ISH All-time Top 25 Guards Project: #2 Kobe Bryant vs Magic Johnson.

[QUOTE=juju151111]Na I pretty sure the big dog wins 3 Fmvps and a Mvp in 2000. Yep I am pretty damn sure.:lol[/QUOTE]


meh....

[IMG]http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/1600/kobepotd.jpg[/IMG]


"Big Dog"....can have his Final MVP's against the weak East......


real fans Know who the man was and still is....



next

[QUOTE=AlphaWolf24]meh....

[IMG]http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/1600/kobepotd.jpg[/IMG]


"Big Dog"....can have his Final MVP's against the weak East......


real fans Know who the man was and still is....



next[/QUOTE]

You keep posting this idiotic pic as if it means anything.

Seriously, you actually give credibility to a silly public opinion poll that ranks LeBron over guys like Duncan, Shaq, and KG for player of the decade?!

Gross.






subsequent

[QUOTE=SuperPippen]You keep posting this idiotic pic as if it means anything.

Seriously, you actually give credibility to a silly public opinion poll that ranks LeBron over guys like Duncan, Shaq, and KG for player of the decade?!

Gross.






subsequent[/QUOTE]

puplic opinion poll that used millions of voters means less then a poll of 10 people online???


and fans here say winning is so Overrated ....and all the winning has to be put in context as a "team award"...so why is it crazy that the majority has LBJ higher then Timmy and Shaq:confusedshrug:

I think Kobe/Magic is an interesting comparison. Although I definitely and ultimately fall on the side of Magic, I think the Kobe argument has its merits.
Along with Pippen, Rodman, etc., Kobe's greatness as a player to me is one of the most difficult to quantify.
He is an enigma in so many ways, intimidating yet often disappears for stretches, deadly yet often inefficient, an absolutely incredible lockdown defender when he wants to be, but often takes plays off on D. Incredibly clutch, but also prone to poor decisions more than he should be.
I often think that Kobe's peak play, meaning his highest level over a stretch of a week or two, is the 2nd or 3rd greatest of all players, but I have a hard time putting him in the top 5 if his total body of work (just watching him play, not titles, all this team or that, etc.) is considered.
On my all time list he is somewhere in the top 10 (with a gun to my head at #6 behind MJ, Magic, Wilt, Kareem, and Shaq). Whereas Magic (with a gun to my head) is at #2 behind Mike.
I guess, for me it's hard to go against the magic of Magic, which is what puts him over the great big men for me at the end of the day, though it is certainly arguable.
If I want to win titles, all things being equal and I could have either Magic or Kobe. It's got to be Magic. And that answers the question for me.

Quick sidenote: I think Oscar should have won over West, and think that most guys who played against them would tell you the same thing. I understand West's argument, but I think the mark was missed on that one.

[QUOTE=BIZARRO]I think Kobe/Magic is an interesting comparison. Although I definitely and ultimately fall on the side of Magic, I think the Kobe argument has its merits.
Along with Pippen, Rodman, etc., Kobe's greatness as a player to me is one of the most difficult to quantify.
He is an enigma in so many ways, intimidating yet often disappears for stretches, deadly yet often inefficient, an absolutely incredible lockdown defender when he wants to be, but often takes plays off on D. Incredibly clutch, but also prone to poor decisions more than he should be.
I often think that Kobe's peak play, meaning his highest level over a stretch of a week or two, is the 2nd or 3rd greatest of all players, but I have a hard time putting him in the top 5 if his total body of work (just watching him play, not titles, all this team or that, etc.) is considered.
On my all time list he is somewhere in the top 10 (with a gun to my head at #6 behind MJ, Magic, Wilt, Kareem, and Shaq). Whereas Magic (with a gun to my head) is at #2 behind Mike.
I guess, for me it's hard to go against the magic of Magic, which is what puts him over the great big men for me at the end of the day, though it is certainly arguable.
[B][SIZE="4"]If I want to win titles, all things being equal and I could have either Magic or Kobe. It's got to be Magic[/SIZE][/B]. [B][SIZE="7"]And that answers the question for me.[/SIZE][/B]

Quick sidenote: I think Oscar should have won over West, and think that most guys who played against them would tell you the same thing. I understand West's argument, but I think the mark was missed on that one.[/QUOTE]


just curious...does that mean Bill Russell is better then Jordan on your imaginary top 10 list?

since what put Magic over Kobe is ability to win (but they both won 5:confusedshrug: )....please explain.

[QUOTE=AlphaWolf24]just curious...does that mean Bill Russell is better then Jordan on your imaginary top 10 list?

since what put Magic over Kobe is ability to win (but they both won 5:confusedshrug: )....please explain.[/QUOTE]

Nope, if I wanted to win more titles I'd choose Mike over Russell too. Just because Russell has more titles than MJ, doesn't mean that, all things being equal, he would have more titles than him. That is flawed logic.
Rick Mahorn has more titles than Barkley, does that make him a player who you would win more titles with.
All things equal, I think Magic would get you a better chance at winning a title of Kobe, regardless of how many each currently has.

Actual titles come with a whoooooole lot of context, sure they are important, but there is so much more that goes into it when looking at a player.

Incidentally,the whole "how many titles" argument it is why I think Oscar is VASTLY underrated on this board, along with Ewing, Karl Malone, Barkley, etc...and why Hakeem is overrated on this board. GREAT player sure, but overrated here IMO.
Michael Jordan's best play to me was before he ever won a title, but if he played in '88, '89, and '90 with a better cast and wins a title then, does that make him greater? You just have to weigh in everything.
And for me, weighing in everything, I think Magic gives you a better shot at a title than Kobe.

And I think you can tell from my earlier post, I have mad respect for Kobe, just trying to be objective.

[QUOTE=BIZARRO]Nope, if I wanted to win more titles I'd choose Mike over Russell too. Just because Russell has more titles than MJ, doesn't mean that, all things being equal, he would have more titles than him. That is flawed logic.
Rick Mahorn has more titles than Barkley, does that make him a player who you would win more titles with.
All things equal, I think Magic would get you a better chance at winning a title of Kobe, regardless of how many each currently has.

Actual titles come with a whoooooole lot of context, sure they are important, but there is so much more that goes into it when looking at a player.

Incidentally,the whole "how many titles" argument it is why I think Oscar is VASTLY underrated on this board, along with Ewing, Karl Malone, Barkley, etc...and why Hakeem is overrated on this board. GREAT player sure, but overrated here IMO.
Michael Jordan's best play to me was before he ever won a title, but if he played in '88, '89, and '90 with a better cast and wins a title then, does that make him greater? You just have to weigh in everything.
And for me, weighing in everything, I think Magic gives you a better shot at a title than Kobe.

And I think you can tell from my earlier post, I have mad respect for Kobe, just trying to be objective.[/QUOTE]


wait..... Thinking a player who won 14 major basketball Titles in 13 years (Russ) is better at winning Titles , then a player who won 8 in 18 years (MJ) is flawed logic?...


and then you compared Rick Mahorn to Barkley....since when were they in similar roles....

all things bieng equal as you say I agree....magic could probably take any group of players and make them achieve greatness more so then any player ever..."make your team better"....so would you put him over Jordan also since Magic is clearly superior to Jordan in that same criteria.

[QUOTE=AlphaWolf24]wait..... Thinking a player who won 14 major basketball Titles in 13 years (Russ) is better at winning Titles , then a player who won 7 in 15 years (MJ) is flawed logic?...


and then you compared Rick Mahorn to Barkley....since when were they in similar roles....

all things bieng equal as you say I agree....magic could probably take any group of players and make them achieve greatness more so then any player ever..."make your team better"....so would you put him over Jordan also since Magic is clearly superior to Jordan in that same criteria.[/QUOTE]

In answer to your question, taking into account nothing but the nuber of titles with Russell/MJ, and using nothing else the way you are is definitely flawed logic.
Yes, the way you are trying to twist what I am saying turns it into definitely flawed logic. But the fact that you can't understand the actuality of what I am saying, and of the point I am making, regardless of whether you agree with it, shows a lack of objectivity and subtlety.
Isiah, who is underrated on this board IMO, has more titles than Oscar, but is he "better" at winning titles. All things being equal I would say no. You see, you are missing the "all things being equal" point.

Rick Mahorn and Barkley was just a random comparison of two Power forwards,as is Oscar/Isiah with point guard.

And no, Magic is not "clearly" superior to Jordan in that criteria IMO. I would argue that Mike is superior, though I think Magic has an argument. If I wanted to win titles though, I would go with Mike over Magic more often than not.
To say Magic is "clearly" superior in that criteria is just off base, and the absolute nature of that comment loses it's objectivity.

[QUOTE=BIZARRO]In answer to your question, taking into account nothing but the nuber of titles with Russell/MJ, and using nothing else the way you are is definitely flawed logic.
Yes, the way you are trying to twist what I am saying turns it into definitely flawed logic. But the fact that you can't understand the actuality of what I am saying, and of the point I am making, regardless of whether you agree with it, shows [B]a lack of objectivity and subtlety[/B].
Isiah, who is underrated on this board IMO, has more titles than Oscar, but is he "better" at winning titles. All things being equal I would say no. You see, you are missing the "all things being equal" point.

Rick Mahorn and Barkley was just a random comparison of two Power forwards,as is Oscar/Isiah with point guard.

And no, Magic is not "clearly" superior to Jordan in that criteria IMO. I would argue that Mike is superior, though I think Magic has an argument. If I wanted to win titles though, I would go with Mike over Magic more often than not.
To say Magic is "clearly" superior in that criteria is just off base, and the absolute nature of that comment loses it's objectivity.[/QUOTE]

That pretty much describes AlphaWolf in a nutshell.

You have my respect for trying to reason with the unreasonable. I'll try to do it too, on occasion, whenever I'm bored and I feel like shooting down any of Alpha's "arguments."

[QUOTE=SuperPippen]That pretty much describes AlphaWolf in a nutshell.

You have my respect for trying to reason with the unreasonable. I'll try to do it too, on occasion, whenever I'm bored and I feel like shooting down any of Alpha's "arguments."[/QUOTE]

+1.

And you also have to have a good sense of humor.

[QUOTE=BIZARRO]In answer to your question, taking into account nothing but the nuber of titles with Russell/MJ, and using nothing else the way you are is definitely flawed logic.
Yes, the way you are trying to twist what I am saying turns it into definitely flawed logic. But the fact that you can't understand the actuality of what I am saying, and of the point I am making, regardless of whether you agree with it, shows a lack of objectivity and subtlety.
Isiah, who is underrated on this board IMO, has more titles than Oscar, but is he "better" at winning titles. All things being equal I would say no. You see, you are missing the "all things being equal" point.

Rick Mahorn and Barkley was just a random comparison of two Power forwards,as is Oscar/Isiah with point guard.

And no, Magic is not "clearly" superior to Jordan in that criteria IMO. I would argue that Mike is superior, though I think Magic has an argument. If I wanted to win titles though, I would go with Mike over Magic more often than not.
To say Magic is "clearly" superior in that criteria is just off base, and the absolute nature of that comment loses it's objectivity.[/QUOTE]



I can't understand ...because picking someone who won 8 major titles (MJ) in 18 years(as a main contributor) over someone who won 14 major titles (Russ)in 13 years(as a main contributor) and trying to interpolate how MJ is better at winning....when he clearly isn't???


not trying to be anti subtle....but it's hard to understand your logic and try to read between the lines when you give no reason beyond "all things if equal"....and then don't even explain what that means???

and Magic was a far better facilitator then Jordan....Magic was a far greater winner too....he was a champion and Dominated at every level to go aong with winning 5 Titles in whats widely regarded as the greatest era of basketball......9 NBA Finals and "0" sub .500 seasons....

if you want to use context and "all things equal" please explain...until then I'll try to interpolate.

[QUOTE=SuperPippen]That pretty much describes AlphaWolf in a nutshell.

You have my respect for trying to reason with the unreasonable. I'll try to do it too, on occasion, whenever I'm bored and I feel like shooting down any of Alpha's "arguments."[/QUOTE]


how was I being unreasonable....:confusedshrug:


asked him if Russell was on top of his list since he won 14 major titles??

Jordan stans are cranky today....

[QUOTE=AlphaWolf24]how was I being unreasonable....:confusedshrug:


asked him if Russell was on top of his list since he won 14 major titles??

[B]Jordan stans are cranky today[/B]....[/QUOTE]
When aren't they? :oldlol:

Kobe has never ever carried a team on his own before. From 2005-2007, he couldn't do crap without Shaq. He and the Lakers were dead fish in the water going no where. And in 2008, when they made it back to the finals, they got blown out in Game 6 (imagine what the result would have actually have been if they didn't have Gasol? Would they even be in the finals)?

At least Allen Iverson, Dwayne Wade, Jason Kidd, and Tim Duncan CARRIED THEIR TEAMS.

Magic Johnson was carrying the Lakers since he joined them as a rookie...

[QUOTE=BIZARRO]In answer to your question, taking into account nothing but the nuber of titles with Russell/MJ, and using nothing else the way you are is definitely flawed logic.
Yes, the way you are trying to twist what I am saying turns it into definitely flawed logic. But the fact that you can't understand the actuality of what I am saying, and of the point I am making, regardless of whether you agree with it, shows a lack of objectivity and subtlety.
Isiah, who is underrated on this board IMO, has more titles than Oscar, but is he "better" at winning titles. All things being equal I would say no. You see, you are missing the "all things being equal" point.

Rick Mahorn and Barkley was just a random comparison of two Power forwards,as is Oscar/Isiah with point guard.

[B]And no, Magic is not "clearly" superior to Jordan in that criteria IMO. I would argue that Mike is superior, though I think Magic has an argument.[/B] If I wanted to win titles though, I would go with Mike over Magic more often than not.
To say Magic is "clearly" superior in that criteria is just off base, and the absolute nature of that comment loses it's objectivity.[/QUOTE]


:oldlol: Your delusional.