ISHiots:oldlol: Using Kobe's stats from when he was 18, 19, 20. Pippen wasn't even in the NBA until he was 22.
Printable View
ISHiots:oldlol: Using Kobe's stats from when he was 18, 19, 20. Pippen wasn't even in the NBA until he was 22.
BTW...from Pippen's OWN MOUTH, "If he's not the next Michael Jordan I don't know who is"
[QUOTE=eliteballer]BTW...from Pippen's OWN MOUTH, "If he's not the next Michael Jordan I don't know who is"[/QUOTE]
you misquote the great scottie pippen:banghead:
[url]http://youtube.com/watch?v=ZuD_cOBkTsM[/url]
Pippen said it in the lockeroom after a game when he was still playing:no:
[QUOTE=eliteballer]BTW...from Pippen's OWN MOUTH, "If he's not the next Michael Jordan I don't know who is"[/QUOTE]
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.
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.
[QUOTE=BIGSHOT]Current Kobe Bryant> Prime Jordan.
Kobe is the G.O.A.T[/QUOTE]
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:
[QUOTE=Scott Pippen]you misquote the great scottie pippen:banghead:
[url]http://youtube.com/watch?v=ZuD_cOBkTsM[/url][/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
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:
[QUOTE]You honestly think Jordan got protected by the league and the reds when he first entered the league?[/QUOTE]
yes, and i watched the games. jordan also shot more free throws than anyone else besided moses malone
[QUOTE]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[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]Throw in Grant Hill, Alonzo Mourning, Jason Kidd, Karl Malone, Vince Carter and arguably guys like Dikembe Mutombo and Michael Finley..[/QUOTE]
hill: 14th, mourning: 7th, kidd: 8th, malone: 9th, carter: 10th, mutombo: :roll: , finley: 16th
[QUOTE]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?[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]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[/QUOTE]
shaq was only the best player in the nba in 2000, and 2001, aswell as '97 and '98.
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
you said kobe shot better with shaq than without shaq, i gave the numbers that proved he shot better without shaq.
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]you obviously don't understand how basketball works..hand checking = tougher defense[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]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[/QUOTE]
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
[QUOTE=Shep]yes, and i watched the games. jordan also shot more free throws than anyone else besided moses malone[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
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
[QUOTE]more contact/hard checking only started late 80's and into the 90's.[/QUOTE]
I've seen plenty of really physical mid 80's games.
[QUOTE]hill: 14th, mourning: 7th, kidd: 8th, malone: 9th, carter: 10th, mutombo: :roll: , finley: 16th[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]impossible to say. shaq at that point was in his peak, a peak that was greater than anyone's peak in nba history.[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE] 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.[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]shaq was only the best player in the nba in 2000, and 2001, aswell as '97 and '98.[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]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.
[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE=eliteballer]BTW...from Pippen's OWN MOUTH, "If he's not the next Michael Jordan I don't know who is"[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]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[/QUOTE]
if you are convinced at what you believe is right, anything other than the correct answer is crazy..you obviously aren't too sure.
[QUOTE]I've seen plenty of really physical mid 80's games.[/QUOTE]
..as have there been plenty of physical games in the early 00's
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
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
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
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
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
so we agree kobe's better
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
so we agree kobe's better
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
his one year peak i'm talking about, and shaq in '00 was better than anyone has ever been for one full season.
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE=RoseCity07]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.[/QUOTE]
Repped.
[QUOTE=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.[/QUOTE]
Explain to me your definition of ballhog
[QUOTE=Shep]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.[/QUOTE]
So you're saying MJ was given more superstar calls as a rookie than he was in his 37 ppg season?
[QUOTE]if you are convinced at what you believe is right, anything other than the correct answer is crazy..you obviously aren't too sure.[/QUOTE]
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"
[QUOTE]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[/QUOTE]
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%
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]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[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
The stats were close, Eddie Jones was the best player on his team and he played clearly better defense than Bryant.
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]jordan wasn't top 3 in '98.[/QUOTE]
:roll:
[QUOTE=Shep]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.[/QUOTE]
The best record is due to the man who you said played better than anyone has ever played as is the championship.
[QUOTE]So you're saying MJ was given more superstar calls as a rookie than he was in his 37 ppg season?[/QUOTE]
i'm saying he was given the same superstar treatment in '85 that he was getting for the rest of his career
[QUOTE]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"[/QUOTE]
:oldlol: each to their own
[QUOTE]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%[/QUOTE]
kobe bryant 1.6spg>>>grant hill 1.4spg
kobe bryant 0.9bpg>>>grant hill 0.6bpg
kobe bryant 2.8tpg>>>grant hill 3.2tpg
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
: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
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
:lol
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
the lakers were 54-11 with kobe+shaq. the lakers don't win 67 games and a championship without kobe.
[QUOTE]The stats were close, Eddie Jones was the best player on his team and he played clearly better defense than Bryant.[/QUOTE]
:lol how did he clearly play better defense than bryant?
[QUOTE]How does that supporting cast compare to Kobe's team which included the man who you said played better than anyone has ever played[/QUOTE]
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)
[QUOTE]Glen Rice a guy who was 2 years removed from averaging 20 ppg and just 3 years removed from a 27 ppg season [/QUOTE]
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
[QUOTE]:roll: [/QUOTE]
:confusedshrug:
[QUOTE]The best record is due to the man who you said played better than anyone has ever played as is the championship.[/QUOTE]
no kobe = no best record
[QUOTE=Shep]i'm saying he was given the same superstar treatment in '85 that he was getting for the rest of his career[/QUOTE]
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?
[QUOTE]kobe bryant 1.6spg>>>grant hill 1.4spg
kobe bryant 0.9bpg>>>grant hill 0.6bpg
kobe bryant 2.8tpg>>>grant hill 3.2tpg[/QUOTE]
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:
[QUOTE]: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[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]the lakers were 54-11 with kobe+shaq. the lakers don't win 67 games and a championship without kobe.[/QUOTE]
How do you know? They weren't doing badly without Kobe.
[QUOTE]:lol how did he clearly play better defense than bryant?[/QUOTE]
Did you even watch basketball back in 2000? There was a reason Eddie was 3rd in DPOY voting.
[QUOTE]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)[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]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[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]no kobe = no best record[/QUOTE]
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.
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.
[QUOTE=Shep]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[/QUOTE]
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 [url]http://youtube.com/watch?v=i9bzrWTff5U[/url] 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)
[QUOTE=Loki]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:[/QUOTE]
Why does it say "LOKI BANNED"????
[QUOTE=StoneCold]Wow..
It amazes just how [B]UNINFORMED[/B] U kobe homers [B]REALLY[/B] 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, [B]BARELY[/B] saw him from 1996-98..and those [B]WEREN'T[/B] even his [B]PRIME[/B] years!
It's the [B]SAME[/B] 'ol story with U guys..Y'all try & rank & compare them based on your [B]UNINFORMED[/B] opinions, rather than what they've actually [B]DONE[/B] on the floor..
MJ's [B]"ROOKIE"[/B] season he had an [B]NBA Efficiency Rating (PER)[/B] of [B]29.24[/B], & [B]13.2[/B] [I][U]player wins[/U][/I]. He also [B]IMPROVED[/B] them by 10 wins & took 'em to the Playoffs, a place they hadn't [B]SEEN[/B] since 1981..
Kobe's 2006-07 season, he had an [B]NBA Efficiency Rating (PER)[/B] of [B]27.65[/B] and [B]11.2[/B] [I][U]player wins[/U][/I].
Well homers, how do U explain that? And U claim kobe's better?
[B]THAT'S A JOKE!![/B]
In the seasons [B]BEFORE[/B] Pippen & Co., he had a [I][U]combined[/U][/I] average of [B]33ppg 5apg 6rpg 2.74spg 1.26bpg 49 FG%.[/B]
Show me [U][B]ANY[/B][/U] season from kobe with better [B][U]OVERALL[/U][/B] Production than that?
MJ is the [B]ONLY[/B] player in [B]HISTORY[/B] to lead his team in [I][B]scoring, rebounding, assists & steals[/B][/I]..(4 out of 5 categories) & he did this as a [B]ROOKIE!![/B] 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 [B]REMOTELY[/B] close to that? Hell no & if U claim he has, you're a liar & the truth aint in ya..
And U got the [B]NERVE[/B] to call MJ [I]"selfish"[/I]? Are U serious?
Kobe has [B][I][U]53 games[/U][/I][/B] to date, with [B]NO ASSISTS![/B] MJ has only [B][I]"6" in 14 years of play[/I][/B], with the [B]1st[/B] game like occuring in 1997..that's [B]13 STRAIGHT years with at least "1" assist![/B]
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 [B][I]'Denial'[/I][/B] & snap back into reality..[/QUOTE]
/thread
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.
[QUOTE=Shaquille O'Neal]Why does it say "LOKI BANNED"????[/QUOTE]
:confusedshrug:
[QUOTE]/thread[/QUOTE]
Just a question: Did you care to check the validity of the facts and figures posted above?
Psileas, you a big fan of Clockwork Orange?
I find that movie very overrated. Maybe it's the english accent... :oldlol:
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.
[QUOTE=StoneCold]Oh Really?
Let me repeat what I previously posted, in case U missed it:
"MJ's [B]"ROOKIE"[/B] season he had an NBA Efficiency Rating [B](PER)[/B] of [B]29.24, & 13.2 player wins[/B]. He also [B]IMPROVED[/B] them by 10 wins & took 'em to the Playoffs, a place they hadn't [B]SEEN[/B] since 1981..[/QUOTE]
According to [URL="http://www.basketball-reference.com/"]basketball-reference[/URL], MJ's PER was 25.8.
[QUOTE=StoneCold]Kobe's 2006-07 season, he had an NBA Efficiency Rating [B](PER)[/B] of [B]27.65 and 11.2 player wins[/B].
Well kobe homers, how do U explain that? [/QUOTE]
According to the same source, Kobe's PER for 2006/07 was 26.1
[QUOTE=StoneCold]Not to mention MJ shot [B][I]52%[/I][/B] from the field his [B][U]ROOKIE[/U][/B] year...[/QUOTE]
True. (51.5% actually)
[QUOTE=StoneCold]...VS [B][I]46%[/I][/B] for kobe's 2007 campaign! [/QUOTE]
Also True. (46.3%)
[QUOTE=StoneCold]In [B][I]FACT[/I][/B], from a shooting standpoint, MJ's [B][I][U]ROOKIE[/U][/I][/B] year, is [B][I][U]BETTER[/U][/I][/B] than [B][I][U]ANY[/U][/I][/B] of kobe's!![/QUOTE]
True.
[QUOTE=StoneCold]Also during MJ's [B][I][U]ROOKIE[/U][/I][/B] year, he became the [B][I][U]ONLY[/U][/I][/B] player in history [I](at that time..Hakeem did it [B][U]LATER[/U][/B] in his career)[/I], to [B][I][U]LEAD[/U][/I][/B] his team in 4 of 5 categories [B][I](scoring, rebounding, assists & steals)[/I][/B]..[B][U]SHOW ME[/U][/B] a season at [B][U]ANY[/U][/B] point in kobe's career, where he's done [B][I][U]ANYTHING[/U][/I][/B] to this degree! I dare U![/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE=StoneCold]Dr. J did it in the ABA, but [B][I][U]NEVER[/U][/I][/B] in the NBA. MJ came within [U][B]4 blocks[/B][/U] in 1989 of [B][U]REPEATING[/U][/B] this feat..[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE=StoneCold]In the seasons [B][U]BEFORE[/U][/B] Pippen & Co., he had a [I][B]combined[/B][/I] average of [B]33ppg 5apg 6rpg 2.74spg 1.26bpg 49 FG%[/B].[/QUOTE]
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%
[QUOTE=StoneCold]Show me [B][I]ANY[/I][/B] season from kobe with better [B][U]OVERALL[/U][/B] Production than that?"[/QUOTE]
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%
[QUOTE=StoneCold]So I conclude this post, with the [B][I][U]SAME[/U][/I][/B] sentiment I expressed in the previous one: MJ's [U][I][B]ROOKIE[/B][/I][/U] season was productively [B][I][U]BETTER[/U][/I][/B], from an [B][I][U]OVERALL[/U][/I][/B] standpoint, & [B][U][I]TROUNCES[/I][/U][/B] any one of kobe's..[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE=StoneCold]
And U got the [B]NERVE[/B] to call MJ [I]"selfish"[/I]? Are U serious?
Kobe has [B][I][U]53 games[/U][/I][/B] to date, with [B]NO ASSISTS![/B] MJ has only [B][I]"6" in 14 years of play[/I][/B], with the [B]1st[/B] game like occuring in 1997..that's [B]13 STRAIGHT years with at least "1" assist![/B]
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 [B][I]'Denial'[/I][/B] & snap back into reality..[/QUOTE]
This is actually very close to true. According to this website([URL="http://www.michaeljordansworld.com/index.htm"]michaeljordansworld[/URL]), 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!
[I][B]With Bulls[/B]
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)
[B]With Wizards[/B]
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)[/I]
That's an amazing stat.
[QUOTE]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?[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
should've done more
[QUOTE]How do you know? They weren't doing badly without Kobe.[/QUOTE]
so you think the lakers would win the championship without kobe? :roll: you're more deluded than i ever imagined
[QUOTE]Did you even watch basketball back in 2000? There was a reason Eddie was 3rd in DPOY voting.[/QUOTE]
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?
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
: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
[QUOTE]Hmmm so you're comparing 2 years to 23 years?[/QUOTE]
highlighting how pathetic your statement was
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
whats this got to do with anything?
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
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=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.[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE]should've done more[/QUOTE]
With all of those injuries they should have won more than 53 games in the difficult Western Conference? :roll:
[QUOTE]so you think the lakers would win the championship without kobe? :roll: you're more deluded than i ever imagined[/QUOTE]
Look at what Shaq did in the playoffs and regular season. With or without Kobe they are still the favorite.
[QUOTE]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 ****? [/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]why wasn't jones on the 1st team all-defense?[/QUOTE]
Who knows? Who cares?
Why did Kobe finish behind Jones in DPOY?
[QUOTE]: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[/QUOTE]
So? That still doesn't make the talent on his team anywhere near the talent on that Laker team.
[QUOTE]highlighting how pathetic your statement was[/QUOTE]
Well you did a miserable job of it.
[QUOTE]whats this got to do with anything?[/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]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]
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.
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.