How many players in NBA history were the undisputed best player in the league?

[StateOfMind12]

This is a question that I have been wondering about for a while now.

A lot of times when people say a player was the undisputed best player in the league during a season they actually weren't.

A perfect example of this would be Lebron in 2009. I look at a lot of people's posts and thoughts and people talk about how Lebron was the undisputed best player in the league that season and that is simply a myth. I remember for the most part that the majority of the media and analysts actually said Kobe was the best player in the league that season. I don't think there was any mutual agreement between Kobe fans, LeBron fans, Lakers fans, Cavs fans, NBA fans, etc. that LeBron was the best player in the league. Was LeBron James the best player in the league that season? Maybe, maybe not, but there was no way he was the undisputed best that season. I also remember Wade being in the conversation as well and there were plenty of Heat and Wade fans that believed that Wade was actually the best season.

I don't think there was anybody in the 2000s that was ever the undisputed best player in the league except for Shaq in 2000 and maybe Duncan in 2003. Although I remember back in 2003 it was pretty heavy debate between Duncan, KG, Kobe, Tmac, and even Shaq. However, looking back upon it though, it's almost impossible to argue that somebody was better than Duncan that season.

I do think there is a difference between player of the year and best player in the league. The player of the year last season in the '10-'11 season was obviously Dirk Nowitzki but the best player in the league? You could go either way between Dwight Howard, LeBron James, and Dwyane Wade. I don't even think Dirk is even in the conversation or ever was for best player in the league.

Off of the top of my head I would say these players in these seasons were the undisputed best players in the league

'94 Hakeem
'84 Bird
'00 Shaq
'01 Shaq
'03 Duncan
'91, '92, '93, '96 MJ (maybe more, but I am not sure about undisputed)
'87 Magic

I don't know much before the 1980s so I'll let some of you other guys who are informed about that do the talking instead.

[L.Kizzle]

George Mikan was the undisputed best until 1954.

That's a 9 season stretch and no one was really close.

[miles berg]

When you beat Wade and LeBron 4-2, Kobe 4-0, and Durant 4-1 you are clearly the best player in the NBA.

He just lacks ESPN hype.

[FourthTenor]

'02-'12 Scalabrine

[Bless Mathews]

Op is pretty fricking spot on.

[kurple]

Wilt?

[rule1223]

05-06 Kobe was on another level compared to everyone else, dropping 40+ easier than ray allen shooting free throws

[magnax1]

From my memory, this is pretty much it.
Kobe 06
Shaq 00
Jordan most of the 90's
I could go back and just assume some were. Someone that people probably won't say but was pretty much the undisputed best player for a few years was Moses Malone.
Duncan never was. In fact, in 03 he had one of the closer MVP races ever with KG despite winning 10 more games. It was really only after the fact that people put Duncan on a pedestal all alone like they do now.
I'm guessing there were a lot of people who would've taken Bird over Magic in 87 too.

[ballup]

Wilt?
This?

[FourthTenor]

From my memory, this is pretty much it.
Kobe 06



You're saying a guy who couldn't get out of the FIRST ROUND for three consecutive years without an all-star big man was the UNDISPUTED best player in the league?

Hm.

[The Choken One]

You're saying a guy who couldn't get out of the FIRST ROUND for three consecutive years without an all-star big man was the UNDISPUTED best player in the league?

Hm.
Strong troll in this one.

Look at who was starting alongside him you ****ing moron. Luke Walton. Smush Parker.

Get the **** out.

[Sarcastic]

When you beat Wade and LeBron 4-2, Kobe 4-0, and Durant 4-1 you are clearly the best player in the NBA.

He just lacks ESPN hype.

I never knew the Dallas Mavericks were a player. I always thought them to be a team.

[ThePointGuard11]

05-06 Kobe was on another level compared to everyone else, dropping 40+ easier than ray allen shooting free throws

So basically, scoring the most points and shooting the most shots makes you the best player in the league? I guess we should add Allen Iverson to this list somewhere...Kobe Bryant has never been the undisputed best player in the NBA. He is ALWAYS in the argument, BUT since there always seems to be an argument, he's pretty much eliminated from this thread.

[StateOfMind12]

So basically, scoring the most points and shooting the most shots makes you the best player in the league? I guess we should add Allen Iverson to this list somewhere...Kobe Bryant has never been the undisputed best player in the NBA. He is ALWAYS in the argument, BUT since there always seems to be an argument, he's pretty much eliminated from this thread.
You are definitely not giving Kobe's all-around game enough credit but I do agree that he was never the undisputed best player in the league. There weren't many undisputed best players in the league in the 2000s anyways so there is no shame in that.


Wilt?
Good call, in '66-'67 Wilt was probably the undisputed best player in the league. Again, I don't know much about the NBA before the 1980s except for Russell-Wilt and a few other things.

[dude77]

l love this thread :applause:

you have people here admitting kobe was the undisputed best player in one measily season while jordan was the undisputed best 'throughout the 90s' ..

yet people keep trying to compare kobe to jordan on this site ..


http://i1214.photobucket.com/albums/cc494/steelermia/56.jpg

[Kblaze8855]

When you beat Wade and LeBron 4-2, Kobe 4-0, and Durant 4-1 you are clearly the best player in the NBA.

He just lacks ESPN hype.

He lacks quite a bit that the best player in the NBA usually has.

Mostly...being noteworthy in ways other than scoring.

Lack of ESPN hype didnt keep anyone from calling Duncan the best when he was.

[MavsPoke]

When you beat Wade and LeBron 4-2, Kobe 4-0, and Durant 4-1 you are clearly the best player in the NBA.

He just lacks ESPN hype.

Last night after the Clipps/Heat game the SportsCenter Top 10 came on. I was waiting for Dirks amazing game winner to show up.

10...9...8...7...6...5...4...3...2...

It must be #1!!! Cool.

1... No Dirk.

:wtf:

[ShaqAttack3234]

Nobody is truly the "undisputed" best player, there are always debates, regardless of how logical they are.

KBlaze has mentioned the Nique/Jordan debates for example.

But as far as general perception. As a kid, I remember it pretty much being Jordan and then everyone else, except coming off the back to back titles, Hakeem was widely regarded as the best player.

Other than that, it was pretty much considered Shaq's league from '00-'02 and Kobe's from '06-'08(argue all you want, but Kobe was widely considered the best in the game during that time).

I agree that Duncan was clearly the best in '03, but it wasn't undisputed. People were pretty split between Kobe, T-Mac, KG and Shaq as well as Duncan of course.

Just like I do think that Lebron was the best in '09(and '10 for that matter), but people acting like it was undisputed are crazy. How short are people's memories that they don't remember the constant Lebron vs Kobe talk just 2-3 years ago? :hammerhead:

Other than that, from what I've read/seen mentioned in old games, I'd say Bird from '84-'86.

Moses didn't seem to be other than maybe '83. I've seen A LOT of articles calling Bird the best as early as '81.

Definitely Kareem for quite a bit of the 70's, though there was Walton's year and a half and I've heard that there were debates over best player between the 2 leagues(Dr. J vs Kareem).

As far as Wilt? Well, I'll save JLauber some energy and state that I'm NOT commenting on how many years Wilt was the best other than that it's hard to argue against him in '67.

But, in general, people can't forget about Russell. Unless I'm mistaken, I'm pretty damn sure that Wilt wasn't considered clearly better than Russell throughout their careers.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Magic 87-88
Jordan 90-93, 96-98
Hakeem 94-95
Shaq 00-02
Duncan 03
Kobe 06-08

Bird, Kareem, Wilt, Russell somewhere in there too

[Scholar]

1962 Chamberlain, for sure.

[ThePointGuard11]

You are definitely not giving Kobe's all-around game enough credit but I do agree that he was never the undisputed best player in the league. There weren't many undisputed best players in the league in the 2000s anyways so there is no shame in that.


Good call, in '66-'67 Wilt was probably the undisputed best player in the league. Again, I don't know much about the NBA before the 1980s except for Russell-Wilt and a few other things.

35.4 ppg (.450 FG%), 4.5 apg, 5.3 rpg, 1.8 spg in 2005-2006 (Kobe)
31.4 ppg (.463 FG%), 5.4 apg, 5.7 rpg, 1.4 spg in 2006-2007 (Kobe)

33.3 ppg (.447 FG%) 7.4 apg, 3.2 rpg, 1.9 spg in 2005-2006 (Iverson)
27.3 ppg (.476 FG%) 6.0 apg, 6.7 rpg, 1.6 spg in 2006-2007 (LeBron)
18.6 ppg (.532 FG%) 11.6 apg, 3.5 rpg, 0.8 spg in 2006-2007 (Nash)

Of course, the numbers don't tell the whole story, but the point is that there's an argument. I didn't put Duncan or Dirk (MVP in 2006-2007) in the equation either. Unfortunately for Kobe voters factor in the team's record along with those stats and his play didn't lead to a lot of wins that season (42-40). He's a GREAT scorer, but he's an overrated defender, always has been. I know most people will disagree with that, but it's simply my opinion. Great, first ballot Hall of Fame player, but as far as him being the clear cut best ALL-AROUND player in the NBA for any given season...I'm not sure about that. When Jordan, Wilt, Magic and others were at their peak, it was never in question, they were the best and nobody really argued against it.

[StateOfMind12]

1962 Chamberlain, for sure.
I think you mean 1962 Bill Russell. I know Wilt scored 50 ppg that season but he didn't even win MVP and he didn't win the championship either. It was just another year where Wilt lost to Russell. Russell was historically dominant in that game 7 finals though. He scored 30+ points and pulled down 40+ rebounds IIRC and they obviously won the championship.

[InspiredLebowski]

Why do people care so much about this shit?

[PistolPete44]

I think you mean 1962 Bill Russell. I know Wilt scored 50 ppg that season but he didn't even win MVP and he didn't win the championship either. It was just another year where Wilt lost to Russell. Russell was historically dominant in that game 7 finals though. He scored 30+ points and pulled down 40+ rebounds IIRC and they obviously won the championship.
That's because his teammates sucked. Russell + Cousy = invincible
Wilt himself was dominating the whole 1962

[Cali Syndicate]

[SIZE="5"]http://i1214.photobucket.com/albums/cc494/steelermia/56.jpg

^^ How does that happen?

[Artillery]

Strong troll in this one.

Look at who was starting alongside him you ****ing moron. Luke Walton. Smush Parker.

Get the **** out.

It's called padding your stats on a bad team. And Lamar Odom is still a better 2nd option than someone like Derek Anderson on the 2001 Spurs(58 win team) or Jason Terry on the '07 Mavs.

On topic, best players of the 2000s on a yearly basis based on win shares:

2010-11 LeBron James 15.59 MIA
2009-10 LeBron James 18.46 CLE
2008-09 LeBron James 20.25 CLE
2007-08 Chris Paul 17.79 NOH
2006-07 Dirk Nowitzki 16.34 DAL
2005-06 Dirk Nowitzki 17.72 DAL
2004-05 Kevin Garnett 16.11 MIN
2003-04 Kevin Garnett 18.33 MIN
2002-03 Tim Duncan 16.45 SAS
2001-02 Tim Duncan 17.81 SAS
2000-01 Shaquille O'Neal 14.94 LAL
1999-00 Shaquille O'Neal 18.65 LAL

lol at Kobe being nowhere to be found. Guess advanced stats don't like chuckers.

[NugzHeat3]

I'd agree with ShaqAttack. I don't think anybody I have seen has been truly the undisputed best in the league outside of perhaps 2000 Shaq and 1992 Jordan.

I'd say there's a difference between being the consensus best and the undisputed best.

There's always a few detractors or arguments for others.

For instance, 1996 Jordan would have nearly 100% of the vote if you made a thread now but in a poll taken back then, he had 68% of the vote around the league which is enough for a consensus but it's not undisputed. People thought Pippen was better than him.

In 1991, I don't have a poll at hand but I'd suspect it's the same thing with some people siding with Magic just because Jordan wasn't a winner at this point and had the stereotypes of a ball hog, selfish player ect attached to him. At the end of the year, it would've been undisputed though.

During 1993, it would've been a consensus too but there's people siding with Olajuwon and Barkley. Even in 1992, Drexler was catching steam being on Jordan's level.

Shaq was the guy from about 2000 to 2003 as far as consensus goes. You'll still find a lot of debates though with people arguing for Duncan using his versatility and defensive ability or the fact that he didn't have a #2 guy like Kobe.

[Sarcastic]

Mikan, Wilt, Kareem, Jordan, Shaq, Kobe, Lebron.

Magic and Bird were always up for debate so neither of them was undisputed.

[Mr. I'm So Rad]

Actually Kobe was considered the undisputed best in '07 more than '06. That's a really overlooked season of his.

[ILLsmak]

LeBron is the best now no matter how many Bulls or OKC fans wanna say otherwise.

I think Shaq might have been the best in 98-99. But yeah undisputed is hard to say because there are always homers.

But even being able to be an intelligent person and say a player is "the best" is rare. There is usually a him OR him kind of thing going on.

-Smak

[FourthTenor]

Duncan was better than Kobe in all the years prior to Lebron's first MVP, except for the one season he had plantar fasciitis. I believe the Spurs still made the conference finals, while the Ko-bricks were losing in the first round (again).

[Mr. Jabbar]

He lacks quite a bit that the best player in the NBA usually has.

Mostly...being noteworthy in ways other than scoring.

Lack of ESPN hype didnt keep anyone from calling Duncan the best when he was.

so true

[Pointguard]

'94 Hakeem
'84 Bird
'00 Shaq
'01 Shaq
'03 Duncan
'91, '92, '93, '96 MJ (maybe more, but I am not sure about undisputed)
'87 Magic

I don't know much before the 1980s so I'll let some of you other guys who are informed about that do the talking instead.
Undisputed means without a doubt. Lately, its just been way to convoluted. I would create another category called, Clearly, which would include more people.

Undisputed would be Mikan, Wilt, Kareem, MJ, Hakeem, Shaq.
Clearly would include Bird, Magic, Duncan, Kobe, Lebron.

[Force]

What is it with people and kobe 05-06 season? They Lakers were garbage after Shaq and before Gasol. Yet Kobe is one of the best ever that year? Yeah f'n right. Kobe has never been the clear best player in the league, not once.

Shaq is the most recent "undisputed" best player in the league.

[kennethgriffin]

my take on it

whenever there is an undisputed best player. it usually means that the era isnt verry good

jordan dominated the 90's... sure. but how many other 90's players are there in the top 10 all time?

hakeem could be argued. but so could the big O

and when we look at the possibility of wade/lebron getting 2-3 titles before theyre retired.. if they do..

the top 10 players all time could verry well consist of 5 players whos best years were from the 2000's

- jordan 90's
- kareem 70's
- russell 60's
- magic 80's
- wilt 60's
- kobe 2000's
- shaq 2000's
- lebron 2000's
- duncan 2000's
- wade 2000's or Bird 80's


this is why kobe had a hard time getting heads and shoulders above everyone...

this is actually a good thing. it shows there was much harder all time great competition for kobe in his era than jordans or anyone elses

[StateOfMind12]

It's called padding your stats on a bad team. And Lamar Odom is still a better 2nd option than someone like Derek Anderson on the 2001 Spurs(58 win team) or Jason Terry on the '07 Mavs.

On topic, best players of the 2000s on a yearly basis based on win shares:

2010-11 LeBron James 15.59 MIA
2009-10 LeBron James 18.46 CLE
2008-09 LeBron James 20.25 CLE
2007-08 Chris Paul 17.79 NOH
2006-07 Dirk Nowitzki 16.34 DAL
2005-06 Dirk Nowitzki 17.72 DAL
2004-05 Kevin Garnett 16.11 MIN
2003-04 Kevin Garnett 18.33 MIN
2002-03 Tim Duncan 16.45 SAS
2001-02 Tim Duncan 17.81 SAS
2000-01 Shaquille O'Neal 14.94 LAL
1999-00 Shaquille O'Neal 18.65 LAL

lol at Kobe being nowhere to be found. Guess advanced stats don't like chuckers.
Win shares really? That is probably the worst stat you can ever find and ever use. I bet you don't even know how it works and what it is suppose to do.



Mikan, Wilt, Kareem, Jordan, Shaq, Kobe, Lebron.

Magic and Bird were always up for debate so neither of them was undisputed.


Undisputed means without a doubt. Lately, its just been way to convoluted. I would create another category called, Clearly, which would include more people.

Undisputed would be Mikan, Wilt, Kareem, MJ, Hakeem, Shaq.
Clearly would include Bird, Magic, Duncan, Kobe, Lebron.
Lebron was never clearly the best either. Did you even bother to read my post?

[kennethgriffin]

like i said.. how can there be a clear cut best player when theres guys like shaq, duncan, kobe, lebron, wade all in one decade

thats 5 potential top 10 all time players... more than any other era

which makes the player of the decade ( kobe bryant ) that much more impressive

[HurricaneKid]

Win shares really? That is probably the worst stat you can ever find and ever use. I bet you don't even know how it works and what it is suppose to do.

Lebron was never clearly the best either. Did you even bother to read my post?

This is patently ridiculous. A Win Share merely shows a player's contribution as a share of wins produced.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/ws.html

Its a fine advanced Stat.

And I scoff at anyone (and there are plenty of "analysts" in this too) that woul say Kobe (or anyone else) was better than LeBron in 09.

LeBron is leading WS for his 4th straight year. The three previous years he was 2nd. FTR, Kobe has NEVER been in the top 3 (though he IS 3rd this year)

[HurricaneKid]

lol at Kobe being nowhere to be found. Guess advanced stats don't like chuckers.

You know what is even funnier? He has never even been second in WS or PER. He was 3rd once in PER and his highest raking in WS is 4th.

Undisputed my ***.

[StateOfMind12]

This is patently ridiculous. A Win Share merely shows a player's contribution as a share of wins produced.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/ws.html

Its a fine advanced Stat.

And I scoff at anyone (and there are plenty of "analysts" in this too) that woul say Kobe (or anyone else) was better than LeBron in 09.

LeBron is leading WS for his 4th straight year. The three previous years he was 2nd. FTR, Kobe has NEVER been in the top 3 (though he IS 3rd this year)
Ok....go ahead and explain why this stuff happened then with win shares.


-Detlef Schrempf, Dana Barros, Reggie Miller, and Stockton were all ahead of Hakeem in win shares in 1995. The year he won his second ring and was at worst...the second best player in the NBA(in reality...the best). Hakeem wasnt even top 10. Not sure how far he fell but it amuses me to know numbers can be bent that far.

-In 1990 Hakeem put up 24/14/5 blocks 2 steals and 3 assists a game. But his teams record was bad(well...average) so he was behind Terry Porter, Reggie, and so on. And odd thing is Reggies team had almost the exact same record as Hakeems.

-Brent Barry ended up having more win shares than Kidd in 2002. And that was in 02 when midseason Kidd likely would have been voted MVP.

-Oh and also that year in 2002...Elton Brand over Dirk, Shaq(3rd ring year) and KG somehow.


^^ props to Kblaze for mentioning all of this information in another thread.


Yeah win shares is a joke stat but since it probably supports your favorite player you aren't going to go against it.

You don't even understand how win shares work cause if you did you would actually take the time to briefly explain it to me since that link you posted about it does a terrible job of doing so. Obviously you won't care because that stat supports your favorite player and goes against the player you hate, so why would you go against something that makes you happy?

[Deuce Bigalow]

Duncan was better than Kobe in all the years prior to Lebron's first MVP, except for the one season he had plantar fasciitis. I believe the Spurs still made the conference finals, while the Ko-bricks were losing in the first round (again).
:lol
2001, 2004, 2006-Present Kobe's been better than Duncan

[iamgine]

Nobody is truly the "undisputed" best player, there are always debates, regardless of how logical they are.

KBlaze has mentioned the Nique/Jordan debates for example.

But as far as general perception. As a kid, I remember it pretty much being Jordan and then everyone else, except coming off the back to back titles, Hakeem was widely regarded as the best player.

Other than that, it was pretty much considered Shaq's league from '00-'02 and Kobe's from '06-'08(argue all you want, but Kobe was widely considered the best in the game during that time).

I agree that Duncan was clearly the best in '03, but it wasn't undisputed. People were pretty split between Kobe, T-Mac, KG and Shaq as well as Duncan of course.

Just like I do think that Lebron was the best in '09(and '10 for that matter), but people acting like it was undisputed are crazy. How short are people's memories that they don't remember the constant Lebron vs Kobe talk just 2-3 years ago? :hammerhead:

Other than that, from what I've read/seen mentioned in old games, I'd say Bird from '84-'86.

Moses didn't seem to be other than maybe '83. I've seen A LOT of articles calling Bird the best as early as '81.

Definitely Kareem for quite a bit of the 70's, though there was Walton's year and a half and I've heard that there were debates over best player between the 2 leagues(Dr. J vs Kareem).

As far as Wilt? Well, I'll save JLauber some energy and state that I'm NOT commenting on how many years Wilt was the best other than that it's hard to argue against him in '67.

But, in general, people can't forget about Russell. Unless I'm mistaken, I'm pretty damn sure that Wilt wasn't considered clearly better than Russell throughout their careers.
Was Kobe really the best or just the most popular though? Somehow the two seems connected.

For example, in 2005-2006: Whilst Kobe averaged 35-5-5, Lebron averaged 31-7-7 while leading his team further in the playoff. Opinions can vary but those were close enough for it not to be undisputed.

[Pointguard]

Lebron was never clearly the best either. Did you even bother to read my post?

Yeah I read it but it didn't say anything about clearly. Did you understand what you wrote? Even if you think you did, it isn't the law.

Undisputed is for boxing rings and mano a mano matchups. You can't sit on a throne alone in basketball as it is a team sport. Undisputed is an illusion until you unite all categories. MJ is the closet thing to that only because he was the best offensive player and a top three defensive player, was dominant and winning it all and leading his team, all at the same time. But that full size combo only he and Wilt, Kareem and Hakeem (Mikan?) can lay claim to. Shaq was close.

After that, you have to start doing things by piece-meal and haters have always detracted from, and you too are a hater. Some people put a big billing on winning it all. Others on all around game. Still others milk the team ball aspect... . At least we can say that Lebron in '09 put a team on his back, won like crazy, had one of the most complete games ever, was efficient and didn't have much of a knock on him in any category.

[phoenix_bladen]

Dirk was the undisputed best player last year 2010/2011 in the playoffs for sure!

And pretty much Michael Jordan his whole career especially in the playoffs! ... well maybe except for his first year or two when he was a rookie......

[WeGetRing2012]

When you beat Wade and LeBron 4-2, Kobe 4-0, and Durant 4-1 you are clearly the best player in the NBA.

He just lacks ESPN hype.

No Dallas beat the Lakers,Thunder,and Heat not individuals.... Dirk is not a good player on both ends of the court so he was never the undisputed best. Offensively he is great but for a 7'0fter is not a good rebounder or defensive player.

[Pointguard]

Was Kobe really the best or just the most popular though? Somehow the two seems connected.

For example, in 2005-2006: Whilst Kobe averaged 35-5-5, Lebron averaged 31-7-7 while leading his team further in the playoff. Opinions can vary but those were close enough for it not to be undisputed.

Lebron had the better all around game and won more in the playoffs and regular season while playing for a new coach. People outside of LA thought Kobe was more selfish than AI ever was in '06 and '07. Then, in 06 Kobe finished the year off with what looked like an intentional quit in an in reach game seven - that pretty much ruined the year. Even people in LA, at that time, would have not said Kobe was the undiputed best. But now that people might have forgotten... .

I think Kobe might have had a shot in '08 tho.

[ShaqAttack3234]

That's because his teammates sucked. Russell + Cousy = invincible
Wilt himself was dominating the whole 1962

I really suggest you research the '62 season and the '62 Eastern Division Finals more.



I'd agree with ShaqAttack. I don't think anybody I have seen has been truly the undisputed best in the league outside of perhaps 2000 Shaq and 1992 Jordan.

I'd say there's a difference between being the consensus best and the undisputed best.

There's always a few detractors or arguments for others.

For instance, 1996 Jordan would have nearly 100% of the vote if you made a thread now but in a poll taken back then, he had 68% of the vote around the league which is enough for a consensus but it's not undisputed. People thought Pippen was better than him.

In 1991, I don't have a poll at hand but I'd suspect it's the same thing with some people siding with Magic just because Jordan wasn't a winner at this point and had the stereotypes of a ball hog, selfish player ect attached to him. At the end of the year, it would've been undisputed though.

During 1993, it would've been a consensus too but there's people siding with Olajuwon and Barkley. Even in 1992, Drexler was catching steam being on Jordan's level.

Shaq was the guy from about 2000 to 2003 as far as consensus goes. You'll still find a lot of debates though with people arguing for Duncan using his versatility and defensive ability or the fact that he didn't have a #2 guy like Kobe.

Good point about Jordan, I've always heard that there were quite a few questioning if he could win playing the way that he did.

I'd be interested to see how many votes Duncan got in '03. It seems like he got less attention compared to other stars until he beat Shaq/Kobe and continued destroying the playoffs.

As of 2002, Shaq was the clear consensus, and Duncan was again getting underrated in the polls.


That's why Shaq tops THE SPORTING NEWS list of the NBA's 50 best players. We asked one general manager or personnel man from each team to rank the league's top players based on current ability--not potential or past performance--and O'Neal came up No. 1 on 15 of the 18 ballots received.

Here's another one.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/nba/survey/2002-04-19-fan-insider-results.htm

I was surprised to see T-Mac finishing 2nd behind Shaq. Based on memory I would've thought that Kobe or Duncan would have. I remembered T-Mac's prime being more highly regarded back then as opposed to now(the inefficient chucker talk referring to prime T-Mac is a recent thing).

For best player results from insiders it was

Shaq- 56%
T-Mac- 16%
Kobe- 10%
Other- 18%

And for fan voting.

Shaq- 38%
Kobe- 18%
T-Mac- 16%
Duncan- 16%
Other- 12%

Regarding Jordan in '96, well, I'd say that he'd have probably gotten more of the vote in '97 than '96. These surveys are usually taken late in the season, so at the time, Hakeem was coming off the back to back titles and had more consideration. Pippen also got a lot more attention in '96 than '97 and with Jordan winning again in '96, I'd say that it would've been more of a landslide in '97. Despite Malone winning MVP, I don't remember many thinking he was as good/better, there'd probably be a few as there always are. By '98, I'd guess that Jordan would've still won, but I remember Shaq getting more talk as the best than pre-'98 so it'd probably be less of a landslide than '97.

2000 Shaq might have been the biggest consensus since I started watching basketball. Pre-'00, there were questions about if he was focused enough to win ect., but I don't remember many arguments against him as the season progressed. There might have been a few for Duncan having won a title as well as KG for his versatility.



Magic and Bird were always up for debate so neither of them was undisputed.

I was going to say that regarding Magic's '87 and '88 being mentioned. Magic certainly has a case for best, but because of when his prime occurred, I'm not sure he was ever widely regarded as the best, maybe '87, but because his prime overlapped with the last 2 years of Bird's prime and the early part of Jordan's prime, he was never clearly the best.

I would say that Bird probably was during the '84-'86 stretch, particularly '86 when he got all of that GOAT talk.



Was Kobe really the best or just the most popular though? Somehow the two seems connected.

For example, in 2005-2006: Whilst Kobe averaged 35-5-5, Lebron averaged 31-7-7 while leading his team further in the playoff. Opinions can vary but those were close enough for it not to be undisputed.

I do think Kobe was the best, but you're right popularity is a factor.

However, I'd be willing to bet that the vast majority in the game at the time would've chosen Kobe.

I think that'd be the case until 2009.

And was Kobe the best? Yes, I'd say he was clearly better than Lebron in '06. Better scorer and overall offensive player and a better defender. Lebron's team success wasn't more impressive to me either.

Lebron was in a weaker conference and his team was 47-32 in games he played, not much better than the 45-35 the Lakers were in games Kobe played.

Even after Wade's title that year, most still considered Kobe better.

I personally think that Lebron has been better than Kobe since the '08-'09 season, but Kobe was clearly a better player each season before that except for '05 when I'd probably favor Lebron, but they were close.

[Deuce Bigalow]

I do think Kobe was the best, but you're right popularity is a factor.

However, I'd be willing to bet that the vast majority in the game at the time would've chosen Kobe.

I think that'd be the case until 2009.

And was Kobe the best? Yes, I'd say he was clearly better than Lebron in '06. Better scorer and overall offensive player and a better defender. Lebron's team success wasn't more impressive to me either.

Lebron was in a weaker conference and his team was 47-32 in games he played, not much better than the 45-35 the Lakers were in games Kobe played.

Even after Wade's title that year, most still considered Kobe better.

I personally think that Lebron has been better than Kobe since the '08-'09 season, but Kobe was clearly a better player each season before that except for '05 when I'd probably favor Lebron, but they were close.
What about 2010?
Kobe was better imo

[iamgine]

I do think Kobe was the best, but you're right popularity is a factor.

However, I'd be willing to bet that the vast majority in the game at the time would've chosen Kobe.

I think that'd be the case until 2009.

And was Kobe the best? Yes, I'd say he was clearly better than Lebron in '06. Better scorer and overall offensive player and a better defender. Lebron's team success wasn't more impressive to me either.

Lebron was in a weaker conference and his team was 47-32 in games he played, not much better than the 45-35 the Lakers were in games Kobe played.

Even after Wade's title that year, most still considered Kobe better.

I personally think that Lebron has been better than Kobe since the '08-'09 season, but Kobe was clearly a better player each season before that except for '05 when I'd probably favor Lebron, but they were close.
Could it really be that clear? I mean, for a player averaging 35-5-5 vs 31-7-7, I feel it shouldn't be. Was it because Kobe had more moves? Because other players saying he was the best? How about in the playoff when his numbers dropped to 28-6-5?

Also, can a perimeter player really be better than a big man? I feel Tim Duncan was still better than either Kobe or Lebron, even if the numbers didn't show it.

[StateOfMind12]

Kobe was better than Lebron in '08-'09. You have to look outside of the stats to see why. However, just to make it short and dry, Kobe had better and more intangibles, was the better leader, and was the better defender. The last one is pretty key to why Kobe was better than Lebron in '08-'09. I can explain why but I don't ave a lot of time right now. I'm not bringing up the tangible aspects yet but I can explain more later regarding '08-'09 Kobe and '08-'09 LeBron.

ShaqAttack or anyone that sees the '08-'09 Kobe vs. LeBron comparison differently, is there anything you disagree with what I just said?

[HurricaneKid]

Ok....go ahead and explain why this stuff happened then with win shares.


-Detlef Schrempf, Dana Barros, Reggie Miller, and Stockton were all ahead of Hakeem in win shares in 1995. The year he won his second ring and was at worst...the second best player in the NBA(in reality...the best). Hakeem wasnt even top 10. Not sure how far he fell but it amuses me to know numbers can be bent that far.

-In 1990 Hakeem put up 24/14/5 blocks 2 steals and 3 assists a game. But his teams record was bad(well...average) so he was behind Terry Porter, Reggie, and so on. And odd thing is Reggies team had almost the exact same record as Hakeems.

-Brent Barry ended up having more win shares than Kidd in 2002. And that was in 02 when midseason Kidd likely would have been voted MVP.

-Oh and also that year in 2002...Elton Brand over Dirk, Shaq(3rd ring year) and KG somehow.


^^ props to Kblaze for mentioning all of this information in another thread.


Yeah win shares is a joke stat but since it probably supports your favorite player you aren't going to go against it.

You don't even understand how win shares work cause if you did you would actually take the time to briefly explain it to me since that link you posted about it does a terrible job of doing so. Obviously you won't care because that stat supports your favorite player and goes against the player you hate, so why would you go against something that makes you happy?

The statistical analysis in sports largely started in baseball where there are so many controlled experiments and so much data. Statistical analysis in baseball has gotten to be insanely accurate over large periods. Like 98%+. Many of the tools used in baseball have been transferred over to basketball where there are far too many variables and data sets that move too much. Bill James is widely credited with the statistical analysis revolution, which is why the article I linked to was so reverential towards him. WS started out as a calculation who was really responsible, over the course of the year, for that team's wins. Its grown slightly (and there is no longer a hard cap so a teams win are EXACTLY equal to WS of the entire team) as there is still some room for variance, especially in basketball analysis, but it is still generally based on each player's contribution for the team's total number of wins.

So your primary misunderstanding in re: to Olajuwon is that his team just didn't win that many games. If you recall, they were a 6 seed that year. His contributions were calculated to be 10.7/47 wins. Some of the other players you bring up had a lot more wins to split up. A large reason LBJ lapped the field with WS lately is that his teams won A LOT OF GAMES. And his statistical contributions to those teams were immense. If you notice, in PER which doesn't take wins into account at all Dream was #3 in the league. He is severely punished in WS because his team just didn't win that much (until the postseason).

[Disaprine]

jordan is the only i could think of.

[NumberSix]

The 08-09 comparison is not even remotely close to being close. LeBron james was the best player in the league by an easy margin. Hands down. Ridiculous to even attempt to argue that ANYONE was on his level.

As for '06. How is this even a discussion? OF CORSE it was Kobe. Who the hell questions that? Who the hell thinks LeBron was better than Kobe in '06? Laughable. How is this even a question?

[HurricaneKid]

As far as Kidd goes in 01-02, he shot 41% and led the NBA in TOs. Those are both penalized HEAVILY in WS and PER.

[StateOfMind12]

The statistical analysis in sports largely started in baseball where there are so many controlled experiments and so much data. Statistical analysis in baseball has gotten to be insanely accurate over large periods. Like 98%+. Many of the tools used in baseball have been transferred over to basketball where there are far too many variables and data sets that move too much.
Here is your problem already......basektball is not baseball.



So your primary misunderstanding in re: to Olajuwon is that his team just didn't win that many games. If you recall, they were a 6 seed that year. His contributions were calculated to be 10.7/47 wins. Some of the other players you bring up had a lot more wins to split up. A large reason LBJ lapped the field with WS lately is that his teams won A LOT OF GAMES. And his statistical contributions to those teams were immense. If you notice, in PER which doesn't take wins into account at all Dream was #3 in the league. He is severely punished in WS because his team just didn't win that much.
Sure, now go explain why Hakeem (11.2) had less win shares than Reggie Miller (12.1) than in '89-'90 when both of their finishes 41-41. Unless you want to argue Miller was better than Hakeem back then, if so then I think we are finished here.

Oh yeah, and go ahead and explain how or why Kobe had more win shares in the '01 playoffs than Shaq did. I bet you didn't see that coming since win shares usually goes against Kobe.

Win shares is a joke stat and it is almost impossible to say otherwise.


The 08-09 comparison is not even remotely close to being close. LeBron james was the best player in the league by an easy margin. Hands down. Ridiculous to even attempt to argue that ANYONE was on his level.

Yeah if you are a box-score watcher instead of a game watcher.

[NumberSix]

Yeah if you are a box-score watcher instead of a game watcher.
Elaborate.

[StateOfMind12]

Elaborate.
Read my post on post #50 in this thread....


Kobe was better than Lebron in '08-'09. You have to look outside of the stats to see why. However, just to make it short and dry, Kobe had better and more intangibles, was the better leader, and was the better defender. The last one is pretty key to why Kobe was better than Lebron in '08-'09. I can explain why but I don't ave a lot of time right now. I'm not bringing up the tangible aspects yet but I can explain more later regarding '08-'09 Kobe and '08-'09 LeBron.

ShaqAttack or anyone that sees the '08-'09 Kobe vs. LeBron comparison differently, is there anything you disagree with what I just said?

[tpols]

Read my post on post #50 in this thread....
Kobe wasn't a better basketball player than Lebron in 09.. he had a better season, because his team was better and he was allowed to advance farther into the playoffs to achieve more success.

It's like 06/07 with Kobe versus Wade and Lebron.. They had much better teams than Kobe had which allowed them to make the Finals and do what they did, but they sure as hell weren't better basketball players than Kobe in those years.

[StateOfMind12]

Kobe wasn't a better basketball player than Lebron in 09.. he had a better season, because his team was better and he was allowed to advance farther into the playoffs to achieve more success.

It's like 06/07 with Kobe versus Wade and Lebron.. They had much better teams than Kobe had which allowed them to make the Finals and do what they did, but they sure as hell weren't better basketball players than Kobe in those years.
It is pretty clear you didn't even bother to read what I posted on post #50....

[jstern]

To me, in my history of watching basketball, and the way I see undisputed (As in no question about it.). I would have to say Jordan, Shaq and Lebron. Shaq during those Lakers days, and Lebron before the finals and before the playoffs. People forget, but just last year before the playoffs Lebron was out of this world, and the comparison to Jordan was a major topic. I started to get goose bumps because for the first time since Jordan retired, there was someone who was clearly the best in the world.

[NugzHeat3]

I really suggest you research the '62 season and the '62 Eastern Division Finals more.




Good point about Jordan, I've always heard that there were quite a few questioning if he could win playing the way that he did.

I'd be interested to see how many votes Duncan got in '03. It seems like he got less attention compared to other stars until he beat Shaq/Kobe and continued destroying the playoffs.

As of 2002, Shaq was the clear consensus, and Duncan was again getting underrated in the polls.



Here's another one.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/nba/survey/2002-04-19-fan-insider-results.htm

I was surprised to see T-Mac finishing 2nd behind Shaq. Based on memory I would've thought that Kobe or Duncan would have. I remembered T-Mac's prime being more highly regarded back then as opposed to now(the inefficient chucker talk referring to prime T-Mac is a recent thing).

For best player results from insiders it was

Shaq- 56%
T-Mac- 16%
Kobe- 10%
Other- 18%

And for fan voting.

Shaq- 38%
Kobe- 18%
T-Mac- 16%
Duncan- 16%
Other- 12%

Regarding Jordan in '96, well, I'd say that he'd have probably gotten more of the vote in '97 than '96. These surveys are usually taken late in the season, so at the time, Hakeem was coming off the back to back titles and had more consideration. Pippen also got a lot more attention in '96 than '97 and with Jordan winning again in '96, I'd say that it would've been more of a landslide in '97. Despite Malone winning MVP, I don't remember many thinking he was as good/better, there'd probably be a few as there always are. By '98, I'd guess that Jordan would've still won, but I remember Shaq getting more talk as the best than pre-'98 so it'd probably be less of a landslide than '97.

2000 Shaq might have been the biggest consensus since I started watching basketball. Pre-'00, there were questions about if he was focused enough to win ect., but I don't remember many arguments against him as the season progressed. There might have been a few for Duncan having won a title as well as KG for his versatility.



I was going to say that regarding Magic's '87 and '88 being mentioned. Magic certainly has a case for best, but because of when his prime occurred, I'm not sure he was ever widely regarded as the best, maybe '87, but because his prime overlapped with the last 2 years of Bird's prime and the early part of Jordan's prime, he was never clearly the best.

I would say that Bird probably was during the '84-'86 stretch, particularly '86 when he got all of that GOAT talk.




I do think Kobe was the best, but you're right popularity is a factor.

However, I'd be willing to bet that the vast majority in the game at the time would've chosen Kobe.

I think that'd be the case until 2009.

And was Kobe the best? Yes, I'd say he was clearly better than Lebron in '06. Better scorer and overall offensive player and a better defender. Lebron's team success wasn't more impressive to me either.

Lebron was in a weaker conference and his team was 47-32 in games he played, not much better than the 45-35 the Lakers were in games Kobe played.

Even after Wade's title that year, most still considered Kobe better.

I personally think that Lebron has been better than Kobe since the '08-'09 season, but Kobe was clearly a better player each season before that except for '05 when I'd probably favor Lebron, but they were close.
I'd agree with that.

I came across that 2002 poll as well and I was a bit surprised to see Duncan outside the top 3.

Here is the 2003 Sporting News survey ranking the top 25, from March.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1208/is_9_227/ai_98172075/?tag=content;col1

Shaq is first overall and either first or second in each ballot. Kobe is second. Duncan third. I thought Shaq was still the guy this year though in retrospect, most tend to side with Duncan.

It was funny when Byron Scott and KMart were asked to compare the two during the finals. Kenyon put it the best way. Paraphrased, "with Shaq, you know you can't win. With Duncan, you know you still have a chance." He was still that guy whose mere presence on the court still gave them that psychological edge.

I couldn't find Shaq getting much talk in 1998 though partly because of public perception since Jordan had built a firm reputation as the top guy at that point and Shaq wasn't healthy. There's not much reason for people around the league to go with Shaq since Jordan's established.

I personally think he was the best that year because I don't see anything to really criticize him for and he was more dominant than Jordan. He's pretty much the same player he was in 2000, just didn't have the same coaching and system to be recognized as such. Assists aren't as high but I don't think he got as many touches or had the same system that emphasized post play and ball movement.

I've seen his highlights from the series vs Seattle and that's one of his best ever. George Karl called him the GOAT post player after and Bob Weiss said he was far more dominant than Wilt and he played with Wilt on the 1967 team.

[DevilsAssassin]

2003-2004 Kevin Garnett

[HurricaneKid]

Here is your problem already......basektball is not baseball.


Sure, now go explain why Hakeem (11.2) had less win shares than Reggie Miller (12.1) than in '89-'90 when both of their finishes 41-41. Unless you want to argue Miller was better than Hakeem back then, if so then I think we are finished here.

Oh yeah, and go ahead and explain how or why Kobe had more win shares in the '01 playoffs than Shaq did. I bet you didn't see that coming since win shares usually goes against Kobe.

Win shares is a joke stat and it is almost impossible to say otherwise.

Ugh. I wouldn't have spent any time showing you the what and why and origins if I would have known you were going to be so dismissive.

It should come as no surprise to you that all the advanced stats are efficiency based so a guard that shoots 51.4/41.4/86.8 and Avg more points is going to beat out a C that shoots 50.1/16.7/.713. It should be noted that Dream led the league in Def WS by a fair margin.

[Pointguard]

And was Kobe the best? Yes, I'd say he was clearly better than Lebron in '06. Better scorer and overall offensive player and a better defender. Lebron's team success wasn't more impressive to me either.

Lebron was in a weaker conference and his team was 47-32 in games he played, not much better than the 45-35 the Lakers were in games Kobe played.

Even after Wade's title that year, most still considered Kobe better.

This was the first year where we saw young scorers come into the game and exhibit a dimension that previous premier scorers didn't have - superior judgement and point guard like passing skills. Both Wade and Lebron had a great balance of knowing when to pass and when to shoot. And it had upped their teams play considerably. They were totally integrated into their teams and got other players games going. People were also saying "Wow, how did Wade do that with Half-of Shaq and less help than Shaq had in his entire stay in LA when he was in his prime?" Not only that, Wade's scoring was an addition to Shaq's scoring it didn't seem competitive at all. Lebron was already the type of player that if he had 20 in the first quarter he might just pass the rest of the game. Offensively Kobe wasn't on that level yet (If Kobe gets 15 in the first quarter its officially Kobe night - the offense is ordained for the next 3 quarters). Kobe wasn't blocking, stealing or getting assist like them either.

Kobe scored like a madman but people thought that he was oldskool ball hog and that the new breed was taking over. I imagine in LA yall just saw somebody who could score like Jordan and began pushing all the comparisons that just ran amuck. Of course this created the Kobe Haters breeder's camp that has been brewing for years afterward. To people outside of LA, Kobe was looked as selfish and not a team player.

[NumberSix]

It is pretty clear you didn't even bother to read what I posted on post #50....
What exactly do you think you posted in "#50"? I can tell you, you didn't post much of anything. You made generic meaningless statements like "better and more intangibles" and "better defender". The idea that you think Kobe was locking guys up on defense in 2009 in itself is hilarious.

Like I said, elaborate. Something more specific than "better and more intangibles". That alone isn't a case at all, let alone a strong one.

[StateOfMind12]

What exactly do you think you posted in "#50"? I can tell you, you didn't post much of anything. You made generic meaningless statements like "better and more intangibles" and "better defender". The idea that you think Kobe was locking guys up on defense in 2009 in itself is hilarious.

Like I said, elaborate. Something more specific than "better and more intangibles". That alone isn't a case at all, let alone a strong one.
Right....I am just going to ignore you since you aren't worth the time.

NugzHeat3 and ShaqAttack, who do you guys think was better between Kobe and Lebron in '08-'09?? I would like your analysis on that. I think of you guys can agree that neither one or the other was the undisputed or clearly the best right? I assume both of you will have Lebron over Kobe that season but please explain why.

[NumberSix]

Right....I am just going to ignore you since you aren't worth the time.
Yeaaahhhh.... You got nothing.:oldlol:

[StateOfMind12]

Yeaaahhhh.... You got nothing.:oldlol:
Sure, just let me talk to someone that is worth the time explaining to and I will (e.g. tpols, ShaqAttack, NugzHeat, pretty much anyone that isn't too emotional to think). I already see that your emotions are doing more of the talking for you than your brain so until you learn to cope with that then maybe someday I will bother taking you seriously.

[Pointguard]

What exactly do you think you posted in "#50"? I can tell you, you didn't post much of anything. You made generic meaningless statements like "better and more intangibles" and "better defender". The idea that you think Kobe was locking guys up on defense in 2009 in itself is hilarious.

Like I said, elaborate. Something more specific than "better and more intangibles". That alone isn't a case at all, let alone a strong one.
:roll: He's a funny cat. He thinks he's the law and doesn't back up his case. Your questioning is legit but I doubt he'll get back at you.

[StateOfMind12]

:roll: He's a funny cat. He thinks he's the law and doesn't back up his case. Your questioning is legit but I doubt he'll get back at you.
What is your dispute with my post? I'll respond to you since I am sure you will be worth the time.

[HurricaneKid]

I took the time to explain WS to you (even if you totally dismissed it). You take the time to explain how in the world Kobe was better than LeBron in 09. LeBron's 09 season was the best season I have seen since atleast Shaq 01 and possibly back to 1996 Jordan.

[StateOfMind12]

I took the time to explain WS to you (even if you totally dismissed it). You take the time to explain how in the world Kobe was better than LeBron in 09. LeBron's 09 season was the best season I have seen since atleast Shaq 01 and possibly back to 1996 Jordan.
First things first, do you have any dispute with this post at all? Do you dispute anything I said on here?


Kobe was better than Lebron in '08-'09. You have to look outside of the stats to see why. However, just to make it short and dry, Kobe had better and more intangibles, was the better leader, and was the better defender. The last one is pretty key to why Kobe was better than Lebron in '08-'09. I can explain why but I don't ave a lot of time right now. I'm not bringing up the tangible aspects yet but I can explain more later regarding '08-'09 Kobe and '08-'09 LeBron.


Or do you just want me to explain more throughly?

I'll probably make a brief explanation after the Heat-Nuggets game or maybe before the Bulls-Celtics game.

[ShaqAttack3234]

I'd agree with that.

I came across that 2002 poll as well and I was a bit surprised to see Duncan outside the top 3.

Here is the 2003 Sporting News survey ranking the top 25, from March.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1208/is_9_227/ai_98172075/?tag=content;col1

Shaq is first overall and either first or second in each ballot. Kobe is second. Duncan third. I thought Shaq was still the guy this year though in retrospect, most tend to side with Duncan.

It was funny when Byron Scott and KMart were asked to compare the two during the finals. Kenyon put it the best way. Paraphrased, "with Shaq, you know you can't win. With Duncan, you know you still have a chance." He was still that guy whose mere presence on the court still gave them that psychological edge.

I couldn't find Shaq getting much talk in 1998 though partly because of public perception since Jordan had built a firm reputation as the top guy at that point and Shaq wasn't healthy. There's not much reason for people around the league to go with Shaq since Jordan's established.

I personally think he was the best that year because I don't see anything to really criticize him for and he was more dominant than Jordan. He's pretty much the same player he was in 2000, just didn't have the same coaching and system to be recognized as such. Assists aren't as high but I don't think he got as many touches or had the same system that emphasized post play and ball movement.

I've seen his highlights from the series vs Seattle and that's one of his best ever. George Karl called him the GOAT post player after and Bob Weiss said he was far more dominant than Wilt and he played with Wilt on the 1967 team.

Great find, regarding '98. I agree with you to some extent, he did focus a little more defensively in 2000 and I do believe he improved his passing under Phil who emphasized it a lot. But he was a really good passer from '95 on and in that Seattle series you mentioned, you can see how much his passing out of double teams and his shot blocking impacted the team. That was one of his best, another difference in 2000 is that he gave more effort on the boards, and just generally worked harder.

But as an individual scorer, I think Shaq was as good as ever in '98 and his athleticism/skills were near their peak. I might say that was the year he was the best outside of the first 2 titles.

The '98 WCSF were one of Shaq's best series, both statistically(31/10/4/4, 63 FG%) and as far as impact.

Yeah, I've seen Karl's statements, he actually also said he'd take Shaq over anyone in the league that year, and I'd agree.

As far as the system in '98 vs '00, well the most offense was much less refined, it was more stagnant. O'Neal would have more time to back his way in and pass out of doubles, while in the triangle, Phil wanted Shaq to look to score quicker with better position to start and if not, become a passer.


People were also saying "Wow, how did Wade do that with Half-of Shaq and less help than Shaq had in his entire stay in LA when he was in his prime?"

I don't remember talk of that nature at all. I never remember anyone comparing Wade's help to Shaq's in LA. And I disagree that he had less help than Shaq did every year in LA, especially '99 or Shaq's first title in 2000.


I imagine in LA yall just saw somebody who could score like Jordan and began pushing all the comparisons that just ran amuck. Of course this created the Kobe Haters breeder's camp that has been brewing for years afterward. To people outside of LA, Kobe was looked as selfish and not a team player.

I don't live in LA, in fact, I've never even been there. I've lived in NY my entire life.




NugzHeat3 and ShaqAttack, who do you guys think was better between Kobe and Lebron in '08-'09?? I would like your analysis on that. I think of you guys can agree that neither one or the other was the undisputed or clearly the best right? I assume both of you will have Lebron over Kobe that season but please explain why.

I do have Lebron and I disagree that Kobe was a better defender than Lebron on a consistent basis in '09. '09 is also a year where Lebron's mentality doesn't bother me because he played out of his mind vs Orlando, better than Kobe did, imo. I guess the negatives are his game 6 and turnovers late in game 4, but that's asking a lot when he averaged 39/8/8 and everything else went wrong for Cleveland.

His individual dominance was at it's peak as well as elevating his team, and he didn't have the puzzling disappearing acts he did in '10 and '11 to make me question him. His shooting and defense really improved that season to go along with his passing and size/athleticism.

[kizut1659]

This was the first year where we saw young scorers come into the game and exhibit a dimension that previous premier scorers didn't have - superior judgement and point guard like passing skills. Both Wade and Lebron had a great balance of knowing when to pass and when to shoot. And it had upped their teams play considerably. They were totally integrated into their teams and got other players games going. People were also saying "Wow, how did Wade do that with Half-of Shaq and less help than Shaq had in his entire stay in LA when he was in his prime?" Not only that, Wade's scoring was an addition to Shaq's scoring it didn't seem competitive at all. Lebron was already the type of player that if he had 20 in the first quarter he might just pass the rest of the game. Offensively Kobe wasn't on that level yet (If Kobe gets 15 in the first quarter its officially Kobe night - the offense is ordained for the next 3 quarters). Kobe wasn't blocking, stealing or getting assist like them either.

Kobe scored like a madman but people thought that he was oldskool ball hog and that the new breed was taking over. I imagine in LA yall just saw somebody who could score like Jordan and began pushing all the comparisons that just ran amuck. Of course this created the Kobe Haters breeder's camp that has been brewing for years afterward. To people outside of LA, Kobe was looked as selfish and not a team player.

2006 Heat championship was a fluke and a travesty, which is why noone proclaimed Wade the best player after the Heat won despite his finals performance and its not talked about that much nowadays. The Heat advanced to the finals because: 1) East was generally weak; and 2) Shaq played almost like his old self against Detroit, going something like 28/16/5/5 in the final game.

In 2006 finals, Shaq was actually ignored on offense by Wade as much as he was by Kobe in 2004 finals. The difference was that Wade just played better, Avery Johnson did a horrible coaching job, and Wade got many phantom calls - including the overtime call in game 5 which decided the series.

[HurricaneKid]

First things first, do you have any dispute with this post at all? Do you dispute anything I said on here?

You have to look outside of the stats to see why. However, just to make it short and dry, Kobe had better and more intangibles, was the better leader, and was the better defender. The last one is pretty key to why Kobe was better than Lebron in '08-'09. I can explain why but I don't ave a lot of time right now. I'm not bringing up the tangible aspects yet but I can explain more later regarding '08-'09 Kobe and '08-'09 LeBron.


Or do you just want me to explain more throughly?

I'll probably make a brief explanation after the Heat-Nuggets game or maybe before the Bulls-Celtics game.

I completely disagree. But I have no problem with people bringing disparate views. I just want to know on what basis you are making this choice.

You really haven't given any reasons. You wield the word "intangibles" like it means something. I want something tangible. I can show you why MJ was the best player in his day. I can give you data, specific situations he succeeded in where his peers failed, etc. Typically when I see "killer instinct" "warrior" "intangibles" it means someone likes a guy more but is admitting the data leaves them without any supporting facts.

You say Kobe's D was better but every defensive comparison I can find has LBJ WAY ahead of Kobe.

I am fine moving outside the realm of stats and advanced stats, etc. But I still need to see some information that supports your position.

[HurricaneKid]

2006 Heat championship was a fluke and a travesty, which is why noone proclaimed Wade the best player after the Heat won despite his finals performance and its not talked about that much nowadays. The Heat advanced to the finals because: 1) East was generally weak; and 2) Shaq played almost like his old self against Detroit, going something like 28/16/5/5 in the final game.

In 2006 finals, Shaq was actually ignored on offense by Wade as much as he was by Kobe in 2004 finals. The difference was that Wade just played better, Avery Johnson did a horrible coaching job, and Wade got many phantom calls - including the overtime call in game 5 which decided the series.

I actually pretty strongly agree with a lot of this. Except the part where Wade froze out Shaq. Its freezing out if you aren't nigh impossible to stop (given the officials not allowing Dal to defend Wade). Meanwhile, Shaq was shooting 28% from the line or something absurd. Given the way that series went down I think it was totally appropriate for Wade to shoot 23FGA/gm. I feel very differently about Kobe shooting 24fga/gm two years prior.

[NugzHeat3]

Right....I am just going to ignore you since you aren't worth the time.

NugzHeat3 and ShaqAttack, who do you guys think was better between Kobe and Lebron in '08-'09?? I would like your analysis on that. I think of you guys can agree that neither one or the other was the undisputed or clearly the best right? I assume both of you will have Lebron over Kobe that season but please explain why.
I think LeBron was better. I can't really criticize him much for that year. He overachieved in the season and had a great playoff run. He didn't get much help vs Orlando though I don't think that series is as dominant as some people consider it.

For one, I thought he could've made more of an impact defensively. They assigned him to Alston and made him sag off of him and the thing is LeBron didn't make much of an impact on help defense. He didn't really bother Dwight though it was hard to do so because of how deep he was setting up but I don't remember him pressuring the ball to take time off the clock. Kobe's help defense on Dwight was a good bit better and often stripped him or forced a deflection though Kobe had better initial defenders.

He also wasn't that good in some of the fourth quarters like missing five free throws in game three and a whole bunch of turnovers in game four late in the game. Admittedly, fatigue was a factor because they ran a lot of offense through him and he didn't get much help. Game six was kind of weak, two points in the fourth.

One thing I thought was that Mike Brown made a mistake by not giving Ben Wallace heavy minutes because he was the only guy who I thought could hold his own vs Dwight but I guess he wanted to spread the floor offensively.

I don't blame him for the loss though. I believe there's a certain margin of error allowed when one isn't really getting any help.

I don't really have a problem with you siding Kobe though because the reality is Lebron is pretty much the same guy with a mental block until proven otherwise.

I don't think he encountered a situation like last year's finals in 2009 and I can't guarantee if his 2009 self plays much better in the same situation because I think it's more of a mental block or better put a lack of confidence than anything else. I'm aware of his clutch numbers in the season that year before anyone puts them out there.

It's a trend throughout his career in some crucial series. He was more explosive in 2009 though so he'd at least pressure the defense more. Was a lot quicker off the dribble and more agile in general.

[triangleoffense]

Off of the top of my head I would say these players in these seasons were the undisputed best players in the league

'94 Hakeem
'84 Bird
'00 Shaq
'01 Shaq
'03 Duncan
'91, '92, '93, '96 MJ (maybe more, but I am not sure about undisputed)
'87 Magic

Did you not see Jordan play or was his game just erased from your memory? Jordan was easily the undisputed player of the league from 88' till 97 if not 98. And yes I remember the hiatus he took in 94-95 but even when he was playing baseball he was still the best player in the league.

In 96 Jordan averaged 30/6/4 and the Bulls won 72 games. In 97 Jordan averaged 29/6/4 and the Bulls won 69 games (yet Jordan somehow lost the MVP to Malone). What's funny is that Jordan won the unanimous MVP in 96 with a 72-10 record and the next season while averaging near exactly the same numbers (29/6/4 compared to 30/6/4) and winning 97% of the games he did in that historic 96 season (69-13) he somehow lost one of the closest MVP balloting ever to Malone who's team went 64-18. 72-10 and 69-13 for two consecutive seasons by the way is the closest to perfection any team is going to see in the NBA for as long as i can imagine.

[NugzHeat3]

Great find, regarding '98. I agree with you to some extent, he did focus a little more defensively in 2000 and I do believe he improved his passing under Phil who emphasized it a lot. But he was a really good passer from '95 on and in that Seattle series you mentioned, you can see how much his passing out of double teams and his shot blocking impacted the team. That was one of his best, another difference in 2000 is that he gave more effort on the boards, and just generally worked harder.

But as an individual scorer, I think Shaq was as good as ever in '98 and his athleticism/skills were near their peak. I might say that was the year he was the best outside of the first 2 titles.

The '98 WCSF were one of Shaq's best series, both statistically(31/10/4/4, 63 FG%) and as far as impact.

Yeah, I've seen Karl's statements, he actually also said he'd take Shaq over anyone in the league that year, and I'd agree.

As far as the system in '98 vs '00, well the most offense was much less refined, it was more stagnant. O'Neal would have more time to back his way in and pass out of doubles, while in the triangle, Phil wanted Shaq to look to score quicker with better position to start and if not, become a passer.



I don't remember talk of that nature at all. I never remember anyone comparing Wade's help to Shaq's in LA. And I disagree that he had less help than Shaq did every year in LA, especially '99 or Shaq's first title in 2000.



I don't live in LA, in fact, I've never even been there. I've lived in NY my entire life.




I do have Lebron and I disagree that Kobe was a better defender than Lebron on a consistent basis in '09. '09 is also a year where Lebron's mentality doesn't bother me because he played out of his mind vs Orlando, better than Kobe did, imo. I guess the negatives are his game 6 and turnovers late in game 4, but that's asking a lot when he averaged 39/8/8 and everything else went wrong for Cleveland.

His individual dominance was at it's peak as well as elevating his team, and he didn't have the puzzling disappearing acts he did in '10 and '11 to make me question him. His shooting and defense really improved that season to go along with his passing and size/athleticism.
Phil got him to focus more though. I don't see any reason why he wouldn't be able to impact the game in a similar way in the same circumstances.

I guess what I'm saying is the ability is there but for other reasons he wasn't quite as impactful.

[NugzHeat3]

Did you not see Jordan play or was his game just erased from your memory? Jordan was easily the undisputed player of the league from 88' till 97 if not 98. And yes I remember the hiatus he took in 94-95 but even when he was playing baseball he was still the best player in the league.

In 96 Jordan averaged 30/6/4 and the Bulls won 72 games. In 97 Jordan averaged 29/6/4 and the Bulls won 69 games (yet Jordan somehow lost the MVP to Malone). What's funny is that Jordan won the unanimous MVP in 96 with a 72-10 record and the next season while averaging near exactly the same numbers (29/6/4 compared to 30/6/4) and winning 97% of the games he did in that historic 96 season (69-13) he somehow lost one of the closest MVP balloting ever to Malone who's team went 64-18. 72-10 and 69-13 for two consecutive seasons by the way is the closest to perfection any team is going to see in the NBA for as long as i can imagine.
That's horse.

[kizut1659]

I actually pretty strongly agree with a lot of this. Except the part where Wade froze out Shaq. Its freezing out if you aren't nigh impossible to stop (given the officials not allowing Dal to defend Wade). Meanwhile, Shaq was shooting 28% from the line or something absurd. Given the way that series went down I think it was totally appropriate for Wade to shoot 23FGA/gm. I feel very differently about Kobe shooting 24fga/gm two years prior.

Yeah, you have a point. Because Wade was playing well AND officials were giving him phantom calls, there was no reason for him to pass to Shaq. I guess my point was in response to a previous poster who argued that unlike Kobe, Wade made his teammaters better. My point is that he didn't in 2006 - the Heat won not because Wade is a great teammate or anything but because he played well, they got lucky, and the reffs helped them.

[pauk]

What is the undisputed best?

A player who literally everybody said was the best a specific year? Then i believe only Michael Jordan has that honor... nobody would even dare dispute Michael Jordan in the 90s... any other player in history you could dispute...

A player who MOST would say was the best a specific year? Very many... every year.. Today its Lebron for example... but not undisputed... would be undisputed i guess only if he won MVP + DPOY + FMVP + All-StarMVP + 3PT Champ + Scoring Champ + Dunk Champ + Championship + was the most productive/dominant/clutch player all in that year.... no im not being sarcastic, this is Lebron... only then would all haters be either 100% silent or go "Ok then damnit.. Lebron is best".... or wait even then there might be dispute considering he won it with Wade + Bosh... so... there will always be something to cherrypick out for hatredism

Only Michael Jordan was the undisputed best a specfic year.... or at least the closest one to be that than anbody else

Honorary mention: Shaq in 2000

[StateOfMind12]

You wield the word "intangibles" like it means something. I want something tangible. I can show you why MJ was the best player in his day. I can give you data, specific situations he succeeded in where his peers failed, etc. Typically when I see "killer instinct" "warrior" "intangibles" it means someone likes a guy more but is admitting the data leaves them without any supporting facts.
Not everything is a statistic in basketball and in the NBA. Intangibles does exist in basketball whether LeBron supporters believe it or not.

I'll explain how Kobe was the better leader though.

The Lakers were prepared mentally from the start. From the start regular season to the end of the post-season, the Lakers were prepared. That was one reason why the Lakers managed to dominate regular season (1st in West, 2nd in the league) and in the post-season (NBA champions). The Cavs on the other had not prepared mentally from the start, at least in the post-season that is. The Cavs were goofing off the entire post-season. They were doing stuff like the photo-oping, dancing around, etc.

The Cavs were never focused like the Lakers were and that goes to your leader. That's to Kobe's credit for keeping the Lakers prepared for battle on any given night and on any given playoff series and that is to LeBron's fault for not keeping the Cavs prepared for any given moment.

I also remember Kobe slapping Pau Gasol on the back of the head to man up and play better. Kobe was a lot harder on his teammates than Lebron was on his. It was similar to what MJ use to do to his teammates in the 90s, he would talk shit and do all sort of things to get them fired up and Kobe did the same in '09. LeBron didn't do anything close to that that season and he never has in his life. LeBron just isn't a leader.

Being a leader is not a statistic but if you bothered to read any of the stuff I have just said, you would know that Kobe was clearly the better leader of the two.



You say Kobe's D was better but every defensive comparison I can find has LBJ WAY ahead of Kobe.
I am not sure what this means but I am not so sure that is true either.

If you read what NugzHeat3 said...



For one, I thought he could've made more of an impact defensively. They assigned him to Alston and made him sag off of him and the thing is LeBron didn't make much of an impact on help defense. He didn't really bother Dwight though it was hard to do so because of how deep he was setting up but I don't remember him pressuring the ball to take time off the clock. Kobe's help defense on Dwight was a good bit better and often stripped him or forced a deflection though Kobe had better initial defenders.

Now I don't think it is necessarily his fault that Lebron was on Alston that goes Mike Brown for making that assignment. However, keep in mind that Alston was scored 20+ points twice in that series. Rafer Alston was by far their worst and most inconsistent offensive player on that team. The fact that he scored 20+ and the fact that he did it twice against LeBron is saying something.

It kind of makes no sense that Mike Brown assigned LeBron on Alston though. LeBron was suppose to be the free safety i.e. the guy that was suppose to be the ultimate help defender and double Dwight. Yet if any of you watched that series, you would know that the Cavs never even bothered to double Dwight at all and he just went off against Z and Varejao. It was Mike Brown's mistake more than anything.

Lebron didn't guard Hedo if any of you guys who are reading this watched the '09 ECF. Delonte West was the one that defended him and he did a terrific job on him. Hedo was making plays and setting up his teammates but he shot horribly in that series.

Kobe on the other hand, was playing great defense that season. People keep talking about how Kobe hasn't played defense since the Shaq years or what not. It is starting to get ridiculous how a supposed myth is becoming a myth itself.

Kobe has played excellent defense on every post-season with the exception of the 2011 post-season.

If you guys remember what Kobe did in the '09 playoffs, he was assigned to guard Carmelo Anthony because Melo was just going off against Trevor Ariza. Melo never shot over 45% for the rest of the series after Game 1. IIRC, Kobe was the player that Melo had the toughest time scoring against.

Kobe also played great defense in the '09 finals. He was a legit help defender unlike LeBron but that may go to better coaching and game planning more than anything. Like NugzHeat3 said already in this thread,


Kobe's help defense on Dwight was a good bit better and often stripped him or forced a deflection though Kobe had better initial defenders.

One thing I do remember about what Kobe did defensively in the '09 playoffs was how great he was at denying players the ball. He did a great job denying Rashard Lewis the ball, Carmelo Anthony the ball, Ron Artest the ball, etc., etc. He was just terrific defensively that season. I also remember he did great job defending LeBron in the regular season and it was on MLK day when he defended him. It was the first time Kobe and Lebron actually consistently defended each other for the entire game and Kobe won that battle.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200901190LAL.html

This is the game I am talking about....

Lebron scored 23 points and dished out for 4 assists but was 9 for 25 and had 6 turnovers.

Kobe scored 20 points and fished out for 12 assists and was 9 for 22 and had 5 turnovers.


Anyways, Kobe never got torched and lit up like LeBron did by Rafer Alston or by anybody in the Magic really. LeBron's defense in the '09 ECF was pretty pathetic especially for a runner up DPOY candidate.

I still have more of an explanation for why Kobe was better than LeBron but this was just my response to defend how Kobe was a better leader and defender than Lebron was in '08-'09.

[kizut1659]

I think Shaq in 2000 was the last undisputed best player. In 2001, a lot of people were already saying Kobe was the best. . .especially during the San Antonio playoff series untill Shaq's dominating performance against Philly. Some people were also stupidly calling Iverson the best. In 2002, it was Shaq v. Duncan and Kobe to a lesser degree In 2003, it was Duncan v. Kobe v. TMac v. Shaq. In 2004, it was Garnett v. Duncan and many people still though Kobe was the best and just being slowed by his legal problems. In 2005 it was Duncan by default but he already started declining. In 2006-2008, plurality thought it was Kobe but it was never undisputed, with Wade, LeBron, Dirk (in 2006 and 2007) and Paul (2008) also in the conversation. In 2008-2010 it was Kobe v. Lebron v. Wade to a lesser degree, with Durant also moving into conversation in 2010. In 2010, everyone was finally ready to annoint LeBron as undisputably the best but then he chocked in the playoffs. The same story repeated itself in 2011.

[NugzHeat3]

Not everything is a statistic in basketball and in the NBA. Intangibles does exist in basketball whether LeBron supporters believe it or not.

I'll explain how Kobe was the better leader though.

The Lakers were prepared mentally from the start. From the start regular season to the end of the post-season, the Lakers were prepared. That was one reason why the Lakers managed to dominate regular season (1st in West, 2nd in the league) and in the post-season (NBA champions). The Cavs on the other had not prepared mentally from the start, at least in the post-season that is. The Cavs were goofing off the entire post-season. They were doing stuff like the photo-oping, dancing around, etc.

The Cavs were never focused like the Lakers were and that goes to your leader. That's to Kobe's credit for keeping the Lakers prepared for battle on any given night and on any given playoff series and that is to LeBron's fault for not keeping the Cavs prepared for any given moment.

I also remember Kobe slapping Pau Gasol on the back of the head to man up and play better. Kobe was a lot harder on his teammates than Lebron was on his. It was similar to what MJ use to do to his teammates in the 90s, he would talk shit and do all sort of things to get them fired up and Kobe did the same in '09. LeBron didn't do anything close to that that season and he never has in his life. LeBron just isn't a leader.

Being a leader is not a statistic but if you bothered to read any of the stuff I have just said, you would know that Kobe was clearly the better leader of the two.


I am not sure what this means but I am not so sure that is true either.

If you read what NugzHeat3 said...


Now I don't think it is necessarily his fault that Lebron was on Alston that goes Mike Brown for making that assignment. However, keep in mind that Alston was scored 20+ points twice in that series. Rafer Alston was by far their worst and most inconsistent offensive player on that team. The fact that he scored 20+ and the fact that he did it twice against LeBron is saying something.

It kind of makes no sense that Mike Brown assigned LeBron on Alston though. LeBron was suppose to be the free safety i.e. the guy that was suppose to be the ultimate help defender and double Dwight. Yet if any of you watched that series, you would know that the Cavs never even bothered to double Dwight at all and he just went off against Z and Varejao. It was Mike Brown's mistake more than anything.

Lebron didn't guard Hedo if any of you guys who are reading this watched the '09 ECF. Delonte West was the one that defended him and he did a terrific job on him. Hedo was making plays and setting up his teammates but he shot horribly in that series.

Kobe on the other hand, was playing great defense that season. People keep talking about how Kobe hasn't played defense since the Shaq years or what not. It is starting to get ridiculous how a supposed myth is becoming a myth itself.

Kobe has played excellent defense on every post-season with the exception of the 2011 post-season.

If you guys remember what Kobe did in the '09 playoffs, he was assigned to guard Carmelo Anthony because Melo was just going off against Trevor Ariza. Melo never shot over 45% for the rest of the series after Game 1. IIRC, Kobe was the player that Melo had the toughest time scoring against.

Kobe also play great defense in the finals. He was a legit help defender unlike LeBron but that may go to better coaching and game planning more than anything. Like NugzHeat3 said already in this thread,


One thing I do remember about what Kobe did defensively in the '09 playoffs was how great he was at denying players the ball. He did a great job denying Rashard Lewis the ball, Carmelo Anthony the ball, Ron Artest the ball, etc., etc. He was just terrific defensively that season. I also remember he did great job defending LeBron in the regular season and it was on MLK day when he defended him. It was the first time Kobe and Lebron actually consistently defended each other for the entire game and Kobe won that battle.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200901190LAL.html

This is the game I am talking about....

Lebron scored 23 points and dished out for 4 assists but was 9 for 25 and had 6 turnovers.

Kobe scored 20 points and fished out for 12 assists and was 9 for 22 and had 5 turnovers.


Anyways, Kobe never got torched and lit up like LeBron did by Rafer Alston or by anybody in the Magic really. LeBron's defense in the '09 ECF was pretty pathetic especially for a runner up DPOY candidate.

I still have more of an explanation for why Kobe was better than LeBron but this was just my response to defend how Kobe was a better leader and defender than Lebron was in '08-'09.
I agree. Good job explaining your stance as well.

Only thing I disagree on is LeBron getting lit up by Alston. I think that's more strategic than anything else. Mike Brown lived with Alston making those shots with LeBron trying to help out which I don't think he was effective at. LeBron was basically playing off of him.

I remember Kobe did pretty good on Carmelo now that you brought it up. I think he played Melo better than Ariza did in certain occasions. He was more aggressive and better at ball-denial but Melo got doubled a good bit too. Good looking out.

[Pointguard]

2006 Heat championship was a fluke and a travesty, which is why noone proclaimed Wade the best player after the Heat won despite his finals performance and its not talked about that much nowadays.
Its generally conceded as one of the best finals perfomances ever. It was also known as one of the most dramatic. Where have you been? His year was great. He was one of the best finishers. He was super athletic. He was the only guy in recent times (at that time) that could go for 27/5.5/6.5 and shoot 495. You seen the way people reacted to Dirk this year and it had far less the dramatics. And the play was nowhere as near as dominant.

[kizut1659]

[QUOTE=kizut1659]2006 Heat championship was a fluke and a travesty, which is why noone proclaimed Wade the best player after the Heat won despite his finals performance and its not talked about that much nowadays. [/quotes]
Its generally conceded as one of the best finals perfomances ever. It was also known as one of the most dramatic. Where have you been? His year was great. He was one of the best finishers. He was super athletic. He was the only guy in recent times (at that time) that could go for 27/5.5/6.5 and shoot 495. You seen the way people reacted to Dirk this year and it had far less the dramatics. And the play was nowhere as near as dominant.

I never denied that Wade played great well during the finals or that he is a great player - i acknowledged that much in my post. That does not mean, however, that Heat to deserved to win. Wade did play great BUT at the same time he DID get unfair help from the reffs. The whole "D-Whistle" moniker thats so often used on this site did not come out of nowhere. And because the series were so close and "dramatic" - the reffs phantom calls were the deciding factor.

[Pointguard]

I don't remember talk of that nature at all. I never remember anyone comparing Wade's help to Shaq's in LA. And I disagree that he had less help than Shaq did every year in LA, especially '99 or Shaq's first title in 2000.


What boards where you on? NBAwire and Hoopworld were lit up. People have short memories so they were referencing the last 3 years where Shaq unquestionably had more help, more experience, more time together, and more expectations. Wade was really amusing in that he resembled young MJ even more than Kobe did. There was plenty of discussions going on but no different than now.




I don't live in LA, in fact, I've never even been there. I've lived in NY my entire life.

Wow, that's a shocker. In your basketball heart you an LA kid tho. Way too much Kareem, Kobe and naming yourself ShaqAttack which is equal to saying Jersey smells better than NY and is a better place to live.

[StateOfMind12]

I agree. Good job explaining your stance as well.

Only thing I disagree on is LeBron getting lit up by Alston. I think that's more strategic than anything else. Mike Brown lived with Alston making those shots with LeBron trying to help out which I don't think he was effective at. LeBron was basically playing off of him.

I remember Kobe did pretty good on Carmelo now that you brought it up. I think he played Melo better than Ariza did in certain occasions. He was more aggressive and better at ball-denial but Melo got doubled a good bit too. Good looking out.
I think that is also true but I do think Lebron should be held responsible for some. I think Lebron deserves some flack for not contesting and closing out well because that seems to be a defensive weakness of his. I have always thought that Lebron was an overrated defender and I still do think he is currently. If you have watched the past 3 Heat games this season, you would see that Dorell Wright, Caron Butler, and even Danilo Gallinari drilled a bunch of jumpers against LeBron.

Kobe has always played great defense outside of '06 and '07 maybe when he was carrying the biggest offensive and scoring load in his career. '07 for sure Kobe was not consistent defensively but '06 I would say he was pretty good.

The only two seasons since the 2000s that Kobe didn't really play good defense in was '11 and '07. I don't think he played that much in '09-'10 after his injury though but I remember he pretty much shut down Russell Westbrook in the playoffs.

His defense was always consistent in the post-season though outside of 2011.

[La Frescobaldi]

The fact of Dr. J gets avoided by the way you asked the question. He ruled the ABA from the day he stepped on a court until he jacked his knee

[HurricaneKid]

I think that is also true but I do think Lebron should be held responsible for some. I think Lebron deserves some flack for not contesting and closing out well because that seems to be a defensive weakness of his. I have always thought that Lebron was an overrated defender and I still do think he is currently. If you have watched the past 3 Heat games this season, you would see that Dorell Wright, Caron Butler, and even Danilo Gallinari drilled a bunch of jumpers against LeBron.

Kobe has always played great defense outside of '06 and '07 maybe when he was carrying the biggest offensive and scoring load in his career. '07 for sure Kobe was not consistent defensively but '06 I would say he was pretty good.

The only two seasons since the 2000s that Kobe didn't really play good defense in was '11 and '07. I don't think he played that much in '09-'10 after his injury though but I remember he pretty much shut down Russell Westbrook in the playoffs.

His defense was always consistent in the post-season though outside of 2011.

You have a simplistic way of viewing defense. Mia's primary defensive scheme is closer to a matchup zone than it is a strict man to man defense. They rely substantially on Wade and especially LeBron to support their undersized front line with rebounding and interior defense. Just look at all the blocks they get helping down. That is unique. It also makes them especially vulnerable to good shooting teams (see Dal). LeBron admittedly cheats off his man as much as any player in the league which is why I start yelling every time I see him on a shooter (see: JET). Ideally, he should be on a slasher so he can get in front of him on drives and help in other situations. He is peerless against the drive. He is as fast as anyone and his size makes him a nightmare. For evidence of this watch what he did to Rose in the ECF last year. While 6.7% might be an abberation, it is indicative of the level of defense he can play against the drive. It is also telling that he guarded CP3 for the final drive in regulation and frequently takes PF that are giving Mia difficulty. His versatility is unique in the history of the game due to his obvious athletic gifts. This isn't to say he doesn't get out of position too often going for steals he was never going to get or that he doesn't lose his man enough that it frustrates me. But in half court sets against any 1-4 that isn't a very strong shooter he can be tremendous.

I think you are overstating Kobe's defensive contributions immensely. He has always had Ariza/Artest guard his position if his opponent is a high end player. He doesn't get in passing lanes or help nearly at the level of LeBron. Does this mean "his man" doesn't have as many openings? Of course. But given the problems that the LA PGs have had I find it galling that he hasn't been more supportive in his team defense. It is also a huge benefit to have Pau and Bynum or Shaq behind him.

[StateOfMind12]

You have a simplistic way of viewing defense. Mia's primary defensive scheme is closer to a matchup zone than it is a strict man to man defense.
Yeah because most Heat defenders aren't good man to man defenders in the first place.

For evidence of this watch what he did to Rose in the ECF last year. While 6.7% might be an abberation, it is indicative of the level of defense he can play against the drive.
I don't know why people keep bragging about Lebron's defense in the ECF last season. Rose was already struggling before Lebron was assigned to defend him. The Heat could have put either Chalmers or Wade on Rose and Rose would have more than likely would have continued to struggle. It was the team defense that stopped Rose, not one person. I don't know why this is so start for people to understand that.

What LeBron did to Rose in the '11 ECF was not better or more impressive than what Kobe did to Westbrook in the '10 playoffs.

Westbrook was lighting and dominating the Lakers defense until Kobe was assigned to him. Kobe took away Westbrook's effectiveness and dominance and the Lakers ended up winning the series. Rose on the other hand was already struggling to score and play well offensively against the Heat defense. It didn't matter who was guarding him, Rose was simply struggling.




I think you are overstating Kobe's defensive contributions immensely.

He has always had Ariza/Artest guard his position if his opponent is a high end player.
Ariza was never some sort of defensive specialist. Melo was torching Ariza and the Lakers in the '09 WCF before they put Kobe on him. What does that say? It says that Kobe is a great defender and that Ariza isn't so great.

I find it interesting how Lebron almost always plays poorly defensively in the post-season while Kobe almost always plays excellent defensively in the post-season. That is unless you already forgot how Lebron was getting lit up by every Maverick he was guarding in the 2011 Finals.


By the way, I love how you completely ignored my other post. Is it because you have nothing and you know I am right? :rolleyes:

[HurricaneKid]

Yeah because most Heat defenders aren't good man to man defenders in the first place.

I don't know why people keep bragging about Lebron's defense in the ECF last season. Rose was already struggling before Lebron was assigned to defend him. The Heat could have put either Chalmers or Wade on Rose and Rose would have more than likely would have continued to struggle. It was the team defense that stopped Rose, not one person. I don't know why this is so start for people to understand that.

What LeBron did to Rose in the '11 ECF was not better or more impressive than what Kobe did to Westbrook in the '10 playoffs.

Westbrook was lighting and dominating the Lakers defense until Kobe was assigned to him. Kobe took away Westbrook's effectiveness and dominance and the Lakers ended up winning the series. Rose on the other hand was already struggling to score and play well offensively against the Heat defense. It didn't matter who was guarding him, Rose was simply struggling.



Ariza was never some sort of defensive specialist. Melo was torching Ariza and the Lakers in the '09 WCF before they put Kobe on him. What does that say? It says that Kobe is a great defender and that Ariza isn't so great.

I find it interesting how Lebron almost always plays poorly defensively in the post-season while Kobe almost always plays excellent defensively in the post-season. That is unless you already forgot how Lebron was getting lit up by every Maverick he was guarding in the 2011 Finals.


By the way, I love how you completely ignored my other post. Is it because you have nothing and you know I am right? :rolleyes:

Popp and the Spurs success really changed the way defense is played in the league at a high level. Thibbs and the Celts too. Good man to man defense just isn't as effective in today's game as quality team defense. Its harder to run sets against and it helps take away the opposition's biggest strength.

Rose was scuffling and shooting 40% against everyone else but has a history of upping his game in the 4th (at least if you buy the Bulls fans contention). Rather than continue to shoot 40% or make a few big shots he was completely destroyed. Nevermind Rose is considered to be the quickest player in the NBA and LeBron, weighing 70 pounds more, was able to keep up with him; he embarrassed the league's MVP on the biggest stage. Thats why people keep bringing it up. You can certainly call it great team defense, but then you also have to recognize that those same defensive defense choices lead to a lot of the 3s that are hit against Mia.

The Mavs presented a completely different problem. They can pretty much all shoot. So yes, when LeBron helped off his man, which is what Mia DOES, his guy hit 3s. Thats not on LeBron's defense, it is the weakness of the chosen defense. To the Mavs credit they made the shots.

My recollections of the Den series are a lot different from yours. Melo had one really good game in game 1. After that he was terrible. He turned his ankle at some point and shouldn't have been on the floor. He was that bad, especially defensively. After game 1 he shot 35% and I don't think he was over 40% once. I don't think Kobe was on him the final 5 games of the series.

Again, your issue is that you are judging a defender on how many points a guy he may or may not be guarding most of the night scores. Its a dismal way to make such jusdgments. Almost as bad as looking for how many steals a guy has.

[HurricaneKid]

By the way, I love how you completely ignored my other post. Is it because you have nothing and you know I am right? :rolleyes:

I didn't ignore it. I remember things much differently but I will go back and watch pieces of those games to see if your position is more accurate than my recollections.

[StateOfMind12]

Rose was scuffling and shooting 40% against everyone else but has a history of upping his game in the 4th (at least if you buy the Bulls fans contention). Rather than continue to shoot 40% or make a few big shots he was completely destroyed. Nevermind Rose is considered to be the quickest player in the NBA and LeBron, weighing 70 pounds more, was able to keep up with him; he embarrassed the league's MVP on the biggest stage. Thats why people keep bringing it up. You can certainly call it great team defense, but then you also have to recognize that those same defensive defense choices lead to a lot of the 3s that are hit against Mia.
You just sound like a windbag here. You pretty much just type a bunch of stuff and made no relevant point at all. You sure as hell did not refute anything I posted about Lebron on Rose.




The Mavs presented a completely different problem. They can pretty much all shoot. So yes, when LeBron helped off his man, which is what Mia DOES, his guy hit 3s.

Yeah, Lebron doesn't know how to contest shots or play good man to man defense. I already said that, why do you feel like you have the need to say the same thing but in a longer version?

Every Maverick was lighting Lebron up. Shawn Marion was dominating this guy in the post and Jason Terry was pretty much draining every shot over him (at least after he called him out).



Thats not on LeBron's defense, it is the weakness of the chosen defense. To the Mavs credit they made the shots.

:oldlol: Okay.



My recollections of the Den series are a lot different from yours. Melo had one really good game in game 1. After that he was terrible. He turned his ankle at some point and shouldn't have been on the floor. He was that bad, especially defensively. After game 1 he shot 35% and I don't think he was over 40% once. I don't think Kobe was on him the final 5 games of the series.

I am pretty sure I said the same thing that Melo didn't play well outside of Game 1. Melo was torching Ariza until Kobe was put on him. Kobe had far more success defensively than Ariza did on Melo. Then again I am talking to some idiot who thinks win shares is a credible stat.



Again, your issue is that you are judging a defender on how many points a guy he may or may not be guarding most of the night scores. Its a dismal way to make such jusdgments. Almost as bad as looking for how many steals a guy has.
It's not my fault LeBron doesn't know how to contest and play good man to man defense. Don't shoot the messenger. You are just trying to nitpick and find some ridiculous ways to make excuses for Lebron for his failures on defense or prop up Lebron for his successful defense.


You have had pretty much nothing for me the entire time. I think we are done here since either I have shut down all the points you have made and you have barely made any points at all. Talk to me when you actually have something for me. You had nothing for me even though you tried to cherry pick my post and completely ignore the rest.

[Duncan21formvp]

05-06 Kobe was on another level compared to everyone else, dropping 40+ easier than ray allen shooting free throws
No player who loses in round 1 of a season is the "undisputed best player in the league".

[Pointguard]

Good work StateOfMind, you are answering all that is put to you. Repped since I underestimated you earlier.

[Artillery]

I love how Kobe fans adamantly refuse to accept win shares, PER, or just about any advanced stat because it makes their idol look less than "god-like". Unless you're talking about ppg, they'll immediately dismiss the conversation. Instead they'll argue that Kobe's the best in the league because:

-he's a better leader - having the GOAT coach helps but they refuse to factor this into their arguments

-plays better D - ignoring the fact that Lebron has never had another ALL-NBA defensive wing to assist him on ANY of his teams the way Kobe had Artest

-improves his teammates - ignoring the fact that Lebron has NEVER had an all-NBA teammate on ANY of his teams while Kobe's had an ALL-NBA big man on EVERY one those five championships

[Sarcastic]

The fact of Dr. J gets avoided by the way you asked the question. He ruled the ABA from the day he stepped on a court until he jacked his knee

Was he ever considered a better player than Kareem though, regardless of league?

[tpols]

No player who loses in round 1 of a season is the "undisputed best player in the league".
Give Tim Duncan Brian Cook, Luke walton, smush Parker, Kwame Brown, and Lamar Odom as is core teammates and he isn't making it out of the first round either. Duncan's never had a team even close to that level of bad in his entire career.

[StateOfMind12]

I love how Kobe fans adamantly refuse to accept win shares, PER, or just about any advanced stat because it makes their idol look less than "god-like". Unless you're talking about ppg, they'll immediately dismiss the conversation. Instead they'll argue that Kobe's the best in the league because:
I think PER is legit but it doesn't tell the whole story. PER determines how productive you are regardless of pace or minutes. The most productive player isn't always the best player in the league.

Win shares? Joke stat and I already explained how earlier. What other advanced metrics do you have? Offensive and Defensive rating?


-he's a better leader - having the GOAT coach helps but they refuse to factor this into their arguments

I'll quote what I wrote earlier.


The Lakers were prepared mentally from the start. From the start regular season to the end of the post-season, the Lakers were prepared. That was one reason why the Lakers managed to dominate regular season (1st in West, 2nd in the league) and in the post-season (NBA champions). The Cavs on the other had not prepared mentally from the start, at least in the post-season that is. The Cavs were goofing off the entire post-season. They were doing stuff like the photo-oping, dancing around, etc.

That sounds like a legit reason on how or why Kobe was the better leader.


-plays better D - ignoring the fact that Lebron has never had another ALL-NBA defensive wing to assist him on ANY of his teams the way Kobe had Artest
So you found one year out of like the 10-11 other All-defensive selections Kobe got selected in? :oldlol:

Yeah he had Artest in '09-'10, now who else did he have before that? Oh yeah, nobody. Trevor Ariza was the closet one and he was getting torched by Melo in '09 WCF. Kobe had to play defense on Melo to cool him down and it worked.



-improves his teammates - ignoring the fact that Lebron has NEVER had an all-NBA teammate on ANY of his teams while Kobe's had an ALL-NBA big man on EVERY one those five championships
Lebron had Wade and Bosh last season. I think they might be All-NBA worthy players, don't you? :rolleyes:

[La Frescobaldi]

Was he ever considered a better player than Kareem though, regardless of league?

No. He wasn't.

[Artillery]

No player who loses in round 1 of a season is the "undisputed best player in the league".

Losing in round 1 to an Amare-less Suns team and completely giving up in game 7 before halftime. :lol

BUT HE SCORED A LOT OF POINTS THAT SEASON!!!

[NewYorkNoPicks]

You're saying a guy who couldn't get out of the FIRST ROUND for three consecutive years without an all-star big man was the UNDISPUTED best player in the league?

Hm.

Did you not watch basketball that year? Do you realize how BAD the Lakers were? I don't think another player besides Kobe averaged more than 12ppg. It was Kobe, Lamar and a bunch of bench players.

[tpols]

-he's a better leader - having the GOAT coach helps but they refuse to factor this into their arguments


No way to really know this for sure.. but Kobe definitely seems to talk to his guys more, offer criticism, and he can be pretty vocal. Lebron is a pretty quiet dude if he's not joking around.. and he definitely doesn't like controversy getting in his teammates faces etc. Kobe doesn't ever really hold back.



-plays better D - ignoring the fact that Lebron has never had another ALL-NBA defensive wing to assist him on ANY of his teams the way Kobe had Artest


He's on an elite defense right now with great perimeter defenders. Wade and Chalmers are both better than a past prime Ron Artest. not to mention Kobe had his best defensive year ever in 08 when he was playing alongside Derek Fisher and Vladimir Radmonovic on the perimeter with only Pau Gasol as his backup in the paint.



-improves his teammates - ignoring the fact that Lebron has NEVER had an all-NBA teammate on ANY of his teams while Kobe's had an ALL-NBA big man on EVERY one those five championships


He just played with two of them last year and didn't make either one better than what they were before they joined the Heat. Kobe knows how to play off the ball very well.. he runs around screens properly, establishes position perfectly on his man, and just in general knows where to be without the ball in his hands. Lebron doesn't do any of that well.. he camps the perimeter when he doesn't have the ball, so the only way he can be in sync with an elite teammate is either on the fast break, or if he is the one that initiates the offense. Kobe can go both ways which is why the Lakers have been so effective with their inside-out game plan.

Pau Gasol went from being a 20/10 top 5-7 PF before he played with Kobe to 'an elite big man' after joining LA.. his efficiency, points, rebounds.. all went up. He clearly became more effective on the court when he played with Kobe than he was before he joined the Lakers.

[StateOfMind12]

....
Along with what I posted in #89 I also wanted to add a few more things about Kobe-Lebron in '09.



He didn't get much help vs Orlando though I don't think that series is as dominant as some people consider it.
I agree with you on this. I am not sure if this is true or not but I have heard and read that the Orlando Magic coaching staff opened up and said that they purposely let LeBron James get his own and stop everyone else on that team. If that was their gameplan then it obviously worked and it worked effectively since the Magic won that series over the Cavs 4-2.

I know that you are pretty good at finding old articles and such so maybe you can try and find some. If you are interested about it that is.

That gameplan the Magic did in '09 (supposedly) is pretty similar to what the '06 Suns tried to do against the Lakers in the 1st round and Kobe mentioned this himself on a TNT interview. He talked about how their gameplan the entire series was to get everyone else involved so everyone would not just play better offensively but on defense, on the boards, and on every other aspect as well. Kobe pretty much said he could score 50-60 a night and it wouldn't matter because that is what the Suns want. I think if the Magic did play defense to Lebron that way then it just goes to show you that Kobe has a much higher basketball IQ than LeBron.

The link to the Kobe interview about the '06 Suns

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjTm2Dl1bTo&feature=player_embedded


Also, Lebron and the Cavs also blew a lot of big leads in that series too. They were up 15+ multiple times in the series even 20+ at some point.


I think Lebron's '09 ECF series against Orlando was an excellent performance but I think it was kind of overrated as well IMO.

[Artillery]

I think PER is legit but it doesn't tell the whole story. PER determines how productive you are regardless of pace or minutes. The most productive player isn't always the best player in the league.

Win shares? Joke stat and I already explained how earlier. What other advanced metrics do you have? Offensive and Defensive rating?

Don't be so obtuse. Everybody and their sister knows what PER is. You guys will prop up scoring titles(I've seen them listed alongside MVPs when comparing accolades) but ignore any type of advanced stat that doesn't solely value outright scoring.


That sounds like a legit reason on how or why Kobe was the better leader.

So Kobe's the better leader because the Cavs had a coach/organization that was afraid to enforce discipline? Pretty sure Phil Jackson in place of Mike Brown would have made a world of difference there. Hell, Mike Brown was barely managing to keep Stephen Jackson in check back in San Antonio and you expect a former assistant coach to handle the ego of the most talented player in the league. Difference is LA has the big market pull to land big names.

Where was Kobe's leadership when he threw Bynum and his teammates under the bus? Or when he went on a radio tour demanding a trade OUT of LA. Yeah, modest dude, that Kobe Bryant. NONE of Lebron's antics compares to what Kobe did that summer. If the Cavs were gifted a Gasol-level player for nothing he'd probably still be in Cleveland.


Yeah he had Artest in '09-'10, now who else did he have before that? Oh yeah, nobody. Trevor Ariza was the closet one and he was getting torched by Melo in '09 WCF. Kobe had to play defense on Melo to cool him down and it worked.

You're just proving my point in regards to how stacked his Lakers teams have always been. "He only had Ron Artest last year, and Ariza the year before..."

And lol at thinking Kobe's defensive selection means anything when he's been getting in based on reputation the past five years.


Lebron had Wade and Bosh last season. I think they might be All-NBA worthy players, don't you? :rolleyes:

Bosh was selected to an All-NBA team ONCE back in '07. Irrelevant when we're talking about last year(when he wasn't selected at all). Last year, Lebron had ONE All-NBA teammate in Wade, Kobe had ONE All-NBA teammate in Gasol. Both ended up getting bounced by the Mavs. What's your point?

Difference here is that last year was the ONLY year Lebron ever had an ALL-NBA teammate or any kind of help. He had NOBODY in his previous seven years in the league. Compare that to Kobe who had Shaq EVERY year for the first EIGHT years of his career. Kobe went a mere three years without anybody - The spoiled Laker/Kobe fans proceed to remind us every day that Kobe was carrying the WORST team of all-time(yeah, sure). Gasol is gifted to the Lakers and suddenly Kobe becomes the greatest player of the decade when he accomplished about as much as Lebron did when he had no help. Great logic.

[NugzHeat3]

I think that is also true but I do think Lebron should be held responsible for some. I think Lebron deserves some flack for not contesting and closing out well because that seems to be a defensive weakness of his. I have always thought that Lebron was an overrated defender and I still do think he is currently. If you have watched the past 3 Heat games this season, you would see that Dorell Wright, Caron Butler, and even Danilo Gallinari drilled a bunch of jumpers against LeBron.

Kobe has always played great defense outside of '06 and '07 maybe when he was carrying the biggest offensive and scoring load in his career. '07 for sure Kobe was not consistent defensively but '06 I would say he was pretty good.

The only two seasons since the 2000s that Kobe didn't really play good defense in was '11 and '07. I don't think he played that much in '09-'10 after his injury though but I remember he pretty much shut down Russell Westbrook in the playoffs.

His defense was always consistent in the post-season though outside of 2011.
That's the game plan though. If Mike Brown wants him to dare Alston to shoot, then they aren't really concerned with contesting him. It's something they decided to live with.

I think one thing you can get him on for is not pressuring Alston to deny the entry pass or pressing him bringing the ball up the court to slow the offense and take time off the clock and making much of an impact by roaming around. Getting seven blocks and seven steals for the series is weak for a guy who covers as much ground as he does and is in a role where he's supposed to create havoc by double teaming and helping out.

For a guy that finished second in DPoY voting that year, I too think he got overrated at least in terms of the impact he made in that series.

[SlayerEnraged]

No one is the undisputed best player in any season because technically even if .00000009 % of fans think shawn bradley was better than Shaq, it's still disputed.

[juju151111]

No one is the undisputed best player in any season because technically even if .00000009 % of fans think shawn bradley was better than Shaq, it's still disputed.
:facepalm

[Sarcastic]

:facepalm

:oldlol:

[StateOfMind12]

Artillery, I read your post and quite honestly, you are not worth the time to respond to. It sounds like you already made up your mind that Kobe is the devil and Lebron is the angel. You can have fun with that. You can talk to me when you become objective or when you talk with your brain and your logic opposed to your emotions.


That's the game plan though. If Mike Brown wants him to dare Alston to shoot, then they aren't really concerned with contesting him. It's something they decided to live with.

I think one thing you can get him on for is not pressuring Alston to deny the entry pass or pressing him bringing the ball up the court to slow the offense and take time off the clock and making much of an impact by roaming around. Getting seven blocks and seven steals for the series is weak for a guy who covers as much ground as he does and is in a role where he's supposed to create havoc by double teaming and helping out.

For a guy that finished second in DPoY voting that year, I too think he got overrated at least in terms of the impact he made in that series.
Agreed for the most part and well said. It sounds like we both agree that Lebron should have done more defensively in that series. Not sure who you thought was better defensively in '09 between Lebron or Kobe though, but it sounds like we both agree that Lebron's defense was overrated then (I think?). I am not sure what your thoughts are on Kobe's 09 defense though, so I would like to know.

By the way, did you read the other post I responded to you? It's on the top of the page, post #106.

[NugzHeat3]

Artillery, I read your post and quite honestly, you are not worth the time to respond to. It sounds like you already made up your mind that Kobe is the devil and Lebron is the angel. You can have fun with that. You can talk to me when you become objective or when you talk with your brain and your logic opposed to your emotions.


Agreed for the most part and well said. It sounds like we both agree that Lebron should have done more defensively in that series. Not sure who you thought was better defensively in '09 between Lebron or Kobe though, but it sounds like we both agree that Lebron's defense was overrated then (I think?). I am not sure what your thoughts are on Kobe's 09 defense though, so I would like to know.

By the way, did you read the other post I responded to you? It's on the top of the page, post #106.
Yes, I agree in both regards. I believe Kobe was a better defender in 2009 as well as LeBron should have done more defensively.

I think Kobe just had a better understanding defensively though I'm not sure if his effort was there throughout the season but from what I remember, he did very well in the playoffs. You brought it up earlier about his defense on Melo.

I remember him being very aggressive, physical and doing a great job denying the ball though he benefits from the fact that he had two 7 footers in the paint waiting at the rim if Melo got by him so in a way it allowed him to be more aggressive.

I also thought he was also much more effective at bothering Dwight by reading his movements, doubling at the exact time such as right when he's going to the middle for the jumphook or trying to back his way down and forcing a deflection or a bad pass which was more common for Dwight back then (and still is) because he has a tendency to get stripped when he brings the balll too low.

I also thought he rotated pretty well after helping out/executing the double. LeBron as we've mentioned before wasn't that effective in his role. That's the difference I think.

As for the other post, thanks for the link for that Kobe/Barkley video.

I agree with Kobe and the point he was trying to make. Barkley was saying he should've been more aggressive but I think he was just following the game plan trying to get the others involved and establish an inside-out game since the Suns lacked big men. They tried slowing the game down and didn't want to get in a running game with them since Suns had too much firepower.

I don't think it's a sign of higher IQ though. Apart from the turnovers which I think has more to do with fatigue than anything else, I'd say LeBron's decision making was fine.

I don't think they shared PHX and Orlando shared a similar game plan though. Against PHX, you can try to get everyone involved and establish an inside game but you can't do that vs Orlando because of Dwight's presence.

LeBron did make an effort getting people involved but a lot of their guys, especially Mo Williams disappeared. That's why they were forced to rely so much on him just giving him the ball at the top of the key and creating for himself and others.

I do think that series is overrated though partly because his defense wasn't that good, stats were great but not quite reflective of the impact since he was weak in some of the crucial moments and Magic's perimeter defense was pretty horrible despite whatever reputation Pietrus and Lee earned. You're also going to rack up stats when you dominate the ball to such a large degree as he did.

Wade had 50 in just over three quarters vs them and averaged 38 ppg on 52.6 FG% for the season. Helps put James' numbers in perspective.

[jlauber]

Shaq received 120 out of the 121 first-place votes in the 99-00 MVP balloting.

[Pointguard]

Not everything is a statistic in basketball and in the NBA. Intangibles does exist in basketball whether LeBron supporters believe it or not.

I'll explain how Kobe was the better leader though.

The Lakers were prepared mentally from the start. From the start regular season to the end of the post-season, the Lakers were prepared. That was one reason why the Lakers managed to dominate regular season (1st in West, 2nd in the league) and in the post-season (NBA champions). The Cavs on the other had not prepared mentally from the start, at least in the post-season that is. The Cavs were goofing off the entire post-season. They were doing stuff like the photo-oping, dancing around, etc.

The Cavs were never focused like the Lakers were and that goes to your leader. That's to Kobe's credit for keeping the Lakers prepared for battle on any given night and on any given playoff series and that is to LeBron's fault for not keeping the Cavs prepared for any given moment.

I also remember Kobe slapping Pau Gasol on the back of the head to man up and play better. Kobe was a lot harder on his teammates than Lebron was on his. It was similar to what MJ use to do to his teammates in the 90s, he would talk shit and do all sort of things to get them fired up and Kobe did the same in '09. LeBron didn't do anything close to that that season and he never has in his life. LeBron just isn't a leader.
I agree with that argument (leadership) - in fact, I use it on DH12. But you have to apply that argument to Kobe in '06 and '07. Kobe complained about teammates and wasn't as team oriented as Lebron or Wade. Kobe did something very childish to end '06 in a game seven, when Wade took his team to the chip. And '07 when Lebron carried a team of newbies to the finals while LA couldn't play team ball in the first round. I think leadership is a factor when everything else is close, or too close to call. I wouldn't call it an overriding factor if the team wins a playoff series because it takes maturity to pull that off. So if you go the leadership route then you are putting all your baskets on Kobe in '09 when he might not be close enough with the tangibles.

Over the course of the year Lebron was the better defender - I'll give Kobe the playoffs. Lebron, offensively, has the regular season and playoffs. Leadership I'll give Kobe. In no way do the intangibles justify an undisputed decision in favor of Kobe.



Kobe on the other hand, was playing great defense that season. People keep talking about how Kobe hasn't played defense since the Shaq years or what not. It is starting to get ridiculous how a supposed myth is becoming a myth itself.

Kobe has played excellent defense on every post-season with the exception of the 2011 post-season.
In the postseason I think Kobe plays very good to superb defense. A couple of years (somewhere between 05 and 07) he played bad defense in the regular season and got a first team all defense on a recount. It astonished a lot of people. And people began a counter reaction.


If you guys remember what Kobe did in the '09 playoffs, he was assigned to guard Carmelo Anthony because Melo was just going off against Trevor Ariza. Melo never shot over 45% for the rest of the series after Game 1. IIRC, Kobe was the player that Melo had the toughest time scoring against.

Kobe also played great defense in the '09 finals. He was a legit help defender unlike LeBron but that may go to better coaching and game planning more than anything. Like NugzHeat3 said already in this thread,

Lebron scored 23 points and dished out for 4 assists but was 9 for 25 and had 6 turnovers.

Kobe scored 20 points and fished out for 12 assists and was 9 for 22 and had 5 turnovers.

If you go statistics in '09 Lebron wins. There was very little, that Lebron didn't do better than Kobe that year in the playoffs or regular season. Its really not that close in regular stats (I'm sure Kobe got FT's, 3pt shooting) or advanced stats. Kobe was not close in ppg, rpg, apg, FG% and was behind in blocks and steals in either regular or post season. And it wasn't a case of stats not telling the story because Lebron was a much better passer, took better shots, and was more team oriented.


Anyways, Kobe never got torched and lit up like LeBron did by Rafer Alston or by anybody in the Magic really. LeBron's defense in the '09 ECF was pretty pathetic especially for a runner up DPOY candidate.

I still have more of an explanation for why Kobe was better than LeBron but this was just my response to defend how Kobe was a better leader and defender than Lebron was in '08-'09.
You stretched this a little bit. The coach employed Lebron on defense and only half of it was about guarding Rafer. Overall Lebron had one of the best playoff runs that year in recent memory.

[RRR3]

:facepalm
Okay, techincally he's correct, though. TECHINCALLY.

[jlauber]

Regarding Chamberlain...

He was an overwhelming MVP in both '67 and '68. And he also won in '66, giving him three straight MVPs.

Still, it would be a stretch to say he was the "undisputed" best player in the league during any of his seasons. He played in the Russell-era for ten seasons, and that era included Baylor, Pettit, West, and Oscar. Then in his last four seasons, he played in the Kareem-era, which included West, Oscar, Reed, Cowens, and Unseld.

What was more interesting, however, was in the seasons that Chamberlain did not win the MVP.

For example, in his 62-63 season, and playing with arguably the worst roster in NBA history, Wilt put up staggering numbers. He LED the NBA in FIFTEEN of their 22 total statistical categories (and one can only wonder how many more he would have led in, had the league officially record offensive and defensive rebounds, and blocked shots.) He RAN AWAY with the scoring title, averaging 44.8 ppg to Baylor's 34.0 ppg. He also set a then-record FG% of .528 (and he would shatter that record THREE more times.) He even led the league in Win Shares, and by a wide margin, at 20.9, despite playing on a 31-49 team. And he also recorded a PER rating of 31.8 which is STILL the all-time record.

Ok, he didn't win the MVP that season (Russell did), BUT, remarkably, he finished SEVENTH. How ridiculous was that? He not only finished behind Russell, Baylor, Oscar, West and Pettit, but Red Kerr as well. KERR? Kerr averaged 15.7 ppg and 13.0 rpg that season. AND, Wilt had less FIRST-PLACE votes than Terry Dischinger, who was probably the Zephyrs second best player (behind Walt Bellamy), and who was part of a 25-55 team.


I have covered Chamberlain's 68-69 season many times. He was traded to the Lakers, for three players, including all-star Archie Clark and starting center Darrell Imhoff. AND, the Lakers also lost HOFer Gail Goodrich in the expansion draft. All-in-all, Wilt essentially replaced 42 ppg and 18 rpg. And, asd usual, West missed chunks of the season, and was out for 20 games. STILL, Wilt led the Lakers to a then best-ever record in LA, of 55-27.

Ok, he didn't win the award. Who did? Wes Unseld, who was a major reason, but certainly not the only one, for a big turn-around in the Bullets season. Baltimore had the best record in the league, at 57-25. HOWEVER, here were their numbers:

Unseld averaged 13.8 ppg, 18.2 rpg, 2.6 apg, and shot .476 from the field. How about Wilt? Chamberlain "only" averaged 20.5 ppg, mainly because it was HE who was asked to sacrifice his offense, so that Baylor and West could continue to fire away. Wilt also LED the league in rebounding, at 21.1 rpg, and he easily led the league in FG% at .583. He even averaged 4.5 apg, which was considerably more than Unseld. And in the Unseld-Wilt H2H's, Chamberlain easily outplayed Wes. In one game, he outscored Unseld, 25-4, and outrebounded him, 38-9.

Once again, Unseld finished ahead of Wilt. BUT, he wasn't the only one. Russell also finished ahead of Wilt. Now, normally you could make an argument for Russell, simply because his team's usually had better records. However, that was not the case in 68-69. Russell's Celtics went 48-34. Furthermore, H2H, Chamberlain just BURIED Russell. In one of their six regular season games, Wilt outscored Russell 35-5 (and outrebounded him, 19-16.) In another game, Chamberlain murdered Russell on the glass by a 42-18 margin. In fact, Wilt outscored Russell in every H2H game, AND, he went 5-0-1 in rebounding against him in their H2H's. BTW, Wilt's Lakers also went 4-2 against Boston, including a nationally televised rout in BOSTON, of 108-73.

And if that wasn't bad enough...Wilt did not even finish in the top-NINE in the MVP balloting in that 68-69 season. How is that fathomable????


And how about Wilt's 63-64 season? Let's recap that season. Remember now, that Wilt finished SEVENTH in his 62-63 season, when his pathetic cast of clowns who masqueraded as basketball players were so bad that they only went 31-49.

Ok, well Chamberlain essentially took that same inept group to a 48-32 record the very next season, AND, a trip to the Finals. And all he did was average 36.9 ppg, 22.3 rpg, and shoot .524. So who beat him out? Oscar, playing with alongside HOFers Lucas, Tywman, and Embry, improved his team from 42-38 to 55-25. Wilt, with only rookie Nate Thurmond, who played part-time (26 mpg), out of position, and couldn't shoot for his life (.395), as any kind of quality player, led his team from that 31-49 mark to a 48-32 record...or a 17 game turn-around. And he dominated the league in the process. Yet, Oscar won the award. Makes no sense.


Many here are probably aware of this, but for the benefit of those that aren't...Chamberlain did NOT win the MVP award in his staggering 61-62 season. In a record-setting season, which was arguably the most astonishing statistical season in ANY major professional team sport, in all of sport's history, Wilt finished SECOND! Russell won the award, and Oscar, who had a sensational season himself, finished third, BUT, he had more FIRST-PLACE votes.

Ok, to put that 61-62 season voting in perspective, let's examine the 59-60 MVP voting. Russell averaged 18.2 ppg, 24.0 rpg, and shot a career high .467 from the field. And he led, along with SEVEN other HOF teammates, Boston to a league best 59-16 record. Meanwhile, Wilt took what had been a last-place team before he arrived, to a then franchise record of 49-26. In the process, Wilt averaged 37.6 ppg, 27.0 rpg, and shot a career-worst .461 from the field. Who won the MVP (and the ROY)? WILT did.

So, back to the 61-62 season...

Russell averaged 18.9 ppg, 23.6 rpg, and shot .457 from the field, and he, along with SIX more HOFers, led Boston to a league best 60-20 record. Most everyone here knows Wilt's numbers... 50.4 ppg, 25.6 rpg, and .506 (in a league that shot .426) from the floor. And, in the process, Wilt took an older roster to a 49-31 record. And yet, he finished second in the MVP balloting. Even more remarkably, he finished THIRD in FIRST-PLACE votes. WHAT CHANGED? Russell put up similar numbers to what he had in the '60 season, and his team's record was essentially the same. Meanwhile, Wilt's team had a similar record in '62 as they had in '60. HOWEVER, Chamberlain put up FAR greater stats. The ONLY difference in those seasons was that Wilt was a FAR more dominant player. And yet...a DISTANT second in the MVP balloting.

Oh, and BTW, Chamberlain was voted All-NBA FIRST TEAM in 61-62, and AHEAD of Russell.


Once again...the seasons that Wilt did NOT win the MVP were certainly very suspicious in the MVP voting. He may not have deserved to have won it in all of those seasons, but to finish second (in an historic season), SEVENTH (in as great an individual season as anyone has ever had), and not even in the Top-NINE in another one, was just a disgrace.

[Pointguard]

Regarding Chamberlain...

He was an overwhelming MVP in both '67 and '68. And he also won in '66, giving him three straight MVPs.

Still, it would be a stretch to say he was the "undisputed" best player in the league during any of his seasons. He played in the Russell-era for ten seasons, and that era included Baylor, Pettit, West, and Oscar. Then in his last four seasons, he played in the Kareem-era, which included West, Oscar, Reed, Cowens, and Unseld.

1967??? And there were other years where he dominated Russell 8 times in the same season. You can't say a guy that is regularly dominated is an equal. Are you saying Jordan and Mikan were the only ones to be undisputed?

[brahmabull117]

What is it with people and kobe 05-06 season? They Lakers were garbage after Shaq and before Gasol. Yet Kobe is one of the best ever that year? Yeah f'n right. Kobe has never been the clear best player in the league, not once.

Shaq is the most recent "undisputed" best player in the league.



I'm a huge bulls fans here so I have all the bias in the world against Kobe but anybody dissing Kobe's greatness during his prime years is smoking crack. The fact that he won nothing means nothing because he played with complete garbage



Kobe that year not only averaged 35 ppg on a team with zero other real offensive options - he did it with solid officiency (35 ppg on 27 shots a game, which is about 1.30 PPS). In 2006 - 2007, he was even more impressive with scoring 31+ on just 23 shots a game (about 1.36 PPS)



Kobe was the best player in the game between 2005-2007 and there should be no doubt about it

[jlauber]

1967??? And there were other years where he dominated Russell 8 times in the same season. You can't say a guy that is regularly dominated is an equal. Are you saying Jordan and Mikan were the only ones to be undisputed?

I don't think there was any question that Wilt was regarded as the best player in the game in the mid-60's. He won three straight MVPs, and even the Wilt-detractors, who would try to find any almost any reason to NOT vote for him...couldn't vote against him. He led his team's to the best record in the league in each season.

And H2H against Russell, Wilt was, quite simply, a FAR more dominant player. Even in his 62-63 season, when Chamberlain's teammates were so putrid that they went 31-49, Wilt faced Russell nine times. SIX of those nine games were decided by single digits (if you include an OT game in which Wilt's team lost by 15 points.) And, somehow, Chamberlain also managed to lead his team to another win by a 128-112 margin. So, in essentially SEVEN of their NINE H2H meetings that season, Wilt was able to keep his team competitive. And, think about this... Russell had EIGHT other HOF teammates (and a HOF coach), while Chamberlain had ZERO HOF teammates.

In that season, here were their H2H numbers (and the first two numbers are their scoring and rebounding numbers)...

for example, in their first meeting, Wilt had a 45-27 game (obviously 45 points, and 27 rebounds) to Russell's 12-26 game (again, 12 points and 26 rebounds.)

1. Wilt 45-27, Russell 12-26
2. Wilt 43-32, Russell 8-30
3. Wilt 32-27, Russell 11-16
4. Wilt 23-31, Russell 10-33
5. Wilt 45-31, Russell 16-36
6. Wilt 50-17, Russell 23-21
7. Wilt 31-27, Russell 6-28
8. Wilt 40-38, Russell 25-38
9. Wilt 34-30, Russell 20-22

So, Chamberlain outscored Russell, per game, 38 ppg to 14 ppg, and outrebounded him, per game, 29 rpg to 28 rpg.

True, Russell's team went 8-1 against Wilt's TEAM that season, but when you factor in that Wilt's BEST teammate, Tom Meschery, would have been buried somewhere at the end of Boston's bench, it was a miracle that Chamberlain was able to keep his team in SEVEN of those nine games.

BTW, Chamberlain had THREE separate full seasons against Russell in which he averaged 38 ppg; as well as a 35.5 ppg season, a 28.7 ppg, a 28.3 ppg, and a 25.4 ppg season against him.

Of course, Wilt outscored Russell, per game, in EVERY regular season H2H series (and in as many as 13 regular season H2H's), and outrebounded Russell in EVERY regular season H2H series. AND, he outscored and outrebounded Russell in ALL eight of their post-season series'. And in terms of scoring, Chamberlain just CRUSHED Russell H2H. He outscored Russell in 132 of their 142 H2H games. And he was nearly as dominant in H2H rebounding, as well, winning that battle with a 92-42-8 margin.

And Chamberlain had MANY HUGE games against Russell, too. I have posted some 40 games, in which Wilt absolutely abused Russell. Wilt held a 24-0 edge in H2H 40+ point games, which included FIVE games of 50+, and even one game in which he outscored Russell, 62-23 (and on 27-45 shooting.) He also pounded Russell by a 23-4 margin in H2H 35+ rebounding games, which included a 7-1 margin in 40+ rebound games (and Russell's lone 40 rebound game against Wilt was exactly a 40 rebound game.) In fact, Wilt had one game against Russell, in which he outrebounded him by a staggering 55-19 margin.

You would be hard-pressed to find very many games in which Russell even had a slim statistical edge, but you can find a TON of games in which Wilt just overwhelmed Russell. And that includes FG% shooting, as well. In their known H2H FG% games, Chamberlain held a massive edge, and in some by just eye-popping margins. For example, in the '67 ECF's, Wilt outshot Russell by a .556 to .358 margin.

[kizut1659]

I'm a huge bulls fans here so I have all the bias in the world against Kobe but anybody dissing Kobe's greatness during his prime years is smoking crack. The fact that he won nothing means nothing because he played with complete garbage



Kobe that year not only averaged 35 ppg on a team with zero other real offensive options - he did it with solid officiency (35 ppg on 27 shots a game, which is about 1.30 PPS). In 2006 - 2007, he was even more impressive with scoring 31+ on just 23 shots a game (about 1.36 PPS)



Kobe was the best player in the game between 2005-2007 and there should be no doubt about it

As much as I think Heat did not deserve to win 2006 championship, I am not sure Kobe in 2006 was clear-cut better than Wade or Lebron (31-7-7 on 49% vs. 35-5-5 for Kobe on 45%). In 2007, Wade took a step backwards but again, I am not sure Kobe was clear-cut better than LeBron, especially if one takes into account LeBron's playoff performance up to the finals.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Phil got him to focus more though. I don't see any reason why he wouldn't be able to impact the game in a similar way in the same circumstances.

I guess what I'm saying is the ability is there but for other reasons he wasn't quite as impactful.

I agree with that 100%. Though different in the sense that work ethic wasn't a problem for Hakeem, that's kind of similar to how Hakeem's impact went to another level in '93 due to the system and situation. Or Nash in Phoenix for that matter.


What boards where you on? NBAwire and Hoopworld were lit up. People have short memories so they were referencing the last 3 years where Shaq unquestionably had more help, more experience, more time together, and more expectations. Wade was really amusing in that he resembled young MJ even more than Kobe did. There was plenty of discussions going on but no different than now.

Oh, well, more time together, definitely. Wade doing it in his 3rd year was surprising, much like Duncan in his 2nd, or going way back, Kareem and Bird in their 2nd years.

Even so, the Heat weren't unlike the Lakers in that they were a 2 star team with role players and a great coach. Not all that hard for me to see how they won since they had a top 2 player in the entire league in Wade, the best true center(which has added value due to the lack of them) and to add to that, Alonzo Mourning who was without question the best backup center in the league and one of the game's best defensive players period.

Haslem was a good hustle guy and role player, much like the ones LA surrounded Shaq and Kobe with. Antoine Walker was not a guy I was a fan of, but he did turn out to be a good addition. Jason Williams was pretty solid once he toned his game down and GP was a serviceable backup. Not to forget about James Posey either who was a top-notch role player due to his defense and ability to shoot 3s.

Not the most talented finals team by any stretch, but a team that wasn't all Wade, despite Wade having to put them on his back in the finals.

I see a lot parallels between Shaq's first title and Wade's actually, or at least the amount of help(1 star teammate+ role players and proven champion HOF coach) as well as how much of the offense they needed to carry in the finals(38 ppg vs Shaq and 35 for Wade).

As far as the talk at the time. Well, I remember the Wade vs Kobe comparisons and people talking about how well the duos worked with Shaq/Kobe vs Wade/Shaq. I also remember talk of it becoming Wade's team and Shaq stepping aside. Or Wade being the 2nd star of the draft class over Melo who was expected to be Lebron's rival. The usual LBJ vs Wade talk as well. And yeah, some of the "next" Jordan comparison, particularly after the finals.

Wade did play more like Jordan circa '87 than Kobe did, but not more like '90-'98 Jordan.

But yeah, I have no recollection of any sort of significant talk regarding Shaq's help in LA vs Wade's in '06. It's kind of an out of left field comparison and one that isn't made often being star big men and a star guard. To this day, Wade and Shaq are hardly ever compared either on all-time lists or prime vs prime.


Wow, that's a shocker. In your basketball heart you an LA kid tho. Way too much Kareem, Kobe and naming yourself ShaqAttack which is equal to saying Jersey smells better than NY and is a better place to live.

No I'm not, the Lakers have had many great players so as a basketball fan, I usually have an interest in them. Kareem being a perfect example, having an interest in the sport before my time, he was the player who impressed me the most from that era and I love watching him play and discovering his career. I didn't have the luxury of watching him growing up as I was very young when he retired and not even born during his prime.

I wouldn't call Kobe one of my favorite players ever, I do follow him a lot, especially since he played with Shaq so naturally I watched him a lot, as well as the fact that he's been one of the best players on one of the premier teams most of his career in a major media market so those games are on National TV as well as the playoff games, and naturally, I have more of an interest in watching the better teams.

I follow the entire league, not just NY area teams because I love basketball. I've watched the majority of Knick games most years except for when they were painful and the season was lost('06 and '08), part of the reason why I dislike Zach Randolph to this day despite him seeming to turn around his career. I haven't missed a Knick game this year(though I wish I missed tonight's game) and maybe missed a handful at most all last year.

My basketball roots are definitely not LA. Getting into basketball when I did, the Knicks were huge in NY with Ewing, Starks, Oakley, Mason, Harper ect. My first jersey was a John Starks jersey and it seems like I'm one of the only Ewing fans on this board. Later, I really liked Sprewell and Houston. I also watch the Nets when they're halfway decent and occasionally when they're not.

As far as the name? Uh, what exactly does that have to do with anything? As someone who follows the league so much, Shaq is probably my favorite player and the dominant player of the era I identify most with(early 2000s).

I see you going on about Rose all the time as well as Magic. Just means you like their games, has nothing to do with where your "basketball heart" is.



As much as I think Heat did not deserve to win 2006 championship, I am not sure Kobe in 2006 was clear-cut better than Wade or Lebron (31-7-7 on 49% vs. 35-5-5 for Kobe on 45%). In 2007, Wade took a step backwards but again, I am not sure Kobe was clear-cut better than LeBron, especially if one takes into account LeBron's playoff performance up to the finals.

Wade was playing great before his injury in '07. Lebron actually took a step back that year and really had even less of a case over Kobe in '07 than he did in '06. His playoff run wasn't that impressive outside of game 5 vs Detroit.

[Pointguard]

As far as the talk at the time. Well, I remember the Wade vs Kobe comparisons and people talking about how well the duos worked with Shaq/Kobe vs Wade/Shaq. I also remember talk of it becoming Wade's team and Shaq stepping aside. Or Wade being the 2nd star of the draft class over Melo who was expected to be Lebron's rival. The usual LBJ vs Wade talk as well. And yeah, some of the "next" Jordan comparison, particularly after the finals.

Wade did play more like Jordan circa '87 than Kobe did, but not more like '90-'98 Jordan.

But yeah, I have no recollection of any sort of significant talk regarding Shaq's help in LA vs Wade's in '06. It's kind of an out of left field comparison and one that isn't made often being star big men and a star guard. To this day, Wade and Shaq are hardly ever compared either on all-time lists or prime vs prime.

OK, there was a misunderstanding. The comparison was Shaq's help, not Shaq to Wade. Wade was obviously the only guy that could flip that series. This Beta Shaq wasn't the Alpha Shaq that lost to Detroit much less '01 Shaq. People, and you must know that people were just waiting for Kobe to trip up or looking for a way to down him. Another player that resembled Jordan had won it all and in a big way. People do it here with Rose all the time here and he's liked much more than Kobe was at that time. And Rose isn't similar to other players.


No I'm not, the Lakers have had many great players so as a basketball fan, I usually have an interest in them. Kareem being a perfect example, having an interest in the sport before my time, he was the player who impressed me the most from that era and I love watching him play and discovering his career. I didn't have the luxury of watching him growing up as I was very young when he retired and not even born during his prime.

I wouldn't call Kobe one of my favorite players ever, I do follow him a lot, especially since he played with Shaq so naturally I watched him a lot, as well as the fact that he's been one of the best players on one of the premier teams most of his career in a major media market so those games are on National TV as well as the playoff games, and naturally, I have more of an interest in watching the better teams.

I follow the entire league, not just NY area teams because I love basketball. I've watched the majority of Knick games most years except for when they were painful and the season was lost('06 and '08), part of the reason why I dislike Zach Randolph to this day despite him seeming to turn around his career. I haven't missed a Knick game this year(though I wish I missed tonight's game) and maybe missed a handful at most all last year.

My basketball roots are definitely not LA. Getting into basketball when I did, the Knicks were huge in NY with Ewing, Starks, Oakley, Mason, Harper ect. My first jersey was a John Starks jersey and it seems like I'm one of the only Ewing fans on this board. Later, I really liked Sprewell and Houston. I also watch the Nets when they're halfway decent and occasionally when they're not.

As far as the name? Uh, what exactly does that have to do with anything? As someone who follows the league so much, Shaq is probably my favorite player and the dominant player of the era I identify most with(early 2000s).

I see you going on about Rose all the time as well as Magic. Just means you like their games, has nothing to do with where your "basketball heart" is.

Funny I hated Shaq because he used to abuse Ewing and it was personal for him (Now I realize there is a lot personal things with Shaq). My lady, my friends whom Shaq wouldn't pay despite taking merchandise, we just hate him. So my bad on thinking you couldn't be Big Apple and take on a name with Shaq in it. Obviously, I linked guys you hyped together, like 40 years of LA domination - Kareem, Shaq, Kobe. But you play the guitar and grew up in NY theres no need to look at the differences as much. But that was a shocker.

[La Frescobaldi]

OK, there was a misunderstanding. The comparison was Shaq's help, not Shaq to Wade. Wade was obviously the only guy that could flip that series. This Beta Shaq wasn't the Alpha Shaq that lost to Detroit much less '01 Shaq. People, and you must know that people were just waiting for Kobe to trip up or looking for a way to down him. Another player that resembled Jordan had won it all and in a big way. People do it here with Rose all the time here and he's liked much more than Kobe was at that time. And Rose isn't similar to other players.

Funny I hated Shaq because he used to abuse Ewing and it was personal for him (Now I realize there is a lot personal things with Shaq). My lady, my friends whom Shaq wouldn't pay despite taking merchandise, we just hate him. So my bad on thinking you couldn't be Big Apple and take on a name with Shaq on it. Obviously, I linked guys you hyped together, like 40 years of LA domination. But you play the guitar and grew up in NY theres no need to look at the differences as much. But that was a shocker.
********************
I was always a Knicks fan in the 60s and they were horrifical bad. When I got done with school we bought a old Chevelle and took off for California... this was pretty much the time of hippies and we wanted in on it... San Francisco seemed like only one destination in a whole country of destinations.
Well it was a strange thing to get out there and HEY!! Chamberlain is a Laker...!! ...... and then the Knicks became one of the most underrated dynasties in history.
I don't get why people forget the Knicks that ran 70-74 as one of the all-time great teams, but they do, every last time. You never see them on any lists which is pretty disgusting. Yet they will rank the '72 Lakers as one of the 10 best (or whatever) based on Elgin Baylor being on that team!!
lol with his dead-dog loser attitude maybe he should have got MVP that year because they got rid of him and threw a huge celebration by instantly reeling off 33 wins in a row. That was certainly an indisputable fact.

But this indisputable question, it's disputable that any player has ever been indisputable. Does it mean unanimous indisputability? A majority of fans think one guy is indisputaby the best? Or the other players?

I mean 'everybody' thought Jordan was the best player in the league in the 90s. But in fact it was quite disputatious when it was happening. it looked real obvious to a lot of guys (me included) that O'Neal was a far greater force on the court the second half of the decade. He just didn't have as good a team and definitely didn't have Phil Jackson.

Likewise people on these boards have glorified Olajuwon - a great player no question - but he was never really looked at as some all time great center, not until the nostalgia kicked in. Everybody knew he was an awesome center, but there was plenty of dispute about who was best. I have no doubt that Willis Reed & Elvin Hayes would have given Hakeem a lot more trouble than a lot of guys that played in the 90s. I'll get ripped and probably a bad reputation for saying such blasphemy but it's a fact. And those guys were never the indisputables of their day.

To me, these guys were indisputably the best of their day.

* Chamberlain from 66 until he wrecked his knee in '69 (I didn't see him before then so I don't know although I suspect he was better in his athletic prime than he was when he was older),
* Kareem mid-70s,
* Jordan early 90s,
* Shaq for about 4 or 5 years like 96 or 97-2002

If you mean by single season, undoubtedly John Havlicek for 69, Kobe would have one or two....... there's been a lot of guys that had a single great season, where they edged above the rest of the league. But those 4 guys are it really and it is no coincidence they are all centers (except Jordan).

Which makes today's league strategy of no centers very obtuse.

[jlauber]

********************
I was always a Knicks fan in the 60s and they were horrifical bad. When I got done with school we bought a old Chevelle and took off for California... this was pretty much the time of hippies and we wanted in on it... San Francisco seemed like only one destination in a whole country of destinations.
Well it was a strange thing to get out there and HEY!! Chamberlain is a Laker...!! ...... and then the Knicks became one of the most underrated dynasties in history.
I don't get why people forget the Knicks that ran 70-74 as one of the all-time great teams, but they do, every last time. You never see them on any lists which is pretty disgusting. Yet they will rank the '72 Lakers as one of the 10 best (or whatever) based on Elgin Baylor being on that team!!
lol with his dead-dog loser attitude maybe he should have got MVP that year because they got rid of him and threw a huge celebration by instantly reeling off 33 wins in a row. That was certainly an indisputable fact.

But this indisputable question, it's disputable that any player has ever been indisputable. Does it mean unanimous indisputability? A majority of fans think one guy is indisputaby the best? Or the other players?

I mean 'everybody' thought Jordan was the best player in the league in the 90s. But in fact it was quite disputatious when it was happening. it looked real obvious to a lot of guys (me included) that O'Neal was a far greater force on the court the second half of the decade. He just didn't have as good a team and definitely didn't have Phil Jackson.

Likewise people on these boards have glorified Olajuwon - a great player no question - but he was never really looked at as some all time great center, not until the nostalgia kicked in. Everybody knew he was an awesome center, but there was plenty of dispute about who was best. I have no doubt that Willis Reed & Elvin Hayes would have given Hakeem a lot more trouble than a lot of guys that played in the 90s. I'll get ripped and probably a bad reputation for saying such blasphemy but it's a fact. And those guys were never the indisputables of their day.

To me, these guys were indisputably the best of their day.

* Chamberlain from 66 until he wrecked his knee in '69 (I didn't see him before then so I don't know although I suspect he was better in his athletic prime than he was when he was older),
* Kareem mid-70s,
* Jordan early 90s,
* Shaq for about 4 or 5 years like 96 or 97-2002

If you mean by single season, undoubtedly John Havlicek for 69, Kobe would have one or two....... there's been a lot of guys that had a single great season, where they edged above the rest of the league. But those 4 guys are it really and it is no coincidence they are all centers (except Jordan).

Which makes today's league strategy of no centers very obtuse.

I am in agreement with virtually this entire post. :cheers:

[pauk]

********************
I was always a Knicks fan in the 60s and they were horrifical bad. When I got done with school we bought a old Chevelle and took off for California... this was pretty much the time of hippies and we wanted in on it... San Francisco seemed like only one destination in a whole country of destinations.
Well it was a strange thing to get out there and HEY!! Chamberlain is a Laker...!! ...... and then the Knicks became one of the most underrated dynasties in history.
I don't get why people forget the Knicks that ran 70-74 as one of the all-time great teams, but they do, every last time. You never see them on any lists which is pretty disgusting. Yet they will rank the '72 Lakers as one of the 10 best (or whatever) based on Elgin Baylor being on that team!!
lol with his dead-dog loser attitude maybe he should have got MVP that year because they got rid of him and threw a huge celebration by instantly reeling off 33 wins in a row. That was certainly an indisputable fact.

But this indisputable question, it's disputable that any player has ever been indisputable. Does it mean unanimous indisputability? A majority of fans think one guy is indisputaby the best? Or the other players?

I mean 'everybody' thought Jordan was the best player in the league in the 90s. But in fact it was quite disputatious when it was happening. it looked real obvious to a lot of guys (me included) that O'Neal was a far greater force on the court the second half of the decade. He just didn't have as good a team and definitely didn't have Phil Jackson.

Likewise people on these boards have glorified Olajuwon - a great player no question - but he was never really looked at as some all time great center, not until the nostalgia kicked in. Everybody knew he was an awesome center, but there was plenty of dispute about who was best. I have no doubt that Willis Reed & Elvin Hayes would have given Hakeem a lot more trouble than a lot of guys that played in the 90s. I'll get ripped and probably a bad reputation for saying such blasphemy but it's a fact. And those guys were never the indisputables of their day.

To me, these guys were indisputably the best of their day.

* Chamberlain from 66 until he wrecked his knee in '69 (I didn't see him before then so I don't know although I suspect he was better in his athletic prime than he was when he was older),
* Kareem mid-70s,
* Jordan early 90s,
* Shaq for about 4 or 5 years like 96 or 97-2002

If you mean by single season, undoubtedly John Havlicek for 69, Kobe would have one or two....... there's been a lot of guys that had a single great season, where they edged above the rest of the league. But those 4 guys are it really and it is no coincidence they are all centers (except Jordan).

Which makes today's league strategy of no centers very obtuse.

Wilt Chamberlain was disputable all the time *cough* Russell *cough*... you know... the good ol "but he has no rings" excuse... it shouldnt have been disputable at all... but not winning team accomplishments does that to people... even today... kindof reminds of Lebron today... the most dominant, productive, talented player... but it gets somewhat disputable when he doesnt get this precious team accomplishment...

Kareem i can agree with....

Jordan from 1991-1998 was undisputable....

Shaq from 1999 to 2002 was undisputable...

Overall... JORDAN was the most undisputable ever...

[La Frescobaldi]

Wilt Chamberlain was disputable all the time *cough* Russell *cough*... you know... the good ol "but he has no rings" excuse... it shouldnt have been disputable at all... but not winning team accomplishments does that to people... even today... kindof reminds of Lebron today... the most dominant, productive, talented player... but it gets somewhat disputable when he doesnt get this precious team accomplishment...

Kareem i can agree with....

Jordan from 1991-1998 was undisputable....

Shaq from 1999 to 2002 was undisputable...

Overall... JORDAN was the most undisputable ever...

********************************


Chamberlain utterly destroyed Russell when I saw them. It wasn't close.

In 68 & 69, Russell wasn't even the best player on his own team. Havlicek was, and Sam Jones was right there in 67 & 68.

We can disagree, that's fine, but please read this thread before you do.

http://insidehoops.com//forum/showthread.php?t=245643

You can cough cough all you like - but did you watch them? or just read about it.

[Pointguard]

Wilt Chamberlain was disputable all the time *cough* Russell *cough*... you know... the good ol "but he has no rings" excuse... it shouldnt have been disputable at all... but not winning team accomplishments does that to people... even today... kindof reminds of Lebron today... the most dominant, productive, talented player... but it gets somewhat disputable when he doesnt get this precious team accomplishment...

Kareem i can agree with....

When Kareem was indisputable it was when he wasn't winning. But it was obvious dispite that. Winning is a factor but not the overriding factor. Like I said earlier in this thread. Wilt was flat out dominating Russell in some years with high frequency - six or seven times - and breaking records on Russell in Russell's strong suit. Would you say Ben Wallace was better than Shaq in '05? Winning is a factor when its close but if another player dominates another one, awhole lot, commonsense has to step up. The separation that Wilt had from other players makes the ones that Jordan, Kareem and Shaq had laughable. In fact, you can even take their best year of separation each and add it up cumulatively and it wouldn't be close to what Wilt had scoring wise. Of course they never had much separation rebounding wise but Wilt was dominant there as well.

Could you imagine a center averaging 31 more points and 2 rebounds more than the next center and the other center being considered better? Shaq or Hakeem never averaged 30 points in a season.

[Pointguard]

I think people confuse terms a bit to much. Whe you say player, you are talking about what happens on the 90x45 foot court. Player against player. When you say GOAT you are talking about accolades, rings, accomplishments and such. Best player isn't always the Greatest and the Greatest is not always the Best. Why? Because the greatest is usually loaded with things to do outside of the realm a team player can fully control on the court and off of it.

If OP says undisputed "greatest" at that time, the answer can be different than if he says undisputed "best player." Best baseball player of all time is Albert Pujols. Greatest player might be Babe Ruth. Best football player might have been Jim Brown. Greatest will probably be Tom Brady. Best boxer right now is Floyd (he would demolish Paquio and most people know this). But if they never fought, Pacman would be considered greater because of more fights, covered more weight divsions and was liked better.

Great is usually tied to a lot things out of the control of the player. When you say player you are talking about his game.

[Bernie Nips]

Garnett in 04.

[HurricaneKid]

You just sound like a windbag here. You pretty much just type a bunch of stuff and made no relevant point at all. You sure as hell did not refute anything I posted about Lebron on Rose.




Yeah, Lebron doesn't know how to contest shots or play good :wtf: to man defense. I already said that, why do you feel like you have the need to say the same thing but in a longer version?

Every Maverick was lighting Lebron up. Shawn Marion was dominating this guy in the post and Jason Terry was pretty much draining every shot over him (at least after he called him out).


:oldlol: Okay.



I am pretty sure I said the same thing that Melo didn't play well outside of Game 1. Melo was torching Ariza until Kobe was put on him. Kobe had far more success defensively than Ariza did on Melo. Then again I am talking to some idiot who thinks win shares is a credible stat.


It's not my fault LeBron doesn't know how to contest and play good man to man defense. Don't shoot the messenger. You are just trying to nitpick and find some ridiculous ways to make excuses for Lebron for his failures on defense or prop up Lebron for his successful defense.


You have had pretty much nothing for me the entire time. I think we are done here since either I have shut down all the points you have made and you have barely made any points at all. Talk to me when you actually have something for me. You had nothing for me even though you tried to cherry pick my post and completely ignore the rest.

Well you are right that we are done here. I expected to find an intelligent conversation about basketball with a guy who's rep bar is at full health. Instead I find a condescending prick who's understanding of advanced basketball strategies is laughably limited. If you are the best this community has I'll take my leave of it.

I never defended LBJ against Dal. Every time I have discussed the series have plastered him for his defense. I have repeatedly said that the evidence of him choking wasn't in the 18/7/7 but in his defense. I'm not some blind hack.

Learn nuance. It will make you a better man.

[StateOfMind12]

I'm not some blind hack.
You pretty much are but yeah I suggest you leave and learn while you are at it.