Some interesting quotes about the No hand checking rule and Michael Jordan

[ashbelly]

During a 2007 L.A. Lakers pre-season broadcast, Phil Jackson was asked how he thought Michael Jordan would perform today, Phil said: "Michael would average 45 with these rules.



"You can't even touch a guy now," says Charlotte coach Larry Brown. "The college game is much more physical than our game. I always tease Michael [Jordan], if he played today, he'd average 50."



Question for Clyde Drexler: In the current league where there is no hand checking and no ruff play how much better would your numbers be?
Clyde Drexler: "Oh, tremendously better, from shooting percentage to points per game everything would be up, and our old teams would score a lot more points, and that is saying something because we could score a lot back then. I do think there should be an asterisk next to some of these scoring leaders, because it is much different trying to score with a forearm in your face. It is harder to score with that resistance. You had to turn your back on guys defending you back in the day with all the hand checking that was going on. For guys who penetrate these days, it's hunting season. Yes, now you can play (floating)zone(legally), but teams rarely do."




"The defensive rules, the hand checking, the ability to make contact on a guy in certain areas .... [have] all been taken away from the game. If Kobe could get 81, I think Michael could get 100 in today's game." - Scottie Pippen January 2006




Craig Hodges is the Lakers shooting coach, get a look at what he said:
Q: If you could take one player in their prime, would you take Michael Jordan or Kobe?
A: M.J., all day. There's no comparison. M.J. could score 100 points in this era. You can't hand-check now. Imagine that trying to guard M.J. It would be crazy.



[QUOTE]Asked if he could defend Jordan under today

[NBASTATMAN]

:bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:


I asked that question to Clyde on Espn... :rockon:


MJ is easily the best..Still I got alot more respect for Kobe than I have for Lebron... I actually still love Lebrons game but I don't like the way he has conducted himself... Dude has to be put in his place... Pleeze or ash I told you that the Cavs could not win with their lineup... The current heat can win but I fear that Lebron may hurt the team with his selfishness.. Still the Lakers will kill them down low at this point...

[LA KB24]

Yup.
So unless the league changes the rules again, which they won't, MJ will always be G.O.A.T

[whoartthou]

Michael Jordan would absolutely demolish every team today.

[7_cody]

We already know that MJ>Kobe. That doesn't mean that Kobe isn't the best today, or for the last 5 years, or that Kobe>>>>>LeBron (remember TMac?). It also mean that Kobe isn't even comparable to MJ and that it's not even close, because it actually is.

[tpols]

Yea...

while individual defense has become weakened since jordan's era, team defense has improved ...

and team D will always be > individual D.

[7_cody]

Yea...

while individual defense has become weakened since jordan's era, team defense has improved ...

and team D will always be > individual D.

Are you kidding? I'd rather go up against Kevin Garnett and the Celtics defense than John Stockton and Karl Malone.

[tpols]

Are you kidding? I'd rather go up against Kevin Garnett and the Celtics defense than John Stockton and Karl Malone.
You seriously would take the Utah Jazz of the 90s over the Celtics of the past few years in terms of defense?

[ashbelly]

Are you kidding? I'd rather go up against Kevin Garnett and the Celtics defense than John Stockton and Karl Malone.


Key word = Team defense, a handful team play team defense in this era (actually the pistons and the Celtics).. in the golden days all teams strived to play team defense. And Jordan used to shit on team defenses everytime he stepped on the court.

[SGK_81]

what, a bunch or retired stars from the past trying to маке out their time the acme of basketball ?? :confusedshrug: We've seen that before.
It would be the same in terms of scoring averages. I could imagine inferior and less-athletic players profiting more from the no hand checking

[whoartthou]

you guys should rewatch the 2010 nba finals. The boston celtics mostly single covered kobe bryant with either ray allen on him or tony allen. They did not DOUBLE him on every possession. IN fact, when they did double him, he took stupid forced shots instead of dishing it out to an open teammate. I am not saying that the 2008 and 2010 celtics were not great defensive teams, but kobe's shot selection sure does overrate the celtics a little bit..

[tpols]

you guys should rewatch the 2010 nba finals. The boston celtics mostly single covered kobe bryant with either ray allen on him or tony allen. They did not DOUBLE him on every possession. IN fact, when they did double him, he took stupid forced shots instead of dishing it out to an open teammate. I am not saying that the 2008 and 2010 celtics were not great defensive teams, but kobe's shot selection sure does overrate the celtics a little bit..
Kobe did take some stupid shots but their rotations were perfect anytime he took a dribble towards the basket. They'd always collapse on him with 1 or 2 extra guys if he got anywhere near the paint and if he had just passed more and didn't try to take so many hero shots his team could have won a little easier.

[ImmortalD24]

Derek Fisher also said Kobe could score 50 every night if he wanted to. Doesn't mean shit now does it?

If they called it by the book.. Kobe should averge 15+ft's easily. But that would ruin the game so they allow handchecking etc. Why do you think Ray Allen didn't get into foul trouble after game 1? He still played that same grabbing defense..

[ashbelly]

Derek Fisher also said Kobe could score 50 every night if he wanted to. Doesn't mean shit now does it?

he can't because he'll be operating out of the teams offense. The great ones did it within the team's offense..

[tpols]

he can't because he'll be operating out of the teams offense. The great ones did it within the team's offense..
lol you want me to pull up MJ's team's record when he was scoring major ppg?

Don't try to tell me MJ would average 50 a game today while operating within the offense because that would make you a retard...

[whoartthou]

Kobe did take some stupid shots but their rotations were perfect anytime he took a dribble towards the basket. They'd always collapse on him with 1 or 2 extra guys if he got anywhere near the paint and if he had just passed more and didn't try to take so many hero shots his team could have won a little easier.

i agree wholeheartedly. The Celtics rotations were crisp and top notch. I think if the lakers collectively passed the ball down to the post more often (Gasol or bynum) and have odom impose the matchup issues that he gives, i honestly believe that this would have opened the door for kobe to operate more freely and thus having a MUCH more efficient game.

[Quizno]

he can't because he'll be operating out of the teams offense. The great ones did it within the team's offense..
oh, so when players and ex-players say MJ could do it, it's legit, but when they say kobe could, it doesn't count. gotcha.

agenda detected.

[whoartthou]

Derek Fisher also said Kobe could score 50 every night if he wanted to. Doesn't mean shit now does it?

If they called it by the book.. Kobe should averge 15+ft's easily. But that would ruin the game so they allow handchecking etc. Why do you think Ray Allen didn't get into foul trouble after game 1? He still played that same grabbing defense..

Ray allen did handcheck kobe sometimes, but i am sure kobe does not mind it (didn't kobe once mention that he wishes the nba would go back to its physical style of play?).

[ashbelly]

oh, so when players and ex-players say MJ could do it, it's legit, but when they say kobe could, it doesn't count. gotcha.

agenda detected.


The proof is in the pudding, MJ did it and won six 6 rings in the process. When Kobe did it, they couldn't win some playoffs games.. What more evidence do you need to know that he can't do it ??? :confusedshrug:

[jstern]

Jordan once said that he could average 40 points per game, back in the 90s, but that it would have killed the team's offense.

Either way, a million years from now will come, and all this won't matter.

[LA KB24]

you guys should rewatch the 2010 nba finals. The boston celtics mostly single covered kobe bryant with either ray allen on him or tony allen. They did not DOUBLE him on every possession. IN fact, when they did double him, he took stupid forced shots instead of dishing it out to an open teammate. I am not saying that the 2008 and 2010 celtics were not great defensive teams, but kobe's shot selection sure does overrate the celtics a little bit.. So you're telling us to rewatch the Finals and then you say this sh1t? lol.

Whenever he stepped in the paint, there was almost always a tripple team. The C's were an excellent help and recover defensive team.

[Quizno]

The proof is in the pudding, MJ did it and won six 6 rings in the process. When Kobe did it, they couldn't win some playoffs games.. What more evidence do you need to know that he can't do it ??? :confusedshrug:
uhh, not really. when MJ was winning championships with the bulls he was averaging about 30 ppg. when kobe won championships (not counting the 99-00 season when kobe wasn't a superstar), he was averaging about 27 ppg. are you really saying THREE ppg is a huge difference?

[lefthook00]

Players still hand check today dummies. It just gets called more b/c it's "illegal" now. So is 3 seconds. Doesn't mean it doesn't happen ALL THE TIME.

[7_cody]

uhh, not really. when MJ was winning championships with the bulls he was averaging about 30 ppg. when kobe won championships (not counting the 99-00 season when kobe wasn't a superstar), he was averaging about 27 ppg. are you really saying THREE ppg is a huge difference?

Didn't you know that if you want to know who had a better game, all you gotta do is look at their stat line?

3 ppg is HUGE difference. I mean MJ and Kobe played the exact same roles, had the EXACT same teammates, played the EXACT same team that MJ did, faced the EXACT same defenders, FELT the exact same good and healthy MJ did on those EXACT same days, etc etc...

[tpols]

Players still hand check today dummies. It just gets called more b/c it's "illegal" now. So is 3 seconds. Doesn't mean it doesn't happen ALL THE TIME.It's amazing how so many people don't aknowledge this...

They either do it to exxagerate prior eras or they really just don't have a clue...

[7_cody]

Players still hand check today dummies. It just gets called more b/c it's "illegal" now. So is 3 seconds. Doesn't mean it doesn't happen ALL THE TIME.

Yep, but according to some posters, we don't play in a rough league anymore. LOL. I agree that it's not as phyiscal, but there's plenty of contact going around.

As for hand checking... lol, WHY IS KOBE NOT SHOOTING 30 FTS A GAME? ITS ILLEGAL RIGHT?

[LA KB24]

Didn't you know that if you want to know who had a better game, all you gotta do is look at their stat line?

3 ppg is HUGE difference. I mean MJ and Kobe played the exact same roles, had the EXACT same teammates, played the EXACT same team that MJ did, faced the EXACT same defenders, FELT the exact same good and healthy MJ did on those EXACT same days, etc etc...

Hahaha I like this new guy.

[NuggetsFan]

It's just common sense. It's easier to guard someone with your hands. Think about if your playing on the courts and you couldn't use your hands? You'd probably get blown by alot more.

Either way I'm sure great players would adjust depending on what era they played in. Kinda sucks now how there's so many bail out calls tho.

[TheLogo]

This thread is failure.

Let's just say MJ can score with "no handchecking" but you have to factor in that Zone defense is allowed.

MJ wouldn't be able to score, not because of the hand checking, but the zone.

:no:

[LA KB24]

This thread is failure.

Let's just say MJ can score with "no handchecking" but you have to factor in that Zone defense is allowed.

MJ wouldn't be able to score, not because of the hand checking, but the zone.

:no:
:roll:

Why aren't you banned yet?

[jstern]

It's just common sense. It's easier to guard someone with your hands. Think about if your playing on the courts and you couldn't use your hands? You'd probably get blown by alot more.

Either way I'm sure great players would adjust depending on what era they played in. Kinda sucks now how there's so many bail out calls tho.
I know from experience, playing against this 54 year old guy. He's the only person that I know that can beat me one on one, because of his jumper that doesn't miss, but even more because he hand checks. Scoring on him is so much harder than against anyone my age, and gets me so tired.

[jstern]

uhh, not really. when MJ was winning championships with the bulls he was averaging about 30 ppg. when kobe won championships (not counting the 99-00 season when kobe wasn't a superstar), he was averaging about 27 ppg. are you really saying THREE ppg is a huge difference?
I'm pretty sure Jordan was averaging more than 30ppg.

[Quizno]

exactly 30.4 ppg

[jstern]

exactly 30.4 ppg
What season are you talking about?

[Quizno]

What season are you talking about?
the average ppg of the 6 seasons the bulls won championships

[TheLogo]

:roll:

Why aren't you banned yet?

because I don't troll like some people on here.

[7_cody]

It's just common sense. It's easier to guard someone with your hands. Think about if your playing on the courts and you couldn't use your hands? You'd probably get blown by alot more.

Either way I'm sure great players would adjust depending on what era they played in. Kinda sucks now how there's so many bail out calls tho.

The problem is everyone still hand checks today... otherwise Ray Allen would have fouled out of 7 games in the Finals. Yes, all of them. Well, I guess in real life if they called it he would be smart enough to stop doing it... but you get my point.

[jstern]

the average ppg of the 6 seasons the bulls won championships
I thought ya were talking about post season. But if you guys are going to take Kobe's 1st championship out because of what ever reason ya gave, then why not take Jordan's last season out, because he was old averaging 28 ppg on a league that I think was averaging 91ppg. I mean if you're going to take Kobe's weakest championship season why not do the same too Jordan?

[7_cody]

I thought ya were talking about post season. But if you guys are going to take Kobe's 1st championship out because of what ever reason ya gave, then why not take Jordan's last season out, because he was old averaging 28 ppg on a league that I think was averaging 91ppg. I mean if you're going to take Kobe's weakest championship season why not do the same too Jordan?

Someone should do the math on that, I'd be interested to see it

[jstern]

Also there's a big difference between getting away with hand checking on occasion and being able to all the time.

I never understood the logic of, "Ray Allen hand checked Kobe on occasion, so today's defense is the same as the 90s when players were allowed to on every play, and could do it at full force without hesitation."

Don't get the logic.

[7_cody]

Also there's a big difference between getting away with hand checking on occasion and being able to all the time.

I never understood the logic of, "Ray Allen hand checked Kobe on occasion, so today's defense is the same as the 90s when players were allowed to on every play, and could do it at full force without hesitation."

Don't get the logic.

Seriously, on occasion? That's what you saw??

[Quizno]

I thought ya were talking about post season. But if you guys are going to take Kobe's 1st championship out because of what ever reason ya gave, then why not take Jordan's last season out, because he was old averaging 28 ppg on a league that I think was averaging 91ppg. I mean if you're going to take Kobe's weakest championship season why not do the same too Jordan?
well, i only took out kobe's "weakest" championship season because he wasn't a main scoring option on his team. he was definitely one of the best scorers, but he was far from a superstar or a leader. he hadn't really emerged at that point and almost all of the offensive load was carried by shaq because kobe hadn't developed yet, whereas in MJ's six championship seasons he was the undisputed first option offensively

[tpols]

Also there's a big difference between getting away with hand checking on occasion and being able to all the time.

I never understood the logic of, "Ray Allen hand checked Kobe on occasion, so today's defense is the same as the 90s when players were allowed to on every play, and could do it at full force without hesitation."

Don't get the logic.
Yeah its the same thing for me how people act like physical play is nonexistant in the nba today and old school guys would be dropping 50 a game...

[ashbelly]

uhh, not really. when MJ was winning championships with the bulls he was averaging about 30 ppg. when kobe won championships (not counting the 99-00 season when kobe wasn't a superstar), he was averaging about 27 ppg. are you really saying THREE ppg is a huge difference?


Jordan was making 49% of his Field goals while taking 1 more shot than kobe as the 1st option.. by the way he was averaging 31 ppg. Kobe on the other hand was making 44% of his field goals FG's and average 29 ppg.. see the difference , kobe is not a pure scorer/efficient scorer. he'a chucker .. This are from their 1st 3pt.. Their 2nd 3pt(that if La wins this year) shows that jordan maintained his scoring and efficiency while kobe's dropped tremendously.. Further proof that he's not a pure scorer but a chucker..

[tpols]

Jordan was making 49% of his Field goals while taking 1 more shot than kobe as the 1st option.. by the way he was averaging 31 ppg. Kobe on the other hand was making 44% of his field goals FG's and average 29 ppg.. see the difference , kobe is not a pure scorer/efficient scorer. he'a chucker .. This are from their 1st 3pt.. Their 2nd 3pt(that if La wins this year) shows that jordan maintained his scoring and efficiency while kobe's dropped tremendously.. Further proof that he's not a pure scorer but a chucker..
Isnt shit like this ban worthy?

[7_cody]

Jordan was making 49% of his Field goals while taking 1 more shot than kobe as the 1st option.. by the way he was averaging 31 ppg. Kobe on the other hand was making 44% of his field goals FG's and average 29 ppg.. see the difference , kobe is not a pure scorer/efficient scorer. he'a chucker .. This are from their 1st 3pt.. Their 2nd 3pt(that if La wins this year) shows that jordan maintained his scoring and efficiency while kobe's dropped tremendously.. Further proof that he's not a pure scorer but a chucker..

If Kobe's first threepeat was in his prime ('03-'07 probably), and Kobe could face teams like MJ did in the Finals, or i.e., say the Jazz or the Suns in those years, he would have just as good or better statistics as MJ.

Nice way to manipulate stats though.

[ashbelly]

Yeah its the same thing for me how people act like physical play is nonexistant in the nba today and old school guys would be dropping 50 a game...

The great scorers in the old days would score alot, great coaches have said so becuase the new rules would allow them to do so. didn't read the quotes i posted at the beginning of the thread. whats hard to believe ? :confusedshrug:

[ashbelly]

If Kobe's first threepeat was in his prime ('04-'07 probably), and Kobe could face teams like MJ did in the Finals, or i.e., say the Jazz or the Suns in those years, he would have just as good or better statistics as MJ.

Nice way to manipulate stats though.


Kobe couldn't do this because whenever teams have emulated the old defenses( i.e pistons and celtics) he struggled so much against them. Also during his prime he proved that he couldn't win scoring that much, but jordan won scoring that much.. What more evidence do you need ? :confusedshrug: ..

[Batz]

Isnt shit like this ban worthy?
Not when the admins #1 source of humor entertainment is PB.

[7_cody]

The great scorers in the old days would score alot, great coaches have said so becuase the new rules would allow them to do so. didn't read the quotes i posted at the beginning of the thread. whats hard to believe ? :confusedshrug:

Yeah, all those Coaches would be right if the rules were actually enforced. Also, they said easier, but I don't think they were dead serious about MJ being able to average 40 or I don't think that they're trying to say that those guys would be better scorers than our current ones.

If they meant MJ tried hard to score 40 but wasn't acting in the teams best interest, then they might be right. But so could Kobe, and a lot of other current NBA players including LeBron, Wade

[tpols]

The great scorers in the old days would score alot, great coaches have said so becuase the new rules would allow them to do so. didn't read the quotes i posted at the beginning of the thread. whats hard to believe ? :confusedshrug:
The fact that you don't think kobe is a great scorer shows your bias. How do you trolls take yourselves seriously? Wheres kobe on your all time list? 55th, maaaybe 54 lol.

[7_cody]

Kobe couldn't do this because whenever teams have emulated the old defenses( i.e pistons and celtics) he struggled so much against them. What more evidence do you need ? :confusedshrug:

You can't compare Kobe's first 3-peat to MJ's first statistically. That' sjust f**ci**g retarded. There are so many... wow, not even the first option, at that age MJ was only in College, heh... not is using statistics already a lame argument, but to do so in this context is laughable.

However, MJ was in his prime his first 3-peat. In Kobe's prime, he didn't make the Finals. If Kobe did make the Finals, and did play against lesser defense, then he'd put up the same statistics or better. Hell, look at what Kobe did against he Suns and Jazz this year at AGE 32.

If you compare MJ's second three-peat to Kobe's current back-to-back, the numbers are a lot more similar, and logically so.

[7_cody]

The fact that you don't think kobe is a great scorer shows your bias. How do you trolls take yourselves seriously? Wheres kobe on your all time list? 55th, maaaybe 54 lol.

heheeheheheehehehehe......

[jstern]

well, i only took out kobe's "weakest" championship season because he wasn't a main scoring option on his team. he was definitely one of the best scorers, but he was far from a superstar or a leader. he hadn't really emerged at that point and almost all of the offensive load was carried by shaq because kobe hadn't developed yet, whereas in MJ's six championship seasons he was the undisputed first option offensively
And even if you took out Kobe's weakest season, just from looking at the stats it looks like he would be under 27ppg. I just added up his last 2 season's that he won with Shaq and he averaged 26.7 ppg, so he was under 27. But either way, lower shooting percentage than Jordan.

Why not take away all the championships Kobe won with Shaq then? Pretend he only has 2 rings, but then you can't compare him with Jordan. The point is you just can't pick and choose which seasons you want to include.

[ashbelly]

The fact that you don't think kobe is a great scorer shows your bias. How do you trolls take yourselves seriously? Wheres kobe on your all time list? 55th, maaaybe 54 lol.

Kobe is not a pure/efficient scorer., there is a difference. He's a Chucker, his FG% tells the whole story .. Thats a fact.

[7_cody]

And even if you took out Kobe's weakest season, just from looking at the stats it looks like he would be under 27ppg. I just added up his last 2 season's that he won with Shaq and he averaged 26.7 ppg, so he was under 27. But either way, lower shooting percentage than Jordan.

Why not take away all the championships Kobe won with Shaq then? Pretend he only has 2 rings, but then you can't compare him with Jordan. The point is you just can't pick and choose which seasons you want to include.

Using statistics is already WEAK. It's fuu**ng WEAK. But to do so without the proper context is EVEN WORSE.

Yes, you do need to take out seasons when necessary when comparing STATISTICS.

[ashbelly]

And even if you took out Kobe's weakest season, just from looking at the stats it looks like he would be under 27ppg. I just added up his last 2 season's that he won with Shaq and he averaged 26.7 ppg, so he was under 27. But either way, lower shooting percentage than Jordan.

Why not take away all the championships Kobe won with Shaq then? Pretend he only has 2 rings, but then you can't compare him with Jordan. The point is you just can't pick and choose which seasons you want to include.

Jordans is a career 50 FG %, very efficient. kobe does not come close to this. It doesn't matter what years you pick when comparing them.

[jstern]

Seriously, on occasion? That's what you saw??
The rules are not the same as the past, that's why the game is difference. Yes on occasion, it's not the same as not having to hold back. Touch fouls.

[7_cody]

Kobe is not a pure/efficient scorer., there is a difference. He's a Chucker, his FG% tells the whole story .. Thats a fact.

Only a chucker like Kobe could be unstoppable, considered the most dangerous player in the NBA, hit 6 game winning shots in one season, and drop 81 points in one game on 65% + shooting.

Damn, what a lousy chucker. Dude can't even shoot 50% for a season. He should become a slasher.

[7_cody]

The rules are not the same as the past, that's why the game is difference. Yes on occasion, it's not the same as not having to hold back. Touch fouls.

There's always been touch fouls. On ocassion... ok, Ray doesn't hand check Kobe very often. It's only on ocassion. That's really what you saw?

[ashbelly]

Only a chucker like Kobe could be unstoppable, considered the most dangerous player in the NBA, hit 6 game winning shots in one season, and drop 81 points in one game on 65% + shooting.

Damn, what a lousy chucker. Dude can't even shoot 50% for a season. He should become a slasher.

You are now trying to cop a plea instead of arguing facts.. he's not an efficient scorer, one high scoring efficient scoring game does not tell the whole story of his game.

[jstern]

Using statistics is already WEAK. It's fuu**ng WEAK. But to do so without the proper context is EVEN WORSE.

Yes, you do need to take out seasons when necessary when comparing STATISTICS.
So compare only the 2 seasons that Kobe won it as the man, to the 2 season that Jordan won it at the same age that Kobe won those 2.

[7_cody]

You are now trying to cop a plea instead of arguing facts.. he's not an efficient scorer, one high scoring efficient scoring game does not tell the whole story of his game.

FG A > FG B, therefore Player A is more efficient than Player B is not factual. Sorry.

Especially when said FG % is 3-4% higher. Way to keep manipulating stats. They aren't proving anything.

[7_cody]

So compare only the 2 seasons that Kobe won it as the man, to the 2 season that Jordan won it at the same age that Kobe won those 2.

Comparing Kobe's current back-to-back with Jordan's second three-peat is more logical. Comparing both of their first three-peats is as retarded as 90% if ISH. I've seen the numbers. They're very comparable.

[Quizno]

And even if you took out Kobe's weakest season, just from looking at the stats it looks like he would be under 27ppg. I just added up his last 2 season's that he won with Shaq and he averaged 26.7 ppg, so he was under 27. But either way, lower shooting percentage than Jordan.

Why not take away all the championships Kobe won with Shaq then? Pretend he only has 2 rings, but then you can't compare him with Jordan. The point is you just can't pick and choose which seasons you want to include.
it's 26.88 ppg. i rounded up.

and again, i only excluded kobe's first championship season because he wasn't a superstar at that point whereas michael jordan had always been a superstar and first option on his teams. if you really want me to include that season, then kobe's average throughout his championship seasons would be exactly 26 ppg. still not a big difference at all :confusedshrug:

[ashbelly]

FG A > FG B, therefore Player A is more efficient than Player B is not factual. Sorry.


More scoring titles and more rings is factual though . :confusedshrug:

[JustinJDW]

Also there's a big difference between getting away with hand checking on occasion and being able to all the time.

I never understood the logic of, "Ray Allen hand checked Kobe on occasion, so today's defense is the same as the 90s when players were allowed to on every play, and could do it at full force without hesitation."

Don't get the logic.This x1000.

[7_cody]

More scoring titles and more rings is factual though . :confusedshrug:

That hasn't been your argument. WTF? If we're gonna go there, then yes I agree, MJ > Kobe. But it's debatable. Kobe is on MJ's level. He's not better. Of course, this is my PERSONAL opinion.

[Quizno]

Kobe on the other hand was making 44% of his field goals "

in his championship seasons, kobe shot 46.5% from the field :confusedshrug:

[7_cody]

This x1000.

Honest question, did you feel like Ray Allen only hand checked Kobe once in awhile... or do you feel like he was handchecking him the majority of the time?

[tpols]

Kobe is not a pure/efficient scorer., there is a difference. He's a Chucker, his FG% tells the whole story .. Thats a fact.
How is a back to back FMVP and 5 time nba champion reduced to the label of 'chucker'? Please name one other person in the history of the nba who has this resume and has been labeled a glorified chucker.

[jstern]

it's 26.88 ppg. i rounded up.

and again, i only excluded kobe's first championship season because he wasn't a superstar at that point whereas michael jordan had always been a superstar and first option on his teams. if you really want me to include that season, then kobe's average throughout his championship seasons would be exactly 26 ppg. still not a big difference at all :confusedshrug:
It's 26.71. But I'm done comparing.

[ashbelly]

That hasn't been your argument. WTF? If we're gonna go there, then yes I agree, MJ > Kobe. But it's debatable. Kobe is on MJ's level. He's not better. Of course, this is my PERSONAL opinion.


Well Way more scoring titles is Factual that FG% A> FG% B . Player A(MJ) can score at will because he's more efficient , while Player B(kobe)can't score at will because he's less efficient.

[7_cody]

Well Way more scoring titles is Factual that FG% A> FG% B . Player A(MJ) can score at will because he's more efficient , while Player B(kobe)can't score at will because he's less efficient.

You just it again.

[ashbelly]

How is a back to back FMVP and 5 time nba champion reduced to the label of 'chucker'? Please name one other person in the history of the nba who has this resume and has been labeled a glorified chucker.

Fact is kobe is the only player in history that has shot 43% and 41% on his way to winning Back to back Finals MVP. No other player has done so in the History of the NBA.. So yes he's a glorified chucker.

[7_cody]

It's 26.71. But I'm done comparing.

Yes, all you need to do is look at MJ's 30 Finals PPG to know that he was ten times the scorer Kobe was. Man, these statistics are awesome.

MJ slight edge in PPG, therefore MJ >>>> Kobe in scoring
MJ slight edge in FG%, therefore MJ >>>> Kobe in efficiency

Wow, if it was that easy, we wouldn't need scouts. We could just look at their Summer League Stats to determine who the best players are.

[tpols]

Fact is kobe is the only player in history that has shot 43% and 41% on his way to winning Back to back Finals MVP. No other player has done so in the History of the NBA.. So yes he's a glorified chucker.
So, in other words, you put AI on the lakers the past two years and he gets back to back FMVPs...

[momo]

http://www.positivenation.co.uk/issue120/pics/Cover1.jpg

[7_cody]

So, in other words, you put AI on the lakers the past two years and he gets back to back FMVPs...

According to ashbelly, AI isn't a great scorer either (in his prime)

[ashbelly]

So, in other words, you put AI on the lakers the past two years and he gets back to back FMVPs...

Maybe so, they shoot almost the same percentage.. Iverson is a career 43%Fg and kobe is 44% FG.. The sure thing though, add lebron or wade to those teams and You get way better results..

[tpols]

Maybe so, they shoot almost the same percentage.. Iverson is a career 43%Fg and kobe is 44% FG..
man I'm just feeding the troll...

[7_cody]

Maybe so, they shoot almost the same percentage.. Iverson is a career 43%Fg and kobe is 44% FG..

This is what's wrong with trying to figure out who the best players are by looking at their stats. You honestly think that Iverson would function the same in an entirely different offense, different coach, different teammates, different team... for all we know, he would play great against the Celtics or even worse. You can't just say well he shot 43% therefore he'd do the same against the Celtics on a different team.

[jstern]

That hasn't been your argument. WTF? If we're gonna go there, then yes I agree, MJ > Kobe. But it's debatable. Kobe is on MJ's level. He's not better. Of course, this is my PERSONAL opinion.
The thing that separates is not so much the skills, but Jordan's ability to almost take over at will, particularly in the clutch. I'm sure you will take this as a knock on Kobe rather than what separated Jordan from everyone else.

[ashbelly]

This is what's wrong with trying to figure out who the best players are by looking at their stats. You honestly think that Iverson would function the same in an entirely different offense, different coach, different teammates, different team... for all we know, he would play great against the Celtics or even worse. You can't just say well he shot 43% therefore he'd do the same against the Celtics on a different team.


Thats why i said , maybe so.. Things like height advantage might make him not play better than kobe in the same Offense. But i added that guys like lebron and wade would do as much as kobe or even better than him on the same offense

[7_cody]

The thing that separates is not so much the skills, but Jordan's ability to almost take over at will, particularly in the clutch. I'm sure you will take this as a knock on Kobe rather than what separated Jordan from everyone else.

Jordan didn't didn't take over against the '96 Sonics, the only great defense he faced in the Finals.

If we want to talk about taking over... Kobe has done that more AND BETTER than MJ has.

[jstern]

Jordan didn't didn't take over against the '96 Sonics, the only great defense he faced in the Finals.

If we want to talk about taking over... Kobe has done that more AND BETTER than MJ has.
Sure he has. How old are you?

[tpols]

Thats why i said , maybe so.. Things like height advantage might make him not play better than kobe in the same Offense. But i added that guys like lebron and wade would do as much as kobe or even better than him on the same offense
How can you do better than two back to back fmvps?:confusedshrug:

[ashbelly]

Jordan didn't didn't take over against the '96 Sonics, the only great defense he faced in the Finals.

If we want to talk about taking over... Kobe has done that more AND BETTER than MJ has.

:roll: :roll: :roll: Game 7 bro ?? Compared to jordans game 6 vs Jazz. Portland/suns series.. are you delusional bro ? I'm gone now. :roll:

[OldSchoolBBall]

I'm not getting to into this agument, but the fact is that anyone who doesn't think that a 25-30 year old Jordan would average at least 32/6/6/2/1/50% FG/58% TS shooting today is kidding themselves.

In my opinion, playing his normal style but in a Kobe type scoring role (as opposed to a "do it all" role a la Lebron/Wade from '06-'10), Jordan would average 33 pts/6.5 reb/6.5 ast/2.5 stl/1+ blk/50.5-51.5% FG. In a Lebron/Wade style role, he'd average 31 pts/7+ reb/8+ ast/2.5 stl/1+ blk/51% FG. Highest scoring season would be something like 36/6/5/47-48% FG/56-57% TS.

[OldSchoolBBall]

If Kobe's first threepeat was in his prime ('03-'07 probably), and Kobe could face teams like MJ did in the Finals, or i.e., say the Jazz or the Suns in those years, he would have just as good or better statistics as MJ.


You're ****ing crazy if you believe that. :oldlol:

[Sound and Fury]

Jordans is a career 50 FG %, very efficient. kobe does not come close to this. It doesn't matter what years you pick when comparing them.
I could posit that the league-wide field goal percentage was higher in Jordan's era (47% on average) than it was in Kobe's (44%), which I could then interpret to mean that Jordan put up his numbers against inferior defenses.

I could in turn point out that Jordan shot 0.028 percentage points better than the league average for his era (an increase of 6% in scoring efficiency), while Kobe shot 0.007 percentage points better than the league average for his era (an increase of 2% in scoring efficiency) which means Jordan's numbers were a smidge better relative to the defenses he faced than Kobe's were.

Or I could adjust Kobe's scoring average for pace and compare to MJ's. Etc. Ad nauseum.

All this thread has done so far is prove three things...

1. There are lies, damn lies, and statistics.

2. Arguing usually serves only to entrench each side more firmly in the belief that they are right.

3. Most people in this thread are interested in using statistics in the same way a drunk uses a lamp post... for support, rather than for illumination.

And now, to go WAY back to the opening point in the thread in the hopes of re-railling this badly-derailed thread (it's clear the OP has an anti-Kobe, pro-Jordan agenda, which is great for bringing out the trolls on both sides of the Kobe argument, but there are a couple of interesting points to address with respect to hand checking)... and other posters have alluded to this:

Yes, it would be much easier for MJ to beat his own defender in a non-hand-check era. Play against a guy who's about 40 and grew up hand-checking (and let him hand-check you) if you doubt this. It is MUCH harder to beat a hand-check on the perimeter because the hand check essentially extends the area you can deny a defender from about a 3-foot-diameter circle (what you can take up with your body) to an 8-foot-diameter circle (what you can take up with leaning your body either way with your arm extended).

Because it takes the offensive player an extra step or so to cover that extra distance, the on-ball defender has more time to react. Because of this, on-ball perimeter defenders could be much more successful prior to the elimination of the hand-check. Not because they are "better" but because they have more time to react and can deny more space due to the rules at that time.

On the flip side, once an offensive player beat his man, the "illegal defense/man-to-man" rules meant that he had far more driving lanes to the basket and he would be double-teamed less frequently (and only double-teamed, by rule, after he had the ball in his hands). So while it was harder to beat your defender initially, once you did, you were going to make him look bad, because the defense had less time to react and farther to go to reach you.

At the end of the day, though, the proof is in the pudding. Team defenders today are better and react more quickly - and yet, after about 1985 (when hand-checking became more and more aggressive), field goal percentages went DOWN until its elimination, when they reversed course and began climbing - and they're still climbing (though not at their pre-1990 levels) even as defenses have become more complex and help defense has gotten better (and players have grown up without the hand-checking rules).

I would say, then, that it is slightly easier to score without the hand-checking rules in place than it was with them in place, with the proof being the direction field-goal percentage is taking. That said, with the difference in field goal percentage league wide only about 0.030 between the peak of the NBA and now, you are talking about an extra one shot in 30 going in - for a guy like Kobe or Jordan, that's between 1 and 2 points per game.

Also consider that (as alluded to above), the pace of games has slowed down and there are fewer shots to be had. If you adjust for pace, Kobe's numbers look about the same as Jordan's.

So the answer is "no, Jordan would not average 40 points per game in today's NBA" just because of the rule changes - he would have to start breaking the offense to hog shots - the exact same reason he gave for not averaging 40 in the first place (i.e., he COULD do it by choosing to do so, but the rule changes themselves would not automatically make him average 40).

Finally, the answer is, yes, playing against a hand-check is more physically exhausting. Post play hasn't changed much (and because double teams can come and go, may in fact be MORE exhausting than it used to be), but perimeter players definitely get off easier physically today. Again, try playing against a guy who's 40 and hand-checks and then play against a guy who's 22 and doesn't. Assuming they're about equal in skill level (so the guy who's 40 probably was better at 22 than the 22-year old you're playing), you'll find you're MUCH more exhausted after being defended by the 40-year old with the hand check, even if the 22-year old is quicker and jumps higher.

There's the answer to the original question, even if it was clearly agenda-driven (as an excuse to cast aspersions at Kobe). And with that, I'm going to hijack this thread a little further. Most people who have seen both play will tell you that Kobe's not as good as MJ overall, though he does have things that he does better than MJ (three-pointers, for instance), but he's the closest thing we've seen to MJ in our lifetimes... and among the all-time greats on his own merits. And if there was no MJ (or for those who are too young to remember MJ in his prime), he might well be considered the greatest shooting guard ever.

The reason Kobe gets a lot of hate, IMO, is because we actually have another all-time great whose game is very similar and who was slightly better in many areas - we link Magic and Larry because they were almost "The same guy" and played together, but we don't really have a modern analogue for Russell, Chamberlain, Kareem, West, or any of the other guys often mentioned as "top 10 players." Rodman, for instance, had the rebounding of Russell, but not the blocked shots or scoring, so it's pretty obvoius who is superior. Shaq had Chamberlain's power, but not his finesse, which is why we put Shaq with the all-time greats, but usually a notch below Chamberlain. Hakeem had Kareem's finesse, but lacked his outright physical dominance (and Kareem was absolutely DOMINANT through the 70's - don't let his time with the Lakers when he was getting old fool you), and so on.

Magic-Bird and Jordan-Kobe are the only two pairs in the "all-time legends" list whose games are eerily similar (and yes, this is in part because Kobe stole relentlessly from MJ, the same way MJ stole from Dr. J who stole from Connie Hawkins, who stole from Elgin Baylor...). With Magic-Bird, we rank it a draw because we saw them in their primes contemporaneously and they battled to a relative draw most of the time (obviously, SOMEONE has to win a 7-game series, but with those two, you felt if the series went 101 games, it would wind up 51-50)... but with Jordan-Kobe, we never got to see them face off in their prime, and they play under substantially different rules, so it's harder to reconcile in our minds that Jordan and Kobe are very similar as well, and each does a few things better than the other. It's also why it's hard to find a single "Greatest Ever" because each of the guys in the "top ten list" could do some things the other guys couldn't/didn't.

The ISH forums would be a much more congenial place if we would stop trying to declare a "G.O.A.T." or other foolishness - and stop trying to "prove" that Legend A is better (or worse) than Legend B. And that goes doubly for those who say, "well, I don't really hate Legend B, but so many people promote him that I feel the need to jump in and tear him down just to keep things in perspective (and to remind the fans of Legend B that my favorite legend, Legend A, was better than their guy)." Please remember this next time you go to make a thread - or even a post - trying to "prove" that a player is/isn't worthy of respect.

[Quizno]

Maybe so, they shoot almost the same percentage.. Iverson is a career 43%Fg and kobe is 44% FG.. The sure thing though, add lebron or wade to those teams and You get way better results..
are you serious? have you never heard of basketball-reference.com or are you just making stuff up now? kobe's fg% is not not not not not 44%. and allen iverson's fg% is not not not 43%.

[Doranku]

I could posit that the league-wide field goal percentage was higher in Jordan's era (47% on average) than it was in Kobe's (44%), which I could then interpret to mean that Jordan put up his numbers against inferior defenses.

I could in turn point out that Jordan shot 0.028 percentage points better than the league average for his era (an increase of 6% in scoring efficiency), while Kobe shot 0.007 percentage points better than the league average for his era (an increase of 2% in scoring efficiency) which means Jordan's numbers were a smidge better relative to the defenses he faced than Kobe's were.

Or I could adjust Kobe's scoring average for pace and compare to MJ's. Etc. Ad nauseum.

All this thread has done so far is prove three things...

1. There are lies, damn lies, and statistics.

2. Arguing usually serves only to entrench each side more firmly in the belief that they are right.

3. Most people in this thread are interested in using statistics in the same way a drunk uses a lamp post... for support, rather than for illumination.

And now, to go WAY back to the opening point in the thread in the hopes of re-railling this badly-derailed thread (it's clear the OP has an anti-Kobe, pro-Jordan agenda, which is great for bringing out the trolls on both sides of the Kobe argument, but there are a couple of interesting points to address with respect to hand checking)... and other posters have alluded to this:

Yes, it would be much easier for MJ to beat his own defender in a non-hand-check era. Play against a guy who's about 40 and grew up hand-checking (and let him hand-check you) if you doubt this. It is MUCH harder to beat a hand-check on the perimeter because the hand check essentially extends the area you can deny a defender from about a 3-foot-diameter circle (what you can take up with your body) to an 8-foot-diameter circle (what you can take up with leaning your body either way with your arm extended).

Because it takes the offensive player an extra step or so to cover that extra distance, the on-ball defender has more time to react. Because of this, on-ball perimeter defenders could be much more successful prior to the elimination of the hand-check. Not because they are "better" but because they have more time to react and can deny more space due to the rules at that time.

On the flip side, once an offensive player beat his man, the "illegal defense/man-to-man" rules meant that he had far more driving lanes to the basket and he would be double-teamed less frequently (and only double-teamed, by rule, after he had the ball in his hands). So while it was harder to beat your defender initially, once you did, you were going to make him look bad, because the defense had less time to react and farther to go to reach you.

At the end of the day, though, the proof is in the pudding. Team defenders today are better and react more quickly - and yet, after about 1985 (when hand-checking became more and more aggressive), field goal percentages went DOWN until its elimination, when they reversed course and began climbing - and they're still climbing (though not at their pre-1990 levels) even as defenses have become more complex and help defense has gotten better (and players have grown up without the hand-checking rules).

I would say, then, that it is slightly easier to score without the hand-checking rules in place than it was with them in place, with the proof being the direction field-goal percentage is taking. That said, with the difference in field goal percentage league wide only about 0.030 between the peak of the NBA and now, you are talking about an extra one shot in 30 going in - for a guy like Kobe or Jordan, that's between 1 and 2 points per game.

Also consider that (as alluded to above), the pace of games has slowed down and there are fewer shots to be had. If you adjust for pace, Kobe's numbers look about the same as Jordan's.

So the answer is "no, Jordan would not average 40 points per game in today's NBA" just because of the rule changes - he would have to start breaking the offense to hog shots - the exact same reason he gave for not averaging 40 in the first place (i.e., he COULD do it by choosing to do so, but the rule changes themselves would not automatically make him average 40).

Finally, the answer is, yes, playing against a hand-check is more physically exhausting. Post play hasn't changed much (and because double teams can come and go, may in fact be MORE exhausting than it used to be), but perimeter players definitely get off easier physically today. Again, try playing against a guy who's 40 and hand-checks and then play against a guy who's 22 and doesn't. Assuming they're about equal in skill level (so the guy who's 40 probably was better at 22 than the 22-year old you're playing), you'll find you're MUCH more exhausted after being defended by the 40-year old with the hand check, even if the 22-year old is quicker and jumps higher.

There's the answer to the original question, even if it was clearly agenda-driven (as an excuse to cast aspersions at Kobe). And with that, I'm going to hijack this thread a little further. Most people who have seen both play will tell you that Kobe's not as good as MJ overall, though he does have things that he does better than MJ (three-pointers, for instance), but he's the closest thing we've seen to MJ in our lifetimes... and among the all-time greats on his own merits. And if there was no MJ (or for those who are too young to remember MJ in his prime), he might well be considered the greatest shooting guard ever.

The reason Kobe gets a lot of hate, IMO, is because we actually have another all-time great whose game is very similar and who was slightly better in many areas - we link Magic and Larry because they were almost "The same guy" and played together, but we don't really have a modern analogue for Russell, Chamberlain, Kareem, West, or any of the other guys often mentioned as "top 10 players." Rodman, for instance, had the rebounding of Russell, but not the blocked shots or scoring, so it's pretty obvoius who is superior. Shaq had Chamberlain's power, but not his finesse, which is why we put Shaq with the all-time greats, but usually a notch below Chamberlain. Hakeem had Kareem's finesse, but lacked his outright physical dominance (and Kareem was absolutely DOMINANT through the 70's - don't let his time with the Lakers when he was getting old fool you), and so on.

Magic-Bird and Jordan-Kobe are the only two pairs in the "all-time legends" list whose games are eerily similar (and yes, this is in part because Kobe stole relentlessly from MJ, the same way MJ stole from Dr. J who stole from Connie Hawkins, who stole from Elgin Baylor...). With Magic-Bird, we rank it a draw because we saw them in their primes contemporaneously and they battled to a relative draw most of the time (obviously, SOMEONE has to win a 7-game series, but with those two, you felt if the series went 101 games, it would wind up 51-50)... but with Jordan-Kobe, we never got to see them face off in their prime, and they play under substantially different rules, so it's harder to reconcile in our minds that Jordan and Kobe are very similar as well, and each does a few things better than the other. It's also why it's hard to find a single "Greatest Ever" because each of the guys in the "top ten list" could do some things the other guys couldn't/didn't.

The ISH forums would be a much more congenial place if we would stop trying to declare a "G.O.A.T." or other foolishness - and stop trying to "prove" that Legend A is better (or worse) than Legend B. And that goes doubly for those who say, "well, I don't really hate Legend B, but so many people promote him that I feel the need to jump in and tear him down just to keep things in perspective (and to remind the fans of Legend B that my favorite legend, Legend A, was better than their guy)." Please remember this next time you go to make a thread - or even a post - trying to "prove" that a player is/isn't worthy of respect.

:applause: :applause: :applause:

[Sound and Fury]

Maybe so, they shoot almost the same percentage.. Iverson is a career 43%Fg and kobe is 44% FG..Really? This must be some new meaning of the word "almost" with which I'm not familiar.

There's an old saying that goes, "You are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts." If you want to round Iverson's 0.425 up to 43%, that's fine, but you also have to round Kobe's 0.455 up to 46%. You don't get to round 0.455 down to 44% (which is not only poor form, but even if you argue it should be extended to 0.454999 - I haven't run the exact numbers for his career - it would round to 0.45 - your figure of 0.44 is quite simply mathematically incorrect).

So far in this thread, you have been raising your voice when you need to reinforce your argument. If you want to claim "MJ is better than Kobe" go right ahead, but when to try to say, "Kobe is the same player as Allen Iverson," please understand your statement is not really going to fly with anyone who is even moderately objective.

[momo]

I could posit that the league-wide field goal percentage was higher in Jordan's era (47% on average) ...

..(and to remind the fans of Legend B that my favorite legend, Legend A, was better than their guy)." Please remember this next time you go to make a thread - or even a post - trying to "prove" that a player is/isn't worthy of respect.

One of the best posts I have read on the board.

[OldSchoolBBall]

R(which is not only poor form, but even if you argue it should be extended to 0.454999 - I haven't run the exact numbers for his career - it would round to 0.045 - your figure of 0.44 is quite simply mathematically incorrect).

That's actually not true. If the actual value was .454999, one could only round it to .455, not to .460. Significant digits and precision and all that. ;)

I do agree with your point about consistency, however (and also that it's a joke to compare Kobe to AI).

[knightfall88]

you are allowed to put a forearm on the opposition if they are on the move.

[LMFAO]

anyone who was a alive and watching basketball knows how much harder it was to score before the rule change. The NBA changed the rule to increase scoring & increase the pace of the game. Only a person with extreme mental retardation would be anywhere near stupid enough to try and say that that the games great scorers would not increase their scoring average. Their IQ would have to be below 25 for them to actually believe it.

[Sarcastic]

Magic-Bird and Jordan-Kobe are the only two pairs in the "all-time legends" list whose games are eerily similar (and yes, this is in part because Kobe stole relentlessly from MJ, the same way MJ stole from Dr. J who stole from Connie Hawkins, who stole from Elgin Baylor...). With Magic-Bird, we rank it a draw because we saw them in their primes contemporaneously and they battled to a relative draw most of the time (obviously, SOMEONE has to win a 7-game series, but with those two, you felt if the series went 101 games, it would wind up 51-50)... but with Jordan-Kobe, we never got to see them face off in their prime, and they play under substantially different rules, so it's harder to reconcile in our minds that Jordan and Kobe are very similar as well, and each does a few things better than the other. It's also why it's hard to find a single "Greatest Ever" because each of the guys in the "top ten list" could do some things the other guys couldn't/didn't.



The difference between the 2 comparisons is that Kobe is a Jordan clone, whereas neither Magic nor Bird tried to copy the others game. They both played with 2 very unique styles. Had Kobe done something to distinguish his game's style from Jordan's, the debates probably would somewhat different.

[Calabis]

Derek Fisher also said Kobe could score 50 every night if he wanted to. Doesn't mean shit now does it?

If they called it by the book.. Kobe should averge 15+ft's easily. But that would ruin the game so they allow handchecking etc. Why do you think Ray Allen didn't get into foul trouble after game 1? He still played that same grabbing defense..

Yeah I can see how they got away with it too.....lmao

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T01Qa6CIT6o

look at the 1:43 mark

http://www.youtube.com/user/bballbreakdown#p/u/12/Jgi8Oc_WzVM

Yeah real physical defense what a freakin joke

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f01pJh9nG28

Where is this legendary defense???

[Calabis]

lol you want me to pull up MJ's team's record when he was scoring major ppg?

Don't try to tell me MJ would average 50 a game today while operating within the offense because that would make you a retard...

Sure I will

Record in games with 30+ shot attempts
Michael Jordan: 72-57 (.558)
Kobe Bean Bryant: 46-61 (.368)

[Calabis]

uhh, not really. when MJ was winning championships with the bulls he was averaging about 30 ppg. when kobe won championships (not counting the 99-00 season when kobe wasn't a superstar), he was averaging about 27 ppg. are you really saying THREE ppg is a huge difference?

uh yeah because in the playoffs its 33ppg to 24ppg.....I would call that a huge difference

[Calabis]

This thread is failure.

Let's just say MJ can score with "no handchecking" but you have to factor in that Zone defense is allowed.

MJ wouldn't be able to score, not because of the hand checking, but the zone.

:no:

Uhhh nooooo!!!!! The zone myth...lmao him lets see Kobe vs great man to man in 2010 playoffs....38% vs Thunder.....40% vs Celtics.....against the dangerous and invincible zone Suns 50+ FG% and plays his best overall series...yeah JOrdan wouldn't be able to score against zones, although he faced them throughout his career

[Calabis]

:bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:

Hey this doesn't mean anything, former/current Gms's/coaches saying these things about MJ. Only when it favors Kobe, should their word mean something...here check it out

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=183858&page=10

[ginobli2311]

I could posit that the league-wide field goal percentage was higher in Jordan's era (47% on average) than it was in Kobe's (44%), which I could then interpret to mean that Jordan put up his numbers against inferior defenses.

I could in turn point out that Jordan shot 0.028 percentage points better than the league average for his era (an increase of 6% in scoring efficiency), while Kobe shot 0.007 percentage points better than the league average for his era (an increase of 2% in scoring efficiency) which means Jordan's numbers were a smidge better relative to the defenses he faced than Kobe's were.

Or I could adjust Kobe's scoring average for pace and compare to MJ's. Etc. Ad nauseum.

All this thread has done so far is prove three things...

1. There are lies, damn lies, and statistics.

2. Arguing usually serves only to entrench each side more firmly in the belief that they are right.

3. Most people in this thread are interested in using statistics in the same way a drunk uses a lamp post... for support, rather than for illumination.

And now, to go WAY back to the opening point in the thread in the hopes of re-railling this badly-derailed thread (it's clear the OP has an anti-Kobe, pro-Jordan agenda, which is great for bringing out the trolls on both sides of the Kobe argument, but there are a couple of interesting points to address with respect to hand checking)... and other posters have alluded to this:

Yes, it would be much easier for MJ to beat his own defender in a non-hand-check era. Play against a guy who's about 40 and grew up hand-checking (and let him hand-check you) if you doubt this. It is MUCH harder to beat a hand-check on the perimeter because the hand check essentially extends the area you can deny a defender from about a 3-foot-diameter circle (what you can take up with your body) to an 8-foot-diameter circle (what you can take up with leaning your body either way with your arm extended).

Because it takes the offensive player an extra step or so to cover that extra distance, the on-ball defender has more time to react. Because of this, on-ball perimeter defenders could be much more successful prior to the elimination of the hand-check. Not because they are "better" but because they have more time to react and can deny more space due to the rules at that time.

On the flip side, once an offensive player beat his man, the "illegal defense/man-to-man" rules meant that he had far more driving lanes to the basket and he would be double-teamed less frequently (and only double-teamed, by rule, after he had the ball in his hands). So while it was harder to beat your defender initially, once you did, you were going to make him look bad, because the defense had less time to react and farther to go to reach you.

At the end of the day, though, the proof is in the pudding. Team defenders today are better and react more quickly - and yet, after about 1985 (when hand-checking became more and more aggressive), field goal percentages went DOWN until its elimination, when they reversed course and began climbing - and they're still climbing (though not at their pre-1990 levels) even as defenses have become more complex and help defense has gotten better (and players have grown up without the hand-checking rules).

I would say, then, that it is slightly easier to score without the hand-checking rules in place than it was with them in place, with the proof being the direction field-goal percentage is taking. That said, with the difference in field goal percentage league wide only about 0.030 between the peak of the NBA and now, you are talking about an extra one shot in 30 going in - for a guy like Kobe or Jordan, that's between 1 and 2 points per game.

Also consider that (as alluded to above), the pace of games has slowed down and there are fewer shots to be had. If you adjust for pace, Kobe's numbers look about the same as Jordan's.

So the answer is "no, Jordan would not average 40 points per game in today's NBA" just because of the rule changes - he would have to start breaking the offense to hog shots - the exact same reason he gave for not averaging 40 in the first place (i.e., he COULD do it by choosing to do so, but the rule changes themselves would not automatically make him average 40).

Finally, the answer is, yes, playing against a hand-check is more physically exhausting. Post play hasn't changed much (and because double teams can come and go, may in fact be MORE exhausting than it used to be), but perimeter players definitely get off easier physically today. Again, try playing against a guy who's 40 and hand-checks and then play against a guy who's 22 and doesn't. Assuming they're about equal in skill level (so the guy who's 40 probably was better at 22 than the 22-year old you're playing), you'll find you're MUCH more exhausted after being defended by the 40-year old with the hand check, even if the 22-year old is quicker and jumps higher.

There's the answer to the original question, even if it was clearly agenda-driven (as an excuse to cast aspersions at Kobe). And with that, I'm going to hijack this thread a little further. Most people who have seen both play will tell you that Kobe's not as good as MJ overall, though he does have things that he does better than MJ (three-pointers, for instance), but he's the closest thing we've seen to MJ in our lifetimes... and among the all-time greats on his own merits. And if there was no MJ (or for those who are too young to remember MJ in his prime), he might well be considered the greatest shooting guard ever.

The reason Kobe gets a lot of hate, IMO, is because we actually have another all-time great whose game is very similar and who was slightly better in many areas - we link Magic and Larry because they were almost "The same guy" and played together, but we don't really have a modern analogue for Russell, Chamberlain, Kareem, West, or any of the other guys often mentioned as "top 10 players." Rodman, for instance, had the rebounding of Russell, but not the blocked shots or scoring, so it's pretty obvoius who is superior. Shaq had Chamberlain's power, but not his finesse, which is why we put Shaq with the all-time greats, but usually a notch below Chamberlain. Hakeem had Kareem's finesse, but lacked his outright physical dominance (and Kareem was absolutely DOMINANT through the 70's - don't let his time with the Lakers when he was getting old fool you), and so on.

Magic-Bird and Jordan-Kobe are the only two pairs in the "all-time legends" list whose games are eerily similar (and yes, this is in part because Kobe stole relentlessly from MJ, the same way MJ stole from Dr. J who stole from Connie Hawkins, who stole from Elgin Baylor...). With Magic-Bird, we rank it a draw because we saw them in their primes contemporaneously and they battled to a relative draw most of the time (obviously, SOMEONE has to win a 7-game series, but with those two, you felt if the series went 101 games, it would wind up 51-50)... but with Jordan-Kobe, we never got to see them face off in their prime, and they play under substantially different rules, so it's harder to reconcile in our minds that Jordan and Kobe are very similar as well, and each does a few things better than the other. It's also why it's hard to find a single "Greatest Ever" because each of the guys in the "top ten list" could do some things the other guys couldn't/didn't.

The ISH forums would be a much more congenial place if we would stop trying to declare a "G.O.A.T." or other foolishness - and stop trying to "prove" that Legend A is better (or worse) than Legend B. And that goes doubly for those who say, "well, I don't really hate Legend B, but so many people promote him that I feel the need to jump in and tear him down just to keep things in perspective (and to remind the fans of Legend B that my favorite legend, Legend A, was better than their guy)." Please remember this next time you go to make a thread - or even a post - trying to "prove" that a player is/isn't worthy of respect.

the problem with your assertion is simply that jordan was the only perimeter player in the league capable of scoring 28 plus points on high efficiency in his era. while kobe is just one of many many different perimeter players scoring 28 plus points on 45% or above efficiency. its that simple. jordan was one of a kind. kobe is merely one of many players capable of this.

now. go look at the stats....or just take the time to think. the reason why perimeter players back in the last 80s and 90s had better fg% is because they took far less shots and took far better shots.

just look at drexler. career 47% from the field but he only took 16 shots a game.

fg% is actually better currently for perimeter players. perimeter players shoot more shots and more threes yet there fg% is equal or better across the board.

anyone with a brain or eyes knows its far easier to score and score at a better efficiency now than it was in the jordan era.

also...the main reason the fg% of the league back in the 90s was higher was because the game was dominated by bigs. now it is dominated by guards. that in and of itself would explain the fg% drop easily. factor in the much higher number of threes taken and your point holds even less water actually.

oh....and wade and jordan have much more similar games than kobe and jordan.

[Calabis]

As far as the rule changes

Before the defensive rules were changed, only 3 wing players avg'd 24ppg, but after they changed, that number jumped to 11, and they had a 23% INCREASE in scoring & a 4% INCREASE in FG%?" So please quit talking about todays scorers

Nice Article:

About his legendary performance (From ESPN article 'Ranking the 10 worst Finals Performances, John Hollinger June 12, 2008)

Kobe Bryant, L.A. Lakers, 2004
Lakers vs. Pistons -- Bryant's PER 14.2
"With his feud against Shaq escalating and the series getting away from the Lakers, Bryant began taking whatever shot struck him. Mostly, they struck the rim -- he shot 38.1 percent and had nearly as many turnovers (18) as assists (22) as Detroit romped in five games."

During the series, Mav's owner Mark Cuban made some interesting observations about the defensive play of the Pistons (handchecking as Jordan era players new it was dead, but minimal/temporary contact was still sometimes allowed) and the 'advantage' they had over offensive perimeter players and decided a change was necesary to tip the scales in the other direction...

From his Blog Maverick weblog, Mark Cuban's article 'If It’s Not Broke, Doesn’t Mean It’s Optimal. Even in the NBA';Feb 4th 2009:

"So a few years ago, Im watching the Pistons beat the Lakers in the Finals. I’m seeing Larry Brown’s Pistons fully take advantage of the rules. It was impossible to stay in front of Kobe. He could get anywhere he wanted on the court. The Pistons knew it as well. So every time he tried to get to the basket, they would body up and bump him. The officials did just as they were supposed to. Since Kobe had the advantage on the defender, they didn’t call a foul. However that little bump slowed Kobe down just enough that it gave Ben Wallace a split second more to on a pre rotation to the Paint, to be in a better position to defend the basket. Kobe still scored, but not quite as often as he may have otherwise.

At that point it dawned on me that the concept of playing the advantage in a one on one matchup had nothing to do with which TEAM gained the advantage. After all, its the team that scores the most points that wins. Detroit had a brilliant strategy and was playing it to perfection. After the finals, I sat down with the league and discussed with them the difference between player and team advantage. The discussion lead to changing the rules so that perimeter contact was called far more often."

Cuban got his wish and the already stringent anti-contact rules for perimeter play became even more strict. The unintended backlash ended up blowing up in his face:

"The NBA eliminated all forms of hand-checking before the 2004-2005 season. The rule was intended to give offensive players more freedom, but has given offensive players an unfair advantage. It’s virtually impossible to keep perimeter players out of the paint.

Unfortunately for Cuban and the Mavs, the rule changes he helped initiate contributed to Dallas’ loss to the Miami Heat in the 2006 NBA Finals. Dwyane Wade shot an NBA Finals record 97 free throws. To his credit, Wade attacked the basket relentlessly, but there were times when Maverick defenders beat Wade to a spot on the floor, had their arms to their sides, and were whistled for blocking fouls when Wade initiated contact. It was ridiculous. The Mavericks attempted 48 free throws in Game’s 5 and 6. Wade attempted 46 freebies over the same span

Cuban has done a lot for the NBA. But the hand-checking rule was better left unchanged."

[Calabis]

Q/A with Stu Jackson from NBA.Com

NBA.com: Since the hand-checking rule was interpreted differently beginning in the 2004-05 season, the game has opened up. Players are penetrating and the floor is spread. As a result, scoring has risen every season. Was this anticipated back in 2004?

SJ: No. The scoring increase was not our goal. Our objective was to allow for more offensive freedom by not allowing defenders to hand-, forearm- or body-check ball handlers. By doing so, we encouraged more dribble penetration. As players penetrated more, it produced higher quality shots for the ball handler as well as shots for teammates on passes back out to perimeter. When NBA players get higher quality shots -- having more time to shoot -- they tend to make more of them.

NBA.com: Shooting percentages have risen since 2004-05 regardless of location -- at-the-rim shots, short- and deep-mid range and 3-pointers. Does this surprise you, especially the higher percentages from 3-point range?

SJ: It doesn't. With the rule and interpretation changes, it has become more difficult for defenders to defend penetration, cover the entire floor on defensive rotations and recover to shooters. This has provided more time for shooters to ready themselves for quality shots. With more dribble penetration, ball handlers are getting more opportunities at the rim. Additionally, teams now realize the 3-point shot is a great competitive equalizer, so they are taking more; they have improved their skill level on threes and are making them at a higher rate.

NBA.com: Doesn't the wide-open style benefit certain types of players? For example, wing players vs. frontcourt players?

SJ: The benefits of an open game are not limited to just perimeter players. An open game can benefit a post player as well. Remember, if the players are spaced wider and using more of the court, then defenses have to play those players closely because they're good shooters. The style actually serves to open up the middle of the floor. If a team has an effective post player, he would have more room to operate in the post.

NBA.com: From an Xs and Os perspective, how have coaches adjusted to a more wide-open game? What have they done differently?

SJ: Coaches have utilized more space on the floor so to create more room for dribble penetration, two-man pick-and-roll basketball and dribble exchanges on the perimeter. But to do that, they have attempted to place the right personnel on the floor -- more shooters and ball handlers that require defenses to play those players on the perimeter.

Yet somehow some of you let this process through your mind that its harder to score today...also how is there a zone defense with a defensive 3 seconds...go look at Knicks/Pistons to see real zone with big men staying camped out in the lane.

Need more:

NBA rules expert Rod Thorn said this after the handchecking rule was changed and the defensive 3 second rule:"It's more difficult now to guard the quick wing player who can handle the ball," Thorn said of the change. "I think it helps skilled players over someone who just has strength or toughness. What the NBA is trying to do is promote unimpeded movement for dribblers or cutters."

[ginobli2311]

good posts calabis.

its fairly obvious. overall defense has remained somewhat similar.....but perimeter defense has gotten significantly worse since the 05 season.

[Calabis]

good posts calabis.

its fairly obvious. overall defense has remained somewhat similar.....but perimeter defense has gotten significantly worse since the 05 season.

I agree......in Jordan era there were 7 DPOY awards given to perimeter defenders, 1 in Kobes era

[LA_Showtime]

Here's what I don't understand: retired players make ridiculous comments all the time.

"Kobe is better than LeBron James."

"In today's league I could average 40 points per game."

"I'm almost 40 years old and I haven't played since 2006, but I still have a lot left."

Shit like that; you get the point.

Anyways, how come some quotes get thrown out as stupid but other quotes are legitimate? :oldlol:

[KB2009Champ]

what i dont get is, if handchecking is not allowed then wtf do you call the defense that was being played by the celtics in the finals? ray and tony allen had their hands all over kobe when he was driving. he was hand checked the whole series. even non haters have to acknowledge that. they got all up in his space.

[ginobli2311]

Here's what I don't understand: retired players make ridiculous comments all the time.

"Kobe is better than LeBron James."

"In today's league I could average 40 points per game."

"I'm almost 40 years old and I haven't played since 2006, but I still have a lot left."

Shit like that; you get the point.

Anyways, how come some quotes get thrown out as stupid but other quotes are legitimate? :oldlol:

it depends on how accurate they are. for example. jordan could not average 50 a game in the current league. just like drexler could not have averaged over 30. these players took it to the extreme.

but the point they are trying to make is valid. its far easier to score from the perimeter in today's game.

[LA_Showtime]

it depends on how accurate they are. for example. jordan could not average 50 a game in the current league. just like drexler could not have averaged over 30. these players took it to the extreme.

but the point they are trying to make is valid. its far easier to score from the perimeter in today's game.

Eh, I don't buy it. Teams can clog the paint and send help defenders as soon as player X catches the basketball. While perimeter players definitely benefit from the reduced hand checks, it becomes evened out when you include the players' rapid physical development, scouting, help defense, etc.

[Calabis]

what i dont get is, if handchecking is not allowed then wtf do you call the defense that was being played by the celtics in the finals? ray and tony allen had their hands all over kobe when he was driving. he was hand checked the whole series. even non haters have to acknowledge that. they got all up in his space.

I just posted some vids on previous page....its obvious this series was not as physical as people are trying to make it out to be. How people can ignore the whistle every three trips up the court is beyond me

[indiefan24]

hey ashbelly, couldn't you have just titled the thread "kobe is a chucker" instead of posting all that extra fluff?

[ginobli2311]

Eh, I don't buy it. Teams can clog the paint and send help defenders as soon as player X catches the basketball. While perimeter players definitely benefit from the reduced hand checks, it becomes evened out when you include the players' rapid physical development, scouting, help defense, etc.

actually it doesn't. "rapid physical development"??????????? players (especially big men that protect the rim) were much more athletic back in the 90s. "help defense"?????.....don't even get me started on this non sense as if basketball has progressed so much in the last few years.

the fact of the matter is that it does not even out. the only way you can argue that it evens out is if you think that guys like payton/isiah/mullin/drexler/bird were all just average players offensively. because that is what they would be in today's game. if it evens out........monta ellis is isiahi. joe johnson is drexler.

sorry. i don't buy it at all. how is this even a debate? its so freaking obvious how much easier it is now.

[Calabis]

Eh, I don't buy it. Teams can clog the paint and send help defenders as soon as player X catches the basketball. While perimeter players definitely benefit from the reduced hand checks, it becomes evened out when you include the players' rapid physical development, scouting, help defense, etc.

How can they clog the lane, with a defensive three seconds rule? Bigs camped out in the lane back in MJ's era, also I don't see this intense lane clogging here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f01pJh9nG28

[7_cody]

You're ****ing crazy if you believe that. :oldlol:

Why? He's already done it this year, 33 PPG on 53% shooting. Only thing was, it was in the Western Conference Finals, instead of in the Finals.

Michael Jordan isn't this GOD that you remember him to be. He had plenty of bad games.

[Locked_Up_Tonight]

How many times is the defensive 3 second rule called in an NBA game? Maybe 3 times (at the most). An NBA referee can call that rule just about every time for both teams.

[7_cody]

Man, you idiots are a just so smart. What a genius.

So, handchecking makes it easier to score... that explains why Kobe became SO MUCH better of a scorer after '05.

Oh, wait. My bad. His 9 games in a row of 40+ points came before then. Kobe broke out legendary scoring games because, uh, no shaq... and, uhhh... he was on a crappy team with LO as the second offensive option. I mean, uhhhh... its because teams can't hand check him (yet they do, for the majority of every game).

Nice.

[Bird]

I could posit that the league-wide field goal percentage was higher in Jordan's era (47% on average) than it was in Kobe's (44%), which I could then interpret to mean that Jordan put up his numbers against inferior defenses.

I could in turn point out that Jordan shot 0.028 percentage points better than the league average for his era (an increase of 6% in scoring efficiency), while Kobe shot 0.007 percentage points better than the league average for his era (an increase of 2% in scoring efficiency) which means Jordan's numbers were a smidge better relative to the defenses he faced than Kobe's were.

Or I could adjust Kobe's scoring average for pace and compare to MJ's. Etc. Ad nauseum.

All this thread has done so far is prove three things...

1. There are lies, damn lies, and statistics.

2. Arguing usually serves only to entrench each side more firmly in the belief that they are right.

3. Most people in this thread are interested in using statistics in the same way a drunk uses a lamp post... for support, rather than for illumination.

And now, to go WAY back to the opening point in the thread in the hopes of re-railling this badly-derailed thread (it's clear the OP has an anti-Kobe, pro-Jordan agenda, which is great for bringing out the trolls on both sides of the Kobe argument, but there are a couple of interesting points to address with respect to hand checking)... and other posters have alluded to this:

Yes, it would be much easier for MJ to beat his own defender in a non-hand-check era. Play against a guy who's about 40 and grew up hand-checking (and let him hand-check you) if you doubt this. It is MUCH harder to beat a hand-check on the perimeter because the hand check essentially extends the area you can deny a defender from about a 3-foot-diameter circle (what you can take up with your body) to an 8-foot-diameter circle (what you can take up with leaning your body either way with your arm extended).

Because it takes the offensive player an extra step or so to cover that extra distance, the on-ball defender has more time to react. Because of this, on-ball perimeter defenders could be much more successful prior to the elimination of the hand-check. Not because they are "better" but because they have more time to react and can deny more space due to the rules at that time.

On the flip side, once an offensive player beat his man, the "illegal defense/man-to-man" rules meant that he had far more driving lanes to the basket and he would be double-teamed less frequently (and only double-teamed, by rule, after he had the ball in his hands). So while it was harder to beat your defender initially, once you did, you were going to make him look bad, because the defense had less time to react and farther to go to reach you.

At the end of the day, though, the proof is in the pudding. Team defenders today are better and react more quickly - and yet, after about 1985 (when hand-checking became more and more aggressive), field goal percentages went DOWN until its elimination, when they reversed course and began climbing - and they're still climbing (though not at their pre-1990 levels) even as defenses have become more complex and help defense has gotten better (and players have grown up without the hand-checking rules).

I would say, then, that it is slightly easier to score without the hand-checking rules in place than it was with them in place, with the proof being the direction field-goal percentage is taking. That said, with the difference in field goal percentage league wide only about 0.030 between the peak of the NBA and now, you are talking about an extra one shot in 30 going in - for a guy like Kobe or Jordan, that's between 1 and 2 points per game.

Also consider that (as alluded to above), the pace of games has slowed down and there are fewer shots to be had. If you adjust for pace, Kobe's numbers look about the same as Jordan's.

So the answer is "no, Jordan would not average 40 points per game in today's NBA" just because of the rule changes - he would have to start breaking the offense to hog shots - the exact same reason he gave for not averaging 40 in the first place (i.e., he COULD do it by choosing to do so, but the rule changes themselves would not automatically make him average 40).

Finally, the answer is, yes, playing against a hand-check is more physically exhausting. Post play hasn't changed much (and because double teams can come and go, may in fact be MORE exhausting than it used to be), but perimeter players definitely get off easier physically today. Again, try playing against a guy who's 40 and hand-checks and then play against a guy who's 22 and doesn't. Assuming they're about equal in skill level (so the guy who's 40 probably was better at 22 than the 22-year old you're playing), you'll find you're MUCH more exhausted after being defended by the 40-year old with the hand check, even if the 22-year old is quicker and jumps higher.

There's the answer to the original question, even if it was clearly agenda-driven (as an excuse to cast aspersions at Kobe). And with that, I'm going to hijack this thread a little further. Most people who have seen both play will tell you that Kobe's not as good as MJ overall, though he does have things that he does better than MJ (three-pointers, for instance), but he's the closest thing we've seen to MJ in our lifetimes... and among the all-time greats on his own merits. And if there was no MJ (or for those who are too young to remember MJ in his prime), he might well be considered the greatest shooting guard ever.

The reason Kobe gets a lot of hate, IMO, is because we actually have another all-time great whose game is very similar and who was slightly better in many areas - we link Magic and Larry because they were almost "The same guy" and played together, but we don't really have a modern analogue for Russell, Chamberlain, Kareem, West, or any of the other guys often mentioned as "top 10 players." Rodman, for instance, had the rebounding of Russell, but not the blocked shots or scoring, so it's pretty obvoius who is superior. Shaq had Chamberlain's power, but not his finesse, which is why we put Shaq with the all-time greats, but usually a notch below Chamberlain. Hakeem had Kareem's finesse, but lacked his outright physical dominance (and Kareem was absolutely DOMINANT through the 70's - don't let his time with the Lakers when he was getting old fool you), and so on.

Magic-Bird and Jordan-Kobe are the only two pairs in the "all-time legends" list whose games are eerily similar (and yes, this is in part because Kobe stole relentlessly from MJ, the same way MJ stole from Dr. J who stole from Connie Hawkins, who stole from Elgin Baylor...). With Magic-Bird, we rank it a draw because we saw them in their primes contemporaneously and they battled to a relative draw most of the time (obviously, SOMEONE has to win a 7-game series, but with those two, you felt if the series went 101 games, it would wind up 51-50)... but with Jordan-Kobe, we never got to see them face off in their prime, and they play under substantially different rules, so it's harder to reconcile in our minds that Jordan and Kobe are very similar as well, and each does a few things better than the other. It's also why it's hard to find a single "Greatest Ever" because each of the guys in the "top ten list" could do some things the other guys couldn't/didn't.

The ISH forums would be a much more congenial place if we would stop trying to declare a "G.O.A.T." or other foolishness - and stop trying to "prove" that Legend A is better (or worse) than Legend B. And that goes doubly for those who say, "well, I don't really hate Legend B, but so many people promote him that I feel the need to jump in and tear him down just to keep things in perspective (and to remind the fans of Legend B that my favorite legend, Legend A, was better than their guy)." Please remember this next time you go to make a thread - or even a post - trying to "prove" that a player is/isn't worthy of respect.

This has easily been the best and most rationale post I have read yet on the basketball boards.

Kudos.

[LA KB24]

oh....and wade and jordan have much more similar games than kobe and jordan.
Wade reminds me of the younger Jordan before his first championship, Kobe reminds me of 2nd 3peat Jordan.

[MasterDurant24]

Jordan, Isiah Thomas, Clyde Drexler, Charles Barkley, and even Tim Hardaway would all dominate this era. That's just a few. Plus, the fact that the talent is more spread out only helps them.

[MasterDurant24]

Why? He's already done it this year, 33 PPG on 53% shooting. Only thing was, it was in the Western Conference Finals, instead of in the Finals.

Michael Jordan isn't this GOD that you remember him to be. He had plenty of bad games.
I wouldn't say plenty of bad games....not at all...

[indiefan24]

I could posit that the league-wide field goal percentage was higher in Jordan's era (47% on average) than it was in Kobe's (44%), which I could then interpret to mean that Jordan put up his numbers against inferior defenses.

I could in turn point out that Jordan shot 0.028 percentage points better than the league average for his era (an increase of 6% in scoring efficiency), while Kobe shot 0.007 percentage points better than the league average for his era (an increase of 2% in scoring efficiency) which means Jordan's numbers were a smidge better relative to the defenses he faced than Kobe's were.

Or I could adjust Kobe's scoring average for pace and compare to MJ's. Etc. Ad nauseum.

All this thread has done so far is prove three things...

1. There are lies, damn lies, and statistics.

2. Arguing usually serves only to entrench each side more firmly in the belief that they are right.

3. Most people in this thread are interested in using statistics in the same way a drunk uses a lamp post... for support, rather than for illumination.

And now, to go WAY back to the opening point in the thread in the hopes of re-railling this badly-derailed thread (it's clear the OP has an anti-Kobe, pro-Jordan agenda, which is great for bringing out the trolls on both sides of the Kobe argument, but there are a couple of interesting points to address with respect to hand checking)... and other posters have alluded to this:

Yes, it would be much easier for MJ to beat his own defender in a non-hand-check era. Play against a guy who's about 40 and grew up hand-checking (and let him hand-check you) if you doubt this. It is MUCH harder to beat a hand-check on the perimeter because the hand check essentially extends the area you can deny a defender from about a 3-foot-diameter circle (what you can take up with your body) to an 8-foot-diameter circle (what you can take up with leaning your body either way with your arm extended).

Because it takes the offensive player an extra step or so to cover that extra distance, the on-ball defender has more time to react. Because of this, on-ball perimeter defenders could be much more successful prior to the elimination of the hand-check. Not because they are "better" but because they have more time to react and can deny more space due to the rules at that time.

On the flip side, once an offensive player beat his man, the "illegal defense/man-to-man" rules meant that he had far more driving lanes to the basket and he would be double-teamed less frequently (and only double-teamed, by rule, after he had the ball in his hands). So while it was harder to beat your defender initially, once you did, you were going to make him look bad, because the defense had less time to react and farther to go to reach you.

At the end of the day, though, the proof is in the pudding. Team defenders today are better and react more quickly - and yet, after about 1985 (when hand-checking became more and more aggressive), field goal percentages went DOWN until its elimination, when they reversed course and began climbing - and they're still climbing (though not at their pre-1990 levels) even as defenses have become more complex and help defense has gotten better (and players have grown up without the hand-checking rules).

I would say, then, that it is slightly easier to score without the hand-checking rules in place than it was with them in place, with the proof being the direction field-goal percentage is taking. That said, with the difference in field goal percentage league wide only about 0.030 between the peak of the NBA and now, you are talking about an extra one shot in 30 going in - for a guy like Kobe or Jordan, that's between 1 and 2 points per game.

Also consider that (as alluded to above), the pace of games has slowed down and there are fewer shots to be had. If you adjust for pace, Kobe's numbers look about the same as Jordan's.

So the answer is "no, Jordan would not average 40 points per game in today's NBA" just because of the rule changes - he would have to start breaking the offense to hog shots - the exact same reason he gave for not averaging 40 in the first place (i.e., he COULD do it by choosing to do so, but the rule changes themselves would not automatically make him average 40).

Finally, the answer is, yes, playing against a hand-check is more physically exhausting. Post play hasn't changed much (and because double teams can come and go, may in fact be MORE exhausting than it used to be), but perimeter players definitely get off easier physically today. Again, try playing against a guy who's 40 and hand-checks and then play against a guy who's 22 and doesn't. Assuming they're about equal in skill level (so the guy who's 40 probably was better at 22 than the 22-year old you're playing), you'll find you're MUCH more exhausted after being defended by the 40-year old with the hand check, even if the 22-year old is quicker and jumps higher.

There's the answer to the original question, even if it was clearly agenda-driven (as an excuse to cast aspersions at Kobe). And with that, I'm going to hijack this thread a little further. Most people who have seen both play will tell you that Kobe's not as good as MJ overall, though he does have things that he does better than MJ (three-pointers, for instance), but he's the closest thing we've seen to MJ in our lifetimes... and among the all-time greats on his own merits. And if there was no MJ (or for those who are too young to remember MJ in his prime), he might well be considered the greatest shooting guard ever.

The reason Kobe gets a lot of hate, IMO, is because we actually have another all-time great whose game is very similar and who was slightly better in many areas - we link Magic and Larry because they were almost "The same guy" and played together, but we don't really have a modern analogue for Russell, Chamberlain, Kareem, West, or any of the other guys often mentioned as "top 10 players." Rodman, for instance, had the rebounding of Russell, but not the blocked shots or scoring, so it's pretty obvoius who is superior. Shaq had Chamberlain's power, but not his finesse, which is why we put Shaq with the all-time greats, but usually a notch below Chamberlain. Hakeem had Kareem's finesse, but lacked his outright physical dominance (and Kareem was absolutely DOMINANT through the 70's - don't let his time with the Lakers when he was getting old fool you), and so on.

Magic-Bird and Jordan-Kobe are the only two pairs in the "all-time legends" list whose games are eerily similar (and yes, this is in part because Kobe stole relentlessly from MJ, the same way MJ stole from Dr. J who stole from Connie Hawkins, who stole from Elgin Baylor...). With Magic-Bird, we rank it a draw because we saw them in their primes contemporaneously and they battled to a relative draw most of the time (obviously, SOMEONE has to win a 7-game series, but with those two, you felt if the series went 101 games, it would wind up 51-50)... but with Jordan-Kobe, we never got to see them face off in their prime, and they play under substantially different rules, so it's harder to reconcile in our minds that Jordan and Kobe are very similar as well, and each does a few things better than the other. It's also why it's hard to find a single "Greatest Ever" because each of the guys in the "top ten list" could do some things the other guys couldn't/didn't.

The ISH forums would be a much more congenial place if we would stop trying to declare a "G.O.A.T." or other foolishness - and stop trying to "prove" that Legend A is better (or worse) than Legend B. And that goes doubly for those who say, "well, I don't really hate Legend B, but so many people promote him that I feel the need to jump in and tear him down just to keep things in perspective (and to remind the fans of Legend B that my favorite legend, Legend A, was better than their guy)." Please remember this next time you go to make a thread - or even a post - trying to "prove" that a player is/isn't worthy of respect.

bump for awesomeness

[indiefan24]

now. go look at the stats....or just take the time to think.




anyone with a brain or eyes...


you are such a hypocrite, only you would complain about people attacking you on ISH and then turnaround and do the same thing

[Jasper]

this topic is a non - issue : I'll bow to Jackson's comment from a couple years ago ... comment is refering not to the player , but to the player working within a team concept :
this During a 2007 L.A. Lakers pre-season broadcast, Phil Jackson was asked how he thought Michael Jordan would perform today, Phil said: "Michael would average 45 with these rules.

[7_cody]

this topic is a non - issue : I'll bow to Jackson's comment from a couple years ago ... comment is refering not to the player , but to the player working within a team concept :
this During a 2007 L.A. Lakers pre-season broadcast, Phil Jackson was asked how he thought Michael Jordan would perform today, Phil said: "Michael would average 45 with these rules.

You're right, MJ would be twice as good with these "rules"

That's why Kobe isn't hand checked for the majority of every game

That's why after '04-'05, when hand checking became "illegal" (yet everyone still does it), Kobe suddenly became twice as good right?

GTFO

[Batz]

I could posit that the league-wide field goal percentage was higher in Jordan's era (47% on average) than it was in Kobe's (44%), which I could then interpret to mean that Jordan put up his numbers against inferior defenses.

I could in turn point out that Jordan shot 0.028 percentage points better than the league average for his era (an increase of 6% in scoring efficiency), while Kobe shot 0.007 percentage points better than the league average for his era (an increase of 2% in scoring efficiency) which means Jordan's numbers were a smidge better relative to the defenses he faced than Kobe's were.

Or I could adjust Kobe's scoring average for pace and compare to MJ's. Etc. Ad nauseum.

All this thread has done so far is prove three things...

1. There are lies, damn lies, and statistics.

2. Arguing usually serves only to entrench each side more firmly in the belief that they are right.

3. Most people in this thread are interested in using statistics in the same way a drunk uses a lamp post... for support, rather than for illumination.

And now, to go WAY back to the opening point in the thread in the hopes of re-railling this badly-derailed thread (it's clear the OP has an anti-Kobe, pro-Jordan agenda, which is great for bringing out the trolls on both sides of the Kobe argument, but there are a couple of interesting points to address with respect to hand checking)... and other posters have alluded to this:

Yes, it would be much easier for MJ to beat his own defender in a non-hand-check era. Play against a guy who's about 40 and grew up hand-checking (and let him hand-check you) if you doubt this. It is MUCH harder to beat a hand-check on the perimeter because the hand check essentially extends the area you can deny a defender from about a 3-foot-diameter circle (what you can take up with your body) to an 8-foot-diameter circle (what you can take up with leaning your body either way with your arm extended).

Because it takes the offensive player an extra step or so to cover that extra distance, the on-ball defender has more time to react. Because of this, on-ball perimeter defenders could be much more successful prior to the elimination of the hand-check. Not because they are "better" but because they have more time to react and can deny more space due to the rules at that time.

On the flip side, once an offensive player beat his man, the "illegal defense/man-to-man" rules meant that he had far more driving lanes to the basket and he would be double-teamed less frequently (and only double-teamed, by rule, after he had the ball in his hands). So while it was harder to beat your defender initially, once you did, you were going to make him look bad, because the defense had less time to react and farther to go to reach you.

At the end of the day, though, the proof is in the pudding. Team defenders today are better and react more quickly - and yet, after about 1985 (when hand-checking became more and more aggressive), field goal percentages went DOWN until its elimination, when they reversed course and began climbing - and they're still climbing (though not at their pre-1990 levels) even as defenses have become more complex and help defense has gotten better (and players have grown up without the hand-checking rules).

I would say, then, that it is slightly easier to score without the hand-checking rules in place than it was with them in place, with the proof being the direction field-goal percentage is taking. That said, with the difference in field goal percentage league wide only about 0.030 between the peak of the NBA and now, you are talking about an extra one shot in 30 going in - for a guy like Kobe or Jordan, that's between 1 and 2 points per game.

Also consider that (as alluded to above), the pace of games has slowed down and there are fewer shots to be had. If you adjust for pace, Kobe's numbers look about the same as Jordan's.

So the answer is "no, Jordan would not average 40 points per game in today's NBA" just because of the rule changes - he would have to start breaking the offense to hog shots - the exact same reason he gave for not averaging 40 in the first place (i.e., he COULD do it by choosing to do so, but the rule changes themselves would not automatically make him average 40).

Finally, the answer is, yes, playing against a hand-check is more physically exhausting. Post play hasn't changed much (and because double teams can come and go, may in fact be MORE exhausting than it used to be), but perimeter players definitely get off easier physically today. Again, try playing against a guy who's 40 and hand-checks and then play against a guy who's 22 and doesn't. Assuming they're about equal in skill level (so the guy who's 40 probably was better at 22 than the 22-year old you're playing), you'll find you're MUCH more exhausted after being defended by the 40-year old with the hand check, even if the 22-year old is quicker and jumps higher.

There's the answer to the original question, even if it was clearly agenda-driven (as an excuse to cast aspersions at Kobe). And with that, I'm going to hijack this thread a little further. Most people who have seen both play will tell you that Kobe's not as good as MJ overall, though he does have things that he does better than MJ (three-pointers, for instance), but he's the closest thing we've seen to MJ in our lifetimes... and among the all-time greats on his own merits. And if there was no MJ (or for those who are too young to remember MJ in his prime), he might well be considered the greatest shooting guard ever.

The reason Kobe gets a lot of hate, IMO, is because we actually have another all-time great whose game is very similar and who was slightly better in many areas - we link Magic and Larry because they were almost "The same guy" and played together, but we don't really have a modern analogue for Russell, Chamberlain, Kareem, West, or any of the other guys often mentioned as "top 10 players." Rodman, for instance, had the rebounding of Russell, but not the blocked shots or scoring, so it's pretty obvoius who is superior. Shaq had Chamberlain's power, but not his finesse, which is why we put Shaq with the all-time greats, but usually a notch below Chamberlain. Hakeem had Kareem's finesse, but lacked his outright physical dominance (and Kareem was absolutely DOMINANT through the 70's - don't let his time with the Lakers when he was getting old fool you), and so on.

Magic-Bird and Jordan-Kobe are the only two pairs in the "all-time legends" list whose games are eerily similar (and yes, this is in part because Kobe stole relentlessly from MJ, the same way MJ stole from Dr. J who stole from Connie Hawkins, who stole from Elgin Baylor...). With Magic-Bird, we rank it a draw because we saw them in their primes contemporaneously and they battled to a relative draw most of the time (obviously, SOMEONE has to win a 7-game series, but with those two, you felt if the series went 101 games, it would wind up 51-50)... but with Jordan-Kobe, we never got to see them face off in their prime, and they play under substantially different rules, so it's harder to reconcile in our minds that Jordan and Kobe are very similar as well, and each does a few things better than the other. It's also why it's hard to find a single "Greatest Ever" because each of the guys in the "top ten list" could do some things the other guys couldn't/didn't.

The ISH forums would be a much more congenial place if we would stop trying to declare a "G.O.A.T." or other foolishness - and stop trying to "prove" that Legend A is better (or worse) than Legend B. And that goes doubly for those who say, "well, I don't really hate Legend B, but so many people promote him that I feel the need to jump in and tear him down just to keep things in perspective (and to remind the fans of Legend B that my favorite legend, Legend A, was better than their guy)." Please remember this next time you go to make a thread - or even a post - trying to "prove" that a player is/isn't worthy of respect.
Only mother****er that knows what the hell is goin on.

[Calabis]

You're right, MJ would be twice as good with these "rules"

That's why Kobe isn't hand checked for the majority of every game

That's why after '04-'05, when hand checking became "illegal" (yet everyone still does it), Kobe suddenly became twice as good right?

GTFO

You do know that they removed handchecking, but were still allowed to use forearms right up until

2002: The following rules were implemented to limit defenses.

A. No contact with either hands or forearms by defenders except in the frontcourt below the free throw line extended in which case the defender may use his forearm only.
B. Neither the offensive player nor the defender will be allowed to dislodge or displace a player who has legally obtained a position. (They might as well have named this one "The Shaq Rule.")
C. Defender may not use his forearm, shoulder, hip or hand to reroute or hold-up an offensive player going from point A to Point B or one who is attempting to come around a legal screen set by another offensive player.
D. Slowing or impeding the progress of the screener by grabbing, clutching, holding

[The_Yearning]

the problem with your assertion is simply that jordan was the only perimeter player in the league capable of scoring 28 plus points on high efficiency in his era. while kobe is just one of many many different perimeter players scoring 28 plus points on 45% or above efficiency. its that simple. jordan was one of a kind. kobe is merely one of many players capable of this.

now. go look at the stats....or just take the time to think. the reason why perimeter players back in the last 80s and 90s had better fg% is because they took far less shots and took far better shots.

just look at drexler. career 47% from the field but he only took 16 shots a game.

fg% is actually better currently for perimeter players. perimeter players shoot more shots and more threes yet there fg% is equal or better across the board.

anyone with a brain or eyes knows its far easier to score and score at a better efficiency now than it was in the jordan era.

also...the main reason the fg% of the league back in the 90s was higher was because the game was dominated by bigs. now it is dominated by guards. that in and of itself would explain the fg% drop easily. factor in the much higher number of threes taken and your point holds even less water actually.

oh....and wade and jordan have much more similar games than kobe and jordan.

Know Itawl

[Lebron23]

I agree with Phil Jackson. This guy was a very efficient scorer, and he didn't take stupid shots.

http://blitzsportsnetwork.com/2012/01/the-michael-jordan-era-defenses-vs-the-kobelebron-era-defenses/

Michael Jordan era defense vs. Kobe/LeBron era defenses

Good article from Bruce Blitz.

[I.R.Beast]

Yea...

while individual defense has become weakened since jordan's era, team defense has improved ...

and team D will always be > individual D.
handchck didnt stop teams fro scoring as much as they did in the hand check era of basketball....couldnt have been that great....Team defense trumps individual defense. Now ways there is more taffic around the rim in the hand check era.

[Leviathon1121]

handchck didnt stop teams fro scoring as much as they did in the hand check era of basketball....couldnt have been that great....Team defense trumps individual defense. Now ways there is more taffic around the rim in the hand check era.


Actually, the 3 second rule creates giant voids in the middle of the lane, and the significant lack of quality centers on today's league also creates a giant void around the rim.

But yah, there is more traffic there now. :rolleyes:

[jstern]

Actually, the 3 second rule creates giant voids in the middle of the lane, and the significant lack of quality centers on today's league also creates a giant void around the rim.

But yah, there is more traffic there now. :rolleyes:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rp2QBmFmwAM

[Da_Realist]

the same way MJ stole from Dr. J who stole from Connie Hawkins, who stole from Elgin Baylor...)

I don't get why people say this. Jordan's game looked nothing like Dr J's except they were both high flying athletes. Jordan's game was totally different than Dr J's. Is it the free throw line dunk? :confusedshrug:

[32Dayz]

Kobe's TS% in the Playoffs b4 the new Hand Check Rules = .515%
Kobe's TS% in the Playoffs after the Rule Changes = .560%

Speaks for itself.

:applause:

Jordan could average 50 today on ridiculous efficiency and score 100 points.

Had the rules not been changed to help perimeter players Kobe would be a less efficient less productive version of TMac with much better longevity.

[GIF REACTION]

I could posit that the league-wide field goal percentage was higher in Jordan's era (47% on average) than it was in Kobe's (44%), which I could then interpret to mean that Jordan put up his numbers against inferior defenses.

I could in turn point out that Jordan shot 0.028 percentage points better than the league average for his era (an increase of 6% in scoring efficiency), while Kobe shot 0.007 percentage points better than the league average for his era (an increase of 2% in scoring efficiency) which means Jordan's numbers were a smidge better relative to the defenses he faced than Kobe's were.

Or I could adjust Kobe's scoring average for pace and compare to MJ's. Etc. Ad nauseum.

All this thread has done so far is prove three things...

1. There are lies, damn lies, and statistics.

2. Arguing usually serves only to entrench each side more firmly in the belief that they are right.

3. Most people in this thread are interested in using statistics in the same way a drunk uses a lamp post... for support, rather than for illumination.

And now, to go WAY back to the opening point in the thread in the hopes of re-railling this badly-derailed thread (it's clear the OP has an anti-Kobe, pro-Jordan agenda, which is great for bringing out the trolls on both sides of the Kobe argument, but there are a couple of interesting points to address with respect to hand checking)... and other posters have alluded to this:

Yes, it would be much easier for MJ to beat his own defender in a non-hand-check era. Play against a guy who's about 40 and grew up hand-checking (and let him hand-check you) if you doubt this. It is MUCH harder to beat a hand-check on the perimeter because the hand check essentially extends the area you can deny a defender from about a 3-foot-diameter circle (what you can take up with your body) to an 8-foot-diameter circle (what you can take up with leaning your body either way with your arm extended).

Because it takes the offensive player an extra step or so to cover that extra distance, the on-ball defender has more time to react. Because of this, on-ball perimeter defenders could be much more successful prior to the elimination of the hand-check. Not because they are "better" but because they have more time to react and can deny more space due to the rules at that time.

On the flip side, once an offensive player beat his man, the "illegal defense/man-to-man" rules meant that he had far more driving lanes to the basket and he would be double-teamed less frequently (and only double-teamed, by rule, after he had the ball in his hands). So while it was harder to beat your defender initially, once you did, you were going to make him look bad, because the defense had less time to react and farther to go to reach you.

At the end of the day, though, the proof is in the pudding. Team defenders today are better and react more quickly - and yet, after about 1985 (when hand-checking became more and more aggressive), field goal percentages went DOWN until its elimination, when they reversed course and began climbing - and they're still climbing (though not at their pre-1990 levels) even as defenses have become more complex and help defense has gotten better (and players have grown up without the hand-checking rules).

I would say, then, that it is slightly easier to score without the hand-checking rules in place than it was with them in place, with the proof being the direction field-goal percentage is taking. That said, with the difference in field goal percentage league wide only about 0.030 between the peak of the NBA and now, you are talking about an extra one shot in 30 going in - for a guy like Kobe or Jordan, that's between 1 and 2 points per game.

Also consider that (as alluded to above), the pace of games has slowed down and there are fewer shots to be had. If you adjust for pace, Kobe's numbers look about the same as Jordan's.

So the answer is "no, Jordan would not average 40 points per game in today's NBA" just because of the rule changes - he would have to start breaking the offense to hog shots - the exact same reason he gave for not averaging 40 in the first place (i.e., he COULD do it by choosing to do so, but the rule changes themselves would not automatically make him average 40).

Finally, the answer is, yes, playing against a hand-check is more physically exhausting. Post play hasn't changed much (and because double teams can come and go, may in fact be MORE exhausting than it used to be), but perimeter players definitely get off easier physically today. Again, try playing against a guy who's 40 and hand-checks and then play against a guy who's 22 and doesn't. Assuming they're about equal in skill level (so the guy who's 40 probably was better at 22 than the 22-year old you're playing), you'll find you're MUCH more exhausted after being defended by the 40-year old with the hand check, even if the 22-year old is quicker and jumps higher.

There's the answer to the original question, even if it was clearly agenda-driven (as an excuse to cast aspersions at Kobe). And with that, I'm going to hijack this thread a little further. Most people who have seen both play will tell you that Kobe's not as good as MJ overall, though he does have things that he does better than MJ (three-pointers, for instance), but he's the closest thing we've seen to MJ in our lifetimes... and among the all-time greats on his own merits. And if there was no MJ (or for those who are too young to remember MJ in his prime), he might well be considered the greatest shooting guard ever.

The reason Kobe gets a lot of hate, IMO, is because we actually have another all-time great whose game is very similar and who was slightly better in many areas - we link Magic and Larry because they were almost "The same guy" and played together, but we don't really have a modern analogue for Russell, Chamberlain, Kareem, West, or any of the other guys often mentioned as "top 10 players." Rodman, for instance, had the rebounding of Russell, but not the blocked shots or scoring, so it's pretty obvoius who is superior. Shaq had Chamberlain's power, but not his finesse, which is why we put Shaq with the all-time greats, but usually a notch below Chamberlain. Hakeem had Kareem's finesse, but lacked his outright physical dominance (and Kareem was absolutely DOMINANT through the 70's - don't let his time with the Lakers when he was getting old fool you), and so on.

Magic-Bird and Jordan-Kobe are the only two pairs in the "all-time legends" list whose games are eerily similar (and yes, this is in part because Kobe stole relentlessly from MJ, the same way MJ stole from Dr. J who stole from Connie Hawkins, who stole from Elgin Baylor...). With Magic-Bird, we rank it a draw because we saw them in their primes contemporaneously and they battled to a relative draw most of the time (obviously, SOMEONE has to win a 7-game series, but with those two, you felt if the series went 101 games, it would wind up 51-50)... but with Jordan-Kobe, we never got to see them face off in their prime, and they play under substantially different rules, so it's harder to reconcile in our minds that Jordan and Kobe are very similar as well, and each does a few things better than the other. It's also why it's hard to find a single "Greatest Ever" because each of the guys in the "top ten list" could do some things the other guys couldn't/didn't.

The ISH forums would be a much more congenial place if we would stop trying to declare a "G.O.A.T." or other foolishness - and stop trying to "prove" that Legend A is better (or worse) than Legend B. And that goes doubly for those who say, "well, I don't really hate Legend B, but so many people promote him that I feel the need to jump in and tear him down just to keep things in perspective (and to remind the fans of Legend B that my favorite legend, Legend A, was better than their guy)." Please remember this next time you go to make a thread - or even a post - trying to "prove" that a player is/isn't worthy of respect.
Best post ever.