#apples2oranges

[CanYouDigIt]

Kobe's response to PJ comparing him to MJ.

http://gyazo.com/bfdeae9ffb118f6aa764a074647b89da.png

[chosen_wun]

http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/popcorn_yes.gif

[unbreakable]

15 yrs later ni66az still comparing kobe and MJ.. meanwhile LBJ not even the best player on his team (bosh >>> )

[TylerOO]

so insecurrr

[jlip]

However one feels about the Kobe vs MJ discussion, Kobe does have a point here. MJ and Kobe played the majority of their respective careers under vastly different circumstances.

[Cleverness]

What's wrong with comparing apples to oranges?:confusedshrug:

Comparing apples to oranges: a randomised prospective study

http://ironvan.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/barone2000.pdf

[LongLiveTheKing]

Kobe acts like playing with Shaq was a burden on him?
Bitch he carried you for 3 titles.

[Orlando Magic]

Kobe acts like playing with Shaq was a burden on him?
Bitch he carried you for 3 titles.

This. LOL. Wow, even after all these years, he's still an ignorant ******.

[CanYouDigIt]

Kobe acts like playing with Shaq was a burden on him?
Bitch he carried you for 3 titles.
inb4 Kobe-tards say Kobe led Shaq to 3 titles and Scottie led MJ to 6 titles :lol

[buddha]

If MJ played with Shaq there would be no comparison between Kobe and MJ. Kobe would have maybe 1 or 2 rings while MJ would have atleast 7.

[Killbot]

I never get that saying because people compare them all the time when it comes to a better fruit. :confusedshrug:

[Rondo]

An apple's an apple and an orange is an orange. Kobe's a shooting guard and Michael was a shooting guard. Good one Kobe.

I doubt I'd be too offended if someone implied Michael Jordan was better than me.

What point is he trying to make with Shaq, exactly? If he didn't play with Shaq he'd have 2 rings and even less people would compare him with MJ.

[buddha]

And Kobe is a fcuking idiot for saying the comparisons are apples to oranges, they are as fcuking close to apples to apples as you can get.

- Same height (6'6")
- Same position (SG)
- Stacked teams (Pippen/Shaq)
- Same HC (Phil Jackson)

The only difference is that Kobe wasn't the best player on his stacked team, where Jordan was... And Michael would still be the best player if Shaq was his teammate.

[Unbiased_one]

Kobe's response to PJ comparing him to MJ.

http://gyazo.com/bfdeae9ffb118f6aa764a074647b89da.png

I don't understand what kobe is getting at...if jordan had had a shaq-like player from 87-89 he would have 3 more rings most likely. Jordan is in a totally different league to kobe. (not that that's disrespcting kobe, it's just how great jordan was).

[Deuce Bigalow]

Kobe acts like playing with Shaq was a burden on him?
Bitch he carried you for 3 titles.
Maybe you were born in 01 or 02 so you probably don't know about the playoff series verses the Spurs those years.

[MJ(Mean John)]

Hate it or love it, KB has a point.

If mike came in the league out of HS and was playing with the most dominant force ever and played in Phil's system,

And

Kobe came in after playing college ball and had great players and a great system (similar to 09/10) and his whole career he played with someone of SP level along with a great supporting cast

It would be different. Nobody is saying kobe would be better or anything. I'm not saying that, simply saying that it would be different.

Let's be real, an 18 yr out of HS would be shaqs #2 option too.
Look at Kobe's numbers on those 3 peats. Compare them to the numbers he put them as a #1 option. Imagine if M was sharing the ball with shaq.


So he has a point. In terms of careers, apples and oranges.

You don't know if playing with shaq made a positive, negative, or neutral impact on Kobe's career/talent and to what extent the same way we don't know what playing in M's situation would have done for Kb

[LongLiveTheKing]

Maybe you were born in 01 or 02 so you probably don't know about the playoff series verses the Spurs those years.
Shaq was still the best player in all 3 championships.

[avonbarksdale]

Hate it or love it, KB has a point.

If mike came in the league out of HS and was playing with the most dominant force ever and played in Phil's system,

And

Kobe came in after playing college ball and had great players and a great system (similar to 09/10) and his whole career he played with someone of SP level along with a great supporting cast

It wouldn't be different. Nobody is saying kobe would be better or anything. I'm not saying that, simply saying that it would be different.

Let's be real, an 18 yr out of HS would be shaqs #2 option too.
Look at Kobe's numbers on those 3 peats. Compare them to the numbers he put them as a #1 option. Imagine if M was sharing the ball with shaq.


So he has a point. In terms of careers, apples and oranges.

You don't know if playing with shaq made a positive, negative, or neutral impact on Kobe's career/talent and to what extent the same way we don't know what playing in M's situation would have done for Kb


yes very well said

[Killbot]

Hate it or love it, KB has a point.

If mike came in the league out of HS and was playing with the most dominant force ever and played in Phil's system,

And

Kobe came in after playing college ball and had great players and a great system (similar to 09/10) and his whole career he played with someone of SP level along with a great supporting cast

It wouldn't be different. Nobody is saying kobe would be better or anything. I'm not saying that, simply saying that it would be different.

Let's be real, an 18 yr out of HS would be shaqs #2 option too.
Look at Kobe's numbers on those 3 peats. Compare them to the numbers he put them as a #1 option. Imagine if M was sharing the ball with shaq.


So he has a point. In terms of careers, apples and oranges.

You don't know if playing with shaq made a positive, negative, or neutral impact on Kobe's career/talent and to what extent the same way we don't know what playing in M's situation would have done for Kb

Then it gets to the point of which players can we compare? No one?

[NumberSix]

Yes, because being carried to those 3 championships severely damaged Kobe's legacy. :rolleyes:

[Deuce Bigalow]

Shaq was still the best players in all 3 championships.
That doesn't mean he was carried. Kobe was the best player in two very important series vs the Spurs.

[DonDadda59]

Yes, because being carried to those 3 championships severely damaged Kobe's legacy. :rolleyes:

UngratefulBe
IsaiahThomasLookinAssNigguhWithoutShaqBe
2rangzBe

[chosen_wun]

Shaq is the reason why Kobetards can say "5 ringz!!!" and make moronic Jordan comparisons.

Kobe and his fanbase are ungrateful SOB's.

[LongLiveTheKing]

That doesn't mean he was carried. Kobe was the best player in two very important series vs the Spurs.
Shaq was the best in the most important series: The Finals.

[MJ(Mean John)]

Then it gets to the point of which players can we compare? No one?
How many times do you run into a prime shaq?

[NumberSix]

That doesn't mean he was carried. Kobe was the best player in two very important series vs the Spurs.
How do you figure?

[AlphaWolf24]

Shaq is the reason why Kobetards can say "5 ringz!!!" and make moronic Jordan comparisons.

Kobe and his fanbase are ungrateful SOB's.


what ..Kobe fueled the comeback that started the 3 peat....

kobe dominated the Playoffs in 01' and 02' along with Shaq....



so many jimmies...so many rustled

[AlphaWolf24]

Kobe was the best in the most important series: The WCFinals.

fixed

EC sucked azz in the early 2000's...unless you think Smits Pacers ,Ai's sixers and Kidds nets were better then Pippens Blazers ,Duncan's Spurs, SAC Kings and KG's Wolves

[jzek]

That may be but facts are still facts:

Jordan = 6 rings on 6 finals appearances
Kobe = 5 rings on 7 finals appearances

Jordan = 6 FMVP on 6 finals appearances
Kobe = 2 FMVP on 7 finals appearances

No apples to oranges there... just pure facts.

[maybeshewill13]

That may be but facts are still facts:

Jordan = 6 rings on 6 finals appearances
Kobe = 5 rings on 7 finals appearances

Jordan = 6 FMVP on 6 finals appearances
Kobe = 2 FMVP on 7 finals appearances

No apples to oranges there... just pure facts.
:bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown: how dare people mention KoMe's name in the same sentence as the great MJ.

[Poochymama]

Hate it or love it, KB has a point.

If mike came in the league out of HS and was playing with the most dominant force ever and played in Phil's system,

And

Kobe came in after playing college ball and had great players and a great system (similar to 09/10) and his whole career he played with someone of SP level along with a great supporting cast

It would be different. Nobody is saying kobe would be better or anything. I'm not saying that, simply saying that it would be different.

Let's be real, an 18 yr out of HS would be shaqs #2 option too.
Look at Kobe's numbers on those 3 peats. Compare them to the numbers he put them as a #1 option. Imagine if M was sharing the ball with shaq.


So he has a point. In terms of careers, apples and oranges.

You don't know if playing with shaq made a positive, negative, or neutral impact on Kobe's career/talent and to what extent the same way we don't know what playing in M's situation would have done for Kb

Playing with Shaq for 6 years was a huge, huge, huge positive. To suggest otherwise is extremely disingenuous. Trying to account for differences in career just makes things worse for Kobe, not better.

Kobe was "drafted" to one of the best teams in the league, and spent 13-14 or so years with championship caliber talent, from that he produced 5 rings.

Jordan was drafted to the worst team in the league, and spent 6-7 years or so with championship caliber talent, from that he produced 6 rings.

Huge difference, but it's not in favor of Kobe at all.

[Goldrush25]

However one feels about the Kobe vs MJ discussion, Kobe does have a point here. MJ and Kobe played the majority of their respective careers under vastly different circumstances.

Since when has that stopped anyone from comparisons?

You have Kobe fans, MJ fans, Lebron fans, all they do on this board all day is compare apples to oranges. This board couldn't exist without those comparisons, though they're mostly for entertainment.

[NumberSix]

No 2 players have the same career path. Of the top superstars, the closest career path is probably Shaq/LeBron.

[daj0264]

as kenny smith said shaq allowed one of the best players to go 1v1. If he didnt have shaq he would have been doubled to hell.

[tpols]

I wonder if kobe never played with shaq would he still have that selfish mentality in his prime..

We saw him 07ish-09 when he had a good team in his prime as the man and he played within the system very well not as much hero ball.

The last few years hes been gunning trying to still be the man..with shaq he started gunning when he saw how little credit the second guy gets for winning even if the first guy is the MDE.

Who knows..maybe kobe wouldve evolved into a more team oriented player if he had a pippen or gasol level sidekick his whole career.

[GrapeApe]

This is what I don't really understand. Being compared to the nearly universally agreed upon GOAT should be considered, ya know, a good thing, and a compliment of the highest order. I'm not sure why Kobe and his fans don't realize this.

[AlphaWolf24]

copied from one of my favorite posters ( Unbiased fan) on another site...

and is 100% correct.


It's an interesting question. If we were to match them up by age, the Lakers and Bulls look like this.

Lakers:
1997 - Shaq/Freshmen MJ
1998 - Shaq/Sophmore MJ
1999 - Shaq/Junior MJ
2000 - Shaq/ 85' MJ
2001 - Shaq/ 86' MJ
2002 - Shaq/ 87' MJ
2003 - Shaq/ 88' MJ
2004 - Shaq/ 89' MJ/ Malone/ GP

Now assuming Shaq & MJ got along...

2005 - Shaq/ 90' MJ
2006 - Shaq/ 91' MJ
2007 - Shaq/ 92' MJ
2008 - Shaq/ 93' MJ
2009 - Shaq/ 94' MJ
2010 - Shaq/ 95' MJ

Bulls:
1985 - 00' Kobe
1986 - 01' Kobe
1987 - 02' Kobe
1988 - 03' Kobe
1989 - 04' Kobe/ Pip
1990 - 05' Kobe/ Pip
1991 - 06' Kobe/ Pip
1992 - 07' Kobe/ Pip
1993 - 08' Kobe/ Pip
1994 - 09' Kobe/ Pip
1995 - 10' Kobe/ Pip
1996 - 11' Kobe/ Pip
1997 - 12' Kobe/ Pip
1998 - 13' Kobe/ Pip

I think both players would have still been very successful in both scenarios and won 5+ titles each. But like many pointed out, MJ would have less trophies because both he 7 Shaq would be penalized for playing with each other. And in the Finals, the Lakers went through Shaq due to the East being weaker inside. In Western conference series, I think MJ would shine the most. Kobe & Pippen mesh very well, with 2 extra years(94/95), it would be interesting. I definitely see Kobe increasing his MVP total.

Does this change MJ being the GOAT, no. But it does show how perceptions can change, which is what i think Kobe was talking about. Comparing MJ to Kobe's career path is apples & oranges. Just like Magic's to Lebron's would be.

- Prime Shaq is not going to take a back seat to a 20 year old unknown Michael Jordan....

- and Jordan would not be shooting 25 times per game...winning scoring titles etc...

- Phsychotic competitive MJ would not let Shaq show up outta shape without significant hazing....

[tpols]

copied from one of my favorite posters ( Unbiased fan) on another site...

and is 100% correct.



- Prime Shaq is not going to take a back seat to a 20 year old unknown Michael Jordan....

- and Jordan would not be shooting 25 times per game...winning scoring titles etc...

- Phsychotic competitive MJ would not let Shaq show up outta shape without significant hazing....
Not only that, but imagine if MJ got hurt in a few of those finals series after beasting in the west.. And then Shaq went around flaunting his FMVP in front of MJ. lol, I don't think MJ would respond well to that. Given Shaqs egotistical selfish, bullying attitude MJ might turn on him too and start gunning.

[AlphaWolf24]

Not only that, but imagine if MJ got hurt in a few of those finals series after beasting in the west.. And then Shaq went around flaunting his FMVP in front of MJ. lol, I don't think MJ would respond well to that. Given Shaqs egotistical selfish, bullying attitude MJ might turn on him too and start gunning.


again, I'll say it...

it wasn't until Jordan's Bull's started winning that anyone cared about Finals MVP's...( due to Jordan jockers trying to overplay MJ's first few Titles.....after Losing the first half of his career)

the great 80's teams/players didn't invest in FMVP's...no one said Cedrick Maxwell carried Larry bird....or Kareem carried Magic

- But Jordan wins a few titles and all of a sudden...." hey MJ is so much better because he won FMVP's....Magic didn't win FMVP every time...nor did Bird"



- funny part is.....those 3 players just care about winning.....when comparing " Star" players ( not role players)


" 5 beats 1 " - MJ

[SpecialQue]

This is an instance where Kobe's competitive streak works against him. Because of his mentality, he modeled his game on someone who is widely considered the greatest player of all time. But because of his competitiveness, he not only wanted to play as well as Jordan, but wanted to surpass him. Even if he's older and wiser now, this is a situation that he created for himself, since no one else really gets as many Jordan comparisons as Kobe does. Now that his basketball career is nearing its end, I'm sure he sees the downside to giving himself a nearly impossible goal, even though he got 5 rings from this obsession.

[SamuraiSWISH]

I don't agree with that post, I'm pretty sure '85 Jordan - '89 Jordan paired up with '97 - 2004 Shaq wins multiple rings. Jordan coming into the league was flat out much better player, and made much more impact than Kobe did from '97 - 2000, and Shaq was peaking.

Kobe's career situation is very confusing, though. Which makes ranking him very difficult. He played an awesome second fiddle to Shaq winning three rings, but his production in 2001 almost makes him an equal to Shaquille O'Neal. One could make the argument he was not a sidekick that season.

His most productive or eye popping statistical years individually (2003 excluded) came in his absolute PEAK as a player on bad teams 27 - 30 years old on the 2006, 2007, and 2008 Lakers.

Jordan at his absolute peak '90, '91, '92 and '93 of the same ages was formatting his game to championship contenders, while trying to be a selfless team leader and utility player. Not going on scoring binges, when he was obviously at his absolute best as a player.

Kobe was the best from a leader perspective in 2008 and 2009. He finally got it. He finally seemed mature. He actually finally struck a balance in his game (2008 at least) ... He involved teammates, was trusting, gregarious, and didn't rule over them with an iron fist.

It seems since LeBron won MVP in 2009, thereafter Kobe relentlessly gunned to try and prove he was still an MVP caliber player. Probably because he knew from a legacy perspective, he needed more MVP trophies.

This is where Kobe's need to prove people wrong takes a turn for the worse, because he focuses on the trees and not the forrest. Even more noticeable the past two seasons when his burden should be easing with advanced age and regressing abilities, he should be more of a zen like cerebral team leader by delegating to teammates the way MJ did in '97 and '98 at comparable ages. It seems like he regressed mentally as a leader at times.



This is an instance where Kobe's competitive streak works against him. Because of his mentality, he modeled his game on someone who is widely considered the greatest player of all time. But because of his competitiveness, he not only wanted to play as well as Jordan, but wanted to surpass him. Even if he's older and wiser now, this is a situation that he created for himself, since no one else really gets as many Jordan comparisons as Kobe does. Now that his basketball career is nearing its end, I'm sure he sees the downside to giving himself a nearly impossible goal, even though he got 5 rings from this obsession.
Precisely, by using MJ as the standard of what he was trying to achieve, it became both a blessing and curse. He gets the comparisons to MJ, but he can never truly surpass him because he always comes off as a clone. It pushed him to greatness, but by trying to be so forcibly like MJ, he capped his ultimate potential. Where as say LeBron used MJ as inspiration (as we all did) ... but he ultimately plays his own game.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Phil completely destroyed Kobe in his book. Lol!!! "Kobe forces the action. When his shot isn't falling he will pound away relentlessly." :oldlol:

Sorry Kobe, Phil's criticisms had NOTHING to do w/ Shaq.

[LikeABosh]

But wait, Kobe stans like to gloat about his 5 rings compared to Lebron's 1. Didn't they have #differentcareerpaths considering Kobe was drafted into Los Angeles with Shaq while Lebron was in shithole Cleveland for 7 years? #applesandoranges

[Poochymama]

Jordan with Kobe's career path would be pretty unfair. Jordan/Shaq from 97-04' would have torn up the league in a way that hasn't been seen since the 60's Celtics.

Speaking in terms of the most likely outcome, bolded are most likely championship years.

Lakers:
1997 - Shaq/85 MJ Shaq best player
1998 - Shaq/86' MJ
1999 - Shaq/87' MJ Shaq best player
2000 - Shaq/ 88' MJ Shaq best player
2001 - Shaq/ 89' MJ Jordan best player
2002 - Shaq/ 90' MJ Jordan best player
2003 - Shaq/ 91' MJ Jordan best player
2004 - Shaq/ 92' MJ/ Malone/ GP Jordan best player
2005 - 93' MJ - Ridiculous stats
2006 - DNP
2007 - DNP
2008 - 96' Jordan/ Gasol Jordan best player
2009 - 97' Jordan/ Gasol Jordan best player
2010 - 98' Jordan/ Gasol Jordan best player

10 Championships :eek: That's just insane, though a lot of that timing with when Jordan retired and Kobe's team's sucking is pure luck.

Bulls:
1985 - 97' Kobe
1986 - 98' Kobe
1987 - 99' Kobe
1988 - 00' Kobe
1989 - 01' Kobe/ Pip
1990 - 02' Kobe/ Pip
1991 - 03' Kobe/ Pip Kobe best player
1992 - 04' Kobe/ Pip
1993 - 05' Kobe/ Pip
1994 - 06' Kobe/ Pip/ Grant Kobe best player
1995 - 07' Kobe/ Pip Kobe best player
1996 - 08' Kobe/ Pip/ Rodman
1997 - 09' Kobe/ Pip/ Rodman
1998 - 10' Kobe/ Pip/ Rodman
1999 - 11' Kobe
2000 - 12' Kobe
2001 - 13' Kobe

Kobe would have still had major success with those Bulls teams, in all likelihood we're looking at 5 championships with 5 FMVP, better than what he has now. Like with Jordan, a lot of it's timing, but still. This really puts Kobe's longevity in perspective with Jordan's. Even without an early retirement, he still outlasts him by 3 years and counting.

[AlphaWolf24]

I don't agree with that post, I'm pretty sure '85 Jordan - '89 Jordan paired up with '97 - 2004 Shaq wins multiple rings. Jordan coming into the league was flat out much better player, and made much more impact than Kobe did from '97 - 2000, and Shaq was peaking.

Kobe's career situation is very confusing, though. Which makes ranking him very difficult. He played an awesome second fiddle to Shaq winning three rings, but his production in 2001 almost makes him an equal to Shaquille O'Neal. One could make the argument he was not a sidekick that season.

His most productive or eye popping statistical years individually (2003 excluded) came in his absolute PEAK as a player on bad teams 27 - 30 years old on the 2006, 2007, and 2008 Lakers.

Jordan at his absolute peak '90, '91, '92 and '93 of the same ages was formatting his game to championship contenders, while trying to be a selfless team leader and utility player. Not going on scoring binges, when he was obviously at his absolute best as a player.

Kobe was the best from a leader perspective in 2008 and 2009. He finally got it. He finally seemed mature. He actually finally struck a balance in his game (2008 at least) ... He involved teammates, was trusting, gregarious, and didn't rule over them with an iron fist.

It seems since LeBron won MVP in 2009, thereafter Kobe relentlessly gunned to try and prove he was still an MVP caliber player. Probably because he knew from a legacy perspective, he needed more MVP trophies.

This is where Kobe's need to prove people wrong takes a turn for the worse, because he focuses on the trees and not the forrest. Even more noticeable the past two seasons when his burden should be easing with advanced age and regressing abilities, he should be more of a zen like cerebral team leader by delegating to teammates the way MJ did in '97 and '98 at comparable ages. It seems like he regressed mentally as a leader at times.


- 85' MJ was already 21 - 22 years old....

Kobe at 21 years old was also winning titles....

again this about MJ coming straight into the league as a unknown rookie playing with Prime Shaq...

MJ's numbers take a huge hit and Shaq is easily taking the majority of the shots.



your whole post makes no sense when looking at the context of what Kobe was talking about.....

- even a 18 year old Jordan was no where near Kobe's abilty ( according to MJ himeself)....and no way 18 year old MJ with Shaq win any titles...

- it would have took MJ at least 3- 4 seasons to develop his game.....heck it took MJ 5 seasons to develop a reliable midrange game. ( something he could fall back on when teams took away his slashing game)

[talkingconch]

And Kobe is a fcuking idiot for saying the comparisons are apples to oranges, they are as fcuking close to apples to apples as you can get.

- Same height (6'6")
- Same position (SG)
- Stacked teams (Pippen/Shaq)
- Same HC (Phil Jackson)

The only difference is that Kobe wasn't the best player on his stacked team, where Jordan was... And Michael would still be the best player if Shaq was his teammate.
Thank you for this post. The next time I see a Lebron terd say that Kobe does not compare to Jordan, i will link this post. Not that you are anybody of importance, but you may just be a Kobe-hater or Lebron stan, so its a win-win for me. Again, thank you for this post. At least now we know it is common sense to think Kobe IS comparable to Jordan and Lebron stans just kid themselves when they say he isnt.

[SamuraiSWISH]

Jordan with Kobe's career path would be pretty unfair. Jordan/Shaq from 97-04' would have torn up the league in a way that hasn't been seen since the 60's Celtics.

Speaking in terms of the most likely outcome, bolded are most likely championship years.

Lakers:
1997 - Shaq/85 MJ Shaq best player
1998 - Shaq/86' MJ
1999 - Shaq/87' MJ Shaq best player
2000 - Shaq/ 88' MJ Shaq best player
2001 - Shaq/ 89' MJ Jordan best player
2002 - Shaq/ 90' MJ Jordan best player
2003 - Shaq/ 91' MJ Jordan best player
2004 - Shaq/ 92' MJ/ Malone/ GP Jordan best player
2005 - 93' MJ - Ridiculous stats
2006 - DNP
2007 - DNP
2008 - 96' Jordan/ Gasol Jordan best player
2009 - 97' Jordan/ Gasol Jordan best player
2010 - 98' Jordan/ Gasol Jordan best player

10 Championships :eek: That's just insane, though a lot of that timing with when Jordan retired and Kobe's team's sucking is pure luck.

Bulls:
1985 - 97' Kobe
1986 - 98' Kobe
1987 - 99' Kobe
1988 - 00' Kobe
1989 - 01' Kobe/ Pip
1990 - 02' Kobe/ Pip
1991 - 03' Kobe/ Pip Kobe best player
1992 - 04' Kobe/ Pip
1993 - 05' Kobe/ Pip
1994 - 06' Kobe/ Pip/ Grant Kobe best player
1995 - 07' Kobe/ Pip Kobe best player
1996 - 08' Kobe/ Pip/ Rodman
1997 - 09' Kobe/ Pip/ Rodman
1998 - 10' Kobe/ Pip/ Rodman
1999 - 11' Kobe
2000 - 12' Kobe
2001 - 13' Kobe

Kobe would have still had major success with those Bulls teams, in all likelihood we're looking at 5 championships with 5 FMVP, better than what he has now. Like with Jordan, a lot of it's timing, but still. This really puts Kobe's longevity in perspective with Jordan's. Even without an early retirement, he still outlasts him by 3 years and counting.
Great breakdown ... both Kobe and MJ would've saw success if they were interchanged. I do believe MJ would've seen significantly more dominant success, though. Less personal need for on court ego with Shaq. Given MJ would've instantly made more impact than Kobe, he wouldn't need to over play his cards of insecurity to PROVE himself the way Kobe felt compelled to ... ultimately killing the duo's chemistry with Shaq long term.

An MJ / Shaq combo would be truly frightening. I think 10 titles is realistic actually. I think Kobe would've won around 4 rings max ('91 and '98 being no-go's for Kobe b/c those rings were won unique to what MJ brought to the table) in comparison with those Bulls rosters, and with Pippen being his second best player. And 4 rings is being nice, considering I'm questionable about Kobe being able to lead the '92 and '93 Bulls past the '92 Knicks, '92 Blazers, and especially the '93 Knicks and '93 Suns. Those seasons '91, '92, '93, and '98 were won based off specific intangibles and skills MJ brings that Kobe just can't replicate. I think 2 - 3 rings of Kobe on the Bulls is more realistic. Kobe probably puts them over the top in '94.

But in regards to longevity between MJ and Kobe.

MJ very clearly was still near his peak and prime in '94 and '95 if he played. Especially if he didn't get out of bball shape with his baseball sabbatical. '94 being the probable last year of his peak abilities. '96 being the last year of his true prime, IMO.

You don't think MJ playing full seasons in '94 and '95, and still the best or arguably the best player in '98 at 35 years old ... couldn't have aged gracefully and kept playing the three seasons he missed in '99, 2000, 2001 and still retired in 2003?

That puts him at 19 seasons compared to Kobe's current 17 seasons. MJ clearly had the ability to play in '99, 2000, and 2001 ... still being an elite player. But MJ at that point didn't want to play if it wasn't going to be in a Chicago uniform, if Pip and PJ weren't going to be there, and if they weren't competing for rings every season.

You don't think MJ could've played those seasons?

[DetroitPistonFan]

:bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown: how dare people mention KoMe's name in the same sentence as the great MJ.
Michael Jordan = Jordan = 6 Rings on 6 NBA Finals appearances
Magic Johnson = 5 Rings on 9 NBA Finals appearances

Jordan = 6 Finals MVP on 6 NBA Finals appearances
Magic = 3 Finals MVP on 9 NBA Finals appearances

Magic shouldn't be mention in the same sentence as Jordan neither.

[LongLiveTheKing]

http://blacksportsonline.com/index/kobe-jordan.jpg
They look fat AF.

[sportjames23]

Michael Jordan = Jordan = 6 Rings on 6 NBA Finals appearances
Magic Johnson = 5 Rings on 9 NBA Finals appearances

Jordan = 6 Finals MVP on 6 NBA Finals appearances
Magic = 3 Finals MVP on 9 NBA Finals appearances

Magic shouldn't be mention in the same sentence as Jordan neither.


Now this nikka wanna put down Magic to just to bring MJ down to Kobe's level.

Sit yo ass down, son.

[DetroitPistonFan]

Now this nikka wanna put down Magic to just to bring MJ down to Kobe's level.

Sit yo ass down, son.
It's facts but I hate all of them.

[K Xerxes]

There is far too much emphasis on career achievements, which sadly seems to be the overpowering barometer of greatness here.

MJ is greater than Kobe because he's a better player. That greatness translated itself to dominance in the form of multiple rings and MVPs, but they're not even necessary to see that MJ is better than Kobe. In his prime, he was more athletic, had a better midrange shot and was a superior defender. All Kobe has on MJ is the better long range stroke. However, as his career progressed, MJ developed his 3 point shot and became more skilled with his lost athleticism.

That's all I need to know.

[Nevaeh]

Jordan with Kobe's career path would be pretty unfair. Jordan/Shaq from 97-04' would have torn up the league in a way that hasn't been seen since the 60's Celtics.

Speaking in terms of the most likely outcome, bolded are most likely championship years.

Lakers:
1997 - Shaq/85 MJ Shaq best player
1998 - Shaq/86' MJ
1999 - Shaq/87' MJ Shaq best player
2000 - Shaq/ 88' MJ Shaq best player
2001 - Shaq/ 89' MJ Jordan best player
2002 - Shaq/ 90' MJ Jordan best player
2003 - Shaq/ 91' MJ Jordan best player
2004 - Shaq/ 92' MJ/ Malone/ GP Jordan best player
2005 - 93' MJ - Ridiculous stats
2006 - DNP
2007 - DNP
2008 - 96' Jordan/ Gasol Jordan best player
2009 - 97' Jordan/ Gasol Jordan best player
2010 - 98' Jordan/ Gasol Jordan best player

10 Championships :eek: That's just insane, though a lot of that timing with when Jordan retired and Kobe's team's sucking is pure luck.

Bulls:
1985 - 97' Kobe
1986 - 98' Kobe
1987 - 99' Kobe
1988 - 00' Kobe
1989 - 01' Kobe/ Pip
1990 - 02' Kobe/ Pip
1991 - 03' Kobe/ Pip Kobe best player
1992 - 04' Kobe/ Pip
1993 - 05' Kobe/ Pip
1994 - 06' Kobe/ Pip/ Grant Kobe best player
1995 - 07' Kobe/ Pip Kobe best player
1996 - 08' Kobe/ Pip/ Rodman
1997 - 09' Kobe/ Pip/ Rodman
1998 - 10' Kobe/ Pip/ Rodman
1999 - 11' Kobe
2000 - 12' Kobe
2001 - 13' Kobe

Kobe would have still had major success with those Bulls teams, in all likelihood we're looking at 5 championships with 5 FMVP, better than what he has now. Like with Jordan, a lot of it's timing, but still. This really puts Kobe's longevity in perspective with Jordan's. Even without an early retirement, he still outlasts him by 3 years and counting.

Interesting predictions Poochy, although I strongly disagree with the bolded part. The only thing that will always remain a mystery, however, is we will never know what kind of player Kobe would have been, without Jordan as a blue print. That's another curse that he's gonna have to live with it, because he painted himself into a corner where even youngsters are now calling him a "wannabe Jordan" based on them checking out video clips, and having older relatives who school them to the real origins of Kobe's game.

I can honestly see Kobe in the Clyde Drexler, Penny Hardaway, Prime Sprewell group of players, had he came into the league in the mid 80s. He would have been good, but not nearly as good had he not had Jordan to "push" him emotionally, having already laid his own Legacy down with a game clinching steal and shot to win his final ring.

Jordan, I believe, would have still been just as fundamentally sound, because he actually respects great coaching. The flip side for him, however, would be, would we have seen the "BEST MJ" that we got to see, meaning the version with "something to prove" constantly? Or would we have seen a content 23/5/5 version, on good efficiency, who never had a need to stand out?

There's a lot of variables that go into what motivates a person in a certain direction. The scary part, by all accounts on MJ's history, is that Basketball wasn't even his favorite sport growing up, like it was for Kobe. He just used it as an outlet to fulfill his competitive desires, where as Kobe used the game to define his whole character, seemingly. It's gotta hurt, knowing that as he gets older, that the game that he spent more than half of his life playing, and fighting to be the best at, will never see him as the "Greatest".

But hey, 5 rings right?

[Nash]

If Jordan got drafted into a team with prime Shaq in it he would have had 10 rings by now.

[chosen_one6]

Kobe tried so hard during his career to act, speak, and be competitive like Jordan. Now all of a sudden he doesn't want to be compared? It's a little late for that you f*cking hypocrite.

[DMV2]

Gotta love and laugh Kobe's arrogance. :lol

He devalues Phil's opinion, blames Shaq's dominance for his inability to be the #1 on that 3-peat run, and questions Jordan's #1 option ability if he was playing with another All-Time Top 10 player-----all in one single tweet. LMAO.

[guy]

Hate it or love it, KB has a point.

If mike came in the league out of HS and was playing with the most dominant force ever and played in Phil's system,

And

Kobe came in after playing college ball and had great players and a great system (similar to 09/10) and his whole career he played with someone of SP level along with a great supporting cast

It would be different. Nobody is saying kobe would be better or anything. I'm not saying that, simply saying that it would be different.

Let's be real, an 18 yr out of HS would be shaqs #2 option too.
Look at Kobe's numbers on those 3 peats. Compare them to the numbers he put them as a #1 option. Imagine if M was sharing the ball with shaq.


So he has a point. In terms of careers, apples and oranges.

You don't know if playing with shaq made a positive, negative, or neutral impact on Kobe's career/talent and to what extent the same way we don't know what playing in M's situation would have done for Kb

Why should we assume Jordan doesn't go to college and Kobe does though? That has nothing to do with circumstance unlike who they get drafted by. Those were choices they made, not circusmtances they were forced into. Why should we assume they make different choices? It's not Jordan's fault Kobe didn't go to college and wasn't better prepared for the NBA, which is basically what Phil is saying. If we are going to speculate this drastic of a change in their career paths, then we are basically changing who they actually are as players.

[lebeast666]

Fvck off Chuckbe, you ain't no MJ. Be glad you got them rings gifted to you.

[uoykcuf]

Why should we assume Jordan doesn't go to college and Kobe does though? That has nothing to do with circumstance unlike who they get drafted by. Those were choices they made, not circusmtances they were forced into. Why should we assume they make different choices? It's not Jordan's fault Kobe didn't go to college and wasn't better prepared for the NBA, which is basically what Phil is saying. If we are going to speculate this drastic of a change in their career paths, then we are basically changing who they actually are as players.

Excellent post :applause:

[guy]

There is far too much emphasis on career achievements, which sadly seems to be the overpowering barometer of greatness here.

MJ is greater than Kobe because he's a better player. That greatness translated itself to dominance in the form of multiple rings and MVPs, but they're not even necessary to see that MJ is better than Kobe. In his prime, he was more athletic, had a better midrange shot and was a superior defender. All Kobe has on MJ is the better long range stroke. However, as his career progressed, MJ developed his 3 point shot and became more skilled with his lost athleticism.

That's all I need to know.

So true and exactly what Phil was saying. He said nothing about career achievements and career paths while they were in the NBA, which is all that matters since the comparison is based on their NBA career. How they developed up until that point is irrelevant when saying who's better. It's interesting to point out that its a reason why he's better, but it doesn't downplay that he is better, like some seem to be trying to do here.

[MetsPackers]

Jordan with Kobe's career path would be pretty unfair. Jordan/Shaq from 97-04' would have torn up the league in a way that hasn't been seen since the 60's Celtics.

Speaking in terms of the most likely outcome, bolded are most likely championship years.

Lakers:
1997 - Shaq/85 MJ Shaq best player
1998 - Shaq/86' MJ
1999 - Shaq/87' MJ Shaq best player
2000 - Shaq/ 88' MJ Shaq best player
2001 - Shaq/ 89' MJ Jordan best player
2002 - Shaq/ 90' MJ Jordan best player
2003 - Shaq/ 91' MJ Jordan best player
2004 - Shaq/ 92' MJ/ Malone/ GP Jordan best player
2005 - 93' MJ - Ridiculous stats
2006 - DNP
2007 - DNP
2008 - 96' Jordan/ Gasol Jordan best player
2009 - 97' Jordan/ Gasol Jordan best player
2010 - 98' Jordan/ Gasol Jordan best player

10 Championships :eek: That's just insane, though a lot of that timing with when Jordan retired and Kobe's team's sucking is pure luck.

Bulls:
1985 - 97' Kobe
1986 - 98' Kobe
1987 - 99' Kobe
1988 - 00' Kobe
1989 - 01' Kobe/ Pip
1990 - 02' Kobe/ Pip
1991 - 03' Kobe/ Pip Kobe best player
1992 - 04' Kobe/ Pip
1993 - 05' Kobe/ Pip
1994 - 06' Kobe/ Pip/ Grant Kobe best player
1995 - 07' Kobe/ Pip Kobe best player
1996 - 08' Kobe/ Pip/ Rodman
1997 - 09' Kobe/ Pip/ Rodman
1998 - 10' Kobe/ Pip/ Rodman
1999 - 11' Kobe
2000 - 12' Kobe
2001 - 13' Kobe

Kobe would have still had major success with those Bulls teams, in all likelihood we're looking at 5 championships with 5 FMVP, better than what he has now. Like with Jordan, a lot of it's timing, but still. This really puts Kobe's longevity in perspective with Jordan's. Even without an early retirement, he still outlasts him by 3 years and counting.

LOlOLOLOLOLOLOL @ this whole post. just no. LOL @ this whole thread forr that matter. Kobe stans scrambling on the defensive LOLOLOL

[guy]

Jordan with Kobe's career path would be pretty unfair. Jordan/Shaq from 97-04' would have torn up the league in a way that hasn't been seen since the 60's Celtics.

Speaking in terms of the most likely outcome, bolded are most likely championship years.

Lakers:
1997 - Shaq/85 MJ Shaq best player
1998 - Shaq/86' MJ
1999 - Shaq/87' MJ Shaq best player
2000 - Shaq/ 88' MJ Shaq best player
2001 - Shaq/ 89' MJ Jordan best player
2002 - Shaq/ 90' MJ Jordan best player
2003 - Shaq/ 91' MJ Jordan best player
2004 - Shaq/ 92' MJ/ Malone/ GP Jordan best player
2005 - 93' MJ - Ridiculous stats
2006 - DNP
2007 - DNP
2008 - 96' Jordan/ Gasol Jordan best player
2009 - 97' Jordan/ Gasol Jordan best player
2010 - 98' Jordan/ Gasol Jordan best player

10 Championships :eek: That's just insane, though a lot of that timing with when Jordan retired and Kobe's team's sucking is pure luck.

Bulls:
1985 - 97' Kobe
1986 - 98' Kobe
1987 - 99' Kobe
1988 - 00' Kobe
1989 - 01' Kobe/ Pip
1990 - 02' Kobe/ Pip
1991 - 03' Kobe/ Pip Kobe best player
1992 - 04' Kobe/ Pip
1993 - 05' Kobe/ Pip
1994 - 06' Kobe/ Pip/ Grant Kobe best player
1995 - 07' Kobe/ Pip Kobe best player
1996 - 08' Kobe/ Pip/ Rodman
1997 - 09' Kobe/ Pip/ Rodman
1998 - 10' Kobe/ Pip/ Rodman
1999 - 11' Kobe
2000 - 12' Kobe
2001 - 13' Kobe

Kobe would have still had major success with those Bulls teams, in all likelihood we're looking at 5 championships with 5 FMVP, better than what he has now. Like with Jordan, a lot of it's timing, but still. This really puts Kobe's longevity in perspective with Jordan's. Even without an early retirement, he still outlasts him by 3 years and counting.

I don't see any reason why the lakers wouldn't win in 98 since the 98 bulls wouldn't be the same. I'd probably say they are more likely to lose in 97 and/or 08.

And I don't see any version of Kobe leading those bulls to the title in 98. And by the way, for at least the first 5 years, I don't see Kobe even getting out of the first round. And I'm not so sure 03 Kobe leads them to a title in 91 since he really wasn't close to the leader Jordan was, which may or may not be needed.

[DetroitPistonFan]

Kobe tried so hard during his career to act, speak, and be competitive like Jordan. Now all of a sudden he doesn't want to be compared? It's a little late for that you f*cking hypocrite.
Kobe's said it before. "Stop with the comparisons. He's the greatest of all time." So he's not being a hypocrite.

[andgar923]

BitterBE

[SpecialQue]

If Jordan got drafted into a team with prime Shaq in it he would have had 10 rings by now.

If Jordan punched teammates for not playing hard enough in practice, how long would he have lasted with out-of-shape Shaq? Or are we pretending that Shaq was a loveable teammate who no one except Kobe had major issues with?

[tpols]

If Jordan punched teammates for not playing hard enough in practice, how long would he have lasted with out-of-shape Shaq? Or are we pretending that Shaq was a loveable teammate who no one except Kobe had major issues with?
Jordan stans always ignore this. :oldlol:

MJ would not have coexisted with shaq.. It would've been Shaqs team, Shaqs fmvps, Shaqs rings.. MJ fresh out of college wasn't the type of leader he grew into after his trials with the pistons and Celtics.. And he wasn't close to peak Shaqs level yet.

[iamgine]

Of course Jordan with Shaq wouldn't last long. Both has personality problems that clashed. But Jordan will still get his rings regardless because he would choose good teams to play with.

[KingMichael23]

Fvck off Chuckbe, you ain't no MJ. Be glad you got them rings gifted to you.
What gift?

[Nash]

If Jordan punched teammates for not playing hard enough in practice, how long would he have lasted with out-of-shape Shaq? Or are we pretending that Shaq was a loveable teammate who no one except Kobe had major issues with?
are we pretending this is some kind of love fest or are we talking about championships? Kobe got lucky with Shaq, he wouldn't have had 3 extra rings if it wasn't Shaq. Jordan never had that luxury.

[tpols]

Of course Jordan with Shaq wouldn't last long. Both has personality problems that clashed. But Jordan will still get his rings regardless because he would choose good teams to play with.
Well you have people saying they'd win 10+ rings.. Lol. First off MJ got bored after three rings on less stacked teams. How would he feel playing with shaq? It'd be no contest. He'd be looking for a new challenge.

Could and would are very different things.

[chosen_wun]

Bulls:
1985 - 97' Kobe
1986 - 98' Kobe
1987 - 99' Kobe
1988 - 00' Kobe
1989 - 01' Kobe/ Pip
1990 - 02' Kobe/ Pip
1991 - 03' Kobe/ Pip Kobe best player
1992 - 04' Kobe/ Pip
1993 - 05' Kobe/ Pip
1994 - 06' Kobe/ Pip/ Grant Kobe best player
1995 - 07' Kobe/ Pip Kobe best player
1996 - 08' Kobe/ Pip/ Rodman
1997 - 09' Kobe/ Pip/ Rodman
1998 - 10' Kobe/ Pip/ Rodman
1999 - 11' Kobe
2000 - 12' Kobe
2001 - 13' Kobe

Kobe would have still had major success with those Bulls teams, in all likelihood we're looking at 5 championships with 5 FMVP, better than what he has now. Like with Jordan, a lot of it's timing, but still. This really puts Kobe's longevity in perspective with Jordan's. Even without an early retirement, he still outlasts him by 3 years and counting.
Kobe lead team would win 5 titles from 91' to 98'...mmmkay.

[andgar923]

Well you have people saying they'd win 10+ rings.. Lol. First off MJ got bored after three rings on less stacked teams. How would he feel playing with shaq? It'd be no contest. He'd be looking for a new challenge.

Could and would are very different things.
MJ and Kobe were different players and leaders.

Only thing MJ ever wanted to do was WIN. Kobe wants to win for himself which is what tons of us have been saying for years and Phil confirmed this.

Shaq and MJ dynamic would've been different, MJ would've adjusted his game and been a more athletic explosive version of Magic.

There's also no way MJ shoots under 50% with Shaq, he's shooting 55% for most of his career, with almost double the assists, steals and more blocks.

Also, MJ didn't come into the league disrespecting his teammates and coaches. MJ was shy to even be a vocal leader his rookie year because he deferred to vets, which is Kobe's opposite.

[tpols]

MJ and Kobe were different players and leaders.

Only thing MJ ever wanted to do was WIN. Kobe wants to win for himself which is what tons of us have been saying for years and Phil confirmed this.

Shaq and MJ dynamic would've been different, MJ would've adjusted his game and been a more athletic explosive version of Magic.

There's also no way MJ shoots under 50% with Shaq, he's shooting 55% for most of his career, with almost double the assists, steals and more blocks.
So MJ would've averaged 10+ assists in the same triangle he played in his whole career because shaq was there. Jordan would've become air Johnson except instead of high flying dunks he'd be soaring through the air throwing oops to shaq at the last second. :oldlol:

MJ wouldn't be able to handle shaq winning fmvps and getting all the glory in June and then coming into camp with a big Mac in hand in October. That would never fly and they would be at each others throats pretty quickly.

[andgar923]

Well you have people saying they'd win 10+ rings.. Lol. First off MJ got bored after three rings on less stacked teams. How would he feel playing with shaq? It'd be no contest. He'd be looking for a new challenge.

Could and would are very different things.
Also, which part of MJ being a superior leader did you not understand?

Do you seriously think MJ and Shaq would've had the same issues?

Perhaps to some degree, but the ultimate goal was to WIN and MJ would've stayed the course.

[Young X]

MJ wouldn't be able to handle shaq winning fmvps and getting all the glory in June and then coming into camp with a big Mac in hand in October. That would never fly and they would be at each others throats pretty quickly.
Why do you automatically assume Shaq would be winning FMVPs when MJ was the better/more productive player? Why would MJ have a problem with Shaq if they were WINNING?

[tpols]

Also, which part of MJ being a superior leader did you not understand?

Do you seriously think MJ and Shaq would've had the same issues?

Perhaps to some degree, but the ultimate goal was to WIN and MJ would've stayed the course.
MJ BECAME a great leader.. Through experience and perseverance.
Through failing over and over and developing an unheard of hunger. It would not have been the same if he was handed eve thing from the start

You just admitted that MJ was shy coming into the league dude. You just said he deferred to vets. Now he isn't deferring to peak Shaq? Of course he is.. And shaq would be the man.. And shaq would get the credit at first at least. And that would bother MJ.

It's funny how you said MJ was shy at first but then act like he was at the same time a natural born leader. Nope.. Real leaders are born through experience and that's how MJ did it.

[chosen_wun]

Jordan's ultimate crave was beating his opponents to the point of humiliation. He would have loved playing with Shaq ; dominating the league and sweeping the post-season.

The Ia 1b stuff wouldn't even matter.

[tpols]

Why do you automatically assume Shaq would be winning FMVPs when MJ was the better/more productive player? Why would MJ have a problem with Shaq if they were WINNING?
Because peak Shaq>young Jordan.. I don't think anyone would disagree with this.

[Young X]

Because peak Shaq>young Jordan.. I don't think anyone would disagree with this.
Late 80's MJ > Shaq. Even if you're right, you really think MJ would let his ego get in the way of winning? You really think MJ would rather lose with Bill Cartwright than win with Shaq?

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

All NBA analysts: "Nobody knows Kobe/MJ better than Phil." That settles it doesn't it? Phil completely WRECKED Kobe. :oldlol: The quotes never get old either and the fanbois HATE it.

[tpols]

All NBA analysts: "Nobody knows Kobe/MJ better than Phil." That settles it doesn't it? Phil completely WRECKED Kobe. :oldlol: The quotes never get old either and the fanbois HATE it.
Everyone knows MJ is better than Kobe.. By a good amount.

The thing being talked about here is how MJ would have coexisted with an already established shaq on the Lakers as a rook. Do you have an opinion on that?

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Everyone knows MJ is better than Kobe.. By a good amount.

The thing being talked about here is how MJ would have coexisted with an already established shaq on the Lakers as a rook. Do you have an opinion on that?

How would Shaq have coexisted with an already established MJ? MJ isn't Kobe. Get that through your heads. As Phil said, their leadership and personalities were completely different.

The two combined would have more than 3 titles..that's for damn sure.

[Young X]

The problem in this thread is that people think MJ and Kobe have the same mentality when they don't. Just because Kobe and Shaq collided doesn't automatically mean MJ and Shaq would've. THEY ARE NOT THE SAME.

[tpols]

How would Shaq have coexisted with an already established MJ? MJ isn't Kobe. Get that through your heads. As Phil said, their leadership and personalities were completely different.

The two combined would have more than 3 titles..that's for damn sure.
Your boy andgar just said MJ was shy coming into the league.. That he wasn't the vocal leader he became when he first entered the NBA.

Do you not believe losing to the pistons and Celtics over and over with much less help didn't build his hunger, his role, and his leadership abilities?

You think if you just handed him peak Shaq he'd have ever faced that type of adversity and developed his personality and leadership style in the same way?

You think his ultra competitiveness that he developed as a child would never come out and clash with Shaqs similar level of competitiveness and desire to be the best?

[sportjames23]

Shaq was always deferential to MJ. They wouldn't have had the same problems he did with Kobe because MJ was an established vet and a legend already.

[andgar923]

Because peak Shaq>young Jordan.. I don't think anyone would disagree with this.
Even if one was to agree, all it would prove is that Shaq carried Bean.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

The problem in this thread is that people think MJ and Kobe have the same mentality when they don't. Just because Kobe and Shaq collided doesn't automatically mean MJ and Shaq would've. THEY ARE NOT THE SAME.

Exactly.

[Ne 1]

The problem in this thread is that people think MJ and Kobe have the same mentality when they don't. Just because Kobe and Shaq collided doesn't automatically mean MJ and Shaq would've. THEY ARE NOT THE SAME.

If Kobe and Shaq had trouble because of their "egos" imagine Jordan with Shaq. I actually remember reading before Jordan telling Kobe something like if he was in Kobe's shoes he wouldn't be able to play with Shaq either back in '04.

[tpols]

Even if one was to agree, all it would prove is that Shaq carried Bean.
And that's alright..

But don't go on about MJ's leadership in this hypothetical when you know damn well he developed that leadership within his own circumstances during his early tenure on the Bulls.

Would not have been the same if he got it all handed to him from the start like a spoiled kid.

[andgar923]

Your boy andgar just said MJ was shy coming into the league.. That he wasn't the vocal leader he became when he first entered the NBA.

Do you not believe losing to the pistons and Celtics over and over with much less help didn't build his hunger, his role, and his leadership abilities?

You think if you just handed him peak Shaq he'd have ever faced that type of adversity and developed his personality and leadership style in the same way?

You think his ultra competitiveness that he developed as a child would never come out and clash with Shaqs similar level of competitiveness and desire to be the best?
That was in regards to being respectful. He led by example and was considered the leader at UNC.

MJ talked about his frustrations with his teammates as a rookie but didnt out of respect.

He was always a leader one way or another.

Shaq's main issues with Shaq were due to Kobe's selfish egotistical and arrogant personality.

[andgar923]

And that's alright..

But don't go on about MJ's leadership in this hypothetical when you know damn well he developed that leadership within his own circumstances during his early tenure on the Bulls.

Would not have been the same if he got it all handed to him from the start like a spoiled kid.
MJ was always a leader because we wanted to WIN. He simply didnt have teammates to win. He tried to lead by example early in his career but failed. He modified his approach as a leader no doubt but he was inherently a natural leader which is what Phil is basically saying.

Phil also gives us a glimpse at what a Shaq and MJ duo may have been like.

In short:

Pure dominance

[andgar923]

And that's alright..

But don't go on about MJ's leadership in this hypothetical when you know damn well he developed that leadership within his own circumstances during his early tenure on the Bulls.

Would not have been the same if he got it all handed to him from the start like a spoiled kid.
As to MJ's circumstances....

What they did was simply add more fuel to his fire. He always wanted to win, the struggles only added more fuel.

If he had won early, his ultimate goal would've been Bill's ring count.

[tpols]

MJ was always a leader because we wanted to WIN. He simply didnt have teammates to win. He tried to lead by example early in his career but failed. He modified his approach as a leader no doubt
So you're admitting he modified his leadership style and approach based on his early failures.. Funny how he became the true legend everyone knows today after dealing with those specific circumstances.

MJ wasn't known as the leader he became in the 80s. He was actually seen as a player that was too individually focused in comparison to the legends before him Larry and magic. He changed dude. And it was under the adversity he faced. Pressure either shapes or breaks.

The reason it is apples and oranges is because MJ.. Wouldn't have been the same MJ with totally opposite circumstances.

You keep saying MJ only wanted to win.. When there's mountains of evidence contradicting that saying he wanted to be the BEST and win as the MAN.

[K Xerxes]

What stupid hypotheticals. Really is incredible how much you people can speculate beyond the realms of logic and sanity.

[tpols]

If he had won early, his ultimate goal would've been Bill's ring count.
If it was about ring count he wouldn't have retired to play baseball after winning three straight..

MJ just wanted to be the best.. That's it. And he would've done anything to get to the top.

[Young X]

MJ was always a leader because we wanted to WIN. He simply didnt have teammates to win. He tried to lead by example early in his career but failed. He modified his approach as a leader no doubt but he was inherently a natural leader which is what Phil is basically saying.

Exactly, people always hear stories about how hard MJ was on his teammates without realizing he was hard on them because they were LOSING. Who wouldn't be mad at teammates who shoot a combined 24% in a game 7 after seeing them joking around in practice?

If Kobe and Shaq had trouble because of their "egos" imagine Jordan with Shaq. I actually remember reading before Jordan telling Kobe something like if he was in Kobe's shoes he wouldn't be able to play with Shaq either back in '04.
MJ wouldn't be in Kobe's shoes tho, he was BETTER than Shaq. Even if he wasn't better than Shaq, I have a hard time believing MJ would rather lose with Bill Cartwright than win championships with Shaq. :kobe:

[andgar923]

If it was about ring count he wouldn't have retired to play baseball after winning three straight..

MJ just wanted to be the best.. That's it. And he would've done anything to get to the top.
He retired due to gambling investigation, the being bored was a good cover. Don't you think he would've aimed at beating Magic's rings? He and Magic were jawing at each other during the Olympics.

[andgar923]

So you're admitting he modified his leadership style and approach based on his early failures.. Funny how he became the true legend everyone knows today after dealing with those specific circumstances.

MJ wasn't known as the leader he became in the 80s. He was actually seen as a player that was too individually focused in comparison to the legends before him Larry and magic. He changed dude. And it was under the adversity he faced. Pressure either shapes or breaks.

The reason it is apples and oranges is because MJ.. Wouldn't have been the same MJ with totally opposite circumstances.

You keep saying MJ only wanted to win.. When there's mountains of evidence contradicting that saying he wanted to be the BEST and win as the MAN.

Main difference was addressed by Phil.

MJ did whatever it took to win. Kobe did whatever it took to get his.

HUGE difference

[Doranku]

Main difference was addressed by Phil.

MJ did whatever it took to win. Kobe did whatever it took to get his.

HUGE difference

That's just not true. They both did whatever it took to get theirs.

The difference is that MJ was better, and him getting his lead to winning more so than it did for Kobe.

[andgar923]

That's just not true. They both did whatever it took to get theirs.

The difference is that MJ was better, and him getting his lead to winning more so than it did for Kobe.
That's not what Phil alluded to.

MJ did other things to win if he wasn't shooting well, MJ's leadership was inherently superior all according to Phil.

[Ne 1]

Yes, Kobe was blessed to play with Shaq, but on the flip-side looking at it there's certain things you learn and develop quicker when you are the #1 guy. In Kobe's case it would be his intelligence, passing (or rather willingness to do it), leadership, creativity (would definitely have to create more for others), skill, all of which improved rapidly when he was given the team. If he had this privilege since around 2001ish...one can only wonder how many 33+ ppg seasons we could have seen. He also would have had the chance to wait and have a championship contending team built around him so years like 2006 and 2007 (ages at which Jordan won rings...and prime ages for most players) wouldn't be completely wasted.

Ideal situation for maximizing your legacy is getting a chance to put up mind blowing stats early on in your career as you wait for your team to improve. If you lose in the playoffs, it's because of the lack of supporting cast so you're excused. Then as you get around 26-27 years old, management should have put nice pieces around you (unless they fu*ck up) and you are on a contender for your prime and late-prime years (as #1 option, which is key). Helps even more if the competition at the top of the league wanes as your team gets better. This gives you all those early individual accomplishments and then later on the team ones as well.

[AlphaWolf24]

So you're admitting he modified his leadership style and approach based on his early failures.. Funny how he became the true legend everyone knows today after dealing with those specific circumstances.

MJ wasn't known as the leader he became in the 80s. He was actually seen as a player that was too individually focused in comparison to the legends before him Larry and magic. He changed dude. And it was under the adversity he faced. Pressure either shapes or breaks.

The reason it is apples and oranges is because MJ.. Wouldn't have been the same MJ with totally opposite circumstances.

You keep saying MJ only wanted to win.. When there's mountains of evidence contradicting that saying he wanted to be the BEST and win as the MAN.


This.....early on MJ was viewed a ballhogg who was not going to win playing a selfish style.

The whole..." I just want to win.....but my teammates aren't good enough"....schtick is great for revisionist history and selling books...

Jordan was selfish and wanted to score or be viewed as the "man"....Phil Jackson helped him become more of a facilitator...


- Championship Jordan played through his team early and picked his spots....then took over in crunchtime.....

- the same role championship Kobe had...both had similar results.

[NBAller]

Both are fruits? :confusedshrug:

:lol

[305Baller]

http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/18nyp3ub1e4ilgif/k-bigpic.gif

[guy]

Yes, Kobe was blessed to play with Shaq, but on the flip-side looking at it there's certain things you learn and develop quicker when you are the #1 guy. In Kobe's case it would be his intelligence, passing (or rather willingness to do it), leadership, creativity (would definitely have to create more for others), skill, all of which improved rapidly when he was given the team.

Intelligence - You would think playing with great teammates from the beginning of his career would help him become a much greater decision maker ala Magic and Bird right? Who both played with great players there whole career and as a result, never really had a problem with balance.

Passing (willingness to do it) - WTF, this is absolutely ridiculous. Playing with great teammates from the beginning of your career should make a player MORE WILLING to pass. What sense does that make? If a player is playing with crap from the beginning of his career and for a long time, how would that make a player a more willing passer?

Leadership - Sure, Kobe didn't get as much opportunity to experience that as much as someone like Jordan or Lebron. However, its ridiculous to act like the guy got no experience at all. During the time with Shaq, Shaq missed a total of 110 games. That's alot of time. Now much of that is from Kobe's early years, but its nobody's fault Kobe just wasn't that good his first few years. On top of that during much of that time, Kobe was the man in the 4th quarter that was carrying his teams to victories because Shaq was such a liability. And because of the great teams around him and Shaq's liabilities, he experienced many deep playoff runs where he got the opportunity to lead these teams in close games. Seriously, the whole "leadership" argument is overexaggerated.

Creativity (would definitly have to create more for others) - Umm, wasn't Kobe considered the "primary facilitator" for these Laker teams? So wasn't he the guy that had the greatest responsibility in "creating for others"?

Skill - :oldlol: seriously this is getting ridiculous. So Kobe didn't get to work on his game as much cause of Shaq? Just because he might've not been able to showcase his skills as much doesn't mean he didn't have the opportunity to develop his skill.




If he had this privilege since around 2001ish...one can only wonder how many 33+ ppg seasons we could have seen.

Well in the 9 seasons he's had since playing with Shaq, he's done it once, and thats when he was in his "prime ages" that you referred to. So going by those rates, probably about 0-1.




He also would have had the chance to wait and have a championship contending team built around him so years like 2006 and 2007 (ages at which Jordan won rings...and prime ages for most players) wouldn't be completely wasted.

Jordan was greater then Kobe ever was by arguably 24, at least 25 which was the beginning of his prime. From the beginning of his career till about 27 (1990), his all-time great basketball ability was wasted with crap teammates. Its completely ridiculous to bring up Kobe's "wasted" years and compare it to Jordan.



Ideal situation for maximizing your legacy is getting a chance to put up mind blowing stats early on in your career as you wait for your team to improve. If you lose in the playoffs, it's because of the lack of supporting cast so you're excused. Then as you get around 26-27 years old, management should have put nice pieces around you (unless they fu*ck up) and you are on a contender for your prime and late-prime years (as #1 option, which is key).


:oldlol: thats funny cause Jordan was putting up mind blowing stats even when he was playing on championship teams. During the first three peat he put up statlines of 32/6/6 on 54 FG%, 30/6/6 on 52 FG%, and 33/7/6 on 50 FG%. Sure, its not as great as his previous 4 years, but you really think it was more ideal for him to put up mindblowing stats while getting nowhere with his crap teams instead of winning championships/seriously contending with great teams while putting up a little less mindblowing stats? Seriously, when has it ever been a good thing for someone to spend half of his career with teams that sucked?




Helps even more if the competition at the top of the league wanes as your team gets better.


It helped Bird and Magic that Jordan had nowhere near a good team to contend with them. For 8 years, it helped that Kobe didn't have to be another ringless player in the way of one of the most dominating players ever, and instead got to win rings with him and propell himself to a reputation that he probably wouldn't be at right now (2 titles vs. 5 titles). After those 8 years, it helped Kobe that a trio like KG/Pierce/Allen didn't get together sooner at younger ages, and that Lebron and Wade didn't have contending teams for most of that time. In other words, this is a stupid observation.



This gives you all those early individual accomplishments and then later on the team ones as well.

Doesn't sound like it was ever a problem a with Magic and Bird. Both of those guys were putting up mindblowing stats with all-time great teams. The same can be said about Jordan. How come you don't say Kareem had an ideal situation? He got all the opportunity to put up mindblowing stats on bad teams and then he had about the same amount of teams to contend for titles.

Anyway, its completely ridiculous to act like Kobe hasn't had a fair shot at enhancing his legacy. At this point, he's had 14 out of 17 seasons where he had help around him good enough to contend, so he literally may have had the greatest opportunity out of everyone in history to enhance his legacy.

[#number6ix#]

a lot of speculation and hypothetical situations going on in this thread

[guy]

Kobe is insecure as shit to write this. He's clearly holding on to that reason in any comparison to Jordan. Its funny because what Phil said in those quotes at least HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SHAQ or career achievements. Phil doesn't say anything like "if Kobe got to lead his own team from the beginning he would've been a better player and accomplished more i.e. like Jordan." To basically steer the argument in a different direction reeks of insecurity.

[DMAVS41]

Any pre Wizards version of MJ with Shaq for 8 years? At minimum 5 titles.

So if the situations were reversed Kobe

You would have 2 or 3 titles.

MJ would have 8 to 10 titles.

The gap would be even bigger than it currently is.

[Poochymama]

Any pre Wizards version of MJ with Shaq for 8 years? At minimum 5 titles.

So if the situations were reversed Kobe

You would have 2 or 3 titles.

MJ would have 8 to 10 titles.

The gap would be even bigger than it currently is.

Can't believe we have idiots trying to spin this in a way to say that Shaq was a negative for Kobe's legacy :facepalm


Ideal situation for maximizing your legacy is getting a chance to put up mind blowing stats early on in your career as you wait for your team to improve. If you lose in the playoffs, it's because of the lack of supporting cast so you're excused. Then as you get around 26-27 years old, management should have put nice pieces around you (unless they fu*ck up) and you are on a contender for your prime and late-prime years (as #1 option, which is key).
Read more at http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=300302&page=8#4VYCkIJbMDFQ3tI3.99

:roll: :roll: :roll:

So you think being drafted to a crap team for the first 7 years of your career is better for your legacy than being put in a position to win championships from the get go? Trust me, when all is said and done, people mostly care about rings. Those extra rings you got early on are going to boost your legacy waaaay more than those extra 1-2 ppg on 1-2% less FG% will.

[ispin69]

Damn Kobe so insecure. Anyways, I'll take MJ + Shaq any day of the week. Kobe and Scottie would be a joke and I love Scottie's defense. Scottie loved draining 3's on fast break which is kind of dumb after a nice steal then you get Kobe chucking :facepalm and his overated D.

I would have loved to see MJ+Shaq vs Kobe+Scottie two on two. Shaq dunking on Scottie and his strong post game with MJ's classic high percentage fadeaway -- both high percentage players.

[G-Funk]

Kobe acts like playing with Shaq was a burden on him?
Bitch he carried you for 3 titles.

Kobe would have won 5 Finals MVP's by now bitchaz ni99a

[G-Funk]

Damn Kobe so insecure. Anyways, I'll take MJ + Shaq any day of the week. Kobe and Scottie would be a joke and I love Scottie's defense. Scottie loved draining 3's on fast break which is kind of dumb after a nice steal then you get Kobe chucking :facepalm and his overated D.

I would have loved to see MJ+Shaq vs Kobe+Scottie two on two. Shaq dunking on Scottie and his strong post game with MJ's classic high percentage fadeaway -- both high percentage players.
lol:oldlol:

No basketball knowledge

[TheBigVeto]

Kobe acts like playing with Shaq was a burden on him?
Bitch he carried you for 3 titles.

Kobe has always been an ungrateful bitch, what's new.

[tpols]

Any pre Wizards version of MJ with Shaq for 8 years? At minimum 5 titles.

So if the situations were reversed Kobe

You would have 2 or 3 titles.

MJ would have 8 to 10 titles.

The gap would be even bigger than it currently is.
Im sorry, but this post is way, way too simplistic and doesnt have its roots grounded in reality.

First off you have to use context of what would happen in this scenario.

Rookie MJ would join the Lakers in the late 90s and be a promising young player alongside a very dominant Shaquille Oneal. We all know the offense wouldve still ran through Shaq, and MJ wouldnt have been given full reign to ball out like he did in his first year with the Bulls. Shaq wouldve been the undisputed man.

We all know MJ was a firery competitor and always wanted to be the best. Thats was his goal. To be the best. We all know MJ had a great work ethic, and we also know that he had a hard time trusting his teammates up until 6+ years into his career when Phil reigned him in and made him develop a trust in the system. He was very much seen as an individual type talent and not a true team player ala the greats before him Magic and Larry. That was the main knock on early MJ.

Now, you give a guy who wants to be the best to ever do it, who is insanely competitive and pushes others around him to work as hard as he did, a dominant entering his prime SHAQ and what happens?

They win 2-3 titles within the first 4-5 years easy.. and who gets the credit? Obviously Shaq. He would still feast on the subpar frontlines in th EAST and would still win FMVPs and be seen as the 'man' on those teams.

How does MJ respond to that?

Possessing many of the same traits Kobe does but to a larger than life degree(the real version-competitiveness, the ultimate dick, workaholic, physcotic confidence) MJ wouldve likely tried to get his share of the glory himself and wouldve gunned for FMVPs and to be the featured weapon etc.

Except MJ wouldve done it BETTER than Kobe and he wouldve actually won some of those awards over Shaq because he was actually that good. So say they win 2-3 titles with Shaq getting the glory and then they win their first one with MJ getting the FMVP and large share of the credit?

How does Shaq respond to that? The same Shaq that fueded with Penny.. and Kobe.. and Wade isnt going to fued with perhaps the most demanding and dickheaded player of all time stealing his thunder in the dead middle of his prime ? What?

Guarantee that relationship goes sour well before 5 titles, much less 8 or 10. Thats a joke because we SAW MJ get bored after winning three straight and retire to play baseball. But hes not going to get bored cakewalking to multiple chips with Shaq? MJ always wanted a challenge.

Not only that, but according to andgar, MJ left the league after his three chips because of a giant gambling conspiracy. And were going to act like that type of shit wouldnt affect his ability to stack titles? Having to leave the league under a guise in the middle of his prime because his competitive nature backfired on him(extreme addiction to gambling)?

Not only that but if you look at MJ's leadership.. it was largely built under his tenure with the Bulls where he had to fight it out with undermanned squads against legendary opponents like the C's and Bad Boy Pistons. He built that character and hunger to win through adversity and failing time and time again.. getting nailed in the me3dia for being too selfish and not being good enough. He BUILT that leadership.

It would not have been the same if he got it handed to him from the start. He wouldnt have learned and grown the same way as a player.

This stuff is delicate. It s not a video game where you add up imaginary numbers.

As far as Kobe? Well never know because Pippen developed under MJ.. and so did Kobe actually lol.. Well never know. He literally couldve been a journeyman. You cant just transpose players onto teams without looking at their circumstances. And since Kobe patterned his game from MJ, we would have to assume hed pattern his game off Dr. J or some other great from before him in this hypothetical. Its too messy at that point though.

And sorry for the pauk style essay lol

[Poochymama]

Im sorry, but this post is way, way too simplistic and doesnt have its roots grounded in reality.

First off you have to use context of what would happen in this scenario.

Rookie MJ would join the Lakers in the late 90s and be a promising young player alongside a very dominant Shaquille Oneal. We all know the offense wouldve still ran through Shaq, and MJ wouldnt have been given full reign to ball out like he did in his first year with the Bulls. Shaq wouldve been the undisputed man.

We all know MJ was a firery competitor and always wanted to be the best. Thats was his goal. To be the best. We all know MJ had a great work ethic, and we also know that he had a hard time trusting his teammates up until 6+ years into his career when Phil reigned him in and made him develop a trust in the system. He was very much seen as an individual type talent and not a true team player ala the greats before him Magic and Larry. That was the main knock on early MJ.

Now, you give a guy who wants to be the best to ever do it, who is insanely competitive and pushes others around him to work as hard as he did, a dominant entering his prime SHAQ and what happens?

They win 2-3 titles within the first 4-5 years easy.. and who gets the credit? Obviously Shaq. He would still feast on the subpar frontlines in th EAST and would still win FMVPs and be seen as the 'man' on those teams.

How does MJ respond to that?

Possessing many of the same traits Kobe does but to a larger than life degree(the real version-competitiveness, the ultimate dick, workaholic, physcotic confidence) MJ wouldve likely tried to get his share of the glory himself and wouldve gunned for FMVPs and to be the featured weapon etc.

Except MJ wouldve done it BETTER than Kobe and he wouldve actually won some of those awards over Shaq because he was actually that good. So say they win 2-3 titles with Shaq getting the glory and then they win their first one with MJ getting the FMVP and large share of the credit?

How does Shaq respond to that? The same Shaq that fueded with Penny.. and Kobe.. and Wade isnt going to fued with perhaps the most demanding and dickheaded player of all time? What?

Guarantee that relationship goes sour well before 5 titles, much less 8 or 10. Thats a joke because we SAW MJ get bored after winning three straight and retire to play baseball. But hes not going to get bored cakewalking to multiple chips with Shaq? MJ always wanted a challenge.

Not only that, but according to andgar, MJ left the league after his three chips because of a giant gambling conspiracy. And were going to act like that type of shit wouldnt affect his ability to stack titles? Having to leave the league under a guise in the middle of his prime because his competitive nature backfired on him(extreme addiction to gambling)?

Not only that but if you look at MJ's leadership.. it was largely built under his tenure with the Bulls where he had to fight it out with undermanned squads against legendary opponents like the C's and Bad Boy Pistons. He built that character and hunger to win through adversity and failing time and time again.. getting nailed in the me3dia for being too selfish and not being good enough. He BUILT that leadership.

It would not have been the same if he got it handed to him from the start. He wouldnt have learned and grown the same way as a player.

This stuff is delicate. It s not a video game where you add up imaginary numbers.

As far as Kobe? Well never know because Pippen developed under MJ.. and so did Kobe actually lol.. Well never know. He literally couldve been a journeyman. You cant just transpose players onto teams without looking at their circumstances. And since Kobe patterned his game from MJ, we would have to assume hed pattern his game off Dr. J or some other great from before him in this hypothetical. Its too messy at that point though.

And sorry for the pauk style essay lol


^^^

This is what happens when people let the personal bias cloud their judgement.

[tpols]

^^^

This is what happens when people let the personal bias cloud their judgement.
Care to explain where you disagree?

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

^^^

This is what happens when people let the personal bias cloud their judgement.

This. My god tpols, you REALLY love Kobe man. :oldlol:

[SamuraiSWISH]

This. My god tpols, you REALLY love Kobe man. :oldlol:
Apparently a "Nets fan" too ... very similar to Heavincent. East coast people who defend Kobe like the fiercest of LA stans (YMF, AlphaWolf24, eliteballer, etc)

[poido123]

Maybe you were born in 01 or 02 so you probably don't know about the playoff series verses the Spurs those years.

In 02, the refs won that title for you?

[tpols]

Damn.. and I didnt even defend Kobe there.

You guys think Jordans too untouchable.

Honestly Im all ears to anything you disagree on, since youre probably more knowledgeable on the character traits and abilities and career paths of early shaq and early MJ.

Enlighten me if Im that off base.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Apparently a "Nets fan" too ... very similar to Heavincent. East coast people who defend Kobe like the fiercest of LA stans (YMF, AlphaWolf24, eliteballer, etc)

Honestly, I don't care if they're Kobe fans. I just find it funny that these guys STILL believe Jordan and Kobe are, virtually, the SAME player. That you replace Kobe w/ Jordan and he would have the same career (and vice versa).

I'm over debating this TIRED subject.

[Poochymama]

Care to explain where you disagree?

I might take your post more seriously if you occasionally picked a different side of the argument. I take your opinion of a Jordan/Kobe debate about as seriously as Bruce Bowens, both of you guys are just as sad, only different sides of the spectrum.

[tpols]

I might take your post more seriously if you occasionally picked a different side of the argument. I take your opinion of a Jordan/Kobe debate about as seriously as Bruce Bowens, both of you guys are just as sad, only different sides of the spectrum.
I just dont see how saying MJ wouldve fueded with Shaq after winning 4 titles is.. crazy. Not like Jordan wouldnt have won after Shaq.. end his career with 6 or more titles.

[SamuraiSWISH]

Honestly, I don't care if they're Kobe fans. I just find it funny that these guys STILL believe Jordan and Kobe are, virtually, the SAME player. That you replace Kobe w/ Jordan and he would have the same career (and vice versa).

I'm over debating this TIRED subject.
Kobe wins a ring w/ the Bulls in '94, '96, and '97 ... I give them that.

MJ being the superior player, and bringing unique assets Kobe does not posses IMO he couldn't replicate what MJ did in '91, '92, '93, and '98 with those Bulls rosters.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Kobe wins a ring w/ the Bulls in '94, '96, and '97 ... I give them that.

MJ being the superior player, and bringing unique assets Kobe does not posses IMO he couldn't replicate what MJ did in '91, '92, '93, and '98 with those Bulls rosters.

There are people in this thread that think Kobe would've gotten 5 rings w/ those Bulls teams. ****ing mind boggling. :oldlol:

[poido123]

Im sorry, but this post is way, way too simplistic and doesnt have its roots grounded in reality.

First off you have to use context of what would happen in this scenario.

Rookie MJ would join the Lakers in the late 90s and be a promising young player alongside a very dominant Shaquille Oneal. We all know the offense wouldve still ran through Shaq, and MJ wouldnt have been given full reign to ball out like he did in his first year with the Bulls. Shaq wouldve been the undisputed man.

We all know MJ was a firery competitor and always wanted to be the best. Thats was his goal. To be the best. We all know MJ had a great work ethic, and we also know that he had a hard time trusting his teammates up until 6+ years into his career when Phil reigned him in and made him develop a trust in the system. He was very much seen as an individual type talent and not a true team player ala the greats before him Magic and Larry. That was the main knock on early MJ.

Now, you give a guy who wants to be the best to ever do it, who is insanely competitive and pushes others around him to work as hard as he did, a dominant entering his prime SHAQ and what happens?

They win 2-3 titles within the first 4-5 years easy.. and who gets the credit? Obviously Shaq. He would still feast on the subpar frontlines in th EAST and would still win FMVPs and be seen as the 'man' on those teams.

How does MJ respond to that?

Possessing many of the same traits Kobe does but to a larger than life degree(the real version-competitiveness, the ultimate dick, workaholic, physcotic confidence) MJ wouldve likely tried to get his share of the glory himself and wouldve gunned for FMVPs and to be the featured weapon etc.

Except MJ wouldve done it BETTER than Kobe and he wouldve actually won some of those awards over Shaq because he was actually that good. So say they win 2-3 titles with Shaq getting the glory and then they win their first one with MJ getting the FMVP and large share of the credit?

How does Shaq respond to that? The same Shaq that fueded with Penny.. and Kobe.. and Wade isnt going to fued with perhaps the most demanding and dickheaded player of all time stealing his thunder in the dead middle of his prime ? What?

Guarantee that relationship goes sour well before 5 titles, much less 8 or 10. Thats a joke because we SAW MJ get bored after winning three straight and retire to play baseball. But hes not going to get bored cakewalking to multiple chips with Shaq? MJ always wanted a challenge.

Not only that, but according to andgar, MJ left the league after his three chips because of a giant gambling conspiracy. And were going to act like that type of shit wouldnt affect his ability to stack titles? Having to leave the league under a guise in the middle of his prime because his competitive nature backfired on him(extreme addiction to gambling)?

Not only that but if you look at MJ's leadership.. it was largely built under his tenure with the Bulls where he had to fight it out with undermanned squads against legendary opponents like the C's and Bad Boy Pistons. He built that character and hunger to win through adversity and failing time and time again.. getting nailed in the me3dia for being too selfish and not being good enough. He BUILT that leadership.

It would not have been the same if he got it handed to him from the start. He wouldnt have learned and grown the same way as a player.

This stuff is delicate. It s not a video game where you add up imaginary numbers.

As far as Kobe? Well never know because Pippen developed under MJ.. and so did Kobe actually lol.. Well never know. He literally couldve been a journeyman. You cant just transpose players onto teams without looking at their circumstances. And since Kobe patterned his game from MJ, we would have to assume hed pattern his game off Dr. J or some other great from before him in this hypothetical. Its too messy at that point though.

And sorry for the pauk style essay lol

Good post.

MJ would probably of had Shaq in the best condition of his life. No way Jordan would let Shaq coast through practices and allowed him to be lazy. Who knows, he could of made Shaq into GOAT(not that he already is top 3 now).

It's all very hypothetical, Jordan may not of had the same impact with the Lakers team, because in all likelyhood, there probably wouldn't be any team good enough to challenge them. So all the clutch plays, the flu game, and all the close battles that help build his legacy would not be in existence and people would be saying he isn't that great considering he has Shaq and how stacked they are.

Jordan is one of my favourite players, and his legacy was built on the adversity and challenges he had playing for the Chicago Bulls. It is too simplistic to say that Jordan's impact and GOAT status would be the same if he donned himself a Lakers uniform.

[Young X]

Possessing many of the same traits Kobe does but to a larger than life degree(the real version-competitiveness, the ultimate dick, workaholic, physcotic confidence) MJ wouldve likely tried to get his share of the glory himself and wouldve gunned for FMVPs and to be the featured weapon etc.

Good post but I disagree with this part.

The problem is you think MJ was the same as Kobe personality wise when he wasn't, just because they were both 2 of the most cutthroat/competitive athletes ever doesn't automatically mean they would've handled the situations the same way.

We've never seen MJ play with a player even close to being as good as Shaq so it's unlikely he would've sacrificed winning championships for individual glory.

[tpols]

Good post.

MJ would probably of had Shaq in the best condition of his life. No way Jordan would let Shaq coast through practices and allowed him to be lazy. Who knows, he could of made Shaq into GOAT(not that he already is top 3 now).

It's all very hypothetical, Jordan may not of had the same impact with the Lakers team, because in all likelyhood, there probably wouldn't be any team good enough to challenge them. So all the clutch plays, the flu game, and all the close battles that help build his legacy would not be in existence and people would be saying he isn't that great considering he has Shaq and how stacked they are.

Jordan is one of my favourite players, and his legacy was built on the adversity and challenges he had playing for the Chicago Bulls. It is too simplistic to say that Jordan's impact and GOAT status would be the same if he donned himself a Lakers uniform.
Fvcking thank you.

I cant believe the Jordan stans jump on my ass within 2 minutes of my post.:oldlol:

And then act like its impossible for Jordan to have fueded with a player who fueded with damn near everyone.

[SamuraiSWISH]

Good post but I disagree with this part.

The problem is you think MJ was the same as Kobe personality wise when he wasn't, just because they were both 2 of the most cutthroat/competitive athletes ever doesn't automatically mean they would've handled the situations the same way.

We've never seen MJ play with a player even close to being as good as Shaq so it's unlikely he would've sacrificed winning championships for individual glory.
Precisely. This "MJ was a dick" thing is getting blown out of proportion. PJ himself said MJ was gregarious. He chided teammates but also BUILT THEM UP, and gave them confidence. He included them in poker games on planes, gave them a chance to win money from (as he said) a way of giving back his much bigger contracts from the Bulls to his teammates. That stuff goes a long way. Meaning, he was an inherently better leader. Being a cut throat competitor doesn't make you a dick for life.

I'm tired of the misrepresentation of who MJ was. Like a little kid would walk up to him as him for an autograph and he would spit on the kid and say NO. MJ was NOT that kind of guy.

[DMAVS41]

Im sorry, but this post is way, way too simplistic and doesnt have its roots grounded in reality.

First off you have to use context of what would happen in this scenario.

Rookie MJ would join the Lakers in the late 90s and be a promising young player alongside a very dominant Shaquille Oneal. We all know the offense wouldve still ran through Shaq, and MJ wouldnt have been given full reign to ball out like he did in his first year with the Bulls. Shaq wouldve been the undisputed man.

We all know MJ was a firery competitor and always wanted to be the best. Thats was his goal. To be the best. We all know MJ had a great work ethic, and we also know that he had a hard time trusting his teammates up until 6+ years into his career when Phil reigned him in and made him develop a trust in the system. He was very much seen as an individual type talent and not a true team player ala the greats before him Magic and Larry. That was the main knock on early MJ.

Now, you give a guy who wants to be the best to ever do it, who is insanely competitive and pushes others around him to work as hard as he did, a dominant entering his prime SHAQ and what happens?

They win 2-3 titles within the first 4-5 years easy.. and who gets the credit? Obviously Shaq. He would still feast on the subpar frontlines in th EAST and would still win FMVPs and be seen as the 'man' on those teams.

How does MJ respond to that?

Possessing many of the same traits Kobe does but to a larger than life degree(the real version-competitiveness, the ultimate dick, workaholic, physcotic confidence) MJ wouldve likely tried to get his share of the glory himself and wouldve gunned for FMVPs and to be the featured weapon etc.

Except MJ wouldve done it BETTER than Kobe and he wouldve actually won some of those awards over Shaq because he was actually that good. So say they win 2-3 titles with Shaq getting the glory and then they win their first one with MJ getting the FMVP and large share of the credit?

How does Shaq respond to that? The same Shaq that fueded with Penny.. and Kobe.. and Wade isnt going to fued with perhaps the most demanding and dickheaded player of all time stealing his thunder in the dead middle of his prime ? What?

Guarantee that relationship goes sour well before 5 titles, much less 8 or 10. Thats a joke because we SAW MJ get bored after winning three straight and retire to play baseball. But hes not going to get bored cakewalking to multiple chips with Shaq? MJ always wanted a challenge.

Not only that, but according to andgar, MJ left the league after his three chips because of a giant gambling conspiracy. And were going to act like that type of shit wouldnt affect his ability to stack titles? Having to leave the league under a guise in the middle of his prime because his competitive nature backfired on him(extreme addiction to gambling)?

Not only that but if you look at MJ's leadership.. it was largely built under his tenure with the Bulls where he had to fight it out with undermanned squads against legendary opponents like the C's and Bad Boy Pistons. He built that character and hunger to win through adversity and failing time and time again.. getting nailed in the me3dia for being too selfish and not being good enough. He BUILT that leadership.

It would not have been the same if he got it handed to him from the start. He wouldnt have learned and grown the same way as a player.

This stuff is delicate. It s not a video game where you add up imaginary numbers.

As far as Kobe? Well never know because Pippen developed under MJ.. and so did Kobe actually lol.. Well never know. He literally couldve been a journeyman. You cant just transpose players onto teams without looking at their circumstances. And since Kobe patterned his game from MJ, we would have to assume hed pattern his game off Dr. J or some other great from before him in this hypothetical. Its too messy at that point though.

And sorry for the pauk style essay lol

It's not simplistic at all.

You have to understand how good MJ was right away. The Lakers were a 56 win team without Kobe in 97. Adding a rookie MJ to that team and they make the finals in my opinion

Now, Jordan got hurt in his 2nd year. So we'll throw that out.

3rd year MJ and Shaq in 99? 50/50 if they beat the Spurs. It's not simplistic...you just have no clue how good Jordan actually was compared to early on Kobe.

Obviously then the 3 peat.

Then 1 more for sure title in 03 or 04.

So again...even if you take a year away from Jordan for his injury...you get 5 titles very easily.

If you want to talk about quitting or MJ getting bored or something like that...that is a different story.

But here is reality. Kobe will end his career with 3 more rings than he would have had if he didn't luck into playing with Shaq. The only other player of the era that would have yielded 1 title to Kobe in the 8 year stretch to start his career was Duncan. So if Kobe doesn't play with Duncan or Shaq...he's winless early on

And the downside? His ppg would likely be 1 to 3 points higher per game with his fg% dipping 1% or so

The only thing that would change is that Kobe would be already behind Lebron all time and West vs Kobe would be more of a legit debate

That is it.

Those 5 rings are a huge positive on his legacy and for Kobe to pretend like it was bad luck or something is just absurd

He got to play with prime/peak Shaq for 8 years.

And do you realize that MJ was better than Shaq?

This myth that Kobe had to give anything up for Shaq is nonsense. MJ would have still averaged over 30 a game.

It's not like MJ and Kobe would have played the exact same role. The Lakers would have gone to MJ more than they went to Kobe for the simple reason MJ was much better.

I see it being Shaq as the better player from 97 to 00...and then MJ from 01 through 04.

I have no doubt MJ would have had his issues with Shaq...but Shaq would have listened to MJ...hell, just look at the relationship Shaq and Wade had in 05 and 06. They got it done and Shaq was leading the "flash" bandwagon

The GOAT and peak Shaq is just too good to overcome for the league then.

[The-Legend-24]

Hey, at least Kobe proved he could win without Shaq, Jordan on the other hand...

[The_Yearning]

Hey, at least Kobe proved he could win without Shaq, Jordan on the other hand...

:lebronamazed:

[tpols]

Hey, at least Kobe proved he could win without Shaq, Jordan on the other hand...
Jordan won all of his titles without Shaq you moron.:oldlol:

oh... I fell for it.

[SamuraiSWISH]

Hey, at least Kobe proved he could win without Shaq, Jordan on the other hand...
Proved he could sweep Shaq's team?

Or do you mean when post prime MJ ('97 and '98) led the Bulls to 2x straight rings with his second best player (Pippen) being a total SHELL of himself in the playoffs due to a back injury?

Riiiiight.

[poido123]

Hey, at least Kobe proved he could win without Shaq, Jordan on the other hand...

Ok, this is trolling...:lol:

[Screamingdoom]

I don't agree with that post, I'm pretty sure '85 Jordan - '89 Jordan paired up with '97 - 2004 Shaq wins multiple rings. Jordan coming into the league was flat out much better player, and made much more impact than Kobe did from '97 - 2000, and Shaq was peaking.

Kobe's career situation is very confusing, though. Which makes ranking him very difficult. He played an awesome second fiddle to Shaq winning three rings, but his production in 2001 almost makes him an equal to Shaquille O'Neal. One could make the argument he was not a sidekick that season.

His most productive or eye popping statistical years individually (2003 excluded) came in his absolute PEAK as a player on bad teams 27 - 30 years old on the 2006, 2007, and 2008 Lakers.

Jordan at his absolute peak '90, '91, '92 and '93 of the same ages was formatting his game to championship contenders, while trying to be a selfless team leader and utility player. Not going on scoring binges, when he was obviously at his absolute best as a player.

Kobe was the best from a leader perspective in 2008 and 2009. He finally got it. He finally seemed mature. He actually finally struck a balance in his game (2008 at least) ... He involved teammates, was trusting, gregarious, and didn't rule over them with an iron fist.

It seems since LeBron won MVP in 2009, thereafter Kobe relentlessly gunned to try and prove he was still an MVP caliber player. Probably because he knew from a legacy perspective, he needed more MVP trophies.

This is where Kobe's need to prove people wrong takes a turn for the worse, because he focuses on the trees and not the forrest. Even more noticeable the past two seasons when his burden should be easing with advanced age and regressing abilities, he should be more of a zen like cerebral team leader by delegating to teammates the way MJ did in '97 and '98 at comparable ages. It seems like he regressed mentally as a leader at times.




Good post

[Kiddlovesnets]

If MJ played with Shaq, he'd earn FMVP over Shaq. For Kobe, this would never happen so the Lakers had to sent Shaq away.

[Nevaeh]

[QUOTE]Yes, Kobe was blessed to play with Shaq, but on the flip-side looking at it there's certain things you learn and develop quicker when you are the #1 guy.

Like how to handle pressure, and as history has proven, even a veteran Kobe wanted out, after 2 measly years of "adversity" as a leader.



In Kobe's case it would be his intelligence, passing (or rather willingness to do it), leadership, creativity (would definitely have to create more for others), skill, all of which improved rapidly when he was given the team.


Kobe has never shown a willingness to pass on any consistent basis except for maybe 2 seasons being team leader. He stayed gunning for scoring titles, but always kept coming up short.



If he had this privilege since around 2001ish...one can only wonder how many 33+ ppg seasons we could have seen. He also would have had the chance to wait and have a championship contending team built around him so years like 2006 and 2007 (ages at which Jordan won rings...and prime ages for most players) wouldn't be completely wasted.

Had Kobe been the focal point of the team, under 2001ish rules, he wouldn't sniff anything near 27ppg, let alone 33ppg. We have all seen how Kobe will keep shooting while seeing double team after double team, ending games on 5-21 type shooting, game after game.

As far as his prime being "wasted", that was his own doing, pouting like a b!tch, shooting his team out of the Finals, and stringing the Lakers along, hinting that he ain't coming back to the team, if Shaq returns. Just like this past season, he got EXACTLY what he was asking for, regarding team makeup and coaching style.


Ideal situation for maximizing your legacy is getting a chance to put up mind blowing stats early on in your career as you wait for your team to improve. If you lose in the playoffs, it's because of the lack of supporting cast so you're excused.

You're "excused" if you're the only person on the team that's doing anything worth a damn, while your front office is content to just sell tickets off the back of your ability to reinvigorate and alter the game, year after year, while slowly adding pieces to help you get over the hump.

And lets not act like Kobe didn't have plenty of time to put up "Mind Blowing Stats" as well. He's never been efficient, nor consistent enough to do it, no matter what type of teammates he's played with.



Then as you get around 26-27 years old, management should have put nice pieces around you (unless they fu*ck up) and you are on a contender for your prime and late-prime years (as #1 option, which is key). Helps even more if the competition at the top of the league wanes as your team gets better. This gives you all those early individual accomplishments and then later on the team ones as well

Also helps when you can prove, time and time again, that you're just flat out BETTER than whoever goes up against you, and not curling into a fetal position once you make it to the Finals and have a chance to win it all.

[Ne 1]

Kobe is insecure as shit to write this. He's clearly holding on to that reason in any comparison to Jordan. Its funny because what Phil said in those quotes at least HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SHAQ or career achievements. Phil doesn't say anything like "if Kobe got to lead his own team from the beginning he would've been a better player and accomplished more i.e. like Jordan." To basically steer the argument in a different direction reeks of insecurity.

In general, Kobe is right. If Jordan came into the league playing with Shaq his first 8 years he wouldn't have the same amount of scoring titles, MVP's, Finals MVP's, and overall statistics which would change how he's viewed historically.

Kobe wasn't a starter until 1999, he came into the league as an unproven 17 year old kid out of high-school and had to unseat a quality, 2x ALL-STAR veteran shooting guard (Eddie Jones) who was ahead of him on the roster ... JUST to earn his position, first.

The Bulls were MJ's franchise from the get go ... he was a grown man upon entering the league, and was a starter with the keys to the town from the word "go" and given a free reign.

I think the apples/oranges comparison is missing a lot of shit in here - Kobe is saying that if Mike had to play with Shaq, that he would be consider the "sidekick." And if he played with Scottie/Grant, he might be considered the greatest. Their situations dictated how they were perceived. It seems that people are reading this and coming to the conclusion that Phil is saying that he's not near the player that Mike was and that's just not true. Phil didn't say anything like that, he just said Mike was better.

I agree that Mike is better but the gap between the 2 isn't as astronomical as people want to make it.

[Ne 1]

And let's address this leadership nonsense Phil is spewing.

Again, Jordan was a full grown man approx the same age as everyone else on his team. He was not the youngest guy or close to the youngest on his team. That right there alone changes the dynamics of who's a leader and who isn't.

In addition. He was the most alpha male dominant presence in the locker room. Also Phil sided with Jordan because he was the best player and the biggest alpha male in the locker room.

Phil sided with Shaq who was the most dominant big man in the NBA and Shaq was also an alpha male. But Kobe was too. Neither one would back down. There was no Pippen to MJ relationship with Shaq and Kobe, Phil sided with Shaq, which made Kobe choose to leave or back down for the moment and win these rings. We know what happened; 3peat. Kobe was a young kid out of high school. how hard would it be for a perfectionist hoop junky kid to try and lead a team full of old guys? Kobe is just playing semi passive to be a team guy and win rings with O'Neal. More or less swallowing his pride and winning those first 3. Only showing you how ridiculously good he was vs the Spurs and Kings in the playoffs when the team needed him the most.

Anyway, lets take a look at the age difference

Jordan's Bulls the year they won their 1st ring:
Jordan was 27 years old in his 7th season in the NBA

Player Age
Scott Williams 22
B.J. Armstrong 23
Stacey King 24
Will Perdue 25
Dennis Hopson 25
Horace Grant 25
Scottie Pippen 25
Michael Jordan 27
Cliff Levingston 30
Craig Hodges 30
John Paxson 30
Bill Cartwright 33

Lets look at Kobe.. this dude was the youngest on the team, 21 years old (2nd year in the league as a starter, just barely legal enough to grab a beer). With prime Shaq being in the middle at 27. 6 years older than Kobe and an established superstar and 8 year veteran. There was no way on earth Kobe could've LEAD that team like Mike lead the Bulls. Too many old heads. He's too young and Shaq was older with seniority and too dominant and had too big of an ego to ever allow it to happen. And lastly, Phil took sides before he gave kobe a chance to lead. This is why its so much an apples to oranges comparison.

Player Age
Ron Harper 36
A.C. Green 36
John Salley 35
Brian Shaw 33
Glen Rice 32
Rick Fox 30
Robert Horry 29
Shaquille ONeal 27
Derek Fisher 25
Travis Knight 25
Sam Jacobson 24
Devean George 22
Tyronn Lue 22
John Celestand 22
Kobe Bryant 21

[sportjames23]

Kobe stans straight up buggin'. Still. :oldlol:

[TheBigVeto]

Kobetards are :mad:

[Nevaeh]

Good post.

MJ would probably of had Shaq in the best condition of his life. No way Jordan would let Shaq coast through practices and allowed him to be lazy. Who knows, he could of made Shaq into GOAT(not that he already is top 3 now).

It's all very hypothetical, Jordan may not of had the same impact with the Lakers team, because in all likelyhood, there probably wouldn't be any team good enough to challenge them. So all the clutch plays, the flu game, and all the close battles that help build his legacy would not be in existence and people would be saying he isn't that great considering he has Shaq and how stacked they are.

Jordan is one of my favourite players, and his legacy was built on the adversity and challenges he had playing for the Chicago Bulls. It is too simplistic to say that Jordan's impact and GOAT status would be the same if he donned himself a Lakers uniform.

Great point. Not to mention, Jordan would have had going to the most "Winningest Franchise" right after Magic's era to join another All time Great, who had already been to the Finals hanging over his head as well.

What he did for the Bulls was put them on the Map, and made people take notice that the League's not just about Boston, LA and NY, just like Duncan did with the Spurs. He'd be just be another all time great player who played for the Lakers. Ho Hum, how exciting that would have been.

:rolleyes:

Plus, his kicks would have had some seriously sh!tty colorways, had he been a Laker. Yikes!!


:oldlol:

[guy]

In general, Kobe is right. If Jordan played with Shaq his first 8 years he wouldn't have the same amount of scoring titles, MVP's, Finals MVP's, and overall statistics which would change how he's viewed historically.

Kobe wasn't a starter until 1999, he came into the league as an unproven 17 year old kid out of high-school and had to unseat a quality, established 2x ALL-STAR veteran shooting guard (Eddie Jones) who was ahead of him on the roster ... JUST to earn his position, first.

The Bulls were MJ's franchise from the get go ... he was a grown man upon entering the league, and was a starter with the keys to the town from the word "go" and given a free reign.

I think the apples/oranges comparison is missing a lot of shit in here - Kobe is saying that if Mike had to play with Shaq, that he would be consider the "sidekick." And if he played with Scottie/Grant, he might be considered the greatest. Their situations dictated how they were perceived. It seems that people are reading this and coming to the conclusion that Phil is saying that he's not near the player that Mike was and that's just not true. Phil didn't say anything like that, he just said Mike was better.

I agree that Mike is better but the gap between the 2 isn't as astronomical as people want to make it.

Is he right? Maybe, maybe not. But even if he is right, its completely stupid to attribute that big of a difference to their career path. COMPLETELY STUPID. It is not far-fetched at all to say Jordan in Kobe's situation would've at minimum won 7-8 championships, 4-5 Finals MVPs, 3-4 MVPs, 4-5 scoring titles. Kobe doesn't even come close to that. No one is saying someone has to match or surpass Jordan in all accolades. If someone won 7 titles, 4 FMVPs, 3 MVPs, 4 scoring titles vs. 6 titles, 6 FMVPs, 5 MVPs, 10 scoring titles, it would be understandable if the difference is due to career path and people could reasonably argue that the first guy on paper could still match up with the 2nd guy. But 5 titles, 2 FMVPs, 1 MVP, 2 scoring titles vs. 6 titles, 6 FMVPs, 5 MVPs, 10 scoring titles is WAY TOO BIG of a difference to attribute to "career path".

On top of that, lets stop acting like Kobe hasn't played 9 ****ing seasons without Shaq now. He's played without Shaq as long as Jordan played pre-first retirement now. You can take any 9 year period of Jordan's career, and Kobe's post Shaq career accolades still falls short, even if you include a period that includes his retirements. Shit, just take either 3-peat period and compare it to Kobe's post Shaq career accolades and it still falls short (2 titles, 2 FMVPs, 1 MVP, 2 scoring titles vs. 3 titles, 3 FMVPs, 2 MVPs, 3 scoring titles) :oldlol:

Anyway, your response was COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT to my point, just like Kobe's response to Phil's comparisons was COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT to his point, which clearly shows his insecurity. He's done this multiple times now when it comes to the Jordan comparison. He brings up playing with Shaq when no one else alludes to it almost like its an automatic, robotic response. What does everything that Phil said have to do with their different career paths and having or not having to play with Shaq? This is basically the argument of Phil and the response of Kobe:

Phil: Jordan was a better leader that got along with his teammates better and didn't alienate them as much as Kobe did.
Kobe: Well I had to play with Shaq.

Phil: Jordan was a better defender then Kobe.
Kobe: Well I had to play with Shaq.

Phil: Jordan let the game come to him while Kobe forced himself.
Kobe: Well I had to play with Shaq.

Phil: Jordan had bigger hands then Kobe.
Kobe: Well I had to play with Shaq.

The last one is obviously a joke, but it might as well have happened. What does any of what Phil said have to do with Shaq? In none of those excerpts did Phil say ANYTHING about career achievements. All he did was compare them as players and how good they are by bringing up BASIC SHIT that applies to every NBA player, and removed anything that is reliant at all on team circumstance.

When someone is compared unfavorably by someone else, and their response has nothing to do with what the other person said and basically steers the argument in another direction, it SCREAMS INSECURITY.

[guy]

And let's address this leadership nonsense Phil is spewing.

Again, Jordan was a full grown man approx the same age as everyone else on his team. He was not the youngest guy or close to the youngest on his team. That right there alone changes the dynamics of who's a leader and who isn't.

In addition. He was the most alpha male dominant presence in the locker room. Also Phil sided with Jordan because he was the best player and the biggest alpha male in the locker room.

Phil sided with Shaq who was the most dominant big man in the NBA and Shaq was also an alpha male. But Kobe was too. Neither one would back down. There was no Pippen to MJ relationship with Shaq and Kobe, Phil sided with Shaq, which made Kobe choose to leave or back down for the moment and win these rings. We know what happened; 3peat. Kobe was a young kid out of high school. how hard would it be for a perfectionist hoop junky kid to try and lead a team full of old guys? Kobe is just playing semi passive to be a team guy and win rings with O'Neal. More or less swallowing his pride and winning those first 3. Only showing you how ridiculously good he was vs the Spurs and Kings in the playoffs when the team needed him the most.

Anyway, lets take a look at the age difference

Jordan's Bulls the year they won their 1st ring:
Jordan was 27 years old in his 7th season in the NBA

Player Age
Scott Williams 22
B.J. Armstrong 23
Stacey King 24
Will Perdue 25
Dennis Hopson 25
Horace Grant 25
Scottie Pippen 25
Michael Jordan 27
Cliff Levingston 30
Craig Hodges 30
John Paxson 30
Bill Cartwright 33

Lets look at Kobe.. this dude was the youngest on the team, 21 years old (2nd year in the league as a starter, just barely legal enough to grab a beer). With prime Shaq being in the middle at 27. 6 years older than Kobe and an established superstar and 8 year veteran. There was no way on earth Kobe could've LEAD that team like Mike lead the Bulls. Too many old heads. He's too young and Shaq was older with seniority and too dominant and had too big of an ego to ever allow it to happen. And lastly, Phil took sides before he gave kobe a chance to lead. This is why its so much an apples to oranges comparison.

Player Age
Ron Harper 36
A.C. Green 36
John Salley 35
Brian Shaw 33
Glen Rice 32
Rick Fox 30
Robert Horry 29
Shaquille ONeal 27
Derek Fisher 25
Travis Knight 25
Sam Jacobson 24
Devean George 22
Tyronn Lue 22
John Celestand 22
Kobe Bryant 21

:oldlol: this has NOTHING to do with what Phil said. Being able to get along with teammates and not alienate them has nothing to do with age. Being socially awkward or not has NOTHING to do with age. That's personality, which isn't age specific.

:oldlol: at you say Phil is spewing nonsense. The dude is clearly more qualified then anyone to talk about this, and at this point has no reason to be bias towards Jordan. In fact, if he's still positioning himself for a job with the Lakers, he probably has good reason to be bias towards Kobe. Who the **** are you?

[K Xerxes]

Is he right? Maybe, maybe not. But even if he is right, its completely stupid to attribute that big of a difference to their career path. COMPLETELY STUPID. It is not far-fetched at all to say Jordan in Kobe's situation would've at minimum won 7-8 championships, 4-5 Finals MVPs, 3-4 MVPs, 4-5 scoring titles. Kobe doesn't even come close to that. No one is saying someone has to match or surpass Jordan in all accolades. If someone won 7 titles, 4 FMVPs, 3 MVPs, 4 scoring titles vs. 6 titles, 6 FMVPs, 5 MVPs, 10 scoring titles, it would be understandable if the difference is due to career path and people could reasonably argue that the first guy on paper could still match up with the 2nd guy. But 5 titles, 2 FMVPs, 1 MVP, 2 scoring titles vs. 6 titles, 6 FMVPs, 5 MVPs, 10 scoring titles is WAY TOO BIG of a difference to attribute to "career path".

On top of that, lets stop acting like Kobe hasn't played 9 ****ing seasons without Shaq now. He's played without Shaq as long as Jordan played pre-first retirement now. You can take any 9 year period of Jordan's career, and Kobe's post Shaq career accolades still falls short, even if you include a period that includes his retirements. Shit, just take either 3-peat period and compare it to Kobe's post Shaq career accolades and it still falls short (2 titles, 2 FMVPs, 1 MVP, 2 scoring titles vs. 3 titles, 3 FMVPs, 2 MVPs, 3
scoring titles) :oldlol:

No no no, you're not getting it. Because Kobe had to play second fiddle to Shaq all these years, it prevented Kobe from developing his leadership skills the way Jordan did! Winning 3 titles by your sixth season is obviously far far worse than winning no titles until your seventh season. Yes yes, if Kobe was on a scrub team from the beginning, he would have ended up with a better legacy than he is now, because, you know, he would have developed better leadership, game management and bigger hands.

:roll: :roll:

[Ne 1]

LONG read, so buckle up.

The truth is, Phil is as mesmerized by MJ as is all the MJ lovers. If it wasn't for Mike, he would not be "the ZEN MASTER" sitting on that many rings. He and Mike had a great relationship. Not so with Phil and Kobe that first time around.

Kobe wasn't about that Zen talk. AT ALL. He told Phil many of times "look man, you can miss me with all that Zen talk and book reading stuff. I know multiple languages, I lived in Italy. I'm probably more well rounded then you and I'm younger. Just tell me what you need me to do on the court so I can do that and we can win. Let's keep it simple. Keep the zen talk to yourself or your other players that need that to motivate them. i don't need motivation. I'm a basketball junkie, NERD to the 1000th degree. I eat, sleep and breathe baksetball.

So that broke Phillips heart. He wasn't feeling Kobe ever since. When he and Phil got back together with Gasol and the band. Kobe started to read more of Phil's books and push that ZEN talk to everyone else. This is when Phil gives Kobe props for becoming a better leader. Notice only when Kobe start imparting PHIL-izms on others did Phil give Kobe leadership props.

Coaches sell you something and they want their players to buy in. Kobe wasn't buying what Phil was selling during the 2000-2004 era. Kobe just wanted to win and be told do what on the court. You can keep that zen stuff to yourself. I don't need help focusing. I'm more focused then any man that has ever touched a basketball, including that compulsive gambling alcoholic, I need to take time off to play baseball Mike.

If you ever want to know how focused Kobe is/was about baksetball. Look no further then the rape case and him coming off of a plane flight after fighting for his LIFE then hitting game winners the same day. He didn't need ZEN to do that. Sure it may have gave what he already had a name. But Kobe is another type of animal when it comes to basketball. you may never see anyone that this focused on hoop again in your life. and I'm not saying its necessarily a good thing to be Kobe focused, when it comes to one thing. Doing that makes you lose perspective on life outside of the game. Which is where the loaner/aloof comments come from. But again Kobe's own dad said Kobe is a basketball nerd. How many super nerds do you know that act aloof, and are loaners? A lot of them. So it makes perfect sense.

Mike didn't come in the NBA when he was a baby alongside a bunch of full grown men. Kobe was fresh off the prom. How is he going to lead anyone at that age playing behind an all-star 2 guard in Eddie Jones already, a stubborn older All-Star Nick shoot you in then shoot you out Van Exel, and big ego I'm the MAN Shaq? Not going to happen. How was Kobe going to lead full grown prime Diesel, full grown veteran Rick Fox. Full grown veteran Horry sitting on 2 Rockets championship rings?

How in the hell was a KID low 20 something Kobe going to lead those full grown men? He wasn't.

[Ne 1]

Being able to get along with teammates and not alienate them has nothing to do with age. Being socially awkward or not has NOTHING to do with age. That's personality, which isn't age specific.


Glad you brought this up. Let's go back to this aloof thing. Besides Kobe being a hoop nerd.

Kobe was a KID fresh off his prom when he got into the NBA. He tried to stay away from the nightlife to stay focused. We ask our stars to do this all the time. Do we not? Yet we fault Kobe for not heading out to the club with 27 year old Shaq and 30 year old Robert Horry and Rick Fox. Kobe couldn't even legally drink.

How many teenagers do you know hanging out with grown men in their 30's? YOU DON'T.

Most star players like Kobe, end up on lowly teams due to the draft. Those teams are usually weak because they have a team full of younger guys (past draft picks that have not yet panned out). That's never the case with the Lakers.

The youngest team the Lakers had was when they traded Shaq and they had Lamar Odom, Smush Parker, Luke Walton, Brian Cook, etc. and that team sucked. But yet Kobe lead them to the playoffs in a deep/stacked Western Conference and almost got them to past the heavily favored #2 seed. Has Mike ever upset any team with a lesser team? Nope. He has never come close to an upset. Mike's team was always head and shoulders better then the team he was matched up against. Not his fault. Just a reality of the situation.

At the end of the day, don't be fooled by Phil's books. Phil LOVES drama. He knows drama sells and he's trying to sell a book here. Phil used to side with Shaq when he first came to L.A. (he admitted this himself) which strained his relationship with Kobe. Now I'm not saying he should've sided with Kobe. But a real leader coach could've figured a way how to bring them both together and make them understand how much they needed one another. That never happened. Sure, they won 3 in a row, but they barely could do that due to the infighting and clashing that had a lot to do with Phil choosing sides since he knew Shaq was the big baby of both Kobe and Shaq. Even though Shaq was older. Shaq needed his ego caressed.


The dude is clearly more qualified then anyone to talk about this

Appeal to authority.

[Ne 1]

Winning 3 titles by your sixth season is obviously far far worse than winning no titles until your seventh season.

:roll: :roll:

Yeah, and he never get's full credit from people for those 3 rings. How many times did we here from 2005-2008, "Kobe will never win without Shaq"? and "Kobe wouldn't have won those rings without Shaq." Even until this day people still say that Kobe was Shaq's 2nd fiddle, so they put a qualifier on his first 3 rings and say that only his 2009 and 2010 rings "count" even though he proved he could win without Shaq.

Actually seems like on ISH and similar site that no rings is equal to any rings "2nd option." For example, many times I've seen people on this site rank Wade or over Pippen or say Wade is better than Pippen because Wade has won a ring as "the man", while Pippen's 6 rings rings don't even "count" because he was the "2nd option."

[K Xerxes]

Yeah, and he never get's full credit from people for those 3 rings. How many times did we here from 2005-2008, "Kobe will never win without Shaq"? and "Kobe wouldn't have won those rings without Shaq." Even until this day people still say that Kobe was Shaq's 2nd fiddle, so they put a qualifier on his first 3 rings and say that only his 2009 and 2010 rings "count" even though he proved he could win without Shaq.

There are haters for every great athlete, and Kobe's haters will say anything they can to diminish his status. They can say that Kobe was gifted three rings, but anyone clued up on the game knows that he was a factor in all three, and particularly crucial in '01 and '02. Besides, his two rings as the man validates that he can win without Shaq, which means it should be easy to debunk.

In the eyes of the average fan, would Kobe be 'greater' with 2 rings and 2 finals MVPs, or with 5 rings and 2 finals MVPs? Just think about it, if LeBron won this year, he would have as many finals MVPs as Kobe, but Kobe fans still have the overall ring argument.

Stop kidding yourself, the three titles with Shaq only augments his legacy in the long run, not diminishes. In 20 years time when the new superstars will be centre stage, people will forget this sort of stuff. People will forget what happened in '02. People will forget the decision. Etc etc.

[guy]

Im sorry, but this post is way, way too simplistic and doesnt have its roots grounded in reality.

First off you have to use context of what would happen in this scenario.

Rookie MJ would join the Lakers in the late 90s and be a promising young player alongside a very dominant Shaquille Oneal. We all know the offense wouldve still ran through Shaq, and MJ wouldnt have been given full reign to ball out like he did in his first year with the Bulls. Shaq wouldve been the undisputed man.

We all know MJ was a firery competitor and always wanted to be the best. Thats was his goal. To be the best. We all know MJ had a great work ethic, and we also know that he had a hard time trusting his teammates up until 6+ years into his career when Phil reigned him in and made him develop a trust in the system. He was very much seen as an individual type talent and not a true team player ala the greats before him Magic and Larry. That was the main knock on early MJ.

Jordan had a hard time trusting his teammates cause they sucked. The players he was playing with were either scrubs or players who relied strictly on talent, and didn't care much about winning and were involved in drug use. COMPLETELY different from who he would be playing with in LA. He wouldn't have a problem trusting Shaq who clearly wasn't like that and was one of the most dominant players ever. He wouldn't have a problem trusting veterans like Horry, Shaw, Harper, and Fox who had the experience and only cared about winning.

And you realize in this situation, he'd actually get Phil EARLIER in his career?



Now, you give a guy who wants to be the best to ever do it, who is insanely competitive and pushes others around him to work as hard as he did, a dominant entering his prime SHAQ and what happens?

They win 2-3 titles within the first 4-5 years easy.. and who gets the credit? Obviously Shaq. He would still feast on the subpar frontlines in th EAST and would still win FMVPs and be seen as the 'man' on those teams.

How does MJ respond to that?

Possessing many of the same traits Kobe does but to a larger than life degree(the real version-competitiveness, the ultimate dick, workaholic, physcotic confidence) MJ wouldve likely tried to get his share of the glory himself and wouldve gunned for FMVPs and to be the featured weapon etc.

Except MJ wouldve done it BETTER than Kobe and he wouldve actually won some of those awards over Shaq because he was actually that good. So say they win 2-3 titles with Shaq getting the glory and then they win their first one with MJ getting the FMVP and large share of the credit?

How does Shaq respond to that? The same Shaq that fueded with Penny.. and Kobe.. and Wade isnt going to fued with perhaps the most demanding and dickheaded player of all time stealing his thunder in the dead middle of his prime ? What?

Guarantee that relationship goes sour well before 5 titles, much less 8 or 10.

Sooo you think they could win 4 titles, but its a huge jump to say would win 5? Huh? Kobe's relationship with Shaq was rocky even before they won their 2nd title. I don't think anyone said Jordan and Shaq wouldn't have issues. But would it be a problem on the court and as big of a problem as it was with Kobe? Doesn't seem like it. And from Phil's comments, it seems like Jordan would've clearly had a better relationship with Shaq and the rest of his teammates because he was a more likable person that didn't alienate himself from them, and in turn this would make him a leader that they would actually want to follow. From Phil's comments, Jordan was clearly better at adjusting to the personalities of his teammates.

And I'm pretty sure the 8-10 titles comment is including Jordan with Gasol, Odom, Bynum, etc.



Thats a joke because we SAW MJ get bored after winning three straight and retire to play baseball. But hes not going to get bored cakewalking to multiple chips with Shaq? MJ always wanted a challenge.

Not only that, but according to andgar, MJ left the league after his three chips because of a giant gambling conspiracy. And were going to act like that type of shit wouldn't affect his ability to stack titles? Having to leave the league under a guise in the middle of his prime because his competitive nature backfired on him(extreme addiction to gambling)?

I don't believe in the gambling conspiracy, but how about mentioning that Jordan's father was murdered? Seems like people think that has nothing to do with it.

And Jordan isn't retiring after only 8 seasons in the league regardless of how bored he is. Thats not happening. Maybe he leaves as a UFA, but that wouldn't have been possible until 8 seasons after. Anyway, in these scenarios, I don't think its fair to assume Jordan doesn't retire, because that was the trajectory his career took and it would be unfair to give him two more great seasons that just didn't happen. But even if with retiring, that doesn't mean wouldn't have stacked his resume up like he actually did. But just for speculation's sake, I could see him NOT retiring like he did because even if he is winning FMVPs and MVPs unlike Kobe, he'd probably still get the criticism that he couldn't win without Shaq, which would've kept him motivated.



Not only that but if you look at MJ's leadership.. it was largely built under his tenure with the Bulls where he had to fight it out with undermanned squads against legendary opponents like the C's and Bad Boy Pistons. He built that character and hunger to win through adversity and failing time and time again.. getting nailed in the me3dia for being too selfish and not being good enough. He BUILT that leadership.

It would not have been the same if he got it handed to him from the start. He wouldnt have learned and grown the same way as a player.

This stuff is delicate. It s not a video game where you add up imaginary numbers.

So what are you saying? Jordan doesn't build character, hunger, and leadership if he doesn't face the Celtics and Pistons? There's different ways for it to happen. In general, that stuff happens to EVERYONE as they get older, including Kobe regardless of having to play with Shaq. In general, your general habits like work ethic and personality are fully established by your late teens/early twenties. You don't really change much as a person after that. Experience/knowledge might alter your approach a little to things after that, but the things that Phil was talking about like charisma and motivation are innate, which is why he didn't refer to Kobe's not getting the reigns from the beginning but instead referred to his life before the NBA which didn't include college. Its the same reason you can't simply say switch Kobe with AI, T-Mac, or Carter, and AI/T-Mac/Carter would be considered one of the greatest players and still going strong, while Kobe would be out of the league or barely holding on to a roster spot right now. They clearly didn't have the drive and work ethic as Kobe.



As far as Kobe? Well never know because Pippen developed under MJ.. and so did Kobe actually lol.. Well never know. He literally couldve been a journeyman. You cant just transpose players onto teams without looking at their circumstances. And since Kobe patterned his game from MJ, we would have to assume hed pattern his game off Dr. J or some other great from before him in this hypothetical. Its too messy at that point though.

And sorry for the pauk style essay lol

So basically you're saying we can't compare players? The comparison isn't that complicated. We're just talking about their NBA careers. Not before that. So basically, they are what they were entering the NBA, and how they developed before that doesn't really matter. They were going to progress the way they progressed for the most part because of their focus and desire, and their personality and work ethic were almost fully established at that point, which meant that career path wasn't going to change much WHO they were. The fact that he patterned his game from Jordan doesn't really matter. If we are going to nitpick on things like that, we can go as far back as analyzing their parents and who raised them better, which could play into who was better. Its stupid.

[dh144498]

you guys are not getting the point here. MJ's ego is just as big as Kobe's. So imagine MJ playing with prime Shaq, they sure will at least 3peat, but what would happen a few championships? I just don't see MJ not being overshadowed by Shaq's dominance during the eaerly 2000s. Would MJ get worked up about this? I think most likely.

[rmt]

Don't know why Kobe must continue to bitch - he's one of the luckiest players ever. He played with MDE for 8 years, with GOAT coach for the majority of his career, played under an owner willing to spend, team salaries $10s of millions over the luxury tax, in a city that attracts free agents like no other. What more can he possibly want? Now he's using Shaq as an excuse vs MJ :eek:

Kobe - newsflash - there is no comparison - MJ put up better stats than you, won more championships, had more impact and was plain just a better player - and all without the BENEFIT of having Shaq attracting double teams. Just think about how many championships you would have if Scottie were your team mate instead of Shaq.

[Ne 1]

There are haters for every great athlete, and Kobe's haters will say anything they can to diminish his status. They can say that Kobe was gifted three rings, but anyone clued up on the game knows that he was a factor in all three, and particularly crucial in '01 and '02. Besides, his two rings as the man validates that he can win without Shaq, which means it should be easy to debunk.

In the eyes of the average fan, would Kobe be 'greater' with 2 rings and 2 finals MVPs, or with 5 rings and 2 finals MVPs? Just think about it, if LeBron won this year, he would have as many finals MVPs as Kobe, but Kobe fans still have the overall ring argument.

Stop kidding yourself, the three titles with Shaq only augments his legacy in the long run, not diminishes. In 20 years time when the new superstars will be centre stage, people will forget this sort of stuff. People will forget what happened in '02. People will forget the decision. Etc etc.

Good points. I've actually wonder myself if people 10, 15, or 20 years from now will care about this "#1" thing as much as we do today regarding the early 00's Lakers. I have seen this discussed regarding the 80's Lakers, but even then it was because it suited the agenda of fans of a certain retired player. Usually, though, people always say "Magic has 5 rings" without a qualifier, even though like Kobe, he won his first few with a superior player. Whenever Kobe's rings are mentioned here an immediate asterisk is attached. It is ironic. The asterisk is based on classification of "#1" and "#2.'

[guy]

Glad you brought this up. Let's go back to this aloof thing. Besides Kobe being a hoop nerd.

Kobe was a KID fresh off his prom when he got into the NBA. He tried to stay away from the nightlife to stay focused. We ask our stars to do this all the time. Do we not? Yet we fault Kobe for not heading out to the club with 27 year old Shaq and 30 year old Robert Horry and Rick Fox. Kobe couldn't even legally drink.

How many teenagers do you know hanging out with grown men in their 30's? YOU DON'T.

Most star players like Kobe, end up on lowly teams due to the draft. Those teams are usually weak because they have a team full of younger guys (past draft picks that have not yet panned out). That's never the case with the Lakers.

The youngest team the Lakers had was when they traded Shaq and they had Lamar Odom, Smush Parker, Luke Walton, Brian Cook, etc. and that team sucked. But yet Kobe lead them to the playoffs in a deep/stacked Western Conference and almost got them to past the heavily favored #2 seed. Has Mike ever upset any team with a lesser team? Nope. He has never come close to an upset. Mike's team was always head and shoulders better then the team he was matched up against. Not his fault. Just a reality of the situation.

At the end of the day, don't be fooled by Phil's books. Phil LOVES drama. He knows drama sells and he's trying to sell a book here. Phil used to side with Shaq when he first came to L.A. (he admitted this himself) which strained his relationship with Kobe. Now I'm not saying he should've sided with Kobe. But a real leader coach could've figured a way how to bring them both together and make them understand how much they needed one another. That never happened. Sure, they won 3 in a row, but they barely could do that due to the infighting and clashing that had a lot to do with Phil choosing sides since he knew Shaq was the big baby of both Kobe and Shaq. Even though Shaq was older. Shaq needed his ego caressed.



Appeal to authority.

So basically what you're saying is Kobe was socially awkward, could be a disrespectful asshole to his teammates/coaches alienating them in the process, couldn't adjust as well to his teammates personalities, and took longer to mature. :oldlol: You didn't have to write that much to say you agree with Phil. :oldlol:

I don't give a shit that Kobe was a baby coming from High School that didn't know how to respect his elders and didn't bother trying to relate to them. This is about their NBA careers. How they developed before that doesn't change or downplay who was better then the other. Besides, no one forced him to skip college just like no one forced Jordan to go to college.

If you murder someone today, does the fact that you weren't educated enough to know how wrong murder is make you less of a shitty person? Life doesn't work that way.

[DMAVS41]

you guys are not getting the point here. MJ's ego is just as big as Kobe's. So imagine MJ playing with prime Shaq, they sure will at least 3peat, but what would happen a few championships? I just don't see MJ not being overshadowed by Shaq's dominance during the eaerly 2000s. Would MJ get worked up about this? I think most likely.

Sure...and maybe MJ leaves sooner than Kobe did.

But that really isn't the point. MJ was flat out better than Kobe...and the gap is enormous early on in their careers.

So if you replaced Kobe's 8 years with Shaq....with MJ...you just get different results. End of story.

Debating what might have happened in terms of MJ leaving or something like that isn't apt because Kobe played with him for 8 years and they had tons of problems on and off the court.

Here is what we know. It is perfectly reasonable to assume prime/peak Shaq paired with MJ for 8 years is going to net 5 titles given the circumstances. You get into tough areas like 97 in which MJ would be going against himself...but I certainly wouldn't put it out of the question that the Lakers beat the Bulls in 97.

Again. The Lakers won 56 games with rookie Kobe playing 15 minutes a game. You put Jordan on that team as the starting 2 guard with Jones coming off the bench and you have a team capable of winning 65 plus games. And a team easily capable of winning the title.

We don't know anything for sure, but given the fact that MJ was far superior to Kobe early on in his career as a player...I'd say it is perfectly reasonable to assume Shaq and MJ win roughly 5 titles in 8 years together. And honestly, that might be low...they might be so good that it's impossible for teams like the Duncan led Spurs in 03 to beat them.

[dh144498]

Sure...and maybe MJ leaves sooner than Kobe did.

But that really isn't the point. MJ was flat out better than Kobe...and the gap is enormous early on in their careers.

So if you replaced Kobe's 8 years with Shaq....with MJ...you just get different results. End of story.

Debating what might have happened in terms of MJ leaving or something like that isn't apt because Kobe played with him for 8 years and they had tons of problems on and off the court.

Here is what we know. It is perfectly reasonable to assume prime/peak Shaq paired with MJ for 8 years is going to net 5 titles given the circumstances. You get into tough areas like 97 in which MJ would be going against himself...but I certainly wouldn't put it out of the question that the Lakers beat the Bulls in 97.

Again. The Lakers won 56 games with rookie Kobe playing 15 minutes a game. You put Jordan on that team as the starting 2 guard with Jones coming off the bench and you have a team capable of winning 65 plus games. And a team easily capable of winning the title.

We don't know anything for sure, but given the fact that MJ was far superior to Kobe early on in his career as a player...I'd say it is perfectly reasonable to assume Shaq and MJ win roughly 5 titles in 8 years together. And honestly, that might be low...they might be so good that it's impossible for teams like the Duncan led Spurs in 03 to beat them.

MJ is better than Kobe. But that doesn't not justify what Kobe said about apples to oranges.

[guy]

MJ is better than Kobe. But that doesn't not justify what Kobe said about apples to oranges.

Actually it does. Because his response was to Phil's comments, which had nothing to do with their career paths. His comments were about basic aspects that applies to every NBA player. This maybe hard to believe, but not every slight to Kobe can be appropriately prefaced with "he was playing with Shaq."

[DMAVS41]

MJ is better than Kobe. But that doesn't not justify what Kobe said about apples to oranges.

But he's implying that their circumstances make any possible comparison invalid.

Which just isn't true. We go to see Kobe both with and without Shaq...as a young player, as an older player...with stacked teams and without stacked teams..the same coaches with the same system playing the same position.

I mean, honestly, the Kobe/MJ comparison is probably the easiest and most apt comparison to make in the history of the game. Two players have never had such similarities from playing style to circumstances....

That is what is so funny. It's actually the best and easiest comparison ever.

[tpols]

But he's implying that their circumstances make any possible comparison invalid.

Which just isn't true. We go to see Kobe both with and without Shaq...as a young player, as an older player...with stacked teams and without stacked teams..the same coaches with the same system playing the same position.

I mean, honestly, the Kobe/MJ comparison is probably the easiest and most apt comparison to make in the history of the game. Two players have never had such similarities from playing style to circumstances....

That is what is so funny. It's actually the best and easiest comparison ever.
You still dont get it though..

Their situations they grew up in, that shaped them as basketball players, were completely opposite.

Thats the point.

[AlphaWolf24]

NB4 PJax releases staements saying Kobe was a better shooter and better facilitator....Both Kobe and MJ have attributes better then each other.

Jordan friends will reply with ...he had to...he was under pressure by his girlfriend....

MJ is really leaps and bounds ahead of Kobe with the ball and shooting...check FG%

........

[DMAVS41]

You still dont get it though..

Their situations they grew up in, that shaped them as basketball players, were completely opposite.

Thats the point.

So we should never compare any players ever then. Because you could literally go back to middle school with this shit.

It's just a never ending line of bs excuses that could be given.

Regardless of circumstances....MJ and Kobe are the most apples to apples player comparison of all time. Everyone knows this. No two players can be more easily compared than those 2.

[rmt]

Kobe was a KID fresh off his prom when he got into the NBA. He tried to stay away from the nightlife to stay focused. We ask our stars to do this all the time. Do we not? Yet we fault Kobe for not heading out to the club with 27 year old Shaq and 30 year old Robert Horry and Rick Fox. Kobe couldn't even legally drink.

How many teenagers do you know hanging out with grown men in their 30's? YOU DON'T.

Most star players like Kobe, end up on lowly teams due to the draft. Those teams are usually weak because they have a team full of younger guys (past draft picks that have not yet panned out). That's never the case with the Lakers.

It was Kobe's choice to come out of high school instead of going to college. You'd like him to be excused for being young, but I don't hear any excuses when it comes to all-time points where he benefits from coming out early as opposed to the all-time greats who spend 4 years in college before the NBA.

You acknowledge that most stars end up on lowly teams and it takes a long time for them to win championships - see MJ, Lebron yet Kobe goes to an organization that's ready to win, that spends a lot of money, that gets the GOAT coach and the 5 rings argument is continually rammed down our throats.

[K Xerxes]

Good points. I've actually wonder myself if people 10, 15, or 20 years from now will care about this "#1" thing as much as we do today regarding the early 00's Lakers. I have seen this discussed regarding the 80's Lakers, but even then it was because it suited the agenda of fans of a certain retired player. Usually, though, people always say "Magic has 5 rings" without a qualifier, even though like Kobe, he won his first few with a superior player. Whenever Kobe's rings are mentioned here an immediate asterisk is attached. It is ironic. The asterisk is based on classification of "#1" and "#2.'

I was going to bring up Magic and Kareem, but decided against it because it wasn't exactly the same situation. But since you bring it up... Now, in all of the GOAT lists I've ever seen, Kareem is regarded at least in the top 5, a lot of people have him 2nd, and a few even have him first. But Kareem only had one finals MVP in the five championships he won with Magic. Granted, he was going to win finals MVP in the '80s until he was injured in game 6 and Magic came up with *that* historic game, but how many people do you think know that? Really, people look at Kareem, see that he is the all time leading scorer, see that he has 6 championships and 6 MVPs, and they immediately think dominance and a GOAT contender. But, make no mistake, Kareem was the better player in the early 80s even though Magic won 2 finals MVPs in that time. It's funny how people look back at history.

As history goes on, the haters dwindle into nothingness. People won't look back at LeBron and see that he failed to win in Cleveland. Hell, his '11 performance will be overlooked (Magic's 84 is rarely mentioned afterall). What they will see is a physical specimin like we have never seen before, a player that could dominant all facets of the game like no one in history could, an X MVP winner, and a player that completely dominated the game from 2012 to whenever he stops.

When they look at Kobe, they will see Jordan's successor. He may never be seen as good as Jordan, but they will look at someone with the competitive drive, will to win only matched by Jordan in history. They will see a guy that could play on injuries that would keep anyone else out for weeks. A guy that won 5 rings, 3 with Shaq and 2 on his own (thus invalidating the claim that Kobe couldn't win without Shaq). He will have been deserving of all five rings (at the very least four). They will see an all time great as well.

The haters are most prevalent when people actually play, but they will be gone by the next generation. When they reminisce on the post MJ era, they will look at Kobe, Duncan, Shaq and LeBron (Durant is still pending) and think of supreme greatness. It will happen.

[tpols]

So we should never compare any players ever then. Because you could literally go back to middle school with this shit.

It's just a never ending line of bs excuses that could be given.

Regardless of circumstances....MJ and Kobe are the most apples to apples player comparison of all time. Everyone knows this. No two players can be more easily compared than those 2.
That would just be ridiculous though.. going back to the start of their original nba careers, in a comparison about how their hypothetical nba careers would pan out.. isnt that far fetched. We arent going butterfly effect deep.

Their career starts greatly affected how their roles, responsibilities, mentalities, leadership, etc all developed.

I didnt even mention one guy coming out of HS and one coming out of college. Lets see HS MJ come to play with the MDE and see how much responsibility he is handed.. and then compare that to his career track as an out of college player given full reigns on a shitty team.

Their situations were as apples and oranges as it could get.

[guy]

So we should never compare any players ever then. Because you could literally go back to middle school with this shit.

It's just a never ending line of bs excuses that could be given.


EXACTLY. There maybe some homeless drug addict out there who's dad is in jail and mom was a crackhead, and if he grew up in Jordan's situation would've been twice as great as Jordan was instead of a homeless drug addict. But I guess we can't say Jordan was the GOAT cause there maybe others in the entire population of the Earth's history that would've been better in the same situation. :roll:

[DMAVS41]

That would just be ridiculous though.. going back to the start of their original nba careers, in a comparison about how their hypothetical nba careers would pan out.. isnt that far fetched. We arent going butterfly effect deep.

Their career starts greatly affected how their roles, responsibilities, mentalities, leadership, etc all developed.

I didnt even mention one guy coming out of HS and one coming out of college. Lets see HS MJ come to play with the MDE and see how much responsibility he is handed.. and then compare that to his career track as an out of college player given full reigns on a shitty team.

Their situations were as apples and oranges as it could get.

How they came into the league was different. That is obvious and why you didn't mention it....it's ****ing obvious.

Again. Should we then never compare players? Because if you think comparing Kobe and MJ is apples to oranges.

WTF is comparing a guy like Dirk to Duncan? One guy growing up in Germany and coming to a foreign land and straight to a NBA team vs the 4 year college vet in Duncan...joining Robinson and the Pop on the Spurs.

So those two players can't be compared? We can't rank them all time? Come off it.

No 2 players are ever going to have the exact same career path.

[guy]

That would just be ridiculous though.. going back to the start of their original nba careers, in a comparison about how their hypothetical nba careers would pan out.. isnt that far fetched. We arent going butterfly effect deep.

Their career starts greatly affected how their roles, responsibilities, mentalities, leadership, etc all developed.

I didnt even mention one guy coming out of HS and one coming out of college. Lets see HS MJ come to play with the MDE and see how much responsibility he is handed.. and then compare that to his career track as an out of college player given full reigns on a shitty team.

Their situations were as apples and oranges as it could get.

Skipping or going to college was their choice though, and Phil only made comparisons that really has nothing to do with their career paths. In fact, he didn't refer to any of their NBA experiences, but he referred to how developed they were coming into the NBA, which had alot to do with their own choices i.e. college.

Comparing their defense is not apples and oranges. Comparing their approach isn't apples and oranges. Comparing their personality isn't apples and oranges. You don't have to come up with reasons for them being one way or the other to compare the two.

[tpols]

How they came into the league was different. That is obvious and why you didn't mention it....it's ****ing obvious.

Again. Should we then never compare players? Because if you think comparing Kobe and MJ is apples to oranges.

WTF is comparing a guy like Dirk to Duncan? One guy growing up in Germany and coming to a foreign land and straight to a NBA team vs the 4 year college vet in Duncan...joining Robinson and the Pop on the Spurs.

So those two players can't be compared? We can't rank them all time? Come off it.

No 2 players are ever going to have the exact same career path.
Dude..

Its not about the player to player skill to skill athelticism to athleticism comparison. Those are the things that would NOT have changed as much because of their differing situations entering the league. Those are things that are CONSTANTS.

MJ wasnt losing his vert or his skill because he went to the lakers.

The things that would CHANGE based on their situations are their roles, responsibilities, and leadership development. And those are extremely important in setting a career path off.

[K Xerxes]

While we're on this stupid topic, I have wondered before what would have happened had LeBron grown up like Jordan. Jordan drew his competitive spirit from his siblings IIRC, LeBron never had that. LeBron was always special from a young age and was thrown into the national media as a 16 year old, Jordan had to prove himself from a young age. LeBron was crowned the king from the beginning, Jordan had to earn it.

Hmmm, just wondering.

[DMAVS41]

Dude..

Its not about the player to player skill to skill athelticism to athleticism comparison. Those are the things that would NOT have changed as much because of their differing situations entering the league. Those are things that are CONSTANTS.

MJ wasnt losing his vert or his skill because he went to the lakers.

The things that would CHANGE based on their situations are their roles, responsibilities, and leadership development. And those are extremely important in setting a career path off.

Again. You pretend like we didn't get to see Kobe in every role. If he had played his entire career in only 1 role...then your point would have merit.

We got to see Kobe play the rookie, the young gun with too much confidence for how good he was, the great 2nd fiddle, the star player on crap teams, the star player on good teams, the star player on good to great teams.

We saw everything.

All of what you say is true, but you could go all the way back to middle school or high school and lament about responsibilities and leadership and situations...etc. It's just a non point.

You judge players on what they did in the circumstances they were given. End of story. And with Kobe it's very easy to imagine his career not playing with Shaq. 2 or 3 titles....and probably 2 more ppg in the playoffs and regular season with a 1% dip in overall efficiency.

Does that change anything for anyone? Nope. In fact, it just puts Kobe lower on all time lists I would imagine.

[NumberSix]

While we're on this stupid topic, I have wondered before what would have happened had LeBron grown up like Jordan. Jordan drew his competitive spirit from his siblings IIRC, LeBron never had that. LeBron was always special from a young age and was thrown into the national media as a 16 year old, Jordan had to prove himself from a young age. LeBron was crowned the king from the beginning, Jordan had to earn it.

Hmmm, just wondering.
You could just as easily turn it around. If Jordan was a superstar at the age of 16, would he have still had that chip on his shoulder?

It's pretty amazing that LeBron has put in so much work after already being a celebrity with a $100M contract before even playing an NBA game. Look at guys like Melo who simply don't have the same hunger.

[Ne 1]

He wouldn't have a problem trusting Shaq who clearly wasn't like that and was one of the most dominant players ever. He wouldn't have a problem trusting veterans like Horry, Shaw, Harper.

But would it be a problem on the court and as big of a problem as it was with Kobe? Doesn't seem like it. And from Phil's comments, it seems like Jordan would've clearly had a better relationship with Shaq and the rest of his teammates.........


Now this is just wishful thinking and more authority appeals.


Jordan would've clearly had a better relationship with Shaq

Everything isn't black or white man. This is just wishful thinking.


So basically what you're saying is Kobe was socially awkward, could be a disrespectful asshole to his teammates/coaches alienating them in the process, couldn't adjust as well to his teammates personalities, and took longer to mature. :oldlol: You didn't have to write that much to say you agree with Phil. :oldlol:

Strawman argument.


How they developed before that doesn't change or downplay who was better then the other.

Yes it does. As he said, different career paths. Apples to oranges.


Besides, no one forced him to skip college just like no one forced Jordan to go to college.

That's irrelevant.



If you murder someone today, does the fact that you weren't educated enough to know how wrong murder is make you less of a shitty person?

That is a false dilemma and a weak analogy.

[tpols]

Again. You pretend like we didn't get to see Kobe in every role. If he had played his entire career in only 1 role...then your point would have merit.

We got to see Kobe play the rookie, the young gun with too much confidence for how good he was, the great 2nd fiddle, the star player on crap teams, the star player on good teams, the star player on good to great teams.

We saw everything.

All of what you say is true, but you could go all the way back to middle school or high school and lament about responsibilities and leadership and situations...etc. It's just a non point.

You judge players on what they did in the circumstances they were given. End of story. And with Kobe it's very easy to imagine his career not playing with Shaq. 2 or 3 titles....and probably 2 more ppg in the playoffs and regular season with a 1% dip in overall efficiency.

Does that change anything for anyone? Nope. In fact, it just puts Kobe lower on all time lists I would imagine.
I agree with that..

I said Kobe would win around that.. depending on what you give him.

And I said Jordan would win 4ish titles with Shaq before a split occured, and then he would have over half his career to get more chips.

Youre the one who said 5 minimum and ending at 8-10 championships.. which is just so absurd to think they wouldve stuck around with each other that long when theres so much evidence pointing to it not working out for the long haul.

Not to mention Jordan would've had less MVPs.. just like Shaq. Because they dont reward a guy that plays with another all time great beside him.

[AlphaWolf24]

While we're on this stupid topic, I have wondered before what would have happened had LeBron grown up like Jordan. Jordan drew his competitive spirit from his siblings IIRC, LeBron never had that. LeBron was always special from a young age and was thrown into the national media as a 16 year old, Jordan had to prove himself from a young age. LeBron was crowned the king from the beginning, Jordan had to earn it.

Hmmm, just wondering.


- From watching every Jordan VHS/DVD/TV shows etc...etc...

- Both of MJ's parents worked and MJ's dad ( according to MJ) knew how to fix anything mechanical...cars, engines, farm equipment...etc.

- His dad would often make MJ work....and if Jordan would ge tired his dad would make fun of telling him to " go in the kitchen then and work with the women"

- so obviously he had an " work ethic to prove yurself" with his siblings and his father.....he probably felt he had to prove himself constantly...



- Lebrons menatlity most likely came from his peers.....he was always looked at asbieng great....his peers put that pressure on him to be great.

- Luckily he had great people who raised him when his Mom could not....

- who knows wich is better...but both have excelled and become great at what they love to do...


( Not comparing or saying lebron is better......but both have made it is all)

[Jacks3]

8-10 Championships? Really? :biggums:

[longtime lurker]

I've avoided posting in this thread but Kobe has a point about perception. If Kobe had come first and had the same career he has now there's no doubt he would be looked at in a different light. If Jordan had played with Shaq from when he entered the league he'd be looked at in a different light too regardless of how Jordan like he played. Either way Kobe shouldn't have responded because there's no way he can look good regardless of what he says. Should have just said he respects Phil and respects MJ. But his apples to oranges analogy is just plain dumb. Comparing Kobe and Jordan is pretty much as apples to apples as you can get.

[tpols]

I've avoided posting in this thread but Kobe has a point about perception. If Kobe had come first and had the same career he has now there's no doubt he would be looked at in a different light. If Jordan had played with Shaq from when he entered the league he'd be looked at in a different light too regardless of how Jordan like he played.

This point^^^


But his apples to oranges analogy is just plain dumb. Comparing Kobe and Jordan is pretty much as apples to apples as you can get.

And this point ^^^ directly contradict each other.

[guy]

Now this is just wishful thinking and more authority appeals.



Everything isn't black or white man. This is just wishful thinking.



Strawman argument.



Yes it does. As he said, different career paths. Apples to oranges.



That's irrelevant.



That is a false dilemma and a weak analogy.

Its not a weak analogy. Its exactly what you're doing. Because that murderer wasn't brought up in a more favorable situation, his actions aren't as bad according to you. Just like if Jordan came out of HS instead of college, his accomplishments would be better because he wasn't developed in a more favorable situation. :confusedshrug:

I guess I'll just say this. We can't say that Michael Jordan was that much better then Darius Miles, because Darius Miles could've possibly been better then Jordan if he went to UNC for 3 years then the NBA instead of skipping college then going straight to the NBA.

[Doranku]

:roll: @ the thought that MJ/Shaq would be able to co-exist any better than Kobe/Shaq did.

[guy]

- From watching every Jordan VHS/DVD/TV shows etc...etc...

- Both of MJ's parents worked and MJ's dad ( according to MJ) knew how to fix anything mechanical...cars, engines, farm equipment...etc.

- His dad would often make MJ work....and if Jordan would ge tired his dad would make fun of telling him to " go in the kitchen then and work with the women"

- so obviously he had an " work ethic to prove yurself" with his siblings and his father.....he probably felt he had to prove himself constantly...



- Lebrons menatlity most likely came from his peers.....he was always looked at asbieng great....his peers put that pressure on him to be great.

- Luckily he had great people who raised him when his Mom could not....

- who knows wich is better...but both have excelled and become great at what they love to do...


( Not comparing or saying lebron is better......but both have made it is all)

Lebron is clearly better cause he did it all without a father.

[guy]

:roll: @ the thought that MJ/Shaq would be able to co-exist any better than Kobe/Shaq did.

Its not just any thought. But a thought that is clearly supported by comments from the most qualified person in the world.

[tpols]

:roll: @ the thought that MJ/Shaq would be able to co-exist any better than Kobe/Shaq did.
People are putting 90s champion, overcome everything, killer Mike on LA instead of a rook.. and acting like its crazy to put the situation in context.

[guy]

People are putting 90s champion, overcome everything, killer Mike on LA instead of a rook.. and acting like its crazy to put the situation in context.

Phil didn't say Jordan could get along with teammates better because of anything that happened in the 90s at older ages. He said he could get along with teammates because of his natural charisma and ability to adapt better to social situations that he developed as a result of going to college. What the **** does that have to do with Jordan being a champion? This has nothing to do with their NBA career paths. Phil didn't mention NBA career paths at all.

[AirFederer]

Kobe is shooting himself in the legs with a response like this, it`s that stupid.

#Kobesyndrome

:roll: :hammerhead:

[DMAVS41]

I agree with that..

I said Kobe would win around that.. depending on what you give him.

And I said Jordan would win 4ish titles with Shaq before a split occured, and then he would have over half his career to get more chips.

Youre the one who said 5 minimum and ending at 8-10 championships.. which is just so absurd to think they wouldve stuck around with each other that long when theres so much evidence pointing to it not working out for the long haul.

Not to mention Jordan would've had less MVPs.. just like Shaq. Because they dont reward a guy that plays with another all time great beside him.

What? 5 with Shaq and then at least another 3 given Kobe's circumstances.

That isn't hard at all to follow.

So this is all about me saying 5 and you saying 4? WTF?

I'll say it again. 8 years of prime/peak Shaq with 8 years of MJ...it's just too good to not win 5. Kobe didn't become as good as rookie Jordan until his 5th year in the league. Think about 00 when the Lakers won the title. That Kobe wasn't even as good as rookie MJ....think about that.

I have no clue why you are so up in arms about 8 to 10 titles for MJ switching places with Kobe. You already concede MJ was better...and you are ignoring how much of a non factor Kobe was his first 3 years...and how great MJ was his first 3 years.

[AirFederer]

Mike + "Shack" = at least 5 championships.

Deal with it.

:lebroncry:

[DMAVS41]

:roll: @ the thought that MJ/Shaq would be able to co-exist any better than Kobe/Shaq did.

I honestly don't see the relevance. The problem with Shaq and Kobe really wasn't really the problem...if that makes sense.

It was that Kobe wasn't good enough his first 3 years....Kobe then tried to take a larger role in 03 and 04 and honestly just wasn't good enough.

MJ in his 7th year isn't playing the 03 Spurs the way Kobe did...and he sure as hell isn't doing what Kobe did in 04 against the Pistons.

MJ and Shaq might have hated each other even more...but they would have just been too good for the teams from 99 through 04 to beat them.

[longtime lurker]

This point^^^



And this point ^^^ directly contradict each other.

How so? As far as playing style, position, skills and mentality comparing Kobe to Jordan is a fair comparison. Especially since Phil coached both of them. It's not comparing Wilt to Kobe here. As far as actual roles on the teams, accomplishments etc well that's all where perception comes into play. It will always be a comparison coloured by bias, but there are still other comparisons that can be made.

[tpols]

Phil didn't say Jordan could get along with teammates better because of anything that happened in the 90s at older ages. He said he could get along with teammates because of his natural charisma and ability to adapt better to social situations that he developed as a result of going to college. What the **** does that have to do with Jordan being a champion? This has nothing to do with their NBA career paths. Phil didn't mention NBA career paths at all.
I dont know how this at all applies to what I said. Its not about 'getting along with teammates'. Its about the maintenance of a relationship with one person of a certain bball caliber the likes of which MJ has never come close to playing or dealing with.

[tpols]

How so? As far as playing style, position, skills and mentality comparing Kobe to Jordan is a fair comparison. Especially since Phil coached both of them. It's not comparing Wilt to Kobe here. As far as actual roles on the teams, accomplishments etc well that's all where perception comes into play. It will always be a comparison coloured by bias, but there are still other comparisons that can be made.
Kobe never said their abilities as players were apples to oranges.

He said their situations entering the league were apples to oranges.

I cant believe people dont get this. He literally wrote like 15 words.. and they outlined exactly what he meant.

[Chrono90]

Kobes the closest to Jordan as of now. MJ is still GOAT. MJ is still better.

Lebron has the chance to be better than Kobe but i dont see him surpassing MJ.

But Lebron might not continue his dominance after his athleticism goes away or if he plays hurt after an injury.

And, also, don't count Kobe out just yet. He can still come back and make miracles and make his career better.

[guy]

I dont know how this at all applies to what I said. Its not about 'getting along with teammates'. Its about the maintenance of a relationship with one person of a certain bball caliber the likes of which MJ has never come close to playing or dealing with.

Umm maintaining a relationship with a person has a lot to do with being able to get along with people. From everything Phil said, who is the most qualified person on the planet for this topic, there's more support that Jordan would've had a better relationship with Shaq and those Laker teammates in general then Kobe did.


Kobe never said their abilities as players were apples to oranges.

He said their situations entering the league were apples to oranges.

I cant believe people dont get this. He literally wrote like 15 words.. and they outlined exactly what he meant.

And their situations have absolutely nothing to do with the comments he was responding too. Like I said, cause he's insecure as shit, he went with the same robotic response that he always uses when this topic comes up.

[dh144498]

What? 5 with Shaq and then at least another 3 given Kobe's circumstances.

That isn't hard at all to follow.

So this is all about me saying 5 and you saying 4? WTF?

I'll say it again. 8 years of prime/peak Shaq with 8 years of MJ...it's just too good to not win 5. Kobe didn't become as good as rookie Jordan until his 5th year in the league. Think about 00 when the Lakers won the title. That Kobe wasn't even as good as rookie MJ....think about that.

I have no clue why you are so up in arms about 8 to 10 titles for MJ switching places with Kobe. You already concede MJ was better...and you are ignoring how much of a non factor Kobe was his first 3 years...and how great MJ was his first 3 years.

too bad MJ would be considered lesser than he is now if he played with Shaq.
I see 3-4, then the 2 getting into feuds over who is the real alpha like how Kobe and shaq feuded.

[Doranku]

I honestly don't see the relevance. The problem with Shaq and Kobe really wasn't really the problem...if that makes sense.

It was that Kobe wasn't good enough his first 3 years....Kobe then tried to take a larger role in 03 and 04 and honestly just wasn't good enough.

MJ in his 7th year isn't playing the 03 Spurs the way Kobe did...and he sure as hell isn't doing what Kobe did in 04 against the Pistons.

MJ and Shaq might have hated each other even more...but they would have just been too good for the teams from 99 through 04 to beat them.

If we're assuming that Jordan/Shaq would have the same exact path that Kobe/Shaq did, sure they might win from 99-04, but Jordan could very well end up with zero finals MVPs.

99 and 04 would be the only seasons that Jordan would have a shot at finals MVP. Shaq was far too dominant against the Pacers, Sixers, and Nets that they faced/would have faced from '00 to '03.

'04 is a big stretch too, because Shaq dominated the Pistons while they completely shut down every (yes, not just Kobe) perimeter player they faced.

So maybe Jordan gets one finals MVP in '99 against the Knicks. Meanwhile, Kobe would likely have won 3-4 rings in the 90's with Jordan's cast, winning finals MVP each time.

Ultimately, Shaq would have 4-5+ finals MVPs, Jordan 1-2, and Kobe 3-4. Kobe v. Jordan would be a legit argument (with more likely choosing Kobe as being better) and Shaq would be GOAT.

What exactly are we arguing here, again? :oldlol:

[longtime lurker]

Kobe never said their abilities as players were apples to oranges.

He said their situations entering the league were apples to oranges.

I cant believe people dont get this. He literally wrote like 15 words.. and they outlined exactly what he meant.

Yes and I agree with that. But Phil wasn't just comparing their situations entering the league. He compared their mindset, leadership etc. Kobe would have just been better off not responding because no matter what he says he doesn't come out of this looking good.

[tpols]

I have no clue why you are so up in arms about 8 to 10 titles for MJ switching places with Kobe.
Then I dont know what to tell you man.. You think MJ wouldve won like Bill Russel in the 60s when there were 8 teams in the league. Its just not realistic.

Jordan had GREAT teams for the bulk of his prime starting in the early 90s to the late 90s.. and he won 6.

But with slightly better teams in the 00s he wouldve won 10? Doesnt add up.

[guy]

If we're assuming that Jordan/Shaq would have the same exact path that Kobe/Shaq did, sure they might win from 99-04, but Jordan could very well end up with zero finals MVPs.

99 and 04 would be the only seasons that Jordan would have a shot at finals MVP. Shaq was far too dominant against the Pacers, Sixers, and Nets that they faced/would have faced from '00 to '03.

'04 is a big stretch too, because Shaq dominated the Pistons while they completely shut down every (yes, not just Kobe) perimeter player they faced.

So maybe Jordan gets one finals MVP in '99 against the Knicks. Meanwhile, Kobe would likely have won 3-4 rings in the 90's with Jordan's cast, winning finals MVP each time.

Ultimately, Shaq would have 4-5+ finals MVPs, Jordan 1-2, and Kobe 3-4. Kobe v. Jordan would be a legit argument (with more likely choosing Kobe as being better) and Shaq would be GOAT.

What exactly are we arguing here, again? :oldlol:

You really underrate the difference between Jordan and Kobe if you think that's how it would play out.

[tpols]

Umm maintaining a relationship with a person has a lot to do with being able to get along with people. From everything Phil said, who is the most qualified person on the planet for this topic, there's more support that Jordan would've had a better relationship with Shaq and those Laker teammates in general then Kobe did.



And their situations have absolutely nothing to do with the comments he was responding too. Like I said, cause he's insecure as shit, he went with the same robotic response that he always uses when this topic comes up.
Your first part makes absolutely no sense. Way, way more dirt on Jordan not getting along with dudes than Kobe. I remember someone had a quote that was like 3 pages long of altercations for him.

And sure what Kobe said makes sense. Longtime lurker touched on it.. the perceptions are 180 because of their situations.

And hes also right in Kobe being wrong for responding since, in the end, it will only make him look bitter.. even if its completely true.

I respect that though. Fvck what people think, say what you believe is right.

[guy]

Then I dont know what to tell you man.. You think MJ wouldve won like Bill Russel in the 60s when there were 8 teams in the league. Its just not realistic.

Jordan had GREAT teams for the bulk of his prime starting in the early 90s to the late 90s.. and he won 6.

But with slightly better teams in the 00s he wouldve won 10? Doesnt add up.

Ummm its not a stretch at all to say the Lakers would've won up to 8 titles from 97-04 with Jordan/Shaq, which would've been with 1985-1992 Jordan, and then 2-3 from 08-10 with Jordan/Gasol/Odom/Bynum, which would've been with 1996-1998 Jordan.

[Ne 1]

:roll: @ the thought that MJ/Shaq would be able to co-exist any better than Kobe/Shaq did.

Apparently Shaq that had problems with:
Penny
Kobe
Wade
Jerry Buss
Mitch Kupchak
Phil Jackson
Stan Van Gundy
Pat Riley


Was suddenly gonna back down to Jordan, the same one who said his dream team could beat Mike's dream team, that Shaq?

He's even tryna be an alpha on a freaking studio show, but he's gonna play the background for Mike?

as I said, wishful thinking.

Jordan with Shaq would be like Shaq with Kobe.

Like Kobe, Jordan would be the teams lead playmaker, defensive stopper, closer/go to guy in the clutch, 2nd scoring threat, But the offense would still primarily run through Shaq, especially against declined post-'95 center talent .. Plus we're talking about an 18-21 year old Jordan compared to a peak/prime Shaquille O'Neal.

[guy]

Your first part makes absolutely no sense. Way, way more dirt on Jordan not getting along with dudes than Kobe. I remember someone had a quote that was like 3 pages long of altercations for him.

And sure what Kobe said makes sense. Longtime lurker touched on it.. the perceptions are 180 because of their situations.

And hes also right in Kobe being wrong for responding since, in the end, it will only make him look bitter.. even if its completely true.

I respect that though. Fvck what people think, say what you believe is right.

You respect insecurity?

Well no one said Jordan was a saint. No one said Jordan and Shaq would be best friends. You can find 3 pages of that stuff if you refer to a book where finding dirt and controversy on Jordan was the whole damn objective of the author. And a lot of the stories they have isn't necessarily about players he absolutely didn't get along with i.e. punching Steve Kerr which is the type of shit that happens all the time between teammates.

What we do have is what the coach, who is more qualified then anyone and has no reason to be bias at least not towards Jordan, of both players has said about their personalities and their ability to adapt to his teammates' personalities.

And by the way, getting into confrontations does not mean you are less relate-able and likable then someone aloof who's more of a loner that stays to himself and doesn't socialize as much.

[DMAVS41]

Then I dont know what to tell you man.. You think MJ wouldve won like Bill Russel in the 60s when there were 8 teams in the league. Its just not realistic.

Jordan had GREAT teams for the bulk of his prime starting in the early 90s to the late 90s.. and he won 6.

But with slightly better teams in the 00s he wouldve won 10? Doesnt add up.

You just said he would win 4ish with Shaq. I say 5...not like 5 is out of reach.

Then how many does he win from 08 to present with the Lakers in place of Kobe?

I say at least 3...

That is 8.

:wtf:

[DMAVS41]

If we're assuming that Jordan/Shaq would have the same exact path that Kobe/Shaq did, sure they might win from 99-04, but Jordan could very well end up with zero finals MVPs.

99 and 04 would be the only seasons that Jordan would have a shot at finals MVP. Shaq was far too dominant against the Pacers, Sixers, and Nets that they faced/would have faced from '00 to '03.

'04 is a big stretch too, because Shaq dominated the Pistons while they completely shut down every (yes, not just Kobe) perimeter player they faced.

So maybe Jordan gets one finals MVP in '99 against the Knicks. Meanwhile, Kobe would likely have won 3-4 rings in the 90's with Jordan's cast, winning finals MVP each time.

Ultimately, Shaq would have 4-5+ finals MVPs, Jordan 1-2, and Kobe 3-4. Kobe v. Jordan would be a legit argument (with more likely choosing Kobe as being better) and Shaq would be GOAT.

What exactly are we arguing here, again? :oldlol:

How does Kobe get to 4 finals mvp's? Who is he beating. He's not beating mj, shaq, or duncan from 97 through 05...unless he joins them...which defeats the purpose of this hypothetical.

we saw him fail in 08. and then we've seen 09 to present.

so you have to assume he gets on title contending teams in both 06 and 07...and even then nothing is for sure.

kobe could easily have ended up with 2 titles, 2 finals mvp's, and 3 ppg higher averages and slightly worse efficiency.

why does Kobe automatically fall on championship teams? what if he plays with iverson like help before 08?

and I'm not sure Shaq monopolizes the finals mvp after 02....I'd think they win 5 and MJ wins 2 finals mvp's...then jordan goes on to win 3 more titles and 3 more finals mvps

that is 8 titles and 5 finals mvps....

the one thing you say that is true...is that shaq would be thought of as a better player historically. so true.

now that you can see that. you should apply that same logic to kobe. because the exact same thing is true. you just can't see it.

[DMAVS41]

Then I dont know what to tell you man.. You think MJ wouldve won like Bill Russel in the 60s when there were 8 teams in the league. Its just not realistic.

Jordan had GREAT teams for the bulk of his prime starting in the early 90s to the late 90s.. and he won 6.

But with slightly better teams in the 00s he wouldve won 10? Doesnt add up.

I'll add more.

I said between 8 and 10 titles.

So lets get this straight as you say...MJ won 6 as the clear cut best player on teams. We already saw that.

But now it's crazy to think he could win 8 to 10 playing with prime/peak Shaq for 8 years and then the best supporting cast in the league for another 2 to 3 years...and then more solid teams after?

You do realize Kobe won 5 titles....

You do realize how good those Lakeres teams were Kobe's first 3 years without him playing a big role. You do realize that MJ isn't getting punked like Kobe in the 08 finals or the 04 finals or the 03 Spurs series

Think about what you are saying. Year 7 MJ and Shaq losing to the 03 Spurs...it's the most laughable hypothetical ever. It just wouldn't happen.

[Ne 1]

If we're assuming that Jordan/Shaq would have the same exact path that Kobe/Shaq did, sure they might win from 99-04, but Jordan could very well end up with zero finals MVPs.

99 and 04 would be the only seasons that Jordan would have a shot at finals MVP. Shaq was far too dominant against the Pacers, Sixers, and Nets that they faced/would have faced from '00 to '03.

'04 is a big stretch too, because Shaq dominated the Pistons while they completely shut down every (yes, not just Kobe) perimeter player they faced.

So maybe Jordan gets one finals MVP in '99 against the Knicks. Meanwhile, Kobe would likely have won 3-4 rings in the 90's with Jordan's cast, winning finals MVP each time.

Ultimately, Shaq would have 4-5+ finals MVPs, Jordan 1-2, and Kobe 3-4. Kobe v. Jordan would be a legit argument (with more likely choosing Kobe as being better) and Shaq would be GOAT.

What exactly are we arguing here, again? :oldlol:

Pretty much how I see it stricly from a career stand point. Kobe approximately the same age that Jordan was when he was winning titles on the Bulls, (26+ years old in his prime, which means 2006 on Kobe) wins 3-4 rings with 3-4 Finals MVPs. While 20-25 year old Jordan (1984-1989) with peak/prime Shaq maybe wins more rings, but with Shaq being viewed as "them man".

[DMAVS41]

This is why Kobe and his fans are the best. You literally never know what they are going to say next.

We are now hearing the following;

If Kobe didn't have to play with Shaq and MJ did...Kobe would be thought of as the better player.

It's the best. I can't take it...it's just so good.

[guy]

This is why Kobe and his fans are the best. You literally never know what they are going to say next.

We are now hearing the following;

If Kobe didn't have to play with Shaq and MJ did...Kobe would be thought of as the better player.

It's the best. I can't take it...it's just so good.

I don't see the problem. We all know Mike Bibby would've developed into the greatest PG ever if he played with Kareem+Worthy+etc. instead of Webber+Peja+etc. Same thing.

[rzp]

lol at people thinking Kobe would have won any ring with that 80/90 Bulls (some saying 4/5 titles :oldlol: talk about being a delusional fanboy).

Shaq played 8 years with that ultimate selfish-ballhog-chuker-sub 45% fg player... so i dnt see any reason he couldnt coexist with MJ, way more eficient/higher bb IQ.

[red1]

not really kobe. this is more like comparing apples to apples

[Ne 1]

Jordan had GREAT teams for the bulk of his prime starting in the early 90s to the late 90s.. and he won 6.


The stars aligned perfectly for Jordan in that era. The NBA declined greatly after 1988. The NBA expanded way too fast and competition at the top suffered, It was the perfect opportunity for a "GOAT" level player to step up and scoop up the championships in the post Magic/Bird era. The East was nearly as bad as it was in the early 00s...seriously, you could beat barely above .500 teams in the East (as Jordan did in '91) on your way to a championship.

Mike had his own stage because Magic had HIV, Bird had a broke back, and the Pistons and Sixers were just old and depleted. All the greats and legendary teams were aged out by the time Mike was ready to contend. Not his fault. But lets tell it like it is. Big reason why Jordan is widely vied as the greatest ever. He was the greatest player in his era by FAR since all the other legends who would have challenged his throne were all retired or old, nobody to be measured against him.

People remember 90s as better than they actually were, I should know, I grew up remembering 90s as the golden era...now though? I look back at the laughable perimeter talent and even worse competition at the top of the league (even the center talent declined greatly post-'95). Is it even a question that during the "second threepeat era" that Melo would be the best player in league from 96-'98 (in the absence of Jordan)?

[rzp]

The stars aligned perfectly for Jordan in that era. The NBA declined greatly after 1988. It was the perfect opportunity for a "GOAT" level player to step up and scoop up the championships in the post Magic/Bird era. The East was nearly as bad as it was in the early 00s...seriously, you could beat barely above .500 teams in the East (as Jordan did in '91) on your way to a championship.

People remember 90s as better than they actually were, I should know, I grew up remembering 90s as the golden era...now though? I look back at the laughable perimeter talent and even worse comptetion at the top of the league (even the center talent declined greatly post-'95). Is it even a question that during the "second threepeat era" that Melo would be the best player in league from 96-'98 (in the absence of Jordan)?


huh? Shaq says hi? or u still talking about perimeter players?

[guy]

Is it even a question that during the "second threepeat era" that Melo would be the best player in league from 96-'98 (in the absence of Jordan)?

:oldlol: No it wouldn't be a question cause it be an absolute stupid question to ask, just like it would be now.

[Ne 1]

huh? Shaq says hi? or u still talking about perimeter players?

Yeah, Shaq was the best player (even though he won't be remembered as such) in the era but Melo on that Bulls team (winning championships and all while shooting <42% in the Finals...twice) would be remembered as the best in the league.

[longtime lurker]

One thing you guys are forgetting in your scenario of Jordan winning 8-10 rings with Shaq is that Shaq has an ego size of a planet. There's a reason why Shaq's burned bridges every place he's played. Jordan has a massive ego as well eventually these two are going to clash just like Shaq and Kobe did. The difference is that Jordan wouldn't let it effect his on court play. But eventually I could see the team split up into Shaq guys and Jordan guys. Which brings us to another point the salary cap. Jordan's not going to take a paycut so it's either the Lakers end up paying Jordan and Shaq 20 million plus and surround them with d league players or the team is getting split up.

Anyways continue arguing that one poster's completely made up scenario is more believable than another poster's completely made up scenario :oldlol:

[AirFederer]

http://gyazo.com/bfdeae9ffb118f6aa764a074647b89da.png

http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i4/Fernacious_photos/Samwell.gif (http://s68.photobucket.com/user/Fernacious_photos/media/Samwell.gif.html)

[Chrono90]

Please guys. I'm reading this and you guys are mentioning Melo. He's not even close to be on the same breath as them.

[Ne 1]

One thing you guys are forgetting in your scenario of Jordan winning 8-10 rings with Shaq is that Shaq has an ego size of a planet. There's a reason why Shaq's burned bridges every place he's played. Jordan has a massive ego as well eventually these two are going to clash just like Shaq and Kobe did. The difference is that Jordan wouldn't let it effect his on court play. But eventually I could see the team split up into Shaq guys and Jordan guys. Which brings us to another point the salary cap. Jordan's not going to take a paycut so it's either the Lakers end up paying Jordan and Shaq 20 million plus and surround them with d league players or the team is getting split up.

Anyways continue arguing that one poster's completely made up scenario is more believable than another poster's completely made up scenario :oldlol:

This. Do you guys watch Shaq on TNT? He acts like a little kid constantly and he HAS to be the alpha male on the crew even though Chuck and Kenny have been there longer and are obviously better commentators. Jordan is not gonna let someone be the alpha male over him and multiply that over an 82 game season. peak/prime Shaq and 20-25 year old Jordan would obviously win rings, but just like Shaq and Kobe they would of obviously split by ring 3 or 4 (possibly earlier) and not this 10 ring crap Jordan stans/Kobe detractors are saying in this thread

[Young X]

Is it even a question that during the "second threepeat era" that Melo would be the best player in league from 96-'98 (in the absence of Jordan)?
So you think Melo is better than Shaq, Hakeem, Robinson, Hill, Malone, and Barkley?

http://www.threadbombing.com/data/media/2/50smh.gif

[bukowski81]

So you think Melo is better than Shaq, Hakeem, Robinson, Hill, Malone, and Barkley?

http://www.threadbombing.com/data/media/2/50smh.gif

Payton, stockton, wilkins, ewing, drexler, kidd are all at least debatable. Melo wouldnt be close to being the best player in that era.

[Ne 1]

So you think Melo is better than Shaq, Hakeem, Robinson, Hill, Malone, and Barkley?


Hakeem was declining after '95, he got embarrassed in the Sonics series (even though, Seattle got away with illegal defense that would be legal nowadays). So was Robinson, Barkely was never the same after leaving Phoenix and actually started declining around '94. Shaq was the best player (even though he won't be remembered as such) in the era but Melo on that Bulls team (winning championships and all while shooting <42% in the finals...twice) would be remembered as the best in the league.

[SamuraiSWISH]

So you think Melo is better than Shaq, Hakeem, Robinson, Hill, Malone, and Barkley?
Don't forget Penny and budding AI ... Melo wouldn't even be close to the best. Even with declining Barkley, Hakeem, and David Robinson. This dude spreads his hole for "Kobe's era"

[juju151111]

- 85' MJ was already 21 - 22 years old....

Kobe at 21 years old was also winning titles....

again this about MJ coming straight into the league as a unknown rookie playing with Prime Shaq...

MJ's numbers take a huge hit and Shaq is easily taking the majority of the shots.



your whole post makes no sense when looking at the context of what Kobe was talking about.....

- even a 18 year old Jordan was no where near Kobe's abilty ( according to MJ himeself)....and no way 18 year old MJ with Shaq win any titles...

- it would have took MJ at least 3- 4 seasons to develop his game.....heck it took MJ 5 seasons to develop a reliable midrange game. ( something he could fall back on when teams took away his slashing game)
Kobe took more shots then Shaq during 2001 season.

[juju151111]

Hakeem was declining after '95, he got embarrassed in the Sonics series (even though, Seattle got away with illegal defense that would be legal nowadays). So was Robinson, Barkely was never the same after leaving Phoenix and actually started declining around '94. Shaq was the best player (even though he won't be remembered as such) in the era but Melo on that Bulls team (winning championships and all while shooting <42% in the finals...twice) would be remembered as the best in the league.
The 96-98 bulls isn't winning any championship with Marshmellow. Gtfo Will melody get out the first round even. Would Melo even be able to step his game up in 98 with a crack knuckle,Pippen injured for half the season and was never right that season even after he get back. Melody never even played in a creaking finals. Melody can't pass and is more of a iso player.

[dh144498]

Kobe took more shots then Shaq during 2001 season.

and they went 16-1 in the playoffs. Looks pretty nice.

[K Xerxes]

Hakeem was declining after '95, he got embarrassed in the Sonics series (even though, Seattle got away with illegal defense that would be legal nowadays). So was Robinson, Barkely was never the same after leaving Phoenix and actually started declining around '94. Shaq was the best player (even though he won't be remembered as such) in the era but Melo on that Bulls team (winning championships and all while shooting <42% in the finals...twice) would be remembered as the best in the league.

I lol'd, pretty hard.

[Nevaeh]

The stars aligned perfectly for Jordan in that era. The NBA declined greatly after 1988. The NBA expanded way too fast and competition at the top suffered, It was the perfect opportunity for a "GOAT" level player to step up and scoop up the championships in the post Magic/Bird era. The East was nearly as bad as it was in the early 00s...seriously, you could beat barely above .500 teams in the East (as Jordan did in '91) on your way to a championship.

Mike had his own stage because Magic had HIV, Bird had a broke back, and the Pistons and Sixers were just old and depleted. All the greats and legendary teams were aged out by the time Mike was ready to contend. Not his fault. But lets tell it like it is. Big reason why Jordan is widely vied as the greatest ever. He was the greatest player in his era by FAR since all the other legends who would have challenged his throne were all retired or old, nobody to be measured against him.

People remember 90s as better than they actually were, I should know, I grew up remembering 90s as the golden era...now though? I look back at the laughable perimeter talent and even worse competition at the top of the league (even the center talent declined greatly post-'95). Is it even a question that during the "second threepeat era" that Melo would be the best player in league from 96-'98 (in the absence of Jordan)?


Dude, just stop it. You're in your early f@cking 20s, yet you expect someone to believe that you remember anything about 90s basketball?

:oldlol:

And no clown, you don't just "step in, and scoop up" championships, no matter what conference you're playing in. You compete for them, just like every team in the League does. The fact that Jordan won 6 against the "superior west" also doesn't do the point you're trying to make any favors either.........

or whoever the hell it was that you copied and pasted this tripe from............over and over and over again.............

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

[Poochymama]

8-10 Championships? Really? :biggums:

It's really not all that ridiculous if you look at it objectively. Jordan spent 6 years with real championship caliber talent around him, and he won 6 championships on those 6 years. You think it's ridiculous to hypothesize that he'd win a couple more given the 7-8 more chances that Kobe had?

[guy]

It's really not all that ridiculous if you look at it objectively. Jordan spent 6 years with real championship caliber talent around him, and he won 6 championships on those 6 years. You think it's ridiculous to hypothesize that he'd win a couple more given the 7-8 more chances that Kobe had?

Here are my thoughts on the comparison. And since Kobe played more years, I'll give him an advantage where he starts in Jordan's position at ages where he was better, plus it makes it easier since Kobe's last year would've been 1998 with the Bulls so it better aligns. Jordan still starts in 97 though since the topic is about him being in the same career path and would have the apparent "burden" of playing with Shaq. I'm taking into account their injuries, off the court distractions, etc. Keep in mind, there careers overlap a bit in 97 and 98.

1982 - 1997 Kobe (No playoffs)
1983 - 1998 Kobe (No playoffs)
1984 - 1999 Kobe (No playoffs)
1985 - 2000 Kobe (No playoffs) (Hakeem-ROY)
1986 - 2001 Kobe (8th seed first round exit vs Celtics, scoring title)
1987 - 2002 Kobe (8th seed first round exit vs Celtics, scoring title)
1988 - 2003 Kobe (7th seed first round exit vs Pistons, scoring title) (Bird-MVP)
1989 - 2004 Kobe (No playoffs)
1990 - 2005 Kobe (6th seed first round exit vs. Celtics)
1991 - 2006 Kobe (1st seed Championship vs. Lakers, FMVP, MVP, scoring title)
1992 - 2007 Kobe (1st seed Championship vs. Blazers, MVP, scoring title)
1993 - 2008 Kobe (2nd seed ECF exit vs. Knicks) (Knicks over Suns in Finals)
1994 - 2009 Kobe (1st seed Championship vs. Rockets, FMVP)
1995 - 2010 Kobe (2nd seed ECSF exit vs. Knicks)
1996 - 2011 Kobe (1st seed ECF exit vs. Magic) (Magic over Sonics in Finals, Robinson-MVP)
1997 - 2012 Kobe, 1985 Jordan (2nd seed Lakers championship vs. 2nd seed Bulls) (Shaq-FMVP)
1998 - 2013 Kobe, 1986 Jordan (5th seed Bulls ECSF exit vs. Pacers, 2nd seed Lakers championship vs. Pacers, FMVP) (Malone-MVP)
1999 - 1987 Jordan (1st seed Lakers championship vs. Knicks) (Shaq-FMVP, Shaq-MVP)
2000 - 1988 Jordan (1st seed Lakers championship vs. Pacers) (Shaq-FMVP)
2001 - 1989 Jordan (1st seed Lakers championship vs. 76ers, FMVP, MVP)
2002 - 1990 Jordan (1st seed Lakers championship vs. Nets, scoring title) (Shaq-FMVP)
2003 - 1991 Jordan (1st seed Lakers championship vs. Nets, FMVP, MVP)
2004 - 1992 Jordan (1st seed Lakers championship vs. Pistons, FMVP, MVP, scoring title)
2005 - 1993 Jordan (6th seed WCSF exit vs. Spurs, MVP, scoring title)
2006 - 1994 Jordan (retired)
2007 - 1995 Jordan (No playoffs)
2008 - 1996 Jordan (1st seed Lakers Finals loss vs. Celtics, MVP, scoring title)
2009 - 1997 Jordan (1st seed Lakers championship vs. Magic, FMVP)
2010 - 1998 Jordan (1st seed Lakers championship vs. Celtics, FMVP)

I know it doesn't look very organized but I have:

Kobe - 3x champ, 4x Finalist, 2x MVP, 3x FMVP, 5x scoring champ
Jordan - 10x champ, 11x Finalist, 5x MVP, 6x FMVP, 4x scoring champ

Now I would agree that some are arguable, so I would give them the following ranges:

Kobe - 3x-5x champ, 3x-5x Finalist, 3x-5x FMVP, 2x-3x MVP, 3x-6x scoring champ
Jordan - 8x-11x champ, 9x-11x Finalist, 4x-8x FMVP, 3x-5x MVP, 2x-4x scoring champ.

I didn't look to deep into the FMVP for Jordan and Shaq, but I'm going to assume they just split their's. You can argue Kobe's legacy might look better then it currently is, but I think the gap between Jordan and Kobe is clearly perceived as wider.