# Kobe vs Jordan Espn Poll.



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

I just wanna say why did the idiots over at espn.com even post such a ridiculos Poll. the poll asks who would you rather pick Jordan in his prime or Kobe right now, the results are pretty lopsided toward jordan its like Jordan 86% to Kobe at 13% look for your self at http://msn.espn.go.com/main.html


----------



## ChiBullsFan (May 30, 2002)

I don't think it's that crazy a suggestion.

As muhc as I love Jordan, I think Kobe may go down as the best NBA player in history when all is said and done.

If you think about everything that MJ has accomplished, it was damn impressive, but most of it came after age 27. Kobe is only 24 and ALREADY has 3 rings, almost 10,000 career points, a few first team all NBA and all defensive team selections.

When all is said and done, Kobe will easily be the #1 scorer in the history of the NBA, and will have who knows how many rings, gold medals, MVP awards, etc. He will compare favorably with Jordan.

What will likely separate the two in the end is the dramatics. Will Kobe be able to stack up against Jordan when you look at their memorable or clutch moments? It's hard to think of anybody doing it, but if anyone can it is probably Kobe.


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

i also think its a fair proposal. kobe probably won't ever score over 37 ppg for a season but anything's possible.


----------



## Michael Jackson (Jun 11, 2002)

Kobe won't surpass Jordan although I think Kobe will be considered top five or at least top ten(all-time) in the game when it is all said and done but he hasn't changed the game like Jordan did. He isn't better than Jordan. He is a Belt Notch below Jordan which though is closer than anyone else is


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ChiBullsFan</b>!
> I don't think it's that crazy a suggestion.
> 
> As muhc as I love Jordan, I think Kobe may go down as the best NBA player in history when all is said and done.
> ...


You are forgetting one big thing buddy micheal Jordan never had Shaq Oneal on his team. Shaq maybe the greatest Center of all time, so it would be unfair to compare Jordan when he was 24 against Kobe, Kobe went to a team that Had Oneal, and solid veterens in rick fox,Robert horry, etc. the lakers are well below 500 without Oneal in the lineup, when jordan was drafted by the bulls their current Roster could not even compare to Shaq alone. So when Kobe starts playing dominating ball on a team where he is the man and not oneal then i will give him credit, but untill then the poll speaks for its self , over 80% of the people belive Jordan in his prime is better then Kobe now, and belive me Kobe is in his prime belive it or not, once oneal retires and the NBA starts bringing in better talented players, you will see that Kobe is nowhere near as good as KOBE.


----------



## ChiBullsFan (May 30, 2002)

bizkit,

I'm sick of hearing the "Jordan didn't have Shaq on his team" argument. Kobe can't help that. And it's not like Shaq carried them to Championships either. Kobe was an equal partner. He deserves at least as much credit for the Lakers titles as Scottie does for the Bulls titles.

The thing about Kobe is that he has pretty much ALREADY put together a hall of fame career with his awards, championships and statistics (ok, maybe he'd need a few more years playing to be considered, but you get the point). Kobe has done a lot and he's ONLY 24.

He still has an entire career ahead of him without Shaq (say, by time he reaches age 26 or 27). I feel he will likely carry his own team to its share of championships, while averaging 30+ ppg.

When you compare 24 year old Kobe to 24 year old Jordan, I think an argument can be made for Kobe being better. Jordan was a more dominant scorer (though Kobe is proving he is too), but Kobe shows more maturity in his game than MJ at that age. His all around skills are more advnaced I think. If he is this good at 24, don't you think he will be significantly better in his prime around ages 27-29?

I have little doubt Kobe will outproduce Jordan for his career in terms of major awards and total statistical output. I think he will match, if not exceed MJ's championships. And he will collect some rings as the clear top dog on his team in the future.

Like I said, the one thing that it will be hard to outdo MJ in is the dramatics. Will Kobe have the memorable moments to compare to Jordan? If he does, he will porbably go down as the best player in NBA history.


----------



## Michael Jackson (Jun 11, 2002)

Yeah I really really really tire of the Jordan didn't have Shaq comment. Well Kobe didn't have Pippen. Pippen was considered the best player in Basketball the year and ½ Jordan was out. He only lost two more games than with Jordan the previous year and was so close to a Finals where they could ahve manhandled a poorly playing Rockets team.

I don't think Kobe is better than Jordan but the Shaq thing grows old


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ChiBullsFan</b>!
> bizkit,
> 
> I'm sick of hearing the "Jordan didn't have Shaq on his team" argument. Kobe can't help that. And it's not like Shaq carried them to Championships either. Kobe was an equal partner. He deserves at least as much credit for the Lakers titles as Scottie does for the Bulls titles.
> ...


I did not see Kobe Bryant single handedly beat The Kings last year, Jordan has single handedly changed many games alone, but anyways Kobe may be close to micheal in scoring when he was 24 but Jordans Defense was 10 times more superior then Kobe its a joke to even consider Kobe in NBA all defensive team! Kobe could not Guard Allen Iverson, he could not guard Tracy Magrady, he could not even guard Mike Bibby!! your telling me that this guy is an equal to Jordan!??? Jordan would have killed Kobe in his prime he would have shut down kobe easily, and dont get me started on Pippen, pippen was not seven foot two inches and over 330 pounds ok. anyways i think Kobe is way overrated this guy would not last if he had to go against Jordan,Pippen.Bird,Thomas,Drexler,even Gary payton in their primes, please! Just look at how many times Ron Artest has made Kobe look like a fool. You guys give Kobe to much credit, and another thing Shaq almost single handedly destroyed the NETS in the finals and has dominated in the Playoffs, i doubt the lakers would not have won 3 championships in row without Kobe, but without Shaq they would not go past the first round.


----------



## carver401 (Aug 24, 2002)

*KOBe*

You guys are pathetic, Kobe puts together a string of nice games(okay well really nice games) and your ready to hail him as the all time best. Jordan made the NBA what it is today, without Jordan Kobe would be nothing. I believe there is almost nothing conceivable that Kobe could do to ever be remember as great as Jordan, while Kobe may be considered the "Next Jordan" i think ill stick with the original.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

*Re: KOBe*



> Originally posted by <b>carver401</b>!
> You guys are pathetic, Kobe puts together a string of nice games(okay well really nice games) and your ready to hail him as the all time best. Jordan made the NBA what it is today, without Jordan Kobe would be nothing. I believe there is almost nothing conceivable that Kobe could do to ever be remember as great as Jordan, while Kobe may be considered the "Next Jordan" i think ill stick with the original.


Finaly!!!! Amen brother.


----------



## Michael Jackson (Jun 11, 2002)

*Re: KOBe*



> Originally posted by <b>carver401</b>!
> You guys are pathetic, Kobe puts together a string of nice games(okay well really nice games) and your ready to hail him as the all time best. Jordan made the NBA what it is today, without Jordan Kobe would be nothing. I believe there is almost nothing conceivable that Kobe could do to ever be remember as great as Jordan, while Kobe may be considered the "Next Jordan" i think ill stick with the original.


I agree Kobe is a notch down from Jordan but... He is the best player inn the game today. 

Oh by the way those of you who said Kobe couldn't Gaurd Iverson I think you will rememer MJ had a little problem with him too. Kobe has better competition at the SG than Jordan did. Jordan was a far better defender but he still needed Pip to guard Magic. 

I guess I get sick of everyone ripping Kobe like he is nothing. No Kobe is a Jordan wannabee and that is all he ever will be but that being said he is one hell of a player and if he were a Bull we all would be creamin our jeans


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

If Kobe was a Bull i would be happy, but once people say hes better then Jordan thats what gets me sick. he is a good player but he is not even close to Jordan, and right now i dont see Kobe even being better then Tracy Magrady, Iverson was showing off he said it himself, but also i think the Bulls won that game, but its not just about Kobe i have problems with the Media also saying that Yao Ming is better Now then Shaq was, you catch my point its not that i have something against them its just how bad the NBA is trying to Live a post Jordan era and trying to create the next big thing and not just letting it happen,


----------



## carver401 (Aug 24, 2002)

*Kobe*

If Kobe was on the Bulls they would be out of the playoffs early every year if they even made it. Kobe would be just like T-Mac except Chicago (Besides Jalen) has a worse supporting cast then Orlando does. He would get just as far as Mcgrady because he is a better player so he could make up for the less talent, but he would neve be abl to take his team deep in the playoffs.


----------



## ChiBullsFan (May 30, 2002)

I understand some of you guys want to protect MJ's legacy (hell I would too) but just because you don't like Kobe doesn't mean you shouldn't be willing to assess him fairly.

I don't particularly like Kobe, but I recognize how good he is. Yes, he IS a great defensive player bizkit. You think the people who voted him to the team don't know what they are talking about? Dr. Jack and David Aldridge are idiots? What about Kobe averaging 2.2 spg and 1 bpg? That's not impressive?

The Shaq argument is just plain dumb. EVERY great player who has ever won a championship has had another great player on that team. Bird had McHale and Parish. Magic had Kareem and Worthy. Jordan had Pippen. Russell had Cousy. Akeem had Drexler. Robinson had Duncan. That's just the way it is when it comes to winning championships. Have other talent doesn't diminish what you accomplish. Kobe has averaged 25-28 ppg during his championship run and you think it's OK to write that off because he had Shaq on the team???? That's absolutely ridiculous.

Anyway, bottom line: Kobe isn't MJ yet, but he very well could surpass him. And I'm not singing his praises because of one good stretch of games. I'm singing his praises because of his talent, accomplishments and above all AGE. The Kobe critics invariably ignore the fact that Kobe isn't even close to his prime yet. His career is only going onward and upward. 12-15 more years of doing what he's been doing will amount to the most impressive career in history. Period.

And just to put the doubters to rest, is there a legitimate reason to think Kobe won't be the top dog on future championship teams? I don't think his success is only due to Shaq, and Kobe will prove that in the future.


----------



## Jim Ian (Aug 6, 2002)

If you take 40+ shots a game, and score 50 points, I'm sorry, but I'm not that impressed. You SHOULD score 50 with that many shots. Just this last week, Houston scored 52 on just 26 shots. THAT'S far more impressive to me.


Call me when Kobe:

A) Averages 35+ for the whole season. Not 9 games. 82 Games.
or
B) Shoots over 50%.
or
C) Makes scab teamates look like fringe all-stars.

*
This is NOT a diss on Kobe, he is a top-8 player right now. 
*
But comparing him to Jordan.... I'm sorry.. It's not even an option at this point. 13% for Kobe is too much. Clearly 13% of voters are too young to have seen MJ play. And that's really too bad....


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ChiBullsFan</b>!
> I understand some of you guys want to protect MJ's legacy (hell I would too) but just because you don't like Kobe doesn't mean you shouldn't be willing to assess him fairly.
> 
> I don't particularly like Kobe, but I recognize how good he is. Yes, he IS a great defensive player bizkit. You think the people who voted him to the team don't know what they are talking about? Dr. Jack and David Aldridge are idiots? What about Kobe averaging 2.2 spg and 1 bpg? That's not impressive?
> ...


Kobe is not a good defender, 2 steals sure is good but he never changes the game with his defense like Jordan did, there is nothing to defend about Jordans Legacy, nothing that Kobe can do will ever make him Better then Jordan. I never said i dissliked Kobe i think hes a good player and is not a thug like the rest of the League, but to Vote Kobe in the 1st all defensive team ahead of RON ARTEST that is a Joke and that makes me vomit!


----------



## Jim Ian (Aug 6, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ChiBullsFan</b>!
> And just to put the doubters to rest, is there a legitimate reason to think Kobe won't be the top dog on future championship teams? I don't think his success is only due to Shaq, and Kobe will prove that in the future.


I agree that the future will tell on this.

I think you are severly underestimating Shaqs impact on Kobe's game. What you are dealing with here is one player feeding of another.

Pip fed off Jordan, and for periods of time, he could handle a team on his own. 

Kobe I see in much the same way. He can handle a team for periods, but he has yet to show me if he has the ability to lead, to make his teamates better. 

And without that ablilty... he won't be adding any rings past Shaqs retirerment...


But again, only time will tell.


----------



## carver401 (Aug 24, 2002)

*Kobe*

You say Kobe isnt even close to his prime, what will he average in his prime then a triple double? Or will it be more like you know about 47p 9 and 9. give me a break. Jordan was at his best i think about that age(maybe a little oldr)


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

*Re: Kobe*



> Originally posted by <b>carver401</b>!
> You say Kobe isnt even close to his prime, what will he average in his prime then a triple double? Or will it be more like you know about 47p 9 and 9. give me a break. Jordan was at his best i think about that age(maybe a little oldr)


I agree with you man i belive that most Kobe is the next jordan fans are the same people that say Lebron James is the Next Jordan so 1 year from now we are gonna have 2 jordans in this league wow omg not to mention Vince Carter, Magrady, etc give me a break people stop calling players that can dunk the next Jordans.


----------



## ChiBullsFan (May 30, 2002)

> You say Kobe isnt even close to his prime, what will he average in his prime then a triple double? Or will it be more like you know about 47p 9 and 9. give me a break. Jordan was at his best i think about that age(maybe a little oldr)


Come on, this is ridiculous. It's not about stats, it's about becoming a better player. Jordan's stats were much better at age 24-26 than during his championships. But wasn't he a better player during those championships?

Kobe's stats may not get any better than they are this year at 30/7/7, but he will surely become a better player and learn how to carry his team and lead his team to victories. If this stretch of great games shows us anything, it's that he is indeed learning this skill right now.




> I think you are severly underestimating Shaqs impact on Kobe's game. What you are dealing with here is one player feeding of another.
> 
> Pip fed off Jordan, and for periods of time, he could handle a team on his own.
> 
> ...


Everyone wants to believe that the great players simply CARRY teams on their back and that's just not true. Jordan tried to do this in the beginning of his career and failed. It wasn't until he got Pippen, Grant and Cartwright that he was able to succeed. EVERY great player that has won a championship has had another top 10 player on his team. T-Mac and Garnett have shown that you can't do it alone.

Now people want to cut down Kobe wihtout Shaq, but realistically, his team without Shaq is HANDS DOWN the worst supporting cast in the NBA. The team is built for the two of them to do all the scoring, so when you don't have one of them it is a much harder hole to cover. Even the best players need SOME support. ANd again, I'm not saying Kobe CAN carry a team yet. He is only 24. But he is showing sings that he can more and more every year and every game.

With a new supporting cast in the future... a decent inside presence like a Brad Miller, and a secondary scoring threat (a Mike Miller type) is just about all he will need to have a championship contending team.



> Kobe is not a good defender, 2 steals sure is good but he never changes the game with his defense like Jordan did, there is nothing to defend about Jordans Legacy, nothing that Kobe can do will ever make him Better then Jordan. I never said i dissliked Kobe i think hes a good player and is not a thug like the rest of the League, but to Vote Kobe in the 1st all defensive team ahead of RON ARTEST that is a Joke and that makes me vomit!


I'm sorry bizkit, but you are not an authority on this. You have a right to your opinion, but it is not the accepted opinion. The real experts all agree Kobe is one of the top defenders in the league. And again, he was on the all-NBA first team at age 22! Defense gets better with age. Whether you want to believe it or not, his defense is at least as good as MJ's at the same age. First team or not, Kobe is an excellent defender, and I don't really see why Ron Artest falls into this debate.


----------



## carver401 (Aug 24, 2002)

"The Real Experts" what a JOKE!


----------



## ChiBullsFan (May 30, 2002)

carver, if you don't think the consensus opinion of the people who get to vote for these awards counts, then I can't help you.

But mind you, these are the same people who voted MJ to the all-defensive 1st team every year.

And for the record, Dr.Jack and David Aldrdige, the two NBA experts who I respect the most, both sing the praises of Kobe's defense. I value their opinions as do most fans, but if you don't then I'll accept your right to disagree...


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

So chi bulls fan you telling me that Kobe Bryant is a better defender then Ron Artest? answer me that, and the people that vote in Kobe are persuaded by the NBA to vote for him, They are force feading us Kobe Bryant, I can tell you there are alot more people then Just me and Carver who dont think Kobe is as good as advertised, if kobe changes the league in the next 10 years then ill give him credit, but Jordan changed the game his very first year! If you say that Kobe is the closest thing to Jordan then your saying that Kobe right now is better then Bird in his prime, is better then Oscar Robertson, Is better then Dr J, is Better then Jerry West, is Better then 49 of the top 50 players of all time.


----------



## ChiBullsFan (May 30, 2002)

> So chi bulls fan you telling me that Kobe Bryant is a better defender then Ron Artest? answer me that, and the people that vote in Kobe are persuaded by the NBA to vote for him, They are force feading us Kobe Bryant, I can tell you there are alot more people then Just me and Carver who dont think Kobe is as good as advertised, if kobe changes the league in the next 10 years then ill give him credit, but Jordan changed the game his very first year! If you say that Kobe is the closest thing to Jordan then your saying that Kobe right now is better then Bird in his prime, is better then Oscar Robertson, Is better then Dr J, is Better then Jerry West, is Better then 49 of the top 50 players of all time.


First off, NOTHING about Kobe's selections to the all-defensive teams has anything to do with Artest. And there are several reasons why I am right. (1) the teams are based loosely on choosing two guards, two forwards and a center. Artest plays SF technically, but could be chosen as a guard, while Kobe is technically a SG, but I suppose could be chosen as a forward. Bottom line: no reason why both couldn't be selected on the same team. (2) Artest wasn't as good a defender two years ago as he is now, so maybe he didn't deserve a first team selection. (3) Artest was injured for a chunk of last year, and often that is enough justification to make make an all-NBA first team. (4) Artest will probably make it this year.

What is inherently wrong about your criticisms of Kobe is that you are putting him in the context of Jordan's entire career, when Kobe is only 24. If you compare them at the same age (SAME AGE) Kobe is more advanced than Jordan. Jordan did not change anything when he came into the league, believe it or not. You are probably too young to even recall when he stepped into the league. He was hyped like many great young players, but saying he "redefined" the game can only be said in retrospect. Had he not won the championships later in his career, people would not be saying that at all. Hindsight is always 20/20.

And as for this argument "If you say that Kobe is the closest thing to Jordan then your saying that Kobe right now is better then Bird in his prime, is better then Oscar Robertson, Is better then Dr J, is Better then Jerry West, is Better then 49 of the top 50 players of all time" where do I start with all its flaws? Your premise is all wrong. Im not saying that Kobe is better than Bird, etc in their primes. I am saying that he WILL BE better. Kobe has not yet hit his prime. And also, these players primes did not seem nearly as impressive until all is said and done. Once you become a legend, then you look back and realize how amazing these players are. It's harder to feel that with Kobe right now because he simply has not built up the history yet that these legends obviously has. But when you look back at Kobe's career, you will probably agree that his prime was truly legendary. Try using a little foresight. Put these player comparisons into the appropriate contexts.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

"I am saying that he WILL BE better" how can you say that Kobe will be Better then them, can you magically look into the future and see Kobe being better then All those great players? First of all when those players where playing in their prime there where far more better talent and better defense being played in the NBA back then than now. Take away the 3 championships from Kobe and tell me how is he Better now then Jordan? i will understand it if you are a huge Kobe fan just admitt it. Kobe Bryant is in his prime no doubt, I remember when people where saying that Penny Hardaway was going to be the best of all time, i bet you was thinking that also at the time, i bet you are gonna say that Lebron James will be the best player in the League also,i bet after Allen Iversons 2000-2001 season you said to yourself that he was gonna get better, but its not the happening his numbers have declined each year afterwards, Iam not saying that you dont know what you are talking about Chi fan or even trying to insult you because insulting is just ignorant, but i do have say that by you saying that kobe bryant will be better then 49 of the top 50 players off all time is ridiculous, its just not valid, and you cannot make that kind of a statement, How can you sit there and say that one day kobe will be better then Wilt Chamberlain, or magic johnson, or even Bill Russell, let alone Micheal Jordan, I dont even remember anyone who is on that list say that Kobe is the best or will even be the best, Barkley said that Jordan was the best ever, Pippen said it, Malone said it, even magic Johnson a former laker said it!


----------



## ChiBullsFan (May 30, 2002)

bizkit, go back to my original argument and you'll see why you are putting words into my mouth. First off, I am NOT a Kobe fan. At all. Seriously. I hate the Lakers and have no partiucular affinity for him. But I can recognize how good he is. His performance relative to his age at every given stage of his NBA career (except for perhaps his rookie year) is better than any other NBA player. Also, not a fan of Iverson, never have been. I could care less about Lebron -- it's way too early to start judging him. I'll need to see him play at least 2 or 3 season in the NBA before predicting where he'll place in history.

Now my actual argument is that Kobe MAY be better than MJ and has a very legitimate shot. Like I have said time and time again, more championships (which I think, but can't guarantee he'll get) and having some memorable, dramatic moments to compare with Jordan's will determine his ultimate place in history.

It will determine his place among the top 10 players of all time as well. I'm not calling him better than the Russell's and Chamberlain's just yet, but if I had to bet on it, then I would. I am not clairvoyant and obviously can't see the future. All I can do is PROJECT his future based on what we see now. At 24, I don't hesitate to say, Kobe has accomplished more and is a better player than ANY other player I have seen at that same age. If you think about that comment, you will see that it is very arguably true. Therefore, it's not at all unrealistic to project that he has a legit chance to be better than Jordan.

His career statistics (barring some injury) will be the best of all time. He will obliterate Kareem's scoring mark if he continues at this pace. And longevity does count when looking at greatness. It definitely counts to hall of fame voters. Kobe will have the stats and the career and the awards to back up a claim as best ever. It will be how many rings he gets later in his career and his falir for the dramatic that determine's his place.

Oh yeah, and shall I assume by your refusal to offer a rebuttal to the Artest argument, that you admit you were DEAD WRONG??? Yeah, I thought so...


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

for one dude you said not to talk about the Ron Artest topic wich i did not so now your saying that you shut me up about ron, first of all even in his rookie season Ron Artest played better defense then Kobe has period! his last season with the Bulls he dominated on defense, not statisticaly but the things he did that changed the game, this year you have seen what he is doing and i dont even think you can even compare Kobe and Artest on defense this year, so by just saying that why dont you say that Ron Artest will be the Best defender of all time. Kobe will not be scoring 45 points anight when hes 32 years old, when you look at the All time scoring list you see that the top 3 are Big Men, Jabbar, Malone, Wilt, imagine if Jordan Never retired 2 times imagine how many Points he would have today, kobe would never had a shot, the only reason Jabbar is still on top is because Jordan Retired twice, Also how many Championships would Jordan have if he never retired or if Krause never broke up the championship team, this conversation would not even be taking place. What about Tracy Magrady are you telling me that Kobe and Magrady arent having similar stats, what about Kevin Garnet i think he is better Kobe Bryant. i think a lot of players are better now then Kobe is and i think they will continue to be better then Kobe.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

Chi Bulls Fan. I mostly agree with you. However we disagree on one main point. Kobe will not play another 15 years in the NBA, and he might not even play another 10. Michael is 40 yes, but most people quickly forget that he gave himself several years off by RETIRING TWICE. Further, Kobe has endured playoff runs and championship wear and tear at a MUH MUCH earlier age. For example, while Kobe was winning his 1st championship, at the same age, MJ was playing a 30 game season (MAX) against lesser competition in college. If anything, the length of the NBA season, and Kobe having to endure it so early in his career, makes it all the more likely that he won't play past 35....ESPECIALLY if he becomes the man.

Also, as michael matured, believe me, though he was better at 28-31, he was also noticably slower, than he was at 24-27. That is why he changed his game and developed that patented unstoppable post game. But even at 30, Mike was just as fast and quick as Kobe is now. And yes, I was around and old enought to watch Mike even in college.

If Kobe experiences the same kind of drop off in speed and quickness as Michael did, (as he likely will again given the wear and tear that already exists on his body), then Kobe will have to become just as unstoppable as Michael was in the post. He can do it, but history is not on his side. Michael is the only GUARD that I have ever watched Get better for the first few years AFTER 30, than he was before, at least in my recollection. Drexler didn't, Dominique didn't, though you can argue that he was a forward. Bird didn't (though he still maintained a high level of excellence), Magic didn't (same as bird), Isaih didn't (same as magic), Vince has already dropped off the face of the earth. Remember eddie jones? AI has already slowed down (though he is still prolly the quickest), and so on and so on......it is likely to happen to Kobe as well.....


----------



## HAWK23 (Jul 1, 2002)

did you all notice they changed the poll on the main page from:

MJ in his Prime or Kobe now

TO

MJ at 24 yrs old or Kobe at 24 yrs old


those sneaky ESPN people


----------



## numlock (Feb 8, 2003)

chi on your profile it says you are born 80 and you remember mj so well from when you were 7?


He wasnt slagging off kobe when he first mentioned shaq but if he had stayed at charlotte or been at a similar team he could have similar numbers as he does now but not three rings. I cant see how it matters if he has 3 now much earlier than jordan got his first. 


Maybe kobes game is more similar to an older jordan (as you call it advanced) that could be because of his number of years in the league.


Some jordan "haters" like to mention how jordan mania was thrown in their face

I dont know what this proves but last season before jordans injury i think both he and kobe had similar numbers

chi wat is it that makes you think kobe will be better or is better at similar age? and please dont mention rings


----------



## DaFuture (Nov 5, 2002)

*The only reason why*

Michael Jordan averaged 37 points a game on 54% shooting. In case you did not know this most centers dont even have 54% shooting average and 37 points mostly on layups and drives to the baskets and a few jumpers speaks volumes about his explosiveness. Michael Jordan score 67 freakin points in a game that is about 1.4 points a minute. Unfreaking believable and believe this or not he only played about 35 minutes a game which puts it close to about 2 points a minute. If I remember correctly he took about 35 shots. Kobe should not be mentioned in the same breath as jordan 37 ppg 8 rpg and 6 apg is a stat line that will never be reproduced again and this is when teams actually played defense. Kobe:rotf: 


And the Shaq argument it is not his fault but when teams are hoping to shut down Shaq and betting that Kobe wont beat them I dont think that is a ringing endorsement of his skills. The Lakers were under 500 without Shaq when he comes back they start to make a push for the playoffs. Kobe=Dominique Wilkins playing with Kareem.

No potshots at other posters, please. -- DaBullz


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

lol they must have seen how lopsided it was. But i will still pick Jordan, look at it this way also if Jordan 24 and Playing in the league today he will even be better then when he was playing in the 80's and early 90's, Kobe has never faced the late 80's Detroit Pistons. and also i have not seen the Lakers face anyone in the finals like the bulls did, i mean just look at how good those Utah Jazz teams where they could have easily been back to back Champions, look at the Sonics with a younger Payton and a dominating Kemp, the suns, Portland,Lakers, how about all those tough battles with New York. Just look at the eastern conference now its getting better but its still bad, and a couple years ago it was Pathetic.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

*Re: The only reason why*



> Originally posted by <b>DaFuture</b>!
> Edited by DaBullz
> 
> Michael Jordan averaged 37 points a game on 54% shooting. In case you did not know this most centers dont even have 54% shooting average and 37 points mostly on layups and drives to the baskets and a few jumpers speaks volumes about his explosiveness. Michael Jordan score 67 freakin points in a game that is about 1.4 points a minute. Un freaking believable and believe this are not he only played about 35 minutes a game which puts it close to about 2 points a minute. Kobe should not be mentioned in the same breat h as jordan 37 ppg 8 rpg and 6 apg is a stat line that will never be reproduced again and this is when teams actually played defense. Kobe:rotf:
> ...


I agree with you 100% DaFuture,


----------



## ChiBullsFan (May 30, 2002)

> for one dude you said not to talk about the Ron Artest topic wich i did not so now your saying that you shut me up about ron, first of all even in his rookie season Ron Artest played better defense then Kobe has period! his last season with the Bulls he dominated on defense, not statisticaly but the things he did that changed the game, this year you have seen what he is doing and i dont even think you can even compare Kobe and Artest on defense this year, so by just saying that why dont you say that Ron Artest will be the Best defender of all time.


Your arguing technique needs improvement because you simply take things out of context, misquote and lend yourself to hyperbole.

(a) you should be smart enough to know that Artest wasn't going to make the all-NBA first team his rookie year, or 2nd year by virtue of the fact that he did not have a reputation yet, he wasn't as good of a defender yet (it always takes time to adjust to playing D in the NBA), and he played for the Bulls.

(b) I never said that Artest was a worse defender than Kobe. In fact, I would rate Artest as the #1 or #2 defender in the league alongside Ben Wallace, and I'd rate Kobe somehwere between #4 and #6. Why do you ASSUME that thinking Kobe is a great defender says anything about Artest??? And I never said Kobe would be the best defender of all time, just that he is currently a great defender and will likely go down as one of the better defenders of all time. Honestly, Artest probably will as well, though that reputation simply won't go as far because he is not the all around talent that Kobe is. Not to take anything away from Artest.



> Kobe will not be scoring 45 points anight when hes 32 years old, when you look at the All time scoring list you see that the top 3 are Big Men, Jabbar, Malone, Wilt, imagine if Jordan Never retired 2 times imagine how many Points he would have today, kobe would never had a shot, the only reason Jabbar is still on top is because Jordan Retired twice, Also how many Championships would Jordan have if he never retired or if Krause never broke up the championship team, this conversation would not even be taking place.


Kobe will never be scoring 45 ppg. BUT, he already has 9800+ points. Kareem's career mark is 38,000. If Kobe averages just 25 ppg over an average of 80 games per season (2000 points per season), he will eclipse Kareem in roughly 14 more seasons (when he'd be 38). If he can hold an average of say 27 or 28 ppg, Kobe would do it in around 12 years, by age 36. Very much in reach and very very likely. For the record, if Jordan never retired he MAYBE would have broken Kareem's record. He missed about 3.5 seasons to retirement so if he had averaged 2000 points per season during these years his average would come close to Kareem's (Jordan is at 31,600 now).

As for the championships... woulda shoulda coulda. He didn't win more and that's what matters. Blame it on Krause if you want, but Jordan CHOSE to retire.



> What about Tracy Magrady are you telling me that Kobe and Magrady arent having similar stats, what about Kevin Garnet i think he is better Kobe Bryant. i think a lot of players are better now then Kobe is and i think they will continue to be better then Kobe.


I think both of those players are great. KG is not in the same league as Kobe though. He is the equivalent of a Malone or Barkley to a Michael Jordan. All time great? Yes. As good as the Michael? no. Tracy has a more legit claim to the throne, though to be honest Kobe's defense and rings clearly set him apart right now. Part of how you rank is talent, and part is accomplishments. Talentwise they are very very close. Accomplishments are clearly in favor of Kobe.

You can continue to discount Kobe because of Shaq and continue these hypotheticals, but what matters is what actually HAPPENS in a players career. Kobe is ACCOMPLISHING things at an early age and is setting himself apart from others in history already. He is a winner. Period. He has the rings. And he had a big part ot do with those rings. And that matters.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>thebizkit69u</b>!
> lol they must have seen how lopsided it was. But i will still pick Jordan, look at it this way also if Jordan 24 and Playing in the league today he will even be better then when he was playing in the 80's and early 90's, Kobe has never faced the late 80's Detroit Pistons. and also i have not seen the Lakers face anyone in the finals like the bulls did, i mean just look at how good those Utah Jazz teams where they could have easily been back to back Champions, look at the Sonics with a younger Payton and a dominating Kemp, the suns, Portland,Lakers, how about all those tough battles with New York. Just look at the eastern conference now its getting better but its still bad, and a couple years ago it was Pathetic.


Actually Biskit you bring up an interesting point. One that was conveniently ignored in the NBA forum, when I made it two weeks ago. That is that Handchecking is not allowed today. The physical nature of the late 80' s and early 90's is a thing of the past (exception: Pacers/Nets). The stars in todays league, enjoy an unprecedented amount of protection from the refs....When people talk about how much protection micheal enjoyed to them I say, yes he did.....but not against the pistons and knicks, who basically took to simply trying to beat his *** every time he touched the ball. KObe has yet to experience that brand of physical defense and play....and I doubt he ever will experience it. I don't think we'll ever see a "THE KOBE RULES"...:no:


----------



## ChiBullsFan (May 30, 2002)

DaFuture,


I'm tryin to make a rational argument based on objective POV. I love MJ and don't even like Kobe, but I think I make a fair argument. Who cares if he "would have" went to Duke. He didn't, so I have no loyalty there.



bizkit,

defense in the NBA is much better now than it ever was in the 1980s. One of the main reasons why FG% is so much lower today. Players are bigger, better athletes, more muscular, tougher. Watch an old game. It's sad how far guys would play off their opponents and how little contact there was underneath.

Why do you think scores were often in the 120s and 130s? And this is a commonly accepted belief among basketball pundits. It is plainly visible. Yes, it sounds good for your argument to cite the Bad Boys, but as good as they were on defense, they are not nearly as imposing as todays defenders.

No potshots at other posters, please. -- DaBullz


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

i'm with chibullsfan on this one. i've been both an MJ hater and a kobe hater in my days but i've learned to step back and appreciate the best in basketball. kobe is very much on par with MJ at the same age, with a more complete skillset and championship experience. if MJ were in the L today (at 24) i would expect him to be putting up around 30 to 33 points per game which is pretty close to kobe's clip (all speculation of course). however, there are some many facets of kobe's game that are superior to MJ's at the same time, namely shooting, ballhandling, and passing. of course, jordan has his advantages too.

has kobe surpassed MJ? no

is kobe better at the age of 24? it's very comparable

will kobe end up with the "better" career? it's possible


----------



## DaFuture (Nov 5, 2002)

*If you put McGrady on the Lakers*

they would have won more games, Shaq would actually like him, and the lakers would not even be touched as they trounced their way through the league. The Lakers are not even better than the early Pistons. Shaq thinks things are toungh now, those Pistons would have killed his @$$. He probably would not be able to walk after 2 games.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

> Kobe will never be scoring 45 ppg. BUT, he already has 9800+ points. Kareem's career mark is 38,000. If Kobe averages just 25 ppg over an average of 80 games per season (2000 points per season), he will eclipse Kareem in roughly 14 more seasons (when he'd be 38). *If he can hold an average of say 27 or 28 ppg, Kobe would do it in around 12 years, by age 36. Very much in reach and very very likely.* For the record, if Jordan never retired he MAYBE would have broken Kareem's record. He missed about 3.5 seasons to retirement so if he had averaged 2000 points per season during these years his average would come close to Kareem's (Jordan is at 31,600 now).



I already addressed this. It is highly likely that he WONT be around that long.



> You can continue to discount Kobe because of Shaq and continue these hypotheticals, but what matters is what actually HAPPENS in a players career. Kobe is ACCOMPLISHING things at an early age and is setting himself apart from others in history already. He is a winner. Period. He has the rings. And he had a big part ot do with those rings. And that matters.



I agree. But what if Tmac ends up in saaaaayyyyy.......Minnesota.....or (god forbid) San Antonio, after next season. Kobe can in effect resign himself to the rings he already has for the rest of his career, because at that point he won't be winning anymore....and the pendulum will have swung decisively in Tmacs favor by the time they are 30. WHat will the people be saying then? Will they be trying to forcefeed us more Tmac like they do Kobe now?

The point of this post is that speculating about who is the best currently is useless with so much of both people's career left.

ONe other note. The more I see similarities in Kobe and Michaels game (there are some), the more I see differences in the GAME at the time they were playing. This league has more talent today, but the rules made it harder for Michael than bacck then than they do for Kobe today....


----------



## DaFuture (Nov 5, 2002)

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



The answer is simple players today do not know how to shoot . Something our two starting pgs dont seem to be able to do now. People played as team. There was less isolation and more ball movement and passing. Players today are better athletes not neccesarily better basketball players.


----------



## ChiBullsFan (May 30, 2002)

> they would have won more games, Shaq would actually like him, and the lakers would not even be touched as they trounced their way through the league. The Lakers are not even better than the early Pistons. Shaq thinks things are toungh now, those Pistons would have killed his @$$. He probably would not be able to walk after 2 games.


If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle. If MJ didn't have Pippen he wouldn't have won any championships. These are hypotheticals. 

This does nothing to undermine what Kobe HAS accomplished. Because that is what matters.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

I think people underrate how easy it is to "HOLD" a defender or impede his progress by handchecking...wasn't that outlawed around the time Kobe entered the league?? Try it. It is damn near impossible to go around someone who is essentially HOLDING you with his hand. It was legal and used frequently against mike. THe league wasn't more physical during the 80's, but the bad boys and Knicks were more physical with JORDAN, than ANY TEAM HAS EVER BEEN WITH KOBE....and its because THEY were ALLOWED to be that way. They were allowed to play that way....


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ChiBullsFan</b>!
> 
> 
> Your arguing technique needs improvement because you simply take things out of context, misquote and lend yourself to hyperbole.
> ...


See the thing with you is your only argument is that Kobe has the rings at 24, but he has been in the League for close to 7 years, and how can you say he is a winner when the Lakers are a Losing team with him as the only go to guy. explain that to me. Explain if Kobe was so good why do the media and even laker fans write off the lakers as even playoff contenders when shaq is not with the team that right there questions what you say that Kobe is a winner period. you say that i just kept going back to Oneal, but you just keep going to the fact that kobe has 3 rings, that is your only argument, do you honestly think that if we put a 24 year old kobe in the NBA back when Jordan was playing, do you think kobe will be playing this good? i doubt it, you are talking about 2 tottaly different era's back in the day Kobe would not be getting his 20 free trows a night, the refs would not be calling tiny touch fouls. In a way its not even fair to say that Kobe is better then Jordan at 24.


----------



## DaFuture (Nov 5, 2002)

*Not trying to undermine*

just saying that its not something another comparable player could have done. Kobe=Dominique Wilkins. Atheltic, Stunning Player but will never win a championship on his own or carry a team. Simple as that and in limited chanced he has had he has proved this. 



Jordan>>>>>>>>Kobe


----------



## ChiBullsFan (May 30, 2002)

Also, one thing worth noting is that the best player of all time is defined RELATIVE to his own generation of players. Would Wilt be dominant in today's game? Probably not. Doesn't diminish how good he was for his time.

That's how a player HAS to be judged, because the league and players EVOLVE. Bob Cousy and Jerry West in their primes probably wouldn't make a 10-day contract on a current NBA team. They are still all time greats.

So screw the rules, and different levels of defense, and what have you. Just look at how dominant a player is for his time period and you will find his place in history.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ChiBullsFan</b>!
> DaFuture,
> defense in the NBA is much better now than it ever was in the 1980s.
> 
> No potshots at other posters, please. -- DaBullz


Omg "Please tell me he dint just say that!!!"


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

*Re: Not trying to undermine*



> Originally posted by <b>DaFuture</b>!
> just saying that its not something another comparable player could have done. Kobe=Dominique Wilkins. Atheltic, Stunning Player but will never win a championship on his own or carry a team. Simple as that and in limited chanced he has had he has proved this.
> 
> 
> ...


Though I agree, I think its more like this...

Jordan>>>Kobe.

Hyperbole only makes a person look like they are debating based on sentiment and not logic.


----------



## DaFuture (Nov 5, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ChiBullsFan</b>!
> 
> 
> If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle. If MJ didn't have Pippen he wouldn't have won any championships. These are hypotheticals.
> ...



Jordan would not have won without Pippen??!!

That is it you have lost the match. Give Jordan any comparable 3 of that era and we still win six champioships.  :boohoo:



Jerry West and Bob Cousy would not Make 10-day contracts:uhoh: 



Boy that is tough. There is a Nike Michael Jordan Shirt that says 
"The Game Changes but the Fundamentals Remain the Same"

Maybe I will bye you one?


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

nba fg% is not down because nba players can't shoot anymore. that's not the way the game works. fact is that many of the sharpshooters of yesteryear would have had a heck of a time getting off shots in today's nba. you either need height and athleticism and a great shot or you need an open shot. with the defensive wings and the team defenses of today's nba teams that open shot is not always there. 
many of the NCAA's great shooters can't make the L if they don't have the total package- they won't be able to get their shots off or have a positive affect on offense and they aren't going to be good enough defenders at that next level.

also, the jazz and sonics were mentioned as some of the powerhouses that the bulls had to go up against. give me a break, as good as those teams were they weren't that great. i might argue that the utah team today is only marginally worse that the utah finalists.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Ok how many people think that kobe would dominate in a 7 game series agaisnt the BAD BOY's Detroid Pistons back in the day.


----------



## ChiBullsFan (May 30, 2002)

> See the thing with you is your only argument is that Kobe has the rings at 24, but he has been in the League for close to 7 years, and how can you say he is a winner when the Lakers are a Losing team with him as the only go to guy. explain that to me.


Your argument seems to entirely discount the championships! To discount his importance to thse titles is ridiculous, and the fact that he played such a huge role at age 21, 22, 23 speaks volumes about his talent.

Why can't they win without Shaq? Simple. No supporting cast. The best players still need a good supporting cast to win over the long term. Even MJ couldn't win till he got some talent on his team.

The Lakers without Shaq is basically Kobe vs. the world. They don't have any other legitimate scoring threats, they have no inside game, and yet somehow Kobe is still finding ways to pull out games and carry the team on his back. That's exactly what MJ did early in his career (though he had at least some other options... guys like Orlando Woolridge, Artis Gilmore).

Simply put, no team in the NBA is worse from the #3-12 options than the Lakers, so when you take away Shaq from the equation it's just not fair to expect wins. Kobe is doing extremely well considering the had he's dealt.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

> Simply put, no team in the NBA is worse from the #3-12 options than the Lakers, so when you take away Shaq from the equation it's just not fair to expect wins. Kobe is doing extremely well considering the had he's dealt.


You just posted that on a BULLS forum of all places. Are you serious? Or are you just resorting to overstatement and hyperbole to convey your point?

I can name at least 10 teams right now, worse than the lakers 3-12, including the BULLS.


----------



## DaFuture (Nov 5, 2002)

*A couple of Cheap Shots by Rodman*

and their other big guy and Kobe wouldnt even look at the basket he would just jack up bricks and pass.




Players in the NBA cannot shoot anymore? Why do you think Euros are so coveted because they have fundamentals and msot of all they can shoot. There is always a place for a good shooter. How else do you explain John Crotty or Fred Hoiberg in the NBA granted athleticism is a must nowadays but shooting and overall good basketball play is down in the US. You dont even need to watch the NBA to know that go to your local high school game and everyone is trying to run iso, one on ones, get the dunk, make the flashy pass. its called sportscenter syndrome.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

*Re: A couple of Cheap Shots by Rodman*



> Originally posted by <b>DaFuture</b>!
> and their other big guy and Kobe wouldnt even look at the basket he would just jack up bricks and pass.
> 
> 
> ...


That other big guy would be Laimbeer. 

Laimbeer Punished Jordan
Rodman Punished Jordan
Dumars (who btw was an excellent defender) Punished Jordan
Mahorn Punished Jordan
Vinny Johnson Punished Jordan

and so on and so on...

And don't even get me started on Xavier McDaniels, Anthony Mason, Patrick Ewing, Starks, Oakley, and that thuggish azz crew of Jordan/Pippen Killers. I think one year they made it a point to deliberately try to destroy Pippen (he was seen as the softer of the two)...


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>SkywalkerAC</b>!
> also, the jazz and sonics were mentioned as some of the powerhouses that the bulls had to go up against. give me a break, as good as those teams were they weren't that great. i might argue that the utah team today is only marginally worse that the utah finalists.


So your telling me this years Lakers would beat that Super Sonics team? what are you smoking buddy?

Shaq would be great and play well, but who will match up against A pretty good Shremph,Shawn Kemp, a young Gary Payton, Sam Perkins, etc the sonics could easily sweep this years lakers, this is the same team that took the bulls to six games in 1996.


----------



## ChiBullsFan (May 30, 2002)

Krakken,

I'll take Chandler, Fizer, Williams, ERob and Curry over Horry, Fisher, Walker, George and Shaw(?) any day of the week and twice on Sundays. None of those Lakers can get their own shots.

MAYBE the Nuggets and Cavs are worse from #3-12.


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>The Krakken</b>!
> 
> 
> You just posted that on a BULLS forum of all places. Are you serious? Or are you just resorting to overstatement and hyperbole to convey your point?
> ...


not even close, IMO. i would take the bulls anyday. denver? maybe.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

*Re: A couple of Cheap Shots by Rodman*



> Originally posted by <b>DaFuture</b>!
> and their other big guy and Kobe wouldnt even look at the basket he would just jack up bricks and pass.


In case you haven't noticed Kobe's jump shot has improved...DRAMATICALLY. He's shooting 46% from the field which is pretty good but since the beginning of the year where he struggled a little he's shooting over 50%. Almost 40% from downtown. Just because he is athletic that doesn't mean the guy doesn't know how to shoot. The young MJ was better at getting to the basket but Kobe right now is a better shooter than MJ at the same age.


----------



## DaFuture (Nov 5, 2002)

*Re: Re: A couple of Cheap Shots by Rodman*



> Originally posted by <b>The Krakken</b>!
> 
> 
> That other big guy would be Laimbeer.
> ...



Thanks I was going to say Laneer but that was about 30 years to soon. I couldnt think of th name. I still remember whne Mason still had the writing in his haircut, he was one tough @$$ mofo. He made Oakley look like a puss and that is saying alot. Mahorn was just a dirty mofo. He gave MJ some of the toughest fouls ever in thegame of basketball. hell he mad pippen cry like a little [email protected]


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>thebizkit69u</b>!
> 
> 
> So your telling me this years Lakers would beat that Super Sonics team? what are you smoking buddy?
> ...


i think that the championship Lakers would defeat this team, yes. the same team that defeated stacked teams in portland and sacramento. the 3-peat Lakers can't defeat a one-time finalist? are you kidding me?


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ChiBullsFan</b>!
> Krakken,
> 
> I'll take Chandler, Fizer, Williams, ERob and Curry over Horry, Fisher, Walker, George and Shaw(?) any day of the week and twice on Sundays. None of those Lakers can get their own shots.
> ...


Actually, Fox, prolly bumps Walker from the starting lineup.

And although with the exception of FOX (who CAN post up pretty effectively), nobody can get their own shot, at least they can MAKE them. Only Jwill can get his own shot of that group you named, and he isn't exactly the model for FG% now is he?

That lakers team in all likely hood is still significan't better than us defensively too, which would in all likelihood lead to easy scores...

Oh, and you forgot the Grizz and a few others.....look hard....they are there. Start with Miami.


----------



## DaFuture (Nov 5, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: A couple of Cheap Shots by Rodman*



> Originally posted by <b>DaFuture</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks I was going to say Laneer but that was about 30 years to soon. I couldnt think of th name. I still remember whne Mason still had the writing in his haircut, he was one tough @$$ mofo. He made Oakley look like a puss and that is saying alot. Mahorn was just a dirty mofo. He gave MJ some of the toughest fouls ever in thegame of basketball. hell he mad pippen cry like a little [email protected]



The Nets maybe, the Knicks, The heat, the wiz, cle, grizzlies, orlando, just a few off the top of my head.


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>thebizkit69u</b>!
> Ok how many people think that kobe would dominate in a 7 game series agaisnt the BAD BOY's Detroid Pistons back in the day.


you're basing your argument on competition against a single team.


----------



## DaFuture (Nov 5, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>SkywalkerAC</b>!
> nba fg% is not down because nba players can't shoot anymore. that's not the way the game works. fact is that many of the sharpshooters of yesteryear would have had a heck of a time getting off shots in today's nba. you either need height and athleticism and a great shot or you need an open shot. with the defensive wings and the team defenses of today's nba teams that open shot is not always there.
> many of the NCAA's great shooters can't make the L if they don't have the total package- they won't be able to get their shots off or have a positive affect on offense and they aren't going to be good enough defenders at that next level.
> 
> ...


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>SkywalkerAC</b>!
> 
> 
> i think that the championship Lakers would defeat this team, yes. the same team that defeated stacked teams in portland and sacramento. the 3-peat Lakers can't defeat a one-time finalist? are you kidding me?


Isn't it just a coincidence how those Teams (blazers and Kings), both had a 4th Q "collapse", in game 7 of the conference finals???

 

What happened to portland 4 years ago, borders on blasphemy....


----------



## ChiBullsFan (May 30, 2002)

In all fairness to Kobe, he is shooting 46% from the field, which is well above the league average for a SG. Hardly 40 pts on 40 shots.... Don't just be a spinster for the sake of being a spinster. Look at what you are saying and for god sake put it in context.


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DaFuture</b>!
> 
> 
> > Originally posted by <b>SkywalkerAC</b>!
> ...


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>SkywalkerAC</b>!
> 
> 
> i think that the championship Lakers would defeat this team, yes. the same team that defeated stacked teams in portland and sacramento. the 3-peat Lakers can't defeat a one-time finalist? are you kidding me?


the 3 peat Lakers are no match for the first and second 3 peat bulls, i doubt the lakers would beat all the other teams i mentioned let alone the Sonics, and Those Utah Jazz teams, omg the lakers would be begging for mercy, those Jazz teams had to much Depth, i would take the Jazz in seven.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>thebizkit69u</b>!
> 
> 
> the 3 peat Lakers are no match for the first and second 3 peat bulls, i doubt the lakers would beat all the other teams i mentioned let alone the Sonics, and Those Utah Jazz teams, omg the lakers would be begging for mercy, those Jazz teams had to much Depth, i would take the Jazz in seven.


I wouldn't.


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

and i have no idea what all this jibber jabber about the bad boys is all about. are you seriously trying to argue that MJ was up against better defense by referencing a single visciously defensive team?


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

Scoring 40 points and taking 40 shots does not impress me at all. It means he is not an efficient scorer. he is not producing at maximum efficiency. His shot total in not an athletically viable output. So to speak in economic lingo.:sigh: [/QUOTE]

He's averaging like 40+ points per game in his last 10 games and shooting 50%. How on Earth do you get 40 points on 40 shots out of that? If he's shooting 50% and getting 40 points, after including FTs and 3pts he is probably closer to 30 shots a game max. He probably gets 14-15 points from the FT line and 3pt so that leaves about 25 points. I think 30 shots is more accurate and 40+ points on 30 shots is pretty damn good.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>SkywalkerAC</b>!
> and i have no idea what all this jibber jabber about the bad boys is all about. are you seriously trying to argue that MJ was up against better defense by referencing a single visciously defensive team.


I hope that wasn't directed at me. My arguement would center around Handchecking, and the overall attitude to defense back then, as opposed to now. The bad boys and knicks were merely an extreme example of what was legal back then......and isn't even close to legal now. If a team plays like the bad boys did back then, they would be down to their third stringers by halftime, as the rest would be thrown out.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>SkywalkerAC</b>!
> and i have no idea what all this jibber jabber about the bad boys is all about. are you seriously trying to argue that MJ was up against better defense by referencing a single visciously defensive team.


Not just Detroid but the whole NBA was Better Defensively back then, than it is now. it was a more physicall game, just look how banged up Larry Bird kept gettin night after night, look at how many beatings did Dennis Rodman hand out single Handedly, i see no player in this league that can shut down a player but Ben Wallace and Ron Artest, back then we would see a young mutombo, ewing, Jordan,thomas,rodman,pippen,alonzo mourning,etc shut down many players and the atleast every team in the NBA had 1 or 2 good defensive players, look at our bulls team of today who the hell can play good D in this team, trenton hassel is average at best.


----------



## Michael Jackson (Jun 11, 2002)

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


You completely disrespect Pippen and that irratates me more than anything. Do you recall the 91 Finals? We would not ahve won without Pippen. Could Jordan carry us past the Bad Boys w/o Pippen(migrane)? Nope. Phoenix, Portland, Utah we would all ahve lost without Pippen. the only one was maybe Seattle.

How close was Jordan to a ring prior to Pippen. I can tell you Pippen was a lot closer w/o Jordan than Jordan was w/o Pippen. Please don't try to just replace him.

As for Jordan and anyone else. Yeah Very well could have been done. Jordan and Barkley easily could have won. You know what though Kobe and Barkley could win too. 

You say Jordan can have anyone else comparable to Pippen but for Kobe it is he can't win by himself. A completely biased arguement. 

* No one here thinks Kobe is better than Jordan* but Kobe is damn good. The one Major thing Kobe lacks is leadership and the likeable media personality that Jordan had. 

Also if I have to see the 37ppg 54% stat again I guess Wilt is better than Jordan? 

Kobe is not the inovator that Jordan was but what do you have as a knock on his game. He has lead the team with Shaq down and a rag tag bunch at that. Worse than Minny or orlando with Shaq gone. He is playing great and playing hurt. He has Matured every year. He has threee rings. Oh if Shaq wasn't on his team he would be outscoring both Ivy and Mcgrady. 

No Kobe can't win a Championship by himself but who can.... Wilt nope MJ Nope Shaq...? Nope KG? TMAC? 

It is not about Kobe vs Jordan just give the guy respect.


----------



## Michael Jackson (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>thebizkit69u</b>!
> 
> 
> Not just Detroid but the whole NBA was Better Defensively back then, than it is now. it was a more physicall game, just look how banged up Larry Bird kept gettin night after night, look at how many beatings did Dennis Rodman hand out single Handedly, i see no player in this league that can shut down a player but Ben Wallace and Ron Artest, back then we would see a young mutombo, ewing, Jordan,thomas,rodman,pippen,alonzo mourning,etc shut down many players and the atleast every team in the NBA had 1 or 2 good defensive players, look at our bulls team of today who the hell can play good D in this team, trenton hassel is average at best.


Team defense was better but Jordan only really had one peer athletically in his career at the 2 guard. That was Clyde. Even a young Jordan would have a harder time with a TMAC Kobe Artest on him. Jordan outsized most of the SG's in the day and was faster. In Todays NBA it would not be the case anymore he would just be avg in size.


----------



## DaFuture (Nov 5, 2002)

*My point is this I dont believe Jordan*

took 40 shots in his 67 point performance. Jordan took 40 shots + in one game and that was against Orlando in'93 Kobe takes about that many on a regular basis. My point is this Kobe takes a lot of shots and while he shoots 46% that is a far cry from 54% and he takes a lot of shots I dont care if he takes 30 shots and makes 14 which is 46% to take 30 shots in a game is inefficient and could better be used in passing the ball, drawing fouls, and getting easier baskets. Kobe is Dominique nuff said. 


The argument is this 37 6 and 6 if somebody repeats this over 82 games then he will be the next Jordan unril


Skywalker the point of his argument is that Jordan put up good numbers despite playing an average of 6 straight games against these teams every year in the playoffs for two years and despite this put up good numbers. There will never be a team in the NBA more physical than that detroit team. Talk about Hard fouls. They invented them, they made grown men cry, see Pippen.


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>thebizkit69u</b>!
> 
> 
> Not just Detroid but the whole NBA was Better Defensively back then, than it is now. it was a more physicall game, just look how banged up Larry Bird kept gettin night after night, look at how many beatings did Dennis Rodman hand out single Handedly, i see no player in this league that can shut down a player but Ben Wallace and Ron Artest, back then we would see a young mutombo, ewing, Jordan,thomas,rodman,pippen,alonzo mourning,etc shut down many players and the atleast every team in the NBA had 1 or 2 good defensive players, look at our bulls team of today who the hell can play good D in this team, trenton hassel is average at best.


you named 7 players, arguably the best of that era. zo wasn't even in the L at that point. 
again, you're basing your argument on a very small sample. come playoffs this year take a look at the excellent defense that is being played. i don't even think its very close in terms of wing defenders and overall team defense. handchecking does even things out a bit but kobe's outside game pretty much neutralizes this.


----------



## DaFuture (Nov 5, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Michael Jackson</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I automoatically direct you to this link in the 87-88 Season Jordan had 35.0 points per game 53.5% shooting to go with 6 assist and 6 rebounds with about 3 steals a game. Recognize the Greatness! grinning:


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

> handchecking does even things out a bit but kobe's outside game pretty much neutralizes this.


I will agree that Kobe at 24 is a better deep threat than MJ was. That being said, I am not sure that Kobe would have ever been able to get comfortable enough to get a good shot off with a hand constantly on his hip. Or on his chest, Or in his waist....etc.

Kobe would have had to resort to his post game.......which he is good at, but still a LONG LONG ways away from the lethality of Michael in the 90's.


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

*Re: My point is this I dont believe Jordan*



> Originally posted by <b>DaFuture</b>!
> took 40 shots in his 67 point performance. Jordan took 40 shots + in one game and that was against Orlando in'93 Kobe takes about that many on a regular basis. My point is this Kobe takes a lot of shots and while he shoots 46% that is a far cry from 54% and he takes a lot of shots I dont care if he takes 30 shots and makes 14 which is 46% to take 30 shots in a game is inefficient and could better be used in passing the ball, drawing fouls, and getting easier baskets. Kobe is Dominique nuff said.
> 
> 
> ...


kobe is nique????

why? they are completely different although dynamic, athletic scorers. kobe is probably the best in the game and has very few flaws. he has already lead his team, along with shaq, to 3 titles, and nique has none. kobe can shoot and play point...it goes on but the comparison is ridiculous.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

The point here is i dont think Kobe should even be mentioned in the same regards as MJ, as i also think players should not constatly be compared to each other. But for the record i do belive that Scottie Pippen in his prime was better then Kobe is now and better then Kobe will ever be, so that says a lot about MJ how he made players around him better, if Kobe is so good why does shaq hates his guts, why hasnt young players like George turned into good players, even Phil Jackson himself doesnt even compare Kobe to Jordan cause he knows there is nothing there to talk about, Jordan is the man, think about this also when jordan was about Kobe's age he was a world known Phenom, this guy was more popular then Micheal Jackson, Jordan Changed the game and kobe hasnt enough said.


----------



## DaFuture (Nov 5, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>SkywalkerAC</b>!
> 
> 
> you named 7 players, arguably the best of that era. zo wasn't even in the L at that point.
> again, you're basing your argument on a very small sample. come playoffs this year take a look at the excellent defense that is being played. i don't even think its very close in terms of wing defenders and overall team defense. handchecking does even things out a bit but kobe's outside game pretty much neutralizes this.



Oh you mean the great defense played by the Suns, Rockets, or maybe you mean the Mavericks, or those defensive stalwarts known as the Kings. Or maybe you mean those point stingy demons known as the Celtics. :laugh:


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

As I look at statline after statline I understand how useless this all is. Especially since Jordan didn't win his first title since he came down from those numbers...even if it is only by 2PPG  :laugh:


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

*Re: My point is this I dont believe Jordan*



> Originally posted by <b>DaFuture</b>!
> The argument is this 37 6 and 6 if somebody repeats this over 82 games then he will be the next Jordan unril


That is damn near impossible for a SG in this day in age to accomplish. 37 points per game now, especially with the zone D. No way a guy can consistently attack the basket like MJ did in the 80's. Just look at what happened to MJ over the years. In the championship years he didn't even come close to averaging 37 ppg but I think he was a much better player. As the athletes get better it is harder to just drive by them every time like MJ used to. 37 ppg over 82 games just isn't realistic anymore but that doesn't diminish a player's status. Even MJ in his prime didn't average 37 ppg.


----------



## ChiBullsFan (May 30, 2002)

1980s Defense:

Anybody who knows NBA basketball (and was actually alive in the 1980s) knows that defense was pathetic back then. Players had it easy getting off shots, scoring was high and there wasn't much muscle inside. The teams that actually played defense were good, but it certainly was not the norm in the league.



And DaFuture, you think cuz MJ averaged 37/6/6 he is the greatest ever???? Please. Look what Kobe averages without Shaq. He could do it too. But then he wouldn't be winning.

Jordan wasn't winning when he was scoring that much either, so I don't know why you would rely on stats to prove why he's "the greatest". I think most knowledgeable fans would agree that WINNING is foremost.


----------



## DaFuture (Nov 5, 2002)

*Re: Re: My point is this I dont believe Jordan*



> Originally posted by <b>SkywalkerAC</b>!
> 
> 
> kobe is nique????
> ...


Let me put a qualifier by that statement like I put earlier he is what Nique would be playing with Kareem.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

> Jordan wasn't winning when he was scoring that much either, so I don't know why you would rely on stats to prove why he's "the greatest". I think most knowledgeable fans would agree that WINNING is foremost.


Not entirely accurate. Jordan Carried several of those teams to the playoffs.



> Just look at what happened to MJ over the years. In the championship years he didn't even come close to averaging 37 ppg but I think he was a much better player. As the athletes get better it is harder to just drive by them every time like MJ used to.


Jordan dropped off to 33.6 ppg, and 32 ppg...that is hardly a dropoff. Also, Michael Slowed down as he approached 30. He was still the quickest, but not nearly as quick as he was at 24.

Michael at 24 would run circles around KObe, and virtually anyone else who could not handcheck him in todays NBA.

And the Zone is brand new, so using it as justification for tougher D in the 90's and the new millenium is not fair, since it hasn't been in effect even a year yet. I notice It hasn't stopped Iverson from getting to the bucket.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>thebizkit69u</b>!
> The point here is i dont think Kobe should even be mentioned in the same regards as MJ, as i also think players should not constatly be compared to each other. But for the record i do belive that Scottie Pippen in his prime was better then Kobe is now and better then Kobe will ever be, so that says a lot about MJ how he made players around him better, if Kobe is so good why does shaq hates his guts, why hasnt young players like George turned into good players, even Phil Jackson himself doesnt even compare Kobe to Jordan cause he knows there is nothing there to talk about, Jordan is the man, think about this also when jordan was about Kobe's age he was a world known Phenom, this guy was more popular then Micheal Jackson, Jordan Changed the game and kobe hasnt enough said.


What does being good have to do with hating someone's guts? Do you really think all of MJ's teammates liked him? I'm sure guys like Horace Grant and Bill Cartwright have some very not so fond memories of #23. 

About making players better you can't make talent out of ****. George is in no way, shape, or form comparable to Scottie Pippen. Not even close. Kobe also doesn't have an inside guy like Grant or a shooter like Paxon. He's surrounded by very mediocre role players. As far as making players better I think the guy averages like 7 assists a game which is pretty amazing considering how bad the role players are. 

About MJ's popularity do you realize how stupid that statement is about him changing the game? Of course he changed the game. He was really the first superstar of his kind in the NBA. He was a dynamic, explosive, exciting athlete who really emphasized the importance of the individual. There were great individual players like Wilt and exciting guys like Dr. J but nobody was as good and as exciting as MJ was. He was the first of his kind so obviously he had a greater impact on the game than guys like Kobe and McGrady. No matter how great today's SGs become MJ was the first so he'll always be the most popular.


----------



## DaFuture (Nov 5, 2002)

*Over a Season? On 54% Shooting please*

that is delusional in his 44 point game he shot 41 times. It is not efficient. Plain and simple.



Excuse me that season the team went to the playoffs and I believe they beat the Cavs an made it to the second round in an East that was just as tough as todays west. Mind you Pippen and Ho Grant were 3rd year players then. That is a whole lot more taht what Kobe has done without Shaq. And to saythe defense is better know is not true because offense as a whole in the NBA is not as good as it used to be. 



Pinball remember also that MJ's body took a beating and he was not nearly as explosive as he was when he won the championships. I believe if you gave MJ the explosiveness he had in his first few seasons the bulls still win the championship.


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DaFuture</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> Oh you mean the great defense played by the Suns, Rockets, or maybe you mean the Mavericks, or those defensive stalwarts known as the Kings. Or maybe you mean those point stingy demons known as the Celtics. :laugh:


even though you only listed off 4 teams, there is still some good defense and some great defensive players in this bunch.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Kobe is only averaging 20 points in the playoffs you call that leadership compared to shaq with 28 ppg, umm ok whatever you say. Jordan averaged 33 ppg in the playoffs thats leadership.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>thebizkit69u</b>!
> Kobe is only averaging 20 points in the playoffs you call that leadership compared to shaq with 28 ppg, umm ok whatever you say. Jordan averaged 33 ppg in the playoffs thats leadership.


Sorry dude, but that is a poor arguement. Leadership is an intangible, and cannot simply be measured in the Statline....


----------



## DaFuture (Nov 5, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>SkywalkerAC</b>!
> 
> 
> even though you only listed off 4 teams, there is still some good defense and some great defensive players in this bunch.


I listed 5 or do you want me to continue, what about those tough bullys known as Timberwolves, or that d-first team known as the suns, or maybe you mean the New Orleans Hornets, their defense is abolutely stinging. Or you must mean Utah or Toronto those guys play some tough D.


----------



## DaFuture (Nov 5, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>The Krakken</b>!
> 
> Sorry dude, but that is a poor arguement. Leadership is an intangible, and cannot simply be measured in the Statline....


Yeah when it suits your argument. You guys have lost. Argument is over. Kobe should be glad he can even lick Jordans jock strap.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>The Krakken</b>!
> 
> 
> Not entirely accurate. Jordan Carried several of those teams to the playoffs.
> ...


I'm sure he slowed down a little but not by that much. The fact is MJ couldn't consistently blow by people like he used to. I think that can be attributed more to the increased athleticism of today's players rather than to the decreased athleticism of MJ. That is largely why he developed his jumpshot. Even quick players today have difficulty getting to the basket. The only player who can really get to the basket at will today is Iverson. Another thing that contributed to MJ scoring less is that people learned how to defend him. I think for the first 4-5 years he was in the league everyone was in awe of him. He was the first super athletic superstar in the league and no one had a clue on how to defend him. I think gradually people began to put quicker players on him but they still couldn't stop him. Regardless, I think guys like Iverson, Kobe, and McGrady would have been pretty damn good in MJ's agre too.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>The Krakken</b>!
> 
> Sorry dude, but that is a poor arguement. Leadership is an intangible, and cannot simply be measured in the Statline....


Compared to Oneal where is kobes leadership? sure hes having a hot streak, but where is the leadership, tell me how can a leader have such a horrible record when he has to lead the team, thats new to me, Shaq is the leader hes the big dog hes is what holds that team together he is the reason why they won 3 championships.


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ChiBullsFan</b>!
> 
> 
> The Shaq argument is just plain dumb. EVERY great player who has ever won a championship has had another great player on that team. Bird had McHale and Parish. Magic had Kareem and Worthy. Jordan had Pippen. Russell had Cousy. Akeem had Drexler. Robinson had Duncan. That's just the way it is when it comes to winning championships. Have other talent doesn't diminish what you accomplish. Kobe has averaged 25-28 ppg during his championship run and you think it's OK to write that off because he had Shaq on the team???? That's absolutely ridiculous.



You're right, that argument is dumb. You cannot fault Kobe for playing with Shaq.

However, in your original argument you cited how many championships Kobe has won at his age compared to Jordan at the same age. But who's to say that Jordan wouldn't have won championships early in his career if he had a teammate as dominant as Shaq?

So no, Shaq's presence on the Lakers should not diminish Kobe's value, but you cannot compare the number of championships Kobe and Jordan won in their early careers without mentioning that Jordan didn't have the luxury of playing with a player the caliber of Shaq.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DaFuture</b>!
> 
> 
> Yeah when it suits your argument. You guys have lost. Argument is over. Kobe should be glad he can even lick Jordans jock strap.


You know a person is not paying attention when: 

1) He doesn't notice that I have been agreeing with him (albeit in a different manner) allthroughout this entire thread.

2) he attacks the wrong poster.

Go back and re-read my posts...find me even ONE where I defended Kobe in this argument.......


----------



## DaFuture (Nov 5, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Pinball</b>!
> 
> 
> I'm sure he slowed down a little but not by that much. The fact is MJ couldn't consistently blow by people like he used to. I think that can be attributed more to the increased athleticism of today's players rather than to the decreased athleticism of MJ. That is largely why he developed his jumpshot. Even quick players today have difficulty getting to the basket. The only player who can really get to the basket at will today is Iverson. Another thing that contributed to MJ scoring less is that people learned how to defend him. I think for the first 4-5 years he was in the league everyone was in awe of him. He was the first super athletic superstar in the league and no one had a clue on how to defend him. I think gradually people began to put quicker players on him but they still couldn't stop him. Regardless, I think guys like Iverson, Kobe, and McGrady would have been pretty damn good in MJ's agre too.



You obviously have never heard of Doctor J. or the Black Jesus from philly.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>DaFuture</b>!
> 
> 
> Yeah when it suits your argument. You guys have lost. Argument is over. Kobe should be glad he can even lick Jordans jock strap.


Man dude thats kinda harsh, lol. do you think kobe might like the taste of Jordans Nut sweat?


----------



## DaFuture (Nov 5, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>The Krakken</b>!
> 
> 
> You know a person is not paying attention when:
> ...



Sorry its getting late but if scoring 33 points in the playoffs is not a tangible way to judge leaderhip I dont know what is.


----------



## DaFuture (Nov 5, 2002)

*Let me end the argument on this*

nm


----------



## DaFuture (Nov 5, 2002)

*Let me end the argument on this*

I dont hate Kobe I just hate the media hype, like the hype around Jwill and other college players. Kobe is good but there is one better. 


bizkit, thats what michael's cologne smells like. Uggh putrid stuff.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DaFuture</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> You obviously have never heard of Doctor J. or the Black Jesus from philly.


Dr. J was great but he couldn't hold MJ's jock.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

You make a fair argument but some points to address....




> Originally posted by <b>Pinball</b>!
> 
> 
> I'm sure he slowed down a little but not by that much. The fact is MJ couldn't consistently blow by people like he used to. I think that can be attributed more to the increased athleticism of today's players rather than to the decreased athleticism of MJ.


Todays players were not playing in the early 90's. And in the mid to late 90's they were young and MJ had slowed down ALOT since 24. He still beat many of them to the basket.....




> That is largely why he developed his jumpshot. Even quick players today have difficulty getting to the basket. The only player who can really get to the basket at will today is Iverson.


Jordan at 24 was at least as quick as Iverson is today



> Another thing that contributed to MJ scoring less is that people learned how to defend him. I think for the first 4-5 years he was in the league everyone was in awe of him. He was the first super athletic superstar in the league and no one had a clue on how to defend him.


This will happen to Kobe eventually too.



> gradually people began to put quicker players on him but they still couldn't stop him. Regardless, I think guys like Iverson, Kobe, and McGrady would have been pretty damn good in MJ's agre too.


I cannot argue with that.....:yes:


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DaFuture</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry its getting late but if scoring 33 points in the playoffs is not a tangible way to judge leaderhip I dont know what is.


The problem is that using points alone too narrowly defines leadership. That would be like saying that Dominique (who averaged more points than Kobe in the playoffs in his prime) was a better leader than Kobe is..........:no:


----------



## DaFuture (Nov 5, 2002)

*What about Earl Monroe*



> Originally posted by <b>Pinball</b>!
> 
> 
> Dr. J was great but he couldn't hold MJ's jock.



Most people have never seen him play unless you are about 40 but NBA fils should have some movies on him, watch him when he was with the bullets. Unbelievable.


----------



## DaFuture (Nov 5, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>The Krakken</b>!
> 
> 
> The problem is that using points alone too narrowly defines leadership. That would be like saying that Dominique (who averaged more points than Kobe in the playoffs in his prime) was a better leader than Kobe is..........:no:


Points w/ wins, and since Jordna has more points he wins, since they both have won championships.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>DaFuture</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry its getting late but if scoring 33 points in the playoffs is not a tangible way to judge leaderhip I dont know what is.


i think that post is the best one yet, when someone says that 33 points in the playoffs is not a tangible way to judge leadership that just shows us that this topic is just done, i mean if you honestly think that kobe is a better leader then Jordan then you have some problems, he probably thinks that the way that kobe chews his gum is a tangible of leadership then 33 points. ok


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

*Re: What about Earl Monroe*



> Originally posted by <b>DaFuture</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> Most people have never seen him play unless you are about 40 but NBA fils should have some movies on him, watch him when he was with the bullets. Unbelievable.



Had Jordan fashioned his game after "The Pearl", like Kobe did MJ, than MJ would have never become "His Airness" and Kobe would.....well....I don't know what kobe would have done.....he might be what MJ was back then......then again maybe not....


----------



## DaFuture (Nov 5, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>thebizkit69u</b>!
> 
> 
> i think that post is the best one yet, when someone says that 33 points in the playoffs is not a tangible way to judge leadership that just shows us that this topic is just done, i mean if you honestly think that kobe is a better leader then Jordan then you have some problems, he probably thinks that the way that kobe chews his gum is a tangible of leadership then 33 points. ok



Too bad Kobe got that from MJ too:grinning:


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DaFuture</b>!
> 
> 
> Points w/ wins, and since Jordna has more points he wins, since they both have won championships.


Then again remember that Kobe is not the "man" in LA or hasn't been in the past. In the past he's been asked to do the little things and leave the scoring to Shaq. However, now with Shaq declining it will be interesting to see how Kobe plays in the playoffs now. I'm guessing you'll see numbers that come pretty damn close to MJ's. Will he win though? That remains to be seen.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>DaFuture</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> Too bad Kobe got that from MJ too:grinning:


Lol so damn true. not to mention the way he tries to talk and the way he danced on the table when they won the 3rd championship thats as close as kobe is going to get to jordan. damn iam tired lol.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>thebizkit69u</b>!
> 
> 
> i think that post is the best one yet, when someone says that 33 points in the playoffs is not a tangible way to judge leadership that just shows us that this topic is just done, i mean if you honestly think that kobe is a better leader then Jordan then you have some problems, he probably thinks that the way that kobe chews his gum is a tangible of leadership then 33 points. ok


You too have not been paying attention.......



> Points w/ wins, and since Jordna has more points he wins, since they both have won championships.


Sorry. Still too narrow. Listen I am not suggesting that Jordan isn't a better leader. He is......by far. Where leadership is concerned, 

Jordan>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Kobe

But it is for many, many more reasons than just points. As such using points AND NONE OF HIS OTHER ATTRIBUTES MAKES FOR A POOR ARGUMENT.....do you all understand now???


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Pinball</b>!
> 
> 
> Then again remember that Kobe is not the "man" in LA or hasn't been in the past. In the past he's been asked to do the little things and leave the scoring to Shaq. However, now with Shaq declining it will be interesting to see how Kobe plays in the playoffs now. I'm guessing you'll see numbers that come pretty damn close to MJ's. Will he win though? *That remains to be seen. *


No it doesn't. If shaq is not healthy...Kobe is going out in the first round....ESPECIALLY THIS YEAR, where they are likely to be a 7 or 8 seed. Sacremento, San Antonio, or Dallas will absolutely murder LA without Shaq. I don't care if KOBE AVERAGES 60ppg.

It would be a sweep, and most of those games would be blowouts....


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>The Krakken</b>!
> 
> 
> No it doesn't. If shaq is not healthy...Kobe is going out in the first round....ESPECIALLY THIS YEAR, where they are likely to be a 7 or 8 seed. Sacremento, San Antonio, or Dallas will absolutely murder LA without Shaq. I don't care if KOBE AVERAGES 60ppg.
> ...


You have to be kidding . Kobe get a game or two scoring 50 every night especially against Dallas. 

Listen give Kobe an in his prime Pippen and Kobe would win the title this year. What player closely resembles Pippens game. Really no one right now plays like a prime Pippen. Give Kobe Vince Carter along with Brendan Haywood, Tony Battie and Robert Horry and he'd win this years title.

Kobe isn't as good as MJ is but he's coming awfully close. He's on the right track. The staggering thing in the comparison is this in 86/87 MJ scored 40 pts or more 37 times. While shooting 53%. Thats incredible. Kobe has a ways to go before he matches that but don't blink he's gaining fast.


----------



## DaFuture (Nov 5, 2002)

*Vince Carter and Kobe wow that team would*

be fun talk about no passing. Just run iso and pick and rolls the whole game. Plus with Vince you know you wont get any defense. Go right on ahead that team wouldnt make it out of the december without somebody knocking the crap out of somebody else. Kobe w/o SHaq is nothing but a great scorer.


----------



## QBF (Jul 22, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>jazzy1</b>!
> 
> 
> Listen give Kobe an in his prime Pippen and Kobe would win the title this year. What player closely resembles Pippens game. Really no one right now plays like a prime Pippen. Give Kobe Vince Carter along with Brendan Haywood, Tony Battie and Robert Horry and he'd win this years title.


I agree. Trade Shaq for Garnett, who I have always felt was the Pippen of today. Garnett is uber-versatile, the all-around player who does everything to make his team win and make his teammates look like good players. Unfortunately, Garnett, like Pippen, is not a true scorer and lacks the offensive creativity to dominate the ball at the end of close games, hence the nagging criticisms of the past few seasons. Pair Garnett and Kobe up, and you have the perfect match. You also have a dynasty and potential 70 win team on your hands.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>jazzy1</b>!
> Kobe isn't as good as MJ is but he's coming awfully close. He's on the right track. The staggering thing in the comparison is this in 86/87 MJ scored 40 pts or more 37 times. While shooting 53%. Thats incredible. Kobe has a ways to go before he matches that but don't blink he's gaining fast.


I think they are very close. Both are awesome on offense. Both guys are great scorers but they scored in different ways. MJ was a step quicker and got to the basket faster than Kobe. But Kobe has already developed a better jumpshot and has more of an offensive arsenal. Both are also great rebounder and passers but didn't understand how to use their teammates yet. On defense Kobe can be great at times but MJ was more consistent. Both were different defenders. Kobe is a little better on the ball and gets most of his steals defending his man straight up. MJ got most of his steals by playing the passing lanes. Again MJ was a little at 24 but Kobe is very, very close.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>QBF</b>!
> 
> 
> I agree. Trade Shaq for Garnett, who I have always felt was the Pippen of today. Garnett is uber-versatile, the all-around player who does everything to make his team win and make his teammates look like good players. Unfortunately, Garnett, like Pippen, is not a true scorer and lacks the offensive creativity to dominate the ball at the end of close games, hence the nagging criticisms of the past few seasons. Pair Garnett and Kobe up, and you have the perfect match. You also have a dynasty and potential 70 win team on your hands.


I think Duncan would also complement Kobe very well. Duncan can do his thing throughout the course of a game but he doesn't play well in the clutch. Kobe would be able to take all of the big shots for Duncan.


----------



## DaFuture (Nov 5, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>QBF</b>!
> 
> 
> I agree. Trade Shaq for Garnett, who I have always felt was the Pippen of today. Garnett is uber-versatile, the all-around player who does everything to make his team win and make his teammates look like good players. Unfortunately, Garnett, like Pippen, is not a true scorer and lacks the offensive creativity to dominate the ball at the end of close games, hence the nagging criticisms of the past few seasons. Pair Garnett and Kobe up, and you have the perfect match. You also have a dynasty and potential 70 win team on your hands.



With Kobe taking forty shots and scoring 4o points I dont think there would be enough touched for kG.
Huh? KG's problem is not that he cant score but who the the [email protected]*$ else is on his team. Wally Scerbiak, the great Polisch shooter.LOL. The Twolves problem is that the current CBA ws a few years to late for them. SOme people will do anything to make apoint only to be refuted over and over again. :sigh:


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

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


Enough with the hyperbole. He averages 23 shots per game no 40. That really isn't all that much. Hell Iverson and TMac average more shots and shoot a lower %.


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Pinball</b>!
> 
> 
> I think they are very close. Both are awesome on offense. Both guys are great scorers but they scored in different ways. MJ was a step quicker and got to the basket faster than Kobe. But Kobe has already developed a better jumpshot and has more of an offensive arsenal. Both are also great rebounder and passers but didn't understand how to use their teammates yet. On defense Kobe can be great at times but MJ was more consistent. Both were different defenders. Kobe is a little better on the ball and gets most of his steals defending his man straight up. MJ got most of his steals by playing the passing lanes. Again MJ was a little at 24 but Kobe is very, very close.


I think MJ would appear to be better defensively but in this era the most talented and athletic players play the 2 spot. Plus MJ rested alot of times on defense because he had Pippen locking up the other teams best perimeter guards. I think the main difference really is the manner in which they score. Kobe's a much better ballhandler while MJ had a slightly quicker 1st step but then again consider the Era MJ was athletically before his time while todays 2 guards have great athleticism across the boards so that could be skewed also.


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

*Re: Vince Carter and Kobe wow that team would*



> Originally posted by <b>DaFuture</b>!
> be fun talk about no passing. Just run iso and pick and rolls the whole game. Plus with Vince you know you wont get any defense. Go right on ahead that team wouldnt make it out of the december without somebody knocking the crap out of somebody else. Kobe w/o SHaq is nothing but a great scorer.


I beg to differ Kobe could fulfill the distributor role quite nicely basically what he's done for the past 3 years anyway. all Kobe needs is to play with another scorer who can hit the outside shot. And a team bulit around speed and agressive man to man defense. The Lakers are currently bulit around shaq's skills not Kobe's. The Lakers have a 3 pt shooting pf, and 2 other standstill shooters in Fox and Fisher. They really don't compliment Kobe's athleticism because they don't have another player outside of the clumsy george who can push the tempo of the game.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DaFuture</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> With Kobe taking forty shots and scoring 4o points


Dude...Kobe is shooting 47% from the field this season. 

Havn't checked for my stats, but I heard that not one player leading his team in scoring this year was shooting over 50%...


----------



## Michael Jackson (Jun 11, 2002)

Jeez talk about people believing a hype machine Jordan did not have the high amount of respect until he was 30. There was questions if Jordan could ever win a ring before 91. 

Kobe + Pippen in his prime= championship

Oh I get it someone said Pippen was only good because of Jordan my friends please correct taht Pippen was the best player the year Jordan was out but I guess peopel were still double teaming Jordan somewhere off in the corner.


Jordan got more calls than Kobe kinda like Shaq gets more calls than anyone else today. 

Kobe and Shaq hate each otehr? Yeah Jordan hated Pip and Rodman. He punched little ole Steve Kerr in a practice.

Yes Jordan is better but you ahve yet to prove anything that Kobe is so inferior


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Can you Jordan backers tell me why FG% has gone down as a whole since the 80s? Stop comparing FG% of players from today to players of the past. Insanity.

Also if you want to go pure stats Jordan never touched Wilt.


----------



## DaFuture (Nov 5, 2002)

*Most of you are too young to*

realize why MJ was so great so trying to explain the greatness of a man which many of you never had the chance to witness is a lost cause. I don't care what era it is scoring 35 points a game on 54% shooting is ridiculous. Plain and simple. The reason why defensesfg% have gone down is becomes teams cant shoot and the ever increasing infatuation with the 3 point line.



Wilt was a center in an athletically challeneged and talent deprived time for centers. Wilt was a great one but for a shooting gaurd to have a 54% fgp is INSANE. Kobe will never win a championship without Shaq and most people who play and know the game of bball say that Jordan could have won a championship with any 3 man of similar capability. Detlef Schremf, Nate McMillan, Drazen Petrovic, Cliff Robinson, I oculd go on.



Michael do you sleep w/ children? J/K LOL



There were questions if he could win a championship but lead a team to the playoffs like Kobe will never do with lakers as they are currently constructed I think not.


----------



## hellrazor08 (Feb 20, 2003)

*...*

yes im sure your fg% is going to suffer if you get to go up against a defensive specialist such as craig ehlo in the late 80s. i find it extremely amusing that some of you can actually say defense in the 80s and a whole was better in the nba than it is now. im sure jordan was shivering in his pants going against the double team of fleet footed larry bird and danny ainge and having vertically challenged kevin mchale waiting in the post during the playoffs when he dropped 63. i mean to all you defenders of jordans throne, lets be honest you have jordan going against artest, bowen, christie, patterson on a regular basis and he would not be averaging 37 ppg or shoot over 50%. the fact is there are better more athletic individual defenders in the nba today and allowing hand check back in the 80s really doesnt matter when you have craig ehlo guarding you. as history has shown there will be a better baller than jordan, it just might be sooner than most you jordan lovers expect.


----------



## numlock (Feb 8, 2003)

around the all-star break last season he was averaging 25-5-5 at 38 how do you think he would do if he was 10 or 13 years younger


----------



## Michael Jackson (Jun 11, 2002)

Da Future I saw Jordan at least once but I also saw Reggie Theus. Never saw Sloan though.

I am just looking for a lack of bias in this discussion. If it swang to unbiased thoughts about KObe I would shoot them down.

The pro Jordan arguement here goes like this

Fact
T Mac scored 52 last night in 3 quarters
Jordan spin
MJJ would have scored 62 in 2 quaters against that D

Jordan is the greatest but things do change. Jordan will hands down be ther Greatest in the greatest era of Basketball. But things change. Look at 7' footers. look at the dominace of George Mikan. Now look at Dirk and KG as 7'

Would Wilt be dominante today? Yeah I think he would but not as dominant. How Dominant would Shaq have been in Wilt's Day.

Jordan redefined the SG postion. He was bigger faster stronger than any other SG. That is a hard case with today's athletes to make. 

Many youth are being groomed for age 3-4 one to be mentally ready and physically ready for teh NBA @ 18. LeBron is being condidtioned for the transition to dominante in the pros and ahs for years. Will he pan out... who knows but these are advantages Jordan didn't have. 

Would Jordan beat Kobe... Hell yeah but it would by no means be easy. It would take his all.

One day Jordan's legacy most likely will be far surpassed just as WIlts was. But to us of this Era we will remmeber him as the greatest. 

If you are a B-Ball fan though don't hate on Kobe just sit back and enjoy. He is playing great. I think most (not all)Jordan lovers only hate on him because they worry about MJ's legacy. Don't worry about JOrdans legacy Kobe is an imitator but a damn fine one at that.

Also don't make Jordan bigger than the game it is unfair to Jerry West, Wilt, Big O, Bird, Magic, Isiah Thomas etc.... Just becauyse Jordan did something that Kobe or TMAC did doesn't make their accomplishments any less. Jordan didn't do thing Magic did. Jordan never averaged a triple double like the Big O. It is jsut wrong to put Jordan on a pedastal that can't be touched by younger players.

Finally please stop the Hate on Pippen. We would have lost the LA series if not for him and not passed the Pistons. Don't tell me Clifford Robinson could replace him.


----------



## carver401 (Aug 24, 2002)

*Good Point*



> Originally posted by <b>numlock</b>!
> around the all-star break last season he was averaging 25-5-5 at 38 how do you think he would do if he was 10 or 13 years younger


I think that is the best point made in this whole discusion, how can u say the defenses werent as good back then and thats why his numbers were better when he puts up those type of numbers against todays 2 guards who are "Superior atletically and defensively then the 80's 2s" He would be even more unstoppable today the way offenses are run now with the isolations which would make jordan unguardable with his 24 year old athletiscm.


----------



## Michael Jackson (Jun 11, 2002)

Please Jordan last and this year does not face the defense he did back in the day. Jordan is hitting the outside J alot. He was getting a lot of assists and open looks. It is not the triple our quadruple teaming that he faced in his prime. Jordan if you have watched is far more of an outside man. If Jordan were younger the defense they would throw at him would be much changed. Not that Jordan isn't still good but he wouldn't get alot of what he gets open today. 

Defensively though no one sees as manytriple teams that Jordan saw. No one in the game has seen that I don't think.


----------



## Showtime84' (Oct 8, 2002)

Here's the end all argument:

Malone and Stockton's averages at 40 in the West, filled with athletic PF's and PG's:

Malone- 21ppg 8rbs 4assts 2stls 46%FG

Stockton- 11ppg 8assts 2stls 3rbs 48%FG

Now can you imagine these two guys in their 20's??!?!?!?! They would rule both positions!!!

Remember in today's NBA there are more athletes but a LOT worse teams and overall basketball players. Expansion has really hurt the quality of the league, there are no GREAT teams anymore!!! While the 80's had the Sixers, Bucks,Pistons, Lakers and Celtics.

For God's sake the freakin Pistons are leading the East!!! with one of the sorriest lineups I've EVER seen.

And in the West you have the Mavs, a poor man's imitation of the 80's Nuggets and even WORSE defensively!!!

A late 80's Jazz with young Stcockton and Malone along with Mark Eaton and Thurl Baily would be pimp slapping the Midwest division of today.

Basically, the NBA of the 80's early 90's RULED and the present watered down league SUCKS!!! and the ratings and lack of popularity prove it.

The ALL-Star game on TNT??????? LOL!!! like someone said "Did the Oxygen Network turn it down"


----------



## numlock (Feb 8, 2003)

jacko he probably dosent face the same intsense defending on "him" but when some guy is getting those numbers shouldnt they give him a little more attention. I mean he was the only wiz alive last night and nj couldnt contain him and they are one the best teams in the league

I dont think really really good 40 year olds would have done so well 10 or more years ago. And now we have 3 mj, stock and malone which would make a pretty nice team and could probably do well


----------



## hellrazor08 (Feb 20, 2003)

*...*

ummm malone couldnt shoot straight in his 20s. how is he gonna dominate when he cant even hit a 15 ft jumper?


----------



## Showtime84' (Oct 8, 2002)

By murdering people down low and outrunning them for fast break baskets!!! Remember John Stockton in his prime could lead a bonafied fast break attack as good or better than Jason Kidd and Karl Malone was a GAZELLE back in his younger days.

And by 1989, his 4th season at 26 years old, he already had that mid range jumper down cold, so he would've killed people from ANY angle.

Face it, these 2 guys, along with all the great players and teams of the 80's would own the present NBA.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

*Re: Most of you are too young to*



> Originally posted by <b>DaFuture</b>!
> realize why MJ was so great so trying to explain the greatness of a man which many of you never had the chance to witness is a lost cause. I don't care what era it is scoring 35 points a game on 54% shooting is ridiculous. Plain and simple. The reason why defensesfg% have gone down is becomes teams cant shoot and the ever increasing infatuation with the 3 point line.


Not sure how old you think I am, grandpa, but I grew up in the era of the Jordan hype. I'm not trying to discredit his numbers, but you can't expect a player with Jordan's equal talent to put up those FG% numbers in the modern NBA. In the 80's teams would put in god-awful defenders because they could shoot. Some coaches like Doug Moe gave up over 20 concession baskets a game. There was no advance scouting or rigorous tape watching. I'm suprised by how many defenders know what move a guy like Kobe is going to pull before he even does it. Also all the big men in the 80's were either bean poles or unathletic stiffs. There were some unathletic bean poles as well. Kareem was a twig, Big Chief was a twig, McHale was a twig, Laimbeer couldn't move, Salley was a twig. It's a lot eaiser to finish around the basket with those guys then with guys like Ben Wallace, Shaq, Hillario, Webber and so on. 



> Wilt was a center in an athletically challeneged and talent deprived time for centers. Wilt was a great one but for a shooting gaurd to have a 54% fgp is INSANE. Kobe will never win a championship without Shaq and most people who play and know the game of bball say that Jordan could have won a championship with any 3 man of similar capability. Detlef Schremf, Nate McMillan, Drazen Petrovic, Cliff Robinson, I oculd go on.


To quote you "I don't care what era it is..." but getting 100 points and 55 rebounds in single games is beyond insane. For a center to lead the league in assists in more outstanding than a guard shooting 54%.

The "Kobe will never win a championship without Shaq" statement shows how objective you are on the subject. You're probably one of those people that said Shaq will never be a winner because he cares too much about rap and acting right?



Michael do you sleep w/ children? J/K LOL



There were questions if he could win a championship but lead a team to the playoffs like Kobe will never do with lakers as they are currently constructed I think not. [/QUOTE]


----------



## Michael Jackson (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>numlock</b>!
> jacko he probably dosent face the same intsense defending on "him" but when some guy is getting those numbers shouldnt they give him a little more attention. I mean he was the only wiz alive last night and nj couldnt contain him and they are one the best teams in the league
> 
> I dont think really really good 40 year olds would have done so well 10 or more years ago. And now we have 3 mj, stock and malone which would make a pretty nice team and could probably do well


I do conceed that point only because the teams were sarter in the day. Jordan Stockton and Malone all have higher B-Ball IQ than most today partly because of thier age. Basketball IQ today is most likely more of a dominant feature than Athleticism.


----------

