Kobe or Wade: More Dominant Prime

[SilkkTheShocker]

Which player was better at their absolute best?

[9erempiree]

This crap again to prop up Wade?

:facepalm

[elementally morale]

Some people will go out of their way and answer Wade, but I actually doubt any non-Heat fan above 25 really believes it even if he says so. The answer is Kobe and the gap is not minimal.

[EnoughSaid]

Some people will go out of their way and answer Wade, but I actually doubt any non-Heat fan above 25 really believes it even if he says so. The answer is Kobe and the gap is not minimal.

Come on now. They're practically even. Only thing Kobe had on Wade during their primes is shooting touch. Wade was a better ball handler, better at getting to the rim and finishing, better with stealing and blocking the ball, better rebounder. Kobe was a better SCORER, but Wade was a better OVERALL player.

But career-wise, yeah, it's not that close. But playoff performance and Finals performance wise? Wade's got him there too.

[NumberSix]

Depends what you mean by dominant.

[LikeABosh]

Wade in the 06' playoffs in the ECF and Finals>>>

[talkingconch]

lol. stans are so high and low. i remember like 2 months ago wade was in the worst part of his career, now all of a sudden hes a god. No one is doing what kobe has been

[EnoughSaid]

lol. stans are so high and low. i remember like 2 months ago wade was in the worst part of his career, now all of a sudden hes a god. No one is doing what kobe has been

:oldlol: What? Lakers/Kobe fans were proclaiming that Wade is done and he's not even a top 10-15 at the beginning at the season. Now that LeBron is clearly the the runaway for MVP and Miami is the best team, you guys are out here saying that Wade is amazing and he's a really great player just to diminish LeBron.

Wade has always been a top 5 performer, a top 4 one this season, and he proves it every game.

[baller562]

Wade in the 06' playoffs in the ECF and Finals>>>

that's great... question is what defines Kobe's prime? His numbers are fairly consistent from 2001-2013. I guess you can make an argument about 2005-06, but I thought he was just as good in 2002-03, and 2008-09. Crazy stuff..

[elementally morale]

Come on now. They're practically even.

I doubt too many people believe this who are non-Heat fans and are over 25. That's all. There is nothing wrong thinking any player is better than any other though. It's called an opinion. I just have my doubts that very many people share this opinion who saw enough basketball in their lives and are not reasonably biased vie rooting for the Heat.

But feel free to prefer who you do.

[Legends66NBA7]

I would pick Kobe Bryant as having the more dominant prime.

[9erempiree]

that's great... question is what defines Kobe's prime? His numbers are fairly consistent from 2001-2013. I guess you can make an argument about 2005-06, but I thought he was just as good in 2002-03, and 2008-09. Crazy stuff..

Pretty much this because Kobe has a long ass prime compared to Wade's couple of years.

[Legends66NBA7]

But feel free to prefer who you do.

I think it comes down to that for these two, at least from what I see in this forum.

[EnoughSaid]

Pretty much this because Kobe has a long ass prime compared to Wade's couple of years.

Kobe's more durable, therefore he's been able to consistently play at the same level. Wade's been hurt. Who knows what could have happened from 2006-2013. Might have won an MVP or two and maybe would be in the top 15 conversation right now.

[Remix]

Come on now. They're practically even. Only thing Kobe had on Wade during their primes is shooting touch. Wade was a better ball handler, better at getting to the rim and finishing, better with stealing and blocking the ball, better rebounder. Kobe was a better SCORER, but Wade was a better OVERALL player.

But career-wise, yeah, it's not that close. But playoff performance and Finals performance wise? Wade's got him there too.
Says the kid who admitted to not watching basketball before the decision. Your opinion doesn't matter.

[Legends66NBA7]

Kobe's more durable, therefore he's been able to consistently play at the same level. Wade's been hurt. Who knows what could have happened from 2006-2013.

That has a lot to do also with how both players approach the game on and off the court.

[EnoughSaid]

That has a lot to do also with how both players approach the game on and off the court.

True, but you can't say that Kobe has simply outplayed Wade every year. I mean you have to take health into account.

[EnoughSaid]

And here we go someone already negged me. :oldlol:


Nah not that close - Wade Aka Garbage Boy Who Smashes ur stupid dirty hooker mom

[elementally morale]

I think it comes down to that for these two, at least from what I see in this forum.

70-80% of this forum is below 25. Many young people love to go against the grain and they grew up with Kobe being 'there' and Wade being the 'new blood'. Plus it's a lot more sexy to hate on Kobe than on Wade.

I say you won't find too many people who are over 25 who prefer Wade to Kobe. Be it their peaks, primes, career, whichever. There are many people on this site who say things like 'Wade is a lot better than Kobe', but I'm quite sure a lot less actually believe what they say.

[EnoughSaid]

Says the kid who admitted to not watching basketball before the decision. Your opinion doesn't matter.

What? :roll: I've admitted that I've started watching basketball in 2008. What are you on about? I joined AFTER the decision because that was the event which made me want to find out what other people thought about the NBA.

[steve franchise]

True, but you can't say that Kobe has simply outplayed Wade every year. I mean you have to take health into account.

Join date: July 2010. Clearly another bandwagoner. Your opinion is invalid.

[EnoughSaid]

Join date: July 2010. Clearly another bandwagoner. Your opinion is invalid.

How does my join date make me a bandwagoner? You guys are acting like the join date defines when someone started watching basketball and became a fan. Cuz everybody who starts watching basketball and thinks its cool automatically joins an online message board. :facepalm

[Sharmer]

Wade is better in the post, Kobe a better jump shooter.

[elementally morale]

Wade is better in the post

Say that again, please.

[SilkkTheShocker]

Kobe's more durable, therefore he's been able to consistently play at the same level. Wade's been hurt. Who knows what could have happened from 2006-2013. Might have won an MVP or two and maybe would be in the top 15 conversation right now.

I favor Wade. But the bolded part is just weak.

[NumberSix]

IMO, Wade is the better player, but his reckless style of play has made him prone to injuries. Kobe's ability to stay healthy enough to play is something that you have to account for.

[EnoughSaid]

I favor Wade. But the bolded part is just weak.

What? Wade was absurd in 2006, and from what I've heard he was looking like he'd win it in 2007. Why is it so unlikely that he could have won one?

[steve franchise]

How does my join date make me a bandwagoner? You guys are acting like the join date defines when someone started watching basketball and became a fan. Cuz everybody who starts watching basketball and thinks its cool automatically joins an online message board. :facepalm

I don't believe you. Negged.


Wade is better in the post, Kobe a better jump shooter.

lol what!? :oldlol: Kobe has the best post up game for a guard just behind MJ and Big O.

[Remix]

What? :roll: I've admitted that I've started watching basketball in 2008. What are you on about? I joined AFTER the decision because that was the event which made me want to find out what other people thought about the NBA.
Pretty sure you're the one who conveniently had the story about watching basketball in the spring just before the decision and your cousin or something was a Heat fan which caused you to be one too, all about 3 months before Bosh and Lebron came.

[SilkkTheShocker]

What? Wade was absurd in 2006, and from what I've heard he was looking like he'd win it in 2007. Why is it so unlikely that he could have won one?

Im not saying its absurd. It just think using "might have" is weak,

[imnew09]

When we look up at our generation, we look up to Kobe. He's the best player in the last decade

- Wade

[Legends66NBA7]

True, but you can't say that Kobe has simply outplayed Wade every year. I mean you have to take health into account.

I'm not saying either has outplayed the other every year. That's for another debate.

The fact that Wade is more prone to injury is why more will pick Bryant. And I don't think it's just because of how their playing style, IMO Bryant does have better work ethic. That's why he's able to still have remarkable years this late in the game too, that some say even match his prime numbers statistically (particularly 02-03).

[elementally morale]

What? Wade was absurd in 2006


You have just said you started watching after 2008. Are you sure you are a very good judge comparing a player's 2001 playoffs to another one's 2006 regular season for example? Are you sure you are not basing your opinion on several highlights only? Or on others' opinions? Or due to the fact you root for the Heat?

I started watching in 1980, and I would never ever start arguing a Wilt vs. Kareem in the 70s debate.

[EnoughSaid]

Pretty sure you're the one who conveniently had the story about watching basketball in the spring just before the decision and your cousin or something was a Heat fan which caused you to be one too, all about 3 months before Bosh and Lebron came.

:roll: Come on now. I told you guys about a friend who moved down from Boston to Ohio where I live. It was in 2008 and during the time when the Celtics were obviously dominating so he got me into 2K and we watched the opening game together. From then on I started to watch the NBA on a regular bases and D-Wade became my favorite player and Miami became my favorite team.

[Magic 32]

A reminder for all of us that "best in prime" is an incredibly uninteresting discussion, as well as nearly impossible to messure.

[SilkkTheShocker]

A reminder for all of us that "best in prime" is an incredibly uninteresting discussion, as well as nearly impossible to messure.


It doesn't help that you can't even spell measure right to begin with. Your head might explode trying debate this topic.

[Rysio]

Wade is better in the post.
:banghead:

[EnoughSaid]

I'm not saying either has outplayed the other every year. That's for another debate.

The fact that Wade is more prone to injury is why more will pick Bryant. And I don't think it's just because of how their playing style, IMO Bryant does have better work ethic. That's why he's able to still have remarkable years this late in the game too, that some say even match his prime numbers statistically (particularly 02-03).

You see I'm not trying to say Wade was better in his prime, I'm just saying it's basically even and very difficult to say one is clearly better than the other. I just hate it when people go out and say that Kobe's prime was head and shoulders above Wade's and it's not really close. But thanks for at least trying to reply in a nice manner doe.


You have just said you started watching after 2008. Are you sure you are a very good judge comparing a player's 2001 playoffs to another one's 2006 regular season for example? Are you sure you are not basing your opinion on several highlights only? Or on other's opinions? Or due to the fact you root for the Heat?

I started watching in 1980, and I would never ever start arguing a Wilt vs. Kareem in the 70s debate.

Just said Wade was crazy in that year. Not trying to dissect his games or anything. But going off what I've read and seen I mean I can say he was pretty good. Still I'm not going to just say one is clearly better than the other because that's not the case.

[SilkkTheShocker]

Some people will go out of their way and answer Wade, but I actually doubt any non-Heat fan above 25 really believes it even if he says so. The answer is Kobe and the gap is not minimal.


Disagree entirely. Its one thing if we are talking longevity. But prime for prime, the gap isn't huge between the two at all.

[elementally morale]

You see I'm not trying to say Wade was better in his prime, I'm just saying it's basically even and very difficult to say one is clearly better than the other. I just hate it when people go out and say that Kobe's prime was head and shoulders above Wade's and it's not really close.

It is pretty damn clear to most people who watched a lot more basketball than you have. It's not a HUGE difference but a clear enough difference. Careerwise it is a huge difference though in Kobe's favor. Wade in his best year was closer to Kobe's best year than during the course of their careers.

A lot less difference was there with McGrady's best year compared to Kobe's best year up until 2005. That's a debate. Wade.. not so much.

[SilkkTheShocker]

Wade is better in the post, Kobe a better jump shooter.

Wade is better defender and arguably the best slasher ever. Kobe is better a shooting jumpers.

[Sharmer]

70-80% of this forum is below 25. Many young people love to go against the grain and they grew up with Kobe being 'there' and Wade being the 'new blood'. Plus it's a lot more sexy to hate on Kobe than on Wade.

I say you won't find too many people who are over 25 who prefer Wade to Kobe. Be it their peaks, primes, career, whichever. There are many people on this site who say things like 'Wade is a lot better than Kobe', but I'm quite sure a lot less actually believe what they say.

Contrary to popular belief, no pun intended. Just because something is popular doesn

[elementally morale]

Disagree entirely. Its one thing if we are talking longevity. But prime for prime, the gap isn't huge between the two at all.

Yeah, feel free to disagree, I don't mind that. I think the gap is huge. It's like peak Shaq and peak Duncan. It is pretty clear Shaq was the more effective player and you won't find too many non-Spurs fans teliing you otherwise.

And it's not because Duncan was mediocre.

[SilkkTheShocker]

Yeah, feel free to disagree, I don't mind that. I think the gap is huge. It's like peak Shaq and peak Duncan. It is pretty clear Shaq was the more effective player and you won't find too many non-Spurs fans teliing you otherwise.

And it's not because Duncan was mediocre.

The thing is Shaq is considered the most dominant player in NBA history. Kobe, not so much. And thats not even a shot at Kobe. But no one has ever dominated the game like Shaq. To the point they actually had to change rules and defenses to handle the man.

[elementally morale]

[QUOTE=Sharmer]Even if Kobe is more popular than Wade, that doesn

[elementally morale]

The thing is Shaq is considered the most dominant player in NBA history. Kobe, not so much. And thats not even a shot at Kobe. But no one has ever dominated the game like Shaq. To the point they actually had to change rules and defenses to handle the man.

I agree with this.
Still, it was just an example how these things work. A difference doesn't have to be HUGE for you to observe it. Peak Kobe vs. peak Wade is a clear enough difference. At least to most people who are over 25 and are not Heat fans.

[EnoughSaid]

I agree with this.
Still, it was just an example how these things work. A difference doesn't have to be HUGE for you to observe it. Peak Kobe vs. peak Wade is a clear enough difference. At least to most people who are over 25 and are not Heat fans.

I mean like how can you be so sure that if you're over 25 and aren't a Heat fan, you'll lean towards Kobe's side? What is so apparent that makes Kobe's prime >>>>>>>>>> Wade's prime?

[theBIGjabroni]

Wade is better in the post, Kobe a better jump shooter.
Didn't read past this but i doubt theres any other post as bad as this.

[elementally morale]

I mean like how can you be so sure that if you're over 25 and aren't a Heat fan, you'll lean towards Kobe's side? What is so apparent that makes Kobe's prime >>>>>>>>>> Wade's prime?

I'm not even sure the Earth isn't flat so I'm not the best example here. (Being a physicist doesn't help...)

However, I'm sure watching experience does matter, thus age matters. Not because someone being older is 'smarter' but experience is a thing you cannot outsmart. Having watched 30 years of ball must account for something when compared to 3 years.

And what I said is just an opinion. I might be wrong. What's more, we both can be right at the same time.

[Sharmer]

Sorry to burst your bubble, but since these are not facts either way, the only good way to decide this is via voting. It's not the same as the flat Earth thing, no voting procedure is going to change something we refer to as 'fact'. (For the time being, by the way, but let's save it for another discussion.)

When people have their say on who they think is better, that actually decides who was better -- by the majority. Of course you can be in the minority and be perfectly happy. You should just know that being in the minority also doesn't mean you are automatically right. An opinioin being less popular than another one is not proof in itself it's a more valid opinion.

Good rebuttal, I wasn’t implying the minority was right either. I would prefer expert opinon. For instance the opinions of a number good basketball statistician would be more valid than a fan popularity vote. Most fans opinions are based on emotion rather than statistics or facts.

[LEFT4DEAD]

Im a big fan of Wade, so Ill try to be as realistic as possible:

Regular season: I would take Wade's 09 season over any of Kobes, but Kobe's longevity makes it even.

Playoffs (first 3 rounds): both of them have had some incredible series, my favourite Kobe's were those against Spurs and Kings in the early 2000's.
Wade has couple of great ones from first couple of years of his career, and good ones as a member of BIG 3. I would give a slighty edge to Kobe on this one.

Finals: Its a known fact that Kobe is not a very good finals performer, and when Wade is on other side of this comparation there are not so many players who would take a win here. I will say it again, his 06 finals performance is one of the greatest ever. W for Wade.

Scoring: Kobe was a beast, he could destroy you from any place on the court. Wade had a deadly mid range game when he was younger, but now only every three games. But he is one of the best penetrators the game has ever seen. But Kobes 35ppg' season gives him an edge.

All around game: Wade has always been great passer, best blocking SG of all times, and can rebound. Kobe is known as a very selfish player, who could have been very respectable passer if he ever tried. W for Wade.

Defense: Kobe was a very good lock down defender at the beggining of his career, but later on he was very very inconsistent. Wade's defense was always underrated, and its a main reason why Kobe ended most of the years on the first team instead of him. My opinion here is that they are even on D.

For me they are very even players. Wade was always very underrated, and Kobe will be remembered as the better player between them. And its his accolades that brings him over Wade, nothing else.

[Sharmer]

Didn't read past this but i doubt theres any other post as bad as this.

Wade is second leading score in the post, behind Lebron.

[MaxFly]

Kobe's more durable, therefore he's been able to consistently play at the same level. Wade's been hurt. Who knows what could have happened from 2006-2013. Might have won an MVP or two and maybe would be in the top 15 conversation right now.

I don't think the issue is that Bryant is more durable. He has sustained quite a number of injuries over the years. The issue is that Bryant has, for the most part, minimized the amount of contact he exposes himself to by putting special focus on his mid-range and post game. He has said as much in the past; in order to prolong his career and maintain his health, he had developed parts of his game that are subject to less contact. As a result, his shooting percentage is lower than D. Wade's, but he is on the court more because he isn't going to the rim as often where he is sure to see contact on almost every play.

[EnoughSaid]

Im a big fan of Wade, so Ill try to be as realistic as possible:

Regular season: I would take Wade's 09 season over any of Kobes, but Kobe's longevity makes it even.

Playoffs (first 3 rounds): both of them have had some incredible series, my favourite Kobe's were those against Spurs and Kings in the early 2000's.
Wade has couple of great ones from first couple of years of his career, and good ones as a member of BIG 3. I would give a slighty edge to Kobe on this one.

Finals: Its a known fact that Kobe is not a very good finals performer, and when Wade is on other side of this comparation there are not so many players who would take a win here. I will say it again, his 06 finals performance is one of the greatest ever. W for Wade.

Scoring: Kobe was a beast, he could destroy you from any place on the court. Wade had a deadly mid range game when he was younger, but now only every three games. But he is one of the best penetrators the game has ever seen. But Kobes 35ppg' season gives him an edge.

All around game: Wade has always been great passer, best blocking SG of all times, and can rebound. Kobe is known as a very selfish player, who could have been very respectable passer if he ever tried. W for Wade.

Defense: Kobe was a very good lock down defender at the beggining of his career, but later on he was very very inconsistent. Wade's defense was always underrated, and its a main reason why Kobe ended most of the years on the first team instead of him. My opinion here is that they are even on D.

For me they are very even players. Wade was always very underrated, and Kobe will be remembered as the better player between them. And its his accolades that brings him over Wade.

Great post. :applause: Sadly Wade's lack of 1st Team All-NBA's and 1st Defensive Team All-NBA's really hold him back. Those injuries just made him take several steps back.

[elementally morale]

[QUOTE=Sharmer]Good rebuttal, I wasn

[daily]

Come on now. They're practically even. No their not and it's not really close. Kobe has been the better player even in when Wade was at his best. Wade may have a season or part of a season where he was marginally better than Kobe but for body of work over the prime seasons of their career Kobe is the better player.

[caliman]

Wade is better in the post, Kobe a better jump shooter.


:coleman:

[The Real JW]

I've admitted that I've started watching basketball in 2008.

Then how can you judge the prime years of Wade versus Kobe?

[PJR]

You have to go with Kobe due to the longevity.

But Wade's peak years stack up there. That's why the career averages between the two are identical.

[baller562]

No their not and it's not really close. Kobe has been the better player even in when Wade was at his best. Wade may have a season or part of a season where he was marginally better than Kobe but for body of work over the prime seasons of their career Kobe is the better player.

Well if your comparing a single season... it's basically a tossup. The only way to compare their primes is by how long it lasted, which is no comparison.

[shaq2000]

Wade is better in the post

Are you a bit deranged?

[Sharmer]

I can understand your point, however, you cannot be an expert in preferring coffee to tea. Which one do you like? Coffee or tea? Which one do you prefer? And what's better? Better to whom? So how do you decide? Ask coffee and tea experts? No way. You may say it is impossible to decide and to each his own. Or you may go with a voting process.

Stats are not a good way to measure basketball players and the more basketballl you watch the more you will know it's true. Stats are kept, but basketballl is more than stats.

You can measure women all you want but you cannot measure love.

I

[Sharmer]

Are you a bit deranged?


Have a look at post scoring statistics this year, Wade > Kobe.

[willds09]

:kobe: what drugs are u on for asking dumb schit like dat??

[baller562]

Have a look at post scoring statistics this year, Wade > Kobe.

You mean scoring inside the key? Just because the Heat fastbreak more which leads to more layups for Wade doesn't make his post game better. Frankly, I didn't even know Wade had a post game, I always remember him to be more of a slasher...

[Sharmer]

The statistics don't lie. You can't change facts.

There a reason why Wade is scoring 52% this year, he scores closer to the basket.

[Sharmer]

You mean scoring inside the key? Just because the Heat fastbreak more which leads to more layups for Wade doesn't make his post game better. Frankly, I didn't even know Wade had a post game, I always remember him to be more of a slasher...

I'm not talking Posting up, just pure post scoring.

[elementally morale]

You mean scoring inside the key? Just because the Heat fastbreak more which leads to more layups for Wade doesn't make his post game better. Frankly, I didn't even know Wade had a post game, I always remember him to be more of a slasher...


It's like comparing Duncan to Garnett. There may have been a year when Garnett seemed like the better player and in 2004 you could make a valid argument for him. (I did try at the time.) In retrospect though... Duncan had the better peak and it is pretty clear.

[baller562]

I'm not talking Posting up, just pure post scoring.

You stated that Wade had a better post up game, not that he scored more. Please re-read your original post...

[daily]

You mean scoring inside the key? Just because the Heat fastbreak more which leads to more layups for Wade doesn't make his post game better. Frankly, I didn't even know Wade had a post game, I always remember him to be more of a slasher...

Go easy on him. He's from the planet OhYeahSure, it's in the Upsilon Andromeda Galaxy

[baller562]

It's like comparing Duncan to Garnett. There may have been a year when Garnett seemed like the better player and in 2004 you could make a valid argument for him. (I did try at the time.) In retrospect though... Duncan had the better peak and it is pretty clear.

Well, Garnett's longevity isn't that far off from Duncans.. Garnett's peak was pretty incredible as well...

[elementally morale]

The statistics don't lie. You can't change facts.

There a reason why Wade is scoring 52% this year, he scores closer to the basket.

An average American has 1.2 TV sets. Who exactly does oen 1.2?

[DatAsh]

Some people will go out of their way and answer Wade, but I actually doubt any non-Heat fan above 25 really believes it even if he says so. The answer is Kobe and the gap is not minimal.

:facepalm

[Sharmer]

You stated that Wade had a better post up game, not that he scored more. Please re-read your original post...


Define post scoring? Quantify your answer by feet and body position.

[daily]

Well if your comparing a single season... it's basically a tossup. The only way to compare their primes is by how long it lasted, which is no comparison. This
I'm certainly not not.. Can't believe anyone would use one season or part of a season to say this players prime is better than anothers.
If we did that we'd have to rewrite the top 10 GOATs and it would end up being a bunch of guys who aren't even in the discussion normally. One season does not make a prime, it's just a blip on the radar

[Breezy]

Compare each players best season. 08-09 For wade and 02-03 for Kobe.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&p1=wadedw01&y1=2009&p2=bryanko01&y2=2003

I go with Kobe because of his defense but to say it's not close is silly.

[elementally morale]

[QUOTE=Sharmer]I

[LikeABosh]

that's great... question is what defines Kobe's prime? His numbers are fairly consistent from 2001-2013. I guess you can make an argument about 2005-06, but I thought he was just as good in 2002-03, and 2008-09. Crazy stuff..
The question is who was better at their best. Wade was at his best in the 2006 playoffs IMO and or in 2009. I'll take 09' wade over any Kobe season too

[daily]

Compare each players best season. 08-09 For wade and 02-03 for Kobe.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&p1=wadedw01&y1=2009&p2=bryanko01&y2=2003

I go with Kobe because of his defense but to say it's not close is silly.So you're saying Kobe and Wade were only in their primes for one season?

[baller562]

Define post scoring? Quantify your answer by feet and body position.

Well when you talk about a POST GAME (going by your original words)... its a back to the basket game. You can back down your guy, and do a variety of moves including hooks, spins, fadeaways. Your definition of post game (scoring close to the basket) is greatly flawed... I'm sure Iverson scored tons of points close to the basket on layups using his speed but calling that a post game is laughable.

[willds09]

The question is who was better at their best. Wade was at his best in the 2006 playoffs IMO and or in 2009. I'll take 09' wade over any Kobe season too
Are we talking about tha same league??:lol

[LikeABosh]

Are we talking about tha same league??:lol
Are you a retard?

[DatAsh]

It is pretty damn clear to most people who watched a lot more basketball than you have. It's not a HUGE difference but a clear enough difference. Careerwise it is a huge difference though in Kobe's favor. Wade in his best year was closer to Kobe's best year than during the course of their careers.

A lot less difference was there with McGrady's best year compared to Kobe's best year up until 2005. That's a debate. Wade.. not so much.

Couldn't disagree more, and I'm almost certain I've got you beat in the age department.

Wade's peak was incredible. I do think Kobe's peak - 2008 - was a tiny bit better, but to say it's not minimal just shows bias imo.

Kobe
28.3/6.3/5.4 on 46% FG, 58% TS

Wade
30.2/5.0/7.5 on 49% FG, 57% TS

Kobe was the better defender, and that's why I give him the edge, but it's definitely close; it's closer than 2003 McGrady is to 2008 Kobe.

[3peated]

Is This A Fkin Joke, Wade Could Never Compete With Kobe, Kobe Is Way Older And Still Better Than Him, God Damnit, Fck

[elementally morale]

Couldn't disagree more, and I'm almost certain I've got you beat in the age department.

Great. I don't feel offended if anyone disagrees with me. We are having a civilized discussion, it is all good.




Wade's peak was incredible. I do think Kobe's peak - 2008 - was a tiny bit better, but to say it's not minimal just shows bias imo.


Yes, I may be biased. At any rate, to me peak is not a year or half a year. It's at least 3 years. Preferably more. And prime (to me) is more like 6-8 years at a minimum. So peak Kobe to me is the 2006-2009 version and it is a good deal better than any 3 years Wade has put together so far.

[Sharmer]

First of all: I like your reasoning and I do think you are pretty smart. However, I also think you are a bit young and it shows. You can measure quality but you cannot measure preference. You may say some food is of better quality than some other food but you cannot say people like said food more if they can afford both and eat less of said food. The same thing with love.

You sure can measure hormone levels and we actually do -- usually to try rationalizing and justifying our underlying theories. What you can't say however, is if love is 'the cause' or the 'effect' of said hormonal changes. Love is still a mystery and my guess it will remain one forever. Just like the Big Bang -- if there really was one. You can come up with a million theories but at the end of the day there still remain some questions. There are a lot less facts than you think there are.




That is a clever and valid argument. Yes, you are right, it works both ways.

We may not be able to find cause and effect relationship with hormones studies. But they can show correlations. Which can open up a can of worms.

Preferences can be ranked therefore measured, however not in the sense that you refer to.

I am a strict materialist, which has its dogmas. However it

[DatAsh]

Great. I don't feel offended if anyone disagrees with me. We are having a civilized discussion, it is all good.

Yes, I may be biased. At any rate, to me peak is not a year or half a year. It's at least 3 years. Preferably more. And prime (to me) is more like 6-8 years at a minimum. So peak Kobe to me is the 2006-2009 version and it is a good deal better than any 3 years Wade has put together so far.

I misread the original post, my bad. There's a bigger difference between the two in terms of prime.

[baller562]

Is This A Fkin Joke, Wade Could Never Compete With Kobe, Kobe Is Way Older And Still Better Than Him, God Damnit, Fck

Your Typing Is A Joke.....

I think it's a legit comparison... Wade is a beast when he is healthy, Kobe was considered done all of a sudden this year he ages in reverse. I think more athletes will start using the German treatment in the offseason.

[gengiskhan]

Which player was better at their absolute best?

The queston here has nothing to do with "DOMINANCE" prime here!

the Question here has much to do with "Efficient" prime or "Noticeable" prime.

Neither Kobe nor Wade had "DOMINANT" prime or even close to it & you can add Duncan & AI to that list too.

Kobe had more NOTICEABLE prime (scoring titles + rings), Wade had slightly more EFFICIENT prime (FG% + scoring title).

Lebron, Shaq are examples of DOMINANT prime!

[Sharmer]

Well when you talk about a POST GAME (going by your original words)... its a back to the basket game. You can back down your guy, and do a variety of moves including hooks, spins, fadeaways. Your definition of post game (scoring close to the basket) is greatly flawed... I'm sure Iverson scored tons of points close to the basket on layups using his speed but calling that a post game is laughable.

I used the term post scoring in a different sense to that definition.

By that definition, Kobe POST GAME > Wade.

[tpols]

Couldn't disagree more, and I'm almost certain I've got you beat in the age department.

Wade's peak was incredible. I do think Kobe's peak - 2008 - was a tiny bit better, but to say it's not minimal just shows bias imo.

Kobe
28.3/6.3/5.4 on 46% FG, 58% TS

Wade
30.2/5.0/7.5 on 49% FG, 57% TS

Kobe was the better defender, and that's why I give him the edge, but it's definitely close; it's closer than 2003 McGrady is to 2008 Kobe.
Check out 09 and 10 sortable clutch stats too.. http://www.82games.com

Sucks they don't have Kobe's 06-08 prime on there but even slightly past prime kobe was the most productive clutch player in the league besides LeBron. Wade has never been as clutch as either of them. Kobe was actually clutcher earlier in his career too. He's gotten worse as he ages by a lot in that department.

Kobe also has like 140 forty point games to wades 35. Kobe has 25 fifty point games to wades 3. Wade is more consistent than Kobe. He's consistently great. Kobe has those games though that are just flat out legendary dominant.. Which is why he destroys wade in streak offensive games. That's what dominance really is about.

[baller562]

The queston here has nothing to do with "DOMINANCE" prime here!

the Question here has much to do with "Efficient" prime or "Noticeable" prime.

Neither Kobe nor Wade had "DOMINANT" prime or even close to it & you can add Duncan & AI to that list too.

Kobe had more NOTICEABLE prime (scoring titles + rings), Wade had slightly more EFFICIENT prime (FG% + scoring title).

Lebron, Shaq are examples of DOMINANT prime!


Whaaaaaattt??? Who said anything about Shaq or Lebron?

[elementally morale]

I am a strict materialist, which has its dogmas. However it’s less dogmatic than a number of other belief systems.

I work with equations and numbers all day, so it's not like I disregard the fact department. It's more of a question whether you think something objectively, jsut 'is' regardless of the obsrver or it does not -- and only observation makes things 'be'.

For example there is your flat Earth argument. What shape do you think the Earth had in 1450 Europe? You may say the Earth was round, just like it is round now, it's only (most) people at the time didn't know it was a sphere. But you may on saying it was flat... and only observation made it round. You cannot tell which is true, because there is no way proving one or the other. You have to choose a belief system -- say you choose to think things just 'are' and it doesn't matter what we can or cannot observe, 'things' are independent of the observer. But you can also say the exact opposite, and for example Heisenberg with the uncertainty relation did say just that and it seems to be true (unless it isn't any more, just like everyting else in science).

What do you think about space for example? How many dimensions are there 'really'? Is 3 a fact? Or spece-time with 4? Maybe string theory with 10 or 26? Do you know the answer? Are you sure there won't be another theory around in 500 years telling what you thought all along was 'false'?

So are you wrong now in assuming the Earth is a spherical object? Who can tell? I sure cannot... and I do this for a living... as a so-called professional.

[gengiskhan]

Whaaaaaattt??? Who said anything about Shaq or Lebron?

no one

but

This thread has some thing to do with DOMINANCE in title.

apparently, the thread creator needs to be given a REAL example of DOMINANCE because he does not know what is.

Neither Kobe nor Wade are examples of DOMINANCE!

[elementally morale]

gengiskhan

Why are you typing everything in bold, buddy? If you say something smart or funny we are going to realize that anyway.

[shaq2000]

I used the term post scoring in a different sense to that definition.

By that definition, Kobe POST GAME > Wade.

What kind of post game were you referring to?

[Sharmer]

I work with equations and numbers all day, so it's not like I disregard the fact department. It's more of a question whether you think something objectively, jsut 'is' regardless of the obsrver or it does not -- and only observation makes things 'be'.

For example there is your flat Earth argument. What shape do you think the Earth had in 1450 Europe? You may say the Earth was round, just like it is round now, it's only (most) people at the time didn't know it was a sphere. But you may on saying it was flat... and only observation made it round. You cannot tell which is true, because there is no way proving one or the other. You have to choose a belief system -- say you choose to think things just 'are' and it doesn't matter what we can or cannot observe, 'things' are independent of the observer. But you can also say the exact opposite, and for example Heisenberg with the uncertainty relation did say just that and it seems to be true (unless it isn't any more, just like everyting else in science).

What do you think about space for example? How many dimensions are there 'really'? Is 3 a fact? Or spece-time with 4? Maybe string theory with 10 or 26? Do you know the answer? Are you sure there won't be another theory around in 500 years telling what you thought all along was 'false'?

So are you wrong now in assuming the Earth is a spherical object? Who can tell? I sure cannot... and I do this for a living... as a so-called professional.

No objective reality does imply there is no fact. This in itself is self-refuting. I can

[Kobe 4 The Win]

"Re: Kobe or Wade: More Dominant Prime"


Bwahahahahahahaha!!!

[Sharmer]

What kind of post game were you referring to?

Aggregiate of all points in the post.

I didnt mean post game, just post scoring. But to avoid confusion in the future. I will say inside the key scoring.

[elementally morale]

No objective reality does imply there is no fact. This in itself is self-refuting. I can’t state that there is no fact, because if the statement was true. That would be a fact.

Maybe there are no facts in the sense that even if it is true or it isn't still is not a fact. It may be true that there are no facts on Mondays but not on Tuesdays. There is no rule prohibiting this other than what YOU think is or isn't possible.



Quantum theory is out of my league. Newton’s mechanics is my ceiling point. Lebrons James dunk over Terry is good demonstration of Newton’s second law.

Newtonian physics does work with 'facts', but even Newton himself knew there must be something wrong with facts as he couldn't explain why gravity doesn't make everything in the world collapse upon itself. However, we are viewing Newtonian physics as an oversimplified, specific case of a much more complex 'reality'. (Newtonian physics are a specific case of general realtivity.) Nowadays, it is less and less sure if there are facts orr if there is anything else than what we are able to observe.

At any rate, I really suggest this 1-hour-long presentation. You will like it, the guy as a pure materialist. A well-known physicist called Lawrence Krauss. I think he will show you with pure logic a few things about facts in general. Don't be afraid, you are going to understand it, you don't need higher math or any of that stuff.

A Universe from Nothing
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjaGktVQdNg


Krauss starts talking at around the 2:30 mark.
You will like it. Trust me.

[shaq2000]

Aggregiate of all points in the post.

I didnt mean post game, just post scoring. But to avoid confusion in the future. I will say inside the key scoring.

Oh. You mean just mid-range scoring, right? All shots ~3 to 10 feet from the basket?

I've always heard post scoring to mean scoring while in the post. Back to the basket, low post, high post, etc. And Kobe is definitely better in the post than Wade.

[G-Funk]

Wade's prime only lasted 1 season in 09! lol

[The Real JW]

so..

Kobe: better post player, footwork, triple threat, jump shooter
Wade: better slasher, dunker, rebounder

who would you guys say is the better defender and passer?

[Sharmer]

Maybe there are no facts in the sense that even if it is true or it isn't still is not a fact. It may be true that there are no facts on Mondays but not on Tuesdays. There is no rule prohibiting this other than what YOU think is or isn't possible.




Newtonian physics does work with 'facts', but even Newton himself knew there must be something wrong with facts as he couldn't explain why gravity doesn't make everything in the world collapse upon itself. However, we are viewing Newtonian physics as an oversimplified, specific case of a much more complex 'reality'. (Newtonian physics are a specific case of general realtivity.) Nowadays, it is less and less sure if there are facts orr if there is anything else than what we are able to observe.

At any rate, I really suggest this 1-hour-long presentation. You will like it, the guy as a pure materialist. A well-known physicist called Lawrence Krauss. I think he will show you with pure logic a few things about facts in general. Don't be afraid, you are going to understand it, you don't need higher math or any of that stuff.

A Universe from Nothing
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjaGktVQdNg


Krauss starts talking at around the 2:30 mark.
You will like it. Trust me.

There

[Magic 32]

It doesn't help that you can't even spell measure right to begin with. Your head might explode trying debate this topic.


You do realize that A and S are right next to each other on the keyboard, right?

You f*cking prick.

[elementally morale]

There’s no rule prohibiting from believing that a fact maybe on Tuesday as opposed to Monday. But invariably those statements end up being self-refuting. Like global skepticism.


My math is ok, I’ve been accepted as a PHD student, however I have 4 weeks to vary my study design. The PHD is biomechanics, 12 weeks randomised controlled study on Plyometric training on effects of ground reaction forces and maximal sprint velocity. The problem in biomechanics is huge amounts of data, which end up being difficult to interpret. I’m going to change and investigate supplements and performance. Even though new study will be in physiology, will be much easier to complete and probably more applied.

I’ll have a look at the video.

OK. Check it out, it is well worth your time.

On a last note:
There is nothing wrong with being a materialist (albeit you can find strange correlations between taoism and quantum mechanics for example), but if I can have one last suggestion, it's this: if you are working on your Ph.D and plan to deal with science later on, it is always a good idea to keep an open mind and be the least dogmatic possible. When you are 100% sure you are right... then it is a great time to question yourself. Science (and life in general) always moves forward due to people questioning 'well-known-facts', like 'but the Earth is a flat and infinite plate, we don't fall off of it'.

Thanks for the conversation, I really enjoyed it. :cheers:

[imnew09]

so..

Kobe: better post player, footwork, triple threat, jump shooter
Wade: better slasher, dunker, rebounder

who would you guys say is the better defender and passer?

Wade is a better dunker? Lol go youtube some Kobe ingame dunking highlights..

[elementally morale]

so..

Kobe: better post player, footwork, triple threat, jump shooter
Wade: better slasher, dunker, rebounder

who would you guys say is the better defender and passer?

I don't agree with the notion Wade is a better in-game dunker. Kobe is not some athletic freak but he is a very very good in-game dunker.

[Sharmer]

OK. Check it out, it is well worth your time.

On a last note:
There is nothing wrong with being a materialist (albeit you can find strange correlations between taoism and quantum mechanics for example), but if I can have one last suggestion, it's this: if you are working on your Ph.D and plan to deal with science later on, it is always a good idea to keep an open mind and be the least dogmatic possible. When you are 100% sure you are right... then it is a great time to question yourself. Science (and life in general) always moves forward due to people questioning 'well-known-facts', like 'but the Earth is a flat and infinite plate, we don't fall off of it'.

Thanks for the conversation, I really enjoyed it. :cheers:


Thanks for the advice. :facepalm

Just on the original point, rule by popularity. I recall that one member used bold and large points to make his point. The vast majority are influenced by such emotions in their views. Whilst the other extreme of pure rationalism/materialism maybe dogmatic. It

[PickernRoller]

Is OP being serious or just the normal phagg0try he spills? Maybe and maybe he's so retarded that he actually believes he has a case with the following of the lebron tribe...maybe....that's also pathetic but anyway...OP is a phagg0t.

[elementally morale]

The vast majority are influenced by such emotions in their views.

Well, the presidential elections are nice examples of soap advertising, yes. Still, do you know a better method? People won't wise up all of a sudden ijust because you don't even let them vote. :oldlol: You will just end up in tyranny PLUS lots of assholes.

If people think Madonna is more valuable than Tom Waits, the Foo Fighters or Nine Inch Nails... what can you do about it? Measure 'the quality of music'? You can't do that. Only one thing can do that: time. It's not perfect, but still the best we have. Short term: Voting; long term: Time.

[Deuce Bigalow]

The queston here has nothing to do with "DOMINANCE" prime here!

the Question here has much to do with "Efficient" prime or "Noticeable" prime.

Neither Kobe nor Wade had "DOMINANT" prime or even close to it & you can add Duncan & AI to that list too.

Kobe had more NOTICEABLE prime (scoring titles + rings), Wade had slightly more EFFICIENT prime (FG% + scoring title).

Lebron, Shaq are examples of DOMINANT prime!
The player of the decade was never dominant?

[Sharmer]

Well, the presidential elections are nice examples of soap advertising, yes. Still, do you know a better method? People won't wise up all of a sudden ijust because you don't even let them vote. :oldlol: You will just end up in tyranny PLUS lots of assholes.

If people think Madonna is more valuable than Tom Waits, the Foo Fighters or Nine Inch Nails... what can you do about it? Measure 'the quality of music'? You can't do that. Only one thing can do that: time. It's not perfect, but still the best we have. Short term: Voting; long term: Time.

Plato had the right idea.

But I don't have the a exact solution to the problem.

You maybe find the video interesting.

Noam Chomsky - America is NOT a Democracy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBdk5n68gdM

[elementally morale]

:facepalm
Plato had the right idea.

But I don't have the a exact solution to the problem.

You maybe find the video interesting.

Noam Chomsky - America is NOT a Democracy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBdk5n68gdM


I know this video.
Wha about this one?

The Century of the Self
BBC documentary, 4 hours long. It is going to change the way you look at the world. I promise you. It's on youtube.

[gengiskhan]

The player of the decade was never dominant?

More like "the product of a NBA's winningest franchise & NBAs winningest coach"

Dominant? WTF? 1 consolation MVP in 17 yrs of chucking @ 45%FG

Good luck defending that.

[elementally morale]

Here it is.

The Century of the Self
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7EwXmxpExw

One of the very best documentaries I've ever seen and I've seen some. It focuses exactly on your problem with the world.

[PickernRoller]

More like "the product of a NBA's winningest franchise & NBAs winningest coach"

Dominant? WTF? 1 consolation MVP in 17 yrs of chucking @ 45%FG

Good luck defending that.

Of course not. There is no luck in any of this:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-H_5HJ2TcRV8/T9oCLJzvMHI/AAAAAAAAAII/aWHnxSvdLjk/s1600/nba-funny-images-you-mad-kobe.jpg

http://ll-media.tmz.com/2009/06/17/0617_kobe_lebron_split_kobe_bryant_ap090617020079_ ap_exs2-1.jpg

I understand you're going through a tough period of haterness like all the LeQueen fanboys before you. It's normal for retardiness to increase exponentially the more you try it. Sooner or later you will experience a period of diminishing returns like Pauk and others. At the end of the day there's is no cure for the black mamba's poison. You can only treat it. Worst symptoms include madness, delusion and last of all hallucinations.

Let me know when your boy gets to 2. Then we will postpone our talk till he gets to 3. After that you catch my attention and then I'll give a reason why you should ban yourself and exit this forum.

[Sharmer]

:facepalm


I know this video.
Wha about this one?

The Century of the Self
BBC documentary, 4 hours long. It is going to change the way you look at the world. I promise you. It's on youtube.

If you

[gengiskhan]

Of course not. There is no luck in any of this:



well said.

Teams COLLECTIVELY win championships.

Kobe Bryant's own teammate Mr. ROBERT HORRY has 8 of these championships, 3 more than him. go figure.

while many here pretend that 82 games regular season is useless. I wonder why they play the games & give awards

They should just go straight to the post-season every year.

[elementally morale]

The masses need to be informed, at least to some degree.


You remind me of my younger self, no disrespect. So I think you will grow it out. Until you don't, good luck with educating the masses (at least to some degree). :cheers:

[Deuce Bigalow]

More like "the product of a NBA's winningest franchise & NBAs winningest coach"

Dominant? WTF? 1 consolation MVP in 17 yrs of chucking @ 45%FG

Good luck defending that.
You're the same person that has Shaq (1 MVP), Hakeem (1 MVP), and Oscar (1 MVP) in your top 10.

[gengiskhan]

You're the same person that has Shaq (1 MVP), Hakeem (1 MVP), and Oscar (1 MVP) in your top 10.

Oscar 1 MVP on a WORSE SCRUB FRANCHISE when MVP was never awarded to PERIMETER player let alone PERIMETER DOMINANT PLAYER ON SCRUB FRANCHISE. I'll take 30+ ppg triple double seasons with ABSOLUTE DOMINATION OF THE LEAGUE than 1 consolation MVP over 17 yrs on NBA's ELITEST BEST FRANCHISE.


Hakeem 1 MVP translates into 3 season MVPs in Kobe era. '90s was just EXTREMELY COMPETITIVE & Hakeem got overlooked just like Shaq. Hakeem also has DPOY & FMVP in that same yr. still the best year ever by any GOAT to this day in the BEST NBA DECADE!


SHAQ 1 MVP should've been 2-3 no doubt. SHAQ's DOMINANCE was ignored clearly & Duncan & AI were recipients of the MVP GIFT. btw 2000-2003 SHAQ should've had 2-3 MVPs.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Oscar 1 MVP on a WORSE SCRUB FRANCHISE when MVP was never awarded to PERIMETER player let alone PERIMETER DOMINANT PLAYER ON SCRUB FRANCHISE. I'll take 30+ ppg triple double seasons with ABSOLUTE DOMINATION OF THE LEAGUE than 1 consolation MVP over 17 yrs on NBA's ELITEST BEST FRANCHISE.


Hakeem 1 MVP translates into 3 season MVPs in Kobe era. '90s was just EXTREMELY COMPETITIVE & Hakeem got overlooked just like Shaq. Hakeem also has DPOY & FMVP in that same yr. still the best year ever by any GOAT to this day in the BEST NBA DECADE!


SHAQ 1 MVP should've been 2-3 no doubt. SHAQ's DOMINANCE was ignored clearly & Duncan & AI were recipients of the MVP GIFT. btw 2000-2003 SHAQ should've had 2-3 MVPs.
1 MVP. Not dominant.

[tpols]

Oscar 1 MVP on a WORSE SCRUB FRANCHISE when MVP was never awarded to PERIMETER player let alone PERIMETER DOMINANT PLAYER ON SCRUB FRANCHISE. I'll take 30+ ppg triple double seasons with ABSOLUTE DOMINATION OF THE LEAGUE than 1 consolation MVP over 17 yrs on NBA's ELITEST BEST FRANCHISE.


Hakeem 1 MVP translates into 3 season MVPs in Kobe era. '90s was just EXTREMELY COMPETITIVE & Hakeem got overlooked just like Shaq. Hakeem also has DPOY & FMVP in that same yr. still the best year ever by any GOAT to this day in the BEST NBA DECADE!


SHAQ 1 MVP should've been 2-3 no doubt. SHAQ's DOMINANCE was ignored clearly & Duncan & AI were recipients of the MVP GIFT. btw 2000-2003 SHAQ should've had 2-3 MVPs.
Well.. Just like Shaq was a better player than Duncan and Iverson but missed the award due to extenuating circumstances(not top seed + missing games) peak Kobe was also a better player than Nash and Dirk but didn't have a chance at the mvp because his teams weren't good enough in a monster western conference to get a top seed.

[gengiskhan]

1 MVP. Not dominant.

but

30+ ppgs / 10+rpg / 10+ apg for 5+ years straight is "ABSOLUTE" DOMINANCE! not just dominance!

something Copy Cryant cannot even dream of coming close to.

[Eat Like A Bosh]

Well.. Just like Shaq was a better player than Duncan and Iverson but missed the award due to extenuating circumstances(not top seed + missing games) peak Kobe was also a better player than Nash and Dirk but didn't have a chance at the mvp because his teams weren't good enough in a monster western conference to get a top seed.
Don't bother arguing with that moron...

[Deuce Bigalow]

but

30+ ppgs / 10+rpg / 10+ apg for 5+ years straight is "ABSOLUTE" DOMINANCE! not just dominance!

something Copy Cryant cannot even dream of coming close to.
Oscar 1 MVP in 15 years
Hakeem 1 MVP in 19 years
Shaq 1 MVP in 19 years

None of them were dominant.

[MaxFly]

but

30+ ppgs / 10+rpg / 10+ apg for 5+ years straight is "ABSOLUTE" DOMINANCE! not just dominance!

something Copy Cryant cannot even dream of coming close to.

No one else in the history of basketball has been able to do it. Oscar was special, but Oscar also played at a time when teams played fast paced basketball and the average NBA team gave up in the mid to high 110s in points during games as well as a higher number of rebounds. It's not a legitimate comparison.

[gengiskhan]

Oscar 1 MVP in 15 years
Hakeem 1 MVP in 19 years & 2 x bac-2-back DPOY
Shaq 1 MVP in 19 years

None of them were dominant.

You trying too hard to UNDERMINE Hakeem's accolades.

nice try.

[PickernRoller]

[QUOTE=gengiskhan]well said.

Teams COLLECTIVELY win championships.

Kobe Bryant's own teammate Mr. ROBERT HORRY has 8 of these championships, 3 more than him. go figure.

while many here pretend that 82 games regular season is useless. I wonder why they play the games & give awards

Awards are incentives for performance. You want the MVP of the regular season. Put up the best stats and have either the best or second best record in the league. That award gets you nothing if you don't do shit in the playoffs - some will easily swap that award for a FMVP any day of the week. Also, never and never hurt your reputation as bad as Kobe Bryant did - rape gets you a bad rap. You can never be the face of a league by being accused of rape, moreover if the case ended up in settlement and not a decision. You can't expect people to look at you ever the same, not reporters, not anyone. Unless you're a fan and knows what sup. There is a reason Kobe is a lonely f'ck. As he said, he has made tons of enemies....they still hunt him everyday - mamba just too quick.

The regular season isn't useless. It's the place where you try to bond as a team and secure a playoff spot. An ordeal that all sports have to follow. At the end of the day the Final Trophy is all that matters. IN all SPORTS. It's not useless but not as significant once you get into the top 4 seeds of your respective conference. The real test of how good a player and team is comes in the playoffs - everything is on the table - all or nothing.

[Deuce Bigalow]

You trying too hard to UNDERMINE Hakeem's accolades.

nice try.
1 MVP though. Hakeem "I think I'm dominant" Olajuwon.

[gengiskhan]

No one else in the history of basketball has been able to do it. Oscar was special, but Oscar also played at a time when teams played fast paced basketball and the average NBA team gave up in the mid to high 110s in points during games as well as a higher number of rebounds. It's not a legitimate comparison.

Nobody put a gun to KOBE's or AI's head & ask them to SLOW DOWN THE GAME TO A GRIDING HALT & CHUCK a 18 footer with 2 secs left of a shot clock!

B'ball has always been a fast pace game.

Infact, Kobe & AI were helped a LOT by RELAXED DEFENSIVE rules to INCREASE THE GAME"S PACE.

They just LACKED ALL AROUND TALENT OF BIG O

This is the reality.

Neither of them can really PASS like Big O
Neither of them can rebound like Big O
Neither of them can score like Big O

[gengiskhan]

1 MVP though. Hakeem "I think I'm dominant" Olajuwon.

& Copy "Rapist" Bryant hows up to Houston every summer to learn the DREAM SHAKE in hakeem's gym.

DOMINANT Hakeem teaching INSECURE kobe how to play the game at the level of domination.

Next....

[Deuce Bigalow]

& Copy "Rapist" Bryant hows up to Houston every summer to learn the DREAM SHAKE in hakeem's gym.

DOMINANT Hakeem teaching INSECURE kobe how to play the game at the level of domination.

Next....
Hakeem "I'm not dominant" Olajuwon only won one MVP, therefore he is not dominant.

[PickernRoller]

& Copy "Rapist" Bryant hows up to Houston every summer to learn the DREAM SHAKE in hakeem's gym.

DOMINANT Hakeem teaching INSECURE kobe how to play the game at the level of domination.

Next....

I am gonna leave it here:

http://nsa20.casimages.com/img/2010/11/25/101125035807433904.gif

http://ww2.hdnux.com/photos/03/73/10/1028617/3/628x471.jpg

http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn200/nbacardDOTnet/zz%20NBA%20Photo%20Gallery/z%20Funny%20NBA%20Photos/Funny%20NBA%20Record/Lebron%20James/aka%20big%20choker/lebron-james-2011-nba-final-4q.jpg

Then:

http://ballislife.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/lb.jpg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZzoUr4LKwI

Kobe went to Hakeem after winning in 2009. Get your history right.

[gengiskhan]

Well.. Just like Shaq was a better player than Duncan and Iverson but missed the award due to extenuating circumstances(not top seed + missing games) peak Kobe was also a better player than Nash and Dirk but didn't have a chance at the mvp because his teams weren't good enough in a monster western conference to get a top seed.


That is debatable.

You cant shoot 45%FG & take 50% of FGA of your whole team & NOT MAKE THE PLAYOFFS. Its Kobe's fault & He was rightly NOT VOTED for MVP.

Kobe was never a CLEAR CUT BETTER like SHAQ, LBJ, HAKEEM, MJ etc etc who DOMINATED.

Kobe played very good but LACKED DOMINATION

MJ got 32.5 /8 /8 @ 53%FG with 3 SPG with SHEER DOMINATION & Magic ended up with MVP cuz that only got MJ's bulls to 47 Wins.

MJ got 37.1 /5 /5 @ 48%FG with 200+ steals / 100+ blocks. FIRST player to ever do so. still got him only 40 wins. MAGIC won MVP again.

Kobe never came close to SHEER DOMINATION. NEVER!

If you think chucking at 45%FG to get to 35 ppg is domination that cannot even grab 8th spot in post season. You need help.

[dh144498]

gengisTroll:
Kobe 1 mvp = consolation prize
everyone else 1 mvp = dominant.
:lol :roll:

[gengiskhan]

gengisTroll:
Kobe "consolation" 1 mvp = consolation prize
everyone else 1 mvp = dominant.
:lol :roll:

well said.

[chazzy]

gengiskhaaaaaaan

[dh144498]

well said.

how are you not banned yet with all this trolling. :confusedshrug:

[Magic 32]

gengisTroll:
Kobe 1 mvp = consolation prize
everyone else 1 mvp = dominant.
:lol :roll:

To bad he dominated 3 postseasons. You know the games that matter?

[tpols]

That is debatable.
.
No it isn't. Peak Kobe was a better player than both Dirk and Nash.

[gengiskhan]

No it isn't. Peak Kobe was a better player than both Dirk and Nash.

see here we go again.

"better player" is not an argument.

healthy young 1995-1998 Piston's Grant Hill was a "better player" than 1994-1998 Pippen.

Hill was just all around better than pippen. Better scorer, better ball handler, better leader. Pippen was much better than Hill on defense alone.

We are STRICTLY talking about DOMINANCE here!

Neither Kobe, nor wade, nor Duncan DOMINATED!....NONE OF THEM!

Shaq lost season MVPs despite DOMINANCE of the league
MJ lost season MVPs despite DOMINANCE of the league
Big O lost season MVPs despite DOMINANCE of the league

[dh144498]

To bad he dominated 3 postseasons. You know the games that matter?

yeash Kobe is so underrated by these goons.... :facepalm

[ShaqAttack3234]

Well.. Just like Shaq was a better player than Duncan and Iverson but missed the award due to extenuating circumstances(not top seed + missing games) peak Kobe was also a better player than Nash and Dirk but didn't have a chance at the mvp because his teams weren't good enough in a monster western conference to get a top seed.

Shaq most likely didn't miss out on MVP votes that year for missed games because he played 3 more than Iverson did, or missing out on the top seed because LA was tied for the second best record in the league just 2 games behind the Spurs.

I'd guess he didn't get the votes because LA and Shaq were both measured against their 2000 season and because of the Shaq/Kobe feud.

[gengiskhan]

To bad he dominated 3 postseasons. You know the games that matter?

yeah

like not making the Post Season in his peak prime.

like Blowing a 3-1 playoffs lead & loosing the series.

like loosing 2008 NBA finals despite being favorites.

[PickernRoller]

Shaq most likely didn't miss out on MVP votes that year for missed games because he played 3 more than Iverson did, or missing out on the top seed because LA was tied for the second best record in the league just 2 games behind the Spurs.

I'd guess he didn't get the votes because LA and Shaq were both measured against their 2000 season and because of the Shaq/Kobe feud.

Kobe/Shaq got doomed by the feud. Kobe got it even worse with the rape scandal - never to recover. Plus back then you know how they actually cared if you had a "star" by your side?

At the end of the day no one gives a shit anymore. Wasn't it this year that Shaq was getting his jersey retired at Staples?

[Magic 32]

yeah

like not making the Post Season in his peak prime.

like Blowing a 3-1 playoffs lead & loosing the series.

like loosing 2008 NBA finals despite being favorites.

Like playing in the west, changing coach in mid-season and getting your ankle destoyed?

Like getting eternal revenge against Boston in 2010.

Like being favorites in 2008, predicted by the same people who made these...

http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/347412/seriespicks.JPG

[tpols]

see here we go again.

"better player" is not an argument.

healthy young 1995-1998 Piston's Grant Hill was a "better player" than 1994-1998 Pippen.

Hill was just all around better than pippen. Better scorer, better ball handler, better leader. Pippen was much better than Hill on defense alone.

We are STRICTLY talking about DOMINANCE here!

Neither Kobe, nor wade, nor Duncan DOMINATED!....NONE OF THEM!

Shaq lost season MVPs despite DOMINANCE of the league
MJ lost season MVPs despite DOMINANCE of the league
Big O lost season MVPs despite DOMINANCE of the league
It's very hard to dominate the league without a great team around you because even if you play great your team is still capped at a second round exit. MJ was dominating individually in the 80s.. Putting up absolute monster games and seasons but he didn't become the GOAT until he had a great squad grow around him right as he was hitting his peak. Basically to be consodered dominant you not only have to put up monster performances, but you also have to win against other great teams. Nobody does that on their own.

Kobe was hanging 50 point weeks.. 40 point months.. Outscoring teams by himself.. He was breaking records from wilts day. Kobe was an absolute monster in those years. The best player in the world. But he was unlucky in that his team that he grew with totally dismantled as he entered his peak.. Leaving him with shit to play with in a brutal conference. If kobe had pau and Bynum back then the Lakers would've almost certainly been a top seed and he'd have some MVPs.

[Deuce Bigalow]

yeah

like not making the Post Season in his peak prime.

like Blowing a 3-1 playoffs lead & loosing the series.

like loosing 2008 NBA finals despite being favorites.
"Loosing"

Have you passed the 8th grade yet?

[gengiskhan]

"Loosing"

Have you passed the 8th grade yet?

from "up" 3-1 to "down" 4-3. :lol :lol

suck on that gaayboy! :lol

thats chokBE at his prime peak best! :coleman:

[Deuce Bigalow]

from "up" 3-1 to "down" 4-3. :lol :lol

suck on that gaayboy! :lol

thats chokBE at his prime peak best! :coleman:
http://www.fulcrumgallery.com/product-images/P670339-01/kobe-bryant-2010-nba-finals-game-7-championship-trophy5-fingers-in-studio27.jpg

Art thou mad?

[Magic 32]

from "up" 3-1 to "down" 4-3. :lol :lol

suck on that gaayboy! :lol

thats chokBE at his prime peak best! :coleman:

http://sports.cbsimg.net/images/visual/whatshot/wade-james-mock.jpg

[TheBigVeto]

Wade is overrated but he's infinitely much better than Kobe. Wade wins this one.

[KOBE143]

This topic is very disrespectful to Kobe.. Kobe's prime was far better than Wade and its not even close.. Only players that I think that has a case over prime Kobe were KAJ, Jordan and Magic.. Even current Kobe is arguably better than Prime Wade.. :facepalm

[dh144498]

This topic is very disrespectful to Kobe.. Kobe's prime was far better than Wade and its not even close.. Only players that I think that has a case over prime Kobe were KAJ, Jordan and Magic.. Even current Kobe is arguably better than Prime Wade.. :facepalm

this.

[HannibalKid]

It's Kobe. Simple as that. You don't pick out one year of two players careers to debate thier primes lol

Man Espn has made some fans into idiots the last 8 years.

[NumberSix]

It's Kobe. Simple as that. You don't pick out one year of two players careers to debate thier primes lol

Man Espn has made some fans into idiots the last 8 years.
Has Kobe had ANY seasons that were really all that great?

[fpliii]

Peak = Wade
Prime = Kobe

[ShaqAttack3234]

Kobe/Shaq got doomed by the feud. Kobe got it even worse with the rape scandal - never to recover. Plus back then you know how they actually cared if you had a "star" by your side?

Seems kind of irrelevant to my post.


Has Kobe had ANY seasons that were really all that great?

Pick a year from 2006-2008.

[MisterAmazing]

obvious agenda is obvious

[plowking]

Couldn't disagree more, and I'm almost certain I've got you beat in the age department.

Wade's peak was incredible. I do think Kobe's peak - 2008 - was a tiny bit better, but to say it's not minimal just shows bias imo.

Kobe
28.3/6.3/5.4 on 46% FG, 58% TS

Wade
30.2/5.0/7.5 on 49% FG, 57% TS

Kobe was the better defender, and that's why I give him the edge, but it's definitely close; it's closer than 2003 McGrady is to 2008 Kobe.

If you're considering 2008 Kobe as peak, then its not comparable as to who the better defender was. :oldlol:

Wade by a country mile. As in, its not close. :oldlol:

[Mr. Jabbar]

I would pick Kobe Bryant in every aspect over Wade, including prime,peak etc. He is also better looking and knows how to dress.