# Has Kobe Bryant peaked?



## TJ Kidd's Head (Apr 28, 2003)

Kobe Bryant....the man, the myth, the enigma. Only 24 years old. 3 NBA Championship rings. 1 hot wife.

The Problem: He lives in the shadow of one man, and that man is Michael Jeffrey Jordan...the so-called "greatest of all time." 

The dissension: While many claim Kobe will never be as good as MJ, Kobe apologists will respond by saying that Kobe is better than Jordan at his age.

The underlying theme: Has Kobe "peaked" as a player? While he is arguably better than Jordan at the age of 24, will he ever be as good as Jordan at the age of 32? Will Kobe be as dominant a force without the menacing gorilla known as Shaquille O'Neil?

Your thoughts....


----------



## rynobot (Oct 10, 2002)

Kobe is only going to get better, even when he doesn't have Shaq on his side.


----------



## Desert Nomad (Jul 15, 2002)

Is Kobe better at 24 than Jordan? Please explain. It was along time ago, but my memory says Jordan was great early on. Maybe his team hadn't won championships yet and he hadn't fully developed his all-around game, but his quickness was at its peak. Didn't he score the 61 points against the Celts in the playoffs at about that age?


----------



## Bball_Doctor (Dec 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Desert Nomad</b>!
> Is Kobe better at 24 than Jordan? Please explain. It was along time ago, but my memory says Jordan was great early on. Maybe his team hadn't won championships yet and he hadn't fully developed his all-around game, but his quickness was at its peak. Didn't he score the 61 points against the Celts in the playoffs at about that age?


MJ went through what I like to call transititions during his career. He refined his game so many times that even though his stats got lower...his stats peak was at 86 to 88....he became a better player later on. In the early 90s he was more complete offensively and defensively. In the early 80s he trusted solely on his ahtletic ability to score. In the early 90s he added his smarts to that and a better post game. I think MJs prime was in the early 90s as a player...MJs stat prime was in the mid to late 80s. MJs winning prime was the early 90s to his last threepeat and even then you can say MJ refined his post game..he is still the best post guard I have ever seen in the mid to late 90s. Kobe is far from his prime...he still has a lot of potential to become a better defender and offensive player.


----------



## jbplaya (Aug 16, 2002)

I'm sorry to get off topic, but TJ Kidd's Head is hands down the funniest nickname I've ever seen on any message board. It's hilarious because that kid's head is the size of a Buick Le Sabre. It easily rivals Arvydas Sa"dome"is' head. Sorry to get off track, but I had to give my man props on that name. Now back to the topic.


----------



## 33 (Nov 18, 2002)

Wasn't MJ averaging 37ppg at 24. If you watch any of Mike old games on NBA.com TV, you will see that MJ had a jumper when he was young, contrary to what most believe. He was just better at taking people to the rim. It was when he started to get a little older when he started to rely on his jumper more, but he always had a jumper. I think Kobe may be on pace at best but not better than MJ at that age


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>33</b>!
> Wasn't MJ averaging 37ppg at 24. If you watch any of Mike old games on NBA.com TV, you will see that MJ had a jumper when he was young, contrary to what most believe. He was just better at taking people to the rim. It was when he started to get a little older when he started to rely on his jumper more, but he always had a jumper. I think Kobe may be on pace at best but not better than MJ at that age


His jumper was nothing compared to Kobe's. He surely didn't have the post moves Kobe has. And at 24, 37ppg is easier if you dont have to share the scoring load with another player, plus Kobe faces zone defenses ever time he touches the ball.


----------



## Bball_Doctor (Dec 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>33</b>!
> Wasn't MJ averaging 37ppg at 24. If you watch any of Mike old games on NBA.com TV, you will see that MJ had a jumper when he was young, contrary to what most believe. He was just better at taking people to the rim. It was when he started to get a little older when he started to rely on his jumper more, but he always had a jumper. I think Kobe may be on pace at best but not better than MJ at that age


Jordan's jumper wasn't as developed...he mainly just used his athletic ability to drive pass people to the hole. He would either dunk it on ANYONE, layup, or go to the foul line. He had the jumper but during that time was when MJ was the most aggressive in his career. To IV you are right MJ's jumper did not have the range of Kobe but he had better consistency...actually truth is that MJ has never had the range of Kobe. The only time MJ shot really well beyond the arc was during those years they moved the arc in. MJ was always a 18 feet and in player. But MJ's midrange jumper is much much more better and consistent than Kobe's. Before his 3rd comeback MJ shot over .500 for his career. Also MJ did not have the post moves he developed later onto his career becuz he wasn't that strong...early in his career MJ played at a 195 weight where as he played 210-215 in his championship years. Contrary to your belief 37 ppg is very hard even if you don't share the ball with another bigtime scorer. MJ constantly faced double and triple teams. Teams focused on him much more than how teams focus on Kobe. MJ was banged something that Kobe has yet to experienced. It is kind of like AI's situation in Philly or TMac in Orlando. MJ was more dominant than Kobe as a player at 24 offensively and defensively. Kobe has a more complete offensive package. TMac's offensive dominance is the closest thing to MJ today.


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

The who's better at 24 argument is ridculous really. 

At 24 Mj played in an era where the sg's weren't the most athletic. So scoring 37ppg while a great accomplishment is a little bit different than averaging 30ppg in this era as Kobe does. Ehlo, Ainge Dennis Johnson, Jeff Malone, Dumars, some great players a few great athletes such as Drexler but not that many. Tmac, Bowen, Chrisite, Pierce, much bigger better quality of athlete makes it harder to score. 

I will say it now and continue to say it. Kobe Bryant isn't as talented as MJ is period. MJ was faster, stronger, had more defensive ability. Kobe is a much better shooter than MJ was at 24. But thats a little slanted also because there just aren't the driving lanes with the defense packed in guarding Shaq so Kobe has to pull up and shoot the mid range J. 

NO Kobe hasn't peaked he gets better every year. One thing in Kobe's favor on offense MJ was alot more 1 dimensional because of Pippen. Kobe plays like Pippen and MJ at the same time. Kobe has more diverse skills because its required on the Lakers team. MJ had Pippen as the primary playmaker so all he had to do was score. 

Before alls said and done Kobe will eclipse most of MJ's records but won't surpass MJ's legend simply for the fact that Kobe won't change the game from a social, economic, and even a fashion standpoint like MJ did. He took the league to anothet level. And I don't think the league has another level to reach. This is as good as the League's gonna get when it comes to those things.


----------



## Bball_Doctor (Dec 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>jazzy1</b>!
> The who's better at 24 argument is ridculous really.
> 
> At 24 Mj played in an era where the sg's weren't the most athletic. So scoring 37ppg while a great accomplishment is a little bit different than averaging 30ppg in this era as Kobe does. Ehlo, Ainge Dennis Johnson, Jeff Malone, Dumars, some great players a few great athletes such as Drexler but not that many. Tmac, Bowen, Chrisite, Pierce, much bigger better quality of athlete makes it harder to score.
> ...


Actually there was one before Pip, MJ played the playmaker role. For one season he basically played the point and averaged 8 rpg and 8 apg that season. MJ was never really offensively 1 dimension becuz he had shown he could play Pip's role in his early years and do it better than both Kobe or Pip seriously. Of course when Pip developed MJ and the Bulls took advantage of that but MJ still setup a lot of plays in the half court but Pip was the main ballhandler going up court. MJ still averaged the same amount of assists as Kobe when Pip assumed the main ballhandler. I still don't think Kobe involves his teammates nearly as good as MJ or even TMac although he gets more apg than TMac but not by much. MJ might not have scored 37 ppg against more athletic defenders but he did it against better and deeper teams. Also players like Dumars, Cooper, G Wilkins, and DJ are much better defenders than many of the SGs of today. Fact is that no one could stop MJ....only a team could as evident by the 63 dropped against arguably the best team that year...the Celtics. They threw everybody against MJ...doubled him...tripled him and he still blew pass defenders. There is no question for anyone who has watched MJ during that age was much better than Kobe at the same age. The difference is that Kobe won more. Also MJ had a better midrange jumper...much better than Kobe did at the same age but Kobe has more range. Kobe is stonger than MJ at this age....MJ was reallllllyyyy skinny. But MJ was deadly quick...MJ was a taller AI...I was the first to say that months months ago. You are on the dot though when you said
"I will say it now and continue to say it. Kobe Bryant isn't as talented as MJ is period"...on the DOT.:yes:


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Bball_Doctor</b>!
> 
> MJ was a taller AI...I was the first to say that months months ago.


when iverson was drafted, i compared him to mj, in his ability to beat players off the dribble and get a shot anytime he wanted. ai is quicker, but obviously can't get to the hole or elevate over defenders like mj could.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

Physically Kobe has nothing on MJ at 24. The only advantage he has is that he is a little stronger than MJ because Jordan didn't bulk up until the 90's. Jordan could do everything else as well, and even better than Kobe in some cases. They could both jump out of the gym and both had great body control. They were both very agile and moved around the court like smaller players. The biggest difference is speed and quickness and MJ was the modern day 6-6 AI at 24. Kobe is obviously great in that regard but MJ was on a different level. MJ also had huge hands and that is an advantage that Kobe doesn't have. That being said, the fact that Kobe is even mentioned in the same breath as MJ is a testament to his work ethic. The kid works as hard as anyone and he'll continue to get better as a basketball player as MJ did and he'll probably stay around longer like MJ because of his work ethic. I think he'll leave the game of basketball with a Jordan like legacy and Jordan's credentials, even if he wasn't quite as good as him.


----------



## dawicked (Aug 13, 2002)

> Before alls said and done Kobe will eclipse most of MJ's records but won't surpass MJ's legend simply for the fact that Kobe won't change the game from a social, economic, and even a fashion standpoint like MJ did


 -Jazzy1

Does anyone really think he'll eclipse "most" of MJ's records? Kobe hasn't even won a scoring title let alone 10 in a row. He ain't gonna eclipse that one. He also had the record of 9 straight 'NBA All-Defensive First-Team' selections. Kobe hasn't won that once. Michael also has the record of 7 straight consecutive scoring titles. Once again, Kobe hasn't won once. There's other records I don't see him breaking either.

True Kobe is still very young and has time to do all this but I don't see it happening.

For those people that were saying the Shooting guards defense are better today. Well, probally but Jordan as an old man with limited options can still score 20 pts/game on these guys.


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

Jazzy mentioned this, but SG was VERY weak position in the 80's... while it's probably the strongest position in the league right now, if not then tied for PF in terms of talent at a position.


----------



## TheRifleman (May 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>jazzy1</b>!
> The who's better at 24 argument is ridculous really.
> 
> At 24 Mj played in an era where the sg's weren't the most athletic. So scoring 37ppg while a great accomplishment is a little bit different than averaging 30ppg in this era as Kobe does. Ehlo, Ainge Dennis Johnson, Jeff Malone, Dumars, some great players a few great athletes such as Drexler but not that many. Tmac, Bowen, Chrisite, Pierce, much bigger better quality of athlete makes it harder to score.
> ...



Excellent reply! :clap:

"Will eclipse MJ's records" probably should be stated, "could eclipse", as one never knows what the future holds or even if this planet will be here when and "IF" Kobe approaches 30,000 points, etc.

Also, you're right on when it comes to social, economic, and even fashion issues that Mike changed!! Kobe most likely won't have much of any effect on those issues like Mike did.


----------



## TheRifleman (May 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>KennethTo</b>!
> Jazzy mentioned this, but<b> SG was VERY weak position in the 80's...</b>it's probably the strongest position in the league right now, if not then tied for PF in terms of talent at a position.


REALLY? Ponder the shooting percentages and height and ppg and tell me it was so weak back when Mike was a newby. It doesn't look all that much different to me. 


1984/85 season: Some guards besides Mike

Celtics - Ainge - 12.9 PPG @ 53 fg% , 6'4
6ers - Andrew Toney - 17.8 ppg @ 49FG% , 6'3
nets - Michael Ray Richardson - 20.1 ppg @ 47fg% , 6'5
Washington - Jeff Malone - 18.9 ppg @ 50fg% , 6'4
Knicks - Darrell Walker (defensive guy life Christie) - 13.5 ppg @ 43fg% , 6'4
Bucks - Sidney Moncrief - 21.7 ppg @ 48 fg% , 6'4
Pistons - John Long - 14.7 ppg @ 49 fg% , 6'5
Cavs - World B Free - 22.5 ppg @ 46 fg% , 6'2
Hawks - Eddie Johnson - 16.3 ppg @ 48 fg% , 6'2
Pacers - Vern Fleming - 14.1 ppg @ 47 fg% , 6'5
Nuggets - Fat Lever - 12.8 ppg @ 43 fg% , 6'3
Houston - Lewis Lloyd - 13.1 ppg @ 53 fg%, 6'6
Mavericks - Rolando Blackman - 19.7 ppg @ 51 fg%, 6'6
Spurs - George Gervin - 21.2 ppg @ 51 fg%, 6'7
Jazz - Darrell Griffith - 22.6 [email protected] 46 fg% , 6'4
KC Kings - Reggie Theus - 16.4 ppg @ 49 fg% , 6''7
Lakers - Byron Scott - 16.0 ppg @ 54 fg% , 6'3
Portland - Clyde Drexler - 17.2 ppg @ 49 fg% , 6'7
Phoenix - Walter Davis - 15.0 [email protected] 45 fg%, 6'6
Clippers - Derek Smith - 22.1 ppg @ 54 fg%, 6'7
Sonics - Al Wood - 15.0 [email protected] 49 fg% , 6'6
Golden State - Eric Floyd - 19.5 [email protected] 44 fg%, 6'3


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Bball_Doctor</b>!
> 
> 
> Actually there was one before Pip, MJ played the playmaker role. For one season he basically played the point and averaged 8 rpg and 8 apg that season. MJ was never really offensively 1 dimension becuz he had shown he could play Pip's role in his early years and do it better than both Kobe or Pip seriously. Of course when Pip developed MJ and the Bulls took advantage of that but MJ still setup a lot of plays in the half court but Pip was the main ballhandler going up court. MJ still averaged the same amount of assists as Kobe when Pip assumed the main ballhandler. I still don't think Kobe involves his teammates nearly as good as MJ or even TMac although he gets more apg than TMac but not by much. MJ might not have scored 37 ppg against more athletic defenders but he did it against better and deeper teams. Also players like Dumars, Cooper, G Wilkins, and DJ are much better defenders than many of the SGs of today. Fact is that no one could stop MJ....only a team could as evident by the 63 dropped against arguably the best team that year...the Celtics. They threw everybody against MJ...doubled him...tripled him and he still blew pass defenders. There is no question for anyone who has watched MJ during that age was much better than Kobe at the same age. The difference is that Kobe won more. Also MJ had a better midrange jumper...much better than Kobe did at the same age but Kobe has more range. Kobe is stonger than MJ at this age....MJ was reallllllyyyy skinny. But MJ was deadly quick...MJ was a taller AI...I was the first to say that months months ago. You are on the dot though when you said
> "I will say it now and continue to say it. Kobe Bryant isn't as talented as MJ is period"...on the DOT.:yes:



I'll acknowledge a few of your points that I agree with 1st. 

MJ did fullfill the Pip role. You're correct. He did. BUT I remeber watching him play that role and he turned the ball over too much and the role was very forced and uncomfortable in the way he ran their offense. But I agree he did do an okay job in that role. 

Now the points I disagree with

MJ is much better than Kobe is at this age. That'd would be very in correct. MJ wasn't much better than Kobe at no point . He is netter but only to a small degree not the large degree you mention. 

Listen I don't know how old you were when MJ was 24 but I was in highschool at the time. MJ's legend distorts people's perception of him as a player in the early days. KOBE AT 24 HAS A much BETTER BASKETBALL IQ THAN MJ DID AT 24. There's no doubt in my mind about that. MJ would have stretches where he just totally isolated open teammates and forced shots time and time again. It wasn't all rosy as people seem to think looking at stats. I witnessed it. MJ was known as a dunking ,scorer who had no idea of what teamwork was. And thats accurate. Kobe is more prepared at 24 to understand the pro game at 24 because he was in the game longer because he skipped collge. MJ had no idea what championship level basketball was. He would overlook teammates, ,gamble for steals , force up shots. He was doing this as a competitor but not because he was a bad teammate. Kobe knows what it took MJ the age of 30 to understand about winning. Yes there's the Shaq factor but there's a big Kobe factor also. So saying MJ was much better is inaccurate. Kobe's a legend in the making something I'm not sure people grasp. 

And Kobe does a much better job getting teammates involved than TMac does. Kobe forces shots because its required on the team he plays for at times ,the Lakers offense goes stale leaving him to create. 

Also MJ wasn't a better mid range shooter. Kobe's much better. MJ was better at attacking the basket only alittle better because he had alttle more hops that Kobe has. Kobe's mid range game is where MJ's was in his 30's. Mj at 24 his rnage didn't go out much further than 15 16 ft. 

Another thing I dispute the defenders of the 80's and that celtics teams defense. they had Ainge and DJ who guarded Mj most of that 63 pt game. It was impressive for the sheer numbers but as far as the challenge of the Celtics defense it wasn't there. DJ was an old school clutch and hand check defender, and Ainge while a good athlete was too small at 6-3 to compete with the taller more athletic MJ. DJ would be eaten alive by the Kobe's, Pierce's and TMac's. Lets look at this also. MJ never had a player like TMac as a contemporary. Kobe has a player in TMac thats also going to be one of the alltime greats at a lvel that MJ never had. Drexler was it and he was more like Pierce is as opposed to Tmac's dominance. Kobe's better than TMac but its close real close. MJ was WAY better than Drexler thats not the case with Kobe and TMac. 

Bottom line is MJ's just more talented and meant much more to the league than Kobe ever will but MJ's early years legend grows the further we get from it. He was great than but lets keep it in perspective he was in a different league at a different time. 

Kobe is a legend in the making a fact people have trouble accepting. Kobe has all the attributes of a legend and he has the will. But because of the similaritites to MJ people won't accecpt the obvious. 

As for breaking MJ's record, this is to everyone. 

Is it likely that Kobe will win a scoring title. Consider this TMac won the scoring title over Kobe with no real credible 2nd scorer. As his team improves his scoring numbers may dip. Kobe conversely may go up with Shaq in decline. Kobe's gonna play without Shaq at some point real soon and I think its likely he wins a scoring title. The man averaged 40ppg for a whole month. I think for at least 10 years Kobe will either finish 1st or 2nd in scoring at least 10 years maybe more.


----------



## IV (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TheRifleman</b>!
> 
> 
> REALLY? Ponder the shooting percentages and height and ppg and tell me it was so weak back when Mike was a newby. It doesn't look all that much different to me.
> ...


Athleticism is what sets this generation apart from them. You know you can't compare stats across era's of basketball. They dont apply.


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TheRifleman</b>!
> 
> 
> REALLY? Ponder the shooting percentages and height and ppg and tell me it was so weak back when Mike was a newby. It doesn't look all that much different to me.
> ...



Looking at those numbers consider this. There isn't one player other than MJ as a Guard who averaged over 25ppg. 

Tmac, Kobe, Pierce, AI, averaged over 25ppg this season with Kobe and TMac averaging 30+ppg. 

Stackhouse and Jalen Rose averaged right in there with the 21-22ppg guys of the 84-85 season. Allan Houston did also. Ray Allen averaged around 23ppg. 

MJ himself averaged about 20ppg. The quality is in these facts supports the fact that the players now are better and more athletic. 

Post the stats for this years sg's.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

i think what we've seen is that the 3's of yesterday have all improved their ballhandling and their range and become 2's. essentially, everyone wants to me mj, so that's what they work on. the 3's of today tend to either be tweeners or role players who didn't have the athleticism or skills to be a 2. what we don't have now are guys like aguirre, dantley, english, king, worthy or even nique, guys with more of a post and midrange game, using more strength, and mastering putting the ball in the hole.


----------



## Showtime84' (Oct 8, 2002)

And that's one of the THOUSANDS of reasons why FG%'s have dipped so much, everybody is trying to be a perimiter finess player, even the PF's and C's. Nobody tries to develop a reliable inside game anymore and that is really hurting the overall quality of the league.


----------



## tenkev (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Showtime84'</b>!
> And that's one of the THOUSANDS of reasons why FG%'s have dipped so much, everybody is trying to be a perimiter finess player, even the PF's and C's. Nobody tries to develop a reliable inside game anymore and that is really hurting the overall quality of the league.


I concur.


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

Celtics - Ainge - 12.9 PPG @ 53 fg% , 6'4
6ers - Andrew Toney - 17.8 ppg @ 49FG% , 6'3
nets - Michael Ray Richardson - 20.1 ppg @ 47fg% , 6'5
"Washington - Jeff Malone - 18.9 ppg @ 50fg% , 6'4
Knicks - Darrell Walker (defensive guy life Christie) - 13.5 ppg @ 43fg% , 6'4
Bucks - Sidney Moncrief - 21.7 ppg @ 48 fg% , 6'4
Pistons - John Long - 14.7 ppg @ 49 fg% , 6'5
Cavs - World B Free - 22.5 ppg @ 46 fg% , 6'2
Hawks - Eddie Johnson - 16.3 ppg @ 48 fg% , 6'2
Pacers - Vern Fleming - 14.1 ppg @ 47 fg% , 6'5
Nuggets - Fat Lever - 12.8 ppg @ 43 fg% , 6'3
Houston - Lewis Lloyd - 13.1 ppg @ 53 fg%, 6'6
Mavericks - Rolando Blackman - 19.7 ppg @ 51 fg%, 6'6
Spurs - George Gervin - 21.2 ppg @ 51 fg%, 6'7
Jazz - Darrell Griffith - 22.6 [email protected] 46 fg% , 6'4
KC Kings - Reggie Theus - 16.4 ppg @ 49 fg% , 6''7
Lakers - Byron Scott - 16.0 ppg @ 54 fg% , 6'3
Portland - Clyde Drexler - 17.2 ppg @ 49 fg% , 6'7
Phoenix - Walter Davis - 15.0 [email protected] 45 fg%, 6'6
Clippers - Derek Smith - 22.1 ppg @ 54 fg%, 6'7
Sonics - Al Wood - 15.0 [email protected] 49 fg% , 6'6
Golden State - Eric Floyd - 19.5 [email protected] 44 fg%, 6'3"

To me that shows either
A) Jordan's shooting percentage was not that impressive taking into account that the style of game back then allowed for higher shooting percentages in general
B) Defense at the SG wasn't very high
C) all of the above


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>KennethTo</b>!
> To me that shows either
> A) Jordan's shooting percentage was not that impressive taking into account that the style of game back then allowed for higher shooting percentages in general
> B) Defense at the SG wasn't very high
> C) all of the above


Very interesting points. I hear people pointing to the lower FG% of today's players and saying that they don't know how to shoot...etc. I think the lower FG% of today's perimeter players has more to do with longer, quicker athletes than it does with a lack of fundamentals. The basketball court is still the same size but now you've got bigger, quicker guys playing on it so it becomes more difficult to operate. Sure there are guys who don't have a clue out there but superstars like Kobe, TMac, and AI all shoot less than 50% form the field and I think they're as talented as anyone. I didn't watch alot of ball back in the 80's but I'll bet it's alot harder to get an open look at the basket now than it was back then. It's probably also harder to get to the rack now.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

i don't think anyone can argue it's not a bit of both. imo, clearly, kids spend far more time today developing perimeter skills. pre-mj and magic, size was a big dictator in the role you were going to play. therefore, if you were small, you developed perimeter skills, if you were medium, you developed the mid game, if you were tall you developed the post game. working and focusing on these things makes you better at it. now, you've got no boundaries. 7 footers can play anywhere. gm's and scouts become infatuated with all-around ability (re: non-specialized, but typically freakishly athletic). the minimizing of the college game, where you have to learn to score against multiple types of defenses, and the ability to get a high draft position without a proven ability to put the ball and help your team win in college (it's more important to prove you've got the skills), further contribute to the erosion of non-perimeter skills. aau and traveling all-star games contributes further.

so yes, you have better overall athletes as gm's look for those types of players more (and potential is valued more than a proven commodity - not being judgemental with this one, just a comment - i'd go for the potential as well in many cases). but it is at an expense.


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kflo</b>!
> i don't think anyone can argue it's not a bit of both. imo, clearly, kids spend far more time today developing perimeter skills. pre-mj and magic, size was a big dictator in the role you were going to play. therefore, if you were small, you developed perimeter skills, if you were medium, you developed the mid game, if you were tall you developed the post game. working and focusing on these things makes you better at it. now, you've got no boundaries. 7 footers can play anywhere. gm's and scouts become infatuated with all-around ability (re: non-specialized, but typically freakishly athletic). the minimizing of the college game, where you have to learn to score against multiple types of defenses, and the ability to get a high draft position without a proven ability to put the ball and help your team win in college (it's more important to prove you've got the skills), further contribute to the erosion of non-perimeter skills. aau and traveling all-star games contributes further.
> 
> so yes, you have better overall athletes as gm's look for those types of players more (and potential is valued more than a proven commodity - not being judgemental with this one, just a comment - i'd go for the potential as well in many cases). but it is at an expense.


I agree with this for the most part good points in there especially about aau situations. Kids play too much summer ball and spend less time being gym rats ala Chris Mullin. Being locked in a gym by yourself develop's skills more than anything or any number of non defensive playing summer ball. Gaining confidence drilling and working on shooting can take your game to another level.


----------



## Marcus13 (Jul 17, 2002)

Kobe is done, over, complete, besides he said he's retiring in around 5 years already anyway


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Marcus13</b>!
> Kobe is done, over, complete, besides he said he's retiring in around 5 years already anyway


Kobe is complete but he's far from being done and over. Shaq is more likely to retire in a few years. I think Kobe will keep playing well into his 30's. He loves basketball way too much to give it up.


----------



## rynobot (Oct 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Marcus13</b>!
> Kobe is done, over, complete, besides he said he's retiring in around 5 years already anyway


I think you confused him with Shaq. Shaq is retirning in probably 3 years MAX.


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

To return the topic of Kobe Bryant's skills having peaked...

If anything, Kobe's game has shown us how much the game has changed, as well as how different Kobe is from Jordan.

I'd say that Kobe is looking like a more athletic Clyde Drexler more than anyone. A 6-7 SG with a SMOOTH game, with a silky jumper and some nice handles. He is also a stingy defender and a good passer. Look up their stats, they are really similar from 3-6 years in the league. VERY similar. High assists, good rebounding...

Everyone knocks on Kobe not being as explosive as Jordan. But it's true. He's not. He still gets the job done without being "explosive". And that instantly makes me think of the Glide.

ANYWAY.

That having been said,

Kobe's still got quite a career in front of him. Another 8 years of prime production and then another 4 of great veteran leadership.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Showtyme</b>!
> Everyone knocks on Kobe not being as explosive as Jordan. But it's true. He's not. He still gets the job done without being "explosive". And that instantly makes me think of the Glide.


Actually I'd say he's alot more explosive than he's been in the past. He's was always fairly explosive but more of a glider than anything else like Clyde. But this year with the added muscle he's a quicker and more powerful leaper than he's been in years past. Some of the dunks he's thrown down this year he wouldn't have been able to do in years past. That being said MJ was definately a step faster and quicker than Kobe at the same age.


----------



## JOHNNY_BRAVisimO (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>jazzy1</b>!
> 
> Before alls said and done Kobe will eclipse most of MJ's records but won't surpass MJ's legend simply for the fact that Kobe won't change the game from a social, economic, *and even a fashion standpoint like MJ did*. He took the league to anothet level. And I don't think the league has another level to reach. This is as good as the League's gonna get when it comes to those things.


Michael Jordan Cologne mmmmm...


----------



## TheRifleman (May 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>jazzy1</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You named about 9 players from 29 teams that had 20+. I named 6 from <b>23 teams</b> that had over 20+ ppg

To say that Drexler, Michael Ray Richardson, Darrell Griffith, Rolando Blackman , and Gervin were NOT great athletes is not a fair analysis, imho.


----------



## TheRifleman (May 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>jazzy1</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Well if MJ missed so many shots, you'd think his shooting percentage would have been under 40%, it was NOT. As far as team work, his assists in 84/85 to a team of not great scorers was still 6APG, so I think he understood the game. BTW - I am old enough to have seen not only MJ, but players from the late 60s and the 70s.


----------



## Bball_Doctor (Dec 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>jazzy1</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You were older than me by a couple years when you watched MJ but I disagree with many of the things you said. MJ did often isolate his teammates especially during those 37 ppg and 35 ppg runs but did u see his teammates???? MJ never had a player like Shaq to relief pressure of him. Also MJ scored 63 against DJ who is considered by many as one of the greatest defenders of all time. I watched that game and they sent everybody against MJ and no one could stop him. MJ's IQ vs. Kobe's IQ is debatable. Kobe has the tutorship of Phil much before MJ did. There is no question before the Phil days of both players who had a better IQ...MJ. MJ did have his number of turnovers when he did Pip's role but let's compare to Kobe:

02-03 Kobe (5.9 apg, 3.51 tpg, 1.7 assists to TO ratio)
88-89 MJ (8.0 apg, 3.58 tpg, 2.2 assists to TO ratio)

These are their best apg years. Is Kobe a much better playmaker than MJ...even that is debatable becuz Kobe plays is a much refined system than MJ did before Phil. Like I said this is another Phil factor here. But the truth is that MJ had more apg than Kobe playing the SG/PG role and had the same amount of apg as Kobe even when Pip took over that role. 

Does Kobe really get his teammates involved better than TMac? Let's see, it is generally known that when a player scores more their apg go down right? After the allstar break was when Kobe's apg saw a dramatic droppage...obviously due to his higher scoring but yet TMac also scored at a higher pace...much higher infact after the allstar break...34.5 to 31.8 ppg...and yet had more apg than he did before AS break. Let's see for the year:

TMac 5.5 apg, 2.6 tpg, 2.1 assists to TO ratio
Kobe 5.9 apg, 3.5 tpg, 1.7 assists to TO ratio

From the games I have seen TMac is less selfish than Kobe but not by much. It is definitely arguable who got their teammates involved better but it is not like what most people make it seem...Kobe is a much much better player who gets his teammates involved. I am not saying playmaking here but who gets their teammates involved. 

Kobe has a better midrange than MJ...ARE U KIDDING??? Sure MJ drove alot especially his rook year but he had a very good midrange ever since North Carolina. He midrange game was deadly as evident by his shooting percentage. Sure you can argue the whole perimeter thing here so let's minus Kobe's 3 point attempts...he still shot .465 this year minus 3 pointer attempts. Kobe has more range than MJ but by no means did Kobe have a better midrange game than MJ at the same age. Also 15-18 feet is considered midrange but I agree with you MJ got more range as he got older but his midrange at 24 was better and more consistent than Kobe's. Consistency is the key here. MJ contemparies were the elite of the league...he wanted to beat Magic and Bird. Kobe vs. TMac is not as intense as when either of those three got together although it is a rivalry in the brewing. Also MJ had Nique and those two put up miraculous indivdual performances vs. each other. 

I am not one of those people who make MJ's early day legend grow...in fact I never liked MJ in those days. I said he shot to much but compared to today's elite...cuz they shoot as much...MJ was more consistent. Infact when MJ scored 37 ppg he took 27 shots a game. When AI took that many shots he only scored 31 ppg. Look at MJ's 35 ppg year. I only took 24 spg and when both Kobe and TMac do it they don't even come close to that ppg average. So I begin to appreciate more today than yesterday.

I don't doubt Kobe is a future HOFer. Those who read my posts clearly know that I say Kobe is the most talented and skilled player in the league today. I have seen Kobe since HS and I said he would be a star and I laughed at the teams that passed him over in the draft. 

Also Kobe did averaged over 40 ppg a whole month but dropped to 28 ppg the next. That 40 ppg month was a streak and nothing more. Fans who idolize Kobe make it sound greater than it actually is although that was quite an acheivment. There is no question that Kobe will one day lead the league in scoring. Heck I said that since he was in HS...that was how good of an offensive force I projected him to be. But he won't average 40 ppg a season! like most people are saying he could. That takes amazing stamina and intensity and if MJ could not do it I can't see Kobe doing it. No comparison here but the fact is that MJ is the most complete scorer ever and he couldn't score 40 ppg. Also that whole Shaq factor holds truth. Shaq takes a lot of attention off of Kobe and reliefs pressure off him. It is still to be seen if Kobe can be the player that he is with added pressure and double teams for a whole season. I think he can but even that is speculation. Truth is that we won't know until it happens.

Kobe is a great player and I have even said he has the capabilities to end up top 5 of alltime when all is said and done. However unlike many other fans who idolize Kobe and put him there now...I don't. That is why other posters hate so called "Kobe" fans...they reach to conclusions about his place in history too fast. The truth is that as good as I think Kobe is and I have since his HS play he has yet to have his own team. Imagine if Kobe does not succeed when Shaq leaves? Even if he scores 30 ppg what will it do to his legacy and image? Will he be like Nique? I think he will do well that is why I project him to be top 5 when all is said and done but that is a projection meaning not yet. Kobe still has a lot to prove...and winning without Shaq could be the biggest of them even BIGGER than what he does statistically when Shaq is gone.


----------



## bender (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Bball_Doctor</b>!
> Also Kobe did averaged over 40 ppg a whole month but dropped to 28 ppg the next. That 40 ppg month was a streak and nothing more. Fans who idolize Kobe make it sound greater than it actually is although that was quite an acheivment. There is no question that Kobe will one day lead the league in scoring. Heck I said that since he was in HS...that was how good of an offensive force I projected him to be. But he won't average 40 ppg a season! like most people are saying he could.


Is 35 ppg more realistic? If Shaq leaves the team (and he will before Kobe reaches his prime), there's no one else to score at least 15 ppg (maybe Kareem Rush). When MJ scored 37 ppg a season, he was the only one to score more than 15 ppg on his team. If Kobe has the _opportunity_ to attempt 30-35 shots a game (because no one else on his team can take them), won't he score that much, too?



> Originally posted by <b>Bball_Doctor</b>!
> ... Imagine if Kobe does not succeed when Shaq leaves? Even if he scores 30 ppg what will it do to his legacy and image? Will he be like Nique? I think he will do well that is why I project him to be top 5 when all is said and done but that is a projection meaning not yet. Kobe still has a lot to prove...and winning without Shaq could be the biggest of them even BIGGER than what he does statistically when Shaq is gone.


Wasn't it hard for any great player to lead his team to success _alone_? I can't remember a player to win a championship as the _only_ great player on his team. 86-87 scored 37 ppg, and his team finished 8th in the East. The Magic finished 8th, too, althought T-Mac dropped 32 a game.
Jordan needed Pippen to win his championships. Would he won them without Pippen? Probably not.
Imagine the Lakers with Kobe scoring 30 ppg and another guy who adds 20 (Kareem Rush, let's say). Could this team win? Don't know...


----------



## Bball_Doctor (Dec 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>bender</b>!
> 
> Is 35 ppg more realistic? If Shaq leaves the team (and he will before Kobe reaches his prime), there's no one else to score at least 15 ppg (maybe Kareem Rush). When MJ scored 37 ppg a season, he was the only one to score more than 15 ppg on his team. If Kobe has the _opportunity_ to attempt 30-35 shots a game (because no one else on his team can take them), won't he score that much, too?
> 
> ...


35 ppg is definitely more realistic but even you said if Kobe takes 30-35 shots. Another one of my arguments that MJ was special was that he took 27 shots to score 37 ppg. That is 3 more shots for Kobe. In fact in a previous post MJ has the lowest FGA/gm for any player who has scored 35 ppg. His 35 ppg season he took 24.4 shots per game. Kobe scoring 35 ppg is not an impossibility if he gets 30-35 shots. In fact if he doesn't score 35 ppg with 30-35 shots it would be a shame. That whole Shaq thing I was just basically trying to say that Kobe has more to prove and honestly even if he ends up with 30000+ points but fails to win a championship with a Shaqless team even with another good player would his legacy be great? or will he always be known as Shaq's sidekick his whole career. My point is don't rush to press judgement on Kobe's place in history...yet. Projections are fine but even projections are speculation. And I wasn't attacking Jazzy here becuz he said he is a legend in the making not a legend now. But I see a lot of Kobe posters coming to conclusions too fast.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Bball_Doctor</b>!
> 
> 
> You were older than me by a couple years when you watched MJ but I disagree with many of the things you said. MJ did often isolate his teammates especially during those 37 ppg and 35 ppg runs but did u see his teammates???? MJ never had a player like Shaq to relief pressure of him. Also MJ scored 63 against DJ who is considered by many as one of the greatest defenders of all time. I watched that game and they sent everybody against MJ and no one could stop him. MJ's IQ vs. Kobe's IQ is debatable. Kobe has the tutorship of Phil much before MJ did. There is no question before the Phil days of both players who had a better IQ...MJ. MJ did have his number of turnovers when he did Pip's role but let's compare to Kobe:
> ...


I agree with most of what you said.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Bball_Doctor</b>!
> 
> 
> 35 ppg is definitely more realistic but even you said if Kobe takes 30-35 shots. Another one of my arguments that MJ was special was that he took 27 shots to score 37 ppg. That is 3 more shots for Kobe. In fact in a previous post MJ has the lowest FGA/gm for any player who has scored 35 ppg. His 35 ppg season he took 24.4 shots per game. Kobe scoring 35 ppg is not an impossibility if he gets 30-35 shots. In fact if he doesn't score 35 ppg with 30-35 shots it would be a shame. That whole Shaq thing I was just basically trying to say that Kobe has more to prove and honestly even if he ends up with 30000+ points but fails to win a championship with a Shaqless team even with another good player would his legacy be great? or will he always be known as Shaq's sidekick his whole career. My point is don't rush to press judgement on Kobe's place in history...yet. Projections are fine but even projections are speculation. And I wasn't attacking Jazzy here becuz he said he is a legend in the making not a legend now. But I see a lot of Kobe posters coming to conclusions too fast.


remember the league shot 48% in '88 when jordan scored 35ppg. his 37 ppg season he shot at the league average. the league average now 44%.

i think it's pretty clear kobe's no sidekick. these titles he's been a part of are real, and they count. if he doesn't win a title as a lone ranger, it'll probably effect his legacy, but his legacy will likely still be pretty strong. nobody wins alone.


----------



## Bball_Doctor (Dec 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kflo</b>!
> 
> 
> remember the league shot 48% in '88 when jordan scored 35ppg. his 37 ppg season he shot at the league average. the league average now 44%.
> ...


As far as shooting percentage I am comparing career not just one season. The league shot higher becuz there were less three point attempts and post offence was stronger then. We don't see many great post offensive players anymore besides for Shaq and Duncan. I never criticized Kobe's shooting. In fact it is above average for today's league you are right but I am comparing accuracy and consistency between MJ and Kobe even minus Kobe's 3 point attempts. MJ's midrange jumper is very consistent and arguably his greatest weapon in those 32000 points he scored.

I never called Kobe a sidekick. My point is where would Kobe's legacy be if he does not succeed when Shaq is gone and he is the main man? That is the question I pose to every Kobe fan who already ranks him top 5 alltime and are reaching to conclusions too fast. Heck nobody at least not me considered MJ the greatest until he won and won convincingly. There was no question that MJ was a great player but just imagine if he did not win a championship...what would his legacy be? Most people know I am a Kobe fan...hell I got attacked for saying his was the most skilled and talented player in the league when the Lakers were still losing on this board. I am not hating on Kobe here but I find some fans of his to be ridiculous...Kobe is no where top 5 all time...not even close...to say that would be an insult to many of the greatest players. I honestly do not believe Kobe's legacy will be strong if he does not win without Shaq. It would definitely effect his position on the alltime greats. Kobe is a very good player but please people don't call him the greatest yet...becuz you might be eating your words ten years from now.


----------

