Better Overall Player: Jerey West v. Kobe Bryant

[Vertical-24]

EDIT: Excuse the "Jerey" error!

Kobe Bryant is generally viewed as a consesus top 10 player based on resume, career achievement and overall production. One of my alltime favorite players, Kobe Bryant is IMO the 2nd best SG of all time, a top 8 alltime player, and one of the greatest talents I've ever had the pleasure of watching play.

While I know these player comparison threads are getting tired, especially ones involving players from different eras, I just wanted to know ISH's opinion involving this comparison. West is typically viewed as a top 20 player alongside the likes of guys like the Big O, Baylor, Erving, etc.

The idea for this thread came from a past thread by CavaliersFTW when he posted up a West highlight film he had composed. Somewhere in the thread he assessed both players and came to the conclusion that West could've been the better player. Career achievements barred, who do you guys think was the more complete player: The Mamba or The Logo??

And please don't flame me, I'm not trying to troll, just tryna have good basketball discussion with guys who love the game as much as I do. :cheers:

[ImmortalD24]

Jerry West all day everyday.

[Umad101]

***** can't even dribble with his left hand:facepalm

[TheBigVeto]

Jerry West all day everyday.

This.

[Vertical-24]

***** can't even dribble with his left hand:facepalm

LMAO one of my biggest gripes with West and other perimeter players of the time. I heard the "carrying was called so much" excuse when talking about that era and I wasnt even around to see that era at all so I cant comment on it but I feel like it had less to do with rules and more to do with the game not being as complex and developed as it is today (excuse the run-on).

Regardless, I was surprised to see CavsFTW say that he thought West couldve been the better player but respected his opinion and the criteria he used.

For the record, I believe Bryant is the more complete, overall better player.

Defense (man to man): Kobe (and its not close)
Passing: Kobe = West (though I do believe Kobe is the more versatile passer, i'll give West some slack)
Mid-Range Game: Kobe (though West had a deadly pull-up, midrange shot)
Ball-Handling: Kobe (and its not close)
Post-Game: Kobe (and its not close)
Playmaking: West (and its pretty damn close)
Shot Selection: West
Competitiveness: Kobe
Footwork: Kobe
Creating his own shot: Kobe (though West has a good argument)
Shot Blocking: West
Rebounding: West (though I think its close)
Athletic Ability: Kobe (I even think a current Kobe is nearly as athletic as a prime West, however, I could be extremely wrong)
Penetration/Attacking the Rim: Kobe
Leadership: Kobe = West


Yeah...I do think Kobe is the better player...though I may be biased :confusedshrug:

[TMacMagic]

Jerry West probably couldn't even dribble between his legs...

But as far as clutch goes, J-West all day :rockon:

[Lebron23]

Jerry West all day everyday.


This

[KOBE143]

Kobe Bean Bryant.. Only player that was better than Kobe was MJ and they're pretty close at all..

[DTreats]

This thread isn't serious is it? Jerry West himself admitted that Kobe does things on the basketball court that he never even dreamt of.

[TMacMagic]

This thread isn't serious is it? Jerry West himself admitted that Kobe does things on the basketball court that he never even dreamt of.

I love J-West but compared to Kobe he's just a white dude with no handle. (but clutch, as I said )

[Math2]

West is much better than Kobe IMO. Despite being a rabid Celtics fan, West is one of my all time favorite players.

[Ne 1]

Both were the best SG's of their era, great defensive players, great shooters, and could playmake as well. Not many weaknesses if any at all at the 2 guard.

Kobe's main advantage is his versatility (he's just bigger than West and can move down to SF or play in the post) and the fact that his teams have capitalized on their talent. You could chalk it up to Shaq, Phil, the Lakers front office, or whatever but Kobe's been on 5 championship teams with comparable talent for their eras compared to 1 for West.

That counts IMO. Not to mention Kobe having an MVP. He's broken nearly all of West's Laker records as well.

[IGOTGAME]

Both were the best SG's of their era, great defensive players, great shooters, and could playmake as well. Not many weaknesses if any at all at the 2 guard.

Kobe's main advantage is his versatility (he's just bigger than West and can move down to SF or play in the post) and the fact that his teams have capitalized on their talent. You could chalk it up to Shaq, Phil, the Lakers front office, or whatever but Kobe's been on 5 championship teams with comparable talent for their eras compared to 1 for West.

That counts IMO. Not to mention Kobe having an MVP. He's broken nearly all of West's Laker records as well.


seems a little odd that no one cares that West lost so much with elite teams but they jump down Kobe's throat for losing twice in the Finals.

[Vertical-24]

West is much better than Kobe IMO. Despite being a rabid Celtics fan, West is one of my all time favorite players.

Why do you believe he is way better?

[jongib369]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8rjREaql2U&feature=g-user-u




CavsFTW's video to add to the discussion


:lebronamazed: :lebronamazed: :lebronamazed:

[Ne 1]

seems a little odd that no one cares that West lost so much with elite teams but they jump down Kobe's throat for losing twice in the Finals.

Yeah, if people regraded Kobe as a "failure" or "choker" for losing in 2004 & 2008 what about West's 1-8 Finals record?


West is much better than Kobe IMO.

Well you're entitled to your opinion, but I'm just wondering what makes you believe West is much better than Bryant?

He has just one championship, as arguably the third fiddle. He has no edge on Kobe awards wise, scoring wise, statistically, winning wise...absolutely none.

[TMacMagic]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8rjREaql2U&feature=g-user-u




CavsFTW's video to add to the discussion


:lebronamazed: :lebronamazed: :lebronamazed:

After watching that video I respect J-West's game even more.

Oh, and he could dunk!!? :bowdown:

[DaHeezy]

:facepalm
The only way you would say West is if you're a Kobe hater. This is no disrespect to West but we're talking all-around skilled here in which Kobe may be top 5 of all-time.

"But, but, but, West is clutch"
:rolleyes:

[jongib369]

I know right? Same here, i never realized how good he was before.

If you liked that, I recommend these videos also

These 3 video's...and then watching a lot of actual games made wilt my favorite player

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCWrGWuU2Ak :bowdown:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVDzzxVE34k&feature=plcp :pimp:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kB43A-ODuLc&feature=plcp :eek: this one scares me


Oscar

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ee2Ag5GeMQ&feature=plcp (http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=4ee2Ag5GeMQ&feature=plcp) :bowdown: :bowdown:


let me know what you think!

[Harison]

If West would play today, with current training and rules specifically meant to help wings, West would dominate today more than Kobe can.

[jlauber]

***** can't even dribble with his left hand:facepalm

Interesting...watch VIDEO footage of Pete Maravich. There isn't a player today that could do the things he could with a basketball. And yet, when the two players were in the league together, NO ONE would have claimed Maravich was a better player than West.

[oolalaa]

Despite what their respectiive ring totals would indicte, West was a MUCH better Finals performer than Kobe Bryant (It's not even remotely close, actually) and FAR steadier when the game was on the line (I lost count at the amount of times Kobe shot his team out of a win about 5 years ago).

Besides general athleticism and a small rebounding edge, there is absolutely NOTHING Kobe did (Using past tense becuase Kobe's best years are behind him) better than West. He wasn't a better shooter. He wasn't better at getting to the line. He wasn't a better scorer. He wasn't a better passer/playmaker. He wasn't a better 1on1 defender. He wasn't a better stealer. He wasn't a better leader or teammate.

In my opinion....

1. Jordan
2. Magic
3. Russell

4. Kareem
5. Bird
6. Wilt

7. Duncan
8. Shaq
9. West
10. Kobe
11. Hakeem

[FKAri]

How do you compare someone like West who learned the game largely on his own vs Kobe who probably watched superstars since he was a kid and has been trained from a young age by people with decades of basketball and athletic knowledge?

This thread is stupid.

[jlauber]

While I am an "old school" fan, Kobe's overall resume is better than West's. And his longevity has already surpassed West, with perhaps a few more seasons left in the tank.

I wouldn't put West in a top-10, but definitely top-15.

[Ne 1]

If West would play today, with current training and rules specifically meant to help wings, West would dominate today more than Kobe can.

Yeah, and put Kobe in the 60's and he'd put up 38-42+/7-8/6-7/2-3/56-58% TS a night.

[jlauber]

Yeah, and put Kobe in the 60's and he'd put up 38-42+/7-8/6-7/2-3/56-58% TS a night.

At his peak, probably. His FG%'s would have dropped, though. I suspect he would have been Baylor-esque in that regard.

[BlueandGold]

West had one of the greatest competitive natures of all time. I think him losing all those game 7s still kills him a little.

With that said as far as career achievements, physical ability and overall talent Kobe definitely has the edge in all three categories. West has had some of the greatest Finals performances of all time while also being the only play who has ever won FMVP on a losing team.

I have great respect for both but West couldn't really get it done while essentially being in the same position Kobe was in in 00-04 by having Wilt, Baylor and Goodrich on his team. I just think West should have won more championships with that stellar a cast and that team eventually became one of the greatest all time in the 72 Lakers but in the end they lost more championships than they won.

[DixieNourmous]

Anyone that chose West should be negged. Not a Kobe lover but jezus christ, come on haters,, have some credibility.

Before you open your cawkholster and say west, school your dumbass....


WEST = http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/w/westje01.html
Bryant = http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/bryanko01.html


Now those of you that chose West,, print your post and show your momma what a idiot she raised.

http://gifsforum.com/images/gif/haters%20gonna%20hate/grand/dog_hater_gonna_hate.gif

[kennethgriffin]

Dont really know what to say here except.....

1 for 8... 1 as his teams second best player...

[Xiao Yao You]

Logo

[Mach_3]

Interesting...watch VIDEO footage of Pete Maravich. There isn't a player today that could do the things he could with a basketball. And yet, when the two players were in the league together, NO ONE would have claimed Maravich was a better player than West.

Are people really dumb enough to claim that players back then couldn't dribble with their left hand? My freaking 3 year old niece can dribble a basketball with her left hand.

GTFO with that BS :facepalm

[jlauber]

Are people really dumb enough to claim that players back then couldn't dribble with their left hand? My freaking 3 year old niece can dribble a basketball with her left hand.

GTFO with that BS :facepalm

Agreed. I grew up in the 60's, and the Harlem Globetrotters were often on TV. They were doing amazing dribbling acts long before that, too. Hell, I was doing behind the back dribbling, and between the legs dribblinw when I was 7 years old too.

[Clove21]

How many people here are you going to get that watched West enough during his playing days to make a real comparison? The most anyone here has seen of West is highlights.

This thread is going to be Kobe haters vs Kobe stans. West isn't even part of the equation. :banghead:

[magnax1]

I think if West played this decade instead of the 60's peoples opinion would be much higher then it is now. He would've shot a lot better and scored more because of the 3pt line, and people could've seen his steal records and how good of a defender he was. I mean, think if Reggie Miller played in the 60's how much worse he'd look without the 3 pt line. I doubt West would be shooting as many threes as reggie, but none the less it's a very big deal.
Either way, I'm not really willing to speculate to far on that sort of scenario. In the decades they played, Kobe was quite a bit better.

[kennethgriffin]

If kobe had 1 title as 2nd banana and 0 mvps. Where would he rank all time lol

[NumberSix]

Kobe

[Deuce Bigalow]

Not sure if serious?

[jlauber]

Not sure if serious?

While West didn't win the rings, or the accolade that Kobe has, nor had as long a career, his post-season play was considerably better than Kobe's.

I personally rank Kobe somewhere around 8th-11th (my research on just how dominant Moses was against his peers has led me to put him in that same group), while West would be somewhere in the 12th-15th spots.

And the more I look at KG's career, the more I realize just how great he was, as well. I am debating just where he should rank. Same with Bob Pettit, who actually had an outstanding resume.

To be honest, the 12th thru 20th spots are probably the most difficult to rank. Players like Hondo, Barry, Baylor, Dirk, Robinson, Dr. J., KG, Barkley, K. Malone, as well as Oscar and West.

[Vertical-24]

Logo

Why? I see people saying Jerry West but not a lot of posters are stating why.

[Deuce Bigalow]

While West didn't win the rings, or the accolade that Kobe has, nor had as long a career, his post-season play was considerably better than Kobe's.

How the hell do you know? He played in a different era. How do you not understand yet? :facepalm

And yes West's accolades would look incredible if Wilt didn't choke in the '69 and '70 Finals :facepalm

[jlauber]

How the hell do you know? He played in a different era. How do you not understand yet? :facepalm

And yes West's accolades would look incredible if Wilt didn't choke in the '69 and '70 Finals :facepalm

Aside from the 3pt line (and West would have done quite well, I'm sure) the game has not changed at ALL since the 60's. Basically the same ball (alright, players today have a better ball); the same size hoop, the same siz court dimensions; the same number of players; and for the most part...the same damned rules.

GTFO.

[Vertical-24]

Despite what their respectiive ring totals would indicte, West was a MUCH better Finals performer than Kobe Bryant (It's not even remotely close, actually) and FAR steadier when the game was on the line (I lost count at the amount of times Kobe shot his team out of a win about 5 years ago).

Besides general athleticism and a small rebounding edge, there is absolutely NOTHING Kobe did (Using past tense becuase Kobe's best years are behind him) better than West. He wasn't a better shooter. He wasn't better at getting to the line. He wasn't a better scorer. He wasn't a better passer/playmaker. He wasn't a better 1on1 defender. He wasn't a better stealer. He wasn't a better leader or teammate.

In my opinion....

1. Jordan
2. Magic
3. Russell

4. Kareem
5. Bird
6. Wilt

7. Duncan
8. Shaq
9. West
10. Kobe
11. Hakeem

:roll: :roll: :roll:

:facepalm

[Deuce Bigalow]

Aside from the 3pt line (and West would have done quite well, I'm sure) the game has not changed at ALL since the 60's. Basically the same ball (alright, players today have a better ball); the same size hoop, the same siz court dimensions; the same number of players; and for the most part...the same damned rules.

GTFO.
..............................

"not to diminish guys like Russell and West, two great defenders...but defense back then was nowhere near as good as it is today."

"I know that this is getting away from the original post some, but most people tend to diminish Wilt's accomplishments because he was so much bigger, taller, stronger, and more athletic than his opposing centers. And it is true, that when Wilt was scoring 50 ppg, it was Russell at 6-9 and Bellamy at 6-11, and the rest were pretty much 6-8 or 6-9 "stiffs."

“Wilt's competition in that 61-62 season was not stellar. Basically only Russell and Bellamy were anywhere near his ability...and neither could approach him in terms of statistical domination.”

“I know both you and I will get some flak from "old-timers" about how great some of them were . . . , but realistically, todays basketball players, although many lacking in fundamental skills, are far superior to the players of the 60's.”

“the athletes are better today, no question”

“My personal opinion on athletics today is that, yes, today's athletes are generally bigger, stronger, faster, better trained, and better fed than those of 20 years ago or more.”

“The players of today are generally, and probably considerably, bigger, stronger, faster than previous eras (obviously the further back you go, the bigger the differences.)”

“There is no doubt in my mind that Wilt would be an all-star player today. I certainly wouldn't expect him to score 50 ppg, or grab 27 rpg...but perhaps 30 and 18, in his prime, would have been possible...which would place him above all the centers of today. I think someone on this forum said, or read something to the effect, that Wilt was a cross between Garnett and Shaq. That would be worth about $40 mil a year today.

How many other basketball players could you say that about? Perhaps Russell would be another Ben Wallace, albeit a better passer...but that is not saying much. Sure, West, Robertson, and maybe a handful of others would be good players today, but all-stars?”
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=5029077&postcount=53

[kennethgriffin]

jerry west > michael jordan

don't need facts... just is this way. same as jerry west > kobe bryant!

:roll:

[jlauber]

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=5029077&postcount=53

Good for you. Now read this...

http://insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=272328&page=4


One of Fecal9's very few intelligent posts brought up the FACT that a 38-39 year old Kareem just MURDERED a HELPLESS 23 year old Hakeem. It was just staggering. A 38-39 Kareem, who could barely play 30 mpg, and who could barely leap (only getting 6 rpg) was able to score AT WILL against Hakeem.

I have said it before, but I seriously doubt that you will ever find a string of 10 STRAIGHT H2H games in which an all-time great just CRUSHED another all-time great, like a 38-39 year old Kareem did to a Hakeem, whose averages in those seasons were on par with a supposed peak Hakeem (don't take my word for it....look them up, per mpg, they were as good as any 90's Hakeem.) 32 ppg on, get this... .630 shooting. Which included THREE games of 40+ points, and on staggering FG%'s (40 points on 16-29, 43 points on 16-24 shooting, and 46 points, in only 37 minutes, and on 21-30 shooting.) The fact was, Hakeem was HEMMORAGING when faced with an old Kareem.

Which brings me to two points. One, Kareem was "the Bridge"...the player who played in the NBA in 1969, and who retired from the NBA in 1989. His career was one year short of spanning FOUR decades. Here was a Kareem, a PRIME Kareem, who was, by ALL ACCOUNTS, outplayed by a 34 and 35 year old Wilt, on a surgically repaired knee, and at the twillight of his career. A Chamberlain who not only held a PRIME Kareem to .464 shooting in 28 career H2H games, but who held him down to .434 shooting in their LAST TEN H2H games. In fact, in the last FOUR pivotal games of the '72 WCF's, Chamberlain reduced Kareem to a .414 shooter. AND, those like myself, who saw EVERY game of that series, would attest, that even the shots Kareem made were awful looking. Wilt not only repeatedly blocked the "unblockable" sky hook, his fingertips were nearly grazing almost EVERY shot that Kareem took. And, while a much older Kareem had his skyhook blocked later in his career, it was always in his hand when it was blocked. An OLD Wilt, at 300 lbs, and on a surgically repaired knee, was blocking the skyhoo at it's APEX.

Furthermore, a PRIME Kareem who had a TOTAL of SEVEN 30+ point games, and with a HIGH game of 34 points, in 43 H2H games against an older, and declining Thurmond. Think about that...a geriatric Kareem had SIX 30+ point games, at ages 38 and 39, against a near prime Hakeem, and in only TEN H2H's (and ALL on just mind-numbing efficiencies.) And yet, in 43 H2H's against a declining Nate...SEVEN. In fact, Nate held Kareem to SEVEN games UNDER 20 points in those 43 games. Even more shocking, was that the overwhelming preponderance of the evidence suggests that Kareem may not have even shot .430 against Thurmond in those 43 H2H's. He had a KNOWN three straight playoff series of .486, .405 (in a series in which Thurmond outscored and outshot him), and .428. Oh, and BTW, a 38-42 year old Kareem not only outscored Hakeem in their 23 career H2H's, he outshot him by an astonishing .610 to .512 margin (and keep in mind that Kareem couldn't guard his grandmother at those ages, either.)

All of which is interesting. Here was a Kareem just PLASTERING not only Hakeem, and at will, but in the same week he was embarrassing Hakeem with that 46 point game, a 39 year old Kareem outscored Patrick Ewing by a 40-9 margin, in a game in which he outshot Patrick, 15-22 to 3-17!

So what you ask? Kareem never faced a PRIME Chamberlain. A PRIME "scoring" Chamberlain who had an entire SEASON, and in nine H2H games, of AVERAGING 40.1 ppg against HOFer Willis Reed. Included in those nine games were games in which Wilt outscored Reed by margins of 41-9, 52-23, and a mind-boggling 58-28 beatdown.

Oh, and back to the TEN STRAIGHT GAMES in which a 38-39 year old Kareem just BURIED Hakeem. The only as impressive run as there has been in NBA history, was a string of TWENTY (yes 20) STRAIGHT GAMES in which Chamberlain AVERAGED 48.2 ppg against 6-11 HOFer Walt Bellamy. Included in that amazing stretch, were FOUR games of 60+ points, and a HIGH game of 73 points (on 29-48 shooting, and along with 36 rebounds.)

And, a PRIME "scoring" Wilt only faced Thurmond in about a dozen games. After his 65-66 season, Wilt dramatically cut back his shooting. And, in 11 STRAIGHT games, from their last H2H in 64-65, through nine H2H's in 65-66, and even their first encounter in 66-67, Wilt AVERAGED 30 ppg against Thurmond. And he had nearly as many 30+ point games, SIX, in those 11 games, as Kareem did, seven, in his 43 H2H's against Thurmond. Included in that run were games of 30 (their first game in the '66-67 season, when Wilt's coach asked Wilt to take it to Nate in the second half...and he responded with 24 points in that half), 33, 34, 34, 38, and 45. And, Wilt was outscoring Nate by margins of 33-17, 33-10, 38-15, and even 45-13. Once again, a PRIME Kareem's HIGH game against Nate? 34 points.

Not only that, but in their known H2H FG%'s, Wilt was BLOWING Thurmond away. Interesting too, was that Kareem, in his three straight playoff series against Thurmond, could only shot .486, .428, and a HORRID .405. And yet, Wilt also faced Thurmond in three playoff series, and outshot him by margins of .500 to .392; .550 to .392; and an unfathomable (especially against Thurmond) margin of .560 to .343 in the '67 Finals (in a season in which Thurmond had his highest MVP voting...second, and behind Wilt.)

And, Wilt, in his 68-69 season, and in a season in which he hardly shot the ball, hung TWO games of 60+ point games (including a 66 point game, on 29-35 shooting, which the all-time most efficient 60+ point game in NBA history.)

What is the significance of all of the above? Kareem joined the NBA the very next season after Wilt's last two 60+ point games. And he faced the SAME centers that Wilt destroyed in those 60 point games...and never approached those numbers.

In fact, Kareem would face MANY of the SAME centers that a PRIME Chamberlain just annihilated. Where were Kareem's multiple 50 point games against Reed? Where were his multiple 60 point games against Bellamy? Where were his 38 and 45 point explosions against Thurmond? Hell, where was his 72 point game (as well as other 60 point games) against LeRoy Ellis? Where was his 60 point game against Dierking? Or his 66 point game against Fox? Or, how about this...where was Kareem's 100 point game against Imhoff?

The fact was, Kareem never came with the other side of the Galaxy at dominating the SAME centers that a PRIME Chamberlain just slaughtered. Kareem's career HIGH game, in 20 years, was a 55 point game. Chamberlain had 32 of 60+, and in only 14 seasons.

Another interesting point, as well. 6-11 265 lb. Bob Lanier joined the NBA in the '71 season. Chamberlain would face Lanier in TEN STRAIGHT games, and in his LAST two seasons, and in which Wilt AVERAGED 24.5 ppg on, get this... .750 shooting! Lanier would battle Kareem on nearly even terms throughout the 70's. As would Artis Gilmore.

Gilmore is another interesting case. I haven't been able to determine if Hakeem guarded him in their TEN H2H games in the 84-85 and 85-86 seasons, but in any case, Gilmore was, BY FAR AND AWAY, the BEST player on the floor in those TEN STRAIGHT GAMES. And, the boxscore has the two lined up in every one. In any case, in those TEN STRAIGHT H2H's, Gilmore dramatically outscored and outshot Hakeem. In fact, a 35-36 year old Gilmore AVERAGED 23.7 ppg, on, get this... .677 shooting in those games.

We KNOW that Hakeem TRIED to defend Kareem in those 10 STRAIGHT GAMES in the 84-85 season, and there is a strong possibility that he also TRIED to guard Gilmore in those other TEN STRAIGHT GAMES. If, indeed Hakeem guarded both, he was arguably the WORST defensive center in the NBA in those two seasons. Neither Kareem, nor Gilmore, came close to those numbers against the rest of the NBA in those years.

Continued...

[jlauber]

Then this...


Ok, back to my "changing my mind" a few years ago (back in 2007 or before)...

For years it was a given that every generation became bigger, stronger, faster, more skilled.

I remember reading an SI article in '84 which compared the '84 Nebraska Cornhuskers to their '71 counterparts. Player-after-player were bigger and faster. The fastest '71 Husker was Johnny Rodgers, who had run a 4.5 40. The '84 team had several that could run that, including Irving Fryar who ran a 4.28.

And, in 1988, Ara Parseighian claimed that the '88 Irish would have beaten his '66 National Champs by 40 points.

However, football is the one major sport which is overwhelmingly dependent on physical size and strength. Today, we see o-linemen who average 325 lbs. We have QBs that weigh 260 lbs, and even QBs that run 4.3 40's.

But, sports like baseball and basketball are far more SKILL-dependent. If they were based solely on size or strength, and players like Hank Aaron and Willie Mays would never have been dominant HR hitters (and I'll bring up Mantle in a bit.) And, if size and athelticism were the only requirement in the NBA, then James White, Priest Lauderdale, and Javale McGee would have dominated the NBA. And, how could someone like the 6-1 150 lb Tiny Archibad average 34 ppg in a season? Or 6-5 Charles Barkley lead the league in rpg? And, think about this...how many 7-3+ players have led the NBA in rebounding (hint:...ZERO)?

Anyway...in the NFL, while size and strength have grown dramatically since the 60's, SPEED has not. In fact, there have been many players even before the mid-80's who were faster than the fastest NFL player in TODAY's NFL.

Why did I change my mind?

Continued...

[jlauber]

Then this...


I have made simiar posts even before this one...but in any case, this one is from 2010...

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/sho...=194899&page=3


Quote:
I have been on record as saying the GENERALLY, the players of today in the three major sports (baseball, football, and basketball) are bigger, stronger, and faster. They are probably slightly more skilled as, well, because they have had previous generations of athletes from their particular sport to build upon.

However, aside from the fact that football players of today, are considerably bigger than those of 50 years ago (my god, we have 260 lb. quarterbacks today), almost every other area has, ...IMHO...only seen a SLIGHT increase.

Most uneducated posters here believe that Wilt was a stumbling frankenstein that dunked on helpless, nerdy, skinny, 6-6 white centers. Here are some interesting FACTS: One, the average starting center in Wilt's historic 1962 season was 6-10. In fact, in the following season, Wilt wasn't even the tallest player in the league (Swede Halbrook was 7-3...and barely on a roster.) The average starting center in Wilt's last season of 72-73, was 6-11. How about in 2010? 7-0. That is a whopping two inch increase in nearly 50 years. Not only that, but those that even use the height argument are overlooking,..Two, that there has never been a 7-3+ center to ever lead the league in rebounding. In fact, there have only been THREE 7-2 centers to lead the league in rebounding, in a TOTAL of FOUR seasons. If you take Wilt and his ELEVEN rebounding titles out of the discussion, there have been far more players at 6-10, or less, who have won rebounding titles. And you only need go back a few years when 6-7 Ben Wallace (that's right...6-7, NOT 6-9) won TWO rebounding titles in a row.

Ok, let's get back to my original point here, which is that the players of today are MARGINALLY better, on AVERAGE, than those of yesteryear.

If I were to tell you that a peak Babe Ruth would be a great player in TODAY's game, you, and perhaps the vast majority of this forum would probably laugh me off the board. How could that rotund, tooth-picked legged "athlete" be a GREAT player in TODAY's game?

This is where the "bridges" come in. Players like Ted Williams, Willie Mays, Henry Aaron, and Nolan Ryan.

Ted Williams is a good place to start. His career spanned FOUR decades. In his rookie season, in 1939, he batted .327 with 31 HRs. In his LAST season, in 1960, he batted .316 with 29 HRs (in only 310 ABs.) Back to his rookie season. In his rookie year, Jimmy Foxx batted .360 with 35 HRs. So, we know that Foxx was a better player, in 1939 than Williams was. And just the year before, in 1938, Foxx batted .349 with 50 HRs. In 1932 Foxx batted .364 with 58 HRs. In that same season, Ruth, at well past his prime, batted .341 with 41 HRs. And just five years prior, Ruth slugged 60 HRs.

Ok, continuing...there were pitchers that Williams faced in 1939 that Foxx faced in 1938. There were also pitchers in 1932 that Foxx faced, that also pitched to Ruth in that season.

But wait...those players played before integration. There is no way they would have accomplished those numbers against the players post-1947. Hmmm...interesting point...except that Williams batted .406 in 1941 (pre-integration), and then, in 1957, he batted .388 (with 38 HRs in 420 ABs)...or POST-integration.

In that 1957 season, Mickey Mantle batted .365 with 34 HRs. Just the year prior, in 1956, Mantle batted .356 with 52 HRs. And just the year before that, in 1955, Willie Mays hit 51 HRs. Why is that significant you ask? Those players not only faced many of the same pitchers in the decade of the 50's, they also faced pitchers who pitched in the 40's, and pitcher's who would pitch in the 60's. Incidently, I will get back to Mantle a little later, but for now, let's go with Mays. Mays had a long career. Once again, in 1955, he hit 51 HRs. Ten years later, in 1965, he hit 52. So, his great seasons lasted for many years. How about Aaron? In 1957 he hit 44 HRs. In 1973, and well past his peak, he hit 40 in 392 ABs. He faced pitchers like Robin Roberts, Warren Spahn, Don Newcombe, and many other great hurlers in the 50's. He also faced Koufax, Gibson, Marichal, and Seaver in the 60's. And, in the 70's, he faced Carlton, Palmer, and even Ryan.

Ryan is the next "bridge." He pitched for 27 years, and in FOUR decades. In the early 70's, he was clocked (by a SLOW radar gun) at 101 MPH, in the eighth inning of a game in which he had thrown 162 pitches. His very LAST pitch, in the early 90's, and on an injured arm, was clocked at 98!

BTW, I mentioned a SLOW gun. Here is an interesting article about Ryan's speed... and it might actually have been as high as 108 MPH...

http://www.efastball.com/baseball/st...major-leagues/

Oh, and BTW, how about the name of Steve Dalkowski? He never made it the major's, but he was pitching in the 1950's and 60's. Just take a moment and read this article...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Dalkowski


Quote:
Estimates of Dalkowski's top pitching speed abound. Cal Ripken Sr. guessed that he threw up to 115 miles per hour (185 km/h).[18


Back to Ryan. While we know that Ryan was a great pitcher, and for many years, he was seldom the best in his era. There were spectacular seasons turned in by Ron Guidry and Doc Gooden, among others. Furthermore, as hard as Ryan threw (and he may have been the fastes of all time), there were MANY pitchers that threw hard long before him. Koufax reportedly was clocked at 98 MPH in the mid-60's...and after he had SLOWED down his fastball to control it. Back in the 30's and 40's, Bob Feller was throwing nearly 100 MPH. And, think about this...as hard as Feller was throwing, hw didn't have the K/9 IP that many of the pitchers of today do. In other words, even with his blinding fastball, the players of his era were hitting him. Before him it was rumored that Walter Johnson was probably close to 100 MPH in the "dead ball" era.

Ok, so we have basically covered the Williams thru the Ryan eras...or from the 30's thru the 90's...and there were MANY great players. Williams was certainly among the best, but he played against guys like Aaron, Mays, and Mantle...all of whom were as great, or nearly as great.

We have covered the hard-throwers, but how about the power-hitters? Certainly the players of TODAY hit the ball much farther, right? I recall reading an article in SI about five years ago. The writer claimed that Barry Bonds' LONGEST measured HR was 490 ft. Interesting...Reggie Jackson's HR in the '71 All-Star game may have still been rising at that distance. BTW, Jackson would clear that wall in 1984. Lou Brock, of all people, hit a HR in the Polo Grounds that cleared the 505 ft. sign. Furthermore, there were many power hitters that were hitting tape measure shots back then. 6-8 250 lb. Frank Howard, Harmon Killebrew, Willie McCovey, and Willie Stargell to name just a few.

But the most powerful HR hitter of all-time? I will submit a player that was all of 5-11, and 195 lbs. Not only that, but he was hitting "tape measure" HRs from BOTH sides of the plate. In fact, the term "tape measure home runs" was coined after him.

Mickey Mantle hit MANY HRs over 500 ft.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mickey_Mantle


Quote:
Mantle also hit some of the longest home runs in Major League history. On September 10, 1960, he hit a ball left-handed that cleared the right-field roof at Tiger Stadium in Detroit and, based on where it was found, was estimated years later by historian Mark Gallagher to have traveled 643 feet (196 m). Another Mantle homer, hit right-handed off Chuck Stobbs at Griffith Stadium in Washington, D.C. on April 17, 1953, was measured by Yankees traveling secretary Red Patterson (hence the term "tape-measure home run") to have traveled 565 feet (172 m). Though it is apparent that they are actually the distances where the balls ended up after bouncing several times,[4] there is no doubt that they both landed more than 500 feet (152 m) from home plate. Mantle twice hit balls off the third-deck facade at Yankee Stadium, nearly becoming the only player (along with Negro Leagues star Josh Gibson, though Gibson's home run has never been conclusively verified) to hit a fair ball out of the stadium during a game. On May 22, 1963, against Kansas City's Bill Fischer, Mantle hit a ball that fellow players and fans claimed was still rising when it hit the 110-foot (34 m) high facade, then caromed back onto the playing field. It was later estimated by some that the ball could have traveled 620 feet (190 m) had it not been blocked by the ornate and distinctive facade. While physicists might question those estimates, on August 12, 1964, he hit one whose distance was undoubted: a center field drive that cleared the 22-foot (6.7 m) batter's eye screen, beyond the 461-foot (141 m) marker at the Stadium.




As amazing as those numbers are, how about this link...

http://www.themick.com/10homers.html

Ok, now, after all of that, is it still laughable to presume that Babe Ruth would be a GREAT player today? Incidently, Ruth reportedly swung a 42 ounce bat. Try to swing one if you can even find one. Furthermore, can you imagine what players of yesteryear could accomplish with all of the benefits of modern technology.

Now, we have covered baseball...on to football...

[jlauber]

Then this...


Continuing...

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/sho...=194899&page=3


Quote:
I already admitted that the average football player of TODAY, is considerably bigger than those of 50+ years ago. And I will be the first to admit that the AVERAGE NFL player of today is faster than those of 20-30-40-50 years ago. However, are TODAY's football players the fastest?

Let's start with another "bridge." Darrell Green played from 1983 to 2002. At his fastest, he was clocked at 10.08 in the 100 meters. Remember that number. Now, you can dispute hand-held 40 yard times if you like, but Green had some downright ridiculous one's. There was even one at 4.09. In any case, Green won the "NFL's fastest man" competition FOUR times. Furthermore, at age 40 he was clocked eletronically at a 4.35.

How about Bo Jackson in the 80's, He was a WORLD-CLASS 60 meter man. AND, he has the fastest recorded time at the NFL combine ever, of 4.13.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bo_Jackson


Quote:
he won the 1985 Heisman Trophy, the prize annually awarded to the most outstanding collegiate football player in the United States. He also reportedly ran a hand-timed 4.13 40 yard dash, still considered the fastest verifiable 40 time at an NFL Combine.


Deion Sanders was timed at 4.18 in the 40.

Before him, there was Hershel Walker, who reportedly ran a 10.1 100 meters in the early 80's. And before him were players like Cliff Branch and Mel Gray who were running 9.2 100 yard dash times (or probably around 10.2 in the 100 meters.) Back in the 60's OJ Simpson was part of USC's STILL world-record holding 4x100 yard relay team (I know, it is a little deceptive, since there have been teams in the last few years that ran a faster 4x100 meters.) In any case, OJ was a 9.3 or 9.4 sprinter in the 100 yards. And, players like Henry Childs and Travis Williams were running 9.3's in the 60's as well.

However, the FASTEST NFL player EVER? I will submit Bob Hayes, who played in the 60's, and was a LEGITIMATE HOF NFL player. (My god, the man AVERAGED 42 yards on his 76 career TD's.) He ran a 10.0 100 meters in the mid-60's! There has NEVER been a LEGITIMATE NFL player (not some two-bit track star that got cut, but legitimate) who has run a faster 100 meters.

Furthermore, as big as the players of today are, there were huge athletes back in the 60's. Buck Buchanon was 6-9 285 lbs. Ernie Ladd was over 300 lbs. And how about Jim Brown, who was 6-2 and 230 lbs back then (and a 9.6 sprinter)?

Ok, that was a much more brief look at the football players of today, compared to those of yesteryear...

[jlauber]

And then...this...


Continuing (and yes, some of this is redundant)...and keep in mind this was posted in 2010...

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/sho...=194899&page=4


Quote:
Ok, hopefully we put some the ridiculous myths to rest about Wilt's competition. Chamberlain faced players nearly the same height, on average, that Shaq would face some 40 years later. BTW, who is generally regarded as the best center of the CURRENT NBA? It is 6-10 (or shorter) Dwight Howard. And we know that Wilt was not only taller than Howard, he was bigger, stronger, more athletic, and more skilled. Chamberlain was a high-jump champion, a long jumper, a sprinter, and was not only regarded as the strongest man in the NBA at the time, but there were those that believed him to be among the strongest men in the world at the time (most noteably Howard Cosell.)

And I will apologize up front to those who have read this take many times, but, here we go again...

We have a "bridge" in Kareem that we can compare different eras with. Kareem was the best player in the league in the 70's, no question. BUT, he struggled mightily against Thurmond and Wilt in his H2H games against each.

Thanks to Alexbre and Julizaver, we have virtually EVERY H2H game between Wilt and Thurmond. Kareem faced Nate 61 times, and Wilt 28 times. He seldom scored 30 points against Thurmond (in fact, I believe his high was around 34.) In the VAST MAJORITY of those 61 games, he didn't even shoot 50%. And there were MANY in the low 40's, and even some in the 30% range. In the '72 playoffs, Thurmond not only held Kareem to an awful .405 from the floor, he outscored and outshot him. In the '73 playoffs, Thurmond held Kareem to .428 shooting, and his Warriors stunned Kareem's heavily-favored Bucks. Even well past his prime, in the mid-70's, Kareem seldom shot close to 50% against Thurmond.

Meanwhile, in the 28 H2H games between Wilt and Kareem, Chamberlain held Abdul-Jabbar, who was a CAREER .559 shooter, to a .464 FG% (while shooting 53% himself.) In the '71 WCF's, and only a year removed from major knee surgery, and 11 years older (and well past his prime), Wilt battled Kareem to a statistical draw (in fact, the recaps actually credited Wilt with outplaying Kareem.) In the '72 WCF's, and despite being heavily outscored Wilt, by virtually every account, outplayed or even "decisively outplayed" (Time Magazine) the younger Kareem who had the BEST statistical season of his career. Wilt outrebounded Kareem, and held him to .457 shooting (and only .414 over the last four pivotal games of that six game series.) In fact, Chamberlain took over in the clinching game six, and dominated Kareem down the stretch. Then, in their last six regular games, Wilt not only outshot Kareem, .637 to .450, he even outscored him in one game, despite the fact that he had dramatically cut back his shooting late in his career. Furthermore, in their only H2H game before Wilt was injured in 1969-70 season, Chamberlain just buried Kareem in EVERY aspect. Granted Kareem was a rookie, but, to be fair to Wilt, he was considerably past his "scoring" seasons of the mid-60's, and his overwhelming seasons in '67 and '68.

Continuing, in Wilt's PRIME, he pounded Thurmond on numerous occassions. He had a game in which he outscored him 45-13, and another game with 38 points and 31 rebounds. Even in the '67 season, when his coach asked him to shoot in the second half of a game against Nate, he poured in 24 second half points (30 in all), along with 26 rebounds, and 12 blocks. In fact, in their three post-season series, Wilt shot a combined 54% to Nate's 37%, and outrebounded him in all three (and by over six rebounds a game in '73.) Chamberlain shot over 50% in all three series (with a high of .560), and Thurmond NEVER shot even 40% against Wilt, (with a low of .343.)

Why is all of that significant? Because Kareem would go on to be among the best centers in the 80's. In the '85 Finals, after a poor first game, he averaged 30 ppg over the last five games against Boston's HOF frontline, and won the MVP. He had one season in the 80's when he shot .604. He had another, at age 38, when he shot .599. And amazingly, at age 39, in the '85-86 season, he had three regular season games against Hakeem, in which he scored 35, 42, and 46 points (on 21-30 shooting.) He also added a couple of 30 point games in the post-season against him that season, as well. And, in the same season, he hung a 40 point game on Ewing, while Patrick only managed a 2-16 shooting performance against him. Incredibly, Kareem played three more seasons, all from age 40 on. In those three seasons, H2H against Hakeem, in 13 games, he outshot him, .567 to .475. And, in those three seasons, he had six games against Ewing. Ewing had a slight scoring edge of 18.8 to 16.5, but Kareem easily outshot him, .551 to .483.

We all KNOW that both Hakeem and Ewing went on to be two of the best centers of the 90's. In fact, by most accounts, Hakeem was THE best center of the 90's. And we KNOW that Hakeem battled Shaq to a draw in the '95 Finals (some would even say he "won" that battle.) And, of course, Shaq would go on to dominate the early 00's.

What does all of this mean? Well, if Shaq was the best center of the 00's, and Hakeem was the best center of the 90's, and if an aged, and well past his prime Kareem could outplay Hakeem in the 80's...just what does that say about the greats of the 60's, like Wilt and Thurmond, both of whom were well past their primes when they were giving Kareem fits? In fact, if Wilt were able to win his H2H battles with Kareem, at well past his prime, and on a surgically repaired knee, just what would have a PRIME Chamberlain done to him?

Furthermore, players like 6-9 Dave Cowens gave Kareem trouble in the 70's (even outplaying him in a game seven of the Finals.) 6-7 Wes Unseld outrebounded Kareem in the '71 Finals. Meanwhile, 6-11 Walt Bellamy, who was a force in the entire decade of the 60's (he was routinely among the top scorers and shooters) went on into the 70's, and near the end of his career, in Kareem's spectacular 71-72 season, Bellamy averaged 18.6 ppg on .545 shooting. There were other's, of course. Willis Reed, Bob Lanier, Elvin Hayes, Spencer Haywood, Bob McAdoo (who outscored Kareem in two seasons in the 70's), as well as 7-2 Artis Gilmore, who dominated the ABA, and then had MANY quality seasons in the 80's (he retired as the all-time FG% leader...and still is.)

The 60's and 70's also had players like the great Russell (once again, a world-class leaper with a wingspan of a condor), Jerry Lucas who could grab 20+ rebounds per game in a season, and still shoot from as far as 25 ft. (the "Lucas Layup"), McAdoo, who was 6-11 and could score from anywhere on the floor; Rick Barry who led the NBA in scoring in '66 at 35.6, and then 10 years later, in 74-75, averaged 30.6 ppg; Connie Hawkins, Oscar, David Thompson, Jerry West (who routinely dominated Walt Frazier); Walt Frazier, a truly great guard in the 60's and 70's; Nate Archibald (he and Oscar are the only two players to ever lead the league in ppg and apg in the same season); and thye magical Pete Maravich, who would make Jason "White Chocolate" Williams look ridiculous today.

Each decade gave us new great players, but keep in mind, most of those greats in that new decade, were playing against (and often times being outplayed) by the greats of the previous decade.

Finally, I always bring up this point. If you truly believe that the players of today are MUCH better than those of yesteryear, then give me the EXACT year in which the players became competitive with those of today. Would the Shaq of 2000 be as great today? Would the Hakeem of '95 be as great today? Would the MJ of '91 be as great today? Would the Magic of '87 be as great today? Would the Bird of '86 be as great today? Would the Moses of '83 be as great today? Would the Walton of '77 be as great today? Would the McAdoo of '75 be as great today. The Dr. J of '72? The Kareem of '72? Wilt in '67? Russell in '64? Oscar and Wilt in '62? And if not all of them, give the players that would in the years that they would. But be careful...because I will show the peers of those players in the same seasons, and BEFORE.

The bottom line? Yes, today's players are MARGINALLY better than those of the 60's. But they are not SIGNIFICANTLY better...in ANY sport. I recall reading a post here a while back in which the poster claimed that WNBA all-stars would beat the best of the NBA in the 60's. Just think about how ridiculous that statement is. Do you think the gals of the current WNBA could battle someone like Gus Williams, who was 6-6 235 lbs, and was shattering multiple backboards back then? Or a 6-8 225 lb Lucas who could not only pound them on the glass, but disgrace them all from over 20+ ft? Or 6-10 WORLD-CLASS Bill Russell? Or 6-11 Thurmond with his HUGE wingspan? Or 6-5 225 Oscar? Or Jerry West, who many consider had the perfect shooting form? Or 7-1 (or taller) Chamberlain, with his 300 lbs and reported 500 lb. bench press, along with his 40"+ vertical leap?

The same goes for a "good college team" of TODAY beating the best in the NBA in the 60's. Give me a break! The top players of the 60's would be among the best players in the NBA TODAY. And they would certainly smoke a "good college team."

[Deuce Bigalow]

Good for you. Now read this...

http://insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=272328&page=4
Give me Kareem's stats for the season and playoffs as a 38-39 year old
And give me Hakeem's stats as well in that season

Using a couple of head to head games where one player can get hot changed your mind?

[TMacMagic]

I think jlauber mad.

[SuperPippen]

It's obviously Kobe, and anyone who says otherwise is pretty much guaranteed to be a troll.

But people should stop talking like they know very much about West. It's ridiculously easy to regurgitate the bullshit that he couldn't dribble with his left hand, but I wish people would actually come in with informed opinions instead restating the same old myths.

jlauber made a great point. West supposedly had a "very weak left hand" but what about other guys who played during his time? Like Maravich or Monroe? Those are guys who even back then were known for their legendary dribbling abilities. And yet they were never considered to be nearly as good as Jerry West.


Anyway, yea Kobe is the greater player at this point, but this is a pretty terrible comparison. It's always going to be difficult to compare players who played 40 years apart.

[jlauber]

Give me Kareem's stats for the season and playoffs as a 38-39 year old
And give me Hakeem's stats as well in that season

Using a couple of head to head games where one player can get hot changed your mind?

Look them up yourself. It was the most one-sided beatdown an all-time great ever gave another all-time great over the course of TEN STRAIGHT GAMES...unless you want to count Chamberlain averaging 48 ppg against the 6-11 HOF center Walt Bellamy over the course of TWENTY STRAIGHT GAMES.

[Deuce Bigalow]

jlauber, You have watched basketball since the 60s all the way to now.
based on what you watched you came to the conclusion of those posts you made in the past of how that era was weaker.
What you watched > reading box scores. And according to what you have seen, the 60s was a weaker era.

[Vertical-24]

I think jlauber mad.

LOL couldn't help but think so myself :roll:

[JaggerCommaMick]

seems a little odd that no one cares that West lost so much with elite teams but they jump down Kobe's throat for losing twice in the Finals.


Oh boy. Its the bloody race guy!

Mate has anyone ever presribed you any paranoia medication? For your race paranoia?

[Vertical-24]

Oh boy. Its the bloody race guy!

Mate has anyone ever presribed you any paranoia medication? For your race paranoia?

It seems a little odd that you decided to bring race into the situation when no one else mentioned anything about it.

[IGOTGAME]

Oh boy. Its the bloody race guy!

Mate has anyone ever presribed you any paranoia medication? For your race paranoia?

what does this have to do with race. I'm a huge Jerry West fan. I think Kobe Bryant had a better career and was a better player. Where does race factor in? You are insane.

[JaggerCommaMick]

It seems a little odd that you decided to bring race into the situation when no one else mentioned anything about it.


No mate in another forum he was claiming everyone picked on the one black gymnast on the usa while all the other girls were darlings. It was completely imagined rubbish as everyone agreed, and another poster said he is known to do this all the time.

Now he is sayin 'how come people always talk this or that about kobe but not about west...'

Pretty obvious what hes on about once again.

[IGOTGAME]

No mate in another forum he was claiming everyone picked on the one black gymnast on the usa while all the other girls were darlings. It was completely imagined rubbish as everyone agreed, and another poster said he is known to do this all the time.

Now he is sayin 'how come people always talk this or that about kobe but not about west...'

Pretty obvious what hes on about once again.

was race every talked about in either thread? nope

you are insane.

[JaggerCommaMick]

was race every talked about in either thread? nope

you are insane.


You clearly implied it which more than one person noticed mate and then another guy said you even have a reputation for it. Sounds like maybe youre the crazy one.

[IGOTGAME]

You clearly implied it which more than one person noticed mate and then another guy said you even have a reputation for it. Sounds like maybe youre the crazy one.

I implied nothing. I also posted an article that talked about the bias and mentioned nothing racial. you are insane. have a nice night.

[Vertical-24]

I implied nothing. I also posted an article that talked about the bias and mentioned nothing racial. you are insane. have a nice night.

Hey man, you can't talk to Steve Erwins cousin like that!

[Calabis]

Yeah, and put Kobe in the 60's and he'd put up 38-42+/7-8/6-7/2-3/56-58% TS a night.

:wtf:

No he wouldn't because he wouldn't be the Kobe we know today, no Jordan to copy and no flashy play to copy, plus less exposure to the game, but nice try though

[jlauber]

Give me Kareem's stats for the season and playoffs as a 38-39 year old
And give me Hakeem's stats as well in that season

Using a couple of head to head games where one player can get hot changed your mind?

Here are Kareem's numbers in his first TEN STRAIGHT games against Hakeem in the 84-85 and 85-86 seasons. Keep in mind that Kareem was 38 and 39 years old, and YES, Hakeem was the primary defender on Kareem.




32 14-22 .636
34 14-20 .700
40 16-29 .551
19 8-16 .500
30 13-17 .765

35 17-26 .654
46 21-30 .700
43 16-24 .667
18 7-12 .583
23 10-19 .526

320 or 32.0 ppg

136-215 .633



Now, SAMPSON was the primary defender on Kareem in the '86 WCF's, with help from Hakeem, and Kareem's numbers dropped to "only" 27 ppg on .496 shooting (with games of 31 and 33 points.)

Think about that...a 38 and 39 year old Kareem just annihilating Hakeem in those ten straight H2H's. BTW, in one meeting against Ewing, in roughly the same week that he dumped 46 points on Hakeem, Kareem outscored Ewing 40-9, while outshooting him, 15-22 to 3-17.

And, as I have also mentioned, the relative unknown Artis Gilmore, in the SAME time-frame (84-85 and 85-86 seasons), and at ages 35 and 36, had these TEN STRAIGHT games against the Rockets (and presumably Hakeem)...


84-85 season


1.

Gilmore 8-11 11-13 27
Olajuwon 7-12 0-1 14

2.

Gilmore 9-14 5-6 23
Olajuwon 11-20 5-7 27

3.

Gilmore 4-7 4-7 12
Olajuwon 10-18 2-5 22

4.

Gilmore 11-18 13-17 35
Olajuwon 6-14 6-9 18

5.

Gilmore 10-13 12-13 32
Olajuwon 6-13 4-4 16

6.

Gilmore 10-15 9-10 29
Olajuwon 7-18 2-3 16


Gilmore 52-78 54-66 158
Olajuwon 47-95 19-29 113

Gilmore .666 26.3 ppg
Olajuwon .494 18.8 ppg


Rest of their careers

85-86

4 games

Gilmore 34-49 .694 79 19.8 ppg
Olajuwon 28-57 .491 74 18.5 ppg


Thru 85-86

10 games

Gilmore 86-127 .677 237 23.7 ppg
Olajuwon 75-152 .493 187 18.7 ppg



Now, whether Hakeem actually was assigned to Gilmore, I can't verify. What I do KNOW is that the two were lined up directly H2H in the boxscores. In any case, Gilmore was, by far-and-away, the best player on the floor between the two.

BTW, Kareem and Hakeem faced off in 23 H2H games, with Kareem between the ages 38 to 41, and Hakeem aged between 23-26. Kareem outscored Hakeem, per game, 23 ppg to 22 ppg, and outshot Hakeem by the whopping margin of .607 to .510. In 20 of those 23 H2H's, Kareem shot over 50% in 20 of those 23 H2H's. Not only that, but Kareem shot over 60% against Hakeem in 12 of those 23 games (over 50% of the time.) And, get this, he also shot over 70% against Hakeem in FIVE of those 23 games!

Then compare that with the Kareem-Wilt H2H's. Keep in mind that in 27 of the 28 H2H games between the two, Chamberlain was playing on a surgically repaired knee, and was aged between 34-36 years old, while Kareem was aged 24-26 in those 27 games. And, in the one game BEFORE Wilt's injury, Chamberlain outscored Kareem, 25-23; outrebounded Kareem, 25-20; outassisted Kareem, 5-2; outblocked Kareem, 3-2 (including a block of the skyhook); and outshot Kareem, 9-14 (.643) to 9-21 (.429.)

So, in those 28 H2H games, Wilt held Kareem to .464 shooting overall (while Wilt shot .526.) And, how about this? In those 28 H2H's, Kareem shot 50% or better in only ten of them. Compare that 10 in 28 games against Wilt, to 20 in 23 games against Hakeem. Not only that, but Kareem shot 60%+ against Wilt in ONE game, while he achieved that mark, in 5 less H2H games, 12 times against Hakeem. Oh, and in SEVEN of those 28 H2H games, Wilt held Kareem to under .399 shooting!

Then, think about this. In their LAST TEN STRAIGHT games against each other, Chamberlain held Kareem to .434 shooting, including .414 in the last four straight pivotal games of the '72 WCF's. In fact, a 36 year old Chamberlain, in his LAST season, and covering six H2H games against a 26 year old Kareem, held Abdul Jabbar to .450 shooting (while shooting .737 against Kareem!)

Continued...

[jlauber]

Continuing...

Chamberlain, in his LAST season, and in a season in which he rarely shot the ball, and against Kareem, even managed to outscore the 26 year old Kareem in one game, 24-21, while outshooting him, 10-14 to 10-27.

But perhaps just as amazing, was Chamberlain, in his LAST two seasons, battled the 6-11 260 lb. HOFer Bob Lanier in 10 H2H games. And, in those 10 straight games, Chamberlain averaged 24.5 ppg...on get this... .750 shooting against Lanier!

Lanier would battle Kareem throughout the 70's, and in fact, held his own against him in the majority of their H2H's.

I already mentioned Gilmore's incredible numbers against Hakeem-led teams in his first ten straight games against them. But, in the 70's and 80's, he nearly matched Kareem in scoring in their H2H's (I haven't taken a look at all of their H2H's, but in the many that I did, the two were very close), AND, he outshot Kareem by a solid margin in them.

I will have to take the time to look up all of the McAdoo-Kareem H2H's, in McAdoo's three straight unbelievable seasons (73-74 thru 75-76), but he outscored Kareem in the majority of them I believe, including one game of 41 points.

Another player that gave Kareem trouble (and the NBA as a whole) was the under-rated Dave Cowens. In fact, in game seven of the '74 Finals (in a series in which Kareem did outplay him by a solid margin however), Cowens outscored, outrebounded, outshot, and just plain outhustled Kareem, in a stunning blowout win on Kareem's home floor.

How many here have heard of Nate Thurmond? Well, of ALL of the centers that Kareem faced in his entire career, no other center held Kareem down like Thurmond. The two would battle 43 times as starters, and in the last half of those, Thurmond was fading, while Kareem was in his PRIME.

Think about this...in their 43 H2H games, Kareem had a TOTAL of SEVEN games of 30+ against Thurmond, with a HIGH of 34 points. Now, remember, in his first ten H2H games against Hakeem, a 38-39 year old Kareem had THREE games of 40+ against Hakeem. Furthermore, Kareem seldom shot 50% against Thurmond in those 43 H2H's, and in fact, probably shot around .430 against him in those 43 games. Thurmond even outscored and outshot Kareem in the '72 playoffs, and remarkably, in their three H2H playoff series, Thurmond held Kareem to .486, .405, and .428 shooting!

Continued...

[jlauber]

How about Moses? How many here rank Moses very high in their all-time rankings?

Read this...


How great was Moses Malone? The 6-10 center faced the 7-2 Kareem in 40 total games from the 76-77 season, thru Kareem's last season in 88-89.

Some here claim that Kareem's peak was in that 76-77 season, although I strongly believe that the most dominant Kareem played in the early 70's. His statistical peak came in the 70-71, 71-72, and 72-73 seasons.

Kareem was 29 in the 76-77 season, while Moses was 21. However, Moses jumped right to the ABA at age 19, so he was already in his third professional season by the time the two first met.

Now, granted, the two probably did not exclusively defend each other in every game, nor were they on the floor at the same time in portions of those games.

There are several interesting aspects to this "rivalry." I am only posting the known stats that I could find, and perhaps there are some here who can provide even more info. I did come up with every one of their scoring H2H's, all 40 of them. However, I could only find their FG%'s and rebounding numbers in their last 16 games.

And overall, Kareem team's went 21-19 against Moses, which was surprising, since Kareem played with much more talented teams in nearly all of their 13 seasons in the league together. In facr, Moses only played on ONE team that ever had a better record than Kareem, in those 13 seasons.

However, while Kareem's teams enjoyed 20-13 margin in their regular season H2H's, Moses' team went 6-1 against Kareem's in the post-season. BTW, Kareem's team's were often leveled in the post-season, despite having better regular season records. Included in those post-season H2H's, was the 80-81 Rockets, at 40-42, beating Kareem's 54-28 (Magic was injured and missed 37 games that season), 2-1 in the first round of the playoffs. And, of course, Moses' 82-83 Sixers, which went 65-17 swept Kareem's 58-24 Lakers, 4-0. That was the ONLY season in which Moses had a more talented roster, and they were clearly better, going a combined 6-0 against Kareem's team in the overall season. However, Kareem did miss one of their regular season H2H's that year, so Moses only went 5-0 against him that year.

How about their personal battles? While a much more prime Kareem, at age 29, outscored the 21 year old Moses in their first year H2H's, it was not a dramatic difference. Kareem outscored him in three of their four games, but his high game was only 29 points. And, by their fourth game that season, Moses outscored Kareem, 26-23.

Another interesting aspect was that while both players started declining somewhat after the 84-85 season, Moses' decline was sharper. Still. Moses generally outplayed Kareem even after that. But, Moses was not the dominant player that he was from the 78-79 season thru the 84-85 season.

And while Kareem won the MVP award in the 79-80 season, Moses was probably already the better player. In the 78-79 season, a 23 year old Moses exploded, and averaged 24.8 ppg, on .540 shooting, with an astonishing 17.6 rpg average (winning the rebounding title by nearly 5 per game.) Kareem averaged 23.8 ppg, 12.8 rpg, 5.4 apg, and shot .577. In Kareem's 79-80 MVP season, Abdul-Jabbar averaged 24.8 ppg, on a sensational .604 shooting, but was on a severe decline in the rebounding department, only getting 10.8 rpg. Meanwhile, Moses was at 25.8 ppg, .502 shooting, and grabbing 14.5 rpg. BUT, H2H in that Kareem MVP season, Moses DRAMATICALLY outscored Kareem, by an average margin of 30 ppg to 20 ppg. And, I have no doubt that he probably dominated Kareem on the glass, as well.

From that 79-80 season, on, Moses was CLEARLY the better player. While Kareem's numbers continued to decline, Moses jusr DOMINATED the league. From the 80-81 season thru the 84-85 season, Moses was THE best player in the league (sorry Larry and Magic, but Moses was UNSTOPPABLE.) He LED the league in rebounding EVERY season in those five years, and and scoring seasons as high as 27.8 ppg, and even 31.1 ppg.

And, the Kareem-Moses H2H's, from the 79-80 thru the 84-85 seasons reflected Moses COMPLETE DOMINATION of Kareem, as well.

After that, both declined, and while Moses generally outplayed Kareem, neither were putting up spectacular numbers.

In any case, in their 40 H2H games, Moses held a staggering 25-12-3 margin in their scoring battles. Not only that, but in their 7 playoff games, Moses enjoyed a solid 5-2 edge. And, Moses held a whopping 11-6 margin in 30+ point games against Kareem.

Kareem's two highest games against Moses were 34 and 36. Meanwhile, Moses had games of 34, 34, 35, 36, 37, 37, 38, and 39 against Kareem. And in their post-season H2H's, Moses held a 2-1 edge in 30+ point games (Kareem's high was 32, while Moses had games of 33, and even 38 in their playoff battles.)

Rebounding? As expected, Moses just CRUSHED Kareem on the glass. In the known 16 games in which I could find their rebounding totals, Moses went an unbelieveable 16-0 against Kareem. And some were by HUGE margins. For instance, in the '83 Finals, Moses not only outrebounded Kareem, 4-0, he held a MASSIVE 18-8 rpg differential.

Not only that, but given the fact that Moses was a better rebounder in EVERY season in their 13 years in the league together, there was a very good chance that Moses won the VAST MAJORITY of their rebounding H2H's. I wouldn't be surprised if the overall margin was something like a 35-5 edge (or maybe even higher.)

Kareem did SLIGHTLY outshoot Moses from the floor in those 16 H2H games, but it was very close, and overall, Kareem shot .523 in those 16 games (again, from the 82-83 season thru the 88-89 season.) Moses shot .472 overall in those last 16 H2H games.

All of which is interesting. For instance, in Kareem's 84-85 and 85-86 seasons, against Moses, he averaged 22 ppg on .513 shooting from the field against Moses in their four H2H's. Against a 22 and 23 year old Hakeem, in those two seasons, and covering 10 H2H games, Kareem averaged 31.8 ppg on a mind-boggling .630 shooting. Meanwhile, Moses averaged 23 ppg on .484 shooting against Kareem, all while outrebounding him by an average differential of 12-5 rpg.

So, for those that question Moses's defense, they had better take a closer look. He was clearly a FORCE against Kareem. Once again, Moses' dodged Kareem's truly dominant seasons ('71-73), but even a young Moses was a near match for a near prime Kareem. And a PRIME Moses just ABUSED an older Kareem (even in a Kareem MVP season in 79-80.)


Continued...

[DixieNourmous]

How about Moses? How many here rank Moses very high in their all-time rankings?

Read this...



Continued...
Please ... No More

A short summary would be fine, these book size opinions are obnoxious.

[jlauber]

Now, just what in the hell does all of the above have to do with the OP?

An OLD Kareem just pounded a young Hakeem. Granted, Hakeem would go on to become a better player (although statistically, his '85 and '86 seasons were nearly as good as a peak Hakeem in the 90's...especially given mpg.)

BUT, look at ALL of the centers that Kareem battled in the 60's and 70's. Players like Wilt, Thurmond, Walton, Cowens, Gilmore, Lanier, and Moses. Virtually ALL of them gave Kareem all he could handle.

How? How could someone like Thurmond not only hold Kareem way down in the vast majority of their H2H's, but even outplay him by a solid margin in a playoff series, in which Kareem was coming off of his greatest statistical season?

How could the 6-9 Willis Reed easily outplay Kareem in the clinching game five rout of the '70 ECF's? How could the 6-9 Dave Cowens outplay Kareem in a game seven of the Finals?

How could Gilmore, Lanier, and McAdoo hold their own in many of their H2H's with Kareem?

How could an OLD Chamberlain, on a surgically repaired knee, and in arguably the worst season of his career, battled a statistically peak Kareem to a statistical draw in their first 11 straight games? And how could a 35-36 Wilt hold a 25-26 year old Kareem to .434 shooting in their last ten straight games?

And how could a 6-10 Moses just OWN Kareem in the vast majority of their H2H's?

If the players of the 60's were indeed inferior to those that would play into the 90's (and in Hakeem's case, even into the 00's), where is the proof? Kareem shot FAR worse from the field in the decade of the 70's, as compared to the decade of the 80's (and Gilmore's FG%'s went thru the roof in the 80's.) Hell, a PRIME Kareem had seasons of .539, .529, .518, and even .513 (at age 27 BTW) in the 70's, while shooting .564 or above in the first eight seasons of the 80's, with his career highs of .604 and .599 (at age 37 BTW) coming in the 80's.

I have read where some believe the "modern era" of the NBA began with the rookie seasons of Magic and Bird (79-80.) Well, think about this... the first FOUR MVPs of the decade of the 80's, played in the 70's (and in Kareem's case, even in 1969.) Many players of the 70's would go on to be the best players of the 80's (Dr. J, Moses, Kareem, Dantley, Gervin, Gilmore, etc.) If the "modern era" of the NBA started in 1980, how come the best players of the 70's were still the best players for much of the 80's?

I have maintained the current NBA players are better, overall, than those of the 60's and 70's. But, the difference is MARGINAL at best. The game has simply not changed significantly since the early 60's. True, "pace" was SLIGHTLY higher, but it was offset by just deplorable CONDITIONS, which caused FG%'s to be SIGNIFICANTLY lower than those of even the late 60's.

In any case, the GREATS of the 60's were STILL great in the 70's (Wilt, Thurmond, Oscar, Reed, Bellamy, Hayes, Unselfd, West, Goodrich, Barry, Havlicek, et. al. And, once again, the GREATS of the 70's that played into the 80's, were every bit as GREAT in the 80's. That same trend would continue thru the 90's, 00's, and into today.

Does anyone honestly believe that a 2000 Shaq would not dominate in TODAY's NBA? Or a '95 Hakeem? Or a '91 MJ? Or an '87 Magic? Or an '86 Bird? Or an '83 Moses? Or an '80 Kareem? Or a '75 McAdoo? Or a '74 Barry? Or a '72 Kareem? Or a '72 Wilt? Or a '67 Wilt? Or a '65 Russell? Or even a '62 Chamberlain?

My god, Chamberlain was nearly 7-2 (and would be about 7-3 TODAY), with a 7-8 wingspan, at 280-300 lbs., with enormous strength, with an incredible vertical, with sprinter's speed, and with a variety of SKILLS. Does anyone here honestly believe that that Chamberlain would not be the best center in the current NBA?

Jerry West was an amazing athlete, with as smooth a jump shot as there has ever been. He was great in the 60's, and he would be just as great in today's NBA, as well. So would Oscar, Russell, McAdoo, Archibald, Lanier, Thurmond, Sam Jones, Lucas, Hayes, Cowens, Gilmore, Barry, and Kareem.

[Pushxx]

While West didn't win the rings, or the accolade that Kobe has, nor had as long a career, his post-season play was considerably better than Kobe's.

I personally rank Kobe somewhere around 8th-11th (my research on just how dominant Moses was against his peers has led me to put him in that same group), while West would be somewhere in the 12th-15th spots.

And the more I look at KG's career, the more I realize just how great he was, as well. I am debating just where he should rank. Same with Bob Pettit, who actually had an outstanding resume.

To be honest, the 12th thru 20th spots are probably the most difficult to rank. Players like Hondo, Barry, Baylor, Dirk, Robinson, Dr. J., KG, Barkley, K. Malone, as well as Oscar and West.

Great post.

[kennethgriffin]

kobe bryant has become the most underrated player on ISH



:facepalm


21/5/5 1st title
29/6/5 2nd title
27/5/5 3rd title
30/5/5 4th title
30/6/5 5th title

mvp
multiple fmvps

more records
better skilled
better era
better resume
better defender
not even close

move on

f*ck my life this is dumb... why are you making me type this stuff?


tomorow i'l make a thread saying baylor > jordan


have no proof or facts other than numbers put up 50 years ago

[jlauber]

Great post.

:cheers:

But it is true. Just too many great players to try to lump into a small number of slots. I will honest, I used to have a consistent top-10, with only the order changing periodically, depending on what new evidence has been presented, but lately I have to a top-11 with Moses (who just dominated his peers for nearly a decade.) And, then the more that is presented on Oscar's behlaf, the better he looks, as well. So, even a top-12 is becoming tough.

And then, Lebron will certainly be knocking on that door before long (top-12.) Then you have those other players, like KG, Karl, Dirk, Barry, Robinson, Hondo, Baylor, West, Barkley, Pettit (whose resume screams top-15), and other's that I am sure that I just missed.

Pretty tough.

I know that I can't do a top-20 list any justice. In fact, I probably can't even do a top-10 justice.

[jlauber]

kobe bryant has become the most underrated player on ISH



:facepalm


21/5/5 1st title
29/6/5 2nd title
27/5/5 3rd title
30/5/5 4th title
30/6/5 5th title

mvp
multiple fmvps

more records
better skilled
better era
better resume
better defender
not even close

move on

f*ck my life this is dumb... why are you making me type this stuff?


tomorow i'l make a thread saying baylor > jordan


have no proof or facts other than numbers put up 50 years ago

Well, if it is any consolation, I have Kobe above West in my all-time rankings. And I am one of the biggest defenders of "old-schoolers" on this board.

In fact, IMHO, Kobe has a case over Bird...albeit, I will be in the minority on that one (and I really won't argue either.)

[millwad]

Now, just what in the hell does all of the above have to do with the OP?

An OLD Kareem just pounded a young Hakeem. Granted, Hakeem would go on to become a better player (although statistically, his '85 and '86 seasons were nearly as good as a peak Hakeem in the 90's...especially given mpg.)


What a freaking retard, you write essay after essay with cherry picked stats.
You're such a horrible poster, I can't even believe this bullcrap.

First of all, why don't you mention the fact that Olajuwon in his 2nd pro season absolutely destroyed Kareem in the playoffs, Kareem and the Laker big were helpless against 2nd year pro Olajuwon in the '86 playoffs. You never mention that, you only mention meaningless regular season games.. :facepalm

I know it doesn't fit your agenda that 2nd year pro Olajuwon destroyed Kareem in the playoffs but at least for your own credibility you must mention that FACT.

And the fact that you even try to put his rookie and 2nd year pro season close in term of greatness to his prime because it fits your agenda is beyond garbage.

The same 2nd year pro Olajuwon who absolutely destroyed Kareem in the '86 playoffs was NO WHERE CLOSE his prime, he was very far from his prime and the fact that you try to put them next to each other is retarded. You do that because you want people to believe that Hakeem was basically the same player in his prime and therefor an old Kareem would have done the same scoring on him.. :facepalm

I mean, you just wrote essay after essay after essay, now answer us why you like always jumped over the part where you're supposed to mention that Olajuwon toy'd Kareem in the playoffs of '86?

[KOBE143]

Another hack a thread by jlauber.. :oldlol:

Btw West would at least have 3 rings if not for that choker Wilt..

[scandisk_]

Kobe has West beat on almost all categories :confusedshrug: I agree with Superpippen that it's very hard to argue today's superstar versus a legend from the past (if we're going to match them time machine style, ie what if kobe played in the 60's, etc) But still, even if we're comparing them relative to their respective peers/eras Kobe still has him beat. So it's Kobe by a GOOD MARGIN.

[Overdrive]

***** can't even dribble with his left hand:facepalm

Every idiot in the ballpark can do fancy crossovers and such stuff, do you think West and his peers were less talented than these guys?

It was just the way Basketball was played at the time. The oldschool elite players would be elite players in today's league aswell, because it's not they skilled they showed back then, but the determination and talent to acquire and max out the skills needed to win the ball game.

A genius thrives under any circumstances, and Kobe would've been great in the 60s, but under no circumstances he'd ressemble anything he's today.

IF he had the same athleticism he'd be a Elgin Bayloresque player. He wouldn't do fancy crossovers, dish no looks while hanging in midair under the basket or anything like that. That's stuff introduced later in the 60s, early 70s by the pearl and pistol.

If West played in the 80s to 10s he would have acquired those skills aswell.

All that said I think Kobe had the better career and is also the better player. Although not being an innovater himself, he was better at acquiring the skills needed to win.

Didn't read the Wilt-Antiwilt crap in here that comes up in every vintage ball thread, but you can't solely blame Wilt for choking away late game FTs. A FT is just 1 point in a game, Shaq had and equal amount of misses and his teams never choked as much.
If West and Baylor where that superior to the competetion that Wilt was to blame for their losses why didn't they win without him? Why didn't they build big enough leads in 3 and a half quarters with him on the Lakers to not get into a FT struggle fest?


Kobe has West beat on almost all categories :confusedshrug: I agree with Superpippen that it's very hard to argue today's superstar versus a legend from the past (if we're going to match them time machine style, ie what if kobe played in the 60's, etc) But still, even if we're comparing them relative to their respective peers/eras Kobe still has him beat. So it's Kobe by a GOOD MARGIN.

If you agree with Superpippen you can not compare the relativity to the peers either, because you can not compare the peers of back then to the pears of Kobe.

We just can measure the success that Kobe brought to the team he played on and nothing else actually.

We don't know how good the Spurs, Heat, Pistons, Celtics and Mavs were and are compared to the teams that won over the Lakers in the 60s and early 70s.

[jlauber]

What a freaking retard, you write essay after essay with cherry picked stats.
You're such a horrible poster, I can't even believe this bullcrap.

First of all, why don't you mention the fact that Olajuwon in his 2nd pro season absolutely destroyed Kareem in the playoffs, Kareem and the Laker big were helpless against 2nd year pro Olajuwon in the '86 playoffs. You never mention that, you only mention meaningless regular season games.. :facepalm

I know it doesn't fit your agenda that 2nd year pro Olajuwon destroyed Kareem in the playoffs but at least for your own credibility you must mention that FACT.

And the fact that you even try to put his rookie and 2nd year pro season close in term of greatness to his prime because it fits your agenda is beyond garbage.

The same 2nd year pro Olajuwon who absolutely destroyed Kareem in the '86 playoffs was NO WHERE CLOSE his prime, he was very far from his prime and the fact that you try to put them next to each other is retarded. You do that because you want people to believe that Hakeem was basically the same player in his prime and therefor an old Kareem would have done the same scoring on him.. :facepalm

I mean, you just wrote essay after essay after essay, now answer us why you like always jumped over the part where you're supposed to mention that Olajuwon toy'd Kareem in the playoffs of '86?

Dickwad, you are the biggest embarrassment on this board...bar none. CHERRY PICKED stats. Using a stretch of TEN STRAIGHT games. Or, in FACT, using their CAREER 23 H2H's? You are a complete IDIOT. Those were as solid as concrete in creating a foundation, which I then linked to the centers of the 60's and 70's.

First of all, SAMPSON guarded Kareem in the '86 WCF's. Why? Because Hakeem was YANKED from that assignment for being thoroughly waxed by a 39 year old Kareem in their five H2H's that season. Even the writers had ripped Fitch the for allowing the bloodshed in those games, and he finally relented and put Sampson on Kareem (with Hakeem doubling him.) Of course, had you watched ANY of the Kareem-Hakeem 28 H2H's you would have known ALL of that. Hakeem did battle Kareem, H2H, in 23 games. But the only time Kareem was ever slowed down, was by Sampson. And really, just how "slowed" was Kareem in that series? A basically doubled Kareem, averaged 27 ppg on .496 shooting, with only ONE bad game (a 9-26 game) which lowered his FG% down in that series. Hakeem "dominated" the Lakers to the tune of 31 ppg, 11 rpg, and on .520 shooting. So, a near prime offensive Hakeem (and here again, his numbers bear that out...they were nearly as great as a so-called prime Hakeem in the 90's) barely outscored a 39 year old Kareem.

Which of course is the second point. A 39 year old Kareem...a 39 year old Kareem...a 39 year old Kareem...put up MUCH bigger numbers against Hakeem, than he did against the rest of the league. As did Gilmore, who just obliterated Hakeem's Rockets (and presumably Hakeem, who was the CENTER on those Rocket teams.) In fact, a case could be made that a second year Hakeem might very well have been among the worst defensive centers in NBA history. Players like Kareem and Gilmore just scored at will against him, and were much more productive againtst him, than they were against the more ordinary centers of that era. BTW, Hakeem would be voted first team all-defense the very next year. So, yes, he was nearing his peak very early, as did many players (Kareem included...who was at his peak by his second season.)

Which brings me to the next point. What would a 23 year old Kareem, at his peak, (in his second season, Kareem led the NBA in scoring, at 31.7 ppg, was among the leaders in FG%, at .577, was among the leaders in rebounding, at 16.0, and all in 40 mpg, while winning the MVP and FMVP) have carpet-bombed that version of Hakeem with? 50-60 ppg, and on .650-.750 shooting? Hell, he could score 46 points on his, on 21-30 shots, and in only 37 minutes, as a 39 year old. In fact, the recap indicated that had Kareem continued to play, he likely would have shattered his 55 point career high.

And another interesting aspect to your trash, is that you claim (and it is completely baseless) that a PRIME Hakeemn outplayed Shaq in the '95 Finals (again, it was Hakeem's TEAMMATES who outplayed Shaq's.) Yet, you NEVER mention that that was a 22 year old Shaq. And you NEVER mention that FACT that a 26 year old Shaq just ABUSED a 36 year old Hakeem. In fact, even before the '95 Finals, Shaq was already outplaying Hakeem in their H2H's. And after that season, it was, just like the Kareem games in 85 and 86, a one-sided beatdown. BTW, Hakeem only shot .447 in his career against Shaq , and only .441 in his career against Robinson.

So, when you bring up Hakeem outplaying Kareem in the '86 WCF's, (and keep in mind that he only outscored that 39 year old Kareem by a 31-27 ppg margin...and with SAMPSON being the one to limit Kareem), you NEVER use that comparison in the Shaq-Hakeem H2H's. Given the fact that a prime Hakeem couldn't even outplay a 22 year old Shaq, then CLEARLY a PRIME Shaq was a MUCH more dominant player than a PRIME Hakeem. And once again, it just amazes me at the FG%'s that Hakeem allowed in his H2H's with Kareem, Gilmore, and Shaq. Here was an old Kareem shooting .633, and old Gilmore shooting an unfathomable .677, and a young Shaq shooting .595. Those were just staggering numbers.

Which brings us back to my original point. Here was OLD Kareem, well past his prime, scoring and shooting at will against Hakeem, with THREE games of 40+, and likely a 60 point game had he gone for it, and yet, a PRIME Shaq, and against an admittedly declining Hakeem, scoring his high against Hakeem, of 37 points.

Then, here was the relative unknown center from the 60's and 70's, Nate Thurmond, squaring off against a PRIME, high volume shooting Kareem, and in 43 career H2H's, Kareem's HIGH game was only 34 points. And, while an old Kareem, from ages 38-41 shot a CAREER .607 against a 23-26 year old Hakeem, he seldom even shot 50% against Thurmond, and in fact, was probably around 43% in those 43 games.

Which then brings us to Chamberlain. We already KNOW that an OLD Chamberlain, and WAY past his peak, and on a surgically repaired knee, held a PRIME Kareem to a career .464 FG% in their 28 CAREER H2H's, which included .434 in their LAST TEN STRAIGHT games (unlike Kareem's .633 against Hakeem in their FIRST TEN STRAIGHT games.)

What we don't have is a PRIME Wilt against Kareem (although, in their one meeting before Chamberlain blew out his knee, he just crushed Kareem in every facet of the game.) However, we do KNOW that a PRIME Kareem faced many of the SAME of the centers that a PRIME "scoring" Chamberlain had faced...and he never came within the other side of the ocean of approaching the numbers that a PRIME Chamberlain hung on those centers.

Where was Kareem's 60 point game against Dierking? How about Kareem's 66 point game against Fox? Where were Kareem's THREE games of 50+ against Reed (and BTW, a PRIME Chamberlain outscored Reed by margins of 41-9, 52-23, and 58-28 in the same season)? Where were Kareem's FOUR games of 60+ against Bellamy, with a HIGH of 73? Hell, where was Kareem's 100 point game against Imhoff?

And that brings us back to Thurmond. A PRIME "scoring" Chamberlain faced Thurmond in 11 straight games from their last H2H in '65, thru their nine H2H's in '66, and into their first game in '67...and in that stretch, Chamberlain AVERAGED 30 ppg, which included games of 30, 33, 34, 34, 38, and 45 (and Wilt was just burying Nate in those games, as well, outscoring him by 30-10, 33-17, 33-10, 38-15, and even 45-13.) And while Kareem never approached the 50% mark against Thurmond in their three straight playoff H2H's (.486, .428, and even .405), Chamberlain was outshooting Thurmond by margins of .500 to .392; .550 to .398; and get this, .560 to .343 (and keep in mind, that Thurmond was second in the MVP voting that season behind Wilt.) That was a PRIME Thurmond that Chamberlain was just crushing.

So, YOU tell me just how effective a PRIME, high-powered Chamberlain would have been against your boy Hakeem. EVERY transitory number suggests that it would have been a one-sided massacre.

And in any case, we KNOW that the centers of the 60's and 70's...players like Reed, Lanier, Cowens, Gilmore, Thurmond, McAdoo, Walton, and Chamberlain, gave a PRIME Kareem all he could handle. And yet centers like Ewing and Hakeem were just leveled by an OLD Kareem. And Hakeem would then go to be among the best centers of the 90's (Robinson, and Shaq), and he even battled a young Shaq to a near draw in the '95 Finals. And that Shaq would go on to just obliterate the best centers of the 00's.

What conclusions can you draw from all that?

[jlauber]

So, once again, the best players of the 60's, and 70's, ..players like Monroe, Frazier, Lucas, Russell, Sam Jones, West, Oscar, Thurmond, Bellamy, Reed, Barry, Havlicek, Lanier, Cowens, Archibald, Dr. J, Hayes, Gilmore, Walton, Cunningham, Moses, McAdoo, Kareem, and Chamberlain...ALL would be GREAT in TODAY's game. We have "bridges"...players spanning more than one decade, who prove that point.

[JMT]

How many people here are you going to get that watched West enough during his playing days to make a real comparison? The most anyone here has seen of West is highlights.

:

We're not all kids.

One of the oldest posters here and a big defender of the players from the 60's and 70's.

That said, Bryant is a Top 10 all time player. West is outside that range a bit.

[jlauber]

We're not all kids.

One of the oldest posters here and a big defender of the players from the 60's and 70's.

That said, Bryant is a Top 10 all time player. West is outside that range a bit.

100% agreed.

:cheers:

[Vertical-24]

Besides some of the derailing, some good responses guys :cheers:

[longtime lurker]

Only a hater/deranged retard would choose Jerry West over Kobe. Kobe has been more successful, has more all NBA honours, more championships and individual awards. Jerry West doesn't even have an MVP award. The only choice is Kobe, but Jerry West is right there behind him.

[jlauber]

Only a hater/deranged retard would choose Jerry West over Kobe. Kobe has been more successful, has more all NBA honours, more championships and individual awards. Jerry West doesn't even have an MVP award. The only choice is Kobe, but Jerry West is right there behind him.

Agreed.

[Odinn]

Only a hater/deranged retard would choose Jerry West over Kobe. Kobe has been more successful, has more all NBA honours, more championships and individual awards. Jerry West doesn't even have an MVP award. The only choice is Kobe, but Jerry West is right there behind him.
So, you're basically saying Kobe, the one won his mvp against no all-time great big man which in his prime, would have at least an MVP against prime Russell, prime Chamberlain(and Big O)?

[pauk]

Jerry West... more efficient/accurate (better shooter), better passer, better rebounder, same 1st all-defensive team defense... averaged up to 31 ppg, up to 8 rpg, up to 10 apg...

As far as career accomplishments go, Kobe... he got more hardware

[riseagainst]

short answer:
lebrontards: Jerry west
almost everyone else: Kobe

[Vertical-24]

short answer:
lebrontards: Jerry west
almost everyone else: Kobe
:oldlol: :oldlol:

[Deuce Bigalow]

So, you're basically saying Kobe, the one won his mvp against no all-time great big man which in his prime, would have at least an MVP against prime Russell, prime Chamberlain(and Big O)?
:roll: :roll: :roll:

[skaterbasist]

Threads like these are just breeding ground for Kobe haters to do their thing. Clearly, anyone with a functioning mind knows that Kobe is the second greatest shooting guard of all time.

[Jacks3]

Kobe. Better scorer, defender, rebounder, and nearly as good a play-maker/passer.

Also, he's dominated in IMO a much tougher defensive era with much better competition on the perimeter.

His longevity/durability is also superior. People forget that West missed a ton of time with injuries.

[Heavincent]

Kobe and it's not very close.

[Story Up]

Jerry West... more efficient/accurate (better shooter), better passer, better rebounder, same 1st all-defensive team defense... averaged up to 31 ppg, up to 8 rpg, up to 10 apg...

As far as career accomplishments go, Kobe... he got more hardware
WOW, I need to stay away from this forum it will seriously taint my ball knowledge if I continue reading these retards posts.

[pauk]

WOW, I need to stay away from this forum it will seriously taint my ball knowledge if I continue reading these retards posts.

If you dont like FACTS, then please stay out indeed...

All i see is that Jerry averaged more points at more accurate shooting, more rebounds (8 rpg at best, Kobe never got close to that), more assists (10 apg at best, Kobe never got close to that) and at his peak was a 1st team all-defensive defender...

Kobe was not better at anything... except chucking more shots...

Stop overrating Kobe...

[bizil]

I give West mad props for being the blueprint for the great SG who had the total package. Great scorer, great passer, great rebounder, and great defender all in one. Scoring wise, he had pretty much as complete a scoring skillset as a 6'2 guard can have. And he's one of the greatest shooters of all time. West was also very athletic as well, one of the more athletic SG's of his era.

Many of the SG's after West like Monroe, Pete, Gervin, and Thompson didn't have the all around skillset of West. I do think a guy like Bing was close though. But once MJ came around, he combined the traits West brought to the table (except for the epic deep shooting) and combined with Dr.J type size and freak athletic ability. Kobe came along and was cut from that kind of cloth as well.

So due to size and versatility reasons, I gotta go with Kobe. Kobe can play and defend three positions. Kobe could do damn near anything West could do and often times better in a 6'6 frame. But West was the blueprint and is the greatest player ever under 6'3 and under. It's hard for guys like West, Isiah, AI, CP3 or Tiny to be better than guys like MJ, Bron, or Kobe. Pound for pound they are often times just as skilled, but the size factor is such a huge advantage. On a GOAT list, the smaller guy can be ranked higher because a GOAT list factors a lot of stuff. But in terms of who is flat out the better player, it can be an uphill battle.

[CavaliersFTW]

I give West mad props for being the blueprint for the great SG who had the total package. Great scorer, great passer, great rebounder, and great defender all in one. Scoring wise, he had pretty much as complete a scoring skillset as a 6'2 guard can have. And he's one of the greatest shooters of all time. West was also very athletic as well, one of the more athletic SG's of his era.

Many of the SG's after West like Monroe, Pete, Gervin, and Thompson didn't have the all around skillset of West. I do think a guy like Bing was close though. But once MJ came around, he combined the traits West brought to the table (except for the epic deep shooting) and combined with Dr.J type size and freak athletic ability. Kobe came along and was cut from that kind of cloth as well.

So due to size and versatility reasons, I gotta go with Kobe. Kobe can play and defend three positions. Kobe could do damn near anything West could do and often times better in a 6'6 frame. But West was the blueprint and is the greatest player ever under 6'3 and under. It's hard for guys like West, Isiah, AI, CP3 or Tiny to be better than guys like MJ, Bron, or Kobe. Pound for pound they are often times just as skilled, but the size factor is such a huge advantage. On a GOAT list, the smaller guy can be ranked higher because a GOAT list factors a lot of stuff. But in terms of who is flat out the better player, it can be an uphill battle.
He's not 6-2... he stood slightly over 6-4 in his barefeet as per his autobiographies and interviews and he's got a 6-9 wingspan. His basketballreference listed information is insanely misleading, he's the size of a modern shooting guard not point guard. Wade 6-3.75 barefoot Kobe 6-4.75 barefoot. 70 year old West still looks the same general "size" as them despite having probably shrunk with age.

http://tinyurl.com/7zfbqz2

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/si/2012/writers/sam_amick/02/08/jerry.west.qa/jerry-west.jpg

So what now?

[Heavincent]

If you dont like FACTS, then please stay out indeed...

All i see is that Jerry averaged more points at more accurate shooting, more rebounds (8 rpg at best, Kobe never got close to that), more assists (10 apg at best, Kobe never got close to that) and at his peak was a 1st team all-defensive defender...

Kobe was not better at anything... except chucking more shots...

Stop overrating Kobe...

:roll: :roll:

[longtime lurker]

If you dont like FACTS, then please stay out indeed...

All i see is that Jerry averaged more points at more accurate shooting, more rebounds (8 rpg at best, Kobe never got close to that), more assists (10 apg at best, Kobe never got close to that) and at his peak was a 1st team all-defensive defender...

Kobe was not better at anything... except chucking more shots...

Stop overrating Kobe...

I'm sure you'd take Jerry West over Lebron James too :rolleyes:

[bizil]

He's not 6-2... he's slightly over 6-4 in his barefeet as per his autobiographies and interviews and he's got a 6-9 wingspan. His basketballreference listed information is insanely misleading, he's the size of a modern shooting guard not point guard.

http://tinyurl.com/7zfbqz2

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/si/2012/writers/sam_amick/02/08/jerry.west.qa/jerry-west.jpg

Wow easy, easy! It ain't my fault he's listed at 6'2 everywhere you turn. Hell we need to go back and revisit EVERY player's height from the 60's then. So I guess Wilt is 7'3, Baylor 6'7, Big O 6'7, Cousy 6'3, Russell 6'11, etc. If West is 6'4 barefeet, HOW IN THE HELL IS HE ONLY LISTED AS 6'2? Where in the hell did 6'2 come from. If anything, he should be 6'2 barefoot and almost 6'4 with shoes! I don't get how he was 6'4 barefoot but only listed at 6'2. Hell if he's 6'4 barefoot then he should be 6'5 or 6'6 with shoes. Don't jump down my throat because every website you see (hell even the official NBA website not just bball reference) has him as 6'2!

As it is anyway 6'4 West still lacks the size of guys 6'6 and over 200 pounds in Kobe and MJ. Add their freakish athletic ability, those guys STILL have a size and versatility West can't match. MJ could check a bigger SF like Bird, West couldn't. Kobe could check a bigger SF like Bron or Melo, West couldn't. Kobe could go over the top of a packed in defense and dunk on them West couldn't. West being listed at 6'4 doesn't make up for the facts that I was stating in my post. And most of the perennial All Star-HOF type SG's of the 2000s (other than Wade and Iverson) were 6'5 to damn near 6'9 (Kobe, T Mac, Ray, Vince, Ginobli, JJ, Pierce when he played SG). 6'4 during this era wasn't a lock for a SG. U have a pleothra of 6'4 guards historically, 6'4 isn't a given to be a SG. West could have been a PG or SG in the 2000s era.

[bizil]

He's not 6-2... he stood slightly over 6-4 in his barefeet as per his autobiographies and interviews and he's got a 6-9 wingspan. His basketballreference listed information is insanely misleading, he's the size of a modern shooting guard not point guard. Wade 6-3.75 barefoot Kobe 6-4.75 barefoot. 70 year old West still looks the same general "size" as them despite having probably shrunk with age.

http://tinyurl.com/7zfbqz2

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/si/2012/writers/sam_amick/02/08/jerry.west.qa/jerry-west.jpg

So what now?

So what now?:

http://www.nba.com/history/players/west_bio.html

Get a life! I don't have time to find pictures of guys standing next to West to compare height. THE LEAGUE THAT FEATURES WEST AS THE LOGO HAS HIM LISTED AS 6'2! If u are on here trying to point things out or educate then I appreciate that. But for u to come on here now with the so what now shit simply because I said he's 6'2 is some bitch shit! In the pics he looks taller than 6'2. But don't get mad at me if he's always been 6'4. Get mad at NBA.com, hell start a petition for all bball fans to boycott NBA.com for listing the LOGO at 6'2! Don't start shit with me cause I assumed he's 6'2, there are bigger battles to fight! LMBAO

[pauk]

I'm sure you'd take Jerry West over Lebron James too :rolleyes:

Nah, West wasnt better / wasnt more productive like that than the likes of Lebron, Jordan, Bird.... but he sure was that compared to Kobe.. any non-Kobetard in this forum will tell you Jerry West was a better individual player than Kobe... please remember i am talking about overall talents/skills they possessed and the overall numbers they put up............ career wise / accomplishment wise Kobe got more hardware though (more team accomplishment hardware) so naturally i rank him higher than West...

[oolalaa]

So what now?:

http://www.nba.com/history/players/west_bio.html

Get a life! I don't have time to find pictures of guys standing next to West to compare height. THE LEAGUE THAT FEATURES WEST AS THE LOGO HAS HIM LISTED AS 6'2! If u are on here trying to point things out or educate then I appreciate that. But for u to come on here now with the so what now shit simply because I said he's 6'2 is some bitch shit! In the pics he looks taller than 6'2. But don't get mad at me if he's always been 6'4. Get mad at NBA.com, hell start a petition for all bball fans to boycott NBA.com for listing the LOGO at 6'2! Don't start shit with me cause I assumed he's 6'2, there are bigger battles to fight! LMBAO

:roll: :roll: at you getting mad. CavaliersFTW simply pointed out your honest mistake in a cordial and totally polite manner. You are clearly not very good at reading peoples emotions over the internet. In no way was he trying to show you up or make you look bad....

[CavaliersFTW]

So what now?:

http://www.nba.com/history/players/west_bio.html

Get a life! I don't have time to find pictures of guys standing next to West to compare height. THE LEAGUE THAT FEATURES WEST AS THE LOGO HAS HIM LISTED AS 6'2! If u are on here trying to point things out or educate then I appreciate that. But for u to come on here now with the so what now shit simply because I said he's 6'2 is some bitch shit! In the pics he looks taller than 6'2. But don't get mad at me if he's always been 6'4. Get mad at NBA.com, hell start a petition for all bball fans to boycott NBA.com for listing the LOGO at 6'2! Don't start shit with me cause I assumed he's 6'2, there are bigger battles to fight! LMBAO
lol, my "so what now?" was meant as in "does this change your opinion of Jerry West a little?". It wasn't a challenge on your knowledge or w/e, hardly any1 knows that about West I was just bringing the info forward genuinely wondering how/if it changes your perspective on him.

[bizil]

:roll: :roll: at you getting mad. CavaliersFTW simply pointed out your honest mistake in a cordial and totally polite manner. You are clearly not very good at reading peoples emotions over the internet. In no way was he trying to show you up or make you look bad....

I was good with him pointing that out! But at the end he put "so what now" And he went out of his way to bold my comments. I wouldn't call that cordial by saying "so what now". Whose is the "so what now" direceted to? If it's directed to me, it didn't have to be said. I was cool wit what he pointed out until he had to go outta his way to bold my comments and put "so what now". If "so what now" is directed at the websites then cool. If it was directed at me I have the right to respond. Mind your business!

[RazorBaLade]

Nah, West wasnt better / wasnt more productive like that than the likes of Lebron, Jordan, Bird.... but he sure was that compared to Kobe.. any non-Kobetard in this forum will tell you Jerry West was a better individual player than Kobe... please remember i am talking about overall talents/skills they possessed and the overall numbers they put up............ career wise / accomplishment wise Kobe got more hardware though (more team accomplishment hardware) so naturally i rank him higher than West...

Peak:

Jerry west - more points, more efficient, more assists

[oolalaa]

I was good with him pointing that out! But at the end he put "so what now" And he went out of his way to bold my comments. I wouldn't call that cordial by saying "so what now". Whose is the "so what now" direceted to? If it's directed to me, it didn't have to be said. I was cool wit what he pointed out until he had to go outta his way to bold my comments and put "so what now". If "so what now" is directed at the websites then cool. If it was directed at me I have the right to respond. Mind your business!

You are on a FORUM. People can challenge and interject in other peoples posts all they want.

I just thought you took a way too defensive approach, is all.

[bizil]

lol, my "so what now?" was meant as in "does this change your opinion of Jerry West a little?". It wasn't a challenge on your knowledge or w/e, hardly any1 knows that about West I was just bringing the info forward genuinely wondering how/if it changes your perspective on him.

It is what is and u changed my mind. But at the same time everywhere you look says West is 6'2. I just thought u went a lil out of the way to prove a point such as that. But to each their own and you proved your point!

[CavaliersFTW]

It is what is and u changed my mind. But at the same time everywhere you look says West is 6'2. I just thought u went a lil out of the way to prove a point such as that. But to each their own and you proved your point!
I research (actual) player measurements often. West (and Kobe) are just two players who I found info on a while ago and this thread was a useful place to drop the bomb, didn't mean to single you out lol as I said I'm sure hardly anyone is aware West wasn't as small as his info lists. Btw his 6-2 list info comes from his freshman year at WVU where at age 18 maybe he once was that short I don't know. But interestingly he actually wasn't even listed 6-2 in the NBA, he was listed 6-3 as a pro so I don't know where basketball reference even gets their info. But that's wrong too. He's one of only very few players in NBA history that I've found to have listed shorter than his own barefoot measurement.

[bizil]

You are on a FORUM. People can challenge and interject in other peoples posts all they want.

I just thought you took a way too defensive approach, is all.

You are entitled to your opinion and I am entitled to respond how I choose to. Looking back maybe I did, but personally I felt he went out of his way to prove that point. All he had to do was point out that West was 6'4 and would have been like thanks for letting me know that. I woudln't have went outta the way to bold comments, bring up pictures, say so what now, etc. Especially when it's EVERYWHERE that West is 6'2. It's not a height I just dragged out. And he changed my mind as it was, so I'm not hating.

[The-Legend-24]

Jerry West obviously. :coleman:

[bizil]

I research (actual) player measurements often. West (and Kobe) are just two players who I found info on a while ago and this thread was a useful place to drop the bomb, didn't mean to single you out lol as I said I'm sure not many people are aware West isn't as small as his info lists

The "so what now" comment was the main thing that really through me off. I didn't know what context you were stating it in. We can all agree to disagree and debate.

[oolalaa]

You are entitled to your opinion and I am entitled to respond how I choose to. Looking back maybe I did, but personally I felt he went out of his way to prove that point. All he had to do was point out that West was 6'4 and would have been like thanks for letting me know that. I woudln't have went outta the way to bold comments, bring up pictures, say so what now, etc. Especially when it's EVERYWHERE that West is 6'2. It's not a height I just dragged out. And he changed my mind as it was, so I'm not hating.

Fine, but I think his going "out of his way to prove that point" was just his way of backing up his claim. If he simply stated "Jerry West was 6"4, not 6"2" then you would probably have been highly skeptical.

But, anyway, who cares :oldlol:. CavaliersFTW, what are Kobe's exact measurements, just out of interest. There can't be much more than an inch between him and West....

[SuperPippen]

:lol

At that biased idiot pauk. The answer here is clearly Kobe.

I respect and admire the hell out of Jerry West. He was a terrific player, definitely the 3rd greatest SG ever, and would still be great today. He was definitely at least 6'4" in shoes, and it's a shame that everything about him seems to be vastly underrated by many people today. He was also a very good athlete. He was very quick, coordinated, and a pretty good leaper to boot. Athletically, he would easily be able to hold his own in today's league, of that I have no doubt.

But he's not as great as Kobe. He just isn't.

[oolalaa]

:lol

At that biased idiot pauk. The answer here is clearly Kobe.

I respect and admire the hell out of Jerry West. He was a terrific player, definitely the 3rd greatest SG ever, and would still be great today. He was definitely at least 6'4" in shoes, and it's a shame that everything about him seems to be vastly underrated by many people today. He was also a very good athlete. He was very quick, coordinated, and a pretty good leaper to boot. Athletically, he would easily be able to hold his own in today's league, of that I have no doubt.

But he's not as great as Kobe. He just isn't.

Yet, West was FAAAAR superior on the NBAs biggest stage - The Finals (Particuarly '66, '69 & '70. Three of the most underrated finals performances of all time....because the Lakers lost).

And it makes me laugh when people say (Not necessarily you) that Kobe was a better scorer than West. No ****ing way. Has Kobe ever had series of 46.3 ppg? Or 37.9 ppg? West's 29.1 ppg playoff average is the 2nd highest of all time, too, and that is WITHOUT the benefit of a 3 point line.

Kobe probably has a small edge in 1on1 defense, but West's ALL TIME great pick pocketing ability (He had a playoff game against the suns in which he stole the ball 12 times, and that was in 1970, when he was almost 32 yrs old) made up for that.

Kobe has a small rebounding and versatility edge, too, but West was almost undeniably a better passer/playmaker. Certainly a more willing one, anyway.

[CavaliersFTW]

Fine, but I think his going "out of his way to prove that point" was just his way of backing up his claim. If he simply stated "Jerry West was 6"4, not 6"2" then you would probably have been highly skeptical.

But, anyway, who cares :oldlol:. CavaliersFTW, what are Kobe's exact measurements, just out of interest. There can't be much more than an inch between him and West....
Kobe said in an interview in NY times that he didn't know his height for a long time but out of curiosity had his wife measure him one day at home. 6-4 and 3/4's (6-4.75).

[BrickingStar]

:facepalm
The only way you would say West is if you're a Kobe hater. This is no disrespect to West but we're talking all-around skilled here in which Kobe may be top 5 of all-time.

"But, but, but, West is clutch"
:rolleyes:

no

[RazorBaLade]

Yet, West was FAAAAR superior on the NBAs biggest stage - The Finals (Particuarly '66, '69 & '70. Three of the most underrated finals performances of all time....because the Lakers lost).

And it makes me laugh when people say (Not necessarily you) that Kobe was a better scorer than West. No ****ing way. Has Kobe ever had series of 46.3 ppg? Or 37.9 ppg? West's 29.1 ppg playoff average is the 2nd highest of all time, too, and that is WITHOUT the benefit of a 3 point line.

Kobe probably has a small edge in 1on1 defense, but West's ALL TIME great pick pocketing ability (He had a playoff game against the suns in which he stole the ball 12 times, and that was in 1970, when he was almost 32 yrs old) made up for that.

Kobe has a small rebounding and versatility edge, too, but West was almost undeniably a better passer/playmaker. Certainly a more willing one, anyway.

meh with these cherry picking stats.

Has west ever averaged 35 ppg for an ENTIRE season not a 5 game stretch in the playoffs? Has west scored over 50 as many times askobe? How about 80? Whos higher up on the streaks for 40 and 50 point games? Who has more 40 and 50 and 60 pt games?

Bleh.

[oolalaa]

Kobe said in an interview in NY times that he didn't know his height for a long time but out of curiosity had his wife measure him one day at home. 6-4 and 3/4's (6-4.75).

Wow. A little shorter than he appears.

Do you know how tall Jordan is? I'm guessing he's probably an inch smaller than he's listed, too....

http://didntdrawiron.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/mikekobe.jpg

[chazzy]

Nah, West wasnt better / wasnt more productive like that than the likes of Lebron, Jordan, Bird.... but he sure was that compared to Kobe.. any non-Kobetard in this forum will tell you Jerry West was a better individual player than Kobe... please remember i am talking about overall talents/skills they possessed and the overall numbers they put up............ career wise / accomplishment wise Kobe got more hardware though (more team accomplishment hardware) so naturally i rank him higher than West...
Lebron never averaged 10 assists tho

[Deuce Bigalow]

Yet, West was FAAAAR superior on the NBAs biggest stage - The Finals (Particuarly '66, '69 & '70. Three of the most underrated finals performances of all time....because the Lakers lost).

And it makes me laugh when people say (Not necessarily you) that Kobe was a better scorer than West. No ****ing way. Has Kobe ever had series of 46.3 ppg? Or 37.9 ppg? West's 29.1 ppg playoff average is the 2nd highest of all time, too, and that is WITHOUT the benefit of a 3 point line.

Kobe probably has a small edge in 1on1 defense, but West's ALL TIME great pick pocketing ability (He had a playoff game against the suns in which he stole the ball 12 times, and that was in 1970, when he was almost 32 yrs old) made up for that.

Kobe has a small rebounding and versatility edge, too, but West was almost undeniably a better passer/playmaker. Certainly a more willing one, anyway.
This defense http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pL6jq5Zvos

VS this defense http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1U8g2sJzz4

C'mon man. Different eras.

[CavaliersFTW]

Wow. A little shorter than he appears.

Do you know how tall Jordan is? I'm guessing he's probably an inch smaller than he's listed, too....

http://didntdrawiron.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/mikekobe.jpg
6-4 and 7/8ths IE 6-4.88". From the 1992 Olympics, so he's near as makes no difference the same height as Kobe the difference is likely imperceptible

[oolalaa]

meh with these cherry picking stats.

Has west ever averaged 35 ppg for an ENTIRE season not a 5 game stretch in the playoffs? Has west scored over 50 as many times askobe? How about 80? Whos higher up on the streaks for 40 and 50 point games? Who has more 40 and 50 and 60 pt games?

Bleh.

:roll: :roll: at REGULAR SEASON numbers. How many 50 point playoff games has Kobe had? That's right, one, in a loss. West had 2 and they both included MONUMENTAL clutch heroics by him to lead L.A to a win. West also has more 40 point playoff games, too.

And....
1. That 46.3 ppg average against Walt Bellamy's bullets was a 6 game series.
2. That 37.9 ppg series against Boston IN THE FINALS went the full 7 games, and included one of the greatest playoff performances of all time.

[RazorBaLade]

:roll: :roll: at REGULAR SEASON numbers. How many 50 point playoff games has Kobe had? That's right, one, in a loss. West had 2 and they both included MONUMENTAL clutch heroics by him to lead L.A to a win. West also has more 40 point playoff games, too.

And....
1. That 46.3 ppg average against Walt Bellamy's bullets was a 6 game series.
2. That 37.9 ppg series against Boston IN THE FINALS went the full 7 games, and included one of the greatest playoff performances of all time.

If kobe cracks under the pressure of the playoffs and its definitely not pace,comp,team that is the reason for his less scoring.. Then west should have had an easier time scoring in the regular season. I mean he can do it in the tougher playoffs right? So why is it such a blowout in a much bigger sample size?

Kobe has had monumental clutch heroics in playoff games before.

[Kiddlovesnets]

Jerry West is better, Kobe has always been known as Poor man's Jerry West.

End of the thread/

[BlueandGold]

Jerry West is better, Kobe has always been known as Poor man's Jerry West.

End of the thread/
Did Kobe rape your mom or something?

[Kiddlovesnets]

Did Kobe rape your mom or something?

He did not, I just spoke the truth. Jerry West is the 2nd greatest SG in league history, you have to agree with this.
:bowdown:

[BlueandGold]

He did not, I just spoke the truth. Jerry West is the 2nd greatest SG in league history, you have to agree with this.
:bowdown:
Well I agree that I have West 3rd behind Kobe based on achievements, longevity, playoff performances/records and overall talent level, but nt.

Just wondering though because all of your posts seem to be diminishing Kobe :facepalm

[Kiddlovesnets]

Well I agree that I have West 3rd behind Kobe based on achievements, longevity, playoff performances/records and overall talent level, but nt.

Just wondering though because all of your posts seem to be diminishing Kobe :facepalm

The reason why my posts seem to be diminishing Kobe is that people always overrate and overestimate him. This is why my posts which are supposed to be neutral and objective somehow become Kobe-bashing.
:cheers:

[oolalaa]

This defense http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pL6jq5Zvos

VS this defense http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1U8g2sJzz4

C'mon man. Different eras.

Sure, it's tough to compare across different eras. Offense and defense has moved on quite a bit since the 60s. Strategies and schemes have become more complex and there has been more focus placed on defense as the decades have passed. That said, MOST teams in the 1980s still had an offense first, run and gun style (The FG% in the 80s was a lot higher than the 60s). It wasn't until the late 80s/early 90s that the mindset switched (The bad boys had a lot to do with it). Are you saying all the great scorers pre 1990 were overrated?

I try to judge relative to era. Apart from Rick Barry (Whose FG% was far worse than West's), no other perimiter player was scoring the way West was in the mid/late 60s. Much like Kobe in '06, West showed us exactly what he could do when he didn't have to defer to anyone in the '65 playoffs, and it was a little scary.

And don't forget, the Boston Celtics, who West had to go up against almost every year, were incredibly talented defensively. Besides being anchored by the greatest defensive player in history, they had some really great perimiter defenders (K.C Jones, Satch Sanders, Hondo etc).


Ultimately, I think West and Kobe are a complete toss up. It could go either way, but I'm leaning towards West mainly because, as I've said, he was MUUUUCH better in his Finals appearances than Kobe has been in his.

[Ne 1]

Kobe. Better scorer, defender, rebounder, and nearly as good a play-maker/passer.

Also, he's dominated in IMO a much tougher defensive era with much better competition on the perimeter.

His longevity/durability is also superior. People forget that West missed a ton of time with injuries.

This.

Not to mention West has just one championship, as arguably the third fiddle. He has no edge on Kobe awards wise, scoring wise, statistically, winning wise...absolutely none.

[oolalaa]

This.

Not to mention West has just one championship, as arguably the third fiddle. He has no edge on Kobe awards wise, scoring wise, statistically, winning wise...absolutely none.

GTFO.

[oolalaa]

If kobe cracks under the pressure of the playoffs and its definitely not pace,comp,team that is the reason for his less scoring.. Then west should have had an easier time scoring in the regular season. I mean he can do it in the tougher playoffs right? So why is it such a blowout in a much bigger sample size?

Kobe has had monumental clutch heroics in playoff games before.

A blow out in the regular season?? :oldlol:

West's ppg average in the reg season is 27.0. Kobe's is 25.4. West has had one more 30 + ppg regular season. The one season that all Kobetards (Not necessarily you) have wet dreams about - 2005/06 - was a bit of a joke. Seemingly every perimiter player that year was scoring at will. The defense couldn't breathe on Kobe without giving away a foul.

Also, West was injured a lot in the regular season. Just a fact, not an excuse.

But, ultimatey, :roll: :roll: at regular seasons when comparing all time greats legacies. If they are really close in terms of post season performance, then I would use regular seasons as a decider, but I think West has a small, but clear, edge....

[oolalaa]

6-4 and 7/8ths IE 6-4.88". From the 1992 Olympics, so he's near as makes no difference the same height as Kobe the difference is likely imperceptible

mmmmm thanks.

[BlueandGold]

Sure, it's tough to compare across different eras. Offense and defense has moved on quite a bit since the 60s. Strategies and schemes have become more complex and there has been more focus placed on defense as the decades have passed. That said, MOST teams in the 1980s still had an offense first, run and gun style (The FG% in the 80s was a lot higher than the 60s). It wasn't until the late 80s/early 90s that the mindset switched (The bad boys had a lot to do with it). Are you saying all the great scorers pre 1990 were overrated?

I try to judge relative to era. Apart from Rick Barry (Whose FG% was far worse than West's), no other perimiter player was scoring the way West was in the mid/late 60s. Much like Kobe in '06, West showed us exactly what he could do when he didn't have to defer to anyone in the '65 playoffs, and it was a little scary.

And don't forget, the Boston Celtics, who West had to go up against almost every year, were incredibly talented defensively. Besides being anchored by the greatest defensive player in history, they had some really great perimiter defenders (K.C Jones, Satch Sanders, Hondo etc).


Ultimately, I think West and Kobe are a complete toss up. It could go either way, but I'm leaning towards West mainly because, as I've said, he was MUUUUCH better in his Finals appearances than Kobe has been in his.

lol gtfo with this. Just because the ppg in the 60s was lower doesn't mean the level of play or competition was what it is in the modern NBA. The NBA was fundamentally different back then compared to what it is now. There were less teams, less games to play in order to win a championship (8 compared to today's 16) and the ABA was also around to dilute the competition in taking players like Dr. J and Moses Malone away from the NBA.

[ILLsmak]

:facepalm
The only way you would say West is if you're a Kobe hater. This is no disrespect to West but we're talking all-around skilled here in which Kobe may be top 5 of all-time.

"But, but, but, West is clutch"
:rolleyes:

He was a good GM, too...

I'd say West is much smarter than Kobe, but I don't think his intelligence is on that omgwtf level like Larry Birds where it would be a deciding factor between a player who is obviously more talented than him.

I think Kobe would abuse West.

-Smak

[Deuce Bigalow]

A blow out in the regular season?? :oldlol:

West's ppg average in the reg season is 27.0. Kobe's is 25.4. West has had one more 30 + ppg regular season. The one season that all Kobetards (Not necessarily you) have wet dreams about - 2005/06 - was a bit of a joke. Seemingly every perimiter player that year was scoring at will. The defense couldn't breathe on Kobe without giving away a foul.

Also, West was injured a lot in the regular season. Just a fact, not an excuse.

But, ultimatey, :roll: :roll: at regular seasons when comparing all time greats legacies. If they are really close in terms of post season performance, then I would use regular seasons as a decider, but I think West has a small, but clear, edge....
The entire league in the '50s, '60, and '70s was a joke compared to the modern era.

[jlauber]

The entire league in the '50s, '60, and '70s was a joke compared to the modern era.

Aside from the 3pt line...the same basic game since the mid-50's. Very little has changed. Even the players heights are about the same since the early 60's. Players like 5-8 Calvin Murphy would still be dunking in today's NBA, just as he was in the 60's. Jerry Lucas, who was about the same height and skill level as Kevin Love, would be getting about 14 rpg. Gus Johnson would be elevating as high as any current NBA player. Kareem, who came into the NBA in '69, would still be pouring 40+ point games on the helpless centers of the current NBA, just as he did to every player he faced in his nearly four decades in the NBA. Pete Maravich would be just as dazzling to the crowds of today, who would have never seen a magician like him with a basketball, just as he dazzled them back at LSU in the 60's. Rick Barry would be putting up 30+ ppg seasons, just as he did in '67 and '75. Bob McAdoo would be just as effective as Kevin Durant.

And a 7-2 Chamberlain, with his 7-8 wingspan, and at over 300 lbs, with a 40+ vertical and 500 lb bench, would be running away with rebounding, blocked shot, and FG% titles, and challenging Kobe's "modern" record of 81 points in a game. Except he would do it on a much higher efficiency (just like his LAST 60+ point game, a 66 point game on 29-35 shooting from the floor.) He would be making Bynum look like Walter Dukes.