Printable View
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:
[QUOTE=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:[/QUOTE]
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 [I]he may have won the MVP![/I]
[B]2007/08 Kobe[/B] -- [B]28.3 pts[/B], 6.3 rbs, 5.4 asts, 1.8 stls, 0.5 blks, 45.9%
[B]1984/85 MJ[/B] -- 28.2 pts, [B]6.5 rbs, 5.9 asts, 2.4 stls, 0.8 blks, 51.5%[/B]
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.
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:
[QUOTE=Shep]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 [I]atleast [/I]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[/QUOTE]
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 [url]http://youtube.com/watch?v=i9bzrWTff5U[/url] 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.
[QUOTE=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:[/QUOTE]
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 [url]http://youtube.com/watch?v=i9bzrWTff5U[/url]
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.
[QUOTE=Da_Realist]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.[/QUOTE]
yeah typo
[QUOTE=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 [I]he may have won the MVP![/I]
[B]2007/08 Kobe[/B] -- [B]28.3 pts[/B], 6.3 rbs, 5.4 asts, 1.8 stls, 0.5 blks, 45.9%
[B]1984/85 MJ[/B] -- 28.2 pts, [B]6.5 rbs, 5.9 asts, 2.4 stls, 0.8 blks, 51.5%[/B]
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.[/QUOTE]
I re-read the comment above and wondered how the hell [I]didn't[/I] 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...
[B]2007/08 Kobe[/B] -- 28.3 pts, 6.3 rbs, 5.4 asts, 1.8 stls, 0.5 blks, 45.9%
[B]1984/85 MJ[/B] -- 28.2 pts, 6.5 rbs, 5.9 asts, [B]2.4 stls,[/B] 0.8 blks, 51.5%
[B]1984/85 Bird[/B] -- [B]28.7 pts, 10.5 rbs, 6.6 asts,[/B] 1.61 stls, [B]1.23 blks, 52.2%[/B]
:eek: :bowdown:
[QUOTE]Shep you are what 1 or 2 years older than me? You didn't watch the NBA in 1985 either.[/QUOTE]
but i did start watching it alot earlier than you did, and have far greater knowledge than that of yours about anything nba related
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]The stats aren't that close. Hill has a clear advantage.[/QUOTE]
hill does not have a clear advantage. he does have an advantage, but it is only a slight advantage
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
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
[QUOTE]Grant Hill was the clear first option on his team.[/QUOTE]
who clearly led that team nowhere
[QUOTE]With all of those injuries they should have won more than 53 games in the difficult Western Conference?[/QUOTE]
sixth man of the year, 2nd team all-defense team member, top 6 small forward, top 5 shooting guard, top 2 point guard? yes
[QUOTE]Look at what Shaq did in the playoffs and regular season. With or without Kobe they are still the favorite.[/QUOTE]
:roll:
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]Who knows? Who cares?
Why did Kobe finish behind Jones in DPOY?
[/QUOTE]
who cares? [B]you [/B]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
[QUOTE]So? That still doesn't make the talent on his team anywhere near the talent on that Laker team.[/QUOTE]
nobody knows what iverson would've done with the talent the lakers had
[QUOTE]Well you did a miserable job of it.[/QUOTE]
you must have missed it
[QUOTE]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.
[/QUOTE]
: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
[QUOTE]First of all the word isn't "yeh" it's yeah.[/QUOTE]
its slang, so there is no official spelling - get the **** over it
[QUOTE]Second of all you base that team being bad without Bryant on nothing.[/QUOTE]
never said it'd be bad..it'd be a good team..maybe even a contender..but not a 67 win championship team
[QUOTE]I base my statement on the fact that the Lakers played very well without Bryant for an extended stretch.[/QUOTE]
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:
[QUOTE]I don't know where you get this sh*t but keep posting it because it's funny as hell.[/QUOTE]
where i get this ****? what do you mean? where do i get plain to see facts from?
[QUOTE]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 [url]http://youtube.com/watch?v=i9bzrWTff5U[/url] 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.[/QUOTE]
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.
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..
[B]Kobe will never be Michael Jordan[/b]
[B]Kobe will never be like Michael Jordan[/B]
[B]Kobe will never be another Michael Jordan. [/B]
[B]Kobe will never be better than Michael Jordan[/B]
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.
[QUOTE=Emile]...[/QUOTE]
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.
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.
[QUOTE=Emile]...[/QUOTE]
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.
^ Great post, I definitely see what you mean. Hopefully you also got what I was trying to say.
[QUOTE=Shep]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? [B]you [/B]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.[/QUOTE]
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. [url]http://youtube.com/watch?v=wP-EIeGW4lk&feature=related[/url] He had a jumper from 20ft in FACT don't get it twisted.