kg for odom + bynum..

[QUOTE=lakers-city]yeah, better individual numbers on losing teams who miss the playoffs or get blown away in the 1st round, why discount kobe's rings and playoffs success ? because it clearly makes him better than garnett ? rings and playoffs success is what makes duncan and shaq better than garnett as well, not their numbers.[/QUOTE]

Because KG didn't have Shaq. What sort of postseason success has Kobe had post-Shaq? KG has [b]led[/b] his team further than Kobe has as the #1 guy. That's why I discount it.

And you're wrong -- both Duncan and Shaq had more statistically impressive careers than KG, and both have more accomplishments (beyond rings) to boot. So no, it's not just their championships which make them better than KG. And lol @ "losing teams" -- Garnett, prior to last year, did not have a losing season since 1997, his second year in the league. In addition, he's won 50+ games 4 times, including 58 games one year and a trip to the WCF. Kobe has notched seasons of 34 and 45 wins as the leader of his team thus far.


Kobe has not had the more impressive individual career. He has had (slightly) the more impressive [b]overall[/b] career than Garnett, because of his 3 rings. But last season -- the one season where Kobe was better than Garnett individually -- does not negate 6 of the last 7 years where KG > Kobe individually.

[QUOTE]Bill Simmons is the best basketball writer at ESPN[/QUOTE]

For sure. Big fan of his. He really loves the game.

[QUOTE=Loki]Because KG didn't have Shaq. What sort of postseason success has Kobe had post-Shaq? KG has [b]led[/b] his team further than Kobe has as the #1 guy. That's why I discount it.

And you're wrong -- both Duncan and Shaq had more statistically impressive careers than KG, and both have more accomplishments (beyond rings) to boot. So no, it's not just their championships which make them better than KG. And lol @ "losing teams" -- Garnett, prior to last year, did not have a losing season since 1997, his second year in the league. In addition, he's won 50+ games 4 times, including 58 games one year and a trip to the WCF. Kobe has notched seasons of 34 and 45 wins as the leader of his team thus far.


Kobe has not had the more impressive individual career. He has had (slightly) the more impressive [b]overall[/b] career than Garnett, because of his 3 rings. But last season -- the one season where Kobe was better than Garnett individually -- does not negate 6 of the last 7 years where KG > Kobe individually.[/QUOTE]

ok, the shaq reason, allright, why no mention of kobe having absolutely no talent around him AT ALL and leading the lakers singlehandedly to the post season ? the year kg got past the 1st round (finally !!) he had cassell and spreewell who were playing great, hell cassell is still playing great, and when cassell went down injured the wolves didnt advance any further, coincidence ? :confusedshrug:

[QUOTE=Loki][B]Because KG didn't have Shaq[/B]. What sort of postseason success has Kobe had post-Shaq? KG has [b]led[/b] his team further than Kobe has as the #1 guy. That's why I discount it.

And you're wrong -- both Duncan and Shaq had more statistically impressive careers than KG, and both have more accomplishments (beyond rings) to boot. So no, it's not just their championships which make them better than KG. And lol @ "losing teams" -- Garnett, prior to last year, did not have a losing season since 1997, his second year in the league. In addition, he's won 50+ games 4 times, including 58 games one year and a trip to the WCF. Kobe has notched seasons of 34 and 45 wins as the leader of his team thus far.


Kobe has not had the more impressive individual career. He has had (slightly) the more impressive [b]overall[/b] career than Garnett, because of his 3 rings. But last season -- the one season where Kobe was better than Garnett individually -- does not negate 6 of the last 7 years where KG > Kobe individually.[/QUOTE]

this is the arguement i hate when we're talking about kobe. magic had kareem. jordan had pippen. bird had mchale. shaq had kobe. but for some reason, the other second fiddles (kareem, Pippen, mchale) get more credit and you hear people saying well, put iverson with shaq and it equates to 3 rings.

I agree with the last statment though..if kobe and kg were to retire today, kobe would be ranked higher.

people don't try to annoint pippen and mchale as the best in the league like they do for kobe. kobe is better then them tho.

yeah but some people give more credit to those players than they do with kobe, when its obvious kobe was a much better 2nd option than they were.

i agree that kobe is a better second option then mchale and pippen, not so sure about kareem. he's still not on jordan's level though noone is yet. (lebron and kobe being the closest)

when kareem was "the man" he was flat out better than kobe and even shaq for that matter, but on kareem's late years when he was the 3rd option behind magic and worthy he wasnt nearly on kobe's level because of his age.

[QUOTE=rezznor]i agree that kobe is a better second option then mchale and pippen, not so sure about kareem. he's still not on jordan's level though noone is yet. (lebron and kobe being the closest)[/QUOTE]

I agree with that

The Lakers would be crazy to turn down KG for Odom/Bynum.

What are the odds that Bynum is ever as good as Zydrunas Ilagauskas? Bynum is a solid prospect that has never had higher trade value. The Lakers would be an elite team with Kobe and KG, immediately up there with the Mavs and Spurs.

Lakers will never send both Odom and Bynum, the futures of this team. They'll send Odom, Vujacic, 1st or 2nd rounder. MAYBE

Money wise the lakers have to send LO7 and Kwame Brown. Add
a first round pick. I can't see the Lakers giving up Bynum rather
than the pick. Two starting forwards for KG and a pick are enough,
no way we give them two forwards and a center.

Andrew Bynum is the youngest player in the league. He's a young center who's improved by leaps and bounds. He is just starting to learn how to play and he's already the Lakers' best center. Teams are starving for great, or even good centers. The Lakers can't trade him. It's nothing against KG. Andrew Bynum is a rare asset, a young center who is good and who can be great. If he continues to improve at the rate he is, Mitch would a fool to trade him away.

KG is going to be the highest paid player in the league. It's a lot of money to take on for a player with a lot of miles on his legs. If there's a paycut involved down the line, then it's fine. Odom's contract is pretty good. He won't make 15 mill a year, even in the last year of his deal.

If the Lakers are going to do a blockbuster trade, it will involve Odom and Kwame, because Bynum's rapid development makes Kwame expendable. That's enough money to get KG.

Here is another thing to consider. Will getting KG fix what is broken with the Lakers? He will put up better numbers than Odom. They lose a good interior defender in Kwame Brown. Bynum is improving in that area. KG would help Bynum defend the paint. But getting an upgrade at the 4 (KG to replace Odom) does not fix their most pressing need (PG). Smush ain't cutting it. Jordan Farmar will be the starting point guard by the end of the year because I can't see Phil Jackson sticking with Smush Parker. When that happens, the Lakers will improve because they will have a playmaker at the point who won't fall asleep on the defensive end of the floor. If Radmanovic's hand gets better, they will have a scorer to come off the bench. KG isn't a 3 point shooter and the Lakers need consistent outside shooters. There are needs more pressing than finding a superstar to take Lamar Odom's place.

The Lakers need to stick with the guys they have now. They won't win the title, but the solution to their problems are on the roster right now. Don't sacrifice the future for potential present success.

[QUOTE=magicmanfan]Money wise the lakers have to send LO7 and Kwame Brown. Add
a first round pick. I can't see the Lakers giving up Bynum rather
than the pick. Two starting forwards for KG and a pick are enough,
no way we give them two forwards and a center.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, we might even make the pick a 2nd rounder instead of a first to make it more even.

I understand that you guys like Bynum alot, Id love to have him in Dallas, every team in the league would love to have him off their bench.

But what if he never fully develops? Dwight Howard was a sure thing 10 games into his career, you knew THEN that he would beast the NBA. But Bynum has shown flashes of being good but has never shown much to say that he will amount to more than former All Star Ilgauskas.

Forgetting salary, assuming you had Big Z on your team, would you not trade Odom and Big Z for KG? I would. Don't get caught up too much in age.

[QUOTE=miles berg]I understand that you guys like Bynum alot, Id love to have him in Dallas, every team in the league would love to have him off their bench.

But what if he never fully develops? Dwight Howard was a sure thing 10 games into his career, you knew THEN that he would beast the NBA. But Bynum has shown flashes of being good but has never shown much to say that he will amount to more than former All Star Ilgauskas.

Forgetting salary, assuming you had Big Z on your team, would you not trade Odom and Big Z for KG? I would. Don't get caught up too much in age.[/QUOTE]

Age is a huge factor. You can't disregard Bynum's young age. Also, he has good work ethic. He works hard to improve and we've seen the fruits of his labor. Ilgauskas is not a good example. He's an aging center with a big contract. Let's say Bynum develops into a player similar to Ilgauskas. Bad example, but I'll go with it. Would you trade Odom and a 19 year old Big Z for an aging KG?

I guess people are hesitant on Bynum because they see him as our starting center for the next 12-15 years while Garnett would start declining in 2-3 years. If we don't win now with Garnett it's a complete waste if we give away Bynum. Also giving up Odom hurts, I guess it's too much of a risk to send two of your 3 best players for years to come for KG and try to win now and start rebuilding after he's gone. With Bynum and Odom we have more insurance for the future.

With that being said though I'd give up Odom/Kwame for KG but Bynum is untradable at this point IMO.

[QUOTE=lakers-city]ok, the shaq reason, allright, why no mention of kobe having absolutely no talent around him AT ALL and leading the lakers singlehandedly to the post season ? [/quote]

The point is that KG did that for several seasons. "The Shaq reason" was to counter your ludicrous claim that Kobe's postseason success from '00-'04 is enough to propel him ahead of Garnett [i]as an individual player[/i]. It's not. Kobe was unquestionably better than KG last season [b]individually[/b], but KG was better than Kobe individually from '99-'05, and is again better than him this season (if that will remain true when Kobe returns to 100% form remains to be seen). How does one season negate KG's sustained individual dominance over the course of 7 seasons?


[quote]the year kg got past the 1st round (finally !!) he had cassell and spreewell who were playing great, hell cassell is still playing great, and when cassell went down injured the wolves didnt advance any further, coincidence ? :confusedshrug:[/QUOTE]

Has Kobe gotten past the first round as the leader of his team?


[QUOTE=hotsizzle]this is the arguement i hate when we're talking about kobe. magic had kareem. jordan had pippen. bird had mchale. shaq had kobe. but for some reason, the other second fiddles (kareem, Pippen, mchale) get more credit and you hear people saying well, put iverson with shaq and it equates to 3 rings.
[/QUOTE]

I personally don't give Pippen any more credit for his rings than I give Kobe; in fact, I've stated before that I feel that Kobe was a better #2 than Pippen. Pippen gets more credit in that regard simply because he has 6 championships as opposed to 3, not because he was more valuable to Chicago's success than Kobe was to LA's.


I brought up Shaq for the reasons stated above, not to diminish Kobe's accomplishments in any way. I just don't see how someone can use Kobe's rings as evidence of him being a better player than Garnett while neglecting to mention that he had the good fortune of playing with a top 10 all-time player in his absolute prime while KG was running with Troy Hudson and Kandiman.

Jordan never won without an All-Star caliber bigman who could play some of the best post defense in the L(Ho Grant, Rodman).

[QUOTE=eliteballer]Jordan never won without an All-Star caliber bigman who could play some of the best post defense in the L(Ho Grant, Rodman).[/QUOTE]

Rodman wasn't all-star caliber. He was one-dimensional. Grant was [i]barely[/i] all-star caliber, but dude above is talking about a 25/15/5/3 7-footer (which he feels Bynum will develop into), not a 13 pt/9.5 reb 6'10" PF.

(interestingly, LA is getting similar per minute production from Kwame [i]right now[/i] as Chicago got from Grant, ~14/11.7 vs. ~16/11.7; and Brown is an excellent defender, too).


Find me the number of big men who made the ASG in the last 15 years with a line of 13-14 pts and 8.5-10 rebs or worse.

:roll: Rodman the best rebounder in the league and arguably the best defender at the PF position, a very good passer not All-Star caliber:wtf: HO Grant dropping double-doubles and playing great D isn't either:rolleyes: Funny how groupies pretend like Jordan carried chumps to titles yet turn around and say Rodman> Big Ben and Pippen> Any SF. Give Kobe a better version of Big Ben and a top 3 SF(Bron, Pierce etc) and let's see if he can't win chips.

[QUOTE=eliteballer]:roll: Rodman the best rebounder in the league and arguably the best defender at the PF position, a very good passer not All-Star caliber:wtf: HO Grant dropping double-doubles and playing great D isn't either:rolleyes: Funny how groupies pretend like Jordan carried chumps to titles yet turn around and say Rodman> Big Ben and Pippen> Any SF. Give Kobe a better version of Big Ben and a top 3 SF(Bron, Pierce etc) and let's see if he can't win chips.[/QUOTE]


'Tis true. But Im not sure Kobe could win the chip, but that team would definately be a contender.

[QUOTE=eliteballer]:roll: Rodman the best rebounder in the league and arguably the best defender at the PF position, a very good passer not All-Star caliber:wtf: HO Grant dropping double-doubles and playing great D isn't either:rolleyes: Funny how groupies pretend like Jordan carried chumps to titles yet turn around and say Rodman> Big Ben and Pippen> Any SF. Give Kobe a better version of Big Ben and a top 3 SF(Bron, Pierce etc) and let's see if he can't win chips.[/QUOTE]

Again, find me the list of all-star big men who made the all-star team with lines of 13-14 points and 8.5-10 reb or worse in the last 15 years. Thanks.


For the record, I don't think Big Ben is a great example of an all-star caliber player either, but he basically doubled up Rodman in ppg and was comparable defensively and on the boards; he also was a great shotblocker whereas Rodman wasn't.


I'll wait on your list. 14/10 or worse. All-stars. Find them.


I also like how you use the '96-'98 Bulls as a comparison. When Jordan was 28, he won with Grant (whom Kwame is basically equal to on a per minute basis, as I've shown) and Pippen, who in '91 was better than Odom only defensively. LMAO @ suggesting that Pip is on Bron or Pierce's level -- they're entirely different types of players. I'd be willing to give Kobe a 19/8/6 guy with great defense (which is what Pippen was), not a 31/7/7 guy or a 27/7/5 guy, each of whom can drop 40+ at any time and are extremely aggressive offensively. Know how many games of 35+ points Pippen had in the three seasons from '91-'93? [b]6[/b]. Know how many games of 35+ Pierce and Lebron have had already [i]just this season[/i]? 2 and 3, respectively. So in 14 games, Lebron has half the amount of 35+ point games that Pippen had in [b]246[/b] games. But yeah, let's just give Kobe Bron. Might as well give him prime Kareem too -- he needs it. :roll:


Oh wait -- Bynum is going to be [i]better[/i] than Kareem! :roll: Bynum for prime Kareem:


<Laker_Fan1>: "I wouldn't do that trade; Bynum is young and has great potential. Give them Brown and Evans"

Damn Loki, have mercy on the guy.

[QUOTE=Loki]Again, find me the list of all-star big men who made the all-star team with lines of 13-14 points and 8.5-10 reb or worse in the last 15 years. Thanks.


For the record, I don't think Big Ben is a great example of an all-star caliber player either, but he basically doubled up Rodman in ppg and was comparable defensively and on the boards; he also was a great shotblocker whereas Rodman wasn't.


I'll wait on your list. 14/10 or worse. All-stars. Find them.


I also like how you use the '96-'98 Bulls as a comparison. When Jordan was 28, he won with Grant (whom Kwame is basically equal to on a per minute basis, as I've shown) and Pippen, who in '91 was better than Odom only defensively. LMAO @ suggesting that Pip is on Bron or Pierce's level -- they're entirely different types of players. I'd be willing to give Kobe a 19/8/6 guy with great defense (which is what Pippen was), not a 31/7/7 guy or a 27/7/5 guy, each of whom can drop 40+ at any time and are extremely aggressive offensively. Know how many games of 35+ points Pippen had in the three seasons from '91-'93? [b]6[/b]. Know how many games of 35+ Pierce and Lebron have had already [i]just this season[/i]? 2 and 3, respectively. So in 14 games, Lebron has half the amount of 35+ point games that Pippen had in [b]246[/b] games. But yeah, let's just give Kobe Bron. Might as well give him prime Kareem too -- he needs it. :roll:[/QUOTE]

You want an All-Star big man with those kinds of stats? Sure. [B]Horace Grant in 1994.[/B] Shut IT. Go ahead and start a thread about Rodman vs. Wallace. See how many votes Wallace gets. Did you just say Kwame=Ho Grant? Kwame can't catch the damn ball half the time:roll: Leave it to you to rely on stats...the game is about more than stats. Pippen made the All-NBA first team over a Grant Hill who was doing 20/10/7. Pippen didn't have as many 35 point games. WOW!. His impact went faaaaar beyond how many points he scored. Could Bron or Pierce even PRAY to give Magic fits?:stupid:

Oh my Loki, you're really underrating Pip. Pippen could've been a mid 20ppg scorer possibly on another team. You think Pierce is better than Pippen was? Naw. I'd rather have the guy with the Odom like stats and pippen like defense or in other words Artest (if he wasn't insane) next to Kobe. and the good big man.

I think Pippen in his prime could've atleast had a few 24-27ppg seasons if he was the man on a pretty bad team.

And Sheed had those type of stats last year and made the allstar team.

[QUOTE]All-stars. Find them.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]You want an All-Star big man with those kinds of stats? Sure. [B]Horace Grant in 1994.[/B] [/QUOTE]

LocOwned!:roll:

[QUOTE=eliteballer]You want an All-Star big man with those kinds of stats? Sure. [B]Horace Grant in 1994.[/B] Shut IT.[/quote]

:roll:

That's the entire point of the argument: that Grant was perhaps the weakest all-star big man ever, and that you were trying to paint him as something he was not (I originally conceded that he was BARELY all-star worthy, and you then tried to act as if he was a beast). And I ask you for examples of other all-stars with comparable or worse lines and you post...Grant. What a joke. :roll:


Regardless, none of these guys are a 25/15/5/3 center (better than Shaq #'s), which is what sparked this debate. I didn't say that Kobe should be expected to win without help, I said why can't he win without what people feel will be a 25/15/5/3 big man. You then changed the issue to one of "help." Nobody said Kobe doesn't deserve help.


[quote] Go ahead and start a thread about Rodman vs. Wallace. See how many votes Wallace gets. Did you just say Kwame=Ho Grant? Kwame can't catch the damn ball half the time:roll: Leave it to you to rely on stats...the game is about more than stats.[/quote]

Amazing how well he produces despite not being able to catch the ball, huh? Bynum's per minute production is also comparable to Grant's -- can he not catch the ball either?


[quote] Pippen made the All-NBA first team over a Grant Hill who was doing 20/10/7. Pippen didn't have as many 35 point games. WOW!. His impact went faaaaar beyond how many points he scored. Could Bron or Pierce even PRAY to give Magic fits?:stupid:[/QUOTE]

Like I said, different players. I'd be willing to see if Kobe could win with a 19/8/6 great defensive SF (basically Lamar Odom with better defense), but why does he need a 31/7/7 or 27/7/5 player, one of whom is already hailed as a GOAT candidate, in order to win? Pippen may have been a top 3 SF back then, but the top 3 SF's today (Lebron, Pierce, and Melo) are [b]much[/b] better offensive players than the top 3 back then (Pippen, Hill, and Rice), and Lebron is better than all of them by a good margin PERIOD.


[QUOTE=Y2Gezee]Oh my Loki, you're really underrating Pip. Pippen could've been a mid 20ppg scorer possibly on another team. You think Pierce is better than Pippen was? Naw. I'd rather have the guy with the Odom like stats and pippen like defense or in other words Artest (if he wasn't insane) next to Kobe. and the good big man. [/QUOTE]

Not mid-20's imo. Low 20's, topping out at around 23.5 ppg. Pierce is not necessarily BETTER than Pippen was (though Lebron is), but he's different, and the reason I highlight that difference is because clowns like eliteballer tend to forget about Pippen's offensive woes (especially in the latter postseasons) while hyping him up as some sort of god in order to downplay Jordan. Yeah, I'll give Kobe Artest, so long as Artest shoots 39, 42, and 41% in consecutive postseasons like Pippen did from '96-'98. :rolleyes: Actually, I'd be willing to give Kobe Artest, no problem. But Lebron is a different story entirely.

[QUOTE=Loki]:roll:

That's the entire point of the argument: that Grant was perhaps the weakest all-star big man ever, and that you were trying to paint him as something he was not (I originally conceded that he was BARELY all-star worthy, and you then tried to act as if he was a beast). And I ask you for examples of other all-stars with comparable or worse lines and you post...Grant. What a joke. :roll:


Regardless, none of these guys are a 25/15/5/3 center (better than Shaq #'s), which is what sparked this debate. I didn't say that Kobe should be expected to win without help, I said why can't he win without what people feel will be a 25/15/5/3 big man. You then changed the issue to one of "help." Nobody said Kobe doesn't deserve help.




Amazing how well he produces despite not being able to catch the ball, huh? Bynum's per minute production is also comparable to Grant's -- can he not catch the ball either?




Like I said, different players. I'd be willing to see if Kobe could win with a 19/8/6 great defensive SF (basically Lamar Odom with better defense), but why does he need a 31/7/7 or 27/7/5 player, one of whom is already hailed as a GOAT candidate, in order to win? Pippen may have been a top 3 SF back then, but the top 3 SF's today (Lebron, Pierce, and Melo) are [b]much[/b] better offensive players than the top 3 back then (Pippen, Hill, and Rice), and Lebron is better than all of them by a good margin PERIOD.




Not mid-20's imo. Low 20's, topping out at around 24 ppg. Pierce is not necessarily BETTER than Pippen was (though Lebron is), but he's different, and the reason I highlight that difference is because clowns like eliteballer tend to forget about Pippen's offensive woes (especially in the latter postseasons) while hyping him up as some sort of god in order to downplay Jordan. Yeah, I'll give Kobe Artest, so long as Artest shoots 39, 42, and 41% in consecutive postseasons like Pippen did from '96-'98. :rolleyes: Actually, I'd be willing to give Kobe Artest, no problem. But Lebron is a different story entirely.[/QUOTE]


Sheed. Illguaskus. Magloirre. Jayson Williams. Mutumbo. Smits. Kareem. Tyrone Hill. Laimbeer. Parish. Oakley. Cliff. Sikma. Lucas. Need I go on?:roll: I named the player you were demoting as an actual All-Star. Cork it. Now you're saying Melo and Pierce are better than Pippen? Ridiculous the lengths you will go to defend MJ. Spewing nonsense left and right. Bron isn't better than Hill was. Nope. Hill was a better rebounder, defender and at least as good a passer

Oops. Sheed had 15.1, but whats the difference. He may do it again this year.

[QUOTE=eliteballer]Sheed. Illguaskus. Magloirre. Jayson Williams. Mutumbo. Smits. Kareem. Tyrone Hill. Laimbeer. Parish. Oakley. Cliff. Sikma. Lucas. Need I go on?:roll: [/quote]

Give me years so I can check the stats, because I know you didn't. Again, worse than 14/10 in both categories (because Grant was at 12.8/8.4 and 13.2/9.5 in two of the championship seasons).


Regardless, [b]I originally conceded[/b] that he was a barely all-star caliber big man, but you then proceeded to act as if he was the second coming. Sorry, but 14/10 or 13/9 is skirting the line for an all-star big man. How does that compare to a 25/15/5/3 player? Oh that's right -- it doesn't.


And LMAO @ Hill being better than Bron. As an all-around player, maybe (though it's close), but not as a franchise player to build around. Nobody was mentioning Hill as a GOAT candidate. Ever.

LOL. Hill was annointed the heir to Jordan. The hyperbole of calling players GOAT wasn't as prevalent. Bron has ESPN and Nike. pushing him down everyone's throats.

[QUOTE=Loki]Give me years so I can check the stats, because I know you didn't. Again, worse than 14/10 in both categories (because Grant was at 12.8/8.4 and 13.2/9.5 in two of the championship seasons).


Regardless, [b]I originally conceded[/b] that he was a barely all-star caliber big man, but you then proceeded to act as if he was the second coming. Sorry, but 14/10 or 13/9 is skirting the line for an all-star big man. How does that compare to a 25/15/5/3 player? Oh that's right -- it doesn't.


And LMAO @ Hill being better than Bron. As an all-around player, maybe (though it's close), but not as a franchise player to build around. Nobody was mentioning Hill as a GOAT candidate. Ever.[/QUOTE]

Flawed reasoning. They are either worse in points or rebounds and very few bring the defense to the table. Grant posted comparable numbers to his All-Star appearance in the title years when factoring in FG%, blocks, steals.:stupid:

[QUOTE=eliteballer] Grant posted comparable numbers to his All-Star appearance in the title years when factoring in FG%, blocks, steals.:stupid:[/QUOTE]

I never denied that. But it's a bit misleading to call a 14/10 or 13/9 player an "all-star caliber player." Hell, I even conceded that he was (barely) all-star level, but you had to go an act like a fool, as if Grant was some force. Bynum and Kwame are basically his equal production-wise [i]right now[/i]. You give either of them Grant's 35 mpg (as opposed to 20-25 mpg) and they'll easily put up 13/9. Are they "all-star caliber players", or would you say that that's misleading?

Grant MADE the All-Star team and plenty have with comparable numbers. It goes beyond the numbers. Bynum and Kwame are no where near All-Star caliber. It's like comparing them to Sheed right now. Really need to ask who the hell is better? The only one acting a fool is you.

[QUOTE=eliteballer]Grant MADE the All-Star team and plenty have with comparable numbers. It goes beyond the numbers. Bynum and Kwame are no where near All-Star caliber. It's like comparing them to Sheed right now. Really need to ask who the hell is better? The only one acting a fool is you.[/QUOTE]

Why does it go beyond the numbers, because you said so? Give Bynum 35 mpg and he averages 13/9 guaranteed. Is he an all-star caliber player? He doesn't drop balls like Kwame, either, so there goes that excuse.

If Bynum had the stamina and consistency to GET those minutes than maybe. You always speak about the superior understanding of Jordan on D. Ho Grant's knowledge>>>>>Kwame or Bynums. Just like Sheeds. If you want to rely on stats Bron of the last few years>>>98 Jordan. You asked for a list and you got one. Owned.

Pippen Grant and BJ all made the All-Star team in 94. If Smush, Odom, and Kwame can do that we'll have a discussion:D

[QUOTE=eliteballer]If Bynum had the stamina and consistency to GET those minutes than maybe. You always speak about the superior understanding of Jordan on D. Ho Grant's knowledge>>>>>Kwame or Bynums. Just like Sheeds. If you want to rely on stats Bron of the last few years>>>98 Jordan. You asked for a list and you got one. Owned.[/QUOTE]

:roll:

What's funny is that I said that he was barely AS caliber, but you tried to paint him as some kind of force. Ho Grant wasn't a force -- he was a good, hard-working player. Nothing more or less. He certainly wasn't a 25/15/5/3 big man like was being discussed before you sidetracked things and acted like Grant/Rodman = a 25/15/5/3 big man.

Where oh where did I call Rodman or Grant 25/15 bigmen? Putting words into my mouth to ease your humiliation?

[QUOTE]Pippen Grant and BJ all made the All-Star team in 94. If Smush, Odom, and Kwame can do that we'll have a discussion[/QUOTE]

[B]3 All-Stars[/B]