said:


> Kobe is a great passer for his position
> 
> but, Lebron and Wade are better passers and ball handlers. Both have legitimately started at the pg position for long periods of time (Wade his entire rookie season).....thats not even bringing up the assist numbers.
> 
> ...


Kobe was more of the PG between 99-03 than Derek Fisher and Harper were. Kobe handled the ball more in the backcourt, created more plays, etc... Fish mainly set-up for 3's and Harp rarely took more than 4 dribbles with the ball. Shaw and Lue were more of PGs, but neither played more than 20 mpg.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

ralaw said:


> You are correct it made the team worse in the short term, however, you are ignoring the role Shaq played in the seperation and how his and Kobe's personalities were clashing; therefore, the team had to be blown up regardless.


Right. Kobe was just wise enough to realize a championship-caliber team, that had won three titles, had to be blown up. Sorry, I think that's being an extreme apologist. Kobe is a great player, but he's shown as many "flaws" in being a team player and winner as McGrady.



> According to his ultimate plan, Jerry Buss made the wise decision in trading Shaq.


If one had to be traded, of course you trade Shaq. Bryant was better at that point and much younger.

But the team only HAD to be blown up in part because Bryant was unwilling to play with someone who took the attention away from him. And the result was, he played a major part (but was hardly alone) in turning the Lakers from a title contender into an also-ran.

As I said, I think you purposely choose to ignore any evidence that contradicts your theory.


----------



## reHEATed (Jun 29, 2003)

Jamel Irief said:


> Kobe was more of the PG between 99-03 than Derek Fisher and Harper were. Kobe handled the ball more in the backcourt, created more plays, etc... Fish mainly set-up for 3's and Harp rarely took more than 4 dribbles with the ball. Shaw and Lue were more of PGs, but neither played more than 20 mpg.


and lebron and wade both do the same things now even though they dont currently start at point......Williams job entials basically bring it up and handing to to wade, and standing behind the 3 pt line ready to catch and shoot.....

all 3 players have these point guard abilities, as do most lead guards......Wade and Lebron have actually started at pg (pretty sure Lebron was listed there for a while....I know wade started there his whole rookie season), and currently average more assists. Taking nothing away from Kobe, but I consider them better passers and ball handlers currently. Also like these 2 in getting better shots (as seen in the percentages)

So I said they are on the same level offensively, which is a fair conclusion. Based on offensive statistics, Lebron had a PER of 28.4, with Kobe at 28.3 and Wade at 28. The stats show they are at the same level on the offensive end as well, so I know im not way out there saying this. Kobe still has them defensively, no complaints.


----------



## ralaw (Feb 24, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> Right. Kobe was just wise enough to realize a championship-caliber team, that had won three titles, had to be blown up. Sorry, I think that's being an extreme apologist. Kobe is a great player, but he's shown as many "flaws" in being a team player and winner as McGrady.


Yes, of course it was all on Kobe shoulders. Maybe he should have done a better job of massaging Shaq's fragile ego and maybe they would have won 3 more titles together. I never said Kobe felt the team had to be blown up. I said (my opinion), the team needed had to be blown up considering the relationship between Kobe and Shaq. Buss wanted to go with a more uptempo offense built around the elite wing player in the league, so I see no problem with this.



Minstrel said:


> But the team only HAD to be blown up because Bryant was unwilling to play with someone who took the attention away from him. And the result was, he played a major part (but was hardly alone) in turning the Lakers from a title contender into an also-ran.
> 
> As I said, I think you purposely choose to ignore any evidence that contradicts your theory.


I think you have a shaped opinion of Kobe which is not allowing you to see the truth in the situation. You seem to be implying Shaq was the perfect teammate and had no control over his actions. Did you forget that the Lakers offered Shaq an extention and he declined it? Oh, yes, I know, he declined it because of Kobe's immaturity. You say Kobe was unable to play with a teammate who took the attention away, yet he played second fiddle on 3 championships teams. I'm not understanding that logic. Kobe did play a major part in the breakup of the Lakers and i've never denied this, but in believing we have to make sure it is being kept in proper perspective. At the time of the breakup the team was no longer the invinsible force, as it had lost two consecutive years in the playoffs.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

ralaw said:


> Yes, of course it was all on Kobe shoulders.
> ....
> I think you have a shaped opinion of Kobe which is not allowing you to see the truth in the situation. You seem to be implying Shaq was the perfect teammate and had no control over his actions.


No, neither of these things are true of what I think. That's why I said Kobe was "in part" to blame. It was obviously not all Kobe's fault and Phil Jax, Shaq and Buss all have blame to accept.

But this discussion is about Kobe and Kobe was certainly responsible also. His ego was definitely more important to him than keeping a successful core together.

We can talk about Shaq's insecurity, Jackson's loss of desire to handle the team or Buss' unwillingness to spend more in another thread if you want, but I didn't mention all their parts here because it's not germane to the discussion.

And I don't think Kobe is a selfish player or person overall. I just think you're quick to magnify any little thing McGrady says or does and quick to ignore even this large thing Kobe did.


----------



## ralaw (Feb 24, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> And I don't think Kobe is a selfish player or person overall. I just think you're quick to magnify any little thing McGrady says or does and quick to ignore even this large thing Kobe did.


Sorry if it's coming across like that, but this wasn't my intentions. As I said, I have always like McGrady as a talent. However, it's his other areas where I have a problem. Nonetheless, at the minimum he's the second or third best SG in the league depending on a person's percpetion about Wade.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

wadeshaqeddie said:


> and lebron and wade both do the same things now even though they dont currently start at point......Williams job entials basically bring it up and handing to to wade, and standing behind the 3 pt line ready to catch and shoot.....
> 
> all 3 players have these point guard abilities, as do most lead guards......Wade and Lebron have actually started at pg (pretty sure Lebron was listed there for a while....I know wade started there his whole rookie season), and currently average more assists. Taking nothing away from Kobe, but I consider them better passers and ball handlers currently. Also like these 2 in getting better shots (as seen in the percentages)
> 
> So I said they are on the same level offensively, which is a fair conclusion. Based on offensive statistics, Lebron had a PER of 28.4, with Kobe at 28.3 and Wade at 28. The stats show they are at the same level on the offensive end as well, so I know im not way out there saying this. Kobe still has them defensively, no complaints.


I don't understand where in my post I mentioned wade or lebron.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

ralaw said:


> However, it's his other areas where I have a problem.


I realize that. I just think that you're a bit one-sided on that issue...I think both players have positives and flaws when it comes to the "intangibles."

For now, I agree...McGrady is second or third, since he's coming off a fairly serious injury. Prior to last season, I feel McGrady has matched Bryant in basketball merit. It'll be interesting to see how McGrady plays this season. I have no doubts Bryant will be fantastic, considering his last season.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Minstrel said:


> Very few great players have ever been surrounded by a supporting cast that bad, if any.
> 
> By PER, Orlando had McGrady, two mediocre players in Juwan Howard and Drew Gooden, and then a bunch of barely replacement-level scrubs. That's a pretty historically bad supporting cast.
> 
> ...


I really dont know how you can try to just ignore the fact that he won 19 games. There are 82 games in a season, as a great player regardless of what sort of teammates you are surrounded with, there is no excuse for winning 19 games.


----------



## bballlife (Oct 5, 2003)

Minstrel said:


> A lot. Observationally, Kobe looks far better when he can play tight and go for steals. He can contest many more jumpers and accumulate more steal statistics. .


Maybe so, but here is how I can tell you didn’t pay much attention to those Laker teams. Those squads, especially in 01/02 and 02/03 had a tendency and a reputation for “coasting” and some Laker perimeter players played very loose, much of the time. Kobe & others would often just worry about playing the shot, and be lax on the dribble. (I am talking regular season here)

So while having Shaq guard the house let the Lakers really tighten up when they needed to, it also relaxed their perimeter defenders quite a bit. It worked both ways. 





> And they see Kobe maybe 2-4 times a season. Hardly enough to form a complete and unimpeachable judgement of defense, especially when they have other things on their minds, like trying to win the game..



I would say, with game tape, they see plenty of each player in the league. 



> Yup. Thanks to all his awards when Shaq was on the same time, Kobe automatically ends up in the "usual suspects to consider." Award inertia occurs in all professional sports, even if the player doesn't win every single year. .


You really want to discredit what he has accomplished on defense, don’t you? That is what I just don’t get.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

HB said:


> I really dont know how you can try to just ignore the fact that he won 19 games. There are 82 games in a season, as a great player regardless of what sort of teammates you are surrounded with, there is no excuse for winning 19 games.


Then we simply have a fundamental disagreement. McGrady had superstar level production that season, so what _didn't_ he do that he should have done? If he scores 40, gets 8 rebounds and 8 assists and his team loses because the other team is more talented, why is that McGrady's fault?

This sort of thinking is what made Michael Jordan a "talented, exciting loser" early in his career and then "suddenly" the greatest winner of all-time when he got talented teammates around him.


----------



## Fray (Dec 19, 2005)

Jamel Irief said:


> 1998- Michael Jordan retires
> 1999, 2000- Kobe vs Vince Carter
> 2001- Kobe vs Iverson
> 2002, 2003, 2004- Kobe vs Tmac
> ...


1999,2000- Carter wins
2001- Iverson wins
2002, 2003, 2004- Tmac wins
2005- LeBron wins
2006- Wade wins

Kobe is the constant LOSER. :laugh:


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

bballlife said:


> Maybe so, but here is how I can tell you didn’t pay much attention to those Laker teams. Those squads, especially in 01/02 and 02/03 had a tendency and a reputation for “coasting” and some Laker perimeter players played very loose, much of the time. Kobe would often just worry about playing the shot, and be lax on the dribble. (I am talking regular season here)


You seem to be confused. Playing tight is exactly what allowed Kobe to "play the shot." Playing that tight is bound to allow more people to beat you off the dribble. Nothing you said here contradicts what I said. Bryant was allowed to play a form of defense that looks visually very good but wasn't top-caliber defense in actuality.



> I would say, with game tape, they see plenty of each player in the league.


I would say that they don't sit down and watch game tape of all the players with the express purpose of judging their individual defense. 



> You really want to discredit what he has accomplished on defense, don’t you?


Nope. You're just intolerant of opposing opinions, and always have been. I think Bryant is a good defender, just not an elite defender. It has nothing to do with discrediting; I also point out deficiencies in others of my favourite players, like LeBron James, Allen Iverson, Rasheed Wallace and Tracy McGrady.


----------



## bballlife (Oct 5, 2003)

Minstrel said:


> You seem to be confused. Playing tight is exactly what allowed Kobe to "play the shot." Playing that tight is bound to allow more people to beat you off the dribble. Nothing you said here contradicts what I said. Bryant was allowed to play a form of defense that looks visually very good but wasn't top-caliber defense in actuality.


I am not confused. I was not clear enough. When I said he played loose, I actually meant that he didn’t always stick with his man, and thus roamed around, displaying very good help defense. You make it sound like Kobe had the backup plan (Shaq) and this allowed him to play a very aggressive, successful style of defense. In truth, he played smart, loose, and covered a lot of ground, just like Pippen did. But when the situation called for it, he locked down. Shaq "guarding the house" was important to the Lakers success, but you give Shaq way too much credit for Kobe’s success. Fox, Horace Grant, Fisher, Horry and Shaq all contributed to his defensive success. You stick a great defender in with four other defensive bums, and it won’t be long until the great defender looks mediocre. 






> Nope. You're just intolerant of opposing opinions, and always have been. I think Bryant is a good defender, just not an elite defender. It has nothing to do with discrediting; I also point out deficiencies in others of my favourite players, like LeBron James, Allen Iverson, Rasheed Wallace and Tracy McGrady.


Intolerant of bs. That is it. You called Bryant's defense odinary and poor at times, while stating that Mcgrady's has been very good.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

bballlife said:


> You called Bryant's defense odinary and poor at times, while stating that Mcgrady's has been very good.


In their current situations.

McGrady's defense was ordinary and poor at times in his last couple of Orlando seasons, when he had to carry the Orlando offense entirely on his own, as Kobe has to in LA now.

During the Shaq years, Kobe didn't just "look good." He also played defense well...he just looked even better than he was, because he had defense behind him. He was like a good cornerback who was able to play his man even tighter because he had safety help deep. And the reason he was quite good then was because he had more energy for defense, having Shaq to help him carry the offensive load.

Now, McGrady has help in carrying the offense, giving him more energy on the defensive end.

In my opinion, a young Jordan was the last perimeter player with the endurance to play both stellar defense as well as carry the entire offensive load. Neither McGrady nor Kobe can.


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> From Phil's last book:
> 
> "Would Shaquille returning influence your decision to stay?"
> 
> Kobe: "Yes. I'm tired of being a sidekick."


Not sure what to believe Jamel in THe Show by Roland Lazenby Kobe says that wasn't the case.


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

Minstrel said:


> Very few great players have ever been surrounded by a supporting cast that bad, if any.
> 
> By PER, Orlando had McGrady, two mediocre players in Juwan Howard and Drew Gooden, and then a bunch of barely replacement-level scrubs. That's a pretty historically bad supporting cast.
> 
> ...


You keep slipsliding the arguments. 

There isn't a great player in history that played on the worst team in the league thas an indictment on Tmac YET you deflect Kobe's success by saying Shaq's influence created Kobe's higher profile as well as the teams deep runs in the playoffs. 

Can't have it both ways. The way I see it nowadays it is what it is fair or not. 

MJ was never .500 without Pippen YET he's given more credit for Pippen's success than Pippen is for his, so I say NOW it is what it is. 

Kobe is always basically a good defender just this past season tey were games he locked up his man he clamped down redd, VC the 1st time and Wade down in Miami. Plus harrased lebron into a subpar game in LA. He was good all season. 

In what match-ups has Tmac's defense been better than Kobe's the last couple years. 

Shaq has never been a stellar help defender only intimidation gave him a presence defensvely when they played teams who weren't shook by his presence the Lakers defense suffered, especially when teams ran the pick and roll so Kobe's awads were in fact warranted. 

He was noticed last season because he was stellar against some of the league's best players. The media surely has it in for Kobe at this point as evidenced by his 4th place finish for MVP when most everyone tought he'd win or come in second. So I don't see how his rep is gonna lead to any unwarranted awards. 

Tmac wasn't noticed by TNT's panel of experts and is generally viewed below Kobe's standard. 

He even mentioned not being on Kobe's level.


----------



## bballlife (Oct 5, 2003)

Minstrel said:


> In their current situations.
> 
> McGrady's defense was ordinary and poor at times in his last couple of Orlando seasons, when he had to carry the Orlando offense entirely on his own, as Kobe has to in LA now.


So Kobe was selected to the 1st team despite playing ordinary/poor defense last season? And this coming off 04/05 where he wasn’t even on anyone’s radar. You sure? 



> During the Shaq years, Kobe didn't just "look good." He also played defense well...he just looked even better than he was, because he had defense behind him. He was like a good cornerback who was able to play his man even tighter because he had safety help deep.


I agree in a sense. But good defenders usually have good support. So would you say that Pippen and Jordan each looked better than they were, because of how they covered for each other?




> And the reason he was quite good then was because he had more energy for defense, having Shaq to help him carry the offensive load.


More consistent for sure. His conditioning, though, improved by the looks of what he did last season.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

jazzy1 said:


> There isn't a great player in history that played on the worst team in the league thas an indictment on Tmac YET you deflect Kobe's success by saying Shaq's influence created Kobe's higher profile as well as the teams deep runs in the playoffs.
> 
> Can't have it both ways.


This doesn't make any sense. I'm not being inconsistent in the least.

I don't evaluate players based on their supporting casts. I judge them on what they can control, which is their own play. That leads to not crediting Kobe for having played on title teams, or blaming McGrady for playing on teams with no talent around him.

It also meant that I didn't give McGrady over Kobe for making the playoffs in 2004-05 while Kobe did not...because it's not tennis. Individuals don't win, teams do. McGrady had more talent around him in 2004-05, just as Kobe did prior to that.

You may not agree with that view, but it's certainly not inconsistent as you siggest. And I think it's the most logical view. Kobe didn't suddenly become less talented the year Shaq left. He simply had worse talent around him. Therefore, I don't evaluate individuals by team success.


----------



## bballlife (Oct 5, 2003)

I like Mcgrady's ability, I am disappointed by his approach to the game. 

This is a guy with several sketchy incidents in his career that make me question his will to play basketball/win.


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

Minstrel said:


> Right. Kobe was just wise enough to realize a championship-caliber team, that had won three titles, had to be blown up. Sorry, I think that's being an extreme apologist. Kobe is a great player, but he's shown as many "flaws" in being a team player and winner as McGrady.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This just isn't true. Kobe didn't have the team blown up Buss did. Shaq sealed his fate when he screamed courtside at Buss to give me my money. When they didn't win the title it was an easy decision so stop using that as a stance to discredit Kobe. 

You are the one showing bias and blind allegiance to the defense of Tmac to support your points. Kobe's main flaws I think have to do with being a poor leader not with any instance of proposed selfishness every great player has a degree of selfishness. 

According to Tex Winter the whole Kobe/Phil/Shaq dynamic went downhill when Phil backed Shaq even when wrong against Kobe and Shaq realized it and did what he wanted basically. Kobe eventually melted down by Phil's critique's and Shaq's lax attitude towards preparation. Kobe saw Shaq getting all the credit Phil ripping him at every turn and Shaq laxness and said I'm tired of playing the back while his peers whisper he ain't that good if Shaq's not around. YET Kobe and Phil at the end of the Piston's series and stated he hoped they could stay togehter. Kobe didn't speak up for Shaq sure but it wouldn't have mattered Shaq never spoke up for Kobe so it wasn't unusual. Kobe didn't control te purse strings. 

Remember Buss owned the Team, the bill to keep Shaq and Kobe would have been 250 million and they still weren't guaranteed to win the title. They could not have filled the players around them to win again so buss went anoter way. 

Maybe deep down inside Kobe wanted to try something else knowing they'd never win again unless they got real help but that doesn't revea Kobe's attitude towards winning its just reality the team was toast time to move on. He didn't break up the team and the weren't champs anyway. he played on a winning team last year anyway. 

Tmac though bailed on a BAD team who had help on the way because he couldn't carry a team anywhere. he still hasn't done much in Houston either so nothing's much changed.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

bballlife said:


> So Kobe was selected to the 1st team despite playing ordinary/poor defense last season? And this coming off 04/05 where he wasn’t even on anyone’s radar. You sure?


He was always on people's radars. He still got votes for All-Defense in 2004-05, just not as many in other years. And I didn't say he was poor last year...I said he was "ordinary and poor" since Shaq left. Most of his poor defense came in 2004-05. Last season he was pretty average. Clearly, he still has the ability to turn it up at times, but I don't think he was at all consistent in his defense.

If I need a single stop, I think Kobe is perfectly capable of providing elite defense. I think McGrady has also proven capable of great defense over bursts...while there's no way to reference regular season examples, McGrady's performance against Dirk Nowitzki in the 2005 playoffs was a good example.

Neither player is consistently great. They both have it as their ceiling.



> I agree in a sense. But good defenders usually have good support. So would you say that Pippen and Jordan each looked better than they were, because of how they covered for each other?


I think there's some reinforcing effect from a group of good defenders like Pippen, Jordan, Rodman and Harper. But that's a slightly different situation, since they were all essentially perimeter players...big man defenders can have a much more profound effect in covering for other player's errors.

Shaq was not a great defensive big man in his last few Lakers years, but he was still an intimidating presence that altered paths and shots by slashers.



> More consistent for sure. His conditioning, though, looks to have improved by the looks of what he did last season.


I think both players, Kobe and McGrady, have done a lot to improve their bodies. They were both sticks coming into the league, and now they've filled out, gained strength and endurance. But I still think Jordan (when young...older Jordan admittedly spent a lot of the season in "cruise mode") was a freak of endurance that neither Kobe nor McGrady is.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

bballlife said:


> I like Mcgrady's ability, I am disappointed by his approach to the game.
> 
> This is a guy with several sketchy incidents in his career that make me question his will to play basketball/win.


Ron Artest syndrome. He might do sketchy stuff off the court, but on the court, his will to win cannot be denied. Like Minstrel's been saying, your job as a player is to perform your abilities to the highest degree, and Mcgrady does that. He's doing what he can for his team. How can you question that? 

I'd like you to share some of these incidents too, if you didn't mind.


----------



## jokeaward (May 22, 2003)

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar was a constant. Kidd is. Kobe's had his variances along with all shooting guards it seems.

In 99-00 Kobe got his first ring and was great, but Vintage VC, Ray Allen, Hill, etc. would have done the same with Shaq. 00-01 Iverson made a stronger case, and T-Mac as well. Now, Kobe is in all of this, but he can't separate himself that much besides being on great teams. In 02-03 he showed the great, versatile level, along with T-Mac, neck and neck. 

Then in 03-04, he wasn't as good and was in the bunched top SGs/SFs (Allen, T-Mac, Vince, Peja) right ahead a glut of others (Maggette, Lebron, Joe Johnson late). Even Steven Jackson filled it up at about 25 per after the Reef trade (a little different).

In 04-05, he did a good job rebounding and trying to spread the ball, but he wasn't REALLY like 02-03 and piled up a ton of TOs. It was similar with Iverson, and they shot okay. Lebron was better and more efficient. Last year he was one of the top, top wings, but they were all close. Arenas matched Lebron in their playoff series.

So there was only a brief window where "Kobe vs. Vinsanity" or "Kobe vs. AI" was basically a cinch for Kobe and easier than "VC vs. AI" or "Ray Allen vs. Francis".


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

jazzy1 said:


> This just isn't true. Kobe didn't have the team blown up Buss did. Shaq sealed his fate when he screamed courtside at Buss to give me my money. When they didn't win the title it was an easy decision so stop using that as a stance to discredit Kobe.


I didn't say Kobe had the team blown up, with your implication that I put it solely on Kobe. But Kobe certainly has a share of the blame in that. As do Shaq, Buss and Jackson.



> You are the one showing bias and blind allegiance to the defense of Tmac to support your points. Kobe's main flaws I think have to do with being a poor leader not with any instance of proposed selfishness every great player has a degree of selfishness.


I don't think Kobe is a poor leader, and I don't think I have "blind allegiance" to McGrady. I definitely think McGrady has flaws, mostly around making silly comments in the press when he would do better for himself and his team by remaining silent.

I think Bryant actually has done a very nice job of leading the Lakers, post-Shaq. He's generally very good about knowing when to shoot and when to pass to make the Lakers offense as efficient as possible.

I hate to bad mouth either Kobe or Mac on "intangibles," because I don't think they matter very much but are used to downgrade players one doesn't like. The only reason I brought the Lakers schism up was to show that anyone's dedication to winning can be questioned, so I don't see the value to questioning McGrady's, especially when none of us know him or his motivations.


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

Minstrel said:


> This doesn't make any sense. I'm not being inconsistent in the least.
> 
> I don't evaluate players based on their supporting casts. I judge them on what they can control, which is their own play. That leads to not crediting Kobe for having played on title teams, or blaming McGrady for playing on teams with no talent around him.
> 
> ...


Man in your very 1st post in this thread you list played for a top team , as a reason he's viewed the way he is NOW you're flip flopping. Which is it. Then you mention Shaq's presence as the reason he was perceived to have played great defense. Again using the supporting cast. 

With MJ being below .500 without Pippen he wouldn't have been as great had he played for the Sonics instead thats an illogical argument. 

You have to take it all into account even the teams failures. The year Kobe missed the playoffs without Shaq part of the reason was indeed his fault he wasn't focused on defense at all and he struggled as a leader bringing the team together plus the coaching was terrible. He was trying to do too much facillitate and score. 

Like i said before when its all said and done Kobe will be considered a sure fire HOF'er and Tmac may not unless he wins a title or 2 with Yao. 

Its all relevant to me who you play with and what you do with what you do play with. last years lakers squad was not good talent wise yet They had a good season and overachieved mainly due to Kobe's brillance and PJ's coaching. 

Again name me a great player who's played on the very worst team in the league in hisotry. That player doesn't exist because the greatness of that player should lead them past tat point on their talent alone. There were worse talented teams and Tmac still end up with the worst record.


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

Minstrel said:


> I didn't say Kobe had the team blown up, with your implication that I put it solely on Kobe. But Kobe certainly has a share of the blame in that. As do Shaq, Buss and Jackson.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Tmac's mental weakness and lack of heart has been questioned by many experts and former coaches, last season with what he was going through off the court he openly talked about quitting on the team thats a definite lack of motivation when Kobe pushed through rape allegations and excelled through them. 

Tmac I think has dropped out of the conversation with Kobe still being part of it as the standard. You may not accept it but its true nevertheless. 

People weren't saying what if team USA had Tmac because he's dropped from the dialogue.


----------



## jokeaward (May 22, 2003)

I totally forgot about Pierce, esp. for 01-02 and 05-06.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

jazzy1 said:


> Man in your very 1st post in this thread you list played for a top team , as a reason he's viewed the way he is NOW you're flip flopping. Which is it. Then you mention Shaq's presence as the reason he was perceived to have played great defense. Again using the supporting cast.


In that post I was giving my opinion as to why he's PERCIEVED as the standard. By other people.

That's not how *I* evaluate players. Team success clearly is a big reason in player perception among a great deal of fans, but I think that's a bad way to judge players.

I have been consistent, in all my posts on this site, about how I evaluate players. I never view team success as an important factor because I don't consider it within an individual player's control.



> With MJ being below .500 without Pippen he wouldn't have been as great had he played for the Sonics instead thats an illogical argument.


That is illogical, agreed, which is why team success is a bad way to judge players. Jordan wouldn't have been less talented had he played for the Kings in the 1980s and 1990s...but he wouldn't have won championships. That's impossible to resolve if you factor team success into a player's ability. Which is why I don't.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

jazzy1 said:


> Tmac I think has dropped out of the conversation with Kobe still being part of it as the standard. You may not accept it but its true nevertheless.


Right, and as recently as the 2005 playoffs, nobody was talking about Kobe, while McGrady had a fabulous playoff performance. All you're highlighting is how short the attention span of "the nation" is. McGrady was off the radar because he barely played last year. If McGrady has another great season this season, he'll be right back in the conversation, as he was year before last. You may not accept it, but it's true.

And if he doesn't bounce back from injuries, he doesn't belong in the conversation. Injuries will have removed him. Performance will dictate it, as always.


----------



## Nightfly (Sep 24, 2002)

jazzy1 said:


> Tmac played on the worst team in the league one year won 19 games what great player has EVER played on a team that bad name the great player please.


Pete Maravich played on some pretty bad New Orleans teams.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

kobe has 4 1st team all-nba's in the last 5 years, and '05 was the only year since '00 he hasn't been at least 2nd team. since 2000, only tmac and iverson have 2 1st teams, and only iverson made 1st team when kobe didn't ('01 and '05, and i think kobe deserved it over kidd in '01). people are kidding themselves if they don't think kobe has been the consensus, even if by a small margin at times, #1 guy at his position for a long time now.


----------



## TwiBlueG35 (Jan 24, 2006)

Minstrel said:


> James and Wade will be around longer than Bryant and McGrady.
> 
> It's unlikely any wing will dominate the era like Jordan did. The era is too talent-rich in perimeter players.


Are you sure? Wade is not that much younger than Bryant and McGrady.


----------



## 77AJ (Feb 16, 2005)

TwiBlueG35 said:


> Are you sure? Wade is not that much younger than Bryant and McGrady.


Wade is 4 years younger then Bryant a decent gap in age.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

It will be interesting what type of hit McGrady's numbers take with Yao being the offensive focus. Can he put up elite SG numbers, win at a high level, defend at an All defense level, etc. That seems to be the argument people throw at Kobe. Can Houston get out of the 1st round? Will Houston be an elite team?

The same can be said for LeBron and Cleveland. If Larry Hughes and Big Z are healthy, that should be enough to make them elite in the East.

What people forget is that Kobe has been at it for a decade? Wade for 2 years and LeBron for 3 years. Wade will be defined by what happens AFTER Shaq retires. Nothing he does with Shaq will seperate him from Kobe.

LeBron has to win (and he will) a title. 

Scoring titles mean nothing with this bunch. An MVP would be good but last season any one of them could have gotten the MVP so that is subjective also.

In the end it will be the 1st one to get a title as the unquestioned Alpha Dog. In that regard, I think T Mac is out of the running.


----------



## Hiro! (Sep 10, 2006)

mcgrady never was at the all defense level as a defender and possibly never will be due to his role with the rockets. his best defensive year was when he played second fiddle to vince carter in toronto. also all defense selections nowadays are more recognized on their reputation..see j kidd last year.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

MemphisX said:


> What people forget is that Kobe has been at it for a decade? Wade for 2 years and LeBron for 3 years. *Wade will be defined by what happens AFTER Shaq retires. Nothing he does with Shaq will seperate him from Kobe.*


I don't think that's 100% correct.

Wade won the championship for the Heat. Shaq is now the side-kick. There's a difference, because while Kobe won with a prime Shaq, Wade didn't need to.


----------



## JT (Mar 1, 2004)

*kobe is eternal.*

Kobe Bryant the best player end of story. The folks here and around the world, they can't stand this, it burns them up inside. So they invent false stories and circulate BS statements to make themselves feel better, in order to get a good nights sleep. A terrible way to live, indeed.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

*Re: kobe is eternal.*



sherako said:


> Kobe Bryant the best player end of story. The folkss here and around the world, they can't stand this, it burns them up inside. So they invent false stories and circulate BS statements to make themselves feel better, in order to get a good nights sleep. A terrible way to live, indeed.


lol team kobe to the rescue. BTW where have you been, havent seen you post in a while


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

*Re: kobe is eternal.*



sherako said:


> Kobe Bryant the best player end of story. The folks here and around the world, they can't stand this, it burns them up inside. So they invent false stories and circulate BS statements to make themselves feel better, in order to get a good nights sleep. A terrible way to live, indeed.


Sherako you're such a Kobe homer. He rapes white women, and he doesn't play the right way, you know, unselfish team hoosiers style basketball. He will never win any titles and will never be a winner as long as he plays like that. I mean, look at all the titles that Steve Nash, John Stockton and Jason Kidd have. Those could be Kobe's if he was as unselfish as those guys. He will never have as many rings as them. Just look at all the titles that John Stockton took away from Mr. "I take 20+ shots per game" Michael Jordan in the 90's. Stockton was practically stealing those titles away from Jordan with his unselfishness. HoosierS!


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

PauloCatarino said:


> I don't think that's 100% correct.
> 
> Wade won the championship for the Heat. Shaq is now the side-kick. There's a difference, because while Kobe won with a prime Shaq, Wade didn't need to.


No, that Heat team was just more talented then any Laker Championship team. Shaq was a sidekick in the sense that the other teams geared their defense to slow him down. When Shaq stops commanding double teams then I will say he is a sidekick.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

*Re: kobe is eternal.*



Sir Patchwork said:


> Sherako you're such a Kobe homer. He rapes white women, and he doesn't play the right way, you know, unselfish team hoosiers style basketball. He will never win any titles and will never be a winner as long as he plays like that. I mean, look at all the titles that Steve Nash, John Stockton and Jason Kidd have. Those could be Kobe's if he was as unselfish as those guys. He will never have as many rings as them. Just look at all the titles that John Stockton took away from Mr. "I take 20+ shots per game" Michael Jordan in the 90's. Stockton was practically stealing those titles away from Jordan with his unselfishness. HoosierS!


How come you dont have a team kobe number patchwork?


----------



## Real (Aug 3, 2005)

Hiro! said:


> mcgrady never was at the all defense level as a defender and possibly never will be due to his role with the rockets. his best defensive year was when he played second fiddle to vince carter in toronto. *also all defense selections nowadays are more recognized on their reputation..see j kidd last year*.


So what you're saying that the NBA coaches, not the media, that vote for these teams are just plain ignorant of who really deserves it?


----------



## 77AJ (Feb 16, 2005)

MemphisX said:


> No, that Heat team was just more talented then any Laker Championship team. Shaq was a sidekick in the sense that the other teams geared their defense to slow him down. When Shaq stops commanding double teams then I will say he is a sidekick.


No way! that 3peat Lakers dynasty had the better teams. I'm suprised you said the Heat were better. It was discussed at length here if the Heat Championship team of last season was one of the worst ever to win the title. Now you say that Heat team was better then the Lakers dynasty of Shaq/Kobe Days ?


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

I will say the supporting cast of the Heat team was very strong. Ultimately the 3-peat teams had to beat better teams in the Western Conference though. Those Kings, Blazers, Spurs teams were awfully tough.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

*Re: kobe is eternal.*



HB said:


> How come you dont have a team kobe number patchwork?


because he is a suxX0r raperist ball hog.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

*Re: kobe is eternal.*



Sir Patchwork said:


> because he is a suxX0r raperist ball hog.


I could swear theres a hint of sarcasm in there


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

Minstrel said:


> Right, and as recently as the 2005 playoffs, nobody was talking about Kobe, while McGrady had a fabulous playoff performance. All you're highlighting is how short the attention span of "the nation" is. McGrady was off the radar because he barely played last year. If McGrady has another great season this season, he'll be right back in the conversation, as he was year before last. You may not accept it, but it's true.
> 
> And if he doesn't bounce back from injuries, he doesn't belong in the conversation. Injuries will have removed him. Performance will dictate it, as always.


Again Kobe made all NBA 3rd team when he was injured a large part of the season Tmac made nothing this past season which isn't as valid because no one thought Tmac was above Kobe even during that season or thought he was the standard it wasn't that fickle in the minds of bball people during 05. , Tmac was snubbed for the next 10 in the who are the next 10 to be added to the 50 greatest list not because he was injured last year there were guys who made it that haven't been great in years namely GP. Yet Tmac was snubbed because he has faded in the comparison for how he's viewed in his career. He as I have said may not make the Hall of Fame UNLESS he wins a title with Yao in Houston. Kobe has the hall of Fame locked up already and is roundly thought of as one of the alltime greats. 

Not knocking Tmac just stating how its veiwed by experts and that does matter to argue that is only bias of a Tmac fan because you think he's as talented which I think can be argued but is he a better player and has he been for his career it can't be argued at this point But it can change if he's great the next 5 years or so and wins something. 

Tmac's a great talent and I think he's as talented as Wade, Bron and Kobe but it takes more that just talent it takes a helluva lot of intangibles and sustained effort and intensity to be a standard and Kobe's definitely had fewer issues and excuses to go along the way. 

I thought the most damning indictment of Tmac was what Ho grant said when comparing Tmac's practice habits with those of MJ and Kobe he said its no comparion Kobe and MJ work like demon's while Tmac slacks off. 

As we can't be at practices and around the team thats a glimpse into what makes Tmac tic and why he's viewed on a lesser level.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

T-Mac may make the Hall of Fame, then again Adrian Dantley and Bernard King aren't in the Hall of Fame either.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

23AJ said:


> No way! that 3peat Lakers dynasty had the better teams. I'm suprised you said the Heat were better. It was discussed at length here if the Heat Championship team of last season was one of the worst ever to win the title. Now you say that Heat team was better then the Lakers dynasty of Shaq/Kobe Days ?


Maybe I missed that discussion but whoever thinks the Lakers had more depth of talent is blind. Shaq was more dominant but he hasn't fallen off the map yet.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

jazzy1 said:


> Again Kobe made all NBA 3rd team when he was injured a large part of the season Tmac made nothing this past season


Because McGrady missed most of the season, Kobe didn't. For the time he played, McGrady still put up very good production.



> Not knocking Tmac just stating how its veiwed by experts and that does matter to argue that is only bias of a Tmac fan because you think he's as talented which I think can be argued but is he a better player and has he been for his career it can't be argued at this point But it can change if he's great the next 5 years or so and wins something.


It can certainly be argued. McGrady has the superior career PER to Kobe.

Also, despite your implication, I don't have an agenda to push here. I like both players--they're *both* in my top-five favourites. I've defended Kobe numerous times on this board from claims of him being selfish, or his being incomparable to Jordan. I just believe McGrady is given short shrift in comparison to Kobe due to their relative team success which, as I've said in virtually every player comparison, I don't think has anything to do with individual evaluation because it's not within their control.



> I thought the most damning indictment of Tmac was what Ho grant said when comparing Tmac's practice habits with those of MJ and Kobe he said its no comparion Kobe and MJ work like demon's while Tmac slacks off.


I've never seen such a quote, but even if it's true, it doesn't matter. What matters is on-court production. Coming into last season, the two were pretty even, with McGrady, as I said, holding the career edge in PER (despite Kobe having played one more prime season than McGrady, having come into the league a year earlier). Maybe McGrady has never spent a minute practicing in his life (though Van Gundy said McGrady worked as hard as any player he's ever seen)--it wouldn't matter, what matters is how good they are on the court. Even with your perceived lack of effort, McGrady has been Kobe's equal on the court. Perhaps with effort, McGrady would be far beyond Kobe. It's fun to speculate. But it's not very important...what's important is how well they actually perform, whether they worked like demons to get there or whether they cruised to get there.

And again, it's pretty unlikely that McGrady doesn't work hard. Van Gundy, a disciplinarian, felt McGrady worked extremely hard and if McGrady has matched Kobe's performance with no effort, it would mean McGrady is the greatest basketball talent ever. I like McGrady, but I doubt that's true.


----------



## JT (Mar 1, 2004)

> McGrady has been Kobe's equal on the court.


Perception =/= reality.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

sherako said:


> Perception =/= reality.


"PERception =/= reality" would have been quite witty, actually, since I used PER to justify what I said.

Not very accurate, but witty.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

production isn't all that matters, though. playing on the dream team will lower your production, lower your relative contributions, but it won't lower your ability as a player. production is a fuction of talent and situation/role and mindset. it's not even a true measure of performance. it all needs to be viewed in context. 

making everything completely irrelevant of course.

carry on.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

kflo said:


> production isn't all that matters, though. playing on the dream team will lower your production, lower your relative contributions, but it won't lower your ability as a player. production is a fuction of talent and situation/role and mindset. it's not even a true measure of performance. it all needs to be viewed in context.


I don't disagree, but what you're saying is *raw* production isn't all that matters. Production is still the end-all and be-all, but we should definitely adjust for context. Or maybe we should call it "on-court performance." I use them somewhat interchangeably, though I suppose there is a difference.

My point was that perceived work ethic isn't really relevant. If a player could sit at home all day and put in no non-game effort, yet perform better than Michael Jordan in games, does his work ethic have any relevance to his value? No...he's still better than Michael Jordan. Maybe he could be even better...but that's irrelevant to how good he actually is.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

on court performance works, and it's not PER. although PER helps with the assessment.

and yes, your point on work ethic is true. except to the extent that that work ethic translates into defensive play, or full-game stamina (performance diminishes as game progresses).


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

kflo said:


> on court performance works, and it's not PER. although PER helps with the assessment.


Agreed. PER does not conclusively prove anything...it's just one good indicator, IMO.



> and yes, your point on work ethic is true. except to the extent that that work ethic translates into defensive play, or full-game stamina (performance diminishes as game progresses).


Well, a player's defensive play and stamina are what they are, regardless of what their work ethic is.

What I mean is, if Player A and Player B both play equivalent defense and have equal amounts of stamina (for the sake of argument, we know these to be the case), is it relevant thay Player B works harder off the court? I would say no, because it doesn't translate into an advantage on the court.


----------



## MVP™ (Jun 11, 2006)

Jamel Irief said:


> 1998- Michael Jordan retires
> 1999, 2000- Kobe vs Vince Carter
> 2001- Kobe vs Iverson
> 2002, 2003, 2004- Kobe vs Tmac
> ...


Kobe Vs. Dirk, Coming soon to a TV near you.


----------



## Hiro! (Sep 10, 2006)

kflo said:


> on court performance works, and it's not PER. although PER helps with the assessment.


exactly. :cheers:


----------



## xcellence (Apr 17, 2006)

kflo said:


> kobe has 4 1st team all-nba's in the last 5 years, and '05 was the only year since '00 he hasn't been at least 2nd team. since 2000, only tmac and iverson have 2 1st teams, and only iverson made 1st team when kobe didn't ('01 and '05, and i think kobe deserved it over kidd in '01). people are kidding themselves if they don't think kobe has been the consensus, even if by a small margin at times, #1 guy at his position for a long time now.


 Basically, all of this debating back and forth is a moot point. As much as it may pain certain individuals to realize, history has already been written in that regard. Kobe could announce his retirement tomorrow morning and never play another game...and 20 years from now there would be no doubt as to who the defining perimeter player of his era was.


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

the defining player of his era??? do you mean shaq, tim duncan, and iverson? plz tell me that's who u meant. and right now its lebron and wade as the faces of the NBA.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

kobe is the defining perimeter player of his era.


----------



## Kneejoh (Dec 21, 2004)

duncan2k5 said:


> the defining player of his era??? do you mean shaq, tim duncan, and iverson? plz tell me that's who u meant. and right now its lebron and wade as the faces of the NBA.


It's Stern who wants Wade and LBJ to be the face of the NBA, but theres a reason players around the world and players inside the States recognize Kobe as the best in the league. I don't know why you keep on going into Kobe threads, its clear he can't do anything to satisfy you because of your hate for him so nobody will take you seriously when you voice your opinion about him.


----------



## beamer05 (Feb 24, 2006)

thug_immortal8 said:


> It's Stern who wants Wade and LBJ to be the face of the NBA, but theres a reason players around the world and players inside the States recognize Kobe as the best in the league. I don't know why you keep on going into Kobe threads, its clear he can't do anything to satisfy you because of your hate for him so nobody will take you seriously when you voice your opinion about him.



Church! Anyone who doesn't think Kobe is the best perimeter player in the NBA is just crazy. I know that if you do think that, you must be a Kobe jocker. But I think the haters are just ridiculous in how they dislike Kobe. I mean, I do not like the Spurs at all. Strongly dislike that team. But, Tim Duncan- In my opinion- is the best lowpost player in the game. I can at least give him his props. The Kobe haters can't even give Kobe any props. Or they try and throw out some fancy numbers as to why Kobe isn't that good. Or they just hate him for some stupid reasons. ****ing ridiculous.


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

no one is hating on kobe. kust being honest. kobe has never been the defeining player of any era. ppl think of the early to mid 90s, its MJ. late 90s, shaq and iverson (heck...iverson created a whole culture...well not created, but made it mainstream), the 2000 era, shaq, then when they stopped winning, it became lebron and wade. simple. kobe was always in the shadows though. ill give him that.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

duncan2k5 said:


> no one is hating on kobe. kust being honest. kobe has never been the defeining player of any era. ppl think of the early to mid 90s, its MJ. late 90s, shaq and iverson (heck...iverson created a whole culture...well not created, but made it mainstream), the 2000 era, shaq, then when they stopped winning, it became lebron and wade. simple. kobe was always in the shadows though. ill give him that.


 http://www.hetemeel.com/haha/39877.I+bumped%20A+THREAD!.jpg

Use that next time, gets you even more attention and is slightly more respectable/understandable.


----------



## upsanddowns (Dec 29, 2005)

This is just pathetic. He bumps a thread that's at least a month old...

Dude, are you that obsessed with Kobe?


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

very good arguements you guys make. totally killed mine.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

duncan2k5 said:


> no one is hating on kobe. kust being honest. kobe has never been the defeining player of any era. ppl think of the early to mid 90s, its MJ. late 90s, shaq and iverson (heck...iverson created a whole culture...well not created, but made it mainstream), the 2000 era, shaq, then when they stopped winning, it became lebron and wade. simple. kobe was always in the shadows though. ill give him that.


And yet you keep comparing Kobe to Wade and LeBron by stating that Laker fans are rooting for them to lose.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

duncan2k5 said:


> no one is hating on kobe. kust being honest. kobe has never been the defeining player of any era. ppl think of the early to mid 90s, its MJ. late 90s, shaq and iverson (heck...iverson created a whole culture...well not created, but made it mainstream), the 2000 era, shaq, then when they stopped winning, it became lebron and wade. simple. kobe was always in the shadows though. ill give him that.


he's the defining perimeter player of the post-jordan era. unquestionably. all-nba's, all-defense, championships, press, hate - any reasonable measure, it's kobe. if you call what kobe's been over the last 7 years the shadows, i'd hate to see him in the spotlight.


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

ummm...NO. iverson was the talk of the NBA in the late 90's. no doubt about that. then it was shaq. shaq was the man. the movies, the press. the quotes. everything. then it was wade and lebron. kobe was never the clear-cut face of the NBA, no matter how bad laker fans want him to be. and laker fans DO root for wade and lebron to lose because they think that would make ppl like kobe more. they want kobe to be the poster child. they say things like "lebron was given a star status before he came in the league...thats why he is so good." uuummmmm....posting 20/5/5 as a 18 year old rookie is SICK. he was hyped yes...but he exceeded the hype the way no other rookie has...EVER. they are just jealous of wade and lebron's attention. maybe if kobe wasn't a serial cheater...


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

duncan2k5 said:


> ummm...NO. iverson was the talk of the NBA in the late 90's. no doubt about that. then it was shaq. shaq was the man. the movies, the press. the quotes. everything. then it was wade and lebron. kobe was never the clear-cut face of the NBA, no matter how bad laker fans want him to be. and laker fans DO root for wade and lebron to lose because they think that would make ppl like kobe more. they want kobe to be the poster child. they say things like "lebron was given a star status before he came in the league...thats why he is so good." uuummmmm....posting 20/5/5 as a 18 year old rookie is SICK. he was hyped yes...but he exceeded the hype the way no other rookie has...EVER. they are just jealous of wade and lebron's attention. maybe if kobe wasn't a serial cheater...



Why would you hate such an unsignificant player? I don't hate Isaih Rider.

You are a walking contradiction.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

in your rant, you didn't address the point that kobe's been the defining perimeter player post-jordan. there's simply little argument for anyone else. you're not even making one (shaq?). kobe has been the standard, the comparison point. he's the most decorated, the most accomplished. that's simply fact. again, you're not even attempting to argue otherwise.

face it - guys like you are the ones who make everything about kobe. very few fans hate lebron or wade. they're certainly worthy of sharing the stage with kobe. now.


----------



## beamer05 (Feb 24, 2006)

duncan2k5 said:


> ummm...NO. iverson was the talk of the NBA in the late 90's. no doubt about that. then it was shaq. shaq was the man. the movies, the press. the quotes. everything. then it was wade and lebron. kobe was never the clear-cut face of the NBA, no matter how bad laker fans want him to be. and laker fans DO root for wade and lebron to lose because they think that would make ppl like kobe more. they want kobe to be the poster child. they say things like "lebron was given a star status before he came in the league...thats why he is so good." uuummmmm....posting 20/5/5 as a 18 year old rookie is SICK. he was hyped yes...but he exceeded the hype the way no other rookie has...EVER. they are just jealous of wade and lebron's attention. *maybe if kobe wasn't a serial cheater*...



Get the **** over it man. *EDIT: You know better than that beamer05 - ralaw*. <strike>Your arguments suck and it's a waste of time to try and talk to you.</strike> And, what would his adultry have anything to do with his basketball playing? hmmm.. I'm sure your boy Duncan or anyone else has never done that. Get off your high horse man. You'd trade spots with Kobe in a second.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

I'm not going to get vulgar, but dude, it's Vanessa's job. Get off it.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

duncan2k5 on May 22nd said:


> I GUARANTEE a game 7 win for the spurs and the cavs. the cavs were 1 rebound from winning the series, and The King (to which i am a witness) will not let anyone else take rule over this series. and we all know manu...he will NOT let the spurs lose at home. ive BEEN saying from the beginning it will be spurs and cavs in the finals, and im sticking to it. ive been indifferent to the Mavs...now i HATE them. and ive always hated detroit's flopping-***-team. its one thing when ppl say manu flops, because he doesn't have a "tough guy" reputation. but for a team that are supposed to be so physical and intimidating...detroit is pretty soft and floppy. thats all


bump


----------



## beamer05 (Feb 24, 2006)

EHL said:


> bump



Nice bump lol. I really despise Detroit and I agree about that with Duncan2k5.. *Not necessary*


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

beamer05 said:


> Get the **** over it man. *EDIT: You know better than that beamor05* Your arguments suck and it's a waste of time to try and talk to you. And, what would his adultry have anything to do with his basketball playing? hmmm.. I'm sure your boy Duncan or anyone else has never done that. Get off your high horse man. You'd trade spots with Kobe in a second.


if you could comprehend, you would see the point i was trying to make is that if he wasn't a serial cheater, then he would still be a golden boy in the media's eyes (maybe not the premier one, but he would be up there). so laker fans wouldn't have to be jealous of the attention wade and lebron is getting


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

Jamel Irief said:


> Why would you hate such an unsignificant player? I don't hate Isaih Rider.
> 
> You are a walking contradiction.


the word is insignificant...and since when wade and lebron are insignificant? wow...


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

kflo said:


> in your rant, you didn't address the point that kobe's been the defining perimeter player post-jordan. there's simply little argument for anyone else. you're not even making one (shaq?). kobe has been the standard, the comparison point. he's the most decorated, the most accomplished. that's simply fact. again, you're not even attempting to argue otherwise.
> 
> face it - guys like you are the ones who make everything about kobe. very few fans hate lebron or wade. they're certainly worthy of sharing the stage with kobe. now.


again, i say iverson had mad more impact on american culture, not only in terms of basketball, but all things otherwise than kobe. after iverson, wade and lebron. kobe was always second. there are waaaaaaaaaaaay more iverson fans even today that kobe fans. not even close. down to the jersey sales from the late 90s to now. iverson was "it". now wade and lebron are "it". the whole commodity in LA was kobe AND shaq...with shaq taking most of the shine because he was the man. and at least i have arguements. no matter how much i "hate" on a player...i always have arguements. you guys just say "you dont know what youre talking about" and stuff like dat...smart


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

_Dre_ said:


> I'm not going to get vulgar, but dude, it's Vanessa's job. Get off it.


tell that to the laker fans on this site...and if it's her job, she obviously wasn't doing it right...at least in his eyes


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

and beamer05...duncan has never committed adultery. know why? because no one has ever heard of him doing so. we ALL know kobe done it. so we can talk on it. its like saying "since many humans kill ppl, then im sure tim duncan killed someone before". a senseless arguement. a generalization with no basis. would never hold up in court or the science world. of course i would trade places with kobe...i wouldnt like to BE him, but i would trade places...i would trade places with frikkin flava flave and any of the many millionaires in this world.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

duncan2k5 said:


> again, i say iverson had mad more impact on american culture, not only in terms of basketball, but all things otherwise than kobe. after iverson, wade and lebron. kobe was always second. there are waaaaaaaaaaaay more iverson fans even today that kobe fans. not even close. down to the jersey sales from the late 90s to now. iverson was "it". now wade and lebron are "it". the whole commodity in LA was kobe AND shaq...with shaq taking most of the shine because he was the man. and at least i have arguements. no matter how much i "hate" on a player...i always have arguements. you guys just say "you dont know what youre talking about" and stuff like dat...smart


what do you mean not only in terms of basketball? kobe, on the court, has easily been the standard over iverson. i'm really not interested in who influences culture more. kobe's been the standard on the court, and still is. your whole argument seems to be on who gets more google hits. 

btw:
google hits


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

kflo said:


> what do you mean not only in terms of basketball? kobe, on the court, has easily been the standard over iverson. i'm really not interested in who influences culture more. kobe's been the standard on the court, and still is. your whole argument seems to be on who gets more google hits.
> 
> btw:
> google hits


lol...no one said anything about google..and notice all those google hits have to do with his case. negativity. in terms of popularity. it is iverson...well was. its bron and wade now. kobe was never the best SG in the league. he was only the elite one lucky enough to be on shaw's team. any elite SG would have won with a prime shaq...hell dwyane wade won it with an old shaq (i know that one KILLS u lakers fans, lol). iverson was the best SG in the league for a while...then it was t-mac...then wade and Bron. be serious


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

duncan2k5 said:


> lol...no one said anything about google..and notice all those google hits have to do with his case. negativity. in terms of popularity. it is iverson...well was. its bron and wade now. kobe was never the best SG in the league. he was only the elite one lucky enough to be on shaw's team. any elite SG would have won with a prime shaq...hell dwyane wade won it with an old shaq (i know that one KILLS u lakers fans, lol). iverson was the best SG in the league for a while...then it was t-mac...then wade and Bron. be serious


except that's your opinion, not the majority opinion. kobe is the most decorated. all-nba's. all-defense. year after year. he's the comparison point. still. he's the surest thing for the hof. for an all-time team. it's just the way it is. you're entitled to your opinion of who was the best when, but you can't rewrite what popular opinion was. 

there's room at the top for lebron and wade. it's healthy for the game. what seems to kill YOU is that kobe was and still is there too. 

and you were talking about all the media attention kobe's not getting, when that's simply not the case. it's clearly not lebron and wade, with kobe trailing behind.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

This is about how well we've been doing over the years trying to probe Duncan's mind to find the root of his unnnatural hatred for Kobe:


----------



## beamer05 (Feb 24, 2006)

duncan2k5 said:


> if you could comprehend, you would see the point i was trying to make is that if he wasn't a serial cheater, then he would still be a golden boy in the media's eyes (maybe not the premier one, but he would be up there). so laker fans wouldn't have to be jealous of the attention wade and lebron is getting



You kidding me? I have a D. Wade jersey along with my Kobe and Shaq jersey's. I don't have a Lebron jersey, but I do like watching him play. So, there's no way I can be jealous of Lebron and D. Wade supposedly being the golden boys nowadays. They are great players and the future of basketball.. it just so happens that Kobe is the best player right now, even if he isn't the media's "golden boy." But, if he was the golden boy then maybe the media would get their heads out of their *Edit: I'm not going to warn you again  * and realize he is the best player in the league- maybe you would too. The rape case just adds to peopls claims that he's not the best player in the league or their silly hatred for him.. it is possible to not like a player respectfully, while acknowledging that they are at least good. You just go over the top post after post about Kobe and it's just ridiculous.


----------



## beamer05 (Feb 24, 2006)

duncan2k5 said:


> and beamer05...duncan has never committed adultery. know why? because no one has ever heard of him doing so. we ALL know kobe done it. so we can talk on it. its like saying "since many humans kill ppl, then im sure tim duncan killed someone before". a senseless arguement. a generalization with no basis. would never hold up in court or the science world. of course i would trade places with kobe...i wouldnt like to BE him, but i would trade places...i would trade places with frikkin flava flave and any of the many millionaires in this world.


Picture yourself having tens of girls flock around you at your team hotel right after away games, about 41 nights a year. Or on off days in those cities girls trying to hook up with you.. we all know about the groupies and how they are, so what makes you think Duncan is any different than Kobe or any other NBA superstar? Because he's a good guy on the court and would never do that? Please, everyone thought Kobe would never do something like that until it was found out he had and might have more than once. Sure, Duncan may be the exception to the rule but this is not a generalization with no basis. So many players in all sports cheat on their wives, so why would TD be any different? Oh, does it upset you when someone throws Duncan's name under the bus a little even though the argument sounds ridiculous? Well, maybe you will understand that's how you come across with your posts about Kobe.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

Who cares about spotlight? Kobe has had more spotlight than Tim Duncan over the years, that doesn't mean that he has been greater on the court. Kobe has easily been the standard for perimeter players in the post-Jordan era. The fact that Kobe still shares the spotlight with LeBron and Wade even though he is coming off of a rape case just shows you where he was at. The NBA is at the point where they don't give anything to players with bad press, especially after the brawl, but they still keep Kobe in the spotlight.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

so patch - you're saying that we can't determine the standard at a position by jersey sales??? baaah


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

can you guys read? i made 2 points. one being that iverson and co. were more popular in the eyes of the people, and one showing how kobe wasn't the best perimeter player at any time in his career. i wont elaborate...go back and read.


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

beamer05 said:


> You kidding me? I have a D. Wade jersey along with my Kobe and Shaq jersey's. I don't have a Lebron jersey, but I do like watching him play. So, there's no way I can be jealous of Lebron and D. Wade supposedly being the golden boys nowadays. They are great players and the future of basketball.. it just so happens that Kobe is the best player right now, even if he isn't the media's "golden boy." But, if he was the golden boy then maybe the media would get their heads out of their *Edit: I'm not going to warn you again  * and realize he is the best player in the league- maybe you would too. The rape case just adds to peopls claims that he's not the best player in the league or their silly hatred for him.. it is possible to not like a player respectfully, while acknowledging that they are at least good. You just go over the top post after post about Kobe and it's just ridiculous.


you my friend...are in the minority of laker players who dont have some ill feeling towards either wade, lebron, or both. and what basis do you have for kobe ebing the best player right now? what has he done to prove that? lead the league in scoring? wow. he iesn't even the best perimeter player right now, nevertheless the best one. ALL he is, is a scorer with a bad attitude.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

duncan2k5 said:


> one showing how kobe wasn't the best perimeter player at any time in his career.


again, this isn't popular perception, nor is it something you have shown. you are entitled to believe contarary to majority opinion (and you might be right, might be wrong), but that doesn't change majority opinion.


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

duncan2k5 said:


> can you guys read? i made 2 points. one being that iverson and co. were more popular in the eyes of the people, and one showing how kobe wasn't the best perimeter player at any time in his career. i wont elaborate...go back and read.


It's just your opinion that Kobe wasn't ever the best perimeter player at any time in his career. You can't just state that as if its a fact. I don't think Tmac or Iverson were ever better players. Besides, with Shaq on his team, no one really saw what Kobe was capable of even doing over an extended stretch until this season. At best, you could say that Tmac was equal to Kobe that 02-03 season. Since then, its been incomparable, Kobe completely seperated himself from the rest of the elite wing players last season. Wade and Lebron are only following behind him right now.


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

and how did he separate himself??? lebron had a better statistical year, finished second in MVP voting, took his team to game 7 vs detroit, wade won a championship, finals MVP...

kobe led the league in scoring...big deal. he is a step below lebrona nd wade. scoring doesn't make you the best player. being one-dimentional isn't enough brother. you gotta do the rest.


----------



## ChiBron (Jun 24, 2002)

Drewbs said:


> At best, you could say that Tmac was equal to Kobe that 02-03 season.


Why at best? T-Mac at the very _least_ was Kobe's equal in 02-03. Led the league in scoring. Had a better PER(by a significant margin) and carried a crappy Orlando team to the postseason. 



> Since then, its been incomparable


Eh, how so? In 03-04 Kobe's play wasn't anything spectacular. Numbers(24 ppg on poor FG%) were well down from last season and not to mention the HUGE egg he laid in the NBA Finals. The crappiest I've ever seen a 'superstar' play in the playoffs.

In 04-05 his numbers again weren't up to standards. His team won like what, 34 games? Heck, LA had a better win % w/o him that year.

So how the heck has Kobe been incomparable since 02-03? You got T-Mac as his rival for 02-03. From 03-05 forget _incomparable_, he wasn't even the best guard in the league. I'd say T-Mac or AI had a better argument for that title.



> Kobe completely seperated himself from the rest of the elite wing players last season.




Many obviously don't share your _opinion_. This very board ranked LBJ as the league's best player when rankings were done at the end of the season. Most people around the net(experts+fans) seem to be picking him as next year's MVP too. Wade LED his team to the championship and while not better or an equal, he's pretty close to Kobe. 

To say Kobe's completely seperated himself from his peers is the wishful thinking of fanatics. Like I've pointed out, aside from last season you couldn't even definitely say he was the best _shooting guard_ in the league.


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

prainse ye Jah. someone came to back me up. thank you SPMJ...i thought i would have had to spread the gospel myself. i was gonna rep u, but it said i had to spread some around before giving it to u again. some other time...


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

duncan2k5 said:


> and how did he separate himself??? lebron had a better statistical year, finished second in MVP voting, took his team to game 7 vs detroit, wade won a championship, finals MVP...
> 
> kobe led the league in scoring...big deal. he is a step below lebrona nd wade. scoring doesn't make you the best player. being one-dimentional isn't enough brother. you gotta do the rest.


lebron's per was 28.1, kobe's 28.0, wade's 27.6 (dirk was also 28.1). and kobe is regarded as the best defender of the 3 (although i'm sure you disagree). to say kobe's one-dimensional is hater material. as is saying he's a step below them.


----------



## upsanddowns (Dec 29, 2005)

*Do not call other posters names* is just a flat out hater of Kobe. Even though I do not like LeBron or Wade....I respect their games and their contributions to their franchises. 

*Edit* on the other hand, just overvalues Kobe's mistakes/faults (Colorado charges, etc) and undervalues his strengths. Just probably jealous of the success the guy has had. Unbelievable career and he's still only 28. 


No point in arguing against a person who is blinded by his hate.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

SPMJ said:


> Why at best? T-Mac at the very _least_ was Kobe's equal in 02-03. Led the league in scoring. Had a better PER(by a significant margin) and carried a crappy Orlando team to the postseason.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Just sad, really...



> Many obviously don't share your _opinion_. This very board ranked LBJ as the league's best player when rankings were done at the end of the season. Most people around the net(experts+fans) seem to be picking him as next year's MVP too. Wade LED his team to the championship and while not better or an equal, he's pretty close to Kobe.


This very board was unanimous in selecting Kobe as the best player in the world after his 81 point game.

LeBron and/or Wade are fantastic player, and they may very weel be near Kobe. But they ain't Kobe.



> To say Kobe's completely seperated himself from his peers is the wishful thinking of fanatics. Like I've pointed out, aside from last season you couldn't even definitely say he was the best _shooting guard_ in the league.


Any SANE basketball fan will say Kobe is the best shooting guard in the league. One can say he is not Wilt-Chamberlain-like-heads-and-shoulders-above-anyone-else. But he is the best.

You don't agree? Well, maybe YOU are the "_fanatic_"...


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

umm...no...laker fans just like to claim that kobe is the best SG, and that all other opinions are insane. thats just silly. like i said, i stated reasons why kobe isn't number 1. so instead of saying crap like "lebron and wade aint kobe" give reasons. ive stated mine. not to mention the fact that all kobe does is score. all of the great ones did more than just score. kobe has a LOT to prove in my eyes...and im not sure he can deflate his big head enough to realize there are 4 other ppl on the court. he has been in the league for 10 years and didnt realize it. shaq is lucky he won in spite of kobe. yes i said it. in spite of. because we all say what would happen when kobe takes the role of the primary scorer (the 2004 fiasco), and when shaq is paired up with ANY other superstar guard (ANOTHER championship).


----------



## upsanddowns (Dec 29, 2005)

duncan2k5 said:


> umm...no...laker fans just like to claim that kobe is the best SG, and that all other opinions are insane. thats just silly. like i said, i stated reasons why kobe isn't number 1. so instead of saying crap like "lebron and wade aint kobe" give reasons. ive stated mine. not to mention the fact that all kobe does is score. all of the great ones did more than just score. kobe has a LOT to prove in my eyes...and im not sure he can deflate his big head enough to realize there are 4 other ppl on the court. he has been in the league for 10 years and didnt realize it. shaq is lucky he won in spite of kobe. yes i said it. in spite of. because we all say what would happen when kobe takes the role of the primary scorer (the 2004 fiasco), and when shaq is paired up with ANY other superstar guard (ANOTHER championship).



One word....PATHETIC.


Seriously, is your Kobe hating that monstrous? 

Oh wait it is.


What has Wade, LeBron, or T-mac done that makes them such a "superior" player over Kobe? 

Nothing. 

Kobe has accomplished more than these three players combined.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

**FYI**

Mods are well aware that duncan2k5 isn't posting to start intelligent discussion and is merely contradicting himself, ignoring common sense, and making outrageous statements to instigate fights. They're dealing with it.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

I think Lebron is better than Kobe, but it's close. And Wade isn't that far behind either. On any given day one can appear better than the others. I would say there is parity at the top of the NBA in terms of best players, unlike there has been in a long long time. Nobody is running away with the league like Jordan did. However this isn't to say players aren't better than baldy, it's just that there's a lot of really good ones.

Hell on his day, Tim Duncan is STILL the best player in the league.

There's about 5 or 6 or 7 guys who on any day you could make the arguement that they are the best in the NBA, just depending on how they are playing.

Anyone that says any one of these players is clearly better than the others is just having fun being a fan.


----------



## JT (Mar 1, 2004)

> Anyone that says any one of these players is clearly better than the others is just having fun being a fan.


I agree with your statement that Tim Duncan at his best is the best in the league (he and Kobe are top #2 interchangeable), but nobody brings it night in night out quite like Kobe Bryant. When it comes to technique and impact he is there at the top of Mount Everest. Everybody else is chasing the shadow, still stuck in the snow.


----------



## Pnack (Aug 23, 2005)

futuristxen said:


> I think Lebron is better than Kobe, but it's close. And Wade isn't that far behind either. On any given day one can appear better than the others. I would say there is parity at the top of the NBA in terms of best players, unlike there has been in a long long time. Nobody is running away with the league like Jordan did. However this isn't to say players aren't better than baldy, it's just that there's a lot of really good ones.
> 
> Hell on his day, Tim Duncan is STILL the best player in the league.
> 
> ...


There's only one way to figure it out:

1v1 tourney. Kobe, LJ, Dwade, Tmac, Gilbert, Carmelo, AI, RonArtest, VC and PaulP

I would pay 20 bucks to order this, and im sure any real NBA fan would too.


----------



## Hoopla (Jun 1, 2004)

PauloCatarino said:


> Any SANE basketball fan will say Kobe is the best shooting guard in the league.


I'm insane.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

It's very hard to separate Wade and Kobe. T-Mac is no longer in the conversation as his health has been shot but Wade puts up similar numbers to Kobe while also playing on a better team. Considering Wade is still getting better and Kobe is in his prime, I'm not sure how you can say Kobe is clearly better then Wade


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

sherako said:


> I agree with your statement that Tim Duncan at his best is the best in the league (he and Kobe are top #2 interchangeable), but *nobody brings it night in night out quite like Kobe * Bryant. When it comes to technique and impact he is there at the top of Mount Everest. Everybody else is chasing the shadow, still stuck in the snow.


this is a false statement. game 7...second half


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

EHL said:


> **FYI**
> 
> Mods are well aware that duncan2k5 isn't posting to start intelligent discussion and is merely contradicting himself, ignoring common sense, and making outrageous statements to instigate fights. They're dealing with it.


this coming from a MOD who is a laker fan...VERY biased...and your laker buddies are the ones posting nonsense. im giving facts and reasons..all they are saying is "hate hate hate". no one is saying anything that is worth anything. i dont care what the laker fan mods do. i didnt violate anything, so they can all listen to u for all i care


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

upsanddowns said:


> One word....PATHETIC.
> 
> 
> Seriously, is your Kobe hating that monstrous?
> ...


T-mac has proven with bad teams, he could put up better stats than kobe, while ending up with the same result (1st round knockout). 

wade has had a better season than kobe, plus has more impact on his team

Lebron has had a better season than kobe, plus has more impact on his team.

that's how they are better. kobe has had rings in the past when hee was on a prime shaq's team...face it...if any one of these players was on those laker teams, they would have won too (remember this is an opinion).


----------



## beamer05 (Feb 24, 2006)

duncan2k5 said:


> T-mac has proven with bad teams, he could put up better stats than kobe, while ending up with the same result (1st round knockout).
> 
> wade has had a better season than kobe, plus has more impact on his team
> 
> ...



There's no way you can actually think that is Tmac,D.Wade or Lebron were on those Lakers teams they would have won the championship 3 times in a row. That's just doesn't make sense. Sure, the other teams were better but they had better supporting casts. Just think though, L.A. had 45 wins in west while Cleveland had 50 in the east and Miami 52.. so were they really that much better than the Lakers? L.A. didn't even win in the first round sure, but I'm still under the belief that the west is the harder conference to play in and they also lost to the Western Conference runner-up. Also there's no way in hell that Wade, Bron or anyone else had any more impact on their respective teams than Kobe did. Take Kobe away from the Lakers and they are nothing.. but if you take the other two away from their teams, they would still be o.k- still maybe even make the playoffs. ( Remember this is only opinion too, which you will obviously disagree with because of your ridiculous hatred for the Lakers and Kobe... and you will present other "facts" to prove that Kobe isn't one of the best players in the league, that there is many players better than him. That the Lakers also suck blah blah blah.)


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

duncan2k5 said:


> this coming from a MOD who is a laker fan...VERY biased...and your laker buddies are the ones posting nonsense. im giving facts and reasons..all they are saying is "hate hate hate". no one is saying anything that is worth anything. i dont care what the laker fan mods do. i didnt violate anything, so they can all listen to u for all i care


EHL isn't a mod.


----------



## Samurai of Swoosh (Sep 18, 2006)

duncan2k5 said:


> T-mac has proven with bad teams, he could put up better stats than kobe


Now I love me some Tracy McGrady ... but this statement is false.

Tracy's best:
32 ppg, 6 apg, 7 rpg, on 46% FG percentage.

Kobe's best:
30 ppg, 6 apg, 7 rpg, 2 spg on 45% FG percentage. While also being named 1st Team All Defender. (30 ppg on a team where he actually had to give more touches to a player who was averaging 28 ppg, himself. Kobe very well could've averaged 35 ppg that year as well, if given the chance.)

This Past Year:
35 ppg, 5 apg, 5 rpg, 2 spg on 45% FG percentage. While also being named 1st Team All Defender.

Both seasons on equal level, if not better than Tracy's ONE best year.

Ya, dig?




duncan2k5 said:


> while ending up with the same result (1st round knockout).


Kobe didn't get knocked out in the first round in 2002-2003. Your Spurs knocked them out in the Second Round. Yes, the Lakers (who were the 7th seed), failed in stepping on the throat of the NUMBER 2 SEED in the Phoenix Suns. Kobe brought his game, and his teammates just failed him at the wrong time. They let him down in 3 consecutive games. The Lakers (apart from Kobe) choked under their own momentum and expectations after going up 3-1 on the Suns. T-Mac and the Rockets lost in the first round in the Western Conference Playoffs in 2004 - 2005. This definetely wasn't purely T-Mac's fault. He gave the Mavericks the business, and his team just let him down in their performances. It happens. You can have the greatest player in the world on your team, but in the NBA playoffs, you are going to need top notch performances from at least 2 -3 people in order to advance ANYWHERE. You should know this by now. You are a Spurs fan. You're usually lucky to have 3-4 stars who bring their game all the time during the playoffs.



duncan2k5 said:


> wade has had a better season than kobe


Meh, I wouldn't go that far. That's debateable. And all goes on how you prefer your stats to go.



duncan2k5 said:


> plus has more impact on his team


No, he doesn't. Wade isn't the undisputed leader and/or best player of the Heat. It is still Shaq that has the most impact, and his threat or precense is what allows the players on the Heat to freely play their game. 

The Lakers entirely depend on Kobe for virtually everything. To get them going through motivation, scoring for them, bailing them out, etc. Kobe has a WAY bigger impact on his team than what Wade has on the Heat. Get your facts straight.



duncan2k5 said:


> Lebron has had a better season than kobe


This one, I can agree with. From a numbers p.o.v., LeBron is overwhelming. But however, that does not make him the better player, and does not mean he has...



duncan2k5 said:


> more impact on his team.


Both Kobe and LeBron are depended on equally as the sole leader, and best player on their respective teams. Don't sell Kobe short in these regards. I know you don't like him, but don't let it make you sound like an idiot in your basketball analyzations.



duncan2k5 said:


> that's how they are better. kobe has had rings in the past when hee was on a prime shaq's team.


Yes, and anyone of those players would've played second fiddle to a prime Shaquille O'Neal. Hell, Wade is still the second banana on an aging Shaq team.



duncan2k5 said:


> ..face it...if any one of these players was on those laker teams, they would have won too (remember this is an opinion).


Would they have won A TITLE? Yeah, probably. Would they have won 3 CHIPS IN A ROW?!? That is an entirely different story, and feat. Non of those players you mentioned had the ability to play lock down defense in order to go for three straight chips. Defense is important in winning championships, but it is twice as important in defending a championship. And defending a championship is much more difficult than winning one. The most difficult task in sports is defending a championship, let alone multiple times. Kobe was a HUGE contributer in a team that defended it two years after they won their first. Those other players you mentioned can't do that yet. They don't have the skill set, and/or the mental toughness. Face it. Don't distort accomplishments because you hate the player.


----------



## bballlife (Oct 5, 2003)

Duncan, you bring absolutely nothing to the table, please stop wasting everyone’s time.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

duncan2k5 said:


> T-mac has proven with bad teams, he could put up better stats than kobe, while ending up with the same result (1st round knockout).


When was T-MAc selected in the 1st team NBA All-Defense? 



> wade has had a better season than kobe, plus has more impact on his team


Shaq makes Wade, right?



> Lebron has had a better season than kobe, plus has more impact on his team.


I don't think LBJ plays SG.
I don't think he had a better season.
I don't think he has more impact.
Can you elaborate?



> that's how they are better. kobe has had rings in the past when hee was on a prime shaq's team...face it...if any one of these players was on those laker teams, they would have won too (remember this is an opinion).


IF, IF, IF...
If Drexler played with the Bulls, he may have gotten 6 rings...
If Kobe played with the Bulls he may have gotten 6 rings...
If Artest played with Jordan he may have gotten six rings...
And so on, and so on...

the fact is that your hate blinds your senses... There's nothing wrong with hating a player. Heck, i hate some sorry *** loser players. But you are the kind of poster that gets infantile while adressing your most hated player. Major Haters like Seanet and Fruity can provide some good arguments. But you just crowd the board with the same old "Kobe Sux" posts.

You are, indeed, a gluton for punishment. You have been *******slapped around this board since your first "Kobe Sux" post and still you don't give up... Posters are using your infantile Kobe-hating posts for signatures and still you don't give up... You have been bashed/owned repeatedly in every last freaking thread you try to hijack with your Kobe-hate, and still you don't give up...

It's kinda sad, really...

*No masking.*


----------



## beamer05 (Feb 24, 2006)

PauloCatarino said:


> When was T-MAc selected in the 1st team NBA All-Defense?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Agreed on every point.. I can't wait to see what he says now.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

sherako said:


> I agree with your statement that Tim Duncan at his best is the best in the league (he and Kobe are top #2 interchangeable), but nobody brings it night in night out quite like Kobe Bryant. When it comes to technique and impact he is there at the top of Mount Everest. Everybody else is chasing the shadow, still stuck in the snow.


Lebron brings it every night for longer and more games than Kobe does. I see no reason to say there's a huge seperation in impact and technique, especially impact. Given the before and after of Lebron's presence in Cleveland, it's hard to argue against his impact. He saved basketball in Cleveland.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

futuristxen said:


> Lebron brings it every night for longer and more games than Kobe does.


No, he doesn't. It's IT we're talking about.



> I see no reason to say there's a huge seperation in impact and technique, especially impact. Given the before and after of Lebron's presence in Cleveland, it's hard to argue against his impact. He saved basketball in Cleveland.


And who is saving basketball in Los Angeles? (and before you go saying Elton Brand, think again)


----------



## Samurai of Swoosh (Sep 18, 2006)

futuristxen said:


> Lebron brings it every night for longer and more games than Kobe does.


Cut those minutes in half, cause LeBronze just plays offense. He;s also 21 years old. He should be on the floor more, w/o getting tired. He's a young buck.



futuristxen said:


> I see no reason to say there's a huge seperation in impact and technique, especially impact.


Kobe and LeBron have equal impact on their teams. This is true. Both are the figure heads for their teams, and organizations.




futuristxen said:


> Given the before and after of Lebron's presence in Cleveland, it's hard to argue against his impact. He saved basketball in Cleveland.


We can be real too, how was he saving basketball in Cleveland? It's not like there was a huge cultural following of the sport, anyway... He brought the spotlight to Cleveland. He didn't really save anything. Word on the street is, he is headed for Brooklyn in 2008 / 2009 when Jay brings the team to BK. You know him and Jay Z. That's when his contract runs up with Cleveland. Bronze has gon on recording saying he wants to be a billionaire before he retires, and he gets like a $100 million dollar kicker from Nike if he moves to a major market (NY being the biggest). LeBronze is going to dipset on Cleveland first chance he gets.


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

word on the street is jsut that...word. ppl thought he was gonna bounce this year. and lebron has more impact on cleveland and than kobe does in LA. trust me. i was in pittsburg (futrixten knows that's like an hour away) and we get all the games, and all the talk from cleveland. it's a cursed city when it comes to sports...not just basketball. if you talk to the average person on the street, lebron gives them hope. it has been revitalized to an immense extent.

and i hate how paulo claims i make "kobe sux" threads. all my "kobe hate" threads have points. its just that laker fans NEVER come up with a decent arguement. i would give my POV, and their reply would be "he is a hater...dont answer" or "kobe is the best...hands down" no points. so if there is anyone who needs an arguement, its u laker fans. and i challenge you Paulo to find one thread where i am saying "kobe sux" in a context unlike the one i'm using it in now. if u can do it...then i give the mods permission to ban me without reason.


----------



## Samurai of Swoosh (Sep 18, 2006)

duncan2k5 said:


> word on the street is jsut that...word. ppl thought he was gonna bounce this year.


That's why I said "word on the street"... because it is just that. 

I also didn't say it was for definite. But that's probably why he signed a short term deal, where the contract magically runs out the same year Jay Z brings the Nets to Brooklyn. I'm sure you can't put, two and two together, seeing as with your intelligence level and all.



duncan2k5 said:


> and lebron has more impact on cleveland and than kobe does in LA. trust me


He might, but for different reasons. Sports are virtually non-existent in Cleveland. Their sport teams perpetually suck, and have never won a championship... let alone a championship in recent years. LA has a rich basketball history. Probably the richest in the game of basketball, all-time. Let alone the fact that their city has alot more going for it, then worrying about Kobe Bryant and the Lakers. Yet still, the Lakers are a hotter ticket than the Cleveland Cavaliers. What team can you go watch, where a player has the potential to break the single game scoring record, or deliver HOF caliber performances on a night to night basis?



duncan2k5 said:


> lebron gives them hope. it has been revitalized to an immense extent.


Too bad he couldn't do that for AMERICA, as a whole. You know, the way MJ did. I mean, the only thing LBJ gave me "hope" for is that I will be "WITNESS" to LeBRONZE.



duncan2k5 said:


> its just that laker fans NEVER come up with a decent arguement.


I came up with one, and you didn't have the balls or the know how to even try and refute it. You know why? Cause what I said was truth.



duncan2k5 said:


> i would give my POV, and their reply would be "he is a hater...dont answer" or "kobe is the best...hands down" no points. so if there is anyone who needs an arguement, its u laker fans.


I gave you more than what you're claiming. How come you aren't responding to my truthful comments, with more hate filled rehtoric?



duncan2k5 said:


> and i challenge you Paulo to find one thread where i am saying "kobe sux" in a context unlike the one i'm using it in now. if u can do it...then i give the mods permission to ban me without reason.


No, we're challenging you ... and you keep side stepping the argument.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

duncan2k5 said:


> and i hate how paulo claims i make "kobe sux" threads. *all my "kobe hate" threads have points*.


No they don't. They never did, in fact. 



> its just that laker fans NEVER come up with a decent arguement.


Young grasshopper, it is YOU who have showned you can't put up a single reasonable argument....



> i would give my POV, and their reply would be "he is a hater...dont answer" or "kobe is the best...hands down" no points.


When a poster replies without any shred of sanity, what do you expect us to do?



> so if there is anyone who needs an arguement, its u laker fans. and i challenge you Paulo to find one thread where i am saying "kobe sux" in a context unlike the one i'm using it in now. if u can do it...then i give the mods permission to ban me without reason.


Pfff.... You are mistaking me for EHL, eager bunny. EHL used to search your idiotic posts regarding Kobe to make you feel (again) ridiculous... I don't have the time or the inclination to do so... Your blatant lack of reasoning has been proven thoroughly (sp?).


----------



## beamer05 (Feb 24, 2006)

This is funny.


----------



## John (Jun 9, 2002)

PauloCatarino said:


> No they don't. They never did, in fact.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yes, I hate Kobe, yes I make troll posts, so what? going to hit me in my face?


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

John said:


> Yes, I hate Kobe, yes I make troll posts, so what? going to hit me in my face?


LMAO!!!


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

beamer05 said:


> This is funny.


tell me about it


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

John said:


> Yes, I hate Kobe, yes I make troll posts, so what? going to hit me in my face?


Nope. In your Penny-like knees.


----------



## Samurai of Swoosh (Sep 18, 2006)

PauloCatarino said:


> Nope. In your Penny-like knees.


Hahaha


----------



## John (Jun 9, 2002)

PauloCatarino said:


> Nope. In your Penny-like knees.


Good bait post! You win, I lose. But please dont go to macau!


----------



## Unique (Apr 13, 2005)

If you guys dont stay on topic your going to make me close this thread. Come on guys. Please lets just get back to the subject and not about whos a troll or not.


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

the only time kobe would have been considered the constant comparison IMO was when he was on shaw's team winning championships under shaq. not that he was the best, but because winning championships put ppl in the spotlight. IF it was t-mac, im pretty sure it would have been him getting the comparisons. before shaq started making LA win, no one compared the other guards in the league to kobe...only laker fans. not, only laker fans compare him to other guards again. no one cares about kobe. everyone is comparing wade, lebron, vince, arenas, and melo with each other. not that they are better than kobe (even tho lebron and wade are), but that's wo ppl care about now. 


and look at is this way...if you wanna consider kobe the constant, you can say that about ANY superstar guard, because wade is compared to all of them, so is lebron, so is t-mac, vince, etc. they are all compared to each other.


----------



## beamer05 (Feb 24, 2006)

duncan2k5 said:


> the only time kobe would have been considered the constant comparison IMO was when he was on shaw's team winning championships under shaq. not that he was the best, but because winning championships put ppl in the spotlight. IF it was t-mac, im pretty sure it would have been him getting the comparisons. before shaq started making LA win, no one compared the other guards in the league to kobe...only laker fans. not, only laker fans compare him to other guards again. *no one cares about kobe*. everyone is comparing wade, lebron, vince, arenas, and melo with each other. not that they are better than kobe (even tho lebron and wade are), but that's wo ppl care about now.
> 
> 
> and look at is this way...if you wanna consider kobe the constant, you can say that about ANY superstar guard, because wade is compared to all of them, so is lebron, so is t-mac, vince, etc. they are all compared to each other.


I'm pretty sure you care about Kobe that's why you go around and make a point of dissing him in any thread he is mentioned. He could donate $1 million right now to charity, without publicity.. but if it somehow leaked then you would find a way to diss him and make it seem like Kobe was a bad person for doing such. So, people do care about Kobe... whether it be good or not, they do.


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

ok...so me disagreeing that kobe is the best in the NBA is dissing him?


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

duncan2k5 said:


> ok...so me disagreeing that kobe is the best in the NBA is dissing him?


Nope. You disagreeing that *Kobe has been the constant * (wich is the freaking thread!) is not only dissing him but shows your (lack of) Bball knowledge.


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

lol...so anyone who disagrees with the notion that kobe is the constant doesnt know basketball and is dissing him? THEN WHY MAKE A THREAD ABOUT IT?????????


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

duncan2k5 said:


> lol...so anyone who disagrees with the notion that kobe is the constant doesnt know basketball and is dissing him? THEN WHY MAKE A THREAD ABOUT IT?????????


Did you read the first post on this thread?

This thread was meant to ask posters who would be the new players who people would compare to Kobe Bryant.
And that's because Kobe has been the player who, thorought the years, and being able to sustain his high level of play, has merit the comparison against all the other wing players. You may or may not agree that Kobe was better than T-Mac on said year, or AI the other, but if you don't think Kobe has been the better player thorough the years, well, then there's nothing i can really say...

Now, do you understand why the thread was posted?


----------

