playmaking again is underrated by most people here. Bigs dont carry an offense like guards/wings not because they need to be "birdfed" but because they dont pass as much as most guards/wings besides a few exceptions like late 60s wilt.
Printable View
playmaking again is underrated by most people here. Bigs dont carry an offense like guards/wings not because they need to be "birdfed" but because they dont pass as much as most guards/wings besides a few exceptions like late 60s wilt.
Man you're clueless. What the hell does bird fed even mean? How many PF and Centers can you name that can create their own shot or didn't need someone to give them the ball in the low post? It's called basketball dummy.
Kareem was dominant period. Magic and Oscar wasn't protecting the paint. Kareem also was a clutch player and very reliable in the half court, because he had the sky hook. Kareem is at the very least top 3. I have him at 1. His resume from HS to the Pros speak for itself.
I swear man this is another dumb thread from the OP.
[QUOTE=DMAVS41]
Sigh...
1. Yes, they both have...that is my point. You missed the point. My point was that you don't talk about them with Kobe. You aren't consistent. [B][COLOR="DarkRed"]You post stats when it comes to MJ vs Lebron as part of your argument..then ignore those same stats that favor Lebron when it comes to comparing him to Kobe.[/COLOR][/B] Again, this is called not being an honest actor.
[/quote]
With MJ, I use all the arguments for him over Lebron (including stats), because I can..
With Kobe, I can't use stats, but I can use other things, like his skills and the resulting superior teams that he had.. It's not that complicated.
[QUOTE=DMAVS41]
3. Early years matter. You can't ignore them. Lebron was better early on his career vs Kobe...just like he's clearly better late in his career. Sorry if you don't like it, but if we are ranking careers and not peaks...every year counts. I agree some count more than others, but you can't ignore certain years just to fit your conclusions.
[/quote]
Okay, Lebron has better longevity.. I concede that point to you..
so you're 1 for like 10 or something..
[QUOTE=DMAVS41]
4. No, this is false. Nothing supports the 10 Celtics being the better team leading up to that. [B][COLOR="DarkRed"]To use your own criteria, the Lakers were the pre-season favorites[/COLOR][/B] and then the Celtics struggled all year as KG came back from injury. Regardless, you ignored 08...when Kobe was actually the favorite and played KG's team...and lost. Again, why ignore that if you want to be taken seriously?
[/quote]
you're making my point
Celtics were better on paper in both 2008 and 2010 - better talent - but Kobe's less talented team was still favored both years, while Lebron's more talented teams were underdogs in 16' (despite initially having the on-paper advantage and favorite status in 2015 before the injuries).
[QUOTE=DMAVS41]
5. Every year counts...and if you are going to argue 11 doesn't matter for Kobe because of his decline. The longevity of his career sucks in comparison. So you basically only have 00 through 10 as relevant. Again, why would Kobe get a pass for 11, but you say Lebron losing this year be humiliating? Kobe was in year 15 at the time and didn't have near the mileage Lebron currently does. Again, you make my point for me...you are extremely biased.
[/quote]
Again, Lebron has Kobe in longevity... the first point that I concede to you... you're 1 for a million..
Part of that is because Lebron rests during the year and doesn't go all out, while Kobe does.
[QUOTE=DMAVS41]
6. I disagree overall, but can agree that Kobe is better than some of his stats suggest. However, I haven't seen any statistical analysis from you that approaches the Backpicks stuff...which really details some myths surrounding Kobe's defense / shot jacking. So, no...you don't have much here...especially when I've seen your "stats" you post...and they all favor Lebron over Kobe. You just don't use them here consistently because you don't like the conclusion as I said above.
[/quote]
Again, all you have is statistical arguments - you can't argue skill... I'll take Kobe's skill and winning over Lebron's stat-padding and inferior skillset..
[QUOTE=DMAVS41]
7. Yes, I agree...Kobe has some superior skills in specific areas that are useful. This is a non-point as I, nor anyone, would ever argue that Lebron is better at every facet of the game.
[/QUOTE]
Lebron isn't better at anything, except maybe defensive rebounding
If Kobe decided to forget about winning and hold the ball 11 minutes a game to maximize stats, he'd get the same stats as Lebron.
i.e. if a coach's gameplan was to get maximum stats for one player without worrying about winning - that player would have great stats - that's what Lebron-ball is.. It's Lebron padding stats at the expense of team-ceiling - story of his career.. his limited skillset makes him an inferior winner to kobe, and therefore an inferior basketball player.
[QUOTE=DMAVS41]
2. Completely agree about 2011. Don't agree about 2014, but I can concede that if you like. Again you miss the point....why aren't you doing this for Kobe? [B]He was favored in 99 and lost. Favored in 03 and lost. Favored in 04 and lost. Favored in 08 after the Pau trade and lost. Favored in 11 to make the finals and lost.[/B]
[/quote]
They both were favored and lost - I only brought up Lebron's because you were lamenting about how he was "drawing dead" to win various Finals
But you're actually making my point by saying Lebron was drawing dead, while Kobe never was... Remember that when the 2015 super-team was first assembled, they were favored over the Warriors that year before the injuries - so that means Kobe would've had the best supporting talent in the league with that team and therefore favored in 2016, instead of "drawing dead" like Lebron's underachieving team.. So heading into 2017, Kobe's team would've been perceived as juggernaut favorites, instead of lucky underdogs that had no chance vs KD like Lebron's team..
It would be totally different with Kobe, because he's always gotten much more out of teams, while Lebron is a perennial underdog despite super-teams - that's Lebron's legacy (perennial underdogs despite super-teams, due to an inferior cp3/nash-level skillset), and that's why I knock him down the rankings..
Lebron might be 6'8" with the cp3 skillset, which sounds good and makes him way better than cp3, but it's still a suboptimal skillset that results in struggling teams on the championship level, regardless of cast or opponent.
.
Are we talking about the same Kobe Bryant with...
1x 40-pt Finals game in his entire career
1x MVP in 20 years
Blew a 3-1 lead vs team missing their best player
0x seasons shooting above .469% fg
0x playoff triple doubles
Missed the playoffs in prime (2005)
That Kobe?
Pip was bird feeding Mikey
[QUOTE=3ball]Lebron isn't better at anything, except maybe defensive rebounding[/QUOTE]
:roll:
What a clown
[QUOTE=Kblaze8855]The basketball having to be passed to you in order for you score does not mean you have to be birdfed. It means you
[QUOTE=SpaceJam2]Are we talking about the same Kobe Bryant with...
1x 40-pt Finals game in his entire career
1x MVP in 20 years
Blew a 3-1 lead vs team missing their best player
0x seasons shooting above .469% fg
0x playoff triple doubles
Missed the playoffs in prime (2005)
That Kobe?[/QUOTE]
We're talking about the guy that was always favored because his skillset was the top tier skillset that wins the most (2-way assassin, versatile scorer)
The stats are irrelevant when you consider how good Kobe made his teammates and teams
[QUOTE=Kblaze8855]The basketball having to be passed to you in order for you score does not mean you have to be birdfed. It means you
[QUOTE=3ball]Kareem absolutely needed to be fed
And tbh, so do basically all bigs, which is why they ALL needed a great perimeter player to have a great team:
Shaq needed Penny, Kobe, and Wade
Kareem needed Oscar and Magic
Russell needed 8 other HOF's including Cousy
the only one that didn't need absolute juggernaut perimeter players was Duncan.. Even Wilt needed a loaded Philly team in 1967 with Chet Walker and others, and then he had Jerry West with the Lakers.. But I give Wilt a pass because he was playing the Celtics every year and they needed 9 HOF to beat him.
But again, all bigs need great perimeter players to win, which is why I've been ranking the goat perimeter players over the goat bigs for a while now.. And now I realize that Kareem's losing in the 70's is directly related to him not having a goat PG.. He was a great scorer himself, but he needed someone to give him the ball, like all bigs.[/QUOTE]
he is making a difference between giving (receiver creates) and fed (created for) ya big dummie
[QUOTE=ArbitraryWater]he is making a difference between giving (receiver creates) and fed (created for) ya big dummie[/QUOTE]
Why did he need goat PG's to even have a GOOD team, let alone a great team?
how can he be better than Magic, MJ, Bird and others when he needed so much more help, to even have a GOOD team, let alone great team?
Magic had 1 seeds without Kareem... MJ had championship teams with zero bigs worth anything.. Rookie Bird turned a lottery team into 60-win juggernaut.. Kobe won with Bosh as his sidekick (i mean pau)
how can he be better than these guys if he needed far more help and otherwise lost his ass in what many call a weak era (70's)?..
He was essentially the biggest stat-padder of all-time in the 70's - his sky-hook game was suboptimal and couldn't win shit - just like AD - until he landed alongside a goat PG - just like AD
But who cares about the facts right?.. Let's go with the groupthink that infact makes no sense.. :applause:.. :facepalm:
[QUOTE=DMAVS41]I really don't agree with any of what you say on the topic.
Lebron has had really good teams, to varying degrees, from 11 through this year. Completely agree. The problem for you is that you make it sound like he hasn't done anything in that time. He's won 3 titles and made the finals 8 times or whatever it is now. In some of those finals...he was absolutely drawing dead to win it.
Yes, 11 he was terrible...but Kobe was equally terrible in 04...and actually won a title in 00 playing even worse.
[B]Again, context matters. Kobe played with Shaq 8 years...they won 3 titles. If Lebron did this you would be absolutely killing him. You know this...I know this...we all know this...be consistent.[/B]
Why pick 2010 to compare to KG and 2008 when Kobe had a terrible finals and lost to KG's team?
KG had started his decline by 2010 and the Celtics were absolutely not as good. Duncan beat Kobe/Shaq. Dirk murked Kobe with way less help on your standards in 2011.
Again, nothing supports you here.
No, you aren't...you are assuming Kobe was better than he was because of your obsession with MJ and inability to think beyond the circumstances of certain players...all while glossing over all the real issues of Kobe's career and focusing mainly on the negatives of others.
Again, this is why a more unbaised view of Kobe has him as a fringe top-10 player. RealGM had him him at 11th last time I checked.
And that, based on his actual impact, is where he belongs...somewhere in that range...not in the range of the guys you put him at.[/QUOTE]
Expecting rookie kobe to win it all. LOL. Bron stans gonna bron.
[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents]:roll:
What a clown[/QUOTE]
:lol
He's obviously a closet Kobe fan and it pains him deeply to see Kobe 14th all time per most updated lists :lol
Kareem was a play maker in the low post. He was an excellent passer and commanded a double team. You do realize that you can be a play maker from the low or high post right. Basketball isn't rocket science and the OP is making up stuff to push an agenda. SMH. Basketball consists of passing, dribbling, shoot, rebounding, and defense. Just because Kareem wasn't out on the perimeter dribbling doesn't mean he was bird fed.
This is just a taste of what kareem used to do to "bird feed" his teammates. I also suggest you watch some old lakers came. Kareem won finals MVP at age 38.
[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PyMo7CpO1Oo[/url]
[QUOTE=Replay32]Kareem was a play maker in the low post. He was an excellent passer and commanded a double team. You do realize that you can be a play maker from the low or high post right. Basketball isn't rocket science and the OP is making up stuff to push an agenda. SMH. Basketball consists of passing, dribbling, shoot, rebounding, and defense. Just because Kareem wasn't out on the perimeter dribbling doesn't mean he was bird fed.
This is just a taste of what kareem used to do to "bird feed" his teammates. I also suggest you watch some old lakers came. Kareem won finals MVP at age 38.
[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PyMo7CpO1Oo[/url][/QUOTE]
He had horrible teams without a goat PG
Period.
He was essentially the biggest stat-padder of all-time in the 70's - his sky-hook game was suboptimal and couldn't win shit - just like AD - until he landed alongside a goat PG - just like AD
Sorry, but the bird-fed aren't greater than the bird-feeders.. So Kareem < MJ/Kobe/Bird/Magic