A Rookie 1984 Michael Jordan or a Current Kobe Bryant?

[Dnn111]

I know, I know, I know that this may have been discussed over one billion times but I am wondering who would be better for a team? A young 1984-1987 Michael Jordan or a current Kobe Bryant?

A lot of people say that they didn't know that Michael Jordan would be as good as he turned out to be whenever he was drafted in 1984. But is this type of Michael Jordan (with hair on his head) better than a current MVP Kobe Bryant?

[bleedinpurpleTwo]

Michael who? Jordan?

who's better: early Jordan or prime Bo Kimble?

[TruthKGRay3412]

The better question Jordan as a toddler or current Kobe Bryant?

[InspiredLebowski]

Jordan's walk-on at Illinois son Jeffrey or Kobe's wife. WHO WINS

[Emile]

When it comes to Kobe vs Jordan, I count on only 3 people to make a reasonable/honest/objective assessment here.

Psileas/The Indian Guy/Dejordan.

Maybe someone else I'm forgetting and if that's so, I apologize.

[dazed27]

The better question Jordan as a toddler or current Kobe Bryant?

wow yes i knew it kobe hater...

kg is sucks by the way!!!lol

ur a stupid mutherf*cker

[danumber88]

Jordan.

[dazed27]

honestly

i cant quote on this because i wasnt around to watch those old jordan james

and i bet most of the people who post here didnt either.

but from common sense an 11 player veteran is better than a rookie..in this case...dumb thread...

[Loki]

They were different types of players. Rookie Jordan could most likely equal current Kobe's production, but Kobe's game management and the general polish of his game is more than what rookie Jordan's was. Rookie Jordan was also more of an energy/intensity player than current Kobe, so he could provide a spark that way.

I'd probably take current Kobe. I would take '87 and later Jordan over any version of Kobe, however.

[NoGunzJustSkillz]

I would take '87 and later Jordan over any version of Kobe, however.

I'm pretty sure everybody knows your answer. Stop trolling..

[elementally morale]

When it comes to Kobe vs Jordan, I count on only 3 people to make a reasonable/honest/objective assessment here.

Psileas/The Indian Guy/Dejordan.

Maybe someone else I'm forgetting and if that's so, I apologize.

As you should. :)

[Vendetta]

When it comes to Kobe vs Jordan, I count on only 3 people to make a reasonable/honest/objective assessment here.

Psileas/The Indian Guy/Dejordan.

Maybe someone else I'm forgetting and if that's so, I apologize.

I really don't care what anyone says... the vast majority of the time when it comes to Jordan vs Kobe topics... the only reasonable, honest, objective assessment is that Jordan was by far and away, yes, by far and away, a superior basketball player.

I'd probably take a current Kobe over a rookie MJ but it wouldn't be some slam dunk decision. This one actually is debatable.

But prime vs prime, career vs career, MJ wins hands down. Anyone who says otherwise is a damn fool or completely ignorant of the past.

[InspiredLebowski]

I really don't care what anyone says... the vast majority of the time when it comes to Jordan vs Kobe topics... the only reasonable, honest, objective assessment is that Jordan was by far and away, yes, by far and away, a superior basketball player.

I'd probably take a current Kobe over a rookie MJ but it wouldn't be some slam dunk decision. This one actually is debatable.

But prime vs prime, career vs career, MJ wins hands down. Anyone who says otherwise is a damn fool or completely ignorant of the past.

:cheers:

[iamgine]

Obviously current Kobe. I'd prefer to watch Mike again though.

[dazed27]

I really don't care what anyone says... the vast majority of the time when it comes to Jordan vs Kobe topics... the only reasonable, honest, objective assessment is that Jordan was by far and away, yes, by far and away, a superior basketball player.

I'd probably take a current Kobe over a rookie MJ but it wouldn't be some slam dunk decision. This one actually is debatable.

But prime vs prime, career vs career, MJ wins hands down. Anyone who says otherwise is a damn fool or completely ignorant of the past.

you cannot come to that conclusion yet. kobes career is far from over...

[Poseidon]

Obviously current Kobe. I'd prefer to watch Mike again though.

I agree. Kobe's experience and ability to hit the J makes him a better player than '84 MJ. But there's never been a more exciting player than a 1984-90 Michael Jordan. I would donate my left nut to science research to watch Jordan play again from 23-24 years ago.

[eliteballer]

This is SUCH a joke. Kobe at the same age as rookie Mike was arguably better. Similar numbers, better shooter, better defender(All-NBA Defensive First Team the YEAR BEFORE).

[Loki]

This is SUCH a joke. Kobe at the same age as rookie Mike was arguably better.

:roll: :bowdown: :roll: :bowdown:

[eliteballer]

Jordan at 22(Most of rookie year)

28.2 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 5.9 apg, 2.4 stl, 51.5 FG, 17.3 3FG, 84.5 FT

Kobe at 22

28.5 ppg, 5.9 rpg, 5.0 apg, 1.7 stl, 46.4 FG, 30.5 3FG, 85.3 FT, All-NBA Defensive Second Team(First-Team year before)

Not to mention Jordan was in a faster paced, less defensive easier to score league.

[elementally morale]

Jordan at 22(Most of rookie year)

28.2 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 5.9 apg, 2.4 stl, 51.5 FG, 17.3 3FG, 84.5 FT

Kobe at 22

28.5 ppg, 5.9 rpg, 5.0 apg, 1.7 stl, 46.4 FG, 30.5 3FG, 85.3 FT, All-NBA Defensive Second Team(First-Team year before)

Not to mention Jordan was in a faster paced, less defensive easier to score league.

Lesser defense in the 80's? I'm not sure about that. What sport were you watching back then? Were you even alive in 1985?

[GreatLakes]

Lesser defense in the 80's? I'm not sure about that. What sport were you watching back then? Were you even alive in 1985?

Its true. Just look at scoring averages.

[w00terz]

It's threads like these that make we want to get a sledge hammer and start swinging at the TC's head.

I'll take Jordan at birth (say 12 minutes old) over Kobe at age 83 with Leukemia.

[elementally morale]

Its true. Just look at scoring averages.

Faster game, true. Less defense... not really. Different defense. More physical defense.

[GreatLakes]

Faster game, true. Less defense... not really. Different defense. More physical defense.

Sure more physical defense. But less athletic players. Guys not as long and able to cover as much ground. Easier to run your offense.

[Loki]

Jordan at 22(Most of rookie year)

28.2 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 5.9 apg, 2.4 stl, 51.5 FG, 17.3 3FG, 84.5 FT

Kobe at 22

28.5 ppg, 5.9 rpg, 5.0 apg, 1.7 stl, 46.4 FG, 30.5 3FG, 85.3 FT, All-NBA Defensive Second Team(First-Team year before)

Not to mention Jordan was in a faster paced, less defensive easier to score league.

Not to mention that Jordan was the focus of every defense he faced as opposed to Kobe, who was playing with a top 7 all-time player in his absolute prime. :hammerhead:

[KenneBell]

Not to mention that Jordan was the focus of every defense he faced as opposed to Kobe, who was playing with a top 7 all-time player in his absolute prime. :hammerhead:
Meh, I bet Kobe would still get similar numbers or higher when by himself. It might have been a bit harder but Kobe could adapt. But we'll never know which is why threads like this are worthless...

[Loki]

Meh, I bet Kobe would still get similar numbers or higher when by himself. It might have been a bit harder but Kobe could adapt. But we'll never know which is why threads like this are worthless...

Right. Because it's easier to score against double and triple teams than when you have a teammate commanding those double/triple teams, and it's easier to get assists passing to shooters than it is by driving and dumping it off for guaranteed dunks. :oldlol:

[eliteballer]

Funny when history tells us that a star is on his own team where he has to carry the load on a bad team...his numbers go UP. As Kobe's did without Shaq:D Oh yeah...and Kobe was operating in the triangle, not freelancing like MJ.

[Loki]

Funny when history tells us that a star is on his own team where he has to carry the load on a bad team...his numbers go UP. As Kobe's did without Shaq:D Oh yeah...and Kobe was operating in the triangle, not freelancing like MJ.

Kobe's numbers went up only once they changed the defensive rules that benefitted all perimeter players. Nice try though. In 2005 and from '00-'04 in the games Shaq was out, his numbers were noticeably worse than when Shaq was in.

[bdreason]

They were different types of players. Rookie Jordan could most likely equal current Kobe's production, but Kobe's game management and the general polish of his game is more than what rookie Jordan's was. Rookie Jordan was also more of an energy/intensity player than current Kobe, so he could provide a spark that way.

I'd probably take current Kobe. I would take '87 and later Jordan over any version of Kobe, however.


This is a solid analysis. From a MJ groupie no less.

[eliteballer]

Kobe's numbers went up only once they changed the defensive rules that benefitted all perimeter players. Nice try though. In 2005 and from '00-'04 in the games Shaq was out, his numbers were notably worse than when Shaq was in.

As if the notion that 80's defense at ANY stage was better than 00's defense at ANY stage. As for your second point. NOPE. You're lying. FLAT OUT. I'm calling you OUT to POST THE NUMBERS FROM EVERY GAME KOBE PLAYED WITHOUT SHAQ FROM 00-04 AND AVERAGE THEM, THEN COMPARE. Go ahead, do IT. I've seen them.

[eliteballer]

I'LL PROVE YOUR WRONG RIGHT NOW FOR THE 04 SEASON.

http://www.82games.com/kobeshaq.htm

Kobe Bryant stat splits for the 2003-04 Regular Season
Situation FGA FG% FTM Ast TO OReb Reb Stl Pts Pts100
with Shaq 17.2 45.5% 6.3 5.7 2.9 1.6 5.7 1.7 23.0 100.0
without Shaq 24.0 41.5% 10.3 4.6 2.7 2.0 6.3 2.2 31.6 100.4
Stats shown on a per 40 minutes of playing time basis,
"PTS100" is points per 100 possessions, ignoring offensive rebounds

Without Shaquille, Kobe's field goal attempts increase by a whopping 40%, albeit at a cost in field goal percentage (and for you eFG lovers that adjust for three-point shots made, Kobe's eFG is .487 with Shaq, .443 without him).

Remarkably though, Kobe's efficiency doesn't drop despite the lower FG% number, since he gets to the free throw line a whole lot more, but his scoring average zooms up to 31.6 points per 40 minutes, so yes he may well lead the league in scoring once the Diesel is no longer obstructing his way to the paint.


In other details, Bryant's assists drop slightly without Shaq, but his rebounds and steals move up a little. Most importantly, despite handling the ball more often his turnovers decrease, presumably because he's making less passes into the paint which carry the higher risk/reward equation.

Let's see....EIGHT MORE POINTS PER GAME, MORE REBOUNDS, STEALS, LESS TURNOVERS.

[InspiredLebowski]

Not even mentioning MJ's much superior D, the fact that Jordan shot a career 49%, while Kobe's career high for a SEASON is a rounded up 47% sums it up for me.

[eliteballer]

Not even mentioning MJ's much superior D, the fact that Jordan shot a career 49%, while Kobe's career high for a SEASON is a rounded up 47% sums it up for me.

KOBE IS ALL-NBA DEFENSE, NOT ROOKIE MJ.

[ShowTime LA]

.........

[InspiredLebowski]

KOBE IS ALL-NBA DEFENSE, NOT ROOKIE MJ.
WHAT DID YOU SAY I COULDN'T MAKE IT OUT

Besides, Mike with the gold chain is the best NBA photo of all time

[KenneBell]

Not even mentioning MJ's much superior D, the fact that Jordan shot a career 49%, while Kobe's career high for a SEASON is a rounded up 47% sums it up for me.
We've been over this already. Kobe is more of a perimeter jumpshooter. He takes way more threes than Jordan and pretty much anyone in his era. The game has changed. His FG% as well pretty much everyone else's is lower than players from Jordan's era because of the recent tendencies to take 3's. It's also explains why his TS% is close to MJ's.

18 feet in, Jordan was automatic. That's where he and most guards in his day operated. Not today.

[InspiredLebowski]

We've been over this already. Kobe is more of a perimeter jumpshooter. He takes way more threes than Jordan and pretty anyone in his era. The game has changed. His FG% as well pretty much everyone else's is lower than players from Jordan's era because of the recent tendencies to take 3's.

First of all, my mistake in making this an overall vs. overall debate, it's digressing from the OP.

Anyway, so what? He should be given the benefit of the doubt, even though there's no hand-check these days, because he takes lower % shots? I'll readily admit Kobe has more range right now than MJ ever had in his career, but so what? Is Reggie Miller or Ray Allen better than a guy like Dwyane Wade because they could drain it from 30 feet?

[KenneBell]

Anyway, so what? He should be given the benefit of the doubt, even though there's no hand-check these days, because he takes lower % shots? I'll readily admit Kobe has more range right now than MJ ever had in his career, but so what? Is Reggie Miller or Ray Allen better than a guy like Dwyane Wade because they could drain it from 30 feet?
No I'm just saying...

For the topic, I'd go with Kobe no doubt. I'd like to see 29yo Kobe matchup vs a 29yo Jordan. It'd be interesting to see for sure.

[InspiredLebowski]

No I'm just saying...

For the topic, I'd go with Kobe no doubt. I'd like to see 29yo Kobe matchup vs a 29yo Jordan. It'd be interesting to see for sure.

MJ 11 Kobe 5

[juju151111]

Jordan at 22(Most of rookie year)

28.2 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 5.9 apg, 2.4 stl, 51.5 FG, 17.3 3FG, 84.5 FT

Kobe at 22

28.5 ppg, 5.9 rpg, 5.0 apg, 1.7 stl, 46.4 FG, 30.5 3FG, 85.3 FT, All-NBA Defensive Second Team(First-Team year before)

Not to mention Jordan was in a faster paced, less defensive easier to score league.
I don't understand.I could of sworn Mj was droping 20 ppg at age 40 on ur so called better defensive league?Also u didn't put the FG%.Just because u are on the all team defense doesn't mean anything.Mj averged more stls and blks then kobe that year.He was a rookie and they didn't really know him has a defensive plyer yet, even tho he played defense.Look at 86-87.He was just has good has 88, but no reconition.Look at tmac in his orlano days.He played great one on one defense and got stls and blks no freaking mention on all defensive team.media doesn't now how to pick.Wat was the difference with 87 Mj and 88 Mj that gave him the DPOTY???Noting he was =n't known has a D player doesn't mean he wasn't.

[TmacsRockets]

Meh, I bet Kobe would still get similar numbers or higher when by himself. It might have been a bit harder but Kobe could adapt. But we'll never know which is why threads like this are worthless...

Kobe still shoots a worse fg% than his team average and has done so the last 5 years. Jordan always shot better than his team average.

[eliteballer]

I don't understand.I could of sworn Mj was droping 20 ppg at age 40 on ur so called better defensive league?Also u didn't put the FG%.Just because u are on the all team defense doesn't mean anything.Mj averged more stls and blks then kobe that year.He was a rookie and they didn't really know him has a defensive plyer yet, even tho he played defense.Look at 86-87.He was just has good has 88, but no reconition.Look at tmac in his orlano days.He played great one on one defense and got stls and blks no freaking mention on all defensive team.media doesn't now how to pick.Wat was the difference with 87 Mj and 88 Mj that gave him the DPOTY???Noting he was =n't known has a D player doesn't mean he wasn't.

:roll: Coaches pick defensive teams ISHiot. Steals and blocks numbers dont= good defender. Ask LeBron yrs 1-3 or Bruce Bowen.

[juju151111]

:roll: Coaches pick defensive teams ISHiot. Steals and blocks numbers dont= good defender. Ask LeBron yrs 1-3 or Bruce Bowen.
ok watever coaches.hmmm thats the reason i said great one on one defender.stls and blks are a plus with the defense.off the top of my head i think there are only 4 sg/sf who put up 100plus stls and 100plus blks and mj did it twice.

[VCMVP1551]

Oh yeah...and Kobe was operating in the triangle, not freelancing like MJ.

Kobe didn't play team basketball until the second half of 2000-2001(it's no coincidence the Lakers didn't play championship level basketball until the second half). For a big chunk of the 2000-2001 season Kobe was jacking up shots trying to be the first option which is probably why they went 11-3 when Kobe was out of the lineup.

So don't act like Kobe wasn't playing freely and he was playing perfect team basketball that entire season. That's why Shaq made that quote about how if the big dog wasn't him the house wouldn't get guarded.

Anyway as for the OP current Kobe is clearly better than rookie Jordan but I think Jordan from his 3rd season until 1998 was much better than Kobe ever was.

[eliteballer]

Kobe didn't play team basketball until the second half of 2000-2001(it's no coincidence the Lakers didn't play championship level basketball until the second half). For a big chunk of the 2000-2001 season Kobe was jacking up shots trying to be the first option which is probably why they went 11-3 when Kobe was out of the lineup.

So don't act like Kobe wasn't playing freely and he was playing perfect team basketball that entire season. That's why Shaq made that quote about how if the big dog wasn't him the house wouldn't get guarded.

Anyway as for the OP current Kobe is clearly better than rookie Jordan but I think Jordan from his 3rd season until 1998 was much better than Kobe ever was.

Ya...his numbers were EVEN BETTER for the first half or so of the season before he started deferring. ISHiot.

[VCMVP1551]

Ya...his numbers were EVEN BETTER for the first half or so of the season before he started deferring. ISHiot.

But the W-L record wasn't you f*cking moron. What good is better numbers if the W-L record is worse? He should have been a deferring the whole time considering Shaq was the teams clear best player. It's no coincidence that the teams winning % was better without Kobe(.786) than with Kobe(.662)

[Shep]

current bryant is easily better than '85 jordan, as was '07 bryant, '06 bryant, '04 bryant, '03 bryant, '02 bryant, '01 bryant, and '00 bryant.

peak bryant ('03) wasn't better than '88 jordan, '89 jordan, '90 jordan, '91 jordan, '92 jordan, '93 jordan, '96 jordan, or '97 jordan.

[chocolatethunder]

Kobe over that young Jordan simply because he was too selfish in his earlier age. Not to say he wasn't selfish in his old age, but he did sort of get better. Kobe really has evolved the past 3 years.

This is great comedy.

[juju151111]

Ya...his numbers were EVEN BETTER for the first half or so of the season before he started deferring. ISHiot.
good job skipping my post.Ohh well i still proved MJ rookie season was just has good has this kobe season.

[StoneCold]

Kobe over that young Jordan simply because he was too selfish in his earlier age. Not to say he wasn't selfish in his old age, but he did sort of get better. Kobe really has evolved the past 3 years.



Wow..

It amazes just how UNINFORMED U kobe homers REALLY are when it comes to making these ABSURD comparisons to MJ. Half of U guys didn't even see MJ before the 1st titles & the other half of U guys, BARELY saw him from 1996-98..and those WEREN'T even his PRIME years!

It's the SAME 'ol story with U guys..Y'all try & rank & compare them based on your UNINFORMED opinions, rather than what they've actually DONE on the floor..

MJ's "ROOKIE" season he had an NBA Efficiency Rating (PER) of 29.24, & 13.2 player wins. He also IMPROVED them by 10 wins & took 'em to the Playoffs, a place they hadn't SEEN since 1981..

Kobe's 2006-07 season, he had an NBA Efficiency Rating (PER) of 27.65 and 11.2 player wins.

Well homers, how do U explain that? And U claim kobe's better?

THAT'S A JOKE!!

In the seasons BEFORE Pippen & Co., he had a combined average of 33ppg 5apg 6rpg 2.74spg 1.26bpg 49 FG%.

Show me ANY season from kobe with better OVERALL Production than that?

MJ is the ONLY player in HISTORY to lead his team in scoring, rebounding, assists & steals..(4 out of 5 categories) & he did this as a ROOKIE!! Dr. J did it in the ABA, but never in the NBA. MJ was 4 blocks away from repeating this feat in 1989.

Ever see kobe do anything REMOTELY close to that? Hell no & if U claim he has, you're a liar & the truth aint in ya..

And U got the NERVE to call MJ "selfish"? Are U serious?

Kobe has 53 games to date, with NO ASSISTS! MJ has only "6" in 14 years of play, with the 1st game like occuring in 1997..that's 13 STRAIGHT years with at least "1" assist!

What's kobe's excuse?

U kobe homers need to stop deluding yourselves & get real. Get off your false paradise of eden that's perched on the banks of 'Denial' & snap back into reality..

[Voulnet]

Wow..

It amazes just how UNINFORMED U kobe homers REALLY are when it comes to making these ABSURD comparisons to MJ. Half of U guys didn't even see MJ before the 1st titles & the other half of U guys, BARELY saw him from 1996-98..and those WEREN'T even his PRIME years!

It's the SAME 'ol story with U guys..Y'all try & rank & compare them based on your UNINFORMED opinions, rather than what they've actually DONE on the floor..

MJ's "ROOKIE" season he had an NBA Efficiency Rating (PER) of 29.24, & 13.2 player wins. He also IMPROVED them by 10 wins & took 'em to the Playoffs, a place they hadn't SEEN since 1981..

Kobe's 2006-07 season, he had an NBA Efficiency Rating (PER) of 27.65 and 11.2 player wins.

Well homers, how do U explain that? And U claim kobe's better?

THAT'S A JOKE!!

In the seasons BEFORE Pippen & Co., he had a combined average of 33ppg 5apg 6rpg 2.74spg 1.26bpg 49 FG%.

Show me ANY season from kobe with better OVERALL Production than that?

MJ is the ONLY player in HISTORY to lead his team in scoring, rebounding, assists & steals..(4 out of 5 categories) & he did this as a ROOKIE!! Dr. J did it in the ABA, but never in the NBA. MJ was 4 blocks away from repeating this feat in 1989.

Ever see kobe do anything REMOTELY close to that? Hell no & if U claim he has, you're a liar & the truth aint in ya..

And U got the NERVE to call MJ "selfish"? Are U serious?

Kobe has 53 games to date, with NO ASSISTS! MJ has only "6" in 14 years of play, with the 1st game like occuring in 1997..that's 13 STRAIGHT years with at least "1" assist!

What's kobe's excuse?

U kobe homers need to stop deluding yourselves & get real. Get off your false paradise of eden that's perched on the banks of 'Denial' & snap back into reality..

Hahaha, you're popping veins out there! :oldlol:
Grow up, we're not discussing the value of the human life. We're talking f*cking basketball.

Oh, and btw, not having assists doesn't mean one wasn't passing, it just means the player did not have a pass from which the receiver scored. Just that, nothing more and nothing less. That's why in my opinion, the assist, as a standalone stat, is very very overrated.

[Poseidon]

Wow..

It amazes just how UNINFORMED U kobe homers REALLY are when it comes to making these ABSURD comparisons to MJ. Half of U guys didn't even see MJ before the 1st titles & the other half of U guys, BARELY saw him from 1996-98..and those WEREN'T even his PRIME years!

It's the SAME 'ol story with U guys..Y'all try & rank & compare them based on your UNINFORMED opinions, rather than what they've actually DONE on the floor..

MJ's "ROOKIE" season he had an NBA Efficiency Rating (PER) of 29.24, & 13.2 player wins. He also IMPROVED them by 10 wins & took 'em to the Playoffs, a place they hadn't SEEN since 1981..

Kobe's 2006-07 season, he had an NBA Efficiency Rating (PER) of 27.65 and 11.2 player wins.

Well homers, how do U explain that? And U claim kobe's better?

THAT'S A JOKE!!

In the seasons BEFORE Pippen & Co., he had a combined average of 33ppg 5apg 6rpg 2.74spg 1.26bpg 49 FG%.

Show me ANY season from kobe with better OVERALL Production than that?

MJ is the ONLY player in HISTORY to lead his team in scoring, rebounding, assists & steals..(4 out of 5 categories) & he did this as a ROOKIE!! Dr. J did it in the ABA, but never in the NBA. MJ was 4 blocks away from repeating this feat in 1989.

Ever see kobe do anything REMOTELY close to that? Hell no & if U claim he has, you're a liar & the truth aint in ya..

And U got the NERVE to call MJ "selfish"? Are U serious?

Kobe has 53 games to date, with NO ASSISTS! MJ has only "6" in 14 years of play, with the 1st game like occuring in 1997..that's 13 STRAIGHT years with at least "1" assist!

What's kobe's excuse?

U kobe homers need to stop deluding yourselves & get real. Get off your false paradise of eden that's perched on the banks of 'Denial' & snap back into reality..

Aren't you the clown who was exposed for plagiarizing from another site? :lol

[StoneCold]

Kobe's best & true shooting % for a season, from a EFG% standpoint, was last year at .580%.

MJ had 6 seasons BETTER than that, one of which included..U guessed it, his ROOKIE YEAR, that topped out at a jaw dropping .614%!!

It's pointless kobe homers, he's not comparable or better than MJ.

That FACTS will ALWAYS prove U guys wrong in this comparison...

[ukplayer4]

its really funny to see how petty the kobe fans get when someone posts a whole bunch of facts that show mj's superiority. rather than adress the facts they try to take the piss and discredit the guy who has done nothing more than post simple facts.

[StoneCold]

Aren't you the clown who was exposed for plagiarizing from another site? :lol

No, Those ARE my Posts...

How can I plagiarize myself?

As I stated the last time U tried to say that, take a look at my bio on YouTube.. (www.youtube.com/user/blackadam06)

I AM StoneCold..Blackadam06 & RealFan357..

If you'd bothered to pay attention, You'd notice I CLEARLY state my other Aliases on my page...

[Voulnet]

I don't believe anyone was truly degrading Jordan's superiority. I think it's just that many MJ (and Kobe) groupies and ******gers debate Jordan and Kobe like it's life and death! That is what pisses me off, really. It's definitely not worth a fight, and not worth raising your blood pressure.

[StoneCold]

its really funny to see how petty the kobe fans get when someone posts a whole bunch of facts that show mj's superiority. rather than adress the facts they try to take the piss and discredit the guy who has done nothing more than post simple facts.

Exactly..

This is what U tend to get from them regarding this topic:

A) when confronted with the FACTS, they just KEEP denying them, as if that "CHANGES" 'em.
B) They try & justify their opinions "WITH" opinions.
C) Lash out in petulant temper tantrums when they can't refute the opposing argument.
D) Insist the FACTS don't really mean what they say
E) Rank kobe & MJ based on their opinions, rather than what they've ACTUALLY Done & CONSISTENTLY DO/DID
F) Insist the other guy is "Hating" for stating FACTS

I see it ALL THE TIME from them.

I love to discuss a wide range of sports topic on spots such as this one, but talkin' hoops with them is next to impossible.

There's simply TOO MANY young & uninformed kobe fans who no next to nothing about NBA history & players prior to the 2000 season & the Lakers. If U leave it to them to tell it, he's the Greatest at EVERYTHING & when U ask them to explain, they offer up a bunch of opinions, if's & coulda-shoulda-wouldas..

Confront them with FACTS & watch the fireworks commence. LOL!! Then whatever U guys were discussing regarding him, becomes "overrated" & not important, but he was the "best" at it prior to them getting blindsided by the FACTS of the matter..

It's the reason they're without a doubt, the most DESPISED group of fans on any sports board, blog, etc..U can visit on the internet..

[Lebron23]

Michael Jordan will always be better than Kobe Bryant.

/end Thread

[Kellogs4toniee]

As much as I love Michael Jordan and absolutely like a religion believe MJ in his prime and his career is always better than Kobe Bryants prime or career, in this specific case how can you choose a rookie Michael Jordan.

There are simply too many intangibles in this league that you can only learn with experience. As an offensive and athletic freak Michael Jordan as a rookie is better because he will always be better in this category in retrospect of his entire career. But when you just look at his rookie season, the experience of Kobe Bryant, knowing how to best use his teammates to the best outcome, and the fact that he is in the prime of his career, is simply the better choice if I was to choose between the two to lead my team for "said" year.

However, since I am fairly new, let me make it perfectly clear that Michael Jordan is, will, and forever will be the best player to ever play the game on all levels both on and off the court. I would trade all my monetary money (well maybe thats a stretch) just to see his prime play again in this current crybaby, flopping, weak call league and prove all nay-sayers wrong who say that he wouldn dominate just as he did in the late 80's and 90's.

... sorry got a lil carried away there. I usually do when talking about MJ.

[juju151111]

kobe will never be mj

[VCMVP1551]

current bryant is easily better than '85 jordan, as was '07 bryant, '06 bryant, '04 bryant, '03 bryant, '02 bryant, '01 bryant, and '00 bryant.

peak bryant ('03) wasn't better than '88 jordan, '89 jordan, '90 jordan, '91 jordan, '92 jordan, '93 jordan, '96 jordan, or '97 jordan.

04' Bryant? He shot under 43.8% and averaged 24 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 5.1 apg. I know part of the drop in his numbers was because of Malone and Payton but still his shooting % was too low.

As far as 00' Kobe being better than 85' Jordan....not even close. 01' is debatable too.

Other than those 3 points I actually agree with you for once.

[eliteballer]

But the W-L record wasn't you f*cking moron. What good is better numbers if the W-L record is worse? He should have been a deferring the whole time considering Shaq was the teams clear best player. It's no coincidence that the teams winning % was better without Kobe(.786) than with Kobe(.662)

Ya, that's why Kobe was our best player in the Kings and Spurs series by TAKING over against our two biggest threats that year. Sure LA was better without him. Keep it up ISHiot:oldlol:

[veilside23]

all i know is at age 40 mj still managed to get 20 ppg ... AT AGE 40....
MJ will be the greatest player ever to play this game.....

[VCMVP1551]

Ya, that's why Kobe was our best player in the Kings and Spurs series by TAKING over against our two biggest threats that year. Sure LA was better without him. Keep it up ISHiot:oldlol:

Taking over when Shaq was doubled and tripled every other f*cking play.

There is a reason why Shaq was the leading scorer on a 15-1 playoff team.

Lets see Kobe do that.

The numbers don't lie. 11-3 record without Kobe in 2000-2001.

You know what the Lakers record was in the 31 games that Kobe missed and Shaq played during the 3peat?
25-6.

What's your response for that?

[eliteballer]

Kobe missed 32 games, not 31:roll: Shaq himself called KOBE the best player in the league during the 01 playoffs. Second, those teams were built around Shaq, of course they were going to do well as long as he was in there:rolleyes: Keep telling us inaccurate heights, ISHiot:oldlol:

[VCMVP1551]

Kobe missed 32 games, not 31:roll:

I said games that Kobe missed and Shaq played. Shaq missed one of those 32 games f*cking retard.

You can't even f*cking read. :oldlol:


Shaq himself called KOBE the best player in the league during the 01 playoffs.

Shaq has also said KG can't play defense. You can't take what Shaq says seriously.


Second, those teams were built around Shaq, of course they were going to do well as long as he was in there:rolleyes:

If the teams were built around Shaq then Kobe shouldn't have been trying to be the first option. :roll:


Keep telling us inaccurate heights, ISHiot:oldlol:

You've said ISHiot atleast 5 times in this thread. Come up with a new insult.

As for "inaccurate" heights, pre-draft measurements and players own claims are pretty damn accurate.

[Emile]

Taking over when Shaq was doubled and tripled every other f*cking play.

There is a reason why Shaq was the leading scorer on a 15-1 playoff team.

Lets see Kobe do that.

The numbers don't lie. 11-3 record without Kobe in 2000-2001.

You know what the Lakers record was in the 31 games that Kobe missed and Shaq played during the 3peat?
25-6.

What's your response for that?

Actually, it was Kobe who led that team in scoring until I think the last game in the finals.
Basically, Kobe was leading them firmly in scoring until the finals when Shaq exploded for like 38 ppg or something and Kobe was at 26.
Either way, it's not like it's a big difference, I think Shaq in the end was at 30 and Kobe at 29 ppg.

What bugs us, Kobe fans there is that he is the only guy ever to average 29-7-6 in the playoffs and then get labeled as a second option. It's just wrong. Usually, by second option you consider a guy to be a second option caliber player. Like Parker.
I mean, at least say then that Kobe was the top 3 player which he obviously was that year and a first option playing a 2nd option. It's more politically correct lol.

[guy]

What bugs us, Kobe fans there is that he is the only guy ever to average 29-7-6 in the playoffs and then get labeled as a second option. It's just wrong. Usually, by second option you consider a guy to be a second option caliber player. Like Parker.
I mean, at least say then that Kobe was the top 3 player which he obviously was that year and a first option playing a 2nd option. It's more politically correct lol.

Kobe is definitely not the only guy to ever do that. Jordan, Oscar, Lebron, and T-mac have all done that. But I really don't see how thats wrong, when its true. Shaq was just a monster during those years, and clearly the most important player to that team. But people do have to look into it with more detail then just he was a 2nd option, cause he was a better 2nd option then most.

[Loki]

Kobe is definitely not the only guy to ever do that. Jordan, Oscar, Lebron, and T-mac have all done that.

Yeah, but he meant the only player to do that AND get labeled a second option (which he was). I understand his point, and I believe that Kobe was one of the 2-3 best second options of all time during those years, but it doesn't change the fact that he WAS the second option and, more importantly, he was not as vital to that team's success as Shaq. It wasn't 75%/25% or anything (except maybe in 2000), but it was at least 55/45 (2002/2003) or 60/40 (2001/2002) Shaq.

[GOBB]

Current Kobe, physically bigger/stronger than a rookie MJ. And I'm assuming its in todays game as well.

[VCMVP1551]

Shaq was just a monster during those years, and clearly the most important player to that team. But people do have to look into it with more detail then just he was a 2nd option, cause he was a better 2nd option then most.

Exactly. As good as Kobe was he was the second optiond espite being a top 5 player in the league. he just happened to be playing on a team with the best player in the league.

[Vilmatic]

another jordan and kobe comparision:rolleyes: kobe could never fit in jordans jock strap. he will never be like mike. MJ is the best SG to ever play this game. kobe is a ballhog.

[Shep]

04' Bryant? He shot under 43.8% and averaged 24 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 5.1 apg. I know part of the drop in his numbers was because of Malone and Payton but still his shooting % was too low.
'04. not 04'. i've told you about this. its '04. the "'" comes before the abbreviated year. yes, kobe shot the ball worse, but he was a much more mature player, and a much better defender than the rookie michael jordan. the pace of the game in '85 was also alot quicker than the '04 pace aswell. bryant also shot free throws better, and actually had a game outside 15 ft. its close, but bryant wins.

As far as 00' Kobe being better than 85' Jordan....not even close. 01' is debatable too.
both years bryant was clearly the better player.

[VCMVP1551]

Yeah the game had a faster pace but the defense was also much tougher.

1985 Michael Jordan- 28.2 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 5.9 apg, 2.4 spg, 51.5 FG%, 84.5 FT%, 82 games
2004 Kobe Bryant 24.0 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 5.1 apg, 1.7 spg, 43.8 FG%, 85.2 FT%, 65 games
2000 Kobe Bryant 22.5 ppg, 6.3 rpg, 4.9 apg, 1.6 spg 46.8 FG%, 82.1 FT%, 66 games
2001 Kobe Bryant 28.5 ppg, 5.9 rpg, 5.0 apg, 1.7 spg, 46.9 FG%, 85.3 FT%, 68 games

Jordan played in all 82 games in the 1985 season, rebounded better and average more assists than Kobe in any of those years. He got more steals and shot a much better %. He also scored far more than Kobe did in 2000 or 2004.

Jordan also had to lead his team. Kobe was not the best player on his team in any of those years and he missed an 14 games in 2001, 16 games in 2000 and 17 games in 2004.

As for Jordan not having a game past 15 feet well Jordan came into the league already with an 18-20 foot jumper. Back in the early to mid 80's not many people had a game past the 3 point line which is why Isiah Thomas once finished second in 3P% despite shooting under 30%.

[Shep]

Yeah the game had a faster pace but the defense was also much tougher.
no it wasn't. there was only 2 or 3 good defensive teams in the league in '85. pace was high, and with this comes increased statistics - part of the reason for jordan's numbers being higher than bryant's. teams averaged 111 ppg on 89 fga per game and shot the ball 49% from the field, with detroit leading the league with an almost inconceivable 98 fga per game, and denver averaging 120ppg. 19 years later teams averaged 93 ppg on 80 fga per game and shot the ball 44% from the field.

1985 Michael Jordan- 28.2 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 5.9 apg, 2.4 spg, 51.5 FG%, 84.5 FT%, 82 games
2004 Kobe Bryant 24.0 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 5.1 apg, 1.7 spg, 43.8 FG%, 85.2 FT%, 65 games
2000 Kobe Bryant 22.5 ppg, 6.3 rpg, 4.9 apg, 1.6 spg 46.8 FG%, 82.1 FT%, 66 games
2001 Kobe Bryant 28.5 ppg, 5.9 rpg, 5.0 apg, 1.7 spg, 46.9 FG%, 85.3 FT%, 68 games
:confusedshrug:

Jordan played in all 82 games in the 1985 season, rebounded better and average more assists than Kobe in any of those years. He got more steals and shot a much better %. He also scored far more than Kobe did in 2000 or 2004.
games played doesn't come into discussion. are we talking about who was the better player or who had the better season? factor in pace and kobe narrows the gap in all statistical area's where he trailed mj..and sometimes he beats him. as for fg% kobe shot the ball equal to or better than the league average every year, mj was only 2% better than the league average in '85..so it wasn't a "much better %" when you think about it.
once again kobe was a far better defender than mj was at this point, including 1st team all-defense in '00, '03, and '04, and 2nd team all-defense in '01, and '02. kobe was also part of hugely successful teams, and for the years you are arguing against him he was a top 6 player in the nba each year. jordan led his team to a pitiful 38-44 record.

Jordan also had to lead his team.
this means you have the ball in your hands at all times. you don't have to share the ball, and you can do what you want, when you want with the ball..especially because your team is going nowhere.

As for Jordan not having a game past 15 feet well Jordan came into the league already with an 18-20 foot jumper. Back in the early to mid 80's not many people had a game past the 3 point line which is why Isiah Thomas once finished second in 3P% despite shooting under 30%.
jordan shot the three ball at 17% in his rookie year..made 9 shots in 82 games, 3144 minutes. a three pointer was made by michael jordan every 349 minutes of actual court time, or every 9 games. he couldn't shoot. its a fact. most of his baskets came from isolation plays where he took his man off the dribble

[VCMVP1551]

no it wasn't. there was only 2 or 3 good defensive teams in the league in '85. pace was high, and with this comes increased statistics - part of the reason for jordan's numbers being higher than bryant's. teams averaged 111 ppg on 89 fga per game and shot the ball 49% from the field, with detroit leading the league with an almost inconceivable 98 fga per game, and denver averaging 120ppg. 19 years later teams averaged 93 ppg on 80 fga per game and shot the ball 44% from the field.

Yeah but Jordan's rookie year was not in the superstar protected era Kobe played in. The game was far more physical in the 80's too.


:confusedshrug:

That just shows Jordan had clearly better numbers so when one playr has clearly better numbers the other usually isn't clearly better.


games played doesn't come into discussion. are we talking about who was the better player or who had the better season? factor in pace and kobe narrows the gap in all statistical area's where he trailed mj..and sometimes he beats him. as for fg% kobe shot the ball equal to or better than the league average every year, mj was only 2% better than the league average in '85..so it wasn't a "much better %" when you think about it.
once again kobe was a far better defender than mj was at this point, including 1st team all-defense in '00, '03, and '04, and 2nd team all-defense in '01, and '02. kobe was also part of hugely successful teams, and for the years you are arguing against him he was a top 6 player in the nba each year. jordan led his team to a pitiful 38-44 record.

I can't see Kobe being a top 6 player in 2000. I don't consider him top 10 that year but I could see him top 5 in 2001 and 2004.

As for Jordan's record well look at his supporting cast and then consider Kobe was playing with the best player in the league.


this means you have the ball in your hands at all times. you don't have to share the ball, and you can do what you want, when you want with the ball..especially because your team is going nowhere.

Yeah but because you are the first option the entire team is aiming to stop you. Kobe played with the best player in the league so he had a far easier time getting shots because the defense couldn't aim to stop him as much as they could with Jordan. That's why Kobe shot a better % when Shaq was on the team than he did after Shaq left. That is significant because Kobe has been better in the post Shaq era.


jordan shot the three ball at 17% in his rookie year..made 9 shots in 82 games, 3144 minutes. a three pointer was made by michael jordan every 349 minutes of actual court time, or every 9 games. he couldn't shoot. its a fact. most of his baskets came from isolation plays where he took his man off the dribble

And your point is? a 3 point shot is 23,9 not 18-20 feet.

[Shepseskaf]

How pathetic is is when you have to compare a rookie with an 11-year vet to receive a favorable response?

MJ >>>> Kobe. Give this topic a rest!

[StoneCold]

How pathetic is is when you have to compare a rookie with an 11-year vet to receive a favorable response?


Actually, this is kobe's 12th year & you're ABSOLUTELY right!!

And I've already PROVEN that OVERALL, MJ's ROOKIE season TROUNCES any season kobe has EVER had in a previous post on this thread..

If U have to compare a ROOKIE or Wizard's MJ to Kobe to get a favorable comparison, that IN ITSELF, not only highlights how TRULY desperate kobe fans are to find a way around the FACTS regarding this absurd comparison, but it really shows their DESPERATION in trying to prove kobe is #1 ALL TIME or at least in the running for that honor, but they keep getting BLINDSIDED by a little something called FACTS, that'll continue to blow their silly & UNINFORMED argument, which is nothing more than their "opinions" to begin with, out of the water EVERYTIME & PROVE them WRONG in the process..

Hey kobe homers, ask yourselves this question: If kobe's the better player, "WHY" do U have to CONSTANTLY use MJ as the measuring stick to determine "HOW" good kobe is & "WHERE" he ranks in the Pantheon of Guards?

That OUGHT to tell U something is wrong about your claims regarding him being so much better than MJ!! If he truly were better, in 12 yrears of play, his offensive & defensive resume would've been FAR beyond anything MJ EVER did! But it's not!

In FACT, the changes to the Defensive Rules is what has ALLOWED kobe to even be included in this argument..

Kobe Bryant in years that handchecking was allowed:
561 games - 21.77 ppg on 42% shooting

Kobe Bryant in the final 3 years handchecking was allowed (2001-04)
227 games - 24.29ppg on 43% shooting

[B][U]Kobe Bryant

[guy]

LOL @ 00 Kobe being better then rookie Jordan.

[MaxFly]

And I've already PROVEN that OVERALL, MJ's ROOKIE season TROUNCES any season kobe has EVER had in a previous post on this thread..


Yeah, I'm not sure Jordan's rookie season trounces Bryant's 02-03, 05-06 and 06-07 seasons. Let's be rational here...

[BIGSHOT]

Current Kobe Bryant> Prime Jordan.
Kobe is the G.O.A.T

[VCMVP1551]

Current Kobe Bryant> Prime Jordan.
Kobe is the G.O.A.T


:roll:

[Scott Pippen]

Current Kobe Bryant> Prime Jordan.
Kobe is the G.O.A.T

give me break:rolleyes:

I am huge pippen fan but kobe is poor mans michael jordan


The Playoffs is where you make your name and where greatness is defined. But MJ was more consistent and holds records as well such as:

Highest PPG Average: 30.12
Most seasons leading league in Points: 11
Most scoring titles: 10
Highest PER Efficiency: 27.91

Also, MJ is no doubt the greatest playoff performer and IMO he was the greatest Road Player Ever. Most of his greatest feats happened on the road.

As far as the playoffs go, here are a few things that stuck out in my mind:

Playoffs
Most Points Per Game (min. 25 games)
33.4 by Michael Jordan (179 games)

Most Points in a Game
63 by Michael Jordan

Most 50 Point Games
8 by Michael Jordan

Most 40 Point Games
38 by Michael Jordan

Most 30 Point Games
109 by Michael Jordan

Most 20 Point Games
174 by Michael Jordan (he played 179 playoff games and scored under 20 only 5 times)

These players all lost these series with Homecourt advantage which means they were the favorite. If someone was injured like a main star then that factors in, but if not that doesn't factor in the discussion.


Quote:
Wilt Chamberlain (lost in ’60-61, ’65-66, ’67-68, ’68-69, ’72-73)

Magic Johnson (lost in ’80-81, ’85-86, ’89-90)

Kareem (lost in ’72-73, ’73-74, ’76-77, ’80-81, ’85-86)

Larry Bird (lost in ’79-80, ’81-82, ’82-83, ’84-85, ’87-88,

Oscar Robertson (lost in ’61-62, ’64-65, ’72-73, ’73-74)

Jerry West (lost in ’68-69, ’72-73)

Shaq (lost in ’93-94, ’94-95, ’03-04)

Hakeem (lost in ’84-85, ’86-87)

Duncan (lost in ’00-01, ’03-04)

Bill Russell (lost in 1958) - however he was injured


MJ never lost a series with homecourt advantage/better seed/better record. What does that mean, well he was the only superstar to never lose a series in which his team was considered the favorite and better team. All the other legends lost series.

Also consider the following:

Is 18% a good percentage?

In what you might ask... 18% winning percentage...

Pretty awful right?

Well in 60 years of NBA Basketball only 11 league leading scorers have won a championship... That's 18.333333%...

Their names are: Shaquille O'Neal, Michael Jordan, Kareem Abdul Jabbar, George Mikan and some guy named Joe Fulks...

Most of these players were dominant Centers, who did more than just score.

That means that non center players who led the league in scoring have won in an amazing 10% of the time.. and only one player did it... Michael Jordan. In one era. That phenomenon of nature who won six...

10% winning historically!!! 10 PERCENT!!!

I will argue that the odds are against a high scoring guard from winning it all.

[Scott Pippen]

Here are the playoff top games.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/bas...vidual_points/

Top Playoff Single-Game Scoring Performances
Player Team Opponent Total Date
Michael Jordan Chicago at Boston 63 April 20, 1986
Elgin Baylor L.A. Lakers at Boston 61 April 14, 1962
Wilt Chamberlain Philadelphia Syracuse 56 March 22, 1962
Michael Jordan Chicago at Miami 56 April 29, 1992
Charles Barkley Phoenix at Golden State 56 May 4, 1994
Michael Jordan Chicago Cleveland 55 May 1, 1988
Michael Jordan Chicago Phoenix 55 June 16, 1993
Michael Jordan Chicago Washington 55 April 27, 1997
John Havlicek Boston Atlanta 54 April 1, 1973
Michael Jordan Chicago New York 54 May 31, 1993
Allen Iverson Philadelphia Toronto 54 May 9, 2001
Wilt Chamberlain Philadelphia Syracuse 53 March 14, 1960
Jerry West L.A. Lakers Boston 53 April 23, 1969
Jerry West L.A. Lakers Baltimore 52 April 5, 1965
Allen Iverson Philadelphia Toronto 52 May 16, 2001
Sam Jones Boston at New York 51 March 28, 1967
Eric Floyd Golden State L.A. Lakers 51 May 10, 1987
Bob Cousy Boston Syracuse 50* March 21, 1953
Bob Petit St. Louis Boston 50 April 12, 1958
Wilt Chamberlain Philadelphia at Boston 50 March 22, 1950
Wilt Chamberlain San Francisco St. Louis 50 April 10, 1964
Billy Cunningham Philadelphia Milwaukee 50 April 1, 1970
Bob McAdoo Buffalo Washington 50 April 18, 1975
Dominique Wilkins Atlanta Detroit 50 April 19, 1986
Michael Jordan Chicago Cleveland 50 April 28, 1988
Michael Jordan Chicago Cleveland 50^ May 5, 1989
Karl Malone Utah Seattle 50 April 22, 2000
Vince Carter Toronto Philadelphia 50 May 11, 2001
*4 overtimes
^overtime

This is courtesy of NBA on NBC here:

NBA PLAYOFFS HIGH SCORING GAME BY YEAR
1946-47 - 37 Joe Fulks, PHW vs CHI at PHW 16Apr47
1947-48 - 34 Connie Simmons, BLT vs NYK at BLT 27Mar48
1948-49 - 42 George Mikan, MPL vs WSC 4Apr49 @ MPL
1949-50 - 40 George Mikan, MPL vs SYR at MPL 23Apr50
1950-51 - 41 George Mikan, MPL vs IDS at MPL 21Mar51
1951-52 - 47 George Mikan, MPL at ROC 29Mar52
1952-53 - 50 Bob Cousy, BOS vs SYR at BOS 21Mar53
1953-54 - 36 Dolph Schayes, SYR at NYK 21Mar54
1954-55 - 32 Bill Sharman, BOS at SYR 24Mar55
1955-56 - 43 Neil Johnson, PHW at SYR 25Mar56
1956-57 - 42 Bob Leonard, MPL vs STL at MPL 25Mar57
1957-58 - 50 Bob Pettit, STL vs BOS at STL 12Apr58
1958-59 - 40 Cliff Hagan, STL vs MPL at STL 21Mar59
1959-60 - 53 Wilt Chamberlain, PHW vs SYR at PHW 14Mar60
1960-61 - 47 Elgin Baylor, LAL at DET 18Mar61
............... 47 Elgin Baylor, LAL at STL 27Mar61
1961-62 - 61 Elgin Baylor, LAL at BOS 14Apr62
1962-63 - 47 Sam Jones, BOS vs CIN at BOS 10Apr63
1963-64 - 50 Wilt Chamberlain, SFW vs STL at SFW 10Apr64
1964-65 - 52 Jerry West, LAL vs BAL at LAL 3Apr65
1965-66 - 46 Wilt Chamberlain, PHI vs BOS at PHI 12Apr66
1966-67 - 55 Rick Barry, SFW vs PHI at SFW 18Apr67
1967-68 - 46 Zelmo Beaty, STL vs SFW 23Mar68 @ STL
1968-69 - 53 Jerry West, LAL vs BOS at LAL 23Apr69
1969-70 - 50 Billy Cunningham, PHI vs MIL at PHI 1Apr70
1970-71 - 39 Gail Goodrich, LAL at CHI 28Mar71
1971-72 - 43 John Havlicek BOS at ATL 31Mar72
1972-73 - 54 John Havlicek, BOS vs ATL at BOS 1Apr73
1973-74 - 44 Bob McAdoo, BUF vs BOS 6Apr74 at BUF
............... 44 Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, MIL at CHI 18Apr74
1974-75 - 50 Bob McAdoo, BUF vs WAS at BUF 18Apr75
1975-76 - 45 Fred Brown, SEA vs PHO at SEA 15Apr76
1976-77 - 45 Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, LAL vs GSW at LAL 29Apr77
1977-78 - 46 George Gervin, SAN vs WAS at SAN 18Apr78
1978-79 - 42 George Gervin, SAN vs WAS at SAN 11May79
............... 42 George Gervin, SAN at WAS 18May79
1979-80 - 44 George Gervin, SAN vs HOU at SAN 4Apr80
1980-81 - 42 Calvin Murphy, HOU at SAN 17Apr81
............... 42 Moses Malone, HOU vs KCK at HOU 26Apr81
1981-82 - 39 George Gervin, SAN vs LAL at SAN 14May82
............... 39 Andrew Toney, PHI vs BOS at PHI 16May82
1982-83 - 42 Alex English, DEN vs PHO at PHO 24Apr83
............... 42 George Gervin, SAN at DEN 26Apr83
1983-84 - 46 Bernard King, NYK at DET 19Apr84
............... 46 Bernard King, NYK vs DET at NYK 22Apr84
1984-85 - 43 Rolando Blackman, DAL vs POR at DAL 18Apr85
............... 43 Larry Bird, BOS vs DET at BOS 8May85
1985-86 - 63 Michael Jordan, CHI at BOS 20Apr86
1986-87 - 51 Sleepy Floyd, GSW vs LAL at GSW 10May87
1987-88 - 55 Michael Jordan, CHI vs CLE at CHI 1May88
1988-89 - 50 Michael Jordan, CHI vs CLE at CHI 5May89
1989-90 - 49 Michael Jordan, CHI at PHI 11May90
1990-91 - 46 Michael Jordan, CHI at PHI 10May91
1991-92 - 56 Michael Jordan, CHI at MIA 29Apr92
1992-93 - 55 Michael Jordan, CHI vs PHO at CHI 16Jun93
1993-94 - 56 Charles Barkley, PHO at GSW 4May94
1994-95 - 48 Michael Jordan, CHI at CHA 28Apr95
1995-96 - 46 Michael Jordan, CHI at NYK 11May96
1996-97 - 55 Michael Jordan, CHI vs WAS at CHI 27Apr97
1997-98 - 45 Michael Jordan, CHI at UTA 14Jun98
1998-99 - 37 Tim Duncan, SAN at LAL 22May99
............... 37 Scottie Pippen, HOU vs LAL at HOU 13May99
............... 37 Shaquille O'Neal, LAL vs HOU at HOU 15May99
............... 37 Allen Iverson, PHI vs ORL at PHI 15May99
1999-00 - 50 Karl Malone, UTA vs SEA at UTA 22Apr00
-----
ALL-TIME HIGHEST SCORING AVERAGES, NBA PLAYOFFS
Jerry West, LAL vs BAL, 1965..... 46.3
Michael Jordan, CHI vs CLE, 1988..... 45.2
Michael Jordan, CHI vs MIA, 1992..... 45.0

ALL-TIME HIGHEST SCORING AVERAGES, NBA CHAMPIONSHIP SERIES/NBA FINALS
Michael Jordan, CHI vs PHO, 1993..... 41.0
Rick Barry, SFW vs PHI, 1965..... 40.8
Elgin Baylor, LAL vs BOS, 1962..... 40.6

[Scott Pippen]

Let's just start off by saying one thing: MJ was never
considered the best player because he scored 50 points
for 'x amount' of games against the worst teams during
the regular season. He's considered the greatest
because he played his greatest games against the
greatest teams in the playoffs. Remember, it was just
last year that ESPN banned comparing KB to MJ after
his Game 7 disappearing act.

Now, KB has done some things MJ hasn't done of course
but there are dozens and dozens of feats KB will never
even come close to doing that MJ has done (see
bottom). Single scoring feats are pretty much all he
can try as MJ left that type of game a long time ago
in order to build a better team. If you want to build
an argument, let's put some numbers to back it up.
Your article was all opinion and loose observation.
I'm going to go through your article point by point.

1) Kobe is as good a defender. OK, right there, I
almost stopped reading. Not even the biggest Kobe
homing 12 year old kids will say this. In fact, they
point that this is Kobe's biggest gap between him and
MJ. It's actually safe to say that MJ at age 40 was a
better defender than KB is now. MJ at age 40 averaged
MORE steals AND blocks than KB now at fewer minutes
per game. MJ in his prime averaged TWICE as much. MJ
holds the record for most blocks by a guard (131) and
is the first and only guard to record 200 steals and
100 blocks in the same year - twice. He remains
unbreakable here - 9 all-first Defensive awards plus
the DPOY in 1988, steals leader 3 times etc. Not even
close. Kobe's got 4 all-first Defensive awards that
Sports Illustrated calls "dubious at best" -
especially with Shaq covering 3 of them. And, MJ never
let up on his D when he was scoring 50. He was
frenetic on both ends constantly. When KB goes to
offense mode, his D. disappears as his energy is
focused on scoring. I believe he had only 7 steals and
1 block in his 5 game scoring spree - not exactly MJ
material.

2) MJ was a worse teammate and ball hog? Did you get
this quote from a basketball forum? Sure, MJ was a
tough teammate and was also selfish but he had a great
excuse - he was shooting 3-6% better than his team. KB
shoots 3-6 WORSE than LA. Nothing but nonsense here
anyway as players soon picked up their duties around
MJ and he became the best teammate and leader on his
way to 6 rings. As Magic said during MJ's 37.1ppg
season, "We know MJ can score but he needs to make his
teammates better and win" and that's exactly what he
did to squash the selfish-ballhog title forever. Now,
if KB can shoot 3-6% better than his team - he has a
license to hog as well. Unfortunately, this 5 game
streak was his only license as he has shot a mediocre
45% through his career. MJ had that license for a
decade with his career 50% FG. How can you compare?
You can't.

3) MJ would have problems playing with Shaq? I guess
you missed his interview in Cigar: "Give me a 7-footer
like Shaq and I'd still be playing today". MJ knew it
was all about the rings.

4) Best player argument? Sure, KB is the best right
now. But, that argument might be good for 2 of his 11
years. That doesn't hold water for the rest of NBA
history nor does it hold water against MJ's dominance
for a decade and a half. And, plenty of people will
argue for Shaq, Wade, Duncan as well still.

5) Today's athletes are bigger, stronger, faster. OK,
you should have checked the stats. MJ played in the
Big Man era - the tallest 4 year span ever was 85-89
with the single tallest year ever in 1987 at 6-7.62
(the year MJ scored 37.1ppg). Today, it's down to
6-7.26, Now, the players today are more wing players
than Big players but that's because of all the MJ
wannabes. You got it right that players are stronger
and faster (weights, more athletic scouting) but that
number has remained steady since MJ's last 3 peat when
he was killing it at ages 33-35. It's EVEN more
impressive that MJ's last 3 peat still had him
dominating when there was still some form of hand
checking allowed. Any strength advantage today's
players have is gone through the no-hand-checks which
remains the single greatest change in the game today.
Don't forget the Jordan Rules as well - the most
destructive defense ever for one player in an era of
no flagrants.

6) NBA is tougher now? You did know it's the 'no
hand-check era'. You do know there were no 'flagrants'
back in the day right? You need to read Lazenby's
"Death of Defense" regarding the no-hand-checks.
http://lakernoise.blogspot.com/2006/...e-article.html

7) Kobe is surrounded by mediocre talent. True but
look again, KB's team is actually better than you
think and it's easily better than the coke-sniffing
thugs MJ played with early in his career. This is a
topic I that needs another 5 pages so I won't go there
now. Don't forget, Kobe had the best team early in his
career and look what he wanted to give up. Your
argument that Phoenix and the Spurs are better than
the Suns of yesterday are arguable at best. Do they
compare to the Pistons or Knicks on the Eastern end of
MJ's run as well?

8) Hakeem, Admiral, Ewing didn't affect the game like
Shaq and Duncan. Excuse me but MJ ANNIHILATED the
greatest centers INSTEAD OF HAVING THEM ON HIS OWN
TEAM. I'm going to think this was typo - nothing could
be this ignorant. Let's put it this way, MJ played
greater than the greatest centers in an era where
there were still true centers and he ended up denying
all of them rings. MJ ended up with the #1 PER rating
in history - above Wilt, Shaq and Robinson. The reason
why title teams are built around centers is because
they perform at the highest efficiency. MJ defied
logic and performed at an even higher efficiency which is
why he remains the exception - a 'center's
productivity in a guard's package'. One of Kobe's main
problems is that he knows this. That's why he wanted
to get his own team because he knew he could never be
the greatest behind a dominant big man.

Conclusion: Whether you like Kobe or not, he's the
best answer for the best player today and the closest
to MJ in skill. But, that's where it ends. The scoring
bursts against the bottom 26-30 defensive teams are
great but very self-conscious and still nothing
compared to Wilt. Wilt scored over 70 5 times in his
career and he's no MJ either. And, KB has nothing
going on in the playoffs as an individual - the only
place where things matter and the world watches. If MJ
dropped everything to push a scoring feat (dropped
defense, dropped resting minutes, dropped developing
real team chemistry) and all he went for was pushing
50 points - he'd never, ever have won and he wouldn't
be the MJ we know today. He'd just be known as a scorer
in the regular season and as worthless as A-rod in the
real season. But regardless, MJ still owns the most
scoring records as well as ALMOST ALL THE PLAYOFF
Records. Take a look at the all time scoring feats at
the bottom. MJ has 21 of them and the most important
ones, Wilt has 16, Kobe has 1. Take away Wilt and MJ
climbs to 26 and Kobe has 8. Below that are MJ's
records and KB's records. Not ever close.

Again, MJ retired as the greatest playoff performer
ever which is where he solidified himself as the
greatest ever.

It's not repugnant to say someone is better than MJ.
It's just impossible and we can back that all day with
numbers.

Best,
xxxxxx

[Scott Pippen]

Here's a list of ALL-TIME SCORING RECORDS.

- Highest career scoring average: MJ 30.12
- Highest career playoff scoring average: MJ 33.4
- Highest career Finals scoring average: MJ 33.6
- Highest single season scoring average: Wilt 50.4
- Highest single series playoff average: West 46.3
- Highest single Finals series average: MJ 41.0
- Most seasons leading league in scoring: MJ 10
- Most consecutive seasons leading in scoring: MJ,
Wilt tied at 7
- Most 50 point games: Wilt 118
- Most 50 point games playoffs: MJ 8
- Most 40 point games: Wilt 271
- Most 40 point games playoffs: MJ 39
- Most consecutive 60 point games: Wilt 4
- Most consecutive 50 point games: Wilt 7
- Most consecutive 50 point games in playoffs: MJ 2
- Most consecutive 45 point games: Wilt 7
- Most consecutive 45 point games playoffs: MJ 3
- Most consecutive 40 point games: Wilt 14
- Most consecutive 40 point games rookie: AI 5
- Most consecutive 40 point games playoffs: West 6
- Most consecutive 40 point games finals: MJ 4
- Most consecutive 35 point games: Wilt 33
- Most consecutive 30 point games: Wilt 65
- Most consecutive 30 point games playoffs: Elgin 11
- Most consecutive 30 point games finals: MJ 9
- Most consecutive 20 point games: Wilt 126
- Most consecutive 20 point games playoffs: MJ 60
- Most consecutive 20 point games finals: MJ 29
- Most consecutive double figures scoring: MJ 866
- Most consecutive points in one game: MJ 23
- Most consecutive points in one game playoffs: MJ 23
- Highest scoring game: Wilt 100
- Highest scoring game playoffs: MJ 63
- Highest scoring game finals: Elgin 61
- Highest scoring game rookie: Wilt 58
- Highest scoring all-star game: Wilt 42
- Highest scoring all-rookie game: Kobe 31
- Most points in 3 quarters: Wilt 69
- Most points in one half: Wilt 59
- Most points one half playoffs: Sleepy Floyd 39
- Most points in one half finals: MJ 35
- Most points one half all-star game: Rice 24
- Most points in one quarter: Gervin 33
- Most points in one quarter playoffs: Sleepy Floyd 29
- Most points in one quarter finals: Isiah 25
- Most points in one quarter all-star game: Rice 20
- Most points in OT: Arenas 16
- Most points in OT playoffs: Drexler 13
- Most points in OT in finals: Havlicek, Laimbeer,
Ainge tied at 9
- Oldest to score 50: MJ 51 at age 38
- Oldest to score 40: MJ 43 at age 40


FULL MJ/KB RECORDS LIST:

KOBE:
NBA Regular-season records Kobe holds:
-All-rookie game (now defunct): 31 points

NBA Regular-season records Kobe Shares:
-Most 3 pointers in one game: 12 (shared with 1
player)
-Most 3 pointers in one half: 8 (5 players)
-Most consecutive 3 pointers: 9 (2 players)
-Most free throws made in one quarter: 14 (5 players)
-Most free throws attempted one quarter: 16 (6
players)

NBA Playoff Records Kobe holds:
-NONE

NBA Playoff Records Kobe Shares:
-NONE

NBA Finals records Kobe holds:
-NONE

NBA Finals records Kobe Shares:
-NONE


MJ:
NBA Regular-season records Michael Jordan holds:
-Most seasons leading league in scoring: 10
-Highest scoring average, career: 30.12ppg
-Most consecutive points, one game: 23
-Most seasons leading league in field goals made: 10
-Most consecutive seasons leading league in field
goal attempts: 10
-Most free throws made, one-half: 20
-Most consecutive gms in double figures in scoring:
866
-Most blocks by a guard: 131
-Most consecutive seasons leading PER: 7
-Highest career PER: 27.91
-Oldest player to score 40+ points: age 40 (43 pts)
-Oldest player to score 50+ points: age 38 (51 pts)

NBA Regular-season records Michael Jordan shares:
-Most consecutive seasons leading league in scoring:
7 (tied with Wilt Chamberlain)
-Most consecutive seasons, 2,000 plus points: 11 (Tied
with Malone)
-Most free throws made, one quarter: 14 (twice, tied
with 5 other players)
-Most seasons leading the league in steals: 3 (tied
with two others)

NBA Playoff records Michael Jordan holds:
-Highest scoring average, career: 33.4ppg
-Record Total points: 5987
-Record Most FTS made: 1463
-Most points playoffs, one-game: 63
-Most points playoffs, three-game series: 135 (vs.
Miami, 1992)
-Most Points playoffs, five-game series: 226 (vs.
Cleveland, 1988)
-Most field goals made playoffs, three-game series:
53 (vs. Miami, 1992)
-Most field goals made playoffs, five-game series: 86
(vs. Philadelphia, 1990)
-Most field goals made playoffs, six-game series: 101
(vs. Phoenix, 1993)
-Most consecutive 50pt games: 2
-Most consecutive 45pt games: 3
-Most consecutive games, 20 plus points: 60
-Most free throws made, one quarter: 13
-Most free throws attempted, one quarter: 14
-Most 50 point games: 8
-Most 40 point games: 39
-Most consecutive points: 23

NBA Playoff records Michael Jordan shares:
-Most field goals, in a game: 24 (vs. Cleveland, May
1, 1988; tied with two others)
-Most three-point field goals made, one half: 6
(first half vs. Portland, June 3, 1992; tied with four
others)

NBA Finals records Michael Jordan holds:
- Highest Scoring average: 33.6
-Most points, six-game series: 246 (vs. Phoenix,
1993)
-Most field goals made, five-game series: 63 (vs.
L.A. Lakers, 1991)
-Most field goals made, six-game series: 101 (vs.
Phoenix, 1993)
-Most steals, five-game series: 14 (vs. L.A. Lakers,
1991)
-Highest scoring average, one series: 41.0 (vs.
Phoenix, 1993)
-Most consecutive games, 40-plus points: 4 (June 11,
1993 to June 18, 1993)
-Most consecutive 30 point games: 9
-Most consecutive games, 20-plus points: 29 (June 22,

1991 to June 1997)
-Most points, one-half: 35 (vs. Portland, June 3,
1992)
-Most consecutive field goals: 13 (Vs. LA)
-Most consecutive points: 23 (Vs. Seattle)
-Most Finals MVPs: 6

NBA Finals records Michael Jordan shares:
-Most field goals made, one-half: 14 (vs. Portland,
June 3, 1992 and vs. Phoenix, June 16, 1993; tied with
Isiah Thomas)
-Most three-pointers made, one-half: 6 (vs. Portland,
June 3, 1992; tied with Kenny Smith)
-Most free throws made, one-quarter: 9 (at Utah, June
11, 1997; tied with Frank Ramsay)
-Most free throws attempted, one-half: 15 (at Utah,
June 4, 1997; tied with Bill Russell)

so please no insult jordan. he is one of few players who is better than pippen:applause:

[StoneCold]

Yeah, I'm not sure Jordan's rookie season trounces Bryant's 02-03, 05-06 and 06-07 seasons. Let's be rational here...

Oh Really?

Let me repeat what I previously posted, in case U missed it:

"MJ's "ROOKIE" season he had an NBA Efficiency Rating (PER) of 29.24, & 13.2 player wins. He also IMPROVED them by 10 wins & took 'em to the Playoffs, a place they hadn't SEEN since 1981..

Kobe's 2006-07 season, he had an NBA Efficiency Rating (PER) of 27.65 and 11.2 player wins.

Well kobe homers, how do U explain that?

Not to mention MJ shot 52% from the field his ROOKIE year, VS 46% for kobe's 2007 campaign! In FACT, from a shooting standpoint, MJ's ROOKIE year, is BETTER than ANY of kobe's!!

Also during MJ's ROOKIE year, he became the ONLY player in history (at that time..Hakeem did it LATER in his career), to LEAD his team in 4 of 5 categories (scoring, rebounding, assists & steals)..SHOW ME a season at ANY point in kobe's career, where he's done ANYTHING to this degree! I dare U!

Dr. J did it in the ABA, but NEVER in the NBA. MJ came within 4 blocks in 1989 of REPEATING this feat..

In the seasons BEFORE Pippen & Co., he had a combined average of 33ppg 5apg 6rpg 2.74spg 1.26bpg 49 FG%.

Show me ANY season from kobe with better OVERALL Production than that?"

So I conclude this post, with the SAME sentiment I expressed in the previous one: MJ's ROOKIE season was productively BETTER, from an OVERALL standpoint, & TROUNCES any one of kobe's..

[Voulnet]

Ooops, you just popped another vein writing that point. Your blood pressure is high, and another Kobe>MJ post might give you a heart attack. :lol

[StoneCold]

In terms of OVERALL production, forget comparing him to MJ, he doesn't even stack up to Pippen!


In 12 seasons for "BOTH" Kobe & Pippen


Steals: Pippen 1869 > kobe 1299
Assists: Pippen 4737 > Kobe 3905
Blocks: Pippen 802 > Kobe 501
Rebounds: Pippen 5981 > Kobe 4472
Points: (even with MJ as the 1st Option!) Pippen 21115 > Kobe 15713
2000 Points in a season (Again, even with MJ as the 1st Option) Pippen 4 > Kobe 0
80 game seasons Pippen 5 > Kobe 4
Rings as the 2nd Option: Pippen 6 > Kobe 3

[Scott Pippen]

In terms of OVERALL production, forget comparing him to MJ, he doesn't even stack up to Pippen!


In 12 seasons for "BOTH" Kobe & Pippen


Steals: Pippen 1869 > kobe 1299
Assists: Pippen 4737 > Kobe 3905
Blocks: Pippen 802 > Kobe 501
Rebounds: Pippen 5981 > Kobe 4472
Points: (even with MJ as the 1st Option!) Pippen 21115 > Kobe 15713
2000 Points in a season (Again, even with MJ as the 1st Option) Pippen 4 > Kobe 0
80 game seasons Pippen 5 > Kobe 4
Rings as the 2nd Option: Pippen 6 > Kobe 3

:applause:

[MaxFly]

In terms of OVERALL production, forget comparing him to MJ, he doesn't even stack up to Pippen!


In 12 seasons for "BOTH" Kobe & Pippen

Points: (even with MJ as the 1st Option!) Pippen 21115 > Kobe 15713
2000 Points in a season [B](Again, even with MJ as the 1st Option

Are we talking about regular seasons here? Which seasons did Scottie score 2000 points?

[StoneCold]

Ooops, you just popped another vein writing that point. Your blood pressure is high, and another Kobe>MJ post might give you a heart attack. :lol

More like popped the "Opinion" filled balloon of another kobe homer's UNINFORMED argument..

Besides, I don't see U offering up ANYTHING other than the usual nonsensical rhetoric one tends to get from kobe homers when they can't refute what's being posted..

[MaxFly]

:applause:

Scott... are the stats you're clapping about accurate?

[rs98762001]

I couldn't care less who is better out of a rookie MJ and a current KB. But I do know that posts with a ton of bold and underlining are extremely irritating to read.

[Psileas]

Points: (even with MJ as the 1st Option!) Pippen 21115 > Kobe 15713
2000 Points in a season (Again, even with MJ as the 1st Option) Pippen 4 > Kobe 0

?????

[MaxFly]

?????

Yeah, me too.

[Shep]

Yeah but Jordan's rookie year was not in the superstar protected era Kobe played in. The game was far more physical in the 80's too.
:oldlol: superstars were protected in the 80's just as much as they are now, and the game wasn't more physical, thats just the perception people get because the league didn't frown upon hard fouls back then like it does today.

That just shows Jordan had clearly better numbers so when one playr has clearly better numbers the other usually isn't clearly better.
i was aware of the numbers jordan was putting up

I can't see Kobe being a top 6 player in 2000. I don't consider him top 10 that year but I could see him top 5 in 2001 and 2004.
the only players better than kobe in '00 were o'neal, garnett, duncan, webber, and payton. top 6 in '01, and top 5 in '04

As for Jordan's record well look at his supporting cast and then consider Kobe was playing with the best player in the league.
already taken into consideration. jordan did have orlando woolridge, who put up 23/6 with 55%fg on a nightly basis, but besides that he had junk, but 38 wins is 38 wins. putting up stats all day long doesn't mean **** if you're losing at the end of the day. kobe was only playing with the best player in the league in 2000 and 2001.

Yeah but because you are the first option the entire team is aiming to stop you.
either that or they are letting you get your points and shutting down the rest of the team

Kobe played with the best player in the league so he had a far easier time getting shots because the defense couldn't aim to stop him as much as they could with Jordan. That's why Kobe shot a better % when Shaq was on the team than he did after Shaq left.
what? bryant's highest four years of TS% were the four years he's played without shaq :lol

That is significant because Kobe has been better in the post Shaq era.
2003 remains to be kobe's peak. first year post shaq he was the worst he'd been since 1999, second year post shaq he was better than any year besides '03, third year post shaq he wasn't as good as he was in '00, '01, and obviously '03, and this year he was better than any year with shaq besides '03.

And your point is? a 3 point shot is 23,9 not 18-20 feet.
the point is bryant had more range

[Lebron23]

:applause:


That is one of the worse rebuttal in a basketball forum, and we didn't even know if he is posting some accurate facts, or just telling some Urban Legend to make us believe that Pippen is > Kobe.

[plowking]

In terms of OVERALL production, forget comparing him to MJ, he doesn't even stack up to Pippen!


In 12 seasons for "BOTH" Kobe & Pippen


Steals: Pippen 1869 > kobe 1299
Assists: Pippen 4737 > Kobe 3905
Blocks: Pippen 802 > Kobe 501
Rebounds: Pippen 5981 > Kobe 4472
Points: (even with MJ as the 1st Option!) Pippen 21115 > Kobe 15713
2000 Points in a season (Again, even with MJ as the 1st Option) Pippen 4 > Kobe 0
80 game seasons Pippen 5 > Kobe 4
Rings as the 2nd Option: Pippen 6 > Kobe 3

I swear you made most of these up...

[MaxFly]

I swear you made most of these up...

Specifically, the "total points" and "2000 points in a season" argument.

People tend to disappear when they're called on things that they post.

[Showtime]

Pip has never scored 2,000 points in a season. Kobe has done it 5 times.

[VCMVP1551]

:oldlol: superstars were protected in the 80's just as much as they are now, and the game wasn't more physical, thats just the perception people get because the league didn't frown upon hard fouls back then like it does today.

You honestly think Jordan got protected by the league and the reds when he first entered the league? Jordan was expected to be good but he wasn't expected to be the best ever when he was drafted. Jordan easily had to deal with tougher fouls and more contact in his rookie season.




the only players better than kobe in '00 were o'neal, garnett, duncan, webber, and payton.

Throw in Grant Hill, Alonzo Mourning, Jason Kidd, Karl Malone, Vince Carter and arguably guys like Dikembe Mutombo and Michael Finley..


top 6 in '01

I actually got him right around number 6 too maybe top 5. Top 5-7. Either way it's close enough.


and top 5 in '04

I got him 4-6 so top 5 is fair.


already taken into consideration. jordan did have orlando woolridge, who put up 23/6 with 55%fg on a nightly basis, but besides that he had junk, but 38 wins is 38 wins. putting up stats all day long doesn't mean **** if you're losing at the end of the day.

Yeah but my point is if Kobe didn't have Shaq then how mnay wins do you really think he would have had in 2000?


kobe was only playing with the best player in the league in 2000 and 2001.

If you mean among 2000, 2001 and 2004 then yeah that sounds right because KG and Duncan could easily be argued as better players in 2004.


either that or they are letting you get your points and shutting down the rest of the team

Yeah but teams usually made stopping Jordan did their number 1 priority.


what? bryant's highest four years of TS% were the four years he's played without shaq :lol

Part of that is because he's improved as a three point shooter.

In 1999 Bryant shot 26.7% on 3's, in 2000 he shot 31.9% on 3's, in 2001 he shot 30.5% on 3's and in 2002 he shot 25.0% on 3's.

His 3P% was bringing down his TS%. Bryant's TS% probably has a lot to do with him working hard to improve his 3 point shot.


2003 remains to be kobe's peak. first year post shaq he was the worst he'd been since 1999, second year post shaq he was better than any year besides '03, third year post shaq he wasn't as good as he was in '00, '01, and obviously '03, and this year he was better than any year with shaq besides '03.

I agree 2003 was his peak and I'd rank him above Shaq that year. I also agree that his second best was probably 2006 when he carried that team while averaging 35.4 ppg and this season sounds like his 3rd best. 2002 is an underrated season for Kobe because he played 80 games and was a big part of a 58 win team. Kobe also played great team basketball that year.


the point is bryant had more range

Yeah, so? I was just pointing out Jordan did have range beyond 15 feet back then. Having more range also doesn't mean a lot in deciding who the better player is.

[Shepseskaf]

There are way too many stats in this thread. Stats have their place, but they never tell the entire story.

For people who somehow think that Kobe > MJ, do yourself a favor and find a site that sells games on DVD. Then watch some of Jordan's best games along with Kobe's best games. Your eyes will not deceive you -- the gulf between the two is very wide. And I'm saying this as a Kobe fan.

[deion2123]

no it wasn't. there was only 2 or 3 good defensive teams in the league in '85. pace was high, and with this comes increased statistics - part of the reason for jordan's numbers being higher than bryant's. teams averaged 111 ppg on 89 fga per game and shot the ball 49% from the field, with detroit leading the league with an almost inconceivable 98 fga per game, and denver averaging 120ppg. 19 years later teams averaged 93 ppg on 80 fga per game and shot the ball 44% from the field.

:confusedshrug:

games played doesn't come into discussion. are we talking about who was the better player or who had the better season? factor in pace and kobe narrows the gap in all statistical area's where he trailed mj..and sometimes he beats him. as for fg% kobe shot the ball equal to or better than the league average every year, mj was only 2% better than the league average in '85..so it wasn't a "much better %" when you think about it.
once again kobe was a far better defender than mj was at this point, including 1st team all-defense in '00, '03, and '04, and 2nd team all-defense in '01, and '02. kobe was also part of hugely successful teams, and for the years you are arguing against him he was a top 6 player in the nba each year. jordan led his team to a pitiful 38-44 record.

this means you have the ball in your hands at all times. you don't have to share the ball, and you can do what you want, when you want with the ball..especially because your team is going nowhere.

jordan shot the three ball at 17% in his rookie year..made 9 shots in 82 games, 3144 minutes. a three pointer was made by michael jordan every 349 minutes of actual court time, or every 9 games. he couldn't shoot. its a fact. most of his baskets came from isolation plays where he took his man off the dribble

you obviously don't understand how basketball works..hand checking = tougher defense..its harder to score on someone with their hands all over you...and more points doesn't equal worse defense it means more shots were taken because coaches had more trust in players to shoot better from outside..it was okay back then to come down by yourself 1 on 4 and jack up a shot because guys were better shooters

[Loki]

what? bryant's highest four years of TS% were the four years he's played without shaq :lol

Give Kobe a normal amount of FT's (say, 7-8/gm) as opposed to the absurd amount he's received (10+) the past several years based on his style of play (80% of his shots are jumpers) and see how his "TS%" looks. This is why Kobe fans like to point to TS%.

[chopchop20]

Give Kobe a normal amount of FT's (say, 7-8/gm) as opposed to the absurd amount he's received (10+) the past several years and see how his "TS%" looks.

LOL @ a guy whose shot attempts consist of 80% jumpers getting to the line 10+ times per year. This is why Kobe fans like to point to TS%.

Obviously you haven't watched too many Lakers game this year -- and certainly not in the playoffs. Dude is scoring everywhere on the court... 3pointers, jumpers, slashing, posting up, in transition. WTF, are you talking about?

[chopchop20]

There are way too many stats in this thread. Stats have their place, but they never tell the entire story.

For people who somehow think that Kobe > MJ, do yourself a favor and find a site that sells games on DVD. Then watch some of Jordan's best games along with Kobe's best games. Your eyes will not deceive you -- the gulf between the two is very wide. And I'm saying this as a Kobe fan.

Not that wide, in fact probably even on offense. Jordan's biggest edge over his peers was his consistency -- he was money in the bank everynight. MJ was consistently on his A game more than almost any other player who has ever played. But if you match his best vs Kobe's best, then i don't think it's that wide at all.

[Loki]

Obviously you haven't watched too many Lakers game this year -- and certainly not in the playoffs. Dude is scoring everywhere on the court... 3pointers, jumpers, slashing, posting up, in transition. WTF, are you talking about?

How about you read the quote I was responding to, which clearly said "the last 4 years." Thanks.

EDIT: And yeah, he's been more aggressive this year -- only 75% of his attempts were jumpers as opposed to 80% the past few seasons. :oldlol:

[Shepseskaf]

Not that wide, in fact probably even on offense. Jordan's biggest edge over his peers was his consistency -- he was money in the bank everynight. MJ was consistently on his A game more than almost any other player who has ever played. But if you match his best vs Kobe's best, then i don't think it's that wide at all.
I said that the gulf was wide, and that's what I meant. Your point about Jordan's consistency is true, but that wasn't what I was referring to. The difference, to me, is in the subtleties of MJ's game and the apparent ease of execution that Kobe simply can't match.

While both were capable of scoring at prodigious rates, its easy to see MJ's superiority when you look at the games. Even the so-called advantage Kobe has from longer range is negated by the fact that MJ never really focused on that aspect of his game, preferring to go inside. The first half of the 1992 Finals against Portland, when he scored 35 in the first half, with six three pointers, is a case in point.

If you haven't watched MJ's games on a fairly recent basis, then I can't accept your analysis.

[Loki]

I said that the gulf was wide, and that's what I meant. Your point about Jordan's consistency is true, but that wasn't what I was referring to. The difference, to me, is in the subtleties of MJ's game and the apparent ease of execution that Kobe simply can't match.

While both were capable of scoring at prodigious rates, its easy to see MJ's superiority when you look at the games. Even the so-called advantage Kobe has from longer range is negated by the fact that MJ never really focused on that aspect of his game, preferring to go inside. The first half of the 1992 Finals against Portland, when he scored 35 in the first half, with six three pointers, is a case in point.

If you haven't watched MJ's games on a fairly recent basis, then I can't accept your analysis.

I agree, especially with the bolded portion. Picc84 actually had a great quote about this difference between them, quoted below (this post was made in April of '07):


Jordan makes the game as easy as possible for himself, and makes it look as easy as possible. Kobe looks like he tries to make it as HARD for himself as possible. Jordan looks like he's playing in rec games the way he weaves between everywhere and does whatever he wants. Kobe looks like he's playing in an NBA game. Which isnt bad, since thats what he's really doing. But its not Jordan.

That summarizes the difference in feeling I have when watching each of them play.

[BIZARRO]

Obviously current Kobe. I'd prefer to watch Mike again though.

If you actually watched Mike, the obviously would be the other way around.

Kobe can't even get to the hole currently. His game right now is jump into a crowd of people and wait for a whistle. He's currently so unathletic it is a joke.

MJ was a freak of nature.

'84 MJ would take out current Kobe, '87 MJ would laugh at him.

[Da_Realist]

[QUOTE=StoneCold]Actually, this is kobe's 12th year & you're ABSOLUTELY right!!

And I've already PROVEN that OVERALL, MJ's ROOKIE season TROUNCES any season kobe has EVER had in a previous post on this thread..

If U have to compare a ROOKIE or Wizard's MJ to Kobe to get a favorable comparison, that IN ITSELF, not only highlights how TRULY desperate kobe fans are to find a way around the FACTS regarding this absurd comparison, but it really shows their DESPERATION in trying to prove kobe is #1 ALL TIME or at least in the running for that honor, but they keep getting BLINDSIDED by a little something called FACTS, that'll continue to blow their silly & UNINFORMED argument, which is nothing more than their "opinions" to begin with, out of the water EVERYTIME & PROVE them WRONG in the process..

Hey kobe homers, ask yourselves this question: If kobe's the better player, "WHY" do U have to CONSTANTLY use MJ as the measuring stick to determine "HOW" good kobe is & "WHERE" he ranks in the Pantheon of Guards?

That OUGHT to tell U something is wrong about your claims regarding him being so much better than MJ!! If he truly were better, in 12 yrears of play, his offensive & defensive resume would've been FAR beyond anything MJ EVER did! But it's not!

In FACT, the changes to the Defensive Rules is what has ALLOWED kobe to even be included in this argument..

Kobe Bryant in years that handchecking was allowed:
561 games - 21.77 ppg on 42% shooting

Kobe Bryant in the final 3 years handchecking was allowed (2001-04)
227 games - 24.29ppg on 43% shooting

[B][U]Kobe Bryant

[Da_Realist]

Let's just start off by saying one thing: MJ was never
considered the best player because he scored 50 points
for 'x amount' of games against the worst teams during
the regular season. He's considered the greatest
because he played his greatest games against the
greatest teams in the playoffs. Remember, it was just
last year that ESPN banned comparing KB to MJ after
his Game 7 disappearing act.

Now, KB has done some things MJ hasn't done of course
but there are dozens and dozens of feats KB will never
even come close to doing that MJ has done (see
bottom). Single scoring feats are pretty much all he
can try as MJ left that type of game a long time ago
in order to build a better team. If you want to build
an argument, let's put some numbers to back it up.
Your article was all opinion and loose observation.
I'm going to go through your article point by point.

1) Kobe is as good a defender. OK, right there, I
almost stopped reading. Not even the biggest Kobe
homing 12 year old kids will say this. In fact, they
point that this is Kobe's biggest gap between him and
MJ. It's actually safe to say that MJ at age 40 was a
better defender than KB is now. MJ at age 40 averaged
MORE steals AND blocks than KB now at fewer minutes
per game. MJ in his prime averaged TWICE as much. MJ
holds the record for most blocks by a guard (131) and
is the first and only guard to record 200 steals and
100 blocks in the same year - twice. He remains
unbreakable here - 9 all-first Defensive awards plus
the DPOY in 1988, steals leader 3 times etc. Not even
close. Kobe's got 4 all-first Defensive awards that
Sports Illustrated calls "dubious at best" -
especially with Shaq covering 3 of them. And, MJ never
let up on his D when he was scoring 50. He was
frenetic on both ends constantly. When KB goes to
offense mode, his D. disappears as his energy is
focused on scoring. I believe he had only 7 steals and
1 block in his 5 game scoring spree - not exactly MJ
material.

2) MJ was a worse teammate and ball hog? Did you get
this quote from a basketball forum? Sure, MJ was a
tough teammate and was also selfish but he had a great
excuse - he was shooting 3-6% better than his team. KB
shoots 3-6 WORSE than LA. Nothing but nonsense here
anyway as players soon picked up their duties around
MJ and he became the best teammate and leader on his
way to 6 rings. As Magic said during MJ's 37.1ppg
season, "We know MJ can score but he needs to make his
teammates better and win" and that's exactly what he
did to squash the selfish-ballhog title forever. Now,
if KB can shoot 3-6% better than his team - he has a
license to hog as well. Unfortunately, this 5 game
streak was his only license as he has shot a mediocre
45% through his career. MJ had that license for a
decade with his career 50% FG. How can you compare?
You can't.

3) MJ would have problems playing with Shaq? I guess
you missed his interview in Cigar: "Give me a 7-footer
like Shaq and I'd still be playing today". MJ knew it
was all about the rings.

4) Best player argument? Sure, KB is the best right
now. But, that argument might be good for 2 of his 11
years. That doesn't hold water for the rest of NBA
history nor does it hold water against MJ's dominance
for a decade and a half. And, plenty of people will
argue for Shaq, Wade, Duncan as well still.

5) Today's athletes are bigger, stronger, faster. OK,
you should have checked the stats. MJ played in the
Big Man era - the tallest 4 year span ever was 85-89
with the single tallest year ever in 1987 at 6-7.62
(the year MJ scored 37.1ppg). Today, it's down to
6-7.26, Now, the players today are more wing players
than Big players but that's because of all the MJ
wannabes. You got it right that players are stronger
and faster (weights, more athletic scouting) but that
number has remained steady since MJ's last 3 peat when
he was killing it at ages 33-35. It's EVEN more
impressive that MJ's last 3 peat still had him
dominating when there was still some form of hand
checking allowed. Any strength advantage today's
players have is gone through the no-hand-checks which
remains the single greatest change in the game today.
Don't forget the Jordan Rules as well - the most
destructive defense ever for one player in an era of
no flagrants.

6) NBA is tougher now? You did know it's the 'no
hand-check era'. You do know there were no 'flagrants'
back in the day right? You need to read Lazenby's
"Death of Defense" regarding the no-hand-checks.
http://lakernoise.blogspot.com/2006/...e-article.html

7) Kobe is surrounded by mediocre talent. True but
look again, KB's team is actually better than you
think and it's easily better than the coke-sniffing
thugs MJ played with early in his career. This is a
topic I that needs another 5 pages so I won't go there
now. Don't forget, Kobe had the best team early in his
career and look what he wanted to give up. Your
argument that Phoenix and the Spurs are better than
the Suns of yesterday are arguable at best. Do they
compare to the Pistons or Knicks on the Eastern end of
MJ's run as well?

8) Hakeem, Admiral, Ewing didn't affect the game like
Shaq and Duncan. Excuse me but MJ ANNIHILATED the
greatest centers INSTEAD OF HAVING THEM ON HIS OWN
TEAM. I'm going to think this was typo - nothing could
be this ignorant. Let's put it this way, MJ played
greater than the greatest centers in an era where
there were still true centers and he ended up denying
all of them rings. MJ ended up with the #1 PER rating
in history - above Wilt, Shaq and Robinson. The reason
why title teams are built around centers is because
they perform at the highest efficiency. MJ defied
logic and performed at an even higher efficiency which is
why he remains the exception - a 'center's
productivity in a guard's package'. One of Kobe's main
problems is that he knows this. That's why he wanted
to get his own team because he knew he could never be
the greatest behind a dominant big man.

Conclusion: Whether you like Kobe or not, he's the
best answer for the best player today and the closest
to MJ in skill. But, that's where it ends. The scoring
bursts against the bottom 26-30 defensive teams are
great but very self-conscious and still nothing
compared to Wilt. Wilt scored over 70 5 times in his
career and he's no MJ either. And, KB has nothing
going on in the playoffs as an individual - the only
place where things matter and the world watches. If MJ
dropped everything to push a scoring feat (dropped
defense, dropped resting minutes, dropped developing
real team chemistry) and all he went for was pushing
50 points - he'd never, ever have won and he wouldn't
be the MJ we know today. He'd just be known as a scorer
in the regular season and as worthless as A-rod in the
real season. But regardless, MJ still owns the most
scoring records as well as ALMOST ALL THE PLAYOFF
Records. Take a look at the all time scoring feats at
the bottom. MJ has 21 of them and the most important
ones, Wilt has 16, Kobe has 1. Take away Wilt and MJ
climbs to 26 and Kobe has 8. Below that are MJ's
records and KB's records. Not ever close.

Again, MJ retired as the greatest playoff performer
ever which is where he solidified himself as the
greatest ever.

It's not repugnant to say someone is better than MJ.
It's just impossible and we can back that all day with
numbers.

Best,
xxxxxx

Another great post. Damn...I don't have to write anything.

[Da_Realist]

There are way too many stats in this thread. Stats have their place, but they never tell the entire story.

For people who somehow think that Kobe > MJ, do yourself a favor and find a site that sells games on DVD. Then watch some of Jordan's best games along with Kobe's best games. Your eyes will not deceive you -- the gulf between the two is very wide. And I'm saying this as a Kobe fan.

Best advice ever given on ISH. Watch the games. :pimp:

[MaxFly]

Great post. :applause:

It's actually a horrible post, but I'll leave it up to you to figure out why.

StoneCold... we're still waiting on you to clarify the stats you posted... Some of them seem... off.

[Shepseskaf]

I agree, especially with the bolded portion. Picc84 actually had a great quote about this difference between them, quoted below (this post was made in April of '07):

Originally Posted by picc84
Jordan makes the game as easy as possible for himself, and makes it look as easy as possible. Kobe looks like he tries to make it as HARD for himself as possible. Jordan looks like he's playing in rec games the way he weaves between everywhere and does whatever he wants. Kobe looks like he's playing in an NBA game. Which isnt bad, since thats what he's really doing. But its not Jordan.

That summarizes the difference in feeling I have when watching each of them play.
Totally agreed. Nice summary of the difference between the two.

[InspiredLebowski]

In terms of OVERALL production, forget comparing him to MJ, he doesn't even stack up to Pippen!


In 12 seasons for "BOTH" Kobe & Pippen


Steals: Pippen 1869 > kobe 1299
Assists: Pippen 4737 > Kobe 3905
Blocks: Pippen 802 > Kobe 501
Rebounds: Pippen 5981 > Kobe 4472
Points: (even with MJ as the 1st Option!) Pippen 21115 > Kobe 15713
2000 Points in a season (Again, even with MJ as the 1st Option) Pippen 4 > Kobe 0
80 game seasons Pippen 5 > Kobe 4
Rings as the 2nd Option: Pippen 6 > Kobe 3
Here's the real stats, I used Pippen's stats from 89-90 (3rd year in league, first as full time starter) to 00-01 and Kobe's whole career, including his 15mpg rookie year. All stats from NBA.com, all all for regular season

Steals: Kobe 1321, Pippen 1850
Assists: Kobe 4002, Pippen 5012
Blocks: Kobe 507, Pippen 765
Boards: Kobe 4590, Pippen 6084
Points: Kobe 21,619, Pippen 15,683
2k point seasons: Kobe 5, Pippen 0 (career high of 1720)
80 game seasons: Kobe 4, Pippen 6 (50 or less games seasons: Kobe 1, Pippen 2)

Other than points, and a few stats here and there, what he posted was accurate.

[KenneBell]

It's actually a horrible post, but I'll leave it up to you to figure out why.

StoneCold... we're still waiting on you to clarify the stats you posted... Some of them seem... off.
Agreed...there's no way in hell I'd pick a rookie Jordan over Kobe now. I'd have no problems taking an '87 Jordan over an '06 Kobe but really this thread is ridiculous on all levels. Different eras, different defenses, different players...

[MaxFly]

Here's the real stats, I used Pippen's stats from 89-90 (3rd year in league, first as full time starter) to 00-01 and Kobe's whole career, including his 15mpg rookie year. All stats from NBA.com, all all for regular season

Steals: Kobe 1321, Pippen 1850
Assists: Kobe 4002, Pippen 5012
Blocks: Kobe 507, Pippen 765
Boards: Kobe 4590, Pippen 6084
Points: Kobe 21,619, Pippen 15,683
2k point seasons: Kobe 5, Pippen 0 (career high of 1720)
80 game seasons: Kobe 4, Pippen 6 (50 or less games seasons: Kobe 1, Pippen 2)

Other than points, and a few stats here and there, what he posted was accurate.

Would you then conclude from those stats that Scottie is the better player than Bryant?

[eliteballer]

ISHiots:oldlol: Using Kobe's stats from when he was 18, 19, 20. Pippen wasn't even in the NBA until he was 22.

[eliteballer]

BTW...from Pippen's OWN MOUTH, "If he's not the next Michael Jordan I don't know who is"

[Scott Pippen]

BTW...from Pippen's OWN MOUTH, "If he's not the next Michael Jordan I don't know who is"

you misquote the great scottie pippen:banghead:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=ZuD_cOBkTsM

[eliteballer]

Pippen said it in the lockeroom after a game when he was still playing:no:

[Sneak]

BTW...from Pippen's OWN MOUTH, "If he's not the next Michael Jordan I don't know who is"
The only thing I can conclude from that is that Pippen doesn't know who the next Michael Jordan is.

MJ vs Kobe comparison are so played out / annoying / pointless.

I prefer MJ and am of the opinion that he was the greater player, but really, what does it matter? They are 2 different players who peaked in different eras with different supporting casts and different opponents. Get over it and just enjoy both players for the individual talents that they are/were.

[RoseCity07]

Jordan selfish? Kobe never had to play team ball in his life. High School he was the star and was a ball hog. Went to the NBA and became an even bigger ball hog. Jordan played in a system that did not let him stand out. He learned to play with the team because thats the way things were by Dean Smith.

Of course he is going to stand out on a lottery team in his first year because he was the best player on a bad team.

[BIGSHOT]

Current Kobe Bryant> Prime Jordan.
Kobe is the G.O.A.T
Yup. Kobe is about to win the chip with no other All NBA performers while Jordan needed a top 5 player in the entire league.:roll:

[RoseCity07]

you misquote the great scottie pippen:banghead:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=ZuD_cOBkTsM


Damn exposed that dude. Mark Jackson is such an idiot. Kobe going down as the greatest ever..LMAO. Kobe is the best now but never better than Jordan.

Jordan shot a higher percent with his fade away than Kobe does on a regular jump shot. Jordan averaged over 30 points per game in his career. That's with Jordan bringing down his PPG average playing with the Wizards at 40. Jordan has 6 rings, DPOY, highest playoff scoring average. Kobe is getting old and still hasn't accomplished half of what Jordan has. Kobe Bryant is a creation. Jordan made Kobe. With out Jordan's style and moves Kobe wouldn't have anything to strive to be like.

Kobe Bryant will never be better than Jordan.

[Psileas]

Here's the real stats, I used Pippen's stats from 89-90 (3rd year in league, first as full time starter) to 00-01 and Kobe's whole career, including his 15mpg rookie year. All stats from NBA.com, all all for regular season

Steals: Kobe 1321, Pippen 1850
Assists: Kobe 4002, Pippen 5012
Blocks: Kobe 507, Pippen 765
Boards: Kobe 4590, Pippen 6084
Points: Kobe 21,619, Pippen 15,683
2k point seasons: Kobe 5, Pippen 0 (career high of 1720)
80 game seasons: Kobe 4, Pippen 6 (50 or less games seasons: Kobe 1, Pippen 2)

Other than points, and a few stats here and there, what he posted was accurate.

How are they accurate as long as, not only has he completely reversed some of the owners of these numbers but he hasn't even got one of the other numbers correct?
Having read some more of his posts, I can assure you he's just using his own estimations to post numbers, because the real figures never agree with his quoted.

BTW, since I first opened this thread, the only thing I read is comparing their careers once again. It's got really tiring to see every similar thread getting derailed. :rolleyes:

[Shep]

You honestly think Jordan got protected by the league and the reds when he first entered the league?
yes, and i watched the games. jordan also shot more free throws than anyone else besided moses malone

Jordan was expected to be good but he wasn't expected to be the best ever when he was drafted. Jordan easily had to deal with tougher fouls and more contact in his rookie season
jordan didn't end up being the best ever, would've been if he never retired the first time and won 1 more championship, but unfortunately for him he didn't. more contact/hard checking only started late 80's and into the 90's.

Throw in Grant Hill, Alonzo Mourning, Jason Kidd, Karl Malone, Vince Carter and arguably guys like Dikembe Mutombo and Michael Finley..
hill: 14th, mourning: 7th, kidd: 8th, malone: 9th, carter: 10th, mutombo: :roll: , finley: 16th

Yeah but my point is if Kobe didn't have Shaq then how mnay wins do you really think he would have had in 2000?
impossible to say. shaq at that point was in his peak, a peak that was greater than anyone's peak in nba history. glen rice would've got alot more touches without shaq there..probably would've been closer to his charlotte production, bryant would've been much better statistically aswell and i could see the lakers winning 45-50 games.

If you mean among 2000, 2001 and 2004 then yeah that sounds right because KG and Duncan could easily be argued as better players in 2004
shaq was only the best player in the nba in 2000, and 2001, aswell as '97 and '98.

Part of that is because he's improved as a three point shooter.

In 1999 Bryant shot 26.7% on 3's, in 2000 he shot 31.9% on 3's, in 2001 he shot 30.5% on 3's and in 2002 he shot 25.0% on 3's.

His 3P% was bringing down his TS%. Bryant's TS% probably has a lot to do with him working hard to improve his 3 point shot.
you said kobe shot better with shaq than without shaq, i gave the numbers that proved he shot better without shaq.

Yeah, so? I was just pointing out Jordan did have range beyond 15 feet back then. Having more range also doesn't mean a lot in deciding who the better player is.
it gives the player with range alot more weapons on the offensive end, instead of sagging off your man you have to be up in his face as soon as he gets to 35 feet, it means that his defender can't help out in the post as easily and play off the ball defense as well either..it does have alot of bearing when discussing who was the better player offensively atleast.

you obviously don't understand how basketball works..hand checking = tougher defense
you = shut up.
more physical defense didn't come into the league until the late 80's, and into the 90's. in the early part of this decade basketball was called more or less the same as it was in 1985, except for the fact that you got suspended less back then.

and more points doesn't equal worse defense it means more shots were taken because coaches had more trust in players to shoot better from outside..it was okay back then to come down by yourself 1 on 4 and jack up a shot because guys were better shooters
the emphasis was on outscoring your opponent, not stopping your opponent. these days and early on in this decade the emphasis has been on stopping your opponent, and better defense is the result..:lol and it was never ok to jack up a shot when in a 1 on 4 situation so stop guessing about how the game was played and go back and watch some tape

[VCMVP1551]

yes, and i watched the games. jordan also shot more free throws than anyone else besided moses malone

That's because of his unmatched quickness and athleticism and the fact that he went to the basket more than any other player. If you can get by the defender and dunk on the team that often then you are going to get fouled a lot if you go to the basket.


jordan didn't end up being the best ever, would've been if he never retired the first time and won 1 more championship, but unfortunately for him he didn't.

Irrelevant really. I don't feel like arguing that. I personally feel that Jordan was hands down the best ever although giving that honor to a guy like Magic, Kareem, Wilt, Shaq, Hakeem, Russell or Bird isn't crazy


more contact/hard checking only started late 80's and into the 90's.

I've seen plenty of really physical mid 80's games.


hill: 14th, mourning: 7th, kidd: 8th, malone: 9th, carter: 10th, mutombo: :roll: , finley: 16th

Grant Hill averaged 26, 7 and 5 on 49% shooting, 35% 3 point shooting and 80% free throw shooting. Sure his team only finished 2 games above .500 but replace Kobe with Grant Hill and I highly doubt the Lakers get any worse.

Mourning averaged nearly 22 and 10 with almost 4 blocks and he won the defensive player of the year award. Not to mention he was by far the best player on a 52 win team that finished second in the East. Mourning fit all the criteria for a top 5 player that year IMO. 50 win season, number 2 seed, great defense, very good stats and he was the best player on his team.

Kidd was the best player on a 53 win team in the tough Western Conference. He averaged over 14 and 7 and led the league with over 10 assists per game. He also played excellent defense and shot the ball decent by his standards. Sure he had Penny Hardaway who was still an excellent player but Penny missed 22 games.

Karl Malone was the best player on a 55 win team and the 3rd seed in the West. He averaged 25.5 and 9.5 with nearly 4 assists and played good defense.

Carter led his team to the playoffs with a poor supporting cast. Vince led Toronto to 45 wins and he was one of the most explosive players in the league. He averaged over 3 ppg more than bryant, shot just as well from the field, rebounded about the same and he was a much better jump shooter.

Dikembe Mutombo averaged a double double while leading the league in rebounding with over 14 a game, finishing second in blocks with over 3 a game, finishing 3rd in DPOY voting and he was even efficient on offense shooting 56% from the field and 71% from the line. If you want to say Kobe's better than I can see why for multiple reasons but in my personal opinion Mutombo has a case. If I'm playing devils advocate then I'd say Kobe's better because of his ability to make plays for his teammates and carry team on offense not to mention Atlanta's team was horrible.

Michael Finley averaged nearly 23 ppg and over 6 rpg/5apg while leading a pretty poor Dallas team to a respectable record. It's debatable if he was a better player than Kobe because Bryant was a superior defender but I think if you put him on that Laker team instead of Bryant they don't get any worse.

I forgot about Eddie Jones who led Charlotte to 49 wins while averaging over 20 ppg and 4 apg with nearly 5 rpg and finishing 3rd in DPOY voting.

I also forgot about Allen Iverson who finished 2nd in scoring with over 28 ppg, led Philadelphia to 49 wins without much help, averaged nearly 5 apg and shot the ball fairly well for a volume shooter.


impossible to say. shaq at that point was in his peak, a peak that was greater than anyone's peak in nba history.

Even though Shaq's my favorite player I never thought about his peak as the best in NBA history but you may be right. During his peak he was the best scorer in the league, one of the better rebounders and shot blockers, an elite passer for a big man, a great team player, a very good defender and a winner with 3 straight championships/Finals MVP's.


glen rice would've got alot more touches without shaq there..probably would've been closer to his charlotte production, bryant would've been much better statistically aswell and i could see the lakers winning 45-50 games.

Pretty good point about Rice because he was a jump shooter who was only 2 seasons removed from a 22 ppg season and only he had averaged 17.5 ppg the year before. I could see him in the 18-20 ppg range.

Kobe would have probably put up around 25, 7 and over 5 apg. However I'm not sure if Kobe could have led a very good team at that point in his career. I'd see 45 wins max.


shaq was only the best player in the nba in 2000, and 2001, aswell as '97 and '98.

Shaq is my favorite player but he doesn't have a case against 1996-1997 Jordan.
1997-1998 is closer but I'd still give Jordan the edge. Remember Jordan played injured for a good chunk of that year and Pippen missed a lot of games.


it gives the player with range alot more weapons on the offensive end, instead of sagging off your man you have to be up in his face as soon as he gets to 35 feet, it means that his defender can't help out in the post as easily and play off the ball defense as well either..it does have alot of bearing when discussing who was the better player offensively atleast.


Ehhh better range is nice but it comes behind scoring, rebounding, passing and playmaking.

For example Vince Carter may still have the best range in the league(or atleast he did in 2006-2007) but he is nowhere near the best player in the league despite being solid in every area other than defense.

Rookie Jordan was a much better scorer than 2000 Bryant, about equal as a rebounder(you could argue 2000 Bryant was a better rebounder) and a better passer/playmaker.


BTW...from Pippen's OWN MOUTH, "If he's not the next Michael Jordan I don't know who is"

Kobe is by far the closest to Jordan but that doesn't mean he is anywhere near as good as Jordan. It just means Jordan is head and shoulders above everyone else and Kobe is well above any other shooting guard in this era.

[Shep]

That's because of his unmatched quickness and athleticism and the fact that he went to the basket more than any other player. If you can get by the defender and dunk on the team that often then you are going to get fouled a lot if you go to the basket.
silly statement. jordan shot more free throw attempts per field goals made than at any point in his career, even more than the seasons he averaged 37ppg, and 35ppg. these are facts.

Irrelevant really. I don't feel like arguing that. I personally feel that Jordan was hands down the best ever although giving that honor to a guy like Magic, Kareem, Wilt, Shaq, Hakeem, Russell or Bird isn't crazy
if you are convinced at what you believe is right, anything other than the correct answer is crazy..you obviously aren't too sure.

I've seen plenty of really physical mid 80's games.
..as have there been plenty of physical games in the early 00's

Grant Hill averaged 26, 7 and 5 on 49% shooting, 35% 3 point shooting and 80% free throw shooting. Sure his team only finished 2 games above .500 but replace Kobe with Grant Hill and I highly doubt the Lakers get any worse.
you'll never know for sure what another player would do on another team so why speculate? what happened happened.
hill was only slightly better statistically than bryant and was the best small forward in the nba, but kobe was obviously the much better defender, contributed to a greater cause, and was the second best player on one of the most dominant teams in the history of the nba. i liken this comparison to the one of scottie pippen vs tim hardaway in 1996 - hardaway is slightly the better player statistically (only won 42 games), but pippen was a much better defender, and won alot more games as the second best player on a dominant team. pippen > hardaway, bryant > hill

Mourning averaged nearly 22 and 10 with almost 4 blocks and he won the defensive player of the year award. Not to mention he was by far the best player on a 52 win team that finished second in the East. Mourning fit all the criteria for a top 5 player that year IMO. 50 win season, number 2 seed, great defense, very good stats and he was the best player on his team.
zo was right behind bryant, in sixth spot..but i'm fine with the fact that you have him over kobe, simply because you are a mortal and it was very close between the two players.

Kidd was the best player on a 53 win team in the tough Western Conference. He averaged over 14 and 7 and led the league with over 10 assists per game. He also played excellent defense and shot the ball decent by his standards. Sure he had Penny Hardaway who was still an excellent player but Penny missed 22 games.
all these reasons only made it close between the two players. again, statistically kidd was better..but he shot only 40%, and wasn't the defender bryant was. phoenix also had an embarassment of riches in terms of basketbally talent, being only team in the league who had four players of the caliber of kidd, hardaway, clifford robinson, and tom gugliotta, in other words there were zero teams with a fourth best player who was as good as tom gugliotta, not to mention also having the leagues sixth man of the year rodney rogers on their roster aswell.

Karl Malone was the best player on a 55 win team and the 3rd seed in the West. He averaged 25.5 and 9.5 with nearly 4 assists and played good defense.
yes, good enough for top 9. 36 year old malone was fading and was nowhere near the player he was when he deserved the mvp, and led the jazz to the finals just two years earlier.

Carter led his team to the playoffs with a poor supporting cast. Vince led Toronto to 45 wins and he was one of the most explosive players in the league. He averaged over 3 ppg more than bryant, shot just as well from the field, rebounded about the same and he was a much better jump shooter.
its obvious you care little about wins. all the players you've mentioned so far are statistically superior to kobe, but its plain to see that kobe is much better because of things like wins, and defense. i can't think of any reason why you'd have carter over bryant in '00 if you actually watched games, but you're a fanboy so i'll let it slide

Dikembe Mutombo averaged a double double while leading the league in rebounding with over 14 a game, finishing second in blocks with over 3 a game, finishing 3rd in DPOY voting and he was even efficient on offense shooting 56% from the field and 71% from the line. If you want to say Kobe's better than I can see why for multiple reasons but in my personal opinion Mutombo has a case. If I'm playing devils advocate then I'd say Kobe's better because of his ability to make plays for his teammates and carry team on offense not to mention Atlanta's team was horrible.
so we agree kobe's better

Michael Finley averaged nearly 23 ppg and over 6 rpg/5apg while leading a pretty poor Dallas team to a respectable record. It's debatable if he was a better player than Kobe because Bryant was a superior defender but I think if you put him on that Laker team instead of Bryant they don't get any worse.
so we agree kobe's better

I forgot about Eddie Jones who led Charlotte to 49 wins while averaging over 20 ppg and 4 apg with nearly 5 rpg and finishing 3rd in DPOY voting.
kobe had him in almost every category and the lakers won 18 more games. charlotte had the best starting five in the nba and should've done alot more than 49 wins and losing 3-1 in the first round.

I also forgot about Allen Iverson who finished 2nd in scoring with over 28 ppg, led Philadelphia to 49 wins without much help, averaged nearly 5 apg and shot the ball fairly well for a volume shooter.
yes, good enough for 11th. 28 points on 25 shots? laughable. iverson also had more help than you think, with contributions from very solid role players like theo ratliff (11.9/7.6/3bpg), toni kukoc (14.8/4.9/4.7), eric snow (7.9/7.6apg/1.7spg), and george lynch (9.6/7.8/1.6spg). iverson wouldn't have it any other way anyway, the team was made around him to compliment him, he couldn't, and he can't succeed with another star, or another offensive minded player beside him..a major reason why kukoc left after a short stint.

Even though Shaq's my favorite player I never thought about his peak as the best in NBA history but you may be right. During his peak he was the best scorer in the league, one of the better rebounders and shot blockers, an elite passer for a big man, a great team player, a very good defender and a winner with 3 straight championships/Finals MVP's.
his one year peak i'm talking about, and shaq in '00 was better than anyone has ever been for one full season.

Shaq is my favorite player but he doesn't have a case against 1996-1997 Jordan.
1997-1998 is closer but I'd still give Jordan the edge. Remember Jordan played injured for a good chunk of that year and Pippen missed a lot of games.
the lakers went 38-13 with shaq in the line up in the '97 season, and he made everybody on the lakers roster better..on top of being clearly more dominant and clearly more statistically sound than jordan. jordan wasn't top 3 in '98.

Rookie Jordan was a much better scorer than 2000 Bryant, about equal as a rebounder(you could argue 2000 Bryant was a better rebounder) and a better passer/playmaker.
bryant was an all-league defender, had the best record in the nba and won the championship, had the more polished game, and was overall the better player.

[20 Dimes A Game]

Damn exposed that dude. Mark Jackson is such an idiot. Kobe going down as the greatest ever..LMAO. Kobe is the best now but never better than Jordan.

Jordan shot a higher percent with his fade away than Kobe does on a regular jump shot. Jordan averaged over 30 points per game in his career. That's with Jordan bringing down his PPG average playing with the Wizards at 40. Jordan has 6 rings, DPOY, highest playoff scoring average. Kobe is getting old and still hasn't accomplished half of what Jordan has. Kobe Bryant is a creation. Jordan made Kobe. With out Jordan's style and moves Kobe wouldn't have anything to strive to be like.

Kobe Bryant will never be better than Jordan.


Repped.

[hotsizzle]

Jordan selfish? Kobe never had to play team ball in his life. High School he was the star and was a ball hog. Went to the NBA and became an even bigger ball hog. Jordan played in a system that did not let him stand out. He learned to play with the team because thats the way things were by Dean Smith.

Of course he is going to stand out on a lottery team in his first year because he was the best player on a bad team.

Explain to me your definition of ballhog

[VCMVP1551]

silly statement. jordan shot more free throw attempts per field goals made than at any point in his career, even more than the seasons he averaged 37ppg, and 35ppg. these are facts.

So you're saying MJ was given more superstar calls as a rookie than he was in his 37 ppg season?


if you are convinced at what you believe is right, anything other than the correct answer is crazy..you obviously aren't too sure.

I'm convinced Jordan is the best ever and I'll state several dozen reasons if anyone asks me to back up that statement. However I don't want to act like an ******* and say "my opinion is 100% right and everyone who disagrees is wrong"



you'll never know for sure what another player would do on another team so why speculate? what happened happened.
hill was only slightly better statistically than bryant and was the best small forward in the nba, but kobe was obviously the much better defender, contributed to a greater cause, and was the second best player on one of the most dominant teams in the history of the nba. i liken this comparison to the one of scottie pippen vs tim hardaway in 1996 - hardaway is slightly the better player statistically (only won 42 games), but pippen was a much better defender, and won alot more games as the second best player on a dominant team. pippen > hardaway, bryant > hill

Hill only slightly better statistically?

Grant Hill 25.8 ppg>>> Kobe Bryant 22.5 ppg
Grant Hill 6.6 rpg> Kobe Bryant 6.3 rpg
Grant Hill 5.2 apg> Kobe Bryant 4.9 apg
Grant Hill 48.9 FG%>> 46.8 FG%
Grant Hill 34.7 3P%> 31.9 3P%


all these reasons only made it close between the two players. again, statistically kidd was better..but he shot only 40%, and wasn't the defender bryant was. phoenix also had an embarassment of riches in terms of basketbally talent, being only team in the league who had four players of the caliber of kidd, hardaway, clifford robinson, and tom gugliotta, in other words there were zero teams with a fourth best player who was as good as tom gugliotta, not to mention also having the leagues sixth man of the year rodney rogers on their roster aswell.

Phoenix also had a lot of injuries that year. Kidd was the best player on his team and he didn't have the luxuary of playing with the man who you even said had the best season ever.


yes, good enough for top 9. 36 year old malone was fading and was nowhere near the player he was when he deserved the mvp, and led the jazz to the finals just two years earlier.

I don't care what he did in comparison to 1998. Malone averaged over 25 ppg as the best player on a team that won 55 games. That is better than what Kobe did.


its obvious you care little about wins. all the players you've mentioned so far are statistically superior to kobe, but its plain to see that kobe is much better because of things like wins, and defense. i can't think of any reason why you'd have carter over bryant in '00 if you actually watched games, but you're a fanboy so i'll let it slide

I watch games and have for years. I don't hold Kobe's wins against Vince because Kobe was by far the second option on his team and the Lakers went 12-4 in the games he missed.


kobe had him in almost every category and the lakers won 18 more games. charlotte had the best starting five in the nba and should've done alot more than 49 wins and losing 3-1 in the first round.

The stats were close, Eddie Jones was the best player on his team and he played clearly better defense than Bryant.


yes, good enough for 11th. 28 points on 25 shots? laughable. iverson also had more help than you think, with contributions from very solid role players like theo ratliff (11.9/7.6/3bpg), toni kukoc (14.8/4.9/4.7), eric snow (7.9/7.6apg/1.7spg), and george lynch (9.6/7.8/1.6spg). iverson wouldn't have it any other way anyway, the team was made around him to compliment him, he couldn't, and he can't succeed with another star, or another offensive minded player beside him..a major reason why kukoc left after a short stint.

How does that supporting cast compare to Kobe's team which included the man who you said played better than anyone has ever played, Glen Rice a guy who was 2 years removed from averaging 20 ppg and just 3 years removed from a 27 ppg season along with other great role players like Horry, Fisher, Fox and AC Green.


jordan wasn't top 3 in '98.

:roll:


bryant was an all-league defender, had the best record in the nba and won the championship, had the more polished game, and was overall the better player.

The best record is due to the man who you said played better than anyone has ever played as is the championship.

[Shep]

So you're saying MJ was given more superstar calls as a rookie than he was in his 37 ppg season?
i'm saying he was given the same superstar treatment in '85 that he was getting for the rest of his career

I'm convinced Jordan is the best ever and I'll state several dozen reasons if anyone asks me to back up that statement. However I don't want to act like an ******* and say "my opinion is 100% right and everyone who disagrees is wrong"
:oldlol: each to their own

Hill only slightly better statistically?

Grant Hill 25.8 ppg>>> Kobe Bryant 22.5 ppg
Grant Hill 6.6 rpg> Kobe Bryant 6.3 rpg
Grant Hill 5.2 apg> Kobe Bryant 4.9 apg
Grant Hill 48.9 FG%>> 46.8 FG%
Grant Hill 34.7 3P%> 31.9 3P%
kobe bryant 1.6spg>>>grant hill 1.4spg
kobe bryant 0.9bpg>>>grant hill 0.6bpg
kobe bryant 2.8tpg>>>grant hill 3.2tpg

Phoenix also had a lot of injuries that year. Kidd was the best player on his team and he didn't have the luxuary of playing with the man who you even said had the best season ever.
:sleeping top 6 small forward, top 5 shooting guard, top 2 point guard, sixth man of the year award winner, 2 team members on the all defense second team = 49 wins and first round exit? that roster should be good enough to do more damage than that..even with injuries

I don't care what he did in comparison to 1998. Malone averaged over 25 ppg as the best player on a team that won 55 games. That is better than what Kobe did.
:lol

I watch games and have for years. I don't hold Kobe's wins against Vince because Kobe was by far the second option on his team and the Lakers went 12-4 in the games he missed.
the lakers were 54-11 with kobe+shaq. the lakers don't win 67 games and a championship without kobe.

The stats were close, Eddie Jones was the best player on his team and he played clearly better defense than Bryant.
:lol how did he clearly play better defense than bryant?

How does that supporting cast compare to Kobe's team which included the man who you said played better than anyone has ever played
again, iverson wouldn't want any other supporting cast than the one he had - top five center, a solid offensive player (kukoc), strong defenders and team oriented players (lynch, hill, snow), and solid guys off the bench (mckie, geiger)

Glen Rice a guy who was 2 years removed from averaging 20 ppg and just 3 years removed from a 27 ppg season
this really sounds pathetic. some team should sign kareem today..he'd be a huge contributer consider he is just 23 years removed from a 22/8 year and only 36 years removed from a 35/17 season

:roll:
:confusedshrug:

The best record is due to the man who you said played better than anyone has ever played as is the championship.
no kobe = no best record

[VCMVP1551]

i'm saying he was given the same superstar treatment in '85 that he was getting for the rest of his career

That is ridiculous. Jordan wasn't even the most hyped rookie in that draft class. So you are also saying rookie Jordan was better at getting to the line than 87 or 88 Jordan?


kobe bryant 1.6spg>>>grant hill 1.4spg
kobe bryant 0.9bpg>>>grant hill 0.6bpg
kobe bryant 2.8tpg>>>grant hill 3.2tpg

Yeah because slight advantages in steals, blocks, and turnovers really make up for a big advantage in points, a slight advantage in assists, a slight advantage in rebounds, a large advantage in field goal % and a comfortable advantage in 3P%. Not to mention 8 more games played. :roll:


:sleeping top 6 small forward, top 5 shooting guard, top 2 point guard, sixth man of the year award winner, 2 team members on the all defense second team = 49 wins and first round exit? that roster should be good enough to do more damage than that..even with injuries

Actually the team did do more damage than that. They won 53 games and advanced to the second round.

And that's with Penny missing 22 games, Kidd missing 15 games, Gugliotta missing 28 games and Shawn Marion missing 31 games.


the lakers were 54-11 with kobe+shaq. the lakers don't win 67 games and a championship without kobe.

How do you know? They weren't doing badly without Kobe.


:lol how did he clearly play better defense than bryant?

Did you even watch basketball back in 2000? There was a reason Eddie was 3rd in DPOY voting.


again, iverson wouldn't want any other supporting cast than the one he had - top five center, a solid offensive player (kukoc), strong defenders and team oriented players (lynch, hill, snow), and solid guys off the bench (mckie, geiger)

Yeah but that still doesn't mean he had half as much talent around him as Kobe did. Iverson had to carry the scoring load.


this really sounds pathetic. some team should sign kareem today..he'd be a huge contributer consider he is just 23 years removed from a 22/8 year and only 36 years removed from a 35/17 season

Hmmm so you're comparing 2 years to 23 years? :oldlol: Rice averaged 18 ppg in the 1999 season which was one of the lowest years for scoring and 16 ppg as the clear 3rd option in 2000 so I think if he was a 1st or second option he could still put up 20 ppg in 2000.


no kobe = no best record

In the 16 games without Kobe they went 12-4. That is a .750 winning %. That is on pace for 61-62 wins in the regular season and no other team won 60 games that year so there is nothing to suggest they wouldn't have had the best record without Kobe.

[RoseCity07]

I can't find that MJ commercial where at the very end it shows him walking on the court in what must have been middle school. Anyone find it on youtube? It's like home video of one of his games and then the commercial ends.

[juju151111]

yes, and i watched the games. jordan also shot more free throws than anyone else besided moses malone

jordan didn't end up being the best ever, would've been if he never retired the first time and won 1 more championship, but unfortunately for him he didn't. more contact/hard checking only started late 80's and into the 90's.

hill: 14th, mourning: 7th, kidd: 8th, malone: 9th, carter: 10th, mutombo: :roll: , finley: 16th

impossible to say. shaq at that point was in his peak, a peak that was greater than anyone's peak in nba history. glen rice would've got alot more touches without shaq there..probably would've been closer to his charlotte production, bryant would've been much better statistically aswell and i could see the lakers winning 45-50 games.

shaq was only the best player in the nba in 2000, and 2001, aswell as '97 and '98.

you said kobe shot better with shaq than without shaq, i gave the numbers that proved he shot better without shaq.

it gives the player with range alot more weapons on the offensive end, instead of sagging off your man you have to be up in his face as soon as he gets to 35 feet, it means that his defender can't help out in the post as easily and play off the ball defense as well either..it does have alot of bearing when discussing who was the better player offensively atleast.

you = shut up.
more physical defense didn't come into the league until the late 80's, and into the 90's. in the early part of this decade basketball was called more or less the same as it was in 1985, except for the fact that you got suspended less back then.

the emphasis was on outscoring your opponent, not stopping your opponent. these days and early on in this decade the emphasis has been on stopping your opponent, and better defense is the result..:lol and it was never ok to jack up a shot when in a 1 on 4 situation so stop guessing about how the game was played and go back and watch some tape
MJ goes to the hoop wayy more then Kobe.Kobe just started going to the rim hard like mj when he was in his like 6th year i think in 03.The guy was a chucker.I watched his whole career he likes to chuck.From 03 on he learned that if u drive more u get calls.Look at 06 he got alot of calls.Mj drived the ball like everytime.Mj has a rookie drivewd the ball 95% of the time.If u seen his earrrrly days has a rookie he would just drive close to the basket and stop and pop or just go to the basket and dunk over someone.you know that
l'j dunk where he holds the ball wayy up in the air with one hand dunking mj did that.MJ went to the rim like it freaking owed him something has a rookie.sometimes u thought he would lay it up and then he just dunks even tho people hit him in the air just watch http://youtube.com/watch?v=i9bzrWTff5U LOL Look at LJ he learned it in his 2nd and 3rd year(well mostly because he couldn't make a jumper to save his life but still)

[Shaquille O'Neal]

Right. Because it's easier to score against double and triple teams than when you have a teammate commanding those double/triple teams, and it's easier to get assists passing to shooters than it is by driving and dumping it off for guaranteed dunks. :oldlol:

Why does it say "LOKI BANNED"????

[Shaquille O'Neal]

Wow..

It amazes just how UNINFORMED U kobe homers REALLY are when it comes to making these ABSURD comparisons to MJ. Half of U guys didn't even see MJ before the 1st titles & the other half of U guys, BARELY saw him from 1996-98..and those WEREN'T even his PRIME years!

It's the SAME 'ol story with U guys..Y'all try & rank & compare them based on your UNINFORMED opinions, rather than what they've actually DONE on the floor..

MJ's "ROOKIE" season he had an NBA Efficiency Rating (PER) of 29.24, & 13.2 player wins. He also IMPROVED them by 10 wins & took 'em to the Playoffs, a place they hadn't SEEN since 1981..

Kobe's 2006-07 season, he had an NBA Efficiency Rating (PER) of 27.65 and 11.2 player wins.

Well homers, how do U explain that? And U claim kobe's better?

THAT'S A JOKE!!

In the seasons BEFORE Pippen & Co., he had a combined average of 33ppg 5apg 6rpg 2.74spg 1.26bpg 49 FG%.

Show me ANY season from kobe with better OVERALL Production than that?

MJ is the ONLY player in HISTORY to lead his team in scoring, rebounding, assists & steals..(4 out of 5 categories) & he did this as a ROOKIE!! Dr. J did it in the ABA, but never in the NBA. MJ was 4 blocks away from repeating this feat in 1989.

Ever see kobe do anything REMOTELY close to that? Hell no & if U claim he has, you're a liar & the truth aint in ya..

And U got the NERVE to call MJ "selfish"? Are U serious?

Kobe has 53 games to date, with NO ASSISTS! MJ has only "6" in 14 years of play, with the 1st game like occuring in 1997..that's 13 STRAIGHT years with at least "1" assist!

What's kobe's excuse?

U kobe homers need to stop deluding yourselves & get real. Get off your false paradise of eden that's perched on the banks of 'Denial' & snap back into reality..

/thread

[97 bulls]

the post from scottie pippen was amazing as were all the post for jordan i would have to say that the jordanaires beat the kobeites in this debate.

[Da_Realist]

Why does it say "LOKI BANNED"????

:confusedshrug:

[Psileas]

/thread

Just a question: Did you care to check the validity of the facts and figures posted above?

[~LA's fine$t~]

Psileas, you a big fan of Clockwork Orange?
I find that movie very overrated. Maybe it's the english accent... :oldlol:

[crisoner]

There is a general Kobe topic you know.

But for the sake of argument....

Now....just what is the question?
Would you rather have a young Jordan to build your team around for the future or do you want a prime Kobe Bryant on your team for rings now.

If thats the case....I'm gunna look in to the future and build with Jordan.

BUT

If the question was who was better between a rookie Jordan and a Prime Kobe....OF COURSE ITS PRIME KOBE.

If you disagree then you do not understand basketball.

Kobe h)mers....Jordan h)mers please give these dumb topics to a minimal and post this crap in the General Kobe topic please. :banghead:

But kudos to everyone though....ISH has been a better place to come since the boards are not really flooded with these same BS topics as much.

[Da_Realist]

Oh Really?

Let me repeat what I previously posted, in case U missed it:

"MJ's "ROOKIE" season he had an NBA Efficiency Rating (PER) of 29.24, & 13.2 player wins. He also IMPROVED them by 10 wins & took 'em to the Playoffs, a place they hadn't SEEN since 1981..

According to basketball-reference (http://www.basketball-reference.com/), MJ's PER was 25.8.


Kobe's 2006-07 season, he had an NBA Efficiency Rating (PER) of 27.65 and 11.2 player wins.

Well kobe homers, how do U explain that?

According to the same source, Kobe's PER for 2006/07 was 26.1


Not to mention MJ shot 52% from the field his ROOKIE year...

True. (51.5% actually)


...VS 46% for kobe's 2007 campaign!

Also True. (46.3%)


In FACT, from a shooting standpoint, MJ's ROOKIE year, is BETTER than ANY of kobe's!!

True.


Also during MJ's ROOKIE year, he became the ONLY player in history (at that time..Hakeem did it LATER in his career), to LEAD his team in 4 of 5 categories (scoring, rebounding, assists & steals)..SHOW ME a season at ANY point in kobe's career, where he's done ANYTHING to this degree! I dare U!

I don't know if MJ was the first to do it, but he did infact lead the Bulls in Points (28.2), Assists (5.9), Blocks (6.5) and Steals (2.4) his rookie year. I also know Scottie did it in 94.


Dr. J did it in the ABA, but NEVER in the NBA. MJ came within 4 blocks in 1989 of REPEATING this feat..

Not true. MJ did come within 4 blocks of co-leading the team (Brad Sellers) but he avg'd a few less rebounds than Horace Grant in 1988/89.


In the seasons BEFORE Pippen & Co., he had a combined average of 33ppg 5apg 6rpg 2.74spg 1.26bpg 49 FG%.

Close...Before 1988 (when Pippen started playing for the Bulls), MJ avg'd 31.7 pts, 5 asts, 5.6 rbs, 2.6 stls, 1.2 blks and shot 49%


Show me ANY season from kobe with better OVERALL Production than that?"

Kobe 's had a few come close to the Pre-Pippen MJ Years...

2002/03 30.0 pts, 5.9 asts, 6.9 rbs, 2.2 stls, 0.8 blks and 45%
2005/06 35.4 pts, 4.5 asts, 5.3 rbs, 1.8 stls, 0.4 blks and 45%
2006/07 31.6 pts, 5.4 asts, 5.7 rbs, 1.4 stls, 0.5 blks and 46%


So I conclude this post, with the SAME sentiment I expressed in the previous one: MJ's ROOKIE season was productively BETTER, from an OVERALL standpoint, & TROUNCES any one of kobe's..

Kobe's had some years that are arguably better than MJ's rookie season, but there is no doubt that MJ's rookie numbers can stand beside some of Kobe's best years.

[Da_Realist]

And U got the NERVE to call MJ "selfish"? Are U serious?

Kobe has 53 games to date, with NO ASSISTS! MJ has only "6" in 14 years of play, with the 1st game like occuring in 1997..that's 13 STRAIGHT years with at least "1" assist!

What's kobe's excuse?

U kobe homers need to stop deluding yourselves & get real. Get off your false paradise of eden that's perched on the banks of 'Denial' & snap back into reality..

This is actually very close to true. According to this website(michaeljordansworld (http://www.michaeljordansworld.com/index.htm)), MJ only had 7 games in his ENTIRE CAREER in which he recorded no assists and the first didn't happen until his 12th year!

With Bulls
Apr 12, 1996 vs Philadelphia 76ers W 112-82 (23, 0, 3)
Nov 06, 1996 at Miami Heat W 106-100 (50, 0, 6)
Jan 23, 1997 at Cleveland Cavaliers W 87-71 (32, 0, 9)
Dec 29, 1997 vs Dallas Mavericks W 111-105 (41, 0, 7)
Mar 29, 1998 at Milwaukee Bucks W 104-87 (30, 0, 2)

With Wizards
Dec 6, 2003 at Orlando Magic L 88-78 (16, 0, 6)
Mar 05, 2003 vs Los Angeles Clippers W 99-80 (10, 0, 9)

That's an amazing stat.

[Shep]

That is ridiculous. Jordan wasn't even the most hyped rookie in that draft class. So you are also saying rookie Jordan was better at getting to the line than 87 or 88 Jordan?
you are ridiculous, you don't know **** about who was hyped in 1985 because the world had the privilege of not having you around yet, and you had no idea of what basketball was for decades later..infact you still don't :D . the stats prove that michael jordan got to the line atleast at the same ratio/pace as he did when he was a superstar years later.

Yeah because slight advantages in steals, blocks, and turnovers really make up for a big advantage in points, a slight advantage in assists, a slight advantage in rebounds, a large advantage in field goal % and a comfortable advantage in 3P%. Not to mention 8 more games played.
games played doesn't come into the argument for reasons stated previously. and i didn't say bryant was better statistically, i said statistically they were close, which they obviously are, and when you add defense and wins it becomes a no contest.

Actually the team did do more damage than that. They won 53 games and advanced to the second round.

And that's with Penny missing 22 games, Kidd missing 15 games, Gugliotta missing 28 games and Shawn Marion missing 31 games.
should've done more

How do you know? They weren't doing badly without Kobe.
so you think the lakers would win the championship without kobe? :roll: you're more deluded than i ever imagined

Did you even watch basketball back in 2000? There was a reason Eddie was 3rd in DPOY voting.
did you even own a tv in 2000? i asked you to give me reasons why eddie jones was a better defender than kobe bryant and you give me this ****? why wasn't jones on the 1st team all-defense?

Yeah but that still doesn't mean he had half as much talent around him as Kobe did. Iverson had to carry the scoring load.
:hammerhead: he would have it no other way..kobe could do things without the ball in his hands, iverson had to have the ball in his hands at all times

Hmmm so you're comparing 2 years to 23 years?
highlighting how pathetic your statement was

Rice averaged 18 ppg in the 1999 season which was one of the lowest years for scoring and 16 ppg as the clear 3rd option in 2000 so I think if he was a 1st or second option he could still put up 20 ppg in 2000.
whats this got to do with anything?

In the 16 games without Kobe they went 12-4. That is a .750 winning %. That is on pace for 61-62 wins in the regular season and no other team won 60 games that year so there is nothing to suggest they wouldn't have had the best record without Kobe.
yeh, because all you need to do after 16 games is multiply by 5.12 to get what your record at the end of the season will be huh..teams should just have to play 16 games..if a team wins their first 16 they automatically finish 82-0..makes perfect sense..you ****in joke

[VCMVP1551]

you are ridiculous, you don't know **** about who was hyped in 1985 because the world had the privilege of not having you around yet, and you had no idea of what basketball was for decades later..infact you still don't :D . the stats prove that michael jordan got to the line atleast at the same ratio/pace as he did when he was a superstar years later.

Shep you are what 1 or 2 years older than me? You didn't watch the NBA in 1985 either.

Your original comment was that Jordan got to the line a lot because of the refs which wasn't true. Jordan earned a lot of the hype and respect. Hakeem was considered the obvious number 1 pick back then.


games played doesn't come into the argument for reasons stated previously. and i didn't say bryant was better statistically, i said statistically they were close, which they obviously are, and when you add defense and wins it becomes a no contest.

The stats aren't that close. Hill has a clear advantage.

As for defense, yeah Kobe was better but once again wins don't really come into play because he was playing with Shaq in his prime who led the Lakers to a 12-4 record without Kobe.

Grant Hill was the clear first option on his team.


should've done more

With all of those injuries they should have won more than 53 games in the difficult Western Conference? :roll:


so you think the lakers would win the championship without kobe? :roll: you're more deluded than i ever imagined

Look at what Shaq did in the playoffs and regular season. With or without Kobe they are still the favorite.


did you even own a tv in 2000? i asked you to give me reasons why eddie jones was a better defender than kobe bryant and you give me this ****?

Jones was better because he was a shutdown defender who didn't get lit up nearly as often as Kobe did. Penny Hardaway and Jalen Rose both torched Kobe in the playoffs.



why wasn't jones on the 1st team all-defense?

Who knows? Who cares?

Why did Kobe finish behind Jones in DPOY?


:hammerhead: he would have it no other way..kobe could do things without the ball in his hands, iverson had to have the ball in his hands at all times

So? That still doesn't make the talent on his team anywhere near the talent on that Laker team.


highlighting how pathetic your statement was

Well you did a miserable job of it.


whats this got to do with anything?

Pointing out that if Glen Rice can average 17 or 18 ppg when scoring was way down in 1999 and then 16 ppg as a clear 3rd option the next year then it's pretty obvious that if he was the second option he could have averaged around 20.

Just part of pointing out how much better the talent was on that Laker team instead of the 76er team.


yeh, because all you need to do after 16 games is multiply by 5.12 to get what your record at the end of the season will be huh..teams should just have to play 16 games..if a team wins their first 16 they automatically finish 82-0..makes perfect sense..you ****in joke

First of all the word isn't "yeh" it's yeah.

Second of all you base that team being bad without Bryant on nothing.

I base my statement on the fact that the Lakers played very well without Bryant for an extended stretch.

I don't know where you get this sh*t but keep posting it because it's funny as hell.

[Koop1]

are you guys ****ing kidding me?
A ROOKIE michael Jordan over current Kobe Bryant?
The Current MVP kobe Bryant who dominates the game in passing, can score whenever he wants too, and get everybody else involved
and you're gonna pick A ROOKIE Jordan
maybe if you said jordan in his prime
but when he was a ****ing rookie
:roll:

[Da_Realist]

are you guys ****ing kidding me?
A ROOKIE michael Jordan over current Kobe Bryant?
The Current MVP kobe Bryant who dominates the game in passing, can score whenever he wants too, and get everybody else involved
and you're gonna pick A ROOKIE Jordan
maybe if you said jordan in his prime
but when he was a ****ing rookie
:roll:

I would take current Kobe over rookie MJ ONLY because of experience. Not because of ability, skill, competitiveness or anything else. You can even argue that MJ had a better rookie year than Kobe did this year, therefore if you slide rookie MJ into this year he may have won the MVP!

2007/08 Kobe -- 28.3 pts, 6.3 rbs, 5.4 asts, 1.8 stls, 0.5 blks, 45.9%
1984/85 MJ -- 28.2 pts, 6.5 rbs, 5.9 asts, 2.4 stls, 0.8 blks, 51.5%

Look at the team MJ was on and look at this year's Lakers team. Kobe is in a much better system, coached by the best coach of the last 40 years and he's playing with better players in a softer league. I would choose experience (Kobe) but it's much much closer than some of you guys think.

[Brunch@Five]

This thread really is laughable. Rookie Jordan isn't close to as good as current, prime MVP Kobe. He was more athletic, but that's it. He wasn't as skilled nor did he possess the intangibles Kobe does right now.

And I thought Kobe groupies were bad :ohwell:

[juju151111]

you are ridiculous, you don't know **** about who was hyped in 1985 because the world had the privilege of not having you around yet, and you had no idea of what basketball was for decades later..infact you still don't :D . the stats prove that michael jordan got to the line atleast at the same ratio/pace as he did when he was a superstar years later.

games played doesn't come into the argument for reasons stated previously. and i didn't say bryant was better statistically, i said statistically they were close, which they obviously are, and when you add defense and wins it becomes a no contest.

should've done more

so you think the lakers would win the championship without kobe? :roll: you're more deluded than i ever imagined

did you even own a tv in 2000? i asked you to give me reasons why eddie jones was a better defender than kobe bryant and you give me this ****? why wasn't jones on the 1st team all-defense?

:hammerhead: he would have it no other way..kobe could do things without the ball in his hands, iverson had to have the ball in his hands at all times

highlighting how pathetic your statement was

whats this got to do with anything?

yeh, because all you need to do after 16 games is multiply by 5.12 to get what your record at the end of the season will be huh..teams should just have to play 16 games..if a team wins their first 16 they automatically finish 82-0..makes perfect sense..you ****in joke
Once again people talk with no facts.Mjtook like 60 3pt shts his rookie season.He went to the hoop.He went to the hoop more in his first 3 years then any point in his career.Players now a days like Kevein durant who is skinny doesn't go to the hoop alot and takes alot of 20ft/3pt shots.Mj never got the idea of taking long range shots he would take the 16ft jumper or dunk it.Thats the reason he gets so much fouls.Just watch a little sample of Mj rookie year http://youtube.com/watch?v=i9bzrWTff5U MJ Went to the basket and didn't care if he got hit.It took Kobe until like 02 to start going to the basket like how MJ did.Thats the reason his FTs started going up that year.This is the smartest Kobe i have seen in a while.He attacking way more in the playoffs which leads to less miss shots,less positions for the other team because he shooting 50%.He not settling.

[juju151111]

This thread really is laughable. Rookie Jordan isn't close to as good as current, prime MVP Kobe. He was more athletic, but that's it. He wasn't as skilled nor did he possess the intangibles Kobe does right now.

And I thought Kobe groupies were bad :ohwell:
Rookie Mj was kevin durant, but better.He looked skinny and frail, but would come down the lane and dunk on u.The only reason i give kobe the win is because Kobe has experience over the rookie Mj. Watch the things he was doing ijn rookie year http://youtube.com/watch?v=i9bzrWTff5U

[2LeTTeRS]

This thread proves that this board can't handle a MJ-Kobe thread on matter the basis. I honestly think on this current Laker team, rookie MJ would be better because he still has all his athleticism and would probably be a superior defender, and would drive to the basket more often sucking defenders off those big men for the easy assist. As a player though Kobe is probably better, because of experience.

[juju151111]

Maybe this was a typo and you really meant he shot close to 60 3pt shots his rookie season. Actually, he only shot 52 3pointers his rookie year.
yeah typo

[Da_Realist]

I would take current Kobe over rookie MJ ONLY because of experience. Not because of ability, skill, competitiveness or anything else. You can even argue that MJ had a better rookie year than Kobe did this year, therefore if you slide rookie MJ into this year he may have won the MVP!

2007/08 Kobe -- 28.3 pts, 6.3 rbs, 5.4 asts, 1.8 stls, 0.5 blks, 45.9%
1984/85 MJ -- 28.2 pts, 6.5 rbs, 5.9 asts, 2.4 stls, 0.8 blks, 51.5%

Look at the team MJ was on and look at this year's Lakers team. Kobe is in a much better system, coached by the best coach of the last 40 years and he's playing with better players in a softer league. I would choose experience (Kobe) but it's much much closer than some of you guys think.

I re-read the comment above and wondered how the hell didn't MJ win the MVP his rookie year. I looked it up and some guy named Bird won it for the 2nd consecutive year (and won it again the next year).

For comparison's sake... let's look at the 2 mvps along with MJ's rookie season...

2007/08 Kobe -- 28.3 pts, 6.3 rbs, 5.4 asts, 1.8 stls, 0.5 blks, 45.9%

1984/85 MJ -- 28.2 pts, 6.5 rbs, 5.9 asts, 2.4 stls, 0.8 blks, 51.5%

1984/85 Bird -- 28.7 pts, 10.5 rbs, 6.6 asts, 1.61 stls, 1.23 blks, 52.2%

:eek: :bowdown:

[Shep]

Shep you are what 1 or 2 years older than me? You didn't watch the NBA in 1985 either.
but i did start watching it alot earlier than you did, and have far greater knowledge than that of yours about anything nba related

Your original comment was that Jordan got to the line a lot because of the refs which wasn't true. Jordan earned a lot of the hype and respect. Hakeem was considered the obvious number 1 pick back then.
i never said he got to the line because of the refs, i said he recieved atleast the same number of favourable calls in '85 as he did when he was a superstar and the numbers provided back that statement up.

The stats aren't that close. Hill has a clear advantage.
hill does not have a clear advantage. he does have an advantage, but it is only a slight advantage

As for defense, yeah Kobe was better but once again wins don't really come into play because he was playing with Shaq in his prime who led the Lakers to a 12-4 record without Kobe.
once again :oldlol:..wins don't come into account because you're playing with a great player? that must mean scottie pippen was a nobody, guys like kevin mchale and robert parish were nobody's, kareem was a nobody..infact any player who is the second best player on a championship team is a nobody..this theory makes total sense :hammerhead: . as for the 12-4 record without kobe? 12 wins will get you the first pick in the lottery

Grant Hill was the clear first option on his team.
who clearly led that team nowhere

With all of those injuries they should have won more than 53 games in the difficult Western Conference?
sixth man of the year, 2nd team all-defense team member, top 6 small forward, top 5 shooting guard, top 2 point guard? yes

Look at what Shaq did in the playoffs and regular season. With or without Kobe they are still the favorite.
:roll:

Jones was better because he was a shutdown defender who didn't get lit up nearly as often as Kobe did. Penny Hardaway and Jalen Rose both torched Kobe in the playoffs.
18.8 compared with 16.2 per 36 by penny vs the lakers is getting torched? did you even watch the finals? kobe guarded miller in that series, and shut him down. jones got lit up for 40 against allen iverson in a game 1 loss that set the trend for an easy round 1 victory for the less talented sixers.

Who knows? Who cares?

Why did Kobe finish behind Jones in DPOY?

who cares? you should care considering it does nothing to your argument that he was a better defender. so far you haven't said anything that backs that statement up..i won't hold my breath

So? That still doesn't make the talent on his team anywhere near the talent on that Laker team.
nobody knows what iverson would've done with the talent the lakers had

Well you did a miserable job of it.
you must have missed it

Pointing out that if Glen Rice can average 17 or 18 ppg when scoring was way down in 1999 and then 16 ppg as a clear 3rd option the next year then it's pretty obvious that if he was the second option he could have averaged around 20.

Just part of pointing out how much better the talent was on that Laker team instead of the 76er team.

:oldlol: the idea is a pathetic one. kukoc would've averaged 25ppg if he was a first option. lynch would've averaged 15/10, ratliff 12/8/3..argument is as weak as your frame

First of all the word isn't "yeh" it's yeah.
its slang, so there is no official spelling - get the **** over it

Second of all you base that team being bad without Bryant on nothing.
never said it'd be bad..it'd be a good team..maybe even a contender..but not a 67 win championship team

I base my statement on the fact that the Lakers played very well without Bryant for an extended stretch.
16 games :lol . this team was almost beaten in the first round by sacramento with shaq, kobe, and glen rice in the line up :roll:

I don't know where you get this sh*t but keep posting it because it's funny as hell.
where i get this ****? what do you mean? where do i get plain to see facts from?

Once again people talk with no facts.Mjtook like 60 3pt shts his rookie season.He went to the hoop.He went to the hoop more in his first 3 years then any point in his career.Players now a days like Kevein durant who is skinny doesn't go to the hoop alot and takes alot of 20ft/3pt shots.Mj never got the idea of taking long range shots he would take the 16ft jumper or dunk it.Thats the reason he gets so much fouls.Just watch a little sample of Mj rookie year http://youtube.com/watch?v=i9bzrWTff5U MJ Went to the basket and didn't care if he got hit.It took Kobe until like 02 to start going to the basket like how MJ did.Thats the reason his FTs started going up that year.This is the smartest Kobe i have seen in a while.He attacking way more in the playoffs which leads to less miss shots,less positions for the other team because he shooting 50%.He not settling.
jordan took it to the rim more because he had no jump shot. once he developed his game more and worked on his jumpshot he became a superstar, bryant already had a three point shot in '00, a year in which he became the youngest player ever to make the 1st team all-defense.

[Emile]

I pretty much see one common response/phrase here and not only here but pretty much wherever the topic at hand is brought up.

It's..

Kobe will never be Michael Jordan

Kobe will never be like Michael Jordan

Kobe will never be another Michael Jordan.

Kobe will never be better than Michael Jordan

And I think it's funny. There's a whole saga of youtube videos dedicated to that one premise, Kobe never being better than Michael Jordan. Not just that, countless of websites are being dedicated to that one theme, Kobe never being Michael Jordan.

I think it's ridiculous. But in a way understandable since Kobe is such a direct threat/competition to Jordan. Exact same style, mannerisms, even appearance. Take someone like LeBron or Shaq for example and they can be appreciated because they don't mimic Jordan as much.
But for Kobe, there's this huge Jordan barrier that prevents him from being appreciated. It's like, when people are finally ready to appreciate and celebrate Kobe, they just can't do it. Because the minute you praise Kobe, the question comes up, how does he stack against Jordan? And most just aren't ready to answer favorably for Kobe. They can't because the Jordan love is stronger so immediately they restore to sayings like "Kobe will never be Jordan". And go from there.

It's ridiculous and it's why Kobe gets taken for granted so much. Why is it to hard to accept him.
I remember someone in the media saying "falling in love with Kobe doesn't mean you're breaking up with Michael". I'd just like to add Doc Rivers' statement to that when he said that he wishes more people celebrated Kobe because we're all missing on how great he really is. And that is true.
Like my friend, watched the game last night, rabid Kobe hater, can't stand him and every time Kobe did something, he was impressed but held it back, his wow's were kind of wow's you see in the movies when people are frightened after being threatened at gun point.

It's silly. But is reality. People are missing out however. Players like Michael and Kobe come once a lifetime. We've been fortunate enough to live in the time when both played. One still is. And you're missing out.
Kobe's biggest mistake was breaking out just after Michael. When he memory still was fresh, when the emotions still were strong. And so on.

In a way, I do understand why Kobe has to go through so much to get his respect. But in a way I don't. So many of his feats have been undermined because people like to put a negative twist to everything he does.
" Had Shaq, did it against bad defense, didn't win, can't do this, can't do that" He really had to work harder than anyone to earn his respect IMO because people just didn't/ don't want to give it to him.

I don't expect any of this to really change, regardless of Kobe's success. Michael will still be the people's champion and a basketball icon. While Kobe will be that great player that a lot of people don't like. But at least, they"ll admit he's great.
i just think the MJ barrier is too much for many to overcome and give Kobe his props. And for one to really be celebrated, he has to be liked. Will Kobe ever get there? I dunno.
If he slips just once, commits one error, lot of people you don't see now will be back in full force. I'm not talking like it's a matter of life and death. It's just sports, fans take sides, root for players, root against players. Nothing big.
But I don't see a majority embracing Kobe and putting an extra positive twist to everything he does as was the case with Jordan, they will still try to nitpick and focus on the negative, no matter how small it is. In a way it's shame. I think only Laker fans fully understand and semi appreciate Kobe's greatness. As for the rest...they will think of this post as groupiesm, not because they necessarily disagree with the content but because they"ll be too annoyed by it to rationalize it.

Either way, respect or no respect, love or no love, whatever. It doesn't matter. Kobe just gotta keep going strong. His best is only yet to come and the window is open for quite a while.

[Da_Realist]

...

I think for the most part people answered the topic question without being too inflammatory. Just stating their opinion and giving reasons why. I don't know if I read every single post, but from what I read more people (including me) said they would choose current Kobe over rookie MJ. Even for the few that choose MJ, it's still just their opinion.

[Emile]

I'm not talking about the thread question but how things are generally. Comparing a rookie Jordan to a 12 year vet Kobe is ridiculous IMO but it just really proves my point. And on top of that, you still had dozens of "Kobe will never be Jordan/Kobe was never better than Jordan replies".
I think it's ridiculous, always have.

It just proves though, people will not give Kobe an ounce more credit than they absolutely have to. Whereas for Jordan, they"ll melt and decorate everything nicely. Therefore, it's extremely hard for Kobe to win really anything. It's hard to even give Kobe props without digressing with a but...but this...but that...

It's really like Milton said, the mind is it's own place and in itself, can make heaven out of hell or hell out of heaven.

It is why the comparison of Kobe vs Jordan is incredibly unfair to Kobe. You may not think so, all the anti Kobe reasons may actually be legitimate to the Kobe detractors, you've convinced yourself of it but some of the reasons were beyond absurd and illogical. While for Jordan, everything still ends up so much more sugarcoated and gets that legendary feel to it when a legend is told and it's so amazing, flawless, perfect..

Not saying it's wrong or that people don't have right to feel or think however they want however, personally...I feel these comparisons come incredibly unfair to hm and common tendencies always make him look worse.


What I want to say is that if I wanted to put a negative twist to many things Jordan, I certainly could. And believe it, too. Jordan always wins his could-should-would's though..trait of love. As opposed to Kobe.

What tendencies I'm speaking of? Legend of Jordan, sugarcoating and putting the negative twist to all that's Kobe.
For example, when the Bulls win 55 games, it's ignored. When Kobe finally has good teammates, he's crucified for it. Not to mention the Shaq factor.
When Jordan would have huge scoring games he was the king and it was so hard at the time. When Kobe has them, it's a weak era, it's a bad team, he got too many FT's, didn't have enough assists.. There are so many things, it's not even funny.
Everything Kobe does, a negative twist it put to it. Everything Jordan got was celebrated. Just like Jalen Rose said.


It's just a lot of those natural tendencies. Comparisons are unfair to Kobe simply because the Jordan bias is too strong. I'm not calling out anyone, we're all just people after all. And fans at that.

[Da_Realist]

...

You gotta look at it from the other side, too. Kobe can't have a great game without half the world comparing him to MJ. He can't make a great shot without half the world comparing it to MJ. I don't see many Kobe fans complaining about the comparisons when it somehow favors Kobe (81 points, the **-consecutive 40 point games, 3 titles before MJ won his...), it's only when it doesn't work in Kobe's favor that fans of his complain about the comparisons.

This board loves the MJ-Kobe comparisons. I try to talk about Larry Bird or Isiah Thomas and I may get 2 or 3 responses. I post video of Hakeem Olajuwon, no one responds. But when there's a Kobe to MJ comparison...:rolleyes:

It's a catch-22. When Kobe does well, a lot of Kobe fans can't wait to find some way to put it on par with whatever MJ did back in the day. But when MJ fans point out some things that favor MJ, all of the comparisons are "unfair" and "no one appreciates Kobe".

It starts with Kobe himself. He modeled his game after MJ to a tee. And that's fine. He's wanted to chase MJ all along just like Tiger has always wanted to chase Jack Nicholas. That's fine, too, but you can't embrace the comparisons when Kobe does well or better than whatever MJ did, then complain about them when he falls a little short.

No different than Tiger. They both made it their mission to be better than what is considered the best. When Tiger wins 5 majors in a row, his fans love the favorable comparisons. When Tiger doesn't win a major in 6 tries, all of a sudden the comparisons are tough to deal with.

When you boldly state (by admission with Tiger, by intent with Kobe) that you want to better what's considered the best, you have to roll with the punches.

To prove my point, wait until (if) the Lakers win this year. There will be post after post proclaiming that Kobe is well on his way and has 4 rings by the age of 29 and MJ only had 1. Then every Laker fan will love the comparisons again.

Until MJ fans retort.

Let the games begin.

[Emile]

^ Great post, I definitely see what you mean. Hopefully you also got what I was trying to say.

[juju151111]

but i did start watching it alot earlier than you did, and have far greater knowledge than that of yours about anything nba related

i never said he got to the line because of the refs, i said he recieved atleast the same number of favourable calls in '85 as he did when he was a superstar and the numbers provided back that statement up.

hill does not have a clear advantage. he does have an advantage, but it is only a slight advantage

once again :oldlol:..wins don't come into account because you're playing with a great player? that must mean scottie pippen was a nobody, guys like kevin mchale and robert parish were nobody's, kareem was a nobody..infact any player who is the second best player on a championship team is a nobody..this theory makes total sense :hammerhead: . as for the 12-4 record without kobe? 12 wins will get you the first pick in the lottery

who clearly led that team nowhere

sixth man of the year, 2nd team all-defense team member, top 6 small forward, top 5 shooting guard, top 2 point guard? yes

:roll:

18.8 compared with 16.2 per 36 by penny vs the lakers is getting torched? did you even watch the finals? kobe guarded miller in that series, and shut him down. jones got lit up for 40 against allen iverson in a game 1 loss that set the trend for an easy round 1 victory for the less talented sixers.

who cares? you should care considering it does nothing to your argument that he was a better defender. so far you haven't said anything that backs that statement up..i won't hold my breath

nobody knows what iverson would've done with the talent the lakers had

you must have missed it

:oldlol: the idea is a pathetic one. kukoc would've averaged 25ppg if he was a first option. lynch would've averaged 15/10, ratliff 12/8/3..argument is as weak as your frame

its slang, so there is no official spelling - get the **** over it

never said it'd be bad..it'd be a good team..maybe even a contender..but not a 67 win championship team

16 games :lol . this team was almost beaten in the first round by sacramento with shaq, kobe, and glen rice in the line up :roll:

where i get this ****? what do you mean? where do i get plain to see facts from?

jordan took it to the rim more because he had no jump shot. once he developed his game more and worked on his jumpshot he became a superstar, bryant already had a three point shot in '00, a year in which he became the youngest player ever to make the 1st team all-defense.
Don't put too much stock into that all defense thing.Tmac got screwed in 02-03 and Mj got the samething in 87.I have watched kobe all this year and i don't understand how he gets it this year.Most of the time they just keep giving u itevery year like the all-star gm.LMAO off Mj had 20ft jumper from his rookie season.WTH are u talking about??All he did was take 20ft,16ft jumpers early in his career.If he didn't have those jumpers everyone would of backed off of him so he couldn't drive. http://youtube.com/watch?v=wP-EIeGW4lk&feature=related He had a jumper from 20ft in FACT don't get it twisted.

[Da_Realist]

^ Great post, I definitely see what you mean. Hopefully you also got what I was trying to say.

No...I understand. That's why I've made a conscience decision to only state opinions I can back up instead of some of the inflammatory things I said when I first joined this board.

[Psileas]

This board loves the MJ-Kobe comparisons. I try to talk about Larry Bird or Isiah Thomas and I may get 2 or 3 responses. I post video of Hakeem Olajuwon, no one responds. But when there's a Kobe to MJ comparison...

Regrettably, in this board, when it comes to retired players, Jordan is where the knowledge of the average fan starts and ends.

As for the comparison, let's get real. That's not prime Jordan. This is inexperienced, 28/6/6 Jordan who was selected 2nd all-NBA team, was not selected in an all-D team, led his team to 38 wins and finished 6th in MVP voting. And he's compared to a 12-year veteran, who's won MVP, led his team to 57 wins and is 2 wins away from the NBA finals. It's not a crime to believe/admit that Kobe at his absolute peak is not worse than all Bulls' versions of Jordan.

[juju151111]

I pretty much see one common response/phrase here and not only here but pretty much wherever the topic at hand is brought up.

It's..

Kobe will never be Michael Jordan

Kobe will never be like Michael Jordan

Kobe will never be another Michael Jordan.

Kobe will never be better than Michael Jordan

And I think it's funny. There's a whole saga of youtube videos dedicated to that one premise, Kobe never being better than Michael Jordan. Not just that, countless of websites are being dedicated to that one theme, Kobe never being Michael Jordan.

I think it's ridiculous. But in a way understandable since Kobe is such a direct threat/competition to Jordan. Exact same style, mannerisms, even appearance. Take someone like LeBron or Shaq for example and they can be appreciated because they don't mimic Jordan as much.
But for Kobe, there's this huge Jordan barrier that prevents him from being appreciated. It's like, when people are finally ready to appreciate and celebrate Kobe, they just can't do it. Because the minute you praise Kobe, the question comes up, how does he stack against Jordan? And most just aren't ready to answer favorably for Kobe. They can't because the Jordan love is stronger so immediately they restore to sayings like "Kobe will never be Jordan". And go from there.

It's ridiculous and it's why Kobe gets taken for granted so much. Why is it to hard to accept him.
I remember someone in the media saying "falling in love with Kobe doesn't mean you're breaking up with Michael". I'd just like to add Doc Rivers' statement to that when he said that he wishes more people celebrated Kobe because we're all missing on how great he really is. And that is true.
Like my friend, watched the game last night, rabid Kobe hater, can't stand him and every time Kobe did something, he was impressed but held it back, his wow's were kind of wow's you see in the movies when people are frightened after being threatened at gun point.

It's silly. But is reality. People are missing out however. Players like Michael and Kobe come once a lifetime. We've been fortunate enough to live in the time when both played. One still is. And you're missing out.
Kobe's biggest mistake was breaking out just after Michael. When he memory still was fresh, when the emotions still were strong. And so on.

In a way, I do understand why Kobe has to go through so much to get his respect. But in a way I don't. So many of his feats have been undermined because people like to put a negative twist to everything he does.
" Had Shaq, did it against bad defense, didn't win, can't do this, can't do that" He really had to work harder than anyone to earn his respect IMO because people just didn't/ don't want to give it to him.

I don't expect any of this to really change, regardless of Kobe's success. Michael will still be the people's champion and a basketball icon. While Kobe will be that great player that a lot of people don't like. But at least, they"ll admit he's great.
i just think the MJ barrier is too much for many to overcome and give Kobe his props. And for one to really be celebrated, he has to be liked. Will Kobe ever get there? I dunno.
If he slips just once, commits one error, lot of people you don't see now will be back in full force. I'm not talking like it's a matter of life and death. It's just sports, fans take sides, root for players, root against players. Nothing big.
But I don't see a majority embracing Kobe and putting an extra positive twist to everything he does as was the case with Jordan, they will still try to nitpick and focus on the negative, no matter how small it is. In a way it's shame. I think only Laker fans fully understand and semi appreciate Kobe's greatness. As for the rest...they will think of this post as groupiesm, not because they necessarily disagree with the content but because they"ll be too annoyed by it to rationalize it.

Either way, respect or no respect, love or no love, whatever. It doesn't matter. Kobe just gotta keep going strong. His best is only yet to come and the window is open for quite a while.
I agree, but it doesn't help when u have people who grow up with Kobe saying MJ was noting compared to Kobe.I think kobe is great, but he just does so many things like MJ.Why is he shaking head and wagging his fingers??I think i saw a vid where he tapped the floor too.I understand kobe tho.If i was a Nba player i would do everything Mj did.I would probably pump fist after every shot.LOL

[juju151111]

I'm not talking about the thread question but how things are generally. Comparing a rookie Jordan to a 12 year vet Kobe is ridiculous IMO but it just really proves my point. And on top of that, you still had dozens of "Kobe will never be Jordan/Kobe was never better than Jordan replies".
I think it's ridiculous, always have.

It just proves though, people will not give Kobe an ounce more credit than they absolutely have to. Whereas for Jordan, they"ll melt and decorate everything nicely. Therefore, it's extremely hard for Kobe to win really anything. It's hard to even give Kobe props without digressing with a but...but this...but that...

It's really like Milton said, the mind is it's own place and in itself, can make heaven out of hell or hell out of heaven.

It is why the comparison of Kobe vs Jordan is incredibly unfair to Kobe. You may not think so, all the anti Kobe reasons may actually be legitimate to the Kobe detractors, you've convinced yourself of it but some of the reasons were beyond absurd and illogical. While for Jordan, everything still ends up so much more sugarcoated and gets that legendary feel to it when a legend is told and it's so amazing, flawless, perfect..

Not saying it's wrong or that people don't have right to feel or think however they want however, personally...I feel these comparisons come incredibly unfair to hm and common tendencies always make him look worse.


What I want to say is that if I wanted to put a negative twist to many things Jordan, I certainly could. And believe it, too. Jordan always wins his could-should-would's though..trait of love. As opposed to Kobe.

What tendencies I'm speaking of? Legend of Jordan, sugarcoating and putting the negative twist to all that's Kobe.
For example, when the Bulls win 55 games, it's ignored. When Kobe finally has good teammates, he's crucified for it. Not to mention the Shaq factor.
When Jordan would have huge scoring games he was the king and it was so hard at the time. When Kobe has them, it's a weak era, it's a bad team, he got too many FT's, didn't have enough assists.. There are so many things, it's not even funny.
Everything Kobe does, a negative twist it put to it. Everything Jordan got was celebrated. Just like Jalen Rose said.


It's just a lot of those natural tendencies. Comparisons are unfair to Kobe simply because the Jordan bias is too strong. I'm not calling out anyone, we're all just people after all. And fans at that.
LOL wats with the 55 win season.U guys like to point out that in 93 they had less.Let me tell u how the 93 season went.In the summer of 92 pippen and Mj played for the Dream team which wore them out and Mj had a wrist problem the whole season.The arguement is also flawed because in 1992 they had a 60 win season.The 94 team was an experience team led by scootie in his prime.87-92 Scottie didn't really help in the playoffs series.Go look at his stats.u will see alot of 6-22.Scottie helped in the most improtant part tho was his defense.

[MaxFly]

2007/08 Kobe -- 28.3 pts, 6.3 rbs, 5.4 asts, 1.8 stls, 0.5 blks, 45.9%
1984/85 MJ -- 28.2 pts, 6.5 rbs, 5.9 asts, 2.4 stls, 0.8 blks, 51.5%

I'm not sure you can base your argument simply on numbers. We're trying to compare 2008 to 1985, a 23 year span. A lot of changes have occured and there are a lot of differences between the two eras.

For example, teams in 1984-1985 game up 110.8 points per game on average. Teams today give up 99.9 points per game on average. The pace was much different with more fast break basketball and more possessions per game. You cannot accurately support an argument with stats without taking into account the various factors that serve to influence those stats.

[juju151111]

I'm not sure you can base your argument simply on numbers. We're trying to compare 2008 to 1985, a 23 year span. A lot of changes have occured and there are a lot of differences between the two eras.

For example, teams in 1984-1985 game up 110.8 points per game on average. Teams today give up 99.9 points per game on average. The pace was much different with more fast break basketball and more possessions per game. You cannot accurately support an argument with stats without taking into account the various factors that serve to influence those stats.
I agree, but the asts,blks,rebs stay the same.The PPg has been decreasing since the 80s.The 90s had like 100PPG averge i think.I don't know why because the only thing that was changed from the 80s and 90s was the flagrant fouls 3 second rules.

[Vendetta]

I pretty much see one common response/phrase here and not only here but pretty much wherever the topic at hand is brought up.

It's..

Kobe will never be Michael Jordan

Kobe will never be like Michael Jordan

Kobe will never be another Michael Jordan.

Kobe will never be better than Michael Jordan

And I think it's funny. There's a whole saga of youtube videos dedicated to that one premise, Kobe never being better than Michael Jordan. Not just that, countless of websites are being dedicated to that one theme, Kobe never being Michael Jordan.

I think it's ridiculous. But in a way understandable since Kobe is such a direct threat/competition to Jordan. Exact same style, mannerisms, even appearance. Take someone like LeBron or Shaq for example and they can be appreciated because they don't mimic Jordan as much.
But for Kobe, there's this huge Jordan barrier that prevents him from being appreciated. It's like, when people are finally ready to appreciate and celebrate Kobe, they just can't do it. Because the minute you praise Kobe, the question comes up, how does he stack against Jordan? And most just aren't ready to answer favorably for Kobe. They can't because the Jordan love is stronger so immediately they restore to sayings like "Kobe will never be Jordan". And go from there.

It's ridiculous and it's why Kobe gets taken for granted so much. Why is it to hard to accept him.
I remember someone in the media saying "falling in love with Kobe doesn't mean you're breaking up with Michael". I'd just like to add Doc Rivers' statement to that when he said that he wishes more people celebrated Kobe because we're all missing on how great he really is. And that is true.
Like my friend, watched the game last night, rabid Kobe hater, can't stand him and every time Kobe did something, he was impressed but held it back, his wow's were kind of wow's you see in the movies when people are frightened after being threatened at gun point.

It's silly. But is reality. People are missing out however. Players like Michael and Kobe come once a lifetime. We've been fortunate enough to live in the time when both played. One still is. And you're missing out.
Kobe's biggest mistake was breaking out just after Michael. When he memory still was fresh, when the emotions still were strong. And so on.

In a way, I do understand why Kobe has to go through so much to get his respect. But in a way I don't. So many of his feats have been undermined because people like to put a negative twist to everything he does.
" Had Shaq, did it against bad defense, didn't win, can't do this, can't do that" He really had to work harder than anyone to earn his respect IMO because people just didn't/ don't want to give it to him.

I don't expect any of this to really change, regardless of Kobe's success. Michael will still be the people's champion and a basketball icon. While Kobe will be that great player that a lot of people don't like. But at least, they"ll admit he's great.
i just think the MJ barrier is too much for many to overcome and give Kobe his props. And for one to really be celebrated, he has to be liked. Will Kobe ever get there? I dunno.
If he slips just once, commits one error, lot of people you don't see now will be back in full force. I'm not talking like it's a matter of life and death. It's just sports, fans take sides, root for players, root against players. Nothing big.
But I don't see a majority embracing Kobe and putting an extra positive twist to everything he does as was the case with Jordan, they will still try to nitpick and focus on the negative, no matter how small it is. In a way it's shame. I think only Laker fans fully understand and semi appreciate Kobe's greatness. As for the rest...they will think of this post as groupiesm, not because they necessarily disagree with the content but because they"ll be too annoyed by it to rationalize it.

Either way, respect or no respect, love or no love, whatever. It doesn't matter. Kobe just gotta keep going strong. His best is only yet to come and the window is open for quite a while.

I don't love Jordan, I don't like Jordan, I was never a fan of his and I never rooted for the Bulls.

Like, dislike, love, hate... none of these matter.

Nobody to be taken seriously compares the two in the sense of actually thinking Kobe might be at that level or better.

Jordan was better. By far. Get the **** over it.

[Emile]

LOL wats with the 55 win season.U guys like to point out that in 93 they had less.Let me tell u how the 93 season went.In the summer of 92 pippen and Mj played for the Dream team which wore them out and Mj had a wrist problem the whole season.The arguement is also flawed because in 1992 they had a 60 win season.The 94 team was an experience team led by scootie in his prime.87-92 Scottie didn't really help in the playoffs series.Go look at his stats.u will see alot of 6-22.Scottie helped in the most improtant part tho was his defense.

My point exactly. I don't care. Don't need to get all defensive. I'm not trying to dethrone MJ. Just wanted to illustrate that there's plenty of good, bad and whatever you want to make it look like in everything. Therefore, if you'd put a negative twist to everything about Jordan, decide to focus on the negative, decide to highlight each bad thing, you very well could make him look worse.

That 94 season is one thing I don't get. Why being so defensive about it and unable to admit that it happened? Doesn't take anything away from Jordan. That simply was a great Bulls team with a great coach. Basketball is a team sport. No one can win by themselves. Wilt couldn't do it. Neither could Jordan. Neither could Kobe. Neither could Shaq. Neither could Duncan. No one. It's 5 on 5 plus benches plus coaching.

In contrast to Kobe, 94 season is ignored or debated. But a few years ago, perhaps even now, it was a fact that Shaq could've won titles win just about everyone, basically to take credit away from Kobe. And it grew from a perception to reality. Even though 2 seasons before, Shaq would get swept, with other all star players on his team as well.
But slowly, credit from Kobe was taken away. On counterfactual.

It's like everything with him, there's a way to put a negative twist to all he does. And since people generally want to believe that more than the Bulls actually being great even without Jordan, they do. While the 94 Bulls is rarely brought up. Only by Kobe fans, basically. And is still considered a blasphemy to bring it up.
So basically, like Jalen Rose said....when Kobe does something, everyone are like ummmm "did they win, how many assists he had", basically trying to take away while Jordan would just get celebrated. And I do think that's more of a general thing, not just MJ/Kobe thing. Everyone is a MJ fan after all.
LeBron fans, VC fans, T Mac fans..whoever. But Kobe is that connection between the past, recent past, present and the future, being compared to all from Jordan to LeBron, thus automatically almost being disliked by them. And generally had a bad image for quite a while.

I realize how you guys get annoyed by people saying Kobe > MJ. Those however are kids, kids who don't know better. But other than a few of them claiming that, I do think generally the bias for Jordan is so strong that it's unfair to Kobe. Not a whole lot of people I think can be counted on for being level headed about it.
I personally am a Kobe fan but I feel MJ was a better and more talented individual. Not by as much many would like to think though. I feel if MJ is 99, Kobe is 95. However, in terms of accomplishments it isn't even close. Who knows though, I hope it will be some day.

[Vendetta]

I personally am a Kobe fan but I feel MJ was a better and more talented individual. Not by as much many would like to think though.

Oh for ****'s sake. It has nothing to do with "would like to think" and it has everything to do with reality. The reality is that it's not some small gap in difference. It's rather large. Just like every other perimeter player in history has a large gap between them and Jordan.

[Emile]

I don't love Jordan, I don't like Jordan, I was never a fan of his and I never rooted for the Bulls.

Like, dislike, love, hate... none of these matter.

Nobody to be taken seriously compares the two in the sense of actually thinking Kobe might be at that level or better.

Jordan was better. By far. Get the **** over it.

Oh yeah, you're the one to be a voice of reason here.

[juju151111]

My point exactly. I don't care. Don't need to get all defensive. I'm not trying to dethrone MJ. Just wanted to illustrate that there's plenty of good, bad and whatever you want to make it look like in everything. Therefore, if you'd put a negative twist to everything about Jordan, decide to focus on the negative, decide to highlight each bad thing, you very well could make him look worse.

That 94 season is one thing I don't get. Why being so defensive about it and unable to admit that it happened? Doesn't take anything away from Jordan. That simply was a great Bulls team with a great coach. Basketball is a team sport. No one can win by themselves. Wilt couldn't do it. Neither could Jordan. Neither could Kobe. Neither could Shaq. Neither could Duncan. No one. It's 5 on 5 plus benches plus coaching.

In contrast to Kobe, 94 season is ignored or debated. But a few years ago, perhaps even now, it was a fact that Shaq could've won titles win just about everyone, basically to take credit away from Kobe. And it grew from a perception to reality. Even though 2 seasons before, Shaq would get swept, with other all star players on his team as well.
But slowly, credit from Kobe was taken away. On counterfactual.

It's like everything with him, there's a way to put a negative twist to all he does. And since people generally want to believe that more than the Bulls actually being great even without Jordan, they do. While the 94 Bulls is rarely brought up. Only by Kobe fans, basically. And is still considered a blasphemy to bring it up.
So basically, like Jalen Rose said....when Kobe does something, everyone are like ummmm "did they win, how many assists he had", basically trying to take away while Jordan would just get celebrated. And I do think that's more of a general thing, not just MJ/Kobe thing. Everyone is a MJ fan after all.
LeBron fans, VC fans, T Mac fans..whoever. But Kobe is that connection between the past, recent past, present and the future, being compared to all from Jordan to LeBron, thus automatically almost being disliked by them. And generally had a bad image for quite a while.

I realize how you guys get annoyed by people saying Kobe > MJ. Those however are kids, kids who don't know better. But other than a few of them claiming that, I do think generally the bias for Jordan is so strong that it's unfair to Kobe. Not a whole lot of people I think can be counted on for being level headed about it.
I personally am a Kobe fan but I feel MJ was a better and more talented individual. Not by as much many would like to think though. I feel if MJ is 99, Kobe is 95. However, in terms of accomplishments it isn't even close. Who knows though, I hope it will be some day.
I am sorry i sounded defensive.U and a few other people are the only one who post things that make sense.I ushally get Mj era was soft,kobe more athlethic etc...I do think it's unfair for kobe because he doesn't really compare his self to mj.The media does most of that.When was the last time u seen Kobe do something amazing without one commentator saying mj name.They did it yesterday too.

[Emile]

Thanks for the compliment.
Well, the way I see it, I don't see anything wrong with commentators bringing up MJ because they're right IMO. Let's face it, those things that Kobe can do and does them, only MJ could, they're amazing from will to degree of difficulty to the amazement factor. So I guess it's natural for them to be reminded of MJ in an instant. It's not a bad thing IMO. It's just incredible skill that in all years of the league has only been seen perhaps in those two players and a few more but those two happen to play the same style.

I don't generally see a problem with that, I think it's just fan sensitivity. I remember when Gilbert Arenas got on fire last year. scored a lot of 3's and commentators were saying it reminded them of Kobe, in fact he was doing it against Kobe. They went nuts at lakersground calling it a fluke and luck and marking days until Kobe can pay him back. Arenas did score like 60 points that game and that's rare. So really, instead of giving props, they hated it and put a bad twist to it.

It's silly IMO. We're witnessing greatness yet can't enjoy it and get annoyed for those silly things and side taking. Takes away the beauty of basketball.
I mean, as a Kobe fan I definitely do want him to accomplish more than anyone when it's all said and done but it's pretty obvious what a longshot that is and how long it will take. I'm hoping though.

[deion2123]

I'm not sure you can base your argument simply on numbers. We're trying to compare 2008 to 1985, a 23 year span. A lot of changes have occured and there are a lot of differences between the two eras.

For example, teams in 1984-1985 game up 110.8 points per game on average. Teams today give up 99.9 points per game on average. The pace was much different with more fast break basketball and more possessions per game. You cannot accurately support an argument with stats without taking into account the various factors that serve to influence those stats.
yeah..you can....MJ took less shots to get his points than Kobe did even in the higher scoring era and shot a higher percentage...even Wade and Tony Parker can shoot over 50%..why can't Kobe ??...this era is high scoring as well considering what teams like the Nuggets did this year...

[juju151111]

yeah..you can....MJ took less shots to get his points than Kobe did even in the higher scoring era and shot a higher percentage...even Wade and Tony Parker can shoot over 50%..why can't Kobe ??...this era is high scoring as well considering what teams like the Nuggets did this year...
The answer is wade and parker drive the ball and take mid range shots.

[Psileas]

yeah..you can....MJ took less shots to get his points than Kobe did even in the higher scoring era and shot a higher percentage...even Wade and Tony Parker can shoot over 50%..why can't Kobe ??...this era is high scoring as well considering what teams like the Nuggets did this year...

I accept the first part, but, about percentages:

-Wade and Parker take very few long range shots. Parker was taking quite a few 3's more in the beginning of his career and his percentage never got as high as when he stopped. Kobe last year shot 49.7% in 2-point shots.
-Wade and Parker are quicker when driving to the basket.
-Parker never had to score as much as Kobe and wouldn't shoot 50% if he did.
-Technically, Wade never shot 50%.
-Similarly to your argument, Magic in 1985 shot 56%, Bernard King shot 53% and Dantley 53.1%. So why didn't Jordan?

[Brunch@Five]

I agree, but the asts,blks,rebs stay the same.

False. Less shots = less rebounds, less assists, less blocks.

[MaxFly]

I agree, but the asts,blks,rebs stay the same.The PPg has been decreasing since the 80s.The 90s had like 100PPG averge i think.I don't know why because the only thing that was changed from the 80s and 90s was the flagrant fouls 3 second rules.

Team points per game have decreased overall because the game had become increasingly defense oriented with coaches opting to slow down the game in order to limit opponent fast break scoring opportunities and get defenses back to defend the basket. If a team can slow the tempo of the game, they can decrease the number of possessions the opposing teams have to score and can do a better job of preventing them from attacking the basket before their defense is back and has been set up.

As a result, the pace of the game has decreased. There are fewer possessions in the average game today than there were in 1984-1985. Fewer possessions generally means fewer points, as well as fewer rebound, assists, blocks and freethrows. Obviously the situation isn't linear and conditions change based on specific teams, but the change is pace makes it difficult to do a blanket comparison of stats from different eras as so many people are wont to do.

[juju151111]

Team points per game have decreased overall because the game had become increasingly defense oriented with coaches opting to slow down the game in order to limit opponent fast break scoring opportunities and get defenses back to defend the basket. If a team can slow the tempo of the game, they can decrease the number of possessions the opposing teams have to score and can do a better job of preventing them from attacking the basket before their defense is back and has been set up.

As a result, the pace of the game has decreased. There are fewer possessions in the average game today than there were in 1984-1985. Fewer possessions generally means fewer points, as well as fewer rebound, assists, blocks and freethrows. Obviously the situation isn't linear and conditions change based on specific teams, but the change is pace makes it difficult to do a blanket comparison of stats from different eras as so many people are wont to do.
Good points i did notice the game slowing down when i watch 90s games.Mj dominated in the 90s too.he just couldn't be stopped.

[juju151111]

One thing i notice about Mj is his defense.I think he was the only one who stls the ball when people are trying to get it to the post player.I mean when they lob it up in the air for the post player he jumps and catches it.I have only seen that like 10 times in the last 13 years.

[MaxFly]

yeah..you can....MJ took less shots to get his points than Kobe did even in the higher scoring era and shot a higher percentage...even Wade and Tony Parker can shoot over 50%..why can't Kobe ??...this era is high scoring as well considering what teams like the Nuggets did this year...

Again, we're talking about a different era. Higher tempo, more fast break points, more scoring against defenses that aren't set, play closer to the basket... Wade and Parker shoot above or close to 50% because they score in the paint. What do you think D. Wade would do in 1985 with a more fast paced oriented game?

Relative to some of the years in the 90s, this era is indeed high scoring. You mentioned the Nuggets. The Nuggets this year scored 110.7 points per game and gave up 107 points per game. Basically, the Nuggets, which were second in the league in points per game this year managed to score just as much points as the league average in 1984-1985. In comparison, the second highest scoring team in 1984-1985 averaged 118 points per game that season.

This year, the Warriors were the team that have up the most points per game, allowing opponents to score 108.8 points per game on average this year. So the team that gave up the most points this year of all the teams in the league still managed to give up 2 fewer points than the league average in 1984-1985.

The obvious point here is that this era is not as high scoring as that era, and it's not even comparable to the point where we can say, "well... this era is high scoring too..." :confusedshrug:

[deion2123]

Again, we're talking about a different era. Higher tempo, more fast break points, more scoring against defenses that aren't set, play closer to the basket... Wade and Parker shoot above or close to 50% because they score in the paint. What do you think D. Wade would do in 1985 with a more fast paced oriented game?

Relative to some of the years in the 90s, this era is indeed high scoring. You mentioned the Nuggets. The Nuggets this year scored 110.7 points per game and gave up 107 points per game. Basically, the Nuggets, which were second in the league in points per game this year managed to score just as much points as the league average in 1984-1985. In comparison, the second highest scoring team in 1984-1985 averaged 118 points per game that season.

This year, the Warriors were the team that have up the most points per game, allowing opponents to score 108.8 points per game on average this year. So the team that gave up the most points this year of all the teams in the league still managed to give up 2 fewer points than the league average in 1984-1985.

The obvious point here is that this era is not as high scoring as that era, and it's not even comparable to the point where we can say, "well... this era is high scoring too..." :confusedshrug:
what was the FG % for the 1984-1985 ?? I bet it was higher than it was now...

[MaxFly]

Good points i did notice the game slowing down when i watch 90s games.Mj dominated in the 90s too.he just couldn't be stopped.

Also, remember... other factors affect numbers as well. Look at the minor controversy recently over the types on assists Chris Paul has been getting. We don't know how widespead that problem may be, so the way statitians record assists may very well may be inflating assist numbers in this era... or rebounds for all we know. The point I'm hoping to make is that people should avoid comparing stats so linearly between two such disparate eras.

[juju151111]

Also, remember... other factors affect numbers as well. Look at the minor controversy recently over the types on assists Chris Paul has been getting. We don't know how widespead that problem may be, so the way statitians record assists may very well may be inflating assist numbers in this era... or rebounds for all we know. The point I'm hoping to make is that people should avoid comparing stats so linearly between two such disparate eras.
yep, but cp3 was the same on the road with 11 asts.I dont know about the rebounding tho

[MaxFly]

what was the FG % for the 1984-1985 ?? I bet it was higher than it was now...

Oh, it most certainly was. In 1984-1985, the FG% for the league, on average, was 49.1% and the average fg% in today's league is 45.7%.

Now before guys are quick to say, "See, guys shot better and were better scorers back then," we have to take into account the fact that teams today shoot a little more than 5 and a half times as many threes as teams shot back then, and that three point shooting will drag FG% down. Looking at points per field goal attempt is a better indication of scoring efficiency considering the large disparity in the number of three pointers shot. In 1984-1985, the league average was 1.24 points per FGA. In 2007-2008, the league average was 1.23 points per FGA. There isn't a large disparity.

[MaxFly]

yep, but cp3 was the same on the road with 11 asts.I dont know about the rebounding tho

That's why I don't think the problem, if there really is one (i'm not sure there is), would have to do with the home statitians as some people are saying, but rather the ways statitians today, in general, regard what an assist is. The way statitians are interpreting what is and isn't an asssit could be inflating today's assists stats in comparison to those of the past. That possibility is no where near proven... it's just a possibility that has presented itself recently. I'm just using it to indicate that it's not easy and probably not wise to compare stats across eras in a blanket manner since there are so many factors involved. :confusedshrug:

[Da_Realist]

I'm not sure you can base your argument simply on numbers. We're trying to compare 2008 to 1985, a 23 year span. A lot of changes have occured and there are a lot of differences between the two eras.

For example, teams in 1984-1985 game up 110.8 points per game on average. Teams today give up 99.9 points per game on average. The pace was much different with more fast break basketball and more possessions per game. You cannot accurately support an argument with stats without taking into account the various factors that serve to influence those stats.

I agree up to a point. I don't think stats should be the end-all to every comparison due to a lot of different factors you mentioned in your posts. They do, however, provide some sort of basis when making comparisons. And when they represent a pattern over a large number of years, that provides some context.

For example, Larry Bird shot a lot of jumpshots in his career. His career fg% is 50%. Taken over the length of his career, I would put credence into the thought that he was a very efficient scorer. I don't need to measure the pace of the games or the heat index in each specific arena to believe that. FG% doesn't say everything, but taken over a 13 year career...I would confidently use that stat to back my argument.

You can't really make comparisons between different players that play(ed) in different eras fairly, but we do anyway. Especially on ISH. Therefore we have to use stats to, in part, justify what we believe. Otherwise, everyone on this board would just state opinions without ever being able to back them up.

"Michael was better than Kobe"

"Why?"

"Because."

It's up to us to provide the context of the stats within our arguments. That's when things get interesting here. And that's why I keep reading and posting here.

[MaxFly]

I agree up to a point. I don't think stats should be the end-all to every comparison due to a lot of different factors you mentioned in your posts. They do, however, provide some sort of basis when making comparisons. And when they represent a pattern over a large number of years, that provides some context.

Indeed... the point I'm making is that the stats themselves need context.

Earlier, you said:


You can even argue that MJ had a better rookie year than Kobe did this year, therefore if you slide rookie MJ into this year he may have won the MVP!

2007/08 Kobe -- 28.3 pts, 6.3 rbs, 5.4 asts, 1.8 stls, 0.5 blks, 45.9%
1984/85 MJ -- 28.2 pts, 6.5 rbs, 5.9 asts, 2.4 stls, 0.8 blks, 51.5%


You bolded a few to indicate which stats Jordan won and which Bryant won, furthering the argument that it's arguably that Jordan's rookie season was better than Bryant's present season. Unfortunately, you're comparing stats that have 23 years between, so I'm just providing the context. Someone looking at those stats would say that 28.2 points is 28.2 points, or 6.5 rebounds is 6.5 rebounds and that there's no difference between eras where as that's not the case at all.


For example, Larry Bird shot a lot of jumpshots in his career. His career fg% is 50%. Taken over the length of his career, I would put credence into the thought that he was a very efficient scorer. I don't need to measure the pace of the games or the heat index in each specific arena to believe that. FG% doesn't say everything, but taken over a 13 year career...I would confidently use that stat to back my argument.

Well we're comparing two players at specific times during their careers. Here's an illustration of what I'm talking about.

In 1987-1988, Larry Bird shot 52.7% from the field. Michael Jordan shot 53.5% from the field. Now just looking at those numbers, some would conclude that Larry and Michael shot at a similar efficiency, and some would even conclude that Michael Jordan was a little more efficient. The problem is that Larry took a little more than 4 times as many threes as Jordan did that season. Larry's eFG%, taking into account three point shooting, was 55.6%. Jordan's eFG% was 53.7%. This illustrates why we should try to look at stats while taking context into consideration... even more so when we're comparing stats across eras where different styles were played.


You can't really make comparisons between different players that play(ed) in different eras fairly, but we do anyway. Especially on ISH. Therefore we have to use stats to, in part, justify what we believe.

It's up to us to provide the context of the stats within our arguments. That's when things get interesting here. And that's why I keep reading and posting here.

Agreed, that's why I've brought up the point that Jordan's stats in 1984-1985 in comparison to Bryant's stats this past year don't necessarily indicate that Jordan had a better season.

[VCMVP1551]

but i did start watching it alot earlier than you did

I started watching in 1993, I doubt you watched it much earlier than that.


, and have far greater knowledge than that of yours about anything nba related

:roll: Thanks for the laugh.


i never said he got to the line because of the refs, i said he recieved atleast the same number of favourable calls in '85 as he did when he was a superstar and the numbers provided back that statement up.

No it doesn't. You're forgetting that taking shots uses a lot of energy. The more shots he took the less energy had so he couldn't go to the basket as much per shot. Not to mention his jumper improved a lot from his rookie season to his thread season. He took 8 more shots per game in his 3rd year than he did in his rookie season.


hill does not have a clear advantage. he does have an advantage, but it is only a slight advantage

Pointless argument.


once again :oldlol:..wins don't come into account because you're playing with a great player? that must mean scottie pippen was a nobody, guys like kevin mchale and robert parish were nobody's, kareem was a nobody..infact any player who is the second best player on a championship team is a nobody..this theory makes total sense :hammerhead:

You're an idiot. My point is you can't compare a second options wins to a firrst options wins. You can't hold it against Grant Hill that Kobe won more games because if Kobe and Hill trade places then that laker team probably wins 70 games.



. as for the 12-4 record without kobe? 12 wins will get you the first pick in the lottery

12 wins and 70 losses will but when did they lose 70 games without Kobe? :roll: In fact for the entire 3peat I think the Lakers were 31-6 or 31-7 without Kobe.


who clearly led that team nowhere

And how do you know Kobe could have even led a team to the playoffs at that point in his career?


18.8 compared with 16.2 per 36 by penny vs the lakers is getting torched? did you even watch the finals? kobe guarded miller in that series, and shut him down. jones got lit up for 40 against allen iverson in a game 1 loss that set the trend for an easy round 1 victory for the less talented sixers.

Penny averaged 21.4 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 5.6 apg on 48.7% shooting.

Much higher than his season averages.

Kobe averaged 21.0 ppg, 3.8 rpg, 3.4 apg on 45.2% shooting

Well below his season averages


who cares? you should care considering it does nothing to your argument that he was a better defender. so far you haven't said anything that backs that statement up..i won't hold my breath

I keep backing up my arguments but you are in denial and convinced you are right whcih is really funny. :oldlol:


What is your argument? How is all-defensive first team better than finishing higher in DPOY voting?

Yes


:oldlol: the idea is a pathetic one. kukoc would've averaged 25ppg if he was a first option.

No he wouldn't have. He was the first option on a horrible team right after Jordan retired and he didn't even average 20 ppg. :oldlol:


its slang, so there is no official spelling - get the **** over it

What the f*ck is the point of cutting one f8cking letter out of the word?


never said it'd be bad..it'd be a good team..maybe even a contender..but not a 67 win championship team

And you base that on nothing.


16 games :lol . this team was almost beaten in the first round by sacramento with shaq, kobe, and glen rice in the line up :roll:

And your point is? A lot of teams take a while to get going in the playoffs. The Lakers had homecourt and in reality weren't going to lose that series.


where i get this ****? what do you mean? where do i get plain to see facts from?

:roll:


jordan took it to the rim more because he had no jump shot. once he developed his game more and worked on his jumpshot he became a superstar, bryant already had a three point shot in '00, a year in which he became the youngest player ever to make the 1st team all-defense.

His 1st team all-defense selection wasn't even deserved.

Kobe's 3 point shot wasn't even that good in 2000 either.

[MaxFly]

Incidentally, the conversation between Da_Realist and me is what all these conversations should look like. No one's calling anyone names, getting upset, or making ridiculous claims. We're having a reasoned and respectful discussion about ball without the added drama.

[juju151111]

Incidentally, the conversation between Da_Realist and me is what all these conversations should look like. No one's calling anyone names, getting upset, or making ridiculous claims. We're having a reasoned and respectful discussion about ball without the added drama.
I agree completly.Do you know how hard it is to talk about Mj vs Kobe on any forum without someone just saying nonsense.Anyways i have a question mcfly.Why didn't rebounding decrease for centers in the 90s and 80s?If the game started using more set offense which resulted in less shots wouldn't players rebounding drop?Hakeem and Shaq rebounded the same in 80s,90s,00s.Well they could just be Great rebounders no matter what, but the less shots would of indicate a drop in rebounding right?The same thing can be argued with stls,asts,blks etc...In What ever era Mj was still getting the same amount of stls.This is the reason i think people put too much stack in eras.The only eras that were not advance was the 50s and 60s.You still have to put the basket in the hoop.Also U could just look at Mj shots per gm in his rookie year and Kobe shots per game in his MVP year.

[Da_Realist]

Indeed... the point I'm making is that the stats themselves need context.

Earlier, you said:



You bolded a few to indicate which stats Jordan won and which Bryant won, furthering the argument that it's arguably that Jordan's rookie season was better than Bryant's present season. Unfortunately, you're comparing stats that have 23 years between, so I'm just providing the context. Someone looking at those stats would say that 28.2 points is 28.2 points, or 6.5 rebounds is 6.5 rebounds and that there's no difference between eras where as that's not the case at all.

I agree with this. In fact, I even said I would take Kobe over the rookie MJ because of the experience factor -- something you can't measure by stats.




Well we're comparing two players at specific times during their careers. Here's an illustration of what I'm talking about.

In 1987-1988, Larry Bird shot 52.7% from the field. Michael Jordan shot 53.5% from the field. Now just looking at those numbers, some would conclude that Larry and Michael shot at a similar efficiency, and some would even conclude that Michael Jordan was a little more efficient. The problem is that Larry took a little more than 4 times as many threes as Jordan did that season. Larry's eFG%, taking into account three point shooting, was 55.6%. Jordan's eFG% was 53.7%. This illustrates why we should try to look at stats while taking context into consideration... even more so when we're comparing stats across eras where different styles were played.

I wasn't really comparing Larry to MJ...(2 different positions and all that). But if i were to make a point arguing for MJ I could point out that some people would be more impressed that a 6-6 shooting guard who slashed to the basket and upheld the bulk of the team's offense on his shoulders while also doing a damn good job anchoring the defense could shoot a higher percentage than a world-class player and champion with multiple titles playing on a team that shared the offensive load and wasn't "as much" of a defensive presence. I could argue that. :)


Agreed, that's why I've brought up the point that Jordan's stats in 1984-1985 in comparison to Bryant's stats this past year don't necessarily indicate that Jordan had a better season.

Agreed. It doesn't necessarily say MJ had a better season. It also doesn't necessarily say Kobe had a better season. I'm really just impressed that the guy put up those numbers fresh out of college. Numbers that...taken at face value...could have put him in serious consideration of the MVP this past year. And I'm even more impressed that...in 1985, he didn't and shouldn't have won. Larry Bird's numbers were ridiculous that year. I started watching in 87 (and since have collected dvds of many games prior), so researching the 84/85 season surprised me a little.

[Da_Realist]

Incidentally, the conversation between Da_Realist and me is what all these conversations should look like. No one's calling anyone names, getting upset, or making ridiculous claims. We're having a reasoned and respectful discussion about ball without the added drama.

Agreed. :cheers:

[Shep]

Don't put too much stock into that all defense thing.Tmac got screwed in 02-03 and Mj got the samething in 87.I have watched kobe all this year and i don't understand how he gets it this year.Most of the time they just keep giving u itevery year like the all-star gm
what the hell are you rambling on about? we are talking about 2000 kobe here, and kobe hadn't ever been selected in an all-nba defense team before that season so your argument is mute. and tmac has never been deserving of an all-nba defense birth

LMAO off Mj had 20ft jumper from his rookie season.WTH are u talking about??All he did was take 20ft,16ft jumpers early in his career.If he didn't have those jumpers everyone would of backed off of him so he couldn't drive. http://youtube.com/watch?v=wP-EIeGW4lk&feature=related He had a jumper from 20ft in FACT don't get it twisted.
yes, because 1 game full of jordan highlights is going to accurately show what type of game he had :applause: . i can play this game too: http://youtube.com/watch?v=K-vRqz36iOU 2000 kobe abusing 2nd team all nba defender scottie pippen

I started watching in 1993, I doubt you watched it much earlier than that.
what you doubt doesn't matter

Thanks for the laugh.
you're laughing because of that one quote? i'm in tears with laughter at every word of every response you make

No it doesn't. You're forgetting that taking shots uses a lot of energy. The more shots he took the less energy had so he couldn't go to the basket as much per shot. Not to mention his jumper improved a lot from his rookie season to his thread season. He took 8 more shots per game in his 3rd year than he did in his rookie season.
easily the worst "argument" yet. if getting tired was a factor he wouldn't have played more minutes in the years after his rookie season, but he did

Pointless argument.
:lol

You're an idiot. My point is you can't compare a second options wins to a firrst options wins. You can't hold it against Grant Hill that Kobe won more games because if Kobe and Hill trade places then that laker team probably wins 70 games.
if thats how it is then you also can't compare first option stats to second option stats. you can't hold it against kobe that he only averaged 22ppg because if hill was on the kobe and hill trade places then hill probably averaged 18 ppg

12 wins and 70 losses will but when did they lose 70 games without Kobe?
they only won 12 games without kobe, what would've happened if kobe missed the whole season is heresay

In fact for the entire 3peat I think the Lakers were 31-6 or 31-7 without Kobe.
:roll: another pathetic argument. example of this argument: say in the entire 18 years in utah when they didn't have karl malone they went 1-0. omg this equals 100% win record :roll: ..pathetic

And how do you know Kobe could have even led a team to the playoffs at that point in his career?
because he was a better player

Penny averaged 21.4 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 5.6 apg on 48.7% shooting.

Much higher than his season averages.
his minutes were up, he averages 2 points per 36 better than what he did in the regular season. torched? not exactly :rolleyes:

Kobe averaged 21.0 ppg, 3.8 rpg, 3.4 apg on 45.2% shooting

Well below his season averages
+ a game winning shot. game 5 was a blowout lakers victory, so kobe didn't really need to contribute as much as he had the previous games. first four games: 22ppg, 4.5rpg, 3.5apg, 2.25spg, 1.75bpg on 47% shooting - better than his regular reason numbers. not to mention the lakers would've been 1-1 going into 2 straight away games if it wasn't for kobe.

I keep backing up my arguments but you are in denial and convinced you are right whcih is really funny.
its funny getting clowned post after post? you're a strange individual

Yes
:lol

No he wouldn't have. He was the first option on a horrible team right after Jordan retired and he didn't even average 20 ppg.
you missed the point

What the f*ck is the point of cutting one f8cking letter out of the word?
its one less letter i have to press? what the **** is the point of having the letter "a" in the word "yeah"? dumb ****

And you base that on nothing.
except facts

And your point is? A lot of teams take a while to get going in the playoffs. The Lakers had homecourt and in reality weren't going to lose that series.
:roll: more pathetic statements. the lakers weren't going to lose that series? easy to ****in say 8 years after it happened

:roll:
:lol

His 1st team all-defense selection wasn't even deserved.
who was more deserving and why?

Kobe's 3 point shot wasn't even that good in 2000 either.
it was twice that of michael jordans..you're not doing yourself any favors by saying stupid **** like that

[VCMVP1551]

what you doubt doesn't matter

Well then state your age and tell me when you started watching the NBA.


you're laughing because of that one quote? i'm in tears with laughter at every word of every response you make

Thanks again. :roll:


easily the worst "argument" yet. if getting tired was a factor he wouldn't have played more minutes in the years after his rookie season, but he did

You just backed up my argument. With playing more minutes and taking far more shots it's obvious he'd lose some of the energy necessary to drive to the basket.


if thats how it is then you also can't compare first option stats to second option stats. you can't hold it against kobe that he only averaged 22ppg because if hill was on the kobe and hill trade places then hill probably averaged 18 ppg

You aren't factoring in that as a first option without Shaq Kobe would have faced far more double teams. We don't know how 2000 Kobe would have handled those double teams. Hill's assists also may have gone up with Shaq although his rebounds probably would have been slightly down.


they only won 12 games without kobe, what would've happened if kobe missed the whole season is heresay

Well all the information available points to the team still being very good.


:roll: another pathetic argument. example of this argument: say in the entire 18 years in utah when they didn't have karl malone they went 1-0. omg this equals 100% win record :roll: ..pathetic

Comparing 1 game to 37 or 38? :roll: That's nearly half an NBA season while 1 game means nothing considering there are 81 more and you can get lucky in 1 game.


because he was a better player

Nice complete argument! :roll: Even if he was the better player(which he wasn't) that still doesn't mean he was the better leader. The fact is Kobe at 21 may have not been mature enough to lead a team for 82 games.


his minutes were up, he averages 2 points per 36 better than what he did in the regular season. torched? not exactly :rolleyes:

I don't care about per 36, I care about the points in the boxscore after the game. Penny averaged nearly 6 points over his season average against Kobe while outscoring Bryant so yes he torched him.


+ a game winning shot. game 5 was a blowout lakers victory, so kobe didn't really need to contribute as much as he had the previous games. first four games: 22ppg, 4.5rpg, 3.5apg, 2.25spg, 1.75bpg on 47% shooting - better than his regular reason numbers. not to mention the lakers would've been 1-1 going into 2 straight away games if it wasn't for kobe.

A gamewinning shot is nice and that was in game 2 I believe so that really changed the series because if he misses the series is tied and that shot put the Lakers up 2-0. However one shot doesn't decide who the better player is.

Not to mention Kobe averaged 22.5 ppg over the 22 ppg he averaged those first 4 games, he averaged 6.3 rpg in the regular season which is much better than the 4.5 he averaged in those 4 games, he averaged 4.9 assists in the regular seaosn much better than the 3.5 in those 4 games and he shot 47% in the regular season matching his shooting % from those games.

If you are going by the first 4 games then these are Penny's averages

24.8 ppg, 3.8 rpg, 6.5 apg, 1.8 spg, 1.0 bpg on 53.7% shooting

Those destroy Penny's seaosn averages.


its funny getting clowned post after post? you're a strange individual

I guess if I were you I wouldn't want to face reality either.


you missed the point

Your point was a weak one because Kukoc had a chance to be the first option and averaged 5-6 ppg below what you used as an example on a horrible team.


its one less letter i have to press? what the **** is the point of having the letter "a" in the word "yeah"? dumb ****

Because "yeh" sounds f*cking retarted.


except facts

What facts? The fact is that the Lakers went 12-3 without Kobe with Shaq in the lineup. So the fairly small sample we have of the 2000 Lakers without Kobe shows they were a good team during that stretch. That is the only thing to base how good they would ahve been without Kobe, everything else is just guessing.


:roll: more pathetic statements. the lakers weren't going to lose that series? easy to ****in say 8 years after it happened

It was obvious. The Lakers were at home with the best player and they had the much better team. Didn't Shaq have a 30-20 game and the Lakers won easily?


who was more deserving and why?

Eddie Jones because he was easily the best perimeter defender back then and his only competition for that title was Scottie Pippen. Jones could shut down a good scorer much more often than Kobe. Kobe got torched by several players who weren't exactly Allen Iverson.


it was twice that of michael jordans..you're not doing yourself any favors by saying stupid **** like that

And Jordan's driving game was more than twice that of Kobe's.

[juju151111]

what the hell are you rambling on about? we are talking about 2000 kobe here, and kobe hadn't ever been selected in an all-nba defense team before that season so your argument is mute. and tmac has never been deserving of an all-nba defense birth

yes, because 1 game full of jordan highlights is going to accurately show what type of game he had :applause: . i can play this game too: http://youtube.com/watch?v=K-vRqz36iOU 2000 kobe abusing 2nd team all nba defender scottie pippen

what you doubt doesn't matter

you're laughing because of that one quote? i'm in tears with laughter at every word of every response you make

easily the worst "argument" yet. if getting tired was a factor he wouldn't have played more minutes in the years after his rookie season, but he did

:lol

if thats how it is then you also can't compare first option stats to second option stats. you can't hold it against kobe that he only averaged 22ppg because if hill was on the kobe and hill trade places then hill probably averaged 18 ppg

they only won 12 games without kobe, what would've happened if kobe missed the whole season is heresay

:roll: another pathetic argument. example of this argument: say in the entire 18 years in utah when they didn't have karl malone they went 1-0. omg this equals 100% win record :roll: ..pathetic

because he was a better player

his minutes were up, he averages 2 points per 36 better than what he did in the regular season. torched? not exactly :rolleyes:

+ a game winning shot. game 5 was a blowout lakers victory, so kobe didn't really need to contribute as much as he had the previous games. first four games: 22ppg, 4.5rpg, 3.5apg, 2.25spg, 1.75bpg on 47% shooting - better than his regular reason numbers. not to mention the lakers would've been 1-1 going into 2 straight away games if it wasn't for kobe.

its funny getting clowned post after post? you're a strange individual

:lol

you missed the point

its one less letter i have to press? what the **** is the point of having the letter "a" in the word "yeah"? dumb ****

except facts

:roll: more pathetic statements. the lakers weren't going to lose that series? easy to ****in say 8 years after it happened

:lol

who was more deserving and why?

it was twice that of michael jordans..you're not doing yourself any favors by saying stupid **** like that
LOL I was talking about Kobe this year.I said people make the all defense team because they made it the year before.U obviously never watched tmac in 03.He played the best one on one defense while getting 100 blks and 100 stls.
I wasn't posting the highlights to show off MJ rookie season.I was posting it to show u he had a jumper from 20ft since his rookie year.If he didn't people would of just backed off him so he couldn't drive.

[ukplayer4]

however bad kobes all deffensive selection was this year it pales in comparisson to last year when he openely admitted publicly a number of times that he wasnt playing good deffense cause the offensive load was such that he needed to conserve energy on deffense.

kobe himself wouldnt have even selected himself to an all deffensive team last year, total proof that these things are done off reputation, an utter farce of the highest order....

[juju151111]

however bad kobes all deffensive selection was this year it pales in comparisson to last year when he openely admitted publicly a number of times that he wasnt playing good deffense cause the offensive load was such that he needed to conserve energy on deffense.

kobe himself wouldnt have even selected himself to an all deffensive team last year, total proof that these things are done off reputation, an utter farce of the highest order....
exactly this guy shep things he should get it even if he isn't playing defense.Look shep is just a homer.Look how shaq almost gets voted in the all star game when he out of his prime.It's nonsense really.Mj didn't have a reputation of a defensive player in 87, but he played great defnse yet he was critized for scoring too much and not playing defense.The following year He did the same exact thing, but the media just started noticing and he got DPOTY.Thats BS.Why isn't Ron artest on the team every year.I watch him and he plays way better defense then even bowen, but because bowen is on the spurs he gets reconized.I gurentee u if artest was on the spurs and was winning chips he would be on the all-defensive team.

[MaxFly]

I wasn't really comparing Larry to MJ...(2 different positions and all that). But if i were to make a point arguing for MJ I could point out that some people would be more impressed that a 6-6 shooting guard who slashed to the basket and upheld the bulk of the team's offense on his shoulders while also doing a damn good job anchoring the defense could shoot a higher percentage than a world-class player and champion with multiple titles playing on a team that shared the offensive load and wasn't "as much" of a defensive presence. I could argue that. :)

You make a few good points. What I was saying was that someone who looks at stats without taking into account any additional context may inaccurately interpret those stats... but I think we agree on that point.

I think in the same way, when we compare stats from 85 and 2008 without looking at the style of basketball played in those eras and some of the other factors that may affect those stats, we may end up applying those stats inaccurately to our arguments. We may come to conclusions that we think those stats support though the stats themselves are skewed.


Agreed. It doesn't necessarily say MJ had a better season. It also doesn't necessarily say Kobe had a better season. I'm really just impressed that the guy put up those numbers fresh out of college. Numbers that...taken at face value...could have put him in serious consideration of the MVP this past year.

But here's the problem... How do we know that he would put up those numbers in this day and age. The stark numbers themselves translate well, but there are questions as to whether a rookie Jordan would be able to recreate them now. A player like Jordan is built to exploit that eras fast paced style of basketball, and I think his numbers from that era reflect that somewhat.

[dawsey6]

I would take current Kobe over rookie Jordan. Even though it could be argued that Michael was a better player, a superstar 11 years of NBA experience along with championship experience will beat out a superstar in the developing stages in the developing stages. There's no way to replace veteran leadership when you're that good of a player.

[MaxFly]

I agree completly.Do you know how hard it is to talk about Mj vs Kobe on any forum without someone just saying nonsense.Anyways i have a question mcfly.Why didn't rebounding decrease for centers in the 90s and 80s?If the game started using more set offense which resulted in less shots wouldn't players rebounding drop?Hakeem and Shaq rebounded the same in 80s,90s,00s.Well they could just be Great rebounders no matter what, but the less shots would of indicate a drop in rebounding right?

This is a good question.

The reason rebounding didn't see a significant decrease for centers is that the number of rebounds available per game didn't see a significant decrease. Normally, you'd think... well, fewer shots taken per game would mean fewer rebounds available... but the answer lies in why there were fewer shots taken per game; defenses got better and made it more difficult to score, and especially to do so, quickly. As a result, though the number of shots decreased, the number of missed shots stayed relatively the same. In 1985, teams, on average, missed 3,718 shots per year. In 2008, teams, on average, missed 3627 shots a year. That's a difference of about 1.1 fewer missed shots a game per team. Also, remember that teams are taking more threes now than back then, and the three is, by it's very nature, a lower percentage shot.

I'd also add that because teams in the 80s played such a faster pace of basketball, centers didn't always get back to rebound fast break misses or quick shots.


The same thing can be argued with stls,asts,blks etc...In What ever era Mj was still getting the same amount of stls.This is the reason i think people put too much stack in eras.The only eras that were not advance was the 50s and 60s.You still have to put the basket in the hoop.Also U could just look at Mj shots per gm in his rookie year and Kobe shots per game in his MVP year.

If I told you that next season, Lebron would only play high scoring teams and teams that gave up a lot of points like the Suns, Nuggets, Warriors and Grizzlies, do you think there would be a good chance that that would affect his numbers?

[Da_Realist]

But here's the problem... How do we know that he would put up those numbers in this day and age. The stark numbers themselves translate well, but there are questions as to whether a rookie Jordan would be able to recreate them now. A player like Jordan is built to exploit that eras fast paced style of basketball, and I think his numbers from that era reflect that somewhat.

My personal opinion is that it would be easier for the young slashing MJ to score with with the loss of handchecking and physicality along with the addition of the 3-second defensive rule. Here's an excerpt from an old Scottie Pippen article that gives his point of view on the differences in the eras (one that I agree with)...




NBA.com blog archive (http://www.nba.com/blog/blog30.html)

Can't Compare Kobe and MJ
The eras in which they played are completely different
Kobe Bryant's 81-point performance the other night against Toronto was certainly incredible, but it is unfair to try and compare what Kobe did to what Michael Jordan did in his playing career or what he could have done for that matter.

In the era when Michael played, it was a physical game. Defense was promoted. Guys took pride in it. Today defense is no longer a part of the game. Guys are driving to the basket. There are rules where you can't step in front of them. To me, it is taking away from the game seeing a guy like Tony Parker taking advantage of the rules. He is shooting 55 percent from the field. That says something about the game itself. In the history of the NBA, I'm sure a point guard has never led the league in field goal percentage. It's a different game now. It's really not about being tough and physical because the NBA isn't a physical game anymore. When you talk about how the Knicks and Bulls used to battle in the early '90s, the Oakleys, and Pat Ewings, the Masons, and how they would have the ability to use their hands to put you in a trap position. There is no way you can even triple team a guy now and stop him. Any contact is a foul. I can't compare the two players because I see it as two different games. If I'm guarding Kobe Bryant in today's game, I couldn't be the defender I was known as.

The defensive rules, the hand checking, the ability to make contact on a guy in certain areas, the ability to come over in the lane to stop guys from getting to the basket, that's all been taken away from the game. There is no contact up on the floor. The way I played Magic Johnson in the '91 Finals, I would have fouled out the first time down court. To compare how someone would have played Michael Jordan, Chuck Daly would send someone to wear him down. Even though he may get 30 or 40 points, they're going to be a hard 30 points. But in today's game, you can't put that physical wear and tear on a guy. It's a free ball type of game. If you are shooting it well, you can score 80, as you've seen because you are going to get to the foul line.

Officials have very quick whistles now because they're promoting scoring. Let's not forget, three years ago, this league was trying to figure out how they could get the scoring back up, how they could drive the fans back into loving the game, and this is what they were building on. They changed the field of rules. Those rules are huge in the game today. They benefit the perimeter guy. Back in the day, you may get one guy to score 40 points in a month. When Michael Jordan scored 40, it was all over the front page of a newspaper. Now you can pretty much have 40 points at halftime. Until the league went and changed the rules and tried to get some of that bully ball out, you couldn't come out and perform like that every night. The game was too physical. You were too sore the next day and you were just tired and physically worn down. The game seems so fun and free now. Guys are making a living just standing out there shooting jumpers.

If you want to say that Kobe could get 100, I would say that Michael could get 100. If Kobe could get 81, I think Michael could get 100 in today's game. I think the psychological style that Michael was able to master in the game, puts him far beyond Kobe. But Kobe's youthfulness has put him in a position where it looks like he is overtaking Michael. Kobe has 10 years in this league. That is a lot of experience to have and still be a very youthful player.

I would love to see what would have happened the other night if the rules had been the same as in past years. Kobe is as close to being like Mike as anybody, but you can't make the comparisons anymore. Tracy McGrady can probably, from a numbers standpoint, put up the numbers Michael Jordan put up. He has that type of ability. Dirk Nowitzki can put up those kinds of numbers. The game is built for those guys to put those shots up. If they get touched, they get to the foul line. I would say Kobe is the most polished of all of them as far as being able to handle the ball and create his own shot and opportunity. But this is what the game is going to turn into. Guys are going to start to score 40 points regularly. It may become an average.

I don't think Kobe will get 100. What he did is what like Wilt did, a once in a lifetime experience. Given the fact that he shot a heck of a percentage it could have been better, but I don't think he still could have gotten to 100. It would almost have to be perfect and the game would have to go to overtime. I think a lot of things would have to come into play for him to get that.

With that said, I am sure Phil doesn't want to coach that type of game. It's not his style. I don't expect it to happen again. Phil will probably do everything in his power to make sure it doesn't. I don't think Phil is going to try to promote what Kobe has done more than anything because he has damaged his whole team. You just scored 81 points. Do you need your teammates? Are they going to step up when you need them or are you going to continue to pound them like you've been doing and be selfish just to get some individual accolades?

From a leadership perspective I think Kobe has taken a step back. Look at what he has to live up to now. You just scored 81 points. If you scored 81 points, your team should pretty much go out and win at least 75 percent of their games the rest of the year. Is that fair to say? You just compared yourself to Wilt. Can you go out with your team and do that or are you just going to go out and score tons of points every night? Are you going to get back to the point where you are shooting a lot of shots and you're teammates are not shooting and you're losing?

Right now, Kobe has willed the Lakers to a 22-19 record. It will be interesting to see what happens the rest of the way.
Posted by Scottie Pippen - Jan 24 2006 4:28PM

[KenneBell]

This thread is just going in circles. :oldlol:

I really don't see how you can compare the two at those points in their careers. Kobe of '08 vs Jordan from '92 or '93 would make much more sense in terms of age, game, and overall basketball intelligence.

[MaxFly]

My personal opinion is that it would be easier for the young slashing MJ to score with with the loss of handchecking and physicality along with the addition of the 3-second defensive rule. Here's an excerpt from an old Scottie Pippen article that gives his point of view on the differences in the eras (one that I agree with)...

I think that with the slower game, prevalance of half court defenses and offenses, prevalance of shading, and the doing away of true isolation plays, young Jordan would not have put up the scoring numbers that he did his rookie season. Again, that fast paced full court era catered to players with Jordan's skill and talent.

As his career went on, Jordan improved his mid range game in order to adapt to the slower, half court style of play.

Notice how Scottie doesn't mention that the average team back in 1984 averaged 10 more points a game than teams do now. He doesn't mention that the game was faster... that it was easier for slashers to take advantage of the full court game, attacking defenses before they were set... basically, If I'm to take what Scottie said at face value, I have to believe that teams back in 1984 who gave up 110 points a game on average, made it more difficult to score than teams today that give up 100 points.

[juju151111]

This is a good question.

The reason rebounding didn't see a significant decrease for centers is that the number of rebounds available per game didn't see a significant decrease. Normally, you'd think... well, fewer shots taken per game would mean fewer rebounds available... but the answer lies in why there were fewer shots taken per game; defenses got better and made it more difficult to score, and especially to do so, quickly. As a result, though the number of shots decreased, the number of missed shots stayed relatively the same. In 1985, teams, on average, missed 3,718 shots per year. In 2008, teams, on average, missed 3627 shots a year. That's a difference of about 1.1 fewer missed shots a game per team. Also, remember that teams are taking more threes now than back then, and the three is, by it's very nature, a lower percentage shot.

I'd also add that because teams in the 80s played such a faster pace of basketball, centers didn't always get back to rebound fast break misses or quick shots.



If I told you that next season, Lebron would only play high scoring teams and teams that gave up a lot of points like the Suns, Nuggets, Warriors and Grizzlies, do you think there would be a good chance that that would affect his numbers?
I know it would affect his stats, but not everyone back then was a fast break team.Mj knew how to stl the ball in his era and he did the same thing in this era.When he was 40 he got 123 stls, but playing in only 67 games and was injured.My point was If u know how to rebound,stl,blk u still get the same stats in this era.My point is if u take Kobe and put him in the 80s and early 90s he won't start averging 2 stls a gm because he doesn't have the anticipation like say iverson does.How would players know play in that era??They complain about every touch foul on the perimeter and get calls for handchecking.I also think old skool players will have a hard time adjusting to the new rules and some defenders who were great back trhen would be subpar know.Dumars could move his feet good, but he relied on shoving Mj alot to tire him out.How would would Mj play if he doesn't get touched on the perimeter?

[juju151111]

I think that with the slower game, prevalance of half court defenses and offenses, prevalance of shading, and the doing away of true isolation plays, young Jordan would not have put up the scoring numbers that he did his rookie season. Again, that fast paced full court era catered to players with Jordan's skill and talent.

As his career went on, Jordan improved his mid range game in order to adapt to the slower, half court style of play.

Notice how Scottie doesn't mention that the average team back in 1984 averaged 10 more points a game than teams do now. He doesn't mention that the game was faster... that it was easier for slashers to take advantage of the full court game, attacking defenses before they were set... basically, If I'm to take what Scottie said at face value, I have to believe that teams back in 1984 who gave up 110 points a game on average, made it more difficult to score than teams today that give up 100 points.
Dwade put up 28ppg and could barley shoot from 16ft.Mj has a rookie had a game 18ft and in.Dwade in this era just like Mj did.Gong hard to the basket with no fear of getting hit to the ground.So u would believe wade can averge 28ppg playing this style, but Mj couldn't.Mj tried to improve his game every year.He didn't do it because he thought the way the game was played was going to change.The resason he worked on his jumpers so much after his first retirement is because he was not has explosive anymore.

[MaxFly]

I know it would affect his stats, but not everyone back then was a fast break team.

Granted, not every team back then was a fast break team by design, but the vast majority of them were... and even the stingiest teams back then, those that gave up the fewest number of points, still gave up a lot of points. In 1984 the Bucks were the team to allow the fewest number of points per game... they gave up 104 points per game.



Mj knew how to stl the ball in his era and he did the same thing in this era.When he was 40 he got 123 stls, but playing in only 67 games and was injured.My point was If u know how to rebound,stl,blk u still get the same stats in this era.My point is if u take Kobe and put him in the 80s and early 90s he won't start averging 2 stls a gm because he doesn't have the anticipation like say iverson does.

I don't think he would necessarily average more steals, but he'd likely average slightly more rebounds a game playing closer to the basket and certainly more points on a better fg%.


How would players know play in that era??They complain about every touch foul on the perimeter and get calls for handchecking.

How would Lebron react to a true iso where defenders couldn't roam and you either had to commit to the double or not... oh, and you couldn't double until you had the ball in your hands. Of course players argue now given the contact and the rules, but if the rules change, they'll adapt to the rules.


I also think old skool players will have a hard time adjusting to the new rules and some defenders who were great back trhen would be subpar know.Dumars could move his feet good, but he relied on shoving Mj alot to tire him out.How would would Mj play if he doesn't get touched on the perimeter?

I think MJ would be great regardless... my question is how a rookie MJ would play in a half court defense where he could be doubled even without the ball, where there were fewer fast break opportunities, and where he couldn't run isolation plays.

[MaxFly]

Dwade put up 28ppg and could barley shoot from 16ft.Mj has a rookie had a game 18ft and in.Dwade in this era just like Mj did.Gong hard to the basket with no fear of getting hit to the ground.So u would believe wade can averge 28ppg playing this style, but Mj couldn't.Mj tried to improve his game every year.He didn't do it because he thought the way the game was played was going to change.The resason he worked on his jumpers so much after his first retirement is because he was not has explosive anymore.

D. Wade highest average was 27.4 points a game but he also saw a lot of single coverage because of Shaq and the great shooters he had on the team. Put D. Wade in a full court system in 1984 and he would have done even better because that kind of play caters to his strengths as a player.

[Poseidon]

http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj135/JWA2_18/kobe.jpg

[juju151111]

Granted, not every team back then was a fast break team by design, but the vast majority of them were... and even the stingiest teams back then, those that gave up the fewest number of points, still gave up a lot of points. In 1984 the Bucks were the team to allow the fewest number of points per game... they gave up 104 points per game.




I don't think he would necessarily average more steals, but he'd likely average slightly more rebounds a game playing closer to the basket and certainly more points on a better fg%.



How would Lebron react to a true iso where defenders couldn't roam and you either had to commit to the double or not... oh, and you couldn't double until you had the ball in your hands. Of course players argue now given the contact and the rules, but if the rules change, they'll adapt to the rules.



I think MJ would be great regardless... my question is how a rookie MJ would play in a half court defense where he could be doubled even without the ball, where there were fewer fast break opportunities, and where he couldn't run isolation plays.
People know don't double until u have the ball.I have league pass and i watch alot of gms i don't see people getting doubled until they get the ball.I have seen it probably 3 or 4 times the whole season when a team went to some kind 1-2 zone.I never seen a team stay in zone defense for more then a Q.They always switch back cause it not that affective.The only time i seen somebody doubled somebody like that was when melo had 40pts and they doubled him before he had the ball so he couldn't get 50.

Kobe FG% would stay the same.Kobe will still be Kobe the guy who takes 3s in a bunch and jumpers in a bunch.players back then took mostly mid range or going to the basket.I was watchin nba classic and they had celtics vs someone(I forget) and it was the ECF and bird made a 3.The commentator said it was bird first 3 of the playoffs.I was shocked because he was one of the better 3 pt shooters.
Why do u keep saying people don't run isolation plays.Watch the end of a close BB.They do it every freaking time.LJ or Kobe gets the ball up top and his shooters stay in the corner.The only time they come double is if they drive whuch they did in the 80s and 90s too.Look at LJ in the finals last year when he missed the gm winner.I have seen plenty of iso.If a player is hot they do it like crazy.All u need was two guys who could take 3s so they don't double (paxton/pip).I don't see no double comin.Also if u know Mj u would know he would shoot way before the double comes.He freaking has some kind of spider sense.I have seen him back down someone a turnaround shot when he wasn't looking and in the post game interview he said he felt the double comin and in the replay he wasn't looking.

[juju151111]

D. Wade highest average was 27.4 points a game but he also saw a lot of single coverage because of Shaq and the great shooters he had on the team. Put D. Wade in a full court system in 1984 and he would have done even better because that kind of play caters to his strengths as a player.
he would of had to do that with handchecking rules and no 3 second rule with the centers.Also are u saying dwade can't averge 27ppg without shaq??Every player have great shooters around them so i don't count them, but u saying d wade can't averge 27ppg without shaq is interesting.Dwade will be injury free next season lets see if ur claim happens because i know for a fact Dwade can averge 27 ppg without shaq.

[juju151111]

http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj135/JWA2_18/kobe.jpg
I know Kobe we all want to be LIKE MIKE http://photobucket.com/image/kobe%20bulls/rceballos10/KobeBryant-Bulls.jpg?o=3

[wang4three]

Jordan's walk-on at Illinois son Jeffrey or Kobe's wife. WHO WINS
Jeff's the man!!!!!!!

http://www.illinoisloyalty.com/i/20071012/illini-basketball-madness-377.JPG
http://bp0.blogger.com/_Cr3eftbZPZk/RzYS_P1I9HI/AAAAAAAABXc/TyyIn_WiYWk/s400/michaeljordan-1.jpg


Go Illini!!!

[MaxFly]

he would of had to do that with handchecking rules and no 3 second rule with the centers.Also are u saying dwade can't averge 27ppg without shaq??

He would also have had to do it in an era that catered to his strengths as a player... his quickness, his slashing ability. Handchecking isn't going to stop Dwyane Wade in the open court.

And yes, I think D. Wade would find it hard to average 27 a game on close to 50% shooting without Shaq, given the way he plays.


Dwade will be injury free next season lets see if ur claim happens because i know for a fact Dwade can averge 27 ppg without shaq.

I think D. Wade can continue to average 27 without Shaq. I don't think he can do it at the efficiency he does it given the way he plays and how teams defend him. If he works on his mid-range game, we'll see. Keep in mind that D. Wade isn't a rookie. Would Jordan average 28 points a game on nearly 50% shooting in his rookie year?

[juju151111]

He would also have had to do it in an era that catered to his strengths as a player... his quickness, his slashing ability. Handchecking isn't going to stop Dwyane Wade in the open court.

And yes, I think D. Wade would find it hard to average 27 a game on close to 50% shooting without Shaq, given the way he plays.



I think D. Wade can continue to average 27 without Shaq. I don't think he can do it at the efficiency he does it given the way he plays and how teams defend him. If he works on his mid-range game, we'll see. Keep in mind that D. Wade isn't a rookie. Would Jordan average 28 points a game on nearly 50% shooting in his rookie year?
I think he can averge around the same thing.What are u talking about??They will rotate just like they do today and play off of him.
Once again MJ had a 18ft and 20ft jumper from his rookie season.D wade jumper in 06 was equal to mj jumper in his rookie season.Wade rookie season he couldn't shoot for crap.I think d wade will averge 26-8 ppg and 48-50% next season.

[dhenk]

Are you happy, Kobe?

Happy to trick the little kids into believing you would be anything close to MJ?

Let them watch Naruto, and get the hell out of my TV.

Goodness gracious, to even compare them is laughable...:ohwell:

You can list stats and arguments all the way you want, but answer me one question:

How did MJ manage to give me goosebumps with his game, when Kobe brings nothing more than a bored look on my face?

And I`m not a MJ groupie. My vote for GOAT goes to Larry Bird.

Gosh, kids nowadays...

[Shep]

looks like you've had another productive weekend :oldlol:

Well then state your age and tell me when you started watching the NBA.
23. 1987

Thanks again.
:confusedshrug:

You just backed up my argument. With playing more minutes and taking far more shots it's obvious he'd lose some of the energy necessary to drive to the basket.
if he had energy to shoot alot more shots he would've had the energy to drive to the basket

You aren't factoring in that as a first option without Shaq Kobe would have faced far more double teams. We don't know how 2000 Kobe would have handled those double teams. Hill's assists also may have gone up with Shaq although his rebounds probably would have been slightly down.
kobe recently averaged 35.4ppg with no other offensive force on the team, i'm sure he'd be capable of 28 or even 30ppg on that piston team

Well all the information available points to the team still being very good.
but not of championship caliber

Comparing 1 game to 37 or 38? That's nearly half an NBA season while 1 game means nothing considering there are 81 more and you can get lucky in 1 game.
he missed 16 games one year. this is in no way something that would carry on for 82 games and into the playoffs. shaq needed kobe

Nice complete argument!
it wasn't an argument, it was a statement

Even if he was the better player(which he wasn't) that still doesn't mean he was the better leader. The fact is Kobe at 21 may have not been mature enough to lead a team for 82 games.
well he couldn't possibly have done worse than what hill accomplished that year

I don't care about per 36, I care about the points in the boxscore after the game. Penny averaged nearly 6 points over his season average against Kobe while outscoring Bryant so yes he torched him.
obviously if someone plays more minutes than what they usually do they are going to average more points, which is obviously what happened in this situation, and he only averaged 2 points more than what he would've if he played his regular minutes..its not rocket science.

A gamewinning shot is nice and that was in game 2 I believe so that really changed the series because if he misses the series is tied and that shot put the Lakers up 2-0. However one shot doesn't decide who the better player is.
i know, i decide who is the better player

Not to mention Kobe averaged 22.5 ppg over the 22 ppg he averaged those first 4 games, he averaged 6.3 rpg in the regular season which is much better than the 4.5 he averaged in those 4 games, he averaged 4.9 assists in the regular seaosn much better than the 3.5 in those 4 games and he shot 47% in the regular season matching his shooting % from those games.
the 2.25spg over the 1.6spg and the 1.75bpg over the 0.9spg make his numbers better overall

If you are going by the first 4 games then these are Penny's averages

24.8 ppg, 3.8 rpg, 6.5 apg, 1.8 spg, 1.0 bpg on 53.7% shooting

Those destroy Penny's seaosn averages.

the first four games weren't the suns most important games. in the most important game in the suns season (game 5 elimination game) penny went a disgusting 1-9 with only 3 rebounds and 2 assists in 40 minutes in a blowout loss

I guess if I were you I wouldn't want to face reality either.
that didn't make any sense

Your point was a weak one because Kukoc had a chance to be the first option and averaged 5-6 ppg below what you used as an example on a horrible team.
all your points are weak/baseless. there is no point saying glen rice would've averaged this if he was the second option instead of the third

Because "yeh" sounds f*cking retarted.
yeh sounds retarded? say "yeh", then say "yeah"..they sound the ****in same you dumb ****

What facts? The fact is that the Lakers went 12-3 without Kobe with Shaq in the lineup. So the fairly small sample we have of the 2000 Lakers without Kobe shows they were a good team during that stretch. That is the only thing to base how good they would ahve been without Kobe, everything else is just guessing.
these are the facts: shaq hadn't yet won a championship, the lakers went on 16 and 19 game win streaks with kobe and shaq both playing, and common sense playes a big role too. the lakers were obviously much stronger with kobe, and he proved to be huge at huge moments..game 7 of the portland series for example: he totally outplayed shaq and led the lakers into the finals with a line of 25/11/7 with 4 blocks.

It was obvious. The Lakers were at home with the best player and they had the much better team. Didn't Shaq have a 30-20 game and the Lakers won easily?
what you thought was obvious was obviously thrown out the door when the eighth seed split the first two games with the 67 win lakers.

Eddie Jones because he was easily the best perimeter defender back then and his only competition for that title was Scottie Pippen. Jones could shut down a good scorer much more often than Kobe. Kobe got torched by several players who weren't exactly Allen Iverson.
another baseless argument. "jones is easily the best perimiter defender" shut the **** up. give me reasons you little smelly boy

And Jordan's driving game was more than twice that of Kobe's.
kobe's clutch game, defense, wins, and all-round smarts were all better than jordans

[Da_Realist]

Well then state your age and tell me when you started watching the NBA.


23. 1987

You're 23? That means you were either born in 1984 or 1985. How the hell you start watching basketball (and know what you were looking at) when you were 2 or 3 years old?

That must be sarcasm. :confusedshrug:

[VCMVP1551]

23. 1987

So you remember watching the NBA at 2 years old? :roll:


if he had energy to shoot alot more shots he would've had the energy to drive to the basket

Yes he was driving to the basket more getting to the free throw line 3 more times per game in 1987 than he was in his rookie year but because of all the extra shots the ratio might not be better.


kobe recently averaged 35.4ppg with no other offensive force on the team, i'm sure he'd be capable of 28 or even 30ppg on that piston team

First of all 2006 Kobe was much more polished in every way. Look at the improvement in his 3 point shot, post game and he was even much stronger not to mention how the change in the handechking rule helped perimeter scorers so Kobe's 2005-2006 season is irrelevant to his 1999-2000 season.


but not of championship caliber

What information points to that?


he missed 16 games one year. this is in no way something that would carry on for 82 games and into the playoffs. shaq needed kobe

He needed him? That's why he kept winning at a great rate while he was out. Kobe was actually out to start that season so Shaq got the season started very strongly winning all of those games without Bryant. Shaq did need Kobe in 2002 to win the championship without a doubt and possibly 2001 but not 2000.


it wasn't an argument, it was a statement

So you counter my argument with a statement? :oldlol:


well he couldn't possibly have done worse than what hill accomplished that year

Yes he could have done far worse than 42-40. Kobe's Lakers finished what 34-48 in 2004-2005? Bryant was much better at that point than he was in 2000 and he missed the exact same amount of games.


obviously if someone plays more minutes than what they usually do they are going to average more points, which is obviously what happened in this situation, and he only averaged 2 points more than what he would've if he played his regular minutes..its not rocket science.

However when you are a top 2 player on your team then playing more minutes is helping your team. Penny playing more minutes than Kobe shouldn't be held against him. The bottom line is he scored more and had better assist numbers while shooting a better %. That's being more productive.


i know, i decide who is the better player

:roll:


the 2.25spg over the 1.6spg and the 1.75bpg over the 0.9spg make his numbers better overall

No that doesn't make up for the 1.8 drop in rpg, the 1.4 drop in apg and the 0.5 drop in ppg.


the first four games weren't the suns most important games. in the most important game in the suns season (game 5 elimination game) penny went a disgusting 1-9 with only 3 rebounds and 2 assists in 40 minutes in a blowout loss

Yeah and even with that terrible game it wasn't enough to bring his averages down below Kobe's.


all your points are weak/baseless. there is no point saying glen rice would've averaged this if he was the second option instead of the third

Why not? You just said Kobe would've averaged 28 or 30 ppg as a first option on that Piston team.


yeh sounds retarded? say "yeh", then say "yeah"..they sound the ****in same you dumb ****

No it doesn't sound the same you f*cking moron.


these are the facts: shaq hadn't yet won a championship, the lakers went on 16 and 19 game win streaks with kobe and shaq both playing, and common sense playes a big role too. the lakers were obviously much stronger with kobe, and he proved to be huge at huge moments..game 7 of the portland series for example: he totally outplayed shaq and led the lakers into the finals with a line of 25/11/7 with 4 blocks.

I never said they'd be better without Kobe I just said they would still be a great team without him.


what you thought was obvious was obviously thrown out the door when the eighth seed split the first two games with the 67 win lakers.

A weaker team can get a few fluke wins especially in a 5 game series but when it comes down to the deciding game at home and you have by far the best team, by far the best player and the best coach then there is no chance that they are losing that game.


another baseless argument. "jones is easily the best perimiter defender" shut the **** up. give me reasons you little smelly boy

Little smelly boy???? wtf :roll: That was your worst insult yet.

I told you. Unlike Kobe, Jones could be counted on to shut down elite perimeter scorers while Kobe was lit up more often.

You give me reasons why Kobe was the better defender.


kobe's clutch game, defense, wins, and all-round smarts were all better than jordans

Kobe looked better because of his role. He got to be the second option on a team with by far the best player in the league at the time and the best coach. Give Jordan that situation and I guarantee his smarts look better, defense and clutch game look better.

With Phil and Shaq, rookie Jordan would play with a dominant first option and he wouldn't face that many double teams meaning he'd have to do less and thus turn the ball over much less, force less poor shots and pass the ball more. Rookie Jordan's defense would also improve because he'd be playing under an elite defensive coach and with Shaq who finished 2nd in DPOY voting and was maybe the most intimidating player of all time. As for his clutch game well with the attention Shaq drew Jordan would have more space to make his move and less pressure considering he wasn't the first option. Not to mention a great coach like Phil can draw up plays that would help rookie Jordan more.


You're 23? That means you were either born in 1984 or 1985. How the hell you start watching basketball (and know what you were looking at) when you were 2 or 3 years old?

That must be sarcasm. :confusedshrug:

Nothing Shep ever says is based on logic so I'm afraid he is probably serious as sad as that sounds.

[Shep]

You're 23? That means you were either born in 1984 or 1985. How the hell you start watching basketball (and know what you were looking at) when you were 2 or 3 years old?

That must be sarcasm.
my older brother use to watch games all the time and i remember always being around him, whatever he did i did, so i watched nba

So you remember watching the NBA at 2 years old?
yes

Yes he was driving to the basket more getting to the free throw line 3 more times per game in 1987 than he was in his rookie year but because of all the extra shots the ratio might not be better.
all the extra shots should've led to a better free throw ratio than his rookie season, especially considering he was a superstar from his third year

First of all 2006 Kobe was much more polished in every way. Look at the improvement in his 3 point shot, post game and he was even much stronger not to mention how the change in the handechking rule helped perimeter scorers so Kobe's 2005-2006 season is irrelevant to his 1999-2000 season.
2000 kobe was a much better rebounder, passer, and defender, and he also took better care of the ball. the shooting percentages were basically the same, and the only real statistic he had on 2000 kobe was ppg. kobe bryant was still kobe bryant.

What information points to that?
common sense

He needed him? That's why he kept winning at a great rate while he was out. Kobe was actually out to start that season so Shaq got the season started very strongly winning all of those games without Bryant. Shaq did need Kobe in 2002 to win the championship without a doubt and possibly 2001 but not 2000.
wow. you've just gone on record saying that the lakers would beat sacramento, portland, and indiana, all without kobe bryant in 2000. how do you feel? :roll:

So you counter my argument with a statement?
argument? you never had an argument :roll:

Yes he could have done far worse than 42-40. Kobe's Lakers finished what 34-48 in 2004-2005? Bryant was much better at that point than he was in 2000 and he missed the exact same amount of games.
2005 kobe was nowhere near the player he was in 2000

However when you are a top 2 player on your team then playing more minutes is helping your team. Penny playing more minutes than Kobe shouldn't be held against him. The bottom line is he scored more and had better assist numbers while shooting a better %. That's being more productive.
no, it shouldn't be held against kobe 2 of the 4 victories were blowout wins so kobe didn't have to average 45mpg to be competitive..scott skiles obviously thought he needed penny out there almost every minute of the game..even when he's going 1-9 :roll:

No that doesn't make up for the 1.8 drop in rpg, the 1.4 drop in apg and the 0.5 drop in ppg.
it does

Yeah and even with that terrible game it wasn't enough to bring his averages down below Kobe's.
who cares? kobe just won the series 4-1 you think he gives a **** about who scored more points throughout the whole 5 games? the suns just got dominated in an elimination game thanks in part to the woeful display put on by their second best player, a top 5 shooting guard in the nba.

Why not? You just said Kobe would've averaged 28 or 30 ppg as a first option on that Piston team.
i'm just beating you at your own game..simple

No it doesn't sound the same you f*cking moron.
wait..you actually pronounce the "a" when saying "yeah"? no wonder you have no friends, you can't even ****in talk properly :roll:

I never said they'd be better without Kobe I just said they would still be a great team without him.
no 'ship, no 67 wins

A weaker team can get a few fluke wins especially in a 5 game series but when it comes down to the deciding game at home and you have by far the best team, by far the best player and the best coach then there is no chance that they are losing that game.
it was unlikely, but there would've been some very nervous laker fans before that game 5

Little smelly boy???? wtf That was your worst insult yet.
:cry:

I told you. Unlike Kobe, Jones could be counted on to shut down elite perimeter scorers while Kobe was lit up more often.
reggie miller was shut down in the finals by kobe. kobe held the league's second highest scorer allen iverson to 7-25 and 6-20 shooting in two regular season games for an average of 15.5ppg for 2 victories, down almost half of his 28.4ppg average..meanwhile the same iverson goes off for 40 on eddie jones and the charlotte hornets in a game 1 that set the tone for the rest of the series

You give me reasons why Kobe was the better defender.
:lol

Kobe looked better because of his role. He got to be the second option on a team with by far the best player in the league at the time and the best coach. Give Jordan that situation and I guarantee his smarts look better, defense and clutch game look better.
we'll never know

With Phil and Shaq, rookie Jordan would play with a dominant first option and he wouldn't face that many double teams meaning he'd have to do less and thus turn the ball over much less, force less poor shots and pass the ball more. Rookie Jordan's defense would also improve because he'd be playing under an elite defensive coach and with Shaq who finished 2nd in DPOY voting and was maybe the most intimidating player of all time. As for his clutch game well with the attention Shaq drew Jordan would have more space to make his move and less pressure considering he wasn't the first option. Not to mention a great coach like Phil can draw up plays that would help rookie Jordan more.
no. rookie jordan had no range, therefore shaq would be clogging the lane for jordans pet move: the drive. kobe's outside game was the perfect match to shaq's inside game.

[stevoe]

bryant for me

[JellyBean]

Wow. I would take the current Kobe over the '84 Jordan. The current Kobe is more polished, that '84 Jordan was still raw.

[deion2123]

my older brother use to watch games all the time and i remember always being around him, whatever he did i did, so i watched nba

yes

all the extra shots should've led to a better free throw ratio than his rookie season, especially considering he was a superstar from his third year

2000 kobe was a much better rebounder, passer, and defender, and he also took better care of the ball. the shooting percentages were basically the same, and the only real statistic he had on 2000 kobe was ppg. kobe bryant was still kobe bryant.

common sense

wow. you've just gone on record saying that the lakers would beat sacramento, portland, and indiana, all without kobe bryant in 2000. how do you feel? :roll:

argument? you never had an argument :roll:

2005 kobe was nowhere near the player he was in 2000

no, it shouldn't be held against kobe 2 of the 4 victories were blowout wins so kobe didn't have to average 45mpg to be competitive..scott skiles obviously thought he needed penny out there almost every minute of the game..even when he's going 1-9 :roll:

it does

who cares? kobe just won the series 4-1 you think he gives a **** about who scored more points throughout the whole 5 games? the suns just got dominated in an elimination game thanks in part to the woeful display put on by their second best player, a top 5 shooting guard in the nba.

i'm just beating you at your own game..simple

wait..you actually pronounce the "a" when saying "yeah"? no wonder you have no friends, you can't even ****in talk properly :roll:

no 'ship, no 67 wins

it was unlikely, but there would've been some very nervous laker fans before that game 5

:cry:

reggie miller was shut down in the finals by kobe. kobe held the league's second highest scorer allen iverson to 7-25 and 6-20 shooting in two regular season games for an average of 15.5ppg for 2 victories, down almost half of his 28.4ppg average..meanwhile the same iverson goes off for 40 on eddie jones and the charlotte hornets in a game 1 that set the tone for the rest of the series

:lol

we'll never know

no. rookie jordan had no range, therefore shaq would be clogging the lane for jordans pet move: the drive. kobe's outside game was the perfect match to shaq's inside game.
lol...unless you are extremely gifted ..you don't remember anything when you were 2

[gpfanz]

This is a joke right :wtf:

[juju151111]

kobe's clutch game, defense, wins, and all-round smarts were all better than jordans
:roll: :lol :oldlol: :lol :oldlol: :roll: :roll: I can't stop laughing.Please tell another joke ur funny.

[juju151111]

no. rookie jordan had no range, therefore shaq would be clogging the lane for jordans pet move: the drive. kobe's outside game was the perfect match to shaq's inside game.
:( This is the dumbest comment i have ever read in my life.No joke.:wtf:

[Da_Realist]

Video spotlights a game during MJ's rookie year (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwyqE22CSyM&feature=PlayList&p=54E559C8CA83F25E&index=9).

He was an athlete! And he played defense even during his rookie year.

[ukplayer4]

larry bird at the height of his powers said during the 84/85 season that michael jordon was the best player hes ever played against- that was mj as a rookie.

[VCMVP1551]

:roll:
all the extra shots should've led to a better free throw ratio than his rookie season, especially considering he was a superstar from his third year

No you f*cking idiot. The more shots you take, the more energy you use. The less energy you have, the harder it is to attack the rim and get to the line. Jordan took 8 more shots in 1987 than in his rookie season and he played 2 more minutes per game.


2000 kobe was a much better rebounder, passer, and defender, and he also took better care of the ball. the shooting percentages were basically the same, and the only real statistic he had on 2000 kobe was ppg. kobe bryant was still kobe bryant.

Kobe averaged 13 more ppg in 2006 than he did in 2000. Kobe also carried a pretty sh*tty team to 45 wins and the playoffs.


wow. you've just gone on record saying that the lakers would beat sacramento, portland, and indiana, all without kobe bryant in 2000. how do you feel? :roll:

Kobe wasn't even good for most of the Indiana series. :roll: 15.6 ppg, 4.4 rpg, 4.2 apg, 36.7 FG%


2005 kobe was nowhere near the player he was in 2000

:roll:


no, it shouldn't be held against kobe 2 of the 4 victories were blowout wins so kobe didn't have to average 45mpg to be competitive..scott skiles obviously thought he needed penny out there almost every minute of the game..even when he's going 1-9 :roll:

That's because Penny didn't have the benfit of playing with by far the best player in the league.


who cares? kobe just won the series 4-1 you think he gives a **** about who scored more points throughout the whole 5 games? the suns just got dominated in an elimination game thanks in part to the woeful display put on by their second best player, a top 5 shooting guard in the nba.

Once again Penny didn't have the benfit of playing with by far the best player in the league. Switch Penny and Kobe and the Lakers still win in 5 if not 4.


i'm just beating you at your own game..simple

:roll: how? You haven't made any sense yet.


no 'ship, no 67 wins

You base this on nothing. the team was 12-3 without Kobe when Shaq was in the lineup.


reggie miller was shut down in the finals by kobe. kobe held the league's second highest scorer allen iverson to 7-25 and 6-20 shooting in two regular season games for an average of 15.5ppg for 2 victories, down almost half of his 28.4ppg average..meanwhile the same iverson goes off for 40 on eddie jones and the charlotte hornets in a game 1 that set the tone for the rest of the series

Iverson is known to be streaky. He can go off on any given night or he can shoot 7-25 on any given night. Iverson also dropped 48 on Kobe in the 2001 Finals. He can off against anyone.


no. rookie jordan had no range, therefore shaq would be clogging the lane for jordans pet move: the drive. kobe's outside game was the perfect match to shaq's inside game.

:roll: Shaq wouldn't make Jordan worse. Man now you're really talking out of your ass.

[Shep]

No you f*cking idiot. The more shots you take, the more energy you use. The less energy you have, the harder it is to attack the rim and get to the line. Jordan took 8 more shots in 1987 than in his rookie season and he played 2 more minutes per game.
jordan was also a top 3 player in the nba in 1987, so he would be getting alot more superstar calls. more shots + more superstar calls = more free throws

Kobe averaged 13 more ppg in 2006 than he did in 2000. Kobe also carried a pretty sh*tty team to 45 wins and the playoffs.
the increase of 13ppg was due to him having that same "pretty sh*tty team". lamar odom was a very good second option with his nightly 15/9/6/1/1.

Kobe wasn't even good for most of the Indiana series. 15.6 ppg, 4.4 rpg, 4.2 apg, 36.7 FG%
stopping the other teams most dangerous offensive option isn't good to you? :roll: not to mention he played half of that series injured, and came up huge when that fat guy fouled out. kobe brings alot more than stats anyway, if you actually watched the 2000 playoffs you'd know this.

:roll:
:oldlol: :roll: :roll: :oldlol:

That's because Penny didn't have the benfit of playing with by far the best player in the league.
so he should've averaged alot more than what he did, especially playing with a top 2 point guard

Once again Penny didn't have the benfit of playing with by far the best player in the league. Switch Penny and Kobe and the Lakers still win in 5 if not 4.
heresay bs. switch kobe with penny and shaq injures his left pinky and sits out the rest of the year while kobe leads the suns past the lakers.

how? You haven't made any sense yet.
:roll: read from my first post on

You base this on nothing. the team was 12-3 without Kobe when Shaq was in the lineup.
how far does 12 wins get you? the first draft pick?

Iverson is known to be streaky. He can go off on any given night or he can shoot 7-25 on any given night.
:lol more excuses. i give you facts, you give excuses.

Iverson also dropped 48 on Kobe in the 2001 Finals. He can off against anyone.
:roll: more proof you haven't seen a game of nba basketball in your life. kobe was guarded by derek fisher and ty lue you dumb ****

Shaq wouldn't make Jordan worse. Man now you're really talking out of your ass.
jordan was a guard who had no range, shaq was a center who had no range. yes the team would win more games if it had shaq but rookie jordan would not be better statistically

[juju151111]

jordan was also a top 3 player in the nba in 1987, so he would be getting alot more superstar calls. more shots + more superstar calls = more free throws

the increase of 13ppg was due to him having that same "pretty sh*tty team". lamar odom was a very good second option with his nightly 15/9/6/1/1.

stopping the other teams most dangerous offensive option isn't good to you? :roll: not to mention he played half of that series injured, and came up huge when that fat guy fouled out. kobe brings alot more than stats anyway, if you actually watched the 2000 playoffs you'd know this.

:oldlol: :roll: :roll: :oldlol:

so he should've averaged alot more than what he did, especially playing with a top 2 point guard

heresay bs. switch kobe with penny and shaq injures his left pinky and sits out the rest of the year while kobe leads the suns past the lakers.

:roll: read from my first post on

how far does 12 wins get you? the first draft pick?

:lol more excuses. i give you facts, you give excuses.

:roll: more proof you haven't seen a game of nba basketball in your life. kobe was guarded by derek fisher and ty lue you dumb ****

jordan was a guard who had no range, shaq was a center who had no range. yes the team would win more games if it had shaq but rookie jordan would not be better statistically
LOl no range MJ could shoot from 20ft has a rookie retard and how does dwade who can't shoot like mj play with shaq then.ur a fing retard.u make lakers fans look dumb(even tho most of them are dumb)

[juju151111]

Video spotlights a game during MJ's rookie year (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwyqE22CSyM&feature=PlayList&p=54E559C8CA83F25E&index=9).

He was an athlete! And he played defense even during his rookie year.
look ho3w far he took off from whilt doing rock the craddle:eek: :wtf: :wtf: :bowdown:

[VCMVP1551]

jordan was also a top 3 player in the nba in 1987, so he would be getting alot more superstar calls. more shots + more superstar calls = more free throws

You're an idiot. Don't underestimate how much energy it takes to shoot an additional 8 shots every night and play an additional 2 minutes.


the increase of 13ppg was due to him having that same "pretty sh*tty team". lamar odom was a very good second option with his nightly 15/9/6/1/1.

:roll: A 22.5 ppg scorer doesn't because anywhere near a 35.4 ppg scorer just by switching roles. Don't forget Kobe was a MUCH better 3 point shooter and much stronger in 2006.


stopping the other teams most dangerous offensive option isn't good to you? :roll: not to mention he played half of that series injured, and came up huge when that fat guy fouled out. kobe brings alot more than stats anyway, if you actually watched the 2000 playoffs you'd know this.

I did watch the 2000 playoffs. One of many reasons I'm such a hug Shaq fan today. Kobe had 2 good games in the entire series. Game 1 and Game 4.


so he should've averaged alot more than what he did, especially playing with a top 2 point guard

I posted the stats for the series, you can't expect a player who averaged 16, 6 and 5 to average much more than thta in a series.


heresay bs. switch kobe with penny and shaq injures his left pinky and sits out the rest of the year while kobe leads the suns past the lakers.

:roll: What? Shaq carried the Lakers when kobe was injured. A 12-3 record sound familiar? And that was to start the season so the momentum from that start was very important. Your comment didn't make sense.


how far does 12 wins get you? the first draft pick?

How far does an 80 winning % get you? 66 wins.


:lol more excuses. i give you facts, you give excuses.

Not one fact yet.


:roll: more proof you haven't seen a game of nba basketball in your life. kobe was guarded by derek fisher and ty lue you dumb ****

You f*cking idiot. They switched on and off but Kobe guarded Iverson quite a bit in the 2001 Finals. When Iverson was torching Kobe and Fisher they tried Lue on him which worked for a while. Iverson went cold in the 4th quarter.


jordan was a guard who had no range, shaq was a center who had no range. yes the team would win more games if it had shaq but rookie jordan would not be better statistically

Once again as another poster pointed out look at Wade and Shaq in Shaq's first 2 seasons. That worked pretty well didn't it?

Give it up the other posters in this thread are laughing at your stupidity.

[baseketball4life]

Kobe

[Scott Pippen]

Shep:roll:

[305Baller]

Interesting question, and of course it goes to Bryant. But of course you have to go with Bryant if you dont want to discredit Kobe vs Jordan completely.

[Shep]

You're an idiot. Don't underestimate how much energy it takes to shoot an additional 8 shots every night and play an additional 2 minutes.
:lol energy. shut up. he was a bonifide superstar in 1987 so more shots should've atleast equaled his ratio from 1985

A 22.5 ppg scorer doesn't because anywhere near a 35.4 ppg scorer just by switching roles. Don't forget Kobe was a MUCH better 3 point shooter and much stronger in 2006.
28ppg is very reasonable. no fat guy in the middle clogging lanes, freeing up 20+ shots per game, you'd be a retard to think he wouldn't be capable of doing so..oh wait

Kobe had 2 good games in the entire series. Game 1 and Game 4.
in the most important game of the season he was spectacular, leading the lakers to an overtime victory (game 4) with the fat guy fouled out. he only played 9 minutes in game 2 due to injury, did not play in game 3 due to this injury (the game in which miller located his shot and found some momentum). the only game in which he played below par was game 5.

I posted the stats for the series, you can't expect a player who averaged 16, 6 and 5 to average much more than thta in a series.
why not?

What? Shaq carried the Lakers when kobe was injured. A 12-3 record sound familiar? And that was to start the season so the momentum from that start was very important. Your comment didn't make sense.
this has got nothing to do with what you responded to

How far does an 80 winning % get you? 66 wins.
66 games out of 15 games? how is that possible? :roll:

Not one fact yet.
go back and read from post 1

You f*cking idiot. They switched on and off but Kobe guarded Iverson quite a bit in the 2001 Finals. When Iverson was torching Kobe and Fisher they tried Lue on him which worked for a while. Iverson went cold in the 4th quarter.
kobe only guarded iverson once or twice, fisher and lue guarded iverson in that series. go watch the series then come back and pass judgement..because until you've done that your opinions are worthless..come to think of it they'd still probably be worthless after you had studied the tape for 20 hours, knowing your brain capacity.

Once again as another poster pointed out look at Wade and Shaq in Shaq's first 2 seasons. That worked pretty well didn't it?
:roll: you think it was shaq that made wade better statistically?

Give it up the other posters in this thread are laughing at your stupidity.
who's laughing? that juju loser can't even construct a simple sentence..probably the type of person you'd get along with knowing your propensity to have retarded friends :roll:

[Heilige]

You gotta look at it from the other side, too. Kobe can't have a great game without half the world comparing him to MJ. He can't make a great shot without half the world comparing it to MJ. I don't see many Kobe fans complaining about the comparisons when it somehow favors Kobe (81 points, the **-consecutive 40 point games, 3 titles before MJ won his...), it's only when it doesn't work in Kobe's favor that fans of his complain about the comparisons.

This board loves the MJ-Kobe comparisons. I try to talk about Larry Bird or Isiah Thomas and I may get 2 or 3 responses. I post video of Hakeem Olajuwon, no one responds. But when there's a Kobe to MJ comparison...:rolleyes:

It's a catch-22. When Kobe does well, a lot of Kobe fans can't wait to find some way to put it on par with whatever MJ did back in the day. But when MJ fans point out some things that favor MJ, all of the comparisons are "unfair" and "no one appreciates Kobe".

It starts with Kobe himself. He modeled his game after MJ to a tee. And that's fine. He's wanted to chase MJ all along just like Tiger has always wanted to chase Jack Nicholas. That's fine, too, but you can't embrace the comparisons when Kobe does well or better than whatever MJ did, then complain about them when he falls a little short.

No different than Tiger. They both made it their mission to be better than what is considered the best. When Tiger wins 5 majors in a row, his fans love the favorable comparisons. When Tiger doesn't win a major in 6 tries, all of a sudden the comparisons are tough to deal with.

When you boldly state (by admission with Tiger, by intent with Kobe) that you want to better what's considered the best, you have to roll with the punches.

To prove my point, wait until (if) the Lakers win this year. There will be post after post proclaiming that Kobe is well on his way and has 4 rings by the age of 29 and MJ only had 1. Then every Laker fan will love the comparisons again.

Until MJ fans retort.

Let the games begin.


Do you have any links to where Tiger boldly stated that he wants to be the best ever? Also, do you have any links where Kobe states he wants to be the best ever? Though, in your post you mentioned it is by intent that Kobe wants to be the best ever. How can you be so sure?

[AIrules]

Kobe

[VCMVP1551]

:lol energy. shut up. he was a bonifide superstar in 1987 so more shots should've atleast equaled his ratio from 1985

You aren't making any sense as usual.


28ppg is very reasonable. no fat guy in the middle clogging lanes, freeing up 20+ shots per game, you'd be a retard to think he wouldn't be capable of doing so..oh wait

Without Shaq defenses would have been able to double and triple Kobe as much as they want. He'd have to take tougher shots and he'd have to work harder for his shots. I have my doubts he'd even average 25 points in 2000.


in the most important game of the season he was spectacular, leading the lakers to an overtime victory (game 4) with the fat guy fouled out. he only played 9 minutes in game 2 due to injury, did not play in game 3 due to this injury (the game in which miller located his shot and found some momentum). the only game in which he played below par was game 5.

Kobe was also terrible(8-27) in game 6. So 2 out of 4 games he played like sh*t.


why not?

Because they are already playing so far above their usual level.


66 games out of 15 games? how is that possible? :roll:

I'm talking about the pace they were playing at. Makes more sense then you talking out of your ass with that stupid **** "12 wins is a lottery team".


kobe only guarded iverson once or twice, fisher and lue guarded iverson in that series. go watch the series then come back and pass judgement..because until you've done that your opinions are worthless..come to think of it they'd still probably be worthless after you had studied the tape for 20 hours, knowing your brain capacity.

Coming from the retard who said Shawn Marion was better than Tim Duncan and Marcus Camby is better than Dwight Howard.


:roll: you think it was shaq that made wade better statistically?

First of all I never said that. I said if they could play together then why not rookie Jordan and 2000 Shaq? 2000 Shaq>>>2004-2006 Shaq

Second of all yes he did make Wade better.

In 2003-2004 Wade averaged 16.2 ppg and 4.5 apg
In 2004-2005 Wade averaged 24.1 ppg and 6.8 apg


who's laughing? that juju loser can't even construct a simple sentence..probably the type of person you'd get along with knowing your propensity to have retarded friends :roll:

A few other posters were laughing at you when you said you can remember watching basketball at 2 years old.

[Shep]

You aren't making any sense as usual.
:confusedshrug:

Without Shaq defenses would have been able to double and triple Kobe as much as they want. He'd have to take tougher shots and he'd have to work harder for his shots. I have my doubts he'd even average 25 points in 2000.
:roll: yes, he would only average 2 more points per game without a guy who would usually score 30 a night on the roster :roll: this makes perfect sense

Kobe was also terrible(8-27) in game 6. So 2 out of 4 games he played like sh*t.
26 points, 10 rebounds, 4 assists, 1 steal, 2 blocks, and 1 turnover think otherwise

I posted the stats for the series, you can't expect a player who averaged 16, 6 and 5 to average much more than thta in a series.
for someone to average what he did for the first four games, you'd expect a better performance in a win or go home game than a 1-9

I'm talking about the pace they were playing at. Makes more sense then you talking out of your ass with that stupid **** "12 wins is a lottery team".
you think taking a 15 game w/l ratio and making it into an 82 game season is ****in logical? so teams that go 14-1 during the first 15 games of the season would be expected to be the greatest single season team in the history of the game? get the **** out, and don't come back.

Coming from the retard who said Shawn Marion was better than Tim Duncan and Marcus Camby is better than Dwight Howard.
= admitting you've got nothing. moving on..

First of all I never said that. I said if they could play together then why not rookie Jordan and 2000 Shaq? 2000 Shaq>>>2004-2006 Shaq

Second of all yes he did make Wade better.

In 2003-2004 Wade averaged 16.2 ppg and 4.5 apg
In 2004-2005 Wade averaged 24.1 ppg and 6.8 apg
he didn't make wade nothing. wade was young, and if you had watched him in the '04 playoffs you'd know that he was a star on the rise

A few other posters were laughing at you when you said you can remember watching basketball at 2 years old.
not my fault they can't believe something happened that actually did :D

[VCMVP1551]

:roll: yes, he would only average 2 more points per game without a guy who would usually score 30 a night on the roster :roll: this makes perfect sense

Yeah and his FG% would drop. He'd be the main focus of the defense and average 25 ppg max.


26 points, 10 rebounds, 4 assists, 1 steal, 2 blocks, and 1 turnover think otherwise

:roll: He had more shot attempts than points scored and he shot 29.6%. :roll: :roll:


for someone to average what he did for the first four games, you'd expect a better performance in a win or go home game than a 1-9

He was already playing above his usual level at that point in his career so he was due to have a bad game. If this was 1995 Penny then I'd expect him to average over 20 ppg with good assist numbers on good shooting numbers but by 2000 Penny had declined quite a bit. He was still a good player but 16, 6 and 5 isn't that unusual.


you think taking a 15 game w/l ratio and making it into an 82 game season is ****in logical? so teams that go 14-1 during the first 15 games of the season would be expected to be the greatest single season team in the history of the game? get the **** out, and don't come back.

I use that stretch as an example because they did pretty much keep up that pace the next few years with Kobe out. The team was 25-6 without Kobe during the 3peat. You base the 2000 Lakers needing Kobe to win the title on nothing. I have proof of what they did without Kobe and they were playing at a very high level.


he didn't make wade nothing. wade was young, and if you had watched him in the '04 playoffs you'd know that he was a star on the rise

Yes everyone knew Wade was going to be a star which is why Shaq wanted to go there in the first place but there is a huge difference between 16 ppg/4 apg and 24 ppg/7 apg. Not to mention Miami won 17 more games despite losing arguably their best player from 2003-2004 Lamar Odom and another key player in Caron Butler.


not my fault they can't believe something happened that actually did :D

It's not hard to believe that you watched games at 2 years old because they were on but there is no way in hell you can remember watching them.

[Shep]

Yeah and his FG% would drop. He'd be the main focus of the defense and average 25 ppg max.
being easily the best player on his team, his number of touches and the time the ball was in his hand would increase dramatically, and there is no doubt he would've scored atleast 2 more field goals per game

He had more shot attempts than points scored and he shot 29.6%.
so what? coaches always tell scorers to keep shooting, even if they are having an off night, you'd rather kobe went 8-27 than 3-10, especially in a close game. atleast he was still being aggressive, he went to the line 9 times and made 8, while recording 4 assists and only 1 turnover so offensively he made a huge contribution regardless of shooting percentages

He was already playing above his usual level at that point in his career so he was due to have a bad game.
he was due to have a bad game? :lol i'm sure coach scott skiles would've sat back after being eliminated and thought to himself "well, he played good throughout games 1-4, so i expected him to play like a chump in game 5" :roll:

I use that stretch as an example because they did pretty much keep up that pace the next few years with Kobe out. The team was 25-6 without Kobe during the 3peat. You base the 2000 Lakers needing Kobe to win the title on nothing. I have proof of what they did without Kobe and they were playing at a very high level.
that three year regular season record means nothing. if portland pushed la to 7 games with both shaq and kobe there is no way in hell they are losing to them without kobe. kobe even outplayed shaq in 3 or 4 games that series :oldlol:

Yes everyone knew Wade was going to be a star which is why Shaq wanted to go there in the first place
yes, its the story of shaq's career - when the going gets tough bolt to another team with an up and coming superstar

but there is a huge difference between 16 ppg/4 apg and 24 ppg/7 apg. Not to mention Miami won 17 more games despite losing arguably their best player from 2003-2004 Lamar Odom and another key player in Caron Butler.
yeh they won 17 more games - that will happen when you give away a guy who isn't even top 11 at his position and another guy who barely averages 9 points per game for a top 3 player. wade also had alot more of the ball due to not having odom around anymore and had significant increases in fga, fta, and turnovers.

It's not hard to believe that you watched games at 2 years old because they were on but there is no way in hell you can remember watching them.
i'm not saying i can remember individual games, but i do remember doing it..it was like a family tradition :D

[Brunch@Five]

Anyone who takes rookie Jordan over this Kobe is beyond retarded.

[Silverbullit]

Anyone who takes rookie Jordan over this Kobe is beyond retarded.

Why not ask about a rookie Kobe vs. prime Michael? :)

[chopchop20]

They were different types of players. Rookie Jordan could most likely equal current Kobe's production, but Kobe's game management and the general polish of his game is more than what rookie Jordan's was. Rookie Jordan was also more of an energy/intensity player than current Kobe, so he could provide a spark that way.

I'd probably take current Kobe. I would take '87 and later Jordan over any version of Kobe, however.

Even Washington Wizards' MJ? :confusedshrug:

As an objective Jordan watcher, I'd say his best years were between 1990 - 1998.